H PRINCETON, N. J. "J>
Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa.
Agnciv Coll. on Baptism, No.
So- 6
^
SERMONS,
ON THE
MODE and SUBJECTS
O F
Chriftian Baptifm,
An attempt to pew that pouring or sprinkling
is a scriptural mode ; and the infants of
believers are proper subjects of the
baptism injiituted by christ :
WITH AN
EXAMINATION of VARIOUS OBJECTIONS,
Particularly thofe contained in a Courfe of Anon- ymous Letters to Bijhop Hoad/y.
By JOSEPH /l ATHROP, D. d.
Paftor of the Firft Church in Weft- Springfield.
THE THIRD EDITION.
® &&<$>
;<XX><X><X><XXXXXX>^)<MXXXXX>0O<><XX>O<>0< PRINTED at NORTHAMPTON, by WILLIAM BUTLER,
(For the Hampjhire Mijfwnary Society. J 1803.
SERMONS.
> ZHKMXX x:-<XXKX>o< EPHESIANSy IV. 5.
ONE BAPTISM. D I S C 0 U R S £— I.
lO perfuade the Ephefians to keep the unity of the fpirit in the bond of peace, the Apof- tle urges this, among other arguments, that they had received one Baptifm. If this one Baptifm was defigned to be a bond of peace and unity a- mong christians, how unhappy it is, that it fliould become an occafion of divifion and feparation ? Some will fay, ' It is not one baptifm, but differ- ent baptifms that caufe divifions.' It is true, bap- tifm is adminiftered in different modes , and to differ en tfubjecls ; but ftill, 1 hope, it will appear to be one baptifm ; and if fo, then this difference is no juft reafon for difunion.
You are fenfible, my brethren, that I have not been wont to bring controverfies into the pulpit. I have purpofely avoided the controver- sy concerning baptifm in years paft, and fliould
have
have done fo ftill, had it not been lately revived a- mong you. — It is not any prejudice again ft our brethren who differ from us, but a regard to your prefent circumftances, and to the defire of many among you, that now induces me to enter upon it : and I hope to handle it in fuch a manner, as, at leaft, not to offend, if I iliould not convince. I mall not call in queftion the validity of the bap- tifm of our brethren : I only aim to vindicate our own. And furely when we are charged with hav- ing effentially changed a divine inflitation — when we are reprefented as being in an unbaptized ftate — when we are treated as unfit for chriftian communion, we have a right to plead in our de- fence.
There is a late pamphlet which many of you have read, written by way of Letters to Bijh- op Hoadly, the author of which labours to dif- prove the validity both oifpr inklings and of hifant baptifm, and treats them both with great con- tempt. I fhall pay particular attention to this piece, and take notice of every thing that is material in it.
The queftions before us are two; whether fprinkling is a fcriptural mode : and whether in- fants are proper fubje&s of baptifm ? Thefe quef- tions have no neceffary connection with each oth- er. But as the validity of our baptifm is denied on account of the mode in which it was adminiftered, as well as of the age at which we received it, I (hall diftinclly confider both queftions ; and fhall begin with the former.
Part
PARTI.
"We will firft enquire, What is the L'ut fcriptural mode of Baptifm ?
There are two ways, in which this ordi- nance is administered ; one is immerfian, or plung- ing the whole body into water : The other is affu- /ion, which is pouring or fprinkling water upon the fubject. We do not deny the validity of im- merfion ; we only deny the nccejfity of it : But our brethren (at leaf! many of them) deny the va- lidity of affufton, and reprefent it as no baptifm, to whomfoever administered. It is therefore of fomc importance that we enquire, whether there be no;: fuch evidence, that affufion is a fcriptural mode, as may juftify our ufe of it, and fatisfy thofe who have received baptiim in this manner.
I shall firft examine the import of the Greek word ufed for baptifm — then confider the ufes of baptifm and the allufions of fcripture to thefe ufes — next enquire, what was the apoftolic prac- tice— and laftly take fome notice of the ufage of the church after the apoftolic age.
I. We will examine the import of the word laptizo, which is the ufiw.l, if not the only word by which the writers of the New Teftament ex- prefs the chriftian ordinance of baptifm.
It is agreed, that the word baptizo, fignifies to wajh by the application of water : But then, bow the water is to be applied, whether by plung- ing the fubjecT: into water, or by pouring or fprink- ling water upon the fubjecl, is the queftion. This will bed be determined by confidering, how the word is ufed upon commou occafions.
a The
The author of the Letters to Bifhop Hoadly tells us, c That the writers of the New Teftament borrowed their phrafes from the Greek tranilation of the Old Teftament, called the Septuagint.' He refers us to this for the fenfe of the words, which they have ufed for baptifm. He allows that ' baptizo is the offspring of bapto ;' and con- fequently may be taken in the fame fenfe. Zeal- ous as he is for immerfion, he is conflrained to ac- knowledge, that ' bapto is never ufed in the Septuagint for the rite of warning a perfon 's whole body f But on the contrary, is fometimes ufed for wetting the body by fprinkling ; as in Dan. 4. 33. and chap. 5. 21. where Nebuchadnezzar* s body is faid to be wet with the dew of heaven. Now he fays, * We all know,that a perfon is wet with dew, not by immerfion into it, but by its diftillation in gentle drops ; we are fprinkled with it* And if bapto is never ufed for plunging the whole body, but fometimes for fprinkling it, probably baptize, 4 its offspring/ is generally ufed in the fame fenfe. Accordingly this author concedes that ' the word baptizo, is never but once ufed, in thofe very nu- merous places of the Old Teftament, where bathing the perfon is commanded.' The one inftance he mentions is in 2 King. 5. 14. where Naaman is laid to have dipped (or baptifed) hinf elf feven times in fordan, for the cure of his leprofy. But this one inftance, at beft, is but a doubtful one ; for the jaw prefcribed that the leper fhould be fprinkled feven times for his cleanfing. The Prophet fays, wa/h feven times and thou Jhalt be clean. If the Prophet had any refpecl to the law, as it feems he •had, by his enjoining him to wafli feven times, then
by
by wafhing he meant Jpr ink ling ; (o that this exam- ple / ill by no means prove, that the "word baptizox Signifies to plunge. We have then no inftance of bapto, and but one (and that a very doubtful initance) of bopiizo, ufed in all the Old Tefta- ment for immerfion or bathing the body : But fome inftances of the former's being ufed for fprinkling. Thus the matter Hands according to the conceflions of this writer.
Let us now confult the New-Teftament.— There we (hall find clear and direct evidence, that the word baptizo, fi* lilijs to pour or fprinkle.
' It is faid, in the beginning of the 7th Chap, of Mark, That the Pharifees, when they faw fome of the difciples eat bread with defiled (that is to fay, with lavwajhen) hands , found fault ; for the Phar- ifees and all the Jews, except they wafh their hands oft, eat not. And when they come from the market, except they wafh, (can me baptizontai, except they are baptifed) they eat not. What in the former claufe, is called wafhing the hands, is here called being baptifed. The ufual manner of wafhing hands among the Jews, we learn from 2 Kings 3. 11. where it is faid, Elifha poured water on the hands of Elijah. Here then you fee, perfons are faid to be baptifed, when only a part of the body is wafhed by the pouring on of water. It is added, Many oth- er things there are, which they have received to hold, as t/je wajhings (baptifmous, baptifms) of brazen vef fels and tables, or beds, i. e. the feats on which they ufed to recline at meals, whicli were fo large, that they could be wafhed only by pouring water on 'them.
It is faid, Luke 11. 37. A certain Pharifee
afked
afked Jefas to dine with him. And he went in and fat down to meat. And when the Pharifee faw it, he marvelled, that he hadnatfirft walhed before din- ner : Not warned his whole body, but only his hands > according to the Jewijh cuflom mentioned in the before cited paffage in Mark. And this is expref- fed by the fame word, which is ufed for baptifing. He 'marvelled that he had not been baptifed, ebaptiflhe, before dinner*
The Jews, by divine appointment, obferved divers kinds of purifications, the greater part of which were fprinklings- And thefe are exprefsly called baptifms. The Apoflle, in the 9th chap, to Heb. iotli verfe, fpeaking of the Jewijh. ritual, fays> It flood only in meats and drinks a)id divers wafhingSyidiaphorois baptifmois, divers baptifms.') By thefe divers baptifms, he plainly, means the various ceremonies of fprinkling ; for k> he explains them in the following verfes. The blood of bulls and of goats, and the afhes of an, heifer fprinkling the un- dean,, fanclifieth to the purifying of the fiefh. Mofes took the blood of calves and goats with water — and fprinkled the book a-id all the people. He fprinkled likewife with blood both the tabernacle and all the vef- fels of the miniflry. And almofl all things are, by the law, purged with blood, i. e. with the fprinkling of blood. Now as the Apoftle fpeaks of divers bap' tifms, and "hca immediately illustrates them by di- xcrsfprinklingSy and mentions no other purifica- tions, but fprinklings, as inftances of thefe divers baptifms, it is evident, that if the facred writer un- derflooJ Greek, fprinkling is baptifm.
And fince the word, wherever it is ufed in fcripture for any thing beiides the chriftian ordi- nance,
nance , plainly fignifies pouring or fpr inkling, except in thc/fr/g/einflance of Newmans dipping himfelf in Jordan, which at mod is a very doubtful one, we mult naturally fuppofe,- it is ufed in the fame fenfe, when it is applied to the chriftran ordinance. This conclulion may have the more weight, be- caufe it is deduced from the conceflions of a critical writer on the other fide of the queftion.
There is another Greek word, louo, fuppof- ed to be fometimesufed for baptifm, on which the author of the letters lays more weight : for, 1 This, he tells us, is almoft the conflant word of the Septuagint, in thofe very numerous places where bathing, or waihing the whole body is com- manded.'
This word is indeed frequently ufed for wafh- ing the body ; fome times for waihing the whole body ; And if this were the conflant and only word for baptifm in the New Teftament, here would be a plauiible argument for waihing the whole body in baptifm. — But it mould be obferved, that this word is very feldom, if ever ufed for baptifm. The author of the letters has cited about fixty pafTages in the New Teftament, as fpeaking of baptifm : A- mong all thefe, there are but four where this word is ufed. It is not certain, that baptifm is the thing intended in thefe : But if it is, yet no argument c.»n be drawn from them in favour of immerfion ; but perhaps the contrary. Let us confider them.
One is in Heb. 10. 23. Let us draw near having our body wajh^d, {lehumenoi foma, being warned in the body) with pure water. Now a perfon is warned in his body, though water be poured only on apart of it. Thus when the wo- man
IO
man poured ointment on ChriftVs bead, fhe is faid to have anointed his body. And this warning is, in the preceding claufe, expreffed by fprinkling. — Having our hearts fprinkled/ro/tt an evil confcience, and our body warned with pure water.
Another paflfage is in Titus 3. 5. He hath faved us (dialoutrou) by the wafhing of regenera* tim, and renewing of the Holy Ghofi, which he hath Jhed, or poured on us. Now if baptifm is here in- tended by the wafhing of regeneration, this text af- fords a plain argument for affltjion or pouring in bap- tifm : For this warning denotes the renewing of the Holy Ghofi, which is poured on us ; and therefore, that there may be fome refemblance between the fign and the thing fignified, baptifm fhould be per- formed by pouring. The phrafe of the pouring of thefpirit is an allufion to the pouring of water ia baptifm.
A third pafTage is in Eph. 5. 26, Tkat he might f and if y it (the church) having cleanfed it with the wafhing of water by the word. Now if baptifm be here intended by warning, then the church is faid to be fanctified and cleanfed by the baptifmal warning : But how this wafhing is per- formed, whether by fprinkling or plunging, is dill thequeftion. The Apoftle hys,* fpri;/kling—fanc- tifieth to the purifying of thejlefh. If then we will allow the Apoftle to interpret his own phrafes, it is fprinkling that fancYifies and cleanfes the flefh, and confequendy is the wafhing intended, when the church is faid to be fanclificd and cleanfed by the wajlmig of water. In the 5iftPfal„ 2d verfe, the Pfalmilt prays, Waft me thoroughly from mine ini~
quity * Hob. q. it
II
f utty and ckanfe me from fin. I Te adds ver. 7. Purge me, (in the Creek it isfprinkle me) and IJhall be cleanfed. What in the ad ver. is called ivafhing thoroughly, is in the 7th ver. called fprinkl'mg ; and the latter is faid to cleanfe, as well as the former. The other pailage is in 1 Cor. 6. 11. But ye are wafted, but ye are fanclified, &c. This is fo near- ly par?.: lei to the former, that the fame remarks are applicable to both, and therefore nothing further needs to be added. — It appears, I think, that the word which our author chiefly depends on to prove jmmerfion entirely fails him, and finally determines in favour of affufwn.
This now is the refult of our enquiry. The word froptizo, is but once, and perhaps never ufed in all the Old Teftament, where bathing the body is commanded. It is often ufecl, in the New Tefta- ment, for fpr inkling or pouring. Tnis is the ufual, if not the only word for baptifm. It is ufed, to be fure, in near fixty pafTages. The word, lotto 9 is fometimes ufed for bathing the body, but never certainly ufed for baptifm : There are but four pafTages, where it is pretended to be fo ufed : And even here it is plainly fynonymous with pour- ing or fprinklinv.
It is indeed very remarkable, that the writ- ers of the New Teftament, when they fpeak of the chriftian ordinance of baptifm, have gene ally (if not always) avoided that word, which in the Sep- tuagint is ufed for bathing the body ; and chofen a word of a more general fignification ; and if they have ever ufed the former, they have joined with iifprinkling or pouring, as if it were on purpofe to
teach
12
teach us, that plunging the whole body is a ceremo- .jjy not required under the gofpel.
II. I apprehend we may obtain fome fat- isfa&ion in the point before us, if we attend to thofe pafiages of fcripture, in which the ufes of baptifm are manifeilly alluded to.
i. One ufe of it is to reprefent the fan&ify- ing influence of the fpirit. Chriflians are faid to be bom of water and of the fpirit ; and to be faved by the wafting of rcge?ieraiion and renewing of the holy Ghofl. Peter fays to the convicted yews, Be baptifed and ye [hall receive the gift of the holy Ghoji.* The influence of the Spirit reprefented in baptifm, is often exprefied by pouring and fprinkling ; as in the before cited pafiages to Titus, and to the He- brews. The renewing of the holy Ghq/f, which he hath poured on us. Having the oeart fprinkled/rc;/2 an evil confciente. This pouring out of the Spirit is called, being baptized with it. That promife, Ye Jhall be baptifed with the holy Ghoft, is laid to have been fulfilled when Chrift Jhed or poured forth the Spirit, f
2. Baptism reprefents the forgivenefs of fins. Hence thefe directions. Be baptized for the remijpion of fins — Be baptized and wafh away thy fins. I Our fins are waihed away in Chnft's blood. The blood of Chrift cleanfeth from all fin. He hath wajhed us from our fins in his own blood. § And this application of ChrmVs blood is exprefled by fprinkling. Ye arc conie — to Jefus the mediator of the new covenant and to the blood of iprinkling. E- kcl according to the foreknowledge of God, thro;
fantlifi cation
* A<St. t. 38 f AA. 1. 5- and ch. 2. JJ.
I Aft. 238. and ch. %%■ 16. § r Joh. I. ?. and Rev 1
ration cfthefpirii unto — fprinkling rfthe blood :bri/t*
3. Baptism with clean water may denote the ty of the Gofpel difpenfation.
The writer of the letters fays, c There does not appear, in all the five books of Mofc.^ any rite of fprinkling meer water, but it was water mixed with blood, allies, &c." The Mofaic inftitution was of a mixed nature : It confided both of moral and ceremonial precepts. And the rites of purifica- tion were of a piece with the difpenfation itfelf; for they were performed by water mixed with other ingredients. But the Gofpel difpenfation is pure and fimple, charged with few external rites, and thefe plain and eafy. Thus. Ezek. 36. 25. God, foretelling the happinefs of his people in the Gof- pel times, fays, Then will /fprinkle clean water up- on you and yc foall be clean* ' This exnreifion,' fays the author before mentioned, c allines to fome watery purification in the law of MofcsS But he fays, c There was no ceremony of unmixed water.' He thinks, ' it alludes to the water, of feparation.' And yet he fays, c This was a compojition of vari- ous ingredients.'
The meaning of the palfage then mud be
this. In the latter times I will give you a pure and
fpir'itual difpenfation, not burdened with fuch rites
and ceremonies as the prefent. The fimple nature
and fpiritual defign of it fhall be reprefentcd by the
great rite of initiation, which thai! be tbejprhtiling
of pure water, and not the application officii mixed
compofitions as are now in vS--.
Obferve here : Sprinkling is fai J to clsanfe the
B , perfon
* Htb. 12.24, x Per. 1. 2.
14
perfon. I will fprinkle clean water upon you and ye (kail be clean, and from all your filthinefs will I cleanfejcx So warning Peter's feet only, was warning him. Peter fays, Thou /halt never wajh my feet. Jefus replies, If I wajh thee noi\ thou haft no pari in me. When he moved, that his hands and head might be warned too, Chrifl anfwered, He that is wq/bed9 need not free to wajh his feet, but is clean every Whit.f
It has been faid, c A minifter may as well wafh the hands or feet, as fprinkle the face of a perfon, in the name of the Trinity, and call it bap- tifm.' 1 am far from afTerting, that the validity of baptifm depends upon the part to which the water is applied. There is however an obvious proprie- ty in applying it to the head. This is the principal part of the body. It is the part which is ufually uncovered ; *ud the water doubtlefs mould be ap- plied to the^rfon, rather than to his clothes. The ceremony of benediction was performed by laying the hands on the head. Unclion was performed by pouring oil on the head^ which was called anointing the body. The Holy Ghoft was communicated by the impofition of the Apoftles hands : And they who had the Spirit communicated to them, v ere faid to be baptized with it ; which makes it highly proba- ble that baptifm, the token of this communication, was performed by putting water on the heads of the perfons baptized. Accordingly, the Apoflle to the Hebrews fpeaks of the doclrine of Baptifms . laying on of hands. \
4. The Apoflle, in 1. Cor. 10. fpeaki: the Jews who came out of£gy/tf,fays, They -
baptized
f John ty S, 9, 10. \ Chap. 6. 2.
ntc Mofcs in the cloud and in the fed. The Apoftle here undoubtedly alludes to chriftian bap- tifm, and therefore we may fuppofe there was fqme rcfemblance between baptifm unto Chrift, and than ancient baptifm unto Mofes, — Now how were they baptized in the cloud and Tea r Surely not by be- mgplunycd all over in water ; for they went over dry j tod ; but only by being fprinkled with ibme (prays of the fca, and drops from the cloud. This appears to me the melt natural fenfe of theexpref- fion. The author of the letters indeed ridicules fuch an interpretation, and fays, c Here is an allu- iion to the cuftom otimmerfion, the Israelites 9 being covered by the cloud over, and by the water on each fide of them.' But I think he has not mended the matter ; for though the waters furrounded them, yet (as he would have it underftood) not even a fpray touched them, nor a drop fell on them ; for then they would have been fpr'niijM, It was a dry baptifm : A baptifm without water. Jonah might as well have been f<ud, to be baptized in al- Iufion to immerjion, when he went down into the fides of the fhip, and there lay, while a ftorm hung over him.
5. Baptism fignifies our obligation to re- nounce fin and put on the character of Chrift.
The Apoftle fays, Rom. 6. 4. We are bu- ried with Chrift by baptifm into his death. And Col. 2. 12. Buried with him in Baptifm, The plain meaning is ; by baptifm we are bound to die to fin, and walk in newnefs of life, in conformity to the Heath and refurreclion of Chrift. Our breth- ren imagine, thefe two paffages aflbrd a itrong ar- gument for immerfion. They tell us, c The
phrafe
IS
phrafe of being buried with Chrifi in Baptifm, al- ludes to the manner of baptifm, which was a bu- rial in the water ; for if there were nothing like a burial, the phrafe uould be very improper. But as well might they fay, ' The mode of baptifm muft refemble his crucifidion ; for in the fame paf- fage the Apoftle fays, We are baptized into his death, ■planted together in the lrkenefs of his death — our old man is crucified with him. But I am willing their argument fhould have its full weight ; for if they think immerfion can be proved from thefe two paf- fages, where our conformity to Chrifi is exprefTed by our being buried with him in baptifm, they mult, if they will be confident with themfelves, allow that fprinkling can be more clearly proved from thofe numerous paffages, where our juftification through ChrifVs blood is exprefTed by the fprink- ling of his blood ; and our fan&ification is exprefTed by thejprinfijfto of clean water*—by the heart's be- ingfprinkled — by the fpir it's being poured on us, &c. The conclufion then from this argument will be, that both modes were admitted by the Apof- tles — both are valid and agreeable to the inftitu- xion. Let us no longer contend. This argument bids fo fair to reconcile our brethren to our prac- tice, that I could willingly leave them in full pof- feflion of it. — I vvifh it good fuccefs. — But if it be attended to, I am afraid, it will appear to have lit- tle weight.
How was Chrifi: buried ? Not as the dead are ufually buried among us, but as rich men were a- moitg the Jews, in an apartment cut out in the fide of a rock. Such tombs were called jepulchres
on high ;* becaufe they were made above ground. Lazarus s grave was of this fort ; and he was laid in it in fuch apofition, that, upon his revival, he came forth, while he was bound hand and foot ; but he could not wait, till he was loofed. c Loofe hint and let him go.'f Plunging then no more rcfem- bies ChrifVs entombment than fprinkling does. It there were any circumftances in his burial, which baptifra can referable, it mult be his embalmment. — It is faid, Nieodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes , and 'wound the body of J ejus in linen clothes with the fpiees, as the manner of the jews is to bury .'I And after this, the women prepared f pices and oint- ments and came to anoint his body. The expreflion of being buried with Chrifl in baptifm, may allude to his body's being anointed with aromatic oint- ments at the time of his burial ; and this was done by pouring and rubbing them on the body. Ac- cordingly when the woman p our ea the precious ointment on Chrift's head5 He fays, In that ftjt, poured it on my body, ft. e did it to my burial. She is come to anoint my body to the burying.% Obferve ; her pouring it only on his head, he calls pouring it on his body ; as on another occafion, a woman's dropping her tears on his feet, he calls wafting his feet ; and waffling Peter's/^/ was wafhing him. — Now in allufion to this manner of anointing, chrift- ians are faid, to be anointed with the fpirit, and to have an unclion from the Holy One, which tcachcth them of all things. \ What is elfewhere called the pouring of the fpirit on them ; and being baptized with the fpirit j is here expreffed by the anointing b of
* Ifa. 22, 16. f Joh. ir. 44. \ Joh. 19. 40.
S Mat. %d, 7, J) a Cor. 1. ai. and 1 Joh. a. 20. 27.
:8
q£ the fpirit, in aliufion to the manner of anointing by pouring oil on the head.
III. It is time that we proceed to enquire, in what manner baptifm was adminiftered in the ?imes of our Saviour and his Apoftles.
Our brethren, and particularly the gentle- man before mentioned, think it very manifeli, that immerfion was the mode practiced in thofe times, be caufe the perfons baptized are, in one or two in- itances, laid to go i?Uo9 and come out cfl\\z water ; becaufe fome were baptized in a river ; and be- caufe places abounding with water were ehofen for baptizing.
But let us not be carried away by the meer found of words without examining their fenfe.
Iris faid, Mat. 3. 16. Jefas being baptized tame up out of the water. The Greek phrafe (apo udatos) properly fignines, from the water ; and therefore implies no more than that he went down to it ; which he might properly be faid to do in whatever mode he was baptized. And as all natural collections of water are in low places, fo the motions to and from them, mull be defending and afcending, which is fufficient to account for the ex- preflion, he went up from the water.
As Chrid was without fin, his baptifm could not be in token of repentance and forgivenefs ; and, as he came to John after all the people were baptized, it could not be for an example of baptifm to them : but it was evidently his public confecra- tion to the miniilry, en which he was now enter- ing. He chofe this ceremony of confecration, in conformity to the law of God, which had inltitut- ed a fimilar form for the reparation of the high
pried
19
pricft to his office. And therefore he fays, Thus it mefb us to fulfil all rightcoufnef. The priefts under the law, were to enter on the public fctvicc. of God at the age of thirty years ; Chrift, when be began to be about thirty years oj ' a-n\ wa; baptized. They were confecrated to their of- fice by wajhing with water, and by anointing with oil : He was publicly inaugurated into his miniftry, by baptifm and the unftion of the Holy CLoJL God fays to Mofcs ; Aaron and his f on* jhalt thou bung to the door of the tabernacle, and Jt alt wajb them with water ; — and thou jhalt pour the anointing oil on hts head. Thou fl: alt make a lover ofbrafs- and put wa- ter therein ; for Aaron and his fans JL all wajb their hands and their feet therein. And Mofes brought Aaron and his fons and wajhed them with water, and he poured the anointing oil on Aaron's headwind anoint* cd him to fanclify him*
The priefts were warned, not by the immerfion of their bodies into a fountain, but by the applica- tion of water to their hands 2nd feet from a laver ; they were anointed by oil poured on their heads $ thus they were publicly inflated in their office. Chrift was baptized at Jordan ; after his baptifm he was anointed with the Holy Ghoft, which viiibly defcended upon him ; and then he was declared from heaven to be the Son of God, and the people were commanded to hear him. Alluding to the manner, in which the priefts were confecrated, the prophet, in the perfon of Chrift, fay?, The fpirit of the Lord is upon me, becaufe be hath anointed me to preach the gojpel.f Peter, fpeaking of the word
which
• Excd. 29. 4, 3cc, Chap. 30, 19, &c. Lev. 8. 6, ift
2<&
which God lent to Ifrael by Chrift, fays, That word ye know, which began from Galilee ', after the bap- tifm which John preached, how God anointed Jefiu of Nazareth with the Holy Ghoft, and with power.
Now as in the account given by the Evangel- ifts concerning Chrift s baptifm there is nothing which neceflarily imports an immerfion ; as his baptifm was in compliance with the inflituted ufage of confecrating the ancient priefts, and as there is no mention of their total immerfion, but exprefs mention of their partial warning; we may, with great probability, conclude, that his baptifm was by the application of water to a part of his body.*
But though he had been warned by immer- fion, this would no otherwife be an argument for immerfion no - , than as an inftance of the ufe of the word baptize, becaufe his baptifm was a different thing from that which he afterwards inflituted. — And as it appears highly probable, that his baptifm was a partial wafhing, it was an example in favor of our opinion, that bapt'fm does not fignify a total immerfion ; but may properly be performed by pour- ing or fprinkling water on a part of the body.
Again, A£c. 8. 38. They (Philip and the Eunuch) went down both into the wafer, and he baptized him, and they came up oat of the water. — This paffage is thought to favor immerfion : But it no more proves that the Eunuch was covered with water, than that Philip was ; for one is faid to go into the water, as much as the other. They might
be
* The laver in which the priefts were wafhed wa9 a portable vcfi'el of brafs, ftanding on a fingle foot, and not of fufficicnt capacity tor the immerfion of a human body.
21
be faid to go into the water, if they only ftept into the edge of it. The words do not neceflkriiy im- ply even fo much as that ; for the particles render- ed into and out cf very often fignify no more than to and from ; as where Chrift bids Peter, go to the fea and cajl his hook — and where the £>uccn of the South is laid to conic from the utihojl parts of the earth. Now no man fiippofes, that Peter plunged himfelf into the fea ; or that the Queen of the South crept out from under ground ; and yet the Greek particles here rendered lo and from are the fame, which in the cafe of the Eunuch are rendered into and out cf All therefore that we can conclude from this pafrage is, that they went down from the chariot to the water, there Philip baptized him, and then they returned : But in what manner he baptized hrm, we can no more learn from this paf- fage, than from any other in the bible. But if the accounts of ancient and modern writers are true, he could baptize him only by pouring or fprinkling water on him \ for they fay, that in the place here mentioned, nothing more than a fmall fpring can be found.
It is faid, Mark i. 5. They were baptized of John in the river cf Jordan. Hence fome have concluded that they were plunged in the river. But this is ay^ra'iconclufion. Chrift fays to the blind man, whofe eyes he had anointed with clay, Go waflo in the pool cf Siloam* Here the phrafe of wafhing in the pod, intends no more than warning his eyes with the water of the pool. And with e- equal propriety John's hearers may be faid to be
baptized
Joh. 9. z.
22
baptized in Jordan, if o\\\j fome of the water of the river was poured on their faces.
We read John 3, 23, that y<?Zw baptized in Enon becaufe there was much water there. It is uiked, c Why fhould he chufe a place abounding with water to baptize in, if he did not baptize by immerfion ?' I anfwer, Thefe words (polla udata) rendered much water, properly fignify many waters, and may be underftood of various rivulets or fprings, which, travellers fay, are the only waters there to be found, and not any large collections convenient for immerfion. If John bap- tized only by affufion, a confiderable quantity of water would be neceifary to baptize fuch multi- tudes, as went out to him from Jerufalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan.—- Yea, though ever fo few of them had been baptiz- ed, there was good reafon why he ihould chufe a place to preach in, that was well fupplied with wa- ter ; for the multitudes that attended on his preaching, in the wildernefs, at a diftance from their homes, would need much water for their re- freshment. It is by no means fuppofeable, that fuch numbers could, here in the defart, be provided with change of apparel proper for immerfion ; and furely, in fuch a numerous and mixed affembly, they were not baptized naked. The circumftances of the cafe therefore lead us to fuppofe, they were baptized by affufion.
We read, Aft. 2. Of three thoufand baptiz- ed, in only part of a day, at the feafl of pentecoft. It cannot rationally be thought, that thefe were plunged. There does not feeua to have been time
for
for it ; nor is it likely they had change of raiment, as they came to the feaft without any expectation of iuch an occafion ; nor is it probable, they could be accommodated there with any convenient place for immeHion. If there were baths fufficient for the purpofe in the temple, yet it is very incredible, that the priefts and officers of the temple fhouhl be wil- ling to accommodate the Apoflles with them, in or- der to initiate thefe converts into a religion, which they were endeavoring by all means to fupprefs.
When we read of whole families baptized in their houfes, particularly of the jailor and his fam- ily baptized at home, and at midnight too, in the fame hour in which he believed, we cannot think, that a fufficiency of w:ter, and other conveniences for a decent immerfion, could be procured on h fudden an occafion.
