i;y»^;: 
 
PRXHGJSTOH 
 .ttt0.,0GTl8b2 
 
 TH5IOL0GIG&L 
 
 BV 813 .K87 1840x^ 
 Kurtz, Benjamin, 1795-1865. 
 Arguments, derived from 
 sacred scripture and sound 
 
 "snr 
 
V^ 4 \ * . » » 
 
DERIVED FROM 
 
 SACRED SCRIPTURE AND SOUND REASON, 
 
 EXHIBITING THE 
 
 NECESSITF AM) ADVANTAGES 
 
 OF 
 
 INFANT BAPTISM; 
 
 AND PROVING 
 
 SPRINKLING OR AFFUSION 
 
 TO BE THE MOST SCRIPTURAL AND APPROPRIATE MODE OF 
 ADMINISTERING IT ; 
 
 TOGETHER WITH A NUMBER OF 
 
 ESSAYS ON IMPORTANT SUBJECTS 
 CONNECTED WITH BAPTIS3I. 
 
 BY BENJAMIN'KURTZ, D.D 
 
 BALTIMORE. 
 PRINTED AT THE PUBLICATION ROOMS, 
 
 No. 7, S. Liberty street. 
 
 1840. 
 
Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1840, 
 
 By the Publisher, 
 
 In the Clerk's office of the District Court of Maryland. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The following pages have been written in obedience 
 to a " Resolution'''' of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod 
 of Maryland, and in accordance with the reiterated 
 requests of personal friends. 
 
 In preparing them, it has been our uniform endeavor 
 to concentrate the largest possible amount of conclusive 
 evidence and useful information, within the narrowest 
 limits ; and also to adapt our language and reasoning to 
 the capacity of the plain unlettered reader, in order thus 
 to meet an important desideratum in the church. 
 
 If in some cases, the nature of our subject compelled 
 us to depart from this course, and to enter into a train of 
 abstruse argument and philological criticism, the merits 
 or demerits of which can only be fully estimated by the 
 learned, those instances are by no means so frequent as 
 to interfere materially with the popular utility of the 
 work. We therefore indulge the hope, that our investi- 
 gations may present some claim to the attention of those, 
 whose want of time or inclination forbids the task of 
 poring over ponderous tomes of scholastic erudition, and 
 
iV PREFACE. 
 
 be found not altogether unworthy the notice of the stu- 
 dent and divine. 
 
 To say that we are indifferent as to the judgment that 
 shall be pronounced upon our efforts, would be mere 
 affectation ; — we are not indifferent. We cordially de- 
 sire that they may be well received by the church gene- 
 rally, and particularly by that class of individuals for 
 whose special benefit we have mainly labored ; and 
 above all, that the Master, whose glory we trust we are 
 most anxious to advance, may in great mercy, smile 
 upon them, and by his blessing, make them instrumental 
 in promoting correct views on the interesting questions 
 M-liich we have discussed. 
 
 THE AUTHOR, 
 
INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 
 
 Before we proceed to the investigation of the subject 
 of the present work, a few preliminary remarks ex- 
 planatory of our view of the nature of baptism in gene- 
 ral, are deemed necessary. 
 
 Christian baptism is a sacrament ordained by Christ 
 as the sign and seal of God''s covenant tvith his people, 
 and a formal recognition of their right of membership 
 in his church. 
 
 1. Whether we define a sacrament merely as an ordi- 
 nance by which we are formally brought under an obli- 
 gation of obedience to God, and which obligation is 
 equally sacred with an oath,' or as "an outward and visi- 
 
 ^The word sacrament is derived from the Latin word sacrame)xt- 
 um, which was adopted to signify an oath, particularly the oalii 
 taken by soldiers to be true to their country and general. This 
 word has other significations, but it is in this sense mainly, if not 
 exclusively, that it is used in reference to baptism and the Lord's 
 supper, in which Christians may be said to bind themselves as by an 
 oath, or tlie most sacred vows, to obedience to God. 
 1* 
 
6 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 ble sign of an inward and spiritual grace ;" — baptism is 
 equally a sacrament. For in it the subject either per- 
 sonally or by sponsors acknowledges God's claims on 
 his obedience, and solemnly devotes himself to his ser- 
 vice ; and it is obvious that tlie water applied to the sub- 
 ject, is " an outward and visible sign," and diat the co- 
 venant of which it is the seal, guarantees the richest 
 spiritual blessings. Hence baptism is to all intents and 
 purposes a sacrament. 
 
 2. If it be maintained that a sacrament is a means of 
 grace, we add that such is plainly the nature of baptism. 
 It symbolically represents some of the most important 
 truths of the gospel, and that too in a very striking and 
 forcible manner ; and as divine truth is the principal 
 means of grace, it is evident that baptism must necessa- 
 rily partake of tliis nature. Moreover, its administration 
 is connected with God's word and prayer, which in 
 themselves are the most efficient means of grace ; hence 
 it follows that it must likewise be a means as well as a 
 seal of grace. 
 
 3, It is also a sign and seal of God's covenant zvith 
 his people. The covenant here alluded to, is that which 
 was solemnly entered into with Abraham, nearly two 
 thousand years anterior to the Christian era:* '■^ And I 
 nnll establish my covenant between me and thee, and 
 thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an cverlast' 
 ing covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed 
 after thee.'^ Of this covenant, circumcision was the ori- 
 ginal sign and seal:^ "And he that is eight days old 
 shall be circumcised," &c. But when Christ appeared, 
 the old dispensation, having fulfilled its grand design, 
 was set aside to give place to the new one ; the church 
 
 'Gen. xvii. 7. ^Gen, xvii. 12. 
 
BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 7 
 
 assumed a difterent aspect ; its external ordinances, its 
 ceremonies, sacrifices, etc., which referred to and pre- 
 figured him especially in his mediatorial character, were 
 necessarily abolished, because they all centered and re- 
 ceived their accomplishment in him. Circumcision, 
 one of the ordinances of tlie old economy, shared the 
 same fate ; it was annulled to make room for Christian 
 baptism, an institution better adapted to the simplicity, 
 increased light and more " easy yoke" of the New 
 Testament economy. The Abrahamic covenant how- 
 ever, usually denominated "the covenant of grace," 
 was not and could not be abrogated, because that was 
 designed to be an " everlasting covenant." While 
 the covenant therefore, by which the church of God 
 was organized, continued substantially the same, the 
 sign and seal of that covenant was altered ; circumcision 
 was repealed and baptism substituted, as will hereafter 
 be more fully proved. Hence baptism is, as we have 
 defined it, a sign and seal of GoiVs covenant ivith his 
 j)eople. 
 
 4. It is further a ybrmaZ recognition of membership 
 in the church of God. Baptism is almost universally 
 spoken of as an initiatory rite, or a means of intro- 
 ducing individuals to membership in the church. With 
 certain limitations, this mode of I'epresenting it may be 
 admissible, but if strictly interpreted it is calculated 
 to convey, and in numerous instances has conveyed, an 
 unscriptural and consequently erroneous view of the sub- 
 ject. Children are members of the visible church of 
 God through the merits of Christ's atonement and in 
 virtue of their birth from Christian parents or of their 
 being brought umler Christian guardianship, and there- 
 fore have no need to be made members by baptism. With 
 
8 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 regard to adults, whether heathen or inhabitants of a 
 Christian country, they are always previously instructed 
 in the precepts of the gospel and required to profess 
 their faith in it, prior to their baptism ; and it is this pro- 
 fession, and not their baptism, that constitutes them 
 members of God's true church. By baptism they are, in 
 a very solemn and impressive manner, recognized and 
 publicly proclaimed as members of the church ; hence we 
 prefer describing baptism as a formal recognition of 
 church-membership, rather than as an initiatory rite. 
 
 The idea here advanced may be illustrated by the fol- 
 lowing fact : In Europe there is a "Traveller's Society," 
 the constitution of which declares that every person of 
 good character who has travelled in foreign countries to 
 a certain extent, shall be a member. The mode of ad- 
 mission is thus : the member subscribes the constitution ; 
 a mark is made on his right arm Avith indelible ink ; his 
 name is added to the list of recorded members, and he 
 receives a certificate of membership. (This may in 
 some sense be termed an initiatory ceremony.) If he 
 neglect to lay claim to his membership in due time, he 
 forfeits it. From this statement it is evident, that every 
 traveller of a certain description is a member of the so- 
 ciety, and can rfemanrf admission; that if he neglect to do 
 so he loses his membership, which however, by a com- 
 pliance with certain requisitions, may be regained ; and 
 that before he can participate in the rights and honors of 
 the society, he must submit to a prescribed form in 
 which his membership is openly recognized and his 
 obligations as one of the parties constituting the associa- 
 tion are sealed. It is manifest that it is not the cerem^ony 
 of initiation, but his having performed certain journeys, 
 visited certain cities, &c., that made him a member ; and 
 
BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 9 
 
 his initiation is no more than a formal recognition and 
 ratification of membership previously possessed. So 
 chikh-en are members of God's church in virtue of 
 Christ's merits and their birth from Christian parents ; 
 God's covenant with Abraham, made nearly forty centuries 
 ago, and never revoked, constitutes them members, and 
 when baptized their membership is set forth and so- 
 lemnly certified. We indeed readily admit that the 
 analogy in the foregoing illustration is not perfect, but 
 Ave think it sufficiently so to answer our purpose. 
 
 In support of this view, we must be permitted to offer 
 a few remarks. The covenant with Abraham, which is 
 confessedly still in force, being emphatically an " ever- 
 lasting covenant, ^^ embraces his " seed in all genera- 
 tions,^^ as well as himself, consequently his infant off- 
 spring and that of all his posterity were included as sub- 
 jects of this covenant, or in other words, as members of 
 the church of God, and that by virtue of their birth from 
 Ci chosen and godly parentage, or of their being placed 
 under a godly influence. It was not circumcision there- 
 fore, that entitled the pious patriarch and his children, or 
 the slave-child born of Avorthless parents but brought 
 under Jewish protection,' to church-membership, but the 
 stipulations of the covenant. Circumcision however was 
 the sign and seal of the covenant, and must therefore be 
 regarded as a solemn token of membership. Apply this 
 elucidation to baptism, and the idea we wish to impart 
 will be easily apprehended, 
 
 'It should be borne in raind that God also required the children 
 of heathen parents to be circumcised, if by slavery or otherwise, 
 those children were brought under Jewish control. " He that is 
 born in thy house, and he that is bought icilh thy money, must needs 
 be circumcised." Gen. xvii. 12, 13 ; see also Exod. xii. 48. 
 
10 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 This exhibition of the subject receives irresistible force 
 from the fact that God ordained, that if any, whether in- 
 fant or adult, should not be circumcised, <■' that soul 
 should be cut off from his people f because, it is added, 
 "Ae hath broken my voiv." Here then it is clearly- 
 manifest, that the individual so "cut off," in consequence 
 of non-circumcision, must previously and independently 
 of circumcision, have belonged to God's people ; — have 
 been a subject of the covenant, and member of the 
 church ; or how, on any other supposition, could he be 
 exscinded, or be said to have broken his vow? Who then 
 must not plainly perceive, that church-membership exist- 
 ed prior to circumcision,' and that the latter was, strictly 
 speaking, only the recognition of the former ? In like 
 manner, the children of Christian parents are by birth, 
 in virtue of God's covenant, members of his church, and 
 when baptism is administered, their membership is pub- 
 licly signified and the covenant of grace sealed. 
 
 Some additional light may be reflected on this sub- 
 ject, by a reference to the established usages of civil life. 
 A number of individuals in a state are chosen members 
 of Congress ; they are termed " members elect," and 
 are members in full so far as "the sovereign people," 
 the source of all power in a republic, can make them 
 such ; but they cannot claim a right to the exercise of 
 their official privileges, until they shall have complied 
 with certain forms prescribed by the constitution. Evi- 
 dently it is not these forms that elevate them to their 
 office, but the voice of the people ; the forms however 
 may be regarded in a sense as a seal of their member- 
 ship, and should they refuse to comply with them they 
 
 'Abraham was a subject of God's covenant fourteen years before 
 circumcision was instituted. 
 
BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 11 
 
 would be " cut off" or excluded from the enjoyment of 
 their membership. So children of Christian parents are 
 members of God's church in virtue of his election of 
 them through Christ to that dignity in the covenant of 
 grace, and baptism is the seal of that covenant, the vow 
 of fidelity to it, and of course, a public recognition of 
 their membership. 
 
 This is perhaps as suitable a place as any other to 
 observe, that the common English version of the words of 
 the institution of baptism,' is confessedly erroneous ; — 
 the Avord, i^aOyinvatzTs means, to disciple or make disciples, 
 and hence the passage should be rendered thus : "Go 
 ye therefore and disciple (or make disciples of) all nations, 
 baptizing for, and baptize) them in the name,"* &c.; 
 the monosyllable "by" frequently inserted immediately 
 before baptizing, is an interpolation not found in the 
 original and conveys a wrong idea. 
 
 These words present baptism to us as an ordinance to 
 be administered originally by the aposdes, and subse- 
 quently by the ministers of the gospel ; for what was the 
 duty of the apostles in this case, is equally the duty of 
 all succeeding ministers. Moreover, the office of bap- 
 tizing was entrusted to the same individuals who were 
 commissioned to "teach" or preach the gospel, and these 
 were the pastors of the church, hence they and they 
 alone are warranted under ordinary circumstances to per- 
 
 'Matt. xxviii. 19, 20. 
 
 ^There can be no dispute concerning this translation, as the ablest 
 and most respectable philologists bear harmonious testimony to its 
 correctness. Examples of a like construction of the present parti- 
 'Ciple are of constant occurrence in the New Testament. Thus, 
 Matt. XV. 25, *H Je saSou?* cTgo«xuva a.uTa> Kiycv;a., " but she came and 
 worshipped him and said,'' &c. See also Matt. xi.\. 3, and many 
 other similar instances. 
 
13 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 form this office ; and the more so, as a commission to 
 perform any specific work, on prudential grounds at least, 
 excludes all upon whom that commission has not been 
 conferred. 
 
 We hope we shall be pardoned for here introducing a 
 few remarks, which, though not perhaps legitimately con- 
 nected with the argument, are yet not irrelevant. In 
 some of the ancient liturgies of the Lutheran church in 
 Germany, we find provision made for the administration 
 of baptism in cases of " extreme necessity " by 7nid- 
 wives. This practice was originally intoroduced by the 
 church of Rome. In that church it is maintained that 
 children, dying without baptism, are not saved, but have 
 a place allotted them in Limbus, the ante-chamber of 
 liell ; and hence the intense solicitude of its members to 
 have their children baptized even by a female, rather than 
 that they should die without receiving the ordinance. 
 This unscriptural view has been rejected by the Luther- 
 ans, but they nevertheless hold in Germany to what is 
 termed ^^ Nothtaiife," that is, private baptism by the 
 midwife in cases of extreme necessity. They do not 
 pretend that there is a divine command or any express 
 authority for this doctrine. Baptism, they conceive, is a 
 consecration of the child, not to a secular but to a spirit- 
 ual kingdom, yea to God's eternal kingdom in glory, and 
 hence, it is deemed highly proper that every infant should 
 be baptized, though its temporal existence should endure 
 but for an hour. Moreover, it is regarded as a source of 
 precious consolation to parents to reflect, that their chil- 
 dren, who are hurried hence immediately after they open 
 their eyes upon this world, have received the seal of 
 God's gracious covenant, and been solemnly dedicated to 
 him in his own appointed ordinance. The hope of a 
 
BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 13 
 
 glorious re-union seems to be thereby strengthened, and 
 thus an invisible bond between the living and the dead is 
 cherished through the power of the gospel. From all 
 this it is inferred, that children should by all means be 
 baptized if they survive their birth long enough to admit 
 of it ; and if the services of a minister of the gospel can- 
 not be procured in time, it is thought better that the ordi- 
 nance should be administered by a pious midwife than be 
 altogether neglected. 
 
 But in the church in Germany where this practice still 
 obtains, the most judicious measures are pursued in order 
 to secure the assistance of midwives of adequate profes- 
 sional and moral qualifications. The civil authority takes 
 cognizance of tlie subject, and has adopted wise and effi- 
 cient regulations in reference to it. A midwife is re- 
 quired to be an educated and intelligent woman, who has 
 herself given birth to children ; she must not only be in 
 high repute for patience, meekness, diligence, skill, &;c. 
 but also afford undoubted evidences of piety. Physicians 
 duly appointed for the purpose, examme and decide as to 
 her professional ability, and the clergy must pronounce 
 upon her moral and religious character. They must 
 moreover be women of ample experience in other res- 
 pects as well as in personal religion, and it is a part of 
 tlie duty assigned them, to impart consolation and en- 
 couragement to the patient, to pray with her, &c. Every 
 species of superstition and quackery is strictly prohibit- 
 ed. Such is the character of licensed midwives in Ger- 
 many ; and in special cases, such as have been mention- 
 ed above, it belongs to their office to administer baptism. 
 But if a regular minister can possibly be procured during 
 the probable lifetime of the child, they are relieved from 
 tills duty, 
 2 
 
14 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Should the child after such baptism be restored to 
 health, it is subsequently carried to the church, where 
 testimony is publicly borne to the fact of its baptism ; 
 the ordinance however, is not repeated, but sanctioned 
 and confinned by the officiating minister. The cere- 
 mony on such occasions is exceedingly interesting and 
 impressive ; but it would lead to too long a digression 
 to repeat the form. 
 
 One of the arguments adduced in support of the fore- 
 going usage, is the fact that on occasion of the sickness 
 of Moses, his wife Zipora performed circumcision on 
 their child, Avhich in ordinary circumstances, was the 
 prerogative of the father. But our object is not to de- 
 fend the practice, but simply to state it, and to remark, 
 that though we are not aware that it prevails in the Lu- 
 theran church in this country, yet thei'e are some who ap- 
 prove of it. That it obtains in the church of England, 
 is known to most readers. We do not at present either 
 advocate or condemn it, and think we have expressed 
 ourselves with sufficient definiteness in a preceding para- 
 graph, as to the class of individuals to whom in ordinary 
 circumstances, the duty of administering baptism proper- 
 ly belongs. After this slight digression, we return to our 
 main subject. 
 
 Water was selected by our Lord as the sign in bap- 
 tism, for very obvious reasons. It is a striking emblem 
 of moral purification, and therefore admirably adapted to 
 set forth the import of this sacrament and the obligations 
 of its subjects; it was in previous use at the "divers 
 baptisms" which existed among the Jcavs under the law, 
 and it may be had without cost and in all countries. 
 Having been wisely chosen by the Divine Author of bap- 
 tism, we have no more right to substitute sand or milk or 
 
BAPTISM IX GENERAL. 15 
 
 any thing else for water, than we have to change the out- 
 ward elements of the holy supper. If these elements 
 cannot be procured, the irremediable want of them ab- 
 solves us from the obligation of celebrating the sacra- 
 ments. Our Lord never required impossibilities from 
 his disciples. 
 
 The water must be applied in the name of the Triune 
 God, — Father, Son and Holy Ghost ; the baptism of all 
 those who do not believe in the Trinity, and cannot there- 
 fore consistently baptize in the name of the Great Tliree- 
 One God, is unscriptural, — is not Christian baptism. 
 
 The practice of baptizing organs, bells and other inani- 
 mate objects, is so gross a perversion that it is not worthy 
 of serious refutation; the command of Christ as Avell as 
 the example of the apostles and their immediate success- 
 ors, plainly limits its administration to human beings. 
 
 Adidts are required in the Scriptures to profess their 
 faith in Jesus Christ prior to baptism, that is, to make a 
 public declaration of their cordial belief in the doctrines 
 and precepts of the gospel, Avhich is usually in this 
 country denominated a Profession of Religion ; for the 
 command in reference to them is, to disciple them, not 
 however by baptizing them, as is generally maintained, 
 but by preaching the gospel to them ; and so soon as they 
 embrace 'the gospel or profess faith in the Messiah, bap- 
 tism is to be administered. The apostles undoubtedly 
 understood Christ's command thus ; for Peter called upon 
 the Jews to repent and then be baptized ; Philip did not 
 baptize the eunuch until he professed faith ; Lydia was 
 not baptized until the Lord had opened her heart; the 
 jailor was baptized in consequence of his faith; so was 
 Paul; so were Cornelius and his household. 
 
16 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Infants obviously come under a different rule. They 
 are incapable of professing faith, and are accordingly bap- 
 tized on the profession of their parents, or of those who 
 offer them to God in baptism, and who are their proper 
 and authorized representatives in this transaction. 
 
 All the Israelites made public profession of the religion 
 of the Scriptures ; all were circumcised and regularly 
 celebrated the passover ; if they neglected to do so they 
 were " cut off;" hence, in ordinary circumstances no 
 children but those of professing Jcavs and those under 
 Jewish guardianship could lawfully be recognized as 
 members of the church and receive the seal of the cove- 
 nant of grace under the old dispensation ; and unless 
 that covenant in this respect has been altered, (which has 
 not been, and never can be proved,) it follows irresistibly 
 that no children but those of professing Christians and 
 such as are brought under Christian influence can lawfully 
 receive the seal (which is baptism) of the same covenant 
 under the new dispensation. Peter declares that the pro- 
 mise is to as 7nany (and their children) as the Lord our 
 God shall call;^ as all are bound to obey the call he must 
 have alluded to such ; but obedience to the call implies 
 a profession of faith, hence baptism, strictly speaking, 
 belongs only to those who profess the religion of the 
 Bible, and to their children and wards, or such as are 
 under their care ; so affirms the apostle in language that 
 can hardly be misunderstood. Paul teaches, that if both 
 parents be unbelievers, that is, heathens, their children 
 are unclean,^ that is, are not members of the visible 
 church of God, and may not be offered to him in bap- 
 tism, unless made clean by their adoption into a Chris- 
 tian family or by their being brought under Christian in- 
 
 'Acts ii. 39. ^1 Cor. vii. 14. 
 
BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 17 
 
 fluence. But if any one of them be a believer, then are 
 the children holy, (in an ecclesiastical sense,) that is, 
 they are members of the church of God to which the 
 believing parent is united in virtue of his or her profes- 
 sion, and must in consequence of this relation, be de- 
 voted to him in baptism. 
 
 It is in vain to object to this view of the subject on 
 the supposition that children are entitled to baptism in 
 their oivn right and independently of any relation to 
 their parents ; for not only can no such right be found in 
 tlie original stipulations of the covenant, but the very 
 idea is subversive of the great design of baptism. On the 
 above supposition ministers would be bound to adminis- 
 ter it to the children of infidel and heathen parents, 
 whether they renounced their infidelity and heathenism 
 or not ! — and Avould not this defeat one of the principal 
 objects of this holy ordinance? — No, like circumcision, 
 it is "a seal of the righteousness of faith," and therefore 
 presupposes the exercise of at least historical faith ; but 
 it is impossible for infant children to believe, and hence 
 it is on a profession of faith made by those who present 
 them in the ordinance, that they can be baptized. If it 
 be contended that as children were universally circum- 
 (used under the law, so they ought to be universally bap- 
 tized under the gospel ; our reply is, that the circumcis- 
 ion of children was precisely co-extensive with a profes- 
 sion of the religion of the Bible on the part of parents, 
 and the same rule should govern in the administration of 
 baptism; for it is in every case, this profession which 
 gives the right, in the church, to this ordinance. If pa- 
 rents refuse to believe in the gospel, how can they dedi- 
 cate their children to the service of its divine Author ? if 
 2* 
 
18 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 their heart be radically wrong in the one case, can it be 
 right in the other ? — In vain will it be pretended that they 
 love their offspring more than themselves, or that they 
 can perform an act of religious duty on their behalf, 
 which they cannot perform on their own. 
 
 It is hardly necessary to add concerning this profes- 
 sion, that it should be sincere ; or that those who make 
 it ought to mean all that is ordinarily intended by the 
 profession. 
 
 The want of such sincerity however, though it incul- 
 pates the hypocritical professors, cannot affect the valid- 
 ity of the ordinance. It is to be feared that Jewish chil- 
 dren Avere often circumcised while their parents did not 
 exercise genuine faith, yet the circumcision was neither 
 invalidated nor rendered unmeaning on that account. It 
 is sufficient for the visible administration that faith is 
 visibly professed. The Baptists no doubt often admin- 
 ister baptism to adults who are not honest in their pro- 
 fessions, but they do not consider such dishonesty as di- 
 vesting the ordinance of either its warrant or its meaning. 
 
 We cannot close this chapter, written more than a year 
 ago, without quoting a passage from an article in a late 
 number of the Biblical Repository, which, so far as it 
 goes, entirely accords with the views just expressed: 
 ♦'It is a common sentiment," says that writer, "that the 
 baptism of children makes them members of the church, 
 but this is an error ; their baptism does not make them 
 members, it only recognizes their right of membership 
 already existing ; their membership is not founded upon 
 their baptism, but their baptism upon their membership ; 
 and whether that seal of the covenant be applied to them 
 or not, they are (in the case of believing parents) not 
 " without" but within the pale of the church. Is any 
 
BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 19 
 
 one here disposed to object, "how can children be mem- 
 bers of the church without their own consent ?" I 
 reply, that with equal propriety it might be asked, how 
 can they be members of the civil state, or created rational 
 beings, without their own consent. It is their " birth- 
 right," their privilege, and none the less such because it 
 is a common one or greatly perverted." See Bib. Rep. 
 for Oct. 1839, Art. III. by Rev. S. Helfenstein, p. 314. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF COD. 
 
 Having had repeated occasion to use the phrase, 
 church of God, and as it will often occur in our future 
 investigations, it may be useful to ascertain the several 
 meanings attached to it. 
 
 The expression, church of God, is frequently synony- 
 mous with kingdom of God and kingdom of heaven. 
 
 1. The visible church or kingdom of God signifies 
 the aggi-egate body of all those who profess the true 
 religion, and of their infant offspring, 1 Cor. xii. 28 ; xv. 
 9, &c. The whole of this body comprehends all Chris- 
 tian nations, but constitutes only one society, of Avhich 
 the Bible is the statute book; Jesus Christ the Head; 
 and a covenant relation the uniting bond. 
 
 2. The invisible church comprises all those of every 
 denomination in the world, who are thoroughly converted 
 to God, whether in a state of imperfection and conflict 
 on earth, or of perfect holiness and glory in heaven. 
 Eph. v. 24—27 ; Heb. xii. 23. 
 
 3. The term church also denotes any body of profess- 
 ing Christians who live together in the same city or 
 vicinity, and worship in the same or in different houses. 
 Acts xi. 22 ; xiii. 1; 1 Cor. i. 2 ; Gal. i. 2. 
 
 4. It is also used in a denominational sense, signifying a 
 whole Christian community, who hold to the same creed 
 or confession and are united in the same mode of worship 
 or discipline. This is a more modern application of the 
 
THE CHURCH OF GOD. 21 
 
 word, and it is in this sense that we speak of the Lutheran 
 church, the Presbyterian church, the church of Eng- 
 land — of Scotland — of Rome, &c. 
 
 . 5. It yet further designates a congregation of Chris- 
 tians who worship together in the same place and under 
 the same minister. Col. iv. 15 ; Rom. xvi. 5. 
 
 We cannot recollect that the phrase is ever used in 
 the Bible to denote the building or hoicse of worship, 
 although by metonymy it is often thus employed in the 
 present day ; some think it is used in this sense in 
 1 Cor. xi. 22; but to us it appears very doubtful, espe- 
 cially as we do not read that houses of public worship 
 were erected at so early a period as that at which the 
 aposde penned his Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 
 Accordingly, when we say that baptism is a formal 
 token of membership in the church of God, we do not 
 mean that a baptized person is necessarihj a member of 
 the invisible church, or of the Lutheran church, or of 
 tlie Presbyterian church, &c., but of the church of God 
 in its most enlarged acceptation ; and he may also, and 
 indeed is bound to be, a member of the invisible church ; 
 at the same time he may be a member of the Lutheran, 
 or of some other denominational church. 
 
 Again, a person baptized in the Romish or Greek 
 church, or in the church of England, and communing in 
 that church, is not of course a member of the church of 
 Scotland, or of the German Reformed church. 
 
 Further, a person baptized in the Presbyterian church 
 in Philadelphia, and in good standing there, is not neces- 
 sarily a member of the Prebyterian church in Baltimore, 
 for he has no right to vote or perform any other act of 
 membership in that church on the mere ground of his 
 
22 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 membership in the former place, unless it be occasional 
 communion, and that by special permission. 
 
 Once more, an infant baptized by a particular minister 
 is not necessarily a member of the church over which 
 that minister presides ; it may be the child of parents 
 belonging to some other church, or even some other 
 Christian denomination, and must be regarded as a mem- 
 ber in the church of its parents or guardians. 
 
 A Lutheran from New York may, in adult age, be 
 baptized by a Lutlieran minister in Baltimore, and thus 
 receive the token of membership in the visible church of 
 God, and yet have no intention of becoming a communi- 
 cant in the Lutheran church, or, in other words, never 
 acquire a right to perform acts of membership in it. 
 
 Thus also a student of divinity may be solemnly set 
 apart to the gospel ministry, but this does not constitute 
 him a minister of a particular church, but of the church 
 of Christ at large. As a minister he stands in the same 
 relation to the church Avhich an adult in a private point 
 of view sustains who has just been baptized. The one 
 becomes the minister of a particular church, solely by 
 the fact, that a congregation is committed to his charge 
 in conformity to proper ecclesiastical authority ; and the 
 other becomes a member of a particular church solely by 
 his agreeing with some particular body of Christians to 
 worship God in connection with them, in the same man- 
 ner and in accordance with the same principles ; and to 
 unite together in the same communion and under the 
 same discipline. In the Evangelic Lutheran church this 
 latter act is made public by the solemn rite of confirma- 
 tion, which is regarded as a voluntary and personal rati- 
 fication of the original covenant sealed in baptism, and as 
 
THE CIIURCn OF GOD. 23 
 
 a peculiarly appropriate and impressive mode of admit- 
 ting individuals to adult denominational membership. 
 
 From all these facts it is obvious, that a person may 
 be a member of the church of God at large, and not a 
 member of a particular church ; and that something apart 
 from baptism, and even from a general profession of reli- 
 gion, is required to constitute an adult a member of a 
 particular church. Let us suppose a case : A man offers 
 himself for baptism, he is examined, and if found defect- 
 ive in Christian knowledge, receives instruction; he then 
 professes his faith and promises obedience, and tliis con- 
 stitutes him a member of God's church at large. He 
 next voluntarily receives baptism, as a seal on the part of 
 God, of his covenant with the man, and of his acceptance 
 of him into his family ; and also as a seal on his own 
 part of his own covenant with God. Here then Ave have 
 him a member of the church of God in general, and it 
 remains for him to become a member of a particular 
 church in the manner specified above. Precisely similar 
 to the case just supposed, was that of the Ethiopian 
 eunuch. He made a profession of religion, and was 
 accordingly baptized by Philip. By his profession he 
 became a member of the church catholic ; by his baptism 
 his membership was formally recognized, but he was not 
 a member of any specific church, for he could not have 
 acted in the ecclesiastical measures of any specific church, 
 nor voted in the regulations of worship, communion or 
 discipline. 
 
 These observations were thought necessary in order to 
 explain the views we entertain on this subject in general. 
 If they be well founded, then it is not a strictly appro- 
 priate application of language, to call baptism an initia- 
 
24 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 tory^ ordinance, or to exhibit it as a means of introduc- 
 tion into the church of God. It is, accurately speaking, 
 no such ordinance or means ; but it is a hohj sacra- 
 ment, an appointed means of grace; — a solemn sign 
 and seal of the glorious covenant of God with his peo- 
 ple, — and an impressive recognition of membership in 
 the church general. 
 
 ■ If the word initiatory be used in the popular sense of introducittg 
 or entering, it is erroneous to prefix it to baptism ; but if only to 
 designate a formal setting forth and acknowledgment of a right to 
 privileges previously possessed, it may not be particularly objection- 
 able. 
 
ARGUMENTS, &c. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Having dwelt at some length on the nature of baptism 
 and the church of God m general, we shall, after one 
 more preliminary observation, proceed to the argument. 
 In advocating the baptism of young children Ave by no 
 means wish to be understood to intimate that adults have 
 no right to this ordinance ; on the contrary, they are 
 solemnly bound, if unbaptized, to lay claim to it without 
 delay, and if they afford evidence of repentance and faith 
 in Christ, it is the duty of the minister of the gospel to 
 whom they apply, to administer it to them. 
 
 Thus prepared for investigation, our first object shall 
 be to prove the necessity of infant baptism. And 
 we shall endeavor to arrange the arguments in that order 
 which commends itself to our mind as the most natural 
 and easy of apprehension. 
 
 first argument. 
 Christ has commanded infant baptism. The com- 
 mand is recorded Matt, xxviii. 19 — 20, " Go ye therefore 
 and disciple or make disciples of all nations, baptizing 
 them in the name," &c. 
 3 
 
26 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Here we have a universal precept embracing " all 
 nations," or according to Mark, " every creature ;" and 
 in our judgment children are included in this precept as 
 well as adults. If they are not it belongs to anti-pedo- 
 baptists to prove it, either by adducing other texts of 
 Scripture of a contrary import, or by showing that the cir- 
 cumstances under which the command was given, neces- 
 sarily restrict its meaning. But they do not pretend to 
 find a single passage in all the sacred writings, debar- 
 ring infants from the privilege of baptism, and so far from 
 restricting the application of the precept, all the circum- 
 stances of the case conspire not only to prove its univer- 
 sality, but to afford the clearest additional evidence that 
 neither the apostles nor the Jews could possibly have 
 understood the injunction in any other sense than as com- 
 prehending infants. 
 
 They must have thus interpreted it, because — 
 
 1 . It had been a general and long continued practice 
 among the Jews to baptize as well as circumcise the 
 children of proselytes when they received them as mem- 
 bers of the church, so that in fact infant baptism prevailed 
 prior to its divine institution by Christ. If therefore our 
 Lord had designed that infants should be excluded, it 
 would have been indispensably necessary, expressly and 
 positively to forbid iheir baptism, but as he did not add 
 a prohibitory clause, it follows that his command embraced 
 them, and all who heard it must most indisputably have 
 so understood it. 
 
 That baptism prevailed among the Jews prior to and 
 at the time of Christ's incarnation, is a historical fact 
 susceptible of abundant proof. They practised it on 
 various occasions, but it is sufficient for our purpose to 
 
FIRST ARGUMENT. 27 
 
 show that they were in the habit of baptizing all prose- 
 lytes to their faith, whether adults or children. 
 
 The testimony of Maimonides,' the great interpreter of 
 the Jewish law, is very satisfactory on this subject. 
 "Israel," he states, "was admitted into covenant by three 
 things, namely, by circumcision, baptism and sacrifice. 
 Baptism Avas in the wilderness, before the giving of the 
 law." Again, " Abundance of proselytes Avere made in 
 tlie days of David and Solomon before private men ; and 
 the great Sanhedrim was full of care about this business ; 
 for they would not cast them out of the church, because 
 they were baptized." Maimonides. Issure Biah, c. 13. 
 " Once more, whensoever any heathen * * * will take 
 the yoke of the law upon him, circumcision, baptism 
 and a voluntary oblation are required. * * * * That 
 was a common axiom, no man is a proselyte until he be 
 circumcised and baptized. Jevamoth fol. 46. 
 
 Dr. Gill has indeed ventured the assertion that no men- 
 tion is made in the earlier writings of the Jews of 
 admitting proselytes by baptism. But the evidence of 
 this fact does not rest solely on the testimony of Jewish 
 records ; it was known even to the heathen. " Why," 
 says Epictetus in reproving those who professed to be 
 philosophers while they did not live as such, " Avhy do 
 you call yourself a Stoic ? Why do you deceive the mul- 
 titude ? Why do you pretend to be a Greek when you 
 are a Jew, a Syrian, an Egyptian ? And when we see 
 any one wavering we are wont to say, this is not a Jeiv, 
 but acts one. But when lie assumes the seitiments of 
 one who hath been baptized and circumcised, then he 
 both really is, and is called a Jew. Thus Ave, falsifying 
 
 'Maimonides lived in the 12th century. 
 
28 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 our profession, are Jews in name, but in reality some- 
 thing else."' 
 
 As our Baptist brethren have labored hard to prove, 
 that the baptism of proselytes was not practised anterior 
 to the Christian era, we shall add the testimony of other 
 distinguished writers : 
 
 " The Jews require three things to a complete prose- 
 lyte ; baptism, circumcision and sacrifice ; but for wo- 
 men only baptism and sacrifice." — Cahnefs Dictionary, 
 art. Pros. 
 
 " Whenever gentiles were proselyted to the Jewish 
 religion, they were initiated by circumcision, the offering 
 of a sacrifice, and baptism. They were all baptized, 
 males and females, adults and infants. This was their 
 constant practice, from the time of Moses to that of our 
 Saviour, and from that period to the present day."— 
 Dr. Wall. 
 
 " The custom of the Jews, in all ages, has been to 
 receive their heathen proselytes by baptism, as well as 
 by sacrifice and circumcision." — Stackhouse. 
 
 " When a gentile becomes a proselyte of righteous- 
 ness, three ceremonies were used, viz., circumcision, 
 baptism and sacrifice." — Witsius. 
 
 " The apostles knew well, that the Jews not only cir- 
 cumcised the children of proselytes, but also baptized 
 them. The children and even infants of proselytes 
 were baptized among the Jews. They were in conse- 
 quence, reputed clean, and partakers of the blessings of 
 the covenant." — Dr. A. Clarke. 
 
 'Epictetus lived according to Dr. Lardner A. D. 109, and accord- 
 ing to Le Clerc A. D. 104. He was about sixty years old when he 
 penned the quotation, and obtained his information probably thirty 
 or forty years earlier, which brings it up to the apostles. 
 
FIRST ARGUMENT. 29 
 
 But the testimonies are too numerous to be quoted ; 
 we refer those who wish for further proof, to Lightfoot's 
 Hor. Heb. on Matt. 3 and John 3 ; Gale's Reflections on 
 Wall's History; Michaelis' Dogm. § 180; lahn's Archae- 
 ology ; Witstein on Matt. iii. 8 ; Gill's Body of Divini- 
 ty; R. Robinson's History of Baptism, and other works. 
 Dr. Woods' reflections on this question, deserve a 
 place here. In regard to this subject, says he, let the 
 following things be well considered : 
 
 " First. The rabbins unanimously assert that the bap- 
 tism of proselytes had been practised by the Jews in all 
 ages, from Moses down to the time when they wrote. 
 Now tliese writers must have been sensible that their 
 contemporaries, both Jews and Christians, knew whether 
 such a practice had been prevalent or not. And had it 
 been known that no such practice had existed ; would not 
 some Jews have been found, bold enough to contradict 
 such a groundless assertion of the rabbins ? At least, 
 would there not have been some Christians, fired with 
 the love of truth, and jealous for the honor of a sacred 
 rite first instituted by Christ, who would have exposed 
 to shame those who falsely asserted that a similar rite 
 had existed for more than a thousand years ? But nei- 
 ther of these things was done. 
 
 "Second. Had not the Jews been accustomed to 
 baptize proselytes previously to the Christian era ; it is 
 extremely improbable that they would have adopted the 
 practice afterwards. For their contempt and hatred of 
 Christianity exceeded all bounds, and must have kept 
 them at the greatest possible distance from copying a rite 
 peculiar to Christians. 
 
 " Third. It seems to have been perfectly consistent 
 and j)roper for the Jews to baptize proselytes. For 
 
30 INFANT BAPTISM- 
 
 their divine ritual enjoined various purifications by wash- 
 ing or baptism. And as they considered all gentiles to 
 be unclean, how could they do otherwise than under- 
 stand the divine law to require, that when any of them 
 were proselyted to the Jewish rehgion, they should re- 
 ceive the same sign of purification, as was, in so many 
 cases, applied to themselves?" 
 
 Here then we have proof positive, that in all cases of 
 adult proselytes to the JoAvish church, baptism Avas 
 inseparably joined to circumcision. That such was also 
 the fact in reference to infants, is no less certain. For 
 the same distinguished and learned Jewish writer, Mai- 
 monides, states : " They baptized also young children. 
 They baptize a little proselyte according to the judgment 
 of the Sanhedrim ; tlaat is, as the gloss renders it, if he 
 be deprived of his father, and his mother brings him to 
 be made a proselyte, they baptize him (because none 
 becomes a proselyte without circumcision and baptism) 
 according to the judgment, or rite, of the Sanhedrim ; 
 that is, that three men be present at the baptism, who are 
 now instead of a father to him. And the Gemara, a little 
 after says, if with a proselyte, his sons and his daughters 
 are made proselytes also, that which is done by their 
 father, redounds to their good. 
 
 " If a heathen Avoman is made a proselytess while in 
 gravidation, the child needs not baptism ; for the baptism 
 of his mother, serves him for baptism. Otherwise he 
 were to be baptized, Jevam. fol. 78. 
 
 " If an Israelite find a gentile child, or a gentile 
 infant, and baptize him, * * * behold he is a proselyte." 
 Maim, in Avidim. c. 8. 
 
 It is accordingly a fact well attested, that when pro- 
 selytes to Judaism were gained from the surrounding 
 
FIRST ARGUMENT. 31 
 
 nations, all the children of a family were invariably 
 regarded as members in the chnrch as well as the parents, 
 and on the faith of their parents, all the males whether 
 children or adnlts Avere circnmcised, and in connection 
 with circnmcision, the whole family, male and female, 
 were baptized, and incorporated in the commnnity of 
 God's people. Nearly all the most competent judges in 
 the Jewish and Christian church, from Selden and Light- 
 foot down to Dr. Ad. Clarke regard the testimony to this 
 historical fact as abundant and conclusive. Even Mr. 
 Booth, a distinguished Baptist writer, admits that, " the 
 children of proselytes ivere baptized along luith their 
 parents.^^ Moreover, it seems plain that the Jews 
 must have been accustomed to the rite of baptism and 
 expected the Messiah, when he came, to practise it, or 
 how can we account for their propounding to John this 
 question: "Why baptizest thou, then, if thou be not the 
 Christ?" 
 
 It is further obvious that Christ's language must have 
 been thus understood by the apostles because — 
 
 3. They knew that infants had from time immemorial 
 been regarded as members in the church of God. When 
 Jehovah made his covenant with Abraham, he expressly 
 included them in that covenant, and ordained circumcis- 
 ion as the sign and seal of it.^ Even Baptists do not 
 and indeed cannot deny this fact. For nearly two thou- 
 sand years therefore, the practice of acknowledging chil- 
 dren as members of God's visible church, in the ordi- 
 nance of circumcision, had existed, and still existed at 
 the very time the command in question was issued. 
 Hence the apostles had no idea of a church from which 
 children were excluded. They knew that the covenant 
 'Gen. xvii. 10—14. 
 
32 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 with Abraham continued in force and was to be " an 
 everlasting covenant,"" that the church of God under the 
 new dispensation was not a different church from that 
 under the old, but essentially the same, and hence they 
 could not do otherwise than believe, that as children 
 were considered members of the church by virtue of the 
 covenant with Abraham, therefore, — that covenant having 
 never been abrogated, — they must continue to be so con- 
 sidered ; and accordingly, "when the Saviour uttered 
 the universal, unlimited and unqualified command : "Go 
 ye and make disciples of all nations," they could not in 
 the nature of things have understood that command " to 
 convey a new and unheard of restriction, which was 
 contrary to all their prepossessions, feelings and opinions, 
 and of which (restriction) they could not know any thing, 
 unless it had been explicitly communicated to them." 
 Add to this statement, the fact already mentioned, that 
 baptism had been previously connected with circumcis- 
 ion, and was applied to infants, and it appears to us it 
 must have been utterly impossible to understand these 
 words of Christ in any other sense than as comprehend- 
 ing children. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 OBECTIONS TO THIS ARGUMENT. 
 
 First Objection. — The command of Christ does not 
 expressly require the baptism of infants. 
 
 Answer. It has already been abundantly proven that 
 an express requirement was, under the circumstances of 
 the case, altogether unnecessary, and would have been 
 superfluous. The apostles needed no such requirement, 
 and could not fail to understand what was their duty in 
 reference to children, without it. 
 
 Moreover, if no obligation can be imposed without an 
 express command, why do our opponents attend public 
 worship, keep the first instead of the seventh day holy 
 unto the Lord, and administer the holy supper to fe- 
 males ? — AVhy do they pray with their children and fami- 
 lies, or teach them to read ? — Why do rulers provide the 
 means of defending the country they govern, or punish 
 a twentieth part of those crimes, which, if left unpun- 
 islied, would ruin the country 1 They cannot find in all 
 the Scriptures of God, one solitary express injunction 
 demanding these duties. The extent to which this prin- 
 ciple would lead, if fairly pursued, would astonish even 
 those who urge it. 
 
 Dr. Lightfoot has spoken well on this point : " To the 
 objection. It is not commanded to baptize infants, there- 
 fore they are not to be baptized ; — I answer : It is not 
 forbidden to baptize infants, therefore they are to be bap- 
 tized. And the reason is plain : for when pedo-bajJtism 
 
34 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 in the Jewish church was so known, usual, and frequent 
 in the admission of proselytes, that nothing almost 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 evangelical use, as he 
 found it : this only added, that he might promote it to a 
 worthier end and a larger use. The Avhole nation knew 
 well enough that little children used to be baptized ; 
 there was no need of a precept for that, which had ever 
 by common use prevailed. * * * On the other hand, 
 therefore, there was need of a plain and open prohibi- 
 tion that infants and little children should not be bap- 
 tized, if our Lord would not have had them baptized. 
 For since it was most common in all preceding ages, that 
 little children shoidd be baptized; if Christ had been 
 minded to have that custom abolished, he would have 
 openly forbidden it. Therefore his silence and the 
 silence of the Scripture in this matter, confirms pedo- 
 baptism and continues it to all ages. 
 
 Second Objection. — The very command that pre- 
 scribes the baptism of all nations, also requires their in- 
 struction : " teaching them," &c. ; but young children can- 
 not be taught, and for this reason ought not to be baptized. 
 Moreover, adds the objector, the exercise of "/aj7/i" is 
 connected with baptism, but children cannot believe, 
 therefore it is preposterous to baptize them. 
 
 Answer. — If the principle involved in this objection 
 were universally adopted, it would prove the greatest 
 absurdities. For example, the apostle declares, " that 
 if any would not work, neither should he eat."^ Here 
 
 H Thess. iii. 10. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 35 
 
 working for our bread is connected with eating ; but 
 children cannot work, therfefore they have no right to 
 eat ; — neither aged and infirm people, nor others confined 
 to bed by sickness labor for subsistence, therefore they 
 also ought not to be permitted to eat. Again, the exer- 
 cise of faith is equally connected with salvation : " He 
 that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved ; but he that 
 believeth not shall be damned ;"^ but children and also 
 idiots and insane persons cannot exercise faith, therefore 
 they cannot be saved, but must all without a single excep- 
 tion be " damned.''^ Further, when children were cir- 
 cumcised under the Mosaic dispensation, they were 
 thereby in a formal manner obligated to observe the 
 whole law, moral, ceremonial and civil ; for, " every 
 man," says the apostle, " that is circumcised is a debtor 
 to the whole law ;"* but as children it was impossible to 
 fulfil this obligation, therefore it was wrong to circumcise 
 tliem. Thus, the principle assumed in the foregoing objec- 
 tion, when carried out, not only leads to the most palpable 
 absurdities, but absolutely arrays its advocates in open 
 hostility to God's express command ! 
 
 But a syllogistic statement of the arginnent contained 
 in the objection, will present its utter fallacy in a still 
 more glaring light. — "i/e that believeth and is bap- 
 tized shall be saved f^ thus far our Baptist brethren quote. 
 We continue the quotation: ^^ But he that believeth 
 not shall be damned." Now for the syllogism. 
 
 Their argument is this : 
 
 1 . Faith is required in order to baptism : 
 
 2. But infants cannot exercise faith : 
 
 3. Therefore, infants cannot be baptized. 
 
 'Mark r^'i. 16. ^Gal. v. 3. 
 
36 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 We turn this argument thus : 
 
 1 . Faith is required in order to salvation : 
 
 2. But infants cannot exercise faith : 
 
 3. Therefore, infants cannot be saved. 
 
 Thus, the objection begins by shutting out our children 
 from tlie church of God; and ends with shutting all of 
 them who die in infancy in the prison of hell forever !^ 
 
 Our readers will observe that these several refutations 
 of the objection are legitimately drawn from our Baptist 
 brethren's own principles, in bringing them to bear 
 against themselves ; and may well be said to rank among 
 the argumenta ad hominem, which constitute the strong- 
 est sort of argument. Thus, in attempting to wound us, 
 they absolutely destroy themselves, and should they pre- 
 vail by means of this weapon, the victory must be fatal 
 to their own cause ; for in the moment that it is achieved, 
 they meet their OAvn death on the point of their own 
 sword. 
 
 Now We candidly appeal to every unprejudiced mind, 
 whether a position that necessarily conducts to results so 
 
 1 We aclmowledge ourselves indebted to the late distinguished Dr. 
 Mason of New York, for this mode of stating the subject, though 
 we have not chosen to adhere to his phraseology. In a note of 
 reference to the latter syllogism, he remarks : " We do not say that 
 the opposers of infant baptism hold such an opinion. Their most 
 distinguished writers disown and repel it. But we say, that it neces- 
 sarily results from their requiring faith, in all cases, as a qualification 
 for baptism. They do not follow out their own position. They 
 stop short at the point which suits their system. We take it up 
 where they leave it, and conduct it to its direct and inevitable con- 
 clusion. Therefore, though we do not charge the men with main- 
 tainmg that those who die in infancy, perish ; yet we charge this 
 consequence upon their argument : for it certainly proves this or it 
 proves nothing at all." 
 
OBJECTIONS. 37 
 
 grossly inconsistent with the clearest dictates of common 
 sense and sound religion, can by any possibility be 
 founded in truth ? — and yet such is the nature of the 
 objection now under consideration. 
 
 How then do we understand the injunction to teach, to 
 believe, to repent, &c., when in juxtaposition Avith bap- 
 tism ? — There is not the slightest difficulty in the subject, 
 when viewed aside from preconceived opinion. All 
 those requisitions manifestly refer to adult persons, and 
 when called upon to baptize such, we always consider it 
 a duty to teach them, and to require them to repent and 
 believe; our language to them is: "If thou believest with 
 all thine heart, thou mayest be baptized.'" But this 
 evidently has nothing to do with infant baptism. Infants 
 are incapable of being taught, of believing &c. and of 
 course, these duties cannot be consistently demanded from 
 them preparatory to their baptism, any more than the 
 duty to work, in order to entide them to food. It mav 
 be laid down as a rule, that absolute inability to perform 
 a duty exonerates us from the obligation to perform it. 
 Thus a blind man is not bound to read the gospel, nor a 
 deaf man to hear it preached, nor an insane man to 
 repent, nor a sick man to labor, unless the absolute inabi- 
 lity in the several cases can be remedied. God does not 
 require impossibilities. — On the same principle, infants 
 cannot be required to believe, for the purpose of giving 
 them a right to baptism or to salvation. "It is a dictate 
 of common sense, which all men observe (and the oppo- 
 nents of pedo-baptism also, in all cases except this,) that 
 any passage of Scripture, requiring a qualification or 
 action of which children are incapable, is intended to be 
 applied only to adults ;" and consequently their inability 
 
 'Acts viii. 37. 
 4 
 
38 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 to believe, is no more a barrier to their baptism than to 
 their future salvation ; if it were, it must also have formed 
 an insurmountable obstacle to their circumcision. 
 
 It is however urged again and again, that as baptism is 
 a " seal of the righteousness of faith'" and as infants are 
 incapable of acting either intelligently or voluntarily in 
 any respect whatever, it is not only useless but down- 
 right folly to baptize them. — The whole of this language 
 applies with equal force to circumcision. It is admitted 
 by all that infants of eight days old were by divine ap- 
 pointment circumcised, and thus declared members of 
 the church of God ; it must also be conceded, because 
 expressly declared by the apostle, that circumcision as 
 well as baptism Avas, " a seal of the righteousness of 
 faith. "^ Here then, we would ask, were children of 
 eight days old more capable of exercising faith when they 
 were circumcised, than they are now when tliey are bap- 
 tized? Surely this objection is as valid in the one case 
 as in the other, and hence every charge oi folly, absurd- 
 ity, &c., brought against infant baptism on the score of 
 incapacity to exercise faith, lies with equal force against 
 infant circumcision. Do our adversaries then say, " the 
 baptism of infants who know nothing of believing in 
 
 'As this quotation will be frequently found in this volume, it may 
 be well to define its meaning. A seal is an instrument used to make 
 an impression on wax, annexed to some writing, containing the en- 
 gagement of him whose seal it is. The design of the seal is to make 
 known that the writing is his writing, or the act his act and sets forth 
 his pleasure. Thus bonds, deeds, &c. are sealed to authenticate the 
 instrument itself and furnish obligatory proof of the engagements 
 of the sealer. We therefore understand the quotation to imply, 
 that baptism is a solemn exliibition and evidence of the fundamental 
 truth, that we become righteous in the sight of God, or are justified, 
 by faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 ^Rom. IV. 11. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 39 
 
 Christ, is a nullity and mockery; an absurd and foolish 
 ceremony:" then it follows, that the circumcision of in- 
 fants who knew nothing of that righteousness of faith 
 which it sealed, was also a nullity and mockery, was also 
 an absurd and foolish ceremony; and the divine command 
 which enjoined it, (with reverence be it spoken) a foolish 
 and an absurd commandment! 
 
 Are Baptists then, willing to say, that the application 
 of a 'seal of the righteousness of faith' to unconscious 
 infants, of eight days old, was so wickedly preposterous? 
 "Are they prepared thus to 'charge God foolishly?'— 
 Yet they must do it, if they would be consistent. They 
 cannot escape from the shocking alternative. Every 
 harsh and contemptuous epithet which they apply to in- 
 fant baptism, must, if they would adhere to the principles 
 which they lay down, be applied to infant circumcision 
 But that which unavoidably leads to such a consequence 
 cannot be warranted by the word of God.''^ 
 
 The fallacy of the preceding objection is exposed by 
 Edwards in a very lucid manner. '^ That particular rule, 
 against which this argument oflends, is this: ^ Non debet 
 plus esse in conclusione quam erat in premissis. Ratio 
 manifesta est, quia, conclusio educenda est ex pre- 
 missis.^ That is, 'Thei-e should not be more in the 
 conclusion than was in the premises. The reason is 
 plain, because the conclusion is to be drawn from the 
 premises.' We will try to make this plain, by exam- 
 ples both of true and false reasoning. 
 
 "1. In the Baptist way of reasoning. When the Scrip- 
 tures say, 'Repent and be baptized;' and, '"If thou 
 behevest thou mayest,' &c., they address only sinful 
 adults; and then, an argument formed upon them should 
 'See Dr. Miller on Baptism. 
 
40 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 reach no farther than adults of the same description. But 
 the Baptists form their fallacious argument on these pas- 
 sages, by bringing infants into the conclusion, who, as 
 they are not addressed, are not at all concerned in the 
 premises. This will appear plain by three instances on 
 the Baptist plan. 
 
 "The Baptist argument runs thus: The Scriptures 
 require faith and repentance in order to baptism; but 
 infants have not faith and repentance ; therefore they are 
 not to be baptized. Now as the Scriptures require faith 
 and repentance only of adults, we must place that word 
 in the argument, and then it will stand in this form: The 
 Scriptures require faith and repentance of adults in 
 order to baptism ; but infants cannot have these : there- 
 fore infants are not fit subjects of baptism. In the same 
 way, we may form the two following instances, viz.— 
 The Scriptures require faith and repentance of adults in 
 order to salvation ; but infants cannot have these : there- 
 fore infants cannot be saved. Again, He [an adultj who 
 will not work, neither should he eat ; but an infant can- 
 not will to work, therefore an infant should not eat. The 
 reader may perceive, that by placing the word adults in 
 one proposition, and infants in the other, (wliich makes it 
 a sophism) there are three things proved in the same 
 way, viz. That infants cannot be saved — that infants 
 should not eat — that infants should not be baptized. And 
 so, for the same reason, that an infant cannot be saved, 
 that an infant should not eat; it will follow, that an infant 
 should not be baptized. For all these are equally true, 
 and supported by the same reasoning. And it is in the 
 same way, that this argument proves against the baptism 
 of Christ, and the circumcision of infants. We will now 
 view these three instances, 
 
OBJECTIONS. 41 
 
 "2. In the Pedobaptist way of reasoning. We will 
 place the same word in each proposition, thus : The 
 Scriptures require faith and repentance of adults in order 
 to baptism ; but some adults have no faith, no repentance ; 
 therefore some adults are not to be baptized. Again, 
 The Scriptures require faith and repentance of adults in 
 order to salvation ; but some adults do not believe nor 
 repent ; therefore some adults will not be saved. Once 
 more — He [an adult] who Avill not work, neither should 
 he eat ; but some adult will not work ; therefore some 
 adult should not eat. Now by placing the Avord adult m 
 each proposition, without which it would be a sophistical 
 argument, the reader may see, that as infants can have 
 no place in either, there is nothing to forbid their sup- 
 port, their salvation, or their baptism. They only prove, 
 that an idle adult should not be supported ; that an im- 
 penitent adult will not be saved ; and, that he has no right 
 at all to baptism. 
 
 *'Once more — As I have nothing in view so much as 
 tnith, I have a great desire to make this matter plain to 
 tlie meanest capacity. For if I am clearly understood in 
 this part, my end, on the present argument, is attained ; 
 and what I have before advanced upon it, will be in a 
 gi-eat measure, useless. The reader, therefore, is de- 
 sired to observe, that the design of this argument is to 
 conclude against the baptism of infants. Then, as infants 
 are to be in the conclusion, they must also be in the pre- 
 mises ; for the rule says, ' there should not be more in 
 the conclusion than ^vas in the premises ; because the 
 conclusion is to be drawn from the premises.' 
 
 " Now to make the argument of the Baptists consist- 
 ent with itself, we must place infants in the premises as 
 
 well as in the conclusion ; and then the argument will 
 4* 
 
42 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Stand thus : The Scriptures require faith and repentance 
 of infants in order to baptism ; but infants have not faith, 
 &c. ; therefore infants are not to be baptized. The reader 
 may discern an agreement, in the parts of the argument, 
 with each other ; it has infants in each part, as well in 
 the premises as in the conclusion. But then the fallacy 
 of it is more strikingly evident than before : for the error, 
 which before crept into the middle, does here stand in 
 front ; it is in this proposition, the Scriptures require 
 faith and repentance of infants in order to baptism, which 
 is not true ; for infants are never required to repent or 
 believe, in order either to baptism or salvation. Whereas 
 before, when it was said the Scriptures require faith and 
 repentance of adults in order to baptism ; but infants 
 have not faith, &c., the error consisted in putting in the 
 word ' infants,' who have no concern at all in the require- 
 ment. 
 
 " By placing one thing in the premises, and another in 
 the conclusion, which is done by the Baptists, in this 
 argument, we may be able to evince any absurdity, how- 
 ever glaring. This being the manner of the Baptist argu- 
 ment, notliing more is necessary to take off its force 
 against infants, but to make the premises and conclusion 
 to correspond with each other. That is, while it con- 
 tinues to be a sophism, it proves against infants ; but it 
 ceases to prove against them, as soon as it is made a good 
 argument, e. g. Faith and repentance are required of 
 adults in order to baptism ; but infants have not these : 
 therefore infants are not to be baptized. This is no-' 
 thing more than a pure sophism, and, as such, it concludes 
 against infants; but all its force against infants is set 
 aside by making it good, thus : Faith and repentance are 
 required in adults in order to baptism, but some adults 
 
OBJECTIONS. 43 
 
 have not faith and repentance ; therefore some adults are 
 not to be baptized. The reader may see, that now it is 
 a fair argument, all its force against infants is gone. 
 
 " Having said thus much on the fallacy of this argu- 
 ment, I shall only add one specimen of its mode of opera- 
 tion; and that is a specimen, in which it will conclude 
 two contrary ways, on one place of Scripture, Rom. ii. 25. 
 ' For circumcision verily proiiteth, if thou keep the law ; 
 but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is 
 made uncircumcision.' 
 
 "Now the Baptist argument, on the first member of 
 this text, will operate thus: Circumcision verily profit- 
 eth, if thou keep the law ; but infants could not keep the 
 law ; therefore their circumcision must be unprofitable, 
 that is, as no circumcision, a mere nullity ; and this reflects 
 on the wisdom of God. But if we form the same argu- 
 ment on the other member, it will be no nullity either, 
 for thus it will run : If thou be a breaker of the law, thy 
 cii'cumcision is made uncircumcision ; but infants could 
 not break the law ; therefore their circumcision could not 
 be made uncircumcision, i. e. a nullity. Such is this 
 Baptist argument, that it will prove infant circumcision 
 to be something or nothing, according to that part of the 
 text on which it is formed ; and it is therefore evidently 
 no more than a sophism. 
 
 " I have endeavored to make the reader see, not only, 
 that this argument is false, but wherein that fallacy con- 
 sists. That it is false, appears in this, that in every in- 
 stance it opposes a known truth ; it opposes the circum- 
 cision of infants — the baptism of Jesus Christ — the sal- 
 vation of infants — and, their temporal subsistence. The 
 nature of the fallacy is the placing of adults in the pre- 
 
44 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 mises, and infants in the conclusion ; which any person, 
 who has the least knowledge of the art of reasoning, 
 must see instantly to be repugnant to the laws of truth." 
 
 Third Objection. — In those passages in which Chris- 
 tian gi-aces are connected with baptism, the former always 
 precede the latter in the collocation of words. Thus it 
 is said, " He that believeth and is baptized," &c. — 
 ♦'Teach all nations, baptizing them," &c. "Repent, and 
 be baptized every one of you." Now as repentance, 
 faith, &c. are placed before baptism in the arrangement 
 of the words enjoining it, so they must be anterior to it 
 in practice ; but in the case of children they cannot be 
 anterior in practice, therefore it is reversing the order 
 plainly marked out by Christ to make children partakers 
 of this ordinance. 
 
 Answer. — This is indeed a very flimsy objection, but 
 as it is often urged it must be noticed. It supposes that 
 acts of obedience to the gospel must succeed each other 
 in tlie precise order of the several words employed in 
 prescribing those acts ;- — in other language, that the order 
 of words and the order of things are exactly the same. 
 A few plain facts will abundantly expose the utter untena- 
 bleness of this position. 
 
