-^^^MwFPRMi^ 
 
 BV 811 .H689 1858 
 Hodges, William, d. 1881? 
 Baptism tested by scripture 
 and history 
 
BAPTISM 
 
 BY SCRIPTUEE AND HISTOEY ; 
 
 THE TEACHIXG OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, AXD THE PRACTICE AND 
 TEACHING OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH IN EVERY AGE SUC- 
 CEEDING THE APOSTOLIC, COMPARED IN RELATION 
 TO THE SUBJECTS AND MODES OF BAPTISM. 
 
 BY THE 
 
 REV. WILLIAM HODGES, A. M., 
 
 RKCTOR OF TRINITY CHURCH, COVINGTON, KENTUCKT. 
 
 SECOND EDITION, REVISED AND ENLARGED 
 
 •Prove all things: hold fast that which is ffood."— St. Pacl, 
 
 PHILADELPHIA : 
 
 H. HOOKER & CO., PUBLISHERS^ AND BOOKSELLERS, 
 
 S. W. CORNER CHESTNUT AND EIGHTH STREETS. 
 
 1858. 
 
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1858, by 
 
 H. HOOKER & CO., 
 
 iu the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern 
 District of Pennsylrania. 
 
 HENRY B. ASHMKAD, BOOK AM) JOE PKIXTEII, 
 
 George Street above Eleventh 
 
PREFACE 
 
 The second edition of this work comes before tlic public revised 
 and much enlarged. Besides new proofs of the authority of Infant 
 Baptism, and a more thorough examination of its' relations to Cir- 
 cumcision, the Mode or Modes of Baptism, Imve been added, and 
 further investigation of the rise and progress of the Baptist Church 
 and Baptist principles. 
 
 The general plan and arrangement of the book are the same. The 
 Baptism of Infants is traced, first, to the Apostolic Age. The laws 
 of interpretation are then discussed, and the use and application of 
 the word baptism and kindred words b}- the Apostles, and by writers 
 of the next age, compared. 
 
 In treating of the Modes of Baptism, concerning which Baptists 
 change their mode of argument from a negative to a positive kind, 
 they are met on their own ground ; and first, the application and 
 meaning of the word Baptism as used by New Testament writers, are 
 considered ; second, the precepts and examples of Christ and his 
 Apostles ; third, the figurative language and allusions in the New 
 Testament ; and fourth, the use of language and teaching of Apos- 
 tolic men and their successors. 
 
 The author having devoted much time to the study of these sub- 
 jects, and read all the works that he could obtain in the American 
 
 1* 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 market that treat particularly upon them, without regard to names 
 or shades of faith, has used the information thus acquired in the way 
 which he supposed would develop most clearly and enforce most 
 successfully the truth. 
 
 And although he has made free use of the information obtained 
 from every legitimate source, he has always given credit to the pro- 
 per authorities, when conscious of using their own words, or of ex- 
 pressing his views in similar language. 
 
 He has not regarded the effects of Baptism as coming within the 
 purview of his legitimate work, and ha^ therefore cited the testimony 
 and doctrines of writers bearing on points at issue, irrespective of 
 their shibboleths, leaving to others to draw their own inferences. 
 And whilst he hop.es his readers will follow the order marked out for 
 them, he would call the attention of mothers particularly to the latter 
 portion of the eighth chapter, and that of his Baptist brethren to the 
 closing part of the book. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 ARE LITTLE CHILDREN EMBRACED IN THE TERMS OF THE CHRISTIAN 
 COVENANT ? . 
 
 Preliminary Remarks — Nature of the Testimony — Removal of ex- 
 traneous matter — State of the Question — Point at issue — Prin- 
 ciples of Interpretation— Practice of all Ancient Churches — 
 Origin of Antipedobaptists— Infant Baptism traced— Constantly 
 referred to in the Pelagian Controversy — Admitted to be the 
 Rule of the Universal Church by Pelagius and Celestius — 
 Council of Carthage, 214 Bishops present — Council of Milevium 
 — Synodical Letter from Africa 13 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 HISTORICAL TESTIMONY CONTINUED. 
 
 Testimony of Council of Carthage — Aurelius — Donatists — Chrysos- 
 tom — Baptism, Christian Circumcision — Original sin — Benefits 
 of Baptism — Jerome — Augustine — Ambrose — Optatus — Nazi- 
 anzen — Basil — Council of Eliberis — Council of Carthage, 66 
 Bishops present, Cyprian presiding — Tertullian _ - - 38 
 
Vlll CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 HISTORICAL TESTIMONY CONTINUED. 
 
 Origen born of Christian parents — His piety, learning and travels 
 — His declaration that Infant Baptism is the usage of the whole 
 Church, handed down by the Apostles — Care of early Christians 
 to preserve the true faith — Ireneus hearer of Polycarp, the 
 pupil of St. John — His zeal for Apostolic usage — Use of the 
 term regeneration, and testimony to the Baptism of all ages — 
 Agreement of various sects on this pont — Interpretation of St. 
 John iii. 5, and Titus iii. 5------- 71 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 TESTIMONY HISTORICAL AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL. 
 
 Testimony of Justin Martyr, born at the close of the Apostolic age, 
 in the midst of Christians — Many baptized in childhood — 
 Gentile Christians received circumcision in baptism — Interpre- 
 tation of Col. ii. 11, 12— Clemens Romauus — All ages corrupt, 
 and remedy provided before. born, or necessity of putting all 
 into a new state — Hermas — Necessity of baptism to all — In- 
 fants, and those who continvie Infants without malice, most 
 honorable of all — Interpretation of St. John iii. 5 — Christian 
 Church organized before New Testament written — Infant Bap- 
 tism before New Testament canon settled— Universal in the 
 next age after the Apostles — Improbability of so notable an in- 
 novation without opposition in that period — The adherence to 
 " the one only faith" by Polycarp, Ireneus and Christians im- 
 mediately succeeding the Apostles— Summary of historical and 
 circumstantial evidence - - - - -- - - ^7 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 RELATION OF BAPTISM TO CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 A church on earth Avhen Christ came— The temple and synagogue 
 services — Preceded by the Tabernacle with its altar, mercy seat 
 and consecrated ministers — preceded by the Abraham ic and 
 patriarchial dispensations— Circumcision the outward token of 
 
CONTENTS. IX 
 
 the Abrahamic covenant, sealing spiritual and temporal promises 
 — Abraham made the father of a spiritual seed, in virtue of 
 being at the head of a covenant bearing the seal of the righte- 
 ousness of faith — This covenant perpetual — Mosaic dispensa- 
 tion added to it — Circumcision continued to the coming of 
 Christ, " the promised seed" — The change of the seal from cir- 
 cumcision to baptism did not affect the right of Infants — The 
 law for their membership having not been repealed, they have 
 the same claim to baptism that they had to circumcision — 
 Baptism called Chris.tian circumcision by primitive Christians 
 — Held the same place in the same church while circumcision 
 has passed away 134 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 RELATION OF CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM, CONCLUDED. 
 
 St. Paul's definition of circumcision — Exposition of the moral law 
 under Moses — Old Testament appealed to by Christ and his 
 Apostles — Transfer of the kingdom — Branches of the wild olive 
 grafted into the good olive tree — Strangers and foreigners made 
 fellow- citizens with the saints — New and better covenant — 
 New and old, comparative terms — Basis of the Christian 
 Church — Gentiles brought in with Jews — Faith of parents avail 
 for their children — Hannah — Nobleman — ^Woman of Canaan — 
 Religion always a family thing — Baptism on the faith of the 
 parent — Syriac version of the Holy Scriptures . - . 160 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 The Grand Commission to the Apostles to baptize all nations — 
 True principles of Interpretation— Infants had been always 
 members of the Church, and no restriction now made in regard to 
 them — Jewish practice with Proselytes — Talmud and Mishna — 
 Objection to baptizing before teaching, answered — The Church 
 a School — Objection to the want of faith in little Children, 
 answered — Christ's treatment of little children shows they were 
 not to be regarded as "aliens and strangers" to his kingdom — 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 True rendering "of such is the kingdom of God" — The promise 
 to children repeated in the first sermon under the Gospel Com- 
 mission — Family baptisms — Lydia and her children, the Jailer 
 and all his, and the family of Stephanus — Meaning of 01x05 
 *' house" — In the absence of demonstration, the greater pro- 
 bability, the law of action — Claims of duty between an old 
 established rite, and supposed error - _ _ _ - 179 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 TESTIMONY OP THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, CONCLUDED. 
 
 Laws of marriage among the Jews — The holy seed not allowed to 
 mingle with heathen nations — Such marriages dissolved in 
 times of reformation— Heathen wives and children put away — 
 Difficulties suggested in regard to " believing and unbelieving" 
 husbands and wives under the new dispensation — Ceremonial 
 law not applicable — Positive influence from believer on unbe- 
 liever fits the latter for their union, hence the children are holy 
 and not unclean — Holy and unclean always used in a ceremo- 
 nial or religious sense — Children numbered among the holy 
 and saints by St. Paul — Their parents instructed how to train 
 them — St. John divides the members of the Church into three 
 classes, fathers, young men and little children — Summary of 
 testimony — Earnest exhortation to the faithful training of our 
 little ones for Christ's spiritual kingdom 229 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 MODE OR MODES OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Meaning of "Words — Language of the New Testament — Septuagint, 
 and Jewish Customs — Divers Baptisms — Water of Separation — 
 Ritual Purifications — Oriental Washing — Baptism a Generic 
 Term — John's Baptism — Prophecies of Isaiah — Ezekiel — Ma- 
 lachi — Baptism of the Holy Ghost, poured out, shed forth or 
 fell upon, descended — Baptism applied to the various Ablutions 
 of the Ritual Law — No English Word will supply its place — 
 Immersion not its true meaning — No Mode implied in the 
 term — No Specific Directions in regard to it — Circumstances of 
 each case must be examined 280 
 
CONTENTS. XI 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 EXAMINATION OP THE MEANING AND MODES OP BAPTISM, CONTINUED. 
 
 John's Baptism — Prepositions " in," " into," and " out of," deter- 
 mine nothing — iEnon or Springs — Apostles baptized without 
 regard to circumstances — Baptism of three thousand — of the 
 Samaritans — of the Eunuch — of Saul — of Cornelius — of the 
 Jailer — of the Disciples at Ephesus — Mode indicated only by 
 the Spirit — End of Baptism — Christ the second Adam — Circum- 
 cision of Christ — Figurative allusions — Explanations — Sum- 
 mary of Scriptural testimony — Concluded with historical proof 
 of Baptism by different modes in every age of the Church since 
 the death of the Apostles - - - - - - -312 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 BAPTISM BY DIFFERENT MODES VALID IN EVERY AGE OP THE CHURCH. 
 
 At the time of the Reformation — Church of Geneva — at Mentz — 
 Council of Cologne — English Church — Lynwood's Constitution 
 — Wickliflfe — Langres — Synod of Angers — Thomas Aquinas — 
 Bonaventura — Strabo — Gennadius — Augustine — Chrysostom — 
 Jerome — Athanasius — Gregory Nazianzen — Basil — Baptism of 
 Constantino — Washing before Pouring — Cyprian — Lawrence 
 and Romanus — Novatian — Basilides — Origen — TertuUian — 
 Clemens Alexandrinus — Justin Martyr — Baptism of Christ — 
 Cataconab of Pontianus — Reasons for no prescribed Mode — 
 Essence and Incidents — Supper and Baptism — Greek Church — 
 Mar Yohannan — Examination of Principles — Summary - - 347 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 HISTORY OP THE BAPTIST CHURCH EXAMINED. 
 
 Modern Organization — Waldenses and their Faith — Albigenses — 
 Pierre De Bruys — Cathari — PAterini — Paulicians — Bulgari 
 Donatists — Novatians — Bede — Pelagius — Ancient Church of 
 Briton — Rome — Greece — Alexandria — Palestine — Coast of Mal- 
 abar— Rise of Antipedobaptists in Twelfth Century — Collected 
 together in 1521 — Munster taken in 1533 — Retaken next year — 
 Anabaptists Scattered — Rallied under Mano 1536 — Confession 
 of Faith published 1636— First Church, in England 1638— In 
 America 1639 — Present position and Concluding Remarks - 383 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 ARK LITTLE CHILDREN EMBUACED IN THE TERMS^ OF THE 
 CHRISTIAN COVENANT ? 
 
 Preliminary Remarks — Nature of the Testimony — Removal of extraneous 
 matter — State of the Question — Point at issue — Princijiles of Interpre- 
 tation — Practice of all Ancient Churches — Origin of Antipedobaptists — 
 Infant Baptism traced — Constantly referred to in the Pelagian Contro- 
 versy' — Admitted to be the Rule of the Universal Church by Pelagius 
 and Celestius — Council. of Carthage, 214 Bishops present — Council of 
 Milevium — Sjniodical Letter from Africa. 
 
 The ruling desire of every heart should be, to em- 
 brace the truth, only the trutli, and the ivhole truth con- 
 tained in the system of Religion taught by our Lord 
 Jesus Christ. No man has the right to erect for himself 
 a standard lower than this. Nor to reject any means, 
 within his reach, that will aid him in the attainment of 
 Gospel truth. The Holy Scriptures being our rule of 
 faith, our first duty is to endeavor to understand them. 
 
 When tiuo opposing doctrines are drawn from their 
 holy pages, it is certain that one is wrong. Both can- 
 not be right. Truth calls for an investigation of the 
 claims of each. The principles of interpretation on 
 which they depend should be examined^ and their true 
 meaning earnestly sought out. 
 
 How do men proceed in such cases witli other Annient 
 
14 PRELIMINARIES. 
 
 writings f All readers of the ancient classics know, 
 that in order to ascertain the entire meaning of passages 
 found on almost every page of such writings, we must 
 make ourselves acquainted with the customs, laws and 
 various institutions of the country and age of the writer. 
 And when called on to decide between the opposing in- 
 terpretations of Annotators, we bring to our aid all the 
 light that can be obtained /rom every source. Shall we 
 observe less care and diligence in the interpretation of 
 the ancient records of the Holy Scriptures ? Is it more 
 important to ascertain the full meaning of the ancient 
 classics, than the true intent of the writers of the Bible ? 
 Surely this will not be admitted ? What then ? Shall 
 we take for granted there is nothing in the Scriptures 
 "hard to be understood " — nothing but what is plain to 
 the most illiterate reader — and about which all men may 
 easily agree ? The Divine record itself^ as well as facts 
 numerous testify to the contrary. 
 
 On the subject of our present inquiry, the conduct of 
 many who call themselves Christians is truly lament- 
 able ! They take up the New Testament, read over the 
 English translation in a cursory manner, interpret it 
 without any regard to the circumstances under which the 
 events and teaching therein recorded took place, and not 
 finding the doctrine of Infant baptism taught in the way 
 which they had marked out for it in their own imagina- 
 tions, they discard it, and refuse to hear anything more 
 concerning it ! 
 
 In this way half of the doctrines of our holy religion 
 may be rejected. Aye, the tvliole Scriptures of both the 
 Old and Ncav ^IVstaments ; and hence, the wliole of oijr 
 
PRELIMINARIES. 15 
 
 religion ! Some even go so far as to presci'ibe ^^ a plain, 
 positive jjrecept or example,'' as necessary to their recep- 
 tion of this doctrine ! Such presumption need not be 
 noticed here, however, further than to ask — " Who hath 
 known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his 
 counselor?" Is it not his to command, and ours to 
 obey ? 
 
 A clearly implied duty is as binding, as one made 
 known in any other way. Our business in such cases, is 
 to examine testimony, not to prescribe ivliat kind it shall 
 be. Be it express or implied, direct or circumstantial, 
 we must hear it, and give it the authority to which it is 
 entitled. God, our Supreme Lawgiver, has the right to 
 teach us in any way that he pleases ; and if any truth 
 or duty be clearly implied in his holy word, it is at our 
 peril, that wd reject or neglect it. We are not permit- 
 ted to dictate the mode, in which He shall teach us. But 
 must thankfully receive his instructions in lohatever tvay 
 he may choose to give them. Thousands split on this 
 rock ! Hhej prescribe beforehand the tuay, in which In- 
 fant baptism must be made known — not remembering 
 that the Church was planted before the New Testament 
 Scriptures were written — that it was only necessary to 
 allude to many things because well known to all, at the 
 time — and that the Evangelical record is a very concise 
 statement of the sayings and doings of Christ and his 
 Apostles, preserving merely the seeds, for the future 
 use of the Church — we say, not bearing in mind these 
 things, they do not govern their expectations according- 
 ly, and hence not finding Infant baptism set forth in that 
 bold relief ^^\\\Q\\ they anticipated, they reject it, without 
 
16 PRELIMINARIES. 
 
 making a thorough examination of the subject. In the 
 same way the Jews rejected the Saviour ! They had 
 pictured in imagination, a royal personage in pomp and 
 splendor, to which the meek and lowly Jesus did not cor- 
 respond, when he came, and before examining sufficiently 
 to discover that He was the promised Messiah, they re- 
 jected him ! as others do now many of his doctrines ! 
 
 2. Another obstacle that stands in the way of an im- 
 partial examination of this question is, the want of clear 
 and definite vieivs of what is embraced in the inquiry. 
 Many associate with Infant baptism the mode of baptiz- 
 ing. Supposing the mode to be included in the ques- 
 tion at issue. As if young children could not be bap- 
 tized in any way, that you may baptize an adult. Again, 
 certain abuses that have been witnessed in the baptizing 
 of children, are often associated with the ordinance, as 
 if a part of the question itself — but what institutions 
 may not be abused ? 
 
 In order to enter, upon an impartial examination 
 of this question, all these obstacles must be removed. 
 The examiner should free his mind from all previous 
 bias /or or against Infant baptism; lay aside all pre- 
 conceived notions as to the hind and degree of evidence ; 
 remove from the question itself all extraneous matter, 
 and place before him the simple inquiry — " Is Infant 
 baptism a Divine Institution, or is it not ? 
 
 3. Bearing in mind these preliminaries, and thus re- 
 lieving the question of much unnecessary incumbrance — 
 we may next inquire into the state of the controversy. 
 For Infant baptism is not a question which has just be- 
 inm to be controverted. It has been in the field of 
 
PRELIMINARIES. 17 
 
 Theological warfare more than three centuries, and the 
 cause of occasional debate more than six. During the 
 last fifty years Antipedobapti^ts* have labored with 
 great zeal and energy to spread their principles in newly 
 settled countries, but they are yet few in number, com- 
 pared with those who baptize children. All the Ancient 
 Churches now In existence, without an exception, still 
 baptize Infants, and contend that the Apostles and their 
 successors did the same. And more than seven- eighths 
 of those bearing more modern names adhere to the same 
 rite ; for which they claim the authority of Scripture 
 and History ; and challenge the proof of a single sect 
 (which baptized at all,) that did not baptize little chil- 
 dren during the first thousand years of Christianity., 
 To all this, Antipedobaptists reply, — that although it 
 was the general custom of Christians to baptize Infants, 
 for a long series of years, it had its beginning after the 
 death of the Apostles — yet they admit that they do not 
 know in what way or at what particular time it was in- 
 troduced. 
 
 4. Such being the state of the case, we ask how shall 
 this controversy be settled ? It will perhaps be replied, 
 let both parties go to the Scriptures This they have 
 done, but difier in their interpretations on this point. 
 Various passages are pointed out by one party — saying, 
 " Here it Is commanded," " there it Is again implied" — 
 " that passage takes for granted the church-membership 
 of little children" — "this alludes to the same thing," — 
 and so on. But the other denying, refers them all to 
 something else. 
 
 * Now generally called Baptists. 
 
18 rilELIMINARIES. 
 
 Must they thus separate forever ? Always continue 
 In this state of opposition to each other ? Shall the 
 Church of Christ be thus rent in twain, and a schism 
 perpetuated to the end of time, notwithstanding the Sa- 
 viour himself prayed the Father, that his followers 
 might '^ all be one, as he and his Father were one?" 
 And when the Apostle Paul also, with so much earnest- 
 ness enjoins it on Christians that there should be no di- 
 visions among them? saying, '•^ Notu I beseech you, 
 brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye 
 all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions 
 among you, but that ye be verjectly joined together in the 
 same mind and in the same judgment.'"'^ Surely, if we 
 desire to obey the injunctions of Divine writ, ayc must 
 desire to see this controversy brought to a close. • And 
 if we love truth, if w^e love peace, if we love our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, we will avail ourselves of all lawful means 
 to find truth, preserve peace, and honor our blessed Re- 
 deemer. 
 
 5. Now there are principles of interpretation receiv- 
 ed and applied to other ancient writings, and likewise 
 to other portions of the Holy Scriptures, which, if ap- 
 plied to these disputed passages, will show on which side 
 the truth lies. There are also the writings of early 
 Christian authors, Avho lived in the next age after the 
 Apostles, that will aid us in this matter. Writers who 
 were members of the Church, and who devoted their 
 lives to the cause of Christ, suffering some of them, even 
 unto death in defence of the Gospel. Shall we hesitate 
 to consult them on this point — whether so notable a thing 
 
 * 1 Cor. i. 10. 
 
rRELlxMl.XAKIES. 19 
 
 as Infant baptism was practiced in their day? Whether 
 a public ordinance of the Church, about which they 
 could not be deceived, was then observed ? Surely not. 
 They had eyes as well as we : they had memories too. 
 And if pious, conscientious men, why refuse their testi- 
 mony to that which is the object of the senses and of 
 public notoriety ? If they speak of the baptizing of 
 young children in their writings, why not believe they 
 speak the truth in this, as in other things ? Is it to be 
 presumed, they would refer to a thing which had no ex- 
 istence ? And if we cannot trust to their testimony on 
 a point of this kind, how shall we trust their testimony 
 in regard to the different books of the New Testament ? 
 To whose writings do we now appeal in support of the 
 genuineness of each book?* To the same which we now 
 propose as witnesses to Infant baptism. And what in- 
 ducement could they have had to deceive us in regard to 
 an ordinance of our religion, that did not operate in re- 
 gard to the books of the same ? They were as well 
 qualified — even better qualified, to testify to a public 
 practice like Infant baptism, than to the authenticity of 
 the different manuscripts sent to the various churches. 
 And therefore, consistency, as well as love for the truth 
 require, that if we receive their testimony to the one, 
 we should to the other also. We are obliged to receive 
 it as to the Scriptures — how then can we reject it as to 
 Infant baptism ? And here we remark for such as have 
 not for themselves drawn the distinction — that there is a 
 wide difference between the testimony of early Chris- 
 tians to facts, and their mere opinion as to doctrines. 
 
 * This subject will be discussed in another place. 
 
"20 PRELIMINARIES. 
 
 We may receive the former and give it all the credit of a 
 qualified witness, whilst the latter should be received as 
 we receive the opinion of other Christians, making due 
 allowance for the advantages of time, place, and other 
 circumsta*nces.* Respect is due the opinions and com- 
 mentaries of early Christians, because from their near- 
 ness to the Apostles, they possessed many facilities 
 of ascertaining their teachings which we do not. But 
 the testimony of the Fathers as to facts must be regard- 
 ed as something more than the mere opinions of good 
 men, — must be received as valid testimony to the truth 
 to which they depose. Just as we regard the testimony 
 of Christians in this day concerning the practices of 
 their respective Churches. Will anyone say, that some 
 hundreds of years hence, the writings of the Bishops 
 and other ministers of Christian Churches must not be 
 consulted, when trying to find out the rites and religious 
 services of the respective Churches to which they be- 
 longed ? If, for instance, there should be found at that 
 time, in the writings of the ministers of the Episcopal, 
 Presbyterian, Methodist and other Churches, accounts 
 of the baptizing of young children, shall it be objected, 
 such testimony cannot be received as to the practice of 
 
 ■^ On this point a living author remarks as follows : — " Another re- 
 mark which I would here offer is, that we draw a wide distinction be- 
 tween the value of the testimony of the Fathers as to doctrines and 
 the oral teaching of the Apostles, and their testimony as to those 
 matters of fact, that came under their immediate cognizance. It is 
 important to keep this in view, because the value of human testimony 
 is very different in one of those cases to what it is in the other. The 
 value of a man's testimony to a fact that takes place under his own 
 eye, or to a matter that is the ol^ject of the senses, is very different to 
 that of his report of an oral statement, especially with respect to mat- 
 ters of doctrine." — Goode's JJivinc Hide of Faith and rraciice. 
 
PRELIMINAllIES. 21 
 
 those Churches ? No one will say this. "Why then ob- 
 ject to the testimony of the same kind of men on the 
 same subject in the earlier days of Christianity ? It 
 cannot be done by consistent, impartial lovers of truth. 
 When such writings have been examined and believed to 
 be genuine,* and are received as testimony on other 
 points, we must receive them on this likewise. And 
 when all men shall be brought to take an enlightened 
 and correct view of this question, and shall search after 
 truth from a love of it, they will gladly avail themselves 
 of all the aid that such testimony affords. They will 
 rightly examine also the principles of interpretation 
 which they adopt, and omit nothing that will throw light 
 on the subject of their inquiry. And thus acting, they 
 will bring this controversy to an end, and admit that In- 
 fant baptism stands on a firm and immovable basis. 
 
 6. The state of the controversy — the point at issue, 
 and nature of the evidence, being now considered, let us 
 proceed to the examination of the question — '"/s Infant 
 Baptism of Divine authority, or is it an innovation 
 brought into the Church since the death of the Apostles f 
 In conducting this investigation it must be remembered, 
 we are not to bring this question and place it in the 
 midst of the customs and institutions of our own age, and 
 examine it under their colorings and shadows, but trans- 
 fer ourselves in imagination to the Apostolic age, and 
 there in the midst of the institutions, customs, etc., that 
 surrounded the Apostles, conduct our examination. 
 
 "" Only those "vrritings, and portions of T^'ritings, the authenticity of 
 which, have borne the test of sound criticism, and received the apjiro- 
 val of schohirs, will be introduced as authority in this work. 
 
22 PRACTICE OF ALL ANCIENT CHURCHES. [A. D. 1S57— 
 
 This is also an error into which many fall — They ap- 
 pear not to consider that we are some 1750 years in 
 advance of the days of the Apostles — that the usages, 
 LAWS, and habits of this age, dijGfer greatly from those 
 of that, and of other ages. And hence in looking at this 
 question through the medium of any other than its own 
 age and institutions, they may see it in very different 
 colors from its true one. 
 
 To understand precisely the meaning of any writer, 
 it is necessary to know all the circumstances that affect- 
 ed his mind at the time he wrote. Therefore, in order 
 to understand as correctly as possible the meaning of 
 the writings of the Apostles, we should endeavor to place 
 ourselves in the same age, amidst the same customs, sur- 
 rounded by the same circumstances, and read as a 
 cotemporary of the Apostles would read. 
 
 7. And that we may adhere to these principles, and 
 particularly to the one last mentioned, we will take up the 
 practice of baptizing young children, as we find it now 
 among us, and trace it back through the different ages 
 of the Church up to the days of the Apostles, to ascer- 
 tain when it commenced, or whether there is any period 
 between this and the Apostolic age, when it was not 
 known in the Church. And if we find it in all the inter- 
 vening ages, we will then take up the Holy Scriptures, 
 and having made ourselves acquainted (so far as we shall 
 be able) with the laws, customs, and influences likely to 
 have affected the Apostles, examine their writings on 
 this point — bearing in mind those influences under which 
 they wrote. 
 
-1130 A. D.] ORIGIN OF ANTIPEDOBAniSM. 23 
 
 1. Beginning at the present time (the middle of the 
 nineteenth century) we find that all the Ancient Churches 
 known to us, The G-reek Cliurch, Syrian Churchy Latin 
 or Roynan Qhurch, JVestorians, Armenians, Qopts, Ahys- 
 sinians and all the sects of Moiiophosytes, baptize In- 
 fants. And so also seven-eighths" or nine-tenths of 
 those bearing more modern names (some of whom claim 
 to have descended in a direct line from the Apostles) 
 Protestant Episcopalians, Moravians, Lutherans, Pres- 
 byterians, Congregationalists, Methodists and numerous 
 others, all baptize Infants. 
 
 2. On the other side, the Antipedobaptists* form a 
 large and respectable body of Christians, and are found 
 in various parts of the relig:ous world. They are known 
 in history by several different names — " Anabaptists — 
 Menonites or Minnists, — Baptists," and some others. 
 But they prefer now, with few exceptions, the name of 
 Baptists. And though differing among themselves on 
 many other points, are united in their opposition to the 
 baptism of young children — that is, are all Antipedo- 
 baptists. 
 
 And however respectable in numbers, at the present 
 time, before we travel back more than three centuries, 
 they dwindle into a few scattered sects, confined chiefly 
 to Holland, Upper Germany, and countries contiguous 
 to the Alps. 
 
 About the year 1636, their system was first reduced 
 into consistency and moderation. f 
 
 ^ Antipedobai3tists — this term embraces all those who are opposed 
 particularly to the baptism of children (avti against rtatj, Ttaibo^ 
 child — /3artTts-cd — to baptize. 
 
 f See Mosheim — Encyclopedia of Religion?! Kiiowlodop. (a Rnptist 
 Avork.) 15nrk"s Tlico. Pid. utid cilicrs. 
 
24 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. D. ll.W— 
 
 3. Continuing our march some four centuries fartlier, 
 we come to the period when their principles as Antipe- 
 dobaptists, are first brought to light in the history of 
 the Church. It seems that one Pierre de Bruys, a 
 native of Toulouse, about the year 1110, began first 
 to preach publicly against the baptism of young children 
 — denying that they could be saved ! He continued his 
 career some twenty years, and collected a considerable 
 number of followers, but was arrested about the year 
 1130, by the Papal authority, burnt to death, and his 
 followers dispersed !* 
 
 On this point we shall dwell more at large in another 
 place, in connection with the history of the Waldenses. 
 It is only necessary to glance at these centuries in our 
 march, for history has made them familiar to every 
 reader. No one doubts the fact that Infant Baptism was 
 the prevailing practice of Christians during this time, 
 and it would be a work of supererogation to swell this 
 volume with citations of the proof. 
 
 Passing on through the eleventh, tentli, and ninth cen- 
 turies, we find it uyiivcrsal — practiced everywhere, and 
 hy all. No one called it in question who baptized at 
 all. There were some who rejected water baptism alto- 
 gether — but no record (yet brought to light) tells of any 
 baptizing sect that rejected Infants. Indeed, nearly 
 the whole Church, in those countries where Christianity 
 had been introduced at an early period, was composed 
 of members baptized in their infancy. Adult baptism 
 was comparatively a rare thing except in places more re- 
 cently converted to tlie Christian faith, and in those 
 
 "■ Sop Mnshcini — Waddington find Wall, 
 
—900 A I).] PRACTICE OF THE CIlUUCIT. 25 
 
 regions where missionaries were at work. In all the 
 National ChurcJies Infant Baptism was not only univer- 
 sally practiced, but almost the only baptism, because 
 family baptism had been handed dow^n from past gener- 
 ations.* 
 
 And so with the eighth, seventh, sixth, avAffth cen- 
 turies, Infant Baptism had no one to oppose it except 
 those who opposed all baptism. Its universality is vir- 
 tually admitted by the concession of Mr. Tombs, a cele- 
 brated Antipedobaptist writer, who says, '' It was carried 
 almost ivithout control," during this period. And Wall, 
 objects even to his use of the word '^almost'' in that 
 place. And says Tombs '• Puts in the word almost, as if 
 some, though few, did oppose it : there is on the contrary, 
 not one saying, quotation or example that makes against 
 it, produced or pretended, but what has been clearly 
 shown to be a mistake. As in the first four hundred 
 years (of Christianity) there is none but one Tertullian, 
 who advised it to be delayed till the age of reason ; and 
 one Nanzianzen until three years of age, in case of no 
 danger of death : So in the folloAving six hundred years 
 there is no account or report of any one man that op- 
 posed it at all."t 
 
 This question called forth great research and -much 
 labor about the close of the seventeenth, and beginning 
 of the eighteenth centuries. And among others a " Mr. 
 Danvers, an Antipedobaptist writer of those times, found, 
 as he supposed, various passages in the writings of 
 authors of the first thousand years of Christianity, that 
 
 ^ See "W. Wall's Histoiy of Baptism. 
 
 t History of Tnfnnt Baptism, Third Edition, vol ii. pao-e 212. 
 o 
 
20 INFANT baptise:. [A. ]■). ]000— 
 
 did imply opposition to Infant Baptism, but Wills and 
 Baxter, who followed him on the other side, discovered 
 and exposed his many mistakes and errors. There 
 wants nothing but looking into the books themselves 
 (continues Wall) to see they are nothing to the purpose. 
 Mr. Dan vers created to Mr. Wills and Mr. Baxter a great 
 deal of trouble in sending them from one book to another, 
 to discover his mistakes and misrepresentations of seve- 
 ral authors within this -space ; but withal a great deal of 
 discredit to himself, for there is not one of his quota- 
 tions that seemed material enough to need searching but 
 proved to be such."* (i. e. Mistakes or nothing to the 
 purpose.) 
 
 Since the time of these writers, the opponents of 
 Infant Baptism have almost abandoned the field of his- 
 torical evidence, and entrenched themselves within their 
 own interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 They, however, have written Church Histories, and 
 some other works, into which these same errors have 
 been introduced, (it may be without a knowledge of 
 their true character and previous exposure) to which we 
 shall recur, and particularly to a passage from a 
 defective copy of the work of the venerable Bede, who 
 wrote in the eighth century, and to Jones' History of 
 the Christian Church — so called. 
 
 Were it necessary, volumes of proof, specific in its 
 character, might be collected from the authors of these 
 centuries testifying to the fact that Infant Baptism was 
 the doctrine and practice of the Church. But as it is 
 admitted by high authority on the other side, that " It" 
 
 "-•" Hist. T'lip.. vol. ii. ji;ioo 'Ji •_>. 
 
-400 A. D.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 27 
 
 Vfas carried almost beyond control" during that period 
 — and we shall soon show that it was universal long 
 before — and it being our ultimate object to ascertain 
 when it commenced, we might pass on to the remaining 
 four centuries. 
 
 But, before doing so, for the satisfaction of the unin- 
 formed reader, we will show what was the faith of the 
 Church on this point during the "Pelagian controversy," 
 which agitated the Christian world. East and West, 
 during the fifth century. The cause of this controversy 
 was the denial of original sin. Pelagius and others 
 contended that young children were born without sin, 
 and in the same state which Adam was before his fall. The 
 great body of the Church on the other side, held that 
 all of Adam's posterity were born with depraved natures, 
 and the inheritors of original sin, etc. In this contro- 
 versy Infant Baptism was frequently brought up to dis- 
 prove the doctrine of the Pelagians. Wh}^, it was asked, 
 did the Church baptize Infants, if not on account of 
 ^' original sin ? What other sin had they ?" 
 
 Pelagius and his followers were also charged with 
 undermining and making useless the baptism of Infants 
 by their doctrine, but tliis they denied. Its high author- 
 ity was acknowledged by both parties ; no one called 
 that in question. And we shall see in the course of our 
 research that its autlioritif was never called in question 
 during the first thousand years of Christianity by any 
 one that admitted water baptism at all. 
 
 For the two individuals, to whom reference has already 
 been made, as having advised its dolay, both admitted 
 its necessity in danger of death. One advi.-:Gd its delay 
 
28 INFANT BAPTISxM. [A. I). 4:30- 
 
 iintil three years of age, that the child might be able to 
 answer the questions for itself, instead of its sponsors.''' 
 The other having embraced the doctrine that baptism 
 "washed away all past sins, advised its postponement to 
 a period in life, when men would not be so likely to sin 
 after their baptism. But in cases of danger, even lay- 
 men must baptize, sooner than permit any to go w^ithout 
 the cleansing of the sacrament. f 
 
 Therefore neither of them called in question the 
 authority^ but only advised in certain cases the delay of 
 Infant Baptism. But more of this in its proper place. 
 
 Let us return to the Pelagian controversy. Augustine, 
 a man of great power and learning, holding very decided 
 views of original sin, attacked the doctrines of Pelagius 
 and his friend Celestius, w^ith great energy and success. 
 He unmasked and exposed their errors in every phase 
 in which they could be presented ; and for that end, the 
 autliority and i?ractice of baptizing little cliildren "were 
 his frequent weapons. 
 
 And the fact, of introducing Infant Baptism to dis- 
 prove a doctrine that so deeply affected the whole 
 Church, proves not only its practice, but its liigli 
 authority, at the time. This is confirmed also by the 
 consideration, that no one on the other side called in 
 question its validity. The Divine authority of this rite 
 was admitted by all ; and when the opposers of original 
 sin were pressed with the charge of making useless or 
 undermining Infant Baptism, they gave other reasons 
 than original sin, as the ground of its necessity. 
 
 * Oratio De Baptismo. Greg. Nan. 
 
 f TcrtuUianus De Baptismo. Chapter 18. 
 
-417 A. 1).] PKACTICE OF THE CHUKCH. 29 
 
 Instead of rejecting Infant Baptism as some inferred 
 from his doctrines, Pelagius declares, as we shall see, 
 that " He never heard of even an impious heretic ^Yho 
 would avow such a thing." And to correct the many 
 misrepresentations in circulation, both Pelagius and 
 Celestius drew up articles of their belief and sent them 
 to the Bishop of Rome. 
 
 In which Pelagius, when he comes to baptism, says : 
 
 "We hold one "baptism which wo affirm must be administered 
 with the same sacramental words to infants with which it is to 
 elder persons."* — Lieellus FiDEi.f 
 
 He thus acknowledges his faith in Infant baptism, 
 but evades the doctrine of original sin, and also cuts oif 
 the charge of two baptisms, by saying — the " same sac- 
 ramental words" are to be used in all cases. 
 
 He sent likewise with his "confession of faith" an 
 accompanying letter, parts of which are quoted by 
 Augustine, in order to make his animadversions upon 
 them. In one place Augustine quotes him, saying — 
 
 " He is slandered b}^ men, as if he denied the sacrament of 
 baptism to young children, and did promise the Kingdom of 
 Heaven to any, without the redemption of Christ.''^ — Augustin 
 
 DE PeCCATO OrIGINALE, C. 17, 18, ETC. 
 
 After some remarks on this — Augustine quotes him 
 as next saying, 
 
 * Apud Augustin, de gratia Christi, c. 32. 
 
 ■f Baptisma unura tenemus, quod iisdem sacramenti verbis in infan- 
 tibus quibus etiam in majoribus asserimus esse celebrandum. 
 
 % Se ab hominibus infamari quod neget parvulis baptismatis sacra- 
 mentum, et absque redemptione Christi abquibus regna coelorum 
 promitat. 
 
30 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. D. 417- 
 
 " He never heard even of any impious heretic -who would avow 
 such a thing in regard to little children — for who is there so igno- 
 rant of Gospel reading (Evangelicse lectionis) that he would — 
 not to say, venure to affirm this — but even in a heedless way 
 SAY, or indeed think such a thing. In a word, who can be so 
 impious as to wish little children not to be sharers in the King- 
 dom of Heaven, and so forbid them to be baptized and regenerat- 
 ed in Christ/^" — Ibid. 
 
 Again : — 
 
 "Who is there so impious as to interdict the common redemp- 
 tion of mankind to any age whatever.^'! — -Ibid. 
 
 Augustine, commenting on these passages and others 
 of like import, charges Pelagius with evasions and ambi- 
 guity. That he keeps away from the main point at 
 issue. That the question was not whether Infants 
 ought to be baptized, but if they have no original sin, 
 why are they baptized ? And when did they sin ? Or, 
 if thoj have no sin at all, what is their condition before 
 baptism ? and so on. 
 
 Here we would remark that we have nothing to do 
 with the subjects of controversy that may be brought 
 up in connection with the question before us. Our 
 only business is to find out, at each successive step, 
 whether Infant baptism is still the practice of Chris- 
 tians. 
 
 * Nunquam se vcl impium aliquem Hereticivm audisse, qui hoc 
 quod proposuit de parvulis, diceret. Quis euim ita Evangelicae lec- 
 tionis ignarus est, qui hoc non modo affirmare conetur, sed qui vel 
 leviter diccre aut etiam sentire possit? Deniquc quis tam impius, 
 qui parvulos cxortes rcgni coclorum esse velit, dum cos baptizari et in 
 Christo renasci vetat. 
 
 f Quis ille tam impius est, qui cujuslibet aetatis parvulo intcrdicat 
 communem bumani generis redemptionem. 
 
-317A. Aporf.] PRACTICE OF THE CHUIICII. 31 
 
 Whatever doctrines may be advocated or opposed, it 
 forms no part of our present plan to defend one side 
 or the other, or to stop to show that Infant baptism is 
 not answerable for men's fancies. The simple ftict, "Is 
 Infant baptism the practice of the Church, or is it not?" 
 is all with which we are now concerned. 
 
 Celestius, in his confession of faitli (Libellus fidei) is 
 more open and explicit on original sin. As recited by 
 
 Augustine, he says : — 
 
 • 
 
 " We acknowledge that Infants ought to be baptized for the 
 remission of sins, according to the rule of the Universal Church, 
 and according to the meaning of the Gospel. For the Lord has 
 ordained that the kingdom of Heaven is not to be conferred on 
 persons unless they are baptized, (referring to St. John, iii. 5) 
 which, because the power of nature cannot give, it is necessary to 
 confer through the liberty of grace. But we do not therefore say 
 that Infants are to be baptized for the remission of sins, that we 
 may seem to confirm the opinion of the propagation of sin, which 
 is a thing far from the Catholic sense. For sin is not born with' 
 a man which is afterwards committed by him. Because it is not 
 the fault of nature, but of the will, as may be demonstrated. 
 It is, therefore, proper to confess the former, lest we seem to make 
 divers kinds of baptism ; and also necessary to guard against the 
 latter, lest by means of this mystery, it be to the reproach of the 
 Creator said, that sin was conveyed through nature to man before 
 it was acted out by man.^'* — Augustin de Peccato Origixall. 
 c. 5. 
 
 * Infantes autem debcre baptizari remissionem peccatorum secun- 
 dum regulam. universalis Ecclesiic, et secundum Evangelii senteutiam 
 confitemur ; quia Domiiius statuit regnum Coelorum non nisi bap- 
 tizatis posse conferri : quod quia vires naturas uon habent, con- 
 ferre necesse est per gratis libertatem. In remissionem autem pec- 
 catorum baptizandos infantes non idcirco diximus, ut peccatum ex 
 traduce firmare videamur ; quod longe a Catholico sensu alienum est. 
 Quia peccatum non cum homine nascitur, quod postmodum exercitur 
 ab homine ; Quia non natune delictum, sod voluntatis esse demon- 
 
32 INFAx\T BAPTISM. [A. D. -117- 
 
 Iri this passage Celestius not only shows that he did 
 not oppose Infant baptism, but tells us that it is the 
 "rule of the universal Church," and doctrine of the 
 Gospel (Evangelii sententiam.) Pelagius said he had 
 never heard even of any impious heretic who denied 
 it — (meaning among those who baptized at all) — and 
 asks, w^ho is so ignorant of gospel reading (Evangelicse 
 lectionis) as even to think such a thing, much less affirm 
 it. 
 
 The testimony of these two men is the more impor- 
 tant on this point, because of the great advantages they 
 had enjoyed for knowing the custom of the Church in 
 different parts of the world. They were born and bred, 
 the one in England and the other in Ireland, came to 
 Rome early in the fifth century, and resided there till 
 the invasion of the Goths, 410, A. D, They both vrent 
 thence to Carthage, in Africa, at which place Celestius 
 remained sometime, and attempted to gain admittance 
 as a Presbyter into the. Church ; but being disappoint- 
 ed, afterwards travelled over Greece and various por- 
 tions of Asia, visiting all the most noted Eastern 
 Churches of Europe and Asia. Pelagius went direct to 
 Jerusalem and settled there.* 
 
 Both of these men, who had enjoyed such opportuni- 
 ties of knowing by personal observation the practice of 
 all the most noted churches in Christendom, sent in a 
 written declaration of their faith in the year 417, A. D., 
 
 stratur. Et illud ergo confitcri cougruum ne diversa baptismatis 
 genera facerc videamur : et hoc pra?munirc ; necessarium est, ne per 
 mysterii occasionem, ad Creatoris injuriam, malum auteqnam fiat ab 
 homine tradi dicatur homini per naturam. 
 ^^- See Wall's History, vol. i. p. 370. 
 
-317 A. Apos.] practice of THE CHURCH. 38 
 
 one of them saying — "Infant baptism is the rule of the 
 Universal Church" — the other that he had "never 
 heard of even any heretic (or sectary) that denied bap- 
 tism to Infants." 
 
 The following year a council was held at Carthage, 
 in which all the provinces of Africa were represented — 
 214 Bishops w^re present, and eight canons passed 
 an;ainst the Pelao;ian tenets. In the second canon 
 Infant baptism is referred to, and two errors con- 
 demned — one ao;ainst the doctrine of Pelao:ius and 
 Celestius in regard to original sin — the other against 
 the opinion of some who thought baptism ought not to 
 be given until the eighth day after birth — the time of 
 circumcision. 
 
 That which regards Infant baptism, is as follows : 
 
 " Resolved also, that Tvhosoever denies that Infants be baptized 
 fresh from their mother's womb, or says that they are indeed bap- 
 tized for the remission of sins, but yet they derive no original sin 
 from Adam, vrhich is expiated by the laver of regeneration, 
 (v^-hence it would follows that in them, not the true form of bap- 
 th;m for the remission of sins is understood, but a false one) let 
 him bo Anathema. For what the Apostle says — * by one man 
 sin entered into the v\'^orld, and death by sin ; and so death passed 
 upon all men, for that (or, in whom) all have sinned,^ can in no 
 otherwise be understood but in the way the Catholic'^' Church ex- 
 tended everywhere has always understood it. For by this rule of 
 faith also the little ones, who cannot as yet have committed 
 any sin in themselves are truly baptized for the remission of sins, 
 that what they derj,ved by generation may be cleansed by regen- 
 eration."! — CoxciLii Cartiiag. Anxo 418 Caxon Secuxdus. 
 
 ^ '' Universal," not "J?o?/2an" Catholic. 
 
 f Item placuit ut qui cumque parvalos reccntes ab uteris matrum 
 baptizandos ncgat ; aut dicit in remissionem quidem peccatorum eos 
 
34 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 318- 
 
 Let it be remembered that we have nothing to do for 
 the present, with any opinions as to the effects of bap- 
 tism or other notions advanced in regard to it. Our 
 simple inquiry is, Does the Church at this time practice 
 infant baptism ? And I suppose this canon, passed in a 
 council where all the provinces of Africa were represent- 
 ed, will satisfy any mind as to the practice of the Church 
 throughout Africa. 
 
 It may be proper to remark here, that some writers, 
 meeting with this canon, and not examining the circum- 
 stances under which it was passed, have inferred that 
 Infant baptism was not established fully in the Church 
 till about this time. Whereas, the authority of Infant 
 baptism is taken for granted, and the canon passed to 
 meet the Pelagian doctrine of original sin, and the cus- 
 tom of some others, who put off baptism till the eighth 
 day after birth ; the same day on which circumcision 
 was performed. This same thing was a subject of legis- 
 lation at Carthage some hundred and fifty years before 
 this, as we shall show hereafter. 
 
 This canon has also been quoted by certain Antipedo- 
 baptist writers as passed in a council at Milevium, 416, 
 A. D. But it will be found on examination, that a sy- 
 nodical letter contains all that was determined on this 
 
 Ijaptizari, scd nihil ex Adam trahcre originalis peccati quod lavacro 
 regenerationis expietur (unde sit consequens ut in eis forma baptis- 
 matis in remissionem peccatorum non vera sed falsa intclligatur) 
 Anathema sit. Quoniam non aliter intelligendum est, quod ait Apos- 
 tolus, Per unum hominem peccatum intravit in raumdum ct per pec- 
 catum mors, et ita in omnes homines pertransit, in quo omnes pecca- 
 verunt : Nisi quemadmodum Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffusa semper 
 intollexit. Propter banc enim regulam fidei, etiam parvuli, qui nihil 
 peccatorum in seipsis adhuc commmitterc potuerunt, ideo in pecca- 
 torum remissionem veraciter baptizantur, ut in eis regeneratione 
 mundetur quod regeneratione traxerant. 
 
-316 A. Apos.] practice of the CHURCH. 35 
 
 point at that time, whicli was sent to Innocent, bishop of 
 Rome, soliciting his aid in putting a stop to" the Pelagian 
 heresy. The account of which is, so far as baptism is 
 concerned, that a new sect had sprung up, of men that 
 were enemies to the grace of Christ, making useless or 
 undermining Infant baptism."^" This was written before 
 the last works of Pelagius had reached Numidia, and 
 the inference they had thus deduced, was drawn from the 
 doctrine simply that '^ chikh-en neiv horn ivere in the 
 same state that Adam was before the fall" Hence they 
 inferred that those who held such views must think that 
 children did not stand in need of baptism or anything 
 else to entitle them to salvation. And some of the dis- 
 ciples of the new doctrine, although they baptized their 
 children and claimed for so doing, Divine authority, had 
 already ventured the opinion, which was new and strange 
 in that age, that though children should happen to miss 
 of baptism, it would not aifect their salvation. 
 
 This letter not only takes for granted the practice 
 and necessity of Infant baptism, but condemns every one 
 whose doctrines shall in any way seem to contravene it. 
 
 In the same year a council at Carthage, where Celes- 
 tius had been condemned four years before, sent a synod- 
 ical letter to the Bishop of Rome to the same effect, but 
 couched in stronger language, calling upon him to unite 
 in anathematizing all whose doctrines made it a matter 
 of indifference as to the salvation of children whether 
 they were baptized or not. 
 
 This council has also been referred to, to show that 
 
 ■•^ Synodical letter of Milevium Council, to Innocent (27) Apml 
 Ano-nstiniiin. E))i?;t. 52. 
 
36 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apoh. 316- 
 
 Infant baptism was not fully established in the Church 
 till about this time. But every reader will find, on ex- 
 amination, that it was written with the express view^ of 
 arresting the doctrines of Pelagius and Celestius — that 
 they are even called by name, and that the writer goes 
 on to say that '' though they oivn that Infants have 
 REDEMPTION BY THE BAPTISM OF^ Cheist, yet many of 
 them who are called their disci2)les, advocate doctrines 
 which overthrow the Christia7i faitliJ'"^^ Infant baptism 
 is taken for granted as the imiversal, well known and 
 acknowledged practice of the Church, and the object of 
 the Epistle is to solicit the co-operation of Innocent in 
 suppressing the difi'erent opinions assigned by this new 
 sect — and to confine them to what had been heretofore 
 the doctrine of the Church — namely : the removing of 
 them from under the condemnation consequent on the 
 fall of Adam, and bringing them into a state of sal- 
 vation under Christ. Or transferring them from the 
 first, to the covenant of the second Adam. 
 
 As to the prevalence of Infant baptism at this time 
 more than a hundred proofs might be adduced in con- 
 nection with the Pelagian controversy alone. And in 
 every case find it referred to as a thing well known, 
 universal, and its authority never questioned. But when 
 a Council of 214 Bishops pronounces an Anathema on 
 any who shall deny original sin, and " that Infants are 
 hai^tized that ivhat they derived hy generation, may he 
 cleansed hy regeneratiori " — and Pelagius, a Briton, who 
 had lived in Home, then in Carthage, and settled finally 
 in Jerusalem, tells us he had ''never heard of even a] 
 
 ■"- Wall, vol. i. p. 333. 
 
-316A. apo?.] practice of the church. 37 
 
 heretic {or sectary) that denied baptism to Infants^ — and 
 Celestius who had travelled West and East, and visited 
 the most noted Churches in Europe and Asia, prodaims 
 it to be the " universal rule of the Church to baptize In- 
 fants,'' &c. What need we more ? To add other testi- 
 mony to prove the practice of Infant baptism in the 
 Church at this time, would be offering an insult to the 
 intelligence of the reader. 
 
 We pass on to a period before the Pelagian contro- 
 versy arose. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 HISTORICAL TESTIMONY CONTINUED. 
 
 Testimony of Council of Carthage — Aurelius — Donatis ts — Chrysostom — 
 Baptism, Christian Circumcision — Original sin— Benefits of Baptism — 
 Jerome — Augustine — Ambrose— Optatus — Nazianzen- — Basil — Council 
 of Eliberis — Council of Carthage, 66 Bishops present, CjqDrian presiding — 
 TertuUian. ^ 
 
 About the year 400 or 300 from the Apostolic age, a 
 question was proposed in a Council at Carthage, which 
 shows the prevalence of Infant baptism at that time. It 
 was the case of certain persons carried away captive in 
 their infancy into barbarian countries, who after a lapse 
 of years had been found and ransomed by their friends. 
 But. when brought back none of their relatives, then alive, 
 were able to testify whether or not they had been bap- 
 tized before they were carried away. They being in- 
 fants when their parents were captured, w^ere of course 
 too young to remember anything about it, and their 
 friends were in doubt what to do. They would by no 
 means have so important a thing neglected, and yet 
 they were afraid of desecrating the ordinance by re-bap- 
 tism. The case was laid before a council at Carthage, 
 and the following is its decision : 
 
 " It is resolved concerning Infants, that whenever positive wit- 
 nesses cannot be found, who will testify that they have been bnp- 
 
-300A.APO3.] INFANT BAPTISM. 39 
 
 tized -without doubt ; and they, by reason of their age, are not 
 able to answer as to the administration of the saAament to them, 
 that they be baptized without any scruple • lest that scruple do 
 cause them to go without the benefit- of the sacrament. For our 
 brethren sent from the Mauritanians, have asked our advice in 
 council on this point."* "Who ransom many such from the 
 barbarians," &c.— coxcilii carthaginiensis quinti, canon 6. 
 
 This not only shows that they practiced Infant bap- 
 tism, but that it was so diligently observed, that they 
 hesitated to baptize a person who had been carried away 
 in early infancy, fearing they would be guilty of re-bap- 
 tism ; so great was the probability that such, however 
 young when carried away, were previously baptized. 
 
 Three years before this, a question was discussed at 
 the same place in regard to the promotion of persons to 
 offices in the Church, who had once belonged to heretical 
 sects, which incidentally testifies to the prevailing cus- 
 tom of Infant baptism, Aurelius, the Bishop, remarks : 
 
 " In a former council it was resolved, you remember, that they 
 who were baptized in their infancy among the Donatists before 
 they were able to understand the mischief of that error, and when 
 afterward they had come to the age of understanding, — the truth 
 being acknowledged by them, &c. . . . they were received 
 by us. . . . such, without doubt, ought to bo promoted to 
 Church oflSces, especially in times of so great need, as all must 
 concede. 
 
 " Some of the teachers of the same sect, would come over with 
 their congregations, if they might continue in their offices [with 
 
 ^ Placuit de infantibus quoties non invenhintur certissmi testes qui 
 eos baptizatos esse sine dubitatione testentur, neque ipsi sunt per ffita- 
 tum idonei de traditis sibi sacramentis respondere ; absque ullo scru- 
 pulo eos esse baptizandos. Ne ista trepidatio eos faciat sacramento- 
 runv purgatione privari. Hiuc enim legati Maurorum fratres nostri 
 
40 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. SOO- 
 
 their honors] among us. But this I leave to the further consider- 
 ation of the brethren, only that they consent to our determination 
 in admitting these to orders.* — codex canonum ECCLEsiyE Afri- 
 cans, CANON 57. 
 
 Infant baptism is here mentioned as a thing common 
 and well known, and the points at issue, are, whether 
 those baptized among the Donatists in infancy are not 
 less to blame than those received among them at adult 
 age ? And whether such ought to be debarred from 
 holding offices in the Church, if they return to it, as soon 
 as they come to years of discretion? The following re- 
 solution had been before passed in regard to this subject 
 in an assembly at Carthage rf 
 
 " In reference to the Donatists, resolved that we consult our 
 l)rethren and fellow Bishops, Siricius and Simplicianus, concern- 
 ing only those who are baptized in infancy, among them — that 
 when they have been converted to the Church by the wholesome 
 purpose of God, whether that which they have not done by their 
 own judgment, but was the error of their parents, shall hinder 
 them, that they shall not be promoted to Ministers of the holy 
 altar V — concil. cartuag. tertii can. 48. 
 
 * Superior! consilio Statutum esse mecum recognoscit unanimitas 
 vestrti ut hi qui apud Donatistas parvuli baptizati sunt nondum scire 
 valentis en oris eorum interitiim, et posteaquam ad aetatera rationis 
 capacem perveneriiiit, agnita veritate, &c. — recepti sunt- sine dubio 
 ad otiicium clericatus tales esse appHcandos, et maxune in tantarerura 
 necessitate nullus est qui non concedat. 
 
 Quanquam nonnulli ejusdcm sectae clerici cum plebibus atque 
 honoribus suis ad nos transirc desiderent, &c. — Sed Loc mnjori fratruni 
 supradictorum consideratioui dimittendum ccnsco. — Tantiun do his 
 qui Iiifiintes baptizati sunt satagimus, ut mostraj si phvcet, in iisdeni 
 ordinandis consentiat voluntati, &c. » 
 
 f De Donatistis, placuit ut consulamus fratres et consacerdotes nos- 
 tros Siricium et Simplicianum. de solis infantibus qui baptizantur 
 penes eosdem, ne [leg. an.] quod sue non fecerunt judicio, cum ad 
 Ecclesiam Dei salubri projjosito fucrint conversi, parentum illos error 
 impediat, ne provetiantur sacri altaris ministri. 
 
— 2S0 A. Apos.] practice of the CHURCH. 41 
 
 From this resolution and the words of Aurelius, wef 
 see that the Donatists, a schismatical sect, baptized 
 young children as well as the great body of the Church, 
 and yet some Baptist writers tell us that they themselves 
 are descendants of the Donatists ! 
 
 We need nothing plainer or more satisfactory — as it 
 regards the Church of Carthage at this time. Let us 
 pass on some twenty years nearer the Apostles and see 
 what was the practice in other places ? 
 
 John Chrysostom was a native of Antioch, called 
 the "golden mouthed" on account of his eloquence — 
 was a voluminous writer,* and finally made patriarch of 
 Constantinople. In one of his homilies on Genesis, he 
 speaks of the pain and suflfering of circumcision, and the 
 advantages of baptism over it in the following manner : 
 
 "But our circumcision, I mean the grace of baptism, gives 
 cure without pain, and procures for us a thousand benefits, and 
 fills us with the grace of the Spirit. And it has no determinate 
 time as that had ; but it is lawful to any one in the very begin- 
 ning OF HIS AGE, or in the middle of it, or in old age, to receive this 
 circumcision made without hands. In which there is no trouble to 
 be undergone — but to throw off the load of sins and receive pardon 
 for all foregoing offences.^'t — hom.40in genesin.edit. savil. tomI. 
 
 * TVe quote only from those books that are generally acknowledg- 
 ed to be genuine, or such portions as are received by Protestants and 
 Romanists. 
 
 tx^t' "tr^v latpstav xai fxvpioiv ayaOutv ripo^tvfo^ yivEtac v^fttVy xai -tr^^ 
 'tov Hvivy.a'toi yji-iai f^rttrtXj^jt ;^apt'T'oj. Kat ovde apK^jxevov sxt^v ;t;atpoi/ 
 xa9oTt$p Extt, aXX* e^snro xai 'f v acopj^ t^lxlo. xav zv /xbctj, xac sv avfoi 
 rco yvi(ia ytvoixevov Tfcva, Tfavfrjv Sffas^at tyjv axst'portoitjtov rifpito^viv 
 tv vi ovx eSfL Ttovov rtpo{xs(.vac,, aT^K 'ajxaptrjfiatuv ^opi'ta aHoOitat, xac 
 tuiv £v riavtc ;^poi'c<3 rC7iyijj,jxe7^i^jxatuv vyx^^pyjcst'V svps9a,(>» 
 
 4* 
 
42 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 280- 
 
 Chrysostom here calls baptism the Christian's circum- 
 cision, and says that it is confined to no particular age 
 as was circumcision. Instead of the 8th day after 
 birth, we may receive it in the very beginning of age 
 (fvacop?^ Tjuxia'^ or in the middle of it, or in old age. 
 Meaning at any time when in the providence of God the 
 sacrament can be administered. 
 
 That he means by ''the beginning of life," the first 
 stages of infancy, is obvious both from the sense, and 
 from his use of the same phrase in another place con- 
 cerning circumcision, where he says, '' circumcision was 
 appointed on the 8th day, because the cutting off the 
 flesh is more easily borne ' in the beginning of age.' " 
 (iv acop'/j r^KLxia) i. e. when very young, the infant is not 
 so sensible of the pain. 
 
 In another of his homilies, he condemns a heathenish 
 and superstitious practice of some mothers in rubbing a 
 certain kind of mud on the forehead of a newly born 
 child to keep it from being bewitched. And asks them 
 how they can bring such children to the priest to be 
 baptized. His words are : 
 
 " He that annoints an infant so with mud, how can he think but 
 that he makes it abominable? How can he bring it to the 
 priest? Tell me, how can you think it is fitting for the minister 
 to make the sign on its forehead, when you have besmeared it 
 with that mud."*— IIoM. 12, in 1 Epist. ad Corinthios. 
 
 * O BopGopCO ;^piCOl' 7tCL.$ OVXf' XO.l '^hiT.VXtOV TtOtft -to 7i0.lhlQV ; 7tu)5 
 
 -yap avto ripocjaysc tai^ X^-?^^ '^ov tfpiwj : siris jxov rtwj a|iots ertc rov 
 fAetutriov d^payiba tTiifite^yivai, Ttapa ti^i z'ov rCptspvtspa ;^£tpoj fv^a 
 tw BopSopov trisxpisO'i' 
 
-2S0 A. apo3.] practice of the church. 43 
 
 By the '' sign," he refers to the sign of the cross then 
 made on the forehead in baptism, and seems to think 
 that the child is rendered almost unfit to receive bap- 
 tism, and to have that sign made on the same place 
 which had been defiled by such a superstitious rite. 
 
 Again, Julian and Augustine both quote him, where 
 he is speaking of the benefits of baptism ; Julian, who 
 was opposed to the doctrine of original sin, to show that 
 he did not enumerate "forgiveness of sins" among the 
 blessings received in baptism — hence he could not have 
 believed in original sin : Augustine, to show that this 
 same passage may be reconciled with the doctrine of 
 original sin. The sentence on which the question turned 
 
 was this Ata tovto xai T'a Tiatbia, 'BarttL^ofxev xaotot, afiaptiri.iyjfa 
 
 ixrj Exnvifa. " For this also we baptize children although 
 they have not any sins." Julian had translated it to this 
 effect : " For this cause we baptize children also, although 
 they are not defiled with sin." 
 
 Auofustine makes a distinction between the "defile- 
 
 o 
 
 ment of original sin," and the expression "not having 
 any sins" — i. e. personal sins of their own. He has the 
 whole passage relating to the benefits of baptism written 
 out in the original Greek, and also Julian's translation 
 of it, with his own corrections, according to Wall, who 
 gives it as follows : 
 
 " Blessed be God, who onl}^ does wonders, who has created and 
 ordered all things : Lo ! they do enjoy the serenity of freedom, 
 who but even now were held in captivity. They are become citi- 
 zens of the Church, who were in a vagabond state of aliens. 
 And they are entered into the lot of the righteous, who were under 
 the confusion of sin. For they are not only free, but saints ; nor 
 saints only, but justified ; and not only justified but sons ; and 
 not only sons, but heirs ; not heirs only, but brothers of Christ ; 
 
44 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 278- 
 
 not only his brethren, but co-heirs ; not co-heirs only, but mem- 
 bers of him ; not members only, but his temple ; and not his 
 temple only, but organs of his Spirit. You see how many are 
 the benefits of Baptism. And yet some think that the heavenly 
 grace consists only in the forgiveness of sins ; but I have reck- 
 \ oned up ten advantages of it. For this cause we baptize infants 
 
 also, tliougli they are not defiled with sin,"^ that there may be 
 superadded to them saintship, righteousness, adoption, inheri- 
 tance, a brotherhood with Christ, and to be made members of 
 him."t — St. Austin. Lib. 1. Contra Julianum. 
 
 We should perhaps be puzzled to distinguish between 
 all the benefits enumerated bj this ancient orator ; but 
 he leaves us in no doubt as to the practice of infant bap- 
 tism, which is our only business for the present. 
 
 AYe pass next over to Rome, (a place of resort at that 
 time from every part of the world) to see whether this 
 practice prevailed there also. 
 
 Jerome, who was educated at Rome, and now residing 
 there again, after having spent some years in Syria, is 
 highly esteemed and much courted for his literary 
 attainments. In writing to a lady of great distinction, 
 and endeavoring to impress on her mind her responsi- 
 bility in training up her young daughter, tells her that 
 the sins of children are laid to the charge of the parents 
 till they arrive at the age of discretion. And specifies 
 among others the neglect of their baptism as a sin of 
 the parent, and not of the child. Supposing her to 
 object in the language of Ezekiel — '^ The sins of the 
 father are not imputed to the children, nor those of the 
 children to the father, but the soul that sinneth, it shall 
 die" — he answers : 
 
 * Austin's correction is, " have not any sins," of their own. 
 f Wall's History, vol. 1. p. 167, 3d edition. 
 
-278 A. Apos.] practice OF THE CHURCH. 45 
 
 " This is said of those that are a])le to understand ; of such as 
 he was, of whom it is written in the gospel, ' lie is of age, let him 
 speak fur himself.' But he that is a child, and thinks as a child, 
 (until he come to years of discretion, and the letter Y of Pythago- 
 ras brings him to the place where the road parts into two) his 
 good deeds as well as his evil deeds are imputed to his parent. 
 
 " Unless you suppose the children of Christians, if they do not 
 receive baptism are themselves accountable for the sin. And the 
 wickedness not imputed to those who would not give it to them, 
 particularly at the time they ought to receive it, and could not 
 have made any opposition to receiving it," &c.* — IIierom. Epist. 
 
 AD LeTAM DE LVSTITUTIONE FiLIAE EpiST. 7. 
 
 Here again we see Infant bfiptism spoken of as the 
 practice of Christians, and in a w^aj that declares it to 
 be a sin in parents to neglect it. But that which is 
 most important to our purpose is, that it is incidentally 
 referred to, not brought up as a question of doubt. And 
 we wish the reader to observe that in all the places in 
 which it has yet been introduced, it was brought in for 
 the purpose of sustaining, or illustrating in some way, 
 other questions at issue. And it will be further seen 
 that Infant baptism itself never was called in question 
 during the earlier ages of Christianity. Whenever 
 referred to, its Divine authority is always taken for 
 granted. 
 
 We have now seen that before the rise of the Pela- 
 gian controversy as well as after it, that Infant baptism 
 
 * Hoc de his dicitur qui possnnt sapere, de quihus in Evangelio 
 scriptum est; aetatera habet, loquatur pro se. Qui autem parvulus 
 est et sapit ut parvulus, donee ad annos sapientiie veniat, et Pytha- 
 gorse litera Y eum perducat ad biviura ; tam bona ejus quam mala 
 parentibus imputantur. Nisi forte existimas Christianorum filios, si 
 baptisma non receperint, ipsos tantum reos esse peccati; et non etiam 
 scelus referri ad eos qui dare noluerint ; maxinnu eo tempore quo 
 coutradicere non potuerant qui accepturi erant. 
 
46 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 288.- 
 
 was the practice of the Church in each of the then 
 known quarters of the globe. But as it has been 
 alleged that Augustine, never alluded to Infant baptism 
 till after the rise of the Pelagian controversy, we will cite 
 one more passage from him, written in the earlier part 
 of his life, and not far from the time we are now con- 
 sidering. And we do so for the twofold object of show- 
 ing, both the universality of the practice, and his opinion 
 as to its Divine authority. 
 
 The DoNATiSTS were a body of Christians that had 
 separated from the Church Catholic, in consequence of 
 certain objections to Cecilianus, who was made bishop 
 of Carthage in the year 211 after the Apostles. They 
 objected to Cecilianus both on account of his own former 
 conduct, and on account of the life of one of his Con- 
 secrators. They called themselves the true Church, and 
 required all that had been baptized in the Church under 
 Cecilianus, when they came over to them,. to be re-bap- 
 tized, on the ground that a Church that permitted such 
 an officer to perform its functions was corrupt and in 
 error, arid its ordinances therefore invalid. Augustine 
 made issue with them on this point, and took the posi- 
 tion that error in the head or heart of an officer, did not 
 annul the authority of his office. That the validity of 
 baptism was not destroyed by error of the life, or judg- 
 ment of the administrator while acting under proper 
 authority. Nor even in the case of a person receiving 
 baptism, would error in judgment, or the want of the 
 right faith, necessarily make void his baptism. In de- 
 fence of this position, he adduced the practice of the 
 Church in giving baptism to young children, who could 
 
-288 A. Apos.] practice OF THE CHURCH. 4T 
 
 not as yet exercise faith. The following are his 
 ■words : 
 
 " Which (sentiment) the universal Church holds as handed 
 down to them, when little Infants are baptized. Who certainly 
 cannot yet believe with the heart unto righteousness or confess 
 with the mouth unto salvation as the thief could : [who by ne- 
 cessity was saved without baptism] nay by their crying and 
 noise while the sacrament is administered to them, they hinder 
 from being heard the mystical words. And yet no christian 
 
 WILL SAY THEY ARE BAPTIZED TO NO PURPOSE. 
 
 "And if any one should seek Divire authority in this thing ; 
 although that which the universal Church hohls, and not in- 
 stituted BY councils, but WAS EVER IN USE and most rightly be- 
 lieved to be handed down by none other than Apostolic author- 
 ity; nevertheless, we can make a probable estimate of what^the 
 sacrament of baptism avails to young children, by the circum- 
 cision of the flesh, which God's former people received."* — 
 
 AUGUST. DE BAPTISMO CONTRA DONATISTAS, LIB. 4. 
 
 After this he goes on to show the similarity between 
 circumcision and baptism. But we have enough for our 
 present purpose. The most learned man of ancient 
 times here informs us that Infant baptism is a doctrine 
 held by the Universal Church, and not instituted by 
 
 * Quod traditum tenet universitas ecclesiae cum parvuli infantes 
 baptizantur ; qui certe nondum possuut corde credere ad justitiam 
 et ore confiteri ad saluteni, quod latro potuit : Quiuetian flendo 
 et vagiendo cum in eis Mysterium celebratur, ipsis mysticis vocibus 
 obstrepunt. Et tamen nullus Christianorum dixerit eos inaniter 
 baptizari. 
 
 Et si quisquam in hac re Divinam antoriatem qucerat ; Quan- 
 quam quod univei'sa tenet Ecclesia, nea Conciliis institutum sed 
 semper retentum est, non nisi autoritate apostolica traditum rectis- 
 sime creditur ; Tamen veraciter conjieere possumus quid valeat in 
 parvulis baptismi Sacrameutum ex circurndgione carnis quamprior 
 populus accepit. ' 
 
48 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 2S8.- 
 
 Councils, but ordained by notliing less, as all believed, 
 than tlie authority of the Apostles. 
 
 We next visit the Church in Mih\n in -which we find 
 Ambrose the bishop commenting on the Abrahamic 
 covenant. He also institutes a comparison between the 
 rites of circumcision and baptism, and remarks : 
 
 " As circumcision is from inf^mcy so is the disease. No time 
 ought to be void of the remedy because none is void of guiU."* 
 He then apphes it to baptism and reads, " No person comes to 
 the kingdom of heaven but by the sacrament of baptism. "f 
 
 And cites the words of our Saviour to Nicodemus 
 with the annexed comment — John iii. 5 : 
 
 " For unless any one be born again of the water, and of the 
 Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. You see 
 he excepts no pers(jn, no not an infant not one that is hindered 
 by any unavoidable accident. And even if such (as are hindered) 
 have freedom from punishment. I know not that they shall have 
 the honor of the Kingdom. "J Ambrosius de Abra. Patr. lib. 2. 
 c.ll. 
 
 He regarded it not only as generally necessary to 
 every one, young or old, or as a law which all are bound 
 to obey — but would not take on himself the responsi- 
 bility of saying, that even those who missed of baptism 
 by accident or by no fault of their own, would certainly 
 have the lionor of Heavtn, although they might escape 
 any positive punishment. 
 
 We liave no time to discuss the extreme nature of his 
 
 * Ambrosius de Abra. Patriarch, lib. 2. c. 11. 
 
 •j- i. e. no other prescribed mode. 
 
 \ Nisi enini quis renatus fu^rit ex cqua et Spiritu Snncto, non 
 potest introire in regnum Dei. lltique nullum cxcipit : Non infantem, 
 non aliqua prevcntufi8" necessitate. Habeiint tamcn ilkin opertam 
 penaruui iniinunitateni, niseio an habeant regni bonorem. 
 
—260 A. Apos.] practice of THE CHURCH. 49 
 
 views, but more unequivocal testimony to tlie doctrine 
 of Infant baptism in the Church of Milan at that time 
 could not be given. 
 
 Passing on thirty years nearer to the Apostles, we 
 come to the time that ,, Op tjitiL% -bishop of Milevium 
 wrote. In comparing the Christian's putting on Christ 
 in baptism, to the j)utting on of a garment, he says : 
 
 " But lest any one should say I speak irreverently in calling 
 Christ a garment, let him read what the Apostle says; 'As many 
 of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ' 
 Oh what a garment is this, that is always one and innumerable, 
 that decently fits all ages and all shapes! It is neither too big j 
 for IxFAXTS nor too little for men, and without any alteration, / 
 fits women/'* — lib. v. de schismate doxatistarum. ^-^ 
 
 This is too plain to need comment. The garment of 
 baptism " fits all ages and all shapes, not too big for 
 Infants or too little for men,'' 
 
 Let us turn next to Gregory Nazianzen who wrote 
 about the same time with Optatus, but in a different 
 part of the world, was born in Cappadocia and educated 
 in Athens. In reference to baptism, he often uses the 
 term '' Laver of regeneration'' — '^ the seal," the ^^ grace," 
 the ^' anointing" to be ^'•sanctified" kc. Finding that 
 there were those among his hearers who were almost 
 persuaded to be Christians, but who then, as is too often 
 the case now, could not make up their minds fully to 
 unite themselves with the Church — some of them having 
 
 ■^ Sed ne quis dicat, temere a me Filiiim Dei vestem esse dictuam 
 legat Apostolum dicentem; Quotquot in nomine Christi baptizti: 
 estis, Christum induistis. tunica semper una et innumerabilis 
 quaj decenter vestiat et omnes setates et formas : nee infantibus 
 rugatur nee in juvenibus tenditur, nee in foeminis mntatur. 
 
 5 
 
60 I^^FANT BAPTISM. tA. Apos. 260- 
 
 been catecliumens for a long time, (i. e. receiving a 
 course of instruction to prepare them for baptism) yet 
 delayed to come for^vardj he admonishes them, that 
 Satan ''Sets on all ages and must be resisted hy all. 
 Art tJiou a youth I fight against pleasures and passions 
 ivith this auxiliary strength; enlist thyself in God's 
 army. . . . Art thou old? let thy gray hairs strengthen 
 thee: strengthen thy old age ivith baptism.'' 
 
 " Have you an Infant? Let not wickedness have the advan- 
 tage of time: from his infancy let him he sanctified; from the 
 ctadle let him be consecrated by the Spirit. You fear the seal 
 on account of the weakness of nature : how faint-hearted a mo- 
 ther and of little faith. Iltinnah, even before Samuel was born, 
 promised him to God, and consecrated him immediately after his 
 birth and brought him up in the priestly dress, not fearing any 
 human infirmity, but trusting to God.'^^f — oratio de baptismo, 
 40. 
 
 Nazianzen here urges that no time be lost— that In- 
 fants be *' sanctified" and receive the "seal" (baptism) 
 from the cradle, and rebukes faint-hearted mothers who 
 sometimes delay the baptism of their children on account 
 of their weakness — pointing them to Hannah's faith. 
 
 But afterwards, when on a different subject, he recom- 
 
 * Tlic error that Grotius fell into in this passage has been so often 
 exposed that it is unnecessary to refer to it here. 
 
 f| ovvx^^v vadii^o-'^ritu) -fco nrfv^uaru 2d 6f5oixaj tr^v cr^paySa bia to 
 
 Ttptv ri yivv>]9'yjvai, tov Sa^otjyX xa^vvrtipxito •fw ©£(o scat yivvr^Qi:Vta 
 iipov ev^vi Ttoiti, xav 'tiq tfpaf tx>^ j'-foT.'/^ Gvva.viBp'ti'^iv^ ov to avd^f-^Tiivov 
 ^oSrjOeLOa, tio 6i ©£« rtvc^tivaaaa' 
 
—260 A. Apos.] practice OF THE CHURCH. 51 
 
 mends three years as a suitable time where weakness or 
 disease did not endanger the life of the child. When 
 this was the case, however, he would allow no time to 
 elapse before baptism. Otherwise, he thought it might 
 be deferred till they could speak distinctly enough to 
 answer the questions themselves, in the baptismal ser* 
 vice. But either case admits the principle involved in 
 the question of Infant baptism, and shows that this was 
 the then usage of the Church. In the latter case he 
 was reproving certain candidates for baptism, who seem- 
 ed more concerned in making outward preparation than 
 inward — telling them that a preparation of heart and an 
 earnest desire for it, was the acceptable thing to God — ' 
 but lest some might suppose that what he had said con- 
 flicted with an established doctrine of the Church, he 
 adds : 
 
 " Some may say, suppose this to hold in the case of those who"^ 
 can DESIRE baptism ; what say you as concerning those who are 
 as yet Infants, and are not sensible of its loss or of its ^race, 
 shall we baptize them too? By all means, if any danger make 
 it requisite. For it is better that they be sanctified (baptized) 
 without their own sense of it, than that they shoukl die unsealed 
 and UNINITIATED. And a ground of this to us is circumcision, which 
 was given on the eighth day, and was a typical seal, and was 
 practiced on those who had no reason. As also, the anointing of 
 the door posts, which preserved the first born by things which had 
 no sense. As for others, I gave my opinion, that they should stay 
 three years or thereabouts, when they are capable to hear and 
 answer some of the holy words: and though they do not perfect- 
 ly understand them, yet they form them ; and that you then seem 
 to sanctify them in soul and body with the great sacrament of in- 
 itiation."* — Oratio de Baptismo, 40. 
 
 ' Eatco 'tavta, ^rjist rtfpt t'coj/ STiili^fovvTfoiv to jSajtifis/xa ti 5' av £t,7ioi$ 
 
52 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 26'0— 
 
 It will perhaps surprise some of onr readers to hear 
 that this passage "was ever referred to in behalf of Anti- 
 pedobaptism. Nothing can be more manifest than its 
 recognition of the doctrine of Infant baptism. Every 
 one who thinks at all, must know that three years of 
 age is not the ''age of discretion,'' which is the lowest 
 limit that Antipedobaptism will allow. Gregory himself 
 says, they cannot understand the meaning of the words, 
 but yet they will be able then to pronounce some of them, 
 and gives it merely as his own " ojnnion," (not the doc- 
 trine of the Church,) that in such cases it will be well to 
 delay it until about that time. As to his opinion, or the 
 reason he gives for it, few we presume, will be disposed 
 to give them much weight. His longest limit admits the 
 principle of Infant baptism, much more his answer in 
 regard to the weak and sickly. 
 
 So much for one of the '' ttvo, who advised the delay 
 of Infant baptism during the first four hundred years 
 of Christianity." We shall come to the other presently. 
 But who would dream that anything against its authority 
 could be found in these passages ? Who does not see 
 that both its practice and authority are clearly implied — 
 even its necessity urged in cases of bodily weakness ? 
 
