« ÎnapoiContinuă »
from which alone they receive their whole Force and Efficacy, and are only by Virtue of that one Authority, made equally neceffary and binding to us.
WHOSOEVER affirms Baptism to be wholly Null and Invalid, by reafon of the Omiffion either of Water, or of the Form of Adminiftring in the Name of the Trinity, ought alfo for the fame Reafon to acknowledge, that Baptifm is as much Null and Invalid when it wants only the Divine Authority or Commiffion of the Adminiftrator.
DEMON. This will follow from the Second Propofition of the Introduction.
FOR the only Reafon why the Omission of either Water, or the Form, makes fuch a Bap tifm Void, muft be, because fuch Omiffion is Unlawful, or Contrary to the Institution of Baptifm (Axiom 4.) So that he must affirm fuch Baptifm Null, becaufe 'tis Administer'd either with fuch Matter or Form as the InftiI tution has not appointed; or, because 'tis not Adminifter'd with fuch Matter or Form as the Inftitution requires. Now, forafmuch as Chrift, who appointed the Water and the Form, appointed alfo the Perfon who should Adminifter both the one and the other: And C fince the Divine Authority of this Adminiftrator is an Essential Part, and as much obliging
and neceffary as Water and the Form, thofe Two other Effential Parts of the Inftitution, (by the 1st and 2d Propofitions ;) it must neceffarily follow, that the want of Divine Autho rity in him who Adminifters,is equally a Breach of, or contrary to, the faid Inftitution; and therefore, if the want of Water, or the Form, makes any Baptism to be wholly Null and Void, because contrary to the Inftitution; the want alfo of only the Divine Commiffion in the Administrator, must for the fame Reason make that Baptifm fo Minister'd to be wholly Invalid, and of no Effect, being equally contrary to the fame Institution. And confequently, whofo ever affirms Baptifm to be wholly Null and Invalid, by reason of the Omiffion either of Wa ter or the Form, ought alfo for the fame Rea fon to acknowledge, that Baptifm is as much Null and Invalid when it wants only the Divine Authority or Commiffion of the Adminiftra tor. Q. E. D.
FROM this Propofition it undoubtedly follows, that the Invalidity of fuch Baptifms as are adminifter'd by Unauthoriz❜d Perfons, cannot be partial, but entire: For, if Baptism be wholly void for want of Water, or the Form of Adminiftring in the Name of the Trinity, as the whole Church of Chrift have conftantly and with great Reafon affirm'd; it muft
must be alfo (by this laft Propofition) as entirely (and confequently not partially) Invalid, for want of only the Divine Miffion of the Administrator; and all this, by reason of the Equal Authority and Neceffity of every one of thefe Effential Parts.
I mention this, that there cannot be any Partial Invalidity, but it must be whole and entire] because I have heard from fome, that the want of the Divine Miffion of the Adminiftrator of Baptifm, makes fuch a Baptifm but partially Invalid; and that, provided the Perfon is Baptized by fuch a one with Water, and Pronouncing of [In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,] Impofition of the Bishop's Hand is fufficient to fupply the other Defect, and confequently to make fuch Baptifm as Valid, as it would have been if adminifter'd by one divinely authoriz'd, that is, wholly and entirely Valid. But that this cannot be, is evident by the above-mention'd Corollary; wherein 'tis plainly demonftrated, that if in this Cafe there be any Invalidity at all, it cannot be Partial but Entire. And as for the Virtue of fuch Impofition of Hands, 'tis utterly contrary to Axion the 5th, which is a FIRST PRINCIPLE; viz. That no Power or Authority on Earth, can by any AfterAct (not appointed by God for that purpose) make that which before mas Invalid, to become as Valid, as Conforming to the Divine Institution it felf would have made it. So that, if by Im
pofition of Hands, they would make fuch Ins perfect or Invalid Baptifms, to be as Valid as the Perfect ones perform'd according to the Inftitution; it lies upon them to demonftrate, that fuch Impofition of Hands was appointed by God himself, either in fome Law, or by the Practice of the Holy Apoftles, for fuch a Purpose: But this I defpair of ever feeing them do; because the Sacred Oracles gives us not the leaft Encouragement, either in plain Words, or by good Inferences, (to be drawn from fuch as are not fo plain) to believe that this Rite of the Impofition of Hands, with respect to Baptiz'd Perfons, was ever Ordain'd, but to be perform'd on those only, who were before truly and validly Baptiz'd. There is not one Example of the Apo ftles using this Ceremony to make up such De fects of Baptifm, nor any thing like it: And if in After-Ages fome us'd this Ordinance for that Purpose, (as 'tis afferted, tho' upon what good Evidence I know not, that they did) they feem thereby to have difpens'd with a Divine Pofitive Inftitution, at the fame time that it was binding and obliging; which was taking to themselves an Authority that did not at all belong to them (by Axiom 3.); I fay, They difpens'd with a Divine Pofitive Inftitution, when 'twas binding and obliging; because they allow'd of the Omiffion of the Divine Authority of the Administrator of Baptifm, which might have been had (and was
therefore binding and obliging,) at the fame time as they gave Impolition of Hands to fuch invalidly Baptized Perfons, who might inftead thereof, have been then Baptiz'd by themselves or their Subftitutes, who were vefted with the Divine Authority for that Purpose.
AS for the Church of England, she gives - us not the leaft Intimation of any Efficacy in the Impofition of the Bishop's Hand, to give Validity to fuch Baptisms as are fuppos'd to be partly Invalid before: For, her Office of Confirmation is made only for Perfons validly Baptized; and if they are not fo, the Use of that Office upon their Account, will be a perfect Contradiction: Because the Prayer of the Bishop, before he bleffes by Impofition of his Hands, afferts, "That God has Regenera
ted the Perfon by Water and the Holy Ghost; "and has given unto him Forgiveness of all "his Sins; which takes in the whole Bene fit of Valid Baptifm, and therefore cannot be faid, with any Senfe, over a Person whose Baptism is fuppos'd to be but partly Valid, and confequently, to convey but Part of the Benefits of True Baptifm. So little has the provided for any Method of giving Validity to partly Invalid Baptifms.
WE have fome among us, who fay, "That "the Ancient Churches, when they found "that Perfons had been baptiz'd in or with. “Water, in the Name of the Father, and of