to signify and profess that your Old man or fleshly Lust is dead and buried with him and you rise thence to signify and profess that you rise to Newness of Life In his third Argument against Mr. Bâ—ake he saith quoad modum with respect to the Manner It is commonly confest by us to the Anabaptists as our Commentators declare that in the Apostles time the Baptized were Dipt over head in Water And though we have thought it lawful to disuse the manner of Dipping yet we presume not to change the Use and Signification of it Dr. Cave In his Primitive Christianity pag. 320. saith That the Party baptized was wholly immerged or put under Water which was the almost constant and universal Custom of those times whereby they did most notably and significantly express the great End and Effects of Baptism for as in Immerging there are in a manner three several Acts the putting the Person into Water his abiding there for some time and his rising up again thereby representing Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection c. Dr. Nicholson late Lord Bishop of Glocester In his Exposition of the Church-Catechism saith in pag. 174. And the ancient manner in Baptism the putting the Person Baptized under the Water and then taking him out again did well set out these two Acts the first his dying the second his rising again And in the same Page upon Col. 2. 12. he saith Into the Grave with Christ we went not for our Bodies were not could not be buried with his but in our Baptism by a kind of Analogy or Resemblance while our Bodies are under the Water we may be said to be buried with him Dr. Fowler present Lord Bishop of Glocester In his Scope of the Christian Religion upon Rom 6 4. saith Christians being plâ—nged into the Water in Baptism signifieth their undertaking and obliging themselves in a spiritual sense to die and be buried with Jesus Christ that so answerably to his Resurrection they may live a holy and godly Life Dr. Tillotson late Archbishop of Canterbury In his Sermon upon 2 Tim. 2. 19. saith Anciently those who were Baptized put off their Garments which signified the putting off the Body of Sin and were immersed and buried in the Water to represent the Death of Sin and then did rise up again out of the Water to signifie their Entrance upon a new Life And to these Customs the Apostle alludes Rom. 6. 4. Dr. Jer. Taylor late Lord Bishop of Down In his Ductor dubitantium lib. 3 cap. 4. saith The Custom of the ancient Church was not Sprinkling but Immersion in pursuance of the sence of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both in the Commandment and Example of our Blessed Saviour And this agrees with the Mystery of the Sacrament it self for we are buried with him in Baptism saith the Apostle The Old-man is buried and drowned in the Immersion under Water and when the Baptized Person is lifted up from the Water it represents the Resurrection of the New-man to Newness of Life The Learned Joseph Mede In his Diatribe on Titus 3. 5. saith There was no such thing as Sprinkling used in Baptism in the Apostles time nor many Ages after them Mr. Daniel Rogers None of old were wont to be Sprinkled and saith he I confess my self unconvinced by demonstration of Scripture for Infants Sprinkling It ought to be the Churches part to cleave to the Institution which is Dipping And he betrays the Church whose Officer he is to a disorder'd Error if he cleave not to the Institution which is to Dip. Rogers's Treatise of the two Sacraments part 1. chap. 5. The famous Reformer Luther Luther de Baptismo tom 1. fol. 71. in the Latin Edition printed at Wittemburgh saith Baptism is a Greek word it may be translated a Dipping when we dip something in Water that it may be covered with Water And although it be for the most part altogether abolished for that they do not Dip the whole Children but only Sprinkle them with a little Water they ought nevertheless to be wholly dipt and presently to be drawn out again And in Tome 2. fol. 79. concerning Babylon's Captivity The other thing saith he which belongs to Baptism is the Sign or the Sacrament which is the dipping it self into the Water from whence also it hath its Name Nam baptizo Graece mergo Latinè Baptisma mersio est For Baptizo in Greek is in Latin Mergo to dip and Baptisma is dipping And a little after speaking of Rom. 6. 4. he saith Being moved by this Reason I would have those that are to be Baptized to be wholly dipt into the Water as the Word doth sound and the Mystery doth signifie And when Complaint was made to him and other Divines at Wittemburgh That a Child had been Sprinkled at Hamburgh and their Advice desired upon it he wrote to Hamburgh to acquaint them that their Use of Sprinkling was an Abuse which they ought to remove Ita mersionem Hamburgi restitutam esse So Dipping was restored at Hamburgh Author Joannes Bugenhagius Pomeranius in his Book printed Anno 1542. He was Contemporary with and a Successor of Luther at Wittemburgh The Learned Grotius On Matth. 3. 6. Mersatione autem non perfusione agi solitum hunc ritum indicat vocis proprietas loca ad eum ritum delecta John 3. 23. Acts 8. 38. Et allusiones multae Apostolorum quae ad aspersionem referri non possunt Rom. 6. 3 4. Col. 2. 12. Mr. John Calvin On John 3. 23. Baptism was performed by John and Christ by dipping of the whole Body in Water And in his Institutions lib. 4. cap. 15. sect 19. he saith thus Caeterum mergaturne totus qui tingitur idque ter an semel an infusa tantum aqua aspergatur minimum refert sed id pro regionum diversitate Ecclesis liberum esse debet Quanquam ipsum baptizandi verbum mergere significat mergendi ritum veteri Ecclesia observatum fuisse constat Here you may see that although he thinks it a thing indifferent whether it be done by Dipping or Sprinkling and that thrice or once only and that it 's left to the Churches Liberty according to the diversity of Countries yet he comes in at last with his Quanquam notwithstanding the word Baptism signifies to Dip and it is evident that the Rite of Dipping was observed by the Old Church The Case is so clear as a learned Writer hath noted that Calvin up and down his Works doth often confess that the ancient manner of Baptism in the Primitive times was by Dipping the whole Body under Water Piscator On John 3 23. saith That Baptism was performed by Dipping the whole Body under Water The Dutch Translators Matth. 3. 1. Joannes de Dooper John the Dipper Vers 6. Gedoopt in de Jordaen Dipt in Jordan Vers 16 Ende Jesus gedoopt zynde epgeklommen uyt het water And Jesus being Dipt he climbed or came up out of the
either in that Commission or any other place where there is a Command in Holy Scripture for Baptism So that he needs no other Confutation than his own Confession in the presence as is supposed of about 2000 Witnesses 4. As for their Consequences which they were so desirous to have a Grant from me that I would allow them to make use of it 's very observable that if they can do any thing that way it 's yet to be done for they did not offer them to us in the Disputation but have reserved them in their own Breasts as the Pope doth his unwritten Traditions And how they should think the People should be convinced of the truth of their Practice when they tell them there is no express Command in Scripture for it and pretend only they have some Consequences to prove it by and yet refuse to tell what these Consequences are it is beyond my Imagination I can assure them those that can take up a Satisfaction in such empty Pretences are sufficiently prepared to be Priest-ridden with a witness 5. When they should have proved if they had known how that Infants are capable to be made Disciples by the Ministry of Men according to Christ's Commission they tell us instead thereof That Children are accounted so when they first enter the School and call a School-master for their Voucher When the very naming of it confutes themselves because they are so far from being made Scholars by Teaching that they know not one Letter of the Book by their own Confession 6. I cannot but observe how strenuously they opposed themselves against our way of Baptizing by Dipping and rejected the Authority of their own Authors and divers of the greatest Protestant Writers since the Reformation who have asserted our Practice therein to be agreeable to the Etymology of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Practice of John the Baptist Christ and his Apostles and yet themselves can when it is to serve a Turn practise it the same way by plunging the Person over Head and Ears in Water An Instance whereof as I received it well attested from several hands and the Persons own Confession take as followeth To back that Instance of Mr. Williams's about the Virgin Mary and our Saviour in answer to Mr. Leigh's Demand namely to give him an Instance of one Person that was born of a Believer and was Baptized when he came to grown years see pag. 34 35. We can give you an Account of one whose Parent was a Believer when he was born and Baptized when adult by Mr. Earl the Presbyterian Minister at Gosport by Dipping being about 40 years of Age. And this was done by the Advice of several of their Ministers particularly Mr. Chandler and Mr. Williams His Name is Joseph Fox he is a near Neighbour of ours And they did it either by the Commission or without regard to it I know not which that they best know And by another hand I have this Account We have also thought fit to acquaint you with the Person and his Name who was Baptized by the Presbyterians at Gosport which is as followeth It was Mr. Joseph Fox living in Gosport who being by our Brother Duke desired to answer him one thing which was Whether when he was Baptized by Mr. Earl it was done by Dipping the whole Body under Water And he said it was and that in the Presence of four Presbyterian Ministerâ— Thiâ— was acknowledged by him to our Brother Duke on the 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 16â—6-9 And we do desire you if you think 〈…〉 in some part of the Dispute that the World may 〈◊〉 acquainted with that Proceeding of theirs Now by this Action of theirs if they believe it to be according to the Commission then they justify our Practice if they do it for any by-end without believing it to be according to God's Word then as Mr. Calvin saith the whole Action is but a Sport Now that Mr. Chandler can have no other Thoughts of it doth evidently appear from his own Words for in his Sermon preachd at Portsmouth Nov. 10. 