6. /?. 'o t> ^ii^Mkmlosk^l^ ^ >^#^*" ^^%: PRINCETON, N. J. %. r« r^ Presented by ^— ^ ^ (O^ CKvavVxov. BV 813 .P3 Patten, Moses A treatise upon infant b aptis m A TREATISE UPON INFANT BAPTISM BY / y MOSES PATTEN. With an Introduction BY Rev. G. FREDERICK WRIGHT, D. D., LL. D., Professor of the Harmony of Science and Revelation. CONCORD, N. H. : Zhc IRumfor^ press 1S99. Eafcered according to an Act of Congress, in the year 1899, By Moses Patten. Published hy the Author MY THREE CHILDREN WHO Timitb tbelr Deceased anD %\vim /nbotbcrs HAVE TAKEN SO GREAT AN INTEREST IN ITS PREPARATION, (El?e conftbent hope an'b pleasing assurance, Baseb upon Clcrenant promises, tl]at ttiey, 0,5 cl^ilbren of tt^e dorenant, BY THEIR GODLY WALK AND CHRISTIAN LABORS, BE £)bject Cessons, EVER SETTING FORTH MORE AND MORE, THE CONVERTING AND SANCTIFYING POWER OF 3nfant Baptism AS A MEANS OF GRACE, FAR, VERY FAR, MORE ELOQUENTLY AND IMPRESSIVELY THAN • THESE, OR ANY OTHER POOR, WORDS OF MINE CAN DO, THIS VOLUME, WITH A GREAT DEAL OF PLEASURE, IS INSCRIBED, (WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE) Sy tl^etr affectionate ^atl^er. PREFACE. Infant Baptism, like every other important subject, needs, first and most of all, a thoroughly exhaustive trea- tise, setting forth its nature and proof. One to meet this imperative demand, must be severely logical. As an argument it must be full, clear, candid, flawless, and convincing. It must confess, fairly estimate, and com- pletely remove all the difficulties besetting it. It must, without prejudice, consider and actually refute all the objections urged against it. It must take no disputed fact for granted; nor use, as a basis of reasoning, any one objected to as unfounded, without first having proved it. It must show objectors that the ordinance comes legiti- mately and necessarily from those same facts and princi- ples which they, themselves, together with all others, confess and act upon as fundamental and indisputable. This so essential treatise must meet all the just demands of every class, and, so, must contain much which some will deem not needed. A treatise of this kind having been prepared and made accessible to all by its publication, then, and not until then, the way is open for those of a more popular charac- ter. In such it will suffice simply to refer readers to that exhaustive work for the full, thorough, and conclusive treatment of the parts omitted, because too severely tax- ing the thought and patience of most readers. It would be greatly out of place for us to claim to have furnished such an indispensable production; but we can, with propriety, and do, say that this has been our one great aim. Of our success the reader must be the judge. We have made large use of the word believer because one single one was needed which, according to Old and New Testament usage, was best fitted to designate God's people of both the present and all past ages. We have also made a large use of the word rite, for brevity's sake. VI PREFACE. We have no doubt but that some points will fail to sur- vive the crucible of public criticism. All books have that experience. But we are confident that none essen- tial to the integrity of the argument will. It is not to be expected that all the actually true ones will meet with the immediate assent of all readers. Points so new and startling as many in this treatise are, will be sure to call forth more or less of dissent and rekindle strong chronic prejudices. But we cherish the assurance that the candor — working power of time, and the silent influences of further prolonged thinking, will, sooner or later, bring about a general acquiescence in all the essential ones as well- founded — as true as new. We feel certain that they who find themselves unable to accept its main conclusions will yet find many points affording them much help and throwing much light upon their pathway in their investi- gations of the subject. The most searching criticism is solicited. No one can be more desirous to have every lurking fallacy, if any, brought to light than its author. A parting word to the unconverted subjects of the rite, of all ages, reading this book; my earnest prayer is that its reading may make you fully conscious of the vi^e-like grip which your infant baptisms have, and more and more will ever have, upon you. We very gratefully acknowledge our great indebtedness to the following Fathers and Brethren for their kind and patient listening to the reading of more or less of this treatise in manuscript, and for their valuable sugges- tions, words of approbation, and encouragement: Profs. Edward A. Park and G. Frederick Wright; Presi- dent Cyrus Hamlin; Drs. Joshua W. Wellman, Daniel L. Furber and Henry J. Patrick; Revs. Nathan F. Carter, Harry J. Brickett, Justin E. Burbank, and others. M. P. HOOKSETT, N. H. CONTENTS. Chapter Page I. Preliminary Statements 1-4 II. Argument from Reason Part I. Not Inherently Wrong . . . 5-25 III. Part II. Its Great Usefulness . . . .26-51 lY. Scriptural Argument. Parti. Proof Texts; Universality of Moral Precepts and Institutions; Inferences . . 52- 69 V. Part II. Abrahamic Institutions Defined Neg- atively 70-87 VI. Part II con. Abrahamic Institutions Defined Positively 88-102 VI r. Part III. Abrahamic Institutions in the Pre- Abrahamic Age^ 103-121 VIII. Part IV. Abrahamic Institutions in the Abra- hamic Age 122-127 IX. Part V. Abrahamic Institutions in the Chris- tian Age 128-148 Christian Church and Covenant Defined and shown to be another Form of the Abrahamic. X. Part V con. Abrahamic Institutions in the Christian Age 149-160 Baptism Defined and shown to be another form of Circumcision; A Supposition gr,anted in this chapter. XI. Part V con. Abrahamic Institutions in the Christian Age 161-189 The Supposition of last chapter withdrawn; In- fant baptisms in the ministries of John, Christ, and the Apostles; Among Gentile Believers; A Remarkable Coincidence; A Sea Voyage. XII. Part VI. Concluding Points .... 190-206 XIII. Historical Argument. Part I. Writings of Certain Fathers in the First Five Centuries 207-224 XIV. Part II. Other Related Historical Facts: Clos- ing Words 225-238 Appendix A. Baptized into the Name of the Trinity 240-246 Appendix B. Of Such is the Kingdom of Heaven . 247-251 Appendix C. The Mode-Question in a Nutshell . 252^258 INTRODUCTION. So long as Christianity maintains its preeminence in the world, everything pertaining to it will derive from the connection interest and importance. Discussions con- cerning the form of church government, concerning the nature and significance of the sacraments, concerning the use or disuse of liturgies and of artistic music in church worship, as well as those concerning the proper perspec- tive to be given to the several doctrines in a systematic statement of fundamental beliefs, will be carried on Avith a vigor which is out of all proportion to the importance of the things in themselves, but which is accounted for and justified by the vital relation which these practices are thought to sustain to the propagation and mainte- nance of Christianity in the world. In the light of expe- rience and of a true knowledge of human nature, it is idle to contend that the divisions which separate the Christian world are all of them based on matters of trifling concern. These divisions certainly have not been trifling, but have been among the most serious facts in history; and, so far as we can see, they can be removed and avoided in the future only by such discussion as shall bring the disagree- ing parties to see the truth in the same light. The significance of baptism a.nd the question of the subjects to whom it can properly be applied are not among the unessential points of Christian doctrine, but are questions whose settlement aff'ects the whole range of Christian thought and practice. The doctrine of bap- tismal, regeneration which has been so closely connected with the practice of infant baptism determines the char- acter of a large part of the activities of the churches main- taining it. Its lamentable results we see in the Catholic, X INTRODUCTION. the Greek, and the Armenian churches, and to some ex- tent in some branches of the Protestant church. In the effort to maintain the proper belief in the connection of regeneration with repentance and faith, and to secure a regenerate church membership, it is becoming increas- ingly difficult for the evangelical churches to retain the practice of infant baptism. For, even according to the Congregational creed of 1883, the baptism both of believers and their children is a "sign of cleansing from sin, of union to Christ, and of the impartation of the Holy Spirit." In the application of this definition, it has been difficult to avoid regarding children as church members, and so as really regenerate persons. Those advocates of infant baptism who deny baptismal regeneration and still speak of baptized chil- dren as members of the church, usually qualify the des- ignation, and speak of them as "potential," or "incho- ate," or "infant" members, or as members "in some sort," or "in a very qualified sense." In so doing, they give such a generic meaning to the word "member" that little practical use can be made of it, without prefixing an adjective defining the species. The word becomes about as definite as "vertebrate" would be in defining man. It states one thing; but that one thing is so general that crocodiles and dodos and gorillas are included in it, as well as men. By such a reduction of the meaning of the word "member," it is made to include everybody for whom the church has any sort of responsibility, even excommunicated members. So when we wish to speak of the real thing of membership, we have to say, "members in full," or in "complete standing," or "actual mem- bers," or "adult members." Dr. Bushnell uses language which is specially strong in advocating the church membership of baptized chil- dren. Those, and they are many, who do not understand the personal equation of this brilliant writer so as to make INTRODUCTION. XI due allowance for the vivid rhetoric under which he was accustomed to conceal his ideas, are likely to underesti- mate the depth of meaning which he really gave to regen- eratio^i. Dr. Bushnell says, that as all colts are horses, and all lambs are sheep, "so children are all men and women, and if there is any law of futurition in them to justify it, may be fitly classed as believing men and women. . . . The conception, then, of this member- ship is that it is a potentially real one; that it stands, for the present, in the faith of the parents and the promise which is to them and their children; and that on this ground they may well enough be accounted believers, just as they are accounted potentially men and women. Then, as they come forward into maturity, it is to be as- sumed that they will come forward into faith, being grown in the nurture of faith, and will claim for themselves the membership into w^hich they were before inserted." He says of the exclusion of children from the church till they give evidence of conversion, that in this view Christianity "gives to little children the heritage only of Cain, re- quiring them to be driven out from the presence of the Lord, and grow up there among'the outside crew of aliens and enemies." Twenty-five years ago the discussion of these questions came to a crisis in New England, especially in two arti- cles in the Bibliotheca Sacra, in which the Baptists urged with great force the difficulty of preserving the prevail- ing New England standard of regenerate church member- ship while practising infant baptism. ^ On the other side, the advocates of infant baptism seemed too readily to accept the statement that baptized children are actually church members. In this discussion I was asked to take a part. The results of the protracted personal study and conference at that time given to the subject may be found in two extended articles on "Infant Baptism and Church 1 Vol. xxviii (1871), pp. 262-301; xsix (1872), pp. 665-698. xii INTRODUCTION. Membership " in the Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. XXXI, pp. 265-299, 545-575. During the period of this preparation it was my privilege to form the acquaintance of Kev. Moses Patten, the author of the present volume, and to hold many conferences with him and with Professor Park. Already at this time Mr. Patten was deeply engrossed in the study of the subject, and had thought his way through it along the lines which are mainly adhered to in the present volume. Mr. Patten's completed work has the advantage, there- fore, of being the product of the study of a lifetime; for, from that day to this, he has adhered to the single pur- pose of presenting his solution of the intricate subjects involved. To accomplish this he has read widely, thought deeply, and written and rewritten perseveringly, until there is not an obscure paragraph or sentence in his book. Whether one accepts his solution or not' the reader will, from beginning to end, be conscious that he is dealing with no immature and hasty effort, but with an argument that has been thoroughly thought out with full knowledge of all the difficulties encountered. As such I can heartily commend it, with a hop'e and expectation that it will be widely read, and will render effective help in leading all parties to see more clearly the true nature of the moment- ous questions involved in the rite of infant baptism. G. Feedekick Weight. Obeelin, Oct. 24, 1899. INFANT BAPTISM. CHAPTER I. Preliminary Statements. I. The Theory: Its Title and Main and Essential Points; Points Disputed and, so, Demanding Peooe; Main Divisions of Argument. I. ITS THEORY. A clear and correct conception of what Infant Baptism professes to be, will help us the better to examine and test its claims to our acceptance. We will, therefore, to begin with, give a brief statement of what we understand to be its theory. In doing this, and in this entire treatise, we shall simply state our own views, making no claim to speak for others. ITS TITLE. Infant Baptism, according to the theory now being given, has for its full and accurate title, the following : Christian Baptism, as administered by believing parents and the church of which they are members, to the children — both the believing and non-believing — of such parents ; and, also, to all the other members of their households — the believing and non-believing — who occupy in them a position similar to, and substantially the same as, that of chil- dren. 2 2 INFAKT BAPTISM. ITS MAIN AND ESSENTIAL POINTS. Infant Baptism, as we understand its claims, in- volves and rests upon the following points : 1. Par- ents are the divinely appointed guardians of their children ; under obligations to support them ; to con- secrate them to God ; to lay them upon God's altar as his ; to bind them permanently to his service ; to impose upon them all the duties and responsibilities of believers ; in a word, to bring them up, by a wise and faithful nurture, for God — to be his for time and eternity. 2. Their church sustains a similar relation — part- ners with them in this their high calling as the guardians of their children. 3. God graciously enters into covenant with all parents and their church endeavoring faithfully to perform these their bounden duties, in which he promises the bestowment of rich blessings upon their children — especially and preeminently to make them true believers. 4. Their children are bound by all such obliga- tions imposed upon them. The parents and church are not the only ones imposing these bonds. They do it in unison with God and all other faithful, moral beings. They find them already imposed upon them, and simply add to their authority and sacredness. 5. These peculiar duties, responsibilities, and priv- ileges are, by divine appointment, symbolized by the church ordinance of Christian Baptism. 6. God, in making Christian Baptism a symbol of the sacredness and the surety of this his mutual covenant between himself and believers, constituted ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 6 it a solemn seal of that covenant, by which he bound himself, as with an oath, to its certain fulfilment. 7. Christian Baptism is a divinely-appointed sym- bol of a believer, and faith on the part of its subject is absolutely essential to its validity as it respects himself. No one destitute of faith can possibly be a baptized person. 8. Christian Baptism, by divine appointment, may, and, in proper circumstances and for probationary purposes, should, be administered to non-believing children. 9. These two points (7 and 8) apparently so mutually contradictory, are in perfect harmony — reverse hemispheres exactly fitting each other and, together, making one and the same globe — truth. 10. God's Peculiar People of the Abrahamic age were a church of God and are correctly designated as the Abrahamic church. 11. The Abrahamic and the Christian, are one and the same church — the latter only a new and higher development of the one, and only one, church of God upon earth. 12. The Abrahamic and Christian covenants are, in a like sense, one and the same. 13. Baptism in the Christian church is the same identical rite with circumcision in the Abrahamic — two different forms of one and the same ordinance. Such is the theory of Infant Baptism as we under- stand it ; and the work before us is to show that it so rests upon such corresponding facts as fully to establish its truthfulness. 4 INFANT BAPTISM. II. DISPUTED POINTS DEMANDING PROOF. Some of these points in this theory will not be questioned and so call for no proof. Only in the case of the following disputed ones is there a demand for, or need of, demonstration in this treatise. (1). The right of the parents and the church to bind their children to the service of God ; to impose such solemn obligations without their consent. (2). Children thus made more responsible for that ser- vice ; under greatly increased obligations to render to God that service because thus imposed. (3). Their right to administer to non-believing children a rite which is a symbol of a believer and, also, a sym- bol of all the duties, responsibilities, obligations, promises, etc., set forth in this theory. (4). The alleged fact that Christian Baptism is a seal of God's covenant with believers. (5). The alleged harmony between the baptismal symbol, as a divinely-consti- tuted badge of a believer, and the non-belief of the children to whom it is administered. (6). The alleged fact that God's Peculiar People were a church. (7). The identity of the two churches, that of the two covenants and that of the two rites. As these are the only ones of the points named in the theory to be established wdiich will be disputed, our great and exclusive work is their establishment. III. MAIN DIVISIONS OF ARGUMENT. The argument for Infant Baptism which we pur- pose to present in this treatise, has three main divi- sions, viz. : (1). Argument from Reason. (2). The Scriptural. (3). The Historical. CHAPTER II. I. ARGUMENT FROM REASON. This argument has reference to the inherent nature and legitimate fruits of such an infant baptism as that which the above theory describes. It takes for granted the scriptural authority of such an ordinance and considers the testimony of reason as to its inher- ent character and legitimate influence as such. It thus seeks to be an a priori argument in preparation for the scriptural. It consists of two parts: 1. Not inherently wrong. 2. Most useful in its legitimate tendencies and results. Part Fikst. Sucli an Infant Baptism^ as that Set Forth in this Theory^ not Inherently Wrong. — It is objected to this rite that Christian Baptism, by being given to non- believing children, sometimes including those sin- fully refusing belief, has imposed upon it a greatly modified meaning — one differing largely from that which it has when given to believers ; and such a modification is alleged to be inherentl}^ wrong — wrongf in the sense that it can in no circumstances be done without sin. That it is apparently a very great modification must be confessed. The rite certainly does not, in most cases, symbolize believers. It is actually the case that Christian Baptism, while a b INFANT BAPTISM. divinely-appointed symbol of its believinp^ subjects^ does, as given to non-believing cliildren, symbolize those destitute of belief. It is confessedly true that a symbol is administered to them which, when given to believers, designates them as believers, as mem- bers of God's holy Church, as buried with Christ, as being in the name of the Holy Trinity, etc. This objection, now to be considered, has a great deal of apparent weight, is very influential with many consci- entious Christians, and is regarded as a fatal one by all rejecters of the rite. This objection, apparently so strong and invincible, must be removed if we would have the rite rest upon a trustworthy basis. If valid it strikes a fatal blow at the very vitals of the ordinance. If it involves anything inherently wrong, wrong in its very nature, then it cannot possi- bly, in any circumstances, be rightly practised. Let its essential sinfulness, in any of its legitimate re- quirements, be fully established and no reasonings in its favor, however plausible and otherwise convincing^ can be of any avail. We must, therefore, to begin with, carefully and thoroughly consider this feature of the rite which is so much objected to as involving inherent wrong. Just here we wish to reiterate and emphasize the fact that Christian Baptism is a symbol of the faith of its subjects, in the sense that no one destitute of it can be a baptized person. A non-believing child^ receiving its form, is not, accurately speaking, a baptized child ; though usage for convenience's sake^ designates him as such. Only when, having become old enough to be capable, he shall give vitality to ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 7 that lifeless (on his part) form by his own faith, does it become to him a living, real baptism. It was, when first administered, a living one on the part of his believing parents, and their church, but not on his, because of his want of the requisite faith. His part of the baptism has not been performed. Baptism is an act of two parties acting mutually — the baptizer and the baptized — and demands of each one true faith as essential to its validity on his part. It follows, therefore, that a baptism may be perfectly valid on the part of one and, at the same time, wholly invalid on tbe part of the other, because of the latter's wan tof dispensable faith. To illustrate : I listen to a voluntary in church, executed by a gifted and a highly spiritual organist, who, in it, happily voices, the true and acceptable worship of his heart. I, on the other hand, while greatly enjoying the music, render, by means of it, no heart-worship to God. Evidently that which was designed to be an expression of our united worship was real worship on his part, but was not at all such on mine. Again, I listen to a voluntary executed by a very wicked organist, yet one of very great musical abilities. In the sight of God, it was not a worshiping service, on his part, but I enter into it as a true worshiper, and by it, as with wings, soar up towards heaven. Manifestly that voluntary was a real, and an ac- cepted, one on my part. My faith made it such, right in the face of the vile character of the one who played it. Just so with baptism. It is valid to either party who has the essential faith, but to neither who has it not. 8 INFANT BAPTISM. 1. It is not inherently wrong to bind non-believing cbildren to the service of God as is done in their baptism. The fact that infant children are unable to give, their believing consent to be thus bound, and the fact that older ones do not choose to give such con- sent, does not render their baptism inherently wrong, as we shall endeavor to show. In the case of the former the binding is, of course, prospective, and does not make the child responsible, until he becomes a moral agent. It lays hold of him when he first be- comes such and keeps taking faster and faster hold upon him all through his life, increasing in its strength of grasp at a ratio corresponding to his growth in knowledge, and his opportunities for Christian usefulness. Limitations. Parents can bind them only with those obligations which God has already placed upon them. They can impose only God-imposed duties. The same is true respecting their binding themselves, as parents, to their own duties in the covenant — their pledge to trust God's sure word of promise, faith- fully to train their children, etc. They can rightly pledge themselves to do nothing for their children which God has not commanded them to do. In all this binding of themselves and children they must act strictly in the same line with God. They, there- fore, simply make previous responsibilities greater : add new bands to those they find already closely binding their children. Proof from Analogous Cases.— Parents rightly bind them to the service of men to a limited extent. AEGUMENT FROM REASON. 9 and, in so doing, necessarily bind them to the service of God. They cannot, rightly, command or bind a child to do an errand without, at the same time and by the same act, binding him to do it for God ; neither can a child rightly do any service to a man and not also, in the same act, do the same to God, nor can he truly serve God without, in spirit if not in formal act, serving men. in the same acts. The two kinds of service are inseparable — mutually essen- tial to each other, different phases of one and the same thing, and for that reason, it is not possible for a parent rightly to enjoin upon his minor son an hour's work for a neighbor wdthout having true ser- vice to God involved in, and essential to, that same enjoinment. He cannot, by his authority, make it obligatory upon that son to do a favor for another, and not, at the same time and by the same command, make it obligatory upon him to do the same, in the same act, for God. Hence, the undisputed right to bind children in service to men, necessarily involves the right to bind them to all of God's requirements. In sending a son to school they impose upon him all the obligations of a Christian scholar. By their godly lives they greatly increase their children's ob- ligations to live the same. In leading them to God's house of worship they make it their bounden duty there to render true w^orship to God so far as they are capable. The majority in the state through their representatives, impose upon the minority, often without their consent, sometimes against their indig- nant protest, laws which they are in duty bound to obey. 10 IKFANT BAPTISM. The very act of consecrating a child to God neces- sarily binds him to his service. Joshua of old thus bound his whole family Avhen, filled with the Spirit of God, he uttered in the presence of all the tribes of Israel, those ever-memorable words of personal and household consecration : As for me and my house we will serve the Lord. Those of his house who, cooperating with him, bound themselves to the same service, received an additional band in the one imposed by him ; while those, if any, refusing thus to bind themselves were all the same bound by him. He did not need their consent for his justification nor to make his binding real. Ecclesiastical councils, in ordaining a man to the gospel ministry, not only thus recognize him as al- ready called and set apart by God to that work, bound to it by God, but they, themselves, also, set him apart and bind him to it. They do this not only by the authority of the churches they represent, but, also, by their own as moral beings, each member act- ing for himself ; and the man ordained will, if un- faithful, be more guilty because of the obligations imposed upon him by the authority of each and every member of the council. We bind the angels of heaven with additional ol> ligations to praise God every time we sing those lines of doxology so appropriate for, and so often used in, songs of divine worship ; " Praise Him above ye heavenly hosts, Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." An angel refusing thus to praise would be more guilty because of those songs of God's children upon ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 11 earth binding him. No moral being can knowingly be urged to do a God-imposed duty by the humblest one in the universe, without being placed under addi- tional obligations to do it by that urging. We think we may with unimpaired reverence add that a pray- ing man, pleading at the throne of grace for the con- version of a sinner, binds God to cause that conversion if he can wisely do it. It seems to us that such a prayer increases his obligations in the case. We seem ourselves to get grander and more glorious conceptions of God's infinite moral greatness and holiness when we contemplate him as acknowledging and glorying in the bands thus placed upon him by his praying children. Enjoined hy Crod Himself — That God enjoins upon moral beings the duty of thus binding each other appears from the fact that his requirements are such that one cannot possibly meet them without so do- ing. He commands every one to confer upon others all the good in his power. It is confessedly a great good to be bound to duty by others — in other words, to have one's obligations to it increased by them. Hence one cannot comply with the requirement of God to confer all the good he possibly can, without so binding them. It cannot, then, be inherently wrong for parents to do this for their children as they do in their baptism. The Fiindameyital Pi-incvple. — The right to bind or pledge others to the performance of their real duties, with or without their consent, is a fundamental prin- ciple of moral government. It inheres in every moral being. By virtue of the fact that he is a 12 INFANT BAPTISM. moral being, he has the inherent right to bind to the faithful doing of every duty, not only himself, but also every other moral being. He is his bro- ther's keeper ; everj^ moral being is his brother ; he, therefore, has all the rights and powers essential to such a high calling. This, of course, must be done with wisdom and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Because of the lack of the necessary wisdom and a loose, distrustful hold upon God's promises to guide, multitudes are greatly limited in this impor- tant sphere of usefulness. They are largely shut up to the binding which comes from prayer. Christian living, the Cliristian nurture of children, etc. In most cases, it would be unwise and, consequently, wrong to inflict penalties to secure fidelity, as' they, at best, can only secure that which is outward and formal. Parents may do this to a limited extent. Citizens in the state may and must do this, either personally as government officers or simply as private citizens through their representatives in office. But limited and indirect as is their power to inflict needed penalties, they can and they must, as faithful moral beings, use all the moral power they can put forth in binding others to every one of their God- imposed duties. The Essential Basis of all G-overning. — This prin- ciple is one upon which all rightful governing rests. Parents could not with right govern their children, nor civil rulers their subjects, nor God all moral beings, were it not for this right, inherent in them as moral beings. As a matter of fact, every man does govern not ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 13 only his children, but also his fellow-men. In the state, every citizen governs every one of his fellow- citizens. He enacts the statute laws of his common- wealth through the legislators acting by his author- ity. He passes judgment upon those laws, and pronounces judicial sentences upon violators of them through the judges acting as his agents. He exe- cutes those laws through the agency of executive officers. When a man is executed for the crime of wilful murder, every man in the state puts the death noose around his neck and lets drop the fatal trap upon which he stands, and so inflicts the dread pen- alty of the law. As it is a universally accepted maxim, that what one does through another he him- self does, it certainly follows that every man is, by right and necessity, a law-maker, a judge, and a ruler, just as truly and just as extensively as do those acting officially. Infant Baptism, then, stands in these respects upon the same immovable rock with parental, civil, and the divine government. 2. Not inherently wrong to administer the church symbol of faith and of a believer to a non-believing child, as is done in his baptism. Numberless Confirmatory Analogies. — That it is not necessarily wrong to lead unregenerate chil- dren- to take the posture and utter words of prayer is universally admitted. The child himself, if old enough to be a moral agent, does wrong in doing so not in faith; but his believing parents do not. But faith on the part of those using forms of prayer is as essential to a real prayer as to a real baptism. As the words, posture, etc., of prayer are the 14 INFANT BAPTISM. expressions of the real prayer of faith, they are sym- bols of faith ; hence the parents, in leading him to use these forms, administer to him symbols of faith, substantially the same thing which they do in giving him the rite of baptism. It is not necessarily wrong in parents to lead their non-believing children, even grossly wicked ones, to the house set tipart exclusively for the sincere and holy worship of God ; although all entering it are, if old enough, required to do so as believing wor- shipers, and greatly sin if they do not. It is not thus wrong to invite unbelieving persons to sit in the church choir and lead the congregation in the holy service of sacred song, much as God demands, with fearful penalties, the true spirit of holy worship in all participating in it. Nothing, then, can be more certain than that God requires parents to induce their children to do things which he allows them to do only in faith, when they at the same time have no reason to believe that they in doing them will comply with that condition, so absolutely essential to all permissible acts. For their justification, they must fall back upon this fundamental principle in moral government just con- sidered, viz.: The right to persuade with binding authority and in some cases to compel others to do their duty, even when they know that they will do it not in faith, and so not acceptably to God, belongs to every moral being. Thus to impose moral obligations is his high and responsible calling. He is not to blame for their ARGUMENT FROM REASON". 15 failure in duty in the case. The certainty that they will not discharge the obligations as God requires, does not necessarily make it wrong for him to impose them. He and his fellow-men are put by God in partnership as his servants, and he must per- form his part, whether his partners do theirs or not. In attempting to disregard this principle and act upon its opposite, men must run into gross absurdi- ties. They who maintain the inherent wrongfulness of giving the baptismal symbol to non-believing chil- dren, cannot in consistency lead them to repeat the Lord's prayer, take the posture of prayer, nor go with them to God's house of worship. They cannot pray with unconverted men, as that involves the effort to lead them in prayer. Roger Williams saw this. " He maintained that it was wrong to pray with an unregenerate man, even though he be a wife or child, and for that reason would neither pray in his family nor give thanks at meals with his wife and children," so Hubbard says, " because some were unregenerate and others would fellowship Avith churches which he denounced."^ But with all his conscientious painstaking, he could carry out his principles only to a very limited extent. To do so in all things he must needs go out of this sinful world. We are not sure that perfect consistency would permit him to remain in heaven, where, if we mistake not, the redeemed as ministering spirits have much to do with inducing parents upon earth to teach their unbelieving children to pray, and in 1 Congregational Quarterly, July, 1878; also Mass. Historical Col., chap. 2. 16 INFANT BAPTISM. urging believers to pray in the presence of unbeliev- ing men as opportunity is given them and wisdom directs. We feel sure that they look upon all such nurture by parents with approbation and delight. This, of course, would shut them out from the fel- lowship of good Roger Williams, provided he remained of the same mind as when upon earth. We say this with a great deal of respect for his sincerity and piety. It was his head, not his heart, which was at fault. To Proceed with Analogies, — It is, confessedly, not wrong to unite unbelieving ones in the holy bonds of marriage. But God requires all entering that sacred relation to do so as believers, for the reason that, as a holy God, he does and must require this same qualification of all moral beings in all they do. Hence the wedding ring put upon the finger of the bride is a symbol of faith, and as such is adminis- tered by the officiating clergyman. If this is not inherently wrong in marriage, it cannot be so in baptism. In this ceremony the parties are bound to the believing performance of all the duties of hus- band and wife, just as the unbelieving subjects of parental baptism are in respect to all the duties of believers. The apparent, not real, incongruity of uniting in marriao-e believino- with unbelievino^ ones has trou- bled some thoughtful, godly ministers. Rev. Dr. Mckeen, for forty years the honored pastor of the Congregational church in Bradford, Vt., positively refused in his early ministry to solemnize the mar- riage of a professing Christian and one who was ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 17 not. Consistency required him to refuse when both parties were not. If wrong to induct an unbelieving one into such a holy relation with a believing one, much more must it be to induct two such into that which, in its origin and highest use, involves a union with Christ. Had he known what this mean- eth — this fundamental principle underlying all moral government just mentioned — he would not thus have condemned a guiltless practice on the part of the officiating minister. It should here be stated, in justice to that saintly man, that, in the later years of his ministry, he retreated from this extreme posi- tion to the wiser one now generally, if not univer- sally, accepted. 1 The Two Coordinate Principles. — In dismissing this point which we have been considering, we ask the reader to mark well the fact that we, in confirmation of the seventh and eighth points in the theory set forth at the commencement of this treatise, insist just as strenuously as anyone does or can, that bap- tism is a symbol of its subject's faith, and that his faith is absolutely essential to its validity on his part ; also, that we, in the same confirmation, insist just as strenuously upon the coordinate and equally evident truth, that symbols of faith may and should, in certain circumstances and for probationary pur- poses, be given to those destitute of faith. We have found, as we think, that these two twin truths are fundamental, not only to infant baptism, but also to nearly all other transactions in a moral system. In saying this we are not unmindful of the grand 1 Congregational Quarterly, July, 1878, p. 391. 3 18 INFANT BAPTISM. principle much insisted upon by all true Protes- tants, viz. : Every symbol derives its usefulness and the justification of its use from the truths it repre- sents, and so must never be seriously used where those truths are wanting. We confess the validity and great importance of that principle, but at the same time deny any conflict between it and giving the baptism-symbol of faith to a non-believing child. Christian baptism, as we have seen, consists of two parts, the act of two parties — those administering and those receiving it. In infant baptism only one party acts, the believing ones administering it. On their part the truths symbolized do actually exist, and hence there is no violation of the principle. That it does not forbid tiie use of a symbol in all cases where some parts of its truths are wanting on the part of one party in its use, is evident from what we have repeatedly, and with much emphasis, shown in the case of teaching children to pray, sing, etc. 3. Not inherently wrong to administer the divinely- appointed symbol of a church-member to non- believing children. In the baptism of a non-believing child, a symbol of a church-member is given one who, because of his want of faith, is not, and cannot be, a real church- member. By this means all the duties and responsi- bilities are prospectively imposed upon him. The same reasons prove this not inherently wrong which were used to prove the same in the two other respects (1 and 2) just considered at length, viz.: Not inher- ently wrong to impose, as God's agents, what he has ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 19 already imposed, as what is thus wrong can no more be done by God than man. No more wrong than to induce him to utter words of prayer and praise. Not wrong to impose them prospectively, before he becomes a moral agent for the reason that they do not become really imposed upon him until he becomes one. By every one of their prayers for his early conversion and by all they do in preparation for his Christian nurture, they prospectively impose obliga- tions which will keep hold of him, with ever-increas- ing grasp, in all the ages of eternity. 4. For like reasons it cannot be inherently wrong to administer to non-believing children the holy bap- tismal seal of that sacred covenant made by God with believing, faithful parents and their church respecting their children. 5. Not thus wrong to baptize him into the holy name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Whatever may be the specific meaning of being in the name of the Triune God, it cannot be a union any more intimate and sacred than that which a believer experiences when praying; and they both must be substantially one and the same. All speci- fic unions with God are, and must be, identical — dif- ferent forms of one common substance. A believer's prayer shows him a real and an accepted worshiper of the Father, and, as such, in a most intimate union with him ; it also shows him in the most intimate holy union with the divine Son, through whom he prays ; also, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, making his abode in him, pervading him as the soul pervades the body, and inditing his 20 INFANT BAPTISM. petitions. What, then, is this union in prayer but being in the most holy and the closest union possi- ble with God? What can it be but being in the name of the Holy Trinity ? But the outward form of prayer (its words, pos- ture, etc.) is a symbol of true prayer; and as prayer puts one into the name of the Trinity, it follows that its form symbolizes the being in that holy name, just as truly as does the outward form of baptism. Now, as it is confessedly right to give non-believing chil- dren the prayer-symbol of being in that name, it can- not be inherently wrong to do essentially the same thing, in giving them its baptism-symbol. For a further treatment of this point, see Appendix A. 6. Not thus wrong to forestall the choice of the child as to the time and mode of his baptism, so far as his baptism does this. If, when converted, he is not satisfied with his pre- vious parental baptism, and feels it his duty to receive another, Infant Baptism, as we understand it, gives him the liberty. That re-baptisms are not necessarily wrong, but sometimes right and expe- dient, is shown b}^ the fact that Christ and his apos- tles were, according to the theory of Infant Baptism, re-baptized ; first in their circumcision, and again in their Christian baptism. If circumcision and bap- tism are one and the same in different forms — a sup- position witli which Infant Baptism stands or falls — they were certainly re-baptized. If so, such cannot be essentially wrong nor never allowable. 7. The washing of his disciples' feet by Christ, at his last paschal supper, strikingly confirms the not- inherent wronoffulness of the rite. ARGUMENT FROM REASON. .21 It was not the prescribed Jewish ritual washing at their meals, as that took place before eating ; while this was during supper (John 13: 2. Rev. Ver.). In the former special prominence was given to wash- inof their hands ; in the latter the feet alone were washed. It evidently was an unusual, if not an unprecedented, procedure called forth by the disgust- ing strife of his disciples for preferment. His object was to give them an object lesson of true greatness in humble service. He washed their feet rather than hands, as the former was more the service of a menial that the latter, and hence a better object lesson in the case. He did not also wash their hands as that would have added nothing to the desired effect. Another object of his was to symbolize their spiritual cleanliness because washed in his own blood. His washing their feet, he made a picture of that wash- ing of regeneration which they had received. For he says to Peter, with great emphasis of expression : *' If I wash thee not " (do not give you that cleans- ing which this my Avashing symbolizes) " thou hast no part with me." Now every one thus cleansed is wliolly cleansed, made clean in all his parts, if we may look upon the spiritual man as made up of parts. One part made clean is certain evidence that all the others have been. Hence it was not neces- sary to wash symbolically more than one member of Peter's body. That of his feet, or that of a single finger, would picture his entire cleansing just as truly and far more impressively than that of his whole person ; or even that of two or more members of it. Christ really said to Peter : You have been washed 22 INFANT BAPTISM. and made clean in my blood. To symbolize this it is needful only to wash your feet. As they are washed in this water, so your whole soul has been washed. The symbol thus pictures you " clean every whit." For a like reason, a little baptismal water sprinkled or poured upon the head of a believer, symbolizes his entire cleansing, just as truly, and, in many respects, far more impressively as it seems to us, than does the entire immersion of his body. This his washing, then, symbolized exactly the same thing with Christian baptism — spiritual cleans- ing in the blood of Christ. This fact thus established, leads us to consider next that act of Christ which bears most decisively upon the question before us, viz.: He washed the feet of Judas — not only those of his eleven genuine disciples, but, also, those of the apostate one. No mention is made of his pass- ing by him as there most certainly would be if he had. He thus did essentially just what parents do in giving the baptismal symbol to a grossly wicked child. The same difficulties, the same objections against, and the same reasons for, hold in the one case as in the other. That sacred symbol (washing his feet) was modified in its meaning by the charac- ter of the one to whom it was given, as all symbols must be more or less. Christ did his part ; Judas did not do his. It symbolized his crying need of that spiritual cleansing ; it bound him anew to God's service ; it imposed fearful obligations ; it is His last opportunity for • pressing invitation and agonizing entreaty. His loving Saviour is still striving to reclaim him ; to save him from his dreadful doom ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 23 right before him. Oh, how loath to give him up ! A reiteration of the heart-rending lamentation of Hosea: "How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? How shall I deliver thee, Israel ? How shall I make thee as Admah? How shall I set thee up as Zeboim? Mine heart is turned within me, my repentings are kindled together." It was meet that he should, even at that eleventh hour, throw wide open the nearly closed door for his return, by giving him the same symbol as to the other true disciples. It was most good-shepherd- like that his heart full of compassion and his hand so ready to the rescue, should unite in this his last possible and greatest effort for this his lost sheep. Was he not his own child, even one numbered with his apostolic children ? Had he not come up under his own loving nurture ? Will there not be a man- sion in his father's house all prepared for him if he only would, in this his last probationary opportun- ity, turn to him and live ? Who can tell the unut- terable anguish of his heart when, in its despair, he was forced to exclaim : " And ye are clean, but not all." As Christ rightly gave him a symbol of the washing of regeneration, it cannot be inherently wrong to give the baptismal symbol of the same to non-believing children. CHAPTER III. Part Second. Such an Infant Baptism as that Set Forth in this Theory^ G-reatly Useful in Its Legiti^nate Ten- dencies and Results. G-reatly Useful to the Children Baptized. — Having proved the rite not inherently wrong, we have removed a much-used and a very influential objection which, were it a valid one, would render all further efforts to establish it entirely useless. We, there- fore, are now at liberty to consider the question of its usefulness, the certainty of which will make it clearly a demand of reason. Reason demands every- thing which is both not inherently wrong and, also, useful. In this part we shall endeavor to show that it is greatly useful to all the parties, parents, church, and children, by showing it so to the children. All that proves this will, also, be proof of its usefulness to the parents and the church. They, under God, are the givers, the children the receivers. As it is more blessed to give than to receive, so what is useful to the children receiving, must be the same to the others giving. We shall not, therefore, consider directly and separately its usefulness to the parents and church, but we shall do so indirectly and no less effectively, in showing its very great usefulness to the children. ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 25 Infant Baptism, as a symbol, makes use, and greatly augments the power, of such effective instrumentali- ties, as parental consecration, prayer, and all other ones made use of in the Christian nurture of chil- dren. It must then, when rightly improved, secure the blessing of God upon them in large measure. An examination of the rite will show it happily fitted, savingly to affect their minds and hearts. 