THE Published by the fame AUTHOR, DIP PPING Not the only Scriptural and Primitive MANNER OF BAPTIZING: And fuppofing it were, yet a ftrict adherence to it not obligatory on us. In the Prefs and speedily will be published, A DEFENCE O F Infant Baptifm, in point of Antiquity; Against the Exceptions of Dr. John Gill, and others. * Is this, also, " by the same Author" ls Nos I and II? THE INTRODUCTION. A general view of the feveral difpenfations of religion with respect to INFANTS. F ROM the exactest observations, it appears, that of thofe who are born into the world, fcarce a third part attain to the age even of one year. Thousands of INFANTS every day languifh under grievous distempers; are tortured, convulfed, and in piteous agonies give up the ghoft.-This, at firft, feems a very frange difpenfation; hardly reconcileable with the wif dom and justice, much lefs with the goodness and mercy of GOD. It is fcarce poffible not to afkhow comes it to pafs, that millions of harmless babes, in whofe frame is difplayed fuch infinite skill; who are formed with capacities of fuch exalted attainments, both intellectual and moral; with capacities of an happiness ever-growing, and everlafting, in the knowledge, imitation, and enjoy. ment of GOD.-How comes it to pass, that they only thus glance upon the coafts of life; are juft brought into the world with exquifite pains, moan away a few weeks of mifery and disease upon it, and then in terrible convulfions, fall victims to death! What light has GoD caft upon this dark fcene of his providence? Has he left it quite covered with Impenetrable clouds? And, where the intereft and comfort of fo great a part of his intelligent creation are deeply concerned, has he given no intimations which may be a folid ground of hope? It can never be supposed. There are four difpenfations, under which RELI GJON has principally fubfifted fince the fail, viz. the difpenfation of the Light of Nature, the Abrabamic, the Mofaic, and the Chriftian. Now, each of thefe cafts fome light upon this awful scene, and adminifters fome hope as to fuffering and dying Infants. Let it then be enquired FIRST. What judgment doth REASON, or the Light of Nature, pafs upon their cafe? There are but two ways, in which REASON can account for this proceedure of providence, viz. by fuppofing thefe fuffering Infants to have exifted in fome former ftate; or that they will exift in fome future. Some have imagined, that they have exifled and misbehaved in a former ftate of being; and that their fufferings in the prefent, are a correction or punishment for evils done there. This the Platonic philofophy taught: and it feems to have been an opinion not uncommon amongst the Jews, in the days of our Saviour. Concerning the man that was born blind, the difciples, therefore, afk himmofler who did fin; this man, or his parents; that be was born blind (a): But this præexistence of Infants, being a matter of abfolute uncertainty; unsupported by any folid or probable grounds; REASON de (a) John ix. z. rives rives its principal fatisfaction, from the supposition of their existence in a state after death. There, the Almighty RECTOR can give them pleasures and entertainments abundantly to counterbalance the fufferings of their prefent ftate. This is what REASON, I fay, furmifes and hopes; but cannot certainly conclude. It wants fome REVELATION, fome promife from Gov, to give ftability and vigor to these wavering hopes. And under all the corflicts and pains which he fees his dying child fuffer, the pious parent has nothing, from the Light of Nature, whereon to trust, but the uncovenanted goodness and mercy of GoD. Now, were it not, in thefe circumstances, a most defireable thing, that God would give us fome revelation or promife concerning our INFANTS? Some covenant to affure us, that they are the objects of his favour and peculiar regard; and that as they fuffer and die in this world, fo they fhall be raised again to life and happiness in the other? Was not, I ask, fome fuch covenant, revelation, or promife, concerning our INFANTS, what nature greatly wanted, wifhed, for and defired; and, if God fhould be pleafed to grant it, ought it not to be highly valued, and most thankfully received (b)? Behold! B 2 SE (b) There is a very rational and just fenfe, in which GoD may be faid to eftablish his covenant with INFANTS. For the fcripture exprefsly fais, Gen. ix. 9, 10, 12, 13. that he efablished his covenant, even, with the cattle and the fowl; folemnly engaging no more to drown them by a flood. Is there any thing range, then, or unreasonable, in God's establishing his covenant with Infants; folemnly engaging to pour his fpirit and blefing on them? Or, that the evils they fuffer in confequence of Adam's fin, fhall be removed and amply recompenfed through the righteoufnefs of Chrift? Moft furely not at all. But, if there is a rational and just fenfe, in which GOD may eftablish his covenant with INFANTS; there is the highest reafon to prefume that he actually HAS done it, and that they are taken |