i.A^-.'--;;
'ns ^i^^
i4,n 'o6r^
Srom t^e feifitar^ of
(profe66or ^amuef OXiffer
in (glemot)? of ,
3ubge ^dntuef (glMffer QSrecftinrtbge
^teeenfeb fil?
^amuef (gltffer Q0recftinr(bge feong
to f ^ feifitati? of
(princefon C^eofogicaf ^eminarg
/7^
4
-Ut. ^ ^'Mt^ ^^^ /^-H^
REFLECTIONS
Mr, Walh HISTORY
OF
JtdmtMptitu
In JeVeral Letters to a Friend.
Jo B vi. 24, 25.
Teach me^ and I will hold my tongue : an4 caufe me to
underftand wherein I have erred.
How forcible are right words! but what doth your
arguing re f rove ?
LONDON:
Printed, and Sold by J. D a r b y in Bar-
tholomew^Clofi. MDCCXI.
Advertifement.
THERE wou'd have been no need to
tell the Reader that the following Let-
ters were written in the Years 1705, 17060
but that, there having been two Editions of
Mr. Wallas Hiftory^ he might fee the Reafon
why the firft of thefe is made ufe of, and
conftantly refer'd to.
And as thefe Letters were originally de*
fjgn'd for the private perufal of a Friend, fo it
is not to be thought ftrange that they were not
publifli'd fooner, but rather that they are pub-
lifh'd at ail : for the Author, tho he was urg'd
to it pretty early, had no Thought nor Incli-
nation, in the leafl:, to have given the Pub-
Mck this trouble. He hopM a more learned
Advocate wou'd have been engaged in this
Controverfy : But it feems that Gentleman did
not think it neceffary, fince Mr. Wall had not
pretended to reply to his Jnfrver to Mr. RulFen ;
and had alfo been convinced by him in private
Converfation, that he was miftaken in charg-
ing him with a Mifreprefentation of a Paffage
out 0[ Dr. Alkx'^s Remarks on the Antient Church
of Piedmont, which he promised to redify, to^
gether with fome other Inadvertencies, in his,
fecond Edition.
It not being known therefore that a direfl
Anfwer to Mr. Wali''^ Book v/as defignM by any
other Hand, the Author's Friends reprefented
to him how much the Paedobaptids on all Oe-
eafions boafted of that fuppobM unanfwer-
A 2 abli
Jdvertifement.
able Performance, which has indeed been
highly recommended and extolFd by the moft
learned among 'em, and by fome in Print.
Mr, Reeves^ fpealcing of the Hiftory of Pe-
lagius, fays, || *' 'Tis treated of by Dr. Forbes^
*• Du Pin, and efpeciaily by the learned Mr.
*' IValt^ in his excellent Account of Infant-
*^ Bapufm ; which laft I particularly recom-
*' mend to the Englifh Reader.''
Dr. Stanhope, fpeaking of the pretended
"^ewifb Baptilm, fays, " * It is fet in a very
*^ clear Light, by the late excellent Labours of
** a worthy and learned Divine," referring to
Mr. W^^//of Infant- Baptifm, in the Margin.
And above all, the whole Clergy in Con-
vocation have in a particular manner approved
and commended the Book in the following
Vote pafs'd foon after the Publication of ir,
to (hew how very acceptable it was to "em,
teh. 9. 170^-6. *' Ordered^ That the Thanks
^' of this Houfe be given to Mr. Wall^ Vicar
*' of Shoreham in Kj^^y for the Learned and
" Excellent Book he hath lately written con-
** cerning Infant- Baptifm ; and that {a) Dr. B.
'' and Mr. R. do acquaint him with the fame.'*
Nay, Dr, At terburji^ the reputed Author of
the Proceedings in the Convocation, A, D. 1705.
faithfully reprefented, fays, (J?) The Hillory of
Infant- Baptifm was a Book '' for which the
'' Author deferv'd the Thanks, not of the
II Apologys, Vol.2, p. 9$7. not.
* Paraphrafe, (^Vc. on the Epiftles, ^c. Vol. 4. p. 540.
(4) The two Pro^hrs for the Dioceis. (b) Pag. 35.
*' Englifh
Jdvertifement.
" Englijh Clergy alone, but of all Chriftian
•« Churches."
Thefe things, together with the Importu-
nity of the Author's Friends, did at length
prevail with him to fufFer the Publication of
the following Reflexions, to inform the Pub-
lick, that the Jj^abapti/is, as they're calPd, not-
withftanding the Noife Mr. IVallh Hiftory has
made, and the Reputation it has gain'd, are
ftill fafe and untouch'd by him : and likewife
to let thefe learned Gentlemen know, that they
have been much too hafty in their Judgment,
and that this Hiftory is not by far what they
take it to be.
The C at dlogue of Authors added at the end
of thefe Letters, was drawn up with a Defign
to have fet down what Editions are made ufcof,
in order to prevent any Miftake that might
otherwife happen ; which is done with regard
to the Authors of greateft Confequence in the
Difpute : but all the Books couM not be con-
veniently come at juft when the laft Sheet was
to be printed ; and therefore the Editions are
not always noted, which the Reader is defir'd
to excufe. The Author however promifes to
be anfwerable for all his Citations, which
are none of 'em taken at fecond hand : and if
any are fought for in one Edition, and not
found, they may be met with in another.
A J THE
THE
CONTENTS,
H
Letter I.
EATS among Chriflians imon/ijient with
their ProfeJJion>j and a great Di/honour to
Chrtflianity^ p. 3. 7*^15 RtfieCiion occafion'd
hy a Letter the Author received, very unbecoming the
CharaBer of his Friend that fent it^ p, 4. The Author
endeavours to find an Excufe for his Friend^ ibid.
We are generally more fuhjeCt to PaJJion in Matters of
Religion^ than in other Things ^ ibid. His Friend's
great ref^e(i to the Church of England, which he
thinks to be the hefi conftituted National Church in the
Worlds fome fort of Excufe for him^ p. 5. We have
no infallible Judg on Earthy p. 6, Nothing can ex-
cufe unreafonabk ExceJJes of any kind^ ibid. Hard
Names y &c. no real Prejudice to our Caufe^ p. 7.
Mr.VJaWs Moderation only pretended^ p. 8. The An-
tipadobaptijls hearty Friends to the prefent Govern-
tnent^ p. 9. They who make the greatefl Outcries of
the Church's Danger^ known to be her greatefl Efft^
tnies^ ibid. Ferfccution for Religion^ direBly contrary
So our S AV 10 VR ^s Do^rine and Example^ p. 1 1.
Arguments frcm Scripture^ the proper Means to con-
vince Mcny iUd. The Antipicdobaptijls open to In-
fl ruff ion J
The CONTENTS.
jiYuBion^ p. 1 2. A/r^Wairi H'tjlory not fo formidable
as vs pretended, p- 1 3 • f^^ ^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^ depended
oHy p. 1 4. //w re^/ Aim and Defign was only to
eflablifh the Baptifm of Infants \ as appears by confi-
dering hvs Pretence from Juft in- Martyr, p. 1 5. j4no-
ther from St. Cyprian, p. 16. Another from the
Apoftolical Conititutions, p. i p. He takes all occa-
(ions to blacken the Jntipadobaptifis •, difguiftng his
Dejigns with pretences to Moderation^ p. 20. 7 hvs
Charge not inconftjlent with Charity^ p. 22, Learned
Men are befl able to judg of Matters^ p. 23. Mr.
Wall endeavours to poffefs hvs Readers with an Opinion
of hvs Learnings by fever al needle fs Digreffions^ on the
Decretal Epiftles, p. 23. On the Hiftory of Pelagi-
anifm, p. 24. And in th'vs^ on the Lawfulnefs of
Oaths J and pofejfmg of Riches^ ibid. On the l^irgi-
nity of our LORD's Mother^ P-^S- ^« the Sooiy
nians, and tfeeTritheiim they charge on the Fathers^'
ibid. Thvs a SuhjeB too difficult for A/r. Wall, p. 16.
His ridiculous Reflexion on Mr. Stennett noted^ p. 27.
jinother Artifice to gain Reputation^ by quarrelling
with feveral of the greatefh Men for Learnings &c.
p. 28. As Archbifhop Tillotfon, ibid. Bifhop Bur-
net, ibid. Rigaltius, p. 29. Gregory Nazianzen,
Father and Son^ ibid. St. Chryfoftora, p. 30.
Mr. LeClerc, p. 31. Difference in Opinion no war-
rant to difpenfewith the Rules of Charity^ ibid. Afo-
ral rertues more acceptable to GO D^ than fpeculative
Notions., p. 32. Afr. LeClerc wo Arian, Photinian,
or Socinian, p. ^3, yi/K.VVall alfo quarrels with Gro-
tius, p. 38. The Scnfe of a Paffage in St. Gregory
fet rights which Mr ,W 2i\\ had mtfreprefented^ p. 40.
the Scnfe of a Canon of the Neocsefarian Council
re feud from the Force yiir.Wall put upon it, p. 42.
As alfo the'vVords 0/ Zonaras and Balfamon in rela-
tion thereto, p. 4 3. St. Aultin and Pelagius fpeak of
the End, not of ths Subjcds of Biptifm, p. 45. He
A 4 f^^^
The CONTEKTS,
that tales fo much Liberty with fuch Men^ wiU take
fnore^ in aU probability^ with the Anufadobaftifts^ ib.
iJ^r. Wall ha/i not aHed the Part of a faithful Hifiorian
towards us, ibid. He feveral times^ on no ground at
aU, tales for granted fome things, merely hecaufe they
favour his Defign^ p. 46. And charges the Antipa-
dobaptifis with whatever he has^ heard any one among
^em to have believ'd or faid, ibid.
Letter II.
THE private Opinions of a few not jufily inferted
in the Hifiory of the whole Body, p. 50. There
are probably ill Men among us, o/s well as among
others, p. 52. Some of our Author^ s invidious InfinU'
ations, ibid. Our Adverfarys, infiead of railing,
Jhou'd endeavour to convince us from Revelation, or Rea^
fon, or Antiquity, p. 53. // their Refiedions were
true, our Reputation can't fuffer much, p. 54. We
are not guilty of the hated Opinions i?l/r,Wall loads
us with, p. 5 5. Our Separation eafy to be jujlifyd,
p. 57. ^^'.Wall has not fufficiently fhewn wherein
the Sin of Schifm confijls, ibid. He only explains it in
general by Divifion, Separation, &c. ibid. The
true Notion of Schifm, p. 58. It may either be lawful
or unlawful, ibid. Who are Schifmatich, ibid. Not
they who go out from a Communion they were before
joined with, but they who unmceffarily give or tale the
Occafion ^ or continue feparate without jufl Caufe, p. 59.
It being lawful in fame Cafes, and unlawful in others to
feparate ', his examin'^d what will jufiify a Separation,
p. do. Mr.WaWs Diftin^ion between Fundamentals
and Non- Fundamentals, the good in it felf, ts infuffi-
cient^ unlefs he had determined what are Fundamentals,
an4
The CONTENTS.
and what not^ ibid. A Rule to know tbcfe^ p. 6i.
CHR 1ST alone can determine what vs neceffary ; and
what be has not expre/ly madefo^ is not fo^ p. 62. Tis
ufeful to difiingwjh between things neceffary to SaU
vation^ and things only neceffary to the Confiitution of a
true Gofpel'Church^ ibid, ibi^ Difiin&ion weU-ground-
ed, becaufe the Qualifications of a Chriftian and of a
Church are very different^ ibid, ^n Error in what is
effential to the Conflitution of a Church only^ afuffi-
cient Warrant to feparate from a Community in fucb
Error, p. 6$, Which is alfo confirmed from fome of
Mr.WsiWs own Words, p. 66. Agreement in the
Fundamentals of Religion, not a Sufficient Re af on againfi
Separation, aiMr,Wa\\wou*durge it, ibid. Turned
againfi himfelf^ p. 67. Therefore his Arguments tend
to nothing fo much as Confufion, p. 68. 7ho it fhoWd
be allowed, that we ought to fubmit all things purely
indifferent, to the Determination of our Superiours -,
this wovHd make hut very little, if at all, in A/^.Wall'j
Favour, p. 69. It does not follow, that Perfons who
think they ought not to renounce Communion for fmaller
Matters, mufb therefore conflantly conform in thofe
things, and negleB what they think is better, p. 70. If
the Ceremonys are not of fo much Confe^uence, as to
juflify the Diffenters in their Separation -, neither wiU
they jufiify the Church in fo unneceffarily infifling on
''em, p. 71. Thefe things, faid to be indifferent in
themfdves, by being the Occafions of Divifton, ceafe to
be indifferent, and become unlawful, p. 72. The Dif^
[enters are verily perfuaded, the things for which they
diffent, are not fo indifferent as they are pretended,
p. 73. The churches Power of making Laws for its
own Government, of no fervice to A/r.Wal), p. 74.
Things in themftlves lawful, may he fo circumflan-
tiated, as to become unlawful, p. 75- ^i the Cafe
flands at prefent, the Diffenters are obliged to diffent
from the National Churchy ibid. The uncharitable Ob-
fiinacy
The CONTENTS.
ftimcy of our Mverfarys^ ibid. The Separation of
the j^ntipadohaptifts particularly defended^ p. 75,
^r.Wall pretends^ that tho they are right^ they have
fio ground to feparate^ p. 77. The Antipaedohaptift^s
Notion fiatedy ibid. The Time and Manner of re-
ceiving Baptifm^ fo far as it relates to our prefent Dif^
ftfte^ are Fundamentals^ p«78. That can^t be true
Baptifm which differs from true Baptifm^ p. 79. Our
Separation jujlify'd by the Definition of a Churchy in
the 19th Article of the Church 0/ England, p. 80. l^e
ought not to unite with Perfons unbaptixJd^ p. 8 1 .
True Baptifm necejfary to Church. Memherfhip^ p. 82.
The Words of the Inflitution^ the befi Rule to judg what
h true Baptifm^ 83. We refuje to communicate with
the Church of England, for the fame Re a f on for which
flje refufes to communicate with Perfons unhaptizJd^ ib.
Mr,V\l^\Vs Terms of Vnion very partial and unreafo-
nable^ p. 84. We are obliged to the Toleration for the
general Forbearance ^^r.Wall boafts of^ p. 85. ^nd
deftre to remain in the Hands of Her Majefly and Par^
liament under GOD, who have hitherto fo kindly fe*
cur^'d uSy ibid. u4 fair Propofal in order to eftabli/h
Vnity among us, p. 8(^. ^r.Wall a Friend to Per-
fecutionsfor Religion^ p. 87. The Conclufton, p. 88.
Letter III.
ANother Jnftance of M'. Wall'j Vnfairnefs^ p. 90.
The Difpute between the Englifh Padobaptifis
and us cajl under two Heads, ibid. Ws fircinge^
things fo clear fhoud be capable of fo much Difpute^
p. p r . So far as the Scriptures are clea>', our Pra&ice
vs allowed to be exaBly agreeable therewith^ ibid.
Therefore if we err^ we arc^ however^ on the faftr
fide.
The CONTENTS.
fide^ p. 92. GOD has reveaPd hvs Will with fuffi-
cient ckarnefs^ in all material Points^ ibid, ^nd he
'bos not left it doubtful in what Manner^ or to what
Suhje^s Baptifm fhould be adminijlred^ P- P3- ^
trifling Remark ofMr.W?i\Vs noted^ ibid. 'Tw better
not to pretend to baptize Perfons, than not to do it as
CHRIST requires it fhould be done^ p. 94. The
Greek Word for baptize alx^ays fignifys to dip only
into any manner of things ibid, 5'oLycophron, p.95.
^«^ Sophocles, ibid. But more commonly^ ^tisus'd
for dipping into Liquids^ ibid. So Homer^ P. 96".
Metaphors include and borrow their Beautys from the
thing from whence they are taken^ p, 97. . P-iodar-YiWii
hvs Scholiaft,^ p. 98. Euripides and his Scholiafts^
p. 100. Ar\^o^\\2Lntsin many Places^ p. loi. The
Words in Difpute frequently apply^d to the Dyers Art
ibid. And they colour things by dipping "em^ p. 102.
Several Paffages wherein the Word alludes to the Art
of Dyings confider'd^ ibid. 7he improper Vfe of
Words in metaphorical Paffages^ can't be fuppos^d to
alter their Signification^ p. 105. Figurative Forms of
Speech^ are only abbreviated Similes^ p, 1 06, ^Tis no
Ob]e(Iion to fay^ if Words are always literally under^
ftood^ Authors will be made to f peak Nonfenfe^ p. 107.
Figurative Sentences not literally true^ astheyftandy
but being defective ^ the Senfe mufi befupply'd^ p. 108,
Wefhou'd diftinguifh between the Senfe of a Phrafe^ as
it includes fome Words not exprefs'd ; and the Senfe of
the particular Words ftngly confider^d^ jufl as they
ftand^ ibid. Words have no more than one Signi-
fication^ p. 109. Words are always to be taken in
their literal Senfe, ibid. The Vfe of thefe Obferva-
tions in the prefent Difpute^ p. 1 10. A^ore Inflames
/rom Ariftophanes, p. ni. uKvvq is to wafh
by dippings p. 113. More Inflames from Ari-
ftotle, p. 115. Frow Heraclides Ponticus, p. 117.
from Herodotus, ibid. Frow TlKocritus, p. 118.
From
The CONTENTS.
From Mofchus , p. 119. From Aratus, ibid*
Frow Callimachus, p. 120. From Dionyfius Hali-
carnaflTeus, p. 122. From Strabo, p,i23. From
Plutarch, p. 124. From Lnchn^ p. 125. From the
Emperor Marcus Antoninus, p. i25. The Metapho^
rical Vfe of the Word in difpute^ when applfd to the
Mind^ confidtr^d and explain^ d^ p. 127. Other In*
fiances from Pollux, p. 129. From Themiftius, ib*
That Lexicographers and Criticks render the Word by
lavo, is no Argument they ever underftood it to mean
lefs than to dip, p. 130,
Letter IV.
CRiticls conftantly affirm^ the proper and genuine
Senfe of ^xttI'^q is immergo, &c. p, 132. So
VoIIius, Gonftantine, and Stephanus render it, ibid.
A Teftimonyfrom C^[sL\ihon, p. 133. His poor Eva^
(ion^ p. 134. Another from Gxoi\\i%^ p, 134. Ano^
ther from Dionyfius Petavius, p. 135. Tii needlefs
to coUeCi more, ibid. Mf. Wall confcious^ notwith-
ftanding his Pretence^ that the Opinions of learned Men
are againjh him, p. 136. Whereas M^- WaW appeals
to the Scriptures for the Senfe of the IVord, ''tis /hewn
largely to be never there uid in his Senfe, hut the con*
trary^ p. 1 37. Levit. xiv. 6. confider'd, ibid. That
the Word does not always neceffarily fignify to dip all
over, is the moji that can he infer'd from it, p. 138.
Befides, here it means to dip aU over, p. 1 39. Ifai.
xxi. 4. Ezek. xxiii. 15. Dan. iv. 33. ^«^ v. 21.
confideid, p. 140, &c. Hot Climates very dewy, p.
143. The Syriack l^erfion confirms our Senfe, p. 144.
Eccluf. xxxi. 16. 2 Mace. i. 21. Eccluf. xxiv. 16.
confider'^dj p. 1 45, &C. Tlje Purification enjoined for
touching
The CONTENTS.
touching that which is dead^ to be perform'd by Sprinl'
ling^ p. 145. Together with Dipping^ ibid. The Msi"
hometans purify in fuch Cafes by wafhing all over^ p.
♦^49. Wafhing was the main part of the Purification
among the Jews, ibid. For which reafon the Son of Sy-
rach ufes this Word to intend the whole Ceremony^
p. 150. Luke xi. 38. confider'^d^ p. 152. Afr.Wall
pretends the Jews always wafh'd their Hands ^ by ha^
ving Water pour'' d on 'em^ p. if 3. Which is falfe^
p. 1 50. The Priefis wafh'd their Hands and Feet by
dipping 'ew, ibid. Our Lord wafh'd his Difciples
Feet fo likewife^ p. 156. The Authority of the Rah'»
bins not to be depended on^ p. 1 57. Dr.Pocock allows^
the Jews were obliged fometimes to wafh by dipping^
p. 158. And from thence accounts for the ufe of the
Word ^oLTrlili^oci^ Mark vii. 4. p. 159. Mr.WaWs
next Injlance^ which is Mark vii. 4. conJider'*dy p. i<52.
They that came from the Market did wafh by dipping^
p. 153. Se&s among the Jewsw/jo wafh'd themfelves
frequently^ p. 1(^4, The Words may refer to the
things brought from the Market ^ p. 167. Heb. ix. 10.
and Matth. xxvi. 23. conjider'd^ p. 168, &c. The
Sacramental Wafhing being exprefs'd by Words which
ftgnify any kind of Wafhing^ does not prove it may
therefore be adminifterd by any kind of Wafhing^ p. 1 72.
Words^ like our Ideas^ have their Genera and Species,
p. 174. Words of a more particular Senfefhou^d ex-
plain the more general, and not the contrary , p. 175.
Letter V.
To appeal to the Scriptures only for the Senfe of a
Word^ very unreafonable, p. 179. ^Tis not*
withflanding prov'd from them, that the Greek Word
muB
The CONTENTS.
ntufl always fignify to dip, f. 180, What Pajfages
may be argii'd fronij ibid. Luke xvi. 24. /6/J. John
xiii. 25. p. 181. Rev. xix. 13. ibid. The vulgat
Copys have lofl the true Reading in the laft^ ibid*
Metaphorical Pajfages make for^ not againft mj Op-
nioYiy p. 182, Languages don't exatily anfwer to one
another^ p. 184. J f the Word jiaTrli^G) were other*
wife ever fo ambiguous^ yet as it relates to Baptifntj
h'vs fufficiently determined only and necejfarily to mean
to dip, p. 186. By the DoBrine and PraClice of St.
John, p. 187. Of the holy J^oftlesj p. 188. Of the
fucceeding Church for many Century:^ which urg^d a
trine Immer/ion^ p. 190. Learned Men in general
allow this Mode of Baptifm^ p, 1 92. Mr^ Wall pre-
tends^ tho the Antients did generally baptiz^e by Im-
merfion, they likcwife us'd AfFurion,or the like^ p. 194^
But this was not aUow'd in common Cafes ^ p. 195.
jifperfton^ how at firjl admitted^ p. 195. ^Tis unrea-^
fonable to argue that the general Senfe of a LaWj is the
fame with the Exceptions that are made to it^ p. 197.
The antient Church of the firfi Centurys did not prac'
tife Affufton^ &c. p, 200. St. Cyprian'j Plea for
jifperfion 'very triflmg^ p. 2cr. All who were baptizj'd
in the ApojlWs Times ^ were bapuz!d by Immerfion^
p. 204. The Clinical Ajfufions don't appear to have been
introduced till about 250 Tears after C h R i s T, p. 2o5.
At which time^ they very much doubted of their Fali^
dtty^ p. 207. Sy the firji Patrons granted to be pre^
fumptive^ p. 209. All allow Jmmerfion was infijled on
antiently as the only regular way^ in all common Cafes
atleajl^ p. 213. A humble Remark on the Bifhop of
Salisbury '5 Plea for changing the manner of admini-
firing the Sacrament here in England, p. 2ij. The
Clergy pretend they would gladly revive the antient
Pra^ice^ but don^t tale the f roper Methods ; and in
reality obfiruH: its being reviv'd^ p. 216. bocttIq and
{hairVlo) fynonymous^ p. 217.
L Et T ER
The CONTENTS.
Letter VI.
THE other chief ArticlB^ in Difpute between the Bap*
tifts and their Adverfarys^ p. 220. They conti-
fsnaUy repeat the moft trifling Ohjeliions^ tho they have
been fairly anfwer''d over and over^ ibid. Which has
made it necejjary to fay a great deal to what has been
well enough anfwer''d already^ and concerning things
which are very plain of thetnf elves ^ ibid. The late
handling of this Controverfy ha^ convinced the World^
the Baptifls are not that unreafonable SeCl they re ere re»
prefented to he : and ^tis not to be doubted but the revi^
ving the Difpute at prefent may go far to open Peoples
Eyes yet much more in their favour^ ibid. ^Tispityfome
friendly Meafures are not tahen to compofe the Differ
rence^ which is not fo impracticable 06 fome fancy ^ p,
221. Mr, WaWs Attempt^ tho the beft in its kind^
falls veryfhort of anfwering the Beftgn of it^ ibid. His
Scheme^ ibid. He firft allows it cannot be made ap-^
pear from Scripture^ that Infants are to be baptiz?d^ ibid.
And therefore recurs to thefe as the only Expedients :
I. To the Pra^ice of the Jewifh Church : 2. To the
Practice of the antient Chriftians^ p. 222, Some Re^
fieClions which overturn all he fays as to his main Con*
clufion^ tho he fhould prove thefe two Points ever fo fo^
lidly^ p. 223 . From his Concejfion^ that it cannot be
proved from Scripture^ it unavoidably follows ^ that Uis
no Inflitution of Christ, ibid. And to fuppofe it
may be included in fome of the more general Exprejftons^
is only to beg the thing in difpute, iz^. Vnlefs he can
fhew us Infant 'Baptifm is fo much as mentioned in
Scripture,^ we fhan't believe it^s inftituted there, p. 225.
Our Author makes the Scriptures the Rule of Language •,
which
The CONTENTS.
which he therefore ought with much more Reafon to male
the only RuU of his Faith and Praifice^ p. 227. The
Baptifm of Infants is unlawful if CuB^isr has not
inftituted it, ibid. True Proteftants fhou'd adhere to
the Serif turcy as the only infallible Guide in aU religious
Controverfys, p. 229. They who do othcrwife, feem to
be too near the Church of Rome, as to the Article of
Tradition at leaft j which is an Inlet to aU the reft^ ibid.
Our Adverfarys ad very inconfiftently in reje&ing Tra*
ditiortj in their Difputes with the Roraanifts, while
they recur to it as their main Refuge in the prefent Dif.
pute with us, p. 230. That Infant -Baptifm ought not
to be praCiis^d, is proved from cur Juthor^s Principles^
compared with the Articles of the Church, ibid. It gives
the Romanifts a Handle to weaken the Reformation
with too much Advantage, p. 231, The Articles of
the Church direCily againft Ti^aditions, p. 232. The
Scriptures ftlence as good an Argument againft Pado^
baptifm, as can be defir'd, p. 233. We find a ftrong
Tendency in our Minds to depend upon the Scriptures
only, ibid. We are obliged by any fort of Law ^ &c.
only to the Particulars the f aid Law exprejfes, p. 234.
This illujlrated by Inflames, and by an undoubted
Maxim from Tertullian, ibid. Apply' d alfo to the
prefent Dffpute,and illujlrated by more Injiances, p.235.
Some build the Eccle/iaflical Hierarchy mainly on that
very Foundation on which the baptizing of Infants is
oppos'^d, p. 237. Mr, Wa\\ fometimes argues in the
fame manner as the Baptijls do againfi Fadobaptifm^
p. 238. The Ob]e£iion, that C hr^i s t no where for,,
bids us to baptiz^e Infants, anfwer*d^ p. 239. IVe are
forbid to teach the Traditions of Men for Command-
ments of God, f . 240. The Padobaptifts Argument
enervated by TertuUian, ibid. Tho the Scriptures 5;-
lence may fometimes, it does not always leave it fo
much as lawful to do what it does not mention, p.
242.
Letter
The CONTENTS.
Letter VII.
^Hat the Scripture does not leave Infant- Baptifra
fa mdetermind as fomewou'd pretend^ is largely
/hewn from Mattb. xxviii. 19. p. 247. uiU Laws e^
qually oblige in all Particulars mentioned in Vw, ibid.
lljis apply d to our prefent Difpute, p. 248. The Com-
mijfton neceffarily obliges to teach all it intends /hou'd
be baptizJd^ p. 249. Therefore Infants cannot be in-
clnded in that Commijfion, p. 250. The Commijfion
alfo requires^ that all of whom it fpeaks fhou'd be firfi
taught J and afterwards haptiz^dy p. 251. Theridicu*
lous ObjeQion of fuch as fay^ Infants alfo are to be
taught^ anfwer'd^ p. 25- 4. Some wou'd evade itsforce^
by confejfmg^ this Commijfion relates particularly to the
Adult \ which is direBly giving up the Argument^ p.
255. iVbat the Padobaptijls urge from the Words all
Nations, anjwer'd^ p. 255. 'Tis not faid all of all
Nations, ibid. Illufirated by a parallel Infiance from
Matth. iii. 5, 6. p. 257. ^'^^^ Dorrington cenfur'd^
p. 258. ''Tisprov'd^ the Commijfion moft dire^ly ex*
eludes Infants, ibid. What the Padobaptijls urge con-
cerning the GvQQk Word MocOviT/Jtrccft, anfwer'^d, P.2f 9-
Br. Hammond cenfur' dfor fo grofly contradimng him^
felf in this Point, ibid. Men of thegreateji Learning
difown the Criticifm of the Padobaptifis, p. 2^0. A
Paff age from the Bijhop of Sarnm, ibid. Another from
Dr. Whitby, p. 161. M(x3hT&v is conjiantly m'd to
fignify nothing lefs than to teach, ire. p. 262. The
Senfe of the Word prov'd from its Etymology, p. 253.
The Primitive, and all its Derivatives, include teach-
ing, ^c. ibid. No room for an Antiphraiis, which
is now exploded by the bejl Grammarians, p. 2^4. Thg
The CONTENTS.
Pretence from the Termination^ that Words in ivco are
to be interpreted by fum in Latin, is gromdkfs^ ibid.
Plutarch ufes the Word to ftgnify to teach, /?. 266.
j^nother Inftance from St. Ignatius, p. 267. Another
from the famey p. 268. Another from the fame ^ ibid.
Some from 5t. Clemens Alexandrinus, p. 269, One
from St. Juftin Martyr, p, 270. The Meaning of
as TO oi'o/xa, p. 271. Another Injlance from St. Juf-
tin, p, 274. The Word imQ^nvav^ even in its fup^
pos'^d Neuter Acceptation^ notwith (landing the contrary
Pretences^ always includes teaching, ibid. Matth.
xxvii. 57. conftder'dy p. 275. Infiances wherein the
Word ftgnifys to teach, &c, even when conflru&ed
with a Dative Cafe^ from Plutarch, p. i^j6. From
Origen, p, 277. From St. Irenaeus, expounded by
a Paffage of Socrates *, and from Clemens Alexan-
drinus, p. 2.78. Ihe true Senfe of the Word farther
iUuflrattd by fynonymom Words^ p. 279. Infiances
0/ ^^/(^ua), /row Plutarch, ibid. From EA'ian^ ibid.
From Plato, p. 280- Infiances of daico, from Pin-
dar, ibid. From Diogenes Laertius, p. 281. From
Plutarch, ibid. An Injlance of §j-(xk^O!> from Plu-
tarch, p. 282. A very remarkable Injlance of the
Senfe of ^a0n75U£n', from Clemens Alexandrinus,
ibid. Another from the fame^ p. 284. One from
Origen, p. 285. Be fides ^ if what our Adverfarys
advance were rights it can be of no Advantage to 'fw,
hecaufe the Word in the Commijfion w allowed to be
tranfitive, p. 287. Bifciplejhip necejfarily includes
teaching.^ ibid. MaStiftiico means to teach fuccefs-
fully *, and therefore is indeed confequmtiiilly to make
bifciples, ibid.
Letter
The CONTENT!
Letter VIII.
D^. Hammond explains |U(x0nT£u<3-aTe, Matth.
xxviii. ip. by John iv. i. without^ if not con^
trary to all Reafon^ p. 292. Hi^ Vnfairnefs notedy
ibid. A Pajfage of the Bf/hop of Sarum in favour of
theAntipadobaptiftsSenfeoftheWord^ P'25?3. Ano^
ther from Mr, Le Clerc, ibid. What Mr, Wall
urges from the Notion of a Difciple^ con/ider^d^p.^g^.
mocSmttj; is only faid of fuch as are at leaji capable of
being taught^ ibid. Mr,Wa\Vs groundlefs and unfair
Attempt upon Ads xv. 10. to prove the contrary^
examin^dj p. 295'. 77?^ IVords relate only to Adul:
Ferfons^ ibid. u4 Difciple^ in common Difcourfe^
ever fignifys one that's taught^ &c. p. 296. So it
does likewife among the Latin Authors ^ from whom
we borrow it^ p. 297. Proved from the Etymology of
Difcipulus, ibid. By Inflames from Cicero, ibid.
From Juvenal, p. 298. From Terence, ibid. Front
Cornel. Nepos, ibid. AH the World have had the
fame Notion of a Difciple^ ibid. Inftances in the
Eaftern Languages^ p. 299. In the Anglo-Saxon^
ibid. No Inftance that Yvs us'd otherwife in any
Gx^t\i Author^ but many of the Senfe the Antipado^
baptifts plead for^ ibid. One taken from John ix. 27.
ibid. 0/7^/?ow Ads xviii. 23. ibid. Another from
Dionyfius Halicarnaflkus, ibid. lUuflrated alfo by
fynonymous Words^ p. 300. Inflances of 'ak^occhic^
ibid. From Diogenes Laertius, ibid. From Plu-
tarch, ibid. An Inftance of AH,pocouev<^ from Plu-
tarch, p. 3c I. Of 'Ait^g'HS from iEUan, ibid,
from Dionylius HalicarnaflTseus, ibid. This tUuflra-
ted by Inftances from Roman Authors^ ibid. From
Cicero, ibid. The Inference from all thvs in the pre^
a 2 fcnt
The CONTENTS.
fent Difpute^ p. 302. ^ P^Jfage from Lucian,'
wherein he explains the Phrafe to make Difciples,
p. 303, Difciple and Teacher uid 06 Correlates^ ibid.
£y Themiftius, p. 304. By Cicero, ibid. This
apply d to the pre fent Difpute^ ibid. The tnolr Judi*
cious have always allowed, that the Word in the Com"
tniffton particularly ftgnifys to teach and inflru&^ ibid.
As Conftantine, p. 305. Stephens, ibid. Leigh,
ibid. Turretine, ibid. Epifcopius, p. 305. Lim-
borch, p. 307. Cameron, ibid. Martin Bucer,
ibid. Rigaltius, p. 308. Erafmus, ibid. Groti-
us, ibid. Lucas Brugenfis, p. 309. This proved to
he the Senfe of the Place from the fever al Fcrfions^ p. 3 1 o.
7he Hebrew, p. 311. Syriack, ibid. Arabick,
p. 312. Perfick, ibid. Etiiiopick, ibid. Arias
Montanus, p. 31^. J^ulgar Latin, ibid. That of
Sixtus V. ibid. Beza, ibid. Erafmus, ibid. Caf-
talio, ibid. The Italian, ibid. Spanifli, ibid.
French, ibid. Dutch, ibid. Danifli, ibid. Sax-
on, ibid. Vulgar Greek, ibid. The Fathers of the
Primitive Church always under jiood the Word in the
Commijfion ftgnify'd to teach, ibid. Thus Clemens
Alexandrinus, p. 3^4. Origen, ibid. ^^ Juftin,
p. 315. Eufebius, 316. Apoilolical Conftitutions,
ibid. St. Clement, ibid, Epiphanius, p. 3 17.
St. Bafil, ibid. Tertullian, ibid. Clarus, Bi/hop
0/ Mafcula, p. 3 18. 5f. Hierom, ibid. Laftly^
nis is proved to be the true Senfe of the Place by
the Authmty of the Sacred Scriptures themfelvesy
p,3I9. The Prailice of the Apoftles^ p. 320. Pa-
rallel Places^ P» 32T. The Sum of the Evidence y ibid.
From all it follows^ that the CommiJJion obliges to teach
all that are to be baptized : and therefore that the
Scriptures are not fo ftlent concerning the Baptizing of
Infants as the Padobaptifts woiCd have us thinly ibid.
So that f/y^r.Wall fhou^d prove the ]ews and ChxiRi-
ans^ did baptize their Children^ we have ftill reafon
enough not to admit tbePra^ice^ p. 322.
Letter
The CONTENTS.
Letter IX,
MR.WaH'j Jttetnpt founded en Mi ft ah ^ p.*324
His Pretences from the Jews examined: which
he has coUe&ed from the Learned Men who heft under^
fiood their Writings, p. 325. Their Authority of no
weight : the Reafons they go upon being too weak^ ibid.
T« without fufficient ground that our Author ajferts^
the Jews make it plain they baptized their Profelytes
before CHRIST'S time, ibid. His Authority s too
late J p, 3 2d. Great Alterations introduced in a fhort
time^ p. 327. The Pajfages produced by Mr, Wall
don^t fo much as intimate that the Jews baptized
Profelytes in our SAf^lOV R^s time^ p. 328.
There is no nece/Jity to underftand the Words in
/^r. Wall'f Senfe^ ibid. The Jews us'*d to baptiz.c
for the Pollution contra&ed in Circumcifion : which
may be the Baptifm fpoken of in the Talmud, p. 329.
Some of the Rabbins plainly fhew us they neither knerp
nor allowed of any initiatory Baptifm^ ibid. They ri-
dicule our Baptifm as a fanciful Ceremony^ a/s appears
from the antient Nizzachon, which fixes the rife of the
Pradice in C HRl ST^ and mentions it as an Ini-
tiation peculiar to Chriftians\ and oppofts to it the
Jevvilh Circumcifion only^ p. 330. It appears farther
from Rab. Ifaac, p. 332. So that the Jewifli Wri-
tings^ if any things prove contrary to our j^uthor's
Opinion^ P« 333. The Authority of the Rabbins very
inftgmficant, and never to be depended on^ p. 334.
Their Writings in general fluffed with very foolifh
Romantic Tales ^ P- 3 3 5- Tbeir fabulous and ridiculous
way of accounting for CHRlSTs Power of Miracle Sy
from Toldoth Jefchu, ibid. More Inftances of their
ridiculous Whimfys from the Talmud, p. 338. Their
a 3 foolifh
The CONTENTS.
foolifh Ml f application of Scripture^ p. 340 . Their im-
fiom Reprefentations of G O Dy p. 342. A fabulous
Account of the Origin of Rome, p. 343. Another
concerning R. Eliezar, in Confirmation of their Tra^
ditions^ ibid, Tloe Pirke of Eliezar, p. 344. uino-
ther Reafon vohy the Rabbins are not to he rely^d on is^
that they profefs to follow their Dolors in aU they affert^
tho ever fo ahfurd^ p. 345. They prefer their Tal-
mud and Traditions before the Scriptures themfelves^
ibid. The CharaEier of the Rabbins, p. ^4fi. Their
.exeeffive Pride ^ ibid. Their way of interpreting the
Scriptures J p. 347. The Sanhedrim^ tho made up of
their bejl Men^ confifled only of Magicians^ as them-
felves ajjert^ &c. ibid. They have endeavoured to
corrupt the Scriptures j p. 348, AU learned Men give
the fame Chara&er of the Jews, and their Writings,
p. S49- 5o A/r. Le Clerc, ibid. yl/K.Du Pin, ibid,
jUfr. DodwcWj ibid. Scaliger, p. 350. Naucle-
T us, ibid, Buxtorf, ibid. Lightfoot, p. 3 5 1 . And
the fame Charader is given of ^em by CHRIST
himfelf too^ who cenfures ^em more particularly on ac-
^ount of their Walkings^ ibid. Their Traditions were
many and mifcbievous^ P* 35^- -^^ ^^^fi things ap-
ply'd to the prefent Vifpute^ ibid.
Letter X.
ARrian, from whom Mr. Wall next argues^ toa
late to determine the Matter^ p. 35 S* -^^ ^^7
perhaps only fpeak of the Purifications for Pollutions,
ibid. The Pagans frequently confounded the Jews and
Chrijlians together^ as appears from Themiftius, p. 3 $7.
From Arrian hiwfelf^ p. 3 59. Ffom Lucian, p. 35 r .
From Tacitus, ibid. From Suetonius, ibid. And
Rigaltius uvderflands Arrian'i IVcrds fo too^ p, 352.
As do alfo Petavius, Lipfius, and Barthius, ibid.
Mr.
The CONTENTS.
Mr.WaWs Argument from Gregory Nazianzen ex^
amirid^ p. 363. this Father livd too late to deter^
mine our Dif^ute '^ and does not fp ok of an initiatory
Baptifm^ p. 36'4. 77?^ Scripture makes no mention of
an initiatory Baptifm in tife among f^e* Jews, p. 365.
Exod. xix. 10. makes nothing to the Purpofe^ ibid.
Maimonides, his Rule of Interpretation falfe^ p. 367.
77?^ Rabbins very bad Interpreters^ p. 368. Sandify
does not neceffarily imp^ly wajlnng^ ibid. Nothing in
the Words which fo much as intimates the Body was to
hewafl?d^ P* 3'^P* There is no mention of an initia"
tory Baptifm in any authentic antient Hifiory i even
tho they had the fairefi Occafions^ and ought not to
have omitted it^ if there had been any fuch Vfage^
p- 370. This illuftrated by fome In fiances from Jofe-
phus and Ganz, ibid. ^Tis on many Accounts very
improbable that-th^ Jews had any fuch Ceremony^
p. 371 . Proved from St. FauVs Words^ ibid. From
Gregory Nazianzen, p. 372. Fro»^ 5f. Peter, ibid.
Several Authors of Reputation^ and efpeciaRy the Art-
tients^ do in eff'eEh deny they knew of any initiatory Bap^
tifm among the Jews, ibid. Thus St. Barnabas,
p. 373- Juftin Martyr, p. 374. Tertullian, p.37<5.
Origen, p. 377. St. Cyril of Jerufalem, ibid.
Many Writers fay our Baptifm came inflead (not of
Baptifm among the Jews, bin) of Sacrifice j as the
Recognitions, p. 378. Or of the Wajhingsfor Pollu-
tions^ ^/r/7f ApoftoiicalConititutions //rfff;*?^, ibid.
And Mr.iilW fpeah to this Purpofe^ p. 379. Others
more commonly fay it fucceeds in the Place of Circum^
cifion^ ibid. The Conclufion from thefe Obfervations^
p. 380. Tho the Jews coud be proved to have bap'
tizjd their ProfelyteSy this does no fervice to the Caufe
ofPtedobaptifm^ ibid. For^ i . It does not appear that
Infants were admitted^ ibid. 2. If the Jews had
fuch a Baptifm as is pretended^ it is no Rule to Chrifii-
ans: otherwife the Socini2it\S^ &c. have a good handle
to lay afide the Vfe of Baptifm^ ibid. And thtre is
34 no
The CONTENTS.
ns mafiner of Analogy between the Jewiih, and th^
ChviGiian P(edohaj>tifm^ p. 382. 3. U^e need only gO
back to the Baptlfm of St, John , which there is more
reafon to think was the Pattern of C H RI ST^s than
a Jewifh Ceremony^ p. 383, ^f. John, CHRIST^
and his Apofiles baftizjd no Infants^ ibid, v^ Paffage
of Jofephus to this furpofe^ p. 384, Another from
Origen, p. 385. Another of St.? 2i\x\^ ibid. 4. At
befi this fupfos d Baptifm of the Jews ps only a Traditi--
mary Ceremony from the Rabbins, p. 386. Their
quoting Texts for it no proof of its divine hflittition^
ibid. The Kabhias don t pretend to find an initiatory
Baptifm in the Scriptures^ ibid. But confefs it is only
a Tradition of their Elders^ p. 387. This prov d from
the Words of the Talmud, ibid. Which are explained
by fame Rules of M^imonidcs^ ibid. Exod. xix. lo.
Cited only by way of Accommodation^ p. 390. *T/>
therefore great Prefumption to draw a Rabbinical Tra^
dition into a Precedent for the Chriftian Churchy p. 3 9 1 ,
Thefe things applfd to the prefent Difput^^ ibid, 71?^
Conclufion^ ibid.
Letter XL
WHA T is to he the particular Bufmefs of the
following Letter Sy p. 395. The Authority of
the Primitive Fathers more to he valued than Daille,
andfome others fuppofe^ ibid. ''Twoud he eafy to de-
fend the Credit of the Fathers from the Cavils of thefe
Aien^ p. 395. They were^ doubt lefs^ faithful in the
Relations they were well cjuaUfy'^d to give of Affairs in
their own Churches and Times ^ ibid. And fo far
their Authority is of Confequence^ ibid. But yet this
is net fujficient to ground y^rAVall'j Attempt upon^
tho they fiioud afford ever fo m^nyfull Citations^ ibid.
Tioey
The CONTEKTS.
Tl^ey were fometimes in the wrongs p. 397. 7%«
two only ways to prove Infant-Baftifm are infufficienty
even tho the Arguments our Adverfarys make ufe of
be allowed all the Force they are pretended to have^
p. 398. 'TV J probable^ the ear Heft Churches praBis^d
only what they receiv'^d from the Apoftles^ ibid. Mr^
Wall tahs no notice of St, Barnabas^ becaufe he makes
againft Infant- Baptifm in feveral Places^ p. 400.
The Palfages from St. Clement examin^d^ p. 401,
MriSSf 2^5 Argument from ''em flat ed^ p. 402. The
main Point on which it turns agroundlefs Miftake^ viz.
that Baptifm is neceffary nniverfally to all thatjhall be
fav^d^ p. 403. Baptifm does net appear to have
been defigrid to wajh away Original Sin^ ibid. By
this fame Argument^ it might as certainly be prov'^dj
that all the AntlpAdobaptlfls now are for Infant-Bap"
tifm^ p. 404. The Paffages from Herraas confider*d^
p. 405. In the Pa f ages citcd^ this Father fpeaks only
of Adult Peyfons^ ibid. Johniii. 5. confiderd^ p.408.
Kingdom of GOD doe^ not neceffarily mean the King^
dom of Glory^ p. 410. 77?^ Words cannot be taken
-univerfally^ p. 412. Ti$ has no relation to Infants in
any Place of Scripture^ p.413. And here relates
only to the SubjeUs of whom our LO RD fpeaks^
p. 41 4. Who are only Adult Perfons who have heard
the Word preacWd^ ibid. As appears^ l, Becaufe
fuch only can be expelled to comply with the Inftitutiony
to whom only it is truly given^ p. 415. 2. Becaufe
fuch only can be fav'd by it^ according to 5f.P^ter,
p. 415. Whofe Words the Padobaptifts have never
yet fairly interpreted^ ibid. Dr. Whitby 'j EvafoH
conftderdy p. 41 7. 3- The fame Form of Speech ifual^
when Infants are not included^ p. 418. As they feem
not to be in this place j by our SATJOVR's Words
in the Context^ p. 420. 4. The Words vnder Confi-
deration cannot be true of Infants^ p. 421. 5. Some-
thing in the Words themfelves limits 'em to Adult
ferfonsj ibid. M^hat it is to be born of the SPIR IT^
p. 422.
The CONTENTS.
p. 422.. Dr, Whitby'j judicious Ohfervations on the
Text^ p. 423' Another Pajfage of Hermas cotjfi-
derdj ibid. He only defcribes Vifiom^ and therefore
is not always to he taken literally^ p. 424. He can^
not meanj that Terfons in their fefarate State were
or coud he hapizjd with material Water ^ p. 425.
He fays nothing however of Infant -B apt ifm ^ but ra-
ther excludes Infants in this very Taffage^ p. 426.
Befides^ to give tif all our Adverfarys can reafonably
defire here^ it woiid only prove Infants fh all be baptized
in their feparate Eft ate after Deathj which is nothing
to our Difputcj p. 427. Another Pajfage of Hermas,
p. 428. That Infants are efteemd ofGOD^ no
Argument they ought to be bapti^Jd^ ibid. This Paf-
fage makes rather againfl Infant -B apt ifm ^ p. 429.
iiQVmsiS fays feveral things inconfifient with it^ ibid.
Matth. xix. 14. confider^d^ p. 430. It has no rela-
tion to Baptifm^ ibid. Z)r.^A^hitby'J Improvement of
the Pajfage examin*d^ p. 43 1 . ^Tis probable the Chil-
dren were brought to be heal^d^ ibid. It does not
follow from thefe Words^ that they are fit to be de-
dicated to CHRIST by Baptifm^ p» 432. The
Bijhop 6>/Salisbury'j JJfertion noted^ and difprovd^
p. 433. Conclujion, ]p. /\.s$'
Letter XII.
WHat Mr' Wall produces from the Writings of
the fecond Century^ examlnd^ p. 439. A
Pajfage in St, Juftin confiderd^ ibid. Which
makes nothing for Infant-Baptifm^ ibid. Neither
does it fpeak of Original Sin^ as our Author pretends^
p. 440. Mr. Wall has perverted the Words, ibid.
His Tranflation of ^em -unintelligible, ibid. 'Atto 7^
'AcTix/^ means from Adam, p. 441. Another Mif^
confiruEllon noted, p. 442. Tioe Phrafe explain d by
a Pajfage in Dioiiyfuis Halicarnaflkus, ibid- And
another
The CONTENTS.
another in Thucydides, p. 443. Another Paffage
from St* Juftin conflder^d^ ibid. He does not call
Baptifm Circumcifion^ p. 444. He coud not mean
Ba^tifm by the ffiritual Circumclfion he /peaks of^ ib.
What he vnderftands by fpiritual Circitmcifion^ ibid.
Other Writers of the Primitive Church talk in the
fame manner^ P* 447« CololF. ii. 11, 12, confiderd^
p. 448. l^he Scrip ure no where calls Baptifm Cir-
cumcifon^ ibid. The Words in themfelves are not ca-
pable of the Senfe our Adverfarys give ^em^ p. 449.
'The Antients did not call Baptifm the Circumclfion
without Hands ^ as Mr^WaW pretends^ p. 451. Mr.
WallV Argument from the Parallel between Circum-
clfion and Baptifm^ frnwn to he groundlefs^ ibid.
The Principle on which ^tis founded^ evidently falfe^
p. 452. Some of the Confequences of it : as that
Baptifm muft be admlnlfterd only on the eighth T>ay^
ibid. That Females mufi not be haptl^Jd^ p. 453.
As the Apoftles did not make Circumclfion their Rule
in relation to Baptifm , fo neither jhou'^d we^ ibid.
Another Pajf age from 5f. Juftin, p. 454. '^Tis not to
he imagined he jhou^d forbear to mention Infant- Bap-
tlfm^ ifithadbeenthenpraBis^d^ ibid. Or however^
he ought not to have fpoken fo as is inconfifl-ent with
that PraBlce^ p. 455. The Pajfage is dlreUly again fl
Infant' Baptifm^ p. 455. The Reafons why Mr,Wa\\
cites this Pajfage ; tho he confeffes it makes nothing for
fnfant' Baptifm^ p. 457. The firfi- Reafon makes ^-
galnft him^ ibid. His next Reafon^ that Regeneration
is put for Baptifm^ groundlefs^ p. 458. St. Juftin
never tinder fiands Regeneration fo^ ibid. Baptifm
not Regeneration^ hut the Symbol of It^ p. 459. The
third Reafon contradicts his former Affertlon^ p. 450.
Another Paffage from 5r. Juftin, ibid. Which Mr.
Wall draws to his fide by a very unfair Tranflation^
p. 461. ^h-/. TTociSluV fignifys from their Childhood,
ibid. Ilhftrated by hftances from Cicero, p. ^61,
From Laertius, ibid, from Plato, ibid. From Plu-
tarch,
The contents;
tarch, ibid. From Origen, ibid. From Theophi-
lus Antiochenus, p. 463. From the Scriptures^ ibid.
Mr. Wall himfelf tranflates a Fajfage of St. Bafil
thus on another Occafion^ p. 464. The famous Faf*
fage from St. Irenaeus conjider^d^ ibid. ^Tis not
genuine y p. 465. Cardinal Baroriios obfirves^ the
latter fart of the Chapter contradichs the beginnings
ibid. Petavius'^ Anfwer to this proves nothings p.465.
7lje Author of the lafi part of the Chapter attempts to
confirm a manifefi Falfhoody by the Authority of the
Antients from St. John, which St. Irenxus coud nc
ver have done^ ibid. Mr. Dodwell'j Fretence^ that
St^ John, &c. judged of our L o a d 'j Age by his
Count en.'ince^ too weah^ and groundlefsj p. 467. They
coud not but know the time of our L o R D 'i Birth
more exaBly^ ibid. St, Irenaeus coud not think
C H R I ST arrivd to near fo much as his 40/-/; Tear :
the contrary being fo evident from the Cenfual Rolls
then in beings and from the Difputes with the Adver-
farys of the Chrifiian Religion^ p. 470. iVky, it ap-
pears from St. Irenaeus'^ own Words^ that he was not
in fo grofs an Err or .f p. 47 1 . He fixes the time of
the L o R D 'j Birth^ ibid. The time of his Pafilort
computed : From the time of Pontius Pilate'^ Govern-
menty and Tiberias'/ Reign^ ibid. From the Fie-
firu^ion of JQVd^ikmj &c. p. 472. ^^r. Dodwell'j
Attempt to excufe the Extravagance of this fpurious
Pajfagej wholly vfdefs^ p. 475. Beftdes^ the Pajfage
zs taken only from a very bad Tranflation^ as learned
Men confcfs^ viz. Scaliger, /?. 475. Du Pin, ibid,
Mr. Dodwell, p. 477. Dr. Grabe, ibid. This may
alfo appear^ by comparing it with the remaining Frag-
ments of the Original.^ ibid. Again ^ the Word Re-
generated in this Pajfage^ does net mean Baptiz^^d^
p. 480. The Jews did not give Rife to this way of
fpeakingj p. 48 1. The Scripture Notion of Regene-
ration^ p. 482. John iii. 5. co-nfider'^d^ p. 483. The
Regeneration there mention^d^ ccnfifis in the Opera-
tions
The CONTENTS.
tUm of the Spirit J of which Baftifm is the Sign and
Sealy ibid, ^nd this appears from ovr L o r d 'x
exvn Words following^ p. 484. Titus iii. 5. confi"
der^dy p. 485. That the Antients never mean Bap"
tifm^ but an internal Change by Regeneration^ jhewn
from Clemens Alexandrinus, p, 490. Tertullian,
ibid. Origen, p. 492. Clemens Romanus, p. 493.
St. Barnabas, tbid. And St, Iren^eus no where ufes
the Wordy as our Author pretends he always does^ p.
494. The Inference from thefe ObfervationSy p. 498,
A ContradiBion of Mr* Wall'j, ibid. Another Ex^
ception to the Pajfage cited from St, Irenxus, is^ that
Infantes does not necejfarlly mean fuch young Children
as the P^edobaptifis admit to Baptifm^ p. 499. Om-
nis iEtas does not always include Infant s^ ibid. As
appears by an Infiancefrom St. Cy^irisinj ibid. The
Recognitions, p, 500. Dionyfius of Alexandria,
ibid. Nor does the Enumeration of the fever al Ages
make it necejfary to under ft and futh Infants as are
not capable of Reafon^ ibid. Infancy^ according to
St, Irenasus himfelf reaches to ten Tears ofAge, p.
501. As Mr. Dodwell alfo thinks^ p. 502. The
Inference^ ibid, Perfons under Ten^ capable of In^
ftriiShion and Baptifm^ p. 503. Recapitulation and
Conclufiouy ibid.
Letter XIII.
A TV Argument again ft Infant- B apt ifm^ drawn from
PolycratesV better to Vidor, p. 507. Tertul-
lian no Friend to Infant -Baptifm *, which makes Mr*
Wall begin his Citations from him^ with decrying his
Authority^ p. 508. His general Exprejfions no Ar*
gument for P^edobaptifm^ ibid. Tertullian'j fteddy
Meaning is eafy to be come aty without i^/r-Wall'^ ex--
travagant GueJfeSy p. 509. Tertullian'i mentioning
Infant-
The CONTENTS.
Jnfant^Baftifm^ no Argument it was jraEiis^d in his
tinte^ hut only that fome were endeavouring to bring in
the PraBice^ p. 510. Tertullian does not fimfly ad*
vife (as Mr» Wall pretends) to defer the haptiz,ing
of Children^ but argues againfl it^ as a thing that
ought not to be done^ p. 511. The reading of the Paf-
fage on which Mr* Wall grounds his Suppofition^ aU
together impertinent and abfurd^ ibid. Tertullian'j
DoBrine concerning Baptifm-f inconfifient with Peedo'-
haptifmj p. 512. Hii Expofitien of I Cor. vii. 14.
not in favour of Pdtdobaptifm^ p. 513. Not one Au'
thor of the fr ft three Century s^ who under fiands that
Text of Baptifm^ ibid. Mr' Wall'j Endeavours to
prove that a}4(^, &C. mean wajh^d^ &c. inejfeBual^
p. 514. The Senfe given by the Bijhop 0/ Sarum,
and Dr. Whitby, cannot be the true one^ p. 515.
The befi Interpretation which can be made upon our
Author^s own Principles.^ is what he fo much defpifes^
viz. that by Holinefs is m€a?n Legitimacy^ p. 516.
This prov'^d to be the true Sefjfe^ p. 517. Holy ne-
ver fignifys baptiz'd, tbid* When Mr. Wall comes
to Origen, he cites fome Pajfages which arc plain to his
Purpofe^ p. 519. But they are only taken fromhditm
TraTiJlations^ ibid. The Paffage fome cite from the
Greek Remains of this Father^ {as Mr. Wall himfelf
confeffes) proves nothings ibid. The Latin Tranfla-
t ions from whence the main Citations are taken .^ are
very corrupt and Ucentiom^y p, 521. Several learned
Men confefs it^ ibid. As Grotius, p. 522. Hue-
tius, ibid. Daille, ibid. Du Pin, ibid. Tarinus,
p. 523. Which is alfo abundantly provd^ by com-
paring the Tranflation with the Greek Fragments^ as
now extant.^ ibid. St. Hierom was not more faithful
in his Tranflations than Ruffinus, p. 524. ^Tts very
probable they took this liberty in all other things^ as well
as in thofe particularly for which Origen was que-
ftion^d^ ibid. Ruffinas, notwlthftandwg what Mn
Wall fays to the contrary., took as much liberty with
the
The CONTENTS.
the Efiftle to the Romans as he did with other Boohj
p. 525. He exfrejly fays^ he had added many things^
p. 525. Befides-t that Commentary was very much in^
t erf dated before Ruffinus took it in hand, p. 527.
y4s to the Pajfage taken out of the Homily s on Jolhua,
it'^s at beft doubtful whether he fyeaks of Infants in Age^
ibid. In one fart of thefe Homily s he has inferted^
tho it be not in the Original^ this Pajfage particularly^
which is the Ground of the Ptcdobaftifrs Argument ^
p. 528. In St. Cyprian'j time Infant- Baftifm was
fratiis*d in Africa j and f rob ably firfi took rife there^
together with Infant -Communion^ ibid. The Africans,
generally Men of weak Vnderflanding-i p. $29. Tfce
Greek Churchy probably^ had not yet admitted the
Err or ^ ibid. The Inference from the whole j p. 530*
ji Recapitulation-f ibid. A Reafon why fo much only
of Mr. WallV Hiflory as relates to the firfi Century s^
is examind^ p. 54I. How Infant- B aft ifm was at
fr^ brought in vfe^ p. 542. Errors ffrung vf in the
Church very early^ ibid. This of Infant-Baftifm not
brought in all at once^ but by degrees^ p. 543. And
was occaftond in fame meafure by their Zealy which
was not always according to Knowledge as fever al other
things were^ ibid. .A Parallel betwixt this Practice
and the PofiJIi Notion of Tranfubflantiation^ ibid.
When John iii. 5. was tinder flood to relate to Infant s^
as well as others^ no wonder Infants were baftizjd'^ p.
545. Vfon juft fuch another Miftake of our S aVi-
our'j Words ^V? John vi. 53. the earliefi Padcbap-
tifts admitted Children to the L o R D V Suffer^
p. 546. Conch/ion^ ibid.
ERRATA,
ERRATA.
PAg. X4. Lin. 16, dele one. P. 25. 1. 24. for Liturgy, read
Lethargy. P. 5$. 1. 6. r. he aflures us alfo ; and 1. 11. r.
he is in no, fyc, P. 42. 1. 29. r. // /^ «of veryflrange that, eb"*-*.
P.44. 1. 27. r. KoldTi^vkt. P. 95. 1. 22. for )>. r. r. P. 97.
L 17. r. as //it, ^^r. Ibid. not. lin. i. r. ct^rS <r^. P.107. 1. 35.
r. which feem to be usM, <fyc. P. 131. 1. 14. for xxv. r. xxiii.
P.134. not. 1. 5. r. eo. P. 157. not. 1. 3. for chap. vi. r. chap.
Xiv.d. Ibid. 1. 4. for i Kings r. i Sam* Ibid. 1. 5. for 8. r. 7.
P. 141. 1. II. for xxv. r. xxiii. P. 149. 1. 29. r. Kumb, vi. 9.
P.155. 1. 1, r. 2 Kings iii. 11. P.162. 1. $. r. ^^e Words. Ibid.
1. penult, r.xi.32. V*\']6.\.i^,At\e not therefore. P.180.I.14.
r. fince Vk. P.209. 1. 29. r. fafefl. P.210. 1. 9. r. had not. P.
228. I. I. for i5. r. 6. V. 272. 1. 23. for Faith r. Belief, P.
290. 1. 26. for Laertius, r. Plutarch, P.312. 1. 10. delete. P.
g54. 1. 17. for the, r. thU, Ibid. 1. 34. x.FauL P.377. 1. 28.
for xxix. r. xxx, P. 460. 1. 5. r. 38.
REFLECTIONS
On Mr. Wa l l's Hiftory of
Letter I.
Heats among Chriftians inconjtftem with their Profs f-
pon^ and a great DiJIjonour to Chrifiianity. This
RefleElion occafon^d by a Letter the Author receivd^
very unbecoming the CharaEier of his Friend that
fent it. The Author endeavours to find an Excufe.
for his Friend. We are generally more fubjetl to
Pajfion in Matters of Religion^ than in other Things..
His Friend^ s great Re fpeEb to the Power of the Church
cf England, which he thinks to be the heft confiitu-
ted Kational Church in the World^ fome fort of
Excufe for him. We have no infallible Judg on Earth.
Nothing can excufe unreafonable Exeejfes of any hind.
Hard Names^ &c. no real Prejudice to our Caufe.
Mr. Wall'/ Moderation only pet ended. The Anti-
fiidobaptifs hearty Friends to the prefent Govern^
mem. Thofe who make the greateft Outcries of the
Church"^ s Danger^ known to be her greatefi Enemies.
Perfecution jor Religion^ dire^ly contrary to our
Saviour'/ Do^rine and Example. Arguments
from Scripture the proper Means to convince Men,
% ^'flecliom o?i Mr.WzlYs Let.u
The Amif^dohapifis of en to hifirun^iori. AfrAA'aWs
• ■HrjhcryirDtfv fvrmiduhir-nts is fretendtd,- ^e is not
- rmfth-trf-brdefendtdrmr*- -His reed^-Atm tmd-^eftg n
was only to eft ah Up) the Baptifm of Infants ^ as ap"
fe^sjy conftdering his Pretence from Juftin Martyr.
^i^hp-from St. Cyprian. Another from the Apol^
tolical Conftitutions. He takes aH Occafions t&
blacken the Antif^dohaftifts , difgulfing his Defigns
with Pretences to Moderation* This Charge not in-
confftent with Charity. Learned Men are heft ahle to
judg of:^Matters^. Mr^^.Sil} e^ideavoufs-to^ppfifs his
Ae^rP with an Qpmoh i^. his Lear ping ^ 'hy fever a I
needtefsDigrejfim's.,' dn the Decretal ^piiR:lt^;.^-jQ»
the Hiftory of Pelagianifm ^ and.^ in this., on the
' ijawfi(l»€fs of Oath^^^-^a^d-fxfJfeJfing^-RleUes* X)n the
virginity of our L o R d'j Another. On the Socini-
ans, and ths Trithcifm phey charge on the Fathers*
This a.SuhjeU: too difficult for A<[r. Wall. His ri-
dicuiotis RefleBion en Mr. Scennett noted* Another
Artipce to gain Refutation^ by quarrelling with fe-
'ueral of the greateft Men for Learning,, &C. As
Archhiflop 1 illo'tfon, Bipop Burnet, Rigaltius,
Gregory Kazianzen^F^fkr and Son\ 5f. Chry-
foftom, Afr. Le Clerc. , Difference in Opinion^ no
'warrant to difpenfe with the Rules of Charityl Mo-
ral l^ertues more acceptahl'e to G op, than Specu-
lative Notions. Mr.Lt Clerc ;;£7 Arian, Photi-
nian, or Socinian. Mr. Wall alfo quarrels with
Gi otiiis. The Senfe of a Paffiage in St. Gregory fet
right ^ which Mr. Wall had mifreprefented. The
Senfe of a Canon of the Neocxfarian Council ref-
cti^d from the Force Air* Wall put -upon it : As
ipjfo^ the Words o/2onaras and Balfamon, in rela-
tion thereto* 5f. Auftin ^w^ Pelagius ypc.^^ of the
End^ not of the StibjeH^s of Baptifm. He that takes
fo much Liberty with fuch Men^ will take more.^ in
all prob ability J with the Antipdidobaptifts. Mr.SVsW
has not aftcd the Part of a faithful Hiftorian towards
its.
Let. I . Hiflory of Infant-^Baptlfnu 5
tis. He feveral times^ on no ground at all^ takes
for granted fome Things merely becaufe they favour
his Defign. And charges the Antip<edobaftifts with
whatever he has heard any one among ^em to have
believed or faid*
S I Rj
ON E wou'd think it impoITible, whea
we confider the perfe(& Charity and
Moderation which Chriftianity every
where recommends, to find its Profef-
fors fo overcome with Bitternefs and Heat. 'Tis
a great Refiedion on our holy Religion, and no-
thing hardly can cxpofe it to Jeft and Banter more
than thefe Animofities and violent Divifions, which
reign among thofe who make the higheft Pretences
of Affedion to it *, who after having magnify'd
it to others, and endeavour'd to convince 'em of
its Excellence and Truth, fo foully contradid its
Piety and Goodnefs in their Adions, which are fo
diredly oppofite to that Divine Spirit which
breath'd it forth : which difcovers they have no
fuch great opinion of it themfelves, and gives the
Enemys of our Faith but too much colour to
cry it down as an Impofture, and an Invention
of State, to frighten Children and Fools into
Subjedion and Slavery. Rage and Fury are incon-
fiftent with Chriftianity •, and where thefe govern,
that can find no place : For, what Agreement can
there be between a perfecuting Temper, and the
peaceful Spirit of Christ our Lord? What
Communion hath Light with Darknefs ? What Cori-
cord hath Christ with Belial i' &c. 2 Cor. vi.
V, 14, 15. And accordingly, 'tis to be obferv'd,
no Party encourages this fiery Zeal fo much, as
the moil Anrichriltian of all Churches, viz.. that
of Rome*
B 2 you
4 ^fleHlons on Mr. WallV Let. i .
, You will eafily apprehend. Sir, the Occafion of
.'thefe Reflexions -^.for give me leave to tell you,
nothing, cou'd be. more unbecoming your Charac-
ter, either as a Chriflian, or a Learned Man,
than the Letter you ■ fent me. I (hou'd never
have expedkd it from one of but tolerable Senfe
and Candor j and much lefs from you, who arc
a Pel fon of uncommon Abilitys, and a liberal
^j£(iucation. . • . .
f ,,rl can't tell how to€xprefs the Surprize I was
-in, that you, of aij my Friends, fhou'd dip your Pen
.ib deep in Gall, and treat us with fo much feeraing
. ill-nature^ and I was the more concern'd, becaufe.I
.cou'd think of nothing which might excufe you.
,'jis, indeed, what I never obferv'd in you be-
fpre,. during our long Acquaintance •, but this only
increafes the prefcnt Wonder: arid I can't ima-
gine what Provocation you had to it now, un-
■lefs, perhaps, fomething extraordinary had chaf 'd
you^iind turning your Thoughts, in the Com-
motion, upon the unhappy Difference between
us, you were betray'd into this Warmth una-
wares.
And 'tis our.Misfortune, indeed, that in Mat-
ters of Religion, where we fhou'd (hew the leait,
we generally have the greateft Paflion : Here our
Kature is more apt to take Fire ^ and we think
it jaftifiable too, or rather our Duty ^ cheat-
ing our felves with falie Pretences to a Zeal
for God and Religion : for all things that are
comprehended under that venerable Kame, juftly
make a deep Imprelfioa on our Souls, and touch
their moil: fenfible Part. From thefe Confidera-
tlons, I fhou'd be glad to frame an Excufe for
^;you*, and to give it the greater weight, 1 add
'farDhcrDQ your Behalf, that not beint:;'a Divine^
. y^ovi have not made it your Bufinefs to examine
the Coatroverfy thorowly, but have taken it on
Trult
Let. I . Htfiory of Infant-^aptifm. 5 ■
Trufl from the Clergy, as I fear they do too of-
ten from one another.
This, I own, is but an indifferent Plea ^ yet
I'm willing it fhou'd pafs with my felr, for I
wou'd fain find fomething which might be if rctcb'd
into an Excufe for a Perfon I fo much elT.;- "■
And, indeed, to one that knows you, it will uuz
feem altogether unlikely, that this was the Caufe,
The Deference and Refped you pay to 'the
Church oi England^ and its Governors and Cuf-
toms, is undoubtedly very commendable, and no
fmall Argument of a devout Mind : efpecially
confidering how much you are perfuaded that
Christ has left many Things, even all that
are indifferent, in the Church's Power \ and that'
therefore all ought to obe^^ and intirely fubmit'
to that Power and Authority, with v;hich it is
thus by him invefted. And as to the Church of
EngUnd in particular, I know you look upon her
to be, by far, the purefl; and beft conftituted Na-
tional Church in the World, and very conforma-
ble to the primitive Pattern, both in refpect
to the Holinefs of her Dodrines and the Ufcfal-
nefs of her Difcipline, as eftablifh'd in the Ca--
nons and Conftitutions of the Church: and that
fhe eminently enjoys what is made a diilinguini-
ing Chara(^er by Christ Himfelf, in that fiie
prefcrves an extenfive Charity \ and is in her
Nature an utter Stranger, let fome of her pre-
tended Sons be what they will, to thofe Tyran-
nical Principles, which are the Support of her
Antichriftian Neighbours: And all the World
owns, none can boall of a more learned Clergy,
to maintain the Interelb of our mod: holy Reli-
gion. Now thefe things are, doubtlefs, enough
to- create a jufl: Veneration in you, for the Au-
thority and Judgment of fuch Guides ^ and there-
fore 1 don't wonder that you apply to 'em the
B 3 Apoltle's
^ <I(efleSlions on Mr.WallV Let.i.
Apoflle's awful Charge, i Cor. iv. i. Let a Man
fo account of Vrw, as of the Mlnifiers of Chrifi^ and
Stewards of the Myfierys of God*
I am foliicitous, you fee. Sir, to excufe the
Fault I think you have committed ^ and have fet
down my Thoughts juft as they came to Mind,
that you may perceive, by their Diforder, how
much I am concern'd. But after all, I mult ob-
ferve, that having no infallible Judg on Earth,
we are not blindly to prollitute our Confciences
to the Dilates of any Power whatever, but have
an undifputed Right to that Liberty wherewith
Christ has made tis free*
'Tis an unpleafing Refledion, becaufe it fo much
weakens the Force of what I have been contri-
ving in your excufe *, but ftill I can't forbear think-
ing, that nothing will by any means juftify a rafli
Unchriflian Gondud. Religion, which is the
higheft Reafon, can be no Excufe for unreafona-
ble Excedes of any kind , and therefore whoever
engages in the defence of a Party with the ufual
Violence, you may be fatisfy'd, and may take it
for a general Rule, has not his Zeal from Religion,
but fomething which lies at bottom, of a quite
contrary nature. And this your own Experience
niuft needs have coniirm'd to you.
However, if thro the Mifreprefentations of o-
thers, you are perfuaded to think fo ill of us,
and believe you have treated us as well, or it may
be better than we deferve j I only beg you wou'd
let me know the Reafons on which this ill Opi-
nion of us is grounded, and I will promife im-
partially to confider 'em : and if they have any
Weight, I'll ingenuoully acknowledg it, and give
up my Caufe, But till I can fee fomething more
conclufive than what Mr. IVall^ or any elfe I have
yet met with, have offer'd, I muft defire you
will allow me to continue my Separation from
the
Let.i;. Hijio^y of Infant- ^Baptifm. 7
the National Cliiirch, and rcligioufly adhere to
that more defpis'd one, of which, I hope, I fliall
never be alham'd or afraid to own my fclf a
Member.
We are very little mov'd at the Reflexions and
hard Names you beftow on us, whatever Force
you may think there is in 'em. Conceited Seciarys^
and Ohftinate Hereticks, are old Calumnys. St.Paid
himfelf did not efcape'em, and has taught us to
confefs, that after the way which fome call Herefy^
fo worjfnp we the God of our Fathers^ Ads xxiv. 14.
'Tis no real Prejudice' to our Caufe that It is
ridicul'd, and the confcientious Profeflbrs of it
vilify'd and abus'd. Christ and His whole
Dodrine, while He was on Earth, and a long
time after, was not better treated ^ and His
great Example, we thank God, has encou-
rag'd us to endure all manner of Reproaches
for His fake with Patience : we know, and He
bid us remember it in the Times of Trouble, that
we who are Servants, are not greater than our
Lord and Mafter. We can never forget with how
much Contempt He was treated, who with won-
derful Patience endur'd whatever the Malice of De-
vils and wicked Men cou'd invent ^ and 'tis our con-
ftant Prayer, that imitating his Greatnefsof Soul,
we alio may hlefs them who curfe us^ and pray for them
who deffitefidly vfe us. To fuffer after Him is no
Dilhonour, but having His great Example always
before our Eyes, we (hou'd rather rejoice, as he has
encourag'd us to do, when we are perfecuted for
His fake-, for he has aRlir'd us, and we humbly
trull to Him to fee it perform'd, that if we are
revifd for his fake^ our Reward pall be great in
Heaven.
The main Ground of Difference between us, in
my Opinion, Sir, is the Cafe of Baptifm j but
B J. • ■ how
8 ^fleBions on Mr-WalFj Let. i .
how fome Men can improve this to juftify their
traducing us as dangerous Enemys to the State,
I'm not clear-fighted enough to difcern. 'Tis true,
you don't charge us with this ^ but yet give me
leave here to obferve, that a great many do, and
propagate the Opinion all they can : And the Au-
thor you fo much admire, byhisinferting, among
other things, the fcandalous Story of "^ Mr. Hkks^
which himfelf can fcarce forbear confefling to be
falfe, gives me reafon to fear he's of the fame
Mind too, tho he endeavours to conceal it. And
tho he has pretty well imitated the Moderation
and Candor he fo much pretends to, he fully
difcovers, at fome Turns, that thefe are only
Pretences : witnefs f his aflerting, that the For-
bearance the States of Holland allow, and which
lie mifchievoufly infinuates \% outdone by another Na-
tion^ is the mofl contrary to the Nature and Deftgn
of ChrJfiianity^ of any thing that coud be devised,
Witnefs alfo his |1 Quotation from Dr. Featly^
who was certainly the molb railing Adverfary in
the World, and urg'd the Words of the Parable,
.Compel ''em to come in^ as ftrongly as the hotteft
Convertift in France, And Mr. Wall has fuch an
Efteem for the Dodor's Principles, tbet in one
Ihorr Paragraph he cites him three times for fet-
ting forth the Mifchiefs of a Toleration in any State^
without adding one Reaion for it but the Dodor's
if fe dixit : and fays, the Ohfervation the DoHror made
tipon the firfi Toleration that had ever been in Eng-
land, the Experience of all Times fince following^ has
floewn to be a jufi one^ Why did not our Author
at once fet himfelf to juftify more diredly the
French King's ading in relation to our diftrefled
* Part IT. p. 2i5. f Part II. p. 388,
I Part II. p. 213, 214.
Pro*
Let. I. Hijlory of Infant-'Ba^tifm. p
Proteftant Brethren, who fo miferably groan un-
der his moll barbarous Oppreflion ? For Dr. Feat-
//s Principles are evidently the fame with thofe
of the French Convertifts.
'Tis therefore more than a Prefumption, that
our Author's Charity and Moderation are ftill
the very fame as when he took fo much Care to
perform his Part with thofe who were endeavour-
ing to plunder and root out the Mahaftifts in his
Neighbourhood. But whatever he may think of
that matter now, there will come a Time when
'twill be but an unpleafmg Reflexion to him. And
tho he, and others like him, may ftrive to blacken
us, by their falfe Reports and Innuendo's, we are
atprefent happy in a gracious Queen, who is not
to be impos'd on by thefe Artifices againft us :
She is fcnfible we are as hearty as any of her Sub-
jeds, and as ready, with the utmoll hazard of our
Lives and Fortunes, to fupport the Crown and
Dignity Ihe juftly enjoys, and fo highly adorns.
And if I know the Antipsedobaptifts, as I think I
do, I fpeak from my Confcience, and in God's Pre-
fence, I am fatisfy'd, there are not truer Friends
to the Government, that will do more for it, ac-
cording to their Abilities, in the three Kingdoms.
'Tis known they acknowledg her Majefly's Ten-
dernefs and Care of the common Intereft very
gratefully, and make her the belt Return a Body
of private Men can do, by devoutly praying for
her Prefervation in their publick Allemblys.
But it feems we have the Unhappinefs to dif-
fer from the Church in feveral Things, which is
Handle enough for fome Perfons to cry mightily
againit us. Perhaps they imagine, violent, noify
Pretences to Zeal for the Church, will recommend
'em to Ecclefiaftical Preferments, notwithftand-
ing, in reality, the Church is the lead of their
Concern: and after all, it may, fadly be obferv'd,
that
I o f^fleBions on Afr.Wall'^ Let. i .
that Piety and true Religion are almoft quite
loft, in the midft of thefe zealous Pretences *, for
thofe who make the greateft Stir about Religion,
are too frequently found to have the leaft regard
to it in their Lives and Adions : juft as the Male-
contents and Nonjurors, who can certainly be no
Friends to England^ raife the loudeft Outcrys of
the Church's Danger, when, at the fame time, 'tis
known they are the greateft Enemys to it, and
its prefent Eftabliihment. How elfe cou'd one
of 'em fo impudently propofe an Union with the
Clergy of France ? A Friend to that Church can
be no Friend to this at home. Yet thefe are the
Men who begin the Clamour, to the great Diftur-
bance of the Catholick Church ^ and then bafely
turn it upon us, by a common Jefuitical Figure,
and cry, that we are the Church's Enemys, and
defign its Ruin ^ and all for no other Reafon, Sir,
but becaufe we will not intermeddle with it at all.
A Feint and Amufement only, that they may un-
obferv'd and unfufpeded betray her more effedu-
ally : For if ftie is in Danger, 'tis from them •,
from whom, tho we are thought her Enemys, we
unfeignedly pray G o d to deliver her. But fhe
need not be apprehenfive of what they can do,
while her Majefty is at her Head, who has piouily
engag'd to proted her, tho not in the Method of
Rome^ and of thefe her Votarys, by crufhing the in-
nocent, and, it may be, miftaken Diflenters. Po-
liticks, perhaps, might perfuade her to treat her
avow'd Enemys with more Severity, who dare
queftion her Title, and her Supremacy in all Ec-
cleliaftical as well as Civil Matters, throughout
her Realms •, which many of the Clergy, contrary
to their repeated moft folemn Oaths, publickly do :
but fhe will never be brought to believe that God
is, like the barbarous Heathen Dsemons, to be
delighted with the dreadful Pomp of Human Sa^
crifices,
Let. I . Hijiory of Infant-'^aptifm. 1 1
crifices, and huge Draughts af the reeking Blood
of poor trembling Wretches.
'Tis ftrange any Men (Viou'd go to introduce
Dragoons and Faggots into a Syftem of Chrlftiaa
Religion : for what can be more directly con-
trary to our S A V I o u r's Doftrine and Example,
than Malice, and Oppreflion, and Maflacres ? or
more prepofterous, than to fend them to Hell
(for they damn all Hereticks thither) to fave
their Souls ? While, on the other hand, Charity
and mutual Forbearance, and to treat one ano-^
ther like Brethren, are the blelTed Fruits and
Confequences of his moft holy Dodrines^ and
whatever may be infinuated, thefe are the Things
our Principles teach us. We dell re to be His Dif-
ciplcs, and therefore following His holy Inftruc-
tions, we refolve ^ to love one another j and if any
creep in among us of a contrary Temper, wc
heartily renounce both them and their Pradices.
But enough of this.
Perfons of more Honour, and better Under-
ftanding and Temper, purfue more commendable
Methods *, and as C h r i s t has committed to 'cm
the Sword of theSi?i^\ T, which is the Word <?/ G o D,
they employ that alone to defend His Church and
Truth. And undoubtedly, the moft efFedual
way to fupprefs Error is, (and it is the only one
C H R I s T has provided) by Arguments drawn from
the Scriptures-, which are, in their own nature,
moft proper to convince the Judgment, and work
upon the Affedtions too. This is the Bufmefs and
indifpenfible Duty of every careful Shepherd of
Ch R 1 s t's Flock, over the Confciences of whom
he has no Power, but to teach, and knowing the
Terror of the Lor d, to ferfuade Men.
f John 13, i/er. 35.
But,
I z ^JJeSlions on Afr. Wall V Let. 1 1
But, you fay, Thts has been always our Pretence^
and we have constantly commended this Method^ he^
caufe it is fo gentle^ and we can eafily put by the Force
ef it : For we feem refolv*d to take very little No-\
tice of what is done in this kind '^ or at leafi^ obfli-^l
nately to cavil at it^ tho ever fo unreafonahly. But'
indeed, Sir, you wrong us very much \ for if we.
are in an Error, we heartily defire to be convinc'd
of it: and every one muft acknowledg, we are
not ty'd to our Opinion by Reputation and In-
tereft ^ lince it rather deprives us of thofe Ho-
nours and valuable Promotions in the State and
Ghurch we might otherwife enjoy a fhare of. Tho^
for ray own part, thofe Advantages don^t in the
leaft tempt my utmolt Ambition, to make me,*
in difobedience to G o d and my Confcience, deny^
what I know and believe to be right ^ yet out of?
mere refped to Truth, 1 fhall ever think my felf
oblig'd to any Man who kindly takes pains to un-
deceive me in a Matter he thinks I am miftaken-
in, and fhall always be open to Inftrudion : And
as far as I can judg of our whole Body, they are
ready to embrace the Truth, and renounce their
Errors, as foon as they fhall be made appear to be
fuch by authentick Proofs. And this "Charader
Mr. Wall himfelf too allows us, among . other
things to the fame efFed, adding thefe Words, |1 /
take ^em generally to be cordial^ ofen, and frank Ex-^
frejfers of their Sentiments,
You call this, alfo, the Old Cant^ and hofe we
will no more make ufe of ity till we have anfwer^d what
is fo learnedly written againfi tts by Mr* Wall j who
has^ you think, mofh effeBually ruind our Caufe^ m
the Judgment of all reafonahle conf derate Men- But
that you are miftaken in your Opinion of his Book,
8 Partll. p.4x^-
and
Let. 1 . Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. i 5
and that Mr. Wall has done our Caufe no Preju-
dice, nor is the formidable Adv^rfary you repre-
fent him to be, is as clear to me, as the contrary
fcems to you, and perhaps you may be perfuaded
ftiortly to think fo too. I confefs, I look on
what he has done, as the belt Defence of Infant-
Baptifm extant, and therefore it deferves an An-
fwer. And you may expedt a complete one, by a
very learned Hand, which, 'tis likely, may go far
toward putting an end to the Controverfy *, but
the Perfon who undertakes it, is under fuch A-
vocations, that I doubt it will be fome time be-
fore it can be publifh'd. In the mean while, there-
fore, 1 will fet my felf to obey your Commands,
(for fuch I efteem the Requefts of my Friends) and
the more willingly, that I may confirm you in the
good Opinion you are pleas'd to exprefs of me :
You think I have fo much Ingenuity, as to follow
Truth wherever 1 find it ^ and fince I perfift in
my former Notion, you are willing to believe K
have fomething which appears a Reafon to me, to
offer in my Defence: and on this account, you
ihall be glad, you fay, to know my Sentiments of
Mr. IVairs Book ^ which I will give you, without
Prejudice or Heat, and I hope the Confequence
will be the continuance of your Friendfhip.
I efteem Mr. IVali's, I faid, the beft Defence of
Jnfant-fiaptifm I have feen, and that for thofe Rea-
fons on which he recommends it himfelf in his
Preface. I believe, indeed, they are not all
found ^ but he all the way endeavours to impofe
'em on the Reader with fuch an Air, as fhall
make 'em pafs for fuch with many. Befides, it
muft be allow'd he has, in fome refpeds, argu'd
to more advantage than any before him, ha-
Ting reap'd the Benefit of their Writings^ but
with all his Advantages, and tho he ftandson the
Shoulders of thofe who have gone before him, his
i:!)u* size
1 4 (^efrHlons on Mr. Wall V Let. i ]
Size is not fo gigantick, that we need be afraid
to engage bim, and enter the Difpute. Bat before
I come to Particulars, it may be proper to make
feme general Remarks, which will be of fervice
to us, when we confider the feveral Arguments
wherein his Strength lies.
In the firft place. Sir, I muft defire you to be-
lieve Mr. Wall is not every where to be depended
on : He reprefents Tome Things fo unfairly, and
others in To falfe a Light, that he is not to
be read without much Caution and DiftruH.
He wou'd be thought, indeed, ^a mighty fair
and impartial Writer, and to this end, endea-
vours to conceal the contrary Byais he was un-
der v and he has done it fo fuccefsfully too, that
he has had the good Fortune generally to gain the
Reputation he aim'd at*, but how undefervedly,
I will leave you, tho fo much his Friend, to judg,
by the following Inftances,
He tells us in the Title-Pagc, his Defign is im^
fartially to colleEh all the Paffages in the Writers of the
four frfi Centurys^ as do make either For or Again fir
Infant' Baftifm. And afterwards ^ he fays, he has
jroducd all he has met with in the Authors that wrote
in the four firfiCenturys •, and that he has done it ia
'J' their own Words^ without omitting any one that he
inows of within the limited Time. He afliires us
of it again in another place 1], in order to re-
move all Doubts, and perfuade you, that he
has not fufer'd a fingle inftance to efcape his
Diligence, efpecially in the earliefl; Ages. But
I am pofitive, 1 cou'd eafily point out feveral
PalTages, all cited from Writers in the three firft
Centurys, which he has taken no notice of, and
'^'fVm II. p. I. t Introd. p. 2. |1 Part II. p. 8.
each
Let. I . Htftory of Infant'^apttfm. 1 5
each of 'em ftronger in favour of Antip^dobaptifm,
than any he produces for the contrary, till St. Cy^
^rianh Time. This is not the proper Place, but
if there is occafion, I intend to give you fome
hereafter, when they may more conveniently fall
in : At prefent, I Ihall only obferve, he difcovers
his Defign, notwithftanding his Pretences to Im-
partiality, was to eftablifh the Baptifm of Infants,
i had almoft faid per fas & nefas. For after a
long Quotation from Jufiin Martyr % firit Apology,
which does not in the lealt touch on the Baptifm
of infants, as Mr. ^F^// himfelf confeffes, he makes
the Reader put the Queftion ■^, To what Pur^ofc
this is cited in a Difcourfe of Infant- B aft ifm f plain-
ly intimating, it did not direftly ferve his fecret
real Defign, the Baptifm of Infants not being fpo-
Icen of in it v however, to ballance the matter,
he fays, it makes nothing againft it neither, in
which he is manifeftly in the wrong.
The Martyr is there giving the Emperor an
account of the Chriftian Form of Baptizing in
general, as 'twas adminifter'd to all, and not, as
Mr. IVall takes the freedom, without any ground,
to fuppofe, to thofe only who were converted
from Heathenifm ^ thereby introducing Two Bap-
tifms into the Church, contrary to the exprefs
Words of St. Paul (|, and making Jufiin molt im-
prudently fall into what he was endeavouring to
avoid, namely, the Sufpicion of dealing unfairly^ by
concealing fome thing from the Emperor's Know-
ledg. But to fortify his Conjedure, he adds, the
Reafon of the Martyr's profound Silence in the
matter was, that he had no Occafion to /peak of the
Cafe of Infants,
■■ I I ■ III ■ III II 1 1 ■■
* Parti, p. 15, II Eph. iv. 5.
1 6 ^ficElions on Mr.WzWs Let. i T
y-A very difingenuous AiTertioa ! as you can't but
tMnk it, Sir, if you call to mind the Scandal
Chriftians were commonly under, in thofe Days,
which St. Jufim himfelf, and all the Apolo-
gifts are fo careful to remove, I mean, their be-
i|jg tax'd with murdering their Children at their
Meetings, and feafling on their Flefh. For this
Calumny was induftrioufly fpread among the Pa-
.gans, and the Chriftians clear'd themfelves very
.well ^ but without difparaging the Arguments
•they employ'd, I'll venture to fay, the Baptifm
of Infants, if it had been in ufc among 'em,
jmight have been urg'd with as much Weight as
any, and they wou'd certainly have thought it as
concluiive,, and not have pafs'd it over with a to-
tal NegleQ:.
On the whole, I infer, and I hope not without
ileafon, this Paflage of St. Jufim is diredly againft
infant-Baptifm ; and therefore, when Mr. WaH
fays, 'tis not direSlly for his Purpofe, that muft im*
.ply, whatever he pretends, his Aim was only to
:iind out what might be moll plaufibly offer'd for
^tjie Opinion he had before entertain'd. 1 draw
ithis Inference not from this Paflage alone, but from
Several others ajfo in his Book, and from what I'm
going to add in the next place, which perhaps you
jnay efteem the plainer Proof.
After our Author has labour'd || to eftablifli the
•Credit of SuCyprlan^ and his Teftimonys for In-
fant-Baptifm, fuppofing the Reader fufficiently
prepar'd to underftand all that Father fays of
Baptifm, as including Piedobaptifm too^ he pre-
fents us with a Citation out of his Common-
Place Book, as Mr. Wall terms it, where St. Cy*
friarij to Ihew the Neceflity of Regeneration and
li Parti, p. $7, 58.
Baptifm,
Let. I. Hijlory of Infant-^ aptifm. 17
Baptifm, ( not or Baptifm, which wouM have
anfWer'd Mr. WdW End better) ufes the Words
of St. John^ ^ Except a Man he borrij &C. and then
fuddenly changing the Perfon, becaufe St. Cyprian
quoted St. John^ he fubftitutes St. John^s Authority
in the room of St. Cyprians^ and runs on as if he
was only arguing from that facred Teftimony^ to
fix the Scnfe of thofe Words in fome Particulars
he had molt occafion for, and which have really no
Difficulty in 'em.
Thus haying pafs'd it on you, that St. Cyprim
does fometimes fpeak in favour of Infant-Baptifm,
and then taking it for granted he does it here
too ^ he fhifts Author itys, after his fmgular Me-
thod of improving Things, and makes a Defcant
on the Words of St. John^ in hopes to carry it
with the credulous Reader *, and at laft concludes,
that from thefe Coniiderations, we mz^ fee plainly
this is a good Teftimony for Infant-Baptifm.
And as he reprefents it, indeed, it feems to have
fome Weight. But pray. Sir, obferve the Fallacy :
To perfuade you that St.Cyprian means nothing but
Water-Baptifm, he unfairly cuts off thefe Words
taken out of the fame Gofpel, -j~ Except ye eat the
FlejJjj and drink the Blood of the Son of Man^ye have no
Life in you j which immediately follow thofe cited
by Mr. Wall^ and make up this whole Chapter.
As if he forefavv they wou'd leflen the Tefti-
mony he was fo fond of, and therefore, in point
of Prudence, might be omitted : For 'tis clear
from them, that by Regenerate in the Text, St.
Cyprian did not underiiand Baptifm only, nor
at all indeed, for that Word feems plainly to
refer to thefe Words, John vi. 53. and alfo, that
^ John iii. 5.
t lb. vi. 5g.
he
I 8 (I^efleBions on Kr.WallV Let. i :
he pleads as ftrongly for thcNeceflity of commu-
nicating Infants, as baptizing 'em.
Mr. ^IVall therefore, being prefs'd afterwards
■^ by Mr. Dailies Argument from this Paflage^ to
prove Infants were admitted, in St. Cyprian^
time, to the Eucharifr, wou'd extricate himfelf,
by owning, in exprefs Terms, when he thinks it
has firft had its effed in this place, that it wou^d
he hut a very weak Argument for Infant-Baptifm,
were it not that he himfelf (viz.» St* Cyprian) in other
places mentions Infants hy JSfame^ as contain d tinder
the general Rule that requires Baptifm \ and with
this confeflion of his Difingenuity, he thinks to
ward off the Force of Mr. Dailie's Argument. But
this does him no manner of Kindnefs*, for what-
ever may appear from other Pafiages to have been
St. Cyprian s Judgment in the Cafe, if this parti-
cular Pallage does not prove it, (as he confefTes it
does not) a Man of his pretended Impartiality
fliou'd not have iniifted on it. Befides, whatever
tie wou'd have us believe, he muft needs perceive,
thofe Texts being join'd together without any
thing between 'em but a necefTary Copula^ under
the fame Head, and unavoidably apply'd to the
fame Subjed, the Paflage is either of no ufe to
confirm Infant-Baptifm, or elfe it maybeasw^ell
urg'd for their being admitted to the awful Sa-
crament of the Lord's Supper. To fave you
the trouble of turning to the place, I will tran-
fcribe the whole Chapter, which Mr. IVall did not
think, fit to do, that you may fee whofe Rea-
fons are belt grounded. The general Head of
this Chapter in St. Cyprian is, -f- Except any one he
'f- Part II. p. 3 55-
f Lib. 5. Tcjltmomor. ad Qumn.c. 25.
Ad regmm Del n'lfi bapti:;^atHs ^ renatus qms fuerit, perve-
n'tre non poJJ'e*
In
Let. 1 . Hlflory of hifant'^Baptlfm. 1 9
haptiz^ed and horn agdn^ he cannot come to the King-
dom of God : And the Chapter it felf runs thus.
In the G of pel according to St, John : Except any
one is born again of Water and of the Spirit^ he can-
not enter into the Kingdom of God» For that which
is horn of the Flefh is flefi ; and that which is born of
the Spirit is Spirit, And again : Except ye eat the
Flejl} of the Son of Man ^ and drink his Blood-^ ye have
no Life in yon.
This is the entire Chapter, without any Alte-
ration, jull as 'tis publifh'd by the learned Bifhop
Fell,
He has a6led with the fame Artifice in relation
to the Jpoftolical Confix itutions^ as they are call'd.
For he produces Words from the fixth Book, di-
ved indeed to his Purpofe \ only they, like all the
other boafted clear Proofs, unluckily happen to
be fpurious, and foifted in, as many other things
wxre, during the fourth Century, as he himfelf is
forc'd to confefs. And how he can make 'em of
any Authority then, I leave his own Confcience
to aniwer. He gives but an indifferent Account
of their Colledion into one Body at firft, nor
dares deny their being frequently alter'd after-
wards, and interpolated till about the 4th Century.
Monfieur Jurieu alfo queltions their Antiquity,
and fays, "^ They are a Work of the fourth ^ge^ and
perhaps the fifth. It's certain, they have been con-
fiderably alter'd fmce Epiphaniush Time, who died
In Evangelio cata Joamem : I^ifi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua fy
[ph'itu^ non poteft mtro'ne in regmm Dei. Q^ed emm ttatum eji
de carne^ caro ei? : ^ quod natum eft de ffnitu fpiritm eft* Item
illic : Njfi ederitis carnem fiin bominisy fy biberitis [anguinem
eJHSy mn habebitis vitam in vobis,
♦ Lett,Paftorale9. an. 1686. Cette Compilation qu'on appelle
/w Conftitktions ApoftoUqueTy eft m ouvrage du quatrieme fiecky
^ psut Qtre dn cinqmme,
C 2 '^ ia
20 <^fleSlions on Mr!Wa\Y$ Let.i.
in the fifth Century *, for of the many PafTages he
quotes from 'em, fome are very difierent, others
are contrary, and fome not to be found, as they
are read now.
Thefe Gircumftances, if Mr. Wall had been un-
prejudic'd, wou'd have funk the Authority of the
Conflitutions very lov/ with him. And to (hew I
am not miftaken, in another place "^ he ufes 'em
meanly himfelf. He cou'd not avoid owning they
mention'd communicating of Infants^ which made
it not for his purpofe they fhou'd be well thought
of j and therefore he tacks about, and undervalues
'em to fuch a degree, that he thinks 'em not worth
an Anfwer. So plain is it, by his own Words and
Management, that he endeavours to perfuade his
Readers, by {training i PalTage, which, according
to his own Confeflion, is not to his purpofe. And
what can we exped, Sir, from fuch a Writer ? I
wiih, for his own fake, he had confider'd a little
fooner of what he afterwards fays, \ That my
uinti^d>dohaftijl^ I add, or Paedobaptill either, who
having better Mmns^ of Knowledge is convincd that
any of thefe Arguments have really no force^ and yet
does vrge ^em on the more ignorant Feofle^ aBs very
difingenuoitfly towards ^em^ and is a Prevaricator in
the tioings of God, For to vfe any Argvment with an
Intent to deceive^ has in it (tho there be no Propofition
■zttter'^d that is fdfe in Terminis) the nature of a Lye :
which as it is bafe and unmanly in human Affairs^ fo it
is impious when ^tis pretended to be for God j as Job
fays^ ch. xiii. ?•
How little Mr. Pfk// is to be rely 'd on, appears
farther, if you obferve how induftrioufly he takes
all Advantages to blacken us, and reader us the
Objeds of Refentment and Contempt, by many
» Part 11. p. 95o. t Part II. p. 3^2*
.L things
Let. I . Hijiory of Infant-^aptifm. 2 1
things which are carefully fcatterM thro his whole
Book : That a Man who fets himfelf to write with
this Temper and Defign, will fay any thing that
favours his Intention, a common Knowledg of
the World will acquaint us by infinite Examples.
When an Author once makes it his Bufinefs to
expofe and defame his Adverfary, he never fails
to mention every thing that may difcredit him :
Old Storys^ tho ever fo falfe and fcandalous, arc
repeated anew ^ all former Wounds tore open a-
frefh, and rak'd into to the very Bone j and thofe
Animofitys, which had been happily extinguifh'd
and effac'd by a more charitable Temper, or elfe
confiderably worn out by Time, are again revived,
and perhaps with new Improvements of iMalice.
He gives his own Caufe the molt pleafing Co-
lours, and infinuates himfelf into your Belief with
fpecious Pretences of Argument, and an Air of
Probability and Aflurance : For, as Tully obferves,
* There is nothing fo abfurd and incredible^ hut may
be refrefented fo as to look very probable.
But this is not all \ there is another Invention,
and that is, to alTume an Appearance of Impartia-
lity and Equanimity, and talk much of it \ and
under this Difguife, to infert fuch Innuendo's and
Expreffions as will provoke the PalTion of hafty
Bigots againft his Antagonifts. Thus to make
'em look like Criminals and dangerous Perfons,
'tis pretended, they are liable to the Lafh of the
Law, but are fpar'd out of Generofity and Ten-
dernefs*, that their Principles and main Defign
are to overturn both Church and State ; that they
have fome pernicious Intereft to carry on, fome
Ambition or fome PalTion to gratify ^ and are a
^ Paradox, cap. i. Nihil eft tarn incre<libile5 quod non
dicendo fiac probabile,
C 3 fort
1 1 <S^fleHions on Mr.WaU'^ Let. \.
^ort of obftinate Boutefeus and Hereticks : and to
fecure all, a great many fcandalous Falfhoods are
officioufly obtruded on the Credulous, as diligent-
ly as if they were the Fundamental Articles of
the Chriftian Faith. And if I can form any Judg-
ment, Mr. W^ali has too near approach'd this Me-
thod.
You'll be furpriz'd, I know, Sir, at fo fe-
vere a Charge from me, who have always fo
much talk'd of and admir'd Charity, as the
moft amiable, darling Attribute of the A l m i g h-
TY^ * r^r God is Love: witnefs the amazing
Inftance of it in His Redeeming us from the
Curfe, by the Sacrifice of His Only begotten
Son. But you mult not upbraid me with vio-
lating even the ftrideft Rules of Charity, which
the Dodrine and Example of the Blessed
Jesus have taught us, and which I pray G o d I
may always diligently ftudy to obferve. I'm very
backward, and you mufl: be fenfible of it, to ufe
fo much as an ordinary Liberty of cenfuring the
Anions of others: Nothing grates more upon my
natural Temper, than to tell unwelcom Truths,
and lay Mens Faults before 'em. I much rather
chufe, which perhaps is the contrary Extreme, to
pafs 'em by, for the moft part, in Silence : And I
wou'd willingly have done fo here, if I had not
believ'd it wou'd be a manifeft Prejudice to the
Truth ^ for I faw what Succefs his Arts had with
you, and therefore I thought it altogether fea-
ibnable, to dillinguilh thofe Things in our Author
which juftly render all he fays fufpeded : and
when you find what full Proof J can make of all
I tax him with, I hope you'll befatisfy'd, I have
done nothing inconliftent with the noble Princi-
ples of Charity I profefs and fo much magnify ;
? I John iv. 8.
but
Let. I . Htflory of Infant- ^aptifvi. i ^
but, on the contrary, was even oblig'd by thcni
to do you and onr Caufe this piece of Juftice. In
the mean while, if any thing really blame- worthy
or indecent has flip'd from me, I heartily beg
pardon of you and Mr. Wallj and jfhall be very
forry whenever I perceive it.
'Tis generally allow'd, and juflly, that Men of
the greateft Learning and Penetration, who are
duly furnifh'd with proper Materials, and have
taken confiderable Pains to fearch out the Truth,
are belt qualify'd to judg in any Cafe, and are
mod to be depended on. We are naturally pretty
much inclin'd to fubmit our felves, in a good de-
gree, to their Refolutions. Mr. Wall was ap-
prised of this-, and that the far greater part of
your Church acknowledg (as abundance have done
in my hearing) they practife Infant-Baptifm more
on the Authority of the learned, venerable Body
of their Clergy, than for any Reafon they fee ei-
ther in the Scriptures or in the Nature of the
Thing. It very much concern'd him, therefore,
to preferve this Efteem in the Minds of the Peo-
ple, left if it w^ore off, they fhou'd ftart from
their Liturgy, look about 'em, and bravely af-
fume the Liberty of judging for themfelves, and
refufe to be led any longer in Shackles.
I am apt to think, this put Mr. Wall to the
fruitlefs Pains of introducing fo many Things,
which are really nothing to the Purpofe, but only
as they ferve his Oftentation, and to difplay his
Reading. Thus, for Inftance, of what Ufe in a
Difcourfe of Infant-Baptifm, is a Hiftory of the
falfe * Decretal Epiftles of the Bifhops of Rome >
when at the fame time he allows, and we don't
ask him to prove it, they are fpurious, and forg'd
J Parti, p. 17$.
C 4 by
24 ^fleBions on MrWsXVs Let.t.
by an ignorant Romanift, viz,, all of 'em before
Sirlcius'Sj who came to the Chair about 385. As
fuperfluous to the full is his tedious and partial
Hiftory of Telagius^ and the Herefy which takes
its Name from him, which reaches quite thro that
long 19th Chapter, and fills near a hundred Pages
of his firft Part, which contains but 36G in all,
including the Title, Preface, and Introduftion.
He offers, 'tis true, to excufe the DigrefTion ^,
but I think very indifferently : for whatever he
may think of the matter, it neither illuftrates
nor enforces his Arguments in the leafl:*, which
wou'd have been as clear and valid, tho he had
fav'd himfelf and his Reader all that trouble :
but then he wou'd not fo well have gratify'd his
Ambition to be thought a Man of more than
ordinary Learning and Application. 1 wonder he
did not with the fame Excufe, draw in more
fuch Hiftorys at every Turn, which offer'd as fair,
and might have done him as much Service as
thefe : for I can't fee, how the Senfe of the other
Tlaces cafl be apprehended better than thofe of
St, Avguftw') &c. unlefs he had taken the fame
Pains as largely to (hew on what Occafions they were
ffohn likewife.
But even in this DigrefTion, which was long e-
nough in Reafon without it, it falls fo luckily in
his way, he mufl needs treat of the lawfulness of
an Oath, and pofTefling great Riches without gi-
ving all to the Poor •, both which, 'tis faid, the
Velagians held were damnable. This is perfeft
Excurfion, when a bare Narration had fuffic'd,
efpecially confidering he was out upon the Ram-
ble already^ and that neither thefe things, nor
what gave him occafion to mention 'em, have any
relation to his Subjed.
» Pref. p. 5,
Let. I. Hijlory of Infant-^aptt/m. ij
A little after, he lanches out again ^ and will
by no means allow the BlelTed Virgin to have
been without Sin, fince he found the Pelagians
made the Belief of it a neceflary Article. But I
mull once more remark to you, all this is nothing
but Trifling ; for whether ftie was the immacu-
late, adorable Virgin, the Papifts idolatroufly
maintain, or only the holy Mother of our Lorp
according to the Scriptures, how is the prefent
Controverfy afteded by it ? Infants may or may
not have as much Right as Adult Perfons to
Chriftian Baptifm, which-ever of thefe Opi-
nions is true.
But I'm weary with following our Author
thro things of this nature, and therefore will
only add, out of a multitude, one more of hisf
Sallys, becaufe it is very long and very imperti-
nent. 'Tis in the Second Fart, and employs no
lefs than twenty Pages, viz.. from a hundred to
the end of the Chapter. He takes occafion
there feverely to fcoarge the Socinians^ and ail
that he fancys favour 'em any way \ and, as al-
ways when he touches this Point, which is pret-
ty frequently, he difcovers abundance of Heat,
and I think is conftantly tranfported even be-
yond the Bounds of Civility and Good Man-
ners.
Whether the Fathers held a Numerical or
only a Specifical Union in the Div'me Nature^
has been warmly difputed by feveral confidera-
ble Men •, and is a Branch of one of the molt
celebrated and intricate Controverfys in Divi-
nity : this might tempt Ux^Wall^ perhaps, to
think it a fair Opportunity for him to fhew his
Abilitysin determining a Matter of this nature.
But it had been more to his Honour, if he had
us'd a little Moderation, and not been altoge-
ther fo Dogmatical, which has too much of the
Preceptor
t6 (^fleBions on Mr.WallV Let. i .
Preceptor to pleafe any but the Ignorant, who
are mightily taken with Noife and Confidence,
which is always to fuch the belt Reafon and the
befl Eloquence.
But yet I can't fee any great Execution Mr.
Wall has done : for tho I'm as far from Socini-
anifm, or Tritheifm either, which he believes
is charg'd on the Fathers by Mr. Le ClerCj &c.
and which I'm perfuaded they are perfedly clear
of j tho I'm as far, I fay, from thefe two Ex-
tremes as any Man living, yet I can't help think-
ing, there are fome Difficultys too great for
Mr. Wall to mafter, if we may be allow 'd to
judg from the Specimen he has giv'n us of his
Skill. And it muft be confefs'd, either thro
"^ Incaution, or whatever elfe may be fancy'd
the Reafon, there are PafFages in the Antients
which require a curious Headpiece to excufc.
After all, he cou'd not exped to win much
Reputation by tranfient Reflexions on fo copi-
ous a Subject ^ for at befl, thofe (hort Sketches
can lignify but very little : and therefore, fince
the matter is fo very extenfive, and very intri-
cate too, I wifh he had not meddl'd with it
here ^ for one can't forbear enquiring, to what
purpofe? and how it is brought into a Dif-
courfe of this nature ? I don't fee any other
Reafon that cou'd prompt him to it, than only
an indifcreet Ambition to magnify himfelf, and
his Learning. 'Tis this, perhaps, makes him
run fo much upon the Socinians in feveral pla-
ces, who, by his Leave, are not fo defpicable
a fort of Men as he wou'd have us think ^ wit-
nefs, befides other things, CrelHus'shmous Trea-
tife, De Vno Deo Patre : which, after all his O-
* Part II, p. 115, »^^'
vations
Let. 1 . Hijlory of Infant'^a^tijnu 27
vations and Triumphs, yet wants a Tibl^antial
Anfwer*, and I'm glad to find fo learn'd a iMai
as Dv. Whitby of the fame Mind. Not but that
Tm perfuaded, all that is there fo ingenioufly
and advantageoufly urg'd, might be cftedually
confuted to general Satisfadion, if the Dodor,
or fome other learned Hand, who is furnifli'd,
like him, with all neceflary Qiialifications, wou'd
in good earnefl fet about it.
I mention thefe things, Sir, to convince you,
Mr. Wallh Digreffions are neither neceffarily
brought in, nor skilfully handl'd ^ which ren-
ders him the more inexxufable : for who can be
prevail'd on to think well of the Condud of
that Man, who, without any kind of Kecefiity,
takes fuch a world of Pains to expofe himfelf ?
And I believe, by this time, you are ready to
grant it ^ and that I have alTign'd the molt pro-
bable Reafon of it. How ridiculous and mean
mufl it then appear, for him, of all Men, to
refled fo unjuftly on Mr, Ste-rwetty as if he had
needlefly tranflated fo many Pages of French^
only to fhew his ^ Vein of fine Language^ of
which he is a Mafter ^ when 'tis certain the
whole Paflage was directly and very much to his
purpofe ? while this Man's own DigrelTions are
longer, and utterly foreign to the matter in hand.
But he knew what kind of Influence thefe Me-
thods wou'd have on the People of his Party,
and has, without doubt, found his Account in
fitting his Calculations to that Meridian : which
brings to mind an Obfervation of his own, 77?^^
there is a fort of People^ that take a malicious Tlea^
fure in trying how broad Affronts the Vnderftandings
of fome Men will bear.
I Part II. p. 287.
Another
2 8 (I(efleBms on Mr.WzWs Let. i .
Another thing our Author fo induftrioufly
improves to the fame purpofe, mult not be
omitted : 'Tis an ill-natur'd Vleafure indeed
he takes in arraigning and cenfuring very fe-
verely fome of the greateft Men for Wit and
Learning that have appear'd. Ko body can
read him without obferving, how liberal he is
of his quarrelfom Criticifms, and how free he
makes with their Charaders, without any Defe-
rence to their Station : doubtlefs, defigning to
place himfelf above them, and to be underftood
to be a Perfon of much better Apprehenfion ^
or, at leaflr, to have div'd deeper into the Know-
ledg of Things.
I'm unwilling to bear too hard upon Mr. Wall^
and therefore won't fay he defign'd a Refieftioa
on that worthy Man Archbifhop Tdlotfon^ when
he gives him an inferior Title, barely ftyling
him ^ Bljhof ^ whereas he never was a mere
Bifhof in his Life : it looks therefore as if he
queftion'd his Grace's Title to that high Dig-
nity he was fo defervedly rais'd to ^ or elfe dif-
allow'd of the Order of an Archbifhop, tlio o-
therwife, indeed, I fee no reafon to think him
an Enemy to the Ecclefiaftical Hierarchy. Bat
iny Lord of Sarmn is more apparently vilify'd.
Mr. Wall does not name him indeed, but every
one knows who is the Author of the late Ex^ofi-
tion of the XXXIX Articles of the Church <?/ Eng-
land. And for the indecent Treatment he has
given to a Man of his Lordfhip's Charai5ter and
high Station in the Church, I refer you to the
place cited below f.
Every Man is at liberty to think as he can,
and to defend his Opinions upon occafion, and
* Part 11. p. 584, f Part II. p. 124,
if
Let. I . Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. 1 9
if it be neceflary, handfomly to fhew the Mif-
takes he thinks any great Man has been guilty
of ^ but this fhou'd be done with all Decorum
to his Parts and Charader, which is very much
wanting in Mr. IVall, efpecially in the fecond
Chapter of his fecond Part, where he profeC-
fedly calls to account feveral learned Moderns,
who have, or feem to have written in favour
of Antip^edobaptifm, as Ludovic-us Vives^ Cvr-
celUus^ Riaaltivs^ Bifhop Taylor^ Bifhop BarUw^
Bilius^ Daille, &c. As to Rigaltius^ he makes
Dr. Fell^ the Zealous Bijhop of Oxford^ his Prece-
dent ^ but his Lordfhip's being a little warm on
this occafion, who at other times Ihews Rigd-
tins the ReffcEt which his great Learning deferv*d^
will in no wife juflify Mr. JT^/Z's being continu-
ally out of Temper, as perhaps he expedted it
fhou'd *, for this may eafily be pardon'd in a Man
of his Lordfhip's Elevation towards one of an
inferior Rank.
When he wants their Authority, our Author
is full of Veneration to the Writers of Antiqui-
ty ^ and is mightily enrag'd at any one that
ventures to fay the leaft thing to their Difcredit :
for 'tis no lefs than Blafphemy with him, and
touches Chriilianity fo home, that if purfu'd it
wou'd drive it out of the World. But after-
wards, when they Hand too much in his way,
he IS as rough with 'em as any, and gives 'em
no more Quarter than the re:I of their Enemys
do. Thus Gregory Naz.ianz.en^ Father and Son,
are but indifferently handl'd. The ^ Father is
reprefented an ignorant Man, and of very mean
Capacitys ', and the f Son is a Trimmer, who
merely in complaifance to his ignorant Father,
f 'Part II. p. 572.
t Parti, p. 82. rfn^Partll. p. 61.
perfuades
5 o ^fleStions on Mr.WaUV Let. u
perfuades Men, againft his Confcience, to neg-
led what he knows is their Duty, and take the
Liberty to defer the Baptifm of their Children
to a more convenient Time than he believ'd
Christ and His Church at firft faw fit to
appoint. An odd Charader of Bifliops of the
Chriflian Church, whofe Order enhances, and
not (as Mr. Wall vainly imagines) in the leaft
extenuates the Crime ; for the Priefthood, if
any, and efpecially the Bifliops, ought ftridly
to maintain the Purity of our Lor d's Inftitu-
tions, and be, as the Apoftle fays •^, in all Re-
fpeds, hlamelefs. But Mr. Wall had rather they
ihou'd appear fuch as he has defcrib'd 'em,
than make any Figure againft him : for fo he
'finds their Pradice and Teftimony to be, and
has no other way to come off, but this, and
pretending they were -j* fmgular in this Prac-
tice^ and yet unwarily, a few Lines after,
he confeiTes, 'twas very common at that time
for Perfons to defer their Childrens Baptifm till
they were in danger of Death.
He is yet bolder with St. Chryfoftom^ and I
think with lefs Caufe. That Father's way of
arguing againft Circumcifion, indeed, will hold
as well againft Picdobaptifm : but his De-
Jign does not feem to have been any thing
that way \ and it being not material to our pur-
pofe, I Ihall not examin it. For however this
be, I'm fure it favours too much of fome-
what I don't care to name, to reprefent fo
great a Man, and a Bifhop of the Illuftrious
See of Cotifiantifiofle^ as a || Leaden-headed Lo^
^Ician^ whom all the Antients jullly admir'd
"^ I Tim. iii. 2. t Part TI. p. -59- (ir,d 6\,
II Part I. p. III.
for
Let. 1 . Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. 3 i
for his mafterly Eloquence, and exemplary
Piety.
But of all he concerns himfelf with, he An-
gles out the learned Grotius^ and Mr. Le Clercj
in chief: he carefully catches at all Opportuni-
tys to bring thefe upon the Stage. His Me-
mory never fails him for the latter, whom he
hales in fo unaccountably, as if one great
Reafon of his writing this Hiftory was, that he
might find Opportunitys to quarrel with a Man
of his Figure in the World. Mr. Le Clercj I
believe, will never think it worth his while to
take notice of our Author's Refledions ^ for he
has fome time lince publifh'd, in the third Part
of the j4rs Critica^ the Reafons, in a Letter to
Mr. Limborch^ why he negleds the Calumnys of
much more confiderable Men ^ and it wou'd be
well our Author wou'd do himfelf the kindnefs
to read 'em. It concerns us to be acquainted
with Mr. WaWs Sincerity, and therefore let us
a little examin the Cafe.
You may bbferve he is angry with Mr. Le
Clerc chiefly on thefe Two Accounts : Becaule
he endeavours with fo ^ foul a Mouth to vilify
the Fathers and their Writings *, and the other
is, his fufpeded Heterodoxy concerning the Blef-
fed T R I N I T Y, and particularly the D e i t y of
Christ. This is the common Objedion of
all Mr. Le Clerch Enemys, for which they mofb
bitterly exclaim againft him, tho veryunjuftly,
and oftentimes in very bad Language too. But
it ought to be confider'd, whether a different
Sentiment, or fufpending the Judgment in fo
abftrufe a Point, is a fufficient warrant to dif-
penfe with the Rules of Charity and Forbear-
* Part II.- p. 114, 117, ire. and 343.
ancf?5
3 1 ^fleSlions on Mr. Wall V Let. i •
a nee, which the Great Incarnate God fo repeated-
ly enjoins, and has made the difcriminating Badg
of His Difciples. 'Tis dreadfully fevere to damn
Men, becaufe they can't /«^ out the A l m i g a t y
toferfeEiion \ for who then can he fav*d ? But,Thank$
be to G o D, the Scriptures give us better Hopes,
and at the fame time alTure us, their Condition is
much the more dangerous, who fo freely pre-
fume to judg their Brethren : For thou art inex-
cufdle^ O Man^ (fays St. Favl^ Rom. ii. i.)
whofoever thoii art^ 'that judge fi*
Befides, fuch Men, in effeA, do nothing lefs
than oppofe themfelves to the merciful Defign$
of om- Great Redeemer,, and ftfive to fruf-
tratei his kind Endeavour to make us like Him-
felf^ while He wou'd teach us thofe admirable
Vertuesdf Meeknefs, Love, and Good- will, &c\
And tho He has been pleas'd t6 take fo much
more Care to fix us right in the Pradice of
thefe things, than in the Speculations which
difturb us ^ yet an exad Conformity in thefe
weighty Matters, which our Lord Himfelf lays
fo muchStrefs on, a fpotlefs Converfation, a pious
Life in all Godlinefs and Honefty, are not Pro-
te6;ion powerful enough to fecure Men from the
Infults of thefe Furiofos, as if they thought
all moral Vermes were nothing, without being
right in the Notion of the Trinity *, and that this
one Speculation might compenfate for the want
of all other good Qualitys : and I believe. Sir, you
may have obferv'd, with me, that many of thefe
fiery Zealots are none of the exavfleft: Men in their
Lives. But God grant they may in time confi-
der that molt charitable Warning our Gracious
Lord has given 'em of their Danger, before-
hand afluring 'em, Not every one that fays unto
Him^ Lord! Lord! and in Words only ac-
knowledg his mighty Power and Attributes,
Let.K Hiftory of hfant'^aptifyn. 35
fljAll e^fjter into the Kingdom of Heaven-, hut he only
that does the Will of His Father which is in
Heaven*
But what confiderably aggravates the Crime in
the prefent Gafe, is, that the Charge is utterly
falfe •, and 'tis ftrange Perfons that pretend to
Jultice and Honour, Ihou'd exclaim againft Mr. Le
Clerc on fuch (lender grounds, who muft be ac-
knowledgM a Man of great Piety and Learning.
For the Subftance of all they urge, with any man-
ner of Pi^bability, is, That his Interpretations
of feveral Portions of Scripture deflroy the fine
Gloiies others have built upon 'em ^ and that
he has gone about to fhew that the Fathers
did not altogether underftand this Myftery in
the prefent Orthodox Senfe. Hence fome an-
gry Men proceed to accufe him of Socinianifm^
fome (for they are not agreed) of Arianifm^ and
others again of Photinianifm \ but they all join to
reproach him, tho for no Reafon, as I can difco-
ver, but his refufing to ftrain any Text which he
believes in his Confcience is not to the purpofe,
as Men of no mean Figure have done. A Method
which, he rightly thinks, only ferves to expofe the
Caufe they pretend to vindicate.
By the way, Sir, I wou'd not be thought to
juftify all his Expofitions •, fome of 'em I receive,
and thank him for •, but not all : and I know-
Air. Le Clerc will not be offended at my diflenting.
The Queftion is not whether his Interpretations
are juft, or not •, he thinks they are, and has a
Right therefore to propofe 'em, without being
rtan'd with fuch hideous Outcry s of Socinianifm^
&c. efpecially fince in feveral Parts of his Works
he has clear'd himfelf to the Satisfadion of any
impartial Readers. I open'd the third Vojume-
of his ArsCritiea^ and the following places in his
P Letter
34 5^t^eHwn5 on j^fr.W Lct.i.
Letter to his Grace, the prefent Archbifhop of
Canterbury tiirn'd up. ^ '- ' ;
The Letter was occafionM by fonT6 too fevere
Retiediofls that had beencaft on him. by the
learned Dr. Gzw, and which the Doftor ^imfelf
knows 4i'.e' not very, agreeable with the pure cha-
ritable SjHrit which ennobled Primitive Chrifiiamty.
''Tisnot Qyr Bufinefs to enter into the Merits of
their Coiitrbverfy ^ apy One who will take the
Pleasure to read the Volume of Letters I refer to,
iii^y perceive how/mufcti: Mv^ Le CUr'c^has been
abusM, and withal', hoS^ able he is to defend
himfelf. . What is more immediately to our Pur-
pofe^ is, th|^t the Dcx^tot had fuggefted, Mr. Le
Clerc was .either v^/^;^ or' iP^o/^/W^w, he did not
certainly Iriow whfcli :;,,byt co^ifidering the wide
Difference between thefe;two Opihions, and that
the Jirl^nns anatherpiz'd t'hej PhotiniaHs^ and were
the ruoft; adive in ;that Council which dcpos'd,
and" procured the Banifiimeiit oF Photinus: Bifhop of
Slrmjitmy. in. the Year s'Si-; it's ftrahge, a$ Mr. Le
C7frc bbfcrves, th-dr^^'4'nY iVan, Ihou'd fo exprefs
hi^ifelf^ as to make it plain he was a Favourer of
one/of theft Party s, ;aiid yet leave i^ fo hard to
determine, that the. Dodor himfelf fhou'd not be
able tp guefs which'. For his Satisfadibn, Mr. Le
r/waiTur^^ him hej5.,nei'tlier. But take' in fhort
what is ■ fufiident t'd wipe plf the Slander^, in his
own.Wprdsl^
n(vs fuent;iu^cbe,'qjLti<^ii]5/y^riaiiis,/iii:nime ffntiOj^i^ioeos in
'--•■" ^L en
Let. I . Htjlory of Infant- ^uptifm . 3 5
on the Books of the NcrvTefiamertt alone^ and not on
the lVriti?7o^s of EnCi^hmSy or ^ny other Father. Two
Pages farther, he fays/ ^ /neither approve the Opi'
nion of f^^ Arians, nor the Photinians way of inter-
fretin^ thofe Scriptures which fpeah of the Divinity of
Chrlfi. ■ He allures alfo, in the fame Letter, that
-f" neither of thofe Opinions^ viz. Arian, or Sociaian,
Can be learn d from his Writings,
' In his Tarrhafiana^ difproving the Calumnys of
fom£.G^^7»rff»^Divines, arvery vi^id fort of People,
he .fays in fo Hiany Words, |[, He is no-wife a Soci-
nian. And in another place \ ^^. Jf they under ft and
hy it^ the Dlv I iJ IT Y of the Son, his difiin^ion
from the ¥ At H B ^^ and the Redemption of Manlind^
Mr. Le Clerc is more convinced of thefe things than
the moft z^ealous Cocceian of ^em alL
He has one PaiTage in thisXhapter that ftrikes
at the very 'Root of Socinlanifm, which, you
know, Sir, is, that the Dodriiie of the T 11 in r t y
is perfedly unintelligible \ "hence they infer'd 'twas
a Contradiftion, and, in the next place, falfe :
And becaufe iVir. Le Clerc fo handfomly removes
all thefe Pretences, 1 will tranfcribe the PafTage at
large.
* Pag, 70. Nee Arianorum probo fententiam, nee earn
ratlonem, qua Photiniani Sciipturs loca de Clinfti Divini-
tate interpretantur.
t Pag, 71. Cerre neutrara harum opinio num, ex meis
iibellis haurire potuit.
H Tom. I. Fag. 405. "Mr. L. c. n'cft nullement Socinien,
ire.
♦♦ Ibid. Pag.^7,'^. Qlie fi Ton entendoit par la la Divi-
nite du Fils, fa diftin^tion d'avec le Pere. ;1<: la redemtion du
genre humain ; Mr. L. c. en ell plus convaincu que ne le
font les plus zslez Cocceicns.
D 2 ^ Not
3 6 ^jieFtions on Mr. WallV Let. i .
* Not thaty according to Mr, Le Clerc'i PrifjcipUs-i
rve mufl ex feci to have clear and compleat Ideas of all
things Revelation contains^ or ferfcH^ly to underftand
all it fays* He is far from thinking fo , ajtd with
all Men in their Senfes^ believes there is an infinite
Number of Things in G o D, and Divine A'fatterSy
which we know nothing at all of^ or underftand very
iynperfethly, B^it we mufl not confound this Obfcu^
rity with what we call ContradiBion^ which is not to
^ Pankafian. Tom, i. Pag. 418, Ce n'eft pas que, felon
les principes de Mr. £. C. nous dcvions avoir des idees
Claires, & complettes de tous les objets que la Revelation
renferme, ni entendre parfaitment tout ce qu'elle nous dit.
II eft tres-eloign6 de cette penfee. II y a, felon lui comme
felons tous ceux qui n'ont pas perdu le fens, une infinite de"
chofes dans Dieu & dans les chofes divines, que nous nc
comprenons point du tout, ou que nous n'entendons que
.tres-impRrfaitment. Mais il ne tiaut point confondre cette.
obfcurite avec ce qu'on appelle contradiction, qui ne fe
trouve point dans ce qui eft vrai. 11 ne faut pas non plus
s'imaginer d'en favoir plus, que ce qui nous a ete revele ;
mais ftf contenter de cela, fans y rien ajoHter. II y a-
dans les chofes divines des myfteres, que nous ne penetre-
rons jamais, & dont nous avons neanmoins des preuves af-
furees dans la Revelation, &quelquefois meme dans la Rai-
fon, comme Mr. I.e. I'a fait voir dans fa Pneumatologie.
Par Exemple, les Apotres parlent du Meflie, non feule-
ment comme d'un homme, mais encore dans les memes
termes, que de Dieu le Pere, & ils lui attribuent la Crea-
tion du Monde ; ce qui nous fait comprendre qu'ils he
I'ont nullement regarde comme un fimple homme, mais
comme etant uni a la Divinitc, d'une maniere fi etroite,
qu'on pent lui attribuer ce que Dieu a fait long-temps a-
vant qu'il naquit. Mais il n'y a Perfonne, qui puiffe de-
iinir la maniere de cette union & s'en forme une idee claire.
Qiie faut il done faire ? Acquiefcer dans I'idee generale &
confufe, que nous tn pouvons titer de I'Ecriture Sainfe,
& n'expliquer pas ce que nous ne favons point, ou impofer
aux autrcs la necelTite de croire nos explications particu-
lieres. La Raifon nous apprend que Dieu a cree le.Monde
du neant, mais il n'y a Perfonne, qui puiffe favoir la ma-
niere de cette action Divine.
h
Let- 1 • Hljlory of Infant-^aptifm. j 7
be found in any thing that is true. Nor flioud we
fuppofe wc know more than Revelation has exprefs^dj
but content our feives with thaty and not prefume to
make Additions. There are Aly fiery s in divine things
we jl) all never be able to penetrate \ of which notwith-
flanding we have certain Proofs from Revelation^
and fometimes even from Reafon^ as Mr. Le Clerc
has jhewn in his Pneumatology. For Example :
The Apoftles fpeak of the M es> s i AHy not only as of
a Afany but in the very fame Terms as of God the
Father, and afcribe to H I M the Creation of
the World : whence ^tis plainly they in no wife looked
on Him as a Man only^ but as united to the Di-
vinity in fo clofe a manner^ that we may
truly afcribe to H J Ai thofe things which were done
by G OD long before HE was horn. But no Aian
can define the manner of this Vnion^ and form a
clear Idea of it. What^s to be done then in this Cafe •*
We fiwud acquiefce in the general ohfcure Idea we
can collet from Script urCy and not go about to explain
what we dont undeYfiandy nor impofe a Neceffity of
believing our particular Explications upon other Men.
Reafon teaches us that God created the World cut of
Nothings hut no body can comprehend the manner of
that divine AB ion.
This may fuffice in behalf of Mr. Le Clerc^ tho
more might be added from his Writings : but I
think nothing can be more plain and exprefs than
this. By which you may obferve, Sir, what a
Liberty our Author takes : and I muft confefs, 'tis
not without fome Indignation I fee all thefe
learned Gentlemen I have mentioned, together
with others, fo fcornfully and unhandfomly treat-
ed. And when Learning and Piety, Innocence,
Dignitys and Honours are thus vilify'd and
tranipl'd on \ who can fee it unconcern'd, and
withhold himf elf from fpeaking ? fifpecially if we add
to the reft, his barbarous Ufage of the incompa-
D 3 riible
38 <llefieFlmson Mr.W^Ws Lct.T.
rable Grotius^ a Man who is fcarce to be eqiial'd
in all his different Capacitys, and whofe lingular
Abilitys have fafely plac'd him out of the reach
of Envy.
Grotius falls under Mr. WaW^ Difpleafure, for
being guilty^ as he imagines, of a foul Impoftvrey
when he went about to difprove the antient TraCtice
of Infant' B aft ifm from St. Gregory Naz^\anz.eri%
40th Oration, which is concerning Baptifm :
whence he briskly obferves, that a great Stock of
Learnlug does not always cure that I>Iarrorvnefs of
Sovl^ by which fome Fiople are inclind to do any
mean and foul things to favour a Side^^ or fet -up a
Party »
'Tis a high Imputation you'll fay, Sir^ on fo
great a Man ^ but if Grotius is really fo bafe, it
muft be acknowledged he is beyond Excufe, and
Mr. Wall has been very kind to him ^ and his
Learning and Station ftiou'd not fecure him from
a harfher Cenfure : And on the other hand, if it
prove a bare Allegation, and not true, let his
Impeacher look to that, and prepare to anfwer
it as well as he can, before that jult Judg, who
loves. Righteoufnefs, and fees to the Bottom of
our moil; f^crct Defigns. I am tempted to be-
lieve^ (and what lie fays in another place, viz,.
Part II. p-2i5 &c^ bears me out in it) that his
own Coafcience tells him he wrongs G'rofiw^. Per-
haps he does it. on purpofe to have an Opportu-
nity to criticize on him, and let the World fee
how much he is an Over-match for him : But judg
of his Succefs by the fequel.
The Words of Grotius which Mr. IVall parti-
cularly refers to, are thefe : * The Senfe (viz- of a
Cita-
* Xnmt, in Mattb. 19. 14. Senfus eft, ,veniant ad Chnr-
turn ut inftituantur, noji ut baptizentur, nifi poftquam vim
Baptifmi intellexevrnt, Nazianzcnus agens de iis qui fine
Bap"
Let. 1 . Hijlory of Infant-^aptifnu 39
Citation from TertullUn) is^ Let them come to
C H R I s T ro he taught'^ tiot to he haptiz^^dy till they
can tinder ft and the Force of B apt ifm. Kazianzen
/peaking of fuch. as dy'*d without Baptifm^ inflances in
fuch as were not haptiz?d^ J^ioc vm^ioThTzt^ hy reafon
of their Infancy, And the fame Kazianzen himfelf^
tho a Bijljop^s Son^ and a long time train d up under
his Father"* s C^.re^ was not haptiz^d till he came to Age ^
as he tells us in his own Life*
Grotim begins this Annotation with -obrerving,
that the Cuftom of baptizing Infants was groun-
ded on thefe w^ords of our Saviour, among
others ^ Suffer little Children to come vnto me: and
that it appears from St. Auftin^ St. Cyprian^ dec.
to have been pradis'd by the antient Church ^
but withal remarks from Tertidlian^ that the pre-
cife Age it was to be adminifter'd at in his time
was undetermin'd, and left to every one's Dif-
cretion. And here immediately follow the words
I have jufl now tranfcrih'd.
Now can it be pretended from hence, that Gro^
tius went ahout here to difprove the antient TraBice
of Infant 'B apt ifm j when 'tis plain he firlt pleads
foritsLawfuInefs and Antiquity, and even after-
wards can mean no more than that it was not
thought fo indifpenfably neceflary, but it might
be defer'd, if the Parents pleas'd, to a more
advanc'd Age ? And that they adtually did fo, he
has put beyond all Contradidion by the fingle In-
ftanceof Naz.ianz.en the Elder, if he had brought
no more. And Mr. Wall confefTes this is all GrO'>
/xwj intended, when he fays, Grotius did not rhain-
Baptifmo decedunt, exemplum ponit in iis quibusBaptif-
mus non contigit ha. v^irioTATdL. Atque is ipfe Nazianze-
nus, Epifcopi cam effjc Filius, Paths Tub cura diutiffime
educarus, baptizatus non fuit rtifi cum ex ephebis exiiiTet,
ut ^pfe- in Yita lua nos docet.
^- • * D 4. tain
40 ^fleBions on M-WslVs Lct.i.
tain there was ever any Churchy or any time in which
Infant' Baptifm was not us*d. Pray obferve how un-
fairly Mr. Wall deals with him. But Crotim had
fo exprefly declar'd his Opinion, that 'twas im-
pofTible he Ihou'd be mifunderftood *, for the gene-
ral Conclufion he at laft draws from all his Argu-
ments which oppofe Infant-Baptifm, is this :
^ But as all this fljews the Liberty^ Antiquity and Dif^
ference of the Cvftom^ fo it argues nothing at ally for
refufwg Baptifm to hfants whom the Parents offer*
How couM Mr. Wall^ after reading this, fay, he
went about to difprove Infant-Baptifm ? If Mr. Wall
underftood the Greek as well as Grotim^ and had
but a fmall fhare of his Penetration and Sin-
cerity, he wou'd not have taken this occafion to
cavil, notwithftanding he finds fo great a pleafure
in it.
Whoever h-4S an Opinion of GrotiusV Sincerity^
Mr. Wall fancies, muft blujh to read that PaiTage in
St. Gregory^ together with his Annotations on Mat.
19. H* But he is very much miftaken. Sir, for an
Excvfe may without any Difficulty be made for him^
and need not fuppofe he took the Quotation from
Somebody at fecond hand neither^ viz. by fliewing
that St. Gregory^ by the Phrafe in difpute, at leaft
might intend fiich Children as chanc'd to mifs of
Baptifmthro their Parents Fault ^ who being al-
low'd to fufpend it, on account of their Infancy,
to a later Seafon, perhaps abus'd this Liberty,
and fometimes put it off fo long, that by one
means or other the Children dy'd without it.
Crotim might think it reafonable to underftand
him thus, from St. Gregorys way of exprefhug
^ Mnotat. Mattb. yiiy:. 14. C^terumifta ficut libertatem,
vetuflatem & confuetudinis differentiam indicant, ita ni-
hil aiferunt cur repudiandus fit Baptirmusinfantiuin,quos
Pyrenees, &c. conlecrandos oifcrunt.
himfelfj
Let. I. Hifiory of hfantSa^tifm. 41
himfelf ^ for 01 is$i ucrlv b h^'jxfxei t« Si^xc&c<t
^x vijTTioTHTZiy &c. cannot admit of the fallacious
Turn Mr. Wall gives it, but mufl be render'd,
IVho are not in a Capacity to receive it^ or can^t re^
ceive it becaufe of their Infancy, For I never yet
obferv'd, nor I bilieve better Grecians than Mr Wall
and m^ ielf, that eivxi b St'va/^et fignifies to have in
one's Tower : And becaufe I wou'd not rely on my
own knowlcdg too much, I confulted Stephens^
who was utterly ignorant alfo of this new Con*
ftrudion ^ he has the Greek Phrafe exaftly, and
tranflates it as I hav'e.done. And one wpii'd
have thought, Epcietush celebrated Diftinftion of
HjingSy which are^ and are not in our own Power j
might have taught Mr. Wall how that Scnfe is to
be exprefs'd in Greek. Befldes, Grotim was too
able a Man to commit fo grofs an Error \ and it
feems more probable that he took St. Gregory
right, if you confider (which Grotius mufl: cer-
tainly know, and Mr. l^F^z// confefles) that it was
common at that time for People, for fome Reafon
or other, to let their Children go without Bap-
tifm many years : And even, in the Oration be-
fore us, St. Gregory advifes People to delay their
Childrens Baptifm, till they are capable to hear and
ginfwer fome of the Holy Words^ as our Author
tranflates the Pailage. All which Confiderations
make it almoft necelTary to undcrn:and the Paf-
fageas Grotiiis did, who therefore can't be thought
guilty of fuch a bafe Defign as our Author char-
ges on him. And therefore to ufe fomething bet-
ter than his own Logick, I won't fay a great flock
of Learning, but I find a great ftock of AITurance
is not always an infallible Sign that an Author is
not inflav'd to that Narrownefs of Soul, by which
fome People are inclined to do any meau and foul thing
to favour it Sidcy or make a Figure in a Party.
What
4 1 (I(efleRms on Mr.'WzlVs Let A.
What Mr. Wall obje^rs againfl: Grotimy in rela-
tion to the NeocAfarian Council, may be eafily an-
fwerM likewife, by comparing with but mode-
rate Attention what he and they have writ. Ac-
cording to our Author's, own Reprefentation of
it, any one who goes about it with ever fo good
a will, muft find it difEculc to fee wherein Cr*?-
tli:s is to be blam'd. As to the Words of the
Council, Mr. WaU acknowledges they are fo am-
biguous in themfelves, that they may be fairly un-
derftood in favour of either Party. And as to
tht laft Claufe, which is the principal Ground of
the Controverfy, he can't deny but Balfamorty
who was Patriarch of Antioch^ and Zor^aras^ who
had been Secretary to the Emperor u4lexls Comne-^
nusy both of them Grecians and learned Men, did
nnderftand it in the Senfe Grotlus cites 'em to
confirm : Kow upon thefe Conceffions, I defy KU
vety Marfially and Mr. IVall himfelf, to faften any
thing upon Grotias like foul Dealing in the Mat-
ter. And pray mind, Sir, how Mr. Wall^ tho he
knows thefe three famous Men were unexceptio-
nable Judges in the Greek Tongue, and expoun-
ded the Words in the Senfe he believes is not the
true, forgetting what he had ownM before, pka-
fantly affirms they do it contrary to the Rules of
Crlt'ichs^ and that dny Critickwill ohfcrve the pecu*
liar Notation of the word IcAf©-', determines his
Senfe only to be true : That it fhou'd be fo plain
and obvious for a^y Crltlck to obferve, and yet
thefe three, and indeed all others but himfelf,
who to be fure mult be no Criticks'of courfe, had
not the Wit to fee if, no mare than he had to
avoid the Abfurdity of fayidg the words of the
Canon m.ay be well' enough underftood either way,
and yet that the Nature and rdiom of the Greek
Language fliew, they can be fairly underftood but
^flone Senfe, viz^. his own.
Tho
Let. t . Htflory of Infant^^aptifni. 4 5
Tho he wou'd infinuate indeed, that the Opt"
nions of Balfamon and Zonaras are but of little
moment, which by the way is a certain fign they
are againll him, I hope they will appear other-
wife, and far fuperior to his Detradions and Cri-
ticifms. The words of Zon^rras are fuch down-
right mere Antip^dobaptifm, exprefs'd fo fully,
without Referve, that I wonder Mr. Wall had the
Courage to infert 'em fo largely. But his Tran-
flation of 'em might have been more exa(ft : for
what he unintelligibly renders, 1 believe from the
Latin Tranfla tor whom he miIlakes,F<?r,rays it (viz..
the Canon) every one's own Choice is requifite that
they do profefs themfelves Followers <?/ Ch R i s T, and
it af fears by that Baftifm which they receive with a
willing Mind (which Words I can't find have any
Senfe) fhou'dbe englifh'd thus (to vary from him
as little as polTible) It fays^ in the Profejjlon of be^
coming Followers of Christ, every ones Choice is
requir'^d \ and by this it appears whether they come t^
Holy Baftifm with a willing Mind- The Truth of
what I fay will appear from the Original, if
you'll pleafe to compare it, which MrAVallh2i%
omitted, I fuppofe^ that his Senfe might pafs the
better.