1. Greatly useful because it binds them so solemnly to the service of God. Parents, in consecrating their children to God in their baptism, bind them to his lifelong service, and the rite, as a divinely-appointed sign, helps them so to bind them. It is a great blessing to a child to be so bound. No child can look upon himself as thus consecrated to God and not feel that his guilt will be greatly augmented if he refuses to consecrate himself in like manner. No child can contemplate himself as publicly and solemnly bound to the service of God by his loving parents and their church, without feeling himself held by chains as irrefragable as heaven's throne is immovable. This is a terrible truth to a child who is at enmity with his God. To resist such chains is to fight against the Almighty. It is to be guilty of despising such holy bands imposed by a father and mother's hands acting as God's servants and at his commands ; of hardening his heart against parental love and fidelity; of smothering the tenderest and sweetest emotions of his nature. Vain and foolish all such efforts to break such chains, to cast away such cords from him. The more he tries to free himself, the more firmly he 26 INFANT BAPTISM. is held — escape as impossible as from the grasp of omnipotence. To him resisting they are indeed heavy and galling, yet none the less sure and relent- less ; but, on the other hand, they are light, easy, and precious to the believing child. He glories in them; he kisses them in gratitude to God for the unspeakable blessing. To his believing, loving spirit, they are easy like the yoke of Christ, light as his burden, tender as the caress of love. To his mind they possess an indescribable charm in the fact that they have been made fast upon him by his affec- tionate parents. It was this charm, perhaps, which first turned his attention to the solemn obligations imposed, made them subjects of meditation and, so, an important instrument in his conversion. It is this same charm which causes him to prize them more and more and brings him more and more every day under their sanctifying power ; and will do so all through his life. 2. Greatly useful because of the solemn pledges of the parents for the faithful nurture of their chil- dren, and their full assurance in the covenant promises of God secured for them. Parents, in baptizing their children, solemnly pledge themselves to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, by precept, by example, and by wise correction. They, by so doing, also pro- fess to have large assurance in the rich promises of God respecting them. Their baptism as a symbol, helps them to keep these pledges and to continue and grow in these blessed assurances. This, also, is a great blessing to their children. No child can con- ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 27 template himself as one whose parents have pledged themselves to train him up for God: for whose con- version and lifelong devotion to his service, they took, and have ever since been keeping, such fast hold of covenant promises ; and were, and have ever since been, so confident of their fulfilment, that they placed the divinely-appointed symbol of a believer and church-member upon him, while yet an infant, in glad anticipation of it. No child can contemplate himself in such a light and not be greatly moved. The consciousness of being the object of such solemn pledges — pledges involving such self-den^dng labors and watchful care ; the object of such an holy conse- cration, such wrestling prayers, such full assurance of faith respecting himself, such glad anticipations ; the consciousness of having had all things prepared by parental forethought for his new birth — even the holy symbol of baptism to designate him as a be- liever and as a member of Christ's church, when he shall become one — such a consciousness as a power acting upon him is great beyond description. Dread- ful the thought of resisting such great and hallowed influences and being lost in spite of them all, as, alas, is possible. The most favored child, in all these respects, may, if he will, walk the downward road to death, right in the face of all these powerful and touching influences. As a free agent he has, and must have, the power to cast himself fatally down from the highest pinnacle of privilege and responsi- bility. The very thought of this danger, so dread- ful, will arrest him in his mad career of sin and turn him back in penitence and faith, if anything will. 28 INFANT BAPTISM. It is in perfect keeping with that affecting picture of the prodigal son, so happily delineated by the blessed Saviour, to suppose his praying, believing father con- fident all the while of his wicked son's return, and, in the fulness of his faith, keeping the fatted calf and the best robes always in readiness for him. How significant that he saw him when a great way off I Was he not looking for him with that triumphant assurance which God often gives his children of large faith when about to answer their persistent wrestling prayers ? Was it not in answer to such prayers and out of regard for such faith, that the gracious influences of God's spirit followed him all along his mad career of sin and death and, at length, brought him back to his home in penitence and love ? The poor prodigal, in his state of starva- tion, was greatly moved to return by the thought that there was bread enough and to spare, in his so- much-wronged father's house for all, not excepting the hired servants. How much more would he have been moved and constrained had he really known the unwavering faith and the full assurance of his grieving yet forgiving father ! What would have been his emotions could he, in the depths of his shame and misery, have seen the fatted calf and the best robe set apart and kept in readiness for his coming back to the home so wickedly forsaken ? For a like reason no child can see his baptism in its true light without being greatly moved. 3. Greatly useful because of the intensity of this moral pressure which their parental baptism brings to bear upon them all through their lives. ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 29 This tremendous pressure which Infant Baptism, when correctly understood and fully appreciated, brings to bear upon a man can no more be described than a sunbeam painted ; its measure no more com- puted than the force of gravitation in the universe. It can be but little known excepting by those who have felt it; those whose eyes have been opened by a rich, precious experience to see something of the magnitude of its touching, solemn claims ; whose hearts are filled with that loyal reverence of parents and that supreme regard for duty which the word of God enjoins. To an unconverted man waking up to a consciousness of these obligations, this pressure, gaining more and more of force from his resistance, becomes an agony — often the agony of the new birth. To a true Christian it is a constant and an ever- increased inspiration, as the experience of untold numbers does testify. The thought that he was bound, when an infant child, to a lifelong service to his God, thrills his soul. It stirs him up to run still more swiftly the race set before him. It comforts him in his tribulations, and makes him glory in all the hardships of his master's service. It sweetens his sorrows and intensifies his joys. It strengthens his faith and fires his zeal. 4. This, its great usefulness, is not disproved by the imperfections of the results of the rite in its practical workings. The results of all efforts and instrumentalities to save and. perfect men are sadly disappointing. When we consider the power of truth to affect men and the power of Christ in wielding it, we should expect, if 30 INFANT BAPTISM. not knowing to the contrary, that the Jews to whom he ministered did all experience the saving power of his ministry among them, but, alas, how very, very small the number that did this. So of Infant Bap- tism, when we consider its power, as rightly used, to lead children to Christ when quite young, and build them up into consistent, active Christians, we are sorely disappointed to find that in practice, it does this only to a limited extent. With many, not until they reach the age of advanced youth or manhood ; sometimes not until the evening of a long life. With many it does not prevent their dying in their sins. With some it does not restrain them from falling- o into gross iniquities, and sinking down into the low- est depths of degradation. Such universal imperfection, and such extreme cases of failure — the latter comparatively few in number and strikingly exceptional — seem surpassing strange to us in case we confine our view to the nature and legitimate tendencies of the rite. But when w^e turn our eyes to the other side and look at the adverse circumstances — the nature of its subjects and the shortcomings of the parents in making use of the rite, the strangeness largely disappears. It is, indeed, very strange in the sense that all sin is strange ; but it is not so much so, in the light of the fact that the character and circumstances of men ren- der the results of all efforts for their moral elevation equally disappointing. In passing judgment upon such results we should carefully consider and give due weight to the many and great obstacles confront- ing parents in the nurture of their children, some of which are the followdnof : ARGIJMENT FROM REASON. 31 1. Obstacles arising from the nature and circum- stances of children. In view of the fiery passions and vehement im- pulses bound up in every child, in view of the fertile germs of all the vices, as well as virtues, of free moral beings, planted in his nature — the latter dependent for their growth and fruitage largely upon the care- ful cultivation of parents and others, the former grow- ing spontaneously like noxious weeds, to be trans- formed from fruitful sources of evil to those of good by repression, budding and grafting ; in view of all his perilous exposures to temptation and fatal ship- wreck, in his unavoidable contact, more or less, with the wicked in the world, the subtle efforts of Satan to lead astray and destroy him; more than all, in view of the imperfection of the faith and nurture of even the most faithful parents and church — in view of all these and countless other great obstacles, we cannot be surprised at the imperfect results of the rite as actually witnessed. We cannot be surprised that even those baptized children who have been most favored in their parental nurture, sometimes walk the downward road and become greatly wicked. The wonder rather is that such cases are so few and ex- ceptional — far more so than many suppose. Because of such hindrances to the successful train- ing of children for God, parents have a most difficult task before them ; one of the most intricate and per- plexing problems to solve known to human experi- ence, one wringing from their grieving hearts, oh, how often, the wail of anguish. Who is sufficient for these things ? They must reprove, correct, com- 32 INFANT BAPTISM. mand and persuade, neither too much nor too little. They must choose the golden mean, the midway course between hurtful excess and equally hurtful deficiency. They must search unceasingly and pray- erfully for that hidden, trackless path, which how- ever earnestly sought, is never by mortals fully found ; however nearly approached, is never exactly reached. As children grow up, early methods must be largely exchanged for others better adapted to their more mature state of development and altered circum- stances. Their parents must soon see them leave their homes of sweet and life-nurturing atmosphere, and enter upon lives largely separate from, and inde- pendent of, themselves ; and, so, find themselves, to a great degree, shut up to the throne of grace for their power to influence them while they are making their perilous voyage upon the tempestuous ocean of life, beset, all the way, with hidden reefs and soul- wTccking breakers. The conflict of parents with Satan for the posses- sion of their child is indeed a severe one, sometimes stretching from his cradle to his grave, taxing their faith and perseverence to the utmost. It is some- times a conflict in which hopes and fears alternate with painful frequency all through life — the result trembling in the balance until their children, grown old, lie upon their dying beds. Faithful parents, keeping fast hold of covenant promises, do not de- spair even when they see their still precious son far gone in the ways of sin and death. They still hope though against hope. If the shocking tidings come to them of his death in a den of infamy and shame, ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 33 his lips cursing his God on the very day of his death, they still cling to the covenant promises made to them and dare trust that in his last dying moments, his thoughts turned away to his loving parents, still pleading for him in the full assurance of hope, and that his heart, in penitence, then cried out for, and received, mercy, in fulfilment of God's gracious pledges. Those having such a faith respecting such a son, can peacefully fall asleep in Jesus, leaving him in the hands of that God to whom they gave him in his baptism ; whom they have striven to train up for God under divine guidance and with divine help, to the best of their ability. If the secret history of these lifelong and victo- rious conflicts of saintly parents for their wicked children could be written out for our perusal, they would give us many a story most wonderful and thrilling, like those of the eleventh chapter of He- brews : Precious sons of promise offered up with Abraham's faith, accounting that God was able to raise them up from their graves of moral death ; kingdoms of Satan subdued, promises obtained, out of weak- ness made strong, waxed valiant in fight with the wicked one for their children, armies of opposing obstacles put to flight, women receiving their dead raised to life again, great mountains of difficulties removed and cast into the sea, tortured with the agony of suspense, yet full of blessed assurance. Thus it has pleased God in bringing many wayward children unto glory, to make their believing parents perfect through suffering. Godly parents who, in such apparently hopeless 34 INFANT BAPTISM. cases, steadfastly keep up their prayerful nurture till the end, and, even until death, maintain this their full confidence unwavering, never so great as when they are faintly breathing their last, expiring breath, present a spectacle of sublimity unsurpassed here below, the admiration of heaven and earth; and when the great object of their faith is secured, and the perishing one has been snatched as a nearly-con- sumed brand from the devouring flames, it must be that the angelic hosts — their long agony of suspense now broken — fill the spacious arches of heaven with their glad shoutings of victor}^, like as his father's house was filled to overflowing with joy over the pen- itent prodigal's return. 2. Obstacles arising from the imperfections and circumstances of the parents. In accounting for this falling short of useful re- sults, we must consider not only the obstacles on the side of the children, but also, those caused by the shortcomings and limitations of the parents to which a large share of it is owing. The failures pro- ceeding from their neglect of duty or from obstruct- ing circumstances, beyond their control, cannot justly be laid at the door of the rite. That is ac- countable only for what comes from its right use. This is so evident, and the imperfections of parents, even the best, are so well known, that these few words are all that are needed upon this point. We have dwelt thus long upon the greater or less imperfections in the results of the rite as practised in this imperfect world, and their causes, for the pur- pose of giving a correct and a surely understood idea ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 35 of their bearing upon the question before us, viz. : The usefulness of the rite. We have set them forth in their greatest magnitude as seen only in a few ex- ceptional cases, for the purpose of giving the objec- tion founded upon them the strongest position possi- ble for it ; and we now, therefore, feel assured that these imperfections in results have been so presented as to make it evident to every candid mind that they do not disprove the usefulness claimed in the least. All that is now needed, then, to fully establish this main point, is to repeat, in a few words and with greater emphasis, what has been already indirectly shown. They are not the legitimate fruit of the rite, not those for which it is in any sense responsible. It is, indeed, not useful to some of its subjects, but it would be if rightly improved by them. It does not result in the early conversion of great numbers, only for the reason that they will not fulfil the obliga- tions it places upon them. It does not prevent all from becoming grossly wicked ; but it does so prevent great multitudes and would do the same to all if they would listen seriously to its entreaties and give heed to its solemn warnings. There are those who per- vert it to the hardening of their hearts and the bitter resistence of its claims ; they do the same to other divinely-appointed means of grace. Multitudes, by refusing the salvation offered by Christ, make it that he died for them in vain, but that does not detract, in the least, from the infinitely great usefulness of his death. And here let it be kept in mind that pa- rental Christian nurture is the actual and only sub- stance symbolized by the rite, so far as the agency of 36 INFANT BAPTISM. the parents is concerned. To baptize a child and fulfil all the requirements of the baptism, then, is to give him a faithful Christian nurture, in the highest and most comprehensive meaning of that term — noth- ing more, nothing less. To deny the usefulness of the tendencies and legitimate results of the rite, then, is to deny the same of such nurture. Let it also be borne in mind that the baptismal formula used to symbolize it, devoutly administered, helps parents to give that nurture. To deny this is to deny the uni- versally-acknowledged helpfulness of appropriate symbols and to set aside the testimony of great mul- titudes of the most godly and intelligent Christians the churches have ever known. We may, then, safely dismiss the objection based upon those imper- fections as wholly unf-ormed:. /Uyt^i^A-ti^zMM^ A Supposed Case: A Drama^tvith two Scenes. — With the purpose of imparting greater vividness and impressiveness to this argument for the usefulness of the rite now completed we will set it forth dramat- ically by giving a picture of a baptism and its results, which, while fictitious, shall yet be true to life. First Scene. — Suppose a young man greatly de- praved looking over the papers of his deceased, saintly parents now sleeping in their graves. His eye chances to fall upon the following written upon the day of his baptism : " This morning we took our little babe to the sanc- tuary and there laid him upon God's altar in bap- tism. Thus early did we publicly consecrate and give him away to our heavenly Father as our most costly offering of love, in return for the precious ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 37 treasure given to us. On the day of his birth, yea before his birth, we laid him upon that altar, and ever since that glad day we have daily done the same. This morning we sought, in compliance with the requirements of God's word, to do this with the helpful use of the symbol, in its Christian form, of the blessed covenant of promise made with Abraham and his seed. In the use of this symbol we solemnly, in the presence of God and men, consecrated him to God, bound him to his unending service and imposed upon him all the obligations of a believer ; obligations destined to rest upon him at the commencement of '.his moral agency and to continue with ever-increas- ing binding force all through his life upon earth and,- also, in that beyond the grave. We sought to pledge ourselves, in the presence of the same divine and hu- man witnesses, to hold him as simply lent to us, not ours but his, to be entirely at his disposal. We ren- dered heartfelt thanks for the precious gift ; such a sweet fountain of happiness and hope. We earnestly prayed for grace to be faithful to our trust, confess- ing the awful, yet blessed, responsibilities resting upon us. We prayed that our church, now taking it under her watch and care, as her ward,i might, also, be faithful to these her covenant vows. We prayed for great blessings upon it in all its future life, especially spiritual ones. We prayed that he might serve his God in a manner most conducive to his glory, even if it did involve great hardships and sufferings. We had such faith in the promises of iNot as one of her members, as none but believers can be such, but as her ward. 38 INFANT BAPTISM. our covenant-keeping God, and were so fully assured that he would, sooner or later, give the little one a believing heart — not for any merit or worthiness of ours, but of his wondrous love and mercy — that we administered to him the church-symbol of faith, so that, when he shall be born into the kingdom of heaven, in fulfilment of covenant-promises, he will have the symbol of a believer already on him — that robe made and kept in readiness for him at his spir- itual birth, as his material ones were at his natural." As that depraved young man carefully folds up and lays that sacred paper back in its place, how greatly he is affected ! How deeply moved ! He cannot suppress the tears rolling like rivers down his bloated cheeks. His loving parents, though long dead, stand before him, still pleading for him. What sad memories of their loving kindness and of his own base ingratitude and wicked perversion of their self- sacrificinor efforts for his gr-ood now torture him ! How painful the afflictive scenes of their peaceful, triumphing deaths, which come so fresh to his mind ! How affecting the confidence in the covenant-prom- ises of God respecting him which, like the radiant beams of the setting sun, lingered and played upon their countenances as they fell asleep in Jesus I He cannot forget the smitings of his guilty conscience he then experienced, nor his resolutions to reform so ruthlessly broken. He feels himself terribly rebuked for his life of sin and strongly drawn towards one of penitence and faith, such as his baptism demands. That holy rite, its consecration, its faith, its binding vows, its confident expectations, its fearful responsi- ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 39 bilities, rebuke and tenderly plead with him. They will continue jbo do so night and day, even to the hour of his death. He ma}^, indeed, harden himself against all these gracious influences, and thus make them a savor of death unto death, as the power to do so inheres in him as a free moral agent, but it will cost him a lifelong struggle of pain and torture. His whole future career will, be emphatically one of kicking against the pricks. But his parental bap- tism, in case its great and good influences are per- mitted to produce their legitimate results in leading him to repentance and starting him off in a new life, will not stop here, but will continue to act upon him all through life, as a motive power to him for Chris- tian growth — one of the great cloud of witnesses encompassing him and urging him to lay aside every weight and the sin so easily besetting him, and run with patience the race set before him. That young man so tenderly touched by the picture of his parental baptism thus brought to his view, and so painfully conscience-smitten because of his swine-like trampling the precious pearl beneath his feet, finds himself "almost persuaded" to become a Christian, as by his parents bound. His ears catch the soft whisperings of the Spirit saying : " Come, for the door of mercy is even now open to you." Sad to say, his ears also catch the insidious whispers of Satan saying : " Do n't be so foolish as to throw away all the pleasures of this life for a gloomy, sad religion. Time enough yet. Say to the Spirit : ' Go thy way for this time ; by and by I will give heed to your so earnest solicitations.' " Thus two worlds 40 INFAKT BAPTISM. are contending for liim, and he stands halting and wavering in the most momentous crisis of life which can be experienced by an immortal man. The cur- tain now falls and he passes from sight, leaving us in a state of great and terrible suspense. Another Scene in the Drama. — The curtain rises, presenting another scene in the same drama. Sev- eral years have passed since it fell, and the young man, before so penitent and apparently so near the kingdom of heaven, now lies, grown prematurely old and greatly haggard, upon his dying-bed, close to death's dark portals, swung wide open for his speedy entrance. In that supreme destiny-moment of his life, following the reading of that paper, he made that suicidal choice, which, alas ! multitudes make, and gave himself back again to his great soul- destroyer. But he did it at the cost of a terrible struggle, with his remonstrating conscience contest- ing every death-step he took and piercing him through and through, like a sharp, two-edged sword for every one taken. When a grossly wicked man, so greatly wrought upon, deliberately rejects such a gracious call and re- turns to his old life of sin, like a dog to his vomit, he does it with all his might. It was so in his case. His stinging conscience compelled him. The reaction was very great; the rebound carried him far beyond all former experiences. He rushed on in his down- ward career of wickedness like a mad man. Under the fiendish sj)ell of the wicked one, he pressed on in his career of wickedness, with all the force of his being, to the greatest possible lengths of depravity. ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 41 To get rid of the torturing stings of his outraged conscience, he stupified his sensibilities by all the de- vices to which he could resort. He spent more and more, day by day, of his rapidly diminishing possess- ions, in degrading carousals — eating and drinking with the drunkard, bringing on redness of eyes and getting wounds without cause. Because of his drink- ing debaucheries, he fell down, oh, how often, in the presence of fatal dangers and laid unconscious like one lying down in the midst of the sea, or on the top of a swinging, jerking ship-mast. To gratify his beastly lusts, he spent his substance with riotous liv- ing, and devoured his paternal patrimony with har- lots. Under the hardening and debasing influence of such a shocking life of loathsome sin, he curses his loving father and mother, and derides their faith- ful nurture. He speaks contemptuously of that sacred paper of theirs which once so touched his heart. He especially spites his baptism by them as interpreted by that paper, and scorns the bands they endeavored to fasten around him and the obliofations they claimed to impose upon him. He indignantly denies their right thus to bind him without his consent, and scoffs at all demands founded upon their bindings. How foolish, as well as wicked, his frantic efforts to free himself from those bands. As well attempt to strike the sun from the heavens. His mad strivings to break their bands asunder and to cast away their cords from him, were so ludicrous that he that sitteth in the heavens laughed, and the Lord had them in derision. By such heaven-daring deeds he became, more and more each day, a monster 42 INFANT BAPTISM. in wickedness, and plunged more and more deeply into its dark, foul abysses. But such a self-destructive career cannot last long. Health must soon break down and the dark door of death must soon be reached. It was so with him. That iron constitution — his priceless inheritance from his parents so temperate in all things, and so watchful of him — struggles hard to keep him from breaking down. Though so sorely abused, it disputes the battle-ground with death, inch by inch, and keeps the foe at bay with surprising success, for quite a long time, considering its great abuse. It was at length, however, compelled to give up the contest in despair and leave the poor wrecked man to die long before his time. So now he lies there before us upon a ragged, filthy cot, as wretched as he has made himself sinful — a terribly hardened man ; twice dead. As his accustomed grosser gratifications have now for a short time been beyond his reach — not even their husks obtainable — his mental faculties have rallied somewhat from their prostration, and he, there- fore, now sees himself close to the grave ; and he rec- ognizes, in his present sufferings and degradation, the legitimate results of his sinful life. But his moral sensibilities remain still blunted and callous as before — his heart cold as ice, hard as a stone. He lies there deserted of all his old companions in wickedness, uncared for, to die alone. But the Holy Spirit which has been seeking to reclaim him during all his down- ward way to death, has not forsaken him. He is still with him putting forth his utmost efforts to save him. Because of the priceless value of his immortal being, ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 43 he is most earnest to rescue him; to save his soul from death and thus hide a multitude of sins. He also wishes to have the confident hopes of his parents thus made good. But he finds his efforts thwarted at every attempt because of the great insensibility of the perishing man — like trying to move a dead man. He gives no attention to what he says and takes no notice of his repeated efforts. In vain he points him to a heaven of bliss within his reach ; he manifests no interest in it. In vain he points him to a world of woe, sure to be his portion unless he repents at once ; he feels no concern whatever about it. Under all these Spirit-strivings he lies wholly unmoved — dead in his trespasses and sins ; an apparently hopeless case. But the good Spirit, as a last resort, puts his lips down close to his ear and tenderly whispers mother ; and lo ! his languid eye kindles up a little as if that once charming word had again touched a responsive chord in his soul. This gives unspeakable joy to the striving Spirit and encourages him to keep on striving. It shows him not absolutely dead and, so, affords one single dim ray of hope of getting effect- ual hold of him. Dickens, describing an abandoned woman, fallen to the lowest depths of sin and shame, tells us that within herself — as within an abandoned dilapidated house, and away up many a pair of wind- ing stairs — in the inmost recesses of her nature, is a door and on that door is written woman; and that, by ceaseless knocking, one may hope to get entrance to that secret place, not yet wholly despoiled, and, by working through which, he may, perchance, transform her into a virtuous woman. So there is an innermost 44 INFANT BAPTISM. chord ill the heart of the callous heart of the most de- praved wretch, buried deep beneath the filthy rubbish of sin, which, in hours of great calamity, will respond to the magic word mother^ and the soul-rescuer may hope, by tenderly touching it, to succeed when all other means fail. Therefore the Spirit, having touched this chord and noticed a slight response, sets himself, with new earnestness, to take advantage of this favor- able symptom. So he whispers again mother, and repeats it at proper intervals. With gladness he wit- nesses the same eye-kindling, each time slightly more distinct and unmistakable. The wretched man, thus repeatedly touched, sees his loving mother standing before him, charming, as in the sunny days of his childhood. Soon his devoted father takes his place by her side and lo, the poor man's countenance is all aglow with a long absent light. But a look of sadness quickly succeeds and quenches this light. He is now remind- ed of their prayers, their consecration, their faithful nurture ; the bands cast about him ; the obligations imposed and the countless other good things received. There dawns upon his mind the sacredness of the claims imposed upon him. He now finds these bands still unbroken, still hugging him too strong and too close to be cast away ; never more sure and relent- less in their hold than now. He finds their more than iron strength and fastness greatly augmented by all his frantic efforts to cast them off and, so, get rid of them. They are now cutting into his very soul by reason of their thus-increased strength and tightness. Now his countenance falls, and a look of ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 45 intense anguish and utter despair comes over him. The sight of his godly parents and the consciousness of the inexorable obligations they imposed, calls up his great wickedness in so disregarding their instruc- tions and in so thwarting their kind, holy purposes ; in setting his heart against their wrestling prayers, in blasting their fondly cherished hopes ; in deliberate- ly choosing and walking in the ways of sin. He is now overwhelmned with the conviction of his great guilt which rolls in upon him like sea-billows moun- tain-high. He now knows nothing but complete des- pair. He sees nothing possible for him but the dark and terrible world of woe. But the gracious Spirit as- sures him that Christ died for just such great sinners as himself, that he certainly died for him, and that, by his death, the gate of heaven is open to the most wicked, if penitent; that it remains open till the last moment of life. Had he the requisite faith he would at once look to him as his sufficient Saviour and find his crushing burden removed. But he has no faith. The guilt of sin kills out faith and makes its restoration to life most difficult and prolonged. So he gets no relief from being pointed to the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world. God cannot possibly forgive me, he exclaims. The blood of the Saviour cannot atone for sins so heinous and numberless as mine. " No, I am lost," he exclaims in the agony of despair. But the pitying Spirit says : " Your believing parents obtained prom- ises respecting you in your infancy and lived and died keeping faster and faster hold of them — promises 46 INFANT BAPTISM. covering just such a possible life of sin as you have made actual. Can you not believe that God will, in memory of the faithful service and implicit confidence of your godly parents in him ; in memory of their consecration of yourself to him and their prayerful training of you for his service ; in memory of the promises he made to them and of their unfaltering reliance upon them even until death — can you not believe that, in memory of all these things, God will save even you, if you will only look to him in peni- tence for mercy, and trust in his Son, Jesus Christ?" This suggestion, turning his thoughts again to his father and mother, gives another affecting touch to that tender chord in his heart which responded to the magic word mother. There now comes a gleam of hope, called forth by the possibility (so his small faith will speak of it) that God will, in remembrance • of his saintly parents, and the promises they obtained, forgive even him for Christ's sake. But, oh, how can I repent so as to secure forgiveness for their sakes, he exclaims. Just then these lines of sacred song come to his mind — words indicative of little faith, yet true to the experience of many of God's imperfect children : "I can but perish if I go; I am resolved to try; For if I stay away I know I shall forever die." These words of a despairing sinner, resolving to try, touch a tender spot. They express the agony of a fellow-sufferer, one of like experience, to some de- gree, with himself, and they call forth in him some ARGUMEKT FROM REASON". 47 little more of trembling hope and courage. " Yes," he says, " I can try. There will be no hazard in try- ing as I can but perish if I do not succeed." He rises up to the resolve : " I can and I will try to cry for mercy," and, lifting up his weeping eyes, he, with nearly his last breath, cries out " God be merci- ful to me the greatest of all sinners." That peni- tent prayer is no sooner uttered than a swift-winged angel, right from the throne of God, alights by his bedside with the edict of his pardon bearing the high seal of heaven. He dies, yet, in the wondrous love and mercy of God, and in fulfilment of covenant promises, he dies a redeemed sinner — a brand in the last stages of consumption by the flames, snatched from the burning. He sweetl}^ falls asleep in Jesus. Angels bear him upon their snow-white wings away to the home of the blessed above. Oh, how gladly his long-waiting, yet never-doubting, father and mother welcome their well-beloved son, who was dead but is alive again ; lost but found. His salvation no longer a future certainty by reason of their faith, but an experienced reality. They are satisfied because they now see the long, sore travail of their souls rewarded. God has now set his seal of approbation upon their faith and unfaltering assurance, professed in, . and helped by, his baptism. In bringing their wayward son to glory, God has, indeed, made them perfect through suffering. The question here arises : Why did not such parental nurture keep him from such a life of sin, stretching from his early years away down close to his grave ? We reply : The imperfections of even 48 INFANT BAPTISM. such a remarkable nurture and faith are a sufficient cause. God in his wisdom often chastens his beloved servants by long delaying the fulfilment of his prom- ises, but never fails in the end to give them all their proper requests when they strive to wrestle for them, in faith and obedience, to the best of their abilities. He never suffers his little ones, large in faith, not to receive the blessings asked, if sought under the guid- ance of the Holy Spirit, which never fails, when suf- fered to do its perfect work, to lead them to ask for proper things. He will, in no case fail to bestow them in fulfilment of his covenant promises. But the great power for usefulness of all saving agencies is seen, not only in their reclamation, sooner or later, of many desperately wicked ones, but, also, in the bitter hostile feelings and cruel persecutions they call forth. They are thus useful even in the case of those finally lost. The useful power of Christ's ministry so far as im- mediate results are concerned, is, indeed, seen in the very few disciples it produced. It is also seen in the malicious opposition it called forth. That he, by teaching and applying, with his lips and spotless life, none but the most pure and elevating truths, with the kindest disposition and in the Avisest methods — never giving any one the least cause for offense — that he should thus unite the entire Jewish nation and the Roman rulers in malicious opposition to, and in crucifying, him, in the short period of three years, is a marvelous demonstration of the power of his min- istry, the usefulness of which, in all cases, no one will deny. The preaching of the gospel would and ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 49 could not be a useful agency if it did not prove itself a savor of death unto death to those who despise it, as well as a savor of life unto life to those who rightly improve it. If then the prodigal son, just considered, had not repented in his last dying moments and had perished in his sins, his mad perversions of his parental bap- tism would, all the same, have shown in his sad case, the great usefulness of the rite in its tendencies and legitimate results. Other pictures might be drawn representing cove- nant children as becoming Christians in early or ma- ture life ; but we have chosen this of such a dark background, for the ^Durpose of encouraging and com- forting those few faithful parents whose cliildren be- come desperately wicked. We have pictured such an extreme case of depravity as a possible one, not as one often actual, for the purpose of setting forth the duty and privileges of parents, and the faithfulness of God to his holy word of promise. Is it too much to believe, and rest in God's covenant promises, with such full assurance, even in such apparently hopeless cases? We have not thus learned him. We shall never question its propriety so long as the blessed Saviour's touching story of the rescued prodigal son and the prevailing cry of the dying tliief linger in our memory. His word of promise is a solid rock ; and no hopes built upon it can possibly fail. In view of what has been said so much at length, we ask, in closing, who can measure the usefulness of Infant Baptism to its subjects when rightly used and improved ? Who can adequately set it forth in 50 INFANT' BAPTISM. human speech ? Who, upon the wings of a fervid imagination, can mount up to its lofty, dizzy heights ? A sad fact that Christian parents and the churches are so little conscious of the power savingly to bless their children, which the rite, properly used, puts in- to their hands. They should not only baptize them, but they should, also, strive to keep their baptism, with all its interesting, solemn meaning, before their minds so much as they prudently can. Would it not be wise for the parents to prepare for each child a paper descriptive of his baptism, similar to that of the parents in the supposed case just given, written in large letters, and in an attract- ive style ; set it in an appropriate frame and, with the consent of the child, never without it, put it in some suitable place in his room, where his own eyes alone — not those of others — would frequently fall U23on it ? Would not this, or some other equivalent method — always selecting the one best adapted to the circumstances — tend to keep him continually under the convicting, converting influences of his baptism ? Alleged Hurtful Teiidence. — We are aware that much is said about the hurtful tendencies of the rite. It undoubtedly has its dangers to be carefully guarded against, as is the case with all other divine ordinances. There is great danger that even the holy service of praj'er and praise, habitually engaged in, will degen- erate, as it often does, into lifeless formality. All divine ordinances when perverted, necessarih' become hurtful — their power for evil always corresponding in magnitude, to that for good when not perverted. ARGUMENT FROM REASON. 51 What we have said of the nature and character of the rite shows that all its evil results in the past, of which so much is made by way of objection, have come from its perversions and from them alone ; and so furnish no valid objection to it. Those equally hurtful have come from similar perversions of the Lord's Supper. This verdict of reason, as to the inherent character and usefulness of the rite, now ascertained, enables us next to enter upon the second main division of the argument, The Scriptural, in circumstances of very great advantage. It gives a very weighty antecedent probability in favor of a genuine scriptural basis for it. Being not inherently wrong makes it possible, and being so very useful, makes it exceedingly prob- able that such a basis, real and sure, exists in the Bible. CHAPTER IV. IL SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. Part First. Pkoof Texts : Univeesality or Moral Precepts ; In- ferences ; Universality or Moral Institutions ; Certain Essential and Largely Decisive Facts Established ; One Absolutely Decisive and Abso- lutely Essential Fact to be Established. I. THE PROOF-TEXTS. Infant Baptism, if an obligatory ordinance, must have been established bj divine authority, and, so, must be found in God's revelation of his will to men. It must have an unmistakable scripture foundation. It must be able to point to a certain record of its ordainment by God in our Holy Bible given us by him, — that sacred charter of all the duties, rights, and privileges of human beings. If it cannot there cite a '' Thus saith the Lord " as a positive proof-text for its authority, then its claim to our acceptance and ob- servance cannot l^e a valid one, and it must be re- jected as unscriptural and unlawful. In this Scrip- tural Argument, therefore, the first, and substantially the only, work before us is to find adequate Bible proof texts for the ordinance. Those of the Theory. — According to the theory of SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 53 Infant Baptism, as set forth at the commencement of this treatise, the most specific proof-text is Gen. 17 :10 : " Every man child among you shall be circum- cised." That commandment instituted the Rite of Circumcision; that rite thus instituted implies, and is inseparable from, its covenant ; and that covenant implies, and is inseparable from, that peculiar people of God — Abraham and his .seed — who were in cove- nant with him. Hence the Abrahamic church,^ its covenant and its symbol, circumcision, are one and inseparable. Hence those three institutions are, in a more general, yet equally real, sense so man}^ proof- texts, according to the theory which we shall try to establish. Hence, also, all the numerous precepts of twBible related to and implying these institutions, are so many valid proof-texts. Hence those institutions, as institutions, are of themselves, according to the theory, comprehensively and preeminently the proof- texts, inasmuch as they contain within themselves the primal command to Abraham, together with all the other precepts which constitute their component parts. These Abrahamic Institutions the Grand Proof- Texts in this ArgumentP- — To show that they are 'For convenience's sake we here use, and shall continue to use, the title, Abrahamic church, to designate the peculiar people of God, be- fore it has been proved that they were a church. Its brevity and prevalent use, as such a title, make it a convenience, almost a neces- sity—so to use it. But let the reader fully understand that we are not unmindful that it is a disputed fact, and, so, one that must be certainly established before being rightly made the basis of reasoning. This, its establishment, we promise to accomplish at the proper time in this treatise. 2 We shall designate them as Institutional, as distinguished from Passage, pro6f-texts. 54 INFANT BAPTISM. valid and adequate proof-texts in reality, as well as in theory, is the work upon which we now enter. Infant Baptism claims that these Abrahamic insti- tutions exist in the Christian age in the equivalent forms of the Christian church, its covenant and its symbol, Baptism ; and the work of demonstrating this claim rests upon us as its advocate. If we would show Infant Baptism planted upon an immovable foundation rock, we must furnish conclusive evi- dence that these Christian are but other forms of the Abrahamic. We, of course, mean that the two classes are respectively identical. We do not mean that the church of one class is identical with the covenant or symbol of the other; but with the corresponding church ; the covenant of one identical with the cov- enant of the other; the same of the symbols. We mean that the two corresponding ones of each pair are one and the same in substance. It rests upon us to make this their alleged identity so certain as not to admit of a reasonable doubt. Just such a demon- stration is imperatively demanded of us ; and it is just such a one that w^e now propose to give, in cheer- ful compliance with a so reasonable demand. Moral institutions are made up wholly of their precepts, and so cannot be binding unless the latter are, and must be if they are. We must, then, prove that the precepts of these Abrahamic institutions are binding in the Christian age. In other words, that they are identical with those of the Christian church, covenant, and sjnnbol. Baptism. In our efforts to do this we will now consider : SCRIPTUKAL ARGUMENT. 55 II. THE UNIVERSALITY OF MORAL PRECEPTS.^ 1. Their Substance is Benevolence P' — All moral pre- cepts have for their substance benevolence — good- will to all others, a disposition to benefit them in every way possible. Just learn what benevolence demands of a moral being and what specific precepts will lead him best to meet those demands, and we have the very ones binding upon him. Whatever be- nevolence enjoins is right and obligatory ; whatever it does not enjoin is w^rong and the reverse of obliga- tory. In its high behests are bound up all the duties and the only ones of both God and man. Moral activities are benevolence incarnated in moral deeds, both mental and manual. This grand substance of all the numberless right acts of moral beings is, in them all, one and the same benevolence — not one kind in one, another in another, varj-ing more or less frequently with specific acts ; but in every one of them, without exception, the one and the same benev- olence. But benevolence has an infinite number of specific phases adapted to a like number of different circum- stances, some of which are embodied in some corre- sponding precepts, others in others. While, there- 1 This is the grand foundation stone upon which all precept-identi- ties rest, and therefore must be fully established. - Every moral precept is made up of two elements: Its substance and its form, embodying that substance. In this treatise, much use is made of the phrase, Essential features of precepts, meaning those specific phases of general benevolence which are embodied in, and are essential to, different precepts. For example: Love for a child is that phase of benevolence which is found in, and essential to, all pre- cepts enjoining the right treatment of children. These essential ones are universal and immutable, like that general benevolence of which they are distinct phases. 56 INFANT BAPTISM. fore, every precept, in a general sense, embodies gen- eral benevolence, including all its phases, it at the same time especially embodies some one of its phases as its specific substance. The command. Thou shalt not steal, has for its specific substance, that phase which has respect to the property rights of others. The precept. If thine enemy hunger, feed him, em- bodies that phase which respects the duty of render- ing to all suffering ones proper lielp. Every precept embodies some one of those innumerable phases as its specific substances. 2. This Benevolence is Eternal^ Immutable^ and Everywhere Present. — Universality inheres in its very nature. Like God himself it never began, and can never cease, to be. We cannot form a conception of its non-existence in any conceivable or possible cir- cumstances ; nor of a moral being not bound by it. This is true not only of general benevolence, con- sidered as a whole, but also equally true of each and every one of its phases. Benevolence lives or dies with every single one of them. Let one embodied in a precept esteemed the most trivial, cease to be, and all the other phases cease with it. Every most insignificant right precept, then, has a specific sub- stance as eternal, immutable, and omnipresent as God himself. 3. This Universality of Their Substajiee makes the Precepts Themselves Likewise Universal. — This state- ment is not disproved by the changeable nature of their forms. The latter are necessarily subject to change. They are simply mediums tlirough which benevolence exjDresses its demands as called for by SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 57 circumstances, and, therefore, must change with those widely varying circumstances. They are the acci- dental, not the essential, parts of moral precepts. They are just such parts of them as photographs are of the men they picture. Its forms are so unimpor- tant relatively, and are so overshadowed by its sub- stance that the composite precept itself — both sub- stance, and form — may properly be termed immutable, like the substance ; as a man of a mortal body is im- mortal, because his soul never dies. The photograph through which a man is seen does not make him any the less immortal ; so the changeable form by which the substance of a precept is expressed, does not affect its immutability. 