It was unleavened bread which our Lord took and broke (for the Jews at that time, by the express command of God, were to have no other in their houses*) when he instituted the supper, and said-Do this in remembrance of me: and concerning which, it is said—As oft as ye eat this bread-What bread was that? Bread that was unleavened. Yea, and both these circumstances, viz. The bread being unleavened, and the having but one loaf, are as expressly alluded to by the apostle, and represented as significative of something moral in this sacrament, as immersion is of being buried with Christ, in the other. By the former, the unleavened bread, the christian worshippers are reminded, of the purity and sincerity with which they should assemble, and celebrate this religious rite. Therefore let us keep the feast; not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. Behold how emblematical and significative it is made! And by the latter, the one loaf, the unity of the church is, with great beauty and propriety, figuratively shewn forth, and the communion in one body, into which all christians are received. For we being many, are one bread, and one body, for we are all partakers of that one bread, or, as the passage ought to have been rendered, because there is one bread, or loaf used in this sacred ceremony, we who are many are one body; for we are all partakers of that one loaf.§

Let some reason be now shewn-Why we are to be tied down to a rigorous conformity to the circumstance of dipping, in one sacrament; but are not to the circumstance of unleavened bread, and

* Exod, xiii. 7. † 1 Cor. v. S. ↑ 1 Cor. x. 17.

O ng Ag ο σώμα οι πολλοί εσείς οι γερ παίλες εκ τις ενος αρτα μετοχημεία

of one loaf, in the other? If we must indeed fulfil all righteousness (as is warmly urged on this head) if we must observe exactly all the institutions and rites of the apostolic church; let us indeed, fulfil it. But then let us be consistent and uniform in our obedience: fulfilling the righteousness of saluting with the holy kiss-of anointing the sick with oil in the name of the Lord—of unleavened bread, and one loaf in the sacrament of the supper; as well as the righteousness of dipping the baptised. To conclude

4. From our Lord's decision in a like case, viz. The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; and I will have mercy and not sacrifice:*-It appears plainly to be his will, not to tie up his followers to a rigid and severe exactness in things of a ritual and positive kind.

The law injoining the sabbatical rest, was one of the ten delivered, with infinite pomp, at mount Sinai-Is often spoken of as an important part of the covenant which subsisted betwixt God and his people-Great blessings are promised to its religious observation; and severe threatenings denounced upon those who neglect it-Yea, a trangressor was once, by the express command of God, stoned to death for its violation, as a warning to future ages. This is a thousand times more than can be said in support of the form of dipping in baptism yet behold! The strict observance of this sabbatical rest, even under the Jewish, ceremonial, weakly dispensation, was violated by the apostles, and dispensed with by our Lord, when convenience or compassion to the body required it. Much more, then, may we conclude, that the strict observance of dipping, may be innocently peglected, under the infinitely more exalted dis

pensation of Christ; when either decency, or mercy, or great convenience forbids its use.

This fact, viz. the disciples breaking the sabbatical rest, by plucking and rubbing ears of corn, and our Lord's reasoning thereon, happened, no doubt, and was recorded with a view to the instruction of after ages; and was designed as a precedent, a rule of judgment and action, by which we are to be directed in every like case. Our divine legislator hath hereby taught us to reason thus -When the strict observance of a merely ritual command will be attended with danger and great inconvenience to the disciples, it may lawfully be waved-Or thus: baptism was made for man, and not man for baptism. If, therefore, through any change of national custom, or of climate, the form of dipping in baptism should become odd and unbecoming (as the love-kiss would now be) hazardous to the health, or troublesome to the disciples, it might then innocently be waved; and a form less burthensome and disagreeable be substituted in

its room.

And here I beg leave to ask-Whether a strict adherence to dipping the baptised, would not, probably, be attended with as much danger and inconvenience to the bodies of the disciples now; as a strict observance of the sabbatical rest would have been to the twelve apostles, when going through the field of corn? In other words :Whether it be not as much mercy to excuse some at least (viz. new-born infants, weakly and unhealthy persons, and even all others throughout the winter season, in these northern and cold cli mates) from being totally plunged in baptism; as it was to excuse the twelve for plucking and rubbing the corn on the Sabbath day?

It enters into the nature of things ritual and circumstantial, to be mutable, transient and liable to

be changed. As they are often but an adoption of some national custom (which is apparently the case as to the institution of baptism) or, an accommodation of a common usage to some purpose in religion: so, they are alterable in their nature; and are themselves in some measure to be accommodated to prevailing customs and tastes; to the several countries, climates, and tempers of mankind. This, I apprehend, is the only reasoning on which it is possible to justify our disuse of the primitive, apostolic practice of saluting with a kiss of love, in our worshipping assemblies. The custom of those ancient times rendered such salutations neither odd nor ridiculous: but should the practice be introduced into our present churches, and worship, it needs not be said--with how just an offence!

Now, if, for no other reason than a change of national custom, we lay aside this undoubtedly ancient, apostolic, religious ceremony, the kiss of charity; why should not a like change of national custom, with regard to bathing the whole body, be allowed to justify its disuse in the ceremony of baptism? For a woman, in thin apparel, before a multitude of spectators, to go into the water, and be taken into the arms of him who officiates, and be laid under the water, is, in the present nation and age, an equally indecent and disagreeable sight, as for men, at the conclusion of public prayers, to salute one another with a kiss of charity or peace.

To conclude:-If after all that hath been said any still think it their indispensable duty to baptise by immersion only; let them, by all means, thus baptise; but then, we beseech them to forbear all severe censures of those, who are not dipt. Let them not represent us as persons unbaptisedwithdraw from our churches-refuse communion

with us, at the common table of our Lord, upon so trifling a difference. This, surely, were to dishonour our sacred religion; and too naturally brings not only christian baptism, but christianity itself, into manifest contempt.

Let us therefore, according to the apostolic precept-receive one another, but not to doubtful disputations. To maintain an unity of spirit, by mutual forbearance, and to live together in perfect charity, is a matter of infinitely more importance, than the quantity of water, or the manner of its application, with which a person is baptised. For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. And the end of the commandment is charity; out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned.

Now the God of patience and consolation grant us to be like minded one towards another, according to Christ Jesus. That we may with one mind, and one mouth glorify God, even the father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen.