Слике страница
PDF
ePub

subjoin a few instances in the margin, to shew, derivatives in signify the same as their primitives; which you may examine at your leisure. I am,

Sir,

Yours, &c.

‘Ορκόω,

ο Βλύω, βλύζω. Θύω, θυάζω. Βορβορέω, βορβορίζω.

ὁρκίζω.

̓Αλέγω, ἀλεγίζω. Καναχέω, καναχίζω. Εθω, ἐθίζω. Ηθω,

hei, et infinita alia.

LETTER VI.

THE other chief article in dispute between the baptists and their adversaries-They continually repeat the most trifling objections, though they have been fairly answered over and over; which has made it necessary to say a great deal to what has been well enough answered already, and concerning things which are very plain of themselves-The late handling of this controversy has convinced the world, the baptists are not that unreasonable sect they were represented to be; and it is not to be doubted but the reviving the dispute at present may go far to open people's eyes yet much more in their favour -It is pity some friendly measures are not taken to compose the difference, which is not so impracticable as some fancy— Mr. Wall's attempt, though the best in its kind, falls very short of answering the design of it-His scheme-He first allows it cannot be made appear from Scripture that infants are to be baptized; and therefore recurs to these as the only expedients-1. To the practice of the Jewish church-2. To the practice of the ancient Christians-Some reflections which overturn all he says as to his main conclusion, though he should prove these two points ever so solidly-From his concession, that it cannot be proved from Scripture, it unavoidably follows, that it is no institution of Christ-And to suppose it may be included in some of the more general expressions, is only to beg the thing in dispute-Unless he can shew us infant-baptism is so much as mentioned in Scripture, we shall not believe it is instituted there-Our author makes the Scriptures the rule of language which he therefore ought with much more reason to make the only rule of his faith and practice-The baptism of infants is unlawful, if Christ has not instituted it-True protestants should adhere to the Scripture, as the only infallible guide in all religious controversies -They who do otherwise seem to be too near the church of Rome, as to the article of tradition at least; which is an inlet to all the rest-Our adversaries act very inconsistently in rejecting tradition, in their disputes with the Romanists, while they recur to it as their main refuge in the present dispute with us That infant-baptism ought not to be practised, is

:

proved from our author's principles, compared with the Articles of the Church-It gives the Romanists a handle to weaken the reformation with too much advantage-The Articles of the Church directly against traditions-The Scripture's silence as good an argument against pædobaptism as can be desired -We find a strong tendency in our minds to depend upon the Scriptures only-We are obliged by any sort of law, &c., only to the particulars the said law expresses-This illustrated by instances, and by an undoubted maxim from Tertullian-Applied also to the present dispute, and illustrated by more instances Some build the ecclesiastical hierarchy mainly on that very foundation on which the baptizing of infants is opposed--Mr. Wall sometimes argues in the same manner as the baptists do against pædobaptism-The objection, that Christ nowhere forbids us to baptize infants, answered-We are forbid to teach the traditions of men for commandments of God-The pædobaptist's argument enervated by Tertullian-Though the Scripture's silence may sometimes, it does not always, leave it so much as lawful to do what it does not mention.

SIR,

Now we have taken breath a little; if you please, sir, we will enter upon the other chief article in dispute between us and our adversaries.

If Mr. Wall, like some others, had argued with a great deal of concern, that it is unlawful to dip those who are baptized, because it is a breach of the sixth commandment, and virtually to murder; undoubtedly you would say this could not have deserved an answer, and yet it could not fairly have been passed by neither.

Of the same kind exactly, or it may be more trifling, are the two main foundations of infant-baptism, I mean the celebrated arguments from original sin, and from circumcision; which have been so

often and fairly baffled, and yet are continually returned upon us as gravely, as if nothing had ever been said to them.

And if I should be necessitated to make a formal answer to these and some other such pretences, you know where to lay the fault, though I design to avoid it all I can.

We were once taken for a very strange sort of people, and accordingly were furiously attacked without any moderation; but our adversaries at length thought fit to let the controversy drop, the effect of which has been only to persuade the world we are not that unreasonable, mischievous sect we were represented to be. And it has been made appear, that we have abundantly more to say for ourselves than was believed or expected. This has been the only consequence of the warm handling of this controversy not long since. And I do not doubt but the more it is canvassed, the more people's eyes will be opened in our favour; and therefore I am not displeased, some go about to revive the dispute again.

I only wish a more impartial and learned examination of these matters might be seriously entered on; for it is highly necessary, points of this nature should be determined, if possible. And, I think, it lies on our adversaries, either to renounce their error, or else to justify themselves more solidly, by setting things in another light.

I should be heartily glad if some amicable measures might be concerted, in order to compose the difference, and put an end to the dispute. Perhaps it is not a design altogether impracticable, and I am sure it would be very useful, if it should be managed

in that becoming manner, in which we are convinced by a late glorious instance, I mean that of the Union, that the most nice and difficult points may be treated and adjusted with success. But it is observed, ecclesiastics are too often subject to the same passions with other men.

In the meantime let us examine Mr. Wall's attempt, which I have owned is the most considerable of any thing I have seen of the kind: for he has amassed together the substance of all that can with any show of reason be insisted on: and thus he lays his scheme.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

He first very freely allows, (and indeed what unprejudiced man would venture to assert the contrary?) that it cannot be made appear from the Scriptures that infants are to be baptized. For in the commission, Matt. xxviii. 19, there is no par⚫ticular direction given what they [the disciples] 'were to do in reference to the children of those that received the faith. Nor is there in any other place, among all the persons that are recorded as baptized by the apostles, express mention of any infant. And the proofs drawn by consequences 'from some places of Scripture [for any one side of this question] are not so plain, as to hinder the arguments drawn from other places for the other side, from seeming still considerable 5.' All which

6

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

6

d [The Union of Scotland with England was brought to a conclusion in the year 1707.]

e Peface, near the beginning.

[ocr errors]

f Ibid.

* [Dr. Wall does not finish his sentence here, nor are his sentiments fairly expressed he had said, that the proofs &c.—are 'not so plain, as to hinder the arguments-from seeming still considerable to those that have no help from the history of the

[ocr errors]
« ПретходнаНастави »