 71 xai, tavta ^cxrit t6o^iv ; jiavvyi, f trtf p rt$ f rtaty?; xivhwo^ ICpstutov -yap 
 avai^Yjtoji ayLa^7]i'0.i, r^ arti%9eiv aa^paytita, xac attXsnxa. Kat rorfoo; 
 Jtoyoj Tifxiv 7] oxtayjixipoi rifpftofiri, TfvrCixTj f t$ ovaa o^pay^s* xai, aXoytj- 
 toii I'd 7ipoiayo/x£V7i, «$ 5t xat tj tU)V ^%icov xpt^t^ 5ta fcov avai^ritoiv 
 ^%attovsa ta rtpototoxa. Uepi 6f t'wv aTJKuv 8i8<^fiat yvu^ixr^v, tr^v 
 tpwtiav ava^fvoi/'T'aj, t] fiixpov evto^ iovtov, r^rtsp ifovfovj r^vixa xae 
 axov6ai, rt /xvoixov xat artoxpivs^ai 8vvavtai, ft xai fxr^ avvuvra TfXftwj 
 aXT. ovv TfvTtov/xeva, ovtio^ aytaffij/ ;iat '^v^o-i xat 6io[xo.ta tw ^tya^iai 
 
-260 A. Apos.] practice op the CHURCH. b6 
 
 It is not our business to attempt to reconcile his in- 
 consistency apparent or real, when at one time he ex- 
 horts persons procrastinating duty, to avail themselves 
 of this " auxiliary strength," and not to permit " wick- 
 edness to have the advantage of time with their chil- 
 dren, but consecrate and seal them from the cradle;" 
 and at another, advises delay until " three years of 
 age, unless danger make it requisite." It is, however, 
 not unusual for men in the warmth of feeling to push a 
 favorite theory too far, and then stretch other principles 
 beyond their lawful bounds to harmonize with it. Gre- 
 gory was very justly reproving those who were more 
 anxious to have one high in office to baptize them, and 
 to avoid the poor and have the rich their fellow-recipients, 
 at the same time, &c., than they were about their own fit- 
 ness for the ordinance ; and hence admonished them that a 
 due preparation of heart — a right spirit — a ^^ heart in- 
 flamed ivitli the desire for it,'' — were things more import- 
 ant than all external pre-requisites and appendages. 
 But in attempting to apply, what was true of all capa- 
 ble of desiring it, and needing such preparation, to little 
 children who did not need it, and were incapable of the 
 "inflamed desire;" he proposes to defer baptism in their 
 case to a time when they might at least seem to desire 
 it, by pronouncing the words expressive of the feeling; 
 in order that the same principle should cover all, instead 
 of making the proper distinction between the two classes, 
 as had always been done. But who followed his advice? 
 And what is his reply to the simple question — " Shall 
 Infants be baptized, too?" Answer — " Zes, hy all 
 means if danger make it requisite. For it is letter that 
 
 5* 
 
54 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 260- 
 
 tliey he sanctified witJiout their own sense of it, than that 
 they should die unsealed and uninitiated. Aiid a ground 
 of this to us is circumcision,'' &c. Thus teaching that 
 baptism supersedes circumcision. Shall we number this ^ 
 man as an opposer of Infant baptism ? We trow not. 
 
 In connection with this we will notice another writer of 
 this age, whose testimony has been brought forward to 
 produce the impression that Infant baptism was not the 
 universal practice of the Church at this time ; and then 
 pass on to that which is more explicit on the subject. 
 
 Basil, a cotemporary of Gregory Nazianzen, and 
 Bishop of Ccesarea, in an exhortation to catechumens, 
 uses language w^hich seems to imply, as some think, that 
 young children were not baptized by him. He reminds 
 some of his auditors that "they had been catechised from 
 childhood, and still put off their baptism." This is 
 brought forward, as if proof positive that Infant bap- 
 tism was not then universal. But every one at all fami- 
 liar with Church history knows, that as early as the 
 close of the second century, so great was the influx of 
 uninformed persons into the Church, that it was found 
 necessary to adopt measures by which applicants for 
 baptism should be instructed. Pouring into it, from 
 every class, and of different nations, and bringing with 
 them, as we may suppose, every variety of opinion; 
 many of them knowing but little more of the doctrines 
 of Christianity than the great truths of Christ's death 
 and resurrection ; it was expedient that all such should 
 be more thoroughly instructed before they were admitted 
 to baptism. And for this purpose, they were first form- 
 ed into classes and taught by questions and answers; 
 afterwards schools and teachers in different places were 
 
—260 A. Apos.] practice of the CIIUE.CH. 55 
 
 provided for them. Thej who chose, brought also their 
 children with them to these schools. (At that time, only 
 the children of baptized persons were baptized, except 
 such as were adopted by Christians, or for whom Chris- 
 tians stood as sureties for their thorough religious train- 
 ing.) iVnd this system soon suggested the idea to 
 pious parents of availing themselves of a similar method 
 for the instruction of their baptized children. And by- 
 and-by, classes of these Y>-ere likewise formed. 
 
 It appears that some of those who had entered the 
 catechetical school under Basil, had become careless and 
 lukewarm in regard to their' baptism and put it off till 
 they had now grown old, some of their children had 
 grown up to manhood, w^ho were brought with them when 
 very young. These were not baptized during their mi- 
 nority, because their parents themselves were not, and 
 now they were old enough to receive the ordinance on 
 their own responsibility, they were following the example 
 of their parents in imtting it off. Basil, in a public ad- 
 dress, thus speaks to this latter class of persons : 
 
 " Do you procrastinate, and deliberate, and put it off? Haying 
 been catechised from a little child in the word, have you not yet 
 learned the truth? Always hearing it, and not yet come to the 
 knowledge of it. A trier all your life long ; a considerer till you 
 are old? When will you become a Christian ? "When shall we 
 see you become one of us ?'^* — oratio exhortatoria ad baptis- 
 
 MUM. 
 
 * " Oxrf tj xai ^mfkvv^ xat 5ta,uf7.?.Etj ; ix vt^fiov 'tov "Koyov xatrixov- 
 fxivoi ovrtw avvtOov fr^ a?tjj9f ta ; rtavtots [xav^avuv orSfrtco r^x^ei Ttpoi 
 tfjv e7iiyviC)6Lv ; 7t£tpa6tr^i 6ia /3tor, xaiaozoTto^ f-'-^XP'' y^P^i'y TiotTf 
 ytvr^'^Yi ;^ptff'r't.ai'Oj rtof a yj'copcijco^afv Of (d$ Tj'^ufri'poz', &c. 
 
56 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 260- 
 
 This passage has been often brought forward, and as 
 much noise made about it, as if of itself, a demonstra- 
 tion against Infant baptism in that age, because Basil 
 tells some of his auditors that they had been "cate- 
 chised from a child." But where is the proof that these 
 catechumens were born of Christian parents ? There is 
 none. What is it worth then, so long as we know that the 
 children of heathens were received into these schools, 
 with their parents, and continued as catechumens or candi- 
 dates for baptism, some of them for many years. If it 
 could be shown in a single case that the infant children of 
 Christians were made catechumens of such schools before 
 their baptism, then this passage could only make it a 
 question of doubt, whether he was addressing those born 
 of Christian parents or those of heathen ? But since 
 there is nothing in the passage itself to show this, and 
 no one has yet adduced any other proof to that effect, 
 every one must perceive that this passage has no bear- 
 ing whatever on the question. 
 
 We might dwell longer upon it, but as testimony 
 already adduced has proved the prevalence of Infant 
 baptism at this time, and there is abundance of evidence, 
 which cannot be questioned, of its prevalence before this 
 time, further remark is unnecessary. There is a pas- 
 sage from Basil himself, which shows what was his 
 opinion as to the propriety of Infant baptism. Referring 
 to Solomon's words, that there is a " time for every- 
 thing," he adds : 
 
 "There is, therefore, tlic proper season for several things — a 
 time peculiar for sleep, and one peculiar for watching, a time for 
 
-260 A. Apos.] practice OF THE CHURCH. 57 
 
 war, and a time for peace. But the whole life of one (or of any 
 one's life) is proper for haptism."*t — Basil Oratio Exhortato- 
 
 RIA AD BaPTISMUJI. 
 
 Passing on to a C ounc il of Eliberis, held a little more 
 than 200 years from the age of the Apostles, we find a 
 
 * There is aiiutlier psissage of Basil's — also one from Jerome — that 
 are sometimes introduced into this controversy. But they are not 
 deemed of sufficient importance to be given a place in the body of 
 this evidence. A mere glance at their import will show that they 
 have no beai-ing on the question before us. The passage of Basil 
 referred to, was introduced in an argument with the EunomianSj_ who 
 denied the Divinity of the Son and Holy Ghost. He argued that in 
 thus acting they renounced their baptism — for that was in the name 
 of all three persons in the Trinity, hence into the faith of the Divinity 
 of each. And as the faith into which they were baptized is prior to 
 the act of baptism, a renunciation of that foith was a renunciation of 
 their baptism. This is the substance of the passage and argument. 
 But what pedobaptist, if he should choose to adopt the same kind of 
 reasoning, might not say the same thing ? That all rightl}^ baptized 
 are baptized into the faith of the Trinity — that ah adult must believe 
 and be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost 
 — Infants are baptized likewise in the same faith, and taught to be- 
 lieve, and brought up in the same doctrine. In baptism, as it was in 
 circumcision, faith is prior in the purport of the design, but not in 
 the execution of the artist — not necessarily prior in point of time in 
 its application to its subjects. Nor does Basil mean anything more 
 than this, as is evident both from the passage and nature of the argu- 
 ment which he used. 
 
 In the case of Jerome, he was commenting on the commission '' to 
 teach and baptize all nations," in which he shows the necessity of 
 instructing nations before we baptize them. To which every pedo- 
 baptist will agree, and according to which every one acts. "Whenever 
 sent to a heathen land, no one ever dreams of baptizing before he 
 has convinced the people of the truth of his message, and instructed 
 them to some extent in the great principles of Christianity. But as 
 soon as this is done, and parents who have children believe, and are 
 baptized, he also baptizes their young children. Just as we believe 
 the Apostles acted under the same commission. Jerome, as has been 
 already seen, expressly declares it to be a sin in parents to neglect 
 the baptism of their children. It is, therefore, loss of time to dwell 
 on this passage. 
 
 "I" Katpoj [.isv ovv u.7Jkoi.i, aW.oj STiitr^SiLo^ 16105 ^vrCvov, xac t§toj 
 
 ypr^yopr^aeoii, *t6to$ rCo7^i,uov xat 't§i,o$ tLpr^vr^^' Katpoj 8s /3artT'tcf,uaT'os 
 
 1 
 
58 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 205- 
 
 canon passed, containing regulations in regard to schism, 
 and the conditions on which those who had been guilty 
 of that sin, should be received back into the church 
 when application was made by them. 
 
 '' If any one go over from the Church Catholic to any heresy 
 (or sect) and again return to tlie Church : Resolved, that repent- 
 ance be not denied to such an one, inasmuch as he has acknow- 
 ledged his fault. Let him be in a state of repentance for ten 
 years, and after ten years be admitted to the communion. 
 
 " But if they were Infants when they were carried over, iuas- 
 mucfi as it was not their own fault that they erred, they ought to 
 be admitted without delay. ^^^'' — Concil. Eliberitanum. Can. 22. 
 
 From this we learn again that infants were made 
 members of schismatical sects, as well as of the Church 
 Catholic, or great body of Christians. This canon was 
 passed on account of schism, and the conditions made 
 in regard to such as had gone over from the Church, or 
 carried over, (transducti,) which implies that all such 
 were members of the Church before they were carried 
 over. And the manner in which infants are referred 
 to, very clearly shows what was the common practice of 
 the age. 
 
 Fifty years still nearer to the Apostles, we find an- 
 other Council was held at Carthage. And among the 
 questions brought before that body for their deliberation, 
 was one which brings out very explicitly the practice of 
 the Church, and the opinion of the Council in regard to 
 
 ^' Si quis de Catholica, Ecclosia ad hercsim transitum fecerit, rurs- 
 usque ad ecclesiam recurrent: placuit hie penitentiam non esse dene- 
 gandam, eb quod cognoverit peccatum suum : qui etiam decem annis 
 agat penitentiam ; cui post decem annos prrestari communio debet. 
 Si vero infantes fuorint transducti ; quod non suo vitio peccaverint, 
 incunctanter recipi debent. 
 
-205A. apos.] practice of the church. 59 
 
 Infant baptism. The question proposed was, wlietlier it 
 would not be better to delay the baptism of infants till 
 the eighth day after their birth, than to continue baptiz- 
 ing them so young as two and three days of age, as was 
 at that time the custom ? It was then likewise usual to 
 give the "hoW kiss" to all who were baptized. Fidus, 
 who sent up the proposition to the Council, gives among 
 other reasons for its delay till the eighth day, that this 
 was the time when circumcision was administered, and 
 that it would be more pleasant to give them the holy kiss 
 at that age, than when only two or three days old. His 
 proposed change and reasons being considered, a synod- 
 ical letter was written in reply to him, of which the fol- 
 lowing arc extracts : 
 
 " Cyprian and others of the College of Bishops who were pre- 
 sent, sixty-six in number, to Fidus, our brother, greeting : 
 
 ''We read your letter, most dear brother, &c 
 
 So far as it pertains to the case of Infants, Avho you think ought 
 not to be baptized within the second or third day from their birth : 
 and that the ancient law of circumcision should be observed, so 
 that none should be baptized and sanctified before the eighth day 
 after birth ; it seemed to all in our Council far otherwise. For 
 as for what you proposed to be done, there was not one of your 
 opinion. But on the contrary, it was our unanimous decision 
 that the grace and mercy of God should not be denied to any 
 one as soon as born. . . . And whereas, you say that an 
 infant in the first days after its birth is unclean, so that one dis- 
 likes to kiss it ; we think not thus, nor that it ought to be any 
 impediment to giving it the heavenly grace."* — Cypr. Ep. 59 ad 
 
 FiDUM. 
 
 * " Legimus literas tuas, frater carissime, &c. . . . Quantum 
 vero ad causam infantium pertinet, quos dixisti intra secundum vel 
 tertium dierrf| quo nati sunt, constitutos baptizari non oportere et con- 
 
60 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. luO- 
 
 There are several things for tlie reader to observe iu 
 this place. 
 
 First, That this testimony is like all the other hereto- 
 fore given, incidental. The right of infants to baptism 
 is taken for granted, and a secondary question implying 
 its previoas existence discussed; the mere appendage of 
 a few days delay. 
 
 Secondly, That the reasons assigned for its delay till 
 the eighth day, instead of affecting its divine authority, 
 were offered, because, in the first place, circumcision 
 was given formerly on the eighth day, and because, in 
 the second, when children w^ere so young it was unpleas- 
 ant to give them the holy kiss, which w^as the common 
 practice of this age. 
 
 And thirdly, That we have now arrived within about 
 one hundred and fifty years of the Apostolic age, and 
 may presume that most of these bishops living so near 
 that age had abundant means of ascertaining whether 
 this thing was of divine authority or not. And further, 
 that of so large a number as sixty-six, it is not unreason- 
 able to suppose that some of them were old men, whose 
 memories would carry them back half the intervening time, 
 and only leave them some sixty or seventy years to trace 
 it to the Apostles. For which family tradition, coming 
 
 siderandura esse legem circuracisionis antifiufe : ut intra octavnm 
 diem, cum qui natus est baptizandnm et sanctificandum non putares, 
 longe aliud in Concilio nosti'O omnibus visum est. In hoc enim quod 
 tu putabas esse faciendum nemo consensit : sed universi potius judi- 
 cavimus nuUi hominum nato misericordiam Dei et gratiam denegan- 
 dam. . . . Nam et quod vestigium infantis in primus partus sui 
 diebus constituti mundum non esse dixisti, quod unusquisque nos- 
 trum horreat exosculari : nee hoc putamus ad ccclestem gratiam 
 dandam impcdimento esse oportere. ^ 
 
-150 A. AP0S.3 PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 61 
 
 only through the father or grandfather, would be suffi- 
 cient; which is a kind of tradition few will hesitate to 
 receive, when in the line of their own ancestors. 
 
 And be it further observed, that the whole number, 
 without a dissenting voice, decided against even the sec- 
 ondary question of a few days delay. 
 
 Thus far the way is open and clear before us. Other 
 testimony might have been introduced, but omitted, be- 
 cause deemed unnecessary. As we draw nearer to the 
 Apostolic age, the number of writers of course diminish, 
 and much less is said about baptism, but enough for our 
 purpose. The few who wrote during the first century 
 and early part of the second after the Apostles, were 
 chiefly engaged in opposing heresies and combating new 
 doctrines. Infant baptism not being one of these, when 
 referred to, is introduced in an incidental way in connec- 
 tion with something else, similar to the cases already 
 noticed. 
 
 Tertullian, to whom allusion has been several times 
 made, was the only man during the first thousand 
 years of Christianity, so far as we can learn, that did 
 oppose Infant baptism, and he only when there was no 
 danger of death. Nor did he confine himself to the ^^ 
 case of young children, but embraced the young and 
 unmarried of both sexes — virgins, and those in a state of 
 widowhood. 
 
 He had adopted the opinion that baptism washed 
 away all previous sin, whether actual or original, and 
 hence the longer delayed the better, because sins com- 
 mitted after baptism, could not, according to his theory, 
 be washed away by it. Tertullian was a man of lively 
 6 
 
62 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. loo- 
 
 imagination, and very visionary. He left tlie Church, 
 and was at one time a Montanist, afterward the founder 
 of a sect called after his own name. He was neverthe- 
 less a man of considerable acquirements, and so far as 
 a public practice of the Church is concerned, must be 
 received as a very competent witness. In a discourse 
 on baptism, he speaks as follows : 
 
 " Therefore according to every one's condition and disposition, 
 and also their age, the delaying of baptism is more profitable, 
 especially in the case of little children. For what need is there, 
 except in great necessity, that their sponsors should be brought 
 into danger? Because they may either fail of their promises by 
 death, or they may be deceived by a child's proving of a wicked dis- 
 position. Our Lord says, indeed, 'Do not forbid them to come 
 unto me.' Let them come, therefore, when they are grown up ; 
 let them come when they can learn ; when they can be taught 
 whither it is they come : let them be made Christians, when they 
 can know Christ. What need their innocent age make such haste 
 to the forgiveness of sin ? Men proceed more cautiously in worldly 
 things ; and he that is not trusted with earthly goods, shall he be 
 trusted with divine? Let them know how to ask salvation, that 
 you may appear to give it to one that asketh. For no less reason 
 unmarried persons ought to be delayed, because they are exposed 
 to temptations, as well as virgins that are come to maturity, and 
 those that are in widowhood by the loss of their consort, until 
 they either marry or be confirmed in continence."^" — Tertulli- 
 
 ANUS DE BaPTISMO, C, 18. 
 
 * Itaque pro cujusque persons conditione ac dispoaitionc, etiam 
 aetate, cunctatio baptism! utilior est ; praecipue tamcn circa parvulos. 
 Quid enim necesse est (si nou tamen necesse) sponsores ctiam pcricu- 
 lo ingori? quia et ispi per mortahtatcm destituere promissioncs suas 
 possunt, et prevent make indolis falli. Ait quidem Dominus Nolite 
 illos prohibere ad me venire. Yeniant ergo dum adolescunt, veniant 
 dum discunt, dum quo veniant doccntur ; fiant Christiani quum Chris- 
 tum nossc potuerint. Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem 
 peccatorum ? Cautius ageter in secularibus ; ut cui substantia terre- 
 na non creditur Diviua credatur. Korint petere salutem, ut petenti 
 dedisse videaris. Nou minori de causa iunuptl quoquc procrastinaudi, 
 
-lOOA. Aporf.] PllACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 68 
 
 From this passage it is evident that Tertullian would 
 delay the baptism of all classes till by age or other cir- 
 cumstances they were not likely to be brought under 
 strong temptation through the flesh. That all unmar- 
 ried persons, both those who had never been married 
 and those who had lost their partners, should be kept 
 waiting till they were either married or confirmed in 
 chaste single life. 
 
 Now what Church in Christendom would adopt such 
 views as these ? In the case of little children, baptism 
 must be deferred till they are grown up — and then till 
 they are married, or by age, and the practice of virtue 
 '' confirmed in continence." ("Donee aut nubant aut 
 continentia corroborentur.") And he might have added 
 better than all, defer the baptism of every one, till just 
 before death ; and then all their sins will be washed 
 away, and no time allowed to sin afterwards. 
 
 It was the adoption of this theory — of washing away 
 past sin, that led him to oppose the usage of the 
 Church. But in his argument he does not venture to 
 say, that the baptism of children is an innovation brought 
 into the Church since the days of the Apostles, or that 
 it is a new thing in the Church. He merely ventures 
 to oppose it on the grounds of " greater usefulness" — 
 " Utilior est" — "it is more useful," &c. His referring 
 to their baptism AT all, proves that it was customary 
 then to baptize young children, which is all that chiefly 
 concerns our present inquiry. His opinion is his own. 
 
 in quibus tentatio praeparata est ; tam virginibus per maturitatcra, 
 quam viduis per vacationem, donee aut nubant aut continentia cor- 
 roborentur. 
 
64 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 100- 
 
 The practice of the Church is what we desire to know — 
 and the manner in which he alludes to it, and the mode 
 of reasoning pursued bj him in regard to it, are suffi- 
 cient for our purpose. For he refers to the bap- 
 tism of young children in the same way that he refers 
 to other classes of persons usually baptized, and argues 
 the point in a way that proves beyond all doubt, that 
 Infant baptism was then the usage of the Church. " For 
 what need is there," says he, "that their sponsors (god- 
 fathers) be brought into danger," &c. This shows not 
 only that young children were at the time baptized, but 
 even that sponsors were then used at their baptism. 
 How could he refer to such things if they did not exist ? 
 He also attempts to reconcile with his theory a pas- 
 sage of Scripture which, it appears, was regarded by 
 himself as authority for bringing young children into 
 Christ's kingdom. " Our Saviour (he admits) does in- 
 deed say, 'do not forbid them to come to me,' but let 
 them come when they are grown up — let them come 
 when they learn — when they are taught whither they 
 are coming." By referring to this passage, he shows 
 what was the age of the persons (parvulos) of whom he 
 was speaking, and also how the passage was generally 
 understood in that early age of the Church. He was 
 evidently speaking of the same class of little children 
 that were brought to our Saviour by their mothers, and 
 which He took up in his arms and blessed, saying : "Of 
 such is the kingdom of God," Mark x. 14. Their infan- 
 tile state, is further manifest by his speaking of them as 
 so young that their " disposition was not yet unfolded" 
 — that they did not "know whither they were coming" 
 
-100 A. apos.] practice of the church. 65 
 
 — were unable to ask for themselves, and beino; of an 
 innocent "guiltless age." 
 
 But be it observed that he does not appeal to the 
 usage of the Church at that time, or any previous period 
 between that and the days of the Apostles to sustain his 
 opinions. He does not say that it is not the uniform 
 practice of the Church, or a new thing brought into the 
 Church, nor intimate anything of the kind. How easily 
 might he have put down this practice and establish his 
 own theory by an appeal of this kind, had there been 
 any ground for it. And how natural is it for men to 
 appeal to the strongest known authority when anxious 
 to establish any point. The absence of all such reason- 
 ing is of itself, strong presumptive proof that Ter- 
 tullian knew all the testimony was on the other side. 
 For we cannot suppose a man of his acquirements could 
 not trace back a public usage of the Church only one 
 hundred years, which would bring him to the Apostolic 
 age. The whole of his reasoning shows that he was 
 trying to introduce a new arrangement in the Church, 
 which he placed entirely on grounds of expediency. Nor 
 does it appear that the Church or the Montanists with 
 whom he afterwards unitedj followed his opinions. 
 
 Dr. Wardlow, of Glasgow, speaking of the opinion of 
 Tertullian on this point, says — ''Emphasis is laid on the 
 peculiar opinion of this Father. But the question be- 
 fore us is not one of opinion — but of fact. Tertullian 
 was remarkable for singular and extravagant opinions." 
 "He was endowed," says Mosheim, "with a great 
 genius, but seemed deficient in point of judgment. His 
 piety was warm and vigorous, but, at the same time, me- 
 
66 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 100- 
 
 lancholy and austere. His learning was extensive and 
 profound ; and yet his credulity and superstition was 
 such as might have been expected from the darkest ig- 
 norance. And with respect to his reasoning, it had 
 more of that subtlety that dazzles the imagination, than 
 of that solidity that brings light and conviction to the 
 mind." On the particular subject before us, he not only 
 advised the delay of baptism in the case of infants, but 
 also of unmarried persons. Will our. Baptist brethren 
 admit the influence as to the latter, which they draw so 
 complacently as to the former? The truth is, that, as 
 to both, the legitimate inference is the very contrary. 
 The very advice to delay, or if you will, the condemna- 
 tion of baptism in infancy (though these two are far 
 from being the same, and the former alone properly be- 
 longs to Tertullian,) is conclusive evidence of the pre- 
 vious existence of the practice. This is the point. The 
 opinion is nothing to the purpose. It has no authority. 
 If our Baptist friends think it has, let them do the good 
 old father justice, and follow it fully. His condemning 
 the practice of baptizing infants so far from being in 
 their favor, militates against them. It not only proves 
 its previous existence ; it proves more. It proves that 
 it was no innovation. When a man condemns a prac- 
 tice, he is naturally desirous to support his peculiar views 
 by the strongest arguments. Could Tertullian, there- 
 fore, have shown, that the practice was of recent origin ; 
 that it had been introduced in his own day, or even at 
 any time subsequent to the lives of the Apostles, we 
 have every reason to believe he would have availed him- 
 self of a ground so obvious, and so conclusive. It 
 
-100 A. Apos.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 67 
 
 proves still further, that the baptism of infants was the 
 general practice of the Church in Tertullian's time. 
 His opinion is his own. It is that of a dissentient from 
 the universal body of professing Christians. He never 
 pretends to say that any part of the Church had held 
 or acted upon it. Of his ojmiion and advice, then, we 
 may say, Valeant quantum valere possunt. But the 
 total absence of any attempt to support and recommend 
 them, by appeal to the practice of the Church in Apos- 
 tolic times, or of any part of the Church at any inter- 
 vening period between tht)se times and his own, certainly 
 goes far to prove the matter of fact, with which alone 
 we have to do — that ^' Infant haj)tism was the original 
 and universal loractice.''"^ 
 
 The fact is, that even Tertullian's strong love for 
 his new theory on baptism, could not lead him away so 
 far, as to induce him to give up Infant baptism where 
 there was danger of death. In the passage just cited, 
 the clause (si non tarn neeesse) " except in great neces- 
 sity" — (meaning danger of death) is in all of the older 
 manuscripts. Rigaltius left them out in his edition 
 without giving any reason for it. Whilst they are found 
 in the .edition of Pamelius, and he informs us that 
 Gaigneus, the first editor of the book, has them.f 
 
 Even Baptist writers now generally admit, that this 
 passage of Tertullian, shows that the baptism of young 
 children was at that time practiced in the Church, but 
 endeavor to evade its force, by presuming that it had 
 "just then been introduced." But on what authority is the 
 
 * Woods on Baptism. — See Appendix. 
 
 f Wall's history of Baptism, 3d edition, vol. i. pag-e 48. 
 
68 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 100- 
 
 presumption made ? Where is the evidence that it was 
 just then begun ? There is not one word. Tertullian's 
 advising its delay in this case, can be no evidence of 
 such a thing, because he advised the delay of other 
 classes of jyersoiis which, all must admit, were then and 
 ever had been admitted to baptism from the first preach- 
 ing of the Apostles. He does not say, that it is a new 
 thing, nor do any of his cotemporaries. He could 
 easily have appealed to the old men of his day, (whose 
 memories would carry them back within a few years of 
 the Apostolic age itself,) and ^Vfio, beyond a doubt, would 
 have made frequent mention of the fact, had it been in- 
 troduced within the time of their memories. But he 
 neither makes such an appeal nor any such an allusion. 
 Hence with others he admitted the authority for this 
 rite, but thought that now Christianity had become 
 more general, baptism would be more profitable if 
 delayed in certain cases. His advice to delay it in the 
 case of children is no index of even his own opinion, as 
 to its authority, for if he advised delay to one class 
 which the Apostles baptized, why not to another ? This 
 he certainly did in regard to young men, widows, &c., 
 and why suppose he entertained a difi'erent opinion in 
 regard to infants ? Or, if he questioned the divine au- 
 thority of Infant baptism, why did he -not say so ? He 
 admits in other portions of his writings that " every soul 
 is reckoned in Adam, until it be enrolled in Christ," (de 
 anima c. 39,) and explains, Cor. vii. 14. " Else were 
 your children unclean but now they are holy," to refer 
 to their religious (not civil) privileges, and hence 
 teaches their fitness for baptism. But his theory of 
 
-looA. apos.] practice of the church. 69 
 
 applying baptism to only past sins, led him to advise its 
 delay. 
 
 Such is the authority of Tertullian — the only man that 
 did oppose Infant baptism during the first four hundred, 
 aye, the first tliousmid years of Christianity. This is the 
 great opponent to baptizing young children, to whose 
 testimony Baptists so often appeal. The Great Gun so 
 frequently drawn out in battle array, and pointed at those 
 who dare to follow the practice of the Apostles and pri- 
 mitive Church, in baptizing their little children. 
 
 Examine it, and you will no longer fear it. It is an 
 empty blunderbuss which can do no harm. 
 
 Tertullian's opinion is that of an unsound mind, based 
 on unsound doctrine, involving principles destructive of 
 the plainest teachings of our Saviour. His testimony 
 proves, that it was then the usage of the Church to bap- 
 tize Infants ; his advice shows that he reasoned from 
 false premises ; his admission that Infants ought to be 
 baptized in danger of death, or his theory of the effects 
 of baptism concedes the whole question as a matter of 
 principle, that little children are proper subjects of bap- 
 tism. 
 
 Had he embraced correct views of baptism in the first 
 place, and instead of applying it to only past sins, re- 
 garded it as the seal of a covenant co-extensive with the 
 existence of man ; we should never have heard of Tertul- 
 lian as an opposer — or rather as the advocate for the 
 postponement, of all baptism till late in life, or just be- 
 fore death. 
 
 We have dwelt longer on the testimony of this Father 
 than its importance demanded, because his name is so 
 
70 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 100— 
 
 often, quoted by persons who never take the trouble to 
 examine his writings. As to the usage of the Church 
 in his time, that is placed beyond all doubt by contem- 
 poraneous authority. It does not admit of controversy. 
 The evidence on this point will be adduced in the next 
 chapter, with other proof that Infant baptism was the 
 doctrine and practice of the Church in the first century 
 after the Apostles, and before Tertullian was born. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 HISTORICAL TESTIMONY CONTINUED. 
 
 Origen born of Christian parents — His piety, learning and travels — His 
 declai-ation that Infant Baptism is the usage of the whole Church, hand- 
 ed doTvn by the Apostles — Care of early Christians to preserve the true 
 faith — Ireneus hearer of Polycarp, the pupil of St. John — His zeal for 
 Apostolic usage — Use of the term regeneration, and testimony to the 
 Baptism of all ages — Agreement of various sects on this point — Inter- 
 pretation of St. John iii. 5 and Titus iii. 5. 
 
 Origen was a cotemporary of Tertullian — born about 
 eigbty-four years after tbe deatb of St John, of Chris- 
 tian parents, himself baptized in infancy, and the most 
 learned man of his day. ^'His works," says Wadding- 
 ton, " exhibit the operation of a bold and comprehensive 
 mind, burning with religious warmth, unrestrained by 
 any low prejudices or interests, and sincerely bent on 
 the attainment of truth." 
 
 In his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, he 
 is led to speak of the inherent corruption of every one 
 born in the world, and refers to David as teaching the 
 same doctrine, in the fifty-first Psalm — where he says : 
 "In sin did my mother conceive me." Concerning which 
 he says, " there is in the history no account of any par- 
 ticular sin that his mother had committed," and adds: 
 
 " For this also it was, that the Church had from the Apostles i 
 the tradition (or injunction) to give baptism to young children.-f 
 For they, to -whom the Divine mysteries were committed, knew 
 
72 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 110- 
 
 that there is In all persons the natural pollution of sin, which 
 must be done away by water and the Spirit, on account of which 
 the body itself is also called the body of sm."f — Comment, on 
 -Epist. ad Romanos, Lib. 5. 
 
 In this passage, Origen appeals to Infant baptism as 
 tlie usage of the Church, not only at that time, but as 
 handed down from the Apostles. Nor does he seem to 
 add the latter clause of the sentence to give authority 
 for the usage, but merely refers to it as an acknowledged 
 and undisputed truth, believed by all. Adduced, as he 
 would any other acknowledged truth, to bear on the 
 point before him- — namely, the corrupt nature of every 
 one that is born into the world. ^' Tradition" was a 
 term at that early period used for what was written as 
 well as delivered orally:* and was regarded as including 
 the written words of the Apostles, as well as those un- 
 written. The Apostle Paul uses the term in the same 
 way—" Hold the traditions which you have been taught, 
 
 •5^ The term traditio — TtapSojtf " tradition," as used by the ancient 
 Fathers, signifies good and credible evidence delivered by one person 
 to another, either written or by speaking ; and is applied even to the 
 Gospels, which were called (Suicer. Thesaur. Tom. ii.) Evayy sT^ixaf, 
 rtapaSojiij, '' traditionary gospels." — C. Taylor. 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen calls the books of the Xew Testament — " The 
 Evangelical and Apostolical traditions." (EvayyeUxais ts xac artoj 
 
 Tertullian, referring to portions of the New Testament, exhorts their 
 opposers to " believe what is delivered." Crede quod traditmn est. 
 
 Hyppolytus, the Martyr, quoting certain passages of the New Tes- 
 tament, calls on his brethren, saying, "Let us believe, dear brethren, 
 according to the tradition of the Apostles, (^xata -tTjv TtapaSojcv tcov 
 iXTioi'to^.'kcov. — Goode's Divine Rule of Faith and Practice^ vol. i. p. 18, 
 andfolloicing. 
 
 f Pro hoc et Ecclesia ab apostolis traditionera suscepit etiam par- 
 vulis baptisraum dare. vSciebant enim illi quibus raysteriorum secreta 
 commissa sunt Divinorum, quia essent in omnibus genuine sordes 
 peccati, quae per aquam et spiritum ablui deberent, propter quas etiam 
 corpus ipsum, corpus peccati, nominatur. 
 
—no A. Apos.] practice of the CHURCH. 73 
 
 whether by word or our Epistle." (2 Thess. ii. 15.) 
 Although this term has been variously used since that 
 time, and made the cloak of many errors, it was at that 
 early period of binding authority, and doubtless referred 
 to by Origen as such. "Which shows the antiquity and 
 authority of Infant baptism at that time. 
 
 Origen was a warm advocate of innate corruption ; his 
 mind is said to have been tinctured with the Platonic 
 philosophy, but that does not affect his testimony as a 
 witness to what was the daily practice of the Church. 
 He could not be deceived in regard to a fact that was 
 constantly occurring before his eyes. And his theory 
 of natural corruption led him to refer oftener to the 
 baptism of infants than he would otherwise have done, 
 because this he regarded as acknowledged authority for 
 the depravity of every one born into the world. In a 
 Homily on a part of Leviticus, he refers also to the same 
 words of David just noticed, saying : 
 
 " Hear David speaking : ' In iniquities I Tras conceived/ says 
 he, ' and in sins did my mother bring me forth :' showing that 
 every soul born in the flesh is polluted with the filth of sin and 
 iniquity ; and that on this account, that was said, which we men- 
 tioned before: ' no one is clean from pollution, though his life is 
 but the length of one day/ 
 
 " Besides all this, it may be learnt, since the baptism of the 
 Church is given for the remission of sins ; why, according to the 
 usage of the Church it is likewise given to little children : where- 
 as, if there was nothing in little children that needed remission 
 and mercy, the grace of baptism would be superfluous to them."* 
 — HoMiLiA 8 IN Lev. Tom. I. p. 145. 
 
 * Audi David diceutera ; In iniquitatibus inquit, conceptus sum et 
 in peccatis peperit me mater mea : ostendens quod quaecunque^anima 
 
 7 
 
74 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. Iio- 
 
 Thus again we find him appealing to the " usage" of 
 the Church in baptizing young children as a thing con- 
 firmatory of the doctrine of original sin. For he refers 
 to this usage of the Church, as confirming what he had 
 akeady said, and supposes the doctrine he was advoca- 
 ting to be the reason, or groundwork of this practice — 
 ^' handed down from the Apostles." Addi his etiam 
 illud potest — literally "This may be added to these," 
 that is, in addition to what has been already said, we 
 can now understand why the Church administers to lit- 
 tle children the rite of the washing away of sin ; for if 
 infants were free from a sinful nature, it would be super- 
 fluous to them. With the nature of his argument we 
 have nothing now to do. So far as the usage of the 
 Church is concerned, this is as plain and as much to the 
 point as we can desire it to be. 
 
 In his commentary on St. Luke's gospel, he again 
 uses the same kind of argument, and testifies as une- 
 quivocally to the practice of Infant baptism. 
 
 " Little children are "baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Of 
 what sins ? Or when did thej commit them ? Or how can any 
 reason be given for baptizing them, but only according to that 
 sense which we mentioned a little before : ' none is free from pol- 
 lution, though his life be but the length of one day upon the 
 earth.' And for that reason infants arc baptized, because by 
 
 in came nascatur, iniquitatis et peccati sorde polluitur et propterea 
 dictum esse illud quod jam superius memoravimus ; quia nemo raua- 
 dus a sorde, nee si unius diei fuerit vita ejus. Addi his etiam illud 
 potest, ut requiratur quid causse sit, cum baptisma ecclesire in remis- 
 sionem peccatorum detur, secundum ecclesire observantiam etiam 
 parvulis quod ad remlssioncm deberet et indulgentiam pertinore gratiiA 
 baptism! superflua videretur. 
 
— lluA. Apos.] practice UF the CHURCH. ib 
 
 i 
 I the sacrament of baptism, the pollution of our birth is taken 
 
 / away."^ — Homil. in Lucam, tom. ii. p. 223. 
 
 To this might be added jet other passages from the 
 writings of Origen to the same effect, but enough is 
 given to satisfy any reasonable mind. Let it now be 
 remarked, first — that infant baptism is not of itself a 
 matter of dispute, but introduced in connection with an- 
 other question, second — that it is appealed to, as if a thing 
 the authority of which no one doubted. So certain was 
 Origen that all would admit the authority of this rite, 
 that he based his reasoning on the ground, that a denial 
 of natural corruption would come in conflict with the 
 apostolic rite of Infant baptism. For (says he) it was 
 for this reason that the- " Church had from the Apostles 
 the tradition to give baptism to young children." In- 
 fant baptism is therefore brought in incidentally, and in 
 such a way as to prove that it was the established, 
 honored, and universally acknowledged doctrine of the 
 Church at that time. 
 
 As to the authority of these passages — it so happened 
 that two different writers made translations of the 
 writings of Origen in the next century after he wrote, 
 and they belonging to opposite parties on many points 
 of which he treats, but in both of which the doctrine of 
 Infant Baptism is fully set forth, which makes his testi- 
 mony even more certain than if found only in the origi- 
 
 * Parvuli baptizantur in remissionem peccatorum. Quorum pecca- 
 torum? Yel quo tempore peccaverunt? Aut quomodo potest ulla 
 lavacri in parvulis ratio subsistere, nisi juxta ilium sensum de quo 
 paulo ante diximus ; Xullus mundus a sorde, ncc si unius diei quidem 
 fuerit vita ejus super terram ? Et quia per baptism! sacramentum 
 nativitatis sordes deponuntur, propterea baptizantur et parvuli. 
 
76 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 110- 
 
 nal works purporting to be his own. The passages 
 already adduced are from both translators — two from 
 RuFiNUS, and one from Jerome. Others could be ad- 
 duced were it necessary. 
 
 Before we proceed, however, to the next witness, we 
 will consider the many advantages possessed by Origen, 
 to know whether this "usage of the Church was handed 
 down from the Apostles" and universal. In regard to 
 his learning and piety, as has been already remarked, 
 the Church in that age did not possess his equal. " He 
 was a man (says Mosheim) of great and uncommon abili- 
 ties, and the greatest luminary of the Christian world — 
 the immensity of whose genius, and the fervor of whose 
 piety — whose indefatigable patience, extensive erudition, 
 and other eminent and superior talents, all enconiums 
 must have fallen short had his judgment been in corres- 
 pondence. Yet such as he was, his virtues and his labors 
 deserve the admiration of all ages : and his name will 
 be transmitted with honor through the annals of time 
 as long as learning and genius shall be esteemed among 
 men." 
 
 And besides this he had enjoyed other advantages to 
 qualify him to speak on this subject. Eusebius informs 
 us that he was born and bred in Alexandria — lived some 
 time in Greece and in Rome — visited Cappadocia and 
 Arabia in his travels, spending some time in each — and 
 passed the greater part of his life in Syria and Pales- 
 tine, the seat of the first Churches.* 
 
 Thus, added to the other means which men of learning 
 
 * Eusebius, liber 6. 
 
-110 A. Apos.] practice of the CHURCH. i i 
 
 possess for knowing the doctrines of their Church, Ori- 
 GEN could speak from personal ohservation in regard to 
 Infant baptism, in all these portions of the world — Alex- 
 andria, Greece, Kome, Cappadocia, Arabia, Syria, and 
 Palestine. Now mark, a man born only eighty-four 
 years from the Apostles' times, of Christian parents, 
 baptized and taught the Scriptures from infancy, re- 
 markable for his piety in boyhood, in mature manhood 
 the "brightest luminary of his day," and having visited 
 all these portions of the world — appeals in his written 
 works to Infant baptism, as a public rite of the Church, 
 handed down by the Apostles, and as such received and ob- 
 served by all. And this referred to in elucidating another 
 doctrine. Can any reasonable man suppose Origen 
 would appeal in an argument to a rite, and that fre- 
 quently, concerning which, there was any doubt ? 
 Would a man whose fame had spread over Christendom, 
 risk his reputation and his cause by making such appeals, 
 without giving reasons in support of that to which he 
 appealed, had there been any question about its Divine 
 authority ? Assuredly not. Origen by appealing to 
 Infant baptism in support of other doctrines, and taking 
 for granted its Divine authority ; and Tertullian by re- 
 ferring to it, because in some measure conflicting with a 
 favorite theory, and yet not calling in question its Divine 
 authority, establish beyond all doubt both the prevalence 
 and antiquity of the rite. 
 
 These two writers lived in different parts of the world. 
 Tertullian wrote the earlier of the two, but beino; born of 
 heathen parents was converted to Christianity in adult 
 age, while Origen enjoyed the privilege of descending 
 
 7* 
 
78 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 110- 
 
 I from Christian parents, and of being taught the Chris- 
 
 Ltian doctrine from childhood. 
 
 To doubt whether these two men could trace back a 
 public rite in the Church, the short time intervening be- 
 tween them and the Apostolic age, is to deny all that 
 the learned have said in regard to their mental endow- 
 ments. Tertullian at the time he wrote, need go no 
 farther than to ask the old men then living, whether 
 their own fathers practiced it. jjOrigen's ancestors being 
 Christians from the middle of the Apostolic age, he need 
 [„iix)t have gone out of his family to inquire ; — for his 
 biographer informs us that ^' the Christian doctrine was 
 conveyed to him by his forefathers."* RuriNUS trans- 
 lates it, "grandfathers and great-grandfathers," which 
 would reach back into the middle of the Apostolic age. 
 Origen's own father practiced it. And if his father be- 
 fore him did the same, (and no one called it in question) 
 this was as far as he need go. For this would reach 
 the days of the Apostles, and if practiced under, and 
 sanctioned by them, we need no higher authority. 
 
 They were the authorized agents of Christ " endued 
 with power from on High," and set apart for the express 
 work, of building up His Kingdom on earth. The 
 Saviour did not himself baptize, nor did the Gospel 
 Church assume any definite form or structure while He 
 was on earth. But He prepared the way and made 
 ready all that was necessary, and then committed to 
 his Apostles the duty of executing and consummating 
 what He had taught them concerning his Kingdom. 
 ^ They were commissioned "to disciple all nations, bap- 
 
 "^ Enscbius. 
 
-llOA. Apos.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 79 
 
 tizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching them to observe all 
 things whatsoever (He) had commanded them." With 
 the promise, " Lo I am with you alway, even unto the 
 end of the world." Matt, xxviii. 19-20. And after his 
 resurrection, he continued with them forty days longer, 
 instructing them,* — " speaking of the things pertaining 
 to the kingdom of God."t 
 
 He also commanded them to tarry at Jerusalem, after 
 his ascension, until they were baptized by the Holy 
 Ghost, which would complete their qualification for the 
 great work to which he had assigned them. And on the 
 day of Pentecost the Holy Ghost was accordingly pour- 
 ed out upon them, and miraculous gifts conferred — and 
 then it was, the New Dispensation proper begun. 
 
 The thousands soon converted, J called forth the appli- 
 cation of principles that gave the visible form, and re- 
 sulted in the organization, peculiar to the Christian 
 Church. 
 
 The inspired Apostles being the appointed agents of 
 Christ, and qualified by the Holy Ghost for this work, 
 whatever they sanctioned and practiced as essential ele- 
 ments in the Christian Church has an authority to which 
 we must all submit. In a matter so fundamental as the 
 subjects of baptism, there can be no appeal from their 
 teaching and practice. If they sanctioned Infant bap- 
 tism, the question as to its authority is settled. We need 
 nothing more on that point. 
 
 The Apostle John lived beyond the close of the first 
 century, and wrote his " General Epistle," as late as 
 
 * St. Luke xxiv. 45. f Acts i. 3. % Acts ii. 41-47. 
 
80 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 110- 
 
 91 or 92 A. D. The object of which was to refute the 
 prevailing errors of that period. And had Infant bap- 
 tism been one of them, he would have referred to it as 
 such, beyond all doubt. But it is not included among 
 those errors, and, therefore, if in use at that time, it 
 was with his approbation and has all the authority we 
 
 -need. 
 
 Nor ought the teaching and influence of the Apostles 
 to be confined to the age in which they lived. " To 
 commit to faithful men, able to teach others also," the 
 charge of the Churches, was their anxious concern.* 
 And of these " faithful men," there were somez^e knoiv^ 
 who did not fail to fulfill all that was expected of them 
 — all that their responsible position demanded. 
 
 Polycarp, for instance, who lived through the whole 
 timeliearly, between the death of St. John and birth of 
 Origen, has the attestation of the Holy Spirit to his 
 faithfulness to his charge. He is commended by Him 
 who is the "First and the Last," as the ''Angel 
 (Bishop) of the Church of Smyrna." Rev. ii. 8-10. — 
 " jSe alivays taught ivhat he had learned from the Apos- 
 tles^ ivhat the Church had handed down, and ivhat is 
 the one only true doctrine,'' — writes a cotemporary.f 
 "/ie was remarMhle for his vigilance and strict adher- 
 ence to the one only true faith lohich had heen taught 
 him by the Apostles,'' — adds Eusebius.J 
 
 - "Under such a man as this, it requires some evidence 
 of the fact to induce us to believe that an innovation on 
 the most public and well known usage of the Church 
 
 * 2 Tim. ii. 3. f Ircnciis. "l Lib. 4. chap. xiv. 15. 
 
-no A. Apos.] practice of THE CHUKCH. 81 
 
 was introduced, and neither he nor any other taught by 
 the Apostles, raised their voice against it. Yet, who 
 has ever read or heard of even an allusion to such an 
 innovation or complaint in his day ? And could the Holy 
 Spirit mistake the character of Polycarp ? And is all 
 that the venerated Ireneus has said of him false ? 
 
 Instead of anything to suggest such a supposition, 
 everything known, confirms the opposite opinion. Origen 
 who was born only a few years after his death, tells us, 
 that " Infant baptism was handed down by the Apos- 
 tles."* Thus confirming the faithfulness of Polycarp 
 and the testimony of Ireneus concerning him — and also, 
 the Divine autliority of Infant baptism. For if it was 
 not introduced during the time of Polycarp, which filled 
 up the space between the Apostolic age and the birth of 
 Origen, it was of course practiced by the Apostles. 
 
 And as to the means and ability of Origen to ascer- 
 tain whether this rite was in use among the Apostles, 
 there can be no controversy. He it was who made the 
 first catalogue of the dijBferent books that compose the 
 New Testament canon. For as yet the whole of the 
 writings of the New Testament had not been collected 
 together and put into the possession of all the Churches. 
 Nor had it been determined how many of those claiming 
 inspired authority should be received into our present 
 canon. And to no one member of the primitive Church 
 are we more indebted for his labors, or did the Church 
 pay greater deference in settling this question, than to 
 this Father. 
 
 * Comment ad Romanus, lib. 5. 
 
82 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. lio- 
 
 Shall we then admit the authority of his testimony in 
 regard to the books of the New Testament, but reject it 
 in regard to Infant baptism ? Admit the greater, but 
 deny the less ! 
 
 What, reject the authority of such a man as this, 
 and believe without 07ie luord of evidence, that this 
 "great innovation, the source of so many evils,"* ac- 
 cording to some Baptist writers and declaimers, was 
 palmed on the Christian Church, with the connivance of 
 the most vigilant and faithful guardians through whose 
 hands it has ever passed, and who for its preservation 
 and the defence of the truth, suitered martyrdom at 
 the stake and in the amphitheatre ? Pause, dear reader, 
 and think before you act. You are to decide, not be- 
 tween two new doctrines, which to adopt, but whether 
 you will denounce and cast out of the Church, that 
 which you find to be its doctrine and practice in every 
 age since the Apostles, and always believed to be p'(7(?- 
 ticed hy them, and no evidence to the contrary? Will 
 you then adopt the '■^surmise,'' (for that is all,) and ex- 
 clude little children from God's covenanted blessin<2;s, a 
 privilege which they have enjoyed ever since God has had 
 a visible people on earth, because forsooth, Infant bap- 
 tism is not taught in the New Testament, in the way 
 which some men choose to prescribe to the Holy 
 Spirit ? Remember, whether you have children of your 
 own, or not, by uniting with those who proscribe the bap- 
 tism of children, you thereby unite in excluding from the 
 covenanted blessings of the Gospel, all the little ones of 
 
 * Howell's Evils of Infant Bnptism. 
 
-no A. apos.] practice of the church. 83 
 
 present and coming generations ! First let the inquiry 
 be well pondered. If the rejecters of Infant baptism can- 
 not show when, nor lioiv, it began ; and it has been the 
 practice of Christians in every age since the Apostles, 
 and received by them as the doctrine and practice of the 
 Apostles — on what ground is it now resisted ? Is there 
 anything in the Bible that excludes them from the New 
 Covenant? To which Ave answer unhesitatingly, not one 
 zvord, that does not apply with equal force to the Old 
 Covenant — into which they were always received. 
 
 The commission under the New, makes no exception 
 to little children, but on the contrary, St. Peter de- 
 clares, that the promises are ''to the children,'' as well 
 as to their parents'^ — the Saviour took the little children 
 up into his arms and blessed them — saying, " Of such'' 
 was his kingdom. f Family baptisms are recorded as a 
 common thing. J And chiklren numbered among the 
 saints in the Epistles, addressell to the Churches, and 
 instructions given to them, and concerning them.^ 
 
 But lest we anticipate too much, we return to the 
 Historical branch of evidence, and examine further, first, 
 the testimony of Ireneus. 
 
 Iren.eus was- born before the death of St. John, and 
 was for some years a hearer of Poly carp, the pupil and 
 intimate friend of St. John himself. About the year 
 47 after the Apostles, he was made assistant to Po- 
 thinus, bishop of Lyons, in France, and succeeded to 
 the Episcopal office in the year 69. His writings are 
 appealed to, and received by all generally called Or- 
 
 ^ Acts ii. 38—39. f Islixii. xix. 13. Luke xviii. 15. 
 
 + Acts XYi. 13—15. i Eph. Y. 14. Col. iii. 20, 21. 
 
84 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 110- 
 
 thodox Christians, and are believed to have been more 
 useful in the second century than those of any other 
 "VTriter of that age. He is also believed to have been 
 more successful in arresting heresy, and preserving the 
 " one true faith'' than any other man of his day. 
 
 During the second and several succeeding centuries 
 baptism was spoken of very generally under the name of 
 ^' regeneration^ And whenever the term regeneration 
 was used, as expressive of one's relation to God, it 
 always included baptism, though often times more be- 
 sides. The Apostle's form of expression " tlie washing 
 (or baptism) of regeneration^' was much in vogue. And 
 the doctrine generally received that the act of baptism 
 not only changed the state and relation to God of the 
 person baptized, but conferred other blessings also, the 
 extent and peculiar character of which are not very 
 clearly defined. Be the nature of the change, however, 
 what it may, it was customary to call it " regeneration'" 
 — and whenever this term was applied to persons, it in- 
 variably included baptism under it. 
 
 For instance, Justin Martyr, referring to the mo(ie 
 of receiving members into the Church, says — " Then 
 we bring them to a place where there is water, and we 
 regenerate them, by the same way of regeneration by 
 which we are regenerated, for they are washed Avith 
 water in the name of God the Father and Lord of all 
 things," &c.* Every reader must see that he means 
 they are regenerated by baptism, or that baptism is 
 implied in the term '^ regenerated." For he says, 
 
 ■^ Justini Apologia prima. 
 
-67 A. apos.] practice of the church. 85 
 
 "they are regenerated by the same way oi regeneration 
 by which we were regenerated., for they are washed with 
 water," &c. 
 
 Clemens Alexandrinus, in reply to the sect of Yalen- 
 tinians, who contended that various ceremonies v/hich 
 they had added to baptism, must be observed, before 
 one is in a complete state of Christianity, or perfectly 
 initiated, asks "whether Christ, as soon as He was 
 regenerated, was perfect ? Or whether he still wanted 
 something to put him into a complete state of John's dis- 
 pensation," etc. And then adds — "As soon as baptized 
 by John he was perfect — he Avas perfected by the wash- 
 ing alone."* 
 
 Here baptism is again included in the term " rege- 
 nerate.'' " As soon as he was regenerated (baptized) 
 he was perfectly initiated.'' Both of these men lived in 
 the sape age with Ireneus, who referring to the same 
 sect of Yalentinians, who had corrupted baptism by their 
 various ceremonies, says, " this generation of heretics 
 has been sent out by Satan, for the frustration of tlie 
 baptism of regeneration unto God, and the destruction 
 of our whole faith. "f Again, in his third book, c. 15, 
 he says — " when he (Christ) gave his Apostles the com- 
 mission of regenerating unto God — and mark the phrase- 
 ology — he said go and disciple all nations, baptizing 
 them in the name of tlie Father, and of the Son, and of 
 the Holy Ghost." Thus including baptism under the 
 same form of expression he had used in regard to the 
 Valentinians, i. e. " regenerating unto God.'' 
 
 Clem. Alox. Pedagog. lib. 1. c. 6. f Iron. lib. 1. c. 18. 
 
 8 
 
>^6 IKFANT BAPTISM. [A. Aros 67- 
 
 Now, see how he applies this same term to young 
 children : 
 
 For he [Christ] came to save all persons by himself: all, I 
 mean, AA'ho are by him regenerated unto God — Infants and little 
 ones, and children and youths, and elder persons. Therefore, he 
 ■went through the different ages: for Infants being made an infant, 
 sanctifying Infants : to little ones, he was made a little one, sanc- 
 tifying those of that age, and also giving them an example of 
 godliness, justice, and dutifulness. To youths he was a youth, ^^ 
 &c.,t continuing on through the different ages, setting them an 
 example of a holy life. — Ireneus Adv. Her. Lib. 11, cap. 18. 
 
 Here he applies to Infants, and every succeeding 
 stage of life, not only the same term under which he 
 always included baptism, when applied to the living, 
 but the very form of expression, "regenerating unto 
 God," which he particularly applies to the "great com- 
 mission" under which the Apostles were to disciple all 
 nations. 
 
 Now as Justin Martyr, who wrote a few years sooner 
 than Ireneus, and Clemens Alexandrinus, who wrote a 
 few years later, both imply baptism in their use of the 
 term "regenerate,"* and this, the invariable use of the 
 
 "" Let it be borne in mind by the reader that these Avriters, in their 
 use of the term "regeneration," do not necessaril}' teach or imply 
 spiritual change of nature. Such is the meaning given to the term 
 by many modern ■writers, but anciently " baptismal regeneration'' im- 
 plied chanc/e of state, or being " put into a nezo siate,"^ " enrolled in 
 Christ," J " delivered from death and assigned to life," J " the spiritual 
 circumcision,"^ " enlightening," &c. 
 
 I Onmes eniin venit per semet ipsura salvare : Omnes, inquani, qui 
 per earn ranascuntur in Deum ; infantes, et parvulos, et pueros et 
 juvencs et seniorcs. Idco per oiunem vcnit ictatem ; et infantibus 
 inlans factus, sanctilicans intkntes : in parvulis parvulus, sanctificans 
 banc ipsam habentes aetsitam ; sinml et exemplum illis pietatis eflec- 
 tus, etjustitia', et subjcctionis: in juvenibus jiivcnis, &c. 
 
 * Clomont Alox. tTortuUiaii. + Clomcnt Horn. § Justin Martyr. 
 
-67A. Apos.] practice of TIIK CHUllCH. 87 
 
 term in this age, — Ireneus himself, in other portions of 
 his writings, using it in the same sense, and particularly 
 with the same form of phraseology which he has here 
 applied to Infants, how otherwise can we suppose he 
 used it in this place ? In Avhat other sense can Infants 
 be said to be "regenerated unto God," under the "com- 
 mission" of the Apostles? 
 
 Various methods have been adopted to evade the 
 force of this passage, but without success. Mr. Gale 
 labored, perhaps, more than any other man to that 
 effect. He first called in question the authenticity of 
 the passage ; then cavilled at the translation ; then 
 attempted to show that regeneration did not mean 
 baptism in that place ; and lastly, not satisfied with his 
 previous efforts, undertook to make it appear that Ire- 
 neus did not probably mean Infants, but children of 
 some ten years of age ! 
 
 As to its authenticity, and the translation, it is unne- 
 cessary here to say anything, the whole literary world 
 acknowledges its authority. On the use of the word "re- 
 generate," he mistook the meaning of Wall, against whom 
 he wrote,* supposing he meant to say, that Ireneus and 
 others only used "regenerate" as synonymous with 
 baptism. Whereas, Wall says, and the argument drawn 
 from the passage is based on the same, that regenera- 
 tion, when applied to persons in regard to their relation 
 to God, was either used interchangeably with, or else 
 always included baptism. So that the greater portion 
 of Gale's argument, leaving out his mistakes, and such 
 
 * See Wall's Defeuce. 
 
88 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 67- 
 
 parts as have no bearing on the question, goes to sup- 
 port the above use of the term. For instance, he brings 
 forward a passage from the dialogue of Justin with 
 Trjpho, which sajs, " Christ is become the head of an- 
 other people who are regenerated by him by water, faith, 
 and the tree," [the Cross.] But what does this teach 
 other than that baptism is included under the term re- 
 generated ? Does not '' regenerated by water, faith, 
 and the cross," mean that state attained when baptized 
 in the faith of the Cross ? Again, he brings forward 
 another passage, which runs as follows : " Him that is 
 washed with the laver for the remission of sins and re- 
 generation," &c. What does this mean, but simply 
 baptism for the remission of sins and regeneration ? And 
 does not baptism here form a part, or is it not implied, 
 when we say one " is washed with the laver for the re- 
 mission of sins and regeneration ?" Nothing can be 
 more obvious. Mr. Whiston, one of Mr. Gale's own 
 party, admits, " it is undeniable that the word regene- 
 ration was generally, if not constantly, used with rela- 
 tion to MDaptismal regeneration' at this time, and that 
 Mr Gale does not make it appear that Ireneus used it 
 in a different sense in this passage." He grants that 
 the passage refers to the baptism of Infants, and takes 
 up Avith the suggestion that by Infants it means children 
 large enough to be catechised. 
 
 But better for him to have given up at once the 
 whole argument against Infant baptism. For it must 
 be obvious to every reader that Ireneus designed par- 
 ticularly to specify every age, from birth to manhood — 
 '^InfantSj little ones, cJiildr en, youth, and elder persons.'' 
 
-67A. Apos.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. ■ 89 
 
 Making four grades, before he reaches manhood. And 
 as if to prevent all misconstruction of his words, draws 
 a distinction between Infants and little ones. Added to 
 this, he informs us that the Saviour gave an example of 
 a godly life to the other ages, but snjs nothing on this 
 point in regard to the Infants, Avhich shows he regarded 
 them as too young to imitate example. 
 
 Even Neander, to whom Baptists so frequently ap- 
 peal in this our day, admits that this " passage points 
 to Infant baptism."* And it is surprising that any one 
 should dispute it, were it not that, considering the time 
 during which Ireneus lived, his character, zeal for Apos- 
 tolical usage, and means of knowing certainljj what that 
 usage was, all give to his testimony a power that dispels 
 as the morning mist before the sun, the unauthorized, 
 gloomy surmise, that Infant baptism is an innovation 
 on Apostolic usage ; and sheds upon it a light that shows 
 its foundation to be firmly seated in the authority of 
 God, and the Lord Jesus Christ its chief corner-stone. 
 
 And why labor so much to evade the testimony of 
 Ireneus in this place, wdien he shows, in another way, 
 even more satisfactorily than the full force of his words 
 here can make it, that Infant baptism had been the 
 practice of the Church from the first preaching of the 
 Apostles ? 
 
 His zeal for Apostolic usage, and opposition to every 
 thing like change or novelties have already been alluded 
 to. He wrote against the heretical sects that had sprung 
 up after the first preaching of the Apostles, and gave 
 
 "'^ Church Hiitor}', vol. i. p. 108. 
 
90 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. APo.s. 67— 
 
 the origin and history of each one in its turn, from 
 Simon, the Magician, down to near the close of his own 
 life. And made it his special business to point out 
 the peculiar doctrines of each ; to collect together all 
 their tenets, in which they differed from the Church ; 
 and to show wherein they differed ; and the superiority 
 of the Church over them all, in soundness of doctrine 
 and conformity of practice to the usages of the Apostles. 
 These are his words on this point — " Since then there is 
 manifold evidence agaiiist all the sects: and that my 
 'purpose is to confute each of them according to their 
 several tenets : I thinJc it lyroper to recount from lohat 
 fountain and original they sprung.'' He therefore 
 made it his business to expose their errors and trace 
 them to their sources. And began with the first sect 
 tliat arose in the days of the Apostles, and continued his 
 catalogue several years beyond the time at which Origen 
 was born. "Who, as we have seen, records it as the prac- 
 tice in his day to baptize Infants, and that the "usage 
 was handed down by the Apostles." 
 
 Now if there was any difference in opinion or in prac- 
 tice on the point of Infant baptism, between these sects 
 and the Church, (or great body of Christians) he would 
 of course have mentioned it. But what is the fact ? 
 He begins with Simon, the Magician, and Menander as 
 the first, — points out their designs and errors. Next 
 takes up Saturninus and Basilides, specifies their error. 
 Then Carpocratis and Cerinthus, enters into their pecu- 
 liar doctrines. And so on with the Ebionites, Nico- 
 laitains, Encratites, Caians, Marcionites, Yalentinians, 
 etc.. — down to between 80 and 90 years after the Apos- 
 
-AP05. Age.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 91 
 
 ties. (At whicli time Ave have already shown that 
 the Church every where baptized young children.) He 
 enumerates their different tenets — shows in what particu- 
 lars they differed from the Church — and so far as bap- 
 tism is concerned, speaks of some who used no baptism 
 at all — of others who mixed oil and water together and 
 poured it on the head — of others, who baptized persons 
 lately dead ; and of the addition of various absurdities 
 in connection with baptism. But says not one word of 
 the rejection or adoption of Infant baptism as the pecu- 
 liarity of a single sect. Although he enters into the 
 minutia of their practices and doctrines, Infant baptism 
 as a point of difference is not mentioned in a single case. 
 Now what is the inevitable inference ? Why, that they 
 did not differ from the Church, on this point. If any of 
 them had differed in this particular, would Ireneus have 
 noticed such things as the above and passed over this ? 
 Who, that knows anything of the controversy that has 
 continued to agitate the Church, ever since the Divine 
 authority of Infant baptism was first called in question 
 in the twelfth century, can believe its introduction would 
 have been passed over unnoticed in an age, when the least 
 deviation of opinion or of practice from the Church, was 
 called heresy ? Or who that observes the minutia into 
 which Ireneus enters on other points, can for a moment 
 entertain the thought ? What then ? Why, that the 
 Church and all the sects that baptized at all, were 
 agreed in the baptism of the young children of Chris- 
 tians — or else none baptized them. But that it was 
 the usage of the Church, at the time when Ireneus 
 wrote, to baptize Infants, there can be no doubt. Aside 
 
92 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 67- 
 
 from his own declaration, Origen's testimony will cer- 
 tainly settle that point. Ireneus lived to be a very old 
 man and was put to death during the persecution under 
 Severus near the close of the second century ;* and had 
 brought his history down some years beyond the birth 
 of Origen. And if the testimony of Origen, the most 
 learned and pious man of his times^ can not be relied on, 
 as to a public usage in his childhood and youthful days 
 — then all that is past must remain a blank. 
 
 Ireneus compared the tenets and practices of the va- 
 rious sects with those of the great body of Christians 
 who adhered to the same communion and fellowship ; 
 and who were holding fast, as they believed, to the doc- 
 trines of the Apostles ; and to this standard measure he ■ 
 brought them all ; and pointed out what had been added 
 to, or taken from "the one only true faith." 
 
 Now some of these sects had sprung up before the 
 death of St. John, others soon after and during different 
 periods in the second century, and if they differed not 
 from the Church, at the time when Ireneus was writing, 
 in the baptism of Infants, it follows that they baptized 
 them also ; because the Church at that time we know, 
 did baptize them. And if the sects that arose in the 
 Apostolic age baptized Infants, then the Apostles did 
 the same, as there was no difference on this point be- 
 tween the Apostles and those who baptized at all. And 
 that the followers of Simon Magus, and Menandcr — 
 the Ebionites, and others that originated in the Apostolic 
 age did baptize, their disciples, we know also, on the 
 
 ^ Milner, p. 9G. 
 
-Apod. A.iE.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 93 
 
 authority of Ireneus who tells us that Menander bap- 
 tized in his own name, and that the Ebionites practiced 
 both baptism and circumcision. And that the Valenti- 
 nians, Cerinthians and others that came after, baptized 
 — one, the living for the dead — the other, anointed with 
 oil after baptism — and others again mixed oil with the 
 water which they used, etc. And as he recorded things 
 of this nature, can we suppose he would have omitted 
 the rejection of Infant baptism, a thing of vastly more 
 importance, had a difference on that point existed? 
 
 And further, since there was no difference between 
 them and the great body of Christians down to the 
 time, when Ireneus closes his history, is not the conclu- 
 sion inevitable, that the Apostles, the baptizing sects, 
 and the primitive Church at that time, all practiced 
 alike in that particular, and hence all baptized little 
 children ? 
 
 Confirmatory of this conclusion, four other writers 
 who have treated on the same subject, all of whom 
 lived before the close of the fourth century, and have 
 brought their history of the different sects down to 
 their own times, record no difference of this kind. 
 Epiphanius, Philastrus, Augustine and Theodoret have 
 each in their turn continued this parallel till it comes 
 down long beyond the time, when the universality of 
 Infant baptism is as well known, as the existence of the 
 Church itself. And still no baptizing sect that rejected 
 Infant baptism is named. Thus they have endorsed the 
 faithfulness of Ireneus as a witness, and by a negative 
 train of concurrent testimony corroborated what has 
 been proved by positive and circumstantial evidence, — 
 
94 ' INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 67- 
 
 i. c, That Infant baptism was the doctrine and usage of 
 the Primitive Church, taught and '•'' handed down hy 
 the Apostles." 
 
 As some persons are slow to comprehend how it is, 
 the absence of controversy can ever prove the existence 
 and unity of practice, let them suppose three parallel 
 columns — And in the 1st, the Church under the Apostles ; 
 in the 2nd, the Church after the Apostles down to the 
 close of the second century ; in the 3rd, the doctrines and 
 practices of the various sects during both periods. Then 
 select one who was born and had grown up to manhood 
 among those who had been eye-witnesses of the doings of 
 Apostles, and had been trained and taught by a disciple 
 of one of their number ; and let him mark all things in 
 each column that diifered from either of the other two ; 
 and then suppose the eye to pass over the things in which 
 they diifered, and there to see Infant baptism though 
 only implied in two of them, is written in specific terms 
 in the other, and yet not marJced like other things as a 
 point of difference from them ; and what does he learn 
 from it ? Most obviously that they were all agreed in 
 that, though two of them record it in only general 
 terms. Further, let four others in the next and succeed- 
 ing centuries review the same, and continue the parallel 
 to successive periods, until it comes down to the close of 
 the fourth century, and still this perfect agreement on 
 this point ; when the practice of Infant baptism is as 
 common and well known as the public worship of Chris- 
 tians ; and when its specific mention lias been called 
 forth among most of tlie Sects also ; and then read 
 tike declaration of a pi'omincnt Teaclier that he "werer 
 
-Arcs. Auk.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 95 
 
 heard of even an impious heretic that denied baptism to 
 little children ;'''^ and 'vvhiit is tlic conclusion? More 
 espcciiilly when drawn in view of what Ireneus teaches 
 in another connection — " Christ came to save all per- 
 sons by himself : all who are by himf regenerated (bap- 
 tized) unto God — Infants, little oyies, and children and 
 youths and elder p)ersons ? " 
 
 The only conclusion that can be legitimately drawn, 
 is, that the Church, during the time of and after the 
 Apostles, down to the period when Ireneus Avas writing, 
 and the baptizing sects of the same age, were all agreed 
 as to the practice of Infant baptism. That it is implied 
 in the record of the teaching and practice of the Apos- 
 tles, was adopted by the baptizing sects, and continued 
 in the primitive Church. And like many other things 
 referred to in only general terms, until circumstances 
 called forth its special notice. 
 
 That '' Infants, little ones, and children, and youths, 
 and elder persons," embrace all ages in the above pas- 
 sage, there can be no doubt. And for the use of the 
 term '' regeneration" for baptism by Ireneus and his 
 cotemporaries, they refer to both Christ and St. Paul 
 for their authority in such use and teaching. (See John 
 iii. 5, Titus iii. 5.) Thus taking us to the fountain 
 head — the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 Wherefore, with others, the venerated Ireneus, Avho 
 was taught by the disciple and personal friend of St. 
 John, and who in his latter days said that he remem- 
 bered what his teacher, Polycarp, said and did better 
 
 * Pelagius. 
 
 f Per eum renascuntnr, not per semot ipsum ronascuntur. 
 
96 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. (57- 
 
 tban the occurreDces of the then present period,* and 
 who TV as as anxious to adhere to " the only true faith" 
 as his teacher, testifies to the Divine authority of Infant 
 baptism in two ways — first, to the baptism of all ages ; 
 second, that there was no difference between the Apos- 
 tles, the baptizing sects, and the primitive Church in 
 their practice on this point, which is confirmed by four 
 other writers. 
 
 We pass on to another, born about the close of the 
 Apostolic age. 
 
 * Euseb. lib. v. 20. 
 
CHAPTER TV. 
 
 TESTIMONY HISTORICAL AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL. 
 
 Testimony of Justin Martyr, born at the close of the Apostolic age, in the 
 midst of Christians — Many baptized in childhood — Gentile Christians 
 received circumcision in baptism — Interpretation of Col. ii. 11, 12 — 
 Clemens Romanus — All ages corrupt, and remedy provided before born, 
 or necessity of putting all into a new state — Hermas — Necessity of bap- 
 tism to all — Infants, and those who continue Infants without malice, 
 most honorable of all — Interpretation of St. John iii. 5 — Christian 
 Church orgiinized before New Testament written — Infant Baptism before 
 New Testament canon settled — Universal in the next age after the 
 Apostles — Improbability of so notable an innovation without opposition 
 in that period — The adherence to " the one only faith" by Polycarp, 
 Irencus and Christians immediately succeeding the Apostles — Summary 
 of historical and circumstantial evidence. 
 
 Justin, the martyr, whose memory is held sacred by 
 every Christian that knows anything of his history, and 
 who suffered martyrdom in defence of the Gospel under 
 Marcus Antoninus, was born in the midst of Christians 
 at Neapolis, in Samaria, and wrote about forty years 
 after the close of the Apostolic age. In an apology 
 addressed to Antoninus Pius, in behalf of Christians, he 
 speaks of aged persons, then living, who were made dis- 
 ciples to Christ from their childhood. The enemies of 
 Christianity had accused Christians of teaching doc- 
 trines and indulging in practices corrupting and perni- 
 cious in their tendency. This, in the course of his 
 apology, he denies, and says : 
 9 
 
98 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Aros. 40 
 
 " There are many persons among us, of both sexes, of sixty and 
 seventy years of age, who were made disciples to Christ from 
 tlieir childhood, that continue uncorrupt."* — Jl'stin. Apol. ii. 
 p.- 02. 
 
 From this passage it appears that there were then 
 living many Christians who w^ere baptized about the 
 middle of the Apostolic age in their childhood. For 
 the Apostles commenced the preaching of the Gospel in 
 the year 33 or 34. St. John died in 102, A. D., and 
 seventy years from the time Justin was writing, would 
 carry him back about half way between the death of St. 
 John and first preaching of St. Peter, which would be 
 about the middle of the Apostolic age, and thirty years 
 beyond the limits assigned to our inquiry. 
 
 Various other passages might be cited from his writ- 
 ings, from which the baptism of Infants may be deduced 
 by inference. His doctrine of original sin — explanation 
 of regeneration, — and comparison of baptism to circum- 
 cision — all show that he believed in the necessity of In- 
 fant baptism. 
 
 The term used in the above extract for " childhood " 
 (rtatScou) is the same which St. Matthew applies to little 
 children under two years of age, (chap. ii. 16,) whom 
 Ilcrod had ordered to be slain. It is a term which em- 
 braces the general class of childhood — extending from 
 Infancy upward, as far as comes within the range of chil- 
 dren incapable of managing for themselves. Justin 
 says, there were ''^many of both sexes,'" {no-K-koi, tiv^i Ttoxxat) 
 and therefore he employed a term which included little 
 
 * " Kat Tto'hXoi tivs^ x(xv TiaXXai t^-f^pxautovtao xa.i s68o[xyjxoytovtaii 
 06 fx rtaiBuiv ifxaOritivOrjiiap rw ;^pt-s-rw, a4)6'opoc bcafiepovai' 
 
TO MID. Apos. Age.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 99 
 
 children of all ages. Of these, some were older and 
 others younger ; and had he adopted a term which was 
 confined to the youngest age alone, he would not have 
 expressed the idea which he wished to convey. 
 
 Hence, the objection sometimes made by Antipedo- 
 baptists — that he did not employ a term confined to In- 
 fants only, instead of strengthening their cause, tends 
 to make it weaker — for it shows that children of difi'er- 
 ent ages, and in large numbers were taken into the 
 Church in the Apostolic age, as they were afterwards, 
 and are at the present day. He knew many who were 
 made disciples to Christ in childhood, thirty years before 
 the death of St. John ; and while St. Luke, and Thomas, 
 and Jude, and Timothy, and Titus, were all then 
 alive. And he uses a term for their difi'erent ages, appli- 
 cable to the youngest Infants, as well as to those further 
 advanced, so as to include all who were then made dis- 
 ciples in their childhood ; that is, baptized. For there 
 is no other way in which little children can be " made 
 disciples to Christ," but by baptism. 
 
 The attempt to evade their baptism as some Antipedo- 
 baptists have done,"" by supposing {iiua9r^t£v9ri6av,) "were 
 made disciples" in that place, means only a state of train- 
 ing for disciples, is equally unfortunate for their cause 
 with their objection to the term supposed to express the 
 various stages of childhood. For Justin was writing in 
 defence of the members of the Christian Church. He 
 was advocating the purity of those witJiin the pale of 
 the Church, not of those without. And his object was to 
 show that the doctrines and practices of Christians were 
 
 ^ Gales' "Reflections. 
 
100 ' INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 40- 
 
 beneficial to those who had been under their influence, 
 and trained up in the Church from their earliest child- 
 hood. How could he as an honest man, say that people 
 had been made disciples to Christ, when only put into a 
 state of training for his disciples ? Do Baptists con- 
 sider their Sunday-school children who have not been 
 baptized, and others too young to attend the Sunday- 
 school, whom they profess to be training, as already dis- 
 ciples of Christ ? Do they speak of them as such — or 
 would they in a written defence of the members of their 
 Church, include such under the term of disciples or mem- 
 bers f No — they tell us that they hold the membership 
 of little children in utter abhorrence. 
 
 And we know that no such forms of speech are to be 
 found in any of their writings. And we find no such 
 perversion of language among the friends of Infant bap- 
 tism, as that of the '^ discipleship'' or membership of 
 Christ's Church, to mean only their '^training up" 
 for it. 
 
 The obvious design of Justin was to refute the slan- 
 ders charged upon Christians, by appealing to the lives 
 of many who were then old men and women among 
 them, that had been made disciples, and brought under 
 the influence of their doctrines from early childhood. 
 And as President D wight justly remarks, '' there never 
 was any other mode of making disciples from childhood, 
 except by baptism." 
 
 The term sixaey^teveriaav — "were made disciples" — is a 
 part of the same verb used in the commission given to 
 the Apostles to "disciple all nations, baptizing them," 
 &c., (Matt, xxviii. 19,) and is from the root of the same 
 
■ju MID. APU3. Age.] practice of THE CHURCH. 101 
 
 ivord used every ivhere in the New Testament for " dis- 
 ciples." Acts ix. 26. "And when Saul was come to 
 Jerusalem, he essayed to join himself to the ^ disciples,' 
 {jio.dritaii) but they were all afraid of him, and believed 
 not that he was a 'disciple,' {jiaOritrii'.) Disciples 
 (jxaOr^tai) are also called Christians, (;xpt5-r'cavor5.) Acts xi. 
 26. "The disciples were first called Christians at An- 
 tioch." Previous to this time they vfere mostly called 
 disciples — now, they began to be called Christians. 
 
 We thus learn the meaning of this term, both from 
 use and etymology. Ma^j^i^fj means a "disciple," and 
 fxaerjtvisv ^'to disciplc." "Disciples" were called "Chris- 
 tians," and Justin was writing in defence of Christians, 
 and referred to those that had been made disciples from 
 childhood — members of the Church. For unless he re- 
 ferred to the members of the Christian body — the 
 Church — it would not have been a defence of Christians. 
 And to be a member of that body one must be baptized. 
 Therefore their disciples were baptized, and had been 
 trained and nourished by Christian doctrine from their 
 childhood. 
 
 And that such is the meaning and teaching of Justin 
 is obvious from what he says of the relation of baptism 
 to circumcision. For he tells us that baptism, under 
 the new dispensation, holds the place of circumcision 
 under the old. And as circumcision was always given 
 to little children, baptism, having now superseded it, 
 must of course be given to little children also, no excep- 
 tion having been made in their case. 
 
 The following passages will show in what connection 
 he regarded these two rites : 
 
102 INFANT BAPTISM. [A. Apos. 40- 
 
 "We (Gentile Christians) also, who, through him, have had 
 access to God, have not received that circumcision which is ac- 
 cording to the flesh, but that which is spiritual, which Enoch 
 and those like him had. And w^e have received it by Baptism, 
 through the mercy of God, for we Avere indeed sinners ; and it is 
 enjoined on all to receive it in the same way."* — Dialog. Cum 
 Trypho. p. 59. 
 
