H PRINCETON, N. J. "J> 
 
 Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Agnciv Coll. on Baptism, No. 
 
 So- 6 
 

 
 ^ 
 
SERMONS, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 MODE and SUBJECTS 
 
 O F 
 
 Chriftian Baptifm, 
 
 An attempt to pew that pouring or sprinkling 
 
 is a scriptural mode ; and the infants of 
 
 believers are proper subjects of the 
 
 baptism injiituted by christ : 
 
 WITH AN 
 
 EXAMINATION of VARIOUS OBJECTIONS, 
 
 Particularly thofe contained in a Courfe of Anon- 
 ymous Letters to Bijhop Hoad/y. 
 
 By JOSEPH /l ATHROP, D . d. 
 
 Paftor of the Firft Church in Weft- Springfield. 
 
 THE THIRD EDITION. 
 
 ® 
 &&<$> 
 
 ;<XX><X><X><XXXXXX>^)<MXXXXX>0O<><XX>O<>0< 
 PRINTED at NORTHAMPTON, by WILLIAM BUTLER, 
 
 (For the Hampjhire Mijfwnary Society. J 
 1803. 
 
SERMONS. 
 
 > ZHKMXX x:-<XXKX>o< 
 EPHESIANSy IV. 5. 
 
 ONE BAPTISM. 
 D I S C U R S £— I. 
 
 lO perfuade the Ephefians to keep the 
 unity of the fpirit in the bond of peace, the Apof- 
 tle urges this, among other arguments, that they 
 had received one Baptifm. If this one Baptifm was 
 defigned to be a bond of peace and unity a- 
 mong christians, how unhappy it is, that it fliould 
 become an occafion of divifion and feparation ? 
 Some will fay, ' It is not one baptifm, but differ- 
 ent baptifms that caufe divifions.' It is true, bap- 
 tifm is adminiftered in different modes , and to 
 differ en tfubjecls ; but ftill, 1 hope, it will appear 
 to be one baptifm ; and if fo, then this difference 
 is no juft reafon for difunion. 
 
 You are fenfible, my brethren, that I have 
 not been wont to bring controverfies into the 
 pulpit. I have purpofely avoided the controver- 
 sy concerning baptifm in years paft, and fliould 
 
 have 
 
have done fo ftill, had it not been lately revived a- 
 mong you. — It is not any prejudice again ft our 
 brethren who differ from us, but a regard to your 
 prefent circumftances, and to the defire of many 
 among you, that now induces me to enter upon it : 
 and I hope to handle it in fuch a manner, as, at 
 leaft, not to offend, if I iliould not convince. I 
 mall not call in queftion the validity of the bap- 
 tifm of our brethren : I only aim to vindicate our 
 own. And furely when we are charged with hav- 
 ing effentially changed a divine inflitation — when 
 we are reprefented as being in an unbaptized 
 ftate — when we are treated as unfit for chriftian 
 communion, we have a right to plead in our de- 
 fence. 
 
 There is a late pamphlet which many of 
 you have read, written by way of Letters to Bijh- 
 op Hoadly, the author of which labours to dif- 
 prove the validity both oifpr inklings and of hifant 
 baptifm, and treats them both with great con- 
 tempt. I fhall pay particular attention to this piece, 
 and take notice of every thing that is material 
 in it. 
 
 The queftions before us are two; whether 
 fprinkling is a fcriptural mode : and whether in- 
 fants are proper fubje&s of baptifm ? Thefe quef- 
 tions have no neceffary connection with each oth- 
 er. But as the validity of our baptifm is denied on 
 account of the mode in which it was adminiftered, 
 as well as of the age at which we received it, I (hall 
 diftinclly confider both queftions ; and fhall begin 
 with the former. 
 
 Part 
 
PARTI. 
 
 "We will firft enquire, What is the L'ut 
 fcriptural mode of Baptifm ? 
 
 There are two ways, in which this ordi- 
 nance is administered ; one is immerfian, or plung- 
 ing the whole body into water : The other is affu- 
 /ion, which is pouring or fprinkling water upon 
 the fubject. We do not deny the validity of im- 
 merfion ; we only deny the nccejfity of it : But 
 our brethren (at leaf! many of them) deny the va- 
 lidity of affufton, and reprefent it as no baptifm, to 
 whomfoever administered. It is therefore of fomc 
 importance that we enquire, whether there be no;: 
 fuch evidence, that affufion is a fcriptural mode, 
 as may juftify our ufe of it, and fatisfy thofe who 
 have received baptiim in this manner. 
 
 I shall firft examine the import of the 
 Greek word ufed for baptifm — then confider the 
 ufes of baptifm and the allufions of fcripture to thefe 
 ufes — next enquire, what was the apoftolic prac- 
 tice — and laftly take fome notice of the ufage of the 
 church after the apoftolic age. 
 
 I. We will examine the import of the word 
 laptizo, which is the ufiw.l, if not the only word 
 by which the writers of the New Teftament ex- 
 prefs the chriftian ordinance of baptifm. 
 
 It is agreed, that the word baptizo, fignifies 
 to wajh by the application of water : But then, 
 bow the water is to be applied, whether by plung- 
 ing the fubjecT: into water, or by pouring or fprink- 
 ling water upon the fubjecl, is the queftion. This 
 will bed be determined by confidering, how the 
 word is ufed upon commou occafions. 
 
 a The 
 
The author of the Letters to Bifhop Hoadly 
 tells us, c That the writers of the New Teftament 
 borrowed their phrafes from the Greek tranilation 
 of the Old Teftament, called the Septuagint.' He 
 refers us to this for the fenfe of the words, which 
 they have ufed for baptifm. He allows that 
 ' baptizo is the offspring of bapto ;' and con- 
 fequently may be taken in the fame fenfe. Zeal- 
 ous as he is for immerfion, he is conflrained to ac- 
 knowledge, that ' bapto is never ufed in the 
 Septuagint for the rite of warning a perfon 's whole 
 body f But on the contrary, is fometimes ufed for 
 wetting the body by fprinkling ; as in Dan. 4. 33. 
 and chap. 5. 21. where Nebuchadnezzar* s body is 
 faid to be wet with the dew of heaven. Now he 
 fays, * We all know,that a perfon is wet with dew, 
 not by immerfion into it, but by its diftillation in 
 gentle drops ; we are fprinkled with it* And if 
 bapto is never ufed for plunging the whole body, 
 but fometimes for fprinkling it, probably baptize, 
 4 its offspring/ is generally ufed in the fame fenfe. 
 Accordingly this author concedes that ' the word 
 baptizo, is never but once ufed, in thofe very nu- 
 merous places of the Old Teftament, where bathing 
 the perfon is commanded.' The one inftance he 
 mentions is in 2 King. 5. 14. where Naaman is laid 
 to have dipped (or baptifed) hinf elf feven times in 
 fordan, for the cure of his leprofy. But this one 
 inftance, at beft, is but a doubtful one ; for the 
 jaw prefcribed that the leper fhould be fprinkled 
 feven times for his cleanfing. The Prophet fays, 
 wa/h feven times and thou Jhalt be clean. If the 
 Prophet had any refpecl to the law, as it feems he 
 •had, by his enjoining him to wafli feven times, then 
 
 by 
 
by wafhing he meant Jpr ink ling ; (o that this exam- 
 ple / ill by no means prove, that the "word baptizo x 
 Signifies to plunge. We have then no inftance of 
 bapto, and but one (and that a very doubtful 
 initance) of bopiizo, ufed in all the Old Tefta- 
 ment for immerfion or bathing the body : But fome 
 inftances of the former's being ufed for fprinkling. 
 Thus the matter Hands according to the conceflions 
 of this writer. 
 
 Let us now confult the New-Teftament.— 
 There we (hall find clear and direct evidence, that 
 the word baptizo, fi* lilijs to pour or fprinkle. 
 
 ' It is faid, in the beginning of the 7th Chap, 
 of Mark, That the Pharifees, when they faw fome 
 of the difciples eat bread with defiled (that is to fay, 
 with lavwajhen) hands , found fault ; for the Phar- 
 ifees and all the Jews, except they wafh their hands 
 oft, eat not. And when they come from the market, 
 except they wafh, (can me baptizontai, except they 
 are baptifed) they eat not. What in the former 
 claufe, is called wafhing the hands, is here called 
 being baptifed. The ufual manner of wafhing hands 
 among the Jews, we learn from 2 Kings 3. 11. 
 where it is faid, Elifha poured water on the hands of 
 Elijah. Here then you fee, perfons are faid to be 
 baptifed, when only a part of the body is wafhed 
 by the pouring on of water. It is added, Many oth- 
 er things there are, which they have received to hold, 
 as t/je wajhings (baptifmous, baptifms) of brazen vef 
 fels and tables, or beds, i. e. the feats on which 
 they ufed to recline at meals, whicli were fo large, 
 that they could be wafhed only by pouring water 
 on 'them. 
 
 It is faid, Luke 11. 37. A certain Pharifee 
 
 afked 
 
afked Jefas to dine with him. And he went in and 
 fat down to meat. And when the Pharifee faw it, 
 he marvelled, that he hadnatfirft walhed before din- 
 ner : Not warned his whole body, but only his hands > 
 according to the Jewijh cuflom mentioned in the 
 before cited paffage in Mark. And this is expref- 
 fed by the fame word, which is ufed for baptifing. 
 He 'marvelled that he had not been baptifed, ebaptiflhe, 
 before dinner* 
 
 The Jews, by divine appointment, obferved 
 divers kinds of purifications, the greater part of 
 which were fprinklings- And thefe are exprefsly 
 called baptifms. The Apoflle, in the 9th chap, to 
 Heb. iotli verfe, fpeaking of the Jewijh. ritual, 
 fays> It flood only in meats and drinks a)id divers 
 wafhingSyidiaphorois baptifmois, divers baptifms.') By 
 thefe divers baptifms, he plainly, means the various 
 ceremonies of fprinkling ; for k> he explains them 
 in the following verfes. The blood of bulls and of 
 goats, and the afhes of an, heifer fprinkling the un- 
 dean,, fanclifieth to the purifying of the fiefh. Mofes 
 took the blood of calves and goats with water — and 
 fprinkled the book a-id all the people. He fprinkled 
 likewife with blood both the tabernacle and all the vef- 
 fels of the miniflry. And almofl all things are, by the 
 law, purged with blood, i. e. with the fprinkling of 
 blood. Now as the Apoftle fpeaks of divers bap' 
 tifms, and "hca immediately illustrates them by di- 
 xcrsfprinklingSy and mentions no other purifica- 
 tions, but fprinklings, as inftances of thefe divers 
 baptifms, it is evident, that if the facred writer un- 
 derflooJ Greek, fprinkling is baptifm. 
 
 And fince the word, wherever it is ufed in 
 fcripture for any thing beiides the chriftian ordi- 
 nance, 
 
nance , plainly fignifies pouring or fpr inkling, except 
 in thc/fr/g/einflance of Newmans dipping himfelf 
 in Jordan, which at mod is a very doubtful one, 
 we mult naturally fuppofe,- it is ufed in the fame 
 fenfe, when it is applied to the chriftran ordinance. 
 This conclulion may have the more weight, be- 
 caufe it is deduced from the conceflions of a critical 
 writer on the other fide of the queftion. 
 
 There is another Greek word, louo, fuppof- 
 ed to be fometimesufed for baptifm, on which the 
 author of the letters lays more weight : for, 
 1 This, he tells us, is almoft the conflant word of 
 the Septuagint, in thofe very numerous places 
 where bathing, or waihing the whole body is com- 
 manded.' 
 
 This word is indeed frequently ufed for wafh- 
 ing the body ; fome times for waihing the whole 
 body ; And if this were the conflant and only word 
 for baptifm in the New Teftament, here would be 
 a plauiible argument for waihing the whole body 
 in baptifm. — But it mould be obferved, that this 
 word is very feldom, if ever ufed for baptifm. The 
 author of the letters has cited about fixty pafTages in 
 the New Teftament, as fpeaking of baptifm : A- 
 mong all thefe, there are but four where this word 
 is ufed. It is not certain, that baptifm is the thing 
 intended in thefe : But if it is, yet no argument 
 c.»n be drawn from them in favour of immerfion ; 
 but perhaps the contrary. Let us confider them. 
 
 One is in Heb. 10. 23. Let us draw near 
 having our body wajh^d, {lehumenoi foma, being 
 warned in the body) with pure water. Now a 
 perfon is warned in his body, though water be 
 poured only on apart of it. Thus when the wo- 
 man 
 
IO 
 
 man poured ointment on ChriftVs bead, fhe is faid 
 to have anointed his body. And this warning is, in 
 the preceding claufe, expreffed by fprinkling. — 
 Having our hearts fprinkled/ro/tt an evil confcience, 
 and our body warned with pure water. 
 
 Another paflfage is in Titus 3. 5. He hath 
 faved us (dialoutrou) by the wafhing of regenera* 
 tim, and renewing of the Holy Ghofi, which he hath 
 Jhed, or poured on us. Now if baptifm is here in- 
 tended by the wafhing of regeneration, this text af- 
 fords a plain argument for affltjion or pouring in bap- 
 tifm : For this warning denotes the renewing of the 
 Holy Ghofi, which is poured on us ; and therefore, 
 that there may be fome refemblance between the 
 fign and the thing fignified, baptifm fhould be per- 
 formed by pouring. The phrafe of the pouring of 
 thefpirit is an allufion to the pouring of water ia 
 baptifm. 
 
 A third pafTage is in Eph. 5. 26, Tkat 
 he might f and if y it (the church) having cleanfed it 
 with the wafhing of water by the word. Now if 
 baptifm be here intended by warning, then the 
 church is faid to be fanctified and cleanfed by the 
 baptifmal warning : But how this wafhing is per- 
 formed, whether by fprinkling or plunging, is dill 
 thequeftion. The Apoftle hys,* fpri;/kling—fanc- 
 tifieth to the purifying of thejlefh. If then we will 
 allow the Apoftle to interpret his own phrafes, it is 
 fprinkling that fancYifies and cleanfes the flefh, and 
 confequendy is the wafhing intended, when the 
 church is faid to be fanclificd and cleanfed by the 
 wajlmig of water. In the 5iftPfal„ 2d verfe, the 
 Pfalmilt prays, Waft me thoroughly from mine ini~ 
 
 quity 
 * Hob. q. it 
 
II 
 
 f utty and ckanfe me from fin. I T e adds ver. 7. 
 Purge me, (in the Creek it isfprinkle me) and IJhall 
 be cleanfed. What in the ad ver. is called ivafhing 
 thoroughly, is in the 7th ver. called fprinkl'mg ; and 
 the latter is faid to cleanfe, as well as the former. 
 The other pailage is in 1 Cor. 6. 11. But ye are 
 wafted, but ye are fanclified, &c. This is fo near- 
 ly par?.: lei to the former, that the fame remarks are 
 applicable to both, and therefore nothing further 
 needs to be added. — It appears, I think, that the 
 word which our author chiefly depends on to prove 
 jmmerfion entirely fails him, and finally determines 
 in favour of affufwn. 
 
 This now is the refult of our enquiry. The 
 word froptizo, is but once, and perhaps never ufed 
 in all the Old Teftament, where bathing the body 
 is commanded. It is often ufecl, in the New Tefta- 
 ment, for fpr inkling or pouring. Tnis is the ufual, 
 if not the only word for baptifm. It is ufed, to be 
 fure, in near fixty pafTages. The word, lotto 9 is 
 fometimes ufed for bathing the body, but never 
 certainly ufed for baptifm : There are but four 
 pafTages, where it is pretended to be fo ufed : 
 And even here it is plainly fynonymous with pour- 
 ing or fprinklinv. 
 
 It is indeed very remarkable, that the writ- 
 ers of the New Teftament, when they fpeak of the 
 chriftian ordinance of baptifm, have gene ally (if 
 not always) avoided that word, which in the Sep- 
 tuagint is ufed for bathing the body ; and chofen 
 a word of a more general fignification ; and if they 
 have ever ufed the former, they have joined with 
 iifprinkling or pouring, as if it were on purpofe to 
 
 teach 
 
12 
 
 teach us, that plunging the whole body is a ceremo- 
 .jjy not required under the gofpel. 
 
 II. I apprehend we may obtain fome fat- 
 isfa&ion in the point before us, if we attend to thofe 
 pafiages of fcripture, in which the ufes of baptifm 
 are manifeilly alluded to. 
 
 i. One ufe of it is to reprefent the fan&ify- 
 ing influence of the fpirit. Chriflians are faid to 
 be bom of water and of the fpirit ; and to be faved 
 by the wafting of rcge?ieraiion and renewing of the 
 holy Ghofl. Peter fays to the convicted yews, Be 
 baptifed and ye [hall receive the gift of the holy Ghoji.* 
 The influence of the Spirit reprefented in baptifm, 
 is often exprefied by pouring and fprinkling ; as in 
 the before cited pafiages to Titus, and to the He- 
 brews. The renewing of the holy Ghq/f, which he 
 hath poured on us. Having the oeart fprinkled/rc;/2 
 an evil confciente. This pouring out of the Spirit is 
 called, being baptized with it. That promife, Ye 
 Jhall be baptifed with the holy Ghoft, is laid to have 
 been fulfilled when Chrift Jhed or poured forth the 
 Spirit, f 
 
 2. Baptism reprefents the forgivenefs of 
 fins. Hence thefe directions. Be baptized for the 
 remijpion of fins — Be baptized and wafh away thy 
 fins. I Our fins are waihed away in Chnft's blood. 
 The blood of Chrift cleanfeth from all fin. He hath 
 wajhed us from our fins in his own blood. § And 
 this application of ChrmVs blood is exprefled by 
 fprinkling. Ye arc conie — to Jefus the mediator of 
 the new covenant and to the blood of iprinkling. E- 
 kcl according to the foreknowledge of God, thro; 
 
 fantlifi cation 
 
 * A<St. t. 38 f AA. 1. 5- and ch. 2. JJ. 
 
 I Aft. 238. and ch. %%■ 16. § r Joh. I. ?. and Rev 1 
 

 ration cfthefpirii unto — fprinkling rfthe blood 
 :bri/t* 
 
 3. Baptism with clean water may denote the 
 ty of the Gofpel difpenfation. 
 
 The writer of the letters fays, c There does 
 not appear, in all the five books of Mofc.^ any rite 
 of fprinkling meer water, but it was water mixed 
 with blood, allies, &c." The Mofaic inftitution 
 was of a mixed nature : It confided both of moral 
 and ceremonial precepts. And the rites of purifica- 
 tion were of a piece with the difpenfation itfelf; 
 for they were performed by water mixed with other 
 ingredients. But the Gofpel difpenfation is pure 
 and fimple, charged with few external rites, and 
 thefe plain and eafy. Thus. Ezek. 36. 25. God, 
 foretelling the happinefs of his people in the Gof- 
 pel times, fays, Then will /fprinkle clean water up- 
 on you and yc foall be clean* ' This exnreifion,' fays 
 the author before mentioned, c allines to fome 
 watery purification in the law of MofcsS But he 
 fays, c There was no ceremony of unmixed water.' 
 He thinks, ' it alludes to the water, of feparation.' 
 And yet he fays, c This was a compojition of vari- 
 ous ingredients.' 
 
 The meaning of the palfage then mud be 
 
 this. In the latter times I will give you a pure and 
 
 fpir'itual difpenfation, not burdened with fuch rites 
 
 and ceremonies as the prefent. The fimple nature 
 
 and fpiritual defign of it fhall be reprefentcd by the 
 
 great rite of initiation, which thai! be tbejprhtiling 
 
 of pure water, and not the application officii mixed 
 
 compofitions as are now in vS--. 
 
 Obferve here : Sprinkling is fai J to clsanfe the 
 
 B , perfon 
 
 * Htb. 12.24, x Per. 1. 2. 
 
14 
 
 perfon. I will fprinkle clean water upon you and ye 
 (kail be clean, and from all your filthinefs will I 
 cleanfejcx So warning Peter's feet only, was 
 warning him. Peter fays, Thou /halt never wajh 
 my feet. Jefus replies, If I wajh thee noi\ thou haft 
 no pari in me. When he moved, that his hands 
 and head might be warned too, Chrifl anfwered, 
 He that is wq/bed 9 need not free to wajh his feet, but 
 is clean every Whit.f 
 
 It has been faid, c A minifter may as well 
 wafh the hands or feet, as fprinkle the face of a 
 perfon, in the name of the Trinity, and call it bap- 
 tifm.' 1 am far from afTerting, that the validity of 
 baptifm depends upon the part to which the water 
 is applied. There is however an obvious proprie- 
 ty in applying it to the head. This is the principal 
 part of the body. It is the part which is ufually 
 uncovered ; *ud the water doubtlefs mould be ap- 
 plied to the^rfon, rather than to his clothes. The 
 ceremony of benediction was performed by laying 
 the hands on the head. Unclion was performed by 
 pouring oil on the head^ which was called anointing 
 the body. The Holy Ghoft was communicated by 
 the impofition of the Apoftles hands : And they who 
 had the Spirit communicated to them, v ere faid to 
 be baptized with it ; which makes it highly proba- 
 ble that baptifm, the token of this communication, 
 was performed by putting water on the heads of the 
 perfons baptized. Accordingly, the Apoflle to 
 the Hebrews fpeaks of the doclrine of Baptifms . 
 laying on of hands. \ 
 
 4. The Apoflle, in 1. Cor. 10. fpeaki: 
 the Jews who came out of£gy/tf,fays, They - 
 
 baptized 
 
 f John ty S, 9, 10. \ Chap. 6. 2. 
 
ntc Mofcs in the cloud and in the fed. The 
 Apoftle here undoubtedly alludes to chriftian bap- 
 tifm, and therefore we may fuppofe there was fqme 
 rcfemblance between baptifm unto Chrift, and than 
 ancient baptifm unto Mofes, — Now how were they 
 baptized in the cloud and Tea r Surely not by be- 
 mgplunycd all over in water ; for they went over 
 dry j tod ; but only by being fprinkled with ibme 
 (prays of the fca, and drops from the cloud. This 
 appears to me the melt natural fenfe of theexpref- 
 fion. The author of the letters indeed ridicules 
 fuch an interpretation, and fays, c Here is an allu- 
 iion to the cuftom otimmerfion, the Israelites 9 being 
 covered by the cloud over, and by the water on each 
 fide of them.' But I think he has not mended the 
 matter ; for though the waters furrounded them, 
 yet (as he would have it underftood) not even a 
 fpray touched them, nor a drop fell on them ; for 
 then they would have been fpr'niijM, It was a 
 dry baptifm : A baptifm without water. Jonah 
 might as well have been f<ud, to be baptized in al- 
 Iufion to immerjion, when he went down into the 
 fides of the fhip, and there lay, while a ftorm hung 
 over him. 
 
 5. Baptism fignifies our obligation to re- 
 nounce fin and put on the character of Chrift. 
 
 The Apoftle fays, Rom. 6. 4. We are bu- 
 ried with Chrift by baptifm into his death. And Col. 
 2. 12. Buried with him in Baptifm, The plain 
 meaning is ; by baptifm we are bound to die to 
 fin, and walk in newnefs of life, in conformity to 
 the Heath and refurreclion of Chrift. Our breth- 
 ren imagine, thefe two paffages aflbrd a itrong ar- 
 gument for immerfion. They tell us, c The 
 
 phrafe 
 
IS 
 
 phrafe of being buried with Chrifi in Baptifm, al- 
 ludes to the manner of baptifm, which was a bu- 
 rial in the water ; for if there were nothing like 
 a burial, the phrafe uould be very improper. 
 But as well might they fay, ' The mode of baptifm 
 muft refemble his crucifidion ; for in the fame paf- 
 fage the Apoftle fays, We are baptized into his death, 
 ■planted together in the lrkenefs of his death — our old 
 man is crucified with him. But I am willing their 
 argument fhould have its full weight ; for if they 
 think immerfion can be proved from thefe two paf- 
 fages, where our conformity to Chrifi is exprefTed 
 by our being buried with him in baptifm, they mult, 
 if they will be confident with themfelves, allow 
 that fprinkling can be more clearly proved from 
 thofe numerous paffages, where our juftification 
 through ChrifVs blood is exprefTed by the fprink- 
 ling of his blood ; and our fan&ification is exprefTed 
 by thejprinfijfto of clean water*—by the heart's be- 
 ingfprinkled — by the fpir it's being poured on us, 
 &c. The conclufion then from this argument will 
 be, that both modes were admitted by the Apof- 
 tles — both are valid and agreeable to the inftitu- 
 xion. Let us no longer contend. This argument 
 bids fo fair to reconcile our brethren to our prac- 
 tice, that I could willingly leave them in full pof- 
 feflion of it. — I vvifh it good fuccefs. — But if it be 
 attended to, I am afraid, it will appear to have lit- 
 tle weight. 
 
 How was Chrifi: buried ? Not as the dead are 
 ufually buried among us, but as rich men were a- 
 moitg the Jews, in an apartment cut out in the 
 fide of a rock. Such tombs were called jepulchres 
 
on high ;* becaufe they were made above ground. 
 Lazarus s grave was of this fort ; and he was laid 
 in it in fuch apofition, that, upon his revival, he 
 came forth, while he was bound hand and foot ; but 
 he could not wait, till he was loofed. c Loofe hint 
 and let him go.'f Plunging then no more rcfem- 
 bies ChrifVs entombment than fprinkling does. It 
 there were any circumftances in his burial, which 
 baptifra can referable, it mult be his embalmment. — 
 It is faid, Nieodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and 
 aloes , and 'wound the body of J ejus in linen clothes 
 with the fpiees, as the manner of the jews is to bury .'I 
 And after this, the women prepared f pices and oint- 
 ments and came to anoint his body. The expreflion 
 of being buried with Chrifl in baptifm, may allude 
 to his body's being anointed with aromatic oint- 
 ments at the time of his burial ; and this was done 
 by pouring and rubbing them on the body. Ac- 
 cordingly when the woman p our ea the precious 
 ointment on Chrift's head 5 He fays, In that ftjt, 
 poured it on my body, ft. e did it to my burial. She is 
 come to anoint my body to the burying.% Obferve ; 
 her pouring it only on his head, he calls pouring it 
 on his body ; as on another occafion, a woman's 
 dropping her tears on his feet, he calls wafting his 
 feet ; and waffling Peter's/^/ was wafhing him. — 
 Now in allufion to this manner of anointing, chrift- 
 ians are faid, to be anointed with the fpirit, and to 
 have an unclion from the Holy One, which tcachcth 
 them of all things. \ What is elfewhere called the 
 pouring of the fpirit on them ; and being baptized 
 with the fpirit j is here expreffed by the anointing 
 b of 
 
 * Ifa. 22, 16. f Joh. ir. 44. \ Joh. 19. 40. 
 
 S Mat. %d, 7, J) a Cor. 1. ai. and 1 Joh. a. 20. 27. 
 
:8 
 
 q£ the fpirit, in aliufion to the manner of anointing 
 by pouring oil on the head. 
 
 III. It is time that we proceed to enquire, 
 in what manner baptifm was adminiftered in the 
 ?imes of our Saviour and his Apoftles. 
 
 Our brethren, and particularly the gentle- 
 man before mentioned, think it very manifeli, that 
 immerfion was the mode practiced in thofe times, be 
 caufe the perfons baptized are, in one or two in- 
 itances, laid to go i?Uo 9 and come out cfl\\z water ; 
 becaufe fome were baptized in a river ; and be- 
 caufe places abounding with water were ehofen for 
 baptizing. 
 
 But let us not be carried away by the meer 
 found of words without examining their fenfe. 
 
 Iris faid, Mat. 3. 16. Jefas being baptized 
 tame up out of the water. The Greek phrafe 
 (apo udatos) properly fignines, from the water ; 
 and therefore implies no more than that he went 
 down to it ; which he might properly be faid to do 
 in whatever mode he was baptized. And as all 
 natural collections of water are in low places, fo the 
 motions to and from them, mull be defending and 
 afcending, which is fufficient to account for the ex- 
 preflion, he went up from the water. 
 
 As Chrid was without fin, his baptifm could 
 not be in token of repentance and forgivenefs ; 
 and, as he came to John after all the people were 
 baptized, it could not be for an example of baptifm 
 to them : but it was evidently his public confecra- 
 tion to the miniilry, en which he was now enter- 
 ing. He chofe this ceremony of confecration, in 
 conformity to the law of God, which had inltitut- 
 ed a fimilar form for the reparation of the high 
 
 pried 
 
19 
 
 pricft to his office. And therefore he fays, Thus it 
 mefb us to fulfil all rightcoufnef. 
 The priefts under the law, were to enter on 
 the public fctvicc. of God at the age of thirty years ; 
 Chrift, when be began to be about thirty years oj ' a-n\ 
 wa; baptized. They were confecrated to their of- 
 fice by wajhing with water, and by anointing with 
 oil : He was publicly inaugurated into his miniftry, 
 by baptifm and the unftion of the Holy CLoJL God 
 fays to Mofcs ; Aaron and his f on* jhalt thou bung 
 to the door of the tabernacle, and Jt alt wajb them with 
 water ; — and thou jhalt pour the anointing oil on hts 
 head. Thou fl: alt make a lover ofbrafs- and put wa- 
 ter therein ; for Aaron and his fans JL all wajb their 
 hands and their feet therein. And Mofes brought 
 Aaron and his fons and wajhed them with water, and 
 he poured the anointing oil on Aaron's headwind anoint* 
 cd him to fanclify him* 
 
 The priefts were warned, not by the immerfion 
 of their bodies into a fountain, but by the applica- 
 tion of water to their hands 2nd feet from a laver ; 
 they were anointed by oil poured on their heads $ 
 thus they were publicly inflated in their office. 
 Chrift was baptized at Jordan ; after his baptifm 
 he was anointed with the Holy Ghoft, which viiibly 
 defcended upon him ; and then he was declared 
 from heaven to be the Son of God, and the people 
 were commanded to hear him. Alluding to the 
 manner, in which the priefts were confecrated, the 
 prophet, in the perfon of Chrift, fay?, The fpirit of 
 the Lord is upon me, becaufe be hath anointed me to 
 preach the gojpel.f Peter, fpeaking of the word 
 
 which 
 
 • Excd. 29. 4, 3cc, Chap. 30, 19, &c. Lev. 8. 6, ift 
 
2<& 
 
 which God lent to Ifrael by Chrift, fays, That word 
 ye know, which began from Galilee ', after the bap- 
 tifm which John preached, how God anointed Jefiu 
 of Nazareth with the Holy Ghoft, and with power. 
 
 Now as in the account given by the Evangel- 
 ifts concerning Chrift s baptifm there is nothing 
 which neceflarily imports an immerfion ; as his 
 baptifm was in compliance with the inflituted ufage 
 of confecrating the ancient priefts, and as there is 
 no mention of their total immerfion, but exprefs 
 mention of their partial warning; we may, with 
 great probability, conclude, that his baptifm was by 
 the application of water to a part of his body.* 
 
 But though he had been warned by immer- 
 fion, this would no otherwife be an argument for 
 immerfion no - , than as an inftance of the ufe of the 
 word baptize, becaufe his baptifm was a different 
 thing from that which he afterwards inflituted. — 
 And as it appears highly probable, that his baptifm 
 was a partial wafhing, it was an example in favor 
 of our opinion, that bapt'fm does not fignify a total 
 immerfion ; but may properly be performed by pour- 
 ing or fprinkling water on a part of the body. 
 
 Again, A£c. 8. 38. They (Philip and the 
 Eunuch) went down both into the wafer, and he 
 baptized him, and they came up oat of the water. — 
 This paffage is thought to favor immerfion : But 
 it no more proves that the Eunuch was covered with 
 water, than that Philip was ; for one is faid to go 
 into the water, as much as the other. They might 
 
 be 
 
 * The laver in which the priefts were wafhed wa9 a portable 
 vcfi'el of brafs, ftanding on a fingle foot, and not of fufficicnt capacity 
 tor the immerfion of a human body. 
 
21 
 
 be faid to go into the water, if they only ftept into 
 the edge of it. The words do not neceflkriiy im- 
 ply even fo much as that ; for the particles render- 
 ed into and out cf very often fignify no more than 
 to and from ; as where Chrift bids Peter, go to the 
 fea and cajl his hook — and where the £>uccn of the 
 South is laid to conic from the utihojl parts of the 
 earth. Now no man fiippofes, that Peter plunged 
 himfelf into the fea ; or that the Queen of the South 
 crept out from under ground ; and yet the Greek 
 particles here rendered lo and from are the fame, 
 which in the cafe of the Eunuch are rendered into 
 and out cf All therefore that we can conclude 
 from this pafrage is, that they went down from the 
 chariot to the water, there Philip baptized him, 
 and then they returned : But in what manner he 
 baptized hrm, we can no more learn from this paf- 
 fage, than from any other in the bible. But if the 
 accounts of ancient and modern writers are true, 
 he could baptize him only by pouring or fprinkling 
 water on him \ for they fay, that in the place here 
 mentioned, nothing more than a fmall fpring can 
 be found. 
 
 It is faid, Mark i. 5. They were baptized of 
 John in the river cf Jordan. Hence fome have 
 concluded that they were plunged in the river. But 
 this is ay^ra'iconclufion. Chrift fays to the blind 
 man, whofe eyes he had anointed with clay, Go 
 waflo in the pool cf Siloam* Here the phrafe of 
 wafhing in the pod, intends no more than warning 
 his eyes with the water of the pool. And with e- 
 equal propriety John's hearers may be faid to be 
 
 baptized 
 
 Joh. 9. z. 
 
22 
 
 baptized in Jordan, if o\\\j fome of the water of the 
 river was poured on their faces. 
 
 We read John 3, 23, that y<?Zw baptized in 
 Enon becaufe there was much water there. It is 
 uiked, c Why fhould he chufe a place abounding 
 with water to baptize in, if he did not baptize by 
 immerfion ?' I anfwer, Thefe words (polla 
 udata) rendered much water, properly fignify 
 many waters, and may be underftood of various 
 rivulets or fprings, which, travellers fay, are the 
 only waters there to be found, and not any large 
 collections convenient for immerfion. If John bap- 
 tized only by affufion, a confiderable quantity of 
 water would be neceifary to baptize fuch multi- 
 tudes, as went out to him from Jerufalem, and all 
 Judea, and all the region round about Jordan.—- 
 Yea, though ever fo few of them had been baptiz- 
 ed, there was good reafon why he ihould chufe a 
 place to preach in, that was well fupplied with wa- 
 ter ; for the multitudes that attended on his 
 preaching, in the wildernefs, at a diftance from 
 their homes, would need much water for their re- 
 freshment. It is by no means fuppofeable, that 
 fuch numbers could, here in the defart, be provided 
 with change of apparel proper for immerfion ; and 
 furely, in fuch a numerous and mixed affembly, they 
 were not baptized naked. The circumftances of 
 the cafe therefore lead us to fuppofe, they were 
 baptized by affufion. 
 
 We read, Aft. 2. Of three thoufand baptiz- 
 ed, in only part of a day, at the feafl of pentecoft. 
 It cannot rationally be thought, that thefe were 
 plunged. There does not feeua to have been time 
 
 for 
 
for it ; nor is it likely they had change of raiment, 
 as they came to the feaft without any expectation of 
 iuch an occafion ; nor is it probable, they could be 
 accommodated there with any convenient place for 
 immeHion. If there were baths fufficient for the 
 purpofe in the temple, yet it is very incredible, that 
 the priefts and officers of the temple fhouhl be wil- 
 ling to accommodate the Apoflles with them, in or- 
 der to initiate thefe converts into a religion, which 
 they were endeavoring by all means to fupprefs. 
 
 When we read of whole families baptized in 
 their houfes, particularly of the jailor and his fam- 
 ily baptized at home, and at midnight too, in the 
 fame hour in which he believed, we cannot think, 
 that a fufficiency of w:ter, and other conveniences 
 for a decent immerfion, could be procured on h 
 fudden an occafion. 
 