4. The identity of a moral precept is not impaired in the least by any changes in its forms. It remains absolutely the same in them all. A Bible-truth is the same unchanged truth, whether expressed in the concrete or the abstract ; in the glowing tropes and metaphors of the Orientals, or the more frigid, literal statements of the Occidentals ; whether in the distinctive letters, words, and idioms of one language or those of another; Avhether in forms adapted to the peculiar circumstances of one country and age, or in most dissimilar ones adapted to the peculiar circum- stances of other countries and ages. In all the numerous possible different forms in which it may be expressed, it remains the same identical truth. This is very happily illustrated by an analogy drawn from The Persistency and Constancy of Physical Force. — Scientists have discovered the fact that physical force never suffers any change in its nature or qual- 58 . INFANT BAPTISM. ity, but remains the same and without increase or diminution, in all its varied forms of heat, light, and motion. It neither ceases to be, nor knows any change in its substance, as it la3^s aside its dazzling robes of sunbeams and puts on, instead, the soft foliage and the hard, solid fibres of forest trees ; then locks itself up in black, carboniferous coal, reappearing, after the lapse of ages, in the glowing furnace ; from thence go- ing out into that endless variety of motion imparted to machinery through the agency of steam. It is one and the same force which transmigrates from the sun's glittering beams into the carbon of animal food ; next into the heat of animal bodies ; thence into the strength and movements of animal muscles, and the power and activity of the brain and its related nerves. It is the same identical force, now evoked by the slow decay of animal and vegetable substances, again in the intense combustions of great conflagrations ; now in some noiseless chemical combination, again in a terrific explosion. Just so with moral precepts, — the same identical, essentially unchanged precepts, in all their m-eat and innumerable chano^es of forms. III. INFERENCES. Certain Impor^tant Infe7'ences DeiHved from this Universality of Substance and this 3Iutahility of Forms. Inf. 1. All moral precepts are identical with each other in the general sense of liaving one and the same germ-substance. Just as all parts of a tree are one as o-rowths from one and the same seed. Inf. 2. No moral precept can possibly be done X SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 59 away, experience any essential change, nor, for any reason, cease to be. It must always have been such in the past, and must always continue such in the future — the same unchanged and unchangeable pre- cept. It may and in nearly all cases, must change in its form ; but its identity, as we have seen, is not af- fected, in the least, by all such numberless changes actual or possible. It does not follow, however, that every precept of one age finds its exact duplicate- form in any single one of another age. Its specific substance may not be found in any single other form alone. One phase of it may be be embodied in one precept of a different form ; another phase in another, etc. Its substance, in its different phases, may be found embodied in the forms of many others. But a precept so incorporated in the forms of many others, as even to be undistinguishable, exists all the same. The conclusive evidence of its continued existence in them, is that all its obligations exist in them, for substance ; just as they did when and w^here it was first enacted in form. When, therefore, two pre- cepts of extremely different forms are found to enjoin the same obligations, they are one and the same in that intimate sense in which each one is one with its own self. Christ pointed the lawyer to tw^o great commandments, and assured him that they were but other forms of all those of the law and the prophets, Christ gave a number of parables setting forth the kingdom of heaven. For substance they were all alike and, so, were one and the same ; differing forms of each other. He gave his sermon upon the mount, making use of Jewish local imagery and adapting the 60 INFANT BAPTISM. forms used, to the peculiar circumstances of his hear- ers. We must change the forms he used so far as our circumstances are not like theirs. We must not often turn the other cheek to one smiting us, nor al- ways enter into our closets and shut the door when we pray. If a missionary in India could take all the truths of that sermon, and give exact expression to them in language and imagery, peculiar, familiar, and adapted, to those of his mission field, he would thus reproduce the real sermon of Christ, possessing just the same authority with that. The same is confess- edly true of all correct translations of the Bible. Just so far as a translation gives the same truths as the original genuine manuscripts, just so far is it the same authoritative Word of God, no matter how different may be its forms. Inf. 3. A precept binding upon any one moral be- ing, in any time or circumstances, is, also, binding upon all other moral beings in all times and places. The duty of each one is the duty, in other forms, of every one without exception. The laws of heaven are the laws of earth expressed in forms adapted to that holy place ; and the laws of earth are the laws of heaven expressed in forms adapted to the circum- stances of this earth. CORROBORATIONS OF THIS LAST INFERENCE. (1) Conscience corroborates this last inference. That the duty of one man is necessarily the duty of all others in like circumstances, is an unmistakable dictate of conscience. That voice of God within the soul always acts upon it and so recognizes it as an SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 61 axiomatic truth. A man seeing another performing a deed, as in dut}^ bound, never fails to have his con- science bid him go and do likewise if in like circum- stances. One of the earliest moral conceptions of a little child is that what is Avrong in his playmate is, also, wrong in himself. (2) History and the drama corroborate this same inference. The power and usefulness of history and the drama, when unperverted, as confessedly great teachers of moral truth, is derived from this same source. They hold up before us men and nations acting their respective parts upon the stage of life, and bid us learn our duties from the characters there delineated. They thus act upon, and so recognize, the maxim : One man's duty, the duty, for substance, of every man. Deny this fundamental truth and you take away all their power as moral teachers. (3) The Bible also corroborates this same infer- ence. That Holy Book, as a revelation of God's will to men of all ages and countries, rests upon, and so recognizes, tliis truth. It is made up, largely, of precepts addressed to one nation, almost exclusively to the Abrahamic and Apostolic churches ; and its truths are, for the most part, clothed in local forms, designed to suit their peculiar circumstance. But the fact that all the duties of that one nation and of those few provincial churches are equally the duties of all nations and all churches, of all times, makes the Bible what it claims to be, a revelation to all mankind. Inf. 4. Each and every moral precept, not except- ing the one esteemed the most trivial, holds all others wrapped up in itself. 62 INFANT BAPTISM. We might, if possessed of the requisite mental power, strip off from any one moral precept its un- essential form in which we find it, and re-clothe its substance — general benevolence — in any other pre- cept-form, and thus make it, in a sense, another precept, distinct from the first ; we might then re- clothe again that same substance in another form, making still another 'precept in the same sense ; and so on, until we have re-clothed the same in (one after another) all those infinitely numerous and varied ones which the infinitely numerous and varied cir- cumstances of all moral beings demand. In this way we should obtain, derived from the first precept — however seemingly trivial — all the possible ones in the universe. God alone has the requisite knowl- edge and mental power for a process of induction and deduction, of such boundless magnitude ; but the fact that he can and does do it is enough to establish the principle. True of All the Jewish Sacrijieial Precepts. — Their burnt offering, for instance. The soul of that offer- ing certainly was consecration, one of the grand divisions of benevolence. That soul imparted its own character and purpose to every one of its numer- ous related precepts, even the most mechanical and trivial. Hence, every single one of these latter, as well as all the others, ran down to that consecration, that benevolence, as its source, and identical with it in substance, just as every glittering beam of sun- light points back to its fountain-sun, with which it is identical in substance. Hence, each one, with- out exception, involved all the others, held them SCRIPTUEAL ARGUMENT. 63 bound up in itself. It necessarily, therefore, also in- volved all the other moral precepts in the universe, as they all grow out of, and express, that same uni- versal benevole'nce. Everyone of the most trivial of them, then, must exist in all the moral universe, either in substance alone, or in it as embodied in cor- responding changed forms. ^ It follows, then, from this law of generalization, that all the Jewish pre- cepts, of every class, — here assumed to be divinely inspired, and, so, morally binding upon the Jews, — must exist in the Christian age, either with or with- out corresponding forms. The physical world is full of striking analogies of this inference. The falling of an apple is a fact from which may be derived all the laws, and all the results of gravitation in the universe, past, present, and fu- ture. Dr. Thomas Hill, ex-president of Harvard uni- versity, tells us that " The shortest fragment of a curve contains the whole ; that could the geometer know the exact path of a comet for the thousandth part of a second, he could from that predict accurately its whole course and orbit, in its journey for centu- ries, through the remotest bounds of space. "^ Inf. 5. All the once-binding precepts of the Bible, those of the Old Testament, as well as of the New, are now binding upon all men.-^ Inf. 6. All the promises of the Bible are equally ^From "Universality of Jewish Sacrificial Precepts"— a Treatise, in manuscript, by the author, 2Bib. Sacra., Vol. XXI, July, 1879, p. 443. 3If ,as some claim, there are any Bible-precepts which were essentially wrong when given, then they, of course, are not now binding upon any one. This law of universality makes them the same now as they were at first. 64 INFANT BAPTISM. for all men. God is not partial, but sincerely wishes to confer substantially the same blessings upon all ; and he actually does this, so far as they will receive them. His infinite benevolence causes him to wish to do this. All his promises made, and all his privi- leges proffered, are, as they must be, conditional and the only reason why some are more blessed by him than others, is because they better comply with his wise and essential conditions. Inf. 7. All moral precepts, together, constitute an organic system, a moral Cosmos. As a tree growing from its one germ-seed is a harmonious unit in all its great variety of roots, trunk, branches, leaves, etc., so all moral precepts, because the unfoldino-s of one and the same universal germ-substance, benevolence, must be an organic S3'S- tem ; a Unum in Pluribus ; its parts all embodiments of this one substance and in organic union with it and each other. Corroboration ly the Unity of the Physical Universe. — Prof. Dana, in liis Manual of Geology (Revised ed. pp. 3, 4), assures us as follows : "Although thus diminutive, the laws of earth are the laws of the universe. One of the fundamental laws of matter is gravitation, and we trace it, not only through our planetary system, but among the fixed stars, and we know that one law pervades the universe. The rays of light which come from the remotest limits of space, are visible declarations of unity ; for this light depends uj^on molecular vibrations ; that is the ultimate constitution and mode of action of matter, and, by the identity of its princip)les and laws, whatever its source, it proves the essential identity of the molecules of matter. Meteoric SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. Q3 showers are specimens of Celestial bodies occasionally reaching us from the heavens. They exemplify the same chemical and chrystallographic laws as rocks upon earth, and have afforded no new principles of any kind. The moon presents to the telescope a surface covered with craters of volcanoes, although of immense size. The prin- ciples exemplied upon the earth are repeated in the sat- ellite. Thus from gravitation, light, meteorites, and earth's satellite, we learn that there is oneness of law throughout space. The elements may differ in different systems, but it is a difference which exists among known elements and could give us no new fundamental laws. New crystalline forms might be found in the depths of space, but the laws of Crystallography, Physics, Celestial Mechanics, printed, in our office, would serve for the universe. The universe, if open to our inspection, would vastly increase our knowledge, and science might have a more beautiful superstructure, but the basement laws would be the same. The earth, therefore, though but an atom in immensity, is immensity itself in its revelations of truth and science, though gathered from one small sphere, is the deciphered law of the universe." Just SO in the moral universe. If open to our inspection in every one of its precepts, it would, indeed, greatly expand our knowledge, but it would afford no new principle, no new precept-substance ; but the one and the only one of which all precepts are simply its mediums of expressing itself. They would be merely repetitions, in other forms, of those known to us — all contained in the latter, yea wrapped up in each and every one of them ; all having a gen- eral identity with each other. 6 66 INFANT BAPTISM. lY. UNIVERSALITY OF MOEAL INSTITUTIONS. All the reasons in proof of the universality of moral precepts just given, and all the inferences just drawn from them, hold equally true of moral institutions. As the latter are made up wholly of moral precepts and have the divine sanction equally with them, the same universality must inhere in both. As moral institutions they have universal benevolence for their common substance, and as they are all developments of the same, they must themselves be, for substance, universal. Being made up wholly of moral precepts, this must be true of them as it is of their precepts : viz., that they are all identical in the general sense of having the same common germ-substance ; that they exist, for substance, in all times and places ; that all their obligations rest upon all moral beings : that all the promises of each and every one of them are proffered to all upon the same conditions ; that each one holds all the others wrapped up in itself ; and that they all constitute a moral system, harmonious in all its parts and functions. Y. SOME IMPORTANT FACTS ESTABLISHED AND THE GREAT PROBABILITIES SECURED. We feel fully justified in devoting so much time, as we have, to this Universality, and these its -Infer- ences, because of their yevy great importance, not only for use in this argument, but, also, in almost the entire field of Biblical study. They are the bases of all scriptural interpretation, and absolutely essential to its successful accomplishment. All moral institu- tions rest upon them as their indispensable founda- SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 67 tioii-stone. They all grow from them by a natural development, as their legitimate outcome. They enter directly, or indirectly, into the correct decisions of all questions respecting such institutions. They do so in the case of the identity of the Abra- hamic and Christian Institutions, now under consid- eration. They bear most directly and with a great deal of force, at certain points, in that case, and so make them of very great importance as reasons for that identity. They sweep away objections which are alleged to be insurmountable and have always been very influential as weapons hostile to Infant Baptism : — (1) They show that the great dissimilarity in the forms of the two classes of institutions is no valid objection to their identity. They thus furnish a fact which is essential to its establishment. (2) They show that the circumcision-command and all the others making up the Abrahamic Institutions, are not done away, nor out of obligatory use. (3) They show that each and all of these commands are, in their specific substances, binding in the Christian Age; and that all those many phases of benevolence which demanded and found embodiment in every one of their precepts, exist in this Age^ just as really and just as authoritatively as in the Abrahamic. (4) They, therefore, make it exceedingly probable that they demand and receive an appropriate embodi- ment in corresponding Christian Institutions. (5) As the Christian Church, covenant, and symbol, baptism, are the only ones found in that Age, they make it exceedingly probable (well-nigh morally certain), that they are indeed, the corresponding 68 INFANT BAPTISM. ones predicted, and so identical with the Abrahamic. They thus furnish a very weighty presumptive proof of that identity, and enable us now to set about furnishing the further proof required, under circum- stances of very great advantage. With such form- idable objections removed and such great probabili- ties in our favor, we are certainly justified in cherish- ing the fullest assurances of success. VI. THE ONE ESSENTIAL FACT, AND THE ONLY ONE, WHICH REMAINS TO BE ESTABLISHED. When Columbus, reasoning from acknowledged principles and facts, became convinced that, in the greatest probability, there was an unknown continent in the far away West, he set about the attempt to test the accuracy of his reasoning by searching for it, and, in making its discovery, he fully established that accuracy. When Le Verrier, by calculations based upon universal gravitation, and certain astro- nomical facts, confessedly established, came to the conclusion that there was, most probably, an undis- covered planet in a certain position in the heavens, he directed the operator at an observatory to turn his telescope in that direction to ascertain if there really was one there as thus predicted. The obser- vation was successful, a new planet w^as discovered, and the accuracy of his calculations was absolutely confirmed. We have just completed a similar process of reasoning based upon the well-established univer- sality of moral precepts and its inferences, and have come to what we regard as a well-nigli certain con- clusion, that the Abrahamic and Christian institu- SCRIPTUKAL ARGUMENT. 69 tions are respectively identical ; and we shall next proceed to test the correctness of our reasonings by their examination, to see if they themselves, as ex- amined and compared, give sure evidence of being one and the same ; to see if the most probable, is, also, the actual. Such an examination must consist in carefully defining and comparing them. If they show themselves having the same definitions they will, by so doing, show themselves really identical. CHAPTER V. Part Second. The Abrahamic Institutions Defined NEGATivEiiT. In giving the definition, both negative and affirm- ative, of these, we must carefully distinguish between the ideal and the actual ; between those institutions, as they should have been, and as they really were in their history. We must not accept definitions which include illegitimate characteristics, as legitimate ones ; nor perversions of their divine idea, as non- perversions. We must get such an apprehension of them as God designed them to be in all their history, and then see if they, as such, have their duplicates in the Christian. In determining what in them are perversions, we must use, as a final test, the known character of God and his holy Word ; as every thing found in institutions ordained by him, in conflict with his character and word, must surely be perversions. We must, also, ascertain what in them was essential and, consequently, permanent, as distinguished from the merely local and temporary, subject to change with circumstances. It is only the former that we may necessarily ex- pect to find in any others identical with them. In a word we must find out just what their divine idea did sanction as authorized, as essential and as per- manent in them as found in bible his tor}" ; and just what it did not sanction as such. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 71 We will, therefore, divide the question thus : (1) What they were not? (2) What they were ? What These Abrahamic Institutions, in Their Di- vine Idea, Were Not? — Their divine idea did not sanction the following unscriptural features as legit- imate, nor the following local and temporary ones, as essential and permanent. I. Their divine idea did not sanction the claim that non-believing ones could be real members of God's peculiar people, the Abrahamic church; nor actual parties in the covenant instituted by God, be- tween himself and that Peculiar People ; nor that the circumcision of such could be valid on their part. 1. The character of God shows this. That of it- self alone necessarily and fully establishes this affirm- ation. As a holy God, he cannot have for his chosen ones, those hostile to him in their hearts, as all refus- ing belief actually are. He cannot have, as such, those not capable of belief, as they are not moral agents. As such a being, he cannot be one with non- believing ones, nor with them in a mutual covenant, the essential characteristic of which is sincerity of heart, mutual love, and intelligence enough to con- stitute one a moral being. As such he cannot re- gard those who have received the form of the rite, and yet are destitute of faith, as validly circumcised, on their part, for the reason that he does and must require every good gift of his to be received with a loving believing heart, as a condition of its being rightly and validly received. As the character of God, here set forth in proof of this affirmation, is of itself alone sufficient completely 72 INFANT BAPTISM. to establish it, we are at liberty now to dismiss its consideration, and pass on to the next one in order. But we prefer to consider further : 2. The confirmation of the same by the Old Testa- ment Scriptures, by the claims and professions of the Jews themselves, and by the testimony of their holy prophets. (1) The fact that there were many unbelieving ones in that church does not, of itself, decide this question. There are many such in Christian churches ; but it will not be claimed that any such are legitimate members. The decisive question is : Were they there in accordance with its divine idea ? Were they real members ? (2) The covenant of God was with Abraham as a believer, and with him only as such. No one will claim that his faith was not absolutely essential to his being a party in that covenant. No one believes that God would have entered into covenant with him as he did, if he had not had obedient faith. No one will deny that this covenant with him was one and the same with that into which he entered with his seed. It follows, therefore, that faith, on their part, was just as essential as on the part of Abraham ; and that none of his unbelieving seed were or could be in that covenant with God. The unbelieving ones could stand related to it as those in whose behalf covenant- promises were made to the believing ones ; but never as themselves being in it. (3) The promises and conditions of that covenant show that God desior-ned to have none but believers initiated into the membership of his Peculiar People. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 73 His covenant gave promise of the greatest possible (to them) blessings, and imposed, as a condition, the highest faith, on their part, of which they were capa- ble. Their most needed blessing was the regenera- tion (to borrow a New Testament term) of all their oliildren at the commencement of their moral agency. God was certainly able to confer this, and ready to do so, if they would exercise constantly the requisite faith. We cannot reasonably doubt but that a faith which would secure the taking up and hurling into the sea great mountains, though itself like a grain of mustard seed in its smallness, would secure just that unspeakably great blessing to believing parents and the churches. It follows then, that God, in his cove- nant, made provision b}" which all the natural seed of Abraham could and should have been regenerated in childhood — each one, when he first became a respon- sible moral being — and so would be justly entitled to membership with God's believing people. In that case no formal initiation would be needed, excepting their previous circumcision which they, by their first moral act — that being one of faith — would make their anticipatory rite of initiation. We find substantially this same view set forth in an editorial of the Sunday /School Times of July 9, 1898, viz.: "The child of Christian parents and of the Christian Church should never know an hour of conscious life in which it is at enmity to God and requires to be reconciled to him. He should grow up into Christian living with the expansion of mind and affection, never sustaining a less loving relation to God than to his mother. This does 74 INFANT BAPTISM. not mean that he will have no battles with the baser self in him, but that from the first dawn of conscious existence he becomes alive unto God through Jesus Christ, and has the purpose to do his Father's will as the dominant motive of his life. With such a past he can break only by apos- tasy, and to his woeful loss. His breaking with the evil within him and without him is not a breaking with his past, but holding fast to the grace which is given to child- ren as amply as to elders," We should distinctively state and •emphasize the bible-truth that such a child has, and must have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, as no one not " born of water and of the spirit" can possibly see the king- dom of God. Thus interpreted, the editor gives his emphatic testimony to our claim that the Abrahamic Church might have had all their children regenerated, and so legitimate members, at the commencement of their moral agency. We regard it as most probable that this high ideal, thus held up before them as a mark towards which they should be constantly pressing on with all their might, will be fully reached by all the churches of Christ in the Age of their promised millenial perfec- tion. Whether or not there have been in the history of the churches a considerable number, or only a very few, of such cases of infant regeneration, is a question upon which good men have widely differing opinions. We think, however, that not many would affirm that there have been none at all. None are necessar}^ to establish the self-evident possibility here claimed. But even one single one would confirm it, and so greatly help to harmonize the policy of the Abrahamic SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 75 Church in receiving all the infant children of her members as supposed believers, — becoming actual ones at the commencement of moral agency — with its great doctrine of the absolute necessity of faith to legitimate membership in it. Had the Abrahamic Church, then, perfectly com- plied with the conditions of their covenant so far as possible for them, they would not have had any unbe- lieving seed among them, for the reason that all their children, becoming believers at the commencement of their moral agency, would be believing members with them. God assumed that they would be thus faith- ful and so had them start off, on trial, with regarding all their children as true believers entitled to mem- bership. Had they complied with the enjoined conditions, even so far as to secure the regeneration of a consid- erable part of their children in early childhood, they would have been justified in considering all of them as members of the church. As they could not dis- tinguish the regenerate from the unregenerate, when so immature, they must treat either all or none of them as believing. It would, then, have been their -duty, because of their inability to read the hearts of the children, to receive them all, both the unregen- erate and the regenerate, rather than keep out the latter with the former. This is the policy of Chris- tian churches. They do not apply tests sufficiently decisive certainly to keep out all not christians. They could not without also keeping out with them many real, though imperfect, ones. As a matter of fact, the best of them take in more or less of those 76 INFANT BAPTISM. not Christians. They act upon the wise principle that it is better to admit, through charitable mistake, some who are not Christians, than to keep out many who are. Hence, in doubtful cases, they very properly give the candidate the benefit of the doubt. The question arises : Why did not God, knowing that they would not comply with those conditions, direct them not to regard any of their children as regenerate until they had given other more certain evidence of it when old enough to do so ? We reply : His way is to lay down general principles and leave men, in most cases, to search out for themselves their wise application to their circumstances. He sees it best to have them seek long and diligently for the hidden path, and learn from their mistakes when dis- covered. Had they rightly studied those principles, so clearly revealed, they would, in view of their short- comings in complying with the conditions of their covenant, liave required better evidence of the regen- eration of their children than the forfeited promises of that covenant. (4) God's rejection of the natural seed of Abraham through Ishmael, Ketura, and Esau, and the separa- tion from them of his Peculiar People, taught the latter the obligations laid upon them to remove from their membership all unbelieving ones, so far as it could be wisely done. This rejection of, and separa- tion from, those of his natural seed, had, for its reason, their apostasy from the faith of their believ- ing ancestor. No one will claim that he would thus have cast them off had they remained in that faith. God, then, by so doing, gave them an object-lesson SCRIPTUKAL ARGUMENT. 7T illustrating and enforcing the principle which should govern them with respect to all among them desti- tute of Abraham's faith, setting forth the grand pur- pose which they should ever strive to accomplish, viz., to keep their membership strictly and only a believ- ing one. These rejections show conclusively that mere natural descent and circumcision, both combined, did not of themselves alone, constitute a legitimate mem- ber. They also show that the circumcisions of those apostate ones were uncircumcisions — null and void, because not vitalized by that faith which is absolutely essential to their validity. (5) The excommunications by cutting off from Israel, enjoined by God, gave them a like object- lesson, teaching the same duty. Those guilty of cer- tain offences must be cut off because their conduct was unmistakable evidence of unbelief. With God the great cause and the great characteristic of all wicked deeds is unbelief. Hence he, in enjoining the excommunication of those guilty of them, pro- claimed as with trumpet-tongue, the great truth that faith is absolutely essential to membership with his people ; that without it neither Abraham's lineage nor his circumcision, nor both combined, could make one a member. Why then, it may be asked, did he not specify more offences indicating unbelief, as a cause for expulsion ? Doubtless because he knew that the few given were as many as they, in their great ihiperfections, would make use of for the specified purpose. Besides, as we have just noticed, the divine policy is not to enact many specific statutes, but rather to set forth govern- 78 INFANT BAPTISM. ing principles ; enjoin as specimens a few of the detail- duties involved; and leave their further application largely to the wisdom and fidelity of his people, under the guidance of his spirit. The New Testa- ment specifies but very few offences for church disci- pline. It wisely leaves- it with the churches them- selves to guard carefully against admitting unbeliev- ing ones, and to remove from their folds, after the most faithful efforts to reclaim them, all such, so far as can be wisely done. (6) The Jews themselves claimed that their church had no legitimate place for those in unbelief. They strenuously insisted that only those possessing Abra- ham's faith could rightly l^elong to it. Great num- bers of them, especially in times of their great degen- eracy, did indeed maintain that all the natural seed, through Jacob, were, with rare exceptions, real mem- bers ; but they also maintained, just as strenuously, that they were at the same time, true believers and must be, to be such members. Each and every Jew, without exception, professed himself a believer. They, one and all, held, in theory, that if any one should show himself not such, he ought to be cut off from Israel. Many based this their claim for the real membership of them all, upon the covenant-promises of God to them, in case they complied with their con- ditions ; also upon their self-righteous assumption of having always complied Avith them. Thus blinded by their wicked perversions, they falsely claimed legitimate membership for all, right in the face of such sinful lives, on the part of great numbers, as showed them certainly not entitled to it. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 79 These opinions and claims of the Jews have some bearing upon the question before us, for the reason that perversions usually have some phases of truth for their basis, and so testify to *the same as being the truth. They point, as evidence, to the real facts perverted, of which they are perversions. Great and odious as was this self-righteous perversion (their assumption of perfect compliance) by the Jews, it still accurately points to and confirms this absolutely essential condition of being a party in that covenant, aad a legitimate member of that church. They, by their grossly false assumptions, confessed that what they assumed to have (Abraham's faith), they must have in order to be legitimate members. (7) Testimo7iy of the Jewish Prophets. While it was indeed true that the great majority of the Jews looked upon nearly all of the natural seed through Jacob as true believers, and, as such, legitimate mem- bers of their church, largely regardless of the char- acter of their lives, the same was very far from being- true of their godly prophets. They made a sharp distinction between those of wicked and those of righteous lives, between those who really served God and those who served him not. Their recorded words show how scathingly they rebuked the latter for their sins, as reprobates. Isaiah voices the sentiments of them all when, as interpreted by the apostle Paul, he exclaims : Though the number of the children be as the sands of the sea, a remnant shall be saved. — Rom. 8 : 27. The claim that that holy prophet re- garded such wicked apostates as in covenant with God, and as legitimate members of his peculiar peo- 80 INFANT BAPTISM. pie, is absurd. He must have regarded them as not really in that covenant and as not such members. Those inspired men also maintained that true faith was essential to a real circumcision. They regarded all those wicked Jews who had received its form as still uncircumcised on their part. Jeremiah expresses the views and feelings of them all when he says of multitudes of Jews : Behold their ear is uncircum- cised and they cannot hearken. — Jer. 6 : 10. All the house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart. — 9 : 26. The same appears in the impassioned defense of the saintly Stephen before the Jewish sanhedrim. Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost ; as your fathers did so do ye. — Acts 7:51. He evidently regarded his madly opposing hearers and their wicked fathers of past generations, as both alike uncircumcised on their part. The Jews did not err in circumcising their non- believing children, as that was God's commandment to them ; but they did err in giving them the rite as those morally certain to commence their moral lives as belicA'ers, and in maintaining that its gift neces- sarily implied that they with rare, if any, exceptions, actually did so. The rite had two distinct functions: (1) To designate believers in covenant with God in their own behalf. (2) To designate their children — the believing and non-believing — as those in whose behalf they were also in covenant with him. (8) Does any one object that the Abrahamic church was simply a nation, nothing but a civil com- monwealth, and as such rightly included all as legiti- SCRIPTUEAL ARGUMENT. 81 mate citizens without reference to the state of their hearts, we reply: God requires faith as a condition of legitimate citizenship, just as imperatively as for legitimate membership, in his church. The state is a divinely organized body and subject solely to his con- trol as its king, just as really as is his church. He demands faith of all men, without exception, in all their relations, as a condition of legitimacy in those . relations. We should be glad to consider at length the many questions and difficulties which this state- ment suggests, but the space at our command will not permit. We will only say that the same princi- ples apply as those which we have reasoned upon in considering like questions in respect to legitimate church membership. The Primitive Immaturity of the Ahrahamic Church to he Kept in Mind. — In passing judgment upon the Abrahamic church for not keeping more distinct and visible the line separating its true believing members from those non-believing natural descendants of Jacob, in whose behalf they were in covenant with God, we should not forget that it existed in a very early period of human history, in which a high degree of development could not be expected. The Church of God is a creature of growth, by gradual processes, from great infantile immaturity to a state of millennial perfection. We must not expect, then, to find the riper and more perfect fruit of the Christian Age in the earlier ones. It is enough that we surely find in the little child the same germs, slightly developed, which are to grow into higher development all through its life. So it is enough that we certainly 7 82 INFANT BAPTISlSr. find in tliat primitive clmrcli those principles revealed, more or less clearly, and to some extent recognized, which have been from the beginning unceasingly struggling for larger development, and, by gradually ascending steps, have succeeded in becoming, as the ages rolled by, more and more embodied in better forms, until at length they attained to the so-much superior ones of the Christian age. God wisely leaves his church largely to self-development, under the invisible guidance of his Spirit, and the use of that knowledge of his character and will which they do possess ; and her progress is governed, to a con- siderable extent, by the laws of the human mind. The same grand truths were with her in her infancy which have been ever since ; but it took long ages for that comprehension and embodiment of them which is now witnessed, and a great many more will pass before perfection is acquired. It took Christian churches many centuries to shut their doors against slaveholders, and a great deal more of such progress remains to be made. The development still goes on from one degree to another higher one, and will con- tinue to do so till, after the lapse of ages, the highest possible on earth will be experienced. First the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear. The new and improved forms and policies found in each succeeding age, are, then, owing to legitimate growth, and not to any change in princi- ples or identity. What^ and the Importance of IVhat^ has been Shoivn. — We have now shown, conclusively as we believe, that the Divine Idea of these institutions SCRIPT CTRAL ARGUMENT. 83 does not sanction any claim that non-believing ones could be real members of that church of God ; nor actual parties in the mutual covenant instituted by God between himself and his peculiar people ; nor that the circumcisions of such could be valid on their part. In so doing we have removed one of the most formidable objections to the identity of these institutions with the Christian ones. If it were true that unbelieving ones had a legitimate place in the former church and covenant, then they could not possibly be the same Avith tlie latter ; and if their cir- cumcisions were valid on their part, the rite cannot possibly be the same with baptism. If these things were true, the alleged objection, founded upon them, would be insurmountable ; but as they are not true, it falls to the ground upon the slightest touch. The reader, then, as well as ourselves, must be deeply impressed with the very great importance to this argument, of the truth now established (absolutely essential to it) ; and this so evident, and so great importance, is our apology for devoting so much time to its consideration. We would here again emphasize the fact that the character of God, of itself alone, is sufficient to make certain the truth we have been maintaining, so that the reader need not liesitate to accept the conclusion reached, even if he finds himself unable to accept, as valid reasons, all those which have now been consid- ered. II. Tlieir divine idea did not sanction that narrow missionary spirit which characterized the Jews in all their history. 84 INFANT BAPTISM. They did not cherish a large missionary spirit with reference to the gentile nations of the earth, nor ade- quately recognize their obligations to labor to induce them to become the believing seed of Abraham by exercising his faith, a duty which was enjoined upon them by God in these institutions. All the mission- ary enterprises of the past, present, and future, were, wrapped up in the promise made to Al)raham of a seed including all the families of the earth. Prom- ises of the ingathering of the gentiles were dimly re- vealed in the provision for the circumcision and the adoption, as Abraham's seed, of the strangers dwell- ing among them, and in the real or attempted ab- sorption of other peoples, as in the case of Rahab, Jethro, Hobab^ and others ; in the preaching of Jonah to the Nineverites ; and the many exulting predic- tions of their ingathering, made by their holy prophets. Yet the Jews, heedless of all these inspiring mis- sionary voices, and full of odious self-complacency, heartlessly looked upon them as outside the pale of salvation, and not as objects of compassion nor any rescuing efforts. Their sad departure from their di- vine idea, in this respect, brought upon them untold evils. III. Their divine idea did not sanction their royal government as the only right, nor as the best, form of civil government. The Jewish form of government, especially in its later developments, is largely a perversion of the di- iCritical Notes on Numbers 10:28, by Professor Willis D. Beecher, D. D., Sunday-school Times, July 13. 1895. SCEIPTimAL ARGUMENT. 85 vine idea given them. They were to have no earthly king, no state court, no royal line. God consented to their having a king, in compliance with their wicked urgency ; but it was upon the condition that he himself was, in every case, to designate him by the anointing of his prophet, and that his appoint- ment, so made, should be ratified by the whole peo- ple, as in the case of Saul and David. The king was to rule, in all respects, as directed by himself. This idea, fully carried out, would have given them a model government in all their history ; in its sub- stance, the best for all nations then and now. IV. Their divine idea did not sanction the exer- cise of civil functions by the church, as an essential, world-wide policy. This exercise by that ancient church, so far as done Avisely, was not a perversion of the divine idea, but, to a large extent, simply a temporary expedient, in perfect harmou}^ with that idea. It was not a state church, in the modern sense of that term, in which the church is, more or less, governed by the state — the latter a distinct and separate bod}^ ; but a church exercising, solely as such, civil functions so far as demanded by its members and those under its care. There was no separate civil organization. As there was no such civil government to exercise them, the necessity of doing it was forced upon the church as the only existing power able to do it. This must necessarily have been the case with Abraham and his immediate household; also with Isaac, Jacob and theirs; also with the Hebrews in their forty years' wanderings in the wilderness, and in their residence 86 INFANT BAPTISM. in the land of Canaan. It naturally continued to be so, as long as they remained an independent commu- nity, subject to no other civil power ; but it of course ceased when they became subject to conquering na- tions. In the changed circumstances of the present time, especially in this country, Avhen and where so large a portion of the inhabitants are non-church members, it would, manifestly, be most impractical and detrimental for the churches to exercise civil functions beyond a very limited extent. The differ- ence, then, between the Abrahamic and the Christian churches is one of local and temporary forms, not of substance. V. Their divine idea did not sanction the exclu- sion of the local church element from the normal structure of that church. The local-church element, which is so prominent a feature of Christian churches, was not very distinctly developed in the Jewish, until they were brought under the pressure of the Babylonian captivity ; but it was evidently there in germ from tlie beginning, as we shall see. The patriarchal families, of so numer- ous membership, maintaining family worship and religious instruction, as they did, were really local churches. Indeed the Jewish church, even when numbering millions, was in fact a local church so far as common instruction and united worship were con- cerned. They had one common house of worship — first the tabernacle, next their temple. They all met together at stated times for united worship, partak- ing of their sacrificial sacraments, etc. But when scattered abroad, deprived of access to their beloved SCRIPTUEAL ARGUMENT. 8T temple, and unable to meet together, excepting as little gatherings in their local settlements, they were compelled to form themselves into small local bodies called synagogues, for worship, instruction, etc. These correspond to the local churches of the present time. As then the germs of local churches are clearly seen in the Abrahamic, the difference between that and the Christian, in this respect, cannot be a radical one, but purel}^ the result of growth — the germs in the earlier more fully developed in the latter. YI. Their divine idea did not sanction their pecu- liar ritual as essential and designed for permanent use in all future time. The peculiar ritual of that ancient church was, in its forms, local and temporary. Its great design was to typify the promised great high priest — both priest and sacrificial lamb. It was, therefore, largely sacri- ficial. Such being its office, it would, of course, as a result of growth, be remodeled into new forms at the advent of its great Antitype. These peculiarities of the Abrahamic institutions, which we have considered so much at length, consti- tute all the important differences between the Abra- hamic and Christian; and, as they have been shown to be, either perversions, or of an unessential, local, and temporary character, they cannot stand in our way at all in proving the identity in dispute. CHAPTER VI. Part Second. — Continued. The Abeahamic Institutions Defined Positively. This their positive definition, now called for, is, in some of its parts, incidentally expressed, and, in others, more or less implied, in the negative, one just given. For that reason less time will be required to show, positively, what those institutions were in their divine idea; and the definite knowledge of their perversions and of their local and temporal features, which we have thus obtained, will add much to our facility and certainty in seeking to ascertain their divinely-intended character. After we have eliminated from corrupted divine institu- tions (all those of this earth made more or less so by imperfect men in charge of them), — after we have eliminated all those features which are in conflict with the character of God and not enjoined in his word, then we may be sure that we have, in what remains, the institutions themselves as God designed them to be ; and that in accurately describing them we shall have their true definitions. We will, there- fore, now proceed to learn what the}^ in their divine idea were. :r. THE ABRAHAMIC CHURCH.^ iln these definitions of the Abrahamic church we shall confine our- selves, mainly, to essential church elements, letting alone those unessential features which distinguish different bodies of believers from each other. The same method in our definitions of the related covenant and sj'mbol. SCRIPTUEAL ARGUMENT. 89 The definition of that cliurch must be derived from tlie nature and cliaracteristics of that com- munity in the Abrahamic age, which the Bible designates as tlie Peculiar People of God. It con- sisted, historically, mainly of Abraham and his believing natural seed through Isaac and Jacob. They were specially called to be God's peculiar people in whom he delighted. They were taken by him under his special care and nurture. From these facts we learn that that church was : 1. A Community of Believers and of Them Alone. — As this alleged fact Avas considered at length, and, in our judgment, fully established, in the last chap- ter, when defining that church negatively, no further treatment of it seems now to be incumbent upon us. 2. An Organized Community with a Form of Organ- ization to so77ie Degree Local and Temporary. — It was at its commencement a single, small family, thence growing into a larger patriarchal one ; and at length, into one of national dimensions. A family is a divinely-organized community; and a family made up wholly of real believers under parental oversight and instruction, as Abraham's was called to be, is, in itself, a divinely organized church in miniature — the parents its officers ; and one made up of professed believers, as w^as the Abrahamic patriarchal one, is such a church, in the usual sense of that word, even if many of them are not real, but only professing believers, as is the case, more or less, with all churches in this imperfect world. 90 INFANT BAPTISM. 3. A Coimnunity of Believers in Covenant ivitli G-od in Behalf of Themselves^ their Children^ their Felloiv-men^ their Worldly Possessions, etc. — As those especially called to be the guardians of their chil- dren, the resj)onsible keepers of their brother-men, God's stewards in respect to all their powers and possessions, they must be thus in covenant with him. 4. In Covenant ivith Each Other. — This is neces- sarily the case with all true believers in the world ; yea, with all the brotherhood of holy beings in the universe. It is especially so with all those living together in local communities as neighbors. 5. Having a Declaration of their Faith. — They had this in their holy scriptures, and in the personal revelation of his will, in many instances, given them. This is a matter of indisputable Scripture record. 6. Under common instruction ; united in worship ; their children under covenant nurture. Their family and temple service show this. 7. Having overseeing and teaching officers. 8. Having Church Sacraments. — They had them in their divinely-ajDpointed sacrifices, pointing to the coming Christ as their atoning Saviour, and in their sacred symbol and seal, circumcision, given them by God to designate themselves as believers, and their children as children of God's covenant with them. Common to all Believers. — It is evident that all these essential features defining the Abrahamic church, necessarily exist in all times and places where true and faithful believers are found : (1) All those believing ones any where or at any SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 91 time dwelling near each other are a community of believers. (2) They form, or ought to form, them- selves into an organization as God's servants. He certainly calls upon them so to do. (3) They are, as they must be, in covenant with their God. (4) And with each other. (5) God will not, as he never has, fail to give them some revelation of his will which they do or should use as their declaration of faith. (6") They certainly ought to combine for common instruction, associated work, and united worship. They certainly ought to give their chil- dren covenant nurture. (7) They do or should have the requisite officers. (8) As holy sacraments are confessedly essential to the spiritual welfare of believers, God certainly would not fail to provide the same for them. History shows that those of all ages have been provided w^ith them as we shall see.^ [No community of men can possibly destroy, nor, by mere neglect or positive efforts, shut themselves out from any institution founded upon God's truth. A family may refuse to erect and maintain a family altar in their home, but it is there with them all the same. They cannot rid themselves of its obligations, nor make it not ready to be of great benefit to them if improved. A nation may decree to banish the Bible— burning up all its volumes — but they cannot banish or burn up its truths, nor cause that its proffered blessings are no longer held out to them. 1 Everj- divinely-appointed institution has, and must have, all its essential features common to all believers. A single one not thus common, would show an institution so far not of God. 92 INFANT BAPTISM. Their mad efforts only add to the relentless grip of its holy commandments. So a church — its obligations necessarily resting upon all men and its proffered blessings held out to them conditionally — does and must exist, in its sub- stance, wherever men, even the most wicked, are found. It especially exists Avith all believers, as they confess its obligations and avail themselves of its promises. They do this, more or less unintelli- gently and otherwise imperfectly, as they themselves are ignorant and imperfect; but to he believers they must do it to some extent.] As these definitions are common to all believers, — and so must be true of the peculiar people of God, it is not necessary to use our limited space in citing the Bible proof-texts which substantiate them, as we should be glad to do. It will be seen that all these just-considered char- acteristics of the Abrahamic church, here shown to be common to all believers, constitute all its essential ones. It follows, then, that that church itself exists wherever faithful believers are found ; that it must exist among them all, in its essential featwes ; and that it most probably does so in some organic forms, where believers are disposed to do their duty. This fact should be carefully kept in mind for use when we come to examine the records of Bible history to see if those records actually show an Abrahamic church, identical with this, — in substance, not in form, — in all the history of God's people. It will greatly aid us in, and greatly add to our assurance of, finding it so. The fact now established, that all the SCEIPTIJRAL AEGUMENT. 