c

graph in thefe Words; namely, "I have no need to dwell upon this, becaufe my Province is only confin'd to Lay, i. e. [that is] Unauthoziz'd Baptifm, fuch as is perform'd by Perfons, who never were authoziz'd for that purpofe; who act in "Direct Oppofition to that Order of Men, who ok are impower'd by Chrift to authorize others to Baptize And the Adversary can bring forth cc in their behalf not one Council, either General or Provincial, till the Corrupt Ones of the "Church of Rome." And all this I do ftill infift upon, and affirm in answer to his Question, that the Council of Eliberis is not for "Lay, that is, Unauthoziz'd Baptifm, "fuch as is perform'd by Perfons who never were authoziz'd for that purpofe, who act in Direct Oppofition to that Order of Men, [i. e. Bishops] who are impower'd by Chrift to Authorize o"thers to Baptize.

This is the Connection of my Words; and I will not depart from them, but challenge Mr. Bingham and all his Friends to prove, that the Council of Eliberis's Canon, made with Defign to Authorize and Impower fome of their own Laicks to Baptize, was a giving Countenance to the Baptifms above-mention'd, which I am difputing against. But of this fee more in Page 58, &c. of the following Treatife, that I may not be further Guilty of Repetition; whereby the Reader will eafily fee, that our Lay-Baptifms are not favour'd by that Council; and in Page 193, &c. that the Ancient Churches who allow'd of the Validity of fome Heretical and Schifmatical Baptifms, did not esteem thofe Baptifms to have been deftitute of Commiffion, or Unauthoriz'd, that is, never Authoriz'd'; for they esteemed the Clerical Orders of the Baptizers to have been Valid.

Mr. Bingham's 150th Page about Tertullian is anfwer'd in Page 39, &c. of this Treatise, to which I add,

that

"

that 'tis very strange, he should charge me with a Mi ftake for faying, That Tertullian refers us to the "Law and Practice" of the Church, by his faying concerning Hereticks, we have a Kule to Rebaptize them ", when Mr. Bingham himself cannot deny but acknowledges, pag. 150, 151. that Tertullian makes the then Rebaptization of Hereticks to have been the Practice of the Church in Tertullian's Days, and that this was founded upon a Rule: For fays our Hiftorian, I own he speaks of the Practice of Rebaptizing Hereticks as Heathens: But the Kule by which he juftifies this Practice is not the Rule « of the Church, but the Rule of Christ," pag. 150. And he calls this, of Rebaptization, "The Practice of the Church, in Page 151. Mr. Bingham would infinuate to his Reader, that I make what Tertullian calls a Rule for this Practice to be " the Law and Rule of the Church, diftinct from the CC Law of Chrift ". But our Reverend Hiftorian fhould have produc'd fomething, if he was able, from my own Words, to bave proved this, which he cannot do and therefore herein he acts very much beneath himself Ifpeak of "the Law and Practice of the Church without concerning my felf whether she made "a Law 6C and Rule diftinct from the Law of Chrift" or no, and without once Specifying what lot of Kule it was whereon fhe founded her Practice: If she founded it upon the Law of Chrift and the Apoftles, as Mr. Bingham words it, p. 150. why then fhe took this Law for her Rule, and fo 'twas her Lam too; so that even according to Mr. Bingham himself, it was the Law and Practice of the Church: It was "her Law", because She made it the Rule of her Practice; and it was her Law and Practice", because she bound those who would be admitted to her Communion to be subject to it. And Mr. Bingham cavils at my calling it "her Law

a 3

"and

"and Practice", as related by Tertullian, when his own Account of Tertullian's Words makes it to be fo

too.

His Note concerning St. Ignatius, pag. 152. is fufficiently answer'd in the following Page 35.

And all that follows of Heretical and Schifmatical Baptifms in Page 193, of this Book.

And as for the Conclufion of his Appendix, with a Latin Sentence, that he may fee I have tranflated it, and made the Application as he [it feems ] defires me to do; I hereby affure him, that if the Perfon who Baptiz'd me was Epifcopally ordain'd [as he certainly was] and he had been a Heretick, and publickly cenfur'd as fuch which he never was] nay though he had never given Publick Notice to the World, that he had repented of and forfaken bis Herefy, and so I might have been tempted to believe, that he was therefore a Heretick, at the very Time that he gave me Baptifm; [All which, God be praised, I am fully satisfied is no ways applicable to that Reverend Priest who baptiz'd me; yet,] If all this bad been juftly chargable on him, I should not in the leaft [confidering the Now Laws of the Catholick Church, and of the Church of England in particular ] have fufpected the Validity of Baptifm, given me by fuch a one with Water in the Name of the Trinity; but should have reckon'd my felf an Incorporated Member of Christ's Church, &c.

But to conclude my long Preface, I leave this with our Reverend Hiftorian, as he is a Clergyman] and do affirm, that 'tis a Propofition very easy to be proved against any Man whatsoever, That if Baptifm perform'd by Perfons who were Never really and truly Commiffion'd by Bishops to Baptize, and who act herein, Rebellioufly against, and in Oppofition to, the Divine Right of Epifcopacy, be Good and Valid Baptifm; Then, Authoritative Preaching, Adminiftring the other Sa

cra

crament, the Power of Excommunicating, of Binding and Loofing, of Retaining and Abfolving Men's Sins, and all the Spiritual Functions of the Clergy, are alfo Good and Valid, when attempted by Unauthoriz❜d, never Commiffion'd Lay-Perfons: The Gonfequence of which, is, the utter Dissolution and taking away of the Neceffity of the Chriftian Priefthood, therefore of Chrift's Authority here on Earth, and fo of all Reveal'd Religion too; which is a Dreadfull Confideration; and much more fo, if any who ought to be the Guardians of thefe Sacred Things, should endea vour by their Writings and Preaching,to establish the dangerous Premifles, from whence fuch prophane Confequences do naturally flow.

London, May 29th, 1713.

7

24

THE