Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

was not from the beginning, or was not universal; and though I proposed to manage impartially, yet I hope no reader that is a Pædobaptist will expect that I should do the like with those learned men that give their ver dict for it. Instead of that, I must declare that all the rest that I have seen, that have occasion to speak of this matter, are of opinion that the sayings of the fathers are a sufficient evidence that it was always in use, and that as the general practice of the church of Christ.

Indeed, they will many of them say thus:-That there may perhaps be produced here and there a singu lar instance of a person that did omit it through carelessness, or some accident, &c. and that Tertullian also is an instance of one man that advised the delay of it till the age of reason, in case there appeared no danger of death in the mean time; and that this is ordinary in all customs, however allowed and established, that some one in an age happens to speak or act against them; and that a few such straggling instances are not to be esteemed of force sufficient to weaken the authority of a general rule.

It seems to me that the instances which the Antipadobaptists give, of persons not baptized in infancy, though born of Christians, are not (if the matter of fact be true) so inconsiderable as this last plea would represent.

On the contrary, the persons they mention are so many, and such noted persons, that, if they be all allowed, it is an argument that leaving children unbaptized was no unusual, but a frequent and ordinary thing; for it is obvious to conclude, that if we can in so remote an age trace the practice of so many that did this, it is probable that a great many more, of whose birth and baptism we do not read, did the like. This I will own, that it seems to me the argument of greatest weight of any that is brought on the Antipædobaptists side in this dispute about antiquity; and I believe the reader has observed in the places I have last quoted, that it is that which has most prevailed, both with Strabo and Vives, to think it was once the general practice to leave infants unbap

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

tized; and with Grotius, Bishop Taylor, and the others, to think it was once counted indifferent. It deserves, therefore, not to be so slightly passed over; but, if one had time and opportunity, to be thoroughly examined.

The worst is, it is a business of a great deal of dust and tediousness, to search after the birth and parentage of so many men (who, though they were conspicuous persons, yet many of them sprang from obscure origi nals) and not to be well done by any who has not a good library at hand. I have in my reading taken some observations of this matter, which I shall communicate in the next chapter.

CHAPTER III.

OF THOSE WHO ARE SAID TO HAVE BEEN BORN OF CHRISTIAN PARENTS, AND YET NOT BAPTIZED TILL OF MAN'S AGE.

An Account of the Persons, and State of their Case..

THE instances of this that are commonly given, are the five emperors mentioned before by Mr. Daillè, viz. Constantine, Constantius, Gratian, Valentinian the Second, and Theodosius the First; and also four noted persons of the Greek church, viz St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, Nectarius, and St. Chrysostom; and three of the Latin, St. Ambrose, St. Hierom, and St. Austin. Mr. Tombs mentions also Alypius and Adeodatus; one the friend, and the other the base, son of St. Austin; and both baptized at the same time with him.

Many of the Pædobaptists inake but weak answers to the argument that is drawn from the example of these men. They content themselves to say, that it was from some erroneous or corrupt principles that many, in those times, thought fit to defer baptism a great while, and some till just before death; either that they might gain

a longer time for their lusts, or because they thought that wilful sins committed after baptism could not be forgiven.

That many new converts did do this is too plain; and is a thing grievously complained of by the preachers of those times; and the granting of it to be true does not at all affect the question in hand, which is not Whether adult persons did defer their own baptism? but, Whether such adult persons as were come to a full resolution of being Christians, and were accordingly baptized themselves, did use to baptize their children in infancy or not? and to grant this latter, that they who were once baptized, did frequently use to let their children grow up without baptism, is to weaken, in great measure, the argument for infant baptism that is drawn from the practice of these antients; for if many did omit it, though upon erroneous grounds, the argument from the general practice is lost.

Some others have attempted a better answer, by shewing these instances, or some of them, to be mistakes; and that not all the persons mentioned were born of Christian parents, particularly Constantine and Austin have been excepted; as it was indeed easy to shew that those two ought to be. I shall make soine particular search concerning each of them.

The thing to be enquired concerning each of them is, 1st, Whether his baptism were delayed till years of age?— and if so, then,

2dly, Whether his parents were baptized Christians at the time of his birth? I say, baptized; because it was, as I said before, a very common thing for men in those times to be Christians in their intention and in their conscience, i. e. they were convinced that that was the truth, and did resolve some time or other to be baptized into it; and yet did put this off from time to time (as lukewarm men do now-a-days their repentance, or their receiving the other sacrament) knowing that ba tism would engage them to a very strict course of life; and in this state many lived for a long time after their conversion; being, in some sense, Christians, i. e. they

declared for that religion as the truth, they favoured it, they spoke for it, and in many things lived according to the rules of it; but for all that, were not as yet baptized, and so not accounted, in the phrase of those times, fideles, faithful, or brethren.

These men, while they were in this state, had oftentimes children born to them; and for such, it cannot be expected that they should bring their children to baptism before they could find in their heart to be baptized themselves; also many such children (being not baptized in their infancy, because their parents, though believers, were not yet baptized) when they grew up delayed their baptism as their fathers had done; and so the mischief was continued. To these it often happened that they were instructed from their youth in the Christian religion, and yet not baptized. Of such St. Basil speaks in the place cited, Part 1, ch. xii. Therefore, you see I have reason to say that our inquiry is of infants born of parents that were at that time baptized Christians; and that is all that any Pædobaptist would have to be done now, viz. that when any man is baptized himself, he should baptize his infant children.

Mr. Walker, endeavouring to shew that the instances brought by the Antipædobaptists do them no service, because the antients that delayed their childrens' baptism did it not on the same principles that they do now, viz. of the unlawfulness of it, reckons up* several reasons which moved some formerly to delay the baptism of their children; whereof the first is, doubtless, a plain and true one, viz. that "some were as yet Heathens themselves when their children were born; and no marvel if they would not make their children Christians," &c. "And the same is the case of such as though in heart and purpose Christians when their children were born, yet kept off from being baptized;" but he gives three reasons more, for which some that were baptized themselves might delay the baptizing of their children.

[ocr errors]

Preface to Modest Plea.

[ocr errors]

Any reader would, from what he says, conclude or suspect that many did this; at least that for these three reasons there were an account of three persons that had done it; but, upon search, I believe, it will appear that there is no proof of so many as three; and that there is but one, viz. the father of Gregory Nazianzen, that makes an instance for this, and he not a plain one; for it depends on an obscure point in chronology, Whether the son were born before his father's Christianity, or after?

In making this inquiry, I shall begin with the emperors; of whom it is proper to note, that whereas Mr. Daillè having, as I cited before, spoke of the frequent deferring the baptism of children and of other people, names the emperors. I suppose he means them among the other people, not among the children whose baptism was deferred; for all take him to be a man of another pitch of reading, than that he should think Constantine's father, for example, to have been a Christian; but the Antipædobaptists take this from him; and they understand it so, and do very tenaciously maintain that it was so.

Of Constantine and Constantius his Son; that they were not born of baptized Parents.

THAT Constantine was not baptized in infancy, but, on the contrary, in his old age, is a plain case. Eusebius, who was familiar with him, tells us when and how it was, viz. That when he thought himself near death, he went to Nicomedia, and having assembled the bishops in the suburbs of that city, he spoke thus to them :

"This is the time which I have long expected [237], with earnest desire and prayers, to obtain the salvation of God. It is time that I also should enjoy the badge of immortality, time, that I should be made partaker of the seal of salvation. I purposed once to

* De Vitâ Constantini, lib. 4, c. 62.

« AnteriorContinua »