//-/ )ivisioa Section 5^C ^i^ 3 P (#•- FACTS AND ETIDENCES ON THE SUBJECT OF A to Dr. R.'s propositions, p. ix, Gaixjs's Challenge in behalf of Dr. Eyland's ** Candid Statements," p. xiii. -Letter 1. To the Editor of the Baptist Magazine, intended to discuss certain points in Dr. R.'s Candid State- ments J and distinction betweea the words plunge and dip, p. xiv. Letter 11. denying the existence of Enon, as described by Dr. R. p. XX. Letter I. To a Deacon — Dipping and plunging not the same. — Baptism by the Holy Ghost, given by pour~ ing ; its synonyms compared, p. 6. — water Baptism^ by pouring, p. 10 Immersion not baptism, p. 18.— Mr. Salt's account of Baptism in Abyssinia, p. 19. — Evidence from ancient representations, and the plates, p. 27. *^* If any Gentleman can adduce an ancient authentic representation of Baptism bi/ plunging, the Editor of Cal- inet, will esteem himself highly gbliged by it: for purpose* not connected with the present pamphlet. Dr. Ryland's oversight respecting "many waters" p. 41.— Explanation of washings for burial, p. 43.— 'Of plant- ing, p. 49*'— of crucifixioQi p. 50. IT CONTEl^TS. JLetter II. To a Deacon : opposition between Jewish and Christian sympathies, p. 3. — Kind feelings towards children, p. 5.— Baptism is consecration, p. 7. its intentiorl : wljy not enacted in reference to infants, p. 11 — TertulJian, p. 13— Origen, p. 1.').— Tradi- tion, what, p. l6. — Origen family, p. 20. -Distinction between house,— ^family, and house/(oW, illustrated by the Royal Family, p. 23. Private families, consist of children* distinct from their parents, p. 26 — distinct from servants, ib. — House imports children — and in- fants, p. 27. — Lydia's house All the house, the Tchole house, imports a numerous fiimily, p. 30 — the Jailor's numerous family — Cornelius's numerous family, p* 32 — Baptized families not Church-mem- bers, Stephanas — Crispus — many Corinthian, p. 34. — Number of families marked as baptized, p. 36. — Calculation continued, p. 37. — Family of Stephanas, young, p. 41. — Considerations on Lydia's family* p. 42i — ^on that of Stephanas^ p. 44. Letter III. To a Deacon. New Testament writers not at liberty to use the word infant, &c. in reference to Infant Baptism, p. 2 — The term house answers the purpose most effectually, p. 3. — Plan of a Greek Louse, p. 4. — Aristotle's definition of a house, p. 5. and household, p. 6. — Hebrew etymology of a house, p. 8. — Proofs from Scripture that house imports building, p. 9- — Proofs that house imports chil- dren, distinct from their parents, p. 10. — Proofs that house means infants, and nothing else, p. 11. — • use of the words ail and zohole confirms this sense, p. 14. Postcript.^ — Both Baptism and Circumcision practised by the Hebrew Christians, p. 18. — Baptism given to the Gentiles instead of giving them circumcision, p. 20. — Glory, Nimbus, i. e. sprinkling, p. 23. — Bap- tism, in the name of the Lord Jesus, alludes to the Trinity, p. 24. — The present manner of speaking of tvomen and families iu the East, is by using th* term house, ib. UNABLE, himself, to answer the Arguments brought forward in the annexed tract, the Deacon has caused them to be pu Wished, by way of appeal to the Body of the Baptist Denomination at large. He has, as stated in the Introductory Observations, repeatedly con- sulted his friends, in private, without receiving satisfaction; and he earnestly wishes to see that practice vindicated, which he has been in the habit of promoting, and for which he has been a staunch advocate, during many years. Felruary 20, 1815. # IJVTRODUCTIOJW iiiese were more voble than those of Thc.tsatortica ; in tlml Tfipy received the uord with all readiness of mind, and Skarched the scriptures dailYj — whether thoss things icere so. It is now nearly forty years, since an occa- sional jaunt settled me, for a Sunday, in a country town, where I happened to attend di- vine service at a large and handsome Meeting : the sermon had tio particular reference to the Sacrament of Baptism ; but, by the Preacher's descending the pulpit steps at the close of his discourse, it appeared that tiiat Ordinance was now to be administered. A rustic pair came forward^ the mother carrying her child, perfectly clean and neat; her own clothing decent, but coarse, and her husband's clothing mended throughout, for the occasion, with such evident housewifery, that it raised an interest for the woman's cha- racter, of which, I trust, she was uniformly de- serving. She presented the child for Baptism, But another incident contributed to fix this ser- vice on my memory ; for the officiating Minister, or Priest, (a very grave gentleman in a very white wig,) perceiving himself closely watched by a pair of strange eyes, glaring from a cornei', felt Introd, a tJYTRODUCTlOM TtieSe were more noble than those of Thcssalonica ; in that They received the word with all readiness of mind, and Skarched the scriptures daily, — whether thosa things were so. It is now nearly forty years, since an occa- sional jaunt settled me, for a Sunday, in a country town, where I happened to attend di- vine service at a large and handsome Meeting : the sermon had tio particular reference to the Sacrament of Baptism ; but, by the Preacher's descending the pulpit steps at the close of his discourse, it appeared that that Ordinance was now to be administered. A rustic pair came forward, the mother carrying her child, perfectly clean and neat; her own clothing decent, but coarse, and her husband's clothing mended throughout, for the occasion, with such evidciit housewifery, that it raised an interest for the woman's cha- racter, of which, I trust, she was uniformly de- serving. She presented the child for Baptism. But another incident contributed to fix this ser- vice on my memory ; for the officiating Minister, or Priest, (a very grave gentleman in a very white wig,) perceiving himself closely watched by a pair of strange eyes, glaring from a cornei', felt In trod, a [ ii 1 an additional inducement to a proper discharge of the service. Apparently, these rustics could nei- ther write nor read: tlie Administrator, there- fore, took occasion to obtain fiom them a con- fession of their faith, by neatly enquiring, — " You believe, so and so?" — "You shall educate this child in the nurture and admonition of the Lord :" — " You shall take and bring it up for God ; as rather his child, than your own," &c. As many curtsies and half curtsies as the pauses required, answered these questions and admoni- tions in the affirmative. " Well ! thought I, cer- tainly, here was no putting away of the filth of the flesh," (for, indeed, the child was very clean; and the parents, though rustics, had not been idolaters ) — but, here was some commemoration of the " stipulation of a good conscience towards God," which, the Apostle Peter observes, is the salutary part of Baptism. Many years after this, and not in the same town, I visited a very c.ipacious edifice, evidently built for display on occasions of public Baptism; — the font "was sunk deep into the floor; and the sides of it were drawn up for the approach- ing service. After a sermon on the subject, con- taining arguments on the veracity and validity of which, I am not called to decide — the people were engaged in singing a hymn, when the ves- try doors were thrown open, whence issued a procession, headed by the Priest, or Minister officiating, in his robes, supported by his Dea- cons, followed by the catechumens, who were now about to be made "faithful"; — their friends were in attendance on these: and the pew- openers were in attendance on their friends. Having sedately advanced to the edge of the water, the Priest addressed a few words to the people ; then consecrated the sacramental element by prayer ; and entering first into the font, in his full paraphernalia, he received the Catechumens [ iii 3 sihely, and plunged them " in the Name," &c. -^each of tliem, instantly retired to the vestry, and when ail had been plnnged, the Priest, wet as he was, gave the general benediction, and the service closed. — Closed! — without so much as a single word, importing " the stipulation of a good conscience towards God." Not a single obligation of any kind- to subsequent holiness, did these catechumens contract before the as- sembled congregation, or the world ; not a sin- gle reference escaped them, to any principle, or confession of faith : they were all as mute as fishes, so far as religion was concerned : — and yet these were adults! On one occasion, I ^aw plunged a man of sixty, or seventy years of age. *' He might have stipulated for a good con- science towards (jod, in private, 2// the vestry" — Granted ; he might ; but what passed in private, in the vestry, is not to the purpose. I have seen Baptisms in foreign parts : I have seen Baptisms in the established church ; I have seen Baptisms public and private, among the Dissenters; — in ALL these I heard some " stipulations for a good conscience towards God ;" — in those among the Antipedo-Baptists, no such thing ! And yet I have seen the late learned Dr. Andrew Gifford baptize ; — his successor, Mr, Smith, — Mr. Cox- head, &c. &c. but the Catechumens neither an- swered for themselves, nor did any body answer for them. I have seen Dr. Giftbrd sweat pro- fusely from vexation at the clumsy, incoherent, unrecollected answers, given by some of his Ca- techumens, at his evening lecture, for instruc- tion by catechizing : I have heard others en- large in endless repetitions on what was plain to infantine comprehension. But, at that precise time, when the antient Church would most parti- cularly have demanded answers from them — at their Baptism, — not a vvord did any one of them utter, ^ a2 Fveiy body knows, tbat at Baptism the an- t»eut Church expected, at least, answers t& certain questions: — tliat the hniguage of ari: ancient father implies, that even tke sick were obliged to declare their faith ; for he speaks of the faltering tongue, hardly able to utter the words of the ho hj institution r and he urges to the laver of Regeneration while in health, by much the same arguments as preachers now-a- days urge conversion and repentance without delay. And yet, this denomination professes to have studied the subject of Baptism, till it lias attained to such New^ I'estamcnt purity in all things connected with it, that in witnessing a Baptism among them we see the Apostles re- peating what they practised in the primitive Churches. Not so ; if I have either judgment, or feeling. I have retired from such services, reflecting — " Here is Immersioii ; but not Bap- tism ; — the putting away the filth of the flesh ; but not the stipulation of a good conscience to- wards God:" can this be Apostolic? Accident, which the pious reader is perfectly at liberty lo call Providence, if he pleases, gave occasion to the following addresses. The Dea- con, a Baptist of the Baptists, was also the strictest of the strict on this article of Chris- tian Practice. A very %vorthy gentleman, not a Baptist, who had recently married a lady from the Church which accepted the Deacon's ser- vices, desired occasional Communion with this Church. The Deacon " more than hesitated dis- like;" — in short, he pleaded a conscientious negative. The worthy Pastor, less excessively rigid, as a Baptist, than the Deacon, struck with his scrupulosity, desired his re-consideration of the subject, putting into his hands certain tracts suited to that purpose. It was during the Dea- con's perusal of such tracts, &c. that the wri- ter of these letters happened to call on him, re- [ V ] "specting a matter perfectly intlifferent to this subject. The Deacon had Mr. Booth's volumes " Fedobaptism Examined" in his hand. That work gave occasion to a conversation, -which •ended in saying, " Do not tell me of Mr. Booth's authority : tell me of Scriptural authority. If you wish to understand the subject, consult Scripture." Ardent with zeal for the conversion of his friend ; and sure and certain of an easy and glorious victory, the Deacon spent several Sun- day evenings with him, diligentij^ engaged in ex- amining Holy Writ. But, Holy Writ was found, on examination, to declare in favour of Infant Baptism !! Staggered, but not convinced, the Deacon desired leave to ask assistance: a sketch of the argument, in a few lines, was sub- mitred by him to those whom he respected as perfectly able casuists. It remained unanswered. After many months of waiting, it was supposed that an appeal to the body of the Baptist deno- mination, by means of the Baptist Magazine, which professed to be completely at home on the subject, THust meet with attention, and beyond all possibility of doubt, with refutation, also, as the Deacon assured himself most firmly. While waiting for an opportunity, the following article appeared in the Magazine for January, 1814. If there be any error in attributing it to Dr. Ry- land, that gentleman is respectfully intreated to extend his forgiveness to an involuntary fault. ON THE BAPTISM OF HOUSEHOLDS. While 1 cordially approve of our having a Magazine of our own, especially to contain a fuller naiTative both of our past history, and of recent occurrences in our connection, than we could reasonably wish to be in- serted in a more general periodical publication, it is my earnest desire, that the Baptist Magazine may evet be so conducted, as to give no plausible occasion to our Christian brethren, to charge us with laying an undue stress upon the subject wherein we differ from them. [ vl 1 Way he that searcheth all hearts keep us inwardly ip a truly right spirit, and may the manner in which we vindicate our own opinions, when calkd to it, oblige thp truly candid to confess, that, though we conscientiously endeavour to conform exactly to the primitive pattern ourselves, yet we sincerely cultivate harmony and con- cord with all those who are united to the living head of the church. I trust it will be no infringement of this rule briefly to notice the objection, which I have lately seen ia print, to our practice of Baptizing none but professed believers ia Christ. One very friendly and respectable writer* has noticed a circuni'^tance, which has since been brought forward by another, to whom neither of these appellations can be given, viz. That in reading the Periodical Accounts of our Mission in India, they could not avoid marking the difference between the Bap- tisms there recorded, and those which are mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, " The Indian Missionaries baptize only ini)ividuals, \yhefeas the Apostles bap- tized Houstholds." Undoubtedly our dear brethren in India would grea'ly rejoice, and we should rejoice with them, if they could send an account of one of the native officer's inviting a Missionary to his house, and "calling together his kinsmen and near friends" to meet him, and telling him, " We are all present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God ;" and if they could add, that all who assembled on such an occa- sion were influenced by the Holy Spirit cordially to embrace the Saviour as revealed in the Gospel. But this narrative would differ from the account of Peter's visit to Caesarea, if it should be added, that not only they who believed with all the heart were baptized, bui their iujiihts also. There certainly is no hint, in the xth and xith of Acts, either that Cornelius had any in- fant children, or that the children of any who met at his house wore baptiztrd, Peter did not command any to be baptized, but those who had received the Holi/ Spirit. As to the term household or house, used in three * Letters to the Stranger in Reading, by Detector, p. 1S4, 135. an Evangelical Ckrgjman, now at Olnejc [ vu 1 other places, there is not only no proof that infants vere included in the household of Stephanas, of Lydia, and the Philippian Jailor, but strong evidence is con- tained in the history to the contrary. Stephanas in- deed is not mentioned in the Acts, but by Paul, j n the first Epistle to the Church at Corinth, ( i, 16) he says, " 1 baptized the household of Stephanas," and he afterwards ( xvi. 15.) beseeches the brethren " to submit themselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us and laboureth ;" alledgin^ as the rea- son of peculiar respect being paid to them, that they kittw the members of this family to be " the first fruits of^Achaia, and that they had adtlicted themselves to the ministry of the saints." Now infants could neither preach the gospel, nor even wait upon or assist those that did ; and some considerable time must elapse be- fore they could be fit to take the lead in the church.* As to Lydia, whose marriage is no where recorded, she appears to have crossed the J^gean sea, from Thy- atira to Philhppi, upon a trading voyage, and to have left her husband and infants, if she had either, at home; and her household, consisting most likfly of her servants employed in preparing the purple dye which she sold, are spoken of as " bi-ethren," whom Paul and Silas " coinforted, before they departed." Acts XVI. 14, 15, 40. We have no objection to baptize any household which consists of those who can receive evangelical consolation. With respect to the Jailor, vre are expressly as- sured (32) " they spake the word of the Lord to all that were in his house," and that he rejoiced, be- lieving in God with all his house." If our brethren had had etjual success in the jail at Calcutta, they would not only have baptized Mr. Gordon the Jailor, and his young daughter, but all his family, and the prisoners too, upon their believing : ybr there is ajine tank of water in the prison, as there usually is in the East. But without this pre-requisite, they durst no more baptize his unconverted children, than the un- converted criminals. * Dr. Whitby thinks this Epistle was written but three years after Paul was at Corinth, others reckon double that time ; but this will not suffice for infants to become preachers or leaders in a Christian Church. E viii } St. Luke mentions Crispus as believhig in the Loril with all his house, xviii. 8. and adds, that nany of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized. And he tells us that when the Samaritans believed, they Tvere baptized, both meyi and icomen, viii. 12. but he no where speaks of the baptizing of children, though he introduces children on a much less im- portant occasion, (xxi. v.) of going out of the city, along with their parents, and Paul, who knelt down and prayed with them on the shore, before he em- |)arked to go to Jerusalem. I infer, therefore, that the accounts of the Baptisms in Bengal, are really more conformable to those )e- corded in the Acts, than those of that eminent Man of God David Brainerd himself, whom 1 have revered for nearly forty years, as much as good Mr. Gauutlett can do. But I (i;Me not follow even Brainerd farther than I am sure he followed Christ. In baptizing un- converted children, I could not answer the question. Who hath required this at your hands ? Though Kreeshnoo Pa\il, the first convert at Seram- pMC, had not the pleasure of seeing his whole houser hold converted at the same time with himself, yet his wife, with two o^ her daughters, and both their hus- bands have long since been baptized; so have a good part, if not all, of some other families there ; and we have known in England instances of whole households baptized on :■ piofession of Faith. As soon as children can give evidence of repentance and faith, we are ready to baptize them. A lad cf twelve years old was bap- tized along with me, and 1 was last week reading a sermon preached by Dr. Baldwin, at the ordination of Mr. Chaplin of New-York, who was hopefully con- verted at ten years of age, and baptized at eleven. But I should tremble at the thought of a child of mine be- hevinr that he was made a member of Christ and an heir of heaven, by an act of mine, performed before he could know what was done to bin), and of which he could have no knowledge now but by the information of others. I only add, that instead of speechless babes being tmnecissariiy included in the term household, the Scrip- ture sometimes speaks of all the house where an infant I « 1 existed, without his being indudecl, 1 Sam. i. 21, 22, ^' The nia.n Elkanah, and all his At KAewtiit up to ofier unto the l.ord the yearly sacrifice anri his vow, but Hannah went not up, for she said uwty hor husband, I will not go up, until the child (Saniuel) be weaned, and than I will bring him that he may appear before the Lord, and ther*; abide for ever." We conclude, therefore, that neither of these cases affords even a presumptive argument in favour of infant Baptism, and the discrepancy between the ancient and juodern accounts of tlie administration of this ordi- uanre is to be found among the Poedobaptist Mis- sionaries, and not among- ours. Nevertheless, this mis- take shall never hinder our rejoicing in their success in the conversion of souls. J.R. In examination of this article, the following was transmitted .* TO THE EDITOR of the BAPTIST MAGAZINE. SIR, Feb. 1814. It was with some pain, I perceived that your very valuable correspondent, J. R. in your number for January, page 11. has been so far misled by his in- cautious reliance on the English Version of the New Testament, as to assert, that the household of Stepha- nas was " fit to take a lead in the church at Corinth, and that that church, [as a body], was directed" to submit themselves to that household. I am urged by my solicitude for eliciting trutli, to state objections against this view of the passage. No- body can value your correspondent's learning and use- fulness more highly than I do ; but, the facts of the case are independent of those considerations, and at this moment, from particular circumstances, they are of considerable interest to me, and perhaps of importance to the Baptist connection. It is objected, that J. R's. view of the place, is impugaed by the grammar of the passage ; 1 Cor. xvi. [ * I ^oy the reasons assigned by the apostle ; and by the — possibilities of thejact, as they existed at that pe- riod, I. Tlie grammatroal construction of the passag-e does Bot allow us to accept the words cnrlcsed in a pa- renthesis by our translators, as part of the orig-inal text, written according to the train of thought current in the apostle's mind ; and indeed, the necessity felt for in- cluding them in a parenthesis, is demonstrative proof that they have not been so considered, But, a parenthetical sentence though not a direct member of the text, should be so constructed as to reud in with the text, and with the subject treated on in the text, which these words will not. It is evident, that the apostle's " I beseech you, bre- thren," requires to be followed by a that or a there- fore, or some other term congruous to his leading and introductory expression. There is no such cause tchy he hesought them, marked ; but a harshness of transi- tion irreconcileable with usual and regular construction } " I beseech you, brethren — ye know*^' — . This want of connection and consequence cannot be reduced to grammar, in the sense whiclj J. R, has annexed to the passage. II. The reason assigned for submission in J. R's. sense, is absolutely foreign from the purpose, and in- consistent with it. Nobody supposes that submission in temporals is intended by St. Paul. Can he say, •' the household of Stephanas had addicted itself — (m diaconian) — to do certain services in temporals to the saints ; do you therefore submit to that household in spirituals''"/ This is ridiculous. Popery itself never ha- zarded a more futile consequence ; never drew a mor^ monstrous inference. It appears still more glaring if reduced to modern language. — " The household of Sir John A. has kindly engaged itself in supplying board and lodging, &c. to certain travdling ministers, or other pious christian brethren, Sec. — therefore, I be- seech YOU, the wliole church at B, to submit your- selves to that household" ! ! What conpection hag th^ cause with the consequence here 'i III. The possibilities of the facts are completely re* pu§;nant to J. R's. statement. From ver. 8, we learn that St. Paul was at Ephesus, distant far enough from Corinth, where the household of Stephanas resided : the Corinthians, therefore, knew inuch more about the dispositions of the household of Stephanas, than Paid did : they knew it long before he did : it must have been announced to theui many weeks — more hkely many months, prior to his iufoimation about it; — why then should he so earnestly ^^ beseech them" on ^ matr ter which was not of a nature to be a secret ? — Its use- fulness and application depended on its being extensively reported. It concerned the church at Corinth. Ihe church at Corinth could not possibly be ignorant of it; why then this " beseeching ?" Your very learned correspondent's assertioij that the househokl of Stephanas was " fit to take a lead in the church," is utterly inconsistent with the little importance attached to the family ot that Ciiiis- tian Brother in the first chapter of this epistle. — St. Paul mentions Crispus and Gains, all th*^ membej-s of this body which he had baptized :■ — but he overlooks, or forgets this family ; and add^ it, subsequently, only by an after-thought, an act of recollection among the uncertainties in his memory. Clearly, Crispus and Gains were more prominent in the Apostle's contempla- tion, than the family of Stephanas, which does not ap- pear to have been esteemed by the apostle, for the pur- poses concerning which he was writing, on the sarae level with Crispus and Gaius. Is it possil le, that an act of recollection would be necessarv to this inspired penman, in reference to a family " fit to take a lead iii the church" } Is it possible, that jamily shouli be •' fit to take a lead in the church" whi( h was not so competent to support the party of St. Paul, as Gj^ius and Crispus were ? And further, those who deny the baptism oi households, assert boldly, that the household of Stephanas was Hof o/" Me c/ii\ Ryland's ari{uments : some of them meet my entire and iniqualiiied approbation. Neither let it be thoui;:lit that any man exceeds me in real respect for the Doctor -'^or, that 1 impeach his iearniog-, his talents, his piety^ &c. — would ! I had tht- thonsandth part of either ! His knowlfdjje of iiretk \ allow, and admire • but I cannot coincide in his application of English. It is the fate of g-reat talents to attract general attention* Dr. R. may thank his extensive reputation fnr this ad- dress. When s^reat candour combines with great talents — -it is on such a man an impression may be hoped for, from respectful solicitation and liberal argu-' ment. He has no reason to fear any abatement of real dignity, even should error be proved upon him, to whom hisa;plicant concedes, what I most willingly con- cede to Dr. Kyland. But, is the Doctor infallible .'' The question is almost a libel up'tn him. The motto selected from his dis- course, implies his acknowledgement of liability to mistake, and bis desire of receiving arguments by which he may be convinced of his errors : — under his own protection, therefoi'e, I proceed. On the subject of Baptism, I am a friend to immer- sion ; ye' I humbly think Dr. R. has erred, by push- ing' his inductions to extremes. In the case of ex- tremes, it is allowable to demonstrate their nature and consequences, without reserve ; to shew, in whatever mode H);iy best answer the purpose, that the arguments, illustrations, or propositions, are invalid ; or, that the language in which they are couched is incorrect, faulty, extravagant, or absurd, &c. Whoever translates from a foreign language, should most solicitously select corresponding terms in the lan- guage into which he translates : he should not, for in- stance, adopt several terms having distinct ideas, in hi* ( xvii ) own laiig'uag'e, to express one idea of his orig'inal ; at least, he should be most anxiously cautious not to com- bine them, — or so to employ them as if they were synouinious, that his ordinary readers must misappre- hend them. If the foreign term be of extensive im- port, a caution should mark in what sense it is used in such, or such a place, lest the writer should subject himself to unpleasant and even irritating- imputations. For instance, says some perverse sophist *' The term Baptism in Dr. Ryland's acceptation of it, imports droicnivg.'" vide the Doctor's Notes to his Sermon. Page vi. He quotes from Josephus — " the ship (of Jonah) was about to be baptized''' — i. e. sunk or over^ whelmed. The death of Aristobulus — enticed into the water, to swim, and then, under pretenceof play, 6api2cet/ him — he was droivned. Again : the young man being immersed in a fish- pond, he came to his end. Page vii. Josephus's own ship being baptized ; — i.e. wrecked. Page viii. The Dolphin vexed at the Ape's falsehood, immersing him, killed him ; by plunging him into the water. Page xi. Lucian represents Timon the man-hater as saying, " if any one being carried away by a river, should stretch forth his hands to me for aid, I would push him down again when sinking, [baptizonta] that he should never rise again." We know, perfectly well, that Dr. R. would startle at the inconsistency alledged against him, by such wicked wit ; — and certainly no such charge is in my contemplation ; yet the argument is good, by way of demonstrating the necessity of caution ; and guarding against the extreme to which the acceptation of a fo- reign term may be pushed. Introd. h [ xviii ] Baptists, when writing on the subject, begin their statements — as Mr. Jones, in his new Dictionary of the Bible — " Baptism from the Greek word Baplizo, of Bapto, I dip or plunge.^' Dr. R. snys page &. " to dip, plunge, or immerse :" to these three words he adffs in the conrse of his tract, im/nied, Notes p. iii. drenched, or soaked, p. ii. note, overivhelmed p. vii. "What, Sir, are all these English t^rnis synoniraous I Have 1 he words dip, plunge, immerse, imhue, drench, soa/c, oiierwhelm, the same meaning, in our language, to say nothing of sinking and drowning ? I did not think good sturdy old English was a tongue so compliant, nor do I now think it. Here again surely, the worthy Di'. sins by excess. If it be true, that either or all of these words, fairly expresses the sense of the Greek word baptize, then has Dr. R. resigned the Baptists' cause to its adversaries. To demonstrate the guilt of excess here, let us in- terchange some of these synonyms : I content myself, with phirige and dip, to meet the proposition of Mr. Jones, and of those who modestly restrain themselves within that proposition. The instances shall be taken from the New Testament. Luke xvi. 24. •' Send Lazarus, that he may plunge Iht iip of his finger in water." Plunge the (extreme) TIP of his finger ! The ideas are irreconcilable : the phrase is ludicrous : the thing is impossible 1 Matthew xxii. 3. Mark xiv. 20. He (Judas) who plunges his hand with me in the dish." What ! two hands plunged into the same dish at the same instant ! Good manners forbid ! I will not believe it of our Lord. Rev. xix. 13. *' The person called the word of God was — clothed in a vesture plunged in blood." The idea might suit Mahomet: it does not suit Jesus Christ. The context shews that the writer had in his mind the effect of grapes trod in a wine press ; does the man who treads grapes in a wine-press plunge his clothes in their juice ? Surely not. Does Dr. R. know in what manner the wine press was anciently trod ? — and what, and how, the treaders held supports in their hands, ta avoid this plunging } [ xix ] To these passages may be added another, not ad- duced in this sense by Dr. R. The writer to the He- Heb.x. 2» brews says, " our fathers were (baptized) phmged in the sea,"— But Moses says, Exod. xiv. " The child- ren of Israel shall go on dry ground through the sea r and verse 2'J, the children of Israel walked on dry Innd in the midst of the sea." Isaiah also, sanctions Isaiah xi. 15. this by allusion, when he speaks of men's passing the sea (Iri/sfiod. How then were the Israelites baptized, in the sense of being plunged ? By what means, while this is maintained, shall we reconcile these in- spired writers ? And, moreover, if full grown meil were really plunged in the sea, what became of child- ren, not half their height ? — they must have been " baptized unto Moses," in the sense oi drowning. As it is the English language that I am endeavour- ing to vindicate, for the purpose of marking distinc- tions, and correctly applying its terms, 1 beg attention for a moment to the current of ordinary English dis- course. I dip my pen in ink ; I do not plunge it ; for then it would bs black from end to end. Yon hare seen a round of matches as large as a wheel ; they were rendered inflainmable by means of melted sulphur : were they plunged into that sulphur ? no : for then they would have been coated with it all over : but, one superficies presenting pointed tips, was first dipped in the liquid sulphur ; then the whole was turned, and the other superficies presenting a new combination of pointed tips, was dipped also. Plunging and dipping, then, are not synonymous terms ; but are distinct ; and ought to be distinguished. But, it is agreed, generally, and un«quivocaIly, so far as I know, that baptism is a dyer's term, in the origi- nal : an instance from the vat, therefore, may be thought conclusive. You know well enough the random shot (blue) cotton stockings, once worn by every body ; and still worn by thousands : how were they di/ed ? , The white cotton was tied in hanks, and each end of the hank — first one end, and then the other — was dipped in blue colouring liquor, the middle remaining undipped. Now, had these hanks been plunged in the colouring liquor, they would have been blue throughout : whereas, in fact, though twice dyed, these hanks were not once plunged : they th€refore were blue and [ XX ] white, and in this state were woven into stockings. Can a child mistake the application of this to the sub- ject under enquiry ? Do we need any turllier proof of the necessity for accuracy in our choice of English terms, and their apphcation ? This letter is already too long : I add, therefore, only the following iufereucts. 1. We should be cautious not to err by stating even truth in extreme terms. 2. It is not safe to say — " Baptism always includes droivniiig.^^ 3. It is not not safe to say — " Baptism always in- cludes plunging,^* 4. It is not safe to say " Bapto, I dip or plunge,**' without explaining the tlistinction between these terms, in the English language ; and marking in w hat places they occur in the sense proper to each term. Were this correctly practiced, I humbly conceive it would- contribute essentially to the prumotiovi of Christian Charity. I solicit, very respectfully, the sentimenis of your Correspondents, but especially of Dr. R. on these con- siderations : and shall, if permitted, so far resume the subject, as to shew that these are not the only parti- culars, in which that very worthy and learned Divine has !=inned against the English language, and against Truth herself, by excess. I am. Sir, Your's, &c. AtOLYTHUS. No. II. TO THE EDITOR OF THE BAPTIST MAGAZINE* Jf we are mistaken, we uhh to be convinced of oitr error. It is not enou^-h for my purpose, to prove that Dr. Ryland has been unhappy in his apphcation of sundry Eiighsli terms, 1 must further endeavour to shew ihat he is culpable also, in refusing to empl<^y a pioper term, when obviously demanded by the sjfciise, and. [ xxi I imporf of a passage on which he has enlarged : as ia the following note to his sermon. " John iii. 23, is rendered by our translators, " because there was much water there." But our brethren, afraid that this expression should countenance the idea of im- mersion, alledge that liijdata polla, would he more i^xrx voK>^ literally rendered many waters, or, as one of them explained it, small streams ; as if these latter words might have been given as the rendering of the Creek.- Tims it is insinuated, that though there were such small springs as would suffice to give drink to a multi- tude of people, or even to their cattle, yet they would never suffice for the purpose of immersion. It is true that h>/data polla is plural, and denotes literally /n«ny ivaters, but that it does not ineati small streams is evident, from all other places where it is used in the New Testament. It occurs only in the Re- velations written by this Evangelist. See Rev. i. 15, " his voice as the sound of muuf/ icaiersJ" Let this description of the appearance of our Lord be compared with the appearance of the glory of the God of Israel^ iu Ezek. xliii. 2. — See also Rev. xiv. 2, and xix. 6, where the united chorus of all the inhabitants of heavea is said to have been " as the voice of many ivulcrs,' and as the voice of a great thunder," or, in the latter place, " as the voice of many thunderings." That sound which resembles mighty thunderings, may re- semble the sound of a cataract, or the roaring of the sea, but cannot resemble a tihkling rill. The same term is used respecting the Antichristian Harlot, Rev. xvii. 1. who sat upon moiit/ waters, which are explained, in the 15th verse, as the emblem of peoples, and mul- titudes, and nations, and tongues. A representation not taken from such small streams as a stranger could hardly find ; but evidently from the situation of old Babylon,* near the confluence of the Tigris and the Euphrates, .ler. li. 13. " O thou that dwellest upon ma7i(/ waters, t3"c." The fact is, that hydata polla is evidently an He- braism, the word for waters in that language being in tiie Dual form mim, and having no singular, always is D73 * A great mistake of Dr. Ryland. See Miijor Rennell's " Map of Babylon," Geog, Herod, p. 333. [ -xxii J D'31 D'D eoimected wltli a plural adjective; as mini r ((htm, tDtiny D"n D'Q waters, mim c/iaiim, living^ waters, mini udirim, mio lity 0'")>nH D'Q waters, mim cabirim, mighty waters, inim Icluirim cltaii D»-)23 D'D wsitsi'Sj '^c. Sec. The torresponding phrase »?/Vn rabim occurs often in the Old Testament. Ezek. xliii. 2. lias been noticed already. Look at the foliowiii;;' passag'es, and try Mr. Mends's explanation. Psa. xviii. 10. He drew me out of many waters, or small streams. — Cant. viii. 7. Mantj waters cannot quench love, (i. e. small streams cannot !) — Psa. Ixxvii..l9, Thy way is in the sea, and thy path in mani/ icalers. (E. T. the great waters.) — xciii. 4. The Lord on hig'h is nvightier than the noise of many waters, yea, than the mighty waves of the sea. — Isa. xxiii. 3. It is said of Tyre, By many waters, {E. T. great waters,) the seed of Sihor, the harvest of the river is her revenue, &c. Let our Brethren search if they can find an instance of »wm DOT D'O rabim being used as synonymous with small streams*/* A go«dly parade of words ! — " voices— ^roarings — thunderings — Cataracts — -Seas — Sihor — Tigris — Eu- phrates, — " why did not the Doctor add — " Burham- pooter — Oronoko — Niagara".'' the addition would have been quite as much to the purpose, as the other ingre- dients of the note. Happy fountain ! Happy Enon / en- nobled by such mighty associations, by such magnificent alUances ! But, the nature of the fountain called Enon, is a question not to be solved by verbiage. It is honestly and truly, a simple question of pure geography; and no- thing else. Is there, was there ever, issuing from one spring:, a body of water forming many parts, in any district of the land of .ludea, in any locality accessible to John Baptist in his travels, by which these allusions to the Tigris, Euphrates, &.o. may be justified } or, are they merely phantoms of Dr. R's. ingenuity and fancy ? The Dr. lias a thousand times enforced the estab- lished maxim in logic — " ('onceruiiig that ivhirh does not exist, and thai which cannot he shewn to exist by credible testimony, the inference is exactly Ike * To the two passages from Ezekiel adduced in conl'ufa- tion of Dr. Ryland's tliallenge, in the first letter, may be added Ezek. xvii. 5. also, verse 8. [ xxiii 1 same, Utider the shelter of this maxim, I affirm, with the most respectful deference, but in unequivocal terms, that, there is no such spring in existence ; there never u'«A- such a spring- in existence, in any part of Judea, as the Enon thus described, and thus ilhistrated by Dr. R. It a spring- so copious were in existence, it would be invaluable to the native inhabitants : the memory of it could not have perished : it would be still in use : some rumour of it would have reached us. Who mentions such a spring ? European travellers Lave explored the Jordan, from the lake of Tiberias to the Dead Sea, with gfreat assiduity : which of them has everseen this wonderful discharge of waters ? Which of ihem ever gathered the most distant hint of a pheno- menon so mighty, so acceptable ? They have visited Scythopolis, or Beth Shen * or, if Salim, as is proba- ble, be some miles further south, — the wonder is so much the greater, that a body of water so considerable should continue unknown; since hundreds of traveller* Lave been within a short distance of it. Nay, more ; the French, at the time of Buonaparte's expedition into Syria, had a corps of horse at Beth Shen; and roamed the country down the Jordan : particularly they explored it on the west. Have they dropped the smallest hint t)f a discovery so acceptable, for cavalry, especially? Nor. a word : not a single word, of any fountain answer- ing to Dr. R's. Enon. In short, our whole information concerning this spring rests on the authority of Euse- bius, repeated by Jerom, who says in a few words, it was eight miles from Scythopolis, south, between Salim and the Jordan. This is the whole that appears in Calmet. True it is, that Mr. Arrowsmitb, in his two sheet map of Syria, marks a place by the name of Enon; but of this thundering fountain, he knows nothing : I have caused the enquiry to be made : he Jcnoivs absolutely nothing. Since, then, it is unknown to our ablest Geographers, to our most adventurous and observant travellers, to onr most inquisitive men— I deny its existence :— that is to say, according to the character attributed to it by Dr. R. Let him pnint out any credible traveller, whose account of it coincides with his own, and I will retract these assertions, with an apology, on his producing the passage. He has advanced his affirmative : let him, as in duty b«ui)d, prove it by testimony ; or let him acknowledge that he [ xxiv j f)as affirmed what he cannot prove ; in which case, tiiis will be another instance of his sinning" by excess. What miserable puerility has Robinson vented oa the subject of Enon ! yet, to do him justice, he was a man of research ; and if any body could have found out an Enon justly assimilated to the Euphrates, the Tigris, &c. he would have done it. That beiiior impossi- ble : — let us for a moment consider the matter rational- ly ; and adduce what may be serviceable indirectly, by %vay of illustration ; though not directly, by way of strict consequence. . Enon, by its name, imports a single spring ; *' the fountain of On :" but, it flowed in several, or many streams. There is no difficulty on the word pollu ; it clearly signifies mariy ; nor ought there to be, on the adoption of the English word streams : notwithstanding the determined opposition of Dr. R. to this very conve- nient, and very innocent monosyllable. The English word, " stream,'^ is of very extensive import: it des- cribes the whole course of the Ganges, at its most extensive overflow : the much narrower course of the Thames, as distinct from the tide-way ; the progress of the sea, running thousands of miles in the open ocean — as the g\i\f-stream ; the cument of a rivulet, or the flischarge from the spout of a tea-pot. But, on the subject under investigation, we want an article that we can reduce to the test of occular evidence : we want one on which the same Greek icord has been employed, as we find employed by the Evangelist John, in describing the spring of On. I know of but one such ; and that is so favourable to the Doctor's view of the subject, that I protest against being hound by this : though marked by an acknowledged degree of similarity. It is the fountain of Elisha, at Jericho. In 2 Kings ii. 20. the elders of Jericho complained to Elisha, " the under is naught," — says our transla- tion, but the words are plural in the Hebrew ; and the voarx Greek renderins: is plural, also — ta hi/data poncra : 'Bo\r)fa. the streams are evil. Now, what says matter of fact to this ? Maundrell shall inform us. I copy from p. 8. Edit. 2, 1707. " Its waters are at present received iu a basin, about nine or ten paces lons^, and five or [ XXV 3 six broad : and from theuce issuing out in good plenty^ divide themselves into several small streams, dispersing' their refreshment to all the field, between this and Jericho, and rendering it exceeding (ri.itt'ul. Close by the fountain groves a large tree spreading into boughs over the water, and here in a shade we took a colla- tion, with the Father Guardian, and thirty or forty Fryars more, who went this j( urney with us. ' Here we have " ivatcrs" " in goodphnttf ;" and it might appear an unexceptionable rendering of the pas- sage, to say, in Bible language, " John was baptizing in the fountain of Elisha, near Jericho, because there was good plenty of water." But, against this rendering, fair as it seems, we are barred, by ihe plural form of the original : this good plenty describes the water, vi'hile flowing in one body ; the Hebrew and the Greek speak of it after its division ; to represent tiie original accurately, we must render, " Jolm was baptizinsr at the fountain of Elisha, near Jericho, because these were several streams there :" — we cannot in justice avoid the term. It is demoustialcd, by this evidence, that the Greek term hydata, impurts streams' : aad as to the *' many'''' — let Dr. R. understand, and tijen state it, at his discretion. Dr. Gregory will inform him, that water issuing from one source, the greater be the num- ber of streams into which it is divided, the more is each diminished. Two are of less masfnitude than one : four, than two; eight, than four, kc. Now let the Dr. fix on what number he pleases for this many, and let his argument abide the consequence. Here again, 1 say, let me not be misunderstood : I believe that immersion was practised at John's baptism ; but the present question is not, what was practiced, or not practised ? — what 1 believe, or do not believe ? — but, what was the magnitude, and what the powers and properties of the spring of On ? — On this subject, I confess my ignorance : — if Dr. R. or any of your cor- respondents, can adduce an accurate geographical des- cription of this spot, he will do me, and the workl, a great favour. T,ll then, I must ti.ke the liberty of infer- ring from what/f/o know, and kn ivv satisfactorily, that it is not safe to describe the spriiigof On, by compari- son to the " Tigris, the Euphrutti, or mighty thun- DERINGS;" it is SINNING BY EXCESS. 1 am. Sir, Your's, &c. ^ ACOLYTHUS, Itttrod. c [ xxvi ] These letters were returned with a refusal of insertion, early in January, 1815. The first *' Letter to the Deacon", is dated Jan. "21. Being composed at snatches of time from other avoca- tions, — it is probably the work of less than forty-eight hours ; and therefore, if any slips of the pen, or the press, are found in it, the candid will make due allowances. None is desired for the Facts or the Evidences, themselves. It was quickly understood, that this was not to he an- swered: the second Letter, therefore, was put to press : the same silence ensued. The third now intreats the reader's consideration: and with this the correspondence closes ; — not for want of ma- terials, for much more might be said; but be- cause there is no probability of effecting any fur- ther service to Tjiuth, at present. It may be proper, however, to notice, a flying report or two, that has been in circulation, in reference to the First Letter. For instance. It is complained, tliat " I have been severe on Robinson, a man who, being dead, cannot re- ply." I wish it had been avoidable : but, the special pleading that vitiates his volume, is dis- gusting. The man who professes to write the history of any subject, shoidd adhere to truth, and follow truth fully: he should not report ex- clusively in handsome terms, what favours his own hypothesis ; — and represent as ridicu- lous, or in ridiculous terms, what annihilates it. — Moreover, Robinson evades difficulties which he could not but see: He hints, for instance, that had the old Saxon compound word " cradle" child" been used, in reference to Baptism, it would have fixed the application of the rite; yet can this historian! enlarge on the discourses of Gregory Nazianzen, but shut his eyes against the evidence aflbrded by that Father, becai hand with me in the dish. One of the twelve that^ One of the twelve that ^^^^\o dippeth with me me in v plungeth with me iu the dish. } the dish. He it is to whom I shall ^ He it is to whom I shall give John give a sop, when I have f asopwheni havePLUNG- dippcd it; and when he ( ED it; and when he had Jkad dipped the sop — ' plunckd the sop — — wbi. W ( 5 ) Now, will any man persuade me, that language to- lerates the expression " to plunge the tip of a finger"? — that Christianity tolerates the notion of our Lord Jesus " wearing a garment plunged in blood"? — that common decency tolerates the plunging of two hands in the same dish, at the same time? No, Sir! what I would not believe of a Hottentot, without ample evi- dence, I '^ill not believe of Christ. The xxom}, haptismos occars four times: y.o<;. -the washing of cups^ the plunging of cups j^j^yj. jj . and pots, and of brazen \ and pots, and of brazen .; g. 1 vessels, and tables. } vessels, and tables, --the foundation — of) thedoctrineof6flp • and ap- peared to them cloven tongues, &c. Actsii.i?. that they might receive the Holy Ghost ; for as yet he was fallen upon none of them. Ats.vJLi.ig. Ananias put his hands on Paul, that he might be Jilled with the Holy Ghost. Acts ix. 17. God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost. AcUx.pa B 4 ( 8 ) Acts. ..44. Thc.HoIy Ghost fell on all ■ Acts xi. 15. The Holy Ghost FELL on thcui, even as on us, at the beginning. Acts X. 45. They of the circumcision Mere astonished, because on the Gentiles was poured out the Holy Ghost. Actsxv.8. giving them the Holy Ghost, even as unto us. Titusiii. 6. The Holy Ghost — which he shed on us abundantly^ 1 Peter The Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. i. 12. • Eph. i. 13. Sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise. These passages give us as synonimous with baptize i 1. Sending dow^t. 2. Coming. 3. Giving. 4. Falling. 5. Shedding. (5. Pouring. 7. Sitting, or Abiding. 8. Anointing. 9. Filling. 10. Sealing. Now, in all these synonimous words, chusevvh ich you will, or lake them all together, there is not o?ie that raises the idea of plunging, or so much as approaches to it. Yet they refer to baptism: — E. gr. "the Apostles shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost," is the prediction; — the Holy Ghost was poured out upon them, is the accomplishment: and even Paul ^ho was then absent, speaks of the Holy Ghost as being shed on him ; — at his baptism, doubtless. Perhaps, however, after all, the instance of our Lord, is the most complete, of baptism by the Holy Ghost; and in that we are certain, to the very height of certainty, there was no plunging, nor uny thing like it: although, in lact, almost all the synonyms meet in hi? person;— as descending, com- ing, falling, anointing, sitting or ABID'NG. sealing, &C, Acts ix.l7, . ( » ) . We are now advanced to a proper period for the question,—" Did baptism by water resemble baptism by the Holy Ghost?— and, in wliat ]" That there must have been some resemblance is certain : more than that, the resemblance must have been striking; for the Apostle Peter seeing the Holy Ghost poured out on tlie company at Cornelius's, immediately recollected an al- lusion to John's baptism by water. The Lord said, " John baptized with water ; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost." If there were no resemblance between the two baptisms, how came the Apostle's memory to be refreshed by what he saw ? How came he to lay a stress on his recollection, thus raised to exercise ? And this made so strong an impression on his mind, that he adverts to it a long while afterwards ; — why so, unless the fact Avere striking? And if it be asked, what he did see 1 I answer, — he saw the pouring down of the Holy Ghost; for this is the term expressly used in the history. Try, now, both these irreconcileable propositions by the substitution of their synonyms ; — E. gr. " John plunges you in water ; but ye shall be plunged in the Holy Ghost." Shocking abuse of language, and prin- ciple !— Try the other ; " The Holy (ihost shall be POURED upon you — shed upon you— fall upon you, &c. as John pours water, sheds water, /cts fall Wister, &c. upon you." What is there oifensive in this? What is there contrary to fact? What to decency? What to the analooy of faith? And, what to tiie analogy of grammar and language? Even thut seemingly-inai)i)ro- priate term, ajioiuting, preserves the action, thougii it changes the fluid. The baptism by the Holy Ghost, it is clear, was con- ferred by the descending of the baptismal element. Are there any instances of the use of the word baptism in reference to icutcr, which instances also mark the descending of the baptismal clemeut? — if there arc. Acts Kv. 8. ( 10 ) then water hapihm, where described, must be taken m a sense coincident with baptism by the Holy Ghost, and that strictly; or else we render one part of the Word of God repugnant to another. The first instance I refer to, is afforded by the Greet translators of Daniel, who inform us, that Nebuchad- nezzar in his deranged state, should be baptized with tlie dew of heaven ; and this is repeated, to inform us, IfeffluT .g.?. jjj^j |jg leaiiy yfJ^^ baptized with the dew of heaven ; and this is repeated again ; affording so many unquestionable Jtearjv.33. applications of the v.ord baptize to the descent of th^ dew of heaven upon Nebuchadnezzar. For, how stood Il^-T.2i.. tjiis fact? The vapours raised up ijito the atmosphere during the heat of the day, — descended, — shed them- selves, — fell down, — during the cooler hours of the evening and night, on the person of the unhappy Baby- lonian Monarch : by these, say the Seventy, he was bap- Uzed. A clearer instance of descent there cannot be. A New Testament instance, yoa yourself. Sir, have ftiruished me, by quoting a passage from an eminent Greek scholar, who, intending to elucidate the subject, sfeniniks, that the word baptism is iibcd with reference to the Israelites passing through the sea, and under fi(*r>a.* the cloud. But, with all deference to that character, the Israelites did not pass throtigh these//, if by sea he nieaus the water ; for Moses affirms twice, that they 21, V?^ passed over on dry land ; but if he means to say, they Kehoin. passed alons:, or across (as the word is used) the bed of la.ll. *" ,^ , ,, 111 the sea, where the waters usually were, though at tliat time absent, he is right; — but, then, what language is. this I — to pass through dry land \ On the other clause of the sentence, there can be but one opinion ; for,, if Israel were under the cloud, then was the cloud over Isvafl ; ami if Israel were baptized in the cloud, thou ♦lid the haptismal element, water, descend on the Israelites, fiom above, as the dew had descended ou ISebucbuduezzar. And thus we see, that the word ( 11 ) baptize maintains the same reference to descending^ when water is the baptismal element, as it bears when employed to describe the pouring out, or pouring down, i. e. shedding, of the Holy Ghost. I now beg leave to close this preparatory Introduc- tion, by reminding you, Sir, that I have adhered to the Utmost to the rule you assigned me, and in which 1 most heartily coincide ;— that every word should be TAKEN IN ITS PRIMARY, OBVIOUS, AND ORDI- NARY MEA>UNG, UNLESS THERE BE SOMETHING IN THE CONNEXION OR IN THE NATURE OF TKINGS WHICH REQUIRE IT TO BE TAKEN OTHERWISE. When the Pharisee saw that our Lord went to dinner V'}^^^ %oithout BAPTISM, — is it possible that he could expect our Lord should plunge Am«e//" before dinner ?— The thought is absurd. But, to see the real force of this ' word, m this instance, we must recollect that the feet Lute were washed, as a customary compliment, by pouring ^"- '^• water upon them ; and the hands, also ; so we read of Elisha's " pouring water on the hands of Elijah," ^jif 'u * If any body asks, whether the word baptize as used by the Greek translators of the Old Testament, neces- sarily implies plunging, let them consider the use of it in the instance of the passage of the Jordan by the josli. Israelites: a history that affords great illustration to "'• i^- that of the passage of the Red Sea, by Israel under Moses. " And as they which bare the Ark of the Lord, were come unto Jordan, and the feet of the priests that bare the Ark were — baptized, say the Lxx. — i. e. MOISTENED, damped, wetted, aipped in the smallest possible quantity of water; the very reverse of plung- ing, suiely ! the water recoiled, and stood on a heap," &c. It is clear that the priests' feet were rather at, f iian in the water: rather at the brim of the bank that cou- tined the water, than immersed In the water itself. And y^^sc 17. ( 12 ) this oi>r translators have properly expressed. All Israel', it is to be understood, passed over on diy grouudj as a* the Red Sea. Again, tlie bird that was to be let fly away at the cleansing of the leper, was to be baptized, dipped, m the blood of the bird that was killed; but it is. evident to common sense, that no bird could yield blood enough to admit the plunging of the living bird; of cedar wood ; scarlet wool, and hyssop ; which also were to be dipped. In fact, I am not aware that the word baptize is ever used in the Lxx. in the sense of plunging; Hor is it so understood by our translators, except in one Jo* ix. 31. iubtauce for the sake of a strength of expression^ ^3B The Hehrew term rendered baptize, expresses, not only in the Old Testament, but in Talmudical Hebrew^ also, ablution, immersion, washing, &c. — But to Gospel baptism, this can have had no reference, though ift PRECEDED that ordinance, beyond all doubt: see the 2K7ngs instance of Naanian, the allusions to the custom, in the '• *^ Psalms of David, and other passages in the Old Testa- ment : that it was continued afterwards, appears, no^ only from the united, unequivocal, awd uniform testi- monies of the best informed, and most inquisitive Jewish Rabbins; but also from the questions agitated betweci\ 30^1151^5. certain Jews and the disciples of John, about rituai^ pmitication. FACTS AND EVIDENCES ON THE SUBJECT OP ©:ai&5r3^flp. To the Law and to the Testimoyiy ; If they speaknot according to this word, ZViere is no li^ht in them. i HAVE often pitied that ill-judged zeal by whick Christianity has been set in opposition to the religion of the Jews. Our Lord declares that " he came to fulfil the law and the prophets" ; and that heaven and eartli were not more fixed and permanent than the Divine Institutions of antient times. He was, in one sense, ratiier a reformer, than an institutor; he perfected what life found existing. A Parable, for instance^ Avas a Jewish mode of tcach- iilg: — who taught by parables, equal to Jesus Christ ? And what is the most distinguished and appropriate rite of his religion, but a service grafted on tlie passover cus- toms among the Jews of his day? It was not ordained by Moses that a part of the bread they had used in the passover, should be the last thing they ate, after that supper ; yet this our Lord took, as he found it, and converted into a memorial of his body. Tiie " cup of blessing" has no authority whatever from the original institution, yet this our Lord found in use, and adopted as a memorial of his blood : — taken together, these «4euiients form one commemoration of his death. Pro- fcabUity, rising to rational certiiiaty, therefore, wwuld ( 14 ) lead us to infer, that whatever rite Jesus appointed as the ordinance of admission into the comnuuiity of his followers, he would also adopt from some service already existing; some token familiar among the people of his nation. A ceremony for the first time heard of, would have surprised, would have shocked, them; it would have acted as a prohibition, on the minds of a people so remarkably, and obstinately, tenacious of established customs and notions. In fact, we know that " divers baptisms" existed Milder the law; and we have every reason to believe that the admission of proselytes into the profession of Judaism, was really and truly marked by a washing with water in a ritual and ceremonial manner. I have always understood, that Maimonides is perfectly cor- rect, when he says, " in all ages when a Heathen (or stranger by nation), was willing to enter into the covenant of Israel, and gather himself under the wings of the Majesty of God, and take vpon himself the yoke of the law — he must be\. circumcised, and 2. baptized, and 3. bring a sacrifice ; or, if the party were a wo- man, then she must be 1. baptized, cJirf 2. bring a sa- crifice. He adds — at this present time, when [the temple being destroyed] there is no sacrificing, a stranger must be 1. circtimcised, and 2. baptized. The more strict among the Jews described this cere- mony, as a death, in a religious sense; and deemed the past life of the party, to be as distinct from his ensuing life, as the lives of two separate persons could be. They even showed their conviction of his not being the same person, by allowing him to marry among his former relatives, within the degrees of kin, prohibited by the law. They gave rules for the performance of this initiatory rite; and caused it to be strictly aud thoroughly performed, by washing the person all over, 111 a biith, cr other sufficient quantity of water ; liot less than a certain number of gallonr,. This was not baptism, correctly speaking, f'>r baptism being a ( 15 ) ^reek term, was not adopted by the Jews— cotdd not be adopted by tlieoj, to express a religious ceremony practised long before Greek became the prevailing laii- g«ageofthe East. Itwas indeed, wlrat the lxx, adopted the Greek word baptize, to express; but that was prior n^*ia to the days of John and Jesus. This was/ting I beg leave to call immersion: — and I wish you to re- collect its signification, — Death. Was such washing, ^r immersion, continued, in the administration of John's baptism ? — I appreJiend it was. Was such IMMERSION tli€ whole of John's baptismi -^No. Was IMMERSION of the like kind continued among; the primitive Christians ? — I apprehend it was ; and many expressions we meet with in the New Testa- ment, have a clear and unimpeachable reference to this preparatory rite. E. gr. The Apostle describes the Corinthians, as being — iCoT.