practised in the first century, he might very well have spared the rest of his pains; for we should not then have disputed with him the practice of those who lived afterwards. But as matters stood, I must allow he was in the right of it, not to stop till he found infant-baptism fully settled; and therefore he runs on so far as St. Austin; for there is no author sooner who speaks so effectually to his purpose.

Before I conclude, sir, I must just take notice of one thing I remember you were used frequently to object, viz. That we are not able to assign the time when infant-baptism first commenced; and that it must seem mighty strange, and indeed improbable, to such as reflect upon the great piety and sincerity of the early centuries of the church, that an innovation of this nature should ever be in the least attempted; and much more that it should prevail so far, and be so generally owned and defended, and all so early as even we ourselves acknowledge it was. But, sir, I must beg you to consider,

1. That very many errors of as gross a kind were as soon started, and as generally received as the baptizing of infants: for the truth of this, I appeal to the Church histories, which abundantly make it appear, and all learned men acknowledge it. Monsieur Jurieu has given a catalogue of divers of them in his eighth and some following pastoral letters for the year 1686: and Monsieur du Pin has noted many alterations at the end of the first three and of the fourth centuries, in his Ecclesiastical History.

2. You are not to imagine this practice was established altogether, and at once, in as great a

latitude as it is at present. It began, doubtless, at first, as all other innovations do, with only some little variations in opinions, and then passed to as little in practice; and so by very short steps, at length attained unobserved the great reputation it has now indeed for a long time enjoyed. And all this might be done in a very short time, as I have often observed to you it happened in the manner of administering this sacrament here in England : for dipping was wholly laid aside, and sprinkling used in its stead, in less than half a century, (even as our adversaries themselves still confess,) though directly contrary to Christ's direction, to a decree of a synod under Kenwolfe, the express words of the Service-book, and without any allowance, &c.; and sure no alteration can be more bold than this is.

3. Lastly, that very piety and zeal you mention as a security against this innovation, in reality tended very much to betray them into it. It is true, it would hardly suffer them to lose any thing they had received, but it was not so inconsistent with their adding many things. And accordingly we see that from the very beginning it had this influence. Hence came the anointing the newbaptized, and giving them milk and honey to eat, &c., which are very early mentioned. It was the piety of the ancients that made them think and speak such high things of the sacramental supper, which by degrees brought them to speak of it as of a real sacrifice; and then they were continually talking of offerings and altars, &c. Upon this, others soon began to understand those expressions literally, and to attribute much to the power of the priest's

consecration, which easily led people to esteem the elements of a most holy nature after that ceremony: all which prepared them to understand our Lord's words, This is my body, in that very absurd sense many so strenuously plead for. And then the most pious dispositions, upon these mistakes, might well think the mass a meritorious and expiatory sacrifice, wherein the very body of Christ was not offered up once for all, but every day for the sins of the people: and all this must work them into the highest veneration for the transubstantiated wafer; and no wonder if at length they ran into the idolatrous adoration of it, and other fopperies, which naturally attend such extravagancies.

Much after the same manner infant-baptism seems plainly to have been introduced. They soon began to talk in very lofty hyperboles concerning the powerful effects and necessity of baptism: and at first indeed this was meant well enough; but as they did not foresee, so they did not very cautiously guard against future mistakes. The effects of it have been carried to that height, that it has been thought to save ex opere operato. And the necessity was very early improved so far as to be accounted absolute and indispensable: for several of the first Fathers do pretty plainly shew us, they thought that such as died without baptism could not be saved, or at least that their salvation was very doubtful. This indeed was at first meant only of such as had heard the word preached, as I have proved to you before; but afterwards came to be equally applied to all adult persons: and then, when from its being useful in order to salvation, they

had brought it to be so indispensably necessary, especially to some, this prepared them to mistake our Lord's words, John iii. 5, which they began to think expressly asserted, it was impossible for any of Adam's race to be saved without baptism: and upon this supposition no wonder if they were soon prevailed on, by their natural tenderness and affection, to secure the salvation of their beloved infants, which lie too near a parent's heart to be neglected in so weighty a point as that of their eternal felicity. And could it be made appear that this is the true sense of our Saviour's words, we should soon be brought to believe he intended infants should be baptized. It is not only probable that infant-baptism came in this way; but that this really was the case, must be plain enough to those who are acquainted with the writings of the Fathers. What I have said in several former letters, proves it in some measure; and if I had thought it needful, I would have taken some pains to have done it professedly, and more at large. But particularly, nothing can be plainer than that the misunderstanding the sense of John iii. 5. gave rise to the error: for the Fathers who speak of it, always deduce it from those words, and upon every pinch recur to them as their main retreat and Mr. Wall confesses that they as well as himself looked upon this place as the chief ground of infant-baptism; and therefore it is pretty certain they had no better foundation for their practice, which most now see to be very sandy, and nothing but a mistake. So that this is not so hard as some fancy to be reconciled to the honesty and integrity of those pious men, who were doubtless liable to

mistakes as well as we. For thus in a case most exactly parallel, the same persons who introduced the baptizing of infants, were equally for admitting them immediately after that to the other sacrament likewise, and that upon just such another mistake of our Saviour's words too: for as they inferred the necessity of baptism from John iii. 5, so they did also that of the eucharist from John vi. 53. Thus St. Austin, from these very texts, at the same time argues for baptizing and communicating infants. And this custom of communicating infants accompanied the baptizing them, even from the first rise of pædobaptism, for several hundred years together, as in the Greek church it does to this day. All which is so true and manifest, as to be pretty generally acknowledged. Dr. Taylor somewhat largely proves it, and frequently says the one is altogether as well grounded as the other "; and indeed earnestly pleads for the continuance of both. But seeing the church has thought fit to disuse one, no man can shew a reason why the other may not as well be laid aside, since it is not built on a better foundation.

Now, sir, I think to lay down my pen: for I hope I have sufficiently proved to you, that we have abundant reason to persist in our opinion; and that Mr. Wall has not so effectually done our business, as you at first believed. I recommend what I have

t De Peccator. Merit. et Remission. lib. i. cap. 20.

u Worthy Communicant, cap. ii. sect. 2. [See The Worthy Communicant,' by bishop Jeremy Taylor, 8°. 1674: or in the collection of his works.]