 , " Gentile Christians" received this circumcision by 
 
 ^ Baptism ! This ancient Father and Martyr for the 
 cause of Christ, writing only forty years after the Apos- 
 tolic age, informs us that Christians now have secured 
 to them by baptism the spiritual blessings and promises 
 symbolized and conveyed under the rite of circum- 
 cision. And that all persons are enjoined to receive 
 them in the same way. 
 
 Again, in the Quoest. ad Orthodox, ascribed to Jus- 
 tin, it is written, '' Quest. Why, if circumcision be a 
 good thing, we (Gentiles) do not use it as vfell as the 
 f Jews ? Ans. We are circumcised by baptism — by 
 Christ's circumcision." Col. ii. 11, 12. "In whom 
 also ye are circumcised with circumcision made without 
 hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh 
 by the circumcision of Christ; buried with him by 
 baptism," etc. 
 
 Not only is Baptism here called " Christ's circum- 
 cision," which Christians receive instead of the "circum- 
 cision of the flesh," but the words of the Apostle Paul 
 
 * Kat, »7jti£t$ 90 6ia "tovrov Ttpoxcopi^ciavtsi tui ©tw, av to-vtiqv ifrjv 
 
 xa-ta. sapxa ?tap£Xa/3o|U»;ji/ Tttpctofir^v, aVKa, TivBVfio.'tLxriVf r.v 'E.vi^x ^^^ 
 
 ot ofioiov £<J)DXa|av. ^i^ixsl^ 8e 6ia |3a7tT'£'S(UaT'o5 avtrjVi STtadav a/xapt&Xov 
 
 ysysvBifjLsv bia 'to £7.fOj io Ttapa 'tov &bov €-7<.a^ojXEV xat Ttttfftv t^Etov 
 
TO MID. AP03. Age.] PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH. 103 
 
 are appealed to as authority for such use and teaching. 
 And such was the generally received doctrine of the 
 ancient Fathers of the Church, as we shall presently 
 show. Hence a three-fold cord of proof for the Apos- 
 tolic practice of Infant baptism. One, that "many 
 were baptized in childhood," in the middle of the Apos- 
 tolic age. Another, that Baptism has taken the place 
 of Circumcision under the Christian Dispensation. A 
 third, that such was the common doctrine of the early 
 Fathers, and the generally received interpretation of the 
 Written Word. 
 
 Further, original sin and the corrupt nature of every 
 one horn into the luorld, which they supposed to be the 
 ground or chief reason why the baptism of infants was 
 given by the Apostles, is much dwelt upon by the early 
 Fathers ; and the necessity of baptism enforced often- 
 times, when they do not enter into detail^ in regard to 
 the subjects of baptism. For instance — Clemens Ro- 
 manus, who lived and wrote in the Apostolic age, in his 
 Epistle to the Corinthians, referring to Job's words, 
 chapter 14 — writes : 
 
 ''There is none free from pollution, no, though his life be but 
 the length of one day^ 
 
 In another place he quotes Ps. li. 5, 
 
 " I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive 
 me." 
 
 Thus showing the corrupt nature of infants, as well as 
 of others, and also adds : 
 
 " He that formed and made us, brought us into this world, 
 having prepared for us his benefits before we were born." — 
 Clemens Romanus, Epist. ad Corinthios, c. 38. 
 
104 INFANT BAPTISM. [Apos. Agk^ 
 
 He evidently means all ages are corrupt, and all need 
 tlie benefits provided for them, to "put them into a 
 new state,'' i. e., baptism. 
 
 Hermas, who lived and wrote at the same time, (during 
 the Apostolic age,) speaks of the necessity of baptism to 
 every one, and calls it a " seaV He says : 
 
 " The seal of the Son of God is necessary for every one to enter 
 into the kingdom of Heaven/' and "that seal is baptism."* 
 
 Again : 
 
 "Whosoever shall continue as infants without malice, shall be 
 more honorable than all those of whom I have spoken. For all 
 infants are valued by our Lord and esteemed first of all." — Her- 
 mas, LIB. 3, SIMIL. 9, c. 16. 
 
 By which he shows how 7ie understood the words and 
 actions of our Saviour in regard to little children. And 
 adds — those who shall continue as Infants, without 
 malice, w^ill be esteemed the most honorable of all. And 
 what he says in reference to the necessity of baptism to 
 every one, is in accordance with the Ancient Interior eta- 
 tion of the words of the Saviour to Nicodemus, John iii. 
 5. The English translation reads, " Except a man be 
 born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into 
 the kingdom of God. The original is (mj^yu^ rt?) " unless 
 any one be born," &c. Wall says : " Our Saviour's 
 words to Nicodemus do so stand in the original, and are 
 so understood by all the Ancients, as to include all 2^er- 
 sons, men, women and children.' 'f 
 
 Therefore the teaching of these men of Apostolic times, 
 the interpret ation of the words of our Saviour by primi- 
 
 * i. e., generally necessary. f Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. 
 
ap. a«e.] before neav testament canon settled. 105 
 
 tive Christians^ show that they understood baptism to be 
 necessary to all — to every one — io.v /xt^ rtj, any one. Not 
 necessary in that absolute sense that knows no excep- 
 tion, but as a law that binds all, and cannot be laid aside 
 by men. 
 
 Both of these writers lived and wrote whilst inspired 
 Apostles were still on the earth, and their writings were 
 reckoned by many for hooks of the Holy Scriptures, and 
 read in many of the Churches as such ; according to 
 Eusebius.* 
 
 Thus, before the canon of the New Testament had 
 been settled. Practice, Doctrine and the received In- 
 terpretation of the words of Christ, and of his Apostles, 
 ALL unite in corroborating the Divine authority of the 
 Baptism of Infants. 
 
 And had any doctrine been advocated in the first ages 
 of the Church, militating directly or indirectly against 
 it, much more, doubtless, would have been written con- 
 cernincr it. But errors of other kinds arose in those 
 
 o 
 
 days to occupy the attention of the Church. Such as 
 the Divinity of Christ, Original Sin, the various forms 
 of Gnosticism, &c. When, however, any question did 
 arise affecting or calling forth any allusion to Infant 
 baptism, we find it mentioned or alluded to as often as 
 any other well-known and established rite should be, 
 under similar circumstances ; and its authority never 
 questioned — no never. f 
 
 Again, it is a fact not known, perhaps, to some who 
 
 * Eccl. His. lib. 3. c. 3. 
 
 j- It is unnecessary to repeat here tlie proof that Tertullian did not 
 deny the authority of Infant Baptism, but only advised its delay ex- 
 cept in certain cases. 
 
106 INFANT BAPTISM BEFORE ' * 
 
 oppose Infant baptism, that the same authority which 
 settled and handed down the New Testament canon, did 
 at the same time practice and hand down the baptism of 
 little children. In other words, the Primitive Church 
 at the time it was determining what books should be re- 
 ceived as its rule of faith, or the men who acted a con- 
 spicuous part in the settlement of that question, .recog- 
 nized Infant baptism as the authoritative teaching of those 
 Scriptures which they received. For that the baptism 
 of little children, was the settled practice of the Church, 
 before the New Testament canon was a settled question, 
 is beyond all controversy. This no student of Eccle- 
 siastical Literature will deny. 
 
 Let us enter a little into detail. We know that the 
 Christian Church was founded before the books of the 
 New Testament were written. And that it had been 
 planted in places wide and far apart, before important 
 portions of that canon had been committed to paper.* 
 We know also, that these wTitings were sent, some of 
 them to the Church in one place, and some of them to 
 it in another. They were not deposited in the same 
 congregation, or in the same city. But written at dif- 
 ferent times, by different men, in different places, and 
 sent to different portions of the world. During the 
 same time, and soon after. Epistles and WTitings were 
 circulated from pens that were not inspired. Some of 
 these bore the genuine names of their authors, others 
 were spurious and ascribed to Apostles and writers who 
 never saAv them. 
 
 * See dates of the Epistles, and the opinions of Home and otlicr 
 learned men on the sn])ject 
 
SETTLEMENT OF NEW TESTAMENT CANON. 107 
 
 Of course the good must be selected from the bad, 
 and the manuscripts or copies from all these points, col- 
 lected together and decided upon by competent author- 
 ity, before the canon of the New Testament could be 
 closed. This was a work of time and great care. 
 
 Many Christians have fallen into the mistake of sup- 
 posing that the New Testament was given to us as a 
 Constitution, |)resc'r^7>^«^ the organization and order of 
 the Christian Church. But not so. The Church was 
 organized, or had passed into the Christian Dispensation 
 before any fart of the New Testament was written. 
 And instead of minute directions and specifications on 
 every point, many things are taken for granted, and only 
 so much committed to writing and deposited among the 
 faithful, as was deemed necessary by the Head of all, to 
 preserve and jj'er/ec^ what was already begun. All the 
 essential doctrines of salvation, and whatever was re- 
 quisite for the defence of the Church against the 
 "Gates of Hell," and to secure its success in the earth, 
 were committed to its care and keeping, in a Way that 
 should be handed down to the latest posterity. Much, 
 therefore, is implied^ that would require express precept 
 in a formal Constitution. 
 
 The Holy Scriptures contain the words of eternal life, 
 and make up the standard of our faith and practice. 
 They are the touchstone to which everything 7ieio must 
 be brought, and to which everything must conform. But 
 before the different writings that compose the New Test- 
 ament had been collected together, and the present canon 
 adopted, by reference to the early Christian writers, 
 we find that Infant Baptism was beyond doubt the estab- 
 
108 SETTLEMENT OF NEW TESTAMENT CANON, 
 
 lished usage of the Church, and received as the doctrine 
 and practice of the Apostles. 
 
 Origen, who acted a very important part in sifting out 
 and testing the authority of the various manuscripts, 
 gives us the first regular Catalogue^ of all the books of 
 the New Testament* — and who by reading, travel, and 
 a lon'g residence in Palestine, enjoyed many advantages 
 to be well informed in regard to the received doctrines 
 and public rites of the various portions of the Christian 
 Church, tells us : — " The usage of the Church in baptiz- 
 ing little children was handed doivnfrom the Ajjostles." 
 
 And if he is high authority in regard to the canon of 
 the Holy Scriptures, why not in regard to a received 
 doctrine and public rite of the Church at the same time? 
 If he was competent to judge of and aid in the decision 
 of the external and internal evidences of the different 
 books of the New Testament, should we not conclude 
 that he ought to know whether Infant baptism was in- 
 consistent w^ith their teaching ? 
 
 Among those, before him, who are cited as authority, 
 and who were instrumental in establishing the claims of 
 no small portion of the Inspired Writings — the nwst 
 pro7ninent of the7n, have referred in their writings to the 
 usage of Infant baptism. We have seen that Justin, who 
 wrote only forty years after the death of St. John ; and 
 Ireneus who filled up the gap between St. John and 
 Origen, and likewise TertuUian confirm the same usage. 
 
 And of those who came after him, and among whom 
 full catalogues became numerous, the brightest lights of 
 
 * Even he omitted St. James and Jude, but quotes them in othei* 
 places. — See Home and Dr. Lardner. 
 
NEW TESTAMENT CANON. 100 
 
 their day, have also left their undoubted testimony to the 
 authority and universality of Infant baptism. See Jerome 
 and Augustine among others. But in the time of Origen, 
 the canon of the New Testament may be regarded as 
 virtually settled, although doubts and differences of 
 opinion at times prevailed in portions of the Church, 
 respecting some of the books received, and others re- 
 jected, which were not finally put to rest till the Council 
 of Laodicea.'^ 
 
 There are undoubtedly internal as well as external 
 evidences of the Divine authority of the New Testament. 
 But these are not all evident to the Christian reader of 
 the present day, and hence our indebtedness to the prim- 
 itive Church for settling the authenticity of these books; 
 and we now receive them as the genuine works of their 
 authors chiefly because they have been handed down to 
 us by the Church from its purest days, and when it en- 
 joyed advantages which we do not, for so important a 
 decision. We have still means and tests however, by 
 which we can verify much that was then done for us, but 
 in the rejection of some books, and the reception of 
 others, we should find ourselves quite unable, at the 
 present day, to make a satisfactory decision without the 
 aid of primitive Christians. For instance, what is there 
 in the character and style of the Epistles of Clement 
 and Barnabas, which were read as authoritative writings 
 in some of the Churches for a time, by which we could 
 determine ih^j are of less authority than the Epistles 
 
 ■" For a full exposition of the question of the genuineness and 
 authenticity of the New Testament the reader is referred to Horno 
 and Lardner. 
 
 10 
 
no PKINCIPLES OP SETTLING THE 
 
 of St. John or that of St. James? Yet we reject the 
 former and receive the latter. Why ? not upon the 
 authority of our own independent investigation alone, 
 but by the aid and decision of the primitive Church, or 
 competent authority in that Church. 
 
 And shall we admit that the authority which was able 
 to decide between the genuine and spurious books first 
 read in the Churches, was incompetent to decide at the 
 same time whether Infant baptism was of Apostolic 
 origin ? Will we as Christians consent that before the 
 New Testament Canon was settled as the law and rule 
 of faith in the Christian Church, one of its most pub- 
 lic and important rites was perverted and applied to a 
 class of people never intended ? And that there was 
 not w^isdom enough in the Church to detect this error, 
 and hence it was practiced and handed down by the 
 very authority that handed down the Scriptures ? An 
 error too that prevailed every vv here for a long period, 
 and deprived the great body of the Church for many 
 generations of valid baptism ! For the great majority 
 of the oldest Churches for centuries had none others 
 than members baptized in infancy, except an occasional 
 isolated case. And this, the Church established by in- 
 spired Apostles, to be " committed to faithful men who 
 shall be able to teach others" also? And concerning 
 which the Saviour said the " Gates of Hell shall not 
 prevail against it" — and to its founders made also the 
 promise, " Lo, I am with you alway, even u»to the end of 
 the world ?" Yet before the next generation had passed 
 away — aye, whilst the persons and teaching of several 
 of its founders were fresh in the memories of many, its 
 
NEW TESTAMENT CANON. Ill 
 
 most public and well known ordinance was by universal 
 consent perverted, and the foundation of the whole struc- 
 ture sapped ! " Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in 
 the streets of Askelon" — lest the enemy of our holy 
 religion triumph over us ! 
 
 If before one generation after the Apostles had passed 
 away, our religion became fundamentally corrupt^ and 
 there was neither the ability to detect nor the spirit to 
 oppose the error, what confidence can we have in it now ? 
 What new power has been communicated to the present 
 age, that was not then given ? If we admit the Church 
 to have been so corrupt and ignorant in the beginning, 
 how shall Ave defend it against the attacks of Infidelity ? 
 Or if we admit that the writings of the Fathers have 
 been so much interpolated, and so much fraud practiced 
 in the name of the primitive Church, that, after all efforts 
 to separate the genuine from the spurious, no reliance 
 can be placed in their testimony, how shall we defend 
 the authenticity and purity of the Holy Scriptures ? 
 Can we lay aside all antiquity and prove that a single 
 book in the New Testament was written by its reputed 
 author, or that every book has not been corrupted since, 
 and its teachings altered ? No — we must receive the aid 
 of such testimony, or the key of the arch remains loose, 
 and the whole structure will fall. Not that we are de- 
 pendent upon it exclusively, but as important testimony 
 to be cautiously received in confirmation of the high 
 claims of the Gospel of Christ. It is not by one train 
 of proof, or a single argument, that the Divine authority 
 of Christianity can be sustained at the present time : 
 there are opposing reasons and difficulties that are sufii 
 
112 NEW TESTAMENT CANON. 
 
 cient to annul the force or hold in abeyance any one kind 
 of proofs unless corroborated and supported by others. 
 !N either the internal evidence alone, nor the historical^ 
 nor the fulfillment of j^rophec^/, nor miracles, nor any 
 other independent proof of itself, would overcome all 
 the objections of the natural heart. But these all united 
 and corroborating each other — interwoven by a thousand 
 circumstances and all pointing to the same great truths, 
 entrench our common Christianity within a bulwark that 
 all the battering rams of an infidel world can never 
 shake, to the end of time. And in this magnificent 
 structure, the aid of the primitive Church and the testi- 
 mony of the ear]y Christian Fathers form a part — the 
 whole would not be complete without them. 
 
 If primitive Christians could testify to the genuineness 
 of a manuscript read in the Churches, they could testify 
 to the practice of a public rite in the sam.e Churches. 
 And if we receive their testimony in regard to some of 
 the Churches, we must receive it in regard to all; 
 they having by travel and reading enjoyed the advan- 
 tages necessary to such knowledge. And since we have 
 their testimony to the fact that Infant baptism was the 
 usage of the tvJiole Church, handed down from the Apos- 
 tles, we have legitimate proof of the universal practice 
 of Infant laptism in the primitive Church, For '-'"what 
 has been received everywhere, always, hy all,'' (quod 
 ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est,) is 
 a rule to which every one should submit as authority in 
 the Christian Church. 
 
 Iteject this, and admit that whilst Apostles were yet 
 fresh in the memories of many, the initiatory rite of the 
 
INNOVATION HIGHLY IMPROBABLE. 113 
 
 Church had been perverted to a use never intended, and 
 one fraught loitli the direst of evils, according to some 
 Baptist writers,* and that this evil had spread through- 
 out the Christian world, before even the code of laws left 
 for the preservation and guidance of the Church could 
 be collected together, and that no raan was found to 
 protest against it as unauthorized — no one found out its 
 invalidity for a thousand years afterwards — in conse- 
 quence of which the Church was, during all that time, 
 filled with invalid baptisms, or with persons not baptized 
 at all ! — admit all this, and how ridiculous do we appear 
 in the eyes of an infidel world ! Into what endless ab- 
 surdities do we involve ourselves ! ! 
 
 Consider further the improbabilities that such an in- 
 novation by a public rite could have gained foothold 
 among the next generation after the Apostles, without 
 opposition. — 
 
 It must be remembered that it was the care of the 
 Apostles, ^' to commit to faithful men who shall be able 
 to teach others also," (2 Tim. ii. 3,) the charge of the 
 churches. And we may suppose that these " faithful 
 men" selected and instructed by the Apostles them- 
 selves, would very probably continue the doctrine of their 
 instructors during their own lives. Now St. Jude, and St. 
 Thomas — also, St. Luke, all lived beyond the year 70. 
 St. John died, as has been before remarked, a little after 
 the close of the first century ; Timothy and Titus a few 
 years before. Polycarp, the friend and disciple of St. 
 John, and who also as the angel (bishop) of the Church 
 of Smyrna, is highly commended by the Head of us all, 
 ^ See HowelL 
 
 10* 
 
114 INNOVATION WITHOUT OPPOSITIOI^ 
 
 (Rev. 2 cliap.) lived till about sixty-five years beyond the 
 death of St. John. And Ireneus, the friend and disciple 
 of Polycarp, lived about ninety-six years beyond it, and 
 more than ten years beyond the birth of Origen, who, as 
 has been shown, frequently appeals in his writings to In- 
 fant baptism as the common practice of the Church, and 
 J says "it was handed down from the Apostles." Hence, if 
 / Infant baptism is an innovation, it was brought into the 
 I Church during the lives of Polycarp and Ireneus. And 
 although we have seen, from the testimony, both di- 
 rect and indirect, of Ireneus and Justin Martyr, (who 
 lived, one of them, through the whole intermediate time 
 between St. John and Origen, and the other the greater 
 portion of it,) that Infant baptism was the practice of the 
 Church during that period and before it, we will never- 
 theless consider the 2^robahiUties of the introduction of a 
 thing of the kind under Polycarp and Ireneus without 
 open opposition on their part to such an innovation. 
 
 St. John spent the last years of his life at Ephesus, 
 and was instrumental in making his friend Polycarp 
 bishop of the Church of Smyrna. Between these places 
 and Alexandria, the intercourse by sea was direct, and 
 from Alexandria to Crete almost daily. With the cus- 
 toms of the Churches of Alexandria, Crete, and others 
 along the Mediterranean, he, therefore, could not but be 
 familiar. His General Epistle to the Churches, the 
 main object of which, was to confute the prevailing errors 
 of that time, and guard Christians against false teachers, 
 was written about 91 or 92, according to Mill and Le 
 Clerc, and as late as the close of that century, accord- 
 ing to Du Pin, L'Enfant, Beausobre, and Townscnd. 
 
HIGHLY IMPROBABLE IN THAT AGE. 115 
 
 But in tliis epistle no allusion is made to tlie baptism of 
 young children as one of 'those errors, hence if then prac- 
 ticed, it was not an error. He wrote tlie Apocalypse, 
 or book of "Revelation" as is generally believed, after 
 his General Epistle, but more probably just before it. 
 In which he specifies particularly the errors and "things 
 wanting" in the Churches of Asia Minor, (Rev. ii. and 
 iii.) and as the baptism of young children is not alluded 
 to among these errors and "things wanting," it was of 
 course not one of them. Because under the influence 
 of the Spirit by which he was directed to write, he speci- 
 fies the different things which were disproved. " Unto 
 the Angel of the Church of Smyrna write ... I know 
 thy works, and tribulations, and poverty, (but thou art 
 rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they 
 are Jews, and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan. 
 Fear none of these things which thou shalt suffer. Be- 
 hold the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye 
 may be tried ; and ye shall have tribulation ten days. 
 Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown 
 of life." Rev. ii. 8, 10. In the Church of Smyrna, 
 therefore, over which it is generally admitted that Poly- 
 carp was the bishop, or angel thus addressed, and who 
 continued a zealous defender of the faith and of Apostolic 
 doctrine through a long life, we must infer no error of 
 this kind prevailed. For this and the Church of Phila- 
 delphia, are the only two out of the seven against which 
 charges are not brought, and that received the unquali- 
 fied commendation of the Spirit. For these, then, we 
 have the testimony of the Spirit, to their freedom as yet 
 from innovation. 
 
 The errors of the others being particularly specified. 
 
116 INNOVATION WITHOUT OPPOSITION 
 
 is equally conclusive against all other errors not speci- 
 fied. Infant baptism, therefore, if practiced in these 
 churches at this time, has the seal of the Spirit's approval. 
 If not in practice, it Tvas introduced under Pol jcarp, the 
 probabilities of which we will now examine with refer- 
 ence to his known cliaracter and vigilance, as a steward 
 of the heavenly mysteries. 
 
 He sealed his conviction of the truth of what he 
 taught and practiced, by his own life's blood, about 
 167, A. D., or sixty-five years after the death of St. 
 John — during the persecution of Marcus Antoninus. 
 When the persecution began to rage with great vio- 
 lence, Polycarp, through the persuasion of his friends, 
 retired to a farm, not far distant from the city, and 
 there continued in constant prayer in behalf of the 
 churches. But on hearing that some of his friends were 
 put to the torture, to make them betray him, he could 
 remain no longer concealed. " The will of the Lord be 
 done," was his pious ejaculation, and he then came for- 
 ward and surrendered himself to his enemies. When 
 brought to the place of execution, the pro-consul, be- 
 holding his extreme age and venerable person, used 
 many efibrts to induce him to renounce Christ, that 
 he might release him. To which he replied, "eighty 
 and six years have I served him, during all of which 
 time he never did me an injury, how then can I 
 blaspheme my king and Saviour ?" When still fur- 
 ther urged, his answer was, "I am a Christian." He 
 was then fastened to the stake, and expired amidst sur- 
 rounding flames.* 
 
 * See Eusebius, lib. iv. cap. passim. 
 
HIGHLY IMPROBABLE IN THAT AGE. 117 
 
 This man, says Ireneus also, " had been instructed by 
 Apostles, and had familiar intercourse with many that 
 had seen Christ ; he had also been appointed bishop by 
 Apostles in Asia, in the Church of Smyrna, whom we 
 have also seen in our younger days, for he lived a long 
 time, and to a very advanced age, when, after a glori- 
 ous and most distinguished martyrdom, he departed this 
 life. He always taught what he had learned from the 
 Apostles, what the Church had handed down, and what 
 
 is the only true doctrine The same Polycarp, 
 
 coming to Rome under the Episcopate of Anicetus, 
 turned many of the aforesaid heretics to the Church of 
 God, proclaiming the one and only true faith which he 
 had received from the Apostles — to wit; that which 
 was delivered by the Church."'"^ 
 
 Now how much probability is there that a man, who 
 had been the intimate friend of the Apostle John, com- 
 mended in the inspired volume by Him " who is the first 
 and the last ;" (Rev. ii. 8,) a man that taught the " one 
 and only true faith received from the Apostles," would 
 permit an entirely unauthorized error, utterly opposed 
 to what had always been the doctrine and practice of 
 the Apostles, (as Infant baptism would have been, if a 
 new thing,) and not have raised his voice against it, as 
 he did against all other errors ? Who, I say, can for a 
 moment entertain the surmise, when he sees how consci- 
 entious, firm, and vigilant was this man for Apostolic 
 doctrine ; sealing with his own life's blood his faith in 
 the same ; that he would encourage or permit so radical 
 a chaDo;e to be made in the doctrine he had been 
 taught ? 
 
 •" Eusebius, lib. iv. cap. xiv. 
 
118 INNOVATION CONTRARY TO THE 
 
 To this consideration now add also the character and 
 influence of Ireneus, who was a friend and hearer of 
 Polycarp more than twenty years ; whom all historians 
 unite in praising for the elevation of his character, lofti- 
 ness of his feelings, and value of his writings. His 
 name was the praise of martyrs in his own day, and has 
 been handed down with veneration ever since. He lived 
 nearly through the whole of the second century, was a 
 strenuous advocate of Apostolic Usage, and the most 
 successful of all the opposers of heresies during his age. 
 He wrote and preached against all the errors and new 
 doctrines advocated in his time. An extract from his 
 own writings will show what his character was in this 
 respect, and what probability there is, that he would 
 receive an error of this kind. 
 
 Writing to Florimus, who had become the advocate of 
 certain new doctrines, he says : " These doctrines were 
 never delivered to thee by the Presbyters before us, those 
 who also were the immediate disciples of the Apostles. 
 For I saw thee when I was yet a boy in Lower Asia with 
 Polycarp, moving in great splendor at court, and endeav- 
 oring by all means to gain his esteem. I remember the 
 events of those times much better than those of more re- 
 cent occurrence. As the studies of our youth, growing 
 with our minds, unite with it so firmly, I can tell the 
 very place where the blessed Polycarp was accustomed to 
 sit and discourse ; and also his entrances, his walks, the 
 complexion of his life, and the form of his body, and his 
 conversations Avith the people, and his familiar inter- 
 course with John, as he was accustomed to tell ; as also 
 his familiarity with those that had seen the Lord. How . 
 also he used to relate their discourses, and what things 
 
CHARACTER OF APOSTOLIC MEN. 119 
 
 he had heard from them concerning the Lord. Also 
 concerning his miracles, his doctrines ; all these were 
 told by Polycarp, in consistency with the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, as he had received them from the eye-witnesses of 
 the doctrine of salvation. These things, by the mercy 
 of God, and the opportunity then afforded me, I atten- 
 tively heard, noting them down, not on paper, but in 
 my heart; and these same facts I am always in the 
 habit, by the grace of God, to recall faithfully to mind. 
 And I can bear witness in the sight of God, that if that 
 blessed and Apostolic Presbyter had heard any such 
 thing as this, he would have exclaimed, and stopped his 
 ears, and according to his custom would have said : ' 
 good God, unto what times hast thou reserved me, that 
 I should tolerate these things.' He would have fled 
 from the place in vrhicli he sat or stood, hearing doc- 
 trines like these. From his epistles, also, which he 
 wrote to the neighboring churches, in order to confirm 
 them, or to some of the brethren, to encourage them, 
 or exhort them, the same thing may be clearly shown."* 
 
 This shows how anxious Ireneus was to adhere to the 
 doctrines of the Apostles, with his father in the Lord, 
 Polycarp, and also what advantages he had for knowing 
 their doctrines. He remembered what was said and 
 done by Polycarp better than the things that were then 
 occurring in more advanced life, which is the experience 
 of all old men in regard to what has occurred in youth 
 and early manhood. 
 
 Now, how much probability is there that an entire new 
 practice, diametrically opposed to what Baptists contend 
 
 ''• Eusebius, lib. v. xx. 
 
120 INNOVATION CONTRARY TO THE 
 
 is the only true faith, could have been introduced 
 under this man and Polycarp ? The one, teaching the 
 ''only true faith,'' which he had received from Apostles 
 and men who had seen Christ. The other, what he 
 had heard from the former, and old men who were his 
 cotemporaries ? The piety of Ireneus is acknowledged 
 to be of the highest character— whose love and zeal for 
 truth led him tooppose with great earnestness the least 
 departure from Apostolic Usage — even writing out in 
 order, one by one, everything which he regarded as op- 
 posed to, or wanting Apostolic authority ? 
 
 The character of these tw^o men alone, ought to be 
 sufficient refutation of a groundless suspicion like that 
 alleged against Infant baptism. For it has not a 
 vestige of testimony to sustain it, save a contract- 
 ed method of interpreting the Scriptures, which is 
 utterly at variance with the spirit and design of their 
 Author. 
 
 If this controversy w^ere concerning the introduction 
 and establishing of a new thing in the Church, there might 
 be some apology for hesitating to adopt it. But it is about 
 a sacred rite, found in the Church in its earliest and 
 purest days, practiced in every place where the Church 
 was planted, and regarded as of Divine authority, from 
 the first time that it is alluded to. Hence the question 
 to be settled, is, shall this ancient, universal rite, so 
 highly prized by primitive Christians, handed down 
 with and sustained by the Scriptures, (as the majority 
 of Christians in every age have interpreted them) be 
 cast out of the Church as an innovation ? or shall it be 
 continued ? 
 
CHARACTER OF APOSTOLIC MEN. 121 
 
 How can an unbiassed, conscientious man resist such 
 testimony and not feel himself bound to continue it, Ayere 
 the Scriptures even silent on the subject, which we shall 
 show is not the case. Ireneus lived through the whole 
 time in which it could possibly have been introduced, if 
 an innovation ; while his known character, in the first 
 place, contradicts the supposition that it could be intro- 
 duced in his time and not be openly opposed by him — his 
 works against heresies and novelties, in the second, show 
 that it is not recorded and classed amono; them — and his 
 written declaration, in the third and last place, shows 
 that Christ's commission to his Apostles authorized it. 
 
 To Polycarp and Ireneus may be added Justin Martyr, 
 who, though not born of Christian parents, was born in 
 Palestine, in the midst of Christians, about the close of 
 the Apostolic age — studied in the schools of philosophy 
 in Alexandria — wrote his celebrated apology for Chris- 
 tians about forty years after the death of St. John — 
 preached the Gospel in Italy, Asia Minor and Egypt, the 
 very country of the Origen family, — wrote against the 
 heresy of Marcion and others at Rome, and suffered 
 martyrdom for his religion, about the year after the 
 Apostles 65. 
 
 Is it probable that this man, who boldly attacks 
 other departures from the faith of the Apostles — ad- 
 vocated Christianity in the face of persecuting Em- 
 perors — and gave his own life in defence of the truth, 
 would countenance a public innovation of this character? 
 
 We here appeal to the candor of every reader who can 
 comprehend the very plainest kind of reasoning, to say 
 whether there is the least ground for supposing that a 
 11 
 
122 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL TESTIMONY. 
 
 new public rite, like that of Infant baptism could have 
 been introduced into the Church during the lives of 
 these men — or that it could have spread over Christen- 
 dom and become the established practice of churches ex- 
 tending thousands of miles (as the testimony of Origen 
 shows it had) and not one word be uttered against it ? Not 
 one man found to rise up and oppose such an innovation 
 on the sacred usages of his fathers and the Apostles ? 
 Is the mere surmise that because Infant baptism is not 
 commanded in the Holy Scriptures in such terms as some 
 have unwarrantably prescribed for it, sufficient of itself 
 to establish the point that it was introduced under these 
 men, in the face of all this to the contrary ? 
 
 Does not the manner in which Infant baptism is first 
 mentioned, after the Apostolic age, indicate its antiquity 
 as well as prevalence ? It is never referred to as some- 
 thing new, or as that about which there was any doubt, 
 but incidentally mentioned as occasion required, and as 
 a thing well known to all ; and its authority is questioned 
 by none. Just as any other rite would be referred to, 
 concerning which there was no dispute, when other 
 questions called it forth. How can we account for 
 this but on the principle that it had been the practice 
 of the Church from the first ? 
 
 Thus evidence positive and negative, from different 
 sources, and in various ways accumulates, and with 
 united strength scatters as chafi" before the wind all sus- 
 picions against the validity of Infant baptism. 
 
 We have seen, by tracing its history, that it has 
 been the practice of the Church in every age since 
 
SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL TESTIMONY. 123 
 
 the Apostles. We have followed it in a continuous line 
 from the present, first, to the time of the great Pelagian ; 
 controversy which agitated the Church throughout the { 
 Christian world ; when — 
 
 A. D. 417 
 
 or 
 A. A. 317. 
 
 A. A. 317. 
 
 A. A. 318. 
 
 Augustine, the most learned man of that age, 
 then declared, "The baptism of little infants is held 
 by the Universal Church, and not instituted by 
 Councils, but ever in use, handed down by none 
 other than Apostolical authority." When — 
 
 Celestius admitted '' Infants ought to be baptized ^- ^- ^^^' 
 according to the Ride of the Uiiiversal Church and 
 meaning of the Gospel.'" And, 
 
 Pelagius said, " He never heard even of an impi- 
 ous heretic that would deny baptism to little chil- 
 dren." 
 
 In a Council held in Carthage, about the same 
 time, it was ''^Resolved, Whosoever says Infants 
 are baptized for the remission of sins, but yet 
 they derive no original sin from Adam, which is 
 expiated by the laver of regeneration, let him be 
 anathema." 
 
 Advancing onward wx come to another Council, in 
 which, in cases of doubt in regard to the baptism of 
 little children who had been captured and taken off 
 by the enemy before they were old enough to remem- 
 ber, and afterwards recovered, it was "Resolved, 
 That such be baptized without any scruple ; lest that 
 scruple do cause them to go without the cleansing of 
 the sacrament." 
 
124 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL TESTIMONY. 
 
 A few years nearer to the Apostles, a Canon was 
 passed at Carthage concerning such as had come into 
 the Church from some of the schismatical sects, 
 which gave to little children an advantage in regard 
 to Church offices over those who acted on their own 
 responsibility when they united with the Donatists. 
 
 A. A. 297. It was ^''Resolved, That they who were baptized in 
 their Infancy among the Donatists, before they vrere 
 old enough to understand the mischief of that error, 
 ought to be promoted to Church offices, especially in 
 times of so great need," &c. The case of the others 
 was deferred to another time. 
 
 A. A. 2S0. Chrysostom writes, " Our Circumcision — I mean 
 the Grace of Baptism — gives cure without pain, and 
 haS no determinate time as that had, (the eighth day) 
 but it is lawful to one at the beginning of life, (first 
 day of his birth) or in the middle of it, or in old age, 
 to receive this circumcision, made without hands." 
 He also enumerates the benefits of baptism, and 
 adds, " For this cause we baptize infants also, that 
 they be not defiled by sin." 
 
 A. A. 278. Jerome, the author of the Latin translation of the 
 Holy Scriptures, called the Vulgate, writing to a lady 
 of distinction says : " The good and evil deeds of the 
 child are imputed to his parent. Unless you suppose 
 the children of Christians, if they do not receive 
 baptism, are themselves accountable for the sin. 
 And the wickedness not imputed to those who would 
 not give it to them, particularly at the time they 
 
SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL TESTIiMONY. 125 
 
 ought to receive it, and could make no opposition to 
 receiving it." 
 
 Ambrose, bishop of Milan, writes : ^' No man ^- ■*■• 274. 
 comes to the kingdom of Heaven but bj the sacra- 
 ment of baptism."* For which he quotes our 
 Saviour's words to Nicodemus, " Unless any one be 
 born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot 
 enter the kingdom of Heaven," and makes this com- 
 ment : " You see He (Christ) excepts no person — not 
 an Infant, not one that is hindered by any unavoida- 
 ble accident. "t 
 
 Optatus, bishop of Milevium, calls baptism a "gar- ■^* ^ 260 
 ment that fits all ages — not too big for Infants nor 
 too small for men." 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen was of opinion that "baptism a. a. 260. 
 to Infants might be delayed till three years of age, 
 or thereabouts, unless danger made it necessary 
 sooner. And in such cases must not be postponed." 
 
 Basil, bishop of Caesarea, specifying the proper a. a. 205. 
 time for various things, remarked, " The whole of 
 one's life is proper for baptism." That is, from 
 infancy up to old age, or until received. 
 
 A Council in Eliberis decided that those baptized a. a. 205. 
 in infancy by schismatical sects, might be received 
 into the Church without the same delay that was 
 imposed on such as were grown up when baptized by 
 them." 
 
 •^ i. e. no other prescribed mode for any. 
 
 f Such, he thought, would not suifer positive punishment, but 
 he could not say they -would certainly enter the kingdom of 
 heaven. 
 
 11* 
 
126 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL TESTIMONY. 
 
 A. A. 150. 
 
 A Council in Carthage, to whom was referred the 
 question whether it would not be better to delay 
 baptism to the eighth day after birth than to give it 
 to children so young as two or three days old, deci- 
 ded in the negative, ''lest by such delay some might v 
 die without it," and added, ''As far as in us lies; no 
 soul, if possible, is to be lost." 
 
 A.^^^no. Origen, who was himself baptized in infancy, and 
 whose father and grandfather were Christians before 
 him, concerning " the sinful nature of every one born 
 
 A. A. 86. into the world," remarks : " It is for this reason the 
 Church had from the xipostles the injunction to give 
 baptism to little children." Again, "No one is free 
 from pollution, though his life is but the length of one 
 
 day Therefore, according to the usage of the 
 
 Church, baptism is given to little children." 
 
 Tertullian, confining baptism to the washing 
 away of past sins, advised its delay to all young per- 
 sons, virgins, and those in widowhood, and all such as 
 were likely to fall into sin after baptism ; and, of course 
 included young children. He asks, "What need is 
 there that their sponsors be brought into danger, for 
 they may fail in their promises by their OAvn death, 
 or by the child's proving of a wicked disposition."* 
 Which shows that Infant baptism was the usage of the 
 Church at that time, or he could not have referred to 
 it and its connection with sponsors. 
 
 * Which proves that sponsors were then used by Christians as 
 they were among the Jews. 
 
 Wrote 
 A. A. 100. 
 
 Born 
 A. A. 45 
 
SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL TESTIMONY. 127 
 
 Ireneus, wlio was born about the close of the .^•'^'^ /^f,^<^ 
 
 " the end of the 
 
 Apostolic age, and lived througb nearly the -whole of ^^^p*^^ Lived 
 the second century, writes: " Christ came to save all nearfy^the 
 who are through him regenerated (baptized) unto Sid^centmy! 
 God — Infants, and little ones, and children, and the birth of 
 youths, and elder persons;" hence, all ages.* He 
 also wrote a history of the different sects — beginning 
 with those that arose in Apostolic times, and brought 
 it down to nearly the close of his own life — in which 
 he specifies the errors and points of difference between 
 them and the Church, but infant baptism was not a 
 point of difference, they were all agreed on this point, 
 which confirms its Apostolic origin and common prac- 
 tice. For it was during the life of this writer that 
 Origen was born and baptized in his infancy, and if 
 the sects that arose in the days of the Apostles did not 
 differ from the Apostles on this point, nor the Church 
 in his day, they must all have baptized infants. 
 
 Thus by testimony of a two-fold character does he 
 certify to the practice of Infant baptism before and 
 during his own life, and he born at the close of the 
 Apostolic age, and taught by a pupil of St. John. 
 
 Justin Martyr was born in the times of the ApoL^lge. 
 
 Wrote 
 
 Apostles, and wrote about forty years after St. John's a. a. -lo 
 death. In his Apology for Christians he says : 
 ^^ I hnoiv many of both sexes, sixty and seventy years 
 old, lolio were made disciples to Christ from childhood. 
 Hence they were baptized in childhood in the middle of 
 
 ^ Regeneration always included baptism in the writings of 
 Ireneus, and was used, in the same sense generally at that time, 
 says Wall. Neander admits, " this passage, without doubt, points 
 to Infant baptism."' 
 
128 'summary op testimony 
 
 d^ys iTf the^^® Apostolic age, as there can be no other way to 
 Apostles, jjiake children disciples of Christ but by baptism.* He 
 also tells us that '' Christians receive their circumcision 
 in baptism" — and calls baptism " Christ's circum- 
 cision/^ By which he teaches that baptism has taken 
 le place of circumcision as the initiatory rite of the 
 Church under the Christian dispensation, and in 
 which he is supported by Origen, Chrysostom, Basil, 
 Augustine, and others of the most noted of the Chris- 
 tian Fathers. Thus testifying, first, to many baptized 
 in childhood in Apostolic days, — and second, to the 
 right of little children to baptism by virtue of their 
 right to circumcision. 
 Born in .the PoLYCARP, the disciplc of St. Johu, who " altvaifs 
 pufUaSt ^<^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^'^^y ^^'^^ faitl^' lived nearly thirty 
 by St. John, years beyond the time when Justin wrote, whose 
 character is a guaranty that he would have sanction- 
 ed no innovation in his day. 
 Born and Clement and Hermas wrotc, both of them, during 
 
 wrote while ' ^ 70 
 
 ^^wetr^'et'^''* the lives of the Apostles, and their writings were read 
 living, 'y^ some of the Churches for a time as authoritative 
 teaching. And like all others who had received and 
 submitted to the teaching of St. Paul, they held that 
 tlie pollution of original sin needed cleansing as 
 well as that of actual sin. Clement writes, " Infants 
 as well as others are corrupt. . . . None is free from 
 iwlluiion tlioiigli his life he hut one clay on the earth.'' 
 Afterwards, " He that brouglit us into this world hath 
 prepared for us his benefits." 
 
 * Baptism fit any age before capable of acting as a moral agent 
 is virtually Infant baptism. 
 
HISTORICAL AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL. 129 
 
 Hermas says, — '''Baptism is necessary to all — and 
 ■whosoever shall continue as Infants is more honor able 
 than all, for Infayits are esteemed hy our Lord as first of 
 alir 
 
 Now after tracing Infant baptism up to the days of 
 the Apostles, add what these cotemporaries of the 
 Apostles say about original sin — the necessity of bap- 
 tism to all — the estimation in which Infants are held, 
 and how could circumstantial and positive proof more 
 perfectly unite and sustain each other ? And remember 
 that about the same time, the baptism of whole families 
 by the Apostles is reported as a common thing — 
 children called '•^Saints'' in the letters of the Apostles, 
 and directions given to their parents for their "train- 
 ing and nurture in the Lord." 
 
 Again that baptism has superseded circumcision, (as 
 we shall further prove) holds the same place, in the same 
 Church, while the law for Infant membership has never 
 been repealed. 
 
 And yet again, that Infant baptism was the doctrine 
 and practice of the universal Church before the 
 Neio Testament Qanon ivas even settled — was always 
 referred to, as a thing well known and acknowledged 
 by all — and has the consentient testimony of antiquity 
 to its authority. Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab 
 omnibus creditum est, '•'Received everywhere, alivays,by 
 all.'' A laiv professedly submitted to by all. 
 
 Whenever history and the testimony of the ancient 
 Fathers are appealed to in controverted questions of the 
 
130 CORRECT MODE OF 
 
 present day, it is the custom of many to reply, ''Oh this 
 is the way by which the claims of Romanism are estab- 
 lished." Not so, but exactly the reverse. This is the 
 way to divest Rome of all her pretended claims. What- 
 ever was the doctrine and practice of Christians '-' al- 
 ivays, everywhere^ hy alV in the primitive Church, if 
 an essential doctrine, must be continued. And whatever 
 Rome can gain by that rule let her have — nor should we 
 abandon it, because she has it. But bring her to the 
 test of the Holy Scriptures interpreted by the universal 
 practice and teaching of the primitive Church, and you 
 strip her of all claims and pretensions beyond what be- 
 longed to the other Churches established by the Apos- 
 tles. And this can be done without making our Holy 
 religion the sport of infidels,* or admitting any writing 
 that will not bear the test of sound criticism. 
 
 Trace back the unauthorized dogmas of the Romish 
 Church as we have the history of Infant baptism, and 
 how many of them w^ill you find in the primitive Church, 
 immediately after the death of the Apostles ? How far 
 do you trace back the " Immaculate Conception ?" How 
 far Transubstantiation ? The worship of the Host ? 
 Can Rome trace back the doctrine of Indulgences — or the 
 worship of the Virgin Mary, or the practice of praying 
 to departed Saints, or Purgatory, or any authority in 
 the bishop of Rome over his fellow bishops, to the next 
 century after the Apostles? No. Such doctrines and 
 such authority were unknown to the Christian Church 
 in that age. And what ignorance to call Infant baptism 
 a " Relic of Popery !" What tyro does not know that 
 
 ^' As docs the rejection of all antiquity. 
 
EXPOSING ERROR. 181 
 
 Infant baptism was long in the Church before Popery 
 began ? 
 
 If you would expose the fallacies of the Roman Church, 
 trace them back to their origin, and show when and how 
 they began, and their inconsistency with the teaching of 
 the Holy Scriptures, and early practice of the Church. 
 This was the way the English Reformation was con- 
 ducted, and this is the only way, to take our stand on a 
 basis that the combined powers of Infidelity and Roman- 
 ism can never shake. 
 
 Thus, we can show that Infant communion, which is 
 so often lugged in to detract from the authority of 
 Infant baptism, is never spoken of before the time of 
 Cyprian, and never became universal in the Church. 
 As to customs unimportant in their nature, such as 
 chrism, the holy kiss, washing of feet, &c., partly social 
 and partly religious, which may be continued or omitted 
 without affecting the essential character of the Church, 
 let those continue them v/ho may choose to do so. But 
 a rite fundamental in the o7^ganization of the visible 
 Church, like that of Infant baptism, which involves the 
 validity of the baptism of generations, and places our 
 little children in a relation to God, and to ourselves, 
 with claims to the care and sacred training of parents 
 and Christian friends, (that few appreciate, and fewer 
 still discharge) — such a rite is of vital import to the 
 nature of the Church, and to the character of its mem- 
 bership. It is one of those things that cannot be left 
 to our own choice, and laid aside. It has an authority 
 that knows no distinction between "Divine" and "Apos- 
 tolic." Whatever was ordered by the Apostles, of like 
 
132 DUTY OF ALL CHRISTIANS. 
 
 nature, is as binding as that instituted by the Saviour 
 in person. They were his appointed agents, divinely 
 inspired ; and what they established as an essential ele- 
 ment in the visible Church of Christ cannot be discarded 
 and laid aside by Christians. Those who have been so 
 much influenced by the slang about '' baby sprinkling" 
 that they cannot rest contented vi'iih. pouring the water on 
 the infant, ought to have it baptized by diioping it into 
 the water. For they cannot omit the baptism of their 
 children altogether, without injury to the child, and the 
 sin of violating the order of the Church of God. Nor 
 can those who have no children of their own, unite with 
 those who exclude little children, without incurring like 
 condemnation. 
 
HISTORICAL TABLE. 
 
 133 
 
 THIS TABLE REPRESENTS INFANT MEMBERSHIP EXISTING IN THE 
 CHURCH OF GOD AT THE BIRTH OF CHRIST AND AS TRACED BY A 
 CHANNEL THROUGH THE FIRST FOUR CENTURIES OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 Birth of Christ. 
 
 «-( 
 
 A. D. 33 
 
 H 
 
 Christian Dispensation begun. 
 
 
 " 49 
 
 g 
 
 Circumcision discn.ssed. 
 
 K 
 
 50 
 
 g 
 
 td 
 
 Household baptisms recorded. 
 
 O «5 te| 
 
 — "- 67 
 
 Polycarp born. 
 
 s« 
 
 t;; 
 
 72 
 
 H 
 
 Jude died. 
 
 >3 ,.^ 
 
 76 
 
 ^ 
 
 Luke died. 
 
 
 94 
 — "— 97 
 
 ^3 
 
 Titus died. 
 J Ireneus born. 
 I Timothy died. 
 
 M^ W 
 
 
 w 
 ^ 
 
 
 ENEU 
 
 3MAN. 
 ASTOR. 
 JUST 
 
 A. D. 100 
 
 fe? 
 
 Close of Apostolic age. 
 
 ^3 
 
 
 —"—102 
 " 103 
 
 . > 
 
 H 
 
 St. John died. 
 Justin Martyr born. 
 
 ^ 
 
 ■<^, 
 
 
 " 14o 
 
 S 
 
 TertuUiah born. 
 
 LIVE 
 
 CLEMEN 
 
 MARTY 
 TERTl 
 
 
 
 " 16.5 
 
 a 
 
 H 
 
 Justin Martyr died. 
 
 ^ 
 
 - 
 
 — " 167 
 
 g 
 
 Polycarp died. 
 
 186 OR 
 T ALEX. 
 
 R. 
 rLLIAN. 
 
 o 
 
 
 — "— 186 
 
 y 
 
 Origen born. 
 
 § 
 
 
 " 198 
 
 _ 
 
 Ireneus died. 
 
 
 
 A. p. 200 ) 
 
 >^ 
 
 > 
 
 100 After Apostolic age. 
 
 
 
 Tertullian wrote. 
 
 U 
 
 
 " 210 } 
 " 220 ( 
 " 246 
 
 H 
 
 ...... t^ 
 
 Origen wrote. 
 
 t-i 
 
 
 M 
 
 Cyprian converted. 
 
 q 
 
 
 " 2.50 
 
 w 
 
 El 
 
 Council of Carthage. 
 
 S 
 
 
 " 2.51 
 
 Novatian schism. 
 
 i 
 
 
 " 259 
 
 ^ 
 
 3 
 
 Origen died. 
 
 
 A. D. 300 
 
 
 200 After Apostolic age. 
 
 
 " 305 
 
 "^ 
 
 Council of Eliberi.s. 
 
 
 " 311 
 
 ^ 
 
 Donatists arose. 
 
 
 " 328 
 
 2! 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen born. 
 
 
 " 329 
 
 
 Basil born. 
 
 
 " 331 
 
 H 
 
 S 
 
 Jerome born. 
 
 
 " 344 
 
 Chrysostom born. 
 
 
 " 354 
 
 Augu.stin born. 
 
 
 " 360 
 
 W 
 
 Council of Milevium. 
 
 
 " 374 
 
 2 
 
 Ambrose wrote. 
 
 
 " 397 
 
 t> 
 
 Third Council of Carthage. 
 
 
 A. D. 400 
 
 O 
 
 Fifth Council of Carthage. 
 
 
 " 417 
 
 o 
 
 Pelagian controversy. 
 
 
 " 429 
 
 ^ 
 
 Various Councils. 
 
 
 " 431 
 
 i 
 
 o 
 
 General Council of East and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \Vest. 
 
 12 
 
CHAPTER y. 
 
 RELATION or BAPTISM TO CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 A church on earth when Christ came — The temple and synagogue services 
 — Preceded by the Tabernacle with its altar, mercy seat and consecrated 
 ministers — preceded by the Abrahamic and patriarchial dispensations — 
 Circumcision the outward token of the Abrahamic covenant, sealing 
 spiritual and temporal promises — Abraham made the father of a spiritual 
 seed, in virtue of being at the head of a covenant bearing the seal of the 
 righteousness of faith — This covenant perpetual — Mosaic dispensation 
 added to it — Circumcision continued to the coming of Christ, " the 
 promised seed" — The change of the seal from circumcision to bap- 
 tism did not affect the right of Infants — The law for their membership 
 having not been repealed, they have the same claim to baptism that 
 they had to circumcision — Baptism called Christian circumcision by 
 primitive Christians — Held the same jolace in the same church while cir- 
 cumcision has passed away. 
 
 We shall now proceed to examine more closely the 
 connection between Baptism and Circumcision. For if 
 Justin Martyr and the Ancient Fathers of the Church 
 are right in calling Baptism " Christian Circumcision," 
 and in teaching that Baptism has taken the place 
 of Circumcision under the Christian Dispensationj then 
 we have another separate and distinct line of proof, 
 full and independent of all others, leading to the same 
 result. 
 
 In the first place, we must admit that the early Fa- 
 thers of the Church had as good, and even better, oppor- 
 
THE REDEEMER COME TO ZION. 135 
 
 tunities to learn what was a doctrine of the Apostles 
 than we have ; for Justin had the instruction of those 
 who had seen and heard the Apostles, to aid him in 
 the interpretation of their writings. And if circum- 
 cision under the Old has been succeeded by baptism 
 under the New Dispensation, it follows that infant chil- 
 .dren must be baptized ; for we all know they were 
 circumcised by expy^ess laiv. And unless that law 
 has been repealed, it of course covers the substitute 
 as it did the rite in whose place it stands, and therefore 
 binds Christians to the duty ot continuing infant mem- 
 bership and family religion under the New Administra- 
 tion. Changing merely the "seal" of a covenant, contract, 
 or deed of gift, does not affect or change the covenant 
 itself. The new seal covers what the old one did at the 
 time the change was made. So little children have the 
 same religious privileges under the seal of baptism 
 which they had under circumcision. 
 
 But has the seal of circumcision been changed into 
 that of baptism ? or does baptism occupy the same place 
 as a religious rite under the Gospel Dispensation that 
 circumcision did under the Jewish ? And is the Church 
 of Christ a continuation, in its essentials^ of the An- 
 cient Church or Covenant into which God's former 
 people were received and trained ? When the " Re- 
 deemer came to Zion,"* did He find no church, no tem- 
 ple, no synagogue, no religious organization, in the public 
 worship of which He and His Apostles could unite on the 
 Sabbath day ? Luke iv. 16, Acts xiii. 14. Or did He 
 destroy that ''kingdom" which He compared to a 
 
 * Isaiah, ch. lix. 
 
136 WORSHIP OF THE JEWS. 
 
 ''vineyard," and forewarned the Jews that it would 
 " be taken from them and given to a people bringing 
 forth the fruits thereof?" Matth. xxi. 43. Or was it 
 merely transferred into the hands of other husbandmen, 
 as he said it would be ? And under its new adminis- 
 tration improved and enlarged by more efficient culture 
 and better regulations ? 
 
 Now we know that our Saviour did find such a 
 Church, and that He and His Apostles did recognise 
 the Divine authority of its ordinances and worship. 
 And that it was "their custom" to attend and unite in 
 the services of the temple and synagogues.* And we 
 know also, that in this Church were trained the prophets 
 and holy men of old, who spake as they were moved by 
 the Holy Ghost. And that to "Israel" were "committed 
 the oracles of God." Rom. iii. 2. And that to them 
 as the Church of God, ''pertained the adoption, and 
 the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the 
 law, and the service of God, and the 2?romises. Rom. 
 ix. 5. And that this temple succeeded to the taber- 
 nacle, with its altar and mercy seat, its consecrated 
 ministers, and prescribed services — all fashioned and 
 modeled according to God's own appointment, Exod. 
 XXV. 40, called the " Church in the Wilderness." Acts 
 vii. 38. Not a promiscuous assembly, as ^xx-kyiokx some- 
 times denotes, but a regular ecclesiastical organization, 
 denominated by St. Paul, "A house," in which Moses 
 acted as a "servant," and afterward Christ as a "son." 
 ''Whose house are we," says the Apostle. Heb. iii. 5, 
 6 ; compare Ps. xxii. and Ixx. and Heb. ii. 12. 
 
 * Luke iv. 16 ; Acts xiii. 14 ; xv. 21 ; xvi. 13; 
 
And further we knoTV, that in this Church in which 
 Moses was faithful as a " servant," and which is called 
 bj the various names of ^' House," ''Israel," "Zion," 
 " Vineyard of the Lord,"* &c., was taught and practiced 
 the worship of the true God, and the duties of the true 
 religion. t And that for the preservation and continu- 
 ance of this religion and worship, Moses was raised up, 
 and commanded to conduct this people into a land to 
 themselves. "J They having become seriously affected 
 with idolatry and sins of the Egyptians, during their 
 sojourn among, and their oppression by that nation; in 
 order to deliver them from this oppression, and reform 
 their religion, § Moses was appointed to remove them to 
 a land favorable to this work, and to give them a system 
 of laws, rites and ceremonies adapted to this end ; and 
 for the transmission of this religion to the dawning forth 
 of a brighter day, whose rising sun would reveal with 
 perfect clearness its glorious beauties now so dimly seen 
 under a darker dispensation. || 
 
 Hence the Apostle Paul tells us, " The law (Mosaic 
 Dispensation) was added because of trangression till the 
 seed (Christ) should come." Gal. iii. 19. The corrupt 
 state of the world, and the sins and idolatry with which 
 Israel had become infected, made it necessary to add, 
 to the Covenant of Grace under which they lived, the 
 dispensation of Moses, as subservient to the preservation 
 and continuance of the doctrines and truths of their reli- 
 
 ^ Isaiah v. 1 — 7. 
 
 f Exod. iii ; xviii ; xix. Leviticus, Dent., Acts vii. 34 — 38. 
 
 % Exod. iii. 12. ix. 1. xx. chap. 
 
 I Joshua xxiv. 2—14. || Gal. iii. 19. Heb. x. 1. 
 
 12* 
 
138 PRINCIPLES OF god's GOVERNMENT 
 
 gion to the coming of Christ with his brighter light and 
 more perfect dispensation. 
 
 The Jews had long been in covenant relations with 
 God, chosen by him for his select people, to whom He 
 promised the special doctrines and duties of religion, and 
 whom He had brought into a Church state for the purpose 
 of preserving and handing down the worship of the true 
 God, and the promises connected with a coming Saviour. 
 
 This solemn covenant had been ratified by an outward 
 and visible sign and symbol of a new heart,* and had 
 been in existence from the time of Abraham, bearing 
 the sign of circumcision — '^ a seal of the rig7iteous7iess of 
 faith" that its blessings " 7night he of grace.' ''\ And it 
 was declared by God to be an " everlasting covenant."J 
 
 Afterwards when sin and idolatry had multiplied, " the 
 law" or dispensation of Moses was added to it, to sub- 
 serve in promoting the great ends for which it had been 
 established among men. Hence the Saviour teaches, 
 " Circumcision is not of Moses but of the Fathers." 
 John vii. 22 : — continued by him for the perpetuation 
 of the original covenant to which it belonged, and to 
 which the Mosaic dispensation was added for special 
 reasons. 
 
 Thus we trace back the visible Church of God on 
 earth to Abraham's day. Before that period, God had 
 not given to His people a peculiar badge or visible sign, 
 by which they were to be distinguished from others. He 
 had included all under a course of discipline, by which a 
 people who were infants in knowledge would perhaps be 
 
 * Rom. iv. 11 ; Rom, ii. 29. 
 
 t Rom. iv. 16. X Gcu. xvii. 7. 
 
THE SAME IN EVERY AGE. " 139 
 
 sooner taught his dislike to sin, from its public punish- 
 ment. Instead of collecting the better portion of man- 
 kind into one body, by calling them out from among 
 the wicked — His plan was to drive out the wicked from 
 among them, and thus preserve them from the contagion 
 of evil, at the same time his displeasure at sin would be 
 manifest to all. Cain and his wicked descendants were 
 driven out to a land to themselves as exiles.* And 
 when the two races came together afterwards and the 
 " sons of God " intermarried with the wicked, and sin 
 as a consequence greatly multiplied, a deluge swept oiF 
 the ungodly, leaving only righteous Noah and his family 
 on the earth. t And when his descendants fell into 
 idolatry and various other sins, then Abram was called 
 out into a different land from them, to form a separate 
 and distinct people for the Lord. And now God 
 changes his mode of administration, but not the prin- 
 ciples upon which it is founded. Up to this time He 
 had manifested his displeasure against sin by driving 
 out and punishing the wicked. Now and hereafter he 
 will exhibit rather his love of virtue by calling out the 
 righteous from among the wicked, and forming them 
 into a separate people under covenanted privileges, 
 thereby granting high and peculiar favors to those who 
 shall love Him and keep his commandments. The great 
 principles of His government, and the end to be secured, 
 are the same under both methods, and ever must be the 
 same. For God is ever the same, and can not change. 
 But He applies those principles in the way best adapted 
 to the age and condition of the people who are to be af- 
 
 * Gen. iv. chap. | Gen. vi. chap. 
 
140 THE ABRAIIAMIC COVENANT CONFIRMED. 
 
 fected by them. Hence His outward and visible " Co- 
 venant of Grace," embracing present and future bless- 
 ings to the faithful, begins with Abraham. 
 
 It was instituted under the following circumstances. 
 
 The descendants of Noah, although they worshipped 
 the true God, had now converted created objects into 
 deities, and the sun and moon, stars and winds, rocks and 
 rivers had become objects of worship ; and these demand- 
 ing no morality in conduct, the practice of virtue, and 
 the knowledge and worship of the true God were fast 
 disappearing from among them. And for the purpose of 
 preserving and transmitting the religion and worship of 
 the One only true God, wath kindred subjects,* Abram 
 a man of faith and of the right spirit was selected and 
 commanded by the Lord to leave his country and kin- 
 dred and go into a land which He vrould show unto 
 him; adding — " And I will make of thee a great nation, 
 and I will bless thee, and make thy name great ; and 
 thou shalt be a blessing ; and I will bless them that 
 bless thee, and curse them that curse thee, and in thee 
 shall all the families of the earth be blessed." Gen. 
 xii. 1—3. 
 
 Abram obeyed, and " went out not knowing whither 
 he w^ent." Heb. xi. 8. And when he came to the land 
 of Canaan, " the Lord appeared unto him and said, 
 Unto thy seed ayHI I give this land ; and there builded 
 he an altar unto the Lord who appeared unto him." 
 Gen. xii. 8. And w^hen his faith and obedience had 
 been more fully tested, and Abram was now ninety and 
 nine years old, God ratified under the form of a visible 
 * Joshua xxiv. 2 — 14 ; Gen. xii. 
 
A PROMISED SAVIOUR INCLUDED. 141 
 
 seal, all that He had promised unto him, under the so- 
 lemn injunction — " I am the Almiglity Cfod : walk 
 before me, and he tJiou perfect. And I will make mj 
 covenant between me and thee," &c. Gen. xvii. 1, 2. 
 Abram fell upon his face, and God in a summary man- 
 ner reiterated his former promises. All of which may 
 be considered as briefly comprehended in the 7th verse : 
 '-'- 1 ivill establish my covenant between me and thee, and 
 thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an everlast- 
 ing covenant ; to be a God unto thee and thy seed after 
 thee.'' To be a God unto us and our descendants, is all 
 that we need, and all that we should desire in any cove- 
 nant with Him. Such a covenant embraces all that is 
 good for all ages and all countries. 
 
 And to this Abram gladly gave his consent, by 
 submitting to a religious rite affixed as the seal of the 
 arrangement, in which his name was changed to Abra- 
 ham, because to him was sealed the promise of an 
 innumerable seed, and he thus made the father of all 
 that believe — " The First and Head of the Visible Cove- 
 nant of Grace embracing a promised Saviour."* 
 
 As to the nature and character of this covenant none, 
 we presume, can explain it better than an inspired 
 Apostle. And no interpretation will be received of 
 higher authority than that of the Apostle Paul. He 
 tells us, first, that a promised Saviour was thereby co- 
 venanted. '' Now, to Abraham and his seed were the 
 promises made. He saith not and to seeds, as of many ; 
 but as of One, and to thy seed lohich is Christ.'' Gal. 
 iii. 16. This he further explains in the next verse (17,) 
 
 * Rom. iv. 11-13. 
 
142 THE COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM. 
 
 and calls it 'Hhe covenant that was confirmed before of 
 God in Christ.''' The promised Saviour, was therefore 
 the grand feature in this compact, or Deed of Gift. The 
 Apostle, next, informs us that it is a Covenant of Grace 
 in which men are justified by faith. '' Abraham be- 
 lieved God, and it was counted unto him for righteous- 
 ness." Rom. iv. 3. And in the 16th verse, he adds, 
 " Therefore it is of faith that it might he hy grace ; to 
 the end that the promise might be sure to all the seed : 
 not to that only which is of the law, but to that also 
 which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of 
 us all." So justification by faith is another feature in 
 that covenant. 
 
 Further, the same Apostle informs us that Abraham, 
 Isaac, and Jacob regarded the land of Canaan as merely 
 a type of the Heavenly Canaan, and that they "so- 
 journed in the land of promise as in a strange country, 
 looking forward to a city which hath foundations, 
 whose builder and maker is God." And that they and 
 multitudes of their descendants, " all died in faith, not 
 having received the promises, but having seen them afar 
 oif, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, 
 and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on 
 the earth. For they that say such things, declare 
 plainly that they seek a country. And truly if they 
 had been mindful of that country from whence they 
 came out, they might have had opportunity to have re- 
 turned. But now they desire a better country, that is, 
 an heavenly. Wherefore God is not ashamed to be 
 called their God ; for He hath prepared for them a 
 city." Heb. xi. 9-16. 
 
THE COVENANT OF GIIACE. 143 
 
 Thus we see the great end and efforts of the members 
 of the Abrahamic covenant, were to reach the heavenly 
 city. They lived by faith, looking forward to that 
 spiritual Jerusalem, whose builder and maker is God ; 
 which He has prepared for all "Abraham's seed and 
 heirs according to the promise." Gal. iii. 29. Nor were 
 they disappointed ; for God is not ashamed of those 
 who thus fulfill his covenant. Hence the Abrahamic 
 covenant vouchsafed to its faithful members — a loromised 
 Saviour — justification hy faith — and the final possession 
 of heaven. 
 
 And is not this the same which the Gospel covenant 
 now proposes, — the promised Saviour (having come) and 
 fulfilling for those who look back, precisely what He 
 did for those who looked forward to His coming ? And 
 does not the Apostle Paul expressly teach that the 
 Christian covenant is the continuation of this same cove- 
 nant formed ivith Abraham ? That Christ redeemed us 
 from the curse of the law, that the blessing of Abraham 
 might come upon the Gentiles through Jesus Christ ? 
 Gal. iii. 13, 14. And that if we are Christ's, then are 
 we Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise ? 
 For neither the law, nor any other power could annul 
 the covenant made with Abraham. Gal. iii. 15-17. 
 Read the third chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians. 
 
 See first, the declaration that the Gospel was preach- 
 ed unto Abraham. " And the Scripture foreseeing that 
 God would justify the heathen through faith, yreachcd 
 hefore the Crospel unto Abraham, saying. In thee shall 
 all nations be blessed. So they which be of faith are 
 blessed with faithful Abraham." Gal. iii. 8, 9. 
 
144 ABKAIIAMIC COVENANT NOT ANNULLED. 
 
 See next, that Christ has redeemed us that the bless- 
 ing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles through 
 Jesus Christ. " Christ hath redeemed us from the 
 curse of the law, being made a curse for us : for it is 
 written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree : 
 that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gen- 
 tiles through Jesus Christ ; that we might receive the 
 promise of the Spirit through faith." Gal. iii. 14, 15. 
 
 Now mark, that this covenant, by which " they who 
 are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham,"* 
 the Apostle affirms has not been annulled ; and cannot 
 be annulled. " Brethren, I speak after the manner of 
 men ; though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be 
 confirined^ no man disannulletli or addetli thereto. Now, 
 to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He 
 saith not — and to seeds, as of many ; but as of one, and 
 to thy seed which is Christ. And this I say^ that the 
 covenant ivas confirmed before ofHod in Christ, the law, 
 ivhich was four hundred ayid thirty years after, cannot 
 disannul, that it should make the promise of none 
 effect.'' Gal. iii. 15, 16, 17. More explicit evidence of 
 the perpetuation of the Abrahamic covenant could not 
 be given. Apostolic declaration is supported by Apos- 
 tolic argument to show that that covenant is still in force. 
 
 Four hundred and thirty years after the calling of 
 Abraham, the " Law" was given at Mount Sinai, and 
 the Mosaic Dispensation then commenced. Some might 
 suppose the Abrahamic Covenant was then annulled, 
 and superseded by the Mosaic. Not so, says the Apos- 
 tle. The Law was added in subserviency to the ends 
 
 ■^- GaL iii. 7. 
 
CONTINUED UNDER THE GOSPEL. 145 
 
 for whicli the Covenant with Abraham was instituted. 
 It was grafted on the Abrahamic Covenant for a speci- 
 fic object. "Added, (to it) because of transgressions till 
 the seed (Christ) should come, to whom (or concerning 
 whom) the promise was made." Gal. iii. 19. That is, 
 the Dispensation of Moses was added to the Covenant 
 of Abraham, to serve in counteracting the influence of 
 sin, and in preserving the knowledge and worship of the 
 true God until the coming of Christ. It shadowed forth 
 and prepared the way for the coming Saviour and his 
 more spiritual administration. But when the promised 
 Seed came, its work was done. Its term of office expir- 
 ed — having "waxed old" it passed away, leaving the 
 Abrahamic Covenant as it found it — in full force. 
 
 The Saviour came like the rising sun, lighting up into 
 perfect day the dim twilight spread over this Covenant, 
 and revealed to view the beauty and glory of much that 
 had remained unperceived and hence unappreciated. He 
 himself was the grand object in the foreground of the 
 picture — in him Avas fulfilled, and through and by him 
 are being fulfilled all that it promised, and all that will 
 be needed to its perfect fulfillment to the end of time. 
 
 The fuller development of its principles was followed 
 by some change in externals^ and the mode of its appli- 
 cation to a more enlightened age ; but no change in the 
 principles themselves. Circumcision has been superseded 
 by the more comprehensive rite of Baptism; and the 
 seventh day Sabbath by the Lord's day, which embraces 
 the completion of the Redemption also with the Creation 
 of the world. 
 
 The Gospel Covenant being therefore a continnation 
 
IX' 
 
 r 
 
 14G CIRCUMCISION SEAL OF SPIRITUAL BLESSINGS. 
 
 of the Ahraliamic Covenant, more enlarged in its mode 
 of application to our fallen race ; and little children 
 circumcised and made its members by law, it follows 
 that tbey must by authority of the same law be now bap- 
 tized — their right to membership having never been re- 
 pealed, the change of the Seal cannot deprive them oi 
 it. This will be admitted by those who admit that the 
 Abrahamic and Christian is one and the same Covenant. 
 And that must he admitted by all who will apply them- 
 selves to the question until they properly understand it. 
 
 As to the objection sometimes urged, that circum- 
 cision only embraced temporal blessings and the lineage 
 of Abraham- — one must have read his Bible to little 
 profit, who can seriously entertain it. Are there no 
 spiritual blessings embraced in the following language ? 
 '^ And he (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision, 
 a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet 
 being uncircumcised ; that he might be the father of all 
 them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that 
 righteousness might be imputed to them also ; and the 
 father of circumcision to them who are not of the circum- 
 cision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith 
 of our father Abraham which he had, being yet uncir- 
 cumcised." Rom. iv. 11. 12. 
 
 Are not the things here specially pointed out spirit- 
 iial ? Did Abraham receive the seal of merely temporal 
 promises for a temporary end? Or did he receive "the 
 seal of the righteousness of faith,'' that he might be the 
 spiritual fat] ler also of true believers whether they were 
 circumcised or uncircumcised? Did not the Apostle 
 introduce these passages for the special object of show- 
 
147 
 
 ing that circumcision was the seal of a covenant of 
 grace, by which all true believers should be regarded as 
 the spiritual seed of Abraham ? And what does " the 
 righteousness of faith" mean hwt justification hy faith? 
 And if Abraham received the seal of justification hy 
 faith, could he have received the seal of a higher and 
 greater spiritual blessing? Again, " The promise was 
 not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but 
 throuo-h the risihteousness of faith." Rom. iv. 13. 
 
 The thing is too plain to dwell upon, and the more in- 
 telligent, in order to escape the legitimate sequences, 
 resort to the alternative of making circumcision mean 
 one thing to Abraham, and another and different thing 
 to his posterity. To Abraham, say they, "it was a seal 
 of the righteousness of his faith — but to his posterity 
 not of faith but of a certain covenant." 
 
 Wonderful discovery ! A sign of one thing to Abra- 
 ham, and of another to every one else ! Was it ever 
 heard that, when a grant was made to certain persons 
 and the authoritative seal of the State affixed to the 
 instrument, it did not confirm to all alike accord- 
 ing to the specifications? God said, "I will estab- 
 lish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after 
 thee." And with Abraham his seed stands connected 
 in every specification made in the grant ;* and the same 
 seal or token is applied to every one of the party. If 
 it was a seal of justification by faith, when applied to 
 Abraham, it was therefore the same when applied to 
 Infants. 
 
 Abraham and his seed are made members of the same 
 covenant, signed with the same seal, confirming to each 
 
 * Genesis xvii. 7, 14. 
 
148 THE FATHER OF THE FAITHFUL 
 
 the same tJiingB. Who has the power to distribute to 
 each contrary to the terras of the grant ? 
 
 But here refuge is again sought in the attempt to draw 
 a distinction between the " seal" and " token" of a cove- 
 nant. "Circumcision," say they, "was the 'token' or 
 'mark' of the covenant with Abraham's seed — not a 
 ' seaV to them^ but only to Jiim.'' 
 
 Let us analyze this distinction. Suppose you call it 
 a ' token,' or a ' mark,' or whatever you please. Was it 
 not the sign of God's covenant with them ? And if a 
 sign was it not an autlioritative sign — a2:>poi'iited by Godf 
 And if an authoritative sign of the covenant — what is 
 that but a seal? AVhat is the seal of a promise or con- 
 tract but the mark of an a^opointed sign f 
 
 And now if God appointed, as the " token" or " sign" 
 of this covenant, the " seal of the righteousness of faith" 
 and ordered it to be applied to Abraham and his pos- 
 terijty alike, did not the sign of itself indicate the nature 
 of the covenant and include all the parties under it, and 
 remind young and old that they must " walk in the steps 
 of that faith of their father Abraham which he had being 
 yet uncircumcised ?" Rom. iv. 12. And does it not 
 still proclaim to Jew and Gentile the power of faith and 
 way of becoming the true spiritual children of Abraham ? 
 
 But here a third effort to escape is made under the 
 shelter of "faith." " Abraham's /azY/i only^ (say they) 
 made him the father of all believers." Not so — writes 
 the Apostle Paul — " Abraham believed God and it was 
 accounted unto him for righteousness. . . . And he re- 
 ceived the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteous- 
 ness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised, 
 
BECAUSE HEAD OF A VISIBLE COVENANT. 149 
 
 that he might be the father of all them that believe," 
 &c. Rom. iv. 3. 11. 
 
 Mark, he " received the sign of circumcision that he 
 might be the father of all them that believe." The 
 Apostle is specific in giving the reason why circum- 
 cision was added. Faith alone, did not make Abraham 
 the " father of the faithful," but the sign of circumcision 
 was ordered, " that he might be the father of all them 
 that believe." His faith publicly attested, by God with 
 the sign and seal of the righteousness of faith, made him 
 the father of future believers. 
 
 Abraham's faith before his circumcision brought to 
 him justification^ but the power of that faith was made 
 known through circumcision. His faith was the ground- 
 work, but the Divine attestation of a visible sign and 
 seal, placed him at the head of a Covenant, by means of 
 which the righteousness of faith is proclaimed to men, 
 and he made the father of all who believe. That is, cir- 
 cumcision pointed him out as an example and made him 
 the first in the visible line of God's people on earth. 
 He thus became the head and father of a visible Cove- 
 nant of Grace ; by virtue of which he is called by the 
 Apostle " The father of us all." 
 
 Were it not for circumcision Enoch, and Woah, and 
 others would more properly be called the prototype and 
 father of the faithful. For they lived before Abraham, 
 and "had the testimony that they pleased God," Heb. 
 xi. 5, 6, 7. 
 
 But circumcision was a notable and significant sign — 
 the seal of a Covenant embracing things temporal and 
 spiritual, promising to Abraham an innumerable seed — 
 
 13* 
 
150 GRAND OBJECT OP CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 in which the Apostle informs us a spiritual as well as a 
 natural seed are included,* and thus he is made the father 
 of all true Christians. 
 
 Hence by virtue of this Covenant Abraham is called 
 the "father of the faithful," although Enoch, and Noah, 
 and Abel lived before him. To their faith the Holy 
 Ghost hath testified as well as unto Abraham's but with 
 them that visible Covenant of Grace had not been form- 
 ed, of which Abraham is made the head, and through 
 which all true Christians are called "his children," and 
 into which fathers, and mothers, and their little children 
 have been received some four thousand years. 
 
 It is true that circumcision did include temporal with 
 spiritual blessings, but it was administered to all who 
 united themselves with the people of God. Ishmael 
 and his descendants, who never inherited any portion of 
 the land of Canaan, and those purchased for servants, 
 and the tliousands of other iiations who from time to 
 time became Jews, were all alike circumcised. The 
 land of Canaan, as a type and pledge of the Heavenly 
 Canaan, was included ; and for the purpose of preserv- 
 ing and transmitting the worship of the true God, it 
 Avas important that they should have a separate and dis- 
 tinct country to themselves at that period. But this, 
 and all things of a temporary character, with the legal 
 Dispensation of Moses added, were subsidiary to the 
 higher and spiritual ends of a promised Saviour, and 
 justification by faith, of which circumcision was the 
 si(j7i and seal. 
 
 Nor when that which is temporary and limited in a 
 * Rom. iv. 12. Rom. ix chapter. 
 
THE NATURE OF A SEAL. 151 
 
 covenant expires bj its own nature or limitation, does 
 it affect the validity of the remaining portion ? All that 
 is permanent and unlimited in its character continues as 
 firmlj secured and the covenant as binding as if no 
 part had run out. In the words of another, "A cove- 
 nant, considered as a contract, or deed of gift, or a 
 promise showing the purpose and plan of the author, 
 may be made to-day, the items increased to-morrow, and 
 the seal not applied until the third day, or some subse- 
 quent period ; and yet whenever it is affixed, it covers 
 all the items embraced in the covenant. 
 
 " Some of these items may be temporary in their 
 nature, and expire by their own limitation, while the 
 covenant remains in force ; others may be permanent, 
 and have no end ; still, the seal covers with its sanction 
 all the various provisions, just so long as by their nature 
 or the original appointment they continue in force. 
 
 "Again, the seal may he changed^ without touching 
 the covenant itself. Lawful authority may decide that 
 the old seal shall no longer be used, and ordain that 
 another shall take its place, transferring all its legal 
 force to the substitute. And when this appointment 
 goes into effect, the new seal ratifies the covenant pre- 
 cisely as the old one did, at the time of the transfer. If 
 any part of the covenant had from any cause expired, if 
 any part terminated at the very moment the transfer 
 was made, then the new seal covers and continues just 
 what the old one would have done had it been continued 
 afterwards."* 
 
 Thus circumcision covered all that was contemplated 
 
 * An anonymous pamphlet. 
 
152 infants' claims not affected. 
 
 and promised from the calling of Abraham to the time 
 the covenant was closed and the seal affixed. And 
 when the temporary items terminated, as in the case of 
 the land of Canaan, the spiritual Canaan typified, and 
 other blessings embraced, still remained as secure as 
 before. 
 
 So when Christ, the promised seed, came in the flesh, 
 he went on to fulfill the duties implied and necessary to 
 the perfection of a covenant of grace, securing to men 
 salvation through faith. And every fulfillment that 
 thus takes place, should inspire us with greater confi- 
 dence in that which is yet to come. Confiding fully in 
 the promise that ''He will be our God," and make us 
 all the spiritual "children of Abraham," who "walk in 
 the steps of the faith of Abraham," and bless us with the 
 realization of all that v/as expected from a promised 
 Saviour and an inheritance of the Heavenly Canaan. 
 
 And when the seal of circumcision was chano^ed for 
 that of baptism, then baptism sanctioned all that cir- 
 cumcision w^ould have secured had it been continued. 
 
 Therefore, the membership of infants under the New 
 is as valid and binding as it was under the Old. No 
 change was made in their case at the time of the abro- 
 gation of the old seal ; there is nothing in the nature of 
 the new, or in the terms of the covenant, by wdiich it 
 could be terminated ; and who will dare assume the re- 
 sponsibility to take from them a right which they have 
 so long possessed ? 
 