W'-en Corndim and his friends received the gofpel, Peter afks, not whether any man could hin- der them from going to a fountain or river ; but whether any man could forbid water ^ i. e. hinder wa- ter from being provided, that they fhould not be bap- tised ?*
Paul feems to have been baptized in the houfe of Judas. There Ananias found him, de- livered his meilage to him, and laid his hands on him ; And he received fight fort hzuth andarofe and was baptized^
It is worthy to be remarked, that though. we read of baptifms in various places, yet we have no account of any perfon's going from the place where he was, in order to be baptized in a fountain or river. They who were baptized in dreams and
natural
* Aft. io. 47. f A<St 7. i?.
^4
natural collections of water, arefuch as were found abroad, either in the wildernefs, or on the road, when they firfl difcovcred their defire to be bap- tized.
IV. It now remains, that wc confide", what was the ufage of the primitive Church, upon which our brethren lay great weight in this contro- verfy.
The author of the letters fays, s The whole chriflian church, for 1300 years fucceffively from the time of the Apoftles, underftood by baptifm, immerfion, and fo practiied ; Sprinkling being only ■permitted on extraordinary occajions.' This argu- ment he often repeats, and depends much upon, as do mod of the advocates for immerfion : for they reckon, that the early practice of the Church in this matter may fliew, what was the practice of the A- poftles, becaufe it is not likely, the apoftolic prac- tice would be early and generally difufed.
The truth is, The manner of baptizing a- mong the ancients was looked upon circumftantial, and no way eiTential to the validity of the ordi- nance. In the times near the Apoftles, immer- fion was much practiced, but never afferted to be ncceftary : Far from this ; fprfoldifig was expreff- ly allowed, and frequently ufed, efpecially in cafes of infirmity, hafte, or want of water or other con- veniences. This the Author himfelf concedes, that from the Apoftles times for 1300 years, c fprinkling was permitted on extraordinary occa- sions.' Cyprian (who wrote within about 150 years of the Apoftles) fpeaking of fprinkling, fays, * in the facrament of falvation (i. c. baptifm) when
neceffity
25
neceilky compels, thcjborie/l ways of tranfa<fting divine matters, do, by God's grace, confer the whole benefit.' And it may not be impertinent to obferve, that the ancients, who practiced im- merfion, did ufually, after the body had been plung- ed, apply water to the face. So far therefore as the practice of the ancients is of weight, it proves all that we contend for. We do not fay, immer- fion is unlawful, or a meer nullity : We fay, it is not neceflfary, but affufion is fufficient and agreea- ble to the divine word. And fo laid the ancient church.
1 hope what has been offered is fufficient to juflify the mode of baptifm admitted in our church- es, and to fatisfy all, who have received baptifm in this mode, that they have no need to feek immer- jion. The queftion concerning the mode is really of fmall importance in itfelf, and nothing but the controverfy about it has made it otherwife. If our baptifm is treated as a nullity, it is of importance to fatisfy our minds : And if any have been thrown into doubts, I hope, the consideration of what has been faid, will give them fatisfa<ftion.
PART II.
*+*■ ***^*^+4t^2<£gZrA
DISCOURSE II.
.1 COME now to the fecond part of my defign, which is to vindicate the right of Infants to baptifm.
The method in which I mall proceed is as follows. I fhall firft confider the ufual objections againft infant-baptifm. — Next produce our argu- ments in vindication of it. — Then briefly touch up- on the reafonablenefs and ufefulnefs of it. — After \vh ch I fhall give a fliort view of the practice of the church foon after the Apoftles. — And then by way of conclufion mail mew the abfurdity of reparations in churches on account of differences refpecting baptifm. The unwarrantablenefs of rebaptiza- tion, &c.
I. I will diftinftly confider all the material objections o: our brethren againft infant baptifm, as I collect them from their writers, and particularly from the author of the letters before mentioned.
i. It is faid, < thrift has fully and plainly declared his mind about baptifm ; and becaufe he has not commanded the baptifm of infants, he has virtually forbidden it.'
Now though it fhould be allowed, that there is no exprefs command, yet if we can find a virtual >
confequentiai
^7
ttmfequentkd command for it, that, I truft, will
fuflicient warrant : Otherwife what warrant dial I we have to admit females to the Lord's flipper ? To obferve the firft day of the week as holy ? To maintain public worihip ? Iheft and many other things, are no where enjoined, in fo many words, but yet can clearly be fliewn to be agreeable to the will of God. What command have our brethren tojudify their practice? Where is the pafiagc, which tells us, that baptifm mud be confined to the adult ; and infants, though formerly admitted to the fcai of the covenant, mud now be admitted no more ? They can find nothing of this fort. But, I truft, it will appear, that there is what may proper- ly be called a command for our practice. If that paiTage iu Ifaiab, Li, I haiefet thee jcr a light to the Gentiles, was i / to the Apodles, to go
and preach to the. G rciiles, as it is faid to be \f* then the direction given to Abraham our Father, to affix the token of the covenant to his infant-feed -, the commiflion given to the Apodles to difciple all nations baptizing them ; and the exhortation of Pe- ter, be baptized— for the promife is to you and your children, are commands to admit infants to baptifm ; as we (hall endeavour to ihew hereafter.
2. It is objected, ' that in all the hiftory of the 'New Teftament there is no e:<a?nple of infant-bap- ' tifm ; but the baptifms we have an account of, 6 are the baptifms of profeffed believers/
But if there is no exprefs mention of infant-bap- tifm, yet we cannot hence conclude, it was never pra&ifed ; any more than we can conclude, that
fome
Aft. 13. 46.
28
fome whole churches were formed without any baptifm at all, becaufe it is no where fa id, they were baptized. If a plain direct example be infill- ed upon, our brethren mull certainly give up their notion of baptifm ; for they can find no example in their favor, whatever we can ; as will be evident, if we only cciifider what is the queftion between us. It is not, whether adult profelytes fhould be baptized ? But whether the infants of profeifed be- lievers fhould be baptized ? There are, it is true, inltances enough of the baptifm of adults, who had been converted from Judaifm or Paganifm : But thefe are nothing to the point ; for we allow bap- tifm to all adult believers, who have not been bap- tized in infancy. And the Apoitles' baptizing/^ is no argument, that they did not baptize infants , a- any more than our iniiikmartes' baptizing adults a- mong the natives, is an argument, that they do not baptize infants. The quefhon is merely this ; are the infants of baptized believers to be admitted to baptifm ? Or to be rejeeled ? If you fay, they mud be rejecled and fuffered to grow up before they are baptized ; I afk, Where is your example ? Did the A potties refufe to baptize fuch ? Or among the a- dults whom they baptized, do you find any that were born of chriltian parents ? The hiftory of the A£te contains a period of above thirty years, and the New Teftament, a much longer period. There was time enough for two or three generations of in- fants to grow up to adult age. We have all along accounts of baptifm. But it is remarkable, that in all this time, there is no intimation, that any one of the children of the early believers was baptized af- ter he grew up ; or that any one of thofe adults
whom.
29
whom the Apoflles baptized, was born of believing parents. It is plain then, there is not one example, which in the leait, favors the opinion of our breth rcn, which is this, That the children of believers majl be left to grow up before they are baptized. They alk, ' Is it not a little ftrange, that wc no where find children mentioned, if it were the Apodlcs' cuf- tom to baptize them with their parents ?' And I afk ; is it not very llrange, that we no where find the children of believers baptized after they grew up, if it was the Apoftles' cullom to leave them un- baptized till they grow up ? There is no example of this kind. But, we think, we have examples, and juitiuch examples in favor of our practice, as wc ihculd have, upon fuppofition, the Apoftles did bap- tize children with their parents.
Let us fuppofe infants were baptized : And what account fhould we have of it ? Would the liiltory tell us, fuch an infant by name of fuch an and fuch an one of fuch an age, was baptized ? No : This minutenefs could not be expected con- cerning infants, who are feldom known, by their names or ages, out of the families, to which they belong. All wc could expect to be told is this ; fuch a man was baptized and his family — fuch a woman and her houfehold. And this we are told ; Stephanas'* houfhold, Lyciia and her hcufhold, the yailor and all his were baptized ; which are plain examples of families baptized upon the faith of their refpective heads ; as I ilia.ll fliew more fully hereafter. .
3. It is argued, c that faith and repentance the conditions of baptifm ; infants are not ca thefe, and therefore not capable of baptiir - c
3^
But as well might our brethren fay, c Faith and repentance are conditions of falvation, and therfcre infants, being incapable of thefe cannot be faved.' It is exprefsly faid, He that believeth not fl: all be damned. It is no where faid, He that believeth not, or repenteth not, fhall not be baptized. Faith and repentance are required on fcveral particular occa- fions, when baptifm v,as to be adminiftered to adult perfons ; but we find no general rule given to ex- clude from baptifm fuch as are incapable of faith and repentance. Our brethren will not exclude in- fants from falvation, upon the authority of thofe texts, which make faith the condition of it ; and furely, if they will be confident with themfclvcs, they cannot exclude them from baptifm, upon the authority of thofe texts, which make faith the con- dition of that ; efpecially fmce thefe texts plainly refpecl adult profelytes. 'YhMfucb mult profefs their faith we allow. But the apoflolic practice fhews, that upon their profeffion, not only they, but their houfholds alio ihould be baptized ; as under the ancient difpenfation, when a Gentile became a profelyte, not only he himfelf, but all his male chil- dren were circumcifed.
The inftances in which faith, or repentance is en- joined previoufly to baptifm, are only when adult perfons enquired what was necefiary for thenfelves. The queflion was not concerning the qualification for baptifm in general ; but what was requifite in their own cafe. 'What (hall we do?' — 'What hinders me to be baptized ?' The Apoftles anfwer the queflion, as it refpecled thofe who propoftd it. Repent ye and be baptized— If then believe/?, thou mavji le baptized, Thefe directions only prove,
that
3*
that a profcfEon of faith and repentance is ncceffa- ry to the baptifm 01 adults, which none deny j but, in no decree allcci: the right of infant?*
Faith was as much required under the Old Tef- tament in order to circumcifion, as it is under the new in order to baptifm ; but (till infants were cir- cumcifed. The gentile profelyte was not admitted to this rite, till he profeiTcd his faith in the God oflfrael ; neither was the adult jew. During the forty years that circumcifion was intermitted in the wikierneis, a new generation came on the ftage. c w;rre circumcifed ibon after they parted over Jordan.* But prevkuifly to tin's, they had folemn- Jy avouched the Lord to be their God. Now be- caufe faith was a pre-requiiitc to the circumcifion of adults, (hail we conclude that no infants were cir- cumciied ? This uonld be contrary to known fact. But this conclusion would be as juft as the other, which determines againU: the baptifm of infants, becaufe a profeffion of faith was required in profe^ lytes. The truth is, all arguments drawn from fpecial and particular cafes, are impertinent to an enquiry concerning a general rule of practice.
The author of the letters lays particular weight upon that paflage, i. Pet, 3. 21. The like figure wbereurJo, even beptifm^ doth nozv •fwve its, not the putting away the jiiih oftheflejh* but the anfwer of a good con future towards Gcd. * Here,' he fays, ' iucli
* a condition of baptilm is required, as infants are
* not capable of. The filth of their flefli may be ' put away : But how ihall they anfwer the good £ confeience V But it thould be obferved, that the
anfwer
*Jofh. 5.
32-
1
anfwer of a good confcience is made the conditio* offalvation : Not of bapiifnu He might therefore rather have faid, fuch a condition offahation is re- quired as infants are not capable of. This is a con- dition of falvation and baptiim too in adults, but of neither in infants, who are not yet moral agents. The Apoftle -fays, Circumcifion is that of the heart ;, but furdy he did not mean, that yews were incapa- ble of the flemy circumcifion, until they were capa- ble of profefling the circumcifion of the heart. Bap- tifm, which is externally the putting away the filth oftheflejh, Signifies our obligation to anfwer a good confcience toward God. This obligation immediate- ly takes place with refpeft to all, who are moral a- gents, and with refpeel: to infants, when they be- come Tuch. Here is then no argument again/I the baptifm of infants.
Let us fee if there be not a plain argument/^/- it. The Apoitle is here Speaking of the prefervation of Noah and his family in the flood by means of the ark. The Apoftle to the Hebrews fays, By fai'h, Noah, prepared an ark to the faving of his houfe. It was by Noah's faith, that his family was brought into the ark, and preferved in the flood. The like figure whereunto, even baptifm, doth now five us. Where is the likenefs ? Plainly here. As Noahbj faith prepared an ark, by which his houfe was fav- ed ; fo the faith of the chriftian parent brings his family within the privileges of the covenant. Sal- vation came to Zaccheus's houfe, in confequence of his believing. They enjoyed forae fpecial privileg- es on account of his faith.
4. We read, A&. 8. 5. that when the Samari- tans believed Philip, preaching the things concerning
the
the kingdom of God, thcyi ! Hzedbotb men and
Upon this our author obferves, ''lhe
hiitory is (o particular as to mention both men and
//, but there flops. — Had the facred hiftorian
. a little more explicit and faid, men, women and
ren, if the facl were really fa ; it would bave
. 1 much doubt and con trove: '
In atrfwer to this, it is fufficient to fay ; as the fcal of the covenant under former difpenfations had been affixed only to males, (o there was good rea- fon, why the hiftorian fhould be fo particular, as to mention both men and women, i. e. males and fe- males, (for thefe terms are in fcripture applied to perfons of all ages) that it might appear, that the covenant- feal was, for the future, to be affixed to perfons of bother/. But as the feal had always been applied to children, there was no occaiioii lor his being fo explicit, as to fay, men, women and chil- dren, if the facl were really io ; for children's right to the covenant-token had not then been mad/ a quellion ; and they who knew the immemorial and univerial ufage of admitting Jewjb infants by circumcilion, and the infants of Gentile profelytes by baptifm, did not need to be mitrufted, that in- fants were entitled to baptifm under the chriftian difpenfation. They mult naturally fuppofe it, un- lefs exprefsly told the contrary.
5. It is urged by fome, 'that Jefus Chrill, who came to be our example, was baptized at adult age, and that we ought to imitate him herein.'
But his example is no more an argument againft infant baptifm, than againft all baptifm under the age of thirty years ; for this was his age, when he was baptized, though he was certainly capable of
underflanding
34
underftanding the nature of baptifm before he was twelve. Do our brethren think, that all are bound, in imitation of Chriit, to live, unbaptized, twenty years after they arrive to the age of underftand-
fag ?
The objection before us is founded in the fup- pofition, that the baptifm which Chrift received, was the fame, in its nature and defign, with that which he himfelf afterwards appointed. If it was a different thing, no argument can be drawn from it in the prefent qaeftion. If it was the fame, then it at once removes the principal objection againft the baptifm of infants, taken from their incapacity for faith and repentance. For Jefus was as incapable of faith in a mediator and repentance of fin, as in- fants are ; though from a different caufe.
But, as I have before (hewn, ChriiVs baptifm was his public inauguration into his miniftry, and therefore is impertinently adduced to difprove the baptifm of infants. When we are aiked, why Chriir. was not baptized in his infancy, it is fuffi- cicnt to anfwer, becaufe he did not take on him his public miniftry in his infancy. To argue, that ho- caufe Chrift was publicly confecrated to his priefl- hoocl at the age of thirty -years, therefore none fhould be given to God by baptifm in their child- hood, is an inconclufive way of reafoning.
Let it, however be obferved, thar, though he was not baptized in infancy, yet he was dedicated to God, by fuch rites as were then in life. He was circumcifed on the eighth day ; and on the fortieth day, he was brought by his parents into the tem- ple, and there prelented to God, according to the law, which required, that every firfbborn male
fhould
35
ihonld be holy to the Lord. This example (hews, nts ought publicly to dedicate their chil- dren to God in his appointed way ; and, fince bap- ;^ now the appointed ceremony of dedication, it 'Ihcws, that they ihould prefent their children to him in baptifm.*
6. The
• If ft could be proved, which certainly it never can, t! . baptized only adu'ts, yet no argument could hence be dech: gaiuft the rigl.tof in fa lire to baptifrn uiider the goipcl difpenfatit n ; for the b:iptiim which John adminiftcrcd, was not properly ciniirhm baptifm.
Though before Ch rift's lime, baptifm w as in ufe among the Jews, yet it was net mad, the only initiating fcal of the covenant, until afrer his refurrecli; n.
John was ftnt to preach the baptifm of repentance for the re- in rfti on of fins, and thus to prepare men for that new difpenfation of God's kingdom, which was not yet come, but was then at hand. — Chrift inftituted his baptifm afrer this difpenfation was come. John's baptifm materially differed from thi.«. The baptifm, which Chrift inftituted was, in the name of '.be Father, of the Son, and of the HolyGhoft. John di J not baptize in the name of the Holy Chfl ; for fome who bad received his baptifm, confeffed that tb:y /.ad not fo much as heard, xibctbcr ther* ti'ere 'any Moly Ghofl. He did not bap- tize in the name of the Sen, or in the faith, that Jefus vas the Cbrif ; but tiitb tie baptifm of repentance, faying to the people, tint they fkould be- lieve on him ivbofhould come after him ; that is, en Jefus Chr'f. Nor did he baptize into Chrift\ death, for this event had not th< n taken plp.ee. Had John taught that Jefus of Nazareth was the Chrift;. and bap- tized the people in his name, and into this fa:th. they would not have mufed in their her.rts, "uhelher John ivere the CBrjp ; nor have afk- ed him, Why bapiizcf thou, if thou art 'not the Chrift ? Nor would Jc- fus have cautioned hisdjfciples, to tell no man, that he was tSe Cbriji , till after hi < rcftrreclion. John's baptifm was d figntd to prepare men for the faith in Chrift, when he fhould he made rr.anifcfi to Ifrael.
C"t what is decifive in th<^ cafe is, that fume who had rece ved John's baptifm, were afterward* baptized in the name of the Lord Jefus.
Among the many tboufands \ from all Judea and tJerufalevty\.tS whom P(.tf-r preached on the da\ Of pentccoft, it cannot be doubl- ed, that there were multitudes, who had been baptized by John ; for there runt oat t-j bim all the IjhJ cf Judea, and they rf jenfi all the region round about Jordan, and w ere baptized of bim. And vet Peter fay* to thtra, without clift:nclinn, Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jefus Chrift.
An
6. The incapacity of cnndren for the ends of baptifm or for any benefit from it, is often urged as an argument againft their bein*. baptized.
But really the queflion is, Whether there be any divine warrant for their baptifm ? Jf there is, it becomes us to pra&ife accordingly, and not to arraign the wifdom of God. That there are fome rational ends to be anfwered by infant baptifm, and that it is a gracious and beneficial inftitution, I fruit, will appear under another head, where this objection will receive a full anfvver. In the mean time it may fufnee to obferve, that infants are now as capable of the ends of baptifm, as they were anciently of the ends of circumcifion. They may be brought into covenant wuh Goi — may have privileges made over to them — may receive the leal and token of privileges — may be laid
under
An inftance ftill more plain we hare in the beginning of the 19th Ch. of A£ls. Paul finding at Ephefus twelve dileiples, fail to them, Have ye received the Holy Gbojl fince yc believed ? And they faid to him, IVe bave not femxb as bend libeller thei e be any Holy Gbof:.-— And he faid tO them, U'tlo ivhatthen luere ye baptized ? And they laid, Un-o Johns b'ptifn. Then faid Paul, John verily battled with the baptifm of repentance, faying unto the people, that they foould believe on ft it, luhofoouU come aflei h;r.:y that is, Oil Jefus Chriit. IV ben tiey beard this, they ivere baptized 'in tbc ra?xe of the Lord Jefus. Ard rvben /' ■ id
laid bis bands on then, the Hoi ' j Ghoji came upon fbcm, \jc.
IVbin they beard this, they ivere b.ptized in the name of the Lord jfefs. The meaning cannot he, thai when t he people heard "John they were by him baptized in ihe name of tie Lord Jeffs ', be- caufc then it will follow, that Paul laid his htwds on all the people wh( m John baptized ; for they, who are I: r? faid to 1 ire
evidently the p«rfi)ns on whom f-rol hid bi% band*. But the fenfe mult be, thst v Nn theft twelve difciples who ; i been baptised by John,now heard Paul, they were baptized 1\> hi no. It follows ;'..n that John's baptifm, being neither in the n; hnft nor of the
Holy Ghofr, wfcs different from that •>» h<ch Chrtf) i ^nd
no arguments can bt drawn from the forme 1 line the mode,
or fubje&s of the latter; nor can the repetition of chriftian bap- tifm be juftifiedfrom this example of Paul.
37
«adcr obligations to obey the gofpel, as the Jcwijh Infants by circumcifion became debtors to obey the hw — and may become fubjccls of that hlftification through ChriiVs blood, that renovation of the Spirit, and title to eternal life, which are fignified anJ fced i:i baptiim.
Li: .- given you a view of all the material
W, which are brought to difprove infant bapti I'm. And what has been faid in anfwer to rhem is, I think, futhcient to ihew, that they have SO real weight. The way is now prepared to bring forward our arguments in vindication of this t-, which was the itcond thing propofed.
II. We will here take a diltincl view of the prin- cipal arguments in defence of the right of believer's inrants to baptiim, and endeavour to eftablifh them again it the cavils of our opponents, and particu- larly the author of the letters before mentioned.
i. Our iirff. argument mall be taken from the Abrahamic covenant together with the Apoflle's explanation of it.
In the 17th chap, of Gen. we find, that God made a covenant with Abraham and his feed, into which his infants were exprefsly taken, together with himfe f, by the fame rite and token. This covenant comprehended not only his natural feed, but the Rranger who was not of his feed. It was ^fpiritual covenant, The capital promife of it was Izui// be a Gvd to thee and thy feed after thee. — This was the fame covenant, which now fubfifte, an 1 which we are now under in this gofpel-ag the Apoftle exprefsly teaches us, in the 4th chap * to Rom. and 3d chap, to Gal. where he argues from the covenant with Abraham ', to fhew the if a- D
33
rare and extent of the gofpel-covenant. He tefti- ftft, that all believers under the gofpel, whether Jews or Gentiles ^ are the fpiritual feed of Abraham, and confequently heirs of the promife made to him — that the covenant made with Abraham was confirm- ed of God in Chriji — that the law which was given afterwards did not difannul the covenant, or vacate the promife — that the gofpel was preached to A- braham, in that promife of the covenant with him, In the: fall all nations be bleffed — that the bl effing of Abraham is come upon the Gentiles through Ghriil — that the promife made to Abraham is font to all the feed, not only to that which is of the law, but to that alfo which is of the faith of Abra- ham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, / bavd made thee a father of many nation* — that they Vshoare of faith are the children of Abraham, and to Abraham and his feed were the prcmifes made — and much more to the fame purpofe.
Now if we are the feed of Abraham, for whom the covenant with him was e'hibiifhed, and are flill under the felf-fame covenant, then the fame privi- leges that were herein granted to him, belong to us. One grant of that covenant was, that infants ihould be received with their parents by the fame llgn and feal ; and therefore we, as the feed of Abraham, may claim this privilege for our infants. Yea, God not only allowed, but commanded, that the appointed token of the covenant fhould be af- fixed to every male child who was not under eight days old. Here then is a plain command given to Abraham our father, and confequently to us his children, to apply the token of this very covenant, which we are now under, to our infant-feed. The
only
qucftion is, whether tha .■■■nv any token
of the covenant r Had circumciiion been continn* ed, none could doubt but infants were flili fu, of it by virtue of the command given to Abraham* unlefs they would expunge the 4th chap, to Rom. and 3d to Gal. Circumcinon has ccafed. ±\n has Chrifl: appointed any token of the gofpcl cov- enant ? Baptifm is certainly fuch. This then is to be applied to the fame fubjecls as that was. If there was an exprefs command to affix the covenant feal to infants in Abraham's time, and the covenant ftiil remains ; then the covenant-feal, whatever it is, ought to be affixed to infants now, unlefs the com- mand has been repealed. The change of the feal makes no change of the fubjed. There muir. be a command to warrant our rejecting the eld fuijec?, as well as to juftify our dropping the old feal. M our brethren alk, Why we have difcontinued cir- cumcinon, and now make ufe of baptifm ? We anfwer, Chrift has io ccmmanJed* I^et them pro- duce as good authority for affixing this new feal of the fame covenant to believers only^ and not to their children, and we wili comply with them. We demand of them to fhew us fome plain, pofitive or- der Oi Chrifl: to deny the feal of the covenant to thofe fubjecls, to whom it was firft ordered to be applied. Until fuch order appears, we boldly af- firm, that the old command remains, and to act in difobedience to it is prefumption.
To evade the force of this argument, our breth- ren aflat, that f the chriflian church is an inftitu- tion entirely new ; a flructure erected on a new foundation, diilinct from, and unconnected with the foundation of the patriarchal and jewifli
church ;'
40
church ;' for they eafily fee, that if the chriitiaa church is the aaeieUt church, continued under the fame covenant which was made in ancient times, then the admilBon of children with their parens into this church, will ftand fecure on the foot of the former inititution. It may not therefore be improper to purfue our prefent argument a little farther.
The foundation of the ancient church is, the difcovery ofGodys mercy to fallen men through a re- deemer. This difcovery was firflmade to Adam in the fentence on the tempter ; and afterward more fully to Abraham in the promife already mention- ed. This God exprefsly calls his e-zcr lqf}i?ig cove- nant. This is always confidered by Moles and the prophets, as the ground on which the Faith and hope of the jewifh church refted; Mofes fays,* c Ye (land all of you before the Lord, your li'ives and little ones, that thou fhouldft enter into cove- nant with him, that he may be a God to thee, as he hathfivorn to Abraham. The prophet Jeremiah, f foretelling the gofpeldifpenfation, defcribesit by an allufion to the covenant with Abraham, which he diilinguiihes from the covenant of peculiarity made with the Jews at Sinai, when they came out of E- gypt. The apoftle to the Hebrews { applies the prophet's defcription to the gofpel-ftate. The old covjflant, which, he fays, was decayed and ready to^pifh, is not the covenant with Abraham ; for thisnt calls the covenant which God would make in the latter days, or would explicitly renew in the gofpel time, promifing, / Witt he their Led : but
ti.
* Dcu: 29. I C? • v :
41
the old covenant, which was to vanifli away, np more to be renewed, is the ceremonial covenant, or that which God made with the Jews, when ho brought them out of Egypt.
When the prophets foretel the call of the gen- tiles, they fpeak of them as joining themfelves to the church then fubfilling. In the 49th chap, of Ifaiah, God comforts Sion, the Jewifh church, in her defpondency, with a promife that he will never forfake her, but her walls fhall be continually be- fore him.. c Lift up thine eyes round about,' fays her God, c and behold! All thefe gather them- felves-together, and come unto thee. The chil- dren, which thou {halt have after thou haft loft the other, fhall fay, The place is too ftrait for me. — Then flial t thou fay, Who hath begotten me the'e,, feeing I have loft my other children ? Thus faith; the Lord, Behold, I will lift up my hand to the- Gentiles — and they {ball bring thy fons, in their- arms, and thy daughters fhall be carried on their moulders.' — The children of thefe Gentile profe- lytes are called the fons and daughters of the church. They are brought in the arms of their parents to the church ' to be nurfed at her fide.' — No words can more plainly defcribe the admiilion of Gentile profelytes into the very church which w&s then in being, and the folemn dedication of their children,. as members of the church with them. Similar reprefentations are frequent in the prophet- ic writings.
The words of our Saviour, in 1 oth chap, of John, are full to our purpofe. ' Other fhtep I have which are not of ;*ns fold ; them alio I muft bring.' 1 muft bring them into this fold, the Jew iih ,
d church ■
42
church ; for what oilier fold was there then exit- ing ? ' And they fhall hear my voice y and there Khali be one fold and one fhepherd ■
The apoftle Peter,* exhorting the Jews to repent- ance, points them to the Saviour, whom the proph- ets foretold, and fays, c Ye are the children of rhe prophets, and of the covenant, which God made with our fathers, faying, In thy feed flail all tie families of the earth be blcffed : unto you firft God hath raifed up his foil, and lent him (o blefs you/
Paul, in the epiftle to the Ephefians, treats ex- plicitly on this fubje<5r. He fays, c Ye v. ere r afar off, without Chrift, aliens from the Comn • wealth of Ifrael, and ftrangers from the coven;. of promife. But now in Chrift- ye are made n; Chrift is our peace, who hath made both ore f \\ hath united both Jews and Gentiles. Now there- fore ye are * no more flrangers and foreigners, 1 fellow- eiii%cns with the f amis, and of the ,'^'flcbf God ; and are built en the foundation of -the ap<J and prophets, Jefus Chrift himfelf being- thee; corner (tone.' The prophets and apoflles laid -the fame foundation. The prophets foretold a Saviour to come ; the apoflles preached this Saviour alrea- dy come. The predictions of the former, and the doctrines of the latter are the fame foundation, the corner-irone of which is Chrift himfelf. The a- poftle adds, fc Ye have heard of the difpenfation of the grace of God. that the gentiles fhould be fel- low heirs, and of the fame body and partakers cf ' hh promife in Chrift -by the gofpeh*
The Jews, who were baptized on the day of penteebfh believed -that Jeiuswas Lord and Chrift,
on
on evidence derived foom the prophcir. ; and were admitted to baptifm on the foot of the prom.'/l made to their fathers. The fume promife, which was the foundation of the ancient church, and of which circumcifion was the feal, is alledged by the apof- tle,as a reafon for the baptifm of tiiefe Chriftiari Jew j and their children, and as many as God fhould call from among the pentiles. The ehrifuan church here flands on the old foundation ; and to this church were added thole who afterwards were baptized.