 It will be admitted by all, that in Christian experience, 
 justification precedes sanctification, and yet in the order 
 of words used by the apostle, the latter has a priority of 
 place;' "But ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the 
 name," &c. Again, in every conceivable sense Christ is 
 infinitely above the prophets and apostles, and in point of 
 
 ^Cor. vi. 11. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 45 
 
 antiquity tlie former were prior to the latter; and not- 
 withstanding, in the arrangement of words, the first is 
 named last and the last first : " And are built upon the 
 foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ 
 himself being the chief corner-stone."^ Ham was the 
 youngest of Noah's sons, and yet he is always named 
 before Japhet. The three persons of the Holy Trinity 
 are equal, but the name of the Father always precedes 
 that of the Son, and the name of the Son that of the Holy 
 Ghost. It is written, "John did baptize in the wilder- 
 ness, and preach the baptism of repentance;"* but will 
 any one be so intolerably silly as to infer from this, that 
 he actually commenced his ministry by baptizing? — If 
 things take place agreeably to the order of the words 
 employed in stating them, then all the antediluvian patri- 
 archs uniformly begat their sons first and afterwards their 
 daughters ; for it is written, they lived so many years and 
 '■'■begat sons and daughters.''''^ 
 
 'Eph. li. 20. ^Mark i. 4. ^Gen. 5. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 SECOND ARGUMENT. 
 
 Baptism is the appointed token of church member- 
 ship. — In order to appreciate this argument in all the 
 length and breadth of its force, several important points 
 must be previously established. 
 
 1 . That children ivere entitled to membership in the 
 church of God under the old dispensation, and that cir- 
 cmncision was the sign of that membership. 
 
 By the church of God here, we understand the collect- 
 ive body of all those who profess the true religion, and 
 tlieir infant offspring. (See page 20.) Such a church 
 always existed, but it was not formally organized until 
 the days of Abraham, and nothing is more plainly taught 
 than that at its organization God ordained that infants 
 should be members of it, and receive the rite setting forth 
 their membership. A full account of God's covenant 
 with the ancient patriarch and his posterity, may be found 
 in the 17 ch. of Genesis. In examining this covenant, 
 the foUoAving particulars are obvious : 
 
 First. It had respect to spiritual as well as temporal 
 blessings, for according to the stipulations, Abraham was 
 to be " the father of many nations ;" God was to be a 
 " God to him and to his seed after him," and in Abra- 
 ham's " seed all the nations of the earth were to be 
 blessed." In these provisions the richest spiritual bless- 
 ings that God could bestow, were comprehended, and for 
 this reason circumcision, which was the seal of this cove- 
 
SECOND ARGUMENT. 47 
 
 nant, is expressly declared by the inspired apostle' to 
 have been "a seal of the righteousness of faith:' 
 
 Second. This covenant embraced in the most explicit 
 terms, the infant seed of Abraham, and was never to be 
 revoked: "I will establish my covenant between me 
 and thee, and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for 
 an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee and to 
 thy seed after thee,"^ 
 
 Third. The sign and seal of this covenant Avas cir- 
 cumcision,'' which was to be administered to children 
 when they were only eight days old, and was actually 
 administered for nearly nineteen centuries at that tender 
 age, in token of their church-membership and their con- 
 sequent title to the privileges of the church, or in other 
 words, of their relation to God's covenanted family and 
 their right to the privileges of that covenant.— Here 
 then, we have our first point clearly established ; viz. : 
 that by the express appointment of God children ivere 
 constituted members of the church, (or, which is the 
 same, subjects of his covenant with Abraham), and when 
 eight days old, received the ratifying ordinance, (or, 
 which is the same, the sign and seal of the covenant,) 
 tvhich was circumcision. We wish our readers to bear 
 this in mind, for it is a fact of the utmost importance, to 
 which we shall often have occasion to refer in this dis- 
 cussion ;— a fact acknowledged by all and incapable of 
 refutation by any ; on which, as on an immovable and 
 everlasting foundation, we are enabled to rear a super- 
 structure which all the skill and might of man cannot 
 subvert. For if it was fit and necessary, in the judg- 
 ment of God, to declare children to be members of his 
 church of old, and bestow upon them the seal of mem- 
 •Rom. iv. 11. 2v. 7 ; see also vs. 8, 9, 10. ^See vs. 10 and 12. 
 
48 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 bership (which was " a seal of the righteousness of 
 faith'''') before they were capable of exercising faith, we 
 ask in the name of common sense, why it should not be 
 equally fit and necessary now? 
 
 The next point to be established in order to develop 
 our argument is — 
 
 2. That the church of God under the former and 
 present dispensation, or in other ivords, in the Old and 
 Neiv Testament is substantially the same. 
 
 We do not assume here, that the exterior aspect of the 
 church is the same now that it was formerly, for when 
 Christ died many divine appointments of an external 
 character received their accomplishment, and were there- 
 fore of no more use. But the identity of tlie church 
 imder both dispensations, has been unalterably preserved. 
 We still have the same Lord and Saviour as head of the 
 church, the same Holy Spirit, the same atoning sacrifice, 
 (which all the sacrifices of old prefigured as their grand 
 antitype), and are strictly under the same covenant; we 
 are required to exercise the same faith and to practise the 
 same moral duties, all which are summed up in love 
 supreme to God, and love to our neiglibor equal to that 
 which we bear to ourselves. True, we enjoy a larger 
 amount of light and privilege than did God's people of 
 old ; but this does not touch the identity of the church, 
 any more than an accession of rights and immunities 
 conferred upon an individual, or corporation, or a town, 
 affects their identity. They are still the same individu- 
 al, corporation or town notwithstanding the enlargement 
 of their powers and privileges. A man of fifty years of 
 age is the same individual that he was when an infant at 
 his mother's breast, and the sturdy oak of a century is 
 the same tree that it was when a yielding sapling, and 
 
SECOND ARGUMENT. 49 
 
 yet it is known that both the man and the tree have again 
 and again changed their component particles. So the 
 church of God now in her matnj-ity and in the plenitude 
 of her light and privilege, is the identical church that she 
 was in her nonage and in the paucity of her light and 
 privilege.^ Under the former just as well as under the 
 present dispensation, she was therefore, to all intents and 
 purposes, a gospel church. 
 
 In reply to the objection, that the Old and New Testa- 
 ment church is totally distinct, and that the old was abol- 
 ished, and an entirely new church erected in its stead ; 
 so that if infant membership were intended to be retained, 
 it must needs be commanded anew ; the Rev. Doctor 
 Schmucker thus remarks : " The New Testament, how- 
 ever, teaches a different doctrine, representing the Chris- 
 tian church as built on the Jewish, as being only the more 
 perfect and complete economy of the one church of God. 
 ' Think not,' says the blessed Saviour, ' that I am come 
 to destroy the law, or the prophets ; I am not come to 
 destroy, but to fulfill ;' or rather, to make i^erfect, ( 7r\„- 
 tctTM^ to complete.^) The Apostle Paul, also, speaking 
 of the future restoration of the Jews, says : They also, 
 if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in : for 
 God is able to graff them in again. — For if thou (gentile) 
 wert cut out of the olive tree, that is wild by nature 
 (heathenism) ; and wert graffed contrary to nature, into a 
 good olive tree (the Jewisli church) ; how much more 
 shall these (Jews), who are natural branches be graffed 
 into their own olive tree (church) ? The good olive 
 tree here must signify the Jews, either as a nation or 
 a religious community, a church of God. It cannot 
 mean the former, for the gentiles never were graffed on 
 
 "Gal. iv. 1—6. ^Matt. v. 17. 
 
 5 
 
50 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 the Jewish nation. It must then mean the church. Now 
 the apostle teaches, that the Jews were cut off from this 
 church by unbeHef, and the gentiles received or graffed 
 into it; and in the fullness of time the Jews shall again 
 be received into their own church, or olive tree, which 
 must therefore be still standing : that is, the Christian 
 and Jewish churches are essentially one and the same 
 church. When therefore an ordinance is once estab- 
 lished, it remains in force until revoked by God. Hence, 
 as infant membership has confessedly not been revoked 
 by God, our conclusion irresistibly follows, that we are 
 not at liberty to reject it.'" 
 
 The third point to be made out in this chain of rea- 
 soning, is — 
 
 3. That children are, in virtue of their birth from, 
 Christian parents, members of the church under the 
 new dispensation. 
 
 Having abundantly sustained this position in reference 
 to children born under the old economy, it is self-evident 
 that they occupy the same relation to the church under 
 the existing economy, (the covenant establishing it, being 
 of perpetual obligation,) unless it has been rescinded. But 
 we boldly challenge the world to produce one particle of 
 evidence in proof of its revocation. We take high ground 
 here and use strong language, but we do it without fear of 
 successful contradiction. If God, who nearly four thou- 
 sand years ago, by an express statute, constituted the chil- 
 dren of believing parents, members of his church, has 
 annulled that statute, or by any direct or indirect, posi- 
 tive or implied warrant, withdrawn the privilege which 
 it vouchsafed to them, let the testimony be forthcoming. 
 But there is no such testimony to be found either in the 
 Old or New Testament, and therefore the church-mem- 
 
 iSee Popular Theology p. 212. 
 
SECOND ARGUMENT. 51 
 
 bership of infants remains unrevoked, unimpaired, un- 
 touched, and in all the primitive force with which divine 
 authority originally invested it. 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Schmucker's (junior) statement of this 
 argument is alike remarkable for its cogency and its bre- 
 vity: "An ordinance which God himself appointed in 
 his church, and which he never revoked, we have no 
 right to reject ; 
 
 "•Bat God did confessedly appoint infant membership in 
 his cliurch, and did never revoke it ; 
 
 " Therefore ive have no right to revoke it."' 
 
 The language of Dr. Mason on this branch of our sub- 
 ject is too eloquent to be omitted. 
 
 "Conceding, then," says he, "to the opposers of our 
 children's claim as members of the Christian church, all 
 that they ask with regard to the silence of the New Tes- 
 tament, that very concession works their ruin. If their 
 views are correct, it could not have been thus silent. Out 
 of their own mouths we draw their conviction ; and cast 
 them in the judgment by the very evidence which they 
 offer in their vindication. 
 
 " The case is now reversed. Instead of our producing 
 from the New Testament such a warrant for the privileges 
 of our infant seed, as they require, we turn the tables 
 upon them ; and insist, that they shall produce scriptural 
 proof of God's having annulled the constitution under 
 7vhich ive assert our right. Till they do this, our cause 
 is invincible. He once granted to his church the right 
 for which we contend; and nothing but his own act can 
 take it aAvay. We want to see the act of abrogation ; 
 we must see it in the New Testament ; for there it is, if 
 it is at all. Point it out, and we have done. Till then 
 
 'See Popular Theology, p. 211. 
 
52 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 we shall rejoice in the consolation of calling upon God 
 as our God; and the God of our seed. * * * * 
 
 " The case is still stronger when we reflect that the chil- 
 dren of believing parents participate in all the disasters 
 of tlie external church. If she be corrupted, the corrup- 
 tion infects them ; if she be persecuted, the persecution 
 smites them ; if her mercies be sinned away, the punish- 
 ment of the sin lights on them. Could they suffer more 
 upon the supposition of their being really members ? It 
 seems, then, that they are to share in all her afflictions, 
 Avithout sharing in her privileges : that when evil over- 
 takes her, they are to be treated as citizens ; but when 
 immunities are dispensed, as aliens. So that the Lord 
 our God suspends a leading principle of his physical and 
 moral order, for the sake of barring the seed of his peo- 
 ple from privilege i and permits it to take its full course 
 for the infliction of calamity ! This is more than incredi- 
 ble !"» 
 
 We come now to the last particular to be established, 
 which develops the gist of the whole argument, and in 
 fact is the argument that stands at the head of this arti- 
 cle, viz. — 
 
 3. That baptism is the appointed token of church 
 membership in the Neiv Testament. 
 
 This is evident from the fact, that as circumcision was 
 confessedly the sealing ordinance in the former economy, 
 and baptism has been substituted for it, therefore baptism 
 is now the sealing ordinance, and must of course be ad- 
 ministered to infants, because infants are the declared 
 members of God's church and subjects of his covenant. 
 
 Our Baptist brethren however deny this position, main- 
 taining that as there are some points of difference between 
 
 'See Cliristian Mag. II. 27, &c. 
 
SECOND ARGUMENT. 53 
 
 Circumcision and baptism, therefore the latter cannot be a 
 substitute for the former. But does it follow, when one 
 tiling is put in the place of another, that there must be in 
 every respect a perfect resemblance between them ? — by 
 no means. All that is requisite to constitute a substitute 
 is, that there should be a general agreement as to the main 
 object in view, or the great end to be accomplished; this 
 being the case, there may be a variety of discrepancies 
 without in the least affecting the principle of substitu- 
 tion. For instance, in time of war a man may be drafted 
 to proceed to the frontiers to defend his country; he 
 employs another to take his place; there is a considera- 
 ble difference between them in age, stature, complexion, 
 temper, habits, physical and mental powers, and other 
 respects; yet the great object to be attained, being the 
 same, the latter goes in the room of the former, and is 
 properly and legally his substitute. A superintendent of 
 a Sunday school, about to leave home for a few weeks, 
 requests his Christian neighbor to supply his place during 
 his absence; there may and probably will be numerous 
 points of even striking dissimilarity ;— perhaps in person 
 and appearance, talents and acquirements, intellect and 
 endowments, aptness for imparting instruction, piety and 
 fervor, &c. ; yet the principal end to be answered, being 
 identical, the one is justly regarded as the substitute o'f 
 the other. So our houses of worship are represented as 
 coming in the place of the Jewish temple and synagogues, 
 because they contemplate the same great object, which is 
 to afibrd convenience for public Avorship and religious 
 instruction; yet in their construction, dimensions, mode 
 of worship, &c., they differ vastly. The Lord's supper 
 is often referred to as having come in the place of the 
 passover; gospel ministers in the room of Levitir-al 
 5* 
 
54 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 priests ; the simplicity of Christian worship instead of 
 the gorgeous services of the temple, &c. Certainly, in 
 all these exemplifications of substitution there is a gene- 
 ral concurrence as to the main object, but in numerous 
 instances the contrast is exceedingly glaring. In like 
 manner, our Lord himself became a substitute ; he as- 
 sumed our form and nature, put himself in our place and 
 "bare our sins in his own body on the tree," What an 
 infinite disparity between him and us, in dignity, the 
 mode and duration of sufljering for sin, &c. &c. ; yet the 
 great purpose of suffering being the same, namely, the 
 vindication of divine justice and the fulfillment of divine 
 laM^ he was emphatically the substitute of a rebel world. 
 The illustration may be extended to civil matters. An 
 old law is repealed and another enacted in its stead ; but 
 according to the new enactment, the constituents of the 
 crime contemplated, the evidence required to establish it, 
 the penalty, the mode of inflicting it, &c., may all differ 
 from the provisions of the former statute ; yet the object 
 being precisely similar, viz. the prevention of some par- 
 ticular species of felony, the one is termed and published 
 as a substitute for the other. 
 
 We have dwelt at some length on this point, because 
 it is of the utmost importance, and we desire to be dis- 
 tinctly understood. Having now a clear apprehension of 
 what is meant by a substitute, or one thing coming in the 
 place of another, let us proceed to inquire whether there 
 be a general agreement in the great object contemplated 
 by circumcision and baptism, — a suflicient resemblance 
 in the leading purpose, to warrant the doctrine of substi- 
 tution. Circumcision had a spiritual meaning, so has bap- 
 tism ; circumcision Avas a seal of a covenant guarantying 
 not only temporal but also and chiefly spiritual blessings. 
 
SECOND ARGUMENT. 55 
 
 SO baptism is the badge of an external relation and out- 
 ward advantages, but is mainly the seal of spiritual bless- 
 ings. "Circumcision," says an eminent divine, "was an 
 emblem of moral' cleansing and purity. So is baptism. 
 It refers to the remission of sins by the blood of Christ, 
 and regeneration by his Spirit; and teaches us that Ave 
 are by nature guilty and depraved, and stand in need of 
 the pardoning and sanctifying grace of God by a crucified 
 Redeemer. Surely, then, there is the best foundation 
 for asserting that baptism has come in the place of cir- 
 cumcision. The latter, as all grant, has been discon- 
 tinued ; and now baptism occupies the same place, means 
 the same thing, seals the same covenant, and is a pledge 
 of the same spiritual blessings. Who can doubt, then, 
 that there is the utmost propriety, upon principle, in 
 applying it to the same infant subjects ?" ' 
 
 We may here add, that an early father, Justin iNIartyr, 
 takes the same view of the substitution of circumcision 
 by Christian baptism : "We gentiles," Justin observes, 
 " have not received that circumcision according to the 
 flesh, but that which is spiritual — and moreover, for in- 
 deed we were sinners, we have received this in baptism^ 
 through God's mercy, and it is enjoined on all to receive 
 it in like manner." 
 
 " Yet, though baptism manifestly comes in the place of 
 circumcision, there are points in regard to which the 
 former diflers materially from the latter. And it differs 
 precisely as to those points in regard to Avhich the New 
 Testament economy differs from the old, in being more 
 enlarged and less ceremonial. Baptism is not ceremoni- 
 ally restricted to the eighth day, but may be administered 
 at any time and place. It is not confined to one sex, but 
 like the glorious dispensation of which it is a seal, it 
 
56 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 marks an enlarged privilege, and is administered in a 
 way which reminds us that ' there is neither Greek nor 
 Jew, neither bond nor free, neither male nor female, in 
 the Christian economy ; but that we are all one in Christ 
 Jesus.' '" 
 
 'See Miller on Infant Baptism, p. 13. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO THIS ARGUMENT. 
 
 First Objection. The circumcision of infants was 
 an express and positive institution, but their baptism is 
 not, and however admissible it may be, in a general 
 point of view, to argue the necessity of moral duty by 
 inferential reasoning, yet in cases of positive institu- 
 tion it is insufficient ; nothing short of the most direct 
 and explicit authority can avail in matters of this cha- 
 racter. 
 
 Answer. — This is a new principle set up by our Bap- 
 tist brethren, in order to escape the irresistible argument 
 based on the church-membership and circumcision of 
 infants under the Mosaic dispensation. But it is as un- 
 sound as it is novel. As circumstantial evidence in a 
 court of justice may be and often is as clear and strong 
 as positive, so inferential and analogical reasoning is fre- 
 quently as conclusive as any other. This point is too 
 obvious to require further illustration, and hence we find 
 that our Baptist brethren themselves tacitly admit it 
 at the very moment that they profess to be governed by 
 the principles assumed in the objection. For it is con- 
 ceded that the Lord's supper is a positive institution, and 
 that females are positively bound to partake of it, but 
 where in the Sacred Scriptures do we find a direct pre- 
 cept, or even an explicit example to warrant them in 
 doing so ? — How then do our opponents arrive at the 
 
58 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 conclusion that it is the duty of females to commune ? — 
 Undoubtedly by inferential reasoning, and that too of 
 the most convincing nature which can never be refuted, 
 and yet not more convincing or irrefutable than that 
 chain of logic by Avhich we prove infant baptism. As 
 often then as they admit women to a participation of the 
 holy supper, they fly from the principle involved in their 
 own objection, and yield, in reference to a positive insti- 
 tution, to the force of argument derived altogether from 
 inference and analogy. Would it not be better to aban- 
 don the unsound principle and succumb to the poAver of 
 solid logical deduction ? 
 
 Second Objection. — " If baptism succeeded in the 
 place of circumcision, how came it that both of them 
 were in full force at the same time, that is, from the 
 commencement of John's ministry to the death of Christ? 
 For one thing to come in the room of another, and the 
 latter to hold its place, is an odd kind of succession. 
 Admitting the succession pretended, how came it that 
 Paul circumcised Timothy, after he had been baptized?" 
 Thus far Mr. Booth, — but in order to make this objec- 
 tion still more cogent, Ave add, — how shall Ave account 
 for Paul's silence on the subject, Avhen it Avas knoAvn to 
 him that some of the HebrcAv believers still practised 
 circumcision ? 
 
 Answer. Baptism could not be made the sign and 
 seal of the perfected covenant of grace, until that coa'c- 
 nant was both perfected and proposed for acceptance, 
 which did not take place until after " the blood of the 
 everlasting covenant" was shed, and our Lord, after his 
 resurrection, had opened its full import to the apostles, 
 
OBJECTIONS. 59 
 
 who were to publish it " to all nations." Accordingly, 
 we find that baptism was formally made the seal of this 
 covenant for the first time when our Lord commissioned 
 his disciples to " go and disciple all nations, baptizing 
 them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
 the Holy Ghost," — " he that believeth and is baptized 
 shall be saved." John's baptism was upon profession 
 of repentance and faith in the speedy appearance of Him 
 who was to baptize with tlie Holy Ghost and fire ; and 
 our Lord's baptism by Ids disciples was administered to 
 those Jews that believed on him, as the Messias, all of 
 whom, like the apostles, waited for a fuller development 
 of his character and offices ; both ihercfore looked for 
 something yet to come, and was not certainly tliat bap- 
 tism in the name " of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost," wliich was afterwards instituted as 
 tlie standing, confirmatory I'ite of membership in the 
 Christian church. 
 
 As for the circumcision of Timothy, and the practice 
 of that rite among many of the Hebrew believers, we 
 observe, that there are two grounds on which circumcis- 
 ion may be conceived to have been innocently, though 
 not wisely, practised among the Christian Jews. The 
 first was that of preserving an ancient national distinc- 
 tion on which they valued themselves ; and M'ere a con- 
 verted Jew in the present day disposed to perform that 
 rite upon his children for this purpose only, renouncing 
 in the act all consideration of it as a sign and seal of the 
 old covenant, or as obliging to ceremonial acts in order 
 to justification, no one would censure him with severity. 
 It appears clear that it was under some such view that 
 St. Paul circumcised Timothy, whose mother was a 
 Jewess; he did it because of "the Jews which were in 
 
60 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 those quarters," that is, because of their national preju- 
 dices, "for they knew his father was a Greek." The 
 second Avas a lingering notion that, even in the Christian 
 church, the Jews who believed would still retain some 
 degree of eminence, some superior relation to God ; a 
 notion wliich, however unfounded, was not one which 
 demanded direct rebuke, when it did not proudly refuse 
 spiritual communion with the converted gentiles, but was 
 held by men who "rejoiced that God had granted to the 
 gentiles repentance unto life." These considerations 
 may account for the silence of St. Paul on the subject of 
 circumcision in his Epistle to the Hebrews. Some of 
 them continued to practice that rite, but they Avere proba- 
 bly believers of the class just mentioned; for, had he 
 tliought that the rite was continued among them on any 
 principle which affected the fundamental doctines of Chris- 
 tianity, he would no doubt have been equally prompt and 
 fearless in pointing out that apostasy from Christ which 
 was implied in it. We have a remarkable proof of the 
 correctness of this view of the subject in the fact, that on 
 another occasion Paul resolutely refused to permit cir- 
 cumcision to be administered to a gentile convert. We 
 read in the epistle to the Galatians, that certain Judaizing 
 teachers, whom the apostle terms "false brethren," were 
 anxious that he should circumcise Titus; their object 
 appears to have been, had they succeeded, to use the 
 authority of the apostle's example to practise the rite 
 among other converts from the gentiles, and so bring 
 tliem under bondage to the law of Moses. But when the 
 rite was to be administered with this view ; when the 
 motive was not simply to preserve a favorite national dis- 
 tinction, but to oblige the subject to observe tlie Mosaic 
 ceremonies as a partial ground of justification before 
 
OBJECTIONS. 61 
 
 God ; then Paul promptly resisted it with great decision ; 
 he at once took high ground and maintained that ground 
 with his usual boldness, observing in relation to those 
 Judaizing teachers: "To whom we gave place by sub- 
 jection, no not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel 
 might continue with you.'" 
 
 Circumcision might therefore be practised with views 
 so opposite, that on one occasion it might be wholly inno- 
 cent, although an infirmity of prejudice ; while on the 
 other, it would involve a rejection of the doctrine of jus- 
 tification by faith in Christ. This remark will apply 
 with equal force to the observance of "days and months, 
 and times, and years" for which the Galatians were re- 
 proved. If Baptist writers could show that the apostles 
 sanctioned the practice of circumcision as a seal of the 
 old covenant, then there would be some force in the argu- 
 ment that one could not succeed the other, if both Avere 
 continued under inspired authority. But we have the 
 most decided testimony of the Apostle Paul against any 
 such use of circumcision ; and he makes it, when prac- 
 tised in that view, a total abnegation of Christ and the 
 new covenant. It follows, then, that when circumcision 
 was continued by any connivance of the apostles,— and 
 certainly they did no more than connive at it, — it was 
 practised upon some grounds which did not regard it as 
 the seal of any covenant ; — from national custom or pre- 
 judice, a feeling to which the Apostle Paul himself yielded 
 in the case of Timothy. He circumcised him, but not 
 from any conviction of necessity, since he uniformly 
 declared circumcision to have vanished away with that 
 dispensation of the covenant of which it was the seal 
 through the bringing in of a better hope. 
 
 iGal. ii. 1—5. 
 6 
 
62 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Third Objection. — If baptism has been substituted 
 for circumcision, why is it not as universal in the Chris- 
 tian church as circumcision was in the Jewish church ? 
 
 Answer. — Because professing Christians are not as 
 mindful of this duty as they ought to be. The precept 
 to administer baptism is at least coequal in extent of 
 application, to that requiring circumcision, and every 
 father and mother who hear the gospel are bound to em- 
 brace it, to profess it and to comply with its invitations, 
 and if they v/ould yield to duty, we should not have a 
 child in the land growing up without this sacramental 
 seal. This objection then does not militate against infant 
 baptism, but against the remissness of many who profess 
 to believe in it ; at the same time it pronounces a censure 
 upon the Baptists who urge it, for they too as well as 
 inconsistent professors, aid in restricting the prevalence 
 of the practice in question. In one respect however, bap- 
 tism is more universal than circumcision was ; it is ad- 
 ministered to both sexes, whereas the seal of the old cove- 
 nant was confined to males. But this suggests another ob- 
 jection, the very reverse of the one under consideration. 
 
 Fourth Objection. — If baptism has come in the 
 place of circumcision, why is it not limited to male in- 
 fants ;— females were excluded from circumcision, must 
 they not then by consequence be debarred from the seal 
 of the new covenant ? 
 
 This apparent difficulty has already been anticipated 
 and fully met on a preceding page, by a correct exhibi- 
 tion of the constituent feature of a substituted But a 
 few additional remarks will place the subject in a still 
 clearer light. 
 
 ' See pages 53 and 54. 
 
OBJECTIONS, 63 
 
 The objection before us, like many others, proves too 
 much ; for as adult females did not receive the seal of 
 the covenant any more than infant females, it would 
 necessarily exclude the former also from a covenant rela- 
 tion to God, and this is doubtless more than the objector 
 would like to see established. Will our Baptist brethren 
 deny that adult females were members of the visible 
 church of God under the old dispensation ? and yet they 
 received not the token of membership ! 
 
 AVe readily grant that there was no external ordinance 
 of divine appointment by Avhich infant females were per- 
 sonally recognized as members of the Jewish church, and 
 yet they were plainly included in the stipulations of the 
 covenant, and were members, and when they attained 
 a proper age, enjoyed all its privileges. If a gentile 
 family became proselytes, the adult and infant males 
 were circumcised ; but the females, adult as well as 
 infant, became members of the church Avithout any exter- 
 nal rite other than proselyte baptism, by virtue of their 
 connection with the males. In this, as in many other 
 cases, they were evidently considered as represented by 
 the men, and virtually included with them. Even in the 
 present day females are in numerous instances regarded 
 as being represented by males ; they have no vote, are 
 not eligible to office, &c. ; these restrictions prevailed to a 
 still gi-eater extent among the Jews. Both in church 
 and state their rights were in some respects absorbed in 
 those of the men ; — circumcision furnishes an illustration 
 of this very fact. Consequently the meaning of circum- 
 cision must have been the same as though it had been 
 applied to both sexes. But under the new dispensation 
 Christ has appointed an ordinance, alike applicable to 
 males and females ; hence, the distinction that once 
 
64 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 existed (which was only in form and not in substance) 
 is now done away, and God requires the seal to be 
 applied to adults of both sexes, and of course to all their 
 children whether sons or daughters. The extension of 
 this ordinance to female cliildren, is no greater enlarge- 
 ment of privilege than might be expected from the supe- 
 riority of the new economy over the old ; and it impres- 
 sively reminds us that in this new, more expanded and 
 glorious dispensation, " there is neither bond nor free, 
 neither male nor female, but that we are all one in Christ 
 Jesus." 
 
 There is however another very obvious reason why 
 the new seal of God's covenant should be conferred on 
 females. Under the old dispensation, no messengers 
 "were sent forth to proselyte the gentiles, so that when 
 proselytes were made, the whole family came together ; 
 Avhilst among the Jews all professed faith. But noAV the 
 gospel is preached "to every creature," and it often 
 occurs, that the females in a family are converted, while 
 the head of the family and all the males continue unbe- 
 lievers. It is manifestly proper therefore that every indi- 
 vidual should receive baptism. Accordingly, as adult 
 females are recognized as members of the church by a 
 divine ordinance, which was formerly not the case, so 
 infant females receive the seal of the covenant, which 
 they formerly did not. 
 
 To conclude, does not this objection involve a denial 
 of the advantage of circumcision? — and if so, must not 
 our Baptist brethren be " hard run" for objections to 
 infant baptism, that they should run counter to God's 
 word?' 
 
 'See Rom. ii. 25, and iii. 1,2. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 65 
 
 Fifth Objection. — If now as formerly infants are by 
 virtue of their birth, members of the church of God, 
 and consequently entitled to the sacramental seal of 
 membership, why are they not treated as such ; — church 
 members, whether young or old, should be instructed, 
 watched over, and disciplined when circumstances re- 
 quire it, by the church ; but are infant members thus 
 treated by the advocates of their baptism ? 
 
 It must be acknowledged that there is great force in 
 this objection, not however against the membership or 
 baptism of children, but in its application to individual 
 churches and their officers. Doubtless it is the official 
 duty of ministers, elders and deacons to look well to the 
 moral education of the children of the church, who by 
 their baptism have been recognized and proclaimed as 
 members ; and it is a matter of serious regret and deep 
 reproach that this most important obligation is so gene- 
 rally neglected. Was it not God's design in instituting 
 the church, to " purify unto himself a peculiar people 
 zealous of good works?" — Are not children just as em- 
 phatically as their parents, comprehended in that cove- 
 nant Avhich contemplates the separation of a holy people 
 from the world that lieth in wickedness, and the training 
 up of a spiritual and godly seed for the glory of the 
 Lord? — And is not the sealing ordinance intended to 
 mark and distinguish all those whom he designed to 
 purify? Upon what grounds then can the church justify 
 or apologize for its delinquency in this respect ? It is 
 unquestionably a most important duty to provide for the 
 religious instruction of adult members, and to exercise 
 spiritual inspection and discipline in relation to them ; 
 and by what process of reasoning can the church be 
 exempted from tlie discharge of like duty in regard 
 6* 
 
66 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 to infant and juvenile members? — Verily, Pedobaptist 
 churches are inconsistent, and more or less guilty in this 
 respect, and it behooves them to inquire how they may 
 more faithfully discharge their obligations to "the lambs 
 of the flock." We think we shall do an essential ser- 
 vice here by presenting to our readers the excellent 
 remarks of Dr. Miller of Princeton on this subject : 
 
 " Let all baptized children, from the hour of their 
 receiving the seal of God's covenant, be recorded and 
 recognised as infant disciples. Let the officers of the 
 clmrch, as well as their parents according to the flesh, 
 ever regard them with a watchful and afiectionate eye. 
 Let Christian instruction, Christian restraint, and Chris- 
 tian warning, entreaty and prayer ever attend them, from 
 the mother's lap to the infant school, and from the 
 infant school to the seminary, whatever it may be, for 
 more mature instruction. Let them be early taught to 
 reverence and read the word of God, and to treasure up 
 select portions of it in their memories. Let appropriate 
 catechisms, and other sound compends of Christian truth, 
 be put into their hands, and by incessant repetition and 
 inculcation be impressed upon their minds. Let a school 
 or schools, according to its extent, be established in each 
 church, placed under the immediate instruction of exem- 
 plary, orthodox, and pious teachers, carefully superin- 
 tended by the pastor, and visited as often as practicable 
 by all the ofticers of the church. Let these beloved 
 youth be often reminded of the relation Avhich they bear 
 to the Christian family ; and the just claim of Christ to 
 their aff'ections and service, be often presented with dis- 
 tinctness, solemnity, and afiiection. Let every kind of 
 error and immorality Jje faithfully reproved, and as far 
 as possible suppressed in them. Let the pastor convene 
 
OBJECTIONS. 67 
 
 the baptized children as often as practicable, and address 
 them with instruction and exhortation in the name of that 
 God to whom they have been dedicated, and every en- 
 deavor made to impress their consciences and their hearts 
 with gospel truth. When they come to years of discre- 
 tion, let them be affectionately reminded of their duty to 
 ratify, by their own act, the vows made by their parents 
 in baptism, and be urged, again and again, to give, first 
 their hearts, and then the humble acknowledgment of an 
 outward profession, to the Saviour. Let this plan be 
 pursued faithfully, constantly, patiently, and with parent- 
 al tenderness. If instruction and exhortation be disre- 
 garded, and a course of error, immorality, or negligence 
 be indulged in, let warning, admonition, suspension, or 
 excommunication ensue, according to the character of the 
 individual, and the exigencies of the case. 'What!' 
 some will be disposed to say, ' suspend or excommuni- 
 cate a young person, who has never yet taken his seat at 
 a sacramental table, nor even asked for that privilege V 
 Certainly. Why not? If the children of professing 
 Christians are born members of the church, and are bap- 
 tized as a sign and seal of this membership, nothing can 
 be plainer than that they ought to be treated in every re- 
 spect as church members, and, of course, if they act in 
 an unchristian manner, a bar ought to be set up in the 
 way of their enjoying Christian privileges. If this be 
 not admitted, we must give up the very first principles of 
 ecclesiastical order and duty. Nor is there, obviously 
 any thing more incongruous in suspending or excluding 
 from church privileges a young man, or young woman, 
 who has been baptized in infancy, and trained up in the 
 bosom of the church, but has now no regard for religion, 
 than there is in suspending or excommunicating one who 
 
68 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 has been, for many years, an attendant on the Lord's 
 table, but has now forsaken the house of God, and has 
 no longer any desire to approach a Christian ordinance. 
 No one would consider it as either incongruous or unrea- 
 sonable to declare such a person unworthy of Christian 
 fellowship, and excluded from it, though he had no dis- 
 position to enjoy it. The very same principle applies in 
 the case now under consideration. 
 
 " It has been supposed, indeed, by some Pedobaptists, 
 that although every baptized child is a regular church 
 member, he is a member only of the general visible 
 church, and not in the ordinary sense, of any particular 
 church ; and, therefore, that he is not amenable to eccle- 
 siastical discipline until he formally connects himself with 
 some particular church. This doctrine appears to me 
 subversive of every principle of ecclesiastical order. 
 Every baptized child is, undoubtedly, to be considered 
 as a member of the church in which he received baptism, 
 until he dies, is excommunicated, or regularly dismissed 
 to another church. And if the time shall ever come 
 when all our churches shall act upon this plan ; when 
 infant members shall be watched over with unceasing and 
 affectionate moral care ; when a baptized young person, 
 of either sex, being not yet what is called a communi- 
 cant, shall be made the subject of mild and faithful Chris- 
 tian discipline, if he fall into heresy or immorality ; 
 when he shall be regularly dismissed, by letter, from the 
 watch and care of one church to another ; and when all 
 his spiritual interests shall be guarded, by the church, as 
 well as by his parents, with sacred and affectionate dili- 
 gence ; when this efficient and faithful system shall be 
 acted upon, infant baptism will be universally acknow- 
 ledged as a blessing, and the church will shine with new 
 and spiritual glory. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 69 
 
 " The truth is, if infant baptism were properly im- 
 proved ; if the profession which it indudes, and the obUga- 
 tious which it imposes, were suitably appreciated and fol- 
 lowed up, it would have few opponents, I can no more 
 doubt, if this were done, that it would be blessed to the 
 saving and conversion of thousands of our young people, 
 than I can doubt the faithfulness of a covenant of God. 
 Yes, infant baptism is of God, but the fault lies in the 
 conduct of its advocates. The inconsistency of its friends 
 has done more to discredit it, than all the arguments of 
 its opposers, a hundred fold. Let us hope that these 
 friends will, one day, arouse from their deplorable leth- 
 argy, and show that they are contending for an ordinance 
 as precious as it is scriptural." 
 
 Sixth Objection. — If children are members of the 
 church by virtue of their birth, and are publicly recog- 
 nized as such in their baptism, Avhat is to hinder them 
 from coming to the Lord's supper? Lideed, continues 
 the objector, as members it is their duty to come and no 
 one has a right to raise up any barrier whatever, or to 
 require their compliance Avith any further condition. And 
 yet some churches do not permit them to come, vmtil 
 they submit to a course of religious instruction and the 
 rite of confirmation, while others require them to make a 
 formal profession of religion in some other way prior to 
 their communing. 
 
 Answer. — The fallacy of this objection lies in the 
 supposition that there can be no gradation of capacity for 
 the enjoyment of church-membership, or that every 
 member, irrespective of age, condition or qualification, 
 
70 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 must necessarily be entitled to the same privileges. If 
 this supposition were well fovinded, the objection would 
 not be Avithout force ; but as it proceeds from an entirely 
 erroneous view, the difficulty is altogether imaginary. — 
 How was it among the Jews ? Their children were mem- 
 bers of the church, and recognized as such by circum- 
 cision ; but was it therefore lawful for them to come to 
 the passover (the ordinance which has been succeeded 
 liy the holy supper) without regard to age or any other 
 qualifications ? — By no means ; they were not permitted 
 to share in that ordinance until they were thought to be 
 old enough to understand its nature, and not even then 
 unless they were also ceremonially clean. Previously to 
 their admission to the passover, they were instructed, 
 trained up to religious exercises, and ascertained to be 
 Avorthy to engage in that solemn festival. The age fixed 
 upon for their first celebration of it, was for a female 
 twelve and for a male thirteen years. Anterior to their 
 first participation, they were regarded as infant members 
 and not under obligations to the law or subject to its pen- 
 alties, but subsequently they were viewed as adult mem- 
 I^ers, and denominated "sons or daughters of the congre- 
 gation of Israel." — Here then, we have an illustration 
 derived from the Sacred Scriptures, precisely in point. 
 Jewish children were members of the church, but not 
 allowed to share in all its privileges until they arrived at 
 the age of discretion, had received instruction and could 
 voluntarily and intelligently assume the obligations of the 
 law and the engagements of the covenant. What then 
 becomes of the objection stated at the beginning of this 
 paragraph ? 
 
 But the sophistry of this objection may yet further be 
 exposed, by a reference to the established regulations of 
 
OBJECTIONS. 71 
 
 civil society. Our children are all citizens of the state 
 in which they are born; they are plenary citizens by 
 virtue of their birth, but do they as children enjoy all the 
 rights of citizenship ? No, as infant citizens, the constitu- 
 tion and laws guaranty to them a certain and adequate 
 amount of privilege, such as personal protection, provi- 
 sion for subsistence and education if they are in want, 
 &c. ; when they reach the age of tAventy-one, this amount 
 is greatly enlarged ; they are then authorized to exercise 
 the elective franchise, to make contracts, to hold certain 
 offices, &c. ; but even then'they cannot enter into office 
 until they have been appointed or elected, and also taken 
 certain prescribed oaths ; after they advance a few years 
 more, they become eligible to other and more responsi- 
 ble posts of honor and trust. Thus we perceive that 
 there is a difference in the aggregate of civil rights vouch- 
 safed by the state to citizens of dissimilar ages and quali- 
 fications ; but notwithstanding this relative inequality or 
 limitation of prerogative, which is as necessary for the 
 good of the state collectively, as it is wise in reference 
 to the individuals more immediately concerned, all with- 
 out distinction are universally regarded as citizens. We 
 might add other illustrations, taken from the restrictions 
 and expansions of privilege prevalent in military, or 
 naval, or even social life, but the foregoing is sufficiel^ 
 for our purpose. Now let these remarks be applied to 
 the objection before us : all baptized children are recog- 
 nized members of the church, and as such entitled to cer- 
 tain advantages already specified; (see answer to last 
 objection) ; but it would be preposterous to maintain, that 
 they have, as infant members, a claim to all the privi- 
 leges, which the church in the exercise of its legitimate 
 authority, has accorded only to adult members. When 
 
72 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 they attain to suitable age and capacity for the exercise 
 of additional privileges, when they beconie qualified to 
 "examine themselves and discern the Lord's body," and 
 profess a sincere desire to fly from the wrath to come, 
 accompanied by a corresponding life, then they receive 
 an accession of privilege, — they are confirmed, thereby 
 taking the oath or assuming the pledge of allegiance to 
 their Divine King, and are admitted as guests at his table. 
 If in after life they prove faithful and evince suitable 
 qualifications, their rights are increased; they may at a 
 proper age be elected to office, &c. If on tlie other 
 hand, they backslide and fall into gross error, their rights 
 are curtailed ; if they persevere in open vice they are 
 entirely exscinded from the church, just as citizens of the 
 state, who, when they commit certain criminal actions, 
 are deprived of their freedom by imprisonment, and in 
 aggravated cases, cut off from all their civil rights. 
 
 Seventh Objection. — If children of Christian parents 
 are born members of the church, they have no need of 
 baptism, they belong to the church without it, and it 
 becomes a work of supererogation. 
 
 ^ Answer. — Children of believing Jews were in like 
 manner born members of God's church, and yet he 
 appointed them to be circumcised in ratification of it ; on 
 the same principle and for the same end, he now requires 
 our children to be baptized. If indeed, it were main- 
 tained that baptism was simply instituted as an initiatory 
 rite, and contemplated no other end, the objection in 
 question might not be thought altogether so specious ; but 
 both suppositions are erroneous. The ordinance under 
 consideration is not a constituting, but a setting forth and 
 
OBJECTIONS. 73 
 
 certifying of membership. Moreover, it has other and 
 more important designs ; it is the seal of GocVs everlast- 
 ing covenant, which is a matter of the utmost moment, 
 and hence the objection is also on this account equally 
 void of point and force ; but even on the mistaken 
 hypothesis involved in it, it is a sophism. For by a 
 similar process of reasoning, the necessity of the Lord's 
 supper, and indeed of every duty not in all cases abso- 
 lutely essential to salvation, might be invalidated. For 
 the great condition of justification before God, is faith in 
 Jesus Christ, and if a man believes with all his heart, it 
 might with equal propriety be urged, he Avill inherit eter- 
 nal life without communing. But faith is active in good 
 works and evinced by obedience, and thus ensures a 
 ready and joyful compliance with all other Christian 
 duties. The believer accounts it a high privilege to show 
 forth and strengthen his faith by celebrating the eucharist, 
 and in the exercise of the same faith, he esteems it no 
 less a privilege to proclaim and ratify the membership o f 
 his infant offspring, and seal their title to the covenant 
 of grace by devoting them to the Triune God in bap- 
 tism. 
 
 Eighth Objection. — If infants are members of the 
 church by birth, and are not baptized, they forfeit their 
 membership, and hence, on the Pedobaptist principle, all 
 unbaptized children are excluded from the church of 
 God, and therefore lost. 
 
 Answer. — There is a strange admixture of truth and 
 error in this statement. The major and minor proposi- 
 tions are doubtless correct, but the last branch of the 
 7 
 
74 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 deduction is an egregious blunder. It is true, the chil- 
 dren of Christian parents do forfeit their membersliip if 
 they grow up without baptism ; but is this a hard case ? 
 — if so, it may be easily remedied, for M^e are now speak- 
 ing of children, the neglect of whose parents is volun- 
 tary ; (hoAV far the want of an opportunity to present 
 them in baptism, may operate in changing the relation of 
 unbaptized children, it is not for us now to inquire.) If 
 however, it be still insisted, — that the doctrine is cruel in 
 relation to children, who must be regarded as innocent 
 notwithstanding the remissness of the parents ; then we 
 refer the objector to the God of Israel; — with Him, — 
 not with the humble writer, let the contest be waged, 
 if an impotent worm of the dust can be found sufficiently 
 reckless to enter into conflict with the Lord God of 
 hosts ! — He it Avas that ordained that the uncircumcised 
 child ^'■shoidd he cut off from his people f and if bap- 
 tism has been substituted for circumcision, which can 
 never be successfully gainsayed, then it follows that 
 unbaptized children are " rxit off'' from the visible 
 church, and whoever desires to have an altercation on the 
 question, must submit to have, not feeble man, but the 
 omnipotent Jehovah for his antagonist. 
 
 But here the query arises : what is meant by this ct(t- 
 ting off from God's people? Does it imply exclusion 
 from heaven 1 — God forbid ! — it imports neither more nor 
 less than a shutting out from external church privileges. 
 The individual cut off from the people, — (that is, from 
 the Jewish people who were emphatically God's peo- 
 ple,) had no right to partake of the passover, and of 
 some other religious exercises, but if he died in infancy, 
 would be received into heaven, on the ground of Christ's 
 merits, just as certainly as the unoflending child of a 
 
OBJECTIONS. 75 
 
 heathen. Thus also, if any individual in a Christian 
 land grows up to adult age without sealing the covenant 
 of grace in God's own appointed way, he has no right to 
 celebrate the Lord's supper, nor to perform other acts of 
 membership in any Pedobaptist church, so long as he 
 remains unbaptized; he h s lost his membership; his 
 own voluntary neglect ejects him from God's people. 
 
 The aspect presented by the denomination, called 
 "Friends," (who reject baptism altogether as well as the 
 holy supper,) in this view of our subject, is a peculiar 
 one, for if rigidly carried out in all its extended bearings, 
 it will in a sense unchurch them ; but whatever be the 
 mistakes of men, they do not alter the truth of God. 
 For the orthodox portion of that denomination, we enter- 
 tain high regard; in various respects they are an amiable 
 and exemplary people, and we hope a goodly proportion 
 of tliem are genuine Christians. How far their want of 
 correct apprehensions of baptism, Avhich is the founda- 
 tion of its rejection among them, will tend to extenuate 
 the guilt attaching to its neglect, does not belong to our 
 province to investigate. The new dispensation is con- 
 fessedly more spiritual in its general character than the 
 old ; in some respects a conformity to the spirit of the 
 gospel may apologize for the omission of a rigid con- 
 formity to its letter, more effectually than it would have 
 done under the inexorable requisitions of the law ; but 
 still no human writer is to be held responsible for the 
 ixltimate results of truth, whithersoever it may lead, or 
 whatever want of charity those results may seem to indi- 
 cate. " Let God be true, but every man a liar." 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THIRD ARGUMENT. 
 
 TVe find numerous passages in the Sacred Scrip- 
 tures, lohich cannot be consistently explained witJwut 
 admitting the right of infants to baptism. — As a consid- 
 eration of all those passages would carry us far beyond our 
 prescribed limits, we must be content with a brief refer- 
 ence to a few of them. 
 
 1. "Then were brought unto him little children, that 
 he should put his hands on them, and pray : but the dis- 
 ciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, suffer little chil- 
 dren, and forbid them not, to come unto me ; for of such 
 is the kingdom of heaven. And he laid his hands on 
 them and departed thence."' Observe here, that the 
 children spoken of were ^^ little children;^'' according to 
 Mark x. 16, they were so young that our Saviour "took 
 them up in his arms," and in Luke xviii. 15, they are 
 expressly called " infants."^ They must accordingly 
 have been children not only in temper, docility, &;c., but 
 also and emphatically in age and stature. — Notice next, 
 that our Lord positively affirms respecting them, that, 
 " of such is the kingdom of heaven;'''' that is, of such 
 little children is the kingdom of heaven, — to them it 
 
 ^Matt. xix. 13—16. 
 
 -Tot fi^KpH — very young children, and tliis was probably the reason 
 that the disciples rebuked the parents, thinking them too young to 
 receive any good. 
 
THIRD ARGUMENT. 77 
 
 belongs, or theirs this kingdom is. "It is well known," 
 says Professor Schmucker, " to those acquainted with 
 the phraseology of the New Testament, that the expres- 
 sions 'kingdom of God' and 'kingdom of heaven' are 
 familiarly used to designate the church of God under the 
 New Testament economy. Thus, John the Baptist 
 preached, saying, Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven 
 is at hand. It will not be supposed that heaven was lit- 
 erally descending to the earth and had almost arrived 
 amongst us; but the Saviour evidently meant, that the 
 time for remodeling his church into its New Testament 
 form was at hand." Robert Hall, a distinguished and 
 learned Baptist minister, explains this phrase in the same 
 manner, his words are: "The kingdom of God, a phrase 
 which is constantly employed in Scripture, to denote 
 that state of things which is placed under the avowed 
 administration of the 3Iessiah.'"^ — K then the expres- 
 sion, "kingdom of heaven," signifies the visible church 
 of God, as distinguished both from the heathen world 
 and tlie old economy, and this church, as Christ declares, 
 is composed in part of " little children," or embraces 
 them as members, then of course they are entitled to bap- 
 tism as the sign of their membership. 
 
 In order to escape the force of this argument, Anti- 
 pedobaptists maintain, that the words, "of such," desig- 
 nate not little children, but adults who resemble them in 
 spirit. But why, in this event, did Christ wish little 
 children to be brought to him ? Could he not have taught 
 without their presence, that adults of a child-like dispo- 
 sition were the subjects of his kingdom? According to 
 this exposition our Lord's language, paraphrased, would 
 be to tills efi'ect: Suffer little children to come unto me, 
 
 •See Hall's Works, vol. 1. p. 372. 
 
 17* 
 
'78 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 for my kingdom belongs not to them, but only to adult 
 persons who resemble them in spirit. — It would not have 
 been more preposterous for him to say: suffer doves and 
 lambs to come unto me, for my kingdom consists not of 
 them but of adults of clove-like and lamb-like temper. 
 Such absurdity is its own refutation. The inconsistency 
 of this gloss will be made still more apparent, by refer- 
 ring to parallel language in other parts of Scripture. 
 "Blessed," says our Lord, "are the meek: for they 
 shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which are per- 
 secuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the king- 
 dom of heaven.'" The form of expression here is pre- 
 cisely the same in the Greek, as that under consideration. 
 We might therefore with equal propriety expound these 
 texts thus : the kingdom of heaven does not belong to 
 those who are " poor in spirit," but only those who 
 resemble them ; it does not belong to those who are 
 " persecuted for righteousness' sake," but only those 
 who are like them in temper. Who does not see the 
 folly and Avickedness of thus trifling with inspired truth? 
 But we are sometimes told that the expression, "king- 
 dom of heaven," implies the kingdom of glory, or a 
 heavenly state ; — suppose it does, — our argument is only 
 strengthened by this construction, for if our little chil- 
 dren belong to the kingdom of glory, much more do they 
 belong to God's kingdom on earth; and if so, why not 
 administer to them the appointed seal of that interesting 
 relation? If they have the thing signified, which is mem 
 bership in the church, why withhold the sign of it, which 
 is baptism ? — After all, it will perhaps be asserted, that 
 those children were brought, not that Christ should bap- 
 tize them, but heal them of diseases. We are, however 
 
 'Matt. v. 3—10. 
 
THIRD ARGUMENT. 79 
 
 not left to conjecture Avhat was the motive, for we are 
 plainly" told, that it was that our Lord might bestow his 
 blessing upon them ; accordingly the sacred Avriter in- 
 forms us, that " he put his hands upon them and blessed 
 them." Whether he baptized them or not, is a matter 
 perfectly immaterial to the validity of our argument. It 
 is sufficient for our purpose to know, that little children 
 belong to God's church and therefore have a right to its 
 privileges. 
 
 2. "Then Peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized, 
 every one of you. * * * For the promise is unto 
 you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off,'" 
 &.C. It is worthy of notice that the apostle here uses 
 the definite article the, — not a but " the promise," that 
 is, the promise of God to Abraham, " to be a God unto 
 thee and unto thy seed after thee,^'' is equally " unto 
 you and to your children.'" Now in order to decide 
 what Peter meant by the expression, "your children," 
 it is only necessary to ascertain the import of the words 
 " thy seed" in the promise referred to. It is universally 
 admitted and has never been denied, that the latter com- 
 prises small children " eight days old," and hence it fol- 
 lows Avith all the clearness and certainty of a mathemati- 
 cal demonstration, that the former embraces the same 
 description of individuals. Every one knows that the 
 word seed means children ; and that children means 
 seed ; and that they are precisely the same. The pro- 
 mise then, in which God engages to be our God and to 
 constitute us his people, extends equally to our children, 
 and of course gives them as well as us, a right to the 
 privileges of his people. And if they have a right to 
 tliose privileges, what further argument need we to show 
 
 'Acts ii. 38—39. 
 
80 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 that they are entitled to the outward token and seal of 
 those privileges ? 
 
 It will avail nothing here to inform us, that T-exva, chil- 
 dren, means posterity ; — suppose it does, — s-^spa'.*, seed, 
 ako means poHterity, but both include our earliest as 
 well as our latent posterity, our youngest children as 
 well as our most distant successors. Admitting that the 
 word children does not always signify infants ; the ques- 
 tion is whether it can mean any thing else but infants in 
 this passage ? Peter speaks to all who were capable of 
 understanding him, 'I'hese he calls you. Now, whom 
 can he possibly mean by the children of these hearers 
 but the infant offspring which they either had or might 
 have ? And if the promise to the adults be a reason for 
 submitting U) be baptized, it must also be a reason for 
 baptizing the children ; since the promise is said to be 
 equally to both ; and this is made the foundation of their 
 baptism. Our Baptist brethren would make Peter a 
 weak rea-soner indeed. According to them he says to 
 h'lH audience, " The promise is to you," therefore be 
 ye baptized : the promise is also to your little ones* 
 therefore let them not be baptized ? — Spirit of party ! 
 what havoc hast thou made of the Holy Scriptures ! 
 But that our tenderest offspring are included is even 
 evident from the grammatical construction ; for the apos- 
 tle says : the promise is to you, and your children, not 
 is to you, and vrill be to your children when they reach 
 manhood ; but is even now to you parents and your 
 little ones, &,c. Eilv)ards, (;ornmcnting on this pas- 
 sage, remarks : " We should more certainly come at 
 the truth, if instead of idly criticising, we could fancy 
 ourselves Jews, and in the habit of circumcising iil- 
 fanUJ, and receiving them into the church; and then 
 
THIRD AROrMF.NT. SI 
 
 icoulil wo imniiiuo ono of our own nation and rrlii^ion to 
 address us in the very huiguagc ol" Poior. in the text, 
 ' tJie promise is to you aitd to your children :' Un us 
 ask ourselves whether we eoukl ever suppose him to 
 mean aduU posterity only !"' 
 
 3. " The unhelievino- hushand is sanetitied hy tlie 
 "wife, and the unbelieviuo- wite is sanetitied hy the l\us- 
 bai\d ; else were your ehihlren unelean ; but now are 
 tJiey holy."" The apostle is speakiuij ol" a mixed nuir- 
 riage, in whieh one of the parties is a heathen and the 
 oUier a professing Christian. In what light are the otV- 
 spring of this eonneetion to he regardeil ; — as hohj or as 
 t(nclciv). that is. as members oi' the ehureh or as heathen ? 
 He deeides that they are members ; tor says he, the un- 
 believing husbaiul is sanetitied by the believing wife, 
 ami vice versa, that is, the one is so purilied by means 
 of his relaiion to ilie other, that their mutual otVspring 
 are not KnclcuiK — not heathen — but Iioli/. — that is, sepa- 
 rated from the gentile world and in eovetiant with (lod, 
 or nuMubers ol' that ehureh w'uh whieh ilie believing 
 parent is. in virtue of his protession. united, lint if both 
 parents were imbelievers or pagans, then their ehihlren 
 would be imchut)!. that is. they eould not be regarded as 
 inehided in the eovenant of grace, and belonging to the 
 visible ehureh of Cod. It will be noticed, that '' holi/" 
 and •' unclean" are here converse terms. 
 
 After this exposition, we iuhhI scarcely remind the in- 
 telligent ivailer, that the worils sanctijied and //()/// in the 
 above text, are eniplovt\l. not in a spiritual, but in ;ui 
 eccldtiastica/ sense, ami ilesignate something set apart 
 to a holy or sacreil tise, that is. separated from a eom- 
 mon or profaiu\ to a holy purpose. Thus, the .Tews 
 
 'Ethvanls on l>ai>lisin. -1 Cor. vii. It. 
 
82 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 were called a " holy people," the " people of God," 
 &c., not because they were all or even a majority of them 
 spiritually holy, and really united in heart to God, but 
 because they were separated from the rest of the world 
 by God's covenant with them, and constituted his pro- 
 fessing people. In the same sense the Christian Avorld 
 may be regarded as holy, or as GocVs people, because 
 severed from the heathen, and professing his name. So 
 the Lord's day is holy, being set apart from a common 
 to a religious use ; so the vessels of the temple, the vest- 
 ments of the high-priest, &c,, were holy. To maintain 
 on the strength of this passage, that a very pious luis- 
 band or wife is always instrumental in conferring on an 
 unbelieving partner, spiritual purity or sanctification of 
 heart ; or that every child born of parents of whom one 
 is a believer, will necessarily become the subject of gos- 
 pel holiness ; would be to assert that which history and 
 experience but too often and too sadly contradict. The 
 opinion that this text decides a question of legitimacy 
 respecting children born from mixed marriages, and that 
 agreeably to this decision, the offspring of parents, one 
 of whom is pious, are no longer bastards, but to be con- 
 sidered as begotten in lawful Avedlock ; is such a wild 
 and far-fetched fancy, that we cannot ^stop to notice it, 
 except with this single remark, that the word " holy" 
 is no where in the Bible applied to legitimacy of birth. 
 And as to the idea that piety in one party is necessary to 
 render a marriage contract valid ; it is too ridiculous to 
 deserve confutation. 
 
 Should it be contended that our exposition of this 
 passage proves too much for our purpose, since if the 
 children are " holy," or members of the church because 
 either of the parents is a believer, then also the belief of 
 
THIRD ARGUMENT. 83 
 
 one parent makes the other " holy" or a member of the 
 church, even while he or she still remains a heathen, 
 ("unclean,") because it is plainly said, that "the unbe- 
 lieving husband is sanctified by the wife," and vice 
 versa; — our reply is, that however ingenious this objec- 
 tion is, it has no foundation in truth. Its fallacy lies in 
 the idea that the sanciification of the unbelieving hus- 
 band (by his alliance with a believing wife) is in every 
 respect precisely the same with the holiness, which chil- 
 dren derive from their descent from a believing parent. 
 But this supposition is altogether gratuitous. We indeed 
 readily grant, that the believing wife does, in some sense, 
 sanctify the unbelieving husband, but by no means to an 
 extent sufficient to confer upon him the right of church- 
 membership ; for this would be a gross violation of the 
 covenant, and could therefore never have been intended 
 by the apostle. But the membership of infants, on ac- 
 count of the faith of any one of the parents, would be 
 no such violation, but in perfect accordance with the 
 covenant, and is therefore not only admissible, but an 
 absolute corollary. The language of the passage itself 
 suggests this explanation; for the sanctification spoken 
 of, is imputed to the unbelieving parent, evidently not on 
 his own account, but for the sake of the offspring, or in 
 other words, not with the view to constitute him a mem- 
 ber, but to transmit membership to the children of a 
 believing parent. This construction, as already inti- 
 mated, is perfectly consistent with the original terms of 
 the covenant. According to those terms, church-mem- 
 bership was the invariable birthright of the children of 
 God's people, but in no event was it based upon the mere 
 fact of intermarriage with that people ; nay more, adults 
 conld not under any circumstances become members 
 without a profession of their faith. Who then must not 
 
8^ INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 perceive, that the " sanctificalion of the unbelieving by 
 the believing parent, and the external or ecclesiastical 
 "holiness" of the children, conferred by the same cause, 
 are two distinct things, and that, to understand them as 
 implying the same, would involve a contravention of the 
 stipulations of the covenant? 
 
 " The passage thus explained," says an able writer, 
 " establishes the church-membership of infants in another 
 form. For it assumes the principle that when both pa- 
 rents are reputed believers ; their children belong to the 
 church of God as a matter of course. The Avhole dif- 
 ficulty proposed by the Corinthians to Paul, grows out 
 of this principle. Had he taught, or they understood, 
 that no children, be their parents believers or unbelievers, 
 are to be accounted members of the church, the difficulty 
 could not have existed. For if the faith of both parents 
 could not confer upon a child the privilege of member- 
 ship, the faith of only one of them certainly could not. 
 The point was decided. It would have been mere im- 
 pertinence to teaze the apostle with queries which carried 
 their own answer along with them. But on the suppo- 
 sition that when both parents were members, their chil- 
 dren, also, were members ; the difficulty is very natural 
 and serious. ' I see,' would a Corinthian convert exclaim, 
 ' I see the children of my Christian neighbors, owned 
 as members of the church of God ; and I see the children 
 of others, who are unbelievers, rejected with themselves. 
 I believe in Christ myself; but my husband, my Avife, 
 believes not. What is to become of my children? Are 
 they to be admitted with myself? or are they to be cast 
 off with my partner ?' 
 
 " ' Let not your heart be troubled,' replies the apostle: 
 « God reckons them to the believing, not to the unbe- 
 lieving, parent. It is enough that they are yours. The 
 
THIRD ARGUMENT. 85 
 
 infidelity of your partner shall never frustrate their inte- 
 rest in the covenant of your God. They are ' holy' 
 because you are so. 
 
 " This decision put the subject at rest. And it lets 
 us know that one of the reasons, if not the chief rea- 
 son of the doubt, whether a married person should con- 
 tinue, after conversion, in the conjugal society of an infi- 
 del partner, arose from a fear lest such continuance should 
 exclude the children from the church of God. Other- 
 wise it is hard to comprehend why the apostle should 
 dissuade them from separating, by such an argument as 
 he has employed in the text. And it is utterly incon- 
 ceivable how such a doubt could have entered their minds, 
 had not the membership of infants, born of believing 
 parents, been undisputed, and esteemed a high privilege ; 
 so high a privilege, as that the apprehension of losing it 
 made conscientious parents at a stand whether they ought 
 not rather to break the ties of wedlock, by withdrawing 
 from an unbelieving husband or wife. Thus, the origin 
 of this difiiculty on the one hand, and the solution of it, 
 on the other, concur in establishing our doctrine, that, by 
 the appointment of God himself, the infants of believing 
 parents are born members of his church.''^^ 
 
 'Essays on the Church of God, by Dr. J. M. Mason. Christiaii's 
 Magazine, ii. 49, 50. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 FOURTH ARGTJMENT. 
 
 Tlie ancient practice of family baptism, which was 
 continued in the apostolic age affords very strong pre- 
 sumptive evidence on this subject. 
 
 That this practice prevailed under the Old Testament 
 economy, that is, that gentile parents when they re- 
 nounced idolatiy and professed the true religion, were 
 with all the members of their families, including the 
 youngest children, baptized and circumcised in token of 
 their ablution from heathenism and their title to the bless- 
 ings of the Abrahamic covenant, is a historical fact already 
 sufficiently proved.' The children were uniformly em- 
 braced in this solemn transaction, on the profession of faith 
 made by their parents. This interesting practice (with 
 the exception of circumcision) was not set aside, but con- 
 tinued in the apostolic age. We have no doubt that hun- 
 dreds of families, the heads of which were converted by 
 the preaching of the gospel, were baptized, embracing 
 thousands of infants. The very language in which the 
 baptism of families is mentioned in the New Testament, 
 affords proof that such instances were of frequent occur- 
 rence, and constituted a standing practice. Witness, for 
 example, the case of Lydia: "And when she was bap- 
 tized, and her household, she besought us," &c. It is 
 obvious to the plainest reader, that the baptism of "her 
 household," is recorded not as an uncommon event, but as 
 
 'See p. 20 sqq. 
 
