the beginning of 1799; at which time I felt fome hesitancy as to its being fupported by the oracles of God.

My prefent thoughts with respect to the above texts, you will permit me to defer till I write you again; and in the mean time believe me to be

Yours, &c.

IN

REVEREND SIR,

:

LETTER II.

IN the clofe of my laft, the thought was fuggefted, that my mind hefitated, in the beginning of 1799, as to the validity of infant baptifm; it did, however, preponderate in its favour. But in the winter and fpring of this year, a new fcene opened to view. At this time a remarkable and extenfive reformation took place among my people; and among the converts, there were not less than twenty or thirty who were diffatisfied with infant baptism, and many of them doubted of sprinkling being the baptifm of the gofpel. It became my indifpenfable duty to take up the fubject, and canvafs it as well as I could. It was attempted; but I found not my path so clear of difficulties as it was wifhed to be. However, my ignorance and unbelief fuftained me for the time and by not understanding, and by mifapplying Mark vii. 4. and by going with the young converts to the water, and there partially washing them for baptism, their minds were in measure fatisfied. At the fame time, they had encouragement that the fubject of baptifm fhould be foon taken under confideration again, and that they might expect to have it then more fully and fatisfactorily explored. Thus the matter apparently refted with them; but my own mind was not long at a time without queries upon the subject. I now read my Bible over and over again; every pamphlet and every page written by any Pædobaptift, upon infant fprinkling, I read with eagernefs, wherever I could find it; but whenever I lit upon a leaf written in favour of gofpel baptifm, I either neglected it wholly, or read it with prejudice. My object was not fo much to know what baptifm was, as to prove that sprinkling was baptism. I pursued this fruitless fearch for nearly fix years. At intervals my mind was fatisfied, largely fo, that fprinkling, or rather that partial washing, was gofpel baptifm, and infants

the proper fubjects; as fully perfuaded of this being thecafe, perhaps, as you were, after three years fearch. My mind almoft perpetually gave judgment in favour of infant fprinkling, and feldom, if ever, doubted but it would pafs for baptifm. I was willingly ignorant of the true gofpel baptifm. Not only was I willingly ignorant, but, like my Pædobaptist brethren, I chose darkness, in this matter, rather than light. I was much like them alfo in another particular, in that I too much faid, in both words and practice, that any application of water, in the name of the Lord Jesus, was baptism; and that there was no determinate way, clearly pointed out in the Bible, by which water fhould be ap plied. For fprinkling, as being gofpel baptifm, I long and vainly fought; and because I could not find it, I more vainly concluded, that the matter was all left at fuch loose ends that nobody could know; and fo we must practise, and be agreed about the matter as well as we could. However, my mind could not, for a long period at a time, reft in this state of grofs darkness and ignorance. Befides, my people did not forget my encouragement, that the fubject of baptifm fhould be again taken up, and more fully handled; nor did they forget to remind me of my promise.

But the more I ftudied on the fubject, the more I discovered my darknefs, and my unpreparednefs to treat on it publickly. Whilft fearching every where for data to prove fprinkling or partial wafhing to be baptifm, it used occafionally to be fuggefted, Who are gospel subjects of baptifm? This became to me a ferious queftion in the year 1804. My difficulty was, indeed, not small; yet I thought myself juftified in continuing my practice. In Auguft of this year, juft before the administration of infant fprinkling, this text fomewhat forcibly ftruck my mind, He that doubteth is damned if he eat.' In a moment the following thought came to my relief, I doubt the lawfulness of my refusing to adminifter. In this trait, my judgment was, that duty call. ed me to proceed.