In the i ith chap, to the Romans the apoflle ea* prefsly declares, that the gentile believers are grafts ed into the fume olive-tree (torn ythtdijbme of the Je s, the natural brandies, were broken off by unbelief. ' H fome of the branches, were broken oa, and thou, being a wild olive, v.ert grafted in among them,' the branches that remained, c and with them partakefl of the root and fatnefs. of the olive tree, boaft not again il tire branches ; for thou beared not the root, bat the root thee. They were broken off by unbelief, and thou (landed by faith.' It is the fame root, which bearetb the natural, and the ingrafted branches. Some of the natural branches v\ere broken off — not all. — The "believing Jews continued ftiil in the fame old dock, in. wbkh they had before flood, and in which be- lieving, gentiles were ingrafted. The gentiles were not infer ted into a new flock, a tree lately grown up ; nor were believing Jews lopt off from the old tree to be inferted with gentiles into a new one : but the former remained in the old flock-, and the latter. wTere grafted in among them, to partake wi'h them' of the root and fatnefs of the fame olive, which jrmerly uourifhlhem. . And. it is obfcrvable,
that
4*
that thefe Jews,who immediately and readily fubmit- ted to thegofpel,on its being propofed to them,feem not generally, if in any infrance, to have received chriftian baptifm. Heathens and Samaritans, who were not of the church of God, and thofe Jews, who by obiliuate unbelief, and open oppolition to the gofpel, had' broken themfelves oiF. from the church, were on their profeiTed repentance, bap- tized. The other continued in God's covenant and church. This thought we fhall have occafion to refiime hereafter. When the unbelieving Jews fhall, in the latter days, turn to the Lord, they. fhall be grafted again — into what ? — another tree ? no ; into their own olive-tree ; for the covenant which God made with their fathers, is the fame \ which he will make with them in the latter days, when he fhall take away their fins.
We have now an obvious anfwer to a queftion, which our brethren often put to us. ' If the chil- dren of believers are fubjjefts of the covenaut-ieal under the gofpel, as they were under former dif- penfations, why have we not fome direcl, pofitive inftitution, which might have prevented all contro- verfy ?'
The facfc is, the gofpel found the children of God's people already in covenant by virtue of the ancient inflitution : and a new inftitution of that, which had been plainly inftituted before, and was not then fo much as queftioned, would have been fuperfluous : not to fay, abfurd. The gofpel has made it as plain as language can make any thing, that the ancient covenant with Abraham is (till con- tinued : and if children were, by divine command,to receive the leal of the covenant formerly, they are
to
"O
to receive it ftill, unlcfs the command is fomewherc in the gofpel exprefsly revoked. We need no new yiititution to warrant cur applying the feal to them ; but we evidently need a new kiftitution to jullif. them from ir.
Infant baptiiin (lands on the fame ground as the chriftian fabbath. if it be afked, why the gofpel has not, in to many words, inftituted a week- ly fabbath, the anfwer is, it found a weekly fab* bath already inilituted ; and a formal inflitution of that, which had been inftituted before, was whol- ly unneccftary. The apoftles took the fabbath as they found it, only obferving a different day, after Chrhi's refurrection, in me r.ory of that glorious event. So they continued the ancient ufageof ap- plying the feal of God's covenant to children, as well as parents ; only they changed the external form of the feal, fubftituting baptifm. forcircumci- fion. The ancient iniliuition unrevoked, if we had nothing more, would be (utneient to juftify the ap- plication of the feal to infants. But we have ftill farther warrant.
Let us view the argument in another light.
2. Circumcifion was of old, by divine com- mand, applied to infants : And if baptifm (lands now in the place of circumcifion, then this is alfo to be applied to the faune fubjects. The confequence is plain and undeniable. The only question i?., Whether baptifm does now (land in the place of circumcifion ? This is the point to be proved.
That circumcihon was the feal of the covenant with Abraham, and va>, by divine appointment, adminiiKred to infants, is well known — that the Abraluink covenant ftill fubf ,K and is (lie fame as
the
46
the Go/pel covenant, the Apoftle plainly teaches — that baptifm is now the appointed token of the gofpel covenant, none will deny : The confe- qnenceis obvious ; baptifm now (lands in the place of circumcifion, for it is the initiating feal of that very covenant, of which circumcifion was the feal formerly.
Again. The Apoftle fays, Rom. 4. 11. A- braham received the fign of circumcifion, a feal of the righteoufnefs cf faith. It is plain from this pafiage, that circumcifion was a fign of fpiritual blefiings, the blefiings of the covenant of grace : And not (as fome abfurdly pretend) meerly a fign of world- ly privileges, fuch as a right to the land of Canaan, a numerous ifiue, &c. There were, it is true, temporal blefiings promifed to Abraham and his feed. But to argue from hence, that the cove- nant with him was a meer temporal covenant, and that circumcifion was only a feal of has fuch, is as abfurd, as it would be to fay, The gofpel is a meer worldly institution, becaufe it has thepromife of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. The Apoftle, in this pafiage, reprefents circum- cifion in quite a different light, as efpccially and eminently a feal of fpiritual blefiings. — That baptijm is fuch, all allow : And therefore it comes in the room of circumcifion, and (lands in the place in which that once flood.
Farther y Thefe two rites, though different in their outward form, are \\i<zfamc in their fpiritual ufe and fignificancy. Circumcifion iignified our na- tive corruption : (o does baptifm. Circumcifion pointed out the necefiity of inward purity and fpir- itual renovation : fo docs baptifm. That repre-
fentcd
47
footed our juftification by the blood of ChrJfl : fo docs this* That was a ceremony of admiilion into God's church : fo is (bis. 7 bat denoted men's re- lation to God and obligation to obey his law. This alfo denotes our relation to Chrift and obliga- tion to obey his gofpel.
But the apoftle puts this matter out of all doubt, when he calls bap ti fin the circumcifion of Chrijt, and urges chriflians being baptized, as a reafon why they need not be circumcfcd.
Ke fays, Col. 2. 1 1. i 2. Tc are con pic te in him% (in Chrift) in whom ye alfo are circumcifcd with the circumcifon made without hands, in putting cjf the body of the fins of the fejh by the circumcifion of Chrift, buried with him in baptifn. The apoftle here calls baptifn, the circumcifon of Chrift, or the chriftian circumcifion. But he calls it by this name without any propriety, unlets it ftands in the place of cir* cumciiion.
The author, whom I have feveral times mention- ed, labours much to evade the force of this pafTage. He fays, By the circumcifion of Chrijl is meant, • lYizfpiritual circumcifion,' or renovation of the heart, in diftinclion from. ' the literal circumcifion.' But this cannot be the meaning of the phrafe : For the inward fpiriual circumcifion is mentioned in the preceding branch of the fentence, under the name of the circumcifion made without hands. And if we take .both phrafes to fignify the fame ; then we fhall make the words to run thus. Te arc circum- cifed with the fipiriiual circumcifion, in being circum- cifcd by the fpiritual circumcifion. Such an unmean- ing repetition never dropt from the Apoftle.
The writer fays, ' That to guard the Coloflians
againfl
4s
againft Ac danger of being fed uced to the o^ferv- ance of circumcifion, the Apoflle tells them.' c They had received the /^/W/zWciraimcifion— and therefore the literal circumcifion was not necelTary.' But how did this fpiritual circumcifion or internal renovation prove, that the literal circumcifion was not neceifary ? Circumcifion ufed to be neceflary for good men : Why net now? According to this in- terpretation, external ordinances are not needful for true chriitians, but only for iinners. Thofe among the Coloilians,who were not fure they had received the jpiriiual circumcifion. could not apply this argu- ment ; and therefore, according to our author, mull ilill obferve the literal circumcifion. Befides ; the fame argument would prove, that they need not be baptized ; for if they had received the fpir- itual wafhing of fancliiication, what occafion was there for the literal wafhing of baprfm ? And ycr, according to him, none mufl be baptized, but act- ual believers ; fo that, if we admit his conduction of the nafTaffc, we mull: difallow cf all banti:,
Our author fays, * In the Apoftles days, the chriitians converted from Judaifm were zealous to incorporate circumcifion with chriitianity. — Do the Apollles inftruct them, that they need not be fo tenacious of one rite, tincc another is appoinl d in its Jlead? Such an obfervation would have been much to the purpofe — but nothing can be found of it in their reafonings to diffuade chriitians from circum- cifion.'
But the gentleman is under a great mi:: The jewijh converts were zealous to incorporate, notmeerly circumcifion, but the whole ceremonial law, with chriitianity. They contended for circum- cifion
49
ciiion as a rite binding to the obfervance of the 4 whole law, without which, they imagined, chriitiani- ' ty would be incomplete. From this notion Paul labors to reclaim them, and fecure others. He does not oppofe circuinrificm Jjmply ; if he had, he would not have circumcifed Timothy, nor fayc ap- proved infant circumcifion among the jewifh believ- ers ; but he oppofed it, in the fenfe above mentioned as binding men to keep the ceremonial law in order to acceptance with God. Though he had,upon pru- dential reafons, circumcifed Timothy ', yet he gave no place to thofe who would compel Titus to be circum- cifed.that they might bring him and others into bon- dage to the law. Now what argument docs he ufe to dhTuade the Coloflian believers from circumciiion and the obfervance of the law ? It is this ; They had received baptifm, the chriflian circumciiion, and were now bound to obey the gofpel, which, being a complete inftitution, had fuperfeded the law. Thus he reafons with them in the place before re- ferred to. Beware left any manfpoil you through philofophy and vain deceit ; after the rudiments of the world and not after Chrift — for ye arc complete in him, and fo need not add the ritual law to his gof- pel : in whom ye are circumcifed — with the circum- cifion of Chrift, or chriflian circumcifion, being buried with him in baptifm. — Wherefore if ye be dead with 1 from the rudiments of the world', if by bap- tifm into his death ye are freed from the rites of wfdic drfpenfatibnj why, as though thing ■ in the \, or under that difpenfation, are ye fubjccl to ? You fee, that the Apoftle urges their baptifm into Chrift, as a reafon why they fliould not be fubjefr. to circumcifion, and the rites of the ceremonial law, for which the Jews contended. E He
So-
He ufes the very argument to diffuade them from circumcifion, which this author fays, he would ufe, if baptifm came in its place : And therefore, by his own conceiiion, baptifm does come in its place. And if fo, then it is undeniably to be adminiflered to the fame fubje&s, even the infants of believing parents.
We are told,* that fome of the believing Jews at Jcrufalem were much difpleafed, when they heard that Paul taught the Jews, who were among the Gentiles, that they ought not to cirewncife their children. Would it have fatisfied fuch zealous con- tenders for infant circumcifion, to have told them, baptifm now came in the place of that ancient cere- mony, but yet mutt not be applied to their chil- dren ? This would but have provoked them the more. Had it not been the ufage of the apoflles to admit children with their parents into covenant by the fame rice, certainly the Jews, among other ob- jections againft the gofpel, would have urged this, that it excluded their children from covenant priv- ileges. They were apt enough to make objections, and lince we find none of this fort, we may conclude, there was no room for any.
That infants, under the patriarchal and mofaic diipenfations, were admitted into covenant by a par- ticular token, is certain. It is evident, this was cohfidered as a privilege. It is allowed, that the gofpel confers greater privileges than former dif- pen fations : hut if children are now ihut out of covenant, then the gofpel, inftead of enlarging, has in this refpe£t diminiflied our privileges.
But fays our author, c The infallibility of the
Roman
51
Roman church may be proved ih the fame mamu r ; as thus : The people of God under the Old-Tcda- ment enjoyed the benefit of infallibility. The high Pried had the Urim and Thummim, by which the mind of God was known, &c. confcquently there mud be infallibility in the chriiVian church ; Qther- wife the lefs perfect diipenfation of Mofcs will have a great privilege beyond the chrijtian'
The truth is, The chrijlian diipenfation has this privilege far beyond the mofaic. The additional revelation of the gofpel difcovers the mind of God as infallibly, and far more fully and extenfively than ever it was difcovered by Urim and Thum- mim.— Such occafional difcoveries now are not need- ed, fince we have a complete ', Jianding revelation.
The author of the letters tells us, that circumcif- ion, € that Old-Tedament rite, "was a ufehfs^ bur- tben/btHty injurious ceremony, and treated as fuch by the Apodles.? And hence he concludes, bap- tifm cannot come in its room to be admimdered to infants, as that was. - But where do the Apoflles treat circumcifion in this manner ? The ceremonial law indeed is confidered as a yoke of bondage ; as burthenfome, not injurious ^ for it would id become the teachers of religion to reprefent God as injuring his people by his inditutions r Bat circumcifijr^ confidered as a token of the covenant, is treated as a great privilege.* What advantage bail) the yews ? ylnd what profit is there of cirtumc Much every way. ' It was a great privilege for the children of Jens to have God for their Gcd, in fuch a fenfe as he was not the God of'heathen chil- dren ; to be born to the enjoyment of the oracles
and
Rom. 3. 1.
52
and ordinances of God ; and to be under the care of parents, who were folemnly bound to bring them up in the knowledge and fervice of the God of IfraeL And if the profit of circumcifion was much every way, then the lofs by its abolition is much every way, unlefs there be fomething appoint- ed in its room.
It is often faid, ' Circumcifion was applied only to males : Baptifm is defigned for both fexes, there- fore they are not parallel ordinances, nor can we argue from the one to the other.'
But it is certain, they are parallel in their main defign, as initiating ;feals of the fame covenant* Andfemales were admitted into covenant, as w.ell as males, though no vifible token was appointed for them. Every Jirjl-born male was to be publicly prefented to God in token of the obligation of the whole family to be holy to him ; for if 'the Jirji fruits be holy,fo is the lump. So the parent's dedicating his males to God by circumcifion, was a token that all his children belonged to God. Accordingly God equally claims an interefl in children of both fexes, by virtue of the covenant relation of their parents. God fays to the Jewi/h church, Ezxk. 16.7. I entered into covenant with thee, and thou becamejl mine* And then he complains, ver. 20. Thou hajl taken thy fons anil thy daughters, which thou hajl born unto me, and thefe thou haft facri- jiced. Thou ha/ljlain my children. So Dcut. 29.10. Ye /land this day before the Lord — all the men ofJfrael, your little ones, and your wives, that thoujhouldd enter into covenant, that he may be unto thee a God— as he hath /worn to Abraham. They were all admitted into covenant, though the ma':.
53
oniv received the vifible token. But under the goTpd there is no diltin&ion of male and female, but all are one in Chriit, the vifible leal being affix- ed to one as well as the other, la this refpeel the gofpel difpenfation is more large and free than the former, that it makes no diftinclion of nation orfex. And fhall we think it was intended to be contracted in another refpeel:, by cafhieiing all children, who are more than half of mankind ?
The author before mentioned tells us, tint ' chil- dren were admitted to the pallbver ; and hence we may infer their right to the Lord's fupper ; as well ?s from their circumciiion infer their right to bapiifm.'
It feems probable, that perfons of all ages partook of ihejirjl paffover mentioned Exod. 12. which was in fome refpe&s lingular, and different from fucceding paffovers. But it appears from Luke 2. 42. that it was not the cuflom of the fcajl, for pa- rents to bring their children to it, until they were about twelve years old \ at which age, they might be able to enquire of their parents, What mean ye by this fervice ? And at this age, no doubt, many are capable of underftanding the nature and end of the Lord's fupper.*
e But
* ' Children at the age of i.-a years, were brought by thtir pa- rents to the temple : And from that time they began to cat 67 the paffover and other facrifices. Hyrcanus in Jofephus, B. 12. Chap. 4- fays, The Jewifh law forbids the fon to eat of the facrifices, be- fore he has come to the temple, and there himfelf prefented an of- fering to God.' (Pol. Synop. in Exod. 12. 26.)
The law prefcribed, that whew the Jews were ccrne inro the land, which God would give them, all their males fhould appear before him every year at the pafTover,in theplacewhichheappi inted. But it is added, Tkeyjhall not appear before mc empty, but every one ac- cording to tbegift of Lis baud. (Deut. 16. 16. and alibi, vide. Marg.)
The male, or men children, who were to appear before God', in their appointed place, to cat of the paflbver,. were only fticli a* <M>u!d faring a gift in their hand ; or prefent an offering for them--
54
But if infants had been ufually admitted to the paiTover, it would not in the leaii: weaken our ar- gument from circumciiion ; for the paflover was •not a feal of the Abrahamic . covenant (k being ap* pointed more than 4,00 years after that covenant was made) but one of the mafak rites. Now the ritual law is fupcrieded by the gofpel .; but the Abrahamic covenant remains. The Lord's iiipper is a commemorative fign, intended to Hiew forth Chrift's death and bring him to our remembrance. But baptifm is -a token of admifhen to the vifibie privileges of God's people; and therefore infants are capable of this* though not of the other.
Some perhaps will aJk, How could baptifm come in place of circumcifion, when it appears to have been in ufe before circumcifion, ceaied ? Let me aflc another auefticn, How could Soknwh rek<n in
the
iclves. Tins probably is the law to which Hyrca'jus alludes, Bp. Patrick, who was very learned in the jcwifli laws and cufroms, f.»Vo, 4 When children were twelve years old, their parents were bound to bring them to the temple, ^i the pafibver, where, feeing what was done in this feftival, they would be led to enquire, what i»can ye b) this fervice ?' (Comment, in lixod. 12.)
As the end of the paiKncr was to perpttuate the memory, ofthc deliverance from Egypt, and as the erpiefs reafon why children were to attend it in the appointed place, was that they rfTignt be iu- ilrucTtcd in that wonderful deliverance, parents could DO! \.lw thcmfelves as bound to bring their childrm to the iblcmnity, 1 u- fore they were capable o^' enquiring and underHanding what w as- meant by it. Luke tells us (Chap. 2. 42.) that the parents of Jt- i us went up every year to Jerui'alcm at the icaft of the padbver : and when he was 12 yin c.V, they wtnt up qfftr the cujltut ofthrfcijl. Their going after the cujlum oft/jefe.rf, doubtlcls intends their taking their fon with them, who was now 12 years old : for it appears that he accompanied them ; and this is the lii ft time we hear ol hit* going to the feflival. It may aJfo be cbft rved, that the :x.ila only wire required to appear before God at the padbver ; and uohc tan im- agine, that infants and fuck! bags were taken In m their mt&rj arms to be cairied to, and dctaiued at the temple, tluiiiv the. continuance of fo long a folemuity.
50
the place of VhtuI as his fucceflbr, when he be- gan to reign before David was dead ? There is no more difficulty in one qucflion, than in the other. Though baptifm was in ufe, yet it was not made the peculiar initiating leal of the gofpel-cov- enant until after Chrift's refurrcction.
It has been enquired,. ' If baptifm fucceeds cir- cumcifion, why were thofe baptized, who had al- ready been circumcifed ?' We anfwer,
i. We think it has been proved, that both thefe ordinances were initituted as feals of the fame gra- cious covenant ; and therefore the right of infants to baptifm will not at all depend on the foiution of this quedion.
2. It is evident from the 15, and 21 chapters of A<fts, that infant circumcifton was praftifed, with a- poitolic approbation, by the Jtzi'ijk believers in the ChrijUan church in jerufalem, and in other church- es, by the Je%m who were members of them. For tho' the apoiiles and elders agreed, that infant cir- cumciilen ought not to be required of Gentile be- lievers ; yet they allowed and approved it among the Jeu-jjh converts, who, having been accuftomed to it, and knowing it to have been a ufage from the time of Abraham, could not at once, be perfuaded to relinquifh it for another rite.
That infant circumcilion was not now regarded by the apoiiles merely as a ceremony of the Mofaic law, is manifefl ; becaufc, in this view, as we have before lhewn, they utterly difallowed it, and ftren- uoufly oppofed thofe who contended for it. They mult therefore have regarded it, as that 'leal of the righteouihefs of faith/ which was appointed to Abraham, and continued under the patriarchal and
mofaic
mofaic difpenfations* In the chriflian church, it for a time held the fame place among the Jewifh, as baptifm held among the Gentile believers. Hence it follows, that the feal of the covenant was applied to the infants of believers, in the time, and with the approbation of the apoftles, and that baptifm fue- cccdcd in the place of circumcifion y as a feal of the fame covenant.
It is no objection to this argument, that the apof- tles, infome injiances, complied with Jewifh cus- toms, for thefe compliances were only occafional I But the obfervance of infant circumcifion among believing jews was general and conjlant for a courfe of years, probably for 30 years together, and this under the eye, and with the advice of all the a- poflles.
They recommended to the Gentile believers a charitable and pacific condeicention to their jewifh brethren in matters, which interfered not with the infli tut ions or doctrines of the gofpel, particularly, in an abftinence from olfenfive meats, and in the obfervance of favorite days. But they never re- quired or advifed the Gentiles to conform to the Jews in the obfervance of the Abrahamic rite of infant circumcifion, tho* this was a rite, of which the jewifh chriftians were as tenacious as of any oth- er. The reafon is obvious : The Gentile believers obferved another rite inflituted in its place, name- ly, infant baptifm.
If under the chriflian difpenfation, infant circum- cifion had been, in itfelf wrong, it would not have been allowed to the Jewifh believers. If it had been, under prefent circumfiances, an indifferent ceremony, like abllinence from meats, {having the
head
57
head, and purification in the temple, it would, for peace fake, have been recommended to the Gentile
iievers. But as another ordinance was by them ufed in its place, there would have been an impro- priety in their adopting this, and therefore it was
t required of them.
3. It is an undeniable fact, that circumcifed be- lievers were frequently, if not generally, received* to fellowlhip, in the chrillian church, without baptifm \ ibr all churches have fellowfhip with the church in Jerufalem, and Jewiih and Gentile believers had communion in the fame churches. That ChrinVs rirfl difciples were baptized, we have no evidence. That the twelve partook of the firfl fuppcr, before chrillian baptifm was fo much as inftituted, is un- deniable ; for it is evident from .Acts 19. 5. and the author of the letters himfelf concedes, that John's baptifm was not chrljlian baptifm. Now if circumcifion was, in the cafe of the difciplee, fufE- cient for their admiflion to the great go fpel-ordinance cf the fupper, then certainly it was a feal of the gofpel-covenant ; and therefore the baptifm of be- lievers, already circumcifed, was a matter not ofu- niverfalneceflity, but only of particular expedience. It feems to have taken place chiefly in the cafe of the Jews, who after Chrifl's refurrec"tion. had for a time openly oppofed the gofpel, and the fuperior -evidence which then attended it. Now
4. There was a manifeft propriety in baptizing fame who had been circumcifed, although baptifm and circumcifion are fuppofed to be feals of the fame covenant.
The long expected MefBah had now appeared ;
learer difpenfation of the covenant of grace, at- tended
58
tended with larger promifes and more liberal priv- ileges, was now introduced ; the way was opened for the admiflion of a 1 nations into the church of God ; and baptifm was inftituted to be a feal of the covenant, and a badge of diftmclion between the church and the unbelieving world. Though circuracifion had been, and ftiil might be a mark of difcrimination between the worihippers of the true God and idolatrous heathens, yet, after the inftitution of baptifm, the former rite would not fo clearly difcriminate between chriftians and unbe- lievers in general ; for unbelieving Jews would (till ufe circumcifion. It was therefore proper, that the circumcifed Jew, when he embraced the gofpel, if he had before openly oppofed it, mould fubmit to baptifm, to teftify his belief that Jems of Nazar- eth, whom he had rejected, was the promifed Mef- Hah ; that the doctrine preached by the apoftles, in his name, was divine ; and that the ancient dis- tinction of Jew and Gentile, male and female, was abolifned, and all were to become one in Chrift. Had none of the believing Jews been baptized, there might have remained too great an appearance of a diftinclion between them and gentile believers ; a diftinclioa which, after all, many of the Jewiih chrif- tians were flrongly inclined to preferve, and which the apoftles were no lefs folicitous to extimuiifh. It was Chrift 's defign, that his church ihould be, and appear to be one ; that, while it was diftin- guilhed from the world, it fhould harmonize with itfelf, and keep a unity of fpirit in the bond of peace.
Suppofe a prince, who had appointed a partic- ular uniform for his foldiers, (hould think proper,
on
59
on the introduction ot a new difcipline, and the acquifition of ne>v fubjects, to appoint for theft a- nother uniform ; might we not expect, that he would allow, and in cafe of a rebellion raifed on thisoccafion, would require many of his former fub- jccls to adopt the fame, that there might be no dif- tin&ion kept up between old fubjecls and new, but all might become one harmonious body r And would any man, in this cafe, imagine that the new livery came not in the place of the old ? Or that the one had not been, as the other was now, a badge and token of allegiance ? — No more can we, on this ground, pretend, that haptifm fucceeds not in the place of circumcifion.
It will perhaps be afted ; ' Why then ought not baptifm to be adminiftered on the eighth day ac- cording to the law of circumcifion ?'
We anf* er ; It was not eflential to the validity of circumcifion, that it fhould be adminiflered on the eighth day. It was not to be delayed beyond that day without occafion ; nor ought we, without occafion, to delay baptifm. But where circumftances admitted not fo early an application of the feal, the delay was not faulty then, nor would it be now. Circumcifion, indeed, might not be performed earlier than the eighth day : but for this delay there were particular reafons, not applicable to baptifm. One reafon might be the tendernefs of the infant, and the weaknefs of the mother, which would render an immediate opera- tion of this kind dangerous to both. But the prin- cipal reafon was the legal impurity of the mother and the confequent impurity of the child for the firfl feven days. This reafon is exprefsly aiTigned in
the
6o-
the divine law ;* If a iveman Dave bom a man child, fee [J j all be unclean feven days — -and on the eighth day he fall be circumefd. But as the legal impu- rities have ceafed under the gofpel, there is no fuch reafon for the delay of baptifm.
Thus, I think, it undeniably appears, that bap- tifm (rands in the place of circumcifion, and that the arguments to the contrary, are futile and imperti- nent. And if it (lands in the fame place, it is cer- tainly to be applied to the fame fubjecls, the infants of God's people. — I proceed to another argu- ment.
Eg9B*C»3»;»g'ffiff<!fgk^g <fr«« ttHtfl
DISCOURSE III.
3. 1 HE right of infants to baptifm may be clear- ly inferred from- the words of our Saviour, Mark 10. 14. compared with thofe, John 3. 5. Stiff?? little children to co?ne to me—for of fuch is the kingdom of God. — And, Except a man (ean me tis, r.v- cept any one) be born ofiuatcr and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
By the kingdom of God mufr. be underftood either the Church, God's vifible kingdom on earth ; or Heaven, his invifible kingdom above. Into the former we are admitted by baptifm, which is the flgn of that fpiritual renovation, by which we are prepared for the latter, Thefe little children are
called
4 Levit. n. 1. 2.
called Infants \ they were brought to Chrift ; were i up in his arms ; doubtlefs therefore they were muter the age of difcretion. They who brought. them were believers ; othcrwife they would not have fought *blcffingfrotn Chrift for them. The phrafe being bornofwatet^ fignifies being baptized : So the author of the letters imderftands it, and numbers it among the paflages that fpeak of bap- tifm.*
Now if, by the kingdom of God, we underftand the church, then here is an exprefs declaration, that infants belong to the church, are ChrifVs dif- ciples and viiible members of his body : And con- sequently have a right to baptifm, the only inftitut- ed fign of admiffion into this kingdom. Except a- ny one be born of water, he cannot enter into this king- dom. Hence the chriftian church is laid to be clcanfedbythciCafljingofiuatcr^ If by the king- dom of God, we underftand the invifible kingdom a- bove, then here is a plain declaration, that infants belong to that, and confequently may be bom of the fpirit ; for except one be born of the fpirit, he cannot enter into that kingdom, which flefli and blood do not inherit. And if they may be born of the fpirit, doubtlefs they may be born of water, or baptized. As the church is tile gate of heaven, fo baptifm is
the
' The author of the letters fays, • Chriftian baptifm was not
iituted.' This is doubtlefs true: but Jchm preached, faying,
rdom of God is at band; and he baptized with the baptifm of
repentance to prepare the people for this kingdom, ft was there-
ery fcafonable for Chrift now to inftruct Nicodcmttx, that bap-
ti'.'m. or being hom cf water, was foon to be the rite of admifiion imp
igdom. But whether we underftand the phrafe, ot ' nut-xat '
i tptrjim, or inward fanctification, our argument front it v.ill be ecpa! "
nrlufive.
- Eph. s- 16.
F
62
ihejign of regeneration. And if they may be ad- mitted into heaven by regeneration, they may be ad- mitted into the church by baptifm. If the things jignified belong to them, ihejtgn and token mud be fuppofed to belong to them. The Apoftle Peter* plainly teaches us, that they, to whom the promife of the fpirit pertains, have a right to baptifm, the ilgn of the promife. In whatever fenfe therefore we underftand the kingdom of God, the conclufion is the fame, That infants are fubje&s of baptifm.
It cannot reafonably be faid, that the words — of fuch — intend only perfons of a childlike difpofition : For then how would this be a reafon why little children fhould be brought to Chrifl, and why he mould be difpleafed with his difciples for endeavour- ing to hinder them ? This makes our Lord's argu- ment run thus. Suffer infants to be brought to me, for ray kingdom confifteth only of adult perfons re- fembling children in their difpofition. He elfe- where makes Lambs and Doves emblems of a chrif- tian temper ; and according to this interpretation, he might as well have faid, Suffer Lambs and Doves to come to me, for of fuch is the kingdom of God ; i! e. it confus of perfons of a lamb-like and dove- like temper.
Well, ' but thechriflian rite of baptifm was not given to thefe children ; they were bro't to Chrifl for his bleffing and prayers, accompanied with im- pofition of hands.' True : but our Saviour de- clares, that fuch, i. e. the infants of believers, be- iong to this kingdom, into which none are admitted, but by being born of water ; fo that here is a plain
declaration,
v. is
declaration, that infants were to he introduced into his church by baptifm. And by taking them into his arms, praying for them, and blefTmg them, he (hewed \\wlfuch are capable fubjecls of the influ- ence and blefling of the Spirit, which are the things reprefented in baptifm. He did not pour water on them ; but he performed a ceremony quite as facred and folemn, and thus (hewed, that infants are meet fubjecls of that external rite, which de- notes the conveyance of fpiritual bleflings ; and fuch a rite is the ordinance of baptifm.
4. The baptifmal commifTion, Mat. 28. 19. gives a plain warrant for admitting infants to baptifm. It runs thus. Go, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, teaching them to obferve, &c.
Some w7ill fay, ' Infants arc not exprefsly men- tioned here.' True : neither are Adults. But Chriil ufes the word, nationsy which is a collective term, and mud: naturally be undcrflood as includ- ing both. And had he intended to teach his Apof- tles, that perfons of every age muft be admitted to baptifm, he could not have chofen any fingle word to cxprefs it better. Baptize all nations. The chriftian church is called a ?iation, a people, becaufe it confifts of perfons of every age.*
But it is objected ; ' Teaching is required previ- ous to baptifm, which infants are not capable ofV
Here let it be obferved, that the word A tyfate, rendered Teach, is not the fame which is commonly ufed for teaching, but of a more general fignification. The proper import of it is, to profe-
h'e
* ! Pet. 2. fl.