Balfamon is as dired to the fame purpofe : for?,
alTigning another Reafon why the unborn Child
cou'd not be thought baptiz'd in the Mother's
Paptifm, befides this, that the Woman has nothing
comfnon in the matter of Baftifm with the Child in her
Womb'^ he adds^ They (viz. the Fathers of the
Council) fayy every Perfons own Profejfion is ncccf-
fary at Bavtifm \ but now the Child v.nborn^ being
void of all Senfe^ can^'t make the Profeffxons which
aretabe made a Baftifm, For thus I think the
Senfe better exprefs'd tnan as Mr. Wall has ren-
der'd the Paflage.
It
44 ^fleHtons on MrMslYs Let. i T
It appears from the whole, that Grotitu cited
thefe PafTages very properly, and they prove at
kaft, that Ignorance and want of Defire were a
good reafon againft baptizing fuch as were not
able to make and declare their Choice : And both
thefe Commentators exprelTing this fo amply,
have made it probable, that fuch Children at
that time were not, or however, according to
them, needed not be baptiz'd, efpecially if there
was no apparent danger of their Dying. Any
one who fhall read over their Comments with an
unbiafs'd Mind, will fee the Writers were as much
for the Liberty and Indifference of Paedobaptifm,
as either of the Gregorys^ and T'ertulllan is fup-
pos'd to have been ^ otherwife their arguing is
unaccountably abfurd. But I can't tell how to
think two fuch Men, and according to their In-
terpretation the whole Council too, fhou'd make
ufe of what Mr. Wall calls fuch leaden-headed
Logick*
{own Balfamon^ or perhaps fo me body elfe, has
fubjoin'd, at the end of his Comment, fome words
which allow Children may be brought to Baptifm
by Sponfors : the Place is a little obfcure, and I
Can't be pofitive of the perfed SquCq of it ^ but it
does not feem at all to do our Author the Ser-
vice he is willing to believe it does, kxtoc ri-
eevTot/, in the latter Claufe, fhou'd not be tran-
flated fo readily by Promlfe \ for the Profefiion,
requir'd at Baptifm, is exprefs'd every where elfe
in thefe Citations, by o/^o^o}^^ and o^xaKoy^^. But
let this be as it will, if Balfamon does here coun-
tenance Infant-Baptifm, 'tis no more than what I
have (hewn Grotlm did too \ and therefore thefe
words (hou'd not be urg'd againft him, fince they
are confiftent enough with l^^ Liberty aadlrtdife'
rencs he pleads for.
Mr.
Let. I . Htflory of Infant-^aptifm. 4 5
Mr. Wall endeavours to ftrehgthen his Suppofl-
tion, from the Difpute between St. j^vfiin and Pe-
lagiw. But this will do him no Service, if you
cx)nfider their Difpute was not, whether Infants
fhou'd be baptiz'd or no, but for what end they
were baptiz'd : and he fhou'd not have faid, they do
declare that they never read or heard of any Chriftians
that were againft Infant- Baftifm j but, which had
been truer, that JPeUgim did not contradid St.
Auftin^ when he declar'd he never heard of any
that deny'd Baptifm was given for Remljfon of
Sinsy as perhaps I may have occafion to fhew here-
after.
I beg leave now to apply what is faid above
more clofely to my Defign, by remarking, that
a Man, who is fo free with Perfons in fuch Repu-
tation, will take a much greater Liberty, 'tis to
be fufpeded, with the poor defpis'd Antipaedo-
baptifts ^ and I defire therefore you will be pleas'd
to read him with Diffidence and Circumfpeftion.
Nor indeed has he by abundance adted the Part
of a credible Hiftorian towaVds us *, tho he makes
a Shew of treating us with extraordinary Ten-
dernefsand Refped. But 'tis all aflum'd and hol-
low, and maybe eafily feen thro ^ and he conveys
his Afperfions the more fecurely by it, and with
lefs Sufpicion ftabs our Reputation. He care-
fully affeds to ftile us Antip^edobaptifts quite thro
his Book, becaufe forfooth he wou'd avoid calling
any Refledions on us ^ but he cou'd not forbear
difcovering how uneafy he is at the Reftraint he
laidonhimfelf: and fo after he has painted ^na-
baptifm in no very pleafing Colours, he as carefully
lets you know •^, Sir, we defervethat reproachful
Name, tho fmce we difown it, he has not given
it us.
T Part IL pag. 99.
4^ ^fleBions on A/r. Wall'j Let. i ■
I remembet three feveral Places, where he is
ib incautious. as. to, confefs he is in a very willing^
Hu^tiour to believe and fuppofe an^ thing, tho-
upon no ground, fo it does but fa-vour his De-
fign: So when he finds ^///^ had fa id, Perfons'
tame later to Baptifm in the Primitive Times than
nowa-daysy which is moft diredly to deny Infant-
Baptifm was pradis'd in the Primitive Church ^
Mr. Wallis fo hard put to. it, he can only relieve^
himfelf by refolving"^ to believe, if one were to
look over Bilius'j Writings, one jhou^d find that this
was not his fettled Opinion* He has the fame Dex-
terity in other Places, where he fays, u4ll I he^
lievethis learned Man woiid fay (for I have not the
Book) &C. and fo, for ought I know, do all the reft of
fJb^Eaftern, &c, a Sign he's powerfully inclined to
fancy what he pleafes fhou'd be true. How often he
ufes this notable Expedient, is not readily difco-
ver'd ', but;'ti$ very reafonably infer'd, from thefe
open ConfelTions, heimploys it where he is not fo
kind as to give us warning.
. He builds on this fort of Arguments, when he
wou'd reproach us with fomething he has no other
Evidence for V as, nliiy befeen by feveral PaiEges
in his Account of the frefent State of the Antipccdo-
baf lifts in E^igUnd : and of a-piece with it is his
foeafily receiving and officioufly reporting every
uncertain Rumour that had reach'd his Ears. If
he has but heard that any one, or a few Perfons at
moft, whocalFd themfelves, or were call'd by o-
thers An^ibaftifts^ have ever maintaiil'd or prac-
tis'dfuch things, as may enrage People againft us,
andexpofe us to the Scorn and Fury of the lefs
thinking bigotted part of thofe from whom we
diiTent, he does not forget it. Thus he infmuates,
'{that we countenance, at leaif , and have among
* Part II. p. 20. t Part !!• p, 223.
i
Lf 1. 1 . Hijlory of Infant-'Baptifm. 47
us, fome who deny the Human Kature of our
Lord Christ. This at belt is fpitefully e-
nough reprefented : - But I proteft, for my part I
donH know there-is -fo much as a fingk Man ia
our Body who dares impiouily deny fo great a
Fundamental of the Chrillian Faith. We are fure
fuchanone can be no Chriftian *, and if there be
any fuch, vvedifown'em all, and their pernicious
Herefy, which we are firmly perfaaded aims at
no lefs than the utter Deftrudion of Chrillianity
it felf As invidious is his relating the fcandalous
Story shout Mv. Hicks'^ which, were it as true as
it isfalfe, has been equal'd and outdone by fome
of our Author's Communion : and therefore not-
withftanding this, we may ftill be reckon'd as
loyal to the Governrfient as themfelves. But flnce
he is forc'd to confels,- that no more than two Per-
fons enly appear''d tH have been gvilty^ he Ought in
'Honour, and in refpeft to the Oaths of thofe of
hisown Party, to have left the Scandal in the Ob-
fcurity it deferves, e^r. lam,
S I R,
Jq'^U GALE,
Letter.
4?^ (J(efieaions on Mr.'^AYs Let.i:
Letter II.
The private Opwio^s of afew^ notjuflly inferted in the
H'tftory of the whole Body. There an probably ill Men
among us^as well as among others* Some of our Author^ s
invidious Jnfinuations. Our Advcrfarys^ inflead of
. railings Jljoud endeavour to convince tis fropi Ee-
velationy or Reafon^ or Antiquity. If their Reflec-
tions were true., our Reputation cant fujfer much.
We are not guilty of the hated Opinions A/r.Wall
loads Its with. Our Separation eafy to bejuflify^d.
Air. Wall has mt fufficiently fliewn wherein the
Sin of Schifm conffts. He only explains it in ge^
Keraly by Divilioii, Separation, &f. The true
. Notion of Schifm. It may either be lawful or nn^
lawful. Who are Schifmaticks. Not they who go
out from a Communion they were before join d with^
but thofe who unnecejfarily give cr take the Occa-
fion j or continue feparate without a jufl Caufe. It
being lawful in fome Cafes^ and unlawful in others
to feparate^ 'tis examined what will juftify a Sepa-
ration. Mr. VV^all'i DiflinBion between Funda-
mentals and Non-Fundamentalsy tho good in it felf^
is jnfujfcient^ unlefs he had determined what are
Fundamentals^ and what not, A Rule to know
thefe. Christ alone can determine what is Ne-
cejfary \ and what he has not exprefy made fo^ is
?wt fk^ ^Tis vfeful to difiinguijh between Things
necejfary to Salvation^ and Things only necejfary to
the Ciinft:itution of a true Gofpel-Church. This Dif-
tmclion TTcll 'grounded^ becaufe the Qualifications of
a Chriflian and a Church are very different. An
Error in what is ejfential to the Conft-itution of a
Church
Let. 2. Htflory of Infant-^aptlfm. 49
church only^ a fifffcient warraf/t to feparate from
a Community in Inch Error, Which is alfo con-
firmed from fome 0/ yl/r. Wall'j own Words, A-
greement in the Fundamentals of Religion not a
fufficient Reafo'a againfi Se-paration^ as Mr, Wall
woud urge it. Turnd again fi himfelf. Therefore
his Arguments tend to 720thing fo much as Confii-
fion, Tho it fjond be allow* d^ that we ought to
fuhmit all things purely indifferent^ to the Deter'
minations of our Superiors ^ this woud make hut
very little^ if at all^ in Air. Wairj* favour . It
does not follow-^ that Verfons who think they ought
not to renounce Communion for fmaller Ad'atters^
muft therefore co'rjftafitly conform i?i thofe thi-ngSy
a?id negleH: what they think is better. If the Ce-
remony s are not of fo much Confequence^ as to juf-
tify the Dijfenters in their Separation \ neither will
they jufiify the Church in fo iinnecejf^rily infiftlng
^n ""cm, Thefe things^ faid to be i;idi]fcre?it in
themfelveSf by being the occafions of Diviflons^
ceafe to he indijferent^ and become tinlawfuL
The Dijfenters are verily perfuaded^ the things for
which they dijfent^ arc not fo indifferent as is pre^
tended. The Church^' Power of making Laws for its
own Government^ of no fervice to -^r.Wall. Things
in themfelves lawful^ may be fo circumftantiatedj
as to become unlawful. As the Cafe fiands at pre-
^ fent^ the Dijfenters are obliged to dtffent from the
National Church. The uncharitable Obftinacy of
our Adverfarys, The Separation of the Antip^do-
baptifis particularly defended. Air. Wall pretends^
that tho they are right ^ they have no ground to fe-
parate. The Antip^dobaptifl Notion fated. The
Time and Alanner of receiving Baptifm^ fo far as
it relates to our prefent Difpute^ are Fundamentals.
That can^t be true Baptifm^ which differs from true
Baptifm. Our Separation juftify^d by the Definition
of a Churchy in the 19th /Article of the Church of
£ England.
5 o (I^efieFliom on M^. Walli Let. 2 .
England. iVe ought not to unite with Pcrfons wi-
ha^ti^d* True Saptiftn necejfary to Church-Mem'
herjJjip, The Words of the Inftitution^ thehefi Rule
by which to judg what is true Ba])tifm. We re*
fufe to communicate with the Church of England,
for the fame Reafon for which jhe refufes to xom^
municate with Ferfons jhe efieems tinhaftiz^d. Mr,
Wall'j Terms of Vnion very partial and unreafona-
hie. We are ohligd to the Toleration for the ge-
neral Forbearance Mr. Wall boafls of. And de-
Cire^ to remain in the Hands of her Majcfly and
P arUaments under G o^D^who have hitherto fo kind-
ly fecur^d us* A fair Propofal^ ' in order to eftablifh
Vnity among us. Mr. Wall a Friend to Perfecu-
t ions for Religion. The Conclufion.
SIR,
WHat I have already faid in my former, in-
Head of more, may ferve for a Specimen
of Mr. Wall's Moderation and Ingenuity. What
can be more unfair, than to reprefent and judg
of a whole Body by the odd fmgular Opinions
of a few particular Men in it? Mr. Wall^ and all
Men, wou'd juftly efteem him an abufive Hiito-
rian, who, reciting the Dodines of the Church
of England, fhouM charge her with the miferable
Abfurdity of the Church of Rome, Tranfubfian-
flat ion, only becaufe Biihop Bramhall fays, Ko ge-
nuine Son of the Church of England did every deny
the true real Prefence ', or the gainful Anicle of
Purtratory, becaufe Mr. Dodwell ^ has unaccounta-
bly aOertcd, and cited the Liturgys publiiVd by
Primate Vfhcr, to prove, that the Dead, not ex-
cepting the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apofiles, Martyrs,
and even the Blcjfed J^irgin herfelf, are now in Slavery
to the Devil: And adding in the next Page, that
* Epifto!ar\Difcourfc, p. 258.
by
Let . 2 . Hijlory of Infant'%xptifyn . 5 i
by this Slavery he does not mean they arc liable
to any Puniihments, bat only certain iMolefta-
^tions and Difjuietudes^ from which they A; may
he relieved by the Prayers of the Living. Had Bel-
larmine been to argue this Notion of a Purgatory
with Mr. Dodweilj he wou'd have dclir'd no grea-
ter Conceflions.
That Man wou'd be juflly blam'd, who Ihou'd
pretend the Church of England teaches C h r i s t's
Sacrifice of Himfelf was not Expiatory for Sin,
or that the Martyrs are capable of making the
like Expiation^ becaufe Mr, Dodiv ell in anotiier
place Ij ventures at the extravagant AfTertion,
that this Power and I'^irttie is common to Christ
avd His Afyftical Body : fpeaking more particular-
ly of the Primitive Martyrs making their Blood
almofb equally effectual with Chris t's, to the
purging away Sin ^ and accounting them fo many
expiatory Sacrifices for Sin ^ diredly contrary to
the Determination of the holy Penman, that
Christ, Heb. ix. 25. orxe in the End of the World
hath affetzr^d to put away Sin by the Sacrifice of Him-
felf (Cap. X. ver. 10.) Which was offered once for
alL fVer. 12.) One Sacrifice for Sins for ever.
(Ver. 14.) For by one Offering He hath perfecled for
ever them that are fanEhify^d. (Ver. 1 8.) And, There
is no more Offering for Sin.
'Twou'd be fhameful Injuftice to make the
Church anfwerable for all the ftrange, nay fomc-
times.^biafphemous and atheiftical Fancys, and
bad Actions of her pretended Sons. Too great a
part of the Clergy, 'tis notorious, are either o-
pen nonjuring Jacobites, or fecret, and therefore
more mifchievous, Highflyers \ entirely in the
f Eplliolary Dijcourje^ p. 259.
Ij DiiTertat. Cyprianic. 13. §. ^6, Et vero Nominjs Ratio
fuadet potius ut lit Virtus hsc CHR.ISTO cum ejufdem
Aiyjhco Corj'Ofe communis.
E 2 Pre-
52 ^flections on Mr.Wall'^ Let. 2.
Pretender's Interefl:, and as hearty Friends to
Popilh Tyranny and Superltition, as ever was the
Latidean Faction. What a Number is there of
'em, who glory in being call'd High-Church-Men,
and carefully keep up the Diftindion, notwith-
Handing the Q_aeenand Parliament have often de-
clared fuch to be dangerous Enemys to Church and
State ? But to afcribe the Difloyaltys, Corrup-
tions, and pernicious Do(5trines of thefe Men to
the Church, tho they have had the Fortune to
worm themfelves into fome Share of her Dig-
nitys, wou'd be difingenuous, and every honeft
Man wou'd abhor it.
Of the Twelve our LORD had chofen, one
was a Devil *, and I Ihall never pretend no fuch
have crept in among us, who, whether defigned-
ly or no, prejudice thofe they fheiter with, and
the Chriltian Religion in general. Undoubtedly,
there are privately among us, as well as others,
weak and ignorant, and perhaps too, fome ill-
meaning People, who are fond of peculiar Con-
ceits, and idle extravagant Notions of their own
framing. But this can be no fair Objedion to
the whole Body : For let any one fhew me the
Community whofe Individuals are all correct and
found, and not fome of 'em lingular and faulty ^
which hov;ever are but as the Wens and unna-
tural Excrefcences in the human Body, which
enter not into the Defcription of the Body, but
at molt are only counted accidental Irregularitys
it is liable too. - -
When Mr. Wall therefore, in order to make
us look the more monilrous, fhuffles into his Im-
partial Account, as he calls it, of our prefent
Opinions, the Freaks and Perfualions he has heard
a fingle Man, or a very few Perfons that have
been in our Party, maintain ^ it looks very piti-
ful in him, andean impofe only on fuch Readers
who are as willing to be deceiv'd as he delir'd. And
indeed,
Let. 2. Hijiory of Infant'(Baptifm. 55
indeed, fuch Readers only can bear his many mif-
chievous lafinuations ^ a fort of Ornament he
feems fond of. I can't comprehend what cou'd pof-
fibly be his Defign in his filly Excufe for Mr. Baxter^
who continu'd to charge us with a notorious
Falfi-iood, even after all proper Care was takea
to let him know it , nor what occafion he had for
his Innuendo, when he briefly mentions our Li-
berality to our Poor ) adding in an invidious Pa-
renthefis, that we attrad the Multitude by this
Artifice, and gain Profelytes to ftrengthen our
Party. I wonder in my Heart what he thinks 'tis
that attrads the Rich j for unlefs there are fnch,
the Poor are not like to be provided for : Is it
that they feek Opportunitys to difpenfe of their
good Things to the necefiltous and wretched ? I'm
afraid this wou'd be too great a Commendation
of 'em y and Mr. Wall woad not willingly be guil-
ty of fuch a Suppofition ', he rather feems defirous
to have it fuppos'd they are aded only by an un-
quiet faSious Spirit : for what elfe can be his
meaning in faying, "^They either out of Peevijlmefs,
or elfe being over-ferfuuded by their Leaders^ who fnd
their Account in continuing feparate Bodys^ whereof
they may be Headsy do refufe to join even in thofe
things wherein they agree in Opinion with us ?
Whyalfo does he fo ofcen upbraid us with ha-
ving had Jefuits found among us, and take the
Pains fo induftrioufly f to aggravate the Thing,
unlefs to make us thought al:roublcfom fadious
Party, and the Tools of difaffeded Men to divide
and weaken the Proteftant Intereft ? But fuch
Clamours only fhew Paflion and Diltafle in our Op-
pofers, and are no Demonftration they have ei-
ther Truth or Juftice on their lide, and that we
are in the Error. If thcfe zealoas Men wou'd cf-
"t Part I. p. 96. t Part 11. p. 282.
E 3 fedaally
54 ^flefiions onMr.WAYs Let.2.
fei^ually ruin our Caufe, they fhou'd leave railing,
and ufe their Strength to convince us from Reve-
lation, or the Principles of Reafon, or the Hif-
tory of the Primitive Church, that we are the
vile, novel, and humorous Seft they abufively
pretend. We invite 'em to the Trial, and are not
appreh^nfiveof being worfted in the IfTue • for we
bottom our Caufe on the liable Foundation of
Scripture, Reafon, and Primitive Pi adice. Does
it not look as if they were confcious that they
can do us no Hurt from thefe Topicks, by their
for faking thefe Arguments, and endeavouring to
opprefs us by more popular Arts? as if they
thought one of the molt prevailing Arguments a-
gainft us is, publiihing and perfuading People to
believe, that our Leaders are Romifh Priefts, or
Perfons who are their Retainers, and do 'em Ser-
vice. And they ufually ply us hard with thefe
Reflexions. Nothing can be more exemplary in
this kind, than the heroick Exploits of Feat/yy
Baxter^ and Rujfcti y to mention no more.
But as we have already, fo we fhall fee farther,
^s .w.e proceed, that Mv, M'^afPs Fidelity in rela-
tioii§ of this nature, is not altogether fo much to
be Trnftcd to, but we may fairly queftion the
Fafts : Beddes, were thefe things true, our Re-
putation can't faffer much ^ for every one muft
needs be fen fible, 'tis impoifible always to be aware
of thofeb'jfy Intruders, who wear any Shape, and
chufe to mix in Societys they think dangerous to
rJieir Dcirgns, to breed Corruptions and Diforders
there, -and then get themfelves difcover'd, in or-
der tol^y the whole Difgraceon the Societys, and
make them bear the Scandal. And Mr. IV^Jl might
have conliderM, that even the National Church
has not beta free from fuch Mafquers, who have
tbuad, Means ta open therafelves a Way to her
Frcfcrnieais and Profits. I need bring no other
Telti-
Let. z . H'lflory of Infant- 'Baptifm. 5 5
Teftitnony fure of this, than a "^ Speech made in
Parliament, February 9, 1640. by the Great Lord
Falkland^ a true Friend of the Church, according to
the Charader given him by our late ^^ Noble Eng-
lilh Thucydidesy who was himfelf too as firm a Pa-
tron of the Church as by Law eftablilh'd, as any
in his Time ^ and that noble Lord's Complaint,
therefore, can't be judg'd to come from Envy or
Detradion.
But left all this Oiou'd not be effedual to exppfe
us fo much as he cou'd wi(h ^ to fhew his real
TeriderriefstQyN ^rds us, he loads us farther with
fome of the moft infamous and hated Opinions,
which the generality of Chriftians difown, and the
warm and eager anathematize with the greateft
Fury. , And this Addition, perhaps, he thinks
will weigh down our Scale.
If, indeed, the Things he taxes us with were
true, 1 wou'd be filent on the Pointy but they
are fo notorioufly falfe, that I admire any Man,
efpecially one of Mr. Wall's Order, cou'd perfuade
himfelf tQ accufe us of 'em. Socinianifm is one
of the blackeft heretical Tenets, with moft Peo-
ple, that infefts the Chriftian World : 'tis com-
monly thought fo derogatory to our Redeemer's
Honour, and fo inconfiftent with the Fundamen-
tals of Chriftianity, that all its Abettors may be
juftly treated like Infidels, and open Enemys of
God and Religion. This, Mr. Wall knov^s, is
much the more prevailing Temper, as well as it
feems to be his own. And therefore, to expofe
us to a general Contempt, and to draw this O-
dium upon us, he takes care to inform you, that
i* we have many Socinians among -us : infinuating as
if we countenanc'd 'em f> and that \ the old Here-
- ^ Rufhworth. Vol, \. p, 1^4. ** lor^ Clarendon,
t Part II. p. 222. !j lb. p. 265.
E 4 ticb ,
56 ^feHions m MrAVall'^ Let.i.
tich^ fome of \m^ denfd Him (viz. CHRIST)
tohe G OD'^ and others of V w denyd Him to he frO'
ferly Man : But thefe^ fays he, deny both^ and fay^
He is neither GOD, nor -proferly Man*
'Tis ftrange, any one fhou'd have the Face
fo boldly to afHrin this, when himfelf, and all that
are acquainted with us, know it to be utterly
falfe. There are fuch, I know, in the Church of
England^ tho Ihe defervedly difclaims 'em ^ and
there may fecretly be fome with us \ and fo iu all
Partys : but they are fo uncommon, or fo con-
eealM, that I don't know fo much as one among
us. And I need only appeal to our Author him-
felf, to jallify us from his own Calumny \ for at
another time, when he's not in quite fo ill an
Humour, he confelFes, that tho we || have fome
Socinians who creep tn among vSy yet I have not heard,
fays he, of any Church or Congregation of '^777, that
makes Profejfion of that DoEirine ', but on the contrary j
that they that frofefs it openly^ are rejeBed from their
Commimio:^, And pray, what can we, or any
Church in the World, do m.ore to cleanfe our
felves of that Leprofy ? and yet he cou'd fuffer
himfelf to accufe us of holding thofe very Opinions,
he here owns we endeavou^i' to root out. Can
this. Sir, and the other things I've been noting,
flow from an honeft good Mind ?
I wou'd omit other Miftakes, &c. o^ lAr.Wall',
as his charging PeLigUnifwy and holding the Mor-
tality of thv Soul^ upon us ; v^hich are very falfly
imputed, in order to come to the grand Queftion
between us : but what he fays of the Non-Necef-
fity a-rid Unreafonablenefs of our Separation muft
ilot be paiVd over without a Reflection, it feem-
ing to be defign'd to render us odious, by infinu-
l Part II. p, 275.
ating,
Let. 2. Hifiory of Infant-'Bdptifm. 57
ating, how much our cenforious quarrelfom Spirit
delights in Fradions and Divifions.
Tbe Kecefllty and Reafonablenefs of a Separa-
tion from the Eftablidi'd Church, you kaow, Sir,
have been copioufly treated by feveral eminent
Men 7 and I think it no hard matter to vindicate
ours from the ftrongeft Objedions rais'd againft
it: But this is not the Place, 1 (hall therefore on-
ly make a fhort Reply to what Mr. Wall urges,
becaufe his Reprefentation of the Thing may
polTibly too much have its defign'd EfFedb> and do
us a prejudice with your felf, Sir, or others, into
whofe Hands thefe Letters may fall.
Mr. Wall begins his laft ^ Chapter, which he-
calls a Dijfuafive Jrom Separation ^ with an Account
of the great Sin and Mifchief of Schifm, which,
he obferves, all Men allow to be of a very hei-
nous ISJature ;, and he ought in Charity therefore,
to fuppofe all Men as follicitous to avoid the
Guilt of it as himfelf ^ and kindly in afTifting 'em
to fiee from the Wrath which is to come^ he fhou'd
not only warn 'em of the Evils it produces,
which they are already convinced of, but plainly
fhew wherein the Sin conlifts, that they may
ihun it the better. He has not done this diltind-
ly enough, but conftantly exclaims againfl Schifm,
without ever giving the true Notion of it, and
proving particularly what it is, which was the
Bulinefs of the Chapter. Had he clearM up this,
and then convided us of it, he had triumph'd^
andwewou'd have immediately put an end to our
Separation.
Inftead of this, he only explains it in general,
by Bivifion^ Separation^ and breaking the Vnity *, and,
to make all Separatifts from himfelf as black as
may be f, wou'd have this Separation in general
* PartU. p. 382, t Part II. p. 585.
believ'd
5 8 (^flcBwns on Mr. Wall V Let. 2.
believ'd no better, than what Sr. Taul calls Here-
fy. And yet certainly he wou'd not have us un-
derftand all Divifions, 6'r. are culpable Schifms ^
for he fuppofes it lawful to feparate on account
of Difference in Fundamentals, tho even then
(which looks like a Contradiction) there is]] a
Sin he feems to fay in the Separation. So that
he leaves the thing very obfcure, and, by feme
Paffages, feems to think he may lawfully fep:^ratQ
from all who don't agree with him •, but they^
on the other hand, can't forfake him without a
great Sin. Hence you fee, Sir, how neceffary it
-was to fix the right Notion of Schifm, if our Au-
thor had intended his Dilfuafive ihou'd have had
any Succefs.
Briefly to fupply this Defect : Tho S;)/cr/-^oe,you
l^now, Sir, fignifies literally a bare Rent or Divifwn^
yet in the Ecclefiaftical Senfe it either relates to the
bilTenfions among the Members of the fame parr
ticular Church, as i Cor. xi. 18. or more comr
monly, as alfo in our prefent Difpute, '^tis us'd
for a needlefs and unjuft occafioDiiig the Body of
Chrift's Church, which is but one, to be torn inr
to different Communitys. 'Tis not fo much th^
a6:ual feparating, as the unjuftly cauHngit, :is the
Sin. Schifm, ' in the large Senfe of the WorcJ^
may be lawful or unlawful, as 'tis apply'd to one
or t'other Party \ for the Divifion or Separation is
rfvjtual, and relates equally to both Sides that dlf-
'agree. Now Mr. Wall ufes the word undctermi-
Lately^ and, which renders what he fays per-
plex'd, confounds the different Meanings of it.
That we may proceed more clearly, I intend by
Schifmaticks flich as unnecellarily caufe Divifions,
and by Schifm 'th^ great Sin fuch are guilty of
In this Seafe only Schifin is to be condemn'd as
'-^ - "■'*' ' unlawtitl ;
Let. 2. Hiftory of Infant-^aptt/m. 5 9
unlawful*, and thus St. P^m/, by a Peripbrafis^calls
Schifmaticks not Separates barely, but "^ fuch as
cavfe Divifions. This I take to be the peculiar and
proper Import of the Word, as it has been, and
is now usM in the Church.
Hence it follows, that not fo much they who
go out from a Communion they w^ere join'd with
before, are the Schifmaticks, as thofe who rafhly
and unjultly either give or take occafion fo to fc-
parate. Thus if the Church of Rome^ by her Ido-
latrys and other Corruptions, makes it juft and
neceflary to divide from her, Ihe commits the
SchiHn or Separation, by rendring the Terms of
Communion founfafeand impradicable, and not
our Forefathers, who wifely follow'd the Apo-
Itle's Counfel, to -f- come out from among ^em.
In like manner, if any Church, thro length of
time, and the Prefumptions and Mifmanagemcnt
of her Governors, degenerate into dangerous Er-
rors and Corruptions, and a few Perfons obferv-
ing it make proper Application to have 'em re-
drefs'd, and no Care is taken upon it^ thofe few
wifer and more confcientious not only lawfully
may, but are indifpenllbly bound to renounce the
Communion of fuch unreafonable Bigots. The
other Side, tho, as it generally happqns, by far
the Majority, are the Schifmaticks, in' adhering
fo obilinately to their Corruptions, which are
incompatible with the Purity of a Church of
Christ, and refufing to join with the others in
a Reformation of thofe Abufes, and endeavour-
ing to reduce themfelves to a nearer Conformity
with the Primitive Church.
The Cafe will be much the fame in regard to
thofe who never were in Union, if they continue
feparated upon infufficient Grounds from a 5o-
^- Rom. xvi. 17. f aCor. vi.i^.
ciety.
^o (^efleBions on M'.WallV Let. 2.
ciety -, which, if compar'd, has more Propertys
of a Church than themfelves. This is formal
Schifm, which, as I faid, is being feparate and di-
vided, without juft Caufe, from a true Church.
And this will make it difficult for feveral Mem-
bers, the Church of England is troubled with, to
clear themfelves from the Guilt of Schifm, in ac-
knowledging that at Rome for a true Church, and
yet fcparating from her, if they are feparated, and
not, as many fufpecl, her real Friends, and recon-
cile to her in their Heart ^ tho for Deiignsbell
known to themfelves, they affed to appear other-
wife^and fo reproach her with Schifm underhand, in
fuch manner as may not expofe 'em to her Cenfure.
To return : By what has been faid, the Mat-
ter is brought to this Iflue, that thofe who un-
juilly give^occafion to feparate from the true
Church, and thofe who unjuflly take it, with
fuch alfo as continue ununited without fufficient
Caufe, are alone Schifmaticks in the Scripture-
S<:R^t^ which is the right ^ and are therefore fair-
ly reckoned Enemys of the Crofs and Catholick
Church of Chris T.
But now fmce 'tis lawful in fome Circum[lance$
to renounce Communion, and fmful in others, it
concerns us to examine what thofe Circumftances
are, which may make Separation Schifmatical or
not '^ and indeed here the main Difficulty lies.
Mr. W'^^// offers to explain it, by diftinguifhing
between fundamental Points, and fuch as are not
of the Foundation. An Error in the Fundamen-
tals of Religion^ he fays ■^, does pit a Bar to our
Communion with thofe that teach it> But for Mif-
takes in matters of lefs moment, he thinks we
have St. Paul'j DireHion and Order to bear with one
another^ and receive one another into Communion^ not-
I Part II. p. 3^5.
withflanding
Let. 2 . Hifiory of Infant-^ aptifm. 6 1
withfianditig thofe Differences \ which indeed it muft
be allow'd are not fuflicient to warrant fo del^
perate a Remedy as Separation* But this Diftinc-
tion, tho good in it felf, will however do little
Service in the Cafe before us, becaufe we are ftill
to determine which are Fundamentals, and which
are not *, and 1 don't remember Mr. Wall has
touch'd upon this : Neverthelefs, I obferve, he
has made fome Articles fo, which I and Thou-
lands befides can by no means grant him. Til
not iingle 'em out, becaufe they fignify little to
our prefent Difpute ^ but I mention'd the thing in
grofs, to fhew how requiute it was for him to
have taken fome care to fettle this Matter.
The Subjed is too large for me to handle it
thorowly: I fhall therefore fatisfy my felf with
laying down but one Rule, which I believe will
not be controverted, and perhaps might eafily be
ihewn to be a very certain univerfal Guide to
direct us at all times to diftinguilh Things A^fc-^/l
(ary and Effential^ from Vfeful only. Not all
things plainly contain'd in the Scriptures, as fome
€xprefs themfelves too generally, but fuch aUm
as exficitely^ or by very flam Confeq^eme^ fo as all
Men^ even the mo ft ignorant and fmfle^ by fairly read-
ing and confderivg^ may difcern them to he decUr'd
neceffary in the Scripture^ which is our only infallible
Guide on Earthy are aU the fundamental and necef-
fary Articles of the Chriftiun Church and Faith.
To illuftrate it by an Example ^ 'tis faid diredly,
that after they had fung an Hymn^ they went out int^
the Mount of Olives ^ and, in ajiother place, that
Saul was confenting to Stephen'^ Death : neither of
which is a neceflary Article that will endanger a
Man's Salvation who queftions it, or is ignorant
of it, or, if it cou'd befuppos'd, Ihou'd mifun-
derftand it. But when the Lord fays, i:his is
Lfe Eternal^ that they might know Thee the only
true
6t ^flecliom onMr.W^lYs Let. 2.
true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thouhafi
fern ^ and again, Vnlefs ye eat my Fleflj^ and drink
my Bloody ye have no j>art in me ^ and, without faith
it is im^ojfihle to fleafe Gov: Konc can be fo
blind as not to fee that thefe, and many other fuch
Paflages, are Points abfolutely neceflary to Salva-
tion under the Gofpel.
Our Lord, and He only, can teach us what
things he indifpenfibly requires of all to whom
his Gofpel is preach'd •, and we having' no way
to know his Will but by fearching the Scriptures,
it can't be queflion'd but their Authority muft be
enough to determine the Things, which really
are, and ought to be accounted neceflary or not
neceflary by us ; for no Power can alter what our
Lord has there eftablifli'd.
'Twill be convenient here, to diflringuifli be-
tween things necefi^ary only to Salvation, and
thofe which are necefl^ary to the rightful Confl;i-
tution of a true Gofpel- Church : for thefe are
far from being one and the fame. It wou'd be
needlefs to go about to fhew that, this Diftinc-
tion is well grounded ^ but Mr. Wall feeming not
appris'd of it, or not to own it, 1 will venture to
fay fomething to confirm it.
In order to this it may be obferv'd, the Qiiali-
fications which make a true Chrifl:ian, and which
conftitute a true Church, are difi^erent. The Fun-
damentals of Chrifl:ianity may be found in a lin-
gle Man, but a Angle Man can't have all the Eflen-
tialsof a Church : And farther, a Body of Men
rnay be good Chrifliians, Orthodox in all Funda-
mentals, and yet not able to form themfelvesinto a
Church. 'Tis necefls.ry indeed, that Church-Mem-
bers be true ChriRians, and free from funda-
mental Errors •, but this alone does not conftitute
Vm a Church, which is not only a Body of faith-
ful IVxn abd Wonien, but they mull be united to-
gether
Let. 2. Htftory of Infant'^aptifm. 6 3
gether in Chri si's Name, fo as that among
them may be orderly pertorm'd the feveral Dutys
required in a Chriftian Church.
: Thus the Parliament for inftance, and all our
pther Civil Society s, we'll charitably fuppofe, are
good Chriilians^ that hold the Truth in all God-
linefs and Honelly •, yet no body fure can pre-
tend, when they are aflembled in their Houfes
finder their Speakers, their fole Heads as Parlia-
tnents, they are then a rightly conftituted Church,
where the Ecclefiaftical Offices may be legally exe-
cuted. So that tho Perfons may hold all the necef-
fary Articles of Chriftian Religion, by which
they are, according to the New Covenant in
Christ's Blood, intitled to Salvation ^ yet on
fome other accounts they cannot be thought to
conflitute a true Church.
The Confequence therefore is unavoidable, that
the Fundamentals of Chriftian Religion, and a
Chriftian Church, are not altogether the fame :
And 1 think 'tis prov'd ^Ifo from the Authority
of the Church of England^ which makes the due
Admifliftration of the Sacraments eflential to the
Being of a true Church, and yet charitably grants
that of Rome to be in a falvable State ^ tho, for
fome Reafons, their Salvation cannot but be
thought very hazardous, and muft'be fo as by
Fire.
One of the neceftary Qualitys of a true Church
is, the Edification of the Meml)ers, which is our
Lord's great end in founding Churches on
Earth. If therefore all other Kecellarys are re-
tain'd, and by fuperititioufly adding fome things,
and prefumptuouily altering others", the Conver-
fion of Sinners, and the Edification of Believers
is not promoted but hinder'd, that Church can-
not be counted a true one.
I Ag;iia :
^4 ^fleclions onMr.W<i\Vs Let. 2.'
Agaia : To iniftake in the Notion of a Churchy
and deny there ought to be an Order of Ferfons
lawfully ordain'd and fet apart for the Aita? , to
preach the pure Word of God, and adnuxTifter
the Sacraments, is an Error we may fall into,
vv'ithout endangering our Salvation, or the Foun-
dations of Chriftian Religion.
If the Divine Right of Epifcopacy be queftion'd,
and the Nonjuiing Bifhops rejeded by the more
judicious Part of the Church of England^ and the
Chimera of uninterrupted Succellion given up, tho
we fliou'd fuppofe them in the wrong and Mr. Dod^
well in the right, he was certainly much too hafty
in charging the prefent Church of England with
Schifm and Herefy too •, for tho thofe things
fhou'd deftroy the Being of a true Church, they
do not endanger a Man's Salvation : So that I
infer from the Principles of thefe rigid High-
flyers, who difovvn the prefent Conltitution, and
account themfelves another Church, different from
that by Law EllablilhM, which they openly call
Schifm at ical and Heretical, that all the ElTentials
of a Church are not necellary to Salvation. But
on the other hand, you are to obferve. Sir, tho
to be right in the ElTentials of a Church is not a
Fundamental of Religion *, yet to be right in the
Fundamentals of Religion, is a neceflary Article
of a true Church ; the Fundamentals of a Church
including the necellary Articles of Chriftianity,
but not vice versa. I fpeak of a particular vifible
Church, not of the univerfal invifible One, which,
perhaps, has no other Eflentials than the necelTary
Articles of the Chriftian Religion •, for every true
Chriftian is a Member of the Catholick Church,
tho he ftiou'd happen not to be in Communion
with any vilible one. Is there not an apparent
Diftinclion now between things neceflary to make
a true Chriftian, and to m.ake a true Church t
The
Let.zl Hijlory of Infant'^aptifm. 6^
The firll: muft be in every Member, but the others
can be in the Aggregate or Body only.
'Twas not enough then for Mr. Wall to fay, in
general, that a DifTerence in Fundamentals is a
fufficient ground of Separation, becaufe it ftill
remains a Queftion, whether both kinds of Funda-
mentals juftify it ? and if not, which fort can do it ?
By thetenour of the Chapter, he feems to mean the
Fundamentals of Religion only, taking no notice
of the others : But it may be ask'd, whether an Er-
ror in what relates to the Fundamental Conftitu-
tion of a Church only, will not warrant a Sepa-
ration from a Church in fuch an Error ? One
wouM think this cou'd not poffibly be deny'd :
for let the neceffary Qualifications, efrential to the
very Being of a Church, be what they will ^ if
they are any of 'em wanting in a Community, of
confequence there can be no Church *, and we not
only may, but ought to withdraw our felves from
it : for 'tis only Schifm to feparate from a true
Church, and not from one fo corrupted.
For Inftance : If a Civil Society, which we'll
fuppofe to be perfedly right in all the Fundamen-
tals of Religion, ihou'd at any time prefume to
call themfelves a True Church of Chrift, and ac-
cordingly, without ^e proper Qualifications, af-
fume the Sacred Offices, and adminifter the Holy
Sacraments ^ I'm no way oblig'd to unite with 'em *,
or if already united, to continue fo ^ but on the
contrary, to come out from 'em, and difown their
Prefumption.
We fee from hence, 'ds commendable in us to
feparate from any Body of Men, tho perfectly Or-
thodox in the fubftantial Articles of our molt ho-
ly Religion, merely on account of their Errors in
things which relate to the Fundamental Con-
Ititution of a Church. And tho Mr. Wall^ as
F 1 faid.
66 ^fleEtions on Mr. WallV Let. 2.^
i faid; dbes nat mention this Diftindion, or per-
haps may, not be willing to admit it; yet I have
jufl ."recollected a Paifage^, where, in effea:, he ac-
knowledges all I have faid. After he has enume-
rated fbme (for I fuppofe he does not pretend 'em
to be all) Fwadamental jirticles of our Faith ^ on ac-
count of ferrors in. which a Separation is on all
ha'flfds allow'd lawful,* he adds, ^ But there are^
befides thofe that hdld fuch DoEhrines ^ferniclous to the
Foundation^ , ahundai^ce of Chrifiian's. t'hat hold the
fame Faith In aU Fundamental Points^ rvho'do y/t live
in Divifohs and Separatiof/y. difownin^ and renouncing
one another s Communion. Tis pity \ l?ut thefe fioud
be reduced to the Vriity which CHBs.l'st'i Bodyre^
^I'h'thei^. Words;; li'd'''p^^^^^ ^ujfjpfelTes''^' ■sLcrety
may hold f^r fame Faith it! all Fundamental Points^
as he grants at lea^ ^me of the Diffcnters do,
aild yet not have .Pb\^er tO conftitute a true
Church •,' for if thay. were fo, they wou'd be the
fame Cbarcti and Body df C hr i st, and no more
divided than the parti^eular Bodys"af'the Church
of fw^te^are: btit he denys, this to the Dif-
fehter^, * %. his tkmirig . their (ibrlduQ: in the
Matter.; ;;"';':'' ''"" " ' : ,j *■■ '
'. .Bjr tiiii Paffage aifp it appear$,\ o'ur Author
can hot '(inly allow it lawful \i\ fome cafes, but
even urge It as a Duty, to feparate from a Com-
munity which calls it felf a Church,- and holds
all the Fundamental Points of Faith^ folcly on ac-
count of {b.me other things, in which he fuppofes
it' defective. Now, if this Society is a true
Church, Mr. Wall will not pretend 'tis a Duty to
fepar^ie^ffbrn fuch a one. By advifing the Mem-
bers of tnat Society, therefore, to leave it, and
unite themfclves, to the Church of Endand^ he
■:.C., .'....'.'. . _. < -■■■•■ 5^
f-. ■ '■ ,- — = ■ '
"'» Part U. pe 38;^.
\. implys.
Let. 2. Hiflory of Infant-^aptifm. 67
implys, there are fome other things necefTary to
the Conllitution of a true Church, befides Ortho-
doxy in Fundamental Articles of Faith *, and plain-
ly enough afferts, that we ought every one to
renounce fuch a Commuxiion, while deltitute of
thofe necelfary things, whatever they be.
If 'tis lawful then to feparate from fuch Chrif-
tians as we agree with in Fundamentals of Faith,
^xis ftrange our Author ftiou'd make this fame
Agreement his only Reafon againft a Separation,
as you fee he does in the Words cited, as well as
in feveral other places. Since they hold all the
Fundamental Points^ he fays, they ought to unite,
and not feparate *, and yet,^ thofe who hold all the
Fundamental Points^ lawfully may, and are fome-
times bound in Duty to feparate from one ano-
ther. This looks like fomething of an Abfurdi-
ty, not eafy tp be reconcil'd, and which unwary
Men only can' be guilty of. I believe 'twou'd
puzzle you. Sir, to guefs his Meaning, unlefs it
be, that none may lawfully feparate from the
Church of England that hold the fame Faith in all
Fundamental Points^ becaufe he is of that Church,
and the DiiTenters are oblig'd to leave their
Churches, whereof our Author is not a Member,
tho agreeing in the fame Faith in all Fundamental
Points, and join therafelves to his Communion.
But I'm enclin'd to believe, our Author will have
the Mortification to fee, notwithltanding the
great Authority he afiumes, that few, if any, will
lay fo much Strefs on his Example, as merely on
account of that, or any thing he has written,
fo eafily to for fake their own Churches, and
fondly join themfelves to his.
But, befides the Fallacy of this Arsumcnt, it
turns as ftrongly upon himfelf, and the Church
whereof he's a Member : for let us put the 11 e-
verfe, and fay, (which is true) the Church of Eng-
F 2 Und
6% (I{efieBionsonMr.'W:i\Ys Let.a:
la^d is feparate from and difowns the DiflTenters,
as well as the Dlfienters are feparate from her :■
and if Agreement in the Fundamental Articles of
Faith alone, according to Mr. Wali^ is fufficient to
render Separation unlawful*, I ask, on this Sup-
pofition, whether 'tis not as much the Duty of the
Chujxh, as of the DifTenters, to end the Separa-
tion by conforming ?
1 can't, 1 confefs, fee but both fides are equally
afiefted with the Argument : for if 'tis incumbent
on all in general to unite to thofe they agree with
in the Fundamentals of Faith, without refpeding
any thing elfe ^ the Obligation is as binding on
the Church to conform to the Dillenters, as it
can be on the DilTenters to conform to the
Church.
And if fo, to what purpofe then does our Au-
thor infill; fo much on this fingle Topick, which,
if it does any thing, is as full againft the Church
he undertakes to defend, as againft any other that
holds the fame Fundamentals in Faith ?
The Reafoning of this Chapter, therefore, (tho
I'm far from thinking it his Dclign) if juftly pur-
fti'd, V70u'd produce Confufion and Obftinacy ra-
ther than any thing elfe. For it makes it necef-
fary for the Dillenters to alter their own Confti-
tution, and receive that of the Church of Eng-
land ^ which is oblig'd at the fame time, and for
the fame Reafon, to quit her Conftitution, and
receive that of the Dillenters : and when this is
done, the Separation will continue ftill as wide as
before, and they muft change back again, and fo
go on in a conftant Round ^ unlefs to fix the Mat-
ter, one fide fliall finfully refolve to adhere to
their old Form, in order to afford the other a
pofiibility of knowing and performing their Duty.
But 'twou'd be endlefs to trace this winding Maze
of numerous Abfurditys quite thro. Mr. IVail in-
deed
Let. 2* JHi/iory of InfantSapti/?n. 6^
deed thinks there is a great difparity between
the Church of England and the Diflenters, and
therefore the Argument does not oblige both
alike.
Thfy agree, 'tis true, in all Fundamentals of
Religion, and the Diffv^n'ence between 'em is, in
his opinion, concerning things of far lefs Moment,
and in which that Church has fignally the Advan^
tage, in that Ihe is Eftablifh'd by the Civil Au-
thority of the Land ^ and therefore in all things
of an indifferent nature, ought to have the Pre-
ference, and be obey'd : and the DilTenters not
Handing on the fame Foot, ought to fubmit all
fuch things, and acquiefce in her Determina-
tions.
Suppofing this, and that nothing can be more
jufl and reafonable than in things purely indif-
ferent, to be regulated by our Superiours '^ xMr.
Wall mufl; take this along with him as the Gonfe-
quence, That if any of the diflcnting Partys
ihou'd become the National Church by the Civil
Power, they wou'd have a right to the fame
Privileges : for what the Magillrate's Eftablifh-
ment gives to one, it cannot but give to ano-
ther ^ and ^o what the Church of England is en-
titled to, here, by her Civil Eftablifhment, may
be as juftly claim'd by the Presbyterian Churches
in Scotland and thofe of the Vnited-Provinces^ and
by the Lutherans in Prujjla^ Sweden^ and Den-
t7tark \ and if fo, th(^y muft be fuppos'd to want
no Ellentials to the Conftitution of a true Church
of Christ. 'Twill be as great a Sin and Schifm,
then, for any, even of the Church of England iu
felf, to divide from their Communion in thofe
States, as 'tis tor the Diflenters to feparate from
the National Church here. And this feems to place
the Nature and Guilt of Schifm in nothing fo
much, as in the departing from any Church ella-
F 3 bliiVd
70 1{efleBwns on Mr.W^iWs Let.i.
bliOi'd by the Law of the Land. And therefore our
Author fays, "^ The Church of England wou^d not
approve of a Schifrh that Jhdu'^d be fet vp in any other
Churchy tho it were for the introducing thofew'ays of
Woyfloip which they have pre fcrib^d. But we fe^ how
true this is, by their building Churches, and fendr
ing their Miniflers abroad *, and from my Lord
Clarendons and Dr. Morley's refufing to corama-
nicate with the French Proteftants, under Mon-
fieur Claude *, and my Lord Sciidarnore'% withdraw-
ing from the Church at Charenton, And the Com-
mons^ in a very memorable Declaration they drew
up in the 19th of James I. fay. That If his Majefly
cannot by Treaty procure the Peace and Safety of his
Children abroad^ and of the true Profcjfors (in foreign
Parts') of the fame Religion profefs'd by the Church of
England, they wou'^d^ to their utmofl Power^ with
their Lives and Fortunes^ affift him fo^ as that he
may be able to do it with his Sword,,
If there is no other Reafon why the Diflentet^ ;
fhouM unite with the Church, but her being fop-
ported by Law, for in all other refpeds theyVe
fuppos'd equal, the Crime can pe very little, if
at all, lefs in the latter than "in the former j and
the Schifni mufl: be at lead; almofl equally finful in
both, 11 nee there is no eifential Ground, accords
ing to the Cafe fuppos'd, on either fide, to juftify
their Separation.
'{" f^arious Ceremonys^ Forms and Afethods of or-
dering Church-Matters J \\ particular Collets or Pray-
ersj or Claufes of Prayers^ IVlr. Wall thinks fhou'd not
beeftecnl'dby the Difientcrs a fufficient Caufe of
Reparation, But he knows the impoiingthefe things
is thought a 'fufficient Reafon, and llrongly urgd
as fuch too : and tho Tome can venture to g6
with him thus tar, that upon the Suppofitioa
"^ Pnrr n. p. 294, t Part n, p. $92. i Part II. p. 897?
Let. 2; Hlftory of hjfant-^aptifin. 7 1
thefe things do not evert the Foundation, as he
fomewhere phrafes it, nor appear inconfiftent with
the Fundamentals of the Chriftian Church and
Religion^ they are then, indeed, no good Rea-
fon why any one Ihou'd renounce the Commumon
of thofe , S,ams who are pleas'd with thefe Cere-
mony?, C^c. yef the fame Perfons think it will
not therefore follow, that they rauft conftantly
conform to all thofe things, being verily perfuaded
they may have the liberty notwithftanding, com-
monly to exercife fuch Ceremony s only, as they
like better, and think are more for God's Ho-
nour and the Good of their Souls. After this
manner, Mr. Wall in efFed allows ^ they might
Itill continue to be the fame Church ^ for as long
as they don't renounce one another's Communion,
but communicate together as fhou'd feem conve-
nient, they'll fcarcely be more different than Ca-
thedrals, Chappels, and Parifh-Churches, whofe
Forms differ very much in feveral Particulars ;
fome chufmg the Cathedral VVorfhip, and others
the Parochial, and yet continuing to be the fame
Church.
Whether thiswou'd be granted or no, Mr^Wall
cannot poffibly deny, but that if thofe Ceremonysy
&c. are not of fo much confequence as to juftify
a Separation, and that therefore the Diffenters are
to blame in feparating on their account ; for
the fame reafon, any Church, which unneceilarily
infifts on thefe things fo ftifly, is full as acceffary
to the Separation, and as guilty of it, and per-
haps more guilty, than the f Diffenters them-
felves.
F 4 For
* Part II. p. g9<5.
f This, with all its Confequencesy tho they bear fo hard m
fuch Cburcbesy is fully aUow'd 4P feveral Turns by the rparmeft
of
7 1 ^fleFlions on Mr.^slYs Let. i1
For tho Ihe may think the Ceremonys decent
and ufefnl, &c. yet being of an indifferent Nature
at beft, they may either be us'd or laid afide, as
fhall be found mod: convenient •, and there is no more
neceflity from the things themfelves, for the ufe
than the difufe of 'em : wherefore rigidly to refolve
to introduce 'em into the Church, ' or maintain 'em
there, is unnecelTarily giving Occafion to others
not fo well fatisfy'd, to difown thofe things, and
the Church which impofes 'em.
And thus the common Pretence of their Ufe-
fulnefs ceafes *, and inftead of it, they become pre^
judicial, by creating Divifions, which alters the
Cafe quite, and renders 'em not merely indifferent,
but unlawful. For tho they are indifferent in
themfelves, 1 hope our Author w^on't imagine 'tis
of our Adverfarysy who really ruin their own Caufe, and give up
all the Djjft-nters as^ -' Thus one of 'em particularly, who is
tffually very angry, fays, We may partake of other Mens
Sins, by giving Offence or fcandalous Example. As Men
are Members of Society, they ftand refponfible not only for
the poiitive Legality of the Anions, as confidefd in them-
[elves, and their own Natures, folely with refpeU to the
Subjeil: Matter of them ; but nlfo for their Relative Con-
fequences, as they may ajfe^ the Confciences of Others,
to which we are bound by the Laws of Charity to give no
VioUtion, Difturbance, or occafion of Tranfgrefmg \ and in
all our Deportment, to confnlt not only its Lawfulnefs, but
its Decency and Expediency, with regard to our Brethren,
againft whom we may fin, C^^ 5?. Paul fays, in the ad-
mirable State of this Cafe, i Cor. viii. ic ) and wound
their weak Confciences, and fin againft C H R I S T.
7hus the Abufe even of an innocent Liberty 'cannot be juf-
tify'd by a good Intention ; and we are liable to anjwer
for the Fall of fhofe to whom we become a Stumbling-Block
and u Rock of Offence. Dr, SacheverellV Sermon at the
Affixes hdd at Dcxh'j, Aug. 15. 1709. Page 12.
In giving Offence by our Anions, we ufe our Liberty for
A Cloak of^Malicioufnefs ; and mak^ what WQu'd be otherwife
Jnnocent, Culpable: Ibid, p. 14.
an
Let. 2 . Hijlory of Infant- 'Baptifm. 7 5
an indifferent matter whether they prove an occa-
fion of rending the Body of CHRIST, nor
queftion its being far better, and, to be plain,
their indifpenfable Duty too, rather to alter and
wholly give up what themfelves account fo ii>.
different, than by retaining 'em, to endanger and
break the Unity of the Church, which they find
is impoffible to be preferv'd while they are re-
tained.
'Tis ftrange Men can exclaim fo bitterly againft
Schifm, (and God knows the Sin is black enough)
and at the fame time know in their Confciences^
they prefer their Humours and Opinions about
external indifferent Matters, before the impor-
tant Concern of the Peace and Edification of the
Church.
There are feveral publick Defences made, by
which all Men may fee how far they can juf-
tify themfelves, who difown the Church of Erig-
Lwd^ even upon thefe trifling accounts, as they
are thought ^ and on what Grounds they think
it cannot be their Duty to yield to the National
Church in her impofing things which are really
indifferent : But whether they are able to make a
rational Defence of themfelves or no ^ nay, let us
fuppofe that fome can't, and yet are refolv'd to
continue their Separation ^ if fuch unreafona-blc
niiftaken Men, or what you'll pleafe to call 'em,
are found among us, this will not leffen the
Church's Guilt, in fo tenacioully continuing to
throw the needlefs Occafions in their way. Be-
fides, 'tis to be bellev'd, all the Churches, and
the greatelt part, if not every private Man of the
Diffenters, are fatisfy'd in their Hearts, that the
things they diffent for, are not fo indifferent as
'tis laid, nor can be receiv'd without corrupting
the Purity of the Chriftian Religion.
This
7 A ^flefiions on Mr.WalYs Let. 2.
This confiderably enhances their Fault, who ia
Matters they confefs to be indifierent, thro no
iNjecefllty, but from the Motions of an arbitrary
Temper only, will bear fo hard uj^on the Gon-
fciences of fach as cannot have the fame Opi-
nion, and drive 'em to the defperate Dilemma
of conforming againft their Confciences, or break-
ing the Unity of the Church. A more Chriftian
and becoming Difpofition in the governing Par-
ty, might have remov'd the whole Difficulty,
without any Inconvenience at ;alJ, by kindly not
infilling on thofe things which fome of their
weaker Brethren coa'd not digeft, and which
they themfelves likewife are under no manneii.Qf
Keceffity to adhere to. ) :?.5j,.:r
Every Society has Power, under the Supreril'fe
Authority, to frame By-Laws for it felf, to
which all its Members are bound, and may be
oblig'd to fubmit. So the whole Church, un*-
doubtedly, and every particular Part of it, may
rightfully claim a Power, as far as CHRIST
the Supreme Head permits, to make fuch Orders
and Conftitutions as they Ihall judg proper for go-^
verning their feveral Bodys. And this is all that,
with any face of Reafon, can be demanded. But
this will be of little or no Service in excufiug the
Church, or condemning the DifTenters, if we con-
jider, that this Pov^er is not unlimited : but as
the Laws of any Corporation are null, when re-
pugnaint tottie general Inllitutions of the Nation-^
fo all Prefcriptions in the Church are of no force,
and unlawful, when contrary to any which Jes.u s
C H R r s T, our great Legillator, has ordain'd ^ -or
when fhe exceeds the lawful Bounds of her Power.
And therefore, even thofe who can allow the
Church is poiTcfs'd. of a Legillative Power in. Mat-
ters purely indifTercnt, and are willing to fuppofe,
that her Members are oblig'd to comply with
( :'i ; her j
Let. 2 . Hifiory of Jnfant''Ba[)tifnu y 5
her-, infer notwithftanding, that if thofe things,
which are indifferent in themfelves, are circum-
ilantiated, as it often happens, fo as to deftroy
any of our LORD's Precepts, we are difcharg'd
from Obedience to our fubordinate Ecclefiaftical
Governors, and fuch her Decrees are /p/o faB:o
void.
Kay they farther affert, that tho the Cliurch
might lawfully exercife fuch Power as is pleaded
for in Matters of Liberty, yet as the Cafe ftands
at prefent, the Di (Tenter sin JE^T^te^, fomeof'em
at leaf!:, are oblig'd to feparate from the Natio-
nal Church, who, as they think, by mifufing
her Power, has render'd the Terms of Commu-
nion unlawful: or if the Terms are not fo them-
felves, yet they are^pt to fuppofe fhe is as
much to blame as the Diflenters, if by arbi-
trary Impofitions fhe breaks in on Fundamental
Laws, and exceeds her CommiiTion ^ and by nar-
rowing the Gate, prevents many from entring
into the Church, to her own great Injury, whofe
Growth her Governors are bound, by all lawful
Means, to advance.
Peace and Unity are flridly enjoin'd, and
Ihou'd be the particular Care of thofe whom the
Holy Ghpfi has made Overfeers of the Flock *, and yet
fome xMen deliberately and with pleafure ftudy ii.-
flexibly to maintain and impofe thofe things,
which they know by Experience confound the U-
nity they preach, and Ihou'd preferve. 'Tis a
chief Part of their Office, with Tendernefs, to
inftrud and relieve the Confciences of the Peo-
ple^ but they, on the contrary, opprefs and
perplex 'em, beyond what they are able to bear.
Is this agreeable to Charity, thus deliberate-
ly to conflrain us to what they count a Sin, and
againft which themfelves pronounce Damnation?
Pivijions^ Sphifmsj SeDarations^ and ivhatfoevcr breaks
the
7^ ^fleFliens on Mr.WdVs Let. 2 .
the Vnity of the Churchy are plac'd, they fay, -^ by
St. Paul in the Roll or Catalogue he gives of the Sins
which are certainly damning , which they that pradtife^
fhall not inherit the Kingdom of G 0 D^ Gal. v. 1 9,
20, 21. And notwithftanding this, they are fo
far from helping us to avoid the Danger, that
they willfully lay the unnecefTary S tumbling-Blocks
before us, which they are aflur'd will, and do make
us fall, in dired oppofition to the Apoftle's Coun-
fel and Pattern -f*, who fays, But when ye fin fo
againfi- the Brethren^ and wound their weak Confid-
ence^ ye fin again fl CHRIST. Wherefore^ if
Meat male my Brother to offend^ I will eat no Flep
while the World ftands^ lefi I make my Brother to of-
fend. How vallly different from this tender Re-
gard and Confideration of the Infirmitys of others,
and of ho v7 different an Original, is the inflexible
Temper of fome now-a-days, who rather than
part with any thing they have once receiv'd,
will endanger the Salvation of thofe who can't
fubfcribe to it, even tho it fhou'd prove the c-
ternal Ruin of Thoufands for whom Christ
died f
I have faid more on this Occafion than at firft
I intended ^ but Mr. Wall had fupprefs'd fo many
Particulars, in his treating this Head, that 'twas
needful to fapply'em: for they are material, and
give the Cafe of our Separation quite another Af-
ped. I might here make feveral Dedudions from
the Obfervations I have made, and apply 'em to
the Condition of the Church in E?igland ^ but I
wave it, and only defire you to compare what I
have writ with the lall Chapter in Mr. Wall.
After he has declar'd the Mifchief and Sin of
Divifions, &c, he addreffes himfelf to the Anti-
* Part II. p. 385.
t I Coy. viii. 9. Kom, xiv. 1 5« ^ Cqu viii. 1 2, 13.
p«do-
Let. 2 . Hijlory of Infant^^a^tifm. yy
pcedobaptifts : and ilnce Vm oblig'd to follow him,
let us briefly confider the Point, Sir, between the
Church of England and them. And firft, I mull de-
iire you always to remember, Mr. Wall argues on
the Sappolition that we are Right, and t'other
fide in the Error \ and undertakes to ihew, we
have notwithftanding no fufKcient Ground to fe-
parate : an Attempt which appears too extrava-
gant for any but a very partial Man to engage in.
Wou'd you have thought it poffible. Sir, with-
out this Inftance, that a Perfon of Senfe and Read-
ing fhou'd afiert, 'tis unlawful to feparate from a
Church, which fo freely prefumes to innovate in
the pofitive Inftitutions of our Saviour, and
impofe her own Alterations inftead of 'em ? And
that you may fee this is really the Cafe, and judg
better how Mr. Wall has acquitted himfelf in his
Undertaking, Til prefent you with our ISIotion of
the Point.
When our Lord fent out His Difciples to
preach, and inftituted the holy Ordinance of Bap-
tifm. He commanded, that all Perfons fliouM be
firft taught to believe in Him, and then be ad-
mitted into His Church and Covenant, by being
dip'd into the Water, in the Name of the Fa t h e r,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
None therefore can be true Members of the Chrif-
tian Church the Apoftles were then fent forth to
gather, unlefs they are accordingly firft taught,
and afterwards regularly receiv'd, according to
our Lord's Diredion, by dipping 'em into the
Water, and pronouncing that Sacred Form of
Words He prefcrib'd.
Now, our Author fuppofes us in the right in
all this ^ and yet fays, it i* not fufficient to juftify
our Separation. The Strefs of what he urges lies
in this Poiition, That the Difference is not about
Fundamentals \ if it were, he acknowledges, we
ought
7 8 (^fleBions on Kr. Wall V Let. 2 .
ought to feparate ^but the Agq or Time of re-
ceiving Baptifni cannQt be fuch^ But whatever it
may be in his Opinion, 'tis a Fundamental with
us in the Conftitution of a Church : and if he can
think, the true SubjeQ:, and the ji^ft Manner of ad-
ininiftring this Ordinance, aye. not of its Eflence,
but wholly indifferent, and what there is no need
to be curious in •, I allure you, we are of another
Mind *, and have niore Reverepce for our LORD's
Inftitutions, than to efleem th^ due Performance
of 'em fo light a thing. 'Tis. of important Confe-,
quence, we think, to retain hi^ Methods pundual-
ly^ and not deviate i;i the leaft Particular; iQv]tps^
highly fut able ,tothei nature of things^ to believe j as
my Lord Bifliop of 5^r;/«2 , judicioully obferves,
"^ T^hat our S a v i'<> V R>' who has. inftituted the Sacra:-.
mefJt^ has alfieitfjer infiltuted tU Form ofity or given
iis fiich Hmsy-asto lead us very near, it * And there-
tore, if It were not in reality aFundamental, yet
while we believe itns, itha^-tl\e intiuence of one
upon our Confcieiyre?, and.vve ]:;ave the fame rea-
ion to ieparate. , ;; • . : .; .;- ^■'
J ^f the Church has ; a greater 'Lititude, I appeal
to. you, SiVp^ whAch- is molt 'expedient and juft ^
that fhc fliou'd dole the Rupture, by yielding to
the TenderpeJ^, of our Conlpences,,^^^^ give up
y;hat flie efteems fo very iiidiperent/, or that we
who are not fo at liberty, (hou'd. ad againit our
Confciences, and comply with her ?
!. But I will endeavour to prove, Sir, that what we
dlv.idefor, is a Fundamental ,^ and, without the
help of a ijuppofition, that the.Eftablifn'd Church
is polTibly in the Error. To c;ut this aiort (for I
wou'd fain have dpne with this 3vib)ea) 1 will not
give the Reafons our Author ufqs here, a partic|a-
lar. Examination ;, they are fafficiently aafwer'd
->'*. Export. Articles, p. 26.:.
by
Let. 2 . Hiflory of Infant-^ al)tijnu 7 9
by the foregoing Diftin(flion, between Fundamen-
tals of Religion, and Fundamentals in the Con-
ftitution of a true Chriftian Church. All he at-
tempts to prove, is, that it is not a Fundamental
Article of Faith, without which none can be fav'd \
which is nothing to the purpofe : for, as I (hew'd
above, there are other Caufes which not only juf-
tify^ but alfo neceflltate a Separation from a
Church. Befides, he can never evince this Nega-
tive from his own Principles. He owns Baptifm
it fclf is a Fundamental^ and wou'd be under*
Ibood, certainly, to mean true Chriftian Baptifm,
and not every Invention of Heretlcks in antient or
modern Times : He mull comprehend, then, all
that is elfential to true Baptifm,or elfe 'twill bs im-
perfed \ and if thefe fuppos'd Circumftances fhou'd
be found to be of its EfTence, it will follow from
himfelf, that thefe things are Fundamentals, as
being efTential to what is allow'd to be fo.
Baptifm, I grant, is of great NcceiTity *, and
tho I dare fix no Limits to the infinite Goodnefs
and Mercy of God, which I am confident he will
give mighty Proofs of, in great Inftances of Kind-
nefs towards all fincere, tho miftaken Men *, how-
ever, the Gofpel-Rule is, according to the Doc-
trine of the Apoftle, to rc^ent^ and he havtiz^d^
for the kemiffion' of Sins, We (hou'd be very cau-
tious therefore of making any Change in thefe
things, left: we deprive our felves, thro oar Pre-
fumption, of that Title to Pardon, without which
there is no Salvation. But Mr- Wall coiifcfles this *,
and, 1' think, 'tis as clear, that nothing can be
Chriftian Baptifm which varies from Christ's
Inftitution. That only is Baptifm which He
appornte'd,- and theretore That which differs
from what He appointed, dilfers from Baptifm ^
and to bring in Alterations is to change the thing,
and
8o (^fleSlions onMryK/^iiYs Let. 2 J
and make it not the fame, but another. This is
felf-evident, and beyond a Queftion.
The only Pretence, I think, that can be devis'd,
is, that our Lord's Inftitution is not fo ftri :tly
pundilious, and confin'd in the particular Cir-
cumftances of it. But Mr. JVali can have no bene-
fit from this Evafion, becaufe, as I faid before,
he fuppofes our Opinion, in this Cafe, is the true,
and all he fays is to proceed on this Suppofition.
ButasBaptifm is an Ordinance of Christ, it
mull of neceflity be celebrated exadly as he ap-
pointed : and fince to the very Being of Baptifm,
aSubjeft to whom it muft be adminifter'd is necef-
fary, and a Mode of adminiftring, without which
it wou'd be only a ISJotion in the Brain ; thcfe
Things, therefore, areas neceflary as Baptifm it
felf. And hence it follows that the true Subjects,
which are profefs'd Believers only, and the true
Mode, which is only Dipp/?/^ into the Water, are
necefFary to true Baptifm ^ and confequently a
Difference in thefe Points is a Difference in Fun-
damentals, and fo by Mr. Wall's Conceffion a juft
Caufe of Separation.
'Tis fuperfluous, I think, to fpend more time to
fhew thefe things are as proper Fundamentals as
Baptifm it felf, and effential to it, without which
'tis impoffible it (hou'd be Baptifm, and wherein
its very nature confifts. I will go on, therefore,
to manifeft how juft and unavoidable our Separa-
tion is.
I don't know what Mr. Wallh Notion of a
Church may be ^ but if he takes it from the
Thirty Nine Articles he fubfcrib'd to at his Ordi-
nation, it will be plain : for the ipth Article fays,
The J^ifihle Church of Chrifi is a Congregation of
faithful Men^ in which the Sacraments he duly
adminifier'd, according to Chrijfs, Ordinance in all
things^ that of Nccefflty are requifite to the fame,
Now
LeM. Htftory of Infant'(Baptifm. 8 t
Now, if Baptifm can't be duly perform'd ac-
cording to Christ's Ordinance, (as we believe,
and Mr. Wall fuppofes it true) but by dipping Be-
lievers into the Water on the Profefiion of their
Faith *, then that Church, ivhich adminifters it o-
therwife, cannot be fuch a Church of Christ,
as the Article fpeaksof: and if fo, 'tis hard to
imagine why it fhou'd be unlawful to decline her
Communion: For her Baptifm, being wrong, be-
comes no Baptifm, and perhaps fome may carry
this fo far, as to queftion whether fuch a Congrega-
tion is a Vifible Church. For if, as I will prove here-
after, her Baptifm is not true, that is, if ihe have no
Baptifm (JoxTertuUians Maxim will hold good,
* They who are not d^uly h(!ftiz?d^ are certainly not
haftiz^d at aU) tho we don't aflert fo much, yet
to fome it will, it may be, feem a little probable,
that (he may perhaps have no Bifhops, Presbyters,
C^r. no lawful Ordinations; and (if this fhou'd
be allow'd) neither of the Sacraments can be duly
adminifter'd. And then from thefe Suppofitions,
and by the Authority of the Article cited, the
Clergy of the Church of England in general teach
us to infer, that fuch a Congregation can be no
more than a pretended Church, and that we
ought to feparate from fuch an one.
And if, as both Sides agree, Baptifm is a ne-
ceflTary Initiation into theChriftian Churchy and
if none are baptiz'd but Believers dip'd into the
Water^ (which you remember, Sir, Mr. Wail fjp-
pofes) then nothing can be more evident, than
that fuch as are not fo baptiz'd, are not rightly
initiated \ and have no Title therefore to Church-
Memberlhip, but fhou'd be difclaim'd.
"*• De Baptifmo^ cap, 15. ])ag, 230. Baptifmum cum rite
aon habeant, fine duUio non habent.
Q Before
8z (^efleaionsonMr.W^lYs Ltui]
Before I leave this Head, I beg leave to obferve,
hoAV unhandfomly Mr. Wall ads, in fuppoilng us
right in our Opinion^ and yet pronouncing our
Separation unlawful ^ and telling us, we ought to
unite with Perfons we are perfuaded are not
baptiz'd. Wou'd he follow fuch Advice himfelf,
and admit any into the Church, if he believ'd they
were without what he efteems Baptifm ? It mull
be an abfurd thing, upon Mt» Wall's own Principle,
to receive Perfons to the Koly Eucharift, before
they have giv'n themfelves to CHRIST, and
according to his Appointment, w^alh'd away their
Sins. This he'll think v/ou'd be to abufe the Sa-
cred Ordinance ^ and therefore the Church of
England refufes to admit any to the Communion,
unlefs they are firft not only baptiz'd, but alfo con-
firmed ^ as is refolv^d at the end of the Order of
Confirmation.
I know iMr. Wall wou'd fay, he acknowledges
Baptifm it felf is a Fundamental Article^ and
therefore it has been inferred into fome antient
Greeds : but Modes and Circumftdnces are not fo
material *, and for that Reafon, fhou'd not be made
a Pretext for Divilions. I have fufficiently an-
fwcr'd this above: but I add, IVIr. ^^// can't ima-
gine Baptifm in general^ (which in truth I don't
know what to make of, nor how it can be admi-
nifter'd , for to baptize with Baptifm in general^
looks like a Contradidion) Mr. Wall^ I fay, can't
imagine, that Baptifm in general, without any
regard to fome Conditions and Circumftances, is
any Baptifm at all. IMor can I believe, when he
makes Baptifm necelTary, he wou'd be underftood
to mean, that fome kind of Baptifm or other is
neceflary ^ but that all Modes, Circumftances, and
the like, are wholly indifferent, and at the dif-~
cretion of every Perfon, or Church either : for
then the impious Cuftoms of the antient Here-
. - : '. ticks
Let.z. Hijiory of Infant' ^aptiffn. 85
ticks wou'd be as authentick, as the Sacred Form
our LORD commanded his Difciples. But it has
been univer&lly allow'd in the Church from the
beginning, and our Author feems to infift on it
too, that if the Perfon baptiz'd has an erroneous
and not a true Faith, according to the Scriptures,
concerning GOD the Father, and JESUS
CHRIST, and the HOLY GHOST i and
if the Baptifm is not adminifter'd in that only
regular Form of Words which the Inftitutor pre-
fcribM, in the Name of the Holy and Ever-blef-
fed T R I N I T Y •, that Baptifm is ipfi fa^ia null
and vacated : nay, St. Cyprian^ and the Council
Mr. IVall is fo fond of at another time, make even
the Orthodoxy of the Adminiftrator neceflary.
From hence it appears, that he mult be under-
Itood to mean true Baptifm is neceflary ^ which is
what we fay, and is therefore a fufficient Caufeof
our Separation ; which thus, you fee, our Author
himfelf unwarily juftifys. ^•'
Since he owns CHRIST'S prefcribmg the
Words of the Inftitution, is the only fufficient
Authority to fix the Form, 1 can't but think we
fhou'd ftridlly follow the fame Words of the Infti-
tution, as the only Rule we can be direded by ia
all things elfe relating to this Ordinance : and
then all other parts of Baptifm, efpecially the
true Subjecl: and Mode of Adminiftration, are as
necefl^ary as the true Form of Words •, and if on-
ly that Form is true which is there prefcrib'd,
then thofe only are the lawful Subjeds, and that
the right Mode which is there likewife fpecify'd :
ond thefe are, therefore, of the Foundation, as
well as the Form of Words ^ and without either
of thefe, the Baptifm is invalid.
In Ihort, we refufe to communicate with the
Church of E-dgUnd^ for the fame Reafon that (he
refufes to communicate with Perfons fhe cannot
G 2 eltcem
84 <l(efieElms on Mr.'^^.Ws Let.2.
efbeem baptiz'd •, and therefore it muft look very
flrange now, that any of her Members (hou'd
prefs us to ad contrary' to her Rules and Deter-
minations, and join with fuch as we conclude are
without Baptifm : and we fhou'd ftill be guilty of
a worfe Prevarication, if they prevail'd on us to
grant theirs to be a fufficient Baptifm, and at the
fame time keep our prefent Opinion; of our own.
This wou'd be acknowledging twoBaptifms^againit
the exprefs Declaration of the Apoftle, whofe
Judgment we more willingly depend on, that
there is only ^ one LORD^ one Faith ^ one Baptifm,
And if C H R I S T, as we are well aflur'd (and
our Author, you are to remember, luppofes)
commanded only to baptize fuch as adually believ'd
m him, according to the preaching of the Difci-
ples ; then the Baptifm fo giv'n is alone the true
one Baptifm, which is certainly ncceflary \ and
we are oblig'd and warranted by Divine Authority
to own that and no other.
This is what I judgM needful to fay, in order
to juftify our Separation ^ and demonftrate how
very frivolous Mr. W^.Uh Reafoning about it is.
But after he has labour 'd to prove our Separation
Schifmatical and Sinful, (as if he believ'd the
Bufinefs v/as cffectuany done) he is pleas'd to pro-
pofe the Terms of a Union \ which are in Sum,
That the Church of Er.gUnd fhall kindly conde-
fcend to remain in all Particulars juft as Ihc is, and
the Antipxdobaptifts fliall humbly fubmit them-
felvcs and their Confciences to the Power and Per-
fecutions of the ai^gry Party in the Church : or if
they retain their Opinions concerning Baptifm,
they (hall be indulged in that, provided they'll be
careful to keep 'em to themfelves.
4 How
Let. 2 . Hiftory of Infant'^Baptifju. 8 5
How impartial and feafible a Propofal is here!
Cou*d he, think you, forbear fmiling at it himfelf,
or in earnelt expert it fhou'd be embrac'd ? He
confefles, the Church may prefent Antipxdobap-
tilts, and has done it, while they were reputed
her Members, and were confequently in her Pow-
er : and 1 can tell him, however he may fmooth
over the Matter, they have taken the Warning,
and will not put it to the Venture again ^ and
they think themfelves highly oblig'd to the Go-
vernment,- for the Protedion it gives 'em. They
will never be perfuaded, on our Author's Terms
efpecially, to rely on the Favour of the Eccleli-
afticks, and ftrip themfelves of the inviolable Se-
cuiity of that Toleration our molt Gracious and
Pious Queen has fo often and fo folemnly declar'd
Jlje will maintain,
Tho it Ihou'd be granted, the Church o{ England
like all other Societys, has Power over her own Bo-
dy j yet fhe'has certainly none over thofe who
withdraw from her Communion. 'Twasahome
Refledion therefore on the Wifdom and Autho-
rity of the, Queen and Parliament, for our Au-
thor to infinuate, that the ji^ of Toleration cannot
^tie up the Church's Hands from any Proceedings again fi
DilTenters^ who befides, by being out of her Body,
are merely, on that account, out of her Power.
'Tis notorious that this does tie up the Hands of
the angry Party ^ and we are fo extremely fenll-
ble of her Majefty's Goodnefs in taking this Me-
thod, that we beg her Majefty gracioufly to
give us leave ftill to rely folely on her Self
and Parliament, under God, for Security ;
for all other we difown. As for -{* the general
Forbearance which is now vs'*d ^ there are fome who
pradift it only out of Keceflity, and becaufe
* Pare 11. p. 410, 4u. t Part II. p, 411.
G 3 they
^6 (IlefleSiiom m MrMAYs Let.x. :
they can't help it. But fhou'd the Tokratidti be
oDcb repeal'd, I fear this g^d Tempet-wokM va-
niih like a Vapour. JPof Mt. ^^//^dti-'t btft re-
incmber the Prtffccuticn and Excommtinkation
he pronounc'd againll Mrs-. Ha/l ofhis Parilh.
And, doubtlefs, he has not wholly forgot, tliat
he prefented Mr. Jofeph Brown his ISfeighbour, for
not bringing his Children to be ehritteh'4.- I
confefs, he feme time afterwards ask'd thatGen-
tleman's Pardon for what he had done 5 who very'
readily forgave him : and I fhou'd, tMtefbre, ne-
ver have mention'd the^ thing, but -tiiat I have
obferv'd, Mr. Wkll is troubled with Moderation
and: Forbearance but very rarely, by fudden lits
and ftarts, which are no fooner over, than he finds
himfeif as violent -^nd- -inveterate as eVier : or if'
he be now indeed chang'd, (as I fhou'd^ 'be -heartily
glad' to be aiTur'd he is) -^ inay hOwevef^Vety w-ell
think there are Tome of that fame DifpofitionftiH,
who wou*d never fufFer us to be quiet. : ' i
But had Mr. Jr^// beenfetious, he iTic^-d'lrave
inad'e a Propofal more •fait'- and -equal on both
Sides, and proper to eftablilh Unity and Concord
on the Principles of the firft Churches of Ch'rifti-
ans. In order to this, it wou'd be reqiiifite, and
I think none can except againft it, that fome fit
Perfons were chofe on both Sides, to examine the
Scriptures impartially, and the Fathers of the
three firft Centurys, who follow'd their great
Mafter thro Sufferings, and whofe Writings are
undoubtedly by far the belt Commentary on
the Sacred Books ^ and with thefe lielps to
colledt from the Word of God, the true Doc-
trine and Difcipline of the Primitive Catholick
Church : And to what fhou'd be thus iincere-
ly deduc'd, every one fhou'd refolve to xon-
•form, without Referve. And 1 doubt not, if a
Union were endeavour'd ojl this Expedient, it
wou'd
Let. 2. Hijlory of infant-^aptifm. %7
wou'd be accomplifh'd much more eafily than is
imagin'd. -''"^ ' .'
I juit hint at this, to fhew, Mr. Wdl might have
chofen a more reafonable Method than he did. But
'tis not likely he fhou'd come into it, becaufe he
feems of an imperious Temper, and pofitive^ in
his Opinions, which he wou'd force upon others,
and not bend himfelf. And for this I appeal, a-
mong other things, to the feveral places where he
complains of the Mifchiefs of the Magiftrate's
granting Tolerations. Why did not he embellifh
his Paragraphs with the famous Examples of ?«-
das^ and ViUte^ and the High Prieft, who as xoift-
ly cut off the Ringleader of that Sed which en-
deavour'd to abolifh the Traditions of the Elders ?
For thefe things will be found to be of joft the
fame kind, if the Words of the K i n g in the Pa-
rable be true, Matth. xxv. 40. that what is done
to His Brethren He accounts as done to Himfelf.
But had not our Author forgot, that it is as in-
decent as it is unjuft to talk thus ? For this is to
refled on the Wifdom and Lenity of the Britifi
Government, and in effed to magnify the French
Fafliion of Dragooning People, only for endea-
vouring to preferve a Confcience void of Of-
fence toward GOD and toward Man. But fure
our poor Proteftant Brethren in France deferve ra-
ther to be pity'd and reiiev'd, than thus flily in-
fulted and condemn'd : and G o d be thank'd, they
are, and will be kindly entertain'd with us, to
the immortal Honour of our Gracious Queen, ^ by
whofe pious Liberality fo many afflided Familys
are comfortably fubfifted. And (he has moft kindly
endeavour'd to have the like Toleration fettf d by
other Princes, her Allies, abroad, which fhe has
confirm'd at home. So extenfive is her Good-
nefs ! But it touches me very clofe, to fee a Man,
G 4 whofe
88 ^efl^aions on Mr.WslYs Uui.
whofe Fun^ion is to ferve at the Altar, and mi-
nifter in the Holy Things of the Gofpel, of a Com-
plexion fo repugnant to the Meeknefs, Love, and
charitable Forbearance which CHRIST fo of-
ten, fo ftriaiy enjoin'd •, and I'm concern'd that
foineof the Leaders of the Church do not know
what manner of Sprit they are of,
Kow, to conclude : I hope I have made out.
Sir, what I took upon me to prove, which was.
That Mr. Wall is not a Writer to repofe a full
Confidence in ^ but has committed feveral Mif-
takes, and mufl: be read warily, and with Suf-
picion.
I am, cSrc.
Lett
E R
Let. 5 . Hifiory of Infant-^aptifm. 89
L E T T £ R I I I.
Another Infiance of Mr, Wall'j Vnfairnefs. 'The
Difyute between the Englifh Fxdoha^tifis and us
c aft under two Heads, It^sftrange^ Things fo clear
fijou'd he capable of fo much Difpute. So far as
the Scriptures are clear ^ our Frail ice is allowed to
be exa^ly agreeable therewith. Therefore if we err^
we are^ however^ on the faferfide. God has re^
veal^d His Will with fujjiciem Clearnefs^ in all ma"
terial Points, jind He has not left it doubtful in
rah at Manner^ or to what Subjects Baptifm jhoud
be adminifter d, A trifling Remark of Mr, Wall'x
noted, ^Tis better not to pretend to baptiz,e J^er-
fons^ than not to do it as Ch r i s t recjuires itjljoud
be done. The Greek Word for baptize always fig-
nifys to dip only into any manner of thing. So Ly*-
cophron. And Sophocles. But more commonly y
^tis us^d for dipping into Liquids, So Homer. Meta-
phors tnclttde and borrow their Beautys from the
Thing from whence they are taken, Pindar and his
Scholiaft, Euripides and his Scholiafts, Arifto-
phanes in many places. The Words in Difpute fre-
(^uently applfd t§ the Dyers Art : and they colour
things by dipping ^em. Several Paffages wherein
the Word alludes to the Art of Dyings co^ifider^d.
The improper Ufe of Words in metaphorical Pajfa^
gesj can^t be fuppos^d to alter pheir Signification,
figurative Forms of Speecffy are only abbreviated
Similes, ^Tis no ObjeAion to fky^ if Words are al-
ways literally underjhodj Authors will be made to
fpeak Nonfenfe, Figurative Sentences not literally
^rue^ ^s they ft and j but being defdiive^ the Se^fe
mujp
C 5) o (^(efleFtms on Mr.WslVs Led 3 .'
Tnufi be fufflyd. IVeJhoud dlftinguiflj between the
S£ufc Mf.^^hcaJ£^aiit include i fome Words not
.^xx^^fi'd.'f^.md. tb^. Senfe of tb£..pirticuUt: Wjords
fingly conjtde/dj jvft as they ft and* Words have
no more than one Signification. Words are always
to be taken in their literal Senfe. The Vfe of thefe
Obfervations in the frefent Difpute. More Inftan-
" ces from Ar'AoY)\\ims. nK\jm is to wafli by dif-
vinf. More Jnftances from Ariftotle. From He-
raclides Pon):icus. F^-owi Herodotus Halicarnaf-
i:, feus. Fro;w Theocritus. From JAok\\\x%. From
^A Aratus. From Callimachus. From Dionylius
Halicarnaileus. From Strabo. From Plutarch.
-^x From Lucian. From the Emperor Marcus Anto-
-$4V\ ninus. The metaphorical Vfe of the Word in Bif-
T.s \fute^ when apply* d to the Mind^ confider^d and ex^
■ ' jlaind. Other Jnftances from Pollux. . From The-
miftius. That Lexicographers and Critich render
J he Word by Lavo, is no Argitment they ever under ^
ftood it to mean Ufsthan to dip.
S I Kj
BY Mr. Wairs Gharader, which I have given
you at large in my former, you may judg of
his Temper and Defign : but there is one remark-
able Inftance of his Difingenuity, not yet taken
notice of, which muft by no means be omitted : 1
mean,' his unfair Pretences, and falfe Aflertions,
concerning the Word Qxif^iloi' I de(ign*d to have
mention'd this before, but conlidering it is a
Branch of our main Difpute, and requires a par-
ticular Examination, I defer'd it, and will enter
on it now. ' , '
As the Controverfy ftands between us and ^^^^
Englijh Paedobaptifts, it may be caft under two
Heads : One relating to the Mode of Baptifm j
whether it is to be adminifter'd only by Dipping :
and the other <which mult be haadl'd more tully)
is,
Let. 3 . Hijlory of Infcint-^ciptifm. 9 1
is, who are the true Subjefls of it, whether A-
dult Perfons alone, or Infants alfo.
One wou'd wonder a thing of this nature
Ihou'd be capable of fo much Difpute : for if it is
not inftituted, it ought not to be pradis'd \ and
if it be inftituted, it fhou'd feem impolTible for
any not to fee it. But if there is indeed reafona-
ble ground for thefe Doubts, and a matter of fuch
Importance is involv'd in fuch inextricable Diffi-
cultys, as fome pr-etend *, I think it refleds highly
on the Legiilator's Condud:, who has ordain'd
Laws, on the performance of which our Eternal
Salvation depends, and yet left the Senfe and
Conftru(flion of 'em fo perplex'd and hard to be
known. But we are well aflur'd it isnot fo, and
are more concern'd for the Honour and Goodnefs
of God, than to imagine, with our Author and
his Party, that our blefled Saviour has not
plainly enough told us what he ^xpec^s from us :
no, we are confident he has declar'd his Will to
us, in this and all other Articles of likeConfe-
quence, with all necefTary Evidence^ and what
he has not taught us with a fufficient Clearnefs,
he never defign'd for the Objedtof Obedience.
Our Ejiemys allow, that as far as the Scriptures
are clear in the prefent Cafe, our Pradice exadly
agrees with 'em \ and they muft confefs too their
own is very different from what the Text declares
to have been done in the antient times. Thus
they allow, nothing is more clearly fet down ia
Holy Writ, than that thofe who believ'd were
to be, and adually were baptiz'd, by being im-
mers'd or dip'd into the Water on the ProfefTion of
their Faith : and that our Pradice thus far punc-
tually anfwers, is beyond Contradidion ; whence
it follows, that the Pradice of the P^dobaptifts,
where it differs from ours, is not conformable to
fomething deliver'd in Scripture: and therefore
on
9 z ^fleftions on Afr. WallV Let. ^ .
on the whole, we do what the Scriptures e;cprefly
teach, while they, at belt, do but what is very >
obfcurely, and perhaps not at all taught in 'em.
That the Apoftles and the Primitive Church did
dip when they baptiz'd, is plain ;, but that they
us'd Sprinkling or Affalion iikewife, is not: And^
that they baptiz'd Adult Perfons who declar'd^
their Faith in our Redeemer, is clear , butj
that ever any Infant was baptiz'd by 'cm, is agaifli
confefs'd on all hands not to be fo evident.
As far as we go, then, we have the Scriptures
undoubtedly juftifying us ^ but where they leave
us, we {top, not daring to venture beyond their
Direction, as thinking it fafer to walk by their
Light, than to wander in unknown Paths. If this
be a Fault (as I can't tell how to think it one) 'tisi
a Fault however on the fafer hand : for what can
poor fallible Mankind do better, than wliere two
things feem to claih, to follow that which is
clear, rather than uncertain Conjedlures, or even
the faireft Probabilitys ? which (to fuppofe mor^
than is true) is the molt that can be urg'd iojiimt
Adverfarys. ,. tM*.;-;! -^^^cri -i
Thefe Confiderations alone, if nothing . elle
cou'd be added, wou'd render our Cafe fecure, and
far the more eligible. But we have infinitely
Aiore to fay in our behalf: For God has trulv.
reveal'd his Will with Clearnefs, and not couch'a
it in ambiguous I'erms and myfterious Forms of
Speech, like the Oracles of the Heathens^ he de*
fign'd to be obey'd, and has fpoke fo as to be un;?
derftood : And we can't but think, to deduce
a Senfe from the Words which was not intended,
is very difficult, and requires Artifice and Vior
lence *, whereas the genuine meaning wants no
fuch Labour, bat is natural and cafy : And what-
ever Senfe," therefore, appears conftrain'd, Qught,
at lealt, to be fufpected as foreign from the tru^.
For
Let.?. H'lflory of Infant-^aptifm. 95
For tbefe as well as other Reafons, Sir, which
I Ihall lay before you in the Profecution of this
Difcourfe, we cannot believe it is fo doubtful in
Scripture, as many pretend, whether Dipping on-
ly be Baptifm, and whether Believers alone may
lawfully be bapti^'d. Thefe are the chief Ques-
tions in Debate between the P^dobaptifts and us,
which, if they can be amicably determin'd, will
go far towards putting an end to the Separation,
But. Mr. Wall's Management is not likely to have fo
good Succefs : the Point muft be treated with more
Temper and Modefty, as well as ftronger Argu-
ment, if it be really intended to gain us •, but nei-
ther his Arguments, nor any other, which yet have
been produc'd, will prove what they are brought
for, as 1 will now endeavour to (hew : and I'll be-
gin with the words ^ixr.Til6b znd fbocTnccy for they
are fynonymous,as Mr. Wall himfelf likewife feems
to allow •, and therefore I (hall promifcuoufly cite
the Inftances wherein one or the other word
occurs.
Our Author, to make us look very inflexible
and cruel, begins what he fays upon this Head,
with this frightful Remark, That we are fofefs'd
with an Opinion of the abfolute Necejfity of diffing the
haptisi'd Perfon over Head and Ears into the Watery
fo foTy as to let any Man, tho ever fo fick, die un- \^
haftizjd^ rather than haptiz.e him by Affupony &c.
Which you are to imagine is a great piece of Bar-
barity, becaufe in fo doing 'tis fuppos'd wechufe
to expofe a PeiTon to the hazard of being damn'd,
rather than recede from our fix'd Method. But
Mr. WaH might have fpar'dthc Refledion, fince
himfelf allows the Defire of Baptifm is fufficicnt,
where Baptifm it felf can't be had ^ fo that the
Confequence of our refuling to adniinifter that
Ordinance in fuch a manner, is not fo terrible as
he inlinuates.
Beiidcs,
94 ^fieBions on ^fr. Wall V Let. 5.^
Befidcs, we think it better to do thus, than to
. delude dying Men with falfe Performances, and let
'em go out of the World,as Pagdobaptifts do, with-
out real Baptifm, or even a Defire of it, which
doubtlefs is much worfe than what we are charg'd
with. But to make a Shew of Tendernefs and
CompalTiOD, fuch generous Men as our Author
and his Party have found out an Expedient, ra-
ther than fuffer Perfons to go into Eternity, with-
out being firft baptiz'd for the RemifTion of their
Sins, to baptize, u e. dip 'em by AfFufion or
Sprinkling.
But notwithftanding the Inventions which in-
genious Mea may be fond of, I am honeftly for
fitting down with the Simplicity of the firft
Chriftians, and keeping to the good old way: the
fine Improvements introduc'd fince are too cu-
rious and fubtle for me to comprehend 'em ^ and
1 can't fee but "^ the word Baptize neccjfarily hi'
eludes Dipping in its Signification^ and that Chrifi by
commanding to baptize^ has commanded to dip only*
Mr. Watt indeed tells me this ^ plainly a Miftakc ;
but 1 have no great Opinion of his Judgment, and
won*t take his Word : on the contrary, I hope
to make it appear plainly to be an unavoidable
Truth, and no Miftake. In order to this, I mult
defire you. Sir, to confider how the word is us'd
among the Greeks^ by the Particulars which follow.
1 have carefully obferv'd it a confiderable time,
as it occur'd in reading, and aflure you 1 never
found it once usM to fignify to pour or fprinkle^
or any thing lefs than Dipping ^ and I may chal-
lenge any Man to fhew a fingle Inftance of it,
except in fome Ecclefiaftical Writers of the latter
corrupt times, who retaining the words of the
Inftitution, and altering the thing, do, in this
* Par. U. p. 219,
Cafe
LcL 3 . Htjiory of Infant'^dptifin. o j
Cafe indeed, but no other, extend the word into
a wider Senfe : But profane Authors, who lay-
under no fuch biafs, have made no fuch Altera-
tbn* 'Tis evident from them, the primary mean-
ing isfimplyr^ dlfy not only into Water, but any
Matter.
Thus Lycofhron^ reprefenting Cajfaudra prophe-
fying how Oreftes fliou'd punifh Clytemnefira for her
Parricide, fays ■^, the Child^ difcovering his Fa-
ther's Murder^ fliall, with his own Hand (P;a4«)
thruft his Sword into the P^iper^s Body j or, as the
great ScaUger has more literally tranflated it, mer*
get^ Jha/l plunge his Sword into the Viper's Bowels j
that is, run her thro. It can't be pretended that
this is a figurative ExprefTion, for the Senfe of
the word plainly appears to be natural and dired,
and to contain no Metaphor in it.
Exadly the fame Phrafe is that of Sophocles f,
(t|boc4as) Thou haft dip'd or thruft thy Sword into
the Grecian j4rmy :, and Plonger r Epee^ in this ve-
ry Senfe, is common enough in the French Tongue.
Mr. Dryden likewife exprefles the Poet's Senfe
thus, in the 7th Eneid^ p. 638.
Thus having faidy her fmouldring Torch^ imprefsU
With her full Force ^ Jhe plunged into his Breaft.
I might multiply Examples to this purpofe, but
^oL-nTilcc is more commonly us'd to fignify to dip
into Liquids 9 not from any neceflity in the wor^
but becaufe Liquids are molt proper for this Ac-
tion, which alfo is moftly perform'd in 'em*
Twou'd be endlefs to colled all the Inftances of
this kind in Authors, who frequently ufe the word
* Caflandr.v.ii2i. Ei; CT^clfxy lyiS^m twiix!»g 0^4^
t Ajace, v. 95. "E^^^tfj ty^cf tS" t^^V dfynu? rfceriv^.
^6 (^fleSlions on Mr.WslYs Let.^.
in this Senfe, but never once to fignify Wafhin^
in general, or Sprinkling, Nay, I don't remember
one Paflage, where all other Senfcs are not neceC-
farily excluded befides Diffing^ as may be fecn
from thefe Quotations.
Homer (for we'll begin with him as the moft an-
tient, and trace it down to the latter Period of
the Grecian Empire) defcribing Vlyfes with his
Companions putting out Polyphemms Eye with a
burning Brand, and what abundance of Blood
iffu'dout, and quench'd the Brand with a loud
hifling, illuftrates it with this Simile, ^ As when
a Smith to harden a Hatchet or maffy Vole ax (jJxXTrTej)
dip ^em in cold Water, If any one can doubt what
the word imports here, any Blackfmith's Boy will
fet him right by an ocular Demonftration. And
in his Batrachomyomachia (if he be the Author of
that excellent ludicrous Poem, and not Pigres^
BvothQV to Arteme/iaySiS Plutarch is inclined to be-
lieve) when one of, the Champions is flain on the
Bank of a Lake, he fays, \\ He hreathlefs feil^ and the
Lake was tinged (ilbxyvJ iTo) with Blood.
I the rather mention this, becaufe if any Place
is brought to prove Psoctttq and jiavrTi^^) do not al-
ways fignify to dip, 1 fancy this will be one-
But, whatever fome may do, you underftand the
nature of Languages too well. Sir, to make it an
Exception ^ and all who have made any Obferva-
tions of the Ufe of Words in their Mother-
Tongue, rauft be fenfible it is not againft what I
alTert, but for it. ThePhrafe, we muft coniider,
is borrow'd from the Dyers, who colour things by
dipping them in their bye : and to this the Poet
,lB,\v liJkTi 'ivyjf^ Ca-ZIh^^c,. Odyil- i» v. 392.
jl Y. 218. KaWsCI cT', «X AfiViV^.Y iJ/5*V7s7B J^' eSfifJLATi
plainly
Let. ^ . Hlftory of Infant-^aptifm. ^7
plainly alludes ^ not that tiie Lake was actually
dip'd in -Blood, but fu dcc|)ly Itaiii'd, that to
heighten our Idea, he cxprefl'cs it, with the ufual
liberty of Poets, by a Word which lignifys more
than what is i|:r idly true, which is the natuieof
all Hyperboles. Thus the lits-^ral Senfe is, The Lake
wasdifdin Blood -^ but the Figure only means, it
was coloured as highly as any thing that's dip'd
in Blood.
I am apt to think co'cTre^, coo-avl/, C^c. are to be
underllocd here to qualify the feeming Extrava-
gance of the Exprefhon •, as alfo in all Hyferholesy
^ which I- take to be fo many Ellypicd Phrafes in
which a Word is wanting : now if we fuppofe the
Poet, as 'tis natural enough, fupprefles feme Par-
ticle, and we fupply it by inferring obo-mpy the
Senfe will run very clear thus. The Lake wks. as it
had been difd in Blood, Whether yGu'U, allow
this Criticifm or not, you can't but fiiy,. nothing
cou'd render the Paflage more exprefllve, or the
Si^ii'ic more natural and eaf\' .
Every Metaphor, you'll remember. Sir, in-
cludes the ThiniMVom whence 'tis borrow'd, re-
ceives its whole Force from it, and muft have
its Senfe dctermin'd by it. To give an Inftance
from the fine Language of Thucydidcs : Pericles^
in an Oration there, reminds the murmuring A-
thenians^ that they ought to labour to fupport
the Dignity of the Commonwealth, by maintain-
ing the Independent Pov;er and Command they
were all fo proud of, ^ and either -not fiy from
Dangers^ or not furfue after Honours. In the Word
^euye/v, to fly '.^ and ^/o^kuv', to ^iirfue\ is an Al-
iufion to the Fortune of a Battel, v;hcre one
^ Lib. 2. c. 6-^, Tjk t« rToMed<; y^iV £i)t5< rrj 77fy.<^ji'Wo) cL'Tq
^^X-'^ (eyV-Brep a.'7ZdLv]ii etythhlS^i) (^Oil^khj r^ f'.W fiy'je/J' TVi
H Side
9 8 (JiefleBlons on Mr.W^W's Let.j:
Side is worlted and flys, and the other purfues
'em : and thus underftood, the Words have a
mighty Emphads in 'em *, but otherwife, no
Meaning at all, but are Soloecifms both in Lan-
guage and Senfe too.
To fpeak but of one : Sicj^eiv fignifys only to
purfue, as a Conqueror does a flying Enemy ; and
when transfer'd to another Cafe, it continues to
fignify the £ame thing, in forae refped or other :
* 'tis a fhorter kind of Simile, where feveral
things are imply'd which are not exprefs'd ^ at
leafl: the Beauty of it lies in comparing the pro*
per Import of the Word, with what it is us'd to
fignify by the Figure. Thus the Eagernefs and
Vigour with which a vidorious purfues a routed
Army, is apply'd to that Pafllon for Glory, which
was fo confpicuous in the Athenians. And to bring
it clofer to our purpofe : The Effed being as it
were the fame, Homer ^ by putting the Caufe for
the Effed, defcribes the Lake's being thorowly
itain'dby a Word, which fignifys a Dyer's dipping
a thing to colour it.
From all this it appears, that the Senfe of
C^ttT^s even in this place, is to dij^y and nothing
elfe. I have infilled the larger on it here, be-
caufe I don'c know whether 1 ihall care to take the
fame pains with all other metaphorical FafTages.
It you find any which feem material, and 1 fhou'd
let 'em go unobferv'd, examine 'em by what is
here adv;inc'd, and I am perfuaded the Difficultys
will prefently vanifh : if they don't, pray acquaint
me with 'em, and I will conllder 'em with all Im-
partiality and Attention. But to proceed.
The next Author 1 Ihall mention, is Pindar-^
who upon his Enemys bafely afperfing him, de-
* Ariftor. Poetic, c, 22. T© y6 \v (/.{jctp^uvy ro Qy.orjf
4- fciibes
^ytu^tiv ecj
L et. J w Hiftory of Infant-^aptifm. p^
fcribes his Contempt of their impotent Malice by
this Simile, which as literally as I can render it
in Erjgl'iflfJ^ is thus : ^ As when a Net is cafl into the
Sea^ the Cork fwims above ^ fo^ (ijhdivli^(?i- , am not I
funk^ viz. in their Reproaches. And by the way,
this place confirms what I a little before advanc'd,
that Figures are but a fhort imperfed Simile^
for aj^raTrl/g-©^ here is full as metaphorical as that
which I cited from Homer : (and Horace feems to
imitate this of Pindar^ Lib. i. Epilt. 2.
Affera mult a
Tertulit^ adverfis Rerum immerfabills Vndis.)
To cpiKK(^^ the thing whence the Simile is taken,'
being added, the Senfe is very clears and the
Word, 'tis evident, intends, that the Cork, while
the Net (inks down into the Sea, cannot it felf be
forc'd down, but will float above. This is fo
plain, that I think it neither wants nor can have
an Explanation : but the Words of the antient
Greek Scholiaft on the place, tending fo much to
confirm my AfTertion, I will tranfcribe 'em : For
like the Cork of a Net in the Sea^ I fwim, and
(^ ^OL-nllloixcci) am not funk. As the Corkj tho
loaded with the Tackle^ does not finkj i lAuVe/ j fo I
alfo am immerfihle^ d^,cl.-7v\i^^^ like it^ and not to he
overvohelrnd. They rail atme^ indeed^ fays he: hut
AS when the Net is cafi^ and funk under Water ^ the
Cork remains ^p^ctTr"^! $"©-', immerftble^ and fwims on
the Surface on the Sea^ being of a nature which
a€a7rTjcr(^ cannot fink ; in like manner cannot I
ajict'Trlig-i^, fmk or he overwhelmed in the Calumnys
* Pyth. 2. V. 139. "Aji y6 iivAKicv Tizvcv o
H 2 ani
I oo (^fleSlions on Afr.WallV Let.3 ^
and BetraEhions of others \ for fm of another nature^
and as the Cork is in a Fijhing-JVet.
Thus the Scholiaft, you fee. Sir, by his ufe of
the Word, leaves not the leaft room to imagine
it ever fignifys to fprinkle or j)our^ or any thing
but to dip^ or pvt under^ or into. And 'tis very
remarkable, that he feems to have thought no
Word more proper than this to exprefs what you
fee plainly is his Senfe : but as often as he repeats
the fame thing, which he does ad naufeam^ tho
it had been needful to vary the Word, and avoid
thatunpleafantnefs of the Repetition, he changes
it but once, and then he has Mm inftead of it,
which you know. Sir, fignifys to fwk^ tho not fo
emphatically as jia-zsTi'^co, witnefs Tollux in Ono-
mafi.
In the next place, give mc leave to cite £//n-
fides- The Grecians had facrificM Polyxena to the
Gholl of Achilles \ and after the Solemnity, they
permitted Hecvba to bury her Daughter's Body :
in order to which, according to the known Cuf-
tom of her Country on fuch Occafions, (he de-
figns firfb to wa(h and purify the Corps: for
which purpofe, (he calls out to her Servant, ^ Go^
take the Water-Pet^ my good old Maid^ and jhoi\\a6\
dip it in the Sea^ and bring it hither, &c. for the
Sea- Waters were thought naturally more clean-
Ting than others, as f Didymus and |1 Evjtatltius
tell us.
Bavfft/v -zrovTO^ a\©^, the Phrafc the Poet puts
into Hfczii'^'s Mouth on this occaiion, can have no
T£y
"*• Hecub. Aft. ?. V. 609. tot. Dram. ^ St>' /' av^ ^ttCvffa.
fiv^Q-y i^')^idL hdrei^ Jidi'\>s/.ff\ hifni cT.iufi^ ^rovjUf dhoi* ^
f D id ym" ad Iliad, ^.v. 314. *uVf/ /ft to u<r<yp ^^aKaost/iS
jl Euftath. ibid. p. 108. ''H 7dv\tii //«' ra ^Vg/ fvTTJiKOv
Am-
Let. 3 . Hijiory of Infant-^aptifm. i o i
Ambigaity in it ^ and the Schoiiaft renders it ex-
ceeding plain by the parallel Phrafes he mentions :
thus To 'i(p(x.yi tS oe'pT^, is to eat Bread^ and to
e-Trre tS ol'v^, to drink Wine : and fo €oc7rTe/v 7revT7(X^
ah(^ is, as we commonly fay in EngUjh^ to dip a
Pail of Water, But if it will be more Satisfaction
to you, ril bring the decifive Determination of
a Grecian Gritick, whom Arfenius Archbilhop of
Monemhafta^ thought fit to be admitted, among
other great ones, into his Collection of Scholiafts
upon Euripides. One of 'em fays exprefly on this
place, "^ BavrTe/v fignifys to let down or put any thing
into Water, or any other Liquid, He explains it by
the very fame Word which is us'd by St. Luke^
AB:s\%, 25. and in his Gofpel, C^^p. v. Fer, ^^ 5.
to exprefs letting the Net down into the Sea :
and fo alfo by St. Marli^ Chap. ii. Ver. 4. Accord-
ingly, either the fame Critick, therefore, or fome
other from whom Arfenius takes it, obferves a
little before, that the f Water was to he drawn out
of the inmoft parts of the Sea \ having an Eye, un-
doubtedly, to the Meaning of the Word, which
muft be to dip,, or the Remark is wholly ground-
lefs : for in any other Senfe there can be no oc-
cafion, nor indeed any room for it.
Arifiophanes ufes the Word feveral times : I have
mark'd down fourteen, which I believe are all the
places where it occurs *, and they none of 'eni in
the leafl: favour Mr. If^^//'s Pretences, but on the
contrary, make very ftrongly for the Opinion I
advance. The Grecians very frequently apply the
Word, in all its various Forms, to the Dyers Art •,
fometimes perhaps not very properly, but always
fo as to imply and refer only to its true natural
Signification, to dip.
H 3 Thus
loz (^efleaions on Mr.WzlYs Lct.j.
Thus, ^ Drefs not with coftly Clothes^ fays this
Poet, which (ft3a7rT(i)v) are dy'd or difd in the richefi
Colours. And fo again in his Comedy, entiti'd,
•f- Peace : and in his || Lyfiftrata, Ariftotle likewife
ufes It fo, when he fays, -^^ All thcfe things^ by
means of Heat and Moiflure^ enter the Pores offuch
things as are difd (^^Qinlofj^Oiv) into ^emy which re^
tain the Colour they have taken^ when the Moifture is
drfd away. And at the end of the fame Chap-
ter ^ -f-f The colour of things difd or dfd^ (jibaTrTo-
fA/jav) is changed by the forefaid Cavfes. And Plw
tarch fpeaking of Lycurgus\ Care to fecure the
Commonwealth from all thofe Arts which intro-
duce or encourage Luxury \ among the reft, fays,
||]| He forbid to pradife the Art of Dyings (|^-
<^[vJd^ or dipping into Colours, becaufe it tended
to effeminate the Mind, by engaging aridjlatter'
ing the Senfes.
But there is a great plenty of Examples of this
kind (^j, which 'tis needlefs to mention: and I
believe there is no occafion to go about to per-
fuade you, that Workmen dye by dipping •, and
for that reafon, have appropriated the Word to
their bufinefs. However, left there be any Suf-
picion in you, that it might perhaps be per-
formed in fome other manner ^ I'll only defire you
* Plut. k^. 2. Seen. 5. "Ot/y IuutIvv ^infic^v i^-mLvtn^
t Hug. 612, 674. II Pag. 828. ^ '. ^
'^'^ De Color ib lis, cap. 4. 'Ae/ y6 clttd -miflm ctv-r^j 1^
tt Twf cAh ^cLTrlofj^av rot yn^^^cL\±^ a.hKoi'^nnt J^ict TitV
III Apopth. Laeon. p. 405. 1l\w Ai Ccopmluji «V M^^AKiUu
\a) Hivodot, Pol)mn. p. 258. Ctef, Indicis paffim, e^^o
wqu'cl
Let. 3 . Hijlory of Infant-^Baptifm. i o 3
wou'd pleafe to confider, dipping is the only pro-
bable and convenient way, and in every refpeft,
perfedly agreeable to the Mature of the Thing, as
well as to that Senfe of the Word, which is very
confiderable. We fee, 'tis the only way with us^
and, which carrys the Parallel ftill farther between
the antient Greehs and Us, as they us'd Ba/iTo), we
ufe the Word Dip, both among the Workmen in
the Shop, and in ordinary Converfation ^ for
what's more common, than to talk of having
fuch or fuch a Thing dip'd^ meaning in the Dyers
Copper^ or in fome Colours ? So Mr. Miltori has
us'a it, in his beautiful Defcription of the Angel
Eaphaelj Paradife Loft, B. $.
. The middle Pair^ i. e. of his Wiag^",
Girt like a Starry Zone his IVaJle^ and round
Skirted his Loins and Tloighs with downy Goldy
And Colours dip'd in Heav*n*
Befides, 'tis obfervable, that the Grecians made
a difference between i>ye and other colouring Mat-
ter : Thus Plutarch ^ diftinguifhes between yi^d-
fuLol^oL and bccix^juocIol *, and Pollux f does the fame j
g^diJi^oi fignifying only that fort of Colouring
into which any thing is dip'd, according to the
Senfe of the Word, as I fee Stephens \\ alfo has re-
mark'd. And there is a PalTage in Seneca *^ very
clear to this Purpofe : Jnterefi^ quam diu macerate
fit^ crajfius Medic amentum an aquatius traxerit^ ft-
plus merfa fit & excoEia^ m femel tin^a* There is
a difference alfo^ how hng it lies infused *, whether the
Dye be thick and grofsj or water ijh and faint \ and
f- De difcernend. Amic. & Adulat. p, 94. med.
f Onomaft. lib. 7. c, 23.
jl Ad Voc. %f%«.
** Quajft. Natural, lib* 1. c 3. p. 484.
H 4 whether
? 04 %eflefitons on Mr.WaU'^ Let.;'
Tohether it he /^i-p^d very often and boird thorowly^ or
only once tificiurd. A nd "^ Fhiivorinvs and -{- Polhfx
uk •f(j/l(y.^clzf\cdVy which on all bands is allow'd
moH emphatically to f'g.Dify dippings plunging^
imme'-fiiig^ as a fynonymoiis Word for p^ocTrTcov and
X5''^v'a's, u^ Ef^glijh a Dyer,
This makes it neccfiary to fuppofe they dy^dhy
dipping ', as well a? another word us'd among 'em in
thefe Cafes, viz^. e-jr-JV to boil ; || They boil it in
Kettles^ fays Arifiotle\ — — and when the Flowers are
boiPd long enough together^ at length all becomes of a
purple Colour. And Hefy chins and Tolhx inter-
pret the fame word of Dying. iNow if they us'd
to boil the Things they dy'd^ undoubtedly they hrft
dip'^d or put ''em into the Liquor. But enough of
this.
There are other Paffage?, fomewhat a-kin to
thefe, which feem however to leave a little more
room for the Objedions of our Adverfarys ^ where,
tho indeed the Word is us'd, it appears by other
Circumftances, that the Writer cou'd not mean dip
by it. We may fee Inftances of this in Arifto-
phanes *, as where he fays A^fagncs^ an old Comick
of Athens^ us'd the ^^ Lydian Muftck^ jhav^d the
Face., and fmear^d it over (^fbccTi^ o f/jijuQ-') with tawny
IVafoes. He fpeaks of the homely Entertainments
of the antient Theatre, where the A6:ors daub'd
themfelves with Lees of Wine, and any odd Co-
lours, before Efchylus reform'd it, and introduc'd
the ufe of Mafques and Vizors. Ariflophanes ex-
prefles this by Qx7i\6jj^(Gt^ fbocl^xdos^ j not that
t Ono'.Tia!iic. lib. 7. c. 2:;.
II D^ Colv)ribus, c. 5. ''E^'^^^tv \v rali yyTftm ;^ tots
^^ 'IiTiK, Ad. I. Seen. ^. p. 300. Kit/ Av/j^«yy, ;^ ^^t-
he
Let. 5 . H'lftory of Infant-^apti/nu i o 5
he fuppofes they dip'd their Faces into the Go-
lour, but rather fmear'd the Colour on their Faces.
He has alfo "^ €oc7rT®^ o^vjs for ^ coloured Birdy not
implying it was dy'd by Art, but only denoting
its natural Colour by that Epithet. In like man-
ner, Arlfiotle fays, f // V/j prefs'd^ it dyes (QccTilti)
and colours the Hand ^ and Plutarch^ || That which
is black of it felf^ is not (SecTrfov) dyd or coloured by
Arty but by Nature^ &c.
But thofe Perfons who wou'd depend upon thefe
PalTages to prove, that QcLi\o^ lignifys fomething
elfe befides dippings mult confider, there is a mani-
feft Allufion in thefe and all fuch, to the Art of
Dying. And if the Word is borrow'd from
thence, as none can be hardy enough to deny, they
muft allow it is us'd there improperly, and meta-
phorically y and that its true primitive Meaning
only is ftill refer'd to, and imply'd. What I faid
above upon the fecond Citation from Homer,
which is exadly the fame Phrafe with thefe, may
therefore equally ferve to explain all fuch Paifages :
and 1 defire you wou'd carry it along with you.
Sir, in reading, to fave me the trouble of repeat-
ing it.
If in all alluUve metaphorical Expreflions, we
fjppofe the Senfe of Words to be alter'd, there
will be the greateit Gonfuficn in Languages ima-
ginable, and much beyond that of Babel. All
Words haid a determinate Signification there, in
themfelves •, and the People were miraculoufly
render'd incapable of underftanding one another,
not by the various Significations of the fame Word,
but, as 'tis generally believ'd, by new ones being
"^ Op^'/9. p. $26,
fHift. Animal. lib, «5. cap, 15. p, 64^, QKi^o^cvQ- cAl,
^ 11^ Quift. Rom. 26. p. 482, 489. To M AvTox^>iV (M^clv, ^x
'Cssni TiX^ni (i?M 0uV$/ ^A'vfi<iv i9J, &c.
inftantly
1 o6 ^fleElions on Afr. Wall'^ Let. j .^
inftantly put into the Mouths of thofe, who were
made at the fame time as fuddenly to forget the
old ones they had been always us'd to.
We are by no means therefore to imagine Words
are of fo vagrant and uncertain a Meaning : the
improper ufe of 'em does not change their Senfe j
other wife there cou'd be no improper ufe, no Fi-
gures of Speech, and no Allufions : for the Senfe,
not the Letters of a Word, is the Foundation of
the Allufion *, and if the natural Senfe is chang'd,
and another fubftituted, Words are us'd alike
properly in all Cafes, and only for what they li-
terally llgnify : and fo lofing in fuch Cafes their
former Signification, all Metaphors, Allufions,
Hyperboles, c^c. are loft too. But the Allufion
being fo plain in the Cafe before us, I infift upon
it, that the Word literally fignifys only to dip^
or put into^ &:c. and, as I noted before, 6)o-'C7e^, or
feme fuch Particle, is to be underftood,toq^ualify
the feeming Extravagance of the Expreflion, which
is a fort of abbreviated Simile, where a great
part is fupprefs'd and conceal'd ^ and only fo
much exprefs'd as will hint the reft to the Mind,
and give it occafion to fupply it. This Obferva-
tion will, without much Difficulty, be admitted
by all who have any Knowledg in, and made any
Obfervations about, the nature and ufe of Langua-
ges ; and I fliall elfewhere have occafion to cite
feme Words from PUto^ which confiderably illuf*
trate, or rather enforce it.
'Tis very pertinent to this Purpofe, what the
Scholiaft fays on a Paffage of j4riftophanes *, which
is literally thus \ Left I dip you (^{hd^Cu) into a Sar-
dinian^ i. e. a Scarlet, Dye, The Senfe of it, fays
^ 'A;^5o;,. Aft, I. Seen. 3. "Iva ^la Qi /2:«'4«» ^i^A Qet^-
the
Let. 3 . Hifiory of Infant-'Ba^tifm. 1 07
the Scholiaft, is, "^ If you don't tell me the Truth., fll
heat you till I make you all red with Blood* That is,
(to fill up the Senfe of the Poet from his Scholiafi:)
I'll beat you till you are befmear'd over with Blood,
and as red as if I had dip'd you in Scarlet. But
the Poet, to carry off fomethingof the Littlenefs,
which in a Thought fo low and familiar wou'd
otherwife too much have (hewn it felf, ufes a
more rais'd and vigorous Expreffion here, inftead
of this long Sentence, which wou'd have been too
tedious and flat.
'Tis no Objedion to fay, that if the Word in
fach places lignifys literally nothing but to <3//f,
&c. the Senfe, if it muft be fuppos'd there can
be any, will be abfurd, as well as mofl: grofly falfe.
For indeed, what can be more ridiculous than for
a Man ferioufly to talk of dipping a Lake or Ri-
ver, &c, in Blood? or of a Lady's dipping her
Face in Vermilion, when fhe adorns it with ar-
tificial Colour? which, on the contrary, 'tis
known mult be more artfully laid on. I readi-
ly grant, the Words, as they ftand in the
Pafiages refer'd to, are not literally true *, and if
it cou'd be imagin'd the Authors intended they
Ihou'd be literally underftood, they wou'd appear
very ridiculous, and deferve the utmolt Con-
tempt: But 'tis plain, their Defign is very differ-
ent ^ and their manner of exprelling themfelves
is very proper to their Defign, and agreeable e-
nough'to the Kature of Languages, and efpecially
of that they wrote in. And it can be no very
ftrange thing to meet with Words in Books, as
well as in common Converfation, us'd in a Senfe
not literally true \ and all Ironys and Hyperboles,
and, in general, all the Tropes and Figures of
■ ■ Speech
I o 8 ^fleclions on MrWsilYs Let. ^ ]
Speech which Rhetorick teaches, are Inflances of
it : and this you, to be» fure. Sir, fo perfectly un-
derftand, that I need not enlarge. But to illuf-
trate it by one plain Example in our own Tongue,
be pleas'd only to obferve, 'tis common with us
to fay, fuch a Fad or Report ftains a Mans Refu-
tation, Neverthelefs, this is not true in the Let-
ter, nor wou'd we be underftood as if it were.
Reputation not being capable of a literal Stain *,
we only mean to fignify by this Ellyptical Si-
rnile, (the word Stain giving occafion to fuppiy
what is fupprcfs'd) that as Stains on Linen,
or any thing white, take from its Beauty and
Clearnefs*, fo ill Reports, &c, leOen and impair
the Purity of a Man's Reputation, and are to it
what Stains are to clean Linen. And thus, not-
%vithftanding this Phrafe be not true in the Let-
ter^ yet the word Stain does not in the leaft
change, but retain its Signification ^ and the
Scnfe of the Phrafe is to be fupply'd, as the word
Stain directs, by filling up the Similitude, as I
have juft now done, or elfe in that fhorter man-
ner I before fhew'd, when I fpoke of Horner^ by
inferring as it were •, and then it will run thus :
This or the other thing does as it were ftain a Mans
Refutation,
This is readily brought home to the Cafe in
hand. 1 proceed therefore to add farther. That
it may not be amifs to make a diltindion between
the Senfe of a Phrafe, as it includes Words not
exprefs'd^ and the Scnfe of the particular Words
lin^ly confider'd, jufl as they ftand: For by this
dirdnction, the fune Sentence may, and may not
be literally true, at the fame time. The literal
Senfe of a Word, 1 call the obvious natural Senfe
it has by common Confent and Cuftom *, for
Words are merely arbitrary Signs of Ideas in our
Mind, and come to lignify, properly and literal-
Let. 3 ~* Hijlory of hfcint'^aj^tifm. \ o 9
ly, this or that, by Agreement only, and there-
fore are to be regulated by nothing elfe.
'Tis jufl; the fame with regard to particular
Phrafes *, for Words rang'd in fuch an Order and
Conftrudion, exprefs this or the other Senfe by
mutual Confent and Ufe. Tho the Words there-
fore as they Hand, are us'd and join'd together
improperly, yet the whole Phrafe is neverthelefs
literally underftood to be true, if it lignifys what
it is conftantly us'd to exprefs, which is the cafe
of all proverbial Sentences and figurative Con-
ftrudions. The foregoing Example in our Mo-
ther Tongue, of fiaining a Marias Refutation^ will
make this plainer. That only which is exprefs'd,
contains indeed the literal Senfe of the Words ;
but this making of it felf no perfed Senfe, toge-
ther with what is to be underftood and fupply'd,
is the literal and compleat Senfe of the Phrafe :
for tho 'tis but partially exprefs*d, yet the reft
is neceflarily iniply'd and hinted to us •, the Occa-
lion, and common Ufe, together with the Words
which are exprefs'd, adfually railing in our Minds
that part which, on thefe accounts, it was not lo
iiecelfary to fet down at large, and therefore
might fafely be omitted : and the Idea which is
thus neceflarily rais'd in the Mind, is the direct
natural, and confcquently the literal Senfe of the
Phrafe.
I'm inclined to believe, in general, 'tis a Mif-
take to fuppofe Words have more than one Sig-
nification ^ and that Words or Sentences are pro-
bably never to be underftood, but in their literal
Senfe. And tho it be true, that Sentences fome-
times are not to be taken according to the Letter
of thofe Words only which are exprcfs'd, yet
thofe Words can by no means be fuppos'd to lofe
or alter their Senfe, and receive a new one, but
the true full Senfe, which is there ellyptically ex-
prefs'd.
1 1 o (^flcElions on Mr. Wall V Let. 3 1
prefs'd, is to be made up^ as the literal Senfe of
the Words us'd, and common Cuftom, &c, (hall
dircft.
But I have dwelt too long, perhaps, on thefe
things, and might have fpar'd my Remarks to
you, Sir, who have read with fo much Penetra-
tion and Care the Works of that excellent Philo-
fopher, the late ingenious Mr. Locke^ and what he
has fo judicioufly written in the third Book of his
EJfay on Human Vnderfianding^ concerning the Na-
ture and Ufe of Words and Languages, by which
you are undoubtedly rais'd above my Remarks.
But 1 jadg'd it convenient to recal thefe things to
your Mind, tho you might know 'em before *, and
to acquaint you, that I believe thefe Obfervations
fairly apply'd, will remove the imaginary Diffi-
culty of proving ^octtT/^O) flgnifys only to di^ or
jut into^ he, and that no fingle Inftance can be
produe'd to the contrary.
Before I difmifs this matter, I will render what
I defign, by diftinguifhing between the literal Senfe
of the Words, and the literal Senfe of the whole
Phrafe, more obvious. I propos'd to fhew by it,
that in reality thefe and all fuch Palfages, what-
ever may be fancy'd to the contrary, are to be un-
derftood literally, and according to the ftrid pro-
per Senfe of the Words. For tho taking the
Words as they ftand, they cannot be true, nor
indeed have any Senfe at all ^ as to talk of dip-
ping a thing that is not capable of being dip'd, is
Nonfenfe : yet taking the fame Words to- be, as
common ufe has made 'em, an Ellypfis \ 'tis but
fupplying the other Words which are included,
and the Senfe and Conftruftion become very
eafy ^ and it appears the whole Phrafe, and eve-
ry particular Word, is to be underitood lite-
rally.
1 think
Let. 3^ Hijlory of Infant'^aptif?)!. 1 1 1
I think it plainly enough follows from all,
that Words, even in figurative Conftrudions,
are to be underftood literally *, and that in thefe,
and all fuch like Paflages, jiocTTTii), pravrTi^cj, &:c.
iignify nothing elfe but todlpy &c. However if
notwithftanding all I've faid, you fliou'd believe
I have not wholly taken away the fuppos'd Diffi-
culty, yet fince thefe Obfervations muft be al-
lowed applicable to the Cafes in Difpute, and
fairly explain and unravel the meaning of thefe
and all fuch Forms of Speech in fo eafy and fea-
fible a manner, 'tis an unavoidable Inference ^
1. That thefe Inftances, which fincerely I think
as good as any that can be brought againft us,
have no Force at all : for the eafy rational Ac-
count I have given of 'em, will go far enough at
lea ft to render 'em fo obfcure and doubtful, as
to be no Counter-Proof; and I'm perfuaded e-
very impartial Antagonift will own they carry
the Point much farther, and are ftrongly on my
Side. And,
2. That my Aflertion remaiiTS in full Force,
notwithftanding thofe Inftances which may be
cffer'd to the contrary •, and if fo, then 'tis eafy
to fee on which fide the Advantage lies : For
thefe doubtful obfcure Paflages at moft, are all
the Strength our Adverfarys have j whereas we,
on the contrary, have a greater number of fuch as
are clear and infallible, where the word can only
fignify to dip^ which I fiiall now go on to prove.
Ariftophanes^ for I have not yet done with him,
tho he may perhaps feem to give room for fome
Men to cavil in one place or two, which never-
thelefs you fee how fully we are able to account for,
affords us convincing Inftances, that he thought,
the true fignification of the word wis only to
dip. In his hated Comedy of the Clouds^ defign'd,
with too much Succefs, to expofe and ridicule the
Great
1 1 1 <]^fleFl'ms on Mr. WallV Let. 3 .
Great Socrates^ the Philofopher is fuppos'd grave-
ly tobufy himfelf, in computing how many times
the Diftance between two of its Legs, a Flea
Iprung at one Leap \ and in order to raeafure the
Diftance between the two Legs, one of his Pupils
is made to defcribe him ufing this Method : "^ He
firfl melts a Piece of Wax^ and then taking the Flea-,
he difd^ \.vi^oi\iv^ two of its Feet into it^ §cc. The
Other part of this ridiculous Experiment is no-
thing to our purpofe, and therefore I omit it.
Another PafTage you have in his Play, intitled
Teace^ \ Bring me hither the Torchj fays one, and
ni dip />, i/jL[hoi'la. To underftand this, it will
be necelTary to obferve the Poet introduces fome
Perfons about to facrifice to the Goddefs Peace j
and, among other Ceremonys, he mentions this
of the Torch as one : Now if you pleafe to re-
member. Sir, the antient manner of purifying a-,
mong the Grecians^ by a lighted Torch, you'll
grant it was perform'd by dipping the Torch in
Water, and fo fprinkling the Perfons or Things
concern'd ^ and 'tis to this effcd the Greek Scho-
liaft explains it, as does Florent, Chrifiianm in his
Note on this Place, who was the learned Precep-
tor to Henry IV. of France^ and is honoured with
a very handfom Elogy by the admirable Monfieur
de Thou,
There is another PalTage in Ariflophanes very
flrong to the fame purpofe, which however fome
perhaps may fancy favours the contrary: 'tis in
his Parliament of Women* \\ Firfi^ fays he, they
^ Nc^sA. Aft. I. Seen. 2. Ki^v Jicnii^a^, g»7a rnv 4^'a-
t E/f*?^. p. 662. iti^iS^ liS'j.Siov roS'llA^ct^eo ^^CaJv.
\\ EKyM7tct(. p. 6f6. rif^Ttt /mV -py T^excL ^ ^
wajh^
Let. ^ . Hiflory of InfantSaptifm. \ 1 3
wajhj p:>Oi'nl^(Tt^ or dip the Wool in warm Water^ ac-
cordiTig to old Cufiom- Here the word implies
Wajlnng^ as Mr. Wall wou'd have it \ and no doubt
if he knows of this Place, he thinks it mightily
for hispurpofe, and efpecially if he has but found
that Suidas ^^ and Thavorinus f interpret it by
ttAuv^o-/, which TUny^ on another occafion, ren-
ders elumt^ i. e. they wafi ovt *, and Stephens II fays,
it iignifies Uvoj and is peculiarly fpoken of Gar-
ments, &c» as A^OD is of the Body, and vi7rT(i) of
the Hands and Feet. Thefe things may feem of
great force, and pleafe Mr. Wall^ it may be, and
a great many more *, but I believe you underftand
this better. Sir, than to lay any ftrefs upon it.
Mr. WaM indeed finds ^ the Sacramental Wajhing is
exprefs^d hy Words^ which fignify Wajliing in the or-
ditiary and general Senfe ^ and therefore he infers,
baptiz^e is not to be limited in its fignification to
dip only : much more then will he infift on this of
j4rifiophanes^ which in it felf plainly fpeaks of
Wafhing, and is by the Greek Lexicographers in-
terpreted by a word which is always fo us'd. But
you mult needs perceive. Sir, inftead of prejudic-
ing, this will be found greatly to confirm my
Caufe : For in Wafhing, Wool is and mufl be
dip'd and put into the Water ^ and that this is
the Senfe of the word here, I appeal even to Sui-
das and Phavorlnusj whofe Glofs 1 am very well
pleas'd with.
For tho ttKvvco (from whence perhaps comes our
Englijlj word plunge) does fignify to wafli, 'tis fo
far from excluding, that it necelTarily implies ^/p-
ping •, and accordingly we fee it is appropriated to
Clothes, &c. which are dip'd into the Water
when they are wafh'd. Homer has a Verfe very
** Ad voc. iS*VT«^/. t P^g. 352.x
Ij Ad voc, TM/V<y. ^ Part II. p. 220.
I clear
M4 ^'fJeHtons onMr.Wzll's Let. 3.
clear to' this effed,^ where TrAuvav; is explain'd,
^^jLOiT ayco^ii h -^oTUphj to carry and put themin-
\toth€Rlver'\ '^.^Tii ^little after [|, he defcribes
their mariner of ^vaihing by a word which ex pref-
fes the Fullers Cuftom, fays Stephens^ of treadwg
things in- the Water: '^&^6v^iinLTp)i,^^'^^'^^^f^^
DldymtUy iv p^o^pcm^ th^ey tread ^ em- in '^r eat Stone-
Bafonsy aixl they^rtiuft certainly then i>e firft put
■ into the Water v',igrteable with thi^-TrAuiTfioe is a
• iVaOierwoman, 6t. Lau^idrefsy m^PoHpx'* ^ It ap-
fjpearsnovv j^lainiy' enWgh from all this^'that if
the woixi doe's tlgnify to wafh here, 'tis only ex
ro^/f^wf?if/,.and lireansfuch a Wafliing is imply s
Dippings and is perfor m'd by if, and therefore
this cad be of no Service to Mr. 1^^//, unit fs to
convince "him of his Miftake. ;' " -^ '; '-••-V-/*
'V'Befides thefe Paflages, //;irporr^f/o;7 '^ has pre-
fery'd.a Fragment of one of Arificfhaneis Com^-
dys, which are loft ;, the words ar« thefe: When
I *^ have dip^d^ 7 will' cite the Stranger before the
judges. This PaGage wouM have been very ob-
fcure, and I don't knpw whether any thing wou'd
.have given Light to it,' if 5W^ had not attemp-
■■tfed,'it ^ for I tal>e' this rn be the tallage he refers
■|:o,^ wheii he fays, -{-f IVhsH I have- dip^d- the Oar^
&c." which helps u's to/ the fenfe of the word
jJixdas in this Place, tho it does not clear up the
whole ; or pei'hap^i fays he, it may be a Afetaphor
taken from the Dyers ^ who fay ^ for infi^ni'e'j ril'd'ip
?>, and make it a black:' Athendius ha's- preferv'd
twb Other Fragments of the fame Author, in
*** ' ^' ''■ 7 . J 1 1 -' '' JVj '. ■ ... '
tOiyfe f. 'v. <'l • '111^(1.7.92.
* Ad voc.Nfiiyrcr./x^^f. - -'/.i: ., ' .. Y"
-j- which
Let. 3 . Hiflory of Infant ^aptifn. \ ^ ^
which this word occurs ^ one is, IVhat ^ Wretch
am I to he thus dip^d over Head and. Ears^ oc'niQx<p'
3n, in Brine like a pckled Herring r 1 know no-
thing of theoccafion of thefe Words, and there-
fore can only fay in ge^ieral, the fenfe of .the
word (XTTEj^acp^n feems apparent enough. The
other Fragment is more obfcure, and 1 can't de-
termine the word by any Circumftances to one
Side or t'other, and for that reafon 1 omit it.
I will now. bring you an Inftance or two from
Ariftatlc^ who abounds with 'em *, but a few may
fuffice. In hisTreatife of •the5t;w/, lib. ^. cap-ii»
he fays, '^ If a Alan dips^ ^eL^&i.^ any th.i'f^g into
IVax^ as far as it is difdy it is movd. Here 'tis i m-
poIFible to queftion the meaning of the word,
any more than in thefe following Inftanees^ as
where he fays, a certain fort of Fifli -{- carit hczr
any great Alterations^ for Example^ to he put into
jia7rT»fl"iV, a. colder Water in, Sutpmer : And that
the Flax in Elephants is. curd,., jj ky givi??g ''em
TO arm Water to drink^ and H.iy dip'd^ foocTrTovles, in
Honey to eat. Again, fpeaking of a kind of Ser-
pent bred in Africa^ he fays,, thofe who are bit by
it, ufe for a Remedy a certain "^"^ Stone found in
the Sepulchre of one of their antient Klngs^ which
they put into^ cl7^o^d^\cL]ii^s^ the Wine they drinh.
In another Place he mentions a Pool of Sicily (of
th^ fame nature with the Lake Agnano^ near the
Grotto del Cant ^ in the KeighbOurhood oi Naples')
t Hift. Animal. 1. 8. c. 2. tin. Kai tu^ ^ijaCo^A? cfi\vx
}j Hift. Animal. I. 8. c. 26. Koli r yj^nv rt< (Aki ^a'ctJcv-
'*-f- ibid. c. 29. '^Ov M^ Kiy^aj AK^ Hfrtz/iS©- 77<, hv Ka^/.-
CAV^a■^\l ti'7ro7A(^4 $ia,^h%Mi 7^1' a ^^'. All', )y iv Qivu afrzCu,-\cLi^lif,
I Z into
1 1 6 (^fleSlions on Afr. WalV^ Let. 3 .
•^- imo which if Birds and other Animals are fut^
flCTToSacp^, after they are ftrangled^ they immediately
recover.' He fays alfo, || "^Tis the Cuftom of fome
Nations^ in order to harden their Children, to dip
^emy aTrOjGrotTfftiv, into cold Water ^ foon after they are
horn, Thefe Paffages are fo very plain, they want
no llluftration.
But there is another Place in this Author, and
I remember no other in all his Works, which may
feem to have fome Difficulty in it, and therefore
I will be fo fair as to mention it. Speaking of
feveral ftrange Narrations, he fays, || The Pheni-
cians, who inhabit Cadiz, relate^ that failing beyond
HerculesV Pillars^ in fovr days^ with the Wind at Eafi^
they came to a Land uninhabited^ whofe Coafi was full
of Seaweeds^ and is not laid vnder Water ^ €a7rTl^t-
Sta^ at Ebb ^ but when the Tide comes in^ ^tis wholly
cover'^d and overwhelmed, BoczTTilicdvci being us'd
here to fignify the Land was under Water, by
the Water's coming in upon it, and not by its
being put into the Water, fome perhaps may
think it a confiderable Cbjedtion : but it will be
found of no advantage to our Adverfarys, if it
be obferv'd, that it here neceffarily and unavoida-
bly imports to be under Water, or to be over-
whelm'd or cover'd with Water*, which no way
futes our EngUjJj Pasdobaptifts, but is very agreea-
f De Mirabil. Aufcult. non longe ab initio. Uiex S/xg-
?^\av q (pcKTJV eiva.1 tVo]©" cvT^i^y.^iTJoVy «? o ret 'Uivrviffj^'ct T^f
Q^viuV K^ <T^ KOl'TTOyV C^OV, OTAV CUTTO ^O.d'j' y TA^IU AVdCtCl.
Ijll De Republic. 1.7. c. 17. init. ^to i^^ arohxoli %^tv
n^S ^ae^dfcov 'iSQ- Toii ^\ ei' 'TTC'Uiaov am^^iLTr]eiV ta yt^vo-
fliVeL'X-Vyj^lVy &c,
Ij be Mirabil. Aufcult. Aiyaci ^ ^ohiy^f t«< n^otMv%(
Tec ToiS'sH(^ KethH,(jSf^cf.j 'iEeo '■/rXioyla.i 'Upa-K-Aiieoy ^Awf', d^nKtujn
<LViao) K^ifrt? TiT]a.petc, ti^^^-^yc^t itg jjva^ TeV»< €fij/!x«f, 0fy« xj
ble
Let. 3 . JrLijtory of infant-^JiapttJnu 1 1 7
ble with what the Antipsedobaptifts, and the
whole Greek Church (which one wou'd imagine
ihou'd underftand the force of the word) at this
day continue to praftife : and this being the
plain fenfe of this Place, 'tis natural enough to
fay, a^ it xoere^ or, in a mmner^ or fome fuch Ex-
prefllon is to be underftood.
Befides, the word ^oL-nrilGi^ perhaps, does not
fo neceffarily exprefs the Adion of putting under
Water, as in general a thing's beingin that Con-
dition, no matter how it comes^fo, whether it is
put into the Water, or the Water comes over it*,
tho indeed to put it into the Water is the molt
natural way and the mod common, and is there-
fore ufually and pretty conftantly, but it may be
not neceflarily imply'd. However that be, the
Place makes nothing at all for our Adverfarys ;
and therefore, as they'll not infill on it, I'll dif-
mifs it, when 1 have defir'd you, if you believe
there is any Difficulty remaining, to confider it
impartially, and examine it by the Rules 1 laid
down for underflanding metaphorical, ellyptical,
&c* Forms of Speech.