-n.it. 1. WASHED, — 2, sanciiji^d. 1. Having our bodies w^ashed with pure water — n and joined in reciting the Lord's Prayer. ** Here, as I was given to understand, the ordinary ceremony of baptism concludes; but as the boy had been a Musselmaun, he was, in addition, crossed with the consecrated oil over every joint of his body. After this, he was wrapped in a clean white linen cloth, and placed for a moment in my arms, the priests telling me that " I must henceforth consider him verily as my ton." The high priest did not take any active part iu this ceremony, but the w hole was conducted with great decorum, and a due degree of solemnity. The boy at- ( 21 ) terwards, according to the custom of most of the East- ern churches, was admitted to partake of the holy cora- munion." On the subject of the white linen cloth, Mr. Salt adds in a note, ** This is a very antient part of the ce- remony, as appears from the testimony of many of the Fathers collected by Casalius." — Puellus infans muta- •tione vestis sensu externo festum colit, quandoquidem interior! animi sensu nondum potest, &c. Vide De ve- teribus sacris Christianorum ritibus, auctore Johannis Bapt. Casalius Romanus. Francofurti, 1C81." The same author says, p. 60, on the reception of the cucharist, by the newly baptized — Ritum Eucharistiae suscipiendae post Baptismum non solum adultis, veruqi etiam infantibus fuisse communem." Here we have a clear and incontestible distinction and separation preserved between immersion and bap- tism: for had it so happened, that this boy had changed his mind, in the interval between coming from one place, " dripping wet from head to foot," and reaching the other place, [about " thirty yards" distant?] where baptism was performed, he would, it is evident beyond all denial, have suffered immersion, but he would not have been baptized. The Abyssinian church, it is understood, derived its rites, with its conversion, from Egypt, A. D. 313; and it is hazarding little to say, that those conversant with the subject, will readily recognize in Mr. Salt's descrip- tion, the baptism of a Heathen, as performed in Egypt, &c. in the second century: by Origen, or some other father. Here is no necessity for tanks and cisterns, and reser- voirs of water; these priests could have immersed in rivers, or lakes, had they so pleased : but they had been accustomed to use " great basons of water," from their c3 ( 22 ) forefathers, in the days of antiquity; and these they still retahi. Ac(s What a light this throws on the story of baptism con- X. xi.xv. ferred on Cornelius! That every Romau family had such a " great bason of water," or what was much the same, is notorious. Cornehus, as a Roman, could not be without one; and what answers the purpose of the church at Chelicut, where baptism is expected to be performed, as a Christian rite, might well answer the purpose in the house of a Roman officer, who had not the most distant idea of baptism. Is it asiced, did other churches practise baptism in similar " basons?'' — The proofs of it are extant to this day. Several of these *' great basons" are still preserved in Italy ; and some in France. I have seen them; and any body Avho takes a trip to Paris, may see them too, — unless they have been destroyed during the French revolution, at no greater distance than St. Denis, five miles from Paris. But, the history of the baptism of Cornelius leads to further, and important consequences: — for, if I were asked to produce an instance of baptism, con- ferred viithout previous immersion, this is that instance. It will repay the closest investigation. Acts X. 14. It is remarkable in this history, that Peter uses two words to describe the natural condition of food: 1. un- washed: 2. unchansed. The first certainly signifies UNWASHED in the instance of hands not immersed be- fore dinner: the second, with equal certainty, signifies a ritual, ceremonial, or religious cleansing: and is by far the stronger term. The answer to Peter therefore is — " What God hath ritually, ceremoniously, or reli- giously CLEANSED, in the strongest and highest degree, that call not thou unwashen, in the lower and weaker degree." This was done thrice. Now, taking this in re- Verse 44. ference to Cornelius — did not the descent, ?ind pouring out of the Holy Ghost, on that good man, announce his ritual, or religious cleansing, though a heathen. ( 23 ) lind that in the strongest possible degree? What ne- cessity after this unequivocal, this sublime, this Divine token of a purified and accepted person, was there, could there be, for the entire washing of his body in water, — his immersion? That, indeed, might have been indispensable, for his regular admission into the Jewish community: not so into the Christian church. Having received the greater purification, the higher degree of celestial cleansing, why impose the lesser, the carnal and beggarly elements of this world 1 It would be degrading the baptism by the Holy Ghost, below the preparation for the humble baptism administered by John. — Surely, this is impossible! The answer of Peter when challenged on the subject, coincides perfectly with this representation : — " As 1 Acts xi. 15. began, to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with wa- ter; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Forasmuch, then, as God gave to them the like gift [baptism by the Holy Ghost] as he did to us, who be- lieved on the Lord Jesus Christ, — what was I, that I COULD withstand God ? " Nevertheless, it being proper that each convert should personally make a clear and distinct profession of his faith in Christ, and of his future adherence to him, should be openly consecrated to his service, and this being the regular intention of Christian baptism, the Apostle directed that these highly favoured persons should have that opportunity, before proper witnesses ; for his justification, and for their own satisfaction. " He commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." Such was the authority of Peter for departing from the strict rules of the Judaico-Christian church; and such the circumstances under which the first fruits of the Gentiles were dedicated to Christ; and by which those who called Peter to account were at length put to silence. c 4 ( 24 ) There is another history of which the same view may be taken, though not so clearly; that of tlie hrethren, wh»> had been baptized with John's baptism only. Hav- ing been immcred previous to their reception of that Actsxix.o. j.jj^^ ^jjgy ^^,gj.p simply, under Paul's direction, baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, as a proper opportunity of explicitly acknowledging him as their head and sovereign ; an opportunity that they had not, — could not have, at the time when they received baptism from John. Acts U.38. The advice of the Apostle to the people of Judea, at the feast of Pentecost, agrees too, with this: they had been baptized with John's baptism; Peter therefore counsels them, now, to make an explicit avowal of the name of Jesus Christ in baptism. And thus, I believe, we have made some progress to- wards explaining that very difficult expression, *' bap- tism in the name of Jesus:" — i. e. that these people had already religiously recognized the God of the Jews, &c. jn the rite of baptism: to which they now added a re- cognition of the Lord Jesus. I believe these are all the places where this phrase occurs. But, this Abyssinian baptism for, you will ob- serve. Sir, that Mr. Salt calls the entire ceremony by this name ; not dividing it into 1. immersion, and 2. bap- tism, as he might have done; but speaking of the whole under one comprehensive term; — I say, this Abyssinian baptism so strongly recalls the second century of the Chriiitian church, that I cannot dismiss it without a few additional words. In the first place, it affords a memorable instance of the exrreme impropriety of annexing to the rite of Gospel Baptism, observances founded on the literal acceptation of yLETAPHomc Ah PASSAGES OF ScRIPt TUBE. ( 25 ) Perhaps, Sir, you have been startled at the intro- duction of this oil and anointing into the office of Baptism. — Yet it is of extreme antiquity in the church, and passages of scripture may be adduced in its fa- vour; — for, was not Jesus Christ anointed at his Bap- tism ? — and why should not believers be anointed also ? whose duty it is to be conformed in all things to their Head. Nay, more, it is of almost universal usage, where oil is the product of the country; and some churches anoint be/ore immersion as well as after it. Scripture authority may also be pleaded for the " clean white linen cloth," used as a garment; — for, are Eph.iv.24L we not commanded to " put off the Old Man with his Rom. deeds," (which was done in the previous washing), and ^"'' ^'*' to pnt on the New Man? — to put on Jesus Christ? &c. as sigified by this white robe. Antiently, also, the first food taken by the person baptized, was milk and honey; -r . , — for, does not scripture say, the Messiah shall eat vii. i5. *' thick milk [the Eastern buttei~] and honey, that he may know to refuse the evil and choose the good." Can we, then, too closely imitate actions attiaMited to Jesus Christ? You see, I repeat, the consequences of adopting, into the administration of a Christian ordi- nance, customs grounded on metaphorical expressions of scripture; thhik you, they furnish valid arguments for the practice? No, Sir, the sacrament of Baptism, does not rest on such supports; neither is it improved by the adoption of sHch similitudes. But, there is another view of this administration un- der which it answers punctually to the expressions used in scripture, in reference to Baptism. — Take a specimen. Did they exhort you to " Arise, and wash AWAY Actsxxii. •pHY SINS, calling on the name of the Lord?" — Yes. ^^• Did they lead you to the washing of regenera- Titus iii. 5. TION, and PUTTING AWAY THE FILTH OF THE Heb.'x. 22^ FLESH, by having 3/OMr body washed with pure water? — Yes; they washed me all over very care- fULLY. ( 20 ) Were you buried with Christ in baptism, — Rom. Ti. PLANTED with him, — CRUCIFIED with him, — BAP- 3—6. TfZED into his death, — immersion in *' the great bason of w ater, " importing all tiiese ? — Yes. Is immersion ALWAYS practized at baptism 1— Is it esteemed essential to th© ordinance? — Yts. You were " dripping wet from head to foot," after your immersion ; and upon the whole, do you affirm that this is the regular and established administration of the ordinance in the Abyssinian church? — Yes, indeed it is; IMMERSION has been the eontinued practice, for more than FIFTEEN HUNDRED YEARS. This Catechism might be greatly enlarged. — Every answer furnishes a direct attestation to the practice of Baptism by immersion, in Abyssinia; — and the whole taken together, afifords nothing short of an ABSOLUTE demonstration! Absolute ! did we not know all the while, from the same e^dence, that immersion was an introductory obser- vance; — That BAPTISM was administered in a dif- ferent place — by a different person — from a different font — with a different water — requiring a different action — under a different form of words: in short, that the actions were, strictly speaking, intirely different ; though, in common speech, they formed nominally one ceremony, called Christian Baptism. So much for absolute demonstRx^tion!!! These questions have been formed in reference to the rite importing death; and to that only: but the infer- ence is certain, that this boy now commenced a reno- vated LIFE; and henceforth he will be known by his new name of GEORGE; — What was his Mohammedan appellation, or name previous to his symbolical deat]i> Mr. Salt has not stated. EXPLANATION OF THE PLATES ANNEXED. -That your love may abound j'et more and more in knowledge and JUDGMENT, — that ye may distinguish things that DIFFER————— OF the hundred testimonies quoted from critics by Mr. Booth, on the subject of Baptism, in his " Pedo- Baptism examined", ninety-nine are repetitions or copies and are reducible to the effect and power of one or two original witnesses ; but the first in his seventh chapter, is of a nature to have startled that writer, if, on the Booth, subject of Baptism, he could have been startled.— ^''^•^•^^'^* " Deylingius says, " So long as the Apostles lived, as many believe, immersion only Avas used ; to which afterwards, perhaps, they added a kind of affusion; such as the Greeks practize at this day, after having PERFORMED THE TRINE IMMERSION." What! do the Greeks, at this day, ADD a kind of pouring, AFTER immersion 1 — then, it is clear, that they do not consider immersion as the whole of Baptism. In fact, we might rather say, that they consider immersion as preparatory, only, to Baptism; exactly as we have seen their disciples in Abyssinia perform the ordi- nance, and " perhaps" this they received from the Apostles' days. But, it may be asked, since Baptism has certainly undergone many variations, what confi- dence is due to the Greeks of this day? — and how far may this *' perhaps" be converted into certainty? — ( 58 ) always supposing that the higher we can trace the evi- dence, the nearer to the first century, the more effec- tually it justifies our reliance; to which we must add, that, independent witnesses, if possible to be obtained, are worthy of more tJian double honour : their united testimony is credible in a much greater ratio, than the testimony of each taken singly ; or supposed to stand alone. Montfaucon has well observed in the Preface to his Antiquite Expliquee, that we learn a thousand particu- lars from antient representations, sculptures, &c. con- cerning points of classic enquiry, which are not men- tioned by any classic writer, whatever; and certainly Robinson was much in the right, in his History of Bap- tism, to introduce such antient representations of that Christian ordinance as he conceived might illustrate the subject. For, it will be observed, that, these speak the same language to all nations : they present no diffi- culty of construction, nor variation of sense in particles or prepositions; the learned and the unlearned may translate them with equal correctness ; and after some little practice, with equal facility. They are vouchers for the time, in which they were executed ; and, though we cannot hear the men of that generation viva voce, and we dare not put words into tiieir lips, yet we may see their testimony, and judge of its relevancy to the the enquiry that engages our attention. For these reasons, and in full reliance on their authen- ticity and authority, the following subjects have been compiled, and are set before the reader, in Plate I. ANTIENT REPRESENTATIONS OF BAPTISM. No. 1. From the door of the antient Metropolitatj Church of Pisa. This subject forms part of the ornament to the door / ( 29 ) of the Great Church. It is not certain that it was wrought at Pisa; it might be brought from a foreign Country, — whether from Jerusalem, or from the Ba- learic Islands, in the 12th century, is uncertain. That the Pisans brought it from abroad, has always been be- lieved; and in the Annals of Pisa, by Paul us Tronci, mention is made of certain excellent spoils of war, A. D. 1117, among which certain leaves of brass, which were consecrated as gifts to the Metropolitan Church. From the shape of the characters, this is judged to be a very antient performance. It forms part of the History of the Life of our Lord, the motto upon it is BAPTIZAT. Such is the account given by Ciampini ; but the tra- dition current among the Pisans is, that it was brought from Jerusalem, by their troops engaged in the cru- sades. It seems to have been made for some church, or Christian establishment. The envelope that surrounds the figure of Christ is completely unintelligible from the print: Robinson thinks it is a shroud ; implying the death of the wearer: I rather think it is a damage, the effect of age, or of accident; but it may be a cloud supposed to have descended from heaven. No. 2. Baptism of Christ, in Jordan. — From the church of St. Paul exira muros [at Rome] on the Via Ostiensis. The outside is a plate of brass, covering a substance of wood. The figures are partly in relief, partly engraved: some of the hollows have been in- laid with silver. The inscriptions are in Greek. — The motto on this is — BAnTlCHC. The age of this performance is uncertain: the door which it covers is dated 1070; but it may safely be ac- cepted as by very much older than the door: and from the letters being in Greek, it certainly is of Greek origin and workmanship. No. 3. Jesus Baptized in the river Jordan. — In this representation of the sacred mystery, we find the ( «o ) two modes of baptism, immersion and aspersion, [con- joined]. These are the sentiments of Ciampini. This is from the door of the antient Archiepiscopal Church at Beneventum: where it still exists. Bene- ventum was one of the first cities in Italy in which Christianity made progress: said to be under Pliotinus, a disciple of the Apostle Peter. This performance is rudely executed; and extremely antient; but no memo- randum of its date is extant. No. 4. Baptism of Christ in Jordan. The- center-piece of the dome of the Baptistry at Ravenna. This building was certainly erected by Neo, bishop of Ravenna, in 451 ; and was decorated by him in the manner which it still retains. It is detached from the Metropolitan Church; at one of the side doors of which it stands. This subject is executed in Mosaic; and this deline- ation of it is sufficiently large and distinct to allow a fair and correct idea to be formed of the action of the figures, and of the various accessories. Ciampini explains it to the following effect. In the midst of the picture is the figure of St. John the Baptist, clad in a violet coloured garment, and standing on the bank of a river, holding in his left hand an oblong cross, in his right hand a shell, or something of the kind, from which he POURS water on the head of Christ, who is immersed in the water to the depth of his navel. Over the Lord Christ is an uncommon crown of glory: represented, under the figure of a dove, is seen the Holy Spirit. It is to be observed, that in this re- presentation the rite of Baptism is performed, by im- mersion and by aspersion, at the same time. ••• .The name Jordan n is written over the head of the figure which represents that river, according to the custom of the antieuts. No. 5. Baptism of Christ, in Jordan. — In the church of St. Mary, in Cosmedin, in Ravenna, built originally A. D. 201., but, as it should seem, re-edified ( 81 ) A. D. 553, is a representation in Mosaic of the Baptism of Christ, in Jordan. This edifice was made by Theo- doric, for the use of his clergy of the Arian persuasion. In the center stands Christ our Saviour, in the river Jordan, immersed up to the navel : to the left, on a rock, stands John the Baptist, his left hand holding a bent rod, his right hand holding a patera [shell?] from which he POURS WATER on the head of the Saviour; over whom descends the dove, the symbol of the Holy Ghost, with expanded wings, and emitting rays of glory and grace. Such is the explanation given by Ciampini. These representations struck that learned antiquary, as they well might strike any reflecting mind, convers- ant with Christian antiquity and sacred literature; he, therefore, on this occasion reasons to the following effect: In these pictures we see Christ immersed in water; and John also pouring water on his head. This, among other things, raises a doubt, whether Baptism should be performed by immersion, or by aspersion, or by BOTH. That this rite was antiently performed by immersion, we have the testimony of various represen- tations, and various writers. Venerable for its anti- quity is an instance (of representation) now existing at Naples, — the account of which has been sent to us from the most illustrious and reverend D. Andreas ab Aquino, lately bishop of Tricarensia. — This monument of sculpture, consisting of two representations on the same tomb, exists in the palace of Prince Caramanico, his relative, at Chiaia, near Naples." From the dresses introduced, they are supposed to refer to the Longo- bardi, who were brought to the reception of Christianity by Theodolinda, a princess of Bavaria, A. D. 591. — The history of which is not to our purpose. Ciampini infers that these sculptures represent the baptism of Argilulfus, the king of that people, and perhaps of Theodolinda, his queen. The Longobardi occupied Be- neventum from A. D. 571 to A. D.971. — This related. ( 32 ) he proceeds to inrestigate the difficulties presented by these testimonies ; which he reduces chiefly to, I. The person who administers Baptism; — who is a layman, not an ecclesiastic. II. Baptism is administered by 1. immersion, and 2. by aspersion. He conchides, after considerable argument, that, as to the first difficulty, all the canonists agree that in caseiS of necessity laymen may administer Baptism He proceeds to draw the following inferences on the second point. " It is certain, and beyond all doubt, that the first faithful were baptized wherever convenience offered :— • some in rivers, others in fouutains; others in lakes; others by the way-side, others in the sea, others in pri- vate houses: — as appears from authors cited. The mode, also, of baptism differed, as is believed; iiisomtich that if they were in a place convenient for immersion, baptism was conferred by immersion: if they were in a place where streams, fountains, or other lesser waters were founds water was poured on the head." Some writers think, that submersion was some- times practized in baptism. The word first occurs in a letter of our countryman Alcuin to Odouin, [or rather, as the names should be written, Alkwin to jEdwin; both being Saxons] — they lived in the eighth century. Trine submersion is alluded to by the same writer. Our author (Ciampini) sums up the whole in these words, p. 22 : " Baptismus itaque primitiva in ecclesia, ut nuper eacposuimus, ubicunqiie se offerebat oc- casio, celebratur; nam in Jluminibus ; in fontibus; in Mari Domi, aUisque in locis hoc primum ad salutis januam ministrabatur sacramentum." From the expressions used by this indefatigable an- tiquary, it appears that he had not arrived at any fixed and determinate opinions on the subject of Baptism, as represented by these compositions. He perceived their ( 39 ) testimony, and acknowledged theii* competence; but be draws his references with hesitation and indecision. It does not appear to have occurred to Ciarapini, that these pictures represent, as passing at the same in- stant, actions really distinct, because such was the ne- cessity under which the art of the painter, or sculptor, was confined. But a moment's consideration will de- monstrate this; — for, the descent of the Holy Ghost was not, till after our Lord had come up out of Jordan; yet, in all these subjects it is represented as descending upon him while in Jordan: contrary to the moment of time, and, so far, to the text. In like manner, the action of the Baptist, pouring, is distinct from the prior im- mersion, though consecutive on it; neither painter nor sculptor could represent this action as distinct from the other, without employing tivo pictures, or two sculptures. Let us now examine the facts stated by these evidences. Here are five antieht and ecclesiastical representa- tions, in which our Lord Christ is IN the water of Jor- dan, as clearly as any man ever was. It is to no pur-i pose to dispute about the power of the Greek preposi- tion, or particle : we have only to open our eyes, and declare whether or not his figure be immersed IN the water, up to the waist. It is a question — not of gram- mar, but of appeal to the senses: this is immersion. Secondly, observe, that although Jesus is in the wO' ter, yet John is not. Every one of these representa- tions (as also others instanced by Robinson) places John on the bank of the river, but not IN the water. And this is clearly consistent with Holy Scripture, which ne- ver gives the least hint of John's being in the Jordan. It will follow, I suppose, demonstratively, that John, standing on the bank, and higher than Jesus, could not possibly plunge him. I say, unless he were in the water — which he is not — he could not have sufficient power over the person ofany one who is in the water, to PLUNGE him. Thirdly, supposing it possible that John could have had power, not being himself in the water, to plunge itual^Mr(/?irc^ey«:— this contention could relate only D 3 ( 38 ) xaOapIo- to the addiHon made by John to the washings common H-o*^' among the Jews. The querists, no doubt, attacked his new-fancied mode; and his authority for this innova- tion. To no other period of our Lord's life than his baptism could these words spoken by John refer, ia those early days of his ministry, when he had as yet done comparatively nothhig; and what but the action of giving [see the synonyms already adduced] could recall, by association of ideas, the Baptist's mind to the recollection o( giving out of a measure? In fact, every one of the tigures administering baptism holds in his hand what answers the purpose of, and in eftect is, this measure ; and in No. 6. and No. 7. of this Plate, and No, 5. of the second Plate, we see clearly in what sense the water of baptism was really given out of a measure, to the person baptized ; for a vase, or measure of ca- pacity, is a leading sense of the word metron; and such a vase is used in those representations. Unable to deny the authority, or the authenticity of these representations, you object. Sir, that they are not of the first ecntury; but of the third, ox fourth, or fifth, or possibly later. But do you not observe. Sir, what additional strength this gives to their evidence'? For, in the third, or fourth, and still more in the fifth century, the administration of Baptism had departed greatly from its original simplicity. Metaphorical allu- sions had been multiplied, — some scriptural; others totally unwarranted. For instance, — the baptistry had three steps leading down to it: the person descending was supposed on the^rs^ of these to renounce the world; on the second, to renounce the flesh ; on the third, to renounce the devil ; — then again, in returning, he was supposed to ascend thefirst step in the name of the Fa- ther ; the second step in the name of the Son ; and the third step in the name of the Holy Ghost; — and many other unscripiurals were practized. But, in our sub- jects we see nothing of all this; nor of any thing (the cross excepted, in No. 4.) but the simple rite; for as to the angels " attending on the Son of Man," they are supposed to be invisible; and as to the different forms of the glory and the dove, they are subsequent to the ( 3» ) act of Baptism. Now, what could induce these artists, Latins as well as Greeks, to adhere to the simple action, to the unvaried truth, — the truth, unadulterated by me- taphorical allusions — in contradiction, as I have stated, to the taste of their time, unless they had felt them- selves constrained by the unbroken consent of all Christ's disciples to this mode of Baptism, as being verily and indeed that to which their Lord and master had submitted ? What but the force of truth held them to this simplicity? I believe no answer can be given to this argument ; — for which I am obliged, Sir, to your objection. Plate II. In order to remove all doubts on the question whe- ther baptism might not be administered (to Cornelius, for instance") in the house of the person receiving it, by means of those baths with which every Roman family was furnished, this plate contains examples of those ar- ticles. No. 1. is an example of an antient bath, still extant in the celebrated Baptistry of Constantine, which is now seen in Rome, near the Lateran. Tt is undoubtedly an- tique. It was used for baptism from the earliest times; and continues to serve for that purpose. It is copied from Ciampini; but, unfortunately, the original has no scale to it; by which to estimate its dimensions. To compensate for this defect, as much as possible, I have added several figures of antient baths, of different sizes : many more might easily be adduced. No. 2. is a representation from an antient picture found in the baths of Titus, of a bath capable of con- taining several persons; three are absolutely in it. In such a bath, no doubt, a person might be drowned : but there is remaining at Rome one still larger, (antique) now used as a fountain for beasts, in the open street or market. No. 3. shews a bath, somewhat smaller than the for- mer; but sufficiently large to contain a full-grown man, and two boys, conveniently ; the whole group is im- mersed above the knees. D 4 ( 40 ) No. 4. is the antient statue of the famous Seneca, dy- ing in the bath, by order of his quondam pupil, the em- peror Nero: the size of this bath is but small, and barely sufficient to hold a single person. Such an one might therefore easily be removed from room to room in a house; and might serve for a variety of purposes, including baptism, conveniently enough. Since, then, such baths were common, if not rather wmt'ersa/, in Roman families, Cornelius, himself a Ro- man, required no tank in which to be baptized. The PhiUippian jailor, having used a bath for the purpose of washing the stripes of his prisoners, might subsequently use the very same bath for the purpose of washing away his sins; and of receiving baptism, afterwards, in the name of tlie Lord. No. 5. is the administration of baptism by St. Lau- rence; who thus initiates the blessed Romanus. It is in the church of St Laurence extra muros, at Rome; and is of the seventh or eighth century. The vases, or jugs, are the most remarkable things in this representation. They agree with those in Nos. 6, 7. in the former plate; and the action oi pouring is the same; but is here per- formed by an ecclesiastic. In fact, it is the circumstance of these vases that has induced me to give this subject : for, if it might be said, that the military man, in Nos. 6. 7. of Plate L admi- nistering Baptism, in an inconvenient manner and place, udopted the vase, because he had no better vehicle at hand, the remark cannot apply to this ecclesiastic who administers Baptism in a regular baptistry, ex officio, and with all due paraphernalia; by pouring, only. Immediately over this subject in the original Plate, is another, in which a priest appears to be administering Baptism, by laying his hand on the forehead of a per- son, one of two who are in a small bath; — his action is exactly that ascribed by Mr. Salt to the priest, in Abys- sinia; but as Ciampini, not having such clear evidence as the reader has seen, has given an explanation of the subject altogether different, it is omitted; that nothing 4ubious might appear on these Plates. ( 41 ) ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS. IF the Facts and Evidences adduced have truth on their side, whatever appears to oppose them is pro- portionably weakened, and rendered inefficient as ar- gument. They might, therefore, safely be left to their influence on intelligent minds; nevertheless, you did right, Sir, to remind me of arguments drawn from inci- " Extract of a Letter from Bristol, dated *' January 3, 1815. " On Sunday last Mr. John Thompson, an eminent *' dealer in this city, went as usual to the Rev. " Dr. 's meeting house, about the time for be- *' ginning worship, half past ten o'clock in the morning; " but he had not been there many minutes, when the " Rev, Dr. having a dispute with hiai about money raat- " ters, (Mr. Thompson not having paid up his full sub- " scription,) struck him with death; and immediately ( 4G ) " some of the young men, teachers in the Sunday school " of that meeting, wrapped him up in his clothes, great " coat, &c. carried him out just as he was, and defini- " tiYcbf interred him. About one o'clock (as Mr. " Thompson did not come liome) his wife Mary Ann *' came into the meeting, seeking him ; and after a few *' words, she also fell a victim to the Dr.'s vindictive "proceedings about money matters, and was buriej> " INSTANTLY by the same young men, And thus, in the " short space of less than three hours, from ten o'clock " to one at noon, were both husband and wife dejhii- " lively interred by the side of each other, in an untimely •' grave." Would not the whole kingdom ring from end to end on occasion of such an atrocity ? Would not the so- ciety in which it took ])!ace be execrated, without re- mission, and without reserve ? What! bury -AxwdLn — de- finitively inter him — his nearest and dearest relations not knowing of his death ! even his wife remaining^ in perfect ignorance of his decease ! — what flagitious wickedness! Bury a woman, too, hy men! Contrary to decency ! Contrary to the custom of the country ! Coutrai-y to the laws ! Contrary to every thing human and divine! Cart there be stronger proof that the word rendered to hnry, must be taken iiere in u sense ■\'ery distinct from that of definitive interment; al- though applied to persons no longer living. Even in the parable of the rich man, who is said i.vi.26. to be buried — our Lord does not mean to admit of the smallest interval between his death and punish- ment: he died; and while his body w^s preparing for interment, his soul was in torment. In short, every thing concurs to support the expla- nation given by Parkhurst, in his Dictionary. He says, the word " includes the whole funereal appara- tus of a. dead body. To PREPARE a corpse for v^v- RIAL, as by WASHING, anointing, swathing, this was incomplete; for the women who designed to anoint him, also " bought spices." If then, this pre- paration for intended embalmment was so strongly pressed for time, and therefore so slightly executed, — if the second preparation for interment, anointing, had not been so much as commenced, but, was postponed, and was uttempted on the third day after his being de- posited in Joseph's tomb, what argument caii be found- ed on the delusive use of the term buried, in our version, as importing the grave in which his body lay! Was he truly and without equivocation definitively inter- red? Answer this question, yourself. Sir. Now let us apply this view of the state of our Lord's body, on which the sepulchral rites w^re begun, to the subject under consideration. How was the baptism of believers assimilated to this? I answer: — Whoever was rituaUy united to Christ, was baptized into the profession of his death, by that washing at baptism which " put away the filth of the flesh;" — by that washing, which all considered as importing death; — which all esteemed a proof of death; — which all took for death, and called death. Such a person was conformed to what had passed on Christ's body: — he was — not dejinitively interred, for Christ v.as not definitively interred; but he under- went the ritual preparation for definitive interment, as Christ underwent the mortuary preparation for definitive interment. The resemblance is exact, and striking. It gives also the true import of this comparison — bap- tized into a conformity to that preparation for defini- tive interment which had passed on Christ, i. e. washed from former sins and pollutions; as Christ was washed from natural defilements, and from the efi'ects of his suflcrings. For what purpose is this death 7 — that we y k) ( 49 ) might afterwards walk in newness of life: for you will observe, Sir, that the Apostle reserves his particle of Jikeness for the proper action of baptism, that which represented rising again, as Christ rose again, to the glory of God the Father. Observe, also, that although the Apostle does not de- scribe the baptism of converts as possessing any resem- blance to the death of Christ; yet he does describe what is rendered planting, as possessing such resemblance; to express which he employs a significant and specific «'A*<'*'*^f*fl"'» term. This, then, merits investigation. Dr. Macknight says, in endeavouring to explain this allusion, " The burying of Christ and of believers (in baptism) is fitly enough compared to the planting of Reeds in the earth," &c. How strangely ignorant are some learned men! Good Dr. Macknight, seeds are NOT jilanted: they are sown; and the Apostle speaks ex- pressly and repeatedly of the body as sown in the earth by definitive interment, when his subject related to a body so deposited; then, too, he employs a distinct and iCor. proper word, — not at all related to this under consider- ^^'* * ation, — to signify definitive interment, or sowing. In *'**'^^''"* truth, the Apostle was an infinitely better gardener than the modern divine. The proper sense of the term here used, we learn Jam.i. 21 from the Apostle James, in whose Epistle it denotes en- grafting: now, what is the process oi engrafting? — The scion is wholly and entirely removed from the pa- rent stock; — no longer draws nourishment, or influence from it; — no longer dejiends on that for vitality, and Rom. progress; — but now draws nourishment and influence '"" ^^' from another root, depends on another stem for vitality, and progress; — and, in fact, is wholly supported by its new connection. Is not this the exact " similitude" of Christ's personal state in heaven? No longer connected with this world, by bodily ties; — no longer partaking of earthly food, or drinking of the fruit of the vine; — no longer subject to bodily inconveniencies — to suffering — to insult — to death: — He being raised, dieth no fiiore: no! but his resurrection is to glory, — and he E ( 50 ) now draws all his honours from the blissful state, and world: — in short, he is transplanted from earth to heaven. In like manner, converts (heathen converts, es- pecially) are, at their profession of Christ, trans- planted into a new state; old things are done away, all things are become new ; old connections are shaken off; old practices are abandoned; old principles are disavowed; old names, even, are relinquished; the old man is no more, &c. &c. and instead of these old things, the newly transplanted person draws nourishment and ' influence from his new connection ; depends on his new source for vitality and progress; is wholly supported by a new sap, as it were, and, in short, possesses a new life, to be dated and reckoned from the day of his trans- plantation. " If, then, we have been transplanted con- formably to the similitude of Christ's death, — we should be — we shall be, further into that of his resurrection, as the direct consequence;" spending the remainder of our time in godly fear, and bringing forth the fruits of ge- CoL iii. 1. nuine piety. This resuri^ection, then, is from the death of sin, to a new hfe of holiness; and is manifested ON EARTH — NOT j« heaven. This sense of these two siraiUes is CQnfirmed by the import of the third simile, crucifixion, on the con- sequences of which the Apostle reasons at length. Our old man is crucified with Christ: — in order that, as in baptism we professed death unto sin, by undergoing a metaphorical death, i. c. washing, preparatory to interment: — in order that, 2. as in transplantation we broke off all connection with our former state, — so in this, crucifixion, " the body of sin might be destroyed." The Apostle's purpose is one, though ^his similies be THREE. He exhorts, that 1. after baptism we fehould walk in newness of lite : that 2. after transplan- tation we should conform to the holiness and resurrec- tion of Christ; — that 3. after crueijixion, we should " yield ourselves unto God, as those who are alive from the dead, and our members ;h instruments of righ- teousness unto God." These similies, I say, are three ; but the purpose of them all is one. The last, also, is, asl asserted, the strongest; the middle one is marked ( 51 ) by the point of similitude; the first is the weakest, and preparatory to the others: — they stand, — they must stand, 1. prepared for interment, 2. transplanted, 3. crucified : to violate their order is to wrong the Apostle ; — which can be intended only by folly or ignorance. We are now prepared to understand a literal ver- sion of the argument. — " How shall we, who are dead " to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not that **v whosoever of us are baptized (ei?) unto a profession ** of Jesus Christ, are baptized («*?) unto a profession of *' his death? We are therefore, prepared for interment " {^n*)for the purpose of Baptism (ek) unto a profession *' o//[ts death, (ty«) in order that in like manner as Christ ** was raised from the dead (oio) for the purpose of the *' glory of the Father, so also [to the glory of the *' Father] we should walk in newness of life. So surely " as we have been transplanted together by similitude '* of his death, moreover [much more] by that of his " resurrection, we shall be. Knowing this, — therefore " our old man is crucified with him, that the body of " sin might be destroyed, that we should not, hence- " forth, serve sin : — for the dead is discharged from " sin." There can be no doubt, but what, the resurrection after crucifixion is intended for this life : there can be no doubt, but what the resurrection after baptism is intended for this life; the inference is undeniable, that the resurrection after planting must be intended for this fife also. See how easily— by foolishly realizing a metaphorical expression into a literal proposition, Hy- meneus and Philetus might err concerning the faith, \C'i&. saying that " the resurrection is past already" — i. e. in baptism! Against such errors, Sir, I most seriously caution you : this slight sketch has brought us acquainted with but too many ; — there is no need, however, to pursue them any further, at present : and here I must close. If I have been happy enough to convince you that the Latin term immersion is no translation, to an English reader, of the (}reek terra baptize;— which Greek term E 2 Sllnr. ( 52 ) suffers extreme violence when forced into English by the term plunghis;, I have prepared you for a very dif^ ferent view of the subject from that usually taken- by your friends. 1 have shewn^ that the baptism by the Holy Ghost descended, — that the baptism of Nebu- chadnezzar descended — that the baptism received by the antient Israelites descended also: that the use of the word baptize by the Lxx, stands opposed to the sense of plunging; — that the Hebrew rite of washing was long prior to Christ, and was continued in Christian baptism ; but with additions ; much as the Lord's Supper was a continuation of a part of tlie Passover^ but with additions; — that the additions to ritual washing were the true and proper jBwp?m«; — that Scripture enables us to distinguisli between the two actions of immersion and baptism; — that the churches which best understood the language of the New Testament, it being tlieir mother tongue, observed and perpetuated the distinction be- tween immersion and haptism; — that the distinction be- tween immersion and baptism obtains at this day, and is still practized, beyond all denial, or possibility of doubt; — and lastly, that this ritual washing, or cleans- ing, resembling that always applied to the dead", recalled the idea of mortal departure ; while the addition made to it under the Gospet dispensation, expressed and signified professional holiness, a resurrec- tion, a newness of life:— The general inference is, thai WHOEVER ADOPTS IMMERSION WITHOUT ADD- ING POURING, MAY CERTAINLY CLAIM ALL THE CREDIT DUE TO THE REVIVAL OF AN ANTIENT Jewish crremonv, signifying DEATH; BUT, CHRISTIAN BAPTISM, signifying LIFE, THEY DO NOT PRACTIZE. Excuse this freedom and abruptness, in. Sir, yours, &c. Jan. 21, 1815. G. Hazard, Prhiter, ;>0> Be«ch S'-reet, Loniixtu SECOND LETTER TO A 23taton OF A BAPTIST CHURCH, ifC. 4-C. Dear Sir, OF all the arts of logic, there IS none I admire more than a well-managed SOPHISM ; by which I understand, a proposition that presents the semblance of truth, but is essen- tially /a/.?e. Take an instance, which I suppose includes the very essence of the arguments against ,,^°^*''', Poedobaptism. "To imagine that the first positive rite of religious worship in the Christian Church, is left in so vague a state as PcEdobaptism sup- poses, is not only contrary to the anafoe^i/ of Divine proceedins;^ in similar cases, but renders it morally impossible for the bulk of Christians to discern the real ground on which the ordinance is administered. — A plain unlettered man.... must become a disciple of those who are the humble pupils of Jewish Rabbles.. ..of the writings of the Talmud, for it is thence only he is able to learn, that the children of proselytes were baptized along with their parents^ when admitted men bers of the Jewish.church: and, thence also he must in- fer that our Lord condescended to borroic of his ene* B Vol. 11.42. ( 2 ) iTiies an important ordinance of religious tcorship for his own disciples." — "Now, I knew, that our Lord had condescended to borrow of John Bap- tist " an important ordinance of religious worship for his own disciples ;" but, I never knew before, that John was an "enemy" of Jesus. But, if this writer, by " enemies of Jesus," means the Jews of that age . — though I deny that our Lord borrowed Baptism of them, since they practiced only itnmersion, yet I would ask, did not our Lord condescend to borrow of them in that important ordinance of religious worship, his sa- cred supper? — and can any plain unlettered man, thoroughly comprehend that service with- out some acquaintance with Jewish learning ? Can he so much as discern the " real ground" of the 1 Ctir. T. 7. 8, Apostle's language, " Purge out therefore, the old leaven that ye may be a new lump,....there- fore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the imleavened bread of sincerity and truth"? — who, I say, can adequately understand this reference, unless he have some acquaintance- tvith the pains taken by the Jews to cleanse their houses from leaven ? And, how many other things are there in Christianity, on which a plain unlet- tered man needs almost perpetual assistance ? Never let it be forgot, that our Lord was by birth, by nation, and by religious ordinances a Jew ; that his gospel was first offered to Jews, by descent; and that Judaism was the basis on which the Redeemer founded his religion: — but, it does not follow that the spirit of the two dis- pensEttions was the same. On the contrary, their differences are striking and essential. For in- stance : some things, which Judaism held sacred and binding, the gospel held with a great latitude, and indeed allowed the human will to follow its own determination, concerning them. — Nothing could be more positively enjoined by divine au- thority, than the distinction of meats ; yet the Apostle leaves it to the choice of convert* (« ( 3 ) adopt it or ilot : " God hath received him who Rom. xiv. 8. eateth," says he, although God had ordered such transgressors to be cut off ; and the whole nu* merous family of the Maccabees submitted to death, rather than to such defilement. Neither ■was the distinction of days less authoritatively enacted ; yet St. Paul, dispenses with the obser- .. j^ vance, in those who objected to it. What was this, but leaving in quite as vague a state as Poedo- baptism supposes, most important points of the divine law ? — or, if Poedobaptism be left in the same state of liberty, how is it contrary to the analogy of Divine proceedings in similar cases ?" But there are other instances which affect the closest connections of the heart and life, and are more nearly related to the main purpose of our present enquiry. Moses forbad the " taking of the daughters of the land, unto thy sons for \vives,-^lest they Exod. 7nake thy sons go a ichoring after other gods." He '""''*• !*• admits not the slightest ray of hope, " that thy sons may convert their wives to the worship of the God of Israel:"-^— No : he is tormented by fear; jealousy corrodes, and despair confounds him. — But, what says the Gospel, in a similar case ? with what a noble consciousness of supe- riority over all other religions, it commands the very contrary!" "How knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband ?— Or, how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt iCor.vii.i6. save thy wife?" — Hope triumphs here! Despair is banished ! and the same feeling is cherished by another sacred writer, who strongly advises wives to exemplary conduct, " that if'any obey not the word, they may without the word, be won by the ^ ^**^'" '"■ *' conversation of their wioes.'l— VVhy did not these Apostles, like Moses, dread the heathenish conse- quences of such abhorrent connections ? Because they served a dispensation of Grace, not of ter- tor: they knew their master's mind: — " Whoso- ever, is not against us, is for us." B2 We have a practical illustration and instance of the jealousy of Judaism in the conduct of the Eznx. 3—44. pfiest Ezra ; who caused the " chief priests, the Levites, and all Israel to swear, that they would put away their foreign wives — and they made proclamation throughout Judah and Jerusa- lem — and allowed only three days — and called the people over — after the house of their fathers, and all of them, hy their names, ^c. and expelled their foreign wives, even those hy u-liom they had children." A striking instance of Jewish eccle- siastical harshness, surely ! But what does Chris- tianity direct in similar cases. " If any hrother hath a wife thatbelieveth not, and she be [)leased iCor. vii 12 ^^ dwell with him, let him not put HEa AWAY. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, if he be pleased to dwell with her — LET HER NOT LEAVE HIM." What a iio- ble triumph of the kindness of Clirist over the severe correctness of the Mosaic law ! The gospel disturbs no domestic harmony : it dissolves no happily formed connection : it finds the bands of love tied ; and in the name of that God who is love, it sanctifies, and by sanctifying .y^re/io-f/^e/i^ them. It would be the strangest thing in the world if this most sympathizing feeling, which studies the affections and love of the parents, were repugnant to their children. In this, too, the gospel is op- posed to the law : I say, it is opposed to the law, Timothy, we know, was the son of a Jewess, by a Greek father : he had not received in his in- ActsxTi. 1. fancy the divinely appointed sign of the Abra- hamic covenant, circumcision, because he wa& allied to the Abrahamic descent, by half-blood only : the balance between holiness and unholi^ ness was equipoised in him : — the unholiness of his father prevailed, however, in fact, against the holiness of his mother, and J udaical scrupulosity reprobated Timothy as unclean. Not so the jaw of liberty ; not so the attractive kindness of the blessed Jesus, The Apostle advises, when- { fi ) ever the balance is even between holiness antl tinhoUness, to incline to tlte most favourable side : exclude none who do not exclude themselves. " For the unbe/ieviiioc husband is [^lias been, i. e, his intercourse] rendered hob/ to the (believing) wife, and the unbelieving wife is \_has been'] ren- 1 Cor.vii. 14. dered holy to the believing husband : else, were the issue of such intercourse unholy [as under the law it was] but now, — under the gospel, it is HOLY." Directly contrary, observe, to the dog- mata of the Jewish Rabbins, contrary to the de- cisions of Ezra and of the prophets, contrary to the recent case of Timothy ; and, no doubt, to thousands of other cases, besides. Did this accord with the sentiments of our Di- vine Master himself? Did he thus favourably regard and accept what his nation pronounced unclean? It was prophesied of him, that inhis name should the Gentiles trust ; — that he should not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax :" — that, as " the good shepherd he should carry Ihe lambs in his arms" — did his personal conduct justify the language of prophecy ? Three of the Evangelists take good care to instruct us by instances of this: " Then were there brought Mat. xix. 13. to him little children, that he should put his hands on them and pray; and the disciples re- buked them. But, Jesus said sutfer little chil- dren, and FORBID TiiEM NOT, to com^ unto me; for of such is the kingdom of heaven. And he laid his hands on them." Mark expresses our Lord'-s feelinss, by sayinff, " he was much dis- pleased"— at the Jewish insensibility of his ' * disciples, who did not yet know what manner of spirit they ought to be of : that Evangelist adds, *' Jesus took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them." Luke describes , u — nt ,1 • /- . 1 11 1 1^ 1- Luke xviu. 15k them as infants: and ah the Evangelists agree m saying that our Lord compared his real disciples, those who enter the kingdom of heaven wor- thily, to such infants. Well, Sir, what pious mmd would by any reluctance in shewing favour ( 6 ) td infants, incur the risque of this " much dis- pleasure" of our blessed Lord ? Nor is this the only lesson the disciples received from their Master, by means of little children : for he tells them, explicitly, " Except ye be converted, and become Mat. wui.3. as LITTLE CHILDREN, yc sliall not enter into the kingdom of heaven .—whosoever shall ofi'end [give occasion of scandal, or cause to trip'] one of these litte ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the depth of the sea." So then, these little ones were believers in Jesus, and the severest punish- ment awaited whoever despised or dishonoured them. On the contrary'-, a pious attention to little ONES has the promise of a blessing. " Whoso- Mat. X. 42. pygj. g^^ajj gjyg ^ gyp fjf qq\^ w ^Xtx to one of these LITTLE ONES in the name of a discitle, shall in no wise lose his reward !" These little ONES, then, were capable of being disciples: — how can any, in defiance to this text, insist, that when our Lord commands his Apostles to " go and disciple all nations,' he absolutely ex- cludes little ones? But, the conduct of the Apostles in repelling diildren from the affectionate arms of the conde-^. scending Saviour, was precisely according to their Jewish feelings. It was, even in those good men, the old leaven of Judaism, which with un- abated fermentation actuated the Pharisees ; Mat.xxi. 15. " who when they saw the children crying in the temple, Hosanna to the Son of David f they were sore displeased; and said unto him, Heai-est thou what these say ? and Jesus answered them. Yea, hai^e ye never read out of the mouths OT BAEES AND SUCKLINGS THOU HAST PER- FECTED PRAISE.^" A Striking picture this, of the powerful distinction between the stiffly starched supporters of the law ! the law! and the mild, condescending, benign tendernesses of the Son of God. ( 7 ) After these repeated reproofs, admonitions, and instructions in the mind of their divine master, what could be the conduct of the Apos- tles towards litth ones? — could they look with askance eye on children? — could they profes- sionally sanctify to the service of God, such a man as Simon Magus, because he could make — make! — a credible [credible!!] profession of his faith — while they refused the token of Gospel devotion to little children who believed in Christ, who were disciples of Christ ? Could they baptize ^n old conjuror, hardened in guilt by the con- firmed habit of many years, and actually " in the gall of bitterness, and the bonds of iniquity," but repel from the sign of consecration to Christ, those BABES and sucklings, out of whose mouths GOD himself had perfected PRAISE? — "Baptize a child — I would soon- er baptize a dog !" was the emphatic language of a person known to us : what Jewish obduracy of heart! — what slavery to the worst form of Jewish obduracy, under the Gomplete liberty of the Gospel of Christ! You are pleased to observe. Sir, that I have used the term consecration in a sense that requires explanation; and you think the allusion to anointing — which also is one mode of consecration is " sufficiently unpromi- sing." I am sure you cannot think that I use the term in the Popish sense : — but, as I have — whether happily, or unhappily, — stumbled upon it, I shall not decline an attempt to shew its re- ievancy to the subject under discussion, Consecration is a setting apart from an or- dinary or profane use, or purpose, to which a person or thing has been accustomed, — to a par- ticular use or purpose, — usually in relation to the Deity. The sign, or mark, of such consecration antiently, was anointing, ^o Jsicob anointed the stone at Bethel : so the implements of the taber- Oen.xxviii. u ^dicle were anointed : AMon wsls anointed to the "** '^^^'^' { 8 ) 1 Sam. X. 1. priest's office ; Saul and David, &c. were xiv. 1. anohited to the regal oftice ; prophets also were anointed, &c. But not all consecrated persons were anointed; for the daughter of Jepthah was consecrated, yet we cannot think she was anointed; and Samuel, who was consecrated from his in- fancy, was not anointed at that time, if ever. Now whatever, or whoever, was set apart from a former character and destination, and received a new character and destination, as marked by Qjiointing, might, without violating the metaphor, be said to die to former connections and self, and to begin a new life, marked by new functions ; — which is the very acceptation and import of baptism. And for this purpose our Lord was baptized : not to put away sin ; but, to mark his passing over from his former life, in which he had paid some attention to worldly con- cerns, as appears from his subjection to his pa- . rents at Nazareth : and from his being described Markvi. 3. as " the carpenter" by those who well knew his origin and previous deportment. But now— he enters on a new life — he commences a new character — he is publicly consecrated to the great purposes of his mission: he becomes " the man Acts X. 38. whom God had anointed with the Holy Ghost:" . . -7—" thine holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed." And his followers in some humble iJohHii. 27. degree resembled him: for the Apostle John writes to those who had received an unction (anointing) from the Holy One ; and who were taught by this anointing. With this doctrine St. flCi-i^i Paul agrees, when he says, " He who hdith anointed us, is God : — who hath also sealed us." — Now, when were these disciples anointed, if not at their baptism.^ — and for what purpose, if not in token of their future devotion to the Christian name and profession ? True it is, they were not anointed with oil ; it follows, that baptismal water, or the baptismal service, became the sign, or the . . occasion, of their consecration; and this — dediv cation to God — I conceive, is the most simple, most t adequately sympathize with Christians under the terror of Roman persecution, and the violence of heathen priesthood. Hence the necessity of some ac- quaintance with Church History, beyond the limits G-f the New Testament : hence the ne- cessity for some to teach " plain unlettered men :'* and hence, too, the guilt of those wdio never instruct their hearers in what would contribute so greatly to their knowledge, edification, and comfort. On whoever came to Jordan, John conferred baptism: — why not? since whoever received his rite stood pledged to repentance and holiness. On whoever desired baptism from the apostles, t hey bestowed it ; for, how could they refuse to consecrate to Almighty C^od, or to their Divine Master, an applicant, from any part of Judea, at firsr, — from any part of the l^arth, in the sequel? Their practice demonstrates their principle. But, not a soul was subject to compulsion. Happily, the history of the Christian Church has preserved ir.stances in proof of this proposition? ( 13 ) for we read of several, in after ages, and when Christianity was extensively promulgated, who were baptized in adult years: these we con- sider as being much in the same situation as those children who were left at home when their parents travelled to the Jordan to John: or or those children who, in the wilderness, under Moses, did not receive circumcision, because the perils of time and place forbad the safe per- formance of the rite. These were afterwards circumcised in adult years, from the necessity of Josh. v. 2—7, the case, though in strict compliance with the Divine law they ought to have been circumcised on the eighth day" after their birth. Now we most chearfully quote, and support, these in- stances of adult baptism., recorded in Church_ History ; because they demonstrate, that Christian parents " were not under bondage," — Divine benevolence " preferred mercy to sacrifice." But then, be it remembered also, that that same Church History unequivocally proves the baptism • of little ones to be a Christian practice : and we accept its testimony on this, with equal confidence. Late in the second century, and within ahundred and fifty years after the churches were planted by the apostles, Tertullian wrote against infant baptism. Now, he could not have wrote against a custom, which custom did not exist; nor in- deed unless it prevailed. His reasons are sophis- ticated by " the spirit of bondage" of the ancient law : they are marked by that disposition to dread and despair which characterized the Mosaic dis- pensation: — He argues — " Give to th^m who ask thee, — but children cannot a6^- ; Do not for- bid them to come : therefore let them stay till they can come: let them come when they are grown up — when they understand — when they are instructed whither it is they are about to come : let them be made Christians when they can know Christ." [You best know, Sir, whether these arguments are retained, and to what effect, in the present day.] " For reasons equally valid, A. D. 200. { 14 ) ttNMAURIED I»ER80NS OUgllt tO be hcpt O^ from baptism, who are likely to be visited by temptation, — as well those who never Were mar- ried (ought to be kejit off) on account of their coming to maturity, as those in a widowed state, by reason of the miss of their conjugal partners.'* Add, the thousand reasons which deter persons engaged in the multifarious concerns of life, in middle age, — add the inevitable infirmities and weaknesses, mental and bodily, of old age — and baptism is postponed till doomsday. A hopeful method, truly, of establishing the Church of Christ 1 But, after all, Tertullian had a shorter way of confounding the popular practice, could he have availed himself of it: he omits the strongest ARGUMENT that possibly could be employed against the object of his aversion, had truth al- lowed him to use it : the very battering-ram of destruction against Infant Baptism, could he but have wielded it. E. gr. — " This practice is a NOVELTY : it dates but of yesterday: it was UNKNOWN to Christians fifty years ago; it was UNKNOWN to the first churches; it was unknown to the Apostles." He' looJild willingly have said this, for this must have condemned the practice conclusively; not another word \^ as necessary: but he COULD not. He might twist a few texts, or so, out of their perpendicular, in support of his principles ; or he might go so far as to ha- zard a slight fib; but on a downright falsity the Christian Father would not venture; although intent on suppressing Infant Baptism itself. I know not which speaks most loudly, th^ SILENCE of Tertullian, notwithstanding what he would have said, or the affirmation of his contem- porary Origen, wdio, in express terms, ascribes the practice of infant baptism to the Apostles. But we ought to remember, that Origen had many advantages, not then common : — that he was of Christian descent; — that his father was a Chri»'- ( 15 ] tian martyr; that his grandfather, and great grand father were Christians also. Could a family so early christianized, be ignorant what had been the primitive rites and customs of the Apostles, and the apostolic churches ? A moment's reflec- tion answers this question. Origen's words are, " For this also it was, that the Church received from the Apostles the injunction (or tradition) to GIVE BAPTISM eceu TO INFANTS." A lid in another place, " According to that saying of our Lord concerning infants, — {and thou wast art INFANT ivhen thou toast baptized) — their angels do always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven.'' True it is, and I exceedingly re- gret it, that we have these explicit passages in a translation and abridgement of Origen's works from Greek into Latin. Had the original at large come down to us, I feel persuaded, that we should have found the sentiment stated more fully — more explicitly it cannot be — and per- haps justified by instances. But this I am sure of, *— that if the testimony of Origen had stood op- posed to infant baptism, we should never have heard one word on the disadvantage of having his work in a translation only, or any imputation on the competence or correctness of his trans- lator, Rufinus, from those who now censure him. It remains that we justify the practice of the primitive churches, by observing, that whatever opinions might obtain in different places, or whatever difference in administration, no instance of reproof from the Apostles is recorded. Hap* pily for us, though unhappily for themselves, the Corinthian church transgressed in the ad- ministration of the Lord's Supper : by the admo- nition addressed to them on that occasion, suc- ceeding ages are taught, to the distance of thou- sands of years; — it were but a dubious specimen of Christian charity to regret, that some occasion ©f reproof on the subject of baptism did not occur among the churches, by which we also might have been instructed ; but from this silence it is ( 10 ) clear, tliat this Sacrament had not, in the days o^ the Apostles, been misunderstood, or misap- plied. Tradiiionem. Tlie churches, sa3's Origen, acted upon tradi- nscpxloa-ir Hon : now, what is the meaning of the word tra- dition, in the A postolic writings, and those of the early fathers? We, in the present day are accustomed to aftix to it the notion of a mer& rumour unsupported by documents, and there- fore liable to perversion ; — but this is directly contrary to the import of the word among the first Christians. The Apostle writing to the Thessalonians, exhorts them to" hold the fradi-- 2Thes9. ii. 15. ^^0/2^ they had been taught, whether by word, or hy our epist/e." He makes no difference be- tween what he had written, and what his au- thorized agents reported in his name: and he calls his own epistles, traditions. The iirst epistle to the Corinthians is a collection of traditions ; for it was- delivered to the church at Corinth, by Stephanus, and Fortunate s, and Achaicus, in the name of Paul. It is i» series of instructions communicated by second ha^c^s; it i;^ composed o^ioritlcn traditions, asitsiands; and Supposing, which IS very likely, that Paul add; d verhal in- structions, also, on some points, to Stephanus and his brethren, these became unicritten tradi- tions, when they were reported by those Chris- tians to iheir constitu; IKS, the Corinthian chi--ch. And this — " Instruc! on" — is the true meaning of ICorxi. 2. the word: — it is rendered precspta — traditiones, in Latin : m FngKsh, directions, [^Instructions, Doddridge. !