A DEFENCE OF PÆDOBAPTISM EXAMINED, &c. CHAPTER I. Concerning the Title of Dr. WILLIAMS's Book, his Professions, and his Conduct, relative to this Controversy. DR. WILLIAMS having called his book, Antipædobaptism Examined, as a counter-title to mine, it is natural to enquire, why he did not add, On the Principles, Concessions, and Reasonings of the most learned Antipædobaptists? Having reversed the leading term in the title of my book, and professing to give it a full reply, it might have been expected that the title of his performance would have been a perfect contrast to mine. It might also have been justly expected, that he would present his reader, under each branch of the general subject, with a number of such quotations from the writings of Baptists, as would (to use an elegant phrase of his own) have been "plump against"* themselves. For though the publications of Baptists are Antipæd. Exam. vol. ii. p. 70. N. B. For the sake of brevity, I shall, in the following pages; when quoting the book on which I animadvert, mention only vol. i. or vol. ii., and the number of the page. very few, in comparison with those of Pædobaptists, yet, had the authors of our persuasion been divided among themselves, with reference to the subject before us, their printed works are sufficiently numerous to have furnished my opponent with a considerable number of quotations, upon the plan of Pædobaptism Examined. To what then was it owing, that Dr. W. did not avail himself of "principles, concessions, and reasonings," contained in the writings of Baptists, when professedly contending with them, and when answering a book intended to show that Pædobaptists are extremely inconsistent with themselves? Was it because he was quite averse to confront them with their own words, and to confute them on the ground of their own concessions? That is to the last degree improbable; because it is manifest from various instances, to be remarked in their proper place, that he did not want an inclination to avail himself of the argumentum ad hominem. Was it because he considered the Baptists as being, of all Christian professors, the most harmonious in their theological views, and the most consistent with themselves; so that it would have been in vain to seek for a difference of sentiment among them, relative to any article of importance? Were that the case, it would be a strong presumption in our favour, and much to our credit. But this honour Dr. W. is extremely far from allowing us; for he represents the Baptists as being, "perhaps, more than any other denomination of Christians divided about the import" of our Lord's "command, 'Go-preach the gospel to every creature." In regard to which, he exhibits them to the public, as " perpetually clashing" one with another.* Was it, then, "perpetually clashing" as they are about some other particulars, that he could perceive scarcely any thing in their publications which has the appearance of inconsitency with their avowed sentiments and practice, * Vol. ii. 403, 404. relative to the mode and subject of baptism? This is, apparently, the fact; and it is greatly to the reputation of their cause, considered as Baptists: for it is a presumptive evidence that their views and conduct in regard to baptism, proceed on a solid foundation— on plain scriptural principles, contained in precepts and precedents. Severe, therefore, as my opponent's reflection upon us manifestly is, with reference to some other particulars, it furnishes an inference extremely favourable to our cause, in respect of baptism. For is it supposable, that such clashing mortals as, according to Dr. W's. representation, the Baptists are, should be so consistent, and so harmonious, respecting the baptismal rite, if they did not proceed on a good foundation ?. So consistent and so harmonious are the Baptists, relative to the ordinance under discussion, that our zealous opponent has not produced, from their publications of any sort, so much as one direct concession, that is by natural and fair construction, inimical to their own practice. No, not so much as a single instance has he produced of their admitting, that the rite in question is any thing short of a solemn immersion; that it was ever administered, by the apostles, in any other manner; that the apostles, or apostolic men, ever baptized any that were naturally incapable of making a personal profession of repentance and faith; or that they deliberately avow any principles which, in their necessary consequences, are inimical to their own sentiments and practice respecting baptism. Hence the reader may justly conclude, that "principles, consessions, and reasonings," in favour of Pædobaptism, were extremely hard to be procured, by Dr. W., from the writings of Baptists: even while he could easily have produced an immense number of inconsistencies, relating to other articles of doctrine and of practice, from those "perpetually clashing" authors. It seems, therefore, that, with regard to baptism, we are tolerably well agreed among ourselves. For, had our sentiments and language, respecting the mode and subject of that ordinance been remarkably discordant, it is highly probable that the title of Dr. W's. book would have run thus: Antipædobaptism Examined, on the Principles, Concessions, and Reasonings, of Antipædobaptists; with whatever else the author might have thought proper.-None can doubt, but my opponent would have transcribed a number of testimonies and concessions in favour of infant sprinkling, had he found them in the writings of Baptists, with much more pleasure than he did those which he has produced from the works of Pædobaptists. I cannot forbear suspecting, therefore, that when he concluded to answer Pædobaptism Examined, it must have been a little mortifying for him to find, that he could not, with any appearance of propriety, reverse the whole title of my book, to make it "plump against" me. This, perhaps, may be considered by some readers as a presumptive evidence, that his performance is not a "full reply" to mine: to which particular I must, however, hereafter advert. The professions and conduct of my opponent, in the management of this controversy, deserve regard. When, in a certain passage, he is observed to denominate his work an "humble attempt, one is led to suppose that the estimate he formed of his own abilities, as an author, was far from being high, or assuming; and, that no airs of self-importance, that no confident, overbearing language, would appear in the course of his undertaking. But, notwithstanding this, Dr. W. frequently, and in variety of style, gives plain indications of superior confidence. When reflecting on various particulars, to be introduced in a following paragraph, I cannot forbear suspecting, that we have an early specimen of the good opinion he entertains of his own abilities, in * Vol. ii. 161. |