Heraclides Pomicusj a Difciple of Arlflotle*^^
may help us, alfo, in fixing the Senfe of the word ^
for moralizing the Fable of Mars^s being taken in
a Net by Vidcm^ he fays, '{■ Neftune is ivgenioujly
fuppos^d to deliver Mars /row Vulcan, tofynify^ that
when a Piece of Iron is taken red-hot ovt of the Firey
and fut into the Water^ jiOdTrTf^eTai, the Heat is re-
pel^d and extingutjlid by the contrary nature of the
Water.
I Ihou'd have quoted Herodotus before, but hav-
ing fome how or other forgot him in his proper
t Allegor. p. 495. Uoceiihov cT' o ^vofjLivQ- 'jrctf 'Hp(Li<ni^
(^VnW^ilJicli KdkTU^^i^V dvcLTltiviTSil.
I 3 Place,
Plate; give me leave to tranfcribe a Paflage or two
out of hiai here. In the /\th Bool of hisHifiory^
defcribing the Cuftoms of the Scythians y Always^
lays hc^^ vphen they conclude an Alliance- with any
c'fie^ they' ratify it' in this manner : They fill a large
JEnrthQ^YVeffel with Wine^ and mingle' into it Blood
drawn from each . P^arty., by making an Incifion in their
Fle(l} with a Swo-rd.- Into this they dip a Scy miter ^
fpme Arrows y a Pole-Axe^ and a Javelin V ^i^d then
rvith_ many horrid Imprecations^ they who treat the
League^ and the chief Per fans of the Coin f any drink
tip the Mixture. In another Place^. fpeaking large-
ly of the Guitoms and Antiquitys of th^ 'Egyptians^
he fays, * Swine are counted fuch unclean Beafis a-
mong''em^ that if an Egyptian does but touch one in
p^'^ffi-'^g-i he runs to the River ^ and dips^ ijhx^i^ him^
fclf in ity with his Clothes.
Theocritus ufes the word in the fame manner,
when he fays, ^?" Every Mornings inp-cad of Water^
wy Maid jlmll dip me^ jiaxja/, a Cup of Honey \
that is, {liill fill me a Cup of Honey. Here
fi:<x'4^t implys her dipping the Cup into fome large
V-^lTclof Honey, and can fignify neither to w a fly
nor pour^ &:c. nor any thing elfe but dip. As a-
■gain, where he fays, 77?^ Lad let down a mighty
I' Melpomen, p. 154. "0?x*^sq 'zoiivvjat lyJ^at a Ay ^^oi
dii
errs co;{,/cyTO/4yA'.V''o/, >', ^^ i-rouiveov ol T>«/V8 d'^tcf.
■ *■ Euterpe,^ p. 68.^'"Tj' /s 'AiyvVltv yuA^ov i^ybxijai byfiav
Hl'Jti' }y T^TV /J^J, hJj T,i -vJ^uVll dvTCdV TTCtftCOV vU^AUJOKTl TSt'
Cri\ucJLrio!<n cLlTt^iVi^.H^''^ ico-jJ^V, ^■M'ii'f 'TTolct^'.QV.
t itiy.ll. <. V. 1 2f.— • Kit/ TO 'TTor ^^tsv
^i-\ffj.
Pitcher^
Le t. 3 . H'tftory of Infant-'Baptifm. 1 1 9
Pitcher ||, and made hafte to dip itj fhoc-xiccij viz. in the
Water.
Mofchus^ cautioning againfl: Cupi£s Treacherys
and Arrows, fays. They are deceitful all^ and Pre*
fents dip^dj fbi^an'mi^ in Fire: that is, as fome
Nations ufually dip their Arrows in the ranked
Poifons, to render the Wounds they give incura-
ble ^ fo Cupid's are, as it were, dip'd in Fire^ to
create Pain and Anguifh.
As near as I can remember, mofl of the In-
ftances which follow are plain and eafy, likethofe
immediately preceding; fo that 1 fhail but jufi:
mention 'em (except when I come to Callimachns)
and add no Expofition. If this prove tirefom
and infipid, you cannot cenfure me, (ince you
have ingag'd me to give you fo particular an ac-
count of the word, which cou'd not be done with-
out being tirefom both to your felf and me.
I don't know whether ^r^rz/j, in hhPhmomena^
ufes the word above three times. One is in de-
fcribing the Setting of the Confleliation Cephevs^
in the Latitude of about 69 or 70 Degrees, where
he calls it, ^ Dippings j2:a7rT(i)V, or plunging his tipper
Parts into the Sea* And the Latins frequently in-
terpret the word, as ||j| Ovid does, by mtigo in
thcfe Cafes. And again, giving that fame Rule for
judging of the Weather, which our Lord men-
tions Mat. 16. 2. Aratus fays, \ But if the Sun
dips^ j^ocTrTo/, himfelf without a Cloud intothelVeJlern
11 Idyll. 13, V. 46. "Httj/ 0 x»f©- i'^ei;)^ 'TTomS 'Tro^v^yJ^icL
* V, 550. To, u^JH? tCitpaXlw yjihA 7tdv\dL
Bctf^^cov eoKZAi/oio.
||I|Frf/?. /.4. ]). 80. Ante tamen quam fiimma dies fpe61a-
cula iiltat,
Enfiter Orion cequore merfus erit,
1 4 Se^y
? 2 o <I(efleflions on Mr.W^iWs Let. 5 ]
Sea^ &c. Laftly, repeating more Prognoftications
of the Weather, f f // the Crow dips^ i^ocy^oujOj
his Head into the River ^ &C.
My Opinion is confirm'd alfo by CalUmachus^ in
his Hymns, when he fays, {a) Te Grecian Waters
women (they farnifh'd private Houfes with Wa-
ter, as fome do among us) dlf not your Vejfels in
the River Inachus to day. The Hymn was madeon
the folemnizing the Feftival of wafhing the Statue
of Pallas •, which Ceremony was perform'd, by
Perfons fet apart for that purpofe, in the River
Inachus^ a little before day : from this River the
Inhabitants were ufually fupply'd with Water,
which makes the Poet, in veneration to the God-
defs, charge the Water- Women here not to dip
their Pitchers in the River on that day. This
is clearly the Senfe *, and therefore they who have
tranllated it by lavate^ wajli^ confonant with
Mr. Myall's Notion of the word, are grolly mifta-
kcn : and I wonder Theodoras Gravius^ who be-
gan, and his incomparable Father, who complea-
ted the late curious Edition of this Author, have
left this Fault untouch'd, efpecially if they were
timely enough pofTefs'd of that immenfe Trea-
fury, the illuftrious Baron Spanhelrns Remarks on
Callimachusy who particularly correds this Error,
with great Solidity of Argument. FoUtian too
had render'd it very juftly by tingete^ dip^
and did not deferve the Cenfure of that honoura-
ble Critick, tho indeed he has treated him with
his ufual Decency and Mildnefs: For as Baron
Spnnheim himfelf notes, the old Scholiaft on Ni-
cander^ who has us'd the word juft in the fame
manner as CalUmachus here does, interprets it by
"n^«f OK, Kt(pctMii &c.
(4) InLavacr.Pallad. V.45. ^ct^jLiCpv vJ^c^po^i (xh Cct-Trjiji.
Let. 3 . Hiflory of Infant'^a^tifm. 1 1 1
yk^l'^y which fignifys to fill -^ and this muft be done
by dipping. This, if polTible, is dill more evident
from the PalTage 1 juft now cited from Theocritus^
^ The Boy let down his mighty Pitcher in hafie to dip it.
Axidi Arift of hanes exprelTes the fame Senfe, thoon
another occafion, thus : '{- With Pitchers fetch me Wa-
ter from the River* And fo Aniftotle ufes aiquv,
on tlie like occafion, Qt^cefi. Mechanic, c 29. And
Confiantine obferves from an j^igram of Hermo-
laus^ \j; \}S^cau KptoVo-ov \^oi\^^ He dip^d hij Pitch-
er in the Water, The myfterious Lycopbron affords
us an Inftance parallel to this, in CalUmachus \ || dip^
ping^ P30c4avT^, xvith ftrange and foreign Buckets :
and Canterus renders the Word here fc^ Tingentes^
as Politian has done in CalUmachus ^ which is cer-
tainly the true and literal Scnfe. And the Greek
Scholiaft on Euripides^ who ufes the Word like-
wife exaftly to the fame purpofe, in the pl^ce a-
bove cited, fays exprefly, as I there tranfcrib'd
him,"^"^ Boiirliiv fignifys to let or put down into Water \
and yet at the fame time he interprets j'loc-laoTz.
dippings (Etiripides\ Word) by yifjii(ju<m. filling ;
which fhews he underftood it in that and other
fuch places, to fignify to fill by dippi?7g.
To this may be added what Ariflotle fays in
his Mechanical Qjieftions^ '[-[ The Bucket mujlhe firjh
let down^ or dip*d^ €a4oi/, and then he drawn up a-
gain^ viz. when it is full. When his Excellency,
therefore, correds Politian^ and renders the Word
here by Haurite^ as Scaliger has done that in Ly-
cophron by Haurientes \ he is not to be fuppos'd to
*"Idyl.i3.v.45. "Htb 0 ;t«f ©- Ww^p^* Tniw m^v^J^et k^uoj^v
t Ran. Aft, $, Seen. 2. KctK'maiT bif.7n]a.fj(MV S^^atv ai^'n,
II Caffandr. V. 1365. -^^uo^s^im h^ViUun Cd-^AvUi TfvQ-'
If Cap. 29. Bd^-Myt^^^^ )^ Tbr' ctV<y eAxoW.
meajj.
rfz <I(efleEiions on Ur.WslVs Lct.jl
mean^ it does not figriify to dip^ in that placej
but only that the Latin Twgo dbcsnot fo fully and
tjroperly exprefs the Poet's Senfe, as Haurio does j
and fo tho Tingo^ by a Metalepl^s, is the true
Senfe of ^olt^q^ (for as f^ojfius remarks, Ij Im-
merfion is before tinging^ for 'things are ting d by it)
yet Haurio is more proper when we'fpeak of
drawing or taking up Water out of a River.
Ovid ufes it thun^ F^fior. lib.. 4. Et Manibus
fur am Fluminis haufit Acjuam^ And with her Hands
fie fcoop'd the Chryftal Flood. . ,In this Paflage ViS
obvious, that byAfanibusAquamhaurire^hcvnuit
necefTarily mean, to take up Water in the Hands^ by
dipplnfr them tnto it : and fo the Phrafe includes
dipping, as undoubtedly thofe great Men defign'd
it fhou'd, when they tranflated Qdmlc^ by Hau-
rioy as the apteft Latin Word, and exadly in the
fame Senfe as Ovid here ufes it.
A thing of this nature, and fo evident, did
pot indeed need to have been fo largely treated
as it has already been : but the unaccountable
Tenacity of our Antagonifts, together with your
Commands, have made it nece'flary to be very
particular, and therefore I mult jp^roceed to add
fome few Inftances more.
Dlonyfius Halicaruaffcus defcribing the warni
Duel between Aruns and Brutvs^\\i^ this Evprefli-
on \ '{- One thruft his Spear^ P:dXocc^ between the ^^
therms Ribs ^ who at the fame. 7nJ}antpu}h^d his into
his Enemy^s Belly. In the Life of Homer ^ wbich
that excellent Philologiil; Dr. Gate has prov'd ^ to
have been written by this Dionyfiusj we have a.ve^
li Erymoiogic. ad voc. Baptifmus Pofterior eft Immerfi-
owi Tmitura, quia h^c Immerlione fit. .
i; Antiq. Rom. lib. 5. p. 278. 'o^'fk.Taf 'arxi/^^^'f i^*4«*5
tVjj cijyijJ^jj^ ^. d'i iif Tu? kci^va.^. ,v -
^, * Fiifat. ad Opufcul. Myihologic.
Let.^ • Hiftory of Infant-^aptifm. x^'
ry remarkable PalT^ge. The Biographer ispoiiit-^
ing out fome of the innumerable Beautys in 1^0^
msr\ incomparable Poems, and. takes notice par-
Iticularly of one in the fixteenth Jllad^ v. 333;*
where Ajax is defcribM ^iWing CUohulus : -]- Ha;
flruck him . acrofs the Neck witip his heavy Sword :. '
And the whole Sword became warm, with the Bloody
fays the Poet. By which is emphatically exprefs'd,
how much the Sword was dip'd in, tgocTrT/o&M, (as
Pfeudo-Didymiis Q^Y^hins it) and wet with Blood.
And Dlonyfius'% Words, for the fake of which I
mention this,, are thefe: || In that Plyrafe^ Homer'
exvrejfes hlmf elf with the gr e at efl Energy^ fi^^^fy'^^^t
that the Sword was fo dlfd^ Sa-zsTi^evTi^, in Bloody
that ^twas even heated by it,
Straboh very plain in feveral Inlliances : fpeak-
ing of the Lake near Agrigemum^^ a Town on ths
South-fhore of Sicily ^ now call'd Gergeml^ he lays,'
* Things which otherwife will not fwim^ dont Jinkj
€a75Tj^fca^/, in the Water of this Lake ^ but float like
Wood, And there is a Rivulet in the South-Parts
of Cappadocia^ he tells us, -ff whofe Waters are fi
buoyant^ that if an Arrow is thrown in^ it will hardly
fink or be dipd^ |?:a'5TTi^€a9a/, into \m. Again,
fpeaking of the daring Attempt of Alexander at
Thafells^ at the foot of Climax^ a. Mountain ia
Lyciay between which and the Sea the PaiTage is
very narrow, he obferves, that at High- water;
ITAMjfl&f ^J<PiH etV)^iVA KjCOTTriiVTJ . - »
ricTj/ cfl VTIi^^OUCV^ c'lfp&cLl^TI.
II Vit. Homer, p. 297. Udiv <r' uVedtf u^V^w ^ipQ- atfxdpn
K) y6 oy T^TO) fuo^'iyn (ji^i^ova. iy.(pACjyt eo^ ^clt^^Ic^pIQ: kiw
* Lib. d. p. 421. 'OvJ^i. ydp nli etyjaKvfj.Cm ^A'Tffji^i^t
ft Lib. 12. p. 809. Tw ^i yj^^ivTi d/Jvnov aiveoUv Hi r
C'AppVy jj 'did, rk vJb^Q- avirr^^lTJii iz^y-nv, asi uo/^ii B^^^^
and
1 24 ^fleSlions on jV/r.Wallx Let. ^ I
andefpecially in Winter, at which time Alexander
was there, 'tis overflowed by the Sea ^ bat not-
withftanding, the King, impatient of Delays, led
on his Army, and * the Soldiers marched a whole
Day thro the Water^ dlfd^ /bocsffi^o^tvo.v, up to the
Wafte. In another place, afcribing the rabulous
Fropertys of the Afphaltltes to the Lake Sirbo?tj
he fays, 't* the Bitumen floats a-top^ hecaufe of the
Nature of that Water ^ which admits no diving ^ for
if a Man goes into it^ he can't fink ^ or he Jip^d^
€<x7zrf({££&(U, hut is forcibly kept above* Take one
Inftance more from this Author, who a little af-
tef, in the fame Book, mentions a fort of wild
Arabsj whom he calls Elephantophagi^ or Elephant-
Eaters \ fome of whom, among other Artifices,
he tells you, they made ufe of to catch the Ele-
phant, II kill'* d him with Arrows dip'^d J [hiQcifJ.fA.iVo7sj
in the Gall of Serpents.
Plutarch^ in his Treatife concerning the Educa-
tion of Children, advifes not to overtask 'em ;
and adds: ||lj I have known feme Fathers^ who thro
exctjfive Fondnefs^ have ^ot truly lov^d their Children
at all* To make my fclf better underfiood by an In*'
* Lib. 14. p,982. Y^oAohhjj rm iiui^.y Uvctsi.Jt '•^A^t tIjj
t Lib. id. p. 1108. '^En fcOT7n;A*^»<75s M rUo (pvciv rk
ildCeiPTzt , efc AX* t^Alfi^t.
II Lib. 16. p. 1 1 17. Thii /t )^ ro^Jij^mv dvcui^m sLvrii
|!|j Pag. 15. "HcAjt c/)i' riya4 iy^ .itJhi^ Tntfie^^ o^r 7^ xiccv (pi><{iv
TO fm ^i?i%tf eiiTiov }(^Ti^- tI hv t<^v 0 ^vKofJiM x.iyctv j ha
fiance :
Let, 3 • Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. i z 5
fiance : Being eager to have their ^Children early ad*
mir*d^ and excel in all things^ they lay Burdens on
Vw that hear no froportion to their Strength^ and only
ferve to offrefs and jade ^em> And when they are
th'U-s fatigu*d^ ^tis imfojfihle their Minds JIjom d im-
prove : for as Plants thrive and flourifli^ when they are
moderately water d^ hut wither and fine away if you
drench ^em too mvch ^ fo the Mind if moderately ex-
ercis*d with Lahours proportionable to its AbilitySy
grows more vigorous '^ hut too much ToUy ^ccsff i^tTou,
as it were drowns and overwhelms it*
If this PalTage fhou'd fecm to be a little obfcure,
I muft refer you. Sir, to what I have faid before,
which will effedually take away all the Difficulty,
and which I need not repeat. Bat I will give an-
other Inftance from Plutarch^ that (hall be evident
enough. Relating the Stratagem of a Roman Ge-
neral a little before he dy'd of his Wound, he
fays, that ^ he fet up a Trophy^ on which having
dipt^ Ca-sff/Vas, his Hand in Bloody he wrote this In*
fcription^ d>CC.
I have almoft tir'd my felf, and will mentioa
bat two or three places more. Take one fiom
Lucian'j who defcribing the cruel inhuman Difpo-
iition of Timon^ that monftrous Athenian^ who
bore a profefs'd inconceivable Hatred to Human
Kind, makes him exprefs hiixifelf thus: f Shou'd
I fee any one^ fays he, in the midfi of raging Flames^
jull ready to take hold on him •, and jhou*d he ear-
neftly beg me to put out the Fire^ fd pour on Pitch
and Oil : If a Man were hurry^d down a rapid Stream^
— — — ^ . ■ ■ . - ■ _ . -J
* Parall. Gragc. Rom.^ p. 545. Kat iU Ta cfc?fc* Ttw^uef.
t Lucian. Vol. I. p. 139. *£/ </i« nvet IJ^otfu cy T^ve^ J}(tip»
mi
:\i6 (J^fleEtions on Mr. Wall V Let. j^
and tpith out-ftretclrd Hands cry* d to me for Helpy
J-d thrufi him doxpn when pnkingy QocTsjiloyTOi^ he ne^
^er P^oud rife aa-ain.
The pious Emperor Marcus Antoninus^ in his
admirable Meditations, ufes the Word whofe Senfe
we, are fettling, feveral times ^ but I think al-
ways metaphorically, fo that, indeed, it is not
-very fair to argue from thofe Pallages. However,
left my Adverfarys fhou'd imagine they make a-
gainft me, L will touch upon 'em.
In the third Book, he draws the Charader of
'fuch a one as he thinks may be reckon'd a Man of
tru€ Merits and. fays, he |j is not to be corrupted
^withPleafures^ nor broken by Misfortunes '^ -unmoved
with Calumny s and Slanders ^ a Conqueror in that
noble Strife of maftering and fubduing the Pajfiotis^
■ andy QiQocixfj,ivp\'j difd^ as it were, ?^, or fwallow'd
■ \}ipwithjufiicej that is, perfedly juft : as we fay,
Perfons giv'n up to their Pleafures and Vices^ are
immers'd in, or fwallow'd up with Pleafures er
Wicked nefs. So 'tis in i Tim. vi. 9. They that
will be richy fall int-a Temptation^ and a Snare^ and
into many foolijh i^nd hurtful Lvfts^ which drown Men
in Defiru^ion and Perdition, Again, the Imperial
Moralift fays, ^ Such as the Thoughts are which you
are mo ft fcjfefs^d with^ fich will your [Mind he .\ for
the Thoughts^ ^JcT^TiTDiij dip or tinBure the Mind :
^iX-srTe, dip^ or tinflure />, therefore^ by accuftoming
■ yourfelfto fuch Thoughts as thefe^ &C. In the fixch
Book, and I think the Word occurs no oftner in
all. thefe noble Meditations, the Emperor fays,
. II . §♦. . 4v p. 1 7. T pj' '^Av^^u-Tffov Ayj^¥-^v {i/oi'coy , at^utov %W
[^.; ■* Lib'. e,,^.i6, ]^. /^i'''^OidL alv '^Khdiu; ^dLv-ryL^Ai-t /rzicLV-m
Let. 3 . Hijlory. of. hifantr^Bapti/??!. 1 1 7
^^vDcn't mah thefqrmr Emperors the Pattern qP
your ABions^ Ufi',^p{Cpy:Sj you are in feEl^d or fiaind
or as it were^dip'd ;ind dy'd,. viz^, in MilUkcs or
Vices. Tlie Period, is extremely Ellyptical, and
vftaads in need of tbefe or fuch Supplements to
\*niake but. the Sen/e ia another Language, wherein
'(that defedive Form is not in ufe.
\s.\ I don't fee any Advantage our Adverfarys can
■ poflibly preteAd to from thefe or any the like
Paflages : That they are metaphorical, none cafi
qui^ftion ^ nor,, in my opinion, can it be doubted^
hut they neceifarily allude to, and impjy Mppim ;
for only in that Senfe of the Word can the Me-
taphor be juftify'd, which, according to Cicero's
-Rule :| , is natural, and not too licentious.
... But to pafs this, I wou'd only note, that PI at 0^
7vtn his admirable Commentarys concerning Govern-
'ment, has purfu'd this Metaphor very clofely,
■ and.thereby fliewn us the Propriety of it, and how
exprelTive it is ^ for which reafon I will tranfcribe
oMm U large, r:
01 MXhe Dyers^ when they are ahouttadip.a.QvdM'
2'Jtityof,Wool to make it of a purple Colour^^, -iull out
T^fMhitefi.ttf'th^ Fleece J and pre^ar^ and worl it with
ouuX 'jii: 0; .rx, ,. ♦ • - ^.V^• a
■^'TTtE-7f7—-r^ — : — '■ -— r-
Ollf -^'' ' ^^^^"- ^'^- ^* ^' 57- Tranllatipnem pudentemeffe
afrpffere, ut cum ratione in confimilem rem tranfeat, ne
-''flrte'dVfeau temerci& cupide videatur in diffimileia traaf-
-cmxiffe. ^. _ ,;.
'ksjr.-^'' F-^^-^^-^^ Republica, l^b. 4. p. 6^7, E." or/Sct^gV? Ytt^/Z^V
^ %'''^''' f^ '^'^'^ 'H, ^''''^■^ ^ >i7a>J'ii Cct'TTr.icn' '^ 0 {jl6.i;a9
; ar cLvd,jviJ.ucl.nxoi>^ "^j^ ^.erat pviji.uu70)V d\lvet.Tctt ctVTzav i^dLV^Q-
■<t<^cLi^u^. a cT' av (xti Q.'^ da ^lynrcti 'iciv 75' 77^ ctAAcc
iiB (]^fleclions onMr.WslYs Let.j.
a world of trouble '^ that it may the better take the Grain ^
and then they dip ity (bXTrltsai, The Dye of Things thus
difd is lafting and unchangeable^ and cannot he fetch'' d
out or tarnifii d^ either by fair Water ^ or any Trefara^
tions for difcharging of Colours, But things which
are not dfd after this manner^ you know what they
are \ no matter what Dye they are difd in, iboczff>j^ they
never look well ^ without this V reparation they take hut
a nafly Colour ^ and that is eaflywajWd out too. And
thus in like manner our chufing Soldiers^ and inftruEling
^em in Mufick^ and thofe Exercifes which confifi in
Agility of Body^ you mufi imagine our Defign is only
to make ^em the better receive the Laws^ which are
a Kind of Dyc^ that their Tempers being forrnd by a
proper Difcipline may befix^d and unalterable by Ter^
ror^ &C. and fhoicplw^ their TinBvre may not be waJJj^d
out by any Medicaments of the moft powerfully expelling
Nature *, a^ Pleafure which is ft ranger to this JEffe^^ than
any Lye^ as is likewife Griefs Fear or Defire^ and
the like.
The Figure, you fee Sir, is maintain'd quite
thro the PafTage, by applying the Dyers Terms to
the Things of the IVlind. 1 find Gataker alfo has
tranfcrib'd this Place a little more at large, together
with feveral others from Seneca^ &c, to the fame
Effed, in his Learned Note on the Words above
cited, in the 4th §. of Antoninm\ Third Book ;
which if you think it needful you maybe pleas'd to
turn to, for they confiderably illuftrate my AfFer-
cvTcic^ cvjT^ n e/b'Jrt yifvono )^ mex J^eiveov xj Tnei r oiKKuVi
«^a To ir\jjj T5 (^\icnv x} Ttou T^tplw i'mmS^eiAV d'^yjivdu' jy
c4CKAvi^e<Vy « 7i riJhi'fj, 'nuvlU ^^at^j^ <f\kHVOTi^ Hov nro
tion ;
Let. 3- Hi/iory of Infant-^aptifm. i 29
tion. But give me leave to add another Paflage much
like the preceding one of Plato^ which jult comes
into my mind ; 'tis part of Ly/ls's Epiltle to ///p-
parchus^ pablifh'd by the Learned Dr. 6Vf, in his
Opvfcula Mythologica : Speaking of Pythagor.tsh Me-
thod with his Pupils, ^ As ^Dyers^ fays he, firfi
cleanfe and wajJ} Clothes which are to be dy^dj in fame
Aflringent^ that fo they may take a more durable Co-
lour 5 in like manner^ that Great Man us^d to prepare
fuch as came to learn of him^ &c. Mentioning of
thefe Metaphors gives i?ie occalion to remember
the Words of Plutarch concerning Otho^ whom Ju-
nius was folliciting Galba to nominate his Succeflbr
in the Empire; and tho 'tis out of due Order, as
having difpatch'd P/j^z-^rr/? before, I'll mention 'cm
here, the word jioc7rT/^6) being us'd as figuratively
as in the PafTage above : f He was^ fays Plutarch,
over head and ears [/2?£€cc'SjT/a-/x«vov] in debt \ which
is exadly our EngUfl: Phrafe.
Pollux^ in the Work he composed for the Ser-
vice of the Emperor Commodus^ to teach him to
fpeakCre^^ corredly, puts ]] ^OL'd\llio3^i for a Ship's
being funk and totally immersed in the Sea.
ril add but one Inftance more, which fhall be
out of Themifiius j who fays, ^^ 77?^? Pilot cant tell
hut he may fave one in the Voyage^ that had better he
drovond^ [[f^oc-sff/W/] funk into tlie Sea.
^ Pag, 737. K:6,3s«,'^f >S li ^dL^ii<; fntsii^'''^^es^.VTii
ttvcfmeovv^ )y /uaif^k'^oKct yiviftian^kyttv li^iTztKov' r avTov o thjiio-
OTTZC^ ACM, &C.
^ t Moral. Tom. 9. Galba, p. 1504. Koj mvi^Kt^Muv ixvcl'
II Onoraaftic. Lib. i. c.^. Td JV W3« oyTzo^ olv «Vo/?.
vaSmi-, &c.
'^"^ Orat. 4. p, 1 5 5.^00' 7t 0 yjuCi^VfiTtH, u c^^n hi irS "^^^
K Thus
130 (^fleBions on Mr.WdVis Let.^.
Thus I put an end to my laborious Task: You
fee, Sir, how many Examples 1 have produc'd,
and I might eafily enumerate as many more,
from the Authors I have nam'd, and likewife from
thofe I 'have wholly omitted ^ but I'm wearied with
heaping up dry Sentences, only to get at the
Senfe of a Word, which I think fufficiently clear
already, and altogether as plain of it felf as any
thing in the World can make it. Your expreily
obliging me to this Service is a very good Excufe j
and yet I can hardly forbear thinking I had need
fay fomething more, but that I conlider it was
apparently neceflary to do as I have done ,
fince fome Perfons fo confidently pretend, and
withal fo very unreafonably, that jJ^a-sfliVo) do's
not always fignify to dip ^ and among the reft
Mr. Wall is one. He takes the Liberty to fay,
yl/r. Walker has largely fiiewn from the Greek Authors^
and Lexicographers andCrlticks^ that be/ides the figni-
fication Immergo, they give It that of Lavo In ge^
neraU Whereas you fee, Sir, I have fully baffled
all that is alledg'd from any Paflages in the Gre-
clan Writers : As to Lexicographers and Cri-
ticks, were it fo material, I cou'd eafily prove him
to be very much miftaken there alfo: The 6'r^f;^
Lexicographers aiford him no ground at all for
his Pretence^ and the moft Learned of the others,
if they do interpret the word by lavo^ don't mean,
as. he pretends, any wajhlng in general, but only
fuch as is perform'd by dlppt?7g: for they may render
it well enough by lavo^ the general Word, which
comprehends mergo the particular.
I know it fignifys to wajlj^ as a Confequence of
Dippings but fo likewife it do's to wet, colour,
dye, drown, and to poifon: it alfo fignifys to put
on C k R I s T, and to be bury'd with him, as the
. Apoflle himfelf teaches us. But what I have fur-
ther to fay I hiuft leave to my next. Jatn^ &c.
.J, LET-
Let. 4- H'lftory of Infant-'^aptifm. \ 3 1
Letter IV.
Critich confiantly affirm^ the proper and genuine Scnfe
of fboi'ifiilcd is immergo, &c. So VoUius, Coji-
ftaiitine and Stephanus render it. A Teftimony
from Cafaubon. His poor Evafion. Another
from Grotius. Another from Dionyfius Pctavius.
'Tis needlefs to colleEt more. Mr. Wall confcioufy
notwithfi-andmg his Pretence^ that the Opinions of
learned Men are againfi him. Whereas Mr. Wall
appeals to the Scriptures for the Senfe of the Wordj
^tts fijewn largely to be never there vs^d in his Senfe ^
hut the contrary. Lev. xiv. 6. confiderd* That the
Word, does not always neceffarilyfgnlfy to dip all over^
is the mofi that can be infcr^d from' it \ befides^ here
it means to dip all over. Ifa. xxi. 4. Ezek. xxv.
15. Dan. iv. 33. & v. 21. confider'^d. Hot Cli*
mates very dewy. The Syriac ^erflon confirms our
Senfe. Eccluf. xxxi. 25. 2 Macc. i. 21. Eccluf.
XXxiv. 2(5. confider^d. The Purification enjoin d for
touching that which is dead^ to be performed by Sprin^
kling. Together with Dipping. The Mahometans
purify in fuch Cafes by waflnng all over* Wafh-
ing was the main Part of the Purification among
the Jews. Por which reafon the Son of Sirach ufes
this Word to intend the whole Ceremony, Luke xi.
38. confider'd. Mr. Wall pretends the Jews al-
ways Wdfi'i'd their Hands^ by having Water poured
on ''em. Which is falfe. The Priefls wafha their
Hands and Feet by dipping ^ em. Our LORD
wafij^d his Difciples Feet fo likewife. The Autho^
rity of the K2Lhbins not to be depended on. Dr.Fo-
cock a/lows^ the JCYiSwere obligd fometimes to wafh
K 2 by
1 11 '^fleclions on Mr.Wall'^ Let.4,
by Dlppirig. y4nd from thence accounts for the
tife of'the word ^OLii\l{^c^i^ Mark vii. 4. Mr.
■ Wall'j^ next Inftance^ which is Mark vii. 4. co'afi-
der'^d* Thofe that came from the Market did
rva(h by Difving. Se^s among the Jews who wajh^d
themfelves frequently. The Words may refer to
the thi?jgs brought from the Market* Heb. ix. 10.
/fW Mat. xxvi.23. confider^d. The Sacramental
Wafhing being exfrefs^d by IVords-^ which fignify
a,ny kind of tVajhing^ does not prove it may there-
fore be adminifterd by any kind of Waging. Words^
"' like eiir Ideas-^ have their Genera and Species.
■ Words of a more particular Senfe jhoud explain
the more (reneraly and not the contrary.
SIR,
TH E proper and genuine Senfe oi ^az^ilo^^ the
Crlticks (^Qnftantly affirm, is immergo^ mergo^
.61C, Conftantine armoft always renders it fo,and Ste-
phens never fails to doit, and explains it to ligni-
• fy "^ to dye^ ovwaflj by dipping '-, till in another Pe-
riod he inclines to fhewa little Favour to the Au-
thority of the Church, and her Pradtice, and to
that end indeed interprets it by lavo^ abluo^ &:c.,
But he confirms this Expofition by no Examples,
except two from Scripture, Afark vii. 4. and Luke
- xi. 28. which we Ihall examine by and by, and
fbme from the }ateir Ecclefiaftical Writers.
And yet, at the fame time, he can't forbear
blaming fuch as ufe thofe words in relation to
the Chriftian Sacrament, and fays exprefly, That
']' TertuUian rendered it more properly by mergitare,
"^ Ad voc. f6A'7f\i(^co^ ut quce tingendi aut abliieadi gratia
•aqua? immergimus.
t Ad voc. (ict^li(et). Tertullianiis de Corona Militis, ma-
gis propric interpretatus eft mergicare, fervata propter tri-
nam immerfionem, forma quain trequentativam Gramma-
tiei vocant.
Let.4« Hiftory of Lifant-^aptifm. ;l 3 3
on account of the trine Immcrfion in Baftifm-^ retain-
ing what the Grammarians call the frequentative Ter-
mination,
The great Vojftus fpeaks exadly to the fame pur-
pofe, and indeed almoft in the fame words ^ for
without ever taking the leaft notice of iavoy or
the like, he exprelly fays, "^ Tho ^oLt^Cj^ and p.^ocvi--
Ti^Cd are rendered by mergo or mergito, and tingo,
yet they properly fignify mergo ^ and tingo only hy a
Metalepjisj i. e. as tingo implys mergo : and there-
fore he adds, '\' Tinging follows Immerfion^ and is
done by it, Alfo in his Treatife of Baptifm, as
well as here, he tranllates the Greek word by mer-
go^ and fays again, that's its proper fignification ^
and, farther than this, that particularly when it
relates to the Chriftian Sacrament, it fhou'd of
choice be render'd by mergito^ as you may fee in
his Etymologicon at the word Baptifmus.
Cafaubonj no inconuderable Judg in matters of
this nature, is very exprefs in his Note on Matth,
iii. 6, which being fo remarkable, Til tranfcribe the
whole Paffage : || For the manner of Baptiz^ing^ fays
he, was to plunge or dip ''em into the IVater^ as even
the word fbxzrii'l'civ it fe If plainly enough fiews^ which
as it does not fignify S^Xi'iW^^ to (ink down and periJJj^
neither certainly does it fig-nify '^^TToAa^efV, to fwim
cr float a-top ^ thefe three words ^ b^7n)/\a^£ii', jioczzr-
"n'^e/V, J\uv£(V, being very different. Hence it ap-
pears^
^ Etymologic, in Voc. Baptifmn^. Etfi autem f^d^'jM & /Setrr^
rl'^co, turn mergo^ ve\ mergito, turn tingo transferri foleanc ;
proprie tamen wer^o notat, & y/.<{]dLK;]7fliyMiy tingo.
t Ibid. Nam pofterior eft Immerlione Tinftuia, quia hacc
Iminerlione fit.
II Hicenim fuit baptizandi Ritus, ut in Aquas immerge-
rentur : quod vel ipfa vox (ici7f\i^c-iv declarat fatis \ qux- uc
non ligniticat Jl»>,wi/, quod eft jufUum petere cum jua pernicie,
ita profe^o non eft ^nrirohA/c-iv, Diftcrunt enim hsac tria.
M4 %efleclions on Afr.WalF^ Let.4.
pearsiy that ^twas not without reafon that fame have
lo'ng fwce i?jfifted on the Immerfion of the -whole Body
in Baftifm^ for which they urge the word pjazff/^eiV.
Bt^t their Opinion is juftly long (Ince exploded^ the
Force and Energy of this facred Aiyfiery not con-
filling in that Clrcumfhance, A very poor Evafion
for lb great a Man, after he had grai;ted fo much :
He allows Baptifm was adminifter'd by Immer-
iion, and that Christ, when he commanded
to haftlze^ commanded to Immerfe or plunge, for
that, he fays, is the Signification of the word :
And now, after thefe Concellions, heand all thofe
who make fo free with our LORD's Inftitu-
tions, as to pretend it is not neceflary to perform
them juft as he has direded, fhou'd confider how
they will be able to anfwer it, and whether it does
not look a little too much like mocking him,
when they deviate from what they know to be his
Command.
Grotlus^ than whom no Man ever knew better,
gives it on my fide, in his Annotations on the
fame Place, Mat. iii. 6, "^ That this Rite rvas wont
to be ferforrnd by Immerfion^ and not by Terfufion^
appears both by the Propriety of the Word^ and the
Places chofen for its Adminlftratlon^ John iii. 23.
Adsviii. 38. and by the many Allufions of the Apo-
files ^ which car?t be refer'' d to Sprinklings FvOm. vi.
3, 4-
PrnnroKcL^^.V:, ^t^.Tr'iii^eiv, Ib'mv. Unde inttflligimus non
effe abs re quod jamprideni nonniilli difputarunt de toro
Corpore immergendo inCeremonia Baptifmi : Vocemenim
^ct^']i'(^<civ urgcbant. Sed horum Sententia merito eft jam-
pridem explofa, cum non ia ea poiita lit Myilerii hujus vis
^ Merfatione autcm non Perfufione agi folitum hunc Ri-
tum indicat & vocis Proprietas, & ioca ad eum Ritum de-
lei'ta. Job. in. 23. A^.vnl 58. & Alluiiones multae Apofto-
lorum, qu3s ad Alp^riionem referri non poffant, Rom. vi.
3.4.
Let.4- Hiftory of Infant-(Baptifm. i 3 5
3,4. Col. ii. 12. The Cuflom of Ferfufion or Af^err
fion feems to have obtain d fome time after^ in favourr
of fuch who lying danger ou fly ill ivere defirous to dedi-
€4te th cm f elves to CuKisi:: Thefe were cail^dr-QWr
-nics by other Chrifiians. See Cyprian'j Epifile to
Magnus to this purpofe. Nor flwud we wondsr th^t
the old Latin Fathers nfe tingere for baptizare, fee-
ing the Latin word tin go does properly and generally
fignifythe fame as mtrdrc^ to immerfe or plunge.
To the fame purpofe fpeaks the celebrated £^io^
nyfius Fetavltis^ -giving Inftances of the Church's
Power, to alter or impofe: -^ Jnd indeed, fays
be, Immerfion is properly fiird ^X7^1i<Tfj.k^ tho at
prefent we content our feives with pouring Water on
the Head^ which in Greek is caWd -Wt^lyifmc,^ that
is, Ferichyfm^ if I may fo anglicife, but not Bap-
tifm.
But why do I fpend time in tranfcribing thefe
Qiiotations, when there are fuch large Collections
already, whicb render this Labour needlefs, and
will make any modeft Perfon blufh, to fay in
general, that Griticks and learned Men allow of
that pretended Senfe of the word ? IMr. Stennett^
in his Anfwer to Ruffen, a Book Mr. Wall has feen,
and I wifli he had confider'd it more impartially,
for then I'm fatisfy'd he wbu'd have laid by his
Delign, and there wou'd have been no occafion for
3,4; Co/, ii. 12. Serius aliquanto invaluiffe videtur mos
pertundendi live afpergendi, in eorum Gratiam qui in gra-
VI morbo cub.intes nomen dare C H R I S T O expctebant
quosc£teri;c^/;/;c«f vocabant. Vide Epift.C>/)r/4«i aA Magi
num. Qiiod auteni t'wgere pro baptiT^ure ufurpant Latini vete-
res mirum videri non debet, cum latine tmgendi vox &
propne & plerumque idem valeat quoi merfare. Pag. 102.
\^'Dogmat.Thiohgic. iib.2. de Pjinitentia, cap. i. §. n. ac
fane immenio proprie dicicur /g^eT^/cr^o;, cum hodie fatis
habeamus aquain- c^piti affundere, qtiod Greece dicitur
K 4 thefe
1 3 6 (^fleBions on Mr.WzWs Let.4.^
thefe Letters : Mr. Stemetty I fay, has furnifh'd
us with fo many Inftances, both Antient and Mo-
-dern, of this nature, fome of which are taken
from the greateft Men of the Church of England
naw living, or lately dead, that he makes the
thing evident almoft to Demonftration ^ fo that
-I'lti in no fear of being contradifted by the Learned,
vivho acknowledg all I plead for in this Cafe.
And indeed you may be pleas'd to obferve, Sir,
-(tlK) Mr. Wall ventures, with fuch an Air of AfFu-
irance, to affirm, || ^tis fUinly a Mijiakelo fay,
that haptiz,e means only «Vp, and that it appears
to be fo from the Greek Writers and Criticks, &c.)
that he is certainly' under fome Apprehenfion on
this Point, by his paffing over this part of the
Argument fo willingly : And, which is fomething
ftrangc,and does not argue abundance of Ingenuity,
MwWaff^ you may remember, produces the Suf-
frages of feveral learned Men, and pleads ftrong-
-ly himfeif for immerllon, in the ninth Chapter of
i his Second, Part, where he confefles Immerfion is
the more regular and convenient manner, and
ttnoilagveeible to" the Example of Christ and
c the Primifive Church. Bat to qualify this Con-
, cellion, he a<:ids indeed, that Immerfion is not fo
' neceflarv toBaptifm, but it may be adminifter'd
'by Aff.ilion, &c. which looks to me like a Con-
tradiclioa of what he allow'd before : for nothing
certainly fhou'd be done in this Cafe, but what
' is mol^ icg'ilar and agreeable to the Pradice of
"Christ a^id his Apoftles ;, nothing fliou'd be or-
' dinarily pridis'd now, which is not fo well as
what was ordinarily praftis'd then.
But to leave this : Pray whence did Mr. Wall
•receive his Knowledg, that Baptifm may be ad-
minifter'd by /^crr/V;^, 5^c? I have already large-
ll Pa: til. pag. 219.
Let.4- Hifiory of InfantSaptifm. i ; 7.
ly, and, I think, beyond Contradidion, prov'd,
that, with the Greek Authors, and other learned
Men, the word is never Us'd to fignify Pourings
but always Dippwg, But it feems our Author
was aware of this, and therefore tells us, ^ What
the Greek Writers andCriticks^ &c. fay^is not much to
the Furpoje *, for the Senfe of a Scrlptvre-Word ts not
to be taken from them^ but from the ufe of it in
Scripture \ from whence he pretends it may be
plainly determin'd to fignify to wafl) in general.
But, notwithftanding he takes the liberty to
aiTert this, I hope to prove he is in an Error,
and to fortify my Proofs from the conftant ufe of
the Word among the Greeks^ with the Authority
of the Scripture too \ and to Ihew it was thus only
that the Apoltles and Primitive Chriftians under-
ftood the Word, and pradis'd this facre^ Ordi-
nance.
In the Seventy's Tranflation of the Old Tefta-
ment, and the Apocrypha too, 1 can find but
twenty five Places where the words occur, and in
eighteen of 'em they do undoubtedly mean to
dif^ as you'll allow, if you read over the Verfes
cited below f : For I don't think you are likely
to make fuch a trifling Remark on any PaiTage,
as Mr. Wall has on Lev. xiv. 6. He was endea-
vouring, if you remember, to fliew from the Old
Teftament, that the word does not necefTarily fig-
nify to dip \ and quotes this Place of Leviticus^ than
which nothing cou'd be more diredly againlt him,
and obferves thus : l| The xoord is fboc-^^r, and the
* Part II. p. 2 1 9, 220.
t Exod. xii. 22. Lev. iv. (5, 17. Chap.ix. 9. Chap, xi,
32. Chap.yvi t6, 51. Numb. xix. 18. Deut. xxxiii. 24. ^^
Jo(h. iii. 15. Ruth ii. 14. 1 Kii^sxiv. 27. & 2 Kings v. 14. jZ^..^^
Chap. viii. 15. Job ix.31. Pfal. Ixviii. 23. Judith xii. 8.
II Part II. p. 221.
Engliflj
138 <!iefleams on Mr.WaWs Let.4.
BngUflj dip, yet it cannot he vnder flood Dipping all
ever '-) for the Blood of the Bird in the Bafon coud
not he enough to receive the living Bird and the Cedar
JVcodj and the Scarlet and the Hyffop all into it.
ISIow fuppofing this to be true, how does it prove
the word does not iignify to' dip ^ The molt he
can infer from it, is only that it does not always
neceflarily mean to dip' all over ^ and he fhou'd have
been fo juft to his Readers, as not to have con-
founded this with Dipping in general: by this
Stratagem making fnch, as are willing to believe
it, take this for a good plain Objection, and (be-
caufe it feems, as Mr. Wall reprefents the matter,
not to mean that the living Bird, &c. were dip'd
all over) to infer, the word in this Place does not
fignify todipatall. This, if any thing, muftbe
his meaning here. But if he wou'd not be fo un-
derftood, 'twill be no eafy thing to imagine what
he can fuppofe the word does here fignify. Un-
doubtedly he can't mean that the Bird, &c. were
pur'^d or fprinkled into the Blood, or the like ^
and yet if he won't allow the word to fignify to
dipy he ought at leaft to have told us what is the
i^gnifitation of it, and not have left us wholly in
the dark.
Farther, to go on-ftill with the Suppofition that
the living Bird-, &c» cou'd not be dip'^d all over :
This does not affed ourDifpute, fince we readily
^rant there may be fuch Circumftances in fome
Gafes,' which neceflarily and manifeitly fhew the
thing fpoken ofis notiaid to be dip'4 all over;
but it does not therefore follow that the word in
that Place does not fignify to dip, and 1 believe.
ls\X;Wa,ll vyin.allo;EV,his Pen isdip'din the Ink, tho
*it ii'nbt daubrd all ovdr, or totally immers'd. So
|hat, after all he fays, it ft ill remains that the
TV ord does fig aif y to dip-
Befides^
Let.4- Hiftory of Infant^^aptifm. i 3 9
Befides •, I can't fee why it fhou'd be thought
impoflible for the living Bird and the other things
to be dip'd all over. 'Tis true, there appears fome
Difficulty in it upon Mr. Wall's Suppofition *, but
that is grounded on a very grofs IVliitake •, for the
order of Purification in the cafe of Leprofy was
this, to take a quantity of Water in an earthen
Bafon, out of a Fountain or running Stream,
which in the remoteft Times was always judg'd
pureft and moft proper for their Purification ^ o-
yer this VelTel of Fountain-Water they kill'd the
Bird, fo as to have the Blood run into the Wa-
ter, and mix with it in the Bafon •, and then the
living Bird, the Hyflbp, &c, were dip'd into this
Mixture, which might be capable of receiving 'em
^11^ tho the Blood alone, as our Author fays, was
-mc.; - And finc^ the Seventy tranllate r<7r/> 5. and
■^f?y^'5i. in th^ fame manner, vi;^, overnmmng
Water \ and Jonathan's Targum too tranflates botti
in the fame words^ W^. in Blood and in Water ^ it's
plain they underftood the two Hebrew Fhrafes
to exprefs the fame thing.
I might confirm this account of the thing by
^the Teftimonys of the Jewifl) Viodiors^ if they
were of any Authority ^ but as they are a very
trifling fort of Interpreters, of no Credit,
and never tq be depended on, I rejea: 'em, and
argue only from the Reafon of the thing, and the
plain Import of the Words themfelves, compar'd
with K<?r. 5 1, where the dipping into the Water, as
well asintotheBlood,is mention'd, perhaps, more
diftina:ly : but it is plain to Demonitration, from
Heb, ix. 19. For when Mofes had fpoken every Precep
to all the People according to the Lavo^ he tool the
Blood of Cdves andof Goats ^ with Watcr^ and fear-
let Wool^ and Hjjfof^ and fprinkUd both the Book and
all the People, The utmoft, I fay, that cou'd be
mfcr'd from this Pafiage, is only, that the
Word
140 ^fleBions on Mr.WzWs Let.4'^
Word does not always neeefTarily imply a total
Immerfion, or dipping the whole thing fpoken of
all ovcr^ which I readily allow: but then. Sir,
we fhou'd remember, *tis not from any thing li-
miting the Senfeof jiocTrfl^d), but from fomething
limiting the Extent of the Adion in the Subject,
which direfts us to apply the full Senfe of the
Word to one particular thing, or perhaps to one
part of a thing only *, for a Synecdoche does not af-
fe6: the Verb, but the Thing fpoken of. Thus, to^
ufe the familiar Inftance I mention'd before, we
fay, dif the Per?^ meaning only the Nib of it,
which we really dip into Ink : Tho the whole Pen
is not dip'd all over, yet the Part particularly re-
fer'd to, is, and the Pen may be truly faid to be
dip'd*, according to that known Rule, What is
true of a ay one Par^, may be faid of the Whole
complexly, tho not of every Fart of the Whole
feparately.
Of the twenty-five Inftances where the Word is
us'd in the Old Teftament and Apocrypha, eigh-
teen, you fee, Sir, are manifeflly us'd to fignify
to dip. There wou'd be no need to mention the
other feven that remain, after what has been faid,
but that hix.Wall infinuates, and wou'd have it
believ'd, that it may be abundantly prov'd from
Scripture, that the Word does not always mean
to dip^ Thefe Places which ftill remain, if there be
any Difficulty in 'em, may be eafily accounted for
by what I have already faid on fome Paflages pa-
rallel to 'em : however, I muft jufl: mention 'em.
The Seventy have tran Hated Ifaiah xxi. 4. very
loofly J and without any occafion, ufe the Word
in difpute. The Senfe in tht Hebrew runs thus:
My Heart has wander d^ and Horror has affright en d
me h but they have render'd it, and Iniquity^ ^octt-
T/{e/, overwhelms me. The Senfe is obvious to
thofe who are acquainted with the Style of the
Pro-
Let. 4. Hijlory of hifciJit'^aptifm. 1 4 1
Prophets, which abounds with frequent Meta-
phors and Allufions. I have accounted for this
manner of Speech already *, and fiiewn, that ta-
king it for a kind of Simile, and fupplying what
IS necellary %o fill up the Senfe, it rather proves,
than makes any Objedion againft, what I plead
for. Befides, as the Word liere can't be under-
ftood to iignify to waJJjy four^ or fyrinkle^ &c,
I fuppofe no body will urge this place againlt
me.
The Inftance m Ez^ehel xxv. 15. is manifeftly
an Argument on my fide, if you confider what I
faid above on thofe Phrafes which fpeak nf Bying-^
and it may be noted that ttu^QcctsIa here iigui-
fys dip'd, as much as does the Hebrew Word
D^^l^t^; which is tranllated by it ^ the Original
Jignifying what our EngUjli Verlion here calls dy^d
Attire ^ and every one mult own *?3to fignifys only
to dif-
I don't know whether you'll think Dan. iv. ^3,
and V. 21. more intricate than the preceding In-
ftance s : butbecaufe Mr* Wall has endeavour' d to
defend hirafelf by it, I mult take a little the more
notice of it. The fame Word is us'd in both
places, and on the fame occafion, and therefore
we may confider 'em as one PafTage.
The Word here us'd in the Original is VDoifS^
which in the Chaldee necefTarily implys di^png ^
witnefs Buxtorf-, Cafiell^ &c. and above all, the
conltant ufe of the Word. 'Tis by this Word
the Jerufalem Targum renders the Hebrew ^Do,
Levit. iv. 6. the only place where that imperfeft
Verfion tranflates the Hebrew Word ; but had it
been complete, we fhou'd, probably, have had
more Inftances.
^ Page 126, &c.
In
14^ ^fleSlions on Mr.W^ilYs Let.4,
In other places where the Word is us'd, the
not to tranflate *?Dt3, it is always in the fame
Senfe, fignifying to immerfe or drown •, as Exod,
XV. 4- in which place the jerufalem Targum^ Jona-
than'% Paraphrafe, and that call'd Onkelos^ the Sy-
riac Verfion, and the Original of Mofes, do all
ufe J?DD or yDD to lignify immerfe^ plunge^ or
drown^ as our Verfion renders it : but 1 fup-
pofe it will not be queftion'd, otherwife I wou'd
attempt more largely to prove this Word does
always properly lignify to dip To this Confidera-
tion if it be added, that the Word by which the
Seventy turn it into Greeks is alfo confefs'd on all
hands to have primarily and generally this Sig-
nification, there can be no Difficulty to determine
the Senfe of the Word in this pkce. For fincc
the Greek Word commonly and properly fignifys
to dify and is put for a Chaldee one of undoubtedly
the fame Meaning, it muft be very natural to
. judg that to be the true Senfe, and what the Wri-
ters here intended.
'Tis indeed us'd here metaphorically •, as 'tis
five times in thefe two Chapters, on this fame oc-
cafion : and therefore the Seventy render it once
by noHa^ec&ou, made to lie '-, and twice, according
to the vulgar Editions, by au\i{£f5ou, to lie all
Nighty asVerfeis, 25. tho fome Copys, which
feem to preferve the antient true Reading, with
Theedoret^ tranQate it literally in this laft Verfe, by
/lacpM^Toa., jliall be dlfd ^ as the Seventy alfo have
thought fit to do, Verfe 33. (the place which
Mr. Wall quotes) and Chap. v. 21. retaining the
Metaphor. Herxe it feems very clear, that both
Daniel and his Tranilators defign'd to exprefs the
great Dew Ncbuchadnez^zar fhou'd be expos'd to,
.j3iore emphatically, by faying, he (liou'd U€ in
Dew, and be cover'd with it all over, as if he had
. been dip^d : for that is fo much like being dip'd,
as
Let.4- Hijlory of Infant'^a[)tifm. 145
as at moft to differ no more than being in, and
being put in *, fo that the Metaphor is very eafy,
and not in the leaft ftrain'd.
The Tranllators abundantly intimate, they
thought this to be the true Senfe of the place,
by varying, as they have, the Word in their Ver-
fion, which in the Original is but one : they turn
it Tcolfoilicdvciy and duKiljcodrx,i^ to exprefs his lying
out in the open Air ^ and Qa.7f\i<drx.i^ to fignify
he fhou'd be as wet by it, as if he had been dip'd
in Dew. But having faid fo much already, I will
only add in pafTing, that the Dews in the Eaffc
are generally very large, as appears from fevcral
Paflages of Scripture, as well as from the Accounts
of Travellers into thofe Parts. Therefore, in the
Story of Gideons Fleece, you find, after, it had
been expos'd to the open Air all Kight, he prefs'd
out of it a Bowl full of IVater^ Judges vi. 38. And
the holy Pfalmift, fetting forth the Advantages
of Unity, compares it to the Dew of Hermon^ and
the Dew that defcended vfon the Mountains of Zion^
Ffal. cxxxiii. 3. And philofophically fpeaking, the
hotted Climates and cleareft Skys naturally ^-
bound moft with Dew, which is alfo confirmed
by conftant Experience. 'Tis commonly known
to be fo in her Majefty's Leevvard-Iflands in u^me-
rica J where one Seafon of the Year, when they
have no Rains for a confiderable time together,
the Fruits of the Earth wou'd be burnt up,
were it not for the Dews which fall plentifully
in -the Isight. That incomparable I\lathcmati-
cian Capt. Hallcy^ obferv'd, when nuking fome
Experiments in St. Helena^ that the Dews fell in
. fuch abundance, as to make his Paper too wet to
write on, and his GlalTes unfit for ufe with-
• out frequent wiping. And as to j^frica. in
particular, where part of Ncbuchadnez,z.arh Do-
minions lay, Tliny tells us, the JS^ights there were
very
1 44 ^flcBions on Mr.WaU'^ Lct.41
very dewy. Egypf I'las little or no Rain, but is fed
by the overflowing of the Nile^ and by conltant
nofturnal Dews : and Nebuchadnez,z.ar kept his
Court in a Country of near the fame Latitude, and
confequently of the like Temperament.
It appears from hence, how properly the Sa-
cred Writer has, on this occafion, us'd a Word
fo emphatical and exprelTive^ and avoided one
that wou'd only have fignify'd a moderate gentle
wetting *, for that had fall'n Ihort of the Truth,
and not exprefs'd fo fully as was neceflary, the
great quantity of Dew by which he was made
'very wet. This fhews alfo how faulty thofe Ver-
lions are which take a Word too weak, and that
does not by far reach the full Senfe.
The Authors of the antient and valuable Sy-
rlac Verfion, who were of the Neighbourhood of
Babylon^ and well enough acquainted with the
large Dews in thofe Parts, and endeavour'd to
give an exadt literal Tranflation, have fliun'd this
Error : 'Tis worth our obferving, that they ren-
der the Word there by NX^al, which from the
Hebrew yDSD> tofut into any things as t Sum, xvii. 49-
fignifys to immerfe or dip^ but never once, that 1
know of, to TF^jJj, or fprinklcj or fimpiy to wn.
And in thefe Verfes the fame Word is always us'd
in the fame Senfe ; which makes it very plain,
how thofe Interpreters underftood it, and that
they thought that manner of Expreffion very pro-
per and futable to the thing intended.
And now, from all thefe Con fiderat ions I think
'tis very plain, what is the true Senfe of this
place, and that it makes nothing againft me. For
the Interpretation I give, is grounded on the cer-
tain allow'd general Senfe of the Words ^ is very
agreeable to the Nature and common Ufe of
Languages*, and withal, exadly conformable to
the Defign of the Writer , aad (trongly counte-
■ ■ • " nanc'd
Let.4- Hiflory of Infant-^aptifm, 1 4 5
nanc'd by the original Word, and the heft: Tranfla'
tions : and nothing more than all this can bede'
lir*d to jaftify any Interpretation whatever.
Bat after all, it notwithllanding what has been
faid, any can pofllbly judg this Senfe of the place
which I have given, not fo neceflary as I pretend,
the Objeftion Mr. Wall raifes from it, is however
efre(^ually enervated : For, if it is in it fclf fo un-
certain and obfcure, as to afford no neceflary Ar-
gument for my Opinion ^ he and all Men mult
however grant, they can draw no necelfary Con-
fequence from it againft me. For it v/ill be al-
low'd, that the Words are, at lead, capable of
my Expofition, without any Abfurdity or Gon-
ftraint at all. I have now but one Pallage or two
more to take notice of from the Old Tcftament
and Apocrypha.
Eccle/Jafiicus XXXi. 30, but in the EngHjh 'tis
ver.ld". The Furnace proves the Edge i?2 the teryfering^
tv €c;c4>>i, by diffwg. This is juft like the firil: Qno-
tation from Homer ^ and what I have faid there
may ferve to illuftrate this, efpecially if we add
Didymus^s Kote on that place, that ^ Red hot
Jroriy by being difd into cold Water^ becomes very
hard*
The Word is us'd again, 2 M.ucab. i, 21. to fig-
nify drawing Water^ viz. by dipping a Bucket, &c.
And this Ufe of it 1 have largely confider'd before,
and therefore (hall need add i3ut one Remark here.
That 'tis neceflary the Word fhou'd lignify to dip
in this place, becaufe the W^ater is faid to be at
the bottom of a deep Pit, P^er. 19. Kow 'tis
certain the Water cou'd not bedrav/n up, as our
Tranilation reads it, without dipping the VelTel
into it : fo that the Force of the VVoVd can't be
^ exprefs'd
1 46 (J^fleElions on Mr.WdYs Let.4ii
exprefs'd more exaiftly than by our BngUflj Phrafe,
to di^ a Pail or Bucket of Water. .
But of all the Texts which caa be. produced ,
fome think Ecclefiafticus xxxiv. 26. the moft con-
liderable by far ^ and indeed they may. give it a
very plaufible Appearance* The Words are in
our Tra Dilation *, He that waflieth him f elf hecaufe of^
a dead Body^ and toncheth it again ^ what availeth his,
wajhrrFg ? B0i7i\il6(!A/jQ^ is the Word *, and 'tis,
here us'd to fignify that walhing which the Law
enjoin'd upon all who had been defil-d by touching
a dead Body. Now, the manner of Purifica-
tion in fuch Cafes, is thus defcrib'd, Ni^mb.xix. 1 8.
^nd a clean P erf on foail take Hyjfop^ and dip it (by
the way, you may obferve, the Word iiere is |la4«*,
and plainly fignifys to dip^ tho perhaps 'twas not
dip'd all over, no more than our Author thinks
the living Bird, &c. were, in an Inftance we con-
fider'd before) intheWater^ and fpr inkle it upon the ^
Tent^ 6vC, and upon him that touched a Bone^ or one ^
flain^ or one dead^ or a Grave, There are other
Pafiages to the fame purpofe, which either men-
tion this fprinkling, or plainly enough allude to
it ^ as Verfe 9. A'rid it (viz. the Holy Water)
^)all he kept for the Congregation of the Children of
Ifrael^ for a Sprinkling-Water,
Thefe and fuch-like other places, which make
Sprinkling necelFary, may feem to put the matter
beyond difpute ^ and I remember the time^ when
I thought this a very formidable Inftance : but I
foon found and correded my Miftake j and I
think 'ris exceeding clear, to any who are wil-
ling to fee it, that a farther walhing is necefTary
befides thefe fprinklings, and that this wafhing
w'as the finilhing of the Ceremony. The defil'd
Perfon was to be fprinkl'd with the Holy Water
on the third and on the feventh Day, only as
preparatory to the great Purification which was
4- to
Let.4- Hiftory of Infant'^aptifni. 1 47
tobe by wa filing the Body and Clothes on the {e-
venth Day, with which the Uncleannefs ended.
Thus, Numb. XIX. 19. 'tis faid exprelly, j^nd the
clean Perfon jJiall ffrinkle vpon the unclean on the
third Day-y and on the feventh Day : and on the ft^
venth Day he fiall purify himfelfj and wafJj his Clothes^
and bathe himfelf in Heater j and pidl he clean at
Even.
That the Word here us'd in the Hebrew is
l^rn, can be no ObjcLlioii^ for befides that 'tis
faid, Levit.x'^. \6. fthonotin the fanne particu-
lar Cafe) Then he fiiall wa^J all his Flejh in l^P'ater^
the Word always includes r^ipp/;?^, and never iig-
nifys lefs. Thus 'tis us'd, in the Story of Na^^
man., 1. Kings y, more than once *, and is explain'd,
at laft, by Naamans Adioa related /V/'e 14.
and by the Word '^2^-, which 'tis exprefs'd hy
in the Hebrew^ and which the Seventy -have rea-
der'd there by p;«7rT/<^t(v: and all this evidently
fhews, that Naamanj the Hiftorian, and -thefe
Tranflators, underitood it to mean to wafh bry
dipping.. -r ;• ;
Some, indeed,, are pleas'd to fancy, the Words
which command bathing, are not fpoken of the
unclean Perfon who had touch'd the dead, but of
the Prieft officiating ;, and they fortify this Sur-
mize by the 7th and 8th Verfes preceding, where
the Prieft is exprelly commanded tozv.^jh his Clothes^
and bathe himfelf in Water. 'But it does not follow,
becaufe this place relates to the Prielf, that the
other does fo too \ nay rather, 'tis abfurd it ihou'd,
for it interrupts and confounds the Senfe of the
place : befides, in the very next V'crfe but
one, viz.. 21. 'tis order'd, that he whofprinkles the
Water of Separation^ Jl)all wafi) his Clothes^ &c.
plainly intimating, that was not the Defignof the
Words almofl; immediately foregoing; Bclides,
it can't be reafonably imagined, that the.Prieft by
L 1 barely
148 ^fleElions onMr.W2i\ys Let.4:
barely purifying the unclean, fhou'd need Co much
greater a Wafhing and Purification than the un-
clean himfelf.
Thisalfo, I think, will farther appear, by com-
paring this place with Leviti xi. 31, 32. which
fpeaks of the fame thing, viz., of Pollution con-
traded by touching that which is dead ^ and fays,
the thing fo polluted mufi be put imo Water. And
here it may be noted again by the way, that the
Seventy have chofe jiacpHcrsTca, as the moll pro-
per Word to comprehend the full Senfe of the
Hebrew Phrafe t<2V CD^M, than which (the Verb
being in the Form they call Hophal) no Words can
more ftridly and emphatically fignify, it jhall be
put into Water ^ and therefore 'tis very furprizing
to Rnd that Dr. Pococli couM poflibly fufFer himfelf,
on another occalion, ^ to tranflate thefe Words
C^'M *in* N^2*^, manus aqua perfuAerit^ diredly
contrary to the true obvious Senfe. 1 won't pre-
tend to guefs what cou'd move him to this, but
I confefs this rendring fervcs his Turn belt. This
is not wholly foreign to the Ehifinefs in hand, tho
it may be mifplac'd, and therefore 1 have juft
hinted it. But to return.
Thefe two Paflages, 1 fay, compar'd together,
muftbeof conilderable Force, fince 'tis plain from
'em, that all Velfels (except earthen, which were
to be broken, Levlt, xi. 33.) that had been pollu-
ted by the touch of a dead Body, were not only to
be fprinkled, as Numb. xix. 18. but they were alfo
to he put into the Water^ Levit. xi. 32.
Now fince it can't be thought, the Pcrfon touch-
ing the dead was lefs defil'd than the Veflels which
touch'd the fame, or were only in the Tent w^ith
|t, or that he wanted a lefs degree of Purification \
>tis very natural, and I think neceflary to under-
» Nor.Mifcellan. cap. 9. pag. ^83.'
.L ftand
Let.4- Hljlory of Infant'^apttjm. 1 49
ftand Numh.xh. ip. to befpoken of the unclean^
who, I infer, therefore, was not only to be fprin-
kkd on the third and feventh Days, but was alfo
to bathe, dip, and wafh himfelf in Water, as is
plain too from Numb, xxxi. 21, &c. And if Dr.
Pocock'% way of arguing from the Mahometans in
fuch Cafes as this, be good, the thing perhaps
may be yet fet in a ftronger Light : for 'tis be-
yond queftion, that they purify Perfons defil'd
by the dead, by Immerfion and wafhing all over;
as 1 might fliew from the Alcoran, if it were at
hand, and feveral other Writers. But inftead of
all, let this fuffice, from the judicious Compendium
of the Mahometan Religion, firft publifh'd from
the Manufcript by the ingenious Mr. Rdand of
Vtrecht : The Author, fpcaklng of that kind of
Purification by Water which they calFd 6"^/?, in
which, he fays, the Water muft touch ^ every
Hair of the Body, and the whole Skin all over *, tells
us, this manner of wajhing the whole, Body is necef-
fary in order to Purification after Circumcifion^ &c;
and in cafe of Tcllution by the dead.
And this, -]- Strabo informs us, was in ufe a-
mong the Babylonians', whether the J^ipj borrowed
it from them, or they from the Jews, And in-
deed, to the Jews this was the chief part of the
Purification, and may alone be caJl'd (imply the
Purification ^ as the feventh Day is caiPd the Day
of Purification, or Cleanfing, Numb. ix. 5. be-
caufe the Purification was completed on that Day ;
or principally, becaufe then this Waihing or Ba-
thing, which was the great as well as the con-
cluding part of the Purification, was performM v
from which, as the principal part, that Day takes
its Denomination. And by this, which was the chief
* M.^^.l. I. f Lib. 16. M.1081.
L 3 partj
1 5 o ^fleFlions on Mr.W^ilYs Let.4 •
part, is the whole Ceremony intended, Levlt.
xxii. 6. where 'tis fiid of the Priefts, particularly
o{Aaro'r7 and his Sons, they fhail not eat of the holy
things, after contrnfting any Uncleannefs, mlefs
they w^iP^ their Flefj in Water^ i, e. purify them-
felves regularly according to the Law. In which
Cafe, the chief thing to be done, was to wafh their
Flelh in Water. And Levitt xi. 32. fpeaking of
putting the VeiTels into Water, it's faid, fo they
jljall he cleans^ d»
'Tis the fame in other Cafes : As for Inftance,
in that of Leprofy, many things were requir'd for
feveral Days, but the chief and mofl efTe&ual on
the Eighth • which is therefore call'd the Day of
Cleaning *, and the Offerings are order'd to be
brought for hisCleanfin^^ Levit. xiv. 23. as if the
whole, or, at leaf!:, the main Efficacy were afcrib'd
to them.
Thefe Confiderations necefTarily oblige us to be-
lieve, bathing and wafhing the whole Body in Wa-
ter, was not only a necellary, but likewife a chief
part of the Purification. And after ail this, cer-
tainly there can remain no Difficulty in Ecde-
Jtafiicusjixxiv. 16. For hence 'tis very plain,
Syracidcs by €(X'STT/^d/^ev(^ in that place, means
bath'd, dipp'd, and waffi'd ^ for you fee, the Law
requir'd no lefs, and no lefs was pradis'd by the
Jews^ in cafe of {Iich Pollution by the dead. And
'tis ^afy to fee the reafon why he mentions, and
more immediately refers to the bathing only, viz^,
becaufe, as 1 before noted, that was tl>e chief
part, upon which Cleannefs immediately follovv'd,
all the reil being only neceffiary Preparations.
And fo we may find in many Iiiftances, Lev, xv,
and elfewhcrc, the walhing only is exprefs'd, tho
the Holy Water was likewife to be fprinkl'd \ for
it was kept for a Water of Separation, and a
Purification for Sin, Numb,..xi:i> 9^ and viii. 70
Aac}
Let.4- Hijiory of Infant-(Bapti/m. 151
And fo the wafhing only is mentioned in this very
Cafe of Pollution by a dead Body, Levit. xxii. 5.
as before noted. And Eleaz.(ir^ Numb. xxxi. 23.
orders all which abides not the Fire^ ye jhall make
go thro the Water \ not adding, the Water of
Separation was to be fprinkl'd on thofe things :
tho he there intimates it miift be fprinkl'd on the
things which were to pafs thro the Fire \ and we
are affur'd, from Numh^ xix. 18. it was likewife
to be fprinkl'd on the VefTels of Wood, &c^
which cou'd not bear the Fire, but were to be
wafli'd, or put into the Water, Levitt xi. 32.
But befides, 'tis ufual, in fpeaking of the Whole,
to mention a Part only \ which may very well be
thought the Cafe in hand, feeing 'tis prov'd that
dipping was to be one part of the Ceremony ^ and
'tis allow'd by all, that the Word does almoft
conftantly, and I think always, fignify to di^^
-plungCy or fut into. Which Conliderations render
the Synecdoche very eafy \ for thus the Word may
be us'd to fignify fuch a wafhing as includes di-^-
png^ notwithftanding fprinkling be alfo one part
of the Purification : but then it does not fo much
exprefs the fprinkling as the dipping, on account
of which particularly the Word is apply'd to this
Purification.
Thus I have now revis'd all that can be urg'd
from the Old Teftament, at leaft all that my
own Obfervations and Kircher% Induftry have fur-
nifh'd me with \ and, notwithftanding Mr.^^^//'s
needlefs Appeal to Scripture, have difcover'd ma-
ny undoubted Inftances there, of the Senfe of the
Word, as us'd, in direct oppofition to what Mr.
^Fk// aiTerts : while no one PalFage can be found
to be on his fide ^ atbeft, he can urge but twocr
three, which are very doubtful and obfcure ^ and
after all Improvements on 'em, conclude no-
thing. For whatever real or imaginary Difficultys
L 4 may
152^ d^flcFtms on Mr.WzlYs .Lct.4.
may appear in 'em^ you fee. Sir, I have fairly
remov d and accounted for 'em all.
Let us now, if you pleafe, turn over the Kcw
Tefliament, and fee what mighty Proofs that af-
fords in our Adverfary's Favour.
In thefe molt venerable Records, which are the
unerring Rule of our holy Religion, the Word
p^ocsjllloi is often us'd, but moft commonly con-
cerning the Baptifm &{John^ or theChriilian Sa-
crament, which is the Subjed of our Difpute *,
but 'tis often without any Circumftance which may
determine how we mull underftand it : which, if it
proves anything at all, fliews the Word is us'd
in the common S^^St only, and according to the
general Acceptation *, for elfe it had been neceifary
to have appris'd us of the new and particular
unufual Senfe ; and nothing of this being done,
it feems reqfonable to give it the fame Signification
in all thofe places as it has every where elfe. I
think this is plain and undeniable ^ but Mr. Wall
believes he can prove, by other Inilances, that it
does nor, every where elfe, fignify fo dif.
To that purpofe, he mentions only four, which
he calls flain Instances \ and to remove all ima-
ginable Difjicultys, I will omit none he might
poilibly have added, except fuch as are plain-
ly metaphorical, which therefore no Man can
jaftly argue from, and they may all be ve-
ry eaiiiy accounted for by what 1 have faid a-
bove.
The firfb, and which he enlarges moft upon,
is ^x.. Luke \\. 38. which our EngHflj reads thus:
^?id when the Thanfee faw It^ he marvelled that he
hdd not frft rvajhed before Dmrier. The original
Word, he notes, is t€(X7iTtc&M ^ and comparing this
T^iace with Su A/ark vii. 5. which fpeaks particu-
.larly of wajJnng of Hands ^ he infers, this is a
fliilfi Infl.ince^ that they vs'd the Word to baptize
for
Let.4- Hiflory of Infant'^a^tifm. i 5 j
for any ordinary Wafhing^ whether there were dlpfiria
in the cafe or not* ^
To make this Conclufion pafs more fecurely,
he had infinuated before, that "^ their way of that
Waflmig was this : They had Servants to four the Water
on their Hands ^ 2 Kings iii. 1 1. who pour'd Water
oa the Hands of Elijah^ i. e. who waited on him as
a Servant,
He fays no more to prove this Cuftom, but
thus (lightly overpafTes a Point which deferv'd
and unavoidably requir'd greater Examination,
confidering the whole Strefs of his Argument de-
pends entirely upon it^ for, if they wafh'd their
Hands, as we ufually do now, by dipping 'em into
the Water, no body need be told his Inftance turns
againft him, and makes con fiderably for us.
^ To fhew then, how little Service this does him,
give me leave to remark thefe things to you : In the
firll place. There is a vaft Diftance of Time be-
tween the Period refer'd to in the Book of lOngs^
and our Saviour's Time; and the Words he
cites, at moft do butdifcover what was the Cuftom
near a thoufand Years before, and fignify nothing
to the Tiipe when the Words, which are the
Ground of his Inference, were fpoken.
And who does not know what great Alterations
might happen, or rather muft have happened in
fuch a Succeffion of Years ? The great Revolutions
in the States and Kingdoms of the World fuffici*
ently lliew the Power of Time ; a Multitude of Ex-
amples of this kind may be found in all, and even in
our own Nation. But not to mention any of thofe
Cuftoms, which once univerfally prevail'd among
the antient Britaim^ and are now quite worn out
1 will inftance in Baptifm it felf, which all Men
know was us'd to be adminiftred in England by
Dipping till Queen Elizabeth's Time, fince which,
f Part II. p. 220.
that
1 54 ^fleElions on Mr.WsWs Let4^
that pure Primitive manner is grown into a total
Difufe, within little more than loo Years ^ and
Sprinkling, the moft oppofite to it imaginable,
introduc'd in its ftead. The Matter of Fade
is notorious, or otherwife, I think, it might
feem much more incredible, than to fuppofe a
People who once wafh'd their Hands by having
Water pour'd on 'era, cou'd pofTibly looo Years
afterwards, inftead of this, wafh 'em as we do now,
by dipping 'em into the Water : Efpecially, confi-
dering how often they had been conquer'd, led into
captivity and difpers'd, and were even then adu-
ally under the Roman Yoke -^ for fuch Revolutions
always bring great Changes in the Cuftoms and
. Humours of a People, along with 'em : and the
Jems had • actually fo chang'd their Language in
NebemlahhDays^ that they did not underftand the
Scriptures in the Hebrew Tongue. Add to this,
-that Christ himfelf has alTur'd us, they w^ere an
obftinate, bigottedRace of Men, aftif-necJidGe-
neratiort^ as their Prophets ftil'd 'em ^ and tho they
valued themfelves extremely on their Law, yet
our Saviour aflures us likewife, that they had
introduc'd abundance of Innovations in their Re-
ligion, fo far as to deftroy its EfiTence, and vacate
the grand Points of that very Law they were {o
proud of^ and that particularly in the Wafhings it
prefcrib'd: and yet this is certainly much harder
to conceive them capable of doing, than that they
ihou'd make an Alteration in the Manner of wafh-
ing their Hands. But Secondly, '
I obferve the Words don't prove what Mr. W^l
cites 'em for: As our Tranflation reads 'em, they
appear, indeed, to countenance his Suppofition,
that about £//;^/?'sTime they might perhaps wafh
their Hands after that manner •, but if you read
-the Original^ Sir, you will allow the Place mi^ht
be. altogether- as well rendred, -who fourd out Wn-
tcr for, not upon, the Hdndi^of .'iXi\A\ ^ the He-
brew
Let.4- Hiflory of Infant-^ aptijm. i 5 5,
brew Particle Sy ^ often (ignifying for^ in this.
fenfe, as Pfalm xxxii. 6. rnXT ^y, /or r^/V Caufe
Jhall every one that is godly pray to thee^ &c. And
tjius it is us'd very frequently, as in all thofe
numerous Inftances where 'tis join'd with ]^^,
fo for Example, Gen^n. 24. p — *7j;, hiyjiv rir^^
according to the Seventy : and perhaps our Lord
from them, Matth-xix, 5. For this Caufe ^ fay our
Tranflators, fljall a Man leave Father and Mo-
ther^ &c. So again, Gen. xi. 9. p— 7J?, ^^ t^tz j
for this Caufe, or, therefore is the Name of it call d
BaheU And once more for all, Trov. xxviii. 21.
ZZiVh — nS— -7^, in our Tranflation, for a Piece
of Bread^ that Man will tranfgrefs.
'Tis plain from thefe Inftances, without adding
anymore, that the Words naturally admit a dif-
ferent Senfe from what Mr. Wall wou'd fix on
'em, and therefore can avail him nothing. But,
Laftly, If 'tis worth while to enquire what
was the Cuftom fo long ago, in a Matter of this
nature, 'twill with little fearch appear at lead
very probable, that their religious Wafhing of
their Hands and Feet was perform'd by dipping
''em. into the Water. For when Afofes receiv'd
diredions from God concerning the Utenfils of
the Tabernacle, he was commanded, among other
things, to make a Laver of Brafs, in which Water
was to be kept between the Tabernacle of the Con-
gregation and the Altar, for the Priefts to wafh
their Hands and Feet before they enter'd the Ta-
bernacle, or when they approach'd the Altar to
offer ^ fo they jhall wafh their Hands and Feet that they
die not ^ Exod. XXX. 21. The Word here us'd by
the facred Penman, in the Original is 'ini't
which, as I before noted, generally, and I think
always, includes dipping in its iignincation, and
therefore too makes it at leaft probable, they were
to wafn their Hands and Feet by dipping 'em into
thp Water. Had p2f> bceo us'd here, as in
2 Kings
1*^6 ^fleSiions on Mr.WsWs Let.4.
iKin^si^.^. above-cited, which (ignifies to pour^
Mr. Wall wou'd fcarcc have omitted this PalTage,
but have thought it very convincing and ftrong on
his fide, as now, 1 think, it mult be allow'd to
be againft him.
The fame Word, we may obferve, is us'd
2 Chrori. iv. 6. about the vail Brazen Sea, Solomon
caus'd to be made, which held 200 Baths, that
is, near iodo Barrels of Water: the Bulk of it
argues, the Priefts were to go into it; the
Words exprefs it alfo, the Sea was for the Triefis
to wapj in *)D. So again, in another inftance,
Exod. xxix. 4. concerning the Confecration of the
Priefts, which Jonathan renders ^:3to> thou fhalt
dip 'em in 40 Meafures of Spring Water.
Farther: That this was the Way our Lord
took, when he walh'd his Diiciples Feet, John xiii. 5.
feems very certain, both from the Propriety of the"
Words, and the Manner in which 'tis related :
After that^ he fours Water into a Bafon^ and began
to map the Difciples Feet^ &:c. We fee the Water
was not pour'd on their Feet, but into the Ba-
fon, before he came to 'em, where their Feet were
to be waih'd. The Book that goes under the
Kame of the Apoftolical Conftitutions, relates
the Adion thus : ^ After that^ he fourd Wa-
ter into a Bafon^ and 04 we fat^ he came to us^
And waflj^d our Feetj and wifd ''em with a T'oweL
The Bafon here is vi-syTw^, which fignifies a VeiTel
to waih in; from whence it has its Name, as the.
Water they wafh'd with, was alfo from thence
call'd v/a/x<y, ViTrT^ov, zro^ivizf^pov^ or \&^QViziJ^oVj
and the like ; and fo Euftathim '\ upon Horner^
explains x^V^'i^^? to mean the Water which is pour'' d
* Lib. 5. c. 19. ' E/7U £>-iKKe^ uA'f «? r viiPiY\^a: ;^ v\^v
t Pag. 1401. xi^fiCa, ii -Ttt sk P(5/f*j vifjiLuc ^i^a^ofjt^ei,.
Let.4- Hifiory of Infant'^aptif??!. 157
cut for^ not upon, the Hands ^ by which their
Cuftom, as well as the Senfe of the Words, is
cxprefs'd. And to all this we may add, that
Mark vii. 3. unlefs they wajhy 'rr/f/xJ?, up to the Elbow
oxWrifi^ muft \n\\A^ dtffmg. But, belldes what
our Author had faid hirafelf to fupport his Opi-
nion, he refers us alfo, in his Margin, to Dr. Po-*
cocky who he fays, has largely frov^d^ in his Not.
Mifcell. from Maimocides, and others ^ that this was
the Jews way^ and then, not very fairly adds a
Piece of a Sentence, which wou'd make any one
think the Dodor meant that the Jews never
wafh'd but by Affuflon, which feems not a fair way
of dealing with the Authority he cites in his De-
fence y or does he think none have read the Dodor's
Writings but*himfelf ?
That Learned Gentleman, I know, has taken
a World of Labour to explain feveral Particulars
relating to the Walhing of Hands, according to
the Sentiments of the Jewi^ Dodors \ and has
ihewn himfelf very well vcrs'd in the Rahhini*
cal Writings, which he underflood, perhaps, as
well as ever Maimonides did. But really, Sir, I
ihou'd have honoured his Parts and Learning much
more, if he had trufted lefs to thofe fanciful
Authors the Rahhies^ whofe Commentarys are fri-
volous and impertinent \ and, in fhort, 'tis im-
poiTible to ered a firm Building on fo uncertain
a Foundation. As for Maimonides^ whofe Autho-
rity, Mr. Wall is careful to inform us, is usM by
Dr. TccGck in this Affair, perhaps, to intimate that
the Matter is therefore grounded on unexcepti-
onable Evidence^ 1 confefs, he was one of the
greateft and molt: judicious that ever appear'd
gmong the Rahhins^ but a true Rahhln notwith-
ftanding, and perfedly befotted to the idle Dreams,
in which their boalled Knowledg chiefly confifts ♦,
and confcqucntly, even He cannot be much de-
pended on : Befides, he liv'd not above 600
Year$
1 5 8 (J^fleSlwns onMr.WzWs Let.4:
Years ago, that is, about || 11 00 after Christ,
and therefore cou'd know what was pradis'd in
our Saviour's Time no better than many can
now \ and yet he is, by far, the belt Authority
of any Dr. Pocock makes ufe of,
I wou'd not be thought to flight the Teflimony
of the Rahhins thus, becaufe they are againfl: me
in this Point, or that I'm fo hamper'd with
what the Doftor fays, that I can anfwer no other
ivay but by lelTening their Credit \ for neither
they nor the Doftor are fo much againft me as
Mr. Wall pretends : befides, they have not this
Charader from me alone, but from all who are
acquainted with 'era, even thofe Perfons that
follow and depend on 'em fo much, which is fome-
thing ftrange. But I fhall have otcafion to fay
more of 'em in another Place, where I may give
fome Reafons for my Opinion.
But becaufe our Author refers, not fo much to
the Rahhins themfelves as to Dr. Pocock^ a Man of
very great Reputation, efpecially for his Skill in
thefe things^ in deference to him, I will take
notice of a Line or two in the Chapter Mr. M^all
has cited ^ which may difcover how much he
abufes the Dod^or, who very fully grants all I
need defire: for he allows jbocinlliSvci fignifys
more than x^^v/Trfetv, to wajh the Hands ^ fo that
poi-nWtiStii mult fignify more than barely any
Manner of w^alhing 'em , and he can mean no
lefs than to dip 'em: For his "^ Words are-,
Thefe things abundantly confirm what I afferted in
the Beginnings viz. that 72tO {which anfwers to
jiagfT/^£a5ai in the Greekj fgnifys a farther Degree
of
ii R. David Ganz.
^ Not. Mifcell. cap. 9. pag. 999. In his qua? produx-
imus eft quod ea quae initio diximus abunde conlir-
niet, effe fcil. ^3tp (quod (tfinfli^i^t fignificat) ulteriorem
purgationis gradum quarn is qui per *7K>3 feu ^irW^iv in-
" teiligitur.
Let.4- Hiflory of Infant'^aptifm. i 59
&f, Pvrificationy than 7t33, or y^Q^viitl&v^ yet not fo
as riecejfarily to imjfly an Immerfion of the rvhole>
Body.'-) for the gre-atefi and mofi notor'iom Vncieatt"
nefj of the Handi reached hut to the Perek, or the-
Wrlft^ and was cleans'-d by immerfmggr Mppw^ V/w
jtp fo high. . r. . , ;
►, How different is this from our Author's Re-
pj-efentation of the Dolor's Opinion, that the
Jews do not wajh their H(znds^ but by having Water
fvur^don'^em? Whereas, you fee, the Dodor fays^
he has been abundantly proving, that ^y^ or
fSocTrT/^tf&ou does fignify more than iimply to wafli
the- Hands •, and the following Lines, wherein he
explains what he .means by more than ^^^e^viVTav,
fhow clearly that .he means to immerfe or dip, a9
appears by the Inftance, and the exprefs Words
he rnakes ufe of; And therefore alfo affigning the
Reaftn why g^oL-zslili^cu. is us'd, Mark-^iu 4. he
recurs to this 'Cudiom of dipping their Hands
into the Water, from which alone, he thinks, the
Exprefiion is to be juflify'd ^ intimating, or ra^
tter.aflerting, that the Word is us'd there and
m the parallel Places, with a particular regard
to that ?V2iddQQ.. So Tiv* Hammond underltands
him?, and determines this to be the Sta^t of the
Fiace too ^ for he .fays, the Word (ignifys the
^. Wafloin^ of any Part., as the Hands here.^ by way
of Immerfion in Water., as that is opposed to j^Jfufwfi
or fouri'fig Water on them* But Dr. Pocock\ Words
are thefe :
'f* III give you my Opinion : for their common crdi-
telligitur, nee tamen totius corporis Merfation-m necenano
indigitare, cum vel grav-nTima ac m.inifein/rima manuum
immundities ttJ Perek, feu ea qus ad Brachiale eft junfta-
ra finiatur, & manuum eoufque Merfatione tollatur, ace. '
^ Annot. in Marl^^H. ^,
f Not. Alifcell. c. 9. p. ^97. Dicamquod fentio ; cibum
ordinarium cap:aris liberum erat five manus Aquarum juft»
Menfur^ conceptaculum, vel foncem immergere, five eaf-
dem
\6o ^fleBionson Afr. Wall'j LCC4;
nary Meals^ they were at liberty^ either to immerfe or
dip their Hands In a Springs or a Bafon which held a
certain qvantlty of Water^ or to wajlj ^em In the manner
J defcrlVd^ by four ing Water on^em* Since then they
might wajh which of thefe ways they pleas^d^ and ^tls
likely enough fome who pretended to a more than ordinary
SanStltyy &c — ■ — might chufe that which was reckon d
the chief'-) ^tls not without great re af on ^ that a Word
is tis^d which jhoud comprehend both ways ; for tha
fhocifj il^odtci does indeed principally agree to the Immer-
fion^ yet that It does not neceffarlly and only fignlfy
that^ I think Is plain from Luke xi. 38. I add
thefe laft: Words, becaufe in them the Dodor
feems to declare agaiiifl: me, by inftancing in the
Place under confideration, to prove that (bot7rTi'^6)
does not always mean to dip. But,
- Firft, 'Tis no good Argument, but downright'
begging the Qpeftion, to inftance in the very Cafe
difputed. And Secondly, The Dodor having,
juft before, allow'd that the Jews did wafii by
Dipping as well as by Affufion, and that the Word
does properly and principally fignify fuch a wafli-
ing as is perform'd by Dipping, and withal ac-
counting from thefe Confiderations for the Ufe
of it in Mark vii. 4. which is parallel to this
in Luke xi. 38. it appears not only reafonable
but necelFary to underftand the Dodor's Mean-
ing to be, that the Word does not neceffarlly and
anly fignify to dip \ for fo his Senfe is conliftent
dem eo quem defcripfn-nus modo Aqua affusa lavare : Cum
ergo utram mallent harum lotionum adhibere poffent, &
fans probabile fit ex iis qui majorem fan^iimonias fpeciem
prae fe ferrent, fuiffe qui, &c. earn quae graviffima
putabatur obfervarent, non fine magna ratione ufurpatuni
videarur verbum quod utramque comprehenderet. Nam
quamvis ^ct/xli^Sf^/ ei revera, quae immerfione fit pracci-
puc competat, non tamen de ea folum, vel neceiTarib dici
patere arbitror ex illo. Quodoccurrit Luc* xi. v. 38.
with
Let.4« H'tjiory of Infant'^aptijm. 1 6 1
with what he had faid before, and is indeed all
he intended to prove by it: tho, at the fame
time, I muft fay again, even this is but begging
the Queltion.
Thus much then may- be fairly gather'd from
the Dodor's Words, that in Luke yi\. 38. and
Marl vii. 4. pj^-srT/^eo^ / does naturally, and prin-
elf ally ^ fignify to wafh the Hands by Dipping 9
, which is all I defire, and directly contrary to
what Mr. Wall cites him for. He fuppofes, in-
deed, that 'tis us'd to comprehend the other way
of Wafhing too \ but this is an arbitrary Suppo-
rt ion, which feems to be made only to ferve a
Turn : nor does he fo much as go about to prove
the Word is ever once us'd fo ^ the only reafon he
has to think it, are the Sayings of the Rahhins.
But I wonder a Man of the Dodor's Parts fhou'd
(contrary to what he granted was the proper and
general, and I add the conftant Ufe of the Word)
wreft and (train the facred Text, to make it com-
ply with the fenilefs Fancys of thofe chimerical
Men.
In hae ^ what the Dodor fays from the Rahhins^
we fee, is of no great Weight 3 and if it were
ever fo confiderable , yet it makes nothing
for Mr. Wall^ but rather againft hi^. For lince
'tis beyond difpute, that the Word properly and
generally (ignifys to dif^ and that the Jews did,
at kail:, fometimes wafh by Dippings and that
Dipping alfo was thought a more perfed: Purifica-
cation, which therefore, at leaft, fomc of the
fuperltitious Pharifees very Itridly adher'd to :
'tis very natural, and even neceflary, to believe
the Word means nothing lefs in the Place before
us, efpecially if it be conlider'd, 'tis a zealous
Pharifee who is there fpeaking, who alfo, per-
haps, look'd for Signs of the fevereft Sandity
in a Perfon who fee up for a Ccnfor and Re-
M former
\6i ^eflcclions on Jfr.WallV Let.4.
former even of the Seft of the Pharifees them-
felves^ wh^ made fuch mighty Pretences to, and
had gain'd fo great a Reputation for HoUnefs,
ere Add to all this, that if any heed is to
be given to Words themfelves, the plain Letter of
the t: oly Text, which implys to dif^ is on my fide ^
while, on the contrary, Mr. Wall produces no one
thing to make it probable, in the kail degree,
that the Pharifecy or if you pleafe St. Luhy did
not mean to dip.
But I have run too great a length on this
Paflage; and will therefore endeavour to contraft
on thofe 'which remain.
Tlie next Inflance Mr. Wall makes ufe of is
Al^i'fk Yil 4. which he brings as an undoubted
Proof for his Purpofe : and, as if it needed or was
capable of no Improvement, he only remarks,
that what is trunjlated the Walhing of Pots, &c.
is in the Original the Baptizing of Pots, &c»
And what is there faid^ when they come from
IMarket, except they walh they eat not, the
Words ^/5n Mark arc^ except they be baptiz'd,
they eat not. Profound Obfervations ! Any
Man of a different Difpofition from Mr. Wall^
wou'd have taken this for a very clear Inflance
againft him •, or to be fure no other Man could
have cited thefe Words, but he would at leaft
have thought it neceflary to fay fomething how-
ever, to fnew which way they fo flrangely and
v;onderfully prove j3-a7rTi'^fc does not llgnify to
dif, I can't but wonder what it is Mr. Wall
means; for, as to the VeiTels, if we know any
thing of the matter, they were to be cleans'd
by fvtting ^em into the Watcr^ at leaft if we may
take the exprefs Word of God for it, Lev. ii. 32.
And Dr Hammond fays, |[ The Baptlfm of Cups is
11 An not, in Mar^siu 4.
putting
Let.4- Htflory of Infant^^aptifm. 1 6 5
flitting hito Water all over^ rinfng them. And as
to the Perfons, whether they wafh'd by dippings
and whether they wafh'd all over, or fome part on-
ly, deferv'd to have been a little more enlarged on *,
but why do I fay a little more, when he has faid
nothing at all to it, but has taken it for granted,
without the lealt hefitation? as if it was a
felf-evident firft Principle, that 'tis very diredt
and ftrong in his favour, notwithftanding he has
allow'd that the Jews did immerfe the Thing or
Ferfon to be wafh'd "^.
And here again our Author refers you to his
Margin, to one Line or not fo much, which he has
tranfcrib'd from Dr. Pocock^ in thefe words *, '} They
who wajlj'^d at coming from the Afarket^ did 'twt dip
their whole Bodys : Which Words Mr. Wall brings
in with a very magifterial Air in thefe terms.
This was 7iot dipping. But, by his and the Dodor's
leave, 'tis a Miftake : for they, when they came
from Market, did wafh by dipping *, and thefe
dogmatical Aflertions won't be thought to go a
great way to prove the contrary.
The Dodtor, indeed, fets himfelf with all his
might to juitify his Opinion^ and to that end
calls in the whole Body of Rabbins to his aflift-
ance, fuch as it is, light and inconfiderable enough
in reafon^ but never attempts, as I remember,
to give one Inftance that the Word is fo us'd
as he pretends : which, neverthelefs, would have
carry'd fomething more of foUdity in it, than thus
to build all on the Authority of a thoufand Rab-
bins^ who make Reafon and Revelation the leaft
part of the Rule they fpeak by *, and yet thefe
Men only does the Doctor oppofe to the univerfal
* Pare ir. pag. 924.
f Lavantes a tbro totum corpus non raerfabant. Mifc.
cap 9.
M 2 Acccp-
1 64 ^fleFlions on K^.WallV Let. 4.
Acceptation of the word, and the venerable Au-
thority of the facred Text. What Refped can
fuch Perfons have to that awfd Pillar and Ground
of the Truth, who induflrioufly make it bend and
yield to the filly Whimfys of thefe Men? Buta-
gainlt them and the Doftor I produce Vatahlus^
a Man fo fingularly vers'd in the Rabbinical Wri-
tings, that even the Jews themfelves, as Monfieur
de Thou tells us, greatly admir'd his Ledures, and
attended 'em when he was publick Hebrew
Profcflbr at Park. VatMus fays, -\ Theywajh^d
themfelves all over. And to pafs by others, 1 will
only add the Authority of the admirable Grotlus^
who ought never to be nam'd without a Mark
of Honour •, he fays on Mark vii. 4. [] They were
more folUckoits to clean fe themfelves from the De-
fAcmcnt they had contratled in the Market ^ and there-
fore they not only wafj'd their Handsy hut immersed
their whole Body.
Thefe Authority s are valtly beyond Mr. Wallh
Quotation, and proportionally determine the
thing againft him : but as confiderable as they
are, I don't defire you ihou'd truft to thefe alone
neither ^ for it will likewife appear that Antiqui-
tv, and, above all, the facred Text it felf contra-
di(^>s him alfo.
That 'twas cuftomary to purify themfelves by
wadiingthe whole Body, atleaftin fome Cafes, is
fliewn before ^ and the Priefts were particularly
forbid to eat, unlefs they firft wafh'd their Flefli in
Water, Lev. xxii.<5. And we have frequent mention
among the Antients of the HemerobaptiJl^s^Yjho were
fo call'd from their Practice of wafhing themfelves
in this manner every day j as in the Apoltolical
t Ad Marc. vii. 4. Se totos abluebant.
li Majori cura fe purgabant a fori conta£lii, quippe
ndn manus tantum lavando, f^d & Corpus merfando.
Gonfti-
Ler.4. Hlflory of Infant-^apti/jn. 1 6 5
Conftitutions 'I", where 'tis noted, that unlefs
they're fo wafh'd, they eat mtj for without vvafh-
ingthey thought they cou'd not be fav'd, accord-
ing to that Renunciation, tranfcrib'd by Cotelerins
"^ from the Regius Co^.ex^ 1818. They are infer-
red in the Catalogue ofjewiflj Seds by Hegefi^^us |; ;
and Juftln Martyr^ mentioning feveral Seds alfo of
the Jews^ names thefe among the refl:, and calls
'em ^^ Baj}tifi^j from this lignification of the
word : and thefe Wafhings are what in the ar/-
ftitutions 'W are intended by p:avlT/(T^u:tT<l^v >f^^rfjii-
pivtov, daily W-afljwgs^ as may be farther confirni'd
by that account given us of one Sed of the Jews
by >y^pto||||, who liv'd in the Apoftolical Times,
and is of infinitely more Credit, and more to be
rely'd on than all the Rabbins^ he expreily men-
tions, more than once, their Wafhing of their Bo-
dys. TertulUan too plainly intimates, the Jews
us'd to wafh their whole Bodys, when he fays, Tho
the Jews daily wajh every fart of the Bodyy yet they
are never cUah, 'And Rabbi Benjamin^ iiji his: Iti-
nerary (^) mentions the Chzuhites or Samaritans'Z'
bout Naflofa^ formerly S/c/a.-^^, between Geraz.im
and Ebal ^ and fays, they Itill waQi thejr^ficcljs
every day.
And what elfe but this wafliing of the whole
Body can be the meaniag of the facred. Text:,
when 'tis fo plain, and beyond all pofiible Ambi-
guity, that the Wafliing of the Hands is men-
tion'd in the words immediately preceding, and
t Lib. 6, cap. 6. "Oi\ivc^ ka^' Ikcc^v v\ijA^.v^ \'^v [J.h Cclt^
^I'jcovlcLt iiK io^i<dcrtVy &c.
^ Ad Recognit. lin. i. pag. 499.
ii Eufeb.Hift. Ecclef. lib. 4. cap. 22. fol. 41..
**• Dialog, cum Tryph. pag, 507. o.- rayt
t Lib. 6. cap. iS. -.r
jlll B?il. JiHaic, lib. 2. cap. 7, f*^) Pag. 19.
M 3 thcrciore
\66 <^fleSlionson Mr.WaWs Let.4;
therefore can't, without great Abfurdity, be a-
gain fo formally repeated here? If indeed the
words in the 3d Verfe exprefs'd only a light wafll-
ing of the Hands, it might then be feafible enough
to fuppofe, that in the 4th, Su Mark defign'd to
fignify their extraordinary Care to wafh 'em
more thorowly after they had been in the Market.
But it is not fo •, for the 3d Verfe, 'tis generally
agreed, exprefles the greateft and molt folemii
Wiifhing of the Hands, whether Truy^w fignifies
only t<^ the Wrifi^ as Dr. Toc(Kh^ Hammond^ Whitby j
&:c. ^niong our own Countrymen, think from
the Rabbins^ or (which feems moll agreeable to
the ufe of the word) to theElbow-^ as TheophyUB is
commonly noted to explain it, and fome of the
belt (iri ticks, as Drufms^ Caff el ^ 6s:c.
Can any one poflibly imagine now, that jult
after faying, the Pharifees, and all the Jews, ex-
ccft they wafi their Hahds^ ivxjyiJ^^ ^*p to the Wriflj
or Elboxv^ eat not^ holding the Tradition of the El^
ders •, the Holy Evangeliit fliou'd immediately add,
not only that they always wafh their Hands be-
fore they eat, but alfo when they come from the
Market^ tmlefs they waJJj their Hands^ they eat not ?
This feems very mean and unneeeflary, for 'twas
fully comprehended in the words immediately fore-
going, and does not heighten or explain 'em at
all. But to return to the Cafe in hand, if we un-
derlland it to mean the walliing of the whole Bo-
dy, theSenfe is pertinent, eafy and natural, and
very regularly exprefs'd too •, for 'tis methodical
enough to exprefs their common Purification firft,
and then to add, that in cafe of greater Pollution
contracted at the Market, they were not content
with barely this Wafhing, or any thing fhort of
w^afhing the whole Body, jllbertus Bobovimj chief
Interpreter to the Emperor Mahomet IV. has fol-
lowed this^Order in a like Cafe, viz.. in defcrib-
ing
,Let.4- Hijlojj of Infcint'^ctptifm. 167
Ing the Mahometan WaHiings, which they bor-
row'dfrom thQjews: Firft, he leUtes their' ordi-
nary Luflratipns, G^c the wafhing of the Face,
the Hands and Feet, &c. before Prayers , and af-
terwards adds, that upon greater and extraordi-
nary Pollutions, they are oblig'A to wafli rhe
whole Body. And here by the way, if Dr. Po-
cock's Method were good, we might improve
this to our purpofe, and (hew, that in extraordi-
nary Defilements, fuch as this in St. Mark^ the
Jem did wafli the whole Body , for thus the Doc-
tor frequently expounds the Jewijlj Ceremonys,
by recurring to the Mahometan. But I think we
don't need fuch Evidence.
But before I conclude what I have to fay on
'this, give me leave to obferve to you, that all the
V^erfions in the Polyglot, except MGntanus*'^ and
the vulgar Latin, to wit, the Syriac^ Arabic^
Ethlofic and Perfic^ unanimoufly underftand the
words in a fenfe quite difierent from what has
been hitherto mention'd \ that is, they all take
the meaning to be, not that the Jews walh'd them-
felves, or their Hands, &c. when thev came
from the Market, but that the Herbs, for inftance,
and other things they bought there, were firft to
be wa(h'd before tiiey cou'd be eaten. Thus
they tranllate the Place, and what they buy m the
Aiarket, imlefs it be wajli*d, they eat not.
It muft be own'd, the Greek is capable of this
Senfe ^ and I wonder Commentators have takea
fo little notice of it, efpecially fince thefe four
valuable Verfions fo intirely agree in it : for the
Syriac Sind Ethiopia are allow'd to have been made
in or near the Apoftolic Times, and queftionlefs
by fuch as underftood the Jewip Ceremonys very
well, and perhaps were Jews themfelves, as the
greateft part of the Chriftian Church at that time
was. I can't but pay very great Refpecl to v.-ch
M 4 antient
1 6 8 (l^efleFlions on Ur.W^lYs Let.4.
antient Tranflations, and therefbre am willing to
grant, this perhaps may be the true meaning.
Robert Stephens^ in an antient Manufcript from
Italy^ and the Copy Bez.ez prefented to the Uni-
verfity of Cambridge read otM tK3r:om\\ when they
come \ and therefore our EngUflj Tranilators have
not put theft words in the Supplemertal Charac-
ter : but Grotius thinks they were conjedurally
added in th^ Greek:, by fome body who thought
they were wantirig ;,, and Lncas Brvgenfis. fays, they
are infer ted from fomr faulty Latin Co^-^^: The
moft and the bell; Copys omit 'em, and learned
Men in general fee no Necrlfity of inferting 'em.
But the Authority of thefe antient V^erfions is, !
had like to have faid, irrefiiliMe, and fhews that
undoubtedly they were not in. the Autografha^ and
theearlic.: Copys.
Infhort, if the Senfeof the Words is as thefe
V^rfions take it, they are directly againfl: Mr. Wall^
for; no body will make a queftion how Herbs
are wafh'd ^ and if this is not the Senfe, yet i
think I have fhewn plainly enough, that the Jews
did fometimes, and more than probably in the
prefent Cafe, wafh the whole Body : or if after
all neither of thefe Senfes will be allow'd, fup-
poling the Place does fpeak of wafhing the Hands,
even Dr. Pococky Dr. Hammond^ &c. allow, and
urge it too, that it means to wafli 'em by dipping,
which anfwers my end full as well as either of
the other ways ^ for if the word does but {igmfyto
dipj I ask no more, let it relate to the whole Bo-
dy, or a Part of it only, either way I gain my
Point.
The next Place our Author cites, will do him
as little Service as any of thofe we've already ex-
amin'd are found to do : 'Tis in Heb. ix. JO. JVhich
fioed only in Meats and Drinks^ and divers IVaJIj^
ings and carnal Ordinances^ &c. iNow of thefe
dix^ers
Let.4- Htjiery of Infant'^apti/m. 169
divers Wajhlngs^ [hoci^is-fAol^^ fomc, our Author tells
us, were by Bathing, and others by Sprinkling ;
and fo takes ft for granted that the word in this
Place fignifies to walli in general, and. any or all
kinds of Wafhing, and to fprinkle as well ^s to
dip.
But you may be pleased to obferve, Sir, this is
groQy begging the Queftion : For without any
necellity, meeting with the word here, he fuppo-
"fes air the legal Sprinklings are intended by it, as
■well as the Bathings,, and fo learnedly demon-
'ftfates the thing ^ and then draws 'his Conclulion,
that it fignifys to fprinkle.
J"^' But the words, for ought he knows to the con-
trary, may fpcak of thofe Wafliings only which
were by Bathing or Dipping into Water, and fo
Grotius and Dr.ll^/?/r^^ underftand 'em.' And there-
fore fuppofing. the .word principally to exprefs
Dipping, and not always or neceilarily (if at all)
to imply any thing elfe, which can't be deny'd
me ^ and there being nothing in this Paflage which
makes it needful it fhou'd inciade Sprinkling ^ it
muft feem very reafonable to fuppbfe, it means
only the Bathings : for there's not only no men-
tion of Sprinkling, &c\ or Alluuon to it ^ but the
word being allow'd generally and mxolt properly
to lignify to dipy and here being no Intimation that
any thing elfe is intended, 'tis fomething of an
'Argument to prove fprinkling is not intended.
While our Author endeavours to fhew this
Greek word does fometimes fignify to. fprinkle or
wafh, he fhou'd certainly have madeufcof fuch Ih-
ftances wherein Spri-Ming is plainly meant •, which,
neverthelefs, we fee. Sir, he has not done.
Our Tranilators have rendePd the Place before
us well enough, one wou'd have thought, fo as to
have given our Author no reafonabie. ground of
citing it to the purpofe he does. But, ic feems,
there's
1 70 (^fleHions on M'.WallV Let.4.
there's no being-fete^rom the Cavils of fome
Men, and therefore I think it might have been rea-
der'd fomething more determinately, divers Bath-
ingsj or Dlffings, If it had been fo render'd, I
prefume Mr. Wall wou'd not have thought our
Tranilation did at all favour his Pretence ; and
yet the Greek is as exprelly againft him as that
cou'd have been : for I Hill alTert^the word does al-
ways, and here too^ only fignify Dippings^ Bath-
ingsj See* and unlefs hecanafiigna Realontothe
coivtrary, the allow'd common fettled Senfe. of the
word will be thought fufficient to juftify my Af-
fertion. And, if it were nothing elfe, the bare
Poflibility of this being the true Senfe^ will alone
deftroy all he fays from the Words, which can
have no force, till it is made appear they are ca-
pable of his Senfe only, and no other ^ for if
they are equally capable in themfelves of either
Senfe, they can argue nothing either way.
OurTranflatorsreudring the Original fo loofly,
perhaps gave Mr. Wall occafion to imagine the
Greek word is as general as the Engliflj ^ and
therefore that the Text, fpeaking of Walhings in
general, might be fuppos'd to comprehend all the
VVa filings of every kind (tho, by the way, it
feems a little harfti to call Sprinkling, Wafhing)
but he is to prove, and not to fuppofe, that the
Greek is of fo large a Signification. However,
if we grant the facred Writer defign'd by the
words, all the Jewljii Purifications by Sprinkling
as well as by Dipping, it will no more follow,
againitthe univerfal ufe of the word, thatitbere
fignifies to fprinkle, than that TWttcro, for inftancc.
In Z/^.r.w, (ignifies the Hilt of a Swordy becaufe 'tis
fometkies put for a Sword^ but ftridly lignifies on-
ly the ?^/??f of it. So here-, granting for once
that S^rmKiingsare included in the Writer's De-
.. the word only fignifies Dipping, and is
put^
Let.4- Hijiory of Infant^^Aptifm. \ 7 1
put, by a Synecdoche a potioriy to fignify all tbeif
Purifications, this being one pait of 'em: but 'tis
no Confequence, that therefore the word fignifies
each Part llngly, or that it belongs as properly
to one Part as another, or that it ever fignifies a-
ny of the other Parts, without or diftind from
this of Dipping •, which neverthelefs, as abfurd as
it is, is our Author's Inference. Jultas if, be-
caufe Ciceroj in one of his ^ Letters, calls his
Wife and Daughter Charijfim^ Anintdty fome won-
derful Critick fhou'd thence pretend Anima in La-
tin fignifies Body or Matter, as w^ll as Mind or
S fir it,
Tho the Tithing of Mim^ Anife and Cummin^
Mat. xxiii. 23. by a Synecdoche^ denotes the whole
Ceremonial Law, yet I fuppofe our Author won't
go about to fay, v)iAuo(r/^ov, the Original word for
Mint^ fignifies Sacrifice ^ and that ocvmOov, Anife^ is
as properly a Burnt-Offering ^ and Ku/xivov, which is
render'd Cummin^ comprehends in its fignification
the holy Water of Separation, or the legal Sprin-
klings. In like manner Circumcifwn is frequently
put for the whole Law, and fo is Sacrifice *, yet no
Man can be fo inconfiderate as to urge from
thence, and infift on fuch Inftances, to prove that
either of thefe words fignifies what the other does ;
and yet Mr. VVallh Argument from this PafTage is,
at beft, no other : For he fuppofes the words
here are put for all the Waihings, or rather all
the Parts of the Purifications by Water ^ and
thence concludes, the word fignifies one as well
as the other. Sprinkling as well as Dipping. And
even this is grounded on a very falfe and preca-'
rious Suppofition, viz., that the Original word is
of as large an Acceptation as the EngUfij word by
which 'tis render'd : But the Greek is as much a-
5 Lib. 14. Famil. Epift. 14.
galaft
\7^ . ^fleSlions on Kr. Wall V Let.4.^
gainft him^ as what I count the more literal and
truer EngUfh^ viz. Divers Bathings or Dlppwgs,
wou'd be^ for fo it fhou'd be tranflated, which
every one will fay is quite oppofite to his Suppo-
tion J for divers Bathings^ or Dippings^ undoubted-
ly are not fome Dippings and fome Sprinklings.
And this being agreeable to the true Senfe of the
word, till I can fee a good reafon to the contrary,
I muffc think this Place means nothing elfe.
The laft Place Mr. ^F^// mentions, isy^^^. xxvi.
23. He that dips his Hand with me in the DIJIj^ See.
and all the ufe he makes of it, is only to obferve,
the word does not here mean the Dipping of the
whole Hand. But this is nothing to the pur-
pofe : For the Queftion is not about the Whole,
or a Part of the Subjed, but whether the Greek
word iignifics only to dip, or any thing elfe.
And therefore this is fhuffling off the Queftion,
and feeming' to fay fomething, when, in reality,
he fays nothing at all, but even by this tacitly
allows all we demand. For, -all other Confidera-
tions a fide, if it be true that |ba-srT/^(i) does only
lignifyto dip^ 'tis all we ask, and fhall but defire
our Adverfarys fo far to acknowledg the Truth,
and our prefent Difpute is at an end.
• There is another Fancy of Mr. IT^/ZV, which is
almoft too trifling to be taken notice of : he pre-
tended to eftablifh the Senfe ;o£ the word :f5om
thefe two Particulars. ^ ; a 'ioi ]i; , 'yr^ o'nn
I. The plain Application of it in Scripture,-to
lignify to walh, by Sprinkling or pouring on Water,
and this we have been examining. ;.2. Hhat the Sa-
cramental Waging is often in Scripture exprefi by other
words he fides baptizing j which other words do f^nify
Wafljing in the ordinary and general Senfe ■^. The
Truth'of this Obfervation I Ihall not go about
^ Part II. p. 221.
to
Let.4* Hiflory of Infant'^a^tljm. 173
to queftion, I grant it is a plain Cafe^ but what
is this to the Bufinefs in hand? Be is to Ihew
j2)a7r7[^co does fignify any kind of Wafhing, and
to that purpofe he tells you, the Sacramental
Wafhing is exprefs'd by words which fignify to
wafh in general \ and what of that ? Why here
the force of this Argument, if it has any, mulfc
lie : The word which is fometimes us'd to exprefs
the Sacramental Wafliing, fignifies any kind of
Wafhing in general *, therefore this Sacrament
may be adminifler'd by any kind of Wafhing.
And again, by another therefore^ the word pjaTiT/^O),
efpecially when apply'd to this Sacrament, mult,
if it agrees to the thing 'tis apply'd to, fignify
any manner of Wafhing too. To difcover what
admirable Logick this is, let us invert his Argu-
ment thus: jia7rT/^6), 'tis plain, in all other In-
llances, fignifies to dip^ and not one Inftance can
be given where it ever fignifies any thing elfe ;
therefore the Sacramental Wafhing, which is ve-
ry commonly and indeed molt properly exprefs'd
by it (iox 'tis nam'd Baftifm) was and is to be
adminifter'd by Dipping only. And therefore,
2. All the other words, whatever they are,
which are apply'd to this Sacrament, tho it were
^avTilcy it felf, ay, or even gixwl^qs y.ocnt^^oclvQy
muft fignify nothing lefs than to dip likewife.
But the Unhappinefs of this way of arguing
is, that it will equally prove Contrarys true, and
the fame thing to be true and falfe, fo that no-
thing will be gain'd by it : And thus it falls out
with Mr. Wafl ^ he proves by it that eotTrfi'^^) fig-
nifies to four or fprinkle^ or any kind of Wafh-
ing •, and after the fame manner I have prov'd
that Ai63, the word on which he grounds his Ar-
gument, and all the other words w^hich he will
fay fignify to fprlMe^ &c. do always and necelTarily
fignifv to dlpy and only to dip.
You
1 74 ^fleSlions on Mr. Wall V Let4^
You fee, therefore, this Form of Reafouing
concludes equally on both fides, and confequently -
in reality it proves nothing at all.
But if it be not a Fault to treat fo ridiculous a
Fancy more ferioufly, let me ask you, whether
you can eafily imagine that Mr, WaH is himfelf
perfuaded there is any thing in what he fays •,
for he muft needs know well enough, that Words,
like our Ideas, which they're the Signs of, muft
have their Genera^ and their Swedes : Some are of
a very large comprehenfive Kotation *, but the fe-
veral things fuch words comprehend, have befides
a more proper peculiar word to be diftinguifh'd
by, which is not therefore of fo large a fignifica-
tion. Take a familiar Example: we compafHo-
nately fay, fuch a Man is a poor Creature ; but
wou'd any one therefore imagine that the word
Man^ ov that farticuUr A^an^ and the word Crf^-
ture^ are fyi:onymoas Terms, equally large and
comprehenfive in their fignifications ? Could any
body be fo abfurd as to infer, that the word Man
iignifies any created Being, an Angel, a Horfe, a
Worm, a Stock, &c^ becaufe the Generical word
Creature comprehends, and is equally applicable
to all thefe ? Yet this is Mr. \Vall\ own Argument
CO a tittle.
Ihus, fuppofing |^a7fItJ^o7s, Heh» ix. lo. does,
as he wou'd have it believ'd, fignify any fort of
Wafhing, will it follow that the Jewifl) Sprin-
klings, which he fays are meant there, may be
performed by any kind of Wafhing^ and that the
words us'd in the Law for fprmkle^ fignify fo too ?
Or becaufe A»63, the fame word he argues from
here, exprefles the legal VVafhings, will he fay
any kind of Wafhing might be us'd at liberty ;
and that 'twas enough to fprinkle thofe things
which God direftly commanded Ihould h^ put in-
to the Water, Lev* xi. 32. or that N2V CD'M
llgnifics
Lec.4. H'tjhry of Infant-'BaptiJjn. 1 7 5
fignifics to waft in general, and to fprinkic as well
•as any thing elfe, merely becaufe the Walhings
are exprefs d fometimes by a general word, which
comprehends all the kinds of 'em '■> *Tis I thinl"
much more reafonable to fay, that Words, to'
which common Ufe has appropriated a more par-
ticular Senfe, (hou'd be allow'd to determine what
any others have exprefs'd more generally and
at large; the words of a more determinate Senfe
giving a more particular and exad account of
liend the Particular, not wholly, but only as they
alfo.fignifytowafhi for the latter mean fome-
thing more than barely to wafh, and reftrain it
to this or that manner of Waniing. If it is but
Walhing, let It be Dipping or Pouring, or any
thing elfe, it may well enough be exprefs'd by the
general word, tho thisor that particular Mode
ot Wafhing can only anfwer the Import of the
particular Word. Tiius tho all Dipping is Walh-
ing, and as fuch is contain'd under the general
word A»a, which Cgnifies fimply to wafh ; yet it
does not therefore follow, that all Wafting is
Dipping, or that all Waftings may be exorefs'd
bythe word which properly fignifiesto d'p' nor
rirf '" '\° '"'^' ''' "^^ concerning tS
fame thing, as here A^<i) and |i«,rT,'^6>, they are .Vo-
J^mx/Axi, and altogether of the fame Import as
our Author wou'd ftrangely infer. ^ '
For thus * Homer fpeaks of Stars being n>ajh'd in
the Sea, ufmg the fame word Mr. WM\,txt irgues
from ; and yet muft be underftood to mean, their
preffion of the Poets. And therefore when Vir.
£/is fpeaking of the greater and leifer iJ.^r., and
! liiad. E. V. 5.
They
1^6 ^flcFlious onMr.W2L\ys Let.4.^
Thcjr^ ^ ■■ by Fat ir Decree^
Abhor to dive beneath the Southern Sea :
Tingo here, and cr-uv6o in a thoufand Inflances in
t\\^ Grecian Poets, mufl be interpreted to mean
any manner of Wafhing, and may as well figni-
^y ^^ fprinkle^ as to dip or put into,
I need not repeat the Obfervations of Logi-
cians about thtiv Genera and Species '^ yet give
233 e leave only to tranfcribe one Canon from Ari-
fiotle : The '|' Species includes the Definition of the
Genus, and all that is in it^ hut not vice veiTa.
pipping includes Wafhing, but Walhing does
not include Dipping ^ for there may be a Walh-
ing by Pouring, &c. Thus the Cbriftian Sacra-
ment, which is to be adminifter'd by Dipping,
which is one kind of Wafhing, may very well
be call'd by the general name [}Vafir.ng-^ but it
will in no wife follow, that therefore this general
word does not therefore comprehend all that is
fignify'dby the m.ore particular one, or ferve pro-
perly to interpret it.
Thus you fee, Sir, how little there is in what
our Author fays, to make it plain that ^clt^tiIg^
does not necefiarily and always fignify to dip.
I hope I have aded very uprightly in examiniirg
all his Inftances, and allow'd every thing its due
w^eight, in his behalf. Befides thofe he mentions,
I have likewife conlider'd all other Inftances that
I cou'd imagine might polTibly be pleaded for
him, which he took no notice of, without con-
"^ ' — — Perque duas in morem Fluminis Arftos,
ArOos Oceaiii metucntes aDquore T I N G I.
Georgk, lib. i. v. 245.
t Top. lib. 4. cap. I. AnAo;/ «> qti -m a^^// hVh ,w£7?'%« ^^
ysm* Tx /i yirv, "^Z hMy V.
' ' V ccaling
Let4- Hijlory of Infant ^aptifm. 177
cealing any one. And no Man, I fancy, will
think there are others behind which may be
urg'd with any Colour on his tide ^ for fuch me-
taphorical Paflages as Mat^ xx.22. Are ye ahlcj
&C. to be hapnzj^d with the Baftifm that I am bap^
tiz.^d with? and fuch like Places, are fo manifeftly
figurative and obfcure, that they can't be thought
to furnilh any Argument either way, and there-
fore 1 pafs'emby. And what I have farther to
add upon this Matter, i muft refer to my next.
I am,
S I R,
Yours, &c>
N Let t'e r
78 (^fleBions onMr.W^lYs Let.5
Letter V.
To appeal to the Scriptures only for the Senfe of a Wordy
'Very unreafonahle, "^Tis notvoithfl anting proved from
them that the Greek Word mvfl always fgnify to dip.
What Pajfages may he argued from, Luke xvi. 24.
John xiii. 26. Rev. xix. 1 3. The vulgar Copys have
loft the true Reading in the laft* Metaphorical Paf"
fages make for^ not againfi my Opinion* Languages
doat exaElly anfwer to one another. If the Word
praTrTi^co were otherwife ever fo amhiguom^ yet as it
relates to Baptifm^ ^tis fujfciently determined only
and neceffarily to mean to dip. By the DoElrine and
TraElice of St. John. Of the Holy Apoflles. Of
the fucc ceding Church for many Centurys^ which ur£d
a trine Immerfton. Learned A I en in general allow this
Aiode ofBaptifm, Air, Wall pretends^ tho the An-
ticnts did generally haptisie by Immerfion, they like-
wife tu'd Affufion, or the like. But this was mt
allowed in common Cafes. Afperfion^ how atfirfi ad-
mitted. ^Tis unreafonahle to argue that the general
Senfe of a Law y is the fame with the Exceptions that
are made to it* The ant lent Church of thefirjl Cen-
turys did not praBife Ajfufion^ &€. St. Cyprian'j
Plea for jifperfion very trifling. All who were baptized
in the Apoflles timcSy were baptized by Immerfion.
The Clinical AJfufions dont appear to have been intro-
duced till about 250 Tears after Christ: At which
time they very much doubted of their Falidity, By
thefrfi Patrons gra77ted to be only prefumptive. All
allow Immerfion was inffled on antiently as the on(y
regular way-y in all common Cafes at leafi. What to
be thought of thofe Perfonsy who at the fame time
acknow^
Let. 5 • Hiftory of Infant-^apti/m. 1 79
aclnowledg this^ and yet plead for what is fo cer-
tainly and demonftrahly falfe on all accounts. An
humble Remark on the Bljhop of Salisbury^ Flea
for changing the manner of adminifiring the Sa--
crament here in England. The Clergy pretend they
xvoud gladly revive the antient Pra^ice^ but they
dorit take the proper Methods : and in reality ohftruth
its being rwvd, BaTrTo) and psOC'Trfl^Cd fymnymons,
S J Ry
BY what I have already faid in my former,
I believe, it fufficiently appears, that there
is nothing in the Scriptures which any way
juftifies Mr. Wallas Suppofition ^ and that what-
ever he has produc'd is of no Confequence at all :
But that you may fee. Sir, how much reafon wc
have to infift upon it that the Word fignifies
only to dip^ I wou'd add a farther Refledtion
on this Head before I difmifs it.
Our Author, that he may evade the Force of all
that might be faid otherwife, appeals to the Scrip-
tures concerning the Word, and will be deter-
min'd by them only in this Qaeftion ; which is
fo unreafonable a Fancy, that I admire any Gen-
tleman of Underftanding Ihou'd be guilty of it.
For the moft accurate Greek Writers, fuch as the
Poetsi the Grammarians, &c. can undoubtedly
give us the true Senfe of a Greek Word as well as
the Scriptures themfelves, and are as much to be
depended on in that refped : unlefs it be fuppps'd
the Scriptures have ftrangely alter'd and wholly
chang'd the Greek Tongue, and fram'd a Language
to themfelves which wou'd unavoidably render
them very obfcure and unintelligible, and fo
make them unfit for a Rule of Faith j becaufe
this fhou'd be plain and evident to the utmolb
that the nature of the thing will admit, efpecially
ia the moft eflcntial Points. And fuch an un-
N i affeacd
I So (I(efleElio}is onMr.WsXYs Let. 5.
affeded Perfpicuity illuftriouily adorns the facred
Oracles, whatever Mv^Wall may imagine to the
contrary. But if our Author pleafes, I will join
ifTue with him here, and agree, that whatever
fhall be found to be the plain fenfe of ^cci^lla in
Scripture, that only fhall pafs for the fenfe of it
in relation to the Cafe before us, the Sacrament
of Baptifm.
1 have already gone thro all thofe Places which
can be produc'd from Scripture in favour of
Mr. IValFs Opinion, and abundantly prov'd from
the Old Teftament, that the Signification of the
Word is always to dip* Let us now make as
ftrift a Scrutiny thro the Kew, and obferve, iince
lb plain Mr. Wall's Senfe is not favour'd there,
whether any thing appears in it for mine.
Almoft all the PalTages where the Word is us'd
in the New Teftament, relate to the Sacrament
of Baptifm, and therefore can be of no fervice
in our Inquiry ^ for theQueftion is about the Senfe
of it in thofe Places. However, when 'tis accom-
pany'd with any Circumftances that may fix the
Senfe, 1 fhall think it fair enough to urge it
on my fide. All Metaphorical PafTages alfo
are out of doors , becaufe of their ambigu-
Gufnefs and obfcurity *, tho, if they prove either
way, they are againft Mr. M^Ji: And thofe Paf-
fages which relate to the Jervijh Wafhings, ha-
ving been already examin'd-, 1 will not repeat
^em, but go on to give you all the Inllances that
may;be jullly cited in this matter, and they are
only thefe that follow, by which therefore the
Senfe of the Word mult be concluded.
I begin with Lnkexvh 24. which contains the
rich Epicurean % Prayer to Abraham in Heaven, to
fend Lazarus that he may dip the Tip of his Finger
in Watcr^ and cod his Tongue* The Greek is p^oc^if.
And it can never bequefti'on'd, without renouncing
.J, commofl
Let. 5. Hljlory of Infant'^aptifrn. 1 8 1
common Senfe, that 'tis well rendrcd in our Tran-
flation by dip. ; Another Inftar^ce as full and clear
as this, is John xiii. 26. He it is to whom Ijhallgive
a Sop when I have dip^d it *, and when he had dip d
the Sop^ he, gave it to Judas Ifcariot. In the former
part of the Verfe 'tis p^a^^s '-) but in the Alexan-
drine Manufcript e/vt/ia^cis, as 'tis alfo in the latter
part of this Verfe, and in the parallel Places,
Matth. xxvi. 23. Mark xiv^ 20. It can no more b«
queftion'd what is the meaning of thefe Words m
the Original, than what is the fenfe of the EngUjh
Word dip J by which they are fo properly tranflated.
'Tis trifling to enlarge on thefe, and therefore
I go on. The next is Rev.xix, 13. ^nd he was
cloth' d with a Veflure dip^d in Blood ^ and his Name
is caWd the Word of Go D, This ExprelTion ns
fo manifeftly taken from the Dytrs Art, that ther©
can be no difficulty or uncertainty in it: for no-
thing can appear more natural than to under-
Haad -St- John- as reprefenting the Perfon in 4iis
Vifion to have been cloth'd with a Vefture which
was dip'd [or as it were dip'd] in the Blood
of his Eaemys. But this I fay only upon the fup-
pofition, that the vulgar Greek Copys retain the
true Primitive Reading. There are feveral Rea-
fons indeed, to make us think the contrary, and
thit the Word is chang'd ^ particularly the Au-
thority of Origcn^ whofe-Writings are older than
any Copys of the iSJew Teftament we can boaft of ^
and therefore what he tranfcrib'd from Antienter
Copys, mult be more confiderable than any we
have. Now he, in his Commentary on St.Joh?2*s
Gofpel, I] cites thefeWords from ver. 1 1 . to ver. 1 6.
inclufively, almoil: verbatim^ as they are la out*
Editions ^ but reads ep^^vW^vov fprinkled^ in-
ftead of ^i^oiixfjiimj dip'd j which makes this
II P4S. 51.
• N 3 PalTage
iSx ^fleclions on Afr. WalFx Let. 5.
PafTage nothing to our purpofe. However, 1 fhou'd
not think this fmgle Authority of Ori^en fufficient
to juftify my altering the Word j but I have like-
wife obferv'd that the Syriac and ^thiopic Ver-
lions, which for their Antiquity muft be thought
aimoft as valuable and authentick as the Original
it felf, being made from Primitive Copys, in or
very near the Times of the Apoftles, and ren-
dring the PafTage by Words which iignify to fprin-
kby muft greatly confirm Origens Reading of the
Place, and very ftrongly argue, that he has pre-
fcrv'd the fame Word which was in the Autografha^
But befides, if the latter Word ftands, the Senfe
is evidently what I alTert.
Thefe are all the Inftances 1 know of in the
New Teftament, where the Word is us'd accord-
ing to the vulgar Application of it \ but there
are feme, where 'tis apply'd to Baptifm, that
are confiderably in my favour, and fhall be taken
notice of by and by. In the mean time, you
fee. Sir, our Author's Rule of interpreting a
Scripture-Word, by its ufe in Scripture, is more
to my Advantage than his ^ and certainly I
have laid enough now to fatisfy any Man in the
World, who has the leaft pretence to common Senfe
and Reafon, that the Word ^.oL-nMlcii does always
without Exception (ignify only to dip. I have
confirm'd this at large from the Writings of the
Greek Authors, from the Opinion of the beft
Criticks, and from the conftant Ufe of it in the
Scriptures themfelves too ^ and fince all confefs
this to be its general and moft proper Signifi-
cation, we fhou'd never, without manifeft ne-
cclTity, depart from it. 1 believe 1 have given
fufficient Reafons alfo, why Metaphorical PalTages
don't determine againft me: for it no more fol-
lows from them that ^a-nVlfji does not (ignify
to d'fp^ than that mmergo does not lignify fo,
bccaufe
Let. 5- Hijiory of hfant-'Baptifm. \ 8 3
becaufe LaB:antim for Example ufes that Latin
Word to fignify being given up "^ to Wickednefs:
which Phrafe he borrowed perhaps from Origen^
who ufes the fame exadly in his Commentary
upon St. John f. Befides ,^ this Metaphorical
Ufe of the Word is very frequent among the
Fathers, as well as among the profane Authors,
as I obferv'd before ^ for thus Clemens Alexandrinus
fays, [1 They who thro Drunkennefs are difd in (^6ciT'
hlpfjd^oi ds \^vov) or overvphelrnd with Jleep. The
fame fenfe Flrgil thus emphatically expreffes by
a Word which properly iignifys to bury.
-)f^
Their Forces join
V invade the Town^ o'erwhelm'd with Sleep and Wine*
And Clemens in another Place, which is very re-
markable, fays, '|"{^ And we who were once polluted
with thefe things are now wajli^d and cleans a. But
thofe who wajh them/elves in Intemperance^ from So^
briety and a decent Behaviour^ they immerfe (jbXTT^
Ti'^^otJ dip intOy or gi'Ve themfelves vp to Fornication^
ji^dging it good to indulge themfelves in Pleafure
and Ibices. And Gregorius Thaumaturgus ufes the
Word much after the fame manner, in this Faf-
fage of his Panegyrick upon Origen ||ll ^ And reach*
ing his Hand to others^ he delivers all^ drawing ^em
out ( vi^, of the Dillicultys, &c.^ in which they
* Lib. 7. de VitaBeata, pag. 649. Vitiis immerfi.
t Pag. 552. luv 7mvv\izjv -f Ka.yJa.i x,diTuCiCa^'\i<r(^wv.
11 Pcedagog. Lib. 2. pag. 155. 'T'7rvu<S\^i y6 ttoV* 0 ^w?
** Invadunturbem fomno vinoqj/e;)M/^<:z/w. yE;;. 2. 1^.265.
ft Strom. Lib. 3. p. 473. K«ti f)|WH? "pi dTTcK'inxLyjt^dL^ o\
ejc (mp^aifviH Hi ^o^VHdM (^o.'Tfl i(^^ffJ, TcUi riJbvali }y iti? ttcL^ci
Ijll Pag. 72. 'Aaac/j o^i'^cav X"^ tPiaato^iiiTv cuirm§ ^a'tt-
N 4 are
184 ^fleStions on Mr.'W2L[Ys Let.5.
zxt as it were immersed (^ihocn^i^ojj^^^') overwhelm d»
We may meet with feveral fuch as thefe in Scrip-
ture alfo, as Marky., 38. Can ye drink of the Cup
that I drink of ? and he baftiz^d with the Baftifm
that I am baptiTLd with? Luke iii. 16. He (hall
haft 12^6 you with the ]Aotx G h O s t, and with Ftre.
Adsi. 5. Te jhall be bapiz^^d with the Holy
Ghost, not many days hence. I Cor. x. 2. And
were all havtiz!d unto Mofes in the Cloud and in the
Sea^ &c.
Can thefe or fuch like Paflages be thought fuffi-
cient to jullify any Man, in denying the Word
fignifysonly to dif? So far from that, 1 am cer-
tain upon a fair Examination, it will evidently
appear that the natural Signification of the Word
is ftill the fame even in thefe Figures ^ for the
whole Vigour and Energy of 'em depends upon
it. To argue it does not fignify to dtf from thefe
PaiTages, wou'd be juft as ridiculous as if becauie
Tiv^ is us'd figuratively, Markx.^-j, therefore
any one fiiou'd pretend it does not fignify to
drink'^ or again, that jiv6i^Q does not fignify to fmk^
overwhelm or drown^ becaufe in that Ellyptical
Sentence, i Tim. vi. p. which drown Men in De-
^ruBion and Perdition^ as the Words Hand, it
can't be literally true: but tho thefe Words here,
and all Words fome time or other, are thus meta-
phorically us'd, they have ftill one fix'd conllant
Se-fli^ anfl^x'd to 'em-» • -
There is- another thing, w^hich perhaps may
give fome Umbrage ♦, I mean, that poffibly in
fome Cafesy the Greek Word can't be fo well
renderM into English agreeably with our Idiom,
by any other word than to wet or wajh. But
no body can reafonably from hence infer that the
Greek is of as general a Signification as the Englijhy
by which it's render'd, and ftands for any kind of
wetting or waihingo There are no two Languages
which
Let. 5 . Hiflory of hfnnt-^aptifm. 185
which fo exadly anfwer as to have no particular
Word in the one, but the other is provided with a
Term which fignifies neither more nor lefs, to tran-
flate it by. Few People of the fame Country couple
the fame complex Ideas to the fame Word, as is e-
vident by moftControverfys, which have no other
Original ^ much more therefore may two feveral
]SJations, different in Manners and Time, be fup-
pos'd not to have equivalent Words to cxprefs
a complex Idea unvary'd. Thus navtgo^ in Ldtln^
will be very often tranflated into EngUjlj^ go^ bet-
ter than by any other Word we ufe j^as, in GaUiam
dut Belgium navigare^ to go to France or Holland.
But it can't be argu'd therefore, that navigo is
of an indeterminate Senfe, and may equally mean
to go either on Foot or Horfeback, by Coach
or by Water ^ for it always necelTarily fignifys the
laft manner of going , and never any other.
Again, Sufpcionem movere^ is literally to movefufpi-
dot? 'j and in more proper EngUfli^ to give vmbrage.
But no Man in his wits will go about to argue
from hence, that movere fignifys in general to give ^
and that H^redes movere^ which is, to expel the
Heirs^ may be tranflated, to give Hein : For tho,
in both Phrafes, movere means the fame thing ia
it felf, namely to move\ yet it muft be render'd
into Englijh by Words contrary to one another,
viz, to give^ and to expel. And the Reafon is,
that the Senfe of it muft be accommodated to
the Subjed 'tis apply'd to, and underftood accord-
ingly. And tho it ftriftly fignifys to move^ yet
as it is join'd with other Words, it muft he
differently turn'd *, for the fame Aftion produces
different fiffeds according to the Subjed it ads
upon. Thus when movere is joia'd with fvfpi"
fionem^ it fignifys to move^ give motion and aEtion
to Sufpiciovs^ to fet things in a. Ferment^ and caufe
^em to work in the Mind* But tho the Word here
pro-
1 86 (Ilefleaiom 071 MnWaWs Let. 5.
properly enough fignifys to move^ this Senfe can't
be better exprefs'd in EngU^ than by the Words
I before made ufe of, ^iz.. to give Umbrage.
But then when thefe two Words, H^redes movere^
are join'd together, the fame Senfe of the Word
expreffes the fame Adion and Motion, which yet
has a different influence on the Subjed : for 'to
move an Heir is to put him afide out of the
way, from the PoiTeflion of his Inheritance •, for
thefe words ab H^reditate feem to be imply'd.
To conclude this matter : 'Tis plain by thefe Ex-
amples, and you know it would be eafy to give
a Thoufand more, that tho the Genius of our
Language may oblige us fometimes to render
(boL7t\ilQ^ to wet^ or wajli^ or dye^ &c* 'tis moft
abfurd to infer that it therefore fignifies any
thing elfe befides or different from to dif : whereas
it appears always to include dl^^ and means to
•wet^ or wajlj^ or dye^ &c, only by dipping.
If any Particulars I have infilled on above
fhouM be thought too trifling to dcferve arguing
about, I am however to be excus'd ^ for it muft
be confider'd, that Mr. Wall and others, having
urg'd 'em againlt us, it was neceflary on that
account to give 'em an Anfwer.
And, if what 1 have faid, fhou'd not carry
full Convidion to any, fo as to finifh this Part
of the Controverfy, yet methinks 'tis the moft
reafonable Thing in the World to allow, that
tho the Word had been ever fo ambiguous in
it felf, and extenfive in its fignification, yet
as it relates to the Sacrament of Baptifm, the
Senfe is plainly enough determin'd in Scripture
to be to dipy by feveral Circumftances ^ and that
theDodrine andPradice ofSt. J^/?;?, our Saviour
himfelf , and his Apoftles , and the Primitive
Church, are fufficient to afcertain how it muft
be underltood and pradis'd : therefore let us
hear
Let. 5- Hifiory of Infajit-^aptifm. 187
hear how the Scripture confirms this Particular
in our behalf.
That St. Jofow baptiz'd by dipping, is as plain
as a thin§ can well be : and were it not for the
daring Tempers of fome Men, it wou'd be
trifling, in fuch an excefs of Light, to attempt to
prove it. But becaufe I (hall be allow'd to fay
nothing, without a Demonftration, 1 refer you
to Johniiu 23. which will remam unanfwerable,
till fome body, by a mighty Stretch, can find fome
other Turn than has been yet thought of, for the
holy Penman's giving this as the reafon of his bap-
tizing in thofe Parts, Becaufe there was much IVa-
ter. Dr. Whitby, on the Place, fays. In which
their whole Bodys might he dip^d : and adds, in this
manner only was their Baptifm perform'd. If any
other wetting wou'd have ferv'd, this had been
impertinent, and no Reafon at all ^ for there's no
habitable Part of the World, but wou'd have fur-
nilh'd Water enough for that purpofe.
Again, Mark i. 5. And were all baptized of him
in the River Jordan^ confejfmg their Sins. Which, I
pray you, is molt natural to fuppofe, that the
River was pour'd or fprinkPd on them, or they
dip'd into the River ? If it was not the firft, it
muft be the laft •, for no body can bring himfelf
to imagine, they were pour'd or fprinkl'd on
the River, or the River dip'd into them. And
Mr. Wall himfelf owns St. John baptiz'd our
LORD thus. And this (hews what was his Me-
thod in baptizing. What now can have a greater
face of Truth, than to think our Blessed
Saviour, when he appointed this Ordinance
of Baptifm, meant the fame thing exadly, and
underftood and intended the Word in the fame
Senfe that it was known generally and moft pro-
perly to be us'd in, and which was ftx'd to it by the
publick
I S8 (^fteBions on Afr.WallV Let.j.
publick Pradice of the Perfon from whom he
continu'd the Ceremony ?
When People had been usM, for fojne time,
to a religious Baptifm, which was perform'd by
dipping, they cou'd not poflibly underfland our
LOPvD to mean any thing elfe: and if he had
defign'd a different manner from that^ of St. Joh??^
he wou'd doubtlfifs, at leall:^ have avoided a Word
which from St. Johns Example, if it were no-
thing elfe, was liable to be reftraih'd to dipplrig
only. But fince He has us'd the fame Word,
Tjvhich, befides its natural Import, was limited to
this Senfe by the Pradice of St.John^ in this very
Ceremony, and has giv'n us no manner of Cau-
tion againft retraining it to this Senfe '^ it follows,
that we mufb in Jaftice allow this aloae to be
what our LORD intended by it: And accord-
ingly, which carrys the thing much farther, the
holy ApoOiles, and the firft Chriftians, 'tis plain,
underflood it fo. Their Praftice will, furcly, be
granted a very good Commentary on CHRIST'S
Infbitution, and an unexceptionable Rule to guide
us m fetting this matter in its true Light.