■ junctions, Parkhursf.] Ordinances^ in our public version — traditions, — " tradition, 2Thes8 .ii 15. y^^^i^h ye received of us : " "So then, the apostle calls his own teachings, traditio?is; that is to say, instructions, directions, injunctions, or ordinances. It is clear, that Origen uses the word in the same sense. " The church," says he, "received from the Apostles, the tradition — injunction— di- rection — instruction,or— ordinance, iog'wehiiplmii even to infants." This is very credible in itself. ( 17 ) bn the authority of the relator ; but, it becomes much clearer, if uot stronger, by a closer exami* nation of the facts of the case. It is certain from their own testimony, that the Apostles took care to establish means of con- veying their directions or injunctions-— to sue- aPeteri. l*. ceeding generations ; for such, clearly, is the im- port of the Apostle Peter's language, '' I will endeavour, that after my decease ye may each of you make mention of these things;" — and thereby perpetuate the remembrance of them. This is perfectly coincident with Paul's directions to 2Tim. ii. 2. Timothy, " The things which thou hast heard from me (5<«) for the purpose of instructing many witnesses, the same commit thou to faith* ful men, who shall be able to teach others also." And if the Apostles, on their part, were so care- ful, there can be no doubt, but the primitive Christians, their successors, were on their part, also, equally anxious to be informed respecting whatever accounts of the conduct of Christ, and of his Apostles, were in preservation among them. So Irenseus (born A.D. 97) describes his anxiety to acquire information from his master Polycarp: *' / rememher his discourse to the people concerning the conversations he had had ivith John (the Apostle) and others loho had seen our Lord; how he rehearsed their discourses, and what he heard them icho icere eye-witnesses of the Word of Life , say of our Lord, and of his miracles and doc- trine :" — Now, this proves that Polycarp had dili- gently enquired from those who could tell him, concerning our Lord and his doctrine ; he had made himself master of whatever was to be known ; it proves also, that such traditions were repeated by him in his public discourses to the people: it was, indeed, the best of all possible modes of instruction : — moreover, the fact shews, that these discourses had made the deepest im- .pression on the memory of IrenvEUs; and that he did not forget them to his dying day. In this, assuredly, he was not singular; thousands of C ( 18 ) other hearers, equally desirous to know, were equally attentive, and equally aftected. Here it is to our purpose to recollecf, that the same desire animated Origen, afterwards; that for the purpose of acquiring such knowledge, he visited the churches planted by the Apostles : in Cap- padocia, and Arabia, in Greece and Rome, while the main part of his life w^as spent in Syria and Palestine, the seat of the first churches; where he could not fail of acquiring an intimate ac- quaintance with their constitution, manners, and practice. [He himself was a native of Alexan- dria in Egypt.] Let us reduce this to a tangible form. It appears from history that Irenteus, the disciple of Poly- carp, the disciple of John the Apostle, lived long, and might bear his testimony to the truth seventy or eighty years after the death of John; — but to avoid cavil, I take the generations in the family of Origen, and of those " faithful men", to whom Timothy gave charge, at forty years only ; and because Origen's father was martyred, I take him for ticenty-jive years only. It appears, then, that the testimony of Paul, of Timothy, of Ti- mothy's " faithful men," and of " others also," in- structed by them, reaches downwards to the year 180: Origen was born in 1S5; add his fa- ther, twenty-jive years; his grandfather, forty years: and his great grandfather /or^?/ years also ; we are brought ^{ascending) to the year SO, when "Mark the Evangelist, had been dead only ticehe years at Alexandria. Certainly Mark knew the practice of the Apostles : he, too, would select his " faithful men" to transmit his instructiona to his church in subsequent years: St. John was still living — for twenty years — in case any dilll- culty had arisen; and the intercourse by sea from Ephesus to Alexandria was direct: but from Alexandria to Crete, the intercourse was almost daily ; and here was Timothy, or Ti- tus, or some or other of their *' faithful men,'* living contemporaries with the Origen family ( 10 ) for nearly a hundred years! Is it possible that under euch circumstances, the practice of the Church, derived from the Apostles, in a matter of daily occurrence, could be forgot ? — Could it be perverted, abused, counteracted? Could a rite totally new, unfounded, diametri- cally opposite to Apostolic injunctions, be es- tablished, and prevail ? Where was Timothy ? where were his "faithful men"? Not at their posts; not at their duty; if such abominable transgression could be suffered, and not only be suffered, but be announced and acted on, as de- rived from the Apostles themselves! What is this short of impossible? On the other hand, what is it short of im- possible to imagine that Origen had been im- posed upon — he who travelled for the express purpose of acquiring information, who visited the Apostolic churches, and resided among the chief of them. What is it short of impossible, that he should not know the Christian observances in his own family, from his father, his grand- father, &c. derived from Mark the Evangelist? In short. Sir, were this a question on a fact of English history, said to occur a hundred, a hun- dred and twenty, or a hundred and fifty years ago, would you, or would you not, deem the evidence sufficient, and attach a credit to it, on which to establish your belief? Such is the testimony of Origen in reference to injunctions for infant baptism, derived from the Apostles : let us now direct our inquiries to the records of the Apostles' actions, and see how far their practice agreed with their injunctions, and with the report of it as transmitted by Origen. C2 ( ^0 J tABLE OF CONTEMPORARIES, Shewing the Descent of the Origen Family i i.D. SOVi'SApost. PAUL, 67 ©8 Polycarp, dis- ciple of John. 97 Iiaeneus born. TiMOTHY,- 97 101 JOHN dies. 116 Polycarp, ti- shop of Smyr- na. (Rer.ii.8) 170 IrenaeuSjbishop of Lyons, disci- pleof Polycarp, mentions " re- horn iofants." Faithful men, 140. (•2 Tim. ii, 2.) Others also, 180. (2 Tim. ii. 2.) A.D. MARK, Evan. 69" Origeu's great grand-father 8^ Id* Origen's grand- father 12d Origen's father 16^ Origen born 18^ Origen's father martyred 205^ There can be no doubt but what many Apostolic persons were living in Egypt, which had a daily intercourse with Judea ; — that many of the Jewish Chiistians, after the de- struction of Jerusalem, &c. would settle among their coun- trymen at Alexandria ; and that from these, as well as from other Christians, in foreign (Greek) churches, Origen would obtain correct information respecting all Christian rites, oc« casional or constant. But, this Table shews only such con- temporaries with his family as we know from iudisputabl? authority. FACTS AND EVIDENCES ON THE SUBJECT QF n^pz'd^m^ If I know not the meaning of the language^ J shall be unto him that spna^eth a barbarian. And he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me. YOU will have the geodness, Sir, to recollect, that the intention of the present paper is to sup^ port the affirmation of Origen, that " the Church received from the Apostles an injunction to con- fer baptism on infants," by enquiring, whether any traces of such practice by the Apostles them- selves, or by any one of them, are preserved in Scripture? The facts of that question are pur immediate object. And here I beg leave to observe that the im- port of that language in which such facts are transmitted, is not to be decided by the concep- tions of "a plain unlettered Englishman, with the New Testament only in his hand " — at the distance of nearly two thousand years from the original writer, in poiut of time, and more than two thousand miles from his country; — but ra- ther, from those of a plain unlettered G/'ee/cman, able to peruse the N. T. — [what a contradiction in terms!] — who must know what was included in the current language of his age and countiy : |nore properly still, from those of his Excellency ( 22 ) Theophilus, to whom St. Luke dedicates his work, and who certainly understood the full sense of what the sacred writer addressed to him. We must exert ourselves, therefore, to examine this matter accurately, if we would accurately under- stand it. Whoever is acquainted with any language be- side his own, knows well, that with whatever skill a translation from a foreign tongue be exe- cuted, it will always, and inevitably, be liable to imperfections, in the application of words, either as to meaning, or spirit. Valuable as our public version of the New Testament is, it could not escape this defect, which is inherent in the very nature of language. Without further preface, or further apology, for attempting to reduce to ac- curacy of ideas, a version most highly to be esteemed, I proceed to say, that I have never yet seen those passages of Scripture set in a just light, which, in my humble judgment, support the testimony of Origen. A precept, or practice, referring to the baptism of children, might naturally be expected in con- nection with the mention of children; — or, with such particulars as iniply the presence of chil- dren, and demonstrate their participation ; pa- rents without children are not to the purpose, however numerous • children without parents, the circumstances of the Gospel history do not warrant us to expect; — if such occur, they are doubly worthy of notice ; but, in general, we are to expect to find children in company with their parents, children of various ages, especially, in numerous families. Families imply children. Families are composed of children, in every stage of life. To express the presence of children, our lan- guage formerly employed the term house ; and a very expressive term it was: but, at present, modern correctness adopts another usage of the ( 23 ) ^evm ; and to avoid confusion, we shall trace the principles on which that usage rests. The English term house, means a building, or residence; owMiouses are buildings somewhat removed from the family ; usually inhabited by inferior persons, the servants, assistants, &c. House is used, also metaphorically, to denote successive generations of men, allied by con- sanguinity ; it formerly described a contemporary generation, but custom no longer authorises this sense. By the addition of a syllable. House imports the attendants on principals ; their whole esta- blishment, of every description — their House-^ HOLD ; — whoever liolds to their house, i. e. be- longs — appertains to it. To prevent all cavil on the differences intended to be marked by these distinctions, take the most exalted instance in our country. I say — " the House of Hanover occupies the British throne." But his Majesty King George I. though long since deceased, is a member of the House of Hanover ; and so is Kino- George II. His children, also, are members of the House of Hanover ; and so is the late amiable princess Amelia, daughter of George III. though removed to a better life. The Royal Family is part of the House oi Hanover ; yet the terms are not convertible ; for King George I. or King George II. is no member of the Royal Family: the ierva family, therefore, imports restrictwely, descendants of the House of Hanover, living at the same time : contem- porary princes and princesses ; — the king, the queen, the blood royal — all who are in a state of possible association and intercourse. The Princess Charlotte of Wales is a member of the . ( 24 ) Royal Family y as much as her father, the Princ* Regent. But, with an added syllable this word chanjEjes its import: for the Royal Hot/se-iiOLo is no part of the Royal Family : it were neither more nor less than high treason, to affirm that. His Grace the Duke of A. is Lord Chan)berlain of the Ho7ise-HOLD ; the Marquis of B. is Lord Steward of the HoKse-HOLD : the Earl ofC. is Master of the Horse ; and Lords D. E. F. &c. are Lords in Waiting", Lords of the Bedchamber; or enjoy other stations in the Royal House-HOL,T) : and so on, down to the Royal Footmen, &c. all of whom are of the House-noLi>. Who will dare to rank these noblemen as parts of the Royal Family 9 as members of the House of Hanover ? His Majesty has the power of a Sovereign over these his servants : he can dis- place the Duke of A. and confer his office on an- other nobleman ; the Marquis of B. and the Earl of C. are equally removeable : — but, he has not the power to displace one of his sons, or of his daughters, from being of the Royal Family: he cannot give their places to others : into that fa- mily they were born; and of that family they continue branches t'^rough life; notwithstand- ing marriage may carry the Princesses into ano- ther country. These distinctions, then, between house, — family, ?LY\d— house-no ld , are beyond de- nial : they are authorized by current usage, and are established by the uniform language of the law of the land: in short, they are unimpeach- able. Marriage may, indeed, introduce a stranger into the Royal Family ; as in former times adop- tion might do; but such are incidental, not na- tural, privileges. The Greek term for house^ {oikos) corresponds exactly with this usage of the English term; and these distinctions are uniformly preserved, throughout scripture, without any instance of ( 25 ) confusion or interchange. As applied to per-* sons, tills Greek term sic:nifics a continued de- scending line of many generations. So we have the /iow.!fe of Israel, house of David, &c. the near- est line by consanguinity that can be drawn to Israel, to David, th;oui)'a any indefinite number of generations. It signifu s also nfaynl/t/ living at the same time, and usually under one roof — contemporaries. With the addition of a syllable, {oilci-AS) it likewise changes its application; and o is included in the term "famili/,'* used by the writer to the Hebrews. As one decisive instance is as good as a thousand, I shall not ad- luce further evidence to this point. The children of Noah saved with him in the avk, were certainly adults, since chronologers al- low the youngest of them a hundred years of ( 27 ) age: I proceed, therefore, to shew, that this tewa family, denotes children, not only minors, but in the younges. possible state of life; — in a state of early childhood, and infancy. The Apostle, describing the qualifications for a Christian bishop, insists that he should be "one who ruleth well his own family, having i Tim. iii. 4. his children in subjection with all gravity — (for if a man know not how to rule his own family ^ how shall he take care of the church of God ?)" Here it is evident, the children are the family ; and that they are in a state of non-age, pupil- age, and youth, su.ch as requires rulings and guidance by their father. Continui'.ig our perusal of the chapter we find l Tim. iii. 12, a precept which directs, that a Deacon be the husband of one wife, ruling- well his children, even HIS OWN FAMILY — his nearest of kin — his issue. Lest this should admit the possibility of equivo- cation, the apostle marks the family as his own. Nothing can be more a man's oicn than his children ; and the force of the Greek term warrants any degree of strength that can be annexed to it: it therefore, in both these places and connections, fixes the parties designed by it, (equally in reference to the Bishop as the Deacon) to natural issMe, or family. Nor can these children be adults, for then the term ruled could not be applied to them: they mnst be youns: children, still under their father's direction, still subject to his conmiand, and obedient to his controul: he is to rule them. But, these children being under the rule of their father, though still young, are of a certain age: they are somewhat advanced in life. In proof that the term family imports hahes and sucklino;s, consult the advice of the apostle to the- ,„. f II I *. ^^ T ill Tim. V. 11. young women, m a toUowmg chapter. " 1 would have the young widows to — 1. marry — 3. bear children — 3. guide their offspring ; literally, des- potise their family" Most certainly this order ( 2S > of the words is definitive: " marriage, — -childT bearing, — child despotisias;" This third term must riiaik that guidance, that care of, that assiduity concerning infant children, which mo- thers feel, with the most lively anxiety. Who interferes with a niotlier's solicitude for her infant 9 — the father may sympathize with it when indisposed; he may express his fondness in kisses, when it is in health ; bijt, it is the mother who must despotise it — govern it, direct all its motions and watch ail its ways. This is the appointment of Nature; or rather it is the voice of God in his Providence. Tliese could not be foster children: for the apostle speaks of child -hear ino;, bear- ing children of their own body, immediately be- fore : nor could they be adults, as is evident to the meanest capacity, for then, neither could their mother despotise them ; nor could she be youns^^ if her children were of mature age. Observe, also, the change of term : the father (Bishop, or Deacon) was to rule his family: the mother is to despotise her offspring, her infant, with strict, tmremitted, indefatigable— in one word, with ma- ternal, solicitude. I'.vidently, the infant family is of necessity atiachc(l to the mother ; and equally evidently, the mother, on her part, is attache^ to the infant family, by Divine appointment, I demand, therefore, valid reasons why the Actsxri. 15. fomily attached to their mother, Lydia, was not a YouxG family ? for it is a contravention of na- ture to assume, without evidence, that it was adult. Moreover, seeing that Daughters are always more attached to their mothers than sons are, and, for a longer term of years ; I demand, also, valid reasons for denying that Lydia's family were Daughters, in whole, or in part; since there is the greater chance that they were Dau2,hters, ra- ther than Song; if somewhat grownup, accord- ing to the order of nature, and the custom of the sex. Lydia was a native of Thyatira, but set^ tied at Philippi : that she was on a visit, or on ^ ( 20 ) Journey of traffic, does not appear; and the con- jecture is set aside by the mention of herfami/tf, and her residence, which must have been a lartje house, to accommodate several lodgers; and this Pa"^^j'"'j large house farther accommodated a decent con- '*^^ gregation, in addition to her family. Iler trade was of that costly description which implies a considerable capital involved in it; and this, as all know, who are acquainted with trade, re- quires time and steadiness to return it: it cannot be efi'ccted in a mere visit. Observe: it is said of Lydia, that " her heart was opened by the Lord : and that she attended to the things spoken by Paul :" but, nothing of this is said of her family. The haptiy.m of her family evidently accompanied her own; and is spoken of very coolly, without emphasis, as a matter of couise connected with her own baptism ^ — " And when she was baptized, and her fa- mily" There is no salutation to any of Lydia's family in the Epistle to the Philippians: — if her family were sons of mature age, and membei s of tlie church, has not this omission its difficulty? The fixing of the term brethren, in verse 40,: to the family of Lydia, in a restricted sense, is not only unwarranted by the fair construction of ihe passage, but a liberal mind must find some difficulty in suppressing indignation at witness- ing this subterfuge of wicked blindness. It is evident, that in the instance of Lydia's family, the children might be young; and every thing leads to that conclusion; but, beyond de- nial, in a numerous family the certainty that some must be young, is greatly heightened. It is proper, therefore, now to examine the import of such passages as convey this idea. Scripture uses the words all and whole, to im- { 30 } .port many — 7mmerous: the application of ttil^ word to families, deserves notice. There is no occasion to quote such passages as " all the world is gone after him" — " all the world wondered after the beast :" it imports many in lesser num- Math. xiii, 56. bevs ; as " his mother, Mary, and his brethren^ James and Joses and Simon and Judas, and his sisters, are they not all with us?" Admitting an equal number of sisters as of brethren, it makes eight; or nine, with the mother: a large, or nu- merous family. So the nobleman who came to our Lord to beseech him to cure his son, had sei*vants, who met him; and, as became a nobleman (literally, a Johuir. 53. little kinQ-) he had a mimerons household ; for we read " the father believed with all his house- hold." Now here notice the propriety, or rather necessity, of preserving the distinction between liouse (the word used by our translators in the sense of family) and honse-iiOj.T> ; for the story seems to say that this nobleman had only one son : but he had many domestics.- the household was numerous ; but all this household was believers. Acts xvi. 28. So St. Paul uses the term, speaking to the ter- rified Jailor—" Do thyself no harm ; for we are ALL herei" i. e. many prisoners, beside Paal and Silas. The consequence is inevitable, that families distinguished by the word all, or whole, had many children; since children, as we have seen, Actsxviii. 8, ^^'^» i^i fact, the family. For instance; Crispus, the Ruler of the S3niagogue. believed with all— his numerous — family. Further, Cornelius the Centurion is said to have feared God with all his — numerous family. Besides, this particular was so strikhig in his instance, that it \s repeated; for Peter reports the Anj^el to have said to Cor- neliu.'i, that not only himself, but " all his family, should be saved," by the word to be spoken to them. This is not noticed in the first Acts X. 1. — xi. 14. ( 31 ) account of the appearance of the ang-el ; but uli-* questionably, it was a striking fact; and the apostle knew it to be true, from his own obser- vation. This is surely included also when Cor- nelius says — *' we are all here present Ijefbre God, to hear all things that are couiniauded thee of God" — i. €, my family is numerous, as you see. This idea even runs through the story— " moreover the Holy Ghost fell on all them who* heard the word" — on the iii/uicrous assembly. It may be well, here to remark, that as Cornelius se- lected for his piety, the soldier whom he sent to Joppa, who was " a devout man," there can be no doubt, but what he also heard the discourse of Peter to the family ; and, most probably, those two domestics who accompanied him in bringing Peter, accompanied him also in this meeting. Now, as the Holy Ghost fell on all who heard Peter speak,---surely, these members of the house- hold of Cornelius, w^ere among the first fruiis of the Gentiles; — but, that they were not of his famih/, though consecrated, and hovtized, at the same time with their master, is perfectly evident. But passing that, it appears that the assembly baptized at Cornelius's, was a kind of i^pitome, — representatives, as it Avere, of the future Gen- tile church ; and therefore contained individuals of every description; young and old — rich imd poor — masters and servants — high and low — fo- reigners, natives of countries near; and others, natives of distant countries. Nor should it be forgot, that Julian the Apostate, who acknow- ledges only tico eminent converts to Christianit\', names Cornelius, the Centurion, as one of them. This leads us to the history of the Phijlippian Acts xvi.34. Jailor, who rejoiced, believing in God, with all — his numerous family. Now consider, my dear Sir, the force of fact'?, or calculate, if you please, the chances, that Crispus should have a nftJiicrous family — that ( 32 ) Cornelius should have a very numerous fa^ mily, and that the Jailor should have a numerous family, but no youn si; children in one of them ; although the word expressly signifies children — young children! The families are spoken of as being baptized; no exceptions are marked: and the most numerous of all, was baptized by the Holy Ghost, as well as afterwards with water. Make your own reflections on this. But the story of the believing Jailor deserves closer examination : — ior, if we investigate it, we shall find that he could not be an old man; but rather, in the hey-da}^ of life. His first intention after the earthquake — "he drew his sword, and would have killed himself" — is not the character of age, which usually takes events*more coolly, and is much more deliberate in its determina- tions. The action is that of a fervid mind. In like manner, " he called for lights, and sprang ewrew^We IN:" the original well expresses the strenuous action of a robust body; — of a man in the vigour of life: here is no decrepitude, no old age, with creeping steps, doing its utmost to advance with some rapidity; it is the vehement burst of a man in his full strength: j'et this man had a nu- merous FAMILY. He appears to have been a soldier: — Soldiers seldom marry very early in life: his numerous family, then, according to nature, must have contained young children. Cor- nelius was a soldier too, and taking human life as we find it, and as generally modified by profes- 'fessions, to deny that he had youns: children in his very numerous family, appears to be something directly contrary to the desire of acknowledging truth when presented. "" St. Luke was a good Greek writer; and he re- lates the history of the Jailor wnth his customary precision. He says, St. Paul advised him, " Be- lieve in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be safe, with thy family. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were ( 33 ) in his hot(se'iioi'T)y all in the jail, &c. He brought all in his power under tlie word: as Cornelius had done ; but, it is not said, that all who were in his house-HOLV: — attendants, prisoiicis, &c. were baptized [which is said oi' the whole com- pan}r at Cornelius's.] No; but "he and his fa- family were baptized ;" " tie rejoiced with — all his — numerous family, believing in God." — All heard the word; but onlji his family accouipanied the Jailor in bapt'sm. Certainly, this Jailor be- came one of the Philippian brethren; and cer- tainly, he .would not lose the opportunity of at- ' tending the consolatory exhortation at Lydia's; and of bidding his spiritual fathers farewell. The baptism of this femily is spoken of with the same ease and coolness as that of Lydia; as the ordi- nary course of events: thechildien accompanying the father, as is perfectly natural : but, his family was more numerous than that of Lydia; as ap- pears fiom the use of the word all employed in describing it, which is not applied to her family. " I will take you." says the prophet, " one ofj^^, ^^^ j^ a city, or two of a tribe, and bring you to Zion," I think it ^^•onderful, considering the iso- lated nature of the first conversions, that we have so many instances of the baptism of families, as are already enumerated; but, if we could trace the establishment of a church — of a num- ber of persons within a limited neighbourhood, we might expect to find more connected in- stances of this practice. The Church at Philippi, though apparently consisting of a few members only, especially when first planted by the Apostle Paul, afibrds two families, that of Lydia, and that of the Jailor, which were certainly baptized: how many others underwent the rite, as families, we cannot say. The Church at Corinth offers also, two families baptized, that of Crispus, and that of Stephanas ; besides an uncertain number of others, which are. D { 34 ) only fijlnnced at. Tins church Mas numerous, and, no doubt, it included many cases, and many particulars, not discriminately marked by the sa- cred penman. 1 Cor. xvi. 15> Stephanas was *' the first fruits of Achaia;" and St. Paul confesses that he hapthed h>s fa)ni/i/. *' Crispus, the chief of the synaoogue, believed on the Lord, with all his numerous family; and Acts xviii. 8. MA N Y of the Corinthians hearing, believed, and were baptized." In these concise words there are evidently some particulars to be supplied: and some must be taken for granted. 1. The family of Crispus is said to believe, but it is not marked as jiaptized. I suppose their baptism will readily be granted. On this. Sir, take your choice: tbr, to leave this believino- fa- mily unbaptizcd, would cut up " believer's bap- tism" by the very roots, 2. As the passage is, evidently, greatly com- pressed, the same reasons imply that among the " 7nam/ Corinthians" baptized, others, beside Crispus, had /aw/V/e^: indeed, we know this from elsewhere. 3. That Stephanas, who was a deputy from the Church of Corinth to St. Paul, had been baptized, and was a member of that Church. Neither of these particulars is recorded : but they seem to follow so naturally, that they are always taken for granted-; for, if Stephanas were not of their body, how came they to depute him, for the pur- pose ol obtaining answers to questions in which their body was concerned ? And if his family were not, in some sense, attached to the Church at Corinth, what relation could it have to the state of parties in that Church, under any pos- sible supposition ? — or, why recollect it, iii con- junction with Gains and Crispus? Stephanas, ' their father, it is true, is described as the Jirst /r«i^^ of Achaia ; [are we obliged to take this ( 35 ) term in the sense of "frst convert?"'] — but this worthy man might reside at a short distance from Corinth, rather than in the city; and yet he might be a member of tlie Corinthian Churcli. The Church of Corinth, then, presents two particulars which have not heretofore occurred in the history of baptism. The frst is, that Crispus, the head of his fa- mily, WHS baptized by Sh. Paul, separately from, his family : which was not baptized by St. Paul. The second is, that the family of Stephanas loas baptized by St. Paul, separately from its head, or father, who was not baptized by St. Paul : directly contrary to what we have re- marked of Crispus. But, if we admit that the family of Crispus was baptized, because we find it registered as be- lieving, then, we must admit the same of all other families which we find marked as Chris- tians, thouidi they be not expressly described as baptized. So that of Onesiphorus; which the^j™-'-^^-^® Apostle distinguis'i.es by most hearty good-will for their father s sa':e, not for thc'r own ; and to which he sends a particular salutation. Also, that of Aristobulus, and that of Narcissus, which is described as beiuff "in Christ" It is true, ^^j°™ j^^' "~ however, that the v/ord oikos, family, does not occur in these two last instances: yet the phrase evidently implies " the family," and all trans- late ss hitherto have so rendered it. The fact is, that Aristobulus, himself, was at this time preach- ing the gospel in Britain; which is the reason why his family only is saluted, and he is omitted: — probably, his ftunily did not now dwell in one house — oikos — and therefore, that term was in- inapplicable: the same might be the case with Narcissus;— he might be absent, and his family in separate situations in Rome. This is con- jecture merely. Let us review this evidence. D 2 ( 3G ) Christian Families marked as Baptiztd, 1. That of Cornelius. S. Lydia. 3. the Jailor. 4. Stephanus. Christian Families not marked as Baptized. 5. — Crispus. (). Onesiphorus- Christian Families, neither expressed as Families, nor marked as Baptised. 7- Arisfobulus. 8, • Narcissus. Eight families, Christian, therefore, baptized ! — although there were as yet no children of con- verts to receive the orHi nance. There was no such thing as a Christian family, previously. Have we ei2:ht instances of the administration of the Lord's Supper? — no; nor half the number. Have we ei9:ht instances of the change of the Christian Sabbath from the Jewish, to the following day ? No: perhaps, one quarter of the number. Yet I have heard you vindicate those services by the PRACTICE of the Apostles, as recorded in the N. T. How, then, can you deny their prac- tice on the subject of Infant Baptism, when it is established by a series of more numerous in- stances that you can possibly find in support of any doctrine, principle, or practice, derived from the example of the Apostles ? And give me leave, further, to ask you, is there any otlier case, be- side that of Baptism, on which you would take eight families at hazard, and deny the existence of young children in them? Take eight families at a venture in the street, above or below your ' residence: take eight pev\s containing families in your place of worship, above or below your own: I care not where you take them from; they will aftbrd more than one young child. Take these eight families on a fair average: ( 37 ) suppose half to consist of four chihtren, and half of eight children: the average \ssix: cal- culate, if yoa please, the chances, that in forty- eight chil'lren, not one should be an infant: it is hundreds of thousands to one. But, there is no occasion that absolute infancy should be the object: suppose children of two, or three years old ; [the Greek church extends baptism* al infancy to three years, or to four years: the Romish Church extends infancy to seven years,] the chances would be millions to one, that none such was found among forty-eight children, com- posing six families. Or, put the question iii another form : supposing Baptism were completely out of sight, — " How many young children would be found, on the average, in eight families, each containing six children ? '* Here, Sir, we enter on another calculation : what proportion do these,- eight families, identified and named in the New Testament, bear, to that of Christians, also identified and named } The number of names of persons converted after the resurrection of Christ, is— in the Acts of the Apostles, tiventif-eio^ht, or at most thirty: four baptized families, recorded in the Acts, give the proportion of somewhat more than o7fe i?i eight. The number of names of similar converts in the whole of the New Testament, is Qhoiit Jfty-fve^ or under sixfi/ : eight baptized families recorded in the New Testament, give the proportion of one in seven, or at least, of more than one i>i eioht. A wonderful proportion this ! and for what pur( ose recorded? Bat, since Scripture gives this pro- portion, I have a right to carry it thiough the body of Christians not distinguished by name ; nevertheless, to avoid cavil, I lower it to o>ie in ten. How many converts may be fairly interred from the History of the Acts of the Apostles- ten thousand? — this gives one thousand BATTizED FAMILIES. Hovv many from the whole of the New Testament ?— one hundred thousand.? — this gives ten thousand baptized ( 38 ) FAMILIES. How many must be allowed durine^ the first century, and down to the days of Origen ? one million? — itgivesoNE hundred thousand BAPTIZED families: ten millions? the pro- portion is ONE MILLION OF BAPTIZED FA- MILIES. This calculation, or one to the same effect, cannot be evaded ; neither can it be con- futed ; for, if this proportion be reduced to half its power — which is unfair, — still I would say, judge now, Sir, whether Origen, whose great- grand father,grandfather and father were Christians, — who, himself, travelled into the countries, and among the churches where Christianity was first established, — who was the most inquisitive and learned man of his time — could this man be ig- norant whether the churches received infant bap- tism from the apostles or not? Could he have any inducement to deceive or to be deceived on this MOST NOTORIOUS matter, this every-day occurrence — t'lis public and customary proceed- ing? Mr. Booth was right in saying, " the children of proselytes icere baptized with their parents," among the Jews : and he would have been amply justified by the New Testament in adding — " this practice the apostles CONTINUED AMONG CHRISTIAN?." You are pleased to observe. Sir, that, if the New Testament presents so many instances of baptized families, it were not unreasonable to expect that some allusion to them should occur or at least to some part of them, as being in that imperfect state of Church relationship, which is so general in our own day ; — that, while they may be said to belong to a Church, in some respects, they do not beioiig to it in other respects; — that while registered among Chris- tians, they, nevertheless, should not be com- petent to appear in Church transactions, &c. — In answer to this, observe, that where fa- milies M'ere baptized, previous to the formation of churches, the case you suppose was abso- lutely impossible ; — that a history so succinct, as { 39 3 that in the Acts, of the first propagation of the Gospel, could not possibly contain express men- tion of, every supposeablc case; and, that — what you imagine could only happen where a regular and numerous church was established, with whose state/ we hav,e means of better ac- quaintance th.in what are aiibrded us by St. Luke's concise acco'.int. Neveuhp'.ess, the coLin- terpart of this case we may find by examination. It is only by the Aposfle's reproof of a pauty SPIRIT among the Corinthians, that we learn, incidentally, and unexpectedly, the baptism of the family of Stephanas. The Apostle was not discussing the subject of baptism, but was intent on suppressing paijt v : having censure) th;s dis- position, he takes occasion to thank God that his- party (the Paulists) was so few! for, how many did it consist of, in the Corinthian Church? j^ q^^. ^ only TWO, Crispus artil Gaius. " / thank fjod 14—10. that I baptized none of you, Corinthian church- members, except Crispus and Gains; lest any should say that I had baptized i>i my oicn name, and so had formed a party amonjj- your church. However, I did baptize also the family of Stephanas ;" but, they are out of the question, at present, as they cannot support any party. Besides, — or, as to the rest, I do not recollect that I baptized any other family: — but, if I did, they also are out of the q-usiion ; since they also cannot support any party in the Church. This passage gives occasion to two remarks: the first is, that the family of Stephanas was not of the Corinthian Church, so efiectuauy as others who said, "I am of Paul :" or to exert any activity, or to give any voice, in party discus- sions; for, had it been completely of the Corin- thian body, or in full church mend)ership, as we now speak, then the Apostle must have baptized others of that body, beside Crispus and Gains; which he denies: — then too, that uncertain number of baptized families, to which he adverts when using the term, " the rest," or " besides" Xoi-nli and which in the same sentence he denominates Acts xviii. 8. { 40 ) T>yx cc'aXov ** ^".'/ OTHER," muat havf been full church mem- bers, equally with the family of Stephitnas: in that case, it would have been to his purpose to recollect them, lest his enemies should have re- collected them for him; nor could he have de- scribed his party as restricted to two church- members only, when it might have comprized fifty, or a hundred, or any number still higher. The second remark is, that Paul's reference to 7nany baptized families contributes to complete the epitoniized narrative of Luke, who tells us, that many Corinthians believed, and were bap- tized ; but he says not a word on any family ex- ce])t that ofCrispus; and for aught that appears in his text, these converts might be all single men ; so he says nothing about the baptism of the fa- mily of Crispus, but leaves us to infer that, as the natural consequence of believiup^. — Nay, had not St. Paul been intent on reprimanding the Corinthians, because of their party disputes, we should never have known that Crispus himself ^'as hoptized ; for St. Luke omits that fact, in common with many other facts; much less, should we ever have known icho baptized him. The undeniable inference is, that there were many —hundreds and thousands — of baptisms conferred on persons and families in the primitive Church, which are not mentioned; — we see one instance among the Corinthians, in the person of Ciis- pus and his family; another, in the family of Stephanas. Did not similar instances exist to an incalculable number? And this, be it remem- bered, strengthens the average already taken of such baptisms among Christians not mentioned by name in the N.T. their baptized families were unquestionably very numerous, whatever de- gree of confidence be due to that calculation, or to any other. It is not for yourself. Sir, that I desire atten- tion to the grammatical consi ruction and force of this passage ; but for the consideration of such of ( 41 ) your friends, to whom you may think proper to submit the facts it suggests and supports. The passage divides into two branches: First, Whom Paul did not baptize: that is to say, he baptized none of the Co- rinthian church members — Except, Crispus and Gaius. He now takes occasion to rejoice, that none can chartje him with having bap- tized in his own name ; and so con- cludes this brancli of his subject, re- ferring to church members. .S^co ;7(7/y, Whom Paul did baptize: that is to say, he baptized the family of Ste- ])hanas; by Avhich, nevertheless, his pany, in the Church at Corinth, was not augmented. And besides this there were [many] others. This allusion, by modern translators more gene- rally rendered " as to the restj" introducing those describvd as "others," — the connection im- T;y« aXXev pi e> that these othcrs were baptized — baptized families, too — i. e. of the same description, as the inmiediate antecedent, which is, the biptized fa- mily of Stephanas : — but, equally with that fa- mily, they were mcompetent to the augmentarion of a party in the Corinthian Church, in behalf of St. Paul ; for which reason he passes them. I think. Sir, that this case meets your wishes: for these baptized families, in some sense be- longed to the Church at Corinth ; yet they were no members of its body; — and what but the youthful state of these baptized families pre- vented them from being full church members, and capable of giving their voices in behalf of the Apostle, from whom they had received bap- tism ? ( 42 ) ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS. IT IS some^That sin;^ular that a writer, by pro- fession a Baptist, treatinsi' on the subject of Bap- tism, could discover in Scripture no more than three instances of that rite, conferred on what he rindistinoiiishinsly calls honstholds ; — omitting' that of Cornelius, which is a chief and prominent instance — an instance of the interferen'e of the Holy (ihost, as well asofbaprisni hy wafer; that of Crispus — of Onesiphorus — of Aristobulus, and of Narcissus, — he contents himself with mention- ing' that of Lydia, of the Jailor, and of Stephanas. Concevnino- these also, he ar9;ues, that the Jailor's faniily must have been adults, because they " rejoiced in God ;" — Yes, exactly sucli adults, as those children who rejoiced in the tem- ple, crying Hosanna to the Son of David/ whom our Lord compares to baj-es and sucklings. This argument, therefore, is quickly disposed of. On the subject of Lydia and family, I have condemned without reserve that criminal disinge- nuousness, which aiTiruis, that her family, e.T- clusive/y,we.re the "Brethren" comforted by Paul and Silas — that this consolation was a private, and not a public, act, — that these Brethren thus ad- dressed were not the Cliristians of Philippi, but the sons of Lydia. The history stands thus: Acts XVI. 16 ^ii^^l and Silas expelled a Pythonic spirit from &.C. a certain damsel ; her masters caught them and drew them unto the forum [or market place"] [" unto the Rulers," these words are not in theSy- riac, and are evidently su])erfluous:] and brought them to the commandixg officers of the troops in garrison (the Strategoi) saying, these Jews, do exceedingly tiouble our city And the commanding officers (as before) rent oft" ( 43 ) their clothes, anft- -connuanded to beat them ; and when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, chaiging the jailor (the commander of the piace for military punish- ments) to keep them sai'ely And when it was day, the cummandiuir ofjicers (as before) sent the Serjeants, saying, let those men £0 : and the jailor [miHtarij ruler of the prison) told this to Paul saying". The commanding offictrs have sent to let you go : now, therefore, depart in peace. But Paul -aid unto them [i. e. he returned liis answer to the commanding otFicers, by their own messengers, the Serjeants) Fhey have beaten us, openly, uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison ; and now Ao they thrust us out PRivfLY? Nay, verily, but let them CO-ME THEMSELVES, A N I> FETCH US OUT- And the serjeanfs told these things to the com- mandliux <:ifcers ,- and they feared wlun they heard that they were Romans. And they came ^^„ ',.^^„ [m person, publickly, of course] and con^OuEd them, [publickly, of course] and brought them out [publickly, of course] and desired them to depart out of the city. And they went out of the prison, [publickly] and entered into Lydia's {where they lodged) and when they had seen the brethren, who naturally resorted to the Apostle's lodgings, they consoled them, [as publickly as 7r«p£x«X£o-«y they had been consoled by the commanding oilicers, in the verse preceding; the same word beino; used in the same sense] and they departed." Now, if the consolation at Lydia's was private, then the consolation tendered to Paul and Silas by these olhcers -vas private :■ but if the consola- tion tendered to Paul and Sdas by these olficers was PUBLIC, which the whole srory demonstrates, then, the consolation tendered to the christian brethren by Paul and Silas was public ; and if it were public, it was notconfmed to the family of Lydia ; for that is a contradiction in terms. Moreover, the whole of Paul's conduct proves that he studied publicitt/ throughout every part of the transaction : in absolute humiliation of the ( 4-t ) tyrannic military ofticers, who had wrongfully imprisoned him ; and by this, he gave an ex- ample of a certain firmness and courage, of resistance to oppression, and knowledge of hi» privileges and his duty, that could not be too generally known at Philippi, nor too strongly evinced in the pubUcity ot lus consolation to all Phillippum converls, without exception. This arguHient, therefore, for which a certain writer t* thanks God," as mauifesnng a special Pro- vidence over the cause of adult Baptism, is com- pUteiy silenced by the words of the text. The mischance that our translators should have used the terms hoiise and household inter- changeably, though Scripture preserves the dis- tinction, is glaring m the instance of the family eTim. i. 16. of OnesiphoriiS, which in one text is rendered — !▼. 1^. ko?ise, in the other bonsihrhi, notwitiistanding the same word is used in both places ; and the Fame persons are certainly intended. But, it has proved much more unfortunate, that our trans- lators have I'sed one word, honscliold, to express both the/c/w//?/ and the household of Steph;ina«, though Scripture uses two words in order to mark the distinction, and certainly dot s not mean the same persons. Th s has piO(b:ct d confusion, and has given occasion to vurious weak and in- consistent arguments. The passage that alludes iCor. i. 16 to the fainily of Stephanas, has no difficulty : — iCor.xri. 15. ^^^^ ^j^^^^ resi>ectin the hou\ehu/d of Stephanas, is a tissue of difficulties. The fust remark on it is, that, as it stands, it is neither (ireek, grammar, nor common sense: — it cannot be regularly con- strued; all commentators have felt this, and liave attempted to force it into sense by supplementary words. Whitby paraphrases " I beseech vou brethi'en [seeing'] ye know the house of Stepha- nas, that it is thi? first fruits of [the Qospel f//} Achaia, and that they liave [ever since] addicted themselves to the ministry of the Saints ; that you submit yourselves to such [ffiving Reverence and Honour to them] and to every one that helpeth ( 45 ) with us and laboureth." Doddridge rendei^, "Ani I beseech you brethren as ye know the House- hoid of Stephanas, that it is the first fruits of Achaia, and as they have set themselves to ministring to the Saints, that yo i suhject your- selves to such, and to every associate in that good work and labour." li'shop Pearce, with a greater share of critical sagacity than the former, renders " And I beseech you, brethren, have REGARD to the family of Stephanas (l)e(ause THEY AHE the first fruits of: Achaia, and have set themselves about the icork of ministring to the saints) that ye would submit yourselves unto such, and to every one who worketh with them and laboureth." The Bishop saw clearly that " IT IS," in the singular, will not construe with " THEY ake" in the plural. He saw too, that the phrase " I beseech you brethren" — must have an immediate subject ; and therefore he renders " I beseech you have regard." In his notes he gives as his reason for this version, that many MSS. read " thcjj are the first fruits" — and to qualify this plural, I add, some copies read {vide Pagninus, and all th- I.i.tins) — " Stephanas and Fortunatus who are" others read " Ste- phanas, and Fortunatus, au^t Achaicus, who are" • — —These are sufficient proofs of confusion, without seeking others; and justify dissatisfac- tion with the passage as it stands. To prepare our minds for a correct view of the place, v/e must first enquire, what is the Apostle's inten- tion in writing it? and to answer this ques- tion we must consider the whole of the Apos- tle's theme, and begin our enquiries some way back. The first thing remarkable is, the Apostle's description of Timothy, verse 10, "He worketh the work-— ^KGKzetai ergon, — of the Lord, as I also do ! " the next is, that St. Paul desires their submission to co-workers — 5?/«ergonti."- There seems, therefore, to be a mutual reference between these, words; which leads us to infer. ( 4G ) that lie who " worlcetli the worli\ as I aho do," must be a co-worker, i. e. oo-workf-r v'fh mc. This is implied in the i/s fif our translalors: but it dismisses the " associ:ite in that good work" of Doddridge: and it disiriisses'the " worketh ic/th them" of Bishop Pearce. Let us see, now, whe- ther by brino'ing those words somewhat closer together, we may not discover their true station. " If Timothy come to Corinth, take care that he be without fear [or vexation from your party disputes] among you ; for he worketh the work of the Lord, as T also do ; Let no one, therefore, despise him, but accompany him on his journey, th^ he may come to me in safety; for I and the brethren expect him. And as to A polios our brother, I and the brethren exhorted him much to come to you ; but he was by no means in- clined to come now [during your party dissen- tions] yet, he will come, when he hath a con- venient season. And I beseech you, brethren, that ye submit yourselves unto such [as Timothy and Apollos; but T'imothy, especially,] and to every one co-working with me, and labouring." Here eveiy thine: is in its proper place, and re- ference : and to mduce their greater care of Ti- mothy, when he arrived, the Aoo'rtle reminds them that the househdd of Stepi/anas had set themselves to do acts of hospital ty and kind- ness to Ciiriscian ministers and brethien — siip- ■ pose on th;^ir jo.nneys: — ac once an example and a stimulus! Why did not .St. Pa«!', then, recommend Timothy to ioiige at that resi- dence? — Piob<;bly, for a reason already sug- gested; that Stephanas resiled mot in Co- rinth; but at some small di.ntance from it, in Achaia. Thf Corinthian Church, then, was not exhorted to submit itself ^o the honschn/i of Ste- phanas ; the notion is unreasonable: the cause assigned is absurd," What! Crispus and G.;ius, with the whole churcii, submit themselves to the serran^f! of S'eph:;n;is, becaus.^ these ser-^-ants ■very readily and cheerfully oilered their kind I 47 ) assisiance to travellino- brethren! Where is tiie conf-nn'ty between cause and effect? But that Ci ispiis and Gains, with the Corinthian Church, might shew all .leference and hotionr to Timothy, mioht lodo-e, aiid entertain him respectfully, and brino- hhn forivard on his journey, with ever\'^ mark of Christian attention, is exactly coincident with what the Apostle had requested before. It is well known, that the concludin;:^ chapter of other epistles — that to the Romans, for in- stance, is composed of memoranda, addressed by the Apostle to his Christian friends; and when inti'oduced into the text, not placed pre- cisely in due order. — The saaie is t!ie case here ; and this reference to the household of Ste- phanas, is neither more nor less than a marginal note. It could occasion no confusion, in the. original, from the manner of writing it. An instance, in point, as practised by the modern Greeks, may be seen in a facsimile^ given in Hobhouse's Travels in Albania, &c- The whole, I conceive, stood thus: " Now, if Timotheus come, see that he may 1)€ " with yon without fear ; for he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also work. Let no man, there- fore, despise him ; but conduct him forth in peace, that he may come unto me, for I look for him with the brethren. As touching our brother A polios, I greatly desired him to come to you; but his will was not to come at this time: but he will come when, he shall have convenient time. Watch ye, skmd fast in the faith; quitJ^/;X\/' you like men : be strong. Let all things be done Stephanas, with charity ; [and] I beseech you, brethren, that r'""*'"'"^/' «* ye submit yourselves to such, and to every one fl^^-J^lf''f_ that helpeth with me, and laboureth." chaia'] ihnt' ihfv f'fire s(f '' I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and For- ^t'l'tZJlr -,... n t ^ • A t*tJ •^f'i^ 'CCS Oj tunatus and Achaicus: tor that wnuh wr^s lack- «««7«?»« oikc. have refreshed my spirir and your?: therefore ^^7»S '*' ^^ ACKNOWLEDGE them that are such." { 48 ) I^Jtrange, surely! were it true, that the Apostle should command the Corinthian Church, to sub- mit to the servants, but only to acknow/eds^e the master ; only to acknou-ledge the brotiier who had refreshed his spirit, and the spirits ot'the Corin- thians, to whom he writes; but to .suiii\; it to his servants, whose kindness, though extremely lau- dable, terai mated on strangers, from whom nei- ther the Corinthipns nor Paul had received the same " refvi shment" as they had from Stephanas. To complete this absurdity, observe, that Ste- phanas, as a member of the Corinthian Church, is commanded by ihf Apostle, arnono- others, ta suF-MiT (" gwimr Reverence and Honour,''' as Whitby paraphrases) to his own servants ! And this becomes absolutely monstrou.*, if it be in- sisted en, that these were the sons of Stephanas ; for then, that eraineril CiiifStian, .v brother, a de- puty from the Church, \!iiii first fruits uf Achaia, is commanded to submit to his own chil- dren I I I The result of the whole is, that the aonsehold of Stephanas, as individitals, dilfer from the fami/i/ baptized by Paul ; and therefore, thst the notion of baptized households, has no sanction fiom this passage. It follows, that the actions as- cribed to this household^ decide iioth hig whether t\\e family of Stephanas were young or old ; chil- dren or adults; — these actions are performed by others ; not by them. And thus everyone ofthethi'ee instances of baptized jamilies, for which Cod has been thanked, that in his Providence he had preserved sufficient proofs of their being adults, when closely examined, crumbles into dust. Neither of them, taken singiy, nor the whole of thcra taken together, affords the smallest sulv.erfii«-e to those who impugn the testimony of Oripen, that the Apostles enjoined on the churches, the PRACTICK OF GIVING 13APTI;^M TO INFANTS. Priattd by Hatfield aud Twigg, Great New SUeet, Gough-Sq. A THIRD LETTER fffi a IBcacon OF A BAPTIST CHURCH, ^c. ^ c. Dear Sir, I HAVE thrown together the re- marks in my fornier letters, at your request, for the satisfaction of your friends ; I confess that I begin the present letter with a feeling of per- sonal satisfaction, certainly not trifling, nor, as I hope, unbecoming, because there remains but one step more to bring the Facts and Evi- dences already adduced on the subject of Bap- tism, to a fixed and positive conclusion. Un- happily, that step must not be taken, till labour has cleared the way for rendering it definitive. There is such a thing, I am persuaded, as thft arrogance of learning ; but it is most commonly displayed by those whose learning is not exten- sive. General knowledge usually leads to mo- desty. It were, perhaps, an invidious task to determine whether, or not, it be arrogant to ex- clude a writer from the use of whatever terms he thinks proper to adopt in his own language, to describe a fact, respecting which he records his testimony, as an eye-witness. My notion of duty is, that of endeavouring to understand him, according to the customary tenor of the lan- guage, in which he writes, and in conformity to the general acceptation of the terms he uses, among the people of his time and place. Others think differently; of which you will accept an instance directly in point, from a little tract at* tributed-*-perhaps, erroneously, to Dr. Gregory, B ( 2 ) If the argument be made to turn ratlier upon words Letter to Edi- *^'''^" things, there is always this risque run, that the. tor of Evaog. disputants become involvt.'d in all the difficulties arisino: Mag. page 7. from the attempt to tix the meaniiic>s of words which Button, Loud, are necessarily fleeting-, as well as such as may result . from their incompetent acquaintance with a dead lan- guage. Thus, to draw my illustrations from words necessarily included in the discussion, every linguist knows that the words pais, paidos, hreplios, bre- phi/Uion, tccnon, puer, puernlus, purvulus, i»J'anSf infaniulus, piccierillo, infante, infanta, infanzo, en- fant, barne, infant, child, are used indiscriminately for MINORS, whether they be twenty days or twenty years old ; and sometimes for terms of endearment at any age. Hence it happens that we hear of " an infant who was hanged for killing his tutor," — of " the last will and testament of the little infant finfant^dusj Adald," aged eighteen, — of the " Speculum parvu- lorum,^' or mirror of little ones, that is, of the simple, ©r little ones in understanding, — of the " childe of the age of xiiii yere, vesture pryceiii shillings," in a sta- tute of Henry the seventh, — of " the barne (i. e. the young man) is not dead but sleepeth." And hence, in a book of sacred dramas " compyled by Johan Bayle, 1538," we find John the Baptist, or " Johan the rfop- jjer," called puer. Pater Cfclsstisy ^" Preache to the people, rebukyiige their negligence, -< " Doppe them in water, lliey kiwulcdciynge their offence, (*• And say unto them the kingdom of God doth cum. " John Baptist.''^ ** Unmete Lord I am. Quia pura eye iU7/i." So then, poor St. Luke, the Evangelist, or still poorer, St. Paul, the Apostle, however in- tent on relating the practice of the Apostles in respect to Infant Baptism, is prohibited the use of the word Iff ant ! ! Let him not dare to say, "we baptised children: — no! neither pais, paidos, brephos, brephyllion, tecnon, puer,puerulus, par- vulus, infans, infantulus, piccierillo, infante, infanzo, enfante, barne, infant or child, if met with in /iM writings connected with Baptism, could signify what it universally signifies, or could mean, what it really does mean, elsewhere. In Upmer, a child imports a child .-—but, in New Tes- (3 ) tament Greek — no such thing: no! — it imports a MAN. Of what avail then is Dr. R'.s or Mr. B'.s argument — " if the Apostles meant to say they baptized children, why did they not use the term child? — Children are mentioned on occasions of much less importance: why are they not men- tioned in connection with Baptism ?" — The an- swer is easy : because the N. T. writers well understood that these terms were liable to soyne ambiguity; and, for aught I know, they might foresee that men no less It arned than some who have been mentioned, would, in after ages, pervert the meaning of such terms had they used them. Happily they nave not once used such equivocal denominations, in reference to Bap- tism, — -denominations liable to such violence and tyranny. Instead of saying — " We baptized men ivoraen^ and children ," in three words, they tell tis so, in an infinitely plainer and more direct manner, in one wovd) and more hSppily still, to this word, both Greek and Jew attached the same import and application, I hope I may be allowed, therefore, to " thank God", in my turn, that, in his special Providence, he has watched oner the practice of Infant Baptism," by the con- stant use of this word ift the N. T. in reference to that rite : and since the argument — non obstante Di'. Gregory's dictum, must be made to turn on this word," we shall do well to endeavour to ob- tain a full and correct understanding of its force and powen You have already seen, that the term House in. the sense of family, is metaphorical: a;nd is derived from the term House in the original sense of a buildimy. — I say, a building; — not a tent; but a fixed, permanent, and lasting residence. Now, as we are able at all times to recur to the proper use of this term, we are equally able to correct any mistake that may occur in the me- taphorical use of it: and since we find the term used raetaphorically in several languages^ we B2 ( 4 ) may be sure, that there is such a correspondence and similarity between the original object, and the significative application of the term, that with a little prudence and patience our enquiries into its real meaning, cannot fail of satisfactory suc- cess. Give me leave, therefore, to set before you the plan of a ho?tse, as such buildings are commonly constructed in Greece ; and as we have every reason to believe, they were com- monly constructed, in ancient ages. Certainly, I do not mean to infer, that every house corre- sponds to this plan: but, I submit it, as enabling you to form a general, an ordinary, or leading conception, of such an establishment, sufficient for everj- useful purpose, when you wish to bring a proposed idea to the test of matter of fact. ^..- GARDEN or GROUNDS. . .'" s» > o < HOUSE. X TT o K^ w o OIKOS. t/3 i» % w IX w O X c« FAMILY. > H H P rt O S! ^• > ENTRANCE, or GATE. H The. first remark on this figure is, the separa- tion of the out-houses from the principal dwell- ing. It is evident that, correctly speaking, the house caunot be said to include the grounds and ( 5 ) out-houses : the house might be built up, or pulled down, enlarged, or dhninished, without atlecting the out-houses, in tlie least. But, the out-houses may be said, without any force on language, to include the house: — and ccitainly, the whole may be expressed by one comprehensive term — establishment — premises — residence —place — buildings, &cc. We have only to suppose tuat the house is built of stones; oi' permanent materials in combination; (not so the out-houses) to com- plete the conception, sutiiciently for ourf)urpose., Such is the proper and real application of tiie term house: our present business is to trace the conformity of the metaphorical application of the term, to this reality. I suppose, there cannot be equal authority on this subject, much less can there be superior, to that of Aristotle, the fam- ous preceptor of Alexander the Great, and quite as good a critic in Greek as no matter, who. In v/riting on the polity of cities, Aristotle thus defmes a House. *" A House is a Society [or Aristotle Companionship] connected together according to Pol. Lib.i.c,2. the course of nature, for long continuance. Such par'gii^"iJ-^4' (a Society) is called by Charondas, " those who eat from the same cupboard,'' or pantry; but (it is called) by Epimenides, the Cretan, " those who sit around the same fireside :" — [Or, as Du Val, the Editor of Aristotle, rather supposes, cor- recting by conjecture, " those ivho sit around the same table,"] Such a Society, says Aristotle, is an oiKos, or house. * ■>)» /Mfv ovv SIS vxcratv vifAifxi ervvBi'x.oix yLoivutioc. nocroc ^vcriv, OiKOS t^n. oi? 'Ka.fojv^xs (ASM ytoikii oij-o^tirvots' Etti/xcviovis oe o Kpvs-, ofj.ox.x'rrvots. — Coi""* rect to o/AOKXTTois suys Du Val, — that is to say o/j-orfxTrs^on, Societas igilur hi omncisvitce dies constituta, Naturce conveniens et consenta)iea,DoMVS est : ciijus societutis purticipes et oonsortes, 9{ji.oi7tTTvo,s Charondas appellat, [id est, eodem punario, seu ex eadem apotheca victiim sumentes : nos convictiimis uppellemus :] Epime^ nides autein Cretensis oij.ox.x'rroi:, [^id est, %ino et coinmuni foco seu fumo utenteis : dicamus, si placet, coniiibernaleis.