FOURTH ARGUMENT 87 
 
 a natural and very ordinary one, following her own profes- 
 sion of faith as a matter of course. The language of 
 Clemens Alexandrinus, A. D. 190, is in perfect accord- 
 ance with this fact: "The doctrine of the Master of 
 Christianity did not remain confined to Judea, only, as 
 the philosophy of the Greeks was confined to Greece; 
 but it spread itself over the whole world converting 
 equally Greek and barbarian, in every nation and vil- 
 lage, and in all cities entire families (literally whole 
 households) and separate individuals.'" 
 
 Most writers on this subject, refer only to three cases 
 of family baptism, recorded in the New Testament; viz. 
 those of Lydia, the jailor and Stephanas. But an atten- 
 tive examination will justify the assertion, that there were 
 many more. The church at Philippi, though evidently 
 small, certainly furnishes two cases, that of Lydia and 
 that of the jailor ;2 how many others were baptized as 
 families, we cannot say. The church at Corinth also 
 affords two baptized families, that of Crispus and that of 
 Stephanas ;=» besides a number of others, plainly glanced 
 at but not expressly mentioned. The family of Crispus 
 is not positively declared to have been baptized, but its 
 baptism will no doubt be readily conceded, being recorded 
 as a believing family ; and to have left this believing family 
 nnbaptized, would, on the one hand, have been a°strange 
 and unaccountable neglect on the part of the apostles to 
 fulfil their divine commission, (which involved the duty 
 of baptizing all who should believe,) while on the other 
 hand, it would cut up by the very roots the baptism of 
 believing adults no less than that of infants. We wil- 
 
 '0;x(jy; oxs?, km tJix. acjtfrov.— Clem. Alex. Strom, lib. vi. p. 827. 
 *Acts. xvi. 15, and xvi. 33. 
 'Acts, xviii. 8, and 1 Cor. i. 16. 
 
88 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 lingly leave our Baptist brethren to decide according to 
 their own judgment; if they maintain that "Crispus 
 with all his house," though said to be a "believing fam- 
 ily," were not baptized, they virtually impute to the 
 apostles a most flagrant disregard of the plainest duty, 
 and uproot their own favorite scheme; but if they say 
 they were baptized, then they admit inferentially what is 
 not expressly on record, and vastly strengthen the pre- 
 sumption in favor of infant baptism, as will presently be 
 shown. They can choose whichever horn of the dilem- 
 ma they please. 
 
 But if they grant the baptism of the family of Cris- 
 pus, because we find it reported as believing, then en- 
 sues another inference no less certain and still more fatal 
 to the Baptist cause, namely, we must admit the same of 
 all other families which we find marked as Christian, 
 but not described as baptized. Such were the families 
 of Onesiphorus,' Aristobulus,^ Narcissus,^ Aquila and 
 Priscilla,^ Nymphas," and Philemon.* It is true that in 
 the case of Aristobulus and that of Narcissus, the Avord 
 oiicos, family, does not occur, yet the phrase evidently 
 implies family, and all translators have so rendered it.* 
 In order to present this subject more satisfactorily to our 
 readers, we shall lay before them a tabular view of it. 
 
 12 Tim. i. 16—18, and iv. 19. "Rom. xvi. 10—11. 
 
 'Rom. xvi. 3—5. "Col. iv. 15. ^^Phil. i. 2. 
 
 "It is worthy of remark, that the apostle does not greet Aristobu- 
 lus and Narcissus, but only those of their households or families — 
 from which Clarke infers, that either they were dead or were not 
 converted to Christianity, and hence he limits his salutations to 
 their families. 
 
FOrRTH ARGUMENT. 89 
 
 CHRISTIAN FAMILIES MENTIONED IN THE SACRED 
 WRITINGS. 
 
 I. Families expressly stated to have been baptized: 
 
 1. That of Cornelius, Acts x. 1 — 48, and xi. 14. 
 
 2. Lydia, Acts xvi. 15. 
 
 3. the jailor, Acts xvi. 33. 
 
 4. Stephanas, 1 Cor. i. 16. 
 
 II. Families not expressly stated to have been bap- 
 tized :' 
 
 5. That of Aquila and Priscilla, Rom. xvi. 3 — 5. 
 
 6. Nymphas, Col. iv. 15. 
 
 7. Philemon, Phil. i. 2. 
 
 8. Crispus, Acts xviii. 8. 
 
 9. Onesiphorus, 2 Tim. i. 16 — 18, and iv. 19. 
 
 III. Families not expressly represented as families 
 nor as having received baptism. 
 
 10. That of Aristobiilus, Rom. xvi. 10 — 11. 
 
 11. Narcissus, ibid. 
 
 Now then, we have fairly made out no less than 
 eleven believing families ; four of them explicitly af- 
 firmed to have been baptized ; five spoken of in the 
 capacity of families, and as having embraced the gospel ; 
 and the remaining tivo also alluded to as believing fami- 
 lies, but not literally so represented. The last seven 
 either received baptism or they did not ; if not, the apos- 
 tles, as already intimated, stand chargeable with a palpa- 
 
 'We might liave increased this number by adding the family of the 
 nobleman at Capernaum, see Jolin iv. 53 ; but as Christian baptism 
 was not then appointed, we have omitted it, though no doubt he and 
 all his family received baptism as soon as it was instituted. 
 
90 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 ble dereliction of official duty, in not administering it to 
 them, and "believer's baptism," so called, as far as these 
 examples go, is torn to shreds and cast to the winds. 
 But if they did receive baptism, of which in our opinion 
 there cannot be the shadoAV of a doubt, then let us give 
 to this argument just as much weight as it deserves. 
 
 Have we eleven instances of the administration of the 
 Lord's supper ? — not a fourth of that number. Have we 
 eleven instances of the change of the Jewish Sabbath to 
 the Lord's day ? — not a fifth of that number. In fact, 
 there is not a single doctrine, principle or practice, de- 
 rived from the example of the apostles, which can be 
 supported by a more numerous series of clear and de- 
 cided precedents. How then can our Baptist neighbors, 
 in the face of all these examples, deny infant baptism ? 
 Is there any other case, besides this, in which they would 
 take eleven families promiscuously and deny the exist- 
 ence of young children in them ? Take eleven families 
 indiscriminately in Charles street, or any other street in 
 Baltimore : — take eleven pews in any house of worship, 
 containing eleven families : — take eleven family-groups 
 at a zoological exhibition or a public concert, and in 
 every instance they will afford more than one child. 
 The estimated average of children in each family, may 
 be fairly set down at six ; these six in each one of those 
 families, amount to sixty-six ; now it is more than ten 
 hundred thousand times to one, that among sixty-six 
 children, there will be at least one infant. But absolute 
 infancy is not necessary to make out our point ;' sup- 
 pose children of two or three years old, and the chances 
 will be many millions to one that some infants were 
 
 'The Greek church extends baptismal infancy to three years or to 
 four ; the Romish church to seven years. 
 
FOURTH ARGUMENT. 91 
 
 found among the sixty-six children belonging to eleven 
 families. Or put the question in another form : suppose 
 eleven families, each containing six children, — how many 
 young children would probably be found among them ? 
 
 In order to invest this argument with still more force, 
 we must be permitted to indulge in a criticism on the 
 meaning of the word fa7nili/. The Greek term "moc, cor- 
 responds precisely with the word house in English ; 
 both are variously used to express the same ideas. Our 
 object now, is not to analyze all the numerous applica- 
 tions of this term, (^'^^sr,) but merely to ascertain its im- 
 port in reference to family baptism. House or oikos 
 then, signifies, metaphorically, ^family living contempo- 
 raneously and mostly under the same roof.' With the 
 addition of a syllable and a change of the termination to 
 the feminine gender, o«<a, it also changes its application, 
 and comprehends attendants on a family, servants, &c.* 
 While the former therefore answers to the word house 
 ov family, the latter conveys the idea of \\o\xs,ehold, — in- 
 cluding all that hold to the house. Strictly speaking, 
 there is not a single instance on inspired record of the 
 baptism of an entire howsehold, as such, though individ- 
 uals comprising it may have been baptized as individuals. 
 We are therefore narrowed down in this investigation to 
 the Greek term owe?, in the sense of family, and with 
 
 'Scripture regularly employs this term (family) to import the 
 nearest possible degree of kindred ; — by consanguinity generally ; 
 yet not excluding marriage, &c. ; and by descent generally, but we 
 do not know a passage in which it includes servants, or the house- 
 
 HOLD. 
 
 ^ Marriage indeed, or adoption, might engraft an mdividual of the 
 AowseiiOLD into the familij ; but even that is not according to the 
 appointment of nature, but is an unexpected incident. 
 
92 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 this word it perfectly corresponds, and should always 
 have been so rendered when used in relation to family 
 baptism. Such a translation would have prevented all 
 error on the subject of baptism. There can, correctly 
 speaking, be no family Avithout children. A man and 
 his wife do not constitute a family, any more than a sin- 
 gle old gentleman who dwells under the same roof with 
 his maiden sister. When a woman is in a state of gravi- 
 dation, she is said to be " in a family -way.,'''' and when 
 she gives birth to her child, she has a family. This criti- 
 cism applies exactly to the Greek word omo^. No where 
 in the New Testament, does it mean a married pair with- 
 out children, (of course we here allude to the term in its 
 metaphorical sense, as applying to persons, and not a 
 place of residence,) but in several instances it imports 
 children distinct from their parents. For example, the 
 apostle salutes the families of Onesiphonis, of Aristobu- 
 lus, and of Narcissus, but not the heads of these fami- 
 lies ; and he further tells us that he baptized the family 
 of Stephanas, but he did not baptize Stephanas himself. 
 Here then we find the word owoc (house or family) em- 
 ployed to denote the children even to the exclusion of 
 the parents. Again, Noah was saved with his family 
 by means of the ark. The family saved, comprehended 
 Noah with his wife, and his three sons with their wives. 
 Now the writer to the Hebrews, states that Noah " pre- 
 pared an ark to the saving of his (cwoc) house'" or family. 
 This case points out to us with sufficient plainness the 
 meaning of house or family. 
 
 But as in the example just cited, the children com- 
 posing the family, were all adults ; we proceed to show 
 that this word also denotes small children. 
 
 >Heb. xi. 7. 
 
FOURTH ARGUMENT. 93 
 
 " The apostle, describing the qualifications for a Chris- 
 tian bishop,* insists that he should be ' one who ruletii 
 well HIS own yamiVy, having his chihlren in subjection 
 with all gravity — (for if any man know not how to rule 
 his own family, how shall he take care of the church of 
 God?') Here it is evident, the children are ihe family ; 
 and that they are in a state of non-age, pupilage, and 
 youth, such as requires parental ruling and guiding. 
 
 " Continuing our perusal of the same chapter, we find a 
 precept which directs a deacon to 'be the husband of 
 one wife, ruling well his children, even his own fam- 
 ily'" — his nearest of kin — his issue. Lest this should 
 admit the possibility of equivocation, the apostle expressly 
 marks the family as his own. Nothing can be more a 
 man's oivn than his children ; and the force of the Greek 
 term warrants any degree of strength that can be annexed 
 to it : it therefore, in both these places and connections, 
 fixes the parties designed by it, (equally in reference to 
 the bishop, as to the deacon) to natural issue, i. e. a 
 family. Nor can these children be adults, for the same 
 reasons why the bishop's children could not be adults. 
 
 "But, these children being under the rule of their father, 
 though young, are someivhat advanced in life. In proof 
 that the term family imports babes and sucklings, con- 
 sult the advice of the apostle to the young women, in a 
 following chapter. ' I would have the young widows 
 to^l. marry — 2. bear children — 3. guide their ofTspring ; 
 literally, despotise their family.''^ Most certainly this 
 order of the words is definite; 'marriage, — child-bear- 
 ing,— child-f/cs^^o^/sing".' This third term must of neces- 
 sity mark that guidance, that care of, that assiduity con- 
 cerning infant children, which mothers feel, with the 
 
 '1 Tim. iii. 2. ''I Tim. iii. 12. n Tim. v. 14. 
 
94 INFANT BAPTISM.- 
 
 most lively anxiety. Who interferes with a mother's 
 solicitude for her infant? — the father may sympathize 
 with it when indisposed ; he may express his fondness 
 in kisses, when it climbs his knee; but, it is the mother 
 who must despotise it, that is, direct all its motions, and 
 watch all its ways, &c. This is the appointment of 
 nature ; or rather of God in his providence. They 
 could not be foster-children to which the apostle refers ; 
 for he speaks of child-bearing, — bearing children of their 
 own body, immediately before : nor could they be adults, 
 as is evident to the humblest capacity, for then, neither 
 couW their mother despotise them; nor could she be 
 young, if her children were of mature age. Observe, 
 also, the change of term: the father (bishop or deacon) 
 is to rule his family : the mother must despotise her ofi- 
 spring, her infant, with strict, unremitted, indefatigable 
 — in one word, with maternal solicitude. Evidently, the 
 infant familj^ is of necessity attached to their mother; 
 .and equally evidently, the mother is attached to the in- 
 fant family. 
 
 "I demand therefore valid reasons why ihQ family 
 attached to their mother, Lydia,' was not a young family? 
 for it is a contravention of nature to assume, without evi- 
 dence, that it was adult." 
 
 In addition to all this, the Editor of Calmet offers no 
 less than fifty examples in proof of the fact, that cwcf 
 (house) when used in application to persons, denotes a 
 family of children, including children of all ages, and 
 assures us that as many as three hundred instances have 
 been examined, and have proved perfectly satisfactory.' 
 
 With the view to a more satisfactory illustration of the 
 preceding remarks, we shall present to our readers the 
 
 'See Ed. of Cal. p. 155. 
 
FOURTH ARGUMENT. 9'5 
 
 outlines of a house, as such buildings are commonly con- 
 structed in Greece ; and as we have every reason to 
 believe, they were generally constructed in ancient ages. 
 Certainly we do not mean to infer, that every house cor- 
 responds to this plan, but the draft will enable us to 
 form a tolerable conception of such an establishment. 
 
 t 
 
 CQ 
 
 Garden or grounds 
 
 • 
 
 o 
 
 p" 
 o 
 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 
 .2 
 "o 
 
 TO 
 QJ 
 m 
 
 ;=! 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 OIKOS 
 FAMILY 
 
 
 Court. 
 
 J3- 
 O 
 
 m 
 fo 
 
 CO 
 
 S- 
 S" 
 
 p" 
 3 
 m 
 
 Court. 
 
 
 Door. 
 
 
 OIKIA. 
 
 
 OIKIA 
 
 Entrance or ffate. 
 
 The first thing to be noticed in this figure is, the sepa- 
 ration of the out-houses from the principal dwelling. It 
 is plain that the house does not include the grounds and 
 adjacent tenements ; the house might be built up or 
 pulled down, enlarged or diminislied, without affecting 
 the appendant buildings in the least. But the out-houses 
 may be said, without any force on language, to include 
 the house; — and certainly the whole may be expressed 
 by one comprehensive term, viz : establishment, resi- 
 dence, premises, <fcc. The house, omoc, does not com- 
 prehend the whole establishment ; but the establishment, 
 OIKIA, includes the house. Thus, to baptize the whole 
 house, meant to administer the ordinance to all who 
 
96 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 dwelt in the inner or centre edifice, whether young or 
 old ; and to preach the gospel to the household, or o«w, 
 implied its being declared to servants, retainers, &c.; in a 
 word, to all who belonged to the establishment, including 
 the family proper. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO THIS ARGUMENT. 
 
 First Objection. — "With respect to the jailor it is 
 said, that the apostles spake the word of the Lord " to 
 all that were in his house," and that "he rejoiced, 
 believing in God with his house." Now, says the object- 
 or, as the word of the Lord cannot be spoken to chil- 
 dren, and as they cannot rejoice and believe in God, it 
 follows that no children belonged to his house. 
 
 Answer. — This inference is by no means justified by 
 the circumstances of the case. From all that we can 
 learn, the jailor was in the prime of life. We are 
 informed that "he drew his sword and would have killed 
 himself," which is not an act characteristic of age but of 
 a fervid mind and a hasty temper. Again, "he called for 
 lights and sprang in ;"' which in the original expresses 
 the vigorous action of a strong and robust body, — the 
 vehement burst of an individual full of strength. More- 
 over, it is said, " he was baptized and all his, straight- 
 way, that is, he and his numerous family.* It is there- 
 fore at least probable that his family contained young 
 children. But there is another circumstance which ren- 
 
 -The Editor of Calmet has abundantly estabUshed the fact, that 
 the words, all and whole, in Scripture, and especially when prefixed 
 to families, import many and numerous. He cites some dozen or 
 more cases in support of tliis truth. See p. 113 — 114. 
 9 
 
98 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 ders it in our view certain. When the apostle says, 
 V. 31, " thou shalt be saved and thy house," he used the 
 word, owo?, which in this case means only children, or 
 children in connection with their parents ; but when the 
 individuals to whom the word of the Lord was preached, 
 are included, bikoc is dropped and oma. substituted, signify- 
 ing household, including servants, prisoners, &c.; and 
 finally, when the fact of baptism is mentioned it is sim- 
 ply said, "he was baptized and all his." 
 
 Now let any unprejudiced reader observe the nice dis- 
 crimination of the sacred penman, in varying and adapt- 
 ing his language, according to the precise idea he Avished 
 to convey, — using the word house or family at one 
 time, — to denote the jailor and his children, and the term 
 household at another — to designate servants, prisoners, 
 &c., and then let him impartially decide whether no chil- 
 dren were baptized ? — The only apparent difficulty that 
 remains, is contained in the assertion that, " he and all 
 his family rejoiced ;" but may there not be infants in a 
 family that rejoices, — nay, may not young children them- 
 selves of four or five years of age rejoice? Do we not 
 read: " Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings, thou 
 hast perfected praise V — " Allow," says D. Isaac, " that 
 the children were baptized on the ground of their 
 father'' s faith, and all the mystery and difficulty of the 
 passage vanish at once." . 
 
 Second Objection. — In reference to the baptism of 
 Lydia and her family, it is objected, that it could have 
 embraced no children, because it consisted of those bre- 
 thren spoken of in the 40th v. of Acts xvi. who were 
 comforted by Paul and Silas. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 99 
 
 As the case of Lydia affords one of the strongest exhi- 
 bitions of the argument derived from family baptism, so 
 the objection to it, is one of the weakest. It is written :^ 
 " and when she was baptized and her household ;"* and 
 the objection is based on v. 40, "and they (Paul and 
 Silas) entered into the house of Lydia, and when they 
 had seen the brethren, they comforted them." — But this 
 verse does not so much as intimate that "the brethren" 
 whom the apostles comforted, Avere Lydia's family, and 
 tlie attempt to induce this belief, is not only unwarranted 
 by the fair construction of the passage, but a liberal mind 
 must find some difficulty in suppressing indignation at 
 witnessing such a shallow subterfuge in order to elude 
 the result of fair and conclusive investigation. Cer- 
 tainly, Lydia had a family, for it is expressly so stated in 
 the text ; it is scarcely less certain that her family em- 
 braced children, because the Greek word implying that 
 idea, is used to designate her family ; and, as from all 
 tliat we can learn, she had not yet passed the meridian of 
 life, some of her children must have been in an infantile 
 state.^ But there is a still stronger circumstance con- 
 nected with the baptism of her family. " In all the other 
 instances in which adults are mentioned as having been 
 baptized along with the head of the family, they are 
 mentioned as ' hearing,' and ' believing,' or in some terms 
 which amount to this. Cornelius had called together 
 * his kinsmen and near friends ;' and while Peter spoke, 
 
 'Acts xvi. 15. 
 
 -The Greek word is o/x;?, and should have been rendered house or 
 family, not household. 
 
 "^It is a remarkable fact, that the very best of all versions, namely, 
 the Syriac, which was probably of the first century, — reads, " and 
 when she (Lydia) was baptized with her children," &.c. The 
 Coptic version gives the same reading. 
 
100 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 ' the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the ivord,'' 
 ' and he commanded them to be baptized.' So the adults 
 in the house of the jailor at Philippi, were persons to 
 whom 'the word of the Lord was spoken;' and although 
 nothing is said of the faith of any but the jailor himself, — 
 for the words are more properly rendered, ' and he believ- 
 ing in God, rejoiced with all his house,' — yet is the joy 
 which appears to have been felt by the adult part of his 
 house, as well as by himself, to be attributed to their 
 faith. Now, as it does not appear that the apostles, 
 although they baptized infant children, baptized unbeliev- 
 ing adult servants because their masters or mistresses 
 believed, and yet the house of Lydia were baptized along 
 with herself, when no mention at all is made of the 
 Lord ' opening the heart' of the adult domestics, nor of 
 their believing ; the fair inference is, that ' the house' of 
 Lydia means her children only, and that being of imma- 
 ture years, they were baptized wjth their mother accord- 
 ing to the common custom of the Jews, to baptize the 
 children of proselyted gentiles along with their parents, 
 from which practice Christian baptism appears to have 
 been taken.'" 
 
 The various suppositions about Lydia's household 
 meaning " her partners in her mercantile operations ;" 
 or " her journeyman dyers," as she was " a seller of 
 purple;" or "her travelling companions, as she is said 
 to have resided at Thyatira and been only on a visit to 
 Philippi,"^ et id genus omne, are such a tissue of 
 wretched fictions and pitiful shifts to evade the omnipo- 
 
 *See Watson. 
 
 ''It is not true that she resided at Thyatira, and was only on an 
 expedition of traffic at Phihppi. The facts of the case are these : 
 she was a native of Thyatira, and was now permanently settled at 
 Philippi. See Editor of Calmet, &c. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 101 
 
 tent power of truth, that we cannot stop to expose them. 
 They afford melancholy proofs that some men are so 
 bent upon cutting off infants from the church of CtOcI, 
 that they will rather betake themselves to empty dreams 
 and airy nothing than yield to arguments founded on 
 stubborn facts. " They will suppose," says the Rev. 
 Mr. Slicer, " that even partners in business, with Lydia, 
 or 'journeyman dyers,'' were baptized, and constituted 
 ' brethren,' although there is no intimation that she had 
 so much as one partner or one journeyman ; and if she 
 had, (which we think very unlikely,) then they were 
 baptized and made brethren, without grace ; for the pas- 
 sage makes no mention of the heart of any person being 
 opened, except Lydia's ; and there is no intimation that 
 those journeymen either repented or believed, and of 
 course could not have received ' believer's baptism.' I 
 appeal to }^ou, reader, to judge, who would be the most 
 fit for baptism, — the children of a believing mother, or a 
 household of oTttce/ess 'journeyman dyers T 'I speak 
 as unto wise men.' "^ 
 
 The objections offered to prove that there were no 
 young children in the families of Cornelius and Ste- 
 phanas, are of a piece with those already considered in 
 relation to the jailor and Lydia, and hence we shall not 
 fatigue our readers with a refutation of them. It strikes 
 us, our Baptist brethren are compelled to lay their inge- 
 nuity under heavy contributions as well as to make large 
 drafts on public credulity, in order to render it even 
 supposable that not one of all these families contained a 
 single young child. And even if they could satisfactorily 
 dispose of these four families ; there are seven others to 
 be gotten rid of ;'^ and then, there is that of the nobleman 
 
 'See Slicer's Appeal on Baptism, p. 63. *See page 89. 
 9* 
 
102 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 at Capernaum, who is said to have believed "and all 
 (his numerous) house,^^^ and must therefore ivith his 
 house have received baptism; they must prove that in 
 his family also, there were no childi-en, although his sick 
 son is not said to have been his only offspring, and even 
 that son is called by him a child, the diminutive term 
 TuiJ-iov being used. And after all, admitting that they 
 should be able to disprove the existence of little infants 
 in all these families, still the great practice and principle 
 of family baptism, that is, of receiving all the younger 
 members of families on the faith of their parents or do- 
 mestic head, would remain unaffected and be decisively 
 established. This furnishes a foundation on which the 
 friends of infant baptism may plant themselves, as on a 
 rock that cannot be moved. Well may it be asked: 
 " Was it ever known that a case of family baptism oc- 
 curred under the direction of a Baptist minister? Was 
 it ever known to be recorded, or to have happened, that 
 when, under the influence of Baptist ministrations, the 
 parents of large families were hopefully converted, they 
 were baptized, they and all theirs straightway? There 
 is no risk in asserting that such a case was never heard 
 of. And why ? Evidently because our Baptist brethren 
 do not act in this matter upon the principles laid doAvn in 
 the New Testament, and which regulated the primitive 
 Christians."^ 
 
 Dr. Wardlaw's observation on this subject is pithy: 
 "It is a remarkable fact," says he, "that we have no 
 mention of any thing resembling the baptism of house- 
 holds or families, in the accounts of the propagation of 
 the gospel by our Baptist brethren. That the apostle 
 baptized families, no believer of the Scripture history can 
 
 'Jolin iv. 53. 2See Miller, page 15. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 103 
 
 doubt ; and we have seen, that the manner in which such 
 baptisms are recorded, or referred to, indicates no extra- 
 ordinary thing. Now it surely is an extraordinary thing, 
 that in the journals and periodical accounts of Baptist mis- 
 sions in heathen countries, we should never meet with 
 any thing of the kind. I question, whether, in the thirty 
 years of the history of the Baptist mission in India, there 
 is to be found a single instance of the baptism of a house- 
 hold. When do we find a Baptist missionary saying, 
 'when she was baptized and her family' — or, 'I bap- 
 tized the family of Krishnoo,' or any other convert ? We 
 have the baptism of individuals ; but nothing correspond- 
 ing to the apostolic baptism of families. This fact is a 
 strong corroborative proof, that there is some difference 
 between their practice and that of the apostles. If the 
 practice of both were the same, there might surely be ex- 
 pected some little correspondence in the facts connected 
 with it.'" 
 
 'See Dissertation on Infant Baptism, p. 109. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 FIFTH ARGUMENT. 
 
 Tlie uniform practice of the Christian church, from 
 the earliest period down to the present time, affords an 
 unanswerable argument in favor of infant baptism. 
 
 If it can be incontestibly proved from history that this 
 sacrament Avas administered to children during the apos- 
 tohc age ; that it continued to be administered from that 
 time forward, in all subsequent ages by the great body of 
 the church ; that during the long space of no less than 
 ELEVEN HUNDRED YEARS after tliB birth of our Lord, there 
 was not a single denomination on the face of the earth 
 that ventured to call in question the necessity of infant 
 baptism, on any ground or plea whatever ; that the first 
 sect that ever did oppose it was a small faction in the 
 twelfth century, headed by a Frenchman, called Peter de 
 Bruis, who held to the unscriptural and heartless opinion " 
 that infants could not be saved under any circumstances 
 whatever, and therefore ought not to be baptized ; that 
 for FIFTEEN CENTURIES it was iiot opposed at all on any 
 such grounds as are now urged by our Baptist brethren ; 
 and that the very first body of people in the whole Chris- 
 tian world, who did reject it on these grounds, were a 
 fanatical sect called Anabaptists,^ who arose in Germany 
 
 'The word Anabaptist is derived from ava, " anew" and Ba^T/s-TiJC, 
 a Baptist, signifying that those who have been baptized in their in- 
 fancy ought to be baptized anew. 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT. 105 
 
 in the year 1522/ If all this can fairly be made to ap- 
 pear on credible historical evidence, then will infant bap- 
 tism be founded on a rock, steadfast, immoveable, and 
 ever-during as the visible church of God itself. — We 
 shall now endeavor to establish these facts : — 
 
 " TertuUian, about two hundred years after the birth 
 of Christ, is the first man of whom we read in ecclesias- 
 tical history, as speaking a word against infant baptism ; 
 and he, while he recognises the existence and prevalence 
 of the practice, and expressly recommends that infants 
 be baptized, if they are not likely to survive the period 
 of infancy ; yet advises that, where there is a prospect 
 of their living, baptism be delayed until a late period in 
 life. But what was the reason of this advice? The 
 moment we look at the reason, we see that it avails no- 
 thing to the cause in support of which it is sometimes pro- 
 duced. TertuUian adopted the superstitious idea, that 
 baptism was accompanied Avith the remission of all past 
 sins ; and that sins committed after baptism w^ere peculi- 
 arly dangerous. He, therefore, advised, that not merely 
 infants, but young men and young women; and even 
 young widows and widowers should postpone their bap- 
 tism until the period of youthful appetite and passion 
 should have passed. In short, he advised that, in all 
 cases in which death was not likely to intervene, baptism 
 be postponed, until the subjects of it should have arrived 
 at a period of life, when they would be no longer in dan- 
 ger of being led astray by youthful lusts. And thus, for 
 more than a century after the age of TertuUian, we find 
 some of the most conspicuous converts to the Christian 
 faith, postponing baptism till the close of life. Constan- 
 
 'It does not appear that there was any congregation of Anabap- 
 tists in England, till the year 1640. See Bishop Tomlin's Elements. 
 
106 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 tine the Great, we are told, though a professing Christian 
 for many years before, was not baptized till after the 
 commencement of his last illness. The same fact is re- 
 corded of a number of other distinguished converts to 
 Christianity, about and after that time. But surely, 
 advice and facts of this kind make nothing in favor of 
 the system of our Baptist brethren. Indeed, taken alto- 
 gether, their historical bearing is strongly in favor of our 
 system. 
 
 "The next persons that we hear of as calling in ques- 
 tion the propriety of infant baptism, were the small body of 
 people in France, about twelve hundred years after Christ, 
 who followed a certain Peter de Bruis, and formed an 
 inconsiderable section of the people known in ecclesias- 
 tical history under the general name of the Waldenses. 
 This body maintained that infants ought not to be bap- 
 tized, because they were incapable of salvation. They 
 taught that none could be saved but those who Avrought 
 out their salvation by a long course of self-denial and 
 labor. And as infants were incapable of thus ' working 
 out their own salvation,' they held that making them the 
 subjects of a sacramental seal, was an absurdity. But 
 surely our Baptist brethren cannot be willing to consider 
 these people as their predecessors, or to adopt their creed. 
 
 " We hear no more of any society or organized body 
 of dntipedobaptists, until the sixteenth century, when 
 they arose as before stated, in Germany, and for the first 
 time broached the doctrine of our modern Baptist bre- 
 thren. As far as we have been able to discover, they 
 were absolutely unknown in the whole Christian world 
 before that time. 
 
 " But we have something more than mere negative testi- 
 mony on this subject. It is not only certain, that we 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT. 107 
 
 hear of no society of Jintipedobaptists resembling our 
 present Baptist brethren, for more than fifteen hundred 
 years after Christ ; but we have positive and direct proof 
 that, during the whole of that time, infant baptism was the 
 general and unopposed practice of the Christian church. 
 
 " To say nothing of earlier intimations, wholly irre- 
 concilable with any other practice than that of infant 
 baptism, Origen, a Greek father of the third century, 
 and decidedly the most learned man of his day, speaks 
 in the most unequivocal terms of the baptism of infants, 
 as the general practice of the church in his time, and as 
 having been received from the apostles. His testimony 
 is as follows : ' According to the usage of the church, 
 baptism is given even to infants ; when, if there were 
 nothing in infants which needed forgiveness and mercy, 
 the grace of baptism would seem to be superfluous.' 
 Hom. viii. in Levit. ch. 12. Again : ' Infants are bap- 
 tized for the forgiveness of sins. Of what sins ? Or 
 when have they sinned ? Or can there be any reason 
 for the laver in their case, unless it be according to the 
 sense which we have mentioned above, viz., that no 
 one is free from pollution, though he has lived but one 
 day upon earth ? And because by baptism native pollu- 
 tion is taken away, therefore infants are baptized.' 
 Hom. in Luc. 14. Again: 'For this cause was it that 
 the church received an order from the apostles to give 
 baptism even to infants.'^ 
 
 "The testimony of Cyprian, a Latin father of the third 
 century, contemporary with Origen, is no less decisive. 
 It is as follows : 
 
 " In the year 253 after Christ, there was a council of 
 sixty-six bishops or pastors held at Carthage, in which 
 
 'Comment, in Epist. ad Romanes, Lib. 5. 
 
108 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Cyprian presided. To this council, Fidus, a country 
 pastor, presented the following question, which he wished 
 them, by their united wisdom, to solve, viz.. Whether 
 it was necessary, in the administration of baptism, as of 
 circumcision, to wait until the eighth day ; or whether 
 a child might be baptized at an earlier period after its 
 birth? The question, it will be observed, was not 
 whether infants ought to be baptized ? That was taken 
 for granted. But simply, whether it was necessary to 
 wait until the eighth day after their birth ? The coun- 
 cil came unanimously to the following decision, and 
 transmitted it in a letter to the inquirer. 
 
 " ' Cyprian and the rest of the bishops who were pre- 
 sent in the council, sixty-six in number, to Fidus, our 
 brother, greeting: 
 
 " ' As to the case of infants, — whereas you judge that 
 they must not be baptized within two or three days after 
 they are born, and that the rule of circumcision is to be 
 observed, that no one should be baptized and sanctified 
 before the eighth day after he is born ; we were all in 
 the council of a very different opinion. As for what 
 you thought proper to be done, no one was of your mind; 
 but we all rather judged that the mercy and grace of God 
 is to be denied to no human being that is born. This, 
 therefore, dear brother, was our opinion in the council ; 
 that we ought not to hinder any person from baptism 
 and the grace of God, who is merciful and kind to us 
 all. And this rule, as it holds for all, we think more 
 especially to be observed in reference to infants, even to 
 those newly born.' Cyprian, Epist. 66. 
 
 " Surely no testimony can be more unexceptionable 
 and decisive than this. Lord Chancellor King, in his 
 account of the primitive church, after quoting what is 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT. 109 
 
 given above, and much more, subjoins the following re- 
 mark : ' Here, then, is a synodical decree for the baptism 
 of infants, as formal as can possibly be expected ; which 
 being the judgment of a synod, is more authentic and 
 cogent than that of a private father ; it being supposable 
 that a private father might write his own particular judg- 
 ment and opinion only ; but the determination of a synod 
 (and he might have added, the unanimous determination 
 of a synod of sixty-six members) denotes the common 
 practice and usage of the whole church." 
 
 The famous Chrysostom, a Greek father, who flour- 
 ished towards the close of the fourth century, having 
 had occasion to speak of circumcision, and of the incon- 
 venience and pain which attended its dispensation, pro- 
 ceeds to say, ' But our circumcision, I mean the grace of 
 baptism, gives cure without pain, and procures to us a 
 thousand benefits, and fills us with the grace of the Spir- 
 it ; and it has no determinate time, as that had ; but one 
 that is in the very beginning of his age, or one that is 
 in the middle of it, or one that is in his old age, may re- 
 ceive this circumcision made without hands; in which 
 there is no trouble to be undergone but to throw off" the 
 load of sins, and to receive pardon for all past offences.' 
 Homil. 40. in Genesin. 
 
 " Passing by the testimony of several other conspicuous 
 writers of the third and fourth centuries, in support of 
 the fact, that infant baptism was generally practised when 
 they wrote, I shall detain you with only one testimony 
 more in relation to the history of this ordinance. It is 
 that of Jlgustine, one of the most pious, learned and 
 venerable fathers of the Christian Church, who lived a 
 
 'Inquiry into the Constitution, Stc. Part. ii. chap. 3. 
 10 
 
110 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 little more than three hundred years after the Apostles, — 
 taken in connexion with that of Pelagius, the learned 
 heretic, who lived at the same time. Augustine had 
 been pleading against Pelagius, in favor of the doctrine 
 of original sin. In the course of this plea, he asks — 
 ♦ Why are infants baptized for the remission of sins, if 
 they have no sin?' At the same time intimating to Pela- 
 gius, that if he would be consistent with himself, his 
 denial of original sin must draw after it the denial of in- 
 fant baptism. The reply of Pelagius is striking and 
 unequivocal. 'Baptism,' says he, 'ought to be adminis- 
 tered to infants, with the same sacramental words Avhich 
 are used in the case of adult persons.' — ' Men slander me 
 as if I denied the sacrament of baptism to infants.' — ' / 
 never heard of any, not even the 7nost impious heretic, 
 laho denied baptism to infants; for who can be so impi- 
 ous as to hinder infants from being baptized, and born 
 again in Christ, and so make them miss of the kingdom 
 of God?' Again: Augustine remarks, in reference to 
 the Pelagians — 'Since they grant that infants must be 
 baptized, as not being able to resist the authority of 
 the ivhole church, which ivas doubtless delivered by our 
 Lord and his apostles; they must consequently grant 
 that they stand in need of the benefit of the Mediator ; 
 that being offered by the sacrament, and by the charity 
 of the faithful, and so being incorporated into Christ's 
 body, they may be reconciled to God,' &c. Again, 
 speaking of certain heretics at Carthage, who, though 
 they acknowledged infant baptism, took wrong views of 
 its meaning, Augustine remarks — 'They, minding the 
 Scriptures, and the authority of the ivhole church, and 
 the form of the sacrament itself, see well that baptism in 
 infants is for the remission of sins.' Further, in his 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT. Ill 
 
 work against the Donatists, the same writer speaking of 
 baptized infants obtaining salvation without the personal 
 exercise of faith, he says — 'which the lohole body of the 
 church holds, as delivtred to them in the case of little 
 infants baptized; who certainly cannot believe with the 
 heart unto righteousness, or confess with the mouth unto 
 salvation, nay, by their crying and noise while the sacra- 
 ment is administering, they disturb the holy mysteries : 
 and yet no Christian man will say that they are baptized 
 to no purpose.' Again, he says — 'The custom of our 
 mother the church in baptizing infants must not be disre- 
 garded, nor be accounted needless, nor believed to be any 
 tiling else than an ordinance delivered to us from the 
 apostles.'' In short, those who will be at the trouble to 
 consult the large extracts from the writings of Augustine, 
 among other Christian fathers, in the learned JVcUfs His- 
 tory of Infant Baptism, will find that venerable father 
 declaring again and again that he never met Avith any 
 Christian, either of the general church, or of any of the 
 sects, nor with any writer, who owned the authority of 
 Scripture, who taught any other doctrine than that infants 
 were to be baptized for the remission of sin. Here, 
 then, were two men undoubtedly among the most learned 
 then in the world — Augustine and Pelagius ; the former 
 as familiar probably with the writings of all the distin- 
 guished fathers who had gone before him, as any man of 
 his time ; the latter also a man of great learning and 
 talents, who had travelled over the greater part of the 
 Christian world ; who both declare, about three hundred 
 years after the apostolic age, that they never saw or heard 
 of any one who called himself a Christian, not even the 
 most impious heretic, no nor any writer who claimed to 
 believe in the Scriptures, who denied the baptism of in- 
 
113 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 fants. See Wall's History, Part I. ch. 15—19. Can 
 the most incredulous reader, who is not fast bound in the 
 fetters of invincible prejudice, hesitate to admit, first, that 
 these men verily believed that infant baptism had been 
 the universal practice of the church from the days of the 
 apostles ; and secondly, that situated and informed as 
 they were, it was impossible that they should be mis- 
 taken. 
 
 "The same Augustine, in his Epistle to Boniface, 
 while he expresses an opinion that the parents are the 
 proper persons to offer up their children to God in bap- 
 tism, if they be good faithful Christians ; yet thinks pro- 
 per to mention that others may, with propriety, in spe- 
 cial cases, perform the same kind office of Christian 
 charity. 'You see,' says he, 'that a great many are 
 offered, not by their parents, but by any other persons, 
 as infant slaves are sometimes offered by their masters. 
 And sometimes when the parents are dead, the infants 
 are baptized, being offered by any that can afford to show 
 this compassion on them. And sometimes infants whom 
 their parents have cruelly exposed, may be taken up and 
 offered in baptism by those who have no children of their 
 own, nor design to have any.' Again, in his book 
 against the Donatists, speaking directly of infant bap- 
 tism, he says—' If any one ask for divine authority in 
 this matter, although that which the whole church prac- 
 tises, which was not instituted by councils, but was ever 
 in use, is very reasonably believed to be no other than a 
 thing delivered by the authority of the apostles ; yet we 
 may besides take a true estimate, how much the sacra- 
 ment of baptism does avail infants, by the circumcision 
 which God's ancient people received. For Abraham was 
 justified before he received circumcision, as Cornelius 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT. 113 
 
 was endued with the Holy Spirit before he was baptized, 
 Aad yet the apostle says of Abraham, that he received 
 tlie sign of circumcision, "a seal of the righteousness of 
 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 righteousness ; 
 but for this reason, because the sacrament is, in itself of 
 great importance? 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 regenera- 
 tion, by the laver of baptism, came after. And as in 
 Isaac, M'ho was circumcised the eighth day, the seal of 
 Uie 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 religion) 
 conversion of the heart, the mystery whereof went before 
 in tlieir body, comes after. By all which it appears, that 
 tlie sacrament of baptism is one thing, and conversion of 
 the heart another.' 
 
 " So much for the testimony of the fathers. To me, 
 I acknowledge, this testimony carries with it irresistible 
 conviction. It is, no doubt, conceivable, considered in 
 itself, that in three centuries from the days of the apos- 
 tles, a very material change might have taken place in 
 regard to the subjects of baptism. But that a change so 
 serious and radical as that of which our Baptist brethren 
 speak, should have been introduced without the knowU 
 10* 
 
114 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 edge of such men as have been just quoted, is not con- 
 ceivable. That the church should have passed from the 
 practice of none but adult baptism, to that of the constant 
 and universal baptism of infants, while such a change 
 was utterly unknown and never heard of, by the most 
 active, pious, and learned men that lived during that 
 period, cannot, I must believe, be imagined by any im- 
 partial mind. Now when Origen, Cyprian, and Chrys- 
 ostom, declare, not only that the baptism of infants was 
 the universal and unopposed practice of the church in 
 tlieir respective times and places of residence ; and when 
 men of so much acquaintance with all preceding writers, 
 and so much knowledge of all Christendom, as Augustine 
 and Pelagius, declared that they never heard of any one 
 who claimed to he a Christian, either orthodox or here- 
 tic, who did not maintain and practice infant baptism; 
 1 say, to suppose, in the face of such testimony, that the 
 practice of infant baptism crept in, as an unwarranted 
 innovation, between their time and that of the apostles, 
 without the smallest notice of the change having ever 
 reached their ears is, I must be allowed to say, of all 
 incredible suppositions, one of the most incredible. He 
 who can believe this, must, it appears to me, be pre- 
 pared to make a sacrifice of all historical evidence at the 
 shrine of blind and deaf prejudice. 
 
 It is here also worthy of particular notice, that those 
 pious and far famed witnesses for the truth, commonly 
 known by the name of the TValdenses, did undoubtedly 
 hold the doctrine of infant baptism, and practise accord- 
 ingly. In their Confessions of Faith and other writings, 
 drawn up between the twelfth and sixteenth centuries, 
 and in which they represent their creeds and usages as 
 handed down, from father to son, for seveial hundred 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT. 115 
 
 years before the Reformation, they speak on the subject 
 before us so frequently and explicitly, as to preclude all 
 doubt in regard to the fact alleged. The following spec- 
 imen of their language will satisfy every reasonable in- 
 quirer. 
 
 "'Baptism,' say they, "is administered in a full con- 
 gregation of the faithful, to the end that he that is received 
 into the church may be reputed and held of all as a 
 Christian brother, and that all the congregation may pray 
 for him that he may be a Christian in heart, as he is out- 
 wardly esteemed to be a Christian. And for this cause 
 it is that we present our children in baptism, which 
 ought to be done by those to whom the children are most 
 nearly related, such as their parents, or those to whom 
 God has given this charity.' 
 
 "Again; referring to the superstitious additions to bap- 
 tism which the Papists had introduced, they say, in one 
 of tlieir ecclesiastical documents, — 'The things which 
 are not necessary in baptism are, the exorcisms, the 
 breathings, the sign of the cross upon the head or fore- 
 head of the infant, the salt put into the mouth, the spit- 
 tle into the ears and nostrils, the unction of the breast, 
 &c. From these things many take an occasion of error 
 and superstition, rather than of edifying and salvation.' 
 
 " Understanding that their Popish neighbors charged 
 them with denying the baptism of infants, they acquit 
 themselves of this imputation as follows : 
 
 " ' Neither is the time nor place appointed for those 
 who are to 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; Avhich they ought to do to whom they are 
 
116 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 most nearly related; such as their parents, or those whom 
 God hath inspired with such a charity.' " 
 
 " ' True it is,' adds the historian, ' that being, for 
 some hundreds of years, constrained to suffer their chil- 
 dren to be baptized by the Romish priests, they deferred 
 the performance of it as long as possible, because they 
 detested the human inventions annexed to the institution 
 of that holy sacrament, which they looked upon as so 
 many pollutions of it. And by reason of their pastors, 
 whom they called Barbes, being often abroad travelling 
 in the service of the church, they could not have baptism 
 administesed to their children by them. They, there- 
 fore, sometimes kept them long without it. On account 
 of which delay, the priests have charged them with that 
 reproach. To which charge not only their adversaries 
 have given credit, but also many of those who have ap- 
 proved of their lives and faith in all other respect s.^^ 
 
 " It being so plainly a fact, established by their own 
 unequivocal and repeated testimony, that the great body 
 of the Waldenses were Pedobaptists, on what ground is it 
 that our Baptist brethren assert, and that some have been 
 found to credit the assertion, that those venerable wit- 
 nesses of the truth rejected the baptism of infants? The 
 answer is easy and ample. A small section of the peo- 
 
 'See John Paul Perrin's Account of the Doctrine and Order of 
 the Waldenses and Albigenses ; Sir Samuel Morland's do. ; and also 
 Leger's Histoire Generale des Eglises Vaudoises. Mr. William 
 Jones, a Baptist, in a work entitled, a History of the Waldenses, in 
 two volumes octavo, professes to give a full account of the Faith 
 and Order of these pious witnesses of the truth ; but, so far as I 
 have observed, carefully leaves out of all their public formularies 
 and other documents, every thing which would disclose their Pedo- 
 baptist prmciples and practice ! On this artifice comment is unne- 
 cessary. 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT. 117 
 
 pie bearing the general name of Waldenses, followers of 
 Peter de Bruis, who were mentioned in a preceding page, 
 while they agreed with the mass of their denomination 
 in most other matters, differed from them in regard to the 
 subject of infant baptism. They held, as before stated, 
 that infants were not capable of salvation; that Christian 
 salvation is of such a nature that none can partake of it 
 but those who undergo a course of rigorous self-denial 
 and labor in its pursuit. Those who die in infancy not 
 being capable of this, the Petrobrussians held that they 
 were not capable of salvation ; and, this being the case, 
 that they ought not to be baptized. This, hoAvever, is 
 not the doctrine of our Baptist brethren ; and, of course, 
 furnishes no support to their creed or practice. But the 
 decisive answer is, that the Petrobrussians were a very 
 small fraction of the great Waldensian body ; probably 
 not more than a thirtieth or fortieth part of the whole. 
 The great mass of the denomination, however, as such, 
 declare, in their Confession of Faith, and in various pub- 
 lic documents, that they held, and that their fathers before 
 them, for many generations, always held, to infant bap- 
 tism. The Petrobrussians, in this respect, forsook the 
 doctrine and practice of their fathers, and departed from 
 the proper and established Waldensian creed. If there 
 be truth in the plainest records of ecclesiastical history, 
 this is an undoubted fact. In short the real state of this 
 case may be illustrated by the following representation. 
 Suppose it were alleged that the Baptists in the United 
 States are in the habit of keeping the seventh day of the 
 week as their Sabbath? Would the statement be true? 
 By no means. There is, indeed, a small section of the 
 Antipedobaptist body in the United States, usually 
 styled "Seventh day Baptists"--probably not a thirtieth 
 
118 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 part of the whole body — who observe Saturday in each 
 week as their Sabbath. But, notwithstanding this, the 
 proper representation, no doubt is, — (the only represen- 
 tation that a faithful historian of facts would pronounce 
 correct) — that the Baptists in this country, as a general 
 body, observe "the Lord's day" as their Sabbath. You 
 may rest assured, my friends, that this statement most 
 exactly illustrates the real fact with regard to the Wal- 
 denses as Pedobaptists. Twenty-nine parts, at least, out 
 of thirty, of the whole of that body of witnesses for the 
 truth, were undoubtedly Pedobaptists. The remaining 
 thirtieth part departed from the faith of their fathers in 
 regard to baptism, but departed on principles altogether 
 unlike those of our modern Baptist brethren. 
 
 "I have only one fact more to state in reference to the 
 pious Waldenses, and that is, that soon after the opening 
 of the Reformation by Luther, they sought intercourse 
 with the Reformed churches of Geneva and France ; held 
 communion with them ; received ministers from them ; 
 and appeared eager to testify their respect and affection 
 for tliem as ' brethren in the Lord.' Now it is well 
 known that the Churches of Geneva and France, at this 
 time, were in the habitual use of infant baptism. This 
 single fact is sufficient to prove that the Waldenses were 
 Pedobaptists. If they had adopted the doctrine of our 
 Baptist brethren, and laid the same stress on it with them, 
 it is manifest that such intercourse would have been 
 wholly out of the question. 
 
 " If these historical statements be correct, and that they 
 are so, is just as well attested as any facts whatever in 
 the annals of the church, the amount of the whole is 
 conclusive, is demonstrative, that, for fifteen hundred 
 years after Christ, the practice of infant baptism was 
 
FIFTH ARGUMENT 119 
 
 universal ; that to this general fact there was absolutely 
 no exception, in the whole Christian church, which, on 
 principle, or even analogy, can countenance in the least 
 degree, modern Anti-pedobaptism ; that from the time of 
 the Apostles to the time of Luther, the general, unop- 
 posed, established practice of the church was to regard 
 the infant seed of believers as members of the church, 
 and, as such to baptize them. 
 
 " But this is not all. If the doctrine of our Baptist 
 brethren be correct; that is, if infant baptism be a cor- 
 ruption and a nullity; then it follows, from the foregoing 
 historical statements, most inevitably, that the ordinance 
 of baptism was lost for fifteen hundred years : yes, en- 
 tirely lost, from the apostolic age till the sixteenth cen- 
 tury. For there was manifestly, ' no society, during 
 that long period, of fifteen centuries, but what was in the 
 habit of baptizing infants.' God had no church, then, 
 in the world for so long a period.' Can this be admit- 
 ted ? Surely not by any one who believes in the perpe- 
 tuity and indestructibility of the household of faith. 
 
 " Nay, if the principle of our Baptist brethren be cor- 
 rect, the ordinance of baptism is irrecoverably lost alto- 
 gether ; that is irrecoverably without a miracle. Because 
 if, during the long tract of time that has been mentioned, 
 there was no true baptism in the church ; and if none but 
 baptized persons were capable of administering true bap- 
 tism to others ? the consequence is plain ; there is no true 
 baptism in the world ! But can this be believed ? Can 
 we imagine that the great Head of the Church would 
 permit one of his own precious ordinances to be banished 
 entirely from the church for many centuries, much less to 
 be totally lost ? Surely the thought is abhorrent to every 
 Christian feelinsf. 
 
120 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 "Such is an epitome of the direct evidence in favor of 
 infant baptism. To me, I acknowledge, it appears no- 
 thing short of demonstration. The invariable character 
 of all Jehovah's dealings and covenants vi^ith the children 
 of men ; his express appointment, acted upon for two 
 thousand years by the ancient church ; the total silence 
 of the New Testament as to any retraction or repeal of 
 this privilege ; the evident and repeated examples of fam- 
 ily baptism in the apostolic age ; the indubitable testi- 
 mony of the practice of the whole church on the Pedo- 
 baptist plan, from the time of the apostles to the six- 
 teenth century, including the most respectable witnesses 
 for the truth in the dark ages ; all conspire to establish 
 on the firmest foundation, the membership, and the con- 
 sequent right to baptism of the infant seed of believers. If 
 here be no divine warrant, we may despair of finding it 
 for any institution in the Church of God.'" 
 
 'For this interesting history of baptism we gratefully acknowledge 
 ourselves indebted to Dr. Miller ; — see Miller on Baptism. 
 
CHAPTER XL 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO THIS ARGUMENT. 
 
 First Objection. — Infant baptism, says the Rev. Mr. 
 Broaddus, was introduced by the Romish apostacy, and 
 is a relic of papacy ; the Rev. Mr. Judson maintains, 
 that it was ingrafted on the church towards the close of 
 the second century, Other Baptist authorities teach, 
 that it took its rise in Africa from the first to the middle 
 of the third centuries.^ 
 
 Answer. — It is somewhat difficult to reply to such 
 conflicting opinions, and so long as our adversaries them- 
 selves are so at variance, no marvel that we should take 
 the liberty to dissent from them all. If Mr. Broaddus 
 and those who assert with him, that infant baptism is a 
 popish relic, be correct, then Mr. Judson and others who 
 fix its origin in the second century, must necessarily be 
 in error, because popery did not commence until the 
 sixth century ; and moreover, infant baptism is practised 
 in the Greek church, which never had any connection 
 with the pope, so that here we have the difference of 
 " the small matter" of only four hundred years among 
 our Baptist brethren themselves. If on the other hand, 
 Mr. Judson is to be believed, then of course the testis 
 mony of all who date the pretended innovation in the 
 third century, must be rejected. While we leave these 
 gentlemen to settle their own disputes in their own way, 
 we shall proceed to show, that they are all mistified and 
 
 'See Benedict's History of the Baptists. 
 11 
 
122 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 groping their way in darkness. We maintain that they 
 are all mistaken. 
 
 1 . Because there is no evidence of any kind whatever, 
 to prove that infant baptism took its rise as alleged above. 
 We have never met with such evidence ; our Baptist bre- 
 thren have never yet produced it, and never can ; we 
 challenge them to bring forth one particle of proof. 
 
 2. Because, if this ordinance originated some time 
 between the first and the middle of the third centuries, 
 how shall we account for the fact that from the time of 
 its supposed introduction until the year 416, the subject 
 was permitted to sleep, not exciting one word of contro- 
 versy, nor awakening one solitary opponent ? How 
 shall we account for the fact, that the Christians who 
 fled from Africa into Europe, in the year 429, in order 
 to escape the Vandals, carried infant baptism with them 
 and practised it universally ? How shall we account for 
 the fact that the first ecclesiastical canon on the subject 
 in Europe, was as late as the sixth century, and the first 
 imperial law in the eighth century by the emperor Char- 
 lemagne ? — Farther, if infant baptism was an innovation, 
 it must have attracted attention and provoked controver- 
 sy, which would have led, if not to the suppression of 
 the error, yet to a diversity of practice in the ancient 
 churches. Our Baptist brethren would surely have 
 taken alarm at the horrible heresy, and raised their 
 voice and " pleaded trumpet-tongued" for its destruc- 
 tion. Where were they at that eventful period of the 
 church, pregnant with such dreadful error ? was none — 
 not even one, — found faithful enough to utter a syllable 
 of remonstrance ? Methinks we hear old father Tcriv.l- 
 I'lan lift up the voice of warning, — but alas ! even he 
 taught that infants ought to be baptized if " in danger of 
 
OBJECTIONS. 123 
 
 death," and objected as much to the baptism of " unmar- 
 ried believers" as he did to that of children. 
 
 But here comes another disputant, who takes a differ- 
 ent ground from all whom we have mentioned. Mr. 
 Benedict' says : " We date the beginning of our denomi- 
 nation about the year of our Lord, 29 or 30 ; for at that 
 period, John the Baptist began to immerse professed be- 
 lievers in Jordan and Enon," &c. If such be the case, 
 then we would ask, what became of their denomination 
 afterwards ? John baptized thousands, — and tens of 
 thousands ; — the apostles and their immediate successors, 
 hundreds of thousands ; where were all those myriads 
 when infant baptism was introduced ? — we do not hear 
 that one — not even one demurred at it. Surely there 
 could not have been any important opposition to it in all 
 Christendom, in the first centuries, or the annals of the 
 church would furnish some account of that opposition, 
 and of the controversy flowing from it. The dead si- 
 lence on this subject, on every page of history, from the 
 day of Pentecost to the appearance of Peter de Bruis^ in 
 the eleventh or twelfth century, sufficiently uproots this 
 baseless theory. 
 
 Second Objection. — If infant baptism be established 
 by historical evidence, then can infant communion also, 
 for we have equally as good authority for the latter as 
 for the former. 
 
 Answer. — We grant that young children have been 
 admitted to the eucharist in various parts of the church 
 
 'Benedict's History of the Baptists, p. 92. 
 
 ^Some chronologists maintain that it was towards the close of the 
 eleventh — and others in the beginning of the twelfth century that 
 Peter de Bruis lived ; both may be right. 
 
124 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 at an early period of its history. The reason of this 
 abuse, was the erroneous opinion, that a participation in 
 the Lord's supper was indispensable to salvation. Even 
 dying persons as well as children, were forced to swal- 
 low a crumb of bread saturated with wine, and in some 
 eases the superstition was carried so far, that a morsel of 
 bread thus moistened, was thrust down the throats of 
 deceased persons, who had died without partaking of 
 the ordinance, for the purpose of insuring the pardon of 
 their sins and their acceptance with God. This revolt- 
 ing practice arose from a literal interpretation of the 
 words, " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, 
 and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.'" But that 
 we have the same authority for infant communion which 
 we have for infant baptism, is an assertion as void of 
 truth as it is unjust to the cause we are advocating. 
 
 There is not a particle of historical evidence for infant 
 communion until the middle of the third century, at 
 which time it was introduced in some of the African 
 churches ; but the testimony in favor of infant baptism, 
 is clear, uniform, and comprehensive ; it commenced 
 with the apostolic age and remained unimpeached and 
 uncontradicted for more than a thousand years. Moreover, 
 the practice of infant communion was very limited ; that 
 of infant baptism was universal ; the former was opposed 
 and condemned again and again, the latter was never 
 once resisted for fifteen centuries, (except by the Petro- 
 brussians in the twelfth century, who formed a mere 
 handful of factionists, but was approved and inculcated 
 in books and councils time after time ; the one took its 
 rise nearly three hundred years after the other had been 
 in practice throughout the church ; the one was abolished, 
 
 ' Jolin vi. 63. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 125 
 
 in part, prior to the reformation, and entirely by all the 
 reformers ; the other has never been superseded, (except 
 by the Baptists,) but was retained by every one of the 
 great lights of the reformation. The two most distin- 
 guished men of the fourth century, (the most learned and 
 eminent of the age,') who had enjoyed the most favora- 
 ble opportunity of becoming acquainted with the whole 
 church, declared that they had never heard of any pro- 
 fessing Christians in the world, either orthodox or hete- 
 rodox, who did not baptize their children ; but nothing 
 like this has ever been testified in relation to the intro- 
 duction and practice of infant communion. Independ- 
 ently of all this, there cannot be found from Genesis to 
 Revelation one particle of authority for infant commun- 
 ion, whereas, both the Old and New Testament abound 
 with testimony in favor of infant baptism, — testimony so 
 clear and conclusive, that if all other not found in God's 
 word, were for ever cancelled, it would notwithstanding 
 rest on a foundation firm as the everlasting hills. How 
 utterly groundless then, the assertion that the evidence 
 for one is as good as that in support of the other ! — 
 "And as a miserable superstition destroyed it. When 
 transubstantiation arose some time about the eleventh or 
 twelfth century, the sacred elements (now transmuted, as 
 was supposed, into the real body and blood of the Sa- 
 viour) began to be considered as too awful in their char- 
 acter to be imparted to children. But in the Greek 
 church, who separated from the Latin before transubstan- 
 tiation was established, the practice of infant communion 
 stdl continues." 
 
 'Augustine and Pelagiue. 
 11* 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 SIXTH ARGUMENT. 
 
 The names applied in the Neio Testament to small 
 children afford evidence of their baptism. — The disci- 
 ples of our Lord were stigmatized by his enemies as 
 Nazarenes, Heretics, &c. but they called themselves 
 Christians. They added moreover the most affectionate 
 appellations, such as, brother, sister, the called, the elect, 
 the illuminated, holy persons or saints, faithful, &c. 
 These names however, were given to none but church- 
 inembers, and to them they were applied so soon as they 
 were baptized. The newly-baptized were designated as 
 new-plants. If then we can prove that any one of these 
 titles was given to small children, their church-member- 
 ship, and with that their baptism, is the undeniable con- 
 sequence. 
 
 1 . We find in reading the New Testament, that holy 
 persons, was one of the appellations bestowed on church- 
 members.' The aposde also writes on various occasions, 
 to them " who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, to the called, 
 to the holy persons ;^^ — "to the holy persoiis at Ephe- 
 sus:" — "to the holy persons at Colosse;" "to all the 
 holy persons in Christ Jesus at Philippi." Now it is 
 well known that this very same appellation is given to 
 the children of a church-member : "Now are your chil- 
 
 'Acts. xxvi. 10. T*v nyictv saints or holy persons, Rom. xv. 25, 
 
SIXTH ARGUMENT. 127 
 
 dren holy,''''^ and we challenge our opponents to refer to 
 a single passage in Avhich any other than members of the 
 church of Christ, are designated by the term "holy." If 
 then little children are declared by the apostle to be holy, 
 does it not follow that he regarded them as members, and 
 if as members, must they not have been honored Avith 
 the public sign of membership, or in other words have 
 been baptized ? 
 
 2. Again, another appellation, given much more 
 frequently and extensively, to church-members was 
 "Faithful;" this was one of their distinctive titles in 
 many countries and during many ages. It was applied 
 to individuals in the singidar f the mother of Timothy 
 is called a Faithful ;'' it was also applied in the plural ;'' 
 it is addressed to churches as communities ;^ and when 
 Lydia was baptized with her family, she said: "if you 
 have adjudged me to be a Faithful," &c. &c. From 
 all these examples, it is manifest, that to call an individ- 
 ual faithful, in the primitive age, was equivalent to de- 
 nominating him a Christian brother, or a disciple of 
 Jesus Christ, or by any other appellation denoting his 
 membership in the church. Now if we can show that 
 this same title was given to children, then we think a 
 strong argument is made out. The apostle describing 
 the character of a bishop, writes: "he must be the hus- 
 
 '1 Cor. vii. 14 aj/a.. 
 
 H Cor. iv. n ; Eph. iv. 21 ; Col. iv. 9 ; 1 Peter v. 12. 
 
 ^Acts. xvi. 1 OTiTTxc see also 2 Cor. vi. 15 what part hath a faith- 
 ful with a non-faithful, and 1 Tun. v. 16. If any Faithful (man) 
 or Faithful (woman,) &e. Tr/trrsc « TriTTn. 
 
 ''Acts. X. 45 menci; 1 Thn. vi. 2, ma-Tur, 1 Tim. iv. 12; 2 Tim. 
 ii.2 ; Rev. xii. 14 ; Eph. i. 1, 7ri<rTci;: Col. i. 2, tuttok. 
 
 *Eph. i. 1, OTfl-To/j; Col. i. 2, ms-rw. 
 