Hardly any Man of Learning will deny the
Chriftians of the firft Times us'd dipping, and
that in obedience to our S a v i o u r's Commiflion*
Thus, when Philip baptiz'd the Eunuch, Great
Treafurer to Candacc Qiieen of the EthlopLinj^j 'tis
faid, ^4Bs Y III. 38. j^^d they went down both into the
Wateryhoth Philip an-d the Eunuch ^and he baptized him*
i take this to be a plain Cafe, liotwithftanding
the little frivolous Cavils that have formerly
hcQn made againll: itj and the Propriety of the
Words feparately in therafelves, and much more
in this particular Conftruclioii, neccfiitate us to
uadcrftand 'emjn the Senfe I maintain.
- Belldes, there arelikewife many Allufions which*
the Apoftles make, that caa'c poflibly be under-
ftood
Let 5. Hiflory of Infant^^aptifm. 1 8p
flood of any thing but dipping into the Water.
Crotius noted this before ;, and undoubtedly the
Inference is very juft. You may read him oa
Col.W. 12. where thofe who had been baptized,
are faid to be bury'd with Him Qvlz^, our LORD)
in Baptifin, &€. Dr. HAmrnond^ in his Paraphrafe
of thisVerfc, and of ^^w. vi. 4. does expreily fix:
the juftnefs of the AlUifion in the Practice of iin-
Kierfing and dipping Perfons into the Water,
which, he allows without any difficulty, was the
way at that time. And Dr. Whitby fays, ^Tis ex-
frejly decla/d here^ that we are hury^d with CHRIST
in Baptifmy by be'mg burfd under Water ^ or, as he
words it in his Paraphrafe, plunging us under the
Water J which, as he intimates, reprefented the
patting C H R I S T's Body under the Earths And
indeed, the Apoftle's Words, Rom^ vi. 3, 4. are
fo very clear to this purpofe, that we need only
open our Eyes, and read 'em, to be coavinc'd:
Know ye not^ fays he, thaP fo many of m as were
ha^tiz^d into CHRIST^ were bafttzJd into His
Death ? Therefore we are bury^d with Him by Bap-
tifm into Death '^ that like as C H R I ST was rais'i
vf from the Dead by the Glory of the FATHER^
€ven fo we alfo jlioud walk in Newnefs of Life,
The Afofi oiled Conftitutlons give the Senle
thus: * Baptifm is a Refrefcntation ofCHRIST's
Death \ the Water u that wherein we Are bury^d*
And a little after : The Immerfwn ii the dying with
Him'y and Emerfion^ or coming up from imc'.cr the
Water^ reprefents the RcfurreBion- And, therefore.
* Lib. 3. cap. 17. Tclrcv ro u B-z^liJuct, «V ^ ediAjw
Terti'.H'nm
1 90 ^flcBions on Mr.WsilYs Let. 5.
Tmullian likewife fays, -[ We die fymholically in
Baftifm : upon which Words Rivaltius remarks j
II We are immersed as if we [uferd Death^ and
rife vp out of the Water, as reviving again.
And 'tis worth while to tranfcribe a PalTage
from St. Chryfoftom, where he fays, "^^ To he difd
and plunged into the Water , and then to rife out of it
again, is a Symbol of our Defcent into the Grave,
and of our Afcent out of it : j4nd, therefore, Paul
calls Baptifm a Burial, when he fays, we are there-
fore bury d with him by Baftifm into Death,
I argue farther, that this continu'd to be the
Pradice of the Primitive Chriftians, and of
many Centurys together. St. Barnabas fays in
his Epillle, if We defcend into the Water full of
Sins and Defilement, and come vp out of it, &c.
TertulUan almoft conftantly ufes tinguere, mer^i-
tare, &c. which fignify to dip, and immerfe,\%
properly as he cou'd poflibly exprefs it : And in
his Treatife coocerning Baptifm he has thefe
Words, which defcribe, at the fame time, the
Cuftom of that Age, and what they took to have
been the Pradice of St. John, &:c. jjjj 'Tis all one,
t De Refurreaione, pag. 554. per fimulacrum enirn
moriinur in Baptifmate, <kc.
II Mergimur^ qiiafi mortem fubeamus. Emergimus, ut
revivifcentcs.
^^ Horn. 40. in I Cor. Tom. 3. pag. 514. To^/^cfTrH-
f/^Q- hV H- 0cLyctjov. ' „^..,
^^ ft Cap. II. pag. 58. ^077 riJLHi ^ KctluUivo^Jf} th rh
111! Cap. 4. Ideoq; nulla diftinftio efl-, marl quis an ftagno,
fiujiaine an fonte, lacu an alvco diluatur. Ncc quicqium
refcrt inter eos quos Joannes in Jordane, ^ qiios Petrus in
Tiben tiaxit.
fays
Let. 5 . Hiftory of Infant^^aptif??!. 1 9 1
fays he, whether we are wajh^d in the Sea^ or in a
Fond 'j in a Fountain^ or in a River ^ in a fianding^
or in a running Water : Nor is there any difference
hew e en thofe that John baptit^d in Jordan, and
thofe that Peter baptized in the Tiber. In ano-
ther Place he fays, * Our Hands are clean enough^
whichy together with our whole Body\ we have once
wajli^d in Cbrifi* And Gregoritis Thaumaturgui^
'f- fpeaking of the Baptifm of Christ, ufes
jwtTaSt'PDv, to plunge or dip^ as a fynonymous Word
for p>^7ff/<n3v, dip^ plunge me into the River Jordan.
Nay, fo far were they from contenting them-
lelves with any thing lefs than dipping, that
'tis notorious, they very ftrenuoufly pleaded for,
and infilled on a trine Immerfion. Thus Dr. Be-
veridge^ late Bifliop of St. u4faphy explains the
42^ of thofe Canons that are afcrib'd to the Apo-
ftles ^ which rigidly enjoyns, || If any Bijljop or
Presbyter Jlia/l adminifter Baptifm only by one Im-
merfion into the Death of Christ, and not by
three Immerfions^ let him be degraded* And TVr-
tulUan moft exprefly fays, which evidently de-
monllrates what was the Cullom in his time,
^^ W§ are immersed not once^ but thrice^ viz. into
each Person 04 he is narr^d : Or, as the Ku-
brick of the prefent Greek Church exprelfes it,
u4t each CompelUtion putting him (^viz.. the bap-
* De Orat. pag. 155. Ceterum fatis mund» funt ma-
nus, quas cam toto corpore in CHR.ISTO femel
lavimus.
t In Thcophan. pag. 3$. Kul(tJ\f(mv f>tg nmif *Iof</kV«
fMAi Mi^ujiWf ^Tihiavy cLKKA h Bcivrlttr^a. tq h r QdvA-
%v r KTPI'Ot Sicfiif^ov^ KdUi^ei^.
**• Adverfus Praxeamcap.25. pag. 51^. Nam nee femel,
fed ter, ad fingula Nomina in PERSONAS fingulas
£inguimur»
tiz'd
i p 1 ^ flexions on Mr. Wall V Let. 5 .
tiz'd Perfon ) down into the Water^ and raifwg him
up again* St. Cyril of Jerufalem fays very empha-
tically, "If lunge ^em down^ y^TtcPvMe, thrice into the
Water^ and raife ''em vp again, Monnulm^ Bilhop
of Girha^ in his Suffrage, which is the loth in
SuCyprian'% Account of the Council of Carthage j
calls it Baptifmatis Trinitate^ fays the Learned
Bilhop of Oxford^ becaufe it was celebrated by a
trine Immerjion,
Inftead of more Citations from the Fathers,
give me leave to mention fome of our Learned
Moderns, who, upon very nice Examination, con-
firm this to have been the Pradlice of the ear-
lielt Times. And this 1 chufe rather to do,
becaufe at the fame time it fhevvs, not only that
I am right in my AfTertion, but alfo that the
moll Learned and Judicious Criticks acknowledg
and confirm the Truth of it ^ which is a double
Advantage.
Dr. Beveridge^ whom I nam'd but now, at the
beginning of his Annotations on the 50th Canon,
and in his V'indication of the Canons againft
Daille^ largely aflerts the trine Immerfion. So
does the Learned Diony/im Petavins^ in thefc
Words : || Their wonted Afanner of adminifiring
this Sacrament was to plunge the Perfon s baptized
thrice into the Water^ &c. And the Celebrated
^ohan, Gerard* Foffius fpeaks to the fame Effed in
his Etymologicon^ at the word Baptifmus. Cafau-
bon on Matt. iii. 6. fays, * The Form of B.iptiz.ing
t Catechet. MyRagog. cap. 2, pag. 232. K^ iieLliJ)li%
\\ De Pcenitentia, Lib. 2. cap. r. §,11. Ratio autcm
folita Adniiniftrandi hujus Saciamenci eriT, ut ter in
aquam immergerentur qui bapcizabantur.
* Hie enim fuic baptizandi nrus^ ^r ia aqyam iramer-
gerentur, &c.
was
Let. 5 • Hifiory of Infant-^aptifnu 1 9 ^
w^s by plunging into the Water ^ 6cc, The PafTage
is quoted above at large. Epifcopim^ in his Aii-
fwer to Oveft, 35. tells us, -]- Thofe who were haf-
tizjd^ by the Ceremony of f lunging into the Water ^ aid
rifmg out of it again^ declared thcmfclvcs to be as it
were dead^ &c. Monf. Jurieu alTures us, in his
Paftoral Letters, that the Antients H m'd to flunge
Pcrfons into the Water , calling on -the Adorable
Trinity. And in another Place, ^ Becaufe
Baptifm was then adminiflred by Immerfion^ &c.
And, a little after, ff He that was baptiz, d^ was
flung'' d into the Water*
Monf. Le Clerv^ whom you fo defer^edly honour
for his great Lea rning^Jkys-^^e fame thing, on
Rom. vi. 4. nil The Manner of Baptiz^ing at that time^
by plunging into the Water thofe whom they baptizSd^
was an Image of the Burial 0/ Jesus Christ.
The Learned Antiquary , Mr. Archdeacon
Nicholfonj at prefent Bifnop of Carlifle^ in his
Letter to Sir William Dtgdale^ concerning the
Font at Bridekirk in Cumberland^ as 'tis pub-
lifh'd in the Additions to Mr. Cambens Brita?j»
niay ^"^ takes notice. There is fairly reprefented
on the Font^ a Vernon in a long Sacerdotal Habit
dipping a Child into the Water. And prefently
remarks on it thus : Now^ Sir^ I need not accjttaim
you that the Sacrament of Baptifm was antiently ad^
f Pag. 54. Nam ii qui baptizabantur, ritu ifto Immerli-
onis & Emerfionis teftabantur fe mortuorum inftar eiTe, &c.
II Let. 5. An. 168^. pag. 56. On fe contentoit de plonger
les perfonnes dans I'Eau, avec Tlnvocation de I'Adorable
TKINITE,
* Let. 6. An. 1686. pag.42. Parce qu' alors le Batema
fe faifoit par Immerfion, dec.
ft Celui qui etoit biitize, etoit plonge dans TEau.
jljl Li maniere que Ton avoit alors de baptizer, en plon-
geantdans I'Eau ceux que Ton baptizoit, etoit comme une
image de la fepulture deJESUSCHRIST.
l^ Pag, «4i.
O rnimfrrii
194 Reflections o;z Afr.WallV Let. 5.
f'/ilniflred by plunging into the Water^ in the Weftern
AS well a6 the Eaftern Part of the Church \ and that
the Gotluc word (Mark i. 8. and
Luke iii. 7, 12.) the German word tauffen *, the
Danini word 2)obe> ^'^^ ^^^ Bclgic DOOpen, do as
dearly make out that Fra^tice^ as the Greek word
I'll give you but one Citation more, which is
too remarkable to be omitted. 'Tis Dr. Whitby^
Annotation on Rom^ vi. 4. It being fo exprejly de-
clar'^d here^ <^W ColofI'. ii. 12. that we are bury'd
with Christ in Baptifmx, by being burfd under
Water : And the Argument to oblige us to a Con^
formity to his Deaths by dying to Sin^ being taken
thence J and //7/V Immerfion being religioujly obferv^d
by ALL Christians for xiii Century s,
AND APPROVED BY OUR ChURCH, ANDTHE
Change of it into Sprinkling evek
without any Allowance from the
Author of its Institution, or any Li-
cence from anyCouncil of the Church,
being that which the Romanift ftill nrgeth to jufiify
his refufal of the Cup to the Laity \ it were to be
wijl}^d that this Cuftom might be again of general
Vfe. What follows concerning Afperlion being
not to the purpofe, I omit it.
If you f^ieafe you may fee more Inftances of this
iiature in Mr. Stcmct\ Anfwer to Rujfen^ and par-
ticularly thofe taken out of Sir John Floyer ^ but
thefe, i think, are enough to put it palt doubt,
that, the Apoftles and primitive Chriftians did
bapfr/.e only by Immerlion^ and that this Rite
c^ntinu'd in tlic Church for many Centurys.
To evade the Force of this, Mr. Wall is w^il-
lin^^, to compound the Matter with u?, and al-
lovvs, they did generally baptize by Immerfion :
had then in fomc Cafes, as in danger of Death,
rj?c. he pretends they thought Afruiion or
Sprink-
Let. y. Hijiory of Lifant'Sapti/m. 1 9 5
Sprinkling fufficient; and that in fuch Cafes it
was adtually permitted. In anfwer to this, 1 fay :
I . Suppofing thefe Exceptions to be well
grounded, and that Afperfion was fufferM i.i Ga-
les of NecefTity ^ yet even then, it mult follow,
that according to the Sentiments of the Antients,
'twas utterly unlawful to ufe Afpcrfion in any
common Cafes, or at all, but in fuch Neceifity :
For they never .thought themfelves at liber-
ty to adminifter this Sacrament in what man-
ner they woa'd, as our Author pleads ^ and
that to baptize, as he will have it, is to waQi ia
any manner: and it is ttill plain, that a general,
and much more then a total difufe of Immerlion,
is the greateft Affront to thofe. pious Saints, and
the whole primitive Virgin Church, that can bc
well offer 'd ; and it muft be no fmall Prcfump-
tion, to fancy Christ did not enjoin what they
{o itridlly and univerfally pradtis'd.
'Tis not to be imagin'd, the pious primitive
Fathers, and the whole Church of that Time^
cou'd be guilty of the abfurd Folly, of tying
themfelves up fo unneceffarily, and even contrary
to what, according to Mr. Wa/l^ they knew to be
theSenfe of the Word, and the Defign of Chrjst.
This is not at all confiftent with his pretended
Veneration for the Fathers, nor his building his
darling P^edobaptifm fo entirely on this Foun^da-
tion. I can't think they wou'd commit fuch la-
novations fo early : But if G h r i s t had intended^
and the Word He exprcfs'd Himfelf by had sm-
ply'd, that Baptifra might be regularly admini^
fter'd by one kind of W^aOiing as well as another,
they wou'd, doubtlefs, have fiaod fafi in that Li-
berty^ for fome time, at leaft ^ whereas^ €Ysa
tho Mr. Watt\ Suppolition be true, that in fome
Cafes of Neceffity they did difpenfe with Immer-
lion, yet 'tis plain, they held Dipping the only
Q 2 gens::
1 96* ^jiccllons on A//r.Walli Let, 5.
general regular way, which nothing but endan-
gering a Man's Life cou'd make 'em fuperfede.
This appears from St. Cypriarj^ the earlieft Advo-
cate for Afperfion *, which neverthelefs he pleads
for only in extraordinary Cafes.
And it feems at firft to have been admitted
upon this Kotion, that GOD will have Mercy
and not Sacrifice j which they underftood to mean,
that all pofitive Inftitutions mult give way to the
eternal Obligation of moral Dutys. So David^ from
the Keceflity of preferving his and his Followers
Lives, made free with the Shew-Bread, in oppofi-
tion to the pofitive Command *, and our Saviour
Himfelf vindicates his Difciples from the fame
Principles, and from this Example of David^
Matth. xii.
This Foundation is certainly very good ^ and
they might from hence juftify their forbearing to
adminifter this Sacrament at all, in fuch Cafes,
where 'tis apparent it cou'd not be adminifter'd
without violating fome unchangeable moral Duty,
But the Antients who introduc'd Sprinkling or
AfFufion, feem'd unwilling to carry the Mat-
ter fo far. In prefent danger of Death, they
thought it neceflary that all fhou'd be made Par-
takers of the Salutary Illumination, without
which, they imagined, it wou'd be impoffible to
obtain Salvation \ and yet they fear'd, left bap-
tizing 'em according to the Inftitution, might,
confidering their Weaknefs, occafion their Death,
and fo they fhou'd become guilty of IVlurder. To
•avoid both Inconveniences, they thought it belt
to divide the Difficulty ; and rather than difpenfe
with the whole Sacrament, to make this Akera-
tion in the Manner of its Adminiftration only;
which, after at), was in reality no better than
nullifying the whole : For if C h r i s t command-
ed only to dli-t as themfelves vehemently urge,
in
Let. 5^ . Hi [lory of Infant' ^aptifm. 1 9 7
in all Cafes where it can be fafelv comply'd with,
then nothing but dipping is obeying the Infti-
tution. But they thought 'twas better to retain
fome, tho but a diilant Shadow, than to part
with the whole Ceremony, in. hopes God wou'd
indulge 'em in this Change, which they were
driv'a to by KccelTity, as they thought ^ and that
He wou'd annex all thofc fpiritual Advantages tp
it, which fhouM have attended a more regular
Adminiftratian. At molt, they only pretended
AfFufion might ferve where Immerfion cou'd not,
as they imagin'd, take place fo well. And this
is formally to acknowledg, that, ftri£lly, the In-
flitution required Immerfion only ^ as molt natu-
rally follows from their rigorous infifting on it in
all ordinary Cafes, and allowing Affufion as an
Exception to the Rule upon fomq Emergence,
where the Ruk cou'd not be fo conveniently
obey'd. - -' • • ,; ■
Islow, no ferious reafonable Man can be fo much
overfeen, as to think it juft to i'nterpret a Law by
the Exceptions that are made to it, any farther
than to infer the Exceptions are different from
th€ Law, and oppofite to it,, the true Senfe of
w^hich fliou'd be determin'd by the ordinary Cafes
'tis fuppos'd only to refped.
Tho the thing is plain enough in it felf, yet ha-
ving found by Experience, how unreafonably
fome Men can cavil as to this Point in particu-
lar, I thought there was need enough to dwell fo
long upon it, and make fuch frequent Repeti-
tions. On the fame account, 1 muft take the li-
berty to illuftrate what I faid in the lafl VVords^
by an Example, which, if pofllble, may yet
make it more plain what 'tis I mean. Your good
Senfe and Candor, Sir, I am fenfible wou'd fave
me the trouble ^ but you tell me my Letters fiiall
be fhewn, and 1 don't know who may be my Rea-
O 3 ders:
ip8 <I(cfleFii(>ns on Ur.WzW's Let. 5.
ders : Out of Precaution therefore, if any of 'em
fhou'd think the matter not fufficiently clear, I
d^fire they wou'd confider, Whether becaufe the
OiJak'ic'rs by a Claufe in fome Ads, are excus'd
from Swearing, they can think the Defign of the
Law was to make it indifferent in all Cafes, whe-
ther any Man in general took an Oath, or only
made the Affirmation*, and that it fhou'd be at
the liberty of every one to choofe ? The Tole-
ration-AQ: binds all Pcrfons whatever, not to
moleft the Proteftant Diilenters in the free Exer-
cife of religious Worfliip according to the Di(f^ates
of their Confcierices": ;but at the' fame time, by a
Claufe purpofely iilferted, it provides, that no
Papifi or Popijh Recufant whatfoever^ or any Perfon
that jh all dcny^ in his Preaching or Writings the Doc-
trine of the B L E s s E p T R I N I T Y, fliall have any
Eafef Benefit^ or Advantage thereby. Now, can it
be imagin'd from hence, that the full Senfe and
Tenor of this Aft is /that thofe who are in Pow-
er, have liberty hereby giv'n 'cm, either to tole-
rate or diftarb, as thev pleafe, Perfons diflenting
from the Eftablifh'd Church ?
I will compare thefe Inflances, to ihew they are
exadly parallel.
I. The Fathers (on whofe Practice we are now
t hictiy arguing) for fome Centurys, made Im-
nierhon neceflary and indifpenfible in all ordi-
r.ary Cafc^. This is fo undeniable, that our Adver-
larys allow it ; and that fo far as the Practice of
the primitive Church is our Rule, we are oblig'd,
la ali ordinary Cafes, to baptize by Immerfion.
To this, in the Indance giv'n, anfwers the gene-
ral Tenourof the Ad, viz.^ That Proteftant Dif-
fentcrs fhali be tolerated in the free Exercife of
leligious Worihln accordiiig to their own way.
a. The
Let.y. Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm] 199
2. The primitive Chureh, as 'tis fuppos'd, has
made a a Exception to this her general Practice,
and allows of Aftulion, to thofe who are in prefent
danger of Death, inftead of Immerlion. So the
Ad excepts, together with Pa^ifis and Popifh Re-
cufants^ all fuch asJJjall deny^ in Preaching or Writings
the DoEhrine of the Blessed T k i n i t y *, to
whom it means no Protedion.
Since the Cafes then are fo far parallel, I might
conclude, 'tis as unreafonable to argue from the
Exception the antient Church is fuppos'd to have
made in fomc Cafes of NecefTity^that they therefore
thought themfelves at full liberty always toadmini-
fter this Ordinance by any kind of wafhing, (which
is Mr. WaU\ Argument) as all the World knows,
it wou'd be, becaufe of that Exception made in
the Ad, to infer, that the Delign and true Mean-
ing of it is to oblige all Perfons to tolerate the
Diffenters, or difturb 'em, as they pleafe.
At the fame rate it will argue farther too, that
if thofe who deny the Trinity, in whatever Com-
munion, are not to be tolerated, therefore none
is under any Obligation to tolerate any of that
Communion ^ then the Church of England her
felf can't fo much as make any Pretence to To-
leration neither \ for there are fome of the rankeft
Socinians in her Bofom, that ever appear'd. See
what ftrange Work Mr. Wall\ Art of Reafoning
wou'd make : but I will leave it to be ftudy'd and
pradis'd by himfelf 'only. As it wou'd be no-
thing but bantring the Ad, and the Royal Au-
thority which gave it Sandion, to argue upon it
at this rate *, fo it muft needs make that Man ap-
pear very ridiculous, who can ferioufty pretend to
argue, that becaufe the antient Church thought
Baptifm might be adminifter'd by Afiufion in fome
Cafes, therefore they thought it might as well be
adminifter'd fo in all.
O 4 The
200 ^'fleclions on Kr.Wall'^ Let. 5.
The antient Church fufficiently intimates, the
Stridnefs of the Law requir'd Immerfion, and
that fhe uaderftood this to be the Senfe of CHRIST
in this Commifilon He gave to His Apoftles ; fince
they had no other Authority to urge for making
Immeriion fo indifpenfible in ordinary Cafes. And
as to that Exception, 'tis beyond all Con trover fy,
they doubted the Validity of it themfelves^ and
'tis certain, there is no room for it in the Com-
niiflion, if the Command to baptize can't be o-
bey'd without Immeriion, as they declare it can't
in ordinary Cafes. Nor does this fame Command
allow Afperlion, or direft to it : and we know of
310 Exception made in the Text, nor of any Com-
mand befides this general one.
The Church of England^ and, if our Author be
right, which I muft examine hereafter, the Apo-
ftles, and primitive Chriflians too, always admit-
ted Infants to Baptifm, without requiring of 'em
a perfonal Profeffion of Faith, fuppofing them to
be excepted when CHRIST commanded to bap-
tize thofe that believe. JSJow, if this fliou'd be
granted to be true, wou'd any Man be fowild
as to infer, that therefore it is indifferent, whe-
ther jiny^ believe and make a Profeffion of their
Faith before they are baptiz'd •, and that CHRIST
has left it entirely to the Difcretion of every one,
whether he will require a publick Profeffion of
Faith from all he baptizes, or from none^ or
from foms only? This is moft exadly Mr. Wall's
way of arguing.
Bat thus far I have gone upon the Suppofltion
that the Apoftles and primitive Church did ufe
Afperfioa : In the next place, I fay,
2. This Suppofltion is utterly falfe and ground-
Icfs ^ on which account, there is ft ill much lefs,
or rather no force at all in the Objedion. No
Man living, I am fare, can Ihew me any Founda-
tion
Let. 5 . Hijlory of Infmt'^a[nijm. 2 o i
tion for it ia Scripture: Mv.lVall does not at-
tempt it •, but only inlinuates in general, that
notwithRanding 'tis plain from the Example of
St. Joh'^\ baptizing CHRIST, &c, that
* they did in thofe hot Country s bapti^Le ordina-
rily by Immerfion *, it docs not follow, that in Ctfes
of Sicknefs^ or other fuch extraordinary Occafionsy
they never h^ptiz^d otherwife. So refoiv'd he is tO
hold his Opinion, that he dares make even the Si-
lence of Scripture an Argument for him. He
forgot, 'tis likely, his own Rule to judg of the
Senfe ©f a Scripture- Word, by its ufe in Scrip-
ture •, for by the fame Reafon that the Scripture
is thought to be of fufficient Authority to deter-
mine the Senfe of a Word, 'tis much more of
Authority to determine what was the Pradice in
relation to an Ordinance of C H RIST ^ and we
ought to acquiefce in the account it gives, and not
raffily fuppofe v^^hat is not fo much as in the
leaft hinted at.
To the Words above-cited, our Author imme-
diately adds, Of this I floall fpeak in the next Chap-
ter. Thh fiU'd me with Expedation of fomething
which might have an appearance of Probability at
leaft:, but when I came to the place, no body
was ever difappointed more ^ for I met with lit-
tle elfe but Inftances from the later Genturys :
Mr. Wall feems to have forgot his Promife, and
never goes about to prove that any were bap-
ti2'd in the Apoftolical Times, otherwife
than by plunging. St. Cyprian^ indeed, in his
Letter to Magnus^ endeavours to juftify Af-
perfion by feveral Paflages in the Old Tefta-
ment, after a very frivolous manner ^ and what
but tenacioufnefs of an Opinion cou'd put any
one on the extravagant Method of determining
* Part II. p. 219.
the
20 2 (I(efleBions on Mr.WslVs Let. 5.
the manner of adminiftring a Chriftian Sacrament
by obfcure PafTages in the Prophets, and by
Words in the Law, which manifeftly relate no-
thing at all to the matter ? Kay, which makes
the thing ftill worfe, from thefe Paflages alone,
he determines the matter not only without, but
dirc6\ly contrary to the whole tenour of the Kew
Teftament.
Obferve here, that this Conduct of St. Cyprian
isaveryplainconfefllon, that there is nothing to
favour his Notion in the Kew Teftament* and
that the Senfe of the Word in our LORD's Com-
niilTion, and other places, is limited fo as not to
admit of pour or fprmUe : for otherwife Mag-
nus cou'd not have made a Qiieftion concerning
the Validity of AfperGon ^ or if he had, the An-
fwer had been very ready and natural, without
recourfe to the myfterious Types and Allufions of
the Law and the Prophets, vItl. to have faid. That
the common Pradice of the Apofbles,^ &c. fufE-
ciently jaftify'd that manner of Adminiftration,
and more efpecially, that the general Significa-
tion of the Word iisM in the Commiffion, com-
prehended that manner as w^ell as any other.
'Tis matter of Wonder to me, that St. Cyprian
fhou'd fo mifapply thofe Texts, and that the lear-
ned Dr. Beveridge iliou'd fo eafily give into the
Error, and venture to fay, that -|- St. Cyprian had
largely provd^ and that from the Scriptures themfelves
too^ that Baptifm might he rightly admimflerd by Af-
perfion. I will lay one of that Father's Proofs
before you, Sir, that you may judg of the force
of his reafonings.
He quotes Numb* xix. 1 3 • Whofoever touches the
dead Body of any Man that is dead^ and purify s not
himfelf^ defiles the Tabernacle of the LO RD'j and
f In Canon. Apoftol. 50. />. 468. b. med,
that
Let. 5 . H'tjlory of Infant-^jptifm. 205
th^t Soul fliall he cut ojf from Ifrael, hecaufe the Wa*
tor of Sevaration was riot fprtnkled upon him. What
Man that ever Uv'd, of a common Imagination,
nay or of the moft luxuriant Fancy, cou'd have
iuppos'd that thefe Words have any refped to a
Chriftian Sacrament, or infer from 'em that it
fhou'd be adminiller'd by fprinkling? But I confi-
der, warm zealous Men often fee with Eyes very
different from what other iMen fee with, efpecially
fuch as are myftically given ^ for they makeMyfterys
of every thing, and fee every thing in their My-
fterys. So fome great Head-pieces, of a molt- pro-
found Invention to be fure, have difcover'd both
Sacraments in the Words of the Spoufe, Canticles
vii. 2. Thy Navel is like a round Goblet^ which want'
eth not Liquor ^ thy Belly is like a heap of Wheat fet
about with Lillys,
A Gentleman v;ho is one of the zealous Wri-
ters of our Time, has improv'd this in a very
furprizing manner^ and fince he has yentur'd to
publifh it to the World himfelf, it can be no
Crime in me to tranfcribe the Paflage in a pri-
vate Letter to a Friend : |) And by the by^ fays he,
here is a great Controvcrfy folv^dj namely, between
vs and the Anahaptifts^ who are againft the baptizing
of Children^ becaufe they are not come to Tears ofVn-
derfianding. Let it be remember^ d^ from what is fug"
gefted to tis here^ that Infants (according to the No"
tion which prevailed in thofe Days) receive IVouriJli^
me?it by the I^avel^ tho they take not in any Food by
the Mouth ^ yea-^ tho (according to the opinion of thoje
Times) they did not fo much astife their Mouths. So
it is no good Obje^-ion again ft baptizing Infants^ that
they are ignorant^ and -underftand not what they do \
and that they are not able to take in the fpiritual Nou*
jl Dr. Edwards'^ Exercittt. on Canticles vii. 2»p,i^6, 137.
rifljment
2 04 (^fleFlions on M'- Wall V Let. 5 •
ri^iment after the ordinary way ^ if it may be done
(as "'tis fdid here) by the Navel^ by that federal Knot
or Link which ties ^em fafi to their Chrlftian and be-
lieving Parents ; which^ according to the befi Divines^
is an unanfwerable Argument to prove the Validity of
hifant-Baptifm : for they belong to the Covenant as they
are the Offspring of the Faithful ^ and thence are pro-
nounc'^d Holy by the /^poflle^ I Cor. vii. 14. And here
alfo. we fee farther the Congruity of the Expreffion here
vs'^d by the wife A'fan'i for the nfe of the Navel is
not only to convey Nutriment to the FcetuS, but to fafi en
the Foetus to the Mother : which denotes that intimate
vnion and conjunSlion with the Church of CHRIST,
our common Mother^ that is made by the baptifmal
Ferform^rnce.
Whatever the Dodor may think of this fine In-
vention, barely to repeat fuch Chimejas is to
confute 'em v and I believe we (hall none of us
think it worth while to take any farther notice
of this mighty Solution of the Controverfy.
Tho L have a great Refped for the primitive
Fathers, and all learned iMen^ yet their loofe Ex-
poutions and rvjifapplications of Scripture are not
to be endur'd. The Citations in St. Cyprian^ befide
the unfairnefs of 'em, run counter to the Hillory
cf the New Teltament, and the primitive Church j
for as to the Apoltles themfelves, they declare,
that all who were baptiz'd in their time, were
baptiz'd by Immerlion. Nothing can be more ex-
prefs to this purpofe than Rotn. vi. 3. As many as
were baptizjd^ i. e. all, without Exception, who
were baptiz'd into Jesus Christ, were bap-
tized into His Death *, and this he calls, Ferfe 4.
being bury'^d with Him by Baptifm* So that 'tis as
plain as Words can make it, that fo many as were
baptiz'd into C H R I S T, were bury'd with him
by Baptifnf^ and none, I believe, are hardy c-
nough to deny that this means, they were plung'd
into
Let. 5 . Htftory of Infant'^aptifm. 205
into the Water in their Baptifm. Dr. Whlthy^ in
his Annotations, judicioully obferves on the
Place, that, the Argument to chl/ge vs to a Con-
formity to His (CHRIS T'j) Deaths by dying to
Sin J is taken from hence, that we were hury'^d with
him in Baptifm^ by being bury^d under Water, Now
as he, from this and other Reafons, advifes to
reftore the Antient Manner of adminiftring the
Sacrament among us, I infer from it alfo, that
as the Duty of conforming to CHRIST'S Death^
by a death to Sin, obliges all in general \ fo the
Argument to enforce it, and perfaade to it, fhou'd
extend to all in common: and the holy Apoflles,
undoubtedly, accommodated their Reafonings fo
as to be conclufive to all. And fince the whole
Strefs of St. Taul\ Argument lies in the Proprie-
ty of the Reprefentation of G H R I S T's Death
and Burial, made in Baptifm, his Logick wou'd
not have reach'd to any who had been baptiz'd by
AiTufion, and the like. But as he feems plainly
'to defign, from the Confideration of their being
bury'd with C H R I S T by Baptifm, to perfuade
all in general to conform themfelves to his Death *,
fo it feems neceflary to fuppofe from hence, that
all were then, and, that the Argument may
not be rendered ufelefs, Ihou'd be now, bury'd
with HI M by Baptifm, by being plung'd into the
Water : for on no other Suppoiition can the A-
poftle's Words be confiftent with good Senfe,or of
any force to u.s now.
It may be faid, tho the Apoflles, and Chriftians
of their Time, did not baptize except by Immer-
fion, yet their immediate SuccefTors in the whole
Church did, and allow'd of AfFufion, at lealt ia
fome Cafes. To this I anfwer :
I. That tho it were true, as 'tis far from being
fo, yet having gain'd this Point, that the Apoftles
themfelves, who were the Mafter-Builders of the
'' "-''' true
2o6 ^fleElions on Mr. WalF^ Let. 5.
true Church under Christ, never authoriz'd it,
we arc fafe enough in refolving not to vary from
their unexceptionable Pradice. We defire to be
Followers of them, even as they were Followers
of C H R I s T ^ and we prefer their Authority to
all their SuccefTors, in oppofition to 'em: and
therefore if Mr. Wall fhou'd be able to make out
his AiTertion, that the whole Church, after the
Apoftles Time, did allow of AfFufion, we may
neverthelefs think our felves oblig'd to withlland
it as an antient Corruption j for Error fhou'd not
be privileg'd by Age. But,
2. The Afiertion is not true ^ and Mr. Wali^s
way of proving it wou'd make one think he knew
it was not : for he never attempts to cite any
Inftances till about 250 Years after Christ,
which is 1 50 after the Apoftles, according to
his own Computation ^ that is, from the Death
of St. John^ who liv'd till more than a hundred
Years rfter the Birth of Christ. So that in
all this Space of Time, he points us to nothingv,
from which it can be fo much as fufpeded that
Baptifm was adminifter'd by any other way than
Immerfion. "^Dx.Beveridge^ I know, quotes Tipr-
tullUn^ who dy'd about Anno Dom. 220. but this
is not early enough neither \ and befides, 'tis very
plain to any one that reads the PalTage, that it does
not fpeak of Baptifm : Cujuflibet Aqu£^ is an in-
vincible Bar againft that Senfcj which (ignifys
any fort of Water, in oppofition to that of Bap-
tifm, and not the Water of Baptifm it felf j for
the Senfe lies manifeftly thus : Ton are fo far, fays
the Father, from being fit to he admitted to Baptifm',
that no body vpoud gi've even a Sprinkling of common
Water to a Man of fuch fallacious and uncertain Pe-
* In Apoftol. Can. 50.
nance^
Let. 5 . Htjlory of Infant^^aptifm. 1 07
^rnnce. I find liigaltlus takes it much to this pur-
pofe too, and adds, that "^ 'TVi af^arent trifling to
tinder fl and thefe Words of j4fperfan in Baptifm : For
wherever he /peaks of Baptifm^ he vfes the Words^
Lavacrum, Tingere, Intingere, Ablui, Mergitari,'
and Immerfio, which dont at all fgnify j^fperfion.
This, if it be confider'd, is an Argument that
Tertullian knew of no Cuftom in his Time, of bap-
tizing by Afperfion, or any thing elfe but Dipping,
And the other Fathers deliver in as full Evidence
on our fide.
Afterwards, indeed, about the middle of the
third Century, I own there is mention made of
this manner of adminiftring, or, to fpeak more
properly, of eluding the Sac^rament. Mr. Wall
f inftances in the Cafe of Novatian^ near 250
Years after Christ; and confefles this is (| the
mofi antient Inftance of that fort of Baptifm^ that is
now extant in Records* This Acknowledgment is
pretty fair, and in effed to own, he has no rea-
fon to fay this i^acrament ifras adminlfter'd by
Perfufion, ire, till about 250 Years after our Sa-
v'louR. But to have been truly impartial, he
fhou'd have given notice, that even at that Time,
they much doubted of the Validity of this Mode,
as evidently appears by the very PafTage Mr.
Wall cites ; which ihews the Judgment of. that
Time was, that one who had been baptiz'd by
AfFufion in Sicknefs on his Bed, cou'd not be law-
fully admitted to any Office in the Church : which
is the fame thing as to fay, he was not on a level
with others who were baptiz'd more regularly.
* Splendide nugantur qui hsec Verba de Baptifmo per
Afperfionem accipiunt. Nam ubicunque de Baptifmo fer-
fnonem facit, Lavacrum dicit, & Tingere, & Intingere,
& Ablui, & Mergitari, & Immerfionem, qu» fane Adfper-
fionem minime fignificant.
t Part IL^ 392. |ilb.;. 2P5.
Our
lot ^fletlms onMr.WslYs Lct.^.
Our Author fetches the reafon of this from a Ca-
non of the Council of Neocafarlay which however
was not made till 8:) Years after, and therefore
can't be juftly brought as any, much lefs the only
reafon of an Opinion that prevailM fo long before.
On the contrary, 'tis clear, as J^defius notes, that
this Bapifm was thought imperfect for fever at Rea,-
fons. Petavius fays, "^ Such were thought irreguUr-
ly haptiz^d^ and were never admitted into holy Orders ^
attributing it to their Perfufion.
There is a remarkable PafTage relating to this mat-
ter, which an unbyafs'd Writer ought not to have
omitted *, but it fhews the Judgment of that Time
was not very agreeable to our Author's Hypo-
thefis. Cornelius^ the fitting BiHiop of Rome^ after
inentioning Novatia'ri\ Cafe, who had been bap-
tiz'd in his Bed by Perfufion, (/or they feared he
woud inftantly die^ fays the Letter) very frankly
adds, by way of Caution and Diftrult, -j' If fuch a
one may he fald to he haptizjd\ which intimates he
made a queilion o^it, and that he had no good
opinion of that manner of adminiftring the Ordi-
nance. And any one wou'd think, this was the
reafon why he afterwards fays, |1 it was not thought
Lawful for any who was haftizfd in his Bed^ hecaufe
cfSicknefs^ hy Terfufion^ to he admitted to any Charge
in the Church. And this is confirm'd by the lear-
ned Bifhop oi Oxford^ when he fays, '\']- Nov at i an
was obnoxious on two accounts : Firfi^ hecaufe he had
* Ve Pcemtent. lib, 2. cap, i. §. n. Ea Le^e ut qui fie
baptizati fuerant irregiilares haberentur, nee iinquamin Sa-
cros Ecclefise Ordines adniitccrentur.
t EuTeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 6. cap. 43. "Et yi -^^ri 7Ayiiv ^
ft In Cyprian. EpiJ}» 69, /•297. Dupllci nomine obnoxius
videbatur Novatianus ; primo, quod in caufa Lapforum
v^cliifma fecerit : fecundo, quod in Le^to perfufus non au-
tern baptizatus fuerit.
made
Let.5. tltfiory of Infant-^aptifnL 209
wade a Svhifm on account of f/;<? Lapfl \ and fecondly^
hecavfe tho he had Water }>our'd on him in Bed^ yet he
wasnot ba^tiz^d*
ConfJ-antine the Emperor feems to have beea
unwilling to tnift to the Validity of thefe Clini*
calPerfufans^ as we may gather from Eufcbius\ Ac-
count of his Baptifm. And tlie pious Prince him-
felf, in his Speech to the Bifhops, wherein he de-
iires'em to baptize him, tells 'em, he had hofd to
have been made Partaker of the Salutary Grace in the
River Jordan-^ bat a violent Fit of Sicknefs, which
he rightly apprehended wou'd concUide his Life,
Blade him look for that Happinefs now no longer.
But notwithftanding the danger of the Diftem-
per, which adually kill'd him in a few Days, the
Hiftorian alTures us, ^ he was not baptiz'd in his
Bed, but, as was ufual, in the Church, call'd
MartyriumChrlfti^ in the ordinary way, h^ Evfe-
^/MjBilhop of Nicomedia'j and with great Tran-
quillity of Mind foon after expir'd. But can it
be imagin'df if Perfufion or Afperfion was at
that time thought fo well of, as it is now^ pre-
tended, that in fo dangerous a Cafe, that good
Emperor, tho an old I\lan, fhou'd, without any
Care or Tendernefs, be baptiz'd in that way
they accounted the moft inconvenient and unne-
ceflary ?. Ko, doubtlefs, the great Refped the
Bilhops had for him, wou'd haveenclin'd'em to
perfuade him to receive Baptifm in the fatteft
way imaginable.
I obfervM, that Comelivs^ in the above-men-
tion'd Letter to the Bifhop of Antloch^ adds, as
the fole reafon of their taking the Liberty of
baptizing by Perfufion , their Suppofition that
Novatian wou'd quickly die, and not a direct
PermifTion in Scripture ^ which is the fame
Excufe St. Cyfrian palliates this Pradice with :
'<■ Vit. Conftant. Itb. 4. wi>. 61.
p an4
2 1 o ^fleBions on Mr. WallV Let. 5 .
and tho he pleads fo much for it, he only pre-
tends it was to be allow'd of "^ m cafe of urgent.
Neceffity \ hoping to come off v/ith this Fancy.
But this way of baptizing was even then fo
rare and uncommon, that Magnus^ tho a f dili-
gent Enquirer into religious Matters, was perfect-
ly ignorant of its having ever been ufual or al-
lowed in the Church ^ and rather feems to take
it for granted, that this Cafe had occur'd before :
and therefore he only asks St. Cyprian % Opinion
about it, what he thought belt to be done in it,
lince neither the Practice of the Church, nor the
Scripture, afforded any Rule. Accordingly, Su
Cyprian anfwers only as from his own private
Opinion, which he feems to give as in.a dubious
Point, as appears from his Words, which Mr Wall
tranflates thus : || Tou enquire alfo^ dear Son^ what
J think of fuch as obtain the Grace in time of their.
Sicknefs and Infirmity^ whether they are to be accoun-.
ted lawful Chriftians ^ bccavfe they are not wajh^d all
over with the Water of Salvation^ but h^kjeonly fome
of it poured on Vw. In which matter^ ri\t(nid ufe fo
much Afodefly and Humility^ as not to prefcribe fo
pofitively^ but that every one jhou^d have the freedom
of his own Thought^ and do as he thinks beft : I do^
iiccording to the beft of my mean Capacity^ judg thusy
&c^ 1 his Anfvver, fure, is far from determining-
* Urgente NecefTicate.
t Cyprian. Epift 6^, initio.
Ij Cypian. Ef'ift, 69- p. 297. Q>U3cfifi:i etiam, Fili CariiTmie,
quod mihi de illis videatur qui in Infirmitate & Languore
Gratiam DEI confequunrur, an habendi lint legitimi
Chriftiani, eo quod Aqua Saluiari non loti lint, fed perfuii.
<^ua in Parte Nemini Verecundia & Mode-ftia noftra praeju-
dicat, quo minus unufquifque quod putat, fentiat & quod"
IVnferit facia t. Nos, quantum concipic Mediocritas noftra,
aeftimamus, &c. ' .
as
L er. 5 • Hijlory of Infant-^apt't/m. 1 1 1
as if the matter were notorious and certain : and
the whole fum of all he fays to the purpofe^ is,
that GOD may, in urgent NcceiTity, difpenfe
with the Stridnefs of the Law ^ for he adds,
when, as it were, he draws up the Conclufion :
'f* In the Sacraments of SAlvAtio7i J the jljortefi Methods
of Performance^ under a prejfmg Necejfity^ (not elfe,
by the way) do^ by G O D^s gracious Indulgence-^
confer the whole Benefit-
I think 'tis confiderable, and well worth our
notice, that Cornelius and Magnus faw nothing in
Scripture to abet this Pradice, nor undcrftood our
LOR D's Inftitution;:or any Words or Phrafes,
to be of a Latitude to;tountenance it \ nor that
Clinical Affufions were ever us'd or favour'd ia
the Hiftory of the Apoflks, or of their SuccefTors.
If they had, they cou'd not have qucftion'd their
Validity : and Sx.Cyprlan^ fo willing as he is to have
the thing admitted, does not argue from any of
thefe Heads, which is particularly to be obferv'd.
For it's known he was a warm Man, and a great
Friend of the Power of the Clergy ^ of a lively
Genius : and therefore certainly wou'd never have
negleded thefe mighty Arguments, which are fo
diredly to the purpofe ^ and have contented him-
felf with only fpeaking doubtfully of the matter,
and citing a Text or two, to fhew, that Afper-
fions were in ufe under the Law : and then, after
all, refer it to the Determination of every one,
who, he fays, might lawfully think and ad in the
Cafe as he fhou'd judg fit^ which is placing the
whole Validity in the Bifhop's Determination.
Ko, this is not like St. Cyprian at all ^ he, doubt-
lefs, wou'd have pleaded the Pra3:ice of the A-
i: Pag. 298. In Sacramentis Salutaribus, Neceflitate ur-
gente, & DE O indulgentiam fuam largicnte, totum Cre-
dentibus conferunt Divina Conii)endia.
J:» 2 potties.
2 1 1 (^jicHlons on Kr. Wall V Let. 5 .
poUles. With what a Grace and Energy might
he have replyM to Magnus^ in the Words he ufes
on another occalion : f Jf wc look back to the Head
and Origin of divine Tradition^ the Errors which are
of hi4mane Original will ce.ife \ and from thence^ the
Nature of the ceUftial Sacraments being well under-
fioad^ whatever was obfciird with Afifisy and hid in
Clouds of Darlinefs before^ will then appear in its
true Light, And a little after : Thus it becomes the
Priefis of G 0 D to do^ who woud keep the divine
Law* If the Truth at any time be fliaken^ or vncer-
tain J let iis look back to the Divine Evangelic k Oricrin^
^nd Apofi click Tr adit ion y &c. And farther, he
woa'd not have failM briskly to urge our Savi-
our's Meaning, and the' large Senfe of the word
/ta-sfT/^o;, hid he found 'em to be on his fide. This
had been founding the matter to the bottom, and
folving the thing at once, in the moll dired way
that cou'd bethought of, and beyond any pofTible
Reply, But that he IhouM wholly negled this,
and reafon only from the Sprinklings under the
Law, hunting out far-fetch'd Inferences, doubtful
Prefumptions, very little or nothing to the pur-
pofe, and then leave the Cafe fo uncertain at laft,
IS an Argument to me, that neither CHRIST,
nor the Apoftles, nor the Church, were believ'd,
even in Si.Cyprianh time, to have known or per-
mitted thefe Clinical 4fufw?is, &c. But I am the
more confirm'd in my Inference, from this Confi-
T ^M^ 74- P'^&' 9^7, gi3. Nam li ad Divlnse Traditionis
Caput *5: Onoin-m revertamur, ceiTat Error humanus ; &
Sacrarut^ntorum co-lcitiam Ratione perfpeda, quicquid Tub
Caiigine a< Nube Ttriiebrariim obfcurum lacebac, in Lii-
cem Veriratis ap^-ritur. Et paulo posl : Qiiod & nunc facere
gportet DEI SaQcrdotcs Pr^cepta Divina ie-rv^ntes ; ut fi
ahqiio nutaverir aut vacillavcrnc Veritas, ad Originem Do-
minicam & Evangelicam, & Apoftolicam Traditionem re-
vertaniur, ^c,
deration,
Let. 5 . Hiftory of Infant- (Baptifm. 1 1 5
deration, that the reft of the Church, and all the
Fathers that have liv'd in it, as well as St. Cy-
frian^ till lately, have had the Ingenuity to u'avc
thofe other Topicks, and defend Affufion, &c. a-
lone by the hope of G O D's Indulgence to-
ward'em, in altering that Circumfta nee only in a
Cafe of NecelTity •, and never dar'd attempt to
juftify it from Scripture, or the Pradice of Christ
and his Apoftles, as now for fome time has been
done. For Mr. Wall can't find an antient Wri-
ter who will pretend, with him, that Baptifm
may be adminifter'd indifferently in any man-
ner ^ much lefs any who argues from the Sig-
nification of the Greek Word, or any Paf-
fage in the Chriftian Canon, that Affufion, or
the like, is good and regular Baptifm : On the
contrary, it appears, they always infilled much
upon Immerfion ^ and in a very antient Council,
held here in England^ under Kenwolfe King of the
Mercians^ Anno 8i5. 'tis exprefly order'd, that
Baptifm fhall not be adminifter'd by Sprinkling,
but by Dipping. But what need is there to urge
this, fince our Author allows that the Opinion of
the Keceffity of Immerfion, at leaft in ordinary-
Cafes, continu'd in moft Parts of the World, efpe^
cially in England^ for a long time^ and ftill pre-
vails in the Gree\ Church, and, as he obferves,
wherever the Pope has had no Power *, feeming to
attribute the Alteration to the Liberty which he
took and taught ?
By this. Sir, I wou'd fatisfy you, that the
Church, even when it had admitted Affufion,
which it did only in Neceffity, never pretended,
as Mr. Wall does, to ground it on the Words of
Christ, or on Ecclefiaftical Pradice : and this im-
plys, that they do in effed deny, againft our Au-
thor, that it cou'd be defended from thence. Sa
that we have the Reafon of the Thing, and the
P 3 Telti-
2 1 4 l^efleFlions on Kr. WallV Let. 5 .
Teftimotiy of all Antiquity, as -f- Petavms fays^
with the concurring Authority of the whole
Church for many Ages, againft our Author in this
Point.
Thus I have made it plain, from the conftant
Ufe of the word ^omMlGi in the Greek Author?,
the Seventy, and the New Tellament, and from
the Authority of the beft Criticks and moft
learned Men, that it always fignifys only to dip
or phme^ &c. and likewife that St.john^ our S a-
V I o u R, the Apoftles, and the whole primitive
Church, conftantly taught and pradtis'd accord-
ingly ^ and that afterwards, when the Church
took the Liberty to admit Sprinkling or AfFufion,
it was thought imperfect and irregular, and al-
low'd in Cafes of neceflity only, on a bare Prefump-
tion of God's Indulgence. To which I added,
that the Church never went about, till lately, to
3uftify Affulion, &c. by the Dodrine, or by the
PraSice of C h r i s T, the Apoftles, and primi-
tive Times. From all this therefore, it ftrongly
follows, that Baptifm ought conftantly to be ad-
minifter'd by Im.merfion or Dipping only ^ and
that AfFufion, Sprinkling, or the like, are ground-
lefs, unwarrantable, and very dangerous Corrup-
tions : and that 'tis as good Senfe to fay a Man
is dip'd, when only a drop or two of Water falls
on him ^ as to fay he is baptiz'd, when he is
only fprinkled.
Suffer me to put the Queftion here : Since the
Clergy allow, in general. Dipping was the anti-
ent manner, univerfally pradis'd by St. Johtj^ by
Christ, his Apoftles, and the whole Church,
for a long time together, and infifted on as the
lawful and regular way, neceflary in all common
Cafes at leaft ^ and that the primary Senfe of the
t Loco fupra laudato.
Greek
Let- 5- Hiflory of Infant-^aptifm. 1 1 5
Greek Word is to dip : nay, fince they have wifh'd
this Cuftom might be again reftor'd among us here
in EngUndy as it continu'd till about Qiieen EH"
7Laheth\ Time ^ Why, after all thefe Concefllons,
&c. do they pretend 'tis indifferent, and that Bap-
tifm may be rightly adminifter'd any way *, pre-
fuming, with '|- Cafanhon^ the Eorce and Energy of
this Sacrament is not f lac* d in the manner of its Ad-
miniftration ? and why do they continue in the
conftant Ufe and Pradice of Afperfion, &c* and
defend it, in oppofition to Immerfion ?
Here I am neceflitated humbly to take notice
of the Excufe which the moft judicious and
learned Bifhop of Sarum has thought fit to
make, for changing the manner of baptizing by
Dipping into that of Sprinkling. His Lordfhip is
pleas'd to obferve on the 27th Article, that the
primitive way of adminiflring Baptifm, was to
lead ^em into the Watery &C. and firfi lay ^em dov n
in the Water^ &"C. then they raised ''em up again^ &c»
which is a moft exprefs Acknowledgment, that
Immerfion was the true primitive manner : but
yet afterwards, on the 30th Article, Tag. 345. he
fays, The Banger of Dipping in cold Climates^ may
he a very good Reafon for cha^iging the Form of Bap*
tifm to Sprinkling. This Excufe is now become
very common, and, however infuificient it may
feem in it felf, has gather'd confiderable Force
by being us'd by Men of his Lordfhip's good Senfe
and Learning. But however great and honoura-
ble the Patrons of a Miftake may be, they are but
Men *, and the Authority of Christ, and the
Refped and Obedience we owe to His Commands,
fhou'd counter-ballance all other Confiderations :
And his Lordfhip's own Words, a little after, a-
t In Matth. iii. 5. Cum non in eo pofita fit Myfterii
hujas Vis & "i.yi^yiiet. ' ^•
P 4 gainfl
2 1 6 ^fleFltons on MrWAYs Let. 5.
gainO: communicating in one .Kind only, had been
much more futably apply'd to the Sacrament of
Baptifm, than thofe above-cited, and are a full
Anfwer to 'em. 'Tis with abundance of Pleafure
I learn from his Lordfhip, that ^ an Infiitution of
CHRIST^s mufl not he alter d or violated^ upon
the account of an Inference that is drawn to conclude
it needlefs. He who infiitutcd ity knew befi what was
moft fittin^j and mofi reafonahle ^ and we mufl choofe
rather to acquiefce in His Commands^ than in our own
Reafonings. Thus does his Lordfhip admirably
argue, with that Force and Solidity that eminent-
ly appears in all his Lordfliip's Writings,
'Tis pretended, the Clergy wou'd gladly revive
the antient Prudice, and defire, according to the
Diredion of the Kubrick, to baptize by Dipping
all that are willing to receive it in that manner,
and able to bear it. But if this Pretence be real,
why don't they take proper Methods (unlefs
they think it a Trifle not worth their. Gare) to
recover it, and put down Sprinkling*, to reform an
Error, which will but grow llronger, and increafe
by continuance ? For when no other Argument
cin be found. Antiquity and Cuftom will be plead-
ed. If the Clergy wou'd, according to their dc-
clar'd Judgment in the Cafe, heartily endeavour
to recover the true primitive Pradice, I am well
aillir'd they cou'd not poflibly fail of Succefs \ for
I know that many, and 1 believe the greateil Part
of the Church of England^ take their Opinion of
Afperfion from the Authority and Pradice of the
Reverend Clergy ^ it being obfervable, this is the
main Thing they urge in its Defence. So that
notwithilanding their Pretences, 'tis tobefear'd
the Clergy are a great Caufe of the Corruption, and
its Continuance. And how they will, ever , be able
* Page 547.
to
Let. 5- H'lflory of Infant'^aptijm. 2 1 7
to anfwer this to God or their own Confciences,
I know not, but heartily wifh they wou'd take it
timely into Co nil deration.
I don't know, Sir, whether you will except a-
gainft my taking the Words jlot'/rTco and jiaTrTi^O)
for fynonymous. Some have formerly made a wide
difference between 'em, allowing the firft indeed
to fignify what we contend for, but maintaining
that ]ia7f[/^65, being a Derivative with a Termi-
nation which they call a Diminutive, does not fig-
nify fo much as ^(hi\c^ : But I think 'tis plain from
the Inftances already mention'd, that they are
io-ocfVuvalUa;, exadly the fame as to their Significa-
tion \ tho fome (as Tertulllan feems to have done
when he render'd it by Mergitare, and F'ofu-t^ and
Stephens) take it for a Frequentative, which iig-
nifys more than the Derivative, and not lefs, as
in Englifflj^ to dip over and over again* Befides,
Mr. Wall feems to allow 'em to be fynonymous,
becaufe he argues promifcuoufly from both. But
I need not enlarge upon this *, for all who are
any thing acquainted with the Greek Tongue, know
the common Criticifm to be nothing but a ridicu-
lous Piece of Pedantry. 1 will however fubjoin a
few Inftances in the ^ Margin, to fhew, Deri-
x'atives in ^6) fignify the fame as their Primitives^
which you may examine at your Leifure. 1 am,
S I R,
Yours, &c*
vJay c^xJI^etf, 'AA5^<tf, dhiyi^co. Kctva.)(iuj yj^ya.y^tC^» "E^,
€d/{'<y. "h^, «5tf <y, & infinita alia.
Let t er
1 8 ^^flectwnsonMr.'^^AYs Let.d.
Letter Vf.
T^je other chief Article in diffute between the Bapifts
and their Adverfarys. They continually repeat the
mop; trifling Ohjetiions^ tho they have been fairly
knfwcr d over and over : Which has made it nc"
Ciffdry to fay a great deal to what has been well
enoT/trh anjxverd already , and concerning things
which are very plain of themfelves* The late hand-
ling of this Controverfy has convinced the World j the
Bapttfts are not that nnreafonable SeEl they were
represented to be : And ^tis not to be doubted
but the reviving the Difpute at prefent may go far
to open VeopWs Eyes yet much more in their Fa'
%'our* ^Tis pity fome friendly Meafures are not
taken to compofe the Difference^ which is not fo
impracticable as fome fanfy. Mr. 'Wa.Ws Attempt ^
tho the befi in its kind ^ falls very port of an-
fwering the Defign of it. His Scheme* He firfi
allows it cannot be made appear from Scripture
that Infants are to be baptized : And there-
fore recurs to thefe as the only Expedients, i. To
the Practice of the Jewifll Church. 2. To the
TrnBice of the antient Chrifiians. Some Reflexions
which overturn all he fays as to his main Conclu-
fiony tho he Jhoud prove thife tw^ Toints &V£r fo
'foiidly. From his Concejfion^ that it cannot be proved
^from Scripture^ it vnavoidahly follows^ that ^tis no
Inflitution o/Ch,rist. And to fuppofe it may
be included in fome of the more general Exprejfions^
is only to beg the thing in difpute, Vnlefs he
can jhew us Infant Baptifm is fo much as men-
tion d in Scripture^ we fiant believe it^s inftituted
there*
hct.6. H'lfiory of Infant'^aptifm. ixp
there. Our Author mahs the Scriptures the Rule
of Language ^ vphlch he therefore ought with much
more reafon to make the only Rule of his Faith
and Pra5iice» The Baptifm of Infants is unlaw
fuly (f C H R I s T has not injlituted it. True
Prctcflants fhoud adhere to the Scripture^ as the
only infallible Guide in all religious Contro^
verfys. They who do otherwife feem to be too
near the Church of Rome, as to the Article of
Tradition at leafl *, which is an Inlet to all the
reft. Our Adverfarys aEl very inconfiftently in
rejecling Tradition^ in their Difputes with the Ro-
manics, while they recur to it as their main Refuge
in the prefent Difpute with us. That Infant Bap'
tifm ought not to be pratlis^d^) is proved from our
Author s Principles^ compared with the Articles of
the Church. It gives the Romanifls a handle ta
weaken the Reformation with too much Advantage^
The Articles of the Church direBly againjl Tradi-
tions. The Scriptures filence as good an Argument
againfl P^do-haptifm^ as can be defir'd. We find
a jirong tendency in our Minds to depend upon the
Scriptures only. We are obliged by any fort of Law ^
&C. only to the Particulars the faid Law expreffes.
This illujlrated by hfiances^ and by an undoubted
Maxim from Tertullian. Apflyd alfo to the prefent
Difpute^ ^.ndilluflrated by more Inftances. Some bmld
the Ecclefiaflical Hierarchy mainly on that very Foun^
dation on which the Baptiz^ing of Infa?ns is opposed.
Mr. Wall fometimes argues in the fame manney^
as the Baptifis do againfl Paedo-baptifm. The Oh-
jeEbion^ that Christ no where forbids us to bap-
tiz^e Infants.^ anfwerd. We- are forbid to teach
the Traditions of Men for Commandments of Gon.
The P<cdo'baptift^s Argument enervated by Ter*^.
tullian. Tho the Scripture^s filence may fome-
times y it does not always leave it fo much as
Lawful to do what it does not mention,
S I R,
2 2 o (^fleBions on Mr. Wall V Let. 6.
NO W wc have taken breath a little *, if you
pleafe, Sir, we'll enter upon the other chief
Article in difpute between us and our Adver-
farys.
If Mr.W^^//, like fome others, had argu'd with
a great deal of concern, that 'tis unlawful to
dip thofe who are baptiz'd, becaufe it is a Breach
of the Sixth Commandment, and virtually to
Murder*, undoubtedly you wou'd fay this cou'd
not have deferv'd an Anfwer, and yet it cou'd
not fairly have been pafs'd by neither.
Of the fame kind exadly, or it may be more
trifling, are the two main Foundations of Infant
Baptifm, I mean the celebrated Arguments from
Original Sin, and from Circumcifion, which have
been fo often and fairly baffled, and yet are con-
tinually return'd upon us as gravely, as if no-
thing had ever been faid to 'em.
And it I fliou'd be neceffltated to make a for-
mal Anfwer to thefe and fome other fuch Pre-
tences, you know where to lay the fault, tho
I defign to avoid it all I can.
We were once taken for a very ftrange fort
of People, and accordingly were furiouily at-
tacked without any moderation *, but cur Adver-
faries at length thought fit to let the Contro-
verfy drop, the Effed: of which has been only
to perfwade the World we are not that unrea-
fonable mifchievous Sect we were reprefented to
be. And it has been made appear, that we have
abundantly more to fay for our felves than was
believ'd or expeded. This has been the only
Confcquence of the warm handling of this Con-
troverfy not long fince. And I don't doubt but
the more it is canvafs'd, the more Peoples Eyes
will be apen'd in our favour^ and therefore I
am
Let.^. Hiftory of Infant^'Baptifm. 1 1 1
am not difpkas'd fome go about to revive the
Difpute again.
I only wiih a more impartial and learned Exa-
mination of thele Matters might be ferioufly en-
ter'd on^ for 'tis highly necelTary, Points of this
nature Ihou'd be determin'd if poflible. And,
I think, it lies on our Adverfarys, either to re-
nounce their Error, or elfe to juftify themfelves
more foHdly, by fetting things in another light.
I fhou'd be heartily glad if fome amicable Mea-
fures might be concerted, in order to compofe tha
Difference, and put an end to the Difpute, Perhaps
it is not aDefign altogether impradicable, and I am
fure It wou'd be very ufeful if it fhou'd be manag'd
in that becoming manner, in which we are con-
vinc'd by a late glorious Inftance, I mean that of
the Vmorj^ that the mofh nice and difficult Points
may be treated and adjufted with Succefs. But
'tis obferv'd, Ecclefiafticks are too often fubjed
to the fame Paffions with other Men.
In the mean time let us examine Mr. Wall'^
Attempt, which I have own'd is the mod con-
fiderable of any thing I have feen of the kind :
for he has amafs'd together the Subltance of all
that can with any Shew of Reafon be infifted
on ^ and thus he lays his Scheme.
He firft very freely allows (and indeed what
unprejudic'd Man wou'd venture to affert the
contrary?) that it cannot be made appear from
the Scriptures that Infants are to be baptiz'd.
For in the Commiffion, Matt, xxviii. 19, ^ Ther'e
ii no ^Articular direElien given what to do with re-
ference to the Children of thofe that receivd the Faiths
Nor IS there in any other Place, f among all the
Perjons that are recorded as hapizJd by the Apoftles^
— — ♦ Piefaee, pag, 3 . | Ibid.
exprefs
2 2 2 (^fleSiions on Mr.WolYs Lct.6.
exprefs mention of any Infant. And the Proofs drawn
by confequence from fame Places of Scripture^ are not
fo flain^ as to binder the Arguments drawn from
ether Places for the other fide^ from feeming fiiH con^
fiderahle^ All which is, in fliort, to grant that
Infant-Baptifm cannot be prov'd from Scripture.
To ballance which, he likewife fuppofes it can-
not be prov'd they were not to be baptiz'd.
This is his firft Polition, and the Ground of
the whole Superftrufture. For hence he infers
in the next Place, that recourfe muft be had to
fome other means, which may ferve to clear up
and interpret the Law, and fix the Senfe, which
he thinks is not fo free from Ambiguity as it
ought to be.
In order to this he propofes thefe Two as
the only Expedients: i. To enquire || what was
the State of the Jewilh Religion^ as to Baptlfm^ at
and before that tlme^ when our Saviour gave his
Order for haptiz,ing all Nations. 2. To learn as
well as we can^ how the firfi Chriftiahs did praHife
in this matter : whether they haptiz!d their Infants or
not. Now if our Author can Ihew that the Jews
did, before and at the time of Christ's fend-
ing out his Difciples, baptize the Infants of their
Profelites:i and that the Primitive Church imme-
diately after the Apoftles time, did likewife ufe
to baptize the Infants of Chriftian Parents \ he
thinks that Praftice fufficiently prov'd to have
been inflituted by Christ.
And, tho there is no neceflity for it, we might
well enough venture to put the matter upon this
Iflue with him, that when he or any one elfe fhall
be able to prove thefe two Points, or indeed
either of 'em, we fhou'd unite our felves to the
Eftablifh'd Church, and immediately own we have
II Introd. pag. 2. rned.
been
Let.(5. H'lfiory of InfantSaptif??u ii-^
been hitherto miflaken: which however is too
much to promife on this fingle Condition^ tho
I am fully perfwaded 'tis impofTible for any Man
to fulfil it. That our Author has not done it,
I fhall (how you hereafter ^ and in the mean time
I will make a Refiedlion or two, which I think
will take off the Force of all he fays to efta-
blifh his general Conclufion, viz., that Christ
commanded to baptize Infants*, even upon the
Suppofition that he proves thefe two Particulars
ever fo folidly.
And firft, you may be pleas'd to obferve his
Conceflion, which is a very unhappy one for him:
for indeed it does molt effedtually ruin the Caufe
he aflerts^ it being an unavoidable Gonfequence
from it, maugre all his other Attempts, that In-
fant-Baptifm is no Inftitution of Christ: and
if fo, tho all the Jews and Fathers in the World
have pradis'd and maintain'd it ever fo labori-
oufly,, we fo all not think our felves under any
Obligation on that account to do fo too ^ becaufc
we profefs not to be followers of them, but
of C H R I s T alone.
St. Cypria^j the darling Author of our warmefl
Adverfarys, and the antienteft Patron of Infant
Baptifm, has a very remarkable Palfage to this
Effed, which is worth tranfcribing. Some in his
time made fo free with the other Sacrament,
as to prefume to ufe Water only inftead of
Wine; for which too it feems they pleaded An-
tiquity. And the Father anfwers 'em thus : //
in that Sacrifice which Christ ojferd^ none but
C B R I s T is to he follorv'^dy then certainly we ought
to obey Christ, and do what he commanded us
to do\ fince he fays in the Gofpel, If ye do what I
command you^ henceforth I call you not Servants
but Friends, ^nd that Christ only is to be
obefd^ even the FATHER witnejfes from Heaven^
faying^
2 24 ^fleElms onMrM^lYs Let.(5.
faying^ This is my beloved Son in whom I am
well pleas'd •, hear ye him. Wherefore^ /f G h r i s t
only is to he our Guide ^ we are not to regard what
fame others before iu have rajljly frefumd to do^ but
only what Christ, who is before all^ firft ^raBis^d,
We are not to follow the Cuftoms of Men -^ but the Truth
cf GoD^ for God freaking by the Prophet Ifaiah
fays: In vain do they worfhip me, teaching for
Dodrines the Commandments of Men. And a
little after he concludes, 'tis very dangerous f<7
change any thing by human Traditions^ from what it
was at frfl by divine Inftitution*
But it will be expeded I (hou'd make out the*
Conclufion I drew from our Author's ConceflTionJ
I don't defire to take any thing for granted which.:
I can imagine may be in the leaft doubted of,'
even by any Man who wou'd be thought rea-
fonable. in^r
Mr. Wall cbrifefles, all the Paflages in Scripture
relate to the Baptifm of Adult Perfons, and
gives this as a Reafon why the Anti-p^dobaptifls'
are fo fuccefsful in their publick Difputations.-^
* Having flain Places of Scripture^ fays he, to pro^'
dnce concerning Adult Baptifm^ and fever al Examples
of tt j they work much on fuch of the People as had
vot minded, this before^ and had not had a right State
of the Oueftion between the Pado-baptifis and the
jintipizdo'baptifts : wherein the former grant that in
a Nation newly converted to Chriftianity (and fuch
are all the Cafes mention d in Scripture) the Adult
People muft be baptiz^^d frfi^ before their Infants
can be baptiz^d^ But this he fuppofes is no Proof
that therefore their Infants were not to be bap-
tiz'd at all.
Part II. pag. 275.
To
L,tt.6. Hiftory of Lifant'!Baptifm. i%^
To this let us add what I cited before, where
he^lows, firfl, That there is no where any f articular
diredion given what they were to do in reference to the
^Children of thofe that received the Faith^ whether they
fiioiid be baftiz^^d or not : And fecondly, That among
all the Perfons that are recorded as baptized by the
Apojhlesj . there is no exprefs mention of any Infant.
And the Confequence from the whole put toge-
ther muflbe very ftrong, that even upon his own
Principles, there is as little ground for Infant-
Baptifm in the Scriptures, as there is for any
thing whatever, of which that facred Rule is to-
tally lilent.
Nay on the contrary, and as he himfelf propofes
the matter, the Advantage lies confiderably againft
him on our fide; the great Evidence and Plain-
nefs of the Truth, which renders it fo obvious
to every Man, obliging him to confefs, that there
are in the Scriptures many plain Places and Exam-
ples which make entirely for Adult Baptifm,
while no fingle PafTage can be found there, which
even he himfelf dares fay, makes plainly for the
Baptifm of Infants, who are not fo much as once
mention'd where Baptifm is fpoken of.
Now to fay that in profely ted Nations the
Adult are firft to be baptiz'd ; and that all the
Cafes in Scripture are of this kind ; and that there-
fore all the Paffages of Scripture which fpeak of
Baptifm, are to be underftood particularly of
Adult Baptifm ; and farther , that there is no
Example nor Diredion of any kind, that Infants
ever were or ought to be baptiz'd : What is all
this but a full and explicit Confelfion that the
Scriptures are wholly filent in this matter, and
know nothing of Infant-Baptifm at all ?
But becaufe this wou'd be granting too much,
our Author, to moderate the Force of it, fappo-
fes (and indeed it is at bell but a Suppofition)
QL in
^^6 ^fleBions on Mr.WAYs Lct.6.
in fome general ExprefTions Infants are to be
included, as in the Commiffion, Matt. xxviiL 19*
and perhaps other PafTages elfewhere, and Joh. iii. 5.
which he reckons "^ the plaineft Argument for
Infant-Baptifm, and, with the antient P^edobap-
tifts, the chief Ground of it. But to affirm In-
fants are intended as well as Adult in thefe and
fuch like Places, is begging the Queftion, and
aflerting the Thing inftead of proving it.
It's true, Mr. Wall^ to do him juftice, has not
done fo *, but fparing the AlTertion, he wou'd feem
to propofe it as a thing in it felf a little doubtful,
and therefore goes about to clear it up from the
Pradice of the Jews and Primitive Chriftians ^
which however we ftiall fee hereafter make nothing
for him.
In the mean time, unlefs he can fhew us, at
leaft by good Confequence, that Infant-Baptifm
is fo rnuch as mention'd in the Scriptures, we
Ihan'c believe it is inftituted there, tho we are
told it ever ib often. But whatever may be pre-
tended at other times, thus much moft plainly
and necellarily follows from, or rather is the very
Senfe of our Author's Words above-cited, viz..
That as to Infant-Baptifm in particular, the
Scriptures are wholly fdent *, and all he pretends
is, not that he fees it by any neceflary Inference,
but only that p-obahly it may be comprehended
in fome of the more general PafTages : that is
in fliort, they are fully refolv'd to find it fome-
where*, but I think it much more probable^ that if it
had been an Inftitution of C h R i s t, it wou'd have
been mention'd infomePaflageof holy Writ, as well
as we fee Adult Baptifni frequently is. However,
we are not to take up with Suppofitions and bare
AlTertion?, and therefore if our Antagonills wou'd
*■ Part IL pa§. 122.
.j. convince
Let.($. Hlflory of Jnfant'^aptifnL 1 27
convince us, they muft not rurmife, but plainly
ihew us that Infant-Baptifm is indeed contain'd in
the Scriptures ^ for if it is not there, we regard
no other Authority, and therefore fliall not think
our felves much concern'd to account for our re-
jecting it.
I fhou'd not have infilled on this fo long, but
only that it ihews, Mv.Wali has rum'd his whole
defign, by what he lays dovvn at firfl: ^ for if In-
fant-Baptifm can't be found in Scripture, as he
confefies, then it ought not to be pradis'd,
efpecially in the Head, and to the excluding of
that which is plainly inftituted in it:
You may remember. Sir, that our Author wou'd
allow of no other way to -determine the Senfe of
the Greek Word ji)a7rT/^&, than by obferving how
it was us'd in the Scripture. So that when he
fanfys it may be ferviceable to him, the Scripture
muft be the only Rule even of Language. 'Tis the
Rule we know of our Faith and Praftice, and was
defign'd for that*, but not to be the Standard of
Speech, which is continually altering, and depends
upon Cuftom. If iMr. Wall therefore wiii needs
have us refer our felves entirely to the Scrip-
tures for the Senfe of a Word, 'tis much more
reafonable, I hope, to determine all Controverfys
by 'em, that relate to the Chriftian Religion,
which is inftituted by God, and contain'd in thofe
facred Books. If Infant-Baptifm then is not to
be found in Scripture, no Chriftian is obliged to
pradife it. This Inference is drawn wholly from
Mr. IValPs own Premifes, and therefore I take it
for an unanfwerable Argument, at leaft ad homi-
77 em^ as they call it.
And farther, this Topic proves not only that
we are not obiig'd to pradife the Baptizing of
Infants*, but on the contrary, that 'tis unlaw-
ful to do it. The Cafe of the Jews was
Q, z parallel -,
2 28 ^'flections on Afr.WaU'^ Let.6.
parallel *, of whom Christ fays, Matt. xv. i5.
Thi^ have ye made the Commandments of Gov
of none effttt by your Traditions: and afterwards
applies to 'em thefe Words of the Prophet, But
in vam do they worpip rne^ teaching for DoEirines
the Commandments ofA'fen. For (as St. Mark vii. 8,
adds) laying afide the Commandment of G o D, ye hold
the Traditions of Men^ as the Waging of Fots and
C-ups : and many ether fuch like thrngs ye do. Nay
thefe Words are much more fevere upon the Pasdo-
baptiftsnow, than they were upon the J^w then ^
for they had the Command of G o d for Wafhing
of Cups, &c. in fome Cafes ^ and this Walhing
of Cups, &c. did not jollle out any other reli-
gious Duty : whereas the Piedobaptifts have not
the leaft Countenance from God for Infant-Bap-
tifm at all, which has neverthelefs, thro the pre-
vailing Power of Cuftom and Intereft, too gene-
rally, but it is to be hop'd not paft all proba-
bility of recovery, fuperfeded the one Primitive,
True, Apoftolical Baptifm, of which only 'tis
confefs'd the Scripture fpeaks, viz.- that of Adult
Perfons upon Profeffion of their Faith: which is a
thing very rarely feen or heard of now in the great-
eft Part of the Chriftian World, their Traditionary
Pasdobaptifm being fubftituted in its room.
Methinks the Gentlemen, our Antagonifts.
whofe Authority and Example, I muft fay, de-
lude the People (who generally plead nothing
elfe but the Authority of their Spiritual Guides
in defence of this Pradice) into this Er-
ror, fhou'd more clofely confider thofe awful
Words of St. Paid^ Gal. i. 9. If any Alan preach
any other Gofpel unto you than that you have receivd^
let him he accurfed. A dreadful Sentence, and not
pronounc'd in vain ! And CHRIST Himfelf has
promis'd to confirm the Sentence of His Apoftles,
John XX. 23... Whofpever Sifts ye remit , they are
remitted
Let.<5. Hiflory of Infmt'^ciptifm. 229
remitted unto them \ and whofefoever Sins ye retain^
they are retained. They wou'd do well to confider,
whether teaching a different, that is, another
Baptifm from that which is fo plainly tanght in
the Scriptures, does not fall under this Anathema,
For my part, I can't but think, the teaching and
pradillng any thing not contain'd in Scripture, as
a Commandment of God f, efpecially if it fets a-
fide fomething that is plainly to be found there;
muft, at ieaft, in fome meafure, feem to fall un-
der the Condemnation in thefe Words, unlefs
where Ignorance may be pleaded in Excufe.
Such as are true Friends to the Proteftant Caufe,
ought always to have particular regard ^to that
which is the chief Corner-Stone in its Founda-
tion •, which is, to have no other Rule of Faith,
or Judg^ of Controverfys, befide , the Sacred
Word of GO D. For if once we admit of any
other, we diredly give up our Caufe, and ex-
pofe our felves to all the Impofitions and Incon-
veniencys which are the infeparable Attendants of
Popery*
This our molt Reverend and Wife Reformers
knew perfedly well, and therefore pioully us'd
all Endeavours to have the Bible, as the bed Rule,
publifh'd in the EngUJJj Tongue •, but not without
the violent and powerful Oppolition of the Par-
tifins of Rome^ who knew it was the molt effec-
tual way to ruin their Kingdom of Darknefs and
Superftition, in which they had fuch coniiderable
Interefts. It has but an odd Afped then, for any
here among us, to olfer to advance another Rule
befides the Scriptures, in matters of this kind ;
tho perhaps they mayn't intend or fee the ill Con-
fequenccs of it ; and I wou'd hope and believe
they don't : yet ftill, to im.itate the Adions of
rhofe who at lirlt per fas & nefas oppos'd our glo-
rious and happy Reformation, fecms, at leaft, to
Q, 3 be-
230 ^fleclions on Mr-WalFj Lct.6.
befpeak, that thofe who do fo are much in the
fame Iiiterell:, as to the Point of Tradition at
leaft.
But all I will atprefent infer from it, fhall be
only the Inconfillency of our Antagonifts Princi-
ples in rejeding Tradition, and appealing to the
Bible, as the fole Authority, when they difpute
againft the Papifts, and in building at the fame
time the Baptifm of Infants, only on the pre-
tended Tradition of the Church. That is, they
will difcard Tradition when 'tis againfl 'em i but
if it will fcrve to fupport any particular Dodrine
or Ufage they are fond of, then it muft be ad-
mitted.
Our Author at his Ordination, in the moft fo-
lemn manner, declar'd upon Oath his free and
full Aifent to the Articles of the Church of Eng-
Und\ and therefore I may take them for uncon-
teftable Principles with him, and indeed with the
whole Clergy of that Church. Kow, the 6th
Article, you know. Sir, declares, TW whatfoever
is not read therein^ (viz. in the holy Scriptures) nor
may be prov'^d thereby^ is not to be required of any
Man^ that it JJjoud be believed as an Article of Fait h^
or be thought requifite or neccjfary to Sdvation^ The
Words of the learned Bifhop of Sarum^ on this
Pafiage, which he indeed aims againft the Church
of Rome^ are fo applicable to another Church
too, in reference to the Point in controverfy
between Her and Us, that I fhall take leave to
traofcribe fome of 'em. If this is our Rule^ fays
his Lordlbip, our entire and only Rulcy then fuch
Docrrincs as are not in it^ ought to be rcjeEled ', and
any Church that adds to the Ojrifiian Rcli^ion-^ is er-
roncovu for making fuch Additions^ &C. So all the
Additions of the five S.:cr anient s^ of the Invocation of
Angels and Saints^ £^C. of the corporeal Trefence in
the £i^iharij}^ &C. with a great many more^ are cer-
tainly
Let.^. Hifiory of Infant-^aptlfm. 1 3 1
tainly Errors, mlefs they can he frovd from Serif-
ture
'e*
And fo lik^ife is Paedobaptifm, which Ux.W.^ll
confeffes caa't be prov'd from Scripture : and what
the Right Reverend Bilhop adds, is as true of this
as of any of thofc Errors he has mention'd ^ of
which he fays, the^ are intolerable Errors^ if as the
Scripture is exprefs in oppojition to them^ fo they de-
file the Worfinp of Chriftians (I forbear to add, as his
Lordfliip docs^' with Idolatry) But they become moft
intolerable-, if they are imposed vpon all that are in
that Communion ^ and if Creeds or Oaths., in which
they are affrrrid^ are requird of all in their Commu-
mon» Here is the main ground of jufiifying our form-
ing- our felves into a diftinth Body from the Roman
cTourch ^ and therefore it is well to be confiderd.
His Lordlhip very neceilarily added thefe lalt
Words 5 and *tis great pity that Matter is fo lit-
tle confider'd : For had it been more ftridly ob-
ferv'd, the Reformation wou'd have been long
fince carried to a much higher degree of Perfec-
tion, and every .evil Work, and everything which
offends, taken away : Whereas the want of ad-
hering to the main Ground of the Reformation, has
unhappily afforded the Romiflj Party an Opportu-
nity to give it feme terrible Shocks.
They have often, and with great Advantage,
argu'd from Infant-Baptifm *, which,they ftrongly
affert, is only grounded on the Tradition of the
Church ^ and therefore v/ill always remain an un-
anfwerable Argument for Tradition, againft all
fuch as admit of that Practice. To this the re-
form'd Divines have yet never made any folid
Anfwer •, and thofe PaiTages which Mr. Stennett,
in anfwer to i^z/jfa;, has tranflated frob the inge-
nious Monfieur Boffuet^ will be a (landing unaii-
fwerable Objedion to the Piedobaptift Proteftants,
and cannot be folv'd, but by flinging up Infant-
Q^ 4 ' Baptifm,
2 3 r (^fleSiions on KrAVall'^ Let.^.
Baptifm, or elfe by fhewing it to be founded on
Scripture, which neverthelefs, 'tis confefs'd, can't
be done : And the Anonymous Anfwer to the
Bifhop of Meavx ingenuoufly acknowledges, that
the Pajfages frodvc^d^ do at mo ft only prove j that it is
■permitted^ or rather^ that it is not forbidden to bap-
tize Infants.
And who now wou'd imagine, that Proteftants
fhou'd fo generally, and that too after they have
been often reminded of it by the mofb learned
Prelates, and others of the Romifl) Communion,
their Adverfarys, ftill continue to pra6:ire what
is fo well demonftrated to be erroneous, I may
fay unlawful ^ efpecially fince it gives t\\Q Romanifts
fuch a Handle to purfue this Example on their
fide, in efl-ablifliing what Corruptions they pleafe,
and abrogating any of our Saviour's Laws?
For their Inference is undoubtedly very juft, that
if Tradition and the Church's Authority be a fufli-
cient ground for altering one Sacrament, it muft
likewife be fuiEcient to juftify any Changes
made in the other, tho it be the'denying the Cup
to the Laiety : and 'twill be a fufficient warrant
alfo to introduce as many other Sacraments as
they think fit to invent : and thus Confirmation,
Penance, Extreme Undion, Ordination, and
Matrimony, are prov'd to be as properly and
truly Sacraments, as the Two which C HRISjT
inffcituted, vItl* Baptifm and the Eucharift.i;,' r'-^
But our prudent Reformers, in order to deli-
ver us efFediially, and prevent all after Attempts
from the Ro?mJh Church, made it a Fundamental
Article of their new Conftitution, which all the
Clergy at lealt are oblig'd indifpenfably to give
their free Ailent to upon Oath, That Traditions,
&c are not to be admitted as a Rule.
The whole 6th Article, 'tis plain, and more
direclly thofe Words a little before tranfcrib'd,
were
Tuct.6. H'lflory of Infant-^aptifm. i^j
were intended, as my Lord of Salisbury does yet
more fully explain and apply 'em, againft that
dangerous Error of the Komijh Church, which is,
as it were,^ the Foundation of all the reft. This
Article declares againft fetting up any other Rule
of Faith, of any kind whatever, in competition
with the Canonical Books of the Old and New
Teftament : and all who enter into Orders do for-
fwear any other.
But how Mr. Wall^ or any Man who owns In-
fant-Baptifm cannot be maintained but by the
Traditions of the Church, and yet pradifes it ^ I
fay, how any fuch Perfon can excufe himfelf of
Prevarication, or fomething worfe, is what I
can't divine. I believe if Mr. IVMl was to attempt
it, he wou'd find the Difficulty not eafily fur-
mounted. In the mean time, I think it's plain
enough, that even the Articles of that very Church
our Author defends, condemn and difallow Iiis
Method, which neverthelefs he thinks is the only
one whereby he can hope to defend Psedobap-
tifm.
But all this is only arguing ad Homlnem ah ah-
furdo. Suffer me now to offer fome few Obferva-
tions which naturally arife from the Silence of the
Sacred Scriptures, and may ferve to make out yet
more fully, that this is fo far from being a fit
Ground-work for Mr. Wall to build upon, that it
is as good an Argument againft him as can reafon-
ably be defir'd.
All Chriftians pay fo high a Veneration to the
Scripture, that, where they have the liberty to
exprefs their Thoughts, they appeal to it as the
only Guide in all Points of Religion. All Partys
are fo convinced of the Sufficiency and Authority
of it, that they are concern'd to found their O-
pinions, tho ever fo miftaken, upon it ; and ne-
ver think 'em fafe, till fomc Texts or other are
brought
2 54 ^fleSiions on Mr.WzWs Lct.6.
brought to fpeak in their favour. Our Experi-
ence may fatisfy us, whatever Rcafonings and Ar-
guments are employ'd to fupport any thing, we
are apt to raife Scruples and Doubts, if we don't
fee it confirm'd by holy Writ.
And in the Nature of the Thing, it muft be fo :
For the Scriptures being the Records of reveal'd
Religion, nothing can be our Duty but what they
enjoin *, and confequently, we are to take no no-
tice of what is not exprefs'd in 'em.
All Laws in general are underftood to bind on-
ly in relation to the Particulars feverally fpecify'd
hi 'em. This is felf-evident ; and 'tis too abfurd
to be made fo much as a Suppofition, that they are
obligatory in Cafes they have no relation to, and
which they don't fo much as mention. An A^Jc which
makes it Treafon to contrive the Death of a King,
does not at the fame time make it equally Capital to
contrive the Death of the meaneft Subjed ^ but oii
the contrary, rather fappofes the latter not to be
equally Capital. Had it mention'd Beggars too,
or been put in fuch general Expreffions as compre-
hended them, or all Men, then the Cafe wou'd
have been the fame : but one Cafe being mention'd
and not the other, makes one Criminal and the
other not ; one being againlt an exprefs Law,
which has no relation to the other.
All Commiffions, and Warrants, &c. do as it
were appropriate the Dutys or Privileges they im-
pofe or grant, only to thofe Perfons and Circum-
ftances feverally therein mention'd*, and at the
fame time tacitly imply, they are not to be con-
ftru'd as obliging any other Perfons, or even the
fame in other Circumflances than thofe exprefs'd.
For when any Powers fpecify fome Particulars,
they are underftood to relate to thofe only, and
to exclude all other?. All Grants and Gifts, whe*
"t)ier by the Crov^n, or any other Authority, are
made
Let.($. Hiftory of Infant-^aptt/m. 235
made to this or the other particular Perfon or
iFamily *, and the bare mentioning of them is a
fufficient cutting off ail other Pretences whatever.
The commifTioning Judges to try fuch and fuch
Caufes, is not only not authorizing 'em to judg
other Caufes, but a tacit forbidding 'em to do
it: For tho the Commiffion gives a Power to
judg and determine-, 'tis underftood to be with
this Reftridion, 'viz,» only the things mentioned ^
fo far it gives Power to go *, but it does jiot give,
which is the fame as to with-hold or refufe, the
Power to go farther. And accordingly, 'tis ac-
counted Criminal, and a high Contempt of the
Superior Authority, to exceed the Bounds of a
GommilTion, barely in doing what it does not men-
tion. From all this I think 'tis more than fuffici-
ently plain, that the Silence of a Lawgiver, &c.
in any Cafe, is uoderftood to be a Prohibition a-
gainft the faid Things he is filent in, efpecially if
fome other Particulars be exprefs'd, and that o-
mitted^ for then it looks as if 'twere defign'd.,
and has therefore fomething more negative in it.
'Tis a fure Maxim of ^ TertulUan^ Negat Serif-
tura quod non notat^ A Maxim fo fatal to the
Caufes which depend on Tradition, that le Trleure
cou'd not fafely pafs it by, without boldly accu-
fing this antient Writer of Heterodoxy.
To apply this to our prefent Difpute : Since
the Scripture, in all the places where it fpeaksof
Baptifm, is confefs'd to fpeak only of Adult Per-
fons, and never once to mention Infants*, one
wou'd think it fhou'd be an unavoidable Confe*
quence, that therefore the Adult only which are
mention'd, and not Infants which are not, fhou'd
be look'd upon as fit Subjeds of Baptifm. If Adult
* De Monogam. pag. 527.
Baptifm
2 3 6 ^fleSllons on Afr.WallV Lct.6.
Baptifm only be meation'd in Scripture, then In-
fant-Baptifm to be fare cannot be grounded upon
that Sacred Law : And to draw a home Inference,
it mult be unlawful to baptize Infants under pre-
tence of divine Authority, and as by CommilTion
from CHRIST ^ fince it appears to be contrary
to, or at leaft different from, his Intention, which
was, that Adult Perfons Ihou'd be baptiz'd : and,
as appears from the frequent mention of Adult,
and the total Silence about Infants, that this Sa-
cred Ordinance (hou'd not be profan'd, by admit-
ting fuch unfit Subjeds to it.
This negative Conclufion mult be as ftrong here
as in all other fuch-like Cafes. So the Patent by
which his Grace was created Duke of Marlborough^
and the Settlements made for the futable Support
of the faid Dignity, are an honourable Acknow-
ledgment of his invincible Courage, and wife Con-j>,
dud, and of his unfhaken Loyalty and Faithful-
nefs, and indefatigable Indultry in the Service of
his Queen and Country, and the whole Proteltant
Intereft. The bare mentioning his Grace, toge-
ther with his Heirs, without mentioning any o-
ther, appropriates this Honour to his Grace'^s
Family only, and to his Heir after him, who
alone, of all the Children, wou'd be entitl'd to the
Honour, notwithftanding the reft are not exprefly
mention'dj and denied it : And theReafon which
excludes the reft, is only becaufe they arc not men-
tion'd in the Patent ^ and fo, exactly on the fame
account, Infants are not to be baptiz'd, viz.. be-
caufe they are not mention'd in thofe Claufes of
our Scripture-Patent which relate to the high Pri-
vilege of Baptifm. Again, every Man of but
common Senfe will allow, that all Obligations
bind only thofe Perfons who are mention'd, and
upon thofe Conditio qs only which are exprefs'd.
If I am bound in a Bond of Ten thoufand Pounds
for
Let. 6. Hlflory of Infrnt^^Baptifm. 237
for my Friend's Fidelity in any Poft •, I fhall not be
accountable on any other Pretence, as of his un-
fitnefs for the Place, or the like ^ nor is any other
Perfon anfwerable for his Frauds, c^c, no other
Condition being mention'd in the Bond befide his
Fidelity, nor no other Man made a joint-Security
with me.
Juft for the fame reafon to a tittle, we think
Baptifm fhou'd not be adminifter'd to Infants :
for 'tis beyond Difpute, that the only Perfons
mention'd in the Baptifmal Clatifes of Scripture,
are the Adult, and the only Condition, Faith and
Repentance. By all which, Infants feem to have
been as delignedly excluded this Sacrament, as
cou'd well be. And tho the Inference in this par-
ticular Cafe will be pinching, and therefore un-
grateful enough to our Author^ he will never-
thelefs readily allow, in fome Cafes which agree
with his Syftem, that negative Arguments are not
always invalid.
On fome Occafions which might be pointed at,
I know he wou'd fubfcribe Dr. Whitby's general
Rule, That "{; in matters of DoHrine^ the Argument
is always good ; We read of no fuch Dodrine in the
Scriptures, therefore it neither is^ nor can he any Ar-
ticle of Faith, hecaufe we have no other Rule of Faith
hefides the holy Scriptures. The Doctor's Reafon
makes the Obfervation appear certainly true,
and therefore gives the Caufe of P^dobaptifm a
more deadly Wound.
And indeed, 'tis mainly on this Foundation the
Ecclefiaftical Hierarchy is at prefent built, for the
appointing Officers in the Church to adminifter
the Sacraments, for inftance, our Author himfelf,
and almoft all Chriftians will allow, is a tacit Pro-
t Anmt. in Afatth, vi. 9. pag, $^. a.
hibition.
2 1 8 (l^efleaions on Afr.WaUV Ltt.6.
hibition, that no other PeiTon prefume to do it.
In like manner, the mentioning the Adult in the
Commiflion to baptize, and not Infants alfo.
Is as llrong a Prohibition not to baptize the
latter.
When we were laft together, you may remem-
ber, Sir, you took occafion to intimate, that pro-
bably Mr. Wall wou'd not ftick to rejed this way
of arguing, if any Ihou'd urge it upon him. But
I obferve, when he writ his Hiltory, he had fo
good an opinion of it, as to ufe it himfelf. For
when he has made the Suppoiltion, that the Jews
did baptize their Profelytes together with their
Children f, and that our LORD transfer'd that
Practice from them into the Chrlftian Church ^ he
adds, to clinch the Kail he has been driving, and
infer Infants mull now in like manner be baptiz'd,
II If our Saviour meant that the Apofiles jhou'd
make any Alteration in that Matter^ and not baptiz.e
the Infants a^ had been tifually done^ it is a wonder He
did not fay fo. Placing the Strefs of the Matter in
this, that the Scripture is wholly filent as to our
L o K d's giving a Diredion to m.ake any Altera-
tion in this Point.
He fpeaks much after the fame manner, and in
the fame Cafe too, when he allows, that notwith-
llanding what he had faid, Baptifm ^ ought to be
regulated by the TraBice of John, and of Christ
Himfelf^ rather than by any frecedrng Cufiom of the
jewifh Nation j if we had any good ground to believe
that they did^ in the Cafe of Infants^ differ^ or alter
any thing from the vfufd way : Bnt we have no kind of
Proof that they m^.de any fuch Alteration. Here a-
gain he argues from the Scripture's Silence, and
therefore my Inference will ftand good againft
Intnd. P3g. IC-. "^ lb, \i^^^ ig.
- *^ ' "' him,
Let.6. Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. 1 3 9
him, That indeed Infants might be baptiz'd :/ wc
had any good grotmd to believe that Chkist and
His Apollles baptiz'd any : hut we have no hmd
of Proof that they baptiz'd any, and if our S k-
V I o u R ineant that the Jpofiles fhou'd have done it,
^tis a wonder He did not fay fa.
But certainly, as we had no Power to baptize
at all without His Command *, fo neither have we
Power to baptize any, hut fuch asRe commanded:
and thofe you have already feen. Sir, Mr. IVall
himfelf allows to be the Adult only, as far as the
Scriptures can go to inform us of the matter.
Againft all this, there is a miferable Cavil, very
comaion in the Mouths of Paedobaptifts, which
one wou'd think Men of the moft ordinary Capa-
citys cou'd not perfuade themfelves to ufe, W;^.
They obferve, that Christ has no where for-
bid 'em to baptize Infants, and therefore they in-
fer they ought not to negled it. This is fo very
trifling, that I don't know whether you will ex-
cufe me for taking notice of it. However, 'tis of
fuch Weight with fome People, and our Author
himfelf has recourfe to it fo frequently, that it is
neceflary jult to touch on it.
The Propofition is this : Christ has no where
forbid us to baftiz^e our Children. Bat, firll, all that
will follow from thence, at bed:, is only, that it
is in it felf, fimply confider'd, lawful to fprinkle or
dip Children, when and how we pleafe: but ic
can in no wife be infer'd, that we ought to do fo-,
no nor that it is lawful to do it as a religious Ce-
remony, or a thing appointed by Christ: nor
will it at all follow, that this may be boldly fub-
ftituted in the place of what our Lord did or-
dain. C H R I s T has not indeed forbid us to bathe
our felves every Day, and therefore it is certainly
lawful to do it : but if we do it as a part of di-
vine Worfliip, and impofe it on others as fuch,
wc
240 ^fleElions on M^.WallV 'Ltt.6.
we become inexcufably guilty of Superltition, and
the worft kind of Tyranny.
Mr. Wall himfelf has noted out of Epi^ha-
nlus^ that 'tis one of Marcion% Errors, to teach,
that fach religious Purification by Baptifm may
lawfully be repeated. Many humane Inventions
may doubtlefs be very lawfully praftis'd as fuch,
becaufe they are not either diredly or indiredly
prohibited in Scripture \ but if they are impos'd
as divine Inftitutions, the Reafon ceafes, and they
are no longer lawful : for tho they may not be
particularly mention'd, yet Christ does ex»
prefly enough condemn 'em in that general Cen-
fure of the Scribes and Pharlfees^ for teaching as
DoBrines the Commandments of Men ^ And what-
ever may be rank'd under the Commandments of
Men^ and belong to that Denomination, cannot
plead the Scripture's Silence in their Favour, but
are here moil diredly and exprefly condemn'd.
So that tho we Ihou'd allow it lawful, merely
in compliance with the Cuftoms of a Country, to
fprinkle Children for their Health, fuppofe, or
on account of any other Civil Ceremony, becaufe
as fuch, 'tis no where forbidden *, I fee no Inconve-
nience in it. But then this Reafon will not hold
if they fliou'd urge it, as the Psedobaptifts do, as
an Ordinance of Chri s t *, for the Scripture is
not filent in this Cafe, but on the contrary, expli-
citly againft fuch Prefumptions, as afcribing Inven-
tions to the divine Will.
Tertidlian^ on another Occafion, well expofes
the Weaknefs of this way of arguing. Some in his
time pleaded for the lawfulnefsof wearing a Mi-
litary Crown, which the Romans gave their Soldiers
who had diftinguifh'd themfelves by fome extraor-
dinary Adion, and thought they might continue
to wear it after their Converlion to Chriftianity 9
and if any found fault, they prefently recurd to
our
LttSl Hifiory of Infantt^apti/m. 141
our Author's Subterfuge, that the . Scriptures no
where forbid 'cm to do fo. '[* Itfs an ci^fy matur^
lays TertulUanj \ to demand where it is written^ we
may not wear the. Crown f Bur then too^ where is it
written^ we may ? Far thofe who require their Adver-
farys to produce Scripture- Authority , conclude by it^
that their own Caufe jhoud he fupforted by the fame.
If 'tis lawful therefore to wear the Crown^ becaufe the
Serif tvre no where forbids it j it may with equal Force
he retorted^ that "'tis therefore net lawful^ hecaufe the
Scripture does no where command it. What then mufl
he done in this Cafe ? Mufi both he allow'' d^ hecaufe
neither is forbidden ? Or^ Advfi: both be rcjefted^ he-
caufe neither is commanded f You II fay^ perhaps^ what
is riot prohibited^ is therefore alloiQ^d : ■ No^ 'its for-
bidden by not bein£ exprcfly allowed.
, If TertuUians Reafoning here fhou'd not hold as
to things in their own nature indifferent *, he mufl:
however be blind' indeed, that does not fee how
itrongly it holds in all religious matters, which
it may be pretended we ought, or ought not to
do. In Ihort, all that can be made of their Ar-
'gument is, that as they have nothing for their
Prat^ice in the Scriptures, fo there is nothing a-
gainlt -it ! ■ As much as to fay, we ' have no
reafon to oppofe the Practice ^ and they have
no reafon to plead for it. But whether we have
f Lib: de Corona, cap. 2. p^i» loi. Et facile eft ft.Uim exi-
"gere, ubi fcriptum lie, ne coronemur ? At enim ubi fcrip-
tumeft, ut coronemur ? Expoftulantes enim Scriptuias Pa-
tFocinium in Parte diverfa, praejudicant fuae quoque I'arti
Scriptar* Patrocinium adeffe debere. Nam ii idcfo dicetur
coronari licere quia non prohibeatScriptura,«que retorque-
bitur, ideo coronari non licere, quia Scriptura non jubeat.
Quid faciet Difciplina ? Utrumque recipiet, quali neutrum
prohi'iitum tit ? An utrumque rejiciet, quali ncutrum pra:-
ceptum lit ? Sed quod non prohibetur, uitro permiffum clt.
Immo prohibetur quod non ultro eft perraiiTum.
ij, - realba
24 2. (^fleBions on Mr.WdXYs Let. 6.
reafoatooppore'em, :let,all Men judg ; if rhey
have no reafon to urge for their Praftice, their
Caufe is bad enough : for, as Mr. Lflr^- To me where
fays, He that heliev.es without havUg any reafon for
hdieving^ may he in love with his vwn Fancy s\ hut
neither jeeks Truth as he ovght^ nor fays the Obedience
due to his Maker. .
'Twou'd be thought ex-travagant in' any Man to
pretend, fijch a Clod in a certain Field is the felf-
fame Piece of Earth which about 6ooo Years ago
was Adamh Be dy, becaufe the Scripture does not
fay the contrary-. As wild as this appears to be,
'tis however as juft as the Paedobaptift's Flea, and
mult be allow 'd fo, for it's grounded on the fame
Reafon, vix.^ that the Scripture no where fays the
contrary. .' -^ ' r..
■ :■%, \ti the next place, you may pleafe to obferve,
that tho in fome Cafes the Scripture's Silence may
leave the thing indifferent, to the freedooi or
opinion of every. Man j. yet 'tis far frorn being fo
always. Things in their own nature indifferent,
may be left fo w^ell enough j but it is not an in-
different matter whether we obey God and
Christ or not, and perform divine Service
according to his Will and Appointment. And
therefore the Scripture's Silence cannot be pleaded
here with any reafon at all. They don't forbid
ijSjjnfo many Words exprefly, to give the Sacra-
mental Supper to a Turk \ but who will there-
fore infer, he may ? Why docs not our Au-
thor baptize Perfons after they are dead, to
wafh 'em from all Sins committed in their Life-
time, fince the Scripture does not exprefly forbid
him to baptize fuch ^ nor any where declare Per-
fons fo baptized (hall not be perfedly cleans'd and
forgiven ?
Again \ where does the Scripture tell us in
Term?, the Roman is not the only true Catholick
: . Church ?
Ltt.6. Hijiory of hfant-^aptifm. 24]
Church ? That Oral Tradition may not entirely
be depended.on ? That the Dodrine of Sacramen-
tal Jaftification is a mifchievous Error? as the
learned Biftiop of Salisbury nevcrthelefs juftly calls
it^ and argues, as 1 have hitherto done, in di-
red contradidion to our Author's way, That
"^ Slrjce this is no where mentioned in all the Urge DiJ^
courfes that are in the New Teftament concerning Juf-
t if cation^ we have juft reafon to reje5i it. Pilgri-
mages, and all kinds of Penance, &c. ftand upon
the fame bottom. But to give an Inftance fome-
thing nearer to the matter in hand ; we are
no where forbid to baptize our Cattle, Bells,
Tables, &c. but yet our Author, I hope, w^ou'd
never infer that they may^ much lefs that they ou^ht
to be baptizM ^ for to adrtiinifter the Sacraments
to vifibly unfit Subjefts, is no better than an im-
pious profanation of 'em.
Now from all this, inftead of a great deal more
which might eafily be added, it clearly appears,
if our Author argues well, and the Scrip-
ture's Silence be a fufficient reafon for a thing,
that he ought in Honour and Confcience to re-
Jbixa to Rome -^ XhdLVs the kaft he can do. Nay,
all the filly Trumpery of Rome^ the Antient as
well as the Modern, may be brought into play
again by this one fmgle Topick, which manifeftly
opens a Door to all the Inventions of every fan-
ciful Brain, which has but the Luck to hit on fuch
odd Notions as the Scriptures do not exprefly
contradid.
I fuppofe. Sir, you may have feen, when you
were at Padua^ the Sermon which good St. Anthony
is faid to have preach'd to a Congregation of
Fifties, in one of his flaming Fits of Devotion :
And fince the Scripture no where forbids to
' ' ■ ■' ..-,..-
* Expofit; Article 11. />, 125.
R 7. pre^ach
244 ^fleclions on Afr. WallV Let.6.
preach to Fiihes, to Trees, to wild Beafts, &c-
but commands to preach the Gofpel to every Crea-
ture^ which feems to have the like Colour with
that which the Psedobaptifts urge for their Tenet,
v;hy (hou'd we laugh at Si. Anthony'' % Zeal? For,
according to our Author's Rule, he was much in
the right, and our Author himfelf ought to follow
bis Example. •- '■ ^ *
1 intended to have' difmifs'd this matter in
fewer Words, but 'tis irtlenfibly grown under my
Pe^c However, of the two Extremes, I had ra-
ther allow my felf to be too long^ than too ohfcure*
I am, •
SIR,
'" Yours, &c.
Lett e k.
■ ■ I'' i
Let./. Hijlo^y of Infunt'-'Baptif?}!. 245
Letter VII.
That the Scripture does not leave Infant^Baftifm fo
undetermined as fome woi^A pretend^ • is largely
Jhawn from Matth. XXViii. 19. j4ll Laws fqually
oblige in all Particulars mention d in 'fw. This ap-
ply d to our prefent Difpute, The Cotpmiffion ns'
ccffarily obliges to teach all tt i/?tends fiiou^d he. bap-
tizjd. Therefore Infants cannot be included in that
Commijfion. The Commijfion alfo requires that all of
whom it fpeals flioud be firfi taught^ and afterwards
baptized. The ridiculous Ohjeciion of fuch as fay ^
Infants alfo are to be taught^ anfwerd. Some woud
evade the Force^ by confeffwg^ this CemmiJJlofj re^
Latts peculiarly to the Adult : which is directly
giving up the Argument* What the Padobaptifts
vrge from the Words All jSations, anfxverd^ ^Tis
mi faidaW of all Nations. Illuftrated by a parallel
Inftance from Matth. iii.«5, 6. Mr, Dorriiigton
cenfurd,, ^Tis prov^dj the Commijfion moji direElly
exchfdes Infants* What the Pdidobaftijls urge con-
cerning the Greek Word MoCr^Tdt'oztTfe, anfwerd*
Dr. iriammoild cenfurd for fo grofly contr.idicling
h'inUlf in this Poi.it, Men of the great c^ Learning
difown the Criticifm of the Padobaptijls* A Paffage
from the Bifhop of ^S2iXnv[i. Another from Dr.
Whitby. M::>/^^'tJV is conftantly tis^d to fig:nfy
nothing bfs than to teach, &c* The Senfe of the
Word proved from its Etymology. The Primitive^
and all its Deriv^itives^ include teaching, &c*
No room fvr an Antipni\^,liS, which is now ex"
ploded by the befl Grammarians. The Pretence from
■ the Termination^ that Words in ^VuJ are to^be inter -
■•;; ' R 3 vmed
1^6 ^flefliom on Mr.WzWs Let./.
preted by fum in Latin, is groundUfs. Plutarch
.-ufes the Word to fgrtify to teach Aft^ther I»flamif-
from St. Ignatius. Another from the fame. Another-
from the fame. One from St. Clemens Alexan-
drinus. OnefromSt.JnlVm Martyr, the Meaning
ofih TO ovo/L4.ct. Another Inftance /ri?w 5f. juilin.
The Word ^aA^iil^'e/v, even in ' its fufpos^d Neuter
Acceptation^ notwithfianding the contrary I'retences^
always includes teaching. Mat. xxvii. 57. conjt-
der d. Jnfiances wherein the Word ft^nifys to teach,
&"C. even when conflruthed with a Dative Cafe'j From
Plutarch ^ From Orjgen ^ From St. Ireneus, ex-
pounded bv aPaJfage (j/Socrates ^ and from Clemens
Alexandrinus. "The true Scnfe of the Word far-
ther illuftrated by fynonymous Words. Jnfiances of
•TT^/ol/^'O^^/r^w Plutarch \ From i^lian ^ From Pla-
to. Infiances of oiwiod^ from Pindar^ From Dio-
genes Laertius ^ From Plutarch. An Inftance of
^oc>c»(i), from Plutarch. A very remarkable In-
fiance of the Senfe of /^offM^'e/v, from Clemens
Alexanclrinus. Another from the fame. One
from Origen. Befides^ if what our Adverfarys ad-
vance were right^ it can be of no Advantage to 'fw,
hecaufe the Word in tht Commljfion is allowed to be
tranfitive. Difciplefijip necefarily includes Teach-
ing, ucL^ivod means to teach fuccefsfully , and
therefore is indeed confequentially to make Dif-
ciples.
I Hope, Sir, I may venture to fay, that what
was urg'd in my laft, amounts to little lefs
than a Demonftration, that 'tis the worft Lo-
gick in the World to argue, as the Paedobap-
tifts do, from the fuppos'd Silence of the Scrip-
tures *, which I have fliewn plainly enough is not
only no Argument for Infant- Baptifm, but on the
contrary, concludes as ftrongly againft it, as any
reafonable Man can defire an Argument ihou'd do.
And
Let./. Htftory of Infant-^aptifm. ' I47
And this is the firft: of thofe Conflderations,
which I pretend do utterly ruin our Author's De-
fign, even tho he fhou'd prove (as wc fhall here-
after fee he does not) that the Jews did ufe to bap-
tize their Profelytes together with their Children,
and that the ChrilHans foon after the Apoiloiick
Times did fo too^ for you will allow me, that
Arguments from .Scripture are of far more Force
than both thcfe. •
But in the next place, I add another Confiderati-
on, of much greater Weight (till, namely, that the
Scripture does not leave this matter fo undeter-
min'd as the P^edobaptills wou'd fain perfuade
themfelves, but that it diredly difallows of Infant
Baptifm, and admits of no other but that of A-
dult Peribns. I once intended to have made out
this, in an exad and particular Examination of
all thofe PafTages of Scripture which have or
might have been pleaded on either fide: but I
find I am like to be tedious enough without it \
and therefore I fhall think 'tis fufficient to do it
ixom Mat th. xxviii. 19. which is indeed the main
Ground and Foundation of the Ordinance, and
the fole Authority and Rule, even for the holy
Apoftles themfelves, in this matter. If I am
pretty large on this, you will excufe me, becaufe
it is inftead of all the reft.
To proceed then with plain and clear Evidence.
I defire you to confider, that if any Law or Com-
miffion, e^c. does enjoin, and particularly men-
tion two or more things to be done •, the faid
Law, &c, does equally oblige to the performance
of each of thofe things, and render one as necef-
fary and indifpenfablq^ as the other, unlefs there
be fomc particular Exception to the contrary.
Thus the Judges, for inftance, are empowered and
oblig'd to try and to give Judgment jn fuch and
fuch Caufes: If they only hear 'exn, they don't
R 4 dif-*
14^ ^fieWons m Mr.WxlYs Let./.
difchafge their Duty, but are equally obligM to
determine and giv^ Sentence according to Law.
For the Authority which obliges to one, is equal
in its Obligation with refped to the other.
This Notion was the Ground of that DiiTatif-
fav!\ion in the Time of K.Char. 1. concerning the Bu-
ll nefs o{ Rochet \ for all People thought thole Forces
had be^n fent to the AfTiftance of tlie Town, and
therefore that they were equally oblig'd, both to
go thither, and to afTift the befieg'd : But when the
matter unluckily mifcarry'd, they began to think
the Gdrnmanders ^were excus'd from aHifting the
diftrefs'd by contrary private lrillfu(^i6ns. And
what mightily; confirms this SuppoHtion is, that^
as Leti remarks^ "^ they mi^ht with very Uttle
D.inger have relieved the FlaCe-'^ and without
fuch inRra<rtions^ -tliey wou'd, as rhey were re-
quir'd, have ad:ed-' with nioire^ Vigour -and Pro-
dence/ • ■'"' -^--^ ' '> \ ^'-- ' '•'' '■ ■ ■'■
But, however the Truth be,'t^is ferves to 11-
Irdtrate my general Rule,* which' I fuppofe will
not be difputed : and then this particular Branch
-of it muft be alfo allow'd me, i/w^r that fince the
'Commifilon to baptize, mentions teaching as well
as baptizing, without making any diftiijdion, or
faying any thing of one, which is not faid of the
ether ^ therefore this GommiiTion does equally ob-
lige both to teach and to baptize. And upon
this Principle I will fhew you, that the Com-
milTion under Confideration cannot comprehend
Infants. '■ In order to which, I obferve, i. That
the Words do necefTarily oblige to teach all whom
they intend lliou'd be baptiz'd. And, 2. That
■ — ". — -■; - .!:"<>■? :...: - — ^ ■ — ' ^
"* 'Ceremoniali 'PtPttlW, lib. 5. ^ag^ 411. Che potevano
con |>oco Rifchio foccbrer la Piazza.
■'' ^■■'•^ " ' . this
Let.7. Hijlory of Infant^^aptlfm. 249
this teaching muft always as neceflarily precede
their being baptiz'd. Both which Articles do ve-
ry plainly exxlude intants, becaufe they are not ca-
pable of being taught at ail.
.1. As to the firft thing, that the Inftitution
does indifpenlibly enjoin, that all who are to be
baptiz'd, muft likewife be taught^ this is evi-
dent, if: you obftrve, that the Command, in
■ both Its parts, is equally and univerfally apply'd
no all thofe Subjeds which are mention'd therein,
-and are denoted by that comprehenfive Phrafe, all
'^Nations. For there is no manner of diftindtion or
•difference made between fome and others of this
Aggregate. This will more certainly appear, if
-we t«efolve the Proportion Logically. The only
■Sabjeas fpoken of, are a!i Nariws / The Things
^faidofthefeSubjeasare, thatthey muft be taught,
and that they muft be baptiz'd. Kow both thcfe
being faid of the fame Subjects, we may form the
Words into thefe two Proportions, for they arc
iVirtMally two, viz.. Teach all Natiom, and Baptlz^e
'iitt Nations, The Steps I take are eafy and fure,
according to the Method in ufe among Mathema-
ticians, than which nothing can be more plain and
Goriclufive;, and therefore'] may well enough call
it a Demonftration, that the very fame Perfons,
whoever they be, who are meant in the Commif-
jion by all Nations^ and commanded to be bap-
tiz'd, are ail equally commanded to be taught like-
wife. And fo far are the Words from intimating
any thing to the contrary, and from diftinguilhing
between fome who are to be taught, and others
who are not, that they are rather fo order'd, as to
render it fcarce poflible for any Man even but to
fnrmife, that thofe two words teach and bamz,e
do not both of 'em relate exadly to all the fame
Perfons, and to whatever is meant in the Com-
miffion by all Nations.
Let
250 <I{efleFlms on Mr. Wall V Let./.
Let u? take it for granted now, that thofe to
whom the CommiHion is given, are bound to teach
all Nations ^ as well as to baptize all Nations \ and
this will be the confequence of it, that Infants
cannot be included in this Commiflion. For, if
it requires the Subjefts fpoken of Iliou'd be taught
as well as baptiz'd, then they niuft be all capa-
ble of Teaching ^s well as of Baptifrp : for the
Scriptures, doubtlefs, are not fo unreafonable as
to command us to do that to any SubjedV, which
it is not capable of receiving. This wouM notcon-
iift with the higheft Juftice, and Goodnefs, and
Wifdom, with which we believe all our L orb's
liiftitutions are giv'n.
How then can the Pxdobaptifls perfuadc them-
felves, to fancy, contrary to the exprefs Words
of the Scripture, that fome only are to be taught,
whilft others may be as well baptiz'd without any
Inftrudion at all ?
They tell us, the Word here tranflated teach^
has another very different, and more proper Senfe j
but how weak this Pretence is, I fliall difcover
by and by. In the mean time, this Objedion
tacitly allows, that both Words do relate precife-
iy to the fame Subjeds ^ which is no lefs than
yielding up the Difpute : and I delire no greater
Advantage •, for I hope to prove in the Sequel,
beyond all Contradidion, that the Greek Word
does neceflarily and properly lignify to teach
or infiruci^ and never means to make Dlfci^
ples^ but in that manner. Til take it for granted
then here, and at prefent only reply againft
their teaching of fome, and not others, that
there is no ground for it in the Words, the
Inftit' tion being univerfal in both its parts,
teachifjg and ba^tiz,ing : and as there is no Excep-
tion n^r difl'erence of PerfoAS made, fo we mult
allow
Ler.7. Hlflory of hfant-^aptifm. 251
allow of none ^ fuch a Fancy being as flrongly
guarded againft as caa pofTibly be, by exprefling tbe
Subjects of Baptifm but once ^ to make it necelTary
that both the Words fhou'd relate only to the
fame Individuals exactly.
All this makes it plain, that Infants cannot be
comprehended, but are rather dellgnediy excluded:
for if Infants might be baptiz'd, then feme might
be baptiz'd, who neither do, nor are oblig'd to
believe in Christ, and whom we are not, nor
cannot be bound to perfuade and teach : which is
dire(ftly contrary to the exprefs Words of the In-
ftitution •, for that, as is above demonftrated,
commands to teach all whom it commands to hap^
tiz,e ', and therefore cither both are commanded
to be done to Infants, or neither. This fliort
Conclufion neceflarily arifes from the Commifllon,
that if it does not fpeak of and enjoin teachiiig
Infants, it does not enjoin baptizing 'em : for if
the Term all Nations comprehends Infants, then
they muft be taught too, which is abfurd ^ and if
it can't comprehend Infants, then they muft not
be baptiz'd : one of thefe things is unavoidable.
The Inference I draw is, that they are not to be
baptiz'd ^ becaufe 1 fuppofe no Man will imagine
the Scriptures require us to preach the Gofj-el to
Infants, unlefs he's arriv'd to the good Su^n-
thony\ exalted pitch of religious Frenzy, and can
think we (hou'd preach to Fifties, wild Beads,
Trees, &c*
2. But in the fecond place, I am to (hew, that
the Commifllon requires. All who are therein
commanded to be baptiz'd, ftiou'd be firfl: taught
and inftruded in the Principles of the Chriftian
Religion. If this can be made out, the Paedo-
baptifts are effedually cut oflT from all their Pre-*
fences and Evafions of any kindj for the.i un-
doubtedly,
2^1 <l^fleEiions on Mr. WallV Ler.7;
doubtediys not Infants, but the Adult only, are
to be baptiz'd.
I have often enough repeated it already, and
*tis fo plain that I think no body can deny it,
that what this CommilTion fays of any oi^e Perfon>
it fays equally of- all, becaufe it fpeaks only in ge-
neral, of all, without Difference or Exception.
From whence it follows, that the fame things; are
to be done to all, and that too in the fame Or-'
der. Since then it leaves no room in the Icaft. for
any Diftinctions, but fpeaks indifferently and uni-,
vtrfally of all ^ what it enjoins on one, it equally,
enjoins on all '^ and there remains only one of thefe
two Extremes to be chofen ^ either that teaching
n)uft always, or that it muil never precede Bap-
tifm. V .
The Paedobaptills are equally averfe from both
thefe : but they muft necedarily choofe one *, -and
either allow, that they ought always to teach Per-
fons before they baptize 'em \ or elfe, that they
may always,, in all Cafes, baptize before they teach
'em. I know, they had rather fay, that fome are
to be taught firft, and others are ta be baptiz^'d
fir ft". But that can't be admitted, becaufe the
Scripture allows no ground for any fuch Di-
ftindion, but fpeaks in the fame manner of all in
general : and if it makes it necelTary, that Teach-
ing or Baptifm ihou'd be hril: adminifter'd to
feme, it makes it as neceflary it IhouM be fo
to all. . .
Which then of the two remaining Extremes is
to be adher'd to, 'twill not be very difficult to
determine. Ko body dares fay, that none are to
be taught before they are baptiz'd : this wou'd
fl.ock every rational Enquirer, 'tis fo grofs and
palpable an Error, as might be (hewn from the
Mature of the Thing, and the Order obferv'd in
the CommifTion, &c. And Christ certainly in-
tended
Let.7- Hiftoiy ofhifcxnt-fyimifm. 25;
tended to be underftood, that his Miniflers fhou'd
teach the Jews and HeathcTJ^-, snd all Adult Perv-
fons, before they were baptiz'd •, which can only
be imply 'd in the Order of the Words, where
Teaching is firft mentioned. And accordingly,
St. Hierom^ as he is cited and tra.nilated by "lAxWall
himfelfy fays on thefe very Words, They fir fit each
ail the Nations \ then whcrJ they are taifght^ they hap^
tlz^e^mwlth Water : for it cannot he that the Body
pwud receive the Sacrari^ent of Baftifm^ ' unhfs the
Soul have before received th^ true- Faith. The fa trie
Senfeis put upon the GommilFiori by others of the
more antient Fathers^' as I Hva II have- occa fieri to
fliew hereafter. But pur Author adds, * St. Hie-
rom here commenting on the Commifjion given by our
Saviour to the JpoftUs^ of carrying the Gof^ei to
^the Nation} that rrfr^ Heathens, exptar'ns the Me-
thod they were to ^ufe^ Viz, Firfi to teach thofe Na-
tions the' Chrifti4n. Religion^ and- then baftiz^e Vw $
which all Ta^dobapfifls grant to be the jMethod that ought
jevertobemd. "'';.'
rneed not infift then any longer on this, our
"Antagonifts readily allowing, that at leaft the A--
-dult, add all fuch as are capable of being taught,
cannot be regularly baptiz'd without it. And
therefore too, in the Catechifm of the Church
of England^ we are told, that of Perfons to be
Laptiz'd are requirM, Repentance^ whereby they fir-
fake Sin ^ and Faith^ whereby they fiedfafily believe
the Promifes of Go D, &c. making thefe the ne-
cedary Conditions of regularly adminiltring Bap-
tifm ^ that is, as they mean, to the Adult.
We fee therefore, that the Psedobaptifts therti-
felvcs will not pretend they mult never teach any
before they baptize 'em ^ but on the contrary<>
make it neceflary, at leaft in fome Cafes, to teach
J. Part II. pag.4.
^'^■' ' firft:
45^4 (j^JieBions ojiMr.WAYs Lct.y^,
firft : But if it mnft be fo in fome Cafes, then, as
1 have before demoiKftrated, it muft be fo in all.
Having reduc'd the matter to this Dilemma,
and withal it being neceflarily and freely allow'd
mc, that the laft part cannot be true ^ it evident-
ly follows, that we are oblig'd to baptize only
fuch as have been firft taught, and do, according
to the Tenour of the Scriptures^ profefs a true
Faith and Repentance.
Tho the foregoing Reafoning is not long, it
may be ufeful perhaps to contradt it here, and give
the whole Force of it in a Ihorter Compafs, that
the Evidence and Certainty of its parts may be
more ealily difcern'd.
Either all muft be taught before Baptifm, or
iione, or fome only. But there's no ground to
fay fome only, becaufe the Commiflion makes no
Diftindion between what is to be done to fome,
and not to others. Neither can it be faid, that
none are to be taught firft, for this (huts out even
the Adult, which is againft the Opinion of Our An-
tagonifts. It can only remain then, as a neceflary
-Conclulion, that all in general are to be taught be-
fore they can be admitted to Baptifm. And,
by another Confequence as ftrong as the former.
Infants cannot be of that Number, and muft not
be baptiz'd before they arc taught.
To evade the Force of all this, it has been an-
fwer'd, and I muft needs fay ridiculoufly enough,
That Infants are to be taught likewife^ i/iz.- when
they come to Age, and are capable of it 5 fo that
tho the Commiflion does require all who. are bap-
tiz'd to be taught alfo, yet that does not exclude
Infants.
, But, in the firft place, I have juft now fliewn,
that all muft be taught before they can be regu-
larly baptiz'd.4 and this unavoidably excludes In-
fants.
f 2. Sup-
Let./. Hlflory of hifant'^a^tlfnu 255
2. Snppoling the CommifTion cou'd allow 'of
this Comment, then it may run thus : Go teach aU
Nations^ even Infants too when they are grown vp^ &c.
/. e. when they ceafe to be Infants. This Shift
can be of no Service to 'em : for if the Term aH
N^jions only means Adult Perfons, and Infants
when grown up, the Queftion will be at an end,
and we are agreed. ' 1 is a pretty odd Diftindion
indeed, but they fhall have it, if they pleafe, and
we'll allow, that Infants when they are grown
up (that is, to fpeak in our own way, and as we
think more properly, when they are come out of
that ignorant State, and are no longer Infants,
but Adult Perfons) may be baptiz'd. And if this
will reconcile us, let both Pattys, inftead of dif-
turbing each other, unite henceforward in a com-
mon Oppolition of thofe Enemys to the Sacra-
ments of our moil holy Religion, who dare wholly
cafhier and rejed the Ordinance.
Some again, with as little Judgment and Con-
iideration, endeavouring to avoid the Force of
what I fay, do in reality give me all I plead for.
They frankly confefs this CommifTion relates pe-
culiarly to the Adult ^ and therefore think it's
no wonder it is exprefs'd fo as to be applicable
to them only. This is infinuated more than once
'h^^Mv.Wall himfelf^ which I admire at. Did
not he fee 'tis all the Antipsedobaptifts defir'd ?
that inftead of invalidating what they urge, it was
granting 'em their Argument? For we prefently
return, that if this Commiflion relates to Adult
Perfons, as they confefs, then it authorizes to
baptize only fuch : From whence 'tis eafy and na-
tural to infer, that no other Baptifm is to be al-
low'd of. ^ If this Commiflion does not enjoin In-
fant-Baptifm, we challenge 'em to Ihew us any
■ — — i— — i— — — Pi— — ^— I— — 1
I Part XL pag. 37S, 379.
other
2 5 6 (IlefleBiom on Mr.W^lYs Let./.
other that does ; and 'tis with the higheft Reafoa
we afTert, there is no Commiffion or Authority
for it in Scripture.
-.But thefc are Trifles. A more material Objec-
tion is ftill behind^ namely. That the Term, in
the CommilTion being all Natiotjs^ Infants, as be-
ing a part of the ISlations, raufl equally be inclu-
ded with the reft ^ and are therefore to be ac-
counted as proper Subjeds of Baptifm, as Per-
fons of a more advanced Age. At ;firft fight t^i^
feems to carry fomething plaufible ii; it^ but 4
little Thought will prcfently difcover how fuper*
ficial it is. ..
For, in the largeft Extent of the Phrafe, . as
taken to li gnify every individual of each Spede3^
all Unbelievers, and profane Blafphemers, bpt^
among the Jews and Heathens^ are compreheiidtd
too : So likewife are all Atheifts, and the vilefj:
Debauchees: Add to thefe, allfuperftitious, ,'Q,b-
lliaate idolaters,^ together with, mere Jsatii^ls,
and raving Madmen, &c. for thefe are all Parts
of t\\^ Nations as truly as Infants. But none. of our
Adverfarys will fay, thefe might therefore all, or
any of 'em, be baptiz'd. , ; i ., - !;;^
Befides, you may take notice, :Sir^' that; Qjjjr
LORD does not fay the whole Nation,: or eve-
ry Perfon of every Niition, or allicf all.I^vation,^,
which woii'd have made the Cafe very differeiiC
from what it is; but only indeEnitely, all ISlla-
trons, Scarce a Youngfter, . who Iras begun his
Logick, but is acquainted with'-^the Diftindion
between genera fngvlorum^ and , /tr:gula g£?ierum[:
and there is vilibly a wide Difference between >?//
Nations^ as. the holy Penmat; cxpiqlles ^t, and .«//
cf. all Nations J as our Antagoaills ,wou\l fain ,un-
derftand it. And, in Ihort, the ; l^i;.i Meaning of
ifioi*. LO RD-^-caii-be-oiily tiuv-thai'as hcfare tixy
had preach'd only to the Jeivs^ now they fl"i..'a'd
':rU<: preach
Let.7. Hiflory of Infant- ^aptifnt. 1 5 7
preach the fame Gofpel to all other Nations,
and baptize 'em ^ that is, fuch of 'em as were
capable of Baptifm, and -wou'd receive it.
Thus, for Example, in a parallel Inllance of
the fame nature, f St.Job?i is faid to have baptiz'd
^// Judea, and all the Region round £ihout Joidan :
And yet we find in the toUowing Verfes, that he
rebuk'd the Pharifees and Sadduces^ and gave 'cmi
to know, that fuch as brought not forth Frv^ts
meet for Repentance^ cou'd not be admitted. Be-
fldes, (which reaches exadly the Cafe in hand) I
obferve, 'tis added, Ver. 6. that they confels'd
their Sins: which makes it plain, that Infants,
were not baptiz'd by him, for they cou'd make
no fuch ConfelTion j and yet of all he there
baptiz'd in general, 'tis faid, namely of Jerif
falem^ and all Judea, &c» that they were baptiz^^d
of him in Jordan, confejjing their Sins. Which by
the way is, I think, a pretty plain Demonftration,
that St. John, our L O R D's Forerunner, did noE
admit Infants to his Baptiun.
Now from all this it is evident, both that all
Judea, &:c. in this Place, and all Nations in the
Comniiffion, can only mean fuch as were capable
and willing to receive the Faith, and did refolve
to endeavour to walk worthy of the Fccatlon where"
with they were called. 'Tis wholly upon the Compre-
henfivenefs of this Phrafe that our Adverfarys
ground all their Hopes to find Infant-Baptifm in-
ftituted in this CommilTion. This our Author
confefTes, when he fays, that it ^ ajfords this Argu-
ment for Pdcdobaptifm ', Infants are part of the Nations^
and fo to be baptized by this Commijfion, But I have
utterly taken away this Pretence, and prov'd,
there is no real ground from the Commifllon to
think Infants ought to be baptiz'd. And the bell
t Mat. ill. $, 5. "^ Part II. pag. 578.
S Arsu-»
258 ^fieSlionsonMr.WsAYs Let.7.
Argument for it is fo very precarious, that I can't
but wonder at Mr. Dorrington^ prepofterous At-
tempt, to make ufe of this Text to prove from
it, that Infants as well as others ought to be bap-
tized.
But that Author afleds Wonders, and his whole
Book is one, in which he undertakes to prove
Infant-Baptifm from Scripture*, which is as
much as to fay, the Scripture pofitively aflerts
what it does not fpeak one Word of. Mr. Wall
has afted more modeftly, and very ingenuoully
owns, all that can be found in the Scriptures is too
obfcure to build upon, and fo wifely declines the
Combat w^ith that Weapon. And if the Redor
of Whrrefljam had better confider'd the matter,
^tis likely he wou'd have laid by his Defign, rather
than have expos'd himfelf fo much by the Publi-
cation of this Book.
What is faid above, concludes at leaft thus
much, that there is nothing in the CommifTion
which can be tolerably urg'd to prove, that In-
fants are included in it. But this is not all : 1
have likewife been arguing, that the Commiflion
neceiTarily and diredly excludes Infants ^ and this
I am chiefly concern'd here to make good. What
we urge to this purpofe, is principally from the
v<'oxd Teach: for as Mr. Wall propounds our Ar-
gument, 'f- Infants are fuch a part of the Nations as
are not capable of being taught^ and fo not to be hap^
tiz'd: becaufe the Commifiion does as much com-
mand to teach, as to baptize all Nations j and if
there be any difference, rather more ftrongly :
For 'tis to he noted, that the Subjed all Nations
is immediately join'd with teach ^ fo that there
cannot pojfibry be any Evafion. This muft needs
be a powerful Argument to all Men that duly con-
.* Part IL pag. 378.
fider
Let-7- Hiftory of Infayit^^ainijyn. 259
ilder it ^ and it highly concerns all P-^dobaptifls
to get clear of it as well as they can.
Bat the word Teach^ which makes the Difficulty,
after a great deal of hammering, they at leng^th
conclude, does not truly exprefs the Senfe of the
Original ^ and therefore they fall foul on theTran-
flation, and tell us, the true Senfe, in w^hich it
ought to be rendered, is, difclfle or frofelyte^ in-
Itead of teach all Nations. jN'ow, fay they, tho
Infants are not capable of being taught, yet they
may be profelyted. But I think this Criticifm has
nothing in it.
If, indeed, the Greeli Word does fignify barely
to difcifle^ by baptizing fuppofe, or any other,
way, without including to teach^ all our Argu-
ment from this Place unavoidably falls to the
Ground- And that it does fjgnify fo, is very fre-
quently aflerted by the Divines of the Church of
England ^ among the reil", by (| Dr. Hammond ^
from whom our Author takes it, as he has done
molt of his beft Thoughts. , ,
I name Dr. Hammond in particular, becaufe
there is fomething in his Condud upon this Point,
which deferves efpecial Notice : For tho he is cer-
tainly a confiderable iMan, yet his Opinion will
weigh but very little on one fide or the other ia
this Cafe, becaufe he grofly contradids himfelf,
and by turns equally countenances and rejeds both.
When he is bent lipon deftroying all that may be
thought to prejudice the Caufe of Infant-Baptifm,
then he fays, -j- the Word does not (ignify to teach^
but to receive into Difciplefhip, by Baptifm as
the Ceremony, without fuppofing any preceding
Inftruftion : And yet, notwithftanding he is fo
pofitive here, in his Paraphrafe and Annotation
be ftrenuoufly allerts the dired contrary, and thus
II Six ^erysy pag. 196. f lb.
S 2 para-
i6o (^(efleElions on Afr.Wall'^ Let.7.
paraphrafes the Woi'ds^ teach all Nations theChri"
filan DoBrine^ and ferfuade ^em to embrace it^ and
to live according to it. And in the Note, he has
more to the falne purpofe. In his Diflertations
on Epifcopacy, he runs the Words thus: ^ Call
to Difciplefhif^ or inftrttB all Nations in the Faith
and hifcipline^ certify all of the RefurreHion of
Christ^ and by preaching the Gofpel in all PartSy
gather Difciplesy and thofe you have fo gather'^d^ bap'
tiz,e and teach*
So plainly does this learned Man contradid
himfelf: upon which, this Remark is obvious,
That when the Doctor's Mind was not immedi-
ately under the Power of Prejudices, (which were
as firong in him fometimes as in other Men) and
when lie had no Intereft to ferve ^ he cou'd fee
aild acknowiedg the Truth, which the Dull his
Pfcjudices rais'd hinder'd him from feeing at o-
ther times.
- But farther, this Anfwer is utterly falfe ^ and
is accordingly difown'd by Men of the greateft
Learning •, as '\ Cameron^ |1 Grotius^ 'f-j- Rigaltius^
with others, whoni I fhall mention hereafter. Add
to thefe the Right Reverend and Learned Bilhop
of Sarum^ who in his judicious Expofition of the
Articles, fiys thus : U}] By the firfi Teaching or
making Difciples, that mtifi; go before Baptifm^ is to
he meant the convincing the Worid^ that j E s o s is
the Chris t, the true M e s s i a s, anointed of
God with Fulnefs of Grace^ and of the Spirit
* Viffert, 9. cap. 4. §. i. Ad Difo'ipulattim vacate, vel Difci-
plina ^ Fide imbuite Gentes omnes, RefurreO:ionem
CHRISTI omnibus teftatam facite, & Evangelio per omnes
oras enunciato, Difcipulos congregate, congreg^atos /Scfrli-,
t -Iti loc. li inloc. tt I^ Cyprian, Epift."54.
I':; F.lgC 500. ■ ■ . '
Without
Let./. Hljiory of Infant-^aptifm. 2 6 1
without Meafurc '-, and [em to* he the Saviour ^und
Redeemer of the World. And when any were
brought to acknowledg this^ then they were to haptiz,e
thern^ to initiate them to this Religion^ &:C. and then
they led ^em into the Water ; and with no other Gar*
ments^ but what might cover Nature^ they at firfi
laid them down in the Water -^ as a Man is laid in a
Crave *, and then they [aid thefe Words^ I baptize
or vvafh thee in the Kame of the Fath e r, Son,
and Holy Ghost: Then they raised them vp a^
gain^ and clean Garments were fut on them^ See. In
this Account of the Method the Apoftles acd firft
Chriftians purfa'd, his Lordfhip has given almoft
as exaft a Defcription of our Pradice to this day,
as if he had dellgn'd to exprefs it.
Dr. Whitby likewife, fomevvhat more largely,
with his ufual Modcfty and Candour, correds this
Miltake. ^ uoc^^iiv^ fays he, here is to preach
the Gofpel to all Nations, and to engage them to
believe it-y in order to theit Profejjlon of that Faith
by Baptifm. This he goes on to confirm, and then
adds, / defire any one to tell me^ how the Apoftles
coud^ /^aenT^'e/v, make Difciples of an Heathen,
or tinhelieving Jew, without being (JLOL^moX-, or
Teachers of them'j whether they were not fent to
preach to thofe that coud hear^ and to teach them to
whom they preacWd^ that Jesus was the Christ,
and only to baptize them when they did believe this ?
This is fo abfolutely necejfary^ in the Nature of the
Things till a Chriftian Church among the Heathers
or the Jews was founded^ and fo exprefy faid ly
f Jullin Martyr to have been the PraEHce of the fir ji-
* In loc.
t Apol. 2. p. 95. E. "Ocvit^V ^nSrum }yj7n^v6)(;jv jixn^
S3, Jg^s
l6z (^fleflions on Mr.Wair^ Let. 7 .
jiges of the Church -^ that to deny what is confirrnd by
fuch Evidence of Reafon and Church Hiflory, wou^d
be to prejudice a Caufe^ which in my poor Judgment -^
needs not this Interpretation of the Word ^jM^dliw i,
nor needs it he ajferted^ that Infants are made Dif-
ciples, any more than that they are made Believers hy
Baptifm^ &c.
I don't fee how it is pofTible to make any Re-
ply to this, aad therefore 1 might be excus'd from
adding any thing more *, but bccaufe the Strefs of
our Argument from the Comminioa lies chiefly in
this Word, and our Adverfarys generally make it
their main ReiTource, I will the more ftudioufly
proceed to (hew, beyond queftion, i. From the
Senfe of the Greek Word ^ 2. From the Autho-
rity of the feveral Verfions ; 3. From the Opi-
nions of the Fathers \ and laftly, From the Scrip-
tures themfclves, and the Pradice of the Apoflles ;
that /.-t^^T<iWTe does always, and particularly ia
the Place under confideration, fignify to teach or
infiruEl^ and to make Difciples only by fo doing.
I. I begin firft with Ihewing, that ijja^i\)it^
is conilantly us'd to Hgnify nothing lefs than to
teach and i?^ftryEh, This feems to me fo incon-
teltably evident on all accounts, that 1 am really
not a little amaz'd to find it contradided by Men
fo coniiderable for Learning and good Senfe.
If we do hut try all the Methods which are us'd
in- finding out the true Senfe of a Word, we can
never fail of perceiving how certainly this is the
Senfe of the Word before ns. And if any one
can make the Experiment, and after Examina-
^i?^. ^5jy it fignifys to teachy he may as well, if
he pleafes, open his Eyes, and turning to the Sun
when it Ihines out, deny there's any Sun.at all, or
affirm 'tis Midnight.