 W'-en Corndim and his friends received the 
 gofpel, Peter afks, not whether any man could hin- 
 der them from going to a fountain or river ; but 
 whether any man could forbid water ^ i. e. hinder wa- 
 ter from being provided, that they fhould not be bap- 
 tised ?* 
 
 Paul feems to have been baptized in the 
 houfe of Judas. There Ananias found him, de- 
 livered his meilage to him, and laid his hands on 
 him ; And he received fight fort hzuth andarofe and 
 was baptized^ 
 
 It is worthy to be remarked, that though. 
 we read of baptifms in various places, yet we have 
 no account of any perfon's going from the place 
 where he was, in order to be baptized in a fountain 
 or river. They who were baptized in dreams and 
 
 natural 
 
 * Aft. io. 47. f A<St 7. i?. 
 
^4 
 
 natural collections of water, arefuch as were found 
 abroad, either in the wildernefs, or on the road, 
 when they firfl difcovcred their defire to be bap- 
 tized. 
 
 IV. It now remains, that wc confide", what 
 was the ufage of the primitive Church, upon 
 which our brethren lay great weight in this contro- 
 verfy. 
 
 The author of the letters fays, s The whole 
 chriflian church, for 1300 years fucceffively from 
 the time of the Apoftles, underftood by baptifm, 
 immerfion, and fo practiied ; Sprinkling being only 
 ■permitted on extraordinary occajions.' This argu- 
 ment he often repeats, and depends much upon, as 
 do mod of the advocates for immerfion : for they 
 reckon, that the early practice of the Church in this 
 matter may fliew, what was the practice of the A- 
 poftles, becaufe it is not likely, the apoftolic prac- 
 tice would be early and generally difufed. 
 
 The truth is, The manner of baptizing a- 
 mong the ancients was looked upon circumftantial, 
 and no way eiTential to the validity of the ordi- 
 nance. In the times near the Apoftles, immer- 
 fion was much practiced, but never afferted to be 
 ncceftary : Far from this ; fprfoldifig was expreff- 
 ly allowed, and frequently ufed, efpecially in cafes 
 of infirmity, hafte, or want of water or other con- 
 veniences. This the Author himfelf concedes, 
 that from the Apoftles times for 1300 years, 
 c fprinkling was permitted on extraordinary occa- 
 sions.' Cyprian (who wrote within about 150 
 years of the Apoftles) fpeaking of fprinkling, fays, 
 * in the facrament of falvation (i. c. baptifm) when 
 
 neceffity 
 
2 5 
 
 neceilky compels, thcjborie/l ways of tranfa<fting 
 divine matters, do, by God's grace, confer the 
 whole benefit.' And it may not be impertinent 
 to obferve, that the ancients, who practiced im- 
 merfion, did ufually, after the body had been plung- 
 ed, apply water to the face. So far therefore as 
 the practice of the ancients is of weight, it proves 
 all that we contend for. We do not fay, immer- 
 fion is unlawful, or a meer nullity : We fay, it is 
 not neceflfary, but affufion is fufficient and agreea- 
 ble to the divine word. And fo laid the ancient 
 church. 
 
 1 hope what has been offered is fufficient to 
 juflify the mode of baptifm admitted in our church- 
 es, and to fatisfy all, who have received baptifm in 
 this mode, that they have no need to feek immer- 
 jion. The queftion concerning the mode is really 
 of fmall importance in itfelf, and nothing but the 
 controverfy about it has made it otherwife. If our 
 baptifm is treated as a nullity, it is of importance to 
 fatisfy our minds : And if any have been thrown 
 into doubts, I hope, the consideration of what has 
 been faid, will give them fatisfa<ftion. 
 
 
PART II. 
 
 *+*■ ***^*^ +4t^2<£gZrA 
 
 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 .1 COME now to the fecond part of 
 my defign, which is to vindicate the right of Infants 
 to baptifm. 
 
 The method in which I mall proceed is as 
 follows. I fhall firft confider the ufual objections 
 againft infant-baptifm. — Next produce our argu- 
 ments in vindication of it. — Then briefly touch up- 
 on the reafonablenefs and ufefulnefs of it. — After 
 \vh ch I fhall give a fliort view of the practice of the 
 church foon after the Apoftles. — And then by way 
 of conclufion mail mew the abfurdity of reparations 
 in churches on account of differences refpecting 
 baptifm. The unwarrantablenefs of rebaptiza- 
 tion, &c. 
 
 I. I will diftinftly confider all the material 
 objections o : our brethren againft infant baptifm, as 
 I collect them from their writers, and particularly 
 from the author of the letters before mentioned. 
 
 i. It is faid, < thrift has fully and plainly 
 declared his mind about baptifm ; and becaufe he 
 has not commanded the baptifm of infants, he has 
 virtually forbidden it.' 
 
 Now though it fhould be allowed, that there 
 is no exprefs command, yet if we can find a virtual > 
 
 confequentiai 
 
^7 
 
 ttmfequentkd command for it, that, I truft, will 
 
 fuflicient warrant : Otherwife what warrant dial I 
 we have to admit females to the Lord's flipper ? 
 To obferve the firft day of the week as holy ? To 
 maintain public worihip ? Iheft and many other 
 things, are no where enjoined, in fo many words, 
 but yet can clearly be fliewn to be agreeable to the 
 will of God. What command have our brethren 
 tojudify their practice? Where is the pafiagc, 
 which tells us, that baptifm mud be confined to the 
 adult ; and infants, though formerly admitted to 
 the fcai of the covenant, mud now be admitted no 
 more ? They can find nothing of this fort. But, I 
 truft, it will appear, that there is what may proper- 
 ly be called a command for our practice. If that 
 paiTage iu Ifaiab, Li, I haiefet thee jcr a light to 
 the Gentiles, was i / to the Apodles, to go 
 
 and preach to the. G rciiles, as it is faid to be \f* 
 then the direction given to Abraham our Father, 
 to affix the token of the covenant to his infant-feed -, 
 the commiflion given to the Apodles to difciple all 
 nations baptizing them ; and the exhortation of Pe- 
 ter, be baptized— for the promife is to you and your 
 children, are commands to admit infants to baptifm ; 
 as we (hall endeavour to ihew hereafter. 
 
 2. It is objected, ' that in all the hiftory of the 
 'New Teftament there is no e:<a?nple of infant-bap- 
 ' tifm ; but the baptifms we have an account of, 
 6 are the baptifms of profeffed believers/ 
 
 But if there is no exprefs mention of infant-bap- 
 tifm, yet we cannot hence conclude, it was never 
 pra&ifed ; any more than we can conclude, that 
 
 fome 
 
 Aft. 13. 46. 
 
28 
 
 fome whole churches were formed without any 
 baptifm at all, becaufe it is no where fa id, they 
 were baptized. If a plain direct example be infill- 
 ed upon, our brethren mull certainly give up their 
 notion of baptifm ; for they can find no example in 
 their favor, whatever we can ; as will be evident, 
 if we only cciifider what is the queftion between 
 us. It is not, whether adult profelytes fhould be 
 baptized ? But whether the infants of profeifed be- 
 lievers fhould be baptized ? There are, it is true, 
 inltances enough of the baptifm of adults, who had 
 been converted from Judaifm or Paganifm : But 
 thefe are nothing to the point ; for we allow bap- 
 tifm to all adult believers, who have not been bap- 
 tized in infancy. And the Apoitles' baptizing/^ 
 is no argument, that they did not baptize infants , a- 
 any more than our iniiikmartes' baptizing adults a- 
 mong the natives, is an argument, that they do not 
 baptize infants. The quefhon is merely this ; are 
 the infants of baptized believers to be admitted to 
 baptifm ? Or to be rejeeled ? If you fay, they mud 
 be rejecled and fuffered to grow up before they are 
 baptized ; I afk, Where is your example ? Did the 
 A potties refufe to baptize fuch ? Or among the a- 
 dults whom they baptized, do you find any that 
 were born of chriltian parents ? The hiftory of the 
 A£te contains a period of above thirty years, and 
 the New Teftament, a much longer period. There 
 was time enough for two or three generations of in- 
 fants to grow up to adult age. We have all along 
 accounts of baptifm. But it is remarkable, that in 
 all this time, there is no intimation, that any one of 
 the children of the early believers was baptized af- 
 ter he grew up ; or that any one of thofe adults 
 
 whom. 
 
29 
 
 whom the Apoflles baptized, was born of believing 
 parents. It is plain then, there is not one example, 
 which in the leait, favors the opinion of our breth 
 rcn, which is this, That the children of believers 
 majl be left to grow up before they are baptized. They 
 alk, ' Is it not a little ftrange, that wc no where 
 find children mentioned, if it were the Apodlcs' cuf- 
 tom to baptize them with their parents ?' And I 
 afk ; is it not very llrange, that we no where find 
 the children of believers baptized after they grew 
 up, if it was the Apoftles' cullom to leave them un- 
 baptized till they grow up ? There is no example of 
 this kind. But, we think, we have examples, and 
 juitiuch examples in favor of our practice, as wc 
 ihculd have, upon fuppofition, the Apoftles did bap- 
 tize children with their parents. 
 
 Let us fuppofe infants were baptized : And 
 what account fhould we have of it ? Would the 
 liiltory tell us, fuch an infant by name of fuch an 
 and fuch an one of fuch an age, was baptized ? 
 No : This minutenefs could not be expected con- 
 cerning infants, who are feldom known, by their 
 names or ages, out of the families, to which they 
 belong. All wc could expect to be told is this ; 
 fuch a man was baptized and his family — fuch a 
 woman and her houfehold. And this we are told ; 
 Stephanas'* houfhold, Lyciia and her hcufhold, the 
 yailor and all his were baptized ; which are plain 
 examples of families baptized upon the faith of 
 their refpective heads ; as I ilia.ll fliew more fully 
 hereafter. . 
 
 3. It is argued, c that faith and repentance 
 the conditions of baptifm ; infants are not ca 
 thefe, and therefore not capable of baptiir 
 - c 
 
3^ 
 
 But as well might our brethren fay, c Faith and 
 repentance are conditions of falvation, and therfcre 
 infants, being incapable of thefe cannot be faved.' 
 It is exprefsly faid, He that believeth not fl: all be 
 damned. It is no where faid, He that believeth not, 
 or repenteth not, fhall not be baptized. Faith and 
 repentance are required on fcveral particular occa- 
 fions, when baptifm v,as to be adminiftered to adult 
 perfons ; but we find no general rule given to ex- 
 clude from baptifm fuch as are incapable of faith 
 and repentance. Our brethren will not exclude in- 
 fants from falvation, upon the authority of thofe 
 texts, which make faith the condition of it ; and 
 furely, if they will be confident with themfclvcs, 
 they cannot exclude them from baptifm, upon the 
 authority of thofe texts, which make faith the con- 
 dition of that ; efpecially fmce thefe texts plainly 
 refpecl adult profelytes. 'YhMfucb mult profefs 
 their faith we allow. But the apoflolic practice 
 fhews, that upon their profeffion, not only they, but 
 their houfholds alio ihould be baptized ; as under 
 the ancient difpenfation, when a Gentile became a 
 profelyte, not only he himfelf, but all his male chil- 
 dren were circumcifed. 
 
 The inftances in which faith, or repentance is en- 
 joined previoufly to baptifm, are only when adult 
 perfons enquired what was necefiary for thenfelves. 
 The queflion was not concerning the qualification 
 for baptifm in general ; but what was requifite in 
 their own cafe. 'What (hall we do?' — 'What 
 hinders me to be baptized ?' The Apoftles anfwer 
 the queflion, as it refpecled thofe who propoftd it. 
 Repent ye and be baptized— If then believe/?, thou 
 mavji le baptized, Thefe directions only prove, 
 
 that 
 
3* 
 
 that a profcfEon of faith and repentance is ncceffa- 
 ry to the baptifm 01 adults, which none deny j but, 
 in no decree allcci: the right of infant?* 
 
 Faith was as much required under the Old Tef- 
 tament in order to circumcifion, as it is under the 
 new in order to baptifm ; but (till infants were cir- 
 cumcifed. The gentile profelyte was not admitted 
 to this rite, till he profeiTcd his faith in the God 
 oflfrael ; neither was the adult jew. During the 
 forty years that circumcifion was intermitted in the 
 wikierneis, a new generation came on the ftage. 
 c w;rre circumcifed ibon after they parted over 
 Jordan.* But prevkuifly to tin's, they had folemn- 
 Jy avouched the Lord to be their God. Now be- 
 caufe faith was a pre-requiiitc to the circumcifion 
 of adults, (hail we conclude that no infants were cir- 
 cumciied ? This uonld be contrary to known fact. 
 But this conclusion would be as juft as the other, 
 which determines againU: the baptifm of infants, 
 becaufe a profeffion of faith was required in profe^ 
 lytes. The truth is, all arguments drawn from 
 fpecial and particular cafes, are impertinent to an 
 enquiry concerning a general rule of practice. 
 
 The author of the letters lays particular weight 
 upon that paflage, i. Pet, 3. 21. The like figure 
 wbereurJo, even beptifm^ doth nozv •fwve its, not the 
 putting away the jiiih oftheflejh* but the anfwer of a 
 good con future towards Gcd. * Here,' he fays, ' iucli 
 
 * a condition of baptilm is required, as infants are 
 
 * not capable of. The filth of their flefli may be 
 ' put away : But how ihall they anfwer the good 
 £ confeience V But it thould be obferved, that the 
 
 anfwer 
 
 *Jofh. 5. 
 
3 2 - 
 
 1 
 
 anfwer of a good confcience is made the conditio* 
 offalvation : Not of bapiifnu He might therefore 
 rather have faid, fuch a condition offahation is re- 
 quired as infants are not capable of. This is a con- 
 dition of falvation and baptiim too in adults, but of 
 neither in infants, who are not yet moral agents. 
 The Apoftle -fays, Circumcifion is that of the heart ;, 
 but furdy he did not mean, that yews were incapa- 
 ble of the flemy circumcifion, until they were capa- 
 ble of profefling the circumcifion of the heart. Bap- 
 tifm, which is externally the putting away the filth 
 oftheflejh, Signifies our obligation to anfwer a good 
 confcience toward God. This obligation immediate- 
 ly takes place with refpeft to all, who are moral a- 
 gents, and with refpeel: to infants, when they be- 
 come Tuch. Here is then no argument again/I the 
 baptifm of infants. 
 
 Let us fee if there be not a plain argument/^/- it. 
 The Apoitle is here Speaking of the prefervation of 
 Noah and his family in the flood by means of the 
 ark. The Apoftle to the Hebrews fays, By fai'h, 
 Noah, prepared an ark to the faving of his houfe. 
 It was by Noah's faith, that his family was brought 
 into the ark, and preferved in the flood. The like 
 figure whereunto, even baptifm, doth now five us. 
 Where is the likenefs ? Plainly here. As Noahbj 
 faith prepared an ark, by which his houfe was fav- 
 ed ; fo the faith of the chriftian parent brings his 
 family within the privileges of the covenant. Sal- 
 vation came to Zaccheus's houfe, in confequence of 
 his believing. They enjoyed forae fpecial privileg- 
 es on account of his faith. 
 
 4. We read, A&. 8. 5. that when the Samari- 
 tans believed Philip, preaching the things concerning 
 
 the 
 
the kingdom of God, thcyi ! Hzedbotb men and 
 
 Upon this our author obferves, ''lhe 
 
 hiitory is (o particular as to mention both men and 
 
 //, but there flops. — Had the facred hiftorian 
 
 . a little more explicit and faid, men, women and 
 
 ren, if the facl were really fa ; it would bave 
 
 . 1 much doubt and con trove: ' 
 
 In atrfwer to this, it is fufficient to fay ; as the 
 fcal of the covenant under former difpenfations had 
 been affixed only to males, (o there was good rea- 
 fon, why the hiftorian fhould be fo particular, as 
 to mention both men and women, i. e. males and fe- 
 males, (for thefe terms are in fcripture applied to 
 perfons of all ages) that it might appear, that the 
 covenant- feal was, for the future, to be affixed to 
 perfons of bother/. But as the feal had always 
 been applied to children, there was no occaiioii lor 
 his being fo explicit, as to fay, men, women and chil- 
 dren, if the facl were really io ; for children's right 
 to the covenant-token had not then been mad/ a 
 quellion ; and they who knew the immemorial 
 and univerial ufage of admitting Jewjb infants by 
 circumcilion, and the infants of Gentile profelytes 
 by baptifm, did not need to be mitrufted, that in- 
 fants were entitled to baptifm under the chriftian 
 difpenfation. They mult naturally fuppofe it, un- 
 lefs exprefsly told the contrary. 
 
 5. It is urged by fome, 'that Jefus Chrill, who 
 came to be our example, was baptized at adult age, 
 and that we ought to imitate him herein.' 
 
 But his example is no more an argument againft 
 infant baptifm, than againft all baptifm under the 
 age of thirty years ; for this was his age, when he 
 was baptized, though he was certainly capable of 
 
 underflanding 
 
34 
 
 underftanding the nature of baptifm before he was 
 twelve. Do our brethren think, that all are bound, 
 in imitation of Chriit, to live, unbaptized, twenty 
 years after they arrive to the age of underftand- 
 
 fag ? 
 
 The objection before us is founded in the fup- 
 pofition, that the baptifm which Chrift received, 
 was the fame, in its nature and defign, with that 
 which he himfelf afterwards appointed. If it was 
 a different thing, no argument can be drawn from 
 it in the prefent qaeftion. If it was the fame, then 
 it at once removes the principal objection againft the 
 baptifm of infants, taken from their incapacity for 
 faith and repentance. For Jefus was as incapable 
 of faith in a mediator and repentance of fin, as in- 
 fants are ; though from a different caufe. 
 
 But, as I have before (hewn, ChriiVs baptifm 
 was his public inauguration into his miniftry, and 
 therefore is impertinently adduced to difprove the 
 baptifm of infants. When we are aiked, why 
 Chriir. was not baptized in his infancy, it is fuffi- 
 cicnt to anfwer, becaufe he did not take on him his 
 public miniftry in his infancy. To argue, that ho- 
 caufe Chrift was publicly confecrated to his priefl- 
 hoocl at the age of thirty -years, therefore none 
 fhould be given to God by baptifm in their child- 
 hood, is an inconclufive way of reafoning. 
 
 Let it, however be obferved, thar, though he 
 was not baptized in infancy, yet he was dedicated to 
 God, by fuch rites as were then in life. He was 
 circumcifed on the eighth day ; and on the fortieth 
 day, he was brought by his parents into the tem- 
 ple, and there prelented to God, according to the 
 law, which required, that every firfbborn male 
 
 fhould 
 
35 
 
 ihonld be holy to the Lord. This example (hews, 
 nts ought publicly to dedicate their chil- 
 dren to God in his appointed way ; and, fince bap- 
 ; ^ now the appointed ceremony of dedication, 
 it 'Ihcws, that they ihould prefent their children to 
 him in baptifm.* 
 
 6. The 
 
 • If ft could be proved, which certainly it never can, t! . 
 baptized only adu'ts, yet no argument could hence be dech: 
 gaiuft the rigl.tof in fa lire to baptifrn uiider the goipcl difpenfatit n ; 
 for the b:iptiim which John adminiftcrcd, was not properly ciniirhm 
 baptifm. 
 
 Though before Ch rift's lime, baptifm w as in ufe among the 
 Jews, yet it was net mad, the only initiating fcal of the covenant, 
 until afrer his refurrecli; n. 
 
 John was ftnt to preach the baptifm of repentance for the re- 
 in rfti on of fins, and thus to prepare men for that new difpenfation 
 of God's kingdom, which was not yet come, but was then at hand. — 
 Chrift inftituted his baptifm afrer this difpenfation was come. 
 John's baptifm materially differed from thi.«. The baptifm, which 
 Chrift inftituted was, in the name of '.be Father, of the Son, and of the 
 HolyGhoft. John di J not baptize in the name of the Holy Chfl ; 
 for fome who bad received his baptifm, confeffed that tb:y /.ad not 
 fo much as heard, xibctbcr ther* ti'ere 'any Moly Ghofl. He did not bap- 
 tize in the name of the Sen, or in the faith, that Jefus vas the Cbrif ; 
 but tiitb tie baptifm of repentance, faying to the people, tint they fkould be- 
 lieve on him ivbofhould come after him ; that is, en Jefus Chr'f. Nor did 
 he baptize into Chrift\ death, for this event had not th< n taken plp.ee. 
 Had John taught that Jefus of Nazareth was the Chrift;. and bap- 
 tized the people in his name, and into this fa : th. they would not 
 have mufed in their her.rts, "uhelher John ivere the CBrjp ; nor have afk- 
 ed him, Why bapiizcf thou, if thou art 'not the Chrift ? Nor would Jc- 
 fus have cautioned hisdjfciples, to tell no man, that he was tSe Cbriji , 
 till after hi < rcftrreclion. John's baptifm was d figntd to prepare men 
 for the faith in Chrift, when he fhould he made rr.anifcfi to Ifrael. 
 
 C"t what is decifive in th<^ cafe is, that fume who had rece ved 
 John's baptifm, were afterward* baptized in the name of the Lord 
 Jefus. 
 
 Among the many tboufands \ from all Judea and t Jerufalevt y \.tS 
 whom P(.tf-r preached on the da\ Of pentccoft, it cannot be doubl- 
 ed, that there were multitudes, who had been baptized by John ; 
 for there runt oat t-j bim all the IjhJ cf Judea, and they rf jenfi 
 all the region round about Jordan, and w ere baptized of bim. And vet 
 Peter fay* to thtra, without clift : nclinn, Repent and be baptized, every 
 one of you, in the name of Jefus Chrift. 
 
 An 
 
6. The incapacity of cnndren for the ends of 
 baptifm or for any benefit from it, is often urged 
 as an argument againft their bein*. baptized. 
 
 But really the queflion is, Whether there be 
 any divine warrant for their baptifm ? Jf there is, 
 it becomes us to pra&ife accordingly, and not to 
 arraign the wifdom of God. That there are fome 
 rational ends to be anfwered by infant baptifm, 
 and that it is a gracious and beneficial inftitution, I 
 fruit, will appear under another head, where this 
 objection will receive a full anfvver. In the 
 mean time it may fufnee to obferve, that infants are 
 now as capable of the ends of baptifm, as they 
 were anciently of the ends of circumcifion. They 
 may be brought into covenant wuh Goi — may 
 have privileges made over to them — may receive 
 the leal and token of privileges — may be laid 
 
 under 
 
 An inftance ftill more plain we hare in the beginning of the 
 19th Ch. of A£ls. Paul finding at Ephefus twelve dileiples, fail to 
 them, Have ye received the Holy Gbojl fince yc believed ? And they faid 
 to him, IVe bave not femxb as bend libeller thei e be any Holy Gbof:.-— 
 And he faid tO them, U'tlo ivhatthen luere ye baptized ? And they laid, 
 Un-o Johns b'ptifn. Then faid Paul, John verily battled with the 
 baptifm of repentance, faying unto the people, that they foould believe on ft it, 
 luhofoouU come aflei h;r.: y that is, Oil Jefus Chriit. IV ben tiey beard 
 this, they ivere baptized 'in tbc ra?xe of the Lord Jefus. Ard rvben /' ■ id 
 
 laid bis bands on then, the Hoi ' j Ghoji came upon fbcm, \jc. 
 
 IVbin they beard this, they ivere b.ptized in the name of the Lord 
 jfefs. The meaning cannot he, thai when t he people heard 
 "John they were by him baptized in ihe name of tie Lord Jeffs ', be- 
 caufc then it will follow, that Paul laid his htwds on all the people 
 wh( m John baptized ; for they, who are I: r? faid to 1 ire 
 
 evidently the p«rfi)ns on whom f-rol hid bi% band*. But the fenfe 
 mult be, thst v Nn theft twelve difciples who ; i been baptised by 
 John,now heard Paul, they were baptized 1\> hi no. It follows ;'..n 
 that John's baptifm, being neither in the n; hnft nor of the 
 
 Holy Ghofr, wfcs different from that •>» h<ch Chrtf) i ^nd 
 
 no arguments can bt drawn from the forme 1 line the mode, 
 
 or fubje&s of the latter; nor can the repetition of chriftian bap- 
 tifm be juftifiedfrom this example of Paul. 
 
 
37 
 
 «adcr obligations to obey the gofpel, as the Jcwijh 
 Infants by circumcifion became debtors to obey the 
 hw — and may become fubjccls of that hlftification 
 through ChriiVs blood, that renovation of the 
 Spirit, and title to eternal life, which are fignified 
 anJ fced i:i baptiim. 
 
 Li: .- given you a view of all the material 
 
 W, which are brought to difprove infant 
 bapti I'm. And what has been faid in anfwer to 
 rhem is, I think, futhcient to ihew, that they have 
 SO real weight. The way is now prepared to 
 bring forward our arguments in vindication of this 
 t-, which was the itcond thing propofed. 
 
 II. We will here take a diltincl view of the prin- 
 cipal arguments in defence of the right of believer's 
 inrants to baptiim, and endeavour to eftablifh them 
 again it the cavils of our opponents, and particu- 
 larly the author of the letters before mentioned. 
 
 i. Our iirff. argument mall be taken from the 
 Abrahamic covenant together with the Apoflle's 
 explanation of it. 
 
 In the 17th chap, of Gen. we find, that God 
 made a covenant with Abraham and his feed, into 
 which his infants were exprefsly taken, together 
 with himfe f, by the fame rite and token. This 
 covenant comprehended not only his natural feed, 
 but the Rranger who was not of his feed. It was 
 ^fpiritual covenant, The capital promife of it was 
 Izui// be a Gvd to thee and thy feed after thee. — 
 This was the fame covenant, which now fubfifte, 
 an 1 which we are now under in this gofpel-ag 
 the Apoftle exprefsly teaches us, in the 4th chap * 
 to Rom. and 3d chap, to Gal. where he argues 
 from the covenant with Abraham ', to fhew the if a- 
 D 
 
33 
 
 rare and extent of the gofpel-covenant. He tefti- 
 ftft, that all believers under the gofpel, whether 
 Jews or Gentiles ^ are the fpiritual feed of Abraham, 
 and confequently heirs of the promife made to him — 
 that the covenant made with Abraham was confirm- 
 ed of God in Chriji — that the law which was given 
 afterwards did not difannul the covenant, or vacate 
 the promife — that the gofpel was preached to A- 
 braham, in that promife of the covenant with him, 
 In the: fall all nations be bleffed — that the bl effing 
 of Abraham is come upon the Gentiles through 
 Ghriil — that the promife made to Abraham is font 
 to all the feed, not only to that which is of the 
 law, but to that alfo which is of the faith of Abra- 
 ham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, / 
 bavd made thee a father of many nation* — that they 
 Vshoare of faith are the children of Abraham, and 
 to Abraham and his feed were the prcmifes made — 
 and much more to the fame purpofe. 
 
 Now if we are the feed of Abraham, for whom 
 the covenant with him was e'hibiifhed, and are flill 
 under the felf-fame covenant, then the fame privi- 
 leges that were herein granted to him, belong to 
 us. One grant of that covenant was, that infants 
 ihould be received with their parents by the fame 
 llgn and feal ; and therefore we, as the feed of 
 Abraham, may claim this privilege for our infants. 
 Yea, God not only allowed, but commanded, that 
 the appointed token of the covenant fhould be af- 
 fixed to every male child who was not under eight 
 days old. Here then is a plain command given to 
 Abraham our father, and confequently to us his 
 children, to apply the token of this very covenant, 
 which we are now under, to our infant-feed. The 
 
 only 
 
qucftion is, whether tha .■■■nv any token 
 
 of the covenant r Had circumciiion been continn* 
 ed, none could doubt but infants were flili fu, 
 of it by virtue of the command given to Abraham* 
 unlefs they would expunge the 4th chap, to Rom. 
 and 3d to Gal. Circumcinon has ccafed. ±\n 
 has Chrifl: appointed any token of the gofpcl cov- 
 enant ? Baptifm is certainly fuch. This then is to 
 be applied to the fame fubjecls as that was. If there 
 was an exprefs command to affix the covenant feal 
 to infants in Abraham's time, and the covenant ftiil 
 remains ; then the covenant-feal, whatever it is, 
 ought to be affixed to infants now, unlefs the com- 
 mand has been repealed. The change of the feal 
 makes no change of the fubjed. There muir. be a 
 command to warrant our rejecting the eld fuijec?, 
 as well as to juftify our dropping the old feal. M 
 our brethren alk, Why we have difcontinued cir- 
 cumcinon, and now make ufe of baptifm ? We 
 anfwer, Chrift has io ccmmanJed* I^et them pro- 
 duce as good authority for affixing this new feal of 
 the fame covenant to believers only^ and not to their 
 children, and we wili comply with them. We 
 demand of them to fhew us fome plain, pofitive or- 
 der Oi Chrifl: to deny the feal of the covenant to 
 thofe fubjecls, to whom it was firft ordered to be 
 applied. Until fuch order appears, we boldly af- 
 firm, that the old command remains, and to act in 
 difobedience to it is prefumption. 
 
 To evade the force of this argument, our breth- 
 ren aflat, that f the chriflian church is an inftitu- 
 tion entirely new ; a flructure erected on a new 
 foundation, diilinct from, and unconnected with 
 the foundation of the patriarchal and jewifli 
 
 church ;' 
 
40 
 
 church ;' for they eafily fee, that if the chriitiaa 
 church is the aaeieUt church, continued under the 
 fame covenant which was made in ancient times, 
 then the admilBon of children with their parens 
 into this church, will ftand fecure on the foot of 
 the former inititution. It may not therefore be 
 improper to purfue our prefent argument a little 
 farther. 
 
 The foundation of the ancient church is, the 
 difcovery ofGod y s mercy to fallen men through a re- 
 deemer. This difcovery was firflmade to Adam in 
 the fentence on the tempter ; and afterward more 
 fully to Abraham in the promife already mention- 
 ed. This God exprefsly calls his e-zcr lqf}i?ig cove- 
 nant. This is always confidered by Moles and the 
 prophets, as the ground on which the Faith and 
 hope of the jewifh church refted; Mofes fays,* 
 c Ye (land all of you before the Lord, your li'ives 
 and little ones, that thou fhouldft enter into cove- 
 nant with him, that he may be a God to thee, as he 
 hathfivorn to Abraham. The prophet Jeremiah, f 
 foretelling the gofpeldifpenfation, defcribesit by an 
 allufion to the covenant with Abraham, which he 
 diilinguiihes from the covenant of peculiarity made 
 with the Jews at Sinai, when they came out of E- 
 gypt. The apoftle to the Hebrews { applies the 
 prophet's defcription to the gofpel-ftate. The old 
 covjflant, which, he fays, was decayed and ready 
 to^pifh, is not the covenant with Abraham ; for 
 thisnt calls the covenant which God would make 
 in the latter days, or would explicitly renew in the 
 gofpel time, promifing, / Witt he their Led : but 
 
 ti. 
 
 * Dcu: 29. I C? • v : 
 
41 
 
 the old covenant, which was to vanifli away, np 
 more to be renewed, is the ceremonial covenant, or 
 that which God made with the Jews, when ho 
 brought them out of Egypt. 
 
 When the prophets foretel the call of the gen- 
 tiles, they fpeak of them as joining themfelves to 
 the church then fubfilling. In the 49th chap, of 
 Ifaiah, God comforts Sion, the Jewifh church, in 
 her defpondency, with a promife that he will never 
 forfake her, but her walls fhall be continually be- 
 fore him.. c Lift up thine eyes round about,' fays 
 her God, c and behold! All thefe gather them- 
 felves- together, and come unto thee. The chil- 
 dren, which thou {halt have after thou haft loft the 
 other, fhall fay, The place is too ftrait for me. — 
 Then flial t thou fay, Who hath begotten me the'e,, 
 feeing I have loft my other children ? Thus faith; 
 the Lord, Behold, I will lift up my hand to the- 
 Gentiles — and they {ball bring thy fons, in their- 
 arms, and thy daughters fhall be carried on their 
 moulders.' — The children of thefe Gentile profe- 
 lytes are called the fons and daughters of the 
 church. They are brought in the arms of their 
 parents to the church ' to be nurfed at her fide.' — 
 No words can more plainly defcribe the admiilion of 
 Gentile profelytes into the very church which w&s 
 then in being, and the folemn dedication of their 
 children,. as members of the church with them. 
 Similar reprefentations are frequent in the prophet- 
 ic writings. 
 
 The words of our Saviour, in 1 oth chap, of 
 John, are full to our purpofe. ' Other fhtep I 
 have which are not of ;*ns fold ; them alio I muft 
 bring.' 1 muft bring them into this fold, the Jew iih , 
 
 d church ■ 
 
42 
 
 church ; for what oilier fold was there then exit- 
 ing ? ' And they fhall hear my voice y and there 
 Khali be one fold and one fhepherd ■ 
 
 The apoftle Peter,* exhorting the Jews to repent- 
 ance, points them to the Saviour, whom the proph- 
 ets foretold, and fays, c Ye are the children of rhe 
 prophets, and of the covenant, which God made 
 with our fathers, faying, In thy feed flail all tie 
 families of the earth be blcffed : unto you firft God 
 hath raifed up his foil, and lent him (o blefs you/ 
 
 Paul, in the epiftle to the Ephefians, treats ex- 
 plicitly on this fubje<5r. He fays, c Ye v. ere r 
 afar off, without Chrift, aliens from the Comn • 
 wealth of Ifrael, and ftrangers from the coven;. 
 of promife. But now in Chrift- ye are made n ; 
 Chrift is our peace, who hath made both ore f \\ 
 hath united both Jews and Gentiles. Now there- 
 fore ye are * no more flrangers and foreigners, 1 
 fellow- eiii%cns with the f amis, and of the ,'^'flcbf 
 God ; and are built en the foundation of -the ap<J 
 and prophets, Jefus Chrift himfelf being- thee; 
 corner (tone.' The prophets and apoflles laid -the 
 fame foundation. The prophets foretold a Saviour 
 to come ; the apoflles preached this Saviour alrea- 
 dy come. The predictions of the former, and the 
 doctrines of the latter are the fame foundation, the 
 corner-irone of which is Chrift himfelf. The a- 
 poftle adds, fc Ye have heard of the difpenfation of 
 the grace of God. that the gentiles fhould be fel- 
 low heirs, and of the fame body and partakers cf ' hh 
 promife in Chrift -by the gofpeh* 
 
 The Jews, who were baptized on the day of 
 penteebfh believed -that Jeiuswas Lord and Chrift, 
 
 on 
 
on evidence derived foom the prophcir. ; and were 
 admitted to baptifm on the foot of the prom.'/l made 
 to their fathers. The fume promife, which was 
 the foundation of the ancient church, and of which 
 circumcifion was the feal, is alledged by the apof- 
 tle,as a reafon for the baptifm of tiiefe Chriftiari Jew j 
 and their children, and as many as God fhould call 
 from among the pentiles. The ehrifuan church here 
 flands on the old foundation ; and to this church 
 were added thole who afterwards were baptized. 
 
 In the i ith chap, to the Romans the apoflle ea* 
 prefsly declares, that the gentile believers are grafts 
 ed into the fume olive-tree (torn ythtdijbme of the 
 Je s, the natural brandies, were broken off by 
 unbelief. ' H fome of the branches, were broken 
 oa, and thou, being a wild olive, v.ert grafted in 
 among them,' the branches that remained, c and 
 with them partakefl of the root and fatnefs. of the 
 olive tree, boaft not again il tire branches ; for 
 thou beared not the root, bat the root thee. They 
 were broken off by unbelief, and thou (landed by 
 faith.' It is the fame root, which bearetb the 
 natural, and the ingrafted branches. Some of the 
 natural branches v\ere broken off — not all. — The 
 "believing Jews continued ftiil in the fame old dock, 
 in. wbkh they had before flood, and in which be- 
 lieving, gentiles were ingrafted. The gentiles were 
 not infer ted into a new flock, a tree lately grown 
 up ; nor were believing Jews lopt off from the old 
 tree to be inferted with gentiles into a new one : 
 but the former remained in the old flock-, and the 
 latter. w T ere grafted in among them, to partake wi'h 
 them' of the root and fatnefs of the fame olive, which 
 jrmerly uourifhlhem. . And. it is obfcrvable, 
 
 that 
 
4* 
 
 that thefe Jews,who immediately and readily fubmit- 
 ted to thegofpel,on its being propofed to them,feem 
 not generally, if in any infrance, to have received 
 chriftian baptifm. Heathens and Samaritans, who 
 were not of the church of God, and thofe Jews, 
 who by obiliuate unbelief, and open oppolition to 
 the gofpel, had' broken themfelves oiF. from the 
 church, were on their profeiTed repentance, bap- 
 tized. The other continued in God's covenant and 
 church. This thought we fhall have occafion to 
 refiime hereafter. When the unbelieving Jews 
 fhall, in the latter days, turn to the Lord, they. 
 fhall be grafted again — into what ? — another tree ? 
 no ; into their own olive-tree ; for the covenant 
 which God made with their fathers, is the fame \ 
 which he will make with them in the latter days, 
 when he fhall take away their fins. 
 
