nium, of the Romans, Galatians, Theffalonians and Coloffians, were not baptized, because there is no express account of it in the history of the New-Teftament: but of several of those churches there is mention made of the baptism of the members of them, of the Romans, Galatians and Coloffians, Rom. vi. 3,4. Gal. iii. 27. Col. ii. 12. but what this author might imagine would prefs us hard, is to give a scripture-example of our own present practice. Our present practice, agreeable to scripture-examples, is not at all concerned with the parents of those baptized by us, whether believers or unbelievers, christians or not chris tians, Jews or Heathens, this comes not into confideration; it is only concerned with the perfons themselves to be baptized, what they are. It seems, if we give a scripture-example of our practice, it must be of a person born and brought up of christian or baptized parents, that was baptized in adult years; but our prefent practice is not limited to fuch perfons. We baptize many whose parents we have no reason to believe are christians, or are baptized persons; and be it that we baptize adult perfons, who are born and brought up of christian or baptized parents, a fcripture-example of fuch a perfon might indeed be required of us with fome plaufible pretext, if the hiftory of the As of the Apostles, which this writer fays continued above thirty years, had given an account of the yearly or of frequent additions of members to the churches mentioned in it, during that space of time; whereas that hiftory only gives an account of the first planting of those churches, and of the baptism of those of which they first confifted; wherefore to give instances of those that were born of them, and brought up by them as baptized in adult years, cannot be reasonably required of us: But, on the other hand, if Infant-children were admitted to baptifm in thofe times, upon the faith and baptism of their parents, and their becoming christians; it is strange! exceeding ftrange! that among the many thousands that were baptized in Jerufalem, Samaria, Corinth, and other places, that there should be no one instance of any of them bringing their children with them to be baptized, and claiming the privilege of baptifm for them upon their own faith, or of their doing this in any fhort time after; this is a cafe that required no length of time; and yet not a fingle inftance can be produced. 3. A third objection is, that "infants can receive no benefit from baptism, "because of their incapacity; and therefore are not to be baptized." To which our author anfwers; that they are capable of being entered into covenant with God, of the feal of the covenant, of being cleansed by the blood of Christ, and of being regenerated by his Spirit: And be it fo; what of all this! as I have observed in the Reply, p. 4. Are they capable of understanding the nature, defign, and use of the ordinance of baptifm? Are they capable of profeffing profeffing faith in Chrift, which is a prerequifite to it, and of exercising it in it? Are they capable of answering a good confcience to God in it? Are they capable of fubmitting to it in obedience to the will of Chrift, from love to him, and with a view to his glory? They are not: what benefit then can they receive by baptifm? and to what purpose is it to be administered to them? If infants receive any advantage, benefit, or bleffing by baptifm, which our infants have not without it, let it be named, if it can; if none, why administered? why all this zeal and contention about it? a mere noise about nothing. To this it faith: which is not denied, 4. A fourth and most common objection, it is said, is, that "faith and repentance, or a profeffion of them at leaft, are mentioned in the New Testa"ment as the neceffary prerequifites of baptifm, of which children are incap"able, and therefore of the ordinance itself." children are capable of the habit and principle of nor is it in the objection; and it is granted by our author, that a profession of faith is a prerequifite to baptifm in adult perfons, who embrace christianity; but when they have embraced it, and profeffed their faith, in the apoftles times, not only themselves, but their housholds, and all that were theirs, were baptized. It is very true, those profeffing their faith alfo, as did the houshold of the Jailor, of whom it is faid, that he was believing in God with all his house: His family believed as well as he, which could not have been known, had they not profeffed it. The inftance of a profeffing stranger embracing the Jewish religion, in order to his circumcifion, which, when done, it was always administered to his family and children, makes nothing to the purpofe; fince it is no rule of procedure to us, with respect to a gospel-ordinance. Ninthly, The performance under confideration is concluded with observing many absurdities, and much confufion, with which the denial of Infant-baptifm, as a divine inftitution, is attended. As, 1. It is faying the covenant made with Abraham is not an everlasting one; that believers under the gospel are not Abraham's feed, and heirs of his promise; that the ingrafted Gentiles do not partake of the fame privileges in the church, from which the Jews were broken off; and that the privileges of the gospeldifpenfation are less than those of the law: all which are faid to be flat contradictions to scripture. To all which I reply, that the covenant of grace made with, and made known to Abraham, is an everlafting covenant, and is fure to all the feed; that is, the fpiritual feed; and is not at all affected by Infantbaptism, that having no concern in it. The covenant of circumcifion, though called an everlasting covenant, Gen. xvii. 7. was only to continue unto the times of the Meffiah; and is fo called, juft in the fame fenfe, and for the same reason, 302 the the covenant of priesthood with Phineas has the fame epithet, Numb. xxv. 13. Believers under the gospel are Abraham's spiritual feed, and heirs of the fame promise of fpiritual things; but thefe fpiritual things, and the promise of them, do not belong to their natural feed as fuch; the believing Gentiles, ingrafted into the gospel church-state, partake of all the privileges of it, from which the unbelieving Jews are excluded, being for their unbelief left out of that ftate. The privileges of the gospel-difpenfation are not lefs, yea far greater than those of the law; to believers, who are freed from the burdenfome rites and ceremonies of the law, have larger measures of grace, a clearer miniftration of the gofpel, and more fpiritual ordinances; nor are they lefs to their infants, who are eased from the painful rite of circumcifion, have the advantage of a chriftian education, and of hearing the gospel as they grow up, in a clearer manner than under the law; which are greater privileges than the Jewish children had under the former difpenfation; nor are all, nor any of these affected, or to be contradicted, by the denial of Infant-baptism. 