As
Let.7. Hiftory of Infant-<Bapttfm. 1 6 5
As to the Origination of the Word, if any
thing may be infer'd from thence \ (and furely it
mufl rather bear fome xAgreemcnt in Signification
with its Primitive, than contradid it j it having
always been thought one good way to know the
Senfe of a Word, to enquire into its Etymology)
Its Origination, I fay, leaves not the lead room
for our Antagonilts to furmize as they do, but
concludes againft 'em as ftrongly as any thing of
this nature can do, and makes it necefTary to un-
derlland it to fignify to teach^ infiruEl:^ or the
like.
No Man doubts but fLi^v^mv^ the Theme, flg-
nifys properly difcere^ docercy to learn^ to teach or
inftrvh ^ and it may be obferv'd, that all Words
deriv'd from it, do ever retain fome Marks of this
Signification : thus M(x6n(X<3^, a Document^ InftrvBi^
on^ or that which is taught or learn d : MaOvjTtV^
teachable^ or apt to learn : MaOnTiaCo, / defire to
learn. And fo in its Compounds, 'A/x^rS?^^, vn^
learrid '•, 'a^T7/.u3c0hs , one that lately began to learn ;
*Auto/x^6ms, one that learn d of himfelf^ without the
help of a Mafter : 'oX/yj/x^^^^MS, one that learn d hut
little: And 7n)Au/>uii6^)S, one that has learn"* d miich.
'Av«/^av8ocv6?, / learn again, KoToc/x^vOficV^, / learn
thorowlyj or exaBrly. 2:u/x/xav:^ctv£/v, to learn toge^
ther '-, from whence chj/x^ocOhths > a School- fellow^ or
Fellow-learner. And fo in like manner of all the
relt.
Since then the Primitive fignifys to learn, &c.
and all its Derivatives and Compounds re-
tain the like Senfe, why muft only /xo^OiiIms and
/xoi6nT^u6) be excepted ? And where's their Inge-
nuity, who fo irregularly, and contrary to the
Analogy of the Greek Tongue, arbitrarily pre-r
tend that thefe Words', have no relation t^
teaching, &c. only becaufe this Fancy ferves their
Purpofe fomething better? whereas an impart^
S ^ Judg
^ 2(^4 ^fleSiiojison Mr.W2i\Ys Let./.
Judg wou'd from this Obfcrvation alone, con-
clude /Ltci^\',Tiviiv mull: needs fignify to teach^ or to
be tau-rht^ or to caufe to he taught^ or fome fuch
thing, which fliou'd include teaching.
I fuppofe no body will any more recur to the
antiquated Invention which fome Grammarians
have long been proud of, I mean the Antifhrafis^
which is now exploded by the bell and moil lear-
ned Piiilologiils, as a mere Cover for the Igno-
rance of thofe who ufe it. I need not refer you
to the Spamfi Minerva *, for to be fure you remem-
ber well enough the i(5th Chapter of the 4th Book^
where San^lus folidly expofes the Miftake thofe
Grammarians committed, who when they knew
no better, imagin'd Words were fometimes us'd
ill a contrary Senfe to the Primitive from whence
they were deriv'd. Li^ctis in Latin is a common
Iiillance ia every body's mouth *, but the more ac-
curate and judicious now no longer fay 'tis deriv'd
a luccndo^ cjuia minimi liiceat ^ but rather, becaufe
of the great and almoft continual Illuminations
in the Groves, occafion'd by Sacrifices, &c. as
iay * ^^(^jf^'us^ and \ Perlz^onius^ to name no more.
And if this Jlnti^hrafu be, as Vojfius exprefTes it,
but a ilyr//y Whim of the Grammarians^ who are of-
tentimes none of the abled Criticks, then MaeMTTjs,
and.aaQnTeuv, as they are deriv'd from [xoiv^niv^
to learn^ d:c, muft likewife bear forne Congruity in
their Signification, and not be applicable to fuch
as are not capable of learning or being taught.
But fome argue from the Termination, and
pretend, that Verbs in iio^ are to be interpreted
by fum in Latin j and fo /X(x0hit)s iignifying a Dif-
* Par tit. Orator. ^ 339.
t In Saii£l. Minerva,/'. 951.
II Etymolog. ad vpceqi Lucus» Inane Grammaticorum
Commenrum/ ^a
ciple
Lec.7- Hifiory of Infant-^aptifm. 265
ciple only, /u^6>itiu6) might be reader'd fum Difcl^
fulns. It is eafy to fee how trifling this is ^ and
that were it true, it coii'd be of no ufe to our
Adverfarys*, for MaBwni; we alTert means fuch a
Difciple only as is taught •, and then /^ae^Ttueiv
will iignify, according to their own way, to be
fuch Difciples. Bat befides, the Criticifm is ut-
terly falfe, as might be made appear from in-
numerable Examples : thus >c^\eu6j lignifys ju»
heo^ to command^ as well as yjtKc^^ from whence
it is form'd ^ and fo jl^Aeu'^ to counfd^ &c.
from /ib'Aa). The like may be obferv'd of ^'eiici),
from whence fccj forms fome of its Tenfes, fo
perfedly fynonymous aie the two Words ^ as
are alfo ^, gq^ and (tivgh ^ x(co and x^^'^ 0
zj-Aeo), '^?\9.\ic^ '^ 7s\i<^^ •Di'tbV^ : and this may be
feen too in ^oLmK^hdy dyo^<i\}0)^ v)ye//toveu6), cpoveuco,
d^^y.-TTchO?^ 0C\M9£t'63, f(;9^TfUu>j XOqZVG)^ ^f:V.(Tiil\iOiy
fc7ro7rTtu6L^, zTf6(pv]\i\)0)^ /^.ocvTtuu), and vrui^m an In-
ftance in the very Cafe, befide Multitudes which
I pafs by, none of which can admit of the Senfe
pretended.
Upon all this, I think I may fafely conclude,
according to the Analogy of Derivations in the
6'y^f/^Tongue,as well as in all other Languages,that
as Difciple in EngHjli is made of the Latin Difcifn-
lus^ which comes from difcere 10 learn \ and as cAi-
^6i(j-A.oih@^ a Tutor ^ Teacher^ Mafter^ from t/^l/'Dctr-
K£/v to teach^ becaufe fuch a Mafter J^iS^dGMii docs
teach '^ but Ki)^[fQ^ a Mafier or Governor, from
Ku^©-', full Power and Authority^ becaufe Mailers
and Governors are fuppos'd, h,u^©^ ty^iv^ to have
fuch Power : fo mocGhtw; cctto tS £/^<x6ov comes from
/xav^^cveiv to learn or teach^ becaufe fxoL^TaA^ or
Difciples learn or are taught : and hence ^uotr^n-
Tcu6) is the proper Word to fignify the Adion of
Teaching, whereby Perfons are to be ipade fuch
' Pifcipics-^
r66 ^fleBions onMrW:i\ys Let.7.
Difciples, or if you plea fe of difcifllng or making
Dlfcifles by teaching. But let this fuffice con-
cerning the Origination of the Word, and the
yMTiftance it yields to find out the true Senfe
of it.
What I am going to add in the next place, will
perhaps be thought lefs liable to Exception, than
arguing upon Etymologys, which with fome Men
is but trifling: 1 will therefore prove what I have
affirm'd, by the Ufe of the Word in Greek Au-
thors, which muft be allow'd to carry Weight
in it.
Of all the PafHiges wherein I have obferv'd it
to occur, I don't know, nor believe there is one,
but does neceiTirily include and lignify teaching,
or at leaft may admit it : and nothing any where
gives reafonable ground fo much as to furmize the
contrary \ fo far is it from being as our Adver-
farys pretend : and if they fhou'd be able to pro-
duce one Inftance v/here, by fonie Itrange Chance,
or a violent Catachrefis^ it does fignify to dlfcipUy
and exclude teaching, which 1 am perfuaded they
will never be able to do, that will be far (hort
of a fufficient Reafon to fay the Word flgni-
fys fo elfewhere ^ much lefs that 'tis the proper
Signification in which it is always or commonly
us'd: and yet our Adverfarys, fome of 'em at
leaft, are very fond of the Thought, and wou'd
fain perfuade tts to believe it too.
But the Evidence on our fide, that the Greek
Word includes teaching, &c. is plain from thefe
folic wing Inftances.
Tlvtarch in the Account he gives of the Life of
Ifocr^.tes^ fays, that when he taught Rhetovick at
jithens^ Hyferides^ Ifeus^ and Demofihenes came to
him, and made him this Offer, That fmce they
couM not give him a thoufand Drachms^ his ufuai
Fee,
Ler.7. Hiflory of Infcmt''Bd[Htfm. 267
Fee, they wou'd not expedl to be taught the whole
Art, but wou'd pay iiim two hundred Drachms
for a fifth part of it only. By..the way obferve,
their fole Aim was to learn or be taught. To
their Propofal Ifocrat es rQturns this Anfwer : \\lVc
don't vfe^ Demofthenes, to divide our Art \ hut as
good Fijij are fold cntirey fo if you have a mind to
le.irn^ or to be taught (/xccP«^euc/v) I will i?jftru^ you
in the whole Art, This Inftance can need no im-
provement : for you have nothing to do but to
read the PalTage, in order to fee that all they ap-
ply to Ifocratcs for, was his Inftruction ^ and that
therefore in his Anfwer he fpeaks of nothing
elfe.
And that this is the Senfe of the Word in the
Language of the primitive Church, methinks
Ihou'd be exceeding plain to all who are not utter
Strangers to thofe ufeful Pieces of Antiquity
which ftill remain ^ for they furnifh us with In-
flances in abundance, and very clear to the pur-
pofe. 1 hus the holy Martyr St. Ignatius^ giving
fome Inftrudions to the Ephefians^ with his ufual
profound Humility aiad Meeknefs, adds, -f^ Not
that I take 7^pon me to direth you^ as if I were any
body : For tho I am bound for His Nstrne^ I am not
yet j)erfe&- in Christ J e s a s ^ riay^ I am as it
were but now beginning (jaaGiiftu'ifSai) r^ learn^ or to
he infirucled'j and Jfpeak to you as Fellow- Difcif.es
withmej &c. If there cou'd have been otherwife
- II Vit. decern Rhetor, p. 1559. To:' Ji A-mvAvcttrti k^ s
t Epift. ad Ephef. cap. 5. *Ov thcf-Uc^iiAiv^Vt ai a>vTi<;'^
any
2(58 ^flcHioyis on Mr. Wall V Ler,7.
any doubt what the Word might fignify here,
m\'hStt(siLocKl^T^i% immediately following in the
laft Sentence, wou'd have made it certain *, for
to fay he fpeaks to them as Fellow-learners, be-
catife he did but then begin /^aOnTturc&ocf, mud
render it yet more neceflary to iindeiliand the
Word thei e, to mean to leam^ or he t.wght or in-
Befides, he ufes the fame Word again exactly
thus 3 little after, where he direds the J-fhcfian
Chrillians how to behave themfelves even towards
Unbelievers and Strangers to the Faith •, and ad-
vifes 'em to pray for all Men : ^ For^ fays he,
there is feme hope they may repent^ and obt.un the
Mercy of God : let ^ em he inftrvUed (^laQsiTiCBvivai)
by your good Worh. When they are angry^ be you
h'rjd and forgiving^ &c. And again, in that admi-
rable Epiftie to the Romans^ fo worthy of a Chri-
ilian Bifhop, wherein he exprefTes an ardent and
impatient Defire to fufFer Martyrdom for Christ*,
among other things, he moft earneflly entreats
'em not to deprive him, thro their m.iftim'd Kind-
nelles, of that glorious Crown, by ufing their In-
tereft to prevent the Death he was then going to
fuffer by wild Beads in the Amphitheatre at Rome,
More, fays the illuftrious Saint, you cannot do for
me, than to fuffer me to be facrific'd to God.
And a little after: -{" Te have never emfd me in
any thing ^ ye have taught others ^ / woud therefore
that thoje things alfo Jhoud be confir7J2d by your Prac-
* tpift. ad Ephef. cap. lo. Y^cti \.^ip ^/ AhXuv J'i aVdfftJ-
Td/^VCtr '<r^p\ TTt? O^yCL^ (AV'^ VIJLH^ '73-^a.H?^ &c.
^^ t Epili c,d Romahos, cap. 3. OvJ^thPh iCacry^vctjc Iv iJ^cf^i*
L'€t7. Hijlory of Infdnt'^aptifvu . 269
tice^ which you have yrcfcrib^d in teaching (fAOi^v!!^
ov^a;) only fray for me that I may be fo flrengthend
within and vrithovt^ as not only to be ca/fd a Chnfiian^
but alfo to be found one.
Thefe Inftances,without adding any more,migbt
very well fuffice to (hew that /^aBi^Teveiv iignifys to
teach^ &c. But to convince you that this is not
only a cafual, but the conirant Senfe of the Word,
I mult take the liberty to add feveral Inftances
more.
Clemens Alexandrinm difcourfing of the Ufe of
Philofophy in Theological Studys, againft fuch
as wou'd have the Greek Learning altogether ufe-
kfs; after he has faid a great deal to that pur-
pofe, he obferves that even the Philofophy, thej
were fuch Enemys, to borrowM many things from
the Scriptures ^ and adds, that -^ the things fo bor-
rowed in fart are true\ and are grounded fometim£<
tifon hare ConjeUvres.^ and fometimes en ncccjfayy
Reafons, If they do learn (iAOi^v^i\j^iv[^.^^ that is,
borrow fomething from the Hebrew Philofophy^ let
them acknowledg it.
Again, (hewing how Philofophy tends to bring
Men to the Knowledg of the true Religion, bv
engaging all impartial Enquirers f to co-aver ft
not only with the Greeks, but with the Barbarians
too (as the "jews and Chriftians w^ere then call'd )
Stromat.^ Lib. i. pag. 520. Tpt ^l^^v^ tcW a vmM'
^ t Stromat. Lib. d» pag. 691. "ET«'^a i^ "£^^»i^ 'tw'''"'^
27 o <^fle&ions on Mr. Wall's Let.7.'
a?7d by thefe commo-a ways of improving their Know^
ledg they are brought to the Faith ^ and then having
laid the Foundation of the Truths they arc better en-
abled to go on in the Search after it. And hence it
16 that being taught (ix(xhvi{z\)CiTLf£^joi) or infiruSled
in the Faith^ they approve of it ^ and by purfuing after
Knowledge they vigorovfly purfue Salvation. 'Tis
plainly impolTible in thefe Inftances to put any
other fenfe on the Word in difpatc than what
I contend for.
Another PafTage of this Author I can't omit, it
being if pofTible more plain and cogent than the
former ^ * Thofe Men^ fays he, that are transforn^d
into Angels^ arefirfi inftruB:ed (lAOc^vil imx^. oi\ ) by "^em
a thoufand Tears^ and fo raised to Perfection : and
then the Teachers were tranfated to Arch- Angels \
and the Learners in their fiead inftruBed (uc<.b]^\i\}ts(n)})
or taught thofe who were to be changed from Men
to Angels, Here ^coiOnlfue<v is molt apparently
interpreted by St. Clement himfelf to mean J\/(iW-
Ketv as it relates to thre Angels, and /uavQocvetv as it
relates to the Perfons that were taught ^ which
renders the Inftance perfedly unexceptionable.
To the fame Effed JujHn Martyr too uies this
word in his Apology to the Roman Senate :
'f' // we were to kill one another^ we jhou^d be the
Cavfes as far as in tis lay^ that no more Terfons
fhoud be brought into the Worlds and taught (/uaOn-
Tixj^vwcci) or inftruBed in the Chrifiian Religion^ and
* Clem. Alexandr. Ecdog. p3g.8o9. a. 0/ y6 cf etvB^cS-
t Apolog. I. aut melius 2. pag. 43. 'E/ Zv -mtvlii eavj^f
(t^oviJ(7VfjS^^ i? )Cf (lege ach) ^f)^Uueu 77m\ ^ fiothliv^twcLi
e> Ttt ^Hct J)J^T^fltTtf , « )Cctt (AVi Went TO CLV^^fhilOY 'ff^^y
of
Let.7- Hijlory of Infant-^ aptifm. 27 1
of fiittin^q; an end to Human Kind. And again^ ia
his Dialogue with Tryfho the Jew^ he tells him,
that as GOD, for the lake of thofe Seventy Thou-
fand n'ho had not bow'd the Knee to Bad^ for-
bore to pour out his Anger upon the whole Body ^
"^^ So now in like mannery fays St. Jnftln^ GOD has
»oty or does not four down his Judgments^ as knowing
that fome everyday are taught to believe (/^aSMTtuo-
fjh^s) in the Name of his., Christ, and do firfake
their erroneous Ways.
Tis a Difficulty to tranOate the Word here by
anyone in EngUjhj which will fufficiently exprefs
the Senfe of the Original. This Paflage may be
thought therefore to make rather againll me than
for me, efpecially if it fliou'd beaflerted, that the
Phrafe MatiMTeueti' el^ to cvoiacc tS xprxTOY here, is
the fame in Senfe with (ha.iz'Jl^&v eis to ovo^octS xpi'-
2:Tor. For to this purpofe our Antagonifts talk,
when they pretend ixcc^^iveiv in the Commiffion is
explaiu'dby the following Words, and means, by
baptiz,ing them, &c. But I know. Sir, you are not
liable to be impos'd on by fuch Fancys : for to
profelyte toCnRi st, ortodifciple to Chri st,
tho it be not the Meaning of the Word, may
indeed be good Senfe enough ^ but to profelyte
into the Name of C h r i s t, is a Phrafe 1 believe
never us'd : Befides, no Man will ever be able to
find an Inftance, where ^aeMTBiW is put for, and
jfignifys jiaTrTl^Gii'.
But if the Word be here us'd in the Senfe our
Antagonifts ailert, it fhou'd be render'd difcipled
in the Name of G h R i s T : and this, tho a'
very odd obfcure fort of rhrafe, may be admit-
^ Pag. 258. Toj/ ivTov TpoToi'j xet/ vvv IHina rtiv K^mv
^7l ^fleclms onVfr.'^AXs Let.7.
ted, if it be underftood to include teaching, and
means to difciple only by that *, which will not be
allow'd : and yet to difciple in the Name of
Christ, without teaching, is Nonfenfe, and
can have no Meaning at all ; fcr a^ to ovo/xoc, in
the Name^ intends into the Beliefs as Dr. Whifhy
paraphrases Matth. yixv'm, 19. and the moft lear-
ned Interpreters generally agree. And to be bap-
tiz'd in the ISlame of C h r i s t, is explain'd Rom.
vi. 3. by being baptiz.'^d into Christ, and i?7to his
Death *, and Gal. iii. 27. by putting on Christ:
all which rauft needs imply a Profeflion of Faith
in Christ, and his Death, into which they
were baptiz'd, as all the Antients underftood it.
Upon which account, Baptifm was call'd in the
Greek Church ^(p^ryis ths niVto:^ \ and in the La-
tin Church, Sigillum Fidei^ the Seal of Faith.
The Subftance of all this Mr. Wall himfelf like-
wife allows, when he infinuates, that fome among
us who baptize only in the Name of the Lord
j E s u s, are probably Soclnians ^ and -j' it is not for
the ufe of tbofe^ fays he, that have a mind to oblite-
rate the Faith of the T R I N i t y, to haptiz.e their
Profelytes into the Faith and Name of it. From
which Words it feems plain enough, that Mr. Wall
by 8s TO ovof(a underftands into the Faith : Now,
to initiate or difciple into, or to the Faith of
Christ, fuch as at the fame time either don't
or can't know any thing of C h r i s t, is an Ab-
furdity of the firft Rank.
It follows then, that the true Senfe of the Word
is no other than what I have given it : and if you
will ftill have it render'd difcipled to the Name
of Christ, that can however only mean in
better Bnghfh^ inftruded in, and brought over to
t Part II. I. 222.
the
Let.7- Htftory of Infant'^aptifml 27 3
the Faith of Christ, which is the Senfe I con-
tend for. Beiides, it may be farther obrerv'd,
that St. Jvftin is here fpeaking particularly of A-
dult Perfons, who of Jews became Chriftims j
which mull be by believing in Christ, and
forfaking their Errors^ as he exprefles it. And of
the fame Perfons again, a little after, he fays ^
They received the Gifts of the Spirit as every
one was worthy^ being enlightned by the Name of
Christ,
If cpGmlofA^©'' is here pretended to mean bap-
tiz'd, as Mr. Wall fays it fometimes fignify'd in
the more diftant Centurys of the Church, but I
think not fo early as St.Jvfiins time^ it will
be thereby yet plainer, that |ua9nTeuB>^ a little be-
fore cou'd not intend the fame, but fomething
dfe, viz. to inftrud, upon which this Baptifm
follow'd 5 the Paifage wou'd otherwife be a grofs
Tautology.
But if that Word only denotes the enlightning
of the Mind, which feems moft likely, it will
ftill argue, that ixMiveiv which precedes it, mult
fignify to inftrud, becaufe the Mind cannot be en-
lightned but by Inftrudion. And if we only ob-
ferve, that the Perfons fpoken of are, as I faid.
Adult, fuch as, 'tis granted on all hands, cannot
become Chriftians without Faith in Christ,
which muft come by Hearing ^ this Conlideration
alone is enough to determine, that the Senfe of the
Word in this place is as I have render'd it, be-
caufe 'tis apply'd to fuch as undoubtedly were
adually inftrufted, and prevail'd on to believe,
and ' cou'd not be initiated, difcipled, or what
you'll pleafe to call it, without fuch Inftrudion.
This I fuppofe is now fufEciently plain, and there-
fore I proceed to another Inftance from the fame
Fatherc
T A
%7A ^ficSiionsonMr.W2L\Ys Let.7.
A few Lines after, he tells bis Antagonift, that
the Jews honour God and his Christ with
their Lips only , "^ hut we^ fays he, having been in-
firucied (^£/ACi9nTeu^if'vo() or ta2^ght in allTruth^ ho-
nour ''em in our ABions^ and Knowledge and in our
•whole Mindsy even vnto Deaths Me/xaOwTeu/^ievoi is
fo ftriftly conneaed to'A^v15£|■c^ in this Paflage,
that trandate it into Engllfl} by what Word you
pleafe, it muft of necefTity imply learnings teach-
ings or the like *, for no one can be difcipied, &c>
to or by the Truth any other way.
But 4 need not repeat Inftances of this kind j
for the more learned and judicious will allow,
that when the Word is usM tranfnively^ as the
Grammarians fpeak, it does^ always fignify as I
contend : but when 'tis usM in a neuter or intran-
fitive Senfe, as 'tis often believ'd to be, they
think it does not lignify to teach^ &c. I don't
indeed remember that Mr. Wall any where makes
this Diftindion '^ tho I know fome of the Psedo-
biptifus do: but he chufes to aflert, with a dog-
matical Air, as if it was one of the plJinelt
things in the World, that the Word f Pgnifys
ynvch like vohat we fay in Englifn to enter any
one's\Name, as a Scholar^ Bifcifle^ or Profelyte^&iC*
and this he never goes about to prove, or give
the leaft Reafon for, but only Ihews how that
Inte*^pretation of the Word makes for his pur-
pofe^'asif that was Pveafon enough, and all iMen
wereoblig'd to fubmit to his Determination.
^But it will appear that he is altogether mif-
takeii in this Criticifm, by (hewing, that even
i:M§' artful Diftindion of fome Men which was
'ii i
• '.t^iJPtialog. cum Tryphon. pag. 258. 'U^.i1<; M^ xal h ^'i?-
t Part XI. pag. $78.
jult
Let./. Htftory of Infant-(Baptifm. 27 j
juft now mention'd, can be of no ufe, becaufe the
Word even in this Neuter Sigaihcation, does
always mean and include teaching.
At prefent, 1 remember but one PalTage which
is cited on this occafion, by thofe of the contrary
Opinion, and that is Matth, xxvii. 57. where 'tis
faid of Jofeph of Arimmthea^ i^^jA^cri^ or as
BeTLas Copy at Cambridge reads it, £/.ux3HT4l'9jf tsT
'IH20y", which our Tranflation renders, was Jesus
Difclple. This is fuppos'd to be a plain Inftance
that the Word fignifys limply to he a Difcifle\
and therefore jj Confi amine cites only this place,
to confirm the Neuter Signification he puts upon
the Word, in oppofition to teach '^ the tranfitive
Senfe he had before mentioned.
To this I anfwer: 'Tis plainly a Miftake to
fuppofe the Word is ever us'd as a Nevter^ or
Intranptively^ Its being frequently conltru'd with
a Dative Cafe, perhaps might occafion the
Miftake j for I obferve Stephens "^, Bushy -y^ Sec.
note, that when it's join'd with a Dative, it fig-
nifys to be a Difciple : but of all the Inftances
of this Conftrudion I don't know one which
will fufficiently confirm this Suppofition.
As for that produc'd by Conftantine^ from Matt,
xxvii. 57, 'tis very ihort of the Pointy for why
may not it as well be render'd, had been infiruEled^
taughty &c. by Christ? or, was brought over
to Jesus, as well as, was Jesus Difciple f For
this will exprefs the Senfe of the Place, as well
at leaft as the vulgar Tranflation *, and with this
Advantage too, that the Words I ufe are much
more agreeable to the Origination and Primary
Senfe of the Creel Word, which ought to be con-
fider'd. Befides, 'tis plain, th^t Jofeph^ who was
II In Lexic. ad Voc.
> Thefaur. Gicec. ad Voc. f Gram. Grxc. p, 162.
T 2 a J(tp;
27^ ^fleSlions on Mr.WAYs Ltt.7]
a Jew^ couM uot become a Difciple of Christ,
but by being taught, and convinc'd that he was
the true Messiah who was to come: and
the very Import and Defign of the Words is ma-
nifeftly to fignify, that Jofefh did believe in Jesus '■,
and therefore i can't fee any reafon to fuppofe
the Word has a new Senle here, when that which
'tis fo generally us'd in, is fo proper.
To make it yet clearer what the Word means
in this Conftrudion, I will prefent you with feve-
ral other Inftances, which I believe will oblige
you to underiland it in my Senfe.
Plutarch^ in the Life of Antl^hon the Orator,
fays, "^ he was taught (/xa9MT<^Ws) hy his Father^
who profefs^d Ordtor)^ 6cc. 'Tis obfervable, that
Tlutarch has himfelf explain'd the force of the
Word here, by thefe Words which immediately
follow : and havi?7g learn d the Art of Pleading^ he
gave himfelf to the Tuhlich And in the Life of
Ifocrates^ he tells us, '\ Theofompus of Scio, Epho-
rus of Cuma, Afclcpiades the Writer of Tragedy s^
and Theodedes of Phafelis, were all educated (e^-
6;iTeu(r?) or taught^ or infirucJed hy^ or brought vp nn*
der. him.
Again, he fays of z/£fchin€s^ that || according to
fome^ he had never been taught (^iiocbwTl\j(T»,i) by any
Mafher^ but by Writing in the Courts^ became acquaint
ted with the Forms and' Aianner of Vroceeding.
^ * Vit. decern Rhetor. 7/:^, 1530. MctS^fl^ji/W cTfeTw TlAreji
f Ibid. pag._ 1^39* 'Eua^y)T<djcn cO' ccvTrA ty SioTroyivr^ 0
11 lb. fag, 1545- 'OiM iiTTov lJ.i}dS p.ct9»7^uaa/ t/ct ^*Ai'^vhjj,
r'^ . - In
Let.7. Hijlory of Infant-^aptif??t. lyy
In thefe and all other fuch-like PafTages, the
Word is manifeftly usM to fignify to be educated
or infirucied by fuch and fuch Mafters : or as Plu-
tarch exprefTes the fame thing in another place,
fpeaking of ^ t/£fchirjes^ he learned to read of his
Father* So that if dv is omitted in the other
places, by an EUipfis (as 'tis very ufual) the full
Conftrudlion will be juft the fame with this. Or if
this Prepofition fhou'd not be inferted, Origeny
who was not only a great Pfcilofopher and Di-
vine, but a great Malter of Language too, plainly
ihews us, that thefe Forms are certainly Ellipti-
cal, and that the Dative Cafe is not governed by
the Verb but a Prepofition, fometimes exprefs'd,
but commonly indeed to be underftood.
The Paifage from whence I gather this, is a
good Inftance againft Stephens^ Conjtantine^ hiC.
that the G'r^^^ Word in diipute, even in this Con-
ftrudion, has no other S^Vi'i^ than that which I
give it. Origenh W^ords are thefe, in anfwer to
a Qucftion put by himfelf, namely, v;hen the
Jews^ who believ'd in Christ, learn'd of the
Father? becaufe the Lord had faid, John
vi. 45. Every Man therefore that hath heard^ and
hath learn d of the Father, cometh unto me:
Origen anfwers as a third Perfon, but yet agreea-
bly enough to what was known to be his own
Opinion, f 77?^ Words mufb not he vnderftood as tho
any one had feen f fo^ F a t H e r, for only He who is
with the Father has feen Him ', hut to import^ that
the Souls of fome^ before they came into the Body and
were born into the World \^fjJziJMvm\}ix'i\(U -TtDi^ -m
n«Tp]) were taught by the F A T H E R, and heard
Him^ 6cc. in that State of their Pre-exiftence.
'', ^''^; "^^f^"^ Rhetor. ^ 1 544. K^/ 'I77 Ucui uv 'i<riJk^Ki
t Comment, in Johan. p. 20;.
T 3 Here
2;^ 8 (^fleHions on Mr.WsXYs Let. /I
Here Origen ufes '^^^nxietv for the fame thing
which in the Text is exprefs'd by /xavB^'veiv 9
which puts it out of all doubt, that the Senfe is
as I have tranflated it : and it can't be obfcure,
becaufe he is fpeaking of fuch as were prepar'd
before their Birth, by hearing the Father.
Ferrarius therefore, without any Difficulty, renders
it edoch^e, a^ud P A T R e M, exadly ill the Senfe I
maintain.
Therefore hy Origerih fupplying the Conftruc-
tion by ynt^j it appears that the Phrafe wou'd
have been defective without it, and that it muft
have been underftood 9 or elfe -v^aro, which Jra-
neus has us'd to exprefs the fame Senfe. For Ex-
ample, fpeaking of St. Poly car p^ he fays, -{- he was
not only inftruBed (^ ixaSn^nvdCig v^3o 'AttocoXcov )
by the j^foftles^ and acquainted with many of thofe
who had feen the Lord;, hut was alfo conjiituted by
the Apoftlcs Bljhop of the Church of Smyrna in Afia.
Tho x;csb be here join'd with a Genitive, it does
not alter the Phrafe j for 'tis us'd promifcuoufly
with a Genitive or Dative, without any diffe-
rence in the Senfe ; ialt as Origen in the place
above cited, and in the following Words, Ihews us
nm.^ is likewife. Thus Socrates SchoUftitus^ fpeak-
ing of Eunomlus the Heretick, has this remarkable
Pallage 9 || that being ^tius'^ Secretary^ he was
taught or led by him into ( \%ij' d\)Tdo irdciS^vdih )
the Herefy which he afterwards gave Name to.
This Pailage is the more obfervable, becaufe it
ferveb to fhew how /L^oCr^Tgu^'rls is to be under-
t Apud EuR^b. lib. 4, cap. 14. YloKv ^^^'ttQ- H « (xovov
II Hift-^Ecclcrf. lib. 2. cap. 35. fin. 'Evyo^i©- Tct^-
ftood
Let./. Hiflory of Infant- 'Baptifm. 279
ftood ill St. Ircmus: for it's plain, the Senfe in
both places is the fame ^ and therefore vrzfMhvd^h,^
.which every body knows fignifys inflrucled^ taught^
or the like, flrongly confirms my Interpretation
of /xoCr^^^Tju^is in the other place. And befideS;,
'tis there capable of no other Senfe \ and the Glof-
farium Latino-Gracum annex'd to Dr. Grahe\ Edi-
tion of St. lren<zus^ renders the Word by edoclm^
taught^ inftruthed^ &:c. C JSTepos expreUes this Senfe
by eruditusj when fpeaking of Alcihiades^y he fays,
■^ he , was taught by Socrates : and fo in other
places.
We have another Inftance much of the fame
nature with that of Socrates^ in Clemens Alexan-
drimtsj which is parallel to what was cited from
Origerr^ and may therefore ferve to expound it,
-f" For we are taught of Go d^ who are taught of' the
Son 0/ G o d, Wifdom which is truly divine) What
Origen exprefs'd by ^arSTfTsuo^aV'^ ^-.^9 '^ ^oc-
Tpl, St. Clement here expffefles by 7ni[§^\)6'ij\hot
im-^T^'^xia -1^ dEOY^, foi: both fpeaj?: of be-
ing taught bf G o p. / ,' . . '
And fince I havebegun^ t will farther ill uftr ate
the Senfe of the Word under confideration, by
more Examples of other W^ords which are fyno-
nymous to it, and us'd exactly to exprefs the
fame thing.
Plutarch^ fpeaking of Lyftas^ fays, !1 he was
taught (vrttii^ivofj^j^ry 01' ftudy^d vnderTi^as and
Kicias <?/Syracufe. Here he ufes ttzuSUvg) diredly
in the fame Senfe, as in the Inftances above-cited
you may fee he, at other times, ufes ^taGnTeW.
So z^lian fays of Per fi us J 'Ai'Ii'yovov iTRiichv^i^ he
^ Vit. Alcibiad. p, 74.
f Stromat. //'i. i. />. 518, BeotfiJccKTOi y^ viyLdiy h^^.h-m^
ji DeVit, decern Rhetc^^.. i', 153(5. UctiJ^.(lo{j.ivQ- -rf.^i
TtjicL H.CU 'NiKicf, TA^' Xv^hj^tot^.
• ■ r 4 taught
28o (I(efleBions on Mr.^olYs Let./.
taught Antigonus. And again, a little after,
^ Lylis a Dlfciple of Pythagoras, inftruEied Epa-
minondas.
Tlato^ in one of his Dialogues, makes Socrates
fay, t Carry your Sons with you ^ for in hopes of
gaining them, they will be the more eafily per-
fuaded to teach us.
In all thefe places ttzh^^iiv is us'd juft as ^ta-
ewTeiJeiv is in others, which I have mention'd be-
fore. From whence it is but reafonable to infer,
that both thefe Words, in thefe and fuch-like
Cafes, lignify one and the fame thing, namely, to
inftru^-, or teaeh^ or the like.
Another fynonymous Word by which the Senfe
of ^a6iiT5i'6) may be illuftrated, is aK.i(i), which is
frequently enough us'd for to learn in the Kew
Teltament , as well as among profane Wri-
ters. Tindar has a PafTage very pertinent to this
effed, tho the Word is metaphorically apply'd
in it : |1 For Salamis can produce as brave Soldiers^
fays the Poet, as any in the World j Hedor learned
(Sk^otvj the Truth of this from A]^X before the Walls
of Troy. The antient Scholiaft interprets aM,«^v
by lxcLV^h^{v iff this place : and 'tis very plain
the Metaphor is taken from the Schools, where
Pupils hear and are taught by Tutors appointed
to that purpofe. And this Word is often us'd
to exprefs this Senfe.
^ JLlian. Var. Hiftor. lib. 3. cap. 17. Avm^Hoyvdeiyi^
f Euthydem. pag. 19c. D. "low? H S'tMof <t^o/u^ dviui
\\ Pindar. Nem. 2. 18. -— K^ti y.ctv
A 'S.a^ay.U yc, ^^i-^at
Diogenes
Let./. Hifiory of Infmt^^aptifm] 281
Diogenes Laertius fays o{ Anaxlrnenes^ that * fce
vpas educated or taught by Qm'isfm) Anaximander :
Others fay^ he ftudy^d under {lyLv.^aoLi) Parmenides.
Of Socrates^ in his^ Life, he fays, that f when
according to fome (ocM-icra;) he had been inftruEled
h-i ^^ fttidfd -under Anaxagoras ^ and alfo by Da-
mon, as Alexander in his Treatife of Succejftons af-
firms ^ after his Condemnation') he heard ((Ait5K.»(Tgv)
er ftudy^d tinder Archelaus the JSfaturalifi. And
again, oi Xeno crates he fayg, that j| he heard (vik«-
^Bv) that is, ftudfd under Plato almoft from his In-
fancy^ And fo in many other places.
Plutarch^ commending the natural Propenfity
to Vertue, of Dion the Syracuftan Brutus^ fays, that
notwithftanding he had liv'd in the corrupt Court
of Dionyfms the famous Tyrant, upon hearing
Vlato talk, tho very young, he was fo enamour'd
with Philofophy, that {a) he refolv'd to find Opfor*
tunitys to fee that great Philofopher^ and be inftruEhed
(aK,9<5"ca) or taught by him. And again, when com-
paring Pelopidas and Epaminondas together, (b) they
feem both^ fays he, to have been equally made for all
kind of V^ertues^ except that Pelopidas delighted moft
to exercife his Body^ and Epaminondas by Learning
to exercife his Mind : They fpent therefore all their
^^ * In ejus Vit. lib. 2. 'AvA^i^ivm "Ev^v^^.ra t^iKmQ-
t Lib. 2.^ *A»»crKf ^ 'AvA^ctyof^^ x/ita tiva^ aKKa haI
AA/Mi>v@-f ui *Am^avA§Q- h J)AcPo'^ii^ P^t:*" tUjj liciin x«-
taJ^UIw J^mnaiv 'Ap^aah -tS ^v^ikS.
jl Vit. Xenocrat. ^'Our©- U m UhATrvvQ- ii;cmv.
C^) In Vir. Dion. p. 1756. '^(T'Tr^cfkji, kai izj^^A-n
^rO/MOTCM^O" ^^bjj\ AVTOV hw^ly n^A70)Vt KdrAKHOAt.
^(6) 1-fK.^elopid. p. ^09. '^U(PAv cAe <cjfoV mcntv A^rhv mipv^
nw^ «re y.Av^veiVj E7miABiua>vS^a4' xct/ ta^ J)ArejL^A^ h rci ^-
A.ot'C«^^o p^-> '2^' TinKAk^^ KAi nijmyiciA^ 6 cTfj AKvavTi kaI
leifurt
282 (!(efleSiions on Mr. Wall V Let.7?
lei fur e Hours ^ one in Hunfwg^ W reft ling ^ and th^
like ; and the other in learning (aV^c^v) or being
inftruBed in fomething-^ and in Philofophical Diffw
tations*
Thus too he ufes the Compound haiiia^ when
he i remarks out of Stefimhrotm the Hiftorian,
"}- that Themiftocles was inftruBed (5>(Xr^o-ou) or
taught by Anaxagoras. Thus in the Life of Cicero^
he fays, [| when he came to Athens, he heard^ that
is, was inftruEhed by or ftudy^d under (^mk^jcte) An-
tiochus o/Scalona, tp/f^ whofe voluble Eloquence he
was extremely fleas^d^ but did not approve of the new
Opinions he had flarted^ Now, in all thefe Cafes,
it's plain, the \X/'ords are us'd exadly in the fame
Senfe as /.lojeM-^^to, which they therefore interpret
in the places before-cited, and are a very home
Argument, that /uec9n75U(i) in all fuch places ne-
celfarily i m pi ys hearing and learning in one Party,
and teaching in another.
Notwithftanding this is fufficiently demonftra-
ted in what I have already faid, I can't forbear
adding one more illuftrious Inftance, which I re-
member I have read in Clemens AUwrndrintis *,
where he is (hewing, that the Jewi^i Philofophy
is much the oldeft"of any other, and that the
Grecian was borrow'd from it : He cites a Faf-
fage out of Democritus^ where he boafts of
his Learning and of his Travels^ which he
intimates, gave him the Advantage of inform-
ing himfelf of many things from wife Men in
all Parts of the World, and from the Egyp-
tians in particular, with whom he fays he had
t Vit Themiftocl. p. 204. KctiTvi^TmiiiCcplQ^^ 'hyet^-
II Vit. Ciceron. p. 1580. 'A<pi)to/jt^@-cf[' ih'AQtivefi^AvTio^H
con-
Let.7- Hlflory of Infant-^aptifm. 285
convers'd eighty Years. After this Citation Cle-
ment adds, "^ he trAveVd into Babylon, Perfia, and.
Egypt, learning (^ar3wTei/6)i') of the Magi and
Triefts. Pythagoras affures tis^ that Zoroafter was
one \ of the Terfian Magi : .Arid thofe who are of the
SeEi of Prodicus, boaft.^ they have fome hidden myfti'
cat Books of that great Man. Alexander, in his
Treatife <?/ Pythagorean Symbols^ fays ^ Pythagoras
was taught (/^a6MT?u5-oy.) or inftruSted by Nazaratus
the AfTyrian : and that be/ides thefe^ he heard Qiim-
;w6VDu) or learned of the DrmdiS and EvdiChmzm*
In. this Paflage, the Word in difpute, ixa^nvQ.,
is twice us'd only to fignify to learn^ juft in the
fame Sen fe as mioi is, immediately after in the
laft Sentence : in which likewife the Words ts
zrpos T^TTJis are to be obferv'd j for they conned
the Senfe of the laft Claufe with that of the forego^
ing : for to fay, b e fides the fe he heard^ or was taught
by fuch or fuch alfo, necefiarily imports, that he
had been faid before to have heardy or been taught
by others. And you may remember, that C/e-
ment is there profefTedly fhewiiig from whence the
Greeks had learn d their Philofophy ^ for this
makes it more necelTary to underftand the PafTage
as I have tranflatedjt, it being fo very agreeable
to his Delign, but otherwife making nothing to
the purpofe.
I^ow, Sir, from all I have hitherto faid, -I am
perfuaded you will think 'tis abundantly evident,
^ Stromat. lib. i. pag. 304. 'EttmaOs -^ Ba.CuXaya, ts x)
ZM^d^^luD S'i r Md^v r Uk?a'lw 0 Ylv^-p^^.^ kJ'-Ahco(nv Bi^A«?
LTTOJifvipiii T^ctpj^^i Tiiihn 7m YlcpS'iyji y.i]iovli'; aii^zcrtv^ etv
f^"^- that
284 ^fleBions on Mr.'WzWs Let.7,
that f>u>:6nTfcU6) does always, even in the pretended
Isleuter Acceptation, fignify to inftruEt^ teach^ or
the like ; and that our Adverfarys have not the
leaft ground to furmize it is ever fo much
as once us'd in any Cafe, fo as not to include
teaching* After the Inftances already given, and
the confiderable Illuftration of 'em by parallel Paf-
fages, wherein vrvAS^im and d^^ia^ being us'd to
the fame Senfe, interpret /xocGHTtu^ in the other
places : I fay, after all this I fhou'd not need to
recite more Inftances, but that you intimate it
will be very acceptable ; and therefore to the reft
I add thefe two or three that follow.
Clemens Mexandrinm^ fpeaking advantageoufly
of Philofophy againft thofe who exploded it,
from fome Premifes he has before been arguing
on, infers thus : "^ Wherefore it is no jihfurdity to
fay that Philofophy was given by Divine Providence^
as a Forerunner to prepare and lead us on to that
PerfeEiion which is in Christ, if it is not ajlmrnd ;
hut learns (^/.<x9MTeL'«£7ct) to advance from barba-
YOHi Wifdom to the Truth* Again, commending the
Holy Scriptures to the Greeks^ he has thefe Words,
which I tranfcribe at large, becaufe that will give
the more force to the Inftance : f The Word which
enlightens us is more to be valud than Gold or Pre*
ciom Stones^ and more dcfirable than Honey or the
Honey^Comb ^ for how fljoud that but he extreamly
defrahle^ which quickens and invigorates a Mind that*s
huyy*d
* Stromat. Lib. ^. pag. 690. *Oyjc a.7o-7rav )y 7m */^o^-
f^a9«7guWtf ^iXo7o<piet i^KO'/leiV «V AA«dr-<«tf.
^ t Protreptic. pag.70. FAyxju? 0 Aof©- e (purlffni HuAiy
3*
Let./- Htjlory of Infant'^aptifml 285
bury'd in Darknefs^ and jharfens the Sight of the Vn^
derftanding ? For of^ if there were no Sun^ notmth^
ftanding the other Stars^ all wou^d he Night '-, fo if
we had not been enlightned by the Word^ we Jhoud
not have differ d from the Fowls which are wont to be
fatned in the dark^ and novrijh^d for Death. Let us
therefore receive the Lights and learn of ( /U^9nT£i;-
<rat)^j) or be inftruBed by the Lord.
As remarkijble and plain are feveral Paflages
in Origen^ for Example where he is explaining
Matt* xiii. 52. j) By Scribe there may be under flood
one that is inflruEled in ( |W^;a^6H7eupt)^©-) that
Knowledg which is according to the Letter of the Larao*
And a little after *, "^ So this Pajfage alfo may be
expounded Tr otologic ally ^ repent, for the Kingdom
of Heaven is at hand, to fignify that the Scribes^
that is J thofe who refi in the bare Letter^ if they
repent , may be inftriiUed ( ye>ta.6nT£ua)vTca) in the
Spiritual DoBrine which^ by Christ Jesus, is
the auickning Word^ and is called the Kingdom of
Heaven. And in the fame Senfe the Word
feveral times occurs in this and the next Page^
to which I will add but one Inftance more from
this Father, taken out of the Books he writ
yof^oh ^ eAvdrcjf T^K^of^ot. Xa>fyii7zo/jSp to ^«f, ''^f ;tf':
fiicTzy^ r 0EO'N. Xtt^iicmiJ^f) to <^^?, Kj iAdM^o^f^ t»
K T P I '^»
II Comment, in Matth. pag. 218. "h 7^e^.^^t*1st/V wkj
"<■ Ibid. pag. 219. ^OvTO) efe i^ re^7n^oyti(reii 7c.j/£/«i'o«Tf,
rot/vl/,M-^, ^.^'ATiv^vV^ T« c^*^ 'I H 2 O^T X P 1 2 T O T
^ agamft
z86 (IlefleElionsonMr.W^Ws Let./:
againft Celft^. Lafhing the Pride and Arrogance
of that virulent Adverfary of Chriftian Religion,
who boafted he was thorowly acquainted with that
Inftitution, he fays, "^ This is jvft as if any one who hoi
traveled into Egypt, where the wife Men^ according
to the Learning of that Country ^ reafon profoundly
among themfelves about many things which they account
Sacred ^ hut the common People amufe themfelves with
fome Fables which they have heard^ %nd the Reafon
*/ which they do-at comprehend, ^Tis^ I fay^ jufi
M if fuch a one jfjall fanfy he vnderfiands all the
Wifdom of the Egyptians, when he*s taught (/W^rSM-
TeuVcc^) only by the empty Chat of the Vulgar^ without
having ever been admitted to the Converfation of the
Friefts^ or been inflruUed by ^em in the Egyptian
Myfierys, This Paflage is the fitter to conclude
witii, becaufe it is very plain from the Defign
of it, that the Word in difpute muft here fig-
nify to teach •, and Origen himfelf explains it fo,
by /ua36)V, in the laft Claufe, which is moil ap-
parently us'd to fignify exadly what before he
had exprefs'd by /^a^Hreuo-a^.
All this largely fhews that the Greek Word
/uci3MTeu6) does, as I aflerted, always fignify to
teach^ or the like*, and that thofe unfaitable
Phrafes, to he Difciplesj or to make Difciplesj if
they can ever be admitted, muft always be under-
ftood to include teaching, for 'tis this certainly
the Word principally imports ^ and therefore the
pretended intranfitive Acceptation of it can be
* Orig. contra Ceir. Lib. i. pag. ii. AoKfi /i fAot nt^Toif
fjtf '9t'? Tivct'; dn^actVTci u v t»? A6f«^ in ^'ptvrAi, ^fa. It*
aUTo7< (p^v^mV (w'sTO yrnvrci 7a 'Ai^v^iiav i^va^vett roH
of
Let.7- Hiflory of Infant-Saptifm^. 1 87
of no fcrvice, jipr is fupported by any one Pre-
cedent. ;^;c^ I;.
But befldes I obferve, that tho the Thing I op-
pofe cou'd be defended, and all I have been fay-
ing had no force, it -can neverthelefs be no Ad-
vantage to our Adverfarys in the prefent Cafe, be-
caufe however the Word is us'd in fome other
Places, yet in the CommifTion 'tis undoubtedly
us'd tranfitively, expreffing an Adion which is to
affed and terminate in the Subjeds mention'd,
viz,, all Nations : and thus to teach^ inftrutb^ &c^
all Nations, ^ is good Senfe ^ but to be Difciples
all Nations, isNonfenfe, and cannot be the Mean-
ing of Infinite Wifdom. The Conftrudion with
an Accufative is alfo a Demonftration, that the
Word is here Tranfitive and not Neuter ; tho
befldes it neither can , nor I believe will be
deny'd, and therefore I need not infiil; longer
upon it.
But farther I add, that Difdplejhlp necelTarily
includes Teaching ^ and therefore tho the Word
cou'd be here rendred to he a Difctfle , yet
our Antagonifts wou'd not be able to avoid the
Difficulty we prefs 'em with : it being enough
for us, that however they will ftrain and torture
the Word, teaching is ftill neceflarily included
in it. ' ^
On this account alfo, to render the Word male
Difciples^ which is much more ienfibie and pro-
per, can do no manner of hurt to us, nor
kindnefs to our Adverfarys. Perhaps there
may be fome colour for this Notion of the
Word in the Nature of Things: And it's true,
there does . feem to be fomething peculiar in
the Word ^' for it means not fimply to teach^
but to teach fo as to prevail^ to bring over to an
Opinion^ and actually to fix and fettle Principles in
the Perfons taught j and this indeed is confequen*
tially
288 ^fleSlions 071 MrWAYs Let.7;
tially making Difciples : but then the Word does
not primarily fignify to make Difciples^ but only
to teach fuccefsfully, and fo as to prevail. Tho
the Terms are almofl: reciprocal, and teaching fuc*
cefsfully^ is mahng Difciples \ and making Difciples^
teaching fucce fs fully : yet you may obferve this
difference, that teaching is the Caufe *, and being
made Difciples^ the EfTea: produc'd by that Caufe,
and fallowing upon it. And therefore, tho to^
male Difciples^ were fippos'd in effed to fignify
the fame thing I plenid for, yet I wou'd chufe
rather to lay that Phrafe afide, becaufe it is not
the immediate Import of the Word : and befides,
we find by Experience, the Interefts and Preju-
dices of fome Men can make it liable to Am-
biguity, which, on the contrary, the primary
and immediate Senfe is wholly free from. If it
be rendred teach^ as you fee in all the Inftances I
have given it unavoidably fignifys, it can lofe
nothing of its Senfe \ for Difciplejhip will follow
if that be to be included : but if it be rendred
make Difciples^ our Adverfarys take an Advantage,
and attempt to argue us out of the principal Sig-
nification, pretending it means to make Difciples
in general, not only by teaching', but even with-
out it too.
Thus Dr. Hammond^ in his Anfwer to the Query
about Infant-Baptifro, argues, || That the Word
in the CommifTion does fignify fimply to make
Difciples of a\\ Islations', and he wou'd have the
Words immediately following to explain and de-
termine the Manner how this was to be done,
namely, by baptizing them *, making this Form of
Baptifm^ fays he, their Ceremony of receiving ^em :
he does not mean of receiving them into Church-
Communion, but into Difciplefliip, that is, ap-
Jl Sh j^ire^c, pag. 196, 197. , .
pointing
Let./. Hijiory of Infant-Saptifm. 289
pointing this Form of Baptifm alone, to be that
which makes 'em Difciples : which, whatever it
be elfe, I am fure is no good Divinity.
Befides, the Dodor never goes about to fhew
the Word is ever once usM fo: whereas I have
largely fiievvn it can't be fo underftood j which I
doubt not will weigh more with you, Sir, thaa
the Dodtor's bare AfTertion : and if any you fhew
thefe Letters to, out of deference to the Dodor's
Learning, fhall infill upon his Interpretation of
the Word, I challenge 'em to fhew any Inftances,
or the lead tolerable Reafon to imagine that
^t«5n75i)6) and ^xwrilc^i are ill any degree fyno-
nymous, or ever put to fignify one and the fame
thing, or that one ever fo explains the other, as
it is pretended^ to do in the CommifTion j nay,
or that ^oc0n7?u(i) can once fignify in any Paf-
fage to make Difciples in general, excluilvely of
teaching. If they will make either of thefe
Particulars appear, I will not only alter my
prefent Opinion, but always gratefully acknow-
ledg my felf very much oblig'd to 'em for the
Favour. I am,
S I R,
Yours, &c*
U Let ter
2 p o (^fleStions on M)\ WallV Le t . 8 <
Letter VIII.
Dr- Hammond expUi-as ^<x6iJtuWTe, Matth. xxviii.
19. by John iv. i. without^ If nat contrary to all
Ren[on» His Vnfaimefs noted* A ^^ffage of the
Bifiop of Sarum i7i favour of the Ariti-p<cdobaptifts
Senfe of the Word. Another from Mr, Le Clerc
Wkat Mr- Wall -urges from the Notion of a Dif-
ciple^ confider^d* MocShttis is only faid of fitch as
are at leaf capable of being t aught • Mr. Wall'i
groimdlefs and unfair Attempt vpon Ads XV. lo.
to prove the contrary^ examined. The Words relate
only to Adult Verfons. A Difciple^ in common
Difcov.rfe^ ever fignifys one that^s taught^ &C.
fo It does likeivife among the Latin Author s\ from
whom we borrow it. Prov''d from the Etymology
of Difcipulus. By hflances from Cicero. From
Javenal. ir(???3 Terence, ir^^ Cornel. Nepos.
All the World have had the fame Notion of a Difci-
pie. Inftanccs in the Eaftern Languages. In the
Anglo-baxon. No Inftancc that hts r^d otherwife
in any Gi'Qck Author: But many of the Senfe theAnti»
p^do'haptifis plead for. One taken from Johnix. 27.
One /r<?W2 Adsxviii. 23. Another from Idion^^ms
HalicarnalTeus. Jlluftrated alfo by fynonymoiis Words.
Inftances of 'Ah^oocTms. From Diogenes Laertius*
From Platarch. An Inftance of 'AK^o'J>f/^Q^
from Laertius. Of *A\i^^vi^ from iElian. From
Dionyilus HalicarnalTeus. This illuflrated by In-
fiances from Koms^a Authors. From Cictro. The
Inference from all this in the prefent Difpute. A
Faff age from Lucian , wherein he explains the Fhrafe
to
Let. 8. Hifiory of Infant^^aptifm. 291
to make Difciples. DifcipU and Teacher m'*d as
Correlates. By Themiltius. By Cicero. This
afpiyd to the frefent Difpute. The mofl Judiclom
have always allow" d^ that the Word 'm the Commijfion.
particularly fgnifys to teach and infiruH:, As
Conftantine. Stephens. Leigh. Turretine.
Epifcopius. Limborch. Cameron. Martia
Bucer. Rigaltius. Erafmus. Grotius. Lucas
Brugenfis. This proved to he the Senfe of the Place
from the feveral l^erfions. The Hebrew. Syriack.
Arabick. Perfick. Ethiopick. Arias Monta-
nus. Vulgar Latin* That of Sixtus V, Beza.
Erafmus. Caftalio. 71?^ Italian. Spanifli. French.
Dutch. Danifli. Saxon. Vulgar Greek. The
Fathers of the Primitive Church always trnderjlood^
the Word in the Commiffion fignify^d to teach. Thus
Clemens Alexandrinus. Origen. St. Juftin.
Eufebius. Apoftolical Conllitutions. St. Cle-
ment. Epiphanius. St. Bafil. Tertullian.
Clarus, Biflwf of U2ik\x\3i. 5^Hierom. Lafdy^
This is proved to be the true Senfe of the Place
by the Authority of the Sacred Scriptures them-
felves. The PraBice of the Apofiles. Parallel
Places. The Sum of the Evidence* From all it
follows^ that the Commijfion obliges to teach all that
are to he baptized : And therefore that the Scriptures
are not fo filent concerning the Baptiz^ing of Infants
as the Padohaptifis wou^d have m think. So that
if Mr. Wall pwu'd prove the Jews and Chriftians
did haptiz^e their Children , we have ftill reafoji
enough not to admit the Fra^ice.
SIR,
TH O I concluded my laft with a Challenge, I
don't exped it fhouM be accepted. Dr. Ham-
mond^ I am perfuaded, was confcious that ao in-
it^nce of that kind cou'd be produc'd ', and there-
y 2 fore
29 1 (^flections on M'. Wall'f Let. 8 .
fore be waves it, aild only makes an unaccoun-
table Reference to what he calls a parallel
Phrafe, John iv. i. The Pharifees had heard that
Jesus made and bafdzjd more Difciples than
John.
But why muft this Place above all others be
Ungled out for a ParaUel? Can we imagine the
Doftor did not know it wou'd have been much
more to the Purpofe, to have cited proper Inftan-
ces which are truly parallel, inftead of one which
is not To? It is to be fear'd the Doctor's Prejudices
interpos'd in this Cafe: for, as I obfervM before,
when he has another Dellgn to ferve, he readily al-
lows, the natural Senfe of //aS'/TeucraTe (and in the
CommifTion particularly) is to teach. So he gives
it in his Paraphrafe, and continually in his Notes
on the Places and fays, in other Places^ when the
Cor)2mijfion of Preaching and gathering Difciples is
given to the ApoftUs : plainly allowing this Place
to be one, where it is given. He expreily inter-
prets the Words fo when he fays, forfo the Words
04 they are repeated by St. Mark muft neceffarily fignify^
Go into all the World and preach theGofpelj to
thofe of the Synagogue firfi^ and then to others alfo.
Thus St. Luiie has fet it down more difiin^lyj
Chap.xxiv. ver.47. that Repentance and RemilTioii
of Sins ihou'd be, preach'd in his Name among
all Kations, beginning at Jemfalem.
Again, He allows that St. Peter only repeats
this very Commifiion, when he fays, ^^jX. 42.
He commanded m to preach to the People^ &c. Now
does not the Dodor feem in all this to contra-
did himfelf, and pull down at one time, what at
another he fo zealoufly eftablifh'd ? And therefore
his.SuffrageJn this Cafe fignifys little. Had he not
been ftrougly byafs'd, he wou'd doubtlefs have
attempted to explain the Commiflion by no other
parallel
Let. 8. Hlpry of Infant' ^aptifm. 295
parallel Paffages but thofe he has cited in his
Annotations.
i know there are feveral befide the Dodor,
who give the Word the fame Senfe, as Biihop
Nkholfon *, Dr. Featly f, and indeed moR Pae-
dobaptifts , who attempt to argue from the
Commiffion. But of all who tranllate it thus,
the moft confiderable, I at prefent remember, are
the Right Reverend Bifhop of Snlishvry^ and the
Learned Mr. Le Clerc^ who neverthelefs both of
'em confirm my Aflertion. His Lordihip ex-
expreOy fays, That |j by the firfi teaching cr ma-
king of Difciples, that mufi go before Baptifr?2^ is
to be meant the Convincing the Worlds &C. And
tho Mr. Wall is fo angry with Mr. Le Clerc at
other times (like theGnat on the Bull's Horn in
the Arabian ^^ Fables) I fancy he was better
pleas'd with him, when he found that Learned Gen-
tleman alFerted, ^ti.^vf^l'i^v fignifys to make Difd^Us^
and imagined it was giving in to his Opinion.
But the French VerfiDn of the New Teftament,
which Mr. Le Clerc afterwards publifh'd with Re-
marks, foon put our Author out of Humour
again, by letting him fee that rendring the Word
fo cou'd do him no fervice: for there he ren-
ders it in the Text , faites des Difciples , make
Difciples : and in his Remark on it fays, f f This
ts the proper Signification of the Word //^^T^eiv, and
77ot to teach: but'then he adds immediately, to pre-
vent all Miltake, and in contradidion to the
^ On the Catecbifm.
t Dipper Dipt, pag. 59.
\\ Expofition of the Articles^ pag. IO0.
**■ Lockmanni Fub,
ft C'cft le propre fens du Verb Miftheeteueiny & non
enfeigner.
^ ^ Us common
2p4 ^fleSlions on A/r.Wall'^ Let. 8.
common Criticifm, that ^ it is neverthelefs very
true, that Dlfciples are not made hut by teaching.
That is as if he had faid, ixMim\} does indeed
inean and include teaching \ but the full Senfe of
it is not fo properly exprefs'd by teach, becaufe it
iignifys fomething more than fimply to teach,
viz,, as I faid before, to convince^ to teach fo as
to prevail^ and bring over to an Opinion ^ which is
in efFed to make Difciples. So that the Word
Itill necelTarily includes teaching. And I hardly
remember any conliderable Man that ventures to
afTert the contrary.
Mr. Wall^ to make the Cavil feem the more rea-
fonable, endeavours to Ihew from the Notion of
a Difciple, that Perfons may be made Difciplcs
without being taught, nay or without fo much as
being in a Capacity of receiving Inftrudion^ and
infers, fmce the Word which fignifys to make Dif-
clplesj does not neceflarily include teaching, it
may refer to Perfons not capable of being taught ^
and fo he thinks the CommiiTion may be eafily
underftood to extend to Infants as well as Adult
Perfons.
But this is fufficiently confuted by the large Evi-
dence 1 have given above of the Import of the
Greek Word, that it does neceflarily include Teach-
ing as well in the Commiflfion, as in all other Places
where it occurs. And in the next Place I will
add, that MctrSwws or Difciple is only faid of fuch
as are capable of being taught, and properly be-
longs to 'em Oiily in this refped.
All our Author fays to the contrary, and which
I can think it fo much as poflible any Man (hou'd
be perfiaaded by, is exprefs'd in thefe Words:
* Quoi qir-l foit vrai que Ton ne fait des Difciples^
qu'cn les cnfci^aant.
St, Fe-
Let. 8. Hijlory of Infant-^apufm. 295
'{• St. ?Qt.tX freaking agait^ ft the impfmg\of Clrcurn-
cifion on the Heathen Ccrverts and their Children^
words it thmy to put a Yoke upon the Keck of the
Difciples : Whereas it was Infants efpecially on whom
this Yoke was attempted to befut^ Ads xv. 10.
Mr. [F^// delivers nothing on this Occa (ion, which
is likely to. deceive the moft Ignorant, unlefs it
be this PalTage, wherein he makes fo bold with
the Scripture, that perhaps Hach as are too cre-
dulous, and not given to examine IMatters as they
ought, may take it for a clear Scripture-Proof
of the Thing. Bat you, Sir, I am fatisfy'd, will
fee thro our Author's fallacious Mifapplication
of the Text he cites. And how dilingenuous is
it to infinuate, with as much AITurance as if ic
were plainly exprefs'd , that the Holy Apo-
file is fpeaking againft impofing Circumclfion on
the Heathen Converts and their Children? And
how much worfe is it to alTert downright, that
a was Infants efpecialiy^ on whom this Yoke was
attempted to be put? Any Man who reads the
Paflage, even tho he be entirely in Mr.^F^//'s In-
terelt too, can't but fee this Aflertion is grofly
falfe, and that Infants are no where mcntioa'd ^
nor is any thing faid which can be apply'd to
'em in the whole Chapter.
The Brethren, ver, i. on whom this attempt
was made, are faid to be taught^ that without
being circumcis'd they cou'd not be fav'd. This
can't include Infmts. Again, ver. 5. fpeaking
only of thofe who were converted, the Pharifces
faid it was needful to circumcife 'era. And
St. Jamcs^ in ver. 19. very plainly ihows us that he
did not underfland the Queftion to relate at all
t Fart II. pag. 578.
U 4 to
2^6 (^efleBionsm^frWzlYs Let. 8.
to Infants, but only to the Adult •, for he con-
lines his Determination to them alone: Where-
forcj fays he, my femence is^ that we trouble not
them^ who from among the Gentiles are turned to
God. And fure none will fay Infants can turn
from a falfe Religion to God. But the whole
Scope of the Place, the Injundions of that vene-
rable Council of the Apoftles, their Letter, and
all the Circumftances do very evidently confpire to
fhew their Confultation related not to Infants, but
only to the Adult. Nay, St.Ptter, in the Words
immediately preceding the Verfe our Author
cites, fays of the Perfons who are the Subjed of
the Difpute, that God had purify'^d their Hearts
by Faith: from whence 'tis plain, the Perfons he
fpoke of were adual Believers , and confequently
by M(x6mT6)i;, in the following Words, the Holy
Apoftle intends only the Converts, exclufively of
their Infants, if they had any. This you fee^
Sir, is fo very clear, that nothing but Prepof-
felTion cou'd incline any Man to allert, it was
Infants efpecially on whom this Yoke was attempted
to be put ^ in hopes he might hence conclude
that Infants are here call'd Difciples^ and by
Confequence muft be capable of being made fo.
'Tis a great Difhonour and DifTervice to Re-
ligion, that any who are Teachers of it, and
appointed to guide the People, fliou'd endea-
vour to fupport their Fancys and Opinions by a
Fallacy. Nothing I think can be more difinge-
i:uoufly iMg'd, or be a more palpable Affront to
the common Senfe of Mankind, than to affirm
JMrcOi-ifi^is may be appiy'd to Infants and Perfons
not capable of being taught •, for every body
conHantly ufes the Word, and always underftands
it to n^.ean one that is taught or learns. In com-'
mon DiRourfe 'tis ever fo : And ask a Country-
man, what he means by the word 5cW^r, he will
teii
Let. 8. Hiflory of InfanU^apttJnu 2p7
tell you he means one that goes to School to
learn. And if you ask what he means hy Dlf-
ciple, he'll tell you, fuch a Man's Difciple is one
that holds his Opinions, and thinks his Way
belt. And you'll find the Countryman under-
ftands his Mother-Tongue better than fome others
feem to do *, and if he ufes more honeft Simplicity,
he ufes mor^ Reafontoo in explaining his Mean-
inp^, than the Byafs of Intereft and Partys will
fufFer fome Men of Letters to do : and if the
matter were to be refer'd, all the World wou'd
prefer the good plain Senfe of the Country-man.
Now common Ufe, which fixes the Senfe of
Words, is an undoubted Proof of their Signifi-
cation.
Befides, we may argue not only from the ufe
of the Word Difciple among our felves, but like-
wife from the ufe of it among the Latlri Authors,
from whom we have borrow'd it. Now it's plain,
JDifcipulus is form'd from difcere to lear??. If the
Kame then is impos'd on Perfons for that reafon,
viz. cjuia difcunt^ it can be apply'd to none but
fuch, in whom the reafon is to be founds other-
wife it wou'd be given not only without, but
even contrary to the reafon of it. But the Latins
always us'd it, according to its Etymology, to
lignify one that was taught, qui difcit^^ fays Stephens^
one that learns : and Cicero promifcuouily ufes
Dlfcipulus and Difcens a Learner^ as fynonymous
Words.
In that ftrange Relation concerning Diodotus
the Stoick Philofopher, he fays, that even after
he was blind, "^ tho it feems almoft impoffihle to he
* Cic. Qii£fl. TufcuL lib, 5. cap, 39. Turn quod fine Oculis
fieri poffe vix videtur, Geometrise Munus tuebatur. Verbis
prscipiens Difcentibus, unde, quo, quamque Lineam fcri-
berent.
^otJe
25)8 (^efleBions on Mr.WiM's Let. 8.
tione without the nfe of Sight -^ yet he taught Geometry^
direBing his Scholars (Difcentibus ) or Pupils^ or
DifcipleSj by Words^ whence and whither^ md what
Lines theyfljoud dram. 'What he here means by
Difcens^ is in other places exprefs'd by Difcifulm,
Thus in a Letter to '|- Fafirim^ he fays, Hirtlm
and Dolabella are my Scholars^ or Difciptes^ (Difci-
puli) or Students in Oratory^ and my Mafters in
Feafttng. The fame Oppofition of Mafter and
Scholar, Juvenal makes ^ when lafhing thofe who
inftil their own covetous Principles into their
Children, he fays, }| Take my word for it^ the Scho-
lar will out'go the Mafter. Old Simo in Terence
ufes Difcipultis in the fame Senfe •, fpeaking to
Davp^^ by whom he fuppofes Pamphilpis was tu-
tor'd and advis'd ^ ^ Why dont you mind your Pu-
•pil ( Difcipuli ) and give him better InftruElions ?
Nepos^ in the Life of Epaminondas^ remarks, that
(^) he did not difcharge his Tutor^ till he had gone
far beyond his Fellow-Scholars ( Condifcipulos ) in
Learning *, by which it was eafy to forefee he wou^d
excel as much in other things.
From thefe inftances, inftead of infinite others
which might be produc'd, it's plain, that thofe
from whom we borrow the Word Difciple^ meant
by it one that is taught j or that learns. And the
fame ]S3otion of a Difciple all the World have had
as well as the Romans : therefore in the Hebrew
t Epjft. FmH. lib. 9. Efiji, 16. Hirtium ego, & Dolabel-
1am dicendi Difcipulos habeo, ccenandi Magiftros.
\\Sat)r.i^. 211. MelioremprxftoMagiftro
Difcipulum —
'^ Andrta, Aft. 3. Seen, u 19. Si. Num immemor cs Dif-
cipuli ?
{a.) Pag. 138. Neque prius eum a fe dimiferit, quam in
Doftrinis tanto antecefTerit Condifcipulos, ut facile intel-
ligi poffet, pari modo fuperaturum omaes in cacteris Ar-
tibus.
(and
Let. 8. Hijlory of Infcint'^apttfm] -ipp
(and other Eaftern Languages to the fame eff*e^)
a Difciple is I'D^n, from -^nSn in Hlfhil^ which
fignifys to make to learn^ or to teach* And IQ*? from
nnb iaPihel^ which fignifys the fame thing: and
fo likewife in the Anglo-Saxon^ Lcopninj-cmhr is a
Bifclfle or Scholar^ trom leopnian to Learn. 'Tis
therefore one of the molt unreafonable things
that can be^ to infiifc upon any other contrary
Senfe, which beUdes is not countenanc'd even
by the common ufe of the Word among our
felves.
Our Author takes his Argument for the Senfe
he gives the Word, from the Scriptures : But
neither in that Sacred Book, nor any one Greek
Author, is iAoi^T\]% ever once us'd as he pretends.
The place he particularly cites, has been examin'd
already, and turnM againft him : and he is op-
pos'd alfo by many others, .yohniyi.i'j, fays the
Man who was born blind| Wherefore won d you
hear it again ? Will ye alfo be his Difcifles ? that is,
will ye alfo believe in him, and fubmit your felves
to his Inftruftion, and become his Followers?
Again, A^s xviii. 23. He went over all the Coun-
try of Galatia and Phrygia in order^ ftrengthning all
the Difciples. Doubtlefs all the Difciples then were
capable of being confirm'd in the Faith they had
All receiv'd j for it's plain, no other are here ac-
knowledg'd for Difciples, but fuch as believ'd ^
for All the Difciples were ftrengtbned.
And fo in all other Inftances, the Word is only
apply'd to Adult Pcrfons, who were actually
taught, agreeably to the Senfe it is us'd in ty
other Authors. So Theopompm the Hiftorian is
call'd by Dionyfius Hdicarnaffeus [| the mofl famous
of Ifocrates'j Scholars or Difciples (MaeHTOv), that
■— — -
II Epift. ad Pompeium de Praecipuis Hiftoric. cip, 6*
'L7Tfipa.i'i^^Q- TmvTay 'IcvK^^Tvi Mcft^Ttyj' ^Aij^^.
is,
3 oo (^fiecl'ms on KnWallV Let. 8.
is, of all who were brought up or inflrudled by
Jfocrates, And 'tis frequent to meet with nAa-ro-
V(^ MaOnTMS, ^Apig'oriK'is^y xon^rejs M(x6h7ms, and
the like, to fignify fuch as were inftrufted by
JPlatOj Ariftothy Socrates^ &c. and it may be illuf-
trated farther by thofe Words which areus'd as
fynonymous to it. Thus Diogenes Laertim^ in the
Life of Strato Lam^facenm^ obferving that there
had been eight noted Men of that Name, fays,
■^ the firfi was Ifocrates'j Hearer or Scholar ('ARpoot-
THS) J the fecondy this Ferfon whofe Life I am writing j
the third was a Fhyjician^ t, Difcifle (MaOn'TTf^) of
Erafiftratus, &c. It is t be noted here, that
'AK^oocm and MyiMTT^s are f romifcuoully us'd to
mean the fame thing : now as the former necefla-
rily implys adual Inftrudion, Maj6nm mull do
fo too.
Indeed what is meftnt by MaBimis in fome places,
we find commonly Enough exprefs'd by 'A^^oaTT^s,
'AR^^'iis, c^c. in ot'^ersi which being therefore
parallel PafTages, arc jaftly brought to explain one
another : for which reafon 1 will give you a few
Inftances.
Plutarch^ fpeaking of Lycurgm^ fays, that -I* he
firfi- fiudy d Philofofhy^ being a Hearer ^ (AM-poaTT^s)
Scholar^ or Difcidle of Plato the Philofopber. A-
gain, (peaking of /i/^'prn^^^/, he fays, H he had been
a Hearer or Difcipte ('AK^cocn^s) of Plato the Philo-
fopher 'y together with Lycurgas, and Ifocrates.
Sometimes'he exprelTes the fame thing by 'Ak^ooj-
* Lib. $. rTf^T©- 'I(rrWT«? «tx^^77/'f. MTi^Q", dv-
•;• Vit. decern Rhstov. par. i<4<,. 'AK^^ctlh <^l ^oi/.ivQ-
Il loid. pag. i5,;9. 'A;c£,?a1wf /e n/cfitW^ O^^/M^^ '^ *'*
Let. 8. Hiftory of Infant-^ aptlfni. 301'
fjUesQ'-, as in the Life oflfocrates^ * he was a Dif-
cifle or Hearer ( 'A'^potoyc^v©-) of Prodicus the
Chian^ and o/Gorgias the Leontiiie, &c. And
fometimes again we meet with 'Avc^g-iis to the
fame effed: Thus <ty£lian fays, \ Zoiius of Am-
phipolis, who wrote againfi Homer and Plato, and
others^ was a Difcifle or Hearer ('An«$-ws) of Poly-
crates the Athenian. So Dionyfius Halkarnaffens
calls Cephifodorus the Athenian^ \\ a true and proper
Difciple or Hearer ('A^^g-ws) of Ifocrates. To
which perfedly agrees that parallel Phrafe of the
fame Author, in a Letter to Pompey^ concerning
VUto J where excullng himfelf for his free Cen-
fure of that great Philofopher, he recounts feve-
ral who had taken the fame Liberty before him :
(a") the firfi of whom^ fays he, was his own Scholar
or Difciple (mocOm'tt^^) Ariftotle, &c. There is
no other Difference in thefe Phrafes, but that Ma-
0H77?/ in one, is exprefs'd by 'AK^$-^ils in the other ^
which plainly Ihews the Words to be fynonymous
i^ all fuch Cafes.
And fo like wife the Roman Authors, who are
conftant Imitators of the Greeks^ have the fame
Expreflion. Cicero^ the great Mailer of Roman
Eloquence, having mentioned Theophrafius^ adds,
Q?) for StratO who was his Difciple^ Scholar ^or Hearer^
(Auditor) tho a Man of excellent Parts^ &c. And elfe-
^* Vit. decern Rhetor, p. 1538. 'hKe^cay.zvQiUcs<PlK>ii!i H
X<», '^ Top}U 78 Aiovriva,
t Var. Hift. lib.^ j^i. cap. 10. ZcoUoi 5 'hiJ.(pi7nKim, 0 )^iU
J Delfocrate Judic. cap. 18. pag. 163. TymcoiulQ' 'Aw-
(a) Pag. 203. U§unvff, 0 yvmcJiztl©- dwn Ma^l^f 'Aei-
s^t/am?, &c.
(b) Academic. Qua(}, lib. i. cap. 9. Nam StratO, ejus Audi-
tor, c^uanquam fuit acri Ingenio, ii;c,
where.
302 <]^fleEltons on Mr.'^^2i\Ys Ler.8.
where, difcour fing of the chief Good^ and men-
tioning Critolaus^ he fays, |1 Diodorus his Dlfci'
tie (Auditor) carry* d the Notion farther^ and thoufrht
be fides Vertue^ there jhoud he freedom from all Tain*
In another place, he has put Auditor and Bifci-
tutus together, and plainly means the fame thing
by 'em. '|^ HeracUdes Ponticus^ fays he, a learned
Man^ Hearer and Difciple of Phto, writes^ that
the Mother of Phalaris drearndjhefaw the Images
of the Gods, &C.
It fuffidently appears then from hence, that
m^Ohtti^, or a Difciple, does undoubtedly mean a
Hearer or Learner ^ and fo to make Difciples muft
imply to teach 'em, or to make them Hearers,
'ulz,, by reading Ledures, and inftruding 'em, or
the like.
Perhaps it mayn't be amifs to obferve here,
how well this agrees with fome Words of Ciceroy
concerning I) ten the Sicilian ^ of whom, as we
noted before, Plutarch fays, that he was very de-
jirous to hear ((XM.b(rou) or be inftruded by Plato.
As Cornel. Nepos alfo expreffes it, ^ He was ex-
tremely defrotis ( audiendi ) of hearing him- But
Ciceroy ia one place, calls him Plato*s> Difciple:
(ji) Dion raho was of Plato'^ School ^ when his Son was
Jiiird hy a fall from the top of a Boufe^ not only gave
II De Fmb, Bon. (fy- Mai. lib. $. cap. $. Diodorus, ejus Au-
ditor, adjungit ad Honeftatem, Vacuitatem Doioris.
f De Divinatme, lib. i.cap. 23. "Matrem Phalaridis fcribit
Ponticus Heraclides, doftus Vir, Auditor, & Difcipulus
Platonis, vifam effe videre in Somniis Simulacra Deo-
rum, fyc,
"^ l^it, 10. Dion, cap, 2. pag, 98, 99. Dion ejus audiendi
Cupiditate flagraret.
" (r?) De ConfQi. p. 567. a. Dion certe, qui e Platonis Schola
defluxit, cum ejus Filius in Atrium e tefto delapfum inte-
rife, non modo non doluit, {"ed etiam in eo, quod turn
forte agebat, conftanter perftitit : quo Fa£lo judicavit &
Vir Sapiens & Platonis Difcipulus, quid Caeteros, qui Sa-
pientes haberi volunt, facere oporteat.
fJC?
Let, 8 . Hiftory of InfantSaptifm. 505
/JO figns of Griefs but cdmly went on with what he
happen d to be doing at the time^ without any Commo-
tion : by which this great Man^ and Difciple of
Vla.to f J ew^d^ hoxv others^ who woud he thought wife^
flwud behave themfelves. In another place, fpeak-
ing of the fame Perfon, he fays, \ Who was it that
enriched Dion of Syracufe with all kind of Learning ?
Was it not Plato ? &c. Did Plato infiruEh Dion in
any other Arts ? &c. In the former FafFage, he
calls Dion Plato's Difciple ^ and in the latter, he
explains what he meant by it, and fays, he was
rnftruded by Plato: as if both ExpreOions a-
mounted to one and the fame thing ^ and that to
call any one Plato's Difciple, was juft the fame as
to fay, he was taught by Plato.
Thus Lucian alfo, who perhaps underftood the
Propriety of the Greek as well as any Man, has
expounded it. Anacharfis was come from Scythia
to Greece to learn of Solon^ &c. the Wifdom and
Manners of the Grecians^ and the Art of Govern-
ment, as he himfelf fays : and Lucian introduces
him faying to Solon^ ]] Tou cant be more willing to
teach (/<cfVoco-K(i3v) me^ and make me your Difciple^
(m^jc^Imv -cyo/^V^v©-) than I Jljall be^ with pie a fur e^
to hear you difcourfe of Laws and Government* Here
it is neceflarily imported, that to make a Difci-
ple, \% to teach ^ and that it is the OfRce of a
Difciple or Scholar, to hear and learn. And
therefore too we fometimes find MocOnj^^ and
AicTtccrM-aA©^, a Teacher or Mafter^ us'd as Corre-
lates; and as fach, oppos'd to each other: So
t De OrAtoYs lib. 3. /». rgi. a. Quk Dionem Syracufium
Doticinis omnibus expolivk? non Plato ? ^c. Ahifne igi-
tur Artibus hunc Dionem inftituit Plato, (fyc.
^ II ^^ Gymnaf. pag 275. '^Qs^ h a!v <p^voti SiJ^<TKeov y.i'^
Thcmi"
3 o4 <I(efleSlms on Kr. WallV Let. 8 J
Themifiius^ in a Speech to the Senate, fays, j| Tho
J am not capable of faying any thing worthy of this
Audience^ but what 1 have bffore learn'*d from you ;
yet I have fir angely venturd to take vfon me the part
of a Mafter^ inftead of that of a Difciple. Evi-
dently importing, that uoc^v.^yi; is a Learner or a
Hearer, 'AM^oocTk, as the fame Author elfewhere
^ exprefTes it. Cicero likewife ufing the fame
kind of Oppofition, fays, Pan^tius f the Mafter
or Teacher (Dodor) of Pofidonius, but the Scho^
lar or Difciple (Difcipulus) of Antipater, deger
nerated indeed from the Stoicksj or the chief Men of
that SeSt
Mow tbe Terms of a Relation, according to
the Logicians, you know, Sir, mutually imply
and relate to each other: and therefore as Mafter
implys a Scholar to whom he is Mafter, fo Scho-
lar implys a Mafter to whom he is Scholar : and
the ground of thefe Relations is Teaching in the
Mafter, anci Learning in the Scholar^ which
therefore either Term of the Relation does always
neceflarily import.
By this time I have certainly carry'd it beyond
all poflibility of doubting, that ucc^tv^s and /^aOM-
l(^Oi do ever include teaching in their Signification,
And to all I have ftill this to add, that notwith-
ftandi^ fome of the Pasdobaptifts generally build fb
much upon this common Criticifm, and think their
Caufe fufficiently fecur'd by it,the moft judicious and
learned Men have always afferted, that the Word
does (at leaft in the CommilTion) fignify to teach
II Orat. 13. pag. 298. '^a^ ic, vvv, i<Hv ctAAo htiuv S'j^iui
Aof Hl'ett.
'f- Orat. 2. p. $3. . .
t De Bivinationey lib. i. c. 3. Sed a Stolcis, vcl principi-
bus ejus Difciplinae, Pofidonii Doclor, Difcipulus Antipa-
tfi, degeneravit Pan9etius, ^c,
and
Let.8. Hiftory of Infant'^aptifm. 305
and inftruEh. I don't deiire you fhou'd take this
on my Word, and therefore V\\ produce feme In-
ftancesof it^ for in matters of this nature I trult
no body my felf, nor wou'd have any body trulb
me.
I need not repeat what I have before noted
from the-Biihop of Salisbury (^), and Dr. Whit-
by (b\ nor how much even Dr. Hammond has
been fhewn (c) to acknowledg the true Mean-
ing of the Word : but I will go on to ob-
ferve^ that Conftantine^ tho he thinks the Word
fometimes means to he^ or to make Dlfiiples *, yet
he fays, that it iignifys (^) doceo, c^i^am^
to teach^ as the primary and more genuine
Senfe^ and for this he cites the Commiffion,
MattL xxviih 19. as a plain undoubted Inftance :
and fo before him does (e) Henry Stephens j for
when he fays the Word fignifys docco to teach^
without any Hefitation he confirms it by this
CommifFion, as iuppofing it to be an unexception-
able Inftance to that purpofe. And (/> Leioh
from thefe, does juft the fame thing.
That profound Calvinift Divine, Monfieur Tur-
retine^ fays. Infants (^) are no more capable of
aBual Faith^ than they are of that Infiruci'lon with
which the Mdult are to he taught^ and made Difci-
pies (7/0 HR 1ST, Matth. xxviii. 19. And in ano-
ther place, he fays, (/?) C h r i s t fending his Jpo-
files to gather a Churchy fuppofcs the Neceffity of a
prece^
(^) Supra p.2do. (6) Supra p. 261. (c) Supra p.25 9,260,292.
{d) Lexic. ad Voc. (e) Thefaur. ad Yoc
(/) Critica Sacra ad Voc. in Margin.
{g) Inftitut, Theology Par, II. pag. 640. §. 9. Cujus non
aiiagis capaces funt, quam illius Inftitutionis, qua docentur
■ Adulti, & Difcipuli CHRISTI fiunt. Mat. xxviii. ip.
(o) Ibid. Par. III. p. 5. §. 8. CHRIST US mittens Apofl-o-
los ad Ecclefiee Colle^ionem, fupponit NeceiTitatem Inftitu-
X ■ tionis
1 0(5 <^fleSitons on Mr.WAXs Let.8.
frtvedaneous InfiruBlon^ and Knoxvledg of his DoC"
trines\ Matth. xxviii. 19. Go teach all Nations^
baptiz.ing them. And fo he goes on, by other Paf-
fages likevvife, to cor. firm this Method of making
Church- Members. I know this fame Gentleman,
treating of liifant-Baptifm in another place, "^de-
nys again that the Word means to teach *, buthov/
thefe Contradi(ftions can be reconcil'd, let ' the
Reader j'^dg : thofe who will give themfelves the
liberty to think, will doubtlefs fee it cou'd be no-
thing but the Prejudice of Education that made
him deny what he had at leaft twice before afler-
ted in the fame Syftem.
Eplfcopim^ the judicious Remonftrant, eftablifli-
ing the divine Authority of Water-Baptifm, has,
among the reft, this remarkable Palfage to our
purpofe : i" Perhaps you will ohjeft^ that fJLixM^(Ftt\t
does ?jot ftgrufy properly to teach^ but to male Difci"
pies. Be it fo *, yet they coud not make DifcipleSy
hut by teaching them^ and by teaching ^em thofe things
•which belo'fig'd to the Chriftian Religion ; for Difciple
and DcBory or Teacher^ are Relatives, Therefore St,
Mark xvi. 15. does not ufe /uaOnfiAe/v, but laipiiijiiv^
i.e. to preach or teach* Befides.^ /<ta8iiI^/V, or the
Hebrew HD^D does not in this place fignify barely
tionis 8c Cognitionis Doflrinas; prascedanese, Matth, xxviii.
Ite. doceteomnes.
* Inltitut. Theolog. Part III. ^ 464. §. 4.
f Kefponf, ad Qu.&fi. 37. pag, 5«5, :?5. Dices; ^M^ffem
non fignificat proprie docere, fed Difcipulos facere. Efto
inquam. At Difcipulos facere non poterant nifi docerent,
& quatenus docerent ea, qiise ad Religionem CHRISTI
pertinebant. Difcipuiusenim & Doftor funt Rclata : unde
Marcus cap. \6 i5- non utitur Verbo ^tt'^iv^v fed Verbo
i(.^^vT%v^ id eft pra-djcare, five docere. Deincie iJA^nveiV
five Hebraeum ID^H non fignincat hoc loco limpliciter
■docere tantum, fed docere ita uc Difcipulos (UQ Dn^O^fl
conlequaris, ^c,
t9
Let. 8, Hi/lory of Infant-^aptifm. 3 07
toteach^ but to teach fo as to gain JDifciples 0^'^^^^^^
&c,
Mr. Limhorch anfwering the fame Objection
witb Efifcopiusj and with the fame Defign, fays,
* I. They cotUd not make Difcifles but by teachina-,
2. By this InftruBion the Difciples were brought over
to the Faith before they were baptizj'd^ Mark xvi.
15, \6. And again elfewhere he fays, '\ Hence
alfo our Lord commanded^ that Men Jhoud firfi
be taught^ and brought over to the Faith^ and after
that be baptiz^d^ Matth. xxviii. ip. Mark xvi.
15, 15.
Cameron on the place, fays, ]] ^oi6;iT£i;etv fgnifys
(Imply ^^(SVJi[\\ to teach \ but here to teach what rf-
lates to Religion* The famous Martin Bucer allows
the Senfe which the Antipsedobaptifts contend
for, and does not in the leaft attempt to evade it ;
for to the Argument which we draw from the
Commiflion, he only fays, (^) The Anabaptifis
think they argue "very P:rongly again fl Infant -B apt ifm
from this Tlace. But I have anfwe/d their Ohje^ion
above^ Chap. 3. And till they can find a Place where
they are commanded to baptiz,e none but thofe that are
taught^ this Text will be of no Advantage to their
Opinion, So that Bucer acknowledges here the
* InflltHt, lib. 5. ca^, 6-^, §. 7. i. Non poterant Difcipulos
facere, nifi docendo. 2. Fer Inftitutionem illam Difcipuli
ad Fidem addiiccbantur, antequam baptizarcntur, Marc.
xvi. 15, i5.
t md, cap. 62. Sea, 2. Hinc & DOMINUS prius Homi-
nes doceri & ad Fidem fuam perduci, dein baptizari juber,
Matth. xxviii. 19. Marc. xvi. 15, id.
!| quin fimpliciter f^aMnveiV eft <hJk'a-KeiV docere, fed
docere ea quse pertinent ad Religionem.
(^3 EnarratJn ^XvangeLm hc.p.204.. Anabaptiftae Infantiuni
Baptifmum fortiffimeoppugnare libi videntur. Sed his re-
fponfum fupra eft Cap, 9. Sane dum non habent Locum,
quo pra£cipitur, tantum Doftos baptizare, nihil roboris
fiiae fententia? hinc adferent.
X 2 Word
;o8 (^cficEiions on Mr.WdlYs Let.8.
Word does mean to teach ; and fancys Infant-Bap-
tifm cannot hence be prov'd unlawful, for no o-
ther reafon, but becaufe it is not faid exprefly,
haptiz.e fuch only as are taught. But • how Weak
and trifling this is, every one that reads it mull
fee. He refers indeed to Chaf, 3. for a fuller An-
fwer :i but all he fiys there is, that theGommif-
fion fpeaks only of Adult Perfons, and that 'tis
no wonder therefore it Ihou'd put teaching before
baptizing.
Rigahiiis argues profelTedly from this Senfe of
the Words, in his Note on St. Cyprian\ 64th Epif-
tle. The PalTage is worth reading, but too large
to be here tranicrib'd, and therefore 1 can give you
bat a tafte of it: "^ This may be gather d^ fays he,
from what has been fatd above ^ where the Words of
our Lord are exceeding clear ^ who commands to
teach^ before they baptize,
Erafmusm his Annotation on Matth. xxvii. 57.
cites the CommifTion as an Inftance in which the
Word is ns'd tranfitively, and lignifys to teach '^
and accordingly tranflates it docete^ ff^r^ all Na-
tions. And in his Paraphrafe on the Words, he
takes it altogether in that Senfe.
The incomparable Grotius explains the Greek
Word by a Pajfage he quotes 'f- from the C&nfiitu-
tions afcrib'd to St. Clement^ without naming the
Place indeed, but you m.ay find the Words exadly
as he has tranfcrib'd 'em, lib. 7. cap. ^o. AllVn-
godlinefs and Impiety^ fijr.s he, mufl be firfl removed ^
'*' Cypjan, pag. 280. Not. a. Hoc neceflario polligi vide-
tiir ex anredi^lis, ubi apertifiima funt Verba p.QM-lN I,
jubentis doce>re, priufquam tingere. v. • _ ;
fin; Loc. Senfum explicat Scriptor Conftitutioniim quae
Clementi adfcribuntur, Ab uo^V ^^t^^v ti^ouv 'haiCeiciV
and
Let. 8. Htjlory of Infanh^aptijm. 309
and t^je contrary Principles of true Holinefs imrodnc^d^
and fo they mufi he haftiz^^d: In the Annotation
on the Verfe foUowiiig the Commifilon, concern-
ing which the Difpute is, he ^remarks, that there
are two forts of teachings the one more imper-
fed, by way of Initiation iato the fir (t Principles :^
the other more complete, by. a fuller and more
accurate Iriftrudion : and .^:. the former^ fays he,
feems to he the. Import of the ll^ord /xa6iiTeu£iV : for it
means to initiate as it were into the Dottrines^ and
this is to precede Baptifm \ the fuller Inft ruction is
fignifyd hy- h^^WciV^ and li here placed after Bap'
tifrn.
' To thefe 1 will add but one Authority more,
namely, that of Lvcas Brugcnfis^ who in his Kote
on Verfe 19. fays, '\ he commands them to teach*
And afterwards, in the Kote: on Verfe 20. he has
thefe Words : ij ^io^xV^f^i-lcs] The Evangelifi^ fays
he, vfts another Word in the Verfe ahove^ where we
read /.laBMTgLVale ; The difference between ''em fcerns
to he this^ that /x^tiMTeueiv fignifys to teach thofe who
are yet utter Strangers to the Do^rine^ and not under
your Tvtora^e^ fo as to make 'em Difc'.ples ; hut JVi-
Stx^v.li'J means to teach fuch as are already become
DifcipleSf andgive themjelves vp to your InfruElions*
And
^ Grot, in Match, xxviii. 20. Cum duplex lit docendi Ra-
tio, alia per Modum 'E/^n^tfT^'f -^Z ^myjHu.oSp'cov, alia per
Modum AtJhi(ri^\ia.^y prior lupra vidctur indicari Verbo
yM^fldUeiV, id enim eft veluti in DifciPiiium initiare, & Bap-
tifirio prseponitur: pofterior Verbo J)a''c;!7u-'.Vi quod hie poft
Baptifmum locatur.
t In 4. Evangel. Jubet cos docere.
11 AiJhf^^Koyjii] Alia eft Vox Grseca VeiTa fup?riori> ubi
legitur— >-, uuL^,(\djcnf^i'. Difcrimen hoc effe videtur,
quod fjM.^^JiieiV fir, docere eos qui a Doctrina & Magifterio
tuo funt alieni, ita ut reddas Difcipulos : c/)c/ttV>6&</ vero,
docere ]am Difcipulos rcdditos, dc Magifterio cuo addictos
tanquam Prceceptorem : quod Difcrimen Loco optima cou-
X 3 gruic.
3 1 o (J^eflefiions on MrWzWs Let. 8.
\y1nd this dijference futes very well with the Place T for
Christ commanded firfl to teach the Nations which
are Strangers to G o t> and the Truth \ and after*
wardsj when they have fuhmitted themfelves to the
Truth^ to teach 'em thofe Precepts and Rules of Life
which are worthy God and the Truth they profefs.
The Order here obferv'd, fays St. ///><? w,' is ex-
cellent : He commands the Apoftles, firft to teach
all Nations ;, and after that, to dip them with the
Sacrament of Faith ; and then to fhew 'em how
they mult behave themfelves after their Faith and
Baptifm. Before Baptifm^ they are to he taught the
Truth of the Gofpel^ cfpecial/y matters of Faith ', hut
after Baptifm-) they are to he inftruEhed in the Chrif-
tian Morals^ and what concerns their PraEiice*
'TwouM be eafy to bring; feveral other Antho-
ritys •, but thefe I think fufficient to fliew that fome
of the beft Judges acknowiedg my Senfe of the
Word. And now, in the next place :
2. I am to confirm this to be the Meaning of it
in the Commifilon, by the feveral Verlions which
have been made : for of all I have yet feen, and
am capable of finding the Senfe of, nfot one ren-
ders it otherwife. Mr. Wall^ on this very Occa-
fion, takes the liberty pofitively to afTert, that
St. Afatthew wrote his Gofpel in Hebrew \ tho it
has been fhewn to be very improbable (or at
leaft exceeding doubtful) by Men of great Repu-
gruit. Jubet enim JESUS, priiis ut G^ntes a DEO ac
Veritace aliens Veritatein doceantur : deinde poftquam
Veritati colla fubdiderint, doceantur Pra:cepta Vita? DEO
ac Veriratedigns. Ordo eft pulchenimnsy iijqui: Hieronymus^
JhJJi^ Apollolos^ ut primum docerent Vniverfas Gentesy de'indcy
Fidei intingerent Sacramento^ fy pojl Fident ac Baptifma qua. ejjent
obferv.indu prjicipnent. Ante Baptifmum docenda eft Veritas
Evarvjelica, docenda funt ea potifllmuin quas funt Fidei,
poft Baptifmum ea quae funt Morura.
tation,
Let. 8. Htftory of Infant'^apti/m. 3 1 1
tation, and therefore is a Notion not fit to ground
an Argument upon. All the Ufe he makes of
this Remark, is to infinuate, that probably the
Word which St. Matthew originally us'd, might
better bear to be render'd, and more properly llg-
nify only to pro felyte or enter as a Dlfciple^ without
implying to teach^ as the Greek Word by which
it's tranflated does. His Words are theft : * The
common Language of the Jews, (in which Langitage
it was that St. Matthew wrote this Gofpel) as it does
not admit of this Phrafe^ an Infant is taught cr in-
ftruded *, fo it very well allows of this other^ fuch or
luch an Infant is enter'd a Difciple, or made a Pro-
felyte to fuch a Frofeffion or Religion.
Tho 'tis very doubtful at leaft whether St. Mat-
thew wrote in Hebrew or not, yet fuppofing he
did, our Adverfarys can have no Help from thence
at all : For,
1. 'Tis very likely, the antient Tranflator of
that Gofpel into Greek-^ whoever he was, (fome
think 'twas St. Matthew himfelf ) underflood the
Force of the original Word at leaft as well as our
Author can do, who does not kno^w what the
Word was. But,
2. We can't guefs what Word was us'd in the
fuppos'd Hebrew Original, better than from the
Hebrew and other Oriental Verfions which are
now extant ^ and thefe make ftrongly againft
Mr. Wall, Tht Hebrew Copy printed at Paris
15-84. reads lirj^M^ and that publilh'd by Hut-
terus reads Mnb from ID7, whofe Signification
no Man queftions to be didicitj docuit^ he learn d^
he taught J or the like. In Kal it fignifys learn,
Jerem^x. 2. \i\ Pihel teach^ as Pfdm 94. 12. The
Syriack Verfion likewife reads it o^.ia;^I.,
* Part II. pag. 578.
X 4 cxadly
3 1 2 ^efleSlions on Mr.WAYs Let. 8.
exaaiy in the fame Senfe, and from the fame
Root ^lia^ ervdivit^ he taught or inflriiBed^
The Arabian Tranflator ufing juft the fame
Word, reads Jj.Ou.l5 which fignifys properly
to teach, as Ads xix. 20. Matth. xiii. 52.. The
TerficJi indeed I know nothing of ^ but Mr. Sam.
Clerk of MeYton-CoViQgQ Oxon^ in the Polyglot^
tranilates the Place docete, teach ^ and therefore
'tis to be prefum'd that Verfion alfo favours our
Caufe as much as the others undoubtedly to do.
The Ethlopick is molt exprefs ; for I don't know
that (JviUi is ever once us'd to fignify any
thing elfe but teach^ learn^ &c. Wemmers in
his Lexicon^ and Ludolfus after him, and Cafiellus^
render it by teach^ but never give the leaft Inti-
mation that it is any where us'd in a Senfe which
can favour our Adverfarys \ and I think I may be
pofitive, no Man can produce an Inftance from
the Scriptures where it does not mean properly
to teach^ learn^ &c. except only from the Old
TeftamiCnt, where indeed it fometimes fignifys to
pr<?y ox plunder ^ a Senfe which can do our Antago-
nifts no Service : but the Lexicons furnilh us with
Inftances enough of its proper Senfe ; to which
might be added M.itth. xi. i. and i Cor. xv. 2, 3.
GaL i. 8, 9, and to the belt of my knowledg, all
other places where the Word occurs, at leaft in
the Kevv Teftament. It may be farther noted, that
this £f/,/^p/6-/^ Word bears confiderable Affinity in
Senfe, and is the fame in Orthography with the
Arahick ^ which is render'd peritus fuit^ he was
shlCd or learn d^ in the Catalogue drawn up by
the admiraole Bjchart^ and afterwards enlarg'd
by Lvdolfus^ to (liew the Agreement of the Ethio-
vick with other Ealtern Languages.
Hence
Let. 8. Hiftory of Infant-^aptifm. 3 1 5
Hence it's plain, all the Oriental Verfions we
know of, underftand and render the Commiffion
fo, as to make ^OHTeuo-aTe iignify to teach. To
thefe we may add Arias Mont anus ^ the Vv.lguir
Latin^ and that corrected by command of SixtvsV,
^f^^'s Verfion, and that oi Erafmus^ which ren-
der it by ilocete^ and Caftalioh^ which has it doElum^
teach. The old Italian Verfion reads infeanate to
teach J and Diodati renders it ammaeflrate^ in the
fameSenfe. A Spanifi Edition at hand, has en-
fennad *, the French printed at Lyons ^ renders the
Word by enfeigner *, and that which was made by
the Gentlemen of Geneva^ by infiruifer^ all figni-
fying properly and literally to teach : as likewife
do the Dutch Verfion, which reads leert., the Da-
mjh iaCXCX^ ^^^ ^^^^ Saxon Edition publifh'd by
Junius l^paS. And the late Verfion into the
Vulgar or Modern Greekj made for the ufe of the
Greek Church, renders it ci\//(x|eT£, the fame
Word which in Matth. xxviii. 20. (the Verfe next
to that which has the Word in difpute) our Adver-
farys fay, fignifys literally and properly to teach.
And 1 think all our EngUJIj Tranflations like-
wife do conftantly render the Commiflion, teach
all Kations, &c. which m.uft appear to be the
.true Senfe of the Place: for the admirable and
'exad Agreement of fo many, and perhaps all,
Tranflations *, and the Judgment of fo many
learned Gentlemen employed in making 'em, is
very confiderable, and will certainly be allow'd
a great Argument in the Cafe, ftrongly to con-
firm our Senfe, as exprefs'd in the common £w^-
liJJ} Vetfion, to be the true, and the moft con-
formable to the Original.
3. In the 3d Place I am to Ihew you that the
Fathers of the Primitive Church alfo underftood
the Words in the fame Senfe. Clemens Alexan-
drinus
5 1 4 ^fleSliojis on Afr.WallV Ler. 8.
drinus reads the Place thus : ^ 6'^ ^^o«f and preach
(fOi^VG-fftlt) and fuch as Jhall believe^ baptiz^e in the
Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost. So Orlgen like wife takes it in
this Paflage: -{- Tloe jipoftles therefore left Ifrael,
artd obeyed our SaviourV Command^ Teach all
Nations; and^ you fhall be unto me WitnefTes
both in Jervfalem^ and in all Judea^ &c. They did
therefore as they were commanded in Jerufalem and
Judea \ hut when the Jews rejeEhed the Word^ for a
Prophet has no Honour in his own Country^ then they
turned to the Gentiles. It's plain Orlgen fpeaks of
the Apoftles Preaching, and cites the Words in
difpute, Aiatth. xxviii. 19. as the Commifiion
Christ gave 'em to do fo. Again, mentioning
the Completion of feveral of our Lord's Pro-
phecys, among the reft he places this : |[ We every
day^ fays he, fee the fulfilling of thofe things our
Lord long fmce foretold^ as that the Gofpel jjjall be
preach' d in all the Worlds and that the Dlfciples going
forth Jhou^d f reach the Word to all Nations <y &C. In
another Place he takes notice of the Wifdom of Di-
vine Providence in facilitating the Work of the
Apoftles, by bringing fo great a Part of the World
* Epitom. pa g. 800. a. Vliexiov*\ii . lu/ifuosijif Kj w -wyet/-
'Ari'OT nNET'MATOS.
f Comment, in Matth. pag. 22$. Kcti ol 'ATn^o^ot //*
*i(n^\uoi Mdijuoi^ tvTZ 'h^v<Ta.Kvi^i jl^ men r^ 'hJklcf., x)
II Contra Celfum, Lib. 2. pag. 84.^ YLai etei of«f7€< tAm-
under
Let.8. H'lfiory of Infant-^aptifm. 5 1 5
under the Roman Emperour's Jurirdidion, * that
it might not be render d^ fays he, too difficult for the
jitoflles to execute the Commands their Lord had
given \m to go and teach all Nations. ^Tu certain
that Jesus xoas horn in the Reign of Auguftus, a
Vrince^ -who as it were prepared the way for him^ by
reducing fo many Kingdoms into one* For had all dif^
ferent States remain d difiinEt^ tender fepar ate indepen-
dant Governours^ it might have been a confiderahle
ObfiruBrion to thefpreading of the Do^rine <?/ J E s us
thro all the World. 'Tis plain that Origen in this
PafTage cites and underftands the Commiflion in
difpute, only in the Seafe we contend for ^ Teach
aU Nations^ being explained in the lall Claufe by
spreading the BoEirine ^/ J E S u s thro all the World*
The Expofttion of Faith attributed to St. Jufiin
has thisPafiage: f Our Lord Jesus Christ,
being about to return into Heaven after his R^efur*
region from the dead^ gives his ^poftles a charge
concerning teaching the Nations^ and the Docirine of
Baptifm^ in thefe Words \ Go teach, &c. ^ And
the fame Father , in his Treatife entitled ,
ji Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, fpeaking of
teaching and converting the Nations, and allu-
ding to the Commijlion, A/^rr. xxviii. 19- fays,
* Contra Celfum, Lib. 2. pag. 79.^ "Ij'f [x^ p(axi7m-npv
1<^ M f^£i BAtnheUi m-aroAAK? r ^^ 9^^- ^ '^ ^v eiXTn"^
t Expof. Fidei, pag. 37<^- '^ KT P I 02^ w,a6»j' IH-
•S.Or'^% XPI2T0^2, MJiJA rlui oit. KiK^ov AMgttoiVy
rVjj' ^ 'Ovc^.voif ^AvoJhv rsToinSmn idhKu^, j^ tUjj f 'EW>r
' When
5 1 6^ ^efleFiions on Mr.W^lYs Let. 8.
jj When Christ came arid fent forth his Vifclples^
he inftruBed (iixcdviTiv^iv) cr taught them^ j, e. the
Kations.
" Evfebius fays, the Apoftles went out and preach'd
to the ISIations "^ with the Power and Authority of
C H Ri ST, voho had, faid -unto ^ern^ Go teach all Na-
tions in my Name. By which it's plain he u«-
derftood thefe Words meant, to preach the
Gofpel.
The Jpojlolical Confiitutionsj which are of con-
fiderable Antiquity, tho not fo antient as 'tis pre-
tended, may ferve to ihew us likewife that tHe
more impartial Antients of the Time in which
they were compos'd, if we fhou'd allow 'em to
be Pasdobaptifts, ad more ingenuoufly than forrie
Moderns, and confefs the Words in difpute are to
be underllood in the Anti-pasdobaptifts Senfe, -a!s
appears beyond contradidion from thefe W^ords,:
'I" All Vngodlinefs and Impiety muft: be firfi removA-t
and the contrary Principles of true HoUnefs introduc^d^
and fo they mnji he baptized. For cur Lord com-
manded^ fiying^ Teach firfl all ISIations : and after
that he addsy And baptize 'cm in the Name, &C'
Whoever is the Author of the Homily s afcrib'd
to St. Clement ^ (perhaps 'tis the Interpolator)
•. II Pag. 272. ^XPIST'OS ^«T©" U9«V, c/)ct r MetSH'^"
^ Hift. Ecclef. , Lib. 3. cap. 5. 'E-; . A' t^? ? Kyi§vfy.cf
a-vv Avvct[jLH T X P I "-£ T 0~ T CiWi/T®" cLvrcli ftsro^Miyrti
(AA^nrdia-cLTi TiUPrvc ret ''ESj'») iv Td 'Q/o(aclt7 fx», &c.
f Lib. 7. cap. 40. "OvTw J^et )y ijua^_ (b^ti^v -n^cay
\^ya,-niCciKKibaA , )(J r ^dLTnijyLATQ- d^l^(jctt. >y "^ ^ ^
■•dvTii^ Hg TO "'Ovo^j^A Tvi 11 A T P O' 2 '^ tS' 'T I 0"T, iCj
7» 'A r r o T n n e t' m a t o 2.
fays
Let. 8 . Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. ^ 1 7
fays exa(^ly the fame thing in thefc Words, which
are fnppos'd to be fpoken by St. Peter j \\ When
our Lord fent vs to the ignorant Gentiles, to ba^^
t'tTLe ^em for the Remijfion of SinSy he commanded -us
firfi to teach ^em»
Epiphanius too paraphrafes the Words thus :
■^ Teach all Nations^ that is^ convert and turn the
Nations from their Corruptions to the Truth, And
to the fame purpofe St. Bafil fays, as he is tran-
flated by Mr. Wall himfelf, f They mujh be firfi in-
firu^ed^ and then admitted to Baptifm. This Au*
thor indeed fpeaks more fully here to this eifedt,
than Mr. Wall has cited him.
The Senfe of the Latin Fathers in this Cafe is
evidently the fame, from their tranflating the
Place conllantly, docete^ teach. Tertullian in his
Treatife of Baptifm reads the Words, Go teach
(docete) the Nations^ &c. To this he adds John
iii. 5. Except a Man be born again of Water and
the Spirit, &c. And from both concludes, that
)[ Faith and the Necejfity of Baptifm are very clofely
joind together j therefore all who believed were bap'
tizjd. So St. Paul when he believd was baptizj'd.
And a little after he lays, ^ Firfi they were to preachj^
arhd after that to haptiz.e. In another Place, on occa^-
li Cleitirntin. Horn. 17. cap. 7. 'E/f rd <zV-<*9w "EQj/jf
• •'f Epiphan. advcrf. Haeref. Lib. i. pag. 50. Mtf9«Tgy'<rfitT«
f De Baptifmo, 1. 1. c.2. p.d4^. D. As7 ^ts^Stov fjLetbifJMLtMeti
-iJ) K T P I' O, ^9 TOTS KAlct^iMvftt TK ct>/« Bc47r'//V/:/at']©-,
' II' Cap. 13. Ite, inquic, ■ docete Nationes, tinguentes eas,
&c. Huic Legi collata Definitio ilia : Nili quis renatus fue-
rit, &c, obftrinxit fidem ad Baptifmi neceflitatem. Ita-
qui omnes exinde credentes tinguebantiir. Tunc & Pau-
ilu&ubicredidit, tinftuseft.
"^ Cap. 14- Nam & prius eft praedicare, pofterius tinguere.
r,^ fion
^ 8 (^JleEllons on Kr.WallV Let.8.
fion of this Commiflion he fays, * The Apoflks
were appowted DoEhors or Teachers of the Nations.
But nothing can be more clear than the follow-
ing Words of the fame Father : When our Lord
'f- was going to his Father after his Refurrechion^
he commanded the Eleven Togo and teach (docere) the
Nations^ which were to be baptiz.^d in the Name^ &C.
The Avoftles therefore (who^ as their Name fgriifys^
were fent^ having by the Authority of the Prophecy in
the Pfalms elefted Matthias by Lot for a Twelfth in
Judas'/ Yoom^ and received the promised Power of the
H o LY Sp I R I T, to enable "* em to work Miracles^ and
fpeak with Tongues \ firfi preached Faith in Christ,
then conftitutcd Chvrches in Judea \ and afterwards
went out into all theWorld^ and publifli*d the fame
Faith among the Nations^ &c.
The Co^nfefTor Clarus^ Bifhop oiMafcula in Nu-
fTj/W^, referring to the Com million, Mat. xxviii. ip.
fays, they after the Apoftles II baptised the Faith of
Believers'^ that is, they baptiz'd according to the
Commifiion and Pradice of the Apoftles, fuch as
beUev'd, upon the Profeflion of their Faith.
To thefe I will only add St. Hierom^ and I
have done with this Head. He, commenting
* Prsfcripr. Hseretic. cap. 8. Nationibus deftinati 0oC-
tores Apoftoli, &c.
t Tertull. de Priefcript. Hseretic. cap. 20. Undecim
digrediens ad PAT REM poft Refurredionem, juiTit ire
& docere Nationes, intinguendas in PAT REM, &c.
Statim igitur Apoftoli (quos hsec Appellatio Miffos intcr-
pretatur) alTumpto per fortem duodecimo Alatthia in lo-
cum Jfuci<g, ex Audoritate Prophetiae, quae eft in Pfalmo
David, ccnfecuti promiffam vim SPIRIT US SANC-
T I ad Virtutes & Eloquium, primo per Judeam conteftata
iide in JESUM CHRISTUM, & Ecclefiis infti-
tutis, dehinc in Orbem profe^li, eandem Doftrinam cjuf-
dcm Fidei nationibus promulgaverunt, &c.
il Cyprian. deConcil.Carthag.Suftrag. 79. Credentium
Fidera baptizantes,
oa
Let. 8 . Hifiory of InfayiU^a^tifjii. 3 i p
on the Words of the Commiflion, fays, f The
Order here oh fervid is excellent : for he commands the
UpofileSj firfi to teach all Nations^ and after that to
drf them with the Sacrament of Faith ^ and then to
Jhirv ^em how they mufi behave themfelves after their
Faith and Bapifm^ And Mr. Wall has tranfcrib'd
Words to the fame effed from this Place of
St. Hterom^ which he thus tranflates : || They firfh
teach all the Nations^ then when they are taught they
baftiz^e 'em with Water ^ for it can't he that the Body
JJioud receive the Sacrament of Baptifm^ unlefs the
Soul have before receiv'^d the true Faith- This Paf^
fage, it ieems, had been made ufe of againft Pasdo-
baptifm : and Mr. Wall undertakes to anfwer the
Argument rais'd from it, by infinuating that the
Commiffion, and the Comment of SUjerom, re-
late only to Adult Perfons. But this is fo far from
lelTening, that it rather adds to itsftrength^ for
if this CommiiTion does not relate to Infant-Bap-
tifm, and therefore not authorize it, the Dif^-
pute's at an end, unlefs they can ihew us fome
other that does command it j which all Men
know cannot be done.
4. Having prov'd our Senfe to be the fame in
which the Fathers of the Primitive Church always
underftood the Commifllon ^ I am now in the laft
Place to confirm it to be the true, by what is infi-
nitely of more weight than any thing urg'd before,
I mean, by the Authority of the Sacred Scriptures
'themfelves.
t In Matth. xxviii. 19. Ordo prsecipuus, jufllt Apo-
ftolos ut primiim docerent univerfas gentes, deinde fidei in-
tingerent Sacramento, & port fidem ac Baptifma quae effent
-obfervanda prasciperent.
II Ibid. Primutn decent omnes gentes, deinde doftas in-
TtTi^nt aqua : Non enim poteft fieri ut corpus recipiat
Baptifmi Sacramentum, nifi ante anima Fidei fufceperit
vericatem.
And
320 (^flcBions on K^.WallV I.et.S*
And here vv^e might largely confider the Hiftory
of the Practice of the Apoftles in this matter, for
they undoubtedly aded in perfed Conformity to
the Diredions and Will of their Great Master,
and therefore their Pradice is juftly accounted
the bell Comment upon our Saviour's Words
and Inftitutions. Now they, 'tis plain, ( if the
Scriptures give us a good Account of the Matter)
conftantly taught firft and baptiz'd afterwards'-,
at leaft, 'tis on all hands allow'd, they took this
method with the Gentiles^ to whom they were fent
by this Commiffion : by which 'tis evident how
they to whom it was immediately given underftood
it, and that they thought it oblig'd 'em to proceed
in that manner. And this precedaneous Teaching
and Faith were neceffary, not only to render the
Perfons mlUng to be baptiz'd, as fome fancy, but
likewife fit to receive the Salutary Grace*, and
therefore St. Fhilif^ ^ even after the Eunuch had
difcover'd his willingnefs, and ask'd for Baptifm,
requires a hearty Faith, as a neceffary Condition
even in Perfons ever fo willing : If thou helieveft
with all thine hearty thou maffl be baptiz'd ;, and not
elfe, tho you defire it ever fo much.
But the Infcances of this kind are too numerous
.to be all repeated, and withal fo very eafy and
obvious, that it is needlefs to do it ^ for all the
Pallages in Scripture, which any way relate to the
Apoftles Pradice in the Matter, are of this kind.
Of St. Vaul and B amah as ^ when they came to Derhe^
Jtis faid, 'j^ they had preach* d the Gof^el in that City^
and had taught many. The Word in the Original,
'here rend red taught^ is the fame with that in the
CommilTion^ which makes this PalTage the more
confiderable, in that it fhews the Pradice of the
Atlsviii. 57. tAdsxiv.2i.
Apof-
Let.8. Hijiory of Infant^^aptif?n. ; z i
Apoftles, and at the fame time determines the
Senfe of that Greek Word to be as we contend.
Bat the parallel Places to the CommiiTion,
■Matth, xxviii. 19. put the Sehfe of it beyond dif-
pute ; for St. Mark exprelles it thus; ^ Go ye
into all the Worlds and preach the Gofpel to every Crea^
ture^ dice. St. Luke^ with reference to the fame
thing, fays, ^|* That Repentance ar^d Remiffon of Sins
jJjould be preached in his Name aynong all Nations*
And St. Teter himfelf, who received theCommiffion
immediately from the Mouth of our Lord, affures
us this was his Sacred Meanings for || he com-
manded us^ fays he, to preach to the People y &C.
all which fets the Matter in the cleareft Light ima-
ginable. And therefore, 1 think, I may fafely
conclude from the whole, that 'tis fully demon-
llirated to be one of the plaineft things in the
World that (UccGMTeija) fignifys properly to teachy
and that this is the Senfe of it particularly in the
Commifilon, Matth. xxviii. 19. And therefore
our Adverfarys when they cavil at this Senfe, do
at bed but trifle, and contradid the conllant Ufe
of theC7r^f,^ Word, and common Senfe of Mankind^
the unanimous Agreement of the feveral Ver-
fions % the joint Authority of the Primitive Saints^
the Judgment of the moll Learned Men •, and the
clear Meaning and Declarations of the Spirit
of God in the Holy Scriptures.
The Argument 1 advanced then, remains in its
full force and unanfwer'd:* namely, that unce
this Commiifllon impowers to baptize oidy
fuch.as it firft commands to be taught, there
is no warrant for baptizing Infants contain'd in
it ^ but on the contrary, infants are effciinjally
excluded, fuch Conditions being made necefiary as
* Markxvi, 15. | Lukexxiv. 47. 1| Aftsx. 42-
Y they
312 (J^fleBions on Mr.WaWs Let. 8 .
they are not capable of. And therefore, well
might I conclude as I did, that the Scriptures do
not leave the Matter fo doubtful as our Adver-
farys pretend. This very much alters the Cafe
from what Mr. Wall reprefents it to be, and fhews
his Scheme is not well laid : fo material an Error
being difcover'd in his very Foundation.
I defign'd to have added fome other Confide- ,
rations to the fame Purpofe : but what I have in-
filled on at large, efpecially the Senfe of Matth,
xxviii. 19. which is in it felf fo confiderable a
Part of the Difpute, and fo efiential to the
Determination of it -^ does plainly demonftrate,
that the Scriptures ^re not filent, but do fuffi-
ciently declare the Baptifm of Infants to be
no Divine Inftitutiou •, and that the Commilfion
to baptize was not intended to include Infants,
but purpofely excludes 'em. Shou'd our Author
therefore be able to prove ever fo folidly that
the Jews and Primitive Chriftians did ufe to bap-
tize their Profelytes together with their Infant
Children, we fiiouM notwithftanding have very
good Grounds to reject the Pradice. And this is
the firft thing I undertook to make out. What I
have fo largely and particularly faid concerning
fome Greek Words, does, 1 confefs, look like Pe-
dantry and Affedtation : but the Tenacioufnefs of
our Adverfarys, who are not fatisfy'd with a few
Inftances, together with your Commands, Sir,
are my Excufe. I am,
Yours, &c.
L E T T E R
Let.p. Hiflory of Infant'^aptifml 323
Letter IX.
yl/r.Wair^ jittemft founded on Mifi ah, HisVre^
. tences from the Jews examlnd : which he has col-
letted from the learned Men who heft underftood
their Writings, Their Authority of no weight : the
Reafons they go upon being too weak, ^Tis without:
Jufficient Ground that our Author afferts^ the Jews
make it plain they baptized their Profelytes before.
C H R I s T 'j time^ His Authority s too late. Great-
Alterations introduc'*d in ajhort time. The Paffacres
produced by Mr. Wall don^t fo much as intimate
that the Jews baptized Profelytes in our Say lou rV
time. There is no necejfity to under ft and the IVords
in y^r.Wall'i Senfe. 7^^ Jews us'^d to baptize for the
Pollution contra^hed in Circumcifion : which may be
the Baptifm fpoken of in the Talmud. Some of the
Rabbins plainly ftjew us they neither knew nor al-
lovo'd of any initiatory Baptifm. They ridicule cur
Baptifm as a fanciful Ceremony^ as appears from the
Antient Nizzachon, which fixes the Rife of the
Practice in Christ^ and mentions it as an Ini^
tiation peculiar to Chriftians : and oppofes to it the
Jewifll Circumcifion only. It appears further from
Rab. Ifaac. So that the Jewifh Writings^ if any
things prove contrary to our Author^ s Opinion. The
Authority of the Rabbins very infignificant^ and ne-
ver to be depended on. Their Writings in general
ftujfdwith very foolifii Romantic Tales. Their fabulcm
and ridiculous way of accounting for Christ'j Power
of Miracles., from Toldoth Jefchu. More In-
fiances of their ridiculom Whimfys^ from the Tal-
mud. Their foolift} Mifapplication of Scripture^
Y 2 Their
3 X4 ^fleSlions mt A/r.WaU'i Let.p.'
Their impious Reprefentatlons of G o D. A fahw
Ipus Account of the Origin of Rome. Another
^oncejping. R^ Elkrer, in Confirmation of their
fraditions. The ?h±Q of EWtz^V. Another Re a-
fon why the Rabbins are not to he relyd on isj
that they profefs to follow their VoBors in all they
ajfert^ the ever fo ahfurd. They prefer their
Talmud and Traditions before the , Scriptures
themfelves. The Chara^er of the Rabbins, Their
excejfive Pride* Their way of interpreting the Scrip-
tures...The Sanhedrim, tho made up of their heft-Men^
conffied only of Magicians j as themf elves affert^ &c.
'They have endeavour d to corrupt the Scriptures, All
Learned Men give the fame CharaEher of the Jews
md their jVrltings. So Mr. Le Clerc. Mr. Du
Pin. 7l</r.Dodwell. Scaliger. Nauclerus. Bux-
torf. Lightfoot. And the fame Char a^er is given
ef ^em by Christ himfelf too^ who cenfures ^em
more particularly on accaunt of their Wafliings*
Their Traditions wtre many and mifchievous. All
thefe things applfd to the prefent Difpute.
SIR,
IN my laft, I made it appear that Mr. Wall
is guilty of an Error in the very Groundwork
of his Syftem *, which, of it felf, utterly ilibverts
the whole. For what is built on an Error, that
is, on a Nullity, has no real Foundation, and muft
fink of courfe : and I hope to fatisfy you in the
Sequel that every part of his Scheme, and all his
Arguments Hand on the fame foot, and are as
ill fupportcd. For to fay, the Jews did initiate
their Profelytes and their infants by Baptifm, and
that the ApofLles and Primitive Church baptiz'd
the Infants of believing Parents, are miftakes^
and the Arguments brought to prove thefe two
Points are no better:
Firfl-,
Lct.p. H'lftory of Infant'^apti/m. ^25
Firlt, We will examine what our Author fays
as to the Praftice of the Jews \ and w^e fhall foon
fee he comes very fhort of proving that they did
in our Saviour's time, and before, initiate Pro-
felytes by Baptifm. His Teftimonys from the
Jevoi^i Writings, he fays, are taken from the moft
Learned and Judicious Authors, who belt under-
Itood that fort of Learning : fo that we may ex-
pcd in Mr. Wdl the united Itrength of our ablelt
Adverfarys all brought.
'Tis confiderable, Iconfefs, that fo many Lear-
ned Men favour the Opinion \ hut it will appear
from the Reafons they give for it, that they were
too credulous, and entertain'd it too eafily, which
leflens their Authority very much. Mr. Wall in-
timates that he is not very capable of fearching
into the Rahhlnkd Writings himfelf ^ but he and
all Men are able to judg whether the Arguments
urg'd from 'em, are fufficient to juftify the P^.
dobaptift Dodrine.
Our Author argues firft from the Jtvos them-
felves, who, he fays, make it f fvlly to appear
that the Cvftom of the Jews before our S a V i o u r'j
time was to baptiz^e as well as circumcife any Profe-
lyte^ S:c. Butthis is too haftily affirm'd. Several
Inftances I know are and may be produc'd, which
are exprefs, but it does not therefore follow, that
the Matter mult be fo clear and evident : on the
contrary it feems a doubtful Cafe at beil, even from
thofe very Palfages they cite ( if they are fup-
pos'd to be the beft ) whether this Cullcm be fo
antient as 'tis pretended •, for tho they plainly
fpeak of their Baptifm, they don't prove it was
pradtis'd in Christ's time, much lefs before it.
I think Mr. H^all cites only the two Talmuds^
M-nimonides^ znd Rabbi Solomon^ to confirm hisAf-
f Inti'od. pag. 5.
Y 3 fertion.
3 2^ ^fleSlions on Mr .Wall's Let.p-
fertion. Now feveral of the greateft Rahhins^ * as
Serira Gaon^ Jehuda Ben-Lcvi^ the Author oi Meor
Ef^ajim^ Abraham Ben-David^ Rah. Mlnchas^ Ifaac
Ahravanel^ &c. and from thefe the moft Learned
Chriftian Writers fay, The antienteft Part of the
*Tdmud^ namely that which is callM the Mlfchna^
was not compil'd till about 1 50 Years after the
DeftrudioD of Jerufalem. B uxt or f ^Siys^ The Je^
rufalem Talmud was compil'd by Rah* jochanan 230
Years after C h r i s t -}- : but the Gemara^ which
is the far greateft Part of the Babylonich Talmud^
was not made till 500 Years after Christ,
jior till 31 T after thcMlfchna^ zccordingtOu^braham
Ben- David and Ganz ||. Maimonides liv'd not till
above 1 1 co Years after Christ. Their own Chro-
jiologift places the Birth of our Lord An. 3761 ^^,
and the time of Maimonides about 4927 -f-j-,
that is, 1 166 Years after ^ and Rahhi Solomon liv'd
much about the fame time, or according to G'^^/z, |1|),
but 60 Years fooner.
Kow, Sir, can any reafonable Man take the
Reports of Authors who wrote fo long after the
Times they fpeak of, for a fufEcient Proof of
-what was done fo long before they were born?
Had they cited any others who liv'd in, or fo
near the Time of our Saviour, as to know what
was then prac^is'd, the Cafe wou'd have been dif-
ferent, and we muft have had recourfe to the Au-
thors they mention'd ^ but lince they have not
done this, 1 think I may fay Maimonides^ tho a
* Vid. R. D. Ganz in Tzemach David, ad An. 978.
Millen. 4.
f Abbreviatur. pag. 242.
11 Tzemach David an An. 260. Millen. 5.
** Ganz Tzemach David, Lib. 2.
tt Ibid. Lib. I.
IIJI Tzemach David, Lib. i. ad An. ^^6'-,.
great
Let.p. Hiflory of Infant-^aptifm. ^ij
great Man, cou'd know and relate what was done
I ICO Years before he was born, no better than
any other Man can now. And therefore fuch Au-
thority s in this Cafe may juftly be rejefted : for
every one knows how little Men, who write at
fuch a diftance from the Times they fpeak of, are
to be depended on, any farther than they pro-
duce fome more Antient and Authcntick Teftimo-
nies of one kind or other, in confirmation of what
they fay.
., ThtMlfchna^ or Text of the T^/wiW, tho much
the antienteft Authority produc'd, is not wholly
clear of this Exception. And if the Senfe of the
Places tranfcrib'd be fairly reprefented, at moft
itcarrys the matter no higher than to 150 Years
after the Deftrudion of Jerufalem-, (which hap-
pen'd Anno C h r i s t i 70) that is 2 1 o Years after
Christ. But will it follow, that becaufe this'
Book mentions x.\\Qjews baptizing their Profelytes,
therefore they us'd to do fo above 200 Years before
it w^as written ? We are convinc'd by many Exam-
ples what 200 Years can do in fuch Cafes. In the
very Cafe of Baptifm among our felves in England^
the manner of Dippings in about one quarter part
of the time, was totally difus'd, and fprinkling
fubftituted in its ftead, and urg'd as the molt
futable way, and as lawful as the other which
was more antient *, and all this not only without^ as
Dr. Wlnthy notes, but likewife contrary to the
Allowance of the Inftitutor, the Approbation of
the Eftablifii'd Church, and that exprefs Deter-
mination of the Council held under Kenwolfe^
which I mention'd before ^. And where's the
neceflity to fuppofe the fanciful Jews more con-
ftant and uniform in Religious Matters than our
felves ? Their frequent and fuddcn Relapfes into
*• Pag. 213.
Y 4 Ido-
328 (l{efleFltons on MrW^lYs Let. p.
Idolatry under their Judges and Kings, are Inftan-
ces of a different Temper.
But not to infift upon this: ThePafTages cited
by Mr. IVJl are fo far from proving, that not one
of 'em does fo much as afTeirt or intimate, that
the Baptifm of Profelytes was in ufe in our Sa-
V I o u r's time : how then cou'd he pretend it was
fo plain a Cafe ? The firft Citation he reads thus :
IVhen a Profelyte is receivd^ he muft he circumcised ^
and when he is circumcised^ they ba^tiz,e him in the
Trefence of two wife Men^ &c. But what of this ?
It fhews indeed what was the Method when
this was written : but from what Words is it to
be colleded, that the fame Cuftom had been ob-
ferv'd for 200 Years before ? which was the thing
to be prov'd.
Befides, there is no neceflity to underftand the
Words in Mr. Wdlh Senfe : and if it fhou'd be
argu'd that they do not fpeak of an initiatory
Baptifm, but only a Purification from the Blood
of Circuracifion, with which the Patient is fup-
pos'd to be defil'd^ I don't fee which way oar
Author wou'd be able to defend his Conftrudion.
The Commentarys on the Mifchna^ which are con-
iiderably later, perhaps may be allow'd in fome
meafure to favour our Author ^ but the Mifchna it
felf may very well mean another thing. For as
Mctiynonides notes, '{" The Stile of it is fhort^ and
capable of diverfe Senfes. That X\\Q Jervs^ on ac-
count cf feveral kinds of Pollution, us'd to pu-
rify themfelves by walhing, can't be queftion'd •,
the diverfe Wajhings mention'd in the Epiftle to the
Hebrews j|, make-it inconteftable. And 'tis plain
enoug,h, that upon fome fuch Kotion,. they were
walhM after the Sore af Circumcifion was heaPd,
t Porta Mofis, pag. 7B, 7^. || Ghap. ix. 10.
I " as
Let.p* Hiftory of Infant-^aptifm. 329
as are alfo the Mahometans ]] to this day from them.
And this Pollution feems to have been contracted
from the Blood of Circumcilion^ for thus theCW-
dee Paraphrafe which goes under the Kame of Jo^
natha?i\^ interprets the Words Ez.ek, xvi. 6. of the
Blood of Circumcifion, from which 'ver*9. God
fays. He wafli'd and cleans'd 'em : and the Jews in
their fecond Benedidion f after Circumcifion ap-
ply the Words in the fame manner. And there-
fore 'tis obfervable, even all natural-born Jews were
wafh'd with this Baptifm, except only Females, as
Dr. Hyde ^ likewife notes, who not being circum-
cis'd, were not wafli'd till they had contracted
Pojlution fome other way : and this plainly inti-
mates that there was a Baptifm thought necelTary
on account of Circumcifion, or fome Pollutioa
contracted thereby \ otherwife Perfons who had
been circumcis'd wou'd not have been oblig'd to a
Baptifm, from which others who cou'd not be
circumcis'd were excus'd.
Why then mayn't the Tdmud be underflood to
mean only this wafhing for Pollution by Circum-
cifion? This was to be done as foon as the Cure
of the Sore was accompliihM, and fo was that
fpoken of in the Talmud : they are the fame there-
fore in refpeCt to Time, and I don't underftand
how a Perfon cou'd be wafn'd with two different
Walhings at one and the fame time.
Further, the Antiquity, &c. of the Praaice
is rendred dubious by the Difagreement of the
Rahhins. Some plainly a'flert it *, and others as
plainly intimate they neither knew nor allow'd of
fuch an initiatory Ceremony. There is no need to
!} Bobov. deXurcarum Liturgia, pag. 23. & Coippend.
Theol. Moham. per Reland, pag. 59.
f Vid. Buxtorf. Synag. Judaic, pag. 100.
^ In Not. 39. ad Bobov. Trad. pag. 22. a.
be
3 3 o ^fleHlons on Mr.^AXs Let.9.^
be large in the Proof of this \ and therefore I fhall
inftance but in one Author or two.
They who have read their Writings againft the
Chriftians, muft have obferv'd they ridicule the
Sacrament of Baptifm as an unaccountable and
fanciful Ceremony. The anonymous Author of
the antienteft Niz.z,achon frequently touches upon
it with his ufual Gall, and wou'd expofe it as very
abfurd and foolifh ^ which to me is a clear Ar-
gument he did not apprehend that our Baptifm was
borrow 'd from the Jews ^ nay he argues againft it in
one Place, where he fays, "^ It is no where command-
ed to f lunge Verfons or Profelytes into the Water, Why
therefore does J e s o s command to do fo ? The Au-
thor muft needs be underftood to fpeak here of
the Baptifm of Profelytes ^ for he cou'd not have
faid in general of all other Baptifms, they are no
where commanded. In another Place, attempting
to fhew the Infignificancy and Ufelefnefs of our
Sacred Inftitution, he fays, '|- From what Sin or
*Vncleannefs does this Baptifm furify? What Sin or
Pollution is there in Infant Children^ that ye haptiz,e
them ? His oppofing our Baptifm fo eagerly, muft
import they had no fuch thing in ufe among
them. The whole Page indeed is to our pur-
pofe, but there are two or three Words I can't
v/ellpafsby: thQ Rabbin had faid, that Chriftians
ought to be circumcis'd in Imitation of C h r i s t
and the Apoftles, as well as baptiz'd in Imita-
tation of 'em : to which, in the Name of the
^ Pag. 55. ^^ o^DD D-iN' p yht^nh b3^
t Ibid. pag. 192. HKD^ILDl NtDH HD DDT^t: STDU;
• ' Chrifti-
Let. 9^ Hijiory of hfant-^aptifm. 3 3 i
Chriftians, he makes this Objection, ||TWChrist
came to renew the Law^ and that he had laid ajide or
abolijh^d Clrcttmcifion^ but inftituted Baptifm, The
Rabbin's blafphemous Anfwer to this fhall not be
repeated, as making nothing to the Point ^ only we
may obferve, the Objedion places the Rife and
Validity of Baptifm in Christ's Inftitution:
and the Jf IP does not, in con tradition, fay, it was
borrow 'd from them *, or that fince it had been a
Pradice under their Difpenfation, there was as
much reafon to abolifh that as Circumcifion, or
the like : for a cavilling, quarelfom Jew might
have faid a hundred fuch idle things on this
occafion, if he had underftood that Christ
adopted the Ceremony from them.
Perhaps fome may think thefe Citations from
the antient Niz,z.achon don't prove, that the Author
of it knew of no fuch Baptifm among the^^irj as he
found pradis'd by the Chriftians j therefore I will
add, that he exprelly fixes the Rife of the Prac-
tice in Christ and St. John his Forerunner ^ for
he makes thefe trifling Reflexions on Johns Bap^
tifm, and the Words in Matth. iii. 5, 6. f But
what fignify'd all this ? Who gave John Fower and
Authority to inftitute this Baptifm ? Vpon what Law
coud he ground the Fancy ? neither on the Old nor
the New. Had it been a Cuftom among them-
felvesj 'twou'd have been eafy to fee from whence
St. John deriv'd it, and the Rabbin won d not
have fail'd to put us in mind how much we
were beholden to them for the fubftantial Cere-
f Ibid, pag.195. unv^ nvs »»i r\r^h ^d^di
monys
351 (^fleBions on Mr.WallV Lct.p]
monys of our Religion ^ and that we copy'd our
Rite of Initiation from their Traditions.
In another Place, upon the Story of the young
Man who ask'd our LOR D, what he rnufl: do
to inherit eternd Life^ Mark X. 1 7, &c, this fame
Writer obferves, that Christ -j- does not com-
mand him to be haf^izjd^ nor take any notice of
that novel Invention, hut only inculcates to him the
Old Commandments, By which Oppofition ot Old
Commandments to Baftifm^ he plainly fignifys, that
he took the Baptifm of C h r i s t to be a new
Inftitution of his own, and fomething fingular
too, or at leaft not us'd by themfelves ^ elft he
wou'd not have been fo much difturb'd at it, and
argu'd againft it fo frequently. He mentions
Baptifm alfo as the Initiation peculiar to Chrif-
tians, and oppofes to it Circumciiion only, as the
Initiation of Profelytes to Judaifm. The Pallagc
is longer than I am willing to tranfcribe, and
therefore 1 refer you to the Book it felf jj.
The Senfe however is much the fame with what
Kah, Ifaac has exprefs'd in thefe Words : ^ They
have abrogated Circumcifion^ and fubfiituted Baptifm
in its fie ad *, as they have likewife done with the Sab*
bath^ infiead of which they obferve the frfl Day of the
Weeh
t Pag. 221. ^^x nSow r\)i>)}^ ^ no^ nh
li Page 242 243, and 251.
♦ ChifTuk Emunah, pag. 401. ^7*0 TS^'^'^ *1 7^3
^^D I'pton pi p^^'^r\ cpvD vnnn D^n^iu?^
&c.
This
Let.p. Hijlory of Infrnt-^aj^tifm. 355
This is exceeding plain , for as they kept a
rew Day inftead of the antient one, fo he fays
they have in like manner fubftituted a new Cere-
mony of Initiation inftead of the old one : nay,
in the very next Words he complains the Chris-
tians have abcltjlj'^d the whole Law-, and all the divine
Preccps which the Law makes necejfary^ except only
fame things in relation to Inceft^ &c. Here he enu-
merates feme of the moral Precepts, but does
not mention Baptifm at all •, which therefore I
argue was, in this Author's Judgment, no Inftitu-
tion of Mofes^ nor pradis'd by the Jews before
Christ, becaiife he aflerts the Chriftians had
abolifh'd all Rites befides thofe excepted, in the
number of which he has not plac'd Baptifm.
And when fome Chriftians had objeded to the
Jews^ that they only circumcis'd the Males, with-
out ufing any initiatory Ceremony for Females,
whereas the Chriftians by Baptifm initiate both
Sexes : If the Jews had us'd Baptifm, they might
have reply'd, they did as much as the Chriftians :
and yet the Author of (a) Nlz,z.achon does not
make the leaft mention of it, but turns off the
Objedion another way.
What has been faid, makes it, I think, very
clear,
1. That the Paflages Mr. Wall cites from the
Text of the Talmud^ may only fpeak of Baptifm
for Purification, and not of Baptiftti for Pro-
felytes.
2. That none of the Jfir/y/j Writings, produced
by him, do aflert or imply, that Profelytcs were
in, or fo much as near C h r i s t's Time, ufually
initiated by Baptifm \ which hov/ever was what
our Author fhou'd have prov'd : But on the con-
trary,
(4) Pag- 251. mej.
3- Some
354 ^fle8ions on Mr.WallV Let.p^
3. Some of the R-abbins manifeftly fpeak of
that Chriftian Ceremony as an Invention of
St. John and our Saviour; and affirm it ex-
prefly to be altogether new, and not grounded
upon any Law. From all which I may fafely con-
clude, that the faid Jewijh Writings are very far
from proving what our Author, and the Gentle-
men he tranfcribes, have undertaken to eftablifh.
For, in. fhort, if any thing is to be coUefted from
'em, 'tis the contrary to that Opinion : none of
'em fay as our Author does, that the Jews before
and incur Sky loxi sCs Time^ us'd to baptize their
Profelytes \ but fome, as I have fliewn you, di-
rectly aflcrt, that this initiatory Ceremony was
not pradlis'd till St. John\ and C h r i s t's Appear-
ance, whom they make to be the firft Authors of
it : fo that it cou'd not be borrow'd from the
Jews. And as for any later Pradices of this be-
wilder'd People, they can be of no ufe to illuftrate
our L o R d's Defign in the Inftitution. And in-
deed, 'tis at belt a very odd Attempt, to put fo
violent an Interpretation on our L o r d's Words,
merely from the Authority of the Rabbins.
But in anfwer to Mr. Wall\ arguing from the
Jewijh Writings, 1 have this farther to fay, that
if the Rabbins had univerfally aiferted in fo many
Words, That the Jews always did ufe to initiate
their Profelytes by Baftifm ; and that St, John and
Jesus Christ borrowed the Ceremony from them ;
I fhou'd neverthelefs think it the greateft Folly
and Madnefs in the World, to believe it on their
fole Authority. All who are acquainted with
t\\Qjews know, it is not without very good rea-
fon that I fay this ; for they are a defpicable,
ignorant, and whimfical fort of Writers, whofe
Credit is at the loweft ebb imaginable.