 We have now an obvious anfwer to a queftion, 
 which our brethren often put to us. ' If the chil- 
 dren of believers are fubjjefts of the covenaut-ieal 
 under the gofpel, as they were under former dif- 
 penfations, why have we not fome direcl, pofitive 
 inftitution, which might have prevented all contro- 
 verfy ?' 
 
 The facfc is, the gofpel found the children of 
 God's people already in covenant by virtue of the 
 ancient inflitution : and a new inftitution of that, 
 which had been plainly inftituted before, and was 
 not then fo much as queftioned, would have been 
 fuperfluous : not to fay, abfurd. The gofpel has 
 made it as plain as language can make any thing, 
 that the ancient covenant with Abraham is (till con- 
 tinued : and if children were, by divine command,to 
 receive the leal of the covenant formerly, they are 
 
 to 
 
"O 
 
 to receive it ftill, unlcfs the command is fomewherc 
 in the gofpel exprefsly revoked. We need no 
 new yiititution to warrant cur applying the feal to 
 them ; but we evidently need a new kiftitution to 
 jullif. them from ir. 
 
 Infant baptiiin (lands on the fame ground as 
 the chriftian fabbath. if it be afked, why the 
 gofpel has not, in to many words, inftituted a week- 
 ly fabbath, the anfwer is, it found a weekly fab* 
 bath already inilituted ; and a formal inflitution of 
 that, which had been inftituted before, was whol- 
 ly unneccftary. The apoftles took the fabbath as 
 they found it, only obferving a different day, after 
 Chrhi's refurrection, in me r.ory of that glorious 
 event. So they continued the ancient ufageof ap- 
 plying the feal of God's covenant to children, as 
 well as parents ; only they changed the external 
 form of the feal, fubftituting baptifm. forcircumci- 
 fion. The ancient iniliuition unrevoked, if we had 
 nothing more, would be (utneient to juftify the ap- 
 plication of the feal to infants. But we have ftill 
 farther warrant. 
 
 Let us view the argument in another light. 
 
 2. Circumcifion was of old, by divine com- 
 mand, applied to infants : And if baptifm (lands 
 now in the place of circumcifion, then this is alfo to 
 be applied to the faune fubjects. The confequence 
 is plain and undeniable. The only question i?., 
 Whether baptifm does now (land in the place of 
 circumcifion ? This is the point to be proved. 
 
 That circumcihon was the feal of the covenant 
 with Abraham, and va>, by divine appointment, 
 adminiiKred to infants, is well known — that the 
 Abraluink covenant ftill fubf ,K and is (lie fame as 
 
 the 
 
4 6 
 
 the Go/pel covenant, the Apoftle plainly teaches — 
 that baptifm is now the appointed token of the 
 gofpel covenant, none will deny : The confe- 
 qnenceis obvious ; baptifm now (lands in the place 
 of circumcifion, for it is the initiating feal of that 
 very covenant, of which circumcifion was the feal 
 formerly. 
 
 Again. The Apoftle fays, Rom. 4. 11. A- 
 braham received the fign of circumcifion, a feal of the 
 righteoufnefs cf faith. It is plain from this pafiage, 
 that circumcifion was a fign of fpiritual blefiings, 
 the blefiings of the covenant of grace : And not 
 (as fome abfurdly pretend) meerly a fign of world- 
 ly privileges, fuch as a right to the land of Canaan, 
 a numerous ifiue, &c. There were, it is true, 
 temporal blefiings promifed to Abraham and his 
 feed. But to argue from hence, that the cove- 
 nant with him was a meer temporal covenant, and 
 that circumcifion was only a feal of has fuch, is as 
 abfurd, as it would be to fay, The gofpel is a meer 
 worldly institution, becaufe it has thepromife of the 
 life that now is, and of that which is to come. 
 The Apoftle, in this pafiage, reprefents circum- 
 cifion in quite a different light, as efpccially and 
 eminently a feal of fpiritual blefiings. — That baptijm 
 is fuch, all allow : And therefore it comes in the 
 room of circumcifion, and (lands in the place in 
 which that once flood. 
 
 Farther y Thefe two rites, though different in 
 their outward form, are \\i<zfamc in their fpiritual 
 ufe and fignificancy. Circumcifion iignified our na- 
 tive corruption : (o does baptifm. Circumcifion 
 pointed out the necefiity of inward purity and fpir- 
 itual renovation : fo docs baptifm. That repre- 
 
 fentcd 
 
47 
 
 footed our juftification by the blood of ChrJfl : fo 
 docs this* That was a ceremony of admiilion into 
 God's church : fo is (bis. 7 bat denoted men's re- 
 lation to God and obligation to obey his law. 
 This alfo denotes our relation to Chrift and obliga- 
 tion to obey his gofpel. 
 
 But the apoftle puts this matter out of all doubt, 
 when he calls bap ti fin the circumcifion of Chrijt, and 
 urges chriflians being baptized, as a reafon why 
 they need not be circumcfcd. 
 
 Ke fays, Col. 2. 1 1. i 2. Tc are con pic te in him % 
 (in Chrift) in whom ye alfo are circumcifcd with the 
 circumcifon made without hands, in putting cjf the 
 body of the fins of the fejh by the circumcifion of Chrift, 
 buried with him in baptifn. The apoftle here calls 
 baptifn, the circumcifon of Chrift, or the chriftian 
 circumcifion. But he calls it by this name without 
 any propriety, unlets it ftands in the place of cir* 
 cumciiion. 
 
 The author, whom I have feveral times mention- 
 ed, labours much to evade the force of this pafTage. 
 He fays, By the circumcifion of Chrijl is meant, 
 • lYizfpiritual circumcifion,' or renovation of the 
 heart, in diftinclion from. ' the literal circumcifion.' 
 But this cannot be the meaning of the phrafe : For 
 the inward fpiriual circumcifion is mentioned in the 
 preceding branch of the fentence, under the name 
 of the circumcifion made without hands. And if we 
 take .both phrafes to fignify the fame ; then we 
 fhall make the words to run thus. Te arc circum- 
 cifed with the fipiriiual circumcifion, in being circum- 
 cifcd by the fpiritual circumcifion. Such an unmean- 
 ing repetition never dropt from the Apoftle. 
 
 The writer fays, ' That to guard the Coloflians 
 
 againfl 
 
4 s 
 
 againft Ac danger of being fed uced to the o^ferv- 
 ance of circumcifion, the Apoflle tells them.' 
 c They had received the /^/W/zWciraimcifion— and 
 therefore the literal circumcifion was not necelTary.' 
 But how did this fpiritual circumcifion or internal 
 renovation prove, that the literal circumcifion was 
 not neceifary ? Circumcifion ufed to be neceflary for 
 good men : Why net now? According to this in- 
 terpretation, external ordinances are not needful for 
 true chriitians, but only for iinners. Thofe among 
 the Coloilians,who were not fure they had received 
 the jpiriiual circumcifion. could not apply this argu- 
 ment ; and therefore, according to our author, 
 mull ilill obferve the literal circumcifion. Befides ; 
 the fame argument would prove, that they need 
 not be baptized ; for if they had received the fpir- 
 itual wafhing of fancliiication, what occafion was 
 there for the literal wafhing of baprfm ? And ycr, 
 according to him, none mufl be baptized, but act- 
 ual believers ; fo that, if we admit his conduction 
 of the nafTaffc, we mull: difallow cf all banti:, 
 
 Our author fays, * In the Apoftles days, the 
 chriitians converted from Judaifm were zealous to 
 incorporate circumcifion with chriitianity. — Do the 
 Apollles inftruct them, that they need not be fo 
 tenacious of one rite, tincc another is appoinl d in its 
 Jlead? Such an obfervation would have been much 
 to the purpofe — but nothing can be found of it in 
 their reafonings to diffuade chriitians from circum- 
 cifion. ' 
 
 But the gentleman is under a great mi: : 
 The jewijh converts were zealous to incorporate, 
 notmeerly circumcifion, but the whole ceremonial 
 law, with chriitianity. They contended for circum- 
 cifion 
 
49 
 
 ciiion as a rite binding to the obfervance of the 4 
 whole law, without which, they imagined, chriitiani- ' 
 ty would be incomplete. From this notion Paul 
 labors to reclaim them, and fecure others. He 
 does not oppofe circuinrificm Jjmply ; if he had, he 
 would not have circumcifed Timothy, nor fayc ap- 
 proved infant circumcifion among the jewifh believ- 
 ers ; but he oppofed it, in the fenfe above mentioned 
 as binding men to keep the ceremonial law in order 
 to acceptance with God. Though he had,upon pru- 
 dential reafons, circumcifed Timothy ', yet he gave no 
 place to thofe who would compel Titus to be circum- 
 cifed.that they might bring him and others into bon- 
 dage to the law. Now what argument docs he ufe to 
 dhTuade the Coloflian believers from circumciiion 
 and the obfervance of the law ? It is this ; They 
 had received baptifm, the chriflian circumciiion, and 
 were now bound to obey the gofpel, which, being 
 a complete inftitution, had fuperfeded the law. 
 Thus he reafons with them in the place before re- 
 ferred to. Beware left any manfpoil you through 
 philofophy and vain deceit ; after the rudiments of the 
 world and not after Chrift — for ye arc complete in 
 him, and fo need not add the ritual law to his gof- 
 pel : in whom ye are circumcifed — with the circum- 
 cifion of Chrift, or chriflian circumcifion, being buried 
 with him in baptifm. — Wherefore if ye be dead with 
 1 from the rudiments of the world', if by bap- 
 tifm into his death ye are freed from the rites of 
 wfdic drfpenfatibnj why, as though thing ■ in the 
 \, or under that difpenfation, are ye fubjccl to 
 ? You fee, that the Apoftle urges their 
 baptifm into Chrift, as a reafon why they fliould 
 not be fubjefr. to circumcifion, and the rites of 
 the ceremonial law, for which the Jews contended. 
 E He 
 
So- 
 
 He ufes the very argument to diffuade them from 
 circumcifion, which this author fays, he would ufe, 
 if baptifm came in its place : And therefore, by his 
 own conceiiion, baptifm does come in its place. 
 And if fo, then it is undeniably to be adminiflered 
 to the fame fubje&s, even the infants of believing 
 parents. 
 
 We are told,* that fome of the believing Jews 
 at Jcrufalem were much difpleafed, when they 
 heard that Paul taught the Jews, who were among 
 the Gentiles, that they ought not to cirewncife their 
 children. Would it have fatisfied fuch zealous con- 
 tenders for infant circumcifion, to have told them, 
 baptifm now came in the place of that ancient cere- 
 mony, but yet mutt not be applied to their chil- 
 dren ? This would but have provoked them the 
 more. Had it not been the ufage of the apoflles to 
 admit children with their parents into covenant by 
 the fame rice, certainly the Jews, among other ob- 
 jections againft the gofpel, would have urged this, 
 that it excluded their children from covenant priv- 
 ileges. They were apt enough to make objections, 
 and lince we find none of this fort, we may conclude, 
 there was no room for any. 
 
 That infants, under the patriarchal and mofaic 
 diipenfations, were admitted into covenant by a par- 
 ticular token, is certain. It is evident, this was 
 cohfidered as a privilege. It is allowed, that the 
 gofpel confers greater privileges than former dif- 
 pen fations : hut if children are now ihut out of 
 covenant, then the gofpel, inftead of enlarging, has 
 in this refpe£t diminiflied our privileges. 
 
 But fays our author, c The infallibility of the 
 
 Roman 
 
5 1 
 
 Roman church may be proved ih the fame mamu r ; 
 as thus : The people of God under the Old-Tcda- 
 ment enjoyed the benefit of infallibility. The high 
 Pried had the Urim and Thummim, by which the 
 mind of God was known, &c. confcquently there 
 mud be infallibility in the chriiVian church ; Qther- 
 wife the lefs perfect diipenfation of Mofcs will have 
 a great privilege beyond the chrijtian' 
 
 The truth is, The chrijlian diipenfation has this 
 privilege far beyond the mofaic. The additional 
 revelation of the gofpel difcovers the mind of God 
 as infallibly, and far more fully and extenfively 
 than ever it was difcovered by Urim and Thum- 
 mim. — Such occafional difcoveries now are not need- 
 ed, fince we have a complete ', Jianding revelation. 
 
 The author of the letters tells us, that circumcif- 
 ion, € that Old-Tedament rite, "was a ufehfs^ bur- 
 tben/btHty injurious ceremony, and treated as fuch 
 by the Apodles.? And hence he concludes, bap- 
 tifm cannot come in its room to be admimdered to 
 infants, as that was. - But where do the Apoflles 
 treat circumcifion in this manner ? The ceremonial 
 law indeed is confidered as a yoke of bondage ; as 
 burthenfome, not injurious ^ for it would id become 
 the teachers of religion to reprefent God as injuring 
 his people by his inditutions r Bat circumcifijr^ 
 confidered as a token of the covenant, is treated as 
 a great privilege.* What advantage bail) the 
 yews ? ylnd what profit is there of cirtumc 
 Much every way. ' It was a great privilege for the 
 children of Jens to have God for their Gcd, in 
 fuch a fenfe as he was not the God of'heathen chil- 
 dren ; to be born to the enjoyment of the oracles 
 
 and 
 
 Rom. 3. 1. 
 
5 2 
 
 and ordinances of God ; and to be under the care 
 of parents, who were folemnly bound to bring 
 them up in the knowledge and fervice of the God 
 of IfraeL And if the profit of circumcifion was 
 much every way, then the lofs by its abolition is 
 much every way, unlefs there be fomething appoint- 
 ed in its room. 
 
 It is often faid, ' Circumcifion was applied only 
 to males : Baptifm is defigned for both fexes, there- 
 fore they are not parallel ordinances, nor can we 
 argue from the one to the other.' 
 
 But it is certain, they are parallel in their main 
 defign, as initiating ;feals of the fame covenant* 
 Andfemales were admitted into covenant, as w.ell 
 as males, though no vifible token was appointed for 
 them. Every Jirjl-born male was to be publicly 
 prefented to God in token of the obligation of the 
 whole family to be holy to him ; for if 'the Jirji fruits 
 be holy,fo is the lump. So the parent's dedicating 
 his males to God by circumcifion, was a token that 
 all his children belonged to God. Accordingly 
 God equally claims an interefl in children of both 
 fexes, by virtue of the covenant relation of their 
 parents. God fays to the Jewi/h church, Ezxk. 
 16.7. I entered into covenant with thee, and thou 
 becamejl mine* And then he complains, ver. 20. 
 Thou hajl taken thy fons anil thy daughters, which 
 thou hajl born unto me, and thefe thou haft facri- 
 jiced. Thou ha/ljlain my children. So Dcut. 
 29.10. Ye /land this day before the Lord — all the 
 men ofJfrael, your little ones, and your wives, that 
 thoujhouldd enter into covenant, that he may be unto 
 thee a God— as he hath /worn to Abraham. They 
 were all admitted into covenant, though the ma':. 
 
53 
 
 oniv received the vifible token. But under the 
 goTpd there is no diltin&ion of male and female, 
 but all are one in Chriit, the vifible leal being affix- 
 ed to one as well as the other, la this refpeel the 
 gofpel difpenfation is more large and free than the 
 former, that it makes no diftinclion of nation orfex. 
 And fhall we think it was intended to be contracted 
 in another refpeel:, by cafhieiing all children, who 
 are more than half of mankind ? 
 
 The author before mentioned tells us, tint ' chil- 
 dren were admitted to the pallbver ; and hence we 
 may infer their right to the Lord's fupper ; as well ?s 
 from their circumciiion infer their right to bapiifm.' 
 
 It feems probable, that perfons of all ages partook 
 of ihejirjl paffover mentioned Exod. 12. which 
 was in fome refpe&s lingular, and different from 
 fucceding paffovers. But it appears from Luke 2. 
 42. that it was not the cuflom of the fcajl, for pa- 
 rents to bring their children to it, until they were 
 about twelve years old \ at which age, they might 
 be able to enquire of their parents, What mean ye 
 by this fervice ? And at this age, no doubt, many 
 are capable of underftanding the nature and end of 
 the Lord's fupper.* 
 
 e But 
 
 * ' Children at the age of i.-a years, were brought by thtir pa- 
 rents to the temple : And from that time they began to cat 67 the 
 paffover and other facrifices. Hyrcanus in Jofephus, B. 12. Chap. 
 4- fays, The Jewifh law forbids the fon to eat of the facrifices, be- 
 fore he has come to the temple, and there himfelf prefented an of- 
 fering to God.' (Pol. Synop. in Exod. 12. 26.) 
 
 The law prefcribed, that whew the Jews were ccrne inro the 
 land, which God would give them, all their males fhould appear 
 before him every year at the pafTover,in theplacewhichheappi inted. 
 But it is added, Tkeyjhall not appear before mc empty, but every one ac- 
 cording to tbegift of Lis baud. (Deut. 16. 16. and alibi, vide. Marg.) 
 
 The male, or men children, who were to appear before God', 
 in their appointed place, to cat of the paflbver,. were only fticli a* 
 <M>u!d faring a gift in their hand ; or prefent an offering for them-- 
 
54 
 
 But if infants had been ufually admitted to the 
 paiTover, it would not in the leaii: weaken our ar- 
 gument from circumciiion ; for the paflover was 
 •not a feal of the Abrahamic . covenant (k being ap* 
 pointed more than 4,00 years after that covenant 
 was made) but one of the mafak rites. Now the 
 ritual law is fupcrieded by the gofpel .; but the 
 Abrahamic covenant remains. The Lord's iiipper 
 is a commemorative fign, intended to Hiew forth 
 Chrift's death and bring him to our remembrance. 
 But baptifm is -a token of admifhen to the vifibie 
 privileges of God's people; and therefore infants 
 are capable of this* though not of the other. 
 
 Some perhaps will aJk, How could baptifm come 
 in place of circumcifion, when it appears to have 
 been in ufe before circumcifion, ceaied ? Let me 
 aflc another auefticn, How could Soknwh rek<n in 
 
 the 
 
 iclves. Tins probably is the law to which Hyrca'jus alludes, Bp. 
 Patrick, who was very learned in the jcwifli laws and cufroms, f.»Vo, 
 4 When children were twelve years old, their parents were bound to 
 bring them to the temple, ^i the pafibver, where, feeing what was 
 done in this feftival, they would be led to enquire, what i»can ye b) 
 this fervice ?' (Comment, in lixod. 12.) 
 
 As the end of the paiKncr was to perpttuate the memory, ofthc 
 deliverance from Egypt, and as the erpiefs reafon why children 
 were to attend it in the appointed place, was that they rfTignt be iu- 
 ilrucTtcd in that wonderful deliverance, parents could DO! \.lw 
 thcmfelves as bound to bring their childrm to the iblcmnity, 1 u- 
 fore they were capable o^' enquiring and underHanding what w as- 
 meant by it. Luke tells us (Chap. 2. 42.) that the parents of Jt- 
 i us went up every year to Jerui'alcm at the icaft of the padbver : 
 and when he was 12 yin c.V, they wtnt up qfftr the cujltut ofthrfcijl. 
 Their going after the cujlum oft/jefe.rf, doubtlcls intends their taking 
 their fon with them, who was now 12 years old : for it appears that 
 he accompanied them ; and this is the lii ft time we hear ol hit* going 
 to the feflival. It may aJfo be cbft rved, that the :x.ila only wire 
 required to appear before God at the padbver ; and uohc tan im- 
 agine, that infants and fuck! bags were taken In m their mt&rj arms 
 to be cairied to, and dctaiued at the temple, tluiiiv the. continuance 
 of fo long a folemuity. 
 
50 
 
 the place of VhtuI as his fucceflbr, when he be- 
 gan to reign before David was dead ? There is no 
 more difficulty in one qucflion, than in the 
 other. Though baptifm was in ufe, yet it was not 
 made the peculiar initiating leal of the gofpel-cov- 
 enant until after Chrift's refurrcction. 
 
 It has been enquired,. ' If baptifm fucceeds cir- 
 cumcifion, why were thofe baptized, who had al- 
 ready been circumcifed ?' We anfwer, 
 
 i. We think it has been proved, that both thefe 
 ordinances were initituted as feals of the fame gra- 
 cious covenant ; and therefore the right of infants 
 to baptifm will not at all depend on the foiution of 
 this quedion. 
 
 2. It is evident from the 15, and 21 chapters of 
 A<fts, that infant circumcifton was praftifed, with a- 
 poitolic approbation, by the Jtzi'ijk believers in the 
 ChrijUan church in jerufalem, and in other church- 
 es, by the Je%m who were members of them. For 
 tho' the apoiiles and elders agreed, that infant cir- 
 cumciilen ought not to be required of Gentile be- 
 lievers ; yet they allowed and approved it among 
 the Jeu-jjh converts, who, having been accuftomed 
 to it, and knowing it to have been a ufage from the 
 time of Abraham, could not at once, be perfuaded 
 to relinquifh it for another rite. 
 
 That infant circumcilion was not now regarded 
 by the apoiiles merely as a ceremony of the Mofaic 
 law, is manifefl ; becaufc, in this view, as we have 
 before lhewn, they utterly difallowed it, and ftren- 
 uoufly oppofed thofe who contended for it. They 
 mult therefore have regarded it, as that 'leal of 
 the righteouihefs of faith/ which was appointed to 
 Abraham, and continued under the patriarchal and 
 
 mofaic 
 
mofaic difpenfations* In the chriflian church, it 
 for a time held the fame place among the Jewifh, 
 as baptifm held among the Gentile believers. Hence 
 it follows, that the feal of the covenant was applied 
 to the infants of believers, in the time, and with the 
 approbation of the apoftles, and that baptifm fue- 
 cccdcd in the place of circumcifion y as a feal of the 
 fame covenant. 
 
 It is no objection to this argument, that the apof- 
 tles, infome injiances, complied with Jewifh cus- 
 toms, for thefe compliances were only occafional I 
 But the obfervance of infant circumcifion among 
 believing jews was general and conjlant for a courfe 
 of years, probably for 30 years together, and this 
 under the eye, and with the advice of all the a- 
 poflles. 
 
 They recommended to the Gentile believers a 
 charitable and pacific condeicention to their jewifh 
 brethren in matters, which interfered not with the 
 infli tut ions or doctrines of the gofpel, particularly, 
 in an abftinence from olfenfive meats, and in the 
 obfervance of favorite days. But they never re- 
 quired or advifed the Gentiles to conform to the 
 Jews in the obfervance of the Abrahamic rite of 
 infant circumcifion, tho* this was a rite, of which 
 the jewifh chriftians were as tenacious as of any oth- 
 er. The reafon is obvious : The Gentile believers 
 obferved another rite inflituted in its place, name- 
 ly, infant baptifm. 
 
 If under the chriflian difpenfation, infant circum- 
 cifion had been, in itfelf wrong, it would not have 
 been allowed to the Jewifh believers. If it had 
 been, under prefent circumfiances, an indifferent 
 ceremony, like abllinence from meats, {having the 
 
 head 
 
57 
 
 head, and purification in the temple, it would, for 
 peace fake, have been recommended to the Gentile 
 
 iievers. But as another ordinance was by them 
 ufed in its place, there would have been an impro- 
 priety in their adopting this, and therefore it was 
 
 t required of them. 
 
 3. It is an undeniable fact, that circumcifed be- 
 lievers were frequently, if not generally, received* to 
 fellowlhip, in the chrillian church, without baptifm \ 
 ibr all churches have fellowfhip with the church in 
 Jerufalem, and Jewiih and Gentile believers had 
 communion in the fame churches. That ChrinVs 
 rirfl difciples were baptized, we have no evidence. 
 That the twelve partook of the firfl fuppcr, before 
 chrillian baptifm was fo much as inftituted, is un- 
 deniable ; for it is evident from .Acts 19. 5. and 
 the author of the letters himfelf concedes, that 
 John's baptifm was not chrljlian baptifm. Now if 
 circumcifion was, in the cafe of the difciplee, fufE- 
 cient for their admiflion to the great go fpel-ordinance 
 cf the fupper, then certainly it was a feal of the 
 gofpel-covenant ; and therefore the baptifm of be- 
 lievers, already circumcifed, was a matter not ofu- 
 niverfalneceflity, but only of particular expedience. 
 It feems to have taken place chiefly in the cafe of 
 the Jews, who after Chrifl's refurrec"tion. had for 
 a time openly oppofed the gofpel, and the fuperior 
 -evidence which then attended it. Now 
 
 4. There was a manifeft propriety in baptizing 
 fame who had been circumcifed, although baptifm 
 and circumcifion are fuppofed to be feals of the 
 fame covenant. 
 
 The long expected MefBah had now appeared ; 
 
 learer difpenfation of the covenant of grace, at- 
 tended 
 
58 
 
 tended with larger promifes and more liberal priv- 
 ileges, was now introduced ; the way was opened 
 for the admiflion of a 1 nations into the church of 
 God ; and baptifm was inftituted to be a feal of 
 the covenant, and a badge of diftmclion between 
 the church and the unbelieving world. Though 
 circuracifion had been, and ftiil might be a mark 
 of difcrimination between the worihippers of the 
 true God and idolatrous heathens, yet, after the 
 inftitution of baptifm, the former rite would not fo 
 clearly difcriminate between chriftians and unbe- 
 lievers in general ; for unbelieving Jews would (till 
 ufe circumcifion. It was therefore proper, that the 
 circumcifed Jew, when he embraced the gofpel, 
 if he had before openly oppofed it, mould fubmit 
 to baptifm, to teftify his belief that Jems of Nazar- 
 eth, whom he had rejected, was the promifed Mef- 
 Hah ; that the doctrine preached by the apoftles, 
 in his name, was divine ; and that the ancient dis- 
 tinction of Jew and Gentile, male and female, was 
 abolifned, and all were to become one in Chrift. 
 Had none of the believing Jews been baptized, there 
 might have remained too great an appearance of a 
 diftinclion between them and gentile believers ; a 
 diftinclioa which, after all, many of the Jewiih chrif- 
 tians were flrongly inclined to preferve, and which 
 the apoftles were no lefs folicitous to extimuiifh. 
 It was Chrift 's defign, that his church ihould be, 
 and appear to be one ; that, while it was diftin- 
 guilhed from the world, it fhould harmonize with 
 itfelf, and keep a unity of fpirit in the bond of 
 peace. 
 
 Suppofe a prince, who had appointed a partic- 
 ular uniform for his foldiers, (hould think proper, 
 
 on 
 
59 
 
 on the introduction ot a new difcipline, and the 
 acquifition of ne>v fubjects, to appoint for theft a- 
 nother uniform ; might we not expect, that he 
 would allow, and in cafe of a rebellion raifed on 
 thisoccafion, would require many of his former fub- 
 jccls to adopt the fame, that there might be no dif- 
 tin&ion kept up between old fubjecls and new, but 
 all might become one harmonious body r And 
 would any man, in this cafe, imagine that the new 
 livery came not in the place of the old ? Or that 
 the one had not been, as the other was now, a 
 badge and token of allegiance ? — No more can 
 we, on this ground, pretend, that haptifm fucceeds 
 not in the place of circumcifion. 
 
 It will perhaps be afted ; ' Why then ought not 
 baptifm to be adminiftered on the eighth day ac- 
 cording to the law of circumcifion ?' 
 
 We anf* er ; It was not eflential to the validity 
 of circumcifion, that it fhould be adminiflered on 
 the eighth day. It was not to be delayed 
 beyond that day without occafion ; nor ought we, 
 without occafion, to delay baptifm. But where 
 circumftances admitted not fo early an application 
 of the feal, the delay was not faulty then, nor 
 would it be now. Circumcifion, indeed, might 
 not be performed earlier than the eighth day : 
 but for this delay there were particular reafons, not 
 applicable to baptifm. One reafon might be the 
 tendernefs of the infant, and the weaknefs of the 
 mother, which would render an immediate opera- 
 tion of this kind dangerous to both. But the prin- 
 cipal reafon was the legal impurity of the mother 
 and the confequent impurity of the child for the 
 firfl feven days. This reafon is exprefsly aiTigned in 
 
 the 
 
6o- 
 
 the divine law ;* If a iveman Dave bom a man child, 
 fee [J j all be unclean feven days — -and on the eighth 
 day he fall be circumefd. But as the legal impu- 
 rities have ceafed under the gofpel, there is no 
 fuch reafon for the delay of baptifm. 
 
 Thus, I think, it undeniably appears, that bap- 
 tifm (rands in the place of circumcifion, and that the 
 arguments to the contrary, are futile and imperti- 
 nent. And if it (lands in the fame place, it is cer- 
 tainly to be applied to the fame fubjecls, the infants 
 of God's people. — I proceed to another argu- 
 ment. 
 
 Eg9B *C » 3 » ;»g 'ffiff<!fgk^ g <fr«« tt H tf l 
 
 DISCOURSE III. 
 
 3. 1 HE right of infants to baptifm may be clear- 
 ly inferred from- the words of our Saviour, Mark 
 10. 14. compared with thofe, John 3. 5. Stiff?? 
 little children to co?ne to me—for of fuch is the kingdom 
 of God. — And, Except a man (ean me tis, r.v- 
 cept any one) be born ofiuatcr and of the Spirit, he 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 
 
 By the kingdom of God mufr. be underftood either 
 the Church, God's vifible kingdom on earth ; or 
 Heaven, his invifible kingdom above. Into the 
 former we are admitted by baptifm, which is the 
 flgn of that fpiritual renovation, by which we are 
 prepared for the latter, Thefe little children are 
 
 called 
 
 4 Levit. n. 1. 2. 
 

 called Infants \ they were brought to Chrift ; were 
 i up in his arms ; doubtlefs therefore they were 
 muter the age of difcretion. They who brought. 
 them were believers ; othcrwife they would not 
 have fought *blcffingfrotn Chrift for them. The 
 phrafe being bornofwatet^ fignifies being baptized : 
 So the author of the letters imderftands it, and 
 numbers it among the paflages that fpeak of bap- 
 tifm.* 
 
 Now if, by the kingdom of God, we underftand 
 the church, then here is an exprefs declaration, 
 that infants belong to the church, are ChrifVs dif- 
 ciples and viiible members of his body : And con- 
 sequently have a right to baptifm, the only inftitut- 
 ed fign of admiffion into this kingdom. Except a- 
 ny one be born of water, he cannot enter into this king- 
 dom. Hence the chriftian church is laid to be 
 clcanfedbythciCafljingofiuatcr^ If by the king- 
 dom of God, we underftand the invifible kingdom a- 
 bove, then here is a plain declaration, that infants 
 belong to that, and confequently may be bom of the 
 fpirit ; for except one be born of the fpirit, he cannot 
 enter into that kingdom, which flefli and blood do 
 not inherit. And if they may be born of the fpirit, 
 doubtlefs they may be born of water, or baptized. 
 As the church is tile gate of heaven, fo baptifm is 
 
 the 
 
 ' The author of the letters fays, • Chriftian baptifm was not 
 
 iituted.' This is doubtlefs true: but Jchm preached, faying, 
 
 rdom of God is at band; and he baptized with the baptifm of 
 
 repentance to prepare the people for this kingdom, ft was there- 
 
 ery fcafonable for Chrift now to inftruct Nicodcmttx, that bap- 
 
 ti'.'m. or being hom cf water, was foon to be the rite of admifiion imp 
 
 igdom. But whether we underftand the phrafe, ot ' nut-xat ' 
 
 i tptrjim, or inward fanctification, our argument front it v.ill be ecpa ! " 
 
 nrlufive. 
 
 - Eph. s- 16. 
 
 F 
 
62 
 
 ihejign of regeneration. And if they may be ad- 
 mitted into heaven by regeneration, they may be ad- 
 mitted into the church by baptifm. If the things 
 jignified belong to them, ihejtgn and token mud be 
 fuppofed to belong to them. The Apoftle Peter* 
 plainly teaches us, that they, to whom the promife 
 of the fpirit pertains, have a right to baptifm, the 
 ilgn of the promife. In whatever fenfe therefore 
 we underftand the kingdom of God, the conclufion 
 is the fame, That infants are fubje&s of baptifm. 
 
 It cannot reafonably be faid, that the words — of 
 fuch — intend only perfons of a childlike difpofition : 
 For then how would this be a reafon why little 
 children fhould be brought to Chrifl, and why he 
 mould be difpleafed with his difciples for endeavour- 
 ing to hinder them ? This makes our Lord's argu- 
 ment run thus. Suffer infants to be brought to me, 
 for ray kingdom confifteth only of adult perfons re- 
 fembling children in their difpofition. He elfe- 
 where makes Lambs and Doves emblems of a chrif- 
 tian temper ; and according to this interpretation, 
 he might as well have faid, Suffer Lambs and Doves 
 to come to me, for of fuch is the kingdom of God ; 
 i! e. it confus of perfons of a lamb-like and dove- 
 like temper. 
 
 Well, ' but thechriflian rite of baptifm was not 
 given to thefe children ; they were bro't to Chrifl 
 for his bleffing and prayers, accompanied with im- 
 pofition of hands.' True : but our Saviour de- 
 clares, that fuch, i. e. the infants of believers, be- 
 iong to this kingdom, into which none are admitted, 
 but by being born of water ; fo that here is a plain 
 
 declaration, 
 
 v. is 
 
declaration, that infants were to he introduced into 
 his church by baptifm. And by taking them into 
 his arms, praying for them, and blefTmg them, he 
 (hewed \\wlfuch are capable fubjecls of the influ- 
 ence and blefling of the Spirit, which are the things 
 reprefented in baptifm. He did not pour water 
 on them ; but he performed a ceremony quite as 
 facred and folemn, and thus (hewed, that infants 
 are meet fubjecls of that external rite, which de- 
 notes the conveyance of fpiritual bleflings ; and 
 fuch a rite is the ordinance of baptifm. 
 
 4. The baptifmal commifTion, Mat. 28. 19. gives 
 a plain warrant for admitting infants to baptifm. 
 It runs thus. Go, and teach all nations, baptizing 
 them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, 
 teaching them to obferve, &c. 
 
 Some w 7 ill fay, ' Infants arc not exprefsly men- 
 tioned here.' True : neither are Adults. But 
 Chriil ufes the word, nations y which is a collective 
 term, and mud: naturally be undcrflood as includ- 
 ing both. And had he intended to teach his Apof- 
 tles, that perfons of every age muft be admitted to 
 baptifm, he could not have chofen any fingle word 
 to cxprefs it better. Baptize all nations. The 
 chriftian church is called a ?iation, a people, becaufe 
 it confifts of perfons of every age.* 
 
 But it is objected ; ' Teaching is required previ- 
 ous to baptifm, which infants are not capable 
 ofV 
 
 Here let it be obferved, that the word A 
 tyfate, rendered Teach, is not the fame which is 
 commonly ufed for teaching, but of a more general 
 fignification. The proper import of it is, to profe- 
 
 h'e 
 
 * ! Pet. 2. fl. 
 