 It has been objected that baptism did not take the 
 place of circumcision because they were both practiced 
 together for some time after the Gospel Dispensation 
 
EECOGNITION OF INFANT MEMBERSHIP. 153 
 
 had begun. We might as well contend that the Chris- 
 tian Sabbath did not take the place of the Jewish Sab- 
 bath because both days were kej^t by Jewish believers 
 for some years after the Gospel was preached and em- 
 braced among them. Jewish Christians for a long 
 period continued circumcision and the Jewish Sabbath, 
 and other rites of their old religion, after they embraced 
 Christianity.* They supposed that the Christian reli- 
 gion was something to be superadded to what they 
 already possessed, to perfect their own system of reli- 
 gion. And therefore they added the Lord's day to 
 their own Sabbath, and baptism as an additional rite to 
 their other ceremonies. And the continuance of cir- 
 cumcision itself proves that they regarded their little 
 children as embraced in the Gospel Church. Eor they 
 could not have added a system which excluded little 
 children to one that embraced them, supposing the two 
 to harmonise and make one whole, had they been 
 informed that little children could no longer be contin- 
 ued in God's Church with their believing parents. And 
 that circumcision was generally regarded as a religious, 
 not merely as a national rite, is i^laced beyond all doubt \ 
 by the fact that it was urged by Jewish Christians - 
 upon Gentile converts as necessary to their salvation : ; 
 "Except ye be circumcised after the law of Moses, ye ' 
 cannot be saved." Acts xv. 1. 
 
 This happened some sixteen yearsf after the Gospel 
 Dispensation had been in successful operation, which 
 proves that they still circumcised their children, and sup- 
 
 * Acts XV. xxi. Ireneus i. 26. Euseb. iii. 32. 
 
 f See best chronologers — Hales, Townsend, and others. 
 
154 HEBREW CHRISTIANS ADHERE TO MOSES. 
 
 posed it to be a necessary rite to salvation. But had in- 
 fants been refused baptism, the nature of circumcision 
 must have been discussed and defined long before this, in- 
 stead of which a Council of the Church was held at this 
 period in Jerusalem to decide on the authority of circum- 
 cision in the Christian Church, and whether it should be 
 imposed on Gentile converts.* Now if they had been 
 taught that little children could not be received into the 
 new Covenant, and that the circumcision which they had 
 continued among them so long in the Christian Church, 
 was only a national badge, how could such a difficulty 
 have then arisen ? 
 
 We call upon the opposers of Infant baptism to reply. 
 The thing is obvious. Infant membership had been 
 continued ; the Jews were permitted to circumcise and 
 to baptize ; and as long as Jewish ceremonies were made 
 subordinate to those more strictly Christian, they were 
 not proscribed, because they were not in their spirit 
 opposed to the Christian system. But now undue im- 
 portance is given to them, and circumcision supposed to 
 be an essential part of the religion of Christ, it is time 
 for the Church in Council to declare that it is not a part 
 of, or necessary to the Gospel Dispensation. These 
 Gentile converts had been baptized, and as a public pro- 
 fession of Christ and the initiatory rite into his Church, 
 this was sufficient. 
 
 So Jewish Christians long kept both the Lord's day 
 and Jewish Sabbath ; but Gentile believers, and those 
 who accepted the Gospel of Christ in its simplicity, 
 
 * This qucetion Avill l)e more fully discussed under the Scriptural 
 texts for Infant Mcniljcrship. Acts xv. and xxi. 
 
CIRCUMCISION SUPERSEDED BY BAPTISM. 155 
 
 kept only the "Lord's day" as the Christian Sabbath; 
 and observed only baptism as the seal of the Christian 
 Dispensation. Baptism and the Lord's day could not 
 be said in point of fact to take the place of circumcision 
 and of the Jewish Sabbath for those who united the two 
 Dispensations ; but to all, then and now, who receive the 
 Gospel, and practice only its own ordinances, the Lord's 
 day is the Sabbath instead of the Jewish Sabbath, and j 
 baptism the initiatory rite of religion instead of circum- 
 cision. And wdiethec we choose to call one the substitute 
 of the other or not, baptism has succeeded circumcision, 
 as the Lord's day has succeeded the Jewish Sabbath, 
 and answers all the sinritual pioyoses, Jiolds the same 
 place in the same Churchy while circumcision has passed 
 away. 
 
 Circumcision was the door of admission into the visi- 
 ble Church of God under the Patriarchal and Mosaic 
 Dispensations. Gen. xvii. 10 ; Ex. xii. 48. 
 
 Baptism is the door of admission under the Christian 
 Dispensation. Matt, xxviii. 19. 
 
 Circumcision was the token of God's covenant with 
 his ancient people. Gen. xvii. 11. 
 
 Baptism is the same with his people of the present day. 
 Mark xvi. 16. 
 
 Circumcision of the flesh was symbolical of the cir- 
 ■ cumcision of the heart, in the spirit. Rom. ii. 29. 
 
 So baptism is symbolical of the cleansing and renew- 
 ing of the heart by the same spirit. Acts xxii. 16. 
 
 Circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of faith. 
 Rom. iv. 11. 
 
 And '^as many as have been baptized into Christ! 
 
156 BAPTISxM, CHRISTIAN CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, 
 there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor 
 female ; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye 
 be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's, seed, and heirs ac- 
 cording to the promise." Gal. iii. 27, 29. 
 
 Again. — '' In whom also ye are circumcised with the 
 circumcision made without hands, in putting off the 
 body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of 
 Christ: buried with him in baptism." Col. i. 11, 12. 
 
 Hence the ancient Fathers alluding to this text were 
 in the habit of calling baptism, the " circumcision made 
 without hands" and "the circumcision of Christ."* 
 Justin Martyn, who lived when many were yet upon the 
 earth, who, as before remarked, had seen and heard the 
 Apostles with their own eyes and ears — tells us that 
 Christians put off the body of the sins of the flesh by 
 Christian circumcision, i.e. baptism. " We have not re- 
 ceived that circumcision ivhich is according to the flesh, hut 
 
 that which is sjnritual Aoid we have received it 
 
 in ba2Jtism."'\ Again, '' We are circumcised hy bap- 
 tism, by Christ's circumcision.' '% 
 
 Origen says, " Christ gives us circumcision by bajj- 
 tism."^ Fidus hesitated to baptize children before the 
 eighth day after their birth, the time at which circum- 
 cision was always administered. And Cyprian to whom 
 the question was referred with 66 bishops in council, gave 
 as their judgment that it might be administered before ; 
 especially in time of danger to the child's life.H Such 
 
 ■'^' Justin, Basil, Chrysostom, Augustin and others. 
 
 f Dialog, cum Tryph, page 59. % Quest, ad Orthodox. 
 
 ^ Horn. V. "" II Cypriani Epis. Gi. 
 
AUGUSTINE AND INFANT BAPTISM. 157 
 
 a question would never have arisen had it not been tha^^ 
 baptism was regarded as having superseded circumcision. 
 Chrysostom says, " There was pain and trouble in the 
 'practice of circumcision, hut our circumcision, I mean 
 
 the Grace of Baptism, gives cure tvithout |j>am 
 
 and has no determinate time as that had, but in the very 
 beginning of age, or the middle of it, or any other 
 time one may receive this circumcision made ivithout 
 hands.' '"^ 
 
 Basil writes, '''And dost thou put off the circumcision 
 made without hands in the putting off flesh ivhich is 
 performed in baptism, when thou hearest our Lord him- 
 self say — 'Verily, verily I say unto you, except one be 
 born of the water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into 
 
 the kingdom of God?'" t 
 
 We need hardly add others, to satisfy any reasonable 
 man that the early fathers in the Church believed, and 
 so understood St. Paul to teach, that baptism in spiritual 
 things, had taken the place and superseded circumcision. 
 But we will cite one more witness to show not only the 
 relation of the two rites to each other, but what was 
 the teaching of the brightest luminary of the ancient 
 Church in regard to this whole subject. The celebrated 
 Augustine, bishop of Hippo, after stating that " Infant 
 baptism was the practice of the whole Church, not insti- 
 tuted by councils, but ever in use by Apostolic authority," J 
 speaks of its importance in the following terms: "We 
 may make a true estimate how much the sacrament of 
 
 "■^ Horn. xl. f Oratio cxhortatoria ad baptismum. 
 
 J Augustin. cle Baptismo contra Donatistas, lib. iv. chap. 15. 
 
 14 
 
158 Augustine's pakallkl of 
 
 baptism does avail infants, by the circumcision which 
 God's former people received. For Abraham was jus- 
 tified before he received that : as Cornelius was indued 
 with the Holy Spirit before he received baptism. And 
 yet the Apostle says of Abraham that he received the 
 sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the 
 faith, by which he had in heart believed, and it had 
 been counted to him for righteousness. Why then 
 was he commanded to circumcise all his male infants on 
 the eighth day, when they could not yet believe with 
 the heart, that it might be counted to them for righteous- 
 ness, but for this reason, because the sacrament itself 
 is of itself of great import ? Therefore as in Abraham 
 the righteousness of faith went before, and circumcision 
 the seal of the righteousness of faith came after ; so in 
 Cornelius the spiritual sanctification by the gift of the 
 Holy Spirit went before ; and the sacrament of rege- 
 neration by the laver of baptism came after. And as 
 in Isaac who was circumcised the eighth day, the seal of 
 the righteousness of faith went before, and (as he was a 
 follower of his father's faith) the righteousness itself, the 
 seal whereof had gone before in his infancy, came after : 
 so in infants baptized, the sacrament of regeneration goes 
 before, and (if they put in practice the Christian reli- 
 gion) conversion of the heart, the mystery whereof went 
 before in their body, comes after."* 
 
 Such is a summary of the whole matter as received in 
 Augustine's day. 
 
 First — That Infant baptism was the practice of the 
 
 •^ AuQfustinns contrn Donntistns, lib. iv. c. ];">. 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 159 
 
 universal Church, and admitted by all to be of Apostol- 
 ical authority. 
 
 Second — That it conveyed all the spiritual blessings 
 of circumcision, and was therefore of great import. 
 
 And third — That it is the seal of the sanctification of 
 the spirit, or justification by faith, as was circumcision. 
 And as circumcision was given to children before they 
 could believe, so baptism is given to children before they 
 can believe. Where then is the force of the objection. 
 Little children must not be baptized because they can not 
 believe ? Could the children of Abraham believe ? and 
 yet did they not receive the sign of circumcision a seal 
 of the righteousness of faith, and symbol of the circum- 
 cision of the heart ? How then can the reader of the 
 preceding pages, exclude little children from baptism on 
 such a plea as this ? And need we prolong this chapter 
 to prove that baptism has superseded circumcision and 
 secures to Christians and to their little children all 
 the spiritual blessings of the first seal ? We can do 
 so, but surely no intelligent reader will deem it neces- 
 sary. But we write for all. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 RELATION OF CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM, CONCLUDED. 
 
 St. Paul's definition of circumcision — Exposition of tlie moral law under 
 Moses — Old Testament appealed to by Christ and his Apostles — Transfer 
 of the kingdom — Branches of the wild olive grafted into the good olive 
 ti-ee — Strangers and foreigners made fellow-citizens with the saints — 
 New and better covenant — New and old, comparative terms — Basis of 
 the Christian Church — Gentiles brought in with Jews — Faith of parents 
 avail for their children — Hannah, Nobleman — Woman of Canaan — Reli- 
 gion always a family thing — Baptism on the faith of the parent — Syriac 
 version of the Holy Scriptm'es. 
 
 It is truly painful to witness the reckless manner in 
 which partisan writers often treat and speak of circum- 
 cision and the Patriarchal and Mosaic Dispensations. 
 " Circumcision (say they) was a mere national badge by 
 which Abraham's descendants were to be distinguished 
 from the rest of the world, and to remind them of the 
 promise of the land of Canaan. And the Mosaic Dis- 
 pensation was a religio-political commonwealth instituted 
 for a specific end, and temporary in its nature." 
 
 Will such permit inspired Apostles and God's own 
 Son to explain the character and objects of these Insti- 
 tutions? Does St. Paul say that circumcision was a 
 mere national badge implying only temporary blessings. 
 Hear him. " For he is not a Jew, which is one out- 
 wardly ; neither is that circumcision tvhich is outward 
 
THE CIRCUMCISION OF THE HEART. 161 
 
 in the flesh. But he is a Jew ivhich is one inwardly : 
 and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and 
 not in the letter ; whose praise is not of men hut of 
 aodr—Uo. ii. 28, 29. 
 
 Can language more plainly teach that circumcision 
 pointed to things spiritual as well as temporal ? Does 
 not the Apostle in these words, beyond all controversy, 
 teach — that circumcision is an outward visible sign of \ 
 an inward spiritual grace, — to wit, the circumcision of ' 
 the heart, which is necessary to make us the true chil- 
 dren of Abraham ? 
 
 And did our Saviour regard that as a mere national 
 institution to the members of which he said — " Many 
 shall come from the east and from the west, and shall 
 sit. down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the king- 
 dom of heaven, but the children of the kingdom shall he \ 
 cast outf Matt. viii. 11, 12, 
 
 *' Children of what kingdom ?" and what connection 
 had it with ^' Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the king- 
 dom of heaven," but as the visible part of a kingdom 
 begun here on earth to prepare men for its more perfect 
 state in heaven, into which Abraham, and Isaac, and 
 Jacob had already entered ? The Jews were members 
 of this kingdom on earth, and the Saviour thus warns 
 them of the danger of being excluded, for the want of 
 fitness, from its perfect state and blessings in heaven. 
 
 Is it more reasonable to conclude, that God called 
 out Abraham to a land to himself to bestow on him and 
 his descendants merely temporal blessings, and to point 
 out the lineao^e of our Saviour throuojh the flesh some 
 two thousand years before he came — than for the higher 
 
 14* 
 
162 CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM. 
 
 purpose of preserving the true religion,''' and establish- 
 ing a visible covenant that should be a witness to the 
 grace of God, and of the fulfillment of his promises to 
 faith and obedience, as well as in regard to the lineage 
 of Christ ? Thus encouraging works of piety and fitting 
 men for the kingdom of heaven ; while at the same time 
 proofs of the fulfillment of his promises, and of the 
 claims of the Saviour would be accumulating. 
 
 Strange that a covenant which testifies to justifica- 
 tion by faith, and points out Abraham as the father of 
 a spiritual as well as of temporal seed, and the members 
 of w^hich are held up as patterns to Christians of the 
 present day, should ever have been supposed, by any 
 one, to be a mere national or temporal institution. 
 
 And the more so, from the fact, that to avoid the 
 idolatry and sin of his people, and to fulfill the great 
 duties of religion, constituted the grand object for which 
 Abram was called out from among his people. f And 
 even as a preliminary to the confirmation of that cove- 
 nant the command was issued, " Walk before me, and 
 he thou perfect 'j'^X and he commended afterwards for 
 his faithfulness in training his children in the way of 
 the Lord. " I know him (says God) that he will com- 
 mand his children and his household after him, that 
 they shall keep the ivay of the Lord, to do justice and 
 judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham 
 that which he hath spoken of him."§ And his faith and 
 devotion were yet more highly approved in the offering 
 up of his son Isaac, in obedience to Divine command. 
 
 •'^ Joshua xxiv. — Exodus — Romans — Galatians. 
 
 f Joshua xxiv. % Gen. xvii. 1. ^ Gen. xviii. 19. Gen. xxii. 
 
SPIRITUAL DUTIES UNDER MOSES. 163 
 
 Further — for the purpose of carrying out the spirit 
 and end for which this covenant was established, Moses 
 was also raised up, and additional laws and ceremonies 
 added,* by which to develop more clearly its character 
 and to combat more successfully the influences of wicked- 
 ness from within and without. The moral law which 
 had been written in the hearts of men from the begin- 
 ning, and which lies at the bottom of true religion and 
 all duty, becoming less intelligible and perhaps almost 
 erased from the minds of some, God commanded to be 
 written on stone, and kept among them ; a more impos- 
 ing ritual and outward form of public worship was adopt- 
 ed ; and such rules and regulations, civil and religious as 
 circumstances called for, introduced by Divine authority. 
 And not only did he give them the law, the spiritual 
 nature of which we presume no one will call in question, 
 but God also called them " A lioly people unto liim- 
 8djy " For thou art an holy people unto the Lord 
 thy God, and tlie Lord hath chosen thee to he a 2:)ecuUar 
 people unto himself above all the 7iations that are upon 
 the earth.'' And he enjoined duties accordingly. " Hear, 
 Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. And thou 
 shalt love the Lord thy God tvith all thine heart, and 
 ivith all thy -soul, and with all thy might. And these 
 words which I command thee this day shall be in thine 
 heart; and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy 
 children, and thou shalt talk of them ivhen thou sittest 
 in thine house, and when thou tvalkest by the tvay, and 
 when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.'' Deut. 
 vi. 4, 5, 6. Are these duties of merely a national 
 
 " Gal. iii. 19. 
 
164 EXPOSITION OF THE JEWISH POLITY. 
 
 character, or are they strictly spiritual ? ^' Ye shall he 
 holy, for I the Loi^d your God am holy.'" Levit. xix. 1. 
 Yet again, '' Sanctify yourselves therefore, and he ye 
 holy ; for I am the Lord your 0-od" Levit. xx. 7. 
 
 Such are specimens of the doctrines and duties incul- 
 cated under this so-called " Religio-political common- 
 wealth." God its founder and the only object to be wor- 
 shipped — they, his peculiar people, who must love him 
 with all the heart, soul, and strength ; and diligently 
 teach their children his statutes, and seek to be holy, 
 for their God is holy. 
 
 Now if the moral law, or ten commandments, with 
 such expositions as these, do not inculcate a spiritual 
 religion, will some one tell us what a spiritual religion 
 is ? If the religion of Christ be more spiritual, please 
 point out the difference, and show in what that difference 
 consists. In a word, did not Moses and the Prophets 
 teach the very lato which Christ came to fulfill ? and in 
 rendering to it the duty due from sinful men, open up 
 to them the way of justification by faith, by which 
 Abraham and all his spiritual seed become the heirs of 
 righteousness ? 
 
 The addition of a civil polity to regulate the civil 
 and social relations of the Jews did not destroy the spi- 
 ritual character of their Church. The Apostle tells us 
 in specific terms, as before referred to, that the law 
 which was four hundred and thirty years after, could 
 not annul the covenant made with Abraham ; and there- 
 fore neither the addition nor removal of the Mosaic 
 Economy — its civil nor religious institutions — destroyed 
 the spiritual principles and life which underlay the 
 
APPEAL TO THE OLD TESTAMENT. 165 
 
 superstructure, and from which the Mosaic Economy 
 derived all its strength and efficacy. 
 
 And notwithstanding the mixed character of civil and 
 religious regulations in the polity of the Patriarchal 
 and Mosaic Dispensations of the Church, it must be 
 remembered that under that polity were trained the 
 prophets and holy men of old, who spake and wrote 
 as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ;" that to it 
 as the keeper of the truth were committed the sacred 
 oracles of God ; and that from it we receive the canonical 
 Scriptures of the Old Testament as the inspired word of 
 God. 
 
 And to these writings did Christ and his Apostles 
 constantly appeal in support of their own teaching. In 
 the worship of that Church did they regularly unite. 
 And to the members of that Church who would not 
 accept the Saviour as their Messiah, he said, " The 
 kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given 
 to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. What 
 fruits did he mean, but those ^'of righteousness and 
 peace?" and what kingdom but the Church of which 
 "He is the Head?"* 
 
 Again, to the members of the Jewish Church he said, 
 " Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold ; them 
 also must I bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there 
 shall be one fold and one shepherd."! What fold was 
 this to which he referred but the Jewish Church, and 
 what "other sheep" but converts among the Gentiles? 
 And did he not teach the sufficiency of that dispensa- 
 tion for the salvation of men, in the parable of the rich 
 
 * Col. i. 18. t John x. 16. 
 
166 MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 
 
 man and Lazarus, when He informed the rich man in 
 hell that Moses and the Prophets were sufficient to save 
 his brethren in this world from coming to the same 
 place ? The rich man, when informed that Lazarus 
 could not come to him to mitigate his sufferings, 
 besought Abraham, " I pray thee, father, that thou 
 wouldst send him to my father's house, for I have five 
 brethren, that he may testify unto them, lest they also 
 come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto 
 him, they have Moses and the Prophets ; let them hear 
 them. And he said, nay father Abraham, but if one 
 rose from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto 
 him, If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither 
 will they be persuaded though one rose from the 
 dead."* 
 
 Now did Christ, in this parable, overrate the value of 
 Moses and the Prophets ? and if not, did he not teach 
 the sufficiency of the Mosaic dispensation for the salva- 
 tion of the people for whom it w^as provided ? And does 
 he not speak of this same Dispensation, (including with 
 it of course the basis on which it is grafted) under the 
 figure of a *• vineyard," and point to the Jewish nation 
 as the husbandmen, who, because of their unfaithfulness 
 and wickedness in killing the son of the Lord of the 
 vineyard, (Christ,) should therefore be driven out, and 
 the vineyard let out to other husbandmen ? Matth. xxi. 
 33-41. And does He not call this same vineyard, ''the 
 kingdom of God," and say unto the Jews, "Therefore 
 the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given 
 to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof ?"t 
 
 -^- St. Luke xvi. 27-31. f Matt. xxi. 43. 
 
TRANSFER OF THE KINGDOM. 167 
 
 Was then this "vineyard" and "kingdom of God" 
 destroyed in passing into other hands, or was it contin- 
 ued and improved under the management of more faith- 
 ful rulers ? 
 
 Hear St. Paul describe the cause and manner of the 
 transfer. Some of the Jews were continued in it, but 
 the great majority excluded. In describing the process, 
 he uses the figure of an "olive tree and its branches." 
 The Jews, he calls the " natural branches ;" the Gentile 
 believers, the "branches of a wild olive tree." And he 
 cautions the Gentile believers against boasting, and the 
 danger of being broken off also, saying, " If some of 
 the branches be broken off, and thou being a wild olive 
 tree wert grafted in among them, and with them par- 
 takest of the root and fatness of the olive tree, boast 
 not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest 
 not the root, but the root thee. . . . And they also, (the 
 Jews) if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted 
 in, for God is able to graft them in again. For if thou 
 (Gentiles) wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by 
 nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good 
 olive tree, how much more shall these which be the 
 natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?" 
 Rom. xi. IT, 18-23, 24. 
 
 Now how can the Jews be called the " natural branch- 
 es," and the Christian Church "their own olive tree," 
 from which they had been "broken off because of unbe- 
 lief," if it be not a continuation of their former Church 
 under Moses and Abraham ? Remember, St. Paul is 
 addressing the members of the Christian Church at 
 Rome — Gentile believers into whose hands chieflv the 
 
168 OLIVP] TREE AND ITS BRANCHES. 
 
 " kingdom" had now passed. And he calls the children 
 of Abraham its "natural branches" — the Christian 
 Church "their own olive tree," from which they had 
 been " broken off," and Gentile believers, the "branches 
 of a wild olive tree" grafted into it. 
 
 If the covenant with Abraham had now ended, and 
 the Christian Church were an entire new Church, how 
 could Jewish believers be "grafted ac/ain' into that to 
 which they had never belonged ? and on what ground 
 could it be called "their own olive tree" from which it 
 had been "broken off," either as a nation or individuals? 
 
 If the Abrahamic tree was dead and rooted up, 
 how would you graft its "natural branches" into it 
 again, or what "fatness" would Gentiles grafted into it, 
 derive from its dead "roots?" Do men graft living sci- 
 ons into dead stocks, or can the branches live if the 
 stock be dead ? 
 
 What does the Apostle mean, then, when he calls the 
 Christian Church the "olive tree" from which unbeliev- 
 ing Jews were "broken off," and believing Christians 
 are "grafted" into it, and tells us that the Jews, its 
 "natural branches," if they abide not in unbelief, shall 
 be grafted into it again?" What but the tree planted 
 in the days of Abraham, rooted in the promise of Christ 
 Jesus, nourished by patriarchs and prophets, and con- 
 tinuing to live and to grow ; and which is now waving its 
 branches over every part of Christendom, ready to re- 
 ceive returning Israel and every other nation desiring to 
 partake of its inexhaustible fatness of a Covenanted 
 Saviour ? And were not little children grafted into this 
 tree from the beginning ? 
 
SAINTS AND HOUSEHOLD OF GOD. 169 
 
 We could hardly frame testimony more full and clear 
 to certify that the Christian Church is a continuation of 
 the Abrahamic Covenant ; and hence, the continuation 
 of infant membership. 
 
 It is unnecessary to attempt to prove more clearly to 
 the intelligent reader, that the Christian scheme is the 
 continuation of the religion of the Old Testament, more 
 fully developed and clearly understood. But, for those 
 who need line upon line, additional proof of the same 
 will be found in the fact, that the Gentiles were called 
 by the Apostles " aliens and strangers ;" and the Jews 
 "saints," and "Israel," and the " household of God." 
 St. Paul writes to the Ephesian converts, " Therefore 
 ye are no more strangers and foreigners ; but fellow- 
 citizens with the sa,ints, and of the household of God." 
 
 Now, why were the terms "aliens" and "strangers" 
 applied to the Gentiles, and the Jews called " saints," 
 and the " household of God," with whom the Gentile 
 strangers were made "fellow-citizens,"* but because of 
 the fact, that Gentile Christians were brought into the 
 kingdom of the Jews, which was continued under the 
 Christian dispensation, but so reformed and improved 
 that unbelieving Israel was excluded and "broken off," 
 and believing Gentiles brought in and grafted in their 
 places ? 
 
 And for this end, the Apostle tells us, the " middle 
 wall of partition" between Jews and Gentiles had been 
 broken down, that they who were without might be 
 brought in, by the blood of Christ. For " in time 
 
 •■^ Read the whole chapter, Ephes. ii. 
 
 15 
 
170 BASTS OF THE CHRISTIAN CIIURCIT. 
 
 past," he writes to Gentile Christians, "Ye were 
 without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth 
 of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, 
 having no hope, and without God in the world : but 
 now, in Christ Jesus, ye who sometime were far off, are 
 made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, 
 who hath made both one, and hath broken down "the 
 middle wall of partition between us ; having abolished 
 in his flesh the enmity, the law of commandments con- 
 tained in ordinances ; for to make in himself of twain 
 one new man, so making peace." Ephes. ii. 11-15. 
 That is, the law and ordinances by which were secured 
 to the Jews superior privileges over other nations are 
 now deprived of their exclusive power, and set at naught, 
 and the way opened to all to come in and enjoy equal 
 favors with them. So that the faithful of other nations, 
 uniting with the faithful of the Jews, might make " one 
 new man" in Christ Jesus. Not by the Jews going out to 
 the Gentiles, but by the Gentiles coming in to the Jews, 
 and taking their stand with them on the basis of the 
 covenant of grace formed with their father Abraham. 
 Therefore the " new man" formed in Christ, does not 
 mean a new and independent Church in an absolute 
 sense, then begun, but a union of the faithful of other 
 nations with the faithful of Israel in their covenant pri- 
 vileges, to be trained under the teachings of apostles 
 and prophets. 
 
 And that such was the basis of union, and order of 
 process in the organization of the Christian Church, is 
 a historical fact as well as a divine doctrine. Not only 
 to the Jews '^pertained the adoption^ and the glory, and 
 
MOSES SUPERSEDED BY CHRIST. 171 
 
 tlie covenants, and the giving of the law, and the services 
 af God, and the j^^omises'''^ — but among them, and of 
 them was formed the first Christian Church — and while 
 they still regarded themselves members of the Jewish 
 Church, they received Christ as their promised Mes 
 siah, who had come to fulfill and perfect what was begun 
 under their fathers. f And when Gentile converts were 
 brought in among them, and it became generally known 
 that they were to enjoy equal privileges with them 
 under Christ, it was an unsettled point whether they 
 should observe the peculiar rites of the Jewish, as 
 well as of the Christian Church. | This of itself proves, 
 that these "aliens" were carried into the "house- 
 hold" of the Jews; and the branches of the wild olive 
 tree hence grafted among the branches of " the good 
 olive tree."§ For as yet they did not understand that 
 the "new and better covenant" of the Gospel Avas to 
 supersede that of Moses, which had now served its pur- 
 pose, and having " waxed old was ready to vanish 
 away II" — leaving only the Abrahamic covenant upon 
 which to graft the "new." And in which there shall 
 be neither Jew nor Greek, and instead of circumcision, 
 baptism shall certify outwardly " Abraham's spiritual 
 seed and heirs, according to the promise. "1[ For, writes 
 the Apostle Paul, " as many of you as have been bap- 
 tized into Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither 
 Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is 
 neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ 
 Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's 
 
 ■^ Rom. ix. 4. f Acts ii. and iii. J Acts xiii. xv. xxi. 
 
 ^ Acts XV. II lleb. viii. 1.']. ^ Gal. iii. 27-29. 
 
172 A NEW AND BETTER COVENANT. 
 
 seed and heirs according to the promise." Gal. iii. 27, 
 28, 29. 
 
 After reading this it couhl hardly have been a matter 
 of doubt among the Galatians, whether the Christian 
 dispensation was to supersede that of Moses, and was 
 designed to carry out and perfect the promise made to 
 Abraham ; and that by baptism, instead of circum- 
 cision, we put on Christ, through whom all are made 
 the children of Abraham, without regard to nation or 
 condition of race. 
 
 Thus history and doctrine explain each other, and 
 unite their strength in testifying to the perpetuation of 
 the Abrahamic covenant, and infant membership under 
 the Gospel. 
 
 As to the objection made on the ground that the 
 Gospel covenant is called a "new and better covenant," 
 and therefore different from the " old," the reader need 
 only refer to the passages in both the Old and New 
 Testaments, to convince him that the comparison is 
 made between the Mosaic and Christian covenants — not 
 the Christian and Abrahamic. " Behold the days 
 come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant 
 Avith the house of Israel and with the house of Judah : 
 not according to that I made with their fathers in the 
 day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of 
 the land of Egypt," &c. — Ileb. viii. 8, 9.* The time, 
 when they were "led out of the land of Egypt" was the 
 period at which Moses was called to act, some 430 years 
 after the calling of Abraham. And hence the Gospel is 
 called a " new and better covenant" in comparison with 
 
 ■^ Jereniuih xxxi. .*!2. 
 
COMPARATIVE TERMS. 173 
 
 that made with Moses. The terms ''new" and "old" are 
 often used in a comparative sense. For instance, the Co- 
 rinthian Church is exhorted to " purge out the old leaven" 
 that it may be a "new lump."* Not to go to work 
 and found a new Church, but to cleanse and purify the 
 old one. Purge it of offending members and erroneous 
 doctrines, and then it would be reformed into a " new 
 body" or "lump." As an altered or amended consti- 
 tution of a state is called a "new constitution;" or a 
 kingdom to which new domains have been added, and 
 in jvhich ncAV laws are introduced and other changes 
 made, is by liberty of speech called a " new kingdom." 
 So the Gospel Dispensation is called a "new" and a 
 " better covenant, which was established on better 
 promises" than Moses, " who served unto the example 
 and shadow of heavenly things." 
 
 The same principle applies to the use of the term 
 "build," and other forms of speech. As when the 
 Apostle Paul tells the Ephesian elders the word of 
 God's grace is able to "build" them up. Acts xx. 32. 
 By which he does not necessarily imply the beginning, 
 but rather the continuing, of that which had already 
 been commenced. So when our Saviour said to Peter, 
 "Upon this rock I will build m}^ church, "f — found 
 the Christian Dispensation — he did not necessarily 
 imply the beginning of everything pertaining to 
 church organization — that he would originate an 
 entirely new thing, never before known — but build up 
 the new dispensation under which the Church, which 
 had been in existence many centuries, was now to be 
 
 •-- 1 Cor. V. 1. f Matt. xvi. 18. 
 
 15* 
 
174 ZION IMPPtOVEB AND ENLARGED. 
 
 continued until perfected. " The Redeemer had come 
 to Zion,"* and would build her up under a more efficient 
 reign. He will now set up a kingdom (or government) 
 that shall never be destroyed. ^' The gates of hell shall 
 not prevail against it."t " It shall stand forever."{ 
 ^' Zion shall now arise and shine, for her light is come, 
 and the glory of the Lord is risen upon her."§ The day 
 has dawned in which " the Gentiles shall come to her 
 light, and kings to the brightness of her rising." " The 
 forces of the Gentiles shall come as a cloud, and as 
 doves to her windows, and shall know the Lord her 
 Saviour and Redeemer, the mighty one of Jacob. "§ 
 
 Thus through the shadow of good things to come, the 
 voice of Prophecy unites with that of Christ and his 
 Apostles in proclaiming, instead of the destruction of Zion 
 and a new and distinct Church in her place, that her 
 Redeemer would come to her assistance and revive her ; 
 that he would enlarge her borders, and exalt her gran- 
 deur beyond that of her first glory. 
 
 And now in accordance with her enlarged sphere and 
 more fully developed character, means of grace and aids 
 to faith are adopted. The services of Moses have been 
 changed into a more simple and spiritual worship, and 
 the bloody rite of circumcision into Christian baptism, 
 which can be applied without distinction to male and 
 female, to Jew and Gentile, to all classes — even to in- 
 fants in the beginning of life ; and the sooner they are 
 brought into the nursery of the Church, and the more 
 diligently they are trained in its duties and doctrines, 
 
 --- Lsaiah lix. 20. f Matt. xvi. 18. 
 
 % Daniel i. 14. ^ Isaiah ch. Ix. 
 
INFANTS (TNdER both t)ISPENSATlONS. 175 
 
 as the foster children of Christ, and thus truly *' brought 
 up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord," the bet- 
 ter for them, and for the cause of our common Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 Religion always has been and always should be, a 
 family thing ; and to object to it because little children 
 cannot believe, is to object to the -wisdom of God's gov- 
 ernment of his people in all past ages. For they ever have 
 been included with their parents in covenanted blessings 
 with God, and need as much the nurture of the Church 
 under the Gospel as they did under the Law. And the 
 very same reasons assigned for excluding them from the 
 one would have excluded them from the other. Lifants 
 could not of themselves have entered into covenant 
 relations under Abraham, nor were they capable of 
 exercising the faith and inward graces of circumcision 
 any more than they are those of baptism. 
 
 Both rites were based alike on faith. Circumcision 
 was the symbol of the circumcision of the heart — the 
 badge of God's people — the sign and seal of the right- 
 eousness of faith. And yet it was given to little chil- 
 dren only eight days old. Baptism means no more, 
 and yet it is denied to little children because they can- 
 not believe ! And the oft-repeated quotation — as oft 
 abused as quoted in such a connection — is made, " They 
 which are of faith, the same are the children of Abra- 
 ham,"* as if any one now doubted that by faith. Gen- 
 tiles as well as Jews are " blessed with faithful Abra- 
 ham." But does this exclude their children from being 
 blessed likewise as was Abraham's, and annul the doc- 
 
 ^ Gal. iii. 7-9. 
 
176 FAITH OF PARENTS AVAIL. 
 
 trine so frequently taught in the Holy Scriptures, that 
 God will show mercy upon the children of those who 
 love him, " even upon children's children of such as 
 keep his commandments?"* 
 
 We would ask of those who suppose the father's faith 
 imparts no benefit to his child — if they have never read 
 what the faith of Hannah did for Samuel ? and the faith 
 of the nobleman in the Gospel for his son at the point 
 of death ? and the faith of the woman of Canaan for her 
 daughter vexed w^ith the devil, and other like examples ? 
 If so why try to deprive little children of all the advan- 
 tages thus secured to them under Gospel grace ? 
 
 From circumcision alone, are derived the following 
 arguments in favor of Infant baptism : 
 
 1. The analogy of the office held by baptism and cir- 
 cumcision. Baptism — as an initiatory rite holds the 
 same place under the new, which circumcision did under 
 the old. 
 
 2. The perpetuity of the Abrahamic covenant proves 
 that baptism holds the same place, in the same Church, 
 and fulfills the same spiritual ends, while circumcision 
 has passed away. 
 
 3. The writings of the most celebrated of the ancient 
 fathers teach, that in things spiritual, baptism was re- 
 garded by primitive Christians as having taken the 
 place of circumcision. t 
 
 4. In point of fact, baptism did supersede circum- 
 cision in the progress of the Christian Church. For 
 both being practised together for some time, circum- 
 
 ■5^ Deut. X. XX. XXX. Ps. ciii. cxii. Rom. xi. 
 
 f See Justin Martyr, Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine and others. 
 
BAPTISM SUPERSEDES CIRCUMCISION. 177 
 
 cision gradual!}'' ceased, and baptism was continued and 
 by a decision of a council declared to be sufficient under 
 the Gospel Dispensation.* 
 
 Now, in addition to this independent line of proof, 
 remember that we have traced up through history the 
 practice of baptizing infants to the Apostolic age — and to 
 the middle of that age, when family baptisms are re- 
 corded as if as much a matter of course, as individual 
 baptisms. The names of the heads only of the families 
 are mentioned, and their faith only specified. We read in 
 the Acts of the Apostles of a missionary visit of St. 
 Paul and some of his brethren with him to Philippi, 
 where they spend several days and pass through some ex- 
 citing scenes, during which time it is recorded that two 
 baptisms took place, and only two ; and both of them 
 of whole families. But no names are given besides of 
 the heads of each. 
 
 This does not look like the report of a missionary 
 tour by those who allow only adults to be baptized. 
 For it would be very remarkable, in the first place, that 
 two whole families, and no others, should be the first 
 fruit of such an eftbrt. And in the second, that no 
 names but those of the parents should be given, if the 
 children were all grown up and baptized on their own 
 personal faith. 
 
 But admit the children to be minors, and these 
 Apostles accustomed to receive parents and their little 
 ones together into the Church, then such a record would 
 be usual ; and to read it, " Lydia and her family, and 
 
 ■^' Acts XV. 
 
178 SYRIAC VERSION. 
 
 the jailer and all his were baptized,"* would be in ac- 
 cordance with what we would anticipate. 
 
 And accordingly the Syriac version of the New Testa- 
 ment reads '■' Lydia and her childreyi."' " The jailer 
 ivith all his children.'' And be it remembered that this 
 version was in use soon after the death of St. John, and 
 before it had been determined whether several of the 
 Epistles in our present canon with the Apocalypse, should 
 be received into it or not. And this is the exclusive 
 version of the Christians of all Syria and the East. 
 And although adopted without the labor and care given 
 to the settlement of our canon, it contains the essentials 
 of Christian life and is spoken of in the highest terms of 
 approbation by Christian scholars capable of appre- 
 ciating it.f Michaelis pronounces it to be the very best 
 translation of the Greek for elegance and fidelity that 
 he had ever seen. It reads, " Lydia and her children " 
 — " The jailer with all his children" — and "the chil- 
 dren of Stephanas." And all who use it, like all the 
 ancient Churches in the world, baptize little children. 
 
 * Acts xvi. 
 
 f See Home, and writers generally on the Syriac scriptures. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 The Grand Commission to the Apostles to baptize all nations — True prin- 
 ciples of Interpretation — Infants had been always members of the Church, 
 and no restriction now made in regard to them — Jewish practice with 
 Proselytes — Talmud and Mishna — Objection to baptizing before teach- 
 ing, answered — The Church a School — Objection to the want of faith in 
 little Children, answered — Christ's treatment of little children shows they 
 were not to be regarded as ''aliens and strangers" to his kingdom — True 
 rendering "of such is the kingdom of God" — The promise to children re- 
 peated in the first sermon under the Gospel Commission — Family bap- 
 tisms — Lydia and her children, the Jailer and all his, and the family of 
 Stephanus — Meaning of oixoi "house" — In the absence of demonstra- 
 tion, the GREATER PROBABILITY, the law of actiou — Claims of duty 
 between an old established rite, and supposed error. 
 
 Having traced the practice of baptizing the infant 
 children of believers up into the Apostolic age, and 
 shown from the history and teaching of the Primitive 
 Church, that in the first generation after the Apostles, 
 Christians baptized infant children, and believed that 
 the Apostles did the same ; and having shown that 
 baptism has taken the place of circumcision, hence 
 infant baptism the place of infant circumcision; let us 
 now see whether the Holy Scriptures confirm our con- 
 clusions by more direct teaching ? And we will begin 
 with the first recorded authority for baptizing in the 
 name of Christ, in the sacred record. 
 
180 THE GRAND COMMISSION. 
 
 On a mountain in Galilee were met together the 
 eleven disciples of our Lord, by his own appointment, 
 made after his resurrection. ^'And Jesus came and 
 spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in 
 heaven and in earth." 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. — " G-o ye therefore and teach 
 (disciijle) all nations^ haiHizing them in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Crhost. Teach- 
 ing them to observe all things ivhatsoever I have com- 
 manded you : a7id lo, I am ivith you aUvay, even unto 
 the end of the world.'' 
 
 This is the Grand Commission under which the Apos- 
 tles were to act in planting the Christian . Church. 
 They were to tarry in Jerusalem until baptized by the 
 Holy Ghost, and then commence in that same city the 
 momentous work herein assigned them. But how did 
 they understand their commission ? This is the point 
 for us to settle. The language in which it is couched 
 seems to this age rather general. But to them, no 
 doubt, was sufficiently definite. Why more definite 
 to them than to us ? Because of previous instruction, 
 and their acquaintance with circumstances of which we 
 are ignorant. We say ignorant, unless we will examine 
 and learn the usages, manners, and laws of the Jews at 
 that time, together with the peculiar circumstances un- 
 der which this commission was issued. 
 
 This brings us to that most important of all laws in 
 the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, or of any 
 other ancient writing, and to which we have before 
 alluded. That is, to make ourselves acquainted, as 
 far as possible, witli all the circumstances and influences 
 
OBVIOUS RULE OF INTERPRETATION. 181 
 
 under which everything was said and done. To study 
 the manners, customs, and peculiarities of tlie people, 
 and endeavor to place ourselves in the midst of the same 
 age, and collect around us all the circumstances and 
 influences by which the writer or speaker was at the 
 time affected. 
 
 In this commission no exception is made to nation, 
 person, age, or sex. '' Go ye, therefore, and disciple all 
 nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." But inasmuch 
 as no age is specified, the question has been raised 
 whether he intended to include the young children 
 or not. The command to "disciple all nations," 
 (^^aOyjfsvaaYs Ttavta ta sOvr,.) translated in our version, 
 "teach ail nations," seems not to be sufiiciently definite 
 to satisfy the minds of many that young children are 
 included. But before entering on a philological inquiry, 
 let us first try this passage by the principle of interpre- 
 tation to Avhich w^e have just alluded, and see how, 
 according to that plain and obvious rule, the Apostles 
 must have understood their commission. 
 
 In giving directions or issuing a command, certain 
 things are always taken for granted as being well 
 known, and we only aim to be explicit enough to be 
 clearly understood. For instance, a messenger is sent 
 to the post-ofiice ; the order issued is, " Go and bring 
 my papers," or simply, " Go to the post-office." The 
 messenger goes and brings letters, newspapers, and 
 pamphlets ; and he acts in accordance with the inten- 
 tion of him who sent him : although, perhaps, he simply 
 told him " to bring his papers," or merely to "go to 
 16 
 
182 KNO^VLEDGE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES. 
 
 the 230st-office." Again, the merchant tells his clerk to 
 collect certain debts, but does not tell him to carry with 
 him the accounts or give receipts, etc. : these are taken 
 for granted as known to be embraced, and necessary to 
 the execution of his orders. And thus w^e might cite nu- 
 merous examples, in which much is generally taken for 
 granted in all kinds of commissions and orders. 
 
 Now put a novice, unaccustomed to either of the 
 above duties, in the place of one or both of these indi- 
 viduals, and he would not execute the orders thus given. 
 Why not ? Because things are taken for granted in 
 which he has never been instructed. And so, many 
 things are often implied in "one age, that are not 
 known to following ages ; and orders and instructions 
 then given, or allusions made, are not understood, or 
 are misapprehended in following years, because things 
 then taken for granted, or the circumstances under 
 which they were spoken, are unknown. 
 
 And hence it is, we find many things in Latin and 
 Greek authors, and in the Holy Scriptures likewise, 
 which are perfectly unintelligible to us, till we learn that 
 certain usages, laws, &c., prevailed in those countries 
 during that age. For instance, it is recorded by the 
 .Evangelists, (Matt. ix. 17, Mark ii. 22, and Luke v. 37, 
 88,) "that if we put new wine into old bottles, the bot- 
 tles will break and the wine run out, but if we put it 
 into new bottles both will be preserved." IIow shall 
 we interpret this passage without some knowledge of 
 the nature of the bottles used in the Apostolic age ? 
 So far as the bottles of this age are concerned, those 
 tliat that have been proved by use are more to be de- 
 
NECESSARY FOR CORRECT INTERPRETATION. 183 
 
 pended on than new ones. But so soon as we learn 
 tliat the bottles used in those days were made of the 
 skins of animals, and "that when those skins became dry 
 and old they lost their elasticity, and would not distend 
 sufficiently to allow for the fermentation of their new 
 wines, we see at once the force and beauty of the illus- 
 tration. Again, it is recorded that when (Matt. v. 13) 
 "salt has lost its savor it is thenceforth good for nothing, 
 but to be cast out and trodden under the foot of men." 
 Now we know that the muriate of soda, which is the 
 common salt used in this country, must entirely evapo- 
 rate before it can lose its saltness ; so obscurity hangs 
 over this passage till it is known that the salt of Judea, 
 used in the time of the Saviour, was dug from the earth, 
 and found mixed with a white earthy substance, which, 
 when the salt had evaporated by exposure to the weather, 
 was good for nothing but to be scattered along walks 
 and such like places. Now, the darkness is dissipated, 
 and the beauty of the illustration appreciated. 
 
 Various other passages might be adduced, and some 
 of a much stronger character, but these are selected 
 because simple and plain, and sufficiently illustrate the 
 principle, that some knowledge of the age and its usages 
 in which the Apostles wrote, is indispensably necessary 
 to a clear understanding of the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 Let us now take a case that shows the application 
 of this principle to the passage under consideration. 
 Suppose some one of the Christian denominations in 
 our land were about to send eleven missionaries to one 
 of the Pacific Isles, and the proper authority should 
 say to them in nearly the words of the Saviour : "Go 
 
184 INl'LUENCE OF PREVIOUS USAGE. 
 
 ye, therefore, and disciple all the people, baptizing them 
 in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost." "W^ould they not construe these words 
 according to the former practice of the Church to which 
 they belonged, and act in regard to the young children 
 as they and their people with whom they were associa- 
 ted had always acted ? Most assuredly. If sent out 
 by the Methodists, or Presbyterians, or Episcopalians, 
 or Lutherans, or any other denomination among whom 
 young children are baptized, they would understand 
 their commission to include young children with their 
 parents, and would baptize them. Wherefore ? Be- 
 cause they had always been accustomed to receive young 
 children into the Church, and knew that those wdio sent 
 them did the same, and therefore it was not necessary 
 to specify more minutely in the charge given them. 
 But suppose this same number of men had been sent 
 out by the Baptist denomination, how would they under- 
 stand the charge? Why, that children are not included. 
 And for the same reasons given in the case of the others, 
 they were not accustomed to the baptism of little chil- 
 dren, and knew that those who sent them were opposed 
 to it ; and therefore there was no necessity for them to 
 be more specific in regard to young children. Both 
 equally sincere — both acting in accordance with the 
 intention of the charge given them, and yet acting in 
 direct opposition on this point. 
 
 In both cases there was no necessity for being more 
 explicit, and yet so much is taken for granted, that a 
 third party in a different country would not be able to 
 understand such a commission, until they had made 
 
ONE INTERPRETATION OF COMMISSIONS. 185 
 
 themselves acquainted with the rites and practices of 
 those by whom the commission was given. Here, then, 
 we see the absolute necessity of going back to the days 
 of the Apostles, and endeavoring to make ourselves 
 acquainted with the usages of the Jews, and the peculiar 
 circumstances under which this commission was issued. 
 TVe have seen how those who immediately succeeded the 
 Apostles understood it ; let us, then, in the next place, 
 examine the rites and usages to which the Apostles had 
 been accustomed, and the circumstances under which 
 they received it, and see if we can learn how they acted 
 under it. 
 
 Now these very men unto whom this "commission" 
 w^as granted, had been themselves made members of the 
 Jewish Church in their infancy. They had been accus- 
 tomed all their lives to regard young and old of the 
 same family as members together of the same Church — 
 all alike included in the same covenant — entitled to the 
 same religious privileges, heirs together of the same 
 Divine promises. With such training and ideas of 
 Church organization, how would they probably inter- 
 pret a commission that made no exception to youno- 
 children ? As Infants had always been received into 
 the Church up to that time, is it at all probable that they 
 would now exclude them without specific instructions so 
 to do ? 
 
 No one doubts whether it was the custom of the Jews 
 to confer the initiatory rite of their religion on their 
 children in early infancy, and that their children were 
 regarded as capable of covenanted privileges, and re- 
 cognised throughout the Old Testament Dispensation as 
 
 16* 
 
186 COMPREHENSIVENESS OF COMMISSION. 
 
 members of the Church with their parents. And when 
 to men, who had been thus associated all their lives, is 
 given a " commission" broad enough to include little chil- 
 dren — aye, expressed in the very terms commonly applied 
 to Jewish members (^aer^tai, /xaOr^tsvaati) " disciple and 
 make disciples" (St. John. ix. 28.)* how must they have 
 construed it in regard to infant children, no exception 
 being made to them ? When commanded to disciple all 
 nations, would they not suppose all were included, little 
 ones as ^Yell as their parents ? 
 
 Suppose circumcision to be put in the place of baptism, 
 and their commission had run thus, " Go ye and disci- 
 ple all nations, circumcising them in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the lto\j Ghost ;" doubt 
 ye that they would have hesitated a moment about cir- 
 cumcising the children of their converts ? You cannot, 
 since you know that this was continued for a long time, 
 to<Tether with baptism. f And if children were- no longer 
 considered capable of covenanted blessings why, we ask 
 ao-ain, was it not made known, instead of permitting 
 them to be circumcised by members of the Christian 
 Church ? If the Messiah intended to curtail the reli- 
 gious privileges which little children had enjoyed with 
 their fathers ever since God had established a visible 
 Church for his people, is it not reasonable to suppose 
 some specification would be made in this commission, or 
 in his teaching otherwise ? But instead of any intima- 
 tion of that kind, he had on the contrary declared that 
 "of such is the kingdom of God ;" had commanded lit- 
 
 " Sec ako Talmud and Justin Martyr, Apol. 2, page 62. 
 f Acts. XV. xxi. 
 
BAPTISM OF JEWISH PROSELYTES. 187 
 
 tie children to be brought to him to receive his blessing, 
 and had shown by word and gesture they w^ere not to be 
 treated as '' aliens" in his Church. 
 
 Further, these men had been already ordained preach- 
 ers to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel ;" (Mark 
 iii. 13, 14. Math. x. 5, 7,) had preached to, and wor- 
 shipped w^ith Jews, recognizing them and their little 
 children as fellow-members of the same Church ; and 
 called upon them to prepare for the reign of their Mes- 
 siah. But now the " middle wall of partition is broken 
 down" — Christ has tasted death for every man, and 
 risen from the dead ; all power is given unto him, and 
 he commissions them to "go into all the world, and 
 preach the Gospel to every creature" — their commission 
 is enlarged, not diminished — Gentiles are included with 
 Israel. Restrictions are removed instead of being im- 
 posed — parents and children of other nations are to be 
 baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. 
 
 Again, at the time our Saviour delivered this commis- 
 sion it was, and had been for many centuries, as we 
 shall show, the custom of the Jews to baptize all their 
 proselytes from other nations, both parents and chil- 
 dren.* Their rule was first to circumcise, then baptize, 
 and then offer for them a sacrifice. Circumcision brought 
 them under the Abrahamic Covenant, baptism brought 
 them under the Mosaic. The offering of the sacrifice 
 was in obedience to the ritual law. And they referred 
 to Numbers xv. 15, for thus acting with proselytes, 
 w^hich reads : " One ordinance shall be for both you of 
 the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourn- 
 
 * See Lightfoot and Wootten. 
 
188 CIRCUMCISION, BAPTISM AND SACHIFICE. 
 
 eth with you, an ordinance forever in your generations : 
 as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the Lord." 
 By stranger, was included all of other nations, whether 
 they be young children found in an exposed state and 
 taken home, or parents with their children who joined 
 their religion, or even those who became servants to 
 them. 
 
 Maimonides, the great interpreter of the Jewish law, 
 says : 
 
 "And so in all ages, when an Ethnic is willing to enter into 
 covenant and gather himself under the wings of the Majesty of 
 God, and take upon him the yoke of the law ; he must be circum- 
 cised and baptized, and bring a sacrifice. As it is written, ' As 
 you are, so shall the stranger be.' How are you ? By circum- 
 cision, and baptism, and bringing of a sacrifice. So likewise the 
 stranger (or proselyte) through all generations ; by circumcision, 
 and baptism, and bringing of a sacrifice.'' — Isuri. Biah., c. 13. 
 
 Baptism was administered to all the children who were 
 born before the parents' baptism, but not to those born 
 after it, because these were by birth inheritors of the 
 ceremonial privileges obtained by it. This was in con- 
 formity also to the above rule. For their forefathers 
 were all of them Jews, baptized unto Moses in the cloud 
 and the sea — men, women, and children ; but those born 
 afterwards were by birth inheritors of the privileges of 
 baptism, and only circumcision and sacrifice were neces- 
 sary for them. " The sons of proselytes, (says Light- 
 foot) in the following generations were circumcised, but 
 not baptized, as being already Israelites." Maimonides, 
 in the same chapter just cited, says, " A proselyte under 
 age, they are wont to baptize on the knowledge of the 
 
EARLY DATE OF MISHNA. 189 
 
 house of judgment, [the court,] because this is for his 
 good." That is, when orphans were baptized the court 
 or consistory acted as parents for them. 
 
 Concerning the age of the child to be baptized they 
 had this rule. " Any male child, a proselyte, that is 
 under the age of thirteen years and a day, and females 
 that are under twelve years and a day, must be baptized 
 as infants, at the request and by the assent of the father, 
 or the authority of the Court, because such an one is 
 not yet the son of assent." That is, not old enough to 
 be baptized on his own responsibility. 
 
 The Jerusalem Mishna says that if a girl, born of 
 heathen parents, be made a proselyte after she be three 
 years and a day old, she is not to have such and such 
 privileges. And the Babylonian edition reads, if she 
 be made a proselyte before that age, she shall enjoy such 
 privileges.* From w^hich it must be obvious to every 
 reader, as Selden and Wotton both remark, "that chil- 
 
 * This shows that the objection raised against Maimonides as not 
 ancient enough, is of no force, since the Mishna (the text) of both 
 the Jerusalem and Babylonish Talmuds, contains regulations for chil- 
 dren made proselytes under and beyond three j-ears of age. The Mishna 
 Avas compiled at so "early a date, that no one will accuse the Jews 
 of borrowing this practice from Christians, or if they do, they admit 
 all we ask, which is, that the Apostles practiced it. According to 
 Dr. Prideaux, the Jerusalem Mishna was compiled in the Apostolic 
 age, just after the destruction of the Temple, and by the almost unan- 
 imous consent of critics, admitted to be completed in the second 
 century.* And if Jehuda the Holy, who was engaged forty years in 
 digesting these laws, did not collect this concerning ''young jDrose- 
 lytes" from among the old customs of his nation in use before the 
 coming of Christ, then it was borrowed from or suggested by the 
 practice of Christians at a period so early that it is as fatal to the cause 
 of Antipedobaptism as it was contrary to the feelings and prejudices 
 of the Jewish nation at the time, or as would be the admission of its 
 previous existence. 
 
 * See Horue and his Authorities. 
 
190 BAPTISM BEFORE JOHN BAPTIST. 
 
 dren, however young, vfere made proselytes. The latter 
 citing also largely from the words of the original law.* 
 
 Thus we see that Infant baptism itself was practiced 
 from time to time before John the Baptist came preach- 
 ing the baptism of repentance. Hence it w^as, the 
 people manifested no surprise at baptism itself, but that 
 John should baptize, as sanctifying the people for some 
 great personage, and new dispensation, when he ac- 
 knowledged himself not to be the Christ nor EHas, nor 
 that Prophet which was to come. " Why baptizest thou 
 then if thou be none of these ?" Why this extra ablu- 
 tion and preparation of Jews, if not for their promised 
 Messiah, and this dispensation, or some prophet that is 
 to come ? Which corroborates the Talmud, that bap- 
 tism, or purification by water, was a thing in use and 
 well known before the coming of John. 
 
 Now what can be more obvious than that men, who 
 were Jews, acquainted w^ith the usages of their nation, 
 who possessed the feelings of Jews — who had always 
 been accustomed to have their children in the Church 
 with them, and familiar with the practice of both cir- 
 cumcising and baptizing children, would construe this 
 commission precisely as the missionaries would who 
 were accustomed to the baptism of children, unless ex- 
 pressly instructed to the contrary ? How could they 
 restrict it to certain ages, when they had never known 
 any age excepted before ? and when their commission 
 was as broad as language could make it — " Go ye, there- 
 fore, and disciple or proselyte all nations." 
 
 " The Anabaptists object," says Lightfoot, " that it 
 ■^ 8ce Wall, Lig'htfoot, ami others. 
 
LITTLE CHILDREN PURIFIED. 191 
 
 is not commanded to baptize infants, therefore thej are 
 not to be baptized. To whom I answer : It is not for- 
 bidden to baptize infants, therefore they are to be 
 baptized. And the reason is plain. For when Pedo- 
 baptism, in the Jewish Church, was so known, usual and 
 frequent in the admission of proselytes, that scarcely 
 anything was more known, usual, and frequent. There 
 was no need to strengthen it with any precept when 
 baptism was now passed into an evangelical sacrament. 
 For Christ took baptism into his hands, and into an 
 evangelical use as he found it — this only added, that 
 he might promote it to a worthier end and a more ex- 
 tensive use. 
 
 " The whole nation knew well enough that little chil- 
 dren used to be baptized. There was no need of a 
 precept for that which had ever by common use pre- 
 vailed 
 
 " On the other hand, there was need* of a plain and 
 open prohibition, that infants and little children should 
 not be baptized, if our Saviour would not have had 
 them baptized. For since it was most common in all 
 foregoing ages that little children should be baptized, if 
 Christ had wished to have that custom abolished, he 
 would openly have forbidden it. Therefore, his silence, 
 and the silence of Scripture in this matter, confirms 
 Infant baptism, and continueth it unto all ages." 
 
 When the Saviour came, all male proselytes were ad- 
 mitted into the Jewish Church by circumcision, baptism, 
 and sacrifice — the female by baptism and sacrifice. He 
 abolished, in his death, circumcision and sacrifice, and 
 only baptism was left as a sign of the covenant, or pro- 
 fession of religion, and this he directed to be given to 
 
192 APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 
 
 all, in the name of the Trinity, as indicative of the new 
 dispensation.* Or if any one prefers it, for the sake of 
 illustration say he abolished all former ordinances, and 
 selected baptism ; because common to both sexes, less 
 burdensome, and more expressive of the new dispensa- 
 tion ; and hence made it the initiatory rite of the 
 Church under this dispensation. In either case, how 
 would men accustomed to see this rite applied to chil- 
 dren, understand the commission "to disciple," and 
 apply it to "all nations?" Would they not suppose 
 that young children were included also ? If the boy 
 sent to the post office, must infer letters and pamphlets 
 were included with the "newspapers," and the mission- 
 aries of the Lutheran and other Pedobaptist Churches, 
 that young children were included in this commission, 
 so must the Apostles have understood children included 
 in theirs. We ask the opposers of Infant baptism to 
 pause and consider this case, and candidly to say if 
 under these circumstances this commission can be rightly 
 construed in any other way ? We may even lay aside 
 all the influence the rite itself would exert, and adopt 
 any other ceremony of admitting members into the 
 
 "• Some have concluded from Jewish haptism that it is unnecessary 
 to contmue baptism among a people whose forefathers have all been 
 baptized. But they should remember that God's people have always 
 had some badge or mark of profession — that although among the 
 Jews, and the proselytes to their religion, baptism was not given to 
 succeeding generations, yet circumcision was, and also sacrihce. But 
 these are abolished under the Christian dispensation, and baptism 
 only remains, which must be given to every one, as a mark or seal 
 of the new covenant, as circumcision was under the former dispensa- 
 tion. This is plaiaiiy taught in Colossians ii. 11, 12. But as the 
 opjjosers of Infant baptism, as w^ell as its advocates, admit baptism is 
 to be given to every one, there is no need for discussing that question 
 in this jilaco. 
 
LITTLE CHILDREN. INCLUDED. 193 
 
 Christian Church, and the construction would be the 
 same. For these men were all Jews, educated Jews, 
 possessing the feelings of Jews, loved their children, 
 and had always seen such received into the Church, and 
 wlmtever religious rite had been instituted as the door 
 into the visible Church, they would have admitted the 
 children with their proselyted parents — unless instructed 
 expressly to the contrary — and have justified themselves 
 for it on principles of duty and reason, as well as of 
 education and usage. For God was the same God he 
 ever had been. He had not changed, and could not 
 change. The great principles of his religion and the 
 foundation of his Church were the same now as in the 
 days of Abraham. The relation between parent and 
 child were still the same. He was about to change his 
 dispensation in the government of the people, but not 
 the essentials of his Church. Rituals and ordinances 
 were to be changed, means of grace and helps to faith 
 instituted better adapted to the state of the world, while 
 the foundation of ricrhteousness and essence of the Church 
 must ever remain the same, because founded on the im- 
 mutable principles of the nature of the great Jehovah 
 himself. These being the same before these rituals were 
 first ordained, and while they were in force, and after 
 their abolition ; were, and are, and ever must be still the 
 same. And if children were fit to be members at one 
 time, why not fit at any other time ? If God commanded 
 that they should be received with their fathers, and 
 the seal or mark of his covenant to be given them 
 from the first moment he began to mark out for him- 
 self a select visible people, and has never since, by 
 IT 
 
194 STATE OF THINGS AFTERWARDS. 
 
 word or deed, forbidden them this privilege ; who will 
 dare to prohibit them as soon as that badge is changed 
 for another ? But again : as Knapp, in his Theology, 
 justly remarks,* "not only do circumstances at the 
 time, and usages before a command is given, enable 
 others at a later period the more clearly to understand 
 it, but the state of things that follow afterwards often 
 throw much light on it." Suppose, for instance, in 
 the case of the missionaries referred to, some fifty 
 or a hundred years after their death, we were to visit 
 those isles, and find their successors practicing Infant 
 baptism in every place, and were to ask them by 
 what authority they did this, and they were to inform 
 ns that the " first missionaries, their apostles, prac- 
 ticed and ordered it," should we not infer that one 
 of the Churches that practiced Infant baptism sent 
 those missionaries ? And should Ave not give credit to 
 their answers, when we found that they were conscientious, 
 pious men ? aye, intelligent as well as pious, and living 
 among many who had known and conversed with inti- 
 mate acquaintances and friends of their missionaries ? 
 
 Now this is precisely the state of the question before 
 us. The Churches of Greece, Rome, Alexandria, Cap- 
 padocia, Syria, Arabia, and Palestine, spread over thou- 
 sands of miles, separated, some of them, so far from 
 others that there had been probably little or no commu- 
 nication between them, are all found in the practice of 
 Infant baptism in the next century after the Apostles ; 
 and no one ever calling in question its lawfulness. On 
 the contrary, the most learned man born in that period 
 records, that it was enjoined by the Apostles. 
 
 * Vol. ii. p. 50. 
 
OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 195 
 
 Considering the whole evidence in the case, the cus- 
 tom of the Jews at the time this commission was given 
 — the language itself, and the state of things found in 
 the Churches soon afterwards, the fact is as fully estah- 
 lished, according to fixed laws of interpretation that the 
 commission given to the Apostles for organizing the 
 Christian Church, embraces Infant baptism, as that 
 water should be used in the administration of the ordi- 
 nance. 
 
 1. Let us now consider some of the objections that 
 have been urged against this interpretation. First, it is 
 said the Apostles w^ere commanded to " teach" and then 
 baptize : therefore, the persons to be baptized, were only 
 such as could first be taught. In reply to which, we re- 
 mark, this is a mistake. The terms of- the commission 
 do not necessarily imply instruction to all. The word 
 in the first part of it (^^laeritivoats,) translated in our ver- 
 sion "teach," is an entirely diiferent word from that in 
 in the latter part (8i8a^xovteg,) translated teaching. The 
 former means to " disciple" or proselyte — while the lat- 
 ter means imparting instruction. The better rendering 
 of the whole passage (as every reader of the original well 
 knows) is, " Go ye, therefore, and disciple — make 
 learners of — all nations, baptizing them in the name of 
 the*Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 
 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have 
 commanded you" — which means, '^ Go and bring into 
 my kingdom every nation, initiating them by baptism, 
 and teaching or training them up in all the doctrines 
 and precepts which I have commanded you." Now, as 
 kingdoms of the world are confined to no age or sex, so 
 
196 MEANING OF DISCIPLE. 
 
 the visible kingdom of Christ on earth, which he chose 
 to represent under the same name, is confined to none, 
 but designed to embrace all ages and nations. To con- 
 vert nations to any faith, we must of course in the 
 beginning work chiefly among the responsible portion of 
 the nation, we must first convert the parents before we 
 can expect to bring their children under the influences 
 of our principles. So in the kingdom of Christ, his 
 ambassadors were sent forth to address and convince the 
 parents — the responsible portions of the community, who 
 must be converted before they could reach their children. 
 But when these were converted they would bring their 
 children with them of their own accord. Or as St. Peter 
 did on the day of Pentecost, when multitudes were made 
 to cry out — "men and brethren, what shall we do?" 
 tell them the " promise is to you and to your children." 
 (Acts. ii. 37. 39.) And as in the case of the jailer 
 and others, whose children were present when the 
 parent believed, baptize them all. Instead of the term 
 fxaeritivBvv — to " disciplc or proselyte," militating against 
 young children, it is of itself, when rightly construed, 
 proof positive that they are included. For it is as ap- 
 plicable to children as to adults, and we have not the 
 slightest intimation that it is used here in a limited sense. 
 On the contrar}^, it seems to be given in its widest |)os- 
 sible application — " disciple all nations" — hence all that 
 compose nations of every age and sex. MadritsvGatt is 
 from fj-adyitrj^ — a "disciple" which is from fiavOavio to 
 "learn." Therefore "a disciple" is a learner and to 
 " make disciples" is to make learners. The Church, in 
 all ages, has been a school for teaching the things of 
 
CHURCH A SCHOOL. 107 
 
 God and training its members in the way of Holiness. 
 Of the father of circumcision, God said, '' Seeing that 
 
 Abraham ^ill command his children and his 
 
 household after him, and they shall keep the way of the 
 Lord, to do justice and judgment, that the Lord mVy 
 bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him." 
 (Gen. xviii. 18, 19.) Moses was instructed to teach 
 Israel, " And these words which I command thee this 
 day, shall be in thy heart. And thou shalt teach them 
 diligently to thy children, and shalt talk of them when 
 thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the 
 way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 
 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and 
 they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou 
 shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy 
 gates." (Deut. vi. 6., 9.) Such was the character of 
 the Church for teaching and training its members from 
 earliest childhood under the Okl Testament Dispensa- 
 tion. Under the New, precisely the same is to be re- 
 tained. '' Go ye, therefore, and teach (make disciples 
 —scholars of) all nations, baptizing them in the name 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; 
 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have 
 commanded you ; and lo, I am with you always even 
 unto the end of the world," (Math, xviii. 19, 20.) was 
 the commission of the Saviour himself. 
 
 Now a school must have different grades of learners, 
 or else there must be many schools. Christ has but one 
 school for all— and this school wonderfully adapted to 
 every age. It has instructions for the first impression 
 the youngest mind can receive. And the first impres- 
 
 17* 
 
198 APPLICATION TO LITTLE CHILDREN. 
 
 sion made oil the infant mind ought to be of Christ's 
 teaching. ''As the twig is bent, the tree's inclined." 
 And as a learner, whose name is simply enrolled, is call- 
 ed a pupil or scholar before he commences to learn, so 
 inHhe case of a disciple : whoever is set apart, and ini- 
 tiated into the school of Christ, is called a disciple from 
 his baptism. Just as all the males of the Kohathites, 
 from a month old and upwards, are called "keepers of 
 the charge of the sanctuary" — infants as well as 
 adults, because belonging to the body and designed 
 for that office. Or as the little ones recorded in the 
 book of Deuteronomy xxix. 11, 12, are said to " enter 
 into covenant with the Lord," although too young to 
 know what the term covenant meant. " Little prose- 
 lytes," a phrase of the import with disciples, was in 
 familiar use among the Jews in the days of our Saviour. 
 Children, however young, whether received with their 
 proselyted parents, or brought under the Jewish faith 
 in any other way, were called "young proselytes." The 
 Mishna of the Jewish Talmud, both of Babylon and 
 Jerusalem, speak of such proselytes, and as already 
 quoted, defines the privileges which may be enjoyed by 
 those born of heathen parents, and made "proselytes" 
 after three years and a day old, and of such as shall be 
 made proselytes before that age. 
 
 Justin Martyr, as has been before remarked, applies 
 the very same word which is used in this commission to 
 children in general, saying that he knew many of both 
 sexes made disciples (y]i.(.a9rjtBv9rjGav) to Christ from child- 
 hood. 
 
 2. It is also objected that this commission, as record- 
 
FAITH AS AN OBJECTION ANSWERED. 199 
 
 cd by another Evangelist, requires faith before baptism. 
 Mark xvi. 15, 16. *' 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 damned." The commission is here embraced in the 
 first verse, '' Go ye into all the world and preach the 
 Gospel to every creature." The next merely affirms 
 what will be the consequence of receiving or rejecting 
 their mission — '' He that believeth and is baptized shall 
 be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned." 
 Now if this passage is to be arrayed against children to 
 keep them from baptism, it must also keep them from 
 salvation, for it expressly says, ''he that believeth not 
 shall be damned." But who will apply it to children, 
 and dare affirm that all wdio cannot believe shall be 
 damned ? No one. By what authority then can we 
 apply one clause of a sentence to children to keep them 
 from baptism, and then exclude them from the next part 
 of the sentence, when there is evidently no change of 
 subject matter in the mind of the author.* The true 
 state of the case is, the Evangelist simply records the 
 broad and universal character of the commission, and 
 then states what will be the result to those who receive 
 or reject the offer of salvation under it. Those who will 
 hear shall live, but those who will not hear shall die. 
 
 The spread of the Gospel, of course, depended on the 
 reception it met with among the acting, thinking portion 
 of the community. If this class of persons received it, 
 
 * The reason given by the first sect who rejected Infant baptism, 
 as we have SQen, was because they coukl not believe, therefore, could 
 not be saved. But that was in the dark ages, and their followers have 
 since changed their .ijround. 
 
200 REPENTANCE PROM ACTUAL SINNERS. 
 
 its blessings would by their consent be given to minors 
 and children. But if they rejected it, much that might 
 be conveyed to others would be lost to such as were in 
 part dependent on them. To this class of persons alone 
 then, so far as faith is concerned, do those words of St. 
 Mark evidently refer. 
 
 Repentance^ as well as faith^ are generally made pre- 
 requisites for baptism, but not in the case of infants. 
 It is said, (Acts xi. 88,) " Repent and be baptized every 
 one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remis- 
 sion of sins." Again, Philip said unto the Eunuch, 
 (Acts viii. 3,) ^' If thou believest with all thy heart, 
 thou mayst" [be baptized.] But these are replies 
 made to those who had proposed particular questions. 
 The very same would in this day be said by any ortho- 
 dox missionary under similar circumstances, whether 
 an advocate for the baptism of children or not. For 
 every sound divine requires repentance and faith on 
 the part of adults. But it does not follow that the 
 same must be required of little children. The covenant 
 made with Abraham was nevertheless based on faith; 
 children were embraced in it who could not believe. 
 "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him 
 for righteousness." . . . "And he received the sign of 
 circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith 
 which he had, yet being uncircumcised."'*'' But to Ish- 
 mael, thirteen years old, and to Isaac, eight j^M old, 
 and to all infant male descendants afterwards, as we 
 have already seen, was this sign and seal given, which 
 brought them under the same covenant, although they 
 
 * Rom. iv. 3, 11. 
 
FIRST AND SECOND ADAM. 201 
 
 were incapable of faith. Abraham was ''justified by 
 faith," and commanded to "walk before the Lord and 
 be perfect."* The covenant made with him was there- 
 fore based as much on faith in God, and obedience to 
 his commands, as is the covenant now under Christ. 
 Indeed, the Christian covenant, as we have already shown, 
 is the continuation of the Abrahamic covenant more 
 fully developed, and under a more efficient dispensation, 
 into which children were received from the first, and 
 continued up to the time of Christ — why should their 
 incapacity to "believe and obey," exclude them after 
 the coming of Christ, if it did not before ? 
 
 And though the Christian were one entire new cove- 
 nant, it would be no more a covenant of faith than that 
 of Abraham. And if the inability of little children to 
 exercise faith did not exclude them from the former, 
 why should it from the latter ? If none can be baptized 
 but those who can believe according to such an inter- 
 pretation of that passage, then consistency requires it 
 to be interpreted that none can be saved who cannot 
 believe ; for the only alternative then allowed, is dam- 
 nation to those who do not believe ! Shall we accept 
 such a construction, or rather that the passage does not 
 refer to little children except through their parents and 
 representatives, and that as they were involved in the 
 sin of the first Adam, without their oAvn personal acts, 
 so they can be made participants of the blessings of the 
 covenant of the second Adam, in like manner ? 
 
 3. But again, it is argued as an objection to Infant 
 baptism, that Christ was not baptized till adult age. 
 ^ 7 Gen. xvii. 
 
202 INFANT MEMBERSHIP OF CHRIST. 
 
 This is to plead his example, and we ought to follow his 
 example in everything moral and pious. But if in all 
 outward ordinances, mark the consequence : Christ was 
 circumcised when eight days old, brought to the temple 
 and dedicated at forty days — was a strict observer of 
 the ritual law of the Jews — and attended the synagogue 
 worship until his death. He was .baptized with John's 
 baptism soon after it commenced, to "fulfill all righteous- 
 ness," in recognition of the authority of his mission. 
 Now if we are to follow his example in all outward acts, 
 we must either submit to all these just as he did, or else 
 so far as they are types of ordinances in the Gospel 
 Church. And if the latter, then we have another argu- 
 ment in behalf of Infant baptism, rather than against 
 it ; for as he was brought into covenant, made a member 
 of the Jewish Church, and dedicated to God in infancy, 
 so ought we. And as he submitted to the ordinance of 
 baptism at the earliest opportunity, so ought we. 
 John's baptism was not instituted in the time of his 
 infancy, but he submitted to it the first opportunity 
 after it was instituted, and hence has given no room 
 to plead delay from his example. John's baptism was 
 not the Christian baptism, because Christ did not 
 manifest himself as the Son of God until after his 
 baptism, neither did John baptize in the name of the 
 "Holy Ghost." His baptism was " unto repentance," 
 saying to the people, "they should believe on Him 
 who should come after him." Christ's baptism was in 
 the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. And 
 we read of those who had been baptized unto John's 
 baptism, that afterwards received Christian baptism, 
 
LITTLE CHILDREN BLESSED — NOT "ALIENS." 203 
 
 (Acts xix.) acknowledging that they had " not so much 
 as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." 
 
 So far, then, as Christ's early life is concerned, his 
 example is altogether on the side of Church membership 
 of infants ; and so far as his acts and words are con- 
 cerned in regard to "little children," they all tend to 
 the same point. We no where read that He himself bap- 
 tized any infant or adult. " Jesus himself baptized not, 
 but his disciples."* But we read of his being displeased 
 at those who attempted to prevent children from being 
 brought to him to receive his blessing — and of " his 
 putting his hands dft them and praying," or "taking 
 them up in his arms and blessing them," exhorting oth- 
 ers to become like unto them, and saying that " of such is 
 the kingdom of heaven." Observing all the different 
 circumstances which have been noticed by the Evangel- 
 ists, w^e have it as follows : 
 
 Matt. xix. 13 ; Luke xviii. 15 ; Mark x. 13, 16.— 
 ''And they hrought young cliildren, infants^ to liim, 
 that he should touch them, put his hands 07i them, and 
 pray, and his disciples 7'ehuked those that brought tliem. 
 But when Jesus saiv it, he luas much displeased, and 
 called them unto him and said, Suffer little children to 
 come unto me and forbid them not, for of such is the 
 kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, ivhosoever 
 shall not receive the kingdom of Grod, as a little child, 
 shall not enter therein. And he took them up in his 
 arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them."-\ 
 
 Does anything here indicate that Christ intended to 
 exclude young children from his kingdom ? Does he 
 
 ■^ St, John iv. 2. f See Hay's Treatise on Baptism. 
 
204 PHRASE, KINCxDOM OF GOD. 
 
 not, on the contrary, say, ''^ of such is the kingdom of 
 God ?" — every action and word of his own going to show 
 that he recognized little children, not as aliens, but as 
 fit subjects for his kingdom. He was ''much displeased" 
 at those who would keep them from being brought to 
 him to receive his blessing ; rebuked them and called 
 for the children to be brought, giving as a reason why 
 they should be permitted to come, that ''of such was 
 the kingdom. of God," and adding that all must become 
 as little children to enter into his kingdom. He then 
 took up the little children in his arms, put his hands 
 upon them and blessed them. And^not only did he ex- 
 hort others to become like unto them — not only did he 
 take them up in his arms, thus manifesting his friend- 
 ship towards them, but he performed the significant act of 
 laying his hands upon them, to impa^rt a religious bless- 
 ing, thereby recognizing them as belonging to the 
 kingdom of God, and not as "foreigners and stran- 
 gers." 
 
 It has been objected that the phrase, "kingdom of 
 God, or of Heaven," does not necessarily refer to God's 
 visible kingdom on earth, but often refers to his kingdom 
 in glory. Whichever construction you give, the result is 
 the same so far as little children are concerned. If fit 
 for the church in glory, they are certainly fit for it on 
 earth. 
 
 "Kingdom of God" is used in both of these senses in 
 the New Testament, but generally refers more directly 
 to the reign of Christ, and the visible portion of the 
 Church on earth, and frequently includes both its pre- 
 paratory state here and its perfect state hereafter. " Re- 
 
2or> 
 
 pent je, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,"'=' re- 
 fers more directly to the reign of Christ and the ushering 
 in of the New Dispensation. " The kingdom of heaven 
 is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gath- 
 ered of every kind,"f — evidently refers to the visible 
 Church on earth. " Xow this I say, brethren, tliat licsh 
 and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. "J This 
 of course looks to the kingdom in glor3\ "Bat seek 
 ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, "§ — 
 includes the reign of Christ within, and without, on earth 
 and in heaven. 
 
 In short, every one who will examine the question 
 thoroughly, vrill find, that the phrase "kingdom of God 
 and of heaven," is used sometimes for the visible state 
 of things on earth, sometimes for them in heaven, and 
 sometimes for the inward work of the Spirit on the 
 hearts of individuals, as, " the kingdom of God is within 
 you" — but it generally includes the perfect as well as 
 imperfect state of Christ's kingdojpa, even when applied 
 more directly to the Church militant. And in this sense 
 no doubt our Saviour used it with reference to the little 
 children when he said, " Of such is the kingdom of God." 
 Such are true members of the true spiritual kingdom of 
 God, as well as of his nominal kingdom. 
 
