neceffary thereunto. Men are not made difciples by baptizing them, as this writer fuggefts, but they must be first disciples, and then baptized. So ferom long ago understood the commiffion, who has these words upon it; "first, they "teach all nations, then dip those that are taught in water: For, it cannot "be, that the body should receive the facrament of baptifm, unless the foul has "before received the truth of faith." To the fame purpose, Athanafius says, "wherefore the Saviour does not fimply command to baptize, but firft says, "teach; and then baptize thus, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the holy Ghoft; that faith might come of teaching, and baptifm be perfected." 5. Such a difciple, as this writer fuppofes to be conftituted by baptifm, namely, a learner of Christ, cannot agree with an infant. What can a new-born babe learn of Chrift? What can it be taught of him, or receive by way of teaching, at the time of its baptifm, or by being baptized? If learners and difciples are synonymous terms, as this author fays, they cannot be difciples before they are learners; and they cannot be learners of Chrift, unless they have learned something of him: And, according to this notion, they ought to learn something of him, before they are baptized in his name. But what can an infant learn of Chrift?

6. The text in As xv. 10. is not to be understood of infants, but of adult perfons; even converted Gentiles, who believed in Christ, and were his difciples; and upon whom, the false teachers would have impofed the yoke of the ceremonial law; and, particularly, circumcifion: Which, because it bound over to the whole law, the apostle reprefents as an infupportable one; and calls this impofition of it on the believing Gentiles, a tempting of God: And as for any other paffages that enjoin the education of children, or speak of it, they are never from thence called the difciples of Chrift, nor any where else.

6thly, This writer afferts, that "it is plain that the apostles thus understood "Our Saviour's meaning, and accordingly baptized Lydia and her houthold, and "the Gaoler and all his *; and the houshold of Stephanas." P. 21. But,

1. Seeing the understanding of our Saviour's meaning in the commission, depends upon those inftances of baptifm, and fo the warrant for the baptizing of infants, the Pædobaptifts ought to be fure that there were infants in these families, and that they were baptized, or otherwife they muft baptize them, at moft, upon a very precarious foundation; for if the commiflion of itself is not clear for it, and thofe inftances in which the apostles acted according to the commiffion, are not fufficient to vouch it, it must stand upon a very bad botee 2

tom,

▸ Primum docent omnes Gentes, deinde doctas intingunt Aqua, &c. Hieron. in Matt. xxviii. 19. 1 Διατύτο γεν και ο σωτηρ ουχ απλως ενετείλαίο το βαπτίζειν, αλλα πρωτον φησι μαθητευσατε, &c. Athanaf. contr. Arianos. Orat. III. p. 209.

tom, having neither precept nor precedent for it; and they must know, that there are families that have no infants in them, and how can they be sure there were any in these? And,

2. It lies upon them to prove there were infants in these families, and that these infants were baptized, or the allegation of those instances is to no purpofe; how they can fatisfy themselves without it, they best know; they ought not to put it upon us to prove a negative, to prove that there were none, this is unfair; and one would think, fhould not fit very eafy upon their minds, to reft their practice on fo poor a fhift, and so unreasonable a demand. But,

3. We are able to make it appear, that there are many things in the account of the baptifm of thefe families, which are inconfiftent with infants, and which make it at least probable, that there were none in them; and certain, that those that were baptized were adult perfons, and believers in Chrift. As for Lydia, it is not certain in what state of life she was, whether fingle or married, whether maid, widow, or wife; whether she had any children, or ever had any; or if she had, and them living, whether they were infants or adult; and if infants, it does not feem probable that fhe fhould bring them along with her from her native place Thyatira to Philippi, where fhe feems to have been upon business, and so had hired a house during her ftay there; wherefore, her houshold seems to have confifted of menial fervants she brought along with her, to affist her in her business; and certain it is, that those that the apostles found there, when they entered into it, after they came out of prison, were fuch as are called brethren, and were capable of being comforted by them ". And as for the Jailer's houfhold, they were fuch as were capable of having the word of God fpoken to them, and of rejoicing at it, and in the converfation of the apoftles, at what was faid and done by them; and are even exprefly faid to believe in God, as the Jailer did, and together with him; and as for the houshold of Stephanas, that is, by fome, thought to be the fame with the Jailer's; but, if not, it is certain it confifted of adult perfons, believers in Chrift, and very useful in the public fervice of religion; for they were the firft-fruits of Achaia, and addicted themselves to the miniftry of the faints. All which, in each of the instances, can never be faid of infants. But,