128 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 band of one wife, having children who are faithfuls;'" 
 here then, the recognition by baptism of the membership 
 of children, is charged on the clergy as a duty ; and the 
 omission is a marked disqualification for ecclesiastical 
 office. To contend that the children alluded to, must 
 have been adults, because they are supposed to have 
 been accusable of " riot and unruliness," is a mere sub- 
 terfuge , because, admitting some of them were adults, it 
 does not follow that all were ; and even if all were, they 
 must have previously been infants, and they were re- 
 quired to be faithfuls irrespective of age. Further, the 
 children of a bishop might have been daughters only, 
 which it is to be hoped, would have exonerated them 
 from the imputation of being riotous, and yet they must 
 he faithfuls; for the term children includes both sexes 
 as well as all ages. Moreover, a bishop might have been 
 young himself, and have had none but little children, and 
 these must be faithfuls also, and hence their member- 
 ship and baptism follow beyond all possibility of refuta- 
 tion. In conformity to this view, we read that Paul sent 
 his salutations to Priscilla and Aquila * * * and the 
 church in their family f also to Nymphas and the church 
 in his family f also to Philemon and the church in his 
 family." And Chrysostora, Theodoret and Theophylact ; 
 also all the Greek scholiasts, and Grotius, maintain that 
 the families of these individuals were all made faith- 
 fuls, so as to be called churches.^ 
 
 'Titus i. 6. The word rendered rmvet. in this passage, means ac- 
 cording to the authority of Robinson, Dr. Gregory, and other distin- 
 guished Baptist writers " minors from tiventy days old to hoenty 
 j/ears." 
 
 2Rom. xvi. 3. 5. sCol. iv. 15. Thil. i. 2. 
 
 *See Whitby in loc. 
 
SIXTH ARGUMENT. 129 
 
 We might with equal facility prove, that the term 
 newly planted, is also an appellation given to church- 
 members, and applied to children,^ but the foregoing is 
 sufficient. We shall only yet add a few sepulchral in- 
 scriptions of the earliest ages, by way of confirming our 
 argument. 
 
 ANCIENT APPLICATION OF THE TERM " FAITHFUL " CON- 
 TINUED TO CHILDREN. 
 
 " A FAITHFUL, descended from ancestors who were 
 also FAITHFULS. Here lies Zosimus ; he lived two years 
 one month and twenty-five days." This inscription 
 bore the symbols of the fish and the anchor, which mark 
 a period of primitive and suffering Christianity. The 
 following are of the same impori : 
 
 Cyriacus, a faithful ; died aged eight days less than 
 three years. 
 
 Eustafia the mother, places this in commemoration 
 to her son Folichronia, a faithful, who lived three 
 years. 
 
 Urcia Florentina, a faithful, rests here in peace : 
 she lived five years, eight months, and eight days. 
 
 ANCIENT APPLICATION OF THE TERM " HOLy" CONTIN- 
 UED TO CHILDREN. 
 
 Maurentius, son of Maurentia, a most pleasing child, 
 who lived five years, eleven months, and two days : 
 worthy to repose in peace among the holy persons. 
 
 Sacred to the great God. Leopardus rests here in 
 peace with holy spirits. Having received baptism, he 
 went to the blessed innocents. This was placed by his 
 parents, with whom he lived seven years and seven 
 months. 
 
 'Rom. vi. 6, and 1 Tim. iii. 6. 
 
130 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 ANCIENT APPLICATION OF THE TERM " NEOPHYTOs" 
 
 NEWLY PLANTED CONTINUED TO CHILDREN. 
 
 Rufillo, NEWLY BAPTIZED, who lived two years and 
 forty days. Quintillian, the father, places this to the 
 memory of his most sweet son, who now sleeps in the 
 peace of Christ. 
 
 To Domitius, an innocent, newly baptized, who 
 lived three years and thirty days. 
 
 Valerius Decentius, the father, places this to his son 
 newly baptized, the well deserving Valerius Vitulia- 
 nus, who lived with his parents three years, ten months, 
 and fifteen days.^ 
 
 'For these inscriptions we acknowledge ourselves indebted to the 
 Editor of Calmet; in his "Facts and Evidences," &c. many more of 
 the same tenor may be found. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 FURTHER OBJECTIONS. 
 
 We have now presented the principal arguments on 
 this subject, and replied to all the adverse reasoning usu- 
 ally relied on to nullify those arguments. A few other 
 objections remain to be ansAvered, which could hot, with- 
 out considerable digression, be introduced in the pre- 
 ceding investigation. It is further urged in opposition to 
 infant baptism, — 
 
 1. That Christ was not baptized until he was thirty 
 years of age. 
 
 Answer. — This argument, like all others that prove 
 too much, fails to prove any thing. If our Lord's ex- 
 ample in this particular is binding, then our Baptist bre- 
 thren, and all other denominations in Christendom, are 
 sadly at fault, because all administer baptism to adult 
 believers before they attain that age ; then also the best 
 Christian in the world, though he profess the clearest 
 testimony of his acceptance with God, and offer the most 
 satisfactory evidence of a change of heart, and of his 
 sanctification by the Holy Spirit, dare not apply for or 
 receive this ordinance, until he is of like age with the 
 Saviour when he entered on his ministry. Such glaring 
 inconsistency and absurdity are sufficiently refuted by 
 their simple statement. 
 
 No example is binding Avithout a command to imitate 
 it, and though Ave are required to Avalk in Christ's foot- 
 
133 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Steps, yet this requirement extends only to his virtues,' 
 and not to his specific acts ; if it embraced the latter, 
 then it would be our duty to walk on the sea, to silence 
 the winds, allay the waves, to ride on no other animal 
 but an ass, to have no home of our own, as "he had not 
 where to lay his head," to be baptized with no other 
 water than that of the river Jordan,* &c. 
 
 But apart from this, the baptism administered to Christ, 
 and that which he enjoins on his disciples, were two dis- 
 tinct things. Those who were baptized by John, were 
 baptized over again " in the name of the Lord Jesus ;'"* 
 not so with those who received Christian baptism. The 
 ministry of John strictly speaking, was not a component 
 part of the old or of the new dispensation, but formed an 
 intermediate step, — a transition from the one to the 
 other ; — it may be said to have constituted a dispensa- 
 tion, per se, that is, by itself, — belonging neither to one 
 nor the other, and yet, as a connecting link, uniting both. 
 
 In order however to place this branch of the subject 
 more fully before the reader, we remark that, — 
 
 First, the baptism of our Saviour did not partake of 
 the character of Johri's baptism, because — 
 
 1. John baptized his converts "unto repentance;" if 
 the baptism administered to our Lord partook of the na- 
 ture of John's, he must have previously repented of sin 
 — which is blasphemous to assert. 
 
 2. John required of the candidate, faith in the Messiah 
 about to come. If, therefore, Christ was baptized with 
 
 'Controlled by this absurd notion, Constantine the Great, resolved 
 not to be baptized until it could be done at the river Jordan, and as 
 he never came to that place, he did not receive that ordinance till 
 on his death-bed. See Pierce on Baptism. 
 
 ''Acts xix. 1 — 5. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 133 
 
 John's baptism, he must have belived in the Messiah to 
 come, and to this faith John must have exhorted him. 
 But the absurdity of such a doctrine need not be men- 
 tioned. 
 
 3. The ultimate design of John's baptism was to 
 "prepare the way of the Lord;" i. e. to prepare the 
 hearts of the people for the reception of the Messiah. 
 But could the proper import of this baptism apply to the 
 Saviour in any form ? 
 
 Jigain. The baptism, administered to Christ did not 
 partake of the nature of Christian baptisin. For, 
 
 1. Christian baptism was not instituted until after the 
 resurrection of our Saviour. If therefore, Christ re- 
 ceived Christian baptism the event must have taken place 
 about three years previous to the actual institution of that 
 ordinance, — which is absurd to suppose. 
 
 2. Christian baptism is performed in the name of the 
 Father, Son and Holy Ghost. But if Christ had been 
 baptized in this profession, it would have been, to say 
 the least, irrelevant and trifling. 
 
 3. The import of Christian baptism is totally inappli 
 cable to the person and character of Christ. For, bap- 
 tism is both a sign and seal. As a sign it witnesseth to 
 our inward washing and regeneration by the Holy 
 Ghost, which from the nature of the case, presupposes 
 defilement by sin. Remove the idea of antecedent pol- 
 lution by sin, and you annihilate the grand intent of bap- 
 tism as a sign. As a seal, baptism becomes the pledge, — 
 
 (a.) Of our fidelity to God. 
 
 (b.) Of God's fidelity to us in bestowing the blessings 
 of the New Covenant, such as repentance, pardon, regen- 
 eration, sanctification, &c. Such then being the true import 
 13 
 
134 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 of baptism, can any person, in his sober senses, presume 
 it to be applicable to the Saviour of the Avorld ? 
 ■ What then was the real design of Christ's baptism ? — 
 He himself furnishes the answer: '■'for thus it becometh 
 lis to fulfil all righteousness."^ In these words our 
 Lord may be supposed to use a slight metonymy, putting 
 righteousness for ordinance or institute; or he may be 
 supposed to use righteousness in the sense, not of ordi- 
 nance, but of the fulfilment of law. In either case the 
 result would be the same, and the Avhole clause may 
 therefore be better understood by reading it: — '■'■ For thus 
 it becometh us to fulfil every ordinance." 
 
 But what ordinance or law, then in vogue, required 
 the Saviour to be baptized ? — We answer ; he was about 
 to enter upon ]iis public ministry. He had attained his 
 30th year, — the age at which, by the appointment of 
 God, the priests under the law were to undertake the 
 duties of their office, — and he was a "high priest." If 
 Ave examine the whole code of Moses, Ave shall find no 
 law that required Christ to be baptized, at this particular 
 juncture, but the law enjoining and regulating priestly con- 
 secration. '^ That our Saviour's baptism Avas a priestly con- 
 secration, is corroborated by all the accompanying cir- 
 cumstances I'ecorded in evangelical history. And in addi- 
 tion, Ave Avill simply say, — Christ did exercise the office 
 of a priest Avhen he purged the temple ; and Avhen the 
 chief priests and the elders demanded of him, on that 
 occasion, by Avhat authority he did these things, Christ 
 appealed to the baptism of John.^ This is Avorthy of 
 particular notice, as Christ evidently appealed to John's 
 baptism for a vindication of the authority he had exer- 
 
 'Matt. iii. 15. ^j^x. xxix. and Lev. viii. 
 
 ^Matt. xxi. 12, 23 — 27. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 135 
 
 cised. And had the Jews then acknowledged the bap- 
 tism of John to have been from heaven, our Saviour 
 would probably have replied: "John bore Avitness of me 
 and foretold you of my authority, and actually consecrated 
 me to the priestly office according to your law." To 
 tliis the captious Jew could have made no reply ; against 
 it he could have uttered no complaint. What was done 
 among the Jews, by an accredited prophet of Jehovah, 
 was as irreversible as the mandate of a Roman dictator. 
 
 The baptism administered to Christ Avas accordingly 
 not the sign and seal of the new covenant, but of his 
 mediatorial office; of course it is altogether irrelevant to 
 tlie point at issue; it has nothing to do with Christiau 
 baptism, and ought not to be forced into the discussion 
 either one way or the other, than as an example of gen- 
 eral obedience t-o the ordinances of God's law.' 
 
 2. Jigain, it is argued that baptism being the seal of 
 a' covenant, it is ivrong to bind a child in a covenant 
 without its knoivledge or consent. 
 
 Ansaver. — The covenant of Avhich baptism is the sign 
 and seal, has been in force, nearly forty centuries, and 
 the children of believing parents are subjects of it by vir- 
 tue of their birth and not of baptism. They are born 
 into the covenant, and the question is not noA/, Avhether 
 tliey shall consent to become a party to it, — they are that 
 already, — but Avhether their inestimable birthright guar- 
 anteed in the covenant, shall be acknowledged and form- 
 ally set forth? and surely to this obvious and easy duty, 
 no believing parent can reasonably object. 
 
 But if it be Avrong to seal a covenant in behalf of an. 
 unconscious child, Avhereby it is solemnly devoted to 
 God, then the controversy is not between the impugners 
 
 'See "Der Besiegte Weidertaeufer," by Rev. Mr. Goering, p. 66. 
 
136 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 of infant baptism and us, but between them and Jehovah. 
 For circumcision was also the seal of a covenant, and by 
 the express command of God, administered to babes of 
 eight days old — of course without their knowledge or 
 consent. — The point at issue therefore, must be settled 
 by our Baptist brethren with the God of Israel; for he 
 it was who tirst constituted children the subjects of his 
 covenant, and commanded that they should be the recipi- 
 ents of a divine ordinance in token and ratification of that 
 covenant, and all this, entirely "without their knowledge 
 or consent." The objection before us then lies just as 
 strongly against the old as against the new seal, but if it 
 was right to administer the former, how can it be wrong 
 to administer the latter?' 
 
 Further, this objection is the legitimate offspring of 
 mfidelity. It is equally opposed to the religious educa- 
 tion of children ; and if followed out, would militate 
 against all those restraints, and that instruction which the 
 word of God enjoins on parents. Nay, if the principle 
 of this objection be correct, it is wrong to instil into the 
 mind of our child an abhorrence of lying, theft, drunk- 
 enness, malice and murder; lest forsooth, it should be 
 without their consent, or inconsistent with the privilege 
 of every rational being to free inquiry and free agency ! — 
 
 Again, are not children frequently bound out by inden- 
 ture to learn a trade, while they are too young to take 
 cognizance of or intelligently yield assent to the contract? 
 Who has ever questioned the propriety of such an act, or 
 
 'It is worthy of remark, that Christ " laid his hands" on infants, 
 (whicli was a religious ceremony, and is classed by an inspired writer 
 with the most important doctrines, Heb. vi. 2,) and " blessed them;" 
 and yet no one will pretend that they understood, either the import 
 of the ceremony or the nature of the blessing. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 137 
 
 denied to parents or guardians the right to perform it? 
 Why then should we not be permitted solemnly and in 
 accordance with God's own precept, to dedicate our off- 
 spring to their heavenly Father? Moreover, Levi, when 
 yet in the loins of his great grand-father, was tithed, and 
 this was a permanent memorial of the superiority of the 
 priesthood according to Melchisedeck over that of Levi. 
 Li a civil point of view, Joshua and the heads of Israel 
 bound the whole nation and its posterity in a covenant 
 established with the Gibeonites, and when Saul, several 
 centuries afterwards violated that covenant, the whole 
 people were punished for it. Hannah devoted her son to 
 God, and bound him to comply with all the restraints 
 peculiar to a Nazarite, such as abstaining from wine and 
 intoxicating liquors, permitting his hair to grow, &;c. and 
 God was pleased with the act. Our own children are born 
 citizens of the state without their knowledge or consent, 
 and on account of their citizenship, are subject to all the 
 restrictions incident to good government, and obligated to 
 perform all the duties associated with that relation. 
 
 The truth however of the matter is, baptism imposes 
 no restrictions and devolves no obligations upon us, which 
 we were not previously bound to observe. We are 
 God's property and subjects by creation and redemption, 
 and owe him allegiance independently of baptism. He 
 claims and is entitled to our services on other grounds, 
 and not one solitary liability is added to the list of our 
 antecedent duties by baptism.' Hence baptism does 
 not involve new obligations, but is rather an exhibition 
 and acknowledgment of obligations previously existing.* 
 
 'See " Der Besiegte Wiedertaevifer," p. 13. 
 
 ^The declaration found 1 Pet. iii. 21 that " baptism is the answer 
 of a good conscience towards God," does not involve a new obliga- 
 12* 
 
138 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Away then with the imscriptural notion that in baptizing 
 our children, we bind them in a covenant without their 
 knowledge or consent; if such were even the case, it 
 could form no reasonable ground of objection. But m 
 fact, there is not an iota of truth in the assertion, and 
 hence it is doubly preposterous to reason thus against a 
 divine institution. — Among the many examples on divine 
 record, of children's being bound in covenant with God, 
 without their knowledge and consent, we shall quote only 
 the following: "Ye stand this day all of you before the 
 Lord your God; your captains of your tribes, your el- 
 ders, and your officers, ivlth all the men of Israel, your 
 LITTLE ONES, your wivcs, and thy stranger that is in thy 
 camp, from the hewer of thy Avood unto the drawer of 
 thy water; that thou shouldst enter into covenant with 
 the Lord thy God, and into his oath, which the Lord thy 
 God maketh with thee this day; that he may establish 
 thee to-day for a people unto himself, and that he may 
 be unto thee a God, as he hath said unto thee, and as he 
 hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to 
 Jacob. Neither with you only do I make this covenant 
 and this oath ; but with him that standeth here with us 
 this day before the Lord our God, and also avitii him 
 
 THAT IS NOT HERE AVITII XJS THIS DAY."' 
 
 3. It is further urged, that ive cannot find in the 
 whole history of the New Testament, a single example 
 of the baptism, of children of professing Christians. 
 
 tion, but simply implies that baptism professes or presupposes a con- 
 science tranquil towards God through (on account of) the resurrec- 
 tion of Christ; — or it may mean, that baptism recognises a covenant 
 in v/hich we are bound to preserve a conscience void of offence 
 towards God. But it does not impose upon us an obligation to 
 preserve such a conscience, — this was our duty previously. 
 'Deut. xxix. 10—15. 
 
OBJECTIONS. 139 
 
 Answer.— Neither can Ave find in the whole history 
 of the NeAV Testament a single example of the baptism 
 of an adult born of Christian parents; on this score then 
 our objection to "believer's baptism" is at least as strong 
 as that of our opponents to infant baptism. — It should be 
 borne in mind that the history of the New Testament 
 embraces a period of more than sixty years after the 
 introduction of the new economy. Now during this time, 
 at least two or three generations of children arrived at the 
 age of maturity, and if these thousands of children born 
 of believing parents, did not receive the ordinance in their 
 infancy, they must have received it in adult age, or re- 
 mained without it. The latter idea is altogether incred- 
 ible. But upon the supposition that they were not bap- 
 tized in their infancy, have we not a right to demand of 
 our Baptist brethren to point out some instances of their 
 baptism as adults ? Where do we find on record a soli- 
 tary example of an individual born of Christian parents, 
 who was baptized as a believing adult? what was his 
 name ? where did he reside ? who were his parents ? The 
 fact is, during the whole three score years after the ascen- 
 sion of Christ, we have not one hint of the baptism of a 
 single individual of this description. In our opinion this 
 silence is no feeble argument in our favor. 
 
 That there should be no special record found of the 
 baptism of little children, is easily explained. The great 
 object of the New Testament history is, to narrate the 
 progress of the gospel among Jews and gentiles ; to in- 
 form us of their conversion and addition to the church, 
 and not to specify the baptism of the children of those 
 parents who had already embraced the truth. Accord- 
 ingly we find, that all the cases of baptism recorded, are 
 those of converts to Christianity, and not of such as 
 
140 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 already belonged to the church. Why then should it be 
 expected that the inspired writers would single out cases 
 of the baptism of infants? — That they should receive 
 the token of church membership, Avas a matter of course, 
 — so perfectly natural that it did not call for express 
 record. No wonder then, that we find no example of 
 this kind registered in the the history of the apostolic 
 church. Besides, children do not in general attract par- 
 ticular notice ; but when they advance in life, they usu- 
 ally fill up a more important place in the public eye ; — 
 some become conspicuous and are extensively knoAvn on 
 account of their standing in society, their talents, their 
 skill, their philanthropy, their wealth, &c. and if bap- 
 tized as adults, and to adopt a common but erroneous form 
 of expression, thus '■'■made disciples of Jesus,'''' it might 
 be expected to be noticed. But such is not the fact, and 
 the difficulty is easily solved. There were none such to 
 be baptized; the children of Christian parents all re- 
 ceived the ordinance in their infancy ; none remained to 
 receive it in manhood, and hence there is no such record 
 to be found. 
 
 4. Once more, it is urged that baptism can be of no 
 benefit to children ; wliat good, says the Antipedobap- 
 tist, can it do an '* unconscious babe" to sprinkle a lit- 
 tle water upon its head? 
 
 Answer. — What good could it do a Jewish child, 
 eight days old, to circumcise it ? The God of Abraham, 
 who is also our God, must have deemed it advantageous, 
 or he would not have required it; and if circumcision 
 was beneficial to the new-born stranger, why may not 
 baptism be so also ? We have a right to demand a satis- 
 factory reply to this interrogatory, and inability to fur- 
 nish such a reply, should for ever seal the lips of gain- 
 
OBJECTIONS. 141 
 
 sayers as to the possibility of benefit accruing to children 
 from their baptism. 
 
 But if it be asked, " Ifliat profit is there of circum- 
 cision? — we appeal to "the law and the testimony," 
 and in the language of an inspired apostle, answer : 
 " Much every way ;" but " what if some (who had 
 been circumcised in their childhood) did not (afterwards) 
 believe ? shall their unbelief make the faith of God with- 
 out effect ? God forbid : yea, let God be true, but every 
 man a liar;'" " for circumcision verily profiteth, if thou 
 keep the law : but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy 
 circumcision is made uncircumcision."'^ In like manner, 
 if cavillers tauntingly say : " What profit is there in bap- 
 tizing your little children ?" we answer : " Much every 
 V}ay,'" — this train of thought however, introduces us to 
 the second branch of our investigation, in which we pro- 
 pose briefly to set forth the benefits of infant baptism. 
 For a full reply to the last objection, we accordingly refer 
 the reader to Part II. 
 
 'Rom. iii. 1 — 4. ^j^om. ii. 25, 
 
INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE BENEFITS OF INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 In exhibiting these benefits, we shall limit ourselves 
 to a few ; our main object is to sustain the baptism of 
 infants, and the practice of administering it by affusion. 
 Besides, though some diversity of sentiment prevails as 
 to the benefits, yet that diversity is not so great, nor does 
 it at present form a topic of such general and sharp con- 
 tention. We shall therefore discuss this branch of the 
 subject rather incidentally, and dismiss it with as little 
 delay as possible. 
 
 We do not profess to know all the advantages that 
 either accompany or follow the administration of this 
 Holy Sacrament ; but there are some obviously connected 
 with it, both directly and indirectly, and these we shall 
 now endeavor briefly to spread before our readers. 
 
 FIRST benefit. 
 
 1. Baptism is a sign of many interesting truths, 
 and a seal of mimerous and inestimable blessings. 
 
 It is a sign of many interesting truths. It holds up 
 to our view, symbolically indeed, but very impressively. 
 
144 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 many of the essential truths of the gospel. It exhibits 
 us as a fallen, guilty and polluted race, who need a reno- 
 vation of our nature and that sanctification which the 
 Holy Spirit alone can accomplish. It magnifies the wis- 
 dom and love of God, displayed in the glorious plan of 
 salvation by the atoning blood of the Saviour and the pu- 
 rifying influences of his grace. It presents to our minds 
 the solemn truth, that we " are not our own," but " are 
 bought with a price ;" that we are therefore the property 
 of God, bound to be " not the servants of men," but of 
 Him who redeemed us, and to " glorify him in our body 
 and in our spirits, which are his." It reminds us that 
 God is our Father and we are his children ; that it is his 
 benevolent design to restore us to the likeness of his 
 image, and reinstate us in the enjoyment of his favor, 
 both which have been forfeited by sin and disobedience. 
 Above all, it is a standing and incontrovertible exhibition 
 of the true nature of the God-head, proclaiming the De- 
 ity to the Christian world, as a Three-one-God ; as a 
 Being, — glorious, unsearchable and incomprehensible, — 
 one in essence but three in person. And so long as bap- 
 tism is taught and practised according to the Scriptures, 
 there is no danger that the sacred and mysterious doc- 
 trine of the Trinity will be obliterated from the Chris- 
 tian's creed, or that the homage which is due alike to the 
 Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost will cease to char- 
 acterize his private and his public devotions. 
 
 It will perhaps be objected, that however forcibly all 
 tliese doctrines are represented in baptism, yet the infant 
 subjects of it do not understand them. Our reply is, 
 neither did they understand the meaning of Christ's lay- 
 ing his hands on them, and yet that very act was accom- 
 panied by a blessing, imparted by the Saviour. Neither 
 
BENEFITS. 145 
 
 did Jewish children of eight days old comprehend the 
 sacred truths of which circumcision was the sign, and 
 yet it did signify such truths, and it was appointed to be 
 administered to such children. The period will arrive, 
 when they shall be able, and when it shall be their duty, 
 to acquaint themselves with them, and when they may 
 rejoice and thank God for all the advantages resulting 
 from that acquaintance. The individuals who present 
 them in baptism, and the particular church of which 
 they are members, enjoy the benefits of which we are 
 speaking, and when in after life, they are engaged in 
 educating and training them up for God's service, it will 
 be no small advantage to remind the children of those 
 important truths which were thus solemnly typified and 
 inculcated at their baptism. 
 
 But baptism is also a seal of numerous and inestima- 
 ble blessings. Here all the rich and ineffable mercies of 
 the new covenant crowd upon our mind. In the original 
 stipulations of the covenant, these mercies were two-fold, 
 temporal and spiritual ; at present we shall glance at 
 them only in the latter point of view. The engagements 
 were : 
 
 1. That God would " greatly bless" Abraham, which 
 promise, as we learn from Paul, referred more fuUy to 
 the blessing of Abraham's justification by the recogni- 
 tion or imputation of his faith for righteousness, together 
 with all the spiritual advantages consequent upon the 
 relation which was thus established between him and 
 God in time and eternity. 
 
 2. That Abraham should be " the father of many na- 
 tions," Avhich we are also taught by the apostle, to inter- 
 pret more with regard to his spiritual seed, the followers 
 
 13 
 
146 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 of that faith whereof cometh justification, than to his 
 natural descendants.' 
 
 3. That " the land of Canaan" should be given to 
 Abraham and his seed, which was manifestly but the 
 type of the higher promise of a heavenly inheritance.^ 
 
 4. That God would always be " a God to Abraham 
 and his seed after him," a promise which is connected 
 with the highest spiritual blessings, such as the remis- 
 sion of sins and the sanctification of our nature. It is 
 even used to express the felicitous state of the church in 
 heaven.^ 
 
 5. That in Abraham's " seed all the nations of the 
 earth should be blessed ;" and this blessing we are ex- 
 pressly taught by Paul, was nothing less than the justifi- 
 cation of all nations, that is, of all believers in all na- 
 tions by faith in Christ." 
 
 Such are briefly the glorious blessings vouchsafed in 
 the new covenant, and of all these blessings, baptism is 
 the appointed seal, that is, the testimony and pledge on 
 the part of God, that they (the blessings) are his free 
 gift to all believers and their infant offspring. 
 
 Should it be contended that these benefits would be 
 bestowed on children independently of baptism, we only 
 
 'Rom. iv. 16. The expression, "father of us all," evidently 
 means, " father of all believing gentiles as well as Jews." 
 
 ^Heb. xi. 9. The " faith" spoken of in this passage, did not refer 
 to the fulfilment of the temporal promise ; for the apostle adds, Heb. 
 xi. 19, " they looked for a city which had foundations, whose builder 
 and maker is God." 
 
 3Rev. xxi. 3. 
 
 ••Gal. iii. 8 — 9. To be " blessed with believing Abraham," as ex- 
 pressed in v. 9, imports that they receive the same blessing, which 
 is justification, and that by the same means, which is faith. 
 
BENEFITS. 147 
 
 reply, that they could also liave been conferred on He- 
 brew children independently of circumcision, and yet an 
 infinitely wise God required them to be circumcised in 
 ratification thereof. If it be further objected, that in nu- 
 merous cases, the professing parents who present the 
 children for baptism, have not true faith, and cannot 
 therefore consistently covenant for their children ; our 
 answer is, that such was doubtless the case under the 
 old economy, and yet we are not justifiable in believing 
 that circumcision was in such cases unavailable. More- 
 over, the same objection may be urged in reference to the 
 benefits said to be connected with adult baptism ; for its 
 subjects are by no means in every instance sincere in 
 their professions, and yet this want of sincerity forms no 
 argument against the advantages of the ordinance in rela- 
 tion to adults ; why then should it in respect to the chil- 
 dren of formal professors ? The baptized children of 
 such parents are at least brought within the care, the 
 watch and the privileges of the church, which is a very 
 important advantage, and has no doubt often been blessed 
 to their eternal salvation, while the hypocritical parents 
 themselves have gone down to everlasting burnings. 
 Where is the faithful pastor who has not beheld the aw- 
 ful truth of this remark more than once signally exem- 
 plijied ? But this is a distinct benefit of infant baptism, 
 and deserves more extended notice. 
 
 SECOND BENEFIT. 
 
 Baptism is a solemn dedication of our children to 
 God by an appropriate rite of his own appointment.-— 
 Our children are the rightful property of Jehovah, by 
 creation, covenant and redemption. It is therefore our 
 duty to dedicate them to his service. This may indeed 
 
148 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 be done privately, and apart from baptism. But in his 
 infinite wisdom and mercy, our heavenly Father ap- 
 pointed a special ordinance peculiarly adapted to this sa- 
 cred duty, and every way calculated to enstamp upon its 
 performance the highest degree of solemnity and impres- 
 siveness. This ordinance was formerly circumcision, 
 under the New Testament it is baptism. And is there 
 no advantage either to parents or to children in thus 
 openly surrendering them up to God, and formally devo- 
 ting them to his service in his own appointed way, and 
 by his own ordained rite ? Is there no advantage in re- 
 cognizing by an act of religion, God's claim to our off- 
 spring, and our covenant engagement to bring them up 
 " in the nurture and admonition of the Lord?" Is there 
 no advantage, during the subsequent process of edu- 
 cating them, to be able to remind them, that at the early 
 dawn of life, they were religiously consecrated to their 
 heavenly Parent, solemnly obligated to renounce "the 
 world, the flesh and the devil," and to walk in the way 
 of his commandments, and that they therefore belong to 
 the Most High by holy and irrevocable transfer, as well 
 as by various other sacred ties ? — And should these pre- 
 cious immortals take their speedy flight to realms of end- 
 less day, soon after they have alighted in this wilderness 
 world, will there be no comfort in the reflection, that they 
 were in a peculiar manner, and by a religious and di- 
 vinely appointed ordinance, given to Him ivho gave 
 himself for them and loved them, even unto death? — 
 Verily, those who carelessly neglect the baptism of their 
 offspring, do not consider what a rich chalice of consola- 
 tion -they dash from their lips, and what a mighty lever 
 of moral influence they deprive themselves of in refer- 
 ence to mcitements to personal duty, as well as in secur- 
 
BENEFITS. 149 
 
 ing obedience from their children. They may imagine 
 the offence a venial one because infant baptism is a 
 mooted point, but it is an impeachment of God's perfec- 
 tions, — a setting up of their own " foolishness" against 
 his unerring wisdom, — a delinquency which may plant a 
 thorn in their dying pillow, and give increased pungency 
 to the reproaches of a guilty conscience, in a world of 
 unmitigated despair. 
 
 13* 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 THIRD BENEFIT. 
 
 It has already been shown, that wlien a child is bap- 
 tized, its right of membership in the visible church is 
 recognized and ratified ; and this baptismal recognition 
 and ratification (without which, according to the tenor 
 of the covenant, it would "be cut off" from God's peo- 
 ple,) secures several inestimable benefits. 
 
 1. One of these benefits is, the special instruction and 
 supervision of the church and its pastor. — Litde chil- 
 dren are generally, and they should be invariably, the 
 peculiar objects of parental solicitude. Parents are com- 
 manded to "train them up in the way in which they should 
 go;" and were all parents and guardians duly penetrated 
 with a sense of this duty, and qualified by grace and wis- 
 dom to discharge it, ecclesiastical and ministerial vigi- 
 lance and instruction in relation to infant members, might 
 not be considered so important a benefit. But many pa- 
 rents are unfortunately not qualified by grace, and some 
 who are not inattentive as to their own personal salva- 
 tion, are nevertheless unskilful and not " apt to teach." 
 Does it not then devolve upon the church and its pastor, 
 to supply as far as in them lies, this great lack of service 
 on the part of parents and guardians ? — It most unques- 
 tionably does ; for when children are baptized, they are 
 thereby recognized as belonging to the church ; they are 
 as it were solemnly entered as scholars or disciples in the 
 
BENEFITS. 151 
 
 school of Christ. They are brought into a situation in 
 which they not only may be trained up for God, but in 
 which the church no less than the parents are hound so 
 to train them up. Yes, the church, — the church is re- 
 quired, by the most sacred obligations to her covenant 
 Head and to her infant members, to make ample provis- 
 ion for the religious supervision and Christian education 
 of the rising generation. 
 
 Every adult member should feel an interest in the wel- 
 fare of the children, and afford by his example, exhorta- 
 tions and prayers, all needful aid to them. It is incum- 
 bent upon the officers of the church especially, to have a 
 constant eye to this important matter. It is their duty to 
 look after the children Avhose parents neglect them, to 
 follow them in their wild retreats, reprove and ad- 
 monish and win them over to the side of virtue by gen- 
 de treatment and persevering efforts. The pastor is 
 under sacred obligations to visit the families of his church, 
 and both privately and publicly instruct the young, to 
 take them by the hand and lead them in the way ever- 
 lasting, infusing into their minds that light and know- 
 ledge, so necessary to qualify them for usefulness and 
 happiness in this world, and for the enjoyment of eternal 
 felicity in the world to come. And will no advantage 
 arise to infant members, from the discharge of these obli- 
 gations on the part of the church? — "We speak as unto 
 wise men, judge ye." 
 
 It may perhaps be urged that these duties are not 
 faithfully performed by the church, — suppose they are 
 not, this is only an objection to the delinquency of the 
 church and not to the benefits of infant baptism. Con- 
 ceive of a Christian association in which the standard of 
 piety is duly elevated, and its professors are what the 
 
152 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 gospel requires them to be, — a peculiar people, adorning 
 their profession by a well ordered life and conversation, 
 and distinguished for their zeal in the instruction of the 
 young and the conversion of their souls, and then say 
 whether the religious instruction alluded to, is of no 
 value ? 
 
 2. Another benefit of infant baptism as a seal of mem- 
 bership, results from the exercise of church discipline. 
 We will not stop here, to prove that every particular 
 church is required to watch over the purity of its mem- 
 bers ; to counsel, exhort and reprove the offending ; to 
 comfort the distressed ; strengthen the weak ; reclaim 
 the backslider ; to cut off or suspend those who will not 
 reform ; to restore the penitent, &c. &c. All this will 
 be admitted by most of our readers without further proof; 
 besides, this is not the proper place to investigate the 
 question of church discipline. All we wish to say at 
 present is, that infant members are entitled to share in the 
 advantages of such discipline; like the subjects of cir- 
 cumcision they "must naturally (says Prof. Schmucker) 
 enter on the enjoyment of these privileges by degrees, as 
 the powers of their minds are developed. Yet does their 
 participation in them commence in their earliest years, as 
 soon as they are capable of being assembled for instruc- 
 tion by their pastor ; whilst the unbaptized are not neces- 
 sarily, nor by virtue of any positive institution, brought 
 under such influence at any particular age during their 
 intellectual minority, nor afterwards until they apply 
 for admission to church-membership. The children of 
 the church are regarded as, in some sense, under the 
 religious supervision of the church, and in our Formula 
 of church government,' it is expressly enjoined on pas- 
 
 'Chap. iv. 10. 
 
BENEFITS. 153 
 
 tors, to instruct them in the elementary principles of reli- 
 gion, and on the church council' to exert themselves to 
 provide suitable and religiously conducted schools, to 
 which they may be sent. They are thus early informed 
 of their relation to the church, and of their obligation at 
 a reasonable age personally to assume, and publicly to 
 confirm the promises, made for them at their baptism. 
 Thus, in a well regulated church, the great subject of 
 embracing Christ is necessarily brought before the minds 
 of all those who had been baptized in infancy ; presented 
 too in the most solemn and direct manner, commended by 
 the strong influence of religious education, of filial attach- 
 ment, and of early associations ; whilst a very small pro- 
 portion of those, who grow up without the pales of the 
 church, are ever placed under such advantageous circum- 
 stances."^ 
 'Chap. iv. 10. ^gge Schmucker's Theology, p. 225, 226. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 FOURTH BENEFIT. 
 
 Baptism secures to infants the immediate and es- 
 pecial blessing of the Saviour. — Our Lord evinced, on 
 more than one occasion, during his visible residence on 
 earth, a peculiar regard for little children. He was not 
 only "much displeased" when his disciples attempted 
 to prevent them from being "brought to him," but posi- 
 tively commanded that they should be suffered to come 
 and not be forbidden. And when they were presented, 
 he kindly took them up in his arms, and prompted by 
 the glowing affection and overflowing benevolence of his 
 divine nature, he put his hands upon, and blessed them. 
 Here it must be borne in mind, that "laying on hands," 
 was, to say the least a very ancient and venerable prac- 
 tice; and is, in the New Testament, ranked with "bap- 
 tisms, the resurection of the dead and eternal judgment."' 
 Our Saviour observed this custom when he healed the 
 sick, as well as when he conferred his blessing on chil- 
 dren; the apostles likewise laid hands on those upon 
 whom they bestowed the Holy Ghost, and the ceremony, 
 on whatever occasion it was employed, seemed to be a 
 concomitant of the communication of some special grace 
 or blessing. The precise nature and extent of the bless- 
 ing imparted by our Lord to the children by the imposi- 
 tion of his hands, it is neither possible nor important to 
 
 >Heb. vi. 2. 
 
BENEFITS. 155 
 
 our purpose to decide; but it is very certain that a bless- 
 ing was conferred, because it is positively declared that 
 "he laid his hands upon them, and blessed them." 
 
 Now in baptism, we emphatically and in strict con- 
 formity to his own precept, bring our children to Christ; 
 we literally present them to him, laying them, as it were, 
 upon his arms, that he may make them the happy recip- 
 ■ients of his special favor. This whole transaction is 
 deeply impressive and of most significant character; it 
 comprehends a solemn consecration of the infant to the 
 service of Jesus Christ; a recognition of its title to all 
 the grace of the new covenant ; a symbolical exhibition 
 of the regenerating influences of the Holy Ghost, &c. 
 &c., and is withal connected with believing and fervent 
 prayer in its behalf. To all this must be added the re- 
 spect which God bears to the believing act of the parents 
 as well as to their cordial prayers on the occasion, in both 
 which the child is interested ; as well as in that solemn 
 engagement which the right necessarily implies, to bring 
 up their children in the nurture and admonition of the 
 Lord. — Can it be reasonably supposed that no divine 
 blessing is imparted on such an occasion, or that the 
 blessing is merely nominal and not substantial and effica- 
 cious ? Is it to be believed that He who in the days of 
 his flesh, said: "sufier little children to come unto me," 
 and when brought, " laid his hands upon them, and 
 blessed them,"" will withhold his blessing, when in the 
 present day, we offer our little ones to him in the sacra- 
 ment of baptism?— ^e/ieue it ivho can.'— Here then, we 
 have another important benefit secured to children bv 
 their baptism. 
 
 AVc have already remarked, that we do not feel war- 
 ranted to define the nature and measure of this blessin<r. 
 
156 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 It may be for aught we know, the gift of the Holy Spirit, 
 " in those secret spiritual influences by which the actual 
 regeneration of those children who die in infancy is 
 effected ; and which is a seed of life in those who are 
 spared, to prepare them for instruction in the word of 
 God, as they are taught it by parental care, to incline 
 their will and afi'ections to good, and to begin and main- 
 tain in them the war against inward and outward evil, so 
 that they may be divinely assisted, as reason strengthens, 
 to make their calling and election sure.'" In partial ac- 
 cordance with this view. Dr. Miller observes, "A gra- 
 cious God may, even then, (at the moment in which the 
 ordinance is administered) accompany the outward em- 
 blem with the blessing which it represents, even the 
 washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy 
 Ghost." — This idea acquires strength from the following 
 considerations. 
 
 1. Revealed truth is not only lucidly typified, but also 
 actually employed in the administration of baptism, and 
 it is through the instrumentality of such truth that the 
 Spirit operates, and the sincere use of which he never 
 fails more or less to attend by his gracious influences. 
 
 2. Baptism is in an eminent degree the emblem of 
 moral purification by the new birth, ^ and may even be- 
 come the blessed means of that birth.^ But the uniform 
 agent in eflTecting the new birth is none other than the 
 Holy Spirit. These remarks appear to favor the notion 
 
 'See Watson, p. 48. ^Tiins, xiii. 5 ; 1 Peter, iii. 21. 
 
 ^When among the primitive Christians, an adult was baptized, he 
 was always presumed to be regenerated, and it was upon the 
 strength of this presumption, that the ordinance was administered ; 
 and hence, to be regenerated, and to be baptized, were considered to 
 be one and the same thing ; and in process of time regeneration and 
 baptism became convertible terms or were used synonymously. 
 
BENEFITS. 157 
 
 that the influences of the Spirit may possibly constitute 
 the blessing conveyed to children at their baptism. That 
 those influences become immediately active, is not main- 
 tained by us, because the infant is not as yet a moral 
 agent or capable of intelligent and responsible action ; 
 but so soon as he arrives at the age of discretion, he may 
 seriously meditate on his relations as a member of the 
 church, and the blessing imparted at his baptism may 
 become efl^ectual to his conversion and salvation ; or if 
 he die before he reaches that age, the same blessing may 
 become alike efficient in renewing his nature and quali- 
 fying him for heaven. 
 
 FIFTH BENEFIT. 
 
 5. The fifth and last benefit of infant baptism which 
 we will mention, has respect to the parents. It renews 
 the assurance to them that God is not only their God, 
 but also " the God of their seed'''' after them; and is a 
 consoling pledge that their dying infant offspring shall 
 be saved ; since he Avho says : " Suffer little children to 
 come unto me," also adds : " for of such is the king- 
 dom of heaven." They are further reminded of the 
 necessity of acquainting themselves with God's cove- 
 nant, that they may diligently teach it to their children ; 
 and that, as they have covenanted with God for their 
 children, they are bound thereby to enforce the cove- 
 nant conditions upon them as they come to years — by 
 example as well as by education ; by prayer as well as 
 by a profession of the name of Christ. 
 
 Let parents think of all this, when they come to pre- 
 sent their children in this holy ordinance. And let chil- 
 dren lay all this to heart, as soon as they attain to the 
 age in which they are capable of remembering and real- 
 izing their solemn responsibility. 
 14 
 
INFANT BAPTISM 
 PART THIRD. 
 
 THE MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Before we proceed to our main argument on this 
 branch of the subject, we must be allowed to premise a 
 few general remarks. 
 
 1. It is well understood that a difference of opinion 
 exists between our Baptist brethren and the great mass 
 of the Christian world, in relation to the mode of bap- 
 tism ; the former believing that it is essential to admin- 
 ister it by submersion or total plunging in water, while 
 the latter maintain that the mode by aspersion or sprink- 
 ling, is not only Scriptural and consistent with the best 
 usage of the church of Christ, but also decidedly more 
 suitable and edifying than the other. But it is not so 
 generally known, that while the numerous millions of 
 Christians who hold to the latter method, have no dis- 
 pute whatever as to the precise manner in which the act 
 of aspersion is performed, submersionists do differ very 
 materially among themselves ; some teaching that a sin- 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 159 
 
 gle plunge under tlie water is sufficient, and others con- 
 tending, with the Geek church, that trine immersion is 
 absolutely necessary. The " Tunkers" (Dippers, usu- 
 ally called Dunkards) insist on an entire triple immer- 
 sion by d. forward motion of the sul)ject, but in the judg- 
 ment of the great Corypheus' of another sect, this mode 
 is nugatory, inasmuch as it does not resemble the burial 
 of Christ ; " we must," says he, " dip only once, and 
 the motion must be backivards.^^ The advocates of 
 these conflicting practices, ought at least to adjust their 
 own disputes and settle down on some one specific 
 mode, before they can reasonably expect us who prefer 
 aspersion, to renounce our present views and embrace 
 theirs. 
 
 2. The proportion of the Christian Avorld avIio prac- 
 tise submersion, is exceedingly small. The Romish 
 church, comprehending a population of perhaps one 
 hundred and thirty millions, advocate affusion ; and the 
 Greek church, amounting to more than half that num- 
 ber,- while they baptize children, difler from most others 
 in that they unite the two modes. Deylingius says : 
 " The Greek church practises affusion after immersion,"^ 
 that is, they first immerse the subject three times, and 
 then sprinkle him ; hence they cannot justly be cited 
 in exclusive support of either mode. The Protestant 
 church is said to contain some sixty millions of mem- 
 
 ' Alexander Campbell. 
 
 ^In a late number of the New York Observer a distinguished 
 writer estimates the Greek and Papal churches at two hundred and 
 fifty millions. 
 
 -'See Editor of Calmet, p. 74, in reference to Booth, vol. i. 286. 
 We ourselves once witnessed the baptism of an infant in the great 
 cathedral in St. Petersburg by pouring ; the trine inmiersion, we 
 presumed, had been pieviously performed. 
 
160 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 bers, and of all these, probably not one-sixtieth part prac- 
 tise submersion. Omitting the Greek church then, in the 
 estimate, the number who hold to plunging, compared 
 with those who consider sprinkling more correct, is in 
 the ratio of perhaps less than a 'million to nearly two 
 hundred millions, or as one is to two lumdred. We 
 mention this fact more as a matter of information, than 
 Avith a view to lay stress on it as an argument. 
 
 3. Though infant baptism has no necessary connec- 
 tion with the mode of its administration, yet it is worthy 
 of notice that all those who have adopted the former, 
 regard sprinkling, and those who have opposed it, ac- 
 count submersion, as the proper mode. The Greek 
 church, so far as we know, is the only exception, and 
 even they, as just remarked, conjoin both methods. 
 But every branch of Christendom that practise allusion, 
 also teach infant baptism. These two appear, in some 
 way, to be almost inseparable ; Avhy it is so, it may be 
 difficult to explain. It would therefore seem that if 
 either can be proven to be accordant with Scripture, the 
 other by common consent, follows as a natural conse- 
 quence ; certainly if baptism by affusion be valid, then 
 the universal practice of the world has decided that in- 
 fants should not be excluded. 
 
 4. There is one repulsive fact in the early history of 
 baptism which it is necessary to mention, as we shall 
 have occasion to make use of it in the course of this in- 
 vestigation, but which it is difficult to speak of without 
 infringing on the restraints of delicacy, or seeming to 
 cast ridicule on the primitive mode of administering the 
 solemn ordinance in question. We allude to the circum- 
 stance, that as early at least as the third century, and in 
 subsequent ages when the mode of baptism by submer- 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 161 
 
 sion became more prevalent, the candidate for baptism 
 was, irrespective of age or sex, divested of all cloth- 
 ing- ; we wish to be understood and must therefore speak 
 out ; we mean, people were baptized in a state of perfect 
 nakedness, not even having an outer garment or a single 
 shred of apparel on. " No exception," says Dr. Miller, 
 " was allowed in any case, even when the most timid 
 and delicate female importunately desired it. This fact 
 is established, not only by the most direct and unequivo- 
 cal statements, and that by a number of writers, but also 
 by the narration of a number of curious particulars con- 
 nected with this practice." It is notorious, (says Dr. 
 Stuart,') and admits of no contradiction, that baptism of 
 those days of immersion, was administered to men, wo- 
 men and children, in puris naturalibis, naked as Adam 
 and Eve before their fall, &;c. &c. Cyril of Jerusalem 
 testifies the same thing, " as soon as ye came into the 
 baptistery, ye put off your clothes * * * and being 
 thus divested, ye stood imitating Christ who was naked 
 upon the cross. * * * A wonderful thing ! ye Avere 
 naked in the sight of men and were not ashamed,* &;c. 
 &c. The testimony of the Baptist historian, Robinson, 
 is clear on this subject; he says,^ " Let it be observed, 
 that the primitive Christians baptized naked. Nothing 
 is easier than to give proof of this by quotations from 
 authentic writings of the men who administered baptism, 
 and who certainly knew in what Avay they themselves 
 performed it. There is no historical fact better authen- 
 ticated than this. The evidence doth not go on the 
 meaning of the single word naked ; for then a reader 
 
 'See Bib. Rep. No. 18, p. 380. 
 "Catch. Myst. 2. ^chap. xv. p. 85. 
 
 14* 
 
162 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 might suspect allegory : but on many facts^ reported, 
 and many reasons assigned for the practice. The rea- 
 sons assigned for this practice are, that Christians ought 
 to put oft' the old man before they put on a profession of 
 Christianity ; that as men came naked into the world, 
 so they ought to come naked into the church ; for rich 
 men could not enter the kingdom of heaven ; that it was 
 an imitation of Christ, who laid aside his glory, and 
 made himself of no reputation for them ; and that Adam 
 had forfeited all, and Christians ought to profess to be 
 restored to the enjoyment of all, only by Jesus Christ. 
 That most learned and accurate historian, James Bas- 
 iiage, than whom no man understood church history bet- 
 ter, says, ' Jflien artists threw garments over pictures 
 of the baptized, they consulted the taste of spectators 
 more than the truth of the fact.' " So far Robinson. 
 And Basnage might have added, that all the truly an- 
 cient representations of baptism which he had ever seen, 
 represented the person receiving baptism, as absolutely 
 naked : not even a wrapper around the middle was 
 thought of, till after the simplicity of the gospel was con- 
 siderably vitiated. It was because the case is so clear, 
 that Robinson gave no additional quotations ; and Dr. 
 Wall was influenced by the same consideration. His 
 words are, " The ancient Christians, when they were 
 baptized by immersion, Avere all baptized naked, 
 whether they were men, women or children. Vossius 
 (De Baptism, Disp. i. cap. 6, 7, 8) has collected several 
 proofs of this ; which I shall omit, because it is a clear 
 case." Hist. Bapt. vol. ii. p. 311. 
 
 'Robinson relates several of these facts which transpired in the 
 baptism of those days, but they are too disgusting to find a place in 
 our pages. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 163 
 
 We must here repeat that we do not advert to this in- 
 decorous fact in order to cast odium on the practice of 
 submersion, but because we intend hereafter to make a 
 very grave and important use of it ; since it will appear 
 that we have as good evidence for baptizing in a state of 
 nudity as we have for submersion. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 In treating the subject before us, we shall carefully 
 examine the following propositions : — 
 
 I. Does the NeAv Testament afford any proof that bap- 
 tism Avas administered among the early Christians by 
 submersion?' 
 
 II. Is the mode of baptism of such essential import- 
 ance, that the example would be binding on us ; could it 
 be conclusively shown that either mode constituted the 
 primitive practice ? 
 
 III. Is the mode by affusion decidedly more Scriptural, 
 appropriate and edifying than that by immersion ?* 
 
 1. Does the New Testament afford any proof that bap- 
 tism was administered among the early Christians by 
 submersion ? 
 
 If such proof is contained in the writings of the New 
 Testament, it must be found either in the literal terms 
 used in reference to baptism ; or in the circumstances 
 attending its administration ; or in the metaphorical lan- 
 guage applied to it. 
 
 'By suhmersion, we understand total plunging under the water ; 
 
 immersion, dipping and plunging may be jmrtial or e7itire, according 
 to the circumstances under which the several terms are used. 
 
 ^We shall employ the words: sprinkling, aspersion, pouring, affi^- 
 sio7i and perfusion, interchangeably, not indeed as meaning precisely 
 the same thing, for this is not the fact, but as designating the same 
 general mode of baptism in contradistinction to submersion. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 165 
 
 THE LITERAL TERMS USED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT IN 
 REFERENCE TO BAPTISM. 
 
 1 . It cannot be found in the literal terms used in re- 
 ference to baptism. Where is the express command of 
 Christ or his apostles to baptize by submersion? — we 
 challenge our opponents to point it out. Where is the 
 inspired declaration, that those who received baptism at 
 the hands of the first teachers of Christianity, were 
 plunged entirely under the water? — it has never yet been 
 discovered. The injunction to baptize all, is plain and 
 positive, but respecting the mode of applying the water, 
 nothing is specified. 
 
 The only terms employed in reference to baptism, from 
 the import of which our opponents pretend to be able to 
 prove submersion, are the verb, fiaLTrn^a) and its cognates, 
 and the prepositions s^, m, oltto and ex or i^ — Now, to con- 
 vince our readers that none of these terms afford one 
 particle of evidence in support of submersion, and that 
 if they reflect any light at all on the question, it is in 
 favor of affusion, we shall enter into a fair and impartial 
 investigation of their signification, and state nothing but 
 what we either know or have good reason to believe to 
 be the honest and unvarnished truth. 
 
 The Greek term, /S^.TT/^a) (baptizo) is derived from 
 ^ATTTo, (bapto,) and when used to designate Christian bap- 
 tism, implies the application of Avater to the subject of 
 the ordinance, but not the mode of its application. — More 
 of this hereafter. 
 
 BAPTO. 
 
 Even ^TTTo,^ (bapto,) the root, Aviiich is a stronger 
 
 'This word is never used in reference to Christian baptism ; it oc- 
 curs but four times in the New Testament, viz. Matt. xxvi. 23, Luke 
 xvi. 24, John xiii. 26, and Rev. xix. 13, and is in every instance 
 
166 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 term than its derivative ji:L^Tt(^a> (baptizo), does not uni- 
 formly nor necessarily imply submersion. We indeed 
 admit that this may be its most common sense, nay 
 that it is its primitive sense ; but it is undoubtedly true 
 that tlie same word has passed over to other mean- 
 ings, such as to sprinkle or stam, to clip partially into 
 a fluid, to ivet slightly, to dye, &lq.., without any re- 
 ference to mode. This application of the term was once 
 strenuously resisted by our Baptist brethren, but the more 
 learned among them now entirely abandon this ground. 
 Indeed, so far has the word passed from its original sense, 
 that it is even applied to coloring an object superficially 
 by gold, that is, to gilding. A few examples on so plain 
 a subject, must suffice. One of these examples is found 
 in Rev. xix. 13, "And he was clothed with a vesture 
 dipped in blood; lii^a.f^/ji.inv a.tfA.a.rt, that is, baptized or 
 stained in blood, and that not by being plunged in it, but 
 aspersed or sprinkled with it. That this is a correct par- 
 aphrase is manifest from the nature of the case. The 
 allusion is to a conqueror having his garments stained in 
 battle by the blood of his enemies. Now, it is well 
 known that when a chieftain's garment is thus stained, 
 it is not effected by plunging or submersing it in blood, 
 but by sprinkling or aspersing. Or the figure may refer 
 to a vintager ; and how is his garment baptized or stained 
 
 translated by the Englisli word, dtp, which does not absolutely im- 
 ply total plunging, and has not this signification in either of those 
 passages. It means to incline downward as the magnetic needle ; to 
 examine in a slight and hasty manner, as dipping in the sciences ; to 
 engage slightly in any business, as dipping in the funds, &c.; to enter 
 the water with the extreme point of something, as dipping the end 
 of the finger in it. See Webster and Walker. The idea of entire 
 2)lunging has been attached to it by the fact, that the Baptists have 
 adopted it to designate their mode of baptism. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 167 
 
 by the juice of the grape when engaged in treading the 
 wine-press ? — unquestionably by the occasional sprink- 
 ling or effusion of the juice ; he does not plunge himself 
 into the wine-vat, but the liquor sometimes gushes out 
 upon him. Thus the apparel of our Saviour was not 
 plunged, nor even wholly dyed in blood, when wrestling 
 with the powers of darkness in Gethsemane, but his 
 blood may be supposed to have oozed out, and to have 
 stained it in places. To be convinced of the correctness 
 of this criticism, we request the reader to compare Rev. 
 xix. 11 — 15, with a parallel passage, Isa. Ixiii. 1 — 3, 
 " Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed gar- 
 ments from Bozra. Wherefore art thou red in thine ap- 
 parel and thy garments like him that treadeth the zvine- 
 press. I have ti'odden the wine-press alone ; and of the 
 people there was none with me ; for I will tread them in 
 anger and trample them in my fury and their blood shall 
 be SPRINKLED vpon my garments, and I will stain all 
 my raiment.'''' 
 
 Here then we undoubtedly have one case in which the 
 word in question, does not imply submersion. ^ 
 
 Another may be found in Matt. xxvi. 23 : " He that 
 dippeth his hand with me in the dish," that is, he that 
 baptizeth his hand, o i/xUdi^^^ * * txv x.H^- Now no one 
 acquainted Avith the mode of eating in the east, will pre- 
 tend that Judas plunged his whole hand in the liquid 
 food contained in the dish; "nothing more can be 
 meant," says a distinguished writer, " than that he took 
 tlie bitter herbs which were eaten at the passover, or 
 other articles of food, and with his fingers dipped them 
 in the sauce prepared." It is a point of etiquette among 
 the Turks and others in Oriental countries, when eating, 
 to present any delicate morsel, in the fingers, to the 
 
168 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 mouth of a giiest.^ This accords precisely with- John 
 xiii. 26 : " He it is to whom I shall give a sop (morsel, 
 ■^o/uicv,'^ * * and when he had dipped the morsel, he 
 gave it to Judas," &c. To dip the hand in the platter, 
 then, was not to bury it up to the wrist in the sauce, but 
 simply to take food from it with the fingers in Asiatic 
 style, instead of using a spoon or fork after the manner 
 of our own country. 
 
 The last instance that we shall quote from the Scrip- 
 tures to prove that S^ttto does not necessarily import sub- 
 mersion, is contained Dan. iv. 33, (see also chap. v. 21) : 
 " His body (Nebuchadnezzar's) was wet with the dew 
 of heaven." Here we have a baptism by the descent of 
 dew on him Avho was the subject of it, and the English 
 word ivet, fully expresses the idea intended to be con- 
 veyed. Now, though we have read of " dew-besprin- 
 kled grass," we never have of Aew-submer ged grass. 
 To urge that the dews in Babylon are copious, and that 
 Nebuchadnezzar was therefore thoroughly drenched, by 
 no means removes the difficulty ; for still it was no total 
 plunging. Moreover, no respectable critic will hazard 
 his reputation by assuming this position ; the dews in 
 that country are not now sufficiently remarkable to at- 
 tract the attention of travellers.^ Our Baptist brethren, 
 
 'Tims Dr. Jowett, speaking of their manners, says, "But the 
 practice whicii was most revolting to me was this; when the master 
 of the house found in the dish any dainty morsel, he took it out with 
 his fingers and applied it to my mouth. This was true Syrian cour- 
 tesy and hospitality; and had I been sufficiently well-bred, my 
 mouth would have opened to receive it." — Christian Researches in 
 Syria, &c. — See Robinson's Calmet, art. Eating. 
 
 -Mr. Rich, in his " Memoir on the Ruins of Babylon," though 
 he speaks of gardens and cultivation, says nothing of dews. Lon- 
 don, 1815. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 169 
 
 in their efforts to show, that to be moistened with the 
 falling dew, is tantamount to submersion, are unwittingly- 
 establishing the validity of baptism by sprinkling, for it 
 is virtually proving that sprinkling is equivalent to their 
 ideas of submersion. 
 
 We have now adduced three distinct examples, taken 
 from the Sacred Writings, in neither of which the word 
 implies total plunging, or even any thing like it. 
 We might also with equal propriety have referred to the 
 case of the rich man (Luke xvi. 24,) who prayed Abra- 
 ham to send Lazarus that he might dip {fia-TrTt) the tip of 
 his finger, &c. But the foregoing are sufficient for our 
 purpose.' 
 
 Let us next inquire into the meaning of the word 
 as used by profane authors. " In the battle of the frogs 
 and mice, a mouse is represented as dyeing or color- 
 ing the lake with his blood — i<^a.7r]{lo aufxAli a/^v«. On this 
 there was once a battle royal to prove that it could be 
 proper to speak of dipping a lake into the blood of a 
 mouse; and all the powers of rhetoric were put in re- 
 quisition to justify the usage. Hear now Mr. Carson, 
 inferior in learning and research to none of the Baptists : 
 "To suppose that there is here any extravagant allusion 
 to the literal immersion or dipping of a lake, is a mon- 
 strous perversion of taste. The lake is said to be dyed, 
 
 'The learned Taylor in commenting on these several cases, uses 
 the following energetic language : " Now, will any man persuade 
 me, that language tolerates the expression ' to plunge tlie tip of a 
 finger V — that Christianity tolerates the notion of our Lord Jesus 
 ' wearing a garment plunged in blood ?' — that common decency tole- 
 rates the plunging of two hands in the same dish, or, for aught I 
 know, no less tlian thirteen hands, at the same moment 1 No, sir ! 
 what I would not believe of Hottentots, without ample evidence, I 
 will not believe of Christ." 
 15 
 
170 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 not to be dipped, or poured, or sprinkled. There is in 
 the word no reference to mode. Had Baptists entrenched 
 themselves here, they would have saved themselves much 
 useless toil, and much false criticism, without straining 
 to the impeachment of their candor or their taste. What 
 a monstrous paradox in rhetoric is the figuring of the 
 dipping of a lake in the blood of a mouse! Yet Dr. 
 Gale supposes that the lake was dipped by hyperbole. 
 The literal sense he says is, the lake was dipped in 
 blood. Never was there such a figure. The lake is not 
 said to be dipped in blood, but to be dyed with blood.' 
 p. 67, Am. edition, N. York, 1832. This is well said, 
 and is the more to our purpose on account of its author. 
 Indeed his whole discussion of this point is able, lucid, 
 and decisive. Of the examples adduced by him we shall 
 quote one or two more. 
 
 '"Hippocrates employs it to denote dying, by drop- 
 ping the dying liquid on the thing dyed : iTntScty i7no-la.^n 
 iTTt TO, ifj.dLTist lia.TWaii : ' When it di'ops upon the garments 
 they are dyed.'' This surely is not dying by dipping.' " 
 Carson, p. 60. 
 
 "'Again. In Arrian — Expedition of Alexander: tovi 
 ii Trofyma.^ xiyit 'i<iiaepc'^c oTi ioLTrTrnTOii ivcTo;: ' Nearclius relates 
 that the Indians dye their beards.' It will not be con- 
 tended that they dyed their beards by immersion.' p. 61. 
 
 " He quotes cases in which it is used to describe the 
 coloring of the hair ; the staining of a garment by blood ; 
 the staining of the hand by crushing a coloring substance 
 in it ; for which, and others of a like kind, we refer to 
 him, and to Prof. Stuart. 
 
 " In the compounds and derivations of this word the 
 sense to dye is very extensive ; to be fully satisfied of 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 171 
 
 which, let any one examine tlie Thesaurus of H. Ste- 
 phens, or the abbreviation of it by Scapula on this word. 
 
 "It is compounded with colors of all kinds, as 7ro^<pu^i>- 
 jfi*<5»)c usL;j^ivQivo/iu.<j»tg, of a purple, or hyacinthine dye. It 
 denotes a dyer, a dying vat, a dye-house, etc., 0^<pi'j; jix- 
 ^uov, etc., and it even passes, as before stated, to cases in 
 which a new color is produced by the external application 
 of a solid, as ;t§!^<^'^*<P«f) colored with gold, or gilded. 
 