1698. he saith It is not likely that that God that will have mercy and not sacrifice would institute an Ordinance so prejudicial to the Bodies of Men and that it 's very unlikely that Dipping which whenever it is mentioned is used as a Token of God's Vengeance should in this Sacrament be used as a Token of his Mercy Where you read of Dipping you find it mentioned in a way of Wrath and Vengeance Thus the old World was Dip'd and Drowned for their Sins God's Vengeance followed them and they sunk as Lead in the mighty Waters Thus the Egyptians were Dip'd and Drowned in the Red Sea Thus the Lord Jesus Christ shall come down from Heaven to render Vengeance on his Adversaries cloathed with Garments Dip'd in blood Rev. 19. 13. Here Mr. Chandler hath rendred that word Dip'd to inveigh and ridicule our Practice of Dipping although he could object against it when I gave it for an Instance But he goes on saying You find still Dipping represents in Scripture God's Vengeance and Displeasure And so I say it is very unlikely that what was always used as a Token of his Displeasure should in the New Testament be used as a Token of Mercy So that it is not necessary that Dipping be used in Baptism To which I give this for Answer 1. If it be so as he saith then it was altogether unnecessary that Mr. Erle by his Consent should dip Mr. Fox's whole Body under the Water 2. That it was not done in Mercy to him thus to Baptize him but in Vengeance and as a Token of God's Displeasure 3. That the Baptism practised by John the Dipper and that of Christ and his Apostles was not an Ordinance instituted of God in a way of Mercy but appointed for the People in a way of Wrath and Vengeance for I have given him a cloud of Witnesses that they did administer it by Dipping the whole Body under the Water 4. By this he doth condemn and ridicule all those learned Protestants I have mentioned with many others that might be named And the Divines of the Church of England as well as we who appoint Dipping as the best way of Baptizing and Sprinkling only in case of Weakness and was used by them formerly as their frequent Practice and is asserted by some of their greatest Divines to be the old and best way of Baptizing and is to this day the constant Practice of the Greek Church I am also well assured from some other hands that upon the 25th of Febr. last a few days after the Dispute Mr. Leigh said in the Presence of divers Persons That to satisfy a Scrupulous Conscience he would administer Baptism by Dipping Whereupon Mr. Williams askt him if he would do it to answer a Scrupulous Conscience without God's Word And he answered No. And I have reason to conclude that Mr. Leigh may believe that Dipping is the right
strange thing is this to talk of Baptizing the Beasts of the Field Who ever did so Dr. Russel I am so far from talking of Baptizing the Beasts of the Field that my Argument is rather to prove the direct contrary And whereas you affirm that Infants have a Capacity to be made Disciples of Christ by the Ministry of Men or else you have been saying nothing to the purpose all this tim◠about it I bring this to shew you the Absurdity of such a No tion And you are bound to shew the Disparity or confes◠you cannot Sirs I would put this Case to you Suppose there were twenty or thirty new born Infants in a Room and you should chuse out the most able and learned Person among you to preach to them in order to make them Disciples according to Christ's Commission I believe he would have no better Success than St. Anthony had as the Story goes when he took upon him to instruct the Pigs or as some others have don◠even Popish Saints who have took upon them to preach 〈◊〉 the Fowls of the Air c. of which I could furnish you with divers Instances But why should Mr. Robinson think it strange that any body should have such a Conceit in their Minds Doth he not know that the Church of Rome baptize things of an inferiour Nature for they baptize Churches and Bells And if I had compared your Practice to theirs of baptizing Belle you had had no reason to complain for they are both passive in the Act only if you will give credit to one of the Fathers viz. Augustine the Bells are upon that account the fittest Subjects for they are wholly passive but saith he the little Children are not so for they shew their Resistance by their Crying And now I demand of any of you to take off the Retortion and shew the Disparity if you can Upon this they were all silent and none of them would undertake to shew the Disparity and till they do it my Retortion will remain upon them Then Mr. Leigh said It is time to proceed to the other Question Dr. Russel I will now enter upon it The second Question is this Whether the Ordinance of Baptism as appointed by Christ is to be administred by Dipping Plunging or Overwhelming only and not otherwise I take the Question in the Affirmative and my first Argument is this Arg. 1. The Holy Scripture shews us the right way of Baptizing as appointed by Christ But it doth not shew us that it ought to be done by Sprinkling Ergo Sprinkling is not the right way of Baptizing Mr. Leigh Sir you must bring in that Dipping is absolutely necessary as in the Question what do you talk of Sprinkling for Dr. Russel Sir I know not of any other way that is practised by you nor I suppose any of these People I conclude they have often seen you sprinkle Infants and Mr. Chandler hath particularly recommended it in his Preaching as the best way of Baptizing and I hope you are not asham'd of your Practice But if you will disown Sprinkling to be the right way of Baptizing I am contented I will not then insist upon it Mr. Robinson We are not discoursing of that now you are to prove Dipping to be the only way and you must and shall prove it Dr. Russel Must and Shall Must and Shall is for the King and not for Mr. Robinson Mr. Leigh But we will not admit of this Argument because it hath not the word Only in it You are to prove that your Way is the only right Way of Baptizing Dr. Russel Mr. Leigh was pleased to make use of an Argument of Induction upon the Question about the Subjects And why may not I use the same Liberty about the Manner and prove it by Arguments of Inductions Upon this some of them fell a laughing and Mr. Chandler thus exprest himself Your Induction is an Induction like the man's Covey of Partridges Mr. Williams ask'd him how many there was in the Covey Mr. Chandler said Why there was but one Mr. Williams replied But there was more a hatching Dr. Russel What is the Reason of all this I tell you I will make it good by Arguments of Induction And if you do not understand my meaning I will inform you and shew that it is a good way of arguing and will answer the End I bring it for For. I will first argue off your way of Sprinkling and after that if you shall assign a Third way that is neither practised by you nor us I will then argue that off also and then I hope I shall fully prove what I design by it namely that Ours is the only right way of Baptizing Upon this they readily discerned they should be forced to give an instance from Scripture for their Practice of Sprinkling which they were conscious to themselves they were not able to do and therefore utterly refused to answer the Argument Dr. Russel If this Argument will not be admitted I will proceed to another That Way which doth not signify that which ought to be represented in Baptism according to Christ's Appointment is not the right way of Baptizing But this your pretended way doth not do Ergo It is not the right way of Baptizing And this I shall make good by the following Syllogism If that Baptism which was appointed by Christ doth properly represent his Burial and Resurrection and ours by him then it must be done not by Sprinkling but by Dipping Plunging or overwhelming the Person Baptized into Water But that Baptism which was appointed by Christ doth properly represent his Burial and Resurrection and ours by him Ergo It must be done not by Sprinkling but by Dipping Plunging or Overwhelming the Person Baptized into Water Mr. Chandler I deny the consequence of the Major that it properly sets forth a Burial and a Resurrection It is not for this Reason the only Way and I deny that this Way doth only set forth a Burial and a Resurrection Dr. Russel Then I will prove 1. That it doth truly represent a Burial and a Resurrection And 2. That it is the only right way of practising this Ordinance 1. That it doth represent a Burial and a Resurrection I prove from Rom. 6. and Coloss 2. In Rom. 6. 4. Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up c. Coloss 2. 12. Buried with him in Baptism wherein also ye are risen with him c. This cannot be understood literally for so they were not could not be buried with him in his Sepulchre neither can we But the Apostle resolves us how this was done and how they were and we may be buried with him and also rise with him and that is by Baptism Buried with him in Baptism wherein also ye are risen with him Therefore Baptism is to be performed in such a way that represents a Burial and a Resurrection which is most aptly represented by Dipping
