Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

they would, in anfwer to the above argument, fay, that the infants of believers unbaptized enter the kingdom, though the unbaptized infants of others do not. I only guess this might be their answer, confiftent with their principles: however, if I am mistaken in this matter, as I think I am not, it is in company with men of learning I am not ashamed to be among. The learned Danaus fays "," the Pelagians deny that baptifm is to be administered to the children of believers,” having plainly in view this paffage of Austin's; and the very learned Forbefius brings in this as an objection to his fenfe of 1 Corinthians vii. I 14. "the Pelagians "abused this faying of the apoftle, that they might fay, that the infants of "believers ought not to be baptized, as we read in Augustin "."

n

5. The words quoted by me out of Jerom, I own, are spoken by way of. fuppo fition; but then they suppose a cafe that had been, was, and might be again; and. it fhould be obferved, that the fuppofition Jerom makes, is not a neglect of the bap tism of infants, as this Gentleman fuggests, but a denial of it to them, a refusing to give it to them; which is expreffive of a rejection of it, and of an opposition to it.. So that from all these instances put together, we cannot but conclude that there were fome perfons that did oppofe and reject infant-baptifm in those times, and think it may be allowed, which is all we contend for; however, as I have faid before, we are not very anxious about it. Mr Marshall, a favourite writer of our author's, fays, fome in thofe times queftioned it (infant- baptifm) as: Auguftin grants in his fermons de verbis Apoftol, but does not refer us to the particular place; it feems to be his fourteenth fermon on that fubject, intitled, Concerning the baptifm of infants, against the Pelagians; where Auftin tells us how he was led to the fubject; and though he had no doubt about it, yet "some men raised difputes, which were now become frequent, and endea"voured to fubvert the minds of many :" by whom he feems to mean perfons diftinct from the Pelagians, fince he reprefents them as having no doubt about it and this is further confirmed by a paffage out of the fame discourse; “that infants are to be baptized, let no one doubt (which is an address to others, "and implies, that either they did doubt of infant-baptifm, or were in danger "of it) fince they doubt not, who in fome refpect contradict it;" which our author has placed as a motto in his title-page..

Austin, we allow, in this age, frequently speaks of infant-baptifm as an ancient ufage of the church, and as an apoftolical tradition; but what proof does he give

[ocr errors]

Baptifmum parvulis fidelium negant dandam Pelagiani. Danæus de facramentis ad calcem August. de Hæref. a Abutebantur hoc Apoftoli dicto, ut dicerent infantes fidelium baptizari minime deberi, ut legimus apud Aug. de peccator. merit. & remiff, 1. 2. c. 25. Forbes. Inftruct. Hiftor. Theolog. I. 10. c. 10. §. 5. • L. 2. de Peccator. merit, & remiff. c. 25. Sermon on baptizing of Infants, p. 5. Sed difputationes quorundam, quæ modo crebiefcere, & multorum animos evertere moliuntur, Aug. de verb Apoflol. Serm. 14.

give of it? what teftimonies does he produce? does he produce any higher teftimony than Cyprian? not one; who, it is owned, fpeaks of intant-baptifm, but not as an apoftolical tradition; Cyprian ufes no fuch language: thofe phraf s, "which were understood and believed from the beginning, and what the church "always thought, or anciently held," are Auftin's words, and not Cyprian's; and only express what Auftin inferred and concluded from him: and befides, his testimony is appealed to, not fo much for infant-baptifm, the thing itself, as for the reafon of it, original fin, which gave rife unto it in Cyprian's time and it is for the proof of this, and not infant-baptifm, that Auftin himself refers to the manifeft faith of an apoftle; namely, to fhew that not the flesh only, but the foul would be loft, and be brought into condemnation through the offence of Adam, if not quickened by the grace of Chrift, for which he refers to Romans v. 18. and yet our author infinuates, that by this he did not confider the baptifin of infants for original fin as a novel thing in Cyprian's time, but refers it to the authority of an apoftle: and by the way, fince Cyprian, the only witness produced by Austin, speaks not of infant-baptifm as an ancient usage of the church, or an apoftolic tradition, there is no agreement between his language and that of Origen, he is made to speak in his Latin translations, as this author elsewhere fuggefts; and it confirms the proof of his having been dealt unfairly with, fince Cyprian, coming after him, ufes no fuch language, nor does Austin himself ever refer unto him.

I have obferved that there are many other things, which by Austin, and other ancient writers, are called apoftolic traditions; fuch as infant-communion, the fign of the cross in baptifm, the form of renouncing the devil and all his works,, -exorcism, trine immerfion, the confecration of the water, anointing with oil in baptifm, and giving a mixture of milk and honey to the baptized perfons and therefore if infant-baptism is received on this foot, thefe ought likewise; fince there is as early and clear proof of them from antiquity, as of that: and my further view in mentioning thefe, was to obferve, not only how early, but how eafily these corruptions got into the church, as infant-baptifm did.