 " But it is needless to quote at large all the examples 
 which might be adduced to illustrate and confirm these 
 points ; and as all that we claim is conceded even by our 
 Baptist brethren, to proceed farther would seem like an 
 attempt at useless display."' 
 
 In accordance with the foregoing criticisms, is the tes- 
 timony of Mr. Edwards and Dr. John Dick. " I would 
 say thus much," remarks the former, " of the term 0x7rloy 
 tlaat it is a term of such latitude, that he who shall attempt 
 to prove, from its use in various authors, an absolute and 
 total immersion, will find he has undertaken that which 
 he cannot finally perform ;" and the latter adds, " 1 do 
 not intend to deny that 0:t7rrce ever means to dip, but that 
 this is its only sense ; and hence we may fairly conclude, 
 that although its derivative JSattIi^oj means to immerse, it 
 does not follow that this is its only signification." 
 
 We close this critique by remarking, that the Rev. 
 John Graves, who was undoubtedly an honest and inde- 
 pendent Greek lexicographer, with Parkhurst and other 
 distinguished men, says : "Ba^ra (bapto) signifies to dip, 
 plunge, immerse; to ivash; to ivet, moisten, sprinkle ^ 
 to steep, imbue, to dye, stain, color.'''' 
 
 'See Bib. Rep. for Jan. 1840, p. 50, &c. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 BAPTIZO. 
 
 The next object of inquiry is, the true import of ^u-rcn^u 
 (baptizo), one of the derivatives oi ^t-n-Tu; and here let it 
 be observed that by the laws of etymology, derivative 
 words lose some of the force of their primitives. Thus 
 TTxa-xo! (pascho) to suffer; but ^raSca- (^pathos), its derivative, 
 signifies passion, evil affection; otttts; (pipto) to fall; but 
 its derivative, 7rTa.ice (ptaio) means to stumble, or partly 
 fall. Hence we may reasonably presume that if Ba^T» 
 primarily signifies submerge, plunge, bedew, stain, wet, 
 •fee, its derivative, /i^tTni^o!, may indicate something less 
 than submersing, plunging, &c., just as in English, the 
 word blackish, (a derivative of black) signifies not quite 
 black, and reddish (a derivative of red) signifies not alto- 
 gether red, &c. 
 
 It is well known that our Baptist friends have confi- 
 dently maintained, that the only legitimate and authorized 
 meaning of this word, is to submerse ; but the fact just 
 adverted to, in reference to its root, affords presumptive 
 evidence to the contrary; and if the testimony of the 
 most profound and competent Greek scholars that ever 
 lived, may be depended upon, there are many examples 
 in the Holy Scriptures, in which it can mean nothing 
 more than affusion, aspersion or partial washing. 
 
 If we should even concede that the original or etymo- 
 logical import of Bolttti^o) was to submerse, yet would this 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 173 
 
 by no means settle its sense in relation to Christian bap- 
 tism. For we all knoAV that words are used in more 
 meanings than one, and that they frequently depart from 
 their primiti(?e ideas and pass over to meanings quite di- 
 verse. That a term originally signifying to submerse 
 should assume the idea of sprinkling, is so natural and 
 probable, that the slightest attention to the laws of the 
 mind and to well known facts will leave no room to doubt. 
 "No principal," remarks President Beecher, " is more 
 universally admitted by all sound philologists, than that 
 to establish the original and primitive meaning of a word, 
 is not at all decisive as it regards its subsequent usages. 
 It often aids only as giving a clue by which we can trace 
 the progress of the imagination, or the association of 
 ideas in leading the mind from meaning to meaning, on 
 some ground of relative similitude, or connection of cause 
 and effect. 
 
 So the verb to spring, denotes an act, and gives rise 
 to a noun denoting an act. A perception of similitude 
 transfers the word to the issuing of water from a fountain 
 — to the motion of a watch-spring — and to the springing 
 of plants in the spring of the year. Yet who does not 
 feel that to be able to trace such a process of thought, is 
 far from proving that, when a man in one case says, I 
 made a spring over the ditch, in another, I broke the 
 spring of my watch, in another, I drank from the spring, 
 in another, I prefer spring to winter, he means in each 
 case the same thing by the word spring? And who in 
 using these words, always resorts to the original idea of 
 the verb ? Indeed, so far is it from being true that this 
 is commonly done, that most persons are pleased when 
 the track of the mind is uncovered, and the path is 
 pointed out by which it passed from meaning to meaning, 
 15* 
 
174 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 as if a new idea had been acquired — so conversation, 
 j)revent, charity, as now used, have obviously departed 
 widely from the sense in which they were used in the 
 days of the translators of the Bible. 
 
 " But to multiply words on a point so plain, would be 
 needless, had not so much stress been laid on the sup- 
 posed original meaning of this word. It is therefore too 
 plain to be denied, that words do often so far depart from 
 their primitive meaning, as entirely to leave out the orig- 
 inal idea — and that the secondary senses of a word are 
 often by far the most numerous and important. 
 
 The Editor of Calmet quotes some eighty examples, 
 taken in part from the ancient fathers and classic writers, 
 hut chiefly from the Bible, in every one of which, the 
 word in question implies less than submersion, and in 
 most of them, no more than aflfusion, moistening, pour- 
 ing or staining. We can do no more than examine a 
 few of them. 
 
 The first that we shall take up is recorded Mark vii. 4- 
 " And many other things there be which they have re- 
 ceived to hold, as the washing {li:f^Tta-fx'.v; — the hap- 
 tisms) of cups and pots, brazen vessels and of tables." 
 The word translated tables is ka/i-^v (klinon), which means 
 beds or couches ; thus the word is rendered in the 30th 
 verse of the same chapter and in the other eight passages 
 in which it occurs. "Now," says Mr. Woods, "the 
 baptism or ceremonial purification of cups, and pots, and 
 brazen vessels, and couches, was doubtless performed in 
 different ways. Cups and pots and brazen vessels might 
 possibly be immersed all over in water ; though this is 
 not probable. But to suppose that beds or couches were 
 immersed in the same way, would be unreasonable, espe- 
 cially since one of the prescribed modes of ceremonial 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 175 
 
 purification, and indeed the most common mode, was the 
 sprinkling of consecrated ivater." We do not deny the 
 abstract possibility of plunging beds under water, but 
 would it have been practicable to do so as often as the 
 superstitious fastidiousness of the Pharisees required a 
 lustration, without at the same time rendering them con- 
 stantly unfit for use? The orientals have no chairs, they 
 sit or recline on divans or a kind of sofas, which also 
 serve the purpose of bedsteads. Whenever an unclean 
 person sat upon these divans, they were thereby rendered 
 ceremoniously unclean, and every one that touched them 
 previously to their purification, was in like manner de- 
 filed. The Pharisees carried their notions on this point 
 to an extravagant length and precision, and frequently 
 baptized their beds and other furniture, although they 
 knew of no actual defilement, in order to guard against 
 any possible impurity. But that they on all such occa- 
 sions plunged their beds under the water, is not only in- 
 credible, but absolutely impossible. The testimony of 
 Dr. Fisk and Dr. A. Clarke on this subject is just in 
 point. " There is no reason to think," says the former' 
 " that this baptism consisted in immersion. 'Cups and 
 pots, and brazen vessels,' may have been baptized by 
 being plunged into water; but, as the operation could 
 have been performed equally well, by pouring water into 
 them and upon them, we can draw no certain conclusion 
 respecting the mode, and the words /2*^t/^5,7 and i^^Tnia-- 
 (Mw; convey nothing more than the general idea of ivash- 
 ing. The last word in the passage, x.Ktvm, is improperly 
 rendered tables, in our version, and the proper translation 
 is beds or couches. — These were the couches on which 
 they reclined at their meals. They were so large, as to 
 'Theology, Vol. ii. 375. 
 
176 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 hold several persons at the same time ; and, from their 
 size, it seems reasonable to suppose that they were "Jojo- 
 tizecV not by being immersed in water, but by being 
 washed ivith the hand, or sprinkled, to remove any real 
 or fancied impurity." 
 
 "As the word fidL7r]t<r/A.av;, baptisms,'''' adds Dr. Clark' 
 " is applied to all these; and as it is contended, that this 
 word, and the verb whence it is derived, signify dipping 
 or immersion alone, its use in the above cases refutes that 
 opinion ; and shows that it was used, not only to express 
 dipping or immersion, but also sprinkling and wash' 
 ingr 
 
 The second passage illustrating the meaning of 'RauTrli^o, 
 to which we ask attention, is found John iii. 25 — 26 
 " then there arose a question between some of John's 
 disciples and the Jews about purifying. And they came 
 to John and said unto him Rabbi, he that was with thee 
 beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, the same 
 baptizeth and all men come to him." 
 
 The subject of dispute was a Jewish ordinance, called 
 purification ; in order to setde the question the parties 
 appealed to John on the subject of baptism. This proves 
 that a controversy respecting one, equally involved the 
 other, or else their appeal was totally irrelevant. By 
 the way we would remark, that this passage determines 
 John's baptism to have been or to have partaken of the 
 nature of Jewish purification. But if baptism and puri- 
 fication are hindred terms, it follows that baptism some- 
 times denotes sprinkling, because the ordinance of puri- 
 fication was in most instances performed by sprinkling. 
 
 But Paul is still more explicit on this point. He says 
 concerning the Levitical institutions, that they "stood 
 
 •Comment on Mark vii. 4. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 177 
 
 only in meats and drinks, and divers tvashings, JiA<popotc, 
 ^ATrlcTfxoi;, different ba])tis7ns," &c. Tliese different bap- 
 tisms were different modes of ablution, such as sprink- 
 ling, pouring, bathing, &c. and among the rest, sprink- 
 ling was the most frequent and prominent. As they were 
 all legal purifications, the law of Moses must decide the 
 mode of performing them. We find full explanations in 
 the Pentateuch, Levit. xiv. 7. '* And he shall sprinkle 
 upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven 
 times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the 
 living bird loose into the open field." Numbers 8. 7. 
 " And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them : 
 sprinkle water of purifying upon them, and let them 
 shave all their flesh, and let them wash their clothes, and 
 so make themselves clean." See also chap. xix. 18, &c. 
 " In allusion to this established and well understood mode 
 of baptizing or sprinkling, in order to cleanse or purify, 
 we find Isaiah speaking, in his remarkable description of 
 the atonement of Christ. Isaiah lii. 15, 'So, shall he 
 sprinkle many nations.' Hence, too, when Ezekiel de- 
 scribes the future purification of the people of God, he 
 says, Ezek, xxxvi. 25, ' Then will I sprinkle clean water 
 upon you, and ye shall be clean ; from all your filthiness 
 and from all your idols will I cleanse you.' Sometimes 
 oil was used for sprinkling (see Levit. xiv. IG,) some- 
 times blood (see Levit v. 9, Number 19, 1 — 4,) but the 
 persons or objects to be cleansed or purified were not 
 dipped in oil or blood, since it is always expressly stated, 
 that the oil or blood or water was sprinkled. These facts 
 speak for themselves — they scarcely need an application. 
 We do not find even the most remote allusion to the act 
 of immersion.' 
 
 'Essays on the Mode of Christian Baptism by the Rev. Prof. 
 C. F. Schaefter. See Luth. Obs. Vol. 3, No. 17. 
 
178 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 This same subject is referred to by the apostle, Heb* 
 vi. 2, where he enumerates among the principles of the 
 gospel, " the doctrine of baptisms," l^i-TrTia-fAm^ that is, of 
 ritual purifications under the law, which were still in part 
 adhered to among the Hebrew Christians, and were aU 
 emblematic of that purity which a holy God requires in 
 his worshippers, and which in this figurative sense 
 might be classed among the first principles of the gospel. 
 There is however, another use which we wish to make 
 of this passage ; our opponents tell us that the passage, 
 " one Lord, one faith, one baptism,"^ imports that there 
 is but one mode of baptism, but if this argument be 
 good, then by parity of reasoning, the plural number, 
 baptisms, imports a plurality of modes. Our branch 
 of the argument is just as conclusive as the other. But 
 to continue our illustrations of the meaning of the word 
 fieeTTTi^w in relation to ceremonial purifications ; it is said, 
 Luke xi. 38, " And when the Pharisee saw it, he mar- 
 velled that he (Christ) had not first washed efiuTrTia-Bn, 
 baptized, before dinner." So also Mark vii. 4 : " And 
 when they come from the market, except they wash, 
 0A7rTia-a>na.i, baptize, they eat not." Here Ave must again 
 remind the reader that these washings or baptisms were 
 not performed for the purpose of physical cleanliness ; 
 they were ceremonial purifications, mere superstitious 
 refinings, upon the Mosaic ordinances concerning ablu- 
 tion. The question then, to be decided, in order to as- 
 certain the meaning of Hct/arTi^o) in these passages, is : 
 what was the mode of washing hands among the Phari- 
 sees and Jews generally ? We maintain that it was by 
 pouring water upon them. 2 Kings iii. 2 : " Here is 
 Elisha Ben-Shapat, who poured water on the hands of 
 Elijah. The same practice prevailed in the days of 
 
 lEph. iv. 6. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 179 
 
 Christ, and continues to this day in the east, for customs 
 seldom or never change in that part of the world. " The 
 table being removed," says Pitts, "before they rise from 
 the ground on which they sit, a slave or servant, who 
 stands attending on them with a cup of water to give 
 them drink, steps into the middle with a basin, or cop- 
 per pot of water, something like a coffee-pot, and a little 
 soap, and lets the water run upon their hands one after 
 another as they sit. Such service, it appears, Elisha 
 performed for Elijah." On this subject D'Ohsson re- 
 marks : " The Mussulman is generally seated on the 
 edge of a sofa Avith a pewter or copper vessel, lined with 
 tin, placed before him upon a round piece of red cloth, 
 to prevent the carpet or mat from being wet : a servant 
 kneeling on the ground, pours out the water for his 
 master, another holds a cloth destined for the purifica- 
 tions. The person who purifies himself, begins by 
 baring the arms as far as the elbow. As he washes his 
 hands, mouth, nostrils, face, arms. Sic, he repeats the 
 proper prayers. It is probable that Mohammed fol- 
 lowed, on this subject, the book of Leviticus." In the 
 Report of Mr. Oscanyan's Lectures on Constantinople, 
 contained in the Boston Recorder, Jan. 4, 1839, is this 
 passage : " The Osmanlis are remarkable for their atten- 
 tion to cleanliness. * * * When they wash, the water 
 is poured from a vase upon the hands, over a wide ba- 
 sin — they never make use of a basin or a tub to wash 
 in, as is the practice elsew^here. It is a common observa- 
 tion among the Osmanlis, that cleanliness corresponds 
 with the purity and integrity of the mind." 
 
 Dr. A. Clarke says, on Mark vii. 4, " Ba'JD-T/trwTiw may 
 mean either to wash or dip. But instead of the word in 
 the text, the famous Codex Vaticans, eight others, and 
 
180 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Huthymius, have gwT<^■a)^Ta/, sprinkle. According to 
 these authorities, then, the Jews sprinkled their hands 
 before eating. And that this was often practised, seems 
 extremely probable from the circumstance that these 
 were mere ceremonial washings or purifications." 
 
 If then in these instances of legal purifications, bap- 
 tizing implies, as it most unquestionably does, the pour- 
 ing or sprinkling of water on the beds, furniture, hands, 
 (fee, common sense tells us that it cannot at the same 
 time mean submersing or total plunging. 
 
 Another instance of the use of fi^.-m-Ti^m, in which the 
 idea of entire immersion is precluded, is contained in the 
 account of the marriage at Cana. On this passage as 
 well as on the three succeding ones, Ave have adopted 
 the judicious comments of the Rev. Prof. C. F. Schaef- 
 fer.^ " The six water-pots of stone which our Saviour 
 found at the marriage in Cana, John ii. 6, and which 
 contained ' two or three firkins apiece,' held water to be 
 used, as the passage itself tells us, v. 6, for ' the purify- 
 ing of the Jews.' John calls a firkin in Greek /M67g«7«c, 
 a word used by the Septuagint to express the Hebrew 
 'bath,' or 'ephah.' See 2 Chron. iv. 5, in the Hebrew 
 and Septuagint. An ephah was equal to seven gallons 
 and a half. See Home's Introd. vol. iii. p. 555. Sup- 
 pose that on an average, each pot contained two firkins 
 and a half — the capacity of each would be equal to eigh- 
 teen gallons and three quarters. Another calculation 
 which we have made (for there is some uncertainty in 
 reducing ancient weights, measures, &c., to the modern 
 standard) would leave even this quantity too large, and 
 •agree better with the estimate of Wilson. This writer, 
 whose account we find in Home's Introd. vol. iii. p. 326, 
 
 • 'See Essays, &c., Luth. Obs. vol. iii. No. 17. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 181 
 
 says in his Travels in Egypt and the Holy Land, p. 339, 
 that the shape of the water-pots in those countries re- 
 sembled ' the bottles used in our country for containing 
 vitriol, having great bodies and small necks,' and that 
 those which he saw at Cana contained ' three firkins,' 
 that is, about twelve gallons each. 
 
 " Here we have facts. We know that the guests at the 
 nuptial celebration, baptized, that is, washed their hands. 
 The water was poured on their hands by an attendant, 
 an instance of which we find in 2 Kings iii. 11, ' Here 
 is Elisha — which poured water on the hands of Elijah,' 
 that is, here is Elisha, who was formerly the attendant 
 of Elijah, who aided the latter in performing his legal 
 ablutions. Of course the guests did not attempt to dip 
 themselves in these bottles or pots, even if the limited 
 quantity of water would have sufiiced for the bathing of 
 the large number of guests. We may conclude that 
 they tvashed, that is, in Greek, baptized, by having the 
 water applied in the usual way. 
 
 " So far we have at least negative proof, that 0A^li^a) 
 cannot always mean 'dip.' Indeed we see the word 
 applied to the act of sprinkling or pouring, by the sacred 
 writers in such a manner as to convince us that they 
 deemed the word not liable to be misunderstood. Any 
 Jew who read their writings would naturally judge that 
 the Greek '/S^^t;,^*' was the Hebrew 'sprinkle.' 
 
 " Another instance will confirm this view. We read 
 in 1 Cor. x. 1 — 2, ' all our fathers were all baptized unto 
 Moses in the cloud and in the sea.' The question is : 
 How were the Israelites baptized on the occasion to 
 which Paul refers, i. e. when the Egyptians were in 
 pursuit of them and had reached the sea ? As it is not 
 Christian baptism of which the apostle speaks, he calls 
 the application of water to the Israelites a baptism, evi- 
 16 
 
182 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 dently from the similarity in Avhich water in both cases 
 was applied. Now were they dipped in water — im- 
 mersed? But Moses expressly says, Exod. xiv. 22, 
 The children of Israel Avent into the midst of the sea 
 upon the dry ground. How then could they be im- 
 mersed ? Let us, in imagination, represent the scene to 
 ourselves. The Avaters, flowing to the line, and there 
 checked and rising upward, (for they were a wall unto 
 them on their right hand, and on their left hand,) dashed 
 their spray upon the Israelites as they walked onward. 
 A dew or rain from the cloud likewise descended. See 
 Psalms Ixxvii. 15 — 20. This sprinkling of the water as 
 it fell on them from above, appeared to Paul to resemble 
 so strongly the pouring or sprinkling of water in drops, 
 on the head of the candidate for baptism, that in his 
 usual bold style, he did not hesitate to call it a baptism. 
 There was, it is true, on this same occasion, a genuine 
 case of immersion, but it was the Egyptian army that 
 was so completely dipped under water, and hence Paul 
 is very careful not to say that they (the Egyptians) were 
 baptized. How shall this passage be otherwise ex- 
 plained ? Shall we say that the Israelites, between the 
 two walls of water, were thus in a manner immersed ? 
 But then the somewhat mysterious conclusion would 
 foUoAV, that a person may be dipped in water, (if ^^'n- 
 7/^01 has such a meaning,) and yet not leave " the dry 
 ground.''^ If so, then those who dip in the water, espe- 
 cially when sickly persons are to submit to the opera- 
 tion, should provide two large brewers' vessels, fill them 
 with water, and lead the persons who are to be dipped, 
 on " dry ground" between them. The folly of such a 
 procedure is obvious. We m-ust give some rational 
 meaning to the words of the apostle, and we have given 
 the only one which the passage appears to admit/' 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Though the argument contained in 1 Cor. x. 1 — 2, as 
 illustrated in the preceding chapter, can scarcely fail to 
 prove satisfactory to every unprejudiced mind, yet in 
 order to fortify it still more abundantly, we must add a 
 remark or two. In order to evade the force of this argu- 
 ment, it has been maintained, that the language of the 
 apostle is tigurative, and that the "cloud" was over the 
 heads of the Israelites while the waters of the Red Sea 
 stood in walls on either hand, — thus surrounding them 
 in a manner, beautifully typical of submersion. With 
 such flights of fancy, our imagination is indeed regaled, 
 but our understanding is not enlightened. Besides, it 
 is distinctly stated, that the cloud, during the passage 
 through the Red Sea, stood not over the heads of the 
 Israelites, but behind them. Exod. xiv. 19 — 20. The 
 fact is, it alternately went behind them and before them ; 
 now hanging in their rear, for the purpose of concealing 
 them from their enemies ; and then preceding them in 
 their course, presenting a face of splendor to them, and 
 a face of darkness to their pursuers. 
 
 It seems to have been generally taken for granted that 
 the baptism "in the cloud and in the sea," took place at 
 the same instant of time ; whereas, it is by no means 
 clear that this was the case, the grammatical structure of 
 the passage in Corinthians fairly conveys the idea o( tivo 
 
184 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 distinct times of baptism, — one " in the cloud" and the 
 other "in the sea;" and with this hypothesis agree the 
 Old Testament accounts.^ 
 
 The apostle says that " all our fathers were uVo ^nv vi<pi\»v 
 UNDER the cloud, and were all baptized iv in the cloud," 
 or with the cloud. This shows that the cloud with 
 Avhich they were baptized, stood over their heads at 
 the time, as the psalmist says, "He spread a cloud for 
 a covering." But this description does not apply to the 
 time of their passing the Red Sea, but to a subsequent 
 period ; and the cloud was not the same that gave them 
 light by night. Both the psalmist and Deborah and 
 Baruk, place the time of the "ram" from the cloud sub- 
 sequently to the passage of the Red Sea, and the latter 
 associates that phenomenon with the scenes of Sinai. 
 Judges v. 5. How beautiful is the sentiment of the psalm- 
 ist! When that immense multitude were moving over 
 a tract of desert, described by the concurrent testimony 
 of all oriental travellers who have^ visited it, to be most 
 "horrible," — exposed to the burning rays of an Arabian 
 sun, and pi'ompted by a parching thirst and numerous 
 privations, to tempt God and doubt the divine legation of 
 Moses; then it was that God "did send a plentiful 
 RAIN whereby he confirmed his inheritance" in their 
 allegiance to him and Moses their leader. This, we ap- 
 prehend, is what the apostle calls being baptized in the 
 cloud; and it was with strict philosophical propriety of 
 language, that he says they were baptized ^v in or tvith 
 the cloud, when that cloud was being distilled upon them 
 in drops of rain. 
 
 That the Israelites were literally baptized with water, 
 I can see no just ground to deny. That they were 5w6» 
 
 'Psalms Ixviu. 7 — 9 ; Judges v. 4. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 185 
 
 mersed in the cloud, no sensible man ought to affirm,. 
 As to their baptism in the sea, we know it was not by- 
 submersion. It seems most probable that, as the climate 
 was oppressively Avarm, and the people, being closely- 
 pursued by the Egyptians, were greatly fatigued, God 
 refreshed them, (baptized them,) by sprays of the sea 
 being blown over them. We indeed know that this must 
 have been a necessary consequence, as " a strong wind 
 prevailed all that night." Exod. xiv. 21. This is the 
 more probable inasmuch as it was so opportune to the 
 necessities of the people, and also so analogous to their 
 baptism in the cloud. Who can help but perceive that 
 die argument against the doctrine, that CuttIi^w always 
 signifies submersion, drawn from the text under consider- 
 ation, is and must forever remain complete. We will only 
 add, that the new translation of the Campbellite Testa- 
 ment, as well as the Baptist construction, which reads : 
 ." And were all immersed into Moses in the cloud and in 
 tlie sea, " contradicts the facts in the history no less than 
 it does good sense, and is an imposition on the intelli- 
 gence and candor of the age. 
 
 A few examples taken from other than the inspired 
 writings, to show the meaning of 0A7rli^a>, shall close this 
 tedious examination. This word is applied to the pour- 
 ing of a fluid copiously over any thing, so as to thoroughly 
 wet it, though not completely or permanently to submerge 
 it. Thus, Origen referring to the copious pouring of 
 water by Elijah on the wood and on the sacrifice, re- 
 presents him as baptizing them. In this case then, it 
 evidently means pouring and not submersing. It is also 
 applied to cases where a fluid without any agent rolls over 
 or floods, and covers any thing, as in Diodorus Siculus, 
 vol. vii p. 191, as translated by Prof. Stuart: ^The 
 16* 
 
186 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 river borne along by a more violent current, overwhelmed 
 many («/2a7r7/,^s.) So, vol. i. p. 107, he speaks of land 
 animals intercepted by the Nile, as ^iTrli^o/uba., over- 
 whelmed, and perishing. The same mode of speaking 
 is also applied to the sea-shore, which is spoken of by 
 Aristotle as baptized or overwhelmed by the tide. It is 
 also applied in cases where some person or thing sinks 
 passively into the flood. Thus Josephus, in narrating 
 his shipwreck on the Adriatic, uses this word to describe 
 the sinking of the ship. Now, if the word be restricted 
 to the sense it has in some of these quotations, then, to 
 baptize a person, means to drown him. But enough. 
 We have already adduced more than a dozen cases, in 
 which /S^Trli^ce or one or the other of its cognates occurs, 
 and as we think, incontrovertibly proven that it does not 
 in a single one of these instances, imply submersion. One 
 solitary example would have been sufficient for the object 
 we had in view, but in order to guard against every quib- 
 ble and "make assurance doubly sure," we have fur- 
 nished a variety of examples. Our case then is fairly 
 made out, viz. that to baptize does not uniformly nor 
 necessarily signify submersion ; it simply implies the ap- 
 jilication of water, without specifying the mode of that 
 application. Sometimes it indeed means submersion, 
 but frequently only sprinkling, aspersing, &;c., which is 
 all we designed to prove and abundantly answers our 
 purpose. Of course the word itself affords no clue 
 whereby we can determine its precise signification. Nor 
 should the plain English reader be surprised at this, for 
 there are numerous analagous words in the English and 
 other languages. Take for instance as the first that oc- 
 curs to us, ivash, which in its primary sense means to 
 cleanse by a purifying fluid, as water, but by no means 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 187 
 
 defines the mode of applying the water. It may be done 
 by pouring, dropping, sprinkling, rubbing, moistening, 
 bathing, overflowing, phmging, or by some other process ; 
 further, it may refer to the body in general or only a 
 part of it; and in every case the act may with strict pro- 
 priety be termed a washing. But this word also passes 
 over into other meanings, and in its progress, drops its 
 original idea, and assumes a signification that involves 
 neither to purify nor to use a fluid at all. President 
 Beecher's illustrations drawn from this word, are so 
 much to the point that we cannot forbear adding them. 
 
 "As washing is often performed by a superficial appli- 
 cation of a fluid, it often assumes this sense and loses 
 entirely the idea of cleansing, as Avhen we speak of wash- 
 ing a wound with brandy, or Avith some cooling applica- 
 tion to alleviate inflammation. In this case we aim not 
 at cleansing but at medicinal eflject. So Ave speak of the 
 sea as washing the shores or rocks, denoting not cleans- 
 ing, but the copious supei-ficial application of a fluid. 
 
 " Again, as a superficial application of a fluid or a 
 coloring mixture is often made for the sake of changing 
 the color, we have to white-wash, to red-wash, to yellow- 
 wash ; and the substances or fluid mixtures Avith which 
 this is done, are called AVashes. 
 
 " Next it drops the idea of a fluid entirely, and assumes 
 the sense of a superficial application of a solid — as' to 
 Avash Avith silver or gold. 
 
 " And here a remarkable coincidence in result, in 
 Avords of meaning originally unlike, deserves notice as a 
 striking illustration of the progress of the mind in effect- 
 ing such changes. 
 
 In Greek I^-^'^Ik denotes originally to immerse — action 
 alone, Avithout reference to effect. In English wash de- 
 notes to cleanse or purify alone, Avithout reference to 
 
188 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 mode. Yet by the operation of the laws of association, 
 both are used to denote coloring, and both to denote 
 covering superficially with silver or gold. 
 
 " Finally, when we speak of the wash of a cow-yard, 
 and call those places where deposits of earth or filth, or 
 vegetable matter, are made, washes, who will contend 
 that the idea of purity is retained?" 
 
 Similar transitions of meaning could be pointed out in 
 many other English words ; also in Latin terms, as for 
 instance Hugo, lustro, lavo, &c. Now with such facts 
 before us, to increase the number of which indefinitely, 
 were perfectly easy, who can say that there is the slight- 
 est improbability in the idea that the word /iaL?rli^a> should 
 pass from the sense to submerse, to the sense to sprinkle 
 or even to purify irrespective of mode ? Can /3aw7», tingo 
 and wash, pass through such varied transitions and can- 
 not ^a.Trji^ai ? 
 
 The question before us then, is evidently not a purely 
 philological one ; it has indeed been too generally treated 
 as such, and this has no doubt tended to involve it in in- 
 creased obscurity; but if we would do justice to it, we 
 must extend our investigations far beyond a mere consult- 
 ation of our Greek dictionary and grammar; Ave must 
 examine the context, the time, occasion, the habits, man- 
 ners, customs and general ideas of the people, and even 
 their peculiar usages, in fine, all the circumstances that 
 stand in relation to the specific use of the word and to 
 the transaction which it implies. 
 
 It is a remarkable fact, that notwithstanding the copi- 
 ousness of the Greek language, whenever baptism is 
 spoken of in the New Testament, the same words are 
 invariably employed to express it ; and these are the verb 
 fiajTrlt^a, and its derivative noun ^^ttIitij.^. This certainly 
 does not arise from any poverty in the Greek language. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 189 
 
 111 English (we mean Saxon English,) we have at least 
 four words to express the application of water, viz. 
 jtlunge, dip, sprinkle, pour, to which we may add the 
 general verb wash. But the Greek language is much 
 more copious. While we have but one verb to express 
 entire immersion, viz. the Avord plunge, the Greek lan- 
 guage has five or six. Such as x.st.rAa-va), KAruTrovn^ie, KXTa&oLTr- 
 
 Ti^ce, ifx^ATTTic^o), iy.&:L7rTu>, and perhaps some others. The 
 Greeks had also verbs to express dip, sprinkle and pour ; 
 and two or three to express wash, but they abounded 
 more in verbs to express total immersion than perhaps 
 any thing else. Yet amidst this profusion to express it 
 unequivocally, the writers of the New Testament reject 
 them all, when speaking of baptism, and confine them- 
 selves to /2=t3-7/^a', and ^■j.TtlwfjLa.y 
 
 When speaking of the ordinance of baptism they do 
 not call it immersion, or sprinkling, or pouring upon, but 
 emphatically baptism. It seems that no other verb but 
 0x7rlt^ai, and its derivative noun would answer the pur- 
 pose. This is a fact Avorthy of special notice, and shows 
 the importance of ascertaining the exact meaning of tliis 
 verb, and wherein it differs from other verbs expressing 
 the application of water. To this we have particularly 
 directed our attention, and the result is, that all the Greek 
 verbs which express the use of water, except 0x7rri^a', and 
 its cognates, refer to the manner of using it, without 
 specifying the purpose for which it Avas used. Consid- 
 ering this verb as indicating the purpose for Avhich Avater 
 
 'If they had intended to teach us that baptism was performed by 
 submersion, and they had chosen to use the verb fixvn^a, at all, they 
 would have prefixed the preposition nxla. or s^, which would have 
 given force to the simple term, and thus have placed the matter be- 
 yond dispute. 
 
190 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 was to be applied, we plainly perceive one reason why 
 it was selected by the writers of the New Testament as 
 the word, and the only word, suitable to express the ordi- 
 nance of baptism. And we can also easily see why the 
 translators of our Bible chose to retain, in this instance, 
 the original Greek word, only making such a slight 
 change in the letters as would make it conform to the 
 idiom of our language. Indeed they had no other alter- 
 native, unless they had chosen to make their translation 
 ridiculous. Suppose they had been Baptists in sentiment, 
 and had determined to reject the Greek words baptize 
 and baptism, and translated the original words into plain 
 Saxon English, and instead of the "baptism of repent- 
 ance," they had given us the plunging of repentance, 
 and instead of Christ's emphatic words, " I have a bap- 
 tism to be baptized with," the translators had given us, / 
 have a plunging to be plunged ivith, every one must at 
 once see the monstrous absurdity of such a translation. 
 
 In corroboration of the foregoing views we shall con- 
 clude with an extract from one of the communications of 
 the Rev. Mr. Hibbard, published in the "Auburn Ban- 
 iter," to whom we feel much indebted : " The verb /^"■'s^ 
 li^i (baptizo) is translated, so far as I now remember, 
 but twice in the common English Testament, (vide Mark 
 vii. 4, Luke xi. 38,) where it has been rendered by the 
 verb wash. This circumstance sufficiently shows that 
 the learned translators regarded it as extremely equivocal 
 in pointing out any specific mode of baptism, and we 
 may add, their modesty in this instance is not an unwor- 
 thy pattern for some more modern critics.^ 
 
 'Among all the hundreds of languages known in the world, there 
 is, we venture to say, not one which has a veib that perfectly cor- 
 responds in import with the New Testament signification of /inTrji^w, 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 191 
 
 The word /2i®-7/^a> (baptizo) is evidently a generic and 
 not a specific term, comprehending under it a variety 
 of particular modes of applying water to the person. 
 Hence, it corresponds in sense, in some measure, to the 
 English verb wash, though not perfectly. For instance, 
 in Heb. ix. 10, where the noun lia^lKT-fxo; (baptismos) 
 occurs; to render that norm by immersion, Avould be to 
 give a totally false version — a version that would inevita- 
 bly misguide the English reader, and contradict other 
 parts of Scripture. It would be to say, that the Leviti- 
 cal institutes ' stood only in meats and drinks, and dif- 
 ferent immersions, whereas it is notorious that the Jews 
 used sprinkling and pouring, as well as immersion. 
 * * * Our Baptist brethren contend that to immerse 
 (submerse), is the primary, and only true and literal 
 sense of to baptize. Let us suppose, therefore, (though 
 we by no means admit,) that this is correct. What have 
 they gained by this argument? — an argument upon 
 which they have leaned with unbounded self-compla- 
 cency in the hour of controversy. Do they expect to 
 convince the world, because immerse may be the primi- 
 tive sense of baptize, that therefore, the latter word will 
 always bear that sense in composition ? To illustrate 
 this point, we will propound a parallel case. The word 
 S-it^r.v {deipnon) signifies in the New Testament a supper, 
 wliich, with the Hebrews, was the principal meal of the 
 day. It also signifies feast, banquet, (Luke xiv. 12, et 
 al.) Now it is well known that Paul uses this word to 
 
 or a noun which fully expresses the meaning of ^m.TrlKrf/.a.. The 
 proper course then for those who translate the New Testament, is 
 to take the Greek words just mentioned, and give them merely 
 such a change as will conform them to the idom of the language 
 into which they are translated, and this is the rule no doubt which 
 hag been almost imiversally adopted. 
 
19-2 IXTAXT BAPn5Tt. 
 
 siaiiily the mstitution of bread and wine, called the Lord's 
 supper. ^'sL:^.^:^ licnzr, 1 Cor. xi. 20.) Hence, if we 
 adhere riaidly to the primitiTe meaning of the word, we 
 shall arrive at this conclusion, viz. that the Lord's siq>- 
 per h a sumptuaus npast. a full meal, a feast, a banquet, 
 which is exactly contrary to the true application of the 
 term in that connecuon. But there is no reason, so far as 
 the mere philology of the question is concerned, why we 
 should iuTariably tise .e*is-7<* (baptize) in its primitiTe 
 sense of to immerse, and not also as invariably use -^srm? 
 (deipnon) in its primitive sense of a feast, ire. And. if 
 we can obey the command to • eat the Lord's supper ' by 
 eating a crumb of bread and taking a sip of wine, analogy 
 would teach us that we might obey the command to be 
 ' baptized" by having a small quantity of water applied to 
 us. It wotild be easy to extend observations in proof of 
 the utter fallacy of this mode of arguing from the primitive 
 sense of words ; but we have no time, nor is it necessary. 
 We shall close this branch of the subject with an extract 
 firom the Rev. R, Watson. — ' The word itself,' says he, 
 •proves nothing. — The verb (z^*^"*) with its derivatives, 
 signifies to dip the hand into a dish : to stain a vesture 
 with blood: to wet the body with dew : to paint or smear 
 the face with colors : to stain the hand by pressing a sub- 
 stance ; to be overwhelmed in the waters as a stmken 
 ship ; to be drowned by falling into water ; to sink, in the 
 neuter sense ; to immerse totally : to plunge up to the 
 peck ; to be immersed up to the middle ; to be drunk 
 with wine ; to be dyed, tinged, or imbued ; to wash by 
 aSusion of water ; to potir water upon the hands, or any 
 other part of the body ; to sprinkle. A word then of such 
 application, affords as good a proof of sprinkling, or par- 
 tial dipping, or washinff with water, as for immersion in 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 193 
 
 It. The controTeKv on this accommodating word has 
 been carried on to weariness : and if ever the adrocaies 
 of immersion could prove, what thev hare not been 2hle 
 to do, that plunging is \he primary meaninf of the term, 
 they would gain nothing, smce, in Scriptnre, it is notori^ 
 ously used to express other applications of water.'^"' 
 -Tbeokgkal IxEtitntes, roL n. 
 
 IT 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE GREEK PREPOSITIONS. 
 
 Having seen that there is nothing in the word yS«5TT;^« 
 to support the opinion that baptism was administered by 
 submersion among the early Christians, let us next exam- 
 ine the several prepositions connected with this word 
 when applied to the ordinance in question, and see whether 
 they afford any proof. 
 
 The prepositions, four in number, viz. », €/?, avo and «», 
 or «|, are indeed used in connection with water baptism, 
 but as they are employed in different senses, and even 
 promiscuously, and are governed in their meaning by 
 their context, just as similar particles are, in the English 
 and other languages, it is abundantly manifest, that their 
 testimony to the cause of our opponents must necessarily 
 be, even under favorable circumstances, exceedingly 
 equivocal. It is surprising that recourse was ever had to 
 this kind of evidence, and is only another proof of the 
 weakness of the assumptions we are combating. When 
 men have clear and substantial arguments to sustain them, 
 there is no necessity to resort to such as are vague and 
 futile. That this is most unquestionably the character 
 of all those derived from the use of the prepositions in 
 question, will sufficiently appear before we have done 
 with them. 
 
 It is well known to the mere tyro in the Greek lan- 
 guage, that prepositions signifying motion from a place, 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 195 
 
 as ^TTo and iK, and those signifying motion to a place, as w, 
 are frequently interchanged with those which mark rest 
 in a place, as j^, and vice versa. This fact of itself at once 
 shows the impossibility of setding the question by an ap- 
 peal to these particles. But to proceed more systemati- 
 cally. 
 
 THE PREPOSITION EN. 
 
 1. The primary meaning of n is in, and it denotes rest 
 in a place, but in composition it is correctly rendered at. 
 Thus, "the tower «/ (^v) Siloam ;" — "at {») the right 
 hand of God:" see Luke xiii. 4, Rom. viii. 34. Now it 
 is said, Matt. iii. 6, that the people " were baptized of 
 him (John) in Jordan," «v ^a> Jo^J^v^ — ^f Jordan would 
 have been an equally correct translation, and indeed, ac- 
 cording to our view, more correct. But let us take the 
 favorite translation of our Baptist brethren, and see whether 
 it proves any thing in support of submersion. According 
 to this it is maintained, John stood in the river Jordan 
 when he baptized ; but does it follow that he submersed ?— • 
 by no means ; as well might it be contended thatm Beth- 
 lehem implies wider Bethlehem, or in Baltimore wider 
 the streets of Baltimore. John may have stood in the 
 water, or at its edge, but in neither case are we justifiable 
 in inferring that he immersed. All that the preposition 
 u settles, is liis position in the vicinity of the water ; 
 his proximity to it; but with the mode of baptism, it has 
 no more to do than our sitting at tlie table to write, decides 
 whether we write a large and bold or a small and cramped 
 hand. 
 
 In further support of this fact, let us inquire how this 
 same preposition «v is translated in parallel places. Mark 
 (i. 4) says John baptized " zn the wilderness;" Luke (iii. 
 3) says, "he came into all the country {Tne^t x^-go^) about 
 
196 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance," (i. e. calling 
 the people to repentance and baptizing them,) and John 
 declares tliat he baptized in (sv) Bethabara, beyond Jor- 
 dan," John i. 28, and also in (iv) Enon near to Salim, 
 Johniii. 23. Now what connection has this preposition 
 in all these passages with the mode of baptism? — evidently 
 not the remotest. If "baptized in Jordan" implies sub- 
 mersed in Jordan, what is the meaning of "baptizing be- 
 yond Jordan ;" — " baptizing in Bethabara ;" — "baptizing 
 in the wilderness ?" If with these illustrations staring 
 them in the face, our Baptist brethren can still see such 
 potent force in the particle iv in deciding the mode in 
 which the ceremony was performed, we confess their 
 powers of reason are vastly more acute than ours. But 
 if we translate the preposition by the English particle at 
 as it actually is translated in other places, and should be 
 in the cases before us, then the text would read : John 
 baptized at Jordan, or in the vicinity of Jordan, at Beth- 
 abara, at Enon, &c., and thus the true meaning would be 
 distinctly seen. 
 
 2. But the preposition iv has another sense when used 
 in connection with baptism ; it is also properly expressed 
 by the word with, indicative of the instrumental cause 
 or means by which a thing is performed. Matt. iii. 11, 
 Luke iii. 16, "I indeed baptize you si" loith water; " here 
 it is rendered not in, but ivith. It is translated by the 
 same word in other connections ; thus Matt, xxiii. 36, — 
 Thou shalt love the Lord * * * t^ with (not in) all thy 
 heart, and iv with all thy soul, and «v with all, <fcc. Luke 
 xiv. 34. " If the salt have lost his savor sv Tivt ivith (not 
 in) what shall it be seasoned 1 " Matt. vi. 29, " Solomon 
 with, i e by means o/'all his glory was not arrayed like 
 one of these." From these examples it is obvious that 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 197 
 
 the preposition «v, in Matt. iii. 11, and parallel cases, 
 designates the means or instrument whereby a thing is 
 performed ; — to baptize with water accordingly implies 
 water as the means with which the ordinance is admin- 
 istered, but has not the most distant allusion to the quan- 
 tity of water used, or to the mode of using it. 
 
 3. We come now to the third and last sense of the 
 preposition ^h when used in connection with baptism, 
 which is conveyed by the word by, signifying the effi- 
 cient cause or the agency by which a thing is effected. 
 "But ye," says Christ, "shall be baptized ^v, by the 
 Holy Ghost," Acts i. 5 and xi. 16. As this promise 
 refers to the communication of the Holy Spirit on the 
 following Pentecost, when he scd upon each as a cloven 
 longue of fire, it is very obvious that the particle sv affords 
 no evidence of plunging, but rather against it, inasmuch 
 as the mode of the Spirit's descent certainly has more 
 affinity to affusion than to plunging. A similar render- 
 ing of this preposition is found Luke iv. 1, " Jesus * * * * 
 was led si- by the Spirit into the wilderness." — Matt. (iv. 
 1) uses the particle ^^oby, as synonymous. Other illus- 
 trations might be quoted, but these are suflicient to show 
 that svj among other uses, is employed to express the effi- 
 cient cause of a thing, and in such cases is correctly 
 translated by the monosyllable, by. But our Baptist 
 brethren notwithstanding, give us the following notable 
 version of Acts i. 15. "For John truly immersed in 
 water ; but ye shall be immersed in the Holy Ghost," &c. 
 No doubt this rendering accords best with their views of 
 baptism, but it is certainly at variance with the principles 
 of sound theology ; because the doctrine of the passage 
 Acts i. 5 is plainly this : John indeed baptized sv with 
 water, as the instrument, but ye shall be baptized sv by 
 17* 
 
198 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 the Holy Ghost as the agent of that spiritual and more 
 important baptism to which they were referred by the 
 symbolic washing. In one case, the preposition denotes 
 the instrumental cause or means, and in the other, the 
 efficient cavise or agency ; but in neither is there the most 
 distant hint at the mode of baptism. The Baptist version 
 represents the Holy Ghost as a passive, inert element in 
 which the apostles were plunged, just as a man is in 
 water ; Avhich is in itself as absurd as any thing we can 
 conceive of, and is also utterly fatal to the true sense of 
 the passage. But this rendering of our Baptist brethren, 
 is as inconsistent with the plain facts of history, as it is 
 at war with sound theology. To be convinced of this, 
 it is only necessary to call to mind the mode of the Spirit's 
 descent upon the apostles, from which we learn, that they 
 were in fact not imm,erscd in the Holy Ghost, but that 
 the Holy Ghost sat upon them. — Can any argument be 
 more conclusive ? 
 
 We have now amply shown, that the particle «•,, when 
 employed in the New Testament, in connection with bap- 
 tism, has no bearing whatever upon the tnode of admin- 
 istering that ordinance ; or if it have, it favors affusion 
 more than submersion, as is evident from the manner of 
 the Spirit's descent upon the apostles. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE PREPOSITIONS EIS, EK OR EX AND APO. 
 
 The other prepositions used in connection with baptism 
 are : i'c, at or f^ and o-tto, — their primary significations are 
 into, out of, and from; but it is well known that in com- 
 position, they are frequently used in senses different from 
 those just stated, so that it would unquestionably lead to 
 error, to force upon them uniformly the same meaning 
 irrespective of their connection. 
 
 The most specious case in favor of sumersion, — we 
 mean in a philological point of view, — is probably that re- 
 corded in Mark i. 9, " Jesus Avas baptized by John «? in 
 Jordan." Here we have «? Avith the accusative case, 
 after the verb fi^tTrrn^o!, and it is the only instance of the 
 kind on record in the New Testament: a more common 
 construction is the dative without iv, in, alluding to the 
 means, and never to the manner of baptism ; vide Matt. 
 iii. 6, Mark i. 5, et al. If then, we can make it appear 
 that even here submersion is by no means necessarily 
 implied, our opponents will be deprived of one of their 
 strongest philological holds. 
 
 1. Let it then be borne in mind, that the Greek par- 
 ticles are frequently interchanged, i. e. one is often used 
 for the other; every Greek scholar is aware of this fact; 
 and this is manifestly one of those instances. That «<?, 
 into, is substituted for tv, in, in the passage in question, 
 is abundantly manifest from the following verse, for we 
 
200 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 are there told that " Jesus straightway ascending — not 
 out of, but tTTofrom the water." The very same form 
 of expression is used Matt. iii. 16. True, our English 
 translation reads, "om^ of the water ;" but every person 
 in the least conversant with the Greek, knows that this is 
 wrong, and ihat in both passages it ought to read '■'■from 
 (sLTTo) the water." If then, our Lord ascended not out of, 
 hut from the water, up the bank of the river, we conclude 
 that itc into must have been put for ev to or at, and that 
 he accordingly had not been in the water, and could not 
 have been submersed. We appeal to every unbiassed 
 scholar for the legitimacy, — the strict propriety of this 
 interpretation. 
 
 3. Again, it is obvious that the verb in this case defines 
 the sense of the preposition, and not the preposition that 
 of the verb. If baptize has but one meaning, and that 
 is to plunge, then "to be baptized (««) into the Jordan," 
 must imply plunging ; but if it have other significations, 
 which has been a thousand times incontrovertibly proved ; 
 if, for instance it may convey the idea of pouring, sprink- 
 ling, &c., then it results with equal certainty, that to be 
 " baptized in the Jordan," implies no more than sprink- 
 ling, because we are told in the sequel that the individual 
 baptized went up the bank, not out of, but from, the 
 water; hence we repeat, that «? is put for «v, as the cor- 
 responding t'TTo proves. Who does not then perceive, 
 that this passage can only be made to favor submersion 
 upon the supposition that the Greek word /SxTm^ai signifies 
 submersion and nothing else ; of course this throws the 
 controversy back upon the import of the verb baptize, 
 and is an entire abandonment of the argument derived from 
 the preposition e-'f. It is accordingly manifest, that tlie 
 baptism of our Lord by no means presents a clear case of 
 total plunging, and we are surprised that it has ever been 
 admitted by any Greek scholar. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The next strongest philological instance that our 
 Baptist friends can produce, is that contained in Acts viii. 
 3R, "And they went down both w into the water, both 
 Philip and the eunuch," &c. The fact of their going 
 into the water, is regarded as conclusive evidence of sub- 
 mersion ; but if this simple fact afford such evidence, 
 then Philip must have been submersed also, for " they 
 went down both into the water, both Philip and the 
 eunuch;''^ this argument of course proves too much, and 
 therefore by common consent, fails to prove any thing. 
 Moreover, their going down '■'■into the water" did not 
 constitute the act of baptism, for that act is said to have 
 taken place subsequently, and is described by another 
 word, which implies no more than the use of water with- 
 out determining the mode in which it was used. 
 
 But we have a still stronger argument to array against 
 the case before us. The original text does not necessarily 
 prove that Philip and the eunuch went beyond the margin 
 of the water. The phrase ac to yJiiig translated " into the 
 water" may with equal correctness be rendered, " to the 
 water." A few examples selected from a great number 
 will be sufficient to establish this point. Acts xxvi. 14, 
 "And when Ave" (Saul and his company) "were all 
 fallen m to the earth" not into the earth. John xi. 38, 
 " Jesus therefore cometh «« to (not into) the tomb of 
 Lazarus." John xx. 3 — 8, " Peter therefore went forth, 
 
202 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 and that other disciple and came nc to the sepulchre. So 
 they both ran together ; and that other disciple did out- 
 run Peter and came first uc to the sepulchre, * * yet 
 went he not «« in." Now if ei; necessarily means into, 
 we must read, " the other disciple came into the sepul- 
 chre, yet went he not into," which is too gross an absurd- 
 ity to be tolerated for a moment. These examples are 
 to the point ; others might be given, but it is not import- 
 ant. Any person avIio is at all conversant with his Greek 
 Testament may readily satisfy himself as to the use of 
 prepositions by the New Testament writers. If therefore 
 St; TO f^v)ifA.iiov means to the sepulchxe and «c tuv ynv means to 
 tite earth : the preposition merely denoting the point to 
 tohich the motion is made, so also may «? to i/J^g signify 
 TO the ivater, and in the connexion of Acts viii. 38, may 
 mean no more than, that Philip and the eunuch both went 
 to the margin of the icater? 
 
 We are aware that it will be said, "They both come 
 up s« out q/'the water," thus implying that they had been 
 previously into the water. But it is probable that tx- out 
 of, in this passage stands for atto from. The particle 
 e'c often stands in contrast with tTro instead of ix-, in pas- 
 sages like the following : '■^^Trofrom city «? to city," — tTra 
 from. Jerusalem s'? fo Jericho." "The way that goeth 
 down tTTofrom Jerusalem w to Gaza," &c. We have 
 already observed that both Matthew and Mark use "-tto 
 from, instead of ^ out of, when they describe the act of 
 our Saviour in leaving the water after baptism. They 
 simply say, he came from the water. The passage 
 
 *The appropriate word in the Greek language for coming up out 
 of the water, is aiv* Jyai, but in the passage before us, the words nctTt^ 
 fins-etv and aviCna-etv are used, which express the action not of enter- 
 ing water, &c., but of descending or mounting trees, horses, hills, &c. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 203 
 
 therefore in question, is a solitary case in the history of 
 baptism where sji is put in contrast with n^- This circum- 
 stance, to say the least, renders their testimony to the 
 doctrine of immersion extremely unsatisfactory. But 
 furthermore, it is well known that «« is often used to denote 
 simply the point from ivhich a motion is made. Thus : 
 " Howbeit, there came other boats ek from Tiberias." 
 "Get thee '.x-from thy kindred." " Who shall deliver 
 me f^from the body of this death," &c. (John vi. 23, 
 Acts vii. 3, Rom?^ vii. 24.) It would, therefore, be every 
 way consistent with the general use of the prepositions in. 
 question to read — " and they went down both to the 
 water * * * and when they were come up from the wa- 
 ter," &c. 
 
 Besides, it should be remembered, that the act of coming 
 out of the water, as well as going into the water, is affirmed 
 of both Philip and the eunuch, and has no more to do 
 with the act of baptism than with their riding in the char- 
 iot. The Greek prepositions employed in this narration, 
 have the same latitude of meaning of our English into and 
 from or out of. And in popular language, a person goes 
 into the Avater when he enters to the depth of six inches ; 
 and when he recedes from that point, he comes o\it of the 
 water. Prof. Ripley here proposes a question that is, in- 
 deed, singular enough. It is, whether the preposition "c 
 indicates that they went far enough into the water for immer- 
 sion. How each a question is to be determined satisfac- 
 torily, I am unable to judge. Certain it is that philology 
 can never settle it. But while the subject of the eunuch's 
 baptism is before the reader, we will adduce a few consid- 
 erations which may tend to corroborate the foregoing 
 statements, and show that an immersion was not probably 
 practised on this occasion. — And, 
 
204 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 1. The place where the eunuch was baptized was 
 " desert,''^ vide verse 26. The word desert in Scripture, 
 sometimes means a barren waste and sometimes merely a 
 country place in contradistinction of a city. The former 
 is probably the true sense in this connection. For when 
 the angel said to Philip : " Arise and go toward the south 
 unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem to Gaza 
 which is desert,'''' if he intended merely a country place, 
 the description would have been trifling. It was already 
 understood as a matter of course by Philip, that the 
 place was rural, but that it was a desert proper, might not 
 have been so obvious. But to find a body of water in a 
 desert proper, sufficient for immersion, would be strange 
 indeed. 
 
 2. The body of water itself in which the eunuch was 
 baptized. The account says, "they czme ^^ri m vS\^g to 
 some water.^' No more or less can be made of Luke's 
 statement. But what is so?we water ? How much ? The 
 pronoun ft (some, any,) has sometimes a diminutive sense, 
 and so here, " they came to a little water," &c. Our 
 English reads, " a certain water." As if our translators 
 had in view a particular watering place for travellers or 
 caravans. And so the eunuch, when he saw it, ex- 
 claimed, with evident emotion, '^(.^ vS'oeg behold water. 
 He does not say how much water, but seemed a little sur- 
 prised and pleased to find any water in such a place. 
 Indeed, it was in this vicinity — in the valley of Gerar — 
 the valley in which, according to our most accurate maps, 
 the city of Gaza stands — that Abraham and Isaac were 
 obliged to dig wells to procure water for their flocks. It 
 was here that " the herdmen of Gerar did strive with 
 Isaac's herdmen, saying. The water is ours " It could 
 not have been far from this place where Philip baptized 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 205 
 
 the eunuch. We sometimes, in Scripture, read of 
 " springs in the desert," boiling out of the ground, (Gen. 
 xxvi. 19,) and it was probably such a body of water in 
 which the eunuch was baptized. Whence then, has 
 arisen all this fancied abundance of water sufficient for 
 an immersion, where herdmen would contend for a 
 " welV^ to water their flocks ? — The reasonable presump- 
 tion is against it. We want more proof.' 
 
 'See " Greek Particles" by the Rev. F. G. Hibbard. 
 
 18 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Having as we believe, irrefragibly established the fact, 
 that so far as the literal words, employed to designate 
 baptism, are concerned, the New Testament affords not 
 the slightest proof of its dispensation among the early 
 Christians by submersion ; we proceed to examine whe- 
 ther such proof can be derived from the circumstances 
 attendant on its administration. In prosecuting this 
 examination we must necessarily inquire into the mode 
 practised by the first heralds of Christianity. 
 
 I. JOHN THE baptist's MODE. 
 
 We have already sufficiently explained our views on 
 the character of John's baptism ;^ at present its mode is 
 the subject of investigation. It is not indeed a matter of 
 very great importance, what was John's mode, any fur- 
 ther than it may tend to reflect light on the practical ap- 
 plication of the word f*^?^^*; for it has already been am- 
 ply established that his baptism was by no means the 
 Christian sacrament known by that name, and can there- 
 fore have no direct influence in fixing the gospel method 
 of the baptism instituted by Christ. But while we can 
 readily account for the fact that our Baptist brethren, 
 should have so eagerly imbibed the idea that John per- 
 formed his baptism by submersion, we must confess that 
 we are astonished that any one of those who hold to the 
 mode by aspersion, should have ever yielded to this 
 assumption, since the supposed evidence on which it 
 
 'See p. 132, sqq. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 207 
 
 is based, is in all its points so extremely vague and 
 deficient. 
 
 Before stating the arguments in support of our view, 
 we shall notice the most plausible of those, brought for- 
 ward in defence of the hypothesis that John submersed. 
 They are the folloAving: 
 
 First, — " John baptized in Enon near to Salim, because 
 there was much water there;'" — therefore he baptized 
 by submersion. 
 
 Secondly, — John baptized '■'■in Jordan;''''^ — therefore 
 he baptized by submersion. 
 
 Thirdly, — When John had baptized Jesus, it is said 
 that " he (Jesus) went up straightway out of the water ;"^ 
 — therefore John must have submersed him. 
 
 This kind of logic may indeed prove satisfactory to 
 some, but we frankly confess we cannot participate in a 
 faith which has no better evidence for its foundation. 
 We might reply to it in the same superficial strain, — 
 thus : 
 
 First, — John baptized in the wilderness where there 
 was much sand ; — therefore he plunged them under the 
 sand. 
 
 Secondly, — The apostle baptized the jailor in prison 
 where there was little water ; — therefore he sprinkled him. 
 
 Thirdly, — When Christ was about to be baptized, it is 
 said he " went to Jordan ;"'' — therefore he could not have 
 plunged. 
 
 We readily concede that this mode of refutation is in- 
 conclusive, but not more so than the pretended argument 
 to which it is a reply ; and we only state the case thus, 
 to expose more fully the sophistry of such reasoning, and 
 the dexterous facility with which our opponents leap at 
 • 'John iii. 2—3. ^iohn iii. 6. ^jyiatt. iii. 16. "Matt. iii. 13 
 
108 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 conclusions in support of their cause. But the subject 
 demands a more serious examination. 
 
 Why, it is triumphantly asked, did John choose a place 
 for administering baptism, where there was " much water" 
 if he merely sprinkled the people ? — just as if there could 
 have been no possible necessity for a copious supply of 
 water, at a place in a warm climate where vast concourses 
 of people assembled, except for the purpose of submer- 
 sion ! In return, we might ask : Why do our Methodist 
 brethren make it a point, when convenient, to hold their 
 camp-meetings in the vicinity of a running stream, or a 
 large spring, or of some other abundant supply of water ? 
 is it because they are in the habit, or that they may have 
 an opportunity, of plunging under the water, all the in- 
 fants and adult converts who may be baptized on such 
 occasions ? Or Avhy are similar locations preferred for 
 the celebration of American independence on the fourth 
 of July ? — The same answer will furnish a satisfactory 
 solution to each of the queries. But the fact is, we are 
 not bound to point out the real cause of John's choosing 
 such a region. If any man assert that it wasybr the pur- 
 pose of submersion only, why let him prove it, — the 
 o?ius probmidi rests with him. We have not, like our 
 opposing brethren, taken upon us any such responsibility. 
 
 Let us however, notwithstanding, inquire whether a 
 sufficient reason cannot be assigned, apart from the idea 
 of submersion. That it was with a view to submersion, 
 is altogether a gratuitous assumption ; the Bible itself no 
 where states this or even hints at it, but leaves us to con- 
 jecture the motive by the light of circumstances. Ob- 
 serve then, — 
 
 1. That in that country the mercury ranges, in winter^ 
 from 40° to 50° and, in summer, from 80° to 100°, and in 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 109 
 
 the plains of Jordan where John had been baptizin<r 
 much higher. Water therefore, was in constant demand, 
 not merely for baptism but more especially for the use 
 of the people and their beasts. And this necessity John 
 must foresee and provide for, Avhenever he would fix his 
 position for baptizing, unless he would be reckless of the 
 comfort and even endanger the lives of the people. 
 
 2. That Enon, by its name, imports a single spring- 
 - the fountain of On;" but it flowed in several or many 
 streams. The original phrase, ttokkcl .cT^^t* is in the plu- 
 ral, and every Greek scholar knows that it ought to be 
 translated not "much water," but many waters or 
 streams;^ and this rendering would also express more 
 correctly the various rivulets in that region, all emanating 
 from the same fountain. The same word v6... occurs in 
 an oration of Demosthenes against Callicles, at the com- 
 mencement, p. 1272 ult. of Reiske's ed. and p. 275, vol 
 viu. Dobson's " Oratores Attica," where the context and 
 whole object of the oration render it certain that it desig- 
 nates '' rains- If then ^^..^waters-can imply drops 
 of water falling as rain, why must we at once enlarcre 
 Uiese vs..., where John abode, into deep waters or riv- 
 ers? We would describe any river, lake or sea as con- 
 sisting not of ''many waters," (a rather singular expres- 
 sion m such a case,) but of deep waters. If then we 
 here find "many waters" (" much water" in our English 
 Bible), and if '' waters" may be rain as well as seas, then 
 we can lawfully understand them to be only sprinos or 
 fountains. Had the idea of dipping existed in the mind 
 of the sacred writer, he would surely have spoken rather 
 of deep than of many waters. Indeed it is evident that 
 
 JcrRe^riT;^™^ ''^"^' ^^^'^'"^'^" other places, for.- 
 
210 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 these springs of water were not used for dipping, since 
 three thousand were baptized in Jerusalem, Avhere no deep 
 waters were found.* Thus the Baptizer made choice 
 of a place where there was a good supply of water inter- 
 spersing the neighborhood with a number of running 
 brooks, of which the people as well as their camels and 
 asses might drink. This idea is supported by travellers 
 who have visited that region. 
 
 3. That John had previously been baptizing at the 
 Jordan near Bethabara. But the water of that stream is 
 always turbid and black and unfit to drink until it has 
 stood several hours in vessels and settled. Hence the 
 Jordan was sometimes called, by the Greeks, ,wsAa?, which 
 signifies black. The multitudes, therefore, that thronged 
 to John's baptism at Bethabara were probably inade- 
 quately supplied with wholesome water, which deter- 
 mined his course northward, to Enon, where this incon- 
 venience might be obviated. 
 
 4. That John had left Bethabara where there was more 
 water, for Enon, where there was much water. Why 
 should it be said that, because there was much water at 
 Enon, he chose that place for baptism, when he had all 
 along baptized at Bethabara, where the Jordan is much 
 broader, and there was a much larger quantity of water? 
 If the mere quantity of water is to be understood, we 
 can assign no reason why John preferred Enon to Beth- 
 abara, and the passage in question is perfectly enigmat- 
 ical. But, if Enon was supplied with fresh running 
 streamlets suited to the necessities of so vast a multitude as 
 followed John, then we perceive a reason why he should 
 select such a location and also a propriety in the transla- 
 tion we have adopted. 
 