Plunging or Overwhelming the Person baptized into the Water and raising him up again out of it 2. That this is the only right way of performing this Ordinance I prove thus If there were no other way practised by John the Baptist Christ nor his Apostles but what did represent a Burial and a Resurrection then ours is the only right way of Baptizing But there was no other way practised by John the Baptist Christ nor his Apostles but what did represent a Burial and a Resurrection Ergo Ours is the only right way of Baptizing Mr. Chandler You are to prove that because Baptism is significant of a Burial and Resurrection therefore it must be done only by Dipping Dr. Russel By this Mr. Chandler grants that Baptism doth signifie a Burial and Resurrection and I have already proved that therefore it is the only right way of Baptizing that we practise because there was no other practised in those first Times of the Gospel And till he give an Instance to the contrary my Proof stands good But I shall farther prove it by this Argument If there can no Instance be given that ever the Apostles did Baptize other ways than by Dipping then ours is the right Way of Baptizing But there 〈◊〉 be no Instance given that ever the Apostles did Baptize other ways than by Dipping Ergo Ours is the right way of Baptizing Mr. Leigh I deny the Enumeration in your Argument for it doth not follow that because the Apostles did not practise it any other way that there were no others that did For there were divers other Ministers in those Times besides the Apostles that did also Baptize Dr. Russel By this you grant that the Apostles of our Lord did not practise Baptism any other way than by Dipping And to prove that no others did use a different Practice I thus argue If we have no Account in Holy Scripture that either the Apostles or any other Ministers in those Times did Baptize any one Person other ways than by Dipping then Dipping is the only right way of Baptizing But we have no Account in Holy Scripture that either the Apostles or any other Ministers in those Times did Baptize any one Person other ways than by Dipping Ergo Dipping is the only right way of Baptizing Mr. Chandler I can shew there is another way that it might be done and not by Dipping and that from the Etymology of the word Baptizo for it signifies also to wash Dr. Russel I remember what Alstedius saith in his Lexicon Theologicum Having before been speaking about the Etymology of that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tantum significat immergere non lavare nisi ex consequenti and therefore it signifies to wash only in a secondary and remote sense because things that are dip'd may be said to be wash'd But the proper and primary Signification of Baptizo is to dip for it comes from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mergo immergo to dip to plunge to overwhelm to dip into c. Mr. Chandler I own that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies mergo immergo But I can shew great probability that many in Scripture times were Baptized by pouring a little Water on the Face and there is no Certainty that Dipping was ever used Dr. Russel How doth that appear Mr. Leigh We will argue on a Probability It might be done other ways than by Dipping and a Probability is the most you can pretend to for Dipping I require you to prove that Dipping was certainly intended in those places you bring for it and then I will prove that Dipping was not intended but only an Application of Water to the Person Dr. Russel The first Instance I shall give is the Baptism of our Saviour as it is exprest in Mark 1. 9. Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilce and was baptized of John in Jordan The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which words do certainly signifie that he was Dipped into â—â—rdan Mr. Leigh The Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies in as well as into and is often so Translated in the New Testament Dr. Russel That it may sometimes so signify where the Scope of the place may shew it I will not contend But you know very well that where it is joined with an Accusative as it is here it signifies into And I can shew that our Translators have so rendred it in many places in the New Testament And it would many times be Nonsence to understand it otherwise I will give you some Instances of it in the room of many that might be given As in John 3. 17. God sent not his son into the World to condemn the World but that the World through him might be saved Here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred into for the Words in the Greek are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and I hope you will not deny that God sent Christ into the World And in 1 Tim. 1. 15. Christ Jesus came into the World to save sinners c. There 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is also Translated into And I hope you will not deny that Christ came into the World to save Sinners It 's joined with the same Words as in John 3. 17. before recited And in Luke 4. 16. it 's said He went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath-day and stood up for to read Here again it is so rendred for the Words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the Synagogue And the eyes of all them that were in the Synagogue were fastned on him ver 20. which could not have been had he not gone into the Synagogue as it 's manifest he did And I hope you will not deny that Christ went into the Synagogue but you may do it with as much colour of Reason as to say he was not Dip'd or Plunged of John into the River of Jordan when the same Word is used in the same Sense And besides if we do but consider those multitudes that John Baptized in the River of Jordan and other places where there was much Water we have no reason to doubt of the Truth thereof Mr. Leigh We allow that what cannot be now used without being burdensome might be more commodious in that day and observed in that hot Country of Judaea when there was so many came to John to be Baptized and therefore it may be that they went out to Rivers But I will argue upon a Probability It is well known in those hot Countries the People wore Sandals and they might go into the Water a little way to wash their Feet Now I offer this fair Interpretation They might step a little way into Jordan for Ease and Refreshment and then John might pour a little Water on them Now allow â—ut the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie to wash as we can easily prâ—â—e it is often so taken in Scripture and I offer to all the Company whether this be not a fair Interpretation of the place That John washed him with Water he going a little