*4 
 
 lyte or make dtfcipki. The commiilion then is this. 
 Go, difeiple all nations ', baptizing them — teaching them 
 to obferve all things, &c. Here are two words in 
 the commiilion rendered, Teaching. The latter 
 didas kontes, fignifies to indoctrinate ; the other is 
 more general, and fignifies to make difciples, which 
 may be done by introduction into a fchool in order 
 to future teaching. 
 
 Now if we can fiiew, that Infants are ever con- 
 sidered as difciples — as belonging to Chrifl, then it 
 will appear that they come within the commiilion, 
 Difeiple all nations, baptizing them. We are told 
 Mat. 18. 5. That Jefus having let a little child be- 
 fore him, laid, Whofoever Jhall receive onefuch little 
 child m my name reeeivcth me. To receive one in 
 ChrijTs name, is to receive him as being Chrifl' s dif- 
 eiple and as belonging to him. So the phrafe is ex- 
 plained, Mark 9. 41. Whofoever Jhall give you a 
 cup of water in my Name, becaufe ye belong to 
 Chrifl. And Mat. 10. 42. Whofoever fliall give 
 to one of thefe little ones a cup of water only in the 
 name of a difeiple, fjall not lofe his reward. It is 
 plain here that infants, who are to be received in 
 ChrifFs name may be his difeiple s and belong to him, 
 to his church and kingdom. Accordingly they who 
 contended, that perfons under the gofpel ought to. 
 be circumcifed after the manner of Mofes, are laid 
 to tempt God to put a yoke on the necks of the difciples, 
 Act. 15. 10. tnfanis were to be circumcifed after 
 the manner of Mofes, and therefore are compre- 
 hended among the difciples^ on whom the yoke 
 would be laid. The eommifllon then muff refpeel 
 infants as well as others. The Apoftles had be 
 fore been inftru&ed to rcc< I only adults, but 
 
alfo little children in Chri/i's name^ and as his dif- 
 ciplcs. Now a particular rite is appointed, by 
 which they fhould receive or difcif>k.* them in his 
 name. Difeiple all nations, baptizing ttc?n in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, &e. 
 
 But the author of the letters fays, < The difci- 
 plesof Chrift, during his miniftry on earth, as well 
 as the difciples of John, were well acquainted with 
 the inftitution of baptifm, for they baptized great 
 multitudes ; but they adminiftered a baptifm in 
 which infants had no part. When therefore our 
 Lord inftituted his facrament of baptifm, if infants 
 were to be received into it, ic cannot be doubted 
 but he declared this ; otherwife men, who had been 
 ufed to exclude infants, would not think of them as 
 coming within this frefh commiflion.' 
 
 He exprefsly allows, that the Apollles would 
 determined very much by former ufages, in jud 
 whether infants came , within this commifTion. 
 Whether the difciples of John and of Chrift. had 
 been wont to baptize infants, it is not exprefsly 
 laid. And therefore to judge how the Ape 
 would underftand their commiflion, we mud go 
 farther back than to Johns miniftry. Thefe A- 
 poftles were Jews, They had been educated in 
 the yewifh religion. They knew, that from the 
 days of Abraham^ and all along through memo- 
 faic difpenfation, infants had been taken into cove- 
 nant with their parents by the fame initiating rite. — 
 They knew, this had ever been efteemed a great 
 privilege ; and they would naturally fuppofe, the 
 privilege was (till to continue, as the Abrahamic 
 covenant was yet in force. They knew it had 
 been the conftant immemorial practice of the Jzwi/b 
 f church, 
 
oo 
 
 church, to receive gentile profelytes and their in- 
 fant children with them by baptiim. This the an- 
 cient Jewifb writers teftify. Baptiim, we know, 
 was no new thing in John's time. The Jews ap- 
 pear to have been well acquainted with it. They 
 don't afk him, What meaneit thou by this new 
 ceremony? But why baptrzefl thou, if thou art noi 
 the Chrijiy nor Elias, nor that Prophet? Their 
 queftion implies, that the Prophets had been wont 
 to baptize, and they expected Chrijl and Elias 
 would do the fame. John probably took up bap- 
 tifm, as he found it practi fed in the Jewijh church, 
 where it had been conftantly adminiilered to the 
 iff ants of gentile profelytes. And it is not only 
 without proof, but againil probability, that this 
 author aderts, * Infants had no part in John's bap- 
 tiim. ' Farther, thefe Apoftles had been taught to 
 look upon infants as belonging to Chrijl, and to 
 treat them as his . . They had heard Chrih 1 
 
 pronounce them fubje&S of his kingdom, and give 
 directions, that they fhould be brought to him. 
 They had been reprimanded for attempting to 
 hinder infants from being brought. They knew, 
 that Chriit came not to leifen the pri\ of the 
 
 church, (of which the adm:iuon of infants was 
 but to enlarge them ; and that baptifm was now 
 the rite of adinifficn into it. Under tbefe circum- 
 fiances, how mull they understand their commiliion r 
 Certainly, upon this author's principles, they mull 
 fuppofe it to include kifunts ; for he allows, they 
 would underfhmd it according to i. 
 We may then retort his argument. When Chriit 
 inititutcd his faeramenf of ante were 
 
 not to be received to it, ''- can doubted, bui 
 
 * 
 
 he 
 
he ihniciently declared this \ otherwife men, who 
 had always been ufed to f^e infanta admitted into 
 the church of God by the fame token with their 
 parents, would confider them as coming within this 
 frefh commiiHon, Go 3 difciplc all nations^ baptizing 
 them. 
 
 Befidcs, When they faw the doors of the church 
 now enlarged to admit new fubjecls, even all na- 
 tions, they would not imagine, that the furjjecTs, 
 who had ever been admitted, were in future to be 
 excluded. The commiiiion therefore muft be un- 
 derftqod as a virtual command to baptize infants. 
 
 5. Childrens right to baptifm is very clearly 
 taught, in thofe words of Peter to the awakened 
 Jews i Ac). 2. :S. Repot t and be baptized every 
 one of you, ml f Jefus ChriJl,for the ranif- 
 
 fion of'/;ns, and ye ft all receive the gift of the Holy 
 
 u and to vour children, 
 lie does nor lay, The promife is to you, and will 
 be to your children when they become believers ; 
 but it is to bo ;-i and the children which you 
 
 now have : And t r J qll tlk i ; re afar off, as ma- 
 
 ny as the 1 crd our Gid fhdli call, i. e. wherever 
 God lends the gofpel to call the Gentiles, it carries 
 this promife, which is in like manner to them and 
 children. The promife being made to them, 
 is urged as a rcafoa why ihey fhotild be baptized. 
 And the fame reafon holds for the baptifm of all to 
 whom the promife belongs ? and confequently for 
 the baptifm of their children, (ox the promife is to 
 thon. B. baptized— for the promife is to you and to 
 your children. The reafon aifigned for baptifm is 
 fuch as equally takes place with refpett to both. 
 If the parents interc*ft in the promife is a reafon 
 
 why 
 
why he fhould be baptized, his childrens intereft in 
 it, is juft as good a reafon, why they fhould be bap- 
 tized. To fuppofe this promife is a juft ground for 
 the baptifm of believers , but not for the baptifm of 
 their children, is to make the apoftle talk thus ab- 
 furdly and incoherently. The promife is to you, 
 therefore be ye baptized — and the fame promife is 
 equally to your children* yet they mufl not be bap- 
 tized. 
 
 Well, but our brethren fay, c You and your 
 children is nothing more than you and your pofteri- 
 ty,' or your children when they become adult. 
 
 But a little attention will convince us, this cannot 
 be the meaning. This is contrary to the natural 
 conftru&ion of the words — The promife is — to your 
 children ; not /hall be to them, when they become 
 believers. The people, to whom thefe words were 
 fpoken, vvere Jews and Profelytes, who had always 
 been ufed to fee infants comprehended with their 
 parents in covenant tranfa&ions, and therefore 
 would naturally fuppofe, their infants to be intend- 
 ed. To fuppofe that by your children, the Apof- 
 tle meant only their adult .defendants, is to make 
 him fpeak nonfenfe j for then he mufl be under- 
 ftood thus, c The promife is to you and your chil- 
 dren, but not as your children, or as being related to 
 you, any more than if they were children of Pa- 
 gans ; but if they fhould live to adult age, fhould 
 be called by the gofpel, and fhould believe, then the 
 promife will be to them, as it is now to you.' 
 
 Now why are children joined with their parents, 
 as joint partakers of the fame promife, if they de- 
 rive no benefit from this relation, but are to Hand 
 upon precifely the fame footing with the children 
 
 of 
 
69 
 
 v>t he and infidels' i Farther; it fhould he 
 
 remembered, tfiat the great proraife of the Abra- 
 harnic covenant, which probably is here referred 
 called by way of eminence, the promise, via. 
 and your feed ; this promife, I 
 lid certainly belong to the infant children of 
 xkam, and of his fpiritual feed ; and the feal of 
 this promife was exprefsly ordered to be applied to 
 fuch. But our brethren generally fay, c The 
 promife here intended is the promife of the fpirit, 
 contained in the foregoing words, Ye JJjall receivt 
 the gift of the Holy Ghoft.' Be it fo. If then it 
 appears that the promife of the Spirit is in fact, made, 
 not only to believers, but alfo to their children, 
 even to infants ; the reafon will hold, why they 
 fliould be baptized. It is exprefsly promifeel, Ifai. 
 44. 3. I will pour my Spirit upon thy feed ', and my 
 blejjing upon thine offspring ; i. e. thy little ones, as 
 the following words fhew ; and they (thine off- 
 spring)^^// SPRING UP as among the grafs and as 
 willows by the ~vaier-cour/es. They fhall grow up 
 under the influences of my Spirit and bleflings of 
 my covenant, as grafs under the kindly irailes of 
 heaven, and as willows by the fertile banks of riv- 
 ers* 
 
 There can be no doubt with any one who be- 
 lieves the fcriptur.es, but the divine Spirit often has 
 great influence in forming the mind into a prepara- 
 tion for virtue aud ufefulnefs, even in its infant 
 (late. John was filled with the Holy Ghofi from 
 his mother's womb, lfuiah was called and formed 
 from the womb. Jeremiah was fancriiled from the 
 womb. Samuel grew up before the Lord. I 
 qucftion not but all, who are born and educated 
 
 under 
 
7° 
 
 under the gofpel covenant, have, even in early 
 childhood, fome gentle excitations to virtue from 
 the Spirit of grace, as a fruit of this promife to be- 
 lievers and their children. Now fmce the promife 
 of the Spirit does in fact belong to little children, 
 baptifm, the fign of the promife, belongs to them 
 alfo. Let them be baptized— for the promife is to 
 them. Note here ; their receiving the Spirit was 
 not a condition, but a confequence of their baptifm. 
 Be baptized and ye fhall receive, &c. So upon the 
 Samaritans mentioned, Act:. 8. the Spirit was pour- 
 ed out after they were baptized : So that children 
 are to be baptized upon this general promife, even 
 before they can, by a holy life, give evidence of 
 their having actually received the Spirit. That in 
 the gofpel-age, as well as in former diipenfations, 
 children mould be received into covenant together 
 with, and upon the faith of their parents, is plain- 
 ly foretold, Ifai. 65. 22. They are the feed of the 
 bleffed of the Lord, and their offspring with them. 
 And chap. 49. 18.22. They (the gentiles) fall 
 gather themfelves together, and come to thee — And 
 they fhall bring thy fins in their arms, and thy daugh- 
 ters fhall be carried on their moulders. 
 
 6. The accounts we have of fome whole families 
 being baptized, upon the faith of their refpecllve 
 heads, afford an argument of confiderable weight, 
 that the Apoftles underftood their com million as 
 extending to infants, and pra&ifed accordingly. 
 
 If infants were baptized, it is by no means proba- 
 ble, we mould be informed of their names or ages ; 
 we could expect only to be told in general, that 
 fuch perfons were baptized and their families : And 
 f ^ much we are told. Paul baptized the houfhold 
 
 of 
 
of Stephanas, i. Cor. i. 16. Lydia, when the 
 Lord opened her heart to receive the word, was 
 baptized and her houfoold, Acl. 16. 15. The Jay- 
 Ior, upon his believing was baptized, he and all 
 bis, ver. $$. 
 
 This Lydia was of the city of Thyatira ; but (he 
 now dwelt at Philippi ; here (lie had a houfe, in 
 which fhe lodged the Apoflles for fome time, and 
 fhe had a houlhold with her. Whether they were 
 children or fervants, or both, and what their exact 
 ages were, it is not laid, nor is it material. The 
 (lory reprefents them as baptized upon her faith ; 
 and this is all that is to the purpofe. It will be 
 fuggefted perhaps, that they might be baptized up- 
 on their own faith. But the ftory gives no intima- 
 tion of any one's believing, but Lydia. Take the 
 account as Luke has left it, and they were baptized 
 upon her being judged faithful to the Lord. 
 
 The ftory of the J ay lor is to the fame purpofe. 
 He enquired of the Apoflles, what nutft I do to be 
 faved ? They fay. Believe on the Lord, and thou 
 JJoalt be faved and thine houfe. In the fame fenfe, 
 falvation is faid to come to the houfe of Zaeche;:s, 
 becaufe he was a fon of Abraham, i. e. a believer. 
 So fuch as are added to the church are called, The 
 faved. There were doubtlefs feme prefent on this 
 occafion belides the Jaylors family ; and fome of 
 his family might be adults ; and therefore it is faid, 
 They fpake the word to him, and to all that were in 
 his houfe. It is added, Hs was baptized, He and 
 all his Jiraitway. It is not faid, All that were in 
 his houfe were baptized ; but he and all his, i. e. 
 fuch as were at his difpefal — under his government 
 — fubjecl to his command. Thefe were proper! v 
 
 bi<. 
 
his. No mention is yet made of any one's believ- 
 ing, but the Jay/or himfelf. But do not the next 
 words, He rejoiced believing in God with all his Ixufe, 
 import, that all his family believed as well as he ? 
 { think not. The greek words egalliajato panoiki 
 pepifteukos to theo are literally rendered thus, He 
 rejoiced in all his hoitfe, having believed God. The 
 idea conveyed is this : After he had believed God, 
 he rejoiced and gave thanks in the prefence, and in 
 behalf of his whole family. 
 
 Now as it had been the ancient uniyerfal prac- 
 tice, to receive infants with their parents into the 
 church of God, they who mould read thefe accounts 
 of houfholds baptized, would naturally conclude, 
 that infants (if there were fuch) were baptized as 
 well as others. If a Mifhonary lent from this country, 
 where infant baptifm is generally practifed, to goi- 
 pelize the heathen, mould writeback an account of 
 his fuce'efs ; and therein mould fay, he had bap- 
 tized fo many hundreds, and amongfl the reft, fuch 
 a noted perfon and his hou/lio/d — fuch an one and 
 all his ; who would doubt, but there were fome 
 children, under the age of difcretion, whom he 
 meant to include ? But if an Antipredobaptift Mif- 
 fionary fliould publifli an account of the houfholds 
 he had baptized, he would naturally except infants, 
 to prevent miflakes. 
 
 7. The right of infants to baptifm is i ^on- 
 
 firmed by feveral particular pafTages of ferip- 
 ture. 
 
 It may be inferred from thofe words of the A- 
 poftle. Rom. 1 1 . 1 6. 1 7. If the root be holy Jo are 
 the branches. And if fume of the branches (the Jews) 
 be broken oJF, and thou (a Gentile) being a wild elk . 
 
 ri 
 
toerl grsffed in among them, and with them partak- 
 
 efl of the root and fatnefs of the olive tree, boafi 
 :jfc. 
 
 The olive-tree is the church of God, built on the 
 covenant made with Abraham. Of this tree the 
 were the natural', the Gentiles, the ingrafted 
 branches. The root and fatnefs -of the tree, are the 
 privileges and bleiiings of the covenant. It was 
 one privilege of the covenant, that children fliould 
 be admitted into the church with their parents 
 and confecrated to God as his children. Therefore 
 if the Gentiles are graffed into the fame (lock, from 
 which fome of the jews are broken of, and with 
 them who remain, partake of the root and fatnefs, 
 they certainly partake of this privilege of having 
 their children graffed with" them. Accordingly the 
 Gentiles are declared to be fellow-heirs with the 
 — to be of the fame body — to he joint -partakers 
 of the promife. God promifed, that he would be 
 a God to Abraham and his feed. And is he a God 
 of the Jews only ? And not of the Gentiles ? 
 Doubtlefs of the Gentiles alio. God appointed a 
 token of this promife to be applied to Abraham's 
 infants, and to the infants of his feed : And if we 
 ft and in the fame placte as his natural feed, and are 
 partakers with them of the fame privileges, then 
 the token of the promife is to be applied to our in- 
 fants. 
 
 To this paffage we may add that remarkable one, 
 in i Cor. 7. 14. The unbelieving hufband is fancli- 
 ficd by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is fanclificd 
 by the hufband ; elfe were your children unclean, but 
 now are they holy. It is plain here, that the chil- ' 
 <iren of believers are, in fome fenfe or other, holy, 
 G or 
 
'74 
 
 or faints, by virtue of their parents faith. They 
 arc diftinguiihed from the children of unbelievers, 
 who are called andean, in the fame manner as 
 chriflians are diftinguiihed from heathens. Now 
 what is this infant-holinefs, which refults from the 
 parents' faith ? It cannot be legitimacy, as fome pre- 
 tend ; for furely theapoflle did not mean to bajlard- 
 ize all children born of heathen parents. It can- 
 not be real, inherent holinefs ; for in this fenfe, 
 are born, not of blood, nor of the will of man, but 
 of God. It can then be no other, than relative or 
 covenant holinefs. The children of believers are 
 holy, as all the people of Ifrael were holy, by a 
 fpecjal covenant-relation to God. The chriftian 
 church is called a holy na'ion and peculiar people, in 
 the fame fenfe. They are holy, as all the firft 
 bcrn under the law are holy, by a folemn dedication 
 to God in his temple. In allufion to the dedication 
 of the firft-born infants, the chriftian church is called, 
 The church of firft-born perfons. They are holy, as 
 being God's children, born to him of his own cove- 
 nant-people. Now if they are in this fenfe holy, 
 by what rite or ceremony are they declared fo, but 
 by the warning of baptifm ? The church is cleanfed 
 iy thewnjhvig of water. If they are holy as being 
 Gods children, and within his covenant, they are 
 certainly entitled to the mark of his children and 
 the token of his covenant, which is baptifm. 
 
 The manner in which the author of the letters 
 endeavours to evade thefe paflages, (hews that he 
 felt himfelf embarraffed with them. I am c very 
 willing, fays he, that children fhould be as holy as 
 the mod: benevolent perfon can wi(h them. I have 
 fio inclination co lay a fcain upon that innocent 
 
 age.— 
 
75 
 
 a^c — But here is not a word about their baptitm.' 
 The gentleman doubtlefs knew how we argue from 
 thefe texts to prove infant baptifm. Why has he 
 not (hewn, that they mull, ocrndy be token in fc* 
 other fenfe ? Why has he not told us, how the 
 branches are holy by the holincfs of the root : 
 how children are holy by their parents faith, in 
 fome other fenfe than as befog intitled to the 
 privileges and feal of. the covenant ? How the 
 Gentiles can be partakers of the fame promife, ami 
 of the fame root and fa'.nefs with Abraham's nat- 
 ural feed, and yet not be admitted to the fame 
 privileges ? The truth is, the argument from thefe 
 texts is unanfwerable.* Again. 
 
 * To evade the argument from this paflage, fome have faftl 
 t fame holinefs, which is afcribed to the children of the believer 
 it alfo afcribed to the tm&eluv'tg partner, who is faid to btjanfi 
 a< wd\ as the offspring faid to be holy. Why then is not the ui 
 living hufband, or wife, a member of the church by virtue of the 
 faith of the correlate, ac well as the children, by virtue of the faith 
 of the parent ? 
 
 In aofwerto this I would obferve ; Infants, under the Old Te'fti- 
 ment, had ever been received as members of God's church. But 
 ■when th~ Jew?, in the time of Ezra, had, contrary to an exprefs law 
 married ftrange wives, by whom children were born to them, it was 
 ordered that thefe children, with .heir heathen parents, liiould be 
 put away, as unclean ; and the men, who refufed to put away their 
 ft/ange wives, were therafelves to be feparated from the congrega- 
 tion. 
 
 In the Corinthian church a doubt had arifen, whether a believer 
 might continue with an unbelieving correlate. This queflto'ri the 
 apoftle anfwers in the affirmative. For tiiough he advifes chti I 
 to marry only in the Lord, yet a marriage, contracted when both the 
 parties were unbelievers, is not diffolved by the fubfequent faith of 
 one of them. But it might farther be enquired, whether children 
 of parents, of whom one was a heathen, ought not to be excluded 
 from the church with the unclean or heathen parent, as had been de- 
 termined in the time of Ezra ? To this the apoftle anfwers in the 
 negative. If a broth, r have a xuife tub» betievetb not, and Jhe be plcaftA 
 to dwell teitb him, let him not put her aivav, and fo of the wife who 
 hath an unbelieving hufband. Fir the unbelieving hujband is, or hath 
 hc^Of fi/iflijiid by the u-rjl ; or rather, , or to tJSu - 
 
Again. The Apoitje, in \:v: 41I3 d ap. to Gal. 
 tells us, that Ijaac was born a/ier the Spirit, and 
 born by promfe. By this be tfhiltrates the gofpel 
 covenant; and fays, As Ijaac was, fo are wclhc 
 
 children 
 
 'V .."/'. .'.'i'.v.v- Tr)v /..-.! been . t.A in, pi fa tie hujlstrti. Themibe" 
 lievtng is fancitiiied in refpeckof, and in relation to the believing par" 
 ty,fo that the latter has a lawful ufe and enjoyment e>f the former; 
 fttf r.s the apoflle fays clfewh ere, to ibi pure aU things are pure ■, and' 
 ' i'j.-y creature cf Co J is gcc.d.f- r it is far Hi fie J by the -word cf God and 
 prayer. — Elfe ivert y r -::r chi'drtn unclean. If the unbelieving partner 
 were not fancStifled to the ufe of the believer, both the parent* mutt 
 be rejected from the church, the former as a heathen and unclean, 
 the latter a? criminally living in cohabitation with a heathen ; as, in 
 'be time of Ezra, thofe who refuted to put away the ftrange wives, 
 whom they had 'unlawful ly taken, were to be feparated fiom the con- 
 gregation*. Confequcntly the children would be unclean, becaufe 
 both the parents would be fo. But fir.ee the unbeliever is fanctified 
 ia relation to the believer, the children are holy, and fo to be ac- 
 re tinted members of the church. 
 
 The unbeliever !3 here faid to be fanetified, not in relation to Cod, 
 but only in relation to his, or her yokefellow. But the children are 
 faid to be holy, in oppofnion to the unclean, or to heathen. A perfon's 
 being fandtified in a particular rcfpecT, or for a certain purpofe, as 
 the unbeliever is here faid to be fanctified only in relation to the huf- 
 Uand, cr the wife, docs not renominate him a holy one, which is, m 
 fcripture, the appropriate title of thofe who belong to the church. 
 Therefore, though children are members of the church, as defended 
 from, and under the care and government of a believing parent, yet 
 a heathen becomes not a member of the church by marriage with a 
 believer. The words of the apoflle can convey no fuch ic'.ca. Yct 
 Ire calls children holy in oppofition to the uncle ju ; but he cxpicf-ly 
 defines and limits the fenfe, in which the unbeliever is fanerirlcd. 
 It i^ merely in refpect of, and in relation to the believing eorrela'e. 
 
 The fenfe which tjre have given of the phrafc,/.- or to the 
 
 ivife, is approved by critical expofitors, particularly by /?'';%, who 
 fa- 1 , s, it is the fenfe given by the Grnl interpreters ; and it is certain- 
 ly agreeable to the phrafe in the original. The apoflle cannot in- 
 tend, that the unbeliever is converted t? theft* h by the believer ; for 
 fhis fanclification i-; fomething which has already taken place, while 
 the fubjecit. was an unbeliever. The convei lion of the unbeliever 
 by the influence of the believing correlate, the apoflle aft - 
 mentions:' nal reafon for cohabitation; but he I 
 
 of it a* a change which hopefully *ay, not as what already b%s Dt 
 r rrtain !y a ill 1 3 k e p ! a c c . I • ' ' : • 
 
 • 1? And 
 

 children of the promife : i. e. we are born children of 
 the promife, as being born of covenanted parent^. 
 Accordingly the Apoftle to the Hebrews fpeaks of 
 the privileges of the covenant, as being the birth- 
 right of chriftians, and cautions them, that they do 
 not profanely fell their birth-right, as Efau did his' 
 
 And it is worthy to be noted, that the fame titles* 
 by which chriftians are diftinguifhed from heathens., 
 are exprefsly applied to the children of converted 
 parents. Are chriftians cAkd faints ? So are their 
 chiidren.* Are they called difciples ? So arc 
 children. f Do they belong to God's kingdom ? 
 So do their children. \ Are they called believers ? 
 So chriftian families, which were fupported by a 
 common flock, in which infants were included, are 
 called the multitude of them that believe •% And 
 Chrift fpeaks of thofe I'ttle ones which believe in 
 him.\\ Are chriftians called the children of God ? 
 So are the infants of profeiTors.^f They 
 long to the church are called the faved ; Co forma- 
 tion comes to the boufe of the believer. t-j, T . 
 that confiderr, how thefe titles are promifcuouily 
 given to adult chriftians and their children, can 
 doubt, but that children are brought into cove- 
 nant with their parents in the gofpel-time, as they 
 ufed to be before, and confequently are fubje&s of 
 baptifm, the only initiating feal ? 
 
 8. I fhall add to the preceding arguments, one 
 more taken from i Cor. 10. 2. The Apoftle here, 
 ipeaking of the jfezvs who came out of Egypt, fays, 
 They were all baptized unto Mcfes in the cloud and in 
 thefe a. g . That 
 
 * 1 Cor. 7. 14, f A&. 15. 10. i Mark 10. 14. 
 
 § Act. 4. 3*. |j Mat. 18. 6. \ Ez«k. 16. 21. 
 
 tl Luke 19. 9, 
 
That this pailage alludes to clinician baptifiii, 
 our brethren, particularly the author of the letters, 
 allow. The Apoflle plainly confiders their baptifm 
 into Mofes as typical of our baptifm into Chrlft ; for 
 he adds, They did all drink of the fame fpiritual 
 drink ; for they drank of the rock, which followed 
 them, and that rock is Chrift or a type of Chrifl. — 
 All thefe things happened to. them for examples, or 
 types, and are written for our admonition. The 
 jeivijh writers fay, c The people were baptized in 
 the defart and admitted into covenant with God 
 before the law was given.' Now if the Apoille 
 has any refpeft to chriitian baptiim, as it is plain he 
 lias, here is an undeniable proof of the right of in* 
 faats to baptifm. For he fays, They ad, the 
 whole congregation, of which infants then in their 
 parents arms were a great part, they all -i:ere bap- 
 tized into Mo/l j s. All were wider the cloud. All 
 paffed through the fa. &£C, lie repeats the univer. 
 fal term all becauie it is emphatical here. Now it 
 this baptifm into Mofes, was a type and written for 
 our admonition, it typically admonifhes us, that we 
 ail fliould be baptized into Chrid, not believers only ,. 
 but their children alio. 
 
 As the whole congregation were baptized and 
 admitted into covenant at the fca, when Mofs took 
 the command of them, fo this covenant was again 
 renewed with all, both men, women and little 
 juft before he left them. Deut. &g. ic. lejland, 
 all of you before the Lord your God, your I Iders, 
 your little ones, your wives, that thaufhouldcfl enter 
 into covenant with the Lord, that h< h thee 
 
 for a pe:ple unto himfelf a> 
 as he hath f worn io t 
 
 'i Lis 
 
79 
 
 this covenant with Abraham, which is fo exprefsljp 
 renewed with #///<? 3.\v.r, is defcended to us and oar 
 children. 
 
 I (lull now briefly recapitulate the arguments that 
 have been offered, and pre fen t them in one view. 
 
 The covenant, which God made with Abraham 
 and his iced, exprefsly included infants ; and the 
 feal thereof was, by God's command, applied to 
 them. We, believing Gentiles, are the feed for 
 whom the covenant with Abraham was made; and 
 therefore our infants as well as his, are entitled to 
 the privileges of the covenant, and fubjects of the 
 feal of it, by virtue of the original grant to Abraham, 
 m as much as that grant has never been recalled. 
 This covenant was renewed at the red jea — and a- 
 gain in the plains of Ivloab, and lull infants, are ex- 
 prefsly included. — A 11 along under the Old Tefta- 
 ment, children are comprehended with parents in 
 all covenant- tranfaftions between God and his peo- 
 ple, and the token b£ the. covenant is dill applied to 
 them. The Prophets often foretell, that the cafe 
 would be the fame in the gofpei time ; that Chriif. 
 mould gather the lambs with his arms: — that God 
 would pour his Spirit upon the offspring of his peo- 
 ple, who mould be the feed of the blefTed of the 
 Lord, & their offspring with them* \nt\icje\vijh 
 church, it was acuitom, long before our Saviour's- 
 appearance, to receive gentile profelytes with their 
 cl ildren, by baptifm as well as circunacihcn. Chrift 
 alfo himfelf took infants into Ins arms and bleiletl 
 them, and directed that they fhould be brought to 
 him, becaufe of fuch was his kingdom, that king- 
 dom, into which perfons were to be admitted by. 
 being born of water. He ordered his Apoftles tp- 
 
 receive 
 
8o 
 
 receiver them in his name, and treat them as his dif- 
 ciples. When he gave the baptifmal commifTion, 
 he expreffed it in fuch univerfal terms, as muft nat- 
 urally include infants : And the Apoftles, knowing 
 what had been the conftant ufage concerning infants, 
 and how Chrift had ever treated them, muft un- 
 derhand the commiflion as extending to fuch. Ac- 
 cordingly, foon after, when they invited the con- 
 victed Jews to baptifm, they placed their right to it 
 upon the foot of a promife, which equally belonged 
 to them and their children. When they baptized 
 the head of any family in his own houfe, they bap- 
 tized his family with him. They conftantly taught, 
 that the covenant with Abraham, of which circum- 
 cifion was the feal, rs the fame which we are now 
 under, and that the bleiTmgs of it are come upon us 
 Gentiles — that the Gentiles are graffed into the fame 
 itock, from which the Jews were broken of! — 
 that children are holy by virtue of their parents 
 faith — -that baptifm is the chriftian circumcifion, 
 and therefore they who are baptized into Chrift, are 
 freed from the literal circumcifion, and all other an- 
 cient rites — that circumcifion, as a feal of the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, was a great privilege ; but the 
 gofpel-difoenfation confers greater — They illuftrate 
 the goipel-covenant by ancient examples of cove- 
 nant-tranfac"Hons, in which infants were included ; 
 by the cafe oflfaac, who was born after the promife, 
 by Noah's ark, in which his whole family were fav- 
 6d in confequence of his faith, the like figure 
 whereunto even baptifm now faves us ; and by the 
 baptifm of the whole congregation, infants and all, 
 at the red fea, which was a type, and written for 
 our admonition. When wc confidcr thefe things, 
 
 we 
 
St 
 
 we think the evidence abundantly clear, thut the 
 infants of believers are entitled to baptifm. 
 
 DISCOURSE IV. 
 
 H.AVING laid before you the arguments by which 
 the right of infants to baptifm is vindicated, I mall 
 now, as I propofed, 
 
 III. Shew ycu the rational ends and moral ufes 
 of infant baptifm. 
 
 If baptiim be a divine inftitution for the infants 
 of believers, it ought to be applied to them, whether 
 we can fee the ufes of it or not : But ftill it may- 
 give us fome Satisfaction to understand what good 
 ends it can anfwer. 
 
 We are often afked, f What good can baptiim 
 do to infants V It might Suffice to reply, As much 
 good as circumciiion could do to them formerly \ or 
 as much as the public prefentation of firft-born in- 
 fants to God could do them. The Apoftle fkys % 
 The profit of circumcifion^ (which was ufually ad- 
 minillered to infants) was much every way. The 
 profit of infant baptijm may be as much. — Particu- 
 larly, 
 
 I. It is evident, that God treats infants as finners 
 for Adam's tranfgreilion. In confequence of his 
 apoflacy, they fuiFer a fad variety of pains and dii- 
 eafes, which often iiiue in early death. And from 
 that bias and inclination to evil, which they foon dis- 
 cover 
 
cover, there is reafon to fuppofe, they are infected 
 with fome moral diforder, which needs to be re- 
 moved in order to their entrance into the world of 
 glory. By one man, fays the Apoflle, fin entered in- 
 to the world, and death by Jin, and Jo death paffes up- 
 on all men, for that all have finned — By one man's 
 offence, judgment came upon all to condemnation. — In 
 Adam all die. — By his offence many are madefinners. 
 In this language, he fpeaks in the 5th chap, to the 
 Romans. 
 
 Now the gofpel afTures us, that Chrifl: has ob- 
 tained redemption from the condemnation of fin, 
 and that in this redemption, all who believe, are 
 unfailingly interefted. But we fee, that a very 
 great part of the human race are cut off in infancy, 
 while they are incapable of actual faith. What 
 becomes of them ? Is any provifion made for their 
 falvation ? Or rauft they perifh and be loft for ever ? 
 This is a natural enquiry. Now to comfort our 
 minds concerning fitch, God has feen fit to aflure us, 
 that they may become partakers of redemption by 
 Chrift, and be made heirs of the kingdom above, 
 notwithftanding their incapacity for an aclual com- 
 pliance with thofe terms which are propofed to the 
 adult.. And to confirm our faith & hope in his prom- 
 ife, he has appointed, that they (hall be received 
 with their believing parents into his vifible king- 
 dom, the church, and have the feal of his covenant 
 affixed to them. 
 
 The great promife of the covenant is, that God 
 will be a God to believers and tbeir feed. This 
 promife is often explained in fcripture to import the 
 happinefs of the life to come. And God's ap- 
 pointing the feal of this promife to be applied to our 
 
 inf 
 
*i 
 
 infant feed, is a mod comfortable ground of our 
 faith and hope, that if they mould be removed 
 by an early death, they will be tranfplanted into 
 that happy clime, where they will fpring up in ev- 
 erlafting life.* 
 
 God is faid to have eftablifhcd his covenant with 
 the cattle and the fowls, when he engaged no 
 more to drown the earth, with a flood ; and as a 
 token of this covenant, he appointed his bow in the 
 
 cloud. 
 
 * The children of brlieving parents may be faid to be born In 
 ani t as they are born under that promife ©f the covenant, / u ill 
 be a God to thee and to thy feed. Accordingly Gi d calls them his chil- 
 dren, born to him. Tothofe who die in infancy this prom ife may 
 be underftood as importing a refurreelicn to eternal life. As the 
 Apoftle argues concerning the patriarchs, (Heb. u.) fo we may 
 reafon concerning thefe ; unce they enjoy no diftinguifhing favor 
 in this world, there muft be fome good referved for them in another ; 
 elfe the promife fails. Therefore God is mi ajbamed to be jailed Their 
 God, fsr he hath prepared far them a city. To thofe who arrive to 
 moral agency, the promile may import, not only the enjoyment of 
 the external means of religion, but the attendant influences of the di- 
 vine fpirit. The Apoftle tells us, that among the many advantages 
 of circumcifion, this is one of the chief, that to then art committed tit 
 vraclet of God. (Rom. 3. 1.) And God exprefsly promifes to Jacob 
 his fervant, and tolfrael whom he has chofen, I twill pour my fpirit 
 en tby feed) and my lleffing on thine offspring, and thcyfoall faring up as a- 
 rrnng the grafs, and as iviiloii-s by the ivatercourfes. (lfai. 44. 3.) Their 
 
 intereft in this promife, as the children of God's fervants, is one 
 ground of their admiffion to baptifm, the token of God's faithful- 
 nefs, and of their obligation tofervehim. Eut then it is. by baptifm, 
 that they are declared to be within the church, and entitled to the 
 vifble privileges of i:. Ptrfons may be virtually in covenant by their 
 »a«, or their parent 1 faith ; but they are not vifibly and prafifjidly in 
 covenant, or in the church, till they have patted under the appoint- 
 ed ceremony. When we fpeak of pcrlons being admit cd ::;:othe 
 church by baptifm, we mean not. that this conveys the right o 
 n i:Tion ; for i t prefuppofes the right, and the qualification c 
 in which the right, by divine inilitiition, is founded : but that it 
 declares the right, and thus introduces to vifble privileges. God fays, 
 ' The uncircumcifed man-child fliall be cut off from among his peo- 
 ple, he hath broken my covenant.' He was previously in cove- 
 nant, elfe he could not be faid to break it by his uncircumr: 
 So alfo the unbaptized pcrfon is tin be cut off, or excluded from the 
 iieges of thechriftian church. 
 