 See Essays on Baptism by Rev. Prof. C. F. SchaefFer. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 211 
 
 Now then, let us recapitulate ; the climate was warm 
 and oppressive, and pure fresh water was scarce and 
 of great value; the multitude of people was immense, 
 amounting probably to hundreds of thousands ; for " there 
 went out unto him, all the land of Judea and they of Je- 
 rusalem, and were all baptized,'" and no doubt many 
 travelled thither with camels and asses, and remained on 
 the spot at least one night, and hence much water was 
 absolutely necessary for other purposes than that of sub- 
 mersion; John had just before been baptizing in the vi- 
 cinity of Jordan, where there was more water than at 
 Enon, but it was unfit for immediate use ; hence he went 
 from a large body of ivater, to a situation where the 
 supply loas coynparatively small, but notwithstanding, 
 preferable on account of its quality. And does not this 
 sufficiently account for the fact under consideration, with- 
 out the slightest necessity of resorting to submersion? 
 If total plunging had been the practice and the "much 
 water" had been required for that object, would it not 
 have been wiser in John to remain at Bethabara, and 
 does not his departure from a location of more ivater to 
 one of much water rather disprove the doctrine of such 
 plunging ? This passage then, so often quoted by Bap- 
 tists as favoring their views, is found to have no possible 
 connection with the point at issue, or if it have, it fur- 
 nishes an argument against submersion. But to say the 
 least, it leaves the question as to John's mode of bap- 
 tizing, just where Ave found it. 
 
 'Matt. iii. 5 — 6, Mark i. 5, — It is calculated upon correct data, 
 that in the days of David the population of Palestine could not have 
 been less than six millions seven hundred thousand, and in the time 
 of John it amounted to something like six millions, and of these at 
 least one half (three millions) must have been babtized by John, 
 See Mode of Babtism by Rev. Mr. Hibbard, Aub. Jour. 
 
312 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 "But" continue our opponents, " does not Matthew 
 tell us, chap. iii. 6, that on other occasions " they were 
 baptized of him in Jordan? We answer no. It is not 
 tlie old English language but the original Greek which 
 must decide. We appeal to the text to which we have 
 just now referred. How could they be baptized "of" 
 him ? In modern English we would say "by" him. If an 
 English preposition may, or rather did express in the 
 time of King James, the two different ideas of "by" 
 and " of," why is it difficult to conceive that a Greek 
 preposition may have different shades of meaning? It 
 is well known how much the meanings of Greek prepo- 
 sitions vary. * * * This can perhaps be made intelligible 
 even to one unacquainted with the Greek language. The 
 word in question is in Greek '-v rendered here, "in." 
 But the same word stands in a similar connection in Luke 
 xiii. 4, where our Saviour speaks of the tower " in Siloam." 
 Siloam was a well known pool of water, in which our Sa- 
 viour directed a man born blind to wash, (John ix. 7,) that 
 is, his eyes, for the word translated "wash" is appropri- 
 ated to the washing of the hands, feet, face, &c., and seems 
 to exclude the idea of bathing, for which there are other 
 appropriate words. The instances in Bretschneider's 
 Lexicon, given under the word yi?rra), substantiate this 
 remark. In the other five chapters of the New Testa- 
 ment where it occurs, (according to the Greek Concordance 
 of E. Schmidius,) it is uniformly and expressly applied 
 to the washing of the face, feet, or hands. The pool was 
 too shallow to have allowed a bathing of the whole body, 
 and hence this word vitttoi, is used. This same pool is 
 mentioned in Nehemiah iii. 15, where the Hebrew ter- 
 mination, as in numberless instances, differs from the 
 Greek. The pool lay to the east of Jerusalem, and the 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 213" 
 
 tower stood near it, Avhich is meant by the word (v. 
 Thus too we read, Heb. x. 12, Christ " sat down on the 
 right hand of God." Here the same word occurs. Now 
 if we must translate " in " Jordan, we must translate, he 
 sat down " in " the right hand of God, for the word is 
 the same in both cases. But as we, of course, translate 
 it "at" or "by" the right hand, &c., so too we must 
 translate " at " or " by " the Jordan. Still, it may be 
 said, that John must have immersed our Saviour, for we 
 read, Matt. iii. 16, "And Jesus, when he was baptized, 
 went up straightway out of the water." Here we remark 
 that Matthew does not say that Christ went into the Jor- 
 dan, but, v. 13, only "to" it. The question is, how 
 did he then come out of the river? The English words 
 " went up," are expressed by one compound Greek 
 word, a-vi.Sn, and the words " out of" by the simple word 
 ctTTc. We will endeavor to explain the proper rendering 
 of these words to the English reader. Luke tells us, 
 xix. 4, that Zaccheus, in order to have a better view of 
 our Saviour, " climbed up " a tree. The Greek for 
 " climbed up" is ^n/2n, the identical word, in the same 
 person, number, tense, mood and voice, Avhich occurs in 
 Matt. iii. 16. The reader will observe that the idea of 
 ascending, climbing, &c., is connected with avsS^. That 
 is, Jesus ascended, climbed up, the extensive acclivity 
 which stretches forth to a considerable distance from the 
 bed of the river. ^ The Jordan had high banks; and 
 hence in the prophet Jeremiah, xlix. 19, the lion is said 
 "to come up from the swelling" of Jordan, not as if he 
 were an amphibious animal, coming oid of the water, but 
 up from its vicinity. Again, ^.tto is in Matt. iii. 16, trans- 
 lated " out of." But it should be translated simply 
 'See Home's Introd. vol, iii. p. 35. 
 
214 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 ''from.''* — Let us endeavor to prove this assertion. The 
 word ctTTo occurs, for example, Acts xii. 10. When the 
 angel who delivered Peter out of the prison, had conduct- 
 ed him through the iron gate and one street, he " forth- 
 with departed/rom him." But now, if we must translate 
 " out of " Jordan, then, to be consistent, we must necessa- 
 rily translate the same word ^^ro thus : The angel departed 
 " out of** Peter, Avhich of course does not apply — the 
 angel at his side, simply went away. To save room we 
 omit other examples. 
 
 The baptism of Jesus, by John, after these explanations, 
 may be thus viewed: He Avent to John, who Avas in 
 the vicinity of the river, in order to procure water with 
 ease in a vessel, whenever he was requested to baptize, — 
 Christ kneeled down perhaps, and then, to signify the 
 act of anointing, he took water (for neither oil nor Avater 
 had any peculiar spiritual efficacy, and were hence of 
 equal value) and poured it on the head of our SaA'iour, 
 signifying perhaps likewise the out-pouring of the Spirit, 
 Avhich at the time did descend. After his baptism, Jesus 
 ascended or climbed up the acclivity, and went simply 
 aAvay "from" the region of Jordan. 
 
 We have read of no dipping, of nothing that could 
 favor such an idea. Why should John have dipped our 
 Saviour ? Certainly not in allusion to the burial of the 
 latter, for he Avas not yet dead, and hence, had he dipped 
 him, it would have seemed as much out of place, as if 
 he had administered to him the sacrament of the Lord's 
 supper, before it Avas instituted. 
 
 There is one expression in Matt. iii. 16, Avhich needs 
 a passing remark. The translation, " he shall baptize 
 you with the Holy Ghost," has been occasionally im- 
 pugned ; but it is a most successful version. When Ave 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 215 
 
 read in Matt. xxvi. 53, (we take an instance designedly 
 from the same M'riter,) " they that take the sword shall 
 perish ivith the sword," we see at once that with or by 
 can be the only word appropriately prefixed to "sword." 
 The same word is in the former passage prefixed to 
 " Holy Ghost," and hence it is correctly rendered 
 " with" or " by the Holy Ghost."' 
 
 'See Essajrs on Baptism by Rev. Prof. Schaeffer. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 A STRONG argument that John could not, in the nature 
 of things, have baptized by submersion, may be deduced 
 from the shortness of the time employed by him, in ad- 
 ministering the rite to such immense multitudes. 
 
 It has already been remarked that from detailed calcu- 
 lations, made from the best data, he baptized at least half 
 the nation, for he was received by the Jews as a nation ; 
 there was no such division of public sentiment in regard 
 to him as prevailed in reference to Jesus Christ. Phari- 
 sees and Sadducees, Jerusalem and all Judea, and all 
 THE REGION ROUND ABOUT JoRDAN, Submitted to his bap- 
 tism, ambitious of the distinction thus conferred, and all 
 parties coalesced in the popular sentiment that John was 
 a divine prophet. " He was a burning and a shining 
 light, and the Jews were willing for a season to rejoice 
 in his light. "^ 
 
 On a careful examination it appears that John's minis- 
 try did not last longer than nine months ; but we will 
 extend it to ten months, as the utmost limit to which it 
 can be prolonged with any shadow of evidence.^ 
 
 Uosephus the great Jewish historian informs us that there were 
 so many that followed Jolin, that Herod the Tetrarch, fearing an 
 insurrection among the people, apprehended John and caused him 
 to be executed. 
 
 *The duration of John's ministry has been variously estimated ; 
 some have extended it to eighteen months, while others have limited 
 it to less than half that period. We have fixed it at ten months, 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 217 
 
 Now make allowance for the time employed in intro- 
 ducing himself to the people, — preaching to them, Sic, 
 also for the time lost during the winter season, embracing 
 
 not because a medium between extremes is more likely to be correct, 
 but chiefly because an investigation of the subject has satisfied us that 
 tliis estimate approximates nearest to the truth. The Rev. Mr. Hib- 
 bard has bestowed considerable research on this question, and his 
 opinion is therefore entitled to our respect. "According," says he, 
 '• to Lukeiii. 1, John opened his pubhc ministry in the fifteenth year of 
 tire reign of Tiberius Cfesar, (reckoning the three years of his reign 
 conjointly with Augustus,) which, according to our most approved 
 cln-onology, answers to the thirtieth of John's life. It is generally 
 agreed by chronologers that our Saviour was born December 25th, 
 A. M. 4,000. John the Baptist was six months older than Christ, 
 (vide Lukei. 30 — 36 compared with verse 13,) and consequently, was 
 bom the 24th of June previously. Allowing then, Jolm to have 
 opened his ministry at the age of thirty, in the latter part of June, 
 year of the Vulgar era, 26 ; and supposing, as Luke says, (chap. iii. 
 21 — 23,) Jesus was baptized when he was thirty years of age, i. e. 
 about December 25th of the same year,' it would then follow that 
 John had been engaged six months in his public ministry at the 
 time of Christ's baptism. How long John continued baptizing sub- 
 sequently to this period, we are not definitely informed. But from 
 a careful collation of facts, we can safely limit the period of his 
 after labors to four months. 
 
 "The last account we have of Jolxn, previously to his imprison- 
 ment, states that he was ' baptizing at Enon near to Salim.' Jolm 
 iii. 23. This was immediately after our Lord had attended his first 
 passover, which was celebrated on the fourteenth day of the month 
 •Nisan, which, as the Jews reckoned their , years by lunar months, 
 answers to the moon of our March. As a necessary consequence of 
 tlieir reckoning time by the phases of the moon, the celebration of 
 their passover sometimes fell on the latter half of the month of 
 March, and sometimes on the fore part of April. We cannot there- 
 
 'I suppose it will be understood that the birth of Christ is reckoned 
 to have actually taken place four years (strictly three years and six 
 days) before the commencement of the Vulgar era, or Anno Domini. 
 19 
 
218 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Storms, rains, «fec.; also for the time occupied in movinor 
 from place to place ; also for forty-three sabbaths on 
 which according to Jewish notions, it was not lawful to 
 
 fore be exact to a day ; but by closely following the circumstancea 
 in the evangelist 's history, we shall arrive at a reasonable certainty 
 that John did not continue his ministry beyond the period above 
 assigned him. The whole chain of facts runs thus : After Jesus was 
 baptized he went into Galilee, where, on the third day after his 
 arrival, he attended the marriage at Cana. John ii. 1 . After this 
 he went to Capernaum, where he staid ' not many days, verse 12. 
 Leaving Capernaum, he returned into Judea to attend the passover 
 at Jerusalem, verse 13. Here he purged the temple (verse 14) and 
 held conversation with Nicodemus, chap. iii. 1 — 21. Leaving the 
 city of Jerusalem, he went out into the province of Judea, and bap- 
 tized, verse 22. At this time ' John also was baptizing at Enon 
 near to Salim,' (verse 23,) about twenty miles distant. Their mu- 
 tual proximity and the increasing popularity of Jesus led to dis- 
 putes among the Jews, (verses 26, 26,) and excited the jealousy 
 and malice of the Pharisees, chap. iv. 1 — 3. ' When therefore, the 
 Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and bap- 
 tized more disciples than John, — he left Judea and departed into Gal- 
 ilee.' Here then, it is stated that Jesus ' departed into Galilee,' 
 while John was in the vicinity of Enon, baptizing, immediately after 
 the first passover which our Lord attended, i. e. the latter part of 
 Mai'ch, A. D. 27, nine months after John had commenced his pub- 
 lic ministry. But, by comparing Matt. iv. 12, we find tliat Jesus 
 did not depart into Galilee at this time, until after ' he had heard 
 that John was cast into prison.' The conclusion therefore is, that 
 John was arrested during his stay at Enon ; and Jesus, in view of 
 the commotion excited in Judea by that event, and also of the con- 
 troversies going on tliore, concerning himself and John, prudently 
 withdrew, for a season, into the remoter parts of Galilee 
 
 " Various circumstances corroborate this ccuclusicn. It is evi- 
 dent, both from Josephus and the New Testament, that John was 
 arrested by Herod Antipas, governor of Galilee and Perea. But 
 Enon lay at the southern extremity of Herod's dominions on the 
 west of the Jordan ; therefore, if John had been south of Enon, ud 
 would have been beyond the jurisdiction of Herod. And, as we 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 219 
 
 baptize, and we have left about two hundred and twenty- 
 seven days in which we may suppose he exercised the 
 function of his mission. 
 
 If he submersed his disciples according to the modern 
 mode, he could not have thus labored more than six hours 
 per day, standing all the time in three feet depth of water; 
 and according to this estimate, the whole number of hours 
 employed in the act of baptizing amounted to one thou- 
 sand three hundred and sixty-two ; which would average 
 two thousand two hundred and two per hour, thirty-six 
 per minute, or a little over one in every two seconds ! — 
 and he must have pursued these labors in the same rapid 
 ratio during six hours every day, for the space of tM'^o 
 hundred and twenty-seven days ! 
 
 But Ave are bound to concede to the administration of 
 John's baptism, some degree of solemnity, and he could 
 not have averaged during six hours per day for two hun- 
 dred and twenty-seven days, more than one person in 
 
 never read of Jolin's going north of that place, we conclude he was 
 arrested at Enon. 
 
 " Again, our Lord did not fully open his mission until after Jolm 
 weis cast into prison. Matt. iv. 12 — 17. The popularity of John 
 presented an impediment to the ministry of the Saviour. Indeed it 
 is natural to suppose tliat two such great characters, laboring in the 
 vicinity of each other, would inevitably produce a great division of 
 public sentiment. Jesus therefore prudently withdrew himself until 
 John had ' fulfilled his course.' But from the nature of the case, 
 he cannot be supposed to have then withheld long, — the object of hia 
 mission being of such paramomit importance to that of Jolm's. 
 
 " Thus have we followed Jolm, in his public ministry, during the 
 space of nine months. He had introduced Christ to the Jews, and 
 having thus fulfilled the object of his mission, (Jolm i. 31,) he re- 
 tired by a singular providence, from the field of his labor some time 
 in the month of April, A. D. 27. That he continued his ministry 
 longer than about nine months cannot be proved from the Bible." 
 
220 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 every two minutes ; and this would make forty thousand 
 six hundred and sixty persons in ten months, — not one 
 thirteenth part as many inhabitants, as, according to Jo- 
 sephus, perished at the siege of Jerusalem about forty 
 years afterwards ; and at this rate it would have occupied 
 something like fifty years to baptize all who applied to 
 him ! — Or let us suppose he could submerse with becom- 
 ing solemnity, one every minute, and it would have em- 
 ployed him not much short of twenty -five years ! 
 
 We will not increase the difficulty by alluding to a 
 change of raiment, — dressing and undressing of males 
 and females, or their moving to and fro dripping in their 
 garments, either of Avhich would have been indecent; 
 since the M'hole transaction is already impossible enough 
 without this allusion. — But let us suppose that John 
 sprinkled them with a " hyssop branch," dipped in the 
 water, as they passed before him in ranks, and all diffi- 
 culty at once vanishes. This mode of dedicating the 
 people of God was, moreover, actually known among 
 the Jews and had been practised on one of the most 
 grand and impressive occasions ever known to that peo- 
 ple, viz. that of the ratification of the covenant between 
 God and them. (Exo. xxiv. 8.) Thus Paul, (Heb. ix. 
 19) " For 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." 
 It is worthy of remark that when Moses sprinkled " all 
 the people," they numbered six hundred thousand fight- 
 ing men, which, by reckoning five persons that did not 
 bear arms, to every warrior would leave an aggregrate 
 population of three million. These Moses sprinkled, 
 probably as the priest was required to do on another oc- 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 221 
 
 rasion, " with a stick of cedar wood upon which a bunch 
 of hyssop was tied with a scarlet thread." John made 
 no innovation in the Mosaic rites — he instituted no new 
 forms of religion among the Jews, but applied only those 
 which he found already established. 
 
 From the preceding remarks it is evident that the 
 practice of John affords nothing like satisfactory proof 
 that he baptized by submersion ; if however he even had, 
 his example in this particular would possess no binding 
 force on us, as will hereafter be made sufficiently clear. 
 But this not being the case, our view of the subject is 
 doubly fortified. Let us next inquire what was the 
 mode practised by the apostles. 
 
 19* 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 II. THE apostles' MODE. 
 
 The apostolic practice in respect to the mode of baptism 
 must be learned from their Acts, as recorded by the "be- 
 loved physician," Luke. The more closely and impar- 
 tially we examine the several cases related in the Acts of 
 the apostles, the more fully shall we be convinced that 
 they do not furnish any satisfactory evidence in support 
 of submersion. Let us commence with — 
 
 1. The baptism of the three thousand converts on the 
 day of pentecost'. Acts ii. 41, "Then they that gladly 
 received his word were baptized, and the same day there 
 were added unto them about three thousand souls.'''' 
 The mode in which these three thousand were baptized 
 is not specified, and we are left to find it out by the ac- 
 companying circumstances. While we may boldly chal- 
 lenge our opponents to point out one single incident in 
 the whole history of the case, propitious to the idea of 
 submersion, we can adduce strong presumptive evidence 
 againt it. Submersion in the case under consideration is 
 highly improbable, because they had no opportunity for 
 the submersion of such a multitude. Let it be remem- 
 bered that the apostles and their hearers were collected 
 together at one place in Jerusalem, probably in the temple 
 as seems to be intimated in v. 46, and as this Avas the 
 third hour of the day, v. 15, (9 o'clock A. M.) which 
 was the Jewish hour o{ morning prayer, it is most prob- 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 223 
 
 able that the temple was the place in which they were 
 assembled. Now there Avas neither at the temple, nor in 
 any other part of Jerusalem, a suitable place for submer- 
 sion.' 
 
 It is true, the pool of Bethesda lay but a little to the 
 northeast of the temple, but it was used for cleansing the 
 temple, the sacrifices. Sic, and all the blood and offals 
 and filth from the sacrifices and temple were washed into 
 it ; which some suppose imparted to the water its healing 
 virtue ; but whether or not, it was unfit for baptizing. 
 Besides, it contained too little water for the submersion 
 of so many in so short a time as was occupied (five 
 hours,) especially at that season of the year, viz. the 
 month of May or later, (the time when pentecost occur- 
 red,) at which time, John informs us, no rain whatever 
 fell ;- and its porches moreover, Avere occupied by the 
 sick, waiting to receive the benefit of its healing water. 
 But if even Bethesda had been a suitable place for sub- 
 mersion, the use of it could not have been obtained, be- 
 cause it was in the possession of the priests, the avowed 
 and mortal enemies of our Lord and his apostles. And 
 can it be supposed that the dignitaries of the JeAvish 
 church, after their recent, hard-earned and diabolical tri- 
 umph over Christ and his foUoAvers ; — their concerted and 
 undisguised hostility to the Christian name ; — their setded 
 and incurable malice, now rankling of ancAV on account 
 of the alarming success of the apostles ; — can it, Ave say, 
 be supposed that under these circumstances they would 
 peaceably surrender their claims to the use of Bethesda, 
 in order to accommodate the apostles of Christ Avith a 
 
 'The Jews commenced their day at 6 o'clock in the morning, con- 
 sequently their third hour was our ninth. 
 ^Archseology, p. 22. 
 
224 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 place for Christian baptism ; particularly as the time for 
 the evening sacrifice came on between three and four 
 o'clock P. M. (the very time occupied in baptizing) when 
 the use of the pool would have been indispensable ? 
 
 The brook Kidron or Cedron, is still less likely to 
 have afforded the necessary convenience. It flowed 
 along the e.ast side of the city, was at best but a turbid 
 and unimportant stream, and always dry in the summer. 
 Jahn informs us ; " its channel is dry except in winter,"^ 
 and it is well known that the winter is over in that coun- 
 try towards the close of February ; whereas the three 
 thousand were baptized in May or the beginning of June. 
 Hence there could have been no submersion there. 
 
 The only remaining water that might be supposed to 
 have answered the purpose, was the pool of Siloara, or 
 Shiloah, which flowed at the bottom of Mount Moriah to 
 the southeast, at least three-fourths of a mile from where 
 the people were assembled. Jerome, an ancient com- 
 mentator states that " Siloam does not flow regularly, 
 but only on certain days and hours, when it bursts 
 through the crevices of the earth and from rocky caves."* 
 But we have no account of the apostles marching oflf three 
 thousand persons, that distance, with all the multitude 
 of spectators that would naturally follow. In addition to 
 all this, (if any additional remarks be necessary) there is 
 reason to doubt whether Siloam as well as Bethesda, was 
 of adequate dimensions to admit twelve men, (much less 
 the additional seventy disciples) for the purpose of sub- 
 mersing three thousand converts. 
 
 It would be ridiculous to contend that the apostles 
 might have used the washing lavers in the temple, for 
 the malignant opposition of priests and the deadly hatred 
 
 >Jahn, § 19, p. 20. ^j^hn, § 19, p. 20. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 225 
 
 of the Jews in general must have prevented this. Nor 
 can it be supposed that they had access to the bathing 
 places in private houses ; for these were confined to the 
 rich and honorable ; few of whom, as yet, were in any 
 wise disposed to befriend the cause of Christ. Where 
 then, Ave ask, did the apostles submerse those three thou- 
 sand converts? They might conveniently have been 
 baptized by aspersion, but ivhere could they all have been 
 submersed by twelve apostles, in so brief a space of time ? 
 Are there no difficulties attending this hypothesis ? 
 
 But submersion was not only highly improbable but 
 impossible, because — 
 
 They had not time for it. 
 
 Peter, as already intimated, commenced his sermon 
 about "the third hour of the day," that is 9 o'clock A. 
 M. (v. 15.) Judging from the nature of the occasion and 
 the drift of his sermon, (of which we have but a mere 
 epitome reserved on record,) he could not have preached 
 less than an hour. His hearers were excited and alarmed, 
 and anxiously inquired, "what they should do," &c. ; 
 then the apostles entered into personal conversation with 
 awakened thousands, and gave them the proper direc- 
 tions ;^ after all this he continued for some time instruct- 
 ing and exhorting them, for it is expressly said: "And 
 with many other words did he testify and exhort," (v. 
 40.) All this over, the converts must be selected from 
 the multitude, and examined as to their faith and experi- 
 ence. If they were submersed, they must be provided 
 with a change of raiment, because Avhen they left home, 
 they had not the most distant idea of being converted and 
 baptized, and were therefore, so far as a change was con- 
 
 ^Did this personal conversation with awakened sinners, partake of 
 the nature of what, in the present day, is termed an ^^ anxious meti- 
 
226 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 cerned, utterly unprepared for the ordinance ; and as we 
 dare not suppose that they remained on the ground, or 
 returned to their lodgings in their wet clothes, soaked and 
 dripping from head to foot, considerable delay must have 
 been occasioned in procuring the requisite habiliments. 
 Next, apartments for the men and women must be ob- 
 tained adjacent to the place of baptism. Before all these 
 preliminaries could be disposed of with decency, four 
 hours at least, if not longer, must have elapsed ; which 
 would have delayed the ceremony until 1 o'clock. The 
 Jewish day closed at 6 P. M. ; and Luke says they were 
 baptized and added to the church that "same day." Con- 
 sequently they had but five hours left in Avhich to per- 
 form the work of baptizing! In other words, twelve 
 apostles baptized three thousand converts in three hun* 
 dred minutes, or one hundred every ten minutes ! or di- 
 viding them into companies, each apostle baptized two 
 hundi'ed and fifty in three hundred minutes, which would 
 allow one minute and twelve seconds to every apostle for 
 each baptism, provided they all continued hard at work 
 for five hours, without a moment's intermission! We 
 need scarcely stop to say that this was absolutely impos- 
 sible. It usually requires at least five or six minutes in 
 tlie present day to plunge an individual, and how the 
 same thing could be done in about one minute in the days 
 of the apostles, and that too for five continuous hours by 
 the same individual, is more than we can tell. Let us 
 suppose that every one of the two luuidred and fifty bap- 
 tisms assigned to each apostle, required six, or let us say 
 only foicr minutes, this would amount to one thousand 
 minutes, or sixteen hours and four minutes. Now they 
 began at 1 o'clock P. M. or probably later ; standing con- 
 stantly in the water through the remainder of the day and 
 the subsequent night, by the time that sixteen hours and 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 227 
 
 four minutes had elapsed, it would be four minutes after 
 5 o'clock in the morning of the next day, and yet we 
 are told that all this took place "the same day !" Unless 
 another Joshua was there to command the sun and moon 
 to stand still, they must, surrounded by the offended and 
 unbelieving part of the community, have been plunging 
 in the water, in all the darkness and confusion of the 
 whole night. 
 
 In this calculation we have made many concessions ; 
 we have supposed that there was a convenient stream of 
 adequate depth and expanse to admit of all the apostles 
 being engaged at the same time; that they actually all 
 were engaged ; that all the converts went down into the 
 water, and came up out of it, though we read nothing of 
 tliat ; that there were no exhortations immediately prior 
 to the act of baptism, with a view to collect the thoughts 
 and compose the minds of the candidates, after all the 
 hurry and confusion of preparation ; that no agitation and 
 difference of opinion took place among such a multitude ; 
 that there was not a moment's suspension of labor during 
 the whole time ; that all the apostles held out until the 
 last, and that the strength of each suhiced to plunge his 
 full quota under the water during the few hours allotted 
 him.' All this and much more, has been gratuitously 
 
 '" A gentleman of veracity told the writer that he was once pre- 
 sent when forty-seven were dipped in one day, in the usual way. 
 The first operator began, and went through the ceremony, until he 
 had dipped twenty-five persons ; when he was so fatigued that he was 
 compelled to give it up to the other, who with great apparent diffi- 
 culty dipped the other ticenty-two. Both appeared completely ex- 
 hausted, and went off the ground, into a house hard by, to change 
 tlieir clothes and refresh themselves." Scripture Directory for Bap- 
 tism by a Layman, 14. 
 
 We have just seen an article in the " Philadelphia J^orth ^meri- 
 «an," containing an account of the recent revival in Cincinnati, in 
 
228 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 admittecl, and yet, after all these admissions, the whole 
 matter still remains utterly incredible. 
 
 We know it has been said that the seventy disciples 
 aided on this occasion ; but what foundation have we for 
 this assertion? none at all; the proof is all against it. 
 Where is even the evidence that they had authority at 
 that time to baptize ? It is not found in Luke x. where 
 we are furnished with an account of their call and com- 
 mission. The privilege to baptize was one of those im- 
 portant functions, originally invested in the apostles only. 
 It was at first distinctively an apostolic prerogative, sub- 
 sequently they transmitted this power to others whom 
 they judged men of established reputation for integrity, 
 piety, understanding, who felt moved by the Holy Ghost 
 to take the office of the ministry. " Lay hands hastily 
 on no man," was an apostolic maxim in reference to 
 priestly ordination. 1 Tim. v. 22. But we have no ac- 
 count of the apostles having ordained any person to the 
 work of the ministry during the ten days that intervened 
 between their commission and the day of pentecost. We 
 do know, however, that our Saviour himself commanded 
 them to suspend the exercise of all their apostolic func- 
 tions until the descent of the Holy Ghost, which took 
 place on pentecost. Luke xxiv. 49. Acts. i. 7, 8. 
 
 Who, after the foregoing investigation, can maintain 
 that the case before us furnishes any authority for sub- 
 mersion ? It appears to us that such a thought could never 
 enter the mind of a reader, not already committed on the 
 side of plunging: and it surely is high time to abandon 
 
 which we find the following remarlis: "A gentleman informs us he 
 saw eighty-five adults receive at one time the ordinance of baptism, 
 when the officiating clergyman was obliged to desist through ex- 
 haustion, although a large number of other candidates were in at- 
 tendance." 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 229 
 
 an interpretation, at once so unreasonable and untenable. 
 Let us suppose that the apostles, agreeably to a well 
 known custom among the Jews, took bunches of hyssop 
 and sprinkled the multitude, and all the difficulty will at 
 once vanish. "This," says a judicious writer, "could 
 have been done in a very short time, if they passed 
 through the multitude, and the rest of the day have been 
 spent in instruction, in preaching and in prayer, much bet- 
 ter than in needlessly phmging men and women in water, 
 to the detriment of their health, the offence of the modest, 
 and the dishonor of the Christian church. Is it not 
 strange, if the apostles did here immerse, that we do not 
 read of any circumstance which would even in the faint- 
 est manner favor the supposition ? Did the apostles con- 
 ceal the proper mode, and was it left for the sectarian at 
 this late day, to enlighten the church?" 
 
 20 
 
CHAPTER XL 
 
 2. The next case of apostolic baptism that demands 
 attention, is that respecting the Ethiopian eunuch, Acts 
 viii. 38; "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," &;c. As this case 
 has already been examined at large, (see p. 201, sqq.) 
 we shall now finally dispose of it in a few words. It 
 has been conclusively proved, and every one acquainted 
 with the Greek language knows, that the passage may 
 with equal, and as we think, greater correctness, be ren- 
 dered : " they descended to the water, and ascended 
 from it ;" and such a translation would at once strip the 
 case of every circumstance countenancing the idea of 
 submersion. But independently of this, and on the sup- 
 position that the common vei'sion be correct, the mere fact 
 of going into the water is no proof of submersion ; if it 
 were, we should have to believe that Philip was plunged 
 at the same time, as he also went into it. The argument 
 then, apparently in favor of submersion, derived from the 
 case of the eunuch, as well as from the baptism of Christ, 
 is founded altogether on the mere sound of the words, 
 and vanishes on the slightest investigation. 
 
 But as there is nothing in this case to favor submersion, 
 let us inquire whether it presents any evidence for asper- 
 sion. Philip met the eunuch, v. 26, in a road that led 
 through the desert, as the text itself tells us, implying 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 231 
 
 that no streams could be found there, if we consult the 
 geography of the country, we will find that no river, not 
 even a creek, runs through that region. Philip explained 
 tlie 52d and 53d chapters of Isaiah, which are here ex- 
 pressly mentioned. He found these words in the pro- 
 phecy : "So shall he sprinkle many nations," lii. 15 
 Philip, of course, must have told the eunuch that the 
 blood of Christ was shed to wash us clean from sin, for 
 this is the leading idea of the prophecy on which the 
 eunuch was meditating. He must likewise have spoken 
 of professing his faith in Christ, of becoming a member 
 of his church and announcing and sealing the fact by bap- 
 tism, for it was always expected of the Jewish and gen- 
 tile converts that they should make a profession of faith 
 preparatory to submitting to this ordinance, and hence 
 we can understand how the eunuch could mention bap- 
 tism. Philip may have told him that as water cleanses 
 the body, so the blood of Christ effects a spiritual cleans- 
 ing ; — that hence, baptism was fidl of meaning, — that it 
 was a sprinkling, — noting too the word " sprinkle" in the 
 prophecy. The eunuch Avas convinced, and coming "unto 
 a certain water, (perhaps a small spring gushed forth, as 
 is sometimes the case in a desert,') he was baptized, and 
 
 'The place where this eunuch was baptized, Beza, by a very wide 
 mistake, makes to be the river Eleutherus, which ran near the foot 
 of Mount Lebanon, in the most northern borders of Palestine, quite at 
 tiie other end of the country ; Brochard places it near Nehel Escol, 
 or the Torrent of the Grape, the place whence the spies fetched the 
 bunch of grapes ; on the left side of which valley, about half a 
 leagTie, runs a brook, not far from Sicelech, in which this eunuch 
 was baptized. But Eusebius and St. Hierom (followed herein by 
 Ado, the martyrologist) more probably place it near Beth-soran, 
 (where we are told it is still to be seen at this day,) a village twenty 
 miles distant from Jerusalem in the way between it and Hebron, 
 
232 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 in all probability, by sprinkling. Most unquestionably 
 this is a more natural representation than the forced inter- 
 pretation which involves submersion. 
 
 near to which there was a spring bubbling up at the foot of a hill, 
 St. Hierom adds, that it was again swallowed up in the same ground 
 that produced it, and that here it was that Philip baptized the Ethio- 
 pian. See Dr. Cave's " Apostolici," life of St. Philip, vol. ii.'p. 113. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 The case of Lydia and her household, Acts xvi. 13 — 
 15, furnishes no proof whatever in favor of submersion. 
 She may possibly have been baptized by " a river-side," 
 but nothing can be inferred from this in favor of plung- 
 ing, since we are told that she was at that place, not for 
 ihe purpose of being baptized, but because "prayer was 
 wont to be made there." It is even not certain that she 
 was baptized at the prayer-meeting ; and the exclusion of 
 strangers, &c. rather countenances the supposition that 
 she returned to her residence, and there in a retired and 
 silent apartment, she and her children were baptized in 
 the usual way. 
 
 The fourth instance that we notice, is the baptism of 
 Cornelius and his friends. Acts x. 41 — 8. The Holy 
 Ghost having been poured out upon them, Peter deter- 
 mines to administer baptism. But observe, he makes no 
 proposition to leave the spot — no preparations are made 
 for submersion ; but he modestly inquires, " can any 
 man forbid water that these should not be baptized which 
 have received the Holy Ghost as well as we ?" Acts x. 
 47 ; i. e., in plain English etiquette, — " Will some one 
 present be kind enough to fetch some water, that these 
 may be baptized ?" The language of Peter deserves a 
 little farther notice. The verb iia>\iia>, forbid, implies, in 
 :this connection, as in other places, the power (sometimes 
 20* 
 
234 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 including the right) of imposing a prohibition on the 
 thing or act specified. Thus, Num. xi. 28, " Joshua 
 said, my lord, Moses, forbid them," (i. e. Eldad and Me- 
 dad from prophesying). 
 
 Mark ix. 39. But Jesus said forbid him not. 
 
 Mark x. 14. Suffer litde children and forbid them 
 not to come unto me. 
 
 Luke vi. 29. He that taketh thy cloak forbid not to 
 take thy coat also. 
 
 Nothing is more obvious than that the prohibitive 
 phrase in these passages, fully recognizes the power of 
 granting or withholding at option; and this power is 
 also clearly recognized in the persons to whom Peter's 
 address was made. Had they possessed no such power 
 as the one in question, the appeal of Peter on this occa- 
 sion, would have been trifling and senseless. For in- 
 stance, if it had been the intention of Peter to repair to a 
 public pool, a pond, or a river, in order to submerse the 
 candidates, it is manifest that the persons present would 
 have had no power of interference to prohibit such an 
 act. And in such a case it would have been senseless to 
 inquire : *' Can any man present prohibit the use of a 
 public water that these should not be baptized ?" &c. 
 But if the apostle intended to baptize the gentile con- 
 verts on the spot, and by aspersion, and consequently 
 needed only a vessel of water to be brought in — a ser- 
 vice which it was certainly in the power of any one pre- 
 sent to grant or withhold — it was with the greatest pro- 
 priety of language — which at the same moment evinced 
 true delicacy of sentiment, combined with the most dis- 
 ciplined courtesy — that he couched his request for a ves- 
 sel of water in that interrogatory appeal — " Can any 
 man forbid water that these should not be baptized which 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 235 
 
 have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" It seems 
 water was immediately brought into the house at Peter's 
 request; that no interruption occurred, and that they 
 were baptized on the spot. This case then, especially 
 if considered in connection with a right understanding of 
 Peter's question, presents a singular difficulty in the the- 
 ory of exclusive submersion, and appears to us to be 
 irreconcilable with it. 
 
 Dr. Wood's comment on this case corresponds with 
 the above ; " Peter said : ' Can any man forbid water 
 that these should not be baptized ?' It is most natural to 
 understand this to mean, can any man forbid water to 
 be brought? It is far less natural to understand it to 
 mean, can any man forbid us to go out to a river or 
 fountain of water ? It seems impossible that this ac- 
 count should be thought by any one to favor the mode of 
 baptizing by immersion." 
 
 The fifth example that we shall notice, is that of Saul 
 of Tarsus. Acts ix. 18 and xxii. 16. In this and in 
 the succeeding cases we shall adopt the comments of a 
 judicious writer on this subject. " Here we must re- 
 member that Paul had not eaten any thing for three days, 
 verse 9. Nothing is said of his having left the house, 
 in the weak state occasioned by a long and rigid fast, and 
 of being plunged in water. But we find the contrary. 
 ' He arose and was baptized.' We look at the Greek 
 word, and find it to be composed of two others, avacrT*?, 
 which mean ' standing or rising up,' so that we read, lit- 
 erally, ' he, standing up, was baptized.' Nothing is 
 here said of his being buried in a loatery grave — simply 
 that he stood up, in the house, had water poured on his 
 head, and was thus baptized ; — these are obvious circum- 
 stances. If it be more becoming to take the Bible as it 
 
1236 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 stands, rather than attempt to improve the narrative of 
 the sacred vi^riter, then why must we insert so manv cir- 
 cumstances, as that Paul went out of the house, sought a 
 stream, &c., when the simple account before us leads to 
 a supposition the very reverse ? 
 
 " We have now arrived at the sixth case of baptism, 
 mentioned in the Acts, which is that of the Philippian 
 jailor and his household. Acts xvi. 32 — 33. All the cir- 
 cumstances detailed in the preceding verses plainly show 
 that immersion, under the existing circumstances, was 
 totally out of question. Paul and Silas had been thrust, 
 verse 24, into the ' inner prison.' Suddenly came the 
 earthquake, at midnight. The jailor hastened out in 
 alarm, was convinced that God was the protector of Paul 
 and Silas, was awakened, conversed briefly with Paul, 
 and was ' straightway' baptized, that is, ' in the same 
 hour of the night, verse 33. Now as the jailor at the 
 same time brought in water and ' washed their stripes' 
 or wounds, is it not clear, that a part of this water, in a 
 vessel, may have aswered for the baptism 1 We read 
 nothing of the circumstance that at midnight, the whole 
 family with Paul went out of the jail in search of a riv- 
 er, &c., — nothing that would imply such a circumstance. 
 We ask, would it have been in character with the noble, 
 upright Paul, to steal out of the jail at midnight in a 
 clandestine manner, in order to dip the jailor, and then 
 the next morning to refuse to leave his prison walls, till 
 the magistrates who had confined him, would personally 
 dismiss him in an honorable manner ? verse 37. Would 
 such insincerity have been calculated to give the jailor a 
 favorable opinion of the integrity anl honest/ of Paul? 
 Suppose such a scene had occurred to an ramersionist 
 ^preacher — suppose that he had thought it advisable to 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 237 
 
 risk the danger of leaving the jail at midnight, wlien 
 guards surrounded the building, had gone some distance, 
 and dipped the convert ; would he or his friends describe 
 the scene in a way that would lead us to think he had 
 only sprinkled or poured water on the head of the con- 
 vert ? Is there a single circumstance in the whole nar- 
 rative that is favorable to the idea of immersion ? Among 
 the wretched accommodations of a Roman jail, can we 
 find large ponds, or convenient batliing vessels ? The 
 whole account leads us to conclude at once, that the 
 jailor was baptized in the only mode which we have 
 hitherto been able to discover, that is, by pouring or 
 sprinkling. 
 
 But as if to remove all difficulties, and silence all con- 
 troversy, resort is had to the old and convenient hypothe- 
 sis—an hypothesis which has peculiarly befriended our 
 opponents on other occasions of need, viz. that there 
 was, in all probability, a private hath in the jail which 
 served them on this occasion for a place to immerse. It 
 is unfortunate, however, for this hypothesis that Phillippi 
 lay under latitude 41° north— in a climate where baths 
 are little used— and that the person supposed to have fur- 
 nished the bath on this occasion, was a jailor and not in 
 possession of the luxuries of wealth. 
 
 7. The next instance is thatof Paul baptizing at Corinth. 
 Acts xviii. 7—8. None of the circumstances mentioned, 
 imply the mode of baptism, unless that from the circum- 
 stances that Justus lived near the synagogue, v. 7, that 
 Crispus the _ chief ruler of the synagogue believed, and 
 that many Corinthians were baptized, we are to infer, 
 that they assembled at the house of Justus, and were 
 there baptized in the usual way. 
 
238 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 8. We have now reached the last case. It is that of 
 Paul baptizing at Ephesus. Acts xix. 1 — 5. Here too, 
 nothing special is mentioned to indicate the mode ; Paul 
 explained the nature of Christian baptism to the individ- 
 uals mentioned, and as he was satified with their spirit- 
 ual state, they were baptized at once. Where were they 
 at the time ? Near a pond or creek ? If so, how singu- 
 lar it is, that converts in this and other cases, could not 
 be found, unless, by a remarkable coincidence, a large 
 body of water Avas near. If we are to believe a class of 
 men in the west, it must be that there is some special 
 virtue in water, which we have never discovered — for 
 they tell us that dipping in water is essentially con- 
 nected with regeneration. If all the ponds and creeks 
 which exist in the imaginations of immersionists who 
 interpret the Acts, had really watered Judea, then it may 
 be proved by a calculation that there would have been 
 enough water to have turned the whole land into a sea.^ 
 
 We have now noticed all the examples of apostolic 
 baptism recorded in the New Testament, from Avhich it 
 is possible to learn any thing respecting the mode; and 
 after a careful examination, we are confirmed in our ori- 
 ginal opinion, that the circumstances attending those 
 examples, are by no means favorable to the practice of 
 submersion, but the very reverse. 
 
 'Essays, Lutheran Observer, vol. iii. No. 19, 20. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Let it be remembered that our main object thus far has 
 not been to establish the doctrine of affusion, but simply 
 to show that submersion was not in vogue among the 
 primitive Christians. If this fact be established, there is 
 no necessity to adduce arguments in support of our mode, 
 for that will then follow as *a necessary consequence. 
 
 We have plainly seen that there is nothing to be found, 
 either in the literal terms used in reference to baptism. 
 viz. fi^Trri^o) and its derivatives, and the prepositions 
 ua;Di, IX, <fcc., nor in the circumstances accompanying its 
 early administration, which sustains the idea of plunging ; 
 but that, on the other hand, those terms and circumstances 
 greatly favor the mode by affusion, so much so indeed, as 
 to amount to demonstrative proof. There remains how- 
 ever one other source of argument on this topic, and that 
 is the metaphoric or figuarative language applied in 
 the New Testament to baptism, which we shall now 
 proceed to examine. 
 
 TUE FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 
 IN REFERENCE TO BAPTISM. 
 
 1. "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized 
 unto Jesus Christ were baptized into his death ? There- 
 fore 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," &c. 
 
240 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Our Baptist brethren take for granted that there is in 
 this passage an obvious allusion to the mode of baptism ; 
 that it refers to a resemblance between the interment of a 
 dead body and the immersion of a baptized person entirely 
 under the water ; and also to the resemblance between 
 the subsequent resurrection of that dead body from be- 
 neath the surface of the earth and the raising of the bap- 
 tized person up again from beneath the surface of the 
 fluid. In other words, they assert that baptism repre- 
 sents the burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and as 
 none can be said to be buried unless put under ground, 
 so no one is baptized unless plunged under water. This 
 we believe is their usual interpretation, and we have ex- 
 pressed it in as strong and lucid language as Ave could 
 command. 
 
 That some Pedobaptists also have partly adopted this 
 exposition, is well known to us, but we are notwithstand- 
 ing clearly of opinion that it is entirely erroneous. 
 
 There can be no allusion here to the mode of baptism, 
 because — 
 
 [a) The passage manifestly presents a ^Imn antithesis ; 
 the first part of which is, " we are buried with him," 
 (like him, or in like manner with him), the second part 
 is, " even so we also should walk in newness of life." 
 This resurrection to newness of life is evidently spiritual, 
 for it is one which Christians in the present life, have 
 confessedly already actually experienced, consequently 
 the being "buried with Christ" must also be spiritual. 
 To understand it then, as of a literal burial under water, 
 is to understand it in a manner which the laws of exegesis 
 absolutely forbid. But what resemblance is there between 
 being spiritually buried into death, that is, buried and 
 dead unto sin, the world, &c., and a gross literal plunging 
 under water ? 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 241 
 
 (b) There is not another passage in the whole Bible 
 in which baptism, or being bathed or washed in ivater is 
 employed as the symbol of deatli or burial in the grave. 
 In the Jewish ceremonies, it is always an emblem of pu- 
 rification, never of death or interment. Nor can we 
 think that the apostle, in the passage before us, can be 
 justly charged with so glaring a departure from propriety, 
 as to adopt a comparison in which it is impossible to trace 
 one single point of coincidence. 
 
 (c) Instead of any resemblance between baptism and 
 death or burial, there is, in their very nature, a diametri- 
 cal opposition. Baptism, as just remarked, is an emblem 
 of moral purity ; it signifies our being cleansed from sin 
 and renovated by the influences of the Holy Spirit. But 
 how does this comport Avith the place of dead men's 
 bones and all uncleanness, — with physical decomposition, 
 natural corruption, putrefaction, loathsomeness and de- 
 struction ? 
 
 (d) If there even were a similarity between submer- 
 sion and the ordinary literal burying of a dead body ; or, 
 in other words, if suddenly plunging a body under water 
 resembled the lowering of a corpse into a hole dug in the 
 earth and covering it gradually with ground ; still that 
 resemblance would not hold good in relation to Christ's 
 interment, to which the passage obviously alludes. The 
 body of Christ Avas not buried after the manner of the 
 present day. It was placed in a tomb hewn out of a 
 rock ; not a tomb sunk in the earth, but hollowed out of 
 a rock, above ground, and containing separate cells or 
 niches for the reception of bodies, " Even supposing 
 then, that it were yielded to our Baptist brethren that 
 the design of the apostle is to teach the 'mode of baptism, 
 by comparing it to the burial of Christ, it would by no 
 
 21 
 
242 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 means serve their purpose. There was not in fact any 
 such subterranean immersion, if the expression may be 
 allowed, as they imagine. The body of the Saviour was 
 evidently laid in a stone cell, above ground, in Avhich no 
 earth came in contact with it, and in which, when the 
 stone which closed up the door was taken away, the 
 body was distinctly visible. In short, the burial of Christ 
 no more resembled the modern interment of a dead boay 
 among us, than the depositing such a body, for a time, 
 in an apartment in the basement story of a dwelling 
 house, the floor of which was either not sunk below the 
 surface of the earth at all, or if any, not more than a few 
 inches ; admitting of free ingress and egress as a common 
 inhabited room. The figure in question, then, does not 
 serve the turn of our Baptist brethren. 
 
 (c) To maintain that in the passage under considera- 
 tion, the mode of baptism is exhibited by a literal bury- 
 ing of a dead body, proves too much, and therefore en- 
 tirely fails. In the very next verse, (v. 5.) the apostle 
 says : " We have been planted together," (by baptism) 
 "in the likeness of his death;" now what resemblance 
 is tliere between, not the planting of a literal seed in the 
 ground, for there is no such allusion here, but our being 
 "planted with Christ," and submersion? our planting 
 with Christ, is a spiritual one, as the grafting of a branch 
 upon a tree, but is this like plunging under the water ? 
 Further, in the succeeding verse (v. 6.) the apostle speaks 
 of our being ^'^ crucified \v\i\\ Christ," and that also by 
 baptism ; are not our Baptist brethren then bound to show 
 us, how plunging under the water resembles the nailing 
 of a body to a cross ? Evidently they make this passage 
 prove too much for their purpose, and therefore wrest it 
 to the prejudice of their own cause. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 243 
 
 (f) If the text had any reference to the mode of bap- 
 tism, it would rather favor pouring or sprinkling. The 
 modern manner of interring the dead, is, not to thrust 
 the coffin into the earth, but to lower it slowly and 
 solemnly into the grave, and then to sprinkle the earth 
 over it; and this sprinkling or gradual filling up of the 
 grave, is more like pouring in than plunging in. But 
 such an interpretation like that of the Baptist's is per- 
 fectly frivolous, inasmuch as there is no allusion what- 
 ever to the mode of baptism. 
 
 (g) Christ lay in the tomb until the third day ; why 
 then should not the person baptized remain under the 
 water until the third day? Paul speaks in the present 
 tense, " we are," not, we have been, or shall be, but 
 " we are buried with him," as if they had not yet 
 emerged from "the watery grave." Of course then, if 
 the mode of baptism is here exhibited, our Baptist friends 
 are bound to keep their converts three days under the 
 water. 
 
 (Ji) If we understand the phrase, "buried with Christ 
 in baptism," literally, we are bound to give a like inter- 
 pretation to parallel passages, and this would lead to the 
 grossest absurdities. For instance. Gal. iii. 27. " As 
 many of you as have been baptized into Christ, \\2.\e put 
 on Christ." Here the metaphor is taken from the put- 
 ting on of clothes. Accordingly, a literal interpretation 
 would require that at our baptism, we must put off and 
 on our apparel ; and this construction was actually given 
 to the passage by the ancient Baptists. They read of 
 "being buried by baptism," and understanding \i liter- 
 ally, they commenced plunging; they also read of "put- 
 ting on Christ" in baptism, and other similar passages, 
 and by the same rule of interpretation, were compelled 
 
244 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 to baptize naked ! Is this a mere fiction ? — a slander ? 
 God forbid that we should bring a false accusation against 
 our brethren, even for the sake of overthrowing an un- 
 scriptural practice ! — if we are in error, let it be proved. 
 But the disgusting fact is too well authenticated to admit 
 of a doubt. Now, can a principle of exegesis which con- 
 ducts to such absurd results, be correct? — "judge ye." 
 
 We might lengthen this list of objections to the Bap- 
 tist exposition of this text, but we forbear; the difficult- 
 ies are already sufficiently accumulated. We accord- 
 ingly feel compelled to dissent from it, and to believe 
 that the apostle had only a spiritual or moral burying in 
 view. What else but a spiritual burying can be meant, 
 when he says, " we are buried with him by baptism into 
 his death?^' Is this physical ha'piism, or moral? Is it 
 not plain, that reference is here made to baptism, only 
 because, when the ordinance was administered, the Chris- 
 tian promised to renounce sin and to mortify all his evil 
 desires, and thus " to die unto sin, that he might live 
 unto God?" We must believe, therefore, that there is 
 no more reference to the mode of baptism here, than to 
 the mode of the resurrection. The one may just as well 
 be supposed as the other. 
 
 In this view we are strengthened by the opinions 
 of many enlightened writers of various denominations, 
 among whom are even some of the Baptist church. Mr. 
 Robinson, the Baptist historian, and Mr. Judson, the 
 Baptist missionary, who both strenuously maintained the 
 necessity of submersion, " admit that this passage is 
 m,isapplied, when used as evidence of the mode of bap- 
 tism.''''^ Here we have two eminent men, decided 
 advocates of plunging, coinciding in the declaration that 
 
 'Hamilton in his work on the subject, p. 95, 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 245 
 
 this passage affords no proof in favor of their mode of 
 baptism. 
 
 What then is the true import of this text ? — " The 
 apostle in the preceding part of the Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans, had shown that Christians are justified by faith in 
 the righteousness of Christ. He proceeds in the sixth 
 chapter to obviate the objection, that this doctrine tends 
 to licentiousness. " What shall we say, then ? Shall 
 we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid!" 
 He rejects with abhorrence the odious thought. " How 
 shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein?" 
 He then adverts to the significance of baptism, which 
 being the ordinance which seals our introduction into the 
 family of Christ may be considered as exhibiting both 
 the first principles of gospel truth and the first elements 
 of Christian character. " Know ye not, that so many 
 of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized 
 into his death?" He then infers, that since baptism has 
 so immediate a reference to the death of Christ, it must, 
 by consequence, be connected also with his resurrection ; 
 and that, as in the former view, it teaches the regene- 
 rated the abandoning of the old life of sin ; so, in the lat- 
 ter, it equally teaches them the pursuit and progress of 
 tine new life of righteousness. "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." 
 
 The obvious design of the apostle is to illustrate the 
 character and obligations of believers, from the circum- 
 stance, that they are, in a certain respect, conformed to 
 Christ's death ; that as he died/or sin, so they are dead, 
 or are under obligations to be dead, to sin ; that is they 
 are holy, or are, by their profession, obliged to be holy. 
 21* 
 
346 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 " So many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, 
 were baptized into his death." And this is explained by 
 what follows. " In that Christ died, he died unto sin 
 (or on account of sin) once ; but in that he liveth, he 
 liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to 
 be dead indeed unto sin, (or in respect to sin,) but alive 
 unto God through Jesus Christ." This is what was sig- 
 nified by baptism. And so believers were baptized into 
 Chris fs death: not that baptism was a symbol of death, 
 or the state of the dead ; for water, or washing in water, 
 never was a symbol of this. But water, used in cere- 
 monial, Avhether by washing or sprinkling, and after- 
 wards in Christian baptism, always signified the fact, or 
 the acknowledged necessity oi purification. Now being 
 dead or in a state of death to sin, is the same thing as to 
 l)e spiritually purified, or made holy. And this is the 
 very thing that baptism, coming in the place of ablutions 
 under the former economy, is exactly adapted to signify. 
 Or, to say all in a word, water used in baptism is a sign 
 of that moral purification of believers, which the apostle 
 means to express by their being crucified, dead, and con- 
 formed to Christ's death. Their being dead in conformity 
 with Christ, is the expression which contains the met- 
 aphor. And baptism, as an appointed token or symbol, 
 denotes what is signified by the metaphor, not the meta- 
 phor itself."' 
 
 It appears then that nothing more was intended by the 
 figure in the text, than to set forth that by being baptized 
 into the death of Christ, we profess to be dead and buried 
 in respect to sin, without any reference whatever to the 
 mode in which either the burial or the baptism might be 
 performed. And continuing the meta.phor, even as Christ 
 
 'See Dr. Miller on baptism. 
 
MODE or BAPTISM. 247 
 
 lived a new lite after his death and resurrection, so we, 
 having professed Christ at our baptism, are now, as 
 members of his body, bound to lead a new life, that is, a 
 holy life; so that every Christian can say, with Paul — 
 "I am crucified with Christ; I have been made con- 
 formable to his death ; being dead indeed to sin, and alive 
 to God by Jesus Christ." 
 
 In Dr. Wardlaw's Dissertation, we find the following 
 confirmatory remark: — "Now it is quite obvious, that 
 the ars;ument of the apostle has not the remotest connec- 
 tion with the mode of baptism. There is not the most 
 distant occasion for the supposition of any such allusion, 
 in order to render the passage intelligible ; nor does the 
 allusion, when supposed, impart to it any addition of 
 force or propriety. The meaning does not, in the least 
 degree, depend on the manner of performing the cere- 
 mony: it turns entirely on its being baptism into Chrisfs 
 death. Provided it was this, it makes not the smallest 
 difference to the apostle's statement, or argument, or con- 
 clusion, whether we suppose it to have been by immer- 
 sion, by pouring, or by sprinkling." 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 2. Col. ii. 12, "Buried with him in baptism, wherein 
 also ye are risen with him through the faith of the opera- 
 tion of God, who hath raised him from the dead." — As 
 this text is so very similar to the one just examined, the 
 preceding remarks apply to it, and hence we shall dismiss 
 it Math a few words. The Avhole context so plainly 
 proves that the phrase "buried in baptism" is figurative, 
 that we shall lose no time in an attempt to establish it. 
 It means that as a man literally dead and buried, " is cut 
 off from all temporal connections and indulgences ; so 
 the baptized man is really, or at least by profession, dead 
 to sin, and in this way made conformable to the death of 
 Christ in its great design and efficiency, which are to pu- 
 rify to himself a peculiar people, dead to the world, dead 
 to carnal ambition, and secluded from every unhallowed 
 practice." — Besides other objections to explaining this 
 text in reference to the mode of baptism, there is one on 
 the very face of it, which is insuperable. The individ- 
 ual who is plunged rises from the water by the muscular 
 strength of the man who plunges him, or at least by 
 physical power, whereas Paul here says, "risen through 
 the faith of the operation of God." Of course then, he 
 cannot allude to submersion. 
 
 3. 1 Cor. XV. 29. "Else what shall they do who are 
 baptized for (u^«g) or over the dead, if the dead rise not 
 at all?" — The signification of this passage is somewhat 
 obscure ; TertuUian, Theophilact and Epiphanius inform 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 219 
 
 US, that it was the custom of the Marcionites and Corin- 
 thians, if a catechumen died before his baptism, to bap- 
 tize some other in his stead, as the apostle here seems to 
 intimate. And as the early Christians regarded with 
 much veneration the graves of martyrs, and occasionally 
 held assemblies on the spot, it is supposed that in these 
 vicarious baptisms, the rite was performed over his grave. 
 Tliis would be the obvious meaning of the apostle, if his 
 language (^tti^) in this passage signifies over, as it cer- 
 tainly often does in Greek writers. But could the bap- 
 tisms over the graves of martyrs be performed by immer- 
 sion ? Were their graves dug at the bottom of rivers ?' 
 
 4. 1 Cor. X. 1 — 2, " Moreover, brethren, I would not 
 tliat you should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were 
 under the cloud, and all passed through the sea ; and 
 were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea." 
 The fact here referred to is recorded Exod. xiv ; from 
 which we learn that the Red Sea, through which the 
 Israelites passed, was divided before them ; that the 
 waters stood up on each side like a wall ; and that they 
 travelled through on dry ground. We also learn that 
 the cloud by which their course was supernaturally di- 
 rected, did not discharge itself upon them in the form of 
 an overwhelming shower, much less submerge them; 
 that it sometimes preceded and sometimes followed them. 
 In all this, there was nothing that even resembled sub- 
 mersion ; but they were doubtless sprinkled by drops 
 from the miraculous cloud, when it passed over their 
 heads, or at least by the spray of the sea, particularly as 
 we are told that a high wind prevailed at the time, and in 
 this sprinkling their children shared as much as they. 
 The only submersion that took place on that occasion 
 was that experienced by the Egyptians, who were indeed 
 
 Popular Theology, pp. 222—3. 
 
250 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 "buried in a watery grave," from which they never 
 emerged ; but this the apostle does not term a baptism. 
 
 5. 1 Peter iii. 20 — 21, "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 conscience towards God,) by 
 the resurrection of Jesus Christ." — Tlie only beings 
 saved from the deluge, were Noah and those with him 
 in the ark ; but these were not submersed, while all the 
 rest of the world was, and perished ! Submersion on 
 this occasion proved as fatal as in the case of the Egyp- 
 tians who were "buried" in the Red sea. Submersion 
 was the very evil from which the ark Avas the instrument 
 of deliverance. Baptism is here represented as a means 
 of salvation " by (or through) the resurrection of Jesus 
 Christ." This however, all Avill admit, it can only be 
 to those who receive the thing signified by baptism, 
 which is the renewing and cleansing influences of the 
 Holy Gliost. All such are saved in this life from their 
 sins, and through the resurrection of Christ from the 
 dead, have the well-grounded hope of eternal glory. We 
 further learn, that as a means of salvation it was pre- 
 figured ; — but by what? — by the waters of the flood ? — 
 certainly not, for they Avere the means of destruction ? it 
 must then have been by the ark. It may also be re- 
 marked that the ark was not submersed, for had it been 
 so, all must have perished ? but it was borne aloft on the 
 surface of the Avater, (not doAvn under it) and M^as sprinkled 
 with the rain that fell from heaven. 
 
 This text then says nothing in behalf of submersion, 
 but is rather from the circumstance just mentioned, in 
 favor of sprinkling. But in any event, it is "wof the 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 251 
 
 putting aivay of the filth of the flesh" washing, or cleans- 
 ing, or even sprinkling of the body, that can avail, " but 
 the answer of a good conscience towards God," namely, 
 the covenant Avith God, made in baptism, to preserve a 
 conscience void of offence by leading a holy life, — such 
 a life as will exhibit the purification of our nature by the 
 laver of regeneration. We are accordingly most im- 
 pressively cautioned against undue attachment to the out- 
 ward rite, since that will not save us, and admonished to 
 look to the substance. 
 
 We have now examined all the important passages of 
 the New Testament, which are usually introd\iced into 
 this controversy, and which are in the remotest manner 
 calculated to reflect any light on the point at issue. In 
 none of these passages have we discovered the slightest 
 evidence in favor of submersion ; — not even a word, or 
 incidental remark, much less a fact that would even seem 
 to require submersion. On the contrary the whole of 
 the argument is of an adverse character, and preponderates 
 overwhelmingly on the side of baptism by affusion. 
 
 Thus far then, our investigations have resulted in the 
 most triumphant confirmation of the proposition with 
 which we at first set out, viz. " that the writings of the 
 New Testament afford no proof, either in the literal terms 
 used in reference to baptism ; or in the circumstances 
 attending its administration ; or in the metaphorical lan- 
 guage applied to it, that it was performed by submer- 
 
CHAPTER XV. 
 
 The next proposition that calls for attention is : 
 Is the mode of baptism of such essential importance 
 that the example would he binding on us ; coidd it be 
 conclusively shoivn that either mode constituted the 
 primitive practice ? 
 