their choosing places where there was much Water to Baptize in as I have already shewed so far as they would permit me and should have made it manifest beyond exception if I might have been heard But to answer your Demand I alledge Acts 8. 38 39. And they went both down into the Water both Philip and the Eunuch and by Baptized him And when they were come up out of the Water c. Here we have an account that both the Administrator and the Person to be Baptized went both down into the Water and when they came there he Baptized him And if Philip had not been to put the Eunuch into the Water and cover him with it why should they go down both into the Water A little of it might have been brought up to them into the Chariot if Sprinkling would have served the turn But it appears manifestly that nothing less would serve for to answer the Commission but to Dip the Person Baptized into the Water otherwise they did that which was wholly needless and besides the Rule that was given them to practise by And their coming up again out of the Water doth evidently shew that he was Plunged into it and overwhelm'd with it Mr. Leigh replied That the Greek word signified to go down to and come up from the Water Mr. Williams replied That there was two differing Words as he had been informed in the Greek Text as there are two different Words in the Translation For it is said As they went on their way they came unto a certain Water This was before he proposed for Baptism But when a Grant was given him that he might be Baptized it is then said They went down both of them into the Water and Philip Baptized him there Now as they are different Words in the Translation coming unto and going down into even so they are differing Words in the Greek Dr. Russel said They were two different Words to which Mr. Leigh concessed But after the Meeting was over Mr. Williams the Presbyterian Minister in whose Meeting place the Dispute was told Mr. Williams the Baptist Disputant he was in the right and that they were two differing Words in the Greek one for coming unto the other for going down into Dr. Russel I then farther argue If the Spirit of God doth never use the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the Ordinance of Baptism is mentioned but alâ—ays expresses it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then it was performed by Dipping Plunging or Overwhelming only But the Spirit of God doth never use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the Ordinance of Baptism is mentioned but always expresses it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ergo. It was performed by Dipping Plunging or Overwhelming only Mr. Chandler I deny the Sequel of the Major because the Word doth sometimes signify a Washing that is short of Dipping Dr. Russel You must then assign your Instance Mr. Chandler You must know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabal And I will shew that it denotes such a Washing as is short of Dipping And in Dan. 4. 33. where it is said of Nebuchadnezzar His body was wet with the dew of Heaven the Septuagint render it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that it cannot be understood in your sense Dr. Russel That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in the stead of Tabal is true But how do you know that the Word was so Rendred by the Septuagint Mr. Chandler It is so in that Translation that goes in their Name Dr. Russel That I deny for the Word there is Ebaphe and not Baptizo But do you not know what Weemes saith in his Christian Synagogue That the Septuagint Translation was burnt and only some Fragments of it remaining which was made up by others so that neither you nor I know when we read the Septuagint and when we read other men But what doth all this signify That is but a Translation and I think ours to be much better than that if it were as you say and more agreeable to the scope of the place to say his body was wet with the dew of Heaven than to say it was dipt with the dew of Heaven But I pray let Mr. Chandler tell us how it is in the Hebrew which is the Language in which it was written Mr. Chandler The Word in the Hebrew is Tabal Dr. Russel That I deny Whereupon an Hebrew Bible was produced and handed up to Dr. Russel And the Book of Daniel not being placed in its right order as in other Hebrew Bibles he did not readily find it whereupon they cried out They believ'd he could not read it The Dr. answered He could read Hebrew before Mr. Chandler was born and as a demonstration of it he read a Verse or two in the Beginning thereof Upon this Mr. Robinson took the Book and with some difficulty found out the Book of Daniel and then gave it to Dr. Russel again who read the Place by them directed to and told Mr. Chandler that the Word Tabal was not there And then after all this needless trouble Mr. Chandler did confess that it was not and so all his Pretention from thence vanished into Smoak Mr. Chandler also urged for another instance to prove that Tabal signified a Washing less than that by Dipping 2 Kings 5. 10 14. Go and wash in Jordan and be clean And in Verse 14. Hâ— dipped himself in Jordan Now this must signifie a Washing short of Dipping because though Tabal doth express the Act done in Ver. 14. yet the Command is given by Rachatz which signifies to wash Dr. Russel I do allow that the Command is â—xprest by Rachatz and also that it sometimes is used as weâ— as Cabas to signifie less than Dipping when it is applied to some particular things or parts of things which are to be cleansed from Filth as you know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek is to wash the hands But where Rachatz in the Hebrew is used in the Sence as it 's here exprest namely to wash himself it 's always to be understood of such a Washing as is by Dipping The Jews understood it so and Naaman the Syrian understood the Prophet in that sence for it 's said he dipped himself in Jordan seven times And that he was not mistaken about it is evident for that the Spirit of God hath left it upon Record that what he did was according to the Saying of the Man of God so that the Prophet did not intend by Rachatz any other Washing than what is performed by Dipping of the Person so washed into the Water And had this been a Derivative there might have been some doubt raised about it but seeing Tabal is the Root it self it can signify nothing less than what is the known sence thereof viz. he Dipped He dipped himself in Jordan seven times according to the Saying of the Man of God Thus I have cleared this Text from your Objection
as not intending any such thing as you have brought it for but the direct contrary Then Mr. Chandler said We challenge you to prove by Scripture that the Word Baptizo signifies to Dip and that that is intended by Baptism Dr. Russel I will prove it from all the Places where the Ordinance of Baptism is spoken of if you will let me prove it from the Greek Mr. Chandler No you shall prove it from our Translation that it 's there any where so rendred but you shall not do it from any of those places where the Ordinance of Baptism is spoken of Dr. Russel That is unreasonable that when the Use of a Word is enquired into and what was the Practice of the first Ministers pursuant to that Word by which they are commanded to Baptize for all those Scriptures where it is so mentioned to be excluded out of our Enquiry Mr. Chandler I will not allow you to prove it from any of those places where the Ordinance of Baptism is either exprest or intended Dr. Russel If nothing else will do with you I will then undertake to prove from divers places in Scripture that either Bapto or its Derivatives is so rendred in our English Translation The first Scripture I shall instance in is Revel 19. 1â— He was cloathed with a Vesture dipt in Blood Mr. Chandler This is not Bapto Dr. Russel No more is Baptizo Baptismos Baptisma c. but they are all Derivatives from it and so is the Word that is here used And this Mr. Chandler did not deny Dr. Russel did then urge the several places in the Evangelists about Judas dipping with Christ in the dish as Matt. 26. 23. He that dippeth Mark 14. 20. John 13. 26. When I have dipped it And when he had dipped c. Now in all these places you see it 's thus rendred and the Ordinance of Baptism not in the least intended Moreover I will give you one Instance more in which the most minute Action imaginable is intended and yet so much as was put into the Water is said to be dipt Luke 16. 24. Where the rich Man being in Hell desired Father Abraham to send Lazarus that he might dip the tip of his finger in Water to cool his tongue c. By this it appears that our Translators did thus understand the Word to intend Dipping and have never rendred it to Sprinkle in all the New Testament I would only add That when Learned Men come to have but the same Wisdom as the Jewish Rabbies have to reduce all doubtful Words to their Roots and Theme from whence they are derived then much of our present Disputes will issue in the Knowledge of the Truth and we shall cease to strive about Words to no profit but to the subverting of the Hearers Upon this followed a confused Jangling and Noise so that the Amanuensis could not take it down neither did he think it worth the taking But Mr. Williams the Presbyterian Minister said he thought there had been little said to the purpose Upon this Dr. Russel said Mr. Williams I think there hath been a great deal said more than hath been answered but if you are not satisfied we will wave all that hath been said and I will dispute it over with you de novo Mr. Williams shrugged and answered no I am not very well Although he had not been engaged at all in the Dispute himself and the Doctor had been fatigued by so long a Disputation yet Mr. Williams refused to accept his Offer It was at last thought meet by them to put an Issue to the Disputation And Mr Leigh after he had made a Speech to thank the Governour and the Mayor for their Civility towards them and the Baptists had returned their Thanks also he then concluded in Prayer and so dismist the Assembly It was between the hours of Six and Seven of the Clock when the Dispute ended I do now think it proper to give you an Account of those Learned Mens Testimonies to justifie our Practice of Dipping which Dr. Russel was then prevented to recite by reason of the Ministers Hissing and the Noise and Clamour of their Party that would not suffer him to be heard Pool's Annotations Matt. 3. 6 Were Baptized that is Dipped in Jordan Matt. 28. 