34 
 
 cloud. And furely he may, in as juft and rational 
 a fenfe, eftablifh the covenant of grace with infants, 
 engaging to pour his fpirit and blefling upon them, 
 and appointing the feal of this covenant to be af- 
 fixed to them, in token of his faithfulnefs to fulfil 
 his gracious promile. 
 
 2. The parent, by dedicating his children to 
 God in baptifm, folemnly binds himfelf to give 
 them a religious and chriilian education, and to ufe 
 his influence, that they ilia.ll keep the way of the 
 Lord, and not put themfelves out of that covenant, 
 into which they have been thus vifibly introduced. 
 Now if it is any privilege for children to have a re- 
 ligious education, it is a privilege that fuch an edu- 
 cation fliould befecured to them ; and confequent- 
 ly a privilege that the parent, by this public tranfac- 
 tion, fliould covenant and engage to bring them up 
 in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. 
 
 It may be aiked perhaps, How a parent can 
 covenant for his children ? But the anfwer is obvi- 
 ous. He can covenant for himfelf to difcharge 
 fuch and fuch duties to them, and can commend 
 them to God, in hope of the divine blefling upon 
 his pious endeavours. In this fenfe may every 
 religious parent, as Jofliua did, covenant for his 
 houfe, As for mc and my houfe we will fcrvc the 
 Lord. 
 
 3. As the parent, who dedicates his children, 
 fliould confider himfelf bound, by his own acl: to 
 educate them religiouilf ; fo children thus dedicat- 
 ed, when they come to the age of reflection, iliould 
 realize, that, having been given to God, they are 
 not their own, but his ; and are bound to live, not 
 to themfelves , but to htm whofe they are ; and that 
 
 a wicked 
 
 
a wicked, irreligious life Is a practical renunciation 
 of their baptifm, and difavowal of their relation 
 to the God of their Fathers. 
 
 If the Jewijh parent, by circumcifing his children, 
 bound them to own and ferve the God of 1/racl* 
 — If the vow of Scvnpforis parents bound him to be 
 a Nazarite forever — If Hannah's vow bound Sa??i- 
 ltd to attend upon God in the fan&uary ; as well 
 may the act of the chrijiian parent, in bringing his 
 children to baptifm, bind them to ferve the God 
 and Father of our Lord Jems Chrifl. The reli- 
 gious parent may urge his children to a godly life 
 by this argument, that he has given them to God. 
 Thus the mother of king Lemuel expoftulates with 
 him.* What my fan ? And what the /on 0/ my 
 womb? And what the /on c/ my vows? And this 
 argument will have weight with children of an in- 
 genuous temper. Thus the Pfalmifl: reafons with 
 himfelf.f I will walk he/ore the Lord, I will call 
 en his name, I will pay my vows in the pre/ence of 
 his people, Lord, truly lam thy /ervant, I am 
 thyjl-rvanf, the fon of thy handmaid. 1 pafs on, 
 
 IV. To confider the practice of the chriftian 
 church with refpect to infants immediately after the 
 Apojlolic age. 
 
 The author of the letters fay, c It is of fmall im- 
 portance to chriflians, to know what the many wri- 
 ters upon this fubject, fmce the time of the Evau- 
 gelifls and Aporfles, have affirmed. \ But yet to 
 know what they have affirmed concerning the mode 
 of baptifm, he thinks to be of no fmall importance. 
 
 He afferts, upon their authority, that the church 
 for 1 300 years pra&ifed immer/wn ; though indeed 
 H he 
 
 * Pro*. 31. 'ft f PfaJ. rr, $ 
 
86 
 
 he allows, that Jpr inkling was practifed too in ex- 
 traordinary cafes. Upon the fame authority it may 
 be aflerted, that the church, for many hundreds of 
 years, practifed infant bapiifm ; and not a Jingle 
 perfon, much lefs a church, can be produced which 
 denied the laicfulnefs of it. And the practice of 
 the church is as good an evidence in favour of infant 
 baptifm, as it would have been in favour of immer- 
 Jbttj in cafe that alone had been practifed. — This 
 gentleman himfelf (perhaps inadvertently) allows 
 the early, conftant, univerfal practice of admitting 
 infants tobaptifm. For he adopts this paflage from 
 Dr. Wall, ' All chriftians in the world, who never 
 owned the Pope's authority, do now, and ever 
 did j dip their infants in the ordinary ufe.' (Not 
 univerfally, but ordinarily dipt them.) If they dipt 
 infants, they baptized them. This practice is of 
 much more weight to prove i?ifa?its are the fubjccls, 
 tfcm to prove dipping is the mode of baptilm ; be- 
 
 . fe dipping was but the ordinary ufe, whereas in- 
 fant -baptifm, for ought that appears, was the uni- 
 verfal practice of the ancient church, except in caf- 
 es of profelytifm. 
 
 We do not pretend to reft the proof of infants 
 right to baptifm upon the practice of the church, 
 but upon the authority of fcripture. However, if 
 it appears, that the church, foon after the Apoftles, 
 did admit them, and there is no account of any 
 church that rejected them, or any perfon who de- 
 nied the lawfulness of the. practice, or pretended, 
 that it was an innovation, this will be an argument 
 of confiderable weight, that it was derived from the 
 Apoftles : For the early chriftians, they who liv- 
 ed in t&e ages next after the Apoftles, mud have 
 
 known. 
 
known, whaJt their pra&ice was in fuch a matter 
 as this, which was of a mod public nature, and con- 
 cerned the very being of the church. What the 
 ufage of the church was, in the earlieft times after 
 the A pottles, we can learn only from the ancient 
 writers, who are here produced, not as examples , 
 but only as hijhrians, or witnciTes to a plain matter 
 
 of ha. 
 
 Juflin Martyr, who wrote about 40 years after 
 the apottolic age, fays, J We have not received the 
 carnal, but the fpiritual circumcifion by baptifm — 
 And it is enjoined to all perfons to receive it in the 
 fame way.' Here he plainly confiders baptifm as 
 fucceeding in the place of circumcifion, and confc- 
 quently as being defigned for infants as that was , 
 which opinion he could not eafily have fallen into, 
 if the Apoftles had univerfally, both in doftrir. 
 practice, rejected infants. In one of his ape 1 . 
 for the chriftians, he fays, c Several perfons:;' 
 us, of 60 and 70 years old, who were 
 to Chriji from their childhood, do continue w\ 
 nipt.' Made difcipks. He iiies the fame word 
 which is ufed in the commifTion ; Difi nations 
 
 baptizing them. If they were made dij'c/p!,s 7 
 were doubtlefs baptized. 
 
 Irenaus, who wrote about 6y years after the A- 
 pottles, and was born it is faid, before the death o'l 
 St. John, and was acquainted with Polycarp, who 
 was John's difciple, fays concerning Chrift, ' He 
 came to fave all perfons by himfelf, who by him 
 are regenerated (i. e. baptized) unto God, infants, 
 little ones, youths and elderly perfons.' That Ire- 
 naus ufed the word regenerated to fignify baptized, 
 is plain from his own words, where he favs, ' \\ 
 
 Cm 
 
S8 
 
 Chrift gave his difcrples the command of regenerating 
 unto God, he faid, Go and teach all nations, bap- 
 tizing them, &c.' 
 
 Tertullian, who flouriflied about ioo years after 
 the Apoftles, gives a plain teftimony, that the church 
 admitted infants to baptifm in his time. It is true 
 he advifes to delay their baptifm ; not becaufe it 
 was unlawful^ for he allows of it in cafes of necefli- 
 ty ? not merely upon the foot of their infancy^ for 
 he advifes alfo, that unmarried perfons be kept from 
 this ordinance, until they either marry or are con- 
 firmed in continence \ but becaufe the Sponfors 
 were often brought into a fnare , and becaufe, he 
 imagined, fins committed after baptifm were next to 
 unpardonable. But his advifmg to delay it, fup- 
 pofes it to have been the practice ; for otherwife 
 there would have been no room for the advice. 
 He does not fpeak of it as an innovation^ which cer- 
 tainly he would have done, had it begun to be prac- 
 \ ifed in his tiro^. His words rather imply the con- 
 trary. His fpeaking of Sponfors 9 who engaged for 
 the education of the infants that were baptized, 
 fhews that there had been fuch a cuftom. And his 
 afking, Why that innocent age made fuch hajle to 
 baptifm, fuppofes that infants had ufually been bap- 
 tized foon* after their birth. So that he fully 
 enough witneiTes to the fad 9 that it had been the 
 practice of the church to baptize infants. And his 
 advice, to delay their baptifm till they were grown 
 up and married, was one of thofe odd and lingular 
 notions, for which this Father was very remarka- 
 ble. 
 
 Origen, who was contemporary with Teriullian 9 
 exprelsly declares uifmt-baptifin to have- been the 
 
 conftant 
 
conftant ufage of the church from the Apolllcs. 
 He lays, ' The baptifm of the church is given for 
 the forgivenefs of tins : But why are infants, by. the 
 ufage of the churchy baptized, if there is nothing in 
 them that needs forgivenefs ?' 
 
 Further he fays, ' Infants are baptized for the 
 remiilion of fins ; for none is free from pollution, 
 though his life be but the length of one day upon 
 earth. And it is for that reafon, becaufe by bap- 
 tifm the pollution of our birth is taken away, that 
 infants are baptized.' 
 
 Again he obferves, c The church had from the 
 Apoftles an order to give baptifm to infants ; for 
 they, to whom the divine myfleries were committed, 
 knew that there was in all perfons the natural pol- 
 lution of fin, which mufl be done away by water 
 and the Spirit.' 
 
 Now as Origen, in thefe pafTageSj argues from 
 infant-baptifm to prove original fin, we may cog? 
 elude, it was an uncomroverted ufage of the 
 church ; for othervvifc he could not, with proprie- 
 ty., have ufed it as an argument toejlablifli an 
 point. 
 
 Cyprian, who wrote about 15c 
 Apoftles, gives a fuller teflimony to this fact. In 
 this time a queftton was ftarted by one Fidus, 
 whether in hints might be baptized, but) wh 
 baptifm ought not to be given them on the ei 
 day, according to the law of circumciSpn ? 
 queftion was propofed to a council of 66 Bifhop-v 
 convened at Carthage, who unanimoufly 1 
 that the baptifm of infants ought not to be 
 to the eighth day, but might be given them at 
 time before. Aiid a large letter :-> this pun 
 
90 
 
 containing the reafqns of the refolve, was written 
 and defigned by Cyprian, in the name of the coun- 
 cil. 
 
 Now in this aifembly of Miniflers, doubtlefs there 
 were fome 60 or 70 years old, who could remem- 
 ber within lefs than 100 years of the A pottles. 
 And therefore, if infant-baptifm had been a ufage 
 lately introduced, fame 01* all of them mud have 
 known it. — And if fo, it is very flrange that not 
 one of them intimated any fcruple about it. 
 Whether infants lliould be baptized, feems not to 
 have been at all a queltion, but only whether their 
 baptifm needed to be deferred to the 8th day, 
 which, without hefitancy, was determined in the 
 negative. 
 
 A little more than 100 years after this time, 
 Gregary Naziaiixen taught, c that infants Ihould be 
 baptized to confecrate them to Chrill in their in- 
 fancy.' Ambrofe^ c that the baptifm of infants had 
 been the practice of the Apotlles and of the church 
 till that time.' Cryfqftom, c that baptifm had no 
 determinate time, as circumcifion had, but one in 
 the beginning of life, or one in the middle of it, ©t 
 one in old age might receive it/ 
 
 But not to multiply citations ; I (hall add but 
 one more, Aufth^ about 300 years after the Apof- 
 l *:, had a controverfy with Pelagius about original 
 
 : ; and to prove it, he frequently urges infant- 
 bapiifm demanding, Why infants are baptized for 
 the remiilion of fins, if they have none ? Pelagius 
 though greatly puzzled with the argument, yet 
 never pretends, that infant-baptifm was an unferip- 
 tural in lovatbrt, or a partial ufage in the chui 
 ' which, had ic been true, a man .five 
 
9* 
 
 acquittance with the world, mull have known ; 
 and had he known it, he doubtlefs would have laid 
 it, when he found himfelf embarraifed with the ar- 
 gument. But far from intimating any fuch thing, 
 when fome charged upon him the denial ofinfant- 
 baptifm, as a confequenee oF his opinion, he difa- 
 vows the cohfequence and compkins, that he had 
 
 n Jlandcrovjly rcprefented as denying baptifm to in- 
 fants. lie aiks, 'Who can be fo impious as to 
 hinder infants from being baptized and born again 
 in Chriit :' And citing thole vrords, Except one 
 be born of water and the fpirit, he cannot enter into 
 the kir.gdom oj God r , he fays, ' Who can be fo impi- 
 ous as CO refute to an infant, of whatever age, the 
 common redemption of mankind ? And many 
 other exprefliens he ufes, which plainly fuppofe, 
 that infaut-baptiirn had been pra&ifed universally, 
 and time out of mind. 
 
 And from this time, till the year 1522, (as Dr. 
 Wall, upon a moil careful enquiry, allures us) there 
 is not fo much as a man to be found, who has fpok- 
 en again!!, or even pleaded for the delay of the 
 baptifm of infants, except a fmall number in France', 
 in the 1 2th century, who denied the poflibility of 
 their falvation, and confequently their right to bap- 
 tifm. But tins feci loon difappeared. 
 
 Now if all the firfr. churches were every where 
 eftablifhed by the Apoflles, upon the plan only of 
 adult baptifm, and children \vere every where left 
 unbaptii'cd, how could infant-baptifm begin fo ear- 
 ly, and fpread fo extenfively as it feems to have 
 done ? How could fuch a fpeedy and total alteration 
 take place in a matter of fuch public notice and 
 great importance, and yet no noife be made about 
 
 it; 
 
9 2 
 
 it - y no oppofition raifed againft it ? Such a thing 
 would be abfurd to imagine. The early and uni- 
 verfal ufage of the church is then an argument of 
 very confiderable weight, that infant-baptifm was an 
 Apoftolic practice. 
 
 To invalidate this argument our brethren alledge, 
 that many corruptions were early admitted into the 
 chriflian church under pretence of Apoflolic tradi- 
 tions, and prevailed without oppofition ; fuch as 
 Infants Communion^ Exorcifm, Trine- Immer/ion, Unc- 
 tion after baptifm^ &c. But fuppofrng thefe had pre- 
 vailed as early and univerfally, as we find infant 
 baptifm to have done (which truly was not the cafe) 
 yet there is this mighty difference. Thefe were 
 but circumftantial errors, which did not deftroy the 
 being of the church, or nullify men's chriftianity, 
 and therefore it is no wonder, that we have no ac- 
 count of any warm controverfy about them. But 
 infant baptifm^ in the opinion of our brethren, does, 
 fo far as it prevails, unchurch the church of Chrift : 
 For they look upon thofe, who have received no 
 other baptifm, as being unbaptized, and unfit for 
 chriflian communion. Now if the firft chriftians 
 ■had viewed it in this light, would they have fat 
 iilent, when they faw it get footing, and prevail ? 
 Would not fome, alarmed at the dangerous innova- 
 tion, have born their teftimony againft it ? Would 
 there not have been fome churches, which preferv- 
 cd the primitive ufage, and renounced communion 
 with fuch as had fo effentially departed from it ? 
 The different fects of chrifUans were often inflamed 
 againft each other by fmaller differences. It is 
 therefore utterly unaccountable, that there fliouid 
 be no difpute, when this fuppofed fundamental in- 
 novation 
 
93 
 
 novation was introduced, nor the lead remains of 
 any controverfy about it, until within thefc two or 
 three centuries. 
 
 There were indeed Come great corruptions intro- 
 duced into the church, which in time confiderably 
 prevailed, fuch as Image-worjhip, TranfubJlanliatiGn, 
 &c. But tbefe never prevailed fo univerfally, fo 
 early -, nor fo without oppofition, as we have ft en in- 
 fant baptifm mud have done. A great part of the 
 chriftian church has always rejected them and pro- 
 tefted againft them. Many Synods and Councils 
 have publicly condemned them. And in the times 
 when, and places where they mod prevailed, it was 
 by the protection and fupport of civil and mili- 
 tary power ; which cannot be pretended in the 
 cafe of infant baptifm. 
 
 It is time that we draw to a conclufion. 1 havt; 
 only to lay before you a few deductions from what 
 has been offered. 
 
 It has, I think, been proved, that our baptifm is 
 one with that of our brethren* and that we have 
 neither changed the baptifm indituted by Chrift in- 
 to another rite, nor introduced a new fet offubjecls, 
 And therefore, 
 
 i. I beg leave ferioufly to enquire, Whether 
 our brethren have any jull occafion to withdraw 
 themfelves from our communion ? Surely the can- 
 did among them will acknowledge, that our opin- 
 ion is not fo wholly without foundation, but that it 
 may confid with an honed and good heart. And 
 can it be for the intered of chri (Hanky, which we 
 on both fides profefs to regard, that we fhould re- 
 nounce fellowship with each other on account of 
 this difference ? We are willing they fhould com- 
 mune 
 
94 
 
 mune with us, and yet enjoy the liberty of acting 
 agreeably to their own principles. Though we 
 wifh they might think with us, ye* we would by 
 no means conftrain them to bring their infants to 
 baptifm contrary to their confciences. And, I ap- 
 prehend, few minifters would fcruple to adminifter 
 baptifm by immerfion to any fuitably qualified, who 
 chufe fo to receive it. For though they think af- 
 fufion warranted by fcripture, yet they are far from 
 denying the validity of immerfion. Since therefore 
 our brethren may enjoy their own principles with 
 us, what occafion can they have to fcparate from 
 us? 
 
 Perhaps fome will fay, We cannot commune 
 with you, becaufe, in our opinion, you are unbap- 
 tized j nor can we receive baptifm from your min- 
 iflers, becaufe they have received no other than in- 
 fant baptifm, which is a nullity : And fince they 
 have not been regularly baptized themfelves, they 
 cannot adminifter valid baptifm to others. 
 
 It were to be wifhed, that perfons of fuch nar- 
 row fentiments would realize the confequence. In- 
 fant baptifm was undoubtedly the univerfal practice 
 of the chriftian church for many hundreds of years 
 together. Hiflory does not imform us, when it 
 firlt began to be pra&ifed ; but we have particular 
 accounts when it was firft oppofed. And if it be a 
 nullity, there is not, nor can be again, any 
 regular baptifm in the world; for there is not 
 the leaft ground to pretend to a fucceflion 
 of adult baptifm. If we trace adult baptifms back, 
 we mud come to the time when they were admin- 
 iftered by thofe who were baptized in infancy, and 
 who, upon the principles above mentioned, could 
 
 not 
 
95 
 
 not adminiiter valid baptifm. Our brethren there- 
 fore, by nullifying our baptifm, nullify their own ; 
 and by unchurching us, unchurch themfdves. Yea, 
 upon thefc principles, there were no authorized 
 minift ers, nor regular churches, nor baptized chrif- 
 tians, for many centuries together, nor are there 
 now, nor ever will be again, without a new com- 
 mifTion from heaven. How then has Chrift fulfilled 
 his promifes, that he will be with his minifters al- 
 ways to the end of the world, and that the gates 
 of hell fhall not prevail againfl his church ? We 
 may reft aiTured, that thefe promifes have not been 
 forgotten, and confequently, that baptifm did not 
 ceafe, nor the church fail, when infant baptifm be- 
 came fo much the general practice, that a fuccef- 
 fion of adult baptifms was no where preferved. 
 Our brethren then mult allow, that baptifm, as ad- 
 miniftered in our churches, is valid, and confequent- 
 ly, that the above mentioned plea, for declining 
 communion with us, is of no weight. 
 
 And indeed many among them, though they think 
 infant baptifm, efpecially when performed by fprink- 
 ling, not regular, yet do fo far allow the validity of 
 it, that they fcruple not to hold communion with 
 us. Some baptiix churches in England are founded 
 on this catholic plan. The church, of which the 
 late celebrated Dr. Fojler was minifter, received to 
 h.er communion fuch as were baptized in infancy, 
 without requiring them to be rebaptized. The fa- 
 mous Mr. Whijlon, was admitted to the communion 
 of this church, after leaving the church of England^ 
 without rebaptization, which he never would fub- 
 mit to ; for though he pronounced baptifm in in- 
 fancy, and by fprinkling, to be wrong, yet he de- 
 clared 
 
clared it to be c fo far real baptifm, that it ought not to 
 be repeated.'* Were our brethren #// (as indeed 
 many of them are) of the fame generous fentiments, 
 we ihould hardly need to be known as different 
 feels ; to be lure there would be no occafion for di- 
 viding communions upon our different opinions. 
 
 With thofe of lefs generous fentiments, I beg 
 leave ferioufly to expoflulate. That you have the 
 fame right as we have, to judge what are the di- 
 vine inftitutions, and to practice accordingly, none 
 will deny. But to differ in fentiment and practice, 
 is one thing ; to renounce communion on account 
 of this difference is another. To juflify this ftep, 
 it is not fufficient to prove, that you may be in the 
 right : It is neceffary to prove, that we mujl be 
 fundamentally in the wrong. You fuppofe us to be 
 in an error. But is this error, in your opinion, (o 
 manifeft, and fo grofs, that none who embrace it can 
 be honeft chriftians ? — Can you demonflrate, that 
 the feal of the covenant of grace was never appoint- 
 ed for the children of believers ; or, if fuch an ap- 
 pointment was once made, it has fince been revok- 
 ed ? that baptifm always fignifies immerfion^ and that 
 this mode was invariably ufed by the apoftles ? 
 That the age and manner of admiffion into the 
 church, in ufe among you, is fo effential, that 
 the lead deviation nullifies our chriflianity ? — Will 
 you pretend, that there are no real chriftians in our 
 churches ? That the word and ordinances adminif- 
 tered in them, have never been bleffed to men's 
 converfion and falvation ? That there was nothing 
 of the power of godlinefs, in and after the time of 
 reformation ? No true religion among our fathers, 
 
 and 
 
 * Clark's Defence, page 3 4 
 
97 
 
 ; in the churches founded by them ? That there 
 have been no revivals of* piety in thefe churches 
 fince they were planted ? That God has never own- 
 ed them by providential protections, or by the ef- 
 fufions of his fpirit ? Has there never been any real 
 godlinefs, but what was confined to your denomina- 
 
 i ; and none at all in that long period, when your 
 left did not exill ? Thefe things, I know, you will 
 not pretend. Nay, I will enquire farther ; do not 
 many of you date your own convcrfion at a time 
 when you were in fentiment and in communion 
 with our churches ? Did not God bellow this great 
 mercy upon you, while you attended on the minif- 
 tration of his word and ordinances among us r 
 This, I know, fome of you profefs. You believe 
 then, that God has owned, and (till owns thefe as 
 his churches : and will you difown them ? Will you 
 reject that which God receives ? If you think it mofl 
 convenient to worfhip and commune ordinarily with 
 thofe of your own fentiments ; yet why need you 
 l renounce fellowship with us ? Are you doing God 
 fervice, when you caufe divifions and offences in his 
 churches, contrary to the doclrine of peace and 
 unity, that we have received ? Let us not, my breth 
 ren, rend the body of Chrifl by our divifions ; bin 
 with united zeal build up his kingdom in the 
 world. 
 
 2. The preceding difcourfes teach us the unwar- 
 ramablenefs of rebaptization. It is agreed on both 
 hat baptifm is not to be repeated. If then 
 oar baptifm is valid, a repetition of it is contrary to 
 the will of God. In the baptifm of an infant there 
 is the application of water in the nameof the Trinity, 
 as well as in the baptifm of an adult. If this baptifm 
 
 I be 
 
9» 
 
 be not valid, it is only becaufe the fubjeft had not 
 faith, and did not aclually confent to the baptifmal 
 obligations. Now if the baptifm of an infant is a 
 nullity for want of thefe qualifications, the want of 
 them will equally nullify an adult baptifm ; but yet, 
 I prefume, none of our brethren will carry the mat- 
 ter to this length. Let us put a cafe (and fuch a 
 one as doubtlefs fometimes happens.) An adult 
 perfon makes a profeffion of faith and obedience, 
 and is baptized. It foon appears from the wicked- 
 nefs of his life and the corruptnefs of his principles, 
 that he had no faith in any rational fenfe, and nev- 
 er confented to the baptifmal obligations, but was 
 influenced oaly by carnal views. The man after- 
 ward comes to repentance, confeffes his hypocrify 
 in this affair, and owns he had no religious views in 
 the whole tranfa&ion. He now gives fatisfactory 
 proofs, that he is become a real penitent and be- 
 liever. Ought this perfon to be rebaptized ? Every 
 one will fay, No ; becaufe he has been baptized, 
 and his baptifm will fave him, as he has now the 
 anfwer of a good confcience toward God. When 
 Simon the forcerer, who had been baptized by 
 Philip, difcovered the vile hypocrify of his heart, 
 Peter directs him to repent, that his fin might be 
 forgiven ; but fays nothing of his being baptized 
 again : Whereas he fays to the unbaptized Jews, 
 Repent, and be baptized for the remifficn of fins. 
 But there isjuft the fame reafon, why this hypocrite 
 ihould be baptized again upon his repentance, as 
 why the infant fhould ; becaufe he no more had 
 faith before baptifm, and no more confented to any 
 religious obligation, when he was baptized, than an 
 infant. If a profeihon of repentance is all that is 
 
 neceflary 
 
neceflary* to our receiving this baptized hypocrite, a 
 profeflion of faith and obedience, at adult age, is all 
 that is necelTary to our receiving one baptized in 
 childhood. So that rebaptization is unwarranta- 
 ble and finful even upon the principles of our breth- 
 ren themfelves j and much more upon fuppofi ion 
 of infants right to baptifm, which, I think, has 
 been abundantly proved. Further, 
 
 3. If children are the proper fubjccls of baptifm., 
 then it is the indifpenfibleduty of parents to prefent 
 them to God in this ordinance, and there mud be 
 an inexcufable neglect in thofe parents, who, though 
 convinced of their childrens right to baptifm, delay 
 to procure it for them. 
 
 Some will fay perhaps, c Though we difpute not 
 their right to it, yet it appears to us to be a matter 
 of very little confequence.' 
 
 But certainly it is a matter of great confequence, 
 that you comply with a divine inltitution. He that 
 breaks the lead command (hall be called lead in the 
 kingdom of heaven. 
 
 Perhaps yon will fay, c We can't fuppofe the 
 happinefs of our children at all depends upon their 
 baptifm, fince it is a thing out of their power.' 
 Be it fo : Yet if it be a duty incumbent on you to 
 bring them to baptifm, your happinefs may depend 
 on your compliance with this as well as any other du- 
 ty. But how are you fure that their welfare no way- 
 depends upon it ? Their welfare much depends en 
 their being religioufly educated — their education 
 will chiefly lie with you— by their baptifm you en- 
 gage to give them a religious education — and if 
 your bringing yourfelves under public folemn obli- 
 gations, will be any motive with you to educate 
 
 tVm 
 
10© 
 
 them rcligioufly, then their welfare, in fome degree, 
 depends on their baptifm. You will lay, 6 You 
 can do your duty as well without fuch a promife as 
 with it.' With equal reafon might you fay, you 
 can live a religious life without ever making a pro- 
 fefiion of religion, as well as if you did. But God 
 has required you to make a profeflion, becaufe this 
 will be a proper motive and inducement to you to 
 live a religious life ; it is a fuitable means of 
 ftrengthning your obligations and keeping them in 
 your remembrance. And your dedicating your 
 children to God in baptifm is founded on the fame 
 reafon. It is a promife which you take on your- 
 felves, and a means of reminding you of your obli- 
 gations, to educate them religioufly. And this 
 will be an argument, which you may ufe to good 
 advantage in your addreffes to them. 
 
 With refpect to unbaptized infants, we may be 
 afTured, God will do them no wrong. But if he has 
 made their baptifm a condition of the beftowment 
 of fome undeferved favours, who can fay, this is 
 unjuft ? It would be preemption to affert, that all 
 who die unbaptized are .loft. God's tender mer- 
 cies are over all his works. But the promife is to 
 believers, and their children And fhould we fup- 
 pofe, that the baptized infants of believers, have 
 fome advantages above other infants in another 
 ftate, this could not be called abfurd : For it is 
 certainly a part of the fcheme of God's moral gov- 
 ernment, that fome fhould be benefited by the pie- 
 ty of others. All interceffion is founded in this 
 principle. You doubtlefs fometimes pray for your 
 infant children. If you fee them in danger of death, 
 You pray, not only that their lives may be fpared, 
 
 but 
 
101 
 
 but alfo that their fouls might be faved. But 
 why do you pray for them, if you imagine no good 
 can redound to them from your faith and piety ? 
 How often did Chrift exercife his healing mercy 
 toward the fick on account of the faith of others ? 
 How often did he grant cures to children upon the 
 earned: petitions of their parents ? It would then be 
 extremely rafli to conclude, your infants cannot be 
 benefited by your dedicating them to God. Thofe 
 believers, who brought infants to cur Saviour, that 
 he fliould blefs them and pray for them, entertained 
 another fentiment. They thought the good of 
 thefe children, in fome meafure, depended on their 
 bringing them to Chrift. And Chrift commended 
 their piety, and directed others to do likewife. 
 
 Some perhaps will fay, c We believe that infants 
 are fubjects of baptifm, but we queftion our own 
 right to give them up to God therein.' But if you 
 queftion your own right, it muft be, becaufe you 
 queftion whether you have any religion. And can 
 you be contented fo ? 
 
 Whatever the difficulty is, which lies in your 
 way, it Ihould be your immediate concern to re- 
 move it. Is it not your intention to live a life of 
 religion ? Is it not your defire that your children 
 fliould grow up before the Lord ? Is it not your 
 refolution to bring them up for him ? If it is, then 
 fay fo 9 by a public dedication of yourfelvcs and 
 your children to God. If H is not, then tremble 
 at the thought of your own impiety and careleflhcfs. 
 If you have no good purpofes and defires, you can- 
 not confidently profefs any ; if you have good de- 
 fires and purpofes, ftrengthen and confirm them by 
 bringing yourfelves under explicit obligations to acY 
 agreeably to them. i Finally, 
 
102 
 
 Finally. Let fuch as have dedicated their chil- 
 dren to God, acl: under a fenfe of the vows that are 
 upon them. 
 
 If your children are removed by an early death, 
 quietly fubmit to the will of that fovereign Lord, 
 whofe property you have acknowledged them to 
 be, and entertain no anxious thoughts about the 
 manner in which he has difpofed of them. When 
 you gave them to him in baptifm, you profefled 
 your faith in his mercy toward them. If you cannot 
 trufl him to difpofe of them, why did you dedicate 
 them to him ? If you can, why are you anxious a- 
 bout them now fmce he has taken them into his 
 own hands ? 
 
 If your children live* then bring them up in the 
 nature and admonition of the Lord. If your 
 worldly circumflances make it neceilary, that you 
 mould commit them to the care of others, fee that 
 you put them into families where you have reafon to 
 think, they will be religioufly educated. If you 
 keep them under your own immediate care, train 
 them up in the way in which they mould go ; and. 
 commend them to God, and to the word of his 
 grace, which is able to build them up, and to give 
 them an inheritance among the Saints, 
 
 
CHRIS T's 
 WARNING to the CHURCHL 
 
 TO BEWARE OF 
 
 FALSE PROPHETS, 
 
 WHO COME AS 
 
 WOLVES in SHEEPs CLOTHING : 
 
 AND THE 
 
 MARKS BY WHICH THEY ARE KNOWN; 
 
 ILLUSTRATED IN 
 
 TWO DISCOURSES. 
 
 Br JOSEPH LATHROP, d. i* 
 
 Pafior ofthefirft Church in Weft-Springfield. 
 53 >C ;x^occco:xxxx>c<x) <xxx>o<xxg 
 
 There were falfe prophets among the people, even 
 
 as there fhall be falfe teachers among you ■ 
 
 And many fhall follow their pernicious ways. 
 
 Apoftk Peter, 
 
 WITH AN 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 AND 
 OTHER ENLARGEMENTS. 
 
# 
 
 
io5 
 
 DISCOURSE I. 
 
 MATTHEW, vn. 15, i<. 
 
 Beware of Falfe Prophets, tcho come unto you in 
 Sheep' } s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening 
 
 Wolves. Teflxill know them by their fruits. 
 
 CjtOD has, in all ages, had a church in the world ; 
 and he will continue it, until the world (hall be no 
 .more. His church has fubfifted in different forms ; 
 but under every form he has appointed, that there 
 Should be publick teachers in it, to open the im- 
 portant truths, and inculcate the facred duties of 
 religion. Under the old teflament there were 
 prophets, and under the new teflament there were 
 apoflles, ordained for this end : And Chrifl has 
 plainly fignified, that the order of religious teach- 
 ers {hall be preferved, until the faints {hall be gath- 
 ered together in one body in heaven. 
 
 As in all ages there have been publick teachers 
 of religion, fo there have alfo been falfe teachers, 
 who have affumed a facred character, and with cor- 
 rupt views, have endeavoured to draw away difci- 
 ples after them. There were falfe prophets among 
 the Jews : and Chrift and his apoflles have warned 
 us, that there fhall be falfe teachers among Chrif- 
 tians, who fhall privily bring in dangerous hereiies, 
 and corrupt men from the fimplicity of the gof~ 
 pel. 
 
 Our 
 
io6 
 
 Our Saviour fays in the text, Beware of falfe 
 prophets i who come to you in Jheep's clothing, hut in- 
 wardly they are ravening wolves. 
 
 But if they come in fheep's clothing, how fhali 
 we diftinguifh them from fheep : Chrilt adds, By 
 their fruits ye/hall know them. They may carry on 
 the deception for a time ; but their corrupt difpofi- 
 tions will, (boner or latter, betray them. Obferve 
 their mo lions, and you will perceive the ferocity, 
 wildnefs, and greedinefs of the wolf, notwithftand- 
 ing the (lolen fleece on their backs. 
 
 My brethren, as this is a time when errour and 
 wickednefs much abound ; when new and flrange 
 doctrines are taught ; and when teachers, of one 
 fort and another, are itarting up with pretenfions to 
 guide fouls in the way to heaven ; it concerns you. 
 carefully to dhtinguiih between true teachers and 
 corrupt feducers. That you may the more eafily 
 guard againft the common danger, I mall lay be- 
 fore you, with great plainnefs, the marks by which 
 falfe teachers are to be known. I fhall not apply 
 thefe marks to any feet or denomination ; I (hall 
 only point them out to you exactly as they lie hi 
 the fcriptures, and (hall leave you to make the ap- 
 plication, as you may find occafion. 
 
 I. They who refufe to enter into office, in the 
 way which the gofpel prefcribes, are to be rejected : 
 They have one plain mark of falfe teachers. As 
 this is the grand mark of diltinction, I fhall confider 
 it largely. 
 