*4
lyte or make dtfcipki. The commiilion then is this. Go, difeiple all nations ', baptizing them — teaching them to obferve all things, &c. Here are two words in the commiilion rendered, Teaching. The latter didas kontes, fignifies to indoctrinate ; the other is more general, and fignifies to make difciples, which may be done by introduction into a fchool in order to future teaching.
Now if we can fiiew, that Infants are ever con- sidered as difciples — as belonging to Chrifl, then it will appear that they come within the commiilion, Difeiple all nations, baptizing them. We are told Mat. 18. 5. That Jefus having let a little child be- fore him, laid, Whofoever Jhall receive onefuch little child m my name reeeivcth me. To receive one in ChrijTs name, is to receive him as being Chrifl' s dif- eiple and as belonging to him. So the phrafe is ex- plained, Mark 9. 41. Whofoever Jhall give you a cup of water in my Name, becaufe ye belong to Chrifl. And Mat. 10. 42. Whofoever fliall give to one of thefe little ones a cup of water only in the name of a difeiple, fjall not lofe his reward. It is plain here that infants, who are to be received in ChrifFs name may be his difeiple s and belong to him, to his church and kingdom. Accordingly they who contended, that perfons under the gofpel ought to. be circumcifed after the manner of Mofes, are laid to tempt God to put a yoke on the necks of the difciples, Act. 15. 10. tnfanis were to be circumcifed after the manner of Mofes, and therefore are compre- hended among the difciples^ on whom the yoke would be laid. The eommifllon then muff refpeel infants as well as others. The Apoftles had be fore been inftru&ed to rcc< I only adults, but
alfo little children in Chri/i's name^ and as his dif- ciplcs. Now a particular rite is appointed, by which they fhould receive or difcif>k.* them in his name. Difeiple all nations, baptizing ttc?n in the name of the Father, and of the Son, &e.
But the author of the letters fays, < The difci- plesof Chrift, during his miniftry on earth, as well as the difciples of John, were well acquainted with the inftitution of baptifm, for they baptized great multitudes ; but they adminiftered a baptifm in which infants had no part. When therefore our Lord inftituted his facrament of baptifm, if infants were to be received into it, ic cannot be doubted but he declared this ; otherwife men, who had been ufed to exclude infants, would not think of them as coming within this frefh commiflion.'
He exprefsly allows, that the Apollles would determined very much by former ufages, in jud whether infants came , within this commifTion. Whether the difciples of John and of Chrift. had been wont to baptize infants, it is not exprefsly laid. And therefore to judge how the Ape would underftand their commiflion, we mud go farther back than to Johns miniftry. Thefe A- poftles were Jews, They had been educated in the yewifh religion. They knew, that from the days of Abraham^ and all along through memo- faic difpenfation, infants had been taken into cove- nant with their parents by the fame initiating rite. — They knew, this had ever been efteemed a great privilege ; and they would naturally fuppofe, the privilege was (till to continue, as the Abrahamic covenant was yet in force. They knew it had been the conftant immemorial practice of the Jzwi/b f church,
oo
church, to receive gentile profelytes and their in- fant children with them by baptiim. This the an- cient Jewifb writers teftify. Baptiim, we know, was no new thing in John's time. The Jews ap- pear to have been well acquainted with it. They don't afk him, What meaneit thou by this new ceremony? But why baptrzefl thou, if thou art noi the Chrijiy nor Elias, nor that Prophet? Their queftion implies, that the Prophets had been wont to baptize, and they expected Chrijl and Elias would do the fame. John probably took up bap- tifm, as he found it practi fed in the Jewijh church, where it had been conftantly adminiilered to the iff ants of gentile profelytes. And it is not only without proof, but againil probability, that this author aderts, * Infants had no part in John's bap- tiim. ' Farther, thefe Apoftles had been taught to look upon infants as belonging to Chrijl, and to treat them as his . . They had heard Chrih1
pronounce them fubje&S of his kingdom, and give directions, that they fhould be brought to him. They had been reprimanded for attempting to hinder infants from being brought. They knew, that Chriit came not to leifen the pri\ of the
church, (of which the adm:iuon of infants was but to enlarge them ; and that baptifm was now the rite of adinifficn into it. Under tbefe circum- fiances, how mull they understand their commiliion r Certainly, upon this author's principles, they mull fuppofe it to include kifunts ; for he allows, they would underfhmd it according to i. We may then retort his argument. When Chriit inititutcd his faeramenf of ante were
not to be received to it, ''- can doubted, bui
*
he
he ihniciently declared this \ otherwife men, who had always been ufed to f^e infanta admitted into the church of God by the fame token with their parents, would confider them as coming within this frefh commiiHon, Go3 difciplc all nations^ baptizing them.
Befidcs, When they faw the doors of the church now enlarged to admit new fubjecls, even all na- tions, they would not imagine, that the furjjecTs, who had ever been admitted, were in future to be excluded. The commiiiion therefore muft be un- derftqod as a virtual command to baptize infants.
5. Childrens right to baptifm is very clearly taught, in thofe words of Peter to the awakened Jewsi Ac). 2. :S. Repot t and be baptized every one of you, ml f Jefus ChriJl,for the ranif-
fion of'/;ns, and ye ft all receive the gift of the Holy
u and to vour children, lie does nor lay, The promife is to you, and will be to your children when they become believers ; but it is to bo ;-i and the children which you
now have : And trJ qll tlk i;re afar off, as ma-
ny as the 1 crd our Gid fhdli call, i. e. wherever God lends the gofpel to call the Gentiles, it carries this promife, which is in like manner to them and children. The promife being made to them, is urged as a rcafoa why ihey fhotild be baptized. And the fame reafon holds for the baptifm of all to whom the promife belongs ? and confequently for the baptifm of their children, (ox the promife is to thon. B. baptized— for the promife is to you and to your children. The reafon aifigned for baptifm is fuch as equally takes place with refpett to both. If the parents interc*ft in the promife is a reafon
why
why he fhould be baptized, his childrens intereft in it, is juft as good a reafon, why they fhould be bap- tized. To fuppofe this promife is a juft ground for the baptifm of believers , but not for the baptifm of their children, is to make the apoftle talk thus ab- furdly and incoherently. The promife is to you, therefore be ye baptized — and the fame promife is equally to your children* yet they mufl not be bap- tized.
Well, but our brethren fay, c You and your children is nothing more than you and your pofteri- ty,' or your children when they become adult.
But a little attention will convince us, this cannot be the meaning. This is contrary to the natural conftru&ion of the words — The promife is — to your children ; not /hall be to them, when they become believers. The people, to whom thefe words were fpoken, vvere Jews and Profelytes, who had always been ufed to fee infants comprehended with their parents in covenant tranfa&ions, and therefore would naturally fuppofe, their infants to be intend- ed. To fuppofe that by your children, the Apof- tle meant only their adult .defendants, is to make him fpeak nonfenfe j for then he mufl be under- ftood thus, c The promife is to you and your chil- dren, but not as your children, or as being related to you, any more than if they were children of Pa- gans ; but if they fhould live to adult age, fhould be called by the gofpel, and fhould believe, then the promife will be to them, as it is now to you.'
Now why are children joined with their parents, as joint partakers of the fame promife, if they de- rive no benefit from this relation, but are to Hand upon precifely the fame footing with the children
of
69
v>t he and infidels' i Farther; it fhould he
remembered, tfiat the great proraife of the Abra- harnic covenant, which probably is here referred called by way of eminence, the promise, via. and your feed ; this promife, I lid certainly belong to the infant children of xkam, and of his fpiritual feed ; and the feal of this promife was exprefsly ordered to be applied to fuch. But our brethren generally fay, c The promife here intended is the promife of the fpirit, contained in the foregoing words, Ye JJjall receivt the gift of the Holy Ghoft.' Be it fo. If then it appears that the promife of the Spirit is in fact, made, not only to believers, but alfo to their children, even to infants ; the reafon will hold, why they fliould be baptized. It is exprefsly promifeel, Ifai. 44. 3. I will pour my Spirit upon thy feed ', and my blejjing upon thine offspring ; i. e. thy little ones, as the following words fhew ; and they (thine off- spring)^^// SPRING UP as among the grafs and as willows by the ~vaier-cour/es. They fhall grow up under the influences of my Spirit and bleflings of my covenant, as grafs under the kindly irailes of heaven, and as willows by the fertile banks of riv- ers*
There can be no doubt with any one who be- lieves the fcriptur.es, but the divine Spirit often has great influence in forming the mind into a prepara- tion for virtue aud ufefulnefs, even in its infant (late. John was filled with the Holy Ghofi from his mother's womb, lfuiah was called and formed from the womb. Jeremiah was fancriiled from the womb. Samuel grew up before the Lord. I qucftion not but all, who are born and educated
under
7°
under the gofpel covenant, have, even in early childhood, fome gentle excitations to virtue from the Spirit of grace, as a fruit of this promife to be- lievers and their children. Now fmce the promife of the Spirit does in fact belong to little children, baptifm, the fign of the promife, belongs to them alfo. Let them be baptized— for the promife is to them. Note here ; their receiving the Spirit was not a condition, but a confequence of their baptifm. Be baptized and ye fhall receive, &c. So upon the Samaritans mentioned, Act:. 8. the Spirit was pour- ed out after they were baptized : So that children are to be baptized upon this general promife, even before they can, by a holy life, give evidence of their having actually received the Spirit. That in the gofpel-age, as well as in former diipenfations, children mould be received into covenant together with, and upon the faith of their parents, is plain- ly foretold, Ifai. 65. 22. They are the feed of the bleffed of the Lord, and their offspring with them. And chap. 49. 18.22. They (the gentiles) fall gather themfelves together, and come to thee — And they fhall bring thy fins in their arms, and thy daugh- ters fhall be carried on their moulders.
6. The accounts we have of fome whole families being baptized, upon the faith of their refpecllve heads, afford an argument of confiderable weight, that the Apoftles underftood their com million as extending to infants, and pra&ifed accordingly.
If infants were baptized, it is by no means proba- ble, we mould be informed of their names or ages ; we could expect only to be told in general, that fuch perfons were baptized and their families : And f ^ much we are told. Paul baptized the houfhold
of
of Stephanas, i. Cor. i. 16. Lydia, when the Lord opened her heart to receive the word, was baptized and her houfoold, Acl. 16. 15. The Jay- Ior, upon his believing was baptized, he and all bis, ver. $$.
This Lydia was of the city of Thyatira ; but (he now dwelt at Philippi ; here (lie had a houfe, in which fhe lodged the Apoflles for fome time, and fhe had a houlhold with her. Whether they were children or fervants, or both, and what their exact ages were, it is not laid, nor is it material. The (lory reprefents them as baptized upon her faith ; and this is all that is to the purpofe. It will be fuggefted perhaps, that they might be baptized up- on their own faith. But the ftory gives no intima- tion of any one's believing, but Lydia. Take the account as Luke has left it, and they were baptized upon her being judged faithful to the Lord.
The ftory of the J ay lor is to the fame purpofe. He enquired of the Apoflles, what nutft I do to be faved ? They fay. Believe on the Lord, and thou JJoalt be faved and thine houfe. In the fame fenfe, falvation is faid to come to the houfe of Zaeche;:s, becaufe he was a fon of Abraham, i. e. a believer. So fuch as are added to the church are called, The faved. There were doubtlefs feme prefent on this occafion belides the Jaylors family ; and fome of his family might be adults ; and therefore it is faid, They fpake the word to him, and to all that were in his houfe. It is added, Hs was baptized, He and all his Jiraitway. It is not faid, All that were in his houfe were baptized ; but he and all his, i. e. fuch as were at his difpefal — under his government — fubjecl to his command. Thefe were proper! v
bi<.
his. No mention is yet made of any one's believ- ing, but the Jay/or himfelf. But do not the next words, He rejoiced believing in God with all his Ixufe, import, that all his family believed as well as he ? { think not. The greek words egalliajato panoiki pepifteukos to theo are literally rendered thus, He rejoiced in all his hoitfe, having believed God. The idea conveyed is this : After he had believed God, he rejoiced and gave thanks in the prefence, and in behalf of his whole family.
Now as it had been the ancient uniyerfal prac- tice, to receive infants with their parents into the church of God, they who mould read thefe accounts of houfholds baptized, would naturally conclude, that infants (if there were fuch) were baptized as well as others. If a Mifhonary lent from this country, where infant baptifm is generally practifed, to goi- pelize the heathen, mould writeback an account of his fuce'efs ; and therein mould fay, he had bap- tized fo many hundreds, and amongfl the reft, fuch a noted perfon and his hou/lio/d — fuch an one and all his ; who would doubt, but there were fome children, under the age of difcretion, whom he meant to include ? But if an Antipredobaptift Mif- fionary fliould publifli an account of the houfholds he had baptized, he would naturally except infants, to prevent miflakes.
7. The right of infants to baptifm is i ^on-
firmed by feveral particular pafTages of ferip- ture.
It may be inferred from thofe words of the A- poftle. Rom. 1 1 . 1 6. 1 7. If the root be holy Jo are the branches. And if fume of the branches (the Jews) be broken oJF, and thou (a Gentile) being a wild elk .
ri
toerl grsffed in among them, and with them partak-
efl of the root and fatnefs of the olive tree, boafi :jfc.
The olive-tree is the church of God, built on the covenant made with Abraham. Of this tree the were the natural', the Gentiles, the ingrafted branches. The root and fatnefs -of the tree, are the privileges and bleiiings of the covenant. It was one privilege of the covenant, that children fliould be admitted into the church with their parents and confecrated to God as his children. Therefore if the Gentiles are graffed into the fame (lock, from which fome of the jews are broken of, and with them who remain, partake of the root and fatnefs, they certainly partake of this privilege of having their children graffed with" them. Accordingly the Gentiles are declared to be fellow-heirs with the — to be of the fame body — to he joint -partakers of the promife. God promifed, that he would be a God to Abraham and his feed. And is he a God of the Jews only ? And not of the Gentiles ? Doubtlefs of the Gentiles alio. God appointed a token of this promife to be applied to Abraham's infants, and to the infants of his feed : And if we ft and in the fame placte as his natural feed, and are partakers with them of the fame privileges, then the token of the promife is to be applied to our in- fants.
To this paffage we may add that remarkable one, in i Cor. 7. 14. The unbelieving hufband is fancli- ficd by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is fanclificd by the hufband ; elfe were your children unclean, but now are they holy. It is plain here, that the chil- ' <iren of believers are, in fome fenfe or other, holy, G or
'74
or faints, by virtue of their parents faith. They arc diftinguiihed from the children of unbelievers, who are called andean, in the fame manner as chriflians are diftinguiihed from heathens. Now what is this infant-holinefs, which refults from the parents' faith ? It cannot be legitimacy, as fome pre- tend ; for furely theapoflle did not mean to bajlard- ize all children born of heathen parents. It can- not be real, inherent holinefs ; for in this fenfe, are born, not of blood, nor of the will of man, but of God. It can then be no other, than relative or covenant holinefs. The children of believers are holy, as all the people of Ifrael were holy, by a fpecjal covenant-relation to God. The chriftian church is called a holy na'ion and peculiar people, in the fame fenfe. They are holy, as all the firft bcrn under the law are holy, by a folemn dedication to God in his temple. In allufion to the dedication of the firft-born infants, the chriftian church is called, The church of firft-born perfons. They are holy, as being God's children, born to him of his own cove- nant-people. Now if they are in this fenfe holy, by what rite or ceremony are they declared fo, but by the warning of baptifm ? The church is cleanfed iy thewnjhvig of water. If they are holy as being Gods children, and within his covenant, they are certainly entitled to the mark of his children and the token of his covenant, which is baptifm.
The manner in which the author of the letters endeavours to evade thefe paflages, (hews that he felt himfelf embarraffed with them. I am c very willing, fays he, that children fhould be as holy as the mod: benevolent perfon can wi(h them. I have fio inclination co lay a fcain upon that innocent
age.—
75
a^c — But here is not a word about their baptitm.' The gentleman doubtlefs knew how we argue from thefe texts to prove infant baptifm. Why has he not (hewn, that they mull, ocrndy be token in fc* other fenfe ? Why has he not told us, how the branches are holy by the holincfs of the root : how children are holy by their parents faith, in fome other fenfe than as befog intitled to the privileges and feal of. the covenant ? How the Gentiles can be partakers of the fame promife, ami of the fame root and fa'.nefs with Abraham's nat- ural feed, and yet not be admitted to the fame privileges ? The truth is, the argument from thefe texts is unanfwerable.* Again.
* To evade the argument from this paflage, fome have faftl t fame holinefs, which is afcribed to the children of the believer it alfo afcribed to the tm&eluv'tg partner, who is faid to btjanfi a< wd\ as the offspring faid to be holy. Why then is not the ui living hufband, or wife, a member of the church by virtue of the faith of the correlate, ac well as the children, by virtue of the faith of the parent ?
In aofwerto this I would obferve ; Infants, under the Old Te'fti- ment, had ever been received as members of God's church. But ■when th~ Jew?, in the time of Ezra, had, contrary to an exprefs law married ftrange wives, by whom children were born to them, it was ordered that thefe children, with .heir heathen parents, liiould be put away, as unclean ; and the men, who refufed to put away their ft/ange wives, were therafelves to be feparated from the congrega- tion.
In the Corinthian church a doubt had arifen, whether a believer might continue with an unbelieving correlate. This queflto'ri the apoftle anfwers in the affirmative. For tiiough he advifes chti I to marry only in the Lord, yet a marriage, contracted when both the parties were unbelievers, is not diffolved by the fubfequent faith of one of them. But it might farther be enquired, whether children of parents, of whom one was a heathen, ought not to be excluded from the church with the unclean or heathen parent, as had been de- termined in the time of Ezra ? To this the apoftle anfwers in the negative. If a broth, r have a xuife tub» betievetb not, and Jhe be plcaftA to dwell teitb him, let him not put her aivav, and fo of the wife who hath an unbelieving hufband. Fir the unbelieving hujband is, or hath hc^Of fi/iflijiid by the u-rjl ; or rather, , or to tJSu -
Again. The Apoitje, in \:v: 41I3 d ap. to Gal. tells us, that Ijaac was born a/ier the Spirit, and born by promfe. By this be tfhiltrates the gofpel covenant; and fays, As Ijaac was, fo are wclhc
children
'V .."/'. .'.'i'.v.v- Tr)v /..-.! been . t.A in, pi fa tie hujlstrti. Themibe" lievtng is fancitiiied in refpeckof, and in relation to the believing par" ty,fo that the latter has a lawful ufe and enjoyment e>f the former; fttf r.s the apoflle fays clfewh ere, to ibi pure aU things are pure ■, and' ' i'j.-y creature cf Co J is gcc.d.f- r it is far Hi fie J by the -word cf God and prayer. — Elfe ivert yr-::r chi'drtn unclean. If the unbelieving partner were not fancStifled to the ufe of the believer, both the parent* mutt be rejected from the church, the former as a heathen and unclean, the latter a? criminally living in cohabitation with a heathen ; as, in 'be time of Ezra, thofe who refuted to put away the ftrange wives, whom they had 'unlawful ly taken, were to be feparated fiom the con- gregation*. Confequcntly the children would be unclean, becaufe both the parents would be fo. But fir.ee the unbeliever is fanctified ia relation to the believer, the children are holy, and fo to be ac- re tinted members of the church.
The unbeliever !3 here faid to be fanetified, not in relation to Cod, but only in relation to his, or her yokefellow. But the children are faid to be holy, in oppofnion to the unclean, or to heathen. A perfon's being fandtified in a particular rcfpecT, or for a certain purpofe, as the unbeliever is here faid to be fanctified only in relation to the huf- Uand, cr the wife, docs not renominate him a holy one, which is, m fcripture, the appropriate title of thofe who belong to the church. Therefore, though children are members of the church, as defended from, and under the care and government of a believing parent, yet a heathen becomes not a member of the church by marriage with a believer. The words of the apoflle can convey no fuch ic'.ca. Yct Ire calls children holy in oppofition to the uncle ju ; but he cxpicf-ly defines and limits the fenfe, in which the unbeliever is fanerirlcd. It i^ merely in refpect of, and in relation to the believing eorrela'e.
The fenfe which tjre have given of the phrafc,/.- or to the
ivife, is approved by critical expofitors, particularly by /?'';%, who fa-1, s, it is the fenfe given by the Grnl interpreters ; and it is certain- ly agreeable to the phrafe in the original. The apoflle cannot in- tend, that the unbeliever is converted t? theft* h by the believer ; for fhis fanclification i-; fomething which has already taken place, while the fubjecit. was an unbeliever. The convei lion of the unbeliever by the influence of the believing correlate, the apoflle aft - mentions:' nal reafon for cohabitation; but he I
of it a* a change which hopefully *ay, not as what already b%s Dt r rrtain !y a ill 1 3 k e p ! a c c . I • ' ' : •
• 1? And
children of the promife : i. e. we are born children of the promife, as being born of covenanted parent^. Accordingly the Apoftle to the Hebrews fpeaks of the privileges of the covenant, as being the birth- right of chriftians, and cautions them, that they do not profanely fell their birth-right, as Efau did his'
And it is worthy to be noted, that the fame titles* by which chriftians are diftinguifhed from heathens., are exprefsly applied to the children of converted parents. Are chriftians cAkd faints ? So are their chiidren.* Are they called difciples ? So arc children. f Do they belong to God's kingdom ? So do their children. \ Are they called believers ? So chriftian families, which were fupported by a common flock, in which infants were included, are called the multitude of them that believe •% And Chrift fpeaks of thofe I'ttle ones which believe in him.\\ Are chriftians called the children of God ? So are the infants of profeiTors.^f They long to the church are called the faved ; Co forma- tion comes to the boufe of the believer. t-j, T. that confiderr, how thefe titles are promifcuouily given to adult chriftians and their children, can doubt, but that children are brought into cove- nant with their parents in the gofpel-time, as they ufed to be before, and confequently are fubje&s of baptifm, the only initiating feal ?
8. I fhall add to the preceding arguments, one more taken from i Cor. 10. 2. The Apoftle here, ipeaking of the jfezvs who came out of Egypt, fays, They were all baptized unto Mcfes in the cloud and in thefe a. g . That
* 1 Cor. 7. 14, f A&. 15. 10. i Mark 10. 14.
§ Act. 4. 3*. |j Mat. 18. 6. \ Ez«k. 16. 21.
tl Luke 19. 9,
That this pailage alludes to clinician baptifiii, our brethren, particularly the author of the letters, allow. The Apoflle plainly confiders their baptifm into Mofes as typical of our baptifm into Chrlft ; for he adds, They did all drink of the fame fpiritual drink ; for they drank of the rock, which followed them, and that rock is Chrift or a type of Chrifl. — All thefe things happened to. them for examples, or types, and are written for our admonition. The jeivijh writers fay, c The people were baptized in the defart and admitted into covenant with God before the law was given.' Now if the Apoille has any refpeft to chriitian baptiim, as it is plain he lias, here is an undeniable proof of the right of in* faats to baptifm. For he fays, They ad, the whole congregation, of which infants then in their parents arms were a great part, they all -i:ere bap- tized into Mo/ljs. All were wider the cloud. All paffed through the fa. &£C, lie repeats the univer. fal term all becauie it is emphatical here. Now it this baptifm into Mofes, was a type and written for our admonition, it typically admonifhes us, that we ail fliould be baptized into Chrid, not believers only ,. but their children alio.
As the whole congregation were baptized and admitted into covenant at the fca, when Mofs took the command of them, fo this covenant was again renewed with all, both men, women and little juft before he left them. Deut. &g. ic. lejland, all of you before the Lord your God, your I Iders, your little ones, your wives, that thaufhouldcfl enter into covenant with the Lord, that h< h thee
for a pe:ple unto himfelf a> as he hath f worn io t
'i Lis
79
this covenant with Abraham, which is fo exprefsljp renewed with #///<? 3.\v.r, is defcended to us and oar children.
I (lull now briefly recapitulate the arguments that have been offered, and pre fen t them in one view.
The covenant, which God made with Abraham and his iced, exprefsly included infants ; and the feal thereof was, by God's command, applied to them. We, believing Gentiles, are the feed for whom the covenant with Abraham was made; and therefore our infants as well as his, are entitled to the privileges of the covenant, and fubjects of the feal of it, by virtue of the original grant to Abraham, m as much as that grant has never been recalled. This covenant was renewed at the red jea — and a- gain in the plains of Ivloab, and lull infants, are ex- prefsly included. — A 11 along under the Old Tefta- ment, children are comprehended with parents in all covenant- tranfaftions between God and his peo- ple, and the token b£ the. covenant is dill applied to them. The Prophets often foretell, that the cafe would be the fame in the gofpei time ; that Chriif. mould gather the lambs with his arms: — that God would pour his Spirit upon the offspring of his peo- ple, who mould be the feed of the blefTed of the Lord, & their offspring with them* \nt\icje\vijh church, it was acuitom, long before our Saviour's- appearance, to receive gentile profelytes with their cl ildren, by baptifm as well as circunacihcn. Chrift alfo himfelf took infants into Ins arms and bleiletl them, and directed that they fhould be brought to him, becaufe of fuch was his kingdom, that king- dom, into which perfons were to be admitted by. being born of water. He ordered his Apoftles tp-
receive
8o
receiver them in his name, and treat them as his dif- ciples. When he gave the baptifmal commifTion, he expreffed it in fuch univerfal terms, as muft nat- urally include infants : And the Apoftles, knowing what had been the conftant ufage concerning infants, and how Chrift had ever treated them, muft un- derhand the commiflion as extending to fuch. Ac- cordingly, foon after, when they invited the con- victed Jews to baptifm, they placed their right to it upon the foot of a promife, which equally belonged to them and their children. When they baptized the head of any family in his own houfe, they bap- tized his family with him. They conftantly taught, that the covenant with Abraham, of which circum- cifion was the feal, rs the fame which we are now under, and that the bleiTmgs of it are come upon us Gentiles — that the Gentiles are graffed into the fame itock, from which the Jews were broken of! — that children are holy by virtue of their parents faith — -that baptifm is the chriftian circumcifion, and therefore they who are baptized into Chrift, are freed from the literal circumcifion, and all other an- cient rites — that circumcifion, as a feal of the Abra- hamic covenant, was a great privilege ; but the gofpel-difoenfation confers greater — They illuftrate the goipel-covenant by ancient examples of cove- nant-tranfac"Hons, in which infants were included ; by the cafe oflfaac, who was born after the promife, by Noah's ark, in which his whole family were fav- 6d in confequence of his faith, the like figure whereunto even baptifm now faves us ; and by the baptifm of the whole congregation, infants and all, at the red fea, which was a type, and written for our admonition. When wc confidcr thefe things,
we
St
we think the evidence abundantly clear, thut the infants of believers are entitled to baptifm.
DISCOURSE IV.
H.AVING laid before you the arguments by which the right of infants to baptifm is vindicated, I mall now, as I propofed,
III. Shew ycu the rational ends and moral ufes of infant baptifm.
If baptiim be a divine inftitution for the infants of believers, it ought to be applied to them, whether we can fee the ufes of it or not : But ftill it may- give us fome Satisfaction to understand what good ends it can anfwer.
We are often afked, f What good can baptiim do to infants V It might Suffice to reply, As much good as circumciiion could do to them formerly \ or as much as the public prefentation of firft-born in- fants to God could do them. The Apoftle fkys% The profit of circumcifion^ (which was ufually ad- minillered to infants) was much every way. The profit of infant baptijm may be as much. — Particu- larly,
I. It is evident, that God treats infants as finners for Adam's tranfgreilion. In confequence of his apoflacy, they fuiFer a fad variety of pains and dii- eafes, which often iiiue in early death. And from that bias and inclination to evil, which they foon dis- cover
cover, there is reafon to fuppofe, they are infected with fome moral diforder, which needs to be re- moved in order to their entrance into the world of glory. By one man, fays the Apoflle, fin entered in- to the world, and death by Jin, and Jo death paffes up- on all men, for that all have finned — By one man's offence, judgment came upon all to condemnation. — In Adam all die. — By his offence many are madefinners. In this language, he fpeaks in the 5th chap, to the Romans.
Now the gofpel afTures us, that Chrifl: has ob- tained redemption from the condemnation of fin, and that in this redemption, all who believe, are unfailingly interefted. But we fee, that a very great part of the human race are cut off in infancy, while they are incapable of actual faith. What becomes of them ? Is any provifion made for their falvation ? Or rauft they perifh and be loft for ever ? This is a natural enquiry. Now to comfort our minds concerning fitch, God has feen fit to aflure us, that they may become partakers of redemption by Chrift, and be made heirs of the kingdom above, notwithftanding their incapacity for an aclual com- pliance with thofe terms which are propofed to the adult.. And to confirm our faith & hope in his prom- ife, he has appointed, that they (hall be received with their believing parents into his vifible king- dom, the church, and have the feal of his covenant affixed to them.
The great promife of the covenant is, that God will be a God to believers and tbeir feed. This promife is often explained in fcripture to import the happinefs of the life to come. And God's ap- pointing the feal of this promife to be applied to our
inf
*i
infant feed, is a mod comfortable ground of our faith and hope, that if they mould be removed by an early death, they will be tranfplanted into that happy clime, where they will fpring up in ev- erlafting life.*
God is faid to have eftablifhcd his covenant with the cattle and the fowls, when he engaged no more to drown the earth, with a flood ; and as a token of this covenant, he appointed his bow in the
cloud.