19. It 's true the first Baptisms of which we read in Holy Writ were by Dipping of the Persons Baptized Where it may be we judge it reasonable and most resembling our Burial with Christ by Baptism into Death John 3. 22 23. There John was Baptizing because this Aenon was a Brook or River that had much Water It is from this apparent that both Christ and John Baptized by Dipping the Body in the Water else they need not have sought places where had been a great plenty of Water Acts 8. 38. In hot Countries this was usual to Baptize by Dipping the Body in the Water Rom. 6. 4. He seems here to allude to the manner of Baptizing in those warm Eastern Countries which was to Dip or Plunge the Party Baptized and as it were to bury him for a while under Water Dr. Hammond's Annotations Matth. 3. John put the Persons whom he Baptized into the Water Dipped them all over and so took them out again And in his Paraphrase on Mark 1. 5. And John's Baptism was done in Jordan a River convenient for that purpose The Learned Perkins Rom. 6. The ancient Custom of Baptizing was to Dip and as it were to dive all the Body of the Baptized in the Water as may appear in Paul Rom. 6. And the Councils of Laodicea and Neocaesarea The Action of the Minister is his washing of the Party Baptized with the Element of Water Of Washing there be three parts The putting into the Water the continuance in the Water and the coming out of the Water Perkins's Order of the Causes of Salvation and Damnation cap. 33. pag. 74. vol. 1. And in his Comment on Golat. 3. 27. vol. 2. pag 257. the Dipping of the Body signifies Mortification or Fellowship with Christ in his Death the staying under the Water signifies the Burial of Sin and the coming out of the Water the Resurrection from Sin to Newness of Life And upon Matth. 28 19. Here saith he a Question may be made whether washing the Body in Baptism must be by Dipping or Sprinkling His Answer is this In hot Countries and in the Baptism of Men of years Dipping was used and that by the Apostles And to this Paul alludes Rom. 6. 3 4. And Dipping doth more fully represent our spiritual Washing than Sprinkling Ibid. pag. 257. Mr Baxter in his Paraphrase Matth. 3. 5. We grant that Baptism then was by washing the whole Body Matth. 3. 6. Baptism was in John's time by washing the whole Body Rom. 6. 4. Therefore in our Baptism we are Dipped under the Water Coloss 2. 12. Ye are dead and buried with him for so your Baptism signified in which ye are put under the Water
Water Matth. 28 19. Onderwyst alle de volckeren deselve dopende in den name des vaders c. Instruct all the People dipping the same in the name of the Father c. Mark 1. 9. Ende wiert van Joanne gedoopt in de Jordaen Ende terstont al 's by uyt het Water opklaem c. And was dipt of John in Jordan And straightways as he climb'd up out of the Water c. Acts 8. 36. Wat verhindert my gedoopt te worden What hinders me to be dipt v. 38. Ende hy doopte hem And he dipt him v. 12. Wierden sy gedoopt beyde Mannen ende Vrouwen They were dipt both Men and Women Rom. 6. 3. Ofte en wetet ghy niet dat soo vele al 's wy in Christum Jesum dedoopt zyn wy in Synen doodt gedoopt zyn Know ye not that so many of us as were dipt into Christ Jesus we were dipt into his Death And the same in Coll. 2. 12. And according to what I find in all other places where this Ordinance of Baptism is mentioned Dutch Annotations On John 3. 23. And John also Baptized in Aenon near Salim c. seeing there were many Waters there that is Brooks or Rivelets or much Water Because they that were Baptized by John went into the Water with their whole Bodies See Matth. 3. 16. Acts 8. 38. And on Rom. 6. 3. We are Baptized into his Death The Apostle seems here to allude to the manner of Baptizing much used in those warm Eastern Countries where Men were wholly Dipt into the Water and remained a little while under the Water to shew that this Dipping into and remaining in the Water is a Representation of Christ's Death and Burial and the rising up out of the Water of his Resurrection Beza on Matth. 3. 11. The Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to die by dipping or washing and differs from the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to drown or go down to the bottom like a Stone Causabon's Annotations Upon Matth 3. He saith Immerging was the proper Rite in Baptism which the Word it self sufficiently declares which as it signifies not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a going down to the bottom without any ascending so not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a swimming like a Cork above the Water but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a going down and coming up again Tilenus a Learned Protestant Writer In his Disputation page 886 889 890. saith Baptism is the first Sacrament of the New Testament Instituted by Jesus Christ The Outward Rite in Baptism is Three fold First Immersion into the Water 2dly Abiding under the Water 3dly A rising again out of the Water And he there shews at large what a most lively Similitude it is of the Sorrows of Christ which he was plung'd into under Divine Justice and of his Burial and Resurrection c. Leigh in his Critica Sacra He saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tingo to dip or plunge into the Water and signifieth primarily such a kind of washing as is used in Bucks where Linen is plunged or dipt It implieth the washing of their whole Body The Native and Proper signification of it is to dip into Water or to plunge under Water John 3. 22 23. Matth. 3. 16. Acts 8. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dipping into Water or washing with Water c. And in his Annotations on Rom 6 4. He alludes to the manner in which Baptism was then Administred which was to plunge them in the Water the plunging of them into Water that were Baptized was a Sign of their Death and Burial with Christ Wollebius in his Compendium c. Speaking of their present Practise saith The Action is sprinkling of Water which is usurped in the stead of Dipping And then adds Immersio emersio illustre Symbolum fuit Sepulturae Resurrectionis Christi Their being plunged into the Water and coming up again out of the Water was an Illustrious Symbol of the Burial and Resurrection of Christ Daille on the Fathers Lib. 2. p. 148. saith It was a Custom heretofore in the Ancient Church to plunge those they Baptized over Head and Ears in the Water and cites for his Authority Tertullian Cyprian Epiphanius and others And this is still saith he the Practice both of the Greeks and Russians at this Day And Cites Cassander de Baptismo pag. 193. and yet notwithstanding this Custom which is both so Ancient and so Universal is now abolished by the Church of Rome And this is the reason that the Moscovites say that the Latines are not rightly and duly Baptized because they do not use this Ancient Ceremony in their Baptism Also in that Greek Lexicon Published and Recommended to all for the encrease of Knowledge and explained in English by Mr. Joseph Caryll Mr. George Cockayne Mr. Ralph Vening Mr. William Dell Mr. Matthew Barker Mr. William Adderly Mr. Matthew Mead Mr. Henry Jessey They render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dip plunge or drown In the passive Voice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be plunged or overwhelmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dip in as one doth his Finger in Liquor From this we may allow that the Presbyterian Ministers do Baptize their Fingers when they dip them into the Waters but cannot be said to Baptize the Children because they do not dip them in the Water but sprinkle only a little Water upon their Faces Mat. 26. 23. John 13. 26. Mark 14. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to plunge to overwhelm to wash to dip Mat. 3. 11. John 1. 25. Chap. 3. 26. John 4. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 17. John 1. 31. Matth. 28. 19. John 3. 22. John 4. 2. Chap. 1. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be plunged to be Baptized or Dipt By a Metaphor it 's taken for Affliction Matth. 20. 22. which is familiarly read in Scripture whereby Afflictions are compared to the Gulphs and Whirl-Pools of Water into which those are plunged who struggle with the Miseries and Calamities of this Life Yet they are so plunged that they can lift up themselves again I might also add what those several great Masters of the Greek Tongue us Scapula Stephanus Schrevelius and divers others have said concerning the Etymology thereof But the Learned being so well acquainted therewith I shall only touch upon it They confirming what I have already observed from others They tell us in their Lexicons that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies mergo immergo submergo obruo item tingo quod fit immergendo To dip to overwhelm to plunge or dip in to drown or sink in the Water to overwhelm to dip or plunge to put under to cover clean over c. And that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rantizo is Aspergo to sprinkle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aspersio sprinkling Now these two different Words do signifie two different Actions For he that is only sprinkled cannot be said to be dipt or plunged under the Water