 Our Saviour fays, John x. i. He that cnicrcth 
 not by the door into the fheepfold, but climb cth up fame 
 other way, the fame is a thief and a robber. Chrift 
 ii the door ; not only the door by which xht fheep 
 
 enter 
 
!0 7 
 
 enter into the fold, to enjoy the fhepherd's care, as 
 mentioned ver. 9, but alio the door by which the 
 jbepberd enters to take the charge of the fheep ; 
 as here reprefented. 'I o enter by the door, is to 
 enter by ChriiT, and in conform: ty to the order 
 which he has appointed. The qualifications re- 
 quifite in publick teachers and the manner of induc- 
 tion to the facred office, are pointed out in various 
 parts of icripture, and very particularly in Paul's 
 epiftles to Timothy and Titus. It is there requir- 
 ed, that they be men furnifhed with competent 
 knowledge and learning, efpecially in divine things ; 
 not novices — that they be found in faith ; not cor- 
 rupters of the word of God — that they be holy and 
 blamelefs in their lives ; not chargeable with any 
 vice — that they be men of general good report ; 
 not of unknown, much lefs of infamous character — 
 and that they be tried and approved by the elders 
 of the church ; not fuch as rafhly intrude themielves 
 into office. 
 
 The apoflle fays, Heb. v. 4. No man taketh this 
 honor to him/elf, but he only has a right to it, who is 
 called of God, as was Aaron, and his fons. How 
 they were called, we are informed in the 28th chap, 
 of Exodus. They were confecrated to the prieft- 
 hood by Mofes, God's minifter, who was command- 
 ed " to feparate that family from among the chil- 
 dren of Ifrael, and to anoint, fanclify andconfecrate 
 them, that they might minifter in the priehVs of- 
 fice. 
 
 Speaking of the call of the Gentiles, Rom. x. 14. 
 the apoftie alks, how /hall they hear wi hout a 
 preacher? And how jhall they preach, except they be 
 fent ? There mull be a fending, a regular miff on, to 
 authorize them to preach the gofpel. That 
 
io8 
 
 That the work of public teaching in the church 
 is not common to every Ghriflian, who is pieafed to 
 afliime it ; but peculiar to fane, to thofe who are 
 fint, and called thereto in the gofpel way, the apof- 
 tle plainly inflrufts us in his epiflle to the Ephefians, ' 
 chap, iv. and in his firft epiflle to the Corinthians, 
 chap. xii. When Chrljl afcended on high, he gave gifts 
 to men ; and he gave fome apofiles ; fome prophets ; 
 fome evangeli/h ; and fome pafiors and teachers, for 
 the work of the minift.ry, and for the edifying of the 
 body of Chrifi. There were only fome to be teach- 
 ers : It was not intended that every one, who lift- 
 ed, fhould aft in this capacity, under pretence of 
 edifying the church. God has fet fome in the 
 church to officiate in this character $ firft apofiles ; 
 then prophets ; and then teachers. Are all apofiles f 
 Are all prophets? Are all teachers ?~~ By no means. 
 If all the feveral parts of the body were one member, 
 where were the body ? And if all the members of the 
 church fhould alTume one office, where were the 
 church ? All things are to be done decently and in 
 order. 
 
 The apofiles themfelves received their commif- 
 fion immediately from Chrift. In the time of his 
 miniflry on earth, he gave to the twelve, and after- 
 wards to the feventy difciple-, an exprefs command 
 to go and preach the kingdom of God among the 
 Jews. After his rcfurreftion this commiffion was 
 enlarged. All power, fays he, in heaven and in earth 
 is given to me ; go ye therefore and teach all nations, 
 Matth. xxviii. Though they had now received, 
 yet they were not furnifhed to execute this extenfivc 
 commiffion : Therefore Chrift adds, Tarry ye at ye- 
 rufalcm, exercifing your rainiftry there, until ye be 
 
 endued 
 
■aaMMW 
 
 endued from en high— for ycfoall be baptized with the 
 v Gbc/r, not many days hence. Accordingly, a- 
 bout ten days after this, on the day of pcntecofl, 
 when they were all aiTembled together (all the hun- 
 dred and twenty diiciples, who had eompanied 
 together all the time, that Chrift went in and out 
 
 among them ; when thefe were afTcmbled 
 together) the gift of tongues was beftowed upon 
 them, as that of miracles had been before : And 
 now they were furni fried to preach the gofpel among 
 all nations. As thefe were ordained immediately 
 by Chrift, fo they were authorized to ordain others. 
 
 Paul was an apo(He,not by man, but by JefusChrid ; 
 yet, after he received the gofpel, he prefumed not to 
 pre ich, until Ananias, who is fuppofed to have been 
 oneofthefeventy difciples,cameto him, & by anex- 
 prefs command from Chriil, laid his hands on him, & 
 told him, c He was achofenveffeltobear Chrid'snamc 
 among the Gentiles, as well as Jews. The miracle 
 wh:c 1 An;mias performed, inredoring Paultohisfight, 
 was an evidence of the authenticity of his commiffion. 
 A&six. 15, 1 6, 17, 1 8-& chapt xxii. 12, 13, 14, 15. 
 Afterward, when Paul and Barnabas were about 
 to carry the gofpel to the Gentiles, they were, by 
 the direction of the Holy Ghoft, feparated to thai- 
 work by the prophets and teachers in the church at 
 Antioch, ' who faded and prayed, and laid their 
 hands on them, and fern them away.' A&sxiii. i y 
 ]. And thefe apodles, as they went through 
 various cities of the Gentiles, preaching the- gofpel, 
 and confirming believers, * ordained them elders in 
 every church, commending them, by fading and 
 prayer, to the grace of God. Acts xiv. 23. 
 
 Thefe elders, who we/e ordained by the apodles 
 and firft miniders, were at the fame time authorized 
 K to 
 
no 
 
 to tranfmit the office to others. Timothy was or- 
 dained by the 'laying on of the hands ofthepref- 
 bytery, in the prefence of many witneffes :' And 
 the things, which he had received, the fame he was 
 ordered to commit to faithful men, who fhould be 
 able to teach others alfo :' And he is folemnly cau- 
 tioned to ' lay hands fuddenly on no man.' i epif- 
 tle, v. 22 — 2 epiftle, ii. 2. And Paul fays to Ti- 
 tus, who was a minifter in the ifland of Crete, ' For 
 this purpofe have I left thee in Crete, that thou 
 mighteft ordain elders in every city, as I had ap- 
 pointed thee.' Chap. 1 . 5. But why fhould Titus 
 be left there to ordain elders, if the elderfhip might 
 be afTumed at pleafure, or be conveyed by private 
 brethren ? There is not in all the gofpel hiftory, a 
 iingle example of ordination, or recommendation to 
 the work of the mimftry, by any other than the 
 biftiops and elders of churches ; and to fuch only 
 are given the directions relating to this matter. 
 
 We find alfo, that in cafe a complaint arifes againft 
 a minifter, it is to be referred, not to private breth- 
 ren, but to elders or paftors of churches. To Timo- 
 thy as a bifhop is this inflruftion given by Paul. 
 Aga'mjl an elder receive nut an accafation^ but before 
 two or three witntffes. i epiftle, v. 1 0. He is 
 cautioned not to ordain any 10 the miniftry, but 
 fuch as could bring a good report ; for when one 
 defires an office, it is incumbent on him to exhibit 
 evidence of his qualifications. But againft one 
 already in office a bare report is not to be received ; 
 there mud be an accufation fupportcd by two or 
 three witnefles, to ejeft him from office, or fcring him 
 under cenfure. 
 
 Every church has a right to cboofe her own min- 
 ifter ; 
 
 \ 
 
1 1 1 
 
 lilcr ; but die cannot make a minuter. Me muft 
 be ieparated to the work by the elders of the 
 churches. When it was judged neceffary, that a 
 certain number of meet perfons ihould be appointed 
 to prelide over the diilribution of the church flock, 
 and the miniitration to the poor, the twelve apof- 
 tlcs referred the choice to the multitude of the dii- 
 ciples ; but the appointment and ordination they re- 
 ferved to themfelves. ' They called the multitude 
 of the difciples, and laid, Look ye out ieven men of 
 hafcefl report, whom we may appoint over this bufi- 
 nefs : And they chofe feven, and fet them before 
 the apo files, who faded and prayed and laid their 
 hands on them.' Acts vi. 
 
 A Chriflian church is compared to a houfhold, 
 and to a city, in refpect of the order and govern- 
 ment, the peace and unity, that ought to be pre- 
 ferved in it. But if every man might afTume the 
 office of a teacher at pleafure, where would be the 
 order and unity ? There would be the fame confu- 
 fion and diffraction, as in a flate where every one 
 claimed a right to exercife the powers of magiftra- 
 cy. 
 
 You fee then, that they, who take on them the 
 office of teachers in the church, without fubmitting 
 their call and qualifications to that mode of trial, 
 which the gofpel has inftituted, are to be confidered 
 as intruders, and rejected as impoftors ; for they 
 come not in by the door. Their eiiected contempt 
 of regular approbation betrays a confeioufneis of 
 their want of the qualifications which the gofpel re- 
 quires, and indicates fuch arrogance, pride and prc- 
 f umption, as ought never to appear in one, who 
 profeffes to have learnt the religion of the me^k and 
 lowlv Jefus. The 
 
112 
 
 The apoftle Peter, i epiftie, ii. i. fpeaks of feme 
 falfe teachers, who privily bring into the- Church 
 damnable herefies, andfeduce many to follow their 
 pernicious ways. Jude, fpeaking of the fame per- 
 ions, defcribes them as creeping in unawares ; in a 
 fecret fubtle manner. This coming in privily r , and 
 creeping in unawares , anfwers to our Saviours ctef- 
 eription of them, as not entering into the iheepfold 
 by the door^ but climbing w^fome other way. It ef- 
 pecialiy intends their aifuming the office of teachers, 
 without the approbation of thofe, whom the gofpel 
 has conftituted judges of their qualificatioris. The 
 apoflle Jude illuitrates their chara&er, by compar- 
 ing them to the ancient Corahites. They have per- 
 ifoed in the gainfaying of Corah, The ftory alluded 
 to is in the 16th chap, of Numbers. Corah and his 
 companions took upon them to ofFer incenfe, and 
 exercife the functions of the pried hood. They 
 murmured againfl the family of Aaron, which had 
 been confecrated to this holy fervice. They faid, 
 -' Ye take too much upon you feeing all the congre- 
 gation are holy, and the Lord is among them : 
 Wherefore lift ye up yourfelves above the congre- 
 gation V They called < the Handing order' of mjn- 
 ifters a tyranny, a ufurpation of rights common to 
 all the Lord's people : They pretended, that every 
 man, who pleafcd, might officiate in the priefthood. 
 Mofes fays, ' God hath brought you near to him to 
 do the fervice of the tabernacle, and do you feek the 
 priefthood alfo ? Ye take too much upon you, ye 
 fons of Levi.' How their prefumption ifiued, you 
 well remember. Now the apoftle fays, thefe faiie 
 teachers, who crept into the church unwares, were 
 guilty of the gainfaying of Corah. They had af- 
 
 fumed 
 
1! 3 
 
 fumed the facred office like him, uncalled and un- 
 authorized ; were guilty or" his preemption, and 
 expo fed to his condemnation. 
 
 It will perhaps be faid, 'In the apoilles' time, 
 there were fome, who had an immediate call from 
 the Spirit to preach the gofpel ; and this may be 
 the cafe (till ; and if a man is moved by the Spirit, 
 he mult obey.' 
 
 But if the Spirit moves a man to preach the gof- 
 pel; it will undoubtedly move him to aft conform- 
 ably to the rules of the gofpel, and to feek an in- 
 troduction to the work, in the manner which the 
 gofpel prefcribes. The divine Spirit never dictates 
 to the heart a line of conduct, which it has forbid- 
 den in the word. They, who defpife and neglect 
 the gofpel-method of introduction to the facred of- 
 fice, under pretence of fome inward motion, are 
 not influenced by the Hcly Spirit, but iniligated by 
 a fpirit of a very different character. 
 
 There is no inftance, in the new teftament, of 
 any man's affuming the office of a preacher merely 
 on an interned call of the Spirit. The Holy Ghoit 
 commanded Ananias to go and declare to Paul, that 
 he was chofen to preach ChrilVs name: And the 
 Holy Ghoft faid to the prophets and teachers at 
 Antioch, Separate me Barnabas and Paul to the 
 work, to which I have called them. But we fmd 
 not, that Paul or Barnabas, or any other of the 
 piimitive preachers, ran to the work before they 
 were fent, under pretence of an internal call of the 
 Spirit, which no body knew but themfelves. In 
 the prefent day the tables are turned. It is the 
 preacher now who is directed by the Spirit ; not 
 they who are to fet him apart to the wqrk. If it 
 k could 
 
U4 
 
 could be fuppofed, that one might have fuch a fe- 
 cret command from the Spirit, this is only evidence 
 to him/elf: It will not warrant others to attend on 
 him ; it can therefore anfwer no purpofe. What 
 endlefs confufion would follow from admitting fuch 
 pretences ! Any man, who is difhoneft. enough, 
 may pretend fuch a call ; and who fhall contradict 
 him ? What order can there be in the church ? 
 The man may be ignorant, immoral or heretical. — 
 But who fhall judge, cenfure and fileuce him ? He 
 flill pleads a call from the Spirit,, and he will be 
 judged by no man. 
 
 If one pretends fuch a fpecial divine direction, as 
 hi? warrant to preach, let him manifeft it by mira- 
 cles ; as the apoftles manifefled their commlffion. 
 Miracles have ceafed, and fo have all immediate rev- 
 elations ; and the man, who now pretends to them 9 
 is a defigning impoftor, or deluded enthufiaft. 
 
 If fuch arrogant pretenfions mould be accompa- 
 nied, as they uiually are, with an open contempt of 
 human learning, and of that Jiudy and attendance 
 on reading, which Paul enjoins on the minifter, we 
 mayjuftly fufpect, they are held up as a fubititute 
 for real qualifications, a cover for ignorance, and 
 an excufe for lazinefs. 
 
 In Uae apoftles' time, there were inftances of 
 the Spirit's designating the perfons to be ordained to 
 the miniflry ; but it is evident, that this manner of 
 defignation was not to be continued in the church, 
 became the Holy Ghoft has taken care to furnifa 
 the church with Handing rules for her conduct in 
 this matter. Timothy, who was ordained by the 
 elders of the church, IS commanded to commit the 
 fame office which btittd received, to faithful men,, 
 
 who 
 

 «3 
 
 who fhoulcl be able to teach otherfc. But how (halt- 
 Timothy know, who are thefe able, and faithful 
 men ? Shall he ordain every man, who fays, The 
 Spirit moves him to preach ? Or will the Spirit im- 
 mediately point out to Timothy the man who is to 
 be ordained ? No : He mud Inquire into the qual- 
 ifications of thofe vvhoofler thcmfelvcs to the work. 
 Paul fjirs to him, ' If a man defrre the office of a 
 biihop, he dcfireth a good work. A bilhop then 
 muft be blamelefs, fober, of good behaviour, apt 
 to teach, not given to wine, not a novice ; moreover 
 he mud have a good report of them that are with- 
 out/ Surely, if Paul had fuppofed, that the Spir- 
 it would immediately and fupernaturally direft in 
 this matter, he would not have indrucled Timothy 
 fo particularly, what qualifications he muft find in 
 thofe, whom he ordained to be teachers in the 
 church. 
 
 The infractions given to Titus are the fame. 
 c For thfs caufe I leit thee in Crete, that thou 
 may eft ordain elders in every city, as I had appoint- 
 ed thee : If any nvin be blamelefs, fober, juft, holy, 
 temperate, holding fail the faithful word, and a- 
 *b!e by found doctrine to exhort, and to convince 
 gainfayers.' 
 
 Since the Spirit of God has given in the gofpel, 
 fufiicient directions concerning this matter ; to 
 let us attend,, and look for no other. 
 
 It has been urged in favour of private brethren's 
 n the church, That " the apoftle favs to 
 the Corinthians, Ye may allprcphefy one by one, that 
 nil may Lam and be com) c*ted" i epiflle, xiv. 31. 
 
 But could he intend, that all the Chriftians in 
 oth might prdphefy or preach? By no means 5 
 
 for 
 
iiG 
 
 for then we rauft fuppofe that even women were to 
 commence preachers, if they pleafed, contrary to 
 his exprefs inftruftions both here, and in his firit 
 epiftle to Timothy. By all he means all the proph- 
 ets, as will be. evident, if you take the whole fen* 
 tence in its connexion. ' Let the prophets fpeak, two 
 or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be 
 revealed to another that fitteth by, let the iirft hold 
 his peace ; for ye may all prophefy one by one/ 
 In the Corinthian church there were many endued 
 with fpiritual gifts ; who, being ambitious to dif- 
 play their gifts, ufed to fpeak feveral at once, to the 
 confufion of one another, and of the whole atfem- 
 bly. To correct this diforder, the apoftle fays, 
 6 If any man fpeak, let it be by two ; or, at the 
 mod, by three,' i. e. Let noc more than two or 
 three fpeak in the fame meeting ; and let not thefe 
 fpeak all at once, * but by courfe,' one after a- 
 nother : * Let the prophets fpeak two or three, in 
 fucceflion, ' and let the other judge.' ' And if, 
 while one is prophefy ing, any thing be revealed 
 to another,' i. e- another prophet, ' let the iirft hold 
 his peace.' Let the iirft iinifh his difcourfe, and 
 ceafe from fpeaking, before the other begins. ' For 
 ye may all prophefy one by one. If ye will ob- 
 serve order in your aflemblies, all the prophets may 
 have opportunity to fpeak ; ye need not interrupt 
 one another. And do not pretend, that ye are fo 
 overpowered by the divine influence, that you can- 
 not refrain, but rauft immediately give vent to the 
 fervid ebulitions of grace ; 6 for the fpirits of the 
 prophets are fubjecl: to the prophets. God is not 
 the author of confufion, but of peace, as in all the 
 churches of the faints.' Prophets were an order of 
 
 public 
 
 
"7 
 
 c teachers in the primitive church : Thefe only 
 are the perfons, who theiipoitle fays, may all proph* 
 efy. The words therefore, far from alio 
 plainly forbid private Chriltians to flart up and 
 teach in religious afiemblfes. 
 
 I will mention another paflage, which has been 
 fometimes perverted to juiiify private brethren in 
 aiTuming the office of teachers. At the time of Ste- 
 phen's martyrdom, there was great perfecution a- 
 gainft the church, which -was at *Jerufalcm, and they 
 were all fcattered abroad through the regions of Ju- 
 dea and Samaria, except the apqflles. And they, 
 
 that were fcattered abroad, went every where preach^ 
 ing the word. Acts 8. 
 
 But are we to fuppofe that the all, who were 
 fcattered abroad, were all the members of the Church 
 in Jerufalem, and that all thefe went every where 
 preaching ? This would be abfurd ; for then we 
 muff fuppofe the women turned preachers. The 
 church at Jerufalem was, at this time, very large. 
 We read of three thoufands at one time, and five 
 thouiands at another, converted to the Chriilian 
 faith ; befides other confiderable acceflions. A 
 great proportion of thefe were in and about Jerufa- 
 lem. That all the believers in this city fliould go 
 forth to preach, is not fuppofable : So many were 
 not needed, nor could fo many be employed, in the 
 regions of Judea and Samaria, and the other places 
 whither they went ; for they preached to Jews 
 only. And if the lire of perfecution was fo hot that 
 no profeiTed believer could live in Jerufalem, why 
 were not the apoftles fcattered among the reft ? 
 
 It is certain that the church in Jeruijjem was not 
 ilifperfed ; for dill there were in Judea brethren and 
 
 apc/ilcj ; 
 
i iS 
 
 apojlles ; and in the city there were devout men, wh* 
 carried Stephen to his burial ; and difcipks to whom 
 Paul effayed to join himfeif, after he came from Da. 
 mafcus. Yea, we are exprefsly told, that when 
 they, who, by this perfecution, were fcattered a- 
 broad, had gone as far as Phenice, Cyprus and 
 Antioch, preaching the word with fuccefs, tidings of 
 thefe things tame to the ears of the church which was 
 in Jerufalem, Acls . viii. 2— ix. 26 — xi. 1, 19,22. 
 
 Since there were Hill brethren with the apojlles, 
 and fmce we flili find in Jerufalem devout men, difci- 
 pks and a church ; the all, who were fcattered a- 
 broad, cannot be all the Chrijlians or believers in the 
 city. 
 
 Who then were thcfe all? Doubtlefs they Were 
 the hundred and twenty difcipks, who had companied 
 together, while Chrift went in and out among 
 them ; and on whom the Holy Ghofl had lately 
 fallen. Thefe are mentioned in the mil arid fecond 
 chapters of the Acls, and are, once and again, called 
 the all, Thefe were aflembled together, when a 
 fucceffor to Judas was elected. They were #// to- 
 gether in one place on the day of pentecofl. On 
 thefe the Holy Ghofl was {hed forth, and cloven 
 tongues, like as of fire, fat on each cf them. They 
 were all filled with the Holy Ghofl and fpake with 
 tongues. 
 
 Grotius, Lightfoot, and Whitby, fay, that c they all, 
 who were now filled with the Holy Ghoft, were 
 all the hundred and twenty.' This appears to have 
 been a received opinion in the ancient church. 
 Jcrom, Chryfoflom and Oecamenius, obferve, that 
 1 the Holy Ghofl fell on the hundred and twenty 
 to complete the prophecy of Joel.' Whitby favs, 
 
 < It 
 
110. 
 
 S It was not the whole church, or body of the laity, 
 that was fcattercd abroad, but the hundred and 
 eight, who were full of the Holy Ghoft ; the perfe- 
 ction aiming chiefly at thofe, who were ftich as 
 Stephen was. ' 
 
 Thefe were now plainly authorized to preach the 
 gofpel, having, in a publick manner, received this 
 fupernatural gift, and being, according to Chrifl's 
 promiie, endued with power from on high ; and 
 therefore, when they were fcattered from Jerufalem, 
 they went every where preaching the word. 
 
 But whoever ihefe preachers are fuppofed to be, 
 one thing is undeniable ; they were endued with 
 miraculous gifts and powers, which were the pub- 
 lick feal of their divine commiflion. For it is ex- 
 prefsly faid, Acts xi. 21, c The Hand of the Lord 
 was with them.' This phrafe is, more than once, 
 ufed by Luke for the fupernatural and miraculous 
 gifts of the Spirit. When Peter and John and their 
 company prayed, that God would Jiretch out his 
 Hand to heal and to enable them to dofigns and 
 ^wonders in ChrijFs name ; they in anfwer to their 
 prayer, were filled with the Holy Ghofi. Acts iv. 
 30, 31. Thefc men went forth to preach with a 
 publick warrant from heaven. Their example, 
 therefore, will by no means juftify private Chrif- 
 tians, who have no fuch warrant, in going every 
 where to preach the word. If any, defpiiing the 
 ordinary million appointed by God, plead an ex- 
 traordinary commiflion to preach every where, let 
 them (hew the extraordinary evidences of this com- 
 miflion by miraculous gifts and afliftances. God 
 never fends men to do his work, without fome tef- 
 
 timony 
 
120 
 
 timony fufHcient to juflify others in receiving 
 them.* 
 
 It mud:, by this time be manifeft to you, that no 
 man can claim a right to officiate in the character of 
 a mini Pier or teacher in the church, until he has 
 been approbated and recommended to the work by 
 the eiders of churches. 
 
 I fhall now mew, that whenever miaiflers or 
 preachers travel into parts, in which they are not 
 known, they ought to carry with them competent 
 credentials ; and that no man lias a right to acl, 
 and Christians have no right to receive a man, in 
 
 this 
 
 * It has been afked, ' W r hat evidence we nave, that Apollos, be- 
 fore he was received in the character of a Chriftian preacher, had 
 been approved by the eiders of churches.' It is fuflicient to anfwer, 
 We have evidence from the rule and practice ef the apoftles al- 
 ready illuftrated. 
 
 We are not to expect a particular account of every ordinatioa, 
 any more than of every baptifm, in the church : and in neither 
 Cafe can the filence of fcripture, in certain inftances, be urged as au 
 argument a^ainft anefrablifhed ufage. 
 
 There is no evidence that Apollos acted as a Chriftian preacher 
 in the church, much lefs, that he was acknowledged in this charac- 
 ter, before he received regular approbation. When he fir ft came to 
 Ephefus, Acts xviii. he knew the way of the Lord, onJy as far as 
 John's baptifm, or doctrine, had led him. He knew that the king- 
 dom of heaven, or the time of the Meffiah's appearance, -was- now 
 come. But that Jefus of Nazareth was this Mefliah, had rifen from 
 the dead, and fhed down the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, he had 
 not been inftructed. He flrit began to fpeak in the Jewifh fyna- 
 gegue, probably, a3 many others did, by invitation or permiflion of 
 the ruler of the fynagogue. He fpake not as a Chtiftian preacher, 
 but rather as a learned and pious Jew, who was looking for redemp- 
 tion in Ifratl. For it is exprefsly remarked, that he kneiv *nl 
 b.iptifm of 'join. Aquila, who had been infhueted by Paul, and whom 
 Paul left at Epbefus, when he went from thence, and whom fome 
 fuppofe to have been ordained a preacher by this apoftlc, perceiving 
 that Apollos knew onl) the doctrine of John, • took him, and ex- 
 pounded to him the way of the Lord more perfectly. And accord- 
 ingly wc uud, that wijeii Apollos went to Achaia, ' he helped the 
 
 believers, 
 
I 21 
 
 this facred character, imlcls he exhibits fufficient 
 tefb'mony of his being vcfted with it. This is a 
 juft conclufion from the pofition already proved ; 
 and is farther evident from the uniform practice in 
 the apoftles' times. 
 
 Paul, after he had preached Chrifl for fomc 
 time in Dam a feu s, went to Jcrufalem, and effayed 
 to join himfelf to the difciples there: But they 
 all afraid of him, and believed not that he 
 was a difciplc. Acls ix. So cautious were they not 
 to receive one, who had not given them fullicicnt 
 evidence of the truth of his pretenfions. But Bar- 
 nabas took him and brought him to the apoillcs, 
 the proper judges in cafes of this nature, and de- 
 clared to them, how Paul had feen Chrifl in the 
 way, and how he had preached boldly at Damafcus 
 in the name of Chrifl ; and on this teflimony of 
 Barnabas, who was himfelf a miniiler of Chrifl, 
 they received him -, and he was with them, coming 
 
 in 
 
 believers, and mightily convinced the Jews, /hewing from the 
 fcriptnres, that Jefus was the Chrift.' Before he went into Achaia, 
 
 • the brethren' in Epbcfus ' wrote to the difciples, exhorting thtni 
 to receive him.' As there were now many believers, lo doubtlefs 
 there were alfo elders or minifters in Ephefus. We find, not long 
 after this, Acts xx. that there was a number of ciders in that city, 
 who had the overfight of the church there ; that they h.'d been 
 there for fome time, and had been acquainted with Pauls miniftrv, 
 
 * from the firft day that he wcot itktfi Afia.' It is certain then tli3t there 
 were elders in Ephefus, as early a i the time when Apollos was there. 
 Thcfe probably were the i rethrcn, or at Icaft among the breth rcn, 
 who recommended him to the diiciples in Achaia. For brethren is 
 a term often uled for eUtn of the church. It is bv no means fup- 
 pofablc that Apollos fb<>uld b< known to none but private Chriftians. 
 So learned and eloquent a nan, who bad read and fpoken openly 
 in the Synagogue, and been inftructed by Aquila, would certainly 
 become acquainted with the eldera. Ir he was known to them, 
 
 conurred in this recommendation \ and if they re- 
 commended him, they had pr .d him in the charac- 
 ter in which he went to Achaia. 
 
 L 
 
1 11 
 
 in and going out at Jerufalem. You will obferve, 
 he affociated with the apqftles. He did not fhun 
 them : He Submitted to be examined and judged 
 by them ; and being accepted, he conforted and 
 co-operated with them. How differently he con- 
 dueled from impoftors and deceivers, who choofe to 
 avoid the company of the regular minifters of 
 Chrift ! 
 
 In the apoftolick times, the preachers of the gof- 
 pel, when they travelled from place to place, car- 
 ried with them written credentials. Paul fays, 2 
 Cor. iii. Need we, as fame others, letters of commen- 
 dation from yon, or epijlles of commendation to you? 
 Te are our epiftle, known and read of all men. His 
 words import, that others, that minifters in general, 
 when they travelled beyond the circle of their ac- 
 quaintance, had occafion for letters of commenda- 
 tion, although he himfelf was, by this time, known 
 fo univerfally in the churches, and efpecially in 
 Corinth, that he needed no fuch letters. 
 
 Judas and Silas are very particularly recommend- 
 ed to the church in Antioch by the apoftles, elders, 
 and church in Jerufalem. A&sxv. 25. They are 
 called c chofen men ; men who had hazarded their 
 lives for the name of Chrift, ' and whofe informa- 
 tion might be received with full credit. ' And 
 they, being prophets alfo themfehes, exhorted the 
 brethren with many words.' Verfe 32. 
 
 When Timothy went from Philippi to Corinth, 
 to carry Paul's fir ft epiftle to the Corinthians, Paul, 
 in the epiftle which he fent by him, recommends 
 him as a minifter, in thefe words ; chap. xvi. If 
 Timothy come, fee that he may be among you 
 without fear; for he worketh the work of God, 
 
 as 
 
* > 
 
 -J 
 
 as I alio do. Let no man therefore defpifc him.' 
 He recommends him alfo to the Theflalonians. 
 i epiftle, iii. 2. c We have fent Timotheus our 
 brother, and minifter of God, and our fellow- la- 
 bourer in the gofpel of Chrifl to eftablifh you. ' 
 
 When Paul was at Rome, he wrote a letter to 
 the Ephefian Christians, and fent it by the hand of 
 Tychicus ; and, that they might receive Tychicus 
 without diftruft, Paul thus recommends him ; 
 * That ye may know my affairs, and how 1 do, 
 Tychicus, a beloved brother, and faithful minifter 
 in the Lord, fhall make known to you all things, 
 whom I have fent unto you for the fame purpofe.' 
 Chap. vi. In like manner he recommends him to 
 the Coloflians in his letter to them. * All my (late 
 fhall Tychicus declare, who is a beloved brother, 
 faithful minifter and fellow-fervant in the Lord. 
 Chap. iv. 
 
 He commends Timothy and Epaphroditus to the 
 Philippians. Chap. ii. * I truft to fend Timotheus 
 
 fliortly unto you Ye know the proof of him, 
 
 that, as a fon with the father, he had ferved with 
 
 me in the gofpel And I fuppofed it neceiTaiy to 
 
 fend to you Epaphroditus my brother and compan- 
 ion in labour and fellow-foldier — I fend him — re- 
 ceive him in the Lord with all gladnefs, and hold 
 fuch in reputation.' 
 
 Paul tells the Coloffians, chap. iv. 1 o, that c con- 
 cerning Marcus, filler's fon to Barnabas, they had 
 already received commandment ; and if he came to 
 them, they were to receive him.' 
 
 When the eloquent, learned, and fervent Apol- 
 los, who had fpoken boldly at Ephefus, and taught 
 diligently the way of the Lord, was difpofed to pafs 
 
 into 
 
124 
 
 into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the dif- 
 ciples to receive him. A els xviii. 
 
 John, in his third epiftle, recommends Demetri- 
 us, as one who had a good report of all men, and of 
 the truth h{c\f ? and as one, of whom he could him- 
 felf bear teftimony with great confidence. 
 
 Peter, in his firft epiftle, which he wrote to the 
 Jewifh Chriftiaus, difperfed through the provinces 
 of Afia, fails not to make honourable mention of 
 Sylvanus, who carried the epiftle to them. « By 
 Sylvanus, a faithful brother, have I written.* 
 
 Yea, we find, not only minifters, but private 
 Chriftians, recommended to the fellowmip of faints. 
 Paul commends Onefimus to the Coloflians, as a 
 faithful and beloved brother ; and Phebe to the 
 Romans, as a member of the church in Cenchrea, 
 and exhorts them to receive her. 
 
 But I have already dwelt too long on this argu- 
 ment. I am fure, it muft by this time, be exceed- 
 ingly plain to you all, that we ought not only to 
 rejeel: thofe, who without regular approbation, have 
 afFumed the office of teachers in the church ; but 
 cautioufly to av old JI rangers, who, while they pre- 
 tend to be minifters, exhibit no proper credentials 
 of their miniflerial, or even Chriflian character, and 
 of their regular ftandin^ in the church of Chrift. 
 The church in Thyatira is feverely reproved by 
 Chrifl himfelf, c becauie fhe fufFered thofe to teach, 
 who called themfelves prophets ;' but, that they 
 were fuch, gave no better evidence, than their own 
 word. On the other hand, the church in Ephefus 
 is commended, becaufe fhe could not bear them 
 who were evil ; and tried them who faid they were 
 apoflles, but were not, and found thcin liars. Reve- 
 lations ii. 2, 10. IVom 
 
I2 5 
 
 " From the preceding obfervations it appears, that 
 in the primitive church there were two forts of min- 
 iflers ; extraordinary, as apoflles, prophets and e- 
 vangelifls ; and ordinary, as pallors and teachers. 
 The former who were employed in fpreading the 
 gofpel and planting churches in the world, were en- 
 dued with miraculous powers, by which they were 
 enabled, as well to authenticate, as to execute, their 
 extraordinary commiffion. This fort of miniflers, 
 and this kind of evidence were to continue, only lb 
 long as the ftate of the church required them. 
 When the canon of revelation fhould be com- 
 pleted, ' then prophefies were to fail, tongues were 
 to ceafe, and knowledge,' as an immediate, fuper- 
 natural gift, 6 was to vanifh away, i Cor. 13, 8. 
 
 The latter, or ordinary miniflers, were flated paf- 
 tors, who laboured in word and doctrine, for 
 the edification of the churches, over which they 
 were made overfeers. Thefe appear not to have 
 generally pofTefTed miraculous powers. They were 
 to prove their miniflerial authority by ordinary evi- 
 dence ; as by a folemn feparation to their work 
 before many witneiTes ; and, when occafion re- 
 quired, by a recommendation from known miniflers 
 or churches. This order of religious teachers is to 
 continue in the church to the end of the world. 
 Eph. iv. 11, 13. 
 
 All miniflers mud now appear in one or other of 
 thefe characters. If they come as ordinary teach- 
 ers, they are to exhibit the ordinary evidence of 
 having been regularly approbated to their work, 
 and of their good (landing in the church. If they 
 come as extraordinary miniflers, pretending to be 
 fupernaturally called to, and endued for their work, 
 1 and 
 
126' 
 
 and hence claiming an authority to go every where 
 preaching the word, let them produce the great, 
 divine feal of their high commiffion by incontefti- 
 ble miracles. Otherwise we are not to receive 
 them, nor bid them, God fpeed. 
 
 It may be afked, * What if a minifter regularly 
 ordained, mould afterwards become grofsly heret- 
 ical, negligent or immoral ? Is he not to be called 
 afalfe teacher ? — Rather perhaps he is to be call- 
 ed a corrupt, wicked, or flothful fervant. His guilt 
 is not a diforderly intrufion into office, but a crim- 
 inal perverfion of, and unfaithfulnefs in his office. 
 He is not, however, by any means to be tolerated 
 in his wickeduefs ; but the meafures prefcribed in 
 the gofpel are to be applied for his amendment. 
 In cafe of contumacy, or incorrigiblenefs, he is to 
 be rejected by a publick fentence of the elders of 
 churches. Until trial and conviction he is in regu- 
 lar (landing for no man is to be condemned without 
 trial. If in the introduction of minifters gofpel or- 
 der is obferved, as it generally is in our {landing 
 churches, there is little danger, that one grofsly vi- 
 cious, or efTentially erroneous, will long be retained 
 in office, becaufe he will be fubjeft to trial and ccn- 
 fure. But if every man may, at pleafure, aflumc 
 the miniflerial office, and run whither he lifts ; and 
 people will countenance the affumption, by attend- 
 ing his miniftrations, wherever lie goes, there can 
 be no fecurity. For who (hall difplace from officd 
 the man who claims an independent right to affumc 
 and retain it ? He will fubmit to no judicature ; he 
 will fpurn every admonition and cenfurc ; diicard- 
 ed in one place, he will carry his impofitions to 
 another ; and none knows where the mifchief will 
 
 end. 
 