* The children of brlieving parents may be faid to be born In anit as they are born under that promife ©f the covenant, / u ill be a God to thee and to thy feed. Accordingly Gi d calls them his chil- dren, born to him. Tothofe who die in infancy this prom ife may be underftood as importing a refurreelicn to eternal life. As the Apoftle argues concerning the patriarchs, (Heb. u.) fo we may reafon concerning thefe ; unce they enjoy no diftinguifhing favor in this world, there muft be fome good referved for them in another ; elfe the promife fails. Therefore God is mi ajbamed to be jailed Their God, fsr he hath prepared far them a city. To thofe who arrive to moral agency, the promile may import, not only the enjoyment of the external means of religion, but the attendant influences of the di- vine fpirit. The Apoftle tells us, that among the many advantages of circumcifion, this is one of the chief, that to then art committed tit vraclet of God. (Rom. 3. 1.) And God exprefsly promifes to Jacob his fervant, and tolfrael whom he has chofen, I twill pour my fpirit en tby feed) and my lleffing on thine offspring, and thcyfoall faring up as a- rrnng the grafs, and as iviiloii-s by the ivatercourfes. (lfai. 44. 3.) Their
intereft in this promife, as the children of God's fervants, is one ground of their admiffion to baptifm, the token of God's faithful- nefs, and of their obligation tofervehim. Eut then it is. by baptifm, that they are declared to be within the church, and entitled to the vifble privileges of i:. Ptrfons may be virtually in covenant by their »a«, or their parent 1 faith ; but they are not vifibly and prafifjidly in covenant, or in the church, till they have patted under the appoint- ed ceremony. When we fpeak of pcrlons being admit cd ::;:othe church by baptifm, we mean not. that this conveys the right o n i:Tion ; for i t prefuppofes the right, and the qualification c in which the right, by divine inilitiition, is founded : but that it declares the right, and thus introduces to vifble privileges. God fays, ' The uncircumcifed man-child fliall be cut off from among his peo- ple, he hath broken my covenant.' He was previously in cove- nant, elfe he could not be faid to break it by his uncircumr: So alfo the unbaptized pcrfon is tin be cut off, or excluded from the iieges of thechriftian church.
34
cloud. And furely he may, in as juft and rational a fenfe, eftablifh the covenant of grace with infants, engaging to pour his fpirit and blefling upon them, and appointing the feal of this covenant to be af- fixed to them, in token of his faithfulnefs to fulfil his gracious promile.
2. The parent, by dedicating his children to God in baptifm, folemnly binds himfelf to give them a religious and chriilian education, and to ufe his influence, that they ilia.ll keep the way of the Lord, and not put themfelves out of that covenant, into which they have been thus vifibly introduced. Now if it is any privilege for children to have a re- ligious education, it is a privilege that fuch an edu- cation fliould befecured to them ; and confequent- ly a privilege that the parent, by this public tranfac- tion, fliould covenant and engage to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
It may be aiked perhaps, How a parent can covenant for his children ? But the anfwer is obvi- ous. He can covenant for himfelf to difcharge fuch and fuch duties to them, and can commend them to God, in hope of the divine blefling upon his pious endeavours. In this fenfe may every religious parent, as Jofliua did, covenant for his houfe, As for mc and my houfe we will fcrvc the Lord.
3. As the parent, who dedicates his children, fliould confider himfelf bound, by his own acl: to educate them religiouilf ; fo children thus dedicat- ed, when they come to the age of reflection, iliould realize, that, having been given to God, they are not their own, but his ; and are bound to live, not to themfelves , but to htm whofe they are ; and that
a wicked
a wicked, irreligious life Is a practical renunciation of their baptifm, and difavowal of their relation to the God of their Fathers.
If the Jewijh parent, by circumcifing his children, bound them to own and ferve the God of 1/racl* — If the vow of Scvnpforis parents bound him to be a Nazarite forever — If Hannah's vow bound Sa??i- ltd to attend upon God in the fan&uary ; as well may the act of the chrijiian parent, in bringing his children to baptifm, bind them to ferve the God and Father of our Lord Jems Chrifl. The reli- gious parent may urge his children to a godly life by this argument, that he has given them to God. Thus the mother of king Lemuel expoftulates with him.* What my fan ? And what the /on 0/ my womb? And what the /on c/ my vows? And this argument will have weight with children of an in- genuous temper. Thus the Pfalmifl: reafons with himfelf.f I will walk he/ore the Lord, I will call en his name, I will pay my vows in the pre/ence of his people, 0 Lord, truly lam thy /ervant, I am thyjl-rvanf, the fon of thy handmaid. 1 pafs on,
IV. To confider the practice of the chriftian church with refpect to infants immediately after the Apojlolic age.
The author of the letters fay, c It is of fmall im- portance to chriflians, to know what the many wri- ters upon this fubject, fmce the time of the Evau- gelifls and Aporfles, have affirmed. \ But yet to know what they have affirmed concerning the mode of baptifm, he thinks to be of no fmall importance.
He afferts, upon their authority, that the church for 1 300 years pra&ifed immer/wn ; though indeed H he
* Pro*. 31. 'ft f PfaJ. rr, $
86
he allows, that Jpr inkling was practifed too in ex- traordinary cafes. Upon the fame authority it may be aflerted, that the church, for many hundreds of years, practifed infant bapiifm ; and not a Jingle perfon, much lefs a church, can be produced which denied the laicfulnefs of it. And the practice of the church is as good an evidence in favour of infant baptifm, as it would have been in favour of immer- Jbttj in cafe that alone had been practifed. — This gentleman himfelf (perhaps inadvertently) allows the early, conftant, univerfal practice of admitting infants tobaptifm. For he adopts this paflage from Dr. Wall, ' All chriftians in the world, who never owned the Pope's authority, do now, and ever did j dip their infants in the ordinary ufe.' (Not univerfally, but ordinarily dipt them.) If they dipt infants, they baptized them. This practice is of much more weight to prove i?ifa?its are the fubjccls, tfcm to prove dipping is the mode of baptilm ; be-
. fe dipping was but the ordinary ufe, whereas in- fant-baptifm, for ought that appears, was the uni- verfalpractice of the ancient church, except in caf- es of profelytifm.
We do not pretend to reft the proof of infants right to baptifm upon the practice of the church, but upon the authority of fcripture. However, if it appears, that the church, foon after the Apoftles, did admit them, and there is no account of any church that rejected them, or any perfon who de- nied the lawfulness of the. practice, or pretended, that it was an innovation, this will be an argument of confiderable weight, that it was derived from the Apoftles : For the early chriftians, they who liv- ed in t&e ages next after the Apoftles, mud have
known.
known, whaJt their pra&ice was in fuch a matter as this, which was of a mod public nature, and con- cerned the very being of the church. What the ufage of the church was, in the earlieft times after the A pottles, we can learn only from the ancient writers, who are here produced, not as examples , but only as hijhrians, or witnciTes to a plain matter
of ha.
Juflin Martyr, who wrote about 40 years after the apottolic age, fays, J We have not received the carnal, but the fpiritual circumcifion by baptifm — And it is enjoined to all perfons to receive it in the fame way.' Here he plainly confiders baptifm as fucceeding in the place of circumcifion, and confc- quently as being defigned for infants as that was , which opinion he could not eafily have fallen into, if the Apoftles had univerfally, both in doftrir. practice, rejected infants. In one of his ape1. for the chriftians, he fays, c Several perfons:;' us, of 60 and 70 years old, who were to Chriji from their childhood, do continue w\ nipt.' Made difcipks. He iiies the fame word which is ufed in the commifTion ; Difi nations
baptizing them. If they were made dij'c/p!,s7 were doubtlefs baptized.
Irenaus, who wrote about 6y years after the A- pottles, and was born it is faid, before the death o'l St. John, and was acquainted with Polycarp, who was John's difciple, fays concerning Chrift, ' He came to fave all perfons by himfelf, who by him are regenerated (i. e. baptized) unto God, infants, little ones, youths and elderly perfons.' That Ire- naus ufed the word regenerated to fignify baptized, is plain from his own words, where he favs, ' \\
Cm
S8
Chrift gave his difcrples the command of regenerating unto God, he faid, Go and teach all nations, bap- tizing them, &c.'
Tertullian, who flouriflied about ioo years after the Apoftles, gives a plain teftimony, that the church admitted infants to baptifm in his time. It is true he advifes to delay their baptifm ; not becaufe it was unlawful^ for he allows of it in cafes of necefli- ty ? not merely upon the foot of their infancy^ for he advifes alfo, that unmarried perfons be kept from this ordinance, until they either marry or are con- firmed in continence \ but becaufe the Sponfors were often brought into a fnare , and becaufe, he imagined, fins committed after baptifm were next to unpardonable. But his advifmg to delay it, fup- pofes it to have been the practice ; for otherwife there would have been no room for the advice. He does not fpeak of it as an innovation^ which cer- tainly he would have done, had it begun to be prac- \ ifed in his tiro^. His words rather imply the con- trary. His fpeaking of Sponfors9 who engaged for the education of the infants that were baptized, fhews that there had been fuch a cuftom. And his afking, Why that innocent age made fuch hajle to baptifm, fuppofes that infants had ufually been bap- tized foon* after their birth. So that he fully enough witneiTes to the fad 9 that it had been the practice of the church to baptize infants. And his advice, to delay their baptifm till they were grown up and married, was one of thofe odd and lingular notions, for which this Father was very remarka- ble.
Origen, who was contemporary with Teriullian9 exprelsly declares uifmt-baptifin to have- been the
conftant
conftant ufage of the church from the Apolllcs. He lays, ' The baptifm of the church is given for the forgivenefs of tins : But why are infants, by. the ufage of the churchy baptized, if there is nothing in them that needs forgivenefs ?'
Further he fays, ' Infants are baptized for the remiilion of fins ; for none is free from pollution, though his life be but the length of one day upon earth. And it is for that reafon, becaufe by bap- tifm the pollution of our birth is taken away, that infants are baptized.'
Again he obferves, c The church had from the Apoftles an order to give baptifm to infants ; for they, to whom the divine myfleries were committed, knew that there was in all perfons the natural pol- lution of fin, which mufl be done away by water and the Spirit.'
Now as Origen, in thefe pafTageSj argues from infant-baptifm to prove original fin, we may cog? elude, it was an uncomroverted ufage of the church ; for othervvifc he could not, with proprie- ty., have ufed it as an argument toejlablifli an point.
Cyprian, who wrote about 15c Apoftles, gives a fuller teflimony to this fact. In this time a queftton was ftarted by one Fidus, whether in hints might be baptized, but) wh baptifm ought not to be given them on the ei day, according to the law of circumciSpn ? queftion was propofed to a council of 66 Bifhop-v convened at Carthage, who unanimoufly 1 that the baptifm of infants ought not to be to the eighth day, but might be given them at time before. Aiid a large letter :-> this pun
90
containing the reafqns of the refolve, was written and defigned by Cyprian, in the name of the coun- cil.
Now in this aifembly of Miniflers, doubtlefs there were fome 60 or 70 years old, who could remem- ber within lefs than 100 years of the A pottles. And therefore, if infant-baptifm had been a ufage lately introduced, fame 01* all of them mud have known it. — And if fo, it is very flrange that not one of them intimated any fcruple about it. Whether infants lliould be baptized, feems not to have been at all a queltion, but only whether their baptifm needed to be deferred to the 8th day, which, without hefitancy, was determined in the negative.
A little more than 100 years after this time, Gregary Naziaiixen taught, c that infants Ihould be baptized to confecrate them to Chrill in their in- fancy.' Ambrofe^ c that the baptifm of infants had been the practice of the Apotlles and of the church till that time.' Cryfqftom, c that baptifm had no determinate time, as circumcifion had, but one in the beginning of life, or one in the middle of it, ©t one in old age might receive it/
But not to multiply citations ; I (hall add but one more, Aufth^ about 300 years after the Apof- l *:, had a controverfy with Pelagius about original
: ; and to prove it, he frequently urges infant- bapiifm demanding, Why infants are baptized for the remiilion of fins, if they have none ? Pelagius though greatly puzzled with the argument, yet never pretends, that infant-baptifm was an unferip- tural in lovatbrt, or a partial ufage in the chui ' which, had ic been true, a man .five
9*
acquittance with the world, mull have known ; and had he known it, he doubtlefs would have laid it, when he found himfelf embarraifed with the ar- gument. But far from intimating any fuch thing, when fome charged upon him the denial ofinfant- baptifm, as a confequenee oF his opinion, he difa- vows the cohfequence and compkins, that he had
n Jlandcrovjly rcprefented as denying baptifm to in- fants. lie aiks, 'Who can be fo impious as to hinder infants from being baptized and born again in Chriit :' And citing thole vrords, Except one be born of water and the fpirit, he cannot enter into the kir.gdom oj God r, he fays, ' Who can be fo impi- ous as CO refute to an infant, of whatever age, the common redemption of mankind ? And many other exprefliens he ufes, which plainly fuppofe, that infaut-baptiirn had been pra&ifed universally, and time out of mind.
And from this time, till the year 1522, (as Dr. Wall, upon a moil careful enquiry, allures us) there is not fo much as a man to be found, who has fpok- en again!!, or even pleaded for the delay of the baptifm of infants, except a fmall number in France', in the 1 2th century, who denied the poflibility of their falvation, and confequently their right to bap- tifm. But tins feci loon difappeared.
Now if all the firfr. churches were every where eftablifhed by the Apoflles, upon the plan only of adult baptifm, and children \vere every where left unbaptii'cd, how could infant-baptifm begin fo ear- ly, and fpread fo extenfively as it feems to have done ? How could fuch a fpeedy and total alteration take place in a matter of fuch public notice and great importance, and yet no noife be made about
it;
92
it -y no oppofition raifed againft it ? Such a thing would be abfurd to imagine. The early and uni- verfal ufage of the church is then an argument of very confiderable weight, that infant-baptifm was an Apoftolic practice.
To invalidate this argument our brethren alledge, that many corruptions were early admitted into the chriflian church under pretence of Apoflolic tradi- tions, and prevailed without oppofition ; fuch as Infants Communion^ Exorcifm, Trine- Immer/ion, Unc- tion after baptifm^ &c. But fuppofrng thefe had pre- vailed as early and univerfally, as we find infant baptifm to have done (which truly was not the cafe) yet there is this mighty difference. Thefe were but circumftantial errors, which did not deftroy the being of the church, or nullify men's chriftianity, and therefore it is no wonder, that we have no ac- count of any warm controverfy about them. But infant baptifm^ in the opinion of our brethren, does, fo far as it prevails, unchurch the church of Chrift : For they look upon thofe, who have received no other baptifm, as being unbaptized, and unfit for chriflian communion. Now if the firft chriftians ■had viewed it in this light, would they have fat iilent, when they faw it get footing, and prevail ? Would not fome, alarmed at the dangerous innova- tion, have born their teftimony againft it ? Would there not have been fome churches, which preferv- cd the primitive ufage, and renounced communion with fuch as had fo effentially departed from it ? The different fects of chrifUans were often inflamed againft each other by fmaller differences. It is therefore utterly unaccountable, that there fliouid be no difpute, when this fuppofed fundamental in- novation
93
novation was introduced, nor the lead remains of any controverfy about it, until within thefc two or three centuries.
There were indeed Come great corruptions intro- duced into the church, which in time confiderably prevailed, fuch as Image-worjhip, TranfubJlanliatiGn, &c. But tbefe never prevailed fo univerfally, fo early -, nor fo without oppofition, as we have ft en in- fant baptifm mud have done. A great part of the chriftian church has always rejected them and pro- tefted againft them. Many Synods and Councils have publicly condemned them. And in the times when, and places where they mod prevailed, it was by the protection and fupport of civil and mili- tary power ; which cannot be pretended in the cafe of infant baptifm.
It is time that we draw to a conclufion. 1 havt; only to lay before you a few deductions from what has been offered.
It has, I think, been proved, that our baptifm is one with that of our brethren* and that we have neither changed the baptifm indituted by Chrift in- to another rite, nor introduced a new fet offubjecls, And therefore,
i. I beg leave ferioufly to enquire, Whether our brethren have any jull occafion to withdraw themfelves from our communion ? Surely the can- did among them will acknowledge, that our opin- ion is not fo wholly without foundation, but that it may confid with an honed and good heart. And can it be for the intered of chri (Hanky, which we on both fides profefs to regard, that we fhould re- nounce fellowship with each other on account of this difference ? We are willing they fhould com- mune
94
mune with us, and yet enjoy the liberty of acting agreeably to their own principles. Though we wifh they might think with us, ye* we would by no means conftrain them to bring their infants to baptifm contrary to their confciences. And, I ap- prehend, few minifters would fcruple to adminifter baptifm by immerfion to any fuitably qualified, who chufe fo to receive it. For though they think af- fufion warranted by fcripture, yet they are far from denying the validity of immerfion. Since therefore our brethren may enjoy their own principles with us, what occafion can they have to fcparate from us?
Perhaps fome will fay, We cannot commune with you, becaufe, in our opinion, you are unbap- tized j nor can we receive baptifm from your min- iflers, becaufe they have received no other than in- fant baptifm, which is a nullity : And fince they have not been regularly baptized themfelves, they cannot adminifter valid baptifm to others.
It were to be wifhed, that perfons of fuch nar- row fentiments would realize the confequence. In- fant baptifm was undoubtedly the univerfal practice of the chriftian church for many hundreds of years together. Hiflory does not imform us, when it firlt began to be pra&ifed ; but we have particular accounts when it was firft oppofed. And if it be a nullity, there is not, nor can be again, any regular baptifm in the world; for there is not the leaft ground to pretend to a fucceflion of adult baptifm. If we trace adult baptifms back, we mud come to the time when they were admin- iftered by thofe who were baptized in infancy, and who, upon the principles above mentioned, could
not
95
not adminiiter valid baptifm. Our brethren there- fore, by nullifying our baptifm, nullify their own ; and by unchurching us, unchurch themfdves. Yea, upon thefc principles, there were no authorized minift ers, nor regular churches, nor baptized chrif- tians, for many centuries together, nor are there now, nor ever will be again, without a new com- mifTion from heaven. How then has Chrift fulfilled his promifes, that he will be with his minifters al- ways to the end of the world, and that the gates of hell fhall not prevail againfl his church ? We may reft aiTured, that thefe promifes have not been forgotten, and confequently, that baptifm did not ceafe, nor the church fail, when infant baptifm be- came fo much the general practice, that a fuccef- fion of adult baptifms was no where preferved. Our brethren then mult allow, that baptifm, as ad- miniftered in our churches, is valid, and confequent- ly, that the above mentioned plea, for declining communion with us, is of no weight.
And indeed many among them, though they think infant baptifm, efpecially when performed by fprink- ling, not regular, yet do fo far allow the validity of it, that they fcruple not to hold communion with us. Some baptiix churches in England are founded on this catholic plan. The church, of which the late celebrated Dr. Fojler was minifter, received to h.er communion fuch as were baptized in infancy, without requiring them to be rebaptized. The fa- mous Mr. Whijlon, was admitted to the communion of this church, after leaving the church of England^ without rebaptization, which he never would fub- mit to ; for though he pronounced baptifm in in- fancy, and by fprinkling, to be wrong, yet he de- clared
clared it to be c fo far real baptifm, that it ought not to be repeated.'* Were our brethren #// (as indeed many of them are) of the fame generous fentiments, we ihould hardly need to be known as different feels ; to be lure there would be no occafion for di- viding communions upon our different opinions.
With thofe of lefs generous fentiments, I beg leave ferioufly to expoflulate. That you have the fame right as we have, to judge what are the di- vine inftitutions, and to practice accordingly, none will deny. But to differ in fentiment and practice, is one thing ; to renounce communion on account of this difference is another. To juflify this ftep, it is not fufficient to prove, that you may be in the right : It is neceffary to prove, that we mujl be fundamentally in the wrong. You fuppofe us to be in an error. But is this error, in your opinion, (o manifeft, and fo grofs, that none who embrace it can be honeft chriftians ? — Can you demonflrate, that the feal of the covenant of grace was never appoint- ed for the children of believers ; or, if fuch an ap- pointment was once made, it has fince been revok- ed ? that baptifm always fignifies immerfion^ and that this mode was invariably ufed by the apoftles ? That the age and manner of admiffion into the church, in ufe among you, is fo effential, that the lead deviation nullifies our chriflianity ? — Will you pretend, that there are no real chriftians in our churches ? That the word and ordinances adminif- tered in them, have never been bleffed to men's converfion and falvation ? That there was nothing of the power of godlinefs, in and after the time of reformation ? No true religion among our fathers,
and
* Clark's Defence, page 3 4
97
; in the churches founded by them ? That there have been no revivals of* piety in thefe churches fince they were planted ? That God has never own- ed them by providential protections, or by the ef- fufions of his fpirit ? Has there never been any real godlinefs, but what was confined to your denomina-
i ; and none at all in that long period, when your left did not exill ? Thefe things, I know, you will not pretend. Nay, I will enquire farther ; do not many of you date your own convcrfion at a time when you were in fentiment and in communion with our churches ? Did not God bellow this great mercy upon you, while you attended on the minif- tration of his word and ordinances among us r This, I know, fome of you profefs. You believe then, that God has owned, and (till owns thefe as his churches : and will you difown them ? Will you reject that which God receives ? If you think it mofl convenient to worfhip and commune ordinarily with thofe of your own fentiments ; yet why need you l renounce fellowship with us ? Are you doing God fervice, when you caufe divifions and offences in his churches, contrary to the doclrine of peace and unity, that we have received ? Let us not, my breth ren, rend the body of Chrifl by our divifions ; bin with united zeal build up his kingdom in the world.
2. The preceding difcourfes teach us the unwar- ramablenefs of rebaptization. It is agreed on both hat baptifm is not to be repeated. If then oar baptifm is valid, a repetition of it is contrary to the will of God. In the baptifm of an infant there is the application of water in the nameof the Trinity, as well as in the baptifm of an adult. If this baptifm
I be
9»
be not valid, it is only becaufe the fubjeft had not faith, and did not aclually confent to the baptifmal obligations. Now if the baptifm of an infant is a nullity for want of thefe qualifications, the want of them will equally nullify an adult baptifm ; but yet, I prefume, none of our brethren will carry the mat- ter to this length. Let us put a cafe (and fuch a one as doubtlefs fometimes happens.) An adult perfon makes a profeffion of faith and obedience, and is baptized. It foon appears from the wicked- nefs of his life and the corruptnefs of his principles, that he had no faith in any rational fenfe, and nev- er confented to the baptifmal obligations, but was influenced oaly by carnal views. The man after- ward comes to repentance, confeffes his hypocrify in this affair, and owns he had no religious views in the whole tranfa&ion. He now gives fatisfactory proofs, that he is become a real penitent and be- liever. Ought this perfon to be rebaptized ? Every one will fay, No ; becaufe he has been baptized, and his baptifm will fave him, as he has now the anfwer of a good confcience toward God. When Simon the forcerer, who had been baptized by Philip, difcovered the vile hypocrify of his heart, Peter directs him to repent, that his fin might be forgiven ; but fays nothing of his being baptized again : Whereas he fays to the unbaptized Jews, Repent, and be baptized for the remifficn of fins. But there isjuft the fame reafon, why this hypocrite ihould be baptized again upon his repentance, as why the infant fhould ; becaufe he no more had faith before baptifm, and no more confented to any religious obligation, when he was baptized, than an infant. If a profeihon of repentance is all that is
neceflary
neceflary* to our receiving this baptized hypocrite, a profeflion of faith and obedience, at adult age, is all that is necelTary to our receiving one baptized in childhood. So that rebaptization is unwarranta- ble and finful even upon the principles of our breth- ren themfelves j and much more upon fuppofi ion of infants right to baptifm, which, I think, has been abundantly proved. Further,
3. If children are the proper fubjccls of baptifm., then it is the indifpenfibleduty of parents to prefent them to God in this ordinance, and there mud be an inexcufable neglect in thofe parents, who, though convinced of their childrens right to baptifm, delay to procure it for them.
Some will fay perhaps, c Though we difpute not their right to it, yet it appears to us to be a matter of very little confequence.'
But certainly it is a matter of great confequence, that you comply with a divine inltitution. He that breaks the lead command (hall be called lead in the kingdom of heaven.
Perhaps yon will fay, c We can't fuppofe the happinefs of our children at all depends upon their baptifm, fince it is a thing out of their power.' Be it fo : Yet if it be a duty incumbent on you to bring them to baptifm, your happinefs may depend on your compliance with this as well as any other du- ty. But how are you fure that their welfare no way- depends upon it ? Their welfare much depends en their being religioufly educated — their education will chiefly lie with you— by their baptifm you en- gage to give them a religious education — and if your bringing yourfelves under public folemn obli- gations, will be any motive with you to educate
tVm
10©
them rcligioufly, then their welfare, in fome degree, depends on their baptifm. You will lay, 6 You can do your duty as well without fuch a promife as with it.' With equal reafon might you fay, you can live a religious life without ever making a pro- fefiion of religion, as well as if you did. But God has required you to make a profeflion, becaufe this will be a proper motive and inducement to you to live a religious life ; it is a fuitable means of ftrengthning your obligations and keeping them in your remembrance. And your dedicating your children to God in baptifm is founded on the fame reafon. It is a promife which you take on your- felves, and a means of reminding you of your obli- gations, to educate them religioufly. And this will be an argument, which you may ufe to good advantage in your addreffes to them.
With refpect to unbaptized infants, we may be afTured, God will do them no wrong. But if he has made their baptifm a condition of the beftowment of fome undeferved favours, who can fay, this is unjuft ? It would be preemption to affert, that all who die unbaptized are .loft. God's tender mer- cies are over all his works. But the promife is to believers, and their children And fhould we fup- pofe, that the baptized infants of believers, have fome advantages above other infants in another ftate, this could not be called abfurd : For it is certainly a part of the fcheme of God's moral gov- ernment, that fome fhould be benefited by the pie- ty of others. All interceffion is founded in this principle. You doubtlefs fometimes pray for your infant children. If you fee them in danger of death, You pray, not only that their lives may be fpared,
but
101
but alfo that their fouls might be faved. But why do you pray for them, if you imagine no good can redound to them from your faith and piety ? How often did Chrift exercife his healing mercy toward the fick on account of the faith of others ? How often did he grant cures to children upon the earned: petitions of their parents ? It would then be extremely rafli to conclude, your infants cannot be benefited by your dedicating them to God. Thofe believers, who brought infants to cur Saviour, that he fliould blefs them and pray for them, entertained another fentiment. They thought the good of thefe children, in fome meafure, depended on their bringing them to Chrift. And Chrift commended their piety, and directed others to do likewife.
Some perhaps will fay, c We believe that infants are fubjects of baptifm, but we queftion our own right to give them up to God therein.' But if you queftion your own right, it muft be, becaufe you queftion whether you have any religion. And can you be contented fo ?
Whatever the difficulty is, which lies in your way, it Ihould be your immediate concern to re- move it. Is it not your intention to live a life of religion ? Is it not your defire that your children fliould grow up before the Lord ? Is it not your refolution to bring them up for him ? If it is, then fay fo9 by a public dedication of yourfelvcs and your children to God. If H is not, then tremble at the thought of your own impiety and careleflhcfs. If you have no good purpofes and defires, you can- not confidently profefs any ; if you have good de- fires and purpofes, ftrengthen and confirm them by bringing yourfelves under explicit obligations to acY agreeably to them. i Finally,
102
Finally. Let fuch as have dedicated their chil- dren to God, acl: under a fenfe of the vows that are upon them.
If your children are removed by an early death, quietly fubmit to the will of that fovereign Lord, whofe property you have acknowledged them to be, and entertain no anxious thoughts about the manner in which he has difpofed of them. When you gave them to him in baptifm, you profefled your faith in his mercy toward them. If you cannot trufl him to difpofe of them, why did you dedicate them to him ? If you can, why are you anxious a- bout them now fmce he has taken them into his own hands ?
If your children live* then bring them up in the nature and admonition of the Lord. If your worldly circumflances make it neceilary, that you mould commit them to the care of others, fee that you put them into families where you have reafon to think, they will be religioufly educated. If you keep them under your own immediate care, train them up in the way in which they mould go ; and. commend them to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build them up, and to give them an inheritance among the Saints,
CHRIS T's WARNING to the CHURCHL
TO BEWARE OF
FALSE PROPHETS,
WHO COME AS
WOLVES in SHEEPs CLOTHING :
AND THE
MARKS BY WHICH THEY ARE KNOWN;
ILLUSTRATED IN
TWO DISCOURSES.
Br JOSEPH LATHROP, d. i*
Pafior ofthefirft Church in Weft-Springfield. 53 >C ;x^occco:xxxx>c<x) <xxx>o<xxg
There were falfe prophets among the people, even
as there fhall be falfe teachers among you ■
And many fhall follow their pernicious ways.
Apoftk Peter,
WITH AN
APPENDIX
AND OTHER ENLARGEMENTS.
#
io5
DISCOURSE I.
MATTHEW, vn. 15, i<.
Beware of Falfe Prophets, tcho come unto you in Sheep' }s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening
Wolves. Teflxill know them by their fruits.
CjtOD has, in all ages, had a church in the world ; and he will continue it, until the world (hall be no .more. His church has fubfifted in different forms ; but under every form he has appointed, that there Should be publick teachers in it, to open the im- portant truths, and inculcate the facred duties of religion. Under the old teflament there were prophets, and under the new teflament there were apoflles, ordained for this end : And Chrifl has plainly fignified, that the order of religious teach- ers {hall be preferved, until the faints {hall be gath- ered together in one body in heaven.
As in all ages there have been publick teachers of religion, fo there have alfo been falfe teachers, who have affumed a facred character, and with cor- rupt views, have endeavoured to draw away difci- ples after them. There were falfe prophets among the Jews : and Chrift and his apoflles have warned us, that there fhall be falfe teachers among Chrif- tians, who fhall privily bring in dangerous hereiies, and corrupt men from the fimplicity of the gof~ pel.
Our
io6
Our Saviour fays in the text, Beware of falfe prophets i who come to you in Jheep's clothing, hut in- wardly they are ravening wolves.
But if they come in fheep's clothing, how fhali we diftinguifh them from fheep : Chrilt adds, By their fruits ye/hall know them. They may carry on the deception for a time ; but their corrupt difpofi- tions will, (boner or latter, betray them. Obferve their mo lions, and you will perceive the ferocity, wildnefs, and greedinefs of the wolf, notwithftand- ing the (lolen fleece on their backs.
My brethren, as this is a time when errour and wickednefs much abound ; when new and flrange doctrines are taught ; and when teachers, of one fort and another, are itarting up with pretenfions to guide fouls in the way to heaven ; it concerns you. carefully to dhtinguiih between true teachers and corrupt feducers. That you may the more eafily guard againft the common danger, I mall lay be- fore you, with great plainnefs, the marks by which falfe teachers are to be known. I fhall not apply thefe marks to any feet or denomination ; I (hall only point them out to you exactly as they lie hi the fcriptures, and (hall leave you to make the ap- plication, as you may find occafion.
I. They who refufe to enter into office, in the way which the gofpel prefcribes, are to be rejected : They have one plain mark of falfe teachers. As this is the grand mark of diltinction, I fhall confider it largely.