} ( c ) But, the old Grecian distinguishes between oiKOS, House, and oikta, House-no j^b, ex- actly as I have shewn in my former letter, that Scripture distinguislies. Speaking of a city, he tiiff'S-'-j says,* "In order to ohtain a clear idea of the Lid. 1. c, 3. , r 1 • 1 , - T • • parts 01 which a city is composed, it is necessary that we should previously explain what an oiki a is. For every city is composed of connected oiKTAs: and further, an oikia (is composed) of several parts; and these placed together in their stations, constitute the oikia. But, a com- plete Oikia comprises the servants [slaves] and those who are free." By "free" Aristotle means, as appears from the tenor of his whole discourse, extending through several chapters, the Master and his family : one who is capable of citizenship ; onef " among those who are free by nature ; — whereas, to such the slaves be- long." He afterwards expatiates on this definition: he speaks of the wife as being " free" ; not, as among barbarians, a slave ; of the children, as being " free", &c. and, he says, There is but a slight difference between the skill required to go- vern a great oikia — House-HOi.Df and that required to govern a small city." On the whole, nothing can be clearer, than that the term oikos • — House — EXCLUDES the oikia^-oiU-Jwuses, or House-iiohD ; but, the term oikia includes the House; exactly as it might be inferred from con- sideration of our plan; where the proper sense of the terms, with this natural distinction and dis- Vtfi oixixs^ citiEiv Trporspov, iraia-ix yccp iroXts, s^ oi'kiuv a-j[x.tiTxi. oixias \le^e Oixoio/x/ayl Se fA.ipri, j| wv ay^is oig'tx o-.fi'j-oc.Ttzt' o'lKia oe tiXkoj, tx. JoyAwv, xxi BKtvdcpuv, Quundo autem perspiciium est quihus ex partibus constet ciffi- tas, necessurio cle Domo prius dicendum est. Omnis enim Cititas ex domibus ct famdiis coinpotdtur. Domus porro partes sunt, ex quihus Donms contituiiur ; at Domus perfecta atque Integra, ex servis et liht.ris constat. "f" »j f*e» V^fj tX«yS«fwv (pvaci. vi* Ss, SowXwv js-i. Civilis est liberorum natura: I^rile imperium vera, servorum. ( 7 ) tribution of them, is reduced to matter of fact, and appears to the conviction of the eye. Now, ojive me leave here, to beg your consi- deration, Sir, as to what Aristotle himself, had he met with the term house in reading the N. T* would have understood by it — or rather — what would any "plain unlettered (Creek) man having only the Greek N. T. in his hand," have under- stood, when reading in his native language, — "We baptized Lydia, ivitk her society connected together, accordins; to the course of nature, for Ions; cofdinuance :" " We baptized the Jailor, tvith ALL those loho eat from the same cupboard as himself.'' — " I baptized those who sit around the same Ji re side icith my valued friend Stephanas : T— or, if you prefer the corrected readin., "I baptized those who sit around the same table ipith my honoured friend." I found my opinion on these and similar passages, when I say, a Greek reader must have understood this term •^^house — in a very extensive sense: including not only all the children, in every stage of life, but — something more. May I venture to hope. Sir, for a vote of thanks from " the Brethren," for thus enabling them to diversify their phrases in their Bap- tismal sermons? No longer let them confine themselves to ringing those perpetual changes on house and household, in the very medley of " con- fusion worse confounded," at which the ears of every competent Greek scholar must tingle. No, I offer these varieties to their service. I could be glad, however, if they would honestly tell their hearers, in what sense this term was understood, (and still is) by those who used the language of the N. T. But, the elegance of the last definition (though conjectural) " those icho sit around the same table," reminds me of the exquisite comparison of the Psalmist — " Thy wife shall be like a fruit- ful vine, by the side of thy house; thy children Psa 'csxriii, < 8 ) like oHve plants round a^out thy table.''- And this again reminds me, thai, though writ- ing in Greek, the Apostles were Hebrews by de- scent ; that they were perfectly familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures, and with the Hebrew lan- guage, as spoken by their nation, and that, beyond a doubt, they used the term house in the same sense as it is useil by the Old Testament writers. This will not be denied: and if it is not denied, we have only to consult Moses and the Prophets, and rest our enquiry on their an- swer, as the termmation of our labours. We have seen three Grecian Philosophers propose three different ideas (though all coin- cident) on the metaphorical signification of the term House; we are not, then, to wonder, if we find among the Hebrews a fourth derivation, entirely distinct from either of the former, but equally ingenious, and much more plausible. According to the Hebrews, the metaphorical derivation of the term House, was, from the cir- cumstance of a dwelling-house being built — BUILT-UP — of stones, for instance. A metaphot rical House, therefore, — a family — was a build- ing of living stones. Ask yourself, then. Sir, which are the proper living stones to build up a family, or house 9 — are they the seniors, or the ju- niors? — is the infant, born to-day, or the man of a hundred years old, who dies to-morrow ? And here I will not compound with you. Sir; I will not allow you to say, " the term house, as used in the O. T. implies the Eldeks of the family, strictly and properly ; but the infants acciden- tally, and improperly'' • No, Sir, 1 willingly hazard the utmost seve- rity of censure, when I affirm on the contrary, that the direct, strait forward, explicit, and un- questionable, reference of the term House is to the Infants, primarily, and properly ; and to the seniors or even to the Parents, if at all, accidentally y improperly^ and occasionally, only. ( » ) The proof of this may safely rest on the fol- ' lowing passages : — and first, of the metaphor « Building. 2 Sam. vii. 27. Thou, Lord God of Israel, hast revealed to thy servant, saying, I will build thee a HOUSE, i. e. will establish thy famihj, Comp, 1 Chron. xvii. 25. 2 Sam. vii. 11, Also the Lord telleth thee that he will MAKK thee A HOUSE. 29. Now let it please thee to bless the house of tl.y servant — and with thy blessing' let the luiuse of thy sesvant be bl^;ssed for ever." i. e. h\s famtit/. Compare the same promise to S;Ionion ; 1 King's xi. JiS. ExOD. i. 21. "A rid it oame to pass, because the midwives feared God, that he made them houses," i. e. he gave them numerous fumilies. Before reading" the following', consult the History of Gen. xxx. 1-2. Jacob and Rachel ; " Give me children, or else I die," says the disappointed wife: — her husband replies " am I in God's stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb ?" J*SALM cxxvii. Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it. — Lo CHILDREN, are a heritage of the Lord, and the fniit of the loomh is his reward." The Hebrew, very remarkable here, fixes the sense toissue: " those who labour to 3«f?7f/. the ^o?/*i?, in it." That this etymological derivation of the term house — as importing a metaphorical huilding, CONTINUED, and was adopted hy the Apos" ties, may be shown from various passages of N. T. Now, therefore, ye are no more strangers and fo- Eph. ii. 19--21. reigners,bi}t fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household-estabhshment of God; and are built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; in whom all the Building fitly framed together, groweth unto a holy temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit. Coming to the Lord, as to a living [life-giving] stone, 1 Pet. ii. 4, 5. ye also, as living stones are built up a spiritual ( 10 ) HOUSE [family, as that of Aaron,] a holy priestimod, to offer up spiritnal sacrifices," &c. Titus i. 11, They subvert, overturn, — turn topsy-tnrvij, WHOLE HOUSES," — faijiilies ; the very reverse of build- ing up: vs-building. These passages are decisive. In proof that house imports children — distinct from their parents. pEUT. XXXV. 9. Then shall his brother's wife. . . .spit in his face, and say, so shall it be done urito that man vho will ho/ build up his brothp:r's HOUSE," — by obtaining children — infanis — fiotn his widow. Gen. xvi. 2. And Sarai said unto Abraham, the Lor(i hath restraint!! nie from child bearins^: I pray thev go in unt- mv niaid ; it niay be that / may obtain f infant j children hij her,'''' " be builded by her." Margin and Hebrew. xx^. 3. Rachel s,iid to Jacob, behold my maid Bdhah — she shall bear upon my knees, that / may also have finfant J children by her." — -"be BUiLDED by her." Margin and Hebrew. Gen. vii. And t!ie Lord said to Noah, come thou and all thy house into the ark. The parent is distinguished from his family. 1 Kings xvii. 8, 16. The widow woman of Zarepta did acci)rdiiig to the saying of Elijah ;— and 1, she, and 2, he, and 3, her house, did eat many days." — Hereon must be her /y good thiiio^ which the Lord thy God hath given thee, and unto thine house," The distinction is pre- served here also. 3 Sam. xiii. 11. I will raise up evil asjainst thee, (David) out of thine own house :" — " from among thy phihlren. Vide story of Absalon?, &c. That this distinction between parents and chil- dren, CONTINUED, and was apotted by ths Apostles, is manifegt, iiom all the passages al- ready adduced: — Lydia, and her house: — the Bishop, and hiS Jiouse: — the Deacon, and l||s house ■■ — the fami/y of Stephanas, separate from himself; — the famih/ of Crispus, separate irom himself: — the family of Onesiphorus separate, k.c. In proof, that house means infa'sts, eocpUcitly. Numb. xvi. 27, 22. Dathan andAbiram came out and stood in the door of their tents, and their wives, and their sons, and their little children. — And the earih opened her mouth and swallowed them up, and their houses. " Their little (hildren then, were their houaes. Job XX. 28, The increase of his house shall roll away ; shall flow away as a torrent flows, in the day of his wrath." That the term " increase of a house," means a family. See 1 Sam. ii. 3. fsALM Ixviii. 6. Godsetteth the solitaj-y (man) mfami~ lies:'' ina house, i. e. infant?. Marg. and [leb. Psalm cxiii. 2. God maketh the barren woman to sit in her i^ovsE—fnnily ; the jcyful mother of children,'" infants. Isaiah xiii. G, Their children shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes, their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished. The Medes shall not regard silver, nnr delight in gold. — Their bows shall dash the ycnna men to pieces; they shall have no pity on the frvit of the ivomb : their eye shall not spare children.''* It was not the dwelling houses which the Medes were to spoil, for they regarded not silver nor gold. w])ich is the natural spoil of dwelling houses ; but houses in the stxistoi'fatnilies—the fruit of the womb, i.e. infants. ( 12 ) House means Infants, before they are con- c'eivfd — coasequenrly, when they aie not present. Gen, xviii. 19. " I know Abraham, that he will com- mand his children [plural] even his house, after him." Here Isaac is spoken of as house to Abraham, in the close of the day on which he "was promised by the three Angels ; consequently before his conception. 2 Sam. vii. 11-16. " The Lord telleth thee that he will MAKE thee a house and set up thy SEED after thee, which shall procefd out of thi/ bowels "—Consequently, this i)ifunt, David's successor, was not yet begotten. Ruth iv. 12. *' And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders said— The Lord make the woman that is come into thy (dwelling) house, like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build UP the HOUSE of Israel : — And let thy house (family) be like the house of Pharez, whom Tamar bare unto Judah, of the seed which THE Lord shall give thee of this YOUNG WOMAN. It is not possible by any words, or form of words, whatever, to express Infants more de- cidedly, than by these applications of the term house: and, in fact, if there were no other text in the Old Testament, this last, alone, is suf- ficient to establish the proposition that the term house in Old Testament language must mean an infant. The idea recurs repeatedly in the passage. 1. The bia Id ing up the ho?jse of Israel is z;?/a//i-cliild-bearing, undoubtedly; 2. Thy HOUSE — that is, the " seed which the Lord SHALL GIVE THEE of this yOUUg WOmail," MUST mean an infant ; and this is the national and ac- knowledged language, used by " all the people that were in the gate;" and not by the vulgar only, but by those well instructed also ; by the riders; and this took place before Boaz was mar- ried : for it follovvs — So Boaz took Ruth to wile." The rest of the story we know. ( 13 ) Thus we see that an infant is expressed in Old Testament language, by the term house, both by father's side and mother's side, before it is begotten or conceived : — that the same usap;e of the word was continued and adopted bif the Apostles, is clear from the instance of the young Avonien, in Timothy, concerning whom iTim. r. i*. the Apostle sajs, as of an event yet future, he would have them " marry — bear children — de- spotize their house," ox family ; in exact con- form it}' with the wishes of the Elders and the people, in behalf of Boaz and Ruth. We need extend our enquiries no further: — let us reduce the result to conclusive evidence. . By what was Sarai and Rachel buildtd up ?~ By Lifaiits. What does the term Houses imply ? little CHILDREN. . In what house does God set the solitary man? — In an ii^f a'st f ami/ y. In what house does God set the barren woman 9 In an infa-st fa77iily. What is the increase of a house ? Infants. What is a house in the sense oi fruit of the womb? Infants. What was to be commanded, as his House, by Abraham? i/w ejjpeciec? infant, Isaac. What house was the seed which shall proceed out of thine own bowels? An Infant. What/toM^ewasthesEED which ^/i(?/ior(i SHALT, GIVE i/tee of this young woman? An Infant. In these ten instances, (and twenty might be added) the term house must signify infants: — it can signify nothing else : and, moreover, it signifies infants, though not actually present. With these ten instances of the signification of the term house in Old Testament language, be- fore your eyes, and with every demonstration of the continued sense and adoption of the ( 14 ) terni by the Apostles, to the same purport, and intention, and without variation, in the N. T; give me leave to ask you. Sir, What did the Apostles baptise, when: they say they baptized houses ? The question admits but of one answer: in givhig that, let Conscience and Common sense do their duty. Here the enquiry rests: those who wilt not be- lieve Moses and the Prophets, M^ould not believe Paui che Apostle, or Luke the Evangelist, though he rose from the dead. Those who atterhpt to pervert these Old Testament facts,- ivill, cer- tainly, shew no mercy to Nev*/ Testament evi- dences, which are in perfect conformity to them. I remember a worthy old Minister, ofwhoni it was remarked, that after his " lastly," always came " to conclude." I fmd myself obliged to adopt his practice; for, although the argument has reached its " lastly," yet it demands another woi ;i, " To conclude;"— what would a pious He- brew Christian reading the New Testament have understood by the term House, m the Apostles' d?ys, when he found it in various parts of their (sacred) writings? Could he, ^055/6/3/, have sepa- rated the idea of Infants from it ? —And, if he h;<'"i oeen told that it was to be taken as exclud- ins; Infants, would he not have complained of tho deception practised on him ? Would he not have said, " if the N. T. writers use this word in a sense never before used in our nation, a sense entirely new, an.i contradictory to common and j5opular acceptition, why did they not tell us so 9 How are we to understuud them, if not by the language they use ? — And, how are we to under- stand their language, if not in its popular, cus- tomary, and /a'ed acceptation; — the same as that m which it has uninterruptedly been employed, from the days of our father Abraham, to this day; — and, in fiict, iu >vhich it is employed, at this very day .^ " ( 15 ) Now, do these writers drop any hint of such novelty — such deviation ? So far from it, they express theniselves in a manner to give this term the most comprehensive sense, possible. They speak of " the wiioj.e house of Crispus: " ^'-'^* '"'"'• *' no exception is marked. Aristotle says, *" the tchole includes beginning, middle, and end : " No, say some moderns, it only includes the he- ginninirl' — Excellent critics!- -We baptized all the house of the Jailor, says the Evangelist:" acu xvi. 34. Yes, says Mr. Booth ; but when the Evangelists say ALL — they do not 77i€an, all; they only mean some. Do they so, in small numbers, Mr. B. ? — when our Lord says to his eleven Disci- ples, ALL of you drink of the Sacramental cup; — does he mean, oi\\y four or five of you drink of it? — when he says " Go disciple all nations;* does he mean only some nations ? What ! con- tract the free grace of God ! — narrow the exten- siveness of the Gospel of Christ! — It is impiety, if not incipient blasphemy : and, allied to it, in disposition — in Jewish disposition — is the de- sire to exclude from baptism any member of a House, concerning which an Apostle, or Evan- gelist says, the ichole — or all — was baptized. From this Jewish spirit, this spirit of bondage, may, all — without exception — be set free! and among that all my respected friend ! I scarcely know how to address him in the A postle's lan- guage, " Art thou called, being a slave, care not for it" — but in the latter part of his advice I heartily concur, "If thou may est be free, u.se it." (Here research ended : the whole number of texts examined U'os ffty-six. The Deacon found Scripture irresistible, and achnouledged his conviction. What folloiv are mereln crude hintSf and unfinished notes, made en passant.) *Qho)i Js ff/ TO t^oi af^-Tii, xai (Xtrov, Kdt TsXr^Tsv. Poit, 18, ( 16 ) POSTSCRIPT, Though it be clearly our duty to be content with ^uch information and documents as it has pleased Pro- vidence to preserve for our use, so many centuries after the Gospel age, yet it may be pardonable, I hope, to wish, that the history <>f the liebr; w Chri?tian church had come down to us, with the same characters of au- thority and authenticity, as the history of the Gentile Church, which we now have. It is possible, however, that the ditierences in opinion and practice between that Church and the Gentile Christians, might have appeared very gross to us in later ages, and might have given occasion to contests sd'l more afiiictive, if possible, than those, whicl:, most unhappily, did di- vide and distress the Community of Believers. That the sentiments of St. Paul prevailed among the Gentiles, is evident ; not from the New Testament his- tory only, but from Ecclesiastical History, also, and from existing facts. 1 hat the Hebrews had sentiments of their own, which they strongly retained, appears from the same evidence; and merits our attention. It lilt rits our attention, too, on this very subject. — Bap- tism. It is commonly snid, that " Baptism was given in the room, or place, of circumcision ;" — and the im- pertect nuuiuer m which this proposition has been ex- pressed and defended, has occasioned much false argu- ment, and many mistaken assertions. It has been de- scribed as a succcssioti ; and this inaccuracy has be- trayed Mr. Booth, as it had also betrayed his adver- saries. He says, " 1 hat baptism d d not come in the place of circumci- sion, we have the strongest presumpiivf- eviiiei.cc. — - If Baptism succeeded in the place of circumcision, bow came it that both of them wtre in full force at the same tiu)e; that is, trom ihi ciinimnncement of John s ministry iMtliedtalh oi Ch.ist? If one iuNtiimion 8U"red in the p'ace of another, we are unav -idably Wi tu coasidvr tUui othur usharius vacat&d Us ^lace. ( 17 ) " For one thing to come in the room of anothePj and ihe latter still hold its place, is an odd kind of succes- sion. — Admitting the succession pretended, how came it that Paul circumcised Timothy, after he had been bap- tized ? For ihis, on the principle here opposed, there does not appear the least reason. But why do I men- tion the case of Timothy ? seeing- it is plain on this hy- pothesis, that it was the indispensable duty of those parents who were baptized by .lohn, and by the Apos- tles, before the deatli of Christ, to have all their male infants both baptized and circumcised. For that the law of circuprision was then in its fidl vigour, none can doubt ; and that Infant Baptism v.-as then in its prime, our opposers insist. Those favoured infants therefore, if ever they partook of the holy supper, must, in the language of Pcerlobaptism, have had the covenant ra- tified to them by three seals. A singular privilege this, it must be allowed ! But what becomes of baptism as the successor of circumcision ? Further : Had the supposed succession been a fact, not only the Apostles, but all the apostolic churches must have known it. What was the reason, then, that So many of the Jewish converts were highly disgusted j\t the thought of circumcision being laid aside ? Why such warm endeavours to support the credit of an ancient ceremony, which they themselves must have known to be obsolete, and for this very reason ; Baptism came iti its room/" So far Mr. Booth. But, what if the rite of circumcision was not ob- solete ? W'hat, if this succession never was thought of, much less allo^ved, by Hebrew Christians ? What, if the fact intended be true, though the terms adopted in stating it be incorrect ? That St. Paul severely censured the Hebrew Chris- tians for their attachment to the Mosaic law, admits of no question; and though Circumcision be not derived from the Mosaic law, yet he describes his opponents Tj^ug j jq plainly enough, by "vain talkers, and df ceivers, of the cir- phii, iu. 3 cumcision ;" — " beware of dogs : beware of tlie conci- sion : " the severity of this specimen of Jewish wit, playing on the word, is lost on modern readers : it is nevertheless, extremely severe. But, though this A.postle manfully supported Christian liberty in behalf of the Gentiles, it appears demonstrably, from his cir- cumcising Timothy, that he saw na opposition between th« two rites. He practized them both on the sanift C 5^s ( IS ) person. This -^as the sentiment of his nation, gene- rally, so far r ii was converted; and there is little ha- zard in s.iyi; ^, that all Hebrew Christians were BOTH circiim hed and baptized. In proof of this, the following; testimonies, which refer to the Hebrew Church in Judea, are perfectly satisfactory. Heq-esippus, [upnd Euseh. Ecc. Hist. lib. Hi. cap. 32.) s.iys, " The Church of Jerusalem continued a virgin, (or free from heresy,) till the death of Simeon, who succeeded James the Just:" that is, till the time of Trajan, about A.D. 100, or 110. The least this can mean is, that the Church at Jeru- salem retained, during the first century, the customs derived from its predecessors, and original founders. Irenoeus says, {lib. i. cap. 2G) the Ebionites, used only the Gospel of St. Matthew : were over curious in the exposition of the Prophets; disoicned the Apostle Paul, calling him an avost XTEj'rom the law : — they circumcised, and retained the Jewish law and Jeuish ctistoms.^^ These Ebionites were Hebrews, as is clear : they used the Syriac Gospel of St. Matthew, onhj ; be- cause, the other Gospels being written in Greek, were not in the Holy Language : they disowned the Apostle Paul, because he was the Apostle of the Gentiles; and (though Christians) they circumcised their infants. Origen says, " Those of the Jews who believe in Christ, have not abandoned the law of their ancestors ; for they live according to it ; bearing a name [Ebionites], Origin also mentions it, as a proof of ignorance in Cel- sus ; — " that he had not noticed Israelites believing in Jesus, but NOT relinyuishing the laiv of their Fathers." Origen proceeds — " And how confusedly does Cel- sus's Jew speak on this subject? when he might have said, more plausibly, — Some of you have relinquished the old customs. — Some, nevertheless, observe (the cus- toms) of their ancestors — Some are willing to receive Jesus as the person foretold by the Prophets, and to ob- servethe law of Moses according to theancient customsJ'^ It is undeniable, that this disposition of the Hebrew Christians to adhere to the Law of Moses, continued unabated, during the second century. It continued also in the third, and fourth centuries; for, Eusebius says, — " The Ebionites .... used the Gospel accord- ing to the Hebrews, — they hept both the Jewish Sab- bath, and the Christian Habbath,'* Hist. Eccl. lib. iii. oap. 27. ( 19 ) The Gospel according- to the Hebrews, is usually supposed to have been the Synac Gospel of Matthew, already mentioned. Those wlio kept both the Jewish Sabbath and the Christian Sabbath, might well enough practise bothihe. Jewish ordinance otcircMWiciiio/t, and the Christian ordinance of baptism. Jeroui, Comment, on Isaiah, mentions Hebrews be~ Ueving in Christ. He says they were anathema- tized for their rigid adherence to the ceremonies of the Jewish law, which ihey mingled with the Gospel of Christ : Propter hoc solum a patribus anathematizali sunt, quod legis ccercmonias Christi evangelio inis- cuerunt. The same Father has this expression — •' The Naza- renes who so receive Christ, that they discard not the rites of the ancient law.'' Jeroni describes the Nazarenes as persons " who be- lieved ill Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin ■ Mary, in whom the orthodox beluve : — but, were, ne- vertheless, so bigoted to the M oaic law, that they were rather to be considered as a Jewish sect, than a Christian. " To this day," says Jerom, *' a heresy prevails among- the Jetvs in all the synagogues of the East, which is called that of . . . the Nazarenes . . . who from a dtsire of being Jews and Christians, both at ONCE, are neither Jews nni- Christians." Epist. ad Agtistinum, de dissidio Petri et Pauii. Who anathematized these Hebrews, and by what au- thority, we need not be solicitous lo learn ; it is clear enough, that there was little love iost between those who disowned the Apostle Paul, aj an apostate ; and those who anuthemutized his dijQiV:.^rs. This dispo- sition to be Jews and Christians both at once, this bi- gotry to the Mosaic law, in Jerom's days, it seems, prevailed chiefly in the East. With this agrees Epiphanius, who says, *' Ebion adhered to the Judaic law, wit|| jf-spcct to the obser- vation of the Sabbath, and to cirf-Mu:ision ; and to all other things which are commoa to lb:; rites of the Jews and the Samaritans." It may be said, that " thesi?, Chcti^h Hebrew Chris- tians, yjev^ Heretics" ; — It is graniedj that the Gen- tiles called them so; but, t^l'4Ji'--y en ed in this par- ticular, does not appe* ^v^d^ hjvvever, another testimony which regard^ . .h- vtt,,e orthodox; at ( 20 ) least, as to points of principal inlportance, and in a much later age. Other writers inform us * that the bishops of the EusebiiiSj Christian Church, at Jerusalem, who, certainly, had Sulpitius been correctly and fully baptised, were circumcised Scverus, &c. flijiii'g many successions: it should seem, liowever, that not ALL their people retained the Mosaic law en- tire; but, that some of^hem dropped, at least a part of it. The "pcene omMfSj—almost all,— of the author quoted, shews plainly, that some exercised a liberty respecting these observances, which liberty others scrupled. The Church of Jerusalem comprehended, in a sense, the great body of Hebrew Christians : it was justly es- teemed orthodox ; it produced men of great learnins^y says Eusebius: who gives us [Eccl. Hist. A. D. "iO'i. lib. vii. c. 32.) a list of fifteen bishops, in succession, who were circumcised . The first who was uncirciwi- cised, was Marcus, A. D. 13G. I think it is amply proved, that these Hebrew Chris- tians, as well as the Apostle Paul, saw nothing in" circumcision inconsistent with Baptism; and most certainly, they did not consider Baptism as being the successor of their lamily rite, which dated from before the law of Moses. As to the Gentiles, who never practised cjrcunici- sion, it is impossible that Baptism should be the suc- cessor of that rite to them : such an assertion would be a gross absurdity in language and fact. Nevertheless, this gross absurdity may be stated in terms by which it becomes a correct assertion. — E. gr. Baptism was given to the Gentiles instead of GIVING THi M Circumcision as the initiatory ORDINANCE of their religious profession. We learn from Acts xv. that " certain men from Jndea taught the (Gentile) brethren, except ye be cir- * Sulpitius Severus says, (Hist. Sac. lib. ii. cap. 31.) Et quia Christiani fin Phi" o'Stiiia viventesj ex Judceis potissimiim puta- bantur fnamque turn Rierosolyma non nisi circumcisione hubehat ecclesia sacerdotcmj militum cuhortem cuslodias in perpeluum agitare jussit, quce Jndaos omucs Hieroso/i/mcp adifii urceret. Quod qnidcm Christ iance fidtei proficiehat ; quia tum pane omnes, Christum Deum, sub Icgis obsercaiione credebant. Ni- mirvm id Domino ordinunte dispositum, ut legis scrvitus a fibcrta- tcfidai atque ecclesia' tolleretur. Itu turn primum Marcus ex G'cJi- tibus cpxid Hierosolymam espiscopus fecit. i 21 ) fumcis^d, ye cannot be saved." — At Jerusalem, the Actsxvi.l, sect of the Fliasisees insisted on this ; — and there was -a, innrh disputing about it. The Council, however, at len5;;th, determined to the rontrary. But, the Council's letter does not nientiou baptism, or any other Christian rite : it enjoins nothing' positive; but merely negative; abstinence from certain thiui^s ofFtMisive to the Jews. For, the council knew that Baptism was sufficiently administered, alieady. Theij, therefore, did not add cijrcnmcision to baptism, in reference to the Gentiles, although it appears demonstrated, from the testimonies already adduced, that the Jewish Church members re- tained the same principles and practices as to them- selves, for which the Pharisees among- them contended ; and which certain teachers from Judea had propagated amony the Gentiles. It is singular enough that amonof the false accusa- tions urged against !St. Paul, by the believing Jewish Actsxxi. 20. zealots, at Jerusalem— one was, " that thou teachest AM. THE Jews which are ujnong the Centiles,. ,. that they ought not to circumcise their children.'" What then did they suppose Paul practised, in regard to ———21, children, generally ? That they had heard that he did something , or advised something to be done, concern- ing them, seems clear; what could it be ? what did he sulistitute in the place of circumcision .'' — We know of nothinf^ but baptism, that could give occasion to this " information " respecting- Paul's proceedings. We know, the credulity of the multitude, and the frequency of error in vague reports ; (and these reports were brought by unbelieving Jews, from distant countries ;) but, it by no means followed that because Paul conferred baptism on Jewish children, therefore, he prohibited cir- cumcision -.—since both were practised among these He- brew Christians themselves, as we have seen. This, however, confirms the assertion of Irenteus, that the Hebrews, i. e. the mass of the people, disoivned the Apostle Paul; and considered him as an apostate front the Law.'' These Jews were zealous for the circumci- sion made by hands : those who reported this falsity concerning the Apostle, — Jews, who themselves dwelt among the Gentiles, were equally zealots in the same cause. ■ - It is not, then, to Jewish converts, strictly speak- ing, that the Apostle Paul addresses his expression, " In lohom [Christ] ye are circumcised by the circinti- „ , .. .. cision made without hands'' — for, they had been cir- A. D. 140. ( 22 ) rnmrised h:/ hands, by the Mosaic process : neither had tfiri; heen «ircuiiicistd by Christian profession, i. e. by b-ai)ti.sin ; for tliat would have been a second circum- cision : whereas the Gentiles had not been circumcised by hands, l)nt, had pnt off the body of the sins of the Jiesh, hi/ the Llirislian circumcision,^' i, e. liaptisin. To expect to obtain a clear view of this subject from Hebrew writers, were to expect them to be free from their prejudices, which they were not— coukl not be. But, we niu>;t ct)nsult the writino-s of the Gentile Chris- tians, to discover their view of this matter, and how iheif expressed their judg'menl ;— Do we find them say- ing, tliat, THEY received Baptism instead of receiv- ing Circumcision, r* That the Gentile Christians thus understood it, appears from their own testimony ; so Justin, a few years after the Apostles, writes ; " WE [Gentiles — Gentile Christians] also, who by him have access to s^ God, have not received that circumcision according to ^. the flesh; but that (circumcision) which is spiritual. . . . and moreover, (for itideed, we were sinners !) we have received this (circumcision) in Baptism ; for the pur- pose of God's mercy : and it is enjoined on all to re- ceive it in like manner." Justin, therefore, thought that " spiritual circmncision," Baptism, was given ie ns — the Gentiles, instead of giving us — the Gen- tiles, carnal circumcision. In other words, the Gentiles accepted and practised Baptism, instead of accepting and practising circumcision : and Baptism was, to them, instead of Circumcision. Here comes in the evidence of the Quest, ad Ortho- dox: ascribed to Justin Martyr. " Jf'hi/, if circum- tision he a good thing, do we not use it, as well as the Jeivs did / 1'he answer is, Because, WE [Gentiles — > Gentile Christians] are circumcised nv Baptism ivitk i'hrist's circutnci.sion, &c. To support this sentiment, the writer refers to Cnl. ii. 11-12. In other words, " To us. Gentiles, baptism is given, instead of giving us cinumcisioii." John Chrysostoin [Horn. 40, in Gen.) says " There was pain and trouble in the practice of that (Jewish) cir- rumcis/on , , . ,hui ovii circumcision, I mean the grace of Baptism,, gives cure without paiu, &c. and thisyur infuuts, as well as men. If yn sduple this inference~-/()r infants, then — A D or^A lb ije comes in the enquiry of f'idus ; — he hcsit.ited to confer baptism on an iiifant before the eighth day after Us birlh. The reference of this to circumcision. ( 23 ) is too pnlpable to be questioned. He seems to huvr, adopted the Jewish notion that a child was not ptr*- feet till a suhhath had passed over it : but, Cyprian informs him, that a cliikl, being a work of God, is perfect from th« birth : that the spiritual circumcishn ought not to be restrained by circumcision according: to the Jiesh : but, that the nust extensive noliou should be connected with that of the grace of Christ, . . . .especially, in reference to infants. To this all the Bishops, in council, agree. Here comes in the testimony of Origen, that the Apos- tles commanded to confer baptism on [Greek] infants : —also his observation, " 1 hou, being [a Greek] infant, %vast baptized," &:c. On the whole, it is clear — notwithstanding Mr. liooth's facetious allusion to " three seals,''' that the CHURCH saw nothing amiss in retaining the Abrahamic rite, circumcision, and receiving the practice of bap- iis7n ; — i.e. performing both : while the Gentiles ac- knowledge, that thei/ received in baptism that spiritual Acts xviE, !3a^ circumcision, which originated in God's mercy, and led to further communications of mercy : in short. Bap- tism was their circumcision ; and they say it was not restrained, as tlie Abrahamic circumcision was, toa particular, or set time ; but, might be administered he^ Jure the eighth day ; or after it, as convenience, or pro- priety might determine. *^* It deserves notice that the writer of the Epistle, to the Hebrew Christians, never once attempts to draw them oft" from circumcision ; though he labours so hard to moderate their attachment to Moses. That this enquiry is not exhausted, accept the fol- lowing proofs. The circle, or glory, which painters /?'07H th-e earliest ages, have placed around the heads of saints, is called a Nimbus, and is supposed to mark the descent of the Holy Ghost, or, the inspiration of the person so orna- mented, by the Holy Ghost. Martial {lib. l.v. epis.S9,) calls Nimbus, which properly signifies a shvioer of rain, the liquor mingled with saflTrou, with which they SPRINKLED the theatre; L.uhrica Cort/cio qnamvis sint pulpita nimro. The Romans bathed themselves very frequently : Nam Thermii iterum cunctis ilerumfjue laiaiur: Martial, lib. ii. epis. 14. ( 24 ) 't'he Romans anointed tliemsclves regularly aiftef bathing : .i ....... i . , ft sonut fdomus) nnctis Sirlgifibiis, et plow componit linlca giitto. •'AH the house rings with the aiioiutiug of the Striprils, and the preparation of linen cloths, and boxes of un- guents." This custom of fino/w/jwo- after bathing, nii2:ht pos- sibly, give occasion to the ecclesiastical custom of Unction after Baptism; yet, I cannot help suspecting that it was a. sign of the Holy Spirit, retained long after the thing signihed had ceased. I have not suggested, that Baptisni atnong the Jewsi though administered in the name of the Lord Jesus, onl)% might include a recognition of the Trinity, with- out some aulhority. Irenoeus has preserved two He- breiv formules of Baptism, used by the Valentinians, which, though always hitlierto considered as mere gib- berish, a late writer has attempted to reduce to sense and meaning. His version is,—" In nomen tuum. Ex- altissimc, in id quod est Lumen, et, principium vitce, Spiritus, q\ioniain tu in corpore tuo regnasti." In thy Classical J'^'^^^' ^ Most Exalted, in that which is Light, and Journal ^^^^ principle of life. Spirit ; inasmuch as thou in thy Sept. 1813. body art reigning,'''' — as I suppose the intention of the address should be understood. The mention of Light, Spirit, and Exaltation, clearly alludes to a Trinity. The present customs of the East, if closely examined, would add their testimony to principles already adduced. Says D'Arvieux (Manners of the Arabs, p, 240. Lond. 1732.) " The Arabs never speak of their wives, nor does any body speak to them concerning them ; but in- directly, they say "my house," and those at home; instead of OT?/ WIFE and my daughter. When one inquires after their health, it is by '■'■how does your HOUSE?" and how do those o/yovr house do ?" &c. Beside its bearing on the general question, — this authority favours the conjecture, that the house of Lydia were daughters. FINIS. PniitfUT&j Hatfield and Twigg, 20, G. Aew Str. GougU Square, FACTS AND EVIDENCES ON THE SUBJECT OF BAPTISM, IN THREE ADDITIOJyAL LETTERS, BEING THE FOURTH, FIFTH, AND SIXTH, TO A LATE DEACON OF A BAPTIST CHURCH, WITH AN CONTAININC ADDITIONAL LETTERS to the Editor of the BAPTIST MAGAZINE IN EXAMINATION OP BY THE EDITOR OF CALMET'S DICTIONARY OF THE HOLY BIBLE. Now THE LORD MAKE YOU TO INCREASE IN LOVE TOWARDS ONK ANOTHER, AND TOWARDS ALL MEN ; EVEN AS WE DO TOWARDS YOU. Salute ALL the saints in Christ Jesus; . ALL THE SAINTS SALUTE YOU. !lont(on : Printed for C. Taylor, 108, Hatton-Garden, By Hatfield and Twigg, 20, Grtat New Street, Gough Squart, 1810, PREFACE. The former Letters were piiblislied with a bona fide desire on the part x)f the Deacon, to receive such answers as might effectually con- fute their contents. Upwards of a year has elapsed, and no answer has appeared. The Deacon has been led, under Providence, to change his religious connection. The present letters are published, partly in compliance with requests, amounting, in fact, to commands^ from the most respectable quarters, for the continua- tion of the argument. The subject is not ex- hausted ; but, it rests here, for the present. The Gentleman who complains that the former letters were unfit for the perusal of his fimily, will be gratified to learn, that after the opinion of the more intelligent class of readers has been obtained on the argument, they will be reduced to the level of the meanest capacity, in a six- penny pamphlet. For, it appears to the writer to be inconsistent with honour and integrity to ren- der the argument popular^ till after it has been canvassed by those who are best able to appre- ciate it. If it should be annulled by superior in- formation, the writer will rejoice that it can have 11 fallen, hitherto, into such hands, onl}^ to whom it can have done no injury ; as he also enjoys a satisfaction in the consideration, that whatever additional strength former arguments on the sub- ject may derive from his views of it, that not one is in any respect deteriorated ; but retains its full force and effect, with undiminished authority. The writer desires, as before, that his Facts may be met by Facts, should any one think pro- per to examine them ; he again intreats the can- dour of the public, for himself; but, for his Facts and Evidences he desires neither grace nor favour. Jpril 1, 1816. Errata and Corrigenda. Introduction. P. 5, line 2, add in the margin, in the dlh Century. P. 14, line 3, for congregations read congregation. P. 24, margin, for Eph. ii. 9. read ii. 19. P. 28, in the Greek from Hesychius for x«/ ^/.tfos rs read iJ.ifos n. Pt 29, in the fifth line of the quotation from Biel for 2 Kings xxxiii. read xxiii. P. 32, margin for o/xo(pSof«,i/ read oiy.o(p9o^uf. P. 33, note, line 3 from the bottom, for benivolentia read beneoolevtia. P. 38, line 4, for tai read ej-/ 5, for vv^vrcv rea?fe the congregation was cotnposed of u far greater number of dead than oi living, wiiere dt^p-^rled spirits, (if departed spirits re-visit this lower world) were the only witnesses, and where God, the Supreme, and the exalted Saviour, were all the objects that could he adored; — here, we find one of these pictures, for what purpose was it placed here, in this subterraneous vault, if not to instruct Uie administrator and the convert, that thus their Lord himself was baptized in the Jordan] — that duty led them to be thus conr ( 7 ) formed to this part of the image of Christ? — that " if became them thus to fulfil all riKhttousness"] This picture announces Baptism as the beginning of the profession of Christ: the end is denoted by tlie crux geminata, the cross in glory: whicij, with the Alpha and Omega, points to that betier world, to which all here buried, and all here baptized, directed their hopes, their wishes, and their professions. When I began this paper, I confess I was somewhat angry that tlie darkness of my reviewer's intellect should have identified me with heal hen sculptors; that he should have supposed me Cdpatde of abusing the public eye with falsities: — I might go further — but, it is not at the tombs of the martyrs we iearn to expose the weak- nesses of our brethren. Possibly, this writer did not know, that during half a century, my studies have included, among other things, Christian Antiquities. He might not be aware of the number of such instances that have passed under my inspection: — of the number to be found in authors. — May the prosperity both temporal and spiritual, allotted him by Providence, be increased and prolonged, without alloy !— excepting, perhaps, one regret, that his knowledge of the Editor of Calmet was so extremely imperfect. And, if any reader demands a reason why these very- same figures should be chaste and decorous in Robinson, when supporting the cause of Adult Baptism, — but, in me, when enquiring into the history of Baptism at large, they should be indecorus and unchaste, I begj to be excused, if, under present feelings, I refer for a solution of this apparent contradiction, to the Reviewer himself. All who have read the former " Letters to a Deacon," know, that I introduced these subjects, among other reasons, to expose the prevarica- tion of Robinson, of whose capricious Quarto sorne of his Baptist friends have thought so highly. Once more: I protest, solemnly, that there neither was nor is the most distant intention of annexing the smallest particle of ridicule to the term pbmgingf It was employed, merely by way of distinction : and with the utmost integrity of heart and mind. — Neither is there, in the Letters published, any passage intended to ridicule either person or thing, in relation to the B 4 ( 8 ) Baptists. There are allusions, it is true, which the late Mr. Fuller would have understood, (perhaps have felt) easily explained, were it proper to publish what he wrote to the Deacon. I retract nothing I have said ; for while truth is truth, I shall not hesitate to declare in open terms, whoever the declaration may involve — that the Deacon was ill treated — very ill treated, by his then connection. Three years of almost continued investigation of the subject, at the Deacon's request, and greatly improved by his arguments in opposition, have but cjulirmed Miy former opinion. Arrived at a time of lile, when every action includes the possibility of its being the last this may be my dying testimony; — as such, I record my full conviction that the apostles PRACTISED INFANT BAPTISM. But, the more immediate subject, at present, is the mode: and this, I attirm decidedly, without fear of contradiction, included pouking: I say, accurately speaking. Christian Baptism was pouring. More- over, ti»e convert was naked. If any one asks — *' Why, Sir, would 2/ou have us ? The question is not what I would'havel or, what any man living Xvould have] The question is simply this : — In what state did the primitive Christians receive Baptism? — The answer must be — " naked." Now the Reviewer knows very well, that his prin- ciples demand the most scrupulous adherence to the original form of this " positive institution." He knows, that positive precepts admit of uo degrees; no supple- ments; no commutation ; it is the will of God, for the trial of our obedience; nor will he allow us to Booth. enquire why? or how? Compliance must be so, and Paed. Ex- jgo MORE; — AND NO LESS,- -AND NO OTHERWISE. What we call little things, trifling deviations, are the pins and sciews which hold the sacred tabernacle to- gether: take these away, the whole edifice falls. The same rash hand that makes 07ie alteration may make twenty; if in small fhings, why not iu greater? till, at leiij^th, the foundation is destroyed: Christianity is superseded: Suj)erstition takes its place; and all is ideath, desolation, and darkness." am. Vol. I passim. ( 9 ) Tliis conclusion the Reviewer foresaw. " The primi- tive Christians baptized naked; we baptize cloth- ed." But, whence was derived your authority for this' change? Do i/ou know what is proper, better tlian the institutor of the rite? Do i/ou undertake to correct the institutions of tiie Divine Saviour? — to improve them? to qualify them? You talk oi decency, did not HE know what was decent? — oi modesty, oi decant ml O, ho! you understand these things better than Jesus Christ! But, my friends, if you plead decency, mo- desty, decorum, as valid arguments for the change you have adopted, with what grace do you deny to others the right to plead decency, modesty, and de- corum? How happens it, that these terms are com- manding in your mouths, but horrible in the mouths of others? I mean not to deny the propriety of your practice — I repeat this — I do not deny the propriety of consulting modesty and decorum: l>ut I expressly deny your right to practise one thing while you profess anotlier: I deny your right to censure your brethren, who profess less than you do, for deviating from the. primitive practice less than you do, and on less con- trovertible principles. Nor does the evidence of baptizing naked rest on these pictures ; for Dr. Wall, who had examined the sub- ject extensively, says, in so many words, " it was, for |f''*- '^"Pt- certain, the most usual and ordinary way by which the p°29-^ antient Christians did receive their baptism." This he supports by instances, in various places : and he cen- sures those who alledged against the Anabaptists, us a fault, the practice of hdyttizing naked. Moreover, the earliest rite called baptism, that we know oi", is clear on this article. The person who was defiled by the dead, was to wash himself thoroughly — to bathe himself in water — anfl the sprinkling of the xjx.'ji-g^. ashes (called hapiism, by the Apostle) was effectual to the purification of the tent, if the water touched the tent;^of the furniture in the tent, — the drapery, &c. if it touched that furniture, that drapery ; —and it also sanctified to the purifying of the flesh: it therefore was received by the flesh ; and the party receiving it ■mis naked; whether absolutely, or relatively, is no matter. For, if the water purified only where it fell, — vvill the Baptists allow, that a few drops falling on ( 10 ) the face — all the rest of the person being clothed — tha vliole man was sanctified? — That were to support tho odious practice of infant sprinkling! Nor is this all : for the N. T. clearly mentions as a part of Baptism, the putting away of the filth of 1 Peter. lit. the FLESH; — church members are said to have had 21- " their bodies washed with pure water." — Is there a Jleb.x. 22. gjpgig Baptist living whese " body was washed with pure water," at his baplismi — His clothes might be: — granted; but, his body? No. When did any one ** put away the filih of the flesh" at this ordinance, as administered by English Baptists? None living at this day : whateA'er some fanatics might do more than a century ago. Here, I say again, do not mistake me: the error lies in the profession; not iu the practice: You say, and do not. There is also another view of this article: inasmuch as this washing denoted, metaphorically, a funereal pre^ paration, it preserved a commemoration of the state of death in which the body of Jesus lay, for a time: but how can a dead bo jet ^our peace come upon them, Luke x. 5, 6. In*o whatever honsehold ye cuter iirst say, " Peace be to this JaiiiUj/, and in the same house/»oW remain." I will not trouble you, or your readers, with more passages, unless you desire it; — when tliere are many equally clear and conclusive with the above, both from the New Testament and the Ixx. — which may be pro- duced. Meanwhile, I beg your readers to observe, that the passages placed in Class I. shew that the Tem- ple at Jerusalem is oiKoc or the house of God. Class 11. Contains such passages as from circumstances related with, or essential to them, shew that otxo? denotes a building, and not persons. In the third, I have pre- sented omoq used to express the families of two persons who had no children. In Class IV. the passages contain o»x»a and o»>co? in different evangelists, and in the same, used as con- vertible terms: the family residing in the house, with- out any distinction of children from domestics; so that, after all, the houseAo/rf of Stephanas, who had " ad- dicted themselves unto the ministry of the saints," 1 Cor. xi. 15. may be the very sanie/flm?7j/ whom Paul baptized, 1 Cor. i. 16. I do earnestly request, if I have iiiude any blunders, in this business, you would correct it in the Magazine; for reasons of some consequence to myself, and the cause of truth ; and, with salutations to all your omoc, in my sense, not in that of the Reviewer in your Magazine, i. e. not excepting those who do not live with you, nor yourself, I am, dear sir, your's sincerely, Charles Stuart, P. S. If on any account you do not incline to insert this iu the E. M. I beg the favour of you to send it to the llev. Mr. Ivimey, Harpur-street, for the Baptist MasraJne" The only rational attempt that has been made to meet arguments adduced in the previous Letters to the Deacon, is the following paper. The young gentleman who wrote it, has taken the right way to attain truth, by examining scripture : I honour his zeal, and would cougratulate his talents: but truth compels me to meet his observations with an unreserved, and unremitted $eries of contraUictioDs. ( 1^ ) ON THE MEANING OF THE WORDS OIK02 AND OIK.IA. To the Editors of the Baptist Magazine. I BELIEVE a wisii has been vefy generally felt, among your readers, that controversial papers, on the subject of baptism, might, for some considerable time at least, be excluded from the magazine; not, I apprehend, from a suspicion of the weakness of their cause, but from a desire to avoid, or allay, that bitterness of spirit, which such papers do commonly occasion or increase. It appears, however, tiuit the time for which we had longed, and on the attainment of which we had begun to congratulate ourselves, is already expired. Another pamphlet,* in support of infant baptism, has made its appearance, and has been hailed, by one reviewer,! with joy approaching to triumph. I hope, for the sake of truth, of fair argument, and good breeding, it will not be long ere your pages exhibil: a just character of this assuming and boasted performance. In the mean time, I trust, I shall not be thought to infringe on the province of the reviewer, if I enter on the investigation of one of the arguments it adduces in favour of infant baptism. I am induced to do so, more especially, because it must be confessed, that the argument is new, and has a very plausible bearing on the subject. The argument to which I allude, in substance is this: — The words oixo? and otxta, by our translators rendered indifferently hozise or household, have distinct significa- tions. The import of the term oJy.ia, includes all the inhabitants of a house; but scripture alw^ays employs the term oixo?, to denote kindred in the nearest possible degree; and, therefore, emphatically, children; while it uniformly, and necessarily, excludes servants. Hence it is inferred, that the apostles, who so frequently baptized the collection of persons, called an oixo?, but never speak of baptizing an oiJt»«, must have baptized infant children.^: I believe this statement is correct and adequate; but, without attending, at present, to the justice of the inference, let us try, by the scriptural use of the terms ckxo? and oixta, the validity of the distinction ; and, in order to secure impartiality, let us judge of the obvious * Facts and Evidences on the Subject of Baptism : by the Editor of Calmet'a Dictionary. t Evangelical Magazine for September and October. $ Facts and Evidences, letter II. p. 24-26. Letter III. pp. 3-7. c ( 18 ) tnoaning of a few passages, before we ktiow which of the terms is employed. *' lato whatever hoiise ye enter," said our Lord to his di^^ciples, " first say. Peace be to this house." Now, on whom are we to suppose that the disciples were to invoke this blessing? On any one part of the inhabitants, exclusive, or even irrespective, of the other? — Surely, not. Their mission had equal respect to all the inhabitants of every house they entered,. To the blessings they had to propofe, all were equally welcome ; and they were bound to use equal eadeavours with all, to procure their acceptance. Does it not appear, therefore, that the word here rendered house, whatever it may be, refers to all the inhabitants, with- out ajny distinction between kindred and servants, and that it cannot, with any justice, be restricted to the former? But the wprd here used is oUo^, which the editor of Calmet's Dictionary asserts, uniformli/ denotes kin- dred only. Let us take an.olher example. — In Acts, vii. 10, we are informed, that Pharaoh made Joseph " governor over Egypt, and over all his house." By which, I sup- pose, we are to understand, that the king gave Joseph (not a specific control over his own children and rela- tives, merely and exclusively, if at all, but) an authority over the royal domestic establishment, superior to that of any other officer. Now, the term here employed is oixo? — tlie very term which the editor of Calmet's Dictionary assures us, can sig4iify nothing hut kindred onUf. When tJie Philippian jailor inquired, " What must I do to be saved?'' the apostles answered, " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy Itouse." To whom does the word house here refer? To the jailor and his children, his relations, onli/? Did then the assertion, that those who believe shall be saved, refer to his kindred only? Would not his servants be saved also by faith? And, in proclaiming this general and all-important truth, can we believe the apostles employed a term, which necessarily ex- cluded some of those whom, in all probal)ility, they tlicn addressed? I can see but one ground, on which the word here used can be restricted to kindred; it is on the supposition, that the faith of one person ensure* ( 19 ) the salvation of bis relatives. But, on tliis ground, I presume that pious psedobaptists would not he sup- posed lo stand. — Now, the word used in this passa!;i!e is oiV.of ; and, notwitiistandino; the dictuni of th > cditoi' of Calmet's Dictionary, it appears to me to extend to air the inhabitants of J he jailor's hou^e. But, perhaps, additional M^^ht may be Ihrowil on the subject, by examining some of the parallel passages ia the dift'erenl evangelists. In Matt. X. 13, it is said, " If the house be worthy, let your poace come upon it; but, if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you." To this passage, I presume, Luke, x. 5, is parallel. " Info whatsoever house ye enter, first say. Peace be to this house. And if tlie son of peace be tliere, your peace shall rest up<»;i it; if not, it shall turn to you again.'* In these passages, Matthew has used the tertn ^Ima.^ and Lnhe oiy.o?; but I cannot conceive any possibility of doubt, whetiier the same persons are referred to in both. It cannot, surely, be supposed, that our Lord's instructions to his disciples, as recorded by one evan- gelist, refer to all the inhabitants of the houses into which they might enter, and, as preserved by another, only to a part of them ; and, if this be not maintained, then the two words are used interchangeably ; and are, of necessity, in spite of the editor of Calmet's Diction- ary, co-extensive in their import. Another instance occurs in Matt. xii. 25. " Every kingdom divided against itself, is brought to desolation; and every city, or house, divided against itself, shall not stand." The parallel is found in Luke, xi. 17. " Every kingdom divided against itself, is brought to desolartion* and a house divided against a house, falleth." It is true, that the expression employed by Luke, *' a house against a house," differs from that employed by Matthew, " a houi.e against itself." But none, 1 appre^ hend, will doubt, whether the sentiment conveyed be the same in both. Here, again, Matthew lias employed the Word oixia, and Luke c»>;o;; but it will not, surely, be supposed, that in recording this discourse of our Lord, Luke should have thought it necessary to use a ( 20 ) term, uhicli necessarily excludes a part of that collec- tion of persons, of wFiom Matthew speaks; and, if it be not, then non obstante the editor of Calmet's Dic- tionary, the signification of oixo?, is not more limited than that of otxia. There are two passages, in which the apostle speaks of " the house of Stephanas." In 1 Cor. i. IG, he says, "I baptized the house of Stephanas;" and, in 1 Cor. xvi. 15, he says, " I beseech you, brethren, know the house of Stephanas." — Can any question be raised. Whether he refers to the same persons in both? Does he not, in the latter, plainly commend, to the aftec- tionate regard of the church, those whom, in the former, he tells us he baptized? In the former, the apostle uses the term oixo?, and, in latter, oiy.»a. Now, admitting, for a moment, the distinction between these words, let us see what will follow. Paul baptized the children (ojxo;) of Stephanas; but, by his recommending the household (oixi«) to the esteem of the church, it appears, that the servants also were baptized ; and, as Paul says nothing of baptizing them, it is fair to conclude, that they were baptized at a subsequent period. But the apostle commends them all (oinia) to the church, and calls them all " the first-fruits of Achaia;" which, I suppose, he would nOt have done, had they not all been baptized as the AoMse (oixo?), was on his first journey, and at the same time. Hence, I think, it is evident, that he employs tlie two words interchangeably; and, if so, notwithstanding the support of the editor of Cal- met's Dictionary, the distinction falls to the ground. I trust, that your readers will receive, with candid attention, these plain observations, from one w ho is not much accustomed to critical research ; but one, who is happy to know enough of Greek, to consult his New Testament, and to try for himself, by that plain and all-sutficient test, the validity of an argument, though it has been discovered by the editor of Calmet's Diction- ary, and, in support of it, he " defies the utmost severity of criticism!" Trophimus." This letter deserves attention. Trophimus com- mences with allusions to certain quondam proposals in the B. M. to drop controversy : I recollect some- (■ 21 ) thing: of the kind; but it was instantly contradicted in practice by the admission of J. R/s ]>aper " on Households," — a well-known controverted subject ; and, most decidedly, in Mr. Fuller's very inconsiderate, and unqualitied Challenge: an article not called for, but absolutely volunteered ex mero motu. Further, Tro- phimus describes one of the arguments used by the E. C. as " new ;" no, it is not 7tew; — as a " discovery •" the E. C. claims none: — as " very plausible;" no, neither is it very plausible: — it is either demonstrative, or it is NULL. In our enquiries after Truth, it is of great moment to establish the rules which are to guide us; had these been present to the mind of Trophimus, as the diligent disciple of a worthy and learned tutor, and had he tried his paper by the first rule, only, he would not have ventured it. As to Dr. Stuart, it gives me pain to be obliged to wish that he had read the book, Avhich his paper purports to answer. By the following Rules let all attempts to elucidate Scripture be guided. The first rule is extremely well expressed by Dr. Ryland : it has been my guiding star for many years; and not less while investigating the word Baptism; which in various places it has restored from a perverted, to a strict and proper meaning: but, it is perfectly ajiplicable to other words, also, — " every wokd SHOULD BE TAKEN IN ITS PRIMARY, OBVIOUS, AND ORDINARY MEANING, UNLESS THERE BE SOMETHING IN THE CONNEXION, OR IN THE NA- TURE OF THINGS, WHICH REQUIRE IT TO BETAKEN OTHERWISE." I merely ask Trophimus, what there is in the connexion, or in the nature of things, which prevents the term house in the texts he has adduced from being taken in its primary, obvious, and ordinary rneaning, for a dwelling-Aoi/sc.^ The second rule is: Whenever by the connexion of a term, or BY the nature of THINGS, WE ARE OBLIGED TO DEPART FROM THE PRIMARY, OBVIOUS, AND OJIDINARY, MEANING OF A WORD, VIH. SHOULD c 3 ( 23 ) DEPART AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE FROM THAT MEANING, AND EVEN WITH RELUCTANCE. The iietessily of this rule is evident, also, on the word Baptism: for, thoujjh to the English reader it imports purijlcutioiiy yet the Greek scholar knows tliat it is metaphorieally taken to denote corruption. Thirdly: Whatever is EXPRESSED in scripture is CONCLUSIVE argument: whatever is not EXPRESSED, IS not CONCLUSIVE. The Public will give me credit for the extreme reluc- tance with which I enter on a philological disquisition : the gross errors already stated, plead my apology: they MUST of necessity, be corrected. I thought, I had done enough to prevent them: but, it has not proved so. That I was perfectly aware of the proper sense of the term house, — in which sense the texts adduced by my antagonists ought to be taken, — let the following passages witness, Lettcrll. " The English term, house, means a building, or to Deacon residence: ont-honses, are buildings somewhat reinoved P" from the family : usually inhabited by inferior persons, servants, assistants, &c." — •' The term house, in the , — P-25. sense of a building, can have no connection with the subject of baptism of persons." j^etter III. " You have already seen, that the term house in the to Deacon sense of FAMILY, is metaphorical: and is derived from p. 3. 4. ^Y^e terra house in the original sense of n buildrng. — 1 say, a I5UILDIng; — not a tent; but a fixed, perma- nent, and lasting residence. Now, as we are able at all times to recur to the proper use of this term, we are equally able to correct any mistake that may occur in the metaphorical use of it: and since we find the term used metaphorically in several languages, we may be sure, that there is such a correspondence and similarity between the original object, and the significative appli- cation of the term, that with a little prudence and pa- tience oi^r enquiries into its real meaning, cannot fail of satisfactory success, Give me leave, therefore, to set before you the plan of a house, as such buildings are f/2 HOUSE. OJKOS. o FAMILY. BOOit. O ENTRANCE, or GATE. The first remark on this figure is, the separation of the out-houses f.