Tho
Let.9. Hifiory of Infcint^^aptifm. 3 3 5^
Tho this Charader of 'em is notorious e-
nough \ yet becaufe our Adverfarys mention
the Rabbins fo much in this Difpute, and f Dr.
Hammond calls their Authority (not over-prudent-
ly) the true Bafis of Infant -B aft ifm \ I think my
felf oblig'd to confirm what I here advance, be-
ing under a kind of Promife likevvife to aflign
fome of the Reafons which prove the Rabbins
and their Writings are of no Weight, and that
their Teftimony can't be rely'd on by any who
love the Truth, and take a prudent Care not to.
be impos'd on, in their Search after it.
I. In purfuance of this, Sir, I'll firft give you
a Tafte of their Writings, whefeby you may judg
what romantick Authors they are. All their
Books, and almoft every Page in 'em, are fo full
of Paflages which demonftrate this, that I'm at a
Lofs where to begin, and what to fingle out *, for
to mention all of this kind, wou'd be to tran-
fcribe their whole Books :. Bat I will only pre-
fent a Specimen, which (hall convince you what
Gallimaufrys make up their Compofitions. That
deteftable Libel, entitl'd, Toldoth Jefchu, is iill'd
with nothing elfe but the grofTell Fallhoods and
Blafphemys, and all alTerted with as much Ailli-'
ranee, and under fuch pretences of Serioufnefs
and Honefty, as if they were certain Truths. It
wou'd be criminal barely to repeat Words fo ex-
travagantly Impious, wherewith they flanderoufly
abufe and affront the Lord of Life \ and there-
fore if you defire to know more particularly what
that bafe Author writes, I refer you to the Book
it felf, rather than blot my Paper with the Re-
petition of many things it contains.
Some however of the lefs fliocking I'll venture
to mention : The many and prodigious Miracles
t Six Qnerys^ p. 1^5. Margin.
our
3 3 6 (l(efleFtions on iVr. Wall'x Let.p.
our Lord wrought were too apparent and cer-
tain to be deny'd ^ and therefore thefe Authors
woa'd, with their Fathers, evade the Force of
'em, by attributing 'em to Enchantments, and the
Power of Devils. The Relation is very long,
however I'll begin it, becaufe it may fhew what
Heed is to be given to their Traditions ^ and
what reafon Chriftians have to regard thofe Wri-
ters, who can thus traduce the moft innocent and
unfpotted Life that ever was in Hiftory, and ob-
stinately difown the moft apparent Operations of
a divine Power. David, the /6V^^, they fay, in
^ig^wg the Fou7jdatlotJ^ found a Stone laid over the
Mouth of a Pit^ on which was infcrlb^d the Proper
JSlame of God: this he earned to he taken -up^ and
fUc'd in the Holy of Holies* And the wife Men
fearing lefl fome ov er- cur iom young Men might learn
this Name^ and by the Power of it caufe great Diftur-
bances in the World \ made^ by their M.-igick Art^ two
braz^en Lions^ which they fet at the Door of the Holy of
Holies^ one on the right hand^ and the other on the left ^
that if any Jhoud enter in^ and learn this fecret Name^
the Lions^ as he came out again^ Jhoud^ by roarings
ftrike him with fuch Terror and Confufion^ as to
caitfe him entirely to forget the Name he had learn d^
iVtfn? the Rumour being fpread^ that Jesus, G^r.
he left the vpfer Galilee, and came privately to Je-
rufalem, and entring into the Temple^ learned the
Holy Letters J and writ the incomprehenfihle Name an
a Parchment :j and frfl uttering the N^.mc as a Charm
that he might not feel any Pain^ he cut a Gaflj in his
Fl'cjl}^ and put into it the Parchment which contain d
the myftcriota Name ^ and then immediately pronoun^
cing the Name again^ the Flefu w^.s pcrfdily hsai^d
vp as at firfi* As he came cvt^ the braz.en
Lions fet up their Roar -^ and frighted the Name quits
mtt-^f his Mind. Vpon whiih^ he went immediately
without the City j and^ ■ opening the Flefj^ took out the
hidden
Ler.9. Htfiory of Infant'^aptifm. 5 3 7
hidden Parchment^ and by thefe means again.learnt the
fowerful Nam€> After this^ he went into Bethlehem
of Judea, the Place of his Nativity^ and began to cry
rvith a loud Foice^ and fay ^ &C. I am born of a pure Vir"
gin^ 6tC. I am the So s of GoD, and the Prophet Efaias
prophefy'd of me^ f^y'^ng^ Behold a Virgin fliall con-
ceive^ &c, I made even my fdf\ and the Heavens
and the Earthy the Sea^ and all things^ were made by
me, Vpon this^ fome ask him^ faying^ Shew us by
fome Sitrn or Wonder that thou art God. To whom
he anfwerd^ f^^y^'^^-i P'""^^^ hither a dead Body^ and
I will raife it to Life* With that^ they fell to dig-
ging tip a Grave with all Expedition ^ and finding no-
thing but dry Bones ^ they told him^ we have found here
only the Bones* Well^ bring ^em here into the midfi^
fays he* And when they had brought ^em^ he fitted
every Bone to its Place^ cover d ^em with Skin^ and
Flejh^ and Nerves \ and the Body became alive^ and
arofe^ and flood on its Feet : and the whole Company
faw the Wonder^ and was amazjd* -^Bring hi-
ther a Leper^ fays he-y and I will heal him. And when
they had brought one to him-, he in like manner healed
him by the insomprehenfible Name : which when they
that were with himfaw-^ they fell down before him^ and
worfhip^d him J f^ying^ Thou art indeed the S o n 0/
God.
With what amazing Impudence and Blafphemy
is this abfurd Fable related ! The whole Libel
is of apiece with this, and a remarkable Inftance
of Rabbinical Honefty and Good Senfe •, which
fhou'd never be forgotten. The fame Libel con-
tinues thus :
One of the wife Men proposed to the reftj If it may
he thought fit^ let one of m alfo learn the Name^ and
thereby he enabled to do thefe Wonders as well as He^
and perhaps by thefe means we may take Him* The
Sanhedrim approv d of the Advice j and decreed^ that
3 3 8 <B^fieBms on Af'-.WallV Let.p :
whofoever Jhou'*d learn the Name^ and thereby difco^
"uer and expofe Jesus, he jhou^d receive a double
Reward In the other World. Then one of the wife
Men rvhofe Name was Judas, fiood -up^ and faid^ I
will learn ity And then they add the following
Story : J E s 0 sfaldy Does not Efaias prophefy of me ?
arid my great Forefather David likewifefays of me^
The Lord faid unto my L o r d, &c. And again^
Thou art my Son, this Day, &c. And now I
will afcend to my Father who is in Heaven^ and I
will ft at his right hand ^ and this I will do before your
Faces *, bttt thou Judas (Imlt never come there. Then
Jesus immediately pronouncing the mighty Name^ a
fudden Wind arofe and carrfd him into the Air^
where he remain d between Heaven and F/irth, Judas
in like manner pronouncing the Name^ was alfo carry d
tipy andfo they both flew about in the Air^ to "the great
Amaz,ement of all the SpeSiators. ^wf Judas again
pronounci7Jg the Name ^ falls on J eSu s, defigning to
caft him down headlong ^ while Jesus alfo pro-
nouncing the Name ^ endeavour'* d to caft down Judas:
and thm they continud ftrvggling together. But when
Judas faw he coud not prevail againf Jesus, he
vrind') andfprinkl^d it upon him ^ by which being ren-
deid unclean^ they both fell down to the Earth toge-
ther^ and were deprived of the Power of the incompre-
henfihle Name^ till they had wajlj^d themfelves.
If you pi cafe, you may fee more ft ill of their
Konfenfe and intolerable blafphemous Reflexions
on the Blefled Jesus, colleckd by Vcrf^ius in his
Obfervations on D. GanzJs Chronology, at Page
Tho thefe Writers don't always vomit out
the fame Malice as^when they treat this Sub-
ieei, yet they ever fall into the fame Deliriums
of a rambling Fancy, and fcora to be confin'd,
fo much as even to Probability and Decorum.
f will make out this even from their Talmud it
felf,
Let. 9. Htflory of Infant^^aptifm. 339
lelf, for which they have all fo great a Venera-
tion. 'Tis a Medley, a Hotchpotch of the molt
ridiculous and fenfelefs Fidions, and a vaft Gol-
leftion of Foolerys : and you will fee I don't
wrong it, when you look over the following In-
ftances.
* j4s the wife Men were once fitting in the Gate^
two Lads -pafs^d by ^em , one according to the Cuftom
kept his Head cover d^ hut the other vncover^d his
Head* Of him that had -uncovered his Head^ R. E-
liezer faid^ He was a Bafiard, R. Joihua faid^ He
was the Son of a Woman fet apart for Vncleannefs*
But R. Akiba faid^ he was both a Baftardj and the
Son of an vnclean Woman* The reft of the wife Men
fay to R. Akiba, How comes it to fafs^ that you con-*
tradiB your Companions ? He anfwer^d^ I will confirm
what I have faid : and prefently goes to the Mother of
the Lady whom he found in the Market felling Pulfe^
He fays to her ^ Daughter ^ if J^^ will fat is fy me in
the thing 1 fhall ask youy ^ I will make you to enter
into eternal Life* Says fhe^ Swear to me* Where--
"Upon R. Akiba H did fwear with his Lips^ but not in
his Hearty &c. And after this, he put the Quel^
tion to her, which fhe anfwer'd, proving the Per-
fon to be illegitimate, &c.
Such Tales as thefe, which the greateft Rabbins
fo gravely employ themfelves in, wouM not pafs
with old Women and Children in a Winter-Even-
ing. Belides, you may obferve their Integrity
here : R* Akiba is reprefented fwearing falfly, in
contempt of the Decalogue-, tho at other times
♦ Maffechet Chalk.
Z 2 he
340 (^fteBions on Mr.WzWs Let.9.^
he is calFd the '|- Glory of the Law : and was fb
nicely confcientious of keeping the Traditions of
the Elders, that when he was in Prifori, and
wanted Water to drink, he chofe rather to wafh
his Hands with what he had, than drink it to
fatisfy his Thirft, faying, "^ / had better die with
Thirfly than tranfgrefs the Traditions of the Elders *
And yet this Zealot made nothing of Perjury *,
which is all one as to fay, the Traditions of the
Eiders are more to be regarded than the Law of
God.
And what Arrogance and Blafphemy is it for
the vile Wretch to afTume to himfelf the Power
of admitting into Heaven, and diftributing Re-
wards there*, when this, we know, is folely the
Prerogative of the Eternal King? and blelTed
be His Kame that it is fo ! , :^
The Talraudical Treatife tht^ Qd\\ Sanhedrim
has the following inlipid Pafiage. 0^ Rabbins
tellm^ that Jesus had five Difciplesy Mathai, Na-
kai, isieT-er, Bona, and Thoda. IVhen Mathai was
brovght into Court^ he argtid^ 5/?om'^^ Mathai be put
to Deaths feeing it is written ('Ha Mathai) When
fhall I come and appear before God? But they
anfwer^d him^ Ought not Mathai to die ^ when it is
.written. QjDt^ Mathai) When (hall he die, and his
Kame perifh ?
Afterwards they. brought i'd/i^^kdi'^ andhe flcadedj
5/WMsakai be put to Veathy tho it be written^ The
innocent (i- e. 'pD). and righteous flay thou not ?
'.But. they an I wer^ a him^ Shoud not 'i^dk'Ai^die^ when
'tis faid^ In the fccret Places doth he mur^r the
Tniioceat' (*p!r}r ~ '
f Sot a. T\'^r\7\ liaD
After
Ler. p. Hijlory of Infant-^apti/?n. 3 4 1
^fier him they brovght in Nezer, who faid^ Shall
Kezer be put to Deathy when it is written (l^j Ne-
zer) a Branch fhall grow out of his Roots? To
whom they anfwerd^ Shall not Nezcr be put to Death^
feeing it is written^ Thou art caft out of thy Grave
like an abominable Branch ? (/. e. in Hebrew nyj
NeTier).
Next they brought Boni, and he argud^ Shall Boni
die^ when ^tisfaidj Ifrael is my Son ('JD), my Firft-
Born ? But they anfwer^d^ Shall not Boni die^ when
"'tis written^ I will flay thy Son ( ^3D ) even thy
Firft-Born.
Lafi of ally they bring Thoda, who pleaded^ Shall
Thoda be put to Deaths when it is written^ A Pfalm
of Praife ? ( miD'? ) to which they anfwer% Shall
not Thoda be put to Death^ feeing it is written^ Who-
fo offers Praife (or n"nr)7) glorifys me?
In one place the Talmud fays, -^ There are three
Watches in the Night j in every one of which the Holy
and Ever-blejfed ONE roars out for Grief like a
Lion^ and fay Sy Wo is Me^ that I have made deflate
my Houfcy and burnt my Temple^ and that I have
made my Children captive to the Heathen ! Surely
none but Madmen wou'd dare to make fuch grofly
wicked Reprefentations of tke infinite Maiefty of
GOD.
In the faid Trad, the Great GOD is a little
after defcrib'd howling in the fame manner again :
fometimes he is reprefented praying ^ fometimes
weeping, &c. in this one Book, calFd Berachoth^
which treats of Prayer and Thankfgiving. And
^ Berachot. Fol. 3. a. n^OH VH nnOti^D ]i;h\i}
•VDiNi nxD 1H^\:)^ n^pn ou?v TDc»a Sd ^p
2: 3 for
34^ ^fleHions on Mr.WxlYs Let. ^]
for an EfTay of their Philofophy and Divinity^
let this fuffice. ^ When G o p calls to mind the
'Troubles of his Children^ among ffcf Gentiles, it makes
him drop two Tears into tht Ocean ^ the found of which
is heard from one end of the World to the other *, and
this is the catife of Earth^vahes.
I will tranfcribe one PalTage more concerning
G o d's weeping, tho it be pretty long, and very
foolifh : but it Ihews how grofs the Underftand-
ings of thefe Men are. -{- Jufi as the Enemys went
into the SanEhuary^ and burnt it with Fire^ the Blef-
fed God faid^ Now I jhall have no Habitation upon
Earthy &c. Then God rhourn^d and lamentedy
faying^ Wo is me I What have I done ? I did fvffer
my Schechina to dwell in the World^ hecaufe of the
lews^ hut now they have finnd^ and I am returned to^
my antient Habitation^ I jliall become the Scorn of
the Nations y &c, While he was breathing out
thefe Complaints^ Metatron came^ and frofirating
kimfelf on his Face^ cry^dj O thou Lord of the
whole' Worlds I will lament and mourn ^ but weep
not Thou, To whom the Ever-blejfed GOD made
anfwerj If thou dofi not allow me to weep here^ fll
give my felf wholly up to my Grief ^ G 0 D
came down *, his holy jingels^ and Jeremiah the Tro*
fhet going before him : when he came to his Temple^ he
faidy This doubtlefs is my Houfe^ into which my Ene-
mys have enter dy and have done what they pleased*
Then he began to grieve and lament : Wo is me ! that
tny Houfe is defrofd* O my Children ! where are
»Berachot.fol.59.a. VDD DX 1DM HDpnU? j;DtS^3
•NniJi rj>7r\ '^did iyi
t In EchaRabbati, fol. 55. b.
you ?
Let.p. Hiflory of Infant'^aj)ti/m. 345
you ? O my Triefis I where are you ? O my Friefidf !
where are you f What Jha/l I do for you ? I warnd
you^ hut you woud not repent. Then turning to Jere-
miah, he faid^ biC.
I believe you are fufficiently tir'd with thi%
Stuffy but I muft defire you to read one Example
or two more, from the great abundance of which
the Talmud and Commentarys, &c, are made up.
^ GO D kifs'd our Mafter Mofes on the Mouth \
and when he perceived tt took away his Breathy and
that he was dead^ he fell a weeping. The Founda-
tion and Origin of Rome is thus ftory'd in the
Talmud : '1" At that time^ when Salomon married
Pharaoh'j Daughter^ the Angel Gabriel defccnd-
ed^ and f.vd a Reed in the Sea^ which drew '-up
the Mud^ upon which was built that great City
Rome. This Fable is more at large fet down in
the Midrafch Rabha Cantic chap- i. ver. 6. Buxtorf
has tranilated the Place in his Talmudical Lexicon^
at the Word CDII, where he has alfo coUeded
feveral other Pafiages which relate to this matter,
from the Talmuds and Midrafchim : all which does
molt abundantly fhew the great Ignorance of
thefe whimfical Hiftorians ^ and that they are no
more to be rely'd on, than the Popiih Legends and
jAves of their Saints.
Among other things which I am unwilling to pafs
by, is that ftrange Story oiR. Eliez.er^ which I will
endeavour to abbreviate what 1 can. After EUe-
* Midrafch. Chumafch prope fin. *)pl^3 7^'27)T\
t Sanhedrim fol. 21. b. fn:j f— )j< HO^ti^ ^\i>W
''im2v biiJi ^-13 nD3 vSyi pon^&s^
2 4 ^^r
344 ^fleclions on Kr.WallV Let.9.
zer had done feveral flrange things to prove the
true Tradition was in him, it follows, ^ If I am
fojfefs^d of the Tradition^ fays he, let the neighbour-
ing River teftlfy It, And immediately the River
turn'd its Cvrrent the contrary way. But his Adver-
sary s not being fatisfy'd with this, he fays again :
If I hold the Truth^ then let the Walls of this School
hear witnefs of it : and immediately the Walls began
to lean as if they woud fall. Vfon which R. Jofhua
Cry^d outy and faid to the V/alls^ If the Difciples of
the wife Men difpiae among themfelves concerning
"Tradition^ what is that to you^ that you begin to move ^
At this, in refpeB to Jofhua, the Walls were with-
held from falling quite down : and in honour to Eliezer
they remain leaning to this day, • R. Kathan,
by chance^ met with Eiias, and asJCd him^ What
GOD did at that time^ when the Rahbins were fo
hotly engaged, concerning T'radition f Elias anfwer jd-^
Why tr'vly-, he laughed, and faid^ My Children have
conquer d me^ my Children have conquer d mc, 6fC.
Thus they approve themfelves to be what our
Saviour calls 'em, blind Quides^ who lead the
Blind, drc.
The magnify'd Flrh of R, EUe^cr^ which are
adorn'd with the higheft, Encomiums of Divine,
Holy^ S:c. are in like manner nothing elfe but a
Collection of the fame kind of ridiculous fenfelefs
Storys, as thofe which compofe the Talmud. In
one place, for Inft^nce, reckoning up feveu mira-
culous thiugs, the fourth is this : '(- That from the
Creation, no Man had ever been fick, but Men were
taken with a fudden Sneez.ing^ and fo fneez?d out their
Souls at their Nofes, till our Father Jacob, C^c. And
fo all the reft of that admir'dTreatife is nothing
elfe but fjch like filly Wbimfys, rak'd together
without any Judgment or Defign.
* BavaMetzia fol. 59. 9» t Cap. $2-
Another
Let . 9 . Hijiory of Ijifant-^Bapttfrn. 345
Another thing I wou'd obferve to you, in order
to (hew how little the Rabhws are to be trufted in
any thing they fay, is the great Refpe^ and Vene-
ration they exprefs for their whimfical Do6i:ors,and
all their Traditions, which they publickly profefs
to follow, let 'em be ever fo abfurd. Thus R. Sa-
lomon Jarchi^ on Deut. xvii. 1 1 . determines that
the Wife Men muft be fubmitted to, even ^ tho
they jlwud fay the right Hand is the leftj and the left
the right: And therefore 'tis a Law in the Talmud^
that 'f- xvhofoever refufes to obey the Wife Men^ jhall
he put to Death. And the great Ahba^ as 'tis noted
above, was fo zealous for this, that he chofe rather
to die of Third, than not wafh his Hands accord-
ing to the Traditions of the Elders, with that
fmall Portion of Water which was allow'd him in
Prifon. And in the fame Place there is this Sen-
tence, 11 Whofoever defpifes the Words of the Wife
Menjhall be caft into Hell ; for according to R, Ez^e-
chiahj an Author of great Ufe and Authority
among the Jews-, "^^ he that contradicis his Teacher ^
does as bad as if he contradiBed God himfelf.
Nor are they content with all this, but carry
the Matter to a more impious Extreme, and even
prefer the Talmud and the Impertinences of their
Dpftors before the Scriptures themfelves. There-
t Tra^at. Erubim. foi. 21. b. ^31 W *)3lJ?n SD
II Erubim. fei.ai. b. D^::^^ nai *?y ry^DH ^DU^
nnnn nn^^'^z p-i3
^'^ In Chaskuni, fol. 94. ^^ p^^^ni 13") b'jf ^h^TMl
fore
^4^ ^fl^^ions on Mr.WalVs Let^p.
fore they compare f the Text of the Bible to
Water ; but the Text of the Talmud to Wine :
intimating the Mifchna does as much excel the
Scriptures, as Wine does Water. And according-
ly R. Schem Tof aiTcvts^ that || nothing is greater than
the mofi holy Talmud. And the Talmudifts have
the Vanity (or Impudence ftiall 1 fay) to afiert
that even ^ G o d himfelfy of the twelve Hours of
the Day-, fpcnds three in the Study of the Law ^ and
all the other nine in fiudying the Talmud. To fuch
an extravagant Degree of Frenzy and Pride are
thefe Wife Men arriv'd.
From the wholeit appears, thsit thtTalmud^ &c.
of the Jews are a fort of Writings full of fenflefs,
fcandalous Falfhoods, and therefore can be of no
Credit or Authority at all.
2. In the fecond Place it mayn't be amifs to fay
fome things relating to the Charadcr of thefe
Rahblns*
From what I have already faid it's plain they
have always been exceedingly bigotted to their
Wife Men, their Scribes and Pharlfeesj efpecially
the Members of their Sanhedrim^ whofe Aflertions
they are ever ready to fubmit to with entire Refig-
nation and blind Obedience^ which has prepar'd
'em to receive the grofleft Abfurditys and Falf-
hoods, and to fwallow all the Dreams of the Rab-
bins for unexceptionable Truth and Matter of Facl.
And to this may be added their excefllve Pride
and Arrogance-, for they think no body has any
Senfe but themfelves. Thus R. Schimeon fays :
'H* Tloere are but few Wife Men *, if there are two^ it
t Traft.Sopheriin. cap. 15. ,
• II Mizbeach Hazzahab, cap. 5. ^n^p^H nl»7nn
^ Traa.Schabhath. ,
muft
Let.p^ Hiftory of Infant-Ba^ttfml 547
fnufi he I and my Son. A4aimonides^ without nam-
ing the Place indeed, cites || this from the Talmud^
TraB, Succah* fol, 45. b.
They were likewife much given to their Caba-
liftical Art, and that Part of it they call'd
Gematria^ whereby they made Words lignify the
fame as any others they pleas'd to name, if the
Letters of one did but make the fame Number
with the Letters of the other; and they thought
there was no need of any Arguments but this nu-
meral Likenefs to confirm the Senfe they gave a
Word: fo becaufe, Gen.xi. i. 'tis faid, the whole
Earth was of ofie Language^ in Hebrew nriN HSty,
which Letters make the ISIumber 794, which by
fome miftake was taken to be the Number of
^^'^T\ \\yih "^ alfo, hence they wou'd infer, that
the Text means that the whole Earth fpoke at
that time the Holy Language^ as 'tis call'd, viz^,
the Hebrew* And -when ^hafuerm i^ays to Hamarr^
Efth. iii. II. the Silver is given thee,, the People alfoy
to do with them us it feemeth good to thee ^ by the5//-
*ver they underftand the King threatened him with
the Gallows he was afterwards hang'd on: be-
caufe c^oD makes jult the fame Nurnber as i*j;, viz.*
160 ^ and by the fame Rule not a Paffage in Scrip-
ture but may be made to fay any thing, and
indeed a thoufand different things together.
The Sanhedrim^ which was compos'd of their
greatelt and beft Men, confifted of a parcel of
Magicians and Fortunetellers or Conjurers ^ for
the Talmud it felf fays exprefly that a Man
is not received into that avguft AJfemhly uniefs
he be '\ well skilled in the Black Art^ and [peaks
II Porta Mofis, pag. 104.
* Chaskuni ad Gen. xi. r.
t Mcnachoth, fol. 65. a. CD»j?nV1 uD'Sti^D '*?y3
70
34^ ^fleHlons on Afr.Wair^ L,tt.^.
70 Languages^ 5cc. a glorious Qualification indeed
for Directors in Religion !
Another Charge I wou'd layagainft 'em is, their
corrupting and altering the Sacred Scriptures
themfelves, out of which they have attempted to
erafe fome PafTages that did not plea fe 'em. 1
will but juft give a Quotation from St. Juftin Martyr
to this purpofe, in his Difpute with Tryfho the
Jew \ he fays thus : || All thofe Places of Scripture^
which are mamfefily contrary to their fenflefs Con-
ceits^ they woud evade by denying they are fo writ"
ten. And again a little after, ^ As for your Kdh-
bins Thave no credit for Vw, who have the Confidence
to rejeEi the Tranfation made by the 70 Elders tinder
Ptolomey Philadelphus, King of Egypt, a?fd fet
themfelves vp for Interpreters. And I woud have
you tinderftand^ that they have wholly taken out and
difoivn many Paffages of Scripture which are in this
l.'ranflation ^ from whence it is plainly proved tb
have been foretold^ that this cruciffd T erf on was both
God and Man^ and that he Jhoud be crucify* d and
put to death.
Amongfl: other Places thus perfidioufly oblite-
rated by 'em, heinfbances in J^r. xi. 19. But I was
like a Lamb^ &:c. which Verfe however he remarks
was then remaining in fome Copys in their Syna-
gogues, and had been then but lately (truck out of
{1 Pag. 294. B. ""'a ^ aV JiApjifiS'Uu h -rzui y^t^tili
♦ Pag. 297. B. 'AAA' ^-^ Tlii AlJ'oLO-/j!^0!^ v/u^u Tfi'So-
gay^b-^^^'J^, -^ a.';ro^yi](TKay ka'^^v^'j.'IjjQ- A'rod^^Kvu']aj.
any>
Let.9- Hijlory of Infant-^aptifnu ^49
any^ and I thiiik it is in all the Hebrew Copys, and
other Trandations now extant, as well as in that
of the Seventy.
3- I am fenfible I have treated the RMins pretty
roughly \ btitam fatisfy'd all 1 have faid of 'em is
exactly true : and fince without blufhing they offer
fuch broad Affronts to the common Senfe of all
Mankind, and venture to treat the Divine Ma-
jelly both in the Perfon of the Father, and of
the Son, fo blafphemoully, they deferve no fa-
vour. Befides, 1 am juftify'd in this by the Judg-
ment and Pradice of all Learned Men.
' Mr. Le Clerc^ in this prefentCafe in difpute, ex-
prefles the Doubtfulnefs and InfufBciency of the
Authority of the Rabbins^ by faying, ^ The Jews,
if we may venture to believe the Rabbins, receiv'^d no
Trofelytes but ty Baftifm^ &c. More generally ia
another Place he fays, -f- The ]ew%feem to cUimthe
Privilege of cajhiering their Reafony and advance,
without any Jhame all the foolifo Whimfys in the World:
and woud yet fafs for Men of very good Senfe. And
to the fame Purpofe he frequently fpeaks on other
Occafions.
Monf duVin^ when he wou'd give a Treatife he
is fpeaking of, the worft Character he can, fays,
|[ It- was writ by fomebody who was wholly befotted with
the dreaming Enthufiafms of the Rabbins and Caba-
lifts. Mr. Dodwell^ fpeaking of the Ufe of the Jewifi
Writings, fays, "^^ Confidering the idb\x\o\x^i\t^s and
fufpicioufnefs of thefe Rabbinical Records in any
'^ in Not. GaU. ad Matth. iii. 6. Les Juifs fi nous en croj-
ons les Rabbins ne recevoient, &c.
f Bibliotheque .CliGirie, Tom. 13. pag. 405. C'eft II
un Privelege des Tuifs, de ne faire prefque aucun UTage de
Icur Raifon, de debiter, fans honte, toutes'/hrtes de Re-
veries, & de pafler neanmoins pour habiles Gens.
II Hift. Eccler. Vol. I. pag. 155. b.
^^ Utts^ of Advice^ &:c. i. pag. 3^-
thing
35^ (l(efleBwns 07iMr.W2i\Ys Let.p;
thing Hiftorical, / jhoud he much better fatisfy^d
with any Information from thofe more certainly anti-
cnt Authors^ which are extant in other Tongues^ fuch
as Philo and Jofephos, &c* and indeed Jlia/l not credit
f^f Rabbins any farther than as they agree with fuch
better attefted Monvments^ or with the Isature of
Things attefted by ^em.
Scaliger fays of R. Afcher^ who dwelt then at
uimfierdam') that "f- he was an ingenious Man for 4
Jew. And a little after, || ^Tis veryfeldom that a
Jew, who turns Chriftian, is good for any thing ;
they are always bad. Nauclerus fays of the Talmud^
that ^ tho it be full of the mofi palpable Lyes^ and
contrary to all the Laws o/GoD, the Scriptures^
and the Light of Nature^ yet it is enjoined -under pain
of Death that no one prefume to deny any one thing
written therein*
I have the Teftimony alfo of two unexcepti-
onable Judges in this matter; \ mean the great
Buxtorf^ and our own incomparable Lightfoot \
than v;hom none ever better underftood, nor were
more univerfally acquainted with the Rabbins and
their Writings.
Buxtorf^ after he has mention'd all the fine
things which can be faid to recommend the Ufe
and ^Study of the Talmud^ adds thefe Words :
'•]* Thm you fee^ Reader^ with what Impudence and
Impiety^
fal.
Ft Scaligerana, pa^. 218, qui cftoit honefte homme
pour un Juif.
Ibid. pag. 2j8,2I9. Raro Judapus aliquis Chriitianus
.:us, fuit bonus, Temper fiint nequam,
* Gener. 14. Licet planus eft inextricabilibusMcndaciis,
& contra omiem divinam legem, facram Scriptiir» fc. &
Naturae legem confcripnis, fub Pcena tamen capitis edic-
tum eft, neqiiis negetqiiicquam eorum qua? ineo dicuntur.
t Abbreviac, &c. pag.241. Vides, Leftor, obftinatifli-
m» & obcjfcatifTnna^ Gentis, df r;;o Talmud & ejus Com-
rllatonbus.
Let.p- H'tjlory of Infant^^aptifm. ^51
Impiety-, this obftinate and blind People extol and
magnify their Talmud^ and the Authors of it : And
can it -feem ftrange that thefe neglect the Law of
God, to follow the Traditions of their Fathers ?
But Dr- Lightfoot^s Words are, if poflible, fuller
yet than any, and may ferve for a Compendium
of all I have been hitherto faying. || There are
fome^ fays the Dodor, who believe the Holy Bible
was pointed by the Wife Men of Tiberias. / do
not wonder at the Impudence of the Jews who invented
the Story ^ but I wonder at the Credulity of Chriftians
who applaud it* Recollett^ I befeech you^ the Barnes
of the Rabbins of Tiberias, from the firjl Situation
of the Vniverfity there ^ to the Time that it expired j
and what^ at lengthy do you findj but a kind of Men
mad with Pharifaifm, bewitching with Traditions^ and
bewitch^dy blind^ guileful^ doting^ they mufi pardon
me if I fay magical and monftrous ? Aden^ how -unfit^
how -unable^ how foolijh for the Undertaking fo divine !
Read over the Jerufalem Talmud^ and fee there how
R. Judah, R. Chaninah, &c, and the reft of the
grand DoBors among the Rabbins of Tiberias behave
themfelves *, how earnefily they do nothing ^ how child-*
ijhly they handle feriom matters ^ how much ofSophifiryy
Frothy Poifonj Smoke ^ Nothing at all there is in their
Difputes 1 And if you can believe the Bible wai
pointed in fuch a School^ believe alfo all that the Tal-
mud ills write.
4. But above all, this appears from the divine
Authority of the Son of God Himfelf, and his
Difciples \ who often give us the w^orft Charader
pilatoribus, impudentiirima & impia Elogia. An ergo
mirum, quod Dei verbum reliquerunt, ^ pacriim Traditi-
ones fecuci funt ?
J Vol.2. pas,75,
of
35^ (?^e/?efl/o?2i on Af^.WallV Let.p.
of the Rabbins and Governors of the Jews that
'tis poflible to conceive. St. Joh?j calls the Phari-
fees^ ^c. that came to his Baptifm, a Generation
of Fipers^ Matth. iii. ?• and our LORD Himfelf
fays of 'em, chap. xii. 34« O Generation of Vipers^
how canys^ being evil-, [peak good things ? and detefts
feveral of their Enormitys in the Woes he pro-
nounces againft 'em, Matth, xxiii.and chaj>.xxu 31.
"ivhich reprefents 'em to be worfe than the molb
profligate part of Mankind, and fuch whofe Te-
ilimony wou'd fignify nothing in any Cafe.
.The Protomartyr Stephen^ ASs vii. 51. fpeak-
ing to 'em, fays, Te flijf-necked ye do always
refift the Holy Ghost, &€. But not to mul-
tiply Inftances of this nature, which every body
is well acquainted vyith, I will add but one more,
which reaches exprefly the thing in difpute, and
proves their Traditions concerning Wafliings
made void the Law. y^^r^ vii. 8, &c. Laying a-
fide the Commandment of G O D^ ye held the Tradi-
tions of Mcn^ as the wajhing of Pots and Cups % and
many other fuch-like things ye do. And he [aid unto
thern^ Full well ye reject the Command^ment of G 0 D,
that ye may keep your own Traditions making the
Word of G 0 D of -none ejfeci through your Traditions
which ye have delivered. And our L O R D con-
cludes his Cenfure with thefe Words, They he blind
leaders of thchlind^ Matth. XV. 14. All which, if
there be any thing facred and awful, and that de-
fervcs cur moft ferious Regard, in our Saviour's
Words, mull: at leaft fignify, that they are a dan-
gerous fort of Men, and rather to be finin'd than
follow'd: For he has expreily commanded us to
beware of their Leven*
Since then t\^Q Jews and "their Writings are fo
much to be diftrufted, and are fo fcandaious and
fallacious, can what they fay be call'd with any
.]. Pru-
l^tt, 1 o. 0/fory of Jnfant-^aptifm, 1 5 "^
Priidjpppe, "^^ the true B^fis pf Inff^nt^Baftifmf To
condude; WliaHs buifcMpoo jthisB^fis^ is a PL^b"^
binlcal Traditiorj, and one of th^ft Wa(]hii)g§
which our LORD conde^niS , b\i% ijot ^ Chrifti?|||
Paptifoi. I ajTi;
41 iLwiigmg^eaWB
t Z)r, HammpndiV 5a j!^^r|?^, ^ag. 1^5, Margin.
lJA4lJ.Jll..JlU.BW8BegpWJ!J^^,,.lJm4llgW^PWSPBW^.raiLi^^
'■ . -1. ^ - .. ... - ' J. . !. .1 . .. ■ ' I J . ,
Letter %,
Arri^n, frpm whom Mxr Wall next argues^ tM yt$
to ^nermine the Matter, He may ' perhaps a^ly
fpeak pf the Purif cations for Pollutions^ fh^e Pa«-
g^lis frequently confounded the Jevys ^nd Chriftir
,9ns together -i as appears from The milt las. From
Arri^n himfelf From Lucian. From Tacitus^
From Suetonias, And Rigaltius mderflands
Arrian-j Words fo too, As do alfo Petavius,
Lipfius,, and Birthius, Jldr^ Wall^ Argumenf
from Gregory Nazian?:en, exarnmd. This /%?.-
ther liv^d too late to determine our I^ifpute ^
and does not fpeak of an initiatory Bap-r
tifm. The ^eripture mahs no mention of
my mtlatory Baptifm in nfe among the Jevys..
ExocJ. xix, 10. m^ies nqthing to the Purpofe^
Mainio.nides /j^;^ P^ule of Interpretation j falfe, Th§
Rabbi i)§ very had Interpreters. '62Ci\Q(\i'^ daesrP9P
neceffarily imply ypajhing.. Nothing in phe \Vp,rdi
Vphkh fo mtfch as intimates the ^ffpdy jv^ to h?
rpajf)'/^, There is ng memiori fif m mUiatgr^
A a Sifptifr/i
354 ^fleHiom pn^ Mr.WzlYs Let. i o.
Baptifm in any authentic antient Hifiory : Even
tho they had the fairefi OccafionSy, and ought
not to have omitted tt^ if there had been any
fuch nfage. This illuftrated hy fome Infiances
from Jolephus and Ganz. ^Tis on many Ac*
counts very improbable that the Jews had any
fuch Ceremony, Vrov'^d from St, PaulV Words,
Prom Gregory Nazianzen. From St. Peter.
Several Authors of Reputation , and efpecially
the Antients , do in effe^B deny ihey knew of
any Anitiatory Baptifm . among the jews. Thm
St, Barnabas. Juftin Martyr. TertuUian. Ori-
g?P.L.„ A:.Qy^*^^ 0/ Terufalem. Many Writers Jay
cur Baptifm came injlead (not of Baptifm amo/ig.
f/jc Jews, but") of Sacrifices '^ <?j f/?e Recognitions.
Or of the wajhings for PoUutions^ as r/jf ApoftoUcal
Conftitutions pretend. And Mr, Vi^fpeah to the
purpofe. Others more commonly fay ^ it fucceeds in
the place of Circumcifion, The Conclvfion from- thefe
Ohfer vat ions, Tho the Jews cou^d be proved to have
baptiz^^d their Frofelytes^ this does no fervife to that
Caufe of Piddobaptifr/i. For^ I . It does not appear
that Infants were fo admitted, 1, If the Jev/s had
fuch a Baptifm as is pretended^ it is no Rule to Chrifii-
ms: orkr^y^ r^e Socinians, &c, have a good han-
dle to lay afide the Vfe of Baptifm, And there is
no manner of Analogy between the pretended Jewifh,
and the CWi^idiiuFdidobaptifm, 3. We need only
00 back to the Baptifm of St, John;, which there is
more reafon to think was the Pattern p/ C H R i s t's,
than a Jewilh Ceremony, St. John, Christ,
and his Apoflles baptiz.'^d no Infants. A Pajfage
of Jofephus to this purpofe. Another from Ori-
gen. Another of St, Peter. 4. At hefi this
fuppos^d Baptifm of the Jews is only a Traditio-
nary Ceremony from the Rabbins. Their quoting
Texts for it no proof of its divine Infiitution, The
Rabbins dont pretend to find an initiatory Bap-
tifm
Let. I o. Hifiory of hfant'^aptifm. 355
tifm in the Scriptures. But confefs it is o}dy a
Tradition of their Elders* This proved from the
Words of the Talmud. Which are explained by
fome Rules of M2i\T^on\dit%. Exod.xix. lo. cited
only by way of Accommodation" ^Tis therefore
great Prefumption to draw a Rabbinical Tradi-
tion into a Precedent for the Chrlftian Churchy
Thefe things applfd to the prefent Difpute, The
Conclufion'
SIR,
HAving fhewn that the Citations from the
Jewiflj Writers prove nothing at all, and
do our Adverfarys no fervice : I proceed now to
Mr. Wallh other Arguments which are brought
to prove, that the Jews before, and at our S a vi-
our's time, were wont to initiate Profelytes
and their Children by Baptifm.
He infifts upon fome Words of Arrian the Phi-
lofopher of Nicomedia*
1. But firft, This Philofopher liv'd not till
about 150 Years after Christ '•f*, and there-
fore at belt will not prove that Cuftom to have
been more antient : for he only fpeaks of his own
time, without any reference to the paft.
2. Or fecondly, He may, for what appears to
the contrary, allude not to any initiatory Wafh-
ing, but to the frequent Purifications for legal
Pollutions : and the Hemerohaptift^, or, as Juftin
Martyr |1 calls 'em, the Bavrf/sa), have their De-
nomination from this, and from their teaching,
fays the Renunciation cited by Cotekrim ■^, That no
Man cotid be favd unlefs he was waflj'd daily ^ and
f Eufeb. Chronic, pag. 219.
II Dialog, cum Tryph. pag. 307. -
* Codic. Regio 18 18. ad RecogniC Clement, p. 499. b.
^" /ii*?'^' "A>'9f<y7TOr azo^mcu, IcCv lAM x^9* i^^'T^v 'U^t^^.v
^aTrii^ijcti,
A a 2 not
35^ ^flcBions on MrM^M's Ler.io*
not becaufe they were daily mtmcds And Bpff
blm ^ tells us, ivom Heg/fiffm^ th^t one $^^' of
t\\Qjews^ who were very xealoiis for thefe Wafb-
ings, werecaird peculiarly by hisis'atne, \t m'^Y
feem more probable too that Arnm alludes to t\m
Sec^, and thefe Wafti;^gs, if we call to«miud that
Rule jof the tdmud mmxXon^i by Dr.. Ughfm^
if I remember well f , Th^t a Womm hptpz^^d or
w^P^'^d') tho for VncUmnef$ oniyj Aqss nevertbdeff
thereby he pome a comfhaf Profelytifs or jcwefs.. The
Talmud it fclf therefore determiwe?^ that waftiiiig
for Uncleannefs does conftitiite 3 cojppk-it Jew%
which b the utraoft that Jrrian fiiys ; md there-
fore ^ti§ not fleceflary to aaderftand him oi m^
other wafbifig. But,
3. 'Tw^s common for the f^^^f^^ Writers i^
confouod the Jew^ and Chrifiu^ rc)2.etber-; for
Cu%i§r himfelf md his Apofl:J,€$ teii;>g J^ws bf
Birth, md fent primarily to preacb to that Fm*
pie, Slid the firft Churcfo conjlfting ^f Jew^ f^r
the moft part, the Heatheu who were n&t wdt
enoagh acquainted with thefe tb'i.wg?., migbt e.afdy
fuppbfe the Chriftians were only a SeQ of the Jcws^
that made 4 Separation fro;m their anticntGover'-
IQOurs upon account of fome particuiar Opinions
•amoiig themfejves.. Feftus plainly takes it fo whm
he tells King y^grippa^ that Paups Accukrs had only
f erf sin OueftiQ-ns again ft him of their own Superfti^
tioriy .and of one J £ s y s which was dead^ whom Paul
affirmed. to be alive-, Ads xxv.. 19, And elfewhere in
the Scriptures the Apoftles are often fpoKen of
as Jews: nay, fometimes the Chr.iftians are ar-
gu'd to be Jewsy in the beft: and trueft Senfe ^
He is not a Jew which is one outrperdly^ &c. but he
"^ ]H,ift. Ecclef. Lib. 4. ,cap. 22.
t Jebaraoth. fol.45. b.
is
Let. I o. Hijlory of InfantSdptifm. 3 5 7
fj a Jew which is cue inwardly^ Rom. ii, 28* And if
ye be C H R I § t*s, fk^ ^r^ j^^- Abraham'/ Seed, &c.
(7^/. iii. 2^.
This is apparent alfo from many PalTagcs in
the Greek md Latin Authors. Themifliu/ dung
i(^mcWGX(^'i>iromX.\\cOld.Tcj}rnmem:, calls it^ ^ the
Lam aftheAiVyrhns-^ and in fevcral other Places
'j' he gives it the lame Name. And fomewherc,
35 Tetaulus II notes^ he: calls it Syrian^ which will
be conftru^d nothing lefs than calling the Jews,
jijfyrians ^md) Syrians., from the Country they dwelt
in^ and yet, at another time, by Syrians^ he
means the Chriftians^ namely, in his Oration to
the Emperour Jovian, where he extols the Em-
peroar's Generofity and Juftice in permitting
every one to follow what Religion he thought beft.
*(-'!- For, fays he, the Syrians perform Divine IVorJliip
in one rfianner^ the Greeks in another^ ^nd the Egyp-
tian? in a way different from both : nay, and the Sy-
rians themfelves do not agree in all things, no one
believes exactly as his Neighbour ', but this believes
one thing, and that another, &c. Here he mani-
feftly has his Eye upon the Qiiarrels and Difputes
which then diftuf b'd the Church of C h r i s r, and
made too great a Koife not to be obferv'd by
the Enemys of our Holy Profefllon ; efpecially by
f© great a Man as Themiftivs, who artfully im-
proves this Opportunity to iniinuate how^ very un-
certain theChriftians were la- their Belief, there-
by to poflefs the Emperour with an ill Opinion
* Orat. 5. pag< 141. A'ifc.) tJ 'Aojveio>, dec.
t Orat. 7. Inic. & Orat. '9. pag. 201.
II Ad Orat. 12. pag. 63$.
ft Pag. 282. "Aaa«^ 2i//JK? i^K&i 7n)Ki}J!Ji<^tf a.KKa';
A a 3 of
358 (I{cfleHms on Mr.Wall'^ Let. 1 ol
of 'em, to whom he was known to be very much
incUn'd.
Thus Themtfiius^ then, by the fame Word Sy^
rians^ means both Jews and Chriftians^ whom he
does not fufficiently diflinguifh from one another ^
for the Chriftians as well as the Jews appear'd firfli
in Syria^ and about thofe Parts of Afu^ which
were generally counted the chief Nurfery of that
Religion : and therefore Lucian fays, ^ From 'the>
fever at Citys in Alia, came forpe who were fent.
from the Publick Body of the Chriftians^ &c. And it
is very probable this may be one occafion of their
confounding Chriftians and Jews together : there-
fore Le Prieur fays 'f-. Every body knows that the
Church was at firft gather d at Jerufalem, and con^
ftfted of Jews ^ and from hence it is that in fro-
fane Writers^ you hardly find any Difference made
between Jews and Chriftians.
Galilee^ the Upper and the Lower, was moftly
inhabited by Jews^ at leaft one part of it entirely,
together with a large Portion of the other call'd
Galilee of the Gentiles, Aiatth* iv. 1 5. of which
Straho is underftood to fay, || That it was inha-
bited by a mixture of Egyptians, Arabians and
Fhcenicians. Galileans therefore cou'd at firft mean
only Jews of Galilee^ or Galiieanjews\ and accord-
ingly St. Teter is by his Speech difcover'd to be a
Galilean^ Mark xiv. 70. that is, a Native Jew of
Galilee: and fo in that known Blafphemy oi Ju-
lian the Apoftate, when dying he cry'd out,
^^ GALILEAN THOV haft conquered me^
'tis the fame thing as if he had faid, THOV Gali-
^ De Morte Peregrin, pag. ^6j,
t In Tcrtullian.
ii Geograph. Lib. i5. pag. 1103.
^^ Theodor. Hift. Ecclef. Lib. 3. cap. 2$. fol. 320.
lean
Le 1. 1 o ^ Hiftory of Infant- ^aptifm. 359
lean Jew ^ for he means Christ who was a Jew^
and dwelt in Naz^areth in Galilee, For in thefe
and fuch like Places, the Name feems to fignify
one fort of the Jews in particular, as if they
were fomething different from others who were
not of that Country.
I know thefe Words may fometimes be only
us'd to expreis the Country : as a Greek may mean
one born or bred in Greece ^ a Roman^ a Free-
man of Rome J and a Turk^ one born in Turky. But
if they have any reference to the Religion or
ProfelTion, or fome Quality and Difpofition of a
Perfon j then they always mean that Religion, &c.
which was moil famous in that Place at the time :
and thus z Chaldean fignify s znAflrologer y zwild
Arab J a Robber '^ and aGreek^ in Scripture, is one
that pradis'd the Idolatrys of Greece: and the
Word Jewj with us, an Inftance pretty near the
Cafe in hand, does not always fignify one born in
Judea^ or of Jewlfi Parents, but one who pro-
fefies to live according to the Law of the Jews^
which doubtlefs is the Senfe Mr. Wall gives it
in the Paflage oi Arrian: and £odoQs Galilean of-
ten fignify that particular fort of the Jews.
Thus St. Paul^ tho born at Tarfus in ClUciay and
educated at Jerufalem^ and confequently no Gali-
lean by Birth or Habitation, is notwithltanding
call'd a Galilean by Lvclan f , fignifying, that he
was a Jew of that Sed who had embrac'd the
new Dodriiies of Chriftianity ^ Galileans compre-
hending originally none but the Jews^ for they
only of ?har Country adher'd to Jesus.
But then it is wrong, and a confounding of mat-
ters, to call the Chriftians in general by that
Kame, which Ihou'd be attributed to none but
+ Philopatr. pag. 770.
Aa 4 Jews:
1 60 (^fleB'ms m Mr.W^W's Let* 1 o-
yewst Arrian thei-efore^ whonl Ux* Watt afgae^-
from in this Cafe,, h^s committed this Miftake^
"Wh^ri he fays,- f that thro a ftlad foff of Humoiif^
and the prevaiency of a Cuftbffl among 'efiij the
Qaiileans have leafnt to defpife the Power sind S^--
teflty of Magiftfates.- By Galiteans here^ fie G^n't
be' tinderftood to mean any but the Chfffiians,
^hofe Courage ^nd Firmnefs of Mind in' Peffe-
Cution Was very well kttOwn to their Advetfarysy
and xvas falfly afcrib^d by them to Pefverfnefs
and Obfiinacy* As you may fee" the Empe-
rof Mdrciii Amonlnus cenfuTes ^em', whert tepre-
feiltiog a Mind duly pfepaf'd to live Of die m
lA^hatever manner one may be GalJ'd to k, he fays^
■^ This indifference oyWttlifigffefs to fuhmit to one^s Lotf
pjoud ffring from a difcreef and well-weighed judg-^
fnent bf things ;• riot as "'tis with the Chriftian's^ fremt
Btitbborhnefs^ but from feriom Confidcratiort^ and a>
fermity of Mindi, which may ferfuade others to imi-
tate yoUr Example.
What i cited from Jrriari^ who IS- Mr. WalH
own Author, fhews^ that he call'd the Chriftians
by a Kame which belonged only ta the Jews ^
for' 1 believe I\irw Wall can't find a Place where
Odlilean fignifys any but Jews^ unlefs it be this
of Arrian if and fuch others. It follows then that
Arrian does confound the Jews and Chrifiians' to-
gether ^ and therefore he may he underftood to
ipeak of the Chrifilans under the Kame Jewsy ia
the Pailage Mr. Wall refers to j for he<iiay as. well
f In Epidet. lib. 4. cap, 7, pag* 400^ '^E/Jet <a^ ^^vidU
"^ Lib. ii. §. 3' To M Itvii/.6v tStt, I-^i' iV i=D;cnf y^f"
tihKcJi: A2A<};Ysr^4f«?j )^ (h^vsSii )y (ii<>^ }y aifJ^^V Tmc^ty dr^*
^ call
Let. I o. Hijl6yy 6f hfant'^^dptifm. j 6 1
tailt the CM'ftkn.^ Jews ^§ GMean^^ fiiTce tk^ Gd'^
tUedrfSy a'^ I .te^^'e oftei^ t-^Tpe^ted it,, and paittku-
Jarly rhofe ivom ^hom x^hQ'Chylfitaffsar^ eaU'd fc^
were 6nly Jewj^
t thmk'tis a^ Veiry pMn Cafe-^ that XwrW took
the Chrifiarti St leafl for 3 Sed af the J^ir/^ wheit
ipeakmg of the Impoftor he calls Peregrink^^, he
iays^ ^ At which fime he icavr^d the admired Wifdont
ef the Chrifiians^ by Converfrng rvifh thetr Prieftf and
Scribes. What Prrel^s and Scribes were ^mong
the Chti^mns i LueUn miftakes the matter^, and
thinks the Chnfiian Religion was taught by the
Jervi^rW\^^s>y &c^ When Tl^m^j in his AecounC
of the Jews f^iysy that -{- thofe who came over to
^em arre €trcumek^d% and that among the very hrfl*
Priincrples, they are taught to defp[e and jli&ht theit
Tarents and Chifdre-^f dnd Brethren y 'tis Very ptO-*
bable he alludes to that Paflage of our Savio uk^
if ari^ Man come nnto Me^ and hate not his Fathey
Md Mother^ and Wife and ChildrefJ:^ and B'rethreri^
And SiperSy he cannot he my Difcifley h\xk. xiv.. 16^
B-ut thecomnyon lilftanee cited fvom. ^mam^^,
hy if poffible, more plain.. CUuditHj fays- he,,
I expeifd the Jews- out of Ronie upon atcount of the
tontinual Difiurhancet they made- thercy by the hfi.i^
gatiort of C pr K r s t.. Ku t C i* k b s^ t was c be Leader
and Head of the Chrifiians- only^, a^nd not of the
Jews, Suetonius therefore,, when^ he faid: Jewty
iKeant^ or at kaft included the Chrifiians.. And
*^ IJe Morte Peregrin, p. 555-.. ''OTf^f y^ Tvr &*«-
f Hmoriar. lib, 5;. prope- ab)init. Tranrgreffi.fm moreni!
eoriim,. idem ufurpant ;• nee quidiqi^ani priiis- imbuuncur;
(|iiLam, e^c- ■ — -^ Parente9, Lrbeross Fratres, vilia' Habere.
II In Gland, cap. 2^.. Judaeos rmpulfOre GB.RlESTQ' affidue
5^2 ^fleFlions onMr.WsilVs Let.io^
fo likewife in the Paflage Mr. Wall, and before
him Dr. Hammond, cites from Arrian, that Phi-
lofopher may refer only to the Chriflians, not-
withftanding he calls 'em Jews. Rigaltim, with-
out any manner of Hefitation, underftands him
for "^ Even the Stoicks, fays he, knew. That the
Faithful, that is, the Ghriftians, were made fuch
completely by their Baptifm : For thus Arrian exprejly
fays, Sec and here he tranfcribes the very Words.
The '|- learned Petavlt^ is -alfo of this Opinion.
II Lipfitis takes the Place in the fame Senfe, and
compares it with the Words of Suetonius above-
cited *, and fays. For who were baptized but theChrif-
tlans ? And Barthim fays upon it, {a) Baftifm
was not the diftinguijhing Sign of a Jew, but of a
Chriftian.
And it's certain, that fuppofing the Jews did
baptize, yet Circumcifion was the great Badg of
a Jew ; and fo neceflliry, that they are often call'd
from it in Scripture, the Circumcifion emphatically.
Arrian therefore cou'd not be well underftood to
fay, the Profelytes became complete Jews by being
baptiz'd, fince Circumcilion was the more known
and effentiaf Ceremony with them. (^) Petavim
indeed imagines the Paflage in Arrian is corrupted,
and that inftead of >f$'^iU*v», we fhou'd read ttc-
pi>fpH/x£v» ', and fo makes the Place fpeak of Bap-
tifm and Circumcifion too. But the Criticifm is
too bold and licentious, without the Authority of
any Copy, and grounded only on Petavins's Fancy j
* In TertuL de Baptifmo, p. 229. lit. a. Fideles perfici Bap-
tifmo. fciebant etiam Stoici. Sic enim difertiflime Arria-
nus Epiit. 2. 9, &c.
t Not. inThemift. Orat. 12. p. 035.
li Ad Annal. Tacit, lib. 15.
ia) Ad Rutilii Itinerarium. Sane Judsi Signaculum non
erat baptizatum effc, fed Chriftiani.
(b) Not. ad Themift. Orat. 12. p. 635.
and
Let. 1 o^ Hijiory of Infant-^aptifm. 563
and therefore I fee no reafon to admit it. Bat" if
by Jews he meant Converts to Chriftianity, who
at firft were chiefly Jews^ the ExprelTion is well
enough, for they were always receiv'd into the
Body of Chriftians by Baptifm : and not before, but
after this Ceremony, they were accounted complete
Chriftians •, which is all very futable to Anianh
Words : -^ That after Baftifmj and the publkk
Tr^fejfion^ they were accounted^ and. really were true
fjews^ or rather Chriftians. And if this be the
Senfe of the PafTage, then ^m^^^does not prove
what our Adverfarys cite him for.
The next Argument Mr. Wall recurs to, in
order to eftabliih thie true Bafis of Infant- Baptifm j
is a Paffage m Gregory Naz,ianz,en : where that Fa-
ther undertakes to reckon up all the various forts
of Baptifm he knew of, and conliders the Reafons
of 'em. H Mofes baptiT^d^ but that was in Water
only* And before that in the Cloudy and in the Sea*
But this was all Typical^ as alfo St. Paul under ft ands
it.. The Sea typiffd the Water ^ the Cloud the Spi-
rit, the Manna tn the Wildernefs fignifyd the Bread
of Life ^ and the Water they there drank^ the divine
Cup. John alfo.buptizjd^ yet not in Water barely as
the Jews did^ but likewife to Repentance^ &C. In the
following Words he adds the Baptifm of Christ,
the Baptifm of the Spirit, and the Baptifm of
Blood. But this part 1 need not tranfcribe, be-
caufe Mr. Wall grounds his Argument on the firft
Words only, which, he thinks, prove that the Jews
did undoubtedly initiate their Frofelytes by Bap-
t Epiaet. lib. 2. cap. 9. '^O-mv J^' dLVcfX-tC,) to Ud^©-
TO 7« g>cQcLyM^ ^ MfHAcV^, T0T5 ^ 'sV/ tJ OKT/ )L^ KA\eiTAl
II Orat. 39. p. ^54. 'ECfltVJ/01 Muv<nii^c.v iTMli iy 's^
tifm,
3 ^4 ^fieBions m MnWallV Let. 1 6]
tifm, fince they themfdves were alfo at firft fo
imtiated.
Bat here I mult fifft make the common Re-
mark, which. affeSs all Mr. Walh Arguments,
namely, That the Authority; he ufes is of much
too late ^. Date : for $t* Gregory liv*d but about
the latter end of the 4th Century^ which is not
early enough to give an infallible Certainty of
what was done in C \t% 1 st^s Time, and much
lefs in that of Mofes* Befides, St» Grcgdry doe^
uot fpeak of an Initiatory Baptifiti y but only of
the Legal Wafhing$ for Uncleannefi* And this
IS fa obvious, that one ^q\^\ wonder how any
Man Gou'd pretend to underftand him otherwife.
For ilnce he goes to enumerate all the kinds of
Baptifm*^ and the SiiveYs Wa^nngs meation'd in
the Scripture were fo very notorious,, and cou'd
jiot polTibly be forgot ', ^tis unaccountable, how
any one can perfuade himfelf that St. Gregoyy
wouM entirely' pafs over thefecommon VVafhings,
which were 10 well known ; and fpeak of fome
ether ftrange Baptifm not mention^ in Scripture,
nor by any Author of Credit*
It can't be fairly deny'd, that the Words may
very naturally be underftood of thofe Legal Wafh-
ings, and that there is no one Circumftance in ^em
which in the leaft: infmuates they mean any thing
elfey and therefore 'tis a pitiful begging of the
Queftion, to fay, they refer to any fuch Baptifm as
our Adverfarys maintain : on the contrary, I. take
this and all fuch Paifages, to make againft'cm^ for
tho St. Gregory fets himfelf to reckon up all the Bap-
tifms he knew of, and mentions fevcral, yet he
never takes the leaft notice of a Baptifm to ini-
tiate Jews or Profelytes : which rnuft import thus
much, viz.. that St^Gregory knew no fuch initia-
tory Baptifm.
And
Ltr. \ 0. JHfiory of Jnfant'^aptifm, 3 d f
And flOW^ 8lf ^ 1 Ibinj^, I may fay^ thefe arc ^!! the
Arguments W'Wd employs to eft^blift his Po^
iitior), that thgf^???;, ^t<)iir S^yjpu^'s Tim^^
initiated their Froftlytes by Baptifni. fie ekes
indeed Cyfrim and Bafd^ .and ^iiight perhaps jiave
iidded feveral otbm tP as jnuch -purpofe ^ but
wb^t they fty gmounisito jipjiiorethan what w^f
faid by 3t, Gregory^ t40d inay receive jthe fame Aa*-
fwer* ' And from Jienee -'tis fuffideatly evidenf,
Mr. W(ill has faid nothing which rifes toanypro*
hable Proof, that this mmn Bafis of Jnfmt^^sipifm
\% true. For i le^ve you to judg whether every
Pretence tP thi^ hg^' jiot Seen fufficiently re-
futed,
To prov.e Megatiy.es is always difficult, gni
fometimes impoflTibie; and therefore 1 might te
f ,^cws'd from any farther trouble on this .Head..
However, fince it may be of ufe to confirm my
>>lo]tion Pf this Matter, I will endeavour to mafe
out, as far as.it fliall feem needful, thefe following
Obfervations,
I : \ obferve, the Scripture -makes no mention;
.of any fuch Baptifm : and yet one can't tell how
to think it Ihou'd be iilent, if either G op had
appointed the Practice, or if it had been us'd on
any ojtier Foundation before thofc facred Books
were written ? for frequent Cccafions wou'd hav^
offer'd to ^tai^ jiotice of this, as well as of fey^-
ral other Inftitutions of G o d, or Traditions of
their Elders : and without doubt, it wou'd hav.e
been touch'd on, had there "been any fuch thing
in ufe, Mr, Wall^ J know, puts us in mind, that
the Rabbins cite Exod.*xix» lo, to prove, that the
Jews themfelves were initiated, upon the giving
.of the Law, by Baptifm,
But in anfwer to this, it maybe noted, that
ihey did not by this Wafliing enter into Covenant
with G O D ^ for that they had done before by
Circupj'-
3 66 (I(efleSlions on Afr.WallV Let. i o^
Circu'mciflon, which was the Seal of the Covenant :
and therefore the Wafliing here mention'd, was
no more an ij^itiatory Baptifm, than the Wafh-
ings of the Priefts and Levites preparatory to their
feveral Miaiftrations, and thofe appointed for
Pollutions, which all Perfons were ftridtly to per-
form, before they en ter'd the Congregation of
the Lord to worihip. The Sandification and
Wafliing therefore mention'd in the Words re-
ferM to, feem to mean only fuch kind of Purifica-
tion as was common in all Cafes of approaching
to GOD, and was to be repeated as often as
fuch Approaches were made. Tho indeed fome-
thing extraordinary might be enjoin'd on this un-
common and wonderful Appearance of G O D, in
fueh amazing Majefty and Glory. ,,,.;
That the Purification was of this nature only,
may feem more probable, if we obferve, that one
part of it was to confilb in their mt coming at
their Wives^VQV. 15. and the Eaftern Nations al-
ways thought this polluted, and render'd'em un-
fit to enter the Temple, as -[ Herodotus^ \\ Strahoj
&c. afilire us. Ana ^himelech^ when D^i;/W re-
quir'd the Shew-bread of him, makes this Con-
dition, that the young Men have kept themfelves
at leafl from Women ^ 1 Sam. xxi. 4. And more
generally it appears from Gen, xxxv. 2. that this
was but a Purification necelTary in order to per-
form any religious Worfhip *, for Jacob being a-
bout to build an i\ltar to the Lord, orders all
his Houfliold to he clean^ and change their Gar-
ments : which is exactly the fame thing with that
exprefs'd Exod. xix. 10. Of the fame nature like-
wife is that Obligation laid on the Ipraelites by
Mofes and Eleazar^ after their deftroying the Mi-
dianites^ that whofoever hath killed any Ferfon^ and
t Lib. 2. p. 71, Ij Lib. i5. p. io8r.
who-
Let.io. Hijlory of Infant'-^aptifm. ^67
whofoever hath touched my Slain^ fhou'd furify them-
felves, &c- and ye jhall wajh your Cloaths on thefe--
vemh Day^ and ye jhall be clean^ Numb. xxxi. 19^ 24.
And fo Jojhuay Chap. iii. ver. 5. commands the
Ifraelites to fandify themfelves ^ that is, accord-
ing to Mr. Wallh Notion of the Word, to wafti
themfelves, for to morrow the LO RD will do Won^
ders among you : which implys, thefe Sandifications
were ufual in fuch extraordinary Cafes. And thus
among the Heathens, thofe who came to confult
the Oracle of Trofhonins^ were to wafh themfelves
in the River f Hercyna* And the Priefts at Del^
phos wafh'd themfelves before they went to the
Temple H-
So that we fee this is only a common Purifica-
tion, always us'd to qualify Perfons to appear be-
fore G o D i and therefore Mr. Waliy or the Rab-
bins he cites, have no reafon to pretend, the Sanc-
tification. and Wafhing mention'd £W. xix. 10.
lignifys any thing elfe.
But befides all this, I don't perceive the Ne-
ceffity of fuppofing the Words refped the wafh-
ing of the Body, which is neither exprefs'd nor
imply'd. As to the Authority of the Rabbins,
who, our Author informs us from Sclden^ do ge-
nerally favour his Fancy ^ I have already Ihewn,
they are not to be depended on. The Rule^^j-
monides has accommodated our Author with. That
wherefoever in the Law the washing of the Body or
Garments is mention d^ it means ft'dl the wajhing of
the whole Body^ I think ferves but to manifelt the
Confidence of the Rabbins, and our Author's Cre-
.dulity. For, without enquiring into the rea-
fon of the Rule, Mr. Wall takes it folely upon
truft, as a Maxim of Interpretation. But, why
t Paufan. lib. 19. p. dog.
Ij Eurip. in Jove Verf. 96.
fhou'd
feou'd 0m RtiJes which tfe Rabbi as arbitrari*
ly Jay dovwn, te iirg^ in oppollcioa Co tte
f Uio ■ i^ett^ ^ttd Piopiety of tbe origiji^l
Xbe ^ojt th^ can be faid for thefe Int^rpr^t^f^
in the prefent €aft, i^ thatihey iiiuftb.eftppps^4
to oinderftand the idiom ^^4 Phrafes of the //<?«•
^rf,Tp Tong;ue, ;ind tKerefore JTiaybe qualify-d.^ fey
their 'Obfervations mi Knowjedg of that kmi^
to dir.eQ: m in finding out the Senfe of t'hc OH
Teftament.. -Bup the Vanity of this Argivme^D-t m
their fevypur appears by what I have fai4 gboye.
And our great ,£^^:/i^ Rabbin^ T>x, Light fm^ w.a$
fo fgr froDi entertaining fucb .^n Opinion of 'em^
that he judged ^em unfit tp point the 'Bible, pjuicb
more to imake^ftanding Riile-s for th^ Interpreta-
tion of it. Without haying any regard therefore
CO thefe Guides, it may eafily be prov'd, thait
fhere is xiothing which 4oe^ iniport the yv.aihing
of the 3Body. For,
I* C2n*^"^P is only a general Word, .enjoining
fomething to be done thro the whoje term of th^
Time inention'd ; and therefor^ Mmfiermdf^a^
fdhim^ two great Judges, b.efides oth.ers, fay, it
ilignifys here to jre fare:-, as the T^rgums of Onkelos^
.and Ben Vziel^ like wife appear to haye,underftoo4
it, by rendrjng it p:;DTn. And why JhouM it
ineari to waft here, ^ny more than in Levit, xxi.23..
or XX. 7. where GOT) ^pojrilTiands, San^ify your
feives .therefore^ and be ye holy f &:c. Nay, if ip
fhou'd be allow'd to fignify the Ifraeiim were to
fandify themfelves on this great Occafion, by .^1}
the ways ingeaerai which they at any ti.me us'<i,
;and ^onfequenriy by bathing for Pollutions ^ yej
.what has this to do with a Handing initiatory
iBaptifni.? And why rnuft.a Commj^nd on fp fin--
^ubr and extraordinary an PQcafion, be drawn
^ * "" ^ |n|Q
Let. I o. Hifiory of Infant'^aptifm. 3 6^
into a Precedent, and made a Rule for ordinary
Cafes ? But,
2. Neither does this Wafhing feem to be in-
tended *, becaufe, tho there is particular men-
tion of wafhing their Clothes, there is none of
wafhing their Bodys too : and yet no Man can
imagine why either fhou'd be particularly men-
tion'd, if both had been included in the Word to
fanEbify ^ nor if neither were comprehended in
the Word, that the wafhing of the Body was
meant, tho the wafhing of the Garments only is
exprefs'd. For, whence fhou'd they gather this ?
The Word in the Hebrew for waflo^ is only pro-
per to wafhing of Clothes, to which it is apply'd,
and can't be us'd to lignify the wafhing of the
Body. The wafhing of the Body can't be inclu-
ded under wafhing of the Clothes, becaufe thefe
are not only two very different things, but are
alfo as diftindly and particularly exprefs'd, when
both are intended. Thus, Levit, xv. 5-. Whofo-
ever toucheth his Bed^ jhall wajJ) his Clothes^ and
bathe himfelf in Water j &c. And again, Ver. 13.
jhall number to himfelf [even Days for his Cleanfmg^
and wajh his Clothes^ and bathe his Flejh in running
Water ^ &c. And Levit* xiv. 8. 'tis faid very di-
flindly, as of things independent of one another.
He that is to be cleanfed^ jhall wajh his Clothes^ and
Jhave ojf his Hair^ and wajh himfelf 6cc. and fo very
frequently elfewhere.
If the Rule of Malmonides^ that the wafhing of
the Garments means the wafhing of the Body
too, were good, then the wafhing of the Body
wou'd not be fo particularly exprefs'd : Whereas
you fee, Sir, that always when the wafhing of the
Body is intended, 'tis as plainly exprefs'd, and
that by a different Word too, viz.. yrn, and that
even in conjundion with that other wafhing of
the Clothes which is conft-antly fignify'd by D3D-
B b 1 his
2 70 ^fleSlions on M'^WalF^ Let. 7 ol
This IS all I think needful to confirm my firft
Obfervation, viz,. That the Scripture makes no
mentioQ of any Baptifm whereby thQ Jews and
their Profelytes were initiated.
2. In the next Place 1 obferve, That there is
no Inllance or Mention of this Baptifm, in any
other authentick antient Hiftory. 1 muft take
this for granted, till fach a one is produced ^ and
that it has not yet been done, is a great prefump-
tion that none can be found. Kay, it may be
prov'd as well as a Negative can be, that there
was no fuch Pradice *, becaufe in the Accounts of
the Profelytifm of fome, when the Hiftorians had
the faireft Occafion in the Werrld to take notice of
it, they have mentioned Circumcifion, without fo
much as glancing at this pretended Baptifm.
Thus Jofephm informs us, that Hyrcanus^ after
having fubdu'd the Idumeans^ made and initiated
'em Jexps^ by Circumcifion only ^ for had any
thing elfe been as neceilary, Hyrcanm wou'd have
performed it, and the judicious Hiftorian wou'd
not have forgot to mention it : But fmce he has
not left the lead: Intimation of it, 1 reckon we
have the double Authority, viz,- of Hyrcanm who
was High Prielt, and of Jofephm^ on our fide.
The Hiiiorian's own Words run thus : -[ Hyrcanus
aifo took Adora and MarilTa *, and having fubdud
all Idumaea, he gave the Inhabitants leave to continve
in that Country-^ on Condition they woud be circuni'
cis^d^ and objerve the Laws andCufioms of the Jews.
t Antiquit. Judaic, lib. 15. c. 17. p. 450. E. 'TuavU
TzU ^iveiV bf T'A yjofo, ei <:^%ixvhv Ts tu diJ6ia. jy tCh
They
Let. 1 o. Hifiory of Infant'^aptijnu 3 7 ^
They therefore^ ttnwilllng to he eXpelPd their native
Country^ received Circumcifion^ and led their Lives
according to the Aianner of the Jews, And in ano-
ther place he tells us, ih^itArifiobulus^ Son of the
above-nam'd Hyrcanus^ caus'd the Itureans to be
made Profelytes by Circnmcifion, and lays nothing
of Baptifm. '|* He ohligd them that won^d ftay in ths
Land to he circumcised^ and live according to the
Laws and Cuftoms of the Jews. And Thilo^ ano-
ther confiderable Author, is in like manner whol-
ly filent of this Baptifm. To be fare, if there
had been any thing in thefe or fuch-like Authors^
we fliou'd have heard of it over and over : but
their Silence, even when they are profefledly giv-
ing an Account of the Cuftoms and Antiquitys
of the Jews^ is a very weighty Confideration, and
ought to go a great way toward demonftrating,
that no fuch thing either was, or ought to be
pradis'd.
An Inftance of this nature I remember like-
wife in Ganz,^ one of the beft Hiftorians among
the Rabbins : At the Year 3670, he fays, many
great and powerful Citys became the jillies of A^
lexander the Brother of Ariftohulus^ and were cir-
cnmcis'd ^ and never mentions any other part of
the Initiation.
3. But thirdly, I obferve, that what our Ad-
verfarys pretend, is very improbable, upon fe-
veral other Accounts. For Inftance, when St*
Paul fays, the Ifraelltes were all baptiz.'^d un-^
to Mofcs in the Cloudy and in the Sea *, he feems
very plainly to intimate, there was no other
baptizing unto Mo fes^ but this: why elfe Ihou'd
t Antiquitat. Judaic, lib. 15. cap. 19. p.^455.G. *Afatf-
Bb 2 he
37^ ^fleBions on Kr.Walh Let. to.
he call this the baptizing unto Mofes ? It wou'd
have been much more natural to refer to that more
familiar initiatory Baptifm which our Adverfarys
plead for, if the Apoltles had known of it, than
to this figurative one. And then to make this
parallel to our Baptifm, is very improper, if they
had us'd another which refembled ours. The
Fathers of the Jexvs^ then, were baptiz'd unto
Afofes : but how ? If you'll believe the Apoftle,
by being baptizj'd in the Cloudy and in the Sea-
This was their Baptifm unto Mofes^ St. Paul fays ^
and can our Adverfarys venture to fay, this was
not their Baptifm, but another ?
Gregory Naz^ianz.€n^ in the very PalTage cited
by Mr. Wall^ which I tranfcrib'd above fomething
more largely than he had done, without taking
notice of any other Baptifm from whence ours
was deriv'd, or to which it might be compar'd,
only fliews how this mention'd by the Apoftle as
the Type, might be explained, in thefe Words,
the Sea tyfiffd the Water^ the Cloud the S P I R 1 T.
Kow, his noting no fuch Likenefs in any other
Jewiji Baptifm, makes the PaiTage an Argument
rather againft Mr. Wall^ and implys, that he
thought this Baptifm alone correfponded with
ours.
In another place, the Apoftle Peter makes our
Baptifm to be the Antitype of the .Ark in which
few were fav'd by Water \ for fo we likewife are
fav'd by the Water of Baptifm. But is it not
flrange the facred Writers fhou'd point out thefe
Allallons, and yet never in the leaft hint at the
a ntient Ceremony from whence our Baptifm, 'tis
pretended, was immediately borrowed ? Nothing
furely can look more improbable.
4. Several Authors of Reputation, efpecially
the Antients, do in effed deny they knew of any
initiatory Baptifm among the Jews^ which was
the
Let. 1 o. Hfjiory of Infant-^aptifm. 373
the original of ours. This Obfervation is groun-
ded on abundance of PafTages.
The Apoftle Barnabas^ in that Catholick Epiftle,
(if indeed it be his) whereof we have the greatelt
part ftill remaining in the Original, the he is whol-
ly employ'd about the Jewljlo Rites, &c, has not one
Word concerning the Baptifm our Psedobaptifts
contend for ; which being the fame as to Exter-
nals with one of our holy Sacraments, cou'd not,
had this holy Man known it, have been pafs'd
by at fach a time. Nay more, in one place, he
apply s himfelf to find out fome Ttfludcs of our
Chriftian Baptifm ^ and yet even there, where it
wou'd: have- been fo natural and neceflary, we
meet with no FbQtfteps of it. '\Letvsfee^ fays
he, whether God took care to manifcfi any thing
hefore 'hand concerning Water and the Crofs, Who
woud not exped here ^ have that Baptifm it
felf mentioned which was the Forerunner and
Type of ours, and from whence it was immedi-
ately taken, if there had been any fuch ? As a
Type of the Crofs, he mentions the brazen Ser-
pent in the Wildernefs *, and does not forget the
Pofture in which A^ofes flood when the Ifraelites
and Amalehtes were engag'd, Exod. xvii. 8, &c.
When he let down his Hands the Amalekites ^revaifd^
and when he ' held vp his Hands Ifrael frevaifd^
p^er.ii' which was to tignify, fays St. Barnabas^
11 that except they triifl in him-^ they cannot be fav^d*
I think it can't be doubted, but St. Barnabas wou'd
have taken the fame Method in regard to Bap-
tifm, and have mentioned the Original of it among
the Jews^ if he had been acquainted with it ^
f Cap. II. Innaa^JLiv Ji « tjwihi^^ T&S KTPI'Q Grj^^aFe-
II Cap. 12. "G77 i S\iVAv\rU CZti^kucti, \aV fJ^ W CtCTTj
B b 3 whereas
5 74 ^fteHions on Kr-WalFj Let. i o.
whereas he only cites fome Paflages of the Pro*
phets, which he applys to Baptifm, after he had
laid, |[ y4s for Bapifm^ it is written to the People of
Ifrael, that they jliail not receive that Baptifm which
brings to Forgivenefs of Sins^ hut Jhall infiitute to
themfelves others. He means, as Menard is of O-
pinion, their frequent faperftitious Wafhings.
And thefe being the only vicarious Baptifms he
fpeaks of, 'tis probable he knew no other, in
whofe Head ours was at firit inftituted, and is at
prefent continuM.
Juftin Martyr^ in his long Difpute with Trypho
the Jew^ mentions perhaps all their other Rites,
and their Legal Wafhings, but is utterly filent as to
this initiatory Baptifm : and there are fome FafTa-
ges which feem to argue he was ignorant of it.
In one Place he fays thus, ^j- As therefore Circum^
cifion began in Abraham, and the Sabbath and Sa-
crifices^ and Oblations^ and Holy Days^ were firft in^
fiituted by Mo^QS^ all which- we have proved were ap^
pointed becanfe of the hardnefs of the People^s Hearts :
fo they ought all now to ceafe according to the Will of the
F A T H E R, /« him that was born of the Virgin^ of
the Seed tf/" Abraham, of the Tribe <?/ Judah, and of
II Cap. II. n€f/^ ^ ^''TcTii?©-, yi.fe^mVi p^ Jr'U^YW^
t Dialog, cum Tryph. pag. 261. B. 'n? %v diro 'ACejr^
T\^c(;i:)o^A y^ 'Eo{leti, ^ ctmJ^eiyJ^^ ^^'^ ^ o'K^Yi£^yJ.§J)ov t
^ nATP'02 B^Kbj), «V r cT/ii 'f ct^'^r^m ?> A^eJ^.'
^ 0 E 0~T X P r 2 T 'O N. Ka} vuHi cl M tot« '7ra(T'
^^nazcvh^ tJ .©E"^, » TAVThjj rbjj y^ 'S.A^yd, -naPA^hd'
Cou^) 'nzn%[/.Ujj, ctAAa TvdjucultitbjS', i]V 'Efft^X '^'*' ^' ouaiot
iqtVKcL^AV, YilAH^ J^, SiA T BatThX/MiJO' CLV%Jl^, WelJ^ clf^f~
7«Ac/ \y.y^vei/A<^, ^icH 75 "Ea5©- to <5^ r ©Eo'^T, ihcL-
Cof^, Kd.) maiv i(^{\ov oiy.cico^ ^^mxCctVc-ii'*
the
Le 1. 1 o . Hiflory df Infant- ^apttfm. 375
the Stock of David, even Jesus Christ the
Son of go D, — -«-^ j4nd we who thro him find
acCefs to GO 2), do not receive the Circumcifwn of
the Flejhj but that Spiritual one which Enoch and
fttch like oh fervid : and this we receive by Baptifm
thro the Mercy of God, and all are permitted to re-
ceive it this way* 'Tis obfervable here that the
Martyr a Herts, all the Ceremonials of Alofes were
to end in Christ^ Baptifm it felf therefore, if
it had been in ufe before, muft have ceas'd likewife
under the Gofpel : but as this is contrary to the
Inftitution of our Lord, and the univerfal Rnow-
ledg and Pradice of the Chriftian Church, 'tis
certain the Holy Martyr had no Notion of any
fuch Baptifm.
This feems a little more evident from the laft
Part of the Words, wherein he oppofes our new
Circumcilion, and our new Way of receiving it,
to their Circumcifion of the Flefii : and as before
he afierted. That began from Abraham^ and was to
end in ChR isf, his Oppofition here can't mean
iefs than that our Baptifm was a new Thing which
began in Christ, that is, with His new Dif-
penfation.
In another Place, when the Jew acknowledg'd it
was not necefiary to obferve the whole Law at all
times, becaufe 'twas impoOTible, for inftance, to
kill the PafTover when their City and Temple were
deftroy'd ^ St. Juftin puts him upon afligning what
was necefiary in his Opinion : to which the Jew
anfwers, -]- To keep Holy the Sabbaths^ to be Cir-
cumcls^dj to obferve the riew Aloons^ and to be bap-
tlz?d or wdfiid^ ( if he had ftop'd here, this wou'd
have been thought a great Argument for Mr. Wall'^
t Pag. 264. C. KctV-Hj'©-, 7b' ^etCCitii(^HV A€f<M, acti to
Bb 4 but
17 (> ^fleFlions on MrW^lYs Let.io.
but he adds ) when one has touch'' d and been defiled
by any ofthofe things Mofes has mention d. The Bap-
tifm the Jew fpeaks of here is confin'd by the
lalt Words to Purifications for Pollution*, and
Jince he mentions no other, it mud be natural to
fuppofe, he allow'd of no other : for St. Jufiin
putting him to inftance in things which might
and ought to be obfervM, he wou'd certainly
have nam'd Baptifm for Profelytifm, if there
had been any, as well as Circumcifion, becaufe it
was as eafy to be obferv'd.
I remember one FafTage particularly, in Tertul-
lian^ which is very cogent and plain to Ihew this
initiatory Baptifm is a mere Fable. Even in his
time feme wicked People, as he calls 'em, were
arriv'd to that degree of Boldnefs as to deny
the KecelTity and Ufefulnefs of Baptifm, becaufe
they found Faith alone had been fufficient to
fave fome •, and they feem to have objeded that
Abraham^ &c. were fav'd by Faith without Bap-
tifm : to thefe he anfwers, -f* Tho Salvation was
to be had by a bare Faith before our L o R D 's com"
ing^ yet when the Objects of our Faith were multii^lfd^
and we arc to believe in his Birth^ and Pajfion^ and
RefurreU:ionj then there is an Addition made to the
Sacrament^ to wit the Seal of Baptifm-, which is the
clothing as it were of Faith^ which before was bare
or naked. Nothing can be plainer than that Ter-
tulUan here makes Baptifm to be a new Ordinance,
notus'd till theChriitian Difpenfation ^ for Bap-
tifm, he fays, was then initituted, when we were
t De Baptifmo, pag, 229. Fuerit Salus retro per fidem
nudam ante DOMINI PaiTionem & Rcfurre^lionem :
at ubi Fides aufta eft credendi in Nativitatem, Paflioneni,
Refurredionemque ejus, addita elt Ampliatio Sacramento,
Obfignatio Baptifmi, Veftimentum quodammodo Fideij
quae retro erac nuda.
to
Let. 10. Hijlory of Infant'^aj)tifm. 377
to believe in Christ: and till then Faith was
naked and not cover'd with this Clothing, that is,
they were to believe, but were not baptiz'd.
Several other Paflages might be added from this
Father, as where he oppofes the Chriftian Bap-
tifm to the Jewijh Wafhings for Pollution, not
for Initiation ^. But this one is fo clear that
it may ferve for all.
Origen alfo is very plain ; for fpeaking of the
1^3otion of the Pharifees^ that none cou'd baptize
befide Christ, or Ellas ^ or that Prophet^ he fays
in oppofition to Heradeon^ who had allow'd it,
'f- That he cannot prove any Prophet did ever hap~
tiz.e^ neither Mofes^ nor any after him till John^
whom the Pharifees reprov'd : from whence it
feems evident that Origen did not know of any
initiatory Baptifm among the Jews,
To thefe I add an illuftrious Inftance from the
Writings ofSt.C)/r/7 of Jfrw/^/^;?; |j ^ who anfwer-
ing this Queftion, Why the Grace was communi-
cated by Water rather than by any thing elfe?
obferves, that the SPIRIT mov'd upon the
Face of the Waters, Gen. i. 2. That the coming
out oi Egypt was thro the Sea, ^a:^^. xiv. 2 1 .
That Aaron was fuTc wafh'd, and afterwards in-
ftaird High Prieft, Exod. xxix. 4. That the Bra-
zen Laver which was to be plac'd between the Ta-
bernacle and the Altar, Exod. xxix. 18. was a
Symbol of Baptifm: but he never gives the leaft
Intimation of any initiatory Baptifm which gave
* De Baptifmo, pag^a^o. Ceterum Ifrael Judseus quo-
tidie lavat, quia quoridie inquinatur. Qiiod ne in nobis
quoque fadiitaretur propterea de uno Lavacro definitiim
ell, &c.
f Comment, in Joan, pa g. 117. B. 'Oy -^ i^^ ^-ei^cLi vvcl
II Catechetic. 3. pag. 17,
rife
578 <^fleStions on Mr.^olVs Let. t o^^
rife to it, tho he had fo fair an occafion to
meation it, if fuch a Rite had been in ufe. Were
the fame Queftion propos'd to Mr. Wall^ in-
ftead of mentioning all thofe other things, we
may be fure he wou'd anfwer diredtly, that it
having been a Ceremony with the Jews from
the time of Mofes to initiate all Perfons by Bap-
tifm, Christ was willing to continue the
fame Mode of Initiation in his Church *, and if
our Author's Suppofition were true, this wou'd
have been the proper Anfwer to the Queftion :
nor is it to be imagin'd that St. Cyril wou'd have
omitted it had he known or believ'd fuch a Bap-
tifm. On the contrary, the following Words
feem to give us very itrong Prefumptions to
think he dated the beginning of that Ceremony
from St. John only.
Befides, it is faid to come inftead (not of sijew-
i/Z? Initiation, but) of feveral other things ^ which
is not at all conllftent with its being borrow'd
from the Jewijij Initiation, for then it cou'd only
be faid to fucceed that. The Author of the Re-
cognitions fays, it was at firft inftituted, at the
CefTation of Sacrifices, in their ftead \ his Words
are, jl Lefi they jlioud think when Sacrifices were
ceas^d^ there coud he no more Remijfion of Sins^ he
inftituted a Baptifm by Water ^ in which^ by calling on
his Name^ they fiooud be ahfolv d from all their Sins,
There is likewife a very remarkable Paflage in
the Confiitutions^ where the Chriftian Baptifm is
faid to be inftead of a Jewifl: : and if the fol-
lowing Explication had not been added, this
Flace^ no doubt, , wou'd have been frequently
.T^-Un-
II Lib. I. cap. JJ9. Et ne forte putarent, cciTantihtis
Koftiis, RemiiTionem fibi non fieri Peccatorum, Baptifma
eis per Aquam ilatuit ; in quo ab omnibus Peccatis, is-
vocato ejus nomine, folverentur.
turn'd
Let. t o. Hijlory of Infant-^aj)tifm. 379
turn'd upon us ^ but thefe Words have fecur'd it
on our fide : || Baptifm^ Sacrifice^ the Trlefthood^ and
their Local Worjlnf he has changed \ and inflead of
the daily WaJJnngs under the Law^ he has given m
one only Baptifm into his Deathj &c.
Mr. Hillj a Presbyter of the Diocefe of Bath and
Wells, if he be of any Authority with you, aflerts
the fame thing: f ^or to the Levitical IVafliings
a?2frvers our Baptifm , to their Sacrifices^ the Sacrifice
£?/ Christ, &:c. And thofe who fay it fuc*
ceeds in the Chriftian Church in the place of
Circumcifion in the Jewifh^ by this virtually con-
fefs the Jews had no fuch Baptifm ; for if there
was fuch a Rite among 'em, and our Lord
took this Ordinance from it, they ought to fay
our Baptifm fucceeds to that, and not to Cir-
cumcifion. Thefe fame Perfons 'tis true, at other
times, derive it from the JewifJj Baptifm too*,
which plainly difcovers their great Prejudices and
Partiality, and how inconfiftent they are with
themfelves.
But as to the Fathers, they feem in general
never to have given into fuch an Opinion, nor
afforded our Author the leaft Intimation to build
upon. I know they mention Baptifm unto
Mofes^ and Jewifio Baptifm ^ but in thefe Places,
as you have in fome degree feen, they always
mean the Baptifm of the Cloud and the Sea, or
fome fuch typical one, or elfe the jF^n?//?; Waihings
for Purification : this muft be very plain to any
11 Lib. ^. cap. 23. To Bst'-rJ/^/asc, rbJ Qvinav^ tU^'U^'
lov, &c.
t DilTert. de Presbyteratu, Lib. 4. cap. 9. §.9. Stqui-
dem Lotionibus Leviticis noftriim Lavacrum, iftorum Sa~
crificiis C H R I S T I Yiclima— ex adverfo refpondent.
honelt
380 ^fleftions on Mr. Wall V Let. i o.^
honcft Reader of their Writings, and therefore I
think it the iefs needful to infill more upon it.
Now to draw up the Force and Conclufion
of thefe Obfervations in fhort. If, as I have made
out to you, there is no Command in Scripture^
nor Inftance in that nor any other authentick
Writing, of the Chriftian Baptifm's being derivM
from the y^TP/, but feveralconfiderable Authors do,
in effe^^, deny it, and place it in the (lead, not of
a Jervijh initiatory Baptifm, but of fomething elfe :
and if none of the more antient Writers in their
Difcourfcs on the Jewijh Ceremonys do ever once
mention this Baptifm of Profelytes, nor when
treating exprefly on the Chriftian Sacrament ever
intimate they thought it was deriv'd from any
fuch Original *, then all this, I think, muft prove
as fully as a Negative can be prov'd, that there
was no fuch Pradlice among the Jews^ fo anti-
ently as is pretended.
And if, after all, any fhou'd continue to be-
lieve or aflert the Jews did, from Mofes to our
Saviour's time, and fo down, receive their
Profelytes by Baptifm, notwithllanding what I
have urg'd to the contrary, yet on feveral other
Accounts, there is a great deal of Reafon to
fay, this Cuftom of the Jews^ tho ever fo true,
can do no fcrvice to the Caufe of Paedobap-
tifm. For,
1. It does not in the leaft appear, that In-
fants were fo admitted ^ and Mr. Wall does not
offer the leaft Colour of an Argument to make
it probable, but only cites a Paflage or two from
the Rahhins^ whofe Authority I have prov'd to
be of no great weight. But,
2. Even fuppoilng Profelytes and their Infants
were ufually initiated by Baptifm ^ will it there-
fore follow the Chriftian Baptifm muft be ex-
adly the fame, and adminiftred to the fame
Per-
Let. 1 o. Hiftory of hifant^^aptif??!. ^ 8 1
Perfons? by i^o^jneans. How dangerous and per-
nicious this Confequence is, appears from the han-
dle it gives the Socinians^ Quakers and Libertines^
to explode the Ufe of this Sacrament altogether
among the Offspring of Chriftian Parents. For
if the Jewijii Method in their fuppos'd Baptifm
mud l)e the Rule of ours, then none are to be
baptiz'd but thofe who turn from a different
Religion to the Chriftian : the firft Converts and
their Children born before their Baptifm, are to
be baptiz'd, but none of their Pofl:erity born after
their Baptifm ; for this, our Author fays, was the
Pradice of the Synagogue, and "^ our Saviour
gave no direEbion for any Alterations*
Mr. Wall takes notice of f this Difficulty ^ but
I think he fays nothing to evade the Force of it,
and only notes, that both Sides allow the Neceflity
of this Sacrament, and therefore we need not
concern our felves with this Part of the pre-
tended Jewi^ Cuftom. Bui:, by Mr. WalCs leave,
it does affed the Difpute between us^ for 'tis
a common Rule of Difputation, That which f roves
too much^ proves nothing at all. And if a neceflary
Confequence of more than is true, follows from
any Premifes, 'tis a certain fign thofe Premifes
are not true^ and if not true, they are to be
rejeded. This now is the Cafe of the Parti-
cular before us. For if the Jewifii Baptifm was
never adminiftred to any but the firft Converts,
and muft be the Rule to us of our Pradice^ then
we muft not baptize thofe who are born of Chrifti-
an Parents, neither Infants nor Adult.
So that the Premifes upon which ourAdver-
farys build, and which they call the main Bafis
of Infant 'Baptifm^ tend to throw this Sacrament
out of the Church ^ which is undoubtedly a very
^ Introd. pag. 17. f Ibid.
wild
382 (^cfleElions on Mr.WsWs Let. 1 o.
wild and erroneous Extreme. For in fhort, let
the Socinians and others fay what they pleafe, the
Scriptures afliire us, Baptifm was inftituted by
Christ, and was, and ought to be adminiftred
for the iPorgivenefs of Shis ^ and therefore Men
ought to be very careful how they neglcd that
Ordinance. And fince the Paedobaptifts acknow-
ledg this, they ought in Prudence, and for the
Honour of G o d, and of his Sacraments, to lay
afide thofe Principles which are fo deftrudlive
of the Chriftian Oeconomy.
Befides, according to the Principles of the Pae-
dobaptifts themfelves, there is no manner of Ana-
logy between this pretended Jewijh and the
Chriftian Pcedobaptifm : for the Jews^ they fup-
pofe, baptiz'd the Parents together with the In-
fants born to 'em, before their adual Profelytifm ;
but on the contrary, thofe born to Chriftian Pa-
rents before their Converfion to Chriftianity, are
accounted an unholy^ Seed, and not capable of
Baptifm, as Dv. Whitby ^, and moft Paedobaptifts,
are of Opinion. And again on the other hand,
the Jews never baptiz'd the Children born of
Profelytes after their Profelytifm f ^ but on the
contrary, the Children of Chriftian Parents, they
pretend, ftiou'd all be baptiz'd, tho born after
their Parents Converfion. In both Cafes running
diredUy oppofite to the Pattern, which they tell
us C H R I s T II took as he found it^ giving no direchion
for any Alteration.
Again, tho thtjews (hou'd be allow'd to have
baptiz'd the Infant Children of Profelytes, it no
more follows we muft do fo too, than that we
ought to admit 'em to the other Sacrament,
becaufe the Jews caus'd their Infant Children to
* Annot. in iCor. vii. 14.
f Wall's Introd. pag, 12.
|. Ibid. pag. 1 7. med,
eat
Let.io. Hijlory of Infant'^a^tifm. 385
eat of the Pafchal Lamb •, which is fuppos'd to
be a Type of Christ, and of the Supper he
inftituted or borrow'd from thence : nay it wou'd
follow more ftrongly, that fince Infants were ad-
mitted to the Shadow or Type, they fhou'd now
alfo be admitted to the Antitype, which how-
ever our Antagonifts will not pretend.
3. In the third Place, whatever might be the
Pradice of the Jervs^ we need only go back to
St. Johns Baptifm, which there is more Reafon
to think was the Pattern of Christ's than a
Jewijlj Ceremony, becaufe he was our Saviour's
immediate Forerunner. And this our Author
confefles when he fays, ^ The Baptifm indeed of
the Nations by the J^poftles ought to be regulated by
the Frapice of John and Christ himfelf- — ra-
ther than by any preceding Cvftom of the Jewilh
Nation^ if we had any good ground to believe that
they did in the Cafe of Infants differ or alter any
thing from the ufual way*
^ If the Praftice then of St. John and Christ
himfelf is fufficient, and the belt Rule we caa
go by, as far as it is plain, let us for the future
allow no Inventions of the Jews to be made an Ar-
gument in the Controverfy ^ for the Pradice of
St. John and our L or d is abundantly plain from
much better than Rabbinical Authority. TheSenfe
of the Coramiflion Christ gave his Difciples,
Matth, \y.^\iu 19. I have already prov'd does ef-
fedually exclude Infants ^ and what St. John aded
is manifeft, if we dare truft St. Af^^kip's Account
of the Matter, who tells us indeed, that John
baptiz'd Jerufalem and ^//Judea, and all the Region
round about Jordan, but at the fame time aflures
us, that as many as he baptiz'd confefs'd their
Sms^ Matth.iiu^^6. And therefore, as we can't
"^ Introd. pag. i8.
fay
3 84 ^eflea'tons on Mr.W^Ws Let. i o.
fay fome confefs'd their Sins, in that Evangelical
Senfe, and yet were not baptiz'd j fo neither may
any pretend fome were baptiz'd, who yet did not
and cou'd not confefs their Sins. For your far-
ther Satisfaction, you may look back to what is
faid about this in a former Letter.
Eufehius tranfcribes a Paflage from Jofephus very
clear to this purpofe, wherein the Hiftorian fays
thus of Sujohn^ and his Pradice in relation to Bap-
tifm : ^ He was a good Man^ and ferfuaded the Jews
to Right eoufnefs^ commanding them to deal j^ftly with
one another^ and pioujiy towards God, and fo come
to Baptifm* For Baptifm woud he acceptable to Him^
when tis^d^ not for purging away fome particular Of-
fences^ hut for purifying the Body in general^ the Soul
being before purify a by Right eoufaefs. Jofephus in
thefe Words, and Evfebius by tranfcribing them,
do both alTure us, this was St. Johns Method.
And, by the way, give me leave to obferve, that
St. Johns initiatory Baptifm is here remarkably
oppos'd to the Jewiflj Wafhings for particular Qf-
fences^ viz. their legal Uncleanneffes : which is as
much as to fay, the Baptifm of St. John was a
new thing, and not like the other Baptifms in
ufe among 'em, that were admihifter'd for parti-
cular Offences only ^ whereas his was at once to
purge from all.
As to St. Johnh Praftice, Origen^ one of the mofl
learned of the Antients, fays exprefly on the Faf-
* Hift. Eufeb. lib. i. cap. ii. ^Ayi^v ^Av<fl^A Kc^i tbT;
£^iKa.ioffvv^ yj,i T^'^ <r 0EO"N 'EtcnCe/ot p(^^*>^ir8^, BcfTrjuya
OhvUvat* «7W JX) cTm yj,l 7»V BaVtIicIV, OTTTzXiKTW 'AuTW (fCf^Vil-
cTZtl, ftiSi 'g'Tl' TiVUV "cKyLA^TCLthiiV THtP^JTYmi "/JU^iveifpf A^\^
T^P/AKA.'HflJLil'nf' ,
ftge
Let. to. Htftory of Infant- ^aptifm. ^ S 5
fage : '|- We ought necejfarily to obferve^ that both St,
Matthew a,id St. Mark fay ^ that wp«7wc0nfefling their
Sins, all Jerufdem^ and all Judea^ and all the Re-
gion round about Jordan^ or all the Country of Ju-
dea, and aU the Inhabitants (?/ Jeirufalcm, we're ha^-
tiz.d. But St. Matthew brings in the Pharifees and
SadduceS coming to be baptizfd^ but not confejfng
their Sin's ^ and for this reafon they are call'd ^Ge-
neration of \'ipers. And a little after, he adds,
Ij The Pharifees and Sadduces were different from
thofe who confefs^d their Sins, Plainly intimating,
that all thofe who w^ere before faid to be baptized,
were alfo faid to confefs their Sins,
Befides, St. John% Baptifm was the Baptifm of
Repentance ^ fo St. Paul teaches the Ephefans^
Ads xix. 4. John verily baptized with the Baptifm
of Repentance \ and therefore St. John himfelf re-
fufes to baptize the Pharifees^ &c. direfling 'em
to bring firth Fruits meet for Repentance^ Mat. iii. 8-
Kow/ that can never be a Baptifm of Repen-
tance which is given to thofe who don'c repent,
St. John therefore cou'd no more adriiinifler thi^
Baptifm to Infants who cou'd not, than to the
Pharifees who w^ou'd not repent. If you conllder
this impartially, Sir, I am perfuaded you will fee
reafon to believe St. John baptiz'd only Adult Per-
Tons: from whence it will follow, that fince bis
t In yohan. pag. ii8. D. "£77 /i y^? t^ta uvayKAw nuuf
fXtTO^ TTZtVTit^' 0 eTs MetT'?rt<0" ft7x^« ^' kf^OySfv; iff TO
^d-rjtfffut tkV ^Aex^iaiy rM.1 'S.aJ'S'y/M.i^i?, » ^j^v l^cccorcyv^
Ij Fag. lie,. jy.'Eiicjii k77f TTvccjr^ T^i i^ofy.ony-ysi^.im t^<
C c Pra-^ice
5 U (I(eficB'mson Ifr.WaliV Let. i o;
Pradice is allow'd to be our Precedent, we are
bound to do the fame.
4. But in the laft place, to fix the matter en-
tirely, this Cuftom, of the Jews to initiate all Pro-
felytes and their Children by Baptifm, allowing
the Fad to be ever fo certain, was at beftonly
a traditionary Ceremony from the Rabbins : And
tho our Author thinks fit to corred * Mr. Stennett
for faying fo, yet that Gentleman's fhort Argu-
ftient, that no fuch Initiation is commanded in the
Law of G o D, will over-bear all he has there faid
about it.
To fuppofe the Tradition of their Elders of
any Authority to prove the divine Inflitution of
that Ceremony, is very weak and trifling *, and
Mr. Wad wOu'd be far from allowing all the Confe-
quences of fuch a Suppofition.
But he fays, -j- they quoted Texts in the Law of
G OD for what they did. And what then ? Is it
therefore a divine Inftitution, becaufe they pre-
tend this or the other Text favours it? And
will our Author himfelf acquiefce in all they
bring Scripture to vouch ? They may cite the
whole Bible, tho not a Word in it makes for
'em ', and yet, according to Mr. IVali^ the thing
is well enough prov'd, as long as they cite fo good
Authority.
But I am inclinM to think, the Jews v/ere not
fo much out in the Texts they cite, as our Author
is in imagining they grounded their Baptifm of
Profeiytes on 'em. i have already fliewn the
Scriptures mention no fuch Baptifm of Profeiytes,
and that therefore it was only a Tradition : The
Rabbins themfelves tacitly confefs this, in ar-
guing from the legal Walhings *, and exprelly in
.* Introd. pag. 2S. f ibid.
that
Let.io, Hifiory of Infant-'Baptifm. 387
that very Determination of the Difpute between
Rah» Eliez^ar and Rab, Jojhua^ which our Antago-
rifts conftantly quote, in thcfe Words ^ ^ But the
wife Men prortou?7C^d^ that till he were both circum*
cis^d and baftiiJd^ he was not a Profelyte. For this
makes it appear they deriv'd the Fradice only
from the Authority of their Elders.
That this is a jufl: Inference from the Words,
cannot be queltion'd, if we obferve, that the Jews
make a common Diftindion between the Pollu-
tions and Purifications exprefs'd in the Law, and
thofe which are not exprefs'd there, but have
their Obligation from the Authority and Confti-
tutions of the Rabbins. Thus the great Maimo*
nides fays, \ The Vncleannejfes I have expounded^
are all from the Law-y and are therefore called Pollu-'
tions which depend on the Words of the Law : but
there are^ hefde thefe^ fever al other Pollutions^ which
are decreed to be fa by the Authority of the Rabbins
only \ and are therefore called Pollutions grounded on
the Determinations of the Rabbins,
In other FafTages of the fame Preface, he care*
fully preferves this Diftindion, and frequently
notes, that this or the other Pollution arifes from
the Determinations of the Dotiors 9 and this is tin»
clean only becaufe the Scribes have decreed fo^ &:c.
The fame Obfervation holds good likewife in
other Cafes befides this of Pollutions: but 1 in-
ftance in this, becaufe it feems homogeneal to the
matter in difpute^ and in the Talmvd^ you fee,
the Baptifm or Purification of Profelytes is bot-
tom'd on the Authority of the wife Men : for
fince it's plain the Jews have added many things
to thofe determin'd in the Law, and particularly
*• Talmud. Jeba moth. cap. 4.
t Pr*fat. in Seder Taharoth.
C c 2 in
5 8 8 ^efleclions on M}M:x\Ys Let. i o^
in the matter of Wafhings ; and fince we find no
Footfteps of any fuch Baptifm in the Scriptures,
'tis natural to believe it was inilituted only by
the Rabbins \ and that when the Talmud attributes
it to the wife Men, it means fo.
Malmonldes exprefly aflures us, this is the proper
Defign and Meaning of that Talmudical Phrafe :
For fiiewing theSandion of eachConftitution in the
Talmudy he diftributes 'em into. five CUjfes^ \\ Thefirfi.
contains thofe things which were received from Mofes,
and have fame Foundation^ and may he concluded
from the f acred Text^ &c. 71?^ fecond Clafs compre-
hends thofe things which are denominated Confiitutions
of Mofes from Sinai, but cannot he frov d or col-
lected by any Argument from the Scriptur^s^ &c. The
third comprehends thofe which are drawn from Argu-
mentation only^ and which are difputed ^ in which
cafes f the Opinion of the Majority takes place j &c.— -
And thefe ' things, he fays, are known in the Tal*
mud by thefe diftinguifhing Phrafes, JSI. fays tkusj
for this Reafon ^ and N- fays thus^ for this Reafon.
But if any one fljoud think thefe things^ which ad-
mit of difputCy were received by Tradition from Mo-
fes ^ and that the Difpute arofe from Forgetfulnefs or
J[4iflake ^ fo that one fde is right ^ but the other either
miftook the Senfe^ or forgot fome part^ or elfe did not
learn of his Doctor all he ought to have learrPd
This is very unhandfom^ and ah fur d *, and for want
of knowing thingSy and the Foundations of ^ cm^ migh-
tily detrdis from the Reputation of thofe Men who
have delivered to vs the Traditions* ^Tis therefore
altogether falfe^ and arifcs from and their not
difilnguijhlng between thofe things which are recelvd
by Tradition^ and thofe which are only Inferences from
^cm* But whatever elfe thou doubtejt of^ lay down
tlns"a's'd certain Rule ^ That whenever thou findefi a'
Praefat. in Seder Zeraim,
difference
Let. I o, Hijiory of Infant-^aptifm. 389
difference between the Difciples of Shammai and the
Difcifles of Hillel neither what one nor the
other afferts was derived by Tradition from Mofes,
nor ffoken from Mount Sinai-
Aiid therefore fince K. Eliez.ar^ and R.Jopwaj-
do controvert the Baptifm of Profelytes, it can'c
be thought a Tradition from Mofes^ but only aa
Inference of the later Rabbins, drawn from fo me
other Principles) and not capable of being prov'd
from the Scriptures, neither exprefly, nor by
CO nfeque nee ;. for this Maimonides notes as the
Property of the firft Clafs only.
T%e fourth Clafs^ he fays, contains the Decrees and
Determinations, of the Prophets and wife Men r~
which they call Confix it uti on s» — — : — That thou fliah not
eat the FlejJo of a Bird with Milh-^ is a Conftitiition.
of our DoBors^ to keep Men at a greater Diflance-
frorn Tranfgreffion \ for whereas the Law only . prohir-
hited the Fie fh of fomc Beafh^ the wife Men j to keep-
us at a greater diftance from that which the Law
makes unlawful^ forbid alfo Birds^ &c. And
this kind of Gonllitutions, when they are of ge-
neral ufe, he determines out of the Talmud^ that,
even EUas himfelf, to whom they refer all things,
has not power to alter or abolifh in any one fingle
Point.
But the ffth and lafl: Clafs ^ he fays, is of thofe
things which may be of ufe to Men^ in order to the
Ohftrvation of the Precepts of the Law* Of
this fort of Confiitutions there are very many in the
Talmud and Mifchna ^ ■ And fome are the Con^
J} it ut tons of particular wife Men '^ as when ^tis faid^
Hillel determind^ or our Mafler Gamaliel deter-
mind J or R. John the Son 0/ Zacchseus determind^
&:c, — — Others again are Confi^i tut ions of the whole
Body J as when "'tis faid^ "'twas agreed in Ufa \ THE
WISE MEN PRONOUNC'D ^ or'm 4.
Conftitution of the wife Men* And of this nature
G c 3 exaiftly
390 (^efleSlions onMr.WAYs Let.io.'
exaMy is the Cafe of baptizing Profelytes *, for
the Talmud ufhers in the Tradition thus : The wife
Menfrofjou'ficd^ &:c. .
Hence you fee. Sir, the Baptifm of Profelytes
is built on this laft Authority, which is the lowelt
of all. And if Maimonides underftood the Senfe
of their own Talmud^ which 1 believe no Man
ever'did better ^ then the Talmud founds this Bap-
tifm not on the Law, nor on any Tradition from
Mofes^ but only on the Judgments and Determi-
nations of their Rabbins; which reduces ih^main
Bafts of Infant 'Baptifm to nothing elfe but a mere
Rabbinical Tradition.
They cite indeed Exod, xix. lo. as Mr, Wall
objeds J but I have before ^ fhewn, it does not
prove the thing Mr. IVall thinks 'tis: cited for.
Belides, it feems plainly to have been cited only
by way of Accommodation^ not that they be-?
liev'd there was any Argument in it: and this
Method was ufual with the Jews* For, what
Dr. Fccock fays concerning their Cuftom of
wafhing their Hands, is very applicable to the
prefent Cafe : *{- Tho they endeavour to find fame
Foundation in the Law for this Rite^ a?id refer to
thofe Words^ Lev. XV. ii. (or in our Cafe, Exod.
2cix. 10.) this is but an infyfficient kind of T roof and
they themfehes confefs it is only derived from the Au^
thority of their Dottors*
•* Pag. 5^5, (z5rc.
+ Not. Mifcel. cap. 9. pag. 585. Qiiamvis enim Ritum
iftum aliqiio raodo in Lege fundari volunt, & ad verba ifta
CD'aD3 ^l^ti? N^ Vn**) 6* rnanus fuas non laverif^ Levit.
2v. ! r. referant, non eft hoc tamen aliud quam KnDQDi^
N£)^y3 Probjtth minime valida & pD"T1Q N^N I^N?)^
Mft aliunde quam a Do^hribus profe^nm fatentur, <^c.
If
Lrt'.m'- HifidiyhfhifaHi-'Baptifnt. ^pi
" Hf .thert this be the State of the Cafe ^ fappofing
this fcaptiffn had beea Pf adis'd in our S ay i o u r's
Tinie, 'tis great ,Pr^aipUoa. in our Adverfarys
to draw it into a 'Precedent for the Cbriltian
Church, and to corrupt the pure Inftitutions of
CriR.isT with the Fancys of the Rabbins: efpe-
cially after our Lord has ftridly cautionM us,
as well as his Difciples, to beware of the Leven
of the Fharifees.
For it is to be obferv'd, the Traditions our
Lord condemns were fuch particularly as rela-
ted to Wafhings : which (hews, that Corruptions
had crept into thofe things ^ and therefore 'tis
probable, if there was any fuch Baptifm, it was
introduc'd with thefe inventions. And our Lord
by condemning their Traditions, certainly in-
tended, neither that, nor any part of 'em (hou'd
be continu'd without his particular lajundion *,
nor wou'd his Difciples have ventur'd to retain it
on any Pretence whatever. And 'tis very ftrange
that any, but efpecially fo many learned and judi-
cious Men among the P^dobaptifts, fhou'd fo eafi-
ly perfuade themfelves to follow this unwarrant-
able Method, notwithftanding Christ fo clear-
ly difallows it, and they know at the fame time
what a faithlefs fort of iMen the Rabbins are, on
whom they depend.
Thus 1 have prov'd, from many Conliderations,
that the Arguments of our Adverfarys do not make
it appear to have been the Cultom of the Jews at
our Saviour's Time to baptize Profeiytes-^nd
their Children. I have alfo added feveral Argu-
ments which do with great Probability evince the
contrary. 1 have likev/ife fhewn, that even fup-
pofmg the Fad cou'd be demonftrated, it is no
Rule to us in the Adminiftration of a Chriftian
iriacrament as being only a Tradition of their
Cc 4 Elders,
5 9 i ^fleElions on Mi'.WaUV Let. i ol
Elders, and not grounded on Scripture, nor de-
riv'd from Mofes, And this cuts off one great
part of the pretended Evidence for InfaTit-Baptifm,
and effeaually everts what they call the w/^i« Ba-
fs of it. The other kind of Evidence Mr, WJl
produces, 'viz.^ the Authority of the Fathers, i§
iiext to be confider'd. In the mean time, I am,
S I R, &c.
'- -r-^i-'
Letter
Let. 1 1 . H'tjlory of Infant^^aptifm. 393
L E T T E R XL
What is to be the particular Bufnefs of the follovoi?2g
Letters. The Authority of the primitive Fathers
more to be valud than Daill6, and fome others
\,fuffofe, ^Twoiid be eafy to defend the Credit of
'"* the Fathers from the Cavils of ihefe Men, T'hey
werey douhtlefs^ faithful in the Relations they were
well qualiffd to ^ive of Affairs in their own
.''''Churches and Times. And fo far their Autho-
^^ rity is of confequence. But yet this is not 'fuffi-
"* cient to ground Mr* WallV Attempt' upon^ tho
^^''\they fhoud afford' ever fo many full Citations. They
"^^^fvere fometimes in the Wrong. The two only ways
' to prove Infant' B apt ifm^ are infujficient^ even tho
the Arguments our Adverfarys make ufe of be aU
^ low* d all the Force they are pretended to have. ^Tis
^' probable-, the ear lie ft Churches pralhis^d only what
they received from the Apoftles. Mr. Wall takes
no notice of St. Barnabas, becaufe he makes a^
gainft Infant 'B apt i [hi ^ in fever al Vlaces. Tlje Paf-
fages from St. Clement examined. Mr. WaU'f
Argument from ^emftated. The main Taint on which
it turns ^ a groundlefs Miftake^ vi?.. that Baptifrn
is necejfary universally to all that Jhall be fav'*d.
Baptifm does not appear to have been defgn^d to
vpafh away Original Sin. By this fame Argument j
it might as certainly be provd^ that all the Anti^
p£dobaptifts now are for Infant- Baptifm. The
Pajfages from Hermas confiderd. In the Faf-
fages citedj this Father [peaks only of Adult Per*
' ' fons.
3 94 ^fieBions on M'-WallV Let' ril
fans. John iii. 5. confide/ d. Kingdom of GOD
does not necejfarily wean jhe^Kin^dom^^j^ jQlqry\
The Words cannot be taken nniverfally, Ti^has
no relation to Infants in any place of Scripture*
And here relates only to the Subjecis of whom our
Lord fpeah. Who are only Adnlt Verfons who have
heard the Word preached. As appears^ i . Becavfe
fuch only can be expe^ed to comply with the Inftitt^
tion^ to whom only it is truly given*. 2. Becaufe
fuch only can be fav^d by ity according to St* Peter.
Whofe Words the T^dobaptifts have never yet fairly
interpreted. Dr. Whitby j Evafton cc/ifider^d*
3. The fame Form of Speech vfual^ when Infants
are fiot included j as they fe em not to bejnthis
jlace by our S ky io\X'^^s Words in the Context.
-4, The Words under confider'atign cannot be xrM^ of
'''infants. ^ 5. Something in the Words themfefves li-
mits ^erh to Adult T erf on's. 'What it is tok^^orn
of the SPIRIT. Dr. ^Mhi^fs judicious Obfer-
'vations on th^ Text. Another. Pajfage ^ of' }^tX'
mas conftder*d. He only defer ibes yifwnsy' and
therefore is not always to be taken literally. . "He can"
notmeany that T erf ons in their fepar ate State ^ere
or coud be baptix^^d with mat c'ridl' Water. H_^f^y^
nothing however of Infant-^Baptifm'^ but rather
excludes Infants in this very pajfage. Befides^ to
give vp 'all our Adverfarys vaH reafonably defire
here, it woiid only prove Infants fhall be h^pti€d
in their feparate Eft ate after Death-) whish . is no'
thing to our Difpute. Another Pajfage of Jler-
mas. That Infants are, efteernd of Q o D,, )?a Ar-
gument they ought to be baptized. This Pajfage
makes rather againft Infant- B apt ifm. Hernias
fays fever al things inconjiftcnt with it. Matth.
xix. 14. confiderd. It has no relation to Baptifm.
-D^-. Whitby'^ imp-rovcment' of the Pajfige examined.
^Tis provable the Children were brought tD be heal d.
Let. 1 1 . Hiftory of hfcinU^apujm. 595
It does not follow from thefe Words^ that they are
ft to he dedicated to Christ by Baptifm^ The
Bijhop of Salisbury'^ Jjfertion mted^ anddifprov'd.
Conclufion*
YO U may remember, Sir, that Mr. Wall aU
lows there are but two ways to eftablilh the
Credit and divine Authority of Infant^Baptifm,
viz.* to afcertain the Pradice of the Jews in
C H R I s t's Time ^ and of the primitive Church
immediately after.
The Pradice of the Jews in relation to this
Point, was the Subjed of my laft Letter: all i
have farther to add, is to Ihow, that it does not
appear that the Chriftians of the firft Ages did
praftife Infant-Baptifm, and that the Writings
of the Fathers of thofe Times do not counte-
nance it in the leaft. And when this is done^
Mr. Wall's ConcelTion gives up the Caufe, and the
Patrons of Infant-Baptifm fhou'd honeftly renounce
their Error, or elfe produce fome better Argu-
ments on their fide.
To all that is ufually built on the Credit of the
Fathers, fome take the Ihorteft way, and anfwer
by rejeding their Authority, and Dallle^ who
has obferv'd no Moderation towards thofe good
Men in another Cafe, has lent fuch Difputants a
helping Hand to deftroy their Reputation. It
is an ill return for the great Leflbns and Ex-
amples of Piety they have given us, and for their
having been fo inftrumental in tranfmitting to us
the knowledg of our moft holy Religion. And
there is yet a greater Evil attends this Method \
for all the Abufes and Affronts put upon the
Fathers of the firft Centurys, do in the end re-
fieft on Chriftianity it felf, which thofe great
Men have handed down, and which therefore muft
needs be, in fome degree, of but doubtful Au-
thority,
2p6 ^flefiions onMr.Wsiiys Let.ii^
thority, if it depends on infufficient Teftimo-
nies.
It wou'd not be difficult to defend the Writings
of the Fathers from the Reproaches caft on 'em
by thefe Men, and by DailU their Oracle, not-
withftanding he has taken fuch Pains in the mat-
ter, and pufh'd it with all the vigour he cou^.
But 'tis a nice Subject, and much too copious to.
be treated here at large. I fhall therefore only
fay, that in many Cafes, the rejeding the Autho-
rity of the Fathers is a very wild Extreme which
Men are driven to, only becaufe they have no-
thing better to fay for themfelves, and can't brook-
to fee their Opinions contradided in their Wri-
tings.
■ That the Fathers of the firll: Churches were
honeft, faithful Men, and every way capable
to acquaint us with the true Pofture of Affairs
in their own Churches and Times, ^ and there-
fore are to be depended on as far as they re-
late Fads within their proper Cognifance, muft
be allow'd on all hands ; and I don't fee how their
greateft Enemys can have the Face to deny this :,
and Mr, IVall pretends to make no farther ufe of
their Authority, in the prefent Difpute, than to
fhew what was the Opinion or Practice of the
Churches where they prefided, and of the Times
when they wrote. '
However, Mr. JValPs Argument from the Fa-
thers turns upon a Suppofition which cannot eafi-
ly be granted him ^ viz,. That the Primitive
Church believ'd and pradis'd nothing but what
they had receiv'd from the Apollles themfelves.
For, what can he mean by endeavouring to prove,
the Church of the three firfl: Centurys pradis'd
Infint-Baptifm ? unlefs at the fame time he ima-
gines their Pradice a fufficieiit Argument of its
divine Inftitution. And it our Author had veiw
tur'd
Let.ii. HiJlGyyoflnfant-^apti/m. 397
tur'd to lay down this Principle fo formally as I
have exprefs'd it ; every one, tho ever fo little
acquainted with EcclefiafticalHiftory, wou'dhave
been able to judg of the weaknefs of it.
But without any Refiedion on the Honour and
Fidelity of the Fathers, their Teltimonys can't
fupport Infant-Baptifm, tho they fhou'd afford
our Author ever fo many and full Citations: for
if the Fathers only prove FaB in the Church, and
Dot Right J and the Church was not wholly pure
from Innovations^ how does this prove the Bap-
tifm of Infants was no Innovation, but an Infti-
tution of C H R I s T ? And yet this is the thing
our Author fhou'd have done, tho he takes no no-
tice of it.
'Tis irkfom to remember the Inftances of hu-
man Frailty which even the mofl antient Church
was liable to ; they were Men fubjed to like
Paflions with us, and therefore no wonder they
were fometimes in the wrong *, and their Zeal for
God's Honour w^as not always according to
Knowledg : which, tho it might keep 'em from
lofing the chief thing our Lor d had commanded,
might however expofe 'em to the Inconveniency of
fuperadding fevcral things He, never authoriz'd.
The Apoftles undoubtedly kept clofe to His Direc-
tions in all things, without Deviation either in De-
fe(ft or Excefs •, for they had the immediate Aflilt-
ance, in a mofl extraordinary manner, of the Spi-
rit of G o D : 'f- But that the Chriftia?n of the very
n€xt Age made fever d Additions^ Tertullian confejfes
in his Book De Corona. And Eufehius from Hegefij^
t Rjgaltms in C}pnan. Epifi, 64. pag. 279. b. AtChriftia-
nos svi proxime fequentis addidiffe plufcula, fatetur Ter-
SkWofJHs li bro de Corona.
3 9 8 (I(efleBms on Jvfr.'WzlYs Let. r t •
f w/, notes that * the Church cdntinu^d all the Apo-
files Times a pure Flrgin vndefiCd ■■ 'But when
thofe holy Men were dead then Errors began to
arife thro the Miftakes of other Teachers.^ And
therefore in the prefent Difpute between us and
the Paedobaptifts, tho our Author fhou'd prove
with all imaginable Evidence, that the Churches
did, immediately after the Apoftles, pradife In-
fant-Baptifm *, it will be no Proof that Infant-
Baptifm was inftituted by C h r i s t, or pradis'd
by his Apoftles '^ becaufe it remains a very mate-
rial Queftion, whether it was deriv'd from them,
or only began with fome other things after their
Death ? And this Objedion our Author has taken
no care to guard againft, tho we may fuppofe
he cou'd not be ignorant that the Primitive
Churches were liable to Innovations, and did
aftually admit feveral.
Tho this might be very juftly infilled on a-
gainft our Adverfarys^ yet I will give 'em all
the Advantages they can defire : and therefore
I will grant, 'tis however probable, that what
all or molt of the earliefl Churches pradis'd
immediately after the Apoflles Times, had been
appointed or pradis'd by the Apoltles them-
felves, and was deriv'd from them ^ for it is
hardly to be imagin'd, that any confiderable
Body of thofe antient Chriftians, and much lefs
that the whole or a great part of the Church
fhou'd fo foon deviate from the Cufloms and
Injundions of their venerable Founders, whofe
"^ Hift. Ecclef. lib. 5. cap. 7,2. 'Q.? £^ct y.iyjx tH^v Ton
Bi« T4a©- rluutKavTct <f dH^i nWf>K Tiiv 'Af )^iW
Autho-
Let. 1 1 . H'tjiory of Infant^^aptifm. 399
Authority they held fo facred. And befides,
new Opinions or Pradices, we fee, are ufually
introduc'd by degrees, and not at once, nor with-
out Oppofition : therefore in regard to Baptifm
in particular, a thing of fuch univerfal Concern,
and daily Pradice, I allow it to be very proba-
ble, that the Primitive Churches kept to the A-
poftles Pattern, But then I defire it may alfo
be conlider'd, that this, tho ever fo probable,
cannot be fairly made equivalent to the Autho*
rity of the Scriptures : fo that if it can be prov'd
from the Scriptures to be but likewife fo much
as probable, that the Apoftles did not baptize
Infants (which 1 think I have already fhewn) that
other Probability drawn from the Writings of
the Fathers, ought not to be urg'd againit us.
However, I am to fuppofe here, (as indeed I
verily believe) that the Primitive Church main-
tained, in this Cafe, an exadl Conformity to the
Pradice of the Apoftles, which, doubtlefs, en-
tirely agreed with Christ's Inftitution ;
and I might venture to put the whole matter
upon this ilTue. Nay farther, fmce Mr. Wall is
defirous to have it thought "^ impjfihle the Church
fhou'd fo early be ignorant of, or vary from the
Pradice of the Apoftles in fo notorious an Affair
as that of Baptifm, 1 will for once grant him
that too : So that now the whole Queftion is re-
duced to this, Whether it can be prov'd from
the authentick Pieces of the primitive Fathers,
that the Church us'd Infant- Baptifm in thofe
earlieft Times ? And if this can't be prov'd, then
upon our Author's own Principles, that Pradice
is no where grounded on fo much as one fmall
Probability. But let us fee how Mr. Wall has ac-
quitted himfelf in his Attempt.
*■ Part L pag. 21.
4G0 ^ficBions onMr.W^ll's Ltt.vU
Islo other Rcafon that I know of can be grveit
Tvhy he does not begin with St. Barnabas^ but that
iaftead of favouring the Baptifm of Infants, his
Epiftle contains at leaft a Paflage or two utterly
inconfiftent with it ^ however^ had our Author
been true to his Promife, he fhou'd no more have
omitted thefe Pafiages againfty than any others he
thinks for his Purpofe. In one Place St. Barnabas
explaining what was meant by the Milk and Honey
which usVl to be given to the new Baptiz'd, fays
thus, ^ Becaufe a^ the Child is nourijh^d firfi with
Hone)^ and then with Milk '^ fo we being ftrengthned
and kept alive with the Belief of his Promifes and the
IVord^ fmll live and have dominion over the Earth*
Which Words neceffarily (ignify,
1. That the Milk and Honey was given to
every one who was Baptiz'd j as might be largely
prov'd. And,
2. That the Word of God, and Faith in his
Promifes, were the fpiritual Food with which all
thofe new born Babes in Cbriftianity were nourifh'd
and fed^ from whence it muft unavoidably fol-
low, that according to St. Barnabas^ all Perfon5
who were admitted to Baptifm in his time were
capable of feeding on the Word and Promifes of
God by Faith, and Infants doubtlefscou'd not be
of this number. This he exprefly tells us was
the Defign of thofe Symbols, and therefore it
muO: needs appear very improper and abfurd
to ufe the Sign where the 1 hing ilgnify'd can-
not take place \ and to fuppole St. Barnabas
guilty of this, is to fuppofe him capable of an
Abfurdity* The fame Holy Writer fpeaking
in another Place of all who were Baptiz'd, has
* Cap. 6. "On >7r^co-nv tj Vic&i^'oy M»A/77, «?« Tds^aKJi
this
Let. 1 1 . Hijlory of Infant'^aptifm. 40 1
this charitable AfTertion, -f- That we go down into
the Water full of Sins and Pollution j but come vp
again hrlnaing forth Fruit in our Hearts j and having
the Fear and Hope which is in Jesus in our Spirit*
Tho thefe Words are not to be fo interpreted
that every one who is baptiz'd is infallibly re-
new'd, yet they can't mean lefs than that it is
to be hop'd in charity they all rife up out of the
Water of Baptifm, having in their Hearts the
Fear and Hope which is in Jesus. Barnabas
plainly meant fo \ and therefore fince Infants are
not capable of this, of Confequence he knew
nothing of their Baptifm, nor thought 'em fit
for it.
Mr. Wall however does not go about to argue
from this Father ^ but begins his Colledion with
two Paffages foreign to this purpofe in St. Clement^
firfi Epifile to the Corinthians, which according to
himfelf, only prove the Infedion of Adam's Sin
on all his Pofterity. And neither of the PalTages
is plain even to prove this \ for, in the firft, St. Cle-
ment is exhorting the Corinthians to Humility,
among other things, from the Examples of Ahra-
ham^ Job^ and Mofes^ who, tho fuch great things
were faid of 'em, yet fpoke very meanly of them-
felves J but St. Clement fays nothing of Original
Sin, nor feems to have had the leaft Thought
of it. The other Paflage, as every one who reads
it will fee, has likewife no relation to Origi-
nal Sin •, the Words indeed may be ftrain'd to
that Senfe, but there is no plain mention of it, nor
any Circumftance which makes it neceffary to un-
derftand 'em fo. On the contrary, fince St. Cle-
40 2 (^fleflions on Afr . Wall V Let. 1 1 .
mem fubjoins this Inference from all he had been
fayiag, immediately after the Words Mr. ^T^// has
cited ^ '1" Wherefore^ having received all thefe things
from Him^ we ought on all occafions to give Him thanh :
we muft needs think he had not been fpeaking
of Original Sin, for that we can't receive from
G o p,^ who is not the Author of Sin : nor are we
bound to give thanks to God for it ^ for this
wou'd be great Impiety.
Befides, fuppofing St.Clement does fpeak of Ori-
ginal 3jriviw.tat is that to Infant-Baptifm? The
Force of this is altogether invifible to me, nor can
I pofTibiyjwnravel our. Author's meaning in it, un-
lefs it be this: St. Clement afTerts Original Sin is
propagated to all the Fofterity of- Adam : ^o
. Man; can be fav'd from it but by Chris t, and
no Mau: c^ii be fav'd ,by'C h r i s T unlefs he be
baptix'dv therefore none can be fav'd from Ori-
ginal "Sira/. unlefs they are .baptiz'd : but God
intended ail, as well Infants as others, ftpu'd be
fav'd from Original. Sin •^- and therefoi-e God de-
fign'd^ali^ as well Ii\faJits^ as others, Ihou'd be
baptte'ii .: orh rnoit
.1: think,! have done pur -Author all the Juftice
Lijth^ Woi:ld, in this: Reprefentation of bis Ar-
gument^, which I have ftated to the belt Advantage
i cou'd,. aiid lyet 'tis eafy. to fee how weak and
inconciufive 4t is : for the Words he had cited^
aecprding to his own pretence, only prove that
St. Clement beliey'd the Notion of Original; Sin ^
but the , ot|ier Links-of ^the Chain arer^yj^^iolly
ourAothpr's. ^AiiiL :'.... . • -iwijj-i:.
2. If thefe arbitrary 'Su,ppqfitionswefe al},really,
St. Clfynmfh. ^^^y ..Y^9^^^-J^h^J^ only^ fhew what
^^t Cap..- 3^^. fin» Tciv-m %9/:ijui^'fdi- %'^'''^Ai>^^^
was
Let.i i. Hljiory of InfantSaptif??!. 405
was St. Clement''^ Opinion in this Cafe : whereas
our Author is. to fhow what was the Praftice
of the Church of that Time, and not the Senti-
ments of one lingle Man only, for he himfelf
^onfeffcs, ^ th^at the Tefiimony of any of the Pa-
thers is not fo much to he regarded as it freaks
yhetr own Senfe^ as it is for that it gives tu an Evi^
dcnce of what was then believed.) taught^ or prattls^d
in the Church* '"
3. The main Point upon which the whole Ar-
gument turns, }s nothing but a groundlefs and
uncharitable Error. ; If none can be fav'd but
luch as are baptiz'd into 'Christ, then all
the Gentile World, Yi\{ptt' tgnorance GOD
was pleas'd z;^ Ti7/w^ ^f, 'muft be irrecoverably
Jolt: and it might with as much reafon be ar-
gVd, that even air Mankind, from the Creatioii
to Chris fV Death, for above 4600 Years, with-
out excepting Mam^ Enoch^ J4hrahamy Mofes^
Davidj and all the Holy Prophets, mult alfp be
for ever loft, for want^of Baptifin which Was
not then inftitiited, as that Children canpotbe
fiv'd without Baptifm, which vvas not, inlli-
tuted for them. So dreadful are the Confe-
quences of that wild Notion,, which is diredly
contrary to the Dodrine of Christ himfelf^
who more than once faid. Thy Sins he forgiven
thee, &:c. to Perfons net baptiz'd. But our Au-
thor is guilty of another Miftake, which likewife
flows from the former, viz,* that Baptifm is to
cleanfe Trom Original Sin, and that Original
Sin cannot be forgiven without it. But Baptifm,
v;e may anfwer, was not fo much intended for
the ReraiiTion of Original, as of Adual Sins:
for, I. The Scripture only teaches us to exped
the RemilTion of our Adual Sins upon our Bap-
* Part I. pag. 21.
Dd 2 tifrti.
404 ^fleBions on Afr.WaU'i- Let.i i.^
tifm. 2. We fee Infants who are fprinkled, are
as much, and as early inclined to Vice^ and others,
tho ever fo regularly baptiz'd, are liable to the fame
Inconveniences, entail'd by Adams Sin on his Pofte-
rity, as well as the reft of Mankind, tho not in the
fame degree : whereas, had Baptifm been defign'd
entirely to wafh away the Effects and Confequences
of Original Sin, then all who are baptiz'd fhou'd be
as pcrfedly free from thofe things as Adam was in
Innocence^ for what elfe does the RemilTion of Sin
mean, but being clear'd from the Imputation of
Guilt, and deliver'd from the Curfe and Punifhment
of it ? And fmce we are convinc'd by the Ex-
perience of 1700 Years, we mull either fay Bap-
tifm is a vain impotent Ceremony, which GOD
forbid! or elfe grant that it was never defign'd
to purge us from all the Confequences of Original
Sin ; it being impofTible at the fame time both
to be abfolutely free from 'em, and to fuffer 'em.
The P^dobaptifls are at a lofs to determine
what elfe Children fhou'd be baptiz'd for^ who
can't be baptiz'd for the Remiflion of A6lual
Sins, becaufe they have none : and fmce Baptifm
is for the Remiflion of fome Sin, rather than al-
ter their Pradice they pretend it mufl be for
Original Sin, but I have fhewn it does not appear
to cleanfe from that ^ and if then Children are not
baptiz'd for Adual nor Original Sin, it necelTarily
follows, that they are not to be baptiz'd at all.
There is this farther Abfurdity in the Argu-
ment, from the Primitive Church's owniitg Origi-
nal Sin : that if, becaufe they believ'd this, it
mufl be infer'd they believ'd, that all Pcrfons,
Infants not excepted, were to be baptiz'd, and
that they did actually baptize 'em on that ground
only ^ then it may as w^ell follow, that even all
the Antip^dobaptifls in E?7^larid^ who do alfo
firmly
Let. 1 1 . Hiftory of Infant-^aptifm. 405
firmly believe and profefs the fame Notion of
Original Sin, do likewife acknowledg and prac-
tife the Baptifm of Infants too : for it no more
follows that St. Clement^ &c. were antiently for
Infant-Baptifm, than that the Modern Antipccdo-
baptifts are fo now ^ fince thefe own the Doctrine
of Original Sin as well as the others.
Mr. Wall pafTes, in the next Place, to St. Her-
mas^ who maintaining the necefilty of Water-Bap-
tifm to the Salvation of Believers, ufes fome
ExprelTions from whence our Author gathers, that
be and the Church of that Time pradis'd Infant-
Baptifm. The Force of the firll Paflage he men-
tions, depends entirely upon this Sentence, The
Tower is reprefented to be built upon the Water,
hecaufe your Life is fav^d^ and flnill he fav*d by
Water. And from this he wou'd infer, that none
of any Age or Condition can be fav'd without
Baptifm *, and if the Church thought fo, it can't
indeed be doubted, but the Tendernefs of the
firft Chriftians prevail'd on 'em to baptize their
Children: this is Mr.^^//'s meaning, tho he has
not given ic fo dittindly. But, i. It may be
noted, here is no plain Intimation in St. Hemiasj
that none cou'd be fav'd who v/ere not baptiz'd,
tho he feems to make it neceilary in fome Cafes.
2. He is fpeaking of building the Church Trium-
phant out of the Church Militant, which indeed
is built on the Water of Baptifm^ but ftill he no
where fuppofes, that none can be fav'd who are
not Members of the Church Militant on Earth, or
that all Ages, any more than all Conditions, are
fit to be admitted into Fellowfhip. 3. The Stones
of which he is building the Vifionary Fabrick, arc
only Adult Perfons ^ v/hence 'tis clear his Words
can have no relation to Infants^ and therefore, if
they were to be fitted into the Struchne, it mull
be by fome other means. All the Stones, not
Dd 3 only
40(^ ^efleBions en Afr.WaliV Let.i i.
ov^ljr tbofe which were eriiploy'd in the Building,
but which were rejedied too, are thus enumerated
by him according io their different Kinds: "^ Some
Tvere bright fcjvare Stones ^ fome were drawn out of
the Deep-^ others were taken off from the Ground \
^nd of thefe feme were rejeBed^ and fome were fitted
into the Building ^ fome were cut out and cafl at a
diflance from the Tower' There were likewife many
ether Stones lying about the Building-) which were not
made vfe of\ fome of which were very rough ^ others
were cn^cUd'i others were white and rounds not proper
for building the Tower ^ Be fides thefe^ Jfaw likewife
other St0e^;^ which werp caft at a difiance from the
Tower yr find fell into the wayy ^ but did not continue
there^ jbut^ were roTd off into a defart Place. Others
fell into the Fire^ and were bv.rat. Others again fal-
ling by the Water^ endeavoured to roll into it^ but coud
not, !Now, if in all this Variety, Infants are not
compreheAded, then I think it niult be allow'd
that what St. /iV?w^j fays of thefe Stones, or the
Building they' com^pird, cannot be fairly apply'd
to infaiits, ' And, if: we may judg of his Mean-
ing by bis Explication, .it is pail all doubt, that
infants are entirely excluded. For by thofe bright
fquate Stones laid in theFoundati6n,he means 'I" the
jipdfi'hs^- and Bijhops^ and DoBors^ and Minifters :
By -thofe- taken out of the Deep, are iignify'd
\\ .i.hofe who are already,falle?r afeep^ and have fufferd
for tht J^a,/ne of the Lord. They which lis on
the^iGroi/nd nnd'.are not pplijFd^ are thofe which God
has r.pprovd \ becaufe they have entcr''d the Law of the
L Q R D, and -Airetled their way according to his
Commandments. But they, which are brought ^ and
vut into the Buildi?ig of the Tciver^ are the young in
^ L::m. ViC's. cap. _ r ibid. cap. 5. || Ibid.
Faith-.
Let. 1 1. Hijlory of Infant' {Bctptifm. 4^T
Faith^ and the Faithful. By tbofe that were re-
jected and laid by the Tower, are reprefented
■^■^ fuch as having Jtmj'd are willing to recent : By
thofe that are cut out and cafl: at a dilta^nce, are
meant "^ the Children, of Iniquity^ who believed only
hypocritically^ and their Wickednefs is not departed
from \m. The rugged Stones, are -]- they that
have known the Truth ^ but have not coptij^ued m it-,
nor' been join' d to the Saints. The crack*^ Sjtones,
are )| they who keep Difcord In their Hearts', again fi
one mother. The fhor't Stones, zXQ {^) they ^ho
have believed indeed^ but fiilljetainfHU(;h ^f fheir
Wickednefs. The white and round Stones,, are
'\'\ f^ch as have Faith-, but have alfo the kiches of
this frefent World. The Stones which Were roU'd
out of the way into defart Places, fignify Jill f^ch
as have believ'd^ but through' doubting have for fake n
^ the true way. Thofe wfiich fell into the Fire, are
C] they who have for ever departed from the Living,^
GOD'-f nor has it any more enter d. into jheif' Hearts
to repent^ hecaufe of their Lufis. They" that cou'd
not roll into the Water, are () fichus have
heard the Word ^ and "were willing to be bap'tizjd in
the Name of the LO R^D \ but when they con fid.er'' d
what Holinefs the Truth reo^y-ird^ they have ^ drawn
hacky Wad walFd again a'ccordinfg to their oi>n wicked
Lufis. Thus it's evident a!l the Stones, which
St. Hermas h^vc fpeaks .of, reprefent.only Adult
Pel Tons, and particularly flich of th^in as havq
heard, and belie v'd ', and therefore, vVhat he lays
of thefe, fliou'd not be v/relted. and referred to
any other, , ' .■ ^ « O
And as he is only fpeakfhg oT'fuch'^Perfons as
have belicv'd or heard "the Word preach'd, it mult
** Ibid. * Ibid. cap. 6. t Ibid. ]i Ibid. (^) Ibid.
ft Ibid. nil Ibid. cap. 7. ■ [] Ibid. 0 Ibid.