2. It is obferved, that to deny the validity of Infant-baptifm, is faying that "there was no true baptifm in the church for eleven or twelve hundred years "after Christ; and that the generality of the prefent profeffors of christianity "are now a company of unbaptized heathens," p. 52. fo p. 10. To which I reply, that the true baptism continued in the church in the first two centuries; and though Infant-baptifm was introduced in the third, and prevailed in the fourth, yet in both these centuries there were thofe that oppofed it, and abode by the true baptifm. Befides, in the vallies of Piedmont, as many learned men have obferved, there were witneffes from the times of the apoftles, who bore their testimony againft corruptions in doctrine and practice, and among whom Infant-baptifm did not obtain until the fixteenth century; fo that the true baptifm continued in the church till that time, and it has ever fince; fee the Reply, p. 31, 32. As for the generality of the prefent profeffors of chriftianity, it lies upon them to take care of their character, and remove from it what may be thought difagreeable; and clear themfelves of it, by fubmitting to the true baptifm according to the order of the gofpel. As to the falvation of persons in or out of the vifible church, which is the greater number, this author fpeaks of, I know nothing of; falvation is not by baptifm in any way, but by Chrift alone. 3. It is faid, if Infant-baptifm is a divine inftitution, warranted by the word of God, then they that are baptized in their adult age neceffarily renounce a divine inftitution, and an ordinance of Jefus Chrift, and vacate the former covenant between God and them. If it be; but it is not a divine inftitution, nor an ordinance ordinance of Jefus Chrift, as appears from all that has been faid about it in the foregoing pages; wherefore it is right to renounce and reject it, as an human invention: and as for any covenant between God and them vacated thereby, it will not, it need not give the renouncers of it any concern; being what they know nothing of, and the whole a chimerical business. Nay, it is farther observed, that renouncing Infant-baptifin, and making it a nullity, is practically faying there are no baptized perfons, no regular minifters, nor ordinances, in all profeffing churches but their own, and as elsewhere, p. 41. no gofpel-church in the world; and that the administrations of the minifters of other churches are a nullity, and the promise of Chrift to be with his minifters in the administration of this ordinance to the end of the world, must have failed for hundreds of years, in which Infant-baptifm was practifed. But be it so: to whom is all this owing? to whofe account must it be put? to those who are the corrupters of the word and ordinances. Is it fuggefted by all this, that "God "in his providence would never fuffer things to go fuch lengths?" Let it be obferved, that he has given us in his word reason to expect great corruptions in doctrine and worship; and that though he will always have a seed to serve him, more or fewer, in all ages, yet he has no where promised that these shall be always in a regular gospel-church-ftate; and though he has promised his presence in his ordinances to the end of the world, it is only with those ministers and people among whom the ordinances are administered according to his word; and there was for fome hundreds of years, in the darkness of popery, fuch a corruption in the ordinances of baptifm, and the Lord's fupper, in the administration of which the prefence of God cannot be thought to be; nor were there any regular ministers, nor regular ordinances, nor a regular gofpel-church, but what were to be found in the vallies of Piedmont; and with whom the presence of God may be fuppofed to be; who bore a teftimony against all corruptions, and among the reft, against Infant-baptifm P. This writer further urges, that "if Infant-baptism is a nullity, there can be "now no regular baptifm in the world, nor ever will be to the end of it; and "fo the ordinance must be loft, fince adult baptism cannot be traced to the apof“tles times, and as now administered, is derived from thofe that were baptized “in infancy; wherefore if Infant-baptism is invalid, that must be so too; so "in p. 42. P. 42." To which it may be answered, that the first English Antipædobaptifts, when determined upon a reformation in this ordinance, in a confultation of theirs about it, had this difficulty started about a proper administrator to begin the work, when it was proposed to fend fome to foreign churches, the fucceffors ▸ See Reply, p. 11,. 12.. fucceffors of the antient Waldenfes in France and Germany; and accordingly did fend fome, who being baptized, returned and baptized others: though others were of opinion this too much favoured of the popish notion of an uninterrupted fucceffion, and a right through that to adminifter ordinances; and therefore judged, that in an extraordinary cafe, as this was, to begin a reformation from a general corruption, where a baptized administrator could not be had, it might be begun by one unbaptized, otherwife qualified to preach the word and ordinances; which practice they were able to justify upon the fame principles the other reformers juftified theirs; who without any regard to an uninterrupted fucceffion, fet up new churches, ordained paftors, and administered ordinances. Nor is it effential to the ordinance of baptism, that it be performed by one regularly baptized, though in ordinary cafes it fhould; or otherwise it could never have been introduced into the world; the first adminiftrator of it must be an unbaptized perfon, as John the Baptist was. All which is a fufficient answer to what this writer has advanced on this subject 9. 9 See the Divine Right of Infant-baptifm examined, &c. p. 13-15. 8vo Edit, The |