9B essential features of the Abrahamic church must and do exist in the Christian Dispensation, so far as God's requirements are met, will make it far easier to show that the Christian church is identical with the Abra- hamic. In thus setting forth these indisputable character- istics of God's Peculiar People of the Abrahamic age, we have, as we claim, conclusively demonstrated the fact that the_y were a real church of God. That they are just the ones which constitute a church, and, so, necessarily make the body in which they are found, a church, cannot, as we believe, be reasonably questioned. There are no Scripture characteristics of a church which are not found in these, either ex- pressed or implied. We shall, therefore, no longer speak of the Abrahamic church as an unproved fact, nor make use of the term as such, simply for con- venience's sake. We shall hereafter designate it as such because it is in very deed a church of the liv- ing God.^ We now proceed to define ir. THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 1. Its Reiterations. — It was announced in different forms and at six different times to Abraham as follows : Gen. 12 : 1-3 ; 12 : 7 ; 13 : 14-18 ; 15 : 1-18 ; 17 : 1-21 ; 22 : 15-18. Once to Isaac : Gen. 26 : 3-4. Three times to Jacob : Gen. 28 : 13-15 ; 35 : 1 0-12 ; 46 : 2-4. Also to the Hebrews through Moses: Ex. 6:2-8. lAs before promised, we have given the definition of this church, not as the imperfect Jews looked upon it, but as God does and must look upon a body who are his Peculiar People, and are in covenant with him. We have defined it in the light of the New as well as of the Old Testament. 94 INFANT BAPTISM. Allusions to it, both in the Old and New Testaments, aje very numerous. 2. Its Parties. — It was a mutual covenant of God with believing Abraham and his believing seed, and only with his believing seed. That there was a cov- enant between Abraham and his seed, will not be denied. That only he, as a believer, and his believ- ing seed, as such, were or could be, a party to that covenant, has already been shown, and is too evident to need any proof more than its simple statement. 3. Its Fountain Covenant. — The mother of all divine covenants having respect to this world, is that between God and his Son Jesus Christ, recorded in the second Psalm, and the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah : The Lord hath said unto me : Thou art my Son ; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me and I shall give the heathen for thine inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron ; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Ps. 2 : 7-9. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see the travail of his soul and be satisfied ; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many ; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong ; because he hath poured out his soul unto death ; and he was numbered with the transgressors ; and he bear the sin of man}', and made intercession for transgressors. Is. 53 : 10-12. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 95 This great primal covenant of God with Christ, re- specting fallen man, involves the whole work of redemp- tion, and, hence, all the other redemptive covenants found in the Word of God, must be simply branches of it. They must all flow from it as from their com- mon fountain. They must express some specific ap- plications of it; set forth some one or more of its many phases. It follows, then, that each and every one of them must be, for substance, identical with its primal one, as a branch with its vine. i. Its Promises^ — the 3Iore Noted Onek^^—To he their G-od, — -"T^ In this covenant God promised, prima- rily, to be a God to believing Abraham ; his believing natural seed; the believing alien servants in their households ; and the believing stranger coming to dwell among them. But, in its more comprehensive meaning, he promised to be a God to believers of all nations and times ; ^ and in its most comprehensive meaning, he promised the same to Christ. In its largest sense it w^as none other than the mother cove- nant itself. (2) A G-odlij Seed. — God promised Abraham an innu- merable and an honored posterity, including believers of all nations and times — countless as the stars of heaven — and the predicted Messiah, as pre-eminently his seed. He makes the same promise, and makes it good, to every believer. Every believer has for his children, all converted, 1 In a vei'y important sense he is a God to all wicked men, holding out to them rich promises in case they repent and come into mutual covenant with him; but he is a God to those who have actually come into such a covenant with him, in a very much more important sense. It is in this latter sense that he promised to be a God to Abra- ham and his seed. 96 IKFANT BAPTISM. more or less, by liis agency, however indirectly or re- motely. For them he travailed in birth and brought them forth as his children. Every believer, like Abraham, has, for his children, all other believers. He is one with Christ and, there- fore, is joint parent with Christ of all the believing children of the latter. This is happily illustrated in the family. Children of the father are, also, chil- dren of his wife, because she is one flesh with him. A second wife is the mother of the children of her husband by a former wife, because she is now one flesh with him ; and those children, if w^orthy ones, will, for that reason, recognize and address her as such. So every believer, being one with Christ, in a union far more intimate, enduring, and sacred than that of husband and wife, has all of Christ's children for his own. Because of this union, all things are his. Again, every believer has Christ for his seed, as Abraham had. Earthly parents have for their children, not only those to whom they gave physical birth, but, also, those who are one with the latter — their sons' wives, their daughters' husbands. So, as every believer has, as w^e have seen, all other believers for his children, and as Christ recognizes every one of them as his brother, sister, and mother, it follows that he has not only them, but Christ, also (he being one with them), for his seed, in fulfilment of God's seed- promise to Abraham. Christ is the seed of Abraham, not so much because he came from him, after the flesh, by physical descent, as because he is one with that patriarch's believing seed. Because of that union SCKIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 97 he must be his seed. For a like reason he must be the seed of every believer. He is the son of David, according to the flesh, not only because of this natural descent from him, but also, because he united himself with humanity, en- tered the brotherhood of mankind in the flesh. In the same sense, though more remotely, every human being is a son of David because human with him. Christ was, also, the Son of David, according to the Spirit, because he united himself with all those hav- ing David's faith. The same is true of every believer, yet not in such a pre-eminent sense. Thus the amazing humiliation of the incarnation is repeated by Christ, in the case of every regenerated man. His Lord humbled himself to become his son. He who gave him his new birth, condescended him- self to be born of him. Just so he stoops to become one with, and so a child of, every one of his redeemed ones, that, by thus getting fast hold of them, he may lift them up to heaven. It is evident, then, that the promise of God to Abraham, of a numberless seed, including Christ, is, in its most comprehensive mean- ing, the priceless heritage of every believer. (3) A Dwelling-place lalieritance. — God promised to Abraham, as the father of all believers, the goodly land of Canaan as an inheritance for himself and his believing seed ; also for those in whose behalf he was in covenant with them. Primarily this promise was limited to this one small province ; but in its higher and broader meaning, it included the whole world as the destined inheritance of all believers, when the meek shall inherit the earth, and all men shall, by 98 INFANT BAPTISM. believing, become the seed of Abraham. In its high- est meaning it included heaven as the longed-for and certain everlasting home of all believers. God's im- partial and far-reaching benevolence compels us to give this his promise such a comprehensive interpre- tation. (4) Probationary Blessings. — He promised to con- fer such upon their non-believing seed, including, in its largest sense, all destitute of faith. So his benevo- lence demanded. (5) These Promised Blessings Permanent. — All these covenant-promises were to be everlasting, so far as men would receive them. They covered all the coming ages of this world, and all the never-ceasing ones of the world hereafter. 5. Its Conditions^ the More Noted Ones. — (1) Faith. They must be believers. Only such can be in mutual covenant with God. Even tlie non-believing natural seed of Abraham himself could not be. Those through Ishmael and Keturah were shut out from it because of their apostasy in non-belief. So during the entire Abrahamic age, were the great majority of even those through Jacob (all non-believing Jews). They could not be in it because of their unbelief. Heb. 4:6. (2) Prayer and Godliness. — They must be men of prayer and holy lives in order to be in that covenant. This is essential to the real reception of any and every gift of God. (3) Self-denial. — As those in covenant with a per- fectly unselfish God, they must deny themselves, just as often and just as far as their highest usefulness made it necessary. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 99 (4) Entire Consecration to God. — They must daily and hourly consecrate to their God themselves, their children, all their possessions and interests. (5) Faithful Parental Training. — They must train their children and all others, so far as in their power, for God's service, with implicit confidence in his cov- enant-promises respecting them. (6) Common to all ^£?//e^'6?rs.— Substantially the same methods of proof show this as those just used respecting the church. We next proceed to define : III. THE ABRAHAMIC CIRCUMCISION. 1. A symbol of a believer. It was appointed by God to designate Abraham and his believing seed as believers. It is a symbol of a believer in the sense that believers alone can be really circumcised on their part ; and that no non-believing one can be on his part. Jer. 9 : 26 ; Acts 7 : 51. 2. A symbol of God's covenant between himself and believers in behalf of themselves and their children. • 3. A symbol administered by believing ones to their children, to designate them as those in whose behalf they themselves are in covenant with God. As with all rites, the form of this is not absolutely essential. It may be laid aside without impairing its validity in the least, whenever circumstances certainly demand it. Children dying before the eighth day did not often literally receive its form, and no females ever did, but every one of them was circumcised all the same. The substance of the rite was literally, and its 100 INFANT BAPTISM. form was virtually, given to them ; thus making them rank, as they all did, among the circumcised, not the uncircumcised. 4. A seal stamped upon this covenant between God and believer, to declare and emphasize its sacred- ness and surety. 5. A symbol expressing, making prominent, and helping to preserve a wide moral separation between Abraham and his believing seed, as God's Peculiar People, together with those under their covenant- nurture on the one hand, and on the other, the wicked people dwelling around, and, to some extent, unavoid- ably commingling wdth them. 6. A symbol expressing and emphasizing the value and necessity of moral purity, and the loathsome, sin- ful character of moral impurity. It especially empha- sizes the duty of cleanliness from all the low, debas- ing lusts of the flesh. It was chosen by God as one happily fitted to exj)ress, in their climate and sur- roundings, his condemnation and abhorrence of all such vile things. It was, therefore, just the one needed by them in view of the sickening sensual pollutions around, and to some extent among, them.- 7. In a deeper, and by them largely unperceived, sense, it was a symbol of cleansing by the blood of Christ from the deadly pollution of sin. Abraham, as a believer, was cleansed by that blood, and that fact must have been a most important part of the meaning of that symbol appointed to designate him a believer. Every symbol of one cleansed by the blood of Christ, as is true of all believers, is a sym- bol of that cleansing. SCRIPTUEAL ARGUMENT. 101 8. A symbol of the burial and resurrection to neAV- ness of life with Christ. Abraham and his believing seed were buried and raised to newness of life with Christ, just as truly as was the apostle Paul. It fol- lows, therefore, that the rite given to designate them as believers, necessarily symbolized that burial and resurrection of theirs. Every symbol of a believer is also a symbol of all that is involved in his becoming and being such. That which is set forth in formal and emphatic statement in Christian baptism, is only the legitimate development, in process of time, of its vital germ-seed inherent in circumcision, as in every other symbol of a believer. 9. In a word, a symbol of all the righteous experi- ences of those ancient, and all other, believers, and of all the truths in which they believed — all the truths of their holy religion. Commo7i to all Believers. — As with this church and this covenant, so, also, with this symbol in all its essential features — those just mentioned — it is com- mon to all believers. Take away its local and tem- poral garb and we have remaining that same sub- stance which is found wherever the children of God are found. We need not take time to show this at length, as we did in the case of the church. To do that would be simply to restate in corresponding terms what was then quite fully set forth. Sure and Decisive Tests., for Future Use^ Secured. — In these essential features of these three Abrahamic institutions which we have discovered, we have come into possession of sure and decisive tests of all those of other ages which claim to be identical with them. 102 INFANT BAPTISM. If such do not prove to have the same, they cannot be one and the same with them ; if they do then they must be. With these decisive tests now in our hands, we next turn to a careful and thorough examination of the records of history, to see if they give us institu- tions which, while of different forms, have the same essential features, and, so, are identical with the Abrahamic. CHAPTER VII. Part Third. The Abkahamic Church : Its Covenant and its Symbol. Circumcision, as found in Fragmentary Forms in the Pre-Abrahamic Age. It has now been fully established that these insti- tutions are universal in their substance, and that their essential features, enumerated in the preceding Part, are common to all believers. It follows, therefore, that we certainly shall find them in their essential features in that age, and that the only thing now in doubt, is the finding them there in corresponding local and temporal forms. Shall we find, in that early age, those same essential features, embodied in other forms, adapted to the peculiar circumstances of that age, and corresponding to those of the Abrahamic ? The presumption that we shall, is certainly very strong. As we now know by actual demonstration, that all their essential features are there, we have little, if any, occasion to fear failing thus to find them. There is still another fact, not before mentioned, which adds immensely to this same probability, viz. : The necessity of such, or equivalent, institutions to the spiritual welfare of believers. Their necessity in the Abrahamic and Christian ages is shown by their being given to them by God, and in the good con- fessedly experienced by them. Believers before 104 INFANT BAPTISM. Abraham, must have needed them just as much, if not more. They, like all believers, needed a church home, a recognized brotherhood, ^yith creed and cove- nant; one formed and kept u^d for united worship, common instruction, and cooperative work. They needed, and to secure their highest good, must have had, such a brotherhood, — a visible, tangible organi- zation, instituted by God as his kingdom on earth. They also needed to have that covenant, necessarily existing between themselves as believers and their God, recognized, set forth and emphasized as to its great importance, by God himself in his own revela- tion to them. Such a revelation would greatly aug- ment its power to minister to their peace and com- fort — just what they, more than those of later ages, needed. Again : They needed symbols and seals of this cov- enant, like circumcision and baptism, impressively picturing to themselves and the world the great truths of their faith, and emphasizing its sacredness. Universal Necessity and G-reat Usefulness of Sym- bols. — Symbols are a universal necessity among men ; essential to their welfare in all relations and condi- tions, as the history of the world abundantly shows. Nations must have their sacred flags and monuments eloquent with national stor}^, dear to every true citi- zen as the apple of his eye. Armies and navies must have their colors around which the shouting men do rally in the thick of battle with their votive lives in their hands. Churches must have their holy sacra- ments as helps to communion with their God, incen- tives to self-denying service, giving support in trials. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 105 and ministering sweet consolation in the solemn hour of death. By means of their ensign, emblazoned with inspir- ing emblems of national character and achievement, many millions of citizens unite to utter terrific words of warning to their country's foes, and soul-stirring ones of certain protection to her friends. Through it, streaming like a blazing flame of fire from flag-staff tops, they join in the same grand choral song of patriotic devotion to their beloved country and their fellow-citizens. The very sight of it waving in the air, filled with the wafting breezes, gleaming in the dazzling sunlight, is an inspiration. Around it high and low, rich and poor, gather in hours of national peril, and the glad triumph of victor3^ The same, in varying degree, is true of all appropriate symbols. They educate the mind, touch the heart, and ennoble character as few other agencies do or can. As embodiments of much-loved and greatly-venerated truths, they are to all men their most impressive speech; the language through which they express their thoughts most eloquently and effectively; the polished diction of the unlearned and learned alike ; a tongue by which even the dumb speak with flu- ency and power. It is for such reasons that they are so essential to all men; so indispensable to their wel- fare. For such reasons God furnished his Abrahamic church with them. For the same reasons they were just as essential, if not more so, to believers before Abraham.^ ilf the reader shall look upon this episode as far-fetched, and while really, yet not especially, applicable, it is hoped that he will find it a welcome momentary relief, by way of diversion, from the continued strain of an uninterrupted lengthy argument. 106 INFANT BAPTISM. There is, also, a like universal necessity for appro- priate seals (seals are one class of symbols) to im- press with, the sacredness, and give assurance of the certain fulfilment, of solemn covenants ; as appears from their use for such purposes, both in the religious and the secular world, and among men of every grade of society, from the most barbarous to the most cultured and Christian. Can it be supposed, then, that in those primitive times their heavenly Father refused or neglected fully to meet these so great wants of those his believing children with whom He was in loving covenant? Can it be that He, Avho carefully and with such scrupulous pains, nurtures every one of his little ones, as a tender- hearted mother her child, failed thus to provide for them ? Is it possible that the Good Shepherd so left his precious sheep without a fold for two thousand years? We have not so learned our heavenly Father. The probabilities that these institutions, as em- bodied in local and temporary forms, existed with believers in all the pre-Abrahamic age, are, then, very great indeed, as we have seen by the facts con- sidered in chapters V and Yl ; but great as they Avere made by them, they are made still greater by those just considered — this their pressing need of them. All these facts together, therefore, give us probabili- ties amounting, well-nigh, if not quite, to moral certainty. We shall, consequently, start off in this our historic search with the fullest assurance of finding in that age a divinely-instituted church; a divinely-recognized covenant, and a divinely-appoint- SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 107 ed sjaiibol and seal, corresponding, respectively, to the Abrahamic ones. Success 7iot Absolutely Essential. — While most eagar and confident of finding them there, as ex- pected, we still do not look upon our success in the attempt as absolutely essential to our argument. That does not entirely hang upon the existence of those institutions, in organized forms, at that early period. It is sufficient for its validity, that they, as clearly shown, existed then in their essential fea- tures — those essential to the institutions themselves, and, also, common to all believers. While it is most improbable, it is yet possible, that they then existed without such distinctively-organized forms until the Abrahamic age. But the demonstrated fact that they certainly were there in all their essential fea- tures, fully meets the demands of this argument. I. The Adamic Church, Covenant, and Symbol, Be- fore the Fall. — We think we find just such organized forms in the garden of Eden. Unfallen Adam and Eve were a family, and a family is pre-eminently a divinely-organized body. They were perfect believers, not in Christ as their Saviour, they needed none, but as their God. As a believing family, they were an organized body of believers. They were necessarily in covenant with their God respecting themselves and their seed. That they were not left without needed symbols and seals is made evident by the tree of life and that of the knowledge of good and evil given them. These certain and decisive facts, found in their exceedingly meagre history in our possession, suggest the related ones not mentioned. 108 INFANT BAPTISM. II. The Adamic Church. Covenarit, and Symbol^ After the Fall. — We think we find just such organ- ized forms in the succeeding Adamic centuries. (1) Fallen Adam and Eve were an organized body — a family. When regenerated, as we suppose they were, they became an organized body of believers. They had, or should have had, united worship, com- mon instruction, etc. They had family officers. The sacrifices of Cain and Abel show that, in the family of Adam, there was stated worship, through symbols and seals pointing to Christ. They had personal revelations from God, few and meagre it may be, yet sufficient in the judgment of God, for their necessi- ties. As regenerated ones they certainly were in covenant with their God and each other. Hence, with the covenant-symbols and seals given them (as will soon appear) they were a divinely-organized church. (2) God's covenant with them and their believing seed was announced in the curse pronounced upon their wicked seducer : And I will put enmity be- tween thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed. It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise its heel. Gen. 3 : 15. As the seed of the woman, here named, has especial, though not exclusive, reference to Christ, the conflict predicted is that between Christ and believers, on the one side, and Satan and wicked men, on the other, which was destined to prevail in the world until the final and complete triumph of the former. Consequently the connected promise. It shall bruise thy head (fatally), takes in all of God's helpful and efficient SCKIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 109 workings, through his chosen ones, during the entire conflict ; also, all the instrumentalities by him made use of, in the same. It must, especially, take in all his future gracious covenants with believers, includ- ing the Abrahamic. Hence this covenant with Adam must include and, so, be identical with, the Abra- hamic. It also must be included in, and so be identical with, that made with Christ before the foundation of the world. This is further evident from the identity, for substance, of their promises and conditions, as the following few words will show : The very first command to Adam, and afterwards to Noah, and, through them, to the human race, viz. : " Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth," etc., involved a covenant identical with the Abra- hamic. The command, " Be fruitful," imposed the obligation faithfully to train their children for God, 2'elying upon divine help and making use of all the means in their power. This involved the promise by God to render them all needed assistance. What are these commands, mutual promises, and conditions but the covenant made with Abraham ? As before shown, that covenant is nothing more nor less than that which necessarily exists between God and all his believing ones. That same covenant is, in like man- ner, wrapped up in every one of God's commands to men. God imposes no duties without gracious prom- ises and necessary conditions ; and, so far as men receive as good, and faithfully comply with, them, they are all mutual covenants, and sources of price- less blessings. 110 INFANT BAPTISM. (3) In announcing this blessed covenant to Aclam, Ood makes use of a remarkable metaphor. He takes to picture it, one of the most noteworthy facts of natural history known to men, viz. : the aversion of all men and Avomen — especially the latter — for ser- pents ; the universal propensity of men to kill them, almost always, when convenient, by stamping the foot upon their heads ; the spiteful efforts of the latter to bite the foot crushing them ; the conflict generally ending, with rare exceptions, in the death of the latter. Now Ave ask. What other fact could be found which would so fully and so impressively sym- bolize the great and fearful conflict between Christ and his Church, and Satan and his followers ? What other metaphor could be so appropriate ? Now when we consider that all ordinances, like circumcision, are of the same nature with, and fill offices similar to, those filled by metaphors — both of them simply sensu- ous pictures of higher truths — we feel justified in looking upon the one here used to symbolize this first great covenant of God with men, as being, in fact, circumcision in another form. As this metaphor comes from one of the most universal and remarkable facts known to men, and as God here makes use of it to picture all the truths bound up in the promise pic- tured, — all the great truths .of the glorious work of redemption foretold, — it must be confessed to be one of the great symbols of his Church. As it pictures all the covenants wrapped up in that Avith Adam, it must picture the Abrahamic, as that is one of those so Avrapped up, as Ave have seen. As a symbol pic- turing this latter, it fills the same office with circum- SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. Ill cision in that Abrahamic covenant, and, consequently, must be identical with that rite. To our minds the identity is strikingly evident. The claim that God designed that metaphor as a symbol of the sacredness and surety of that covenant with Adam, if well founded, as we fully believe it is, makes it a seal of that covenant, and so gives to it, in this respect, the same office with circumcision. Note here the special adaptation of its form to the peculiar circumstances of Adam and Eve. Their sad seduction by the insidious enchantments of Satan has just been experienced. In view of this most disas- trous fact, and the merciful purposes of God in their favor they needed to have pictured, and so greatly emphasized to them, the long, dreadful conflict in store for them and their posterity, occasioned by their transgression; and, also, the certain victory of the believing ones among them. We ask, then, what other fact could have been found, or imagined, better fitted to do this than the one chosen ? The duty was enjoined upon Adam and Eve, so to consecrate their children, so to nurture and train them up for God, with his promised help, so to take fast hold of, and cling to, his covenant-promises, that, Avith rare exceptions, if any, they would all be regenerated in early childhood. The same was enjoined upon every one of their descendants in all the ages of the future. In case of such fidelity, this their church- family would thus have soon grown into a great, patriarchal church. Colonies would have left it from time to time and formed other like churches in other places, where the}^ went to dwell ; and thus. 112 INFANT BAPTISM. at length, the whole world would have been filled with such, in which the endearing ties of kindred would coincide, largely, with the infinitely higher ones of spiritual fellowship. God acted upon the supposition that they and their seed would all be so faithful to these obligations imposed, as thus to secure a posterity made up almost, if not quite, wholly of believers — Satan baffled in every one of his greatest, most persistent, most artful, most insidious efforts possible to him, to prevent it. He. did not give them a symbol to be administered to their persons, to dis- tinguish them from the unbelieving ones around them, for the reason that there would be but very few, if any, of that class to make such a distinguishing badge necessary. How great and sad their failure to come up to the divine requisitions and thus secure their highest possible perfection as a race, the dark records of history too painfully show. The numbers refusing obedience and abounding in Avickedness in- creased more and more as the centuries rolled by, until at length the earth became so full of w^icked- ness that God was compelled to destroy its guilty inhabitants with a flood ; yet sparing one family — the only faithful oae — with which to fulfil his cove- nant-promises made to his well-beloved Son. By thus removing the great multitudes of the wicked antediluvians from his few faithful believers, God gave its first marked development to that prin- ciple of separation of the believing from the unbe- lieving, which should be maintained by his Church. It was a striking prophecy of that which is so much emphasized in Christian churches. But during all SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 113 this age of degeneracy, there was kept unbroken a narrow line of believing families which constituted the true Church — a line made up of those saintly ones who, like Enoch, walked with God and, at the close of life, were not for God took them. III. The Noachian Churchy Its Covenant, and Its Covenant Symbol. — By the destruction and expulsion from his Church of these wicked antediluvians, God, as we have seen, drew a broad line of separation between its believing and its unbelieving ones. He thus prepared the way for, and, through the few faithful ones spared, introduced, a great reformation in the persons of Noah and his believing family, and we think we find this same historic Church, with this same covenant and symbol, in other forms, in the time of Noah, and in all the remaining pre-Abrahamic age succeeding' him. (1) Noah and his children showed themselves true believers by preparing the ark and shutting them- selves up in it at God's command. They had united worship in their sacrifices. They, also, had in those sacrifices, holy sacraments pointing to Christ. These characteristics, together with the many others implied, fully meet the true definition of a church.^ (2) Being believers, they were necessarily in cov- enant with God and each other. In their covenant, as declared in Gen. 9 : 1-17, we clearly discern the Abrahamic. The whole of the latter, as we have before shown, is involved in the command : " Be fruitful, and multiply and replenish the earth." This, like the same to Adam, involved the obligation to 1 See pages 89, 90. 9 114 INFANT BAPTISM. fill, with God's help, the earth with a believing pos- terity, and the faithful use of all the means necessary to meet it, so far as possible, — just the same as those involved by the Abrahamic covenant. It, also, in- volved the promise, by God, of all needed help and of success always corresponding to their fidelit}^ — just like the Abrahamic covenant. In God's pledge not again to destroy the earth with a flood, is involved, and dimly expressed, the promise of redemption through Christ. His great object in thus sparing them would and could have been no other than to make them, if possible, partakers of his promised and provided salvation. In like manner each clause of the former (Noachian) covenant may be shown to involve the substance of the latter. (3) God gave Noah a symbol and a seal of this covenant, the bow in the cloud. As that is a wel- come harbinger of returning sunshine, it was a very appropriate one in their circumstances. When God, after giving him his covenant-promise, said to Noah : This is a token of the covenant which I make between me and you, and every living creature ^ that is with you, for perpetual generations : I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth, etc., he virtually said : When that bow shall no more be seen in the cloud, then, and not till then, shall this covenant-promise of mine fail of its fulfilment — in other words. It shall 1 God cannot, of course, enter into covenant with, nor make any promises to, irrational creatures; but he can, and does, enter into cov- enant with, and make promises to, his chosen ones respecting them. In this sense, he made his covenant not only with Noah, but, also, every living creature that was with him. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 115 never fail. He thus made its seal-character most prominent. As this Noachian covenant thus involved all the truths of redemption, this its symbol pictures the same truths with circumcision and, hence, we can but recognize the two as different forms of the same substance, and so perfectly identical. This symbol also emphasizes the promise that the period of the earth's probation shall not be brought to a close by deserved judgments, until all that can be, has been, done, to get from the human race as many for God's chosen ones as possible. As God gave this covenant to believing Noah and his believing seed, as the only inhabitants of the, to them, known world; as, in giving it to them, he imposed the obligation that all of them should be believers and their children made heirs of covenant- promises ; and as he gave it on the trial-supposition that such would, with rare exceptions, be the case, he did not give them a symbol to be administered to their persons, thus to distinguish themselves as believers and their children as covenant-children, from unbelieving ones and their non-covenant- children. He did not do this, for the good reason that there could be none such outside of the descend- ants of Noah, and it was taken for granted that because of their fidelity there would be but few, if any, inside of them. At the same time, the duty was, by implication laid upon them and their descendants, to distinguish carefully in their minds between those who actually did become believers and those who did not. In our search, now completed, for these Abrahamic 116 INFANT BAPTISM. institutions in those earliest ages of church-history, we have, as we expected, found them largely in rudi- mentary stages of development. Owing to the ex- ceeding meagreness of Scripture records, we could obtain only slight glimpses of them at best; and, owing to this their state of infancy, we have found more or less of immaturity in what we did discover. But as the lordly river is found in its bubbling fountain-spring, so we detect these institutions in all their coming perfection of organization, in these so very incomplete ones of those ancient days. We find like differences of maturity in the history of sacrifices, stretching from Eden down to Calvary. We certainly find the latter, as offered in acceptable worship, reaching far back to the family of Adam; but we do not find them there in that perfected state of organization, as, in later ages, in the Mosaic ritual ; yet the later are confessedly seen in the former, as tlie fountain-head of the one historic stream. These church institutions, found in the first human family, and again in that of Noah, assure us that they are the out-croppings of a narrow, yet unbroken vein of divinely-organized family churches, stretching from one to the other, in godly believers like the saintly Enoch — their divine organization inhering in their very nature as families. For like reasons, we feel assured that the same reaches down, without a gap, to the time of Abraham. The Germ-seeds of all Religious Ordmanees. — In this connection, it may be noted that all religious ordinances have their origin, under God, in those simple, spontaneous services which had previously SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 117 and naturally come into use in the experiences of believers. Divinely-authorized and enjoined animal sacrifices, for instance, evidently originated in the fact that godly men of old instinctively saw in their customary slaying of animals for hospitable enter- tainment of their distinguished guests, symbols of the worship they rendered their divine Guest. They also naturally saw in the animals slain symbols of themselves as guilty sinners deserving to be morally slain ; in the death of the same, their own death to sin ; in such sacrifices of their property, the duty of offering themselves and all their possessions in sacri- fice to their God. These natural, spontaneous ser- vices are found in tlie Mosaic ritual, so shaped in their forms as to conform to certain prescribed and necessary conditions of times, places, and methods ; thus securing needed uniformity and greater solem- nity of service. The broken bread and the cup of ordinary family meals are, in themselves, fitting emblems of the broken body and flowing blood of the crucified One. They would, or should, be so regarded, even if they had not been set apart as such by the blessed Saviour in the sacramental ordinance he instituted ; and the devout believer now sees the same affecting truths in many other familiar objects ; and worships, through them, just as truly and acceptably as through the consecrated emblems of his Lord's Supper. How often is he reminded of the cruci- fixion on Calvary by the many objects which meet his eye in his daily walks and labors — such as a broken tree-branch or twig, a cleft rock, a crushed 118 INFANT BAPTISM. pebble, a rippling rill, drops of rain trickling down from the drooping branches, and moistening the ground as did the precious blood of his expiring Redeemer ! All nature was thus used by the Saviour to picture and impress holy things. He saw emblems of spiritual truth everywhere around him, and, through them, rendered most acceptable worship to his Father in heaven ; as witness his parables and other charming illustrations, drawn from the scenes of his every-day life. Now so far as we, his disciples, with a like wisdom and spirit, see his broken and bleeding hands, feet, and side, in any object of sense, and, through them, devoutly contemplate the sacred things, thus symbolized, we render substantially the same worship as at the table of our ever-blessed Lord. Circumcision, as a necessary means of cleanliness in warm climates, was practised in Oriental coun- tries long before Abraham. Because adapted to such a use, it at the same time impressively symbol- ized moral cleansing, and was especially fitted to symbolize that cleanness from all the low, debasing lusts of the flesh which characterizes all God's true people. Hence all who practised it, Hebrews or others, saw, or should have seen, this its higher spiritual import. All the devout ones who did see and keep this in mind in their circumcisions offered the same acceptable worship with the pious Jews who afterwards practised it as a divinely-appointed ordinance. The sprinkling of water upon a man, even by acci- dent, naturally pictures the divine imparting of SCKIPTUEAL ARGUMENT. 119 moral cleansing, and also pictured the act of being thus cleansed, if conscious of having had that experi- ence ; pouring it upon him, the pouring of God's spirit upon him ; immersion into and emersion from it, burial with Christ unto death and resurrection with him into newness of life. Each one of these would symbolize the same had no ordinance of bap- tism been instituted by Christ. The thoughtful believer, therefore, who devoutly sees the same truths of baptism pictured to him whenever, in his ordinary experience, he has water sprinkled upon him, or, intentionally or by chance, is immersed into and rises up out of it, is baptized in the same sense as when receiving in an orderly way the insti- tuted rite itself. It does not follow, however, that believers, of themselves alone, would have been jus- tified in instituting such a rite as a church ordinance. To do that is the prerogative of God himself. This substantial identity of all Scriptural ordi- nances, with like human experiences in every-day life, does not detract in the least from their large importance and necessity. It rather greatly empha- sizes and enhances it. It by no means gives the liberty nor the slightest excuse for neglecting them. Their object as instituted ordinances is to secure the more faithful and more impressive observance of what would otherwise be largely neglected and lightly esteemed. This identity of every-day experi- ences with all divine ordinances, as their fountain source under God, furnishes striking corroborative proof of the claim we make, that the Abrahamic are found in other forms in the earliest ages. 120 , INFANT BAPTISM. A Caution Reiterated. — In closing, we would reiterate with emphasis the caution made and em- phasized when we commenced this search for them in the records of those ancient times, against regard- ing as essential to this Scriptural Argument the validity of the claim here made, viz. : That such corresponding local and temporal forms are there found. The existence in that age of the essential features of the Abrahamic is, indeed, essential, but not any corresponding unessential forms. If the latter are not found, it only shows that the former had not by growth attained unto such an embodi- ment. But these unessential corresponding ones not being there would be no evidence that such are not in the Christian age. The absence of fruit in a year-old sprout is no evidence that it will be wanting when it becomes of a fruit-bearing age. It would be most probable that what was non-embodied in the earliest age, but was embodied by growth in the Abrahamic, would by a like growth be embodied in the Christian. The existence of such forms in those primitive times — now proved, as we claim — does, indeed, give much strength to our argument, by reason oi the great increase of probability it affords of finding corresponding ones in the Christian age. As they are found not only in the Abrahamic, but also in the pre-Abrahamic, age, it can be but little short of morally certain that they are in the Chris- tian. For this reason their non-existence in the times of Adam and Noah would be a great, though not a fatal, loss to the argument. The claim made by some scholars that Adam and SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 121 Noah were not historic, but simply mythical, persons, does not seriously affect this argument. In that case their churches would also be mythical, but they would set forth the essential truths of the Abrahamic church, covenant, etc., all the same. Being in harmony with, and illustrative of, the latter, they would teach the same truths just as really as do the later historic facts themselves. Fiction is a much-used and a very effective means of teaching and impressing truth. While our efforts in this chapter to find such cor- responding forms in that age were not called for by the necessities of the Argument for Infant Baptism, and our success was not essential to its validity, we yet feel sure that what we have done will greatly gratify our readers so far as they take pleasure in the exhaustive treatment of important subjects. We are confident that it will be especially pleasing to those who highly appreciate and delight in gen- eralizations as a grand and a most pleasing agency, with scientific minds, in all their successful investi- gations. Oneness of law in numberless variety of phenom- ena is the great charm of the pliysical universe to an intelligent seeker after its hidden truths. The greater the variety, the sharper the contrast ; the larger the apparent contradictions, the more attrac- tive and fascinating the harmony when discovered. The same is true in all departments of knowledge. CHAPTER VIIT. Part Fourth. The Abeahamic Church : Its Covenant and its Symbol, Circumcision, as found in the Abrahamic Age. Our purpose in this part is not to prove the exist- ence of these institutions in that age, as that is self- evident ; but, mainly, to give in brief their history. The church reformation, introduced through Noah and his family, proved itself a lamentable and well- nigh total failure. Apostasy soon set in, and its continued workings were so disastrous that in a few centuries faith seemed to have nearly died out from the earth. This made an imperative demand for another, which should introduce a better epoch. The history of the Church in all ages shows that her progress is marked by periods of alternate reform and decline. First, a high degree of piety and zeal on the part of a few, raised up by God to introduce a new and better era, resulting in a widespread reformation, giving promise of a permanent and an ever-increasing one ; then, sooner or later, a gradual decline, sometimes covering ages, until degeneracy seems well-nigh universal ; then another reformation followed by another decline, and so on. The pure, plump seed, greatly and happily prolific at first, by and by, for the want of proper cultivation and because of the stealthy sowing of the tares by the enemy, begins to deteriorate in the quantity and quality of the yields, and keeps on so doing until SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 123 the harvests are scarcely worth the gathering ; then, by the shifting process of a holy God, the generally depreciated seed is so winnowed and assorted that only a few choice kernels, their ancestral vitality providentially preserved, remain. With them comes a new, more careful and more successful sowing and cultivation ; and so the epochs, commencing in reform and ending in decline, slowly succeed one another, each one leaving the world better than before. This speedy and disastrous decline in the reforma- tion introduced by Noah made evident the necessity of another reformer of such preeminent character, as a believer, as should make him a bright and shining light to all future ages, and so most influential and powerful as a leader in the needed reformation. It also made evident the need of one of such heroic fidelity in complying with the conditions of God's covenant that his seed would start off with and ever maintain the same preeminence of character and the same fidelity in obedience, thus giving assur- ance of securing the complete fulfilment of God's covenant-promises respecting them, as a believing seed destined to become as numerous as the sands upon the seashore. For the purpose of obtaining such a reformer, God took believing Abraham and subjected him to a long and rigorous training. He called him out from his kindred and native land, gave him his holy commandments, made gracious promises to him, favored him with personal inter- views, made him his confidant, manifested his loving presence to him in a smoking furnace. He put his faith to the severest test by demanding the sacrifice 124 INFANT BAPTISM. of his well-beloved son, Isaac, reaffirmed his Adamic and Noachian covenant with him respecting himself and his seed, and gave him the rite of circum- cision as a new symbol and seal of the covenant. He thus made him, indeed, the great human light of history, the acknowledged father of all believers, one whose holy influence has come down to us, mani- festing itself in all the intervening ages with a con- stantly-increasing power, never before so great as now. In this reformation previous methods were changed in this important respect : The apostate inhabitants were not destroyed ; the known earth was not thus left the sole possession of the reformer and his natu- ral descendants ; but the latter were called to live and maintain themselves as God's peculiar people in a world filled with wicked men. They were thus so placed as lights and leavening forces that the first incipient steps of the future world-wide missionary work, stretching down the ages, might be taken by them. At the same time, for the purpose of their self-preservation from the contaminating and fatally- destructive vices of the wicked around them, and as helpful to their own spiritual development, there were enjoined upon them certain distinctive rites, ceremonies, and laws, calculated to keep them, especially their children, so separate as to receive no stain from their corrupting neighbors, and, at the same time, make themselves a better recognized and and a more impressive object-lesson to them. For the purpose of making this separation as effective as possible, the distinguishing badge given them was administered to their persons. , SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 125 Abraham and his believing seed, thus taken into covenant with God as his peculiar people and desig- nated as such by their circumcision, constituted the Abrahamic Church with its covenant and symbol. Their History in that Age. — The history of that church, covering a period of nearly two thousand years, though marred with many blemishes, is yet a great improvement upon the Adamic and Noachian. In some parts of her career it was, indeed, glorious. As the daugliter of God's people she was at times, owing to her willingness to receive such blessings, honored and tenderly cared for by her covenant- keeping God. She received the law from Mt. Sinai and transmitted it to the Christian church ; gave the world a model civil government and code, also an invaluable literature of history, poetry, holy pre- cepts, and divine prophecy. She raised up godly prophets and kings whose names are the richest treasure of the church of all ages. She had the high calling of giving, under God, the world its divine Saviour. Her exalted privileges and price- less heritage, as the chosen people of God, are graphically set forth by the Apostle Paul thus : " Who are Israelites ; to whom pertaineth the adop- tion, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giv- ing of the law, and the service and the promises ; whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came wdio is over all, God blessed forever. Amen." But, sad to say, degeneracy at length invaded even this so highly-favored, and, for a time, greatly-pros- pered church ; and kept on in its deadly work, uatil 126 INFANT BAPTISM. only a small remnant of her enrolled membership re- mained faithful. In their apostasy they, more and more, set up their vain traditions above God's word ; lost sight of the high spiritual character of their splendid ritual ; perverted it to a galling yoke of bondage ; and made it minister to their sinful pride and hardness of heart. They made themselves, by their sins, the victims of wicked rulers, both home and foreign, and, worst of all, stoned the prophets sent unto them, for no other reason than that they told them God's truth. A sad ending it, indeed, was of a history which commenced with so much of promise, and was so glorious in some of its ages. A Larger Development of the Prhicij^le of Separa- tion. — In this Abrahamic Cliurch now under examina- tion we find that grand church-principle of separation between God's believing children — as alone his church — and all non-believing ones, more fully devel- oped than in the Adamic and Noachian. That Church was inaugurated by calling Abraham and his famil}^ out from Ur of the Chaldees ; and thus sepa- rating them from their idolatrous and influential kin- dred and neighbors. God, also, gave them a badge administered to their persons, and a ritual, to keep them separate from the no less idola- trous, yet less influential, inhabitants of Canaan among whom he located them. He early brought about a separation between ^the descendants of Abraham and those of his nephew, Lot ; because the latter pitched his tent toward Sodom, and his poster- ity were unbelieving. He next drew a line of separation in the house of the patriarch himself, by SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 127 cutting off, because of their apostasy, his descendants through Ishmael and Keturah. They received cir- cumcision in form and would have been children of the covenant, equally with those of Isaac, had they not refused compliance with its conditions, in their wicked unbelief. Afterwards he drew a dividing line in the house of Isaac, of whom it was predicted: *'In Isaac shall thy seed be called." Because of their unbelief, he cut off from his covenant Esau and his seed. Again, he incorporated a law in their church code, providing for the cutting off from Israel all guilty of certain crimes. In the use of these disciplinary measures, God went as far as he wisely could in the direction of making his Church perfectly pure, hindered, as he was, by the great imperfections of the true believers in it. He could not wisely go farther, because of the want of a more controlling disposition, on their part, to seek his help and follow his guidance with all their hearts. Had they been of a more teachable spirit, and more fully disposed to do his will, as revealed to them, they would, under the leadings of his Spirit, have carried this separation very much farther, both in not receiving into, and removing from, their church all destitute of faith. But, owing to these, their great imperfections, such a high degree of the develop- ment of this principle could not wisely be secured, until the time for its fuller development in the Chris- tian age should come. This was the ear — a great advance upon the preceding blade — but not the full corn in the ear. CHAPTER IX. Part Fifth. The Abkahamic Institutions as Found in the Cheistian Age in Cokkesponding Christian Foems — The Chris- tian Chuech, its Covenant, and its SxMBoii — Cheis- tian Baptism. A degeneracy so great and widespread, following an earlier career of so much of success and of expe- riences, many of them so happy, showed the necessity of a reformation of a much higher type, and of a re- former, greater and better than man, to introduce and make it effectual ; hence God, in mercy and in fulfil- ment of his gracious covenant-promises, sent his equal Son, the Reformer of all reformers, to introduce, carry on, and consummate the greatest of all reforma- tions. He came, as sent, not only as a divine teacher and exampler, but, also, as an almighty Saviour ; hav- ing power to remit sin, cleanse from its deadly, loath- some pollution, and impart spiritual life. He was preceded, as foretold in Scripture, by John the Baptist, preaching repentance and works of righteousness, in preparation for his immediate advent. He came Avith his ax for the roots of every tree bearing noxious fruit ; with winnowing fan, and with chaff- consuming fire. He thus cut off from the visible and greatly-adultered Peculiar People, all spurious members and gathered, from the few genuine ones remaining, a little company of believing disciples. SCRIPT tin AL ARGUMENT. 