and to come up again out of the Water when they were never in it as those are said to do in Acts 8. 38. They went both down into the Water and they came up again out of the Water Besides I challenge all the Learned in the World to shew one Instance in the New Testament that these words Rantizo Rantismos or Rantisma are ever made use of by the Spirit of God to express that Ordinance of Baptism by For they know right well that Bapto and its Derivatives are always made use of to express it by And where they are translated into English the one is rendred Dipping and the other Sprinkling But if these Men will keep up a Practise contrary to Holy Scripture and the Judgment of the most Learned Lexicographers and Criticks in the Greek Tongue it 's their own fault and not ours The Assembly of Divines Annotations Acts 8. 38. They went both down into the Water They were wont to dip the whole Body or go down into the Water as here and Matth. 3. 16. And upon Rom. 6. 4. Buried with him by Baptism See Col. 2. 12. In this Phrase the Apostle seemeth to allude to the Ancient Manner of Baptism which was to Dip the Parties Baptized and as it were to bury them under the Water for a while and then to draw them out of it and lift them up to represent the Burial of our Old Man and our Resurrection to newness of Life The late Dr. Gabriel Towerson in his Explication of the Catechism of the Church of England Part 4. pag. 20 c. speaks largely upon it in Vindication of the Rite of Dipping in Baptism of which I shall recite some few Passages and refer you to his Book for the rest Baptism is intended as a Sign and that in respect of the Manner of Application used I mean the dipping or plunging the Party Baptized in it A signification which St. Paul will not suffer those to forget who have been acquainted with his Epistles for which he Quotes Rom 6 4. and Col. 2. 12. It was performed by the Ceremony of Immersion that the Person Immersed might by that Ceremony which was no obscure Image of a Sepulture be minded of the precedent Death as in like manner by his coming again out of the Water of his rising from that Death to Life after the Example of the Institutor thereof Then he puts this Question Whether it ought to be performed by an Immersion or an Aspersion c His Answer is It may be a more material Question than is commonly deemed by us who have been accustomed to Baptize by a bare Effusion and Sprinkling of Water upon the Party For things which depend for their force on the meer Will and Pleasure of him who Instituted them there ought no doubt great regard to be had to the Commands of him that did so as without which there is no reason we should receive the benefit of that Ceremony to which he has been pleased to annex it Now what the Command of Christ was in this particular cannot be well doubted of by those who shall consider First The words of Christ Matth 28. 19. concerning it and the Practice of those Times whether in the Baptism of John or our Saviour for the words of Christ are That they should Baptize or Dip those whom they made Disciples to him for so no doubt the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptizontes properly signifies Though if there could be any doubt concerning the signification of the words themselves yet would that doubt be removed by considering the Practice of those Times For such as was the Practice of those Times in Baptizing such in reason we are to think our Saviour's Command to have been concerning it c. there being not otherwise any means either for those or future Times to discover his intention concerning it What the Practice of those Times were will need no other proof than the resorting to Rivers and other such Receptacles of Water for the performance of that Ceremony as that because there was much Water there Matth. 3. 5. John 3. 23. And the Scripture expresly affirming concerning the Baptism of the Eunuch Acts 8. 38. That Philip and the Eunuch went both down into a certain Water which they met with in their Journey in order to the Baptizing of the latter For what need would there have been of the Baptists resorting to great Confluxes of Water or of Philip's and the Eunuch's going down into this were it not that the Baptism both of the one and of the other were to be performed by an Immersion a very little Water as we know it doth with us sufficing for an Effusion or Sprinkling The same is to be said yet more upon the account of our conforming to the Death and Resurrection of Christ which we learn from St. Paul to be the design of Baptism to signifie for though that might and was well enough represented by the Beptized Persons being buried in Baptism and their rising out of it yet can it not be said to be so or at least but very imperfectly by the bare pouring out or sprinkling the Baptismal Water on him But therefore as there is so much the more Reason to represent the Rite of Immersion as the Only Legitimate Rite of Baptism because the Only One that can answer the ends of its Institution and those things that were to be signified by it so especially if as is well known and undoubtedly of great force the general Practice of the Primitive Church was agreeable thereto and the Greek Church to this very Day for who can think that either the one or the other would have been so tenacious of so troublesom a Rite were it not that they were well assured as they of the Primitive Church might very well be of its being the Only Instituted and Legitimate One. I cannot but think the forementioned Arguments to be so far of force as to evince the necessity thereof c. For what benefit can Men ordinarily expect from that which depends for its force upon the Will of him that Instituted it where there is no such compliance in the least with it and the Command of the Institutor as may answer those ends for which he applied it Dr. Barlow late Bishop of Lincoln in his Letter to Mr. John Tombes Printed in his Life-time and owned by him He saith thus I believe and know that there is neither Precept nor Practice in the Scripture for Paedo-Baptism nor any just Evidence for it for about two hundred Years after Christ Sure I am that in the Primitive Times they were to be Catechumeni and then Illuminati or Baptizati And this not only Children of Pagans or Pagans Converted but Children of Christian Parents Nazianzen though a Bishop's Son being not Baptized till he was about Thirty Years of Age as appears in his Life And the like is evident in some others I have seen what my Learned and Worthy Friend Dr. Hammond Mr. Baxter and others say in defence of it and I confess I wonder not a little that Men of such Parts should say so much to so little purpose For I have not seen any thing like an Argument for it I shall add no more but my hearty Wishes That as God was pleased to make the Hearing of the Dispute of such use to several Persons that they were fully convinced by the Grace of God towards them of the Truth of the Doctrine of Holy Baptism and did in few Days after submit themselves to be Dipt in Water upon Profession of their Faith according to the Commission of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ That it may also be of the like use to many others in the Reading of it that so there may be added to the Church daily such as shall be Saved And then my design will be answered in its Publication and I shall count it a sufficient Reward for all my Pains and Labour therein FINIS
A True NARRATIVE OF THE Portsmouth DISPUTATION Between some Ministers of the Presbyterian and others of the Baptist Persuasion concerning the Subjects and Manner of Baptism Held in Mr. Williams's Meeting-place there on Wednesday Feb. 22. 1698 9. THE MANAGERS For the Presbyterians were M. Samuel Chandler of Fareham Mr. Leigh of Newport in the Isle of Wight Mr. Robinson of Hungerford in Berks Moderator For the Baptists were Dr. William Russel of London Mr. John Williams of East Knoyle in Wiltshire Mr. John Sharp of Froome in Somersetshire Moderator Transcribed from two Copies taken at the Dispute the one by Mr. Bissel Town-Clerk of Portsmouth and the other by Mr. Samuel Ring Revis'd and Publish'd by Dr. William Russel London Printed for John Sprint at the Bell in Little-Britain 1699. To the most Honourable Governour Major-General ERLE And the Honourable Colonel GIBSON Deputy Governour of His Majesty's Garrison of Portsmouth THIS NARRATIVE Is humbly Dedicated AS a grateful Acknowledgment of that Favour you did us in your Application to His August Majesty to know his Pleasure whether you might admit of a Disputation betwixt the Ministers of the Presbyterian and those of the Baptist's Perswasion of which this is the best Account the Publisher could obtain whereupon His Majesty out of his wonted Clemency as an Effect of that innate Goodness which he hath always manifested towards his Dissenting Protestant Subjects was graciously pleased to let us have His Royal Perâ—â—iâ—â—ion in answer to your Request For which Favour together with the Liberty we enjoy in the free Exercise of our Religion we desire to lay hold on this Occasion to express our Thankfulness to God and