Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

I am well aware, how diligent the Adverfaries will be to find what Faults they can; and I am not fo vain, as to think my self to have escaped altogether free from fome in this Essay. And therefore, that I might take away all Occafion of unneceffary Difpute, and fave my felf the Trouble of future Anfwers to what may be cavill'd at by fome; I once for all declar'd, in the Second Edition of this Book, what I thought necessary for the more clear Explanation of my Defign and Meaning in fome Paffages, which otherwise I fear'd might have given Offence.

In this Fourth Edition, all thofe Places are more correct in the Body of the Book it felf, and therefore not neceffary here to be particularly explain'd, except in the Appendix,

Page 128. and forward, where, in Answer to the 10th Objection, I have attempted to prove the Validity of Holy Orders conferr'd on Unbaptiz'd Perfons: What I have propos'd in order thereto, I defire the fudicious Lovers of Truth to interpret only as an Effay. I am not fo fond of any thing I bave faid about it, as to strive with those who may happen to differ from me: Nay more; if after due Confideration, it should be generally condemn'd by Orthodox Learned Men; 1 fhall acquiefce, acknowledging, That a Man ought to be a Member, before he fhould be admitted to be a Minifter of Chrift in his Church.

What I bave faid in the following, and other Parts of this Book, in General Terms, relating to Lay-Baptifm, I think necessary by way of Precaution here to explain; by telling my Reader, that I defign thereby to mean fuch Baptifm, as is performed by Perfons who never receiv'd any Real Authority from their Bishops; or elfe by fuch as were

never really Authoriz'd, and yet act in Oppofition to Epifcopacy." Whether Bishops, the Spiri"tual Governors of the Church, who have "Power from Chrift to give a Man a Stand❝ing Commiffion to be a Prieft, cannot give "him a Commiffion pro hac vice, in Cafes of

extreme Neceffity, to do a Sacerdotal Act," I will not prefume to determine. Neither do I think it neceffary to difpute against those, who affirm that they can; provided the Layman be in Communion with, and an actual Member of that particular National, or Provincial Church, over which the Bishops prefide who give fuch an Occafional Commiffion; provided alfo that they give him this Commiffion in such a Manner, and with fuch LIMITATIONS and RESTRICTIONS, as that there may be no more Reason to fufpect the Truth of the Divine Authority refiding in him, for the Executing of that Sacerdotal Act pro hic & nunc, in a Cafe of extreme Neceffity, than there is to queftion the Validity of the STANDING COMMISSION of the Ordinary Priesthood. For then, in fuch Cafe, the Man acts not of himself, or as a mere Laick: He is fuppos'd not to Adminifter by Virtue of any Canon of Foreign Councils; but As empower'd by the Authority of thofe Particular Bishops he is fubject to. And I think it necessary to make thefe Provifo's; because, on the other Hand, it is well known, how apt Men have been, and fill are, to pervert and abuse this Power and Authority, and mifapply it to wrong and ill Purpofes, by unfound and falfe Inferences; (as I my felf have found by Experience, in my Converfa tion relating to my own particular Cafe) fo far as at last to make the Chriftian Priesthood be eBeem'd by the Heedlefs Multitude, as a thing of

[merged small][ocr errors]

no neceffary Ufe and Value at all: And for this Reafon 'tis that I have endeavoured fo much (in this Effay, pag. 85. and Appendix, pag. 149, and 150.) to shew the Ill Ufes which Men are apt to make of the Church's Power.

After all, whether a Church has, or has not the Power of Authorizing her own Laicks (as above fpecified) to Baptize in Cafes of Extremity, I think I need make no Scruple to fay,

ift, That the Practice of one National or Provincial Church in this Cafe, cannot Authorize the Laicks of Another fuch Church, which gives them no fuch Authority. (As here with Us.)

2dly, That no Church can have any Power to allow Laicks of Oppofite Communions to her, to Adminifter Baptifm in that Cafe, much less when there is no Neceffity at all: (As certainly there is none in our Diffenters Baptifms.).

3dly, That no Church has, or can have Power to Confirm Baptifm fo adminifter'd; because Confirmation fuppofes the Perfon to have been validly baptiz'd before, and his Baptifm to be confummated and finished thereby.