7thly, This writer adds one text more, which, he fays, must be allowed to be decifive in the prefent cafe, and that is Romans xi. 17-25. from whence he thinks it is most evident, that fince the believing Gentiles are grafted into all the privileges and spiritual bleffings of the Jewifh church, they cannot be cut off from that great bleffing and privilege of having the covenant fealed to their infant feed, p. 21. To which I reply,

1. It

1. It will readily be allowed, that believing Gentiles fhared in all the fpiritual bleffings and privileges of the Jewish church, or of believers under the former difpenfation; the fame bleffings of imputed righteoufnefs and pardon of fin came upon the uncircumcifion, as well as upon the circumcifion, who walk in the steps of the faith of Abraham°, for such that are Chrift's, true believers in him, they are Abraham's feed, his fpiritual feed, and heirs, according to the promife, of all fpiritual bleffings and privileges P. But,

2. The covenant of grace was never fealed to Abraham's natural feed; the covenant of grace itself did not belong to them, as fuch; nor was circumcifion a feal of it to them; nor is baptifm a feal of the covenant of grace to any; and therefore it is a great impropriety and impertinence to talk of cutting off from, that which was never had, and never was.

3. Though believing Gentiles fhare in the spiritual bleffings and privileges which the Jewish church, or Jewish believers enjoyed, they never were grafted into that church; that church-state, with all the peculiar ordinances of it, was utterly abolished by Chrift, fignified by the baking of the heavens and the earth, and removing of thofe things that are fhaken, that thofe which cannot be shaken may remain". The Jewish church is not the olive-tree, of whofe root and fatnefs the Gentiles partake; they are not grafted into the old Jewish stock; the ax has been laid to the root of that tree; and it is entirely cut down, and no engraftment is made upon it. But,

4. The olive-tree, of whofe root and fatnefs believing Gentiles partake, is the gospel church-ftate, out of which the Jews that rejected Chrift were left, and are the broken branches; and those that believed in Chrift were taken in, and laid the first foundation of it; thefe are the first-fruits, and the root, which being holy, are a pledge of the future conversion and holiness of that people; they of them that received the firft-fruits of the Spirit, were firft incorporated into a gospel church-ftate; and then the Gentiles which believed were received among them, and were engrafted into them; and this engrafture or coalition. was first at Antioch, where and when, and hereafter, the Gentiles partook of the root and fatnefs of the olive-tree; enjoyed the fame privileges, communicated in the fame ordinances, and were fatisfied with the goodness and fatness of the house of God; and of this engrafture, and of this only, does this text speak; so that it is fo far from being decifive in the prefent cafe, that there is not one word, one fyllable about baptifm in it, and ftill. lefs can any thing, in favour of infant-baptifm, be inferred from it.

I shall conclude this chapter, and with it the affair of the divine right of infantbaptism, which, whether illustrated and confirmed in the Dialogue, must be left

to

• Rom. iv. 6—1 2:

P Gal. iii. 29.

4

• Heb. xii. 26, 27.

to the judicious reader, by obferving, that the minilter in it being required to give exprefs New Teftament proof for infant-baptifin, which he was confcious to himself he could not do, in anfwer to it, requires exprefs New Testament proof, that women should partake of the Lord's Supper, and offers to prove infant-baptifm by the fame arguments that this should be proved. But,

1. We do not go about to prove womens right to partake of the Lord's Supper, by fuch arguments as this writer forms for us; as, by their covenant-intereft, by their claim to have the covenant fealed to them, and by their being a part of all nations; and though we look upon their being believers and difciples of Christ, proper qualifications for their admiffion to the Lord's fupper, when these can be made to appear to belong to infants, we shall readily admit them to baptifm. But,

2. We prove their right to the ordinance of the Lord's Supper, by their right to the ordinance of baptifm; for they that have a right to one ordinance, have to the other; that women believing in Christ have a right to baptism, is clear, from Acts viii. 12. They were baptized, both men and women, and therefore should partake of the Lord's Supper. Let it be proved, that infants ought to be bap tized, and it will be allowed and infifted upon, that they partake of the Lord's Supper.