This writer has thought fit to take notice only of one of these particulars, namely, infant-communion; and the evidence of this, he fays, is not fo full and fo early as that of infant-baptifm. Now, let it be obferved, that there is. no proof of infant-baptifm being practifed before Cyprian's time; nor does Austin refer to any higher teftimony than his for the practice of it for original: fin; and in his time infant-communion was in ufe beyond all contradiction: there is an instance of it given by himself, which I have referred to; and that is more than is or can be given of infant-baptifm, which can only be deduced: by confequences from that inftance, and from Cyprian and his collegues reafon-

ing about the neceffity of the administration of it to new-born children. He suggests that Austin expreffes himself differently, when he is speaking of the one and of the other as an apoftolic tradition; but if he does, it is in higher strains of infant-communion; for thus begin the paffages, "if they pay any regard "to the apoftolic authority, or rather to the Lord and Mafter of the apostles, &c. "and no man that remembers that he is a chriftian, and of the catholic faith, "denies or doubts that infants, without eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, "have no life in them, &c." The Punici Chriftiani, which Austin speaks of, are not to be reftrained, as they are by our author, to the chriftians of Carthage, but take in other African chriftians, particularly at Hippo, where Austin was bishop, and where they spoke the Punic language, and in many other places: and surely if Austin is a good witness for an apoftolical tradition, who lived at the latter end of the fourth century; he must know what was the fense of the African chriftians in his time, among whom he lived, and upon what they grounded their practice of infant-communion; which he fays was upon an ancient and apoftolic tradition.

The other rites and ufages, he fays, I make mention of, are spoken of by Bafil as unwritten traditions; and infant-baptism is not mentioned among them, and fo was confidered as ftanding upon a better evidence and teftimony: now, not to obferve that I produce earlier authorities than Bafil, for these apoftolical traditions fo called, even as early as Tertullian, the first man that spoke of infantbaptifm; neither are infant-communion, sponsors at baptifm, exorcifm in it, and giving milk and honey at that time, mentioned by Bafil among them; does it therefore follow that they stand upon a better foot than the rest? besides, since Apoftolic tradition is diftinguished from Scripture, by the author of The baptifm of infants a reasonable Service, with whom I had to do; it can be confidered in the controversy between us, no other than as an unwritten tradition. This writer further observes, that it does not appear that these unwritten traditions were ever put to the teft, and stood the trial, particularly in the Pelagian controversy, as infant-baptifm: it is manifeft that the exorcifms and exfufflations used in baptifm, and the argument from them, as much pinched, puzzled, and confounded the Pelagians, as ever infant-baptifm did: and it is notorious, that figning with the fign of the cross has stood the teft in all ages, from the beginning of it, and is continued to this day; and prevails not only among the Papifts, but among Proteftant churches. Upon the whole then, it is clear there is no express mention of infant-baptifm in the two first centuries, no nor any plain hint of it, nor any manifeft reference to it; and that there is no evidence of its being practised till the third century; and that it is owned, it prevailed in the fourth and fo refts the state of the controversy.

A REPLY

A

REPLY TO A DEFENCE

OF THE

DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPTISM,

By PETER CLARK, A. M. Minifter at SALEM,

ΙΝ A

LETTER to a FRIEND at BOSTON in New-England.

To which are added,

Some STRICTURES on a late TREATISE, called, A Fair and Rational Vindication of the Right of Infants to the Ordinance of Baptifm

Written by DAVID

BOSTWICK, A. M.

Late Minifter of the Prefbyterian Church in the City of New-York.

IT

[blocks in formation]

Tis neceffary that the reader fhould be acquainted with the reason of the republication of the following treatise. In the year 1746, a pamphlet wasprinted at Boston in New England, called, "A brief Illustration and Confir"mation of the Divine Right of Infant-Baptifm," written by Mr Dickinson; which being industriously spread about in great numbers, to hinder the growth of the Baptist-Interest in those parts, it was sent over to me by fome of our friends there, requesting an answer to it; which I undertook, and published in theyear 1749, intitled, "The Divine Right of Infant-Baptism examined and difproved." Upon which Peter Clark, A. M. Minister at Salem in New-England,

66

was

[ocr errors]

was employed to write against it, and which he did; and what he wrote was printed and published at Bofton in 1752, called, "A Defence of the Divine

Right of Infant-Baptifm." This being fent over to me, I wrote a Reply, in a letter to a friend at Bofton, in the year 1753, as the date of my letter fhews, giving leave to make use of it, as might be thought fit; and which was printed and published at Boston in 1754, together with a Sermon of mine on Baptifm, preached at Barbican, 1750. The controverfy lying beyond the feas, I chose it fhould continue there, and therefore never reprinted and republished my Reply here, though it has been folicited; but of late Mr Clark's Defence has been fent over here, and published, and advertised to be fold; which is the only reason of my reprinting and republishing the following keply; to which I have added fome ftrictures on a treatise of Mr Bostwick's on the fame fubject, imported from America, with the above Defence, and here reprinted. The Pædobaptifts are ever restless and uneafy, endeavouring to maintain and support, if poffible, their unfcriptural practice of Infant-Baptifm; though it is no other than a pillar of Popery; that by which antichrift has spread his baneful influence over many nations; is the bafis of national churches, and worldly eftablishments; that which unites the church and the world, and keeps them together; nor can there be a full feparation of the one from the other, nor a thorough reformation in religion, until it is wholly removed: and though it has fo long and largely obtained, and ftill does obtain; I believe with a firm and unfhaken faith, that the time is haftening on, when Infant-Baptifm will be no more practifed in the world; when churches will be formed on the fame plan they were in the times of the apostles; when gofpel-doctrine and difcipline will be restored. to their primitive luftre and purity; when the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's fupper will be administered as they were firft delivered, clear of all prefent corruption and fuperftition; all which will be accomplished, when the Lord fhall be king over all the earth, and there fhall be one Lord, and his name one.

A REPLY

« AnteriorContinuar »