The next Lord's day, in the morning, one of my brethren, who had long doubted infant baptism, came and requested to have his children, eight in number, baptized. This request was at that time to me an unpleasant one: I hefitated. My confcience would but barely confent to the baptism of infants.* Here were children of fufficient age

* I frequently use the words, baptism and to baptize, in their modern nd perverted sense, to fignify rantism and to rantize. It is defired that he reader will understand me, and that the oppofers of gospel baptifm

words being thus used.

the proper fubjects; as fully perfuaded of this being the cafe, perhaps, as you were, after three years search. My mind almoft perpetually gave judgment in favour of infant fprinkling, and feldom, if ever, doubted but it would pafs for baptifm. I was willingly ignorant of the true gospel baptifm. Not only was I willingly ignorant, but, like my Pædobaptift brethren, I chose darkness, in this matter, rather than light. I was much like them alfo in another particular, in that I too much faid, in both words and practice, that any application of water, in the name of the Lord Jesus, was baptifm; and that there was no determinate way, clearly pointed out in the Bible, by which water fhould be ap plied. For fprinkling, as being gospel baptifm, I long and vainly fought; and because I could not find it, I more vainly concluded, that the matter was all left at fuch loose ends that nobody could know; and fo we must practise, and be agreed about the matter as well as we could. However, my mind could not, for a long period at a time, reft in this state of grofs darkness and ignorance. Befides, my people did not forget my encouragement, that the fubject of baptifm fhould be again taken up, and more fully handled; nor did they forget to remind me of my promise.

But the more I ftudied on the fubject, the more I discovered my darkness, and my unpreparednefs to treat on it publickly. Whilft fearching every where for data to prove fprinkling or partial wafhing to be baptifm, it used occafionally to be fuggefted, Who are gospel fubjects of baptism ? This became to me a ferious queftion in the year 1804. My difficulty was, indeed, not small; yet I thought myself juftified in continuing my practice. In Auguft of this year, just before the administration of infant fprinkling, this text fomewhat forcibly ftruck my mind, He that doubteth is damned if he eat.' In a moment the following thought came to my relief, I doubt the lawfulness of my refusing to adminifter. In this ftrait, my judgment was, that duty called me to proceed.

The next Lord's day, in the morning, one of my brethren, who had long doubted infant baptifm, came and requefted to have his children, eight in number, baptized. This request was at that time to me an unpleasant one: I` hefitated. My confcience would but barely consent to the baptism of infants.* Here were children of fufficient age

* I frequently use the words, baptism and to baptize, in their modern and perverted fense, to fignify rantism and to rantize. It is defired that the reader will underftand me, and that the oppofers of gospel baptifm

wanda haing thus ufad

to be taught, and to believe for themfelves. The difficulty which I felt was mentioned to the father of thefe children: he was defired to wait for an answer till the intermiffion: I then took him, with two of my deacons, and converfed confiderably upon the fubject. It was fomewhat plain to me, and mentioned to them, that, going upon the covenant of circumcifion, it was inconfiftent to baptize an infant of eight days, and to refuse another of twice eight years.

The more

I thought and fpake on the fubject, the more my difficulties increased. At this juncture, I fenfibly felt that wisdom was needed from on high. I mentioned to the two deacons, that it was, in my judgment, expedient that there fhould be a day of fafting and prayer appointed, that we might, among other requests, afk of God wifdom and knowledge with respect to baptifm, and the fit fubjects. The deacons agreed to the expediency of the propofal, and the brother confented to defer the baptifm of his children. Not long after, at a public conference of the brethren, my propofal was agreed to, and a day was appointed..

:

The day was folemnly obferved and with pleasure I now give information to all whom it may concern, and for the encouragement of my erring brethren, and efpecially for fuch as are in fenfible darkness respecting the fubjects of our difficulty, that, to the best of my recollection, every brother and fifter, who readily united in this day of feeking wifdom of God, hath been favoured with light, and very comfortable fatisfaction, refpecting thofe things concerning which we asked counsel of God. Our darkness and doubts, however, were not removed all at once, but by little and little; and we were fet at liberty one after another, much as it is in days of reformation.

Several manifeftly felt no need of wisdom; they still remain in their traditionary darkness.

The day of our fafting and prayer to the Father of Lights, for wisdom to guide us into the knowledge and practice of his will, being now ended, my mind was ftill in anxious fufpenfe. My thoughts now turned to infant baptifm. Some expectation 1 poffeffed, that, if nothing could be found for infant sprinkling, fomething might for baptizing, that is, for immerfing them. My cafe was fomewhat like that of a drowning man, -I was difpofed to catch at every straw which might affift in faving my traditionary notions from finking: ftill nothing could I find which appeared fo to comport with the directions and pattern given, as to afford a refting place.