«»m the principal dwelling. It is evi'- dent that, correctly spealiing, the house cannot be said to include the grounds and out-houses: the house might be built tip, or pulled down, enlarged, or diminished, without affecting the out-houses, in the least. But, the out-houses may be said, without any force on lan- guage, to include the house: — and certainly, the whole may be expressed by one comprehensive term — estab- lishment — premises — residence — place — buildings, &c. We have oHly to suppose that the house is built of stones; or permanent materials in combihation ; (not so the out-houses) to complete the conception, suffi- ciently for our purpose. Suctj is the proper and real aipplication of the term house." For what purpose, were these repeated cautions, if riot to prevent the acceptation of the term house, in a wrong c 4 ( 24 ) 0IK02 FcCiUS. xxi.x. ^8. sense, in reference to baptism? As they have proved insufficient; I must entreat the reader's patience, while the pi-oper meaning of these terms o/A:o5 and oilda, under-^ goes examination, and while we ascertain its bearing on the main subject. The first passage recommended to consideration is this:— " The first indispensables for human life are — water, and bread, and a wrapper for the body, and — oikos — a HUT, to conceal the shame of the party. Better is the life of a poor man under the shelter of a shed, or— log- house, than delicate fare at another man's. Be it little or much, hold thee contented : and thou shalt not hear reproach cast on thy — oikia — residence. It is a misera- ble life to go from oikia to oikia — from residence to residence : and where thou dost not own even a hovel, thou shalt not open thy mouth. Thou mayest receive food; thou mayest receive drink; bestowed with an ill grace; and bitter words upon it. "Come house/^m, help spread the table : and hand me up the dish, that I may eat, — Go away, house/css, from before a man of fashion; my oikia — whole establishment —all my lodg- ing room — is engaged: a brother (grandee) is coming to enjoy my hospitality." Tliese things are grievous to a man of understanding; the taunts of the — oikia — residence — and the upbraiding of him who has lent you" a lodging. It is evinr. the structure cannot be too slight, that is marked by ^"'^(^j"* the termoj^o*: It signities a bird's nest;* — "it is so used in the " Geoponics," as edited by Niclas, more than once, and domns is so used by Lucretius at the opening of the tirst book: " Frondiferasque domos avium, camposque virentes." This will remind the reader of the Psahnist's expression, 'Ps:"'- " the sparrow hath found a house" — and again, " As for '^^^.'^7^ the stork, the fir-trees are her house:" i. e. her roosting place. It is impossible to reduce the import of the term oikos, properly taken, lower; but we shall see the distinction yet more strongly, as we proceed in our investigation of oikia. In further proof that o?A"j« implies spacious premises, OIKJA . consult the simile, 2 Mace. ii. 29. " For, as the architect of a new oikia — extensive residence, (say, a gentleman's seat) — must take care of the tvhole structure, in all its various parts. — So, to stand on every point, and to go over things at large, and to be curious in particulars, belongeth to the (Archigetes,) the first author of the story:" — not to those who abridge it An oikia then, resembles a history at large, includ- ing all particulars; and treating on every point speci- fically. The same extensive import of oikia, is satisfactorily Mutt.ii.ii. expressed in the history of the Magi, who visited the Babe at Bethlehem. Three was no room in the inn, says the evangelist: his mother therefore retired to the stable:—^'' And the wise men came into the oikia — * Nor is this idea uncommon in reference to persons in otlier Ianj;uag:es beside the famous oikiscos of Demosthenes, in Greek : there is a pretty r.iitiqae huiso relievo lepresentiug a group of children, in a bird's nest, looking; out for their parents; apd tlie Welsh liave a popular ])oem by Jolo Goch, bard of Owen Glcudwr, who passes the following encomium on his lady; His wife, the best of wives ! Eminent woman! of a Kniohtl^ family: Honourable, benelicent, noble, Her children come in pairs; A beautiful nest of children! ( M > prtinjses — -out-hoMSts, siubh, &c. Avhere thef ydiing chiW was, and found him and his parents." — It is de- monstrative that this oikia cannot possibly denote the dwelling-house; it tawsf denote out-houses. Whoever is acquainted with a Tanner's business, Iknows, that it requires considerable space, and various Actjx.10. and large out-buildings: So the oilcia of Simon tl)© tanner, of Joppa, — his establishment — was by the sea- side : — and the men who wore sent to Peter enquired AetsxLlt. for the establishment— oiVr/fl' — of Simon: — and stood before the gate — not the door of the dwelling-house; ActsxLir. but the gate of the Tanner's yard." The premises therefore included the dwelling-house, on the top of which, Peter Lad his vision, and the oiSces, yard, &c. around it. This is also strikingly apparent, to the slightest at- Ac»»xil.ll tention, in the history of Peter's deliverance. Having ''^* considered — he came to the oikia — premises, of Mary the mother of John, where many were gathered to- gether, praying: And Peter knocked at the door of the gate — not the door of the dwelling-house, but of the outer gate, — and a damsel named Ilhoda, went out to listen — and when she knew Peter's voice — she opened iK)t the gale for joy, but, running in . It seems then, that Mary's dwelling-house, standing across a court yard, somewhat removed from the street, pre-, served that privacy which the case required ; as pas- sengers could not hear the devotions, offered: — the outer gate of the court yard, had a siaaller door; and the whole was strongly fastened : RliofJa ran across the court yard to the outer gate ; where she knew Peter's voice; and immediately ran acro$s the court yard back Qgain. "Now, if the reader Avill turn to the plan given, he will perceive, in an instant, how this might be, with the- court yard, or interval supposed between the house and the outer gate. The passages illustrate the figure, no less, than the figure illustrates the passages. If the out-houses, (and court yard) include the housty it is clear that they arc distinct erections: they are divisible ; they may be separated. Let us further cxr amine this: ( 27 ) That the idea of divisibiliti/ is attached to this term in the N. T. is evident from the language of the apostle, ** in a great house — not oikos — as our translation niiglit sTSiu. uSQ,. lead us to suppose — but oikia, there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour and some to dishonour." The whok of this passage imports divisibilify. So, says our Lord, "In my Father's house — not Jolmxiv. ? oikos, but oikia — are many mansions." Many mansions imply divisibility, and, together wiih tiiis, premises extensive, spacious, wide, large, broad, infinitely be-" yond the feeble comprehension of mortal man. It is well known, that the Evangelists' frequently express the same fact in different terms, and denote the same identical object by different appellations, yet in the case of the Paralytic, Matthew ix. 6. Mark ii. 11. and Luke v. 24. aIl three say, " take up tliy bed, and go to thine house — oikos. The Pharisees are charged with *' devouring widows' houses," Matt, xxiii. 14. Mark xii. 40. Luke xx. 47. — ALL read oi/via; woi oikos. So in the passages subsequently adduced,^ though there be a dozen variations among the evangelists, in the phrase- ology forbidding a man to regard the property in hi& oikia, yet not one of the sacred writers substitutes oikos for oikia. And further; in the course of a long history, comprising no less than sLxty-six verses, in which we have the words over and over again, and from the mouths of difl'orent speakers, not one stumbles on this interchange of oikos and oikia, — but every speaker pre- serves the distinction. I allude to the history of Cor- Act^x. xi, H«lius, The dwelling of Cornelius is called his oikos, by the servants of Cornelius, verse 28, — by Cornelius himself, verse 30, — and by Peter, twice in the following chapter, verses 12, 13, On the contrary, the dwelling of Simon is called oikia, chap. x. ver. 6. by the ange4; ver. 17. by the evangelist ; ver. 32, by Cornelius; and ^gain, chap. xi. ver. 11. by Peter. Now, how is it tliat no interchange occurs here, if the words be intercliauge- able] The fact is, St. Luke was a good Greek writer, and w^s well aware of the difference. With all these distinctions, and diametrical opposi- tions, staring me bi the face, am I to be persuaded that these terms are interchangeable, in their proper accep- ( 2« ) tation? What! is a hut interchan<^eable with a grear house? Is the same term that signifies the fragile ma- terials and small dimensions of a bird's nest inter- changeable with that which denotes the heavenly seat of Almighty power and glory ! Is the careful distinctiou preserved by the evangelists, the merely casual result of accident? Those may believe these iuconsistenciea who can. But, if I could believe these inconsistencies, it still remains to be observed, — and the observation is decisive — that one of these terms, oikos, is a masculine noun, while vikiais a/emhiine noun. Pray, how long have nouns masculine and feminine been sjO freely in- terchangeable, in Greek? Are prince, princess ;—jeu\ Jewess; — tiger, tigress, Sfc. interchangeable, in English! That they denote the same genus and species, is cer- tain; -but, as terms in language, they arc not inter- changeable. Neither can a part be the same as ike whole, or be in- terchangeable with it; nov;-, that oikos really is pmt of oikia, was long ago observed by a very competent Grecian; and deprives the remark of all claim to "novelty," or " discovery." Such is the testimony of Hesychius; and of Biel, repeating him, Hestchius. eiKo?. oXiy)) oiKia. oikos, a small oikia. Odyssey, *• 16. xiji /^f^o? T5 Tiii cixta;. also a Certain part of the oikia, II. Z. 490. Od. A. 356. N. B. Penelope was really within the building wheri she was commanded to go into the oikos, which is de-. scribed as an upper and retired apartment. x«i Ta i* T>) oiy.ko.. and the substance, or property, * within the oikia. Od. B. 48- On this passage a learned friend observes, — " I have a doubt whether the reference in this last case sanctions the interpretation; the (Sioto* J'aTro wa/x7ra» o>.iffcrii, seems to express the property within the oikia, and the oikos appears as if it ought to be taken in the sense of family. For, by ruining the substance, they would re- duce and ruin the name, the family, as we should say. ( 29 ) ftlthotign at present that family might consist only of Teleniachus." Perhaps it is to our purpose, on this occasion, to notice, that in the Evangelists, the property of a householder, is described as deposited in the oikia; for, the person who is said to be on his house-top. is directed not to go down to take any thing out of his oikia, Matt. xxiv. 17. or, as Mark expresses it, xiii. 15. " Let him not go down into his oikia; neither let him enter therein — which imphes some distance to be passed over; and marks a strong distinction; for, whoever was on his house-top, was already in his oikos; therefore he could need no caution agaiust " entering therein." Luke, xvii. 31. speaks of " his stuff — his property — • in the oikia," which is strictly and remarkably con- formable to this passage in Homen BlEL. — " 01^.0?. domus, tentorium, templum, con- Thesnur, clave, farailia. Gen. ix. 21. xxiv. 67. Num. ix. 15. '" ^^'^' Deut. V. 30. Ez. xxxii. 14. 1 Chron. xxix. 19. Gen. vii. 1. 2 Kings iii. 1, 6, 8, 9. et confer. Luke i. 27. et Pfochenium de Styk N. T. § 120. 2 Kings xxxiii. 8, 13.— Q'Ja Jilii, 1 Chron. ii. 10. Jer. xvi. 14. ' Amos iii. 1. Zeph. i. 9. cubiculum. conclave. Jer. XXXV. 4. Jer. xxxvi. 10, 12, 20, 21. et confer LuD. DE DIEU ad. Act 1. 13. Sic et Josepho, de Bell. Jud. vi. 6. conclavia circa templum structa vocantur 0SX.01. Eodem sensu vox legitur in illo Poetae, Odyss. A. v. 353. Sed abi in conclave, et tuarum rerum curam habes. Quo respiciens Hesychius, oiKon interpretatur juspoj tj T13S otMa(; partem quandam domus." i, e. " Oikos. house, tent, temple, parlour, family, inner chamber. The co?nacula, or retiring rooms, built a- round the temple, were called oikoi. In the same sense the word is employed in the Odyssey. Book i. 358. — " But go into your parlour, and mind your own business. ■ On which authority, Hesychius interprets oikos, a certain jDflrf of a house." ( 30 ) The references to sons, Jilii, will not escape the leader. The followins^ remarks, are by the learned friend already mentioned: — "The custom among the middle classes of callinsj a part of the building inhabited by the residents, " the house," 1 hvive observed to be common in Yorkshire, as well as in Lincolnshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, ai>d the northern coun- ties. Mrs. , says, it is also prevalent b2. 3, 4, h,) that the gofls had a great hall, oufj.01. Aiof, in which they met to hold councils, to dine, and \o sup: but, after supper, they retired ejSair or;!oi^s fictdTcc, ad suam quisqve donium, eaeh to his own oikos, his division of the common palace; for Olympus was common to all the gods: and there can be no doubt, but what in this. Homer took his desciHption from a well-known custom of his time. The Labyrinth of Egypt, Herod, lib. i. cap. 148, is an instance, in point. The same idea of a separate apartment, and ap- parently a retired one, we find conveyed in later ages by this word: for Eusebius informs us, that the council Eiiseb. of bishops, at Nice, was held in a large WAiAt-oikos — VitaConst. of the Royal residence- -tw fAso-aiTarw o'iy.ui Bucri}.tti>». 10 Vales. ^^^'"^ ''*^ expresses in another place, by " the great Hall J). 331. in the palace" — aMv fjjyirov \v ro7^ ^«a»X£»oti:, — or, as he calls it, elsewhere, oizo? fuy.rrpjo? — an oratory, or place of prayer: — not a temple, not a separate building — but, a chapel, an apartment in the Palace itself, destined to sacred service: certainly, not accessible to all the world; but, as becomes a place of prayer, at least, retired from the noise and bustle of the palace. ( 31 ) If, tbeti, aihos be a small oihtii,-^'i( aikos be a PART, or DIVISION, in an vikia,— ii' it be an uppev part, an elevation, while the oikia cxleuds in brmdi/u how ciiiii those nouns he inteichanoieable] And if small and ianj;e, a pi/?-^ and the. ivhoh, height and breadth^ be not iuterchani;eai>le, — thcMj the argumeat of my of>- ponents falls to tlie fjround;— and with it^ I take the li- berty of saying — with it tails the whole of their systeiU* After this lona; diatribe on the proper meauing of the terms, and the distinction l»etween them, it is unneces- sary to say nuu-h on \h\xiJiguratiDC acceptation of them which belongs inunediately to our sultject, iu reference Ruklt* to living persons,— to families, I shall, therefore* merely recall to the readei-'s recollection, our second rule of iuterjHctution, which imports, that we k«cp as nearly as posnbie to the pioptr meaning of a wor'imftiil. The Latin writers use the word domus — house, in H';''^-^"' the same sense. And there is somewhat of the same distinction between domus, — us, domus — ?', as between oikos and oikia: — [The modem Italian preserves it, strongly; for casa is a house, but casone, with an ad- ditional syllable, forming the termination, is a great large house,] So, speaking of families, Juvenal sayg, Evcrfere DOMOS tolas optantibus ipsis Di Jaciles Sat. x. 7. " " The too easily acceding gods overturn houses — di'sctnt of families, — by granting the wishes of their principals, in behalf of their children." He speaks also of a house— familj/ — descent, disgraced by adultery : ^ Dedecus ille domus sciet ultimvs. ^ lb. 342. On the whole, it is evident that children are the primary objects of — oikos — house ; but, I have already said, that oikos includes connecti(uis by marriage; the sou-in-lavv, and the daughter-in-law, with their children; the hmWy-descerit . I know but one text where it ex- presses fdmily-ascefit : yet nothing can be clearer than the consanguinity marked by the term, even in that text. I.iiin.v.'t. «' If any widow have children or grand-children (which is the meaning <>f the word rendered nepheics, in Eng. To> i,ho» Tr.) let them learn to shew piety in their own family — okr.'.v. and to requite their parents." Exactly coincident with ( 33 5 tills, (for which reason I quote it,) is the expression of Pindar— " the house Ihricc victor in the Olvmnicrk, -, games : meanuig, tlie familij of Xenophon, to whom o,^,^ the ode is addressed: /. e. — 1. Xenophon, — 2. his father ^.flKo^t Thessalus, and — 3. his grandfather Pitcodorus. Is it ., possible, that knowing this, the E. C. intended to re- i'/r/V^ the term c/Aos to children? to cliildrcn "only and always"? and, if so, what could he mean by in- troducing a quotation from Aristotle, importing that» " Oikos is a society connected together according to the course of nature, for long continuance"? I know, that this version has been the subject of dogmatical reprobation; and that it has been accused of strai?iing the passage, to serve a turn. Would those who have played the critic on this occasion have had it rendered " for every day," as some have done? A society to be tiianged five or six times in a week! how monstrous! — Any sense impoverishes the seiitirnent, unless bv "every ciay" all the dai/s of life are intended; as Du Val understood it. And it was so understood long before Du Val; for Cicero has very elegantly distri- buted the argument of Aristotle, where he describes the progress of a/a?wj7/y.* The first social connection, heV^P^-^ says, is the conjugal: then that of children: these '''^' ' *^' '^'^' constitute a domus — house (or family) common to all. This is the commencen)ent of a city, as it were, the plantation of young trees, — the succession-plot, of the common weal. Then follow the union of brothers and their families; of sisters and their families: and when one house cannot contain their numbers, they form other houses, colonizing, as it were. After these fol- low relations by marriage they have the same family descent, the same family recollections, the same * family rites, aiid the same family sepulchre." This society, then, extends from the cradle to the * Nam cum sit hoc natuta commune aniruanlium, ut habeant lubidiuem pro- creandi, prima societas in ipso cofijogio est: proxima in liheris: deinde una domus, communia omnia. Id autem est principium urbis, et quasi seniiiiariuiu lei publicse. Sequuntur fratrum conjunctiones, post consobiinorura sobrinoium- quve: qui cum una domo jam capi non possint, in alias domes, tamquam in colonias, exeunt. Sequuntur connnbia et alKnitates : ex quibuS etiam plures propinqui. Qu-.e propagaiio, et suboles, orido est rernm publicarum. Sfpiovs oikos; aad, he employs it in such a manner as completely turns the scale. If, indeed, he had used Dikia in connection with genos — children, th.e weigiit of the insUince might have pji spoken: sHt; bcsougl.t us, — saying, if ye have judged ME faithful; — come into MY house: aixl SHE constrained us.'' No mention is niade of any one of her family, in conjunction witli her- self: — no allusion to any such occurs: She does not say, "Gentlemen, come into our house: we \\\\\ endca- Tour to make it as agreeable to you, as "^^E can." Nothing of this: neither is any persou of her family marked as attending to ihe discourses of Paul: — nor as resorting with her to this Proseucha, where Paul discoursed. In fact, we should never have known that she iiad a family, were they not incidentally mentioned, as ac- companying her in baptism': — " And ivhen die ivas bap- tised, ivilh her famili/." Insert her baptisnr, we find her faniHij: omit Acr baptism, she has no family, re- corded: the act of her baptism cannot be separated from that of her family. Now, if her family were of mature age, capable of attention to the word spoken, how is it, that thei/ are not nicntioned together with her, as aflending, since they are mentioned together with her as receiving baptism? How is it, that ihej/ having received baptism together with her, do not con- cur in her invitatiun of their spiritual fathers? Tlteir non-age, only, can explain this. — ^i^nd, this — that those who are not marked as having attended to the word, should nevertheless be marked as receiving baptism, has appeared to the Baptists themselves so unaccount- able, that they have taken different Avays to account for it: which after all they have not accomplished; for a clearer instance, to warrant the baptism of those (children) who have not attended to the word preached, there cannot be. In like manner they have taken different ways to characterize the brethren nientioned, in verse 40. " They were sows of Lydia," say some, — but Scripture says nothing of her having any sens: others, with almost equal wisdom, sav, these hri^thrm D 4 ( 40 ) Stennott, liooth, Ryland, &c. &c. Wfi'e *' her servants, employed in prepariug the purple Hye which she sold:" — "her house contaiued ouly brethren ([>robahiy men-servants) whom Paul com- forted." — " Probably men servants !" Probably the Great Mogul. — How slightly do some very good people read their Bibles! — The Scripture is plain enough, to proper attention. Any who can put two and two together, to make four, may, and indeed ?nust under- stand it. Acts xvi. Verse 10. We read in this chapter, verse 3, Paul would have Timothy " to go forth with him ;" — and no doubt but Timothy did go forth With him: — and thej/, i.e. Paul, Silas, and Timothy, went through the cities — thei/ came by Mysia — to Troas. And a vision appeared to Paul— and after he had seen the vision, WE [/Luke, the writer, being one] endeavoured to go into Macedonia — » WE came to Samothracia — to Philippi — " and we were in that city, certain days." " And on the Sabbaths, WE went out to the Proseucha — we sat down, and spake to the women — Lydia constrained us, to come to her house, and abide there." Now, who were this we, and this us, if not 1. Paul, 2. Silas, 3. Timothy, and 4. Luke? The whole company, being four, lodged a^ Lydia's. " And it came to pass, as we went to prayer — a damsel having a spirit of divination met us— and followed Paul and us — many days." Her masters caught Paul and Silas: — consequently, Timothy and Luke remained at Lvdia's. And when Paul and Silas were delivered from prison, they went to their abode at Lydia's, and there met " the brethren" Timothy and Luke, from whom they had been separated one night. LeUerll. Nothing can be clearer: and whatever may be said to Deacon, of the harshness of the language used in the former P" ^^" letters, it is impossible to abate a jot of it. I called it " blindness" not to see Timothy and Luke here : I called it ** wicked," seeing them, to suggest others, concerning whom Scripture is silent. Which is best entitled to reception, the " brethren" marked by the Evangelist, though modestly: — or the " probably" of a modern divine, who has overlooked the principal personages of the passage? In fact, Timothy and Luke ( 41 ) remained at Philippi, after Paul and Silas left that city; and to Luke, especially, may be attributed the foundation of the church there; for be staid iu it a long while. Paul and Silas went to Thessalonica — and were sent away, by ni2;ht, to Berea — and here we again find Timothy: but, Luke does not re-join the company, till the company returns to Philippi, chap. xx. ver. G. " And Avr sailed away from Philippi." — Therefore, Luke reniainod at Philippi all this interval, naturally continuing at Lydia's; therefore, he wmsf have known every thing concerning her family, as well as con- cerning the church, there: and this renders it the more remarkable, that if Lydia's family were grown up to mature years, the Evangelist, who so long lodged with them, should not drop a single hint about them. Luke, also, must have had personal and in- timate knowledge of the Jailor, and ALL his family: does he once leatl us to conclude, that any one of thenv was grown up to maturity? — not one. Inasmuch, then, as this rule directs me to accept as conclusive evi- dence whatever is expressed in Scripture, I believe that the family of Lydia was baptized, because it is so EXPRESSED, but that one ©f her servants was baptized, I do notbeheve, because it is NOT so expressed. , The same rule holds good respecting the /ami h/ of Stephanas: Scripture says, tliat family was baptized: I therefore believe that fact: Scripture says nothing about the baptism of his houseHOLD, I therefore do not believe it. But, / promise to believe it, whenever a passage of Scripture shall be produced, in which houseiiOLi)-- QiKi A, — is connected with Baptisjni. */ The following Letters tvere in preparation for the continuation of the correspondence with the bap- tist MAGAZINE, had the former Letters been ad- mitted : — that they were not finished is owing to the repulse experienced by the former, which have already been submitted to the reader. ( 42 ) LETTER III. To THE EDITOR OF THE BAPTIST MAGAZINE. [Sketch, or unfinished Draught.] If we are mistaken, we wish to be convinced of our error." As it is impossible to reduce the Greek word Bap~ tism to one signifitation, so it ought to be impossible to reduce it in translation to one English term, and to intend by that term, 07ie action only, in one form, and no more. But, if we use several terms, it is our boun- deu duty to ascertain the meaning of those terms, to wnderstaud them fully, and to state clearly their dis- tinctions and differences. Inasmuch as our language affords more than one term to express various circum- stances, or mode of the same action, it is but doing justice to our native tongue, and to ourselves, who use it, to endeavour to understand these terms correctly, let them occur where they may. I bare already shewn that dipping imports pre- cisely a partial plunging: — when a person dips into a book, we mean to infer, his slight acquaintance with its. contents : we see swallows dip into a pond, but we never see Jthem plunge; and to adel no more, it would be nonsense to call VV^histon's ingenious device of the " dipping needle," by the term *' phmging needle." The inference is undeniable, that \o plunge and to dip are not equivalent terms; — and the purpose of the pre- sent letter is, to point out distinctions at least equally strong between the terms plunging and overwhelming; by both of which your highly and justly valued friend Pr. R. has rendejed the original word Baptism. Over-whelm, is a compound term : when resolved into its component parts, we find it divide into ichelm" —and over: each of these demands attention, separeiag bored through, or," Ac. 7a. Diodorus Sicuius. — " T>i{ hnui ^v&ta-f)nan<;, in the ( 47 ) Text, "whose ship being sunk." In the Note, **f«- " w ;o-9£»c7>)5 being i/Mmerscrf, is the Coisliiiiau reading, ** which is sufficiently elegant. See PoUuius I. 51," lib. xi. §15. Vol. 1. 417. 86. Lucian represents Timon the mau-hater as say- ing, " if any one being carried away by a river should "' stretch fortli Ins hands to me for aid, I would push " him down w!ien sinkinn;, ^xTrnl^otroi, that he should *' never rise again." Vol. I. p. 13i>. OBSERVATIONS. Not one of these instaaccs is from Scripture : there- fore, Scripture never uses the term Baptism, in the sense of plunging ; for then Dr. R. would have dis- ocvered, and quoted it. As I never knew any body who denied that PLUNG- ING is one sense of the term Baptism, there is no need to add a word on tl.is divi^ou of tiie subject. BAPTISM, IN THE SENSE OF DIPPING, MEANING TIIE PARTIAL COVERING, OR IMMERSION OF THE Person, or Thing, in Water. 1. Exod. xii. 22. — ye shall dip a bunch of hyssep in the blood, &c. — Gr. ^»-^xyrsi; — dipping, ye shall strike it, &c. 2. Lev. iv. 6. — the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle it, &c. I3ct^n — y.oci nr^ocfuvn. 3. Lev. iv. 17. — the priest shall dip his finger, &c. 4. Lev. ix. 9. — he dipt his finger in the blood, &c. •5. Lev. xi. 32. — every vessel. Sec. it must be put into water, &C. ilq v^uf $a.(pi^crsrai. 6. Lev. xiv. G. — he siiall dip them, and the living bird, in the blood of the bird, &c. ^ 7. Lev. xiv. 16. — he shall dip his right finger in the oil, &c. 8. Lev. xiv. 51. — he shall dip the qedar, hyssop, scarlet, and the living bird, &c. ( 48 ) &. Num. xix, 18. — A clean person shall take hyssop, and dip {^a--\'ii.) in the water, and sprinkle (a very dil- fennt Avord, m-if^y^et.vn,) upon the tenl, &c. 10. Dent, xxxiii. 24.— Let Asher dip his foot in oil. 11. Josh. iii. 15. — the feet of the priests were dipped in the brim of tlic water. 12. Rulh ii. 14. — dip tijy morsel in the vinegar. 13. 1 Sam. xiv. 27. — Jonathan dipt the end of liiu rod in an honeycomb. 14. 2 Kings viii. 15. — Hazael dipt a cloth in watqr. 15. Job ix. 31. — yet thou shall plunge me in the ilitch. 16. Psa. Ixviii. 23. — thy foot may be d'ppcd in blood, the tongue of thy dogs," ^c. All these places clearly refer to partial innnersion, or dippih^i the passage in Job, not excepted: for tlie import of that passage is, not, " that a righteous person should be entirely plunged over head and ears, into mire and dirt;" — but, *' that his imperfections and failures would prove so many stains on his character: — like the detiled condition of a person who has i'allen into a ditch of shallow muddy water." 20. Luke xvi. 24. — that Lazarus may bapt (or dip) his linger. 21. John xiii. 26. — he to whom I hnpting the sop, &c. i. e. dipping, no doubt. 22. Rev. xix. 13. — clothed with a vesture hapted in blood, i. e. dipped in it. 23. Matt. xxvi. 23. } he that inbapts (i.e. dips) his 24. Mark xiv. 20. ^ hand with nie in a dish. 25. John xiii. 20. — and inbupting (or dipping) the sop. 26. Homer. — As Mhen a Smith, to harden an iron Iiatchet or pole-ax, ^xTnn dips it in cold water. — Odyssey, ix. line 31)2. 28. Lvcopliron.— The child |3*^]/ct shall plunge his sword into the viper's bowels. Cassandra, ver. 1121.'' No child can plunge — from end to cud — a swore* into a vii>er's bowels : the handle, at least, must be ex- cepted. A viper is but a slender creature, neither thick nor broad ; and cannot conUiu a sword. ( 4i) 29. Euripides. — Go, take the water-pot — a.nd0»-\^uy uip it in the sea. Hecuba, Act iii. ver. 609. 30. Theocritus. — Every morning my servant jSa-^/aj shall dip me a cup of honey. Idyllium v. ver. 126. 81. The boy let down a capacious pitcher, making haste /3«v}/at to dip it. Idyllium xiii. ver. 47." No servant would think of plunging, i. e. of sub- merging a cup in a honey-pot: — indeed, good honey does not allow of it. In like manner — who has not a thousand times, drawn water in a pitcher, without submerging, or plunging the whole of the vessel? 34. Dionysius Halicarnassensis. One plunging ^(t-^a.^ his spear between the other's ribs, who at the same instant pushed his into his enemy's belly. Antiq. Rom. lib. v. p. 278." It is completely impossible, that a spear of the shortest kind — fonrteen feet long, — or of any length, entitling it to the name of a spear, should be plunged, i. e. thrust from end to end — into any man's belly. Some spears were twenty-five feet in length. 35. 2 Kings v. 14. — Naaman dipped (or baptized) himself in Jordan seven times. 59. An old verse has often been quoted from Plu- tarch, — Aj-xo? ^aTTTi^ri, ^vvui os rot ov^ij/Ai; £r» — The bladder may be dipped, but never drowned, or it may be im- mersed, but it cannot be kept under water. 61. Basil, the Christian Father, speaks of " suffering *' with those that were immersed or plunged in the sea." 63. Polybius. " Such a storm suddenly arose, " through all the country, that the ships were baptized *' or immersed in the Tyber." 64. Polybius, III. c. 72. (See Elzevir's Livy, Book xxi.y— " The infantry crossed it with difficulty, bap- •* tiled or immersed up to their breasts." 66. Porphyry, speaking of Styx, the fabulous river of hell, says, " The person that has been a sinner, having " gone a little way into it, is plunged or immersed up *' to the head." ^uTrrt^iTo. /aexp* "'f*^''?* ?• 282. 66. Strabo uses, fA.txjf^ o/*faA9y ^ctim^oittvut. Im- merged up to the middk. E C * ) 157. ©fofabrlrt Si'ctilus.— *• Maity land aniflfials, caf- " lied awaj' b^ the river Nile, beinc immersed are de- " strbyed: others escape, fleeing to higher places." Ships ttiay bfe run \Eishore in a river, without being SUlik entirely under Avater. — But, 1 am astonished, that Dr. R. should ([Uote such passages as Nos. G4, Go, 66. in support of his notion, that plunging is the inherent and only sense of the word Baptism. Is a man in water up to his navel, plunged? So directly the con- trary, that riny eye-witness, of only common sense, would think h'lm partially immersed, and no more; for all the upper parts of his person ar* above the water, consequently he cannot he plunged. Immersed mj» to the Ircast — up to the head, afford the same remark. Had Porphyry said, " over the head"^-tlie passage had been to the Dr.'s purpose. 70. Strabo. — " But the Lakes near Agrigentum have •* indeed the taste of sea-water, but a diflerent nature, *' for it does not befal the things which cannot swim *' fo be immersed, (puTrrt^etr^ctt,) but they swim on the *' surface like wood." Geography y 1. ix. p. 431. 71. He speaks of a river, in another place, whose waters are so buoyant " that if an arrow be thrown in, *' j[/.oXXi? S«7rTi^£ 84. Life of Homer, ascribed to Dionysius HalicdrX nensis, " Homer speaks of the whole sword being s»' " immersed ((SaTrTJo-GsvTo?) in blood as to grow warm with *' it," Opuscula Mythological p. 297." 88. ^schylus. — " Immersing his two-edged snord *' in slaughters." Doubtless by plungi?}g it into their bodies, nr)t by holding it before a small puncture to be " sprinkled." The handle i^USt be excepted, in both thesB in- stances. BAPTISM IN THE SENSE OF OVERWHELMING, WEANING — THE WaTER, OR OVERWHELMING MATTER, BROUGHT ON THE PERSON. 39. Mark x. 38, 39. — Are ye able to be immersed ^ith the immersion wherewith I shall be overwhelmed! — and, With the immersion wherewith I shall be over- whelmed shall ye be immersed. 40. Luke xii. 50. I have a Baptism wherewith to be baptized, &c. which Dr. Campbell renders, " I have an immersion to undergo," &c. Read his note." Are ye able to sufter such sufferings as will be brought on me? 52. In the wars of the Jews, he says, " Many of tli« •' noble Jews, as though the city was on the point of *' being overwhelmed, ((SaTrrt^ofAe >-*)?,) swam away, as it " were, from the city. Vol. IL 1105." — overwhelmed by the miseries about to befall the city. 53. Again, speaking of the Heads of the RobbeH getting into Jerusalem, he says, " These very metfj " besides the seditions they made, baptized the city» ** (ElgaTTTJcrav mt irohif) i. e. overwhelmed it, plunged it £ 3 ( &2 ) " into ruin, or were the cause of it's utter destruction. Vol. II. 1169." They brought upon the city utter dcstructioa. 54. So, speaking of the sons of Herod, he says, " This, as the last storra, (iwi^awTKre*) epibaptized, or " overwhelmed, the young men, already weather- " beaten. Vol. II. 1024." 68. Plutarch uses thi« word figuratively, speaking of Otho's "being immersed or overwhelmed or stmk {^t- " ^a7rTi* hibtra Stpiuuius aixit dt bpectim. c. 14. uz ore T»? T i>>l95. ( 55 ) different from either of the origiiml tints. ThJa! is called, in medern language, " breaking of coioura,'' ^nd is.one of the grand arts of painters. The writer referred to, observes, that Marcus AHtOr niaus uses the word Eaplize, both in a good scuge, and in a bad sense. A mind imbued with justice, is improved, as dyed ivory acquires a mpre splendid polour: but, a mind that stains, poUutes, itself in its owa phantasies, or wandering imaginations, is (lis-' coloured, deteriorated by mixture, and is all the worsA for such baptism; it is no longer itself. And this, perhaps, elicits the origin of that seemingly st range and eriioneous version of the Lxx. hitherto found unac- countable. " Iniquity baptizes nie ; i. c. it terrifies me " so, that \ am beside myself." My mind is alienated — changed from what it was;— corrupted — by the force j,^-j^j,^^, of terror: — which is coincident with the sense of our 4^ English version. " Tearfulness — (rather, the. csi^qse qf f(i the same effect : now diophthora, diaphthareises, hitaphthora, call from the. sauje !9ot> express liie condition of a man— " ) they sprinkled them with it." Lib. iv. c. iv. § 6. p. 146." This quotation clearly shews the ditfer- ence between baptizing or dipping, and rhantizing or sprinkling." I am bound by truth to maintain the contrary. Does Josephus really say, " lhe> immerse these ashes into the water?" — Then, his order of the rite, contradicts the express directions of his master Moses, who orders, that they pour the water to the ashes: " they shall ♦'take of the ashes of the burnt heifer, — and running Xvirnt).xi.x, * water shall be put thereto, ia a ve««€l." l^n fact, i^- ( 5« ) then, the ashes were baptized, by the water pat to fhem. 91. But one passage is profiurerl from Origen, ou which more stress is laid than on all otiiprs, in which he speaks of the wood of Elijah s sacrifit-e as being haptized, though the wood was certainly not dipped iu water, but four barrels of water poured upon it three times over. Very true. But read the account in 1 Kings, xviii. 32 — 35. consider the object of the p>"ophet to prevent all possibility of collusion, and then s^y if Origen had written in English, might he not have used the word immerse with propriety, and w^hout rendering it's usual meaning ambiguous? Also, w^uld not any of our opponents think such a three-fold 8i6aking as bad as even a trine immersion]" Any child may detect this silly evasion: which is utterly unworthy a man of Dr. Ryland's acknowledged talents and character. The question is, " By what " ACTION were these faggots soaked?" — The Dr. an- swers, " the quantity of water was great." The infer- ence is left to the reader. Origen is speaking of John's baptism, and consi- dering him as the Elias wIk) was to come, he says, ** How came you to think that Elias, when he should " come, would baptize? who did not, in Aliab's time, *' baptize the wood upon the altar, but orders tlie " priests to do that : not only once, but, says he, *' Do it a second time, and they did it the second *' time. He therefore, who did not himself baptize, *' but assigned the work to others, &c." The coot- parison shews, that as water was poured on the wood, by order of Elijah, so John the Baptist poured water on the people who received his Baptism ; Elijah, indeed, ordered it to be done by others : whereas John poured the water himself. BAPTISM IN THE SENSE OP SPRINKLING, MEANING THE DESCENT, 01^ AFFC&ION OF A SMALL QUANTITY OF WATER, or, &c. OFTEN BY WAV OF RITUAL OBSERVANCE only. 17. Dan. iv. 33. ) Nebuchadne2zar K7«( with the dew 18. V. 21. 5 of heaven." ( 39 ) That the dew of heaven descended on Nebuchadijcz- aar, is as clear, as that it ever descended on any grass of any meadow underjjeavei*:— and who has not read ai ♦'dew-besprinkled grass?" Such is the prosress, o» action, of dew: as to the quantity of dow that then descended at Babylon, we can only say, that it is rwt ^^^^^,^ note remarkable, for if it were so, no doubt iMit 3ir. ^^^insof Rich would have noticed it; he mentions gardens and Babyi»n. cultivation, at Babylon; but says nothing of dews. i^ona-iow 38. Ercles. xxxiv. 25.— He that ivasheth himself from a dead body. (He was to bathe himself in water. See Num. xix. 19.) ^«'7rTK^o(xEvo? avo vi^^cv." Moses c;ives these directions ; «' He that toucheth the dead body of any man, he shall be unclean seven days. He shall purity himself with it (the ashes of the heifer) on the third dai/, And on the ^jeventh day : so shall he be clean; but it he purify not himself on the third dap, then on the seventh day he shall not be cjean. Whosoever toucheth the de'ad body of any man that is dead, and punheth not himself, (u. on the third day, and on the seventh di.y.) he detileth the tabernacle of the Lord ; and that soui shall be cut off from hrael, because tJie water oj separ^ ation was not sprinkled upon htm; he shall De unclean: His uncleanness is ybt upon him.- ••• And for an unclean person they shall take of the asheij of the burnt heifer of purification for sm, and running water shall be put thereto in a vessel: and a clean per- son shall take hyssop, and dip it in the >yatcr, and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all the vesseh, aiid upon the persons that were there, and upon hini that touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave. And the clean person shall sprinkle upon tlie rmclean on the third day, and on the seventh uay: and op the seventh day he (the unclean person; sha purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe hnaseli in water, and shall be clean at even. But the inan that shall be unclean, and shall not purity hunselt, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation; because he liath defiled the sanctuary of the Lwd ;--the WATER OF SEPARATION hutk not bccn sprinkled upon hira. HE IS UNCLEAN." >^othing can be clearer, than, that this service di« Tides into TWO parts; the first, pertormed by the un- ( 60 ) clean person, himself: he was to wash himself, and to bathe himself, thoroughly, in water: and secondly, a clean person, (it is not said priest, or Levite, but a clean person) — shall sprinkle on the unclean, the water of separation: and until the very moment that the water of separation is sprinkled upon him, he is UN- clean. He may wash himself times without number, in any imaginable profusion of water, all goes for no- thing: he is UNCLEAN till the ashes of the heifer sprinkle his Jlesh : the virtue of effectual purification resides in them only. Now, let us examine the con>- parison intended by this writer : *' A man who fasteth for his sins, and goeth again and doeth the same: — who will hear his prayer 1 or, ■what doth liis humbling profit himl So:— He who has been baptized from a dead body, and again toucheth it, of what use is his washing?" This word " washing" must mean his washing of himself: for nobody else washed him : the word bap- tism cannot mean this washing: for baptism \vas per- formed by another person — a clean person; not by Iiimself : it therefore is not the same action. Tlie words baptism and washing are obviously set in contradistinction, expressing the different parts of the rite. A man was not clean by washing himself: Moses takes special care to repeat three or four times over, that he is unclean, upon whom the sprinkling had not passed, on the third day, as well as on the seventh: And this is confirmed by the Apostle: he calls the jjg|j^j^^3 person unclean, who was not yet sprinkled by the ashes of the heifer. Now, the comparison employed by the writer of Ecclesiasticus demands, that the per- son be in some sense clean, how else could his re- newing the cause of his uncleanness renew his un- clean state? — How compare him to a relapsed penitent? It is obvious, that if the person who had been baptized on the third day, should on the fourth day again touch a dead body, he would not be clean on the seventh day, how scrupulously soever he might wash and bathe himself. And this is confirmed beyond denial by the language addressed to the Hebrews, who certainly understood ( 61 ) the rituals of their country. There were divers kinds of baptisms, says the Apostle; and a few lines, after- Heb. ix. lO. wards, he specifies two of these kinds — 1. baptism ^°' '^' by blood: — 2. baptism by water: of these he selects three rites: and what is beyond measure extraordi- nary on the Baptists' hypothesis, ALL THESE three RITES ARE SPRINKLINGS. I know no occasion on which the bloods of bulls and of goats were used together, as on the great day of Expiation : now, what were the directions for that day's service 1 " Aaron shall take of the blood of the Bullock, and SPRINKLE it ivith kisjingtr upon the mercy seat east- ward: and before the mercy seat shall he sprinkle of the blood ivith his Jinger seven times. " Then shall he kill the Goat of liie sin-ofFering, that \3 for the people, and bring his blood within tlie vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat." That the Apostle's allusion is to this service, is clear; for his theme is the Mosaic Tabernacle : he says, tiie priests went into the fiist (or outer) tabernacle daily — But into the second (apartment) went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people- • • a figure for the time then present, in which were of- fered gifts and sacrifices, meats and drinks, and divers kinds of baptisms ; 1. the blood of bulls, and 2. of goats, and 3. the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean. There is nothing in the Apostle's discourse to which it is possible to refer this blood of bulls and goats, except lo the great day of Expiation. There is no action to which these sprinklings of blood, called baptisms, can be referred, but to the sprinkiivgs by Aaron. Thus we see, that the writer of Ecclesiasticus is not singular in describing the action of sprinkling, under the term baptism. And now we are prepared to understand the true fefereptcc of the Apostle's words; — leaving, first pria- ( «2 ) ^{[>les • i • • let lis go on unto perfection; not laying fleb.vi.ii. again the foundation of the doctrine of baptisms, Nc. 45. (pluval) and of layincr on of hands." *' The doctiine oi Jewish baptisms," say some ; — but, mil- friends, the Baptists, would not chose that Jticish baptisms should become the foundation of Christian doctrine. " Tlie baptism by water, and that by the Holy "Ghost," say most; — but this cannot be: whdt doc- trine was connected witli the srift of the Holy Ghostl Was this GIFT imparted to all ? to women, ^c. — \V« do not even know in what it consisted: and, if it b« alluded to in this j)assa2e, at all, it is included in the subsequent term " laying on of hands," which cere- uiony always preceded it. But the baptisms concerninsj which doctrine was delivered to converts, were 1. the itf/shi7tv of the per- son, signifying, death unto sin; and 2. the pouring of water, signifying consecration unto a renewed life. These lay at the foundation of Christianity : these were first principles of the doctrine of Christ: these it was necessary to iearn, and to practise; but it was injuri- ous to rest satisfied with acquaintance with these. — Neither is it possible, unless the plural baptisms here mentioned coalesced into one rite, to vindicate the Eph. Iv. 5. accuracy of this apostle, who says elsewhere — " oac Lord, one Faith, ONE Baptism.'" Now, in what does the Baptism of Mr. Salt's Mussul- niaun Boy dift'er (essentially) from tiiis antient mode of Jewish Baptism? In the first place, the person ren- dered unclean by touching the dead body, was to wash himself, and to bathe himself, thoroughly in water: — So Mr. Salt's convert from Mahometisra was " washed ell over VERY cahefu lly in a large bason of water:" — In the second place, the rituci Baptism, or sprink- ling, was performed elsewhere, by a clean person, as a distinct action, yet part of the same rite; so Mr. Salt's boy was baptized from another font, in another placet —the action was distinct, though the rite was ONE. Thus we see how easily .Tohn the Baptist might baptize a thousand persons in succession, and why he required several streams, in which many might be bathing themselves, or others, at the same tiue^ Hioroughly; — to \v\\o\n, as they approached hihi, ht aftenvards administsred Baptism by pouring. Nor is there any difficulty in admitting, that thre« thousand persons might be added to the Church by Baptism in one day: since those who administered the ritual pourbig, certainly had no occasion to engage iii the previous ivashing. The interval marked by St. Luke between the im- mersion of the Eunuch and his baptism by Phillip, as noted in the first Letter to the Deacon, has been stumbled at by an eminent critic ; and I have been re- minded, that the Syriac and Arabic versions are silent on this particular ; — Granting this, I answer, that St. Luke certainly " knew the customary separation he- " Iween immersion and baptism," (which are my words) — he must have known it, or he must have been totally ignorant of the rite of baptism on account of pollution by the dead; — which, from the frequency of its oc- currence, was impossible. — His language, marking a separation of the two actions, is neither more nor less, than strictly coincident with that established custom. •^— What is there extraordinary, or unnatural, in this 1 Justin Martyr, describing Baptism, says, " I will " now declare to you after what manner we being made a rv ^*, •* anew by Christ, have dedicated ourselves to God:*" - «< .... We bring (converts) to some place where there *' is water, and they are regenerated by the same way *' of regeneration by which we M'ere regenerated; for " they are washed with water in the name of God the *' Father, and Lord of all things, and of our Saviour " Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit." The same Justin also says, that sprinkling with Ho]y Water " was " invented by Dcemons, in imifaiion of the true Bap- *' tism (signified by the prophets) that their votaries *' [those of the Daemons] might also have their pretend- ** ed purifications by water." Now, if the Heathen SPRINKLINGS imitated the true Baptism, then the true Baptism included sprinkling; for, if no sprinkling, no imitation. There is a passage in the Epistles of Cyprian (to Magnus Ep. 76) which seems to turn on this distinction ^^^" ( ei > of the rite inta two parts. A difficulty was started, whether a person (a convert, suppose,^ who being sick, in his bed, received baptism by sprinkling or pouringy ONLY, ought to be considered as completely baptized. Cyprian pleads, that where the faith was complete this 6fl'/>/m;i was complete, also; and might be admitted as entire, and valid. He supports his opinion by reference to tlie purifications, or baptismal sprinklings, under the Slosaic law. But knowing, that in the customary mode of baptism, the ritual sprinkling was preceded by a thorough washing of the person, he adds, " or, if any " one shall think that they are not at all benefited, who *' have been only besprinkled with the water of salva- *' tion, [i. e. without previous washing,] let them not " be imposed on; and if they [the sick] recover, let *' them be baptized [i. e. undergo the customary wash> " ing.] But, if they cannot [witii propriety] be bap- " tized [by the customary washing, because that *' always preceded ritual sprinkling, and never followed " it] as having been already sanctified with the " ECCLESIASTICAL BAPTISM, [sc. the ritual sprink- " ling] why are they distressed with scruples?'' Novr, unless the rite were divided into two parts, where is the possibility of any person's supposing, that sanctificalion ivith ecclesiastical baptism, was in any respect imperfect? How could such expect to render perfect what they had received, by any addition what- ever, unless they understood that addition to be a part of the same identical rite, in its complete state? and how could Cyprian allow a second baptism, who well knew that ONE baptism ouly, was enjoined on believers? .\ ly. 388. That these two ideas were included in the rite of Baptism as late as Augustin's days, is evident from the dlfterent opinions, then afloat, ** Some said, they are *' baptized, 1. not for forgiveness of sin; — but, 2. that " they may be made heirs of tiie kingdom of Heaven." — " A little while ago," says he, " when I was at Car- " thage, I cursorily heard some transient discourse '* of some people who were talking, that infants are " 1. not baptized for remission of sins; — but, 2. they " were baptized, that they may be sanctified to Christ." This b<: thought a novelty; and his opinion, that ori' ( 65 ) ginai sin was " remitted" at baptism, doubtless pre- vailed with those who gradually contracted the entire rite into immersion; only; while those who deemed that consecration to Christ (he should have said, to the Trinity) was the object of baptism, contracted the wiiole rite into pouring only. He is not far from right, when elsewheipj on a dift'crent branch of the ^^ subject, he says, — "if each party would grrin' to the c^^ other what they urge of truth, they would both hold the WHOLE truth." It has not been thought necessary Jo follow this a^'gu* ment any lower. The f.ict appears to be, that the population of the countries had embraced the faith of Christ, so very generally, that converts from heathenism becoming unusual, the rite proper to them gradually lost its application; and thus^ '' the death unto sin" (Idola- try, &c.) no longer possessing any reference to infants born of Christian parents, its ritual representative, immersion, declined into oblivion ; while pouring as the sign of " newness of life, ' or consecration to the c^^^ Trinity, was continued ; such consecration being the intention of parents on behalf of their infants. Thus we have traced the two branches of Baptism, from the Mosaic institution of ceremonial cleansing from pollution by a dead body, which consisted of, 1. washing, and 2. sprinkling:— It is so divided by the writer of the Ecclesiasticus; — it was practised, as a double rite, by John, in his Baptism: Christiaa Baptism is described as a double rite, by the Apostle Peter; — by the Apostle Paul, frequently; who also expressly calls the sprinkling part of the Mosaic rite iaptism; — it was understood to be double by St. Luke; — it is so described (as double) by Justin Martyr; — it is so represented in all the antient pictures known; (say from the second to the fifth century)— we find it alluded to by Cyprian and by Augustin, in terms im- plying the same division; and finally, it is still practised in the same division by the Abyssinian church, which received it from the church at Alexandria, A. D. 313. The reader is aware, that the Church at Alexandria, originally planted by Mark the Evangelist, consisted of Mehnw Christians; whose national mauners uaiifht C 6© ) lastly be prtsfrved in a country, of which Mr. Salt says,": — " The reader conversant in Scripture, cannot fail, I conceive, to remark in the course of this narrative, the general resemblance existing throughout between the manners of this people and those of the Jews pre- viously to the reign of Solomon, at which period the connections entered into by the latter with foreign princes, and the luxuries consequently introduced, teem, in a great measure, to have altered the Jewish character. For ray own part, I confess, that I was so much struck with the similarity between the two na- tions, during ray stay in Abyssinia, that I could not lielp fancying at times that I was dwelling among the Israelites, and that I had fallen back some thousand years, upon a period when the king himself was a •faepherd, and the princes of the land went out, riding on mules, with spears and slings to combat against the Philistines." Now, let Dr. Ryland triumph in the incautious and unfounded concession of Dr. Campbell, *' with what •ppetite he may"; it is clear that his oum quotations do not support his hypothesis : his oum list of passage* furnish three to one against him, but, had the collection l^een extended, as he knows that some of his adver- saries have extended it, and as it may honestly be ex- tended, the proportion would have been, as far as I can judge, about one in ten for him — in the sense o( plunge ing : and nine out of ten against him, in such other lenses as appertain to the term. EXPLANATION OF THE PLATE. No. I. — Is an internal view of the " Chapel of the Saptistery," in the Catacomb of St. Pontianus, at Rome. It is thus described by M. Seroux d'Agincourt, from whose work "The Histoy of the Arts by existing Monuments, from the Fourth Century to the Four- teenth," it is copied. " Perspective view of the place^ which may be con- sidered as one of the first Baptisteries of the Christians; IS is proved, evidently, by the painting in fresco exe- cuted on the wall, at the further end; the subject oi which is the Baptism of Jesus Christ. (67 ) No. 2. "Section of a part of the Catacomb of St, Ppntianus, situated at Rome, out of the gate Portese, No. 3. "Plan of this place, with the s>tair-case which leads down to the basin, and the channel that conducts the water from the spring that feeds it. No. 4. ** Jesus Christ baptized in the Jordan, hy St. John Baptist ; a subject painted in a small chapel of the Catacomb of St. Ponfianus, called " the Chapel ** of the fiaptisteri/ ;" because, in reality, in the first, ages of Christianity, it did undoubtedly serve fur that usage ; and tliis is witnessed both by the source of living vvUter which is still to Ke seen in it, and by the subject of this picture. Beneath, is painted one of those crosses, ornatnented with piecious atones, called GemmatoR ; to the arms of which are hung the symbo-. lical characters of Ciaist, A and i2. (Arringhi, Romck, Sotterranea, torn. 1. p. 331.)" This is a subject of " great interest — and occupies the first place among the Baptisteries, as being the, most simple, and perhaps, the mr)st antient of these monuments : — The [interior] style of the paintings ' shews that they were added several ages after tlieplaccj had been destined to this usage. *'It is situated at Rome, out of the Porta Portese: in a place called Monte I'erde ; there is still seen the' bason of running water, which served to administer Baptism in the earliest times of the church ; that is to say, from the first to the fourth century." Nos. 5, 6. — From subjects painted in miniature iq a Greek Menology, in the Vatican Library : of the ninth century. " The Baptism in the Jordan." These shew John the Baptist no longer dressed in his camel's hair garment, but in ample robes of cloth. However, the action of liis hand is the same, and he still baptizes by pouring. These, are initial letters to discourses on the subject of Baptism. No. 5, makes the figure of a Greek H, N©. 6, makes the figure of a Greek K, No. 7. — Basso relievo executed in marble, over the principal door of the church of St, John Baptist at Monza, near Milan, built in the seventh century, by Queen Theodolinda; the lower part represents the Baptism of Jesus. [N. B. This is the Queen whose Baptisia is represented in our first Plate, No. 6.J F 2 ( 68 ] No. 8. — Another Baptism of Jesus, by John, in th« Jordan, of a date still later; as appears by the full dress of John while discharging his ottice. No. 9. — A Baptism which closely represents that of Mr. Salt's Abyssinian boy. It is perforraed outside of the ciiurch: the hoy is stark naked; and the Sacra- ment is administered by pouring. The date of this piece is about the tenth century; and it is the work of Greek artisis, though executed at Rome. It shews that the Abyssinian mode of baptism is no new thing; but was extant nine (or more) centuries ago, among the Greeks, and apparently among the Romans too. But, I beg leave to recall the Reader's attention to the Chapel of the Baptistery ; concerning which, M. d'A.. says nothing more (historically) in his work yet published. As his work begins in the fourth century, he was under no obligation to examine this subject farther; and his work has no reference whatever to re- Kgious rites; but, being struck with its interest and cu- riosity, he goes out of his way, to insert this Antiquity. He esteems the Baptistery itself, as the first now ex- isting; the picture he places among his suhjects of the fourth century. By examining the Plate, we may trace some incidents of its history: It was a Baptistery before it was a Sepulchre : for, originally the walls of this small Chapel, which does not exceed six feet square, were carried up to the ceiling ; and it formed a narrow, cell- like, but complete room. But, when formed into a burial place, the rock was cut away from the upper part, and part of the sides, leaving the remaining part of the faces of the Baptistery projecting about fifteen or eighteen inches. It is evident, that these Sepulchres were formed at a time of Perse- cution; but, 1 am not aware, that any of their inscrijv tions contains a date, or any niark by which a date may be obiained. The first Persecution took place undeTr A. I?. 64. Nero; but, it is hardly to be supposed, though the Church at Rome was numerous, that Baptism, was, as yet, administered, except in private houses. There could be little occasion for subterraneous privacy. The. 4. D. 107 next violent persecution at Rome, was under Trajan; and by this time the Christians must have found th^ ( 69 ) B«cessity of the most absolute spcrecy, on numerous 0(v casions; for their "superstition" had been embraced by many noble persons, as well as by a multitude of the middling classes. The Baptistery, therefore, may honestly be dated at the latter end of the tirst century, if not earlier. If the reader will examine the plan, at the corner, imme^ (diately over the end of the scale marked 20, he will observe a small recess of about two feet in depth and width, just suthcient to hold one person, onljj: her« Undoubtedly, stood the person who administered the or- dinance: it could serve for no other use : it is, evidently, cut for this purpose. It follows, that Baptism was NOT here administered by plunging: but, as the picture above bears testimony, by pouring on the head of the convert. Yet, this will not decide whether the convert did or did not, here receive a previous ablution. This Baptistery, then, agrees with everi/ instance knoicn, in witnessing that the adminstrator did not enter the water: and so far, the conclusion is established on tUc rock, itself. We cannot say as much for the Sepulchre: that may date from A. D. 107, or A. D. 16<), or A. D. 202. In 235 to 238, a persecution raged, in which many churches, built by Christians, were destroyed: again in 207; the last was under Dioclesian in 805. To say the least thon, these Sepulchres ascend to the third century; perhaps, earlier. The medium, which is the safest course, would place them about 202 to 235, The Picture is more embarassing. It is clear, on inspection, that the rock is cut away over where the picture is now placed; and it was, as is well known, a custom of the earlier Christians, to replace surh orna- ments, where they had before existed. M. d'A. as- signs no other reason for placing this picture at so low a date, but the inferiority ot" the execution. This seems to assume, without any satisfactory warrant, that Christianity, in the first and second centuries, had been embraced by capital Artists. I wish if were true. Certainly, the Painter of this baptism was a Christian; for, to have employed any "heathen sculptor accustomed to represent Jupiter and Priapus," would have placed a most dangerous secret in his power, a secret which reward, interest, loyalty, duty and reli- gion, would incessantly urge him to reveal: wbic^ ( ?o > yfould have ensured the destruction of the whole family,. (f>r society) on whose premises this private chapel was. ijetected, with all the list of the Baptized. The Artist niftht be a mere dauber, as a Painter, yet an excellent Christian: Christian, indubitably he was; and thai answers every cavil raised by the ignorant, against my» former examples. And, I think, too, that the infe- riority of his talents prevented M. d'A. from strictly estimating the date of his performance. It is baa enough ; but not too bad for a Christian slave of the third, or of the second, century : I mean to say, of equal date with the conversion of this Baptistery into a Catacomb. I have chosen this picture of Antient Baptism, because the work which contains it, being in the course of publication may be inspected without dif- ficulty; because, as an example it speaks for itself, be- yond controversy; because it agrees with all other, antient representations known; because the action of the Baptist is clearly that oi' pouring ; and because it is, at the very latest, older than any copy of the Gospels, now in existence. It is two centures older than those venerable MSS. the Alexandrian and Vatican copies. Tlie whole together is one of the earliest possible monu- ments of Christianity, that can be now remaining. The reader will observe the lamb, introduced, in allusion to the "Lamb of God," and the single angel, where the plaster is broke away. As most other Bap- tisms have three angels, I think this is another mark of its antiquity. But, after all, it is not the first of the kind ; it is a repetition of an idea borrowed from else- where: it may even be arej>etition of a picture painted, in the same place, previous to its enlargement for a Ca- tacomb ; but, this can be only conjecture. This chapel had not escaped the notice of Antiquaries before M. d'A. Says Buonarotti — "and here I would in- form the reader that there is found a picture and a like history included in the Baptism of Jesus Christ, in an antient Baptistery in the cemetry of Pontianus out of the Porta Portese at Rome, which does not appear to have been observed by Arringhi." If I rightly understand this author, it was discovered in IQIdU. Puonarotti As applicable to the general subject, I add a few ex,- Oss.sopra tracts from this indefatigable and learned writer. Vetro.p.41. "'* ^^^ certainly the custom to baptize naked •• . apd the person who had been baptized, immediately OQ < n > coming out of the water, was wrapped in a larg;e enve- lope called Sabano, whence says Simon of Thes-- salonica, "immediately the nakrd Catecliutnen, is covered with a large envelope TTzpCrAaia wrapped around him closely in THREE windings."