the King praying for His Majesty's Health and Prosperity in this World and that God would vouchsafe to enrich him with a Crown of Glory in the World to come Your Honours to my Power William Russel To my much Esteemed and Beloved Brethren in the Lord Mr. THOMAS BOWES Messenger and Pastor of the Congregation of Baptized Believers at Portsmouth AND Mr. JOHN WEBBER Pastor of the Church of Christ at Gosport under the same Profession of Believers Baptism in Water Together with the Congregations to whom they belong Wishing your Increase in Grace and in the Knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ and that God would add to your number daily such as shall be saved Honoured and Beloved Brethren I Have thought meet to make this Dedication also to you because ye were not only eye and ear Witnesses of what past in the Disputation but were privy to all the Circumstances with which it was attended and were the sole Cause of my being engaged in it How it was managed you best know and therefore are proper Judges of the matters of fact related in this Narrative For my own part I have took much Pains and used great Care and Consideration in the Review of those Papers you sent me from those that wrote down the Dispute that I might do no Wrong to either Party And herein I have had all the Helps I could obtain both from our Brother Williams who was engaged with me in the Disputation from whom I received by the hands of Mr. Sharp our Moderator an Account of those Arguments he offered and what else he could remember taken from his own mouth besides the account I have had by Letters from divers other Persons that were present All which I have diligently compared and have also endeavoured so far as those Accounts and my own Memory would furnish me therewith not only to give a true Narrative of what was spoken but also to give our Antagonists Words their due weight as well as our own And if there be any thing omitted therein they must blame themselves or their own Scribe and not us For Mr. William Leddell went to Mr. Smith their Writer and carried our Copy with him and desired him to compare it with his He answered that his was very imperfect it being the first time he was in a Dispute and he could not take it but some things were left out and said that it was not as yet wholly written over Mr. Leddell waited upon him a second time but could not obtain a sight of it to compare them together although he was satisfied it was then finished Now whether he did this of himself or by Advice from them is best known to himself However it leaves us without blame I know it is not proper for me who was principally concerned in it to say much concerning the Dispute it self for being made Publick it 's left to every one that reads it to judge for himself Nevertheless it may not be amiss to make some few Remarks upon it because it may fall into some hands who may not well understand the Grounds of the Controversie 1. It is agreed on both sides That Mr. Chandler's Sermons were the occasion of that Offence taken by you and of the Dispute it self as appears by the Preliminaries signed by Mr. Thomas Bowes and Mr. William Leddell on our part and also by Mr. Chandler and Mr. Williams on the part of the Presbyterians as you may see in p. 3 4. 2. The Objections being made against what Mr. Chandler preach'd it had been his proper Work to have vindicated the Truth of his Doctrine against those Objections by the Authority of Holy Scripture But instead thereof he puts us upon it to prove the contrary But as the learned Dr. Smith did well observe He that asserts must prove And their own Moderator did declare that Mr. Chandler had in his Preaching asserted that Infants are the Subjects of Baptism but told us we were not to call on him for that then 3. I would make this farther Remark upon it That the Reason why he took this method was because he was unable to prove what he had asserted for in one of his Sermons he thus speaks But that I may proceed with the greater clearness I shall do these things first prove from Scripture the Warrantableness of Infant-Baptism c. And to make his Assertion good he cites the Commission Matth. 28. 19. for the Baptizing the Infants of believing Parents And argues upon it that Disciples were to be Baptized and saith he we have a plain Text that such Infants are Disciples see Acts 15. 10. And when our Saviour saith Go make Disciples baptizing them it must be understood of such Infants Now as to his Pretence from Acts 15. 10. we did sufficiently enervate that And as for the Commission Mr. Leigh doth confess as well as Mr. Chandler that it is a Command and that the Command is express'd pag. 27. And farther saith in pag. 28. We must all confess that Jesus Christ gave Commission to Baptize Believers when at the Age of maturity but afterwards the Children of those Believers Yet when Mr. Chandler begins to answer my first Argument he affirms That Christ hath no where expresly commanded Infants to be Baptized See p. 6. And if so then Infants cannot be intended
Practice either with respect to the Subjects or Manner And therefore when the People shall see that they have neither Command nor Example for their Practice I hope it will be a means to convince them of the Vnlawfulness thereof and that they will not dare for time to come to practise a humane Tradition in the room of an Ordinance of Jesus Christ remembring what our Lord said of the Jews of old In vain they do worship me teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of men Matth. 15. 9. And in Mark 7. 8. For laying aside the Commandment of God ye hold the Tradition of men And then hear what Paul saith Coloss 2. 20 21 22. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the Rudiments of the world why as though living in the world are ye subject to Ordinances Touch not taste not handle not which all are to perish with the using after the Commandments and Doctrines of men Now the God of Peace that brought again from the Dead our Lord Jesus that great Shepherd of the Sheep through the blood of the everlasting Covenant make you perfect in every good work to do his Will working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ to whom be glory for ever and ever Amen So prays Your Brother and Fellow-Labourer in the Work of the Gospel William Russel The Occasion of this Disputation And how Dr. Russel came to be ingaged therein According to the Account received from Gosport and Portsmouth The Occasion was this THE Congregation of Baptized Believers at Gosport were so blessed with Success in their Ministry that in a short time they had gathered Twenty Members very worthy Persons who were added to them by Baptism Many others were amuzed and put upon Enquiry This startled the Presbyterian Party because divers of them were of their Number either Members or Benefactors and they began to fear the Issue thereof Whereupon Mr. Sam. Chandler of Fareham about five or six Miles from Portsmouth a Presbyterian Minister whom they much esteemed for his Learning was procured to come and Preach up the contrary Doctrine first at Gosport and afterwards at Fortsmouth upon Thursdays on purpose as was supposed to put a Stop to this so hopeful a Beginning amongst the Baptists and hinder their Progress therein And this was managed by him and his Admirers in such a manner as was to the Grief of such as truly fear God in those Parts For it was given out that Mr. Chandler would not only prove Infant Baptism from Scripture-Testimony and answer all the Objections of the Baptists against it but also sufficiently furnish his Hearers with Arguments to defend their Practice And in the Prosecution of this his Design he took occasion to make his Excursions wherein he spake very diminutively of those in the Ministry representing them as Persons ignorant of and unacquainted with the Holy Scriptures He also ridiculed and mis-represented the Manner of their Performance of this Holy Ordinance as it represents a Burial and a Resurrection wherein upon Rom. 6. 