 He was preparing the Church, or people of God for 
 a more spiritual dispensation on earth. They had been 
 for a long period under a dispensation that was adapted 
 to an age then passed away ; and many abuses and cor- 
 ruptions that had sprung up, must now be reformed, and 
 
 ■:^ Matt. iii. 2. f ?,ratt.. xiii 47. % 1 Cor. xv. 50. | :\[att. vi. ?,3. 
 18 
 
206 LITTLE CHILDREN MODEL MEMBEIlS. 
 
 a more spiritual reign commence. To be members of this 
 reformed Church, they must forsake and repent of those 
 sins which they had allowed, and seek after righteous- 
 ness and purity of life, which would prepare them for 
 that perfect state of his kingdom in glory, of which this 
 on earth is the beginning. Hence the penitent, seeking 
 after purity of heart, and governed by His teaching, 
 He regarded as worthy of true membership in that 
 kingdom. And, therefore, little children, who had no 
 actual sins of their own, and whose tender minds could 
 be taught and trained in the right way, by faithful 
 leaders, were, par excellence, members of it. 
 
 That such was the meaning of Christ when he said, 
 "Of such is the kingdom of God," is the more obvious 
 from the fact that he held them, up as models for the 
 imitation of those who, in their unfeeling self-confidence, 
 ordered them to be taken away. He was offended at the 
 manifestation of such temper. And hence he added, 
 "Whosoever sliall not receive the kingdom of God as a 
 little child, shall not enter therein.""^ That is, whosoever 
 shall not humble himself to be taught of Christ, and 
 follow his instruction as a little child, can never be a true 
 member of his kingdom or enter into its perfect state 
 in glory. Men may enter into it on earth, and become 
 members, as those had done who would now send the little 
 children away ; but unless they imitated these models, 
 which they were so ready to reject, and follow after their 
 innocency and teachable tempers, they will never enter 
 into the Church triumphant. As yet they Avere all in the 
 Old Testament Church — the little children as well as 
 
 ^ Mnrlv X. in. 
 
INNOCENCY AND TEACHABLE TEMPER. 207 
 
 those to whom the Saviour addressed himself. The day 
 of Pentecost had not come. But Christ was preparing 
 them for it. He was reforming abuses and pointing 
 out duties ; and when he said of the little children, " Of 
 such is the kingdom of God," he announced a fact 
 which they all knew, so far as the membership of the 
 visible Church was concerned. These were all members 
 of the Church in name ; but he was pointing out who 
 were the true worthy members, that were fitted for it 
 under the more spiritual dispensation on earth, about 
 to take place, and its final state in glory. 
 
 And who, we ask now, is better fitted for such a 
 kingdom than the little children for whom Christ died ? 
 And what could be a more suitable model for men of an 
 overweening self-confidence, whose need of humility and 
 tenderness would drive the lambs away from their shep- 
 herd, than the gentleness and innocency of the lambs 
 themselves ? But there are those in the present day 
 who reject the little children from the kingdom, even 
 though Christ rebuked others for driving them from 
 him, and informed them that such w^ere models for imita- 
 tion to all who would become truly the members of that 
 kingdom ! They reject the pattern, but accept the imi- 
 tation ! Is not this strange, when the pattern is part 
 and parcel of the same material ? Little children are 
 human beings, have souls, and are susceptible of plea- 
 sure and pain. They need and can receive religious 
 blessings, or why did our Saviour pray for and bless 
 them. ? And why should he afterwards reject them from 
 his kingdom, and receive only those who resembled their 
 innocency, humility, and teachable temper? 
 
208 THE LITTLE CHILDREN INCLUDED. 
 
 Could a man utter sophistry more untenable than that 
 of Dr. Carson, when he says, " ' Of such is the kingdom,' 
 cannot mean the persons themselves spoken of, but oth- 
 ers like them. For the term 'such' does not signify 
 identity, cannot signify identity, but likeness." And, 
 therefore, it cannot include the little children, but those 
 like them ! 
 
 Where did he learn this construction of language^- 
 from Scripture usage ? When St. Paul described certain 
 persons as " corrupt and destitute of the truth, supposing 
 that gain is godliness,"* and Yfp.rned Timothy ''from 
 Hucli withdraw thyself," did he mean that he should 
 withdraw from these persons iJtemselves, or only from 
 others who were like them ? 
 
 Again, when the same Apostle tells us that — (Gal. v. 
 21.) " they which do such things shall not inherit the 
 kingdom of God" — does he not mean the very things 
 themselves, as well as others of like character? 
 
 And yet again, when St. John commends the charity 
 of Gains and says of certain persons (3 John 8) " We 
 ought therefore to receive such, that we might be fellow 
 helpers to the truth" — did he intend that the persons 
 themselves, spoken of must be rejected, and others like 
 them be received ? what nonsense ! And what igno- 
 rance of Scriptural usage, to assert that " Of such, can- 
 not signify identity but likeness." 
 
 Scriptural usage, on the contrary, requires the con- 
 struction "of such is the kingdom of Heaven" to in- 
 clude tlie very persons pointed out, and those who are 
 like them. And so we believe the Saviour intended 
 
 * 1 Tim. vL 4, 5. 
 
PROMISE TO PARENTS AND CHILDREN. 209 
 
 to include the little children ^-ith all who should he like 
 them, and in many points they were more highly esteemed 
 by him than were others. And such was the sentiment of 
 a cotemporary of the Apostles. Hermas, who lived and 
 wrote in the Apostolic age, says, " All infants are valued 
 by the Lord and esteemed first of alV'^' 
 
 2. The objection that Christ did not baptize the little 
 children, is scarcely worthy of notice in this place, as all 
 A^io have read their Bible attentively know, that the 
 Saviour " did not baptize, but his disciples." He never- ' 
 theless taught the people and prepared the way for the 
 Gospel in its fullness, and by signs and words testified 
 that little children were included with their fathers in 
 the atonement, and have an interest and claim in the 
 covenant of Redemption. 
 
 Hence in the first sermon preached under the Gospel 
 Dispensation, on the day of Pentecost, the promise made 
 to the children as well as to their fathers was particularly 
 pointed out.f 
 
 Acts ii. 38, 39. " Then Fetor said unto tliem, Re- 
 jjejit and be baptized every one of yon^ in the name of 
 Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall 
 receive the gift of the Holy Grhost. For the promise 
 is to you and to your children and to all that are 
 afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." 
 
 Here children are expressly named with their parents ; 
 and by a Jew, addressing Jews, who had always been 
 accustomed to have their children under the same cove- 
 nant with themselves. Up to this moment the children 
 of the preacher and people had all alike received the ini- 
 
 * Simil. 9, c. 29. f Acts ii. 38, 39. 
 
 18=^ 
 
210 INFLUENCE OE EDUCATION. 
 
 tiatory rite of religion, and if no^Y for tlie first time, their 
 children are to be included, is not this of all language 
 the most singular to use. He quotes from the Old 
 Testament, paraphrases the promises made therein, ap- 
 plies them to their children, and jet children must 
 not any longer be made partakers of the promises ! 
 Would we use such language to prepare men for such a 
 change, or would a Jew likely infer that his little chil- 
 dren were to be shut out from the privileges of their 
 fathers, from such language ? It can scarcely admit of 
 a doubt that he would understand it in any other way, 
 than not to include the young children with their fathers. 
 This must be evident to any one, who has the power of 
 dismissing from his mind for a moment, surrounding cir- 
 cumstances, and of putting himself in the place of a Jew. 
 It is not at all wonderful that persons who have been 
 brought up under Antipedobaptist influence, should at 
 first be disposed to refer the words of St. Peter in this 
 passage, to posterity grown up. Because they read it 
 Avith entirely different feelings and different views from 
 a Jew. They are disposed to construe everything ac- 
 cording to the principles already instilled into their 
 minds. They look through a different medium from 
 that through which a Jevf from education must look. 
 And so it is in all cases where children are referred to 
 in the New Testament. Such persons require some spe- 
 cification for any departure from the principles under 
 which they themselves have been brought up, or which, 
 from other causes, they have adopted ; whereas the true 
 state of the case is, as every unprejudiced mind can 
 see, that somd" specification is required wherever there is 
 
INFANT MEMBERSHIP IMPLIED. 211 
 
 a departure from the established principles and known 
 feelings of those to whom the words were at the time 
 addressed. It is well known to every biblical scholar, 
 that the Jews, and all connected with them, considered 
 their young children entitled to the same covenant privi- 
 leges to which they themselves were entitled : and hence, 
 must, as a thing of course, construe everything said in re- 
 lation to children according to such views, unless some spe- 
 cification be made to the contrary. What then could they 
 suppose St. Peter meant, other than to include their 
 young children at that present time ? Or how could he 
 who was himself a Jew, expect them to understand him 
 otherwise, without some specification to the contrary?* 
 The fact is, Infant Church-membership is taken for 
 granted throughout the New Testament, just as the 
 being of a God, is taken for granted in the Old 
 Testament Scriptures ; and any attentive student who 
 will read the New Testament, with this truth before his 
 mind, will see how exactly every part corresponds with 
 this truth. But as soon as one begins to read it, vath 
 the opposite opinion in his mind, he will find himself 
 constantly reduced to the necessity of giving up broad, 
 plain principles of interpretation, and looking for some 
 hole to escape. Thus it is with the passage before us. 
 Such readers take for granted that Infant baptism is not 
 taught in the Scriptures. Wherefore, when the Apostle 
 
 ■^ Verses 41 and 42 are sometimes referred to as explanatory of St. 
 Peter's meaning. But ihcy only refer to the acts of responsible 
 agents. Possibly very few children -were present on the day of Pen- 
 tecost, but if many^ St. Luke's custom was to speak only of the acts 
 of responsible perspns and heads of families, as in the case of Lydia, 
 and the Jailer, for neither the names nor deeds of any of their children 
 at their baptism are recorded by him. 
 
212 DEFECTIVE RULES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 declares to the penitent multitude, '' the promise is to 
 you and to your children" — they cannot receive it in its 
 broad, natural sense, but give the passage a limited ap- 
 plication, which excludes a portion of their children. 
 So likewise, in the passage just disposed of, where the 
 Saviour says in regard to the little children vrhom he 
 took up in his arms, " Of such is. the kingdom of God" 
 — they set to work and exclude the children themselves 
 (the very subjects of the conversation) and limit the 
 passage to only such as resemble -them in certain 
 particulars. Again, the commission given the Apostles 
 "to disciple all nations, baptizing them," etc., they, in- 
 stead of receiving its broad, general sense, limit it to 
 only believers. And so on, with every passage bearing 
 on the Church-membership of infants. 
 
 Novr this is precisely the reverse of the order that 
 ought to be observed in regard to those passages refer- 
 ring to children. We must remember that the writers 
 of the New Testament were all Jews, and of course to a 
 great extent, under the influence of previous education, 
 and that all departures from established principles, rather 
 than the continuation of them, would be marked by spe- 
 cifications. 
 
 But it has also been argued that the Apostle limits 
 baptism in this place, by repentance, saying, " Repent 
 and be baptized, every one of you," etc. 
 
 The irrelevancy of this objection will be seen, by sim- 
 ply calling to remembrance the fact that the Apostle 
 replied to persons who had committed actual sins of their 
 own, and who had asked what they must do ? and said 
 to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you." 
 
CHILDREN SUSCEPTIBLE OF GllACE. 213 
 
 Just as any Pedobaptist would, under the same circum- 
 stances, at tlie present day. Not one word is said as to the 
 repentance of their children, who had not committed 
 actual sin, but who were affected by original sins, yet he 
 tells them the promise is to their children, as well as to 
 themselves. • 
 
 Again, it has been objected, that the " promise" re- 
 ferred to by the Apostle is the " gift of the Holy Ghost," 
 and not the great promise made to Abraham when God 
 entered into covenant with him and promised '' to be a 
 God unto him and his seed after him," to which it 
 is supposed generally to refer. The reply to be 
 made, is, that so far as the question before us is 
 concerned, the result will be the same in either case. If 
 to the promises in the Abrahamic covenant, it is beyond 
 all doubt that young children are included, because, at 
 the very time that covenant was established, young chil-' 
 dren were by express law received into it. But if we 
 refer it to the gift of the Holy Ghost, what obstacle 
 does it oppose ? Cannot children receive grace as well 
 as others ? Do they not need it, to counteract fallen 
 nature as well as others ? If they are capable of sin 
 through Adam, why not of grace through Christ ? Or 
 why pray for their spiritual benefit, if they be not sus- 
 ceptible of such a thing ? If children cannot receive 
 the Holy Ghost — how is it St. John is said to have been 
 filled with " the Holy Ghost even from his mother's 
 womb ?" Luke i. 15. Isa. xlix. Herein lies the error 
 of such — they assume that no benefit can be conferred 
 on children at their baptism, which they ought first 
 to prove. It is not our object at present to say to 
 
214 THE GOSPEL INVITATION. 
 
 what extent or in what way, spiritual benefit is conferred, 
 whether in the act of baptism itself, or through the 
 pra^^ers of God's people ofiered up for the child, or in 
 consequence of covenanted associations, helps and privi- 
 leges, or through all these separately and conjointly. 
 Certain it is, from Scripture testimony, that young chil- 
 dren may receive the influence of the Holy Ghost,* and 
 spiritual graces, as well as blessings of an external nature. 
 
 Lastly, it has been objected that this promise is limi- 
 ted by the latter clause to "as many as the Lord our 
 God shall call." That is, "to such as can believe, 
 and are effectually called unto salvation." This objec- 
 tion needs only a passing notice, since it is now generally 
 conceded by the most eminent commentators of all 
 shades of doctrine that the call here referred to, means 
 the call made through the Gospel. Namely, that the 
 "promise" extends to all wliQ shall be invited — that sal- 
 vation is offered to all who shall hear its joyful sound — 
 to as many as by that Gospel are called to repentance. 
 The plain natural rendering of the text, therefore, is, 
 "that the promise is to the Jews, and to their children, 
 and to all who are afar off. Gentiles as well as Jews — 
 even to as many as the Lord our God shall call,"f i. e. 
 wherever the Gospel is preached, or this call is pub- 
 lished. J 
 
 Let us see next how some of the other Apostles ap- 
 pear to have construed the commission under which 
 
 * Luke i. 15. Lsa. xlix. Ps. xxii. 9. f Ephesians ii, 13, 17. 
 
 J The reader will observe that these arguments, though corrobora- 
 tive of each other, are yet distinct and separate, and that he may 
 reject any one of tliem if unsatisfactory to himself, without affecting 
 the authority of the others. 
 
BAPTISM OF LYDIA AND FAMILY. 215 
 
 they acted. We read tliat Paul, Silas, and others, in 
 travelling and preaching the Gospel, visited a certain town 
 called Philippi, in Macedonia, and that during their stay 
 there, they baptized two families — and these are the 
 only baptisms mentioned whilst there — both of them of 
 whole families. The first was the family of a certain 
 woman named Lydia. 
 
 Acts xvi. 13, 19. ''And on the Sahhath day we ivent 
 out of the city hy a river side, ivhere frayer ivas wont to 
 he made^ and tve sat dotvn and spake to the ivomen ivhich 
 resorted tliither. And a certain zuoman named Lydia^ 
 a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, ivhich ivor- 
 shipped God, heard us, luhose heart the Lord opened, 
 that she attended unto the things ivhich were spoken of 
 Paid. And when she tvas baptized, and her house- 
 hold, she besought us, saying. If ye have judged me 
 faithful to the Lord, come into my house and abide there, 
 and she constrained us." 
 
 In this account nothing is said of the faith, names, or 
 acts of any other member of the household, but of the 
 head of it. The baptism of the other members of the 
 family referred to, was a thing of course, when the 
 head of it believed. The whole affair is recorded, just as 
 if the privileges enjoyed by the head of the family, in 
 matters of this kind, were the same under the Christian 
 dispensation as they had been under the Jewish. All of 
 which is in perfect harmony with the views we have 
 already advanced. 
 
 Shortly afterwards, Paul and Silas are apprehended 
 and cast into prison. The jailer is charged to keep 
 them safely, who thrusts them into the inner prison, 
 
216 BAPTISM OF JAILER AND ALL HIS. 
 
 and makes their feet fast in the stocks. At midnight 
 an earthquake throws open the prison doors, looses the 
 prisoners from the stocks, and awakes the jailer ; who 
 seeing the prison doors open, supposes the prisoners 
 have fled, and is ahout to kill himself. But Paul calls 
 to him to do himself no harm, for the prisoners were all 
 there — none had escaped. The jailer called for a light, 
 sprang in and fell dovfn at the Apostles' feet ; and hav- 
 ing "brought them out, said, Sirs, what must I do to 
 be saved ?"* 
 
 Acts xvi. 31-33. ''Afid they said, Believe on the 
 Lord Jesus Clirist, and tlioii slialt he saved, and thy 
 house. And they spake unto him the ivord of tlie Lord, 
 and to all that wei^e in his house. And he took them 
 the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes ; 
 and was baptized, he and all his, straightivay.'' 
 
 Here is another case, in which no name or act of any 
 member of the family is recorded but that of the head 
 of it. And yet every member of it was baptized the 
 same hour of the night, the jailer and all his straiyht- 
 luay. No surprise or unusual joy is manifested at the 
 baptism of the whole family, but all is related as if a 
 thing to be expected, that when the jailer believed and 
 was baptized, "all of his" would be baptized likewise. 
 Precisely such an account as we should expect a Jew to 
 give, when, like pious Joshua, he could say for himself 
 and all his, " As for me and my house, we will serve the 
 Lord." Hence, he would take all .belonging to him, 
 and bring them with himself into- the Christian cove- 
 nant, as soon as he believed. 
 
 -- Act? xvi. 23. ?>0. 
 
BAPTISM OF STEPHANAS AND FAMILY. 217 
 
 So was the reply of the Apostles to the inquiry What 
 shall I do to be saved ? of the same character. The 
 answer was, " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou 
 shalt be saved, and thy house ;" that is, thou shalt 
 bring salvation to thyself and house. Faith in Christ 
 is the way to attain safety, and by it you may bring 
 yourself and family into a state of covenanted grace. 
 
 These Apostles, like St. Peter, remembered the bless- 
 ings that would redound to their children with their 
 parents. Believe, and thou and thy house shall be saved 
 — brought into a state of salvation covenanted in Christ 
 Jesus. 
 
 The Apostle Paul introduces the baptism of the 
 household of Stephanas in exactly the same manner. 
 He mentions it in connection with the baptism of two 
 other individuals, without any restriction as to age or 
 sex. 
 
 1 Cor. I. 14-16. ''Ithanh God that Ihaptizcd none 
 of you hut Crispus and Grams, lest any should say that 
 I baptized in my oivn name. And I haptized also the 
 household of Stephanas ; besides, I knoiv not that I bap- 
 tized any other.'' 
 
 Having heard that there were contentions in the 
 Church of Corinth, and that the disciples were calling 
 themselves by the names of the different ministers who 
 had baptized them, he congratulates himself that there 
 were but few there who could call themselves by his 
 name. He only remembered two, Crispus and Gains, 
 besides the family of Stephanas. 
 
 The manyier in which family baptisms are referred to 
 in the Scriptures, must ever strike the mind of the at- 
 19 
 
218 FAITH AND ACTS OF HEADS 
 
 tciitive reader, as opposed to those who advocate only 
 believers' baptism. If only believers Vfere baptized, 
 why, (one is led to ask,) is no restriction made in regard 
 to young children in these cases ? Or if no young chil- 
 dren belonged to them, why are we not informed that 
 all believed, or that all repented, as well as that all 
 were baptized ? Why are they recorded, as if every- 
 thing depended on the heads of these families ? Do not 
 these things go far to show, that no radical change had 
 been made in regard to the principle of receiving young, 
 children with their parents into covenanted privileges ? 
 For if a change had been made on this point, we might 
 certainly expect to see something corresponding in the 
 record — instead of which, every case is recorded in pre- 
 cisely the manner they would have been under the old 
 dispensation, in the event baptism had been merely 
 added to it. Suppose we were to meet in the records 
 of some missionary of the present day, such cases as 
 these to which we have just referred — say, for instance, 
 he records a visit to some town where he baptized two 
 families, and these the only baptisms performed by him 
 whilst there ; he says nothing of the faith or acts of any 
 one, but the liead of each family, and speaks of their 
 family baptisms in a manner that indicates no more sur- 
 prise than individual baptism ? And suppose we find a 
 few pages further on, in a letter to a church in another 
 city, mention made of another family and two indi- 
 viduals, and that these were all that he baptized there 
 also — and yet nothing is said, to indicate that family bap- 
 tism was less common, or in these cases more a matter 
 of gratitude than individual baptism, would we not con- 
 
OF FAMILIES ONLY RECORDED. 219 
 
 elude that tliis missionary belonged to a ChiTrcli that 
 ordered the baptism of the young children with their 
 parents ? Could we come to any other conclusion, when 
 there were only two baptisms in one place, and both of 
 these whole families — in another, one family and two 
 other individuals, without one word of restriction, or of 
 exception in the case of the young children ? Most cer- 
 tainly every reader would infer that this missionary was 
 a Pedobaptist, or one who baptizes young children. 
 Then we must conclude the Apostles were Pedobaptists, 
 unless it can be made to appear that there were no chil- 
 dren in those families. 
 
 1. But where is the evidence to that effect ? It has 
 been said, that the 40th verse of the chapter recording 
 the baptism of Lydia and her family, shows that there 
 were no children in it. Let, us examine it. Acts xvi. 
 40. " And they went out of the prison and entered 
 into the house of Lydia ; and when they had seen the 
 brethren, they comforted them and departed." Now 
 what does this verse mean, but simply that when Paul 
 and Silas were let out of prison, they went to the house 
 of Lydia, at which they met the brethren, and when 
 they had comforted them, both by their presence and 
 words, they departed. Some have endeavored to make 
 this verse support the opinion, that the " brethren com- 
 forted," were only the members of Lydia's family, and 
 hence they must all have reached the years of discretion 
 to »be able to receive comfort. Such objectors must 
 have paid very little attention to the whole narrative, or 
 else they would have seen that Timotheus and Luke 
 wereifellow-travellers with Paul and Silas, and were at 
 
220 BRETHREN AT LYDIA'S HOUSE. 
 
 the time lodging at Lyclia's house. Acts xvi. 3. ^' Him, 
 (Timotheus,) Paul would have to go forth with him." 
 (11, 12 verses.) Loosing from Troas, ive (Luke the 
 writer, with the others,) came with a straight course to 
 Samothracia, and the next day to Neapolis, and from 
 thence to Philippi, which is the chief city of that part 
 of Macedonia and a colony, and we were in that city 
 abiding certain days." Verse 15, " And when she 
 (Lydia) was baptized and her household, she besought 
 us, saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful to the 
 Lord, come into my house, and abide there : and she con- 
 strained us." Who were these {we and us) constrained 
 to abide at her house? Evidently Paul, Silas, Timothy, 
 and Luke. The whole company lodged at Lydia's. 
 '' And it came to pass as ive went to prayer, a certain 
 damsel, possessed with the spirit of divination, met us, 
 which brought her master much gain by soothsaying : 
 the same followed Paul and us, &c. And when her 
 master saw that the hope of their gain was gone, they 
 caught Paul and Silas and drew them into the market- 
 place," &c., verse 19. They were afterwards thrown 
 into prison and remained there one night, but Luke and 
 Timothy were not with them. 
 
 The next day Paul and Silas w^ere released, and came 
 to the house of Lydia, and met there, Timothy, Luke, 
 Lydia, and perhaps the " damsel" out of whom was 
 cast the Pythonic spirit. To which number may have 
 been added also, the jailer and others. So that these, 
 beyond a doubt, were the brethren whom Paul and Silas 
 " comforted." Por so far as Lydia is concerned, there 
 is not a word going to show that one of her family was 
 
lydia's faith governed all. 221 
 
 able to believe. On the contrary, everything connected 
 with the baptism of her family is put in the singular 
 number, as if all depended on her alone. '^ " Her heart 
 was opened to attend to the things spoken. Slie be- 
 sought us, if ye have jugded me faithful, come into my 
 house." Nothing is said of any one of her family in con- 
 junction with herself. It does not read, our Jiouse, or 
 if you have judged tis faithful, or that the members of 
 her family attended. Nor should we have known that 
 she had a family, had they not been mentioned as bap- 
 tized at the same time with her, — " and when she was 
 baptized and her family." Instead of circumstances 
 showing that her children were grown up, everything 
 in the narrative goes to prove, they were minors. Lydia 
 was a native of Thyatira, residing at this time in Phi- 
 lippi, she could afford accommodations to Paul and his 
 three companions, and constrained them to abide at her 
 house. The baptism of her 01x05, "house," is, strictly 
 speaking, an example 0^ family haptism without restric- 
 tion of age or sex. And vre are bound to receive it 
 as a case of promiscuous family baptism. Just as if 
 informed at the present time that a " certain lady and 
 her family were baptized on a particular day, and no 
 specification made as to ago or numbers." 
 
 2. In the case of the jailer, it has been argued that 
 there were no young children in his family, because we 
 are informed the Apostles '' spake unto him the word of 
 the Lord and to all that were in his house." Acts xvi. 
 32. Why, says the objector, did they speak the word 
 
 * Taylor A. B. 
 
 19* 
 
222 THE JAILER REJOICED. 
 
 of the Lord to all, if all were not able to understand it ? 
 We might as well ask, Why does a minister of the pre- 
 sent day speak the word of the Lord to all his congre- 
 gation when a part of them are children ? The earth- 
 quake and the alarm of the jailer, we may well suppose, 
 awoke all in the house, and that they assembled to- 
 gether in the same room — guards and assistants probably 
 assembled with his family. And the Apostles preached 
 or explained the Christian religion to all present, to the 
 oLxia, "household" — and "the jailer and all his, were 
 baptized straightway;" i. g., all his own immediate 
 family, his olxo^, his house-seed — but not ot?fta, '' the 
 household." We will show the difference presently. 
 Nothing is said or done but what might have occurred, 
 had all his own been young children. 
 
 3. Again, it is sometimes affirmed that all the jailer's 
 family were believers, because, after their baptism, it is 
 written in the 34th verse, " He set meat before them 
 (Apostles) and rejoiced, believing in God with all his 
 house." The word "believing" is made to apply to all 
 his house, as if all believed in God, and rejoiced with 
 him. But the error of this interpretation becomes mani- 
 fest by merely referring to the original Greek, which 
 shows that '^rejoiced and believing are both in the singu- 
 lar number, and may only apply to the jailer himself." 
 
 Kat -/jya^'Kiaaato Tiavotxo TiBTiiaTftvxcoi tio Qsoj " and he rcjoiccd 
 
 with all his house, (at the head of his family) he having 
 believed in God." The jailer having believed, rejoiced 
 with, among, or in the midst of his family. 
 
 This is the literal rendering of the sentence, " He 
 rejoiced," ^^ he having believed in God." Not the^ 
 
HOUSE AND HOUSEHOLD. 223 
 
 rejoiced, or they believed. The whole is recorded as 
 if everything depended on the father's agency. And 
 had it been otherwise, no doubt it would have been writ- 
 ten, He and his house, or they all rejoiced, and they 
 believed ; or some allusion would have been made to the 
 faith and acts of others. 
 
 Of the same character is the answer to the inquiry 
 of the jailer. "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 
 " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be 
 saved, and thy house.'' Sis faith only pointed to, as 
 the mediam of the blessings to be received by himself 
 and his children — his acts only recorded when the bless- 
 ing was given to them all. 
 
 The Apostles always make a distinction between 
 {oixoi) "house," and (otxca) "household." By "house" 
 i\\Qj mQdiXi family — children. And by "household" they 
 include the domestics, or servants, and all connected 
 with the establishment. The term 01x05 means literally 
 "house," or "dwelling," but, metaphorically, the seed, 
 descendants, immediate family — as when we speak of 
 the "house of David," or "house of Israel." But 
 OLXLO. "household," is a different word, of different gen- 
 der, and embraces those received into the family — ser- 
 vants, attendants, and appendages, making up all in 
 any way identified with the house. And the Apostles 
 always observed this distinction, but our translators 
 seemed to have overlooked it in some places. The ad- 
 dress, or sermon, was delivered before the oixia " house- 
 hold" — all who belonged to the establishment — but only 
 the jailer and family, or children, were baptized. 
 
 And so it was only Lydia and her ot^os "house," not 
 
224 HOUSEHOLD OF STEPHANAS. 
 
 ''household," as it is translated, but Lydia and her 
 children, that were baptized. This is confirmed by the 
 Syriac version which reads ''children^'' and which, as 
 before remarked, was completed according to Mich^lis 
 and others about the time of St. John's death- — certainly 
 early in the second century. According to this version, 
 (the received rule of faith among the Christians of Syria 
 and Armenia from the beginning,) '''Lydia and her 
 c7iildre7i, the jailer with all his children, and the chil- 
 dren of Stephanas zvere haiotized.'' The jailer could 
 not have been a very old man, for his acts are such as 
 we should ascribe to the rashness and vigor of early 
 manhood. His first thought, was to kill himself! Age 
 is more deliberate. Next he ''sprang in" with the 
 vigor and activity, as indicated in the original, of one 
 in the prime of life — not of old age, and the father of 
 a grown up family. Wherefore everything connected 
 with these cases harmonizes with the doctrine of family 
 baptism, including young children ; and as soon as 
 you adopt the opposite opinion, every incident needs 
 explanation. 
 
 So the Apostle Paul tells us he baptized the [otxov) 
 family of Stephanas, but afterwards refers to the (oixio.) 
 "household" of Stephanas as having "addicted them- 
 selves to the ministry of the saints ;" .that is, the care 
 of attending to the wants of poor saints, and the duties 
 of hospitality. In the first place, he speaks of the 
 baptism of his children — for otzoj applies to one's own 
 children, while otxta includes servants and all others liv- 
 ing in the family. And because some eight or ten years 
 after the baptism of the family, he tells us the " house- 
 
FAMILY BAPTISM COMMON. 225 
 
 hold" were active in a certain duty; some liave inferred 
 that there were no children in that family when they 
 were all baptized. But there is no proof that there 
 were not little children among them when the baptism 
 took place, or even at this last point of time. The " house- 
 hold," or several of its members, may have done much 
 for the poor saints, and yet some of the children still be 
 too young to act as responsible moral agents. It is the 
 manner in which these and all family baptisms are ex- 
 pressed or implied in the Holy Scriptures, that demands 
 our particular attention. 
 
 The baptism of several families in the New Tes- 
 tament is to be learned also merely from implication — no 
 special notice being taken of the event. We have suffi- 
 cient reason for the belief that the families of Crispus 
 and of Onesiphorus, of Aristobulus and Narcissus, and 
 also of Cornelius, were baptized; but so usual were 
 family baptisms that the Holy Spirit deemed it sufficient 
 merely to imply the fact, as in numerous cases of indi- 
 vidual baptisms. And had the usual course of admitting 
 their little children into covenant with God been de- 
 parted from, and only heads of families, and those 
 capable of self-responsibility, admitted to baptism, must 
 not the character of these records have been different 
 and family baptisms less common ? 
 
 "Being myself convinced," writes the remarkable 
 author of Apostolic Baptism, after a learned and labo- 
 rious examination of the subject, " that the Apostles 
 practised- Infant baptism, and that the Evangelists 
 meant to tell us so, I affirm that the natural import of 
 the term otxoj "family," includes children of all ages. 
 In proof, I offer fifty examples ; and if fifty are not 
 
226 GREATER PROBABILITY. 
 
 sufficient, I offer a hundred; and if a hundred are not 
 sufficient, I offer two hundred ; and if two hundred are 
 not sufficient, four hundred."* 
 
 Now in questions that do not allow of absolute demon- 
 stration, we are bound to follow the stronger probability. 
 Neither party can be required to prove the presence or 
 absence of little children in these families; but which is 
 the more pi^ohahle under all the circumstances noted, 
 that there were no little children in any of them, or that 
 there were at least in some, if not in all ? 
 
 When called upon to answer this question, can there 
 be a doubt as to the stronger probability ? Visit eight 
 families promiscuously in this city, and is it probable 
 that you Avill find no young children belonging to even one 
 of them all, or to half of them ? Visit three families — 
 representing the jailer's, Lydia's, and that of Stepha- 
 nas — and take them promiscuously, and which is the 
 more probable, that you will find no children in one out 
 of the three, or that you will find them in two of the 
 three, or in all three ? Yes, w^e may may take the fam- 
 ilies or houses on any street, or through any district of 
 country, and we shall find little children in a large ma- 
 jority of them all, instead of not in one out of three. 
 Therefore, as a question of lorohahilities, the answer 
 admits of no doubt. No man can hesitate for a moment 
 to determine on which side lies the stronger probability ; 
 and when he takes in the number of families, the man- 
 ner in which they are recorded, the universal custom of 
 the Jewish nation, and all the circumstances connected 
 with these cases of family baptisms, recorded in the 
 
 -^ C. Taylor's Apos. Bap. p. 89. 
 
LAW OF ACTION. 227 
 
 Holy Scriptures, the probabilities multiply to an in- 
 finite extent. Then to which shall we give allegiance — 
 to an opinion which started up in the dark ages, or to 
 the practice of Christians from the beginning ? If, in 
 duties where demonstration cannot be given, we are 
 morally bound to take the greater probability, how must 
 we act in this- case ? Shall we, can we, lay aside the 
 ancient universal custom of the Church, the strongest 
 visible tie between Christ and our children, the faithful 
 constant monitor of our duty to our little ones, and sub- 
 stitute a conjecture brooded and hatched when gloom 
 and ignorance had spread over the earth ? What law 
 in morals or religion will authorize such a course ? AYe 
 have seen that the first generation after the Apostles 
 did beyond all doubt baptize their little children. We 
 have seen that it has been continued by the great body 
 of Christians ever since. We have seen that family 
 religion, including the young children as well as the 
 older ones, was the universal privilege of the people of 
 God up to the coming of Christ. Yfe have seen that 
 His great Commission to his Apostles does not forbid 
 this privilege under the Gospel, but rather is clothed in 
 such terms that may not only embrace, but under the 
 circumstances absolutely impose the duty of receiving, 
 the little ones with their parents. And, with this 
 construction, his words and deeds concerning little chil- 
 dren accord, the preaching of the Apostles correspond, and 
 the frequent baptisms of whole families, and their mode 
 of record all unite — thus combining doctrine, practice, 
 and incidental circumstances, into one harmonious whole. 
 And yet we have been told that we ought to give up 
 this time-honored, blessed priyilege, and adopt the cold, 
 
228 LAW OF INVESTIGATION. 
 
 calculating, unfeeling alternative of leaving our little 
 ones to tliG uncovenanted mercies of God, till they can 
 work for themselves ! Although they have never sinned 
 after the similitude of Adam's transgression, yet they 
 must remain under its bondage, (visibly at least,) till 
 they can of themselves apply for the Seal of the Cove- 
 nant of their Redemption ! 
 
 And to any remonstrance to the contrary, how often 
 are we met with the reply, " The burden of proof lies 
 upon you!" as though they who set themselves up 
 against the practice of the Christian world for centuries, 
 ought not to sustain their position by something more 
 than assertion. 
 
 But the humble seeker after truth neither seeks nor 
 desires any advantage of that kind : he wants the truth, 
 and only the truth ; and those who know that the Holy 
 Scriptures were written after the Church was founded, 
 and given to it for its guide and protection — not as a 
 constitution, prescribing its organization — will see that 
 the point before us to be settled is, whether family bap- 
 tisms including little children, are in accordance with its 
 teaching — directly or indirectly implied in its holy 
 pages. And thus far we have seen that the usage of the 
 people of God up to the time of the Apostles, and the 
 teaching and practice of the next generation in the 
 Church after the Apostles, both alike received families, 
 including little children into covenant with God, and 
 that the Apostles did also baptize whole families, with- 
 out regard to age, so far as we can learn anything to 
 the contrary, and therefore were all agreed on this 
 point. If any one can show anything to the contrary, 
 let it bo producf'd. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES CONCLUDED. 
 
 Laws of marriage among the Jews— The holy seed not allowed ^o mingle 
 ■with heathen nations— Such marriages dissolved in times of reformation 
 —Heathen wives and children put away— Difficulties suggested in regard 
 to " helieving and unhelieving" husbands and wives under the new dis- 
 pensation—Ceremonial law not applicable— Positive influence from be- 
 liever on unbeliever fits the latter for their union, hence the children are 
 holy and not unclean— Holy and unclean always used in a ceremonial 
 or religious sense — Children numbered among the holy and saints by 
 St. Paul— Their parents instructed how to train them— St. John divides 
 the members of the Church into three classes, fathers, young men and 
 little children— Summary of testimony— Earnest exhortation to the 
 faithful training of our little ones for Christ's spiritual kingdom. 
 
 We come next to a passage in the first Epistle to the 
 Corinthians, which shows how much the Jewish Chris- 
 tians were under the influence of early education, wdiile 
 it also proves, that the young children of Christians are 
 qualified for church membership. 
 
 The Jews, as the people of God, were called " holy," 
 a "holy people" unto the Lord, "a special people," "a 
 holy seed." (Deut. vii. xxvi. Ezra xx.) Just as Chris- 
 tians are called "Saints," a holy nation, "peculiar 
 people," "chosen generation," (Acts ix. Titus ii. 1 
 Peter ii. &c.) and Pagan nations were called "unclean," 
 " uncircumcised." 
 
 The Jews as a " holy people" were forbidden to inter- 
 20 
 
230 LAW OF MARRIAGE. 
 
 marry with Pagan nations: " Neither shalt thou make 
 marriages with them ; thy daughter thou shalt not give 
 unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy 
 son." (Deut. vii. 3.) And further when such marriages 
 had been contracted, it was deemed essential to a thorough 
 reformation that they be dissolved. 
 
 In the time of Ezra, many had broken through this 
 law and taken to themselves Pagan wives. The princes 
 came to Ezra and complained that the "holy seed" had 
 mingled themselves with the surrounding nations, having 
 taken their daughters for themselves, and for their sons. 
 (Ezra ix. 3.) This was the cause of much lamentation, 
 and the people were assembled and "wept very sore." 
 (Ezra X. 2, 3.) "And Shechaniah the son of Jehiel, 
 one of the sons of Elam, answered and said unto Ezra, 
 we have transgressed against our God, and have taken 
 strange wives of the people of the land : yet now there 
 is hope in Israel concerning this thing. Now therefore 
 let us make a covenant with our God, to put away all the 
 wives and such as are born of them, according to the 
 council of my lord, and of those that tremble at the 
 commandment of our God; and let it be done according 
 to the law." Ezra arose and made all the people " swear 
 that they would do according to this word. And they 
 sware. (5th verse.) And accordingly all such marriages 
 Avere then dissolved. 
 
 Certain Jewish believers at Corinth, as it appears, 
 thought the same law, or principle, ought to be observed 
 under the new dispensation. Eor when it was found 
 that there were some among them, whose husbands or 
 wives were unbelievers, and yet both continuing to dwell 
 
BELIEVERS UNITED TO UNBELIEVERS. 231 
 
 together in wedlock, the question was raised, whether 
 the believer in such cases ought not to separate from the 
 unbelieving partner ? They referred the matter to the 
 Apostle Paul, who replied as follows : 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 12-14. ^' If any brother hath a wife that 
 helieveth not, and if she he pleased to divell with him, 
 let him not j^ut her aivay — and the ivoman ivhich hath 
 an husband that believeth not, aiid if he be pleased to 
 divell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbeliev- 
 ing husband is sanctified by the ivife, and the unbelieving 
 wife is sanctified by the husband: else luere your children 
 unclean, but now are they holy.'' 
 
 This reply of the Apostle shows that the believer is 
 not required, under the Gospel, which leans to mercy, 
 to separate from an unbelieving partner ; and that 
 instead of the believer being polluted by the unbeliever, 
 the latter is in a certain sense sanctified by the former, 
 in virtue of which their children are " holy" — to be treat- 
 ed as the "holy seed," not as "unclean" Pagan chil- 
 dren. Now, as the "holy seed," and all persons called 
 "holy" (aytot) were received into covenant with God, and 
 numbered with his people — and "unclean" and " uncir- 
 cumcised," were terms used to distinguish those not re- 
 ceived into covenant among God's people, this passage 
 teaches, that though only one parent be a believer, their 
 children are numbered among the holy seed, and hence 
 are qualified for the Christian covenant, therefore for 
 baptism, because they must be baptized to enter into 
 that covenant. 
 
 " Holy" {ayioi) is used everywhere in the Septuagint 
 for a Hebrew word which means " pure," " clean," and 
 
232 APPLICATION OF HOLY. 
 
 is used in the New Testament for saints (aytot). Acts 
 ix. 13, 32, 41 ; xxvi. 10, &c. Paul confessed that he 
 had shut many of the saints, t-wv aytwv (holy per- 
 sons in prison,) Kom. xv. 25. " I go to Jerusalem to 
 minister to the saints, {t^ol^ aytots). He also addresses 
 the churches on various occasions, calling the members 
 by the same name (toosayioLi) "holy persons." To the 
 "holy persons" (toi^ aytotj) at Ephesus. To the [foiiayioii 
 xai TCKifoi^) " holy persons (or saints) and to faithfuls at 
 Colosse." " To all the (-z'ots aytotj) holy persons in Christ 
 Jesus at Philippi." This title is given in a multitude 
 of places to the members of the Church, and the "fact 
 is indisputable (says Taylor*) that the appellative ' holy,' 
 is not bestowed in the New Testament on any person 
 not a member of the Church. 
 
 But in the passage under consideration, it is expressly 
 applied to young children. Shall we then receive it in 
 the same sense in this as in other passages, or shall we give 
 it a different meaning from all the other places in which 
 the sacred writers use it? " This appellation being never 
 given in the Scriptures (says Hay) to any but to those who 
 are of the Church and in covenant with God, we must 
 understand it here in the same sense ; and therefore, the 
 children of one believing parent, and more conclusively, 
 if both be believers, are of the Church, and entitled to 
 be admitted therein by baptism, for the children of one 
 believer, are called 'holy,' in the same sense as the 
 Israelites are called a ' holy people,' and the members 
 of Gospel Churches are called " saints" or holy persons, 
 "a holy nation," a "peculiar people:" — not because 
 
 ^ " Apostolic baptism." 
 
UNBELIEVER NOMINALLY SANCTIFIED. 233 
 
 they are all truly pious and sanctified, but because tbey 
 are visibly the people of God, and have been received 
 into his covenant."* Now as the question proposed to 
 the Apostle, must have originated in Jewish scruples, so 
 the reasoning on his answer is exactly adapted to the 
 nature of such an origin. If the believer must put 
 away an unbelieving partner, he must, according to the 
 same law and practice, put away the children of such a 
 marriage likewise: for those "born of them" are un- 
 clean by the same authority, and must be excluded 
 from the community of God's people and covenanted 
 privileges. But the unbelieving partner, in consequence 
 of his union by marriage before the other believed, is 
 sanctified by her faith for the relation of husband, and 
 hence their children must not be treated as "unclean" 
 pagan children, but as "the holy seed." 
 
 The whole argument seems to be this. To the ques- 
 tion asked, (as we may suppose by Jewish believers,) 
 " ought not a believer to separate from an unbelieving 
 partner, and their marriage be dissolved?" The Apostle 
 replies — No. If the unbeliever be pleased to continue 
 with the believer, let them continue together, " for the 
 unbeliever is sanctified by the believer," i. e., both being 
 " one fleshf by lawful marriage before the conversion of 
 
 * Hay on Baptism. 
 
 f There is a difference between the marriages here alluded to, and 
 those formed by the Jews with Pagan nations. The marriage of a 
 Jew with a Pagan, was contrary to law in the first instance, but a 
 marriage between two heathens was according to law, and both con- 
 sequently regarded as one flesh. The conversion of one afterwards 
 may be supposed to pass an influence on the other, or at least entitle 
 him to such privileges as their connection would justify. These pri- 
 vileges or benefits, so far affect his heathen state of uncleanness, that 
 
 20* 
 
234 UNCLEANNESS NOT ILLEGITIMACY. 
 
 the believer, the unbeliever in virtue of this connection, 
 is so far benefited by the believer, or so far entitled to 
 the privileges of the sanctified ones, that he must not be 
 treated as unclean, but as nominally sanctified — else were 
 the children unclean ; but now are they holy, for if the 
 tree be holy so are the branches in a ceremonial sense." 
 
 "If," says Dr. Whitby, '^ t\\Q lioly seed among the 
 Jews were circumcised and made federally holy, by 
 receiving the sign of the covenant, and being admitted 
 into the number of God's people, because they were 
 born seminally holy — then by like reason the holy seed 
 of Christians ought to be admitted to baptism, the sign 
 of the Christian covenant, and so be entered into the 
 society of the Christian Church." 
 
 Seeing that this interpretation must admit Infant 
 baptism, some of its opposers have given the passage a 
 difi"erent rendering ; in doing which, they are compelled 
 to change the meaning of the words "holy" (ayta) and 
 "unclean" (axa^apra) from that generally received to 
 one no where else given to them in the Holy Scriptures ! 
 They render the passage in substance as follows: "For 
 the unbelieving partner is sanctified by the believer, 
 else were your children illegitimate, but now are they 
 legitimate." Neither logic nor philology will admit of 
 this interpretation. For if the question be one of a 
 legal character only, in what sense can the believer add 
 to or take from the lawfulness of the marriage, so as to 
 make the children legitimate ? The children of heathen 
 
 he must not be regarded in the same light with a heathen, but as one 
 in a certain sense sanctified in consequence of the union pre-existing 
 between the pair. 
 
HOLY AND UNCLEAN NOT LEGAL TERMS. 235 
 
 parents are certainly as legitimate in the eye of the law 
 as they would be though one were a believer. And yet, 
 according to the passage, were it not for some favorable 
 influence of the believer, the children would be "un- 
 clean." This uncleanncss cannot, therefore, be illegiti- 
 macy, because it depends on that which cannot affect 
 the legality of the marriage. 
 
 But could the reasoning of the Apostle be reconciled 
 to this interpretation, the meaning of the words aza^apra 
 (unclean) and ayta (holy) cannot. For notwithstanding 
 the very frequent use of these terms in the Sacred 
 Scriptures, there is not one single place in which they 
 are used in such a sense. Besides there are specific 
 words in the Greek language for " legitimate and ille- 
 gitimate," which rendered it necessary for the Apostle to 
 use them in such a sense. Had he meant " illegitimate," 
 he would, beyond a doubt, have used the same word 
 ro^os (bastard) which he uses in his Epistle to the He- 
 brews, (chap. xii. 8.) And had he meant "legitimate," 
 there was also its proper word yvr^ito^- But referring to 
 the Gentile and Christian state, as the whole argument 
 goes to show, he used in their natural sense, the proper 
 w^ords to convey what he meant — axa^apra (unclean) and 
 ayta (holy.) Instead of requiring these terms to be 
 changed from their natural and proper sense, both the 
 nature of the question and the character of the argu- 
 ment require them to be received in the same sense 
 here, in which they are received in all other places in 
 the Sacred Scriptures, and hence to receive into the 
 fold of Christ all to whom the appelhition "holy" is 
 therein applied, though but one of the parents of such 
 children be a believer. 
 
236 CHILDREN OF CHRISTIANS HOLY SEED. 
 
 2. Others, wlio are opposed to Infant baptism, but 
 not willing to adopt an interpretation that changes 
 words so entirely from their usual meaning as to render 
 '' holy and unclean" by " legitimate and illegitimate," 
 would refer the reasoning of the Apostle to the relation 
 existing between all Christian parents and their chil- 
 dren — i. e. the unbeliever is sanctified by the believer, 
 else were the children of all Christian parents unclean 
 to them and must be put away from them. 
 
 This interpretation is inconsistent in itself, for it 
 opposes the idea that "holy and unclean" are used in 
 a legal sense, and adopts that of a religious one, yet 
 changes the religious sense of the terms employed, in 
 their general application to the children of all Chris- 
 tians. The argument is evidently confined to the case 
 of an unbeliever living in wedlock with a believer, and 
 the disadvantages that would accrue to the children, 
 by a separation of such parents from each other. Now 
 the argument being Jewish, the terms used must of 
 course be of the same character — i. e. according to 
 their general acceptation among that people on such 
 questions ; and how could the Apostle expect to be 
 understood, unless he used language as it was generally 
 understood by those to whom he addressed himself? 
 And if he does thus use it, what was understood by the 
 term "holy" when applied to children or to persons 
 among the Jews ? What did they mean when the com- 
 plaint was made, that the "holy seed" had mingled 
 itself with surrounding nations ? And what law was 
 that which was violated thereby, and which some of the 
 judaizing Christians in Corinth thought ought to be 
 
USUAL ACCEPTATION OF TERMS. 237 
 
 applied to the case that the Apostle was considering ? 
 And in that law, how are the terms "unclean" and 
 "holy," used? There is but one answer — all persons, 
 of whatever age, called "holy," belonged to the visible 
 community of God's people — were members of his 
 visible Church. How then, could they imagine the 
 Apostle to mean any thing else, than that these children 
 were to be regarded as all others, upon whom this appel- 
 lation had been bestowed ? His reasoning is just such 
 as we might expect one Christian Jew to use with 
 another, under such circumstances — employing lan- 
 guage familiar to both. And we are, therefore, bound 
 to give these terms their usual acceptation, and to 
 regard the children to whom they are applied, as num- 
 bered with the people of God, and hence entitled to 
 baptism. 
 
 It is a common thing to change the address from the 
 third to the second person, several instances of the 
 kind are to be found in the same chapter to which these 
 words belong — but the use of " holy" in any other than 
 a religious sense, is unknown in the Holy Scriptures. 
 Neither such a perversion of the first principles of 
 reasoning, as that, because religious parents are per- 
 mitted to live with their little children, therefore it 
 follows, believing and unbelieving husbands and wives 
 may live together if they choose. Nor that if you 
 dissolve such marriages then you must dissolve the 
 connection between parents and children. By thus 
 reversing the propositions you see there is no necessary 
 connection between the premises and conclusions, the 
 analogy fails, and such logic could satisfy no inquiring 
 
238 INFLUENCE FROM THE BELIEVER. 
 
 mind. It comes in direct conflict with the very prin- 
 ciple that gave rise to the scruple ; whichj in order to 
 protect the families and rising generation of the people 
 of God, from the corrupting influences of surrounding 
 nations, forbade marriages vv'ith them, and made it a con- 
 dition where such marriages had been contracted, that 
 the partner and children must be abandoned before such 
 an one could be received back among the holy seed. 
 
 But if Christian parents must all be separated from 
 their children, if you separate believing and infidel 
 husbands and wives, according to Dr. Dagg's new 
 theory, then the very end for which such a law was 
 enacted is perverted ; and the influence of pious parents 
 and their inculcation of the true religion among their 
 children, lost. Whereas the inference drawn by the 
 Apostle evidently is — if you put away unbelieving hus- 
 bands or wives, according to the law referred to, you 
 must put away their children also — for on the same 
 principle would they also be " unclean.'' But under 
 the Gospel it is different. Those marriages were lawful 
 in the first place, and the man and wife being one in a 
 certain sense, the act of the believer after their mar- 
 riage, redounds in part to the benefit of the other, and 
 entitles him to the privilege of remaining among the 
 people of God if he chooses. " For the unbelieving hus- 
 band is sanctified hy the wife^ a7id the unbelieving wife 
 is sanctified by the husband ; else luere your children 
 unclean^ but noiv are they holy.'' 
 
 It is strange that such a man as the Bev. Albert 
 Barnes could not see that it was by or through the 
 believing partner that a supposed religious disability was 
 
LITTLE CHILDREN CALLED SAINTS. 239 
 
 removed, and not the infidel state of the parent or sepa- 
 tion that would make the children civilly illegitimate^ 
 which would be a non sequiter in theory as it is in fact. 
 His own references show that the term ''unclean" is 
 used in a religious and not in a mere civil sense. And 
 the only rendering of the passage that harmonizes the 
 scope of the argument^ and the natural use of the terms 
 with a logical conclusion^ is that which shows that the 
 law against certain marriages in a former dispensation, 
 did not apply in this case, and that the believing and 
 unbelieving partner may continue together, and their 
 children be treated as "holy" — numbered among God's 
 people — and baptized. 
 
 And this rendering is confirmed by the fact that the 
 same Apostle addresses children as " saints " and 
 " hol3%" in other places, and recognizes them as be- 
 longing to the Church with their parents. In his 
 Epistles to the Church at Ephesus and at Colosse he 
 enumerates under the title of " saints" (aytot) and 
 "faithful" {riiGtoL) husbands, wives, masters, parents 
 and children — evidently intending to include the whole 
 of Christian families. 
 
 To the Church of Ephesus he writes : 
 
 Ephesians i. 1. " Paul an Apostle of Jesus Christ 
 by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus 
 and to the faithful in Christ Jesus." Now mark, that 
 this Epistle is written to the Church — to the " saints 
 and faithful," or members of a Christian body at Ephe- 
 sus. It reads in chapter vi. 1, 2, 3, 4, " Children, obey 
 your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy 
 father and mother, (which is the first commandment 
 
240 SUITED TO VERY YOUNG CHILDREN. 
 
 Tfith promise,) that it may be well with thee, and that 
 thou mayest live long on the earth. And ye fathers, 
 provoke not your children to wrath : but bring them 
 up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." 
 
 Here are children included among the members of a 
 Church, who are so young that they require the pious 
 training and guidance of their parents in the duties of 
 religion. Their parents are instructed how to bring 
 them up. Not to be so rigid and severe as to provoke 
 and develop feelings of anger and crossness in their 
 offspring, but to pursue a kind and gentle course of 
 discipline ; to exercise the authority and temper of 
 Christian principles towards them ; "to bring them up 
 in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." And thus 
 they would enable them to fulfill the expectations of 
 the Church, and prove themselves worthy of their high 
 calling and name. That such is the meaning of the 
 Apostle is clear from the general scope of the Epistle. 
 After explaining certain doctrines, he then gives some 
 advice and admonition of a practical character. And 
 for this end he specifies the duties that are peculiar to 
 every branch of a Christian family. He points out the 
 corresponding duties of husbands and wives, of masters 
 and servants, and of parents and children ; all of whom 
 are classed among the saints, and the motives held forth 
 to influence their conduct, such only as was of authority 
 among Christians. 
 
 That the Apostle did not intend to confine himself to 
 only those children who were verging into manhood and 
 womanhood, and were capable of making a creditable 
 profession for themselves, is obvious from the fact that 
 
FxVMILY RELIGION. 241 
 
 his words apply more especially to young children, than 
 to those farther advanced. To such as yet needed to 
 be trained "in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." 
 This would be no longer necessary to one capable of 
 such a profession by his own responsible agency. For 
 the time for such training and parental discipline with 
 such an one would be passed. 
 
 Besides, who can suppose that one guided by the 
 principles of Him who sa loved little children that he 
 was offended with others for attempting to keep them 
 away from him — would write for the benefit of every 
 other member of a household, and pass over the little 
 children in silence ! Not say a siagle word — or inti- 
 mate that the parent was bound in Christian love to his 
 dependent little ones, who had souls that needed train- 
 ing, and parental supervision, and heavenly instruction 
 as much as the older children who had grown up and 
 were able to choose for themselves ! What, think it 
 important that the corresponding duties of husband and 
 wife, master and servant, parent and older children 
 should be attended to ; but the younger children whose 
 tender minds are so susceptible of good impressions, and 
 on whose early training so much depends, not worthy 
 of mention, and passed over as farming no portion of 
 that race for whom the Saviour died ! believe it who 
 can. No — the Apostle had more of his Master's spirit, 
 than to go into a Christian family and give directions 
 for the benefit of every one in it, -and not think of the 
 '' little ones" — not even give them a kind look, for that 
 would have called forth some remark concerning them. 
 He acted far otherwise — he included all the children, 
 21 
 
242 ALL THE EAMILY FAITHFULS. 
 
 and especially the younger ones that still needed the 
 watchful care and kind instruction of their parents, and 
 he instructed their parents to train them in the disci- 
 pline and doctrine of Christ and his religion ; as all 
 little children should be trained. 
 
 And he calls them all '-faithfuls" — members of the 
 Christian Church. And commanded that they be in- 
 structed as Christians — that they be governed and 
 guided with the kindness and tenderness in the doc- 
 trines of the Gospel of Christ — not treated with harsh- 
 ness, or ruled with a tyranny that would provoke and 
 discourage them. To the same effect he wrote also to 
 the Church at Colosse. 
 
 CoLossiANS I. 1, 2. — ^'Paul, an Apostle of Jesus 
 CluHst hy the ivill of God, and Timotlieus our brother, 
 to the saints ayid faithful brethren iii Christ ivhich are 
 at Colosse.''' 
 
 Chapter hi. 20, 21. — " Children, obey your piarcnts 
 in all things : for this is well-])leasi7ig unto the Lord. 
 Fatliers, frovol^e not your children to anger, lest they be 
 discouraged.'' 
 
 The same principles are inculcated in regard to 
 children in this Epistle, that were inculcated in that 
 sent to the Church at Ephesus. Children are address- 
 ed and recognized as members of the Church, and 
 duties are laid down for their observance, and that of 
 their parents. They must be trained with the same 
 care and faithfulness as the children of the Ephesian 
 Christians. And the admonition addressed to them, 
 and penned for all, as soon as capable of understanding 
 it, that the highest Authority requires them to obey 
 
INSTRUCTION OF THE SIMPLEST KIND. i^4o 
 
 and honor their father and mother. Such instruction 
 gave more importance and authority to the teaching of 
 their parents, and hence aided them in their work of 
 training. But only the simplest form of truth is written 
 to the children — not things difficult to understand — not 
 such doctrines as require children to be grown up nearly 
 to manhood to comprehend. On the contrary, they are 
 among the most simple and easy duties that can be 
 taught the infant mind ; because they express the na- 
 tural feelings of an innocent age. The duty to obey its 
 mother is among the first things that a child learns. To 
 love and honor father and mother is a lesson soon felt 
 and understood. So that the children addressed, are 
 called upon to attend to the first, or what ought to be 
 the first duties, that are taught them. 
 
 The object the Apostle had in view, was doubtless 
 the due observance of the duties arising from the corre- 
 sponding relations of the different members of a Chris- 
 tian household — and the great end of making all the 
 children, young and old, Christians in heart as well as 
 in name. All of them should be trained in the way 
 that will promote that end, and therefore much care 
 and caution ought to be exercised, lest they be dis- 
 couraged by a want of prudence on the part of those to 
 whom this great work is committed. 
 
 And as these Epistles were written to members of the 
 Church, enforcing duties, on only Christian principles — 
 because "well-pleasing unto the Lord" — little children 
 included ; the membership of little children is therefore 
 recognized by St. Paul. 
 
 In conformity to the custom of the sacred writers in 
 
'2.44: SEPULCHRAL INSCRIPTIONS. 
 
 applying the terms "saints" and "faithfuls" to chil- 
 dren without regard to age, and as confirmation of the 
 above interpretation, we find from the sepulchral in- 
 scriptions of the early Christians that they applied the 
 same terms to those who belonged to the Christian 
 Church, whateyer might be their age. We select a few 
 of the many that are still preserved."^ 
 
 " A ' FAITHFUL,' descended from ancestors who were ' faith- 
 fuls/ here lies Zosimus : he lived two years, one month, and 
 twenty-five days/' 
 
 The symbol of a fish and anchor accompanies this in- 
 scription, which marks the age to which it belonged. 
 The fish and anchor as symbols, were in general us'e 
 among the Christians in the second century, and early 
 part of the third, and is approved by Clemens Alexan- 
 drinus, who vfrote about ninety years from the Apos- 
 tolic age. 
 
 This child was a "faithful," i. e. a Church-member at 
 two years of age. Descended from parents who were 
 "faithfuls," and wdio caused him to be baptized in in- 
 fancy, which shows how they understood the Apostolic 
 injunction. Again — 
 
 " Posthumius Euthenion, a faithful Christian brother, acxjom- 
 panied with the Holy Grace. On the day before his sixth birth- 
 day, early, he gave back that which he had received — his life. 
 He lived six years, and was buried the fifth of the ides of July on a 
 Thursday, on which day he was born : whose soul is with the Holy 
 One in peace. Erected to a well-deserving son, Posthumius, by 
 order of his grandmother Euthenla Fytista." 
 
 "^ Taken from Taylor's Facts and Kvidenees. 
 
INSCRIPTIONS OF PKIMITIVE CHRISTIANS. 245 
 
 This has the word IX0T2 — a "fish" at the top, and 
 forming an acrostic down the side, which was a private 
 mark of Christian sepulchres, to pi*€serve them from vio- 
 lation by the rude hands of the heathen in primitive 
 times. He is called a "faithful Christian brother," yet 
 died before he was six years old. 
 
 " Cyriacus, a ' faithful/ died aged aged eight days less than 
 three years.'' 
 
 " Eustafia, the mother places this in commemoration of her son 
 Polichronis, a faithful, who lived three years." 
 
 "To Pisentus, an innocent soul, who lived one year, eight 
 months, and thirteen days. Newly baptized, buried on the ides 
 of September, in peace." 
 
 " Achillia, newly baptized, is buried here, she died at the age 
 of one year and five months." 
 
 The figure of a dove accompanies this last inscription, 
 which was also a symbol of the second century, and de- 
 rived, says Taylor, from an earlier period. She, though 
 only one year and five months old, was baptized. 
 
 We might adduce many others of the same kind, all 
 preserved as belonging to the primitive and persecuting 
 days of Christianity, illustrating and testifying to the 
 truth, that the iVpostles and their first successors 
 baptized the young children of Christians. And that 
 the terms " holy and faithful," which are applied in the 
 Holy Scriptures to children w^ithout regard to age, were 
 continued to be used in the same way for several centu- 
 ries, and that church-membership and family baptisms 
 were never limited by age in the primitive Church. 
 
 The same use of the term "faithful" applied to the 
 directions of St. Paul to Titus respecting the qualifica- 
 
 21* 
 
246 QUALIFICATIONS NEEDFUL TO BISHOPS. 
 
 tions of a bishop, would give them an easy, natural in- 
 terpretation that would harmonize also with similar 
 directions to Timothy, and with what has been the prac- 
 tice of Christians in every age of the Church. 
 
 Titus i. 6, 7. — "If any be blameless, the husband of 
 one wife, having faithful children^ not accused of riot, 
 not unruly. For a bishop must be blameless as the 
 steward of God," &c. 
 
 Now the phrase ^'•faitlifid cliildren^' in the language 
 of the Holy Scriptures, literally means " believing chil- 
 dren." And if it be a necessanj qualificatmi for the 
 office of stewards and bishops of the Church that their 
 children be believers, in what sense must they be so ? 
 The parent cannot be held directly responsible for the 
 conversion of his children, nor even for the morality of 
 those who are grown up. And if such be the condition 
 on which offices in the Church are to be filled, how many 
 now, would have to lay aside their authority and enter 
 into a more humble sphere ! And what branch of the 
 Church has ever acted on the principle ? 
 
 But if the Apostle meant that the children of such 
 had been numbered among the "faithful" by baptism 
 and Christian nurture, and kept in proper subjection and 
 not allowed to run riot and grow up as heathen children, 
 then there would be a propriety in selecting such an one 
 as fitted to rule the Church. The term "faithful" would 
 be applied in its usual Scriptural sense, and the fitness 
 of the individual inferred from his own acts, not from 
 that which was beyond his control. 
 
 And this accords perfectly with what was written to 
 Timothy on the same subject : 
 
A FAITHFUL FATHEK. 247 
 
 1 Timothy iii. 4, 5. — " One that ruleth well his own 
 house, having his children in subjection with all gravity: 
 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how 
 shall he take, care of the Church of God.)" To "rule 
 well one's own house having his children in subjection 
 with all gravity," is just what every Christian should 
 do, and especially those who undertake to rule or take 
 care of the Church. And to do this they must " bring 
 up their children in the nurture and admonition of the 
 Lord," which is indeed only another form of words to 
 convey the same ideas. Where polygamy had been in- 
 dulged in before their conversion to Christianity, and 
 the children of such marriages were in part or in whole, 
 in the hands of heathen mothers, or on account of other 
 reasons the children were neglected and their religious 
 training not attended to by the parent, such an one was 
 unfitted for a ruler of the Church, both as an exemplar 
 and guide to the flock. Not so with him who had one 
 wife and a Christian family all living in harmony to- 
 gether, governed by Christian doctrine. He was worthy 
 of his position as a husband and father, showed good 
 fidelity as a Christian, did what he could for the salva- 
 tion of his children, ruled well his own house, and hence 
 so far, his faithfulness was a guaranty and pledge that 
 he would rule well the Church. And although some of 
 his children when grown up might not prove to be "faith- 
 fuls" worthy of such a father ; yet in that family one 
 might look for some of each class of such persons, as St. 
 John addresses in his General Epistle. 
 
 1 John, 12, 13. " I write unto you little children, 
 because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake. 
 
248 NATURAL DIVISION OF CHURCH MEMBERS. 
 
 I write unto you fathers, because ye have known him 
 that is from the beginning. I write unto you young 
 men, because ye have overcome the wicked one." 
 
 This is a general epistle written for all Christians, and 
 although "little children," is a phrase sometimes used 
 in a metaphorical sense by this Apostle, and in different 
 senses in this same Epistle, yet v/hen he divides Christians 
 into such natural divisions, as fathers, young men, and 
 little children, we can see no reason for supposing they 
 are metaphorical divisions. "T ivrite unto you little 
 cJiilch^en, because your sins are forgiven you for his 
 name's sake.'' '^ If it be asked, when were their sins 
 forgiven them?" The Ancient Church replies, "I 
 acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins," 
 and the Ancient Church was right, says Taylor. 
 Theselittle children were admitted into the Church by 
 baptism, administered for the remission of sins,"* (Mark 
 i. 4 ; Luke iii. 3 ; Acts ii. 38.) 
 
 And if the attentive reader will interpret the Holy 
 Scriptures in a natural way, according to the scope of 
 the writer, in those passages that refer to little children, 
 families and the subjects of baptism generally, he will 
 find infant membership and family religion particularly 
 pointed to, or more indistinctly implied, and takeyi for 
 granted throughout. But if he chooses to make excep- 
 tions of such passages, and seeks to evade such meaning, 
 and closes his ears against every other kind of evidence, 
 then nothing but an absolute specific command or ex- 
 ample will be received as authority — and he thereby will 
 set himself up as a teacher to the Holy Spirit, and 
 
 ■■^ See Taylor on Apostolic Baptism. 
 
CIRCUMCISION IN THE (lOSPEL CHURCH. 249 
 
 prescribe to Him the manner in Tvliicli He should conr- 
 municate the will of Heaven, and the only conditions 
 on which he will receive and obey his instructions ! 
 
 But such as are willing to be taught in God's way, 
 who are ready to receive the truth in any mode that He 
 may choose to convey it, and are ready to use all neces- 
 sary means to know the truth, we invite to a liberal and 
 impartial examination of the passages to which we have 
 referred, with the light now afforded them. And why 
 should we desire any thing beyond the will of God in this 
 matter ? If we wish to exclude little children, after 
 they have been received for two thousand years by 
 express law, into covenant with God, why not seek for 
 some positive precept or enactment by which that law 
 has been repealed, and their former privileges not 
 allowed under the New Dispensation ? And if this you 
 can not find, why attempt to limit the application of 
 passages to prove in a negative way, that they do not 
 necessarily imply that their former privileges are to be 
 continued, and therefore they shall not be continued ? 
 
 The first Christians did not understand the Apostles 
 to teach that their young children must no longer be 
 included in covenanted privileges with the chosen of 
 God ; for, as already noticed, they continued to circum- 
 cise them as they had done before they embraced the 
 gospel, and under the belief, too, (at least many^ if not 
 all^) that it was necessary to the new Church state. 
 For Avhen the gospel was embraced by the Gentiles, 
 "certain Jewish teachers" insisted that circumcision 
 must be observed by them also as the indispensable 
 duty of Christians. " Except ye be circumcised after 
 the paanner of Moses, ye cannot be saved," Acts xv. 1, 
 
250 PRACTICE OF FIRST CHRISTIANS. 
 
 Now liow could these men continue a religious rite 
 among their little children, which rite they now supposed 
 belonged to the Christian Church, and binding on 
 every member in it, if baptism had ever been denied 
 to their children, or they been taught that young 
 children were no longer entitled to Churclvmember- 
 ship ? And if they believed that they were still entitled 
 to membership, can any one suppose that they would 
 attend to a part of the Church order towards making 
 them members of it, and omit the remaining part — 
 baptism ? 
 
 Let us place this properly before us. The gospel 
 was first preached to the Jews, and confined to them 
 exclusively, (Acts x. xi, xiv.) until after it had been 
 proclaimed and spread throughout the Jews' territory. 
 Canaan, Judea, Samaria, and Galilee had all heard its 
 joyful sound, and thousands hearkened and believed. 
 The Churches for some years, therefore, were composed 
 exclusively of Jewish believers. They believed Jesus 
 to be the true Messiah, and received him as the prom- 
 ised Saviour of the world. And they entered into the 
 Christian covenant by baptism ; but what became of 
 their young children who were with them under the old 
 covenant ? Did they leave them behind ? Or did they 
 bring them with themselves into the Christian covenant? 
 Is anything written, as said or done, that would lead 
 them to suppose that their young children were no 
 longer to be regarded as having any connection with 
 the Church? Nothing is recorded to that efiect: on 
 the contrary, they continued to circumcise them as they 
 had always done, which shows they still regarded them 
 as entitled to Church-membership ; for they regarded 
 
FIRST COUNCIL 01^ THE CHURCH. 251 
 
 the Christian Church as a continuation or enhargement 
 of their former Church, and Christian rites as additional 
 ceremonies in this more enlarged and perfect state. 
 Under this belief must they not have baptized all who 
 were uncircumcised, unless prohibited by the Apostles? 
 And if prohibited from baptism, why is nothing said about 
 it, and yet so much contention about circumcision ? 
 Would it not be marvellous for a Jew, with all his love 
 for the customs and principles of his fathers, to keep 
 perfect silence, if informed that his little children must 
 be excluded from the Gospel covenant? And yet we 
 hear not of a single complaint on this subject from the 
 beginning to the end of the New Testament. Could this 
 have been so had their children been refused baptism ? 
 
 Such was the zeal with which certain believers among 
 them contended for the necessity of circumcision to 
 Gentile Christians, that it was made a matter of much 
 disputation, and a Council called to settle it : which de- 
 cided in the negative, and letters then sent by messen- 
 gers to different places informing Gentile Christians 
 that Mosaic ceremonies were not binding upon them ; 
 but recommending that they should follow that which 
 will promote the peace of the Church — i. e. "to abstain 
 from meats offered to idols, from blood, and from things 
 strangled, and from fornication."* Nothing is said in 
 regard to any rite or duty peculiarly Christian, because 
 there -was no disagreement about anything peculiar to 
 the Christian system. To this the Gentiles had strictly 
 conformed. Baptism is not mentioned, because this 
 they had received, and there was no disputation about 
 
 ■--Act? XV. 1, 29. 
 
252 INFANT MEMBERSHIP IMPLIED. 
 
 it ; nor vsliould we have heard anything about circum- 
 cision had they been unanimous on that point as 
 they were in regard to baptism. Had the Gentiles 
 hesitated to baptize their children, or the Apostles 
 refused it previously to the children of Jewish Chris- 
 tians, there Avould have been room or cause for as much 
 controversy about baptism as about circumcision. But 
 there is not one word on record to show that the Apos- 
 tles or any one else ever taught them to regard their 
 children as excluded from the Christian covenant.^" 
 On the contrary, gospel liberty permitted the Jewish 
 believers to observe the whole lavv^ of Moses as long as 
 it was not substituted for Christ, nor made obligatory on 
 the Gentile Christians. When, however, they began to 
 substitute works for grace, and place Moses before 
 Christ, a warning voice was quickly raised, and the evils 
 pointed out. 
 
 If any one doubts the adherence of Jewish believers 
 to circumcision, even after the decision of the Council, 
 (Acts XV.) that forbade them to imj^ose it on the Gen- 
 tiles, let him turn to the 21st chapter of Acts and read 
 what St. James and the Elders say to the Apostle Paul 
 touching this point, (verses 21, 22.) " Thou seest, 
 brother, how many thousandsf (tens of thousands) of 
 the Jews there are which believe, and they are all zeal- 
 ous of the law ; and they are infornicd of thee that thou 
 teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to 
 
 ^>' The fact that tliey urged circumcision on the Gentile converts, 
 proves thej^ regarded circumcision as necessary to all Christians and 
 young children as members, because circumcision "was as binding on 
 children as on adults. 
 
 t ^xjpcaSos, "myriads." 
 
LIBERTY UNDER THE GOSPEL. 253 
 
 forsake Moses — saying that they ought not to circum- 
 cise their children, neither walk after the customs. 
 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come 
 together, for they will hear that thou art come." See 
 how soon an excitement is produced by the rumor that 
 the Apostle taught, their children need not be circum- 
 cised. 
 
 This visit to Jerusalem was made by St. Paul, accord- 
 ing to the best chronologers,* about twenty- five years 
 after the first preaching of St. Peter, and the conversion 
 of the three thousand. The Jewish converts had now, as 
 we learn, increased to many thousands, and were ^' all 
 zealous of the law" of Moses. A report that the Apos- 
 tle Paul had been teaching their brethren scattered 
 among the Gentiles, that "they ought not to circumcise 
 their children, nor observe their customs," had caused 
 much excitement : to allay which, the Apostle, by ad- 
 vice, conforms publicly to a certain Jewish 'rite, (verses 
 23, 27,) to satisfy the Jews that he was not an enemy 
 to Moses rightly understood. For if he could observe 
 the ritual law Jdmself, it ought to convince them that 
 he would not forbid others to do the same under proper 
 circumstances, and that he himself lived according to 
 the real requirements of Moses — according to the very 
 thing shadowed forth by him. 
 
 By this act, we learn there is nothing in the ritual 
 law that a conscientious Christian might not observe, 
 provided, he in no way substituted it for the Gospel. It 
 was of course unnecessary to the Christian, because the 
 ritual law was merely the shadow of the more substan- 
 ■<■ Home, Whitby, Townsend, and others. 
 
 22 
 
251 GOSPEL MADE MORE EXPLICIT. 
 
 tial things to come Bnder Christ. And this he did not 
 hesitate to declare, (Col. ii. Heb. x.) and to show that 
 justification was by faith, and not by the deeds of the 
 law. " By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justi- 
 fied," (Rom. iii. 20,) was the tenor of his language. 
 "A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the 
 law." (28th verse.) He proved to them also from the 
 case of Abraham that " Christ is the end of the law for 
 righteousness, to every one that believeth." (Rom. x. 
 4.) And in all suitable Avays did he labor to show the 
 use of the law, moral and ritual, and to discourage too 
 strong an attachment for the law of ceremonies, forbid- 
 ding even its observance, if looked to for justification. 
 (Gal. V. 26.) " Christ is become of no efi'ect unto you 
 whosoever of you are justified by the law ; you are 
 fallen from grace." .... "For in Christ Jesus 
 neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcis- 
 ion, but faith which worketh by love." 
 
 Can any one suppose that an Apostle who was so 
 constant and unwearied in his efforts to teach, and to 
 keep the minds of Christians rightly informed as to the 
 nature and uses of the law, would permit the Jewish 
 Christians to circumcise their children under a belief 
 that they still stood in the same relation to the Church 
 they always had done, and never correct their delusion, 
 if this had been one ? Can any one, we repeat, believe 
 that such a man as the Apostle Paul, and all the Apos- 
 tles would so dissemble with the first Christians as to 
 indulge them in an erroneous belief of this kind, and 
 never correct it? It is impossible. Common honesty — 
 their course in regard to every other error, to say no- 
 
GENERAL SUMMARY. 255 
 
 thing of piety, forbid the supposition. Yet where do 
 we find a single sentence, in all the disputes about cir- 
 cumcision, or in all the instructions given in regard to 
 the law, its uses, and reasons for its discontinuance, or 
 in Christ's commission to his Apostles, or his remarks 
 about little children, that even intimates that there is 
 to be any change in regard to them under the Gospel 
 dispensation ? Nowhere, Such an intimation is not to 
 be found in the sacred record. Therefore Christians 
 are bound by testimony, positive and negative in its 
 character — historical, circumstantial, and inspired — to 
 continue infant membership and family religion in the 
 Church of God. 
 
 1. It IS A FACT, that Infant baptism was the acknow- 
 ledged doctrine and common practice of the Christian 
 Church in the next age after the Apostles. 
 
 2. It is a fact, that Infant baptism was the received 
 doctrine and usage of Christians before the books of the 
 New Testament had been all generally received among 
 the various Churches, and the question of their inspira- 
 tion settled. 
 
 3. It is a fact, that Christian cotemporaries of the 
 Apostles, and the Primitive Fathers generally, taught 
 that " all ages, young and old, were corrupt through. 
 the infection of original sin, and that baptism was neces- 
 sary to all." 
 
 4. It is a fact, that Infant baptism had the consen- 
 tient testimony of all antiquity to its validity ; that this 
 w^as believed "everywhere, always, by all," in the Prim- 
 itive Church, so far as anything to the contrary has 
 been found on record. 
 
256 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 5. It is a fact, tliat the most noted of the early 
 Christian Fatliers taught that baptism had superseded 
 circumcision — tluit it liekl the same place under the New 
 Dispensation which eircuincision held under the old, 
 and hence they called baptism '• Cliristian circumcision." 
 
 6. It is a fact, that the first Christians did for some 
 time keep both the old Sabbath and the Lord's day, and 
 practiced both baptism and circumcision ; and that cir- 
 cumcision and the Jewish Sabbath gradually ceased to 
 be observed in the Church, leaving only baptism and 
 the Lord's day remaining. Therefore, as an initiatory 
 rite, baptism has superseded circumcision; and as a day 
 of rest, the Lord's day has superseded the old Sabbath. 
 And, 
 
 7. It has been shown, that the Christian Church is 
 the continuation of the Abraharaic Covenant of Grace, 
 (Gal. iii. 15, 17; Matt. xxi. 43; Rom. xi. 17, 18, and 
 others,) enlarged in its application and more spiritual 
 in its discipline. Hence, baptism holds the same j^lcLc^^t 
 in the same Churchy and fulfills the same spiritual ends 
 of circumcision, and by virtue of the right of little chil- 
 dren to circumcision, they have an unquestionahle legal 
 right to baptism. 
 
 8. It has been shown, that the first Christians 
 received the Gospel as the fulfilment of the promises 
 made to their fathers, and the continuation and perfect- 
 ing of that which was already begun — hence continued 
 the circumcision of their little children and other rites 
 of the Jewish Church, which proves that they still re- 
 garded little children as members, which they would not 
 have done if baptism had teen denied them. And, 
 
GENERAL SCJMMARY. 257 
 
 9. It has been shown, that the mistake of Hebrew 
 Christians in supposing that with the continuation of 
 the Abrahamic Covenant of Grace, the Mosaic economy 
 was also to be continued under the Gospel Dispensation, 
 would have been corrected in the beginning, if when 
 they passed into the Gospel Dispensation by baptism, 
 their little children were not allowed to pass with them — 
 refused entrance but with the remark, " They cannot be 
 baptized." A thing so contrary to the feelings, educa- 
 tion, and practice of a Jew, must have called up dis- 
 cussion in regard to circumcision and the baptism of 
 little children in the commencement of the New Dispen- 
 sation. Instead of which, the circumcision of little 
 children was quietly continued for some years, and 
 when Gentile converts were brought into the Church, the 
 same was urged upon them also, as a necessary Christian 
 duty. Had all the little children circumcised up to this 
 time been refused baptism, how the most strict adherent 
 to Moses could suppose that two rites, so long sepa- 
 rated, must now be united, is unaccountable. But admit 
 that their little ones had also been baptized, then silence 
 on the subject down to that time, and the union of the 
 two rites on Gentile converts, would be natural. And, 
 
 10. We have seen, that instead of closing the door 
 of his kingdom against little children, that the Saviour 
 himself rebuked those who attempted to keep the little 
 ones from him when on earth, and took them up in his 
 arms and blessed them, and said, "Of such is the kino-- 
 dom of God." And, 
 
 11. We have seen, that instead of limitinc; their 
 privileges, and excluding them from his covenant under 
 
 22* 
 
258 GENERAL SUMxMARY. 
 
 the Gospel Dispensation, the Saviour issued his commis- 
 sion to the Apostles in terms of the^ widest possible 
 comprehension, embracing all nations, and when con- 
 strued according to the established laws of interpreting 
 ancient writings, applying to little children as strictly as 
 to adults. And, 
 
 12. We have seen, that in the first sermon preached 
 under the Gospel Dispensation, the promise made to 
 children with their parents, was referred to by St. Pe- 
 ter, To the inquiring multitude, he said, " The promise 
 is to you and to your children," &c. And, 
 
 13. We have seen, that the Apostles baptized whole 
 families, without respect to age, so far as the record 
 shows ; for family baptisms ar^ recorded as if a usual 
 thing, and only the names of the heads of 'them men- 
 tioned, as if they alone were the responsible agents. 
 And, 
 
 14. We have seen, that children are included in the 
 Epistles written to the Churches, and instructions given 
 them, and to their parents concerning them ; and that 
 the same appellation of "faithfuls" and "holy" are ap- 
 plied to them that are applied to other members of the 
 Church. 
 