12 7 
 
 cud. Thofc Chriftiarns, who imprudently follow 
 and encourage vagrant, unknown, unrecomraendcd 
 teachers, do their utmofl to fubvert the difcipline of 
 the churches, and to break down the barriers which 
 the gofpel has placed againil the irruption of igno- 
 rance, err our and vice. ChrijVsJheep will not fol- 
 low aftranger ; they will flee from him ', for tJjey know 
 not the voice oj ji rangers. 
 
 J^^^^-^^^S^^^^f^^f-^c^—- 
 
 DISCOURSE II. 
 
 I PROCEED now to point out to you fome 
 other marks of falfe teachers. On thefe I fhall not 
 have occafion greatly to enlarge. 
 
 II. Our Saviour tells us, Falfe prophets come in 
 /beep's clothing, bat inwardly they are ravening 
 ice foes. Ye fhall know them by their fruits.' 
 
 They will make great profejjiom, and perhaps, for 
 a while, exhibit fome plaufible appearance of hu-_ 
 mility, peaceableneis, meeknefs, and indifference to 
 the world. They will declare, that they have no 
 party defigns, finiiler views, orfeliifli aims ; that they 
 are only felicitous to promoteyourfpiritual & eternal 
 inter-eft ; while their real intention is to divide, fcat- 
 ter & devour you. You may poffibly be deceired 
 at fir (I by their fair pretentions, & be carried away 
 by their diflimulation. But obferve them careful- 
 ly, & you will foon be undeceived. Suppofe, they 
 fhould meet with oppolhien, or provocation, or be 
 
 difappointed 
 
128 
 
 difappointed in their views ; then fee whether they 
 retain the lamb-like gentlenefs of which they boafted. 
 No : You may now begin to difcern the wolf ; 
 Now they betray their pride, paflion and refent- 
 raent : Now they break you into parties, that they 
 may catch fome of you. They may appear modeft 
 and diffident at firfl ; but fuppofe, they mould find 
 their influence increafed by the number of their ad- 
 herents and followers ; then fee whether they are 
 fo moderate in their views ; whether they are con- 
 tent with fmall things ? No : They will leap into 
 one fold and another for new prey. A good fhep- 
 herd attends to his own proper charge : The wolf 
 is a rapacious, prowling animal : Not fatisfied with 
 taking out of one flock, he roams from flock to flock, 
 and can never have enough. 
 
 III. Falfe teachers bring in dangerous herefies 
 privily, unawares, and with cunning craftinefs. 
 Eph. iv. 14. 2 Peter, ii. 1. Jude iv. 
 
 It is not every erroneous doftrine that marks one 
 to be an impoftor. In this imperfect ftate an en- 
 tire uniformity of fentiment is not to be expected. 
 In thofe differences of opinion which affect not the 
 eifence of religion, candour and forbearance will 
 take place among the virtuous and difcerning. Er- 
 rours, which mar the fubflance, and defeat the de- 
 fign of the gofpel, ought to awaken the concern, 
 and warm the zeal of a Chriftian. To draw with 
 precifion the line, and mark with exa&nefs the 
 boundaries between thefe different kinds of errours, 
 will undoubtedly be a matter of difficulty. Though 
 the extremes may be glaring, yet where the ihades 
 mingle, it is a nice eye that can difcriminate. But 
 whatever may be the errours taught, craft & artifice 
 
 in 
 
I 29 
 
 in teaching them arc always to be condemned. — 
 
 The man who affum'es the character of a Chn 
 teacher, will not openly avow doctrines directly 
 and palpably ilib; 4 the gofpel ; for among 
 
 Chriftians, thefe doctrine^, in their naked and 1111- 
 difguifed form, will not be received. The facrcd 
 writers, therefore, make a fubtil and infidious man- 
 ner of propagating errours, no lefs than the errours 
 themfclves, a mark of impoftors. Of the artifice 
 with which they proceed the gofpel has given us 
 warning. They ufually begin with fmaller er- 
 rours, and gradually advance to greater. They 
 open not themfclves fully at once, but with caution 
 and referve. They will not alarm you by calling 
 in queftion the grand principles and doctrines of re- 
 ligion : They rather choofe to lead you on gently, 
 flep by ftep, from one errour to another. The a- 
 poftle tells Timothy, c Evil men and feducers wax 
 worfe and worfe, deceiving and being deceived.' 
 In this refpect he compares them to the firft de- 
 ceiver. 2 Cor. x. Speaking of falfe apoftles, he 
 fays, ? They are deceitful workers, transforming 
 themfclves into the apoilles of Chrift, and into 
 minifters of righteoufnefs, even as Satan himfelf was 
 transformed into an angel of light.' He exprefTeth 
 his concern for the Corinthian?, c Led, as the fer- 
 pent beguiled Eve through his fubtiky, fo their 
 minds mould be corrupted from the iimplicity, that 
 is in Chrift/ The ferpent beguiled Eve, not by 
 bold and direct temptations, but by fly and artful 
 enticements. He fir ft enquires, whether God had 
 forbidden the ufe of every tree. When he was 
 told, that there was a grant of all the trees except 
 mc y which wai guarded with a threatening of 
 
 death 
 
i 3 o 
 
 death ; he replies, c Ye fhall not furely die.' 
 There is not that danger, which you apprehend. 
 He next intimates fome peculiar advantage in eat- 
 ing of this particular tree. ' Your eyes fhall be 
 opened, and ye fhall be as gods, knowing good 
 and evil/ Probably he infinuates, that he was an 
 angel of light fent from heaven to take off the re- 
 ftraint. Thus, by degrees feduced, the woman 
 call a longing eye on the fruit : The fight inflam- 
 ed her defire : This, concurring with his fuggefl- 
 ions, prevailed on her to take and eat. 
 
 In like manner the minifters of Satan are cautious 
 not to flartle men at firft by too bold fuggeftions. 
 They will affect, in mod points, to conform to the 
 minifters of righteoufnefs ; to think as they think, 
 or not greatly to differ from them ; and only to 
 ferve the fame important intereft, which they are 
 ferving. They will fuit themfelves to all compa- 
 nies ; and, as the apoftle fays, c their word will be 
 yea, and nay ; } one thing or another, juft according 
 to the humours and notions of the people they con- 
 verfe with ; until, they imagine, they have gained 
 their confidence, and feduced them fo far, that it is 
 impofliblc to renew them again to repentance : 
 Then they will venture more boldly to difcover 
 their fentiments and open their defigns. 
 
 IV. Unruly and vain talkers and deceivers are 
 defcribed as privately tampering with people of lefs 
 knowledge and difcernment, becaufe thefe are more 
 eafily deluded. 
 
 They choofe not, in the firfl inflance, to prac- 
 tife on thofe who are of full age, and who, by rea- 
 fon of ufe, have their fenfes exercifed to difcern 
 both good and evil. They fhun fuch, left their de- 
 figns 
 
figns fliould be difcovcrcd, and their crrours ex- 
 pofed. They rather attempt to feduce the young, 
 the weak, the wavering, the dilcontented ; that, 
 having gained thefe, they may more eafily make 
 impreflions on the minds of thofe who are connect- 
 cd with them. The old ferpent (irft applied to Eve, 
 whom having feduced, he by her influence drew 
 the man into difobedience. The fame artifice is 
 practiced (till. Corrupt teachers, we are told, 
 * beguile unftablc fouls ;' and 'creep into houfes 
 and lead cdsptivc filly women, laden v ith fins, and 
 Jed away with divers lufts, ever learning, and never 
 able to come to the knowledge of the troth ;' 
 thus c they fubvert whole houfes, teaching things, 
 which they ought not, for filthy lucre's fake.' In 
 this fenfe they are faid c to follow the way, and to 
 hold the doctrine of Balaam,' who taught Balak to 
 cad a (tumbling-block before the children of Ifrael 
 by feducing them to marry the daughters of Moab, 
 that by this idolatrous connexion, they might be 
 enticed to eat things facrificed to idols. 2 Peter, 
 2, 14, 15. — 2 Tim. iii. 6. — Titus, i. 11. — and 
 Rev. ii. 14, compared with Numb. xxv. 1, 2. 
 
 V. Another mark of falfe teachers is an implac- 
 able malignity againft the (landing, regular miniflers 
 of the gofpel. 
 
 Read the epiftle of Jude, and Paul's epiftle to 
 the Corinthians and Galatians, and you will fee 
 this fpirit to be ch ar after i (lick of them. They not 
 only cenfure fome unworthy characters, but declaim 
 againft the whole order, and fpare no pains to in- 
 fufe into people's minds prejudices againft all that 
 belong to it. Jude fays of thofe ungodly men, who, 
 in his day, had crept in unawares j 4 They fpeak 
 
 evil 
 
132 
 
 evil of things, which they know not' — flander min- 
 ifters and churches, with which they are utterly 
 unacquainted. ' They defpife dominion and fpeak 
 evil of dignities.' The falfe apoltles reproached 
 Paul, not only as a man of diminutive figure and 
 contemptible fpeech, but as one that was carnal, 
 walked after the flcfh, and preached only for wa- 
 ges. But they commended themfelves, as making 
 the gofpel free, and as preaching only from love to 
 fouls, without a defire of worldly gain. And what 
 was their aim ? — The apoftle tells us ; and he was 
 well acquainted with them. i They zealoufly affect 
 you, but not well : Yea, they, would exclude us, 
 that ye may affect them.' Gal. iv. 1 7. marg. Their 
 hypocritical pretenfions of making the gofpel with. 
 out charge, and their perpetual clamour againft 
 Paul for taking wages of the churches, were the rea- 
 lbns, why he fo often and fo largely dated and 
 proved the right of mini iters to live by the gofpel, 
 and the obligation of Chriftians to fupport them. 
 But while he claimed a right to a liberal mainte- 
 nance, he tells the Corinthians, he had waved this 
 right among them, taking wages of other churches 
 to do them fervice.' And this he did, on charita- 
 ble and prudential reafons, c that he might cut off 
 occafion from the falfe apoftles, who defired occa- 
 fion, that wherein they gloried, they might be found 
 even as he.* They glorUcl, as falfe teachers mod 
 commonly do, in making the gofpel free : But Paul 
 fays, They are ' deceitful workers.' He acted o- 
 penly and without difguife. He afferted his right, 
 but remitted the exercife of it in Corinth, 'i 
 were vain talkers and deceivers ; they denied the 
 right, and yet exercifed it in a furreptitious man* 
 
 ner. 
 
J 33 
 
 ncr. W^hile they gloried in preaching freely, they 
 actually took of the Corinthians lo extravagantly, 
 that they even ' deviated them, and brought them 
 into bondage. 1 And yet tin . e ionic in Co* 
 
 riiuh, who, while they joined in the clamour a- 
 .ilt Paul as an hireling, would patiently bear any 
 thing, and every thing from theic deceivers. 
 c Have I committed an offence, lays he, becaufe 1 
 preached to you the gofpel of God freely ?' — c But 
 ye fuller fools gladly ; for ye fuller, if a man bring 
 you into bondage ; if a man devour you ; if a man 
 lake of you ; if a man exalt himfelf ; if a man 
 fmite you on the face.' But how did thefe deceit- 
 ful workers carry on their defign of taking wages, 
 while they pretended to have none ? It feems they 
 employed accomplices to take, or rather extort gifts 
 for them : And then, to cover the artifice more 
 deeply, and prevent a fufpicion of their privity, 
 they accufed Paul of this duplicity. But he utterly 
 difavows it, and appeals to the Corinthians for the 
 falfity of the charge. He fays, c I was not burden- 
 fome to you ; — for I feek not yours, but you — 
 very gladly will I fpend and be fpent for you.' — 
 * But be it fo ; I did not burden you, yet being 
 crafty, I caught you with guile.' i. e. Thefe de- 
 ceitful workers, confeious of their own artifice, will 
 fay, 'Though I did not burden you myfelf, yet I 
 craftily employed others to take of you for me.' 
 He defpifes the infinuation. ' Did I make a gain of 
 you by any of them whom I fent to you ? I defired 
 Titus, and with him I fent a brother. Did Titus 
 make a gain of you ? Walked we not in the fame 
 fpirit, and in the fame fteps ?' Paul ' renounced 
 the hidden things of difhonefly, not walking 
 M in 
 
J 34 
 
 in craftinefs. — ' But thcfe deceivers, * through 
 covetoufnefs, with feigned words made merchan- 
 dize of their hearers.' i Cor. ix. and 2 Cor. x. 
 and feq. and 2 Peter, ii. 3. 
 
 This leads me to notice another mark which the 
 apofUe mentions. 
 
 VI. This fort of teachers are guided by no line, 
 and confined to no meafure ; but run from place 
 to place, enter into other men's labours, and build 
 on other men's foundation. 
 
 Wherever the apoftles came preaching the gof- 
 pel, they exhibited full evidence, as of their gene- 
 ral commiftion, fo of their particular warrant to 
 preach in that place. When any fought a proof 
 of Chrift fpeaking in Paul, he was able to anfwer, 
 ' The figns of an apoflle have been wrought among 
 you — and we have been thoroughly made manifeft 
 among you in all things.' He fays to the Corin- 
 thians, ' We dare not make ourfelves of the num- 
 ber, nor compare ourfelves with fome who com- 
 mend themfelves— We dare not imitate the arro- 
 gance and oflentation of your falfe apoftles. ' We 
 will not boafl of things without our meafure, but 
 according to the meafure of the rule which God 
 hath diflributed to us, a meafure to reach even 
 unto you. For we ftretch not ourfelves beyond, 
 nor boaft of things without our meafure, that is, of 
 other men's labours : But wc have hope,when your 
 faith is increaied, that wc (hall be enlarged by you, 
 according to our rule, to preach the gofpel in the 
 regions beyond you ; and not to boafl, in another 
 man's line, of things made ready to our hand.' 
 2 Cor. x. 1 2—16. How different was Paul's con- 
 duct from that of thcfe falfe apoftles ? They could 
 
 ftiew 
 
 , 
 
JO 
 
 fliew nocommiflioii to preach to the Corinthians* 
 nor indeed any where elle : But he could manifeft 
 :oftolick commiilion, and his particular war- 
 rant to preach in Corinth ; for when he was or- 
 dained to preach to the Gentiles, a meafure was al- 
 igned him which included Achaia. They moved 
 by no line, bv no rule, but leaped from one church 
 to another : He went on orderly in preaching the 
 gofpel and planting churches among the Gentiles, 
 from Judea through all the interjacent provinces,un- 
 til he came to Corinth ; and he hoped dill to pro- 
 ceed farther according to his line. They only came 
 and perverted thofe churches, where the faith had 
 been already preached, and fo could only boaft of 
 things made ready to their hands ; inlfead of 
 founding churches, they only formed feels out of 
 churches already founded : He preached the gof- 
 pel where no other apoftle had before been em- 
 ployed ; and erected churches, not as feparate par- 
 ties, but only as provinces of Child's general king- 
 dom, that there might be no fchifm in the body. 
 He fpeaks to the fame purpofe in his letter to the 
 Romans. ' I will not dare to fpeak of,' or aflame 
 tomyfelf, ' any of thofe things, which Chrift hath 
 not wrought by me.' — c Yea, fo have I ifrived to 
 preach the gofpel, not where Chriil is named, left I 
 fhould build on another man's foundation. Rom. 
 :;v. 1 8, 20. 
 
 Miniiiers, you fee, are to have their refpeelive 
 lines and meafures, within which they mult move. 
 They are not to be c clouds without water, driven 
 about with wind* in every direction : but clouds 
 fraught with heavenly treafures, and advancing in 
 a Ready courfe over the thirfly ground. 4 Their 
 
 doctrine 
 
doctrine fliould drop as the rain, and diilil as the 
 dew, as the fmall rain, on the tender herb, and the 
 fliowers on the grafs.' They are not to be c wan- 
 dering (tars/ but ftars confined in their appointed 
 orbits. They are not to crofs each other's lines, 
 and interfere in their motions ; but, like the heav- 
 enly fyftem, to run, each in his proper circuit, a- 
 round the common centre. They are to contri- 
 bute, each in his fphere, to the general order and 
 harmony. They are to be fellow-workers to the 
 kingdom of God. Paul charges the elders of the 
 church, that they take heed to the flock, over 
 which the Holy Ghoft has made them overfeers, to 
 feed the church of God.' Acts xx. 1 8. The cau- 
 tion given by Peter, c Be ye not bufy-bodies in 
 other men's matters/ is peculiarly applicable to, 
 and perhaps efpecially intended for minifters, whom 
 he particularly addreffes in the precedent and fub- 
 fequent verfes. The original phrafe literally im- 
 ports, Let none of you— ad as a bijhop in another 9 s 
 province* I Peter, iv. 15. It is a plain mark of a 
 falfe teacher, to enter upon, and pull dq,wn other 
 men's works, that he may build on their ground : 
 To flretch himfelf beyond his meafare, or to move 
 without any line of direction. In this re fpecl Peter 
 and Jude compare the corrupt teachers, in that day, 
 to clouds hurled about with a temped — to raging 
 waves of the fea — to floating meteors, of ftrong, 
 but tranfient glare, to which is referved the black- 
 nefs of darknefs forever.* VII. 
 
 * The prophet Tfaiah, chap, xxx, verfe ao, fays, " Thine eyes 
 {ball fee thy teacbtr*. This is a blcfling peculiarly promifed to the 
 church of Jfracl, after {he had furmoui.ted her grtatcft trials; ar.d 
 therefore mofi properly belongs to the fpiritual Ifrael, or gofpcl- 
 church ; whofe teachers (hould not dwell, like the Levites, in fcp- 
 
 aratc 
 
<;7 
 
 VII. They arc confidcred by the ap< 
 fulic teachers, who caufe diviiions and offences in 
 
 the churches of Chrift. 
 
 The gofpel every where inculcates peace and 
 unity among Chriftians ; and rcprefents reparations 
 
 and 
 
 aratc cities but in the midft of her, fo that flic mi m, be 
 
 converfant with them, know their ability and fidelity in their office, 
 ha»e their example before her eyes, and enjoy their prefcr.ee and 
 eounfels in all her troubles. Such is evidently the deligu of the gof- 
 pel-miniitry. Accordingly, except a few evangelifb, who were ex- 
 traordinary officers, and who had a work in fome refpicls, peculiar 
 to themfc'.vcs, the ChrifHan churches, in the fir ft ages, had their 
 knvi fettled bifhops, who refidcd, eacli in the churcli 
 
 of which he wa> maJe overfcer. Such a man was elder or loilhop, 
 of this church, andfuch a man of another. Every congregation had 
 its own paftor ; every large city had its body of pallors. Ciiriftians 
 enjoyed a perfonal acquaintance with their minifter ; fully knew 
 his f'airh, doctrine, manner of life, and had accefs to bin] for advice 
 on all occafiom ; and he, Handing in a fpecial and endearing rela- 
 tion to them, naturally cared for their fUte. The evidence of this 
 appears in all parts of the a<Sts and the cpiftles. The churck of Eph- 
 cfitt had her own overfeers, fet apart, by the Holy Ghofl, for her 
 . |] :ce, to which they were commanded to take heed. 
 
 Phc apofllea ordained elders in every church. Titus was left in 
 :, that he might ordain elders in ev/ry city , and fet in order 
 lich were wanting. The churches in Afia had ench her 
 did met an Jt*', or f>a/?or } to whom John delivers a meffage from Chrifr, 
 to be communicated to the churches. Thefe obfervations prove, 
 that a man who choofes to officiate as a preacher, where he i< un- 
 known ; who wand ':=. from town to town, and from ftate to ftate, 
 keeping his external call and qualifications out of fight, carries a 
 r-ioft glaring mark of a fahe teacher. And whatever pretentions he 
 -s of zeal for Chrift, and love to fouls, he is to be regarded 
 i the fame difrruft, at a rambling mountebank, who profrfles a 
 •.latural lie i li to heal men's difeafes, or predict their foi tunes, 
 tries, who are fixed in no one place ; whoexhibit no authentick 
 credentials; who preach not on the inftituted day, in the dated 
 place, under the patronage of fr.ttled miuiftcrs ; but in contempt of 
 all order, creep into corners, call private lectures, endeavour to 
 tafcioate their hearers with the charms of novelty, and, before they 
 can well he known, flee away, and give place to a fucctiTor of the 
 fame defcriptioo, come not from the good Shepherd ; but arethofe 
 thieves and robbfrs, wiio come to fteal and defrroy, and of whom 
 the great Shepherd has warned u* to beware. To finch the porter 
 not open ; and fuchthe fheep may not hear nor follow." 
 
 Letter to the Author from a Fr'und. 
 
 m 
 
*3* 
 
 and party attachments, as an evidence that they are 
 carnal. Errours and corruptions in a church are 
 no reafon, why we mould withdraw from her com- 
 munion, until they plainly appear to be fundament- 
 al and incurable ; they are rather a reafon, why 
 we mould be watchful to reform the things that 
 are amifs, and to ftrengthen the things that remain. 
 There can fcarcely be a more (hiking indication of 
 hypocrify and carnality in a profeiTor of religion, 
 than his feparating from the communion of a church, 
 on pretence of corruptions or ungodly members in 
 it, when he himfelf has never made one fmgle at- 
 tempt to purge out the corruptions, or to reclaim 
 or remove the ungodly members. 
 
 One great end of the iniiitution of churches, and 
 of focial worfliip in them, is the promotion of peace, 
 harmony and love. Thofe teachers, therefore, 
 whofe object is to caufe divisions in churches, have 
 nothing of the fpirit of the gofpel, but are manifeft- 
 ly purfuing a defign in direct oppofition to it. Jude, 
 clefcribing the importers who had fecretly crept in 
 among Chrirtians, fays, ' Thefe are they who fep- 
 arate themfelves, fenfual, having not the fpirit. 
 Verfe 19. No words can be more plain and des- 
 criptive, than thofe of St. Paul. • Mark them who 
 caufe divifions and offences, contrary to the doctrine 
 which ye have received, and avoid them. For they 
 that are fuch ferve not the Lord Jefus Chrirt , but 
 their own belly ; and with good words and fair 
 fpeeches deceive the hearts of the fimple.' Rom. 
 xvi. 17,18. They deceive hyfairjpeeclxs. They 
 profefs uncommon ianctity, high afturance, extraor- 
 dinary zeal, and immediate communication from the 
 Spirit, As the aportle fays, ' they commend and 
 
 exalt 
 
39 
 
 exalt theml'elves, and meafurc themfelvcs by them- 
 . and compare themfelvcs among themfelves, 
 as if they were perfect and inf.dlible ftandards. — 
 They juliify their reparations by prctenfions, that 
 rs are not fpiriiual enough for their commun- 
 ion — they would form a pure church. The lan- 
 guage of their conduct is, 'Stand by yourfelvcs, 
 come not near, for we are holier than you.' But 
 what fays the God of peace and purity ? ' Thefc 
 are a fmoke in my nofe ; a fire that burnetii all the 
 day.' Ifaiah Ixv. 5. 
 
 The promoters of divilions, the better to accom- 
 plifh their wicked purpofes, are watchful to take 
 advantage of any unhappy circumftance in a 
 church ; fitch as an accidental contention, the dis- 
 cipline of an offending member, the ficknefs or re- 
 moval, the death or the temporary abfence of the 
 dated paftor : As the wolf leaps into the fold, when 
 the fliepherd is withdrawn, or a gap is opened. 
 Paul, who knew their craft better than he wifhed, 
 fays to the elders at Ephefus, c I know that after 
 my departure^ fhall grievous wolves enter in among 
 you, not fparing the flock. Alfo of your own 
 feFves (hall men arife, fpeaking perverfe things to 
 draw away difciplcs after them? A els 20, 29, 30. 
 They are induftrious to make difciples : But to 
 whom ? — To Chrift ? No, but to themfelves. It 
 is with this view that they ramble from fold to 
 fold, and enter into other men's flocks. So Chrift 
 fays to the fcribes, ' Ye compafs fea and land to 
 make one profelyte ;' leaving no art untried for 
 that end. But what is their intention ? Is it that 
 their profelyte may be more devoted to God ? 
 No : It is that he mav be attached to them, and fo 
 
 add 
 
140 
 
 add to their importance. c When he is made, fays 
 Chrift, ye make him more the child of hell than 
 yourfelves.' Your corrupt flatteries only harden 
 him m his wickednefs. Matth. xxiii. 15. So Jude 
 fays of them, ' They have men's perfons in admira- 
 tion becaufe of advantage ;.' efteeming and ap- 
 plauding this and that man, not on account of his 
 real virtue and worth, but only on account of his 
 readinefs to ferve their defrgns. 6 No, no,' they 
 will tell you, c we have no fuch unworthy aims : 
 But the churches are fallen from the gofpel purity. 
 And we arepreffed in fpirit to teftify againil them ; 
 we would by all means fave fome.' Is this their in- 
 tention ? Why then climb they over the walls, in- 
 ftead of entering by the door ? Why creep they in 
 unawares, inftead of walking upright ? Why ap- 
 ply they not to the paftors of churches, to convince 
 them of, and reclaim them from the fuppofed er- 
 rours and corruptions ? Would not this be the fur- 
 eft and directeft way to reform corrupt and errone- 
 ous churches ? This is the way that Chrift has point- 
 ed out. When John was fent to the degenerate 
 churches of Afia, did he neglect the flated paftor, 
 and addrefs the people without his' knowledge ? 
 Did he attempt to difafTect them to, and detach 
 them from his miniftry ? Did he caufe divifions and 
 reparations in order to make one pure church out 
 of feven corrupt ones r No : John's letters are di- 
 rected immediately to the angel, or pa/lcr of each 
 church, to be by him communicated to the people. 
 Thus the fpirit fpakc to the churches. John acted 
 by command of Chrifl. c To the angel of the 
 church write' — ' Thefe things faith the Son of 
 God* — 'He that hath an ear let him hear, what 
 the fpirit faith to the churches ? The churches 
 
 were 
 
 , 
 
i 4 i 
 
 were to hear what was (poken ia this way : But 
 they were not to hear every man who came in the 
 garb of a teacher, and who, by his high preten- 
 lions to inspiration, fubvertcd the order which Chi ilt 
 had fettled. There were enough fuch anion;; them. 
 Therefore one church is reproved, becaufe ihe Aif- 
 fered them to teach, who faliely called thcmfelvcs 
 prophets : And another is commended, becaufe 
 ihe could not bear them that were evil ; and tried 
 them, whofaid, they were apoltles, and were not ; 
 and found them liars. 
 
 It is a certain mark ofafalfe teacher, if under 
 pretence of reforming churches, hecaufes divifions 
 in them. There were corruptions in mod of the 
 Afiatick churches : In fome of them there were 
 but few members, who had not defiled their gar- 
 ments. And what were thefe few to do ? — With- 
 draw, left they fhould be infected with the filthy 
 garments of their brethren ? — No : But to watch 
 and keep their own garments, to fave others with 
 fear, and encourage the purity which remained. 
 Rev. ii. and iii. chapters. 
 
 VIII. Falfe teachers ufually attend more to the 
 form, than to the power of godlinefs. 
 
 The preaching of the apoftles was rational, folid, 
 and convincing. It tended to make men wife and 
 good, humble and holy, pious and benevolent — 
 They taught that, ' the kingdom of God was not 
 meat and drink, but righteoufnefs and peace and 
 joy in the Holy Ghoft'— -that < in Chrift neither 
 circumcilion, nor uncircumciiion availed ; but a new 
 creature, keeping the commandments of God, and 
 faith working by love.' Their doctrine was ac- 
 cording to godlinefs. Impoftors rather lay weight 
 
 on 
 
142 
 
 on certain diitinguifhing tenets and ufages of their 
 own ; on particular modes and forms ; on the 
 means and inftruments of religion ; on things fuit- 
 ed to flrike the paflions and captivate the affec- 
 tions. With men of this character, converfion, 
 though perhaps much talked of, is only coming 
 over to their feci, and adopting their peculiar fenti- 
 ments and forms. When they gain profelytes to 
 their party, they boafl the number o^ their con- 
 verts ; and urge their fuccefs, as an evidence that 
 God is with them. The blind, hypocritical guides, 
 fo often reproved by our Saviour, made religion 
 to confid more intything mint, anife and cummin, 
 in long and noify prayers, and frequent fafts, than 
 in righteoufnefs, mercy, faith and the love of God. 
 Matth. xxiii. Thofe vagrants, who went out 
 from the apoftles, becaufe they were not of them, 
 and who fubverted the fouls of the believers, 
 taught, that except men were circumcifed, and ob- 
 ferved the ceremonies of the law, they could not 
 be fdved. Acts xv. The falfe apodles in Corinth, 
 and evil workers in Philippi, had confidence in the 
 flefh, in external rites and forms ; they gloried that 
 they were Hebrews, Israelites, and the feed of A- 
 braham. 2 Cor. xi. Phil. iii. 2, 3, 4. The per- 
 vertersofthe gofpel in Galatia turned their hear- 
 ers to weak and beggarly elements, and taught 
 them to obferve days and months, times, and years. 
 Gal. iv. 9, 10. The unruly and vain talkers and 
 deceivers in Ephefas and in Crete, who crept into 
 liouies, and fubverted whole families, had only a 
 form of godlinefs ; they denied the power of it. 
 They fought to pleafe fuch as could not endure 
 found doctrine- and to gratify their itching ears. 
 
 they 
 

 They humoured the difpofition of thole, \;ho, af- 
 ter their own lufls, heaped to themfelves teachers ; 
 they amufed them with fables, inftead of edifying 
 them with found doctrine, i Tim. iii. and iv. chap- 
 ters. Titus i. 10, li. 
 
 The apoftles of Chrift ufed great plainnefs of 
 fpeech ; by manifeftation of the truth commended 
 themfelves to every man's confeience ; warned and 
 taught every man in all wifdom, that they might 
 prefent every man perfect in Chrift Jems. The 
 falfe apoftles aimed only to move the paflions, 
 pleafe the fancy and excice the admiration of their 
 hearers. c They allured them with great, fuelling 
 words of vanity ;' with words tending both to ex- 
 alt themfelves, and fwell the pride and felf-conli- 
 dence of their deluded admirers. They might 
 boaft of their numerous converts ; but converts 
 made only by the agitation of the paffions, without 
 inftruction of mind or change of temper, are but as 
 ' trees whefe fruit withereth, without fruit, twice 
 dead, plucked up by the roots/ 
 
 The ancient Jews, in their corrupted ftate, call- 
 ed frequent afiemblks, appointed folemn meetings, 
 and multiplied their offerings ; they fought God 
 daily, diked of him the ordinances of juftice and 
 took delight in approaching to him, as a nation that 
 did righteoufnefs and foribok not the ordinances 
 of their God. But God's inftituted fabbath and 
 worfhip was no delight to them. They would wor- 
 fhip God in any time or manner, except that which 
 he had prefcribed. The prophet is therefore di- 
 rected to cry aloud againft them, and teach them 
 their tranfgreilion. Ilaiah lviii. 
 
 However zealous we are to heap to ourfelves 
 
 teachers 
 
144 
 
 teachers, and multiply to ourfelves feafons of wor- 
 jQiip, if we neglect the worfhip of God on the day 
 and in the place, which he has appointed, our re- 
 ligion is but an empty form. Such a perverfion of 
 God's ordinances proceeds not from fpirkual zeal, 
 but from worldly lufr. 
 
 IX. This fort of teachers are defcribed as op- 
 pofing fubordination under infidious pretentions of 
 liberty. 
 
 The apoflle cautions the Ephefians, that ' they be 
 not carried away — by the flight of men and cun- 
 ning craftinefs, by which they lie in wait to deceive.' 
 Chap. iv. 14. He alludes to the fraudful dexteri- 
 ty of practifed gamefters m managing a die, or cube, 
 as the word fignifles, which they will throw with 
 fuch a flight as to make the fide come up which 
 they wifli. Much fo crafty deceivers tofs men a- 
 bout by addreffing their feelings, and plying them 
 with fu bj efts fui ted to agitate their paflions. And, 
 for this fpiritual legerdemain, they feldom find a 
 more handy inflrument, than the form of liberty. 
 Their firfl object is to unfettle people's minds from 
 the doctrine and order of the gofpel, by infmuating, 
 that their underftandings have been impofed on, and 
 their confciences enflaved, and it is time to alTert 
 their liberty. If they can only fet men afloat, they 
 hope to take the direction of them into their own 
 hands. This game the devil too fuccefsfully played 
 with our progenitors in Eden. He infmuated, that 
 they were held in ignorance and blind obedience ; 
 and if they would throw off the reftraint, their eyes 
 would be opened. The mini iters of Satan ufe the 
 fame artifice. Corah would perfuade the Jews, that 
 they were led about blindfold by Moies,and pri eft-rid- 
 den 
 
r 45 
 
 den by the Handing order. Peter and Jude def- 
 cribe feducers, as ' defpifing government,' and en- 
 deavouring, under pretence of liberty, to level all 
 diitin&ions : As c murmurers and complainers ; pre- 
 lumptuous and felf- willed ; and as fporting in their 
 deceptions :' As headftrong in their ways, and 
 Incapable of being mended by eouniel, or reclaim- 
 ed on.* 
 Paul gives the fame account of them in his fe- 
 cond letter to Timothv. He fays, ' Perilous times 
 {hall come, for men mall be lovers of their own- 
 felveSj covetous,' teaching things which they ought 
 not for filthy lucre's fake ; ' proud, and boallcrs' 
 of their own fuperior fanctity ; ' evil fpeakers and 
 difobedient to parents' under pretence of being 
 more godly than they ; ' unthankful, unholy, with- 
 out natural ailection, covenant breakers,' or difre- 
 garding the covenant obligations which they are un- 
 der 
 
 * Peter mentions tin* among other marks of falfc teachers, that in 
 their fcftivals or affemblies, they /ported thcmfelves luitb their ottn deceii- 
 )r with certain devices to deceive their followers ; thus beguilitfe 
 fouls. Irencus, aChriflian father, who wrote foon afttr the 
 apoftles, has mentioned a particular device, which Peter is here 
 (uppofed to allude to. Speaking of thefe hereticks, he fays, ' They 
 made it their cuftom, in their feftivals, fcrtibus ludere, to play with 
 lots.' How thefe lot?, were applied, Peter may be fuppofed to in- 
 timate, when he fays, their /parting was to deceive and iegvile, that 
 they might better exercift their envetuus practices. It is probable that 
 thefe deceivers, pretending, that a lot drawn in a particular man- 
 ner was a divine decifion, took upon them thus to direc?c men's con- 
 duct, and to predict their deftinv. Hence it appears that the impi- 
 ous p:acaicc, lately known among us, of difcovering men's fplritual 
 ftate by a lottery ^ is not fo novel, as fomc have imagined. Some- 
 thing fimilar to it fcems to have been in ufe among thofe religious 
 gamefters who vexed the church in, and foon after the apoftlcs' 
 times. But the ufe of parages of facred writ in a way of lottery, is 
 a fpecies of impiety probably unknown to the ancients. This im- 
 provement on the old plan medern gamefters may doubtlefs appro- 
 priate. 
 
 N 
 
146 
 
 der to the church of God ; c falfe accufers, inconti- 
 nent/ or much given to luft ; ' fierce' and malig- 
 nant in their tempers ; ' heady and high-minded :' 
 And yet afluming ' a form of godlinefs !' 6 Of this 
 fort are they who creep into houfes, to lead the 
 fitnple captive. From fuch turn away.' What is 
 ihe liberty, which fuch goodly patrons procure ? 
 Tlk apoftle calls it captivity, oxfubjeclion to divers 
 hifts. It is a liberty, which begins in licentiouf- 
 nefs and ends in bondage. Peter fays, ' They al- 
 lure through the 1 lifts of the rlefh thofe who had 
 elcaped from them that live in errour. While 
 they promife them liberty, they themfelves are the 
 fervants of corruption ; for of whom a man is over- 
 come, of the fame he is brought into bondage.' 
 2 epiflle, ii. 18, 19. They relax the ftricl: precepts 
 of the gofpel, preach doctrines fuited to men's cor- 
 rupt inclinations ; flatter their fpiritual pride, and 
 bolfter them up with falfe hopes by haltily pro- 
 nouncing them in a (late of grace. Thus deliver- 
 ing them from the reftraints of fear, they plunge 
 them into more abfolute bondage to their lulls, and 
 make their laft ftate worfe than the firfh 
 
 1 would obferve once more. 
 