Our Saviour fays, John x. i. He that cnicrcth not by the door into the fheepfold, but climb cth up fame other way, the fame is a thief and a robber. Chrift ii the door ; not only the door by which xht fheep
enter
!07
enter into the fold, to enjoy the fhepherd's care, as mentioned ver. 9, but alio the door by which the jbepberd enters to take the charge of the fheep ; as here reprefented. 'I o enter by the door, is to enter by ChriiT, and in conform: ty to the order which he has appointed. The qualifications re- quifite in publick teachers and the manner of induc- tion to the facred office, are pointed out in various parts of icripture, and very particularly in Paul's epiftles to Timothy and Titus. It is there requir- ed, that they be men furnifhed with competent knowledge and learning, efpecially in divine things ; not novices — that they be found in faith ; not cor- rupters of the word of God — that they be holy and blamelefs in their lives ; not chargeable with any vice — that they be men of general good report ; not of unknown, much lefs of infamous character — and that they be tried and approved by the elders of the church ; not fuch as rafhly intrude themielves into office.
The apoflle fays, Heb. v. 4. No man taketh this honor to him/elf, but he only has a right to it, who is called of God, as was Aaron, and his fons. How they were called, we are informed in the 28th chap, of Exodus. They were confecrated to the prieft- hood by Mofes, God's minifter, who was command- ed " to feparate that family from among the chil- dren of Ifrael, and to anoint, fanclify andconfecrate them, that they might minifter in the priehVs of- fice.
Speaking of the call of the Gentiles, Rom. x. 14. the apoftie alks, how /hall they hear wi hout a preacher? And how jhall they preach, except they be fent ? There mull be a fending, a regular miff on, to authorize them to preach the gofpel. That
io8
That the work of public teaching in the church is not common to every Ghriflian, who is pieafed to afliime it ; but peculiar to fane, to thofe who are fint, and called thereto in the gofpel way, the apof- tle plainly inflrufts us in his epiflle to the Ephefians, ' chap, iv. and in his firft epiflle to the Corinthians, chap. xii. When Chrljl afcended on high, he gave gifts to men ; and he gave fome apofiles ; fome prophets ; fome evangeli/h ; and fome pafiors and teachers, for the work of the minift.ry, and for the edifying of the body of Chrifi. There were only fome to be teach- ers : It was not intended that every one, who lift- ed, fhould aft in this capacity, under pretence of edifying the church. God has fet fome in the church to officiate in this character $ firft apofiles ; then prophets ; and then teachers. Are all apofiles f Are all prophets? Are all teachers ?~~ By no means. If all the feveral parts of the body were one member, where were the body ? And if all the members of the church fhould alTume one office, where were the church ? All things are to be done decently and in order.
The apofiles themfelves received their commif- fion immediately from Chrift. In the time of his miniflry on earth, he gave to the twelve, and after- wards to the feventy difciple-, an exprefs command to go and preach the kingdom of God among the Jews. After his rcfurreftion this commiffion was enlarged. All power, fays he, in heaven and in earth is given to me ; go ye therefore and teach all nations, Matth. xxviii. Though they had now received, yet they were not furnifhed to execute this extenfivc commiffion : Therefore Chrift adds, Tarry ye at ye- rufalcm, exercifing your rainiftry there, until ye be
endued
■aaMMW
endued from en high— for ycfoall be baptized with the v Gbc/r, not many days hence. Accordingly, a- bout ten days after this, on the day of pcntecofl, when they were all aiTembled together (all the hun- dred and twenty diiciples, who had eompanied together all the time, that Chrift went in and out
among them ; when thefe were afTcmbled together) the gift of tongues was beftowed upon them, as that of miracles had been before : And now they were furni fried to preach the gofpel among all nations. As thefe were ordained immediately by Chrift, fo they were authorized to ordain others.
Paul was an apo(He,not by man, but by JefusChrid ; yet, after he received the gofpel, he prefumed not to pre ich, until Ananias, who is fuppofed to have been oneofthefeventy difciples,cameto him, & by anex- prefs command from Chriil, laid his hands on him, & told him, cHe was achofenveffeltobear Chrid'snamc among the Gentiles, as well as Jews. The miracle wh:c 1 An;mias performed, inredoring Paultohisfight, was an evidence of the authenticity of his commiffion. A&six. 15, 1 6, 17, 1 8-& chapt xxii. 12, 13, 14, 15. Afterward, when Paul and Barnabas were about to carry the gofpel to the Gentiles, they were, by the direction of the Holy Ghoft, feparated to thai- work by the prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch, ' who faded and prayed, and laid their hands on them, and fern them away.' A&sxiii. iy ]. And thefe apodles, as they went through various cities of the Gentiles, preaching the- gofpel, and confirming believers, * ordained them elders in every church, commending them, by fading and prayer, to the grace of God. Acts xiv. 23.
Thefe elders, who we/e ordained by the apodles and firft miniders, were at the fame time authorized K to
no
to tranfmit the office to others. Timothy was or- dained by the 'laying on of the hands ofthepref- bytery, in the prefence of many witneffes :' And the things, which he had received, the fame he was ordered to commit to faithful men, who fhould be able to teach others alfo :' And he is folemnly cau- tioned to ' lay hands fuddenly on no man.' i epif- tle, v. 22 — 2 epiftle, ii. 2. And Paul fays to Ti- tus, who was a minifter in the ifland of Crete, ' For this purpofe have I left thee in Crete, that thou mighteft ordain elders in every city, as I had ap- pointed thee.' Chap. 1 . 5. But why fhould Titus be left there to ordain elders, if the elderfhip might be afTumed at pleafure, or be conveyed by private brethren ? There is not in all the gofpel hiftory, a iingle example of ordination, or recommendation to the work of the mimftry, by any other than the biftiops and elders of churches ; and to fuch only are given the directions relating to this matter.
We find alfo, that in cafe a complaint arifes againft a minifter, it is to be referred, not to private breth- ren, but to elders or paftors of churches. To Timo- thy as a bifhop is this inflruftion given by Paul. Aga'mjl an elder receive nut an accafation^ but before two or three witntffes. i epiftle, v. 1 0. He is cautioned not to ordain any 10 the miniftry, but fuch as could bring a good report ; for when one defires an office, it is incumbent on him to exhibit evidence of his qualifications. But againft one already in office a bare report is not to be received ; there mud be an accufation fupportcd by two or three witnefles, to ejeft him from office, or fcring him under cenfure.
Every church has a right to cboofe her own min- ifter ;
\
1 1 1
lilcr ; but die cannot make a minuter. Me muft be ieparated to the work by the elders of the churches. When it was judged neceffary, that a certain number of meet perfons ihould be appointed to prelide over the diilribution of the church flock, and the miniitration to the poor, the twelve apof- tlcs referred the choice to the multitude of the dii- ciples ; but the appointment and ordination they re- ferved to themfelves. ' They called the multitude of the difciples, and laid, Look ye out ieven men of hafcefl report, whom we may appoint over this bufi- nefs : And they chofe feven, and fet them before the apo files, who faded and prayed and laid their hands on them.' Acts vi.
A Chriflian church is compared to a houfhold, and to a city, in refpect of the order and govern- ment, the peace and unity, that ought to be pre- ferved in it. But if every man might afTume the office of a teacher at pleafure, where would be the order and unity ? There would be the fame confu- fion and diffraction, as in a flate where every one claimed a right to exercife the powers of magiftra- cy.
You fee then, that they, who take on them the office of teachers in the church, without fubmitting their call and qualifications to that mode of trial, which the gofpel has inftituted, are to be confidered as intruders, and rejected as impoftors ; for they come not in by the door. Their eiiected contempt of regular approbation betrays a confeioufneis of their want of the qualifications which the gofpel re- quires, and indicates fuch arrogance, pride and prc- f umption, as ought never to appear in one, who profeffes to have learnt the religion of the me^k and lowlv Jefus. The
112
The apoftle Peter, i epiftie, ii. i. fpeaks of feme falfe teachers, who privily bring into the- Church damnable herefies, andfeduce many to follow their pernicious ways. Jude, fpeaking of the fame per- ions, defcribes them as creeping in unawares ; in a fecret fubtle manner. This coming in privily r, and creeping in unawares , anfwers to our Saviours ctef- eription of them, as not entering into the iheepfold by the door^ but climbing w^fome other way. It ef- pecialiy intends their aifuming the office of teachers, without the approbation of thofe, whom the gofpel has conftituted judges of their qualificatioris. The apoflle Jude illuitrates their chara&er, by compar- ing them to the ancient Corahites. They have per- ifoed in the gainfaying of Corah, The ftory alluded to is in the 16th chap, of Numbers. Corah and his companions took upon them to ofFer incenfe, and exercife the functions of the pried hood. They murmured againfl the family of Aaron, which had been confecrated to this holy fervice. They faid, -' Ye take too much upon you feeing all the congre- gation are holy, and the Lord is among them : Wherefore lift ye up yourfelves above the congre- gation V They called < the Handing order' of mjn- ifters a tyranny, a ufurpation of rights common to all the Lord's people : They pretended, that every man, who pleafcd, might officiate in the priefthood. Mofes fays, ' God hath brought you near to him to do the fervice of the tabernacle, and do you feek the priefthood alfo ? Ye take too much upon you, ye fons of Levi.' How their prefumption ifiued, you well remember. Now the apoftle fays, thefe faiie teachers, who crept into the church unwares, were guilty of the gainfaying of Corah. They had af-
fumed
1!3
fumed the facred office like him, uncalled and un- authorized ; were guilty or" his preemption, and expo fed to his condemnation.
It will perhaps be faid, 'In the apoilles' time, there were fome, who had an immediate call from the Spirit to preach the gofpel ; and this may be the cafe (till ; and if a man is moved by the Spirit, he mult obey.'
But if the Spirit moves a man to preach the gof- pel; it will undoubtedly move him to aft conform- ably to the rules of the gofpel, and to feek an in- troduction to the work, in the manner which the gofpel prefcribes. The divine Spirit never dictates to the heart a line of conduct, which it has forbid- den in the word. They, who defpife and neglect the gofpel-method of introduction to the facred of- fice, under pretence of fome inward motion, are not influenced by the Hcly Spirit, but iniligated by a fpirit of a very different character.
There is no inftance, in the new teftament, of any man's affuming the office of a preacher merely on an interned call of the Spirit. The Holy Ghoit commanded Ananias to go and declare to Paul, that he was chofen to preach ChrilVs name: And the Holy Ghoft faid to the prophets and teachers at Antioch, Separate me Barnabas and Paul to the work, to which I have called them. But we fmd not, that Paul or Barnabas, or any other of the piimitive preachers, ran to the work before they were fent, under pretence of an internal call of the Spirit, which no body knew but themfelves. In the prefent day the tables are turned. It is the preacher now who is directed by the Spirit ; not they who are to fet him apart to the wqrk. If it k could
U4
could be fuppofed, that one might have fuch a fe- cret command from the Spirit, this is only evidence to him/elf: It will not warrant others to attend on him ; it can therefore anfwer no purpofe. What endlefs confufion would follow from admitting fuch pretences ! Any man, who is difhoneft. enough, may pretend fuch a call ; and who fhall contradict him ? What order can there be in the church ? The man may be ignorant, immoral or heretical. — But who fhall judge, cenfure and fileuce him ? He flill pleads a call from the Spirit,, and he will be judged by no man.
If one pretends fuch a fpecial divine direction, as hi? warrant to preach, let him manifeft it by mira- cles ; as the apoftles manifefled their commlffion. Miracles have ceafed, and fo have all immediate rev- elations ; and the man, who now pretends to them9 is a defigning impoftor, or deluded enthufiaft.
If fuch arrogant pretenfions mould be accompa- nied, as they uiually are, with an open contempt of human learning, and of that Jiudy and attendance on reading, which Paul enjoins on the minifter, we mayjuftly fufpect, they are held up as a fubititute for real qualifications, a cover for ignorance, and an excufe for lazinefs.
In Uae apoftles' time, there were inftances of the Spirit's designating the perfons to be ordained to the miniflry ; but it is evident, that this manner of defignation was not to be continued in the church, became the Holy Ghoft has taken care to furnifa the church with Handing rules for her conduct in this matter. Timothy, who was ordained by the elders of the church, IS commanded to commit the fame office which btittd received, to faithful men,,
who
«3
who fhoulcl be able to teach otherfc. But how (halt- Timothy know, who are thefe able, and faithful men ? Shall he ordain every man, who fays, The Spirit moves him to preach ? Or will the Spirit im- mediately point out to Timothy the man who is to be ordained ? No : He mud Inquire into the qual- ifications of thofe vvhoofler thcmfelvcs to the work. Paul fjirs to him, ' If a man defrre the office of a biihop, he dcfireth a good work. A bilhop then muft be blamelefs, fober, of good behaviour, apt to teach, not given to wine, not a novice ; moreover he mud have a good report of them that are with- out/ Surely, if Paul had fuppofed, that the Spir- it would immediately and fupernaturally direft in this matter, he would not have indrucled Timothy fo particularly, what qualifications he muft find in thofe, whom he ordained to be teachers in the church.
The infractions given to Titus are the fame. c For thfs caufe I leit thee in Crete, that thou may eft ordain elders in every city, as I had appoint- ed thee : If any nvin be blamelefs, fober, juft, holy, temperate, holding fail the faithful word, and a- *b!e by found doctrine to exhort, and to convince gainfayers.'
Since the Spirit of God has given in the gofpel, fufiicient directions concerning this matter ; to let us attend,, and look for no other.
It has been urged in favour of private brethren's n the church, That " the apoftle favs to the Corinthians, Ye may allprcphefy one by one, that nil may Lam and be com) c*ted" i epiflle, xiv. 31.
But could he intend, that all the Chriftians in oth might prdphefy or preach? By no means 5
for
iiG
for then we rauft fuppofe that even women were to commence preachers, if they pleafed, contrary to his exprefs inftruftions both here, and in his firit epiftle to Timothy. By all he means all the proph- ets, as will be. evident, if you take the whole fen* tence in its connexion. ' Let the prophets fpeak, two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that fitteth by, let the iirft hold his peace ; for ye may all prophefy one by one/ In the Corinthian church there were many endued with fpiritual gifts ; who, being ambitious to dif- play their gifts, ufed to fpeak feveral at once, to the confufion of one another, and of the whole atfem- bly. To correct this diforder, the apoftle fays, 6 If any man fpeak, let it be by two ; or, at the mod, by three,' i. e. Let noc more than two or three fpeak in the fame meeting ; and let not thefe fpeak all at once, * but by courfe,' one after a- nother : * Let the prophets fpeak two or three, in fucceflion, ' and let the other judge.' ' And if, while one is prophefy ing, any thing be revealed to another,' i. e- another prophet, ' let the iirft hold his peace.' Let the iirft iinifh his difcourfe, and ceafe from fpeaking, before the other begins. ' For ye may all prophefy one by one. If ye will ob- serve order in your aflemblies, all the prophets may have opportunity to fpeak ; ye need not interrupt one another. And do not pretend, that ye are fo overpowered by the divine influence, that you can- not refrain, but rauft immediately give vent to the fervid ebulitions of grace ; 6 for the fpirits of the prophets are fubjecl: to the prophets. God is not the author of confufion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the faints.' Prophets were an order of
public
"7
c teachers in the primitive church : Thefe only are the perfons, who theiipoitle fays, may all proph* efy. The words therefore, far from alio plainly forbid private Chriltians to flart up and teach in religious afiemblfes.
I will mention another paflage, which has been fometimes perverted to juiiify private brethren in aiTuming the office of teachers. At the time of Ste- phen's martyrdom, there was great perfecution a- gainft the church, which -was at *Jerufalcm, and they were all fcattered abroad through the regions of Ju- dea and Samaria, except the apqflles. And they,
that were fcattered abroad, went every where preach^ ing the word. Acts 8.
But are we to fuppofe that the all, who were fcattered abroad, were all the members of the Church in Jerufalem, and that all thefe went every where preaching ? This would be abfurd ; for then we muff fuppofe the women turned preachers. The church at Jerufalem was, at this time, very large. We read of three thoufands at one time, and five thouiands at another, converted to the Chriilian faith ; befides other confiderable acceflions. A great proportion of thefe were in and about Jerufa- lem. That all the believers in this city fliould go forth to preach, is not fuppofable : So many were not needed, nor could fo many be employed, in the regions of Judea and Samaria, and the other places whither they went ; for they preached to Jews only. And if the lire of perfecution was fo hot that no profeiTed believer could live in Jerufalem, why were not the apoftles fcattered among the reft ?
It is certain that the church in Jeruijjem was not ilifperfed ; for dill there were in Judea brethren and
apc/ilcj ;
i iS
apojlles ; and in the city there were devout men, wh* carried Stephen to his burial ; and difcipks to whom Paul effayed to join himfeif, after he came from Da. mafcus. Yea, we are exprefsly told, that when they, who, by this perfecution, were fcattered a- broad, had gone as far as Phenice, Cyprus and Antioch, preaching the word with fuccefs, tidings of thefe things tame to the ears of the church which was in Jerufalem, Acls . viii. 2— ix. 26 — xi. 1, 19,22.
Since there were Hill brethren with the apojlles, and fmce we flili find in Jerufalem devout men, difci- pks and a church ; the all, who were fcattered a- broad, cannot be all the Chrijlians or believers in the city.
Who then were thcfe all? Doubtlefs they Were the hundred and twenty difcipks, who had companied together, while Chrift went in and out among them ; and on whom the Holy Ghofl had lately fallen. Thefe are mentioned in the mil arid fecond chapters of the Acls, and are, once and again, called the all, Thefe were aflembled together, when a fucceffor to Judas was elected. They were #// to- gether in one place on the day of pentecofl. On thefe the Holy Ghofl was {hed forth, and cloven tongues, like as of fire, fat on each cf them. They were all filled with the Holy Ghofl and fpake with tongues.
Grotius, Lightfoot, and Whitby, fay, that c they all, who were now filled with the Holy Ghoft, were all the hundred and twenty.' This appears to have been a received opinion in the ancient church. Jcrom, Chryfoflom and Oecamenius, obferve, that 1 the Holy Ghofl fell on the hundred and twenty to complete the prophecy of Joel.' Whitby favs,
< It
110.
S It was not the whole church, or body of the laity, that was fcattercd abroad, but the hundred and eight, who were full of the Holy Ghoft ; the perfe- ction aiming chiefly at thofe, who were ftich as Stephen was. '
Thefe were now plainly authorized to preach the gofpel, having, in a publick manner, received this fupernatural gift, and being, according to Chrifl's promiie, endued with power from on high ; and therefore, when they were fcattered from Jerufalem, they went every where preaching the word.
But whoever ihefe preachers are fuppofed to be, one thing is undeniable ; they were endued with miraculous gifts and powers, which were the pub- lick feal of their divine commiflion. For it is ex- prefsly faid, Acts xi. 21, c The Hand of the Lord was with them.' This phrafe is, more than once, ufed by Luke for the fupernatural and miraculous gifts of the Spirit. When Peter and John and their company prayed, that God would Jiretch out his Hand to heal and to enable them to dofigns and ^wonders in ChrijFs name ; they in anfwer to their prayer, were filled with the Holy Ghofi. Acts iv. 30, 31. Thefc men went forth to preach with a publick warrant from heaven. Their example, therefore, will by no means juftify private Chrif- tians, who have no fuch warrant, in going every where to preach the word. If any, defpiiing the ordinary million appointed by God, plead an ex- traordinary commiflion to preach every where, let them (hew the extraordinary evidences of this com- miflion by miraculous gifts and afliftances. God never fends men to do his work, without fome tef-
timony
120
timony fufHcient to juflify others in receiving them.*
It mud:, by this time be manifeft to you, that no man can claim a right to officiate in the character of a mini Pier or teacher in the church, until he has been approbated and recommended to the work by the eiders of churches.
I fhall now mew, that whenever miaiflers or preachers travel into parts, in which they are not known, they ought to carry with them competent credentials ; and that no man lias a right to acl, and Christians have no right to receive a man, in
this
* It has been afked, ' Wrhat evidence we nave, that Apollos, be- fore he was received in the character of a Chriftian preacher, had been approved by the eiders of churches.' It is fuflicient to anfwer, We have evidence from the rule and practice ef the apoftles al- ready illuftrated.
We are not to expect a particular account of every ordinatioa, any more than of every baptifm, in the church : and in neither Cafe can the filence of fcripture, in certain inftances, be urged as au argument a^ainft anefrablifhed ufage.
There is no evidence that Apollos acted as a Chriftian preacher in the church, much lefs, that he was acknowledged in this charac- ter, before he received regular approbation. When he fir ft came to Ephefus, Acts xviii. he knew the way of the Lord, onJy as far as John's baptifm, or doctrine, had led him. He knew that the king- dom of heaven, or the time of the Meffiah's appearance, -was- now come. But that Jefus of Nazareth was this Mefliah, had rifen from the dead, and fhed down the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, he had not been inftructed. He flrit began to fpeak in the Jewifh fyna- gegue, probably, a3 many others did, by invitation or permiflion of the ruler of the fynagogue. He fpake not as a Chtiftian preacher, but rather as a learned and pious Jew, who was looking for redemp- tion in Ifratl. For it is exprefsly remarked, that he kneiv *nl b.iptifm of 'join. Aquila, who had been infhueted by Paul, and whom Paul left at Epbefus, when he went from thence, and whom fome fuppofe to have been ordained a preacher by this apoftlc, perceiving that Apollos knew onl) the doctrine of John, • took him, and ex- pounded to him the way of the Lord more perfectly. And accord- ingly wc uud, that wijeii Apollos went to Achaia, ' he helped the
believers,
I 21
this facred character, imlcls he exhibits fufficient tefb'mony of his being vcfted with it. This is a juft conclufion from the pofition already proved ; and is farther evident from the uniform practice in the apoftles' times.
Paul, after he had preached Chrifl for fomc time in Dam a feu s, went to Jcrufalem, and effayed to join himfelf to the difciples there: But they all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a difciplc. Acls ix. So cautious were they not to receive one, who had not given them fullicicnt evidence of the truth of his pretenfions. But Bar- nabas took him and brought him to the apoillcs, the proper judges in cafes of this nature, and de- clared to them, how Paul had feen Chrifl in the way, and how he had preached boldly at Damafcus in the name of Chrifl ; and on this teflimony of Barnabas, who was himfelf a miniiler of Chrifl, they received him -, and he was with them, coming
in
believers, and mightily convinced the Jews, /hewing from the fcriptnres, that Jefus was the Chrift.' Before he went into Achaia,
• the brethren' in Epbcfus ' wrote to the difciples, exhorting thtni to receive him.' As there were now many believers, lo doubtlefs there were alfo elders or minifters in Ephefus. We find, not long after this, Acts xx. that there was a number of ciders in that city, who had the overfight of the church there ; that they h.'d been there for fome time, and had been acquainted with Pauls miniftrv,
* from the firft day that he wcot itktfi Afia.' It is certain then tli3t there were elders in Ephefus, as early ai the time when Apollos was there. Thcfe probably were the i rethrcn, or at Icaft among the breth rcn, who recommended him to the diiciples in Achaia. For brethren is a term often uled for eUtn of the church. It is bv no means fup- pofablc that Apollos fb<>uld b< known to none but private Chriftians. So learned and eloquent a nan, who bad read and fpoken openly in the Synagogue, and been inftructed by Aquila, would certainly become acquainted with the eldera. Ir he was known to them,
conurred in this recommendation \ and if they re- commended him, they had pr .d him in the charac- ter in which he went to Achaia.
L
1 11
in and going out at Jerufalem. You will obferve, he affociated with the apqftles. He did not fhun them : He Submitted to be examined and judged by them ; and being accepted, he conforted and co-operated with them. How differently he con- dueled from impoftors and deceivers, who choofe to avoid the company of the regular minifters of Chrift !
In the apoftolick times, the preachers of the gof- pel, when they travelled from place to place, car- ried with them written credentials. Paul fays, 2 Cor. iii. Need we, as fame others, letters of commen- dation from yon, or epijlles of commendation to you? Te are our epiftle, known and read of all men. His words import, that others, that minifters in general, when they travelled beyond the circle of their ac- quaintance, had occafion for letters of commenda- tion, although he himfelf was, by this time, known fo univerfally in the churches, and efpecially in Corinth, that he needed no fuch letters.
Judas and Silas are very particularly recommend- ed to the church in Antioch by the apoftles, elders, and church in Jerufalem. A&sxv. 25. They are called c chofen men ; men who had hazarded their lives for the name of Chrift, ' and whofe informa- tion might be received with full credit. ' And they, being prophets alfo themfehes, exhorted the brethren with many words.' Verfe 32.
When Timothy went from Philippi to Corinth, to carry Paul's fir ft epiftle to the Corinthians, Paul, in the epiftle which he fent by him, recommends him as a minifter, in thefe words ; chap. xvi. If Timothy come, fee that he may be among you without fear; for he worketh the work of God,
as
* >
-J
as I alio do. Let no man therefore defpifc him.' He recommends him alfo to the Theflalonians. i epiftle, iii. 2. c We have fent Timotheus our brother, and minifter of God, and our fellow- la- bourer in the gofpel of Chrifl to eftablifh you. '
When Paul was at Rome, he wrote a letter to the Ephefian Christians, and fent it by the hand of Tychicus ; and, that they might receive Tychicus without diftruft, Paul thus recommends him ; * That ye may know my affairs, and how 1 do, Tychicus, a beloved brother, and faithful minifter in the Lord, fhall make known to you all things, whom I have fent unto you for the fame purpofe.' Chap. vi. In like manner he recommends him to the Coloflians in his letter to them. * All my (late fhall Tychicus declare, who is a beloved brother, faithful minifter and fellow-fervant in the Lord. Chap. iv.
He commends Timothy and Epaphroditus to the Philippians. Chap. ii. * I truft to fend Timotheus
fliortly unto you Ye know the proof of him,
that, as a fon with the father, he had ferved with
me in the gofpel And I fuppofed it neceiTaiy to
fend to you Epaphroditus my brother and compan- ion in labour and fellow-foldier — I fend him — re- ceive him in the Lord with all gladnefs, and hold fuch in reputation.'
Paul tells the Coloffians, chap. iv. 1 o, that c con- cerning Marcus, filler's fon to Barnabas, they had already received commandment ; and if he came to them, they were to receive him.'
When the eloquent, learned, and fervent Apol- los, who had fpoken boldly at Ephefus, and taught diligently the way of the Lord, was difpofed to pafs
into
124
into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the dif- ciples to receive him. A els xviii.
John, in his third epiftle, recommends Demetri- us, as one who had a good report of all men, and of the truth h{c\f ? and as one, of whom he could him- felf bear teftimony with great confidence.
Peter, in his firft epiftle, which he wrote to the Jewifh Chriftiaus, difperfed through the provinces of Afia, fails not to make honourable mention of Sylvanus, who carried the epiftle to them. « By Sylvanus, a faithful brother, have I written.*
Yea, we find, not only minifters, but private Chriftians, recommended to the fellowmip of faints. Paul commends Onefimus to the Coloflians, as a faithful and beloved brother ; and Phebe to the Romans, as a member of the church in Cenchrea, and exhorts them to receive her.
But I have already dwelt too long on this argu- ment. I am fure, it muft by this time, be exceed- ingly plain to you all, that we ought not only to rejeel: thofe, who without regular approbation, have afFumed the office of teachers in the church ; but cautioufly to av old JI rangers, who, while they pre- tend to be minifters, exhibit no proper credentials of their miniflerial, or even Chriflian character, and of their regular ftandin^ in the church of Chrift. The church in Thyatira is feverely reproved by Chrifl himfelf, c becauie fhe fufFered thofe to teach, who called themfelves prophets ;' but, that they were fuch, gave no better evidence, than their own word. On the other hand, the church in Ephefus is commended, becaufe fhe could not bear them who were evil ; and tried them who faid they were apoflles, but were not, and found thcin liars. Reve- lations ii. 2, 10. IVom
I25
" From the preceding obfervations it appears, that in the primitive church there were two forts of min- iflers ; extraordinary, as apoflles, prophets and e- vangelifls ; and ordinary, as pallors and teachers. The former who were employed in fpreading the gofpel and planting churches in the world, were en- dued with miraculous powers, by which they were enabled, as well to authenticate, as to execute, their extraordinary commiffion. This fort of miniflers, and this kind of evidence were to continue, only lb long as the ftate of the church required them. When the canon of revelation fhould be com- pleted, ' then prophefies were to fail, tongues were to ceafe, and knowledge,' as an immediate, fuper- natural gift, 6 was to vanifh away, i Cor. 13, 8.
The latter, or ordinary miniflers, were flated paf- tors, who laboured in word and doctrine, for the edification of the churches, over which they were made overfeers. Thefe appear not to have generally pofTefTed miraculous powers. They were to prove their miniflerial authority by ordinary evi- dence ; as by a folemn feparation to their work before many witneiTes ; and, when occafion re- quired, by a recommendation from known miniflers or churches. This order of religious teachers is to continue in the church to the end of the world. Eph. iv. 11, 13.
All miniflers mud now appear in one or other of thefe characters. If they come as ordinary teach- ers, they are to exhibit the ordinary evidence of having been regularly approbated to their work, and of their good (landing in the church. If they come as extraordinary miniflers, pretending to be fupernaturally called to, and endued for their work, 1 and
126'
and hence claiming an authority to go every where preaching the word, let them produce the great, divine feal of their high commiffion by incontefti- ble miracles. Otherwise we are not to receive them, nor bid them, God fpeed.
It may be afked, * What if a minifter regularly ordained, mould afterwards become grofsly heret- ical, negligent or immoral ? Is he not to be called afalfe teacher ? — Rather perhaps he is to be call- ed a corrupt, wicked, or flothful fervant. His guilt is not a diforderly intrufion into office, but a crim- inal perverfion of, and unfaithfulnefs in his office. He is not, however, by any means to be tolerated in his wickeduefs ; but the meafures prefcribed in the gofpel are to be applied for his amendment. In cafe of contumacy, or incorrigiblenefs, he is to be rejected by a publick fentence of the elders of churches. Until trial and conviction he is in regu- lar (landing for no man is to be condemned without trial. If in the introduction of minifters gofpel or- der is obferved, as it generally is in our {landing churches, there is little danger, that one grofsly vi- cious, or efTentially erroneous, will long be retained in office, becaufe he will be fubjeft to trial and ccn- fure. But if every man may, at pleafure, aflumc the miniflerial office, and run whither he lifts ; and people will countenance the affumption, by attend- ing his miniftrations, wherever lie goes, there can be no fecurity. For who (hall difplace from officd the man who claims an independent right to affumc and retain it ? He will fubmit to no judicature ; he will fpurn every admonition and cenfurc ; diicard- ed in one place, he will carry his impofitions to another ; and none knows where the mifchief will
end.