 The attentive reader has doubtless already inferred 
 from what has been said, that we regard the question re- 
 specting the mode of applying water in baptism as non- 
 essential, and were we not acquainted with the lamenta- 
 ble proneness of poor, erring man to lose sight of the 
 substance and attach undue weight to mere forms, we 
 should be at a loss to account for the vast amount of con- 
 troversy, — conducted, alas ! too often in a spirit utterly un- 
 worthy of the Christian character, to which this question 
 has given rise. Long before the introduction of Christian 
 baptism, this propensity marred the beauty and harmony 
 of God's house, and called forth the severest rebukes from 
 him and his faithful servants. "To what purpose is the 
 multitude of your sacrifices unto me ? Saith the Lord : 
 I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed 
 beasts ; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of 
 lambs, or of he-goats." * * * Bring no more vain obla- 
 tions : incense is an abomination unto me : the new 
 moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot 
 away with : it is iniquity even the solemn meeting. Your 
 new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth : 
 they are a trouble unto me, I am weary to bear them." 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 253 
 
 Isaiah i. 11 — 14. "For I desired mercy and not sacri- 
 fice ; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offer- 
 ings." Hosea vi. 6.' Our blessed Lord and his apos- 
 tles also found it necessary to caution the Jews again and 
 again against this tendency of their nature, and availed 
 themselves of every occasion to instruct them in the plain 
 but too much neglected truth, that external observances, 
 even though of divine appointment, were of but little con- 
 sideration, in comparison with the spirit of those obser- 
 vances. " Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypo- 
 crites ! for ye pay tithe of mint, and anise and cummen and 
 have omitted the Aveightier matters of the law, judgment, 
 mercy and faith." Matt, xxiii. 23. "Ye observe," says 
 the apostle, " days and months and times and years. I 
 am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in 
 vain." Gal. iv. 10 — 11. "Let no man therefore judge 
 you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or 
 of the new moon or the sabbath days." Col. ii. 16. 
 
 Those who have carefully looked at the state of the 
 church in the present day, and noticed the devotedness 
 with which men are wedded to the externals of religion, 
 and the warmtTi and even acrimony Avith which they too 
 often contend for their own peculiar forms, must admit 
 that the foregoing warnings are as necessary at present 
 as they were in former times. We still have need to re- 
 mind men, that true religion does not consist in meats and 
 drinks and divers washings,^ &c., i. e. outward things 
 which can have no direct moral influence upon the soul ; 
 or in other words, that " the kingdom of God is not meat 
 and drink, (not external ceremonies) but righteousness 
 
 'See also 1 Sam. XV. 22. Jer. vi. 20, and vii. 21— 23. Amos v. 
 21—25. Micah vi. 6—8, and many others. 
 ^Heb, ix. 10. 
 22 
 
254 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.'" When mere 
 forms become the subjects of controversy, the danger of 
 giving them an importance and prominence which they 
 do not deserve, and of overlooking their essence and 
 their end is doubly great. Hence we may in most of 
 such cases, without much hazard of being justly charged 
 with impertinence, address the zealous disputants in the 
 spirit of the apostle's language : " Ye observe days and 
 months and times and years, I am afraid of you ;" " for 
 in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, 
 nor uncircumcision," neither Judaism nor heathenism ; 
 neither forms nor anodes ; neither submersion nor 
 sprinkling, ^'C, but faith which worketh by love.^ These 
 considerations appear to us to apply with peculiar force 
 to the mode of baptism, inasmuch as this, as intimated 
 in our proposition, can by no means be essential to the 
 validity of the ordinance ; and hence whatever may have 
 been the practice of the primitive Christians in this respect, 
 it has no binding application to us. Our reasons, among 
 others, are the following : 
 
 1. No particular mode has been pointed out in the 
 Bible to the exclusion of every other mode. This we 
 think has been conclusively established. The most 
 patient and impartial examination of every legitimate 
 source of argument, has certainly left us without one 
 particle of proof in favor of submersion. Though the 
 inspired writers speak of baptism, directly or indirectly 
 in almost every page of the New Testament and under a 
 great variety of aspects, yet they have not employed a 
 single term, or stated a single fact, or used a single figure 
 of speech, which evinces that they either preferred or 
 practised submersion in any case. They have indeed 
 
 'Romxiv. n. ^Gal. V. 6. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 255 
 
 related some occurrences which cannot possibly, in our 
 view, be reconciled with plunging, but in no instance 
 have they made a representation which is not entirely 
 reconcilable with the practice of perfusion or sprinkling. 
 On the supposition that the doctrine of our Baptist breth- 
 ren is ti'ue, this is a most unaccountable fact. What ! 
 not one evangelist or apostle — though taught by the Spirit 
 of God what to say — kind enough or wise enough to put 
 this matter beyond a doubt ? The unavoidable inference 
 is, that the inspired writers did not deem the mode of ap- 
 plying water in baptism, an essential matter ; and did not 
 therefore think it necessary to state it precisely.* 
 
 At the same time we readily admit that however nu- 
 merous and cogent the arguments in favor of affusion, 
 amounting, in our estimation, to proof demonstrative, yet 
 our investigations have not resulted in the decided con- 
 viction, that this mode is prescribed, to the rejection of 
 every other. Obviously then, if we contend for any one 
 mode exclusively of every other, we transcend our author- 
 ity ; " we attempt to do, what Christ and the apostles 
 left undone; what they left undone, for the very purpose 
 of showing, that they did not regard the particular form 
 of the rite as of any material consequence, and so would 
 have Christians at liberty to vary the form, as circum- 
 stances might require." 
 
 It will avail our Baptist brethren nothing, to contend, 
 tliatthe mode of applying the water is distinctly defined ^ 
 for, independently of all the previous irrefragable reason- 
 ing to the contrary, this position would stand forth in the 
 very face of the most glaring and stubborn facts. The 
 diversity of sentiment prevailing among many learned and 
 pious men ; the numerous public and private controver- 
 
 'See Dr. Miller on Baptism. 
 
256 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 sies ; the scores upon scores of pamphlets and books 
 published on both sides of the question ; — all go to estab- 
 lish most conclusively the point, that the mode of tising 
 the water is not specified in the Scriptures, neither by 
 precept, example nor incidental circumstances. This 
 then, in itself, proves incontestibly that it cannot be a 
 matter of essential moment, and therefore, that whatever 
 may have been the practice of the early Christians, their 
 example in this respect is not binding on us. 
 
CHAPTER XVL 
 
 2. ^^gain, that the mode of baptism is 7iot essential 
 and the primitive example not obligatory, may be proved 
 from ANALOGY. If it can be mad eappear that in analo- 
 gous cases the mode of administering a divine and posi- 
 tive institution, has been admitted by inspired as well as 
 uninspired men, to be of no essential importance, it will 
 follow that baptism belongs to the same category. We 
 shall endeavor to establish this position in reference to — 
 
 (a.) The jmssover. This ordinance was instituted of 
 God in memory of the deliverance of Israel from Egyp- 
 tian bondage ; explicit directions were given as to the 
 time, manner, &c., of the celebration. But these direc- 
 tions were not always strictly observed, for the obvious 
 reason that they were not considered essential. God had 
 ordained that it should be celebrated in i]\Q first month of 
 the year, but in the days of Hezekiah it was kept in the 
 second month ;^ the law also prohibited persons who 
 were ceremonially unclean from participating in the so- 
 lemnity, but on the occasion just mentioned, many who 
 had not purified themselves, " kept the feast." For a 
 " multitude of the people, even many of Ephraim, &c., 
 had not cleansed themselves ; yet did they eat the pass- 
 over, otherwise than it ivas ivritten.^ It may further be 
 added, that the Lcvites " killed the passover,^^ whereas 
 this duty belonged properly to the people f and they also 
 
 '2 Chron. xxx. 13. "Ibid. v. 18. n chron. xxx. 17. 
 
 22* 
 
258 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 assisted more than the law allowed, in offering the sacri- 
 fices, particularly those that were for the purifying of the 
 unclean. Now, let it be remembered that all these exter- 
 nal departures from the plainly prescribed rules, were 
 practised under the very eye and superintendence of that 
 holy and inspired man of God, Hezekiah, and with the 
 consent and co-operation of the Priests and Levites ; 
 moreover, notwithstanding the deviations, the Lord was 
 well pleased and sanctioned the whole transaction with 
 the tokens of his approbation and love ; for it is said : 
 " Their voice was heard and their prayer came up to his 
 holy dwelling place, even unto heaven.'" 
 
 Should it be urged that Hezekiah did not, himself, 
 deem those variations proper and therefore prayed God to 
 pardon them, we answer, that this does not reach the 
 essence of the case. We manifestly have here a want of 
 outward conformity in several respects to the legal regu- 
 lations, specifying the mode of celebrating the passover; 
 a divinely inspired man did not consider the efficacy of 
 the ordinance at all invalidated on that account, and God 
 himself impressed upon it the broad seal of his approba- 
 tion. Grotius very properly observes here, that " ritual 
 institutions must give way not only to a public necessity, 
 but to a public benefit and advantage;" and the pious M. 
 Henry says, "let the circumstance give way to the sub- 
 stance, and let not the thing itself be lost upon a nicety 
 about the time." This case is indeed in some points 
 analogous to baptism, but in others it is a much stronger 
 exemplification of departure from original usage, than 
 sprinkling would be from submersion, upon the supposi- 
 tion that submersion was the primitive mode ; for in rela- 
 tion to keeping the passover, the mode was expressly 
 
 '2 Chron. xxx. 21. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 259 
 
 pointed out, but not so in baptism ; and yet, the non- 
 compliance with that plainly prescribed mode, did not 
 affect the validity of the passover. How much less can 
 the mode of baptism, which is not specified, be thought 
 essential? 
 
 Again, those who read the bible attentively, know that 
 the passover was required to be commemorated with 
 shoes on the feet and staves in the hand, and this practice 
 was emblematic of a historical fact ; yet neither our Lord 
 nor his apostles adhered to it ; nor had it been observed 
 for many years previously. And why ? — because it was 
 a collateral circumstance not necessarily connected with 
 the spirit of the ordinance. And will any one venture to 
 assert that this deviation from the original mode, ren- 
 dered the institution of non-effect, or in any degree im- 
 paired its validity ? Then let the controversy be waged 
 with Jesus Christ and his holy apostles, for it was they 
 who thus varied from the original instructions, and that 
 too without pretending to make any alteration or improve- 
 ment in the ordinance. 
 
 Our position is equally true in relation to 
 (b.) The LorcPs supper. — The external mode of cele- 
 brating this institution is not expressly prescribed, but 
 we know precisely what was the example of our Lord 
 and his apostles. They met in the night ; not on the 
 Lord's day, but on Thursday ; not in a house of public 
 worship, but in an upper chamber of aprivate dwelling ; 
 they used unleavened bread and the pure juice of the 
 grape, and received the supper not standing, sitting nor 
 kneeling, but in a recumbent posture, half sitting and 
 half lying. Now will any intelligent Christian maintain, 
 that a strict adherence to all these particulars is necessary 
 to the validity of the holy supper ? We think not, for. 
 
260 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 in this event, our Baptist brethren, as well as all other 
 religious denominations would be in a sad perdicament; 
 and it might be truly affirmed, that as there is not a branch 
 of Christ's church on earth in which these particulars are 
 observed, so therefore there is not one in which this sac- 
 rament is celebrated ! By common consent then, it is 
 universally conceded, that the external mode of commem- 
 orating the love of our dying Lord, is not essential, and 
 that the practice of the early Christians does not bind us. 
 Now if the prophet Hezekiah, and the priests of God, 
 in his day, and our Lord and his apostles in their day, 
 evidently regarded the external mode of observing a divine 
 and positive ordinance, as of little consequence ; and if 
 all Christian denominations at present, conspire to pro- 
 claim by their usage in reference to the eucharist, the very 
 same doctrine, why should our Baptist brethren form an 
 exception in respect to baptism alone ? Do they not 
 thereby subject themselves to the charge of glaring incon- 
 sistency ? Are they not bound, either to abandon the 
 ground they occupy as to baptism, or else to take the 
 same position in reference to the eucharist ? 
 
 They may however answer, " we do conform to the 
 example of Christ and his apostles, so far as we conve- 
 niently can ; but it would be inexpedient to have the sup- 
 per in an upper chamber and after it is dark ; — to recline 
 at the table on a couch, would not be agreeable to the 
 usage of the present day, nor be thought suitable or de- 
 cent; and as to the unleavened bread and pure grape-juice, 
 these are unimportant and do not enter into the essential 
 constituency of the ordinance ; besides, the latter is diffi- 
 cult to procure." Thus our Baptist brethren may and 
 probably do argue, and we grant that the argument is 
 satisfactory ; but why not adopt the same process of rea- 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 2G1 
 
 soning in regard to baptism ? why not admit the plea of 
 convenience, suitableness, decency, and uniinportance of 
 mere externals, in one case as well as the other ? This 
 plea would certainly be better founded in reference to 
 baptism, than to the eucharist, because our Saviour's di- 
 rections respecting the latter are more explicit, for he 
 says : " This do ye in remembrance of me;" that is, eat 
 this bread (unleavened) and drink this ivine (the pure 
 juice of the grape) in remembrance of me. He has not 
 done any thing like as much to enjoin exact conformity 
 in relation to baptism. 
 
 We have now brought before the reader no less than 
 three distinct cases, in which conformity to the outward 
 mode of observing divine ordinances, has been shown to 
 be non-essential ; in the first two cases even inspired men 
 (including our Lord himself) varied, not only from the 
 ancient but from the expressly prescribed usage, and in 
 the other, the whole Christian church in the present day 
 habitually varies. This argument has been introduced 
 upon the supposition that submersion was the original 
 mode of baptism, which, however, is in no wise admitted, 
 and cannot by any possibility be proved ; but even upon 
 this gratuitous supposition, it appears we are under no 
 obligation to conform. We repeat then, that if it could 
 be established that the primitive Christians practised sub- 
 mersion, we should by no means be bound to adhere to 
 that practice, and would regard affusion (for reasons 
 which will be stated in the sequel) to be decidedly the 
 best and most suitable mode. For, unless it can be shown 
 that total plunging was actually prescribed and was in- 
 tended to symbolize something which cannot be otherwise 
 equally well set forth, then the example of Hezekiah and 
 of our Master himself, authorizes us to consider such 
 
362 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 plunging as a mere circumstance, — an accident not essen- 
 tially belonging to the ordinance. All that Ave are bound 
 to look to, so far as water is concerned, is the preserva- 
 tion of its symbolical expression; that being retained, 
 the sacrament is complete, so far as the outward element 
 can make it so. 
 
 Suppose the idea designed to be expressed by the 
 water, is moral cleansing ; is it not plain that aspersion 
 or affusion represents that idea as effectually as plunging? 
 Were not the most of the typical purifications under the 
 ceremonial law, exhibited by sprinkling and that too by 
 God's own appointment? And are we not thereby 
 taught, that in the divine judgment, sprinkling is even a 
 more appropriate emblem of moral purification than sub- 
 mersion ? 
 
CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 3. Another proof that the mode of baptism is not 
 essential, and the example of the early Christians not 
 binding, may be found in the fact that God equally ap- 
 proves of sincere Christians, whether baptized by sub- 
 mersion or sprinkling. AVhat we mean is, that the 
 question as to the divine judgment respecting Christians, 
 depends not on the form of their baptism, but altogether 
 upon their real, actual character; if they are holy, they 
 are equally objects of God's approbation,, — if unholy — of 
 his disapprobation, irrespective of the manner in which 
 they have been baptized. Their not observing an exter- 
 nal ordinance in the same manner, can be of no account 
 with God. For this view of the subject we are indebted 
 to Dr. Woods and we shall adopt his statement of it. 
 
 " That God does in fact regard Christians, who are 
 baptized in different ways, with equal approbation, might 
 be made evident from the representations of his word, 
 and from his actual administration. But formal proof 
 cannot be necessary. Those who are familiar with the 
 scriptures have learned, that God judges of men, in the 
 manner I have described. And we cannot fail to receive 
 the same impression from what is manifest in his admin- 
 istration. I am happy to acknowledge those, who prefer 
 immersion as the mode of baptism, to be sincere friends 
 of Christ; and I would not cease to rejoice in all the 
 
264 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 tokens of the divine favor which they receive. But do 
 not those Christians, who use sprinkling or affusion, re- 
 ceive as many tokens of divine favor ? Does not God 
 give them as high a degi^ee of the influence of the Holy 
 Spirit ? And in consequence of this do they not exhibit 
 as high a degree of sanctification ? Have they not as ar- 
 dent love to the Saviour, and as much zeal for the promo- 
 tion of his cause ? Do they not labor as diligently and 
 pray as fervently for the salvation of the world? Are not 
 their labors as succcessful ? And do not their prayers 
 meet with as much acceptance, and obtain as many gra- 
 cious answers ? Do they not as sensibly enjoy the pre- 
 sence of God in the special ordinances of the gospel, in 
 seasons of affliction, and in the hour of death ? Will not 
 as welcome and joyful an entrance be ministered to them 
 into the everlasting kingdom of their Saviour? And will 
 they not enjoy as high a degree of blessedness in heaven? 
 Now, if it is indeed so, that God grants to those who 
 believe sprinkling or affusion to be a proper mode of bap- 
 tism, as many tokens of his approbation and love, as to 
 those who prefer immersion : is not the conclusion per- 
 fectly obvious, that God does not consider the particular 
 form of baptism to be of any essential consequence as to 
 the great interests of religion ? It clearly follows then, 
 that we ought to love the followers of Christ who baptize 
 in one way, as much as those who baptize in another 
 way ; and that if we consider the form of this rite as of 
 any essential consequence, or suffer it to have any great 
 influence upon our feelings, we commit a lamentable 
 mistake, and in regard to this point, place ourselves in 
 opposition to the mind of God. And how deeply is it to 
 be deplored, that any Christians should, through weak- 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 265 
 
 ness or imperfection, cherish views and feelings, which 
 are at variance with the divine will and the divine admin- 
 istration !" 
 
 4. A fourth reason why we regard the practice of the 
 early Christians in reference to the mode of baptism, as 
 possessing no binding force on us, is derived from the 
 consideration, that even they tvere liable to err and to be 
 influenced by their pecidiar education and habits. — We 
 readily concede, that those who enjoyed the personal in- 
 structions of our Saviour and his apostles, possessed ad- 
 vantages from which we are necessarily excluded ; — ad- 
 vantages Mdiich would seem to invest their example with 
 a degree of authority over the faith of all succeeding 
 generations of the church. Hence, that popular opinion 
 which is so prone to pay a blind veneration to the exam- 
 ple of the early Christians ; hence the fancied pre-emi- 
 nence for virtue and orthodoxy, of those who think they 
 can find a precedent for their conduct or a sanction for 
 their belief in the opinions and forms of the primitive 
 church. But we must confess, that while we entertain 
 the profoundest regard for the example of our Lord and 
 the apostles, and of all others who taught and acted under 
 the unerring guidance of the Holy Spirit, we cannot ac- 
 cord to others who were fallible men like ourselves, the 
 same degree of respect, just because they lived in, or 
 immediately after, the apostolic age. The advantages 
 enjoyed on their part, find a potent offset in the superior 
 state of moral and intellectual improvement of the pre- 
 sent day, as the facts in our relative histories amply de- 
 monstrate. The early churches were formed from Jew- 
 ish or gentile converts, who had alike been brought up 
 in the vilest superstitions. The influence of their early 
 education and original habits was felt long after their es- 
 23 
 
266 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 pousals to Christianity. Even under the priming hand 
 and the vigilant eye of Paul, there sprang up, in the very 
 bosom of the primitive church, the rank weeds of false 
 doctrine and of a barbarous religion. Endless disputes 
 on points of no importance were warmly prosecuted ; — 
 disputes which could have been generated only in super- 
 stitious and ignorant minds. Even the solemn ordinance 
 of the holy supper, in reference to which Christ's instruc- 
 tions and example were so very plain, was ignorantly and 
 wickedly turned into a bacchanalian revel! So prone 
 were they to abuse the institutions of Christianity, that 
 Paul in his letter to the Corinthians (ch. i. 14 — 15) gives 
 utterance to this strange declaration: "I thank God that 
 1 baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius ; lest any 
 should say that I baptized in mine own nameJ'^ But if 
 we pass over to the second and third centuries, we shall 
 find a state of things still more deplorable. Here the 
 true genius of the oriental philosophy, mingling with a 
 variety of vulgar superstitions, began to display itself.— 
 Who can forget the ridiculous ceremonies at baptism, of 
 exorcism, unction, giving salt and milk to the candidate, — 
 attiring him in a snow-white robe and crowning him with 
 an evergreen ? And who, in view of all this, can per- 
 suade himself that those early Christians, — so prolific of 
 superstitious refinings and innovations upon the rite of 
 baptism, as well as in other respects, did yet in regard to 
 the mode of this rite, remain infallible? — and who, with 
 these facts staring him in the face, can seriously maintain, 
 that their example in a matter, not in itself essential, con- 
 stitutes an authoritative model for us ? 
 
 But, says the opponent, our appeal goes beyond the 
 second and third centuries ; we carry it up to the apos- 
 tolic practice. Be it so ; the weight of the argument 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 267 
 
 from church history, must doubtless mamly hinge here. 
 But it has ah-eady been proven, that the whole force of 
 apostolic example is decidedly on our side of the ques- 
 tion. Let us not however be misunderstood ; we do not 
 admit that even the example of the apostles can, from 
 the nature of the case, determine this controversy. In 
 addition to the considerations already advanced in support 
 of this position, we would merely remark here, that as 
 the verb /2iTT/^&i is manifestly a generic term, like our own 
 verb ivash, and consequently comprehends a variety of 
 modes of ablution, and the command to baptize is there- 
 fore not specific as to the mode, it matters not what may 
 have been the precise practice of the apostles, that pecu- 
 liar practice cannot of course be essential, and therefore 
 constitutes no obligatory rule of faith or of imitation for 
 us. The climate of Palestine, and also of many of the 
 other countries where the gospel was preached by the 
 apostles, is warm. This rendered bathings frequent, and 
 this circumstance of itself, might naturally be supposed 
 to have begotten in them a predilection for immersion, 
 even though it were not required, but only allowed by 
 the original command. But in a more rigorous climate 
 where bathings are unfrequent, and attended with greater 
 inconvenience and exposure, a diverse propensity would 
 naturally exist. The practice of the church therefore, in 
 any age, setting aside denominational prejudices, would 
 be likely to shape itself in general, according to the cli- 
 mate and the corresponding habits of the people. — There 
 is undoubtedly more weight in this remark than a preju- 
 diced mind would be willing, readily to concede. The 
 aquatic habits of a Greenlander and an Otaheitan — we 
 mean their habits in relation to bathing, swimming, diving, 
 &c., although respectively engendered by climate, are 
 
268 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 totally different. And when we say that a Greenlander, 
 if left to the direction of his own choice in relation to the 
 mode of baptism, would feel a natural bias to the practice 
 of aspersion instead of dipping ; and that an inhabitant of 
 the Society Isles would be naturally inclined to a choice 
 opposite to that of his shivering brother, we pay no more 
 than a reasonable tribute of respect to the prejudices of 
 climate. And when we consider that these prejudices 
 are not only innocent and unavoidable, but highly salutary 
 to the health and comfort of the body, we cannot but ad- 
 mire the wisdom and characteristic goodness of the Au- 
 thor of our religion, in so graduating his command, 
 touching the mode of baptism, as to make it harmonize 
 with the various conditions of his great family. If there- 
 fore, it should be found upon examination, that the apos- 
 tolic churches did practise immersion, still that circum- 
 stance can be sufficiently accounted for on other ground 
 than that of a specific command of Christ. 
 
 It would be an easy matter to extend our remarks on 
 this subject to an indefinite length; we might advert to 
 the several benefits of baptism, as set forth in Part II. 
 of this work, and show by the strongest evidence of 
 which the subject is susceptible, that all those benefits 
 are enjoyed, to say the least, in as ample and rich a meas- 
 ure by Christians baptized by affusion, as by those who 
 have received the ordinance in any other Avay ; and justly 
 infer from this fact, that the mode cannot be essential. 
 We might take another view of the holy supper, and 
 prove, that as the eating and drinking of a given quantity 
 of bread and wine by each communicant, is not indispen- 
 sable to a valid reception of this sacrament, so it is pre- 
 posterous to set up such a pretension in reference to bap- 
 tism ; that bread and wine occupy the same place in the 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 269 
 
 one that water does in the other ; all are outward signs 
 and so far as quantity is concerned, mere circumstances. 
 It is the command and promise of our Lord annexed to 
 the signs or emblems, and our faith in the same, that 
 constitute them sacraments, and apart from that command 
 and promise, these emblems, whether used in greater or 
 smaller quantity, cannot possibly partake of a sacrament- 
 al character. Hence the great Saxon Reformer justly 
 remarks on baptism : " It is not the water that produces 
 the benefits, but the word of God which is connected 
 with the water, and our faith confiding in the word of 
 God in this baptismal water. For without the ivord of 
 God the ivater is mere water, but ivith the ivord of God, 
 it is a baptism."^ 
 
 We might yet further refer to the ceremony of " feet 
 washing" as practised by several sects, in literal con- 
 formity to the command and example of Christ, and 
 show that as the Baptists dispense with a literal 
 observance of it, and are content with obeying it virtual- 
 ly ; (that is, with performing acts of condescension and 
 brotherly kindness ;) and to justify themselves, plead 
 the difference of present usages from ancient ones, 
 and the sufficiency of complying with the spirit in- 
 stead of the letter of it ; therefore they themselves con- 
 firm us by their own procedure in the belief, that outward 
 forms and modes are of little weight in religious ordi- 
 nances. We would not be understood to maintain, that the 
 construction put upon the command of Christ to ivash 
 one another'' s feet, and their justification of that construc- 
 tion on the ground of the changes which have taken 
 place in the usages and circumstances of society, and 
 their conforming therefore to the spirit instead of the 
 
 'See Luther's Catechism, fourth part, fifth question. 
 23* 
 
270 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 mere letter of that command, are improper. Far from 
 it ; the principles on which they proceed, in all this, we 
 believe to be decidedly correct. But on the very same 
 principles we are fully sustained in the view, that the 
 outward mode of baptism is not essential, and even if it 
 could be certainly determined that this sacrament was at 
 first administered by submersion, we should not be bound 
 to conform to that practice. But we forbear ; we think 
 the proposition with which we commenced this branch 
 of the subject, has been fully sustained and hence we 
 shall hasten to the last proposition. 
 
CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 The third and last proposition respecting baptism that 
 we intend to consider, is the following : 
 
 III. Is the mode hy affusion decidedly more scriptu- 
 ral, appropriate and edifying than that by submersion? 
 
 Without stopping to analyse this proposition, we shall 
 proceed at once to state the grounds upon which in a 
 general view, we answer it in the affirmative. 
 
 We maintain that the mode by afTusion is decidedly 
 more scriptural, appropriate and edifying than that by 
 submersion : — 
 
 1. Because it falls in 'more harmoniously ivith the 
 circumstances attending the several exainples of baptism 
 recorded in the New Testament. We have already seen 
 that there is not one word, not one incident, not even a 
 hint to be found in the various cases of baptism narrated 
 in the New Testament, which proves that submersion 
 was practised ; even the ordinance as administered to the 
 disciples of John, to our Saviour and to the Ethiopian 
 eunuch does not bring to light a single circumstance 
 which may not be most happily reconciled with the idea 
 of affusion. But can the same be said on the other side 
 of the question ? Think of the baptism of Saul of Tar- 
 sus, of the three thousand converts on the day of Pente- 
 cost, of Cornelius and his household, of the jailor, of 
 Lydia, of the disciples in Samaria, Acts viii. 16, &c., and 
 let any unprejudiced mind decide, Avhether the circum- 
 stances detailed in connection with these cases are not 
 
272 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 absolutely in conflict with the doctrine of plunging, unless 
 violence is done to the text, or some far-fetched and fan- 
 ciful interpretation is forced upon it. We do not aver 
 that it is plainly asserted in totidem verbis that the 
 above individuals were baptized by pouring or sprinkling, 
 but we do say that all the circumstances combined, pre- 
 sent such an overwhelming array of argument as not to 
 leave a solitary loop on which to hang a reasonable doubt. 
 Admit that they received the ordidance by affusion, and 
 all is plain and intelligible ; every circumstance mentioned 
 accords with and corroborates the idea, there is nothing 
 to perplex the plain reader, nothing but what is easily 
 accounted for. But assume the theory of submersion, 
 and that moment you are met at every step with difficult- 
 ies and involved in an inextricable labyrinth of incon- 
 gruities. We have already pointed out those embarrassing 
 circumstances, and shall not travel over the same ground 
 again ; it is sufficient for our present purpose simply to 
 refer to them. But we would not intimate, that because 
 the circumstances alluded to, are, according to the estab- 
 lished laws of exegesis, irreconcilable with submersion 
 and fall in so harmoniously with afl'usion, therefore affii- 
 sion is the only valid mode. We have already proved 
 that the mode is not essential ; that apostolic example 
 itself, unattended by a command, is not binding, and when 
 even enforced by an injunction cannot justly be made to 
 extend to accidents or mere matters in themselves indif- 
 ferent; but what v/e mean is, that though affusion be not 
 the only scriptural mode, yet being more consonant with 
 the example of the apostles as transmitted to us in the 
 scriptures, it is therefore 7no7'e scriptural than submer- 
 sion. There are different degrees of assimilation to 
 complete conformity to primitive example even in the 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 273 
 
 externals of religion, and in proportion as our mode ap- 
 proximates nearer to that kind of conformity, it may be 
 said to be more perfectly in accordance with Scripture. 
 
 2. Again., affusion is more scriptural and appropri- 
 ate because it is the fittest emblem of the blessings in- 
 tended to be represented by baptism. It will be admitted 
 that these blessings are mainly the forgiveness of sin 
 through the blood of Christ, and the sanctifying influences 
 of the Holy Spirit. These were the benefits represented 
 by cii'cumcision ; the apostle tells us it signified "the 
 putting off the body of the sins of the flesh,'" and " the 
 circumcision of the heart, in the spirit and not in the let- 
 ter."^ Clarke's comment on the latter quotation reads 
 thus : " Circumcision was a rite which represented a 
 spiritual thing, viz. the change and purification of the 
 heart, as may be seen Jer. iv. 4 and ix. 26; Ezek. xliv. 
 7 — 9. Thus also baptism symbolically sets forth the 
 remission of sin by the blood of atonement, and the pu- 
 rification of our nature by the operations of God's Spirit. 
 
 Now in order to prove that affusion is a more scriptu- 
 ral and appropriate emblem of these 'gifts, it is only ne- 
 cessary to inquire how the shedding of Christ's blood, 
 which is the meritorious ground of pardon, and the pour- 
 ing out of the Spirit, which is the efficient cause of 
 sanctification, are represented in the word of God. In 
 recurring to the ceremonies of the Mosaic law, we find 
 that the pardoning efficacy of Christ's sacrifice on the 
 cross was prefigured, not hy plunging, but by sprinkling, 
 Exod. xxix. 21, Lev. vii. 14 and xiv. 7, Numb. viii. 7 
 and xix. 18 — 19, Isa. lii. 15, Heb. ix. 13 — 14 and xii. 
 24, 1 Peter i. 2. In all these passages and many others 
 that might be referred to, the act of sprinkling is uni- 
 
 'Col. ii. 11. mom. ii. 29. 
 
274 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 fornily employed as an emblem of the shedding of Christ's 
 blood for the forgiveness of sin ; plunging is not once 
 dreamed of; so also, when the inspired writers speak of 
 imparting the influences of the Holy Spirit for the sancti- 
 fication of our nature, the idea is almost universally ex- 
 pressed by sprinMing and pouring. Isa. xxxii. 15 and 
 Ixiv. 3, Ezek. xxxvi, 25 — 26 and xxxix. 29, Joel ii. 
 28—29, Zeeh. xii. 10, Acts ii. 17—18 and x. 45, We 
 might increase this list of references, but it is already 
 sufficiently long. Now if the reader will turn to them, 
 he will find that pouring and sprinkling are throughout, 
 the terms used to designate the communication of the in- 
 fluences of the Holy Spirit, as the efficient means of the 
 renovation and purification of our nature ; indeed, the 
 phrases : " I will poitr my Spirit upon thy seed ;" "I will 
 sprinkle clean water upon you," &c., seem to be the 
 favorite language of inspiration whenever the subject is 
 introduced. Moreover, the psalmist and the prophet 
 Hosea represent those same divine influences under the 
 similitude of rain, in which the earth, it is well known, is 
 not plunged, but which descends in drops and sprinkles 
 the earth. Ps. Ixxii. 6, Hos. vi. 3. 
 
 Who then does not plainly see that affusion is a de- 
 cidedly more scriptural and appropriate representation of 
 the blessings symbolized by baptism, than submersioji ? 
 and hence we willingly leave the reader to make his own 
 deduction as to the most scriptural and appropriate form 
 of baptism. 
 
 But we have not yet disposed of this view of the sub- 
 ject. The "baptism of the Spirit" was promised by our 
 Lord to his disciples, it had been predicted by the pro- 
 phets of old, especially by Joel, ch. ii. v. 28 — 29. "I 
 will j30wr out my Spirit upon all flesh," &c. ; and on the 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 275 
 
 day of Pentecost especially, and also on subsequent occa- 
 sions, this promise was fulfilled. But hoiv, in what man- 
 ner did the fulfilment take place? was it by submersion? 
 were the aposdes /j/«?j^erf into the Holy Ghost? By no 
 means ; the very thought is preposterous. Turn to the 
 first four verses of the second chapter of Acts, and you 
 Avill find an account of the descent of the Spirit; but not 
 a word about plunging, nor even a circumstance that could 
 possibly call up such an idea ; bvit as a gentle rain de- 
 scends upon the verdant fields, so, we read, the Spirit 
 was poured out in the form of cloven tongues, "■and it 
 sat upon each of t/iem.''^ On another occasion we are 
 taught more distinctly wliat was the mode of this baptism 
 of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. When Peter 
 preached in the house of Cornelius, the Spirit descended 
 on all who heard him, and in relating the occurrence he 
 says, " the Holy Ghost fell on them as on us at the be- 
 ginning, (that is, at the beginning of the new economy 
 on the day of Pentecost.) Then remembered I the words 
 of the Lord, how he said John indeed baptized with 
 water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.'" 
 Now we demand a candid answer to the question; did 
 this baptism consist in plunging the disciples into the 
 Holy Ghost? or did it consist in pouring out the Holy 
 Ghost upon them? in a word, was it a baptism by sub- 
 mersion, or by affusion? 
 
 We feel warranted then, in declaring once more, that 
 affusion being decidedly more significant of tire benefits 
 intended to be represented, is far more scriptural and ap- 
 propriate, and for this reason alone, vastly preferable to 
 submersion. We cannot close this argument better than 
 in the language of a learned cotemporary ; " Surely it is 
 
 ^Acts. xi. 15—16. 
 
276 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 not without design or meaning, that we find language of 
 this kind so generally, I almost say, so uniformly used. 
 Can a single instance be produced from the word of God 
 in which the cleansing influences of the Holy Spirit are 
 symbolized by dipping or plunging into w^ater, or into 
 oil or blood ? Or can a single example be found in which 
 believers are represented as being dipped or plunged into 
 the Holy Ghost ? No such example is recollected. 
 Whenever the inspired writers speak of the Holy Spirit 
 being imparted to the children of men, either in his sanc- 
 tifying power, or his miraculous gifts, they never repre- 
 sent the benefit under the figure of immersion ; but 
 always, unless my memory deceives me, by the figures 
 of ' sprinkling,' ' pouring out,' ' falling,' or ' resting 
 upon' from on high. Now if baptism, so far as it has a 
 symbolical meaning, is intended to represent the cleansing 
 of the Holy Spirit, as all agree ; it is evident that no mode 
 of applying the baptismal water can be more strikingly 
 adapted to convey its symbolical meaning, or more 
 strongly expressive of the great benefit which the ordi- 
 nance is intended to hold forth and seal, than sprinkling 
 or pouring. Nay, is it not manifest that this mode of 
 administering the ordinance, is far more in accordance 
 with Bible language, and Bible allusion, than any other ? 
 Surely, then, baptism by sprinkling or affiision, would 
 have been treated with less scorn by our Baptist brethren, 
 if they had recollected that these are invariably, the fa- 
 vorite figures of the inspired writers when they speak of 
 the richest covenant blessings which the Spirit of God 
 imparts to his beloved people. Surely all attempts to 
 turn this mode of applying the sacramental water in bap- 
 tism into ridicule, is really nothing less than shameless 
 ridicule of die statements and the language of God's own 
 word?" 
 
CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 3. Tlie practice of baptizing by affusion is decidedly 
 more scriptural and appropriate than that by submer- 
 sion, because it alone is adapted to the designed uni- 
 versality of the Christian religion. — Those who are 
 acquainted with the prophecies of the Old and New 
 Testament, know that the church of God is destined 
 ultimately to comprehend the whole world. We are 
 assured that "the wilderness and the solitary place shall 
 be glad, and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the 
 rose ;"^ the Father has engaged to give to the Son " the 
 heathen for his inheritance, and the uttermost parts of 
 the earth for his possession;"" Christ himself has de- 
 clared that " this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached 
 in all the world, for a witness unto all nations."^ The 
 very nature of the Christian religion, as well as the uni- 
 versal benevolence of its divine Author, the provision 
 made for its complete diffusion, and the command to 
 prosecute the preaching of the gospel until " the end of 
 the world;" are so many pledges that the period must 
 finally arrive when the standard of the cross shall be victo- 
 riously planted on all the isles of the sea, and its banner 
 float in triumph in every climate. Then the remotest 
 inhabitants of the polar regions as well as those of the 
 torrid zone ; the wandering tribes of the arid desert and 
 
 'Isa. XXXV. 1- -Ps. ii. 8. 
 
 ^jflatt. xxiv. 14. See also Ps. Ix.xii. 8 — 11. Isa. ii. 2. Dan. ii. 
 34—35. Mai. i. 11. Rev. xi. 15 and xx. 2 — 3, &c. 
 24 
 
278 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 those who dwell in the frigid vicinity of ice-bound streams 
 and snow-capt mountains; — all shall be brought into 
 willing subjection to the King of saints ; — all, all shall be 
 numbered amongst his baptized hosts and joyfully praise 
 and worship him as their common Lord and Saviour. 
 Blessed Redeemer, prosecute thou the Avork of triumph, 
 and hasten the time when all the nations and kindred of 
 the globe shall acknowledge thy authority and bow to 
 thy sceptre. 
 
 But is there no difficulty — no invincible obstacle in 
 the way of Christ's universal reign, on the supposition 
 that submersion is the only acceptable mode of baptism ^ 
 How are the people to be plunged in those large and 
 numerous districts, which are so parched and dried up 
 that neither stream nor pool is to be found for many miles 
 together ? Would not the trouble and expense attending 
 submersion, whether fountains were sought for or baptis- 
 teries were formed, render it impracticable to a consider- 
 able portion of the community, especially if, in a season 
 of gracious visitation, thousands upon thousands should 
 be converted in a day, as we have reason to expect will 
 be the case prior to the dawning of the millenial glory ? 
 And is the difficulty not even greater in the extreme 
 northern regions, where darkness and unmitigated winter 
 reign for six months in succession ? — there every stream 
 is locked up in icy fetters most of the year ; the cold is 
 intense ; the solid covering of the frozen deep impregna- 
 ble. What labor and cost in such countries to obtain an 
 opportunity for submersion ! — And then also, there are 
 seasons even in temperate latitudes, when by reason of a 
 drought, there is hardly a sufficient quantity of water to 
 be found to sustain animal life ; the heavens become brass 
 and the earth iron, and the Lord makes the rain of the 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 279 
 
 land poivder and dust? Now how is submersion to 
 be practised at such times ? Must it be delayed until the 
 rains of heaven pour down a supply of the liquid element? 
 But in the mean time thousands may die, and if submer- 
 sion is essential, what becomes of them ? Dr. Austin 
 speaks to the same effect on this subject : " In besieged 
 cities," says he, " where there are thousands, and hun- 
 dreds of thousands of people ; in sandy deserts like those 
 of Africa, Arabia, and Palestine ; in the northern regions, 
 where the streams, if there be any, are shut up with im- 
 penetrable ice ; and in severe and extensive droughts, like 
 that which took place in the time of Ahab ; sufficiency of 
 water for animal subsistence is scarcely to be procured. 
 Now, suppose God should, according to his predictions, 
 pour out plentiful effusions of his Spirit, so that all the 
 inhabitants of one of these regions or cities, should be 
 born in a day. Upon the Baptist hypothesis, there is an 
 absolute impossibility that they should be baptized, while 
 there is this scarcity of water ; and this may last as long 
 as they live." In addition to all this, how can we safely 
 plunge infirm, diseased and dying persons, especially in 
 those extreme northern climates ? Let us suppose a per- 
 son to be converted on a bed of sickness ; he is extremely 
 feeble; not able to lift his head from his pillow; his 
 recovery depends, under God, on quiet and composure, 
 and especially on being carefully protected from all expo- 
 sure to cold and humidity. This is by no means an im- 
 probable or even a rare case. He is persuaded that every 
 mode of baptism except by submersion, is a nulUty ; of 
 course he is taken from his bed and " buried in a watery 
 grave," and without a miracle, this is the precursor of 
 
 'Deut. xxviii. 23 — 24. 
 
280 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 his actual interment in the earth, particularly if the cere- 
 mony is performed in a high northern latitude or in the 
 dead of winter. Here then Ave have a case of self-immo- 
 lation at the shrine of mistaken zeal, and to the mere 
 outward form of a religious rite ! And if the minister 
 who performs the rite, is old and infirm, he may also fall a 
 victim to the desperate operation. Certainly, Baptist min- 
 isters whose health is impaired and who have grown feeble, 
 can in no case baptize with safety ; and if called on to 
 submerse large and corpulent men, they cannot comply 
 without endanfferinff their life. 
 
 Now, is a religion that dictates a course so merciless 
 as this ; — a religion which imposes impossibilities, — re- 
 quiring submersion in districts of country and in seasons 
 in which it is utterly impracticable ; — a religion that de- 
 mands compliance Avith an external form, which even in 
 the temperate zone, in some cases, insures the martyrdom 
 of its votary ; — is such a religion adapted to universal 
 diflusion ? is it calculated to prevail Avithout a rival to the 
 utmost limits and in all the ends of the earlh ? " It is a 
 general principle, on Avhich the defenders of Christianity 
 often and justly insist, that it differs materially, not only 
 from every false religion but even from the temporary 
 and local Mosaic institutions, in this circumstance, that 
 while none of the latter Avere adapted in their ceremonies 
 and requisitions to all individuals in every nation, the 
 Christian religion, on the contrary, is suited to every in- 
 dividual of every nation, in every age. It Avas designed 
 to embrace all nations, and continue to the end of the 
 world. Its ordinances or outward rites, if they Avere to 
 correspond with this design, must necessarily be fcAv in 
 number, and so framed, that they could at all times be 
 administered to all persons." But Avho Avill maintain 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 281 
 
 that baptism by submersion is a rite which may be ad- 
 ministered "at all times and to all persons ?" 
 
 It accordingly appears to us, that our Baptist brethren 
 must either change their views on baptism or abandon 
 the hope of beholding the universal reign of Christ on 
 earth. Should they adopt the principle that impractica- 
 bility absolves from duty, then the question presents itself 
 in another and equall)^ suspicious aspect, viz. is it credi- 
 ble that a religion designed for the whole world, would 
 be encumbered by its divine Author with an external ob- 
 servance necessarily involving in numerous cases, absolute 
 impossibility ? We leave our opponents to take which 
 horn of the dilemma they choose. 
 
 " Now, contrast all these difficulties, which surely, 
 form a mass of no small magnitude with the entire absence 
 of every difficulty of baptizing by sprinkling or affusion. 
 According to our plan, which, we have no doubt, is by far 
 the most scriptural and edifying, baptism may be per- 
 formed with equal ease and convenience in all countries ; 
 at all seasons of the year ; in all situations of health or 
 sickness ; Avith equal safety by all ministers, whether 
 young or old, athletic or feeble ; and in all circumstances 
 that can well be conceived. How admirably does this 
 accord with the gospel economy, which is not intended 
 to be confined to any one people, or to any particular 
 climate ; but is equally adapted, in all its principles, and 
 in all its rites to every "kindred, and people, and nation, 
 and tongue !" 
 
 " Accordingly, it is a notorious fact, that, in considera- 
 tion of the difficulties which have been mentioned as at- 
 tending immersion, a large body of Baptists, in Holland, 
 I mean the Mennonites, who were once warm and un- 
 compromising contenders for this mode of administering 
 24* 
 
282 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 baptism, at length gave it up, and, while they still baptize 
 none but adults, have been, for more than a hundred 
 years, in the practice of pouring water on the head of the 
 candidate, through the hand of the administrator. They 
 found that when candidates for baptism were lying on 
 sick beds ; or confined in prison ; or in a state of pecu- 
 liarly delicate health ; or in various other unusual situa- 
 tions, which may be easily imagined ; there was so much 
 difficulty, not to say, in some cases, a total impossibility 
 in baptizing by plunging, that they deliberately, as a de- 
 nomination, after the death of their first leader, agreed to 
 lay aside, as I said, the practice of immersion and substi- 
 tuted the plan of affusion."' 
 
 In conclusion, we appeal to every candid reader, 
 whether the doctrine of submersion does not interpose 
 very serious if not insurmountable barriers to the designed 
 universal spread of the Christian religion ? But is this 
 the case with effusion ? Does it thus clog the onward 
 progress of the gospel chariot ? Is it not entirely com- 
 patible with the perfect establishment of the church of 
 God in every climate, in every region, in every season, 
 on every occasion, and among every people, kindred and 
 tongue, and is it not therefore decidedly more scriptural, 
 appropriate and edifying? 
 
 'Dr. Miller on Baptism, 
 
CHAPTER XX. 
 
 4. Baptism by pouring is more consistent with the 
 simplicity and sjnritnality of the gospel than plunging. 
 Simplicity and spirituality are distinctive features of the 
 Christian scheme. It claims to be free from inconvenient 
 and oppressive rites, and to impose no yoke that is not 
 easy, and no burden which is not light. When our Lord 
 told the Jews, that the truth should make them free,^ he 
 no doubt alluded to deliverance from the numerous and 
 burdensome requisitions of the Mosaic ritual, as well as 
 from the bondage of sin, which the gospel was intended 
 to confer upon them, and when he promised rest to them 
 who labored and were heavy laden,- he referred among 
 others, to those also who were heavy laden with the 
 cumbrous rites of the Mosaic institution, rendered still 
 more oppressive by the additions made by the scribes and 
 Pharisees f such were promised rest from these heavy 
 burdens. And in view of the fact that the gospel was 
 intended to afford them this rest, our Lord could emphat- 
 ically say : " My yoke is easy and my burden is light." 
 In reference to the same fact the apostle informs us that 
 Christ " hath blotted out the hand-writing of ordinances 
 that was against us * * * nailing it to his cross. "^ But 
 if in lieu of these irksome ordinances the gospel imposes 
 the yoke of submersion, — the frequently painful and 
 dangerous, and not seldom impracticable burden of total 
 
 iJolmviii. 32. ^^att. xi. 28. ^Ib. xxiii. 4. '«2 Col. ii. 14. 
 
284 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 plunging, where is the ecclesiastical/rcerfoTJi?— where the 
 rest from ritual pressure, guarantied by the Master ? 
 
 If we call to mind all the difficulties detailed in the 
 preceding argument, it will be found that the whole con- 
 geries of Mosaic ceremonies cannot aftbrd a rite so incon- 
 venient and burdensome, so painful and destructive to 
 health, as is submersion under some circumstances and 
 in some climates and seasons, and hence, hundreds 
 submit to it only because they think God peremptorily 
 requires it. 
 
 It may accordingly with very just grounds be ques- 
 tioned, whether all this coincides with the admitted sim- 
 plicity and spirituality of the gospel ; and comports with 
 Christ's promise of freedom and rest from ritual burdens, 
 and the declaration that his yoke is easy and his burden 
 light. No part of this objection lies against affusion, 
 and hence we hold it to be more scriptural and appropri- 
 ate and edifying. 
 
CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 5. Our mode of baptism is more scriptural, edifying 
 and appropriate, because it is not calculated, like the 
 doctrine of submersion, to give rise to any thing that 
 is indecorous or indecent. — We engage in this part of 
 the discussion with no small degree of reluctance, because 
 we are conscious of the difficulty of enlarging on it, with- 
 out ourselves transcending the limits of strict propriety, 
 and giving offence to those whose views we oppose. We 
 desire however to avoid both, and shall go no further 
 than fidelity to our subject seems to demand. 
 
 Whether the baptism of females, in the presence of an 
 assembled and mixed multitude, comprehending all de- 
 scriptions of character and condition, can be conducted 
 in such a manner as not to infringe upon the laws of del- 
 icacy and propriety, we willingly submit to the decision 
 of others. Certainly, there are thousands Avho think that 
 tlie practice is not in strict keeping with those religious 
 feelings which should characterize a Christian ordinance, 
 nor with that rigid sense of decorum Avhich it is especial- 
 ly desirable that the more delicate sex should ever cher- 
 ish. Witness the hurried, convulsive respiration of the 
 fair candidate; her stifled sigh; the violent palpitation; 
 the alarm depicted upon the pale visage ; her spasmodic 
 grasp on the arm of the minister. Do these symptoms 
 afford evidence that the mind is occupied with the devo- 
 tional solemnities of religion ? See her emerging from 
 the " watery grave," her countenance betokening more 
 
286 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 of sorrow and alarm than of joy and confidence ; her 
 apparel thoroughly drenched and dripping, and cleaving 
 to her body, and she, as if prompted by an instinctive 
 feeling of indelicate exposure, anxious to escape as soon 
 as possible the scrutinizing gaze of the multitude. Turn 
 next to the throngs of spectators, among whom are many 
 vain and ungodly men, collected for the express purpose 
 of beholding and amusing themselves with the very scene 
 which has just transpired. What profane ribaldry among 
 that gloating rabble ; what flippant remarks ; impure in- 
 uendoes and frivolous sentiments ! Scenes of this sort 
 have too often occurred; and more than once, while a 
 few pious souls have prayerfully waited at the water's 
 brink, curses from the wicked have floated all around, 
 and tainted the very atmosphere ! We make these state- 
 ments, not in ridicule, but in unaffected sorrow ; God 
 forbid that we should speak lightly of a sacred ordi- 
 nance ! Nor do we ofler this consideration as an argu- 
 ment against submersion in the abstract, but simply as an 
 evidence of its tendency to indecorum, — we will not add, 
 indecency. Such repulsive scenes are never known to 
 be associated with our mode of administering the ordi- 
 nance ; and this is another reason why we greatly prefer 
 it. Can any other case be conceived in which right and 
 wrong are productive of such paradoxical results ? 
 
 Again, it is well known that in the third century, 
 and subsequently, when Cyprian, Cyril, Athanasius and 
 Chrysostom lived, the candidate for baptism was divested 
 of every thread of apparel ; we speak advisedly and on 
 good authority, and wish to be understood; both males 
 and females, all ages and conditions were submersed in a 
 state of perfect nudity. This fact has already been ad- 
 verted to, and amply proved ; even enlightened Baptists 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 287 
 
 do not dispute it.' This outrage on all decency resulted 
 from the practice of submersion, and seems, in some de- 
 gree, necessarily to stand connected with that practice. 
 The learned Wall says: "they" (the submersionists) 
 "thought it better represented the putting oft' the old 
 man, and also the nakedness of Christ on the cross. 
 Moreover, as baptism is a washing, they judged it should 
 be the washing of the body, not of the clothes."- — How 
 natural is the transition from the doctrine of submersion, 
 to this revolting and abominable abuse. "For if the thing 
 signified be the cleansing and purifying of the individual 
 by an ablution which must of necessity extend to the 
 whole person ; it would really seem that performing this 
 ceremony, divested of all clothing, is essential to its em- 
 blematic meaning. Who ever thought of covering the 
 hands with gloves when they were about to be washed ; 
 or expected really to cleanse them through such a cover- 
 ing ? No wonder, then, Avhen the principle began to find 
 a place in the church, that the submersion of every part 
 of the body in water, that the literal bathing of the whole 
 person was essential both to the expressiveness and the 
 validity of the emblematical transaction; no wonder, I 
 say, that the obvious consequence should soon be admit- 
 ted, that the whole body ought to be uncovered, as never 
 fails to be the case, with any member of the body Avhich 
 may wish to be successfully cleansed by bathing. And 
 we have no hesitation in saying, that, if we fully 
 adopted the general principle of our Baptist brethren in 
 relation to this matter, we should no more think, of sub- 
 jecting the body to that process which must, in order to 
 its validity, be strictly emblematical of a comidete spirit- 
 »See p. 160—162. nVall, ch. xv. Part ii. 
 
288 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 ual bathing, while covered with clothes, than we should 
 think, in common life, of washing the hands or the feet, 
 while carefully covered with the articles of dress with 
 which they are commonly clothed. Whereas, if the 
 principle of Pedobaptists on this subject be adopted, then 
 the solemn application of water to the part of the body 
 which is an epitome of the whole person, and which is 
 always, as a matter of course, uncovered, is amply suffi- 
 cient to answer every purpose both of emblem and of 
 benefit. 
 
 Besides, let me appeal to our Baptist brethren, by ask- 
 ing, if they verily believe that the primitive and apostolic 
 mode of administering baptism was by immersion, and 
 that this immersion was performed in a state of entire 
 nakedness ; how can they dare, upon their principles, to 
 depart, as to one iota from that mode ? Let them not say, 
 that they carefully retain the substance, the essential 
 characters of the plan of immersion. Very tnie. This 
 is our plea ; and it accords very well with what we con- 
 sider as the correct system ; but in the mouth of a Bap- 
 tist it is altogether inadmissible. The institute in ques- 
 tion is a "positive" one; and, according to him, we 
 must not depart one jot or tittle from the original plan."' 
 
 So far then as the example of the third, fourth and 
 fifth centuries is concerned, and so far as our opponents' 
 view of the symbolic signification of baptism is correct, 
 they are bound to continue the two practices ; immoral 
 i, and outrageous as one of them undoubtedly is, they are 
 inseparably connected, and must stand or fall together ; 
 — we mean of course, agreeably to the testimony of his- 
 tory subsequently to the apostolic age, and the light in 
 which submersion is represented. 
 
 'See Dr. Miller. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 289 
 
 • Now can a pi'actice which, in connection with such 
 views, tends to Buch indecorum and indecency, be prefer- 
 able to that which has never been known thus to degen- 
 erate, and cannot in the nature of things eventuate in 
 such results ? Is not baptism by aspersion decidedly 
 more scriptural, appropriate and edifying? 
 
 6. Affusion is the most scriptural cmd appropriate 
 mode, because it accords better icith Peter^s definition of 
 baptism. The apostle tells us that this ordinance is "not 
 the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer 
 of a good conscience towards God.'" From this it ap- 
 pears, that its efficacy does not depend upon the quantity 
 of water employed, or on the physical influence of water 
 in cleansing the body, but^japon the faithful answer (stip- 
 ulation or engagement) of a determined and good con- 
 science to believe in Christ, and be entirely devoted to 
 his service. It is in this sense only that baptism can be 
 regarded as partaking of a saving character ; namely, as 
 being the sign and seal of a covenant; which covenant, 
 if faithfully kept, will certainly issue in our salvation 
 through the merits of Christ. Baptism then, has no 
 power in itself, any more than other external ordinances ; 
 its efficacy proceeds from its connection with God's 
 word, from its being the formal recognition and ratifica- 
 tion of a saving covenant through Christ, and from the 
 influence of the Holy Ghost making it eff'ectual. The 
 benefits of the ordinance have accordingly, no connection 
 with the operation of water on the animal frame, but are 
 the result of a gracious covenant solemnly sealed in a 
 divine ordinance, which ordinance is made eflectual by 
 God's blessing upon it. And as the Scriptures have no 
 where expressly informed us of the precise mode in 
 
 '1 Peter iii. 21. 
 25 
 
290 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 which the water employed shall be applied, we have the 
 best grounds to infer, that our mode of applying it (which 
 is not intended to put away the filth of the body) is more 
 significant and appropriate, and to say the very least, 
 quite as likely to be accompanied by the divine blessing. 
 Undoubtedly aspersion accords perfectly with the apos- 
 tle's definition, and in our opinion the doctrine of sub- 
 mersion does not, but seems rather decidedly to conflict 
 with it, and hence we judge the former is more scrip- 
 tural and edifying. 
 
 7. ^fijfusion is preferable because there is no tendency 
 in it to superstition and abuse, as there is in the doc- 
 trine of submersio7i. The tendency here alleged has 
 been developed in different ages and in divers ways. It 
 is well known and has already been adverted to, that a 
 magic power was ascribed to submersion, by those who 
 practised it at an early period. Submersion was put in 
 the place of Christ's atonement and supposed to effect 
 the remission of sins, and the doctrine was taught that 
 sins committed afterwards were peculiarly dangerous,' if 
 not altogether unpardonable, unless the individual died a 
 martyr. Bretschneider states that in ordinary cases, it 
 was believed that if a man sinned after he had been sub- 
 mersed, he would certainly perish.^ Hence, it was 
 deemed advisable to delay baptism, and it was delayed in 
 reference to infants and others ; and some of the most 
 conspicuous converts postponed it until death, in the hope 
 of thus making their salvation certain.* But this is not 
 the only superstition connected with the doctrine of sub- 
 mersion. Passing by various other points that have a 
 
 'See History of Baptism, p. 106, &c. 
 'Bretsclineider's Dogmatic, vol. ii. p. 697, Bqq. 
 *Rees' Cyclopedia. Art. Baptism. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 291 
 
 Similar bearing, we will come down at once to the age 
 in which we live. Do not many Baptists at present lay 
 an unwarranted stress on the practice of submersion ? 
 Do they not dwell with peculiar and the most manifest 
 fondness and complacency on the idea of being " buried un- 
 der the water," just as if it had an innate and saving efficacy, 
 a sort of necromantic power to change and renovate the 
 sinner, and as if those who submitted to it, were necessa- 
 rily regenerated Christians ? We do not say that this is the 
 belief of the pious and enlightened members of that de- 
 nomination ; but look to the great mass, and even to some 
 of their ministers, and see whether they do not positively 
 seem to imagine that " being buried under the water" is 
 the great turning point, the mighty lever in religion, 
 whereby men are transformed into living Christians, and 
 all is made secure for time and eternity ! Thus, submer- 
 sion is put for regeneration, and the effect of the water 
 takes the place of the efficacy of Christ's blood. Here 
 we have another abuse arising from the doctrine of sub- 
 mersion. And no wonder that such consequences result. 
 Just witness the amazing zeal of those brethren in recom- 
 mending submersion ; how they dwell on it, magnify it, 
 hold it up unceasingly to public view, and represent it as 
 the great distinguishing mark of discipleship. T7ie 
 water, the water, THE WATER, seems to be " the 
 one thing needful." Is not such a course calculated to 
 lead men astray and to betray them into a false hope ? 
 We all know how prone men are to self-righteousness, 
 how anxious to build on their own doings, and rely on 
 works of outward obedience for pardon and divine favor. 
 " Whenever therefore, any external rite becomes the 
 grand distinction of a sect, and the object of something 
 approaching to sectarian idolatry, we may be sure there 
 
292 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 exists not only danger, but the actual commencement, to 
 some extent, of that superstitious reliance, whicli he who 
 has not learned to fear, ' knows nothing of the human 
 heart yet as he ought to know.' 
 
 " That this suggestion has something more than mere 
 fancy on which to rest, is evident from facts of recent 
 and most mournful occurrence. A large and daily in- 
 creasing sect has arisen, within a few years, in the bosom 
 of the Baptist denomination which maintains the delusive 
 and destructive doctrine, that baptism is regeneration ; 
 that no man can be regenerated who is not immersed ; 
 and that all, without exception, who have a historical 
 faith, and are immersed, are of course, in a state of salva- 
 tion. This pernicious heresy, so contrary to the plainest 
 principles and facts of the word of God, and so manifestly 
 adapted to destroy the souls of all who believe it, has 
 been propagated to a melancholy extent, by a plausible, 
 reckless, and impious demagogue, and is supposed to 
 embrace one half of the Baptist body in the western 
 country, besides many in the east. In short, the Baptist 
 churches, in large districts of country, are so rent in 
 pieces, and deluded by the miserable impostor referred 
 to, that their prospects, for many years to come, are not 
 only gloomy, but, without a special interposition of the 
 King of Zion in their favor, altogether desperate. 
 
 " Now we maintain that this wretched delusion is by no 
 means an unnatural result of the doctrine and practice of 
 our Baptist brethren, in regard to the baptismal rite. 
 Multitudes of them, Ave know, reject and abhor the heresy 
 in question as much as any of us. But have they duly 
 considered, that it seems naturally to have grown out of 
 their own theory and practice in regard to baptism ; their 
 attaching such a disproportioned importance to the mode 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 293 
 
 of administering that ordinance ; often, very often, direct- 
 ing the attention of the people more to the river than the 
 cross ; exchiding all from Christian communion, however 
 pious, who have not been immersed ; and making repre- 
 sentations which, whether so intended or not, naturally 
 lead the weak and the uninformed to consider immersion 
 as a kind of talisman, always connected with a saving 
 blessing ? This, we sincerely believe, is the native ten- 
 dency of the doctrine of our Baptist brethren, although 
 they, we are equally confident, neither perceive nor admit 
 tliis to be the case. If pious Christians who have not 
 been immersed cannot be admitted to communion in the 
 church below, there would seem to be still more reason 
 for excluding them from the purer church above. And 
 so far as this principle is received and cherished, though 
 far from being alike mischievous in all cases, it can 
 scarcely fail of predisposing many minds in favor of that 
 awful delusion, by which we have reason to believe that 
 not a few, under its higher workings, have been blinded, 
 betrayed, and lost.'" 
 
 'Dr. Miller. 
 25* 
 
CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 8. Effusion should be preferred because it does not, 
 like the doctrine of submersion, interfere with and 
 destroy devotional feeling. We have already detailed 
 some of the revolting and agitating occurrences that are 
 wont to attend the act of plunging:^ but this particular 
 aspect of the subject is too painful to be further enlarged 
 upon. We must however be permitted to present it in 
 another point of view. How often has the doctrine of 
 submersion been obtruded upon the people in seasons of 
 revival, and like a spiritual upas, spread blight and death 
 around it ? 
 
 By believing and earnest prayer the portals of heaven 
 were opened, and by faithful preaching the Holy Spirit 
 melted the obdurate hearts of sinners into deep contrition 
 and prepared them for the reception of God's richest 
 blessings. There was a high degree of holy excitement 
 among saints and sinners ; the former were strengthened 
 in the inner man and rejoiced in the marvellous doings 
 of God's grace ; and the latter, overwhelmed with a pain- 
 ful sense of their moral corruptions, were anxiously in- 
 quiring the way to Zion. From day to day sinners found 
 pardon and salvation in the blood of the Lamb and were 
 added to God's ransomed people ; Avliile others, and yet 
 others were apprehended by the same grace, and more 
 than supplied their place in the class of the anxious. 
 Thus the work of mercy progressed in great power and 
 
 'See p. 145, sqq. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 295 
 
 love ; the incense of prayer and praise daily ascended, 
 perfumed with "the blood of sprinkling;" God's people 
 sang aloud the praises of the Redeemer in unity of spirit 
 and in the bond of peace ; awakened sinners were pointed, 
 without a dissenting voice, to the Lovely One of Calvary ; 
 there was nothing to divert attention from the great lead- 
 ing interests that alike engrossed the minds of all ; one 
 feeling, one desire, one prayer, one spirit animated every 
 bosom ; it seemed as if heaven had been brought down 
 upon earth, or as if the millenial glory had suddenly burst 
 upon the church ; even angels looked down with sympa- 
 thetic delight, and joined in the harmonious chorus of 
 " glory to God in the highest." 
 
