ftian Baptifm, I fhall therefore, in Answer to the next Objection fhew, that those Instances produc'd from Scripture are not parallel to Chriftian Baptifm, and that there is nothing in them that can favour Lay-Baptism, even in Cafes of the greatest Extremity.

Obj. XII. IN the Inftitution of the Paffover, it was appointed that the Jews fhould eat the Pafchal Lamb "with their Loins gird"ed, their Shoes on their Feet, and their Staff "in their Hand, Exod. 12. 11. which fignifies a ftanding Pofture: The Church of the Jews afterwards chang'd this Pofture into that of Leaning or Lying along; and our Saviour finding this Cuftom prevail'd in his Days, comply'd with it when he celebrated the Paffover, (Mat. 26. 20.) Which plainly fhews, that we may many times comply with the Churches changing even a Divine Institution for a Human one; and why not therefore with the Churches allowing of Lay-Baptifm in Cafes of Neceffity? Again, our Saviour reproving the Jews for their over Rigid Niceness in obferving the Divine Inftitution of the Sabbath, tells them, "That David when he had need did "take and Eat the Shew-Bread, and gave to them "that were with him; which was not lawful for "him to eat, neither for them that were with him, "but for the Priests alone (St. Mat. 12. 4. St. Mark 2. 25, 26.) making David's Neceffity a fufficient Reafon, for difpenfing at that time with God's own Pofitive Inftituti

on

on about the Shew-Bread. And further, our Blessed Lord upon the fame occafion reproving the Jews, fays, that God will have Mercy and not Sacrifice, (St. Mat. 12. 7.) Which is fufficient to inftruct us, that in Cafes of Neceffity, the Pofitive Inftitutions of God himself muft be fometimes difpens'd with, for the supply of pur Wants, and confequently that Baptism in Cafes of Neceffity, where a Prieft cannot be had, may be Validly Administer'd by a Layman, to supply the Spiritual Wants of thofe who are Unbaptiz'd.

Anfw. THIS Objection confifts of so mapy Particulars, that 'twill be necessary for me to confider it, in the fame order wherein it lyes. And,

ft. THE Pofture of standing to Eat the Pafchal Lamb, was no more than a Temporary Inftitution, peculiar to the Celebration of the Fitft Paflover in Egypt, the very Night the Jews were to depart out of that Country. This is plain, from the Reason of God's ap pointing them to Eat in fuch a Pofture of Travellers, in hafte, viz. because he would

pafs through the Land of Egypt that Night, "and Smite all the Firft-born in Egypt both of "Man and Beaft, (ver. 12.) which would have fuch an Effect upon the Egyptians, that they would be very preffing and Urgent upon the Children of Ifrael to depart out of their Country to be rid of their Company, for whofe fake they had fuffered fo many and great

great Plagues, and were now depriv'd of their First-born, throughout all their Houses and Families: See Exod. 12. from ver. 29. to ver. 34. And, if the Children of Ifrael had not been that Night in fuch a Travelling Pofture, they would not have been prepar'd for fo fudden and hafty a Departure, as the distracted and terrify'd Egyptians oblig'd them to, whereby they might have been expos'd to abundance. of Inconveniencies, both from the Fury of the Egyptians, and their own Unpreparedness for a Midnight Journey; And therefore that they might not be thus incommoded, God requir'd them to eat the Pafchal Lamb "IN HASTE, "with their Loins girded, and their Shoes on their "Feet, and their Staff in their Hand, to be ready for their Journey at any Warning that fhould be given them that Night; but after their Departure, the Reason of this Appoint ment ceas'd, and therefore fo did the Appointment it felf, and confequently was no longer binding and obliging; and we never find this Travelling Pofture repeated in any of the after Celebrations of the Paffover: but that it was only a Temporary Inftitution, peculiar to that firft Celebration, I appeal to the Learned Jews both Ancient and Modern, and also to our best Commentators upon the Place, (fee Bishop Patrick, Grotius, Diodati, Pool's Synopfis, &c.) to whom I refer the Reader, that I may not be more prolix upon this Subject.

THE

THE Pofture of Standing then, being not enjoyn'd to be conftantly us'd, was no Effential Part of the Inftitution of the Paffover, and therefore 'twas afterwards indifferent what Pofture the Jews fhould Eat the Pafchal Lamb in; for which Reason, their Church certainly had Power to appoint any innocent Pofture The fhould think fit; and fince Leaning or Lying along was determin'd by her, and prevail'd in our Saviour's Days, and he was pleas'd: to conform to it, we ought to follow his Example in complying with fuch Inftitutions of the Church as are not contrary to the Law of God. But this Inftance do's not allow us to comply with the Church's CHANGING a Divine Inftitution for a Human one; because, the Church of the Jews did not herein CHANGE a Divine into a Human Inftitution, for the Posture of Standing was then no Divine Appointment, becaufe not Effential to the Paffover, and therefore the Church of the Jews did not CHANGE this into another Ceremony, but APPOINT the indifferent Ceremony of Lying or Leaning, when there was no Divine Inftitution at that time, obliging them to any other Pofture.

AND therefore, we ought not, from the Authority of this Inftance, to comply with the Church's allowing of Lay-Baptifm in Cafes of Neceffity, becaufe, Baptifm by a PRIEST is Effential to Chriftian Baptifmy and as much obliging as the Inftitution of WATER it felf, during the utmost term of the Chriftian Dif penfation,

ap

fpenfation, as I have prov'd under the First and Second Propofitions. And a Lay-man's Baptizing to confer fupernatural Benefits, is NO INDIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCE in the Power of Man to determine and point, as was the Pofture of Lying or Leaning along, when the Church of the Jews ap pointed it; and therefore, from that Church's Example, and our Saviour's conformity thereto, no Argument can be drawn to fupport the Validity of Lay-Baptifm, even in Cafes of greatest Neceffity, because the Quality of the Perfon who is Authoriz'd to Baptize for Supernatural Purposes, is determin'd by no other than a mere Pofitive Divine Inftitution. And no Cafes of Neceffity whatsoever can determin any other Means for the Conveyance of Supernatural Benefits, than what are already reveal'd to us, except God fhall be pleas'd to make fome New Revelation of his Will for fuch a Purpose. A

2. AS for the Inftance of David, and his Men's Eating the Shew-Bread; least Men fhould from hence encourage themselves to break through all the Divine Laws to fupply their Neceffities, 'tis neceffary to confider, what Circumftances of Neceffity will excuse our breaking amere pofitive Inftitution of Religion. First, THEN, confidering that all God's pofitive Inftitutions are appointed for our Obedience, nothing can excufe us from the Breach of any of one them, butfome other MORE

C