127
cud. Thofc Chriftiarns, who imprudently follow and encourage vagrant, unknown, unrecomraendcd teachers, do their utmofl to fubvert the difcipline of the churches, and to break down the barriers which the gofpel has placed againil the irruption of igno- rance, err our and vice. ChrijVsJheep will not fol- low aftranger ; they will flee from him ', for tJjey know not the voice oj ji rangers.
J^^^^-^^^S^^^^f^^f-^c^—-
DISCOURSE II.
I PROCEED now to point out to you fome other marks of falfe teachers. On thefe I fhall not have occafion greatly to enlarge.
II. Our Saviour tells us, Falfe prophets come in /beep's clothing, bat inwardly they are ravening ice foes. Ye fhall know them by their fruits.'
They will make great profejjiom, and perhaps, for a while, exhibit fome plaufible appearance of hu-_ mility, peaceableneis, meeknefs, and indifference to the world. They will declare, that they have no party defigns, finiiler views, orfeliifli aims ; that they are only felicitous to promoteyourfpiritual & eternal inter-eft ; while their real intention is to divide, fcat- ter & devour you. You may poffibly be deceired at fir (I by their fair pretentions, & be carried away by their diflimulation. But obferve them careful- ly, & you will foon be undeceived. Suppofe, they fhould meet with oppolhien, or provocation, or be
difappointed
128
difappointed in their views ; then fee whether they retain the lamb-like gentlenefs of which they boafted. No : You may now begin to difcern the wolf ; Now they betray their pride, paflion and refent- raent : Now they break you into parties, that they may catch fome of you. They may appear modeft and diffident at firfl ; but fuppofe, they mould find their influence increafed by the number of their ad- herents and followers ; then fee whether they are fo moderate in their views ; whether they are con- tent with fmall things ? No : They will leap into one fold and another for new prey. A good fhep- herd attends to his own proper charge : The wolf is a rapacious, prowling animal : Not fatisfied with taking out of one flock, he roams from flock to flock, and can never have enough.
III. Falfe teachers bring in dangerous herefies privily, unawares, and with cunning craftinefs. Eph. iv. 14. 2 Peter, ii. 1. Jude iv.
It is not every erroneous doftrine that marks one to be an impoftor. In this imperfect ftate an en- tire uniformity of fentiment is not to be expected. In thofe differences of opinion which affect not the eifence of religion, candour and forbearance will take place among the virtuous and difcerning. Er- rours, which mar the fubflance, and defeat the de- fign of the gofpel, ought to awaken the concern, and warm the zeal of a Chriftian. To draw with precifion the line, and mark with exa&nefs the boundaries between thefe different kinds of errours, will undoubtedly be a matter of difficulty. Though the extremes may be glaring, yet where the ihades mingle, it is a nice eye that can difcriminate. But whatever may be the errours taught, craft & artifice
in
I 29
in teaching them arc always to be condemned. —
The man who affum'es the character of a Chn teacher, will not openly avow doctrines directly and palpably ilib; 4 the gofpel ; for among
Chriftians, thefe doctrine^, in their naked and 1111- difguifed form, will not be received. The facrcd writers, therefore, make a fubtil and infidious man- ner of propagating errours, no lefs than the errours themfclves, a mark of impoftors. Of the artifice with which they proceed the gofpel has given us warning. They ufually begin with fmaller er- rours, and gradually advance to greater. They open not themfclves fully at once, but with caution and referve. They will not alarm you by calling in queftion the grand principles and doctrines of re- ligion : They rather choofe to lead you on gently, flep by ftep, from one errour to another. The a- poftle tells Timothy, c Evil men and feducers wax worfe and worfe, deceiving and being deceived.' In this refpect he compares them to the firft de- ceiver. 2 Cor. x. Speaking of falfe apoftles, he fays, ? They are deceitful workers, transforming themfclves into the apoilles of Chrift, and into minifters of righteoufnefs, even as Satan himfelf was transformed into an angel of light.' He exprefTeth his concern for the Corinthian?, c Led, as the fer- pent beguiled Eve through his fubtiky, fo their minds mould be corrupted from the iimplicity, that is in Chrift/ The ferpent beguiled Eve, not by bold and direct temptations, but by fly and artful enticements. He fir ft enquires, whether God had forbidden the ufe of every tree. When he was told, that there was a grant of all the trees except mcy which wai guarded with a threatening of
death
i3o
death ; he replies, c Ye fhall not furely die.' There is not that danger, which you apprehend. He next intimates fome peculiar advantage in eat- ing of this particular tree. ' Your eyes fhall be opened, and ye fhall be as gods, knowing good and evil/ Probably he infinuates, that he was an angel of light fent from heaven to take off the re- ftraint. Thus, by degrees feduced, the woman call a longing eye on the fruit : The fight inflam- ed her defire : This, concurring with his fuggefl- ions, prevailed on her to take and eat.
In like manner the minifters of Satan are cautious not to flartle men at firft by too bold fuggeftions. They will affect, in mod points, to conform to the minifters of righteoufnefs ; to think as they think, or not greatly to differ from them ; and only to ferve the fame important intereft, which they are ferving. They will fuit themfelves to all compa- nies ; and, as the apoftle fays, c their word will be yea, and nay ;} one thing or another, juft according to the humours and notions of the people they con- verfe with ; until, they imagine, they have gained their confidence, and feduced them fo far, that it is impofliblc to renew them again to repentance : Then they will venture more boldly to difcover their fentiments and open their defigns.
IV. Unruly and vain talkers and deceivers are defcribed as privately tampering with people of lefs knowledge and difcernment, becaufe thefe are more eafily deluded.
They choofe not, in the firfl inflance, to prac- tife on thofe who are of full age, and who, by rea- fon of ufe, have their fenfes exercifed to difcern both good and evil. They fhun fuch, left their de- figns
figns fliould be difcovcrcd, and their crrours ex- pofed. They rather attempt to feduce the young, the weak, the wavering, the dilcontented ; that, having gained thefe, they may more eafily make impreflions on the minds of thofe who are connect- cd with them. The old ferpent (irft applied to Eve, whom having feduced, he by her influence drew the man into difobedience. The fame artifice is practiced (till. Corrupt teachers, we are told, * beguile unftablc fouls ;' and 'creep into houfes and lead cdsptivc filly women, laden v ith fins, and Jed away with divers lufts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the troth ;' thus c they fubvert whole houfes, teaching things, which they ought not, for filthy lucre's fake.' In this fenfe they are faid c to follow the way, and to hold the doctrine of Balaam,' who taught Balak to cad a (tumbling-block before the children of Ifrael by feducing them to marry the daughters of Moab, that by this idolatrous connexion, they might be enticed to eat things facrificed to idols. 2 Peter, 2, 14, 15. — 2 Tim. iii. 6. — Titus, i. 11. — and Rev. ii. 14, compared with Numb. xxv. 1, 2.
V. Another mark of falfe teachers is an implac- able malignity againft the (landing, regular miniflers of the gofpel.
Read the epiftle of Jude, and Paul's epiftle to the Corinthians and Galatians, and you will fee this fpirit to be ch ar after i (lick of them. They not only cenfure fome unworthy characters, but declaim againft the whole order, and fpare no pains to in- fufe into people's minds prejudices againft all that belong to it. Jude fays of thofe ungodly men, who, in his day, had crept in unawares j 4 They fpeak
evil
132
evil of things, which they know not' — flander min- ifters and churches, with which they are utterly unacquainted. ' They defpife dominion and fpeak evil of dignities.' The falfe apoltles reproached Paul, not only as a man of diminutive figure and contemptible fpeech, but as one that was carnal, walked after the flcfh, and preached only for wa- ges. But they commended themfelves, as making the gofpel free, and as preaching only from love to fouls, without a defire of worldly gain. And what was their aim ? — The apoftle tells us ; and he was well acquainted with them. i They zealoufly affect you, but not well : Yea, they, would exclude us, that ye may affect them.' Gal. iv. 1 7. marg. Their hypocritical pretenfions of making the gofpel with. out charge, and their perpetual clamour againft Paul for taking wages of the churches, were the rea- lbns, why he fo often and fo largely dated and proved the right of mini iters to live by the gofpel, and the obligation of Chriftians to fupport them. But while he claimed a right to a liberal mainte- nance, he tells the Corinthians, he had waved this right among them, taking wages of other churches to do them fervice.' And this he did, on charita- ble and prudential reafons, c that he might cut off occafion from the falfe apoftles, who defired occa- fion, that wherein they gloried, they might be found even as he.* They glorUcl, as falfe teachers mod commonly do, in making the gofpel free : But Paul fays, They are ' deceitful workers.' He acted o- penly and without difguife. He afferted his right, but remitted the exercife of it in Corinth, 'i were vain talkers and deceivers ; they denied the right, and yet exercifed it in a furreptitious man*
ner.
J33
ncr. W^hile they gloried in preaching freely, they actually took of the Corinthians lo extravagantly, that they even ' deviated them, and brought them into bondage.1 And yet tin . e ionic in Co*
riiuh, who, while they joined in the clamour a- .ilt Paul as an hireling, would patiently bear any thing, and every thing from theic deceivers. c Have I committed an offence, lays he, becaufe 1 preached to you the gofpel of God freely ?' — c But ye fuller fools gladly ; for ye fuller, if a man bring you into bondage ; if a man devour you ; if a man lake of you ; if a man exalt himfelf ; if a man fmite you on the face.' But how did thefe deceit- ful workers carry on their defign of taking wages, while they pretended to have none ? It feems they employed accomplices to take, or rather extort gifts for them : And then, to cover the artifice more deeply, and prevent a fufpicion of their privity, they accufed Paul of this duplicity. But he utterly difavows it, and appeals to the Corinthians for the falfity of the charge. He fays, c I was not burden- fome to you ; — for I feek not yours, but you — very gladly will I fpend and be fpent for you.' — * But be it fo ; I did not burden you, yet being crafty, I caught you with guile.' i. e. Thefe de- ceitful workers, confeious of their own artifice, will fay, 'Though I did not burden you myfelf, yet I craftily employed others to take of you for me.' He defpifes the infinuation. ' Did I make a gain of you by any of them whom I fent to you ? I defired Titus, and with him I fent a brother. Did Titus make a gain of you ? Walked we not in the fame fpirit, and in the fame fteps ?' Paul ' renounced the hidden things of difhonefly, not walking M in
J34
in craftinefs. — ' But thcfe deceivers, * through covetoufnefs, with feigned words made merchan- dize of their hearers.' i Cor. ix. and 2 Cor. x. and feq. and 2 Peter, ii. 3.
This leads me to notice another mark which the apofUe mentions.
VI. This fort of teachers are guided by no line, and confined to no meafure ; but run from place to place, enter into other men's labours, and build on other men's foundation.
Wherever the apoftles came preaching the gof- pel, they exhibited full evidence, as of their gene- ral commiftion, fo of their particular warrant to preach in that place. When any fought a proof of Chrift fpeaking in Paul, he was able to anfwer, ' The figns of an apoflle have been wrought among you — and we have been thoroughly made manifeft among you in all things.' He fays to the Corin- thians, ' We dare not make ourfelves of the num- ber, nor compare ourfelves with fome who com- mend themfelves— We dare not imitate the arro- gance and oflentation of your falfe apoftles. ' We will not boafl of things without our meafure, but according to the meafure of the rule which God hath diflributed to us, a meafure to reach even unto you. For we ftretch not ourfelves beyond, nor boaft of things without our meafure, that is, of other men's labours : But wc have hope,when your faith is increaied, that wc (hall be enlarged by you, according to our rule, to preach the gofpel in the regions beyond you ; and not to boafl, in another man's line, of things made ready to our hand.' 2 Cor. x. 1 2—16. How different was Paul's con- duct from that of thcfe falfe apoftles ? They could
ftiew
,
JO
fliew nocommiflioii to preach to the Corinthians* nor indeed any where elle : But he could manifeft :oftolick commiilion, and his particular war- rant to preach in Corinth ; for when he was or- dained to preach to the Gentiles, a meafure was al- igned him which included Achaia. They moved by no line, bv no rule, but leaped from one church to another : He went on orderly in preaching the gofpel and planting churches among the Gentiles, from Judea through all the interjacent provinces,un- til he came to Corinth ; and he hoped dill to pro- ceed farther according to his line. They only came and perverted thofe churches, where the faith had been already preached, and fo could only boaft of things made ready to their hands ; inlfead of founding churches, they only formed feels out of churches already founded : He preached the gof- pel where no other apoftle had before been em- ployed ; and erected churches, not as feparate par- ties, but only as provinces of Child's general king- dom, that there might be no fchifm in the body. He fpeaks to the fame purpofe in his letter to the Romans. ' I will not dare to fpeak of,' or aflame tomyfelf, ' any of thofe things, which Chrift hath not wrought by me.' — c Yea, fo have I ifrived to preach the gofpel, not where Chriil is named, left I fhould build on another man's foundation. Rom. :;v. 1 8, 20.
Miniiiers, you fee, are to have their refpeelive lines and meafures, within which they mult move. They are not to be c clouds without water, driven about with wind* in every direction : but clouds fraught with heavenly treafures, and advancing in a Ready courfe over the thirfly ground. 4 Their
doctrine
doctrine fliould drop as the rain, and diilil as the dew, as the fmall rain, on the tender herb, and the fliowers on the grafs.' They are not to be c wan- dering (tars/ but ftars confined in their appointed orbits. They are not to crofs each other's lines, and interfere in their motions ; but, like the heav- enly fyftem, to run, each in his proper circuit, a- round the common centre. They are to contri- bute, each in his fphere, to the general order and harmony. They are to be fellow-workers to the kingdom of God. Paul charges the elders of the church, that they take heed to the flock, over which the Holy Ghoft has made them overfeers, to feed the church of God.' Acts xx. 1 8. The cau- tion given by Peter, c Be ye not bufy-bodies in other men's matters/ is peculiarly applicable to, and perhaps efpecially intended for minifters, whom he particularly addreffes in the precedent and fub- fequent verfes. The original phrafe literally im- ports, Let none of you— ad as a bijhop in another9 s province* I Peter, iv. 15. It is a plain mark of a falfe teacher, to enter upon, and pull dq,wn other men's works, that he may build on their ground : To flretch himfelf beyond his meafare, or to move without any line of direction. In this re fpecl Peter and Jude compare the corrupt teachers, in that day, to clouds hurled about with a temped — to raging waves of the fea — to floating meteors, of ftrong, but tranfient glare, to which is referved the black- nefs of darknefs forever.* VII.
* The prophet Tfaiah, chap, xxx, verfe ao, fays, " Thine eyes {ball fee thy teacbtr*. This is a blcfling peculiarly promifed to the church of Jfracl, after {he had furmoui.ted her grtatcft trials; ar.d therefore mofi properly belongs to the fpiritual Ifrael, or gofpcl- church ; whofe teachers (hould not dwell, like the Levites, in fcp-
aratc
<;7
VII. They arc confidcred by the ap< fulic teachers, who caufe diviiions and offences in
the churches of Chrift.
The gofpel every where inculcates peace and unity among Chriftians ; and rcprefents reparations
and
aratc cities but in the midft of her, fo that flic mi m, be
converfant with them, know their ability and fidelity in their office, ha»e their example before her eyes, and enjoy their prefcr.ee and eounfels in all her troubles. Such is evidently the deligu of the gof- pel-miniitry. Accordingly, except a few evangelifb, who were ex- traordinary officers, and who had a work in fome refpicls, peculiar to themfc'.vcs, the ChrifHan churches, in the fir ft ages, had their knvi fettled bifhops, who refidcd, eacli in the churcli
of which he wa> maJe overfcer. Such a man was elder or loilhop, of this church, andfuch a man of another. Every congregation had its own paftor ; every large city had its body of pallors. Ciiriftians enjoyed a perfonal acquaintance with their minifter ; fully knew his f'airh, doctrine, manner of life, and had accefs to bin] for advice on all occafiom ; and he, Handing in a fpecial and endearing rela- tion to them, naturally cared for their fUte. The evidence of this appears in all parts of the a<Sts and the cpiftles. The churck of Eph- cfitt had her own overfeers, fet apart, by the Holy Ghofl, for her . |] :ce, to which they were commanded to take heed.
Phc apofllea ordained elders in every church. Titus was left in :, that he might ordain elders in ev/ry city , and fet in order lich were wanting. The churches in Afia had ench her did met an Jt*', or f>a/?or} to whom John delivers a meffage from Chrifr, to be communicated to the churches. Thefe obfervations prove, that a man who choofes to officiate as a preacher, where he i< un- known ; who wand ':=. from town to town, and from ftate to ftate, keeping his external call and qualifications out of fight, carries a r-ioft glaring mark of a fahe teacher. And whatever pretentions he -s of zeal for Chrift, and love to fouls, he is to be regarded i the fame difrruft, at a rambling mountebank, who profrfles a •.latural lie i li to heal men's difeafes, or predict their foi tunes, tries, who are fixed in no one place ; whoexhibit no authentick credentials; who preach not on the inftituted day, in the dated place, under the patronage of fr.ttled miuiftcrs ; but in contempt of all order, creep into corners, call private lectures, endeavour to tafcioate their hearers with the charms of novelty, and, before they can well he known, flee away, and give place to a fucctiTor of the fame defcriptioo, come not from the good Shepherd ; but arethofe thieves and robbfrs, wiio come to fteal and defrroy, and of whom the great Shepherd has warned u* to beware. To finch the porter not open ; and fuchthe fheep may not hear nor follow."
Letter to the Author from a Fr'und.
m
*3*
and party attachments, as an evidence that they are carnal. Errours and corruptions in a church are no reafon, why we mould withdraw from her com- munion, until they plainly appear to be fundament- al and incurable ; they are rather a reafon, why we mould be watchful to reform the things that are amifs, and to ftrengthen the things that remain. There can fcarcely be a more (hiking indication of hypocrify and carnality in a profeiTor of religion, than his feparating from the communion of a church, on pretence of corruptions or ungodly members in it, when he himfelf has never made one fmgle at- tempt to purge out the corruptions, or to reclaim or remove the ungodly members.
One great end of the iniiitution of churches, and of focial worfliip in them, is the promotion of peace, harmony and love. Thofe teachers, therefore, whofe object is to caufe divisions in churches, have nothing of the fpirit of the gofpel, but are manifeft- ly purfuing a defign in direct oppofition to it. Jude, clefcribing the importers who had fecretly crept in among Chrirtians, fays, ' Thefe are they who fep- arate themfelves, fenfual, having not the fpirit. Verfe 19. No words can be more plain and des- criptive, than thofe of St. Paul. • Mark them who caufe divifions and offences, contrary to the doctrine which ye have received, and avoid them. For they that are fuch ferve not the Lord Jefus Chrirt , but their own belly ; and with good words and fair fpeeches deceive the hearts of the fimple.' Rom. xvi. 17,18. They deceive hyfairjpeeclxs. They profefs uncommon ianctity, high afturance, extraor- dinary zeal, and immediate communication from the Spirit, As the aportle fays, ' they commend and
exalt
39
exalt theml'elves, and meafurc themfelvcs by them- . and compare themfelvcs among themfelves, as if they were perfect and inf.dlible ftandards. — They juliify their reparations by prctenfions, that rs are not fpiriiual enough for their commun- ion— they would form a pure church. The lan- guage of their conduct is, 'Stand by yourfelvcs, come not near, for we are holier than you.' But what fays the God of peace and purity ? ' Thefc are a fmoke in my nofe ; a fire that burnetii all the day.' Ifaiah Ixv. 5.
The promoters of divilions, the better to accom- plifh their wicked purpofes, are watchful to take advantage of any unhappy circumftance in a church ; fitch as an accidental contention, the dis- cipline of an offending member, the ficknefs or re- moval, the death or the temporary abfence of the dated paftor : As the wolf leaps into the fold, when the fliepherd is withdrawn, or a gap is opened. Paul, who knew their craft better than he wifhed, fays to the elders at Ephefus, c I know that after my departure^ fhall grievous wolves enter in among you, not fparing the flock. Alfo of your own feFves (hall men arife, fpeaking perverfe things to draw away difciplcs after them? A els 20, 29, 30. They are induftrious to make difciples : But to whom ? — To Chrift ? No, but to themfelves. It is with this view that they ramble from fold to fold, and enter into other men's flocks. So Chrift fays to the fcribes, ' Ye compafs fea and land to make one profelyte ;' leaving no art untried for that end. But what is their intention ? Is it that their profelyte may be more devoted to God ? No : It is that he mav be attached to them, and fo
add
140
add to their importance. c When he is made, fays Chrift, ye make him more the child of hell than yourfelves.' Your corrupt flatteries only harden him m his wickednefs. Matth. xxiii. 15. So Jude fays of them, ' They have men's perfons in admira- tion becaufe of advantage ;.' efteeming and ap- plauding this and that man, not on account of his real virtue and worth, but only on account of his readinefs to ferve their defrgns. 6 No, no,' they will tell you, c we have no fuch unworthy aims : But the churches are fallen from the gofpel purity. And we arepreffed in fpirit to teftify againil them ; we would by all means fave fome.' Is this their in- tention ? Why then climb they over the walls, in- ftead of entering by the door ? Why creep they in unawares, inftead of walking upright ? Why ap- ply they not to the paftors of churches, to convince them of, and reclaim them from the fuppofed er- rours and corruptions ? Would not this be the fur- eft and directeft way to reform corrupt and errone- ous churches ? This is the way that Chrift has point- ed out. When John was fent to the degenerate churches of Afia, did he neglect the flated paftor, and addrefs the people without his' knowledge ? Did he attempt to difafTect them to, and detach them from his miniftry ? Did he caufe divifions and reparations in order to make one pure church out of feven corrupt ones r No : John's letters are di- rected immediately to the angel, or pa/lcr of each church, to be by him communicated to the people. Thus the fpirit fpakc to the churches. John acted by command of Chrifl. c To the angel of the church write' — ' Thefe things faith the Son of God* — 'He that hath an ear let him hear, what the fpirit faith to the churches ? The churches
were
,
i4i
were to hear what was (poken ia this way : But they were not to hear every man who came in the garb of a teacher, and who, by his high preten- lions to inspiration, fubvertcd the order which Chi ilt had fettled. There were enough fuch anion;; them. Therefore one church is reproved, becaufe ihe Aif- fered them to teach, who faliely called thcmfelvcs prophets : And another is commended, becaufe ihe could not bear them that were evil ; and tried them, whofaid, they were apoltles, and were not ; and found them liars.
It is a certain mark ofafalfe teacher, if under pretence of reforming churches, hecaufes divifions in them. There were corruptions in mod of the Afiatick churches : In fome of them there were but few members, who had not defiled their gar- ments. And what were thefe few to do ? — With- draw, left they fhould be infected with the filthy garments of their brethren ? — No : But to watch and keep their own garments, to fave others with fear, and encourage the purity which remained. Rev. ii. and iii. chapters.
VIII. Falfe teachers ufually attend more to the form, than to the power of godlinefs.
The preaching of the apoftles was rational, folid, and convincing. It tended to make men wife and good, humble and holy, pious and benevolent — They taught that, ' the kingdom of God was not meat and drink, but righteoufnefs and peace and joy in the Holy Ghoft'— -that < in Chrift neither circumcilion, nor uncircumciiion availed ; but a new creature, keeping the commandments of God, and faith working by love.' Their doctrine was ac- cording to godlinefs. Impoftors rather lay weight
on
142
on certain diitinguifhing tenets and ufages of their own ; on particular modes and forms ; on the means and inftruments of religion ; on things fuit- ed to flrike the paflions and captivate the affec- tions. With men of this character, converfion, though perhaps much talked of, is only coming over to their feci, and adopting their peculiar fenti- ments and forms. When they gain profelytes to their party, they boafl the number o^ their con- verts ; and urge their fuccefs, as an evidence that God is with them. The blind, hypocritical guides, fo often reproved by our Saviour, made religion to confid more intything mint, anife and cummin, in long and noify prayers, and frequent fafts, than in righteoufnefs, mercy, faith and the love of God. Matth. xxiii. Thofe vagrants, who went out from the apoftles, becaufe they were not of them, and who fubverted the fouls of the believers, taught, that except men were circumcifed, and ob- ferved the ceremonies of the law, they could not be fdved. Acts xv. The falfe apodles in Corinth, and evil workers in Philippi, had confidence in the flefh, in external rites and forms ; they gloried that they were Hebrews, Israelites, and the feed of A- braham. 2 Cor. xi. Phil. iii. 2, 3, 4. The per- vertersofthe gofpel in Galatia turned their hear- ers to weak and beggarly elements, and taught them to obferve days and months, times, and years. Gal. iv. 9, 10. The unruly and vain talkers and deceivers in Ephefas and in Crete, who crept into liouies, and fubverted whole families, had only a form of godlinefs ; they denied the power of it. They fought to pleafe fuch as could not endure found doctrine- and to gratify their itching ears.
they
They humoured the difpofition of thole, \;ho, af- ter their own lufls, heaped to themfelves teachers ; they amufed them with fables, inftead of edifying them with found doctrine, i Tim. iii. and iv. chap- ters. Titus i. 10, li.
The apoftles of Chrift ufed great plainnefs of fpeech ; by manifeftation of the truth commended themfelves to every man's confeience ; warned and taught every man in all wifdom, that they might prefent every man perfect in Chrift Jems. The falfe apoftles aimed only to move the paflions, pleafe the fancy and excice the admiration of their hearers. c They allured them with great, fuelling words of vanity ;' with words tending both to ex- alt themfelves, and fwell the pride and felf-conli- dence of their deluded admirers. They might boaft of their numerous converts ; but converts made only by the agitation of the paffions, without inftruction of mind or change of temper, are but as ' trees whefe fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots/
The ancient Jews, in their corrupted ftate, call- ed frequent afiemblks, appointed folemn meetings, and multiplied their offerings ; they fought God daily, diked of him the ordinances of juftice and took delight in approaching to him, as a nation that did righteoufnefs and foribok not the ordinances of their God. But God's inftituted fabbath and worfhip was no delight to them. They would wor- fhip God in any time or manner, except that which he had prefcribed. The prophet is therefore di- rected to cry aloud againft them, and teach them their tranfgreilion. Ilaiah lviii.
However zealous we are to heap to ourfelves
teachers
144
teachers, and multiply to ourfelves feafons of wor- jQiip, if we neglect the worfhip of God on the day and in the place, which he has appointed, our re- ligion is but an empty form. Such a perverfion of God's ordinances proceeds not from fpirkual zeal, but from worldly lufr.
IX. This fort of teachers are defcribed as op- pofing fubordination under infidious pretentions of liberty.
The apoflle cautions the Ephefians, that ' they be not carried away — by the flight of men and cun- ning craftinefs, by which they lie in wait to deceive.' Chap. iv. 14. He alludes to the fraudful dexteri- ty of practifed gamefters m managing a die, or cube, as the word fignifles, which they will throw with fuch a flight as to make the fide come up which they wifli. Much fo crafty deceivers tofs men a- bout by addreffing their feelings, and plying them with fu bj efts fui ted to agitate their paflions. And, for this fpiritual legerdemain, they feldom find a more handy inflrument, than the form of liberty. Their firfl object is to unfettle people's minds from the doctrine and order of the gofpel, by infmuating, that their underftandings have been impofed on, and their confciences enflaved, and it is time to alTert their liberty. If they can only fet men afloat, they hope to take the direction of them into their own hands. This game the devil too fuccefsfully played with our progenitors in Eden. He infmuated, that they were held in ignorance and blind obedience ; and if they would throw off the reftraint, their eyes would be opened. The mini iters of Satan ufe the fame artifice. Corah would perfuade the Jews, that they were led about blindfold by Moies,and pri eft-rid- den
r45
den by the Handing order. Peter and Jude def- cribe feducers, as ' defpifing government,' and en- deavouring, under pretence of liberty, to level all diitin&ions : As c murmurers and complainers ; pre- lumptuous and felf- willed ; and as fporting in their deceptions :' As headftrong in their ways, and Incapable of being mended by eouniel, or reclaim- ed on.* Paul gives the fame account of them in his fe- cond letter to Timothv. He fays, ' Perilous times {hall come, for men mall be lovers of their own- felveSj covetous,' teaching things which they ought not for filthy lucre's fake ; ' proud, and boallcrs' of their own fuperior fanctity ; ' evil fpeakers and difobedient to parents' under pretence of being more godly than they ; ' unthankful, unholy, with- out natural ailection, covenant breakers,' or difre- garding the covenant obligations which they are un- der
* Peter mentions tin* among other marks of falfc teachers, that in their fcftivals or affemblies, they /ported thcmfelves luitb their ottn deceii- )r with certain devices to deceive their followers ; thus beguilitfe fouls. Irencus, aChriflian father, who wrote foon afttr the apoftles, has mentioned a particular device, which Peter is here (uppofed to allude to. Speaking of thefe hereticks, he fays, ' They made it their cuftom, in their feftivals, fcrtibus ludere, to play with lots.' How thefe lot?, were applied, Peter may be fuppofed to in- timate, when he fays, their /parting was to deceive and iegvile, that they might better exercift their envetuus practices. It is probable that thefe deceivers, pretending, that a lot drawn in a particular man- ner was a divine decifion, took upon them thus to direc?c men's con- duct, and to predict their deftinv. Hence it appears that the impi- ous p:acaicc, lately known among us, of difcovering men's fplritual ftate by a lottery ^ is not fo novel, as fomc have imagined. Some- thing fimilar to it fcems to have been in ufe among thofe religious gamefters who vexed the church in, and foon after the apoftlcs' times. But the ufe of parages of facred writ in a way of lottery, is a fpecies of impiety probably unknown to the ancients. This im- provement on the old plan medern gamefters may doubtlefs appro- priate.