* The Trinity again ! — it meets us at every turn, wherever we meet with Baptism. But, further, as to this naked: Perhaps, the most learned Reviewer in the Baptist Magazine did not know, that he was repeating the very sentiments and language of Julian the Apoalaiel — yet such is the fact. ' The antient Christians had among them picturer of Adam and Eve ; and, says my author " St. Paolino clearly makes mention of representations of Adam and Eve on occasion of his describing various pictures of the Basilica: — St. Augustine alludes to ihe same subject, in his book against Julian the Apostate. "t — But, it should appear, that Julian had forced a worse meaning, — if a worse meaning can be forced,— than even the " careful" Reviewer, whose soliciUide extends to the seclusion of such subjects as the " Facts and Evidences" contain, from his family. All the subjects on this plate, are from the work of M. d'Agincourt: in order that Gentlemen who phase to examine the truth, may not need to enquire alVer a great number of Books. We have now adduced fifteen antient examples Qf Baptism, all administered by pourivg; Robinson adds three or four others: I think the number lujuht easily be made up thirty or forty, or even fifty; and this, while not one instance of pluncc^ng; ever has been adduced, or ever will be adduced, to the contrary. The inference is left to the reader. The following sentiments of BuonaroUi, who is en- larging on the subject of Baptism, form a proper cou- clusioD to this part of the subject. * As this envelope had the lonti i f r. pallium, or cloak, ii seems to be alluded to by TertulliaB, Suadeo, recerere hahitumunius interim errirrixt'.ii renuncuttarem., . enimvere cum hanc primum sapientinm vestit, qiKE vuniisiiiiis supersiitionilus rsnuit; tunc certissime pallium super omnes exuvicis,et ptplos auf^iuta vtitis. Da jPallis, Cap. 4. in fine, et cap. S. From hence is supposed to have arisen the error of writers who reported that CKristians after baptism left off the toga, and Hssuiiied ihe paUium. f A Pictoribus me didicisse deridts, quod Adam et Muiier ejus pudenda con- texerint, Horatianum illud decantatum audirc mc pracipi$ ; Quidut/et uudeiidi swipcrfuit kqua poUstm, Lib. v. Cbp. 2. ( 72 ) *' Whoerer desires to know to what degree the an- tient Christians were solicitous to preserve a certain tradition of their sacred symbols used in painting, and what care they employed, that they ■niigiit always be represented in the same manner, and not be changed in any thing, which from the beginning had been customary in the church, let him reflect on the uni- formity found among the paintings on these most antient pieces of glass, also on the basso relievos of the Sarcophagi [Sepulchres] on the paintings of the Caemeteries [Catacombs] and the Mosaics of the churches in Rome; which are not equally antient: but especially, let him well observe the Vatican Sarcophagus, published by Arringhi, in p. 295, in the middle of which, as there represented, we see almost the very same things, as are seen on this glass : there is the Saviour on the mount, from which issues four streams.* \\ si variassedaqucilo, clie sul principio avests coiniBcialo a costaiuare la Chiesa, basta viflettere airuiiiloiiiiita, die passa Ira le pitture di quest! vetri anlichissimi, ed i bassirilievi de' Sarcofagi, e le pitiure de' Cimiteri, cd i Mosaici delle Chicse di P^oma, che noii sono tanto antichi; ma parti- colariuente bisogna osservare il Sarcof'ago Vaticano riportato dali' Arrinthio alia pa^. '29b, nel mezna del quale, come si e accennato, vi sono quasi artatto le raede- siiue cose, che si vedouo in questo vetro ; vi e il Salvatore sul Monte, da cui iscatu- riscono i quattro fiumi; il Salvatore da alia figvira, che c dalla sinistra il volume, questa nj^ura e vestita, e sta in attitndi'.ie di scendere nc 1 Giordano, come sla_ la nostra, f(i ha una Croce in ispalla; dalla parte destra vi e quella medesima ini- ma;;ine.di uonio colla barba, e. col pallio, e colla destra dislesa, che noi abbiamo creduto, che rappresenti S. Giovan Batista ; a' piedi del lledcntore vi e I'Agnus Dei, ma con una croce sul capo, e piu basso le pecorine ; di qua, e di la dal Salva- torc vi sono due paline, c sopra a quella a mano dritta vi e un uccello, die sar» ifatto per la nostra fenice ; e vi sono pariinente due tTy)f, Saviour. These lettters, united, form the Greek word signify- Clera. ing a fish; whence a ^«/« became the private mark of ^]^'^^ Christian sepulchres, and concealed them from viola- i,b. iii." tion by the Heathen. c^P- lO. The primitive Christians, also, caused this symbol to be engraven on their seals, and rings ; and by this token they discovered those who had been baptized into their common faith : and it is in reference to this, that Tertullian, speaking of Fideles who had passed through the water of Baptism, calls them, "little cap. if ' fishes" — pisciculi. The reader will combine this with therepetition of the symbol on the tomb of Posthumius, and indulge his own remarks. I have opened this train of argument: Whoever per- severingly pursues it, will, I doubt not, produce several, if not many, instances, which may fairly be referred to the second century; and others also, to the first century. Who then will venture to affirm, that INFANT BAPTISM is a " new of air"? Who will venture to declare publicly, as I hear has been very lately done, that " Infant Baptism was a patched up monster, mutually invented, fostered, and propagated between the Pope and the Devil, no longer ago than the twelfth century, at the earliest"? O! Shamk! Shame!! G, Hazardf Frinter, 50, Beech-street, Londmu r^r ■»[ ji 13 '\^ K?^' h FOURTH LETTER TO A 3Bmton OF A BAPTIST CHURCH. De;\r Sir, YOU know so thoroughly the numerous inconveniences under which the following papers were sketched out, and are so well aware of the 'many and sudden transitions incident to confi- dential conversation, long continued, that, I ven- ture to consider all apology for their irregularities, in point of form, as superfluous. Memoranda made without the slightest expectation of appear- ing before the public, may honestly claim forbear- ance, if not pardon, though somewhat loosely arranged ; and, happily, notwithstanding order would have been extremely desirable on some ac- counts, yet the arguments themselves are, to an unbiassed mind, independent of that species of correctness. If I rightly understand that eminent writer. Dr. Gill, he expressly denies that any Covenant exist- ed, or could exist, between man and God, pre- vious to that of which we have so large an ac- count, the Covenant of Circumcision, made with Abraham. The good Doctor had overlooked or B ( 2 ) Pialm 1. 5. foi-got, the expression of the Deity, " Gather my saints together unto me ; those who have made a Covenant with me by sacrificed Now sacrifice was long prior to circumcision; and covenants, we know, were ratified by sacrifice. This expres- sion is not referable only to saints subsequent to the Abrahamic covenant; but, is addressed to the earth at large, and also to the heavens : it is general, and not restricted. Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged, that we know so little of the modes of performing sacrifice, in the earlier ages of the world, that unless we accept the Mosaic w^ritings and ordinances as representing the more ancient services, we must remain un- enlightened on the subject. It cannot be sup- posed, that the special forms observed in that fttn. XT. 17. extraordinary, and perhaps singular, covenant made between Abraham and God, were custom- ary on all occasions of sacrifice; but rather, that Moses in reducing his Levitical precepts to writing, for the guidance of his people, now be- coming a nation, did but embody and perpetuate the practices of his forefathers, the Patriarchs. Quitting this train of thought, for the moment, it is proper we should observe, that when the Gen. xrii. 10. Covenant of Circumcision was made with Abrar ham, he was already the father of Ishmael ; who, at the time when he received this rite, in his ow^n person, in consequence of the faith of his father Tcr. 55. Abraham, was, " thirteen years of age." This is expressly stated in the history, and admits of neither doubt, nor question. At the same time with Ishmael, were circum- cised, probably about fifteen hundred men, of different ages, who had no relation whatever by consanguinity to Abraham; but merely received this sign, — the seal of Abraham's faith, in confor- mity with the faith and obedience of their Mas- ter. What became of these men afterwards, or of their posterity, and how far they or their's. ( 3 ) were truly pious, it is not easy to determine ; and if we could determine it, it might not much ad- vance our present enquiry, which relates imme- diately to Ishmael, son of Abraham. We are under no difficulty in affirming, that the posterity of Ishmael did, and do to this day, in imitation of his compliance, practice circum- cision, at the same time of life, as he, their great first father, underwent that rite. He is their ex- ample, as well as their progenitor. Nor is this all: for it should appear, that the sons of Abraham by Keturah, the Midianites, &c. conformed to the same custom ; and postponed circumcision till the understandings of their youth were some- what matured, and advanced towards manhood. The first hint of this we have, if I rightly read it, in the incident that befell Moses, after he had received his commission to deliver Israel from the bondage of Egypt. That Jethro priest of Midian, was also priest of the most High God, appears from many con- siderations ; and is even couched, though covert- ly, in the famous Rabbinical story of his rod, [the true Religion] which he gave to Moses. With this chief Moses resided ; and it is evident, that before much time had elapsed after Moses entered the country, Zipporah, daughter of Jeth- ro, became his wife. Now, if Moses resided forty ^^.^^ ^.j ^^ years with Jethro, it will follow — either that his wife Zipporah was barren during many years, al- most the whole of her life, so far as concerned child-bearing, till toward the close of that pe- riod — or, that, at the time Avhen Moses was quitting Midian for Egypt, her children could not Handfuii be infants. I know that Lightfoot affirms," Zip- ^'^JJ'"^"' porah was now lying in childbed, a weak woman, but lately delivered — far re unfit for so long a journey,"' &c.—" but now the child may not stay **'*^"°**' °" till hee bee eight days old." Archbishop Seeker ^^c Geddes agrees with this idea. But, had it occurred to in i«c. B 2 ( 4 ) these learned men, that it was the custom in. Midian to postpone circumcision to the I^hmael- ite tmie of life, to adult years, they would have perceived a veiy different air in tlie history : of which a slight view may convince us. Exod ir. 24, ^^^ circumstauces are these: Moses, preparing * to fulfil his commission, took his wife, and his two sons with him, travelling towards Egypt. And it was in the way, in one of the resting- places of the passage, that an angel of the Lord met him, and sought to kill him, [probably, a violent disease; and Moses knowing that if he should die, his sons would be rejected from their due place among the Isi'aelites, unless they bore the mark of their family-descent from Abra- haiii, through Isaac, and that performed in the true Israelitish manner, and mark, was extremely anxious to see them properly circumcised: but, being too ill to perform the operation himself] Zipporah, their mother took a knife of flint, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and clasped his knees (the knees of Moses,) and exclaimed, " Surely, a new bridegroom art thou to me by fe/oorfi- /"(plural). And the angel (or disease) depart- ed from him (Moses). It was because of the circumcisions, (plural) that she then said, thou art a new bridegroom to me by bloods," (plural.) From these plural terms, it is clear that both the sons of Moses were circumcised at this time : for, no other conjecture is sufficient to account for the use of these plurals. It follows, demonstra- bly, that the eldest must have been more than eight days old; and, indeed, he seems to have been born soon after the marriage. Now this delay of the rite would appear nothing leniiss to Zipporah, who knew the custom of her own country; though a cause of the greatest anxiety to Moses, who knew the order of his people. As we have not the history of the sons of Abraham by Keturah, or of other nations, his i ^ ) descendants, in Scripture, but of the Hebrews only, we cannot expect to find in Holy Writ, par- ticulars of their rites. It should seem that the Edomites retained tlieir family customs with tolerable correctness; for they were allowed to bear office character in Israel, after the third generation, while other nations were excluded, till the tenth. The Circumcision of the Adults of Israel, by Joshua, does not properly come under obscrva- josh. t. i. tion here: it is sufficient to notice it; as not un- usual among the neighbouring people, who were of Abrahamic descent : they would have thought no evil of delay. But it is more than possible that this extra delay is alluded to by Joshua, un- der the term of the" shame of Egypt: "meaning, what the Egyptians thought a shame ; i. e. that people using circumcision, should neglect it till forty 3^ears of age ; or even to thirty, or to twenty ; since they, the Egyptians, practiced it on youth, of thirteen years. It appears, clearly enough, from the history of David and Saul, that the Philistines were not circumcised ; but, we have in the Prophet Je- remiah a passage, which has exercised the con- jectures of the most learned and sagacious cri- tics ; and has been regarded as inexplicable. To me, it seems evidently to refer to the practice of adult Circumcision; and tiius understood (which is warranted by ample and numerous testiinonies) the prophet's language becomes clear, and forci- ble. " Behold the days come saith the Lord, that I jer. ix. 5, 6. will punish all circumcised (yet) uncircumcised : Egypt, and Judah, and Edom, and the sons of Ammon, and Moab, and all in the utmost cor- ners, that dwell in the wilderness : for all these nations are yet uncircumcised (in their persons) and the house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart," ' (though circumcised in person.) Cahnet trans- lates, " I will punish the uncircumcised — the Egyptian, equally with the circumcised — the Jew." Others, adhering to the form and order of the words, render, literally, "I will visit upon all circumcised, in the foreskin." Kimchi and Grotius suppose an ellipsis here, implying " cir- cumcised and uncircumcised," and they are sup- ported by the Chaldee, which reads, "I will visit all the uncircumcised people, together with the house of Israel, whose deeds are no better than those of the uncircumcised." Now, however contradictory these versions may appear, they are both correctly true. That the descendants of Edom, the Moabites, and the Ammonites, with the Egyptiansalso, were, in point of fact, circumcised, admits of no dispute ; but, as they did not perform this rite in the manner of the Jews, they are described as retaining the foreskin ; and as they postponed it till their sons were grown up, and advancing towards man- hood, they are called uncircumcised ; as they really were, in the Jewish import of the expres- sion : so that, the contradiction is, in truth, no contradiction: because they were "circumcised, yet retaining the foreskin," and therefore their rite was null in Jewish estimation. No reason can be adduced why these nations are selected, except as they bore some ritual conformity to the Jews : — why not threaten other neighbour- ing nations, as the Philistines, or Syria, Damascus, Assyiia, &c. among the notoriously uncircum- cised? — The reason is, it could not be said of them with a shadow of truth, that they were ** circumcised, yet retaining the foreskin." They had no such rite: consequently, they could not practice this peculiarity. Euterpe, cap Herodotus, who lived several centuries before "▼• Christ, reports the use of circumcision by the Phcenicians and Syrians of Palestine; meaning ■ ( 7 ) the nations around the Jews ; and apparently in- cluding those we now call Arabs. He says, they borrowed this custom from Egypt ; but, he seems to have been aware of more than one man- ner of performing it : for ho observes, — " tiiese are the only people who use it, and who use it precisely like the Egyptians^ Others, therefore, might, and did, use it, otherwise. That the circumcision of the Edomites was not accounted by the Jews a real circiuncision, ap- pears demonstrably, from Josephus, who assures Autiq.iib.xiii. us, that Hyrcanus, ancestor of Herod, conquered *^*P ®* the Edomites, and permitfe I them to live in their own country, on condition they should be circumcised" &c. It seems, that he reckoned for nothing their rite of adult circumcision, with their manner of performing it; because, it differed from the Jewish rite, both in time and maimer, " The Circumcision practised by our ancestors, De Ciicumdi. says Philo, is ridiculed ; although it has been re- P- ^lO- spected by other nations ; and in a particular manner in Egypt, a country that surpasses the whole world, by the multitude and by the wis- dom of its inhabitants." In the Catholic Epistle of St. Barnabas (cer- tainly not a work of Barnabas, the Apostle ; yet usually referred to the second century) we have the same information. — " But you will say, that Epist. Barn, people were circumcised for a sign ; and so are all "P- ^• the Syrians and Arabians . . . even the Evryptians, themselves are circimicised." " Circumcised for a sign " — then, the Syrians and Arabians con- nected religious ideas with the rite, long before Mahomet. In, or about, the fourth century after A. D. Eusebius, who certainly was industrious, as well as learned, and a man of research, as well as of eminence as a Christian writer, informs us, that ( 8 ) Prep. Evan. « i\^q posterity of Ishmael, settled in Arabia, were '■"P' all circumrised, contrary to the practice of the. Jews, about the thirteenth year of their age,"* — which was the time of Ishmael's life, when, he, their venerated ancestor, submitted to the rite .- in this they imitated him. 'Two or three centuries after Eusebius, arose Mahomet, who, certainly, found the rite of adult circumcision in full vigour, among- the Arabs, as it had bOen from time immemorial ; or rather, to speak correctly, from the days of Ishmael. That it has continued from the propa- gation of the Mahometan faith, to the present time, is notorious. We have no need, therefore, to enquire further into its history; but shall now direct our attention to the ar.i^uuients adduced in support and explanation of this rite, by those who are, professionally, best acquainted with them. If we ask, what reasons they assign for their practice ? The following extracts may enable us, at least, partially, to estimate them ; and we have every inducement to believe that the reasons now urged are fair repetitions of those formerly assigned. From their nature, they may safely be taken as the same; and, on examination, we shall see that those who offered them anciently, or their descendants, who perpe- tuated them, were by no means without very powerful authorities in support of their practice. Ambass.Trav. " The Persians are as free to assume the quality Persia, lib. vi. ^^ Mussulmans as the Turks. They explicate the p. 371. term Mussulman by that oi saved ; — that is, (say the Turks) saved from eternal damnation i * Twv Ss £v Io"/Aa*)Xing he may be able to speak his pro- fession. The Ax^hs, practised it before MahomeVs tifne : yea, some think he suffered it only to please the Avabi;nis.'* — '' The Priest having done his office, the standers by, to joy his initiation, sa- lute him by the name oi Mussuhnan. In com- memoration of such a benefit (imitating Abra- ham) they continue a feast for three days toge- ther." " The Turks circumcise not their children be- Thrrenot. fore the age of eleven or twelve years : to the end ^*'"* ^- P- **■ they themselves may pronounce .. their profession of faith ; and also, to the end they may under- stand WHAT THEY SAY ', and say it, with the HEART, asivellas with the mouth." " When Mahomet promulgated his law he ^e BruvH put this diflerence betv/een his circumcision and Voyage, &c, that of the Jews, that it ouglit not to be admi- nistered to infants, eight days after their birth, but, when they have attained the age of eleven or twelve years ; at which period, not only are they in a state to assign reasons why they believe, and to make witli their lips this confession ha illah ilia Allah, Mahomet resul Allah ; that is to say. There is no God hut God, and Mahomet is his prophet ; but also, to un- derstand the import of this confes- sion. . . . This circumcision, which the Turks call Schounnct, is considered as nothing further than a mark of obedience rendered to the un- ( 10 ) Avritten w6rd of Mahomet; for he has written' nothing about it in his Koraun ... It is forbid to those who have not received this rite, even to children born under their law, to assist at their Prayers. . . . Although it is necessary, in order to circumcision, to be of the age of eleven or twelve years, there are nevertheless, a few who are circumcised at seven or eight years of age. Commonly they are not circumcised younger, but much older; as at fourteen or fifteen years, or more; according to the wishes of the parents. . . . The Imam of the Mosque of the district deli- vers a short exhortation on the subject of the rite about to be performed.*" D'Ohsson, " This pious act is celebrated with domestic '^^'eoo- edit, festivals : the great, and especially, sovereigns, "' make the most costly preparations. The Kha- liphs, and all the princes of the different INIaho- metan dynasties, displayed on these occasions the most dazzling magnificence. The Othoman Sultans have also done the same. They who have been most distinguished were Mohammed II. Suleyman J, and Mourad III. The last of these employed a year in preparing for the festival in- tended for Mohammed, his son and successor. * Loisque Mahomet donna ?a ley il mit cette difference entre sa circoncision ct cclle des Juifs, qu'ou ne la devoit pas adniinistrer aux ^nfans huit jours apres leur naissaiicc, niais lorsqu'ils auroient onze ou douze ans; auquel temps, non-seulemcnt ils sont en etat dc rendre raison de leur foy, et de fairc de bouche cette confession la iUuh ilia Alia, Me- hemet, resul Alia ; c'est a dire, II ny a point {Taulre Dieu que Dieu, et Mahomet est soil Frophete; niais aussi d'KN comprendre le sens Cette circoncision, que les Turcs appcllent Schounnet, nest regardce que comme une marque de J'obeissance qu'ils rendent a la parole non ecrite dc Mahomet; car il n'en a ricn ecrit dans son Alcoran ... II est defendu a ceux qui ne I'onl pas rcGU, raemc aux enfans dc leur loy, d'assister a la Priere. . . . Quoi qu'il faille, pour etre circoncis, avoir onze ou douze ans, il y en a pourtant quclques-uns qui le sont a sept ou huit. D'ordinaire on ne les cireoncit pas plus jeunes, mais bien plus agez, comme de quatorze ou quinze ans, et plus; suivant la volonte des parents 1/Imam de la Mosquee du quartier fait unc petite exhortation au sujet de I'oprration qui se va faire. Corneille Le Bruyn Voyage au Levant, Syrje, &c. Qto. Paris, 1725. p. 254. et seq. ( 11 ) This young prince was circumcised in 999 (1582), at the age of sixteen years. It is cus- tomary to send, on these occasions, circular let- ters to the Paschas, governors, intendants, and magistrates of all the provinces and great cities in the empire. By these letters the Sultan gives them notice of the ceremony, and invites them to partake of it. They attend by substitutes, who represent them on that day at court, arid make in their name rich presents to the young prince, as tokens of homage and dependance. I shall here translate the circular letter which Mourad. HI. addressed on this occasion to the nobles of his empire. It is worthy of remark on account of its style, and the singularity of its metaphors. TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS, &c. By this imperial letter, decorated with our mono- gram, Tovghra, we inform you, most noble and au- gust Sir, that it being;' a sacred and indispensable duty for the elect and blessed, for the Mahometan people, but especially for the Sultans, monarch?, and sovereigns, as also for the princes of the blood of their august fa- mily, to follow entirely the laws and precepts of our holy Prophet, the coryphjeus of the Patriarchs and of the celestial Envoys, and to observe religiiiusly what- ever is prescribed in our sacred volume, where it is said. Follow the example of Abraham tluj father, froviivhom thou derivest the illustrious vame of Mus- stilman : we have consequently resolved to fulfil this precept respecting the act of circumcision, in the per- son of our well-beloved son, prince Mohammed; of that prince who, covered with the wings of tiie celestial grace, and of the divine assistance, advances in happi- ness and reputation in the glorious path to the imperial throne ; of that prince who, honoured with the same name as our holy Prophet, is most justly the object of admiration to our high and sublime court ; of that prince who is the most beautiful flower in the parterre of equity and sovereign dominion ; the most precious shoot in the garden of grandeur and majesty ; the ( 12 ) finest pearl in the monarchy; the most luminous star in the firmament of serenity, peace, and public hap- piness. Thus the august person of this prince, the young plant of his existence, having already made propitious advances in the nursery of virility and strength, and the tender shrub of his essence being already a superb or- nament to the vineyard of prosperity and grandeur, it is necessary that the vine-dresser of circumcision should apply his keen bill to this new plant, to this charming rose-tree, that he should direct it towards the vege- tative excrescence, which is the principle of the renew- ing faculties, and the stem of those precious fruits and fortunate branches in the great orchard of the Khaliphat and of the Supreme Power. This august ceremony will therefore be observed, under the auspices of Providence, in the approaching spring, at the return of the season when nature recovers her youth and beauty, presents to the eyes of mortals the charms of Paradise, and obliges us to admii-e the wonders of the Most High. After the example of our glorious ancestors, who used always to announce these solemnities throughout the whole em- pire, to invite all the nobles, and generally all the of- ficers in places of trust and dignity, we send you the present supreme order, to give you the same notice, and to invite yon to participate the honour and joy of this festival, which will be celebrated in the most ex- hilarating manner. May the Supreme Being deign to bless its commencement and its end, &c. Such are the testimonies of travellers, who have visited the countries where Adult Circumci- sion continues to be practised ; and have ob- tained their information on the spot. The rea- sons assigned fully justify what has been said ; and the reference of the rite to Abraham, the Fa- ther of the Faitliful, is beyond denial or im- peachment. What follows, are sentiments founded on religious treatises of the Mahometan doctors; taken from various authors, whose works are in esteem among the Arabs. I. The first reason is par eminence so powerful and effectual, that others are almost unnecessary: ( 13 ) — it is the Divine Command: " Circumcise Ishmael thy son." Now, it is heresy, and heresy of the worst kind, to suppose, that if Adult Cir- cumcision were not acceptable to the Deity, the Deity would have thus enjoined it in express and unambiguous terms, on a youth of Ishmael's years. 2. Secondly, the uninterrupted practice and TRADITION of his descendants, from that day to this. What other religious rite can shew an unimpeachable tradition of four thousand years ? and this, in conformity to an injunction so solemnly delivered, as part, or countereign, of the most astonishing Covenant ever made be- tween God and man ? 3. The dictates of Common Sense and Un- derstanding. What is a religious rite, unless the party submitting to it have a knowledge of what he is engaged in ? Unless his heart, and con- science, and intellect be active, to what purpose is he present? — to what efl'ect is he concerned? — to what does the ceremony tend, if the prin- cipal party be not in a state to ratify it by his sanction, and to declare- his acquiescence? By what do you know whether he assents or dis- sents ; whether it be a religious rite, or a farce, that is performing ? Are you sure he will ap- prove of this action when he is in a capacity to express his sentiments? Common sense revolts at the thought of impressing an indelible clia- racter on any, who cannot be justly considered as exercising his own will, and speaking his own sentiments : who cannot say Yea : and who, if his heart would say Nay, is unable to express it. There is something extremely barbarous in the practice of causing children, unable to resist the cruelty, to pass through the fire to Moloch ; what less barbarous is there, in inflicting pains and danger, — the pains and danger of circumci- ( 14 ) sion,— on an infant, not in a state to resist the operation ? Have you no pity on his cries and lamentations? Do you think these expressions of his agonies are acceptable to God ? What a savage God your's is, to delight in the screams and teais of piteous infants! They might melt a heart of stone; but they do not melt the heart of your God, or excite the sympathy of his votaries. May I take the liberty of asking you, Sir, with what reply you could meet the observations of some learned Doctor of Islam, who should .sup- port the practice of his country by observations like the following ? " You will readily acknowledge that what- ever is enjoined by Deity is consistent with In- finite Wisdom, and, indeed, is a portion of Infinite Wisdom, directed specifically to us of mankind for some valuable puipose : how then could it enter the imagination of mortals that a religious rite could possibly be directed by God, to pass on a creature, who, as yet, has no capacity — having neither sense, nor understanding, to receive it? — on a creature, who, hereafter may vilify the rite; him who ordered it, with those who performed it ? Is it a mark of the profession of his faith ? — he has no faith to profess. Does it bind him to holiness of heart and life? — he may prove to be an absolute mass of sinful pollution. Does it imply the exercise of any one virtue? — he may be, by constitution, notorious for the opposite vice. To sobriety ? — he may be a drunkard. To honest}^ ? — he may be a thief. He ma}^ be a murderer, a profligate of the very worst descrii> tion, not\\'ithstanding the most perfect perform- ance of this consecrating ceremony. Now, this could not possibly be the case with our venerated father, Ishmael: me was at a time of life when he could assent, and assent by his understanding; and profess according to his judgment. The same we say of our present youth: they know ; ( 15 ) they are previously instructed ; and they approve ; — they stipulate, and engage, from conviction — from the heart. For yon will renieniher. Sir, that our religion is a spiritual religion. It is .sealed in the soul. It occupies the whole man. It is celestial. "We donot allow our sons the title of" elecV *' saved,'' till they undergo the initiatory rite • but, how can any one be saved without faith ? and how can he believe without understanding? and how can an infant understand ? — And, be- sides : there is no warrant for the circumcision ot infants : — I say, there is no warrant for it, in the Divine Word. — As to what has been pretended for it, it is false ; fabricated ; or, at least, it is corrupt, or misunderstood, or misreported. They say there is a kind of obscure — round-about tradition: — but, who can put any confidence in the lying rascals who maintain it ? No, Sir, do not be gulled by their pestilent tradition: WE are the preservers of the law ; both in the let- ter and the spirit of it. We have all the world too on our side; millions after millions, in xiU parts, are of our opinion: and so powerful is the conviction of truth, or the dictates of unso- phisticated reason, that even the Caffres, who Aiboti, CafT. have no books to mislead them, nor any priest ^^ ^' 'i^m to corrupt them, perform this ceremony when Tmr. Africa, their youth approach to manhood : they describe a young Caftre, recently circumcised, under the phrase of — he is made a man ! and he receives an exhortation accordingly. " Let me now beg your attention to the senti- ments and explanations of some of our learned divines. For instance, says one of them, " He De'^ ^Tf>favp who professes this true faith and love, must be- ^f p',"'!*^!^ yl*,!' lieve that this holy Prophet Muhammat, of bless- ii. p. 3o« ed memory, is the first created of all God's crea- tures, the dearest and most beloved .... for whose take we were redeemed from the captivity of ( 16 ) Satan, from remaining in hell, and are preferred to glory." — Now, how can a mewling infant, a child incapable of Instruction believe this? or how can he practice the duties incumbent on those who do believe it? — What does he know of Ma- homet, of faith, of hell, of heaven, of glory, of eternal life? — he, who but a few days ago entered on this perishing life; and, as yet, knows not his right hand from his left. Sir, it is preposterous to enroll him among the votaries of a religious profession, who has not, who cannot have, the slightest idea of the expectancies attached to it. D'Ohssou,p. And then, again, of its duties: "For 321- instance, Prayer — " Prayer requires from man an entire renunciation of workll}' objects : " now how can a child perform this? he knows not even the slightest distinctions of ^^■orldly objects: He is even upconscious of the presence of the lb p 327 <^^ity. " The prayer Namaz must never have any other object than Ihat of rendering to the Su- preme Being the homage which is his due, by requesting of him spiritual blessings, those pre- cious and inestimable blessings which constitute eternal felicity." Now, a child has no notion of eternal felicity,of inestimable blessings which con- stitute it, or of the Supreme Being, who bestows them '; how, then, can he be a fit and proper subject of a religious rite? Moreover, how can you he- sitate a moment, respecting a rite which, pro- perly performed, and on those who are at years of discretion, has had the uninterrupted sanction of all true believers, in all ages? — of which no man in his senses ever entertained a doubt? A rite, which rests on Divine authority : clear, explicit, unequivocal, undeniable ! — To doubt it is blasphemy : to deny it is a damnable sin : to forbid it — O horror! horror! Whereas on the contrary, " What a senseless rite is Infant Circumcision! how repugnant to the understanding ! how de- grading to thf. conscience ! how contrary to sound doctrine ! how vicious in its principle ! ( 17 ) how contemptible (excuse me, sir) how contemp- tible in its performance ! Never, surely, were the human faculties so debased, as in attending on this rite! this non-entity at best, but, assuredly, this detrimental practice, if, instead of growing up in virtue, the youth are taught to look back on it, as a mark of their interest in celestial things! — in heavenly hopes— expectations — enjoyments ! — and all this, as derived from Father Abraham ! — No, no: He was not that fool !— From Divine authority? — incredible! utterly incredible! In short, sir. Infant Circumcision is, beyond a doubt, of all ridiculous things, the most ridiculous ! — of all corrupt superstitions, the most corrupt! — of all impossibilities, so far as the wisdom and good- ness of God is concerned— it is, T say, of all im- possible things, the most impossible! ! — Take my word, for it, — it is the doctrine of devils : it is the offspring of hell! — I say— of hell!!! And yet, most reverend Doctor, indulge me so far, as to allow me to observe, under your favour, that — the Jews *' The Jews ! — el Jehudi ! — that asinine race which wandered forty years in the wilderness, under the guidance of Moses, and have been wandering ever since, without a guide!— the J E-H E w s ! ! ! What, sir ! the finger on the nose— the coun- tenance suffused with blood— the v/hole physiog- nomy a sneer! I am sure, it is high time forme to drop the pen, and profess myself. Your's &c. A FIFTH LETTER €o K 3Btnton OF A BAPTIST CHURCH, 6fc. ^c Dear Sir, NOTWITHSTANDING the vehemence with which our Mahomedan friend thought proper to enforce his dogmata — a vehemence perfectly congenial to the manners and maxims of Turkey, neither are you, nor am I, bound to obey his mandates without, or against, our own conviction. We rejoice that our privilege as Britons both warrants and enables us, to examine FACTS and evidences for ourselves, and to draw those conclusions from them, which, ac- cording to the best of our judgment they autho- rize, or demand. It is of no use threatening us with the vengeance of Heaven, or, with truly Mussulman charity, thrustin^j us down to Hell, among the innumerable Djaurs (Infidels) who are consigned thither in undistinguished masses. No : but, nevertheless, as we have heard his reasons, and will judge on his plea, as well in its parts, as in its whole ; so we will hear that of his opponents, if he have aay, and afterwards will decide impartially. That Adult Circumcision has on it side, a clear command, emanating from the Deity, can- not be denied ; and if the posterity of Isaac plead the example of their parent, why may not the posterity of Ishmael, equally descendants of Abra- ham, avail themselves of the same plea? In fact, it must be granted to them. ( 19 ) As to Common Sense, it is plainly in ftivour of the sons of Abraham by the elder branch ; and whatever may be said in opposition to their ar- guments, by others, I shall not impugn them here. For, the stronger the case that is made out for the Ishmaelites, the stronger must be the com- mand that enjoins a different principle and prac- tice. Nothing short of paramount Divine autho- rity ought to satisfy those who contravene this in- stitution, in this mode of it. The case is not the same as if no different mode, no rival, so to speak, existed, If only one mode were known, there could be no choice ; neither could there be any danger of f^nor : the principle would predo- minate, and would continue to predominate, if the way in which it could act, was one, and no other. And, so far, we must agree with the most reverend Mufti, as to admit, that any who should intend to graft a new principle on a system which had the establishment of so long a course of ages to plead in its favour, and was thoroughly fixed among many nations, through- out a tract of country so considerable, — such an innovator, must either suffer the initiatory rite of his profession to conform to the custom he found in use, or, he would be bound to give most perspicuous directions, if he contemplated, or desired, alteration. If it were his pleasure, that the initiatory rite he preferred should be delayed till the minds of youth were mature, he would say nothing on that particular, knowing that such would continue to be the practice ; but, if he desired to change the practice, if it were his pleasure that the initiatory rite should be performed in an earlier stage of life, he would certainly issue direct and unequivo- cal commands for that purpose. To justify the change, not only must the authority of the law- giver be recognized, but the law itself must be C 2 ( 20 ) clear, and express : and this, the rather, as, if no check were put to the current custom, it would infallibly remain in full force. If another mode, that of foreigners were appointed, acquiescence might be depended on — but the command must, of necessity, be precise, enacting, and indu- bitable. I have no need to prove to you. Sir, that the practice of the Jews was, to circumcise their children in early infancy; and, I think, you will agree with me, that what would have been the fixed duty of a legislator, who derived his descent from Arab parentage, had he wished to change, or to modify an A rab custom, was not less his duty because he derived his descent from Jewish parents, had he wished to change, or to modify, a Jewish custoin. It was the established practice of the Jews to confer the initiatory rite of their religion on their children, in early infancy: — Jesus Christ com- manded no alteration in the principle; he left it, as he found it: The natural consequence is, the (untinuation of the principle. If this be not ac- cording to his intention, why did he not impugn it ? Why did he leave a principle in full opera- tion, which he meant to change? — But, say some, the rite is not the same : granted ; yet, if the prin' ciple be the same, not corrected, not impaired, not abrogated, who is to blame, if it be transferred to a succeeding rite? — This brings us to the en- quiry. Is this principle really transferred to a succeeding rite ? and this will not escape our attention while we examine a few particulars connected with the original rite, as understood by the descendants of Isaac, of Jacob, of Moses and of David. Pliil. iii. 6. " Circumcised the eighth day," is placed by the Apostle of the Gentiles, as the first of his privi- leges, enjoyed as a Hebrew ; but, supposing that he, as thousands of other just born infants, had been sickly or weakly, did the law allow no dispensa- { 21 ) tion from circumcision on the eighth day ? Surely it did; for in every Jewish book describing this service, that I have seen, there is an observation to this effect: " Note; If the child be sickly, he David Levi, is not circumcised till he is quite well."— But, ^^""' ''*'"• even this liberty had its bounds ; and these bounds terminated, if I am not mistaken, at the proper time for registering this infant, among the descents of his house, or family. What that time was, will admit of no hesitation, after having con- sidered a few passages of the Old Testament. The first I shall recommend, is to this effect : — "Hezekiah appointed Kore, son of Imnah, the 2Chron... Levite, over the free-will offerings of God, to 14, &c distribute the oblations of the Lordj and the most holy things. And next to him were Eden, and Miaimin, and Jeshua, and Shernaiah, Ama- riah, and Shechaniah, in the cities of the priests, in their set-Office, to give to their brethren, by courses, as well to the great as to the small: Beside their genealogy of males, from three YEARS old and upwards, even unto every one THAT ENTERETH INTO THE HOUSE OF THE Lord, his daily portion, for their service in their charges, according to their courses : Both to the genealogy of the priests, by the house of their fathers, and to the Levites from twenty years old and upwards, in their charges, by their courses ; and to the genealogy of all their little ones, their wives, and their sons, and their daughters, through all the congregation: for in their set- Office they sanctified themselves to holiness. Also, the sons of Aaron the priest, which were in the fields of the suburbs of their cities, in every several city, the men that were expressed by name, to give portions to all the malesjamong the priests, and to all that loere reckoned by ge- nealogies among the Levites." According to this rendering of the passage, the GENEALOGY of the malcs was authenticated at XXXI. ( 22 ) three years of age ; and they then entered into the house of the Lord : surely, not in an uncircum- cised state; but", prepared by the initiatory rite of their law.* It wiH follow, l.Umt the threat of a child's bcinGi: cut ojf for want of circunjcision, ^vas exec.ted, by omitting to inscribe him in the genealogy of his family. He was not slain; — that had been murder: — he was not doomed to hell ; as some frenzies' fanatics have fancied : but, not being recorded among his tribe, he could claim no civil existence in their line. It will follow 2. that if he were found circumcised, when he was to be enrolled, the want of circum- cision on the eighth day, precisely, did not affect his registry. One surprising thing in this passage is, that children at three years old entered into the house of the Lord: — but, it is absolutely astonisiiing, that the children of the priests, whose were the most holy things, and the oblations to the Lord, had a right to eat of those most ho/i/ thinss, at this early time of life! How could they eat them with proper reverence.^ How couli I they acknow- ledge God, in partaking of them } How could they perform any one act. or cherish any one sentiment, conT"^cted with them? — The thing is incredible : yec so we find the law in the text. Mo! cover, the text is stud iously precise : These Officers were to distribute to the small, as well as to the greai : accordim?- to the genealogy of all their little ones: — and these little ones are distinguished from sons, and from daughters : — and this principle extended through all the con- , gregation. Neither is this a forced sense on the passage : Dr. Geddcs renders — "■ given to such of their male children (from three years, np- wardj as came into the house of the Lord." — It Comprire the strictness of tlic law, with regard to eating yi th« Temple &o. Ley. vii. 10,30. xxii. 10, &c. ( 23 ) IS clear, then, that at this early time of life, chil- dren entered the Holy Temple, were participators in the rites there performed, and were borne on the sacred registers. Now, this passage gives light on another, which though often appealed to, has seldom been accurately investigated. Moses says, " Ye stand Deat.Kxix.li. all of you this day before the Lord your God your LITTLE ones" — i. c. children of three years old, according to the passage in the Chro- nicles, " to ENTER INTO COVENANT with the Lord thy God, and into his oath." — Strange! very strange, this! Children of three years old, enter into God's covenant/ Why, they could not so much as tell what a covenant was .- much less could they assent to its conditions ; and much less still, if they promised to observe those condi- tions, could any dependance be placed on their conduct, in future life. I grant this also is incre- dible: yet, so stands the text. Nor are these the only places where little ONES are public characters : for Joshua confirm- ing, or rather, renewmg, this covenant of the Lord, on Mount Gerizim, " read all the words of j^^j, ^jjj 3 the law, the blessings and the cursings, according ' to all that is written in the book of the law to the LITTLE ones;" — to children of three y fears old ! Why read to them, who could not under- stand a word ? — or, if read to them, why record the reading, and so particularly identify theni ? Be this as it might, it is clear from the passages adduced, that children of three years old were members of the Hebrew community, civil and religious, in the most sacred rites, in the most solemn transactions, equally as their fathers were. They were, no doubt, subject to the same pre- paratory purifications, and were treated on the same ritual principles as their fathers. May we ask What reasons may be alleged for this .?* ( 24 ) Tlie first remark in answer, is, that three years old, was the iveaning time. Josephus tells us, that the Israelitish women suckled their chil- dren three years; and the mother in the Mac- "» M ace vii ^^^^^^ adjures her son — " have pity on me, who «7. gave thee suck three years, and nourished thee." While children were at the breast, then, they were not considered as subjects of regular reli- gious admission to the temple service. It should seem that Hannah attended to this, in the case of Samuel ; she gave her son suck, till she weaned him — and while he was yet j'oung — a merechild^ D'Arvieux ^^"§' ^^^ brought him^— and thenceforth he at- v«i. in. p.' tended at the Divine Altar. The Arab women 296. give their children suck, three years. While children sucked, they were infants, or bales; but after they were weaned, they Avere described by another name — little ones, or little children. The first stage of life is passed. Have we any thing resembling this in the Gospel ? I think we have: because, 1. we are told by Eustathius and Phavorinus that an infant, or babe, is, " a new-born child, nourished by the Bftor. teat, from his birth, until he be four years OLD." The Greeks, then, extended infancy to four years of age : the Jews only to three years of age. Customs of countries differ. Now, who will deny this authority ? Is it not competent? And if it be, on what pretence have some shamelessly affirmed that infancy in the Gospel times, extend- ed to the age of tweyity, or tic€)ity-one ? That a writer already frequently named should play this trick, and insist that infant imported in Greek, as it imports in the language of our English Court of Chancery, a person under mature age, excites no wonder; but, that a gentleman of unquestion- able abilities, and general information, accustomed to mathematical induction, and demonstration, should appeal to the English language, and to terms of E?^^/^Vi judicature, in order to explain a ( 25 ) Greek term, is more than wonderful: that he should say, " brephos, hrcphyllion, — are used in- discriminately for MINOR'S, whether they be twenty days or twenty years old," is beVond belief; and can only be explained by a re- ference to the influence of party feelings, and preconceived hypothesis. No: we cnnnot resist the testimony of Eustathius and Phavorinus: and an infant is such, only to the age of i-our YEARS, at the utmost. This is further evident, if wc consider the terms used to denote the " little ones," whom our condescending Saviour blessed. " The ^'^""^'J)^' ^* Evangelist Mathew calls them " little children;" J^*' .'** Luke calls them " infants;" that is to say, they "'*y^*"" ' were about that time of life, when infancy end?>^ ra p^epn. and chihlkood is beginning ; — about three years of age, more or less ; there were several, but not all of equal age. However, they were so young that they were " brought " although they are said to "come" : and the benignant Redeemer for their security, took them up into *' his bended arms." An action, in the Saviour of the ^^^''^ "" ^^' World, at once graceful and gracious. What has this to do with Baptism? Much. For if, as I have already observed, the Greek language extends infancy to four years old, and the Greek church extends baptismal infancy to fonr years, while the Jewish custom extended it only to three years, — we see the reason at once why Gregory Nazianzen, adopted three years as the term beyond which, he would not have bap- tism delayed. Robinson indeed, calls this opi- nion of Gregory's " a ncic affair:" yes, as new as the days of Hezekiah, King of Judah ; as new as the days of Mo?es and Aaron ; and, probably, as new as the sacrifical rites of the Patriarchs, Jacob and Abraham, if not Noali, himself. ( 26 ) We are now, led by the order of events, to transfer our attention from infancy to childhood. It is certain, that children were included in God's covenant made by the instrumentality of Moses. What is the next period of life, that we find marked in Scripture ? The next period of life ends about the conclu- sion of the sixth year, or the beginning of the seventh. In what we have seen, the little ones were rather passive than active, in making a covenant : but, in the case of King Joash, won- derfully preserved, and at length produced to the 3Kin 8xi 17 P^^P^^ ' ^6 read *' Joash was seven years old — 9 crio!l''xxiii ^""^ Jehoida made a covenant between the Lord Iq[ ' and the King, and the people, — between the King also, and the people." A child, at this time of life, therefore, was competent to acts of the most important nature ; and though, in fact, under guardianship, yet his assent was authoritative and bindine; : and, no doubt, Jehoida delayed the installation of Joash to this time of life, purposely, for this reason, I am not aware, that any thing in the New Testament is pre- cisely a counterpart to this ; but we shall see its application presently. It is natural to enquire, at what time the state of childhood ended ? and this, I apprehend, must be placed at twelve years of age, or thereabouts. At this time of life we find our Lord paying his Luke ii. 42. first visit to the Temple ; I suppose, on this ac- count. About this time of life (or thirteen, at fur- thest) those Jews who can read, are called to attend to the reading in the Synagogue. In short. Dr. Gregory is perfectly right, when he describes the child raised to life, by our Lord, Mark V. 42. " who was of the age of twelve rjears," as called Luke viii. 42. a " little daughter," verse 23;_the " little child," verse 39-40 ;— for, up to this age, the state of ( 27 ) childhood continued ; and about this age — (twelve, or thirteen) — it ceased ; to give place to another appellation. The question of Infant Baptism, does not lead us further, in this direction ; for, I believe, no BapHst scruples to baptize yoath which have arrivea at this aq-p. It is, therefore, proper mere- ly to note, that at twelve, or thirteen^ began the character of " yoirig men" or " young wo7nen" which ended about twenty years of age ; to give place to that of "men", oi-"icomen;" of "fa- thers" or " mothers" I srppose, that the same progress obtains p^ ,^ ^^ among the Jews, at tills day ; for Mr. Frey tells tiveV*"*" us in I' .s .'tTariiitive, " Before I was three years old Life I began the Hebrew alphabet, — and when but six years ofase I could perfectly read any chap- ter of the live books of Moses. It is true, I un- derstood very little," &c. When a Jewish boy has arrived at the age of thirteen years w^d a day, he is considered a man, tit to be one of the ten necessary to constitute a full number for public •worship, &c. ... At the age oi twerdy one I re- ceived a second honorary degree to be a leader of the synagooue, to read the public prayers, and the ia\i^ of Moses." — Have we any such di- vision of life, in the Gospel ? I think we have. It is true, that one Apostle speaks of " travailing again in birth" of Children ; cai. ir. 9. and this, no doubt, must be taken metaphori- cally. That the Apostle John also uses the term " little children" metaphorically, is truth : — I say, it is truth .-—but, it is not the whole truth : for, he also uses the term in its proper and li- teral import. His words are these: " I write unto you little children, because your sins IJohnii. it. are forgiven you for his name's sake. — I write unto you, young men, ... I write unto you, JATHERS." { 28 ) Nobody has ever supposed, that the terms fathers, and young men, are to be taken meta- phorically ; and it is evident, that the term little children, is exactly of the same nature as Johnxxi. 15. they are: it follows, that this term also expresses r*^^bs"^ '''^'^ c/«7(//'e« young in years. And why not ? were ra cepuac. ^^^ ^'^^ souls of children at twelve years old as precious as those at thirteen ? — those of ten, as those of tioehef those of eight, or six, &c. as those of ten ? And since the Jewish period of life, at which infants became " little children" commenced at three years of age, what reason can be given why, John, himself a Jew, should not comply with the custom of his country, and direct his address to children of the same age, as Moses, and Joshua, and Hezekiah, had included in the most solemn religious rites? in the i^exsondX^ct oi covenanti)ig with God? I sa}', no reason can be assigned why the Gospel should exclude children — little children — which the law had included, favoured, and patronized. And here we perceive the genuine application of Dr. Ryland's invaluable rule — " Every word should he taken in the primary, obvious, and ordi- nary meaning, unless there he something in the connection or i?i the nature of things which require it to be taken otherwise." But, there is nothing in the connexion ; neither is there any thing in the nature of things, that requires this word little children to be taken in any other than its obvious and literal meaning ; unless we would annul the proceedings of Hezekiah, Joshua and Moses ; which must not be attempted. And now, what is the doctrine addressed to these children ?— Is it a deep question of divinity ? • — Are the powers of a Newton necessary to com- prehend it ? So far otherwise, it is the simplest proposition possible ; — your sins are forgiven you, for his name's sake.'* Any child may comprehend this. In our own country, happily for the Chris- ( 29 ) tian church, ten thousand children of three years old are daily taught this very doctrine : yes, and they understand it too, as much as is necessary^ for their tender years, though they ca'nnot ex- plain it, or expatiate on it, so learnedly as we have a right to expect from a D. D. And further, this Epistle is GENERAL: it does not describe the slate of" little children" con- nected with a single church onlif ; though it may remind us of those many, which were, in a sense, members of the church at Corinth, yet not full Letter ii. to a members; — whereas, the Apostle John speaks of Deacon, p. 41 these without reserve ; and to wherever his Epistle might be presented. We cannot possibly con- fine this within the limits of the seven Asiatic churches : the influence of his writings, must have penetrated much farther : indeed, far and wide in Asia. Now, as he employs neither hesi- tation nor exception, it will follow, that the cus- tom of admitting infants into the church, bj- baptism, was general : and this contributes to ac- count for our finding it, as we shall see hereafter, in all parts of the Christian world, of which we have any hints, or histories. A practice so ge- neral did not rest on vague report ; but, on well authenticated Apostolic warrant. For, these children, addressed by the Apostle, •were either within the Christian church, or they were without it. If they were without it, how comes the Apostle to address them ? A brother Apostle says, " What have I to do with those who are without?"— ^"Hi^, no doubt, John was actuated by the same spirit. But, if these chil- dren—" little children"— were icithin the church, how became they so ? and, ichen became they so ? They must have undergone the initiatory rite: like the familiar of Lydia, Stephanus, &c., they had been admitted by baptism: for no other means of admission existed. ( 30 ) Mark i. 4. J ggk again, seeing " their sins were forgiven," Luke iii. 3. fiifien Were they forgiven ? " I acknowledge one Actt ii. 38. Baptism for the remission of sins," says the antient Church; and the antient Church was rif^ht: these children were admitted into the church by bap- tism ; by baptism administered for the remission of sins. Here again we meet with authority in support of the opinion, the " new affair," of Gregory Nazianzen. These little children of St. John were 1. past three years of age; 2. they had been ah'eady consecrated to God. But, this is not the only authority that bears on this subject: and I take a pleasure in referring to the words of Irenasus, because he may be con- sidered as a kind of grandson of the Apostle John: for, Polycarp was intimate with John ; and Irenteus was the disciple of Polycarp. He was. Letter II. lo a also, a man of an inquisitive mind; and we have Deacon, p. 17. formerly seen how diligently he treasured up the discourses of his master, and what he repeated from the Apostles. These he echoes ; and his echo is not only in perfect concord with the lan- guage of John, but it is a convincing commentary ^ on it. " He, [Christ, of course] sanctifying evcrj/ several age" — now, when a writer speaks thus — every several age, we may expect to find him very A.D. 167. precise and full in his enumeration: he will leave Adv. Haer. ^yj- ^one. — He " sanctifying every several age by the likeness it has to him.