129 This little band, together with the few other like ones remaining, was the true Abrahamic Church — its entire membership. As prophecy, and subsequent his- tory show, it was the rescued seed-grain of the great world-wide harvests of all future ages. Like Christ himself, it was the rod shooting out of the stem of Jesse, the tiny branch out of his roots, which was to grow into a tree of inconceivable magnitude ; a little torn vine in the long-neglected vineyard, which the boars out of the woods had happened not fatally to waste, and the wild beasts of the field, not completely to devour ; which was to take root and grow to fill the world; covering the hills with its shadows; her boughs like those of the goodly cedars ; sending them unto every sea and her branches to every river. It was the diminutive rill of Ezekiel, issuing from under the threshold of the temple, destined to flow down the ages to the end of time, with ever-increas- ing volume, clothing its broad intervals with living verdure, blushing flowers, and majestic trees, and healing the putrid waters of the Dead Sea of fallen humanity. With this history in view, to be wrought out by himself, the Saviour took this little company of the true sons of Abraham under his instruction and nur- ture, to prepare them for their grand mission. He rebound them in covenant to himself and each other — bonds before resting upon them, in all their obligations and absolutely essential to their real membership in that Church ; gave them the rite of baptism and th'e ordinance of his Supper — new forms of the Abrahamic rite and of the paschal ordinance, — 10 130 INFANT BAPTISM. made to them new and higher revelations of his will — new in form, not in substance ; and commissioned them to go into all the world and preach his gospel to every creature. In fulfilment of his divine mis- sion, he died upon an ignominious cross, was buried and rose again from his tomb, triumphant over death and the grave, and reascended to his Father in heaven. At the next Pentecostal feast, following his ascen- sion, he bestowed his promised gift, the Holy Spirit, upon his pra3dng disciples, and thus fully equipped them for their great and glorious mission, the conquest of tlie world for himself. In this little community of believers, gathered by Christ and anointed with power from on high, by his Pentecostal Spirit, we have, as confessed by all, a church of God, a church-covenant between God and this community, and a symbol and seal of this covenant, in Chris- tian baptism. Are these (this church, covenant, sym-\ bol and seal) the same, in their essential features, as the Abrahamic ? Do all their Biblical and histor- ical definitions show them identical, respectively, with those more ancient ones? This is the great question before us in this part of our Scriptural argument upon which we have now entered. The historic river of God's people, in its flow from Eden down the ages, took on different names, appro- priate to its different circumstances. It appropriately took the name of its great reformer, Abraham, at his advent. It far more appropriately took the name of its divine reformer, Christ (the Christian Church), at his advent. When we gave, in Part II, the definitions of SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 131 these Abrahamic institutions, we requested the reader to keep them carefully in memory, as they would be needed for future use. We have now arrived at the suggested point where their memory is especially needed. We are now to give the definitions of the Christian, as we then did those of the other, and at- tempt to show the identity of the two institutions by placing the definitions of the Christian, side by side, respectively, with those of the Abrahamic. Hence the necessity of a full and correct memory of the latter. We will thus consider first the Christian Church. I. The Christian Church Defined, and, by ITS definition, shown to be, literally, an- other FORM OF THE Abrahamic— We will take for a general definition of a Christian church that given by Prof. A. Hovey, D. D., in an article of his in advocacy of Close Communion, published in Bih. Sacra^ xix, p. 133, viz., "A community of baptized believers, under common instruction and united in worship." We do not, of course, accept his well-known interpretation of the phrase baptized believers, as including only those immersed. We use it as also including those who claim to liave been scripturally bajDtized by other modes. This, his definition as thus modified, we accept as a true, and as an excellent, one ; and we promise to show that it includes just those definitions of the Abra- hamic Church which have been given by us. We claim that it has the latter all wrapped up in it, as essential parts of itself ; that it necessarily involves every one of them and no others. 132 INFANT BAPTISM. That general, comprehensive definition involves, and cannot but involve, the following more specifics ones : 1. A community of, and only of, believers. 2. An organized community. 3. Its members in covenant with God, in behalf of themselves, their children and all their other interests. As God is their Shepherd this must be so. To sup- pose it not true of his believing ones is to deny that they are such. These essential features of it, are, as has been shown, identical with those of the Abrahamic and are necessarily included in all covenants between God and believers. 4. In covenant with each other. This is absolutely essential to a true brotherhood, especially to such a loving one as a church of God should be. 5. They have inspired Scriptures, and, in some in- stances, personal revelations from God — the apostolic churches — for their declaration of faith. 6. They are under common instruction, with united worship and work. 7. They give their children covenant nurture. Only by so doing can they be faithful believers. This definition involves the whole substance of infant cir- cumcision. All the duties and all the promises of the latter are bound up in the faithful, believing nurture of children. 8. Having overseeing and teaching officers. 9. They have a holy sacramental supper pointing back to the crucifixion of Christ, as the passover feast pointed forward to the same. 10. They have the ordinance of baptism, which is a SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 133 rite designating them as believers and initiating them into membership ; and, also, a symbol and seal of the covenant between themselves and their God, as was circumcision, and as every symbol of a believer must be. We promise soon to demonstrate the identity of the two rites. These definitions include all the essential features of the Christian Church. No others can be named which are not necessarily implied in them; and the reader Avill not fail to see that they are essen- tially, and almost verbally, those of the Abrahamic which have before been given. When, therefore, we shall prove, in fulfilment of our promise, that the covenants and symbols of these two institutions have the same essential features, the conclusion cannot be escaped that the Abrahamic and Christian churches are one and the same, and that the latter is another form of the former.^ This Identity fully Established by the Teachings of Christ Himself and by Those of the Apostle Paid. — In Matt. 8: 10,11, 12, Christ says: Verily I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. And I say unto you that many shall come from the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven ; but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness ; there sliall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (1) Those sons of the kingdom, to be cast out, 1 In the definitions of the Abrahamic, Adamic, Noachian, and Chris- tian churches given in this treatise, we have, as before stated, endeav- ored to confine ourselves to essential church elements, letting alone those unessential ones which distinguish different denominations from each other. 134 INFANT BAPTISM. must have been Israelites, as the phrase, not in Is- rael, clearly shows. (2) They must have been the unbelieving sons of Israel, as their casting out was the penalty of their unbelief; also, because no believ- ing one would be. (3) The kingdom of which they were sons, is called the kingdom of heaven in the eleventh verse. Hence they were unbelieving sons of tiie kingdom of heaven ; and that kingdom must have been the kingdom of Israel ; God's Peculiar People of old; the Abrahamic Church. (4) They could have been only nominal or spurious members of it, as faith was absolutely essential to a real mem- bership. (5") Those to come from the east and west to sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, were those gentiles who, in all future ages, were to become believers, and, as such, enter into that kingdom. (6) Those patriarchs were, at the time of Christ's speaking, in the kingdom of heaven in heaven ; and, hence, it was that same one in heaven, into which the believing gentiles were to go and sit down with them as fellow-members. (7) This kingdom of heaven in heaven, into which the believing gentiles were to enter, was the very same one from which the unbelieving sons were to be cast out as spurious members, as the language plainly shows. They must, then, have been members of it, of some sort, otherwise they could not be cast out. (8). Their membership in it necessitates the con- clusion that the Abrahamic on earth and that in heaven are one and the same kingdom. On that supposition, and on that alone, they could be mem- bers of the latter. The two being identical, as sup- SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 135 posed, meinbersliip in one was membership in the other. Spurious as well as real members of that on earth would be the same of the other. In beino- cast out by discipline or death from the one, they were at the same time and by the same act cast out from the other. As every spurious member of the church on earth ceases at his death, if not before by disci- pline, to be any kind of a member of it, none do nor can continue such in the kingdom above after death. These facts, then, show conclusively that the Abra- hamic church and the kingdom of heaven in heaven are one and the same. (9). But the apostle Paul makes it equally certain that the Christian church is, also, the same with the kingdom in heaven (Ep. 3 : 15) — both one family. Besides, the believing Gentiles were to enter into that kingdom above by entering into the phristian church below, considered either in its organic form as consisting of professing believers alone, or "its inorganic, as consisting of all true believers, includ- ing the non-professing. It follows, then, that, as the Abrahamic and Chris- tian churches are both alike identical with the king- dom in heaven, they must, also, be identical with each other, in accordance with the universally- accepted maxim : Two or more things identical Avith another, are identical with each other. This casting out from the kingdom of heaven, pre- dicted by Christ, was to be the continuation of a work which had been going on very imperfectly in all the previous history of God's people in this world. Its workings, otherwise than by death, had 136 INFANT BAPTISM. been confined mostly to the advents of great refor- mations, as has been sliown in previous chapters of this treatise. In the ministry of Christ and his apos- tles it was carried out far more effectually than ever before. He gathered around him a little brother- hood of believing Jews as his disciples, recognized them, together with all the few others like them, as alone the true Abrahamic church, and enjoined the same policy upon his disciples and their successors. He thus struck a blow which soon resulted in the real casting out of nearly all unbelieving Jews. It was, doubtless, this winnowing process in the min- istry of himself and his apostles to which he pri- maril}^ referred in his prediction. By the conditions of becoming members laid down by him, by the dis- cipline he enjoined, and by the promised bestowment of his guiding spirit, he, did all he wisely could to have his church keep herself as free from spurious members as it could be made to do in this imperfect world. But this prediction of Christ had further reference to the casting out, by discipline or death, from the Christian church, throughout its entire future his- tory, all those unbelieving Jews who would, through self-deception or otherwise, and undetected, enter it. Their descent from Abraham, though a great honor and of great spiritual benefit if rightly imj^roved, would not avail to protect them from expulsion, excepting as it led them to repentance. His prediction involved the casting out, by disci- pline or death, all unbelieving Gentile members — those of all coming ages. The great and only rea- SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 137 son for the casting out of the Jewish sons of the kingdom was their unbelief. The grand principle underlying and embodied in the prediction is that faith is absolutely essential to real church member- ship ; and that all members destitute of it must be removed either by their reclamation or expulsion. Hence the prediction involved the casting out from the church on earth all unbelieving ones of every race and ao-e. But this prediction pointed most especially, most broadly, and with greatest emphasis, to the final sepa- ration of all the goats from the sheep at the great da}^ of his coming in his glory. Then the casting out will be complete, and spurious membership be known no more forever. Then the Old Jerusalem will find herself at length transformed into the New, all glorious within, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband; and through her pearly gates there shall in no wise enter anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie, but only they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. The True Definition of the Kingdom of Heaven. — (1). A kingdom has for its true definition: A king and his subjects (2). A kingdom of heaven, or of God, is most accurately and comprehensively defined as consisting of God, its king, and all who are his subjects. (3). Tn its broadest sense it includes as the latter all moral beings, both good and bad, as they all alike owe allegiance to its divine king, and are accountable to him as their lawful sovereign. (4). Tn a restricted, yet higher and most usual sense. 138 INFANT BAPTISM. it has for its subjects all loyal moral beings and them alone. (5). Every community of loyal sub- jects, associated together as one under God's reign, is a kingdom of heaven. (6). Every such commu- nity contains, by representation, the entire kingdom, for the reason that its subjects are representatives of all his loyal subjects in the universe, and that in governing these few he, in the same governing acts, virtually governs all the others. Queen Victoria, in ruling little Bermuda island, virtually rules all her dominions ; and so that diminutive civil community is, in such a sense, not only one little kingdom of Great Britain, but it also contains within itself the entire kingdom of its imperial monarch. It follows from this definition (1) that every bod}^ of true believers upon earth, large or small, even if only two or three, associated as one in Christ, organ- ized or unorganized, assembling together more or less frequently, no matter if onl}^ once, is a veritable kingdom of heaven. They have the invisible Christ with them as their king, and they are a company of his loyal subjects, (2) and that that little kingdom is by representation the whole kingdom of heaven. When the wicked Pharisees, doubtless seeking to find an accusation against him, came and asked when the kingdom of God cometh, he replied : " The kingdom of God is among you, or in the midst of you"(see Authorized and Revised Version, mg), mean- ing thus : I, its king, and these disciples, as my royal subjects, are the kingdom of God ; and so that king- dom is now right here before you. In them, as their representatives, are contained all the other subjects SCKII^TURAL ARGUMENT. 139 of my kingdom on earth and in heaven; therefore that whole kingdom is among you. It did not come by observation. Your eyes were too blind to see its- coming. You even now are groping around with eyes fast shut, professedly seeking to find what is- now actually here in your midst, as plain to be seen by all having open eyes as the unclouded midday sun. To suppose him saying that that kingdom was- literally within each or any one of those abominable Pharisees whom he addressed is absurd ; as well say it was in Satan himself. It also follows from this definition (1) that every single church, being an organized body of believers- under the kingship of Christ, is a kingdom of heaven embodied in an earthly organic form, and as such virtually includes all other churches, because loyal subjects with them of the same entire kingdom ; (2) that all the churches of a country considered collec- tively as one are the kingdom or church of heaven in that country ; (3) that all the churches of any one age are collectively the kingdom or church of that age ; (4) and that the kingdom or church of one age is found with its identity unimpaired in the kingdom or church of every succeeding age, the dividing lines separating them purely imaginary, like lines of latitude and longitude used on maps to divide the undivided and invisible surface of the earth. This definition of the kingdom of heaven gives an easy and a satisfactory interpretation to the many Bible predictions of it, as " coming," as '' near," as " at hand," etc. They are seen to refer, as they 140 INFANT BAPTISM. must, to new methods of its development, new mani- festations of its power, new epochs in its history; not to it as not having alwaj^s been in the earth as well as in heaven. In view of what we have now learned from the study of this passage, Ave do not see how any candid mind can refuse to admit that in it Christ gives unmistakable authority to the claim that the Abrahamic is a genuine church of God and is iden- tical with the Christian. The apostle Paul in Romans II, 17-24 happily sets forth this same transition process and this identity, by like ones in tree culture. Some of the natural branches (Jews) were broken off because of unbelief ; and those of a wild olive tree (Gentiles) were grafted in. The severe pruning and the wise grafting left the life of the tree unaffected, and secured a greatly en- larged growth, and a choice fruitage. But they did not impair the identity of the tree in the least. That remained the same olive tree, as when it sprang from its primal germ-seed. The Fainily Element 3Iodified. — In the Christian church, owing to changed circumstances, the family element, before so marked and prominent, has been, in some respects, considerably modified. A church now does not often consist solel}^ of a family of pro- fessed believers, much less of a patriarchal one. It does not often regard its family organization as being at the same time its church organization. While families made up of faithful believers are church units in their composite churches to which they severally belong, they yet are not regarded nor SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 141 reported as so many churches. This partial severing of the church, as it respects its form, from the fam- ily, resulted necessarily from : (1). The absence of patriarchal families. Only such large ones could conveniently constitute, each one, a distinct body of believers. (2). The fact that, generally, families now soon become widely scattered. (3). And conse- quently, that communities of believers are made up, with rare exceptions, of only parts of families. But while this flesh and blood element has somewhat dis- appeared, the family element in its higher sense, still remains as one of the most important characteristics of the churches. They are designated in the New Testament as households of faith ; their members brethren and sisters, the elderly ones as fathers, the younger as children. The apostle speaks of all be- lievers on earth, together with the glorified ones above, as the one family of their Father in heaven. A Still Higher Development of the Prijicijjle of Separation. — The advent of the Christian church witnessed another, and a more marked, development of this same principle of the separation of the believ- ing from the non-believing, by church lines, of which we have before spoken — a principle which, from the first, had been struggling for a more perfect develop- ment with slow, imperceptible, yet real, progress. It appeared in the cutting off from Israel, by Christ, be- cause of their unbelief, all the Jews,- excepting a few saintly ones — the latter serving as a seed-nucleus of the Christian church. The old olive tree, so long favored with God's loving, faithful nurture, yet bearing - mostly noxious fruit, was pruned of its evil 142 INFANT BAPTISM. branches, and into it were grafted wild olive scions — Gentile believers — who were destined to become, by their growth, branches of great size and fruitful- ness, and to constitute nearly the whole of them, un- til the promised time of grafting back the old stock (Jewish believers) should come. This principle did, indeed, by means of growth, attain to a higher development in the Christian than in the earlier church. But there still remains a great deal of room for more of the same. Its development in the churches most desirous to keep themselves pure, is far from being perfect. The numbers of mere nominal members in the most careful ones are large, while in a great many others, the numbers whose walk is notoriously unchristian, and even scan- dalous, is sadly large. So great are the shortcomings of Christian churches in keeping unworth}^ ones from entering them, and in removing those who have en- tered, that the old Jewish church does not compare with the Christian so unfavorably as it otherwise would. An Ajjology. — We have had so much to say, in this treatise, of this principle, as having been in the body of God's Chosen People from the beginning ; struggling all the while, for legitimate measures of manifestation, yet with slow, and, most of the time, imperceptible progress — we have had so much to say of this, for the reason that its existence among the people of God, in the ages before Christ, is stoutly denied ; and that, upon this its alleged non-existence, is founded an objection which, if valid, would be fatal to the identity of the two churches. If non- SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 143 believing ones had a legitimate membership in the Abrahamic church, and if there were no principle fundamental to it, calling for the keeping them from entering into, and requiring their removal from it, so far as practicable, then that church cannot possibly be the same with the Christian, and the doctrine of Infant Baptism can have no sure foundation stone. This being so, we have certainly been justified in con- sidering the point so many times, and in giving it so much emphasis. A foundation rock upon which the whole superstructure so largely stands, surely needs, by repeated examinations, to be shown solid and im- movable. A PresumiJtion of G-reat Weight. — The Christian church having now been shown identical with the Abrahamic, it becomes well-nigh certain that it has the same covenant and symbol ; and also, has them in corresponding forms. We, therefore, start off in our search for them with a presumption in our favor which of itself is well-nigh conclusive in the case. II. The Christian Covenant Defined. By ITS Definitions, Shown to be Another Form of the Abrahaivhc. — According to the teachings of Christ, all believers are the true seed of Abraham. The Christian church, then, being composed of be- lievers, are the seed of Abraham and, as such, must inherit his covenant, given to him and his seed. This alone is enough to settle the question in dispute. That there is some kind of a covenant, and that an all-important one, between God and his Christian church is absolutely certain. Mutual covenants are essential to every society of moral beings, large or small. 144 INFANT BAPTISM. One cannot exist without them. As possible to have a physical object without the cohesive attrac- tion of its constituent atoms. Covenants necessarily co-exist with brotherly love. Where one is the other must be. Both together, never separately, bind moral beings in worthy societies. Mutual cove- nants between husband and wife, between them both and their children, and between the children them- selves, are the soul of the family. Without them there can be no family. Mutual covenants .between the civil government and its subject citizens, and be- tween those citizens themselves, are the soul of the state. Without them it could not be a state. Mutual covenants between God and his loyal sub- jects, and between those subjects themselves, are the soul of the kingdom of heaven. Without them there could be none such. If, then, there is no all-impor- tant one between God and the Christian church. He cannot be its God, and it cannot be his church. The Definitions. — The character of God, as being infinitely benevolent and holy, makes it certain that he is in covenant only with its believing members, and is with them upon, and solely upon, the follow- ing necessar}^ promises and conditions : I. The promises. (1). To be their God. (2). A godly seed ; spiritual children; those born into the kingdom of heaven through their instrumentality; especially those of their natural seed thus born — pre- eminently, Christ. (3). A dwelling-place inheri- tance, both in this world and in heaven. (4). Pro- bationary blessings for themselves, their children, both the believing and non-believing, and all other SCRIPTUKAL ARGUMENT. 145 subjects of their nurture and prayers. (5). Perma- nency of all these promised blessings. II. The conditions: (1). Faith. (2). Prayer and godliness. (3). Self-denial. (4). Entire consecra- tion. (5). Faithful parental nurture. It must be confessed by every candid mind that these definitions are self-evident, and so can but be the true ones of the covenant certainly existing be- tween God and his Christian church. It is incon- ceivable that a benevolent, holy God- should not make just such promises, on just such conditions, to them as a body of Christian believers. The reader will remember that these very same ones were given, in Part II (Scriptural Argument), of the Abrahamic, as set forth in the Old Testa- ment. Their definitions, then, being the same, they themselves must be one and the same, each one a a different form of the other. The Abrahamic must be simply an embodiment of that covenant between God and his children which pervades the universe ; found wherever God and his loyal moral creatures are found. The same is true of the Christian. To deny that the later is the same with the earlier, then, is like denying that the sunlight flooding this earth, is the same with that illuminating her sister planet, Venus ; like denying that terrestrial gravitation is the same with that exemplified in that brilliant star, Sirius. The earlier covenant is proclaimed not only in its several different verbal announcements to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses, but also, indirectly and by implication, in every chapter and verse of the ancient 11 146 INFANT BAPTISM. Scriptures. Every command in them is a covenant command, every promise a covenant promise, every condition a covenant one. Just so with the Chris- tian Scriptures. All their commands, promises, con- ditions, etc., are covenant ones. Hence the accurate titles of the two are not, as in the Authorized Ver- sion, Old and New Testaments, but Old and New Covenants, as in the Revised. The Christian has no distinctive statute-announce- ments of it in the New Testament. It needed none. It had been so announced centuries before, and, for that reason, such re-announcements were not neces- sary. It is, however, wrapped up in every one of its commands, promises, and conditions, especially in Christ's last great command to all believers, " Go ye into all the world," etc., and his inspiring covenant- promise, " Lo ! I am with you alway." But we are told that Jeremiah predicts a new cov- enant as follows : '' After those days," saith the Lord, " I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, saying, ' Know ye the Lord, for all shall know him from the least of them even unto the greatest of them,' saith the Lord, for I will forgive tlieir iniquities, and remember their sins no more." Jeremiah xxxi : 33, 34. But this covenant, new in form not in substance, is certainly all of it wrapped up in the Abrahamic. It contains substantially the same commands, promises, and conditions, which are involved in tlie latter, as we have many times shown. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 147 The Saviour also speaks of a new covenant. In Matt. 26 : 28 (Rev. Ver.) : For this is my blood of the new covenant which is shed for many unto the remis- sion of sins. That cup was a symbol of his blood, with which he Avas to seal that new covenant between himself and believers. Manifestly it was new only as in a new stage of development. It evidently was new just as his command, Love one another, was new ; new, yet as old as eternity, binding upon those before his day just as really as upon those then personally addressed by him. This new covenant in his blood is clearly seen in the Abrahamic. It has folded up in it all the commands and promises of the New Tes- tament; the Abrahamic has the same, as we have be- fore seen ; hence one must be the same with the ■other. Alexander McLaren (Baptist) says, in Sunday School Times (Vol. xxxvi. No. 4, Jan. 27, 1894 : That article (Gen. 17 : 8) of the old covenant is repeated in the new, with this addition : And they shall be my people, which is really involved in it. The apostle Peter, on the day of Pentecost, assures the conscience-smitten Jews before him : For the promise is unto you and your children, and to all them that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. In other words, to believers in all the world, and those of all the ages. He thus gives the Abrahamic in its fuller form, like that given to Christ in the second Psalm, and so gives his sanction to that broad view of it which has been claimed in this trea- tise. In the next chapter he gives the people, filled with amazement at the healing of the lame man, a 148 INFANT BAPTISM. like encouraging assurance : Ye are the children of the prophets and of the covenant of God made with your fathers ; and hi thy seed shall all the kindreds of ~~. the earth he blessed. Thus the first great public gos- pel invitation after the ascension, resulting in the first great ingathering into the Christian Church, was based upon the Abrahamic covenant. Let the reader bear in mind that this use of it was made after the Christian dispensation had been ushered in, and by the great apostolic and inspired representative of the Christian Church. This his invitation then, sets his seal upon that covenant as actually in the Christian Church as its oivn. What other meaning can be given to his language ? How can such a conclusion possibly be avoided ? CHAPTER X. Part Fifth. — Continued. ABRAHAMIC INSTITUTIONS IN THE CHEISTIAN AGE. HI. Christian Baptism Defined ; By its Def- initions SHOWN TO BE ANOTHER FORM OF CIRCUM- CISION. A Suppositio7i grayited in this cliafter^for the sake of Argimient^ viz,: Christian Baptism is another form of Circumcision^ even on the Supposition that the Ordinance form of Infant Baptism, Corresponding to that of Infant Circumcision, does not exist hy Divine Authority in the Christian Church. We now have, to begin with, four basal and largely decisive facts bearing upon the question before us, viz.: (1). All the essential features of circumcision, being common to all believers, are certainly in the Christian Church. This is necessarily the case with all divinely-appointed ordinances as before shown. In their essential features, they all are, and always must be, in the Christian Church. Hence this rite must thus be in the Christian Church. (2). The pre- sumption is that it also exists there, as embodied in an ordinance-form corresponding to its Abrahamic. In case of every ordinance given to God's people of any age or place to meet their necessities, there is always a presumption that it is also given to them of every age and place in the same or equivalent forms. The fact that there is in the Christian age an organ- 150 INFANT BAPTISM. ized church and covenant corresponding to the Abra- hamic, as before shown, greatly augments the pre- sumption for an ordinance corresponding to their coordinate Abrahamic rite, circumcision. This great presumption in the case before us must be admitted. (3). The ordinance of baptism certainly does exist in the Christian Church. (4). If circumcision does also exist there in corresponding ordinance-form, it must be in that of baptism, as that is the only one having any likeness to a correspondence, known there. Now we claim that these four, certain facts throw much light upon the question before us, and so do much to clear the way for further investigation. Indeed, we regard tliem alone as sufficient to decide the point in dispute. They, of themselves, seem to us to make the conclusion for which we are contending morally certain. It is said, by way of objection, that Infant Baptism is not found in the New Testament, and was not prac- tised in the apostolic churches. This is strenuously insisted upon as an historical fact, and urged as a fatal objection to this alleged identity of the two rites. Well, be it so. Let such be the fact. Let us in this, and only in this, chapter admit that the rite was not known in those churches as a practised ordi- nance. Yea, more, let it be assumed that it was not designed by Christ to be practised in ordinance-form in all the Christian age ; and yet, even upon that assumption, we promise to show the identity of cir- cumcision and baptism. AVe claim to be able to sliow that the latter is another form of the former, even if it was not designed to be administered personally, in SCEIPTUKAL AKGUMENT. 151 form, to children by the Christian churches. It is upon this assumption, granted, at present for the sake of argument, that we now proceed to consider this alleged identity now under investigation. 1. No Objection Furnished by this Here-admitted Supposition. — The essential features of Infant Baptism would and must exist in those churches all the same. It cannot be believed that . the essential features of Infant Baptism, specified in its theory, set forth at the commencement of this treatise, do not exist in them, inasmuch as they necessarily do so among all believers. It can by no means be believed that the commands and promises to faithful parents, the duty of parental faith, consecration, pledges, nurture, and the corresponding divine assurances, are not in every Christian church. Now this actual and necessary presence there of its essential features, is all that is needed wholly to remove this objection urged. Every divinely-appointed rite is always found wherever its essential features are found. It is also virtually found there in an appropriate form. On this supposition the form of the rite, in the case of the children of believing parents, may be consid- ered as merged into the form given their parents. As in consecrating himself to God, a believing parent, by that act, necessarily also consecrates his children and all his possessions ; so in being baptized in form him- self, he, in so doing, necessarily baptizes his children, virtually in form, in the same sense, for substance, as when he literally gives them the form of the rite. If it were physically impossible to give them the literal form, it of course would not be done ; but in that 152 INFANT BAPTISM. case they would be virtually baptized in form all the same — in the form administered to their par- ents. 2. No objection to, but a strong reason for, this alleged identity, comes from the differences in the forms of the two ordinances. Change in the forms of symbols is usual at the advent of new epochs. The Abrahamic had become so largely debased in the great degeneracy of that church, that a new one of virgin purity was demanded. Besides, circumcision, while nicely adapted to the peculiar circumstances of the Abrahamic age and country, was not at all adapt- ed to those of the Christian, especially in view of the coming world-wide use of the rite in the latter. Again, a bloody rite was very appropriate to a dispen- sation of animal sacrifices, and of other prophetic types of the promised Messiah bleeding and dying upon his cross ; but far from being so in one in which they had been, in form, set aside by their fulfilment. Baptism is, as confessed by all, especially adapted, in form, to the circumstances of its dispensation, and for that reason is the wisely-appointed successor of circumcision. 3. No objection to, but a strong reason for, the same, comes from the fact that females are baptized, in form, when they were not so circumcised. They were virtually circumcised in form as well as in sub- stance. They were always numbered with the cir- cumcised, never with the uncircumcised. The form, in their case, was merged into that of the males ; hence the Abrahamic rite, owing to its change of form, now demands their baptism, in form, equall}^ SCEIPTUKAL ARGUMENT. 153 with that of the males. If it did not, then it would show itself not identical with baptism. 4. No objection to, but a great reason for, this iden- tity, comes from the fact that John the Baptist, Christ and the apostles, baptised those who had been circum- cised. In business houses it is customary to re-label goods when a new label has been substituted for the old one. When a new army uniform has been adopted, it is used by the old soldiers who have always worn the superseded one, as well as by the new recruits. Circumcision, because of its great debasement, had largely ceased to designate believers. In the public mind it at best only marked those of Jewish descent, without reference to their character. Hence the de- basement of the rite in public esteem corresponded to that general among the apostate Jews. The outside world judged it by the loathsome depravity of the wicked chief priests and pharisees ; and consequently it was to them a symbol of narrow bigotry and an exceedingly offensive self-righteous pride. It was necessary, therefore, to give the virgin rite of bap- tism to believing Jews to distinguish them as such. 5. Another very weighty reason for this identity of the two rites, so dissimilar in forms, comes from the fact, already shown to be a necessary one, that all the essential features of circumcision are certainly in the Christian church. This point has before been briefly stated ; but its great importance seems to de- mand its restatement. As then shown, the presence of this, its substance, makes that of an appropriate form exceedingly probable ; all the more so because 154 INFANT BAPTISM. it had one in the Abrahamic, a great deal more so be- cause of the now proved identity of the two churches. This identity of the churclies must demand a form for these substance-features of this symbol in the one, corresponding to that found in the other. It must, then, demand baptism for that form, as that is a most appropriate one, and the one, and the only one, actually filling the same office there, as we shall see. 6. An absolutely conclusive reason for this iden- tity of the two rites comes from the fact that they both have substantially the same definitions. We gave the definitions of the ancient rite in Part Second of this Scriptural Argument. We now pur- pose to show that the same apply equally well to the Christian. These definitions, now to be given, will not have any special reference to their universal substance, general benevolence, as it will not be denied that that is the same in both ; nor to their local and tem- poral forms, as these confessedly differ from each other; but they will have special, and almost exclu- sive, reference to their essential features (their more specific substance) which is common to all believers in this world. DEFINITIONS OF CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. 1. A symbol of a believer. No non-believing one can be a baptized person. 2. A symbol of God's covenant between himself and believers in behalf of themselves and their chil- dren. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 155 All true believers are certainly in such a covenant. A symbol designating them as believers must desig- nate them as in it, and so must be a symbol of that covenant. 3. A symbol administered, by believing ones, to their children to designate them as those in whose behalf they themselves are in covenant with God. This their children's covenant relation to them as believers, is certainly a fact. Hence the substance of the baptismal symbol designating it, is certainly ad- ministered to their children. Hence its form is vir- tually administered ; for the reason that the giving of the substance always necessarily involves the virtual giving of its form. As with all rites, the form of this is not absolutely essential. It may be laid aside whenever circum- stances certainly demand it. Many Baptist Chris- tians cannot safely be immersed in their last sick- ness, as they would be glad to be, and so do not receive the form of baptism ; but they are baptized believers all the same. They literally received the substance, and virtually received its form when they first became believers, and so fully complied with the divine command, " Believe and be baptized." It fol- lows, then, that the claim that the form of infant baptism is not by divine appointment in the Chris- tian cliurch admitted in this chapter, does not conflict with the definition here given. The certain fact that parents rightly administer the rite to their childreu literally in substance and virtually (not literally) in form, perfectly justifies it. 4. A seal affixed to this covenant between God 156 INFANT BAPTISM. and believers, to declare and emphasize its sacred- ness and surety. Every divinely-appointed symbol of a covenant not only designates it as a covenant, but also nec- essarily declares and emphasizes its sacredness and surety, and for that reason it is and must be a seal of it. 5. A symbol expressing, making prominent and helping to preserve that wide moral separation be- tween believers, together with those under their cov- enant-nurture on the one hand, and on the other all unbelieving ones — more especially the grossly wicked ones dwelling around, and to some extent unavoid- ably commingling with them. 6. A symbol expressing and emphasizing the value and necessity of moral purity, and the loathsome, sinful character of moral impurity. It especially emphasizes the duty of cleanliness from all the low, debasing lusts of the flesh. 7. A symbol of cleansing by the blood of Christ, from the deadly pollution of sin. 8. A symbol of burial and resurrection to newness of life with Christ. 9. In a word, a symbol of all the righteous expe- riences of believers, and of all the truths in which they believe — all the truths of their holy religions. These definitions, expressing or involving all the essential features of Christian baptism, are exactly the same ones as those of circumcision given in chapter VI, and like them are, in their substance, common to all believers. The Words of Chnst arid Other Neiv Testament SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 157 Statements make Baptism a Covenant Seal. — When Christ, at the paschal feast, the night before he suffered, took a cup containing the crimson fruit of the vine and gave it to his disciples, he said to them : For this is my blood of the new covenant (Rev. Ver. Mg.). This statement is, as we think, correctly interpreted as follows : (1). He was to seal that covenant with his blood, and, in so doing, would make it a seal of the same. In what other sense could it be the blood of that covenant, if not its seal? Moses took the words and judgments which he had received from Israel's covenant God, when in the mount, and wrote them in a book — the book of the covenant. After he had read them to the people and witnessed their solemn vows of compliance, he took sacrificial blood from the altar and sprinkled it upon the people and said : Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord made with you concerning all these words (Ex. 24: 7, 8). By that blood-sprinkling he set forth and greatly emphasized the sacredness and surety of that covenant. He thus made it its blood-seal. Blood used for such a covenant purpose is, and must be, a covenant seal. Now, for our own part, we cannot resist the conclusion that these words of Christ con- tain an intended allusion to that blood sprinkled by Moses, as the great type which he was to fulfil upon the morrow by shedding his blood upon his promised seed — thus making it a blood seal of that same covenant between himself and them. Jn that case, his blood was, indeed, the blood of the new covenant — its most significant and solemn seal. 158 INFANT BAPTISM. (2). That cup which Christ said was his blood of the new covenant was such in a symbolic sense. Because of its color, it was a striking picture of that blood and so was a happy symbol of it. For that reason it is called that blood itself. It was so called by Christ in accordance with that universal usage which often speaks of a symbol as the thing sym- bolized. (3). Every other object which pictures Christ's blood is also a symbol of the same, and as such is his blood of the new covenant in the very same sense in which that cup was. A Christian, touchingly re- minded of Christ's blood running down his body and dropping upon the ground by the sight of raindrops trickling down the drooping branches of a tree, sees in them a symbol of that blood. He sees the blood of the new covenant like as he does in the sacra- mental cup. Such do not have the same degree of sacredness as the one set apart for that purpose, but they symbolize the same blood and are that same blood-seal in symbol. (4). Baptismal water is certainly a striking and a scriptural picture of the cleansing blood of Christ. These New Testament phrases, — " Be baptized and wash away your sins." " Wash." " Washed." " Washed in his blood." " Washing of water in his blood." " Washing of regeneration," all express the washing of sinful men in the blood of Christ. They all point to baptism as the literal fact from which they as figures of speech are derived. It cannot then be disputed that one important thing for which Christ gave the rite of baptism was SCRIPTURAL ARGUMEXT. 159 to mirror that moral cleansing which his blood, and that alone, accomplishes. It must, therefore, be a divinely-appointed symbol of that blood which he made a seal of the new covenant; and so that self- same seal-blood itself, in the very same sense (in symbol) in which that cup then was and still is. We have before seen that this covenant, thus sealed, is that of the Christian church — that between Christ and his redeemed ones — and that it is identical with the Abrahamic. These words and phrases then, confirm and greatly emphasize the claim that Christian Baptism is, and must be, a seal of the Christian covenant between God and believers ; and, as that has been shown to be the same with the Abrahamic, its seal (baptism) must, also, be identical with the seal (circumcision) of the other. The reader will not need be told again that all these definitions of baptism, given in this chapter, are, substantially, and to a great extent, verbally the same with those of circumcision given in Part Second. In view, then, of these definitions of the Abra- hamic and Christian institutions respectively, which we have given at length, in Chapters Y, VI, IX, X, and which have been certainly shown to be respec- tively identical with each other, so we claim, it surely follows that the respective identities of the institu- tions themselves, as well as those of their definitions, have been fully established, inasmuch as identity of definitions necessarily makes that of the things de- fined absolutely certain. 