 Finally, the faithfulness of the parent in " bringing 
 up his children in the nurture and admonition of the 
 Lord," was regarded by St. Paul as a necessary qualifi- 
 cation for the appointment to the office of a ruler in the 
 Church. 
 
 Who, therefore, can be surprised at finding the bap- 
 tism of little children continuing to be the common prac- 
 tice of the next generation after the Apostles ? 
 
GENERAL SUMMARY. 269 
 
 AVlietlier we go up the stream from the present to 
 the Apostolic age, we shall find young children received 
 into the Church during every stage of our ascent, — or 
 whether we start from the days of Abraham and come 
 down it, we shall find them made members of the 
 Church at every succeeding step. And on reaching 
 the days of the Saviour, instead of the slightest intima- 
 tion that a change is then to take place, every thing is 
 of the opposite character. His own words and acts, 
 and the words and acts of the Apostles, rightly con- 
 strued, show that young children are still to be received 
 and doubtless were received. And in passing into the 
 next age, we find their baptism common — and not one 
 calling in question the authority for it. Were we 
 therefore to admit that the Holy Scriptures are silent 
 on the subject, (which they certainly are not, when 
 rightly construed,) how shall we account for the fact 
 that in following the stream of time, we find little 
 children in the Church until we reach the Apostolic age, 
 and then again as soon as we leave it ? Suppose, in 
 ascending a river, we were to find in its waters certain 
 peculiar qualities till we reach a certain place through 
 which we could not pass, and were obliged to travel by 
 land some miles before we came to the river again, but 
 at the point at which we entered, find its waters possess- 
 ing the same peculiar qualities that we marked in them 
 at the time we left them, should we not conclude that 
 they possessed the same peculiar qualities between these 
 two points ? .^ould we doubt it ? 
 
 Now. apply this to the case in hand. The opposers of 
 Infant baptism must admit that from the time of Abra- 
 
260 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 ham to that of Christ, young children were received 
 into covenant with God— and again, that from the first 
 age after the Apostles down to the present time, they 
 have been received into the Church. What then may 
 we infer was probably the case during the time the 
 Apostles lived ? Were the qualities of the waters the 
 same while passing over that short space, which they 
 were just before, and just afterwards ; or were they dif- 
 ferent between these points and precisely the same 
 again at them ? Were little children made members of 
 the Church just before, and again, just after the Apos- 
 tolic age, but excluded during that century, and not one 
 word left on record to inform us of the fact? Nay, 
 the language of the record rightly construed, informs 
 us in various places, that little children were received 
 into the Church during that century as well as every 
 other, that they have always been precious in the sight 
 of God, and ever permitted to form a part of His pecu- 
 liar people. 
 
 1. And why not? If he who adds sins of his own 
 to his original sin, shall on repentance have all his sins 
 washed away, both actual and original, may not he who 
 has committed no sin of his own have his original sin 
 washed away? Is it necessary to add to original sin 
 actual sins, to repent of, before one can have the remis- 
 sion of any sin ? Think for a moment — we are all born 
 in sin, inheritors of Adam's fallen nature, " shapen in 
 in iniquity," and "by nature the children of wrath;" — 
 every child, therefore, born into the world^iias original, 
 or birth sin; and this, which is the root and foundation 
 of actual sin, needs a remedy and the appliances of 
 
ORIGINAL AND ACTUAL SINS. 261 
 
 Gospel grace, as much as do the effects flowing from it. 
 Baptism has been ordained by Christ as the means or 
 visible sign of the washing away of all sin: why tlien 
 withhold it from those involved in original sin, because 
 they have not superadded to it actual sins ? 
 
 If to every unconscious babe of Adam's descendants 
 original sin has been transmitted, and this must be 
 repented of before it can be pardoned, what becomes 
 of all who die before they commit actual sins ? Do they 
 die unpardoned? and are all infants lost? If not, and 
 Christ has atoned for their original sin, why withhold 
 the appliances of Gospel grace and the blessings vouch- 
 safed to his redeemed ones? If repentance and faith 
 after actual sin, entitle one to the seal of the forgive- 
 ness of all sin actual and original, certainly they who 
 have committed no actual sin of their own of which to 
 repent, ought to be entitled to the seal of forgiveness of 
 original sin, and all the blessings accompanying God's 
 holy ordinances when rightly observed. 
 
 Christ died to redeem little children as well as adults. 
 The sin of the first Adam passed upon all, and the pro- 
 vision made in the second Adam was commensurate with 
 the evils of the first. "As by the offence of one, judg- 
 ment came upon all .men to condemnation, even so by 
 the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all 
 men unto justification of life. For as by one man's 
 disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obe- 
 dience of one shall many be made righteous. Where 
 sin abounded grace did much more abound." Rom. v. 
 18, 19, 20. Hence the remedy provided is co-extensive 
 with the evil entailed, and offered as a free gift to all. 
 
262 THE CHURCH A NURSERY. 
 
 And little children being involved in the sin of the first 
 Adam, are therefore included in the provision made by 
 the second. And, 
 
 For the more effectual application of the remedy, 
 God instituted his church as a nursery or school, and 
 ordained means whereby the graces and gifts of the 
 Holy Spirit are nurtured and made more effective in 
 enlivening and invigorating the spiritual powers of the 
 soul, to fit it for his spiritual kingdom. Into this nur- 
 sery all are brought b}^ baptism, and none can need its 
 protecting care and aid more than little children; and 
 the sooner they are taken into it, and the more faith- 
 fully they are nurtured and instructed in the ways of 
 godliness, the more certainly will they become fitted for 
 that spiritual church for which this on earth was 
 founded. Had half the time and labor consumed in 
 discussions and theory-making about the effects of bap- 
 tism, been devoted to the duties implied and the faithful 
 discharge of the obligations imposed, a thousandfold 
 greater would have been the benefits conferred on the 
 church. 
 
 The great end, doubtless, of all the institutions of our 
 blessed Redeemer, is to save the souls of fallen men. 
 For this he came to earth and died; for this he founded 
 a church and ordained means of grace; and the more 
 faithfully we adhere to the order that he has authorized, 
 and use the means that he has appointed, the more suc- 
 cessful will every one bo. in fitting himself and his children 
 for the kingdom of heaven. The more diligently we 
 instruct our children, and the more tenderly we lead 
 them on in the duties of religion; the more cautiously 
 
THE saviour's ESTIMATION OF BAPTISM. 268 
 
 "we preserve them from evil, and the more thoroughly 
 we imbue them with the principles and practices of his 
 church; the more certain will be our success in making 
 them truly Christians. Not by trusting to the letter 
 and opus operatum of ordinances, but looking to and in- 
 voking the accompanying influence of the Holy Spirit 
 on our efforts. 
 
 To affirm that children can be trained in the ways of 
 religion as well out of the church as in it, is the same as 
 to affirm that men can be saved as well without a church 
 as Avith one. It is virtually impeaching the wisdom of 
 God in organizing a church at all. And to ask, as some 
 sneeringly do, " What good can baptism do little child- 
 ren?" is to ask, what good it can do an adult? For 
 there is no reason why it may not do as much for one 
 age as another. Hence the implied objection would 
 make it unnecessary to any one. And yet our Saviour 
 says, "Except a man," any one (sav fxiq tis) "be born of 
 water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the king- 
 dom of God." 
 
 Now which shall rule us, the words of Christ, or heed- 
 less objectors? He certainly regarded baptism of great 
 importance, or he would not have made it necessary " to 
 enter into his kingdom." And whether he meant his 
 kingdom on earth or in heaven, or included both, does 
 not affect the authority of his words, or the obligations 
 which they impose upon every one. Neither can differ- 
 ence of opinion on the effects of baptism, affect its neces- 
 sity and importance where it can be had. Whether it 
 regenerates men in a lower sense, or is the sign of 
 regeneration in a higher sense — whether it washes away 
 
264 REGENERATION AND CONVERSION. 
 
 original sin in infants and applies to them the redemp- 
 tion of Christ, thus transferring them from under the 
 condemnation of the first Adam to the liberty and bless- 
 ings of the second — or whether it is only the sign and 
 outward recognition of the washing away of sin, and of the 
 application of Christ's atonement, certifying to them 
 their redemption, and placing them in new relations to 
 God ; its author is the same^ and that being Divine, no man 
 may lay it aside. Even the lowest theory in regard to 
 its office, m.ay possess an importance in the economy of 
 grace far beyond our highest conceptions. 
 
 Because one " believes the child baptized is washed 
 from the guilt of original sin, and grafted into the mys- 
 tical body of Christ and made a partaker of the Spirit," 
 — and he calls this "regeneration and the new birth," — 
 and when a penitent soul turns with all his heart from 
 sin and Satan to God andholiness, this he calls " con- 
 version," which, he says "may take place before or 
 after regeneration;" and another believes regeneration 
 includes conversion; it does not follow that there is no 
 regeneration or conversion.* Nor does it follow, because 
 there are differences of opinion in regard to the effects 
 of baptism on adult age, that there is no authority for 
 the baptism of that age. On the same principle, differ- 
 ences of opinion in regard to the effects of infant bap- 
 tism, constitute no valid objection to the authority of 
 the rite itself. All agree that baptism puts the child 
 into a new state — removes it from its birth-state of 
 wratli, into the state of the cliildren of grace — makes 
 it a member of Christ's visible church — suil-ounds it 
 
 ■■'■ SiuTHMicnt of Ros])onsibility. 
 
FULFILLMENT OF CONDITIONS NECESSARY. 265 
 
 with all the means of grace — secures to it the covenant 
 seal and pledges of forgiveness of all sin; and that if 
 the conditions of this covenant engagement are fulfilled, 
 it will finally be admitted into the kingdom of God. 
 
 Here is enough to fill every heart with the deepest 
 solicitude for the baptism of their little ones; and if 
 greater blessings still, as some suppose, accompany the 
 ordinance, then greater, if possible, ought to be that 
 solicitude. And if so much interest be justly felt, in 
 regard to bringing them into covenant relations with God, 
 deeper and greater still should be our anxiety for the 
 fulfillment of every condition expressed or implied in 
 that covenant. For as an estate may be made over to 
 a minor on conditions and promises made for him by his 
 guardian, and the covenant be signed and sealed, and 
 the estate called by his name, and spoken of as his, yet 
 if he violates the conditions, he forfeits the possession ! 
 which may be owing chiefly to the neglect of the guar- 
 dian in instructing him, and impressing his mind with 
 the importance of what was involved, and the nature of 
 the conditions to be fulfilled. 
 
 So when parents bring their little children to baptism, 
 they should remember that it is to make them members 
 of Christ's church and heirs of the kingdom of heaven ; 
 that for them and in their names they promise to fulfill 
 all the duties of a member of his church, to wit, "bring 
 them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." 
 So train and instruct them in the doctrines and prac- 
 tices of his religion, that by the blessings of the Holy 
 Spirit, they shall never depart from them, but fulfill 
 all the conditions of their heirship. For this end, let 
 
266 GRADES OF MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 the first impressions made upon their tender minds be 
 heavenly in their nature. Preserve them from evil 
 influences without, and bring the appliances of gospel 
 grace with their quickening and sanctifying influences 
 through the Spirit to bear upon their impressible hearts 
 from infancy to manhood. Lead them on from one 
 degree of knowledge to another. Instruct them in first 
 principles and then in higher branches. Show them the 
 privileges and advantages of being a member of Christ's 
 church. Appeal to them as members, and gradually 
 prepare them to understand and rightly appreciate the 
 responsibility of their membership. 
 
 It does not follow that because one is a member of 
 Christ's church, he is therefore qualified for all its 
 duties or can enjoy all the privileges of membership, 
 any more than because one is a citizen of our country, 
 therefore he enjoys all the privileges of citizenship. A 
 child enjoys all the essential rights of a citizen; has a 
 claim to the protection and all the privileges common 
 to the citizens of his country, but he has not the right 
 to vote in the election of the rulers of his country before 
 he is twenty-one years of age, nor to exercise other 
 functions dependent on conditions which he cannot or 
 has not fulfilled. So infant members of the church 
 enjoy all the essential rights of its covenanted privi- 
 leges — its seal and promises, the right of instruction, 
 means of grace and fostering care. But they are not 
 qualified for the higher privileges of adult members, to 
 vote in the councils of the church, and to partake of 
 the Lord's supper profitably — not being able to '' dis- 
 cern the Lord's body" by faith. 1 Cor. xi. 29; which 
 
IMPORTANCE OF FAITHFUL TRAINING. 2^7 
 
 is an important privilege, and for which all diligence 
 should be used to prepare them as soon as possible. 
 
 It has been supposed by some, that because infants 
 partook of the passover at its first institution, which was 
 to be a commemorative rite, therefore the sacrament 
 of the supper might be given to them. But it does not 
 appear that the children of the Jews partook of the pass- 
 over after they were settled in Canaan till after twelve 
 years of age. Such was the custom in our Saviour's 
 time."^ The passover, however, was a part of the Mosaic 
 covenant not of the Abrahamic, and therefore does not 
 stand on the same ground with circumcision. From the 
 nature of things, the church on earth must be composed 
 of various classes of members, consisting not only of 
 different degrees of growth in grace, but of some abso- 
 lutely bad as well as good. This our Saviour told us 
 would be the case, and compared his church to a "net 
 that was cast into the sea and gathered of every kind, 
 which when it was full they drew to shore, and sat down 
 and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad 
 away." St. Matt. xiii. 47, 48. And the proportion of 
 the good to the bad of every family gathered into this 
 net, will depend, doubtless, more upon the faithfulness 
 of the parents in training up their children than upon 
 any other earthly means. Nothing human has so much 
 influence on the formation of character in after life as 
 faithful training in childhood and early youth. The 
 future man is generally formed and fashioned in the 
 nursery. The moral and religious sentiments there in- 
 stilled into the minds of our children accompany them 
 * St. Luke ii. 41, 42. 
 
268 IMPORTANCE OF FAITHFUL TRAINING. 
 
 through life. If shaken off at any time, they will return 
 again, unless our children are thrown under contrary in- 
 fluence and teaching before their characters are formed. 
 It sometimes happens that they are sent from under the 
 parental roof, and exposed to infidel and immoral influ- 
 ences so young, that all that had been done for them in 
 earlier years is lost. 
 
 But this is like leaving any other important work 
 unfinished. If we w^ould establish them in the doctrines 
 and habits of morality and religion, we must traiJi thejn 
 up to manhood and womanhood. Not begin to train them 
 and stop before their habits are half formed, but con- 
 tinue the good work till it is completed, until they are 
 confirmed in the ways of truth. To train a child a few 
 years and give it up unto its own heart's desires, or 
 expose it to evil influences, is like rolling a stone half 
 up the mountain side, and leaving it to itself to roll 
 down again to its base. Fallen nature needs training 
 up to manhood, as the stone should be rolled onward till 
 it reaches the mountain top and rests on the plain above 
 where we would have it placed, if we would crown our 
 efi"orts with success. How many are ruined because 
 taken from under the pious nurture of the mother, or 
 catechetical class of the minister, before confirmed in 
 the doctrines and duties of religion ! 
 
 All experience testifies to the importance of training 
 children in the principles and practices which we would 
 have them to continue through life. But to have them 
 baptized, and then neglect to train them in the princi- 
 ples and according to the conditions stipulated, is virtu- 
 ally to renounce their baptism. It is like making a 
 
IMPORTANCE OF FAITHFUL TRAINING. 269 
 
 a minor an heir to an estate, as already referred to, and 
 then refusing the aid necessary to enable him to comply 
 with the conditions of its final possession. And it is for 
 this reason that the church of God in every age has 
 required some security for the faithful training in the 
 Tvays of the Lord the little ones brought to it for bap- 
 tism ; that the members of the church who bring their 
 infant children to dedicate them to God in his church, 
 and make them members of the same, shall pledge 
 themselves to train them as such members ought to be 
 trained. The Protestant Episcopal Church in this 
 country requires, where it can be had, additional secu- 
 rity to that of the parents ; that for every male child 
 two male securities and one female, and for every 
 female child two female securities and one male; which 
 are called " God-fathers and God-mothers," or " sure- 
 ties." So important does she hold the proper training 
 of her infant members, that she provides a substitute 
 and aid to the parents, in the case of their death or 
 neglect of this great duty. And all necessary instruc- 
 tion and care beyond this, devolve immediately upon 
 her authorized ministers. 
 
 Were it not that baptism is only the beginning — the 
 initiatory of a great and glorious inheritance, requirino- 
 future corresponding action, we might baptize every 
 child we meet in the street, if permitted, for all have 
 been redeemed by Christ ; but why receive into a cove- 
 nant those for whom there is no reason to hope they 
 will ever comply with its conditions or enjoy any lasting 
 benefit from it ? Why encourage the abuse, and bring 
 into disrepute things sacred, that may be even trampled 
 
 23=^ 
 
270 IMPORTANCE OF FAITHFUL TRAIKIKG. 
 
 upon and cast away by those to whom they are given ? 
 In cases of danger, where death, instead of a long life* 
 and the prospect of a better state of things, seems to be 
 the only alternative, we baptize without sureties, if 
 necessary, because we would not withhold from the 
 dying any benefit conferred by the rite itself. And if 
 the child live, we use all diligence to secure for it after- 
 wards the necessary nurture and instruction of a child 
 of the church. 
 
 But in all cases where there is the ordinary prospect 
 of continued life in the child, it should be presented for 
 baptism by pious sponsors, who conscientiously intend 
 to fulfill the duties required at their hands by the 
 Church. If the parents are not such themselves, and 
 wish their children to be baptized, they should procure 
 responsible persons, and pledge themselves to give up 
 these children to the religious training of them who shall 
 consent to act in their places, and fulfill the correspond- 
 ing duties ; which is a serious undertaking, and ought 
 be w^ell weighed by every sponsor before such responsi- 
 bility is assumed. While we withhold baptism from 
 none, when there is the hope that it will be properly 
 appreciated, and prove a final blessing ; important as it 
 is, we cannot anticipate for little ones much permanent 
 good, when they have not faithful parents, natural or 
 adopted, who set the example, and faithfully teach them 
 the precepts of Christians ; who feel the responsibility 
 resting upon them, and endeavor faithfully to discharge 
 it. 
 
 Alas ! how often do we find that even members of 
 the Church dedicate their children to God in infancy, 
 
IMPORTAJ<CE OF FAITHFUL TRAINING. 271 
 
 and promise to his Church in his presence, to train them 
 in the duties and doctrines of the Church, afterwards 
 give up these same children to the care and teaching 
 of those who they know hoki doctrines contrary to those 
 they pledged themselves to teach them ! For the sake of 
 some vain accomplishment, or some supposed worldly 
 gain, the immortal soul of the child dedicated to God, is 
 subjected to influences of dangerous tendency, and its 
 religious principles budding into life, rooted up and 
 supplanted with the briars and thorns of this world, or 
 the corrupt theory of a corrupt Church ! How a parent, 
 conscious of the responsibility of his position, having 
 dedicated his child to God in baptism, and made it 
 a member of a Church, and promised to bring it 
 up in the doctrines and principles of that Church, 
 can then send it away to be trained by those who de- 
 nounce that Church, and teach doctrines contrary to 
 and subversive of those which he is pledged before G-od 
 and man to instill into its mind, we cannot reconcile on 
 Christian principles. Yet there are Protestants, who 
 have renounced the errors of Popery, and freed them- 
 selves from its galling yoke of bondage, who send their 
 children to its schools, where they may be instructed 
 in the same errors and imbued with the same principles 
 which they have renounced and hold to be dangerous to 
 the souls and bodies of men. 
 
 This is one of the strange things in this strange age of 
 moral and religious culture. The Roman Church is 
 making converts almost daily by means of its schools ; 
 and these schools, as every one knows who has had 
 the opportunity to examine their pupils, are inferior. 
 
272 IMPORTANCE OF FAITHFUL TRAINING. 
 
 in point of tJiorough literary instructiorf, to the best 
 grade of Protestant schools. Yet parents and guar- 
 dians of Protestant children persist in patronizing them, 
 and leaving our own schools to languish ! And for this 
 we have never heard but two reasons assigned. 
 
 The first is, that Roman Catholic schools are a little 
 cheaper than other schools. But shall a Christian man 
 endanger the soul of his child, for such a considera- 
 tion as this ? Will he sell the soul of his child, or 
 run the risk of its being sold for a few dollars ! 
 Is the body worth so much more than the soul 
 that we can risk the sacrifice of the eternal interests 
 of the latter for some slight benefit to the former? 
 Doubtless the chief reason for making these schools 
 cheaper, is to tempt the cupidity of men and draw in 
 Protestant children for the purpose of proselyting them. 
 And to all such as are likely to be caught by such bait 
 as "this, we would say, first make the estimate of how 
 much you may save on the one hand, and see if you 
 cannot live without it ? Then consider how much, on 
 the other hand, may be the loss of yourself and chil- 
 dren at the bar of Judgment, and whether the gain will 
 equal your final loss. 
 
 The other reason is, that their children will be more 
 secluded from company and more closely watched. If 
 this be an object, why not keep them at home, and em- 
 ploy a governess ? or send them to some boarding or 
 family school in the country, and make the request of 
 the teacher to keep them from society? We know 
 many such schools, in which they will learn as little 
 evil and more good than in a Roman Convent. They 
 
IMPORTANCE OE FAITHFUL TEAINIXG. 273 
 
 will undoubtedly hear fewer legends and become less 
 superstitious, and bavo their respect for their parents 
 and confidence in their religion less shaken than in a 
 Roman Catholic school. But if you wish your child to 
 become alienated from you, and to practice deception, 
 to turn Rom.anists or cast off all religion as a fable, send 
 it to Convents, and you will attain your end ! 
 
 But do not make it first a member of another Church, 
 and violate your vows to God and his Church to use all 
 diligence to bring it up in the faith and doctrines of 
 that Church, and to. make it a worthy member of the 
 same. For in so doing 3^ou will add to the sin of sub- 
 jecting it to evil influences willingly, that of violating 
 an implied pledge to the contrary ! Consider, we pray 
 you, dear reader, what constitutes faithfulness to the 
 souls of your little children. To you is committed the 
 responsible charge of shaping their course for time and 
 eternity ! Not only the care of their bodies, but of 
 their souls, rests upon you, and unfaithfulness in either 
 may involve them in irreparable loss, and you in grie- 
 vous sin ! Their souls are immortal, and to them must 
 be given attention second only to your own salvation. 
 The welfare of their bodies should be made next to your 
 OAvn also. But in both cases, the importance of the life 
 to come, so far exceeds the things of this life, that to 
 endanger the soul for any supposed benefit to the body, 
 is inverting the order and setting at naught the com- 
 mand of God, and involves unfaithfulness and disobe- 
 dience of the most serious kind. For to us and our 
 children the command is, "Seek first the kinordom of 
 God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be 
 added unto you." Matt. vi. 33. 
 
274 IMPORTANCE OF FAITHFUL TRAINING. 
 
 Subjecting unnecessarily the impressible souls of our 
 dear little children to erroneous teaching, or evil influ- 
 ences of any kind, that may ruin them forever, must be 
 a sin of a much higher grade than is generally sup- 
 posed. And in most cases, it has been followed by conse- 
 quences, even in this life, of the most painful character. 
 A great change must yet come over the minds of the 
 vast majority of those who have the charge of little 
 children, before they will rightly appreciate their respon- 
 sibility, and do justice to the rising generation. 
 
 It is not, however, because God and his Church have 
 not placed this subject rightly before the minds of men, 
 that it is not better understood. It has been earnestly 
 inculcated, and pressed upon their attention in every 
 age. It was because of Abraham's faithfulness in this 
 very duty that God commended him and showed him 
 special favors. "And the Lord said, shall I hide from 
 Abraham that thing which I do; seeing that Abra- 
 ham shall surely become a great nation, and all the 
 nations of the earth shall be blessed in him ? For I 
 know him that he tvill command his children and his 
 household after him, and they shall keep the ivay of the 
 Lord, to do justice and judgment ; that the Lord may 
 bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.''' 
 Gen. xviii. 17, 19. To Israel, through Moses, he said, 
 "And these words which I command thee this day, shall 
 be in thy heart : And thou shalt teach them diligently 
 to thy childre7i, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest 
 , in thy house, and ivheii thou walkest by the way, and 
 ivhen thou liest doivn, and tvJien thou risest up. And 
 thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and 
 they shall be as frontlets between thy eyes. And 
 
FAITHFUL TRAINING OF CHILDREN. 275 
 
 thou shalt "write them upon the posts of thy house, 
 and on thj gates." Deut. vi. 6. Again, through 
 Solomon, ""Train up a child in the way he should go, 
 and ivhen he is old he will not depart from it.'' Prov. 
 xxii. 6. And yet again by St. Paul, "And ye fathers, 
 provoke not your children to ^vrath : but bring them up 
 in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.'' Eph. v. 4, 
 etc. Thus we see there is want neither of authority nor 
 of information on this important duty. Its faithful ob- 
 servance brought peculiar favors to Abraham ; it was 
 most carefully inculcated under Moses, and afterwards 
 by Solomon. St. Paul continues it, admonishes fathers 
 to avoid the error, into which many fall, of too much 
 rigor in their discipline, and the provoking of the worst 
 feelings of their nature, instead of the best. That they 
 should bring them up in the spirit as well as doctrines 
 of the Lord : with the gentleness and kindness of Chris- 
 tian nurture ; with the tenderness and love of the prin- 
 ciples which they inculcate ; leading them onward as 
 the foster children of the Saviour. 
 
 And if all Christians would take heed to his instruc- 
 tions and faithfully perform this duty, who can estimate 
 the result? If they would only set them, first, the 
 worthy example of a Christian life and spirit, as well as 
 teach them the doctrines, how soon would disobedient 
 children be melted down into submission, the younger ones 
 kindly taken by the hand of the older, and led on in the 
 ways of peace and holiness, instead of mischief and ini- 
 quity ? The discordant family become united in bonds 
 of Christian love ; and this influence spread from house 
 to house, till the wilderness would rejoice and blossom 
 as the rose. 
 
276 FAlTIirUL TRAINING OF CHILDREN. 
 
 If parents would only use the same diligence to make 
 their children Christians and ornaments to the Church, 
 which thej do to make them honest and worthy mem- 
 bers of society, what a change would soon take place ! 
 What father is as anxious that his son should shine in 
 the Church as in the world ? and takes the same pains 
 to impress his mind with the truth, that sin against. 
 God should be as much deprecated as sin against men ? 
 That he should as anxiously avoid the disgrace of lying 
 to God, as that of being called a liar among men ? 
 That to rob God is as great a sin as to rob men ? What 
 mother is so earnest and constant to make her daughter 
 feel the importance of piety to God as to be respected 
 in the society in which she moves ? to infuse into her 
 heart the principle of making the world and the accom- 
 plishment of person secondary to the duties of religion ? 
 We do not say that she does not teach this doctrine at 
 times, but we ask. Where are the mother and the father 
 that show at all times the same interest, and are as con- 
 stant in their eflorts, and are as anxious to impress their 
 children with the belief that it is even more important to 
 " seek the kingdom of God and his righteousness," than 
 to seek the things that are needful to the body, and to 
 their fair reputation in the world ? When parents shall 
 act consistently in these things, and make their children 
 see and feel that such is their faith and the object of 
 their efforts, we may expect a great change to take 
 place in the spirit and feelings of their children, and 
 " the word of the Lord to have free course and be glo- 
 rified." 
 
 But the greater portion of the children baptized into 
 
FAITHFUL TRAINING OF CHILDREN. 277 
 
 the Church at the present day, receive but little more 
 instruction than to learn their Catechism as a task, and 
 attend upon the imperfect instruction imparted in the 
 Sunday school ! And, as soon as old enough to be 
 sent away from home to school, the great question is 
 not concerning the welfare to their souls, but, simply, 
 where can they get the best education at the cheapest 
 rate ? or, in what way can they be prepared to shine 
 most in the world ? Their immortal interest is lost sight 
 of, or made a secondary question, of minor importance ! 
 Better for such parents they never had a child, and bet- 
 ter for such children if given up to others, who would 
 do them more justice. Education for this world is very 
 important, but for the next, more so. Nor will they 
 ever conflict, when rightly understood and appreciated. 
 The child should be taught to repeat its little prayers, 
 night and morning, as soon as able to lisp the name of 
 Jesus. His love should be the theme of conversation, 
 when rising up and lying down, when sitting in thy 
 house, and by the wayside. The Catechism should be 
 taught as a thing most precious and cheering. The 
 Sunday-school made a mere auxiliary to aid the parent 
 in his good work, as confirmatory of his weekly instruc- 
 tion. It can never be made a substitute for parental 
 duty. It is too imperfect ; falls far too short of the 
 warmer, gentle and full flow of love and sentiment that 
 should be poured out from the parental bosom. Sunday- 
 schools were designed at first for the poor and neglected 
 children of this world, to supply in part the loss such 
 sustained for the want of worthy parents to do justice 
 to their souls and bodies. They were afterwards 
 24 
 
278 FAITHFUL TRAINING OF CHILDREN. 
 
 adopted as means to aid others, and farther than this 
 they cannot or ought not to go. The custom of some, 
 in leaving for the Sunday-school teacher to do what 
 they ought to do themselves, and sending their children 
 to the Sunday-school in the morning, and then permit 
 them to return home and spend the hours for Divine 
 service in the streets or in their dwellings, is an abuse 
 of the Sunday-school institution, and dangerous perver- 
 sion of its objects. Above all things, take your chil- 
 dren to church as soon as they are old enough to remain 
 in comfort throughout the services. Let no institution 
 or custom interfere with this duly — better keep them 
 from the school than from the public worship of God's 
 people. The evil they may learn in your absence, and 
 the ruinous habit formed, of absenting themselves from 
 Divine worship, more than counterbalance, by a thou- 
 sand fold, what they gain at the Sunday-school, if such 
 is to be the case. But there need not be, and ought 
 not to be, any conflict between the Sunday-school and 
 regular attendance at church. Both may be attended 
 with great benefit where there is the will and proper 
 arrangement. 
 
 God works by means, and has committed to earthen 
 vessels the glorious light of the Gospel arid the great work 
 of bringing men to Christ ^or salvation. Let parents 
 and others hQ faithful in the use of those means, and 
 the Holy Spirit will bless their efforts and grant them 
 success. If we are faithful in our part, God will cer- 
 tainly be faithful in his. The means granted for the 
 spread and effectual working of the Gospel of Christ are 
 doubtless abundantly successful to the end for which 
 
GREAT BLESSINGS IN THE END. 279 
 
 tliey were ordained. If our children are not saved, it 
 will not be because no provision bas been made for them in 
 the Redemption of Christ, and insufficient means grant- 
 ed to us for its application ; but because we have been 
 unfaithful in their use, and to the trust committed to 
 us. 
 
 And when men shall realize their responsibility, and 
 improve the means given them for their own and the 
 salvation of others, then shall they realize the promises 
 of God to their own souls and to the souls of their chil- 
 dren ; then shall they see the Gospel of Christ begin to 
 work in the fullness of its power, and to move onward 
 in the majesty of its strengh conquering and to con- 
 quer, till " the kingdoms of this world shall become the 
 kingdoms of our Lord and his Christ," and the glorious 
 prediction fulfilled when the " earth shall be full of the 
 knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea," and 
 all know Him, "from the least to the greatest;" whom 
 to know is life eternal. And not till then. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 MODE OE MODES OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Meaning of Words — Language of the New Testament — Septuagint and 
 Jewish Customs — Divers Baptisms — Water of Separation — Ritual Purifi- 
 cations — Oriental Washing — Baptism a Generic Term — John's Baptism — 
 Prophecies of Isaiah — Ezekiel — Malachi — Baptism of the Holy Ghost, 
 poured out, shed forth or fell upon, descended — Baptism applied to the 
 various Ablutions of the Ritual Law — No English Word will supply its 
 place — Immersion not its true meaning — No Mode implied in the Term — 
 No Specific Directions in regard to it — Circumstances of each case must 
 be examined. 
 
 The mode or modes of baptism is a secondary ques- 
 tion, which we did not design, in the commencement of 
 this work, to treat of at alL But so much have Bap- 
 tists magnified its importance, and so remarkable are 
 some of their more recent movements in regard to it, that 
 some notice of it in this connection may not be out of 
 place. Thej have formed themselves into a society for 
 the translation and circulation of the Bible among dif- 
 ferent nations of the earth, and in these translations 
 they render the words "baptize" and "baptism" into 
 terms which mean "immerse" and "immersion !" And 
 they openly avow, in their public meetings, that " the na- 
 tions of the earth must now look to the Baptist denomina- 
 tion ALONE for faithful translations of the Avord of God."* 
 
 * Bible Society Anniversary, April 28th, 1840. 
 
TO ASCERTAIN MEANING OF WORDS. 281 
 
 Out of this movement has grown the ^' Bible Union," 
 formed for the purpose of casting discredit upon our 
 venerable English Bible — so long the source of light 
 and comfort to Christians, and by which so many thou- 
 sands have been guided in their way to glory ; and to 
 substitute in its place another version, in which, among 
 other changes, "baptize" and "baptism" shall be ren- 
 dered into " immerse" and "immersion!" The inevi- 
 table tendency of such things must be to undermine the 
 public faith in the truth of our Holy religion ! 
 
 They contend that the Greek words Bapft^w, baptize, 
 and Bartnafioi, BAPTISM, mean "immerse" and "immer- 
 sion," and nothing more nor less. That "baptize" 
 carries the mode in the name. ^^That it is a specific term, 
 always signifying to dip — never expressing anything 
 hut mode.''' "^ On this simple z'sswe, that to "baptize" 
 means only to "dip or immerse," which they say is the 
 same thing, and is a specific term expressing the mode, 
 is based the wdiole superstructure of the high claims 
 and weighty responsibilities here assumed. 
 
 The whole question turns on baptize, whether it be 
 a specific term confined to one mode of action, or a 
 generic term like purifying and cleansing, which implies 
 an end that may be attained in more ways than one. 
 
 Now, can it be proved that ^'baptize and baptism" 
 mean only 'Hmmerse and immersion?'' Do dictionaries 
 and lexicographers give only such a meaning to these 
 words ? No — they all, ancient and modern, give differ- 
 ent meanings to these terms. Gases — a learned Greek 
 and member of the Greek Church, held in high estima- 
 * Carson, p. 79. 
 
 24* 
 
282 TO ASCERTAIN MEANING OF WORDS. 
 
 tion by his countrymen, and whose work is generally 
 used by native Greeks — gives to baptizo the following 
 definitions : To wet^ moisten^ hedetv, to wasJi, to bathe, 
 to draw, to pump ivater. He uses the word as a generic 
 term, including under it Bof;^", to wet, ^ouw, to wash, 
 avt-kioi, to draw water, &c.* Now, as a native Greek 
 and man of learning, he ought to know something of 
 his own language. And Mr. Carson, a leader among 
 modern Baptist writers, admits that he has "all the 
 lexicographers and commentators against him."t He 
 attempts, therefore, to go behind them, and seek for 
 the meaning of these words in the ancient Greek clas- 
 sics, written hundreds of years before the coming of 
 the Saviour to our earth. 
 
 But is this the way to ascertain the meaning of 
 words which are undergoing changes, and may be used 
 in an entirely different sense in one age from what 
 they are in another ? What does the English word 
 "prevent" now mean ? Answer, " To hinder, to stop." 
 What did it mean several hundred years ago ? Answ^i*? 
 "To lead, to go before,, to aid." Shall we then S^ 
 back several hundred years to ascertain in what sense 
 a writer of the present century uses the word " pre- 
 vent ?" If we do, we shall give the very opposite of its 
 present meaning, and say, "prevent" means "to go 
 before and open the way," when the writer means, " to 
 hinder and stop up the way." 
 
 Again, look at the use of the word "provisions," 
 at different times? It now means generally, "food," 
 "victuals," "something to eat;" but what did it mean 
 
 * Ed. Venice, 2 vols. 4to. f Carson on Baptism, p. 55. 
 
TO. ASCERTAIN MEANING OF WORDS. 283 
 
 in the time of Edward III. ? Sir William Blackstone 
 cites the following illustration of the principles on which 
 laws are to be interpreted :* "A law of Edward III. 
 forbids all ecclesiastics to purchase provisions at Rome. 
 The law (continues he) might seem to prohibit the buy- 
 ing of grain and other victuals ; but when we consider 
 that the statute was made to suppress the usurpations 
 of the Papal See, and that the ' nominations to benefices 
 by the Pope,' were called 'provisions,' we shall see that 
 the restraint is intended to be laid on such provisions 
 only." Provisions^ under the " canon law" of that age, 
 meant "benefices from the Pope;" now they mean 
 "food and sustenance to the body." Shall we go back 
 to Edward's time to learn the meaning of ^provisions at 
 the present time? or for the present use o^ p>reve7it, and 
 many other like terms ? And is such the rule by which 
 we are to settle the meaning of words in the Holy 
 Scriptures ? Does Mr. Carson or his followers suppose 
 that by laying aside all the lexicographers, and going 
 back from five hundred to some thousand years before the 
 coming of Christ, they can settle the meaning of bap- 
 Tizo and baptismos in his day ? Nay, they may look 
 for passages, and strain metaphors, and change ivet into 
 soak, and tinge into die, -and dip into plunge, and all 
 into immey^se, and find at last that all their work was 
 in vain ! for words used so long afterwards, may have 
 greatly changed, and have a very different application. 
 
 The only rule that can be relied on in the meaning 
 of words, is their general application in the age and 
 country in Which they are used. Instead of going 
 ■^ Blackstone, Introduction, Sec. ii. iii. 
 
284 GREEK TRANSLATION OP THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 back to the ancient Greek classics, we should examine 
 how these words were applied by those who wrote but 
 a short time before, and after, and during the days, of 
 the Apostles. How Josephus, and the translators 
 of the Old Testament into Greek, and the different 
 writers of the New Testament, and those who lived in 
 the next age after them, used these terms. 
 
 Further, words often obtain a sacred as well as jjrofane 
 or secular use. For instance, the word ^xx-k-^ma, in secular 
 classical use, means an assembly, however disorderly it 
 may be ; but in its ' sacred use, it means a Church. 
 The word n^to^vt^^oi, Presbyter, means elder, or old man, 
 in secular use ; but in a sacred use, an officer, or ruler 
 in the Church. In classical Greek, the word Ayysy.oj, 
 Angel, means a messenger ; has no reference to a spi- 
 ritual being, to which the sacred Scriptures apply it. 
 
 Therefore, in endeavoring to ascertain the meaning 
 of Baptize and Baptism, in the New Testament, we 
 must not only examine their use at the time in which 
 the sacred writers wrote, but especially their sacred 
 meaning at that time. This, every student of the Bi- 
 ble, and every other scholar, must admit. Why, then, 
 go to the ancient classic Greek to know how Christ and 
 his Apostles used the word for baptism ? The New 
 Testament is not written in what is called " Classic 
 Greek." It is in what has been denominated the 
 Greek of the Synagogue — a language having classical 
 Greek as its basis, but into which idioms and words of 
 other tongues. Eastern and Western, had been intro- 
 duced : modes of thought and forms of speech peculiar 
 to the Chaldee and Hebrew languages interwoven in it. 
 
SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH CUSTOMS. 285 
 
 Hence, said one of the ablest of Biblical scholars, 
 *' classical use, in Greek and Latin, is not only some- 
 times unavailing, but may often mislead in the critical 
 study of the Holy Scriptures."* 
 
 The New Testament was written by men who thought 
 and spoke the Chaldaic or Syriac tongues, and who read, 
 and heard in their schools and synagogues, the weekly 
 lessons from the Law and the Prophets. They were, 
 therefore, familiar with the Greek into which the Old 
 Testament Scriptures had been translated, which trans- 
 lation had been in constant use long before Christ 
 came, and doubtless had more influence on their use of 
 words and style of composition than any and perhaps 
 everything else. 
 
 Hence the study of the Septuagint, in connection 
 with the laws and customs of the age of the Evangelists, 
 are the chief sources whence the knowledge of the use 
 of terms, and of the allusions in the New Testament, 
 is to be obtained. We might as well go to Edward III. 
 for the meaning of "provisions," or to the ancient 
 Greeks for a definition of "angel," as to the Greek 
 classics for the right use of the language of the New 
 Testament. 
 
 I. Let us first examine baptize and baptism, in the 
 connection in which they stand in the sacred writings, 
 with such assistance as the Old Testament and Jewish 
 customs may aiford us, and if that be not sufficient, then 
 look to other sources. But if we be convinced from 
 these alone, tha^t baptize is not a specific term, "signi- 
 
 * Campbell on the New Testament. 
 
286 SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH CUSTOMS. 
 
 fying always to dip, and never expressing anything but 
 mode," but is generic, and admits of different modes, 
 we need go no further. For if it be found not specific, 
 and does not exclude every other mode but dijJ^^ing, 
 then they who attempt to confine it to that one mode only, 
 have gone beyond what is written, and their superstruc- 
 ture tumbles down. 
 
 Now if there be but one mode, and that ''to dip," 
 how shall we understand St. Paul, who calls the various 
 ablutions and purifications of the Jewish ritual "divers 
 baptisms?" In a comparison between the ritual of 
 the first testament under Moses, and that of establishing 
 the second, under Christ, he says : 
 
 Heb. ix. 9, 10. "In which were offered both gifts 
 and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the 
 service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience ; which 
 stood only in meats and drinks and divers baptisms,* 
 and carnal ordinances^ imposed upon them till the time 
 of refo rma tio ?i . " 
 
 He goes on further to enumerate some of those things 
 to which he refers, so that there can be no misappre- 
 hension in regard to them — 
 
 Ver. 13, 14. " For if the blood of bulls and of goats, 
 and the ashes of a heifer sfrinMing the unclean^ sancti- 
 fieth to the inirifying of the fleshy how much more shall 
 the blood of Christ.... purge your conscience from dead 
 works to serve the living God." 
 
 * Reads "washings," in our English version, but the Greek is the 
 same used for baptism everywhere else. 
 
THE WATERS OF SEPARATIOX. 287 
 
 What he means by the ^'purifymg of the flesh," 
 through " the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean," 
 is prescribed in Numbers xix. 17, 18. " And for an 
 unclean person, they shall take of the ashes of the burnt 
 heifer o^ purification for sin, and running water shall 
 be put thereto in a vessel ; and a clean person shall 
 sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and 
 upon the persons that were there, and upon him that 
 touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave." 
 So that one of the "baptisms" referred to by the Apos- 
 tle, is evidently the sprinMing of ivater and ashes over 
 the unclean, for their purification from sin. The Jewish 
 ritual further reads, " And the clean person shall sprin- 
 kle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the 
 seventh day ; and on the seventh day he shall purify 
 himself, and wash his clothes and bathe himself in water, 
 and shall be clean at even. But the man that shall be 
 unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be 
 cut ofi" from among the congregation, because he hath 
 defiled the sanctuary of the Lord : the water of separa- 
 tion hath not been sprinkled upon him; he is unclean." 
 Yers. 19, 20. Here are two ablutions or baptisms spe- 
 cified, one for the person sprinkling the water and ashes, 
 and the other for him whom he sprinkled. Or, if you 
 prefer it, the same person was both sprinkled with "the 
 water of separation," and bathed himself; but without 
 the sprinkling, he was "unclean;" this was an essential 
 part ; if " the water of separation hath not been sprin- 
 kled upon him, he is unclean." Read the whole 
 chapter. 
 
 Now here are two ablutions, one by sprinkling, and 
 
288 BAPTISMS OF THE MOSAIC RITUAL. 
 
 the other bj bathing,* or if you make them both parts 
 of one and the same, the sprinkling is an essential 2^ ciTt^ 
 the most essential, according to the words of the ritual, 
 for it is repeated several times that "he is unclean," 
 upon whom the spy^iiihling had not passed on the third 
 day as well as on the seventh. So that change and 
 modify it in every form possible, sprinkling is one of 
 the essential forms of ablution included under the name 
 of baptisms by the Apostle. What then becomes of the 
 position — "Baptism always signifies to dip, never ex- 
 pressing anything but mode 1" 
 
 Further, the Apostle specifies also the sprinkling of 
 the blood of bulls and of goats, which was performed by 
 the High Priest on the great day of atonement for the 
 sin of himself and the people. (Levit. xvi. 3-15.) And 
 after pointing out how the ritual services of the law, in 
 various ways, shadowed forth the Priesthood of Christ, 
 and his more spiritual dispensation, he adds : 
 
 Vers. 19, 20, 21. "When Moses had spoken every 
 precept to all the people, according to the law, he took 
 the blood of calves and of goats with water and scarlet 
 wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all 
 the people, saying. This is the blood of the Testament, 
 which God hath enjoined unto you. Moreover, he 
 sprinkled likewise ivith blood both the tabernacle and 
 all the vessels of the ministry.'' 
 
 The people, tabernacle, and sacred vessels, were all 
 purified by the sprinkling of water and blood upon them. 
 
 * Not by immersion, but by '' washing." 
 
BAPTISMS OF THE MOSAIC RITUAL. 289 
 
 And this is another of the " divers baptisms" mentioned 
 by St. Paul, as the connection most clearly proves, and 
 yet it was not hy {mmersion, but by sprinkling. Nev- 
 ertheless, according to our Baptist friends, ''baptism is 
 a S2)ecijic term^ always ^igmiymg immersion!''' 
 
 Again, another of these "divers baptisms," included 
 by the Apostle, reads, Numbs, viii. 7, "And this shalt 
 thou do unto them to cleanse them," (i. e. to prepare 
 the Levites for the functions of their office,) ''''sprinkle 
 water of purifying upon them, and let them shave all 
 their flesh, and let them wash their clothes, and so make 
 themselves clean." 
 
 And yet another — for Priests going into the taber- 
 nacle to perform service : 
 
 ExoD. XXX. 18, 20. " Thou shalt make a laver of 
 brass, and his foot also of brass, to wash withal ; and 
 thou shalt put it between the congregation and the altar, 
 and thou shalt put water therein, for Aaron and his sons 
 shall wash their hands and their feet thereat;"^ when 
 they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they 
 shall wash with water, that they die not ; when they 
 come near to the altar to minister, to burn ofifering made 
 by fire unto the Lord." 
 
 For various other purifications, is prescribed " wash- 
 ing of body and clothes," " sprinkling with the water 
 of separation," with "blood and oil," "shaving head 
 
 * This washing was performed by the water pouring upon the 
 hands and feet by passing through a small cock or spout from the 
 laver above into the broad foot of brass below. See various com- 
 mentators. 
 
 25 ' 
 
290 BAPTISM OF CUPS, POTS, BRAZEN VESSELS. 
 
 and face," etc. etc. (Levit. xi. xiv. xv. xvii. ; Numb. xix. 
 xxxi. &c.) Were all these performed bj one mode, and 
 that bj "immersion ?" If not, is baptism then a " specific 
 term, always signifying an immersion," or is it generic, 
 like purification, including different modes ? If St. 
 Paul knew its meaning, and embraced " sprinkling," 
 "washing," and the various ablutions for purification 
 prescribed in the Mosaic ritual, under that name, what 
 shall we say of the assumption of those who confine it 
 to immersion alone, and teach others that it never means 
 anything else ? 
 
 11. Turn now to another inspired writer, and see 
 how he uses the term Baptism : 
 
 St. Mark vii. 4. "And when they came from the 
 market, except they baptize,* they eat not. And many 
 other things there be, which they have received to hold, 
 as the BAPTISMS'^ of ciqjs and of pots, brazen vessels, and 
 of tables.'' 
 
 Were all these plunged under the water ? (for this, we 
 are informed, is also the meaning of immersion.) Tables 
 (K?itiw) twenty feet long and four feet wide and high? 
 Or couches large enough to accommodate several persons 
 to recline upon at meals, and often fastened to the 
 wall? Were these carried to some place to plunge 
 them under the water ? Their brass kettles and cooking 
 utensils all purified in the same way ? Were all the 
 people in that comparatively rude age, prepared and 
 
 * In the original Greek, " baptize" and " baptisms" — the same 
 words which Baptists confine to immersion. 
 
BAPTISM OF CUPS, POTS, BRAZEN VESSELS. 291 
 
 able to perforin such ablutions ? Let common sense 
 answer. Had it been their object to make these things 
 clean literally^ they would have applied the water to 
 them, and not them to the water. But this was a ritual 
 cleansing^ a ceremonial purification ; and whence de- 
 rived ? Need any one doubt, after reading the Le- 
 vitical law of Moses for the purification of tents, and 
 all the vessels in them, as well as persons made 
 unclean in certain ways, (Numbers xix. 18,) "And 
 a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip it in the water, 
 and sprhikle it upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, 
 (particularly " open" ones, loth verse,) and upon the 
 persons that wore them, and upon him that toucheth a 
 bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave?" How 
 easy and natural, from such a law as this, of a house, 
 and washing of hands after going to market, as they 
 might perchance be defiled by the touch of something 
 impure. But purification from such things under the 
 ritual law, was obtained not by immersion, but by " the 
 water of separation sprinkled upon them." And how 
 easily could they sprinkle their couches and brazen ves- 
 sels, but how inconvenient — aye, impossible in some 
 cases — to plunge them all under the water. How 
 could widows and families without male members 
 take such articles to a bath, if they had one ? And 
 did it ever enter the brain of any man that all 
 the poor people were provided with such luxuries as 
 a large and convenient bath to every family for such 
 purposes, until some favorite theory suggested it ? Or 
 how could anyone have hit on the device that the heavy 
 articles might have been taken to pieces, unless driven 
 to the last resort in a weak cause ? 
 
292 WATER POTS FOR PURIFYING. 
 
 Instead of baths, in our Lord's day, purifications were 
 performed from pots and pitchers. St. John ii. 6. "And 
 there were set there six tvater jwts of stone, after the 
 manner of the jnirifying of the Jeivs, containing two or 
 three firkins apiece." These water pots (i-Sptat) were the 
 same brought by the woman of Samaria to Jacob's well 
 for water. (St. John iv. 28.) The same, according to 
 the Septuagint, which Kebecca carried on h^r shoulder, 
 out of which Abraham's servant drank, (Gen. xxiv. 15, 
 18.) And which Gideon put into the hands of his army 
 to be broken in pieces with the blast of the trumpets to 
 dismay the Midianites, (Judges vii. 15-19,) and which, 
 in the English version of our Bibles are called Pitchers. 
 They could be carried "on the shoulder," or "in the 
 hand." 
 
 These were the baths used for purifying by the great 
 body of the Jewish nation, in our Lord's day. Did they 
 plunge their brazen vessels and couches in them ? Ad- 
 mit that those used at the wedding in Cana were of the 
 largest size of such pots or pitchers, and that they held, 
 as some have estimated, half or two-thirds of a barrel of 
 water, were they of the form, or did any one of them 
 hold water enough to plunge a man or a couch under ? 
 No. But they contained enough for all the purposes 
 of a large wedding, and for any ritual services that 
 might be required in the usual way on such occasions. 
 Remember the washing of hands is also called baptism, 
 in connection with the '•'baptisms of cups and of pots, 
 brazen vessels, and tables." The subject was thus intro- 
 duced, Mark vii. 1-4: "Then came together unto him 
 the Pharisees and certain of the scribes, which came 
 from Jerusalem. And when they saw certain of his 
 
WASHING OF HANDS CALLED BAPTLSM. 293 
 
 disciples eat bread with defiled [that is to say, with un- 
 washen] hands, they found fault. For the Pharisees, 
 and all the Jews, except they ivasJi (vt^wr/rat) their hands 
 oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. And 
 when they come from the market, unless they baptize 
 (Ba7tri.'(ywvrat)^ they eat not. And many other things there 
 be, which they have received to hold, as the BAPTiSMsf 
 of cups and of pots, brazen vessels and tables," or 
 couches. 
 
 Here we see baptize (BaTtrtcrwvfat) and tvash (yl-i^ou>vtaC) 
 are used interchangeably for the same thing, and both ap- 
 plied to the washing of hands. That the baptism, on return 
 from market, refers to ivashing of hands, is confirmed by 
 St. Luke xi. 37, 38 : "And he [Jesus] went in and sat 
 down to meat; and when the Pharisee saw it, he mar- 
 velled that he had not first baptized (E^aartfto^)?)! before 
 dinner." Compare this with St. Mark: "For the 
 Pharisees and all the Jews, except they ivash their hands 
 oft, EAT NOT." Washing of hands is, therefore, a bap- 
 tism ; and yet bajjtism is a specific term, never signifying 
 anything but mode, according to the Baptists, whilst it 
 is used in the New Testament as synonymous with an- 
 other word, which is as general in its application as 
 the English word for "washing;" and used in this 
 place for washing the hands and feet, as well as cups, 
 pots, brazen vessels, and couches. 
 
 But our opponents are determined not to be foiled ; 
 they will suppose heavy articles were taken to pieces ; 
 
 * Translated "washing," in our English version, but the same word 
 for baptize, under discussion. 
 
 f Original word for baptisms. % Original word for baptized. 
 
 25* 
 
294 WASHING OF HANDS CALLED BAPTISM. 
 
 and that the hands of the people were dipped into the 
 water to wash them, and this was the baptism. If that 
 be true, was the dipping the washing^ or did they dip 
 them in for the purpose of washing ? Was not putting 
 the hands into the water, merely preparatory to the 
 washing ? When the priest dipped his finger into the 
 blood, to sprinkle it, &c., or the hyssop into the " water 
 of separation," to sprinkle the unclean, was the " dip- 
 ping" or the "sprinkling" the purification? But 
 how is it known they even dipped their hands into the 
 water ? for that is not the Oriental mode of washing 
 hands. Travellers inform us that " before meals, a ser- 
 vant comes round with a pitcher, and pours water on 
 the hands of those about to eat, or they are otherwise 
 cleansed with running or streaming water."* This 
 corresponds precisely with "Elisha pouring water on 
 the hands of Elijah," (2 Kings iii. 11,) and is in exact 
 accordance with the spirit of the Levitical law, for there, 
 running streams, or zvater poured out, or sprinkled, 
 except where fountain spits afforded great abundance of 
 water, is almost invariably required. (Lev. xi. xiv. ; 
 Numb, xix.) Even the Oriental bathing at the present 
 day is not by immersion, but by throwing water over 
 the body in the bath by an attendant. D'Ohsson says, 
 speaking of the women's baths in the East, "They 
 scarcely ever immerse their bodies in the tvater ; the 
 large marble urns, which are in the form of bathing 
 tubs, are for invalids. The strictest decency is ob- 
 served." Denon, describing the bath of the men in 
 Egypt, says, "The bather.. ..is inundated with water, 
 
 * See Hall on Baptism. 
 
BAPTISM GENERIC, NOT SPECIFIC TERM. 295 
 
 ivJncJi the attendants take out tuith a small basin andjoour 
 over Ms hody.'"^ And by reference to the ritual law of 
 Moses, we find that neither the tei'm used for dipping^ 
 T\OY washing clothes^ is employed for bathing the person in 
 water ; but a word of more general application than 
 either. In the same ritual and same passages prescri- 
 bing the order of the services, (Numb. xix. 18, 19,) one 
 word is used for dijjping the hyssop in water, another 
 for washing the clothes of the unclean, and still another, 
 different from both of the former, for bathing the body 
 in water, and this the same which St. John applies to the 
 washing of us from our sins in the blood of Christy Rev. 
 i. 5 : '' Unto him that loved us, and washed ("KovaavtC) us 
 from our sins in his own blood." The leading idea of 
 which is simply purification, or symbol of cleansing. 
 
 Baptism seems to have been a general term, applied 
 to all the ritual ablutions of the Jews, whether divine or 
 traditional. For our examination thus far shows that 
 instead of signifying only to plunge under the water, 
 inspired writers of the New Testament apply the term 
 to "sprinkling" persons and other things, with the 
 "water of separation," with "blood and water," to 
 "washing the body and clothes," " pouring water on 
 the hands and feet" before divine service, the purifica- 
 tion "of cups, pots, brazen vessels,, and tables," and 
 "washing of hands" before meals. It follows, there- 
 fore, that it is not a specific term signifying one mode of 
 action only, but generic, including various modes, and 
 similar in its application to the term purification. 
 
 * Taylor's Facts and Evidences on Apostolic Baptism. 
 
296 John's baptism ceremonial purification. 
 
 III. And let us examine, in the next place, if Puri- 
 fication is not in fact the leading idea, attached to the 
 baptism of both John and of Christ in the New Test;v- 
 ment, rather than that of immersion? When John the 
 Baptist entered upon his mission, he proclaimed himself 
 as one going before to prepare the way for another. 
 He called upon the people to make ready for the coming 
 of the kingdom of God — to repent, for it was at hand. 
 And to all, who gave ear to his preaching, he adminis- 
 tered the rite of baptism, as an outward sign of their 
 preparation — emblematical of the cleansing of their 
 hearts and lives to prepare them for the reception of 
 the promised Messiah. He at the same time called upon 
 those who came to his baptism to " bring forth fruits meet 
 for repentance." That now "also the axe is laid unto 
 the root of the trees : therefore, every tree that bringeth 
 not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire. 
 I indeed baptize with water unto repentance ; but he 
 that Cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I 
 am not worthy to bear ; he shall baptize you with the 
 Holy Ghost and with fire." (St. Matt. iii. 8-11.) His 
 baptism shadowed forth the baptism of the Holy Ghost, 
 the Divine Sanctifier, whose enlightening influence 
 would act " as purifying water, to wash away any inter- 
 nal pollutions, and as a refining fire, to consume all 
 their dross and the remains of corrupt nature."* To 
 which he added, " Whose fan is in his hand ; he will 
 thoroughly purge his floor" — cleanse or purify it — 
 ''and gather his wheat into the garner." (Yer. 12.) 
 Precisely what the Prophet had foretold. " He shall 
 
 * Tliouiiis Scott. 
 
JOHN'S BAPTISM CEREMONIAL PURIFICATION. 297 
 
 sit as a refiner or purifier of silver ; and he shall purify 
 the sons of Levi, and purge [purify] them as gold and 
 silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in 
 righteousness." (Malachi iii. 3.) 
 
 That such was John's meaning, and that he and his 
 followers regarded his baptism as a ceremonial purifica- 
 tion is confirmed by the fact that when a question about 
 PURIFYING had arisen between his disciples and the 
 Jews, he treated it as synonymous with baptism, and calls 
 upon them to bear him witness that he had from the 
 beginning claimed only to be one sent before the Christ, 
 to prepare his way ; and that Christ must increase 
 whilst he must decrease. The followers of the Saviour 
 evidently were now baptizing greater numbers than John, 
 which had evidently given rise to the question. See the 
 connection, St. John iii. 22-30 : '■' After these things 
 came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judea ; and 
 there he tarried with them and baptized ; and John 
 was also baptizing in ^non, near to Salim, because 
 there was much water there ; and they came and were 
 BAPTIZED. For John was not yet cast into prison. 
 Then there arose a question between some of Johns disci- 
 ples and the Jeivs about purifying. And they came 
 unto John and said unto him : Rabbi, he that was with 
 thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou bearest witness, be- 
 hold the same baptizeth, and all men come unto him. 
 John answered and said : A man can receive nothing, 
 except it be given him from heaven. Ye yourselves 
 bear me witness that I said, I am not the Christ ; but 
 that I am sent before him." " He that hath the bride is 
 the bridegroom ; but the friend of the bridegroom, which 
 
298 BAPTISM SUBSTANTIALLY PURIFICATION. 
 
 standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of 
 the bridegroom's voice; this my joy therefore is fulfilled. 
 He must increase, but I must decrease." He then goes 
 on to pass further encomiums on the Saviour, and to 
 speak of his claims, and the necessity of faith in him for 
 salvation. He did not encourage any feeling of rivalry, 
 or even put what he had done on an equality with what 
 the Saviour was doing. But mark, the question was 
 about "purifying," and John answers it as if presented 
 under the name of baptizing. Whether jealousy had 
 arisen in the minds of some because greater crowds 
 were coming to Christ than to John, or whether the 
 baptism of one was esteemed of more value than that of 
 the other, or whether it was a question on ritual lustra- 
 tions p;enerally, or in whatever form it had arisen, 
 John had regarded it as synonymous with his baptism, 
 and admitted that he must decrease and the Saviour 
 increase. 
 
 They were both engaged in baptizing at that time in 
 places not far apart ; a question arose about purifying; 
 certain disciples of John came to him : " Rabbi, he that 
 was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou bearest wit- 
 ness, behold the same baptizeth, and all men come to 
 him.'' "John answered, a man can do nothing, except 
 it be given him from heaven." Or, Ave must submit to 
 God's appointment. " Ye yourselves bear me witness 
 that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent be- 
 fore him.... He must increase, but I must decrease." 
 
 Now what need we plainer than that this question called 
 "purifying," was concerning baptism? When John's 
 remarks concerning the Saviour ended, then folloAVS, (iv. 
 
PROPHECIES FULFILLED IN JOHN BAPTIST. 299 
 
 chap. 1-3,) " When, therefore, the Lord knew that the 
 Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more 
 disciples than John, (though Jesus himself baptized not, 
 but his disciples,) he left Judea and departed again 
 into Galilee." Why? Because he was afraid to divide 
 their persecution against John ? May it not have been, 
 rather, to cut off their influence in fomenting party 
 feeling between his disciples and John's, which they had 
 excited, perhaps, in the first instance concerning the 
 baptism of John and himself? Such an interpretation 
 is natural, and corresponds with the whole narrative. 
 But whatever be the explanation we give as to the Sa- 
 viour's removal from that part of Judea to Galilee, it 
 must be obvious to every intelligent reader, that St. John, 
 the writer, the disciples who came, and the reply of 
 John the Baptist, all refer to "baptism and purifying" 
 as synonymous terms. Indeed, John's baptism was 
 doubtless the purifying under discussion. St. Mark 
 calls it "the laptism of repentance for the remission of 
 sins," (chap. i. 4;) i. e. a washing or purification from 
 sin. St. Luke likewise calls it " the baptism of repent- 
 ance for the remission of sins," (chap. iii. 3,) emblem- 
 atical of the same cleansing or purifying. 
 
 The Jews evidently expected some ritual lustration 
 or purification when their Messiah or his forerunner 
 should come — at least, showed that such a thing did not 
 surprise them. For instead of inquiring into the na- 
 ture and meaning of John's baptism, they first ask him 
 if he was the Christ, or one of their predicted prophets ? 
 and then why he baptized, if not one of them ? (St. 
 John i. 19-25.) "And this is the record of John, 
 
300 PROPHECIES FULFILLED IN JOHN BAPTIST. 
 
 when the Jews sent Priests and Levites from Jerusalem, 
 to ask him, who art thou ? And he confessed, and de- 
 nied not : but confessed I am not the Christ. And 
 they asked him what then ? Art thou Elias ? And 
 he saith, I am not. Art thou that Prophet ? And he 
 answered, no. Then said they unto him, who art thou? 
 that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What 
 sayest thou of thyself ? He said, I am the voice of one 
 crying in the wilderness. Make strait the way of the 
 Lord, as said the prophet Esaias. And they which were 
 sent were of the Pharisees. And they asked him. Why 
 haptizest then thou, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, 
 neither that Prophet?" 
 
 The baptism itself caused no surprise, but that John 
 should baptize did, if not one of such note as would 
 authorize this extra purification. John was the prom- 
 ised Elias, and forerunner of Christ, but not Elijah 
 himself, whom they expected. The prophecies on which^ 
 they based their hopes of a Saviour, and the blessings 
 that would follow, which would be ushered in by a spe- 
 cial messenger going before to prepare 'the way, had 
 induced the expectation of some ritual preparation, or 
 extra purification of the people, from this forerunner. 
 Isaiah, pointing to Christ and his reign had said, in the 
 name of Jehovah, (chap. lii. 13-15,) " Behold my ser- 
 vant shall deal prudently ; he shall be exalted and 
 extolled very high. ...so shall he sprinkle many nations; 
 the kings shall shut their mouths at him ; for that which 
 hath not been told them shall they see ; and that which 
 they had not heard shall they consider." Ezekiel, 
 shadowing forth the blessings of Christ's reign, and its 
 
EMBLEMS OF JOHN'S BAPTISM. 301 
 
 influence upon the hearts of his people, had, in the same 
 name, made known unto them, (chap, xxxvi. 25-29,) 
 "Then I will sprinkle clean water upon jou, and you 
 shall be clean; from all your filthiness and from all your 
 idols will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give 
 you : and a new spirit Avill I put within you ; and I will 
 take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give 
 you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within 
 you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall 
 keep my judgments and do them. And ye shall dwell 
 in the land that I gave your fathers, and ye shall be my 
 people, and I will be your God." Malachi had told them 
 how their Saviour and his reign would be introduced, 
 (chap. iii. 1—3,) " Behold, I will send my messenger, 
 and he shall prepare the way before me ! and the Lord 
 whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even 
 the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in : 
 behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. But 
 who shall abide the day of his coming? and who shall 
 stand, when he appeareth ? for he is like a refiner's fire, 
 and like fuller's soap : And shall sit as a refiner and 
 purifier of silver: And shall jjt^itrif^ the sons of Levi, 
 and purge them as gold and silver," &c. 
 
 With such prophecies familiar to them, and the Le- 
 vitical and traditional purifications constantly practiced 
 among them, we need not wonder that John made no 
 further explanation of his baptism than its shadowing 
 forth the refining and purifying influence of the Holy 
 Ghost. (St. Mark i. 8.) " I indeed baptize you with 
 water, but He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." 
 And can any one doubt whether the baptism of the 
 26 
 
302 EMBLEMS OF JOHN'S BAPTISM. 
 
 Holy Ghost sanctified and cleansed the hearts of men ? 
 When the Saviour was baptized, the Holy Ghost de- 
 scended in the bodily shape of a dove upon him, which 
 was to John the witness of Christ's Messiahship, while 
 in all ages the dove has been the emblem of innocence 
 and affection. When the Apostles were baptized by the 
 Holy Ghost, on the day of Pentecost, cloven tongues of 
 fire sat upon them, indicating its gifts aindi purifying 
 influence. 
 
 St. Luke iii. 21. '^Now when all the people were 
 baptized, it came to pass that Jesus being also bajjtized, 
 and praying, the Heaven was opened. And the Holy 
 Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, 
 and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my 
 beloved son in whom I am well pleased." 
 
 St. John i. 32, 33. ''And John bear record, saying, 
 I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, 
 and it abode upon him. And I knew him not, but 
 he that sent me to baptize with water, the same 
 said unto me, upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit de- 
 scending and remaining on him, the same is he that 
 haptizeth with the Holy Ghost." 
 
 NoAV had John's baptism no reference in his own 
 mind to the baptism of the Holy Ghost ? And if it had, 
 was its office and end dissimilar or similar in character ? 
 If the latter, was it not necessarily a rite of purification, 
 signifying the washing away of sin on repentance, as 
 preparatory for the promised Messiah ? Who can doubt 
 it ? John's baptism was not Christian baptism, because 
 it was not in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
 
CHRIST UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES. 303 
 
 and of the Holy Ghost." It was not an initiatory rite 
 into any Church, because he did not found, or pretend 
 to be a founder, of a Church or sect. It was simply 
 the work of the predicted Messenger sent to prepare the 
 way for the coming and reception of Christ. That it 
 was not Christian baptism is farther made known by the 
 fact that when St. Paul found certain persons at Ephe- 
 sus who had received John's baptism, he re-baptized 
 them in the name of the Trinity, (Acts xix. 1-5.) Al- 
 though "Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the region 
 round about Jordan," received John's baptism, and the 
 disciples of Christ before his crucifixion, baptized at one 
 time even greater numbers than John, we find that on 
 the day of Pentecost, the whole number of the New 
 Dispensation was only one hundred and twenty. (Acts 
 i. 5.) Until his crucifixion, Christ, as well as John, 
 acted under and recognized the authority of the law of 
 Moses ; he was circumcised on the eighth day, brought 
 to the temple and presented to the Lord, after his mo- 
 ther's purification ; attended the public worship of the 
 temple, and drove from its hallowed courts the money 
 changers, who would change his Father's hojise of prayer 
 into a den of thieves. When he cleansed a leper, he 
 bid him " go and show thyself unto the priest, and offer 
 for thy cleansing, according as Moses commanded, for a 
 testimony unto them," (Luke v. 14.) And in his 2:)ubUe 
 teaching to the multitude, told them, " The scribes and 
 pharisees sit in Moses' seat : All, therefore, whatsoever 
 they bid you observe, that observe and do ; but do not 
 ye after their works; for they say and do not." (Matt, 
 xxiii. 2, 3.) Almost the last thing that he did before he 
 
304 JOHN'S BAPTISM NOT CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. 
 
 suiFered, was in obedience to Moses, to observe the "pass- 
 over." (Matt. xxvi. 17-25.) But here ended the Old 
 Dispensation. 
 
 He had united with John in preparing the people for 
 the New. He had submitted to his baptism, not because 
 he needed repentance, but as recognizing John's mission 
 and appointment from Heaven, and his ritual purifica- 
 tion for the introduction of the New Dispensation, and 
 as submitting himself also to all Heaven's regulations 
 "under the law" — "to fulfill all righteousness." (Matt, 
 iii. 15.) And it may be, to set him apart for his priestly 
 ofiice, as was Aaron. For John's baptism, as a prepa- 
 ration for the Gospel of Christ, was certainly very simi- 
 lar to the purification of the Israelites, to prepare them 
 for the reception of the law at Mount Sinai. (See Ex- 
 odus xix.) 
 
 It was necessary that Christ should become subject to 
 'Hhe law in all things^ to redeem them that were under the 
 law." He therefore fulfilled all that was required under 
 the first Dispensation, even submitted to and aided in the 
 mission of John the Baptist in preparing the people 
 generally — especially his chosen Apostles for the New 
 Dispensation. But from the moment he rose from the 
 grave, a new order of things commenced, and his sub- 
 mission to the Old ended. His public declaration now 
 is, ^'Allpoiver is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth, 
 Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them 
 in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy ahostr (Matt, xxviii. 18, 19.) Up to this time 
 all was under Moses ; henceforth all shall be under 
 Christ. The baptism of John was therefore simply a purl- 
 
BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 305 
 
 fication — under the Dispensation of Moses, preparatory 
 for the ushering in of the New Dispensation under 
 Christ. It implied uncleanness through sin, and sym- 
 bolized the purifying and renewing influences of the 
 Holy Ghost. And this the Saviour directed his Apos- 
 tles to wait for at Jerusalem, and not to commence 
 their work before they received it ; although he had 
 continued with them forty days after his resurrection, 
 instructing them in the things pertaining to his king- 
 dom. 
 
 IV. Now did ^'purifying," under the Mosaic Dis- 
 pensation, imply only one mode of action ? And is the 
 baptism of the Holy Ghost represented under the figure 
 of dipping or immersion ? The various modes of " pu- 
 rifying," under the ritual law, we have already noticed. 
 If because of the omnipresence of the Spirit, we are neces- 
 sarily immersed in it, then it is hot by dipping or plun- 
 ging, we get into it ; but we are born in it, and grow up 
 in it, and every one has already been baptized by it. 
 It is not something yet to be done. But if it be an 
 act, or an influence, or gift to men, which any do not 
 yet possess, then it must come of the Spirit, and be 
 applied to them. How this application is made, let us 
 see what the Holy Scriptures teach. Under what mode 
 or figures do they represent the baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost ? The Saviour, when about to leave his disciples, 
 told them they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost 
 not many days hence, and to tarry at Jerusalem till this 
 was accomplished. 
 
 Acts ii. 1-4. ''And when the day of Pentecost was 
 26* 
 
306 BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST — 
 
 fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 
 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a 
 mighty rushing wind, and it filled all the house where 
 they were sitting. And then appeared unto them clo- 
 ven tongues, like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 
 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and be- 
 gan to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them 
 utterance." 
 
 St. Peter informed the multitude that came together, 
 that this baptism was the fulfillment of the prophecy 
 of Joel, verses 16, 17, 18. " But this is that which was 
 spoken by the prophet Joel, And it shall come to pass 
 in the last days, saith God, I will 'pour out of my Spi- 
 rit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters 
 shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, 
 and your old men shall dream dreams : And on my 
 servants and on my handmaidens, I will pour out, in 
 those days, of my Spirit ; and they shall prophe- 
 
 Here the figure used expressive of the mode is that of 
 pouring, not dipping. "I will pour out of my Spirit." 
 When the actual baptism took place, a sound came from 
 heaven as of a mighty rushing wind, and " cloven 
 tongues of fire sat upon them," which was the fulfill- 
 ment of the prophecy, "1 will pour out of my Spirit," 
 &c. And the Apostle goes on further to explain, (vers. 
 32, 33,) " This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we 
 are all witnesses. Therefore, being by the right hand 
 of God exalted, and having received of the Father the 
 
POURED OUT, SHED FORTH, FALLEN UPON. 307 
 
 promise of the Holy Ghcst, he hath shed forth this 
 which ye now see and hear." 
 
 He uses in this place the figure of shedcliyig forth^ as 
 expressive of the same thing, which is closely allied to 
 "pouring." 
 
 Again, wdien St. Peter was preaching to Cornelius 
 and his company, St. Luke informs us, (Acts x. 44-46,) 
 " While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost 
 fell on all them which heard the word. And they of 
 the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many 
 as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also 
 was jjoured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they 
 heard them speak with tongues and magnify God." So, 
 St. Luke applies both " shed" and " pour" to those same 
 gifts of the Holy Ghost received on the day of Pentecost. 
 " For they heard them speak with tongues," &c. St. 
 Peter, relating this event on his return to Jerusalem, 
 says, (Acts xi. 15, 16,) " And as I began to speak, the 
 Holy Ghost /ig?^ on them, as on us at the beginning, 
 [day of Pentecost.] Then I remembered the word of 
 the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with 
 water ; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost." 
 (Acts i. 5.) Hence he regarded this as another fulfill- 
 ment of our Lord's promise of the Holy Ghost, and 
 uses the figure of St. Luke — "the Holy Ghost /eZ? on 
 them." 
 
 In another place he speaks of " the Holy Ghost sent 
 down from heaven," (1 Peter i. 13.) 
 
 St. John says, "I saw the Spirit descending from 
 heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him." (John i. 
 32.) 
 
308 IMMERSION MIS-TRANSLATION OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Thus we see the baptism of the Holy Ghost is de- 
 scribed as "poured out," "shed forth," "fallen upon," 
 "descending," and "abiding upon;" and yet we are 
 told that baj^tize "has but one signification — it always 
 signifies to dip — never expressing anything but mode;" 
 and that ^'baptism always implies immersion!" And 
 with this idea, the "Bible Union," as they call them- 
 selves, are making a new translation of our English 
 Bible, in which immerse and immersion are to be sub- 
 stituted for "baptize" and "baptism I" 
 ' Besides, pouring, shedding foi^th, falling upon, de- 
 scending and abiding upon, we have seen that baptism 
 is applied in the New Testament to washing of hands 
 and feet, cups, pots, brazen vessels, tables, and to the 
 various purifications, by washing and sprinkling, in 
 the ritual law of Moses. 
 
 No English word will express its full meaning, and 
 therefore the translators of our venerable English Bi- 
 ble acted wisely in leaving it untranslated, merely 
 Anglicising the Greek into bajjtize. To p)urify would 
 convey more nearly its full meaning than any other 
 word, perhaps, in our language ; but that would 
 be more liable to abuse. We therefore adopt in full 
 the words of an author who has lately written an excel- 
 lent book on this branch of our subject, which we have 
 met with since this work went to press : " If we reject 
 our English word baptize — for baptize has now become 
 truly and properly an English word — and attempt to 
 translate the Greek baptizo, we should translate it by 
 the word purify, and not immerse. At the same time 
 we remark that the word purify, as used in the Old 
 
BAPTISM IN THE CLOUD AND IN THE SEA. 309 
 
 Testament, is used in a sense different from that in which 
 it is used in common conversation and in the English 
 classics. The English word baptize, in its common 
 acceptation, more nearly expresses the exact idea of the 
 Greek haptizo than the English yf or d purify would. 
 And on this account, we would greatly prefer to see our 
 venerable English stand 'as of old.' To translate the 
 Greek haptizo in the Word of God, by the English 
 words dip or immerse, or into any other language by 
 words corresponding to our English words dip> or im- 
 merse, is to mistranslate the AVord of God ; not simply 
 to make an allowable variation in a version of the 
 Bible, but to mistrmislate the Word of God.''* 
 
 It being now evident to every attentive reader of 
 these pages that baptize and baptism are not specific 
 terms, confined to one mode of action in the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, but generic, and express various modes; it is 
 unnecessary to dwell any longer on this branch of the 
 subject. 
 
 We might have referred to the baptism of the Israel- 
 ites — "unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea," (1 Cor. 
 X. 1, 2,) — concerning which strange perversions of a 
 plain case have been attempted to twist it into immer- 
 sion ! But, after all, the idea of immersion in Avater 
 on " dry ground" is difiicult of comprehension — espe- 
 cially when the water had been removed out of the 
 way for them to pass on " dry ground through the 
 midst of the sea." That they were sprinkled by a mist 
 from the cloud and sea, and therefore baptized by 
 aspersion, is easily understood. The Psalmist, however, 
 
 * Armstrong on the Doctrine of Baptisms. 
 
310 BAPTISM BY THE DEWS OF HEAVEN. 
 
 explains it clearly enough, (Ps. Ixxvii. 16, 20,) "The 
 waters saw thee, God, the waters saw thee ; they 
 were afraid ; the depths also were troubled. The elouds 
 poured out water.... Thou leddest thy people like a flock 
 by the hand of Moses and Aaron." The rain which 
 fell from the clouds before they reached the shore, in 
 advance, it may be, of a storm that accompanied the 
 closing of the sea on the Egyptians, was the baptism 
 which the Israelites received ; while the rushing toge- 
 ther of the waters, covering up the Egyptians, literally 
 immersed them, for they were buried in the Red Sea. 
 We might also have referred to the washing of Naa- 
 man, the leper, in the river Jordan, (2 Kings v. 14,) 
 at the command of Elisha, which may have been an 
 immersion. And we might likewise have examined the 
 baptism of Nebuchadnezzar by the dews of heaven, in 
 his deranged state, (Dan. v. 21.) For the term applied 
 to him in the Septuagint is the root from which haptizo 
 is derived, and more intensive in its meaning. Yet it 
 is used to express the wetting or baptizing of one by the 
 settling down of the dew upon him at night. We 
 should hardly conclude, in such a case, that he was 
 dipped or immersed in the dew. We might further 
 have referred to Christ's allusion to his own sufferings 
 under the figure of baptism, (St. Mark x. 38, 39.) 
 These would have given additional illustrations of the 
 various applications and modes of baptism, but why 
 multiply cases to establish what has been already proved 
 to the satisfaction of every attentive reader — that bap- 
 tize and haj^tism, as used in the Holy Scriptures are not 
 specific terms signifying only one mode, but are applied 
 
BAPTISM BY THE DEWS OF HEAVEN. 311 
 
 to various modes. If Christian baptism, then, was ad- 
 ministered in one particular way, and that way designed 
 to be binding on all generations, we must look to the 
 circumstances under which it was administered in the 
 cases recorded in the New Testament^for the term itself 
 implies no ^mrticular mode, nor have we any specific 
 directions from Christ or his Apostles on that point. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 EXAMINATION OF THE MEANING AND MODES OF BAPTISM 
 CONTINUED. 
 