D d •. be
40 8 (^fleaions on Afr.WallV Let. 1 1 .
be to fach only he is to be underftood to make
Baptifm neceflary. And therefore our Author
ihou'd not have afTcrted from this Place that
St. Hermas believ'd, ^ Baptifm with Water is af-
•pointed the Sacrament of Salvation to fuch as are
fav^d^ but only to fuch as believe or have heard
the Word preached. And to fuch indeed we rea-
dily grant Baptifm is to be adminilter'd, in order
to their Salvation, according to the Terms of the
Gofpel: but it will not follow that Infants too
ought to be baptiz'd, nor that the Primitive
Church thought fo.
Our Author has as little ground to alTert, that his
Inference will more plainly appear to be agreeable
to St. Hermas's meaning, from the next PalTage he
'I* recites : for what has been already obferv'd
on the other, may be apply'd to this. 'Tis a
Vifion much like the former j and the Subilance
and Defign of it are exadly the fame, viz.» under
the Emblem of a Tower to reprefent the Building
of the Church with fuch Stones as only fignify
Adult Perfons.
Mr. Wall makes two Obfervations on the Words
he recites. Firfl, he wou'd from hence fix the
Senfe of John iii. 5. For St. Hermas having faid.
Before any one receives the Name of the Son of GOD^
he is liable to Death \ but when he receives the Seal^ he
is freed from Death^ and deliver'^ d to Life \ now
that Seal is Water^ &:c. and ufmg other Expreflions*
to fignify the necefllty of this Seal to Salvation :
Mr. Wall undertakes to tell us, either that this
Pafiage proves the Words in St. John mean, that
none can be fav'd without Baptifm j or that the
Words in St. John prove thefe in St. Hermas mean
fiD. He has left it a little doubtful which he in-
tends ^ but one he certainly means, or he means
nothing: for as to the prefent Controverfy, what
♦ Part L pag. 5. t Part I. pag. 3.
wo u d
Let. 1 1 . H'lflory of Infant'^a^tlfm. 409
wou'd it (Ignify to know the Senfe of either of
thofe Writers, if it is not fuppos'd to affed our
Caufe ? But our Author, we may fee, underftands
both St. John and St. Hermas to fay, that Baptifm
is necelTary to the Salvation of all without
Exception ^ and by comparing the two Paflages
he muft mean, that one proves and confirms this
to be the Senfe of the other. And by putting
us in mind that St. John wrote his Gofpel after
St. Hermas had wrote this Book, he feems to im-
port that St. John is to be fuppos'd to copy thofe
Words from St. Hermas : but other People who
confider that St. John repeats 'em as the Words
of Christ, who was crucify'd above 35 Years>
before St. Hermas wrote, will believe St. John had
no refped to this FafTage of St. Hermas, and
only relates what he had heard and feen with his
Eyes, &c. and therefore the two Places are not
the fame as Mr. Wall wou'd infinuate.
St. Hermash ExprelTions can refer only to Adult
Perfons, to whom the Word may and ought to be
preach'd *, for upon the necefllty he has been fpeak-
ing of, he fays, for which reafon to thefe alfo was
this Seal preach'd, &c. Whoever are underftood
in thefe Words, he makes Preaching to 'em full
as neceflary, as their being baptiz'd.
Our Saviour's Words, as recorded by
St. John, have nothing in 'em which can at
all favour the Baptifm of Infants^ but becaufe
Mr. Wall here and elfewhere, as well as other
Pasdobaptilts, argues from 'em, 1 will take this
occafion to examine 'em a little.
'Tis very readily allow'd him, that ii> here, as
'Av6pG)7r(^ iC^r. xi. 28. does mean any one, or if
he pleafe every one ; and therefore we will render
the Original of St. John thus, with the utmoft Ex-
tenfion. Except every one he horn of Water, and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of GOD,
By
4 1 o ^fleBiom on Afr.WallV Let. 1 1 .
By Kingdom of G 0 Dy oar Author fuppofes
muft be meant, "^ the Kingdom of Glory hereafter'
in Heaven j and backs it w ith a very indifferent
Obfervation of St. Auftin^ viz,- that its being
laid, ^'fr, 3. cannot fee- the Kingdom of GOD^
inftead of what is afterwards exprefs'd by can-
not enter ^ &c. clearly Ihews the Words do not
ihean the Church *, for one that is not hupiTUd may
fee the Church. It is therefore plainly meant of the
Kingdom of ^ Glory ^
But how frivolous and unfair is this ? for
Mr. Wall can't but know, that the Word fee in
this, and many fuch Places, is no more to be under-
ftood of a Phyfical Sight by means of the bodily
Eye, than 'tis in Matt^ v. 8. where 'tis faid of
the pure in Heart that they jhallfee G OD^ rvhdm -]-
yet no M^n hath feen nor can fee with bodily Eyes j
but it Ihall be in a manner vaftly more glorious and
wonderful, and more futable to his infinite Per-
fedions and :Nature. The Initances of this meta-
phorical Ufe of the Word are too numerous, to
leave our Author any excufe.
But all the Antients do underfcand by Kingdom
of GOD^ in this Text, the Kingdom of G lory ^ ll fays-
our Author. Yet this may not be the true Senfe,
if they do ^ for the Antients were fallible, and
often gave fufficient Proof of it by the flrangc
Interpretations they made : their Opinions are
not to be urg'd as always true, but only to
fhew us v/hat was the Opinion and Praftice of
the Times .they liv'd in. And our Author does
not go about to prove his AlTeition ^ but cites, in
a fcornfai way, the Right Reverend Expofitor of
the 39 Articles^ as acknowledging the Truth of
t I Tim. vi. 16.
it
Let. 1 1 . Hiftory of Infant-^ aptifm. 4 1 1
it, tho he attempts to give the Words another
turn. But his Lordfiiip alTerts only, that very
early fome Doclrines arofe ufon Baptifm^ that we can^
not be determind by* The Words of our Saviour
t(?Kicodemus, were expounded fo^ <Scc. And after
Infant-Baptifm came to fome head, then indeed
this was* much inlifted on ^ and the Authoritys
Mr. Wall makes ufe of, in reference to this Text,
are I think all too late, and of thofe Centurys
wherein Psedobaptifm, and many other Abufes are
known to have prevaiFd. If he had cited the
Writers of the Hrfi: three .Centurys, it had been
coniidcrable ^ bat what is it to me how St. Aufiin^
Fulgemins^ Gregc/y^ Driedo^ Lombard^ Ales^ and
the reft of the Schoolmen, determine in the
matter ?
Mr. Wall has not offer'd to confute thofe Words
of his Lordlhip, wherein he is pieas'd to let us
into the ground of his Senfe of this Text. By
the Kingdom of Gcd^ may v;ell be underftood the
Church or Difpenfation of the Mejfiasy when, as
his Lordfhip unanfwerably argues, * that is the
Senfe in which the Kingdom of GOD docs flrand^
almoft univerfally through the whole Gofpel. Now into
this Kingdom we allow that Perfons can regularly
enter no other way but by Baptifm. And upon
this Senfe of the Phrafe Dx.Whitby argues, that
no Man is indeed a Member cf C h R i s T 'j Kin?dcm^
who is not truly regenerate : vvr,ich he llrengthens
with thefe Words of Christ^ John^iiu 31. //
you continue in my Wordy thtn'^arc ye my Difciplcs
indeed. But if this Interpretation be true, our
Author tells you the Antipcedobaptifts gain no-
thing by it, "]' fmce the only Wi-iy^ at leaf the only
known and ordinary way^ to the- Kingdom of Glory
^ Pag. ?oi. f Part>j:i» p?g. 12$.
4 1 2 ^fleSlions on Mr.W^iWs Let. i ! .
is by being of CHRIST's Church. As if a Per-
fon had no more to do, but to get into the
Church by Baptifm, and he wou'd be iafe enough \
for no more can be needful to make him fafe
but to get into the only way. And, as if a Man,
on the other hand, tho ever fo innocent and
exad in all things elfe, cou'd neverthelefs have
no Salvation, only for vrant of a Ceremony, he
is utterly a ftranger to, or can't attain. I don't
know where our Author learn'd this charitable
Divinity ^ for I am fure neither the Scriptures
nor the Light of Nature teach any fuch dread-
ful Doftrines.
However, taking his Senfe of the Place^^^what
will our Adverfarys gain by it? no lefs they
pretend than the whole matter in difpute : for
then they imagine the Argument -will be very
plain. The ftrefs of it lies in the Comprehen-
livenefs of the Particle tis, which they fuppofe
neceflarily includes all ^ than which nothing in
the World can be more falfe. For tts is not
an Univerfal, but an Indefinite^ and therefore
Jhou'd not be underilood univerfally. But if,
becaufe it is Indefinite, it muft therefore here
comprehend all^ for want of Limitation, then
it may as well be (aid to take in the whole Ani-
mal Creation, nay and Towns and Citys too : for
we find 7i; fo far from being appropriated to
fignify the Species of Men only, that 'tis fre-
quently enough us'd for brute Beafts, and ina-
nimate things: and fincc MwlVall will doubtlefs
exclude them from being intended, for the very
fame Reafons we fliall infift upon excluding of
Infants.
There is nothing in the Particle tt/, which
neceflarily determines us to apply thefe Words
to Infants. ''hv^pQiK^^ iC^r. xi.28. is fynony-
mous with 77S x'cr. 34. of the fame Chapter ; and-
vet
Let. 1 1 . Hlftory of Infant-^aptifm. 4 1 3
yet Infants cannot be thought to be included in
it there, and there's no more reafon they fhou'd
in the Place under Confideration. Again, Mark
xi. 25. Forgive if ye have ought agawfi any, &c.
and Chap. viii. ver- 26. mr tell it to any ifi the
Town. And fo, as far as I remember, in all other
Places of Scripture where it occurs, it plainly
has no relation to Infants at all, nor can pofTibly
be apply 'd to 'em. And therefore, notwithftand-
iflg its Indefinite meaning, there are at leaft very
many Cafes, among which we juftly place John
iii. 5. in which the Particle is not capable of fuch
a lax and general Acceptation : nay there are fe-
veral Inftances where it is diredly oppos'd to
Words of fo comprehenfive a Senfe. Thucydides
fays, that the Athenians || falling on (nh) a [mall
Party^ not many <?/ r/?^ Syraculians, and killing fome
(tivocs) eretled a Trophy, and return d back. And
in this fame Sentence, the Particle is us'd to ex-
prefs but fome of the few mention'd before ^ for
they kill'd not all the few they fell on, h\xtfome
of them only. And why then fhou'd any from
the Force of this Word argue, that all without
Exception mull be baptiz'd, or they cannot be
fav'd ?
If it be faid, that tho 775 does not iignify all,
yet fince it means any one^ or more^ indefinitely,
in all fuch Forms of Speech as this before us,
it does not come fiiort of anUniverfal: for the
Propofition here being ]S'egative, it denys any can
be fav'd without being baptiz'd^ which makes
our Saviour's Words amount to this univer-
fal Negative, that none but thofe who are born again
can enter into the Kingdom of G O D.
H Bell. Peloponnefiac. Lib. 5. cap. 94. ICa/ r I-v^muhuv
To
4 1 4 ^fiePdons on M'.WaUV Let. i u
To this I anfvver, that it proceeds wholly -on
that falfe Suppofition, that -nc, necefTarily intends
my one fo univerfally, as to extend to all Men,
Women and Children. I don't 'know of any one
Infliince where the Particle is fo us'd : on the
contrary I have given fome, and cou'd eafily have
added many more, where it undoubtedly does
not extend fo far. And yet unlefs it does iii
John ill. 5. they can't infer that- our S AyioaR's
Negative affefts all of 'em, but only the 'Subjed:s
fpoken of in the Place: for, at moft, 'tis only
faid, noneof thofe can be fav'd without Baptifm^^
but it can't from thence be concluded that nSne
befide thofe v;ill be admitted without this Con-
dition. ;'^^ ^v ^ ' ; "' ' ■•'
Bat, to cut off all manner of Subterfuges f let
lis coaiider a little who are th'eSubje^s Of w^hom
'Gh-rist fpeaks*, for this will be the only way
td'^fi'x our Lord's Meaning. He fays. Except
^hyohc^^C' Any one what? If our Lx) r d fpeaks
of Beings in general, then it means any one Be-
ing •,■ if h€ fpeaks of Angels, he means any One An-
gel*, if he fpeaks of Mankind, 'as^bur Adverfarys
take it, then indeed he means any one of that
Species^ but if he fpeaks of Men only, he intends
any Oiie Man *, if ^e fpeaks of Women enly, any
one Woman -^ If of Children only, anyone Child,
&c» and if our Lord fpeaks only of Adult Per-
fons, who have heard the Word of G o d preach'd,
^hen tls in the Text can mean onlj any one fuch
'MidrHearer. And fo our S A V lo'u r^s Meaning
mlghit ^be exprefs'd thus: Except Any vnc -who ?>•
corns . fo the Vft tjf-his Reafon^ knd hks heard the'
Word of God pr^Wc^'^, be born a^am of Water ^
antrhe^S'vTKir;1)e'cam7ot: enter into the Kingdom
of.G.o D. .And this ;wti affert is the only genuine
Meaning -of -our L Card's Words ^ which we^
alfo think appears evidently from thefe following
Colifideiations. ^* Be-
Lee 1 1 . Hiftory of Infant-^aptifm. 4 1 5
. :i. Becaufe fuch only can be expeded to comply
\j7it,h the Iiillitution, which indeed cannot oblige
any others ^ for all Laws oblige thofe only to
whom they are given, and can't be faid to be
giyea to thofe who cannot pofTibly know 'em,
which is a dired Gontradidion : for to give a Law'
is,, to make it known to thofe for whom it is
dehgn'd-, and therefore, while they can't know-
it^ -the Law is not given to 'em, nor can they
be oblig'd by it. Hence Gr^tian-, ^ Laws are
made when they are promulgated. And thus St. Faul
argues exprelly, that thofe that hanje fmned with-
out Law^ jhoud perijh without Law ; but as many as
hav.e finned in the Law^ jJjall be judged by the Law,
Rom^ii. 12. And again. We hnow^hat what things
Joev^rthe Law fait h^ it faith to them that are under
the Lavo^ Chap. iii. 19. intimating, that the Law
oblig'd; the Jews only to whom it v/as known ; bat
not thofe Gentiles who were invincibly ignorant of
it> And again, Chap.iy,i$. heafluresus, thateve»
ry thing is indifferent till prohibited or injoin'd by
fonie Law^ and therefore, where no Law is, there
is no Tranfgrejfion. Novy as this was argu'd to the
Jews, to whom the Law was made known, from
which the Gentiles Vv^ere excus'd becaufe they cou'd
not come at the knowledg of it^ fo in relation to
the Law of Christ, they, whether Infants or Adult
Ferfons, who cannot come to the knowledg of it,
a,re not oblig'd to keep it,neither fhall they be judg'd
l?y it.: for the Great Legiilator Himfelf has faid
Hy If. I had not come, and fpoken tinto them^ they
h^d ?m had Sin, John xv. 22. bat to thafe Christ
never yet came nor fpoke. As before Christ
appe^rM, none were boiind to believe and live ac-
caiT^iagi to his peculiar Dodrines ^ fo now they who
.;;o;.Ji:i r
*^** Leges inftituuntur cum promulgantur.
are
4 1 6 (^fleHions on MrWzlYs Let. 1 1 ]
are ignorant, are not oblig'd to do fo till he is made
known to 'em. For the Reafon is the fame now,
with thofe who cannot believe^ in him becaufe
they have not heard, as with thofe who cou'd
not then, becaufe he was not come ^ and in Equity
they are full as excufable. For as St. Paul fays,
Eom. X. 14* How pj all they believe in him of whom
they have not heard?
2. As only they who have heard, and arc
capable of Underftanding, can ever be willing
to fubmit themfelves to this Ordinance of Bap-
tifm, fo neither can any others be fav'd by it : for
St. Teter^ purpofely to obviate this Miftake of
fuppofmg the bare external Wafhing wou'd
fufEce, tells us, the whole Efficacy of Bap-
tifm lies in this, that 'tis done in Obedience to
our lord's Will, and as engaging our felves
to continue in that Obedience: and fo indeed
Baptifm will undoubtedly fave us^ not as it is the
putting away the Filth of the Flejli^ but as it is the
Anfwcr of a good Conference toward GOD. But
fince the faving Efficacy does not confifl: in the
external Wafhing, Infants, who are capable only
of that, cannot be fav'd by Baptifm, nor reap
any Benefit by it: and we can't fuppofe that
C H R I s T 's Words are contrary to thefe, which
yet they muft be if he meant that no Children
cou'd enter into the Kingdom of Heaven unlefs
they were baptiz'd; for then it may be faid of
them, contrary to St. Pmr, that the external
Wafhing does fave 'em. The Bifhop of Salisbury
fpeaks well io this PafFage, in his Exf option of the
Articles^ pag. 303.
Thefe Words of St. Peter are an impregna-
ble Fortrefs of Antipasdobaptifm ^ and all the
Attempts of our Adverfarys againft 'em hitherto
have been unfuccefsful, and will probably ever
be
Let. 1 1 1 Fiijiory of Infajit-^aptifml 4 1 7
be fo. Dr. Hammo7jd * trifles upon 'em molt
egregioufly, and fuppofes all grown Perfons Ihou'd
receive Baptifm with a good Confcience^ but
Infants may teceivie it without any Confcience
at all^ notwithftanding this Text makes Confci-
ence fo neteflary to the faving Virtue of it.
Dr. Whitbyi tho direftly oppofing our Argil*
ment from the Words, did not think Dr. Ham^
moncCs Pretences worth mentioning j but only ob*
ferves, that St. Taul fays as much of Citcumcifion
as St. Peter does here of Baptifm, viz.* that tht
true Circumcifion before G O Dy is not the outward
Circumcijton of the Flefh^ hut the internal Circum*
cifion of the Heart and Spirit^ Rom* ii. 2p. But
roill any one hence argue^ fays the Doftor, that the
Jewifh Infants for want of this were not to he ad*
initted into Covenant with G O D by Gircvtncifion ?
And yet the Argument is plainly parallel. But with
Submilfion to the Dodor, I am of Opinion the
Cafes are not at all parallel. For the Baptifm
which faves is cxpreily defcrib'd and limited to
be^ 1 . Not the putting away the Filth of the Fiejh :
But, 2; The Anjwer of a good Confcience. Whereas
St. Paufs Words do not import that the only
Circumcifion which fav'd was, 1. Not the Circum^
tifion of the Flefh : But, 1. The Circumcifion of the
Heart and Spirit. Or however, there is certainly
this difference, that St. Paul does not fpeak of
Circumcifion while it continued in force, as un^
der the Difpenfation of Mofes •, but only fays
that now, under this new Difpenfation of Jesus
Christ^ the only available Circumcifion is that
of the Heart: and it will be allow'd that the
outward Circumcifion is now of no ufe at all •,
for in Jesus Christ neither Circumcifion avail-
* SlxQtterys, pag; 198, 199.
J£c eth
4 1 8 (^fleSlions on Mr.WzlYs Let. 1 1 ^
eth arty things mr Vnctrcumcifion^ hut Faith which
worketh by Love^ Gal. v. 6, and vi. 1 5. St. Paul
therefore is arguing againft the Necefiity of ex-
ternal Circumcifion, and beating down the Parti-
tion Wall ofaSf^^n?//?^ Rite^ which cannot be faid
of St. Peter in relation to Baptifm. But if the
Arguings of the two Apoftles are fuppos'd to be
parallel, then St. Peter muft be underftood to
mean, that Perfons need not be baptiz'd with
the outward Baptifm, if they do but keep the
Righteoufnefs of the Gofpel ^ and to plead for the
Ufelefnefs of Baptifm, as St. Paul does of Cir-
cumcifion : whereas St. Paul does not deny but
external Circumcifion might in fome Cafes be fuffi-
cient under the Old Law, and therefore Infants
were then capable of that Ceremony ^ tho now,
under the Gofpel which requires Circumcifion of
the Heart, they are altogether unfit to be admit-
ted to Baptifm, becaufe altogether uncapable of
that internal Circumcifion, or of making that
ji'afwcr of a good Confcience.
3.. Another thing from whence it may appear
Infants are not intended, is, that this Manner
of Speech is ufual in Scripture, even when 'tis
certain the things faid cannot be requir'd of In-*
fants, nor indeed of any but thofe who have
hqard the Word preach'd. Thus yf>/;« vi. 55.
\vith the fame Solemnity of AfTeyeration our
1. 0 R D fays, P^erily^ verily I fay unto you^ except
ye eat the Flejh of the Son of Man^ and drink his
Blqfd^ ye have no Life in yon. If we underftand
,this of the Sacramental Supper, and take it as
extcjifively as our Adverfarys do John'nu'^' then
it abfolutely denys that any who have never re-
xeiv'd the Communion, whether Infants or others,
can be fav'd, or have eternal Life, that is, enter
'i'?no the Kingdom of G\0TY : or if we expound the
Words metaphorically, tofignify believing in the
Son
Let. 1 1 . Htjlory of Infant-'Saptifm. 4 1 p
Son of Man (which I think none can doubt ;t6
be the Senfe of 'em, after what Dr. Whitby has
faid with his ufual Solidity) 'tis ftill as certain,
by an Interpretation of this Latitude, that none
who do not a(^aally believe, can be fav'd. For as
in one Paflage Christ makes it an indifpenfable
Condition of entring into the Kingdom, to be
born agatn \ fo here he makes it altogether as in-
difpenfable to eat his Flefi, that is, to believe:
and both iil the fame Latitude. But fince all
will fee it reafonable and necelTary to except In-
fants in one Cafe, it is as reafonable to do fo in
the other.
The fame may be argu'd from thofe other
Words of our Saviour after his Refurredion,
Mark xvi. 16. He that believeth and is baptiz,'*djhall
be fav.d ^ but he that believeth not fiall be damned.
If thefe Words mult be extended to alij and ap-
ply'd to every one, then no one Perfon, no not any
Infant, can be fav'd without Faith. And this
wou'd make the Scriptures contradidory •, for ac-
cording to the Arguing of our Antagonifts,^ 'tis
declar'd here that no Infant, even tho baptiz'd,
can ever be fav'd, becaufe it is impoifible for
him to underlland and believe ; which is diredly
oppofite to their Senfe of John iii. 5. If it can
be fancy'd that, if Infants are but baptiz'd
here, it will be enough, becaufe they may have
more compleat Capacitys in the next Life, and
then they will believe : I will only anfwer, that
the fame may equally be faid of all Mankind,
for all will at the Refurredion believe an^
own that Jesus is the Christ, and un-
doubtedly they will be very forry for their for-
mer Infidelity and Difobedience ^ but this Belief
fhall then have no other effett, than it has now
on the Devils, to make 'em tremble ; for the
Ee 2 Faith
42 2 ^efleBions on Mr.WsXYs Let. 1 1 ^
only to Adult Perfons-, for they require, that the
Subjefts fpoken of fliou'd be bom of the S^ikiJj
as well as of Water. Which, not to enter into a
long Difeourfe upon it, certainly means, as the
Bilhop of Salisbury has exprefs'd it, ^ that except
he were inwardly changed by a fecret Power caird
the Sp I R I T, that Jhou'd transform his Nature, he
cou'd not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven,
For this Senfe is drawn from plain PafTages of
Scripture. Our Lord Himfelf, even in the
next Verfe, explaias it. He that is born of the Flejhj
is Fleflj ^ that is, lives after the Motions of the
Flefh : hut he that is born of the SPIRIT j'j
SPIRIT*, that is, ftrives to live according to
the Motions of the S P I R I T. So thofe who
receiv'd Christ, and believ'd on his Name, arc
fa id to be hom^ not of Bloody nor of the Will of the
Flejl}, nor of the Will of Man^ but of G 0 D, John
i. 13. And again, Whofoever is born of G O Dj
doth not commit Sin ^ and 'tis from that very Prin-
ciple that he cannot fin^ becaufe he is born of GOD^
T John iii. 9. And St. Paul expounds this matter
fomewhat largely, Rom. viii. where h.e fuifici-
ently (hews, that to be bom of the Flejl)^ is to be fo
fubjeft to it as to mind the things of the Flejh ^ and
to he born 'of the SPI RIT^ Is to be fill'd with
fach holy Principles and Inclinations, as to mind
the things of the SPIRIT.
If tlien ta be born of the SPIRIT fignifys
to. be. fo.ihflpenc'd and ^^vrought upon as to mind
the-things of the SPIRIT, or live after the
Motions, of the SPIRIT, as all judicious Di-
vinesand'Gfiticks, Scaliger^ Grotim^ Le Clerc^ &c.
aad ev^n B\\ Hammond, too ^ will allow j and In-
faatscaQjiat poITiblyberf^ horn, of the SPIRIT:
io ■ -
",-^'Arti?M ?;7» pas* •S'J^ib -fbirlvv ^•:i^i'kmc^l: cb' '
V i 3 3 then
Let.ii. Hijloryoflnfant'^aptifm.. 423
then that Text which requires the Subjefts it
fpeaks of fhouM be born of the SPIRIT, car-
not fpeak of Infants.
To evade this, Mr. Wall infinuates, that be-
caufe it is and mult be allow'd, that the HOLY
SPIRIT, befides his Office of converting the Hearty
does fed and a^piy fardon ofSin^ and other Tromifes
of the Covenant j this is to be taken for all that's
meant in the Text by bom of the SP IRIT. But
as this is not confirm'd by any Text of Scripture,
I leave you to judg whether it anfwers the Force
of the Phrafe: and 1 will conclude what 1 have
faid on this Text, with Dr. IVhitbyh judicious Ob-
fervations upon it.
1 . Infants mvft he 'excepted from this Necejfity^ as
being incapable vf knowingy and therefore of tranf-
grejfing this Command.
2. "They alfo are to be excepted who want that Bap'
tifm they defire^ not out of Contempt ^ but of Neceffity^
as dying before they can procure it : thus tho the
Infant who died before the eighth T>ay^ died without
the Sign of the Covenant ^ the Jews never thought fit
t9 circumcife ^em before that Day ', and fines it is
not the rmfiing of the Body, but the Stipulation of
a good Confcience that renders Baptifm faving^
1 Pet. iii. 21. it cannot be purely the Want, but the
Contempt of that which mufi condemn us- And,
3. Whatever Ignorance of the Precept^ or Mi flake
about the Nature of it-, renders not Alen incapable of
the Baptifm of the HOLT GHOST-, can never
render them incapable of the Salvation promised the
baptiz.'^d.
The next Obfervation our Author makes from
St. Hermash V/ords, is grounded particularly on
this, that St. Hermas reprefents the Patriarchs
and holy Men before Christ as having need to
be baptiz'd, and adually being fo in the Life
they are now in j for his Words are thefe : h was
E € 4 neceffary
4^4 ^fleBions on Mr.^dVs Let. 7 1 ]
necejfary for them to come^ up by Water^ that they
might he at Refi \ foic they cou^d not otherwife ^nter
into the Kingdom of G O Dy than by putting off the
Mortality of their former Life : they therefore^ after
they were dead^ were feal'd with the Seal of the SQN
of OQD, &c. From whence Mr. Wall infers,
that if Baptifm was in St. Hermas\ Opinion fo
neceflary to the Salvation of thefe juft Men, as
that they cou'd not be favM without it, and
therefore were baptiz'd after their Death in that
feparate State \ then he muft needs have thought
it as neceflary for all other Perfons, and Infants a-
mong the reft : and therefore the Church of that
time praftisM the Baptifm of Infants.
But, what wild fort of Logick is this ? for
there's no manner of Connexion between the
Prbpofitions. Suppofe St, Herman did think thofe
Perfons were baptiz'd in their feparate State -,
it does not therefore follow, that he thought
Infants muft be baptiz'd in this : nor, if he did
think fo, that the Church of that Time pradis'd
Pqedobaptifra *, for St. Iferm^as gives not the
leaft Hint of that: and yet Mr. Wall pre-
tends only to cite the Fathers in this pifpute,
as they relate, not to their own private Opini-
ons, but to the Pradice of the whole Church.
So that his way of arguing here has no Tenden-
cy to the Propofition he ought to prove, which,
to fay the beft of it, is grounded on obfcure
uncertain Parables, and very diftant licentious
Ipfefences from 'em.
But to anfwer more diftinftly.
T. St. Hermas is only defcribing a Vifion, to re-
prefent the building up of the Church \ and there-
fore every Particular cannot JDe fairly underftood
in the Letter ^ according to the known Rule,
Similitudes don t run on all Four, Thus OurSAVl-
our's Parabh of the ten Virdns with their
Lee. 1 1 . Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. 425
Lamps, is not to be underftood, that ten Virgins,
five Y/ife and five foolifli, fhall go forth to meet
Him at his fecond Coming j the firfl five being
well provided with Oil, and having their Lamps
trim'd at the Alarm : and the others being fur-
priz'd, with their Lamps unlighted and having
no Oil, and that they fhall attempt to buy fome,
or the like. And tho our Lord is pleas'd to
reprefent his Care and Patience towards us, un-
der the J^^otion of the Drefler of a Vineyard, Luke
x.iii. 5, &c. no Man can imagine he will literally
drefs and prune us, but only that he does in us
what is equivalent to dreffing and pruning to a
Vine.
Now thefe not being true Hiftorys, but only
figurative Reprefentations of fomething, I won-
der Mr. Wall IhouM ufe 'em otherwife. He knows
the Books he argues from, are nothing but Vi-
fions J and therefore, tho it be ever fo exprefs
that the Patriarchs were baptized, 'tis no more
to be underftood in the Letter, than the other
things I have mention'd : they were baptiz'd,
that is, in Vifion only, not in Deed. Or, if our
Author's way of arguing be juft, it equally fol-
lows, that in the other World we muft all be
transformed into Stones, and compofe a lofty
File of Building. But as this Inference will not
be allow'd, fo neither ought the other.
2. Befides, St. Hermas cannot be thought to
mean thofe juft Perfons were really baptiz'd with
material Water, becaufe, in the feparate State
they ar^ in, their Bodys being confum'd, and that
of 'em which remains alive being only Spirit,
they are utterly incapable of real Baptifm : for
'tis altogether inconceivable that Spirits can be
immers'd in Water. And as Stones were nor
the Perfons, but only reprefented 'em \ fo their
Baptifm was only a Reprefentation of fomething
\i6 (^efieBions on A/r. Wall'j Let. 1 1 .'
clfe. The PafTage therefore can do our Author
no manner of Service ; for 'tis only of material
Baptifm we arc difputing, not a vilionary, nor a
myftical one.
3. Tho St. Hermas fliou'd be allow'd to plead
for the NccefTity of Baptifm to thofe juft Men,
yet this has no relation to Infant-Baptifm •, nor
does St. Hermas give any ground to imagine he
had Infants in his Thoughts : He fpeaks only of
Adult Perfons, who had committed adual Sins,
from which, he might fuppofe, they needed to be
walh'd. But it is no Confequence, that it mufb
be as neceffary to others that are not Adult ; no
more than becaufe 'tis ufeful to Men, it mufb
therefore be fo to Angels. Nay, on the contrary,
he feems very plainly to exclude Infants from be-
ing capable of receiving any Benefit by Baptifm :
for in this verv PafTage he intimates, they were
to be bapti'z'd for fomethingdone in their former
Life, which he calls the Mortality of their former
Life \ and he can't be underftood to mean any
thing but the Offences they had committed in
that Life. Infants therefore having no fuch Mor-
tality of a former Life to account for, were not
reprefented by St. Hermas to have been baptiz'd :
and fince he makes Baptifm neceflary to the Pa-
triarchs, ire. only on that account, it cannot
polTibly be apply'd to the Cafe of Infants.
It may be added alfo, that St. Hermas here
makes it equally neceflary to ^ tale vf the Name
of the SON of G O D. And he likewife afl^erts,
that 'I' it will avail nothing to take up the Name of
the S O N of G 0 D^ unlefs thou Jhalt alfo receive
———- — — ^-m^:^.
* Lib. ;. Si mil. 9. cap. 12.
f Ibid. cap. 13. .
their
Let. 1 1 . Hiftory of Infant-^aptif?}!. 4x7
their (viz. the Virgins) Garments from them, ISIqw
the Names of thefe Virgins, he fays, are || Faith^
jihfiinence^ Power ^ Patieace^ &c. whoever hears thefe
J^ames, and the Name of the SO N of G 0 D^ fliall
enter into the Kingdom* I fuppofe the leall MviVall
underftands by taking the Name of the SON of
GO Dj is, to be baptiz'd ^ and then it's plain,
St. Hermas declares Baptifm without Fa,ith^ Ah-
fiinence^ &:c. will avail nothing, or is of no ufe
at all : from whence it's manifeft, not only that
this Paflage can't be improv'd for Infant-Baptifm ;
but alfo, that it yields a good Argument againft
it : for if Baptifm fignify nothing without thofe
Virtues, then to be fure St. Hermas did not
thi^k it of any ufe to Infants, who have 'em
not.
4. But in the lafl place, if St. Hermas (hou'd be
thought to make Baptifm necefTary to the Salva-
tion of Infants^ yet lince he finds an Expedient
for the Patriarchs, &c. who liv'd before Christ,
to be baptiz'd in their feparate State, why mayn't
we fuppofe he thought Infants ought not to be bap-
tiz'd till they come into that feparate State too ?
The Patriarchs were luppos'd to receive Baptifm
there, becaufe they cou'd not know and believe in
Jesus here ^ and the fame Reafon holds exadly
as to Infants. So that, after all, if our Author's
Citation proves any thing in favour of Infant-
Baptifm, 'tis only, that they Ihail be baptiz'd in
the other World : But be this as it will, 'tis fuf-
II Ibid. cap. 1$. Quicunque itaque portant hgec Nomina,
& Nomen FILUDEI, in Regnum DEI poterunt
inrrare,
Ecient
4x8 (J^fleSlions on Afr.Wall'^ Lct.i i7
ficicnt that they are not to be baptiz'd here, which
is all we infill on.
Mr. IVali cites || another Paflage from St. Her-
tHAs^ which I had fome time fince noted as an
Inftance againft Paedobaptifm. 'Tis ftrange that
the fame \.Vords fhou'd be cited to fuch contrary
Purpofes. They are thus tranflated : All Infants
are valud by the Lor d, and efteetn*d the firfi of
ait' It is very dubious, what Infants are here
meant, whether Infants in Age, or Infants in
Chriftianity: and what renders it fo doubtful, is
a Sentence at the beginning of this Chapter : Such
as have believed lUe fincere Children ('tis Infantes in
the Latin). And fince he here fpeaks of fuch In-
fants as believ'd, he may perhaps afterwards too
mean only fuch. Dr. Wake feems to have under-
ftood the PafTage fo, by his fupplying the Word
Such \ and the Words our Author cites refer to
fuch Infants as were fpoken of before.
But if they Ihou'd refer to Infants in Age, as
perhaps they may ; yet even then I don't fee how
they can be ftrain'd to fignify that Infants ought
to be baptiz'd. For here is no mention of Bap-
tifm at all : and therefore unlcfs our Author can
demonftrate for a general Principle, that all Per-
fons whom GOD efteems ought to be baptiz'd,
it will be very difficult for any one to imagine
how Baptifm can be deduc'd from hence. No
I\lan can fee any neceflary Connedion between
god's Love and Baptifm-, and the Scriptures
no where furnifh Mr. Wall with this Piece of Di-
vinity. The holy Angels are certainly highly
efteem'd and favour'd by Him ^ but no body pre-
tends they ought therefore to be baptiz'd. ' ht
li Part I. pag, 5.
like
Let.iii Hijiory of hfant'^aptifnf. 4291
like manner, Almighty GOD may have a great
Efteem for Infants, and love 'em according to
His infinite Mercy and Compaffion, without re-
quiring of therti the Ceremony of being baptiz'd.
At leaft, fince St. Hermas no where confirms this
Suppofition, that all whom GOD efteems ought
to be baptiz'd •, it muft pafs only for our Author's
own Conjedure, which renders the Argument
from this Place invalid : for fince both the Pre-
mifes are not St. Hermas% 'tis plain, the Conclu-
iion is not his.
On the contrary, it's very natural to conclude
from the Words, that this Father neither held the
Neceffity of Infant-Baptifm, nor pradis'd it •, for
he fays Jill Infants^ without exception, as if they
were all upon the fame Level, and therefore bap-
tiz'd or unbaptiz'd, it matters not : All are vd"
lu*d by the Lor d, and efieem^d the firjl of all^ mere-
ly as they are Infants, and therefore -]- Innocent*
And no where throughout his Writings has he
left the leaft Intimation, that he ever once
thought of the baptizing 'em. If he had known
any thing of incorporating Children into the
Church, 'tis ftrange in his Reprefentations of the
feveral Materials of which the Church was built,
that he ihou'd never give Infants one Place, but
conftantly negled them^ efpecially confidering
how exceeding nice and particular he is, and that
he frequently had the fittelt Occafions in the
World to introduce 'em. But befides this total
Silence in fuch Cafes, which is very confiderable,
this Father has feveral ExprelTions which are as
inconfiftent with the Motion of Infant-Baptifm,
as any thing can be. For inftance, to mention
f Lib. 3« cap. 51.
but
43^ ^fl^^ions on Mr.Wall'x Let.i I J
but one, Chap. xxxi. He fays, || j4rJ I fay unto you
ali-y whoever have received this Seal, keep SimpUcltyj
and rememher' not JffrontSy &c. Now this Inftruc-
tion is given with the utmoft Latitude, doubly
enforc'd both by an univeiTal Colle(^ive ^//, and
then an univerfal Dillributive Whoever ^ than
which nothing can be more extenfive. But the
things mentioned there not falling within the
Power and Cognizance of Infants, it follows, they
cannot be intended, and that St. Hermas did not
think them to be of their Number who had, or
ought to have, receiv'd the Seal. It is not pofli-
ble any Inference fliou'd be more dired and ne-
ceflary.
But to return back to Mr. WaR^ Management
of the other Citation. He fuppofes, i. Christ's
Words, Matth* xix. 14. Suffer little Children^ and
forbid them not to come unto Me^ for of fuch is the
Kingdom of Heaven^ are a plain Argument for In-
fant^Baptifm. And, 2. That the Words of St.
Hermas are of the fame Import.
As to the Words of our LORD, which
Mr. W^^// (with many other P^dobaptifls ) fo
much perverts, if any thing is plain concerning
^em, it is, that they have no relation fo Baptifm
at all, nor to any thing necefTarilyconneded with
it. You know the Story in theGofpel, and the
Circumftances of it ^ but what is there, 1 befeech
you, in the whole matter, which can make our
Adverfarys fallen on this Place? It can only be
the mention of C-hildren : and they might as well
have cited all the Faflages in Scripture w^here
Children are nam'd.
But Mr. Wall does not reafon from the Words
in Matth' xix. 14. but only -cites *em, as if they
II Dico autem vobis omnibus, quiciinque Sigillum hoc ac-
cepiftis, Simplicitatem habete, neque Olfenrorum memores
tftote, <^c.
were
Let. 1 1. Htjlory of hifant-'Saptifm'. 45 i
were very plain to his Purpofe *^ and therefore we
are to feek in other Authors for the Argument.
'|- Dr. Hammond himfelf reckons this among the
more imperfed ways of proving the Point, and
therefore our Author (hou'd not fo eafily have
taken it for granted. But Dr. Whitby is pleas'd
to improve the Paflage to the utmoft Advantage ^
and he being in general fo very fair and fincere
a Writer, and comprehending the whole Sub-
ftance of what can be urg'd from the Place, I will
examine what he has faid.
His firft and fecond Obfervations, namely. That
they were Infants in Age who were brought
to C H R I s T ; and that they were brought by fuch
as belie v'd Christ to be a Prophet fent from
God, may be allow'd : but the third thing, viz..
That they were not brought to be heal'd of any
Difeafes, cannot be eafily granted : for tho it is
not exprelly faid, they were \ yet fince it was the
Lord's Cuftom frequently to heal by laying on
His Hands, it is probable enough this was the De-
fign of thofe who brought 'em to Him, tho 'tis
only faid, they brought 'em to have His Hands
laid on 'em. The Impofition of His Hands cou'd
not well be the ultimate End, but only the in-
termediate, in order to fomething elfe, which
might be healings for what appears, but can't be
fbppos'd to be their being baptiz'd. Or if
C H R I S T did not lay His Hands on 'era to heal
'em, it was perhaps, as 1| Origen puts it : They
believed that no evil Spirit ccu^d enter-, nor any other
Misfortune hefal thofe Infants or Children whom
C H RIST had once touch' d^ by reafon of fome Vir-
tue that was thereby communicated to 'em^ And fince
t Six Queries y pag. 195.
II la ]^tth. ta^. 373. B.
the
4 ^ i ^fleBions on Afr. Wall 's Let. 1 1 ^
the evil Powers are continually lying in wait to cor-
rupt Mens Minds from the beginnings I am of Opi"
nion^ that they who brought the Children to CHRIST^
feeing His mighty Powerj brought them to Him^ that
by laying His Hands on Vw, &C. by means of the
Touch (^lAioc t5s 'A(p^<;') every Evil might be ex"
peirdj &c.
There is therefore no Neceflity to fuppofe fo
readily, that they were brought to receive fpiri-
tual Blefllngs : For, what fpiritual Bleflings cou'd
they receive ? Not Remifiion of Sins, fays the.
Dodor^ for the Jem did not think 'era gatlty of
any ^ and we never find Hands were laid on any
for that purpofe. But it was, fays he, to obtain
for them fome fpiritual Blejfmg appertaining to the
Kingdom of Go D, What fpiritual Blefling this
couM be, or on what Grounds 'tis aflerted, I fee
not j and the Dodor gives no reafon for it. But
he puts another Suppofition borrow'd from Dr.
Lightfoot^ that Christ laid His Hands on 'em,
to own them as belonging to His Kingdom. But this
cou'd not be the Meaning of it, both becaufe we
no where find this Ceremony us'd for this purpofe j
and He had juft before declared, of fuch is the King",
dom of Heaven-i before He took ^em in His Arms^ andi
laid His Hands on \m. The laying on of His Hands
therefore mult be for fome other End.
Befides, if they were capable of fpiritual Blef;
fings, as undoubtedly they are of being fav'd by
Christ, what's all this to Infant-Baptifm ? Will
ir follow, that becaufe they may be happy here-
after, they muft be baptiz'd here ? Many infants
Ihall, and all may be fav'd without being baptiz'do
And there's a great deal to this purpofe compre-
hended in our S a v i o u r's faying, of fuch^ fpeak-
ing even of unbaptiz'd Infants, is the Kingdom of
Heaven*
the
Let. 1 1 . FTiJlory of InfantSaptifm. 435
The fourth Obfervation the Dodtor is pleas'd
to make, is particularly on thefc Words, for of
fuch is the Kingdom of Heaven : from whence he
thinks it may reafonably be colleded, that there is
fomething in little Children^ why they jhou*d not he hin^
derd from coming to him^ be/ides their being Emblems
of Humility ^ and this he fuppofes can be nothing
hut the Fitnefs of them to be early dedicated to the
Service of G b d, and to enter into Covenant with
him by the Rites appointed by him for that End* But
tho it will be readily allow'd, that Infants are
capable of receiving the Kingdom, it can in no
wife follow, that this means nothing elfe but
their Fitnefs to enter into Covenant. This is di-
redly begging the Queftion. If by Kingdom of Hea-
ven were meant the Church of Christ, there
might indeed be fome greater colour for the Doc-
tor's way of arguing : but if it means only the
Kingdom of Glory, as it plainly does, then the
Dodor's Argument is grounded on a Miftake ^ for
tho Infants are Subjeds of the Kingdom of Glory,
it will not on that account appear necelTary for
'em to be baptiz'd, in order to qualify 'em for
that Glory : on the contrary, it rather follows,
iince as Infants they are Subjeds of that Kingdom,
they have no need of this Ceremony to give 'em a
Right which they have already.
The Right Reverend Bifhop of Salisbury fays,
that II whatever thefe Words may fignify myfiicaHyy
the literal Meaning of them is^ that little Children
may be admitted into the Difpenfation of the M e s-
s 1 A s ; and by confe^uencey that they may be baptized*
Thus his Lordihip feems to make it a plain Cafe j
but I can't perceive how the Words have any re-
Articles, p. 307.
F f lation
434 ^fleBions . m Mr. Wall'^ Let, 1 1 .
lation to Childrens being receiv'd into that Dif'
penfation at all. The Kingdom of Heaven can in no
wife mean fo here,- the it be true, , as his Lord-
fhip fays, this is the Senfe of the Words almofl:
univerfally thro the whole Gofpel: iox.St,.Mark
has preferv'd fome of our L o r d's Words on that
Gccaiion, which make It neceflary to underftand
thefeby the Kingdom of Glory : thus C^.x. Ver,\ 5.
our Lord fays, Whcfcever (Jjallmt receive the Kingdom
of Q o D ds a little Child^ he Jhall not enter therein '-,
that is, into Glory *, for into the Church the great-
eft Villains may be admitted, if they conceal their .
Wickednefs ^ fo that he muft mean they fhall not
enter into his glorious. Kingdom. Befides, if the
Kingdom did mean the Church, how does it appear
Infants were to be admitted into it by Baptifm?
Baptifm is the only way of admitting Adult Per-
fons, *but is no where prefcrib'd to Infants. I
jBiou'd rather imagine from the Words^ that if In-
fants, are to be admitted at all, by any Ceremony^
it muft be only by.laying on of Hands^ and by
Prayer ; for neither; our L o r d's Words, nor his
Adions give us room to think of any other.
And if this way of arguing be good, it may
equally be urg'd, that Infants ought to be com-
municated too 3 for if becaufe offuch is the King-
dom of Heaven^ they may therefore be admitted
into' the Difpenfation of the M e s s i a s, and con-
i*equentiy.have a Right to the Privileges and Sa-
a-aments of it, theiymuft have a Right to the Sup-
per as well as to Baptifm. But his Lord fhip, and
our Adverfarys^ do i^efufe 'em one ^ and we
beg leave to. refufe 'em the other for the very
fame Reafons, w^l. becaufe. they, are not capable
of it, nor of the Conditions which the Church of
£^*fe^ itTelf confelles' are requir'd ofTerfons to"
be baptiz'd, viz,>^ Faith and Recent ame* ■
Since
Let. 1 1 . Hiflory of Infant^^aptifm. 4^ 5
Since then there is nothing in C h r i s t 's
Words for -the Pradice of the- Fxdohaf^iik'^-the
Paffage t)f St. Hermasj which our Author compares
with thefe Words of C h r i s t, cannot be thought
to prove by any fuppos'd Affinity between 'em,
that St. Herrnas^ or the Church of that Time,
knew any thing of Infant-Baptifm. Befides, I
have not only Ihewn the Arguments from the
Writings of the Fathers hitherto, have no refe-
rence to it ^ but alfo, as far as things of this na-
ture can be fhewn, that all of 'em to this Time,
namely, for about a hundred Years after C h r i s t's
Birth, believ'd nothing at all of it, for what they
fay is very inconfiftent with that Pradice. In my
next, I will alfo examine what is faid from St.Jyfiin
and others, in the order in which Mr. Wall has
plac'd 'em. I am,
S I R,
Yours, &c.
Ff2 Letter
4 3 (> ^fleBions on M'-Wall'^ Let. i z.
Letter XII.
What AIr» Wall produces from the Writings of the fe^
cond Century examined, A Paffage in St. Juftin
confiderd. It makes nothing for Infant- Baptifm*
Neither does it fpeak of Original Sin^ as our Author
pretends, yl/r. Wall has perverted the Words, His .
Tranflation of ^em unintelligible. "Ato t5 'AcTbc^
means from Adam. Another MifcenftruEhion noted*
The Phrafe explain d by a Pajfage in Dionyfius
Halicaniafleus ^ and another in Thucydides. An-
other Pajfage from 5r. juftin conjider^d. He does
not call pAptifm Circumcifion. He coud not mean
Baptifm by the fpiritual Circumcifion he fpeaks of.
What he underfiands by fpiritual Circumcifion* O-
ther Writers of the primitive Church talk in the
fame manner. ColoiT. ii. 1 1 , I2. con/ider^d. The
Scripture no where calls Baplfm Circumcifion. The
Words in t hem fe Ives are not capable of the Senfe our
Adverfarys give ^e??2. The Antients did not call
Baptlfm the Circumcifion without Hands^ as Mr*
Wall pretends. Air. Wall'^ Argument from the
" 'Parallel between Circumcifion and Baptifm^fliewn to
be groundlefs. The Principle on which "'tis founded^
evidently falfe. Some of the Confequences of it :
as that Baptifm muft be adminlfi-er^d only on the
eighth Day : that Females mufi not be baftizjd.
As the Apofiles did not make Circumcifion their
Rule in relation to Baptifm '^fo neither JJwud we.
Another Pajfage from St. Juftin. ^Tis not ta
he imaglnd he flioud forbear to mention Infantr
Baptifm^ if it had been then praH^is'^d. Or however y
he ought not to havefpoken fo as is inconfifi^ent with
th0
Let. I 2. Hijlory of Infant- ^aptifm. 437
that TraElice. 'the Tajfage is dire^ly againfl In-
fam-Baptifm. The Reafons why Mr. Wall cites
this Vajfage^ tho he confejfes it makes nothing for
~ Infant- Ba^ifm. The firfi Reafon makes ao-ainjt
him. His next Reafon^ that Regeneration is put
forBaptifm, groundlefs. St. Jultin never under-
ftands Regeneration fo. Baptifm not Regeneration^
hut the Symbol of it. The third Reafon contradicts
his former j4jfertion. Another Pajfage from St. Juf-
tin. Which Mr. Wall draws to his fide by a very
vnfair Tranflation. ^ By. Tnii^v fgnifys from their
Childhood. Illvflrated by Inflances from Cicero :
From Laertius : From Plato : From Plutarch 1
From Origcn: From Theophilus Antiochenus:
From the Scriptures. Mr. Wall himfelf tranflates
a Pajfage of St. Bafil thus on another Occafion.
The ff.mous Paffage from St. Iren^us confider'^d,
^Tis not genuine. ' Cardinal Baronius obferves^ the
latter part of the Chapter contradiEis the beginnina-,
Petavius'j Anfwer to this proves ?wthing. The Au-
thor of the lafl part of the Chapter attempts to con-
firm a manifefl Faljhoodj by the /Authority of the
Antients from St. John, which St. Irenxus coud
never have done. Mr. Dodwell'j Pretence^ that
St. John, &c. judged of our LORD 's Age by
his Countenance.^ too weak^ and groundlefs. They
coud not but Inow the Time of our LO R D^s
Birth more exa^ly. St, Irensus coud not think
CHRIST arrived to near fo much as his ^oth
Tear : the contrary beiffg fo evident from the Cen^
fual Rolls then in beings and from the Dijputes
with the Adverfarys of the Chriftian Religion.
Nay^ it appears from St. Irenseus'j own Words^
that he was not infogrofs an Error. He fixes the
Time of the LORD s Birth. The Time of his
Pajfion computed : From the Defiru^ion of Jerufa-
lem : From the Time of Pontius Pilate'/ Govern-
ment^ and Tiberius'j Reign. Mr. DodweiPj At-
i* f 3 tem^t
4^ 8 (^fleBions on^Mr.WaWs Let. 1 2.
tempt to cxcufe the Extravagance of this ffuriotis
Taffage^ ivholly vfelefs^ Beftdes^ the Pajfage is
taken only from a very had Translation. *, as learned
Men confe'fs j viz.* Scaliger : Du Pin : Mr. Dod-
well : Dr, Grabe. This may alfo appear ^ by com-
paring it with the remaining Fragments of the Ori"
ginaL j4gain^ the Word Regenerated in this Taf-
fage^ does not mean^ Baptized* The Jews did not
give rife to this way of fp caking. The Scripture-
Notion of Regeneration. John iii. ^. confider^d. The
Regeneration there mentioned conftfls in the Operations
of the Spirit ^ of which Baptifm is the Sign and Seal.
And this appears from our L O R D^s own Words
following. T itus. iii. ^. conjider^d. That the An-
tients never mean Baptifm^ but an internal Change
by Regeneraticn^ fiewn from Clemens Alexandri-
nus, Tertullian, Origen, Clemens Romanus,
5^. Barnabas : And St. Iren-jeus no where vfes the
Word^ as our Author pretends he always does. The
, Inference from thefe Obferv^tions^ AContraditiion
^ofMr.VJ^iWs. Another Exception to the J^affage
cited from St- Irenaeus, is^ that Infantes does not ne-
\cefyarily mean fuch young Children as the Tddo-
ba-ptijfs admit to Baptifm. Omnis ^tas does not
.^ always incline Infants. As appears by an Iriftatice
from 5f. Cyprian ^ The Recognitions^ Diony-
f\\x%;cf Alexandria. Nor does the Enumeration
of the fveral Ages make it nece(fary to tinderfvand
fuch.hfapts as are not capable of Re af on. Infancy^
.. according to St- h Qnxus himfe If reaches to teh
:2y<^tl9fAge: As Mr. DodwQ\\ alfo thinks. The
. Infer ence^. F.erfons under Ten capable of Inftru^ion
id Baptifm, Recapitulation and Conclufion .
ant
TH>E Erft Century of Chrlilianity I have al-
ready difpatch'd, and am now to examine
til? ftcpiid.
Mr.
Let. I 2. Hifioryof Infrnhj^a^tifm. 45.9
Mr. Wall begins with St.Jaflin the MartyF,; vvho
liv'd 2iho\!it Anno C HR I ST I 140. but the Pieces
he cites of this Father were all writ after 150.
fo that he paffes over half the fecond Century
without any Attempt upon it ^ and therefore I
conclude that at leaft for 1 50 Years after CHRIST
Infant'Baptifm was not known in the World, or
however, that our Adverfarys are, not able to
prove it was. , ;, . ,, , , .? -f . ;>
The firft Paflage our. Author cites,, is out of the
Dialogue with Tryfha the J^tp, which he fays is
"{" only to fiiew^\that in thefe Times fo very near the
^pojfles^ they fpake of Original Sin ajfe^ing all M^n^
'kind defcended of Adam : and vnderflood that befides
the a^ual Sins of each particuUr •Perfon^ there is in
our Nature it f elf fince the. Fall^ fomcthing that needs
Redemption and Forgivenefs by the Merits of CHRIST,
But this does >not concern the baptizing of In^
fants5 and therefore Mv*Wdl adds of his own,
And that is ordinarily to be appl-fd to every particw
tar Perfon byBaptifm: which iignifys nothing, un-
Icfs he can fhew it is St. Jufti'a\ Aflertion. He is
to prove, that St.Juftin and the Church in his
Time thought fo, and not to fuppofe they did :
nor is jt fufficient to fay the Scripture teaches it ;
for the Qiiellion here- immediatciy is not what the
Scriptures teach, but what Su-Jufiin teaches ^ tho
by the way the Scripture no. iTiore Jteaches tha^t
our S A V 1 .0 u r's Merits are to be apply'd 'to any
Perfons by Baptifm, than it does that his Merits
mull be^appi^'d by Faith or hj the Supper^ in \xhich
thelCup "'is the IVerv Covenant in his Blood. St, Jyf'
ftVs ExprefTions therefore, are of no force, unlefs
he had gone upon our Author's Principle, .whijEh
he does not appear to have done. v'- .'
t Parti, pig. 13.
F f 4 All
440 ^fleBions on Kr.WallV Let.i i.
All that can be urg'd from his mentioning Origi-
nal Sin, I have fully anfwer'd 'j- before. Befides^
it is much to be queftion'd, whether St. Jvfiin^
and moft of the Antients of the firft Centurys,
belie v'd the Kotion. Mr. Wall has very much
perverted the Words 'of this Paflage, to make
'em fpeak to his purpofe -^ and given fuch a Tran-
flation of 'em as no School-boy wou'd have made.
Whether he did it out of Ignorance or Inadver-
tency, I fhall not determine.
The Place, I think, fliou'd be renderM thus :
jl As alfo^ neither did he fubmit to he born and cru"
cify^d^ as being -under any necejfity to do it ; but he
did this for Mankind ^ which from (not by^ Adam
was fallen under Death and the Guile of the Serpent y
by their own AEh and Deed^ every one having done
wickedly. This makes the FafTage rather oppofite
to the Doctrine of Original Sin, than in favour of
it. Mr. Wallh Tranflation is hardly intelligible :
But he did this for Mankind-^ which by Adam was
fallen under Death^ and the Guile of the Serpent^ he-
fide the particular Caufe which each Man had of
finning.
But you fee, as I have render'd it, the Senfe
is very natural and eafy. And that St. Jufiin
meant as I underftand him, appears from the
Words immediately following thofe already tran-
fcrib'd : ^ For GOD willing that all Angels and
Men fhoud be free Agents^ and that their Aclions
Jhou'd
t Pag. 403, &c. ^ ^
[I Dialog, cam Tryph. pag. ?i$, gi5. '^Qtrm^ v <Pi 7«
'*- Ibid. p3g. 3rd. A. B«AoAt5^©- 5^ T8Tit; Iv sAdl/9ijfcc
Let, 12. Hijlory of Infant'^aptifm. 441
Jhoud he determined by their own free Choice' that
if they did what was f leafing to him^ they might be
heft incorruptible and free from Punifhment \ but if
they did wickedly^ he might puniflj every one according
to his Tleafure. Now to fay here, that every Maa
was defign'd by G o d to ftand upon his own Bot-
tom, and to conned this by the illative Particle
/or, to another Sentence wherein he fays all fell
in Adam^ is fo great an Abfurdity, that we can-
not with any good Manners fuppofe St. Jvftin to
be guilty of if, for nothing can be more contra-
didory, than to fay all are Sinners in or by Adam^
and yet that none are Sinners but by their own
free Choice and Adion.
Befides, it is necellary to underftand St. "jvftin
as I have done, even from the Propriety of the
Phrafe he makes ufe of. That aTH) tS *A(^^
means from Adam^ and not as our Author renders
it by Adam^ might be prov'd from an infinite
number of Inftances: but I need only mention
Rom^ V, 14. where we find exadly the fame Phrafe,
in the very fame Senfe too r^ which makes it not im-
probable that St.Juflin had his Eye upon this very
Place, and alludes to it : Death reign d from Adam j
that is, in St. Jufiins Words, Mankind from A-
dam was fallen under Deaths &c. But the Senfe
Mr. Wall wou'd put upon octtq is feveral times in
this Chapter exprefs'd by <l^icl : thus, Ver. 9. We
Jhall be favd from Wrath thro him ( ^' d\)TH ) and
Ver. 10. We were reconciled to G 0 D by (^S^ioL^
the Death of his SON: and Ver. ii. (hV 5$) By
whom we have now received the Atonement : and in
the
44^ ^ flexions on Mr. W2l\Ys Let.! 2.
the nextVerfe it's faid not octto, but e^I tvos 'Av-
G^CoTT^, hy one Man Sin entered into the Worlds &c.
by which 'tis evident, that din tS 'aJ\oc/^ and JVfcc
m *Acf\a/x mean different things.
As to the other Mifconftrudion of St. J-uftins
Words, which I think Mr. Wall has made,, .'tis
not only very confiderable, in that it mak^s
St.Juflin fpeak inconfiftently, and fo as not to
be underftood ; but 'tis plain aifo to all who have
any tolerable Skill in the Greely that tzu^^ which
Mr. Wall here renders befide^ ought to be render'd
for^ hy^ hecaufe of^ &c. Thus that common Phrafe
TTZt^' 0 fignifys for which Reafon^ or the like ^ fo
DionyfiHS Halle arnajfeiis fays, ^ 'Tm^ Oj for which
JReafon alfo the things mention d in the Epilogue are
caWd Exclamations. In his Roman Anticjuitysy h€
has the very Phrafe of St.Juflin ^ and the Occafion
will convince you, that it^muft be underftood as 1
have tranflated it. Siccius Dentatus^ an experi-
enc'd Commander, accompany'd RomlUus the Con-
fulj with a Band of 800 Veterans, againft the
^y£qui. In this Expedition Romilius^ in order to
facrifice this great Man to his Ambition and Envy,
fends him with his Veterans to attack the Enemy,
under fuch Difadvantages as they rnuft neceflarily
have been all cut to pieces* Siccpits undertakes
the Attempt, but leads his Men ninknown to
the. General another way, and fo falling upon
the Enemy unexpededly while the two Arrays
were engag'd, gave 'em a total Overthrow. Sic-
cim at his Return to 7^o;7af, relates the whole
Story to the Tribune and People, with the Con-
ful's Defign upon 'em, '{- and that it was hy his own
Valour
. '^ Ars Rhetoric, cap. lo. §. i8. ITctj* o ;^ 'Eot^s'I'M^V
t Dionyf. Halicarnaff. Antiq. Rom. lib. lo. p.^(f^4i.^ Kct/
MJifOV
Let. 1 1. Hijlory of Infant^^aptt/m. 443 v
Valour and ConduB (ttk^ tmv' ItAi'ai/ 'A^elvjv, fays
Dimyfius) and of thofe who were, with him-t whom
the Conful had defigndfor DeftruEhion^ that the Em'-''
mfs Camp was taken^ &c. 'Tis plain here, from
the Circumftanc^s of the Story, that {yni^ w
iJliav) means by tk/> ^tp??> ia oppofitioa to ano-
ther's : and fo too it {hou'd in St. Jufiin lignify
by their own Favlt,. in oppofition to another's.
There is another Inftance to the fame purpofe m
rhucydides^ where the Senfe is much the fame as
in St.Jnftin, tho the.Exprefiionis fomethmg.va-
ry'd. Pericles is fetting forth the Inconveniences
of the divided State, and confequently the Weak-
nefs of the Velopnnefiahs : ^ Some indeed^ fays he,
are for frofectaing thetr Revenge with the ntmoft Jf-,
plication ', but others are fearful, lefi they prejudice
their own partictdar Jfairs : and when after a thou-
fand Delays, they are at lafi got together, they can
befiow hut a very little Time on the common Good ','
for they have none tofpare from their own particular
Concerns, And every one fancys the Fublick will fuf-
fermthino- by his NeglcEh (ttoc^ tmv. e^uT^ 'A/^i-
A£i«v). This is exactly as St. Jn/^'^ fays, all Men
are fallen under Death, ^es^ twv JcA/ocv 'AiTJ^xv,.
by their own particular Faults
The nextPaflage of St.Jufiin, which our An-
thor ufes, is in the fame Dialogue, where he
meets with fome ExprelTions, from whence he
ventures to infer, tho very unfairly, that
St. Juftin thought Baptifm was to Chriitians
'^ i Pe Bell. Peloponneliac, lib. i. cap. 14I; K^/ 3^ 01 ^
444 ^fleSlions on A/r.WallV Let. i il
inftead of Circumcifion, and therefore, like that,
ought to be adminifter'd to Infants. The holy
Martyr, arguing againft the Geremonys of the
Law, takes occafion to oppofe to the carnal Cir^
cumcipon that which is fplritual : And this^ roe be
ing Sinners^ thro G O D^s Mercy have receivd^ fays
he, hy Baftifm ^ and every one is permitted to receive
it in the fame way. But if Mr. Wallh Conclulion
from hence is fair, I don't know what is other-
wife. For,
1 . What can be more evident than that he does
not fay Baptifm is the Chriftian Circumcifion,
but only, that Chriftians receive the fpiritual
Circumcifion, whatever it is, by Baptifm ? which
is far from faying, Baptifm it felf is it. By
Baptifm we receive the Remiffion of our Sins ^
but how abfurd wou'd it be therefore to fay,
RemilTion of Sins is nothing elfe but Baptifm ?
What we receive, is not the Inftrument or Medium
by which we receive it. We receive all things
by the Mercy of God in Christ^ and yet
thofe things are not that Divine Perfedion we
call the Mercy of G O D^ but only the EfFe^s
and Confequences of it. In like manner, we are
not to abufe St,Jnflin and his Words fo much
as to fancy he meant, that the fpiritual Circum-
cifion he fays we receive by Baptifm, is Baptifm
it felf. May,
2. He plainly fhews he meant no fuch thing:
for the Circumcifion which he oppofes to the
Jevptjij in the Flefti, he exprefly fays is that which
Enoch, and thofe like him ohferv^d'^ and yet he'
fays, We have receiv'd the fame by Baptifm. No
Man fure can really think he means only Baptifm
by all this *, for when, where, and by whom was
Enoch baptiz'd?
And the Maityr often talks diredly contrary
to our Author's Glofs, of which 1 will produce
fome
Let. 1 2 . Hijlory of Infant'^aptifm. 44 5
fome laltances, to let you fee how much Mr, Wall
mifreprefents him. Thus he diftinguilhes between
Baptifm ^ and the Chriftian Circumcifion, when
be explains, || M^afi ye and make ye clean^ and
put away the evil of your doings^ Ifaiah i. 16. and
fays, God commands you to rvajl) with this Laver^
and to he circumcised with the true Circumcifion* The
true Circumcifion anfwers here diredly to the
putting away the evil of their doings^ and not to
their wajliing. As walhing and putting away the
Evil, &c. are two different things ^ fo Baptifm,
which according to St. Jujlin^ anfwers to one,
and Circumcifion which anfwers to the other,
mufl be different likewife: and what the true
Circumcifion confifts in, the following Words of
Ifdah teach us, ceafe to do evil-, ver. 17. learn to
do well^ feek Judgment^ relieve the opprefs^d^ &C.
And if all this is included in the true Circumci-
iion, according to St. Juftiny how can any one fay
he took Baptifm to be that Circumcifion? and
which he afterwards calls * our Circumcifion,
In another place he fays, -f^ Let a Man he a
Scythian or a Perfian, if he receive the Knowledg
of G O D, and his Christ, and ohferve the eter-
nal Rules of Juflice^ he is circumcis'*d with an eX"
cellent and ufeful Circumcifion^ &C. And in the
■¥ery next Page before that which our Author
-takes his Citation from, we have this defcription
of the true Circumcifion. ]1|1 The Precept of Cir-
cumcifion^
II Dialog.^ pag. 235. E. Ai<TcL^ h, >^ vuv^K^Ba^h
■ * Ibid. pag. 236. C.
t Ibid. pag. 245. A.
Jill Dialog, pag. 260. C. 'H J^/Evjohh '^ meJtlofMf^y rjthfu(rA
44^ ^fleBions on M-.Wair^ Let.i 2*
cumcifion^ rvhich commands to circumcife Infants on
the eighth Day^ was hut a Type of that trtie Circum^
cifion^ with yvhich we are circumcis* d from Error and
Wickednefs^ by Him who rofe from the dead the firfi
Day of the] We^k ^ J.e s u s G h R i s T our Lord.
And again, ^ He Q^iz.* Jofhua) is faid in the fe^
cond Circumcifion to circumcife the. People with Knives
of Stone ( Jofll. V. 2^ &c») which fignifys this Circum^
cifion wherewith J e s u s C H R I s T has circumcised.
as J from the worfl)ipping of Stones and Idols. We
are circumcised from the deceit fulnefs of this World
with Knives of St one y that is^ by the Word of our
Lord J e s u s. — — By Knives of Stone we are to un^^
derftand the DoElrine of C h R i.s T, by which fo many
of the uncircumcis^d^ who were once deceiv^dy are
novo circumcised with the Circumcifion of the Hearty d>^C»
And, in the next Pag^: '{" Happy are we who arc
circumcised with Knives of Stone in this fecond Cir"
cumcifion : — But our Circumcifion^ which is the fe^
cond^ and takes place after yours y is performed with
Jharp StoneSy that is by the DoBrines of the chief
Corner Stone^ preached by the Apoftles^ who was cut
out without hands^ and has circumcised us from Ido-
latry and all manner of Evil. Whofe Hearts are fo
circumcised from all Wickednefs^ &c.
aW 'H^:^lll'ZO"'r XPI2T0~T T KTPI'OT
"t Ibid. pag. 94rr A#^
t Dialog, pag. 342. A. Metyjeiot af «^H^ 0/ me/lf^-A^ivlii
J)a: Ai^cov dii^QfjUvVy T»7t'f7, «^fit r A'i^sov r S'lai 'ATncshaf
't ccK^<!-)j>vict'r<i Az9», iy r (£vdf 'X^^^^ Tp]9e;'1©-, 7ne/li[^'
til Kctf cT/cs/ »7Wf> &C.. •-
And
Let, I 2. Hiftory of Infant^'Baptif))!. 447
And whatever may be pretended, the Primitive
Gharch generally talk after the fame manner :
Irevam ufes almoft the fame Words, and tells us,
ij The Circumclfion in the Flejh prefigured the Cir^
cumclfion of the Heart* And Orlgen^ without any
mention ofBaptifm, fays, "^ He who lays afide
his falfe Notions and evil Imaginations^ circumcifes
the Foreskin of his Heart. There's a great deal
more to this purpofe in the fame Place, which 1
will not tranfcribe. TertnlUan^ in like manner,
without giving the lead: Intimation that Baptifm
is the Chriftian Circumcifion, which fucceeds in
the ftead of that in the Flelh, fays, -^ As there-
fore the carnal Circumcifion j which was but for a timey
was given for a Sign to a fitihhorn and rebellious^
People ^ fo the Spiritual is given for' the Salvation of
the Obedient^ as the Prophet Jeremiah fays^ Circum-
cife your felves to the LORD, and take away
the Foreskin of your Hearts, chap, iv. ver. 4. And
fb La^antius fays, (|1| And the LORD f aid to
Jefus or jofhua, malie thee floarp Knives^ and cir^
cumcife again the Children of Ifrael the fecond timey
forefiiewing there was, to be another Circumciflony not
of the Flefij^ as was the firfl^ which the Jews ftrill
praBife \
II Adverf. H^ref. Lib. 14. cap. 5. pag. 319. a. Secun-
dum carnem Circumcifio Circamcificnem praefigurabat
fpiritalem.
^ Homil. 5. in Hierem. pag. 86. D. 'O ctTroTySs^.V'©"
jtUTW, &c.
t Adverf. Judseos, pag. 1 85. A. Sicut ergo Circumcifio
carnalis, quas temporalis erat, tributa in lignum Populo
cpntumaci, ita fpiritalis data. eft in falutem Populo. obau-
dienti, dicente Propheta Hier^mia ; innovate vobis No-
vitatem, &c.
{ill De vera Sapientia, Lib. 4. pag. 405. Et dixit DO-
M IN U S ad Jefum ^ fac tibi Cultellos petrinos nimis acu-
£os, 6;c. fecundam Circumcifionem futuram effe dixit, non
carnis j
44^ (^flen:ions on Mr.WsM's Let. 12.^
pra^lfe ; hut of the Heart and Spirit^ which is given
by CHRIST the true JESVS. You fee, Sir,
he exprefly fays the fecond Circumcidon is not
of the Fleflj ^ but Baptifm is plunging the Flefh
into Water, and is therefore of the Flefh, and
cannot be the fecond Circumcifion. There is
no colour of Reafon therefore for any to pretend
that the Antients, and particularly St. Jufiirtj
ever imagin'd Baptifin fucceeds to us inftead of
Circumcifion.
But here our Author, after his ufual method,
compares St. JvftirPs Words with a Place of Scrip-
ture, which is as wrongly apply'd as the reft.
"^ It (the Faflage of St. Juftin) is to the fame
Senfe^ fays our Author, as is that faying of 5f.Paul,
where he calls Baptifm^ with the putting off the Body
of the Sins of the Flejh^ which attends it^ the Cir-
cumcifion of Christ. And here he cites Co-
loff. ii. II, 12. But 'tis a great Miftake to fay,
St. Pauly by Circumcifion here, means Baptifm.
For,
I . The Scriptures no where call Baptifm Cir-
cumcifion, nor afford us any ground to imagine
fo : and to fay that Baptifm is intended by it
here, is faying a thing at plcafure, and offering
as great Violence to the Words as can well be ima-
gin'd. For fomething very different from the Wafh-
ing of the Body in Water, is frequently in Scrip-
ture call'd Circumcifion, and oppos'd to the Legal
Circumcifion of the Jews ^ and the Scriptures
fpeak of no Circumcifion, but either that under
the Law in the Flefh, or the Spiritual in the
Heart, &c. Even the Prophets under the Jcwijh
carnis •, ficut fuit prima, qua etiam nunc Jud^i utuntur;
fed Cordis, ac Spiritus, quam tradidic CHRIST US,
qui verus JESUS fuit»
♦ Part I. pag, 13.
Oeco-
Let. I 2. Hifiory of Infant'(Baptifm. 449
Oeconomy mention this Gircumcifion, as well as
the Writers of the New Tefiamem.
Now if Baptifm is never call'd Circumcifion in
Scripture , but fomething elfe, vlz,^ Purity of
Heart, &c. is frequently fo call'd-, hov/ natural
and necefTary does it appear to underftand the
Circumcifion, Cotojf. il 11. to mean, not Baptifm,
but Purity of Heart, &c ? For the Analogy of
Scripture has always been thought the chief Rule
of Interpretation, and 1 think our Adverfarys can
fortify their Expofition by no Argument from
Reafon, nor fo much as one fingle Text of
Scripture. But,
2. In the next Place, the Words themfelves
effedually exclude that Acceptation : for they
fo particularlycharaderize the Circumcifion there
fpoken of, that it can't be queftionM what is
meant by it ; and I am amaz'd to fee that Men
of fo much Senfe and Learning as many of the
Psedobaptifts are, can (notwithftanding all the
care St. Paul has taken to be underftood) miftake
his Meaning. The Circumcifion Chriftians are to
regard, he fays, is made without Hands ; now Bap-
tifm is not made without Hands^ and therefore can-
not be this Circumcifion, unlefs he refolves all into
the Quakers internal Baptifm only. This Cir-
cumcifion is oppos'd to the Jervijh in this refped,
particularly^ that theirs was made with Hands^,
and this without: but if he meant Baptifm, it
can no more be faid to be made without Hands
than the Jews Circumcifion in the Flefh *, and
therefore the Chriftian Circumcifion here intended
mult have this difference from the Jewiflj^ that,
it cannot be any thing external or relating to
the Flefh, any farther than it is, as St. Paul af-
terwards fays, hy putting ojf the Body of the Sins ef
the FleJJj *, and ferves to explain yet more particu-
larly wherein this Circumcifion made without
G g Hand^.
4')0 ^fleFmns on Ma Wall V Let. 12.'
Hands confifts, viz.. in fnch internal Operations
of god's Holy SPIRIT on the Mind of
Man, whereby the Heart is purify'd from inward
Filth and evil Inclinations. This is fometimes
exprefs'd by putting off the Old Man, and
putting on the New, Ephef.iv. 22. and Coloff.ni.
9, 10. and this, you know, is the Gircumcifion
St. Paul commonly oppofes to the Jewijh \ as
GaL vi. 15. where arguing againft the Law's
being then in force, he fays, Neither Circumcifion
availeth any thing nor IJnclrcumcifion^ hut a nevo
Creature. And again, ^<7W. ii. 29. Circumcifion is
that of the Hearty in the Spirit. Since then St. Paul
fo plainly fpecifys the Circumcilion here meant,
and charaderizes it by fuch Marks as agree only
to the internal one cf the Heart ^ and withal
conllantly oppofes this Circumcifion of the Heart
to the Jew/Jh^ and never mentions a third : what
can incline any Man, contrary to the Analogy of
Scripture, the particular Signs exprefs'd in the
Words, and without any necefTity, to impofe this
llrange Senfe on this iingle Place of St. Paid <'
The Circumcifion here call'd Chriftian, muft be
either wholly internal or wholly external, or part-
ly both. It cannot be partly internal, and partly
external (which our Author pretty plainly aiTerts)
becaufe, if it confifts of thefe two Parts, one
whereof may be perform'd without Hands, and
the other not, it can't be call'd Circumcifion
without Hands-, for, in order to make it com-
pleat, another part is neceflary which muft be
perform'd with Hands, and what is true of any
one part cannot be deny'd of the whole : and
therefore, if the Chriftian Circumcifion does but
partly confift of what muft be perform'd with
Hands, it is not a Circumcifion without Hands,
which is diredly contrary to St. Paurs Affertion.
And our Adverfarys will grant, this Circumcifion
can't
Let. I 2. Hiflory of Infant'^aptifm. 45 i
can't be wholly external ^ it remains therefore
that it muft be a Circumcillon wholly internal,
and confequently it can't be Baptifni.
Here Mr. IVall tells us, the j^mients were wont to
call Baptifm the Circumcifion done without Hands.
By this Information doubtlefs he hopes to per-
fuade fome that St. Paul calls it fo too, becaufe
the inward Part was perform'd without Hands.
Does Mr. Wall ine^n, that for this Reafon, the
outward Part was call'd Circumcifion without
Hands ? If he does not mean fo, he trifles, for 'tis
of the outward Ceremony we are difputing j and
if he does mean fo, we have a greater Deference
for St. Paul than to think he talks at fuch a rate,
and a more honourable Opinion of the Antients
than to fuppofe they cou'd be fo grofly abfurd
as to fay, the external Ceremony of Baptifm
was perform'd without Hands. The PafTages of
the Antients our Author refers to, I have con-
fulted particularly, and I'm fure they fay no fuch
thing.
Befides, if they, and even St. Paul too, did
commonly fpeak of Baptifm as Mr. Wall pre-
tends , how does this affed Infant-Baptifm ?
Which way can he contrive an Inference to prove
from thence that Infants are to be baptiz'd?
It miuft be thus: If Baptifm fucceeds^ to us in-
Itead of Circumcifion, then it follows, as Infants
were order'd under the Law to receive the
JewiJJj Circumcifion, fo now, tho it be not or-
der'd, they muft be circumcis'd under the Gof-
pel, with the Chriftian Circumcifion ^ that is,
they muft be baptiz'd. I have proposed the Ar-
gument very fairly *, and yet you may obferve. Sir,
how plainly it points us to the Solution which is
contain'd in it. For there is this difference how-
ever, that Infants were order'd to be circum-
cis'd under Mofesy but were not order'd to be
G g 2 cir-
4') ^ ^fleFlions on Kr.Wall'i Let. i il
circumcis'd, that is, baptiz'd, under Christ:
therefore I anfwer, under Mofes they ought to be
circumcis'd, becaufe it was exprefly order'd j but
under Christ, they are not to be baptiz'd,
becaufe it is not order'd. So great a difference
in the two Inftitutions, (hou'd be thought enough
to juftify fo neceflary a difference in the Pradice.
For the Parallel between Circumcifion and Baptifm
failing in this particular, the Argument drawn
from it, which can't extend beyond the Parallel
'tis founded on, mull alfo fail.
But farther : The Principle upon which the
P^dobaptifts go in arguing from this Topick,
muft be this. That what was done and ob-
ferv'd in refped to Circumcifion under the Law,
muft be done and obferv'd now in refped to
Baptifm under the Gofpel. If any plain Inti-
mation cou'd be found, that Infants particularly
are to be initiated now by Baptifm, as formerly
they were by Circumcifion, the Difpute wou'd be
at an end, and we need go no farther back : but
fmce there is no fuch particular Inftrudion, the
whole muft at laft depend upon the general Prin-
ciple mention'd.
Now if this be falfe, as no Man that reads
it can deny but it is, then all that is built upon
it muft of courfe fall to the Ground.
Some of the Gonfequences of this Principle are
thefe :
I. Circumcifion was to be perform'd on the
eighth Day precifely^ it was not to be defer'd
longer upon any pretence, nor to be adminiftred
before, tho in the utmofl danger of Death : ac-
cordingly, the Jews fuffer'd their Children to die
uncircumcis'd rather than do it before the time.
Baptifm therefore, by this Rule, muft be always
adminiftred on the eighth Day precifely, and nei-
ther before nor after on any account whatever.
And
Let. 1 2. Hipry of Infant-IBaptifm. 45 5
And yet this is contrary to the Opinion and
Pradice of the P-^dobaptifts.
2. But what more immediately affeds our pre-
fent Difpute, is to obferve, that the Females were
not to be circumcis'd, and therefore nov/ they
are not to be baptiz'd*, for thofeonly, who were
to be circumcis'd then, are the Subjeds of Bap-
tifm now: and this is not only the Principle
our Antagonifts go upon, but their very Argu-
ment too. And therefore, if it proves Infants
are proper Subjeds from the Analogy, it equally
proves the Male-Infants only are proper Subjeds.
If one was to follow the Argument in every par-
ticular, what confus'd Work wou'd it make ?
In a word, then, it undoubtedly follows. That
whatever Principle leads to fuch wild, extrava-
gant Conclufions, is abfurd, and ought to be dif-
own'd.
But now, if Mr. Wall and the Pxdobaptifts
will grant, that we are not to judg from the
Subjeds of Circumcifion, precifely to thofe of Bap-
tifm, they give up their own Argument^ or if
they will ftand by this Argument, they muft deny
Baptifm to Females. But I know they will depart
from the Rule in thefe Cafes, and we claim the
fame Allowance to depart from it in the other
too.
But they'll tell us the Apoftles vary'd in thefe
and fuch like Particulars, which is Warrant enough
for them to do fo too : they baptiz'd not Males
only, but Females alfo, Me^ and Women. All this
is very true j and the Apollles vary'd alfo in
another Particular, viz.. that whereas Infants were
us'd to be circumcis'd, they admitted none but
the Adult to Baptifm. And hence we infer, that
they did not make Circumcifion their Pattern in
any thing relating to Baptifm : Why then fhou'd
our Adverfarys plead for any Agreement between
G g 3 thefe
454 ^cfleflions on ^/r.Wall'j Let. i 2.
thefe two Symbols, only in this Circumftance ?
for they allow the Apoftles obferv'd no Agree-
ment between 'em in any other Particular. And
does it not at lafl from all plainly appear, that
it is with the greateft Reafon we aflert the Scrip--
ture and antient Chriftians do not pretend to
run a Parallel between Circumcifion and Baptifm ^
and that, if they had in feme refpeds, it cou'd
not be concluded from thence that Infants are
to be baptiz'd? All the Objedions and Pretences
about Circumcifion therefore mufl be manifeftly
invalid ^ and I am perfuaded, if the Clergy them-
felves were to confider the Matter more delibe-
rately, they wou'd be afham'd cf all they have
urg'd from this Head.
Let us proceed now to our Author's next Ci-
tation from St.Jufiin^ which is that Part of the
fir ft Apology^ wherein the Martyr gives the Roman
Emperour an Account of the Chriftian Initiation
by Baptifm. It is too long to be tranfcrib'd :
you may read it in St.Jtftin himfelf, or in Mr.lValih
Hiflory *, for 'tis a noble Piece of Antiquity, and
indeed fo is the whole Apology. If this made for
Psedobaptifm, it wou'd be very confiderable, and
do a great deal more than has been yet done, in
the Argument of Antiquity: hut Mr. Wall himfelf
confefles it does not piove Infants are to be bap-
tiz'd, and therefore fuppofes his Readers will won-
der what he means by producing it here ; in 'an-
fwer to which he tells us, he does not produce it
for that purpofe. St. Juftin introduces the Ac-
count he gives of Baptifm thus ^ left^ fays he,
if I ft-ioiid leave out thiSj I might feem to deal un-
fairly in fome fart of my Apology. If he was ^o
cautious then, not to feem unfair, in hiding any
thing from the Powders before whom he pleaded ^
''tis ftrange he Ihou'd entirely omit, without the
leall Intimation, fo important an Article as the
Cullom
Let. I 2. Hijlory of Infant-^apti/m. 455
Cuflom of baptizing Infants, if it had been prac-
tis'd at that time.
The Heathens were apt enough to charge the
Chriftians with ufing Infants very barbarouily : it
concern'd St. Jufiin therefore not to give any Um-
brage, by feeming to avoid the mentioning of 'em.
So careful an Apologift wou'd certainly have taken
occafion to mention 'em, and defcribe the Chrifti-
ans Treatment of 'em very exadly, in order to
remove all Sufpicions from the Emperour's Mind.
When they were reported to murder Infants, or
make fome impious Ufe of their Blood, what
cou'd pofhbly fortify the Sufpicion more, than
that fo great a Man as St. Juftln fhou'd, in a
publick and formal Apology, decline jfaying any
thing at all of what they did to 'emi ? It was
altogether neceflary therefore for St. Juflin^ at
leaft, to have taken fome notice of Infants, if
they had us'd any Ceremony about 'em ^ and
therefore. 'tis wrong in Mr. W^^// to fay, ^ He had
no occafion to fpeak of the Cafe of Infants.
But fuppohng he had not, mull he therefore
defcribe Baptifm in fiich a manner as cannot be
at all applicable to the Cafe of Infants, as he
has done? This wou'd have been diredly deceiv-
ing the Emperour , who certainly underftood
St. Jvftins Account to be full and true of Bap-
tifm in general, and never imagin'd the Chriftians
baptiz'd other wife. But Mr. Wall fuppofcs the
Chriftian Church, at that time, had twoBaptifms,
as the Church of England has at prefent, namely
one of Adult Perfons", here defcrib'd by St.Jufijn^
and another of Infants different from that. And
therefore he intimates, that what St. Jufiin fays
here might agree to Adult Perfons, but cannot
be apply'd to the Cafe of Infants.
* Part I. ^a^. 16.
Gg 4 A
45^ ^fleBionsonMr.^2lYs Let.iz.
A Man that will take this Liberty, may fay
any thing with as much Reafon. 'Tis true in-
deed, what St.Jufim fays can only be apply'd to
Adult Baptifm : but that the Martyr (hou'd pre-
varicate with the Emperour, and not fpeak of
Baptifm in general as adminiftred to all, but only
in feme Cafes, is unworthy his Sincerity, and al-
together an unreafonable Conjedure : for St. Juf-
tin^ I am fure, affords him no ground for this
iDiftindion , who with Primitive Candor and
Simplicity, gives an impartial full Account of the
Adminiftration of Baptifm in general, and fo as
to reach all Cafes. Upon thefe Confiderations, I
think, it muft be plain to any impartial Judg,
that if this PalTage of St. Jvftin does not make for
Infant-Baptifm, but relates only to the Adult,
by Mr. WaU>\ own Confeflion, then it mult make
Itrongly againfb it : for had there been fuch a
thing as Infant-Baptifm at that time, how eafy
iiad it been for St.Jufiin^ and how necelfary, to
have faid, not only they who are ^erfuaded and do be-
lieve^ &c. but alfo to have added, together with
their Infant Children^ are baptized ^
But there is another thing, even in the Words,
which diredlyoppofes Infant-Baptifm^ the Words
I particularly refer to, our Author tranflates thus :
jlnd we have been taught by the Afoftles this Reafon
for this Thing '^ becaufe we being ignorant of our firfi
Birth^ were generated by Necefjity^ &c. that we
Jhoud not continue Children of that Necejfity and
Ignorance^ but of Will (or Choice) and Knowledg-^
and jJjoud obtain Forgivenefs of the Sins^ in which we
have livd^ by Water ^ &:c„ Nothing can be plainer
than that the new Birth, together with the Re-
mifiion of Sins to be obtain'd by Water, is here
faid to depend not upon any Neceflity, or the
Will of another, as our being born into this
World did, butj on the contrary, on our own
" ' ' ' ' ' ' Wills,
Let. 1 2. Hlflory of Infant'^aj^tifin. 457
Wills, or free Choice and Knowledg ^ for the Op-
pofition lies here : We were at firfl; generated
without our Knowledg or Choice'^ but we mull be
regenerated, and obtain the RemilTion of our
Sins by Water, mth our own Knowledg and
Choice. And this Ihews that Infants, who are
not capable of that Knowledg and Choice, are
confequently not capable of this Baptifm: if they
are to be baptiz'd, it mult be without their Choice,
as much as their firft Generation was^ which de-
ftroys St. Juftinh Oppofition, and therefore mufb
be thought inconliftent with his Notion of the
Matter.
Or however, fuppofing this were not fo plain,
we are at leaft upon equal Terms with Mr. Wall as
to this Paflage, Imce he confefTes it does not make
for Infant-Baptifm. One wou'd be apt to think
therefore it was impertinently cited ^ but our
Author tells us, he produces it upon thefe three
Accounts.
I . Becaufe this is the mofi antient and bell Ac-
count of the Way of Baftiz^ing^ next the Scripture^ Sec,
and he notes that many Chriftians of thofe Times
had liv'd in the Apofiles Days \ intimating, their
Way was the more likely to be the fame with
that of the Apoftles : and if fo, our Author mult
allow, that thofe who come nearell in Pradice
to this Account of St.Juftin^ are to be accounted
molt in the right, and to adminilter the Ordi-
nance in the greatell Purity. Kow it is plain to
any who read St. Juftin\ Words, efpecially when,
they are com.par'd with what he fays in other
Places, that Baptifm was at that time adminiftred
by dipping ^ the Confequence of which is, that not
thofe who fprinkle or pour^ but thofe who dip re-
tain the true Apollolick Way.
In the next Place, St. Jufiin here mentions only
Adult Perfons, and elfe where plainly excludes In-
fants
458 ^fleflions on Mr.W2AVs Let. i z .
fants from being then baptiz'd in the Church j
and fays, that Adult Perfons only can or ought
to be baptiz'd : and therefore again, not thofe
who admit Infants, but thofe who admit Adult
Perfons only, who adually believe, &c. agree ex-
adly with St.Jvfiin and the Chriftian Church of
his time, and confequently with the Apoftles
too. Thus, from this firft Note of Mr. Wall^ it
follows that the Antipsedobaptifts here in England^
who dip the Adult only, are in the rights and
that the Psedobaptifts, whom he goes about to
defend, are as wide of the Truth in thefe Points,
as being diredly contrary to it, can make 'em.
2. The fecond (and perhaps the chief) Reafon
for Mr.Vr^//'s citing this Paflage, is, hecaufe^ he
fancy s, it Jhervstbat the Chriftians of thefe Times us^d
the word KGgQnevsLtion for Baptifm, This Remark
is providently laid down againft a proper time:
for you will find our Author has occafion after-
wards to prove this Aflertion. But this Paflage of
St. Jufiin is far from doing him that fervice he
intends ^ for tho he talks of their being regene-
rated, and joins it pretty clofely with their being
baptiz'd, yet he does not fay Baptifm is Regene-
ration : but only intimates that they receiv'd, or
compleated, or coniirm'd, &c, that Regeneration
by Baptifm : and as he is fpeaking only of Adult
Perfons, he mult doubtlefs mean fome farther
Regeneration than bare Wafliing. The Paflage,
I confefs, is a little obfcurely exprefs'd ; but
however, in this Senfe only, it is agreeable with
St. Jvfiinh Dodrine, as an Example or two may
fatisfy you.
In his Dialogue with 7Vyp^<?, he fays, ^ Christ
^ Pag. 3(57 D. 'Ap5(H -nrlhiv aAA« T's.v\ii yl^oviv t avo.-
'pyyt^vjQ- WD 'Aura c// ''TJaIQ- j^ nij^ecy?, )y SvKny &c.
is
Let. 1 1 . Hiftory of Infant^^apttfjn. 455)
is become the Head of another People, who are rege-
nerated by him by Water^ Faith^ and the Trce^ &c.
As Mr. Wall argues, Regenerated here muft fig-
nify bapt'iTid , and then the PalTage runs thus,
which were baptiz''d of him by Water, Faith and
the Tree, that is, the Crofs. But when did our
Saviour baptize by Water, &cl And whatSenfe
is there in that Expreflion, baptize by Faith, &c?
Regenerated plainly means fomething elfe, which,
he fays, was done by Christ^ and therefore
he cannot intend Baptifm, which is not admi-
niftred by Christ perfonally : or if Baptifm
is faid to be adminiftred by C h r i s t, as it is
done by his Command, and by his Difciples, as
John iv. 1,2. yet we are faid here to be regenerated
by or thro Water, as a Symbol, not as the thing
it felf^ for it is not faid in Water,
Befides, the Rxgeneration is plac'd in Faith and
in the Cr^/f, as well as in Water', and yet Faith,
ftridly fpeaking, is not Regeneration, but only a
Means of it, and fo likewife is Baptifm, &c. And
theCrofs, or Christ's Sufferings, or what. elfe
may be thought is here intended by it, cannot be
our Regeneration, but only a Aleans of it.
We have another plain Inftance to this purpofe
in this very Apology, and but a little after the
Words Mr. Wail tranfcribes^ where fpeaking of
the Sacred Supper, the Martyr fays, "^ Of which it
is not lawful for any to partake^ but fuch a^ believe the
things we teach^ and are baptizjd for the RemiJJlon of
their Sins, and Regeneration^ d^c. This manifeftly
fhews that St. Jufiin thought Baptifm was for
Regeneration, juft as it is for the Remiflion of
Sins^ but as Baptifm is not the Remiflion
'^ Pag. 97. E. '^H? ij\v} cfcA^w (jLi-mx^v ^ov \^v, vt t^
of
4<5o (J^fleBions on MrWsXVs Let. 1 2^
of sins, fo neither is it Regeneration. That the
Martyr fays, 'v^ 'Acpe^T^^os, but gs 'Ava^nnoiv,
is no Objedion *, for -v^ 'AcpiffiGiS is doubtlefs
the fame in Senfe with St. Peters e's "Acpimv^
j4Bs ii. 28. and therefore 'tis all one as if St.jM-
ftwj who was indeed not very exad in his Lan-
guage, had faid &% ''A0icnv, It appears then from
hence, St. Jufiin only thought that we, fome how
or other, obtained or feal'd, &c, our Regeneration
by Baptifm, as a Mean or Sign, &c. juft as we
alfo obtain Remiffion of Sins thereby, but not
that Baptifm is Remiffion of Sins or Regeneration :
And therefore he is to be thus only underftood,
and not as our Author wou'd fain underftand him.
3. The third Thing for which Mr. Wall cites
this PafTage of St. Jvftin^ is, hecavfe^ fays he, we
fee by it that they vnderftood that Rule of our Savi-
our, Except a Man, &c, of Water-Baptifm^ and
concluded from itj that without fuch Baptifm no Perfon
coud come to Heaven* But how ftrangely does
Mr, Wall treat his Readers ? One while he wou'd
have us believe St. Juflin fpeaks here only of Adult
Perfons converted from Heathenifm ^ but now you
are, all on a fudden, to fuppofe he means Infants
as well as Adult : for Mr. Wallh defign in this
Kote, is, to have us believe that St. Juftin aflerts,
no Perfon, whether Adult or Infant, can be fav'd
without Baptifm. But upon Mr. Wall\ own Con-
cefTion (and 'tis alfo too manifeft to be deny'd)
the Martyr intends no fuch thing, but only that
all Adult Perfons who hear the Word preach'd
and believe, for of fuch only he fpeaks, ought
to be baptiz'd in order to their being made
Partakers of the Kingdom.
The next Citation Mr. Wall produces out of this
Father, is taken from the fame Apology with the
former, and he tranllates it thus: Several Perfons
among ^is of 60 and 70 Tears old^ of both Sexes ^ who
were
Let. 1 2. Hiflory of ' "^ant'^aptifm. 46 1
were difcifled to Christ in their Chilhood^ do
continue mcorrufted. His Argument from thefe
Words is this, that many were difcipled to
Christ in their Childhood, and therefore Chil-
dren may be difcipled*, and the Word us'd by
St. Matthew^ Chap* xxviii. 19. which is the fame
as is us'd here, does not mean to teach^ but to
difcifle in fuch manner as Children are capable
of. Kay, if it be true, that St. Juflin wrote this
but 1 00 Years after St. Matthew j and that fome In-
fants had been baptiz'd 70 Years before he wrote,
it follows that Infants were baptizM within the
Apoftolick Age, and even while mofl: of the Apof-
tlcs were yet living. Which is a formidable Ar-
gument indeed ^ but I beg you, Sir^ to obferve the
whole Force of it depends upon our Author's Mif-
reprefentation of the Words, which is beyond
excufe*
As to fioc^{i\AjCd I have largely prov'd from its
Ufe in Greek Authors, from the Senfe in which the
Fathers underftood the CommilTion, from moft if
not all the Verllons, and from the Confent of feve-
ral of the moft Learned Criticks, that it necellarily
includes Teaching in its Signification. The whole
Strefs of what our Author advances to the con-
trary from thefe Words of St. Juftin^ lies in the
Senfe of the Phrafe, oz Tnti^v ^ which Mr. IVall^
that the Pafiage might ferve his turn, has unfair-
ly rendred in their Childhood, To convince there-
fore the moft prejudic'd, I (hall fhew the Difin-
genuity of our Author's Verfion more largely than
fo obvious a Matter requires^ for every body
knows well enough that d^ ynii^v lignifys not
in but from their Childhood^ juft as 'tis faid of
St. Timothy y 11 that from a Childy or from his lu-
ll 2 Thn. iii. I $,
fancy.
j^6% (^fleBions on Mr.'W2L\ys Let. 12.^
fancy, as it ftridly fignifys, he had known the Holy
Scriptures \ not that it can be thought he under-
ftood 'em in his Infancy, but only from his In-
fancy he had been training up in the knowledg
of 'em.
So Cicero "^ fpeaks of being brought up in good.
Learning (per omnem Pueritiam) ^rom one^s ten-
derefl Infancy. And in another Place, f fpeak-
ing of DiodotPts the Stoick^ he fays, under whom I
ftudyd (a Puero) from a Child. Inftances of this
kind are common ^ but 1 mufb confine my felf to
the Greek Writers. Laertiiu i| fays of Xenocrates
the Dull, of Chalcedony that he ftudy'^d under Plato
( oz ve» ) from his Infancy, Socrates fays of the
D<zmon which attended him, "^^ By fome Divine
Diretlion a certain Daemon has continud to attend
me^ beginning from my Infancy {dsc imi^g^j and
fo f icings tranflates it, aprlmaPueritia. And thus
alfo Plutarch f f fays of Cato Minor^ that he was
obferv'd (cz in/Al'i^) even from his Childhood^ in
his Votce^ and Countenance^ and in his Play^ to he of
fin in flexible^ morofe-^ and ob ft in ate Difpofition.
To add fome Fathers of the Chriftian Church
too: Origen fays, |j|| They who are called to do the
Works of the Kingdom of G OT> ( oz UOiiSuv^ iy
TSfdTy.^ 'HAi^'as ) fror/i their Childhood and earliefi
Days^ are thofe whom the Houfholder hir^d early m
the Mornings Matth. XX. i, &c. And a little after,
in the fame Page, They who have been faithful (oz
na/^tv) from their Childhood^ who have labour d^
and with fains have kept a Check upon the Extra^
* Ad Heren. lib. 3. pag. 4.6, b.
t Acadcm. Quaeft. lib. 4, cap. 34. p. $02.-b.
II Lib. 4. in Yit. ejus.
*^ Platon. Theag. pag. 93.
tt In ejus Vie. pag. 1393.
Ilij In Marth. pag. 406. C.
vagancys
Let. I 2. Hijiory of Infant-'Baptifyn. 46 ^
vagiincys of Youth^ think much that they Jhou d re-
ceive no greater Reward than others^ who were idle
^ to Religion till they grew old^ and have received
and done the Works of Faith hut a little time.
And TheofioilpuAntiochenm fays, that Epicuriis and
the Stoicks taught Incefl: and Defilements with
Mankind, and had fill'd the Librarys wkh thofe
impure Dodrines, ^ that Perfons might (o/sc UcuSt^v
(juxv^ocveiv^ from their Childhood learn and be educated
to fuch unlawful Converfation, In the Pttdagogue^
St. Clemens Alexandrinm defines Vczdagogy to be
'|- a good Inftitution in Vertue from the Childhood
And to add yet fome Inftances from Scrip-
ture, Samuel || tells the Ifraelites he had walked
before them (c^z Nto'inT®^) from his Childhood^
vnto that Day. And Job xxxi. 1 8. / have guided
her from my Mothe/s Womb. The Royal Prophet
Ffalm Ixxi. 5. Thou art my Trufi (o/^ NeoTTifos /^^)
from myTouth. And again, F'er, 17. O God, thou
hafi taught me (J/)c NeoTTTfo^ ^^) from my Youth.
And the young Man, whom Christ had di-
rected to keep the Commandments, makes him
this Anfwer, Mafier^ all thefe have I obferv^d (^i/7C
Nto'mTd's /U^) from my Youthy xMark X. 2q.
After all this 1 need make no farther Com-
ment J for no Mortal can doubt but the PafTage
in St. Jufiin ought to have been rendered thus :
Several Perfons among m of 60 or 70 Years of Age ^
of both Sexesy who have been train d up in the Chrif-
tian Religion^ or inftruEied in Christ from their
Childhood^ do continue^ &c. And this is exadly
as Mr. Wall himfelf too has render'd the fame
Phrafe, when he was on another matter, and did
^ Ad Autolyc. Lib. 5. pag. 120. D.
t Lib. I. cap. 5. pag. 87. B.
II I Sam. xii. 2.
not
4<54 ^fleBiojis on Afr.WallV Let. 1 2*
not think it weaken'd his Argument : 'tis in a
PafTage taken out of St. Bajtl^s Exhortation to Bap-
tifm^ which our Author cites and tranflates Part I.
p'ag. 100, thus: When you have been (^qac Nm-th^)
from a Child catechizJd in the Wordj are you not
yet acquainted with the Truth? As in this Place
St. Bafil^ by our Author's own Gonfeflion, fpeaks
to fuch as had been catechized from their Child"
hood ; {o St. Jufiin^ in the other, fpeaks of fuch
as had been inftruEled from their Childhood* And
therefore our Author has dealt here a little un-
fairly with St. Juftin \ and it's plain that thefe
Words, with the other Faflages he cites from that
Father, are really nothing to his purpofe.
I fhou'd now, Sir, Ihew you that St. Ju^in is
fo far from faying any thing in favour of In-
fant-Baptifm, that he frequently enough ufesEx-
preflions and Reafonings, which declare he be-
liev'd nothing of the Matter. But, as I am to
anfwer Mr. Wall^ my Bufmefs is only to confute
his Arguments, which I hope you think I have
fairly done hitherto.
Kext follows St. IrendLus^ in our Author's Quo-
tations ^ and here we are to attack the ftrongeft
Hold of our Adverfarys. But, by the way, let
us obferve that Mr. Wall confeffes, this is thefrft
exprefs mention that we have met with of Infants
baptized, Kow this being wrote by his own
Gonfeflion about 180 Years after Christ, all
that has been cited before that time, can't {i^-'
nify much •, and the Baptifm of Infants does not
appear to have been pradis'd, at beft, till about
the latter End of the fecond Century. Nor have
the Paedobaptifts yet prov'd it was pradis'd then ^
for this Paflage from Irent^m no more proves it,
than you fee the other earlier Citations have
done.
it's
Let. 1 1. Hijiory of Infant-^aptiffn. ^6 5
It's true, many People have thought this PafTage
plain and fttll to the purpofe : for what, fay they^
can be more exprefs than thefe Words, He came
to fave all Perfons hy Himfelf\ all I mean^ who by
Him are regenerated unto God, Infants and little
onesy and Children^ and Youths^ and elder Perfons ?
For as Infants are exprefly raention'd here, and
faid to be fav'd by Christ, by being regene-
rated unto G O D by him : this they fay mult be
thought an unexceptionable Inftance, that Infant-
Baptifm was fpoken of as a thing commonly
pradis'd in St. Irenaus^^ time.
But to give this FalTage the weight they pretend
it has, they ought to have prov'd that St. Iren^us
does certainly fay thus*, which is very doubtful
upon two Accounts, i. It's queftion'd whether
the Faflage be genuine^ or rather it feems to
be undeniably fpurious. Cardinal Baronius ^ ob-
ferv'd this above ICO Years ago ^ and, 1 think, the
Reafons he gives have never been anfwer'd yet.
I . He notes, that the latter Part of the Chapter,
from whence the Words are taken, contradid the
Beginning *, for to fay Christ was baptiz'd
at about 30, and to enumerate three PafTovers
after that, in the lafl of which he fuffer'd, is as
plain an Argument that Christ fuffer'd about
33, as can be defir'd: and yet, in the latter Part
of the fame Chapter, 'tis pretended Christ
Uv'd till above 50. If St. Irenaus was guilty of
fo palpable a Contradidion, he mult have been
ftrangely inconfiderate, and not to be trufted in
any Cafe ^ and then his Teftimony, tho ever fo
full, is juftly contemn'd. But fince both Sides
agree, the Holy Father cou'd not fall into fo
grofs a Blunder : I infer, with the Cardinal, the
latter Part of this Chapter is not his.
f_ Annal. Ecclefiaft* An. 34*
H h Cafau'
4<$^ ^fleBions on.Mr.WzlVs LeMx^
Cafaiihon ^ quarrels with Baronin's opon this
occaiion.^ but fays nothing to defend thciPaflage.
And v^\\^l Fetavius:*\ has offer'd againft him,
which is the moft I have feen, amounts to nothing,
if duly conHder'd. He owns all the Cardinal urges ;
for indeed St. henms is exprefs as to the time of
our Lord's Baptifm, and the three Paflbvers
in^tation'd, which v;jere after his Baptifm : but
becaufe St. hendtus does not particularly fay, the
firll of thefe three did commence with the next
after his Baptifm, therefore Vetavius imagines-
St. Iren^us thought there were fcveral PaiTovers
between his Baptifm, and the firft of thefe three,
which are mentioned. But lince he does not at-
tempt to prove this, 'tis too wild and fanciful
a Conjediire to pafs, and founded purely on
Fetawrius^s Imagination. ' And the only Reafon
Petavius has to imagine this, he himfelf tells us,
is, becaufe, H otherwife St, Irenxus contradiH^s him*
felf r which is very pleafant indeed. For this
is the Cardinal's AfTertion, and Petavius ihou'd
not have fuppos'd the contrary, and then argu'd
from "his Suppofition ^ for that's only begging
the Queftion. In fhort, Petavius allows the whole
Force of the Cardinal's Argument, that the Be-
ginning and End of this Chapter are contradidory,
unlefs it can beprov'd to be probable, that thefe
three PaiTovers are not the three immediately
following upon our Lord's Baptifm: which V
don't fee how any Man will ever be able to do. ^
■ i. Afibther Reafon the Annalift gives, to render
this Place of Irenkus fufpeded, is, that the Au-
thor of the laft Part of the Chapter, wou'd con-
'^ Exercitat. i6. ad An. 34. wim! ^42.-
t Animad. in Epiphan. Hasref. 51.
li Alioqui conlhre ipfc iibi non poteft.
firm
Let. 1 2. Hiftory of Infant'^aptifm. 4.67
firm fo manifell a Falfhood, by the Authority
of the Antients, who he pretends receiv'd it im-
mediately from St. John himfelf and other Apof-
tles : for Bnronius thinks the Fancy is too notori-
oully falfe and ridiculous (as likewife all Men
will allow it is ) to be contain'd in the Scrip-
tures, or afErm'd by any of the Antients Irefidius
cou'd refer to, and more efpecially by St. John
and other Apoftles, who cou'd not be miftaken
in a Matter, which even we at this time know fo
well.
Mr. Dodwell ^, not with any apparent Defign
upon this Argument of the Cardinal's, but in
Anfwer to fome others, who make a different Ufe
of tjie Paflage, wou'd have us believe that St. Johrij
&c. from whom Pfeudo-Iremtfs pretends to have
deriv'd his Opinion, only judg'd by his Counte-
nance, that our Lord was arriv'd to the be-
ginning, at leall, of old Age '^ which, St.lren^usy
according to the Diviiion^of Ages in his time,
underftood to be toward 50 Years. But, if the
Fathers are capable of fuch grofs Errors in Fa^^
all Mr. Dodwell fays fo learnedly in that Dillcrta-
tion, will iignify nothing : becaufe, notwithlland-
ing his Diftindion, if by Reafoning^^ or any otiier
way, they miftake and afiert v/hat is in l^aB; falfe,
their Teftimony cannot be rely'd on even as to
Viichs ^ the Point Mr. Dodwell fo ftrenuoufly la-
bours to carry. And how unlikely is it that
St. John and the Apoflles fhould content them-
feives with barely guefling at our Saviour's
Age by his Looks ^ when nothing was more
eafy than to know it more exadly, and upon
better grounds ? Nay, they cou'd not but know
it-, for doubtlefs they had often heard, and as
often related, the wonderful manner of his Birth,
^ Diflertat. in Irenseum I. §.45. pag. 81, 82.
Hh 2 with
j[6 8 (I{efleHlons on Mr.W^Ws Let. 1 2^^
with the ft range Events that attended it. The
time o{ Augvftush taxing the whole World, and
Herod's, barbarous Maflacre of the Children, &c*
were frefh in their Memory : and what is more
common or natural, than for People to enquire
how long ago fuch or fuch a thing, they arc
told of, was done ? And that they fhouM not
have this Curiofity in fo important a Concern
as the Birth, &c. of CHRIST, is altogether
incredible.
'Tis not to be fuppos'd therefore, that St. In-
n^vs received, or fays he receiv'd, fo falfe an Ac-
count of our Lord's Age from the Apoftles:
and confequently that Part of the Chapter, as it
ROW ftands, is none of his.
3. To the Reafons of Baronius it may be added,
that St. hendus cou'd not but know better, than
to think CHRIST arriv'd fo much as near the
40th Year, much lefs the 50th. The Apoftles
certainly knew the time of our LORD's meri-
torious Pafllon ^ for they were difcon folate Eye-
witnefles of it. And the time of his Birth
they cou'd no more be ignorant of, than any
true Engiijlimm can forget the happy Period when
his late Glorious Majefty bravely refcu'd three
Nations from Popery and Arbitrary Power, and
fecur'd the, Throne to our prefent moft Gracious
Queen, whofe SuccefTion is the greateft Blefling that
has follow 'd upon that generous Attempt ^ in
that it makes all firm and lafting during Her
Sacred Majefty's Life at leaft : which may God
of his infinite Goodnefs lengthen out by a nu-
merous Addition of happy Years, and at laft re-
ward Her fteddy Piety and Juftice with an in-
conceivably happier Eternity.
If then the Apoftles knew the time of our
lord's Birthj^and the time of his Death, of
Let. 1 1. Hijlory oflnfant-^aptifm. 4(^9
confequcnce they knew how old he was at that
time. Aad they with whom they immediately
conversed, had undoubtedly often heard 'em re-
late the whole, and eou'd not but know then the
prccife times when he was born, and when he
dy'd^ Thus we find two of the Difciples, as
they were going to Emaus^ Lukexxiv. 14. talk-
ing together of all the things that had happened *,
and afterwards, ver. 21. noting to the fup-^
pos'd Stranger the particular time they were
done. . - -
Now sClrenxus himfelf tells us he had feen
and learnt many things from fome who had con-
versed with the Apoftles. There is a very remark-
able Fragment of his Epiftle to Florlnus to this
purpofe, preferv'd by Eufehlus^ which runs thus:
^ I faxQ you v^hen I was a young Man in the Lower
Afia ii?i>& Polycarp, making a -notable Figure in the
Emperottr^s Court ^ and endeavouring to gain his Ef-
teem ^ for J remember what was done then^ better than
what has been done in later times (for what we learn
in our Tputh grows tip with our Mind^ and finks
deeply into it). So thai 1 coud dcfcrihe the Place
where, the Blcjfed Poly carp fat a^id difcours'd^ his
going out and coming in^ his manner of Life^ and
his Ferfot^j.bis'pifcourfes to the People^ and the fa-
wiliaY Converfe he faid he had with St. John and
others who had feen the LORD\ and how he r<r-
hears^d their Difcourfes^ and what he had heard them
who had been Eye-witnejfes of the Word of Life re^
late of our LO R D^ and of his Afiracles and Doc*
trine s^ in all exaEily agreeing with the Scriptures*
And thefe things^ which then by the Goodnefs of God
cff'er^d to mc^ I heard diligently-, and committed ^em
* Eufeb; Hiflor. Ecclef. Lib. 5. cap. 20.
H h 3 ' to
470 (^efleElions on Kr.Walt'r'^ Let.i 2.
to Memory^ not in Pafer, but in tny Heart; ' \And by
the Grace of God, / do continually run '^em over
in my Mind diflinEily*
In an Age lb nigh the Apoftles, Perfons who had
the Advantage which St. /rf?/^«/, by , his own
Words, appears to have liad, cannot poffibly be
fuppos'd to have been ignorant of our LORD'S
Age: for it is obfervable in the PafTage juft now
tranilated, that St. Irenms had taken fuch parti-
cular notice of Fdycarp^ that he remembred even
the very. Place he fat in.,^and all the moft mrnute
Circumftances ; and veiy diligently heard the Ac-
counts he gave of his Converfatipn with the Apo-
llles, and of the many things he had heard 'em
relate of the LORD and his Doftrines. And as
the Fatlier^ attended to all thefe things with
the utmoll:; eagernefs, fo he had treafuPd *em
up in his Memory with the greateft Care and
Fidelity. • And is it to be imaginM that Perfons,
fo -zealous and fo nice in their Obfervations,
fhou'd not keep a tolerable Account of the Age,
that 18, the Birth and PafFion df thtit ■ ador'd
REDEExAlER? ■
Befides, as it might eafily be, fo it was commonly
known from the Cenfual Rolls of JuguJFusj both
at what Time, and in what Place our LORD
was born. Juflin Martyr^ in his Apology to the?
Em.perour, appeals to thefe Rolls ^ ^ndTertulUan^
fpeaking of 'em, as things fufficiently known, calls
'em * faithful Witneffes of the Birth of CHRIST.
And, in the beginning of Chriftianity, before
and after Si^ Iremzus^ in the Difputes with their
Adverfarys, the Chriftians were wont to proVe
from the Prophets, when CHRIST was to
appear ^ which occafion'd 'era to obferve and mark
* In Marcionem, Lib. 4, cap. 7. Fideliflimum teftem
Dominic* Nativitatis, &c.
Let.-i2. Htjlory of Infant' (Baptifm. 471
the time of the Lord's Birth, and likemfe the
time of his FafTion, as we k^ Tertullian, Ctemens
AUxandrinus^ &:c. have done: and in defending
the Truth of Facts 'tis very ufual, and indeed
can hardly be avoided, to mention, among other
Circiimftances, the Time and Place, &c^ with-
fome Care, tho not with the utmoft Exadnefs.
So the Scnpture* notes our LORD was about
30 when he was bapti'z^^ii and the like : now
St. Iran £ us muft be fuppos*d'to have {Qcn and read
feveral of thofe DifcouiTei, and cou'd not but
be informed from them In fome tolerable meafare
of tile L OR D^s Age 5^ 'nay, he wou'd certainly
have coiifider'd 'em ' iri. particular, the better to
confute the Rereticks he^^wrote againft, uponfuch
an occafion, and not - negligently have expos'd
himfelf ta the fcorn of his Adverfarys," who
wou'd doubtlefs have us'd ail diligence to fhew
how grofly 1ie argu'd, and how tnii-ch he was
miftaken,' if he had fct down things at random,
and made a falfe Computation.
: 4. St. Ir^aus"^ Own Words prove he was not
guilty of fo great an Error as this fpurious Paf-
fage wQu'd fa-Hen' upon him. For in another
Flace, where iie is^not fo much concern'd to be
exact, .he jnftly places the L O R D's ^ Birth
about the 4r{t Year of Augvfiu; : now if Christ
livM but 40 Years from Thence, he cou'd not
be crucity'd in the Reign of Tiberius^ nov under
Pontius Pilate'^ for Tiberius Af A 37 Years after the
.Birth of Christ, and Pilate was remov'd from
his Government of 5«^e^., at leail, a Year before,
for he was madeGovernour in the Tv;elfth -[- of
"^ Lib. 3. cap. 2$. Natus eft en'vn DOMINUS
nofter circa primam & quadrageliinuin Annam Augufti
Imperii, >^c.
t Eufeb. Chronic, pag. 2C2.
H h 4 Tibe-
47 ^ ^^eSllons on Kr.WallV Let. i il
Tiberius^ and continued but ten Years *•, fo that
he was difplac'd one Year before Tiberius dy'd,
^nd confequently in the 36th Year from the Birth
of C H R I s T : and certainly St. Irenms^ who was
acquainted with Times more remote, cou'd not
but know this from Jofephus whom he had read.
It is not to be imagined, the Time of aSing that
bloody Tragedy on the LORD of Life, cou'd
be fo foon and fo n^uch forgotten by his molt
zealous Adorers, and thofe who profefs'd to
worfhip him as G O D -f". Or however, they
mult needs remember the precife Time of fo
famous an Event as the Deftrudion of Jeru-
falem : when ^very body knows it happen'd
under Fefyafian \ and in hemus"^ days they cou'd
jiot but know it was in that Emperour's fecond
Year \ nay farther, that it was on the firft of
September^ and on the feventh Day of the Week
too, as well as we do now : for St, Iremus wrote
but about 100 Years after it, and was an old Man
too when he wrote. Now from thefe things
nothing was eafier than to compute the time
of the Faffion.
From the Faffion, to the Deftruftion of Je^
rufalem^ 'tw4S generally allow'd by the Primi-
tive Fathers, vfQve about forty or forty-two
Years, as is plain from Eufehius ||, Clemens Alex-
andr'wvs ^^, Origen ff, &c. And Fhlegofjj who
wrote a little before St. Iren^us was born, as he
is cited by Origen [|lj, fays exprefly, that about
* Jofcph. Antiquitat. Judaic. Lib. 18. cap. 5.
t PIm. Lih. IP. Epift. 103, 104. Et a pud Eufeb. Chro-
nic, pa^. 209.
II Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. Lib. 3. cap. 7. Et Chronic-
p?^. 205o
' ■ -^^ Scrom. Lib. i. pag. 349. B.
ft Orig^ adv. Celfum, Lib. 4. pag. 174.
IJI Trattat. 29. in Matth^ pa^. 138, i\^,
40
Let, 1 2." Hijiory of Infant-^aptifm. 475
40 Years from the i^th of Tiberius, (in which
St.Zw^e fays our LORD was baptiz'd, being 30
Years of Age) the City and Temple of Jerufalem
were deftroy d, ' St. Iren^us then can't be fappos'd
ignorant of this, no more than Mr. Wall can
be thought not to know the time when the Re-
formation began in England-^ or that it was under
Hen, YIII. or how long it is fmce that King's Reign.
But if St. Iren£us knew our L O R D 's Paffion
was about 40 Years before the Deftruftion of
Jerufalemy he cou'd not make CHRIST to
have liv'd above 31 Years or thereabout. For
it's plain from the belt Hiftorys, and from the
ObferVations of Eclipfes, that Augvfius dy'd 14
Years after the Birth of C H R I S T •, after which
Tiberius reign'd 23 Years, and confequently dy'd
anno ^'j. Thence Caligula reign'd about "3 Years
and a half, and therefore dy'd anno 41. Clauditu
fucceeded for about 1 3 Years and a half, and dy'd
anno 54. Nero reign'd about 14 Years, and there-
fore dy'd anno 68. Galba reign'd about 7 Months,
and therefore dy'd about anno 69. Otho 3 Months,
and dy'd likewife anno 69. FitelUus reign'd but
8 Months, and dy'd about the beginning of 70.
Veffafian fucceeded him ^ in whofe fecond Year
the City was deftroy'd •, that is. about the Year
71 : but if our LORD fuffer'd' 40 Years before
that, by fubftrafting 40 from 71, you iiave 31,
about which Age he was crucify'd.
There may indeed be feme Variations in com-
puting thefe Periods *, but it's impoflible to find
any ground, efpecially for thofe fo near the Times
we fpeak of, to reckon Christ was near Fifty
when he died.
Clemens \\Alexandrinp^ calculates very much after
this manner, with but little difference. And to
D Strom, lib. i. pag. 339,
fuppofe
474 ^fieFllons onMr.'WalYs Let.tiT
fiippofe St. Irenms ignorant of thefe neceflary
Steps, which were then fo very eafy to be kno.wn>
^f*^. about 60 or at molt 70 Years after tbci E-
vents, is as abfurd a Sappofition as can well be,
gnd makes this Father a moft negligent Writer.
J^fephus alone, whom he had read ^ or Fhlegony
who wrote but in Adrian s> Time,, cou'd have fur-
uilh'd him with Particulars fuffieient to judg of
Ifhe Lord's Age at his PafTion, as appear.^ , by
the following Series extracted from Jofefhm . -; '
^ . . Years. . .; , _
srl^) ^«^^y?^ reign'd 57 . iBlq abf.
^i\f) Tiber iH4 r-r— 20, ,5: r3ijl.'3
ri (c) Caligvla — - —— -^ 3 8 o, • .:Y
b'id) Claudiiu ;-— 13 ,8 30 \ \;
r- 1 it^) Nero — ■" .' ' ^'•.rl 30 3^ ^^ \^ > ,
».(ii)Galba ' — ^ ^-ufo. 7 ..^j: bn-
h'(g) .fOr^o —^.03.:^^,.
- tb)i r/fe////^ -1 — o 8 5
Aand (i) Titm deftroy'd ^erufdcm ">
ia the fecond Year of his Fa-> 20 p" . -
;i $her Vefpafmn J — —
,r: The Totalis — *Jti 4 24
•T'lSow St. Irend^us^ as i have before noted, places
the Birth.of -G H RI ST in the 41ft of Augufins ;
thjsrefore taking 41 from 1 11, there wilV remain
70 for the time between the Birth of CHRIST
■ Ja) Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 5.
'"?b) Ibid. cap. 8.
(c) Ibid. lib< 19. cap. 2.
(d) De Bello Judaic, lib. 2. cap. 1 1.
(e) Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 5.
(0 Ibid.
(g) Ibid. cap. 8.
(It) Ibid. cap. 13.
( i) Ibid. lib. 7. cap. i8.
Let. 1 2. jiijforyof Infant^(Baptif?n. 475
arid the Deftrudtion of Jervfakmt arid then fup-
poling this Deftradipn, according to the common
Acctuntj to have b'ecn about 40 Years after the
P^fllon, CHRIST muft have fufTer'd at nedr
30 Years of Age/ Or to give the matter fhorter,
the Scriptures afliire ijs CHRIST fufferM un-
der Fpmlui Pilati': now he govdrn'et Jndea no lon-
ger* than T/^miwx reigri'd, and not fo long ^ and
Tiberius^ according to Jofefhus^ reign'd 26 Years:
to which if wei;add the 14 Years CHRIST Hv^d
under Augufius^^ they amount to no more tfiah
34 Years, if C H R I S T had livM as long as 77-
herius did. Or again, if 'tiherim reign'd but 20
Years, and CHRIST was about 30 inTtherimh 1 5th,
as St. Lule alTiires us, then hecoii'd hot beabovfe
4 or. 5 and thirty at moft when he died^ but
as he died urid^r TXlate who was difmifs^d the
Government a Year fooner, fo CHRIST maft
have died a Year younger. So that it was horc
poftjblefor St. Iren/m^ which Way foe ver he wenjt
to- work,' to ftretdh the Tinte of dur^ Lord''s
Life upon Earth to' riear 40, vmch kfs 50 Years,
as the Author of the latter part of the Chapter,
out of which the P^dobaptifts cite the Words
they build on, has iriconliderately done.
Mr. Bodwell^ 'tis.ttue, has endeavour'd to make
the Opinion of CHRIST'S* being toward 50
Years old, the more excufable, and likely to have
been St.Irendu/s^ by fhewing, * that he was nearer
40 than is generally believ'd: but if his Calcula-
|:ion be ever fo exad, it can fignify nothing in the
prefent cale, becaufe he agrees with us, that the
time of thePafiion was the 19th of Tiherim ^^nd only
fets the time of his Birth fomething backwarder
than we do ^ which is not to be allow'd in this
J DilTert. I. in Irenaeum, §. 46, p. 82, ^c.
Cafe,
47^ ^fieBions on Kr.WallV Let. i %l
Cafe, becaufe St. Irenms himfelf has determin'd
the time of his Birth to the 41 ft of AugtSvs ^
from which to the 19th oi Tiberius is but 33 x^rs,
according to Mr. Dodwell himfelf. . : ' '
From all this therefore I think it muft neceHarily
follow, that St. Irena^us cannot be reafonably
thought the Author of this part of that Chap-
ter \ for it can't fairly be imagined that a Man of
his Learning and Integrity, was either incapable
of making the neceflary Computations, or fo iiir
tolerably carelefs as to negled 'em, efpecially whea
he was profefledly treating the matter, and di^
not fpeak of it by the by. . \;
2. But in the fecond Place 'tis doubtful wfie*
Ither St, Irenaus ^2a(\ as our Adverfarysunderftand
the Paflage noy^jHiecaufe we have not his own
.Words, but only a Tranflatiop of 'em, which niay
give 'em a quitq different Face from what they
had in the Original : and therefore if the Words
be allow'd to. have any weight at all, it can. b^
tut very little, And TranQa tors very often took
a great Latitude, ^s feveral among the Antients
have complain'd. \'* *
; ;^.,But as to this Tranflation of St. Iren^us iii paV^
ticular, it is a very fcandalous one, and altpge--
ther unworthy the Original. And this all lear-
ned Men confefs,: iince it has been known to be,i
Tranflation : the great Scaliger fays, -^ The tranfr
lator was an Afs-^ and had even lefs Learning than
.Ruffinus : and yet one wou'd think no Man cou'd
abufe his Original more than 'tis known Ruffinus
was wont to do. Monfieur du Pin calls it {a) a
barbarous Verfion : and a little after, fay?, the
Verfion of the five Books againfi Hcrefys^ the barha*
t Scaligerana, pag. 213. L' Interprere d'lrenee eft bien
Afne, il eft plus indole encore que Rurfin.
ia) Hift. Ecclef. p. 67, 58^
rous
Let. 1 2. Hiftory of Infant'^aptifm. 477
reus and full of Faults^ &c. And in a Note he has
added, he fays, (J?) It was certainly comfos^d by a
Man who nnderflood neither Language as he ought i
that is, neither the Greek in which SU Iren^us
wrote, nor the Latin^ into which he pretended to
tranfiate. The learned Mr. Dodwell calls it, (c) a
foolijh Tranflation ; and the Author of it, (^) a
barbarous -unskilful Tranflator^ whp, he fays, has
feveral times miftaken one Word for another^ fo as
even to alter the Senfe very much from what the
Author intended : and he gives feveral Inftances
of it.
Dr. Grabe^ the learned Editor of this Father^
in the Prolegomena he has prefix'd to the late Edi-
tion, reckons it but a bad Tranflation ^ and fays,
They who fancy St. Irenaus to have been the
Tranflator as well as the Author (e) make that
great Man unacquainted with his own Thoughts^ or
elfe they muft fay he has exfrefs^d ^em very auk"
wardly.
But befides the Judgment of learned Men, the
badnefs of the Verfion may be feen by comparing
it with thofe Fragments of the Greek which are
Hill preferv'd.
In one place (/) where the Original and the
Verfion difagrees, Dr. Grabe thinks the Copy
the Tranflator made ufe of was corrupt : which
however cou'd not well be fo early as the
Dodor (without any ground) fuppofes the
Tranflation to be made, namely, in St. Iren^us's
time, or foon after. I fhou'd rather impute the
Variation to the Tranflator's Ignorance or Care-
rs) Pag. 71. Letter i^.
(c) Diflert. V. Seft. 4.
U) Ibid. Sea. 5.
(0 Sea. 2. §.3.
(/) Lib. 3. cap. 21. Not. a. pag. 2<o.
lefnefs
478 ^fleSlionsQnMr.W^Ws Let.tt:
lefnefs ^ efpecially fince we have other undoubted
Inftanees, how unequal he was to the Work he
" In another place, (g) the Dodor thinks fdnxe
W6rds which h^d been noted in the Margin, are
now crept into the Text it felf: and elfewhere
he very frequently finds fault with the Tranfla-
tion. In the 25th Chapter of the 3d Book, in-
Itcad of TTOftiaavT©- tS eEof, the Interpreter
feemsto have read, not without^ very great Neg-
ligence to be fure, TromocvloLS tSto o-Tnp lQ>sKi{o '-,
entirely perverting the Author's Senfe, as the
Dodor has noted (^).
Again, St. Irenms had faid, (0 ^^^ P^^^ h ^
Tree we loft k^ (viz.. the Word of G o d) by a Tree
we hAve received it again *, (but theTranQator falfly
renders it, by a Tree it was again made manifeft un*
to all) jewing the height^ and lengthy and breadth^
and depth (this laft Word is omitted in the Tran-
flation) which is in it : For (the Tranflator turns
It andy and adds as fome of the Amients have faid}
by a divine (this Word the Tranflator omits)
firetching out of the Handsj he gather d two People
under one Head^ even the Father^ (the Tranf-
lator renders it, two People tinder one G od *, and
then adds of his own, two Hands^ becaufe there
'here two People fcattcr'^d to the ends of the Earth j
httone middle Head) for GOD is one who is over
m^ and thro all^ and in alL The Tranflation is
different in this laft Claufe too*, for it runs, /^r
one G O D is over ail^ thro allj ^nd in us all. In
this one Ihort Pafiage, you fee, there is abundance
of-Uberty-taken, and that feveral ^tinies the Senfe
is chang'd.
{g) Ad Lib. 3. cap. 19. Not. b. pag. 245.
{h) Pag. 25$. Not, b.
., h^ pb. 5. cap. 17.- ^.'426.
Lt c.'i t . Hrjlory of Infant-^aptifm^. 47^
-In-a^otber place, to give but one Inftance mor^,'
the TranQator has altcr'd the Senfe of the Greek
very much. St. Iremus reckons up the four Cove-
nants G O D^ had made with Men in this manner :
^ One 'after the Flood of Noah, in the Bow^ the /f-
cond^ i:hat of A'braham, in the Sign of Circumcifion 9
the thirds the giving of the Law by Mofes j and the
fourth^ that of the Gofpel, by our Lord Jesus
Gfik 1ST. But the Tranflator reckons 'em up
thus: One with Adam before the Flood', the fee on d
:r////Noah after the Flood \ the third, the giving of
the Law under Uo{^^\ the fourth renews the Man
4nd comprehends all in it, which is by the Gofpe^
giving Men Wings, and raifing 'em up into the hea-
venly Kingdom, One wou'd think tjiis cou'd not
be pretended to be a Tranflation of St. Jren^us\
Senfe, it is fo different from it. But you may
fee what ftrange Work has been made with this
Book, and how much the Tranflator, thro Igno-
rance, Negligence, and too much Liberty, has
cv)rrupted and abufed this great Man's Work
And can any body, after all this, be fatisfy'd
barely from fuch a Tranllatioo, that he has in
any Cafe, the true Senfe of St. Irenes, without
any Alteration ? And much lefs fhou'd any ground
an Argument upon it. It mull appear therefore
very doubtful, at leafl, whether St. henaus ever
fpoke as the prefent Tranflation makes him do -
for I have fliewn, I think more than probably*
that^this part of the Chapter cou'd not be St./r^!
n^ush ', and that if it was, yet we can have no
reafon to depend on the Tranflator. And there-
fore Mr. Wall fhou'd have fecur'd the Paflage from
thefe Exceptions, if he intended to do his Caufe
any Service with ic : for if St. Iren^us did not
? Lib. 5, cap. II. pag. 223.
write
480 (^fleElions on Kr.Wall'x Let. 1 1.
write thofe Words, or to that purpofe exaft-
ly, whatever may be prov'd from 'em figaifys
nothing.
Kay, if Mr. Wall had prov'd beyond Contra-
didion, that the Lutln Tranflation of the FalTage
he cites does pundtually agree with what was in
the Greek Original written by St, Iren^us him^df j
yet it wou'd Kill have been liable to the follow-
ing weighty Exceptions, which efFedually take off
the force of the Argument the Psedobaptifts raife
from it : it depending entirely on thefe two
Suppofitions, That by regenerated is meant bap^
tizjd^ and by Infants fuch as we now call Infants
in Age, and but new-born : For it's very plain,that
if the Faflage does not fpeak of fuch Infants, or
if it does not fpeak of baptizing 'em, it proves
nothing.
I. In the firft place then, there is no reafon to
think the Word regenerated here means haftit'd*
Mr. IVall indeed tells us, f that fuch as are at all
acquainted with the Books of thofe Ages, cannot
doubt but the Word Regeneration^ in the ufual
Phrafe of thofe Times, fignify'd Baptifm : but one
wou'd think by this Aflertion, that our Author
is not much acquainted with the Books of thofe
Times himfelf^ and that he had never read 'em,
when he fays, the antient Chriftians |1 never vfe
the word regenerate or born again, but that they
mean or denote by it Baptifm *, for nothing can be
more apparently falfe, as I (hall fhew.
But firft, we muft obferve our Author begins
this matter fomething higher : and as he pretends
to have found Baptifm pradis'd by the "fcxos in
and before C h r 1 s t 's time j fo he likevvife tells
t Part I. pag. i8.
ji Introd. pa^. 22,
Let. I 2, Htftory of Infant-^aptifm. 4 8 1
us, 'f' they cali'd that Baptifm^ Regeneration ^ and
from them Christ himfelf and all Chriftians
borrow'd not only the thing, but alfo that way of
fpeaking of it.
But I have prov'd, as plainly as it can be expelled
fuch a thing ihou'd be prov'd, that the Jews had no
iljch Initiatory Baptifm \ and confequently, they
cou'd not call it by that Name. Or however, if
it Ihou'd be allow'd they had fuch a Baptifm, I
believe they no where call it Regeneration^ what-
ever Mr. Wall pretends. I am fure there is no-
thing like it in the Paifages he cites. Indeed,
Profelytes were thought new Men, and the Tal-
mud and Mdmonides^ as our Author quotes 'cm,
fay, they were like Children new-hern : but the fame
is faid of a Slave that's made free too, even in the
fame Words of Maimonides ^ and yet Slaves were
not made free by this pretended initiatory Bap-
tifm. So that tho Profelytes were accounted as
Children new-born, becaufe they were now in a
different State from what they were in before-,
yet where is it faid, or fo much as intimated, that
Baptifm was call'dor thought a Pvegeneration ? It
does not follow, becaufe they are faid to be as
new-born Babes, that they were faid likewife to
he new-born ^ nor if they were faid to be new-
born, that they meant nothing but Baptifm by
that new Birth. Why fhou'd not Circumcifion,
or offering Sacrifice, be the Regeneration, as well
as Baptifm ? Or indeed,Why (hou'd we fay, either
of 'em were call'd Regeneration, when the Paf-
fage our Author goes upon, intimates no fuch
thing ?
And how trifling mufl: it be from thefe Fan-
cys, to go about to explain what the Scriptures
f Introd. pag. 2 r,
I i meaa
482 (^fleBions on Mr. WallV Let. 1 1.
mean by the new Birth and the nexo Creature?
Kay, if all the Rabbins did ailert what our Au-
thor pretends to fay from 'em •, is it becoming
a Chriftian Divine to forfake the Scriptures, to
follow the Rabbins ? By this new Creation the
Scriptures, 'tis plain, mean the renewing of the
Mlnd^ Rom.xii. 2. and the renewing of the HOLT
GHOST, Tit. iii. 5. It's ftrange it fhou'd ever
come into any one's Head to give fo perverfe a
Turn to the Words, If any Man he in CHR 1ST
he is a new Creature ^ as to fay, they mean he is
baptized : but furely no body will think St, Paul
cou'd talk at this poor rate. 'Tis more natural
to underltand 'em, as he perhaps more plainly
runs the fame Argument, Colcjf, iii. 9, 10. to in-
tend, that fuch as were in CHRIST, and ri-
fen with him, Fer. i. v/ere become new Creatures,
by putting ojf the old Man with his Deeds^ and putting
on the new Alan, which is renew'^d in Knowledge af-
ter the Imaqe of Him that created him- And be fide
this, the Scriptures know of no other Regenera-
tion that we are here capable of.
Tho this is undoubtedly the true Scripture
ISsOtion of Regeneration, as appears from the
places where the Word Regenerate^ &c. is us'd^
or Regeneration fpokenof ^ yet Mr. Wall is pleas'd
to call it, with fome feeming Contempt, the mo"
dern Notion, and he appropriates it to fome late
English Writers : and the reafon is plain ^ for if it
fhou'd once come to be thought as antient as the
Scriptures and earlielt Writings, it might go
very near to fpoil the beft Argument for Pasdo-
baptifm our Adverfarys can find in all Antiquity,
which is this of St, Irena^s. But however they
may dread the Confequences, it's certain Regene-
ration meant this fpiritual Birth, and nothing
fhort of a real perfonal Change,
Of
Let. I 2: Hiflory of Infant'-^aptifm. 485
Of all the Paflages in Scripture v^h^re r eg e?2€r ate 9
&c. is us'd, I don't remember any are difputed
but thefe two, viz.. the Words of our LORD,
Joh^i iii. 5. and thofe of St-Paul^ Tit. iii. 5. And
thefe indeed are by our Author cited as Inftances
to confirm his Senfe : but what ground he has,
belide a ftrong Imagination, I don't fee. The
Words of our Saviour are a little obfcure,
fince the prevailing of Infant-Baptifm *, for Bap*
tifm being never adminifter'd but to Perfons fup*
pos'd to be regenerated, of which it was the
Sign, &c, therefore all that were baptized were
fpoken of as regenerated ^ and then Infants being
allow'd to be baptiz'd, they muft: be taken to be
regenerated too, and fo Baptifm and Regenera-
tion come to be taken, by fome People, for the
fame thing. And indeed, upon this Notion it
was pretty eafy to miflake our S a v i o u r's
Words : but this Miftake may be as eafily feen •,
for our LORD does not fay, born of Water done^
but horn of Water and, f/7^SpiRiT. He does not
fpeak of two new Births, one by Water, and one
by the Spirit^ but only of one which was to
be of Water and the Spirit in conjundion.
And thus then, without going any farther, it
appears, that tho we may charitably hope, and
fay, all who are regularly baptiz'd are regenera-
ted, yet the baptizing in Water is not the rege-
nerating ^ becaufe that other Part, viz^. of the
Spirit ^ is at lea it equally requir'd to Regeneration :
and therefore Baptifm with Water is not Rege-
neration.
But we may ask farther, whether the new Birth
Christ fpeaks of, does peculiarly confilt in the
external Adminiflration by Water only, or in the
internal Operations of the Spirit only, or in
both together ? Now that both Water and the
^ ? I R J T are neceffary in the Cafe our Lord is
li 2 fpeaking
484 ^fleBions 071 Mr.WzlYs Let.ii.
fpeaking of, is plain from the Words themfelves :
and that the Regeneration really confifts but m
one, and the other is only us'd as a Means, or the
like, is, I think, full as plain.
For, as to the external Adminiftration of Bap-
tifm by Water ^ it is ever in the Scriptures fpo-
ken of as a Symbol only, and Reprefentation of
fomething elfe of a more excellent Nature. This
is fo evident to all who read the Scriptures, that
I need not go about to prove it : Therefore we are
buried with Him in Baftifm imo Death. And the
very Name of Sacrament^ even according to the
Notion given of it in the Articles of the Church of
England^ \\ imports as much. '
Now if to this it be added, that Baptifm is no
where call'd Regeneration, but that the internal
Change of the Mind, &c, frequently is : That
Baptifm is not obtain'd by means of the SPIRIT j
but on the contrary, theSPIRIT was wont to
be obtain'd in the ufe of Baptifm : methinks it
Ihou'd be plain enough, that the Regeneration our
LORD fpoke of, was fpiritual, to be fignify'd
and obtain'd, or the like, by the Symbol of Bap-
tifm in Water.
But befides, our L O R D 's own Words put
the matter out of doubt : for continuing his Dif-
courfe on the fame new Birth, he appropriates it
wholly to the SPIRIT, and fpeaks only of
being born of the S P I R 1 T *, for 'tis that only he
oppofes to the former flefhly Birth, in the Words
next immediately following, Ver. 6. which fhews
that was the only Birth he meant before •, for how
incoherent wou'd he elfe have been ? When he
had told Nicodemus of a certain new Birth, which
puzzl'd his Underftanding, to run from that, and
II Ankle 2$.