160 INFANT BAPTISM. The conclusion, therefore, is inevitable that the three Abrahamic ones are, as we promised to prove, legitimate and adequate proof-texts for Infant Bap- tism in the Christian church — they making it lit- erally there in its essential features, and virtually there in its form. The remainder of this Scriptural Argument will be mostly historical, — attempting to show that Infant Baptism, in its Abrahamic form, circumcision, was practised by Jewish believers in the ministries of John, Christ, and the apostles ; also that New Tes- tament records of some instances of its practice in its Christian form in the apostolic churches are found. CHAPTER XL Part Fifth. — Continued. ABRAHAMIC INSTITUTIONS IN THE CHRIS- TIAN AGE. The Supposition of the Last Chapter Withdrawn, AND ITS Opposite to be Established, viz. : Chris- tian Baptism Being Another Form of Circumci- sion, AS NOW Proved, not only includes the Es- sential Features of Infant Circumcision, but also, BY Divine Authority, those same Features Em- bodied IN THE Corresponding Form of Infant Baptism. Having shown that Christian baptism, even upon the supposition that it includes only the essential features of infant circumcision (not any changeable form of it) is, nevertheless, another form of the ancient rite, and so, must, and does, virtually/ include the form of Infant Baptism. Our next step is to show that it actually does literally include Infant Baptism as its corresponding equivalent form. This can only be done by showing that it was literally practised in the apostolic churches. Hence, we now turn, as in duty bound, to a careful examination of the New Testament to see if its records substantiate our claim. 1. Antecedent Probabilities. — What was established in the Argument from Reason, viz. : Giving its form to non-believing children not inherently wrong, but 12 162 INFANT BAPTISM. most useful in its tendencies and legitimate results, and all the conclusive reasons which have thus far been given to demonstrate the scriptural authority of the rite, go to make it exceedingly probable that Christian baptism, as the successor of the ancient rite, does certainly include infant circumcision in the form, as well as essential features, of Infant Baptism. The fact that Christian baptism has been shown to be none other than the Abrahamic rite, itself, in an- other form, and, as such, must include the essential features of infant circumcision, gives a probability, amounting to little less than demonstration, to the claim that it actually does include those features embodied in the form of Infant Baptism, as its cor- responding form. 2. This question is not determined, as many claim, by the baptismal clause in the last command of Christ ; nor by that in the exhortation of Peter at the day of Pentecost. It is claimed that, had Christ intended the rite as one of his church, he woukl, in his last command, have inserted a specific clause enjoining it. It is also claimed that, had Peter so regarded it, he would not have put the command " repent " before " be baptized," in his exhortation to the three thousand. But these conclusions do not, by any means, follow as we shall see : — ■ (1). That command of Christ is so brief and, at the same time, so general and comprehensive, that such specifications would not be likely to be made. They were not needed, as we shall see. Its interpre- tation depends, not upon the absence of such a speci- fication, but upon the identity of circumcision and SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 163 baptism, including infant — its form as well as sub- stance. If they are thus identical, as will be proved, then this command must be interpreted accordingly. If baptism includes both the form and substance of infant, as practised in the New Testament chui'ches, then that here enjoined by Christ must include the same. If God had said to his chosen people through Moses, upon the Mount, as he virtually did : '' Go among all other peoples and induce them to become my believing children with you, so far as you can; circumcising them into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He that believeth and is circum- cised, shall be saved ; but he that believeth not and is not circumcised, shall be condemned," no one, in view of the proper subjects of that ancient rite as instituted by God, would fail to see that this sup- posed command enjoined the giving of the rite to the children of all those who became God's believing ones as well as to their parents themselves. Had Christ commanded his disciples, as he virtually did, saying : " Go make disciples of all nations, teaching them to pray Avith the assurance that he that believ- eth and prayeth shall be saved, but he that believeth not and doeth not pray, shall be condemned," we should know that the command included the teach- ing their children in their earliest childhood, to take postures, and repeat words of prayer. We should be forced to this conclusion by what we know to be legitimately included in making nations praying ones.i iThe bearing of this command upon the Mode question. See Appen- dix B. (^^ 164 INFANT BAPTISM. (2). That Christ puts the clause, " Is baptized," after believeth, is exphiined by the fact that he always emphasizes the substance, as the great over- shadowing- element in a rite. The fact that the sub- stance of baptism cannot come before, but must in every case come at the same time with, believing ; the fact that every one is baptized for substance, at the moment he does first believe ; the fact that every believer, when professing his own faith and accept- ing his parental baptism as his own, is, by so doing, virtually baptized, in form — all these facts constitute a good and sufficient reason why he puts this baptis- mal clause after believeth. In our judgment, the correct rendering of Christ's words is : He that be- lieveth and receiveth that washing of regeneration which is symbolized by water-baptism, shall be saved ; but he that believeth not and does not receive that washing which is so symbolized, shall be condemned. This rendering explains why Christ makes both be- lieving and baptism equally essential to salvation. They both, therefore, must occur at the same time ; and baptism might have been placed before, just as well as after, believeth. (3). The exhortation of Peter: First, " Repent ;" second, " Be baptized," is local in form, adapted to the peculiar circumstances of those addressed. Being Jews, no one of them had received baptism, in its Christian form in infancy ; and it was, therefore, necessary to give it to them all when they publicly professed their repentance and faith. Hence, the peculiar local form of the exhortation. He saw that they, in their circumstances, needed first to repent SCRIPT tJRAL ARGUMENT. 165 and then receive the new form, baptism, not before received, as a symbol of their repentance, and he urged them accordingly. 3. Infant Baptism, in its Abrahamic form, circum- cision, is certainly found in the Christian church during all that part of her history covered by the New Testament. This is one of the especially important points in the Scriptural Argument, because of the formidable objection it removes, and the great difficulties it takes out of the way. It effectually refutes the great objection urged, that infant baptisms are not found in the New Testament. The Identity of Christian Baptism and Circum- cision^ the Foundation-stone of this Point. — This point comes legitimately from the proved identity of the two rites. By reason of that, the first is and must be another form of the second, and, so one is neces- sarily found wherever the other is found. Hence, if infant circumcisions are found in the apostolic churches, it follows that infant baptisms, real, bona- fide infant baptisms, are also found there in their ancient forms. This follows with equal certainty, even if they are not, and are never to be, found there in their Christian forms. We have, as we claim, fully demonstrated the identity of the two rites, and therefore, have only to show that circumcision was practised in those churches, to establish this point now before us. (1). It is unquestionably true that circumcision, together with the entire Mosaic ritual were, more or less, observed without rebuke from Christ and his 166 INFANT BAPTISM. apostles, and so, with their approval, in the Chris- tian churches, by Jeivisli believers, during the min- istries of John the Baptist, Christ, and also his apostles, down to the time — doubtless much farther — of the violent seizure of the apostle Paul, when fulfilling the vow of a Nazarite. The Saviour never forbade their observance, but, on the contrary, observed them himself. He and his apostles cen- sured their abuse, and certain incorrect ideas of them, but never their right use. He, his apostles, and all other Jewish disciples were circumcised. He attended the great sacrificial feasts; and with ardent desire kept the Passover, in the use of the paschal lamb, bread, and cup, the night before he suffered. Peter and John went up into the temple at the hour of prayer, to engage in the prescribed service of that hour — they Avith the people praying without, while the priests, within the holy place, offered sacrifices as symbolic expressions of their prayers. The apostle Paul expressed an earnest de- sire to keep the feast of Pentecost. He observed, as just intimated, the ritual service of the Nazarite vow. All these services, by devout Jewish believers, were sincere, spiritual, and a means of grace ; otherwise they surely would have been prohibited b}'' Christ. (2). It follows, then, that Infant Baptism, in its Abrahamic form, w^as certainly observed by Jewish believers in the infancy of the Christian church. This fact is of great importance to this argument. To find Infant Baptism in the earliest Christian churches, in a bonafide and a divinely-appointed form, circumcision, is indeed a great point gained. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 167 . (3). This fact gives a good and sufficient reason why there are no records of any Infant Baptisms, in their Christian forms, among Jewish believers, in the ministries of John the Baptist, Christ, and his apostles. Such were not called for because Jewish believers retained and with divine permission gave the Abrahamic form of the rite to their children. All their circumcisions administered to, or by, them- selves, when in unbelief, were invalid, destitute of life ; but as each one became a believer, he, by so doing, made his own perfectly valid on his part; both that received by him in his infancy, from his unbelieving parents, and, also, those given by him, when himself in unbelief, to his children. The moment he himself received the new life, that moment he imparted the same to all his dead cir- cumcisions, so far as his agency was concerned, hence it was not ahsolutely essential that they should be repeated in their Christian forms. It was not even expedient to repeat them in the case of their children, and, for that reason, they were not required to baptize them, in form, when they made their own profession of faith, as they would have been had they not been circumcised. But it was expedient that their own circumcisions administered to them in their infancy should be repeated in their Christian forms, and, for that reason, they received baptism when they made public profession of their faith. They were baptized in the new form, not because their lifeless circumcisions had not been made living ones, by their faith, but because it was desirable to introduce, as rapidly as could wisely be 168 INFANT BAPTISM. done, the new one, as better fitted and actually appointed for the Christian church. They received the new form, also, because the old had become so debased, by prostitution, that it had ceased to dis- tinguish believers, as such, in the judgment of the world. Circumcision, as a symbol of God's covenant in respect to their children, was not debased in the same sense, nor to the same extent ; hence there was not the same expediency to repeat it in their case. Thus the forms ran along, side by side, among Jewish believers, for a brief transition period, — their children baptized only in their circumcisions ; they themselves re-circumcised in their baptisms when professing their faitli. (4). The same was true of the sacramental feasts of the two dispensations. In them the Jewish believ- ers continued to offer their usual sacrifices pointing to Christ crucified, and at the same time observed the Lord's Supper pointing to the same. The design of God doubtless was to let the Jewish disciples gratify their ardent and praiseworthy attachment to the charming ritual of their revered fathers, until their better knowledge, higher spiritual life, and fruitful evangelistic work, among Jews and gentiles alike, should open their eyes to see it no longer necessary nor desirable. In this appears the great love and tender sympathy of the Good Shepherd for the weak and tender lambs of his fold. 4. An objection to the identity of the two rites, claimed to be derived from the proceedings of the Council at Jerusalem, about A. D. 50. It is asserted, by way of objection, that the non- SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 169 mention of tliis identity in the recorded discussions and result of that council, disprove the claim that they were identical. It must be confessed that this does furnish an objection which, at first sight, seems to be somewhat plausible, so far as it respects circum- cision. The dispute in that council, composed of the apostles, elders, and brethren, had respect to the observance of the whole Mosaic ritual by gentile believers, — whether or not they should be required to conform strictly to every one of its requisitions. Now it is certainly true that the alleged identity of the two rites answers that question in the negative, so far as circumcision is concerned ; and it might have been made use of for such a decisive answer. Peter and James had only to say, circumcision and baptism are different forms of the same rite. Our gentile believers are circumcised in their baptisms, and, therefore, it cannot be necessary for them to be re-circumcised in the use of the other form. We must admit that, at first sight, it does seem strange that they did not make use of it for that purpose. But, because they did not, must we conclude that they are not identical ? Does that necessarily follow ? We will reply Avith a parallel case in this same council. The above fact was not the only one be- fore them which would have settled the dispute at once, so far as circumcision was concerned. The fact that that rite was not actually binding upon the Jews themselves, and that it was soon to cease even among them, and might be dispensed with immediately, if they only had knowledge and grace enough to do so, without needless harm, — that fact, also, gave a like 170 INFANT BAPTISM. complete solution of the disputed question before them. As the ancient rite was not necessarily bind- ing upon the Jews themselves, and was so soon to pass out of use among Christian Jews, it certainly could not be necessary to force it upon the gentile believers. Why did not the apostles make use of this so decisive fact to remove the contention troubling tliem ? It does indeed seem strange that they did not. Shall we then conclude that the alleged fact was not a real one ? Shall we deny the claim that circumcision was not absolutely binding upon the Jews ? Shall we repudiate the idea that it was soon to cease among them simply for the reason that the apostles did not make such a use of it ? That we cannot do, as we do know that it was true. This alleged identity, then, for the like reason, may be true, notwithstanding their not thus making use of the same. This objection, professedly derived from the proceedings of that council, can, therefore, have no weight ; especially in view of the positive reason for this identity which we have set forth. Why Not so Used? — They may not have thought it expedient so to use it, for the reason that it could meet but one of their many difficulties. It only covered the case of circumcision, while the question at issue covered the entire Mosaic ritual. It would have availed but little for them to show by it that that one of the ancient rites need not be enforced, wliile the same was not, also, shown of all the other numerous requirements. It may be that they did not think it wise to publish such a revolutionary truth at that time, in vicAV of the greatl}^ disturbed SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 171 state of the Jewish mind, resulting from the radical change of forms being introduced. In their recorded result, they manifest an earnest desire to conciliate offended brethren and to avoid inflicting any unneces- sary wounds. Evidently they sought, so far as pos- sible, to let those already inflicted remain untouched, to be gradually healed by the recuperative influences of time and the workings of the Holy Spirit. 5.' It is objected that the disparagement placed by the apostle upon circumcision, disproves the high honor given it in this argument, as being identical with Christian baptism. The apostle does, indeed, speak disparagingly, not of the divine-idea rite, but of it as perverted by the wicked Jews. He writes to the Galatians : If ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. But he cannot mean that his own circumcision, nor that which he administered to Timothy, shut them off from all profit by Christ. He rather refers to the rite as claimed to be an act meriting salvation — a ground of justification in the sight of God. A sin- ful man relying upon either that or baptism, as having such a meritorious character, does, indeed, by so doing, reject Christ as his justifying Saviour, and, of course, receives no profit from him. For a like reason, he testifies to every man thus circumcised ; that he is a debtor to do the whole law. In claiming merit for that one act, he wholly sets aside Christ and so must have a perfect righteousness of his own to secure saving justification. Rut this certainly was not true of circumcised Timothy. A confession of oblioration to be circumcised involved the confessed 172 INFANT BAPTISM. obligation to observe all the rites and ceremonies of the Mosaic law. In the same chapter (Gal. 5: 6) he writes : For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love. The same is true of baptism and all other ordinance forms. To the saints at Rome he writes (Rom. 2 : 25) : For circumcision profiteth if thou keep the law ; but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is counted uncircumcision. The same is true of every rite without a life of true obedience, each and every one is invalid. Faith working by love is essential to the vitality of them all. Peter speaks of the Jewish ritual as a j^oke which neither they nor their fathers were able to bear. In most cases such forms become burdensome sooner or later. This must inevitably have come to be the case in time, with a ritual so extensive, costly, and complicated as tiie Mosaic. This resulting burden- someness incident to the changing circumstances of succeeding ages was largely augmented by the great mistake of the Jews, in regarding it as possessing cast-iron inflexibility. They did not perceive their own mission respecting it, viz., to change it so far, but no farther, as circumstances required. This liberty, to be used only as led by the Spirit, is wisely given by God to his people. He will have mercy and not sacrifice. While he often calls them to lives of much suffering, he yet does not doom them to galling forms as acts of penance. Besides, it is most probable, if not morally certain, that Peter's main reference was to the unauthorized SCRIPTURAL argume:nt. 173 traditions, tauglit and rigidly enforced by the ruling Pharisees, as the true word of God given orally to Moses, and to be sacredly preserved and handed down the ages through a divinely-constituted hierach- ical succession. Those traditions were, indeed, excessively and cruelly burdensome ; a galling yoke which neither the apostles nor their fathers were able to bear.^ Now the rigidly conservative Jewish Christians, having been trained to their observance as most sacred and of the most solemn obligation from their youth up, would naturally, as they actually did, insist upon forcing unrelentingly this same hard yoke and these same crushing burdens upon Gentile Christians. It must have been chiefly, if not exclu- sively, against them as of purely human and wicked origin, that the apostle protested so earnestly. There is no good evidence that he regarded circum- cision, the paschal feast, the uncorrupted temple ritual, etc., etc., as thus oppressive — only the wicked traditions of the elders. 6. The New Testament contains records of infant baptisms, in their Christian forms, among Gentile believers. We have now learned just why we do not find any 1 " It was an article of faith that in the Pentateuch there was no pre- cept and no regulation, ceremonial, doctrinal, or legal, of which God had not given to Moses all explanations necessary for their applica- tion, with the order to transmit them by word of mouth. It was not to be supposed that all the traditions which bound the Pharisees were believed to be direct revelations to Moses on Mount Sinai. Viewed as a whole, they (the Pharisees) treated men like children formalizing and defining the minutest particulars of ritual observances. The ex- pressions (New Testament) of *' bondage," of "weak and beggarly elements," and of " burdens too heavy for men to bear," faithfully represent the impression produced by their multiplicity." — Dictionary of the Bible, by Dr. William Smith, page 526. 174 INFANT BAPTISM. instances of infant baptisms in their Christian forms among Jewish believers, in the ministries of John the Baptist, Christ and his apostles, viz.: Their chil- dren received them in their Abrahamic forms. From this fact now learned we may know just where to expect to find them in their Christian forms, viz. : Among Gentile believers in the apostolic churches ; for the reason that their children did not receive them in their Abrahamic forms. The reasons set forth why baptism was not then given to children of Jewish believers do not hold good in the case of those of Gentile — the latter not receiving the rite in its ancient form. Hence they must receive it in its Christian, provided Infant Baptism is a divinely-appointed ordinance in the Christian church. We are then to expect to find recorded instances of them among Gentile believers, and among them alone. We will, therefore, now turn our eyes in that direction in search of them. In doing this, let us bear in mind that we may not expect to find records, which, judged each one by itself alone, without reference to related passages and facts, are absolutely decisive, as to the point in dispute. This is not the case, even in scientific doc- trinal treatises, in which great efforts are made to have all statements so clear and exact as to make their true import at once unmistakable. The in- spired penmen do not Avrite as special advocates or rejectors of the rite, whatever may have been their belief respecting it, and hence cannot be supposed to have used language so carefully guarded, as to make every passage describing, or merely alluding SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 175 to, baptism, perfectly clear and decisive upon the point before us. We are, therefore, to expect to find records partaking more or less of the incomplete and indefinite as to this point, whose full and exact meaning must be ascertained by a careful examina- tion of all the related facts and statements of the Bible. Their interpretation must, to a great extent, be determined by that which corresponds to circum- stantial evidence in civil courts. We find the following, which, at first sight, sug- gest infant baptisms, and, for this reason, call for special examination : "And I [Paul] baptized also the household of Stephanas " (I Cor. 1 : 16). "And when she [Lydia] was baptized and her household " (Acts 16 : 15). "And was baptized, he [the jailor] and all his, straightway" (Acts 16 : 33). In considering these records as indicating the sub- jects of tlie baptisms recorded, we make the follow- ing points : 1. They were all Gentile baptisms. This fact, in its bearing uj^on the question, is a very significant one, for the reason that it is, as we have seen, just what the rite demands. The children of believing Jews received the rite in its Abrahamic form, and so were not baptized in its Christian, but those of Gen- tiles would be. Hence Infant Baptism demands that all household baptisms of those times, including those of infants, should be Gentile ones, and those alone. 2. The phraseology: Her household. All his. The household of Stephanas, suggest infant bap- tisms. They especially harmonize with the claim 176 INFANT BAPTISM. that there were such in them. It is just the lan- guage we should expect to find, on the supposition that there were. It is a noteworthy fact, and one which adds great force to this suggestion, that while these phrases are used to describe Gentile, they are never used to describe Jewish, baptisms. This nat- urally confirms us in our belief that the children of believing Jews were baptized only in their circum- cisions during that brief transition period. 3. These three records of household baptisms con- stitute a large part, nearly one half, of all the rec- ords of Gentile baptisms found in the New Testa- ment. There are but seven in all.^ We do not mean that the number of the subjects of these three bears just such a proportion to the number of those of the entire seven records. We refer to the com- parative number of occasions recorded, when bap- tisms more or less each time were administered. Is it not remarkable, that, in three sevenths of them all, the words " household " or " all his " are used to indicate the subjects of the rite? Is it not, also, remarkable that these households were all baptized by the apostle Paul, the great apostle to the Gen- tiles ? Certainly this so large proportion happily harmonizes with the idea that they included infant subjects. The demands of the rite lead us to expect just such a large proportion. 4. It is morally certain that, among the numer- ous unrecorded instances of Gentile baptisms, there 1 The recorded instances of Gentile baptisms are the following: Acts 10: 47 (Cornelius and others); 16: 15 (Lydia and her household) 16: 33; (the jailor and all his) 18:8 (many Corinthians);! Cor. 1:14 (Crispus); 1: 14 (Gaius); 1: 16 (the household of Stephanas). SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 177 was a like proportion of household ones. All the recorded ones, both the household and all others together, must have been but a very small part of those administered. The number of household ones recorded, then, must also have been a very small part of all the household ones administered. It is, therefore, morally certain that there were a great many such. This fact is of great weight in deter- mining their character. The greater their number, the greater this harmony between the phraseology and the rite ; the more fully the demands of the latter for Gentile baptisms, in the New Testament, termed household, including those of infants, is met. 5. It is most probable that many, if not all, of these households baptized contained children too young to make a profession of their own faitli by baptism. Families without such children were much less known then than now. Instances of such were very rare indeed, for the reason that so many of the married children remained in their parental homes as members of the same families. 6. It is morally certain that they contained household servants. Families of position like those must have had man}^ of them, as was usually the case ; probably the children, and possibly the chil- dren's children, of their servants. All such servants with their children occupied the dependent and sub- ject relation of children, and, as such, were legiti- mate subjects of baptism. 7. The supposition that all the children and ser- vants baptized were believers, does not conflict with 13 178 INFANT BAPTISM. the claim that they were subjects of Infant Baptism, as that includes the believing with the non-believing children for its subjects. 8. It is exceedingly improbable that all the chil- dren and servants in those houseliolds were believers. A fact so very surprising would probably have been mentioned. The records themselves give no intima- tion of such a remarkable fact. The language implies that Lydia herself was a believer, but makes no men- tion of, nor any allusion to, the faith of any other one of her household. The Authorized Version does, indeed, speak of tlie jailor as believmg with all his house; but the Revised gives a different, and pre- sumedly a more correct, rendering, viz.: "He re- joiced with all his house, having believed in God ; " that is, having himself believed. Nothing is said of the believing of the others. The absence of all men- tion of, or reference to, the faitli of any excepting these two — the respective heads of the two house- holds — and, as such, authorized to baptize their chil- dren and servants, greatly increases the improbability that no non-believing children were baptized. 9. The remarkable coincidence between the de- mands of Infant Baptism and the time and nation- ality of these baptisms, adds immensely to the prob- ability that they included non-believing children as a part of their subjects. Its theory, as we have seen, demands that it was first practised in that period of the apostolic age in which the gospel was preached to the Gentiles, and only in that period. It also, as we have seen, demands that it was practised in Gentile households, SCRIPTUIIAL ARGUMENT. 179 and in them alone. That was just the time of these recorded household baptisms, and just such was the nationality of their subjects. We claim, and shall now proceed to show, that this so very striking coin- cidence, in view of all the related facts we have con- sidered, makes it morally certain that they included those of Infant Baptism as a part of their subjects. Incidextal Coincidences : The Importance ATTACHED TO, BY LOGICIANS. — Logicians justly at- tach a great deal of importance to incidental coinci- dences as corroborative j)roof. Very much is made of them in treatises upon the genuineness and cred- ibility of the different books of the New Testament. Independent witnesses giving the same testimony, furnish the most convincing evidence. Different rays of light so refracted as to converge upon the same point, give a blazing light of greatly-increased intensity; and, for a like reason, incidental coinci- dences have very great weight in an argument. This is especially true of the remarkable one now under consideration. It is one so very striking and signifi- cant, that it gives us moral certainty respecting the subjects of those baptisms. An Illustration furnished hy a Sea Voyage. — Several years ago the writer took passage in a ship bound from the Port of Boston to Valparaizo on the west. ern coast of South America. The ship's chart had upon it the following places lying along our contem- plated voyage : Cape Cod ; the Gulf Stream ; Ber- muda Islands ; the Zones of the Northeast and Southeast Trade Winds ; the Latitudes where the Southern Cross and Magellan Clouds would be seen 180 INFANT BAPTISM. at certain altitudes ; Cape St. Roque ; the Port of Rio Janeiro ; the Mouth of the La Plata ; the Falk- land Islands ; Staten Island ; Cape Horn, etc. In our voyage we made, or might have made, all these places. We found, or might have found, them just where the chart said we might, without one single failure. We had, then, in each one of these places thus made an incidental coincidence between the chart and the discovered places, which tended, one after another, greatly to confirm the accuracy of the chart and strengthen our confidence in it as our guide amid all the perils of the trackless, ship-wreck- ing ocean, where our security would depend so abso- lutely upon the truthfulness of that guide. As we sailed on from week to week, each succeeding dis- covery of a place just where the chart predicted made us much more sure of finding the next in order by trusting to the same guidance. This assurance, derived from all these successive coincidences, and gaining new additional strength from each one, also made us quick to detect with conscious certainty the places predicted when as yet just discerned in dim outline. To recognize a little blue object on the dis- tant horizon — scarcely distinguishable from the blue sky in which it was apparently set — as the real Ber- muda Islands, we did not need wait until we had sailed so near, and the atmosphere had become so clear that we could distinctly see its harbor, the trend of its coast-line, its lighthouse, its well-known public buildings, its hills and mountains. We were qualified to decide the question, without doubt or hesitation, simply by the fact that the chart pointed SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 181 to that very object as being the spot where that island is located. After crossing the equatorial line, and many da3^s more of sailing up the eastern coast of South America, we found ourselves, one very foggy morning, in a position where the chart bade us look for Staten Island right over our starboard rail. While we all stood on deck watching with intense interest, the fog became so much rarified as to bring- to view something which seemed to differ a little from both sea and sky — a slight suggestion of land, yet resembling that island about as much as a single pale, scarcely distinguishable, pigment stain looks like a well-known landscape painting. Even after the fog had so far cleared away as to make visible many of its broken outlines, it could not, so far as we were able to discern, be distinguished from ten thousand other islands in the great oceans. And yet at the first dim sight of this something which looked as if it might possibly be land, we knew for certainty that it was the veritable Staten Island itself, simply because our chart, which had shown itself correct in case of all the places previously made in our voyage, bade us look to that locality for it. Thus the chart's index-finger, at once and with certainty, transformed the dim, shadowy object into the island itself. In like manner we have been making a lengthy voyage upon the ocean of Bible-history, in search of facts involved in the theory of Infant Baptism. Our ship's chart has been this theory as set forth at the commencement of this treatise. By its use in this, our voyage of discovery, its truthfulness was destined to be established by our finding, or disproved by our 182 INFANT BAPTISM. not finding, the facts it pi'edicted. That theory claimed, among other things, the following Scriptural facts as its sure foundation : An adequate Bible proof-text given to Abraham ; a rite embodying that text; this rite, circumcision, binding in its sub- stance everywhere and at all times, but changeable in its form ; found, with its related church and cov- enant, in other forms in the pre-Abrahamic and Chris- tian ages; Christian baptism identical with circum- cision, differing only in form; no Infant Baptisms in their Christian forms among Jewish believers, in the ministries of John the Baptist, Christ and his apos- tles ; the essential features of Infant Baptism cer- tainly in the Christian church ; found in its Abra- hamic form among Jewish believers of the Christian churches in the apostolic age ; some records of Infant Baptisms in their Christian forms among Gentile believers in the apostolic churches. Such the chart. We have been all the time upon a careful look- out for these facts in the latitudes and longitudes named, subjecting the claims of each and every ap- parent one presenting itself to a rigid examination ; and have, thus far, up close to the termination of our voyage, found every single one of them, except- ing the last, in just the time and place predicted by the theory ; and, what is very significant and of very great importance in tlie case, not one single biblical fact in conflict with it. This one solitary exception is here reckoned as such for the reason that, in this review voyage^ it has not yet been found. It has already been found by a careful investigation ; but we have not yet, from our vessel deck, turned our SCKIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 183 telescope in that direction in search of it.^ It is the only remaining one needed, and when thus found, will take its place as the capstone of the completed argument. In all these successive facts demanded, which Ave have, thus far, discovered, each one gave assurance that those not then found would be, at the time and place predicted ; and each new-found one, at once united with those before found, in giving the same assurance ; yet one of a magnitude as much larger as was the number uniting with, and thus confirm- ing, it. Hence the certainty of finding the unfound- ones in their order, grew stronger and stronger, as the work of discovery progressed. It follows, there- fore, that now, when only one remains not found, all the others, as thus found, unite in assuring u^ that it will also certainly be, just when and where the theory bids us look for it. Because of this we now turn our glass in the direction specified with the fullest confidence of finding it. We feel morally certain of discovering in the New Testament in- stances of baptisms so suggestive of infant ones in Christian forms as to give full confirmation of the accuracy of the theory and reasoning which demand them. At first look, lo and behold the following sig- nificant statements : " And she [Lydia] was bap- tized and her household." "And was baptized, he ^Before embarking at Boston, we knew the existence and location of Staten Island; but we did not knoAV it as coincident with the chart and ship's reckoning, and, as such, confirming their accuracy. It could not be thus known until something, in dim outline, sugges- tive of it, was actually seen by us. Till then it was unknown and unfound. 184 INFANT BAPTISM. [the jailor] and all his, straightway." " And I [Paul] also baptized the household of Stephanas — all of them Gentiles." "All by the great apostle to the Gentiles." Now we ask, is it not most remarkable that we, trusting implicitly to a theory already con- firmed by so many previous decisive facts, and look- ing just where directed by it, should at once find baptisms, the inspired descriptions of which are so suggestive of those including infant ones ? In view of it, what other conclusion can we possible come to than that they are just such as the theory predicts? They are so very significant that the very first glance satisfies us. There is little if any fog obscuring this baptism island. We see phraseology suggestive of infant baptisms as clearly and distinctly discernible as the stars in the blue sky. As we now stand look- ing with pleasing emotions, all the previously con- sidered facts pointing to them as including such baptisms come pouring in upon us like the light streaming from the midday sun. Now when we have, in addition to all these great and decisive pre- viously-secured evidences, this so very great one, derived from such a remarkable coincidence, how can we avoid the conclusion that the so suggestive baptisms which we now have just got a sight of, do, indeed, include those of infant children as predicted by the theor}^ ? The reader will not fail to perceive the great detriment the argument for this rite has received from the supposition generally held, that all Jewish believers in the ministries of John the Baptist, Christ and his apostles, actually did give baptism in its SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 185 Christian form to their infant children. In that case, the rite stands confronted with the fatal fact that the New Testament co7itains no one single record of^ or slightest allusion to, such baptisms. The phrase household baptism is, in no instance, used to describe Jewish baptisms in all those min- istries. On the supposition adopted in this treatise we do find them in great numbers among both Jews and Gentiles, just where we ought to expect to do so. We find them among Jews in their ancient forms, and among Gentiles in their later ones ; but, on this opposite supposition, we do not find even one mention or suggestion of one, just where we ought to find many — among Jewish believers. A supposi- tion that involves such great difficulties, not to say absurdities, can but be very detrimental to the argu- ment. In view of this absence of any such records and allusions it requires a great deal of positive proof to justify the claim that there were any. It will not do to infer that there were right in the face of their non-mention, simply from the fact that some theory of the rite demands it. If the Scriptures spoke of household baptisms among Jews, or made use of any other phraseology suggestive of Infant Baptisms among them, then the demands of the generally-accepted theory would make that claim very plausible. As they do not, such demands cannot make it at all probable. In such circum- stances, the claim must have positive, conclusive proof. Nothing short of that will satisfy. Proselyte Baptisms. — Efforts have been made to show that proselyte baptisms furnish this proof. It 186 INFANT BAPTISM. is claimed tiiat such were known and practised in those ministries. As proselyte baptisms, including those of infants, were somewhat common in the second century, it is inferred that they were so in Christ's ministry and, therefore, that Infant Baptisms were also practised by Jewish believers. But it is far from being certain that proselyte baptisms were known as early as the middle of the first century. No historian of that time, and no writings then extant, now in our possession, make any mention of them. The Talmudists of the second century do, indeed, represent them as practised in the first and many previous centuries ; but their authority as histories is not regarded as very reliable. Their rejDresentation just mentioned is not supported by any sufficient proof, and is opposed by this so signifi- cant silence of all co-temporary historians and writ- ings. Dr. Wm. Smith, in his Bible dictionary pp. 553-4, concludes from the evidence for and against, as follows : '' (1) There is no direct evidence of the practice being in use before the destruction of Jeru- salem. (2) The negative argument drawn from the silence of the Old Testament, of the Apocrypha, of Philo, and of Josephus, is almost decisive against the belief that there was, in their time (of John, Christ, and the apostles) a baptism of proselytes with as much importance attached to it as we find in the Talmudists." Knapp, after a careful examination of the subject, concludes as follows : " But though much may be advanced in favor of this opinion, it cannot be relied upon with certainty, since it is entirely destitute of SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 187 contemporary evidence."^ Bat if the baptism of the children of proselytes tvas then knoivn^ it by no means necessarily follows that John administered the rite to the children of those baptized by him ; nor that Christ enjoined their baptism in its Chris- tian form upon the believing Jews in his ministry. Such far-fetched inferences are always hazardous^ and never much reliable. They rest upon two un- proved claims, viz., (1) That proselyte baptisms were then common, (2) and that it must follow that like ones, as to their subjects, must have been ad- ministered by John and Christ. The fallacy of the reasoning appears from these unstable rocks upon which it is built. At best such baptisms could fur- nish only a small probability, and that far too slight to overcome the very great counter one arising from the utter absence of all mention of, and of all allu- sion to, any in the records of the New Testament. It is evident, then, that Infant Baptism, if it must carry the supposition that it was practised in Chris- tian form by Jewish believers in those ministries, has a very heavy burden to bear. The Abrahamic Forms of these Institiitions still exist in the Christian Age with all their Original Authoritf/ and Power. — We have, in this and pre- vious parts, considered the identity of these Abra- hamic and Christian Institutions, and, in doing this, we have spoken of the outward forms of the form er- as laid aside, and, consequently, not made use of in the Christian Age. In an important sense they have been and so are not now in use ; but in another equal- iKnapp's Christian Theology, p. 485. 188 INFANT BAPTISM. ly important sense they have not rightly been laid aside, and are, or ought to be, made use of by Chris- tian believers. They by no means have been done away, but still exist as God's instruments in per- fecting his churches. To a large extent their form- functions have been transferred to their correspond- ing Christian forms, but far from being entirely so. Like their essential features, they have in an impor- tant sense permanent existence and unceasing bind- ing power in all the Christian churches of the earth. They are like aged soldiers put upon the retired list, but still occupying subordinate posts of duty. They belong, all the same, to the army, and still do important service. 1. They certainly have a permanent existence historically. As facts of history they can never be done away nor cease to exist. No fact of history can possibly be. Once such, always such, always the self-same fact; immortal as the undying soul of man. 2. They exist in all Christian churches as divinely- commissioned, and very influential, teachers of God's truth. Circumcision, for instance, is seen to-day in the same starry constellation with the bQw in the cloud, and all other sacred symbols of the past. It still proclaims, with stirring eloquence, its great truths, speaking in God's name, as all having ears to hear well know. It is now, as it always has been and always will be, God's blessed evangel preaching day and night the gospel of repentance and promise. That sacredness and charm which was imparted to it by being given to the Divine Child, SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 189 while yet the glad songs of the angelic hosts over his birth had scarcely died away, glorified it, has been glorifying it more and more ever since, and will continue to do so, with ever-increasing power, unto the perfect day. The same is, also, true of the Abrahamic church and covenant considered as historic facts. They still live in their ancient forms as well as their essential features. They now exist with much, if not all, of their original power and influence as di- vinely- appointed ordinances. 3. These their forms so exist in the sense that those Jews who now receive the rite and claim cove- nant membership in that church and covenant, are bound by all those peculiar obligations imposed upon their fathers of old. Those Abyssinian Christians who now practise circumcision by so doing place themselves under greater obligations to comply with the substance of every one of its original require- ments. Now it cannot be said of forms still thus imposing their peculiar obligations, that they do not exist as forms. Forms cannot be dead which mani- fest so much vitality when so used. Their death is simply a change, to some extent, in the methods of their use. Like the saintly Abel, dead, but yet speaking. In some of their functions, they are still, and ever will be, on active duty, never before so influential for good, when rightly apprehended and improved, as now. They are destined to continue more and more so till time shall end. CHAPTER XII. Pakt Sixth. CONCLUDING POINTS. I. The Striking Contrasts. — The study which we have now given to the history of the Church of God running from her primeval fountain in Eden down all through the succeeding ages, to the close of the apos- tolic, has called our wondering attention to the strik- ino- contrasts between the rites and ceremonies of the Abrahamic and Christian churches. In the former these are numerous, costly, showy, and intensely grand. In the latter few, simple, plain — most im- pressively grand in the great truths set forth by them, but not largely so in their forms. In passing from the first into the last, we leave dazzling splendor of forms behind, and enter into chaste simplicity of rituals and ceremonies, in all religious worship. A little reflection sliows the great appropriateness of such a change, — just such as the new circumstances demand. In a dispensation immediately preceding the advent of Christ they would, of course, as they did, point to the Messiah promised, and they, there- fore, should be as they Avere, so shaped as happily to picture his character and work. They would thus be the forerunners and heralds of the predicted glo- rious King: — the Desire of all nations. Called to fill such a high office, it was meet that they be glorious in their apparel. Dazzling splendor of forms, as well SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 191 as inexpressible grandeur of thought, should be theirs. But, on the other hand, such sensuous magnificence would be wholl}^ out of place in the presence of the King himself, arra3^ed in a splendor infinitely greater and higher ; compared with which that of the former is as a dim taper to the blinding effulgence of the midday sun. In a sunless night, it is fitting that the blushing moon should sit in queenly state upon her starry throne in the heavens, pale empress of the night, and sweetly shine in her charming beauty ; that the stars should show themselves studding the blue sky, glittering and sparkling like lustrous diamonds — the admiration and the joy of all beholders ; that, the floating clouds, first to herald his approach, should be decked in their gorgeous morning robes ; that the brows of the lofty mountains, catching the first glimpses of his approaching chariot of fire, should be all radiant with J03^ful smiles ; that thus moon, stars, clouds, and towering mountain peaks, the last two made especially glorious by his dawning light, should together shout for joy in welcome of their re- turning sovereign, the king of day. But when he himself, decked in his royal robes of light, emerges from his resplendent chamber in the east, rejoicing as a strong man to run his race ; when he has, in- deed, thus presented himself in glorious state above the glowing horizon ; then it becomes the blushing moon to veil herself, the streaming stars to retire from sight, the splendor-arrayed clouds and the blaz- ing mountain peaks to lay aside their gorgeous robes of golden hue, and leave their kingly sun, alone to flood the earth with his own life-giving, heart-cheer- 192 INFANT BAPTISM. ing light. For a like reason, all that is so dazzling and splendid in the rites and ceremonies of the Abra- hamic, would be also out of place in those of the Christian, dispensation. When once the whole earth was flooded with the sublime presence and transcend- ent glory of the great King of kings and Lord of lords ; when the angels shouted for joy over His birth at Bethlehem, and the Spirit-dove descended upon him at his baptism ; when he reassumed something of his laid-aside, heavenly glory on the mount of his transfiguration ; when, most glorious and God-like of all the eartly manifestations of him- self, that divinest of all prayers went forth from his loving heart and dying lips to his Father in heaven, " Father forgive them, for they know not what they do ; " when he had entered upon his work of redemp- tion, emblasoned with such unspeakable glories, — then there could properly remain as symbols of him, after a brief period of transition, only a few plain, unadorned sacraments, like baptism and the Holy Supper. n. Wise and Kind 3IetJiods of Transition. — An- other notewortli}^ fact is the wise and kind methods made use of to accomplish this great, difficult, yet nec- essary, change. To the Jew, the rites and ceremonies of his church were dear as the apple of his eye. They were bound up in their inmost hearts, and were pre- cious beyond expression. They had learned to love them from their infancy. The}^ were thrilled with the fascinating charm of their splendid ritual, profoundly impressed with the subduing awe of its imposing grandeur. To the devout ones, who revered and SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 193 observed them, in their true spiritual character, the thought of their being set aside would have been most painful and shocking ; and the same would be true of the hypocritical ones, whose attachment to them, while largely superstitious, was yet exceeding- ly strong. Never were a people, one and all, more completely bound, hand and foot, to their religious observances, by the strong cords of sincere piety, or the galling chains of superstition, than were the Jews when Christ came to inaugurate his New Dis- pensation, in which this their so precious ritual was to be superseded by another most diverse in form. The problem, then, was how to bring about this so painful substitution, with tlie least possible amount of wounds inflicted, and of conflict engendered. An Ayialogy from the Orchard. — The orchardist, in changing the fruit of a tree by grafting, does not cut off, and put scions into all its limbs the first sea- son, as that would greatly impair its vitality, if not destroy its life ; but he then grafts only a few of them, and then waits a year or more until the scions put in have acquired some growth and vigor. He then cuts off and grafts a few more ; and, again, for the same reason, waits until the next season, and so on, adding some each successive season, until the change is fully accomplished, with only slight and temporary shocks to its vitality. With a like wis- dom the tender-hearted Saviour wrought the great transition under consideration. He did not com- mence his ministry with professedly abolishing Jew- ish sacrifices, nor by distinctly predicting their speedy displacement in forms. Had he done that, instead 14 194 INFANT BAPTISM. of waiting three years for his cross, he would, doubt- less, have had it in as many weeks, if not days. On the contrary, he publicly, in his one greatest and most representative sermon, took special pains to declare that he came not to destroy the law nor the prophets, but to fulfil them. In instituting the Lord's Supper, he did not say, nor even intimate, that it was des- tined soon to supplant their sacrifices ; rather, both by his previous observance of them, and by this his silence, bade the believing Jews keep on observing them devoutly, leaving it to the out-goings of their new life, under divine guidance, to lead them to give them up cheerfully, as the wisdom and necessity of doing so should be revealed to them by God's spirit and his providential workings. So Avith baptism. Christ did not enjoin infant baptism in its Christian form upon his Jewish disciples. Had he done that, the Jews would have at once seen in it the intended supplanting of their precious rite ; and the conse- quences must have been an early disastrous con- flict. Had he thus, or in any other way, inti- mated the laying aside of that rite at the begin- ning of his ministry, it is difficult to suppose that he could have secured one single follower, unless by means far more efficacious than those which he, in his wisdom, did use. He took the wiser and kinder way of confining baptisms to Jewish believers^ leav- ing circumcision to continue its legitimate and holy work with their children until the time was ripe for the complete change. III. Certain Importayit Practical Questions and Ansivers. — As our last concluding point, we will SCRIPTUKAL ARGUMENT. 