 John's Baptism — Prepositions "in," "into," and "out of," determine no- 
 thing — JEuon or Springs — Apostles baptized without regard to circum- 
 stances — Baptism of three thousand — of the Samaritans — of the Eunuch 
 — of Saul — of Cornelius — of the Jailer — of the Disciples at Ephesus — 
 Mode indicated only by the Spirit — End of Baptism — Christ the second 
 Adam — Circumcision of Christ — Figurative allusions — Explanations — 
 Summary of Scriptural testimony — Concluded with historical proof of 
 Baptism by different modes in every age of the Church since the death 
 of the Apostles. 
 
 We now proceed to examine the circumstances under 
 which the various cases of baptism recorded in the 
 New Testament occurred. And in order to make our 
 work thorough, we will take up every passage* that can 
 throw any light on the mode, from the beginning of 
 John's baptism to the end. 
 
 But we must first premise that the Greek prepositions 
 translated " in," "into," and "out of," prove nothing 
 of themselves ; because, as every Greek scholar knows, 
 they as often mean "unto," "to," "at," "nearby," 
 "with," and "from," and are so translated in various 
 places in the New Testament. They weigh nothing, 
 therefore, as ]?roof for one side or the other, independ- 
 ent of the verbs and other things with which they stand 
 
BAPTISM IN OR AT JORDAN NO EXPLANATION. 313 
 
 connected. We shall find that in every passage rendered 
 "he went down into the water," and came up "ow^ of 
 the water^'" the sajne terms would be used for "going 
 down to the water," and "coming \x^ from the water." 
 So that something more than such forms of speech must 
 be found to justify any one in confining baptism to the 
 mode of dipping. 
 
 The first passages recorded in the New Testament, 
 on which Baptists rely for proof of immersion, are 
 found in Matt. iii. 1, 5, 6: "In those days came John 
 
 the baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea 
 
 And there went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea, and 
 all the region round about Jordan, and were bap- 
 tized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins." 
 They lay much stress on " baptized of him in the Jor- 
 dan;" but the Greek sv translated "in," means also 
 at^ on, hy, near, and might have been rendered "a^ the 
 Jordan," or "by the Jordan;" and, therefore, can de- 
 termine nothing by itself. St. Luke uses the same 
 preposition to point out the position of the tower at (^v) 
 or near the fountain of Siloam. (Luke xiii. 4.) St. 
 Paul uses the same frequently in describing the relation 
 of one (sv) at or 7iear the right hand of another. (Heb. 
 i. 3: viii. 1: Rom. viii. 34.) St. John uses it to de- 
 scribe the light shining (sv) on one's path. (St. John xi. 
 10.) And others, in like manner. Therefore, we must 
 have something more than the translation of sv into m, 
 to prove anything in regard to the mode in such cases. 
 
 Besides, even admitting the translation to be correct, 
 the language used in such cases, would apply equally 
 well to persons who, with wooden sandals and short, 
 2T 
 
314 BAPTISM IN OR AT JORDAN NO EXPLANATION. 
 
 loose robes, in a sultry climate, would as soon walk a 
 short distance into the water, as to stop at its edge, even 
 for the purpose of pouring the water on their heads, or 
 of sprinkling it over them. In the heat and dust pro- 
 duced by crowds under such circumstances, it would 
 refresh them, and wash the dust from their feet and 
 sandals, to go a few paces into the stream : whilst John 
 could accompany them into the water, or baptize them 
 whilst standing himself on the bank, near them, as we 
 often see their baptism represented in ancient engra- 
 vings. Nothing, therefore, is to be inferred from the 
 rendering, "were baptized in Jordan." 
 
 2. Additional stress, however, has been laid on the 
 following verses, (13 and 14 :) " Then cometh Jesus 
 from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of 
 him. And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up strait- 
 way out of the water." Here, it is often said, " went 
 up out of the water" shows that John immersed him. 
 But not so; the preposition o.7to, translated " out of," is 
 more generally rendered "from" than "out of." And 
 so far as that is concerned, the reading would be equally 
 correct if translated "went u-p f7'om the water." St. 
 Matthew so uses it in the same chapter to describe flee- 
 ing from the wrath to come, (verse 7 :) " Oh, genera- 
 tion of vipers, who hath warned you to flee (aTto) from 
 the wrath to come?" — not "out of" the wrath to come. 
 Again, he applies it to coming down/rc>m the cross of 
 Christ, chap, xxvii. 40 : " If thou be the son of God, 
 come down (p-no) frojn the cross," — not "out of" the 
 cross. St. Luke applies it to the act of one person 
 leaving another : "And it came to pass as they depart- 
 
KECORDS OF JOHN'S BAPTISM. 315 
 
 ed {a.7io) from Mm,'' — not '''out of him." (St. Luke ix. 
 33.) Such is its frequent and most common use in the 
 New Testament ; therefore, it is of no force as proof 
 that Christ was immersed by St. John. 
 
 And even its present rendering applies with the same 
 force to one who had walked in the water with his 
 wooden sandals, or without shoes at all, (as was the 
 case, no doubt, with many,) to receive baptism by pour- 
 ing or sprinkling, that it does for plunging him under 
 the water ; therefore, without something more to aid 
 it, proves nothing as to the mode. Adding to this the 
 fact that ''at or hy the Jordan," and "from the water," 
 may be equally correct, shows that any argument drawn 
 from such sources is utterly worthless. 
 
 3. St. Mark's account of John's baptizing in or at 
 Jordan, is as follows, (Mark i. 4, 5, 9, 10 :) " John did 
 baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of 
 repentance for the remission of sins. And there went 
 out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusa- 
 lem, and were baptized of him in the river Jordan, con- 
 fessing their sins. . . . And it came to pass in those days, 
 that Jesus came from Nazareth to Galilee, and was bap- 
 tized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out 
 of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit, 
 like a dove, descended upon him." 
 
 Here we have precisely the same terms applied to the 
 act of baptizing, that are used by St. Matthew, except 
 in the baptism of Christ, where its is used instead of 
 sv, and is used perhaps in a hundred places in the New 
 Testament to express proximity or nearness to a place — 
 for at, to, hy, on, upon, and near to. For instance, 
 
316 RECORDS OF JOHN'S BAPTISM. 
 
 "his fellow servant fell down (ft?) at his feet," — not in 
 his feet. (St. Matt, xviii.17.) Again, "Seeing the multi- 
 tudes, he went up (^tv) on the mountain," — not in the 
 mountain. (St. Matt. v. 1.) Again, " He gave command- 
 ment to depart ("0 unto the other side," — not in the 
 other side. (St. Matt. viii. 18.) Once more : " So thej ran 
 both together, and that other disciple did outrun Peter, 
 and came first (ft?) to the sepulchre," — not in or into 
 the sepulchre, for we are told that the "other disciple" 
 did not go into the sepulchre at all. (St. John xx.) 
 
 Thus St. Mark records nothing that throws any ad- 
 ditional light on the account given by St. Matthew, or 
 on the 7node of baptism by John. 
 
 4. We come next to St. Luke. All that he says 
 on the subject is, "And he (John) came into all the 
 country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repent- 
 ance for the remission of sins. ...Now when the people 
 were baptized, it came to pass that Jesus also being bap- 
 tized, and praying, the heaven was opened, and the Holy 
 Ghost descended in a bodily shape, like a dove, upon 
 him," &c. (St. Luke iii. 3-21.) 
 
 He says nothing about ^ozV?^ into or coming "out of" 
 the water, but simply informs us that all the people in 
 the country about Jordan were baptized of John, and 
 that Christ being baptized also, while in prayer, the 
 Holy Ghost, in the shape of a dove, descended upon 
 him. 
 
 5. St. John is the only remaining witness whose tes- 
 timony can throw any light on this question. He, 
 after recording the answer of John to the Pharisees 
 who were sent to inquire who John was, and by what 
 
John's sojourn at ^non. 317 
 
 authority he baptized, tells us, "Those things were 
 done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was 
 baptizing." (St. John i. 28.) Again, "And John also 
 was baptizing in (or at) ^non, near to Salim, be- 
 cause there was much [many waters] water there." 
 (Chap. 'iii. 23.) "And he [Jesus] went away again 
 beyond Jordan, unto the place where John at first bap- 
 tized." (Chap. X. 40.) 
 
 The advocates of immersion have drawn largely from 
 the clause, "because there was much water there," 
 urging that immersion required much water, and for 
 that especial reason John sojourned at ^non, a place 
 of several springs or fountains of water. But abun- 
 dance of water, for drinking, washing, and culinary 
 purposes, are as necessary to crowds and large assem- 
 blies in a wilderness, or uninhabited portions of the 
 country, as it would be for their baptism by immersion. 
 When our Methodist brethren purpose holding a large 
 camp meeting, abundance of good spring water is 
 regarded as a very important item. And they are influ- 
 enced in their selection of a place for such an assem- 
 blage more perhaps by a good supply of water than 
 any other one thing — not because of immersion, but 
 for the necessary use and comfort of their assembly, 
 -^non, being the plural of fountain, or spring, probably 
 took its name from the many springs or fountains there. 
 And this agrees with the Greek v8ara novka '•^many wa- 
 ters,'' many springs or fountains, instead of much water 
 in one body. And the passage would be more literally 
 translated if rendered, "And John also was baptizing 
 at ^non (the Springs) near to Salim, because there 
 
 27* 
 
318 iENON, THE SPRINGS OR MANY FOUNTAINS. 
 
 were many -waters there," springs or fountains, to sup- 
 ply all the wants of the multitudes that flocked to his 
 baptism. He would hardly have left the Jordan for 
 ^NON, if water for immersion had been his object. 
 Yet he might have done so for the sake of purer and 
 cooler water to slake the thirst of the people, and for 
 other necessary uses. 
 
 The question has been triumphantly asked, ''Why 
 did John baptize in the river ? Why did he go down 
 to the water at all — even to the edge of the water — if 
 baptism was performed by pouring or sprinkling ? Why 
 not bring the water from the river to the people to bap- 
 tize them?" Such questions would not arise if the 
 circumstances of the case were rightly pondered. 
 Crow^ds of people collected together to see and hear 
 something new outside the city limits, and in retired 
 places, do not often take with them vessels for carrying 
 water. John did not select the city for his operations ; 
 had he done so, such multitudes must have blocked up- 
 the streets, and excited the civil authorities against his 
 mission. He made choice of more open and retired 
 places, under the groves and along the banks of the 
 Jordan. It was, therefore, an easy matter to step down 
 to the edge of the water ; it would even be more con- 
 venient for taking up the water in his hand to pour 
 upon the heads of his numerous converts. For it must 
 be remembered that many thousands were baptized by 
 him ; while we have no right to suppose that articles 
 for such purposes would be very abundant in assem- 
 blages of like character in "the wilderness." (Judges 
 vii. 5, 6.) We are informed that " all Jerusalem and 
 
NOTHING DECISIVE AS TO THE MODE. 819 
 
 all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan," re- 
 ceived his baptism. And if one-twentieth of this popu- 
 lation, according to the estimate of Josephus, was 
 baptized by immersion, John must have remained in the 
 water a large portion of each day during his whole mis- 
 sion. 
 
 Such interrogations, therefore, have no force as argu- 
 ments against baptism by aspersion or otherwise. 
 Place and circumstances show that stepping down to or 
 into the river, would be a natural and easy way to 
 obtain the water even for sprinkling so many ; pre- 
 eminently so, since John's baptism was a Jewish imrifi- 
 cation for the reception of Christ ; and such purifications 
 generally required running water. Hence the propriety 
 of selecting the river Jordan, and the running fountains 
 or streams at ^non, as suitable places for both the rite 
 and the necessary comfort of the people. 
 
 It must now be clear to the reader that nothing 
 definite in regard to the mode can be learned from 
 John's b'aptism. We have examined this point, not 
 because it could decide the mode of Christian baptism, 
 (for we have already shown that John's baptism was 
 not Christian baptism,) but because it has been sup- 
 posed that whatever mode was practiced by John was 
 adopted by the Apostles. This, however, does not ne- 
 cessarily follow ; and if it did, would conflict with the 
 theory that John sought places of much ivater for the 
 object of immersion ; for it is certain no such intima- 
 tion is to be found in the sacred record, for the purpose 
 of Christian baptism. On the contrary, in every case, 
 when the message of the Apostles was received, there 
 
320 BAPTISM OF THREE THOUSAND. 
 
 and then they were baptized. The three thousand on 
 the day of Pentecost, in the city of Jerusalem — men 
 and women by Philip in Samaria — the eunuch by the 
 wayside — Paul in Damascus, and probably in the room 
 where the scales fell from his eyes — Cornelius at his 
 own house — Lydia near the river side — the jailer within 
 the prison walls — the disciples at Ephesus, and others 
 besides, without one word in regard to inconvenience 
 or delay, or removal to another place for the rite. 
 
 II. We will now proceed to examine every instance 
 of Christian Baptism in the New Testament from 
 which an inference in any possible way can be made to 
 bear on the mode in which it was administered. We 
 begin with the three thousand on the day of Pentecost. 
 Having received the baptism of the Holy Ghost, the 
 Apostles entered forthwith upon the great work for 
 which they had been set apart. The people collected 
 in large numbers to hear them, and many were made to 
 cry out, ^' Men and brethren, what shall we do ?" 
 
 Acts ii. 38, 39, 41. '' Then Peter said unto them, 
 Repent, and be baptized every one of you, in the name 
 of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall 
 receive the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, 
 and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even 
 as many as the Lord our God shall call.... Then they 
 that received his word were baptized ; and the same 
 day there were added unto them about three thousand 
 souls." 
 
 This was the first day's work of the Apostles under 
 
BAPTISM OF THREE THOUSAND. 321 
 
 the New Dispensation. Baptized themselves by the 
 Holy Ghust, and three thousand souls converted by 
 their preaching, and then baptized by them. But not 
 a single thing is said or done, so far as the record goes, 
 to indicate in the slightest degree that they were bap- 
 tized by immersion. Not a word about their going to 
 river or pool for baptism ; the whole transaction is record- 
 ed as if they were baptized as soon as convinced by 
 the preaching of the Apostles, and they ready to re- 
 ceive them. And the baptism might easily have been 
 performed in a short time from the contents of the 
 watering pots kept for purifying ; but if by immersion, 
 it must have been laborious work for the remainder of 
 that day. 
 
 Further, it was at a season of the year when the little 
 brook Cedron was generally dry ; the public baths, if 
 any, we may suppose were in the hands of those in 
 authority ; and the supposition that they were scattered 
 through the city to find private baths for such a num- 
 ber, would hardly correspond with the time allowed 
 them, and purport of the record. The only mode inti- 
 mated is that of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, under 
 the figure of "poured out," (^IfA^??.) Therefore, so 
 far as allusions indicate mode, they are decidedly in 
 favor of pouring, or aspersion, rather than immersion. 
 So much for the baptism of the three thousand. 
 
 We come next to the baptism of the people of Sa- 
 maria. 
 
 Acts viii. 12, 13. "But when they believed Philip, 
 preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, 
 
322 NO MODE DEFINED BY THE EUNUCH'S BAPTISM. 
 
 and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both 
 
 men and women. Then Simon himself believed also ; 
 
 and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, 
 
 and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which 
 
 were done." 
 
 We have no allusion to mode here — consequently, 
 
 nothing to favor the idea of immersion. 
 
 III. The next in order is the baptism of the eunuch 
 by Philip. The eunuch, while riding in his carriage, 
 was reading the prophecy of Isaiah, and invited Philip, 
 who drew near to him, to take a seat with him. That 
 portion upon which he was engaged, treated of the 
 vicarious sufferings of Christ, which is embraced in the 
 52d and 53d chapters of Isaiah, (divisions into chap- 
 ters had not then been made,) and asked Philip " of 
 whom speaketh the Prophet this? of himself, or of 
 some other man ?" 
 
 Acts viii. 35-39. " Then Philip opened his mouth, 
 and began at the same scripture, and preached unto 
 him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came 
 to a certain water ; and the eunuch said. See, here is 
 water ; what doth hinder me to be baptized ? And 
 Philip saith. If thou believest with all thine heart, thou 
 mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Je- 
 sus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the 
 chariot to stand still ; and they went down both into the 
 water, both Philip and the eunuch ; and he baptized 
 him. And when they were come up out of the water, 
 the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the 
 
CIRCUMSTANCES UNFAVORABLE TO IMMERSION. 323 
 
 eunuch saw him no more ; and he went on his way 
 rejoicing." 
 
 This passage has been regarded by some persons as 
 ahuost proof positive of immersion. But the very same 
 reasoning applies to it that applies to the baptism 
 in the river of Jordan. The Greek words rendered 
 "into" and "out of," as often mean "unto" and 
 "from." And if translated, "they went down both 
 to the water," and were "come w^ from the water," it 
 would be in perfect accordance with the Greek ; and 
 hence proof resting upon the mere translation of such 
 words amounts to nothing. St. Matthew uses the same 
 Greek word which is rendered "into," in this place, 
 when he says : "Go thou (sts) to the sea," — not into the 
 sea. (Chap. xvii. 27.) Also for "unto," in the passage, 
 " I am not sent but (eis) u7ito the lost sheep of the house 
 of Israel," — not into the lost sheep. (Chap. xv. 24.) 
 Again: "All things are ready, come (si-s) ujito the mar- 
 riage," — not into the marriage. (Chap. xxii. 4.) Thus 
 it will be perceived how uncertain is the meaning of the 
 phrase "went down into the water." And equally un- 
 certain is its corresponding one, "come up out of the 
 water." St. Matthew uses the same word for separating 
 the wicked from the righteous. " Sever the wicked (sx) 
 from among the just," — not out of (Chap. xiii. 49.) 
 Again : " The tree is known (ex) from or bi/ its fruit," — 
 not out of (Chap. xii. 23.) St. John uses it in like 
 manner : " Many good works have I shown you {ex) 
 from my Father," — not out of mj Father. 
 
 Now what is an argument worth in any cause, resting 
 
324 CIRCUMSTANCES UNFAVORABLE TO IMMERSION. 
 
 on such a basis as tins ? The verbs with which these pre- 
 positions stand connected, accord as well with descend- 
 ing from the chariot to the water, and going w^ from the 
 water to the chariot, as descending into the water, and 
 going up out of it. And even admitting that they went 
 into it, would not prove any particular mode of the bap- 
 tism, as we have before shown. Besides which, there 
 are other circumstances that seem to conflict with the 
 idea of immersion. There is no river or water-course of 
 any note between Jerusalem and Gaza, where they were 
 travelling — St. Luke calls it a way that is "desert." 
 He also calls the place of the baptism, "a certain 
 water," as if so inconsiderable as not to deserve the 
 name of river or pond or lake, and hence it was pro- 
 bably one of those luay-side wells, which travellers 
 inform us are to be found sometimes in desert coun- 
 tries, provided for the accommodation and lodging 
 places of those who travel through that way. And 
 such being the case, one might be washed or sprinkled, 
 when plunging him under the water would be imprac- 
 ticable. It must be remembered also that travelling 
 on foot as Philip was, w^et clothes after an immersion, 
 would be rather inconvenient to carry; or, if the opera- 
 tion was performed nude, we hope that we shall be 
 excused in this age, if we depart from example in that 
 particular. 
 
 We should further inquire what suggested baptism to 
 the mind of the Eunuch, that he should propound to 
 Philip the question, " What doth hinder me to be bap- 
 tized?" as soon as he saw water. By turning to that 
 portion of Isaiah which the Eunuch was reading, we 
 
NO MODE OF BAPTISM POINTED OUT. 325 
 
 shall see that the prophet, among the first things after 
 introducing the vicarious sufferings of Christ, says, "So 
 shall he sprinkle many nations." (Hi. 15.) If Philip 
 preached to him baptism from these words, he could 
 hardly have preached baptism by immersion. There- 
 fore, in either case, the probabilities are against, rather 
 than in favor of immersion. 
 
 All the circumstances considered, the condition of 
 travellers, scarcity of water, and language of Isaiah — 
 this passage, on which so much reliance has been placed 
 for immersion, and which Mr. Carson thinks, under the 
 " most violent persuasion it could sustain on the rack, 
 would still cry out, immersion^ immersion,'''^ really 
 proves as much for any other mode as for immersion. 
 No logician can admit that it proves the Eunuch was 
 plunged .under the water. And this is all that we are 
 now to settle concerning it. We have no objection to 
 immersion in itself; our object is to ascertain whether 
 it was the mode practiced by the apostles, and whether 
 we can find any authority that will justify us in con- 
 fining baptism to that one mode and forbidding all 
 others. This we have certainly failed to do thus far. 
 
 4. The next baptism in order is that of St. Paul's. 
 While on his way to Damascus as a persecutor of Chris- 
 tians, he was struck with blindness, and removed to the 
 house of a friend, where he remained " three days with- 
 out sight, and neither did eat nor drink." At the end 
 of which time Ananias was sent to him to open his eyes 
 and baptize him. 
 
 * Carson on Baptism. 
 
 28 
 
326 ^'STANDING UP, WAS BAPTIZED." 
 
 Acts ix. 17, 18. "And Ananias went his way, and 
 entered into the house : and putting his hands on him, 
 said. Brother Saul, the Lord (even Jesus that appeared 
 unto thee in the way as thou earnest) hath sent me, that 
 thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the 
 Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes, 
 as it had been scales : and he received sight forthwith, 
 and arose, and was baptized." 
 
 The following is St. Paul's own account of the same. 
 Acts XX. 12, 16. "And one Ananias, a devout man 
 according to the law, having a good report of all the 
 Jews which dwelt there, came unto me, and stood, and 
 said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the 
 same hour, I looked up upon him. And he said, the 
 God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest 
 know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear 
 the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness 
 unto all men, of what thou hast seen and heard. And 
 now why tarriest thou? arise and be baptized and wash 
 away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." 
 
 These two narratives are essentially the same. Saul 
 had been struck with blindness, and three days' praying 
 and fasting in the house of Judah — Ananias is sent to 
 him by the Lord, finds him engaged in prayer, lays his 
 hands upon him, saying, "receive thy sight," — scales 
 of blindness fall from his eyes — he looks up, and Ana- 
 nias bids him "arise and be baptized," — and he arose 
 and was baptized. Literally, "standing up, he was 
 baptized." 
 
 Now what do, we find here pointing out the exclusive 
 
POURINa OUT OF THE SPIRIT CALLED BAPTISM. 327 
 
 mode of immersion ? So far as the narrative and cir- 
 cumstances indicate any thing, it is that of baptism in 
 the room and on the spot where Ananias found him; 
 which suggest pouring or sprinkling rather than immer- 
 sion. " Standing up, he was baptized." Imagination 
 can take him out to a river or pool and make a great 
 display — but as faithful interpreters of God's word, we 
 must confine ourselves to the laws of interpretation — 
 we must be governed by the record and circumstances 
 of the case. We cannot, therefore, infer immersion, or 
 confine baptism to that particular mode, from such an 
 account as this. But rather the contrary. 
 
 5. We come now to the first baptism of any, outside 
 of the pale of the Jewish Church. Cornelius, a gentile 
 and Roman officer, but truly a devout man, was com- 
 manded by an angel to send for Peter, who received also 
 instructions by a vision, not to despise the gentiles, and 
 went to the house of Cornelius, and there preached to 
 him and his friends collected together, Jesus. 
 
 Acts X. 44, 48. ''While Peter yet spake these words, 
 the Holy Ghost fell* on all them which heard the word. 
 And they of the circumcision which believed were aston- 
 ished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the 
 gentiles also was poured outf the gift of the Holy Ghost. 
 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify 
 God. Then said Peter, Can any man forbid water, 
 that these should not be baptized, which have received 
 the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded 
 them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." 
 
328 POURING OUT OF THE SPIRIT CALLED BAPTISM. 
 
 This though the first baptism among uninitiated gen- 
 tiles, is accompanied with no prescribed mode — nothing 
 about going to a pool or a bath — simply a command at 
 the lime and place that they be baptized. And when it 
 was heard at Jerusalem that " the gentiles had received 
 the word of God," it caused much commotion among 
 the '^circumcision." And St. Peter thus rehearsed the 
 matter : — 
 
 Acts xi. 15, 17. "And as I began to speak, the Holy 
 Ghost fell* on them, as on us at the beginning. Then 
 remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, 
 John indeed baptized with water ; but ye shall be bap- 
 tized with the Holy Ghost. For as much then as God 
 gave them the like gift, as he did unto us, who believed 
 on the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I, that I could with- 
 stand God." 
 
 There is nothing to suggest the mode of their baptism 
 in this case, unless it be the baptism of the Holy Ghost, 
 which is described as "fell upon" or "shed forth," 
 and "poured out;" and which St. Peter himself says 
 he regarded as the fulfillment of the promise of the 
 Lord — "ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost." 
 And seeing .these were baptized by the Holy Ghost, 
 immediately baptism by water was suggested to his 
 mind ; and he asked, " Can any man forbid water, that 
 these should not be baptized, who have received the 
 Holy Ghost as well as we?" When an invisible opera- 
 tion is likened to something visible, we may presume it 
 
 * E7tf7t£(5£. 
 
PAUL AND SILAS AT PHILIPPI. 329 
 
 is because of some resemblance between the things asso- 
 ciated together. Between pouring out of the Spirit 
 and dipping of the body under water, there is cer- 
 tainly very little. But pouring the water on the head, 
 and pouring out of the Spirit on men, very strikingly 
 resemble each other; while bap>tism by the Holy Ghost 
 and hajptism by water, have both the same leading object 
 in view — the purification and renewal of the heart.* 
 And both were intimately associated in the minds of 
 John the Baptist, the Saviour, and his apostles. f 
 
 Pouring being the only mode alluded to in the case 
 of Cornelius and his friends, it is consequently the mode 
 suggested by the narrative of tlieir baptism, and not 
 immersion. Therefore, from this case, instead of finding 
 authority for confining baptism to immersion, we are 
 led to the opposite conclusion. 
 
 6. The next case from which any thing can be 
 inferred from the circumstances, under which it was 
 administered, is that of the jailer. Paul and Silas 
 had been apprehended, beaten, and thrown into prison ! 
 An earthquake the same night threw open the 2^rison 
 doors, and the jailer being aroused /rom sleep, and find- 
 ing them open, supposed the prisoners had escaped, and 
 was about to kill himself. Paul called to him to do 
 himself no harm, saying, "We are all here." 
 
 The jailer called for a light, sprang in, and fell down 
 at the apostles' feet, and "brought them out (of the 
 inner prison,) and said, 'Sirs, what must I do to be 
 saved?' " 
 
 * John iii. 5 ; Acts ii. 38 ; Titus iii. 5. 
 cts i. 
 
 28* 
 
380 PAUL AND SILAS AT PHILIPPI. 
 
 Acts xvi. 31-34. "And they said, Believe on the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. 
 And they spoke unto him the word of the Lord, and to 
 all that were in his house. And he took them the same 
 hour of the night, and washed their stripes, and was 
 BAPTIZED, he and all his, straightway/." And when he 
 had brought them into his house, he set meat before 
 them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house." 
 
 Here the baptism, like that of Cornelius and others, 
 was administered forthwith, the same hour of the night, 
 even before they went into the apartment where the 
 jailer lived, as it appears. The earthquake having 
 aroused all in and about the prison, they had collected 
 together, probably in the outer court, where the apostles 
 addressed them. The jailer first washed the lacerated 
 bodies of the apostles, and was then baptized, he and all 
 his, straightway. After which he took them into his 
 own apartment and set meat before them. The apos- 
 tles preached to all present, the {oixlaj '^household," 
 which includes the domestics and attendants of an estab- 
 lishment — but only the jailer and his own immediate 
 family (ol avtov rcdvtsij were baptized. 
 
 There is nothing written in this place to indicate the 
 mode of this baptism; but the late hour of the night, 
 within prison walls, and without any apparent delay, 
 all taken together, suggest the probability of any other 
 mode, rather than that of immersion. We are not 
 informed that prisons, in those days, were fitted up 
 with baths and conveniences of like nature. And no 
 allusion being made to such things or to immersion, we 
 
BAPTISM OF JOHN'S DISCIPLES AT EPHESUS. 331 
 
 have no right to assume them. Consequently this, like 
 all the other cases examined, fails to point out a case of 
 immersion, or to show any authority for confining bap- 
 tism to that mode. 
 
 7. The only remaining instance of baptism, from 
 which the slightest inference as to mode could be 
 drawn, is that at Ephesus. The Apostle Paul meeting 
 with certain disciples there, said unto them — 
 
 Acts xix. 2, 6. " Have ye received the Holy Ghost, 
 since ye believed? And they said unto him, we have not 
 so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. 
 And he said unto them, unto what then were ye bap- 
 tized? And they said, unto John's baptism. Then, 
 said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of 
 repentance, saying unto the people, that they should 
 believe on him which should come after him, that is, on 
 Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were bap- 
 tized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul 
 had laid his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon 
 them." 
 
 We certainly do not find any intimation of immersion 
 in this place. If an inference affecting the mode can 
 be drawn from it, it is that the narrative would intimate 
 more delay between the baptism and laying on of the 
 apostles hands, in the case of immersion, than the 
 record indicates. Its natural interpretation leads one 
 to infer that the imposition of hands followed immedi- 
 ately after the baptism, and without any such delay as 
 the immersions of the present day require. 
 
332 NO CASE OF UNEQUIVOCAL BAPTISM. 
 
 We have now examined every case of Christian bap- 
 tism in the New Testament that can throw any light on 
 the mode. Some other cases of the mere fact of bap- 
 tism, without any reference to the circumstances, are 
 mentioned — as the baptism of Lydia and her family, of 
 Stephanas and his family. Of Crispus and Gains, &c. — 
 but only ih.Q fact^ is recorded. We have considered all 
 in which the language or circumstances give any intima- 
 tion as to how they were probably performed. 
 
 Have we then found a single case of unequivocal 
 immersion ? or any thing that can authorize any man, 
 or any set of men, to confine baptism to immersion, 
 and pronounce all other modes invalid? The first that 
 occurred under the Christian dispensation, that of three 
 thousand in Jerusalem, Avas under circumstances highly 
 unfavorable^ instead of favorable to immersion. And 
 all that we have heard about baths and cisterns in 
 Jerusalem, (for which we have never yet seen reliable 
 authority,) do not meet the difficulties. Besides, what 
 could the cistern in Jerusalem do for other places ? 
 Paul was baptized in Damascus, Cornelius in Caesarea, 
 the jailer at Philippi, and others at Ephesus; not one of 
 which was ever in Judea. And in every case not the 
 slightest intimation to lead one to suppose they were 
 immersed ; but on the contrary, under circumstances 
 and recorded m terms, that suggest affusion or asper- 
 sion as the most probable. 
 
 The only case, the narrative of which could suggest 
 the idea of immersion, is that of the Eunuch, and this 
 to such as are governed entirely by our English trans- 
 lation ; for the original Greek, as we have shown, is 
 
THE MODE INDICATED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT. 333 
 
 susceptible not only of diiferent rendering, but of one 
 that excludes even the possibility/ of immersion. The 
 present translation in our English version does not 
 teach immersion, nor could any rendering of -which the 
 passage is susceptible teach it. Laying aside the cir- 
 cumstances, and placing every thing in the most favor- 
 able light, neither immersion nor any other particular 
 mode can be inferred from it; therefore, it gives no 
 authority for any exclusive mode. Shall we then base 
 an invariable law on such a passage, and make immer- 
 sion the only valid baptism? Surely not. The only 
 mode of baptism which we have seen clearly indicated, 
 is that of the baptism of the Holy Ghost. And this, 
 under the "figures of '^poured out," ^' shed forth,'' and 
 ^'descending.'' And this baptism, intimately associated 
 with the baptism of water in the minds of the apostles, 
 as St. Peter's own words proA^e. Therefore, if we are 
 guided in our practice of baptism by the teaching of 
 the Holy Scriptures, in connection with the recorded 
 instances therein, pouring and sp)rinMing have both 
 stronger claims to our election than immersion. 
 
 III. But great reliance is placed on certain figurative 
 allusions to baptism by the Apostle Paul, who, in the 
 first place, having shown how the second Adam redeemed 
 us from the condemnation of the first, in order to fore- 
 stall the inference which he supposes some might draw, 
 that we may continue in sin that grace may abound, re- 
 plies — 
 
 Kom. vi. 2-6. " God forbid : how shall we that are 
 dead to sin, live any longer therein ? Know ye not. 
 
334 NOT THE SYMBOL BUT THE END OF BAPTISM. 
 
 that SO many of us as were baptized into Jesus 
 Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore, we 
 are buried with him by baptism into death ; that like as 
 Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the 
 Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 
 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of 
 his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resur- 
 rection. Knowing this that our old man is crucified 
 with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that 
 henceforth we should not serve sin." 
 
 It is inferred from the words " buried with him by 
 baptism into death," that i\iQmode of baptism is com- 
 pared to a BURIAL ; and hence evidence of baptism by 
 immersion. But before we interpret figurative lan- 
 guage, we should examine the subject matter in hand. 
 St. Paul was not discussing the mode of baptism, nor 
 the authority of baptism. Our deliverance from sin 
 through Christ, was his subject. And we being delivered 
 from its condemnation, through Christ, he tells us, we 
 must seek to be delivered from its practice also. For 
 if we recognize him as our deliverer, by means of his 
 death, then regarding him as our substitute, we must 
 reckon ourselves as having died with him ; and being 
 dead unto sin, henceforth live only unto God through 
 Christ ; and not let sin reign in our bodies. For this 
 end he died, and we were grafted into him by baptism 
 to be partakers of his death for this end. We were, 
 therefore, made one with him in his death ; hence bu- 
 ried with him by baptism, as the instrument by which 
 we are united to him and made one with him. Not by 
 
CHRIST OUR REPRESENTATIVE HEAD. 335 
 
 baptism as tlie symbol of his death, but as the appointed 
 medium of our visible connection with him and through 
 him with his death. Thus grafted into him as our repre- 
 sentative head, we died unto sin with him, and being 
 dead to sin in him by the same simile, we should regard 
 ourselves as having risen with him, and henceforth walk 
 with him in newness of life. 
 
 The Apostle evidently refers to the final eiid for 
 which we are baptized, and not to the mode. We are 
 baptized into Christ for what end ? Not merely as our 
 head and deliverer, from the condemnation of the first 
 Adam, but from the power and condemnation of all sin. 
 How did he deliver us from all sin ? By his death. 
 Then we were baptized into his death to obtain this 
 deliverance. And if into his death, on the same prin- 
 ciple were we buried with him, and should regard our- 
 selves as dead to sin ; and as Christ was raised from 
 the dead by the power of the Father, we also being 
 raised with him, should walk with him in newness of 
 life. No necessary allusion to the mode of baptism in 
 all this. It would be turning aside from tracing the 
 great principle and consequent duties of our connection 
 with the death and sufi'erings of Christ to follow after 
 an incidental resemblance, to refer the mode in such a 
 connection. He is treating of that connection as a^fact, 
 not as a symbol. Hence he goes on to say, "that like 
 as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory 
 (power) of the Father, even so we also should walk in 
 newness of life." Being made one with him in his 
 death, we should be one with him in his resurrection. 
 The same idea is continued through the next verse, (5 :) 
 
336 CHRIST OUR REPRESENTATIVE HEAD. 
 
 ''For if we have been united together in the similitude 
 
 of his death, (Ei yap Gvfx<pvtot. y^yovafxsv rw d/j-otiofxatL rov^avdtov 
 
 avTov,) we shall be also of his resurrection." That is, 
 having been made one with, him by baptism into his 
 death, the same similitude shall continue in regard to 
 his resurrection. '' Knowing this, that our old man is 
 C7'ucified with him, that the body of sin might be de- 
 stroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." (Ver. 
 6.) From which we see the same principle connects us 
 with his crucifixion and reign in our hearts, as well as 
 with his death and resurrection. Our " old man was 
 crucified Avith him that the body of sin might be de- 
 stroyed," and we henceforth live unto Christ, instead of 
 serving sin. 
 
 Now does baptism as a symbol shadow forth the Cru- 
 cifixion, Death, Burial, Resurrection and Reign of 
 Christ in our hearts, or does it rather connect us eccle- 
 siastically — aye, really, if rightly received — with all 
 these through him our representative head ? 
 
 Much noise has been made over our present transla- 
 tion of the 5th verse — " For if w^e have been planted 
 together, in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in 
 the likeness of his resurrection." This, though not as 
 literal as that which w^e have given it, yet when rightly 
 interpreted, conveys the same idea under a different 
 figure. The simile is taken from grafting scions into 
 another stock ; thus we are grafted into Christ, and 
 through him into his death by baptism — (" as many as 
 were baptized into Christ were baptized into his 
 death") — and being made one with him by baptism, as 
 the scion and stock become one tree, wc must grow up 
 
BAPTISM CALLED CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST, 337 
 
 with him as one tree. When he atoned for our sins, 
 we, as in a figure, suffered with him. Being thus 
 '' planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall 
 he also [not were] in the likeness of his resurrection." 
 " In the likeness," here, in the last clause, is supplied, 
 not being in the original, and may refer to our conduct 
 in life, or to our future resurrection. There is no neces- 
 sary symbol of baptism by immersion. 
 
 Substitute in the place of baptism, the rite of circum- 
 cision, and the meaning will be the same, and followed 
 by the same legitimate deductions. " Know ye not that 
 so many of us as were circumcised into Jesus Christ 
 were circumcised into his death ? Therefore, we are 
 buried with him by circumcision into death. That like 
 as Christ was raised from the dead, by the glory of the 
 Father, even so we also should walk in newness of 
 life. For if we have been united together in the simili- 
 tude of his death, or planted together in the likeness 
 of his death, we shall be also of his resurrection." 
 
 Here all that the context suggests — all that the scope 
 of the reasoning requires, are preserved, and the legiti- 
 mate deductions the same, without any symbol of death 
 in the rite. 
 
 Nor is circumcision a forced and unauthorized substi- 
 tute in such a connection. The Apostle Paul introduces 
 with this same figure, the same subject in another 
 place, and calls baptism the "circumcision of Christ." 
 Writing to the Colossians, he says, chap. ii. 9-12 : 
 " For in him [Christ] dwelleth all the fullness of the 
 Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which 
 is the head of all principality and power: in whom 
 29 
 
338 RITUAL UNION WITH CHRIST. 
 
 also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made 
 without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the 
 flesh, by the circumcision of Christ ; buried with him in 
 [or by] baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him, 
 through the faith of the operation of God, who hath 
 raised him from the dead." The "circumcision of 
 Christ" and baptism are here made synonymous terms. 
 Now continue the first, which has the same meaning, in 
 the place of baptism, and it would read, "buried with 
 him in [or by] the circumcision of Christy wherein also 
 ye are risen w^ith him" (not by hands from a " liquid 
 grave," but) "through the faith of the operation of God, 
 who hath raised him from the dead." The preposition 
 before baptism, in the passage to the Romans, is 5ta, 
 which means, "through, by, by means of;" in this to 
 the Colossians, it is iv, which, as we have before seen, 
 means "in, by, at, for, with," &c. So that nothing can 
 be claimed for the phrase, "in baptism," but rather the 
 reverse. 
 
 Therefore, these passages, on which so much reliance 
 is placed for immersion, really prove nothing, so far as 
 the mode of baptism is concerned. All that can with 
 certainty be inferred from them is, that there may be 
 an allusion to the mode, but that is all. But if there is 
 such an allusion, it is neither necessary to the scope of the 
 Apostle's reasoning, nor can it be proved from the lan- 
 guage employed. Indeed, when closely examined, the 
 symbol supposed is not so striking as some imagine. 
 The Apostle does not say we are buried with him by 
 baptism as in a grave, but by baptism into his death. 
 He points to the object for which we are baptized — not 
 
RITUAL UNION WITH CHRIST. 339 
 
 to the mode. It is merely the sound of words familiar, 
 and association of death with burial, that lead so many 
 to suppose that immersion under water is alluded to. 
 Keeping in mind the end that the Apostle has in view, 
 we shall not be drawn aside to imaginary resemblances. 
 He includes with the sign the thing signiffed — treats of 
 the internal under the name of external. Thence he 
 also says, ''We are crucified with Christ;" but he does 
 not mean that we have hung upon the cross as a sym- 
 bol of crucifixion. He likewise says, "As many as 
 have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ;" but 
 he does not mean that putting on clothes is a symbol 
 of the mode of baptism. He designs to teach that by 
 baptism as the appointed rite, we put on Christ as a 
 garment — were crucified with him in our affections — died 
 with him on his cross — and were buried with him in his 
 death. We were, therefore, baptized into his death for 
 the death of our sins — henceforth to live a new life. 
 
 This affords an explanation of what the Apostle 
 means when he asks, " Else what shall they do which 
 are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all ? 
 Why are they then baptized for the dead?" (1 Cor. xv. 
 29.) They had been baptized into the death of Christ, 
 for death to their sins, and regeneration in their second 
 Adam. If he had not risen, " then their faith was 
 vain," and they were yet in their sins. For in his re- 
 surrection depended the validity of his atonement, and 
 was involved the earnest of their own resurrection. 
 
 The Apostle was reasoning with those who denied 
 the resurrection of the body. This, he argued, involved 
 the truth of Christ's resurrection. And if Christ had 
 
340 REGENERATED IN CHRIST OUR SECOND ADAM. 
 
 not risen, then his death, into which they had been 
 baptized, for death to their sins, had not accomplished 
 for them what they sought, and they were all yet in 
 their sins. Now had baptism been received among 
 them as the symbol of a burial under the water, and 
 resurrection from the "liquid grave," how could tlie 
 Corinthians have rejected the doctrine of the resurrec- 
 tion of the body ? If every baptism was to them a 
 symbol of death and resurrection, they would hardly 
 have adopted the idea that there was "no resurrec- 
 tion." But regarding baptism as the symbol of cleans- 
 ing and seal of their covenant relations with Christ, 
 the question is diiferent. Their connection with his 
 death is seen in another form; and their baptism into 
 his death is for the death of their sins. And the Apos- 
 tle may well ask, why are they then baptized for the 
 dead — the death of Christ, and their own death to their 
 sins — if Christ has not risen to accomplish this end for 
 them? These objects are sufficient for "the dead" to 
 be put in the plural, whether for the "plural of dignity" 
 or of numbers. 
 
 By the same principle we understand what the Apos- 
 tle means in his Epistle to Titus, when he says, chap, 
 iii. 5, 6 : " Not by works of righteousness which we 
 have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by 
 the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the 
 Holy Ghost," which he shed or poured on us abundantly 
 through Jesus Christ our Saviour. He uses the com- 
 mon word, Tiovtpov, for washing, as synonymous with 
 baptism, and includes with the outward sign the thing 
 signified ; by which we are regenerated in Christ, the 
 second Adam. 
 
BAPTISM IS THE EMBLEM OF PURITY. 341 
 
 The same great principle also explains the meaning 
 of the Apostle Peter, when he tells us the saving of 
 Noah and his family in the ark by water, was a type 
 of baptism. 1 Peter iii. 20-22 : " When once the long 
 suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the 
 ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, 
 were saved by water. The like figure whereunto, even 
 baptism, doth also now save us, (not the putting away 
 of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good con- 
 science towards God,) by the resurrection of Jesus 
 Christ, who is gone into Heaven, and is on the right 
 hand of God, angels and authorities and powers being 
 made subject unto him." The resemblance is in the 
 instrumentality of water floating the ark wherein Noah 
 was saved, and baptism bringing us into the Church of 
 Christ as the ark of our salvation. As the waters of 
 the flood, which destroyed the old world, were made 
 instrumental in saving Noah and his family in the ark, 
 so the waters of baptism, by which we are initiated 
 into the Church and thereby connected with Christ, are 
 made ritually instrumental in saving us. But lest we 
 .might from such language infer that the mere outward 
 application of the water saves, he explains, it is the 
 thing symbolized — to wit, the internal purification, cor- 
 responding to the emblem — "not the putting away of 
 the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good con- 
 science toward God" — the possession and fulfilling, 
 through the Spirit, what baptism implies : which saves, 
 through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 
 
 In this, as in the other cases just examined, the sym- 
 bol is of baptism as the instrument, ritually grafting us 
 
 29* 
 
342 BAPTISM IS THE EMBLEM OE PURITY. 
 
 into Christ, and not of the mode of baptizing. To sup- 
 pose there is an allusion to the mode of immersion in 
 saving Noah in the ark, is to suppose it to be found in 
 every place where water is alluded to. Those who were 
 lost in the flood, were literally immersed — were buried; 
 but not those who were '' saved." If there be any allu- 
 sion to the mode of baptism, it must be the pouring 
 down of the rain upon the ark. We can see no other, 
 nor admit this, unless some portion of it perchance wet 
 the persons of Noah and his family. 
 
 There is an allusion to purification, as ^' the putting 
 away of the filth of the flesh" by washing of water, 
 clearly indicates. And such is the emblem wherever 
 water baptism is used. It symbolizes purity — the wash- 
 ing away of sin. Its Office is to graft us ritually into 
 Christ — its Umhlem is purity of heart — Cleansing, not a 
 Burial. 
 
 St. Paul says, " Let us draw near, in fullness of faith, 
 having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, 
 and our bodies washed with pure water."* Ananias said 
 to Saul, "Arise, and be baptized, and wash awayf thy 
 sins." All of which shows that the emblem of baptism, 
 as pointed out in the Holy Scriptures, is cleansing — 
 not a burial. The imagination may make it the emblem 
 of many things, and so make it a burial; but we do not 
 understand Christ or his Apostles so to teach. John 
 the baptist could not refer to a burial ; yet it is con- 
 tended that his mode probably became the mode of 
 Christ. Nor did Christ command baptism to be admin- 
 
 * Heb. X. 22. 7<.i^ov/xsvot — common word for wash. 
 ■f Acts xxii. 26. amoXouoac — wash, or cleanse from. 
 
FIGUKATIVE ALLUSIONS ALL EXAMINED. 343 
 
 istered as an emblem of his death ; but be did institute 
 the Supper, and say that the bread represented his bro- 
 ken body, and the cup or wine his shed blood, which he 
 commanded us to eat and drink in commemoration of 
 his death. But baptism he commanded simply to be 
 given in his name, in union with the name of the Father 
 and of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 But we have now examined all the figurative allusions 
 made to baptism in the New Testament that can aid us 
 in our inquiries. But not a single unequivocal allusion 
 to immersion has yet passed under our eyes. The two 
 on which most reliance is placed, (Rom. vi. and Col. ii.) 
 instead of being undoubted symbols of the mode of bap- 
 tism, are required by the context to refer to baptism as 
 the instrumental rite, uniting us to the death of Christ 
 as the branch to the vine ; and hence, with his crucifix- 
 ion and resurrection as well as his burial ; and, there- 
 fore, have no necessary reference to the modal act at 
 all ; for baptism in any mode could be applied to the 
 same end. We have seen also that the resemblance is 
 not so apt for immersion in a "liquid grave" as some 
 suppose : the end for which we are baptized, as the 
 Apostle tells us, being a death unto sin, and a new birth 
 unto righteousness. Wherefore, ^' we are buried with 
 him J)y baptism zn/o [or unto'] death.'' Not in a "liquid 
 grave," in imitation of death, but with Christ in His 
 DEATH, as our representative head. Those baptized into 
 him, were baptized into his death, and hence made par- 
 takers of all his sufferings, so that when he was buried, 
 they were buried with him. Hence a principle brought 
 out, before which immersion as a symbol of the mere 
 
344 FIGURATIVE ALLUSIONS ALL EXAMINED. 
 
 mode of burial, fades away as the shadow before the 
 sun. 
 
 Further, in the judgment of many able and learned 
 divines, the baptism referred to in these two passages, 
 was itself spiritual baptism ; and, therefore, could have 
 had no reference to the baptism of water. And this 
 view certainly accords well with what is said in regard 
 to the resurrection, in the passage to the Colossians : 
 " Buried with him in [or by] baptism, wherein also ye 
 are risen with him." How ? " Through the faith of 
 the operation of God, who hath raised him from the 
 dead." Not risen from the "liquid grave," by mortal 
 power, in resemblance of his resurrection, but by a spi- 
 ritual power, through faith in the operation of God. 
 
 We must, therefore, have something more certain 
 than a very improbable allusion, to bind our faith, or to 
 authorize us to bind the faith of others. Even if there 
 was no other obvious and probable meaning, we cannot 
 establish a principle of doctrine on a mere allusion. 
 Much less so, then, when that allusion cannot be proved 
 to have any reference to the supposed object.* 
 
 Thus, we have failed to find in the symbols and figu- 
 rative language of the New Testament, any authority 
 for immersion as the Apostolic mode of Baptism ! 
 
 We have, first, examined the meaning of the word 
 baptize, {BaTtti^u) and found that the writers of the New 
 Testament apply it to the use of water in several ways, 
 for ritual purification, and that instead of being a spe- 
 
 * When the essence of a Christian sacrament is to be determined, we 
 must decline admitting allusions as proof, since the evidence must be 
 clear and unequivocated. — Bishop Kenrick. 
 
NO MODES BUT THOSE OF THE SPIRIT INDICATED. 345 
 
 cific term, "signifying always to dip," it is generic in 
 its character, and used in the New Testament in the 
 general sense of purifying. Therefore, from the mean- 
 ing of the word alone, no particular mode of baptizing 
 can be inferred. 
 
 In the second place, we took up the practice of John 
 the baptist, and passed under review every recorded 
 instance of baptism by him, to ascertain what mode or 
 modes he adopted; and especially with reference to the 
 mode of immersion ; but could find no particular mode 
 defined or brought out from a single case, nor from 
 them all united. The use of water and its object are 
 recorded in specific terms, but the manner of applying 
 it is treated as a matter of indifference, and left unde- 
 fined. 
 
 In the third place, we examined the practice of the 
 Apostles, and investigated every case of Christian bap- 
 tism, with all the circumstances connected therewith, 
 and instead of immersion, found the circumstances more 
 favorable to a less inconvenient mode, and that the only 
 mode, in fact, clearly pointed out, was that of the bap- 
 tism of the Holy Spirit, under the figures of '' pouring 
 out, shed forth, and descending upon." Neither from 
 the words of Christ nor the example of his Apostles, 
 have we precept or example for immersion. 
 
 Lastly. We examined the symbols and figurative lan- 
 guage applied to the Christian baptism in the New 
 Testament, and still found no certain allusion to the 
 mode of immersion. 
 
 Therefore, after a rigid investigation of all that the 
 New Testament contains on the subject, we affirm, that 
 
346 NO MODES BUT THOSE OF THE SPIRIT INDICATED." 
 
 there is not a precept, example, or allusion, from 
 which an undoubted inference for iminersion as the 
 mode of Christian baptism can be deduced. Not one 
 that any impartial or legal mind will admit, can be 
 made the basis of an invariable law to bind the judg- 
 ment and consciences of men. 
 
CHAPTER XL 
 
 BAPTISM BY DIFFERENT MODES VALID IN EVERY AGE OP 
 THE CHURCH. 
 
 At the time of the Reformation — Church of Geneva — at Mentz — Council 
 of Cologne — English Church — Lynwood's Constitution — Wickliflfe — 
 Langres — Synod of Angers — Thomas Aquinas — Bonaventura — Strabo — 
 Gennadius — Augustine — Chrysos tom — Jerome — Athanasius — Gregory 
 Nazianzen — Basil — Baptism of Constantine — Washing before Pouring — 
 Cyprian — Lawrence and Romanus — Novatian — Basilides — Oi'igen— 
 Tertullian — Clemens Alexandrinus — Justin Martyr — Baptism of Christ 
 — Catacomb of Pontianus — Reasons for no prescribed Mode — Essence 
 and Incidents — Supper and Baptism — Greek Church — Mar Yohannan^ 
 Examination of Principles — Summary. 
 
 As we are unwilling to shut out any light that can 
 aid us in the attainment of truth, even in a question of 
 secondary importance, we will now examine the testi- 
 mony of history so far as shall be necessary to show 
 that baptism by different modes has been allowed and 
 regarded as valid in every age of the Church. For 
 although Baptist writers profess to ignore history, they 
 are in the habit of making very broad assertions in 
 regard to the history of immersion, such as it was the 
 universal practice of the Church for fifteen hundred 
 years. 
 
 We will pass therefore to the times of the Reforma- 
 tion, and see what the learned men of that age said and 
 did on this subject. 
 
348 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 In 1536, A. D., Calvin drew up a formula for the 
 administration of the sacraments in the Church at 
 Geneva. In which, for the order of baptism it was 
 written — '' Then the Minister of Baptism pours water 
 on the infant, saying, I baptize thee in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," &c. 
 In his "Institutes" he tells us — ''The difference is of 
 no moment, whether he that is baptized be dipped all 
 over, and if so, whether thrice or once, or whether he 
 be only wetted with the water poured 07i him." Edit. 
 Beg^e, 1576. 
 
 In 1551, A. D., the Agenda of the Church of Mentz, 
 in Germany, as published by Sebastian, directs — " Then 
 let the Priest take the child in his arms, and holding 
 him over the Font, let him with his right hand, three 
 several times, take water out of the Font and pour it 
 on the child's head, so that the water may wet its head 
 and shoulders." A note of explanation is added, which 
 informs its reader, that immersion or pouring is equally 
 valid, and that a man will do ill to break the custom of 
 his church for either. But gives several reasons why 
 pouring is better where the church will allow it.* 
 
 In 1536, A. D., a Council of Cologne refers to it as 
 a matter of indifference, whether " the child is thrice 
 dipped, or wetted with water," &c.t 
 
 In England, the Formula as set forth in the book of 
 Common Prayer, which has been the established rule of 
 the church since the final settlement of the Reformation, 
 assumes the modes of baptism to be a thing of indiffer- 
 ence, and requires the person to be dipped or poured on, 
 * See Wall's Hist. Bap., vol. ii. p. 361. f Ibid. 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 349 
 
 in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost. 
 
 And in 1422, one hundred years before the Reforma- 
 tion openly commenced, Lynwood, the Dean of Arches 
 under Henry Y., in his account of the English Consti- 
 tution, speaks of baptism by POUiiiNa and sprinkling 
 as alike valid with dipping. Referring to the more 
 common mode at that time of dipping, he adds a note — 
 " But this is not to be accounted to he of necessity to 
 haptism; it may he given hy pouring or sprinkling. 
 A7id this holds especially where the Church allows it.'' 
 Constit. lib. 3, c. de Bapt. cited by Wall. 
 
 It seems that in some places the practice was alto- 
 gether by dipping, and in others altogether by aifusion, 
 and in others again both modes were allowed. 
 
 Wickliffe, the first to preach the doctrines of the 
 Reformation in England, writing a half century before 
 Lynwood, 1380, says — "iVbr is it material whether they 
 he dipped once or thrice^ or water he poured on their 
 heads: but it must be done according to the custom of 
 the place where one dwells." Trial og. 14, c. 11, cited 
 by Wall. 
 
 About the same time, a Synod of Langres, in France, 
 1404, on the subject of baptism, speaks only of the mode 
 of pouring — "Let the Priest make iliVQQ pourings or 
 sprinklings of water on the infant's head." Bochell. 
 Decret. Eccl. Galli. 1. 2, de Bap.* 
 
 Advancing onward another century towards the Apos- 
 tles, we come to a Synod held in Angers, 1275 A. D., 
 which on the subject of baptism, directs—'' The infant 
 
 * See Wall's Hist. Baptism, vol. ii. pp. 3G0-3G2 
 
 30 
 
350 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 be dipped tJirice, or the water poured on three times, 
 according to the general custom of the Church." BochelL 
 Decret. Ecch Galli. L 2 de Bap.* 
 
 Some quarter of a century before, Thomas Aquinas, 
 in Italy, 1255 A. D., writes — "Water is used in the 
 sacrament of baptism for the purpose of corporal ablu- 
 tion, by which the interior ablution from sins is signi- 
 fied: and ablution with water can be made, not only by 
 immersion, but by aspersion or infusion." § 3, art. vii. 
 qu. 66, cited by Kenrick. 
 
 Bonaventura, about the same time, in France, re- 
 corded — " The way of Affusion is common in France 
 and other places, and was probably used by the Apos- 
 tles : but the way of dipping is more general," &c. L. 4, 
 Dist. 3 art. 2, cited by Wall. 
 
 As sculpture and paintings cannot be affected by 
 translations, but speak the same language to every age 
 and every nation, instead of detaining our readers with 
 dry repetitions, we shall let the artists of several cen- 
 turies teach us what was recognized in their times. The 
 following representation is the work of Greek artists, 
 and was common in the ninth and tenth centuries. 
 
 " The boy is unclothed, and the ordinance is adminis- 
 tered by pouring. This representation shows that the 
 present Abyssinian mode of baptism, as narrated by 
 Mr. Salt, anciently was extant among the Greeks as 
 well as among the Romans. For, although this plate is 
 at Home, yet it Avas the work of Greek artists, in the 
 ninth and tenth centuries." C. Taylor's edit, of Cal- 
 niet's Bible Dictionary. 
 
 * See Wall's Hist. Baptism, vol. ii. pp. 3G0-362. 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 351 
 
 BAPTISM OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 Mr. Salt, to whom reference is here made, is a modern 
 English traveller, who describes the baptism of a Mus- 
 sulman boy which took place in his presence while in 
 Abyssinia. The boy was first washed all over in a large 
 basin of water, after which a smaller basin, called mete- 
 mar was brought, the water in which was consecrated 
 by prayer, and waving the incense over it, dropping into 
 it a portion of the meiron in the shape of a cross. The 
 boy then repeated his belief, and answered certain ques- 
 tions; and the priest dipped his own hand in the water 
 and crossed him over the forehead, saying, " George, I 
 baptize thee in the name of the Father, Son and Holy 
 Ghost."* 
 
 The Abyssinian Church, was descended from the 
 Church of Alexandria, originally planted by St. Mark, 
 and consisted chiefly of Hebrew Christians. We shall 
 notice this washing or purification before baptism, as 
 alluded to in other places. 
 
 * Facts and Evidences by Tajlor. See Wall also. 
 
352 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 The prevailmg custom varied at this time in different 
 countries ; in one, trine immersion was the general rule, 
 but in cases of weakness and danger, the less inconve- 
 nient mode of pouring and sprinkling was allowed; in 
 others, pouring or affusion was the general mode. 
 
 In England an effort was made in the early part of 
 the ninth century to confine it to immersion only^ except 
 in cases of necessity. A canon was passed in 816 A. D., 
 requiring the priests, when they administered baptism, 
 not to pour the water on the head of the infant, but 
 always to dip it in the font, as the Son of God 
 was thrice dipped in the waters of the Jordan, &c. We 
 do not wonder that a canon attempted to be enforced on 
 such reasoning availed but little. But it explains the 
 reason why Erasmus, in pointing to the national pecu- 
 liarities or prevailing customs in regard to baptism, says, 
 "With us, (the Dutch,) they have water poured on them; 
 in England they are dipt." That is, dipping was the 
 prominent mode, for we know that pouring was very 
 common in England at the time Erasmus wrote. 
 
 The following plate illustrates an earlier period than 
 the last, and such representations were common in the 
 seventh and eighth centuries, and had their origin in 
 the sixth. 
 
 '' This depicts two points of time. First, the candi- 
 date is seen kneeling down and praying near the bath 
 of water; and a hand issues from a cloud above him, 
 to denote the acquiescence of heaven in his petitions. 
 Second ; baptism is administered by pouring water out 
 of a vase on persons who are kneeling on the ground, 
 and not immersed at all. Either then, baptism was 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 353 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF BAPTISM. 
 
 administered without immersion^ by pouring only; not- 
 withstanding the convenience of the bath; or those 
 persons had previously been immersed and afterwards 
 received baptism as a distinct, subsequent, and separate 
 act." Taylor's edit. Bible Dictionary. 
 
 We shall not dwell on this period, but pass on to the 
 practice of the church nearer to Apostolic times, which 
 is of much inore importance to us. 
 
 Gennadius, who wrote in the close of the fifth and in 
 the beginning of the sixth century, shows* that in that 
 period baptism was administered in the French church 
 by both modes, affusion and immersion. Instituting an 
 analogy between martyrdom and baptism, he says, " The 
 person to be baptized owns his faith before the priest ; 
 
 30* 
 
354 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 and, when the interrogatories are put to him, makes his 
 answer. The same does a martyr before a heathen 
 judge : he also owns his faith ; and when the question is 
 put to him makes answer. The one after his confession 
 is either wetted with water or else plunged into it: and 
 the other is either wetted with his blood, or else plunged 
 into fire." De Eccl. dogma, c. T4, cited by Wall. 
 
 Augustine, writing in the earlier part of the fifth cen- 
 tury, speaking of the virtue of the baptism through the 
 power of the Spirit, teaches that, however small be the 
 quantity of water applied to the infant, it cleanses it 
 wholly from the condemnation (not the stain) of origi- 
 nal sin. This is the word of faith which we preach, 
 whereby baptism also is doubtless consecrated that it 
 may cleanse. For Christ loved his church and delivered 
 himself up for her ! Read the Apostle and see what he 
 he adds: "That he might sanctify her,' says he, 'cleans- 
 ing her with the laver of water in the word I' This puri- 
 fication would by no means be attributed to the liquid 
 and transient element, were it not added, 'in the word.' 
 This word of faith is so powerful in the Church of God, 
 that by means of her believing, offering, blessing ; ting- 
 ing (with it) even in a slight degree, it cleanses the 
 infant." Tract Ixxx. in Joan, cited by Kenrick. 
 
 Thus in Augustine's day it was held by the Church in 
 Africa, that the smallest quantity of water in baptism 
 cleansed not partially, but as entirely as a large quan- 
 tity would : if touched by it in the slightest degree, we 
 are cleansed. 
 
 In the latter part of the fourth century, and only two 
 hundred and eighty years from Apostolic times, Chry- 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 355 
 
 sostom, Bishop of Constantinople, praising those who 
 seek baptism in health, instead of putting it oif till the 
 hour of sickness and danger, remarks, "Although the 
 same gift of grace is bestowed on you, and on those 
 who are initiated at the close of life, your free choice 
 and preparation are different ; for they receive it in their 
 bed, you in the bosom of the church, the common mother 
 of us all; they sorrowing and weeping, you rejoicing and 
 exulting; they sighing, and you giving thanks; they in a 
 lethargy from fever, you full of much spiritual delight." 
 Ad Illuminandos Catech. 1, cited by Kenrick. 
 
 They could not plunge people under water "in their 
 beds." 
 
 Jerome of Palestine, about the same period, applies 
 the prediction of Ezekiel, " I will sprinkle clean water 
 upon you," to baptism. 
 
 A few years nearer to the Apostolic age, (274 A. A.,) 
 Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, addressing the neophytes, 
 says, "You took afterwards the white garments to indi- 
 cate that you cast away the cloak of sin and put on the 
 spotless robes of innocence; whereof the prophet said: 
 'Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall be 
 cleansed: thou shalt wash me, and I shall be made whiter 
 than snow.' For he that is baptized seems to be cleansed 
 both according to the law and the Gospel : according to 
 the law, since Moses, with a bunch of hyssop sprinkled 
 the blood of the Lamb : according to the Gospel, because 
 the garments of Christ were white as snow, when in the 
 Gospel, he showed the glory of his resurrection. He 
 whose sins are forgiven is made whiter than snow." L. 
 ad initiandos, c. 7, cited by Kenrick. 
 
356 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 265, After the Apostles, Athanasius reckons up eight 
 baptisms, and the sixth in his enumeration is that of 
 "tears."* 
 
 260 A. A. Gregory Nazianzen uses similar language, 
 saying, " I know of a fourth baptism — that of martyr- 
 dom and blood ; and I know of a fifth — that of tears. "f 
 He refers also to baptism at the point of death, when 
 immersion could not be often, if ever, practicable. 
 
 260 A. A. Basil, bishop of Csesarea, warning his 
 hearers against delay in their baptism, points theni to a 
 time when fever, and weakness of body and mind, may 
 render them unconscious of what is going on, or death 
 may come upon them in the night, when there is no one 
 to give them baptism. He says: "If you utter some- 
 thing in a faint and faltering manner, it may not be 
 understood": everything ye say will be disregarded as 
 the raving of a dying man. Who will give you baptism 
 then ? Who will remind you of it, when you will be 
 sunk in deep lethargy ? Relatives are in affliction : 
 strangers take no interest : friends are loth to alarm you 
 by warning. Perhaps even the physician deceives you ; 
 and you do not know your situation, being blinded by the 
 love of life. It is night, and there is no one to succor : 
 there is no one at hand to baptize you." — Hom. 13, in 
 S. bap. n. 7 cited by Kenrick. 
 
 Such language clearly teaches that baptism may be 
 administered on the dying bed, and at any moment, 
 which we know could not be done where only plunging 
 under water is allowed. 
 
 The following plate shows that even where immersion, 
 * Pond cited by Hall, p. 71, 72. f Ibid. 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 357 
 
 or washing of the body was practiced, 2)ou7nng was 
 made a part of the baptism : 
 
 BAPTISM OP THE EMPEROR CONSTANTIXE. 
 
 Tliis is a representation of the Baptism of Constan- 
 tino the Great. The Emperor receiving baptism is 
 immersed in the baths, metaphorically called the ^' laver 
 of regeneration ;" and Eusebius adds the proper rite of 
 baptism, "hj pouring water on the monarch's head." 
 
 These ancient representations of both Greek and Ro- 
 man origin, taken in connection with other facts, have 
 led many to suppose that pouring was the essential 
 part of baptism, and that the immersion or washing was 
 a preparatory rite for receiving it. As under the Le- 
 vitical law, leprosy,* and the touch of a dead body,t 
 and such like things as exhibited the effects of sin in its 
 more malignant character, required, besides washing the 
 body, the sprinkling of the "blood and water," and 
 
 * Levit. xiv. 2, 32. 
 
 t Num. xix. 9-22. 
 
358 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 '' ashes and water," to cleanse from tlieir pollution ; so 
 nothing less than pouring or sprinkling, in the name of 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, would complete the 
 washing away of sin under the Gospel. Therefore, first 
 there was a washing, and then pouring, as represented 
 in the baptism of Constantino, in the preceding plate, 
 and as in the case of the Abyssinian Church. 
 
 Whatever credit may be due to this theory, it is cer- 
 tain that even in those periods when immersion was 
 most general, it was never regarded as essential to bap- 
 tism. Magnus, living in a retired part of the country, 
 where immersion was the usual practice, wrote to Cypri- 
 an, bishop of Carthage, to learn whether those who put 
 off their baptism by culpable delay, and received it on a 
 bed of sickness by aspersion only, ought to share equal 
 privileges with their more diligent brethren. 
 
 150 A. A. Cyprian, in reply, writes in that modest 
 strain which characterizes great minds, and after giving 
 his opinion, adds : " The contagion of sin is not, in the 
 sacrament of salvation, washed off by the same measures 
 that the dirt of the skin and of the body is washed off 
 in an ordinary secular bath : so that there should be 
 necessity of soap and other helps, and a large pool or 
 fishpond by which that body is washed or cleansed. It 
 is in another way that the breast of the believer is 
 washed — after another manner that the mind of a man 
 is by faith cleansed. In the sacrament of salvation, 
 where necessity compels, the shortest ways of transact- 
 ing Divine matters, do, by God's gracious Dispensation, 
 confer the whole benefit. 
 
 '' And no man need, therefore, think otherwise, be- 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 359 
 
 cause these sick people, when they receive the grace of 
 our Lord, have nothing but an affusion or sprinkling : 
 whereas the Holy Scripture by the Prophet Ezekiel 
 says : ' I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you 
 shall be clean.' " Ezek. xxxvi. 25. 
 
 He then refers to the fact that none such can be re- 
 baptized — not even if they themselves should think they 
 have obtained no benefit,* and further adds : '' The 
 Holy Spirit is not given by several measures, [as if the 
 degree of the gift depended on the quantity of water] 
 but is wholly poured on them that believe." — Cypriani 
 Epist. Ixix. cited by Wall. 
 
 The following plate represents the baptism of Roma- 
 nus by Lawrence, who suffered martyrdom not long after 
 the above letter was written : 
 
 LAUUENTIUS BAPTIZING ROMANUS. 
 
 * This passage has been misunderstood by some writers — Bingham 
 among others. 
 
3b0 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 " This representation is in the Church of St. Lawrence, 
 extra muros, at Rome," says Taylor, ''and the jugs or 
 vases are remarkable, being the same as in other pic- 
 tures of far remoter antiquity." The martyr-preacher 
 is represented to us as baptizing by pouring, in a 
 regular "baptistery." 
 
 158 A. A. "A little while before his death, he also 
 baptized one Lucillus with d^^ pitcher of water.'''^ The 
 "Acts" of Lawrence were interpolated in after ages, but 
 the above is taken from Strabo, who lived before the 
 times when the forgeries and additions are said to have 
 been made.t 
 
 120 A. A. Early in this century, Novatian was bap- 
 tized by effusion as he lay sick on his bed. This was 
 not noted as anything unusual at the time, nor would it 
 have been handed down to succeeding generations, but 
 for the fact he afterwards attempted to supplant Corne- 
 lius as the Bishop of Rome, who, among other things, 
 upbraided him with having delayed his baptism till ter- 
 rified by the approach of death, and then of neglecting 
 to receive confirmation by imposition of hands on his 
 recovery. It had become a rule among Christians of 
 that age, and was afterwards enacted into a canon, that 
 those who delayed baptism till sickness, and were bap- 
 tized under the fear of approaching death, ought not 
 to be promoted to the ministry. An exception was 
 made in cases of great fervency of spirit. Cornelius, in 
 his letter to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, accuses Nova- 
 tian of having obtained the order of Priesthood unlaw- 
 
 * Acta Luurcntii, cited by Bingham, 
 f See Hist. Bap. by Wall, vol ii. p. 356. 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 361 
 
 fully, in the first place, and that, therefore, he was ineligi- 
 ble to the office of Bishop ; for all the clergy and a majority 
 of the laity were against his being ordained Presbyter, 
 because it was not lawful for " any one baptized in bed, 
 in time of sickness^'' {-^yj ^v x'kivri 6td vocov rcepix'^^^^'^^) "as 
 he had been, to be admitted to any office of clergy." In 
 another place, he says : " Baptized by affusion in bed as he 
 
 lay." (bv avtrj tri xT^ivrj yj ixtito TtfpLxvdtn;.) No objoction WaS 
 
 made to the validity of his baptism ; that, not allowed, 
 would ha,ve cut off all his pretensions at once. The ob- 
 jection was to his criminal delay in receiving it, and to the 
 manner in which he rose to the office of Presbyter, and 
 afterwards aspired to the bishoprick.* 
 
 100 A. A. About the close of the first century after 
 the Apostles, or a little later, Eusebius informs us that 
 " Basilides was baptized in prison by some brethren, 
 and the next day after receiving the seal, he was be- 
 headed, "f We can hardly suppose facilities would be 
 afforded by those in authority to baptize him by immer- 
 sion ; and thus aid in the very thing for which he was 
 imprisoned, when they would not allow him the common 
 necessaries of life. 
 
 120 A. A. Origen represents the wood on the altar, 
 over which water was poured at the command of Eli- 
 jah, (1 Kings xviii. 33,) as having been "baptized," and 
 speaks of each pouring as a baptism. J 
 
 100 A. A. Tertullian applies the word "sprinkling" 
 to the act of baptism. After prescribing the course to 
 be observed by the candidate for baptism, and the dili- 
 
 . ^ Cornelius to Fabius, Bishop of Antiocb, apud. Euseb. Eccl. His. 
 1. 6, c. 43. 
 
 f Eccl. His. 1. 6, c. 6. % ^^^ts and Evidences, p. 132. 
 
 31 
 
362 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 gence with which every one should prepare himself, he 
 asks, " For who will vouchsafe to you, so faithless a 
 penitent, a single sprinkle of water?" He further 
 alludes to a fact, that shows others at that time sup- 
 posed wetting or sjJrinJcling was enough for a baptism. 
 Referring to the baptism of the Apostles, about which 
 there was some speculation then as now, he says : 
 " Some, in a manner quite forced, pretend that the 
 Apostles underwent a kind of baptism, when in the boat 
 they were sprinkled [adspei^si) by the waves ; and that 
 Peter himself was sufficiently immersed when walking 
 on the sea."* Now if nothing less than plunging under 
 the water constituted baptism, neither would Tertullian 
 have associated sprinkling with it, nor others have sup- 
 posed that a partial wetting in the boat, or Peter's 
 beginning to sink, was baptism. Further still, Ter- 
 tullian uses, interchangeably with baptize, the words, 
 tingo — to wet, tinge ; lavo — to wash, bathe ; ahluo — to 
 cleanse, purify ; and aspergo — to sprinkle : which proves 
 that he could not have supposed baptism was confined 
 to one mode. It would contradict his own language. 
 And yet he is relied upon more than any other for the 
 theory of baptism by immersion only. 
 
 90 A. A. Clemens Alexandrinus, who lived still 
 nearer to the Apostles, calls wetting with tears baptism, 
 lleferring to a backslider, whom John was the means of 
 reclaiming, he says: "He was baptized a second time 
 with tears." He also uses the words hajjtlzo and lavo 
 interchangeably.'!" 
 
 * De Peuitcntia c. G, De Bapt. n. 4, cited by Kcnrick. 
 f Pond 33, cited by Hall, p. 9G. 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 363 
 
 40 A. A. Justin Martyr, born in the Apostolic age, 
 writing to the Roman emperor in behalf of Christians, 
 invariably describes baptism by the terms ?^ovu, to wash, 
 and Tiovtpov, washing. But those words apply to no 
 particular mode of washing — least of all, to an indis- 
 pensable immersion. Now did Justin intend to mislead 
 the emperor, or did he mean to describe baptism accor- 
 ding to the ordinary interpretation of such terms as he 
 used, and which would leave the mode undefined ? The 
 nearest approach to mode such terms convey, is that of 
 applying the water to the subject — not the subject to 
 the water. 
 
 Further, when Justin writes to the Jews, (in his dia- 
 logue with Trypho,) he uses the words BarttC^oi and Ww 
 interchangeably, as meaning the same thing. Does not 
 this prove that he did not use it as a specific term, and did 
 not confine it to an exclusive mode, and, therefore, used 
 it as Christians generally use it at the present day ? 
 
 Thus, Apostolic men, and the Apostles, used the 
 word BAPTIZE in a generic sense, admitting baptism in 
 different ways, which has been practically exemplified 
 by the Church in every age since. Therefore, examina- 
 tion of the use of the word Baptize by the Apostles and 
 their successors — the figurative language associated with 
 it — the doctrine and practice of the Church in every age 
 after the Apostles — instead of leading to the exclusive 
 mode of immersion, all unite in testifying to the liberty 
 of baptizing by difi'erent modes. 
 
 What was the most usual mode practiced by the Apos- 
 tles themselves and their immediate successors, is involved 
 in much obscurity. The error of looking for correspon- 
 
364 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 dencies, and rendering literally the figurative language of 
 the Apostles, commenced before the last of them had 
 left the stage of action. And nothing connected with 
 our Holy religion was more magnified than the oflBce 
 and effects of baptism. Anointing the baptized with oil 
 was practiced immediately after, if not before, the death 
 of St. John,* making literal the words of the Apostle — 
 "He who hath anointed us is God." (2 Cor. i. 21.) 
 Which was accompanied with the sign of the cross on 
 the forehead, as crucified with Christ. (Gal. ii. 10 and 
 20.) Next, the tongues of the baptized were touched 
 with milk and honey, in token of their new birth,t as 
 the food of "new born babes," (1 Peter ii. 2,) and also 
 in token of "refusing the evil and choosing the good," 
 (Isaiah vii. 15.) And putting off their clothes^ to be 
 baptized, J to represent putting off the "old man" of 
 sin ; and putting on white linen after baptism, as the 
 emblem of the "new man" in Christ. (Eph. iv. 22-24.) 
 
 And so baptism by trine immersion, as the symbol of 
 a burial, (Rom. vi. 4,) and in honor of the three persons 
 in the Trinity. All of which were in vogue at an early 
 period, and had their origin probably about the same 
 time — they certainly followed each other in quick suc- 
 cession. § 
 
 Now, at a period when to every figure was given a 
 literal correspondence, it was natural to look for one in 
 the Apostle's allusion to a burial in connection with 
 
 * Const. Apost. lib. 7, cap. 47. 
 
 t Tertul. dc Coron. Mil. c. 3. 
 
 X See Bingham and Wall, and their various authorities. 
 
 2 Ibid. 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 365 
 
 baptism ; and hence, easy to add to the emblem of puri- 
 fying that of Christ's burial and resurrection, and to 
 change the usual mode into immersion, to correspond ; 
 and then into trine immersion, in honor of the Trinity. 
 And all these having been introduced at so early a pe- 
 riod, the absence of further information leaves much 
 room for conjecture in regard to the changes made in 
 the mode or modes practiced by the Apostles. They 
 should surely teach us to distinguish between JEs:ie7itiah 
 and Non- Essentials. 
 
 It is remarkable, that during a period when trine im- 
 mersion, with all these addenda, prevailed more gene- 
 rally, perhaps, than at any other, the artists of that 
 time should represent the baptism of Christ as standing 
 in the river, and John pouring water on his head with 
 a shell. The following is a specimen of what was com- 
 mon in the fourth and fifth centuries, when but few were 
 baptized by affusion except the feeble and the sick : 
 
 " This is a representation, in mosaic, of the Baptism 
 of Christ in Jordan, preserved in the Church, in Cos- 
 meden, at Ravenna, which was erected A. D. 401. 
 
 ''In the centre is Christ our Saviour, in the river Jor- 
 dan. On a rock stands John the Baptist ; in his left 
 hand is a bent rod, and his right hand holds a patera, 
 shell, from which he pours Avater on the head of the 
 Redeemer, over whom descends the dove, the symbol 
 of the Holy Ghost, wdth expanding wings, and emitting 
 rays of Grace."— C. Taylor Edit. C. B. D. 
 
 Taylor is of opinion that such representations in the 
 midst of a different practice, and at a time when " the 
 administration of baptism had departed greatly from its 
 
 81* 
 
366 
 
 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 CHRIST BAPTIZED IN JORDAN. 
 
 original simplicity," give stronger evidence for affusion 
 than if made at an earlier period. They speak the lan- 
 guage of a practice of a former age handed down, but 
 nearly overrun by a more imposing ceremonial. 
 