 X. Falfe teachers corrupt the word of God and 
 handle it deceitfully. In oppoiition to them Paul 
 f ivs, ' We are not as many, who corrupt the word 
 of God. We have renounced the hidden things 
 .honefly — not handling the word of God de- 
 My — * 2 Cor. ii. 17 — and iv. 2. One com- 
 mon way in which they corrupt the word is, by 
 ' turning the truth into fables,' or by rejecting the 
 plain, literal meaning of fcripturcfor the fake of a 
 myftical, allegorical fenfe, which they abfurdly call 
 
 the 
 
fpiritual (cnic. 9 Thus ihey make (lie v 
 Bible uncertain, and are at liberty to give i 
 text a fanciful turn, which bcit ferves their own 
 purpofe, or pleafes the humour of their hearers. 
 
 There were, in the apoftles' clays, fome of this 
 fantaftick complexion. They denied the literal in- 
 carnation, death and refurreclion of Chrift ; and 
 affirmed that his body was only fpectral, and his 
 death and refurreetum only illufive. They pro- 
 felTed high perfection in holinefs, abfolute freedom 
 from fin, clear difcernraent of fpiritual things, un- 
 common illuminations from God. It is manifeft, 
 that theepillle of Jude, and the firfi: cpifllc of John, 
 were written in oppofition to thefe enthufiaflick, 
 myftical religionifts. Jude calls them c dreamers;' 
 men whofe religious notions were as wild and in- 
 coherent, as the fports of imagination in a dream. 
 
 Some deiltical w r riters have taken this method to 
 fubvertthe credit of revelation : and the fame arti- 
 fice others have ufed to propagate their ii rational 
 and unfcriptnral opinions. 
 
 Nothing can be more dangerous than this way 
 of interpreting fcripture. if we deny irs literal 
 meaning, and conceive the real fenfe to be hidden 
 in myfteries, allegories and fanciful allufious, we en- 
 tirely deilroy its life : And then, in our inquiries af- 
 ter truth and duty, what rule {hall we find to 
 us? Everyman's fancy mull be his guide, v. 
 like an ignis fatuus, will miflead the wandering pil- 
 grim into bogs and moraffes of errour, and finally 
 ingulph him in everlafting ruin. 
 
 I have now laid before you fome cA the diilin- 
 guifhing characters of falfe teachers ; and you 
 will coniider and remember, that they are charact- 
 
148 
 
 ers drawn, not by me, but by the facred fcriptures. 
 Where they apply, let them apply. If you per- 
 ceive that you have hitherto been under falfe teach- 
 ers, it is time to renounce them and feek others : 
 If you find otherwifc, acl: according! v. Teachers 
 you are to have ; but let them be gcfpel ones. 
 You mud judge for yourfelves ; but if you judge 
 wrong, it is at your peril. c Strait is the gate, and 
 narrow is the way, which leads to life, and few 
 there be that find it : Therefore beware of falfe 
 prophets.' Some feem to think it pretty indiffer- 
 ent whom they follow. If it be fo, tell me why 
 our divine Lord, and all his apofUes, have taken fo 
 much care to guard you againfl impoftors and in- 
 truders ; and why they have given you fuch per- 
 petual cautions againfl them ? 
 
 If you fufpect, that the doctrines of religion be- 
 lieved by your fathers, and the order of the church- 
 es, and the manner of introducing and fupporting 
 publick teachers, which have generally obtained in 
 the land, are unfcriptural and deftruclive ; if you 
 imagine, that the churches in the country have been 
 no better than fynagogucs of Satan ; that God has 
 never owned them as his churches, nor bleffed the 
 word and ordinances adminiftered in them ; if you 
 fuppofe, that your fathers have been only fools and 
 hypocrites, and that you, grown better and vJfer, 
 are bound as Chriftians, to encourage innovations 
 tending to the fubverfion of thefe churches ; if 
 thefe are your honcft fentiments, this only would 1 
 learn of you ; when did piety and virtue, peace and 
 good order moft abound ? — In the days of our fath- 
 ers ? — Or fince thefe fuppofed improvements have 
 taken place ? 
 
 There 
 
There are Tome things in religion, which all mull 
 allow to be great and eflential ; iiicli 98 jufticc, 
 mercy, faith, bci peaceablenefe, conde- 
 
 fcen lion and humility. The promotion of th< 
 one great end of focial worihip, and of all fpecial 
 inftitutions. If we find, that any particular 
 ions and ufagcs do in fact anfwcr this important endj 
 there is a ftrong prefumption in favour of them. 
 But if, on the contrary, as new fentiments and forms 
 lake place, they who adopt them become more 
 fwoin with pride and felf-confidence ; more apt to 
 vilify, cenfurc and condemn their fellow Chriftians, 
 and more induitrious to fow difcord among breth- 
 ren ; this is a fhrewd fign, that their notions are 
 not founded in truth : At lead it proves, that their 
 religion has done than no good. 
 
 When a minilter warns his people againft inno- 
 vations in doctrine and worihip, againfl Heaping to 
 thcmfelves teachers, and countenancing divifionS in 
 churches, it is common that they impute to him 
 feme feltiili ekiign. Whatever opinion you may 
 have of your own minifter's views in preaching the 
 gofpel, yet if you only confider him as a man not 
 diverted of the common feelings of humanity, you 
 will know it is impoffible, that he mould be indif- 
 ferent to your intereil. Can you imagine, that 
 one, who has miniftered to you, and been o 
 fant with you, in all circumftances of profperky and 
 adverfity, from his youth for near thirty years ; 
 who has fcen a great part of you prow up 
 his miniitry j who has been foppoited by your lib- 
 erality, and happy in your fteady friendship ; can 
 you imagine, that fuch an one will not naturally care 
 for you ? Can a ftranger, on a tranfient interview, 
 n ha 
 
have feelings like him ? Believe the things now of- 
 fered to be warnings of love. — I know them to be 
 words of truth. 
 
 It is a day, when the churches in the land are in 
 danger ; and you are not exempt. Vice and im- 
 morality prevail ; deflrucYrve errours make pro- 
 greis ; the minds of many are unfettled from the 
 truth, and from the order of the gofpel ; impor- 
 tant doctrines are denied or called in queflion ; fa- 
 cred inftitutions are treated with contempt ; and 
 notions fubvernve of peace and virtue are zealouily 
 propagated and eagerly embraced. But be not 
 you carried about with divers and flrange doctrines. 
 It is a good thing, that the heart be eftablilhed 
 with grace. 
 
 The remarkable prevalence of errour and dis- 
 order in churches, at this particular time, proceeds 
 chiefly, I imagine, from two caufes. Finl, from 
 the great carelefTnefs and flupidity of former years, 
 in confequence of which, many have grown up un- 
 principled in religion, and unfurniihed with doc- 
 trinal knowledge, and fo are peculiarly expofed to 
 the impofitions of defigning men, and utterly un- 
 provided for their own defence. And, fecondly, 
 from the natural operations of the late civil war, 
 Though' it ultimately became a national, yet, in its 
 origin and earliefl flages, it was properly a civil 
 war. And fuch a war fddom fails to produce con- 
 fuficn in religion. The reafon is obvious : In a 
 civil war the fame people, divided into oppofite in- 
 terefh, are filled with more violent animcii:^?, 
 than thofe which take place between contending 
 nations. The mutual jtalouiies and relent i 
 ..eal and cngagednefs of party agaiaft party, aug- 
 mented 
 
1 3 I 
 
 tncnted by mutual recriminations, proximity of 
 fituation, and the remembrance of pad connexions, 
 put the mind on the dretch, dilturb the nervous 
 fydem, and throw the fpirits into an agitation near- 
 ly bordering on enihufiairn. To aggravate the 
 animoiity, religion is ufually introduced on both 
 rides, and, contrary to her mild difpofition, is com- 
 ptlled to bear a part in the keen and angry con- 
 troverfy. In iuch a date of mind, people are pe- 
 culiarly fufceptible of delufive impreflions ; conle- 
 quently new teachers, who rife up, and labour to 
 infufe into Chridians jealoufies of each other, or of 
 their dated indruclors, are lidened to with avidity, 
 and received with credulity. At fuch a time men 
 become a much eailer prey to errour and feduction, 
 than in thole calmer periods, when their fpirits are 
 more ferene and difpafiionate. And Satan doubt- 
 lei s takes advantage of the turbid fcene, more 
 darkly to ply his temptations, and more fuccefsful- 
 iy to fpread the confuiion. 
 
 You have need, my brethren, to be peculiarly on 
 your guard. Beware, led, being led away with 
 the errour of the wicked, you fall from your own 
 deadfadnefs. Remember the facred obligations 
 you are under as profefTors of religion. Let your 
 faith in the truth of the gofpel be confirmed by thofe 
 appearances in the date of the church, which the 
 apcilles have/2/ exprefsly foretold and Jo plainly def- 
 Attend on God's appointed ordinances, 
 adhere clofely to his word, and ceafe to hear the 
 indructions, which caufe to err from the words of 
 knowledge. Let your minds be calm in all your 
 •jus inquiries. Let not pailion, jealoufy or 
 
 party 
 
party defign have any influence in forming your 
 principles, or determining your pracl ice. 
 Confider that religion is a matter of infinite impor- 
 tance ; a bufinefs whofe coniequences are not ter- 
 minated with time, but reach forward into all the 
 depths of eternity. Treat it always as a mofl feri- 
 ous concern ; prove all things \ hold fall that 
 which is good. 
 
 ' But why all this ado about falfe teachers,' fome 
 will affc, c and why are minifters fo averfe to af- 
 fiftance in bringing fouls to Chrift ? The hufband- 
 man, if the harveft is great, rejoices to fee labour- 
 ers come into his field/ 
 
 My brethren, the field is not ours ; it is our Maf- 
 ter's. Ye are God's hufbandry ; we are his Rew- 
 ards, and rauft obey his orders. We rejoice in 
 the help ofthofe, whom he approves and fends. — 
 But if we filently admit intruders, who purloin the 
 crop ; mar the corners of the field ; trample the 
 grain, or bind the fheaves fo ilightly, that they can- 
 not be gathered into his barn ; what fhall we do 
 when he rifeth up ? and when he vifiteth, what 
 fhall we anfwer him ? 
 
 4 But ought we not to attend on preaching, 
 where we are beft edified !' 
 
 You are to fludy the things, which make for 
 peace, and by which you may edify one another, 
 You are to make increafe to the edifying of your- 
 fclvesin love. You are not to be felfifh in your 
 religion, any more than in your worldly bufmefs. 
 You are to confider one another to provoke to love 
 and good works. If under pretence of perfonal ed- 
 ification, you purfue the meafures which tend to 
 hinder the edification of your brethren, you act 
 
 contrary 
 
 fc 
 
*53 
 
 Contrary to the cnara&er of Chriftians, as much as 
 
 :':s contrary to the chara&er of a good citi 
 who manages his worldly bufmefs to the prejudice 
 of his jur's intereft. Miftake not the emo- 
 
 tions of paffion, the flights of imagination or the oc- 
 cafional flow of affection for godly edifying. You 
 are then edified, when you increafe in knowledge, 
 faith, purity, pcaceablenefs, and good works. If 
 you break the bond of peace, and the unity of the 
 ipirit, where is your edifying ? ' The church is to 
 come together into one place' — ' to be builded to- 
 gether for an habitation of God through the Spir- 
 it.' The members of it are to be joined to the 
 head by faith, and to each other by love. If they 
 are divided and fcattered, they have not the Spirit 
 of God, nor the temper of Chriftians, and there is 
 no edifying. 
 
 c But what if we have a minifter, whofe preach- 
 ing is not agreeable to us ; mud we hear him only ?' 
 
 If his preaching is not agreeable to the gofpel, 
 you ought by no means to be content with it. But 
 what will you do ? Will you filently withdraw, and 
 leave your lefs difcerning brethren to periih under 
 his corrupt miniftry ? Rather take gofpel-meafures 
 to convince him ; or, if he is irreclaimable, to re- 
 move him. You are not to icatter away promifcu- 
 oufly from a bad minifter : but he is to be put a- 
 way by a regular, publick cenfure of the churches, 
 that a good one may fucceed. Thus union is to be 
 preferved, and future impolltions prevented. 
 
 c But a minifter may preach the gofpel, and yet 
 his manner not be entertaining. May we not pleaie 
 felyes ?' 
 
 ; fenfible : that hearers have a divcrfity of 
 
 tafles, 
 
J 54 
 
 taftes, as well as minivers a diverfity of gifts ; and 
 among Chriftians of the fame fociety there mufl be 
 fome condefcenfion. c Ye that are ftrong ought to 
 bear the infirmities of the weak, and not merely to 
 pleafe yourfelves. Let every one of you pleafe his 
 neighbour for his good to edification — ' Paul, A- 
 pollos and Cephas preached the fame gofpel ; but 
 in a different manner. Some were pleafed witti 
 Paul's reafoning ; fome admired Apollos's elo- 
 quence ; and fome were charmed with Peter's 
 warmth of addrefs. So much might be expected. 
 But when they ran into parties, and fome attached 
 themfelves to this, and fome to that preacher in 
 oppofition to each other, what faid Paul to them ? 
 c Ye are carnal and walk as men.' 
 
 Itching ears indicate an ill humour in the blood ; 
 and they who with fuch ears, heap to themfelves 
 teachers i are faid to do it, not after the fpirit of 
 God, but after their civn tufts : Not becaufe they 
 love religion, but becaufe they cannot endure found 
 doclrine. From fuch teachers as creep into houfes, 
 or churches, to lead the fimple captive, you are to 
 turn away. Thofe who caufe divifions you are to 
 mark and avoid. Ycu are not to bid them, God 
 fpeed. 
 
 * But furcly there is fuch a thing as a juRifiable 
 reparation ; elfe why fays Paul to the Corinthians, 
 Come ye out from dplofig them, and he ye f par ate V 
 2 Cor. " vi. 17. 
 
 Doubtlefs there is a juftifiable feparation ; jufl 
 fuch an one as Paul recommends. And what is 
 this ? — Not a feparation from the church ; for 
 this direction >s given to the church ; and 
 Paul could not mean, that the church ought to fep- 
 
 arate 
 
»5i 
 
 arate from herfdf : But it is a reparation from the 
 vices of the world, and from the idolatries of the 
 heathens. So the ap< laihs it : * What fel- 
 
 lowship hath righteoufnefs with unrignteoufnefs ? 
 And what agreement hath the temple of God with 
 idols ? And how were thefe Chriftfans to i 
 rate ? The apoftle tells them : 6 Therefore let us 
 clearife our/elves from all filthinefs of the flcfh and 
 fpirit. — ' 
 
 4 Is there no cafe then, in which Chriftians may 
 feparate from a church ?' 
 
 There may be fuch a cafe. If a church is fo ef- 
 fentially and irreclaimably corrupt, as to ceafe to be 
 a church of Chrift, then, after we have in vain til- 
 ed the gofpel-meafures already mentioned, for her 
 reformation, we ought to withdraw from her com- 
 munion. On this principle the proteftants feparat- 
 ed from the church of Rome. She had introduc- 
 ed idolatry in its external form, adopted another 
 rule of faith befides the fcriptures, fet up another 
 head and acknowledged other mediators befides 
 Jefus Chrift, and fhe perfecuted even to prifon and 
 death, thofe who teftilied againd her errours and 
 laboured for her reformation. The apoftle John, 
 Rev. xviii. 4. (peaking prophetically or the corrupt 
 ftate of this church, fays, c I heard a voice from 
 heaven, faying, Come out from ber 9 my people, that 
 ye be not partakers of her fins, and that ye receive net 
 of her plagues. 9 Or if a church requires fuch terms 
 of communion, as we think unlawful, we can have 
 no fellowship with her in divine ordinances, though 
 we may hare a charitable opinion of her, as a true 
 church. There is a material difference between a 
 church's holding certain errours, and her making an 
 adoption of thofe errours a term of communion to 
 
 others. 
 
'56 
 
 others. But in this cafe fhe rather excludes us, 
 than we feparate from her. Our fathers were, in 
 this manner, driven from the church of England. 
 They owned her as a church of Chrift, and would 
 have continued in her communion, notwithstanding 
 certain ufages, which they thought unfcriptural, if 
 fhe would have difpenfed with their conformity tc 
 her therein ; but as fhe made an entire conformity 
 an indifpenfible term of communion, they thought 
 themfelves bound to withdraw. It was not a fepa- 
 ration on their part, but an exclnfion on her part. 
 Or if a number of profefTed Chriftians fhould fepa- 
 rate from a church with which they are in folemn 
 covenant, and form themfelves into a fociety in op- 
 pofition to their brethren, and thus caufe divifions 
 and offences, however candidly we may think of 
 them, as honed, but deluded Chriftians, we cannot 
 have communion with them as a church, not only 
 becaufe they renounce us, but alfo becaufe they 
 combine to fubvert fuch as we fuppofe to be church- 
 es of Chrift. We are to mark and avoid them. 
 But fmaller errours in doctrine or difcipliue, when 
 they are not made terms of communion, can never 
 jnftify fuch afeparation as implies a renouncing of 
 communion. Chrift owns and treats the churches 
 in Afia, as his churches, though mod of them had 
 greatly degenerated : And far from encouraging 
 the purer chriftians to withdraw from the reft, he 
 commands them to be watchful and ftrengthen the 
 things that remain. And let no man dare to judge 
 anddefpife thofe, whom God has received. Rom. 
 xiv. 1,2. 
 
 An honeft zeal for the purity of churches, is to 
 God an odour of a fwcct fmell ; but complaints 
 
 of 
 
l S7 
 
 of corruption, Virhen they proceed from foleen and 
 hv, . are a fmokein his noftrils. many, who 
 
 are loud in complaining of difordcrs in churches, in- 
 
 ad of attempting to reform them, only urge them 
 
 pretentions for feparating from their brethren, 
 
 with whom they are in folernn covenant, Inftead 
 
 adopting the animating language of the Levite: 
 
 to Ezra, Arife,for this matter bchngcth to thec ; ivi 
 
 7 wiii be with thee; they only (land and dif- 
 
 trgc fomc blind and random reproaches ; then 
 
 fade about, and withdraw. Thus they difcourage 
 
 the hearts of their brethren, flrengthen the hands 
 
 of evil doers, and provide a retreat for the guilty, 
 
 who would evade thejuft difcipline of the church. 
 
 How frequent is the cafe, that when an offending 
 
 brother is admonifhed for his fins, he defeats the in- 
 
 ftituted means of his repentance, and feeks refuge 
 
 from merited cenfure, by flying to fome other feci, 
 
 who make him welcome with all his fins, having his 
 
 perfon in admiration, becaufe of advantage. 
 
 To conclude, Be ye all like-minded one toward 
 another according to Chriil Jems, that ye may, 
 with one mind and one mouth, glorify God. Be 
 not deceived by falfe appearances. The kingdom 
 of God cometh not with outward fhow and oiienta- 
 tion ; neither is there occafion to fay, Lo, here ; 
 or, lo, there ; for it is a kingdom within men. 
 True religion is peaceable, modefl and humble : 
 Hypocrify is turbulent, noify and vain. Fajfe doc- 
 trines, like dry winds, are hindering and unfieady, 
 violent in their motions, and noxious in their effects. 
 Thedo&rines of truth are like the gentle dews on 
 the tender herb, and the ftiowers on the grafs. 
 Be ye not carried about with every wind of doc- 
 
 O trine. 
 
trine. The fincere Chriflian, rooted and grown 
 up in Chrift, and eftablimed in the faith, with 
 knowledge and judgment, like the deep-rooted oak, 
 Hands firm and unmoved, whatever winds may 
 blow ; while falle converts and unprincipled pro- 
 feffors, like withered leaves, are caught in the gid- 
 dy whirl, wafted around and made the fport of 
 each wanton gull. Conclude not that there is mod 
 true religion, where the flame of zeal feems to 
 mount the higheft. Chaff and Hubble will fpring 
 into a fudden blaze, which towers for a moment, 
 and then expires : Solid fuel burns more moderate- 
 ly, but yields a more Heady and genial heat. Paul, 
 while a pharifee, was zealous to madnefs againfl the 
 truth ; when he became a Chriflian, his zeal was 
 as much changed as his object. You now fee no 
 more of his former madnefs : His Chriflian zeal is 
 a calm, rational, firm refolution, bearing him along 
 in the courfe of duty, with equable motion, through 
 every oppofition and danger. The fpirit of true 
 religion is not in the florin, the earthquake or the 
 fire, but in the Hill, fmall voice. 
 
 And now the God of all grace and wifdom grant, 
 that your love may abound more and more in 
 knowledge and all judgment, that ye may approve 
 the things that are excellent, that ye may be fin- 
 cere and without offence until the day of Chrift, 
 and may be filled with the fruits of righteoufnefs, 
 which are by Jefus Chrift, to the praife and glory 
 of GOD. 
 
 AMEN. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 jN the preceding pages we have en- 
 deavoured to maintain this pofition, c That no man 
 has a right to officiate, or ought to be received, in 
 the character of a publick teacher of religion, un- 
 til he has been approved and recommended by El- 
 ders of Churches' 
 
 The fcriptural evidence in fupport of our portion, 
 we hope cannot reafonably be controverted. But 
 an objection will perhaps meet us from fuppofed nc- 
 ceiTity, or hiftorical fact. 
 
 6 Many centuries,' it will be laid, c have elapf- 
 ed, fince Chrift commiirioned his apoflles, and fincc 
 rhey ordained their fucceffors : And how can \vc 
 know, that the fucceflion has been continued with- 
 out interruption ? And if there has been an inter- 
 ruption, then there was a time, when ordination 
 was taken up anew by private Chriftians. What 
 then are all prefent ordinations, traced to their or- 
 igin, but lay-ordinations ?' 
 
 This objection may deferve an anfwer. 
 
 The great queftion here mud be, What is the 
 inditution of Chrid, and the apodolick ufage ? By 
 thefe we mud be governed, and thefe mud not be 
 fet aiide by imaginary neceflitv, or liippofilitious 
 facts. 
 
 The gofpel-hidory confirms the pofition which 
 
 we 
 
i6o 
 
 we have laid down. A miniftry in the church is 
 undeniably infiituted by Chrift — introduction to 
 the mim'ftry, in the apoftolick age, was by prayer 
 and the impofition of the hands of elders — this 
 ufage was invariably, and without a fmgle devia- 
 tion, continued, as long as the facred hiftory af- 
 fords any light — the directions concerning ordina- 
 tions are given to bijhops, or elders, and to them 
 only — no provifion is made for cafes of neceility, or 
 for the renewal of the miniftry, if it fhould hap- 
 pen to ceafe — we have an exprefs promife from 
 Chrift, that he will fapport his church, and be 
 with his minifters ahvays even to the end of the 
 ivor Id* When we compare this promife with the 
 inftitution of the miniftry, and the mode of intro- 
 duction, which immediately followed, we think it 
 can import no Ids, than that a regular miniftry, 
 fhould never ceafe in the church, nor any neceility 
 occur for departing from the infiituted manner of 
 introduction. We have the inftitution, the prom- 
 ife and the apoftolick practice in our favour ; and 
 what more do we need ? The promife, fo emphat- 
 ically expreiled, and fo clearly interpreted by fub- 
 fequent ufage, muft, we think, be underftood as 
 we have dated it. 
 
 It is then by no means neceftary, that, by hiftor- 
 ical deduction, we fhould prove an uninterrupted 
 fucceflion ; we have a right to prcfumeir, until ev- 
 idence appears to the contrary. If any fay, the 
 fuccefhon has failed, the burthen of proof muft lie 
 wholly on them. Let them from inconteftible 
 hiftory, fliew us the time, place and manner in 
 which it terminated — who were the laft minifters 
 in the line from the apoftlcs — who the firft in the 
 

 new line — who the laymen that ordained them — 
 and where was the fcene of the transaction.— Un- 
 til we have this information, we rely on the prom- 
 ife of Chrift, in the fenfe in which we underftand it. 
 
 But it will be afked, ' What if a number of 
 Chridians Ihould be cad en a defolate coad or ifl- 
 and, or ihould emigrate to a country fecluded from 
 intercourfc with the Chridian world, and mould 
 have among them no ordained miniflcr ? May they 
 not ordain miniders for themfelves ? May not min- 
 iders thus ordained venture to officiate ? 
 
 But tell me flrit, Where is this folitary ifland or 
 coall — this fecluded country of Chridians ? — Did 
 you ever read of a colony of picus Chridians emi- 
 grating to a new country, who forgot to take min- 
 iflers with them ; or whom no miniders would ac- 
 company or. follow ? If no flich cafe lias ever hap- 
 pened, oris ever likely to happen, it is not ({range, 
 that the Head of the church has made no provision 
 for it ; nor is it nccuTary, that we ihould under- 
 take to remedy ins omiffion. 
 
 But probacy ibme will {rill imagine, that fact, is 
 againd us. They will tell us 5 'Ordinations came 
 down to us through the church of Rome ; and 
 there was a time when that church was fo effen- 
 tially corrupt, that fhe ceafed to be a church of 
 Chrift, and her officers ecafed to be minifters of 
 Chrill ; and therefore they, who withdrew from 
 her, at the time of the reformation, having among 
 them no valid ordinations, mud have beaun than 
 anew.' 
 
 But will hidory fupport this concluiibn ? Did 
 the fird reformers, didruding their pad ordinations, 
 receive one from their lay-brethren ? — The centra- 
 
 o ry 
 
iGl 
 
 ry # is mod evident. The proteftant reformers 
 England early drew up a confeilion of their faith, 
 in which, as Doctor Burnet fays, t they cenfure 
 any who mould take upon them to preach, or ari- 
 minifter the facraments, without having lawfully 
 received the power from the mlniftcrs, to whom a- 
 lone the right of conferring that power doth apper- 
 tain.' Certainly they had no apprehenfion, that 
 the minifterial fucceffion Was at an end. 
 
 The Roman church, though at that time exceed • 
 ingjy corrupt, appears not to have materially cor- 
 rupted her ordinations. In' this matter, we do not 
 find, that the reformers ailedged any complaint. 
 
 Though corruptions early began in the Chriftian 
 church, yet their progrefs was gradual and How. 
 In every age many (Merited from them, great op- 
 position was made to them, and large councils oi 
 bilhops, or minifters, publickly condemned them. 
 The weflern or Roman church ultimately carried 
 her corruptions to a more extravagant height, than 
 the oriental or Greek church ; but even in the 
 
 nier, they never came to their crifis, until the 
 famous council of Trent, which was opened more 
 than twenty, and clofed more than forty years, af- 
 ter yie beginning of Luther's reformation. That 
 council) called by the Pope's bull, and Supported by 
 the fimpcrpur's arms, in oppofition to the t 
 ers, c eftablifhed/ as Doctor Til lotion fays, ' f< 
 
 il New Articles tirljjch'hacj never before been 
 knowlcdged by any general council.' Thofe n*vv 
 
 icles, if avowed, by fi I had pot 
 
 ive.d, in their full extent, as now dei 
 
 . If they hid been deer-, one council, it 
 
 \ as trtial one, and they werefo 
 
 demned 
 
dcmncd by another ; and" therefore were not to he 
 considered as the received and acknowledged doc- 
 trines of the church. At this time, as the Doctor 
 .rours of the church of Rome role 
 to their height/ He demands of the pap! 
 
 i re their religion was before the council of 
 
 .' He challenges them, c to flxew a religion, 
 
 confiding of<?//the fame articles which are defined 
 
 by that council as neceflkiy to falvation, profefled 
 
 by any Chriftian church in the world heftrtthat 
 
 Luther and his aJfbciates, in their firft eppofition 
 
 to the errours of the Roman church, did not con* 
 
 ffder her, as having ejfentlally departed from the 
 
 I, or as being utterly difowned by Chrift ; 
 
 aty object was, not to withdraw from 
 
 her, but to effect a reformation by means which 
 
 might preferve the general union. They never re- 
 
 iced her, until they and their adherents 
 
 .od, and all hopes of union were cut 
 (iff; but, on the contrary, demanded a free and 
 // council, to deliberate on means of accom- 
 : :ig the reformation fo much defired. When 
 er was conflrained to difclaim that church, 
 or Mofhciin obferve?, * he feparated himfelf 
 ; t, only as it acknowledged the Pope to be 
 infallible ; not from the church confidered in a more 
 fenfc ; for he fiibmiitcd to the decifion of 
 church, when that decifion fhould 
 /council Uivfully affembleoV 
 I line, was a judicious dif- 
 -i ; for though the papacy was confounded 
 catholick church, they were in reality 
 ;s. The papacy had indeed by de- 
 res 
 
1 54 
 
 grees incorporated itfelf into the church ; but it 
 was aprepofterous fuppleraent, and as foreign to its 
 genuine conftitution, as a new citadel erected by a 
 fuccefsful ufurper, would be to an ancient city. Lu- 
 ther a&ed on this diftin&ion ;. he went out of the 
 citadel ; but he meant to remain in the city, and, 
 like a good patriot, defigned to reform its govern- 
 ment. * But when the advocates for a general ref- 
 ormation defpaired of their object, they came out 
 from that irreclaimable church, that they might 
 not partake of her fins, nor receive of her 
 plagues. And we derive our ordinations from thofe 
 who came out, not from thofe who remained 
 behind — from the purer part which embraced, not 
 from the corrupter part which oppofed, the refor- 
 mation. It cannot then be true, that our ordina- 
 tions came through the church of Rome, if by that 
 appellation is intended the corrupt body which the 
 proteftants renounced. And furely none will al- 
 ledge, that thofe pious men, who had long oppof- 
 ed her corruptions, and contended for a reformation, 
 were themfelves too erroneous to be owned as min- 
 iflers, or that their hands were too unclean to con- 
 vey a pure ordination. 
 
 One cannot here but feel the finking contraft 
 between thofe ancient reformers, who laboured to 
 correct the errours, without breaking the union of 
 the church, and certain modern pretenders, who, 
 in the firft inftance, feparate themfelves from the 
 churches, and then exclaiming againft them as cor- 
 rupt, promote and. encourage divifions in them. 
 
 It is obfervable, that minifters were the firft to 
 bear tcftimony againft the prevailing corruptions — 
 the firfl to (land forth in the. caufe of truth and pu- 
 rity ; 
 
j and God owned then as his faithful fervanis, 
 and fucceeded them in their arduous undertaking. 
 
 In ihegrcatcft part of Germany, and in many 
 other places, the main body of the clergy foon de- 
 clared in favour of the reformation, and united their 
 efforts la its caufe. In England, more than a hun- 
 dred years before Luther, the feeds of it were fown 
 by the doctrines of Wkkliffi. And though their 
 growth was retarded by the long inclemency of the 
 feafon, yet they were gradually taking root, and, 
 under the rlrft warm beams, they fprang up and 
 g'-ew. The papal jurifdiclion, which for ages had 
 been denied, or received with great limitations, by 
 the Kings of England, was totally renounced in 
 1533, by Henry VIII. and the bifhops ; and the 
 fcriptures were declared to be the flandard of reli- 
 gion. In this reign, Cranmer, as well before as af- 
 ter his promotion to the fee of Canterbury, favour- 
 ed the doctrines of Luther, which by his influence 
 obtained a confiderable fpread among the people 
 and clergy. In 1547, when Edward VI. who 
 had been educated in the principles of the reforma- 
 tion, came to the throne, the proteflant religion, 
 being patronized by the King and his court, and 
 encouraged by many of the bifhops, as well as other 
 clergy, generally prevailed. And, after a fliort in- 
 terruption in the bloody reign of Mary, it was ful- 
 ly eftablifhed under Elizabeth in 1558. So that 
 proteftancy was in fact the religion of England, a 
 number of years before the conclufion of the coun- 
 cil of Trent. 
 
 The rapid progrefs of the reformation, and the 
 vaft number of minifters, who early embraced it, 
 make it evident, that there could be no occafion ; 
 
 and 
 
iJ6 
 
 and the fervent zeal of the reformed againfl the er- 
 rours of popery makes it as evident, that there 
 could be no difpofition, to receive ordinations in fu- 
 ture from the papal clergy. And therefore, with- 
 out the labour of tracing a lineal fucceffion, we have 
 clear hiftorical evidence, that our ordinations des- 
 cended not from the church of Rome, after fhe be- 
 came fo corrupt, as in the opinion of protectants, to 
 ceafe from being a true church. 
 
 It will perhaps be afked, ' How do we know, 
 but the firfl reformers had been ordained by fome 
 of the vileflmenin the Roman church V But let 
 me afk, How do we know, or is it probable, that 
 this was the cafe ? The reformers themfelves ap- 
 pear to have entertained no fcruples on this head. 
 Let it flill be remembered, that irregularity in ordi- 
 nations was not made matter of complaint againfl 
 her; that her corruptions had not fo early rifen to 
 their height; and that fhe had not yet eftablifhed, 
 by a general council, her groiTeO: errours, nor ex- 
 punged her pureft members. 
 
 But admitting that a man of corrupt principles 
 and morals a&s in an ordination ; will his character 
 nullify the tran faction ? As long as the fcribes fat in 
 Mofes' feat, Chrift acknowledged them as officers 
 of the Jewifh church ; nor did he deny the au- 
 thority of the high-pried, though his perfonal char- 
 acter was far from recommending him. 
 
 The perfon ordained derives his authority to 
 preach from Jefus Chriffc ; not from the men who 
 ordain him. They indigitate the perfon to be veil- 
 ed wkh this authority, and officially inflate him in 
 the regular exercife of it ; but it is ChrhTs gofpel, 
 aot their will, which rauft direct him in the execu- 
 tion 
 
i6 7 
 
 bis office. If they are corrupt in principles 
 or manners, it will not thence follow, that be nroft 
 preach hcrcfy or immorality. lie is ordained to 
 preach the gofpel ; and whoever may ordain him, 
 the charge which he receives, and the vow which 
 he makes, bind him to teach, not the command- 
 ments of men, but all things whatibever Chrift has 
 commanded. 
 
 To break the chain of fucceflion at the link in 
 queition, it mud be proved, that the pcrfons, from 
 whom the firft reformers received ordination, not 
 only were in errours, but had actually ceafed to be 
 officers of Chrifh 
 
 With refpect to the ordinations in this land little 
 needs to be faid. It is well known, that the fir II 
 minifters in the country were ordained in England 
 by men whofe authority is not controverted. 
 Though fome of our fathers fuppofed, that lay-or- 
 dinations might be juftified, yet this fentiment was 
 dilapproved by their brethren in England ; and 
 was not fo long retained here, as to be carried into 
 practice. The inftalment of perfons already ordain- 
 ed, was in fome inflances, performed by lay breth- 
 ren ; but during the firft century after the fettle- 
 ment of New-England, ordinations were conflant- 
 ly folemnized by the hands of ordained elders, ex- 
 cept in two or three inflances ; and even in thefe 
 there was the prefence and concurrence of ciders, 
 though they impofed not their hands. Prefident 
 Stiles fays,* that c no more than one fuch inftance, 
 in the laft century, appears with certainty.' And 
 if there were a few fuch inflances, in different times 
 and places, they affect not the fucceflion ; becaufe, 
 
 ordinations 
 
 r Elc&ion Sermon. 
 
 
i6S 
 
 ordinations among us being performed by a num- 
 ber of minifters, not by a {ingle perfon, it may 
 always be prefumed, that fome of the number are 
 men regularly authorized. 
 
 The Prefidcnt, ' on a full, thorough and la- 
 borious inquiry/ affirms, that * the fuccefhon, ih 
 the line of prefbyters, was preferved without inter- 
 ruption, at the time of the reformation, and the 
 New-England ordinations, in this line, may with 
 afTurancebe traced back even to the holy apoftJes. 1 
 
 F 1 N I S. 
 
 
 

J