yourself? One or two of your quotations will determine the matter. 'As a man thinketh in his heart fo is he.' Did you attend to the connexion here, and use the words in the fame fenfe which the royal preacher did? It is evident you did not. Again, when you would fix the charge of inconfiftency upon us, for refufing to communicate with those with whom you fuppofe Chrift communes, you can introduce the apostle Paul as exhorting the Baptifts, to be followers of God as dear children.' I fhall not fay that you have greatly injured: the apoftle;' but I hardly think that in the paffage above, he had reference to our communicating with you at the Lord's table.

The paffage which I quoted was the following; «Now we command you in the name of our Lord Jefus Chrift, that ye withdraw yourfelves from every brother who walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."* In applying this to my brethren, I obferved, "It may be your duty to withdraw from them whom you confider as not conformed to the tradition of the apostles, fo far, as not to partake together at the Lord's table." No candid mind can be at a lofs, as to the exact sense in which I used the apoftle's words; nor can they think that I used the word tradition abfolutely in the fame fenfe which he did. His words are quite in the imperative, mine in the mild fubjunctive mood.

You have been pleased to style St. Paul an eminent peace maker;' and have collected many paffages of scripture to prove, that to this end he was made all things to all men, (not for the fake of communicating with them, bat) that he might by all means SAVE fome. But shall we, from the condefcending light in which you have represented the apoftle, conclude, that if he were among the Baptifts, he would become a Baptift; and fully approve of their mode of baptifm, and of their denying the right of infants, while at the fame time he might know, that the inftitution did not require the former, and that it exprefsly enjoined the latter? Or on the other hand, if he were among the Pædobaptifts, fhall we fuppofe

• 2 Theff. iii, 6.

him one with them; and that he would cordially approve of their mode of baptizing infants, when at the fame time he might know, that neither fubjects nor mode were according to the inftitution? Would fober reafon venerate fuch a character as this? No. It would look upon him as an unprincipled time-server.

To fuppofe that St. Paul would conform to every party which he might occafionally be among, would be to make him refemble that peculiar animal, which partakes of the colour of every fubftance which it happens to be upon! I confefs, I form no fuch opinion of this great apoftle's catholicifm; but conclude, were he among us, he would fay to thofe in the right, "Now I praife you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you." But to thofe in the wrong, " Now in this that I declare unto you, I praise you not."*

But we pafs on,

Secondly, To confider the charges which you exhibit against our fentiments. In your viith. part you proceed to fhow, what appears to you to be the natural tendency of our fentiments and practice; and finally conclude, that they tend to break up all churches, and to deftroy all vifible communion among Chriftians.'+ If this be the cafe, no wonder you are alarmed. But, Sir, you mistake. The churches of our denomination in America, contain upwards of fixty thousand members, which hold vifible communion together: nor did I ever know, that any attempt had been made on our part, to deftroy the vifible communion of Chriftians in general. And certainly, were our fentiments univerfally to operate, they would unite in one great body all Chriftians. to the ends of the earth.

I Cor. xi. 2, 17.

+ Although I have not written documents to prove, yet I have credible information, that a Conference or Council was fome time fince called at West Stockbridge, to advise, whether it were confiftent for the two denominations in that place to build a church, and walk together. It was unanimoully agreeed in the negative. Two of the Pædobaptist Ministers were, Rev. Dr. WEST, Rev. Mr. CAMP. Baptifts, Rev. Meffrs, WORDEN, and BLOUD,

But you object again and fay, Your fentiment and practice tend to lead people to place the effence of religion in the external obfervance of ceremonial institutions, to the neglect of the weightier matters of the law.'

This, Sir, is not true. For our fentiments carry the fullest demonstration to the contrary. It is a fact univerfally known, that no perfon can be admitted as a member in a Baptift church, let his externals be what they may, without fufficient evidence that he has experienced a change of heart, and has become a real Chrif tian. We do not baptize perfons to make them Chriftians, but because we look upon them to be fuch already. And it is well known, that a person cannot be accepted with us, on account of lineal descent from Abraham, or any other believer; nor by virtue of a pretended federal holiness; nor can they make a profeflion by proxy or fponfors; but by their own voluntary act. We never baptize perfons out of our ordinary way, who are in danger of death; nor do we ever give the communion to any who are unbaptized. How then can you poffibly fay, with any appearance of modesty or justice, that our fentiments tend to lead people to place the effence of religion in the external obfervance of ceremonial inftitutions ?"