 He further tells us that the antiquary, Cimpiani, rea- 
 sons in regard to them to the following effect: "In 
 these pictures we see Christ immersed in water, and 
 John also pouring water on his head. This raises a 
 doubt whether baptism shall be performed by immersion 
 or aspersion, or by both. We have also representations 
 of immersion, and the testimony of various writers." 
 Then, after referring to other points, and after some inci- 
 dental remarks in the same connection, he concludes : " It 
 is beyond all doubt that the first faithful were baptized 
 wherever convenience offered — some in rivers, others in 
 
TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 367 
 
 fountains, others in lakes, others by the sea shore, oth- 
 ers in the sea, and others in private houses. The mode 
 of baptism also differed, as is believed, insomuch that 
 if they were in a place convenient for immersion, bap- 
 tism was conferred by immersion ; if they were in a 
 place where streams, fountains, or other lesser waters, 
 were found, water was poured on the head."* 
 
 There has been also found, in the catacomb of Ponti- 
 anus, outside the Portese Gate at Rome, which was a 
 burial place of the Martyrs, under the persecutions of 
 Roman emperors, a Baptistry, in which primitive Chris- 
 tians baptized their converts, when hunted after and 
 pursued as if wild beasts, for confessing Christ ! In 
 this subterranean recess is a small spring, and a basin cut 
 out in the rock some two feet deep and wide, from which 
 baptism was administered ; and, in the rock at the end, 
 is sketched the baptism of Jesus by pouring. This was 
 undoubtedly a catacomb of Christians during the perse- 
 cutions of Christianity, for inscriptions — such as, "Who 
 received the Crown of Martyrdom," "Who was decapi- 
 tated" — were found visible. Whilst further examination 
 has made it evident that it was resorted to for baptizing 
 before it was used for a burial place. Now five of these 
 persecutions took place before the end of the first cen- 
 tury after the Apostles, and all of them before the close 
 of the next. So it is fair to infer this was a place of 
 baptism during the first century after the Apostolic age, 
 and a place of burial in the second. 
 
 Considering all these facts in connection with the ad- 
 ditional fact that neither Christ nor his Apostles pre- 
 * Facts and Evidences, p. 20S. 
 
368 TESTIMONY OF HISTORY. 
 
 scribed any specific mode, and the Holy Scriptures 
 record no example that defines the mode, much is left 
 to conjecture in regard to the usual way in which the 
 Apostles baptized; and no man should take upon him- 
 self to bind the conscience of his brother in things 
 which Christ has left free. 
 
 To limit baptism to immersion only, as Baptist wri- 
 ters propose, would restrict the application of an ordin- 
 ance which was evidently designed for God's people in 
 all ages and under all circumstances ; and thereby cut 
 off many for whom it was provided ! In frozen regions, 
 where everything is bound up in ice for a large portion 
 of the year, and in hot, sandy countries, where water 
 can scarcely be obtained to sustain life for a certain 
 period, immersion would be impracticable for long peri- 
 ods. So, in cases of sickness, dying women and men, 
 and gasping infants, under such a law would go into 
 eternity unbaptized, however much the former may de- 
 sire it for themselves, and for the latter it be desired 
 by parents ! 
 
 Our Saviour, therefore, in this, as in other things, 
 acted with his accustomed benevolence in leaving to 
 circumstances that which he knew circumstances must 
 in many instances control, or render inapplicable. 
 And we confess that we have no sympathy with those 
 who define what God has not defined, and then boast of 
 standing by and seeing persons fit and desirous for bap- 
 tism, die without it, because they could not be immersed 
 all over in water !* And who further take delight in 
 " cutting holes in the ice, while the weather is so cold 
 
 * Hinton's His. Bap. cited by Kenrick. 
 
EXAMINATION OP PRINCIPLES. 369 
 
 as to keep several men stirring the water with poles to 
 keep it from freezing, while they are baptizing delicate 
 women."* We have not so learned Christ, nor can 
 we ever yield to such " the liberty wherewith Christ has 
 made us free," and submit to a bondage even more gall- 
 ing, in such cases, than that from which he delivered 
 us. 
 
 We have no objection to immersion, where people 
 prefer it, and we are prepared to yield much for the sake 
 of uniformity on this point among Christians ; for we 
 are firmly persuaded that our common Christianity has 
 suffered much from the constant controversy that has 
 been so long kept up on this question. We are willing 
 even to make immersion the common mode, if the Bap- 
 tists, on the other hand, will consent that the feeble, the 
 sick, and dying, of all ages, and under such other cir- 
 cumstances that may render immersion impracticable, 
 shall receive baptism in other ways. But we can never 
 consent to cut off one soul from baptism, by applying a 
 rule which neither the word of God nor any branch of 
 his Church ever applied, till the rise of the Anabaptists 
 in Germany, in the sixteenth century. This we dare 
 not do. Nor do we concede thus much on the ground, 
 *' immersion is the safer mode," as certain persons, 
 high in office, are accustomed to call it, in order to 
 proselyte from neighboring churches. We protest 
 against this spirit, and the use thus made of it, because 
 the authority which they profess to respect only, does 
 not authorize it, and many believe pouring to be the 
 Apostolic mode. The mode of baptism was not made 
 * See Hall, p. 115. 
 
370 EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 
 
 an article of faith when Pierre de Bruys first (in the 
 twelfth century) refused to baptize children, because, as 
 he said, they could not be saved. Nor was the mode 
 ever regarded as of the essence of baptism before, or for 
 several centuries after that period. Even in those peri- 
 ods when accompanied with the greatest number of 
 additions and most imposing display, it was allowed to 
 be administered in its simplest form of pouring and 
 sprinkling, in cases of necessity — on the sick lying on 
 their bed, and on the infant embraced in the arms. If 
 we make the mode of doing a thing, the essence of the 
 thing itself, look at the consequences. We must include 
 all the minutiae embraced in the manner, which will 
 oftentimes extend to time, order, and circumstances. 
 This would confine the sacrament of the Lord's Supper 
 to night, as the time for it — to unleavened bread, re- 
 ceived in a reclining j^osture, just after a meal, in an 
 U2:)per room, and no females loresent. Dispense with 
 any one of these particulars, and you may with all. 
 And when you dispense w^ith all, where is the mode? 
 Christians have dispensed with them all, and now 
 receive the sacrament of the Supper generally without 
 observing a single one of them — which proves, beyond 
 all question, that mode is not regarded as of the essence 
 of the Supper ; and why should it be of the other sacra- 
 ment, baptism ? Bread and wine, authoritatively set apart 
 and rightly received, is all that is regarded as essential 
 to the Supper, and so water, authoritatively applied, in 
 the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, consti- 
 tutes the essence of baptism. 
 
 We must look to the end for which things are done, 
 
EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 371 
 
 in order to determine what is essential to them, not to 
 the manner. If a corporal washing was the end of 
 baptism, then much water, and even soap, as Cyprian 
 remarks, would be essential to it. But the end of bap- 
 tism is a spiritual, internal cleansing, not external; and, 
 therefore, a small quantity of water would as clearly 
 signify it as a large quantity — especially in an enlight- 
 ened age and country. And this again suggests to us 
 the wisdom of our Saviour in not prescribing to us a 
 particular mode ; for as a sign and initiating rite into 
 things spiritual, it should be adapted to all conditions, 
 places and circumstances, to teach and admonish men ; 
 and in an advanced stage of civilization, a small quan- 
 tity of water and a more convenient mode would as 
 strikingly set forth the object, as a more imposing mode 
 could do upon a rude age and an obstinate people. 
 
 Therefore, if it could be proved, (which it cannot,) 
 that the Apostles usually immersed in baptism, inas- 
 much as no command to baptize by that mode, or in 
 any other particular way is given, it does not follow 
 that we should confine ourselves to that mode, when a 
 less inconvenient mode would have all the influence 
 upon a refined and enlightened age, that plunging and 
 Avashing of the whole body would have on a ruder age. 
 Further, if we are to imitate in this age the example of 
 those ages in which it is known immersion was gene- 
 rally practised, we must be baptized naked. Is that 
 necessary in this age? It is as well known that people 
 were baptized naked in early times, as it is that they 
 were immersed. Both stand on the same authorit^^ 
 Wall says — " The ancient Christians, when they were 
 
372 EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 
 
 baptized by immersion were all baptized iiahecl; whether 
 thej were men, w^omen, or children."* And Robinson, 
 who was deputed by the Baptists of England to write 
 a history of Baptism, acknowledges this fact. He says, 
 (chap. XV.) " The primitive Christians baptized naked. 
 Nothing easier than to give proofs of this, by quotations 
 from authentic writings of the men who administered 
 baptism, and who certainly know in what way they 
 themselves performed it. There is no ancient histori- 
 cal fact better authe7iticated than this. The evidence 
 doth not go on the meaning of the single word naked, 
 for then the reader might suspect allegory, but on 
 many facts reported, and many reasons assigned for 
 the practice." 
 
 Will any one insist on our follov/ing out the mode of 
 baptism in this particular ? And if we have the discre- 
 tion allowed us to omit washing the naked body, then 
 may we not have the same discretion about breaking 
 through the ice and plunging under the freezing water 
 the feeble and delicate body? And if we have the 
 discretion to postpone such baptisms, and they die 
 unbaptized, which involves the greater responsibility, 
 to baptize them by pouring, (which to them would be 
 as impressive and instructive as dipping,) or to permit 
 them to die unbaptized? What says the Lord? — "I 
 will have mercy, and not sacrifice." 
 
 Again, the baptized were anointed with oil, milk and 
 honey put on their tongues, white garments put on and 
 worn eight days, and other things added afterwards. 
 AYere all these of the essence of the sacrament ? Can 
 
 ^ Wall's Hist. Bap. vol. ii. p. 379. 
 
EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 373 
 
 we dispense with none of them? And if any, why not 
 all — the trine immersion and single immersion — if in 
 our discretion we think best ? for none of them are com- 
 manded in the Holy Scriptures. We are commanded to 
 baptize, but in no particular mode; and water applied in 
 the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, being 
 alone of the essence of baptism, it is left to our discre- 
 tion to apply it in that way which time and circum- 
 stances will m.ake it redound most to the honor and 
 glory of God. 
 
 "But," says Mr. Booth, "positive institutions admit 
 of no degrees, no supplements, and no commutation. 
 It is the will of God for the trial of our obedience: nor 
 will he allow us to inquire why or how? Compliance 
 MUST be so, and NO more, and no less, and NO other- 
 wise. What we call little things, trifling deviations, 
 are the pins and screws which hold the sacred taber- 
 nacle together: take these away, the whole edifice falls. 
 The same rash hand that makes one alteration, may 
 make twenty; if in small things, why not in greater? 
 till at length the foundation is destroyed; Christianity 
 is superseded; superstition takes its place, and all is 
 death, desolation and darkness."''' 
 
 How much sophistry is here clothed under the appli- 
 cation of correct principles to false premises ! The 
 immersionist has no right to dispense with the oil, and 
 milk, and honey, and nakedness of recipients in bap- 
 tism : these are the ^^pins and screws that hold the 
 sacred tabernacle to^rether," accordino; to such reason- 
 ing. The scriptures teach no mode, and therefore he 
 * Booth's Paedo. Exam., v.^l. i. 
 
 32 
 
374 EXAMINATION OE PEINCIPLES. 
 
 can adopt no mode, and hence cannot baptize at all, is 
 the legitimate deduction from his own principles, when 
 applied to the scriptures, as he intended to apply them. 
 Reductio absurdum. Apply them to the other sacra- 
 ment, as he designed they should be applied to baptism : 
 the supper was instituted, as before remarked, at night, 
 in an upper room, received in a reclining posture, after 
 a meal, and no female present. He tells us — '' Com- 
 pliance MUST be so, and no more, and no less, and no 
 OTHERWISE." If you neglect these "pins and screws, 
 the tabernacle will fall." Has he neglected not one of 
 them, and done every thing just so, 7io more, no less, 7io 
 otherwise? Alas! how easily does poor human nature 
 deceive itself! In the Sacrament of the Supper, the 
 Baptists as well as others, have departed from every 
 one of these particulars, and regard no part of the 
 mode or manner in which the last supper was received, 
 as essential to the sacrament, beyond the elements 
 lawfully administered. And why not apply the same 
 principle to baptism, and distinguish between things 
 essential and not essential? 
 
 We are sometimes told that three modes of baptizing 
 would make three baptisms ! To this we should not 
 stop to reply, were it not, in the next breath, pro- 
 claimed, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism;" as if 
 different modes conflicted with this formula of doctrine. 
 Therefore we reply, that different modes of doing a 
 thing do not alter the thing itself. The same letter 
 may be written whilst standing or sitting. We may go 
 to the same place by different ways. A lady may dress 
 herself in a half dozen costumes during the same day, 
 
EXAMINATION OF PNINCIPLES. 375 
 
 and she will still be the same lady. Three men may 
 wash their hands at the same time and for the same 
 object, one at the pump, another in the river, and the 
 third in a basin, and all three attain one and the same 
 end, to wit, the cleansing of their hands. And so we 
 may baptize in three ways for the same end, i. e, the 
 internal cleansing of the Holy Spirit. If different de- 
 grees and phases constitute the essence of a thing, then 
 we have many more faiths than we have baptisms ; for 
 no two Christians, perhaps, have precisely the same 
 degrees and shades of belief in all the doctrines of the 
 gospel. 
 
 It is the end and unity of design that make our bap- 
 tism one and our faith one, and our Lord one ; for 
 without these we may even have different Lords under 
 the same name. Unity of mode would not make one 
 baptism, for we may give different baptisms by the same 
 mode. When the disciples at Ephesus, who had been 
 baptized unto John's baptism, were again baptized by 
 St. Paul,* (if in the same mode,) they received two bap- 
 tisms, and yet by one mode. Therefore, mode cannot 
 constitute oneness. But baptism once administered in 
 unity of name and design into the great body of Christ's 
 people, is one baptism, in whatever way given. 
 
 Herein seems to be the cause of much of the error 
 of immersionists : they lose sight of the great end of 
 the Institutions of the Gospel, and magnify incidental 
 matters into undue importance, thereby destroying the 
 proportions of the grand system of Christianity. 
 
 Again ; they deceive themselves by the sound of 
 
 * Acts xix. 
 
376 EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 
 
 words; they often boast — "We take the Bible alone 
 for our guide ;" but put their own interpretation upon 
 it. This interpretation is opposed by greater numbers 
 of equal learning ; and what is the result ? Thev reject 
 the practice and light of the next age after the Apostles, 
 and attempt to force upon all others their opinions. 
 But here they deceive themselves, for they always act 
 on the testimony of history, when it helps a peculiar 
 view, without seeming to be aware of it. They cannot 
 find an undoubted example of immersion^ nor precept for 
 it, in the Holy Scriptures; and yet they say it was 
 practiced for many centuries. But ought not candor to 
 require the admission, that, according to the same au- 
 thority, other modes have always existed too, and that 
 infant baptism had been the practice of the Christian 
 Church in every age since the Apostles ? It is easy to 
 use high sounding words, and claim a religion without a 
 history ; but for those who would rescue Christianity from 
 the snares of Infidelity, and search out the ways of truth, 
 labor and caution, with all the means which are put in 
 their power, should be employed. It would be wanting in 
 candor in us, not to admit immersion was in use (not 
 exclusively) for a long period. But when first referred 
 to in history, it was connected with other things, which 
 give room for doubt whether it was the first practice 
 among Christians. For instance, it is difficult to per- 
 suade ourselves that the first Christians were baptized 
 naked. Yet there is a difficulty in reconciling even 
 John's baptism with immersion^ and not allow the fact. 
 If the crowds baptized in Jordan, were immersed under 
 the water, we have to choose between the probability, 
 
EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 37T 
 
 that thousands who went to see and hear John, carried 
 extra clothing with them for baptism, which is very im- 
 p?'obable, or that they were immersed nude. 
 
 It is not unreasonable to suppose, that at first, peo- 
 ple were baptized by John, standing in the water, by the 
 mode indicated for the baptism of the Holy Ghost, 
 which w^as afterwards changed, as were many other 
 things, to give a literal meaning to figurative language. 
 Or, we may adopt the idea that immersion of the naked 
 body was usual when circumstances allowed it, and that 
 Christians were indulged in chrism, and other things, 
 according to the taste of the age; any and all of ivliich 
 we may use or dispense with, according to our discre- 
 tion. And in the place of immersion, and nakedness, 
 and oil, and the cross, substitute, if we choose, clothing 
 and pouring, and the cross, without oil ; or omit the 
 cross altogether, and apply the water in the name of 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in any way that we 
 think w^ill comport with the dignity of the sacrament. 
 
 This will be making the proper distinction between 
 the essence of baptism, and what is merely incidental. 
 Water, in the rigJit name, by j^roper autliority, are all 
 that is of the essence of baptism ; as it is acknowledged 
 even by Baptists, that bread and wijie, with like autho- 
 rity, are all that is of the essence of the Supper — objec- 
 tively considered. If we think it is no longer necessary 
 to apply water to the naked body, and, therefore, bap- 
 tize it clothed, may we not omit also the inconvenient 
 and often inappropriate mode of submerging ? In 
 this age, it does not require much water to symbolize 
 cleansing ; and the Lord's Supper frequently received, 
 
 32* 
 
o78 EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 
 
 impresses us much more seriously with the crucifixion 
 and death of our Saviour than baptism by immersion 
 can do. And it was for that especial end the Supper 
 was instituted — for the remembrance of that very thing, 
 we are commanded to observe it. Whilst baptism was 
 commanded to be given in the name of the Trinity — 
 not of the death of the Son. 
 
 There is a passage in the ''Apostolic Canons," as 
 they are called, written by some unknown author or 
 authors, at a very early date, and perhaps about the 
 time the doctrine was first introduced that baptism 
 represented a burial^ (and hence followed by trine immer- 
 sion,) which says: "Jesus did not say, '•baptize in my 
 death;' but ' Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in 
 the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost.' "* This w^ould seem to imply that baptism 
 was then being represented as something to imitate 
 Christ's death or burial, and the writer was opposed to 
 the doctrine. 
 
 We further know deaconesses were appointed to 
 attend to the females, and have them in readiness in 
 the water, in a place by themselves, and to notify the 
 minister when to come to administer the baptism. And 
 as soon as baptisteries were formed, a partition wall was 
 made, to separate the male and female apartments, for 
 the purpose of rendering the baptism of each sex as pri- 
 vate as possible. This proves that a sense of female 
 delicacy then existed as well as now ; and hence increa- 
 ses the improbability that immersion was practiced in 
 
 ■* Can. Apost. 1, cited by Kenrick. 
 
EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. . 379 
 
 public till about the time referred to, as it must stand or 
 fall with naked subjects. 
 
 Sozomen, in the beginning of the fourth century, 
 gives an account of an outrage of certain soldiers in 
 the Church of Chrvsostom, in Constantinople, on Easter 
 eve, when, he says : " There was a great tumult at the 
 font, the women shrieking in affright, and the children 
 crying, the priests and deacons were beaten and forced 
 to run away, with their vestments on."* 
 
 Chrysostom complains of the same thing to Innocent, 
 and says : " The women, who had undressed themselves 
 to be baptized, were forced, by fright of this violence, 
 to run away naked," &c.t 
 
 Now we are left to choose between pouring first and 
 immersion afterwards, or immersion from the beginning, 
 ivith naked subjects. We cannot appeal to history for 
 one thing, and reject it in another. With immersion, 
 we must admit naked subjects, the liberty of baptism in 
 other modes, and infant baptism in every age of the 
 Church. This, certain writers clearly see, and hence 
 the attempt to throw aside history altogether. But this 
 cannot be done, unless w^e intend to remain in ignorance 
 on important points, and surrender the Divine authority 
 of our holy religion. And in appealing to the Greek 
 Church for immersion, as is often done, we can appeal 
 to it also for infant baptism, and the liberty to bap- 
 tize by aspersion, in cases of necessity. But what is 
 the immersion of the Greek Church ? " The infant is 
 placed in the baptismal vase, with its face downward, 
 supported by the left arm of the priest, who, with his 
 * Wall, vol ii. p. 380. f Ibid. 
 
380 EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES. 
 
 right hand, pours water on it."* Such is the immer- 
 sion of the Greeks. It is part pouring, applied to in- 
 fants, and only the pouring required, if necessity de- 
 mands it. 
 
 What is the immersion of all the East? A few years 
 ago, when the bishop of Ooroomiah, in Media, Asia — Mar 
 Yohannan — visited this country, he was asked particu- 
 larly how he baptized ? His reply was, " We baptize 
 children by putting them in the font, in a sitting posture^ 
 up to the breast in tvater, facing the East — then pouring 
 water on them, in the name of the Father, Son, and 
 Holy Ghost. "t And he further added, " Such is th.e 
 kind of immersion practiced all over the East, at all pe- 
 riods." What shall we say to the noise we hear about 
 Greek immersion, and immersion in the far-off East ? 
 Is it immersion, or is it pouring ? would it be complete 
 if there was no pouring? Is it, in every sense, an im- 
 mersion according to the common Baptist mode of 
 plunging people entirely under water ? And, worst of 
 all, infants are the chief subjects! Will it satisfy our 
 Baptist brethren, if we place our little ones in a font, up 
 to the waist in water, and then pour water on them, in 
 the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost ? Oh no. This would be "baby sprinkling," 
 after all ! It would not be a burial. And their own 
 good sense would further teach them that, if they were 
 
 * Euchologium, with Gear's Notes, cited by Kenrick. 
 
 f Note. The author is indebted for the above to the Rev. H. W. 
 DuoACHBT, D. D., of Philadelphia, to whom the Bishop also remarked, 
 that he had never seen an adult baptized. So long had infant bap- 
 tism been universal. 
 
SUMMARY. 381 
 
 nicely washed by their mothers at home, before brought 
 to the font, and the water there devoutly poured on them 
 in the name of the Trinity, it could not make much dif- 
 ference whether they were set down in the font or not. 
 
 In the absence of prescribed law, we may exercise 
 that discretion, that circumstances, in unison with Gos- 
 pel liberty, shall seem to make expedient. And we 
 must also distinguish between the things essential and 
 not essential. As to ivater and the subjects^ they are 
 essentials. As to modes, with all their addenda, they 
 are non-essentials, and may be retained, rejected, or 
 modified, as the age and the prosperity of Christ's king- 
 dom seem to require. 
 
 1. We have now seen baptism administered by day 
 and by night, in sickness and in health — the subject 
 standing by the font, and kneeling by the font — stand- 
 ing in the water, and kneeling in the water — sitting in 
 the water, and held in the arm of the minister in the 
 water — in prison, and on his bed, and by dipping in 
 various ways ; and all recognized by the Christian 
 Church as valid baptism. What does all this teach, 
 but the non-essential character of modes, and liberty 
 allowed in such things. 
 
 2. Neither the Holy Scriptures, nor the Church in 
 the following ages, authorize any man or set of men 
 to confine baptism exclusively to immersion, or to any 
 other mode. 
 
 3. Neither does the application of the term Baptize, 
 in the New Testament, or its use in the next age after 
 the Apostles, authorize its translation into immerse 
 only. 
 
382 SUMMARY. 
 
 4. Nor has any one the authority to say to his brother, 
 You are commanded to be immersed ; for neither Christ 
 nor his Apostles prescribed any particular mode ; and 
 example, if he had it, would authorize, on the same 
 principle, the reply. You are commanded to receive 
 the Lord's Supper reclining at a table, and only at 
 night. 
 
 We should "stand fast, therefore, in the liberty 
 wherewith Christ hath made us free." Taking the Bi- 
 ble as our guide, supported and sustained by the prac- 
 tice of the Church in every age, we cannot go far 
 wrong. With this authority, we may bring all our 
 little ones into covenant with God, and seal it by bap- 
 tizing them in that mode which we believe will comport 
 most with the dignity of the sacrament, and the glory 
 of God through Christ. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH EXAMINED. 
 
 Modern Organization — Waldenses and their Faith — Albigenses — Pierre De 
 Bruys — Cathari — Paterini — Paulicians — Bulgari Donatists — Novatians 
 — Bede — Pelagius — Ancient Church of Briton — Rome — Greece — Alexan- 
 dria — Palestine — Coast of Malabar — Rise of Antipedobaptists in Twelfth 
 Century — Collected together in 1521 — Munster taken in 1533 — Retaken 
 next year — Anabaptists Scattered — Rallied under Manol536 — Confession 
 of Faith published 1636— Fifst Church in England 1638— In America 
 1639 — Present position and Concluding Remarks. 
 
 Having considered the peculiar views of Baptists in 
 regard to the subjects and modes of baptism, we will 
 examine their rise and progress as a church. They do 
 not claim for themselves great antiquity as an organized 
 body under their present name, but contend that their 
 principles have been entertained in the Church of God 
 in every age. 
 
 And some oT them profess to be able to trace them 
 through diflferent sects or branches of the church to an 
 early period. They tell us the Waldenses held similar 
 views, and that they were also advocated among the 
 Cathari in Germany, the Paterines in Italy, and Pauli- 
 cians in Greece. And before them by the Donatists in 
 Africa, and even the Novatians at Rome.* 
 
384 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 Let us examine the facts in the case. The Waldenses 
 were a body of Christians inhabiting the valleys of the 
 Alps, brought to light in the twelfth century. They 
 were an exemplary people for the age in which they 
 lived, and advocated some of the principles of the Refor- 
 mation. They were called the "Vaudois, Yallenses, 
 Waldenses and tlie i^eople of the valleys.'''^ They had 
 been in existence as a religious sect, as it appears, 
 several centuries before the preaching of Peter Waldo 
 commenced. He visited Piedmont about the year 1160, 
 and there found churches holding sentiments similar to 
 those he had preached at Lyons, and became renowned 
 among them as a friend and ally. Some have supposed 
 they were called after his name (Waldo) Waldenses. 
 But it has of later years been shown to be the more 
 probable, that they were called after the place they 
 inhabited. And after their union with the disciples of 
 the Lyonese reformer, they obtained for themselves also 
 the name of Lionist, thereby blending with them the 
 Christians of Lyons. f 
 
 The Waldenses were generally an exemplary people, 
 and opposed to many of the doctrines of the Church of 
 Rome. But did they oppose infant baptism, or denounce 
 all baptisms besides immersion ? These are the points 
 that distinguish Baptists from other Christians. And 
 who is to give us a better account of their faith, than 
 themselves? When their adversaries and persecutors, 
 the Romish priests, falsely accused them, among other 
 things, of refusing baptism to children, they denied the 
 
 * Dr. AUix's History of the Church of Piedmont. 
 f Waddington's Church History. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 385 
 
 charge. But they acknowledged that some of their 
 children went longer without baptism than they desired, 
 because their own pastors or Barbs Avere abroad in the ser- 
 vice of the Church, and they detested the human inven- 
 tions added to the sacrament by the Romish priests, and 
 hence deferred the baptism of their children oftentimes 
 longer than was desirable, awaiting the return of their 
 own Barbs.* In an ancient record among them, called 
 the " Spiritual Almanac," they acquit themselves of 
 this accusation as follows: — 
 
 " Neither is the time or place appointed for those who 
 must be baptized ; but charity and the edification of the 
 Church and congregation ought to be the rule in this 
 matter; yet notwithstanding we bring our children to 
 be baptized, which they ought to do to whom they are 
 most nearly related, as their parents, or those whom 
 God has inspired with such a charity." 
 
 In this they declare, they bring their children to bap- 
 tism, and point out the persons who ought to bring them. 
 
 In their articles of rules of faith and practice, adopted 
 by all the Waldenses assembled at Angrogne, September 
 12th, 1535, their seventeenth article reads as follows: — 
 
 Art. xvii. "As to the sacraments, it has been deter- 
 mined by the Holy Scriptures, that we have but two 
 sacramental signs or symbols, which Christ Jesus hath 
 left unto us: the one is baptism, the other the jEucha7'ist, 
 or Lord's Supper, which we receive to demonstrate our 
 perseverance in the faith, according to the promise we 
 made in our baptism in our infancy ; as also in remem- 
 brance of that great benefit which Jesus Christ hath 
 
 * See Perrin's History of the Waldenses. 
 
 33 
 
386 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 conferred upon us, when he laid down his life for our 
 redemption, cleansing us with his most precious blood."* 
 
 This article shows, that so general was the practice of. 
 infant baptism among them and their forefathers, that 
 their whole assembly had been baptized in infancy ; or 
 at least so nearly all, that they speak of their baptism 
 as received only at that time. "According to the pro- 
 mise we made in our baptism in our infancy." All their 
 descendants practice infant baptism to this day. Nor is 
 there a single word in their whole liistory, that indicates 
 they ever denied it to young children, if we will distin- 
 guish properly when different names are used. 
 
 The name Waldenses was first applied only to the 
 Christians in the valleys between the Alps, who opposed 
 the Romish Church. The name Albigenses was applied 
 to those in the southern parts of France, who (about the 
 same time) opposed, also, the Church of Rome. But 
 some of these sects, though united against Rome, differed 
 widely among themselves on other points. f 
 
 "Albi, a city of Languedoc, in France," says Wad- 
 dington, " was peculiarly prolific in heresies about that 
 time." All those sects known by the name of Albi- 
 genses, and also others in the northern parts of Italy, 
 are frequently, by writers in later and succeeding ages, 
 included under the general name of Waldenses, though 
 widely differing in various particulars — just as the name 
 Protestant is now frequently applied to all who do not 
 belong to the Church of Rome. Or of Presbyterian to 
 all who adopt their kind of Church government ; or 
 Arminian to all that oppose Calvinism. But who in 
 
 * Perrin and Du Pin. f Ibid. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 387 
 
 this day would charge all the erroneous doctrines among 
 Protestants to any of the respectable bodies of Chris- 
 tians that come under that name ? Or charge Presby- 
 terians proper, with all the errors of many others who 
 adopt the same kind of church government?* Owing 
 to this loose way of writing — not distinguishing between 
 the Waldenses proper, and other sects incorrectly em- 
 braced under the term, many have been led into the 
 erroneous opinion that the Waldenses denied infant bap- 
 tism ! But their own works prove the contrary. 
 
 "It is a well known fact," says Dr. Murdock, in a 
 note on Mosheim, vol. iii. p. 228, " that in the sixteenth 
 century, the genuine descendants of the old Waldenses, 
 Wickliffites, and Hussites, who were numerous in France, 
 England, &c., readily united with the Lutheran and the 
 reformed communities, and at length became absorbed 
 in them ; and that very few, if any of them, ever mani- 
 fested a preference for the Mennonite, or for any of the 
 Antipedobaptistf sects of that age." .... "And if we 
 endeavor to trace the history of that grand peculiarity 
 of all Mennonites, their confining baptism to adult 
 believers, and rejecting infant baptism altogether, we 
 shall find, that at the time Menno first embraced it, it 
 existed among the numerous German Anabaptists, but 
 not among the Waldenses of France or Bohemia, who 
 were then universally believers in infant baptism." .... 
 " These Waldensian Pedobaptists, moreover, declared that 
 they held the same belief which their fathers had main- 
 tained for several centuries ; and they appealed to their 
 
 * Compare Du Pin, Perrin, Wall, Waddington, &c. 
 f Meaning Baptists. 
 
388 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 old books, to make good their assertions. There were, 
 indeed, various mystical sects, tinctured more or less 
 with Manichgeism, in the twelfth and following cen- 
 turies, who rejected all water baptism on much the same 
 grounds as the Quakers still do, and some of them 
 assailed infant baptism especially, as being peculiarly 
 unsuitable and absurd." 
 
 Were we to enter into a full examination of this sub- 
 ject, it would swell this chapter beyond its prescribed 
 limits, and be a matter of small moment to our present 
 inquiry when ended — because too far removed from the 
 days of the Apostles to affect the main point at issue. 
 
 Pierre de Bruys, in the beginning of the twelfth cen- 
 tury, as has already been remarked, is the first public 
 teacher on record, who preached against infant baptism, 
 and whose followers entirely rejected it whilst they 
 retained adult baptism. He was a native of Langue- 
 doc, and of the town of Albi. And, of course, belonged 
 to one of the sects of Albigenses. He has, by some 
 writers, been classed under the more general name of 
 Waldenses. He differed, however, from the Waldenses 
 proper, on infant baptism and several other points. 
 Some short time after his death we read of several 
 sects who rejected it, but all of them appear to be 
 branches of the same, although called by other names, 
 and generally after the places in which they flourish, or 
 after their leaders. For instance, the Henricians were 
 called after the name of Henry, who was a disciple of 
 De Bruys, and an Italian by birth. He was zealous 
 and active, and spread his doctrines through various 
 parts of France. His followers were called in some. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 389 
 
 places Henricians,' and in others after the names of the 
 places in which they were known. Arnold, of Brescia, 
 returned to Italy ahout the year 1135 from Paris, 
 assumed the Monastic garb, and began to preach the 
 same doctrines advocated by the Henricians in France. 
 His followers were called Arnoldists. 
 
 A display is sometimes made of all these names ; and 
 readers who are not aware of their origin, are induced 
 to think they wxigh something against infant baptism.* 
 
 Decretal Epistles and Councils are also referred to. 
 But we need only examine the dates and circumstances 
 with which they stand connected, to see how little bear- 
 ing all of them have on the subject. 
 
 The Lateran Council, under Pope Innocent the Second, 
 which condemned Pierre de Bruys and Arnold, was held 
 Anno Domini, 1139, some thirty years after the rise of 
 the Petrobrussians. 
 
 The Lateran Council, under Pope Innocent the Third, 
 was, in 1215, some sixty-four years later than the 
 former, and only shows that the doctrine of Peter was 
 still spreading. 
 
 In the Decretal Epistle of Innocent the Second, is 
 found a letter, in answer to one from the Bishop of 
 Aries, in Provence, the country of Bruys, written about 
 the beginning of the twelfth century, which shows that 
 country gave birth to the first Antipedobaptists, and 
 that they first agitated, for a short time in a more pri- 
 vate way, what De Bruys soon after proclaimed publicly. 
 
 A Synod held at Arras, in the year 1025, which has 
 been already referred to, has often been adduced in this 
 
 ■^' Jones' H. C. Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. 
 
 83* 
 
390 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 controversy. This was first brought forward by Stennet, 
 from Dr. Allix's work. Stennet only gave a part of the 
 facts there recorded. We there find that Gundulphus 
 and his followers denied that baptism could do good to 
 ANY ONE — that their doctrines were very similar to the 
 Quakers of the present day.* 
 
 The Cathari of Germany, Paterines in Italy, and the 
 Paulicians of Greece, are next appealed to as the line of 
 descent in which Antipedobaptism can be traced. These 
 were all branches of the same under different names in 
 different countries, and were semi-manicheans, and ob- 
 jected to all baptism, likewise to the sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper If 
 
 The Paulicians, in Greece, from w^hom all the others 
 sprang, took their name from one Paulus, who com- 
 menced his career in Armenia, about the beginning of 
 the seventh century. He rejected both of the sacra- 
 ments, baptism and the Lord's Supper, denied the 
 authority of the Old Testament — interpreted the New 
 allegorically, and taught that the Supreme Being 
 created neither the world nor the human body: and 
 that this was the work of some inferior being. They 
 were branded as heretics and persecuted by the Greek 
 Church, but persisted in their doctrines. When ban- 
 ished from their own country they sought refuge in 
 others, continuing to inculcate their principles where- 
 ever they went. J " Li different countries," says Mos- 
 heim, (in which he is followed by Baptist writers,) "they 
 
 * Wall. f Waddington and Mosheim. 
 
 X See Fessenden's Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Mosheim, 
 Waddington, and others. 
 
HISTOKY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 391 
 
 were known by different names. In Greece, they were 
 called Paulicians— in Italy, Paterines— in Germany, 
 Cathari, or rather Gazari — in France, Bulgarians, 
 because they came from Bulgaria, the country in which 
 the head of the sect had resided— also, Publicians, pro- 
 bably a corrupt pronunciation of Paulicians. They 
 were also called 'good men,' with several other titles."* 
 Whether these were all different names given to the 
 same sect, at different times and in different countries, 
 or not — certain it is, they differed very little from each 
 other in their doctrines. And there can be but little 
 doubt in regard to the fact, that the influence of these 
 doctrines on the minds of the people of Albi among 
 whom they lived, gave rise to that particular sect of the 
 Albigenses who objected peculiarly to infant baptism. 
 The Catholics on the one hand, baptized both infants 
 and adults— the Paulicians, on the other, rejected all 
 baptism and the sacrament of the supper. The inhabi- 
 tants of Albi being pleased with many of their doc- 
 trines, were not prepared to leap across the whole 
 ground from the Catholics to the Paulicians, and so 
 took a middle position between them, blending together 
 what they most highly approved of each, and rejecting 
 the remainder. They were disgusted with the lives of 
 the Roman Catholic priests and overburdened with use- 
 less ceremonies, but were not willing to give up the 
 sacrament of the supper — and hence retained baptism so 
 far as it could be made a preparatory step to the sup- 
 per, but rejected the baptism of infants. 
 
 Or it may be that the Paulicians, coming among a 
 * See also Waddington. 
 
392 EXAiMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 people where the Gnostic philosophy of the East was 
 little known, and gradually losing its influence over 
 their own minds, they began to decline from the doc- 
 trines of their forefathers, and adopt in part the 
 doctrines of the Christians around them. Their first 
 step was probably to administer the sacrament of the 
 supper, which required baptism, as a preparatory rite to 
 its observance — but they refused it to infants, because, 
 among other reasons, they said, " since they cannot 
 believe they cannot be saved, and it is therefore useless 
 to them." This was, at least, the chief reason given 
 for refusing it to them after De Bruys began to preach 
 in public what they had canvassed among themselves 
 more privately. 
 
 The probabilities in favor of this conjecture are in- 
 creased by the fact, that Alanus, a writer towards the 
 close of that century, 1192, reckoning up the opinions 
 of the Paulicians, or Cathari, as they were then called, 
 says, they '' differ among themselves as to baptism — 
 some rejecting all water baptism, others refusing it only 
 to infants." This was in the same century in which 
 De Bruys lived, but sometime after his death. Before 
 this century, all writers, who give their doctrines on 
 this point, unite in testifying that they rejected water 
 baptism and the Lord's Supper altogether. 
 
 This, after much labor in examining and comparing 
 the accounts given by various authors, is, according to 
 our most careful and deliberate judgment, the most 
 probable of all the conjectures that we have yet seen 
 in regard to the origin of Antipedobaptism. If it ori- 
 ginated before this time, evidence of the fact has not 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 393 
 
 been brought forward by any writer yet known to us 
 on the subject. And why certain Baptist writers 
 should profess to trace their Church through these sects, 
 we are at a loss to conjecture, unless it be, because 
 they objected to the cross, the worship of the Virgin 
 Mary, and some other popish rites. For certainly there 
 is nothing in their history to show they held the pecu- 
 liar doctrine of Antipedobaptism, before the twelfth 
 century. And had they opposed it even from their 
 orioiin, as a sect that was of too late a date to avail 
 anything on the question before us. 
 
 The next step is to the Donatists. Through these, 
 it has been pretended by some, the principles of Anti- 
 pedobaptism can be traced. This sect arose in the year 
 311 A. D. The Bishop of Carthage, Mensurius, died 
 that year, and Cecilianus was elected and consecrated 
 in his place. The Numidian bishops, who belonged to 
 a subordinate province, were not present, and objected 
 both to the person elected and to the manner of proce- 
 dure ; and determined to consecrate Majorinus in oppo- 
 sition to him, declaring Cecilianus was not properly 
 put into office — alleging against him and also against 
 one of his consecrators, viciousness of life. Two parties 
 were now formed, and several successive councils assem- 
 bled to decide the controversy. The Numidian party 
 lost their cause in every Council. A schism was finally 
 produced, and a schismatic body formed, called Dona- 
 tists, after the name of Donatus, their principal leader 
 in the controversy.* 
 
 Between the Donatists and Church Catholic, from 
 
 '^ Mosheim, AYaddington, and Church historians generally. 
 
394 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 which they separated, there was no difference as to 
 Church organization, except that the Donatists after- 
 wards re-baptized such as happened to come over to 
 them from the Church, alleging as their reason for this, 
 that baptism was not valid in a Church in which such 
 officers as Cecilianus and some others of his party were 
 permitted to administer it. As to Infant Baptism, they 
 continued to practice it, as they had done before their 
 separation. This has been before shown from the acts 
 of Councils passed, when the Donatists began to come 
 back into the great body of the Church from which 
 they had separated. In two Councils in the Church of 
 Africa, as cited in the first part of this work, resolutions 
 were passed concerning those baptized in infancy among 
 the Donatists, in connection with holding Church offices. 
 In the first, it was resolved, that it should be made a 
 question of consultation with neighboring bishops, whe- 
 ther those baptized in infancy might not be promoted, 
 because they were too young to know the error that was 
 committed, and, therefore, less guilty than those capa- 
 ble of judging for themselves.* 
 
 In the next, it was resolved, that such as turned to 
 the Church as soon as capable of understanding the 
 error, might hold office in it ; but those who continued 
 with the Donatists, and became teachers, before correct- 
 ing what had been done, must be deferred for longer 
 consideration. t 
 
 Again : Optatus, bishop of Milevium, in persuading 
 the Donatists to union with the Church, tells them, 
 
 ■* Concil. Carthag. can. 48. 
 
 f Codex Canonum Eccl. Africanas, can. 48. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 395 
 
 ^'tlie ecclesiastical organization is one and the same 
 with us and you. Though men's minds are at variance, 
 the sacraments are at none. And we may say we be- 
 lieve alike, and are sealed with one and the same seal : 
 not otherwise baptized than you, nor otherwise ordained 
 than you."* 
 
 Cresconius, who was himself a Donatist, anxious to 
 unite the two parties, uses also these words: "There is 
 between us and you one religion, the same sacraments, 
 nothing in Christian ceremonies different. It is a schism 
 that is between us — not a heresy, "f 
 
 Now, as no one can doubt whether the Church bap- 
 tized infants at this time, what plainer testimony need 
 we that the Donatists practiced the same ? There w^as 
 "no difference in the sacraments" and "Christian cere- 
 monies," say both parties ; and Councils passed laws 
 for such as were baptized in infancy by Donatists. 
 What need we more to prove that the Donatists bap- 
 tized infants ? Surely this is enough to convince any 
 reasonable man. Nor does any writer, in plain terms, 
 deny this fact. Yet some will insinuate and imply as 
 much, even passing on to the Novatians, professing to 
 see signs of Antipedobaptism in that sect also ! We 
 must, therefore, inquire who the Novatians were, and 
 what they taught. 
 
 The Novatiansf were a sect called after Novatian, a 
 
 * Lib. 3 de Scliis. Donatist. 
 
 f Apud Augustinum lib. 2, contra Cresconium. See Wall, vol. i. p. 
 105. 
 
 J See Mosbeim, Lurdner, Milner, Waddington, and bistorians gene- 
 rally. 
 
396 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 Presbyter in the Church of Rome, who was a man, says 
 Mosheim, "of uncommon learning and eloquence, but of 
 an austere and rigid character, entertaining the most 
 unfavorable sentiments of those who had been separated 
 from the communion of the Church. He indulged his 
 severity so far as to deny that any who had fallen into 
 the commission of grievous transgressions, especially 
 those who had apostatized from the faith under the perse- 
 cution set on foot by Decius, should ever be again received 
 into the bosom of the Church. The greater part of his 
 brother Presbyters were of a different opinion in this 
 matter, especially Cornelius, whose credit and influence 
 were raised to the highest pitch by the esteem and admi- 
 ration which his eminent virtues so naturally excited. 
 Hence it happened that when a bishop was to be chosen, 
 in 250 A. D., to succeed Fabius in the see of Rome, 
 Novatian opposed the election of Cornelius with the 
 greatest activity and bitterness. His opposition, how- 
 ever, was in vain, for Cornelius was chosen to the office, 
 of which his distinguished merit rendered him so highly 
 worthy. Novation, from this time, separated himself 
 from the jurisdiction of Cornelius, who, in his turn, 
 called a Council at Rome, in the year 251, and cut him 
 oft" and his partisans from the communion of the Church. 
 This turbulent man erected a new society, of which he 
 was the first bishop."* 
 
 From, this extract, we see that Novatian and Corne- 
 lius entertained the same doctrinal views, belonged to 
 the same Church, but differed in regard to the disposi- 
 tion of those who had fallen away from fear of persccu- 
 
 * iMoshciin. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 397 
 
 tion. But this is not all. Novatian was an aspirant 
 for the office of bishop in the same Church, and a rival 
 of Cornelius. And the success of Cornelius was, no 
 doubt, the chief cause of his forming a new society, over 
 which he could be bishop, whilst laxity of discipline 
 was made the ostensible reason.'*' 
 
 As they were ministers in the same Church, and 
 rivals for the same office, they must have entertained 
 the same general views in doctrine. And when Nova- 
 tian separated, the only reason pretended for it was 
 laxity of discipline. Nothing was said about baptism. 
 
 On the other hand, Cornelius charged him with want 
 of moral courage and unfitness for the' office of bishop, 
 because he had been baptized under the influence of 
 fear on his sick bed, instead of receiving it of his own 
 free will, uninfluenced by external causes. 
 
 On what ground, then, can he be claimed as the 
 advocate of Baptist principles ? A man baptized by 
 aspersion himself, and the baptizer of infants 1 And 
 are we anywhere informed that Novatian or any of his 
 followers ever afterwards changed on these points ? No. 
 Neither Augustine, nor any others who give an account 
 of the various sects of that age and their doctrines, say 
 anything of their peculiar notions as to mode, or refu- 
 sing baptism to infants. Cyprian, who lived and wrote 
 at the time this schism was made, and Eusebius and 
 Optatus, whilst the Novatians flourished, say nothino- in 
 their accounts of the diff'erences between the Church 
 and the sects to that effect. Mosheim, on the con- 
 trary, expressly states that "there was no difference in 
 
 * Milaer, Waddino^ton, and Lardner. 
 
 34 
 
398 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 point of doctrine between the Novatians and the great 
 body of Christians. What peculiarly distinguished them 
 was their refusing to re-admit to the communion of the 
 Church those who, after baptism, had fallen into the 
 commission of sins, though they did not pretend that 
 such were excluded from all possibility of salvation."* 
 
 What then, it may be asked, ever suggested the 
 thought that the Novatians rejected infant baptism ? 
 Nothing, so far as we can learn, except it be the mis- 
 apprehension of a single ivord. The Novatians, like 
 the Donatists, required those who had been baptized in 
 the Church Catholic to be re-baptized when they united 
 with them, on the ground that a Church so lax in its 
 government vitiated and rendered null the holy rite of 
 baptism ; and, for re-baptizing in such cases, they were 
 sometimes called Anabaptists, which simply means, to 
 baptize anew.f Certain Dutch writers of later years, 
 finding this term applied to the Novatians, inferred 
 from it that they rejected infant baptism ; and others 
 have handed down what i\\ey suijposed.X "TheNova- 
 tians assumed to themselves," says Mosheim, "the title 
 Cathari — i. e. yure ; and what shows a still more ex- 
 travagant degree of vanity and arrogance, they obliged 
 such as came over to them from the great body of Chris- 
 tians to be baptized a second time as a necessary prepa- 
 ration for entering into their society," &c.§ ♦ 
 
 It was some half century before this schism, that Origen 
 declared, " Infant baptism was the usage of the Church 
 
 * Vol. i. p. 96. 
 
 \ Am " anew," Bartr't^w ^' to baptize." 
 X See Wall, vol ii. ^ Vol. i. p. \)<o. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 399 
 
 handed down from the Apostles." It was hefore this and 
 before the name of " Cathari" was beard of, that a Coun- 
 cil at Carthage bad legislated against the delay of 
 baptism till the eighth day after birth, as a rule. 
 Hence, had the Novatians rejected infant baptism, it 
 would have been an innovation on the established order 
 of the Universal Church. This, however, they did not 
 do, nor did any other sect branching from or uniting 
 with them in that century. For. in addition to the 
 united testimony of historians, that "there was no dif- 
 ference in point of doctrine between them," we have 
 also the testimony of four different writers, two of 
 whom — Epiphanius and Philastrius — lived and wrote 
 shortly after this schism occurred, who give a history of 
 the schismatical bodies and new sects, and describe 
 their peculiar views and tenets, and, especially, 
 where they conflict with the teaching of the great body 
 of Christians, but say nothing of the rejection of infant 
 baptism as the peculiarity of one of them — which is 
 conclusive testimony that no such difference existed. 
 
 As to modes, we have already noticed the fact, in 
 the former part of this work, that some baptized by 
 pouring water, mixed with oil, on the head — some with 
 balsam — some in the water, and some not at all. We 
 will not waste time on this point, but confine our atten- 
 tion to the practice of infant baptism, as that involves 
 the chief and grand principle that separates Baptists 
 from other Christians. 
 
 Much time and labor has been consumed in searching 
 for evidence to disprove the universality of infant bap- 
 tism in the Church, during the four first centuries of 
 
400 EXAMINATION OF THE OKIGIN AND 
 
 the Christian era, and every shadow of proof that could 
 be found has been brought forth. A Council of Car- 
 thage, in 418, A. D., and another also in 416, A. D., 
 legislating against the Pelagian heresy, have been both 
 referred to as evidence that infant baptism was not 
 thoroughly established in the Church till about that 
 time. But the true state of the case is, (as has already 
 been shown,) that the object of the canons pointed to 
 in these Councils, was to confine the Pelagians within 
 limits that would not permit them to escape the doctrine 
 of original sin.* 
 
 St. Basil's exhortation to his catechumens has like- 
 wise been urged as proof to the same effect, which has 
 also been shown to have no bearing on the question. f 
 We might adduce various others, but they are all of a 
 similar character to those just mentioned, not one of 
 them affecting positively infant baptism. Much stress 
 has been lain on an extract from "Justin Martyr's 
 Apology," where he gives an account of the manner in 
 which Christians received members into the Church, a 
 part of which has been cited. In writing to the Em- 
 peror and Senate, in defence of Christians who had been 
 slandered by their enemies, because he speaks of adults 
 only, against whom the charges were made, and who 
 of course constituted at that time the chief portion, and 
 at all times the responsible part of the Church, it has 
 been inferred there were no children baptized. He 
 gays — '' They who are persuaded and do believe that 
 
 * See Testimony for Infant Baptism iu the first three chapters of 
 this book, 
 t Ibid. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 401 
 
 those things which are taught by us are true, and do 
 promise to live according to them, are directed first to 
 pray and ask God with fasting, the forgiveness of their 
 former sins: and we also pray and fast together with 
 them. Then we bring them to some place where there 
 is water, and they are regenerated by the same way of 
 regeneration by which we were regenerated," &c. &c. 
 
 Because nothing is here said of infant children, and 
 because they could not pray and fast as adults were 
 required to do, it has been argued that they were not 
 then received into the Church ! But why should Justin 
 refer to the case of children? He was not drawing up 
 a regular Formulary of the Christian Church, but only 
 referring to its doctrine and practice, in such a way as 
 to convince the emperor and others that there Avas 
 nothing taught or practiced among them that led to the 
 enormities of which they had been accused. He had 
 already, in this same Epistle, appealed to the lives of 
 many then living, who had been made disciples from 
 childhood as examples of the good influence of their 
 doctrines; and he now shows that there is nothing in 
 their practice, or required of persons to become mem- 
 bers, contrary to the same. There was no necessity for 
 him to speak of children here — this he had done in 
 another place, and his object now did not require it. 
 Charges had been made against those able to perpetrate 
 crimes, not against the children. And he designed to 
 show that nothing was required of persons when initiated 
 or afterwards, but that which must be approved by the 
 emperor and senate. What would the reader think, were 
 no stronger testimony to be produced on the other side ? 
 
 3i* 
 
402 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 The writings of the early Christians have also been 
 ransacked to find testimony of another kind, to disprove 
 the infant's claim to Church-membership. Much labor 
 has been spent to find cases of the children of Chris- 
 tians who were baptized at adult age, in order to prove 
 that it was not the universal custom of Christian parents 
 to have their children baptized in infancy. But could 
 any such cases be found, they would only show, that 
 some Christians in that tige may have neglected this 
 duty, although they acknowledged its authority as many 
 do in this age. It seems, however, that there was great 
 unanimity of action among ancient Christians on this 
 point; for out of fourteen cases, produced .from first to 
 Inst, it has been found on strict examination, that all 
 of them were either baptized in infancy, or were born 
 before their parents became Christians, with the 
 exception of one single case, in the fourth century. 
 This is Gregory Nazianzen, concerning whom it is 
 doubtful whether his father was a Christian or not, 
 when he was born. 
 
 Despairing of establishing the invalidity of infant 
 baptism from the writings and practices of Christians in 
 those countries in which Christianity was first planted, 
 a dernier resort was, for a time, made by a party to 
 Great Britain. But from this covert they were soon 
 driven, and had entirely abandoned it, as many sup- 
 posed, until during the summer of 1843, an editor of a 
 public journal having made a flourish of modern names, 
 favorable to Antipedobaptism, was called upon to give 
 some ancient authorities, or to produce a single pas- 
 sage from any writer during the first thousand years of 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 403 
 
 Christianity, that would show infant baptism was not 
 the practice 'of the Church during that time. He, in 
 reply, cited the testimony of Bede, as he supposed, but 
 unfortunately for his cause he quoted from Fabian, who 
 wrote in the time of Henry VII., in the early part of 
 the sixteenth century. 
 
 The ''venerable Bede," as he is generally called, 
 wrote a Church history of the English nation in the 
 early part of the eighth century, in which he records 
 the efforts of Augustine, the Monk, in the sixth century, 
 to plant the Romish Church among the English people. 
 Augustine found Christianity already among the ancient 
 Britons, and attempted to unite them with his own fol- 
 lowers, but proposed that they should adopt his rites 
 and ceremonies, in such things as he differed from them. 
 This they refused. After making various modifications 
 of his terms of union, he made his final proposal:* "You 
 practice in many things contrary to our customs; and, 
 indeed, contrary to the universal custom of the Church. 
 And yet, if you will comply with me in these things — 
 that you keep Easter at the right time — that you per- 
 form the ofiice of baptizing (by which we are regenerated 
 unto God) according to the custom of the Holy Roman 
 Church and the Apostolic Church. And you, with us, 
 do preach the word of the Lord to the nation of the 
 English. We will bear patiently with all other things 
 which you practice contrary to our custom." 
 
 But they answered, "they would do none of these 
 things, nor own him for their archbishop." 
 
 This passage, says Wall, is given by several English his- 
 * Bede Eccle. Hist. lib. 2, c. 2. cited by Wall. 
 
404 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 torians, and all to the same effect. Among others, bj one 
 Fabian in the time of Henry VII., who wrote a chroni- 
 cle of the English history in English. Two editions 
 were in the Oxford Library at the time Wall wrote, one 
 of which had the title-page torn out. In one of them, 
 the passage to which the appeal is made against infant 
 baptism, was translated into the same sense of the 
 original of Bede. The other had a few words left out, 
 (as he supposes, by mistake.) But on this copy, which 
 diifers both from Bede and from the other edition, rests 
 the whole argument to prove the English Church did 
 not originally practice infant baptism ! Although a 
 writer of the sixteenth century is too late to place con- 
 fidence in, under any circumstances, unless he gives the 
 original of book and chapter from which he copies — yet 
 this defective translation has been made the basis of an 
 argument against the original itself, and against the 
 translation of others ! 
 
 The case stands as follows : One edition of Fabian 
 reads, " Then he (Austin) sayd to them, sin ye woll not 
 assent to my hestes generally, assent ye to me espe- 
 cially in these thyngs : The first is that ye kepe Ester- 
 day in due forme and tyme, as it is ordeyned. The 
 second, that ye give christendome to the children in the 
 manner that is used in the Churche of Rome. And the 
 third, that ye preche unto the Anglis the word of God."* 
 In the other edition, the words, "in the manner that it 
 is used in the Church of Rome," are left out; and the 
 passage simply says, " that ye give christendome to the 
 children." 
 
 * See Wall, vol. ii. 3d edit. p. 118. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 405 
 
 Now, who would ever have supposed that a people 
 who professed to do nothing withcflit a "Thus saith the 
 Lord," would from such evidence as this argue that the 
 ancient Church of Briton was opposed to infant bap- 
 tism ? and quote it, too, as Bede's testimony, when 
 taken from another writer, and from an edition differing 
 not only from another edition of the same writer, but 
 from various other writers who refer to the same ori- 
 ginal ? We all know how liable transcribers are to 
 leave out words or parts of a sentence : an hundred 
 mistakes occur on the side of omission, to one on the 
 side of adding too much. 
 
 The testimony of Bede, instead of proving anything 
 against infant baptism in the ancient Church of Britain, 
 is positive testimony to its authority. It shows that 
 both the Church of Rome and of Britain, which had 
 been separate from their first planting, gave baptism to 
 infants, though there was some difi'erence in their cere- 
 monies attending the administering of the rite. Rome 
 had made additions to it, which did not originally ac- 
 company the rite of baptism, and against which the 
 Britons objected. That the Britons practiced infant 
 baptism is evident, also, from the testimony of Pela- 
 gius, who was born and bred in England, and came 
 to Rome before Augustine visited his country ; and 
 who, in his controversy with Augustine, the bishop of 
 Hippo, declared that " he never heard of even any here- 
 tic that denied baptism to infants." 
 
 So that, so far as the testimony of history can avail, 
 it establishes the fact that the Church in ancient Britain, 
 as well as in Rome and in Greece, and in Alexandria, 
 
406 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 Palestine, and Asia Minor, gave baptism to infants from 
 the beginning. What better evidence need we? 
 
 The same has been found to be the practice of the 
 Christians on the coast of Malabar, who had been sepa- 
 rated from other Christians more than thirteen hundred 
 years. When first discovered, after this long period, 
 and brought to the knowledge of other portions of the 
 Christian world, they had the custom of infant baptism, 
 and still continue it, claiming as the founder of their 
 Church and doctrine the Apostle St. Thomas."* 
 
 To whatever point we turn, therefore, we find evi- 
 dence accumulating on evidence, that infant baptism 
 was the practice of the Primitive Church. And beyond 
 doubt, it must surprise the reader as it has the writer, 
 that any who have examined the evidence, can resist it. 
 But it is stranger still, that such should ransack all 
 history to find testimony on the other side ; and then 
 turn round, and try to cast discredit upon all Church 
 history ; and make an array of the corruptions in the 
 Church, to invalidate the authority of a rite known to 
 exist before such corruptions were made ! But shall we 
 discard a doctrine because of abuse ? Ought we not 
 rather to discriminate between the abuse and the thing 
 itself? "Prove all things, hold fast that which is 
 good," is the Apostolic injunction. 
 
 Shall we discard the Lord's Supper because some 
 have vainly supposed the bread and wine were changed 
 into the natural body and blood of Christ ? The fact 
 that infant baptism was the practice of every Church, 
 extending over thousands of miles, from the first that 
 '■^' Buchanan's Researches. 
 
HISTORY OE THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 407 
 
 is known particularly on that point, and no one ever 
 heard to call its lawfulness in question, is of itself suffi- 
 cient to dispel the mere surmise that it was an innova- 
 tion. Again, the fact that there was much conjecture 
 and discussion among early Christian writers, as to its 
 effects and the reasons why it was commanded, shows 
 that it w^as not instituted by men. For had it been of 
 human origin, the reason and grounds of necessity 
 would have been given in the first place. But, like 
 adult baptism, being ordered by Divine wisdom, men 
 are left to conjecture as to its grounds, effects, and 
 other particulars, which the master did not think proper 
 to reveal. 
 
 The evidence that has now been adduced, be it ob- 
 served, is not merely the opinions or conjectures of men, 
 but their testimony to that which was the object of the 
 senses, and is intended as corroborative evidence of the 
 correctness of the interpretation we give of the Scrip- 
 tures — as the tree, showing by its leaves and fruit, what 
 was the nature of the young scion about which there 
 has been so much difference of opinion. 
 
 Ancient records and passages that speak of infant 
 baptism, are referred to just as we refer to passages of 
 the same writings, that speak of the different books of 
 the New Testament, when our object is to prove that 
 any one of those books w\as received among the early 
 Christians as of Divine authority. How can one, there- 
 fore, under any pretence whatever, gainsay this testi- 
 mony, so long as he appeals to it in support of the 
 genuineness of the different books of the New Testa- 
 ment, and to Avhich we must appeal, or open the way to 
 the rejection of the Holy Scriptures ? 
 
408 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 By such appeal and tests, we can find no Christian body 
 that admitted the necessity of baptism to adults and re- 
 fused it to infants, until the beginning of the twelfth cen- 
 tury, when, in the midst of the darkness that overspread 
 Europe, one Peter de Bruys, of Languedoc, and some 
 others connected with him, began to promulge the doc- 
 trine, that it was unnecessary to baptize infants, because 
 they could not believe, and therefore could not be saved. 
 One, writing about the year 1126, says: "It might 
 have seemed there was no need to confute such a doctrine 
 as this, were it not that it had now continued twenty 
 years. The first seeds were sown by Peter de Bruys."* 
 
 This sect opposed the building of churches, and said 
 that singing *' was mocking God," &c. In regard to 
 infant baptism, this author thus writes : — 
 
 " Christ sending his disciples out to preach, says in 
 the gospel, ' Go ye out into all the land and preach the 
 Gospel to every creature — he that believeth and is bap- 
 tized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be 
 damned.' From these words of our Saviour it is plain 
 that none can be saved, unless he believes and is bap- 
 tized: that is, have both Christian faith and baptism. 
 For not one of these, but both together, do save ! So that 
 infants, though they be by you baptized, yet since by 
 reason of their age they cannot believe, are not saved.'' '\ 
 
 This is the first public and open avowal against infant 
 baptism as a Christian rite, on record. J The followers 
 
 * Peter, Abbot of Cluni. See Wall's History, vol. ii. p. 237.— Mos- 
 heim and Waddington. 
 
 f Wall's Hist., vol. ii. p. 235. Also Milner, aud others. 
 
 J If any writer will produce an undoubted passage to that effect of an 
 earlier date, it shall be inserted in the next edition of this book, and 
 acknowledged in other ways. 
 
HISTORY OP THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 409 
 
 of Gundulphus, who were condemned in a Synod, at 
 Arras, in the preceding century, have been cited as the 
 first. But they held all baptism to be of no use — that 
 a moral life was suflQcient. 
 
 "This," said they, "is our doctrine, to renounce the 
 world, to bridle the lusts of the flesh, to maintain our- 
 selves by the labor of our own hands, to do violence to 
 no man, to love the brethren. If this plan of righteous- 
 ness be observed, there is no need of baptism ; if it be 
 neglected, baptism is of no avail."* They are said to 
 have regarded the Lord's Supper and dignitaries in the 
 Church, in the same light. And in their opposition to 
 baptism, they gave as a particular reason for the case of 
 infants, that they could not understand and confess the 
 truth. They may be regarded, therefore, as esteeming 
 infant baptism even more unreasonable than adult, but 
 both alike unnecessary. In this sense, it may be said, 
 the first opposers of infant baptism were brought to light 
 in the beginning of the eleventh century. But the Petro- 
 brussians, in the following century, took a very different 
 ground, and opposed infant baptism, whilst they received 
 adult baptism. They contended infants could not be 
 saved, though they were baptized, because they could 
 not believe. And they certainly interpreted that pas- 
 sage of scripture, on which the opponents of baptism 
 lay so much stress in this age, more consistently than is 
 now done. " He that believeth and is baptized shall be 
 saved — he that believeth not shall be damned." Mark 
 xviw 16. If, according to this passage, faith be in all 
 cases necessary to baptism, consistency in all its parts 
 
 * Wall. 
 
 35 
 
410 EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN AND 
 
 requires faith as necessary in all cases to salvation. So 
 that if it be applicable to infants in the one case, it must 
 be in both ; therefore, the Petrobrussians were more con- 
 sistent than the Antipedobaptists of the present day, on 
 this point. 
 
 The doctrine of Peter de Bruys was adopted after- 
 wards by several sects, or rather advocated by those 
 called by other names, but they were few in number, 
 and but little known till after the dawn of the Reforma- 
 tion under Luther ; when it appears, that about the year 
 1521, they collected together in considerable numbers, 
 chiefly from Saxony and the adjacent countries, headed 
 by one Munzer, Stubner and Stork, and are described 
 by various writers as very fanatical, turbulent and sedi- 
 tious; — who, says Mosheim, "declared war against all 
 laws, government and magistrates of every kind. But 
 this seditious crowd was routed and dispersed without 
 much difficulty, by the Elector of Saxony and other 
 princes; Munzer was put to death, and his factious fol- 
 lowers scattered abroad in different places." They were 
 afterwards more timid, but still continued to spread their 
 principles, and were called Anabaptists. About the year 
 1533, a portion of them, perhaps more fanatical and 
 seditious than others, headed by John Matthison, John 
 Bockhold, a tailor, and one Gerard, took the city of 
 Munster, deposed the magistrates, and proclaimed John 
 Brockhold king and legislator of their new hierarchy. 
 Munster was retaken the next year, and after a long 
 siege, their New Jerusalem, as they called it, destroyed, 
 and its mock monarch punished with a most painful 
 death.* 
 
 ^ See Mosheim, and historians generally. 
 
HISTORY OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 411 
 
 Their doctrine of a new and perfect Church, guided 
 by visions and revelations from Heaven, which set aside 
 the necessity for civil government; and the abolishing 
 of ranks and titles, and the equal distribution of goods, 
 making a common stock for all alike; together with 
 polygamy and other liberties, brought upon them the 
 dislike and persecution of civil rulers. In 1536 Menno 
 Simonis, who had been a Roman Catholic priest, was 
 chosen their leader, who modified many of their tenets, 
 rejected polygamy, visions, and other more objectionable 
 features, and reduced their system to more consistency 
 and order. 
 
 Their intolerance when in possession of Munster, and 
 open avowal of intention to bring all the nations of the 
 earth under their dominion, had spread far and wide, 
 which excited unkindness and intolerance toward them 
 in return. And not until the publication of their faith 
 in 1626, in a form still more improved, did they obtain 
 the confidence of public rulers, and the liberty to incul- 
 cate generally their doctrines unmolested. 
 
 The first English Baptists that we read of came into 
 England from Holland, about the year 1610. They 
 were among the Puritans who returned after the death 
 of their pastor, Rev John Smith.* 
 
 The first church of that society in England was 
 organized in 1638, under the pastoral care of the Rev. 
 Mr. Jessee.f 
 
 The first Baptist Church in the United States was 
 formed in 1639, in Providence, Rhode Island, by Roger 
 
 * Murdock's note on Mosbeim, vol. iii. 
 f Buck's T. D., and authorities. 
 
412 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 Williams; who, not being able to find an "ordained 
 minister in America that had been immersed on a pro- 
 fession of faith," first immersed Mr. Ezekiel Hopkins, 
 who afterwards immersed Mr. Williams. { 
 
 Mr. Williams afterwards left the Baptists and turned 
 Quaker; but ministers of the Baptist persuasion emi- 
 grated to America and settled in difi*erent States after 
 that, so that all their churches in this country did not 
 spring from him. 
 
 We cannot find that immersion was made essential to 
 baptism by the Anabaptists before the sixteenth cen- 
 tury. iLsTor that infant baptism was rejected by any 
 sect, branch of the Christian Church, or writer, before 
 the twelfth. (We need not reiterate what has been so 
 often repeated in regard to Tertullian.) After its rejec- 
 tion by the Petrobrussians, it spread among some of the 
 sects that were in existence before the time of Pierre de 
 Bruys, but that any one of them rejected it before, we 
 challenge the opposers of infant baptism to prove, and 
 and pledge ourselves, if a single case can be produced, 
 to acknowledge it as publicly as we here declare our be- 
 lief to the contrary. 
 
 And we call upon those who are accustomed to repeat 
 the broad assertions to which we have alluded, to ex- 
 amine the ground on which they stand. The unqualified, 
 dogmatic manner, in which many speak of the mode and 
 subjects of baptism, is unwarranted by Christian charity 
 and the facts in the case. How often do we hear infant 
 baptism denounced as unscriptural and a great evil, with 
 as little qualification as they condemn a gross sin ! 
 
 X Memoirs of Roger Williams, I. D. Kuowles. Also H. Discourse, 
 by Hague, 1840. 
 
CONCLUDING REMARKS. 413 
 
 The Western Recorder, a Baptist newspaper, pub- 
 lished in Louisville, Ky., says: "Of all the 'damnable 
 heresies' in that black catalogue which has befouled 
 Christianity, we consider infant baptism the most dam- 
 nable. If other heresies have damned their thousands, 
 this has damned its tens of thousands." 
 
 Such language in a Christian paper, chills one's blood 
 to its fountain head ! And if uttered by an Infidel 
 writer against nine-tenths of the Christian Church, on 
 any other point as it is here done, would place him un- 
 der the ban of the Christian world. 
 
 A certain Dr. Maclay, a Baptist minister, writing to 
 a minister of another denomination, says: "I consider 
 infant baptism the greatest curse that has ever afflicted 
 Christendom. It has done more to corrupt the Church 
 of God, and make it a den of robbers, than all the other 
 inventions of the wicked one. This accursed thing has 
 rendered the Churches of the Reformation nearly as 
 corrupt as the Romish Church itself."* 
 
 Now we cannot believe these gentlemen had ever ex- 
 amined the question to which they apply such language, 
 beyond a narrow, contracted, and unwarranted inter- 
 pretation of the Holy Scriptures, and perhaps a treatise 
 or two of some prejudiced writer. And although the 
 whole Baptist communion cannot be held responsible 
 for the language and sentiments of individuals, they 
 have, in a corporate capacity, expressed sentiments but 
 little less objectionable to their Christian brethren of 
 other names. 
 
 " The American and Foreign Bible Society," formed 
 * Cited by Thomas 0. Summers on Baptism, p. 175. 
 
 35* 
 
414 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 for the express object of translating the Holy Scrip- 
 tures into Foreign Languages, and ^vhich we believe has 
 the approbation and support of their whole denomina- 
 tion, (but few exceptions, if any,) have published to the 
 world — " Resolved. ...the nations of the earth must now 
 look to the Baptist denomination alone for faithful 
 translations of the word of God."* And in their An- 
 nual Report, they charge the British and Foreign Bible 
 Society, and the American Bible Society, with "virtu- 
 ally combining to obscure at least part of the Divine 
 revelation, and to circulate versions of the Bible unfaith- 
 ful, at least so far as the subject of baptism is con- 
 cerned."t 
 
 Further, out of this has arisen a less responsible 
 body, which have not the approbation of all ; but of a 
 large portion of the Baptists, who are now engaged in 
 making a new translation of our English Bible, with the 
 special object in view to change baptism and baptize into 
 immersion and to immerse. This, of course, is designed 
 to rival our old English version, and the hope is fondly 
 cherished, that it will eventually supplant it ! But who 
 that can appreciate the question, will not desire to see 
 the reasons given for these changes, and hence every 
 change fairly discussed ; and, therefore, a commentary 
 on the Bible, if anything — not a translation expressing 
 their mere ipse dixit ! 
 
 We can foresee nothing but evil in such an attempt ; 
 
 it will open a way for every branch of the Christian 
 
 body to make a translation for themselves, and thus 
 
 destroy the unity of the Bible, and undermine the public 
 
 * A. F. Bible Society, April 28, 1840. f Ibid. 
 
CONCLUDING REMARKS. 415 
 
 faith in the Divine authority of Christianity. Such 
 an effort, such sentiments, are not called for; while 
 they separate Christians farther apart, they also aid in 
 promoting infidelity among men. They do not partake 
 of the spirit of our Holy religion, or illustrate its doc- 
 trines. They assume an infallibility of judgment, and 
 want of Christian charity tow^ards others, not warranted 
 by the word of God. This the world can see, and will 
 not fail to mark. To denounce the great portion of the 
 Christian world as conspiring together to '' obscure a 
 part of the Divine revelation," is a serious charge ! 
 And to pronounce a rite that had been the doctrine 
 and practice of the whole Christian Church until the 
 twelfth century, and which has been continued by nine- 
 tenths of the Christian world ever since, as the " most 
 damnable of heresies," and "greatest curse that has 
 ever afflicted the Church !" if not blasphemy, approaches 
 so near to it, that they cannot be easily distinguished 
 from each other. 
 
 Aside from the spirit and language to which we here 
 object, there is a self-sufficiency and arrogance in the 
 manner in which these subjects are treated in the pulpit 
 and in private, that is exceedingly offensive to Chris- 
 tian taste, and is often an abuse of Christian hospitality. 
 By our firesides and in our families, they are often 
 introduced, and treated in a manner that implies all are 
 knaves or fools that do not agree with them ! 
 
 If such will examine the whole question, as they 
 should do, we believe they would afterwards teach the 
 opposite doctrine, or at least learn to speak of such 
 things wdth more modesty. It cannot be that these 
 
416 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 persons realize how much is implied in the doctrines 
 which they teach. They assume not only that the 
 Church, against which Christ promised " the gates of 
 hell should not prevail," became corrupt in essentials, in 
 the first age after the Apostles, but continued so until 
 the sixteenth century, thereby destroying its "■ tens of 
 thousands," but that for a long period there was no 
 Church, because all, with here and there exceptions in 
 the missionary fields, were baptized in infancy, which 
 they do not admit is baptism, and as baptism is the only 
 initiatory rite by which they could become members of 
 the visible Church, therefore, God had no visible Church 
 at the time of the Reformation. And none who were 
 engaged in reforming the Church were members of the 
 Church, because they had all been baptized in their 
 infancy, except the few re-baptized among the Anabap- 
 tists !'''- 
 
 Is not this a serious thought to a believer in the Bi- 
 ble, and member of the Christian Church, that none of 
 our Reformers, the translators of the Bible, and the 
 long galaxy of great and good men who have written 
 commentaries, and handed down so many learned and 
 
 * And these missionaries having been baptized themselves in in- 
 fancy^ were not baptized at all according to the Baptist theory, hence 
 could not give lawful baptism, and therefore baptism was lost, and 
 the Church had come to an end long before the Reformation, and the 
 ''Gates of Hell" has prevailed against it! although our Saviour ex- 
 pressly declared the contrary. So the Baptist theory is wrong or our 
 Saviour was a false prophet. Read and see. Roger Williams in a 
 few years saw this dilemma and left them, [the Baptists,] admitting 
 that baptism had been lost, and could not be restored unless an angel 
 should be sent from heaven with a new-commission! ! Which shall 
 we adopt, infant baptism and the continuance of Christ's visible 
 church on earth, or a theory that excludes little children, destroys 
 the church, and makes the Saviour a false prophet? 
 
CONCLUDmG REMARKS. 417 
 
 pious works on the doctrines of our religion, and work- 
 ings of the Holy Spirit, were baptized and members of 
 Christ's Church ! Yes — if the doctrine of the Baptists 
 be true — none of them were baptized except the few re- 
 baptized by the Anabaptists, after the work of the Re- 
 formation was nearly completed ! What better argument 
 needs the infidel ? 
 
 But this is not all ; none of us are now members of 
 Christ's visible Church, who have not been immersed in 
 water on a profession of faith. The whole question of 
 membership is made to depend upon the manner of per- 
 forming one of the rites of the Church ! They carry 
 out this principle, and allow no one to commune w^ith 
 them in the sacrament of the Supper, who has not been 
 baptized according to their particular mode. He cannot 
 enjoy this great and essential privilege of God's peo- 
 ple — this distinctive right of the members of Christ's 
 body is not to be granted him ! Why ? he is not a 
 member. Why not a member ? Because he has not 
 been immersed. Therefore, in the mode of performing 
 a rite, depends our membership in the visible Church of 
 Christ — aye, depends the existence of the Church itself! 
 There is no Church when there is no immersion ! 
 
 To what a condition does this bring the Church of 
 God on earth, and place all the great and good men, 
 whose names we so much reverence, and to whose teach- 
 ing we are so much indebted for our. Christian instruc- 
 tion? On the same principle, where was the Church 
 when no believers were baptized ? And when the Church 
 was lost, h.o^Y was it recovered. again? If when that was 
 lost the Church became extinct, who but God could 
 
418 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 begin it again? Roger Williams afterwards saw tlie 
 dilemma into which this theory of the Baptists must 
 bring the Church, and came to the conclusion that 
 "baptism was lost, and could not be restored unless 
 an angel from Heaven was sent to give it to the world 
 again," and left them. And if baptism was lost, so was 
 the Church also, as the existence of the latter depended 
 on the former ! 
 
 So much for the assumptions and theories of men. If 
 the continuance of the visible Church is to depend on 
 the succession of baptism as its sign, it must be the suc- 
 cession of infant baptism. Every historian will admit 
 that. And we must leave it with those who regard it 
 as so "damnable a heresy and cause of so much evil," 
 to reconcile facts with their theory. 
 
 Another modern teacher of the same school to which 
 we have referred, w^ould make infant baptism responsible 
 for nearly all the evils that ever afflicted the Church of 
 God.* 
 
 We have never read, perhaps, in the same space, 
 such a number of unauthorized statements and array of 
 false deductions. We shall not follow him, but notice 
 his congratulation to his own Church, as less liable to 
 corruptions and divisions than others. Is he really not 
 aware of the fact, that many more divisions and corrup- 
 tions have sprung up among Antipedobaptists since their 
 origin than among all others ? In the very beginning 
 their creed was mingled with Manicheism and Socinian- 
 ism, and a motley crowd of undigested principles, that 
 require a long time to be reduced to a consistent system. 
 •'^ Dr. Howell. 
 
CONCLUDING REMARKS. 419 
 
 And scarcely were they organized under their present 
 name, before thej were divided into General and Parti- 
 cular Baptists ; then Open Communion and Free Com- 
 munion Baptists ; Seventh Day Baptists, to which a long 
 train has followed, such as Seven Principle Baptists ; 
 Free Will Baptists ; Church of God Baptists ; Hard Shell 
 Baptists ; Soft Shell Baptists ; Little Children Baptists ; 
 Christian Baptists; Ironside Baptists; Scotch Baptists; 
 Campbellite Baptists, or Reformers ; Dunkers ; Mormons, 
 and a host of others, all of whom are Antipedobaptists. 
 Some of these may be the same bodies, called by differ- 
 ent names, but there are many more, and no two hold 
 precisely the same principles. The author of the Biog- 
 raphia Britannica Literaria, informs us there are some 
 eighty sects that have sprung from the Anabaptists of 
 the sixteenth century spread through Europe and Ame- 
 rica. And yet the Baptist Church is based on a system 
 that cannot be corrupted ! 
 
 Whether the discussion of baptismal regeneration is 
 to prove a blessing or injury to the Church of God, is 
 yet to be determined. Certainly it has not produced the 
 divisions and heresies of Antipedobaptism. Our Bap- 
 tist brethren claim to be friends of Christian liberty, 
 and boast of being the first advocates of true religious 
 toleration ; but the signs of the times do not augur that 
 power in their hands will be any less liable to abuse 
 than in the hands of others. Their proceedings in the 
 Bible questions, the productions of some of their later 
 writers, and their manner of teaching in public and in 
 private, cause us to fear the scenes of Munster might be 
 acted over again. 
 
420 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 
 
 And while we claim the liberty to defend our own 
 principles and our own firesides, we grant them the 
 same. And though we may have written earnestly and 
 plainly, we have endeavored to do so in a Christian 
 spirit, certainly as much so as our opponents. Nor do 
 we intend that difference of opinion, where w^e have the 
 right to differ, shall affect our social intercourse with 
 Christians of a different name. "We have near and dear 
 friends among the Baptists, whom we highly respect, 
 and with whom we have spent sweet intercourse. We 
 do not fear that by this publication we shall offend the 
 generous and liberal minded; and if others choose to 
 stand aloof, we shall give them their choice in doing so. 
 
 It is known that we hold these principles, and it is 
 certainly more manly and open to publish them for all, 
 than teach them privately from house to house, and 
 introduce them where not acceptable, and enforce them 
 where people are not able to combat them. 
 
 We now close this work by earnestly requesting our 
 readers to weigh well the facts and principles herein 
 contained. The principle involved is of more import- 
 ance than is generally supposed. Our children will 
 never be trained and instructed as they ought to be, till 
 we learn the responsibility resting upon us, in regard to 
 them ; and until we dedicate them to God in good faith, 
 train them as his children, as Christians from childhood, 
 pledged and bound to the service of their Redeemer. 
 
 THE END. 
 
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 01021 3603