*. . .for he came to save ALi; by himself. — All. who by him are re-born unto God; 1. infants, and 2. little ones. • Magister ergo existens Magistri quoq ; habebat setatem. Non re- probans nee supergrediens honiinem, neq ; solvans suam legem ia se humani generis : sed omnem aptatem santUficans per illam qnae ad ipsum erat similitudiiiem. Omnes enim venit per seraet ipsum salvare : omnes, inquani, qui per eum renascuntur in Deum ; infantes, & parvulos, & pueros, & jiivcnes, He seniores. Ideo per omnem venit aelatem : & in- fantibiis infans factus, sanctificans infantes: in parvulis parvulns, sancti- ficans banc ipsam habentes aetalem; siniul &exemplum illis pietatiseflec- tus, & justitia'' & subjectionis : in juvenibus juvenis, &r. { 31 ) and 3. children, and 4. youths, and 5. Per- sons of Mature Age. Therefore, he passed through these several ages; — for infants, he was made an infant; sanctifying infants: — for LITTLE ONES, he was a little one, sancti- fying thereby, those of that age ; and also being to them an example of goodness, holiness, and dutifulness; — to youths, he became a youth," &c. " Re-born to God " — regenerated — how this could be, in the case of infants, except rituatlxj by baptism, — " re-born of water" — may puzzle John iii. 5. the most knowing. — See the extract from Justin Martyr, on page 63 of the Introduction. Observe the variation in this pious Father's language : he does not say, Jesus was an example to infants ; because, infants are incapable of fol- lowing an example : [so the Apostle John does not address infants] but, he was an example to little ones, because children from three years old, to six, are capable of being influenced by exam- ple. This demonstrates, that infants in the sense of " men newly converted," cannot be intended here : for Christ is as much an example to them, as to any; and they are bound to follow his example, as much as any. I know that Dr. Gill, by a happy equivocation, insinuates to his reader that Irenaeus contemplated — MEN in all conditions of life" ; are, then, youths, children, little ones, infants, men ? — while Dr. Stennett affirms, that no confidence is due to a writer who reports that Christ went through the stage of OLD AGE, — which we know to be contrary to / truth. But, we know too, that Irenaeus's Avords will not bear this sense, even if tortured by main force ; no : his seniors are the fathers of the Apostle John. When such very good men are driven to such sheer prevarications, who can refrain from pity and blame ? Let us compare these ancient testimonies. { 32 J Years of life IRENMUS JOHN, Apostle. Fifth to 3 or 4 years Infants 3 or 4 years to C, or 7 little ones LITTLE > 6 or 7, to 12 or 13 Children . . CHILDREN S 12 or 13, to 18 or 20 Youth YouxNg Men 18 or20, to elder life Seniors Fathers. Is it possible to produce a closer commentary, a commentary more accurately in unison with the sentmients, the language, and the feelings of the inspired Apostle, the affectionate disciple of the most benevolent of masters ? " Suffer little children to come unto me," says our Lord : — ** lit- tie children your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake," says the beloved disciple :— " l7i~ fants, — little ones, — childrcTt, are re-born unto God, by him, sanctified by him," says the "Faith- ful Man," recording his testimony for the benefit of " Others also." No : the Law shall never triumph over the Gospel in its tenderness for infants. Does it describe little ones entering into covenant with God ? So does the Gospel. Does it allow little children to enter the sacred pre- cincts, and partake of the most holy rites ? So does the Gospel. Does it register them, at their early age, as members of the holy community, as *' among the living in Jerusalem" ? So does the Gospel. Does it sanctify them to the Lord, as Samuel was sanctified ? So does the Gospel : — for, " HE came to save ALL by himself; — Infants — Little Ones — Children — Youths — and Seniors:" — so says the reverend Disciple ; — so says the Apostolic Master ; — and so says the DIVINE LORD :— WHO DARE GAINSAY IT ? " Youths— Children — little ones — Infants" — why, this is a whole oikos : a family ! To be sure, it is : — Oikos includes both sexes, and all ages ; this is the reason why St. Luke employs that term. Had he said " infant," some would have discovered wisely, yes, wisely ! that he did ( 33 ) not mean little children: had he s:ik\ " youths," they would be sure, and doubly sure, that lie could not possibly mean children or little ones : had he used a jnasculine term — females would have been excluded, on the principle of their exclusion fiom circumcision ; and so, of any other tertn that he could have adopted: whereas, by using tlie term oikos, or family, he includes ALL ; none are omitted:—'* we baptized the m^hole family of the Jailor," says tlie inspired Evangelist. I might here rest the argument, did not lecent events compel an additional observation. I sup- pose no Baptist denies the similarity between the Jewish Passover and the Lord's Supper. Dr. Stennett, and other Baptist writers, which I am acquainted with, insist on the resemblance. Why, then, will they not follow out the com- parison ? " Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us," says the Apostle : what did the law require j^^ of worthy partakers of the Passover? — " And when a stranvjer shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the Lord, let ALL his MALES EE CIRCUMCISED, and then let HIM come near and keep it." What ! was not his own personal circumcision sufficient passport to the Passover Table ? No : says Moses, in- flexibly, LET ALL HIS MALES BE CIRCUM- CISED. " But, perhaps" Perhaps me no perhaps's, says Moses, after " every male " is circumcised — then — let him come near and keep the sacred institution." So ! so ! not only must the father of the family be circumcised, but his whole oikos : — Not so, neither: — the whole oiA:o5- was baptized, because " in Ctirist Jesus there is neither male nor female ;" no distinction in behalf of either sex : yet none can deny that if ALL the sons of a family must be circumcised, under the law, that sometJting of a similar duty obtained undc-r the Gospel. Now think of Lydia, of the Jailor, of Stephanas, &c. were not their families baptized on good and valid reasons, D £xud. xii. 4t. { 34 ) on causes completely satisfactory ? And was not the baptism of the numerous family of Cornelius, by the Holy Ghost, at once a wa; rant and an ex- ample? Mr. Hall finds a difficulty in placing Baptism before the Lord's Su]iper; while ;dl his adversa- ries enlarge on thai, as the only correct order of the rites : were it but admitted that as the Lord's Supper was given to Gentile converts, instead of giving them the Passover,so Baptism was given to them instead of giving them Circumcision, con- troversv would cease at once : the baptism of families would be assigned to its proper place ; and this law of the ancient ritual would be ful- filled in the new dispensation. Nor can we deny that reasons might be adduced for the injunction given by Moses: It might be the will of God for the trial of obedience; it might be appointed as the test of established faith ; it might be enacted to prevent discord in famihes : in short, if obedience must be so — and no more — and no less— and no otherwise, — then, that precept might rest on a conviction of its being a touchstone of character, of the hearty good-will with which a convert shewed himself animated, by fulfilling the law to its very uttermost punctilio. Hitherto I have soufiht only Fact- and Evi- dences : I have carefully avoided whatever may be properly called Divinity : I have no desire to alarm weak minds : I have no design of wound- ing tender consciences, or of rendering any pious Christian uneasy ; but, the present topic insists on furnishing a word of exhortation. Reader, let me intreat you to lay your hand on your heart, while I most affectionately ask — Whether you believe that Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us ? — Whether you are willing to manifest your regard to this great Passover, to the same extent as was expected and commanded of old ? — if not, whether you have any reason to think that { 35 ) you can be an acceptable guest at the Christian Passover Table, while you have at home any be- longing to you, any over whom your care ex- tends, any whose welfare you are bound to seek — upon wiiom the initiatory rite of your religious profession has not j:assed ? You see clearly that this obligation was of Divine appointment ; you see that the Gospel exceeds the law in its atten- tion to children : you see that Christ has sanc- tified the state of Infancy : why do yon with- hold the sign of sanctitication from those in that state? How dare you partake of the Chris- tian Passover, while your chiUlren are hi this un- consecrated condition 1— Think what a contrast there is, to your disadvantage, between your con- duct and that of a convert to Judaism — Think what your avowed allegiance demands of you ; and, to what, your duty, as a Christian by profes- sion, ought to bind you. Those Avho do not believe that Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us, are not concerned in these reflections : whether this be to their real advantage, let them devoutly and promptly con- sider. Here this letter must close : and, as Divines " commend their discourses, to the blessing of God, and the pious meditations of their hearers," so I beg the meditations of the reader on the subject here exhibited to his understanding ; and I doubt not of his docility meeting its reward in the conseq'hent blessing of God. I am, Sir, Your'9, kc. D 2 A SIXTH LETTER Co a l9eaton OF A BAPTIST CHURCH, ^c, 6fc. Dear Sir, IT has been a famoui argument among the Baptists, that Circumcision was a token of right to temporal blessings, to property in the land of Canaan, &c. and, therefore, it was conferred on Infants, in proof of their descent from him, to whom the land was specially promised ; but, what j'ight to such succession, did circumcision confer on Ishmael, a son, who, banished his father's house, was expelled from being heir with Isaac ? What 7ight did it bestow on that unspecified number of persons who were circum- cised at the same time with Ishmael ? And, here give me leave to observe, that, among them were ' a great number of children, offspring of the slaves, &c. not directly mentioned ; luit, included in the terms used: now, these children could in no sense be Abraham's posterity; neiUier were they partakers of Abraham's faith: therefore. Circumcision could not be to them, the seal of righteousness by faith : Surely not. — What faith had the Edomites, the Midianites, the Egyptians, &c. What faith have, or ever had, the Caffres ? Circumcision was, clearly, no mark of personal faith among the Hebrews ; but, of obedience. What right to inheritance in the land of Judea did circumcision] confer in later times on the Ci lead ites, on Achior, on tlie many "'"juduh!^ people among the Persians who became Jews, Esther viii!i7. under the patronage of Queen Esther? &c. ( 37 ) The precept given to Abraham commanded Adult Circumcision ; but Infant Circumcision wa» included : — the command given to the Apos- tles was " baptize all nations ;" surely, infants were equally included. If in the term " all males," every boy-child was a party ; so in the term " all nations " every state of life in the com- munity, was a party , also. When we acknowledge the circumcision of Abraham and Ishmael, we do not deny the circumcision of a hundred chil- dren, at the same time: so, when we acknow- ledge the baptism of " men and women," we do not deny the baptism o^ their families. The question is almost ludicrous, that now de- mands investigation: Did Jesus Christ adopt the Arab principle of postponing the initiatory rite of religion, or did he continue the Jewish prin- ciple of conferring the initiatory rite, in infant years? — were Christians Ishmaelites, or Isaacites ? — "Now, we brethren, as Isaac was, are children of the promise," says the Apostle ; and he adds, " cast out the bondwoman and her son ? — " so, then, brethren, (Christian brethren,) we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free; stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free." This was not ad- dressed to Jews by descent : no; but to converts, from whatever nation, the Gauls, &c. resident in Galatia ; formerly heathen, but now Christians. Certainly the primitive Church understood this Gospel liberty; but those who, in later times, take upon them to be wiser than the pri- mitive Church, charge the early professors with perverting liberty into licentiousness, with intro- ducing and cherishing corruption in faitii and practice. That some might do so, is possible ; at least, we know, that many were the sects in acti- vity, even during the life of Jesus Christ himself. But, we must not suffer this acknowledgement to overcome our better opinion of the main body I 38 ) of genuine Christians. It may suit the tenor and character of Socinian argumentation, to in- sist on this ; but, the notion has been well met, by several writers. I avail myself of Dr. Gre- gory's observations in reply to such aspersions. rvi^^***^R *?" I assume it here as a position which caiuiot with any vol"ii p. 116. J"^*^^^^ he disputed, that the opinions held by the majo- rity of real and pious Christians in the early ages, when, as Jerome finely observes, " the blood of Christ was yet warm in the breasts of Christians, and the faith and spirit of religion were brisk and vigorous," were those that were taught by the apostles, and con- stituted the fundamental doctrines of the Christian reli- gion. The observable harmony and unanimilij of the several churcltes in tlieir most public acts is a circum- stance wbicb irresistibly confii-ms this position. It is scarcely probable that any large church of those early ages should vary, in things of moment, from the Apos- tolical doctrines : and it is quite absurd to imagine that ALL the churches should combine in the same error, and conspire together to corrupt the doctrine of Christ. This argument is much and justly insisted upon both by Irenseus and Tertullian against the heretics of their respective times. They both affirm that the true dis- ciple, (that is, according to their own interpretation, one who believes that He who wrought their salvation upon earth was God) " is a follower of the public doc- trine of the church." Is this argument valid against the Socinians, only ? Is it totally inapplicable to the subject of Baptism ? May we not depend on what we find generally practised, while " the blood of Christ was yet warm in the hearts of Christians, and the faith and spirit of Religion were brisk and vigorous"— in reference to 15aptism ? May we not accept the current opinion of those times, as really the doctrine of the Apostles, as the genuine intention and command of Christ ? We have seen that historical Scripture ex- pressly states the Baptism oifamilies, and fami- lies are composed of children in all states of life. ( 39 ) infants, little ones, children, &c. ; we have seen the Apostle Paul acknowledge that he baptised, or was the cause of baptizing^, many families ; we have seen the Apostle John address children, as so far members of the Church, as to be fit subjects of his Apostolic care ; and this in an epistle s^encral to the churches; we have seen his disciple at one remove, aftirni the sanctification of the state of infancy, by Christ, and the ritual sanctifica- tion of the persons of infants, by Baptism; we have seen the Christian writer wlio, of all others, took the greatest pains by inquiry, by travelling, by close examination, purposely instituted, and long continued, — he says, the Church received from the Apostles, the injunction to confer Baptism on infants ; and all this in the very ear- liest ages of the Church : all within two cen- turies. Can falsehood boast of all these inci- dental unanimities, — these coincidences, which in point of fact, and of argument, dove-tail into one another? Can this be error, supported, as it is, by such extensive, universal, and satisfactory evidence ? Is it said " we, in these days, ought not to be too sure, too overweening in our interpretation of Scripture, and the Fathers"? I wish the sentiment on which this proposition is founded, were more prevalent among Christian sectaries ; I think I know some to whom it would prove oi" infinite service. But, to meet it, we shall di- rect our attention for a few moments, to those who must be allowed to have best understood their own langauge, and the practice of their own days. What say the various communities, whose evidence interests us, on this subject ? — Did they conform to the Arab or the Israelite principle and practice ? Did they postpone their rite of distinc- tion from other religions, or, did they not rather anticipate, than delay it? Did they (ritually) sanc- tify infants, little ones, children, and youths, or did they defer ritual sanctification to the seniors and the aged ? ( 40 ) The first proposition in following this enquiry, may properly commence with the harbinger of the Gospel. John the Baptist baptized Infants. For proof of this we refer to the testimony of a body of men, still existing in Syria, the acknow- ledged disciples of that eminent prophet. They are known under the appellation of '^Disciples of John,'" or simply "disciples," or " Sabians," [i. e. Baptists : and sometimes, Hemero-Baptisfs, or Daily-Baptists.] Disciples of John, are spo- ken of repeatedly in the Gospel history. Copies of some of their books have reached the learned in Europe ; and Professor Norberg has lately Literary announced proposals for publishing a complete Panorama, translation of them. They are written in the Galilean dialect: — that body of these people w^hich is known to us, calls itself Galilean. These Sabians denominate the Baptism of their Mkhadfron Master, John, " the Baptism of Light"— [comp, N.T. vol.iir. Heb. X. 32. where Christians are spoken of as V^^'^-V-"^^^- illuminated, i. e. baptized.] They speak of a Being called Liglit, (distinct from the Supreme Being) which united itself with John the Baptist [the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, comp. John i. 33.] at the time when he baptized a celestial Being [" the Lord from Heaven] which appeared to him in the form of a little child." — Their books say, When John baptized in the Jordan of living [running] water, with the bap- tism of life, and pronounced the name of life, the disciple of life, . . . said, " Stretch out thy arms, take me, and baptize me with the baptism of life, and pronounce over me the NAME which thou art accustomed to pronounce!" John answered the disciple of life, 'that cannot ie.^' But the scholars of John earnestly requested him: he bap- tized, therefore, the disciple of life. As soon as the Jordan perceived the disciple of life, the river 296. { 41 ) overflowed, and covered John himself, so that he could not stand. The lustre of the disciple of life shone over the Jordan, the Jordan returned within its banks, and John stood on dry ground." " The river, overflowing, covered John himself." This was a phenomenon, then, a singular in- cident: for, the river did not overflow on account of ordinary baptisms; but on such occasions, John, standing on dry ground, w*s beyond its reach. This statement supports two decided infe- rences: 1. That John baptized in the Great Name; meaning, the name of the God of the Jews, Jehovah. 2. That he who baptized dis- ciples as little children, could have no aversion to the baptism of little children themselves. And this is rendered evident by the practice of his fol- lowers, who baptize children Sitfurti/ days old : and who use a formula, importing, " / baptize thee with the baptism with which John the Baptist baptized.'' They say, the}' know not correctly the M^ords which John used; and therefore they adopt this form ; — in which the reader will per- ceive an indisputable allusion to the sacred name: the name which no Jew ventured to pronounce ; the true pronunciation of which, indeed, the Jews affirmed to be lost. These people also bap- tize by trine immersion ; which is an unquestion- able reference to the Trinity : — three plungings, but one baptism. Compare what is already said, Letter iii. p. 24. It may be worth while to compare with this the history as recorded in the Hebrew Gospel of jj], iv'^comm.' Matthew. " And it came to pass, as the Lord as- in Esaiam. cended out of the water, that the whole foun- tain of the Holy Spirit descended, and rested upon him, and said unto him, " My son, I have expected thy coming in all the Prophets; and now I remain upon thee ; thou art he in ichom I rest ; L^(tei°iu"to thouart my first begotten which shall reign for ever J" Deacon, p. 24. ( 42 ) The Gospel of the Ebionites, a branch of the Nazarenes, had these words . " John came bap- ,, . , „ tiziner the baptism of repentance in the river Jor- r.piph. Haer, , i7 ,, \ r. \ 1111 i • . -r p. 30. dan. — " Alter tiie people had been baptized, Jesus came also, and was baptized by John, and as he ascended out of the water, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Holy Spirit of God in the form of a dove, which descende i*"'' was AFFUSION. In the administration of this ordinance they mix cold and warm water loij,e- ther. When I asked them the reason of this, they seemed at a loss for an answer, and finally said, it was because Christ was baptized in a part of the Jordan where another stream met with it. Respecting the subjects of Baptism, I made no inquiry, as I supposed it was a matter of no- toriety, that the Syrians are p.bdo-baptists. Brother Hall, who conversed with these same Priests, when he was at Cochin, understood that children were usually baptized at eight years old'* Is it too much to conjecture, that these distant countries, to which Christian it^qoenetrated, have retained the practices derived from their fore- fathers, more punctiliously than the perturbed nations of Christendom? They have, certain- ly, been less tormented with opposing opinions : and, apparently, Ambition has had less scope for its operations among them, than among ntore extensive communities and interests. A slight sketch of their history may assist us in forming a judgment on the antiquity of their religious rites. We read of a certain Theophilus who arrived from India, very young, among an embassy sent to Eiuope in the 31st year of the reign of Con- Ti- Viuco vf, stantine, A. D. 337- He returned to India, in t!ie '° ^'"'*; ^^'*'- character of missionary, A. D. 356', having staid nineteen years ; during which his conversion, in- struction, &c. took place. His voyage was up the Red Sea; where he made some converts. Proceeding to the peninsula of India, he there found churches, already established. This seems to be the first mention of Christians on the [ 48 1 coast of Malabar : Cosmas Iniicopleiistes found them there in the sixth century ; and there the Portuguese found them, in the latter end of the fifteenth century, on their discovery of India. Now, this church was of considerable standing, before this visit of Theophilus. Its liturgy was then, as it is now, Syriac. The Bishop was, (it should appear) till within these few years, con- secrated by the primate of Ctesiphon, (the repre- sentative of the ancient Babylon). The jnerchant fleets sailed in the times before Constantine, and at that time, annually, to that coast, from Egypt. By some of these, missionaries might easily pro- ceed to India. This does not carry up the date of Christianity, in that Country, to the time of the Apostles : though, it must be acknowledged, that more than one of them, or their immediate disciples, is said, by good authority, to have preached the Gospel in India ; and, I recollect to have met with mention of a Bishop in India, about A. D- 180. These Christians are called Christians of St. Thomas. A complete history of them would be very acceptable. THE GREEK CHURCH. We come now to the Greek Clrurch : — a Church whose authority in fevour of immersion has been strongly pleaded by Mr. Booth, and his friends : — pleaded, I say, in behalf of immersion, by the very persons who deny it, in respect of Paedo-baptism. Surely, if it be authority for one practice, it is authority also for the other. And this the rather, as it is impossible to ac- count for the " corruptioit" of this church in baptizing children, unless it were an original injunction: since no mistake could occur in the language used to describe it, in Scripture ; for, this Church spoke the same language; which teas, and still is, the dialect of their country ; it is not possible to perceive by what process they should " corrupt " this rite. { 49 ) Whereas, nothing is easier than to perceive by ' what process they varied immersion into bap- tism. They have done no more than take a part for the whole. This form of error, is the mildest possible: whereas, if they have substituted the baptism of infants for that of growr persons, men and women, it is the grossest pcssHble form of error: it is the renunciation of a fixed Apostolic principle, for the reception of a tontraiy princi- ple; in direct violation of Scripture and Tradi- tion, of their original Churches, and of their best- instructed Fathers. Common Charity is at no loss which side to take, on this question ; and happily, Scripture and Charity coincide. "Baptism is perform 'd by Immersion ; it is re- Toumefoit iterated three times, at each time plunging in the Voyg:<-,Vul. I. whole Body of the Child, which the Curate P- iS'-J- holds under the Arms. At the first Immersion he pronounces in hisLangua:ge a Form of Words, that signify. Such a one tlie Servant of God, is baptized in the Na'me of the Father, nozo, for ever, and in Secula Seculorum." At the second Immersion he says, Such a one the Servant of God, is baptized, in the Name of the, So 7, &c. At the third. In the Name of the Holy Ghost. The Godfather answers every tim.e. So be it. The Parents do not usually present the Child till eight days after its Birth ; on the day of its Baptism, they take care to warm a quantity of Water, and to throw into it Flowers of a grate- jful Scent: after the Papas has blown upon it and blessed it, pouring into it, some sacred Oil, with which they anoint the Body of the Chdd so thorowly, that hardly any of the Water can dwell upon it. They throw into a Hole that is under the Altar, all that has been used in this Ceremony. The Greeks so firmly believe that sprinkling of Water on the Head of the Child among us is insuilicient for Baptism, that fre- quently they re-baptize the Latins who embrace ^eir Communion." E ( 60 ) Atnbass.Tiay. " The Muscovites have a custom if there were A. D. 1636. many Children to be baptized, that the Font is emptied for each child, and other water is aonse- €rated ; it being- their persuasion, that the former being soiled icith the impiirity of that Child^s ori' ginal Sin, who had been baptized before, it is not fit to cleanse a second, much less a third. They dip the child three times, pronouncing the ordinary words." " Apostate Christians, Turks, or Tartars, receive Baptism in a brook or river, whereinto they are plunged over head and ears." The reason for this is evident : running, water has always been chosen for immersion ; even the Heathen preferred streams, as the Hindoos prefer the Ganges, at this day. Hence the disciples of John say, he baptized in " living nritef'; — i.e. the Jordan ; hence he baptized at -^non, because there were many streams there ; and, hence the Jewish priests were so scrupulous, that, says Lightfoot, if the water in their reservoir vessels, had stood more than a few hours, without run- ring over, they held it unfit for purification, and drew fresh water. Nothiiig can mor*^ clearly ex- press the ritual cleansing of the person from guilt: and it is, no doubt, in the instance of these Christians, a remain of that " piuting away of the FILTH of the Jiesh*' of that " washing ot the bodies of believers in pure water," which was certainly practiced in the Apostles' time, previous to Baptism. We have something of it among ourselves, in the cleanliness of the children pre- sented for baptism ; in the cleanliness, too, (not seldom an entire dress of white) of the mother, on such occasions ; as the clean and new white dress antiently worn after baptism, was a mark of a new life, now begun, and of putting on the Lord Jesus, in a way of professional holiness. I have done all in my power, by enquiry of the niost learned of the Principality, to ascertain what was the practice of the Ancient British Church : but I have not succeeded. The Welsh ( 51 ) Triads preserve the names of certain persons bap- tized ; but, are silent, on the mode of Baptism. The Baptism of the Church of Rome, is too well known, to need description. Thus we have seen Baptism administered under a variety of forms ; in some churches Baptism has not superseded circumcision; elsewhere, not the priest, but the godfather baptizes the child : elsewhere again, ^/7/^e fmwer^io/i is practiced; in some churches, Baptism is administered either by- immersion, or by pouring; and the water is mix- ed to a certain warmth ; in some places, the sacra- mental words are pronounced but once; in other places, they are pronounced three times. In all these varying ceremonies the essential intent of the rite is preserved; — the subject of the ordi- nance is consecrated to the Trinity. Willing to close these researches, I proceed to distinguish two inferences, which they support. Thefirst'i?,, that we know no Christian Church whatever, that does now, or ever did, reject Infant Baptism. In the North, in the South, in the East, in the West, no Christian Church REFUSES Baptism to Infants. Are then, your friends. Sir, wiser than all the world ? than all who went before them, in the earliest ages, than all their contemporaries in the present age ? Does the sarcasm apply to them — " We are the meii^ and Wisdom shall die with US 9" Are they that " generation which is wiser in its oicn eyes than seven men tvho can render a reason f" I put it to their good sense, I put it to their modesty, I desire to interest their understanding, — is it likely, that they alone, of all the thousands and millions of Christian professors, in all ages, and places, and of all sects and nations, should have had the good fortune, in spite of the facts and EVIDENCES adduced, to be the only persons who have elicited truth ? Secondly, We see that in all these Churches Baptism is a consecration to the Tiinity: not ( 52 ) one uses any form of words— nay, the Bap- tists themselves do not use any form of words, in the administration of Baptism, allusive to the hurlal of the person baptized as Christ wj^s (say they) huricd. Had our Lord intended any such allusion, he could have said so: Does he say so? No. This, then, I submit, also, to their good sense and understanding. They have taken a secondary— 2in incidental sense,a sense referring by- allusion, only, not by direct purpose, as the pri- o)ianj, ?ind peculiar intention of the rite. This is not Wisdom : what else it is, becomes not me to say. This is not Grace ; its true name I leave to be conjectured by others. It is not Orthodoxy ; for orthodoxy would at least endeavour to put the principal things of Religion in the principal place. ... I adhere to the initiatory words of Christ, as the best and greatest authority, on the subject ; for it seems to me, very extraordinary that in a Religion having but two Rites, they should both point at the same thing. — The death of the Saviour, is clearly the purport of the Lord's Supper ; — its 'primary and direct purport : is it likely, or credible, that the purport of Baptism — its primary and direct purport, should also be the death of the Saviour ? But, if in the initiatory rite there be a commemoration of the interposing Deity y and in the Lord's Supper a commemora- tion of the interposing Humanity — if, for this reason, consecration to the Deity is sufficient, by one act, and ought not to be repeated, — whilede- votedness to Jesus, as. Lord of all, is frequently renewed, and to be repeated continually, — then, I say, there is between the two rites that distinc- tion which was evidently intended from the very first, and which it would well become all profes- sors of our common faith, to return to, and to re* tain, to the latest generation. UatJiM and Tk'sS) <''"««' ^^ ^^''^^^> ^^'-"^^ Sqnare. CONCLUDING FACTS AND EVIDENCES ON THE SUBJECT OF IBiiJP^II BY THE EDITOR OF CALMET's DICTIONARY OF THE HOLY BIBLE. Have you a mind to confute the Baptists, who harp so much on a professioa of fkith as necessary to Baptism ? this identical word — [ojTcos] — will open its friendly bQSom to embrace Infants and secure their title to that institution, though incapable of repentance and faith . . . .Our brethren seem to forget that the ordinance about which we contend is a positive institution; and that the only rule of its administration is Divine Law or AposTotic Example, and rot dubious conjecture, which is the utmost that can be supposed here : for none whom I liave observed, pretend a certainty that there were [no] infants in any of these baptized Families. There is too much reason, therefore, to suspect, that the love of hypothesis, and the want of solid argument, excite maii3' of our oppaseis to produce the passages before us with such an air of confidence as they often do. Booth's Pedobaptism Examined, Vol. II. p. 367. Hontion: Printed for C. TAYLOR, 108, Hatton-Gardkn, »Y O. HAZARn, 50, BEECH-STKEET. 1817. IF the Letters to which the present pages are the coiichision, had been announced as a Treatise on Baptism, or, if tlie Correspondent addressed had been ideal, only, the writer would have been liable to well-deserved censure for their disorder and want of arrangement; but, the truth is, these defects were unavoidable. The first letter w as written to he answered; and if instead of a Resolution by the Baptist Com- mittee to disregard it, a moderate attempt had been made to meet it, it is most probable, that the second, and consequently none of the suc- ceeding, had ever appeared. Be that as it might, it is hoped that some service has been done to Truth by their arguments; and the Rehgious World has received them, in a manner which the writer feels to be extremely flattering, and for which he returns his most grateful acknowledgements. By those who differ from him he is charged with a meditated " attack ;" — with a w ant of "temper;" — and with "singularity:" a word in reply, may be proper in this place. It is well known to two of the most eminent Ministers among the Baptists, that the first originals of these papers were drawn up pre- vious to the year 1808. They were intended merely as an article of Literary Criticism, for a respectable periodical work: Fearing contro- versy, the Editor declined using them; they were laid aside for years, out of the writers hands, and might have been no more thought of, had not the Deacon, from the best of motives, attempted to proselyte his friend. A delay of six years! will not be thought to indi- cate much of the spirit of attack: — No: the writer considers himself as strictly a defensive enquirer after Tmth. [ IV ] With what " temper " the proposed Corres- pondence was begun, let tlie following- extract from the Deacon's private letter to the late Mr. Fuller explain: " You have most sovereign authority over every line and every word, if such there be, which contains the mere appearance of harshness towards Dr. R. — -The arguments are committed to you, as to a man of honour." If subsequent conduct has excited indignation, the cause did not arise from this side of the question. Nor is the writer " singular." In early life he found in a sermon, of which he does not recol- lect the author, a remark to this effect : — " If our translators had employed the term family instead of the terms house and household the sect of Baptists would never have existed." The "same distinction is made by a Writer in the Christian Observer, for 1810, who signs A. (He is unknown to the E. C.) — who also refers to the authority of Aristotle; but the existence of the original papers two years earlier, proves that their arguments were independent of that article: in fact, they were drawn from the perusal of Scripture, simply. The Deacon's letter " on Households," is imitated from a letter in the American " Panoplist" which never has been answered, and never will be. To conclude, the Reader is desired, after perusing the following pages, to re-consider the question formerly proposed : — " When the Apostles say they baptized HOUSES — WHOLP: HOUSES—DID THEY not include INFANTS in THE Rite? When error is proved in the affirmative, the writer will be forward to ucknowledge, and abandon, his share in it. INTRODUCTION. THE arguments which have been adduced in this discus- sion of the question of Baptism, have made considerable! impression, not only on the religious public at large, but on thinking Baptists in particular. The more learned of that denomination find themselves obliged to confess that" Infants are included" in the term — oikos — Jamily, as used in the New Testament: the more liberal acknowledge, that '* they did not think so much could be said for Infant Baptism." Others, nevertheless, continue to contend that Infants are EXCLUDED from the term family as used in the N. T. and they insist that the term must he restricted to Adults. It is somewhat curious to observe the difficulties to which those who contend for this sense of the term have been reduced. Taking the Baptist Magazine as the authorized organ of the party, what a change of writers it presents! The first to enter the lists was Dr. Stuart, whose error is acknowledged on all sides. The second was TROPHnvius, a very worthy and able young Divine, who made a little entrance on the subject, and stopped. The third opponent was an egregious elf, who denied, vi et armis, tliat the primitive Christians received Baptism in a state of naked- ness. The gross ignorance of this teacher disqualified him from further proceedings. At length, the office has been committed to another hand : not that he volunteered his services, but that the task was imposed on him; not that he was desired to assist in discovering truth, but, was enjoined to say something against the Facts and E'^'idences. And this gentleman is undoubtedly, a man of great natural abi- lities, of a strong and understanding mind, improved to the highest by extensive learning, and not by general learning, only, by that particular and intimate acquaintance with the arguments on the subject of Baptism, which may naturally be expected from a powerful intellect long devoted to professional inquiries on this branch of Christian practice. From such a man what may not be anticipated? In setting his performance before the reader, I promise him, therefore, if not all that can be said — yet the htst that can be said, in opposition to the principles which have guided the Editor cf Calmeti It appeared in the Baptist Magazine, March, 1817= R ( 2 ) «« REMARKS ON a PUBLICATION ENTITULED FACTS and EVIDENCES on the Subject of Baptism; in three additional Letters, Sfc. By the Editor of Calmet's Dictionary." 1816. ** THE former letters we noticed in our seventh volume, p. 516: since that time, three more letters have appeared, much like the preceding, both in their temper and their singularity. But as they are highly applauded by our Paedobaptist friends, injustice to our brethren, and, we may add, injustice to truth, we are called upon not to overlook them. " Our readers, who have seen or heard of the peculiarities of the author of these letters, will doubtless recollect, that one of his leading sentiments is, that the term o^y.oc, house, is used to point out the nearest relatives, particularly children ; and that the word o^Mot, means servants (A), or what we some- times call the establishment of a family. This is considered as a discovery of great importance, amounting to scriptural evidence of infant baptism ! ! *' When the New Testament writers say, they baptized houses, they mean to say, they bap- tized infants." Introd. to the 1st Letter, p. 28. "The introduction to the first of the additional letters now before us, contains a great deal on this subject. But to say nothing of the criticism, suppose our author is right, that there is a distinction between oixo; and oixiu.: and farther, suppose that we adopt his distinction, and apply it, it ought to follow, on his plan of reasoning, that the term otxo? can never be applied in the description of a family, where there are no infants. For if this is not proved, we are as far as ever from possessing scriptural evidence of the baptism of infants. Now, we are told, that Noah was commanded to enter the ark, and all his house; ita-c, o ojxo?. Gen. vii. 1, — but we know that there was not an infant in the house (B). The salvation of Noah's house by water, the Apostle Peter repre- sents as a like figure to baptism ; but the analogy aftbrds no encouragement to the baptism of infants, since there was not one in the ark. We are also told, that Elkanah went up to the house of the Lord, and all his house; itoc^ o oty.o? awn, to offer the yearly sacrifice, but Hannah and the child Samuel were left at home. 1 Sam. i. 21. Should it be said, these ( s ; members of the family are mentioned as the part excepted out of the house (E); it is answered be it so; then the term house does not necessarily include the infant part of the fa- mily; for the others who went up, and who were not infants, were not less parts of the house than the infant and his mo- ther, who were left behind (C). But if the term house can be applied to that part of the family which is distinguished from the infant members, the boasted argument amounts to no- thing; for there may be a house where there are no infants (D), and before it can be proved that the Apostles baptized in- fants, because they baptized houses, it must be proved that there were infants in the families. This however is not done. " Dr. Ryland, in his " Candid Statement," had adduced various proofs from classical authority of the use of the terms baptize and baptism, in the sense of immersion. On these our author makes the following " Observation :" "^ Not one of these instances is from scripture: THEREFORE, scrip- ture never uses the term baptism in the sense of plunging; for then Dr. Ryland would have discovered and quoted it." p. 47. So then, the use of the word among the best Greek writers does not show what it meant; nor what the Apostles, who wrote in a language the words of which had long been settled, designed to convey by it! In the part of Dr. Ryland's work under consideration, he did not quote scriptural autho- rities; because it would be said, the debate is, how the words used in the scriptures are to be understood. Authorities are, therefore, adduced to show how the word was understood, when it was applied to Ihe common occurrences of life: and then, these authorities are rejected, because they are not scripture ! " Our author finds great fault with Dr. Ryland's authori- ties, for the use of the terms baptize, &c. when restricted to certain defined parts of the body. He gives instances of per- sons said to be baptized, or immersed, up to their breast: — np to their middle: — up to their head, &c. He says, he is astonished that Dr. Ryland should quote such passages (E): and asks, " is a man in water up to his navel, plunged? So directly the contrary, that any eye-witness of only com- mon sense, would think hirn partially immersed, and no more; for all the upper parts of his person are above the water, consequently he cannot be plunged." p. 50. So far as the water came, the person was said to be immersed : the term baptized, Arc. was not applied farther, either by the autho- rities quoted, or by Dr. Rvland. It was the part which was B 2 ( 4 ) in ike water, and not that part which was above the water, which is said to be baptized (F). Common sense justified Dr. Ryland, when the purpose for which he brought these autho- rities is in the least considered; aud exposes the unfairness of our author's objections. *' The attempt to make it appear that the sprinkling of the water of separation, which is prescribed in certain cases of vncleanness, by the law of Moses, was baptism, we should think could not convince any one who reads the passage in the book of Numbers. The Jewish lawgiver directs, that a " clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean (the water of separation on the third day, and on the seventh day; and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, and ivash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even." Num. xix. 19. What the author of these " Facts and Evidences" wishes us to believe, is, that the (G) divers washings mentioned in the Epistle to the Hebrews, ch. ix. 10, not only included the above ceremonial rite, but that they Were all sprinklings, pp. 60, 61. To do this, however, be ought to prove that the words sprinkle, wash, and baptize, mean the same thing; or else the passage above quoted will show, that the term used in the Hebrews is not designed to express the sprinkling of the water of separation, but the other parts of the service. It is certain that the Jews never imagined that their sprinklings were the same thing with ivashing the clothes, and bathing in water; and it is well known, that when they speak of the Christian baptism of ancient times, they describe it as immersion, and use the word by which they are accustomed to express llieir most complete ablu- tions. Justin Martyr, we are told, says, " that sprinkling with holy water ' was invented by daemons in imitation of the true baptism, (signified by the prophets,) that their votaries [those of the daemons] might also have their pretended puri- fications by water.' Now if the heathen sprinklings imi- tated the true baptism, then the true baptism included sprink- ling, for if no sprinkling, no imitation." p. 63. But this is neither a correct translation, nor does it state the whole of the case. Justin says farther, that they ivashed themselves completely before they came to their teinples. Here he used the same word which he had employed before when he de- scribed the baptism of the Christians. Oi' sprinkling, as a part of Christian baptism, he had said nothing ; he therefore could not point out the sprinkling of the votaries of daemons, as the circumstance in which there was an imitation o{ bap- tism. The similarity consisted in that which was commou to ( 5 ) both, which was, that they were washed : and in the latter iastdtice, Justin says, completely washed. This is evidently the point of his comparison; but our author gave us only a part of a sentence : what we have now mentioned, is the con- clusion of the period, of which he takes no notice. See Jus- tini Apologia, pp. 94, 95. edit. Coloniae, 1686. "In this work we have also a plate, representing "an inter- nal view of the ' Chapel of the Baptistery' in the Catacomb of St. Pontianus, at Home ;" p. 66, with the plan, section of the chapel, and various representations of baptism ; which our author tells us, he has taken from M. Seroux d'Agincourt's work, entitled, "The History of the Arts, by existing monu- ments, from the fourth century to the fourteenth," Our author says, " This baptistery may honestly be dated at the latter end of the ^rst century if not earlier." p. 69. But why that date is affixed to it, does not appear. The most learned ecclesiastical antiquarians that we have met with, had no idea that the Christians possesed such chapels in the first century. Even M. d'A. from whom the print and account are copied, dates his " existing monuments" no earlier than the fourth. We are told, that " baptism was not here ad- ministered by plunging." p. 69. Letter third. If this place was an ancient baptistery, baptism might have been administered in it by immersion, for any thing that appears to the contrary : our author has at least brought no evidence which shows this could not be the case. But we cannot help asking, to what does all the pretended evidence, which this work brings forward, from carvings on church doors, old pic- tures, and even this supposed ancient baptistery, amount? If it be designed to show, (H) that the ancients did not use immersion in baptism, the plain reply is, we know that they DID ; — they have told us so thetnselves, in a great variety of forms, in their writings : and the contrary is asserted in the work before us, on the imagined evidence of painters and sculptors, who lived we know not when, and we kwow not where. " We have also a long dissertation about circumcision and tradition, in the fourth letter, in which a Mahometan doctor is represented as stating his opinion on the importance of adult, in opposition to infant circumcision. He argues from various sources, till he becomes quite warm, and concludes his phillippic against the circumcision of infants with — " take Btiy word for it, — it is the doctrine of devils : it is the offspring Jofhell — I say of hell!!!" Here our author adds, "And B 3 ( 6 ) yet, most reverend Doctor, indulge me so far as to allow me to observe, under your favour, that— the Jews — " To which the reply is, — "The Jews! eljehudi! that asinine race, which wandered forty years in the wilderness, under the guidance of Moses; and have been wandering ever since, without a guide ! — the Je-hews ! ! !" p. 17. ** What does this mean? — But we abstain from remarks. — In the fifth letter, the noted passage of Irenaeus is brought forward, in which he sj)eaks of Christ's sanctifying every age, all who by him are born again to God, infants, little ones, boys, young men, and old men. Nothing is said in any part of the chapter respecting baptism : and the Baptists are not the only persons who have thought that the ancient father did not here refer to baptism. But supposing, (not granting), that Irenasus in this passage did intend, that Christ sanctified every age to himself by baptism : then a new difficulty occurs — Js infant baptism regeneration?" [The writer then dig;resses from the question of Fact, to that of Regenera- tion by Baptism: — which is ceitainly piemature, till the Fact be admitted.] I shall lake the liberty of offering a few observations on this performance, in the shape of NOTES. A. " Oikia means servants." Not quite so absolutely: Aristotle says OjA:ia includes both bond and free; and the E. C. in the title of his " Additional Observations," adopts this sense. Nor is this of trivial import, as may appear from a passage which afforded the fairest opportunity in the world for including a servant in the term family, if that could be. John viii. 35. " The servant abideth not in the house — not oikos, \)\xi oikia — forever: but the son abideth ever." Here the son is clearly a member of the oikia; and equally clearly the servant is not a member of the oikos; though our version might lead to that notion. I perceive that the discussion is about to be transferred from the New Testament to the version of the Lxx. I hail the omen ; but I wish, before other considerations already adduced are finally dismissed, to observe, that the distinction between Oikos, an apartment, and Oikia, the whole premises, literally taken, had not escaped Juhus Pollux, who closes his article " On the division of the Oikia," by saying, — " The Oikos is also called a three-tabled room; a five-tabled room, a len-tabled room ; according to the dimensions of the apart- ( 7 ) ment, and the number of eating-tables it is capable of con- tainiri«:. So also among the women's chambers, the wool-house, the bake-house,^ cVc." analogous to the wash AoMse, &c. among ourselves. It is clear, therefore, that oikos being a part, and often a ver> small part, or a chamber, must not be confounded -with the entire oikia. — Also, that. When oikos is used to denote a family, the connexion of numbers with the term forms the experimentum crucis of the distinction between the family, oikos, and oikia, the entire establishment, including servants. So we read of the oikos, family of Noah, consisting of eight persons, being saved in the ark: here servants are evidently excluded. So we read of the whole oikos — family, of Jacob, that went down into Egypt with him, being sixty-six persons; the servants are excluded, for they amounted to some hundreds. " Ahab had seventy sons in Samaria— look out the best, and fight for your master's family" — oikos. The servants are excluded.t &e. That the lxx very readily express infants by the terra oikos, appears from the following instances: Gen. xviii. 19. " For I know Abraham that he will com- mand his children, even his family — oikos, after him." Isaac, was only promised, not born, at this time. Gen. xxxiv. 30. " I being few in number, — shall be des- troyed, I and my family — oikos." We know there were infants in Jacob's family, at the time. Numb, xviii. 31. " Ye shall eat it in every place, ye and your families — oikos — for it is your reward for service." We know that the * fonts of the priests and Levites did eat, at three years old, Uicir " rewards for service." Dent. xii. 7. " And ye shall eat before the Lord — and rejoice — ye and your families — oikos." The same infants as did eat before the Lord, are here said to " rejoice" before the Lord. Comp. chap. xv. 20. Deut. xiv. 26. " Thou shalt eat before the Lord thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou and thy family — oikos." Here again the parent is said to "rejoice" with his family, before the Lord : — which is exactly what is said of the Jailor's family when baptized: and as it here expresses the presence irpo? TO 'i^rcov TotJ j^cEyE6ot;?, o tw» iiKivuv «j)tG|*ot. O dt yvvaiKutrioip Ja^a^o?, »(7Twv. 7ccXcc(7iovcyo(; oixoj, o"»towohco5. x. t. X. t Gen. vii. 1. comp. 2 Pet. ii. 5, Gen. xlvi. 26. 2 Kings, x. 1. 3. B 4 ( 8 ) of infants, i. e. children of three or four years old, so un-, doubtedly, it does in the N. T. instance. Dent. XXV, 9. *' Then shall his brother's wife — say — Thus shall it be done unto that man who will not build up his brother's family^ oeAro*." By procreation of infants. 1 Sam. ii. 33. " The increase of thy family — oikos — shall die in the flower of their age." This must mean infants. 2 Sam. vii. 16. " And thy family — oikQs — and thy king- dom shall be established for ever. 18. Thou hast spoken of thy servant's family — oikos — for a great while to come." See verses 25, 27, 29. Comp. 1 Chron. j^vii, 23, 24, 25,— — This must mean infants. 1 Kings xiii. 2. " Behold a child shall be born to the family — oikos, of David." This child must be an infant. Psalm cxiii. 9. " He caused the barren woman to have a family — oikos — and to be a joyful mother of children." Infants are here intended, beyond all question. The rcmarker's next paragraph is one of the most singular instances of confused logic, and incoherent ideas that ever came under my notice. It mingles truth and falsehood together, without that ingenuity which sometimes almost reconciles the moderately attentive reader to the whole. A less charitable man than myself, would certainly infer that the learned reraarker saw the truth, but did not dare to avow it. That was not the purpose for which he was engaged. B. " The family of Noah, — no infants." Granted ; to save time and trouble ; yet a stout-hearted critic (which I am not) weuld insist, that compared with human life in the Gospel- day, not one of Noah's sons was ten years old — and that, eminent chronologers have taken these years for lunar. C. *' Those who went up, and who were not infants, were not less parts of the house than the infant and his mother who were left behind." Granted, very cheerfully; only observing, that the infant and his mother who were left behind, were not less parts of the house, than those who went up, and who were not infants. p. "There may be a house where there are no infants." May I believe my eyes ? Did this sentence really fall from your pen. Sir, or has it been damaged at the press, or foisted in by the Editor? I grant you, with all my heart, that there ??iffl^ }\c a house where there are no infants : now, grant me, ( » ) l.n return, that there maj/ be a house in which there are infants, and what becomes of your argument? What, Sir! is a man of your taleuts and erudition reduced to support the Baptist cause by a MAY be? Can you lionestly devote your faculties, natural and acquired, to the defence, against all the Christian world, of a sect, whose distinguishing tenet rests on a may be? How are the mighty fallen! It was not so in the old Baptist school. There it was taught that there was not, that there COULD NOT BIS, infants in any house in the New Testament which is spoken of as baptized. — Not in that of Lydia; for the brethren alluded to were her sons, or her servants; I have shewn they were Timothy and Luke: Not in that of the Jailor, for they rejoiced in God ; I have shewn that infants in Scripture language may rejoice in God: — Not in that of Stephanas, for they addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints; I have shewn that the family — oikos — of Stephanas, which was baptized, does not express the same individuals as the household — oikia — of Stephanas. I see no attempt made to revive the old arguments, or the inferences from them. Are they given up? Is the whole system now suffered to rest on the uncertainties of a may be? Leave blockheads and fools to their may bes ; a man like you. Sir, should not be satisfied with any thing less than absolute decision. He should be able to say, ex animo — " there were certainly No infants in any one of those families !" I have no occasion to instruct you. Sir, in the nature of the sin of schism ; in the moral turpitude of un-christianizing all who difter from you, of treating as heretics unworthy your communion, those who adhere to the uniform and universal practice of the Church of Christ. But, this I say, that before a modest man could think it his duty to countenance and vindicate a separation on account of an opinion, he would surely see well to it that such opinion rested on incontro- vertible grounds. He would demand demonstration. If he quotes only may bes, he may be as well among other Christians. You yourself affirm that adducing may bes will not justify Infant Baptism: hqw then can may bes justify separation t E. You know perfectly well that the words house ?ind family mean the same thing ; but, by way of diversifying the argu- ment, 1 suppose, you droll a little on your readers, by assuring them, that "these members of the family — are excepted out of the house." If you intended this for a bull. Sir, you have succeeded to admiration ; for only a bull, in the true Irish sense of the term, can be in the house ami out of the house, ( 10 ) at the same time ! But you must not assume the whole merit of this ingenuity: Mr. Booth has a number of bulls of the same breed ; and as he lays great stress on their power, I shall beg leave to take some of them by the horns. When Jacob was going down into Egypt, the Sacred Writer informs us that the number of his sons and his sons* sons, of his daughters and his sons' daughters, with him, was sixty-six." He then mentions, particularly, the " two souls" born to Joseph in Egypt, which we know were infants, and closes by saying, "All the souls of the house — cikos — of Jacob were three score and ten." Now the phrase, " All the house," is evidently inapplicable till these two infants of Joseph are included. Omit these, the term does not apply : insert these, the term is instantly and correctly applied. The term, therefore, expresses the presence of these infants: and this, assuredly, it must continue to express. For, take the passage, and torture it how you may, no other meaning can be extorted from it. Without these infants the number cannot be mi^de up: the sacred writer waits, as it were, for them ; he waits, I say, to express them ; and then, all the house is the suitable phrase. This passage is demonstrative of the presence of infants in the term oikos; not merely morally, or grammatically, but, by means of the numbers, mathematically, and strictly demonstrative : for not only is the thing so ; but, it cannot but be so. The infants are here, — and are here expressed, — and are here expressed in the term all the house ; — neither fraud nor force can eject them. The Greek is still more favourable to my argument; for it addsjfJve infants, the sons of Manasseh ; and a grandson ofBenjamin; mak'mgallthehouse of Jacob seventy-five persons. Mr. Booth insinuates, by ranging the passage among his exclusions, that when the sons of Jacob came down into Egypt, they left their infants behind them in Canaan. If this were not his object, he might have found the presence of infants expressed, beyond all possibility of doubt, in the use of a term by the Lxx. Exod. i. 1. " Now these are the names of the Children of Israel, which came into Egypt, -every man, iruvomt — with all his house — his own personal family. That the sous of Jacob did bring their little ONES in the waggons sent by Pharaoh, is clearly said. Gen. xlvi. 5. And the intention of the lxx, is to inform us, that the whole did not come down confusedly, in one promis- cuous huddle; but each man distinctly, ixaro? — headingall his familj. Here, then, the term with all his house — PANOi Ki — (11) EXPRESSES the presence of infants; and it is used with that intention. Mr. Booth, repeating Parkhurst, quotes from Josephus, Antiq. lib. iv. cap. 4. " So that they, with all their families , iretvotM, might eat it in the holy city," We know that the children of the priests and levites, at three years old, did eat the most holy things ; and a fortiori, children of the laity at the same time of life, i. e. from infancy, did eat the less holy things ; nor, with regard to the Passover, do I find any exception but the absence of circumcision. But, I find that " the particulars in which it differed from other feasts, are delivered in those interrogatories, or questions proposed in way of catechism, by some child, at the time of eating their passover ; or rather, in the answer made unto the child by him that blessed the table."* I was informed, when attending the passover of a Jewish priest, that the inile is — the youngest of the family who can pronounce the words, "What mean ye by this service?' asks this question. — Now let the Baptists agree on the age of this child; and it w^ill follow on their own authority, that the term panoiki, in Josephus, EXPRESSES the presence of children of that age; without detriment to its importing younger children elsewhere.t F. We come now to the famous example of Elkanah and his family — from which, says the learned remarker, Hannah was excepted; — excepted! why, what had poor Hannah done to justify this cruelty? When she was barren she was a part of of the house; now she is become a mother, under a very peculiar dispensation of the Divine favour, she is excepted from the very family she had so mercifully increased ! ! The height of ingratitude this to Hannah, and no small impiety * Godwin, comp. Exod.xii. 26. " Xhe Children." Alex. Ross. p. 287. Jewish Relig. 1656. " And to him not in a capacity of asking [too young to ask] thou must inculcate knowledge, as it is said, " and thou shalt declare unto thy son, saying, " this is done because of what the Lord did to me, when I came forth from Egypt." HeWew Passover book, Alexander's edit. p. 4. Lond. 1812. t Not having the original works at hand, I cannot affirm that the instances of panoiki mentioned in Mr. Booth's note do absolutely express the presence of infants; but, from appearances, I believe it. " TlocvoiyA, m •nravoty.oi unro'KKvrxi, cum tota domo, sen, jamilia peril." He perished with all hrs house, or family. " UccvotKi ocvxtfubtxt," dicuntur qui funditus pereunt, veiuti quum pestilentia nullum in familia reliquum facit :" is said of those whose family is utterly destroyed ; as when the pestilence leaves no individual remaining in a whole family. Does the pestilence spare infants? Certainly not. Bid's note is — Ylxvomt, cum tota domo, seu familia. Ti^'^ domus. AL. Exod. i. 1. Lex. Cyrilli MS. Brem. TlotyoiM, crvv oXu tu ctxu'." with ail the house. I presume it rather intends, " with all his house." ( 12 ) towards God, were it true. She is excepted /rom the journey, I graot; — but she is not excepted /»'om the house. In fact, it is remarked of Elkanah, that " he loved Hannah ;" he therefore would not willingly "except" her: and the conversa- tion recorded as having passed behveen chem, must have taken place when be was preoaring to go up — before he set out on his journey; for when he had once got his foot in the stirrup, the thing was impossible. This being the case, the history stands thus : " And Elkanah v.as a-going up, i. e. preparing to go up, and al; his family — but Hannah went not up." The Syriac has exactly this sense: Deinde ascendente viro Helcana, cum tola familia sua — sed Hanna non as- CENDir. Jonathan's Chaldee paraphrase is, "And the man Elkanah, and all the men of his house, was a-going up; — but Hannah was not a-going up." We see, then, that these interpreters, wlio certainly understood their original, ex- cluded Hannah from the journey, clearly enough ; but, they never thought of excluding her from the family. t Pardon me, if I ask you. Sir, when you are preparing to go up to London, with all your family, to the yearly Missionary meeting, and your wife, who used to accompany you, pleads an infant at her breast, as the reason for her staying at home this time — whether you except that wife and infant from your family, or from the journey? Methiuks, common sense, the natural feelings of humanity, cry shame! at the question. But, perhaps, we may find another instance in which the term all expresses infants, though import ing an apparent exception. 2 Chron. xxii. 10. " When Athaliah, the mother of Ahaziah, saw that her son was dead, she arose, and destroyed all the seed-royal of the house of Judah." Mark the terms. Sir, " all the seed of the house." Do you doubt whether they import infants ? — read what follows, " But Jehoshebcath stole away Joash from among the king's sons that were slain;" — and we know that he was an infant, not a year old at the time. It follows, that the term all the house, or all the seed of the house, expresses the presence 9f one infant, to a certainty, and doubtless, of many more. I perceive but one instance remaining of Mr. Booth's exceptions [for all the rest are oikia's, not oikos's, and therefore do not meet the argument] and that is, Titus i. 10. " Unruly and vain talkers subvert whole houses, teaching things J The original is, "And Elkanah 7]?' was a-going up — but Hannah nn?)? fttAtaol up."