3 4. he makes too bold with the manner of our Lord's Burial and the Apostles Application thereof to Holy Baptism He might have been pleased to have wounded the poor Baptists through the Sides of some other Person than so great an Apostle He also did greatly extol the Practice of Infant-Baptism and the Use and Advantage of it to them beyond those of riper Years and did inveigh against their manner of Practice with most severe Reflections Upon this the Presbyterian Party began to triumph over the Baptists and boasted that what Mr. Chandler had said upon that Point was unanswerable Whereupon when this last Sermon was to be Preached wherein he was to shew his great Skill in Answering our Objections Mr. Bowes and divers other Brethren of both the baptized Congregations went and heard him When he had done Mr. Bowes desired leave to speak and in a modest and Christian-like Manner did enter his Objection against what Mr. Chandler had spoken and upon a meeting betwixt themselves they did mutually Agree That the Points in Difference should be publickly disputed at Mr. Williams his Meeting-house in Portsmouth and that Mr. Chandler and Dr. Russel should be the Disputants As touching Dr. Russel his being ingaged in it it did not arise from any desire in himself to be concerned in it but from the pressing Importunity of his Friends The Church at Gosport being newly constituted and being more particularly concerned as the thing was circumstanced and supposing that all this Stir and Noise was chiefly designed against them did first make their Application to him for his Assistance And in the Name of the Church a Letter was sent to him by one of their worthy Brethren wherein they express themselves after this manner To our esteemed Brother Russel we of the Church of Christ at Gosport send Greeting VVE being under a Pressure of Conscience having of late had the great Ordinance of our Lord Jesus Christ viz. that of Believers Baptism in Water inveighed against and ridiculed by one of the Presbyterian Ministers Mr. Chandler by Name and being much grieved that the Ordinance of Christ should be thus triumphed over and trodden under Foot and hoping you have so far ingaged your self in Christ's Cause and that God hath given you Abilities to defend it we don't only Beg but Require your Personal Presence and desire your Assistance to defend that Sacred Ordinance c. He also received several other Letters Signed by the Ministers and other Private Brethren to press him to it He did send them word that it was his Opinion it would be the best way for Mr. Chandler and himself to exchange some Letters betwixt them in the first place to try the strength and length of their Weapons and thereby prevent a Publick Disputation if possible But when they let him understand that the Matter was too far proceeded in and so circumstanced that nothing less than a Publick Dispute could decide it he then consented to answer their Request therein because as they had signified to him the Glory of God the Honour of his Truth and the Good of Souls was eminently concerned in such a Publick Defence especially considering that the Presbyterian Party had given out that we were afraid to meet them But I shall detain you no longer from the Dispute it self an Account of which follows For the Presbyterians Mr. Samuel Chandler of Fareham Mr. Leigh of Newport in the Isle of Wight Mr. Robinson of Hungerford Moderator For the Baptists Dr. William Russel of London Mr. John Williams of East-Knoyl in Wiltshire Mr. John Sharpe of Froome in Somersetshire Moderator An Account of the Disputation held at Portsmouth February the 22d 1698 9. THE Disputants going to the Place of Meeting between the Hours of Nine and Ten in the Morning having took their Places Dr. Russel spake to this Effect Gentlemen Forasmuch as the Work we are going to engage in is a Part
way into Jordan Dr. Russel Notwithstanding this Flourish of a pretended Probability you know that the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signifie to Dip as all the great Lexicographers and Criticks do tell us and that its proper and native Signification is to Dip into Water or to Plunge under Water and that I could give you many Instances of out of Scapula Stephanus Schrevelius and many others And they also tell us That if it be used for Washing it is in a remote Sense and if it be taken in its primary Sense it 's such a Washing as is by Dipping or Plunging into the Water and being covered therewith But that you may see I am not singular in my Opinion I will shew you that your own Expositors do thus render it and some of the greatest Men among the Protestants that ever wrote since the Reformation of which I have made a Collection out of their own Works because I would not wrong them I shall begin with the Testimony of those learned and judicious Divines of your own Perswasion who were those that continued Mr. Peol's Annotations upon Matth. 3. 6. These are their own words Were Baptized that is Dipped in Jordan Upon John 3. 22 23. There John was Baptizing because this Aenon was a Brook or River that had much Water It is from this apparent that both Christ and John Baptized by Dipping the Body in the Water else they need not have sought Places where had been a great plenty of Water Before Dr. Russel had read this last Sentence wholly out the Presbyterian Ministers even Mr. Leigh himself as well as the rest of them fell a hissing so loud and set others of their Party to make a noise also by their ill Example that altho Dr. Russel went on with his Work yet the Noise was so great that it wholly drowned his Voice that he could not be heard Whereupon Mr. Sharp the Moderator call'd out aloud to still this great Noise and spoke to this effect What is the reason of this Hissing Gentlemen are you not asham'd You preach to others the Doctrine of Sanctification and Self-denial and to act thus your selves I am asham'd to see it I pray good People take no notice of it now When Dr. Russel perceived they would not forbear this Hissing and uncivil Carriage he forbore to read any farther And when Silence was obtained he addressed himself to the Ministers after this manner Sirs What is the matter with you Must I nâ—â— be permitted to recite your own Authors and some of the greâ—test Men that have written since the Reformation Although their Testimony against us is of little value because they are Parties in the Controversie yet when the clear evidence of Truth shall enforce a Confession from their Pens that we are in the right it is then a great Testimony for us Here is first of all Pool's Annotators certain learned and judicious Divines that say in that matter as we do and they are Men of your own Party There is also Dr. Hammond saith the same Here the Doctor was interrupted again and they cried out What do you tell us of Dr. Hammond What have we to do with Dr. Hammond Dr. Russel Why certainly Gentlemen Dr. Hammond is not thus to be despised upon his Judgment about a Greek word I have also Mr. Baxter Wollebius Tilenus the Learned Perkins and Luther also who was against Sprinkling and practised Dipping and so did the rest of the Divines at Wistenburgh Mr. Calvin also although he did allow a Liberty of Sprinkling in cold Climates yet he saith as I do as to the Signification of the word Baptizâ— that it signifies to Dip and was so used in the Primitive Church There is also the Dutch Translators they do every where render the words that are used to express this Ordinance by as we do and they call John the Baptist Joannes de Dooper John the Dipper And I know not of any place but it 's so exprest And these are Presbyterians Men of your own Religion Upon this one of the Ministers said What! do you understand Dutch Dr. Russel said Yes he understood it but he could not speak it readily They replied We will try that for we have a Gentleman here that understands Dutch very well Dr. Russel You may ask that Gentleman if you think fit he can satisfie you that what I say is true But they had 〈◊〉 Discretion than to call the Gentleman out to confute themselves Dr. Russel I have also the Testimony of the Dutch Annotators who say the same thing And these also are Men of your own Persuasion And to add no more I have also the Testimony of the Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster And I hope they may be of some credit with you But they would not suffer him to proceed in the Reading thereof to the People but cried out We are Protestants and will not pin our Faith on other Mens sleeves Dr. Russel What! not the Assembly of Divines I thought though you had no regard to my words you might have had some regard to the Assembly of Divines You know I do not wrong these Authors and therefore what must the People think of you to oppose your selves thus against these great Men and such multitudes of them that are of your own Persuasion as many of them are and the rest some of the greatest Men since the Reformation Surely the People cannot take it kindly at your hands to reject the Authority of these Men in a matter of this Nature Their Answer was We do reverence these Divines but adhere to what they say no farther than it agrees with the Word of God Dr. Russel We say that in this Particular what they have written doth agree with the Word of God Mr. Leigh You have recourse to the prime Signification of the Word whereas we must take it according to its Acceptation in Scripture And I offer it to the Consideration of the Learned whether the prime Signification of the Word be a sufficient Argument in this case And here he makes his Rhetorical Excursions about a Mathematician an Angel a Foot-boy that carries a Letter a Physician c. and concludes thus but we must go to the Scripture Acceptation of the Word And I challenge you to bring one place of Scripture where it must be understood that it was done by Dipping Dr. Russel It is very well Mr. Leigh will allow that I have given the People the proper Meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that its prime Signification is to Dip. Now he might have spared all the rest that he hath said for we do not lay the stress only upon the Etymology of the Word but also upon the concurrent Testimonies of Holy Scripture that it was so understood and so practised by John the Baptist Christ and his Apostles and so represented by the Metaphors made use of as a Burial and a Resurrection to set it forth by as also