[ocr errors]

The Author of a Pamphlet entitled, New Dangers to the Chriftian Priesthood; who with great Rudeness, inconfiftent with his Priestly Character has, by PARTIAL Quotations from my Two Books of Sacerdotal Powers, and Diffenters Baptifm Null and Void, endeavour'd to perfuade the World, that I Separate the Divine Commiffion from the Chriftian Miniftry, and that I hold and affirm, that Bishops have Power to Authorize Laymen to Baptize, would have done but Common Juftice to have confider'd, and let the World fee what I have faid here in Answer to a Question put to me concerning fuch a Power in Bishops. He knew in

bis Confcience, or might know, that this was in the Second Edition of Lay-Baptifm Invalid, for he refers to that Edition in his abufive Pamphlet. He cannot deny, that in the fame Edition, P. 155. I use thefe very Words, viz. "WHEN IT CAN BE "PROVED, That Chrift has vefted his Church "with fuch a Power, it will neceffarily fol"low, &c." He might have known, that this was in Answer to an Objection which affirm'd, that the "Validity of Lay-Baptism ftands on "the Authority of the Church's Power to "GRANT SUCH LICENCE to Lay-men in Extré"mities." He cannot chufe but be conscious to himself, if he read the Book, that I in the fame Edition, P. 155, 156. fhew'd the Danger of the Church's making ufe of fuch a fuppofed Power; thefe Paffages are in p. 148, 149, and 150. of this prefent Edition. His Confcience must also tell him, that in p. 83. of Sacerdotal Powers, (which he pretends to quote, tho' he does it very unfairly) I Jay concerning Baptifms Administer'd by virtue of the Canon of the Council of Eliberis, thefe Words, "IF ANY THING CAN BE SAID for the Vali"dity of thofe Lay-Baptifms." And p. 85. concerning Midwife-Baptifm, allow'd by the Church of Rome, I fay thus, "So that upon Suppofition, which I DARE NOT GRANT, that thofe Mid"wife-Baptifms could be defended as Valid, upon the Account of their Bishops having "firft granted them fuch Power, &c." Laftly, to let the World fee a little more of the Integrity of this Writer, be cannot be ignorant that he is very unjuft in his Quotation, from p. 6, and 7. of Diffenter's Baptifm Null and Void; for in p.7. be fore the Period is finifh'd, I fay, concerning the Church's Power to Authorize her Laymen to Baptize,

66.

A 4.

Baptize, thus, "Which, whether RIGHT OR "No, is no ways applicable to our Laymen and "Diffenters, who are utterly deftitute of any "fuch Plea, &c." By all which Paffages the Impartial Reader may easily fee, that I do not affirm, that Bishops have Power fo to Authorize Laymen; but that, if Bishops could be fuppos'd, or prov'd to have fuch a Power, yet even then our Diffenters Baptifms are Null and Void notwithftanding. The whole Argument runs upon [if they had Power] [whether Right or no, &c.] But thefe neceffary Connections he purpofely omitted, because he knew that if he had inferted them 'twould have difcovered the Falfenefs of bis Charge, and have spoil'd his Defign, of endeavouring to render a Perfon odious, when he was not able to confute that Truth which he had afferted. How aukwardly foever I may have defended it, that must be left to more impartial Judges than this Gentleman has fhew'd himself to be; however, thus much He and his Friends have difcovered by their Attempts hitherto, that they dare venture no farther than to nibble at fuch little things, as are wholly foreign to the MAIN MATTER difputed; and this they do without any Argument at all, while the Merits of the Cause lie neglected by them, as being in their Opinion, either not worth their Regard, or elfe, because the Invalidity of Lay-Baptifm is too great a Truth for them exprefly and directly to endeavour to overthrow. This Writer calls upon me to anfwer him pofitively, whether I will bold and maintain, that "Bishops can Authorize Laymen to "Baptize." I hereby affure him, that I will give him no pofitive Answer to this Queftion. I will not Declare my felf abfolutely, either for or a

[ocr errors]
« PoprzedniaDalej »