' talk
Let. I 2 . Hlflory of Infant- (Baptifm . 485
talk of quite another thiife, cou'd not but have
made him more confus'dv whereas CHRIST
goes about to take off the Amazement, Marvel
not^ fays He, that I faid^mto thee^ youmufl he born
(iiam^ Ver. 7. and (hews him, it's no wonder if
h'e does not underftand how it can be, fince even
in natural Caufes, the Wind for Inftance, he is
forc'd to confefs his Ignorance. And this makes
it evident, that CHRIST fpeaks of fpiritual
Regeneration, and no other : for had He by born
^^^//7 meant Baptifm, that cou'd not have been fo
hard to be underftood, nor have given our Saviour
occafion to fay, marvel not^ &c. And efpeclally if it
had been the Pradice of the Jews to baptize their
Profelytes, and call that Baptifm Regeneration, as
'tis pretended v how is it poflible Nicodemus fhou'd
not underftand a common Phrafe of his Mother-
Tongue ? CHRIST indeed wonders, that he
being a Ruler in Ifrael^ fhou'd not better appre-
hend what was faid ; but our Adverfarys are quite
miftaken, when they think the LORD wonders
yNhY Nicodemus did not underftand the Regeneration
he fpake of ^ for CHRIST endeavours to convince
him, that this was indeed above his Conception :
and it is after this that Nlcodem-us ^z^^^How can thefe
things he ? and that the LORD anfwers. Art
thou a Mafter of Ifrael, and knowcft not thefe things f
To know here does not mean to comprehends or vn^-
derfland the Nature of the thing ^ but to he con-
vine'' d^ and to believe^ as the fame thing is exprefs'd
Ver. 12. I have told ye earthly things^ and ye believe
not. So that our LORD w^onders that Nicode-
mus^ being a Teacher in Ifrael^ fnou'd not know
and believe, notwithftanding the Prophets had fo
plainly taught it, that there was an internal Re-
novation of the Mind, which all Perfons, as well
the Jews themfelves as the Heathens ^ flood iii need
I i 3 of, .
j^.^6 (l^fleBions on Mr.W^iWs Let. 12.
of, and were to receive efpecially under the Dif-
penfation of the M E S S I A S.
Very remarkable here are the Words of the
incomparable Grotius : "^Christ difcovers a new
thing to Nicodemus ^ that now fomething greater than
Judaifm was requird of all that jljou'd he fav*d»
And doubtlefs, our Lord taught him here the
fame Docftrine which St. Paul taught afterwards,
CaL vi. I 5. that in Christ Jesus neither Cir^
cumcifion availeth any things &c. hut a new Creature:
for Grotius juftly reckons thefe PafTages are paral-
lel. And this clearly feems to have been the
common Stumbling-block which Nicodemus cou'd
not fur mount, W;l. That the Law fhou'd be coun-
ted fo imperfed and infufficient. What has been
faid, I hope^ proves our Saviour, Johniiu 5.
means only being born of the Spirit, by or in
the ufe of Baptifm with Water, as the external
Symbol and Seal of fuch Regeneration.
The other PalTage, Tit. iii. 5. has no manner of
Difficulty in it : nor can I guefs what cou'd in-
cline any Man to cite it as an Inftance, that Rege-
neration means Baptifm, when it evidently means
the contrary. By the Wajhing of Regeneration^ I
allow, is meant Baptifm ^ that is, by the whole
Phrafe : but to fay hj Regeneration is meant Baptifm
too, is abfjrd and groundlefs enough. On another
occafion, ^f- our Author cites this very place, and
argues that A^Tpc\ijthe Wafljing fignifys Baptifm j and
makes A^rpcv and B<x7rT/<3-|Ucs fynonymous Terms :
for, K^K^ijivo!^ he fays, means baptiz^^d ^ and thence
he infers, becaufe ast^o'v fignifys any kind of
^ In Johan. iii. 3. Rem novain Nicoctemo Legis Do£lori
CHRTSTQS indicat, pofthac • ad Saluterli pariendum ma-
jus uJiquid Judjifmo reqairi, •
f Part li. pag. 221.
Walhing,
Let. I 2. Hiftory of InfantSaptifm. _ 487
Wafhing, therefore Baptifm may be adminifler'd by
any kind of Wafhing. But here he'll have the Word
Regeneration mean Baptifm, becaufe this is moll for
his purpofe now : fo that take our Author alto-
gether, and both Words mean Baptifm ^ and then
the Place may be render'd, the Baptifm of Baptifm^
in^QSid oi the WajJnng of Regeneration,
Which of the two Words wou'd any Man think
more particularly and properly here fignify'd
Baptifm ? That which does exprefs fome Wafh-
ing, or that which has no fiich Senfe ? Every One
wou'd pitch on A^rpcV, the Wafhing^ rather than
Regeneration ^ for A^i^ov is made the Genus ^ to
fignify Wafhing or Baptifm in general, and Rege^
neration is added as the Difference to diftinguifh
it from all other Wafhings, and limit the Affer-
tion to fignify, that GOD faves us by the Chrif-
tian Baptifm only, or that Wafhing which i^ the
lVaJhi?2gof Regeneration J and of the renewif^g of the
HOLT GHOST.
But we may fee our Author has offer'd a great
Violence to the W^ords, if we obferve the ufe of
the Phrafe here occurring *, for thus we meet with
the Bapfifm of Repentance feveral times in the Scrip-
ture, to lignify that Baptifm which follows upon,
is accompany'd with, and is a Sign of Repentance,
as Mark i. 4. 'J^s xiii. 24. and xix. 4. And thus
SUjuftin^ probably alluding to this Place in Titus^
ufes '{• d^ix t5 a^oT^S MeTzzvo/a^ 'Zj Tvis rvojiajs t5
0 E o Y~ to, Iignify the Wafhing or Baptifm of Re-
pentance^ and the Knowledg of G 0 D '^ and there-
fore ^ia T^ A^rpb naAifyeveffias ^ \\\OLv.c<.i\Ci/rzG^<>
nNEY'MATOx 'Ari'oY, cxadly the fame
Form of Speech, means, by the Wafliing ov Bap-
tifm of Regeneration^ and of the renewing of the HOLT
t Diilog. cum Tryph. p. 231. B.C.
i i 4 GHOST.
488 ^efleBions on Mr.WalYs Let. 1 2 .
GHOST. And as no body can be fo wild as to
imagine, that becaufe St. yufiin fays, the Wkfiiing
of Recent ance^ therefore Repentance fignifys Bap-
tifm 5 fo in like manner, it is as abfurd to fay,
that when St. Paul fpeaks of the Waging of Rege-
mration^ Regeneration means Baptifm *, for the
Cafe is as exadly parallel as can be wifh'd.
I wou'd add one Remark more, ^qIz,. That St.
Taul calls this the WaPiing (not only of Regenera^
tion^ but alfo) of the renevoing of the HOLY
GHOST. Every one who underftands the
Gree\ Tongue, mull; needs confefs this is the right
Conftrudion of the Place: and 'tis thus the' Ethio-
pick Tranflator has render'd it ^ and the Arahkk
too, notwithftanding the Author of tht Latin
Tranflation of the ^r/?^/rf publifh'd in Dr. Wal-
ton s Polyglot J gives it ^different but a wrong Turn,
which the Arahkk will not admit : for the infe-
f arable Prepofition here, as in the Ethiopick^ tran-
llated by^ is join'd only to Wajhlng *, and all the
reft is, as the Grammarians ftile it, in Sutu con-
ftruBo^ and therefore ought to be render'd, as he
that added the I.^f/;2 Tranflation to.' the Ethiopick
has likewife done, by the Wajhing of Regeneration ^
and of the Renovation of the H O LY GH O S T.
And then if Wafhing refers to the Renovation of
the HOLY GHOST, as well as to Regenera-
tion^ it muft follow, that the Renewing of the
HOLY GHOST means Baptifm as much as
Regeneration does \ that is, not at all : for as the
Inference will be allow'd to be manifeftly abfurd
in one Cafe, fb it is in the other. And therefore
I now draw this general Conclulion, in oppofition
to our Author, that the Scriptures never call Bap-
tifm Regeneration."
As to ]:js other Pretence, -{- that Regeneration
t Part L pag. 18. " '
in
Let. 1 2 . Hijlory of Infant-'Baptifm. 489
irt the vfual Phrafe of that Time^ (viz.. in which
St. Iren^vs liv'd) fgnifys Baptifm ; and that the
Antients ^ never vfe the Word [regenerate^ or [born
again\ but that they mean or denote by it Baptifm :
'Tis, 1 think, one of the moll groundlefs Aller-
tions I ever met with •, for on the contrary, no-
thing is more common than to take this Word ia
a quite different Senfe, and I don't believe it is
ever fo much as once us'd in the antienteft Times
for Baptifm, at leaft: not till their Zeal for Infant-
Baptifm betray'd 'em into that Abfurdity, which
was not near the time of St. lren<zus,
I have (hewn you how St. Jufiin ufes the Word
Regeneration, and that he cannot be underftood
to mean Baptifm by it : and 'tis very eafy to
prove as much of the other Fathers. Clemens ^-
lexandrinus relates from Alexander Volyhiftor^ that
the Indian Brachmans eat no living Creatures, nor
drink any Wine ; that fome of *em eat every
day as we do, and others only every third day :
and he adds, -f^ that they donh fear Death^ nor ef^eem
Life^ becaiife they reclion Death is but another Birth
(naA/fyeveo-fav). Origen ufes it to mean the Fvcfur-
redion, when fpeaking of the Apollles he fays,
fl in the Regeneration (naA/fytveai^) they jhall fit vvon
twelve Thrones, And again, on the fame Occafion,
he fays, (^) thofe who follow'' d our Saviour j/W/
fit upon twelve Thrones^ judging the twelve Tribes of
ifrael :
* Introd. p. 12! ' '
^t Stromar. UbJg.v-^: 4^1. B. Krc7^^£?i'«c7 <^2 ea.vetT^,
^9 mf' icfiv ny^VTcLi^ r'i,,(iiv' Tni^vjae -yi iivAi riccA/pvg-
Vi<jldLV. ' ] ' , ' .
.11 In Matth. pag.;-34-^ E- Ol j^ ^^^^:^vTcit d Iv t« n^
(a) Comment, in Matth. pag. 591. C. Ol tt/w «t'Kox».
vovm
49 o ^fleBions on Mr.WaU'y Let. i 2.
Ifrael : and this Power they Jhall receive in the Refvr-
YcBion of the Dead. For this is the Regeneration^ it
being a kind of new Generation^ &:c. And this
mode of Speech is borrow'd from the Scriptures
themfelves, Matth. xix. 28. and was us'd alfo
by the Jews^ as ^ Grotius has fhewn from Jofefhus
and Philo.
But to come nearer the Cafe in hand : Tertvl-
Han undoubtedly fpeaks of fomething internal,
when he fays, alluding to the Decalogue^ that
'{' we are horn in the fame number of Months^ as
we are regenerated by Precepts. Clemens Alexandri-
nus relating how St. John reftor'd to the Church
that young Man, who, after he had been educa-
ted in the Chriftian Religion, and baptiz'd, be-
came a Captain of a Band of Robbers, and com-
mending his great Repentance, fays, he gave j] a
qreat Example of true Repentance^ and an extraordi^
nary Inftance of Regeneration \ that is, of Conver-
fion ^ for nothing can be here underftood by Rege-
neration, but an internal Change of Mind. In
another PafTage, the fame St. Clement fays, l;]! tbe
"P urnEK of all things receives thofe that fly to fiim j
and having regenerated ^em ( d^iccyiwynjoc:, ) in the
Spirit^ to the Adoption of Sons^ He knows ''em to be
^ Not. in Matth. 19. 28.
t De Anima^ pag. 292. C. Ut tanto TempoHs Numero
nafcamur, quanto Difciplinae Numero renafcimur.
II Apiid Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. 3. cap. 23. A/cA«ir ^i>*
y«fir/ctf, ck.c. ^ _^ ^ .<
llll PGedagog. lib. 1. pag. go. B. Out© jcctf -ixiov ohay 0
Let. 12- Hijlory of Infant-'Bapttfm. 491
of a good Difpofition ^ and them only He loves^ and
helps and defends \ and for this cavfe He calls "^em
Children. Here dvoikvvmois nveu^ioiT/, I hope, can't
be thought to mean baptizM, efpecially iince it's
faid, that thofe who are fo regenerated are vi-Tno/.
Thofe Words alfo of this Father are very re-
markable to this purpofe, where he fays, f To in-
ftruEh and enlighten the Vnderjtandlng^ is called alfo
by the Heathen Philofophers {dvoiymmuf) to regene^
rate.
The Particle alfo in this Period plainly imports,
that the fame way of fpeaking was in ufe among
the Chriftians too *, but the following Words' make
it more evident, where he cites St. Paul as mean-
ing the fame thing, when he fays, i Cor. iv. 1 5.
for in Christ Jesus / have begotten you thro
the Gofpel. To which he might alfo have added.
Gal. iv. 19. My little Children^ of whom I travail in
Birth again^ until Christ be forrrHd in you :
which plainly fhews the Chriftian Birth confifts
in C H R I s T 's being form'd in 'em. And St.
Clement is fo far from leaving any room to ima-
gine Baptifm was call'd Regeneration, that he
exprefly fays it is the (a) Sign of Regeneration : and
fure it can't be the Sign, and the Thing lignify'd
too. And afterwards he calls Regeneration (^) a
new fpir it ual Generation. The whole Paifage is too
long to be tranfcrib'd ^ but I'll give you another
which is much fhorter, and very exprefs : (c) An
Adulterefs lives indeed to Sin^ but jhe is dead to the
Com-
t Stromat. lib. 5. pag. 5^52. C. "E'Tre-f' k^ii m^cr. nli 0ct^-
(a) Eclog. p. 801. b. D.
(b) Ibid. pag. 802. a. B.
j^O Stromat. lib. 2. pag. 425. A. 'H y[^ Ttt crcfrsy:^^.
49 ^ <^fieSlions on Mr.'WsiWs Let. 1 11
Commands j hut Jhe that repents^ being as it were re*
generated ( dmyivm3<ti(SCi) by a change of Manner Sy
has the Regeneration (nocAiry£ve(5"fav) of Life : She is
dead to the former Adulterys^ and is enter''d again
into Life J being regenerated (-ytvi'i^^iW) by Repen-
tance. Jslay, it may be yet farther obferv'd, that
inftead of calling Baptifm Generation or Regene-
ration, he diredly on the contrary calls it f Death^
and the End of the old Life.
In the fame manner like wife Origen talks of Re-
generation *, in one Paflage particularly he is very
plain: and becaufe his Words, 1 think, unravel
the whole Difficulty, and may lead into the rea-
fon of other more obfcure Places, Til tranfcribe
the Paflage at large. "^ The Wafhwg with Water is
A Symbol of a pure Aiind^ cleansed from all Fdthinefs
of Evil : and to one who gives himfelf vp to GO jD,
it is in it felf by the Tower of the Invocation of the
adorable TR INlTT^ the Beginning and Fountain
of divine Gifts. This the Hiftory of the Ads of
the Apoftles greatly confirms^ fince ^tis relatedy that
the SPIRIT did then evidently come vpon thofe
Tvho were baptiz^d^ the Water preparing the way for
him-, in fuch as came to it as they ought ^ infomuch
that Simon the Magician ama^d at the Sight^ wou*d
have obtain* d of Peter the fame Grace ^ and defir^d to
purchafe the mofi righteous thing with the Mammon
of Vnrighteoufnefs. And it is farther to be obferv^dy
that the Baptifm of John was inferiour to the Baptifm
of Jesus, given by his Difciples: thofe therefore
who in the Acls were bapti^d with the Baptifm of
t Eclog. pag. 800. a. C. Qdvctj©- )y Te^©- as>4ta/ t^
* In Johan* pag. 124, 125. ^
John,
Let. 1 2. Hlftory of Infant-'Baptifm. 49 5
John, afid had not heard whether there were any
HOLY GHOST, were baptiz^^d again by the A-
■poflle. For the Baptifm of Regeneration was not gi^
ven by John, but by Jesus, by the Hands of his
Difcifles : and it is called the haver of Regeneration^
the Performance of it being accom-^anfd with the Re^
nevolng (?/ f ^7^ S P 1 R 1 T *, which being from GOD,
is now alfo prefer^ d above the Water ^ but is not always
ingenerated together with the Water.
St,Cl€mens Romanus can mean nothing but internal
Regeneration and Converfion, when he fays, '{-iVi?^^
being found faithful^ freacWd Regeneration ( nocAif-
■y-cvea-jocv) to the World. And it's ftrange what
cou'd be in Junius^ Mind to urge, that by Rege-
neration was to be underftood in this Place the
Refurrcdion : for Noah was indeed a Preacher of
Repentance,but we don't find his main Bufinefs was
to preach the Refurredion •, nor is St.Clement here
fpeaking of the Refurredion. To thefe I'll only
add a Paflage of St. Barnabas ^ which is very re-
markable : ^ Since therefore he has renewed us by the
remijfion of our SinSy he has given us another Form^
that we Jhou^d have our Souls like the Soul of a Child j
even as He Himfelf has forrnd us, Moft diredly
iliewing, that the Chriftian new Formation or Re-
generation is by the SPIRIT.
And now cou'd any body, Sir, that had read
thefe Paffages, fairly pretend the Antients by Re-
generation always mean Baptifm ? if Mr. Wall had
not read thefe Books, he ought not fo readily to
have made the Alfertion : and if he has read
f Epift. I. ad. Corinth, cap. 9. N«ys 'm^Qi euf«3tW, ^li
'*- Epift. cap. 6. pag. 18. 'E^rfi' »V etva.Kctivi(Ta,i ^^£i \v t?
'A(pfc(r« 7UV 'AfjM^-nav, tTroUcnv yiiAa^ dhhov Tv^rovy fi>V Tlctt'
them
494 ^flcBions on Mr.WzWs Let.i 2.
them, what Excufe can be fram'd for him ? For
'tis apparent from thefe Inftances, to which ma-
ny more might have been added, that the molt
antient Fathers, by Regeneration, mean fomething
fpiritual and internal, and very different from
Baptifm. And the fame might be very eafily
prov'd too, from his admir'd St. Auftin himfelf ;
but it is needlefs. Inftead of it we will examine
the other Pofition he lays down, to prove that re-
generated in the Words he cites from St. IrerKZus^
means baptiz'd : and this will quickly be found to
be as groundlefs as the other.
He fays, -{- lren;sus has us^d this Word fo in all
other places of his Bookj that he has ever obferv^d*
But if our Author has not obferv'd the feveral
PafTages where 'tis us'd otherwife, I can't help it :
however, the Argument depends not fo much upon
his Obfervation, as upon the Truth of the Thing
it felf But if he had pleas'd, one wou'd think
he might have obferv'd, that St. Iren^us no where
ufes the Word fo, (at lead, I am moft inclin'd
to think fo) becaufe the Inftance he cites is fo
far from proving what he produces it for, that
it well enough proves the dired contrary : and
therefore I am furpriz'd that the learned Dr. Grabe
fhou'd refer to it alfo with the fame Defign as
our Author. For to go no farther than the
Words Mr. Wall has tranfcrib^d, there is not the
leaft reafon to fay St. Ire^ixus means Baptifm by
Regeneration, JVhen He gave His Bifci^Us the
Commiffion of regenerating unto G O D^ He [aid unto
them^ Go and teach, &c. But why muft we con-
clude from thefe Words, that St. Iren£v.s m.eans by
regenerating, baptizing ? Is it not as good Senfe,
and very agreeable with our Sav iour's Defiga
parti, pag. ip.
Let. I 2. H'tjiory of Infant-^apti/m. 45)5^
ifl the Commiflion, by regenerating to underftand
teachings inflruEilng^ enlightning the Mind^ and co»-
vertmg the Nations to G o d ? This doubtlcfs was
their chief Bufinefs, tho they were likewife to
baptize all they had fo converted. And therefore
it is very arbitrary to reftrain the Word re<renerate
from fignifying what was the main Defign of the
Commifiion, and to limit it, even contrary to
its proper Signification and general Ufe, only to
the lefs principal.
But the next Words of lren<ziis make it appear
more clearly, that he meant an internal Regene-
ration by the Spirit. * For G o d pomiPd to pour
him out upon his Servants and Handmaids in the lat-
ter Days^ that they might prophejy : wherefore he de-
fcended upon the Son of God, when he became
the Son of Man ^ accufioming himfelf in him to dwell
with Mankind^ and to refi in Men^ and to dvoell in
the Creature 0/ G o D, working in them the Will of the
Fat her, and of old making them new in Christ.
It's plain from hence that the Regeneration or Re-
newing St. lren£.us fpeaks of, is to be wrought
by the SPIRIT 's indwelling. And a little af-
ter, fpeakingof our becoming one in CHRIST,
jie fays, f Our Bodys receive that Vnity which is to
Immortality^ by the haver j but out Souls by the
SPIRIT: Ihewing again, that he argues here
Lib. 3. cap. 19. pag.24g. b. Hunc enim promifit
per Prophetas eftundere in noviffimis temporibus fuper
Servos & Ancillas ut prophetent : unde & in FILIUM
DEI, Filium Hominis fadum, defcendit, cum ipfo affu-
efcens habitare in Genere humano, & requiefcere in Ho*
minibus, & habitare in Plafmate DEI, Voluntatem PA.
TRIS operans in ipfis, & renovans eos a Vetuftate in
No vita rem CHRIST I.
t Ibid. pag. 244. a. Corpora enim noftra per Lava-
crum illam, qua) eft ad Incorruptionem, Unicatem accepe-
lunt; Animas autem per SPIRIT UM.
chiefly
49^ ^fl(^^tio7is on MrWslYs Let. i u
chiefly upon that which is fpiritual, and fuffi-
ciently implying, the Regeneration he had before
fpoken of was fuch. The other PafTage which
Dr. Grabe refers || to, is, I think, likewife diredly
to the contrary Senfe^ the Words are thefe :
^ Bccaufe this Kind are fubjeBred to Satan^ to the
denying of the Baptifm of Regeneration to GO D^
and the DeftruEtion of the whole Faith ^ &:c. Now
even here he does not fay that Baptifm which is
Regeneration^ no more than the Phrafe the Bapifm
ofRepntancey means theBaptifm which is Repentance:
and if it wull not follow from this Phrafe that
Repentance means Baptifm, then it will not fol-
low in the other that Regeneration means Bap-
tifm. But it will be yet more clear that Rege-
neration does not mean Baptifm, by what Irenaus
adds: f But they fay it (viz.. what they call'd
Redemption) is neceffary^ &c. that they may be
Ye(renerated unto that Bower which is above alL Now
tlfis being faid of thofe who deny Baptifm, the
Word regenerated cannot mean baptized: and a
little after again 'tis faid, jjil Baptifm indeed was
of Jesus for the Remiffion of Sms^ but the Redemp-
tion is of Christ that came upon him to FerfeEhion j
which lufficiently diftinguifhes Baptifm from Re-
demption, which is necejfary that they may be re*
generated^ for it is oppos'd to it.
St. hendius does not very often ufe the Word
regenerate ^^ but where he does, I am pretty well
li la Irenasum, Lib. 2. cap. 59. pag. i5i. not. i.
* Lib. I. cap. 18. pag. S8. Ke«/ 077 "pt «V *E^A§mcJv r
t Ibid. Aif^at j^ divrtiv dvct^miAv etvctt — ha, cU tI/jj r^lf
lill Ibid. pag. «9. Th p! -^ BdTrji^r^ua, r (pAivo/j^a 'JHSOT,
'A^4Ji»; 'A(xAi']i^v, rlw Si 'Ain^vrpcooir r h 'Avjv XPI2-
aflurM,
Let. 1 1. Hijiory of hfant-^aptifrn. 49;^
aflur'd it never means baptiz^e : and tho it is not
impofllble but I may have pafs'd by fome Paflage^
or miftaken the Senfe fomewhere, yet I have
taken fo much care, that I think I may very well
venture to alTert, there is not one Place in all
St. /rf?7^w/s Books, in which it plainly means Bap-
tifm, or may not at leafl: full as well mean fome-
thing elfe *, and that there are Inftances in which
it cannot mean Baptifm, is beyond difpute. la
one Place he fays, * How Jhall they leave the Gene-
ration ofDeath^ tfthey do not receive the Regeneration
which is by Faith^ believing in that new Generation
given by GO D in that wonderful unexpeBed manner
in fgn of Salvation^ which was of the firgin by
Paith? The Regeneration ^^F^/f^ here, iselfewhere
'f- faid to be by the haver : now as Regeneration
is different from the Faith by which it is in one
place ; fo it is alfo different from the Lavet of
Baptifm by which it is in the other. But I need
add no more, to Ihew you how much our Au-
thor is out in faying St. Irenaus has us'd regene^
rate for baptiz.e in all other Places of his Book 5
iince he ufes it fo in no part of hisWritings^
and fometimes fo as plainly not to mean Bap-
tifm : and therefore it is not true that it always
means Baptifm in this Book, unlefs Mr. Wall means
in the fecond Book particularly, out of which the
Citation is taken, and then indeed his Aflertioa
can't be denyM^ for the Word is us'd in no
other place of that Book at all.
'-■■^
^ Lib. 4. cap. 59. pag. 558. a. Quomodo autem relin-
quet Mortis Generationem, li non in novam Generacionem
mire & inopinate a DEO, in fignum autem falutis, da-
ta m, quae eft ex Virgine per Fidem, credens earn recipiat
qua* eft per Fidcm Regenerationem ?
t Lib. 5. cap. 15. pag. 423, b. Earn quae eft pet Lalra-
crum Regenerationem j &c.
K k Sin^«:
49 8 ^efleFtiom o?i;B^.WalKf \ I^et. 1 2.]
Since then the Scriptur^es, the Primitive Fa-
theVs, and. among the.re'ft St./r^^z^z/^ himi^lf, by
Regeneration never meai? Baptifm, .'tis highly un-
reafonable to pretend jt- means fo in this fingle
places or if there Ihou'dbe fome Inft^nces where
it does fomjetimes flgnifyBaptifm, there are. many
more,"6r, at leait fome, where it plainly fignifys
quite another thing : and therefore, why mull; it
needs mean Baptifm .in this Paflage? If it does
not mean Baptifm always^, then perhaps it may
not in this, Place neither. .
One Reafon Mr. IVali. gives for faying it mull
mean Baptifm in this Place>, is, that here is ex-
prefs mention of Infants who -[ are not capable
of R.eg€?jeration in any oi^her Stnfe of the Word^ than
as 'it fignifys Baptifrru Bpt this is only begging the
Qaeftion, Belides^ Mr.>F"^// contradifts it him-
felf, when p. goes aboi^t to fhew that Infants may
be .regenerated of the S.P IRI T, according to our
CO K.!P's ^ule, as well as of Water ^ . and tells us,
^ tioat GQX} by his SPIRIT does^ at the time of
Baptifmj fe/il and apply , to the Infant that is there
dedicated }o I him^ the, Promifes of the Covenant of
rvtitjc^'he. u. capable^, ^^1%,, Adoption^ Pardon of Sin^
'Ttan^4ti&n -from the.^f^tte of Nature to that of
Grace^ $kQ» ,on which, account the Infant is f aid to
fcV; regenerated oi {vr':by~] tht Spirit. There is
another Regeneration then belides Baptifm men-
ti6n'd.byc0].)r LOR'D, himfelf, of which our Au-
thor^ tells "us Infants ire capable*, and why might
not this be the Regeneration meant by St. Ire-
ndtv^ w4thout Baptifm- ?--And how came Mr. Wait
to be,fo overfeen, as, to,, fay there i% no other
Regeneration of which they ^re Ga;P3}>lc?
iPartL^,pag. 20. :;* '''[,f"r\ :', ^;,::,
F Part-i. pag. 148. & PartTI. pag. li^;. ' ,
2. But
Let. 1 2 . H'tjlory of Infant-'Bapufm. 49 9
2. But this Paflage of St.'Iremusy tho it had
been genuine and well tranflated, wou'd haVebeeri
liable to a fecond Exception, viz,.' that the word
Infantes does not neceflarily lignify here fuch new-
born or young Children, as are not capable of
Reafon^b^t niay very well mean only fuch as
can know and believe, and make a ProfefTion of
their Faith, I will not go about to prove that
this Word and feveral others of much the fame
Senfe, are often apply'd to grown and even to
aged Perfons, to exprefs their being but young
or weak in Chriftianity, which Mr. Wall and every
body allows ^ becaufe the Chapter, as it now
Hands, fpeaks of their Natural not their Chrif-
tian Age : but however it will not follow that
Infantes means only fuch Children as are wholly
incapable of knowing and believing the neceHary
Principles of the Chriftian Religion, which is the
Suppolition of our Adverfarys, for the t^xm In-
fant is of a larger Extent.'
Indeed if it meant only a fucking Child, or one
of two or three Months or Years, or the like, our
Author might have fomething to plead ^ but if
it means all Perfons till 21 Years of Age, as in
our EngUPi Law, he cou'd form no Argument from
it, tho it were faid Infants were to be baptiz'd.
The whole Bulinefs between us is reduc'd there-
fore to this, namely to determine the Period of
Infancy^ and what mull be meant by the Word
in the Paflage under Conllderation.
If it be urg'd that St. Iren^tus fays CHRIST
fandify'd (omnem z^Etatem) every feveral ^gey as
Mr. Wall renders it; and confequently that he
means the youngeft Infants too, who mult be com-
prehended in fo large an Expreflion : it may be-
noted that St. Cyprian ufes the fame Phrafe, yet
fo as Infants cannot be comprehended, when he
Kk 2 fayS;,
500 (^fleSlions on Mr.W^li's Let.iil
fays, ^ The Word of GOD^ our LORD JESVS
CHR IS% came to alij and gathering both the learned
and unlearned^ he gave the Precepts of Salvation to
both Sexes y and (omni iEtati) to every fever al Age*
So whentheAuthor of thcRecognitions hjs^f There-
fore let (omnis ^tas) every fever al Age^ both Sexes^
and all Conditions haft en to Repentance, &c. undoubt-
edly he did not mean fuch Infants too, as were
not capable of Repentance. I will add one In-
ftance more in the Words of Dionyfms the jj great
Bilhop of Alexandria^ who in a Letter to Dc*
tnetius and Didymus fays thus, 'H* It is need-
lefs to mention the Names of the many Martyrs among
-us who were unknown to you ^ but know this, that Men
itnd Women, young Men and old Men, young Women
\and old Women^ Soldiers and private Ferfons, all
Sorts, and (i:Si(rct 'HKirdoC) all Ages, fome gaining
the ViElory by Scourges and Fire, and others by the
Sword, have obtained their Crowns^ Kow as it's
inconteftable that this Phrafe cannot include the
youngelt Infants in thefe Inftances, lb it need
jiot be extended to fuch in the Words of St. Ire*
n^us*
Kor does the Enumeration of the feveral Ages
make it necelTary to anderftand fuch Infants by the
* De Orat. Domin. pag. 107. Nam cum DEI Sermo
DOMINUS nofter JESUS CHRISTUS omni-
bus venent, & colligens doftos, pariter & indo^os, omili
Sexui atque ^tati Praecepta Salutis ediderit, &c.
f Lib. 10. cap. 45. Itaque feftinet ad Pcenitentiam om«^
nis ^tas, omnis Sexus, omnifque Conditio, &c.
11 Eufeb. Praefat. in Lib. 7. Hift. Ecclef.
ff Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. Lib. 7. cap. 11. Ts? ^ tit^UJi^a?
'TTKhii '/c? 077 "AvJ^fg? ^ TuvAiui ^ Ngo/ ;^ Ti^9v]ifj i^ Ko^^/
<w oa 'HhtyJeiy It ^', J)<tl Met^ffov J^ Uv^i* ol J^f e/>* S/-
Word :
Let. 1 2. Hijlory of Infant- !Bitptifm. 501
Word : we muft confider how far each of theft
Ages extends, at what Period they begin, and
at what they conclude. Now that Infancy was
not confin'd to the narrow Limits in which wc
commonly ufe the Word, is I think paft doubt.
Ortgen has a remarkable Paflage to this effet^ : tho
he does not make ufe of this particular Word, yet
the Words he does ufe are equally expreifive of the
tenderefl: Age. || Thofe^ fays he, who from their
Childhood and firft jige^ are called to do theWorh
of the Kingdom of G o D, &c* And St. Irenaus
himfelf in his Epiltle to Florinm ufes 7rp6)Tn 'vi'hmoLy
tho it be properly enough faid even of new-bora
Infants, in fo large aSenfeas to reach that Age,
in which he couM hear and underliand the Teach-
ings of St. Polycarpj fo as to remember 'em per-
fefily well in his old Age: from whence it ap-
pears that thej^r/of thofeAges, into which they
divided Man's Life, was not ihut up in very nar-
row Bounds.
Feuardentius has noted from Thilo^ that HippO'
crates limits Infancy to feven Years ^ but Danet^
* from the Greek and Latin Writers, extends it
to 14: and this feems to be neareft Sx.Jren^us\
Mind, as may be collected from his own Words.
"Juvenes extends to between 30 and 40 : Seniores
between 40 and 50, in the latter part of this very
Chapter, from whence the Psedobaptifts argue.
And as he has thus ailign'd 10 Years to each of
the two laft Stages, nothing can be more pro-
bable than that the three firft were of the fame
Length : upon this Computation therefore In-
fancy ^ will reach to ten Years of Age ^ Farvuli
will include all from thence to twenty, and
^ II In Matth. pag.40^. C. T^< ^' U Uct\<h,Vy id^ v^^nt
eEO^r %ja, &c.
t Diction. Anciq. Rom. &Gr«c. pag.$i.
Kk 3 Puer
5PX: ^fleSliom on Afr.Wall'^ Lee. 1 1 ■ ;
Puiri from twenty, to thirty. This is the more con- ^
fitm'd, becaufe it. agrees with Si,tren<ius\ faying,
he fa w "Florinus when he was Puer^, HaJ^ ', for, as the
Time is laborioufly calculated by the. accurate Mr.
Bodwell^ he was then about 25, which falls in very
Well with thatComputation which makes the Limits
of the Age St.lrenms calls Pwfm, tC), be from 29
to "30. Mr. Dodvpell^ who is of the fame ppinion
in'this Cafe, very learnedly illuftrates the Matter, ^
and after him I muft not attempt it •, and there-
fore I refer you'to his learned DilTertations ^^
If then./«/^«^^J/ in the Language of St. /r^-
^ttr^y,. means not only fuch as we now com-
monly call Infants, of a few Months, but alfo
atiy under ten Y^ars of Age j . what. Advantage can
the Pxdobaptifts . gain' by fxiting this' Paflage?
They ihou'd prbVe the yourigeft Infants, who
have not the leaft Ufe of Reafon, are' to be bap-
tiz'd:: whereas this Place of St. Irenaus at moft
pV6ve§ only that Perfons may be baptiz'd under
10 Years of Age.. Jsow ^ve only .infill that Per-
fons cannot be . baptiz'd till theyWSually know,
or atleaft profefsto know and believe t,he firit Prin-
ciples of the Chriftian Religion : they who make
jfuch a Profeflion, tho ever fo young, ought to be
baptiz'd. And when the P^edobap tilts pretend to
oppofe us, by citing Paflages in whi^h the Words
have a larger Acceptation than 'th?y commonly
have at prefent,.it is all trifling, and can make
nothing to the Purpofe, unlefs the Words were
taken 'in the faftie, limited Senfe j\n/jt^e Paffage
cited, as they are in the Queftion.^ ^' . . ' '.
;^,^^As ibon as Perfons are capable, of being taught
what the Apoftles reciiiirM of thofe they baptiz'd.
P In Irensum, PififemtV 3^ ^6, Sec
fo foon they ma^f be nii^d^/itfor, and r.eceiv'd, to
Baptifin ;^' for: there is np other fet .tiRi(?, whej^
they-,, ^i^ft; 6e reGciy'd ,but this,.: f^/;c. when
th^y'b^Jiieve., And, that Children under :t^,a are
capajble pf ; this, nope .can doubt , vyhq ^ underil-and
any"; ti^ng x)f the PQ.weripf Education. Con^mpri
Experience ihews us how^far that Age can -go in
manyjtUrxg^^^.elpeaailyrjf improv'^d,;by a; good
Educatibiil " I'f you know any of Mr. LocFs Ac-
quaintance, they will teU;you many ftrange Truths
of the Effedls of 'his Method on feveral who
have had the Happinefs to be brought up in it.
And pray, why fhou'd not that Age be thought
as capable of the plain eafy Principles of Chrif-
tianity as of any thing elfe? Si»Auftin \ him-
felf allows, as our Author || notes, that at fe-
ven Years Children might be able to make the
.jieceflary Refponfes. And I have known_lbnie
admitted at about 14, and heard of fome much
younger *, and 'tis only for want of due Care,
that there are not many more fuch In (lances : fo
that at moft all that can be faid from this Faf-
fage amounts but to this, That fome Infants, that
is, fome under ;io Years of Age, may be admitted
to-Baptifm", which makes nothing againft our
Opinion, for fuch alfo may believe. But if it
be confider'd, i. How doubtful it is whether
the Paflage be genuine^ 2. Whether it be well
tranflated ^ 3. Whether it fpeaks of baptizing *,
and lallly. That 'tis plain it does not neceOarily
fpeak of Infants fo young : it muft be allow'd that
tills Jaraous Citation-^, .after.alL.the..JSIoircL.it. .has
made, can't be fufiicient for any reafonable Man
to lay a ftrefs upon it. And yet this is by far
the moft confiderable our Adverfarys can pro-
t Lib. I. de Anima, cap. 10.
II Parti, pag. 188, 6c 288.
K k 4 duee
504 ^fleSlions on Afr.WallV Let.i 2I
duce fo early. I have now made it appear,
that for two hundred Years after Christ,
nothing can be argu'd with any Force for P«-
dobaptifm, for St. Iren^us liv'd to about Anno
190, And the next Author Mr. Wall argues
from is Tertullian^ who did not write till about
the Beginning of the third Century. What he
fays fhall be refer'd to the following Letter,
I am.
SI R,
Yours, &c^
Letter
Let. 1 3* Hijlory of Infant^'Baptiffn. 505
Letter XIIL
'jin Argument stgainft Irffant-Baftifnij drawn from
PolycratesV Letter to Vidor. Tertullian no friend
to Infant' Bapttfm ^ which makes Mr* Wall begin
his Citations from him with decrying his Authority.
His general JExpreJfions no Argument for Padobap-
tifm. TertulUan'j fteady Meaning eafy h be
Ji. Home aty without Mr. Wall'j extravagant Guejfes.
Tertullian'j mentioning Infant- Baptifm^ no Argw
ment it wa^ fra^is'd in his time ^ but only that
fome were endeavouring to bring in the Pra^ice.
Tertullian does not /imply advife (as ^r.Wall
pretends) to defer the baptiung of Children^ but
'. argues againft it as a thing that ought not to be done.
"tiThe Reading of the Parage on which -^r.Wall
\ grounds his Suppofition^ altogether impertinent and
V. abfurd. Tertullian'/ Do6hrine concerning Baptifm
^s^ inconfifient with Padobaptifm, His Expofition of
iCor. vii. 14. not in favour of Padobaptifm. Not
cne Author cited of the firfi three Centurys^ who
vnder^ands that Text of Baptifm. ^r. Wall'j
Endeavours to prove that ayiQ^^ &:c. means
waih'd, C^f . ineffetlual The Senfe given by the
£ijhop of Sarum, and by Dr. Whitby, cannot
he the true one. The befi Interpretation which can be
made upon our Author s own Principles ^ is that
he fo much defpifes^ viz. that by Holinefs is meant
Legitimacy, This proved to be the true Senfe.
Holy, never fignifys baptize. When ^r.Wall
comes to Origen, he cites fome Pajfages which are
plain to hfs Purpofe. But they are only taken from
Latiji
5 o6 . ^fleBions on Mr^.Wall^s . LptiXJ.
Latin Tranjlations. The Tajfage fome cite from the
Greek Remains of this Father (as Afr.Wall him^
feif xronffjfer^fnrveT mthTn^-'--'^fi9€^h€M^'Tf*jftnfln'-
tiom -from rvhe five the mTtirr-Cirm^ims-arr^-tTiditn^
are very corrupt and licentious* Several Learned
Men confefs it- As Grotius. liuetius. Daille.
Du Pin.^ Tarinu^. " Which' is ^ alfd abundantly
proved J by comparing the Tranjlation with the Greek
• Fragmentsy'^ poii? extM^r Sf^Hi^rcyti^r^has Jiot
more faithful ■ in his Tranjlation}^ than ^liS^tim'
^Tis very frohahle they to&k this- liberty in. \M ether
things^ 06 well as in thofe par ticutarly for whivk Qrl*
^cnwas ^uefiion^d. Ruffinus, notMhftandingSmhat
Mr* W3.\[fays-to the- contrary^Wook' as muc^ixli'
berty ■ with the Epifile to the Romans vasz ht:-:^id
with other Books. He exprefly- fays he^hadi aided
many things,, Bejtdes^ thh'Conifi^entarywasv.^ery
much interpolated^ heforeK\ifRxin% took -itHn'^h^pd,
' As to the Faffagi taken oui of the Hhnilyih^"i]Q^u^y
• it^s at be ft doubt fvl whether ht^fpeaks of'Infimtiin
Age* ■ In one part of thtfe'-^^Hvt^iiys^he.'ihasJn-
■ fertedythe it' b-isnot in pheQrigin'H-i-thii F^ffjtge
farti<:ularly^ which is theGround:<ff'the Fadokipt^s
Argument* In St* Cyptian-j time' Infant ^Bdpiifm
was pra^is^d in Africa'-^ ahd-^probably-ifirfi/rtiook
rife there ^ together with Infanf-C^mmuniax^} The
AfricsinSy gei7era^iy Men of weak-VtidtrfLanding*
' The Greek Churchj probably jhdd 'not yet admitted
the Error* The Inference fr@m the whole* ^^ A^Re*
■ capitulation* A Reajon why fo much only : of
Mr* Wall'/ Hiftory as relates to the fir ft Centitrys^
is examined. How Infant "B apt ifm was atftrfthrosight
in vfe* Errors fprung vp in the Church very . early.
This of Infant 'B apt ifm not brought in all at once^
but by degrees : and was occafiond in fome mea-
fure hy their Zeal^ which was not always acccfrd-
ing to Kn^xoledg^ as fever-al other- things^ were*
A FaryJlel betwixt this Practice- and ; the-. Fo-
0,
Let. 1 3- Hijhry of Infant'^aptifm. 507
. fiJI) Notion ofTranfuhftamiMion^-When John iii.5.
was under flood to reUte to Infants^ as well as others^
, no wonder Infants were baptized. \ Vpon jufl fuch
another Mi flake, of our S A v i o a R 'j Words in
John vi. 53. the .earllefl ?<zdobaptifls admitted
ChildrentptkerJsJQ>^P^s Suffeir. i]Conclufion., . r
-S.l R, ^ ' -' '
BEFOR E, I examine what our Author urges
from Tertullianj I will give you an Argument
againft Infant-Baptifm which naturally falls . in;
about this time: it is, for ought J knovy, wholly:
new, and perhaps may not .be P4acceptable ; if it
be, you may eafily pafs it. pver,ytfor it i^ biit
I take it from the Letter Polycrates, writ t©-
rif'^^or concerning Eafler^ wherein he fays thus:
■^ /Polycrates, the. meanefl of you all^ according fa.
the Tradition of my Kinfmen^ fome of whom alfo
I follow \ for f even of my Relations were Bijhops^ and
I am the eighth^ and they always celebrated the Feafly
when the People . rem(Hj\d the Leven : J, therefore^
Brethren^ who am 6,5 Tears old in the L o r d> &g.
Islow from thefe Words! gather, i. That this
Bifhop was defcended of Chriftian Parents^; than-
which nothing can feem- more-; probable,, lincehe.
himfelf afliires us there had been fo many Bifhops-
in the Family, and 'tis likely his Father was
one. Mr. Dodwell^ fpeaking of Hereditary Priefl-
=^ Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. Lib. 5. cap. 25. "E77 ^^ W>«'o
hood,
5o8 (l^fleBions onMr.WilYs Let. 13.^
hood, fays, -{* The Triefihood came by Inheritmce
to ScOpelianus, an Orator in Afia, as Philoftratus
teJHfys ; and in like manner perhofs Polycratcs )Xfas
eighth Bijhof of the fame Family in Alia.
2. Polycrates fays he was 6$ Years old in the
LoRD^ which plainly diftinguifhes between his
natural Age, and his Age in the Lord: feveral
Inftances of this way of fpeaking are to be met
with in the New Teftament. All which put to-
gether, I thinh, ihews that t\iO Folycrates was
born of Chriftian Parents, he was not bapti'L'd
in his Infancy, but, according to the Ufe of the
Church of that time, when he was able to anfwer
for himfelf. I think there is no need to prove
any part of this 5 and therefore I leave the Ar-
gument with you as it is, and proceed now ta
Tertullian*
Mr. Wall begins with leflening TertulUan^ Re-
putation^ and accufes him of having fallen into
great and monftrous Errors. Is all this Severity againft
Tertullian, becaufe his Books afford feveral Argu*
ments againft Psedobaptifm ?. Mr Wall fays, TertnU
Uanhas ffoke fo in this matter of Infant-Baftifm^ as that
it is hard to reconcile the feveral JPaJfagcs with one ano^
ther: which is pretty ftrange too ^ for our Author
cites but one Place where this Father fpeaks of
it at all, and there he fpeaks againft it : and I
don't fee any need to reconcile this with other
Paffages which do not fpeak of it.
But it feems TertulUan^ in fome Places, fpeaks
of theiVi?c^j(7;/;^of Baptifm in fuch general Terms,
t De Jure Laic. Sacerdot. pag. 220. Sacerdotium Sc(h
peliano Rhetori in Afia haereditarium fuiffe Teftis ekPhi-
hfiratWy quo etiam Exemplo fortaffe Polycrates in eadeui
Afia o^avus ejufdem Familiae geflit inter Chriftianos
Epifcopatum,
as
Let. 1 3 . Hiftory of Infant-'^Baptifm] 5 09
as to reckon thofe that die nnbaftiz^^dj as loft Men r
and from thence our Author concludes, that to
be fure TertuIUa?jy and the Church of that time,
thought Children ought to be baptiz'd. The
Anfwer is fhort and eafy^ for he does, in as
general Terms, fay, "^ They who come to he hap"
tixjd^ doy at the Place and Time of Baftifm^ and he*
forcy in the Churchy renounce the Devil^ &c. And
he frequently fays full as much of the Neceflity
of Faith as he does of Baptifm ; in Imitation
of the Scriptures, which fay, thzt now God hath
commanded all Men every where to repent j Ads xvii.
30. And that he will have all Men to he fav^dj and.
to come to the Knowledg of the Truthy iTim.ii.4.
Again, without Faith it is impojfible to pleafe God,
Heb. xi. 6, Follow Peace with all Men^ and Holinefs
without which no Man jhall fee the LOR D^ Hcbi.
xii. 14. Tertullian can't pofTibly exprefs himfelf
more univerfally than thefc Holy Writers have
here done, and yet no body imagines Infants are
included ^ and therefore fuch ExprefTions afford no
more Reafon to fay, Tertullian any where court--
tenances the Baptifm of Infants, than when he
fays, 'I* This Command is given to all^ Seek and ye
fijallfind.
After Mr. Wall has cited feveral Paflages which
he thinks a little inconfiftent with one another, he
pretends toguefs at what might be II his fteady mean^
ing (^if he had any'j) for that's very doubtful in
our Author's Opinion. But indeed I think it is
eafy to fee that Tertullian thought Baptifm was
* De Corona, pag. 102. A. Aquam adituri, ibidem,
fed & aliquanto prius in Ecclefia fub Antiftitis Manu con-
teftamur nos renunciare Diabolo.
t De Praefcript. ad Hseretic. pag. 205. D. Omnibus
diftum fit, Quaerite & invenietis, 6cc
II Paul, pag. 28.
necefTary
5 I o ^fleSlions on Kr.Wair^ Let.i jv
neceflary to all fuch as had heard 'of Christ,
and of its Inftitution •, and that fuch cou'd not be
fav'd if they refus'd to own his Authority : but
he fays no fuch thing of others, who were in-
capable of -knowing or doing the Divine Will.
And therefore he excufes the ^ Patriarchs exprefly
from that NecelTity, becaufe it was not poffible-
they Ihou'd pradife what was then not inftituted,
or believe Jesus was' the Mes si ah, when he
was not yet come: The fame thing in effed
he fays of Infants too, where he oppofes their
being baptiz'd till they are capable of knowing
and defiring to come to C h r i s t.
. But our Adverfarys argue, fince TertulUan men-
tions Infant-Baptifm, it mufl have been known
and pradis'd in his time *, and tho he oppofes
it, his private Opinion (ignifys nothing: for it
is the Pradice of the Church, and not the Opi-
nion of one Dodor, which is to be regarded.
To: this we may return.
1. That Tertullia-a^ as is plain from many other
Places, fpeaks fo of Baptifm, as is utterly in-
eonfiftent with P^dobaptifmv and the Paflage
particularly here, refer'd to, if it were a little
doubtful, might be clear'd up by them.
2. That it at moft only proves, there were
fome. Perfons at that time, who among many
other wild Notions were about to introduce this
of the KecefTity of Baptifm to the Salvation of
Infants ^ and not, as Mr. Wall pretends, that it
was the Opinion of the Church, or that they
pradis'd Infant-Baptifm.
Had it been the fettled Pradice and Judgment
of the Church, and what they thought was fup-
ported by the Authority and Tradition of the
Dc Baptifmo, cap. 13. pag. 229.
Apof.
Let,i;» Hijhryof Infant'!Baptifnt. 511
Apoflrles, (^c. it can't be imagined that Tertvlitan
fbpu'd venture to oppofe it ^ or if he did, that
herfhou'd employ no more pains to excufe what
fecm'4 .to contradift the Dodrine and Praftice of
theApoflles and the whole Church.
Buti fays Uv, Wall-, it's plain TertnlUan only
pleaded.for deferting the Baptifm of Infants whea
there ; was no, immediate danger of Death, be-
ca^fe in , feme (which he takes to be the truer)
Copys, it is faid, For what need is there tinlefs in
Cafrs.of'Neccffityy &c. implying, that in Cafes of
Danger they ought indeed to be baptiz'd without
delay : But the Tautology of thefe Words feems
very; impertinent, as li TertulUan had arga'd
thus, either th^^^; is fome NecelTity, or there is
no KecefTity ^ if there is noNeceflity, then what
KccefTity is there? For the Paflage, as Ux.Wdl
iY^u'4 read iu will run exadly thus : What Ne-
Ciljlty^n there urilefs- there be a Necejfity ? PameliitSy
upoii whofe Authority our Author builds, con-
feffes/he has it only from Gagnaus^, whofe fingle
Judgment is not fufficient. Rigaliins rwtes ^, that
Cofys differ^ and fays that the old Paris Edition
meaning, that ofG'^^^;^«^, but without adding any
othtr that does fo too) foolifhly repeats the word
Niceffe. And Gr otitis f , obferving the fame Va-
riety,. confefTeshe can t fee what tolerable Senfe thofe
Words can have 'j.' and therefore he leaves 'em out
as fpurious. And till better Authoritys can be
produced to confirm that Reading, we fhall think
thc-Repetition too* fitly for Termltiany 3,nd there-
fore rejed it.
. -It's frivolous to fay TertulUan is as much againft
the Baptifm of all unmarry'd Perfons, &c, as of
"^ In the fir ji Edition^ K.nm 16 11^.
f In Matth. cap.xix.14.
In-
5 1 2 (^(efleSiiom on Kr.Wall'^ Let. i ^ I
Infants ; as Mr. Wall does from Bifhop Fell "^.
He advifes fuch, indeed, as are in any danger of
finning,' to delay their being baptiz'd^ but he
plainly oppofes the Baptifm of Infants upon
quite different Topicks, namely, becaufe they are
incapable of that Sacrament, and becaufe they
have no need of it, and it ought not to be ad-
miniftred to 'em. He makes it therefore ufelefs
and unlawful to baptize Infants^ but does not
intimate fb of unmarryM Perfons, &c.
How unfit Infants are for Baptifm, he fhews in
other Places*, as when he fays, f The Soulis fanBi-
fy*d not by Wajhing^ but by the Anfwer of a good
Confcience •, as St. Peter fays, i Epft» Chap. iii. 2 1 .
to which Place TertulUan probably alludes. And
again, to omit abundance more which might be
cited, arguing about the Ufe and Neceflity of Re-
pentance, he fays, [1 Bapti/m is the Seal of Faith '^
which Faith is begun and adorned by the Faith of
Repentance* We are not therefore wafh^d that we
may leave finning^ but becavfe we have already done
ity and are already purify d in our Hearts, Are
thefe the Words of a Man who thought Baptifm
might be given to Infants? Are Infants already
purify'd in Heart? Have they left llnning? And
are they therefore wafh'd ? Have they any fuch
Faith as TertulUan here fpeaks of? And yet he
fays, Baptifm is the Seal of this fort af Faith
particularly ^ and therefore doubtlefs he thought
=*• In Cyprian. Epift. 64.
"■ f De Kcfarrei^ion. cap. 48. pag. 35$. B. Anima non
Lavatione fed ReCpoafione fancitur.
II De Pcenitentia, cap. 6. pag. 125. B. Lavacrum illud
Oblignatio eft Fidei, quae Fides ^ Pcenitentiae Fide inci-
pinir & commendatur. Non ideo abluimur, ut delinquere
definamus, fed quia defiimus: quouiam jam Corde loti
funius. . ' ■
■ A th©
Let. I J. Hijlory of Infant-^aptifm. .51:5
the Seal cou'd not be regularly apply'd w'^^-re
this Faith vVas wanting. But ovr A-' >
don't much heed what TenvlHan ^\''' , ^>
much againft 'em ^ tho if he is thb^j^ht Vr •
any thing in their Favour, he is a good A .: •
rity enough.. And there'fofe Mr IVsrli wa^' 'un-
willing to itrp'the occafion of noting fvom Trrtui-
Haft's Expofition of i Cor. vii. i 4. that thofe Weirds
are by him underftood of Baptifm, and the Holi-
nefs there fpoken of, is Bdptifmal Hdlnefs-,- ' But
what Advantage he propos'd to himfelf by thre I
can't guefs*, for he allows Tertulllan paraphrafes
Holy by deftgnd for Holtnefs^ and- therefore -only
meant at mod that they were deli gn'd to- be
baptiz'd in time, which is oppoiite to the Senfe
the modern Paedobaptifts plead for. ' • •
Befides, I don't fee Tertullim gives any Intima-
tion that he underftood this PatTage to relate- to
Baptifm at all ^ on the contrary,'' he %s, they
are ^ holy by the Prerogative of that Seed^'ar.d the
JnflrtiBion in their Education^ but not a word of
Baptifm : nay he, as plaialy as Words can e^nrefs,
refers to the Cleannefs or Hbliiiefs of ^Bnth,
and underftands St. P^«/ fotoo, wheil he repeats
his Senfe thus, of either fatem farBlffd- the Chil^
dren are born Holy. I hop^ you don't! thln^k he
meant they w'eire born ^^/^^?;c'^':; And agahi he
adds, otherwife thiy woud be ho^'^'^tindean \ which
talTages Mr. PK^// has not ri^gh^'Iy traiilla^ecl/^s
you may ftd by" comparing^ his £/2rg-/;y?j with the
Ltatm. , . ,r,
; Tho Mr. WT^/r has tak^ti fuch' pains f to fhew,
the Antients generally underftood this Paflag^ con-
cernirug Baptifm, yet he has not once attempted to
* De.Ariima, cap. 59. Tarn ex feminis Prasrogativa,
q«am ex Inftitutionis Difciplina.
t Parti, pag. 2i7>6'f«
L 1 fliew
5. 14 ^pciions on Mr.W^XYs Let. i 5 .
flievv that any of the Fathers of the firft 3cmd
Years underftood it.fo •,, and I don't remember that
a fingle Inftance can be produc'd for it from their
Writings, tho I might eafily produce feveral to
the contrary from Suhensus^ St. Clement oi Alex-
andria^ Sec. And as for the following Centurys,
in which Infant- Baptifm,together with a multitude
of intolerable Errors, prevail'd in the Church ; it
is not to be wonder'id at, if feveral Pallages of
Scripture were itrangely mifapply'd, to defend
'em.
To as little purpofe are all Mr. Wall's Endeavours
^ to Ihew the Words a^®', dydlioSm^ dyvl{^jj &c.
mean to wajl)^ or bapiz^e. For, not to enter nicely
into the Examination of the Matter, it's plain they
much more commonly mean no fuch thing -^ in Scrip-
ture they (ignify to confccrate^ EzeL xxii.26. to hal-
low^ Matt. vi. p. and fometimes they mean the
Sanclification of our Lives and Anions, Lev. xx. 7.
and frequently elfewhere. For what Reafon then
will our Adverfarys fo refolutely fix a Senfe here,
that is feldom if ever us'd, rather than any of
the more common and eafy Acceptations ? Why
may not we read the Place, the unbeUeving Huf"
band has been prevail'd on by the,, believing Wife
to forfake his former Vices and irregular Courfe
of Life, &c* as well as according to, the Pxdp-
baptift's Paraphrafe? efpecially fmce the Apoftje
in the next Verfe but one fhews he had that -jn
his Mind, For what knowefi thou^ O Wife^ whether
thou flidt fav^ thy' Husband? ^C, 'Tis thus O;'/-
gen feems to -underftand it by his faying, -^ When
the Husband believes firjly he fometimes faves his Wiff^
— —1 — J 'XOi: .Mi ■ .i-r : ■ • ■
^ 45art I. pagi 82,- 83, t^y^^.- -^ "^*^""
t InMatth. pag.3^2. ."On"^' o*Av*V ^'J^pv 'm^dicni
and
Let. 1 ; . Hlftory of Infant-^aptifni. j\ 5
and when the Wife believes Jirfi^ flie perfuadcs her'
Husband*
Dv. IVhitby is very accurate in proving, t^e.
Words fpeak only of feminal Hdlihers*, as is alio
the Right Reverend Bifhop of Samm ^ : but if this
wereallow'd, it does not immediately follow, tKfc'
Children mull l>e baptiz'd, becaufe the Patent^-'
are Believers j which our Adverfarys take fof^
granted, tho 'tis the very thing in Queftioti*-
And the whole Argument depends- upon this P^-^
tftio Principiij as is plain if we put it into Form.'
All the Hbly Seed, that is, all who are bbrn of
Ghriftian Parents, ought to be baptiz'd : but In-*
fants are the Holy Seed ^ therefore Infants are
to be baptiz'd.
Befides,it can't be pretended that fan Eilfy'd .means
feminally Holy in the former Part of theVerfe;
which Itfakes it the more unlikely it means fo ia'
the latter Part^ tho it (hou'd fignity fo elfewhere'* ' ^'
Nay further, upon the Hypothefis of fome of'
our Adverfarys, which is alfo the moft rational
by far, what St. Paul fays here is utterly falfe,'-
atid muft appear fo to all conilderate Men. The '
only Reafon why' Infants are t6 be admitted to ,
Baptifm, St. P^tt/ fays, according to them, is, that*
one of the Parents is Ghriftian ^ but if fo, then
aH others, tho brought to be baptiz'd by ever fo
good Suretys, are not to be admitted, for they are
unclean: but thfs is contrary to God's infinite
Goodnefs and Juftice, and alfb to the Hypothefis
which the moft judicious Pxdobaptifts now general-
ly follow. And beiides, it gives the ^fir///; Difpen-
fation the Advantage over the Ghriftian in this
refped, that the Infants born of Heathen Parents
might be brought to Circumcifion, and fo enter'd
* Articles^ pag. 50$, 5^6.
L 1 z into
5rir^ (^efleBim on}Mr.W'^\{\ Let.! 3.
into that Covenant/,: whereas, the Grace of
(Christ mufl: be ' limited to narrower Bounds,
\vhile none canj^be^^mUted but thofe bora of at
l^fl: one Ghrilli^n Parent.
The jufteft ^I^iterpretation which can be made^
upon o^r Author's own Principles, I think is that
which he fo much defpifes, namely, that hj HoU-
«W5 isbnly va^y^t^ Legitimacy. For if Profely-
tiim,' among the ^^Tpx, difTQlv'd all natural Tyes
and l?lelations,'fq.as, to make it lawful for a Man.
to ri;iarry his ownMotheji', . &c. ^ becaufe fhe cou'd -
now no, longer be a(;:counted his MotJi^T v and if it
made it; unlawful foraMan to co-habit with his
former Wife, fhe being alfo no longer accounted his
Wife; and if the Chriftlans thought their Rege-^
ner^tion to Chriftianity as extenfive as that of the
Jxwj'i from whom they borrowi'd thi;s , Notion ,4" ?
what can be mor^ proper a,nd:;fiatMral;. than ta»
fiippofe, Su Paul is endeavouriog m ppt better ,
thoughts into his Converts, and.perfuade 'em that
t|ieir Profelytilm did not diflblve natural Bpnds
and Conianguinity J: and that 'twas not only law**
fui, but adviftbk, and, a Duty .for the Wife,
tp dyveli with her Husband? for.be fs jiillj l^er
legitimate true, Jiusband, otherwifeuncjeed, feys i
he, your Child^ren- wpu'id b? qnckan^ 35 :Bafl:aros
%Vcre accounted : tut die Husba^nd . being legiti-
mate^ the Children are fo too- :
This Senfe is deriv'd from our Author's own-
Principles, and thqrpfore^ L think, he ought not
to, except againlj;; it. And it feems to be
the true one, if i vye obferve that the Holinefs
of the Children is faid to refult .not, from
the Chriltianity of either Parent, but from the
Husband's being fandify'd by, or to the Wife.
'^ Wall's Introd. pag. 21. f Ibi<J..-; . .-i '•
Kow
Let. 1 ^. Hljkry of Infmt-^h^tijm. 5 1 7
Kovv what caa this HoHnefs be which fprings
from thexiceP.TheBaptifm of the Parents can't
fervcifoi: ithe Children ^ nor do I fee that in any
other Senfe, beficte what is given^ the Sanc^ifi-
cation of the Parents can denominate the Chil-
dren Holy.
And tho I cannot allow ofi Mr. Watth Hypo-
thefis concerning the pretended Jewi^i Regene-
ration, yet I urge this to be the true Senfe of
the Place, becaufe it's otherwife plain the Jem
did not think it lawful to continue with a Stranger
in Marriage, Nehem^ xiii. 23, &c» as neither did
the Chriftians, as may appear from St. Juftin
Martyrs Apology. And the Greek Church, even
to this day, account it unlawful to marry with
any out of their own Communion *, for all fuch
they look upon as Heathens, out of the Lord;
and the Children of fuch Marriages are to them
but Baftards. Under the Jewiflj Difpenfation in-
deed it was unlawful; but when Christ came,
he difallow'd the Divorces Mefes had tolerated
for the hardnefs of their Hearts ^ it's true, he ftiU
left it unlawrul to marry out of the Lord *, but
as for Marriages already contra^ied in Unbelief,
tho one Party afterwards became a Believer, the
Chriftian Law did not oblige to put away the
other who did not believe*, for Christ allows
no Caufe of Divorce, hut Fornication only- Since
then a miftake in this Dodrine did arife in the
Church, and St. Paul is expredy fpeakmg of this
very Cafe, and endeavouring to convince em, as
appears by the whole Context, of their Error,
what can be more natural, than to take the Words
in the Senfe Mr. >r^// fo fcornfully rejeds?
But however, I think 'tis paft all doubt, the
word Holy cannot fignify baptiz'd^ as Mr. Wall
wou'd have it, and none of his Inftances prove
it does: Z.m>. vi. 27. for Example, only exprefles,
LI 3 t^^^
-^5 1 8 (^fleBiom. on Afr.WaUV Let. i 5.
that whatever touch'd the Flcfh of the Sin-Offerr
ing fhou'd be fanEhify'd *, the Word is general, and
mult be underlbood to mean, according to the
Diredions given in the Law, and imports no
more; and if they fandify'd fuch things by wafli-
ing, it was not from any fuch Senfe in the word
SanBify^ which fignifys no one way more than
another *, but from particular Precepts which de-
termined the way of Sanctifying : as in fome Cafes
it was by making fuch things as abide the Fire
to go through the Fire, Numb. xxxi. 23. and in
this of touching the Flefh of a Sin-Offering, perhaps
it was by wafhing, tho this is not exprefs'd ^ but
if it were, why fhou'd we hence pretend San&ify
means IVajh, any more than that it fignifys to
jinoint^ becaufe in Exod, xxix. 36. 'tis faid of the
Altar, Thou fialt j^noint it to SanEhify it ? And,
in fhort, why may not SanBifyd and Holy, in the
Paflage in difpute, be underftood in the fame Senfe
in which our Lord fays. The Temple SanBifys the
Gold^ and that the Altar SanElifys the Gift, Matt,
xxiii. 17, 19 ^ Here is plainly no manner of refe-
rence to W^/?//w>^. Why may not the Husband be
fanftify'd by the Wife, and the Children by both,
in the fame Senfe as the Gold is fandify'd by the
Tem.ple, whatever that be ? And the Senfe I put
. upon the Words will appear the more probable,
if it be obferv'd, that the Jews ufe C?lnp to fig-
: nify chafi, as Caftellm notes on the Word, and
Htt^lp for a Harlot. And Buxtorf ']- informs us.
The Word was us'd by the Rabhl-as to cxprefs
the Confecration of the Bride to the Bridegroom, &C. in
Marriage: and fo |j ti^lnp is us'd for the thing,(y\z,
t Lexic. Talmud, ad Voc. Col. 1978. Apud Rabbinos
pr^terea IV "^.p fynechdochice dicitur de Coniecratione
V7jZ'?Ss. iL-i Conjugium.
^ \\ Tbid. Col. 1980. Res ipHi, per qnarn fit Defponfatio,
veluti.Annulus auc ponum, quo defponiatur Puella.
the
Let. I ^ . Hijlory of Infant- (Baptifm. 5 1 9
the Ring or Gift) by which the Ceremony of Betrothing
is performed. And fo the third Book of the Seder^
CD>t!?3, is call'd pU^llp*, becaufe it treats of Ma-
trimonial Contracts, the feveral Ways of Betroth-
ing and Confecrating, and decides many difficult
Cafes which arife on thefe points. All this is
highly in favour of the Expofition I give, while
our Adverfarys can make no ufe of St. Paul's
Words, till they can prove that by hoiy he meant
baptiz'd •, or elfe, that becaufe Children are here
faid to be holy, they mull therefore be baptiz'd,
which they are pleas'd generally to take for
granted.
The next Author Mr. IVall argues from is
Origen, And here indeed we confefs, the PalTages
cited are very full and plain Teflimonys for Infant-
Baptifm 7 for as Mr. Wall fays, '\ The TUimefs is
fuch as needs nothing to be faid of it^ nor admits
any thing to be faid againft it. But yet we may
obferve,
I . That thefe, which are the only dired, clear
Paflages yet produc'd to our Author's purpofe,
are not Origens own Words, but taken from
a licentious"/.^?^/?/ Tranilation ; while not the
leafl: colour of any thing can be urg'd from
what remains of that Father's in the Greeky and
yet we have more of his in the Greek than of
any Father who wrote before him. And, I think,
this is very remarkable, that what Origen fays in
favour of Infant-Baptifm, fhou'd be all in thofe
L<«f/w Tranflations, and nothing of the fame na-
ture to be met with in fuch confiderable Remains
in the GreeL Some indeed cite a PalTage from
the Greeks which Mr. Wall thinks is better let
alone ^ for the whole Force of it, he fays, de-
t Parti, pag. 35. ,
LI 4 pends
5v2o d^fleciions on- M-.Wall^y, Let. i;^.^
pends upon an artful leaving out fuch W ords a^' :
puzzle theCaufe: h-^d they been indeed left out
in the Original hjOrlgeji^ Mv*Wcdl thinks f h^:
mufl then have been underftood of Infants in Age* \
But i fee no fuch Kecefiity of this-, the Place, it's
true, had been much more doubtful, and perhaps
might as well, have, been underftood of fuch, as
of Men refemhling Infants: but it cou'd not have
been necelTary to uruderftand it of Infants in Age;
for why m^\\X\mt D.rlge,i have meant the fame
thing he' doe?. mow, tho he had not exprefs'd
himfelf fo clearly ? .
But llnce the Words are put in, they unavoid-
ably 'ihew he did not fpeak of Infants in Age : and
SirjPt>^r76>|-'s proving the fame Word is at fome
Pages diftance us'd by Origen for Infants in Age,
does not prove it muft mean fo here too. The
Father is fpeaking of Guardian Angels, and puts
this Queftion, Whether they take the Care and Ma-
nagement of Verfons^ from the time when they by the
wafhing of I^egenerationf whereby they were new-born^
do^ as new-born Babxsj dejire the fine ere Milk of the
Word^ &c. It's ftrange Mr. Wall Ihou'd fay, after
all his Pretences to Impartiality and Fairnefs,
that the || mention of their defiring of the fincerc
A'filkofthe Word at the time of their Baptifm^ makes
it doubtful (only) whether he meant Infants in a
proper Senfe : for it can be no doubt to any Maa
in his wits, whether Infants of a Month or two
can defire the lincere Milk of the Word. But
Mr. Wall goes On to obferve, that the Anfwer
Or/^c;? gives to thisQaeftion increafes the Doubt ^
and this he grounds upon thefe Words, The time
of Peoples Vnbelief is under the Angels of Satan : and
t Part I. pag. 40.
II Part I. pag. 41.
then
Let.13. Hifiory of Infant.^Baptlfm. jzi
thm after their fien> Birth, he that has bovght u,
mth hs 0vm Blood, delivers W *, a ^ood %g-el..
I am confident no body can imagine thefe Words^
arc fpokenof Infants; and therefore, quite con-'
trary to Mr ^^.//'s Pretence, they take away all
Ambiguity which might have been in the Words,,
and clearly Ihew that On;^f„ fpokc, not of Infants
in Age, but only of fuch tittU ^s as believe in
Chr 1ST. . ' , ; '
f Befides this, I don't remember any thine is
cited from Of'/^.w in theffr^,^, which are hisohlv
Autheniick Pieces: but many things might be
ftrongly urg d from thence againft the Bapdfm of
Infants. I have already cited on another occa-
fion a Paflage very much to this Purpofe; and
t.s certain as to the reft, that wherever he fpeaks
of Baptifm, he fpeaks of it in relation to the
Adult only.
2. But the nextObfervation I make, and which
utterly invalidates all Mr. Walt's Citations, is,That
they are not only taken from Tranflations inftead
v^"^k"'1'' ''"' ^5'^ *'^°^« Tranflations are made
rhl«/r'' /"u^^^-*i''"'^5'' ^'^l^°"t keeping to
the Senfe of the Original, and therefore theylan-'
not be thought Authentick enough to ground an
Argument upon 'em; for we can never W
what 0«^,« fays, from what the Tranflators have
alter d and inferted. The Tranflations of the
fn. ^\ CIS notorious, have a very bad Name,
and thofe of On^eti in particular.
Caffiodorm, fomewhere fpeaking of Clemens Alex-
andrwus s Commentarys on the Canonical Epiftles,
lays, II He has expre/s'd many things very acutely,
A2^^T/°r '"'^•D!^!,»-,Lea. Lib.,. Ubi multa fub-
tihter ,ed ahqua incautfe locutus eft : qus nos ita trans-
tern fecimus in Latinum, ut exclufis suibufdam Offcndi-
cuhs, pnnficata Doftrina ejus fecurior poffit JiaMiri.
and
5^2 ^fleElms on Mr. WallV Let. i ^ .
and fome very vnwarily '-, which roe have caused to he
ttanjlated into Latin, in fuch a manner^ m^ omitting
what might give offence^ his pure and whole fom Doc-
trine might he the more fafety imbibed. And as to
Origen in particular, Crotim fays, ^ A great deal
of what is afcrib*d to him is an unknown Author^s^ and
a great deal is interpolated. And Huetius^ who has
perhaps taken the moft pains with Origen of any
Man, fays f in general of his Remains, that they
are very imperfed and much abus'd, or elfechang'd
and deformed hy abominable Tranflattons. Mr. Daillk
II makes his Earnings of this, and notes that
Ruffinus has fo filthily mangled^ andfo licentioujly con-
founded the Writings of Origen, &c^ which he has
tranflated f«f<? Latin, that you will hardly find a Page
where he has not retrench^ d^ or added^ or altered fome-
thing- Mr, Du Fin feveral times repeats the fame
thing, and fays, *^ Thofe Pieces we have in Latin
are tranflated by Ruffinus and others^ with fo much
liberty ^^ that it is a difficult matter to difcern what is
OrigenV own^ from what has been foifted in hy the
Interpreter, In another Place he fays, f f Ruffiniu
gave himfelfagreat deal of Liberty in his Tranflations^
and kept more to the Senfe which he judged ought to
he given to Authors^ than to their Words, In fijort^
his Tranflations are Paraphrafcs rather than literal and
faithful Ferfions. He hath us^d much freedom par-
ticularly in Eufebius'j Hifiory^ and in Origen'^ Trea^
tifes^ where he has chang^d^ added and firuck out
many things^ as he acknowledges himfelf And again,
St' Hierom^ he fays, \\\\ fomewhere upbraids him with
* In Matth. xix. 14. Cui quae afcribuntur quaedam funt
incerti Autoris, qusdam interpolata.
t Origenian. Lib. 3. cap. 2. Sdt 3. §. i. Perverfis In-
terpretationibus deformat*.
jl De ufu J^atriim, Lib.i, cap. 4,
*'*' Hift. Ecclef. V.0I. I. pag. 117.
•i-f Ibid. Vol. 3. pagi 108.
nil Ibid. Vol. I., pa 2/115:2. frj.
it :
Let. 13. Hiflory of InfanU^aptlJm. 525
it : Beftdes^ this appears by the Travjlation it felfy
which is full of Figures^ and Allupons to Latin Words ^
of Terms taken in another Senfe than what they w§re
j« Origen'j time^ where the T R I N ITYj and
other Myfierys are exprefs^d in fuch Terms as were
not u^d till after the Council of Nice, and where
there are Points of Difciplme more modern than Ori-
gen'/ ^gc'') which has given occafion to thofe who
have not confider^d the liberty Ruffinus took of ad^
ding or leaving out what he pleas'd^ to doubt whether
the greatefl Part of thefe Works were Origen'j or no*
The liberty which Ruffinus has given himfelf is ftitl
more evident^ by what he has written in the Prologue
to this Verfion of the Commentary upon the Epifile
to the Romans, which^ he fays^ he has abridged by
above the Half St, Hierom's Verfions are not more
exaB. To thefe we may add an ExprefTion of
Tarinusy in his Notes on the Philocalia, "^ who fays ^
Ruffinus has perverted the whole Proem^ and^ as he
ufually does, altogether forfakes the Original-
And all this is abundantly evident, not only
from this Cloud of unexceptionable WitnefTes,
but alfo from comparing the Verfions with the
Originals as now ejftant, which you may do at
your leifure, and alfo from their own Confef-
fions in the feveral Introdudions and Clofes pub-
lifh'd together with the Tranllations.
What Man in the World cou'd perfuade himfelf
that an Argument may be founded on fuch Ver-
fions ? For how can he know Whether Origen fpoke
any thing like what he now reads, lince the
Tranflators were fo fcandaloufly guilty of alter-
ing and putting in what they pleas'd ? And fince
Mr. Wall allows this too, he to be fure fliou'd
not have urg'd thefe Paflages.
* Ad Cap. I. pag. i, ver. 28. Totum porro hoc Proe-
miuqi Ruffinw contorfit, & ut foletin aiia vmnia abiit.
But
5^4 ^fleBions on MrWdVs Let. 1 3 .
Bat to this Objedion., which he owas is very
confiderable. Jic anfwers, i. That tho Ruffimtsv/as
fo^cTMilty ill this Point, yet St. Hierom tookainore
faithful Method, "^ exfrejfmg tvery thing as it was
in the Original : and therefore^ fince the Paf&ge he
tranfcribes from the Commentarys on St. Luke^
traiiflated by Su Hierom^ contains the fame thing
in effed with thofe tranfcrib'd from Rvffinush
TranilationS) it is to be fuppos'd Rvffinus alter'd
nothing in thofe Particulars. y-^^-^x^ v t-
But, Sir, you need only compare SV filer of?i*s
Tranflarians with the Originals, to fee that his
Verfions^ as Monfieur du P;V7 fays, are not more exaB
than thofe of Ruffinm j many things he .has left
out, and given a different Turn to others, as might
be iliewn in abundance of Inftances. His Veriioa
of Eufeblu^'^ Chromcon is a great Example of hh
Liberty iivtranflating : as is alfo his Book /i^^ Zw:;V
Hehraicis^ in the Preface of which he confefies he
has omitted what he thought not worth remera-
bring, and alter'd the greatcft part of it. Nay,
lie owns, f he took fuch a freedom in tranfla-
ting Origen^ as to fir ike out what was dangerous,
and leave o.nly that which wsfs ufeful \ which made
Scaliger \\ fay, St. Hierom was but a had Tranfla-
ton
2. In the next Place our Author pretends, that
whatever might have been alter'd and interpola-
ted ia other Matters, there h no manner of Pro-
bability any thing was done fo in the Point of
infant-Baptifmv^caufe it was none of the Sub-
}€ds on which Origens Opinion was queftion'd,
it that time. But Mi. Wall might as well pre-
pare I. p. 36.
Hpift. 62. ad Theoph. Alex.
hL Lib. 2. Apol. contra RufEn.
Scali^erana, p. ipi.
Let. f 5 . Hifiory 4)f Infant'-^aptifm. 5 1 5
tend they left out ndthingbtit what related to
thbfe Points, aS' that they alter'^d nothing dfe^
which however wou-d be falfe. And' ybu may^^-
jnember, Monfieur ^iit Pin bbfervfes trtat the Trah*
flations contain fever al Points of pifciplineriiiD^e
modern thanOrigenhA^^ : anil thb'they tobk par-
tkuto care of thofb things which' ^Were difpcitefd;
yet it does not foOow they -rtiade no inanrier''of
Alteration In any others ; oil the contraty^'tis
very likely^ they who- had once giVen themfelves i
liberty to make their Author fpeak theirThovght^,
have done it oftaer than we ^are aware: Aiid
that they did fo, you will be eonvinc'd^ b^ reVi^
fingOr/g:f?^*s. Fragments with their Tranflatioti'^
where j thro P^ribrahee or Carelefneft, or whatever
might be the Gaule, there are a gre^t many De-
viations froiSi the Originals in Paflages which
don't coticern the Points on which Or/g-^w'sOpinioa'
wiis queftionM* - ' ^ " \ - '-
BefideS) wh^ri the Tranfla tors own tiie Kftfe'
fuHyv and waril theit^ Readers of the great Altera-
tions they have made, it is not to be fuppo^'df
they <v^ou'd be underftood to have alter'd only^
thofe things ^'hich were difputed, but that the^
altered fo rauch^ that fome People thought the^
fhoti'd rather have publifh'd the Work under theit^
own Names,as the Authors,and not asTranflators'l
which appears from the Peroration at the end
of the Verfion of the Commentary upon the Epif-
tie to the Romans, And in Ruffinush Verlion of the
Fragment of this Commentary, which makes the
25tn Chapter of fhe P/7i/c?^^/^ there are hardly
any Footfteps of the Original preferv'd, or any
thing in which they agree.
«'$. 'In the third Phce, our Author fays, tho
Rtijfin^i ufually tool: ^jch a Latitude, and fo ftrange-
ly alter'^d the Gommj^fttury od Leviticus more efpe-
ciaiiy, yet he dealt othtrwiie with that on the-
Epiitlc
^i6 (I^eflcBions on MnWdXYs Let. i f.
Epiftle to the Romans, from which the principal
Citation is taken : for Ruffinus^ only fays, he had
fliorten'd this Work by one half, but /peaks of no
Addition. And it is in this, fays our Author, that
there is mention of the Tradition from the jifoftles^
that Baptifm (hou'd be given to Infants. Ob-
ferve the Inference^ a Man who was wont to
put out, infert, and change whatever he pleas'd
with an unbounded Liberty, mull now be fup-
pos'd only to have fliorten'd the Work without
any Addition or Change, becaufe he only fays he
had jhortend-ity^nd does not : fay ^ he added any
thing to it : but neither does he fajy thq contrary,
and therefore 'tis unreafonableuto fi;ippofe he a^n
ed iiere differently from his couft^nt^ Praftic^* -'f//
ISlay, he confefes,. he has added many tbingSi
of his own 3 for he fays, || fW f^^r* was a great
deal of^the Rody^of the Book wamingj in all Libr^rysr>
And this he has endeavour'd in fopip meafure. Cc^
fupply. And in the Peroration',- he adds, -f- 7l?^j/
tell me, therejs fi mtch of yoW otvn iftfhejfe thhfgJlf'
that you ou^ht to, call ^^fn by your > own Name, avdm'\
title the I'FLr;^',. An Explication of. the Epiftle, tOj
the Romans, by Hierom, for example^ '&c, which is ar
lign there was lefs of Qrige?^ in -this Work,, thaa.,
of tlie Tranllator. To this Ruffinus- anfwers, witM
Out denying the ■. Cha.rge : * But 1 have more reg^rd^
to my Confcicnce, than to a great Name ', and th'Q I
add^
■ • «• '--. <•■ , K. . '\ -^ ,' ■ ' ■
IJ Prafat. Deftihr fere. . apud .Qmriium "Bibliothec^s (in-
cci:tum fane quo Ca'ru') aliquanta ex ipfo Corpore Volo-
njina. - ■■ *./ ; ..-:■. { : li i- . ■ . .>: i _ • ■^^'
t Alunt enim mihi-, in his qua^.fcribis, qjuoniampluri-
ma in eis tui Operis habentur, da Tituluip Nominis tuf,
6i icribe Hierpnymi (verbi gratia) in Epiftolam ad Rp-
mands EKplanationum Libri. -• . v
^ Verum ego qui plus Confcientise me« quam Nomini
defero, etiamii addcre aliqua videor, & explere qu32 de--
funt,
Lee. 1 5 . Hifiory of Infant'^aptifm. 5 1^
add fome things^ and fuffly what was wanting^ and
Jhortsn what feems too long^ J don't think I therefore
ought to put my own Name in the Title ^ and rob him
of the Work who laid the bouyidation^ and furtiiflj^d
Materials for the StruBure. . ';.i.j
If therefore we may take ^wj^«»j's own Word
for it, he has made as free with this Commenta-
ry on the Romans^ as with the other Pieces h^
tranilated. Which is likewife inconteftably evi-
dent, if you compare, as I faid before, the 25th
Chapter of the Philocalia with Ruffinus's Verfion.
.Befides, it may be added, that the Commentary
.was miferably interpolated before Ruffinus took it
,in hand, which he complains of in the Preface-
■ and therefore if he had been ever fo faithful, no
certain Argument cou'd be drawn from xhefe C^m-
-mentarys- .K^ui:\ai:,\j{:\^M
Mr. Wall cites another PafTage from the Homilys
, on Jofliua^ in thefe Words: According to that Say-
ing of our Lo R D concerning Infants^ (tnd thou wafi
,ia?K infant when thou wafi baftizjd) Their ylngels do
: always bthdd the Face of my Fat hek which is in
Meaven. And to ftrengthen this, he fays, f Tho
: this ^ Part of Qu^^^' s Works be not extant in Greek,
-yet m may the more depend upon it^ he cauf eKM^Ti\xs
iafiires us,^ that in the Tr an flat ion of theje Homily f^
i^che has neither added nor omitted any things but
-tridy render d what he found in the Greek Booh.
But,
- I . It's doubtful, as Mr. Wall himfelf alfo notes,
.whether by thou waft an Infant when thou waft hap^
tiz^'dj he- means an Infant in Age, or only in a
fpiritual Senfe. And,
2. Tho
Materia m prasbuit, reaum non puto.
t Pare I. p. 42 ^
528 (^fleSiions on Mr.WzWs Let. 1 5 .
2. Tho Ruffinus fays he has tranflated thefe Ho-
milys as he found them in the Greeks he only means
in comj^arifojl with the Liberty he ufually took
v^ith other Books: but that he added and very
much alter'd even thefe Homilys too, can't well
t^ doubted v for if we compare that Fragment of
the 20th Homily, which is the 12th Chapter of
the Phihcalia, with his Tranilation, you will fee
HOlhing can be more different ; and particularly
jfee- inferts thefe Words : As the Lord [aid of
the linle ones of the Churchy that their Angels do at"
'Boays fiand before the Lord, and fee his Face*
Which are not in the Greek oiOrigen\ and therefore,
j^^ Riiffintis has added 'em here of his own head,
^tis as probable he did fo in the other Paflage our
Author cites. Thus, upon the whole, 1 think it
fufficiently appears, that what is urg'd from On-
j^f)«forf«dobaptifm, has no Force in it.
- . After Origen^ St. Cyprian follows in Mr. WalP%
Quotations: who, Lconfefs, does plainly enough
fpeak of Infant-Baptifm, as pradis'd in Africa in
his time. But it is to be noted, he fpeaks as
plainly of Infant-Communion too •, and therefore
^if his Authority is fufficient for admitting Infants
)^o one Sacramept, it ought^to be allow'd fufEci-
ept for the admitting 'em to the other alfo. 'Tis
^ be obferv'd V like wife, that the firft mention
.^^? Jjave .qf Infant-Baptifm is from thefe Crrfc^
ginian Fathers, which makes it very probable that
it^gaa[fir"ft 'at Carthage. It was attempted in Tlpr-
W-V^'s time i and he, you know. Sir, opposed ic
.ftf^nupuily. But notwithftanding, it took foot-
ing there Ihortly after, and was very common in
St. Cyprianh time : and St. ApjHn thought it an
ApTJftolicalTfadjtion j jult as Dipping, from be-
4fig^ held nectffiry^ was firfl: difpens'd with inXome
*trtct*raordinaty C^fes , then counted indifferent, and
afterwards wholly lard afide, nay counted unlaw-
ful
Let. 1 3 . Htjlory of Infant-^^iptifm. 529
ful too; and all within the fpac? of half a Cen-
tury here in England: and the Error grew as
faft among the ^/nV^;7j, who vv^ere generally Men
of weakUnderftandings. Mr. W^rf/Zhimfelf makes
Fidm but an indifferent Man for a Bifhop, when
he fays, 'j' dl he objeBed of Senfe^ was the Rvle of
Clrcumcifton on the eighth Day* And truly I mull
agree with him, there w^as not much Senfe in the
other things he urg'd, nor indeed in this neither :
for he might as well have baptiz'd on the feventh
Day, becaufe God reded thereon ; as on the
eighth Day, becaufe Ifaac was circumcis'd thereon.
But however, if Fidus was fatisfy'd with St. Cy-
frianh Anfwer, I think this far the greatell Argu-
ment of his Weaknefs, that he cou'd fuffer him-
felf to be impos'd on with fo trifling and empty
a Reply.
But tho the African Bifhops were no wifer than
to admit the Error, perhaps only as an indiffe-
rent thing, or in cafes of Danger, the Greek
Churches feeni very plainly to have been flill of
another Opinion. For Dionyfius the illuftrious
Bifliop oi Alexandria^ in an Epiftle to Dio-ayft^ts a
Presbyter, and afterwards Bifhop of i^^/z?^, concern-
ing Novatian^ ^^ys^ || he utterly difallows of holy Bap-
tifm^ and fubverts the Faith and Vrofeffion "which goes
before it. As this great Man fpeaks of Baptifm in
general, fo he muft be underitood to mean, that in
his Judgment, there was, at that time, a Faith
and Profeffion always to precede it. And it is
impoffible a Man who never dream'd of lafant-
Baptifm, * Ihou'd fpeak more plainly againft ^it :
t Part I. pag. 52.
11 Eufcb. Hift. Ecclef. lib.j. cap. 8. To K^tah i^-riv-n
<r« ciyttiVy ^ rfiv 7? -are? *WT8 Uis-iv x^ 'OiMhayUv dvArf^-
TOtfjt.
M m nor
5 5 o (^jleBions on Kr.Wair^ Let. i 3 .
nor can we exped to find any Paflages more in-
confillent with that Pradice, than this is.
It will not be worth our while to examine how
the Error advanc'd in after-times, and by what
Arts and Changes it extended it felf, and became
fo uaiverfally eftablifh'd, as we fee it at prefent.
'Tis fufficient that the Scriptures, the only infal-
lible Rule of our Faith and Pradice, are found
not to favour the Caufe we difown *, and that the
Authority of the primitive Fathers alfo for at
leaft 250 Years after Christ, give no Counte-
nance %o our Adverfarys, but are rather a-
gainft them. I think, we have abundant rea-
fon therefore to perfift in the Opinion and Prac-
tice w^e profefs, notwithftanding the greateil
numbers of the molt Learned and moft Powerful
are againft us •, and have been fo, it may be, fe-
veral hundred Years.
But to fum up the Evidence fomething more at
large, I rauft deiire you to remember, it has been
clearly provM,
I. Firft in regard to the pretended Silence of
the Scriptures : i . That inftead of yielding our
Adverfarys any Argument, it follows ftrongly
from thence, that Pxdobaptifm can be no Inftitu-
tion of C H R I s T, as being no where mention'd
in the only authentick Chriftian Records. And
therefore to teach and prad^ife, and much more
to impofe it on others, as an Ordinance of
Christ, is altogether unwarrantable. 2. That
the Scriptures are not fo (ilent in this refped,
as is pretended *, and that tho they do not ex-
prelly mention and forbid to baptize Infants,
they do yet require and make fuch Conditions and
Circumltances necelTary in thofe who are to be
admitted, as fufficiently and unavoidably exclude
infants as much as if it had been faid exprelly, In-
fants are not to be baptiz'd. And this I prov'd by
Ihewing,
Let. 1 3. H'lftory of Infant-^apti/nu 5 3 i
fhewing, among other things, that the Commifli-
on, Matth. KXYiii* 19- more efpecially, is fo ex-
prefs'd, as by no means to admit of Infants. And
here, to take off all the Pretences the P^dobaptilts
can be fuppos'd to make, and withal the more
ftrongly to enforce the Argument we draw from
the Place, I have largely (hewn, the Greek Word
^ta6nT5U(i) always, but more efpecially in this Com-
miffion, neceffarily includes teaching in its Signifi-
cation : r. By its Etymology, and the Analogy of
the Greek Tongue ^ by many inconteftable Inftances
of its ufe in the Greek Authors, whether Profane
or Ecclefiaftical, ^s well as in the Scriptures them-
felves, wherein it can be no otherwife underftood ^
and by other fynonymous Words and Phrafes
which frequently occur in parallel Cafes. To all
which I added, the Allowance and Confeflion of
feveral of the moll learned and judicious Writers,
even Paedobaptifts themfelves. 2. By the conftant
and univerfal Agreement of all the Learned Ver-
fions, and as many vernacular ones as 1 have had
opportunity of confulting, which all render the
Word by teach. 3. By the Authority of the antient
Fathers, who continually read and underftand the
Word in that Senfe only. And laftly, by the more
awful Authority of the Sacred Scriptures them-
felves, which do abundantly confirm our Senfe of
the Commiffion j by parallel Places, and other Al-
lufions J and by fhewing, that the Apoftles under-
ftood and obey'd the Commifiion in this Senf5
only.
II. After this, I confider'dthe pretended Prac-
tice of the Jews^ which makes fo much Noife a-
mong the Pxdobaptifts *, and have fhewn evidently,
I. That the Authoritys Mv^Wall cites from the
Jews are not antient enough to aiTure us what
was pradis'd either before, in, or near our S a -
viour's time. 2. That none of the Pafiages
M m 2 fo
5 5 X ^fleElions on Mr. WallV Let. 1 3 ^
To much as afTert or intimate in theleaft, that the
Jews baptiz'd Profelytes in Chri s t'S; time,
which was the thing to be provM. 3. That the
beft Paflage Mr. IVall has, does not neceflarily
ineanBaptifm for Profelytifm, but may very pro-
bably fpeak of fomething elfe. 4. To thefe things
I added, that fome of the Rabbins do fpeak a-
gainft this Ceremony, and make it clear, they nei-
ther allow'd or knew of Profelytory-Baptifm, even
in plainer Words than any cited by Mr. l^ali for
his Purpofe. 5. And then utterly to invalidate all
that is or can be faid from the Jewijh Writings, I
have {hewn, by a great many PafTages taken from
their belt Authors, and by the Teftimony of the
greatcit Judges, that the Rabbinsjn general are
fuch proud, falfe, fenfelefs, whimfical, fcandalous
Writers, as can never be depended on in any
Cafe ^ which makes their Authority the moll def-
picable and infignificant in the Woild : and there-
fore the Baptifm grounded on this Foundation can
be only a fenfelefs Rabbinical Tradition.
I have alfo confider'd' the Paflage he cites from
Arrian:, and fliewn, i. That this is likewife not
antient enough. 2. That he may, for ought ap--
pears to the contrary, fpeak only of the Wafhings
for Pollution, and not for Profelytifm. 3. That
he very probably fpeaks only of the Chriftians,
whom he confounded with the Jews in this, as he
has undoubtedly done in other Places : and thus fe-
veral learned Men have underftood it.
And* as to his next Argument from Gregory
Naz^imzen^ and other Fathers, I have Ihewn,
i. That their Authority in this Cafe fignifys no-
thing, as being too late. 2. That they can't well
be underftood to fpeak of any thing but the Le-
g^I Wafhings for Uncleannefles : and therefore all
MtAV'all advances to prove his Pofition,thatthe J^iPi
'•• ' ' ' in
tct.i 3 • Btftory of Infant'!Bapttfm. j 5 5
in our Saviour's time us'd to baptize their
Profelytes, indeed proves nothing at all.
And after all this, to confirm, as far as. a l^e-
gative can be provM, that the ^^tpj had po fach
Cuftom ^s is pretended, I have (hewn, i . Jh^}
the Saiptures make no mention in the lt?^ft of
any fuch Baptifm ^ and that Exod, xix. lo- par-
ticularly, can't be thought to. do it. 2. That
there is p6 Inftance or Intimation. of fuch Baj^-
tifm in aiiy other authentick^ntient Hvftory, hut
on the contrary a' total Silence, when they, not
pnly had the faireft Occafions, but alfo ought l;^
have mention'd that Cuftom, if they had knowji
it. 3. That the Pretence of the Pagdobaptifts^is
very iinprobajtile. 4. That feveral confiderable
Authors, efpecially the Antients, do in effect deny
they knew .of any Initiatory-Baptifm lamong; f he
Jews', and in their Difcourfes on the Jewtjh Q^-
remonys, never mention this as one : all which
put together, I-fuppofe, can't well be thought
any thing Ihort of proving, the Jews had. no fuch
Ceremony. :-. ^ -^ ,' v"
Butbefides all this, I have, from feveral ^yver
Confidprktions, ihewn, thattho it cou'd.l\ayebee?i
prov'd ever ^ certainly, that the J^w ^)apti2'd
their Profelytes, this can do no Service -to the
Caufe of P«dobaptifm *, becaufe, i .It does not ap-
pear that their Infams werp admitted to that Bap-
tifm. 2. Suppofing Profelytes and th^ir Chil-
dren were ufually baptiz'd by the J^ws, it doesnot
follow their Baptifm muft be a Rule for the Prac-
tice of Chriftians ^ for according to the Paedo-
baptifts themfelves, there is no mai^iier .of^aa-
logy between 'em. 3. Becaufe our Pih.dice.lhou d
rather be regulated by ih^t- of St. John and Christ,
than by that of th^Jews ♦, and they, we arefure,
as far as the Scripture can inform us, baptiz'd no
Children. And laftly, becaufe it is evident, that
Mm 3 ^^
5 ? 4 ' ^fl^^ions on Mr.W^ll^s\ Led. i '^J
at mofl this fuppos'd Baptifm i$ but a RablDihical'^
Tradition. For, i. It's no where itientiQii'd in
the Scriptures. 2. The Jem themfelv.es acknow-
ledg it to be fo ^ and the Phrafe of the Talmud in
thofe very Inftances cited by oar Antagonifts^ even
according to Maimonides his Explication, imports,
that it was neither inftituted by Mofes^^ nor can
be concluded from any thing he writ, nor from
any Tradition from him, but is only founded in
the loweft Authority of the Rabbins: and this
Leven Christ has frequently enough caution'd
us to beware of. And therefore, at laft, from all
it muft follow, that the Pretences our Antago-
nifts make from the fuppos'd Jewijh Praftice and
Writings, can fignify nothing to the Support of
Paedobaptifm.
III. And then thirdly, as to the Dodrine and
Pradice of the antient Church, which Mr. Wall
chiefly argues from *, I have confider'd the three
iirft Centurys, and fliewn, i. in general, That
their Authority alone is not fufficient to bear the
Weight of Infant-Baptifm, tho , they ihou'd be
found to affert it univerfally. a Mr. Wall for-
bears to mention St. Bamahas^ who has fome Paf-
fages iaconfiftent with Paedobaptifni. 3. St, Cle-
mens Rotnanvs^ with whom our Author begins,
and who, he fays without any grbund, fpeaks of
Original Sin as afFeding all Mankind, does not
however fpeak of Infant-Baptifm, nor feem on
any account whatever to have had it in his
Thoughts.
And whereas Mr. Wall argues, upon the Sup-
pofition that St. Clemens efteems all Perfons taint-
ed with Original Sin, that he likewife thought all
ought to be baptiz'd ^ I have obferv'd, i. That
the Premifes as well as the Conclufion, are not
St, Clement's^ but Mr. H^^//'s only. 2. Or fecond-
ly. That at befc, according to our Author, this
only
Let. 1 5 . Htpyyoflnfant'^Baptifm. 5 ] 5
only fhews what was St. Clement's Judgment, and
not what was the Pradice of the Church. Kow
tho the Church in general had thefe Specula-
tions, it won't at all follow they ventur'd bare-
ly upon that account to pradife accordingly.
3. That 'tis all grounded on that uncharitable Er-
ror, That none can be fav'd without being bap-
tiz'd. 4. That Baptifm does not appear to
have been adminifter'd fo much for Original, a^
for Aftual Sins. And laftly. That it no more
follows from that Principle that the antient
Church pradis'd Infant-Baptifm, than that all the
Antipaedobaptifts do fo now, for they likewife
hold the common Notion of Original Sin.
IV. As to St.Hermas, Mr. Wall's next Author, I
have fhcwn, i. That hefpeaks only of Adult Per-
fons who have heard, and believe. 2. That he
only defcribes Vifions, and therefore is not al-
ways to be taken literally. 3. That he cannot be
thought to mean, that thofe he reprefents to have
been baptiz'd in their feparate Eftate after Death,
were adually baptiz'd with material Water. 4.That
if we fliou'd give our Author his whole Argument,
it wou'd only prove Hermas was of opinion that
Infants fhall be baptiz'd in their feparate State af-
ter Death, which is nothing to our Controverfy.
In arguing from this Father, Mr. Wall compares
fome Words of his with our LORD's Saying,
John iii. 5. Exceft a Man^ &c. which gives me
occafion to examine the Argument the Psdobap-
tifts draw from thence. And 1 have, I think, fully
lliewn, T. That the Words cannot be taken fo
univerfally, as to comprehend Infants. 2. That by
Kingdom of GOD 'tis not neceflary to underftand
the Kingdom of Glory. 3. That our Saviour's
Words refer only to Adult Perfons, who have
heard the Word preach'd : i. Becaufe fuch only
can poQTibly comply with the Inftitution. 2. Such
M m 4 only
5 1 6 %efleaions on MnW^Ws Let. i ] .
Only can be fav'd by Baptifm. 3. What's there
faid, cannot be true of any other. And laftly,
fomething in the Words themfelves neceQarily li-
mits'em to Adult Perfons.
In the fame manner Mr. IVa/i gives me occa-
fion likewife to examine what may beurg'd from
Matth. xix. 14. Svjfer little Children^ &C. And I
obferve, i. That the Words have no relation to
Baptifm at all. But, 2. That the Children were
only brought to be touch'd and blefs'd. 3. That
this was probably in. order to heal them, or the
like, and cou'd not be as 'Dw Light foot and Dr.
Whitby fupp6l€, -to ewn\m as belonging to His King-
dom^ nor to obtain for "^emfome fpiritnal Blejfmg af^
pertaining to the Kingdom of G O D. 4. And laftly,
That it does ncit foflow from our Lo rd's faying,
of fuch is the lOngddm of Heaven^ that there is, as
Dr. Whitby afferts, any thing in little Children
why they fhou'd be brought to C h r i s t, befides
their being Emblefti^ of Humility *, much lefs,
that they are fit to be early dedicated to the Ser-
vice of G OD, c^r.T^y the Chriftian Baptifm.
V. After he has dojie with St. Hermas^ Mr. Wall
comes next to St.Jufiin Martyr. ;rrhc'^v^ Paf-
%ehe cites is only to fhev\^,- that^'iie- fpake of
Original Sin as afe(Sing all Mankind. But I fhew,
I. That if it were fo, this is nothing to Infant-
Baptifm. 2. That St. Jw//;? cannot fairly be un-
derftood to fpeakof Original Sin at all i 3. That
Mr. Wail has very much mifreprefented him, and
given a wrong Tranflation of the Words in favour
of his AITertion.
The next Faflage ''which, fpeaking of fpiritual
Circnmcifion, fays, fome have receivd it by Baptifm j
Mr. IVall thinks is as much as to fay. Children
ought to be bapti^M as well as they were wont to
be drcumcisM. But I have clearly fhewn, i . That
St. Jujfin does not call Baptifm Circumcifion.
2, That
LeMj. Hijiory of Infant-Sapttfm. ^yf
2. That hecoa'd not mean Baptifm by the fplm
tual Circumcifion he mentions, both from theft
Words themfelves, and feveral other • PalTages in.
his Writings, which fnfficiently evidence What
he under Rood to be the Chriftian Spiritual Girw
cumcilion. '
^iHere,^ to ftrengthen his AfTertions, our Author
compares fome Words of St. Jvftin with CoL .ii;
II) 12. where he fappofes, St. Paul by the Cirr
cumcifion there fpoken o^, means 'BUptifm, ] la
anfwer to 'which' I obferve, i. That the Scrip-
tures no where call Baptifm Circumcifion : but
that Parity .^^fHeatt, &c. is frequently call'd fo.
2. That the Words in themfeivfis atr^ fuch ascann
not admit of Ib-abfurd an Acceptatbn. 3/ Ich^^it
the Antients can't be thouglit to have under-
ftood 'em foi 4. That befides, if tfiis were the
meaning of St. Jnftin and St. Paul too, it does
not fallow, that the Jewiih Pradice, in regard to
Circumcifion under 'the Law, muft be our Rule
m regard to Baptifift noww : IrQ!r,:aqiafants were
commanded to -be circumcistd ^thfea^ kit are not
commanded' to -'b^ bipti^z'd now. ; 2. Circumcifion
w%s to be on the eighth Day predfely, which
cannot be iirg'd'Of Baptifm. . .3. Females were
not to be eircumci^'d then, and therefore it^woii'd
as well follow they muft not be baptiz'd now.
4^.The Apoftjes did not mak^ Gir^iimcilion their
R«le- in relation to Baptifm. •'■" '1':i '' k
The ne^ct ' Patfage Mr. U^xll' produces fro^m
St.'Jufiin^ not:witH fending his 'Pretences, argues
T^ery ftrongly a^ainft Infant-Baptifm : but" be
fays, he cit^s it only to (hew, i. What was the
moft antient -^^ay of baptizing. Which Obfer-
vation 1 t-firn direft-Iy againft the- EngUjh P^do-
baptifts particularly. 2. That the Chrifiians of
thofe Times -us'd the Word Regeneration for Bap-
tifm. But this Obfervation I have fhewn to be
falfe,
558 (^fleBtom on Mr.W^lYs Let. i f.
falfe, I. From the Words themfelves. And,
2. From other PafTages in St.Jufiin. But the third
thing for which Mr. Wall cites this PafTage of
St. Jufiin is, becaufe he pretends it fhews they
underftood John iii. 5. of Water-Baptifm j and con^
eluded from it, that none can be fav'd without fuch
Baftifm. Which however, it's plain, can't be
St. Jujlin^s meaning ^ for Mr. Wall himfelf allows
St. yw//Vs Words relate only to Adult Perfons,
and not to Infants.
In the next, which is the lall Citation from
this Father, our Author makes him fay, fome
were difcipPd to Christ^ that is," as he under-
ftands it, baptiz'd in their Childhood, even in the
Apoftles times. But this Senfe I have fhewn to
be violently and wrongfully impos'd upon St. Jw/-
tin, by a very falfe and unfair Tranflation of his
Words.
VI. After this comes St Jremus, who is the firfl,
as Mr. Wall allows, that makes exprefs mention
of Infant-Baptifm^ for he talks of Infants, &:c.
being regenerated to GOD. And this is general-
ly thought an unanfwerable Inftance. But I have
fully Ihewn, Firft, That upon feveral Accounts no-
thing can be more probable than that the Paflage,
and all the latter part of the Chapter, is fpuri-
ous. I. Becaufe itcontradids the beginning of it.
2. It's aflerted, St. John and other Apoftles taught
a very grofs Falfhood. 3. St. Irenaus cou'd not but
know the Lord'? Age much more exaftly than
this part of the Chapter makes him do : (i,)From
the memorable things which attended his Birth
and Sufferings. (2.) From his Acquaintance with
thofe who had convers'd with the Apoftles. (3O
From the Difcourfes then extant, to fhew when
the Messias was to come and fuffer. (4.) It ap-
pears even from St. Irenaus's own Writings, ttiat
he
Let.i^. Hijlory of Infant^^aptif?)!. 5^9
he cou'd not believe Christ was near fo old
as this Paflage makes Him •, for he fixes the time
of his Birth, and cou'd not but know the time of
his Death: i. By the famous Event of the De-
flrudion of JerufaUm. 2. Prom Phle^on^ who wrote
but a little before him. 3. From computing the
Years of the Emperors according to their com-
mon Reckonings V or particularly from Jofephus.
Secondly^ This Quotation is taken from a very cor-
rupt Tranflation only ^ as is prov'd, i . By the
Authority of learned Men. 2. By feveral Inftances
wherein the Tranflator appears to- have chang'd,
added to, or taken from the Senfe of the Ori-
ginal.
Bejides this, I have Ihewn, that if the PalTage
were genuine, and well tranilated, i. It does not
fpeak of Baptifm ^ and that it is not true to af-
fert,. as Mr. Wall does, that the Antients always
by regenerate^ &c. mean baptiz'd : nay, I have
prov'd by many Inftances, that they never mean
fo ^ particularly that John iii. 5. and Titus iii. 5.'
cannot be fo underftood ^ and that St. Iren<tus has
not us'd the Word fo once in all his Writings.
2. The Place does not fpeak of Infants in our
common Acceptation, of one or two Years old,
but comprehends all to ten Years of Age. From
all which, I think, it neceffarily follows, that no-
thing hitherto advancM by Mr. Wall can do the
Caafe of P«dobaptifm any Service.
VII. Next we come to Tertidlian^ who Mr. Wall
fays fpeaks of the NecefTity of Baptifm in fuch
general Terms as to reckon thofe that die unhaftizJd
as lofi Men, But I have Ihewn, he fays as much
of the Necejfity of Faith^ &c. and therefore this
Obfervation is no Argument againft us. And as
to his exprefs mention of Infant-Baptifm, when
he oppofes it, that does not neceffarily argue, as
our
54^ ^fleSiions 6nMr.W:^\Ys Let.hj];
our Adverfarys wou'd h^ff it, that it was cpm-
monly praftis'd at that-tia^qv only that fame were
endeavouring to introduce it. j Again, 'tenulUan
does not, as Mr. Wall pretends^ -ifirnpiy advife to
defer the Baptifnr of Childreflo ^Pt ^rg^^s ag^nft
it from their unfitnef?, ^f.; as a thing which
ought not to be done. And in other placejs^ he
fpeaks of Baptifm in fuch Terms as are utterly in-
€onfiftent with Paedobaptifm. . -
As to Tfrfz^/Z^Ws Application of i Ccr. vii. 1 4*
I have obfery'd, i- His Senfe Qfjt is far froi^ fa-
vouring our Antagonifts. 2^. 'M.X'{Wall does. not
attempt to prove that TerttillUff-ov any Writer
of the three firftCenturys underftood the Words
to relate at all tp Baptifm; Hence I take occafion
tOt.examine the Pretences from St! PavFsWqvih
and to ftate the true Senfe of 'em. Herie I ob-
ferve, i . That all Mr. IVair^ pains to prove a^^j^,
&c. mean w^fi-d or baptiz^^d^ is to no purpofe y for
thofe Wor^s neither f)g.nify fo here, or aiiy where
^fe*' 2«,\Tbat: the molt rational late.rpretg.^
tioji of the Words is that which, Mr. W^f I f^
fcornfuUy rejeds^ cpnceri)ing Legitimacy : which
is prov'd, I. Upon our Apthoi's own. Principles^
^. From the- Befign and Context. ' 3. It is^ con-
firmed by the Pradice and Way$ of fpeaking among
thtJewtzn^Chrifiians- , \\ ^.h , .. . :. :
VUL To thefe fucceeds Ori^en^ froiji whom, I
confefs,Mr.Pi^^//.cites.fome plain Paifages to his Pur-
jpofe: but their whole force is taken off by obfer-
ying, I. That they are not cited from his Greek
Remains, but only from the l^atin Tranflations.
a. That thefe are very bad, and made with the
greateft Licence in the World, as appears both
from the Judgment of learned Men, and from fe-
veral Inftances. 3, That tho Mr. Wall fays the
contrary, St» Hlercmy by his own ConfeiUon, was
not
Let. 1 5 . Htflory of Infant^^apti/m. 541
p(^t more fkithful than Rnffi„uf. 4. That the
Tranflators have not taken a Liberty with what
related to thofe Opinions only of Ori^en which
were then difputed, as Mr. IVall objedst 5. That
Ruffinus, whatever Mr. Wall pretends, has dealt
as unfairly with the Commentary on th^ Romam,
trom whence the principal Citation is taken, as he
was us d to do with others. So that nothing can
be infer d from any of thofe Citations out of
Origen.
Thus I have follow'd Mr. IVall for about 2<o
Years, and fhevvn, I think, beyond all Contradic-
tion, that there is not the leaft colour in any
thing yet advanc'd for InfanCBaptifm within that
Period. St. Cy/^r/^w indeed, who comes next, and
others after him, I acknowledg fpeak of it : but
how far they allow'd of it, or made it necefTary,
and in what Cafes, c^c. or how it came to be fa
u'niverfally receiv'd at laft, 'tis not worth our
while to enquire : for as the earlieft Times are
much the moll confiderable and pure, what can't
be prov'd to have been taught or pradis'd in them,
we fliall not be very forward to admit of now,
barely upon the Authority of the more corrupt
Centurys, when an infinite number of Innovations
and Errors were introduc'd. 'Tis enough for us
that It can t be prov'd Christ inftituted this
Pradhce, or that the Scriptures juftify it, or that
tor the firft 50 Years, or lefs, it was at all known :
but hnce we are able to go fo much farther ftill,
and have abundant ground to deny it was us'd
till above two hundred Years after Christ;
and that notwithllanding all the pains our Ad-
verfarys have taken to prove the contrary,
you lee. Sir, there is indeed nothing in what-
ever they^, advance which can in the leaft fa-
vour their Opinion ^ can any thing be more iult
and neceflary, than that we continue to think and
ad
54^ ^fleBms on MrWslVs Let. i f.
ad as formerly ? Doubtlefs, ajl impartial Judges
mult give Sentence in our Favour. And for tjhefe
Reafons it was, I think, altogether needlejfs.to
follow Mr. Wall any farther ^ and therefore I
have negleded all the reft of his Hiftory. And
indeed, there was no manner of neceffity for his
carrying his Account fo far. If he had only
prov'd Infant-Baptifm was pradis'd in the firft
Century, he might very well have fpar'd the reft
of his pains ^ for we fhou'd not then have difpa-
ted with him the Pradice of thofe who liv'd af-
terwards. But as matters ftood, I muft allow he
was in the right of it, not to ftop till he found
Infant-Baptifm fully fettl'd ^ and therefore he runs
on fo far as St. Auftin ; for there is no Author
fooner who fpeaks fo efFedually to his Pur-
pofe.
Before I conclude. Sir, I muft juft take notice
of one thing I remember you were us'd frequently
to objed, v'lTL, That we are not able to aflign the
Time when Infant-Baptifm firft commenc'd ^ and
that it muft feem mighty ftrange, and indeed im-
probable to fuch as refled upon the great Piety
and Sincerity of the early Centurys of the Church,
that an Innovation of this nature fhou'd ever be
in the leaft attempted, and much more that it
fhou'd prevail fo far, and be fo generally own'd
and defended, and all fo early as even we our felves
acknowledg it was. But, Sir, 1 muft beg you to
confider, *
I. That very many Errors of as grofs a kind
were as foon ftarted, and as generally received as
the baptizing of Infants : for the truth of this, I
appeal to the Church Hiftorys, which abundantly
make it appear, and all learned Men acknowledg
it. Monfieur Jurieu has given a Catalogue of divers
of 'em in his eighth and fome following Paftoral
Letters
Let. 13. Htjlory of Infant'!Baptifm. 545
Letters for the Year 1686: and Monfieur duPin
has noted many Alterations at the end of the three
firll: and of the fourth Centurys, in his Ecclefiafti-
cal Hiftory.
2. You are not to imagine this Practice was
eltablifh'd altogether, and at once, in as great a
Latitude as it is at prefent. It began, doubtlefs,
at firll, as all other Innovations do, with only
fome little Variations in Opinions, and then paf-
fed to as little in Practice ^ and fo by very fliort
Steps, at length, attain'd unobferv'd the great
Reputation it has now indeed for a long time en-
joy'd. And all this might be done in a very fhort
time, as I have often obfervM to you it happen'd
in the manner of adminiftring this Sacrament
here in England : for Dipping was wholly laid a-
fide, and Sprinkling us'd in its ftead, in lefs than
half a Century *, (even as our Adverfarys themfelves
ftill confefs) tho diredly contrary to Christ's
Diredion, to a Decree of a Synod under Kenxvolfe^
the exprefs Words of the Service-Book, and with-
out any Allowance, &c. and fure no Alteration
can be more bold than this is.
3. Laflly, that very Piety and Zeal you men-
tion as a Security agalnft this Innovation, in reali-
ty tended very much to betray 'em into it. 'Tis
true, it wou'd hardly fuffer 'em to lofe any thing
they had receiv'd, but 'twas not fo inconfiftent
with their adding many things. And according-
ly we fee that from the very beginning it had this
Influence. Hence came the Anointing the new-
baptiz'd, and giving 'em Milk and Honey to eat,
&c, which are very early mention'd. 'Twas the
Piety of the Antients that made 'em think and
fpeak fuch high things of the Sacramental Supper,
which by degrees brought 'em to fpeak of it as of
a real Sacrifice j and then they were continually
talking
544 ^fleElions on MrM^lYs Let.i 5^
talking of Offerings and Altars, &c. Upon this,
others foon began to underftand thofe Expreflions
literally, and to attribute much to the Power of
thePriefts Confecration, which eafdy led People
to efteem the Elements of a mofl holy Nature /
after that Ceremony : all which prepar'd 'em to
iinderftand our L o r d 's Words, This is my Body^
in that '^ery abfurd'Senfe many fo ftrenuoully plead
for. And then the moft pious Difpofitions, upon
thefe Miftakes, might well think the Mafs a me-
ritorious and expiatory Sacrifice, wherein the ve-
ry Body of Christ was not oJfer''d up once for
W/, but every day, for the Sins of the People:
and all this muft work 'em into the highelt
Veneration for the tranfubftantiated Wafer j
and no wonder if at length they ran into the
idolatrous Adoration of it, and other Fop-
perys, which naturally attend fuch Extrava-
gancys.
. Much after the fame manner Infant-Baptifm
feems plainly to have been introduc'd. They
foon began to talk in very lofty Hyperboles con-,
cerningthe powerful Effeds and Keceflity of Bap-
tifm : and at firft i^ideed thi$ was meant well e-
nough ; but as they did not forefee, fo they did
not very cautioufly guard againil; future Miftakes.
The Effects of it have been carry'd to that height,
that it has been thought to fave ex opere operato.
And the Keceffity was very early improv'd fo far
as to be accounted abfolute and indifpenfible : for
feveral of the firft Fathers do pretty plainly fhow
us, they thought that fuch as died without Bap-
tifhi cou'd not be fav'd, or at Icaft that their Sal-
vation was very doubtful This indeed was at firft^
meant only of fuch as had heard the Word
prcach'd, as I have proved to you before ^ but af-
terwards came to be equally applv'd to all Adult
.j, ■ ' Per-
Let.iji Hiflory of Infant'^aptlfm. 545
Perfons : and then, when from its being ufeful in
order to Salvation, they had brought it to be fo
indifpenfably NecefTary, efpecially to fome, this
prepared 'em to miftake our Lord's Words,
John iii. 5. which they began to think exprefly af-
ferted, it was impoflible for any of Adams K2iQt
to be fav'd without Baptifm : and upon this
Suppofition no wonder if they were foon pre-
vail'd on, by their natural Tendernefs and Af-
fedion, to fecure the Salvation of their belov'd
Infants, which lie too near a Parent's Heart to
be negleded in fo weighty a Point as that of
their eternal Felicity. And cou'd it be made ap-
pear that this is the true Senfe of our Savi-
our's Words, we fhou'd foon be brought to
believe He intended Infants fhou'd be baptiz'd.
'Tis not only probable that Infant-Baptifm
came in this way *, bat that this really was the
Cafe, mufl be plain enough to thofe who are
acquainted with the Writings of the Fathers.
What I havs faid in feveral former Letters,
proves it in fome meafure ^ and if I had thought
it needful, I wou'd have taken fome Pains to
have done It profefledly, and more at large. But
particularly', nothing can be plainer than that
the mifunderftanding the Senfe of J^^?? iii. 5. gave
rife to the Error \ for the Fathers who fpeak of
it, always deduce it from thofe Words, and upon
every Pinch recur to them as their main Retreat :
and Mr. Wall confefles that they as well as him-
felf look'd upon this Place as the chief ground of
Infant-Baptifm ^ and therefore it is pretty cer-
tain they had no better Foundation for their
Pradice, which molt now fee to be very fandy,
and nothing but a Millake. So that this is not
fo hard as fome fancy to be reconcil'd to the Ho-
nefty and Integrity of thofe pious Men, who were
N a doubtlefs
54^ ^fleBions o/zMr.WallV Letlij^
doubtlefs liable to Miftakes as well as we. For
thus in a Cafe moft exadly parallel, the fame Per-
fons who introduc'd the baptizing of Infants, were
equally for admitting 'em immediately after that
to the other Sacrament likewife, and that upon
juft fuch another Miftake of our Saviour's
Words too : for as they infer'd the Necefljty of
Baptifm from John iii. 5. fo they did alfo that of
the Eucharift from John vi. 53. Thus St. Avfiin^
from thefe very Texts, at the fame time ^ argues
for baptizing and communicating Infants. And
this Cultom of communicating Infants accompa-
ny'd the baptizing 'em, even from the firft rife of
P^edobaptifm, for feveral hundred Years together,
as in the Greek Church it does to this day. All
which is fo true and manifeft, as to be pretty
generally acknowledg'd. -{• Dr. Taylor fomewhat
largely proves it, and frequently fays the one is
altogether as well grounded as the other '^ and in-
deed earnellly pleads for the Continuance of botli.
But feeing the Church has thought fit to difufe
one, no Man can fnew a Reafon why the other
mayn't as well be laid afide, iince it is not built
on a better Foundation.
Now, Sir, I think to lay down my Pen : for I
hope 1 have fufficiently prov'd to you, that we have
abundant Reafon to perfift in our Opinion ^ and
that Mr. Wall has not fo effedually done our Bull-
nefs, as you at firfb believ'd. 1 recommend what
I have faid to your ferious Perufal : and give me
leave to put you in mind, that it is very dange-
rous to make too free with our S av 10 u r 's pofi-
^ DePcccator. Merit. & Remiflion. lib. i. cap. 20.
f Wort-hy Cowmunkant^ cap. 2. Seft. 2.
L et. 1 3^ Hiftory of Infant-^aptlfm. 5 47
tive Inftitutions, for which you muft expedl to ac-
count in the laft Day. Let it therefore be your
diligent Care to judg impartially, having no
other Aim but to glorify God, and obey His
Truth : to whom I commit you.
I am, &c»
FINIS,
A T A B L E of the Texts of Scrip^
ture explained or cited in the forego-
ing Letter s.
Gemfis*
Chap.
Ver.
Pag.
i.
2.
317
ii.
24.
iSS
xi.
I.
347
—
P-
15$
XXXV.
2.
Exodus.
366
xii.
22.
137
xiv.
21.
377
XV.
4-
142
XV ii.
8, &c.
373
xix.
10. 3^5? 390
IS-
355
xxix.
4. I
$^j 377
36.
518
XXX.
18.
377
^—
21.
IS5
Leviticus.
iv.
6. I
37, H^
—
17-
137
vi.
27.
517
ix.
9.
137
xi.
31.
148
—
32. 137,
148,150,
^51.
162,174
—-
33.
148
xiv.
6.
137
—
8.
3^9
Leviticus,
Chap.Ver.
Pag.
xiv.
16.
137:
^139
— —
23.
150
— -*—
51-
137:
► 139
XV.
—
150
5-
359
13.
ibid.
16.
147
XX.
7-
a68,
5H
xxi.
23.
368
xxii.
6. 150
,151
,1^4
Numbers,
vi.
♦ 9.
149
viii.
7.
150
xix.
7,8.
147
9. 14^
)I47
,150
13.
202
18.
137,
145,
148,
151
19.
149
21.
147
xxxi.
19,24.
3^7
21, &c.
149
23.
151,
S18
Deuteronomy.
xvii.
1 1.
345
xxxiii. 24.
137
N a 3
Jojhua^
A Talk of Texts of Scripture.
Jojhua.
Chap.Ver.
Pag.
Pfalms.
Ver.
Pag.
iii.
5-
3(^7
xciv.
12.
0
311
*~"
15-
137
cxxxiii. 3.
143
V.
2, &C.
445
Proverbs.
Judges.
xxviii. 21.
MS
vi.
38.
143
Canticles.
-* -»
••
Ruth.
vii.
2.
203
11.
14.
137
Jfaiah.
xii.
I Samuel*
1.
453
*
1.
xxi.
16,17
4-
445
140
xiv.
27.
137
Jeremiah.
xvii.
49.
144
iv.
4-
447
xxi.
4-
S66
X.
2.
311
«• •
2 Kings*
xi.
ip.
348
111.
II. 153
> ip
Ezekiel.
V.
' — ■
U7
xvi.
6.
329
*~*
H- 137
J 147
— ^
p.
ibid.
Viii.
IS-
137
xxii.
26.
514
2 Chronicles*
Daniel.
iv.
6,
Nehemiah*
155
iv.
23.
25.
142
ibid.
xiii.
23.
S17
"
33- 141
, 142
• • •
Efther.
V.
21.
^*fc'^.
111.
II.
347
Judith.
„
3^<?^.
xii.
7-
.137
IX.
31.
137
Eccluf.
xxxi.
18.
4^3
xxxi.
26.
145
145
Pfalms.
xxxiv.
26.
xxxii.
6.
^SS
2 Maccab.
Ixviii.
Ixxi.
23.
5-
137
463
i.
19.
21.
145
ibid.
- — —
17'
ibid.
A^attheTV,
A Table of Texts of Scripture.
Mdtthew*
1
Mark.
Chap.
Vcr.
Pag.
Chap.
Ver. Pag.
iii.
5>^-
2S7,
33^
ii.
4. 1 01
383
vii.
3. 157
7.
3S2
4. 159—162
8.
385
.
5. 152
iy.
y-
358
8. 228,352
V.
8.
410
viii.
26. 413
12.
8
X.
14. 421
vi.
9.
SH
*
17. 332
xi.
I.
312
20. 463
xii.
— .
196
37. 184
2.
119
38. ibid.
34.
3S2
xi.
25. 413
xiii.
52.
285
xiv.
20. 181
XV.
6.
228
• — .
70. 358
14.
3S2
xvi.
15. 306,307,321
xix.
5.
155
16. 419
—
14.
43 c
S53^
Luke.
XX.
I.
462
iii.
7. 194
— ^
22.
177
1 2. ibid.
xxi.
31-
352
16. 184
xxiii.
—
ibid.
V.
4, 5- lOI
17.
518
xi.
38. 152,160,
^T—
19.
.•^/W.
161
23-
171
xiii.
6, &c. 425
XXV.
40.
87
xiv.
26. 361
xxvi.
23.
172.
, 181
xvi.
24. 180
xxvii
• 57.
275
xxiv.
14. 469
xxviii. 19.
221,
226,
21. ibid.
247,272
,305:,
47. 292,321
306,30-
o3Ho
John.
321,461
5 531
i.
13. 422
20.
313
iii.
3. 4^0
Af^r^.
— -^
5. 17,226,317,
i.
4-
487
408,^-^.483,
-
5.
8.
187
194
535>54S554<^
N n 4 John*
Chap.
iii.
A Table of Texts of Scripture
John. Romans*
Ver. Pag. Chap. Ver.
IV.
vi.
viii.
ix.
xiii.
XV.
XX.
i.
ii.
vii.
viii.
ix.
X.
xiii.
xiv.
XV.
xvii.
xviii
xix.
xxiv.
XXV.
ii'
6.
7.
12.
t8.
23.
I.
2.
4S'
53.
31.
2-7.
s.
26.
35.
22.
23<
JBs.
5-
38.
51-
37.
38.
25.
42.
24.
21.
10.
30.
23.
14.
I P.
Romnns*
I.
12.
28.
Pag.
422, 484
485
ibid,
420
134,187
292, 459
459
277
17,418'
411
299
156
181
II
4T5
228
184
460
352
320
134, 188
lOI
292,321
487
320
295
509
299
385,487
7
35^
32
415
357
II.
iii.
iv.
V.
VI.
29.
19.
15.
9.
10.
II.
14.
3,4.
via.
X.
xii.
xiv.
xvi.
iv.
vii.
viii.
x.
xi.
XV.
VI.
111.
iv.
V.
Pag.
417,450
41 S
ibid*
441
ibid,
ibid,
ibid, 442
134,189,194
204, 272
422
tmt.
14.
• 2.
15-
17-
I CorintK
I.
15*
14. 204,Si3,54«>
9. 1^
12,13. ibid.
2. 184
18. 58
28. 409,412
415
482
75
59
49t
34-
2, 3. ,
2 Cormtb'
14,15.
17.
Galatt
8.
9-
27.
29.
19.
I.
228.
412
312
3
59
312
312
272
357
491
5
Galat.
A Table of Texts of Scripture.
Galat* Hebrews,
Chap. Ver. Pag. Chap.Ver.
V. 6- 4^^ iy. 10*
vi. 15. 418,450,485 . 19.
Efhef. . 26.
iv. S. M, 84 X. 10.
— 22. 450 12.
Colof. — 14.
ii. II. 448,449,537 18.
12. i3S>^^^^^^45 xi. 6.
44^,537 xii. 14,
iii. p,io. 450,482
I Tlmoth*
ii. 4. 5^9
iii. 2. 30
vi. p. 12(5, 184
— 16, 410
2 Timoth-
iii. 15. 4<^i
TVr«/. Revelat.
iii. 5. 482,485 xix. 13. 182
IIL
111.
iv.
Pag.
158,328
139
51
ibid,
ibid,
ibid,
ibid.
509
ibid.
I Peter.
21. 416,422,512
I John.
p. 422
8. 22
A CATALOGUE of the
Authors, cited and made ufe of in
the foregoing Letters,
' TT^ Liani VarU HifiorU. Lugdun.Batavoruntyi 70 1 .
JlXIj Amu Thoenomen» Baftlid'^ 1 570.
jiriftofhanis ComcedU, Lugdun* 1624.
jiriftotelis Opera* Aurelia Allobrog. 1605.
Arriani Comment ar» de EfiBet* Londini 1 670,
AtheriAi Deipnofophifi,
Augvfiini Opera* Colon, Agripp* 161 5,
B.
5. Barnaha Epiftola Catholka inter Tatres ApofioUc.
per Clericum. Antwerp* 1 700.
Baronii Annates Ecclefiaftlci,
Barthii Not a ad Rutilii Itinerarium.
Bafdii Opera* Far if, l5i8.
Rab^ Benjaminis Itinerarium,
Beverigii Codex Cation, ad Calcem Patr, Apofiolic, per
- Cleric. Antwerp, 1700.
Annotationes in Canones^ ibid,
Alberti Bohovii Turcarum Litiirgia. Oxon, \6^o.
LucA Brugenfis Not<& ad Varioi LeBiones Gr<ec, iV, 7*.
in BihLPolyglott, Lond, 1(557.
• • In quatuor Evangelia. Antwerp, 1606,
Ijdartin, Buceri Enarrationes in quatuor Evangelia* Ar"
gent or at. I 530.
Busbii Gram. Gr£C, Lond, I ^8p,
Buxtorfii Lexicon Talmudicum, Bafil, 1639.
■ De Abbreviaturisy &c» Franequer. 16^6,
Cal"
A Table of Authors,
c.
CalUmachi Hymn, VltrajeU:!^ 1 597.
Cameronis Annotationes in N. T. inter CrhicM Sacros.
Francofurtij 1 6^6.
Capfelli Annotationes^ inter Criticos Sacros. Fraacofurti.
Cafauboni Annotationes^ inter Criticos Sacros,
» Exercitationes in Baronium,
Cajfiodor, Infiitut, Divin, LeEt.
Caftelli Lexicon Heptaglott, Lond. l65p,
Chryfoftomi Of era,
Ciceronis Opera- Lond. 1 68 1.
Lord Clarendon's ai^ovY of thQ Rebellion, Fol.
dementis Alexandrini Opera. Lutetia^ 1629.
dementis Homili^ inter Patres Apofiol, Antwerp, 1 700.
dementis Roman, Epifiola ad Corinth, inter Pane's
ApoftoL Antwerp, 1700.
Clerici Ars Critic a ^ Tom, 3. Amftel, 17CO.
■ ' Parrhafiana^ Amfterd, 1701,
■ Verfio Gallica N>T. cum notis, Amflerd. 1 703.
Bihliotheque Choifie^ Tom, 13. Amfterd* 1 707.
Confiantini Lexicon,
Conftitutiones ApoftoUc^ inter Patres Apofiolic. An'
twerp* 1700.
Cotelerii Not<£ in Recognitiones^ ibid,
Cypriani Opera Amfielodam, 1700.
Cyrilli Hierofolymitani Opera.
D.
Daille de Vfu Patrum.
Danetii DiBionarium Antiq. Rom. Gr^cc. Par if. 1 698.
JDiogenis Laertii Vit<z,
Dionyfii Halicarnaff(zi Opera, Oxon. 1 704.
* Vita Homer i inter Opvfcula A^ytho^
logica per Gale, Amfterd. 1688.
Dionyfii Epifcop. Alexandrln, Epifiola ad Dionyf
Presbyter, apud Eufeb.
Bodwellh Epiftolary Difcourfe.
Dijfertationes Cyprianicc adCalcem Operum
Cyprian, edit Amfiel. 1700.
^ DodwM's
A Table of Authors.
Dtf^ir^/Z's Two Letters of Advice. Lond. k^qi.
Dijfertationes in Iren£um» Oxon, i68p.
■ i * De Jure Laic* Sacerdot.
D^m;/^f^» on Infant-Baptifm. Lond^ 1701.
Br u fit Annotationes in Nov, Tefl. inter Criticos, Fran*
cofurt* i6q6,
E.
£^ir^r^j's Exercitations. Lond* 1702.
R. Eliezaris Pirke, Venetiis^ 1 544.
Epiphanii Opera*
Eplfcopil Opera, Lond, 1678,
Erafmi Annotationes N, T. inter Criticos Sacros,
Francofurt, 1696,
EuripidisTragoediA per Barnefium.
^ Scholiafi-a'
Eufehii Hifi, Ecclefiafi. Lutet. Parif I 544.
— F'ita Confiantini^ ibid,
R' Ez.echi<£ Chaskuni, Venetiis^ 1 5^4*
F.
JV^^Z/j Dipper Dip'd, Lond. 1651.
FeuardentiiNotA in IrdnAum, Oxon, 1702.
G.
R* D. Ganz. Tz^emach David, PragA^ 15^^*
Glojfarium Latino Gr£cum ad Calcem Irenni, Ox* 1 702.
Grahe in Irendium. Oxon, 1702.
Gregorii Naz.ianz.en, Opera*
Gregorii Thaumaturgi Opera. Par'iJ* 1611*
Grot a Annotationes inter Criticos Sacros, Franc of* 1 6^6,
H.
i///772W(?;7^'s Annotations, Lond* 1659.
■ Six Queries, Lond. 1653.
— Dijfertationes de Epifcop, Jure, Lond* 165 1.
Harpocration*
Hegefippiis dpud Eufeh. Parif. I 544.
HeracLidls Ponticl Allegcriiz Homeri^ inter Opufc, My*
thologic. per Gdle, Amfierd. 1 588.
Hermd> Paftor inter Patres Apoflolic per Cleric, An^
twerp, 1700.
Hero'
A Table of Authors.
Uerodoti Hlftoria fer Stefhan. 1570.
Hefychim. ■
Hide Annotationes in Bobovii Turcar. Lit. Ox, i^pa.
Hieronymi Opera. Colon. Agripv. i6\6.
^^rfio Chronici Eufeb. Amftd. 1658.
■■ De Locis Hebraicis.
Hill dePresbyteratu. Lond, 1 69 1.
Homerus cum Eufiathii Parecbolis. Rom^s.
Cum Dydimi Interpret. Bafil. i 535.
■ Batrachomyomachia. Bafil. i 582.
Horatii Voemata^ Lond. 1 690.
Huetii Origeniana edit, cum Origenis Comment ar. Cr^Cs
Lat.Colon.i6S^,
I.
Ignatii EpifioU inter Patres Apoflolic. per Cleric. An-
twerp. 1700.
Jofephi Opera^ Genev^^ i<^3S«
Jren<&i Opera^ Oxon. 1702.
R. Ifaac Chifuk Emunah. Altdorf. Noric. l58i.
Jurieu Lettres Pafiorales.
Jufiini Martyris Opera^ Par if 16^6.
Juvenalis Satyr ae^ Lond. 166^,
L
LaBantii Opera, Lugdun. Bat. 1660.
Leti Ceremoniale, Amfierd. 1585.
Lightfoot's\Moxk%^ Lond. 1684.
Limborchi Theologia Chriftiana^ Amfierd, 1700.
Lipfius in 'taciturn.
Lock of Humane Underftanding, Lond. I'-joo.
Zockmanni FabuUy Leid.i6i<^,
Luciani Opera^ Amfiel. 1687.
Ludolfi Lexicon Ethiopic. Lond. 1661,
Lycophronis Alexandra Oxon. 1697.
Lyfis Eplfiol. inter Opufc, Mythologic. per Gale. Am-
fierd. 1688.
M.
Mtimomdis Porta Mofis^ Oxon. 1655.
Ma-ci:s Artoninus^ Lond. 1697.
M. S. Njv. Tefi, Roberti Stepham.
M.S.
A Table of Authors.
M- S, iVT. T. ^f^tf Cantahrigid:.
. Alexandrine
Midrafch Chumafch* Venetiis*
Milton s Paradife Loft, Zond» i6"75.
Mofchi IdylL inter Voet 04^ Minor es^ Land, 1(^77.
Mvnfieri Annotate in BihU inter Criticos. Francor
furtij i6p(5.
C. Nefotis VitA Imferatorum^ &c. Lvgdvn, 1 684.
Nichlfons Letter to Sir William Dvgdale^ in Cam"
den^s Britannia^ Lond. 16^'^.
Bifhop Nicholfon on the Catechifm.
Niz^zachon FetuSy Altdorf Noricor* 1681.
O.
OvidliOper^y Am^eL 1664.
Or igenis Comment ar,Grdtc. L at. Colon, 1685.
■ ' CoKtrA Cclfum^ Cant a brig. 1677.
Opera Latin. BafiL 1571-
Fhilocalia ad Calcem Lib* contra Celfum, Can--
tab* IC577.
P.
Pearfcnii Nota in Cyprianum^ Amflerd. 1700.
Pertzonii Not* in Santiii Mincrv* Franequer* 1 702*^
Petavii Dogmata Theolog. Antwerp 1 700.
' Afiimadverfiones in Epiphan*
• Not<£ inThemiftium^ Par if. 1 61 8.
Phavorinus.
PindariOlympiay &c. Oxon* 1697.
' Scholiafia.
Du Pin's Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, Fol. i. Lond. 1692.
, . FoL 3. Lond. 169.8.
Platonis Opcra^ Franco fur ti^ i502.
Plutarchi Opera apud Stephan. I 572»
Pocockii Not a Aiifcellan. Oxon* 1655.
Pcllucis Oncmjflicon,
Polycratis Epjiola ad FiBor^ apud Eufeb*
Lc Priettr AnndtfSicnes in Tertullian^ Parif 1675.
A Table of Authors.^
R.
Recognitiones inter Patres j^fofioU Jntwerf. 1 700J
Relandus de Rellgione TPfohamed, VltrajeB. 1705.
Rigaltii NotA in Tertullian. Varif- l<^75,
» Notdt in Cyprian* AmfieU 1700.
Rujhworth^s Colledions.
S.
R. Salomonis Jarchl Comment* in Bihl, edit.-pcr Bux"
torf in BihL Heh. & Chald. BafiL i6"i8. v
SanEiil Minerva^ Franequer^ 1702.
Bifhop of Sarumh Expofition of the 39 Articles^
Lond* 1700.
Scaligerana^ Colon. 1595.
R.Schem Tof Miz^beach Haz,zahab» BafiL 1602I
Senec<e Operay Amfierd. 1634.
Socratis Scholaflici Hlftor. Ecd^* Barif* 1 544.
Sophoclis Trageedidi,
Stennett^s Anfwer to Rvjfen^ Lend. 1 704.
Stephani Thefaurus Ling' Gr<zc* i 572.
Strahonis Geographia^ AmfleL 1 707.
Suetonii Vita, Cafarum^ AmfteL 1630;
SuidM,
T.
Tacit i Hiftoriarnm Lihb.
Talmud Babylonicum* T^enetiis^ 1 520,
Targum Jonathan, in BibL Polyglott. Lond* 16 ^j*
m . > Jerufalem^ ibid.
*- OnkeloSy ibid.
Tarini Nota in Origenis Philocal. ad CalcemLibb.xon'
tra Celfum. Cantabrig. 1677.
Taylor*% Worthy Communicant.
Terentii Comcedia^ Lond. 1 700.
Tertulliani Opera^ Parif. 1675.
ThemiftiiOrationeSy Par if. i5i8.
Tlnocriti Idyll, inter Poet. Minor. Cantabrig. 16']'].
Tkeodoreti Hifi. Ecclef edit, cum Eufeb. Parif. 1 544.
TheophyUEli Opera.
Theophili Antiocheni ad Autolyc. Libb. ad cakem Juf-
ti?n Martyrisy Parif. 16^6, Thw
A Table of Authors.
Thucydides^ Oxon, \6^6,
Toldothjefchu^ Alt dor f. Nor ic. i(58.i.
Turrettini Inftitutiones Tk^olog* Lugdunl 1 696.
Valefii Notdi in Enfehn Hlft- EccUf.
Vatabli Annotatione^ Inter Criticos. Francofurtij i5^5,
Verfto Syriaca iV^« T. in Bibl. Polyglott. Lond. i(^S7*
■ ■■ A'^^bica-i ibid*
m Ethiofica^ ibid»
mm Perfica^ ibid.
^ LXX Virdis^ Land. 1653.
* Hebraica^ Par if, 1584.
■ fer Hutterum*
Ari<& Montani in Polyglott.
VulgAta^ ibid*
Sixti V.
B€Z<£*
Erafmi.
Cafialionis^ Amfterd, 1683.
Jtalica*
Diodati*
Hiffanica.
Gallica Geneva* *^
• Lugduni.
Belgica,
Danica.
S^ixonica-
Gr^nca, Vulgaris^
yirgilii Opera-, Lond, 1688.
- ■ ■ ■ By Dryden^ 1709.
Vorflii Ohfervationes in Tz^emach David. Ludg. Bat*
1644.
Vojfii Etymologicon' AmfteL 1695.
W.
Wemmeri Lexicon Ethiopicum.
IVhitb/s Anaotations, Lond.
170(5.
5.*^.,'V
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11