3. We prove it by their being church members; Mary the mother of Jesus, with other women, were of the number of the difciples that formed the first gospel church at Jerufalem; Sapphira, the wife of Ananias, was, with her husband, of the multitude that believed, and were together, and bad all things com mon; after whofe awful death, believers were the more added to the Lord, that is, to the church, both men and women'. There were women in the church at Corinth; concerning whom the apostle gives rules refpecting their conduct. Now all those that are members of gospel churches, ought to eat the bread and drink the cup, in remembrance of Chrift'. Women are members of gospel churches; and therefore ought to eat and drink in like manner.

4. We prove this by example: Mary, the mother of our Lord, and other women, being of the number of the difciples, which conftituted the gospel church state at Jerufalem, as they continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, fo likewife in breaking of bread ".

5.

We prove this by a divine direction, exhortation, and command, Let a man examine himself, and fo let him eat". The word ufed is argwr, a word of the common gender, and fignifies both men and women; in which sense it must be often understood, as in 1 Timothy ii. 5. for is Chrift a mediator only between • 1 Cor. xi. 5, 6, 13. and xiv. 34. 35. v. Cor. xi. 29.

AЯs i. 14, 15. and iv. 32. and v. 9, 14. 1 Cor. xi. 26.

■ Acts i. 14, 15. and ii, 1, 44, 46.

between God and men, and not women? Under the gospel difpenfation, in a gofpel church state, there is neither male nor female; they are all one in Christ, and enjoy the fame privileges and ordinances. Let the fame proof, or as good, be given for infant-baptifm, and we have done; let it be proved, that infants have a right to any other gospel ordinance as fuch; that they are or ought to be members of gofpel churches; that there is either precept or precedent for the baptizing of them, and we fhall readily admit them.

СНА Р. VI.

Concerning the Mode of adminiftering the Ordinance of Baptifm, whether by immerfion or by Sprinkling.

THE author of the dialogue under confideration affirms, that there is not one fingle Lexicographer, or critic upon the Greek language, he has ever feen, but what agrees, that though the word baptizo sometimes fignifies to dip, yet it alfo naturally fignifies to wab; and that washing, in any mode whatsoever, is the native fignification of the word baptifmos, p. 31. that the words baptize and baptifm, as used in the New Testament, do not, from their fignification, make dipping or plunging the neceffary mode of administering the ordinance, p. 33. and that one fingle inftance of that mode of adminiftering the ordinance, is not to be found in all the New Teftament, p. 34. nor is it probable it should be the mode, p. 38. and that the mode of adminiftering it by fprinkling is a more lively emblem of what is fignified and reprefented by it, than dipping or plunging can be fuppofed, and therefore the moft proper one, p. 39.

Firft, As to the lexicographers, and critics on the Greek language, they agree that the word Barna, fignifies, in its firft and primary fenfe, "to dip or plunge," and only in a fecondary and confequential sense, to wash, but never to pour or Sprinkle; there being no proper washing, but what is by dipping; and for this we appeal to all the writers of this kind, and even to those this author mentions. Scapula, the first of them, renders parila, by mergo, feu immergo, ut quæ tingendi, aut, abluendi gratia aquæ immergimus, "to dip or plunge into, as what for the fake of dying or washing we dip into water;" item mergo, submergo, obruo aqua, "alfo to plunge, plunge under, overwhelm in water;" item abluo, tavo, "alfo to wash off, wash;" and Ballou, he renders, by mergor, submergor, "to be plunged, plunged under;" and oblerves, that it is ufed metaphorically for obruer, to be overwhelmed; and BaricμO, and ßerrioua, he fays, is, merfio, lotio,,

■ Gal, iii. 28.