You follow this charge with a number of ungenerous reflections upon the Minifters of our denomination. To make this appear, I would only afk; Were I to charge your Minifters with taking up much of their time in public and in private, difputing about' infant baptifm; and fhould have the vanity to fay, they had better inculcate upon their hearers the nature and importance of univerfal benevolence, the duties of brotherly love, juftice, mercy, and compaffion; to live useful lives, ferving their generation by the will of God;' (as if these were almost, if not entirely neglected; and fhould af fure them, that if they would take my advice) they would do much more good in the world, appear much lefs like the Scribes and Pharifees,' which they now refemble, and much more like CHRIST and his AposTLES,' which we fo exactly imitate; would you not think me juftly chargeable with arrogancy and unchar

itableness? I leave the matter to your own feelings. A word to the wife is fufficient.

Another thing you charge us with, is, that we lay an undue frefs' upon the ordinance of baptifm, or at least upon our particular mode. This comes rather with an ill grace, from one of a denomination, which evidently make as much, if not more of the ordinance than we do.

But we will not reft the matter here, without a fair examination. Do we infist on baptifm in any mode, as effential to falvation? You allow that we do not. Do we place it in the room of redeeming blood, and think that by our immerfion we wash away our fins? No, you acquit us from this alfo. Do we look upon it as an inftitution of Chrift, which we are facredly bound to obferve? We do ; and fo do you. Do we look upon it. as an enjoined pre-requifite to communion? We do ; and fo do Pædobaptifts in general. But how does it appear then that we lay an undue ftrefs' upon it? Why you fay, I verily fear !'-(quite a conclufive way of arguing; but go on) I verily fear, that with many, a change in fentiment in favour of your opinion, has been allowed great weight as an evidence of a real change of heart. I with, Sir, you had proved the matter, inftead of fuggefting your fears. But you add, It has been frequently mentioned by thofe of your denomination, as an evidence of great felf-denial, for a perfon to be a Baptift, or to be plunged. And when I hear such things, it always excites fears in my mind.'-Sir, the mere thoughts of a perfon's being plunged, feems to have ftruck you with a hydrophobia, and quite agitated your mind!-But let us try calmly to examine the

matter.

It will probably be granted, that the time has been, when it required fome degree of self-denial to be a Baptist; when the pen of the hiftorian, and the tongue of the orator, were invidiously employed, in reprefenting us in the most ridiculous and whimfical light; while the pulpit thundered, and the prefs groaned with heavy charges against the daring innovators. At the fame time, the civil law added its mild difcipline of ejection,

banishment, and profcription. But thanks be to Heaven, a milder morn has dawned upon us; the cross is lightened, and we have few complaints of this kind to make.

It may be proper now to confider, what firefs has been, and is, laid upon this ordinance, by Pædobaptifts. It was faid by our Saviour, "Except a man be born of water, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." This paffage was very early expounded literally of water baptifm, and the confequence admitted, that no perfon could be faved without it. Hence all infants dying unbaptized, inevitably perifhed.

In the year 416, a council was held at Mela in Numidia, in order to establish a law to compel Chriftians to baptize their infants. They iffued twenty-feven new commandments, among which are the following. "It is the pleasure of all the bithops prefent in this holy fynod to order, 1. That whofoever faith Adam was created mortal, and would have died, if he had not finned; be accurfed. 2. Alfo it is the pleasure of the bishops to order, that whofoever denieth that infants newly born of their mothers are to be baptized, or faith that baptifm is to be administered for the remiffion of their own fins, but not on account of original fin derived from Adam, and to be expiated by the laver of regeneration; be accurfed."*

In the reign of the emperor Charlemagne, a law was established, making it death for a man to refuse to be baptized; and a heavy fine was levied on the parent, who did not have his child baptized within the year. But as at first they only baptized at two times in the year, it was found that many died between; to remedy which, priefts were empowered to baptize at any time, and in any place, in cafe of ficknefs. When it was remarked that a priest was not always at hand, new canons

Vid. Concil. Milevitan, in Rebinson. "An honeft indignation, (Tays a hiftorian) rifes at the found of fuch tyranny; and if a man were driven to the neceflity of choofing one faint out of two candidates, it would not be Auftin, it would be Saint Balaam, the son of Bofor, who indeed loved the wages of unrighteoufnefs, as many other faints have done; but who with all his madness had refpect enough for the Deity to fay, How bull I curse wb m God hath not surfed.”