195 consider some important questions suggested by this Scriptural argument as thus far presented, and give to them carefully stated answers. 1. What shall a man do, when professing his faith, in case he is uncertain whether or not he was bap- tized by his parents? Not absolutely necessary, yet better, that he be baptized. Preferable to be certain that he has received the rite in form as well as substance. If a re-baptism, no harm need come from it, in the circum- stances. On the other hand, if he feels an assurance sufficient to lead him not to receive it, relying upon his mistaken belief that he did in his infancy, no harm need come from his thus not receiving it at all, as he certainly has received its substance. 2. What shall a church do, in case a conscientious believer in her membership, or seeking admission to it, is dissatisfied with his parental baptism? If he cannot, by wise and kind help, become sat- isfied, then baptize him. He who will have mercy and not sacrifice surely will not deny him this privi- lege. As before shown, it is perfectly suicidal for advocates of infant baptism to maintain that re-bap- tisms are never admissible. 3. What shall a man do who becomes convinced that neither of his parents nor tlie minister were true believers when baptizing him ? As to their being real believers, no subject of bap- tism can be absolutely certain. The question, then, is one of vital concern to every baptized person. The answer is evident : Such a one has no reason to be dissatisfied with, much less troubled about, his 196 INFANT BAPTISM. baptism. Its validity, so far as he himself is con- cerned, depends solely upon his own personal faith. A man takes a loyal citizen's oath, but the magis- trate administering it acts with a disloyal heart. The oath, consequently, on the part of the latter, is nothing but a lifeless form ; but, on his own part, it is a living one. His own loyalty makes it such. It matters not that the magistrate remains unchanged ; his own loyalty is all that is needed to make it his real and sufficient oath. So one's own true faith gives life to a baptism, which, as administered to him by unbelieving parents and minister, is a mere lifeless thing on their part. 4. What shall a man do who was baptized on pro- fession of his faith, but afterwards became convinced that he was not a true believer when baptized, and has since become one ? Must he receive the rite again ? Not necessarily. His subsequent faith makes his former dead baptism a living one, and, therefore, it is not necessary for him to receive its form a second time. 5. Are the non-believing subjects of infant baptism legitimate members of the church baptizing them? Does their baptism really induct them into it ? No. Only true believers can be. The great and the absolutely essential idea of a church member is one in mutual loving covenant with his God. This cannot possibly be true of infants too young to be moral agents; nor of those old enough to be, if desti- tute of real love for him. It is most absurd, then, to claim church membership for them before believing. The claimed church membership of believers' SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 197 children necessitates their regeneration. Those accepting it are logically compelled to maintain their regeneration as so general as to give the pre- sumption, in the case of each one, that he was regen- erated in infancy, and so entitled to be considered such until evidence to the contrary is furnished. That granted, they may all be enrolled as members. But as long as so very fev/ in all the history of the churches show, in after life, that they were then regenerated, the claim cannot be entitled to accept- ance, and the membership based upon it cannot be logically admitted. The only legitimate place, then, for them, is outside of it. This was their divine-idea position in the Abrahamic, as we have seen. It must be the same in a Christian. The somewhat prevalent conception of the former as having a legitimate non-believing, as well as believing, mem- bership, is a mistaken one ; and has led to very erro- neous views, respecting the church position of bap- tized children. From this unfounded conception, the inference has been logically drawn that they are rightly taken into the church in their baptism. But the same reasoning gives them a membership all through life, in the full enjoyment of all its rights and privileges, as was the case, with rare exceptions, by perversion of her divine idea, in the Abrahamic church. The only way to run clear of such an absurd conclusion, is to recognize the evident fact that they were not rightly received into, nor rightly permitted thus to remain in, that church. The claim for their church membership with their parents is made by some, on the theory that the 198 INFANT BAPTISM. family is the ultimate cliurcli unit. It is asserted that, for that reason, the family cannot be divided in its church relations, and so the children must be members with them. But that reasoning proves too much ; leads to an absurdity. It follows either that unbelieving parents must be members with their be- lieving children, or that the latter must remain non- members with the former. It also follows that, in case the husband is a believer, his unbelieving wife must be a member with him, or both must remain non-members, because of her unbelief. Such conse- quent absurdities disprove the claim that the ulti- mate church unit is the family. While the family, including only its believing members, constitute a composite unit, individual believers alone constitute the primal units of a church. If legitimate members, as claimed, why are they shut out from church privileges all through life, excepting as they become believers and make a pro- fession of their faith? It is said, in reply, that minors in the state do not enjoy all the privileges of citizens, until, when arriving at the required age, they, virtually or literally, take the citizen's oath of allegiance. But is the change from a minor citizen to a voting one enough like that of an unregenerate to a regenerate man to make the two cases parallel ? Manifestly not. If minors, as a class, were disfran- chised because none of them were, in their hearts, loyal, and so not real citizens, and given the fran- chise when becoming twenty-one years old because they then had become such, the parallelism would hold, but, as the case is, it cannot. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 199 Dr. Bushnell says : "As colts are classed as horses . . . non-believing children are members of the church, though deprived of its privileges." But, we ask, would colts be classed with horses if great num- bers of them did not become such all through their lives, but grew into other animals? And, if all becoming such had to experience a change corresponding in its magnitude to that of regen- eration ? Evidently not. Again, he says : '^ It (Christianity) spreads its arms to say : ' For God so loved the world,' etc., and even declares that publi- cans and harlots shall flock in before the captious priests and princes of the day, and yet it has no place, we are told, for children. Children are out of the categojy of grace. "^ But did, or could, those publicans and harlots flock in as such ? They did so as, and only as, they by their repentance and faith qualified themselves so to do ; and no one disputes the right and privilege of children to enter into the church in the same way. When making use of analogies in an argument, great care should be taken to guard against lurking fallacies. Non-believing baptized children do, indeed, sus- tain a very endearing relation to the church of their parents, as her children, her wards, her consecrated ones ; as those under covenant-nurture, her hope for enlargement, and the perfection of her membership, as God shall fulfil his sure promises secured for them ; but they do not and cannot sustain the rela- tionship of real members. 1 Christian Nurture, pp. 167-8. 200 INFANT BAPTISM. 6. At what age do unbelieving children cease to be proper subjects of baptism? They are proper subjects of its substance all through life. So long as they live neither their par- ents nor the church ought to cease to do for, and by, them, all that is so impressively symbolized by the rite. But not so of its form. They do not continue proper subjects of that when, by common consent, the}^ cease to be children and become old enough to act, to some extent, for themselves. This line of limitation, of course, varies with the varying circum- stances of different ages and countries. Something depends upon the feelings of the child himself. To use force, or bare command, to accomplish it would manifestly be improper. Demented children are proper subjects all through life. In the case of believing children of all ages, whose parents are, also, believers, their baptisms are parental and, at the same time, their own personal ones. They are baptized by tlieir parents and their church, and, also, by their own responsible act. 7. Ought it to be administered to a grossly wicked child? Yes, provided his assent is secured. As God has graciously promised to hear the prayers of all faith- ful parents for, and bless their nurture of, such a child ; as he, because of his base character, needs all the more to have the promises of the covenant secured to them in his behalf; all the more to receive the nurture pledged ; all the more to be continually reminded, by the rite, of the solemn obligations im- posed upon him, — it must be true that he should SCRIPTtJEAL ARGUMENT. 201 receive the rite. It is a blessed truth that even the shocking and loathsome crimes of the prodigal son did not shut out from the throne of grace his praying father daily interceding for him. 8. Can unbelieving parents rightly give the rite to their children ? Of course not. No more than receive it them- selves. As they have not the faith necessary to have it given to themselves, they cannot have that neces- sary to give to any others. If themselves baptized in infancy, they yet did not then receive it in faith, nor have they since made it their own by their faith. They are not baptized persons on their part. Infant Baptism is not a priestly function. Of itself alone it confers no graces. It merely symbol- izes and solemnizes the faith, consecration, etc., of others. Believing parents go to their pastor and vir- tually say to him : '' We have given away this our child to God, have consecrated it to his service, and have secured covenant promises in its behalf; and now, in order that we may be the more impressed with the responsibilities which we have assumed, more faithful to our sacred promises made, and have greater faith in our Heavenly Father as a covenant- keeping God, we ask you to solemnize what Ave have thus done by prayer and the use of the baptismal symbol and seal divinely appointed for that purpose." What, then, could be more improper than for those, not having done these requisite things, to bring their child for baptism? And what more out of place than for a minister to baptize it? Is there no false- hood involyed in thus giving a symbol which says 202 INFANT BAPTISM. that the parents have done these requisite things, when they have not, and when it is known that they have not? 9. Can believing parents who have not made a public profession of their own faith, by uniting with a church, rightly give it to their children ? It is a fully recognized law of obligation that self- consecration must precede the consecration of others. The reasons for the consecration of themselves (the parents) are far more imperative than those for that of their children. The reasons for their doing this publicly and in the usual way are, also, far more imperative than those for that of their children, pub- licly and in the usual way. It is also a fully recog- nized law that certain duties must be performed before certain other related ones can acceptably be. If a man brings his gift to the altar and there re- members that his brother hath aught against him, he must leave there his gift, unoffered, go his way, first be reconciled to his brother, and then, not before, come and offer his gift. So when parents, not church members, propose publicly to consecrate their children in baptism, they must first, in like manner, consecrate themselves. So long as that prior duty is left undone, they have no right to attempt to do the one second in order, dependent upon the first as an essential qualification for its performance. The refusal to do any one known duty utterly disquali- fies one to do all others. It ought to be solemnly impressed upon every man that he has no right to, and cannot acceptably, go to the sacramental table, nor to the sanctuary, nor to his own table at his SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 203 home, nor to any other place, so long as he is con- scious of refusing or, knowingly, neglecting one single previous duty resting upon him. If parents do not see the necessity of first making a public profession themselves, they should be so instructed, in order to become intelligent enough to be qualified to give the rite. No qualifications are essential which are not within the reach of every one, without exception. If they see this necessity and still disregard this prior duty, they thus show themselves morally disqualified to give it to their children. 10. Are children who have no believing parent ever proper subjects of baptism ? They are if they virtually have one, as is the case more or less frequently with waifs, orphans, and others, who are taken by believers into their families and are subjected to their training as virtually their own children. Infant Baptism is, above all, a symbol of the faith, consecration, and the faithful Christian nurture of the parents, and it is difficult to see how children having no sure prospect of such parental training can be its proper subjects. It is a funda- mental principle of Protestantism that sacred syrn- bols can be rightly used only as they represent their real substance, and that their use when not so doing is solemn mockery. A minister may baptize a child independent of its unbelieving parents, provided he can rightly, and will, take it under his own care and nurture, or secure it a home in another believing family ; not otherwise. A church, through its min- ister, may baptize a child of unbelieving parents, 204 INFANT BAPTISM. provided they can rightly, and will, put it under the home training of believing guardians, not other- wise. The great essential to the rite — its indispensable substance — is that the child have believing parents, either natural or virtual ones, who confess them- selves responsible for, and pledged to, its faithful religious training. Only as a minister has credible evidence that this is the case, can he rightfull}^ bap- tize a child. Only upon such conditions can the baptism be beneficial to the child. To baj^tize a child, knowing that it will have no parental, faithful nurture, is cruel and hurtful, like as it is to give one a natural birth and then leave it without parental care. The supposition that a child, who will receive no such nurture, is benefited by the rite, attributes to it a talismanic power ; makes it an opus operatum, — a claim which, while strenuously insisted upon by the Roman Catholic Church, is yet just as strenu- ously rejected by all true Protestants. The fact that the infant is a child of God does not of itself, as some claim, make it a ]Di"oper subject of baptism. Every man, even the most wicked, is, in the same sense, a child of God — such by creation, preservation, and proffered redemption ; such, also, as the recipient of numberless mercies from his lov- ing hand, and as bearing his own real, though sadly defaced, image. If simply being a child of God jus- tifies its baptism, then it follows that all men, regard- less of their character, are likewise entitled to it. 11. Is the baptism of sick children, apparently near unto death, to be encouraged? SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 205 We think not. Its parents, if qualified to baptize such a child, have done so already, for substance, and we think it would be better to let that suffice. In case it was the holy purpose of the parents to baptize it at an early day, but, owing to their sick- ness, or other disabling circumstances, they delayed it until its dying-bed sickness, it would not be very objectionable. But if they had no fixed purpose to do so when the child was well, and probably would not, even in its sickness, nor afterwards, if they should see good evidence of its recovery before they had sent for a minister to baptize it, the rite mani- festly should not be administered. There is usually so much of superstition — looking upon the rite as possessing some magic potency — in such baptisms, that we cannot think it advisable to encourage them. 12. Would it be right and wise for the churches to adopt another form, aptly picturing the substance of Infant Baptism, as a substitute for its present one ; provided that by such a change, the removal of the now-existing lamentable separation of Baptists from Pedo-baptists could be effected, and such a much- desired union secured? While such a substitution would not be inherently wrong, as that of baptism for circumcision was not, it yet would not be practicable and so not wise. It would not accomplish the worthy results sought ; it would not remove the cause of the separation, and so could not make the wished-for union more possible. To Pedo-baptists the new form would be baptism all the same, — changed, not in substance, but only in form. They would be compelled, as in duty bound, 206 INFANT BAPTISM. to insist upon this identity, and, b}^ so doing, make the proposed union repugnant to, and wholly unal- lowable by. Baptists.^ The Rite as affected hy the Claims of Higher Criti- cism. — As this Scriptural Argument has now reached its completion, the question naturally arises : How is the rite affected by the claims of higher criticism ? We reply: As already shown (pp. 121, 122), the claimed mythical character of Adam and Noah does not affect it at all. But we must admit that the claimed mythical character of Abraham does largely affect it. The supposition that Abraham, the cov- enant made with him, the seal given him, etc., are all mythical, takes away from it its great and essen- tial proof-texts. It thus makes it destitute of tex- tual, bible authority, and so disqualifies it to be a church ordinance ; as positive Bible proof-texts are essential to all such. But while so doing, it would not affect its substance in the least. Its Argument from Reason would remain unrefuted and irrefutable, and its foundation-principles, found j)ervading the entire Bible and cropping out in varying forms, more or less frequently in all its parts, would remain unshaken and abiding, like as the deep underground granite strata remain untouched and undisturbed by the furious storms and terrific cyclones sweeping- over and rending the exposed surface of the earth above them. iThe dedication of a child necessarily involves the whole substance of Infant Baptism. CHAPTER XIII HISTORICAL ARCUMENT.i Part First. WRITINGS OF CERTAIN FATHERS IN THE FIRST FIVE CENTURIES. This historical argument has for its field of inves- tigation the history of the churches in that period which extends from the close of the Apostolic age to the present time. Its object is to see how continu- ously and generally Infant Baptism has been re- garded as of scriptural authority in that period. This Argument not EssentiaL — Infant Baptism stands or falls with its scriptural argument, and is wholly independent of its historical. If scriptural, no facts of uninspired history can disprove it as divinely authoritative ; if not scriptural, none can render it such in the least degree. It must find certain proof of that authority in the Word of God alone exclusive of that from all other sources. The facts of history can only show that the churches have, more or less generally, always confessed its scriptural authority by practising it. The only question, then, before us is this, Can the recorded facts of history be interpreted in harmony with the now-proved or assumed scriptural authority of the iTo avoid too great length we shall be obliged greatly to abridge its first part, as prepared in original manuscript. 208 INFANT BAPTISM. rite ? The answer to this question contains all that is necessarily involved in this entire argument. If we had any want of confidence in our scriptural argu- ment just now completed, as in itself alone conclu- sive, we should not waste any more time in consider- ing the testimony of history. We should rather throw away all we have written, and confess our whole undertaking a failure. It is because we full}^ believe that it has been shown to be certainly scriptural, that we now proceed to examine the writings of the fathers upon the subject. We shall, therefore, conduct the investigation upon the assump- tion that the rite is firmly and surely planted on that immovable scriptural rock as claimed, and we shall make use of the jjresumption which that assumption will give in favor of Pedo-baptist interpretations. We, therefore, with good reason, ask objectors to grant this our assumption for the sake of argument. Those refusing, we do not invite to listen to us. As we do not go to history for any essential proof, we have the right thus to limit the scope of our investigation. Apostolic Fathers. — Latter part of First Cen- tury. Baptists tell us, " Not one of these — Barna- bas, Clemens, Romanus, Hernias, Ignatius, or Poly- carp — eitlier expressly alludes to it or says anything which may be referred to Infant Baptism ; but, on the other hand, their writings contain many passages where the baptism of believers is mentioned." We accept this statement without question, and remark that only very few and fragmentary are the extant writings of theirs, and it may be that full records of HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 209 church proceedings in their time would contain many such baptisms. The scriptural authority of the rite, now proved and here assumed, makes it far easier to believe this than that such a rite was not then practised. That presumption practically decides the question. Justin Martyr. — (Middle of Second Century.) In his second apology to emperor Anton i us Pius, he describes the baptism of believers, duly examined, thus : " Afterward they are conducted to a place where there is water, and after the same manner of regeneration whereby we ourselves were regenerated, they are regenerated. For they then take a bath in the name of the Lord God and Father of us all, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit."^ No certain mention of Infant Baptisms is found in any of his extant writings, and only in this one, those of believers. This his mere non-mention is very far from making it certain or extremely probable that Infant Baptisms were not known to him as apostolic. No writer professes to mention every related sub- ject. It is more or less common for one to confine himself to some single point. It cannot be that an apostolic rite had died out of practice as early as his time. Its scriptural authority makes it morally cer- tain that there were such, right in the face of his non-mention. Notice that he uses regeneration for baptism. That fact will shed light upon its use by Ireneeus, as we shall see. Teachings of the Apostles. — (Middle of Sec- ond Century.) In them the baptism of believers is iWiberg on Baptism, p, 212. 15 210 INFANT BAPTISM. described, but no mention of that of children is made. Our scriptural assumption makes it morally certain that there were such notwithstanding. This claim is greatly confirmed by the writings of Origen of the first half of the third century. He expressly says, as we shall soon see, that Infant Baptism was in the church at his time, and had been received from the apostles. This space of time in which the rite is not mentioned, and which is bridged over by the scriptural authority of the rite, covers only about a century. Can so short a bridge by such a builder be condemned as untrustworthy ? We think not. Because circumcision was a divinely-instituted and enjoined rite we know that it was generally practised by the Jews from Abraham to Christ, not- withstanding the very few records of them in all those many centuries. Periods of their non-mention cover ages not mentioned by many of the scripture writers of that dispensation covering many cen- turies. Irex^eus. — (Last part of Second Centur}^) "For he came to save all persons by himself — all, I mean, who by him are regenerated unto God, infants, little ones, and children, and elder persons."^ He here speaks of infants as distinguished from little ones, children, etc., as regenerated by Christ unto God. (1). Does he refer to their actual spiritual new birth ? Does his statement show the erroneous dogma of re- generation of believers' children, as held in his time ? If so, it is most naturally accounted for by ilren. adv. Hasr., lib. 2, c. 22, § 4. Ed. Bened, 171. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 211 the supposition that Infant Baptism had been long known, and that the dogma had grown from it by perversion. (2). Is. his statement to be interpreted figuratively ? Even then he must refer to some kind of a literal regeneration of infants known to his readers. A figure is a literal fact used to mirror a higher truth. " God is a sun " points to a literal sun, picturing God by resemblances. " Burial in baptism " points to a literal baptism by immersion, known in Paul's time. So infant regeneration, as a figure of speech, must point to a well-known literal one used as a mirror. If this was not their actual new birth, what could it be but their baptism ? Just suppose the baptism of infants then known and prac- tised and IreuEeus using regeneration as synonymous with baptism, as Justin Martyr did, and as was doubtless then common, and his statement is seen to be true and appropriate. Whether simply literal or used figuratively, then, in both cases it would seem to point unmistakably to the rite as known and practised in the churches. Our scriptural assumption sanctions this conclusion, and the testimony of Origen confirms the same, as we shall see. TuRTULLiAN (wrote near the close of the second- century). The following is found in his writings : " Baptism is not to be given rashly; but, according to the condition and the disposition and the age of ever}^ person, the delay of baptism is more useful ; but especially of little children. For why is it nec- essary, if not so necessary" (except in cases of neces- sity), "that the sponsors should be brought into 212 INFANT BAPTISM. peril, since they may fail to keep their promises through death and may be deceived through the de- velopment of a sinful disposition. The Lord indeed says, Do not forbid them to come unto me. There- fore let them come when they are growing up ; let them come when they are studying ; when they know whither they are to come. Let them be made Chris- tians when they can know Christ. Why should their innocent age make haste for the forgiveness of sins ? For no less cause must the unmarried be deferred, in whom" (the ground of) "temptation is prepared, alike in such as never were married, by their immaturity, and in the widowed by means of their freedom" (from the marriage yoke) "until they either marry or else are more fully strengthened for maintaining conti- nence. If any understand the weighty import of baptism, they will fear its reception more than its de- lay."i (1). Baptists infer from these his statements, that, in Turtullian's time, Infant Baptism was not gener- ally practised ; was not regarded as apostolic ; had just begun to be practised in rare cases, and was op- posed by him as an innovation. (2). Pedo-baptists : That it was generally practised as apostolic ; that he, through mistaken notions of the nature and respon- sibilities of the rite, and, under the pressure of other erroneous views, advised some modifications of it. His language will justify either of these opposite in- ferences. If it was not regarded by him as apostolic, he could properly advise delay as he did. But it seems surpassing strange that he does not give that 1 Turtullian, Le Baptismo, c. 18. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 213 as a reason. If it was not apostolic, then, of course, little children should not be baptized. Why then not mention that greatest and absolutely decisive reason, if he knew it to be true? This, his non- mention, then, greatly disproves the Baptists' infer- ences. If he regarded it as apostolic and kncAV it to be generally practised, he might still advise such modi- fications as he does. But we are told that he cher- ished a sacred regard for apostolic tmdition. True, but, also, a great propensity for innovation. He went squarely against that tradition in advising the delay of baptism in case of the unmarried and wid- owed. He is rej)resented by historians as a man who "lacked discretion and judgment; "^ and as "nar- row, bigoted, and uncharitable." ^ He evidently was an ill-balanced and eccentric man, and, like many others of the same sort, Avas the greatest stickler for, -and a great innovator of, the same traditionary ordi- nance. Origen (wrote in the first half of the second cen- tury). There are in his extant writings, these three, and only these, passages, in as many different books, which speak of the baptism of children : '' To these considerations it can be added, that it may be inquired why, since the baptism of the church is given for the remission of sins, baptism is given, according to the observance of the church, even to chiklren; for the grace of baptism woukl seem superfluous if there were nothing in children requiring remission and indulgence."^ 1 Mosheim's Eccl. Hist., I, 122-3. 2 The People's Cyclopedia. 3 Homily VIII on Leviticus, c. 12: 1-8, Ruflnus's Latin version. 214 INFANT BAPTISM. "Children are baj)tized for the remission of sins. Of what sins ? or when have they sinned? or how can any reason of the laver in their case hold good, unless accord- ing to that sense which we have just mentioned? None is free from pollution, though his life be but the length of one day upon earth, "^ ''For this also the church has received a tradition from the apostles to give baptism even to children ; for they to whom the secrets of the divine mysteries were committed, knew that in all persons there is the native pollution of sin, which must be done away by water and the Spirit; on account of which pollution, even the body itself is called the body of sin." ^ In these passages Origen refers to children too young to have voluntary sin, too young to believe, and so too young to be baptized upon their own faith. The necessities of his argument require it. He is seeking to prove the sinful pollution of men of all ages, not excepting those but a day old, and he makes use of the apostolic baptism of children as conclusive proof in the case. His reasoning is as follows : Baptism is for the remission of sins ; all its subjects, then, are sinful; children, then, being its subjects, must be sinful, but they cannot have voluntary sin, and so must have involuntary; hence they must have, from birth, sinful natures ; hence human beings, of all ages, must have the same. To suppose him alluding to children guilty of voluntary sin, nullifies his reasoning. The voluntary sin, of itself, would justify their baptism, and there would be no need of any other for its justification. A lec- 1 Homily XIV on Luke, c. 2: 21-24, Jerome's Latin version. - Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Book V, 9, Rufinus's Latin version. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 215 turer speaking of certain animals unable to walk, yet able to move round with facility, and mentioning children as instances, could not be understood as referring to those old enough to walk, but solely those only able to creep. These positive passages — positively asserting In- fant Baptisms — show that there can be, in all his writings, no hostile ones, none in conflict with the rite. No intelligent, honest writer will contradict himself — affirm one thing in one place and its oppo- site in another. But it is claimed by objectors that there are other passages which indicate that Origen could not have believed in the baptism of such chil- dren. We have devoted a good deal of time to their consideration, and are convinced that they are not necessarily hostile, but ma}^ be interpreted as in har- mony with the rite. Take, for instance, this one in his Commentary on Romans (book 5, chapter 8) : "But if he is not buried with Christ, neither is he legitimately baptized." This is pointed to, and greatly emphasized, as certainly and fatally hostile. But it may simply mean that a man destitute of faith, who, through mistake or otherwise, has re- ceived the form, is not legitimately or validly bap- tized on Jiis part. That is true, but the fact does not conflict with the claims of the rite in the least, as we have abundantly shown in our Argument from Reason. It is claimed by objectors that these positive pas- sages are not those of Origen, but interpolations by the translators, Jerome and Rufinus. But that makes it all the more impossible to suppose the 216 INFANT BAPTISM. alleged hostile passages really liostile. If interpola- tions, they must have been inserted by the transla- tors ; and if the alleged hostile ones were such, they must have been known to them as such. Why, then, did they not change or expurgate them ? If dis- honest enough to insert the positive ones as Origen's, when they were not, would they have scrupled, or been foolish enough, to let remain conflicting ones, certain to lead to the detection of their lying fraud ? We can imagine a counterfeiter wicked enough to change the figure five on a bank bill to fifty, and then try to pass it for ten times its value ; but can we suppose him idiotic enough to leave, on the re- verse side, the large letters five unchanged? The charge of interpolations is a very serious one, and cannot be allowed to be made ao^ainst those dis- tinguished and pious Fathers of the Church without the most certain proof, of which there is none worthy of the name. From what Ave have now learned, we confidently afiirm that there are few historic facts more undeniable than that Origen affirms tlie bap- tism of infant children as an ordinance received from the apostles. As Origen makes use of the rite as a basis of argumeiit, it must have been generally known and practised in his time. He would not be so illogical nor dishonest as to make such a use of a disjnited fact, a recent innovation, a rite not gener- ally accepted as apostolic. This so positive and unmistakable testimony of a Father so distinguished and honored, and so Avell qualified to give it, is most weighty and decisive in the case. His great learning, confessed piety, born SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 217 in 185, less than a century after the death of the Apostle John ; the son of a martyr-father ; grandson of an eminent Christian whose birth ran back nearly to the close of the first century, — all these facts fully qualified him to testify to the apostolic origin of the rite. This, his testimony, then, makes it morally certain that Infant Baptism, as apostolic, came down, in a general and uninterrupted practice, from the apostolic to liis own age. This, his testimony, then, confirms the Pedo-bap- tist interpretation of the Fathers preceding him, whose writings we have so hastily examined. Jt also will greatly confirm the interpretation of the writings of his succeeding Fathers, who, as we shall see, pronounce the rite Scriptural, and practised as such, in their times. So generally then known as apostolic, it could not have become not known, as such, before the time of Augustine. Cyprian (Fourth Century) : He asked advice of a council in Carthage, as to the proper time for the baptism of infant children ; whether at birth or on the eighth day as in circumcision? The council gave judgment for the birth-time, and their reasons.^ Gregory Nazianzen (Fourth Century) : " Have you an infant? " he asks. " Let not evil take advan- tage of his age. Let it be sanctified in infancy. Let it be consecrated by the Spirit from birth. You, as a faint-hearted mother of little faith, are afraid to bestow the seal because of its weakness. But Han- nah, even before Samuel was born, promised him to God, and, as soon as born, consecrated him and 1 Sea Wiberg on Baptism, pp. 247, 248. 218 INFANT BAPTISM. clothed him in a holy garment, not fearing human weakness, but trusting in God." No comment needed. This other passage : ''But, say some, what is your opinion of infants who are not capable of judging either of the grace of baptism, or of the damage sus- tained by the want of it? Shall we baptize them too ? By all means if there be any apparent danger. For it would be better that they be sanctified with- out their knowledge than that they should die with- out being sealed and initiated." As for others, I give my opinion, that when they are three years old or thereabout (for then they are old enough to hear and answer some of the mystic words ; and, although the}^ may not fully under- stand, they can receive impressions), they may be sanctified soul and body by the great mystery of initiation.! This last passage shows that he, like Turtullian, was led by erroneous views of the rite to advise some modifications — a delay, in most cases, till about the age of three years. The first suggests the prev- alence of the rite in his time ; this last expresses his own independent opinion. But the delayed ones were infant baptisms all the same. His sanction of the baptism of little children apparently near unto death was a like sanction of the rite as righteous ; and is his testimony to it as scriptural, unless he regarded scriptural authority as not essential to bap- tism. His proposed modification did not essentially change the rite. If all the churches should now delay their baptisms until the age of seven, when 1 Gregory Naz., Or. XL. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 219 they could be made to understand something about the nature and obligations of the rite, they would still be infant baptisms. We once baptized a child of about that age. We first took pains to instruct him as much as we could respecting it and gained his cheerful acquiescence. We baptized him, not as a believer, but as a non-believing child of the covenant. It is an error to supjoose that baptism alwa}- s requires on the part of the subject the knowledge of, and assent to, what is administered. As well say the same of consecrating an infant to God as did Hannah. It is not essential to the dedication of a house of worship that the latter participate intelligently. An infant, not a moral agent, takes no part in its bap- tism, perfectl}^ passive. It was this error which led astray Gregory, as it did Turtullian before, and a great many others since his day, as we shall see. Basil the Great (Fourth Century): "Do you (his catechumens) demur and loiter and put off? When you have been from a child cate*chised in the word, are you not yet come to the knowledge of it? A seeker all your life long ; a considerer till you are old ! When will you be made a Christian ? When shall we see you become one of us ? Last year you were for staying until this, and now you have a mind to stay till next. Take heed that, by promising yourselves a long life, you do not miss 3^our hope. You do not know what change to-morrow may bring." ^ He here makes no mention of their bap- tism. He simply reproves them for not becoming Christians without longer delay. His reproofs are 1 Wall's Hist, of Inf. Bap., part I, c. 12, ss. 3, 4. 220 INFANT BAPTISM. not inconsistent with the claim that some of them had been baptized in infancy and shoukl profesS their faith by accepting their parental baptism as their own. Similar words could be, and often are, now used addressed to those baptized in infancy. Chrysostom (Fourth Century) : " We baptize infants for this reason, that, though not polluted by any sin, they may thus obtain sanctity, righteous- ness, adoption, the inheritance of the fellowship of Christ. 1 Our circumcision (I speak of that of bap- tism) has pleasure without sufferiug and healing, is the minister of a thousand benefits, and fills us with the blessings of the Spirit. Nor has it aLny deter- minative time, as the other; but one in immature age and in middle life and in old age may receive this circumcision that is without hands." ^ Evidently he regards baptism as the successor of, and identical with, circumcision. The clause "with- out hands " seems to show that he has most in mind the spirituaf substance of baptism, the washing of regeneration ; and that he regards both circumcision and baptism as divinely-appointed symbols of it — the latter an improved one. The form of the one is no more without hands than that of the other. Pelaglus (Fourth and Fifth Ceuturies) : "I have never heard of any, not even the most impious here- tic, who denies the baptism of infants." ^ In a heated controversy with Augustine respecting original sin, in which Augustine lays great stress upon Infant Baptism as conclusive evidence of it, Pelagius makes 1 August, contra Jul. Lib. 1, 21. 2 Horn. XL in Genesin. sApud August., De Pecc. Orig., ss. 19, 20. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 221 no objection gTounded on the plea that the rite is unscriptural, as we shonkl think he certainly would have done, had he known it as such. This makes his testimony especially weighty. Augustine (Fourth and Fifth Centuries) : "• If any one demands divine authority for this thing, we can well show what the sacrament of baptism avails for infants from the circumcision a former people received ; though what the whole church practises, and was not instituted by councils, but was always held, may most justly be believed to be handed down by apostolic authority." ^ " The custom of the mother church in baptizing infants must by no means be slighted or esteemed useless, or thought to be anything else than an apos- tolic tradition. "2 " This Infant Baptism the church has always had, always held ; this it received from the creed of the fathers ; this it guards perseveringly to the end."^ Are these, his statements, reliable ? Can we ac- cept them as certain evidence that the rite came down to his time, from the apostles, as a generally- known and practised rite ? It must be admitted that he knew, through his immediate ancestry, as to its prevalence in his own time, and as far back as seventy-five years before his birth, 279, within about fift}^ years of the time when Origen wrote ; and so far his statements are reliable. He certainly knew, upon the authority of Origen, that it came down from the apostles and was generally known iLiberlV, c. 24. 2 De Genesi, Liber X, c. 23. 3 Sermo X, De Verbis Apostoli. 222 INFA^^T BAPTISM. and practised as such in Origen's time. It was safe, then, for him to afifirm its general prevalence from the apostolic age to liis own ; as there could be no break between Origen's time and the seventy-fifth year before his own birth — a period of only some fifty years. Deprived of Origen's statements, his own would not be reliable back to the apostles ; with them they can but be. Statements^ in his writings also speak of infant communion as coming down from tlie apostles ; ^ but, as they are not confirmed by Origen, nor any other writer of Origen's early time, they lack reliability. Certain Church Fathers not Ba2)tized in Infancy : — Dr. A. J. Arnold gives the following list of such : Jerome (born about 354) ; Augustine (born 354) ; Basil (born about 329) ; Gregory Nazianzen (born about 329) ; Nectarius (fourth century) ; Ephraim of Edessa (fourth century) ; Emperor Constantine (born about 274) ; Emperor Theodosius (born 346) ; and the Emperor Valentinus (born 321). Dr. Ar- nold tells us that most of these were born of Chris- tian parents, and several of them (Augustine, Basil, Gregory, Ephraim) are expressly said to have been consecrated in infancy. He also tells us that among all the Christian fathers of the first five hundred years, not one of them is said to have been baptized in infancy.^ These facts cannot prove that Infant Baptism was not known and, more or less practised in the fourth and fifth centuries, in which all these fathers except lAug. de Peccator, Meritis, Remiss, Liber 1, c. 20. 2 Bib. Sacra, Vol. XXVI, Jan., 1869, p. 73. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 223 Constantine, lived, for the reason that it certainly was, as confessed by Baptists themselves.^ (1). Doubtless some of them were not the children of Christian parents. Those of Constantine were pagans. (2). The Christian parents of some of them may not have become such while they were young children. Some may have had only one parent a Christian, the other successfully resisting their bap- tism. (4). The Christian parents of some may have neglected the rite, though known as apostolic in their time. This non-baptism of Augustine could not have been because the rite was not known as apostolic in his childhood, as he himself says it was, and had been from time immemorial. Such possi- bilities harmonize their non-infant baptisms with the proved, and here assumed. Scriptural authority of the rite. That alone makes it morally certain that the rite, thus authorized, was then known and practised as apostolic. This very meagre examination of the writings of the first five centuries, bearing upon the subject, must suffice. As made in our original manuscript it would cover nearly six chapters instead of one. We regret the page-limitations which has compelled it. We have been able merely to touch upon a few salient points in each case. We regret the brevity. While a very subordinate argument, as compared with the Scriptural, it is yet an intensely interesting one — more and more so as more and more fully developed. This is especially true of that derived from the writings of Origen. Its long-continued iWiberg on Baptism, pp. 236, 259. 224 INFANT BAPTISM. study has excited in iis a great deal of pleasing enthusiasm, and afforded a very delightful satisfac- tion. We have been exceedingly gratified to find, by means of a very prolonged and careful investiga- tion, that the churches in those early ages did not suffer this scriptural ordinance to fall into disuse, but, on the contrary, carefully preserved and hon- ored it as a precious treasure bequeathed to them. It will not be necessary to examine the writings of succeeding centuries for proof of its practice, more or less extensively as apostolic, in them all, as it is universally confessed. Some other very impor- tant points, however, call for consideration, and will receive it, in the next concluding chapter. CHAPTER XIV. Part Second. OTHER RELATED HISTORICAL FACTS: CLOS- ING AVORDS. High Christian Character and Achieve- ments OF ALL Genuine Pedo-baptists, as seen IN History. — It will not be denied that multitudes among those who practise it, have always excelled in piety and in large and efficient Christian activities. Dr. A. J. Arnold (Baptist) heartily confesses that it is "practised by a body of churches " (certain evan- gelical ones in Protestant countries), "who have not been surpassed by any body of Christians in ancient or modern times, in morality, home religion, evan- gelical faith. Christian activities, and missionary zeal.^ It cannot candidly be disputed that great numbers of the most godly men and women ever known, espe- cially saintly missionaries of the cross and others full of the missionary spirit, have practised it as a God- imposed duty and an unspeakabl}^ blessed privilege. Hence such have been, all along in the past, and still are, most eloquent and decisive historic object-lessons setting forth its great power, when rightly and faith- fully used, to promote growth in grace, glowing piety, intense Christian activities and the successful family training- of children for God. Ba2?tist Pedo-haptists. — To the same class, as ob- ject-lessons, also belong all those who only, yet really, 1 Bib. Sac, Jan., 1869, p. 77. 