N
146
der to the church of God ; c falfe accufers, inconti- nent/ or much given to luft ; ' fierce' and malig- nant in their tempers ; ' heady and high-minded :' And yet afluming ' a form of godlinefs !' 6 Of this fort are they who creep into houfes, to lead the fitnple captive. From fuch turn away.' What is ihe liberty, which fuch goodly patrons procure ? Tlk apoftle calls it captivity, oxfubjeclion to divers hifts. It is a liberty, which begins in licentiouf- nefs and ends in bondage. Peter fays, ' They al- lure through the 1 lifts of the rlefh thofe who had elcaped from them that live in errour. While they promife them liberty, they themfelves are the fervants of corruption ; for of whom a man is over- come, of the fame he is brought into bondage.' 2 epiflle, ii. 18, 19. They relax the ftricl: precepts of the gofpel, preach doctrines fuited to men's cor- rupt inclinations ; flatter their fpiritual pride, and bolfter them up with falfe hopes by haltily pro- nouncing them in a (late of grace. Thus deliver- ing them from the reftraints of fear, they plunge them into more abfolute bondage to their lulls, and make their laft ftate worfe than the firfh
1 would obferve once more.
X. Falfe teachers corrupt the word of God and handle it deceitfully. In oppoiition to them Paul f ivs, ' We are not as many, who corrupt the word of God. We have renounced the hidden things .honefly — not handling the word of God de- My — * 2 Cor. ii. 17 — and iv. 2. One com- mon way in which they corrupt the word is, by ' turning the truth into fables,' or by rejecting the plain, literal meaning of fcripturcfor the fake of a myftical, allegorical fenfe, which they abfurdly call
the
fpiritual (cnic.9 Thus ihey make (lie v Bible uncertain, and are at liberty to give i text a fanciful turn, which bcit ferves their own purpofe, or pleafes the humour of their hearers.
There were, in the apoftles' clays, fome of this fantaftick complexion. They denied the literal in- carnation, death and refurreclion of Chrift ; and affirmed that his body was only fpectral, and his death and refurreetum only illufive. They pro- felTed high perfection in holinefs, abfolute freedom from fin, clear difcernraent of fpiritual things, un- common illuminations from God. It is manifeft, that theepillle of Jude, and the firfi: cpifllc of John, were written in oppofition to thefe enthufiaflick, myftical religionifts. Jude calls them c dreamers;' men whofe religious notions were as wild and in- coherent, as the fports of imagination in a dream.
Some deiltical wrriters have taken this method to fubvertthe credit of revelation : and the fame arti- fice others have ufed to propagate their ii rational and unfcriptnral opinions.
Nothing can be more dangerous than this way of interpreting fcripture. if we deny irs literal meaning, and conceive the real fenfe to be hidden in myfteries, allegories and fanciful allufious, we en- tirely deilroy its life : And then, in our inquiries af- ter truth and duty, what rule {hall we find to us? Everyman's fancy mull be his guide, v. like an ignis fatuus, will miflead the wandering pil- grim into bogs and moraffes of errour, and finally ingulph him in everlafting ruin.
I have now laid before you fome cA the diilin- guifhing characters of falfe teachers ; and you will coniider and remember, that they are charact-
148
ers drawn, not by me, but by the facred fcriptures. Where they apply, let them apply. If you per- ceive that you have hitherto been under falfe teach- ers, it is time to renounce them and feek others : If you find otherwifc, acl: according! v. Teachers you are to have ; but let them be gcfpel ones. You mud judge for yourfelves ; but if you judge wrong, it is at your peril. c Strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leads to life, and few there be that find it : Therefore beware of falfe prophets.' Some feem to think it pretty indiffer- ent whom they follow. If it be fo, tell me why our divine Lord, and all his apofUes, have taken fo much care to guard you againfl impoftors and in- truders ; and why they have given you fuch per- petual cautions againfl them ?
If you fufpect, that the doctrines of religion be- lieved by your fathers, and the order of the church- es, and the manner of introducing and fupporting publick teachers, which have generally obtained in the land, are unfcriptural and deftruclive ; if you imagine, that the churches in the country have been no better than fynagogucs of Satan ; that God has never owned them as his churches, nor bleffed the word and ordinances adminiftered in them ; if you fuppofe, that your fathers have been only fools and hypocrites, and that you, grown better and vJfer, are bound as Chriftians, to encourage innovations tending to the fubverfion of thefe churches ; if thefe are your honcft fentiments, this only would 1 learn of you ; when did piety and virtue, peace and good order moft abound ? — In the days of our fath- ers ? — Or fince thefe fuppofed improvements have taken place ?
There
There are Tome things in religion, which all mull allow to be great and eflential ; iiicli 98 jufticc, mercy, faith, bci peaceablenefe, conde-
fcen lion and humility. The promotion of th< one great end of focial worihip, and of all fpecial inftitutions. If we find, that any particular ions and ufagcs do in fact anfwcr this important endj there is a ftrong prefumption in favour of them. But if, on the contrary, as new fentiments and forms lake place, they who adopt them become more fwoin with pride and felf-confidence ; more apt to vilify, cenfurc and condemn their fellow Chriftians, and more induitrious to fow difcord among breth- ren ; this is a fhrewd fign, that their notions are not founded in truth : At lead it proves, that their religion has done than no good.
When a minilter warns his people againft inno- vations in doctrine and worihip, againfl Heaping to thcmfelves teachers, and countenancing divifionS in churches, it is common that they impute to him feme feltiili ekiign. Whatever opinion you may have of your own minifter's views in preaching the gofpel, yet if you only confider him as a man not diverted of the common feelings of humanity, you will know it is impoffible, that he mould be indif- ferent to your intereil. Can you imagine, that one, who has miniftered to you, and been o fant with you, in all circumftances of profperky and adverfity, from his youth for near thirty years ; who has fcen a great part of you prow up his miniitry j who has been foppoited by your lib- erality, and happy in your fteady friendship ; can you imagine, that fuch an one will not naturally care for you ? Can a ftranger, on a tranfient interview, n ha
have feelings like him ? Believe the things now of- fered to be warnings of love. — I know them to be words of truth.
It is a day, when the churches in the land are in danger ; and you are not exempt. Vice and im- morality prevail ; deflrucYrve errours make pro- greis ; the minds of many are unfettled from the truth, and from the order of the gofpel ; impor- tant doctrines are denied or called in queflion ; fa- cred inftitutions are treated with contempt ; and notions fubvernve of peace and virtue are zealouily propagated and eagerly embraced. But be not you carried about with divers and flrange doctrines. It is a good thing, that the heart be eftablilhed with grace.
The remarkable prevalence of errour and dis- order in churches, at this particular time, proceeds chiefly, I imagine, from two caufes. Finl, from the great carelefTnefs and flupidity of former years, in confequence of which, many have grown up un- principled in religion, and unfurniihed with doc- trinal knowledge, and fo are peculiarly expofed to the impofitions of defigning men, and utterly un- provided for their own defence. And, fecondly, from the natural operations of the late civil war, Though' it ultimately became a national, yet, in its origin and earliefl flages, it was properly a civil war. And fuch a war fddom fails to produce con- fuficn in religion. The reafon is obvious : In a civil war the fame people, divided into oppofite in- terefh, are filled with more violent animcii:^?, than thofe which take place between contending nations. The mutual jtalouiies and relent i ..eal and cngagednefs of party agaiaft party, aug- mented
13I
tncnted by mutual recriminations, proximity of fituation, and the remembrance of pad connexions, put the mind on the dretch, dilturb the nervous fydem, and throw the fpirits into an agitation near- ly bordering on enihufiairn. To aggravate the animoiity, religion is ufually introduced on both rides, and, contrary to her mild difpofition, is com- ptlled to bear a part in the keen and angry con- troverfy. In iuch a date of mind, people are pe- culiarly fufceptible of delufive impreflions ; conle- quently new teachers, who rife up, and labour to infufe into Chridians jealoufies of each other, or of their dated indruclors, are lidened to with avidity, and received with credulity. At fuch a time men become a much eailer prey to errour and feduction, than in thole calmer periods, when their fpirits are more ferene and difpafiionate. And Satan doubt- lei s takes advantage of the turbid fcene, more darkly to ply his temptations, and more fuccefsful- iy to fpread the confuiion.
You have need, my brethren, to be peculiarly on your guard. Beware, led, being led away with the errour of the wicked, you fall from your own deadfadnefs. Remember the facred obligations you are under as profefTors of religion. Let your faith in the truth of the gofpel be confirmed by thofe appearances in the date of the church, which the apcilles have/2/ exprefsly foretold and Jo plainly def- Attend on God's appointed ordinances, adhere clofely to his word, and ceafe to hear the indructions, which caufe to err from the words of knowledge. Let your minds be calm in all your •jus inquiries. Let not pailion, jealoufy or
party
party defign have any influence in forming your principles, or determining your pracl ice. Confider that religion is a matter of infinite impor- tance ; a bufinefs whofe coniequences are not ter- minated with time, but reach forward into all the depths of eternity. Treat it always as a mofl feri- ous concern ; prove all things \ hold fall that which is good.
' But why all this ado about falfe teachers,' fome will affc, c and why are minifters fo averfe to af- fiftance in bringing fouls to Chrift ? The hufband- man, if the harveft is great, rejoices to fee labour- ers come into his field/
My brethren, the field is not ours ; it is our Maf- ter's. Ye are God's hufbandry ; we are his Rew- ards, and rauft obey his orders. We rejoice in the help ofthofe, whom he approves and fends. — But if we filently admit intruders, who purloin the crop ; mar the corners of the field ; trample the grain, or bind the fheaves fo ilightly, that they can- not be gathered into his barn ; what fhall we do when he rifeth up ? and when he vifiteth, what fhall we anfwer him ?
4 But ought we not to attend on preaching, where we are beft edified !'
You are to fludy the things, which make for peace, and by which you may edify one another, You are to make increafe to the edifying of your- fclvesin love. You are not to be felfifh in your religion, any more than in your worldly bufmefs. You are to confider one another to provoke to love and good works. If under pretence of perfonal ed- ification, you purfue the meafures which tend to hinder the edification of your brethren, you act
contrary
fc
*53
Contrary to the cnara&er of Chriftians, as much as
:':s contrary to the chara&er of a good citi who manages his worldly bufmefs to the prejudice of his jur's intereft. Miftake not the emo-
tions of paffion, the flights of imagination or the oc- cafional flow of affection for godly edifying. You are then edified, when you increafe in knowledge, faith, purity, pcaceablenefs, and good works. If you break the bond of peace, and the unity of the ipirit, where is your edifying ? ' The church is to come together into one place' — ' to be builded to- gether for an habitation of God through the Spir- it.' The members of it are to be joined to the head by faith, and to each other by love. If they are divided and fcattered, they have not the Spirit of God, nor the temper of Chriftians, and there is no edifying.
c But what if we have a minifter, whofe preach- ing is not agreeable to us ; mud we hear him only ?'
If his preaching is not agreeable to the gofpel, you ought by no means to be content with it. But what will you do ? Will you filently withdraw, and leave your lefs difcerning brethren to periih under his corrupt miniftry ? Rather take gofpel-meafures to convince him ; or, if he is irreclaimable, to re- move him. You are not to icatter away promifcu- oufly from a bad minifter : but he is to be put a- way by a regular, publick cenfure of the churches, that a good one may fucceed. Thus union is to be preferved, and future impolltions prevented.
c But a minifter may preach the gofpel, and yet his manner not be entertaining. May we not pleaie felyes ?'
; fenfible: that hearers have a divcrfity of
tafles,
J54
taftes, as well as minivers a diverfity of gifts ; and among Chriftians of the fame fociety there mufl be fome condefcenfion. c Ye that are ftrong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not merely to pleafe yourfelves. Let every one of you pleafe his neighbour for his good to edification — ' Paul, A- pollos and Cephas preached the fame gofpel ; but in a different manner. Some were pleafed witti Paul's reafoning ; fome admired Apollos's elo- quence ; and fome were charmed with Peter's warmth of addrefs. So much might be expected. But when they ran into parties, and fome attached themfelves to this, and fome to that preacher in oppofition to each other, what faid Paul to them ? c Ye are carnal and walk as men.'
Itching ears indicate an ill humour in the blood ; and they who with fuch ears, heap to themfelves teachers i are faid to do it, not after the fpirit of God, but after their civn tufts : Not becaufe they love religion, but becaufe they cannot endure found doclrine. From fuch teachers as creep into houfes, or churches, to lead the fimple captive, you are to turn away. Thofe who caufe divifions you are to mark and avoid. Ycu are not to bid them, God fpeed.
* But furcly there is fuch a thing as a juRifiable reparation ; elfe why fays Paul to the Corinthians, Come ye out from dplofig them, and he ye f par ate V 2 Cor. " vi. 17.
Doubtlefs there is a juftifiable feparation ; jufl fuch an one as Paul recommends. And what is this ? — Not a feparation from the church ; for this direction >s given to the church ; and Paul could not mean, that the church ought to fep-
arate
»5i
arate from herfdf : But it is a reparation from the vices of the world, and from the idolatries of the heathens. So the ap< laihs it : * What fel-
lowship hath righteoufnefs with unrignteoufnefs ? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols ? And how were thefe Chriftfans to i rate ? The apoftle tells them : 6 Therefore let us clearife our/elves from all filthinefs of the flcfh and fpirit. — '
4 Is there no cafe then, in which Chriftians may feparate from a church ?'
There may be fuch a cafe. If a church is fo ef- fentially and irreclaimably corrupt, as to ceafe to be a church of Chrift, then, after we have in vain til- ed the gofpel-meafures already mentioned, for her reformation, we ought to withdraw from her com- munion. On this principle the proteftants feparat- ed from the church of Rome. She had introduc- ed idolatry in its external form, adopted another rule of faith befides the fcriptures, fet up another head and acknowledged other mediators befides Jefus Chrift, and fhe perfecuted even to prifon and death, thofe who teftilied againd her errours and laboured for her reformation. The apoftle John, Rev. xviii. 4. (peaking prophetically or the corrupt ftate of this church, fays, c I heard a voice from heaven, faying, Come out from ber9 my people, that ye be not partakers of her fins, and that ye receive net of her plagues.9 Or if a church requires fuch terms of communion, as we think unlawful, we can have no fellowship with her in divine ordinances, though we may hare a charitable opinion of her, as a true church. There is a material difference between a church's holding certain errours, and her making an adoption of thofe errours a term of communion to
others.
'56
others. But in this cafe fhe rather excludes us, than we feparate from her. Our fathers were, in this manner, driven from the church of England. They owned her as a church of Chrift, and would have continued in her communion, notwithstanding certain ufages, which they thought unfcriptural, if fhe would have difpenfed with their conformity tc her therein ; but as fhe made an entire conformity an indifpenfible term of communion, they thought themfelves bound to withdraw. It was not a fepa- ration on their part, but an exclnfion on her part. Or if a number of profefTed Chriftians fhould fepa- rate from a church with which they are in folemn covenant, and form themfelves into a fociety in op- pofition to their brethren, and thus caufe divifions and offences, however candidly we may think of them, as honed, but deluded Chriftians, we cannot have communion with them as a church, not only becaufe they renounce us, but alfo becaufe they combine to fubvert fuch as we fuppofe to be church- es of Chrift. We are to mark and avoid them. But fmaller errours in doctrine or difcipliue, when they are not made terms of communion, can never jnftify fuch afeparation as implies a renouncing of communion. Chrift owns and treats the churches in Afia, as his churches, though mod of them had greatly degenerated : And far from encouraging the purer chriftians to withdraw from the reft, he commands them to be watchful and ftrengthen the things that remain. And let no man dare to judge anddefpife thofe, whom God has received. Rom. xiv. 1,2.
An honeft zeal for the purity of churches, is to God an odour of a fwcct fmell ; but complaints
of
lS7
of corruption, Virhen they proceed from foleen and hv, . are a fmokein his noftrils. many, who
are loud in complaining of difordcrs in churches, in-
ad of attempting to reform them, only urge them
pretentions for feparating from their brethren,
with whom they are in folernn covenant, Inftead
adopting the animating language of the Levite:
to Ezra, Arife,for this matter bchngcth to thec ; ivi
7 wiii be with thee; they only (land and dif-
trgc fomc blind and random reproaches ; then
fade about, and withdraw. Thus they difcourage
the hearts of their brethren, flrengthen the hands
of evil doers, and provide a retreat for the guilty,
who would evade thejuft difcipline of the church.
How frequent is the cafe, that when an offending
brother is admonifhed for his fins, he defeats the in-
ftituted means of his repentance, and feeks refuge
from merited cenfure, by flying to fome other feci,
who make him welcome with all his fins, having his
perfon in admiration, becaufe of advantage.
To conclude, Be ye all like-minded one toward another according to Chriil Jems, that ye may, with one mind and one mouth, glorify God. Be not deceived by falfe appearances. The kingdom of God cometh not with outward fhow and oiienta- tion ; neither is there occafion to fay, Lo, here ; or, lo, there ; for it is a kingdom within men. True religion is peaceable, modefl and humble : Hypocrify is turbulent, noify and vain. Fajfe doc- trines, like dry winds, are hindering and unfieady, violent in their motions, and noxious in their effects. Thedo&rines of truth are like the gentle dews on the tender herb, and the ftiowers on the grafs. Be ye not carried about with every wind of doc-
O trine.
trine. The fincere Chriflian, rooted and grown up in Chrift, and eftablimed in the faith, with knowledge and judgment, like the deep-rooted oak, Hands firm and unmoved, whatever winds may blow ; while falle converts and unprincipled pro- feffors, like withered leaves, are caught in the gid- dy whirl, wafted around and made the fport of each wanton gull. Conclude not that there is mod true religion, where the flame of zeal feems to mount the higheft. Chaff and Hubble will fpring into a fudden blaze, which towers for a moment, and then expires : Solid fuel burns more moderate- ly, but yields a more Heady and genial heat. Paul, while a pharifee, was zealous to madnefs againfl the truth ; when he became a Chriflian, his zeal was as much changed as his object. You now fee no more of his former madnefs : His Chriflian zeal is a calm, rational, firm refolution, bearing him along in the courfe of duty, with equable motion, through every oppofition and danger. The fpirit of true religion is not in the florin, the earthquake or the fire, but in the Hill, fmall voice.
And now the God of all grace and wifdom grant, that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and all judgment, that ye may approve the things that are excellent, that ye may be fin- cere and without offence until the day of Chrift, and may be filled with the fruits of righteoufnefs, which are by Jefus Chrift, to the praife and glory of GOD.
AMEN.
APPENDIX.
jN the preceding pages we have en- deavoured to maintain this pofition, c That no man has a right to officiate, or ought to be received, in the character of a publick teacher of religion, un- til he has been approved and recommended by El- ders of Churches'
The fcriptural evidence in fupport of our portion, we hope cannot reafonably be controverted. But an objection will perhaps meet us from fuppofed nc- ceiTity, or hiftorical fact.
6 Many centuries,' it will be laid, c have elapf- ed, fince Chrift commiirioned his apoflles, and fincc rhey ordained their fucceffors : And how can \vc know, that the fucceflion has been continued with- out interruption ? And if there has been an inter- ruption, then there was a time, when ordination was taken up anew by private Chriftians. What then are all prefent ordinations, traced to their or- igin, but lay-ordinations ?'
This objection may deferve an anfwer.
The great queftion here mud be, What is the inditution of Chrid, and the apodolick ufage ? By thefe we mud be governed, and thefe mud not be fet aiide by imaginary neceflitv, or liippofilitious facts.
The gofpel-hidory confirms the pofition which
we
i6o
we have laid down. A miniftry in the church is undeniably infiituted by Chrift — introduction to the mim'ftry, in the apoftolick age, was by prayer and the impofition of the hands of elders — this ufage was invariably, and without a fmgle devia- tion, continued, as long as the facred hiftory af- fords any light — the directions concerning ordina- tions are given to bijhops, or elders, and to them only — no provifion is made for cafes of neceility, or for the renewal of the miniftry, if it fhould hap- pen to ceafe — we have an exprefs promife from Chrift, that he will fapport his church, and be with his minifters ahvays even to the end of the ivor Id* When we compare this promife with the inftitution of the miniftry, and the mode of intro- duction, which immediately followed, we think it can import no Ids, than that a regular miniftry, fhould never ceafe in the church, nor any neceility occur for departing from the infiituted manner of introduction. We have the inftitution, the prom- ife and the apoftolick practice in our favour ; and what more do we need ? The promife, fo emphat- ically expreiled, and fo clearly interpreted by fub- fequent ufage, muft, we think, be underftood as we have dated it.
It is then by no means neceftary, that, by hiftor- ical deduction, we fhould prove an uninterrupted fucceflion ; we have a right to prcfumeir, until ev- idence appears to the contrary. If any fay, the fuccefhon has failed, the burthen of proof muft lie wholly on them. Let them from inconteftible hiftory, fliew us the time, place and manner in which it terminated — who were the laft minifters in the line from the apoftlcs — who the firft in the
new line — who the laymen that ordained them — and where was the fcene of the transaction.— Un- til we have this information, we rely on the prom- ife of Chrift, in the fenfe in which we underftand it.
But it will be afked, ' What if a number of Chridians Ihould be cad en a defolate coad or ifl- and, or ihould emigrate to a country fecluded from intercourfc with the Chridian world, and mould have among them no ordained miniflcr ? May they not ordain miniders for themfelves ? May not min- iders thus ordained venture to officiate ?
But tell me flrit, Where is this folitary ifland or coall — this fecluded country of Chridians ? — Did you ever read of a colony of picus Chridians emi- grating to a new country, who forgot to take min- iflers with them ; or whom no miniders would ac- company or. follow ? If no flich cafe lias ever hap- pened, oris ever likely to happen, it is not ({range, that the Head of the church has made no provision for it ; nor is it nccuTary, that we ihould under- take to remedy ins omiffion.
But probacy ibme will {rill imagine, that fact, is againd us. They will tell us5 'Ordinations came down to us through the church of Rome ; and there was a time when that church was fo effen- tially corrupt, that fhe ceafed to be a church of Chrift, and her officers ecafed to be minifters of Chrill ; and therefore they, who withdrew from her, at the time of the reformation, having among them no valid ordinations, mud have beaun than anew.'
But will hidory fupport this concluiibn ? Did the fird reformers, didruding their pad ordinations, receive one from their lay-brethren ? — The centra-
o ry
iGl
ry#is mod evident. The proteftant reformers England early drew up a confeilion of their faith, in which, as Doctor Burnet fays, t they cenfure any who mould take upon them to preach, or ari- minifter the facraments, without having lawfully received the power from the mlniftcrs, to whom a- lone the right of conferring that power doth apper- tain.' Certainly they had no apprehenfion, that the minifterial fucceffion Was at an end.
The Roman church, though at that time exceed • ingjy corrupt, appears not to have materially cor- rupted her ordinations. In' this matter, we do not find, that the reformers ailedged any complaint.
Though corruptions early began in the Chriftian church, yet their progrefs was gradual and How. In every age many (Merited from them, great op- position was made to them, and large councils oi bilhops, or minifters, publickly condemned them. The weflern or Roman church ultimately carried her corruptions to a more extravagant height, than the oriental or Greek church ; but even in the
nier, they never came to their crifis, until the famous council of Trent, which was opened more than twenty, and clofed more than forty years, af- ter yie beginning of Luther's reformation. That council) called by the Pope's bull, and Supported by the fimpcrpur's arms, in oppofition to the t ers, c eftablifhed/ as Doctor Til lotion fays, ' f<
il New Articles tirljjch'hacj never before been knowlcdged by any general council.' Thofe n*vv
icles, if avowed, by fi I had pot
ive.d, in their full extent, as now dei
. If they hid been deer-, one council, it
\ as trtial one, and they werefo
demned
dcmncd by another ; and" therefore were not to he considered as the received and acknowledged doc- trines of the church. At this time, as the Doctor .rours of the church of Rome role to their height/ He demands of the pap!
i re their religion was before the council of
.' He challenges them, c to flxew a religion,
confiding of<?//the fame articles which are defined
by that council as neceflkiy to falvation, profefled
by any Chriftian church in the world heftrtthat
Luther and his aJfbciates, in their firft eppofition
to the errours of the Roman church, did not con*
ffder her, as having ejfentlally departed from the
I, or as being utterly difowned by Chrift ;
aty object was, not to withdraw from
her, but to effect a reformation by means which
might preferve the general union. They never re-
iced her, until they and their adherents
.od, and all hopes of union were cut (iff; but, on the contrary, demanded a free and // council, to deliberate on means of accom- ::ig the reformation fo much defired. When er was conflrained to difclaim that church, or Mofhciin obferve?, * he feparated himfelf ;t, only as it acknowledged the Pope to be infallible ; not from the church confidered in a more fenfc ; for he fiibmiitcd to the decifion of church, when that decifion fhould /council Uivfully affembleoV I line, was a judicious dif- -i ; for though the papacy was confounded catholick church, they were in reality ;s. The papacy had indeed by de- res
1 54
grees incorporated itfelf into the church ; but it was aprepofterous fuppleraent, and as foreign to its genuine conftitution, as a new citadel erected by a fuccefsful ufurper, would be to an ancient city. Lu- ther a&ed on this diftin&ion ;. he went out of the citadel ; but he meant to remain in the city, and, like a good patriot, defigned to reform its govern- ment. * But when the advocates for a general ref- ormation defpaired of their object, they came out from that irreclaimable church, that they might not partake of her fins, nor receive of her plagues. And we derive our ordinations from thofe who came out, not from thofe who remained behind — from the purer part which embraced, not from the corrupter part which oppofed, the refor- mation. It cannot then be true, that our ordina- tions came through the church of Rome, if by that appellation is intended the corrupt body which the proteftants renounced. And furely none will al- ledge, that thofe pious men, who had long oppof- ed her corruptions, and contended for a reformation, were themfelves too erroneous to be owned as min- iflers, or that their hands were too unclean to con- vey a pure ordination.
One cannot here but feel the finking contraft between thofe ancient reformers, who laboured to correct the errours, without breaking the union of the church, and certain modern pretenders, who, in the firft inftance, feparate themfelves from the churches, and then exclaiming againft them as cor- rupt, promote and. encourage divifions in them.
It is obfervable, that minifters were the firft to bear tcftimony againft the prevailing corruptions — the firfl to (land forth in the. caufe of truth and pu- rity ;
j and God owned then as his faithful fervanis, and fucceeded them in their arduous undertaking.
In ihegrcatcft part of Germany, and in many other places, the main body of the clergy foon de- clared in favour of the reformation, and united their efforts la its caufe. In England, more than a hun- dred years before Luther, the feeds of it were fown by the doctrines of Wkkliffi. And though their growth was retarded by the long inclemency of the feafon, yet they were gradually taking root, and, under the rlrft warm beams, they fprang up and g'-ew. The papal jurifdiclion, which for ages had been denied, or received with great limitations, by the Kings of England, was totally renounced in 1533, by Henry VIII. and the bifhops ; and the fcriptures were declared to be the flandard of reli- gion. In this reign, Cranmer, as well before as af- ter his promotion to the fee of Canterbury, favour- ed the doctrines of Luther, which by his influence obtained a confiderable fpread among the people and clergy. In 1547, when Edward VI. who had been educated in the principles of the reforma- tion, came to the throne, the proteflant religion, being patronized by the King and his court, and encouraged by many of the bifhops, as well as other clergy, generally prevailed. And, after a fliort in- terruption in the bloody reign of Mary, it was ful- ly eftablifhed under Elizabeth in 1558. So that proteftancy was in fact the religion of England, a number of years before the conclufion of the coun- cil of Trent.
The rapid progrefs of the reformation, and the vaft number of minifters, who early embraced it, make it evident, that there could be no occafion ;
and
iJ6
and the fervent zeal of the reformed againfl the er- rours of popery makes it as evident, that there could be no difpofition, to receive ordinations in fu- ture from the papal clergy. And therefore, with- out the labour of tracing a lineal fucceffion, we have clear hiftorical evidence, that our ordinations des- cended not from the church of Rome, after fhe be- came fo corrupt, as in the opinion of protectants, to ceafe from being a true church.
It will perhaps be afked, ' How do we know, but the firfl reformers had been ordained by fome of the vileflmenin the Roman church V But let me afk, How do we know, or is it probable, that this was the cafe ? The reformers themfelves ap- pear to have entertained no fcruples on this head. Let it flill be remembered, that irregularity in ordi- nations was not made matter of complaint againfl her; that her corruptions had not fo early rifen to their height; and that fhe had not yet eftablifhed, by a general council, her groiTeO: errours, nor ex- punged her pureft members.
But admitting that a man of corrupt principles and morals a&s in an ordination ; will his character nullify the tran faction ? As long as the fcribes fat in Mofes' feat, Chrift acknowledged them as officers of the Jewifh church ; nor did he deny the au- thority of the high-pried, though his perfonal char- acter was far from recommending him.
The perfon ordained derives his authority to preach from Jefus Chriffc ; not from the men who ordain him. They indigitate the perfon to be veil- ed wkh this authority, and officially inflate him in the regular exercife of it ; but it is ChrhTs gofpel, aot their will, which rauft direct him in the execu- tion
i67
bis office. If they are corrupt in principles or manners, it will not thence follow, that be nroft preach hcrcfy or immorality. lie is ordained to preach the gofpel ; and whoever may ordain him, the charge which he receives, and the vow which he makes, bind him to teach, not the command- ments of men, but all things whatibever Chrift has commanded.
To break the chain of fucceflion at the link in queition, it mud be proved, that the pcrfons, from whom the firft reformers received ordination, not only were in errours, but had actually ceafed to be officers of Chrifh
With refpect to the ordinations in this land little needs to be faid. It is well known, that the fir II minifters in the country were ordained in England by men whofe authority is not controverted. Though fome of our fathers fuppofed, that lay-or- dinations might be juftified, yet this fentiment was dilapproved by their brethren in England ; and was not fo long retained here, as to be carried into practice. The inftalment of perfons already ordain- ed, was in fome inflances, performed by lay breth- ren ; but during the firft century after the fettle- ment of New-England, ordinations were conflant- ly folemnized by the hands of ordained elders, ex- cept in two or three inflances ; and even in thefe there was the prefence and concurrence of ciders, though they impofed not their hands. Prefident Stiles fays,* that c no more than one fuch inftance, in the laft century, appears with certainty.' And if there were a few fuch inflances, in different times and places, they affect not the fucceflion ; becaufe,
ordinations
r Elc&ion Sermon.
i6S
ordinations among us being performed by a num- ber of minifters, not by a {ingle perfon, it may always be prefumed, that fome of the number are men regularly authorized.
The Prefidcnt, ' on a full, thorough and la- borious inquiry/ affirms, that * the fuccefhon, ih the line of prefbyters, was preferved without inter- ruption, at the time of the reformation, and the New-England ordinations, in this line, may with afTurancebe traced back even to the holy apoftJes.1
F 1 N I S.
J