— -The learned reader fees the cliange ol expression. ( 13 ) which they ought not." Why this should be adduced I cannot comprehend: is it because of the teaching; implying that infants cannot bo taught ? But were not Samuel and Timothy infants? and were not they taught? And now. Sir, what is desired of you ? — merely to allovf the same force to the same word in the N. T. which you see plainly it bears in the Lxx. You yourself assert that "the Apostles wrote in a language, the words of which had been long settled," 1 bind you to this assertion. If you stand to it, there is no further discussion between us; for you know, that the Jailor was baptized, he and all his family; — and he rejoiced with all his house— 7ravoi;4» — at the liead of his family, — believing in God, But, panoiki expresses the presence 0/ infants in the instance of the sous of Jacob descending into Egypt; — why then does it not equally EXPRESS the presence of infants in the instance of the Jailor's family? I can find no answer to this question, If the terms all the house express infants in the instance of all Jacob's family, why do they not equally express infants in the instance of all the Jailor's family? If you have any scruples about the Jailor's family, as to this term, you can have none about the family of Cornelius, of whicli it is said, " he with all his house — aw 7r«vT» tw oUu €e,vT8 — feared God :" and all was baptized. " Can infants fear God?" Certainly: did not Samuel fear God, when he "mi- nistered" to the Lord in his sanctuary? — and Timothy, when he studied Holy Scripture? Yet these were infants. Being myself convinced that the Apostles practised Infant Baptism, and that the Evangelist meant to tell us so, I find no great interest in confuting the rest of this paragraph. How could a critic so acute be incautious enough to aifirm that " it ought to follow, that the term oikos can never !! be auplied in the description of a family, where there are no infants"? He must have been conscious that every reader accustomed to reasoning, mr:st disco -'er his extreme distress for argument. No, Sir, no man is bound to prove more than he affirms. I affirm that the natural import of the term oikoSf f^'oily, includes children of all ages. In proof, I offer you fifti/ examples; \i fifty are not sufficient, I offer a hundred; ii ahundred is not sufficient, tivo hundred ; \f tivo htindred ure not sufficient four hundred. I affirm that oikos very often expresses the presence of infants : of this I offer you fifti/ examples; and, if you admit classical instances, ^/Vy more. Euripides alone afJbrds half the number; though he frequentlj uses domos instead of oikos. I tell you also, that somewhat ( 14 ) more than three hundred instances have been examined^ and have proved perfectly satisfactory. Now, it is for you who propose exceptions to justify those exceptions. — Can any thing be fairer? And, Sir, give me leave to ask you, what terras the Evangelist could' have used, to satisfy you of the ApostoHe practice of Infant Baptism? Had he said, " We baptized infants;" — Origen says this; and you imm.ediately exclaim " Metaphorical infants ! metaphorical infants !" Had he said, " We baptized children:" as (the apostles Paul, and John, and) Clement of Alexandria, says, "Yes," you answer, "Metaphorical childrenl metaphorical children!" But do you know, that Clement's allusion — the fisherman, and children drawn out of the water" is extant, among other Christian emblems, of ancient sculpture; in which are seen an angler, at whose line three fishes are nibbling, and already drawn out is — not a bearded sage — not a man — but, a boy about four or Jive years oldff — So much for metaphorical children! As I do not mean to resume the pen, I beg pardon of the learned remarker, if for a few moments I direct my attention to another quarter, in order to include all together my remarks on the term oikos. The interest I take in the respectability of Trophimus, induces me to submit to him this rule — " Whenever a verb implying loco-motion — entering in, going out, &c. — is connected with the terra oikos, look for a dwelling-howse :" — For, a man enters a family by affinity, matrimony, adoption, &c. ; but he enters a dwelling by loco-niotion. Let us try the passages this writer has adduced, by this rule. ** Into whatever house ye enter" — Men on a journey enter a house by loco-motion; it therefore means a diveUing. But Trophimus supposes that the blessing, Peace, is " invoked" on persons, only: What then did David mean, who sent to Nabal a message — " Peace be to thee ; and peace be to thy house, and peace be to all that thou hast" I 1 Sara. xxv. 6. Did David " invoke the blessing" on Nabal's oxen and sheep? on his loaves, his parched corn, his raisins, his figs? which we learn frora the story, were among the things he had. It was in fact, and still is, the customary salutation of the country; and no more " invokes a blessing," than our " good morning to you. Sir." " Let us take another example. In Acts vii. 10. we are informed, that Pharoah made Joseph governor over Egvpt^ m — — — ' t See Arringliius-, or Roma Sottcranea, Tom. II. lab. xlii. ( 15 ) and over all his house." — Very true; but what have children to do here? In 1 Kings, xiii. 8. we have the expression, " And the man of God said to the KiNG, If thou wilt give me half thine house — {oikos, lxx) — his Royal property; surely he did not mean half his children. And from the history of Joseph we know that he was over Potiphar's houses so supremely, that his master knew not aught he had, save the bread he did eat; and had kept back nothing from Joseph, save his wife." Into exactly the same supremacy of administration over his property — house — {oikos, Gt\\.\\\.AO\ did king Ph;noah place Joseph—" only in the throne will I be greater than thou." And that this is the light in which the Psalmist viewed the transaction, is evident; for he tells us, " He made him lord of his house, and ruler over all his substance" — his Royal property. Psalm cv. 21. That substance is properly connected with the king's house, see2Chron. xxi.l7. see alsoProv.vi.31. "A thief shall restore seven- fold, all the substance of his house — all his property. Cant. viii. 7. If a man would give all the substance of his honse — all his property, for love, it woidd be utterly con- temned. See also 2 Sam. xii. 8. Gen. xxxix, />. " When the Philippian Jailor inquired, " What must I do to be saved?" the Apostles answered, " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved and thy house — in- cluding his servants." I have never taken this expression in what I once heard a learned gentleman call the positive tense: a tense that would be very inconvenient on many occasions; as for instance, " All manner of sin and blas- phemy SHALL be forgiven unto men:" — may be forgiven, is tl>e meaning. But, if we take the Apostles' address to the Jailor as a prediction — the utmost, in my judgment, it will b^ar — see how exactly it was fulfilled. The oikia, servants, ^c. of the Jailor heard the Word; but we do not read that ^ne of the oikia was baptized; i. e. saved. But this we do i'ead of the Jailor, and of all his house; which is exactly what the Apostle foretold; and we have no warrant tu go beyond the writer's words, wbeft-canvassing the passage, whatever charity may incline us to hope. To be consistent, the same phrase, in the case of Cornelius, should import, a^ his servants were soldiers, all his regiment; and besides, all tlit inhabit- ants of Cesarea : — against this "sentiment" I do not object; but is it the fair sense of the expression ? The places compared in the Evangelists come under the rule, already stated: they are dwelli7igs, not persons, Tro- ( 16 ) PHlMus says, *' it is true, the expression employed by hak€ differs from that employed by Matthew — but the sentiment is the same." This admission is fatal to his argument; since we are not examining sentiments but expressions, solely. The house of Stephanas. Trophimus knows that I refuse to admit this as evidence, since it is the subject to be decided. E. To conclude with our learned remarker. The reader w ill please to correct this paragraph, thus : " He (Dr. Ryland) gives instances of persons said to be baptized, or immersed up to their breast — He [the E.C.] says he is astonished," &c. This eonfusion in the use of the pronouns, shews a very perturbed state of the writer's mind. F. " It was the part which was i7i the water, and not that part which was above the water, which is said to be baptized." The E. C. would have thought himself very ill euiployed in imagining an argument so imbecile for a gentleman so respectable as Dr. R. Is the Dr. an idiot, that it can be supposed he means to say, " What is under water, is under water; what is above water, is. above water"? No, Sir, if the Dr. was not beating the air, he was vindicating the action of plunging; and this he intended his readers should infer. G. "Divers washings." Are you satisfied. Sir, that the Greek term baptismois, is adequately rendered by the English term washings? You know better. " He ought to prove that the words sprinkle, wash and baptize, tnean the same thing." Directly the contrary ; I insist on the distinction between washing and baptizing; if there be no difference my state- ment fails. The. Apostle does not use the term "sprinkling of water," as you say, but •' sprinkling of ashes;" it therefore eaanot express the other parts of the service, but this onhj." H. "The ancients used immersion in baptism; — ive know they DID; they have told us so themselves, in a great variety ©f forms, in their writings." Aye, or else my pictures must be the greatest liars on the face of the earth ; for they represent immersion more strongly than any words you can select. How then can you say, " the contrary is asserted in the work before us" 1 Immersion was a part of Baptism. How happily applicable are these words! — The sacred writers baptized infants; — " we know they did: they have told ns so themselves:" The primitive Christians bap- tized INFANTS; — " tec know they did : they have told us so themselves." Nothing further is necessary: — not anothep Viord. CONCLUDING FACTS AND EVIDENCES ON THE SUBJECT OP inTim^^^m^ ON BAPTIZING NAKED. I HAD always understood tliat it was a fact acknowledged by all parties, that the primitive Christians received Baptism in a state of nakedness: the denial of this, lately by the Bap- tists, has, I confess, taken me by surprize. Not intending, originally, to make extracts on this particular, as foreseeing no contradiction to my statement, the evidence now offered may not be altogether the most advantageous to the argument; it must be considered as a kind of gleaning; comprising merely such passages as presented themselves in the con- tinuation of researches on the general subject. The first witness is the Baptist Historian, Robinson, who says, cap. xv. p. 85. " Let it be observed, that the primitive Christians baptized naked. Nothing is easier than to give proof of this by quotations from the authentick writings of the men who administered Baptism, and who certainly knew in what way they themselves performed it. There is no ancient historical fact better authenticated than this. The evidence doth not go on the meaning of the single word naked ; for then a reader might suspect allegory: but on many facts reported, and many reasons assigned for the practice. One of these facts is this. Chrysostom criminates Theophilus because he had raised a disturbance without, which so fright- ened the women in the baptistery, who had just stripped themselves naked in order to be baptized, that they fled naked out of the room, without having time to consult the modesty of their sex." Another is this : " Basil rose up with foar and trembling, undressed himself, putting off the old man, and C ( 16 ) went down praying into the water; and the priest going down along with him baptized him." The reasons assigned for this practice are, that Christians ought to putofFthe old man before they put on a profession of Christianity ; that as men came naked into the world, so they ouglit to come naked into the church, for rich men could not enter tlie kingdom of heaven ; that it was an imitation of Christ, who laid aside his glory, and made himself of no reputation for them; and that Adam had forfeited all, and Christians ought to profess to be restored to the enjoyment of all, only by Jesus Christ. That most learned and accurate historian, James Basnage, than whom no man understood Church History better, says, " When Artists threw garments over pictures of the baptized, they consulted the taste of spectators more than the truth of the fact ." So far Robinson. And Basnage might have added, that all the truly ancient representations of baptism, which he had ever seen, represented the person receiving baptism, as absolutely naked : not even " a wrapper round the middle" was thought of, till after the simplicity of the Gospel was considerably vitiated. It was because the case is so clear, that Robinsoa gave no additional quotations ; and Dr. Wall was influenced by the same consideration. His words are, "The ancient Christians, when they were baptized by immersion, were ALL BAPTIZED NAKED, whether they were men, women, or children. Vossius (De Baptism. Disp. i. cap. 6, 7, 8.) has collected several proofs of this ; which I shall omit, because it is a clear case." Hist. Bapt. vol. H. p. 311. What could Origen mean, if Baptism were not received in a state of nakedness, when he says, " With thy garments newly washed thou earnest to the grace of Baptism ; thou wast (by it) purified in thy body; thou wast purified in thy spirit; thou wast cleansed from all defilement of flesh and spirit.''* Hence the Christian Fathers took literally, in reference to baptism of individual converts, the words, Ephes. v. 26, Christ " sanc- tified and cleansed the church by the washing of water: using also a certain form of words [the Baptismal form] — each believer having neither spot nor wrinkle ; but being no less scrupulously washed in his person than was the practice among the Jews, in their administration of baptismal washings. Hence, says a Poet, " The parents receive from the sacred font, their infants white as snow, in body, in heart, in habit. * Lota sunt vestimenta tua cum. venisti ad Baptismi gratiam; purificatus es corpore; purificatus es spiritu; mundatus es ab omni inquitiamento cabnis, et spiritus. £xod. in lib. ii. ( 18 ) The souls of the baptized are cleansed, and the members of their body are washed." § But the history quoted by Robinson (and by Dr. Wall) deserves further examination: for that writer seems to have entertained no doubt, that even women were baptized naked: and Dr. Wall expressly asserts the same, not only in th«^ words we have quoted, but in his remarks on the violence offered to Chrysostom's female converts. "They took s;rcat care to preserve the modesty of any woman that was to be baptized. There was none but women came near, or in sight, till she was undressed, and her body in the water: then the Priest came, and putting her head under water, used the form of Baptism. Then he departed, and the women took her out of the water, and clothed her again with white garments." But, with i2;reat deference to that learned writer, the preservation of modesty by this mode was impossible, as any reader may be convinced on a moment's reflection; especially, when a number of women were to be baptized together. No, Sir, not so much as the face of any modest woman was seen, at any time, except by her own husband: and if it were necessary to prove with Avhat inflexible adherence to custom the women in the east conceal their faces [for only prostitutes suiter them to be seen], reference might be made to Denon, as well to his plates as to his text. Surely then, decent women. Christian converts, would not suffer themselves to be seen and handled, as they must be, if plunged, by any stranger: and this im- possibility increases, as it affects the young women, the maidens. Moreover, the very mention 'in the plural) of priests and deacons, in this history, confutes this notion. Says Dr. Wall, There is an account given by Sozomen, H. E. lib.viii. cap. 21. A.D. 403. of an insult made by the so'diers in the great church at Constantinople, against St. Chrysostom and his adherents : and how on Easter-eve they rushed in armed : and he adds, " There was a great tumult at the Font, the Women shrieking in a fright, and the Children cx-^'m^'. tlie Priests and Deacons were beaten, and forced to run away with their vestments on." Were these Priests and Deacons waiting in the same apartment with the women who were undressing themselves for the purpose of receiving baptism? 6 Ahhdl'is quicumque aiiimas, et membra hnacvi Ceniite propositus ad boncifacta vias. Inde Parens sacro ducit de fonie sacerdos Infantes niveos corpore, corde, habit''. c 2 ( 20 ) Where, then, were female modesty? and Iww is this consistent with the former assertion, that "none but women came near?" In short, the more this is examined, the more evident will it appear that, although these ablutions, or immersions, for they are the same thing, were the initiatory part of Baptism, yet Baptism was not performed by ♦he priest's access to the person of any woman, while she was naked, and " her body in the water. " Could tlie prayers and the responses, or con- fessions of faith, &c. be rehearsed, while a woman, or a num- ber of women, remained standing in the water? The embarassment of our Baptist brethren on this mat- ter greatly exceeds expectation; for they have not been content with a single reprobation of the E. C. on this account; they find themselves guilty of departing from the primitive usage in this particular, even while most vehemently urging uniform adherence to that usage, as part of positive duty, in which negligence is sinful. If precise conformity, in all points, to the original ritual be indispensable, as an obedience to God, to Christ — and if, in this point, they violate the original ritual — then, they stand self-condemned. That they do depart from the institution as at first performed, let these extracts evince: we do not draw the same consequences, nor see their conduct in the same lights as, they, to be consistent, ought to do. On the Construction of Ancient Baptisteries. IT may readily be admitted that, as the practice of im- mersion ceased — converts from heathenism gradually ceas- ing, — the conveniencies of Baptisteries were changed, in consecjuence ; so that now few traces of their original ac- commodations can be discovered. Nevertheless we find, occasionally, hints which afford a reference to them. So John the Deacon, in his lives of the Bishops of Naples, speaking of Vincenzio, whose life he is writing, says. Fecit Baptisterium fontis majoris, et Accuhitum jiixta positum. This Accuhitum I beg leave to translate by the modern term. Vestry, and then the passage reads thus : " He made the Baptistery of the greater font, and the Vestry close by it." This mention of the greater font implies the existence of a lesser font : and this Vestry informs us where the priests and deacons might wait, while the women were in a state of naked- ness, receiving ablution from the greater font, without any disparagement to modesty. The Soldiers, who beset a Bap- ( 21 ) ttstery, would, no doubt, assault the Vestry close to it. We have also in Giuter an inscription to this effect; * — " This is Longinianus, who constructed the Baptismal Fonts:" why fonts, in the plural, unless there were, as in the foregoing instance, a greater and a lesser? Flavius Macrobius Lon- ginianus was Lord Mayor of the city of Rome, A. D. 394. But some may say, " Since these smaller fonts were so useful, it is a pity none of them has been preserved as evi- dence." Very true : I have, however, the pleasure of refer- ing to one, which still exists in the Cathedral at Syracuse, where it is venerated, as a most sacred antiquity : and in my humble judgment, the fonts usual in our parish churches, are but these portable fonts, tixed. The Syracusan font has been the subject of repeated dissertation. Tradition affirms that it is the very implement used by their apostolic Bishop, Marcian : but it cannot be earlier than the fourth century ; and probably may be later. It is of marble ; is small, and has two handles; it therefore was portable; it has also a broad foot, on which to stand steady. It may be about twelve inches deep. This font is inscribed, — ^"The dedicated present of Zosimus^ who devotes to God thisf^oly Cistern for the purpose of sacred ■" HIC EST LONGINIANUS QUI PON- TES BAPTISMATIS CONSTRUXIT SANCTI PAPAE DAMASI VERSIBUS NOBILITATOS A. D. 394. Flavius Macrobius Longinianus fuit Pifefectus Urbi. Vide Gruter, p. 165. No. 1. § ANA0HMA lEPOY BAnTISMAlo; Z02IM0Y 0HnAi2POt;vTo; TON KPATHPA «y»ON This has been translated to this effect : Donarium Sacri Baptismatis Zosimi Deo Donum Hue Vas (sive) Hunc Craterem. Siciliae Inscriptionuni, p. 239. Class. 17, No. 1. Panorm. 1769. Georgii Gualtheri Monumentis Siculis. Jac. Phil. Tomasinus de Donariis. Cap. 43, p. 248. Paciaudi dc Sacris Chrislianorum Bahieis. Cap. xvi. p. 160. Roms, 1758. The only reason assigned by antiquaries why this cannot be earlier than the fourth century, is, because no instances of Christian inscriptions importing gifts to the church, are known so early ; the correctness of this inference may be doubted j we know the Heathen inscribed their gifts to their temples much earlier. c 3 ( 22 ) Baptism." The term cistern — kratera, imports a receptacle, from which water (or wine, at a festival) is distributed to many applicants. This holy cistern was doubtless imitated in the me-te-mak of Abyssinia; which, with other evidence, proves the existence of smaller fonts, at the same time with the larger, at least as early as the beginning of the fourth century. On Deaconesses. WE now approach towards day-light, on this part of the subject. Deaconesses were of Apostolic insti- tution. St. Paul, writing to the Romans, ex- Rom. xvi. 1. pressly calls Phoebe Diaconon, " Deaconess of ^taxovov. the church at Cenchrea ;" and she is described as having been a succourer, protectress, patroness of many. It is also understood, that St. Paul refers to women of this character, whom he describes, among the Deacons, 1 Tim, iii. 11. as " grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things." We know, also, that Pliny, anxious to discover the secrets of the Christians, caused two female servants of the church, who were called ministers, to be tortured; but he could obtain from them no confession of guilt : he could discover nothing but what he calls a vile superstition.* This female Church-officer continued long to be useful and popular among the faithful ; but is gradually more rarely adverted to by ecclesiastical writers ; and ceases to be men- tioned in connection with church-services, after A. D. 1000. To the purpose of our present Haeresi. ixxix. enquiry. Deaconesses are most particularly men- qua est Colly^ tioned by Epiphanius, who says, " There are ridianorum. also Deaconesses in the church : but this office was not instituted as a priestly function, nor has it any interference with priestly administrations; but it was insti- tuted for the purpose of preserving a due regard to the modesty of tlie female sex; especially at the time of baptismal washing, and while the person [body] of the woman is naked; that she may not be seen by the men performing the sacred service, but by her only who, by order of the priest, had charge of the woman, during the time that her person [body] * Quo mag;is necessarium credidi, ex duabus ancillis qua ministry dicebantur, ^uid esset viri et per tormenta qucererc. Kihil aliud iiiveni, mam superstitiovcm pruvain,immodkam. Lib. x. £p. 97. ( 23 ) ■was naked ."t Now, if the men performing the sacred service did not see the woman receiving baptism, while naked, how could any one go down into the font to her, and plunge her? If the woman was seen by the Deaconess only, how could Baptism be administered according to the notion of Dr. Wall, of Robinson, and of the Baptists generally 1 There are two ways by which Baptism might be performed, •with due regard to "female modesty: the first is, that after the Deaconess had caused the woman (or several women) under her care to be properly washed, and clothed ni the baptismal habit, the Priests and Deacons should come into the same apartment, and confer Baptism; or, otherwise, that the woman (or women) properly habited, after immersion, should go out of their apartment'into the Accubitum, or Ves- try, and should receive the remainder of the rite from the lesser font. But, either of these implies a division of the service; the first part being immersion, or washing, the second baptism, or consecration. Nor let it be thought strange that this oflicial superintend- ance of immersion should belong to the Deaconess ; for, as the women in the east are in the habit of going twice or thrice a week to the public baths, it might hapi)en, and doubtless often did happen, that the Deaconess had met with her charge at the baths very frequently, under the same circumstances of nakedness, washing, putting on clean dresses, &c. Possibly, too, she might have done the same services then, from civility, which she now did as a ritual of religion. It is usually under- stood that, at first, Deaconesses were widows, who had lived with one husband only; not less than sixty years of age; t From Gabriel Albaspineus. Diaconiss*. Ministerio Diaconissarum pie- risque in locis pudori Jeininarum consuiehcitur : illcB enim ad Baptismum ve- nientes hoiieste imdabant ct exuebant, neqiiid oculis baptizaiitis inverecunde inge- reretur, ut Epiplianius indicat. Aia-Koviaa-uv (/."nv ray^AOc e^Tii/ «»; tjjk iviy.tv ^s «r£/xi/0TijT0? ra yvvatmeiv yBvai; v) 6'^ li^av Aarpjf ;ta» o re yvf^vu^nv auiAoc yvycuy-S, \vx /x« vtto o uvofuv upspyaiTUv 6e«6£h/, "aX\' VTTO T» »EpEW? E7r^/^£^E^c^6«^ yvvctiyJn iv t»} Ufoc. Tij? Ttf cufji-ccro^ aivrrii; yvfjovaaBuq. Latine ita sonant. Est quideni Diaconissarum in Ecclesia;sed no)i est institutusadfunctionem Sacerdotii, vel adaliquam ejus modi administrati- (,nem, sed ut muliebris sexils honestati considatur, sive ut tempore adsit Baptismi sive quando nudandum est mulieris corpus, ne ab its conspiciutur, qui sucris operantur, sed a sola videatiir Diaconissa; quce jussu sacerdotis luram mulieris gerit, dum vestibus exuilur: atqne id secundum, constitutionem boui ordinis et Ecclesiastics discipline ex prescripto canonis admodum stabilita: See also Isaac Causaubon's Antiquitates Ecclesiaticae, Exerc. xvi. ad Annales Baronii. C 4 ( 24 ) vvhicli, by the fifteenth canon of the council of Chalcedon, was reduced to forty years. In later times they wore a distiuj^uishing dress. They visited women, in the nanae of the Church, when sick, or in poverty: (they also, it is sup- posed, visited prisoners, suflering as Christians). The Apostle says that Phoebe had been his patroness, as well as of many others. This implies a dignity which is seldom considered ; and it shews, at least, that great respectability of station in li^e was the reverse of inconsistent with the office of Deacon- ess. Afterwards, we read of " virgins who were widows," i.e. D aconesses; and it should seem that maiden ladies of a certani age were invested with this office. We have the sepulchral inscription of " Daciana, a Deaconess, ivho lived forty-jive years and three months; in the time when F. Pal- matus was Consul: she was sister to Victorinus the Presbyter; and had instructed in Religion many of her sex."* Con- sidering that men had scarcefy any access to the younger women at home, there can be little doubt, but what they received the major part of their religious instruction from the Deaconesses ; and so much of this as was previous to Baptism, became a very convenient preparation for that rite. We have seen, in the progress of our enquiries, that the practice of anointing after baptism is extremely ancient, and was, in a manner, universal. Now, in this too, the Deaconess performed the principal part : for the Presbyter anointed the woman's head only. The Deaconess anointed the parts of the woman's body [the joints, &c. See Mr. Salt's account of his Abyssinian boy], which, no doubt, was in conformity to what had already passed with the water of Baptism. Let me be permitted to add a word here. The office of Dea- coness, though, unquestionably, scriptural, is discarded from Baptist Churches : tl-ose churches are, therefore, confessedly imperfect : they abandon the scriptural example : for what cause, it may become those to explain who profess inviolate and punctual conformity. For, will any modest mind deny that, especially at the Baptism of females by plunging, such superintendants would be extremely useful, in guarding DACIANA DIACONISSA QUE V. AN. XXXXV. M. III. ET FUIT F. I'ALMATI COS. ET SOROn VICTORINI PKESBRI ET MULT A I'ltOl'HETA VIT. CUM FLACCA ALUMNA V. A. XV. DEPOSITA IN TACE III. 1 1>. A. D. 412. Muratori, p. cdsxxvii. ( 25 ) against exposures ] — It is known that such do happen. — Who has not heard of such ? I think it impossible, after these evidences, that the recep- tion of Baptism, in a state of nakedness, by the first Chris- tians, should be again questioned : It is, therefore, time to solicit the reader's attention to the subjects of the rite. Of Tradition. NOTWITHSTANDING the term Tradition is a Scripture term, used by the Apostle to describe his own writings, yet, because it has received in later ages a very inferior sense, and has been popularly employed to express unwritten re- ports, handed down from age to age, and therefore uncertain, at best, and often mutilated or perverted — the Baptists con- tinue to impose on it this degraded sense, and charge their Piedobaptist brethren with depending on such incompetent and unworthy authority. Such conduct is reprehensible, because this degraded sense of the term is perfectly inap- plicable to the age of the Apostles, and of the Apostolic men, among whom it could bear no such meaning. The term (Parudosis) Tradition, as used by Uxfocooan;. the ancient Fathers, does not signify a mere uncertain tradition ; but good and credible evi- Et/ayya^jxa* deuce, delivered by one person to another, 7rapa^oi7E»?. whether in wrilin?, or in speaking; and is ap- See Suicer, plied even to the Gospels, which were called n.''p^576"""" Traditionary Gospels. Irenaeus says of the Gospel of Mark, in the latin of his works, Marcus disciptilus et interpres Petri, et ipsa quce annimciata erant per scripta nobis tradidit. — Mark was the disciple and interpreter of Peter, and the things that were .spoken by Peter he has preserved by writing-tradition for us." Eusebius has quoted this passage in the original greek. It is well known that the people urged Mark to write; as the Eiders of the church afterwards urged the Apostle John to write: surely, this desire for written tradition was the very contrary from a disposition to depend on uncertain tradition. Clement of Rome says, " The Epis. Corinth. Apostles appointed their first-fruits to be xlu. xr.v. Bishops and Ministers over such as should believe, having first proved them by the Spirit."' ••" They gave direction, how, when they should die, other chosen and < 26 ) approved men should succeed in their ministry." This is perfectly coincident with St. Paul's charge to Timothy to commit to faitiiful men, what he had heard that Apostle deliver to many Christian bre- 2 Tim. ii. 2. thren for this purpose : and Justin Martyr, says of himself, " Having been a disciple of the Apostles, I became a teacher of the nations: those things which were delivered to me I minister to them who are become worthy disciples of the Truth." This was in the middle of the second century; at which time, if the Epistle to Diognetus, ascribed to Justin, be his, the same Father says expressly, " Me Tra- dition of the Apostles is observed." It appears, by our Table of Lives (p. 29. Letter IL to Deacon), that the churches enjoyed the instruction of the Apostolic men, till long after that date: and this, on the subject of Baptism, is of so much the greater consequence, as about A. D. 200, there arose a very violent dispute concerning this rite ; on which occasion, we may be sure, every argument that could be brought to bear on the subject, would be adduced by the opposing par- ties, and made the most of. About the same time, Tertullian remonstrated against Infant Baptism: which not only proves the prevalence of the practice; but is no bad evidence, that ft iiad been recently canvassed, and that thoroughly. On the Distribution of the Ages of Life. IT may be thought, from the manner of its reception among the Baptists, that they supposed the distribution of the ages of life, adopted by Irena;us, to be a peculiarity of that writer : the fact is otherwise. Xenophon, in his first book of the Cyropjedia, describes/oMr stages of life, as being popularly distinguished among the Persians : the first, of childhood; the second, oi' youth; the third, of mature age; the fourth, of eldership, or that time of life which was past military service." And Epiphanius has a passage directly to our purpose: he says, " But to infants correction is given with the linger; to children \\'\\\\ the hand; to youngsters with the whipping rod; to youths with the cane; but to men the grosser crimes are punished with the sword, according to the law." *. This progress from iti/ancy to childhood- -to young- — a.'KXcc ru fA,iv iiTToriT^no d'la S'a.KrvXn 'jta.i^nu yivtrut : 7ra»^»w ^e IltceT. Kxjciii. . ( 27 ) iters-to youth-io manhood, is precisely analogous to that of Ireiv*us,from infancij to litth-ones-io childrm--Xo youth —to seniors i and proves that the distribution of hfe emp oyed bv the Apostle John of—little children— young men— Jatfiers, was well known anions those to whom he wrote: it was we may venture to say, daily familiar to them : they theretore, could not err in accepting his words, as they stand, hierally. On the Church-Membership of Children. WE have seen, that under the Mosaic law, the children of the Hebrews, when arrived at three years ot age or from hat to four vears, were thought capable, by the leadei^^ ot l^.r nation, of covenanting with God, in common with other meni- bers of the Old Testament church ; and became, in ^^n^^' P""' lic persons. We have seen, too, that the Children of he pr ests were, at that age, admitted into the Temple, and ' did eat the most holy things." At three years old Samuel " worshipped the Lord"* in his sanctuary: and, in New Testameivt times, at three years old, that is to say, from his infancy, % Timothy knew the Holv Scriptures, which were able to make him wise to salvation. 'Would the Apostles have refused Baptism to such Children? It is not credible. But, to determine this, requires examination. When our Lord's doctrine, during his personal ministry. was favourably received, the persons so disposed wei-e called disciples; and this is their usual appellation in the Gospels. So we read, " Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John" The reader will have the goodness to notice the phra;eologv here-- He MADE disciples :" how did he make Lm? Bvhis irresistible grace? No; for then, how could his disciples " go back, and walk no more with him? He made them disciples riiually, by baptism; as the context expresses, by the agency of his Apostles. After our Lord s death, his followers were called by their enemies Men ot that iay"-" Nazareues"-Heretics," &c.: but they called themselves Christians. They added, moreover, when ad- dressing each other, the most affectionate appellations ; as Brother or Sister, i. e. in the Lord-with the most kind and respectful titles, as the called, the elect, the illuminated holy persons (or saints), faithful, &c. These were regularly given to church-members, and to church -members only. * 1 gam. i. 28. ii. 11. § 2 Tim. iii. 15. «7ro /Sps^-aj. ( 28 ) None without the church ever received one of these appel- lations, or such like. They were given at, or iinnieiliately on. Baptism, and Baptism was initiatory to these appellations. The newly-baptized were called new plants. Here I waive all reference to distinction between partial church-membership and full church-nienibership. It is suf- ficient for the present purpose, that whoever was baptized was a member of the church of Christ : and as baptism was the vnh/ way ui admission into the church, it will follow, that wlioever was a member of the church of Christ, had been baptized. The terms are interchans:eaMe ; proving one proves the other. If, then, it be shewn that any one, or more than one, of these Christian appellations is, or are, bestowed on Children — that Children arf designated by any one of these titles — the church-memi>ership of Children is the undeniable consequence ; and, with their chuich-membership, their Baptism. On the Appellation Holy, ascribed to Children. HOLY persons, is an appellation given to church-members. So we find St. Paul confessing, that " many of the holi/ persons he had shut up in prison" — Acts xxvi. lO. though afterwards'we iiiid him speaking repeat- '^'^'' «7'*"'- edly in the most respectful manner, of these ; — Rom. xv. 26. *• I go to Jerusalem to minister to the holy per- rot; xy'm<;. sons." He also writes, on various occasions, to them " who are sanctitied in Christ Jesus, to the called, to the holi/ persons" — " To the holij persons at Ephesus" — •• To the holy persons at Colosse" — " To all the holi/ persons in Christ Jesus at Phillippi." In short, this is a title given in a multitude of places, to members of the Christian Church, and to such ONLY. But, it is well known that this appellation is also given to Children of a church-member —"Now are "your children holy." And "^' '!|" ^'*' the lowest sense that can possibly be put on this term in this passage, even by a writer against Infant Baptism, is that of Tertullian, who says they are holi/, be- cause designed for holiness, i. e. in baptism. Even in that ancient adversary s opinion, their ritual holiness was com-' piete at baptism ; for which he assigns two reasons ; 1. se- minis prerogativd, the privilege of descent from a church- member ; 2. institutionis disciplind, the course of education which such a child would naturally receive from its- pa- ( 29 ) rent. His context implies, that the Heathen dedicated their children to their deities before they zvere born. Mr, Booth emplovs no less than forty-four pages of up-hill work, in rehearsin<,Mhe sentiments oi modern writers on this passage : he had better have occupie I his time and pains and pages in refuting this sentiment of an ancient. This fact is indisputable, that, the appellation holy is not bestowed in any place of the Mew Testament, and this is our guide— o/i any person not a member of the Church of Christ. As to the notion of bastardy in this passage, those who cannot hear it without— €om/7flssion / may well stand excused ; as may those also who cannot iuiagine how men who repeat it can believe it ; since they neither produce, nor affect to produce, any passage in any author, sacred or profane, in which the term holy bears the sense of not bastard. On the Appellation Faithful, applied to Children. IN connection with the appellation holy, given to church- members, we find the appellation faithful; and this was perhaps more extensively used m the church, and certainly more permanently: it became the distinguishing title of church-members, not in Scripture, only, but also, in many countries, and during many ages. As this is not always observable in onr translation, a few instances may be ac- ceptable. It is applied to individuals; — in the singular; — to Timotiiy— to Tychicus— to Onesiraus— to Sil- Jp"'"-^''!^- vanus, and probably to others. Col. i7. 9. * ,, , lPet.v.l2. The mother of Timothy, is called a faithful. Actsxvi. 1. What concord hath Christ with Belial?— what 2C0r.vi.15. part hath a faithful with a non-faithful? If any faithful ('man) or faithful (woman) iTim.v.i6, have widows— let such relieve them, that the Church 'r.ro? 5 be not charged. Ttrij. It is also applied in the plural: Andtheyofthecircumcision— "faithfuls— who Acts x. 45. came with Peter, were astonished." — These are called '^'S'Te*. brethren, in the foregoing chapter, verse 23, and in the following chapter, verse 12. ( 30 ) Those servants who have masters that are faith- iTlra.vi.2, FULS — despise them not; because they are brethren. Ttr»\. Let no man despise thy youth; — but be thou an iTim.iv.i2. example to the faithfuls. The things thou hast heard from me; — commit 2Tira.ii.2. thou to FAITHFULS (to men). He is Lord of lords, and King of kings, and 5ley. they who are with him are called, and fchoscn, and ^^"' FAITHFULS. It is also addressed to Churches, as communities : Paul to the holy persons who are at Ephesus, and ^P^- '• '• to the FAITHFULS in Christ Jesus. 7r»roK. Paul to the holi/ persons in Colosse, and to the Col. i. 2. FAITHFULS, lo the brethren in Christ. -Triton;. A truly remarkable instance, is that of Lydia, in her ad- dress to the Apostle — " And when she was baptized, with her family, she besought us, saying, (If, or) Since you have adjudged me to be A faithful to the Lord Jesus, come into my house, and abide." Here the appella- tion faithful, is so strongly connected with the * term baptism, as to be even interchangeable ^'^ '^^'" ^^^ with it; for the sense would be the same, if the term bap- tized, were substituted for faithful, and faithful for baptized; the instance amounts to an identity. It would be an insult to the understanding of the reader, to suppose further proof to be necessay, that the title /fl!7/t- ful, was a current designation of members of the Christian church. To call a man a faithful, was equivalent to calling him a Christian brother, or a disciple of Jesus Christ, or in short, by any other appellation, denoting his relation to Christ, and the church. Is this appellation faithful ap- plied to children? Certainly it is: and that in the sense of a whole family. For so writes the Apostle to Titus, (i. G.) de- scribing the character of a bishop; — " he must be the husband of one wife, having children who are faithfuls" This passage is decisive: of the two terms, we have exa- mined one of them, faithfuls; the other, children (in Greek tekna), on the authority of Baptist writers, themselves, Robinson, Dr. Gregory, &c. Letter III. to expresses, " MiNORs/rom twenty days old to l>eacoii, p. 2. twenty years." No better definition is wanted ; He must be extremely unreasonable, who is not satisfied with ( 31 ) this. The passage then, stands thus, in sense, ** having children, minors from tiventy days old to twenty years, who are church members." And in fact, the Apostle speaks of children at large: He does not say, " those of full age;" — Nor does he say "excepting the younger;" — but, the Bishop's *• children," i.e. of , any age — must be faithfuls, i.e. church-members. And yet, this was a proper place fo have stated excep- tions, if such existed in the Apostle's mind, or practice : for he was Jjot giving instructions lo Titus only, but to all the clergy; and to the Christian world. Error here was error i» perpetuity. Nor does the Apostle formally introduce, or treat the subject: he mentions it, as an expected thing; with- out emphasis or explanation; it was therefore no novelty. In short, whatever were the laitys' liberty, the baptism of their children, — /. e. their Church-membkrship — is here charged on the clergy as a duty; and the omission is a marked disqualification for ecclesiastical othce. Though no considerate mind would raise the argument, yet, I foresee the possibility that some inconsiderate may in- sist, — " these children must he adults; for, you see, they are supposed to be accusable of riot, and unruliness." Now mark the consequences of this notion: 1. The olficial character of the parent is made to depend on the established character of his children; and this pub- licly known and notorious, before their father can enter on his office; supposing then his children to be born, when he is about thirty years of age, and tiieir characters to be, civilly and ecclesiastically, fixed, at the same time of life, — their father must be sixty years old, at least, before he can pos- sess this qualification for a bishop. What service could churches expect from their clergy, every one aged sixty at his entrance on ofiice? — and how is this consistent with other facts? 2. The parallel passage in Timothy, plainly expresses the bishop's having a family of youn^ children. Surely the in- junction applies to him: as it does to all bishops. 3. But, suppose the bishop had daughters only, the sex, I hope, may be relieved from this imputation of being riotous and unruly: yet these must be made faithfuls ; for the term children includes both sexes. 4. Moreover, a bishop might have no children : were not, for instance, Timothy's qualifications for the episcopal of- ( 32 ) fice, sufficient, without waiting till he became a husband, and a father, and till the character of his cliildren should be pronounced by the church and the world? — And the same might be said of many others. 5. The Baptists would then, be bound, by their own argu- ment, to admit only old men — married men— fathers — into the ministry: how can they avoid this? — The argument goes to prove that all ministers, e. g7'. all Baptist ministers, having children who are not baptized, are in St. Paul's opi- nion, unfit j or their office: they are not '* ensamp'tes to the flock." These consequences follow this interpretation of the passage. It may here be observed that we read of yoxing bishops in the earliest ages; as in Ignatius's Epistle to the Magnesians, and elsewhere. Here then I make my stand. Not on unrecorded tradition* not on the universal practice of the churches, not on the positive affirmation of Origen and others, who plead Apostolic injunction for the baptism of children ; — but on Scripture. The language of the Apostle is explicit; it could not, pos- sibly mislead those who consulted his writings. The reader will now do me the favour, and himself the sa- tisfaction, to combine these two facts. 1, The Apostle Paul speaks of children as being church-members under the term holy; and again, as being church-members under the term FAITHFULS. 2. The Apostle .John writes distinctly to lit- tle CHILDREN. The inference is all that can be desired. Here, then, I say, I make my stand; — on the rock of Scrip- ture: and Scripture is consistent with itself; for the Evan- gelists, as we have seen, applied to children the terms believer and disciple. But, though the Apostolic testimony be explicit, and satisfactory, it might gratify enquiring friends, the Baptists included, to know whether Scripture has recorded any instances of conformity with this injunction. Such an enquiry must be answered in the affirmative ; as is evinced by, THREE INSTANCES OF CONFORMITY BY CHRISTIAN TEACHERS TO THE APOSTLE'S INJUNCTION. "Greet Priscilla and Aquila...and the church Rom. in their family;' — this is the sense given to the ^vi. 3. 5, word house, in this place, by Chrysostom, Theodoret, ^vhitby and Theophylact, who say, literally, " their/a»ii7y in loc. was ALL MADE FAITHFULS; and such (whole ( 33 ) families) he (the Apostle) calls a clmrch."* The iCor. same persons are mentioned a second time, "Aquila ''v'- 1^ and Priscilla salnte you miuh in the Lord, with the church in XUa'ir Jamily." — " It signilies, say all the Whitbj Greek scholiasts, and (Jrotius, -d family consisting "' °''" wholly of Christian converts, as was the J«ilor's, Acts xvi. 31, 3-2, and that of Ciiipus^ Acts xviii. 15 " " Salute. . N\niphas and the church in his /^riJi»p uyouctaiv '''f]/ convened their tchole families to the Christian prejessioii ; for suchjamities he calls a Churth. Wliitby on Romans xvi. 5. ^ Tov oiKov TTKHToi. TTi^Hi n%iv, t^Ti >£«• iy.y.'>^riaioi.v y.ciKuc^cti, t Nam ul)i Apos.olus ad CoUosseiises fcribens cap. iv. ait: Salutate Fro- tres qui sunt Laodicea: et Nympham, et quas in domo ejus est Ecclesiam, subdit de hsc saiictissimi exempli iinilieie : tarn cniiii devta \i(letur luisse, ut omnit domus ejus iieno titulata esset Crucii, tioc est in Eccleaiaia conversa P ( 34 ) milies already adduced: perhaps as families of the clergy, they oujjht to be allowed precedence, as a privilejje of the cloth. Thus the evidence increases in strength the more it is examined. How then, can any say, " We have neither precept nor practice for baptizing children of all ages"? The Apostle's injunction has, beyond all doubt, the force of a precept; and so great a number of Christian families exem- plifies the /;rac^/ce to demonstration. For, once more, I desire it may be observed, that there is no exception, no reserve, no restriction marked in any passage connected with baptism. Nothing is desired from any sect or society of Christians, but, that they should follow the Apostolic example, and baptize families — whole families; making no exception, where Scripture has made none. The consequences would soon lead to a decisive /;r«f//cff/ answer to all discussions on this subject. Let those put this to the test, who dare. Here again I rest the cause on the authority of Scrip- ture; let that be accurately examined, well understood, and duly observed. A third appellation given to church-members, is so strongly identified with baptism by Dr. Ryland, that I shall take the liberty of so translating it; " they are about to be planted together in the likeness of his death, being buried with him bji baptism." — The Apostle charges Timothy, that no person newly planted, i. e. newly baptized, should bear office in the church. Our translation says " not a novice;" the original is " not a ncopfii/tos;" i.e. a new-plant. 1 Tim. iii. 6. We shall see the application of this presently Additional Evidence of the Baptism of Children, FROM Authorities marked with the Christian Symbols used in the First Centuries. THE witness of Scripture is beyond all doubt, preponder- ant, and decisive; and 1 do not mean to resign a single iota of it ; — yet, supposing for a moment, that the balance of evi- dence were even, exactly equipoised; then, I say, enquirers do well to examine and obey whatever evidence bears on the question, from other cjuarters. Hence the value of the Christian writers of the first ages; aye, and of the Christian pictures, too, let who will affect to despise them. A branch of evidence was glanced at formerly, which has ( 35 ) been tliouglit to deserve further enquiry. Tlie reader will accept ii slight specimen, in proof how defective is the history of Baptism, as promulgated by the Baptist brethren; not as the result of persevering research, or of singular felicity in discovery. The open profession of Christianity, was at first exposed to incessant and imminent peril: against this, believers pro- vided, ill part, by a certain degree of secresy; to j)reserve which the> adopted, among othtr customs, a series of private synibols; and by these, while they concealed themselves from the heathen, they discovered each other. The Revelations opens with one; "I am the Alpha, and the Omega."* Whoever has read Dr. Middle ton on the Greek Article, knows, that when the article is introduced in tiiis abrupt manner, it implies a previous knowledge, familiar to the rea- der, of the matter spokpn of. Adn.iiting the usual date of this symbolical book (A. D, QQ), it will follow, that before the end of the first century, and during the life of the Apostle John, this symbol, A and 12, was current among the faithfuls. Nor is this the only instance; a passage liitherto covered with impenetrable darkness, as connuentators confess, is illustrated by this custom. " To Eev. ii. 17. him that overcometh will I give . . a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth, saving he that receivetb it." On this, says Dr. Doddrido-e, " It is well known, that among tiic Greeks, a white stone was a token oi' absolution, as a black stone was oi condemnation; but the writing a new name upon this stone is not, that I know of, illustrated by any ancient practice .... I have sometimes thought, the phrase may signify, one that hath re- ceived it, as it seems a name given to any person, must be known to others, or it would be given in vain," &c. This sensible remark, shews the difficulty. But, observe 1. That the term for stone here used, does not import a large sto7ie, proper for building, or, &c.; but a small pebble; it is used to describe ■^v(pov. the vote (voice, Eng. Tr.) given by Paul; e. g7\ Acts. xxvi. 10, about the size of a bean; as customary among the Greeks, in voting. Whoever has examined the Egyptian pebbles, on which the scarabeus is sculptured, knows, that they are usually led Carnelian; about the size of our v\atch- * 'Eyu £i/^j TO A nai TO fi, Vrkshach. Vol. II. p. 581. Edit. Loud. 1810. D 2 ( 3G ) seals; btif, there is also a jvhife Carnellan, equally used for seals; and this is, ap|)vioM, and with him ^/y^^*' ^"^i \' a hundred and forty four thousan people, as in the vision seen by Ezekiel (iv. 6.) — Again, " I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasp/ienu/ ;" under- stand blasphemous syn;bols ; "full of names" is clearly inap- plicable; the beast could not be written all over. Again. " I saw a beast rise out of the sea, .... and upon his heads the name of blasphemy," i. e. a blasphemous device, badge or coguizance, like those placed on the head of idols, — the sun with its rays, the moon with her crescent, !;■ h kyKVfx vxvTty.ri , jjk St^tvxoc J.*£;)^apaTjiTo t^ y><.u(pi)' y.»y ctXitvaiv n; ^, AttojoXw fj^tixnyifftrctt, xcti juv i^ "v^ccTo- anxtrirufxyivuv icxi^^uv. ^int autem nobis (vel vobis) signacnla, columba, vel piscis, vel navii, quWTICTCC liNI '^nopuYTAmuusAnni AYTOY MHNC«.N. "e TPI. Z Mensiuni V. VII. KAAANAWN MAPTIWN HMEPA Kal. Martias Die CEAHNHC ^V ■'^""'^• Muratori, vol. iv. p. 1819. i Refrtcerius qui vixit Annos Pl. M. „ , , . VI. Mens. vim. D. v. Qukscet in Pace. Boldcm, p. 3-16: ( 39 ) shall find their practical application continued from the Apos- tolic age. To impeach the interpretation established among believers, inslructed— partly, by the Apostles, personally, — partly by Apostolic " faithful men," their representatives, and therefore, possessing advantages on matters of practice, every way, and in all respects, infinitely superior to our own, is to impeach at once their integrity, their understanding, and their piety; a disposition too hardened, too malignant, to be acknowledged by any, even by those who indulge it. Ancient Application of the term FAITHFUL, CONTINUED to CHILDREN. * CYRIACUS, a faithful; died aged eight days less than three years. t Eustajia the mother, places this in commemoration to her son Polichronio, a faithful, who lived three years. X Urcia Florentina, a faithful, rests here in peace: she lived Jive years, eight months, and eight days. § The sepulchre of the tivin-brothers Alcinous, and of Alex- ander their cousin: three faithfuls, of twelve years old. ('erected^ by their mother Proemisia. Three fishes. Three fishes! another justitication of the language of Cle- * Cyriacus FIDELIS Decessit Octo dies Minus Tres Annus. III. Kal. Mar, Boldetti, p. 453. Muratori, p. 1856. t B. M. In Commemoratione Enstafia Mater Filio Polichronio. FID. ■ qui vixit Annis III. Grutcr, p. 1057. No. 8. X Vrcia Florentina FiDELis in Pace Vix. An. V, Mes. Villi. Dies Villi. Muratori mcmlx. H § aaktnown ayo chm/v aaehanapot te ctnemWn TPEIC AWAEXETEIC niCTOYC TENETH DPOEnEN^A ixetc r Geminonim Alcinoorum Sepulchrum, Akxandriquc Consanguineornm. Tres Duodennes, Fidkles. Mater Prccmisi. risciis III. IX0YC, id est Piscis, uti perquani notum. Uteris suis indicat noincn JesK Ckristi Dei Filii Sulvatoris. Muratori, p. 1824. No. 6. D 4 ( 40 ) inent taken literally. Every body must see the application of tlie Apostle and his fishing, here. The note of Murafori on this term, is to this effect. " Fiih: l)y this name the most ancient Christians were accus- tomed to express Christ the Lord, according to the testimony of Augustine, Prosper, Optalus, Milevitanus, and others. This was also the symbol during the reigns of the Heathen Emperors, under which the Christians concealed their pro- fession: But their brethren very well knew what it signi- nified." Tertullian says, to the same purpose, " But we little fishes according to the example of our fish (icthon) Jesus Christ, are born in water; neither are we safe any longer than while v.e remain in water." And again, " One kind of flesh of birds, — martyrs w!)o soared to heaven, ia sufferings; another kind, of Fishes, — those who received only Baptism. De Resurr. The following shews that the term faithfut, continued in the Church, applied to children, during several centuries: II Here lies Maria, daughter oj John, who ivas of the town of Nicerata: She lived three years, three months and a half, a faithful: She died the fovrth day of the month Xanticns ; under the Consulate rf the Princes Honorius (the eleventh time) and Const antius (the seiond time.) That the terra fauhful continued from the days of the Apostles, to denote church-members, is evident from the ex- press testimony of Christian writers. Says Clemens Alexan- drinus, *' Nor is it enough for the true character of Chris- tians, that they be pure, but also that their works be con- spicuous; that they may be clear from every censure by others; tfiat they may be of consummate chastity, excluding all cause of suspicion: that they may not only be faithfuls, II EN0A KITF: MAPI Hdc Jacet Mari A GYFATHP lOANNOT aJiliaJohannis K« NIKEPA1 Ct):-i rZHC '^«' (patria locus) Niceratum ENAITH TI'IA MH TPIC V'-fit Annos tres, Menses tres HMIS nrCTH ETEAE (tt) Semis, Fiozi^is, Defuncta TTHCEN MH HAN est Mcnsis Xan AIROY A F YnA'II *'<'' ^^^ ^^'- '^"'' Consula A ONOPlOT AYF TO '"• Himorii Augusti ~A r KAI KDCTANTI XI «' Constanti OT TO B »• II- Muratori cdi. Niceratum, VicuB ingens, apud Aparneam Syr'uc situs: called by Theodcrct Nictrtt. ( 41 ) but also be, evidently, worthy-faithfuls." i. e. not only church-members, but honorable to that station. § Says Eusebius, more formally ; " there are three descrip- tions of members in the churcii : one which guides, and two which are guided: the people of tiie Christian church arc divided into two descriptions; that is to say, faithfuls; and those who have not been admitted, as Worthy, by the lavcr of regeneration." Ancient Application of the Term HOLY CONTINUED TO CHILDREN. *MAURENTIUS son of Mavrentia, amost pleasing child, who lived jive years, eleven months, and two days: worthy to repose in peace among the holy persons. t Sacred to the Great God. Leopardus rests here in peact with HOLY spirits. Having received Baptism he went to the blessed innocents. This was placed by his pare?its, with whom he lived seven years and seven months. + To the honourable memory of Innocent ius Amantius, who lived eight years and six days: who reposes in the bosom of Abraham, Isaac, ajid Jacob, in the peace of the Lord Christ." It is probable, from the phraseology, that this child was of Hebrew parentage. $ Noil solum enim temperantibus satis est, ut sint puri, scd etiam adhibeuds est opera, ut sint ab omni reprehensione Alicni, ut sint comummata Castitas omni exclusa suspicionis causa : ut non simus solum FiDt^hs, sed etiam vidca' mur fide digni.—ojt; ^» /xowv £im» jj/^af •rn^>i<; a.7. 1054. Anna S.. DiesXLM. This is placed by Antiquaries, A. i). Publius Corntiuis Zetos 367. • et Hatria Dignitas ParevtCc in pare B. M. Feccrunt. Reinesius Inscriptionum Antiquoruni. p. 938. No. 172. Lips. i68'/. ( 45 ) childrei, saMs? Who could first think of raUing infants FAITHFUL? in what had their faith betMi tnod ?ni what had ittriun.nl.ed? These are no d.thculties to a Paidob.ptis : he finds these terms used in Script, e, and there apphed to children ; he traces them fiom Scripture, with the H'^t^rv ot the church through the Apostoiic .nen, to the tomlh or httU centurv, or h.ter : or, if the order he more desuab e, he traces them from the fourth or tiflh century, up, through the Apos- tolic men, to Scripture. Either way, they on-mate, or^ ter- minute, in Holv Writ. They re^t on the auihonty ot the Ap, stle Paul;~or rather, of tlie Holy Spirit, spcaknv- by him. >-!n short, if that sacred writer " had the nund ot Christ, if he spake, and wrote, and p,acticed, accord.n- to the inten- tion of the orisinal, and only auth.mtative, Legi.hitor to the church of Clod, t!ien we may safely re.t in fii^ apphcalion ot the te.ms holy and faithful; uhiJ. we see Ae ai'Pl'.es to children; in which he was followed by the Chnstiau church; and in which we may safely tohow, also. It i^ hoped that ths curious particulars contained in the following inscriptions will be sutticient apoloay ior inserting them though the argument is considered as closed. The first is a pleasing instance of respect from tutors to their scholar. t B M To Sihinus, n ewly-b apti z f.d, who lived on earth eleven years, five mdnllis, and ten days: nri/ianus and Lam- padius have placed this to the memory of their scholar. The following is an instance of a child who was a catechu- men not a faithful : ^ "Here rests in peace, Oncsma, a cate- chumen ; the sevenlh of the calends oj July : aged J our years. Jive months, and three days. ^___ t B. M. Silvino. Neofitq. Qui . vixit . in . Saecolo .Ann. XI . INleus . V . Dies X. Virilianus . eV Lam|)adnis . Alumno . suo . lunocenii . Mem.:ia.u . Fosueru>u .^^^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^^.^^^ ^^ ^,^.^^._ §B. A. n. M. ANEnAYCATO ONHCIMH KATH XOYMENH F.IPHNH TH npO EHl A RAA lOYA WN Ml((iS TECCA^iCON MHNWn niNTE iMEPCON IFHWN- Quievit Ontsu-ne Catechun.VI. Depositiis III. Idus . Kuvcmb. Cnns . D . D . N.N. Arcadi . ct . Honor. Au"S . Jmlua . FIDELTS . qui . visit. Annis YU. [The date is A. D. ,'?94.] Boldetti, p. 46'i. wlio refers to Hkrouyin. Aleand. in Svrab. Navis Eccl. p. 97. He <:dds, Justum hunc ideo (ni tailor) FiorLEji appollaf, quia in prima infant! Sacio fontc ablulus fiierat: Constantinum vero JSroniiTUM nominat, quod rccens baptizatus csset. Sec Gruter, MLI. Ex Apiano et Velscrianis* 5f Romano Neofito Bene nierenti qui vixit AnnqsVIir. D. XV. Requiesii in Pace. D N. Fl. Gratiano. Aug. 11. et Petronio Probo C. 8. [Tbc dale is A. D. S71.] ( 47 ) record the dates of baptism, and doatli, with precision. The custom ofdatinj^ was enacted by Justinian, into a law. No- vella 47. He was the first who ordered that in all acts, pub- lic and private, the date should be fixed by inserting the con- sul, the iudiction, the month, and the day. * By birth (of the family of) Sevenis, named Pascasius, because horn in the Pascal iveel-, ^ke first of the nones of April, on a Thursdrnj. The noble Flavins Consfantinus and Rufus beino; Consuls. He lived six years, and received (bap- tism) the eleventh of the calends of May: and on the eighth day after the Pascal, took his white robe icith him to the se- pulchre; where he was buried, the fourth of the calends of May, the noble Flavins Basilius being Consul. ^ ,' These particulars give for the birth of Pascasius, A. D.457, and for his death, A. D. 4G3. In the first year, Easter-day was March 31 ; and the Thursday following was tiie fourth day of April. In the latter* year, Easter-day (beginning on the previous -aseniag) was April 21; he died,' therefore, April 28. The following is the only instance of Anabaptism I have found. From Cyprian's observation, adduced Lett. III. p. 64, it should seem not to be altogether singular; and probably it may be referred to his time: but, it may be observed that Correctors are mentioned as early as A. D. 117. If Zoilus were a public otficer, sent purposely into Sicily to obstruct the progre>s of Christianity, it may account for his wife (a zeal- ous Christian) being sent to a private country village to lie-in; — and for her baptism of her child, performed imperfect- ly (certainly not registered among the faithfuls), in such con- cealment. During the eighteen months of the child's life, the persecution might somewhat remit, at least so far as Zoilus was concerned, who api>ear», at last, to iiave consented to the regular baptism of the infant, at the earnest desire of his wife; who also solicited this dangerous favour from the Christian presbyters. The language of the original is sutficiently awkward; but the general sense of it is obvious enough. * Natu Seven nomine Pascasius dies Pascales Prid non April N die Jobis FL Constantino et Rufo^V V C (T CONSS. qui vixit Annoruiu VI. Percepii XI. kal. iMaias et albas suas , Oct abas Pascae ad Sepvlcrvni depofuit D ITII Kal. Mai. FL. Basilic. V. C. CO. Fabretti, .577. ( 48 ) * To Nila Florentina, a most sweet and innocent infant, MADK A FAITHFUL by her parent ,pJucedivHk her in a cotmtry seclusion • she ivas born the first oj the nones of March, before day-light, daus:liter of Zoilus the Corrector: having completed eighteen months andtwenfy-tivo days, she was [ajfam] MADE a FAITHFUL, at the eighth hohr of the night, at the last extre. mif}/ of life: she lived afterwards hut fonr Ji ours : the rite having been performed according to custom, she died at Hybla, the first hour of the day, the seventh of the calends oJ October; on which decease her parents wept with each other every moment of the night; open lamentation for the [Christian] dead being prohibited as treason; her corpse, with its coffin, was, by the presbyters, intei^red in the burying-place of the Christian martyrs; the fourth of the nones of October. This case 13 precisely that supposed by the Apostle, 1 Cor. vii. 14. a heaihen husband, and a Christian wife; — whose creed shall the child follow with v^liich she is pregnant? Zoilus, as a public officer, must comply with the religion of his country; his child, therefore, following its father, imst be dedicated t6 idols, arid becouie an idolater; — Or, following the^. mother, may it be dedicate*^ to the Ttiaity? — to Jvhovah rather than to Jupiter? It must be to either oiWcr the other; — It is either unclean or holy: what can be dene? "The Apostle says, " If either parent be a faithful, the child is HOLY;" and such is the Christian practice, I shall, therefore, cause it to be baptizkd," says the mother: and she causes it to be baptized. No quei^t'iori of- bastardy ! And this is Teitullian's view of the Apostle's direction. He says, '• The superstition of the Romans places the foetus in the womb under the protection of the goddess Alemona, under Partula, w ho presides over delivery, under Lucina, who luings children forth to the light. • • .at the birth, Lucina and Diana are invoked- . ■ .and its bodily frame is consecrated to the goddess Statina. What vows to avert evil from its head ! Its hair is cut off, or it is shaved off, solemnly; or it is bound up, as an offeiing; or it is sealed up, as devoted ; to comply witH a national custom ; with that of the parentage ; with public ?r private devotion.. •. -Not a biith can be otherwise than UN« LEAN among the heathen. Ilinc enini et /Apostolus ex sanctificato alterntro scxu sanctos procreari ait. lienc* says the Apostle, eitliL'r parent's issue, that parent being. HOL'V, is also HOLY, by privilege of descent, cVc« Dc Animd. * INilaj I'lorcniinae intauii daluisiiiijae at(|. Innocentissi.iiiit' Fibri.i F.ict;ie Parens conloi.i.vit quae Pridic iio:ihs iiiarlias nii:e luctfW |)iit;ana nat^Zoiio cone. iiiei:se Octavo Dcciiuo el vlctsi ma secuiirlii diecoiiipletis FiOhUS lad a iUit*. no Ctis ocluva iiUiiiiiiii) Spi iuiiii af,ens su|)t.-ivixit Horis qualtuor ita ut c iiHuela ri-pcie ot ac de fimcta Il^'ble ,h,;ia