16 226 INFANT BAPTISM. practise its substance, as is true with all faithful Christians who do not jjractise its ordinance-form. All such really baptize their children. Baptist churches have a great many more Pedo-baptist members than they think, including all of those godly ones who conscientiously most condemn the rite. All those among them who consecrate and faithfully train their children for God, in humble reliance upon his prom- ises, obtain the blessings sought through the Abra- hamic covenant, though they see it not in that light. The substance of the rite is the all-important thing. Its form, while of great use, is not so indispensable but that those practising its substance alone, reject- ing the form through honest mistake, will partake largely of the benefits of the rite. The form is sim- ply a picture of the substance, helping to receive and make use of it. While, when known as being such by divine appointment, it cannot be neglected with- out sin, it may be when not so known. The testi- monies, then, derived from the character and achieve- ments of all genuine Pedo-baptists — including all those who so practise its substance alone — in favor of the rite as scriptural, are numberless and of very great weight. Adverse Testimony of Many Church His- torians ; Neander their Representative. — Several church historians affirm that Infant Baptism was not known, as apostolic, in the first and second centuries, and, only to a limited extent, in the third. How can we account for this their testimony ? Among those thus affirming, Neander is most dis- tinguished because of his great learning, exhaus- HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 227 tive research, and world-wide renown. We may, therefore, safely consider him as a representative of them all, and examine the testimony given by him as such a representative. Under the Misleading Guidance of the Baptist Bible Assumption. — Neander investigates under the guidance of an unfounded Bible assumption, as ap- pears from the following : " If we wish to ascertain from whom tliis institution (Infant Baptism) was originated, we would say, certainly not immediately from Christ himself. Was, it from the primitive church in Palestine from an injunction given by the apostles ? But among Jewish Christians circumci- sion was regarded as a seal of the covenant, and hence they had so much less occasion to make use of another dedication of their children. Could it have been Paul who, first among Gentile Christians, intro- duced this alteration by the use of baptism ? But this would agree least of all with the peculiar charac- teristics of the apostle." ^ The Answers to these Questions not Difficult. — They are put by him as insurmountable objections ; but it seems to us that their answers by Pedo-baptists are very CAddent and easy. Infant Baptism did not origi- nate immediately from Christ in his earthl}^ ministry. Its origin was long before his Advent upon earth. He found it a long-established and largely-practised rite in its Abrahamic form. He himself received it in that form. He also recognized it, as he did all the rites of the ancient Church, as one of divine ap- pointment. The pertinent question for Neander 1 Planting and Training of the Christian Church, p. 102. 228 INFANT BAPTISM. was : When, and under whose authority did its prac- tice in its Christian form commence ? The time for that was not in Christ's ministry, as we have shown in the Scriptural Argument. Neither had the time come, in the apostolic age, for this change of form, in the primitive church at Jerusalem, made up as it was of Jewish believers. They were to retain, for a while, the Abrahamic form of their fathers, as a seal of the covenant. Had he asked : Did the change take place among Gentiles when they first began to become Christians, whose children were not to be cir- cumcised ? he would have hit the mark exactly, and he would have found, in the New Testament, house- hold baptisms at that time and not before, and among them alone. We dknnot, for the life of us, find any evidence of, or conceive of, any known peculiar char- acteristics of the Apostle Paul, which would, in the least, keep him from recognizing and making use of such a change as legitimate and necessary, in the cir- cumstances. It rather seems certain to us, in view of his freedom from the bondage of forms ; his keen perception of their unchangeable substance, never to cease ; and of the changeable nature of all forms, embodying it, — that he especially would recognize such a change of form in circumcision as legitimate and necessary, when and where it was so impera- tively demanded. This passage of Neander's evidently shows that he did not look upon Christian baptism as identical with circumcision ; nor upon the outward form of the one as a duplicate of that of the other ; also, that he did regard the rite of Infant Baptism as non-apostolic. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 229 We do not think it strange, therefore, that he failed to find the rite in the two first centuries. If, like him, we looked upon it as thus destitute of Scriptural authority, we should fail to find it there. We should enter upon the study of the fragmentary records of the church history of those times with the strongest presumption against its being then known, and should interpret them accordingly. Their mere silence would be decisive. His Regretahle Disparagement of Origen. — In com- ing to his conclusion, Neander finds it necessary to disparage and rule out the remarkable and decisive testimony of Origen, as follows : " His expression [concerning Infant Baptism] cannot be regarded as of much weight in this age, when the inclination was so strong to trace every institution which w^as con- sidered of special importance to the apostles, and when so many walls of separation, hindering tlie freedom of prospect, had already been set up between this and the apostolic age."^ We confess to a feeling of deep regret to find him thus disparaging the testimony of a man so justly distinguished for his great learning and high Chris- tian character; and the fact that the necessities of his argument compelled it, destroys our confidence in his adverse conclusions. Does he mean that Origen was not intelligent enough to give accurate testimony as to its practice in the middle of the second centur}^ only thirty-five years before his birth? It does not seem possible. Or does he accuse him of being dishonest enough to pronounce iHistory of Christian Religion, Vol. 1, p. 314. 230 INFANT BAPTISM. the rite apostolic when he knew that it was not practised as such at that time ? If he can be taken as a competent and an honest witness, then it is certain, as his honesty can make it, that it was known and practised as apostolic in the second century ; and the opinion of Neander to the contrary cannot be well founded. We must be permitted to repeat with emphasis our painful regret that such an eminent historian should thus seem to impugn either the intelligence or the character of that learned and eminently pious father. It appears to us that lie let his mistaken Bible assumption press him into a very uncharitable and erroneous judgment. We claim that the adverse testimony of the other church historians was owing to causes the same or similar to these just considered. Its Rejection by Baptist Bodies. — Some cen- turies before the Reformation there appeared a few Christians, among them those of deep piety, and, in time, a few churches, who rejected the rite as un- scriptural and sinful. From such small fountains have issued streams, constantly growing in volume in their onward flow, until there have resulted those large and worthy Christian bodies Avho now reject it. While this is not their only distinguishing tenet, it is one of the most noted ones. Why has this been? How account for its rejection by so large and excel- lent a portion of God's people, if it is so surely and evidently Scriptural as is claimed in this treatise? There are many reasons for it, two of which call for special consideration. (1). Incori-ect Misleading Vietvs of Baptism. — They HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 231 did not see both sides of the baptismal symboh Those godly fathers saw but one side of baptism, and hence were naturally misled into their erroneous views and their secession from their brethren. Half truths, in the minds of conscientious men, are fruit- ful sources of error — all the more so because of their conscientiousness. Their readiness to run into errors because of one-sided views, and their persist- ency in clinging to them, correspond to the degree of their conscientiousness. Those saintly men rightly emphasized the necessity of faith on the part of the subject to his valid baptism, but they failed ade- quately to emphasize, and even to perceive, the co- ordinate truth, that, for probationary purposes, symbols of faith may, and, in some instances, must be given to those destitute of it. A Strange Inconsistency^ involving an Absurdity. — They did not see this co-ordinate truth although they necessarily acted upon it every day, as in teach- ing their children to pray. Holding such incomplete views, they were driven by their consciences and their fear of God, to reject it. The same veil has continued to blind and keep in like error their numerous and excellent descendants down to the present time. If they would make the attempt fully to carry out their one-sided view to its legitimate length, they would run into a thousand absurdities too glaring for even their own approval, as did the saintly Roger Williams. ^ (i) The to them Unsatisfactory Character of all Treat- ises in its iSupjJort. — -Baptists condemn all those iSee p. 11 of this treatise. 232 INFANT BAPTISM. treatises as not meeting tlie reasonable demands of their minds. They go to them to learn how a sym- bol of a believer can be rightly given to non-believ- ing, even to unbelieving, children : how the initia- tory rite of church-membersliip can be rightly given to them ; how such can be rightly baptized into the holy name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They go to them for adequate Bible proof-texts. When they find the commandment of circumcision cited as such, they call for conclusive proof that it is now binding; especially that it is in the form of Christian baptism. They demand to be shown either that all Old Testament precepts are now bind- ing, or else a good reason why this is, while others are not. They call for a rule of interpretation founded upon universally acknowledged principles, which shall make the line, if an}^ separating the binding from the non-binding, clear and unmistaka- ble. They point to the absence of any recorded in- stances of Infant Baptisms in the ministries of John the Baptist, Christ, and (as they claim), his apostles, and they strenuously insist that the treatises must satisfactorily account for an absence which seems to conflict fatally with the claims of the rite. They also call for a fair consideration and an effectual refutation of all the formidable objections which its rejecters profess to derive from the Bible and eccle- siastical history. They say that these objections must all be fully met if they would satisfy thinking, conscientious minds. They complain that upon all these points they find nothing which satisfies, or ought, in reason, to satisfy their inquiring minds. HISTORICAL AllGUMENT. 233 It is an undeniable fact that all Baptists, including their most logical and candid scholars, look upon the arguments put forth in advocacy of the rite with great disrespect, not to say contempt. Who can tell how great the number like Judson and Hackett, whose views have been changed to those of the Bap- tists by these treatises? It is, then, as it unques- tionably must be, true that just here we find another reason for the rejection of the rite by a few con- scientious, godly men in the earlier ages of the church ; and for its widespread rejection in more recent centuries. Whether or not Baptists are justified in making such a sweeping, damaging charge, may be ques- tioned; but the fact that they with united voice and evident sincerity do make it, is calculated greatly to hinder and diminish its observance. By such damaging criticisms they do and must have great influence in the case, and will continue thus to do so long as they find no satisfactory refutation of these their objections. It does not become us to pronounce them all well- founded ; but we ma}', with perfect propriety, say that we have never found any treatises in which these objections have been fairly and squarely met, much less removed. We are compelled to confess to receiving but little light upon the subject from all those we have read. This may be wholly owing to our limited acquaintance with the numberless ones which have been published; or to our inability to understand and fully appreciate those examined. Whether or not better abilities and a more exten- 234 INFANT BAPTISM. sive reading would have led us to a different judg- ment, we leave for others to decide. Its Non-Observance by Many in Pedo-bap- TiST Chubches. Non- Observance. — Its large non-observance in many Pedo-baptist churches at the present time must be confessed, and is owing, in part, to that tendency to neglect acknowledged duties which prevails more or less in all churches. It is largely for the same cause that the Lord's Supper, the family altar, secret prayer, etc., are now so greatly, sadly, and increas- ingly neglected. It is also owing largely to a want of confidence in the rite as Scriptural. It cannot be denied that many in those churches, both clergymen and laymen, do not have much confidence in its claims to Bible authority, and that many positively deny tliat it has such authority. This widespread want of confidence, and these decided denials, could but result, as they have, very disastrously as to its observance. This state of things in the churches comes largely from the same cause — those just men- tioned — which occasioned its first and subsequent rejection by Baptists, — one-sided views and unsatis- factory treatises upon the subject. Such views and such dissatisfaction have greatly tended to bring, and actually have brought about, its large rejection and larger neglect. The Great Necessity of the Rite, — The great and crying want of the rite to-day is a treatise which, iyi the judgrtient of all fair-minded scholars^ gives it a sure Bible foundation, and removes the many appa- HISTORICAL ARGUME>^T. 235 rently great objections urged against it. Not until that is done will its observance become as general in the churches as it was in former times. When that is done, it will begin to increase, and, as we think, keep on increasing until instances of its non-observ- ance by candid, faithful Christians will be rare in- deed. In all its history it has shown itself as meet- ing, when rightly used, a great and deeply-felt want in the experiences of living Christians. It has al- ways had, and still has, a warm place in the hearts of all those so using it, notwithstanding the many difficulties calculated to shake their confidence in its divine authority. One very strong and convinc- ing proof of its being from God is the fact that it has, in such unfavorable circumstances, even to the present time, retained its strong hold upon so many of the most intelligent, purest, most spiritual, and most useful of God's chosen ones. Two Additional Causes. — There are two other causes for this, its non-observance, in Pedo-baptist churches : (1). They, in their liberalit}^, often receive Baptists to their membership. Many of the latter unite with them while retaining most of their Bap- tist views. Nearly all such do so as rejecters of Infant Baptism. Many others come into them who were reared in Baptist communities and families, — many who in their earlier years were attendants in Baptist meetings and Sabbath schools. The large inflowing of all these classes naturally and inevit- ably leavened, more or less, with Baptist views the churches into which they came. (2). They have suffered in this respect from their 236 INFANT BAPTISM. neighborhood with Baptist churches. The neigh- borhood of large and influential ones, noted for their spirituality and self-denying labors in the cause of their Master, yet rejecting the rite as anti-Scriptural and sinful, could not, as it did not, fail to make it more difficult to secure its universal observance, and this accounts, in part, for its so large rejection and neglect. A Similar Experience in Baptist Churches. — Our Baptist brethren have a similar experience with re- spect to their so distinctive doctrine, — Close Com- munion. Their reception of some who reject it, and of many more who are not fully satisfied as to its Bible authority, and the neighborhood of worthy Christian churches which reject it as anti-Scriptural, has made it much more difficult to maintain its uni- versal acceptance and practice. Because of these silent, yet ever-acting, influences, the leaven of open communion has worked, and will continue to do so, more and more in their churches. It is not strange, therefore, that this rite is not accepted and practised as Scriptural by all those in Pedo-baptist churches, and the fact that it is not, constitutes no serious objection to it as such. Summary Statement'. — 1. All the facts of church history can be interpreted in harmony with the assumption that Infant Baptism is a Scriptural ordi- nance. 2. While a few of th'em are more easily interpreted upon the Baptist than the Pedo-baptist Bible assump- tion, the great majority are more easily upon the latter than the former. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 237 3. The proved Scriptural authority of the rite fully establishes the claim that all of them are actu- ally in such harmony. This great preponderance of historical testimony in favor of the ordinance gives very weighty cor- roborative proof of its Scriptural authority. Closing AVords. — The completion of this His- torical , Argument, to which we have now come, brino-s this whole treatise to its close. In it we have o endeavored to give the subject a thorough and an impartial investigation. We took up the work be- cause sorely perplexed with the objections urged against it, by such eminently Christian scholars as Judson, Ripley, Hackett, and others, — men Avhose sincerity, learning, hearty consecration to Christ and lives of great usefulness, as his accepted and hon- ored servants, were such as to give presumptive evi- dence of great weight for the correctness of their views. The fear of administering an unauthorized rite haunted us at the very threshold of the gospel ministry, into which we entered, and in which we, as we humbly trust, have been a real, though a very unworthy, co-worker with Christ. So much were we troubled by these objections and fears, that we were driven by conscience and the fear of God to the solemn resolve that we would examine the sub- ject as carefully, exhaustively, honestly, and prayer- fully as we possibly could, and, in case no Scriptural warrant for it was found, we would tear it from our creed, whatever the sacrifices of feeling and interest it might cost. We had not labored long upon this effort before light began to break in upon our minds ; 238 INFANT BAPTISM. at first dim, but surely increasing as studying pro- gressed. We soon had enough revealed by that blessed Spirit which leadeth into all truth, to remove our fears about administering the rite. This led us to keep on in our studies and obtain as complete a knowledge of the subject as we could — its philos- ophy, its Scriptural authority, its historical confirm- ations, the objections urged against it, etc. We have been abundantly rewarded for these great labors and pains, all along the way, by the new and delightful views of truth so frequently brought to light. It has been an unspeakable joy to find, as we have, in reason, in the Bible and in history — more and more clearly as we went on — such a sure foundation for the precious ordinance ; to witness the happy solu- tions of its difficult and perplexing problems ever and anon unveiling themselves to our eager eyes ; sometimes very unexpectedly ; often bursting upon our burdened mind with enrapturing surprise. We desire, in closing, to render heartfelt praise and thanksgiving to God for sparing our lives to see the completion of this treatise ; for all the help He has afforded us in its elaboration ; and for the loving guidance He has given us, as we fully believe, in all our prolonged search for the' truth in the case — the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. To Him alone be all the glory. With Him we cheerfully leave it. To His ever-watchful, loving care we com- mit it, with the earnest prayer that He will make it instrumental in securing a greater and more faithful Christian nurture of children in the churches of His well-beloved Son, Jesus Christ. APPENDIX A. Baptizing Non-Believing Children into the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ! How Justified ? . In the Argument from Reason, a justification of it as not inherently wrong, was derived from the ac- knowledged rightfulness of teaching them to pray. Since the near completion of this treatise, what we regard as important new light upon this question, has been given us. We cannot now conveniently in- sert it in its proper place and, therefore, give it in an appendix. We shall consider it, as we did all the other parts of that Argument from Reason, on the assumption that Infant Baptism has Scriptural au- thority ; also, that Christian baptism and circumci- sion are identical. The great point we propose to make is tliis : All moral beings are in the name of the Holy Trinity and, for that reason, it cannot be necessarily wrong to induct such children into it, as is done in their baptism. To be in the name of another is to bear, or be called by, his name ; to be inducted into it is to re- ceive it as one's own. All moral beings, good and bad, are citizens of the kingdom of God in its most inclusive dimensions. While in its restricted sense, as generally described in the Bible, it includes only God and his loyal subjects ; in its widest sense it in- cludes all who owe allegiance to God as their right- 240 APPENDIX. fill sovereign. No rebellion, however wicked and permanent, absolves them from this their debt of allegiance. All the citizens of an earthly kingdom bear the name of their king. All Englishmen, loyal or dis- loyal, are " Victoria's subjects." That is the real and legitimate name of every one of them. In that their double name they bear the name " Victoria " as their queen ; they also bear the name " subjects " to distinguish themselves from her, as those under lier dominion. So all moral beings, holy or sinful, are " God's subjects." That is their true name, and, in bearing it, they bear his name. Every moral being, however much depraved, is " God's im- age." That is his real name, and, in bearing it, he bears his name. Every one, good or bad, is rightly designated as " God's child," and so bears his name. Children all bear the name of tlieir parents as their patronymic or surname ; so all the children of God in like manner bear his name. The names of God, as borne by his creatures, are always of a derivative form, or otherwise so qualified as to sharply distinguish them from those borne -by God alone. See Psalm 82:67; John 10:39. A disciple of Christ bears his name ; but, in doing so, he is not called Christ, but a Christian, or a Chris t-ite. So beings bearing God's name bear it in a derived form. If Queen Victoria were a perfectly absolute monarch, herself alone the entire govern- ment, — and if her reign ran back, and was to run for- ward, many ages, her subjects might, and doubtless would all, be called " Victorians " ; bearing her name APPENDIX. 241 rather than that of their country. That would be their true name. For a like reason all moral beings, without exception, bear the name of their divine sov- ereign — God. As the name of God is Father^ Son^ and Holy Sjm'it^ they actually bear that same name in a derived form. Speaking after the manner of men, they are Triune Godonians. We use this coined name, and we wish to do so most reverently, because it so exactly expresses the thought intended, and is so easily understood. AVe do not mean that they ever are, or should often be, literally addressed by it, but that they virtually are so designated. A man accepting the theology of Calvin may never have been called a Calvinist, but he is one and that is his true name all the same. If the name Calvinist had never been spoken nor known, the adherents of Cal- vin would so bear his name notwithstandine. What we have just said is, as it seems to us, con- firmed in Psalm 82 : 6, 7. Men are there rightly called gods, because they are all sons of the Most High. But their name is evidently a derived one, equiva- lent to godites. The Psalmist points them to their glorious name as the sons of God ; but, at the same time, seeks to keep them humble, by assuring them that they shall die like men. That of the Triune God borne by all, is, and ever must be, a most holy name in the case of every moral being, good or bad. The most wicked neither do nor can impair its holiness in the least ; but they may and do cast upon it dishonor corresponding, in its magnitude, to their wickedness. Christ, as God, confers upon it infinite honor by his divine character 17 242 APPENDIX. and works. With him it is original, not derived. As man he by the same means honors it as it could not possibly be by any created being. It is, also, a name imposing great and fearful responsibilities upon every moral being, because bearing it. It demands a corresponding holy life and character. The great calling of every one is to honor and make glorious by his life and character, that holy name which he bears ; not to glory in it with selfish pride, but to glorify it with unselfish regard for the name as worth}^ of all the glory which can possibly be bestowed upon it. In striving to do this, he has for his justification and blessedness the example of his God himself, who is ever striving to glorify his own name. This is one of the great motives of his being, for the reason that its glory greatly contributes to its infinite power for good. The more his creatures see its glory, the more influential for their good it becomes to them. When the Psalmist prayed " quicken me for thy name's sake," he appealed to one of the strongest and holi- est passions of his divine nature. A being constantly growing in likeness to God, decks that holy name which he bears witli new robes of honor and glory, and, in that sense, makes it a new name every day. A sinful man by becoming a Christian, so transforms it, in its attire, that it be- comes in that sense preeminently a new one to him — the old one clad in its filthy rags forced upon it, re- clothed in garments clean and most comely. He has entered into a new name. The Bible enjoins baptism, as, like circumcision. APPENDIX. 243 a symbol of three, and only three, of all the classes of moral beings bearing that name, viz.: Christ, regen- erated men, and their covenant children. Christian baptism, therefore, symbolizes its subjects as bearing that name, and in so doing, also, necessarily symbol- izes those characteristics of theirs which make them proper subjects of it. (1). It symbolizes Christ as bearing it in common with all moral beings, and, also, as the divine Son of God. As the Son of man it symbolizes all involved in his work of redemption. (2). It symbolizes regenerated men as bearing that name of God in common with all moral beings. It also symbolizes that new birth of theirs by which their previous dishonoring that holy name, borne by them, was changed into its being greatly honored and made a new one b}^ their changed characters and lives. It also symbolizes that work of Christ and the Hol}^ Spirit, through which that cliange was secured. Their baptism, therefore, is an initiation into that old name made over in new attire b}^ them through the grace of God. (3). It symbolizes the covenant children of believers as bearing that same common name. Most of those thus symbolized are non- believing children. In their case it also symbolizes their promised new birth and their future honoring and making new that holy name which they bear. It also symbolizes their parental consecration, the covenant promises secured for them, etc. It also S3aubolizes that work of Christ and the Holy Spirit upon which those promises rest. Now we ask: Where is the necessarily wrong in this? It cannot be thus wrong to pronounce them 244 APPENDIX. as bearing that name which they are, and always must be, bearing ; no more so than it could be to pronounce them as bearing the image of God, which they do, as confessed by all. These two cases are, as it seems to us, exactly parallel, and as none will deny its rightfulness in the one, there can be no inherent wrong in the other, and so it may be right- fully enjoined by God. It cannot be inherently wrong to set forth, by symbol, their promised new birth, parental consecration, covenant promises re- specting them, the related work of Christ, etc. True, the baptism given to them does not, in all respects, express the same things as when given to believers ; neither does it, as given to the latter, ex- press the same things in all respects as when given to Christ. But as that confessedly constitutes no objection in the one case, it need not in the other. There are no false statements made nor involved. It is not pretended that they are in the name of the Triune God as believers, but as moral beings, and as the children of the covenant, which is certainly true of them. If the views whicli have here been maintained are correct, as we think they are, then a great and a very formidable apparent objection to Infant Baptism, viz., that it inducts non-believing children into the holy name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, of which so much is made, is entirely destitute of validity, and need not in the least shake our confi- dence in the Scriptural authority of the rite. We regard this objection to Infant Baptism, founded upon the baptismal formula, as a very APPENDIX. 245 'serious one. That formula certainly pronounces them in the name of the Holy Trinity. If they are not in it, then a falsehood is involved. It affirms what is not true. It seems, on the face of it, strange and unaccountable that such children should be bap- tized into that sacred name, with the necessary im- plication that they remain in it all through life, whether or not they ever become believers. If a failure to become such in after life takes them out of that name, it would seem to follow that their not being such should have prevented their entering it when children. All thoughtful and candid Pedo-baptists, who have thoroughly studied the true nature and force of this objection, must be deeply impressed with its formid- able character. They must feel themselves under the necessit}^ of showing a sense in which they ac- tually do bear that name, which shall satisfy the demands of reason and Scripture. This we have endeavored to do in this appendix. We need not be a prophet, nor the son of a prophet, to predict, with conscious certainty, that some, perhaps many, Pedo-baptists will be dissatisfied with the sense here given, and reject it. To such we tender our best wishes in their search for a better one. Let the reader not fail to perceive that the objec- tion does not depend upon the soundness of this appendix for its refutation. It is completely refuted by an analogy drawn from teaching such children to pray, as we have before shown. At the same time, the appendix, if sound, is of great importance in the case, because it explains, in a different way and 246 APPENDIX. more at length, how they may be baptized into that holy name. The analogy shows it not inherently wrong because substantially the same as teaching them to pray ; but the appendix seeks to show the same by giving the formula an unusual interpreta- tion, and, if successful, can but be of great impor- tance. If unsuccessful, then that from the analogy remains unshaken and sufficient. APPENDIX B. For of Such is the Kingdom of Heaven. There are those who interpret Christ's words : " For of such is the kingdom of heaven," as teaching that all little children are literally citizens of that kingdom, and from this infer that all of them are, of themselves, entitled to baptism, irrespective of the agency and character of their parents. We admit that this inference comes logically from their inter- pretation, but we think the latter an incorrect one. Little children, because of their negative innocence, diminutive physical size, and strength, and instinc- tively confiding spirit, are indeed very charming and impressive symbols of those who are positively inno- cent, little and weak in their own esteem, triumph- antly trusting in God. For that reason all in the kingdom, not excepting angels, archangels, and Christ himself, are such little children as he took up and blessed. They are such for a like reason that God is a " rock," a " sun," etc., because of their re- semblance at some few points.^ ^But to have Christ say that those infants (Luke 13 : 15) were literally citizens of that kingdom, is to make him say what could not be true. No one too young to be a moral being, can be. That kingdom is made up wholly of 1 The smitten Rock of the Wilderness was Christ— a symbol of Him; and Christ was that Rock. That Rock followed the Children of Israel in all their Wilderness wanderings— not the literal Rock, but the Christ symbolized by it, followed them. 1 Cor. 10: 4. 248 APPENDIX. moral beings. Children are prospective citizens of God's kingdom in its h^oad sense, as including all those who owe allegiance to God as their rightful king — all moral beings, both good and bad — and will become real ones when they come to be moral beings. Those who will, in the future, become believers, are prospective members, in its restricted scriptural sense, as including only loyal ones, and will become real citizens of it when they come to believe, but not before. The kingdom of heaven, as defined by Christ, is made up solely of the poor in spirit, those persecuted for righteousness' sake, and all those alone, who possess, to some degree, a like character. As God's creation, they can and do bear his name ; but, not being moral beings, they cannot be citizens of that kingdom which Christ recognized as not of the world, but as those chosen out of the world. We do not believe that the disciples, in their re- buking, intended any unkindness, or did that which most good men would not have done. They acted through misapprehension. They may have objected to their thus bringing their children because an un- usual proceeding, or because of the Saviour's weari- ness, or to guard against his interruptions in his teachings, or becawse the mothers seemed to them weak minded, and their proceedings to have an air of silliness. Doubtless there was some degree of super- stition in what they did — a feeling that his touch would have a magic effect. But whatever the facts and however repulsive to the disciples, not so with the blessed Saviour. To his heart of infinite tender- ness, and his unlimited breadth of view, those fond APPENDIX. 249 mothers were not beneath his notice nor their efforts to come to him with their chiklren out of place. He, therefore, kindly rebuked his rebuking disciples and took up the little ones in his arms and blessed them, as charming symbols of all those in his kingdom. Suppose there had been, in that same gathering, some demented, aged women who made a fetish of mustard seed, always carrying it with them and ob- trusively showing it to all they met. Suppose them holding it out to Christ for his blessing and asking him to put his hands upon it. We venture the opin- ion that he would not have approved of any rebuke made by any one, but would, in tender sympathy, have bidden them welcome ; taking it and putting his hand upon it, because thus giving them pleasure — their happiness his happiness. We feel certain that he would have said, reprov- ingly, to any one rebuking them : '' Suffer them to bring their loved mustard to me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven. Have not I, myself, in parable, held it up as a symbol of that kingdom ? " As we picture to ourselves the supposed touching scene, we hear him, in the joy of his heart, responding : "Father, I thank thee that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight." Anything and everything picturing to him that king- dom, dearer to him than the apple of his eye, was un- speakably precious. He saw in the apparently so trivial offering of these weak sisters, a glad symbolic prophecy of all men bringing their most costly heart- offerings to him as their sovereign king. 250 APPENDIX. Not that they had the remotest conception of the significance of their seed and of their bringing it, as interpreted by him, yet they pictured it, all the same, and, therefore, were so unspeakably pleasing. The idea has been derived from the words of Christ now under consideration, that children dying in infancy and going to heaven, as we believe they all do, remain permanently as children, in it. This idea is expressed in a favorite hymn, commencing : " Around the throne of God in heaven, Thousands of children stand." But this hj^mn was designed to express a child's idea of heaven. Viewed as a child's poetic fancy, the thought is unobjectionable and very pleasing, but as a reality, it is shocking. The glory of heaven is that it is a place of growth very far more rapid than that upon eai'th ; that an infant child entering it, leaps up to the maturity of a man in tlie flesh in a very short time. A mother fondling her little babe is most happy in its littleness, but let her know that it is always to remain so, and her joy is at once turned into grief too great to be borne. The great charm of little infants is that they are germs of an immediate, never-ceasing and ever-increasing development. When the Saviour would show his Avrangling dis- ciples that greatness consisted in humility, he took a little child and set him in their midst. He did this not because children are any more humble than those older, but solely because it was little in stature and, as such, a true picture of those who esteem them- selves small and unworthy, and delight, most of all, APPENDIX. 251 in ministering to others as better than themselves. He would have set forth precisely the same truth by holding up before them a little bit of gold or silver, or a grain of sand ; but the gold one would be more attractive than that of silver and sand, and the little child very far more attractive than that of gold, be- cause of its intrinsic charms. The Saviour was re- markable for the use of the most pleasing symbols in all his teachings. Sentiment unrestrained by reason has had altogether too much to do in the interpretation of these passages relating to little children which we have been consid- ering. APPENDIX C. The Mode Question in a Nutshell. Decisive Testimony of the Last Command of Christ. —Mark 16: 15,16. Baptists maintain that immersion is absolutely essential to a baptism ; that, without it there cannot be a real one. Upon this claim they justify their denominational separation from many other evan- gelical bodies. They must make and maintain this claim, as that alone can justify their exclusive posi- tion. If there may be and are valid baptisms without immersion, then it is possible that they may, in some instances at least, have other equivalent modes. Take away this their claim, and you remove one of the most essential foundation rocks upon which the denomination rests, so far as the mode question is concerned. This will not be denied, but cheerfully confessed, by Baptists themselves. It is the purpose of this appendix to show that the last command of Christ disproves this their claim. In that command Christ bids his disciples : " Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be con- demned." He gives both the positive and negative side of that part which sets forth the conditions of the salvation offered. He announces both the re- ward of rightly receiving their message, and the APPENDIX. 253 penalty of rejecting it. The antithesis is very em- phatic. The last clause is elliptical, and the ellipsis must be supplied. The two antithetic clauses, filled out, read thus : " He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ; but he that believeth not, and is not baptized, shall be condemned." It is in accordance with universal usage thus to shorten, by ellipsis, the second member of an antithe- sis when the full first one makes evident what is omitted. The supposition that he did not mention baptism in the second member because it is not essential to salvation makes his statement of the conditions very infelicitous, not to say bungling. Why did he not, for the same reason, omit baptized in the first? According to that supposition, the second and shorter interprets the first and fuller — a palpable reversal of universal usage. To our minds, the most natural, the most in accordance with usage, and the only legitimate rendering of the two ver- bally differing clauses as in harmony, is the one here given. The command, then, makes baptism actually essen- tial to salvation. Those, and only those who in faith receive the baptism there enjoined, shall be saved ; none others can be ; no exceptions made nor allowed. Now nothing can be more certain and undisputed in evangelical bodies than that immersion is not essen- tial to salvation. That many die and go to heaven who never have been immersed is admitted by all. They must, therefore, have received in some way that enjoined baptism which Christ made essential to 254 APPENDIX. salvation. It follows that immersion, not being essential to salvation, cannot be essential to that baptism in the cominand which is essential to it. If not essential to salvation, it cannot be essential to anything which is essential to the same. It may be a symbol of it, but it cannot be an essential part. It should be remembered that Christ's mind was always upon the substance pictured by a form, and used the latter simply as a name or photograph of the former. " This cup is my blood." With him, baptism was the washing of regeneration, and an}^ form express- ing it, simply a mirror. It always occurred at the time of conversion. One, when becoming a believer, at the same time received baptism — the washing of regeneration ; and the outward form, afterwards administered, was only an impressive picture of what had previously taken place. For this reason Christ puts believing and baptism together, as both alike essential to salvation. In view of what we have now learned, the two clauses may read thus : He that believeth and receiveth that baptism wliich is symbolized by bap- tismal water (bating exceptional cases) shall be saved, but he that believeth not, and does not receive that baptism, shall be condemned. Again (in deference to Baptist preferences): He that believeth and receiveth that baptism, which, in all future time, is to be symbolized by immersion (bating exceptional cases) shall be saved ; but he that does not believe and does not receive it shall be con- demned. Once more : He that believeth and receiveth that baptism which is now usually symbol- APPENDIX. 255 ized by immersion (this form to be changed as the circumstances of exceptional cases and those of com- ing ages shall demand) shall be saved ; but he that does not believe and receive it shall be condemned. We incline to the opinion that this last rendering accurately expresses the mind of Christ. We think it most probable that immersion was generally, not exclusively, practised in Christ's time, and that he had that form in view as the one for use in the imme- diate future when he gave the command. But the whole tenor of all his teachings and doings makes us certain that he looked upon the form as changeable with circumstances, and wished his disciples, of all times, to look u^^on it in tlie same way. The advocates of immersion, as the onl}^ admissi- ble mode, in all times and places, protest against any change in any case as always sinful ; but, as a matter of fact, the most strenuous of them, in this respect, do make in it the most radical change possible. In some cases they entirely set aside immersion. They do not immerse one sick and near unto death, right in the hearing of Christ's voice, to him. If you are not baptized, you shall he condemned. They thus set it aside, not only when it would be fatal to life, but also when it would be onl}^ greatly inconvenient. In most such cases they might, by taking sufficient pains, safel}^ give immersion. They could build a baptistry in tlie sick-room, make the water of the requisite temperature, and with the help of several strong, yet gentle, hands, immerse one when close to the gates of death without harm. But they rightly do not baptize such, simply and only on the score of 256 APPENDIX. great inconvenience. Thus to set aside a form, is to inflict the greatest change conceivable — from some- thing aivay down to notJiing. If immersion is abso- lutely essential to the baptism here enjoined by Christ, and by him made essential to salvation, then it ought to be administered to all such at whatever cost of effort. It ought to be, even if certain that death will immediately follow in consequence. Infi- nitely better to lose this life than the immortal soul. But this is not the only most radical change which Baptists make in divinely-appointed ordinances. They set aside the sacrament of the Lord's Supper in the case of all such; — change a great and most holy feast to nothing. They do not give the consecrated bread and cup, of which all Christ's disciples are re- quired to partake, to those from whom they with- hold immersion because of great mconvenience. If the symbol of baptism can, without sin, be given such a most radical change for convenience's sake, it is difhcult to see why those far less radical may not, for a like reason, be rightly given it. As we have learned our blessed Lord, and so knowing him to delight in mercy rather than in sacrifice, we are com- pelled to believe him exceedingly well pleased with this change by Baptists, in the case of baptism (not the supper), because a serious inconvenience, and -also the much less ones by those who pour or sprinkle. God, as a Father of infinite kindness, does not take delight in the inconveniences borne by his children simply as such. He imposes no penances for the purpose of inflicting purif3dng sufferings, excepting APPENDIX. 257 as they come naturally and unavoidably to tliem when doing his work. He rejoices to have them take the most convenient way in performing the ser- vice assigned them. It may be that some will object that the genuine- ness of the paragraph in Mark, containing this com- mand, is disputed. But the same conclusion comes from other rightly-interpreted passages of undis- puted genuineness. Christ said to Nicodemus : If a man experiences that new birth which is symbol- ized by water and is the work of the Spirit, he can see, and will enter into, the kingdom of God; but if he does not experience the same, he cannot see, and will not enter into, that kingdom. Again, Peter said to the conscience-stricken Jews : Repent and receive that baptism which will here be symbolized by immersion, in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost ; but if you do not repent and do not receive that baptism, ye shall not receive that gift. Still another: The command of Paul to the terrified jailor, filled out, reads thus : Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and receive that baptism which is symbolized by baptismal water, and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house ; but if you do not believe and do not receive that baptism, you will not be saved, etc. It seems to us that each and every one of these three passages unite with the great command of Christ in making baptism essential to salvation, and justify our contention that immersion, not being es- sential to it, cannot be essential to the baptism here 18 258 APPENDIX. enjoined by Christ ; also that the fact that the most radical change possible of its immersion-form, for convenience's sake, is rightly made by Baptists, jus- tifies, as not necessarily wrong, the less radical ones made use of by those who pour or sprinkle. Note.— On page 3, the page heading should be " Preliminary State- ments." On page 95, twelfth line from the top, the figure (1) should be in the preceding line before " To be their God." On page 163, foot-note, "Appendix B " should be "Appendix C." SUBJECTS. Abrahamic Church, 80-93, 129; Covenant, 94-98: Symbol, 99- 102. Adamic Church, 108; Covenant, 108; Symbol, 110. Baptist Pedo-baptists— All Baptists who faithfully consecrate their children and train them for God's service, 225, 226. Baptized— Certain Fathers not in infancy, 222, 223; Children into the name of the Trinity, 239-246. Binding Others— Rightly done in every baptism, both adult and infant, 8-12; in numerous other cases, 9-13; the fun- damental principle. 11. Bow in the Cloud — Xoachian Covenant Symbol, 114, 115. Case — A Supposed one, illustrative, 36-47. Child, a baptized one — All the obligations of a believer im- posed, 6; solemnly bound, 2-8; not a member of the church, 196, 199; in endearing relations to it, 199. Child of God— Xot entitled to baptism simply as such, 204. Circumcision — Abrahamic Covenant Symbol, 99-101; its two distinct functions, 80; its definitions, 99-101. Common— To all believers, 90, 91 (foot-note), 92, 99, 101; the essential features of all divine ordinances are, 91 (foot- note). Christian Church, 131-143; Covenant, 140, 148; Symbol, 149-159. Coincidences — Incidental ones, 179; a remarkable one, 179-184. Council— At Jerusalem, 163, 169; bearing of its proceedings, 169-170. Degeneracies and reformations alternating, 'tO=^80r / IL !< / -L3^ Discipline— In Abrahamic Church, 77, 126, 127. Disparagement — Of Circumcision by Paul, 171, 172. Drama in Two Scenes — Illustrative, 36-47. Evil Tendencies — True of all ordinances, 50, 51. Faith— Absolutely essential to a valid baptism, 6, 7, 17; a valid church membership, 18, 19; a valid citizenship in the state, 80, 81. Family*- A composite, not an ultimate, unit in church or state, 98; a divinely organized community, 89; a believing one a church in miniature, 89; family element modified, 140, 141. 260 SUBJECTS. Females — Virtually circumcised, 152, 153; the form merged into that of the males, 152, 153. Forms — Of Abrahamic Institutions, 187; their mission in the Christian Age, 187, 189. Genuine Pedo-baptists — Their high Christian character, 225; historic object lessons, 225. Immersion — Not essential to a valid baptism, 252-253. Infant Baptism— Its theory, etc., 1-4; not inherently wrong, 5-25; most useful, 25-51. Infant Communion — Its apostolic origin, claimed by Augus- tine, not sufficiently confirmed, 222. Inferences — From universality of moral precepts, 58-65. Kingdom of Heaven— As defined by Christ, 133-137; by the author, 137, 138; the Kingdom of Heaven v/ithin you, 138, 139. Lawmakers — Every man by right a lawmaker and governor, 11-13. Mode-Question— In a nutshell, 252, 258. Moral Precepts— Their substance universal benevolence, 55, 56; their forms changeable, 57; binding always and every- where, 60; never done away, 58, 59; their universality, 56, 57. Observance — Not observed by many in Pedo-baptist churches, 234. Noachian Church, 113; Covenant, 113; Symbol, 114. Ordinances — Simply organized forms of ordinary experiences, 116-119; their germ seeds, 116, 117. Parents — Their part in the rite, 7; their conflict with Satan, 32, 33; eleventh chapter of Hebrews, 33. Parties — In a baptism, 7, 18. Peculiar People, God's Abrahamic, have all the essential features of a church, 89-91. Persistency and Constancy of Physical Force — Illustrative, 57, 58. Principles — Two coordinate ones, 17, 18; a fundamental one of moral government, 11, 12. Proof Texts, 32-54; proselyte baptisms, 185, 186. Protestantism — Its grand principles not violated, 18, 203. Questions — Twelve practical ones, 195-206. Reason — Argument from, 5-51. Rejection — By a few in the earlier centuries, now widespread, 230, 231. SUBJECTS. 261 Results— Great and good, 26-29; sometimes sadly disappoint- ing, 30-36. Rite— As affected by claims of Higher Criticism, 120, 121, 206. Separation, between believing and non-believing; church — Line of, 76-80, 126, 127; its historical development, 141. Serpents— Universal aversion for, 110; the Adamic covenants symbol, 110, 111. Symbols— A universal necessity, 104, 105; the Adamic and Noachian not administered to their persons, 112-115. Transitions— Wise and kind ones, 191, 193; orchard analogy, 193, 194. Treatise — A satisfactory one the great necessity of the rite, 234, 235. Unitj'^ — Organic, 64; of all moral precepts, 64; analogy from that of the physical universe, 64, 65. Universality— Of moral precepts and institutions, 55-56; of all the Jewish sacrificial precepts, 62, 63. Usefulness — Very great, 26-51. Voyage at sea— Illustrative, 179-184. Washing— The feet of Judas by Christ, 20-23. Wrong — Not inherently so, 5-25. AUTHORS AND WRITINGS QUOTED. Apostolic Fathers, 208, 209; Arnold, Dr. A. J., 225; Augustine, 221, 222. Basil the Great, 219. Chrysostom, 220; Cyprian, 217. Dana, Professor, 64, 65. Gregory Nazianzen, 217, 218. Hill, Dr. Thomas, 63. Hovey, Prof. Alva, 131. Irenaeus, 210, 211. Jerome, with others not baptized in infancy, 222, 223; Justin Martyr, 209. Knapp, 186, 187. Mckeen, Dr., 15, 16; Mclaren, Dr., 147. Neander, 226-230. Origen, 213-217. Pelagius, 220, 221. Smith, Dr. W., 186; Sunday- School Times, 73, 74, 147. Teachings of the Apostles, 109, 110; Tertullian, 111-113. Wiberg, 209, 217, 222; Williams, Roger, 15, 16.