 In the midst of these hallowed exercises a note of dis- 
 cord is unexpectedly heard ; a gruff and grating sound 
 interrupts and mars the euphony of the whole scene. 
 The attention of all is arrested ; they look to see whence 
 this untimely disturbance proceeds, and behold a warm- 
 hearted Baptist brother has made his appearance and the 
 air trembles beneath the sound of his voice, as he ex- 
 claims, full of zeal for Jiis favorite doctrine, " The river, 
 the river ! you must all be 'buried under the water' if you 
 wish to enter tlie kingdom of heaven !" Thus, instead of 
 co-operating with his brethren with all his heart, to bring 
 sinners to Christ and promote the holiness of believers, 
 he labors to convince them that baptism should not be 
 administered by sprinkling, but by plungitig. The 
 consciences of the weak are perplexed ; the attention of 
 the anxious is withdrawn from the one thing needful and 
 directed to an outward ordinance ; believers are diverted 
 from the great work before thejn and involved in unpro- 
 fitable and baneful discussions ; the Holy Spirit is grieved ; 
 God is provoked to put a stop to the current of his bless- 
 
296 INFANJ BAPTISM. 
 
 ings, and the whole scene is changed into one of dishar- 
 mony, jealousy and unkind debate. Thus, by the ill-fated 
 obtrusion of the doctrine of submersion, — oh how many 
 a good work has been thwarted in its incipiency or ar- 
 rested in its progress. Such ministers or Christians 
 would do well seriously to inquire, whether they are 
 pursuing the great object for which the Son of God died 
 on the cross, and whether they are not in danger of sub- 
 stituting an excessive zeal for an external rite, or rather 
 the mere form of such a rite, in the place of pure love 
 to Christ and to immortal souls ? "I have personally 
 linown," says a writer, "such proceedings to occur with 
 a frequency as wonderful as it was revolting ; and with 
 an obtrusive zeal worthy of a better cause. Young and 
 timid consciences have been distressed, if not with the 
 direct assertion, at least by the artful insinuation, that 
 their particular mode of baptism was all in all ; that there 
 could be no safe Christianity without it. The river, the 
 river, really seemed, by some, to be placed in the room 
 of the Saviour! 
 
 " There is something in all this so deeply offensive to 
 every enlightened and judicious Christian, which in- 
 volves so much meanness, and which manifests so much 
 more concern for the enlargement of a sect, than the sal- 
 vation of souls, that it is difficult to speak of it in terms 
 of as strong reprobation as it deserves, without infringing 
 on the limits of Christian decorum and respectfulness. 
 It is conduct of which no candid and generous mind, ac- 
 tuated by the spirit of Christ, will ever be guilty. And, 
 I am happy to add, it is conduct in which many belonging 
 ■to the denomination to which I allude, have souls too 
 enlarged and elevated to allow themselves to indulge,'" 
 
 'Dr. Miller. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 297 
 
 Now we ask, whether the doctrine of aspersion is 
 wont in this wise, to interfere Avith devotion and with 
 revivals ? Every one knows that such is not the case, 
 and cannot in the nature of things be so ; to attempt to 
 prove this would be a Avork of supererogation, because it 
 is self-evident. If at any time Pedobaptists have been 
 forAvard to break in upon the devotion of Baptists, or to 
 interfere Avith and arrest revivals among them, by broach- 
 ing baptism or even by decrying the Baptist mode of it, 
 their course Avas not the legitimate result of their system, 
 but rather of their ignorance or sectarism. But the 
 procedure of Baptists in such cases, is in accordance 
 with their theory ; it is interAvoven with their prescriptive 
 view of the subject and naturally floAvs from that vicAV. 
 Therefore Ave greatly prefer aspersion and deem it to be 
 more scriptural, appropriate and edifying. 
 
CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 9. Affusion does not, like the doctrine of submersion, 
 logically lead to such glaring absurdities. If the doc- 
 trine of our Baptist brethren be correct, conckisions the 
 most preposterous, at which they themselves probably 
 recoil, may be justly deduced. To present this view of 
 the subject in all its various phases, wovild be a tedious 
 task, we shall therefore be content with a single argument. 
 
 According to the Baptist theory no one is baptized or 
 has a right to administer baptism, who has not been sub- 
 mersed ; but if the testimony of authentic ecclesiastical 
 history may be relied on, there was a period in the church 
 (commencing in the fifth and concluding in the twelfth 
 century) when no society of Christians was known to 
 confine the ordinance to adults, or even pretended to 
 teach that it was unlawful to baptize infants. Besides, 
 Roger Williams and his followers, with whom the Bap- 
 tist church in the United States originated, were not bap- 
 tized in adult age.^ Consequently — 
 
 (a) From the fifth to the twelfth centuries, viz. from 
 the year of our Lord 400 to 1 1 50 (seven hundred and 
 fifty years) the line of true or gospel baptism was inter- 
 rupted, and it was impossible to know Avho was and who 
 was not scripturally baptized during all that period, or 
 whether the Baptists, who arose subsequently, received 
 the ordinance from persons authorized to administer it 
 or not. 
 
 'Authentic Hist. viz. Benedict, Backus' Church History, et al. 
 
MODE OP BAPTISM. 299 
 
 (h) The Baptists in the United States have not the 
 ordinance among them, because their founder and his dis- 
 ciples from whom they received it, had no right to per- 
 form the ceremony. 
 
 But this is not all ; if true baptism does not exist, even 
 in the Baptist churches, neither does the Lord's supper, 
 for no one has a right to administer or partake of this or- 
 dinance, who is not duly baptized. Nor do we stop 
 here ; if we have neither baptism nor eucharist, neither 
 have we a visible Christian church in the world. Con- 
 sequently this theory unchurches our brethren "as com- 
 pletely as it does us. — Now then, our Baptist brethren 
 are found in the same dilemma, in which the Catholics 
 have long since been placed, in regard to the "divine 
 succession," the legitimacy of popery and the genuine* 
 ness of their episcopal ordination. If they can extricate 
 themselves from this difficulty, it strikes us they will, at 
 least be entitled to much credit for ingenuity, though it 
 may perhaps be at the cost of sound logic. 
 
 This argument may be thrown into the form of a the- 
 orem, which will present it to a logical mind in a stronger 
 light and give it all the force of a mathematical demon- 
 stration. 
 
 In stating this theorem let it be observed, that we 
 adopt, for the sake of illustration, and to expose its fal- 
 lacy, the Baptist doctrine of submersion. According to 
 this doctrine, the subjoined axioms and corollaries, ap- 
 pear to us to stand indissolubly connected. 
 
 THEOREM. 
 
 AXIOMS. 
 
 1 . Baptism is the submersion in water of an adult be- 
 liever, in the name of the Trinity by a person duly au- 
 thorized to administer the ordinance. 
 
300 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 2. Baptism, in this form alone, is the only means of 
 admission into the visible Christian church. 
 
 3. No person is qualified to administer the ordinance, 
 unless he, himself, has been baptized according to this 
 mode. 
 
 4. The Lord's supper can only be celebrated by a vis- 
 ible Christian church, and none but members of such a 
 church, that is, persons baptized by submersion, have a 
 right to partake of it. 
 
 From these axioms unavoidably flow the following 
 corollaries : 
 
 COROLLARIES. 
 
 1 . All those who have not been baptized (by submer- 
 sion of course) in adult age in the name of the Trinity, 
 are not members of the visible Christian church. (Ac- 
 cording to axioms 1 and 2.) 
 
 2. All those societies calling themselves churches, 
 ■whose members have not been plunged under the water 
 in adult age, are not visible Christian churches. (Ax. 1, 2.) 
 
 3. All those men professing to be ministers who have 
 not t)een submersed in adult age, are not ministers of the 
 visible Christian church. (Ax. 1 and 2.) 
 
 4. Their administration of baptism, no matter in what 
 mode, is null and void. (Ax. 3 and 4.) 
 
 5. The nominal celebration of the holy supper, by 
 such pretended churches and administered by such pre- 
 tended ministers, is positively no sacrament, the whole 
 transaction, including the ceremony,— the participants 
 and the administrator, is clearly and absolutely spurious. 
 (Ax. 2 and 4.) 
 
 6. No one believing the doctrine of submersion dare 
 commune with a congregation, whose members do not 
 hold to that doctrine, because such communion would be 
 thought a tacit, yet a reprehensible acknowldgment of 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 301 
 
 said congregation as a visible Christian church ;— of its 
 teachers as valid ministers of the visible Christian church, 
 and of its communion as a Christian sacrament. (Ax. 1, 
 2, 4 and 5.) 
 
 7. It is not competent for an individual who has not 
 been submersed in adult age, to partake of the holy sup- 
 per in a visible Christian church, because he is hot a 
 member of any visible Christian church and therefore has 
 no right whatever to that ordinance. (Ax. 4.) 
 
 8. It is inconsistent and highly censurable for a minis- 
 ter of a visible Christian church to exchange pulpits, or 
 services of any kind that are peculiarly ministerial, with 
 a teacher who has not been submersed in adult age ; for 
 this is a public acknowledgment of him not only as a 
 member, but as a minister of the visible Christian church ; 
 whereas in point of fact he is neither the one nor the 
 other. 
 
 POSTULATES. 
 
 1. From the year of our Lord 400 to the year 1150, 
 no part of the church, so far as authentic church history 
 informs us, limited baptism to adults only. 
 
 2. The founders or originators of the Baptist church 
 in the United States, viz. Roger Williams and his disci- 
 ples were not one of them baptized in adult age.' Then— 
 
 'Rev. Roger Williams establislaed tlie first Baptist churcli in Amer- 
 ica at Providence, Rhode Island, in 1639. Mr. Williams had been 
 pastor of tlie church in Salem, Massachusetts; Mr. Ezekiel Holyman 
 was a deacon of the same church. When the church in Providence 
 was organized Ezekiel Holyman re-baptized Mr. Williams. Then 
 Mr. Williams re-baptized Ezekiel Holyman and ten others. Ac- 
 cording to the system of our Baptist bretlu-en, neither of them was 
 baptized, nor had any right to baptize others. This is the origin of 
 tlie Baptist church in America, and of course of its baptisms. See 
 Morton's Memorial of New England, Winthrop's Journal and 
 Backus' Church History. 
 26 
 
302 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 COROLLARIES. 
 
 9. There is no certain knowledge of any visible Chris-' 
 tian church in the world from the fifth to the twelfth cen- 
 turies ; seven hundred and fifty years. (Ax. 1 and 2, and 
 Pos. 1.) 
 
 10. The Baptist churches in the United States are not 
 visible Christian churches. (Axiom 3 and Postulate 2.) 
 
 11. There is now no visible Christian church in the 
 world, unless it be the Baptist. (Ax. 1, and 3.) 
 
 And it is most clear that — 
 
 12. The Baptist is not a visible Christian church. — 
 (Post. 1 and 2, and Cor. 9 and 10.) 
 
 Thus, our Baptist brethren commence with denying 
 the validity of our mode of baptism, and end with tear- 
 ing up by the root their own ; they start Avith rejecting 
 sprinkling, and wind up Avith depriving the whole Chris- 
 tian community, themselves included, of the Lord's sup- 
 per ; they begin with setting aside our right of church- 
 membership, and close with completely annihilating their 
 own ecclesiastical existence ; they set out with claiming 
 to be the only visible Christian church, and terminate 
 with blotting from existence every vestige of a visible 
 Christian church on the face of the earth ! 
 
 We would by no means charge them with pressing 
 their principles to this extreme, for we know not pre- 
 cisely how far their practice corresponds with their 
 theory ; what we mean is, that tlie doctrine of submer- 
 sion as held by them, must lead to these results, if hon- 
 estly and consistently carried out to their full extent. 
 
 Now, we will simply put the question, whether a the- 
 ory like this, can plead scriptural Avarrant, and Avhether 
 the doctrine of afiusion is chargeable Avith such extrava- 
 gant logical results ? Is it too much then to say, that this 
 doctrine is more scriptural, appropriate and edifying ? 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 303 
 
 Before we close, we must be allowed to reply to a few 
 objections to baptism by affusion, which have not been 
 fully met in the preceding pages. These objections 
 though trivia] in their character, are not without their in- 
 fluence over many sincere though generally uninformed 
 minds, and must not therefore be passed by in silence. 
 
CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO BAPTISM BY AFFUSION. 
 FIRST OBJECTIOX. 
 
 1. It is objected that affusion or sprinkling is an in- 
 sufficient mode of baptism. " How," says the adver- 
 sary, " can a filthy garment be cleansed by merely pouring 
 or sprinkling a little water on it?" And hence, as if the 
 argument were complete, it is inferred that baptism also, 
 if performed by aspersion, would be a mock cleansing. 
 We marvel that such an objection should ever have found 
 its way into this world of error; for it is calculated to im- 
 pose only on the ignorant, and even in regard to them, 
 the delusion must vanish so soon as they learn to form a 
 correct view of the subject. It is however brought for- 
 ward only for want of something more solid and rational. 
 In reply we remark — 
 
 1. That the objection proceeds from a false assump- 
 tion in relation to the design of baptism. It will not be 
 contended by the intelligent that baptism is intended to 
 remove that common filth, Avhich from personal neglect, 
 accumulates upon the surface of the body. And yet 
 strange as it may appear, this is the identical construc- 
 tion which all those force upon the ordinance, who press 
 too closely the analogy between common and ceremonial 
 washings. If ceremonial ablutions had been designed 
 originally to effect a kindred purpose with that of house- 
 hold washings, Ave readily concede that the quantity of 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 305 
 
 water and the mode of applying it, would materially af- 
 fect the efficiency of their administration. But the case 
 is far otherwise. Domestic washings are used only to 
 effect a physical cleansing, while ceremonial washings 
 borrow all their importance from their mystical signifi- 
 cation, — not from their visible efl'ects ; — and hence the 
 mere quantum of water is not a circumstance of primary 
 moment. 
 
 But cannot our Baptist brethren perceive that their 
 weapon, like the elephants of King Pyrrhus, turns back 
 upon their own ranks ? By their own showing, their 
 own mode of baptism is insufficient ; they are defeated 
 on their own principles, no less than we. If the analogy, 
 above alluded to, is to be thus hardly pressed ; if sprink- 
 ling is to be denounced on the score of inefficacy, then 
 certainly the difficulty is not removed by a resort to im- 
 mersion. If sprinkling a garment will not cleanse it, 
 who can be so silly as to imagine that simple immersion 
 will? — Thus the objection is as fatal to immersion as it 
 is to sprinkling : — let our Baptist brethren themselves be 
 t)ie judges. 
 
 2. Again, the common sense of mankind may be ap- 
 pealed to, as proof of the absurdity of this objection. It 
 was a common custom among the Hebrews, Greeks and 
 Latins, to wash- their hands in token of their innocence, 
 and to show that they were pure from any imputed guilt. 
 So also, according to the Mussulman's creed, ablution 
 consists in washing the hands, feet, face, and part of the 
 head. The devotee is then pronounced wholly clean. 
 Thus, by different nations, in different ages of the world, 
 has the principle been clearly recognized, that perfect or 
 entire purity, may be significantly represented by apply- 
 ing water to a part of the body only. But what renders 
 26* 
 
306 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 this circumstance of weight in the present controversy, 
 is, that the Bible itself has given sanction to the principle. 
 Anciently, among the Hebrews, when the body of a mur- 
 dered man was found, and the guilty perpetrator had 
 -eluded discovery, the elders of the city, nearest the spot 
 where the body was found, were required to wash their 
 hands over a slain heifer, as a public protestation of their 
 innocence of the undiscovered murderer. Deut. xxi. 
 1 — 9. But why were they not required to immerse 
 themselves, if the principle of our opponents be correct, 
 and if consequently, ?l partial washing may not represent 
 entire purity ? David says, " I will wash my hands in 
 innocency." Ps. xxvi. 6. Here undeniably, the wash- 
 ing of the hands betokened the entire purity, or innocence, 
 of the ivhole man. So also, Pilate " took water and 
 washed his hands, saying, I am innocent of the blood of 
 this just person." Matt, xxvii. 24. But why did he 
 not immerse himself in token of his alleged innocency ? 
 
 3. But the subject admits of other proof. Ps. li. 7, 
 David prays : SPRINKLE [g^wm) me with hyssop, and 
 I shall be clean. Ezek. xxxvi. 25 : " Then will I sprin- 
 kle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean.''.'' 
 
 Heb. x. 22 : " Having your hearts sprinkled from an 
 evil conscience." 
 
 Heb. ix. 13: " The blood of bulls and of goats and 
 the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth 
 to the purifying of the flesh." 
 
 We by no means adduce these passages as direct proof 
 that Christian baptism should be performed by sprinkling, 
 but simply to show that Jehovah has long since settled 
 the principle in his church, that a partial washing, or 
 sprinkling the body with water, may suflice to represent 
 an entire cleansing of the moral man. And we wish our 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 307 
 
 opponents to bear it distinctly in mind, that when they 
 ridicule the practice of baptism by sprinkling, on the 
 score of its inefficacy, they ridicule ^principle that God 
 himself has, from the remotest antiquity of the church, 
 settled by his own authority. 
 
 But we have something more to do with the principle 
 under consideration. The subject assumes too serious 
 an aspect to be scouted away by the frivolity of superfi- 
 cial thinkers. When the Bible speaks of the application 
 of the blood of Christ to the heart in order to effect (not 
 a ceremonial but) a real cleansing, it employs the follow- 
 ing allusion : " Elect * * * through sanctification of the 
 Spirit * * * and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." 
 1 Pet. i. 2. The same reference is also made, Heb. ix. 
 13 — 14, and x. 22. So also, Heb. xii. 24: "Ye are 
 come * * * to Jesus and to the blood o/" sprinkling." 
 
 But why is not the allusion made to immersion instead 
 of sprinkling ? Will our opponents ridicule the idea of 
 cleansing the heart from moral defilement by having the 
 blood of Christ sprinkled upon it ? Why then should 
 they speak lightly of having water sprinkled upon the 
 body, when the object is merely to represent this moral 
 cleansing ? " There are three," says John, " that bear 
 witness in earth, the Spirit, the water, and the blood." 
 1 John v. 8. We are acquainted with the operations of 
 the Spirit and the application of the blood of atonement, 
 only by their aflusion upon the heart. This is the mode 
 in which they uniformly yield their testimony to the di- 
 vinity and Messiahship of Christ. Analogy therefore, 
 would teach us that the Avater of baptism, in order the 
 more forcibly to " agree in one" testimony with the 
 " Spirit and the blood," should agree with them also in 
 the mode of its application — i. e. should be sprinkled or 
 poured upon, the body. There is a remarkable instance 
 
308 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 recorded in Isa. vi. 7, of the entire purgation of the 
 prophet, by simply applying a coal of fire to his lips. 
 " Lo," says the seraph, " this hath touched thy lips and 
 thy iniquity is taken away and thy sin is purged." So 
 far as the principle under consideration is involved, we 
 might ask, is there any thing more absurd, in supposing 
 that an application of water to otie part of the body may 
 represent the entire purgation of the whole man from 
 moral defilement, than in supposing such a purgation to 
 be actually effected by applying a coal of fire to the lips 
 only ? 
 
 SECOND OBJECTION. 
 
 2. It is further objected to the practice of sprinkling, 
 that ^^ there is no cross in z7;" while the cross of being 
 immersed is a circumstance urged in proof of the superior 
 and exclusive merits of that mode, the mode by affusion 
 is condemned as not requiring any sacrifice of feeling or 
 comfort. Simple as this objection may appear, it is not 
 without its influence over many sincere Christians. All 
 Christians it is urged, must bear the cross of Christ, that 
 is, a cross to which we feel a strong repugnance. And 
 hence it is loosely inferred, that to overcome our repug- 
 nance to a particular act, is to bear the cross of Christ. 
 Those who reason thus, seem to measure the cross of 
 Christ in any particular duty, according to their reluctance 
 to perform it. This we are well assured, is the popular 
 view taken of this subject. And if people w^ould examine 
 the matter with candor and impartiality, they would find 
 that what generally passes under the specious appellation 
 of the cross of Christ in immersion, is nothing else than 
 the irrepressible risings of a constitutional repugnance of 
 such treatment of the body. To persons living in frigid 
 climates, there is a strong resistance to being plunged into 
 the water. This resistance arises, not from the force of 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 309 
 
 theological opinions, but from the natural effects of cli- 
 mate on the physiological constitution. On the other 
 hand,, in the torrid regions, to be dipped into the water is 
 a luxury ardently craved by every impulse of the lan- 
 guishing system. Yet the cross of Christ no more 
 strongly marks the immersion of an Icelander than that 
 of a Cingalese. The Author of our being has implanted 
 in our nature for our own welfare, an instinctive propen- 
 sity to resist any sudden or unexpected hazard of our 
 safety. The operations of this instinct are involuntary 
 and without the co-operation either of the will or the ra- 
 tional faculty. It is our settled conviction founded upon 
 somewhat extensive observation, that many, very many, 
 who deeply imbibe the doctrine of exclusive immersion 
 beforehand, still, at the moment of baptism, experience 
 so much agitation and alarm as utterly to preclude that 
 sense of religious obligation and devotional awe that 
 should wholly pervade and possess the mind. Still we 
 are taunted with the opprobrium of avoiding the " cross," 
 of inclining to a merely fleshly, selfish ease, to the sub- 
 version of a pure administration of Christian baptism, and 
 this, because we deny the theory of exclusive immersion ! 
 Is it reasonable to expect Pedobaptists to submit to a 
 usage inconsistent with their views of duty, merely to 
 show their Avillingness to " take up the cross ?" May 
 they not, and do they not evince that disposition, in num- 
 berless other instances in which it is their duty to do so ? 
 Have they not advanced to the front ranks in the great 
 strife, and exhibited themselves valiant for God and the 
 ti-uth ? Have they sunk into concealment in the hour of 
 persecution and the times which have tried men's souls ? 
 Have they ever betrayed the common cause, or given any 
 just ground for a latent suspicion, (much less a public 
 proclamation,) on the part of their Baptist brethren, that 
 
310 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 like the apostate Galatians, they wished to " avoid the 
 cross of Christ?" Where then, is the justice — where 
 the truth of these insidious whisperings of defection ? 
 We repudiate the ungenerous reflection thus cast forth 
 upon the fair reputation of the great body of the church ; 
 while we assure the reader that if, in his estimation, we 
 have descended to an odious personality in our argumen- 
 tum ad hominem, it has not resulted from our choice, 
 but from the necessity of the case and the delicacy of our 
 position in this unfortunate controversy/ 
 
 THIRD ODJECTION. 
 
 3. A third objection urged by our Baptist brethren, 
 particularly in their discussions with members of the 
 Lutheran church, is, " that jAither himself, the great 
 reformer, condemned the practice of sprinkling, and 
 even disapproved of infant baptism. That any one not 
 utterly regardless of his reputation, should hazard an as- 
 sertion so entirely unfounded, is a matter of as much re- 
 gret as it is of surprise ; for Luther's writings thoughout, 
 abound with the most conclusive evidence in support of 
 pedobaptism as well as of his conviction of the propriety 
 and validity of its performance by aff"usion ; even his 
 hostility to the abuses of papacy, is not susceptible of 
 clearer or stronger proof. We have gone to the trouble 
 to collect a few passages from those writings, which we 
 shall here translate for the benefit of our readers, and 
 which we have no doubt will prove fully satisfactory to 
 every candid reader ; — we would direct attention particu- 
 larly to those portions of the extracts which are printed 
 in italics : — 
 
 " That the dipping of a child in water or sprinkling it 
 with water according to the command of Christ, should 
 
 'See Rev. F. G. Hibbard on the Mode of Baptism. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 311 
 
 cleanse it from sin and transfer it from the kingdom of 
 Satan to the kingdom of God, is reviled by reason," &c. 
 See Singularia Lutheri by Philip Saltzman, Jena edition 
 1564, Tit. 220. Art. Baptism p. 657. 
 
 " Inasmuch as there is neither ornament nor honor at 
 baptism and God does outwardly no more than apply a 
 Handful of ivater,^^ &c. Ibid chap. viii. p. 669. 
 
 " I- consider that by far the safest baptism is the bap- 
 tism of children ; for as Judas came to Christ to be bap- 
 tized, so an adult may practice deception ; but an infant 
 cannot deceive, and comes to Christ in baptism like John 
 and like the children that were brought to him," Sic. 
 Ibid chap. x. p. 602. 
 
 " We conclude that children believe at baptism and 
 have a faith of their own, that God produces it in them 
 in answer to the faithful prayers and obedience of the 
 sponsors," &c. Ibid chap. xi. p. 663. 
 
 " Devils must flee from baptism ; why ? — they do not 
 regard the water and the letter, but it is because God has 
 commanded that we must use our hand and tongue in ad- 
 ministering it bi/ sprinkling water upon the subject in 
 connection with the words prescribed by God," &c. Ibid, 
 chap. xi. p. 663. 
 
 " We must endeavor by all means to honor baptism by 
 word and work, for therefore we have the baptismal font, 
 the altar, and pulpit, that they may receive us and bear 
 testimony that we are baptized and belong to Christ," 
 &c. Ibid. chap. 15, p. 667. 
 
 Luther's letter inviting a lady to become sponsor to hia 
 own child, will both gratify the curious and add to the 
 amount of evidence on this point ; it is as follows : 
 
 " Grace and peace in Christ ; honorable and virtuous 
 lady ; dear friend ; God has bestowed upon me a young 
 
312 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 heathen, taken from my and my dear wife's body ; I invite 
 you for the Lord's sake that you will do me the favor to 
 aid in introducing her to Christianity and become her 
 spiritual mother, in order that through your instrument- 
 ality and assistance (I mean by your prayers) she may 
 pass from the old birth of Adam to the nev/ birth of Christ 
 by holy baptism. I will strive to make myself deserving 
 of the kindness, I commend you to God, Amen." Table 
 Talk, appendix chap, xxxiii. F. 55. 
 
 Martinus Luther. 
 It is scarcely necessary to comment on any particular 
 portion of the foregoing extracts, for they constitute an 
 almost solid phalanx of proof, the most clear and conclu- 
 sive, not only that Luther insisted on infant baptism, but 
 also that he entirely approved of the mode by affusion or 
 sprinkling. It is however highly probable that at an 
 early period in the reformation, he inclined to the opinion 
 that infants should be ^^ pretty well dipt,''^ but at no time 
 did he consider such dipping essential; but on most oc- 
 casions when he adverted to the subject, he gave us to 
 understand unequivocally, that he. regarded the mode by 
 sprinkling, pouring, the application of " a mere handful 
 of water," &c., as fully adequate and valid. His appa- 
 rent original preference (it was a mere preference) of dip- 
 ping, was soon abandoned, and as he grew older, he 
 settled down into the same opinion that is now entertained 
 by the great body of Lutheran divines in the United 
 States. Such is the conviction to which we have been 
 led by a careful and extensive examination of his wri- 
 tings, and the foregoing extracts sufficiently prove its 
 correctness. 
 
 A few more citations from Luther may not be unac- 
 ceptable to our readers : 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 313 
 
 In the year 1541, Luther preached two sermons on 
 baptism, occasioned by the administration of the ordi- 
 nance to the child of the prince of Anhalt. In the second 
 of these sermons [Siebenter Theil, Fol. 439 — 441,) he 
 says: "Baptism consists of three parts, 1. water, 2. 
 God's word, 3. GocVs command and ordinance f^ he 
 then proceeds in these words : " Here no more is done 
 than that the subject, according to God's command, is 
 dipped, (in's Wasser getaucht,) or the water is poured 
 upon him, (ueber ihn gegossen,) and the words pro- 
 nounced : I baptize you in the name of the Father, &c. 
 If this is done, doubt not that it is a lawful and perfect 
 baptism ; nor need you inquire whether he who adminis- 
 ters the ordinance is a pious and believing man. Though 
 he should not be so, (for as to what he personally is, 
 that does not concern the efficacy of the ordinance) if he 
 only uses the words of the institution and does not take 
 wine, or beer, or lye, or any thing else but water in con- 
 nection with God's word, it is a holy and acceptable bap- 
 tism. For all that is essential to baptism is the use of 
 natural water in connection with the loords of the insti- 
 tution." 
 
 In 1542 John Bugenhagen published a little tract on 
 infant baptism, of ivhich Luther approved, and to which 
 he made some additions. It contains an elaborate argu- 
 ment in favor of pedobaptism, and the following is an 
 extract from it: " Again, if any one can obtain baptism, 
 and yet cavils in this manner : how can a mere handful 
 of loatcr be of any benefit ? — he cannot be saved. For 
 he despises God's word and the ordinance of Christ ; he 
 treats Christ as though he had acted foolishly in ordaining 
 and commanding things useless. Luthefs Works, 
 Achter Theil, Fol. 58. 
 27 
 
314 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 Luther's hostility to the Anabaptists is notorious ; of 
 this we have a curious specimen in a letter addressed to 
 his wife. 
 
 Copia of a letter of Dr. M. L. to his beloved wife^ 
 written in Halle. 
 
 " 1546, Num. 61. 
 " Grace and peace in the Lord ! 
 
 " Dear Katy ; we arrived at Halle to-day at 8 o'clock,. 
 but we could not go to Eisleben. We were met by a 
 large Anabaptist woman with waves of water and great 
 cakes of ice that covered the ground ; she threatened to 
 baptize us over again,' and as we could not retreat in con- 
 sequence of the Mulda (a stream of water) in our rear, we 
 were obliged to remain in Halle, between the waters ; not 
 however as though we thirsted for so much water, &c. 
 
 " Martinus Luther, D. 
 
 " To my kind and beloved " Katy Luther 
 in Wittenberg." 
 
 This letter was written, as before stated, in 1546, that 
 is, in the year of Luther's death ; and every one will 
 perceive that he could at that period have had no predi- 
 lection for the views of the Baptists, inasmuch as it treats 
 those views with not a little irreverence, and even with 
 ridicule — at least by implication. 
 
 We leave our readers to judge for themselves, from the 
 foregoing extracts, what amount of credit is due to the 
 objection made by some of our Baptist brethren, that 
 Luther believed in the necessity of submersion to the ex- 
 clusion of affusion, or that he was not decidedly in favor 
 of children's being baptized. To our more enlightened 
 readers we may owe an apology, for making our extracts 
 
 'Luther had been baptized in his infancy byq^w«on,and consider- 
 ing that vaUd, he was never re-baptized. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 315 
 
 SO copious and dwelling so long on this subject ; but the 
 less informed, Avho have been assailed again and again 
 by this groundless objection, without ability to refute it, 
 will know better how to appreciate our effort. We need 
 scarcely remark that Luther evidendy laid more stress 
 on baptism than many are inclined to in the present day, 
 and that Avhatever may have been his opinion as to the 
 efficacy and indispensable necessity of the ordinance, we 
 do not feel bound to follow him any further than as he 
 followed Christ. 
 
 We have now brought our discussion to a close ; with 
 what success, we are perfectly willing that an unbiassed 
 public shall decide. As we wrote mainly, though not 
 exclusively, for the benefit of the unlearned, it frequently 
 seemed necessary to enter into detail and expand our re- 
 marks beyond what would otherwise have been deemed 
 necessary ; thus the limits which we originally prescribed 
 to ourselves, have been greatly transcended, not however 
 so much, we hope, as to render the work particularly 
 tedious. 
 
 It has been our uniform endeavor to treat those, whose 
 views we have in the providence of God been called to 
 oppose, with due deference ; nor are we conscious of 
 having in the whole course of the discussion, indulged 
 one single unkind feeling towards our Baptist brethren. 
 If a harsh word or a disrespectful remark has escaped us, 
 God is our witness that it Avas not designed, and we sin- 
 cerely pray the Father of mercies to pardon us, and not 
 to suffer the cause of Christ and the rights of "little 
 children" to receive any prejudice on account of a want of 
 temperateness on our part. Our object has been to con- 
 tend for the truth as it is in Christ, and not for victory ; — 
 
316 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 and to contend for and promote that truth, in the love of 
 it, and with the meek and fraternal spirit which it never 
 fails to inspire, when permitted to exercise its divine in- 
 fluence upon the heart. 
 
 In conclusion, let Christian parents once"more be re- 
 minded of their duty, and urged to present their offspring 
 to God in baptism. Think not, dear friends, that if you 
 neglect this duty, the omission is a matter of minor im- 
 portance. " You are evidently casting contempt on a di- 
 vine institution, established by God and observed by his 
 people for generations ; and one which received the appro- 
 bation and sanction of Christ and his apostles. Do you, 
 can you suppose then that he will smile upon you, and 
 bless you and your household, whilst you live in a ne- 
 glect of this duty ? Consistently you cannot: for 'who- 
 soever shall break the least commandment, shall be called 
 least in the kingdom of heaven.' How often did Jesus 
 perform wonders, and heal the sick, on account of the be- 
 lieving entreaties of their friends ! How cheerfully did 
 he bestow his benediction upon children, on account of 
 the faith and earnest desire of their parents ! If you love 
 your little ones therefore and feel concerned for their pre- 
 sent and eternal welfare, bring them in the arms of faith 
 to Jesus, and consecrate them to his service. ' He will 
 in no wise cast them out ; he will carry them in his bo- 
 som, and lead them into paths of righteousness for his 
 name's sake.' 
 
 " Have you already dedicated your offspring to God, 
 forget not your solemn vows and obligations. Call to 
 mind the eventful hour, when in the presence of the 
 heart-searching God, you promised and bound yourselves 
 by ties never to be dissolved, to train them up in his 
 fear and for his glory. Remember that you are intrusted 
 with the care of immortal souls, who are soon to enter 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 317 
 
 upon an existence that will never terminate ; and whose 
 everlasting happiness or misery, stands intimately con- 
 nected with your exertions and prayers. ' These lights, 
 lighted for eternity, it is yours to feed with holy oil from 
 the sanctuary of God, that they may burn, with pui-e and 
 lovely radiance, before the throne above. These never- 
 dying plants, it is yours to rear and to cherish, bringing 
 down upon them, by your supplications, the dews and 
 rains of heaven, that so they may flourish and bear fruit 
 forever, in the paradise of God.' Let us entreat you 
 then. Christian parents, 'to take that child and nurse it 
 for God.' Take it to a throne of grace. Teach it early 
 the importance of religion and the science of salvation, 
 • when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest 
 by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou 
 risest up.' Be more concerned to make it an heir of the 
 kingdom of God, than to raise it to the possession of 
 great worldly opulence and distinction. Impress upon 
 it constantly, the necessity of preferring the interests o 
 the soul to the body, and the things of eternity to those 
 of time. Thus may you expect, that you will be mutually 
 blessed in the present life, and become to each other 
 crowns of rejoicing on the day of the Lord. 
 
 " To those children who have been devoted to God in 
 their infancy, permit us to say : — You have abundant 
 cause of gratitude, when you think how highly yoiv have 
 been distinguished above many around you. If your pa- 
 rents, in the act of your consecration, had right views 
 and exercises, they must have felt a deep and prayerful 
 solicitude for your future and eternal welfare. They not 
 only vowed, but determined in humble reliance on the 
 grace and promises of God, to watch over you, to in- 
 struct and admonish you and to bring you up as disciples 
 27* 
 
318 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 of the Saviour. What profit, my young friends, have 
 you derived from their pious teachings and counsels, from 
 their entreaties and prayers ? Have you fulfilled the ex- 
 pectations and desires of their hearts, by walking in the 
 paths of virtue and religion? 'A wise son maketh a 
 glad father : but a foolish son is the heaviness of his mo- 
 ther.' O beware then of embittering the life of your pa- 
 rents, either by your indifference about religion or by 
 profligate conduct : beware of disturbing the serenity of 
 their dying moments, and of preventing them from 
 closing their eyes in peace and triumph. Beware lest 
 your signal blessings should at last prove a curse, and 
 the privileges with which you are exalted unto heaven, 
 should tend only to sink you deeper into the burning 
 abyss. 
 
 "Let us all endeavor to have our religion seated prin- 
 cipally in the heart, and never depend on any outward 
 form as the ground of our eternal hopes. Let us live 
 upon the great fundamentals of Christianity, and make it 
 our daily and highest concern to exemplify their power 
 in all our conversation and actions. For want of atten- 
 tion to these weightier matters of the law, it was that the 
 Jews came short of heaven, though they were all the 
 children of Abraham, and subjects of the covenant and 
 promise. If therefore you suppose, that you must ne- 
 cessarily be Christians, because you have been born of 
 Christian parents, and received the seal of the covenant, 
 you are under the same awful delusion and will meet 
 with the same disappointment and doom. The carnal 
 descendants of Abraham perished without remedy, and 
 so must all, notwithstanding their baptism, perish with- 
 out remedy and without hope, who have not been born 
 again by the Holy Spirit of God. ' He is not a Chris- 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 319 
 
 tian who is one outwardly, neither is that baptism which 
 is outward in the flesh; but he is a Christian who is one 
 inwardly, and baptism is that of the heart, in the spirit 
 and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of 
 God.' '" 
 
 It is a subject of deep and serious regret, that in a land 
 of gospel privileges, where there are so many opportuni- 
 ties to become wise unto salvation, and Christ's ministers 
 so frequently urge upon the rising generation, the neces- 
 sity of making a public profession of religion, and of 
 renewing the seal of God's covenant with his people by 
 confirmation, there should still be so many who, either 
 ignorant or regardless of their duty, are members of no 
 particular denomination. This lamentable defection is 
 attributable in part, to the mistaken views entertained by 
 thousands respecting the relation in which their baptism, 
 or rather the covenant of grace, of which baptism is the 
 seal, has placed them. "We cannot now," they say, 
 "join the church or submit to confirmation, because we 
 are not prepared ; or we dread the assumption of such 
 solemn responsibilities," &c. But it should be remem- 
 bered, beloved readers, that we do not ask you to join 
 the church, or take upon yourselves the duties of church- 
 membership. This has already been done. You were 
 in fact bor7i into the church without your consent, just 
 as, without any agency of your own, you were born free 
 citizens of the state ; you were embraced in God's cove- 
 nant evening before you entered upon your existence ; 
 the duties of church-membership are therefore already 
 upon you, and you cannot escape without actually re- 
 nouncing them. At your baptism your birth-right was 
 impressively certified, and your participation in God's 
 
 'Cliristian Baptism by a Minister of the Ger. Reformed church. 
 
320 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 covenant was ratified and openly announced ; and hence 
 you are already members of the church of God, and re- 
 quire not to be transferred to this relation by a public 
 profession or by the rite of confirmation. 
 
 A profession is indeed indispensably necessary, but 
 upon grounds very diff'erent from that implied in your 
 objection. Christ expressly commands 'you to confess 
 him before the ivorld, and declares that if you refuse or 
 neglect to do so, he will deny you before his Father and 
 his holy angels. Besides, the profession made in your 
 name at your baptism, whereby your membership was 
 solemnly attested, was made by your parents and spon- 
 sors, and now, having arrived at a proper age to act for 
 yourselves, it is of the highest importance that you should 
 publicly and voluntarily acquiesce in it ; nor can any 
 well-regulated Christian denomination admit you to the 
 full enjoyment of church privileges, unless you do thus 
 acquiesce. 
 
 Accordingly, in addressing those who have not yet en- 
 tered into communion with any Christian denomination, 
 we propose not the question : will you join the church 
 of God; will you become subjects of his cov^enant ; will 
 you consent to become members of his visible kingdom 
 and assume the responsibility connected with that rela- 
 tion ? Far from it ; all this, as already observed, has 
 been done. You are already committed on the side of 
 Christ ; the vows of God are already irrevocably upon 
 you, and the covenant has been solemnly recognized. 
 All the powers of earth and all the ingenuity of infideli- 
 ty, cannot absolve you from the obligations belonging to 
 the position you occupy in reference to Messiah's king- 
 dom. No, the question wears this aspect, and none 
 other : Will you renounce your membership ; are you 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 321 
 
 prepared to become recreant to the church to which your 
 souls have been espoused ; are you willing to be ranked 
 among backsliders and apostates ; have you made up your 
 mind to annul the " everlasting covenant," and can you 
 deliberately consent to be " cut off from God's people ;" 
 which is the penalty denounced, and necessarily incurred 
 by a neglect personally to renew and confirm the covenant 
 in question ? — You may refuse formally to come out 
 from the world, and to renew the profession made at 
 baptism ; but this will not diminish the amount of your 
 duties or the weight of your responsibility ; on the con- 
 trary, it will stamp upon your souls, — deeply and per- 
 haps indelibly, the foul blot of apostacy ! it will mark 
 you as recreants to the cause to which you have been 
 solemnly consecrated, and as traitors to the gracious cove- 
 nant by virtue of which alone you can ever expect to be 
 saved ! A man who attempts to apologize for his omis- 
 sion to make a profession of religion and personally to 
 confirm his baptismal engagements, does in effect say to' 
 Jehovah : I am indeed, by grace, a member of thy church ; 
 all the duties of discipleship are incumbent upon me ; in 
 virtue of my birth I belong to thy gracious covenant, and 
 I stand pledged to believe in thy well-beloved Son for 
 salvation, to renounc'e Satan, the world and sin, and walk 
 in all the ways of thy commandments. But I now delib- 
 erately renounce the church and all its privileges and 
 blessings ; I abjure the covenant of God with his people, 
 and the promises of mercy and eternal life comprehended 
 in it ; I annul and wilfully cast from me the entire spirit- 
 ual and religious relation into which I have been brought 
 by grace, and set up for myself independently of God, 
 and in opposition to his plan of salvation ; I sever my- 
 self from God s people ; I cut loose from the great sheet- 
 
322 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 anchor of hope ; I abandon but we forbear, we can 
 
 pursue the awful subject no further; our heart within us 
 grows faint and sick, while we contemplate the daring 
 presumption and enormous guilt of those, who esteem 
 their privileges so lightly, and thus stretch out their hand 
 against God and strengthen themselves against the Al- 
 mighty. 
 
 Would to God, that all those who are standing aloof 
 from their duty in this respect, would take this view of 
 the subject ! would, that they could realize the true rela- 
 tion they sustain to Jehovah, and the actual ground they 
 assume in refusing to profess Christ before the world, and 
 to incur personally the obligations of church-member- 
 ship ; we are persuaded they would then act differently. 
 The old plea : "I am not prepared to join the church ; I 
 cannot enter upon so solemn and responsible a relation," 
 &c., would no longer be relied upon; its fallacy would be 
 seen and felt, and, ashamed of the base ingratitude and 
 folly involved in il, they would perhaps awake to their 
 duty or be compelled to seek refuge under shelter of a 
 more specious apology. 
 
 Young men and Avomen ! remember, we beseech you 
 that you are not your own ; you are bought ivith a price 
 and therefore bound to glorify Gdd with your bodies 
 and spirits, ivhich are his ; bear in mind that you are 
 Jehovah's own rightful property, not only by creation 
 and redemption, but also and emphatically by a cove- 
 nant-transfer; the God of Israel stipulated for your ser- 
 vices with faithful old Abraham, when he condescended 
 to enter into solemn league with that pious and distin- 
 guished patriarch ; the promise attached to that agree- 
 ment, had respect not only to him and his immediate pos- 
 terity, but also " to all who were afar off, even as many 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 323 
 
 as the Lord our God should call ;'" he has called you 
 by the gospel, and hence the blessings of the covenant 
 appertain to you. When you first opened your eyes 
 upon the world, you did so as subjects of that covenant ; 
 you did so as members of the church of God ; accord- 
 ingly, in due season the covenant was sealed and certi- 
 fied in baptism ; your membership in the church was thus 
 made known and acceded to. Away then, with every 
 idle subterfuge, and with all the miserable excuses with 
 which you have heretofore sought to justify or extenuate 
 your neglect of duty, and attempt no longer to undo what 
 God has already done ; spurn not your blood-bought, in- 
 estimable birthright ; renounce not the church of God in 
 which you were born ; be not apostates from the cove- 
 nant so rich in love and mercy, in virtue of which alone 
 remission of sins and eternal life can be obtained ! — O re- 
 member your Creator now in the days of your youth ; — 
 seek the Lord in brokenness of heart and contrition of spirit ; 
 seek him in true faith on the Saviour of a lost and perish- 
 ing world; — seek him thus, while he may be found; seek 
 him now, even this very moment, lest it be eternally too 
 
 late ; and profess him cheerfully, gratefully, and consist- 
 ently in the face of a gainsaying and ungodly world, lay- 
 ing claim to all the blessings, and honors, and super- 
 abounding riches of grace, appertaining to your covenant 
 relation. And thus, though your life may be accounted 
 madness, and your end to be without honor, yet shall 
 you be numbered among the children of God, and have 
 your lot forever among his saints. 
 
 'Gen. xvii. 7, compared with Acts ii. 39. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 ESSAYS ON SEVERAL SUBJECTS 
 
 CONNECTED WITH BAPTISM. 
 No. I. 
 
 WHY A NAME IS GIVEN AT BAPTISM. 
 
 A NAME is an appellation attached to a person or thing; or 
 it is that by which an object is designated, to distinguish it 
 from another. To give a name is a token of authority ; thus 
 a father gives names to his children, and a master to his ser- 
 vants. So also Adam gave names to all the animals, thereby 
 indicating that they were in some sense placed under his do- 
 minion. 
 
 When God gave a name to an individual or changed it, he 
 thereby signified that, that individual belonged to him in an 
 especial manner, was taken under his peculiar care and ap- 
 pointed to some particular purpose. Thus he gave names, 
 even before their birth, to Jedidiah or Solomon, the Messiah, 
 John the Baptizer, &;c. When he selected Ahram with a view 
 to claim him as his peculiar servant, to enter into a covenant 
 of grace with him, and through him to accomplish a great pur- 
 pose, he changed his name to Abraham. Hebrew and Greek 
 names, have a meaning, and when given or changed on divine 
 authority, their import always corresponded with some promi- 
 nent feature in the character of the individual, or with some 
 important purpose for which he was set apart. The name 
 Alrruham implies the fathtr uf a great multitude ; accordingly 
 28 
 
326 APPENDIX. 
 
 when God covenanted with him, he said: — "Behold, my 
 covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many 
 nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, 
 but thy name shall be called Abraham, for a father of many 
 nations have I made thee. This is my covenant which ye 
 shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee ; every 
 man-child among you shall be circumcised. In the self-same 
 day was Abraham circumcised, as God had said unto him." — 
 Genesis xvii. 4, 5, 10, and 26. 
 
 Jesus means Saviour, and hence this very appropriate name 
 was given to our Lord. Saul was changed to Paul; the former 
 signifies sepulchre, destroyer-, — an appellation quite expressive 
 of the work of destruction in which that determined perse- 
 cutor was engaged prior to his conversion ; the latter implies 
 a worker, answering admirably to the subsequent character of 
 that same man, who could truly say: "but I labored more 
 abundantly than they all." 
 
 It is well known that circumcision was the sign and seal of 
 a covenant with God; in that rite God's authority over the 
 individual circumcised, his favor and mercy towards him and 
 his appointment of him to a particular purpose, were marked 
 and formally recognized. Hence it was customary among 
 the Jews to give names at circumcision, thereby betokening 
 more fully the very thing represented by the rite. Thus, when 
 Abraham covenanted with Jehovah and acknowledged his en- 
 tire subjection to him by submitting to circumcision, his name 
 was changed. The following examples reflect additional light 
 on this subject. 
 
 "And it came to pass that on the eighth day they came to 
 circumcise the child, and they called him Zacharias — Luke i. 
 69—63. 
 
 " And when the eight days were accomplished for the cir- 
 cumcising of the child, his name was called Jesus Luke 
 
 ii. 21. 
 
 "And when Jesus beheld him he said, thou art Simon the 
 son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is, Peter. — 
 John i. 42. Lvike vi. 14. 
 
 " Saul who is also called Paul. Acts xiii. 9. 
 " Joses, by the apostles was suniamed Barnabas. — Acts 
 iv. 36. 
 
 These remarks being premised, the practice of giving a 
 name at baptism is easily accounted for. Baptism has come 
 in the place of circumcision ; it is in like manner an ordinance 
 in which God's covenant of grace is sealed, and whereby we 
 acknowledge his authority over us and his claim to our service 
 and obedience; and he on his part assures us of his favor, 
 owns us as his children and appoints us to purposes of love 
 
APPENDIX. 32T 
 
 and mercy. Hence there is a propriety in giving a name at 
 baptism ; the very idea which it indicates falls in with one of 
 the designs of this ordinance ; it may also, in a sense, be said 
 to be in accordance with divine example in reference to Abra- 
 ham, Christ, John and others, and is evidently a usage that 
 has been transmitted to us from remote antiquity. 
 
 Another consideration which shows the propriety of this 
 practice is the fact, that the individual baptized is recognized 
 as a member of the church. Of course he is entitled to 
 church-privileges, according to his capacity to enjoy them; if 
 he is an adult, all the privileges of full communion belong to 
 him ; if a child, only such as progressively appertain to infant- 
 membership. It is therefore obvious that the individual thus 
 recognized should be announced to the church under some 
 name, so that he may be distinguished from others, and under 
 his own name and in his own proper person, receive the privi- 
 leges and treatment due him from the church. It would be un- 
 reasonable as well as inconvenient to acknowledge a nameless 
 person as a member of any society. 
 
 Further, the rules of the church demand, that a record should 
 be kept in the regular church-book of the baptism of every 
 member. This record presupposes a name ; what kind of a 
 registry of members would that be, in which they could not be 
 distinguished by appropriate designations'? In some countries 
 the civil authority requires such a record, and it is in various 
 respects important that it should be attended to, and hence we 
 have an additional reason for giving a name at an early period 
 in life. 
 
 We should however guard against gliding into an error on 
 this subject. As the announcing of a name was in no sense a 
 necessary part of circumcision, so it is not of baptism ; if ad- 
 ministered without a name, it is in every respect as valid as 
 when one is given, hence the name appropriated to a person at 
 baptism may be subsequently altered if circumstances render 
 it necessary. But this should not be done hastily nor without 
 substantial grounds. No good end could result from frequent 
 alterations, and much confusion and even serious mischief 
 would unavoidably ensue. The name adopted at baptism and 
 entered into the church-protocol, should therefore be invariably 
 retained except in special cases of sufficient importance to jus- 
 tify a change. If the record of the name be a matter of legal 
 requirement, we have no right to alter it, unless authorized by 
 a special act of the legislature. Being enrolled in the appro- 
 priate civil registry, the name has become the property of the 
 State, and cannot be aJjandoned or exchanged for another ex.- 
 cept by permission of the State. 
 
328 APPENDIX. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 SPONSORS AT BAPTISM. 
 
 Sponsors are persons who by appointment are present ar; 
 baptism, to witness the ceremony and answer for the individual 
 baptized, and thus become sureties for his future religioua 
 education. This we presume is a correct definition of the term, 
 according- to its common acceptation ; but it does not compre- 
 hend one of the principal designs contemplated by sponsors 
 in the Lutheran church. By an examination of a number 
 of ancient Lutheran liturgies, we find that god-parents were 
 required to be present at baptism as representatives of the 
 church, to acknowledge in its name, the baptized child, as a 
 member of the church, and, as intermediate persons, to form 
 the cord of union and Christian fellowship between the parties. 
 It was on this ground that parents were not deemed suitable 
 persons to act as sponsors ; — it being their office to dedicate 
 the child, it was thought inconsistent for the same persons to 
 act in the double capacity of offering their child to the church 
 and also of receiving the offering. 
 
 Some very respectable writers maintain, that the practice of 
 having sponsors was introduced at a very early age. It is 
 well known that the primitive Christians were violently perse- 
 cuted and in numerous instances barbarously put to death; it 
 therefore seemed necessary that others besides the parents, 
 should be witnesses at baptism, who in case of the death of 
 the parents, might attest the fact, and if necessary, provide for 
 the religious education of the babtized. This design of spon-. 
 sors accords well with the opinion of those who think they 
 can trace the practice as far back as the second centu y. 
 
 Others are of opinion that there is no historical evidence 
 whatever, that children were presented for baptism within the 
 first five or six centuries, by any other persons than their pa- 
 rents, unless the parents were dead or had not embraced the 
 Christian religion. A very learned Episcopal divine, who 
 carefully examined the subject, and was exceedingly anxious 
 to fix the introduction of sponsors at the earliest possible peri- 
 od, acknowledged that in the first centuries, none but parents 
 were the presenters and sureties for their own children, except 
 in extraordinary cases, as for example, when the parents were 
 not living, or were not professing Christians ; when they cru- 
 elly forsook and exposed their offspring ; and when masters 
 had young slaves committed to their charge.' Augustine who 
 flourished toward the close of the fourth and beginning of the 
 fifth century, maintained that parents ought to act as sponsors 
 
 3ee Bingham's Ecclesiastical Antiquities. 
 
APPENDIX. 329 
 
 for their own children, except in extraordinary cases, viz. such 
 as have just been mentioned ; and added, that in those cases 
 any professing Christians who should be willing to undertake 
 the benevolent charge, might with propriety, take such chil- 
 dren, offer them in baptism, and become responsible for their 
 Christian education. The writings of several of the fathers are 
 sometimes quoted as affording evidence in favor of the use of 
 sponsors in early times; but those who have gone to the 
 trouble of examining them most carefully, assure us that they 
 have not written a sentence which sustains the idea that any 
 others acted as sponsors but parents, provided they were in life 
 and were of a proper character to perform the office. The tes- 
 timony _of Dionysius, which is more favorable than that of 
 others to the early use of sponsors other than parents, relates 
 only to cases in which the children of pagans or unbelieving 
 parents were to be trained up to the Christian religion. It 
 must also be borne in mind that the writings of Dionysius are 
 entitled to no credit, as they are regarded by the most learned 
 as "a gross and impudent forgery." 
 
 Sponsors in cases of adult baptism, appear to have been in- 
 troduced in the fifth century ; but they were employed only 
 under peculiar circumstances; for example, when the adult 
 was dumb, or in a state of delirium and could not answer for 
 himself. On such occasions the sponsors testified to the good 
 character of the candidate and the fact that he was really anx- 
 ious to receive baptism. Subsequently the practice became 
 universal, still the adults always entered into the engagements 
 themselves, provided they were not incapacitated by physical 
 or mental imbecility. The sponsors at adult baptism were 
 usually the officers of the church, and were looked upon as the 
 guardians of the religious life of the persons baptized. 
 
 In the ninth century, the church of Rome prohibited parents 
 to act as sponsors for their own children, and required this 
 duty to be yielded up to others ; — certainly a most arbitrary 
 and unrighteous requisition. 
 
 Among the Waldenses and Albigenses the parents usually 
 stood as sponsors for their own offspring, though other pious 
 persons were not prohibited from performing this office, at 
 least when the parents were dead or absent or for some other 
 reason could not attend to it themselves. 
 
 The church of England and also the Protestant Episcopal 
 church in this country, require god-parents in all cases of 
 baptism, adults as well as infants. In the former the parents 
 are not permitted to stand as sponsors, nor even urged to be 
 present at the baptism of their child. 
 
 The Lutheran church in the United States, as on several 
 other points of doctrine and practice, so also on this subject, 
 occupy middle ground. Indeed, a comparative view of her 
 28* 
 
330 APPENDIX. 
 
 principles and usages place her in this relative position in a 
 variety of respects, as though her ruling maxim had been, 
 Ibis tutissimus in medio. We require the parents to be present 
 at the baptism of their children if practicable, and always ad- 
 vise them to act as sponsors; at the same time, if desired, we 
 admit other sponsors in connection with them, but avail our- 
 selves of every suitable occasion to discourage it. As the 
 church-records attest the fact of baptism, and it is the ac- 
 knowledged and solemn duty of the church to make provision 
 for the Christian education of her young members, especially 
 if they be orphans or destitute, we consider that these objects 
 of sponsors, other than parents, are sufficiently provided for. 
 As to representatives of the church to acknowledge in its name 
 the membership of the baptized child ; we think, that while 
 the parents dedicate it to the Lord, the church is amply repre- 
 sented by the officiating minister. But there are other consid- 
 erations that have operated upon our churches in determining 
 them to resist this practice. The pledges made at baptism in 
 behalf of the child, are such as none but parents are for the most 
 part qualified to redeem, and hence it most becomes them to 
 enter into those pledges. IVIoreover, the use of sponsors, how- 
 ever necessary at first, however laudable the original design, 
 and however faithfully their duties may have been observed, 
 has in too many instances deteriorated into an unmeaning and 
 thoughtless and even sinful habit. Solemn engagements are 
 made which are rarely if ever fufilled, nay scarcely afterwards 
 thought of, and which indeed those who make them have 
 neither intention nor opportunity to discharge. Thus the 
 practice has sadly degenerated, and cannot in such cases be 
 regarded by the Searcher of hearts otherwise than as odious 
 and culpable. For these reasons several of our synods have 
 publicly expressed their disapprobation of it, in ordinary cases, 
 and we rejoice to say that it is rapidlj' disappearing. We 
 must however here remark, that as cur churches are in a sense 
 indepeiident, and claim the right of observing such usages as 
 they deem most subservient to general edification, especially 
 in matters not essential, our statements may not strictly apply 
 to every individual church and minister belonging to our com- 
 munity ; but in general we think they will not be found to be 
 materially erroneous. 
 
 The views and usages of the German Reformed church on 
 this subject, bear so strong a resemblance to those of the Lu- 
 therans, that these observations are perhaps equally applicable 
 to it. 
 
 The conclusions which we draw from the preceding remarks, 
 are the following : 
 
 1. The use of sponsors other than parents, is not a ecriptural 
 regulation. 
 
APPENDIX. 331 
 
 2. It did not exist on ordinary occasions, in the earliest and 
 purest age of the church. 
 
 3. It is productive of very little if any good, as practised in 
 the present day, and is calculated to occasion much evil. 
 
 4. The design of sponsors is amply provided for by the 
 present regulations of the church in Christian countries. 
 
 5. Parents are decidedly the most suitable persons to stand 
 as sponsors for their own children, but they ought certainly to 
 be pious. 
 
 6. If the parents are dead or absent, or insane, or are pagans, 
 or live in vice and immorality, or on some other account are 
 disqualified to act in that capacity, then others should supply 
 tlieir place, but their substitutes should be professing Christians. 
 
 7. When adults are baptized, they should always answer for 
 themselves ; but if they are dumb, or of very feeble capacity 
 and therefore in need of spiritual guardians, then it is proper 
 for some Christian friend or friends to become their sponsors. 
 
 If in view of the foregoing conclusions it should be asked, 
 whether the children of all Christians or baptized parents 
 ought to be baptized % We answer in the affirmative. The 
 practice of circumcision among the Jews was universal ; and 
 though it was the duty of every Jew to be a sincere worshipper 
 of the true God, yet many were not, " they were not all Israel 
 who were of Israel ;" still we have no evidence that any chil- 
 dren were excluded from circumcision, unless their parents 
 were excommunicated. So also the children of all Christian 
 parents should receive baptism ; being born in the church, just 
 as they are born citizens of the state, they are undoubtedly en- 
 titled to the formal recognition of their membership. If both 
 their parents are infidels or pagans, and have thus either re- 
 nounced or never embraced the Christian system, the case is 
 different. But even in this event, if a Christian friend should 
 kindly adopt them into his family, or consent to stand as 
 sponsor and become surety for their religious education, they 
 also, by virtue of this connection would have an equal claim, 
 through the merits of Christ, to the seal of the covenant. But 
 while we contend for the universality of infant baptism under 
 tlie specified limitations, we cannot admit that all baptized 
 parents are qualified to stand as sponsors. Such as habitually 
 violate their own baptismal vows and set at defiance the au- 
 thority of God and the church, and of course have forfeited 
 their membership, are certainly not fit and suitable persons to 
 enter into those solemn engagements in behalf of their children, 
 which baptism involves. How can parents of this description 
 sincerely dedicate their children to the pure and sacred service 
 of God ] — how, consistently obligate themselves to " bring 
 them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord V Is there 
 no incongruity, — nothing like gross hypocrisy in such a pro- 
 
332 APPENDIX. 
 
 cedure ! Does not every formula of baptism that has ever been 
 published in the Lutheran church, whether in Europe or Amer- 
 ica, require those who present the child for baptism, to re- 
 nounce in its name, the devil and all his works and ways, to 
 profess faith in the divine authority of the Christian religion, 
 and to engage to use all necessary care and diligence by in- 
 struction, admonition, example and discipline to train him up 
 in the fear of the Lord? Now, is it not expected that this re- 
 nunciation^ profession, and engagement, should be sincere ? If 
 not, the whole transaction is a solemn mockery ,- but if it is, 
 then we submit it to the decision of any enlightened and un- 
 prejudiced mind, whether ungodly parents, are qualified to 
 perform the office of sponsors ? 
 
 What then, under such circumstances, is the proper course 
 of procedure ] We answer, if either of the parents afford evi- 
 dence of a sincere profession of Christianity, let that parent 
 only, answer for the child ; but if both are still " in the gall 
 of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity," it does not appear 
 to us that the ordinance can be consistently administered, or 
 its engagements be faithfully entered into, unless some Chris- 
 tian friend will kindly consent to act as sponsor. Some minis- 
 ters, feeling the force of this view of the subject, have endea- 
 vored to escape the charge of inconsistency, and of tempting 
 ungodly parents hypocritically to bind themselves by vows 
 which they neither intend nor are capable to perform, by omit- 
 ting to propose the usual questions prescribed in the formulary 
 of the rite ; they think they pursue the safest course by admin- 
 istering baptism without requiring the customary renunciation, 
 profession and engagements. But does it not follow, that in 
 such cases, it is not upon a profession of Christianity that the 
 child is baptized, for there is no profession made; and does 
 not this conflict with the very nature of the ordinance, and with 
 all the examples of its administration recorded in the New 
 Testament ] If they however have the approbation of their 
 own conscience, we shall not condemn them ; but we would 
 respectfully suggest, whether it would not be highly proper to 
 avail themselves of such occasions to administer a solemn re- 
 proof and a pungent exhortation to those who wickedly under- 
 take to covenant with God for their own children, while they 
 themselves are living in rebellion against him ■? and if so, they 
 will find an appropriate text in the sixteenth and seventeenth 
 verses of the fiftieth Psalm : "But unto the wicked God saith, 
 what hast thou to do * * * that thou shouldst take my cove- 
 nant in thy mouth ] Seeing thou hatest instruction, and castest 
 my words behind thee." 
 
APPENDIX. 333 
 
 No. III. 
 CONFIRMATION. 
 
 THE NATURE AND DESIGN OF CONFIRMATION. 
 
 Confirmation is a solemn and religious rite, observed by 
 the great body of the Christian chuich, but is not regarded in 
 the same light by the several denominations among whom it is 
 practised. 
 
 The churches that reject this rite, constitute, comparatively 
 speakino", but a small ininority. Besides the Lutherans, it is 
 held in high estimation in the German Reformed, Protestant 
 Episcopal, Bohemian, Moravian, Roman Catholic, Greek, and 
 some other churches. Even those who have hitherto looked 
 upon it with an evil eye, are beginning to discern its advan- 
 tages, and to speak of it in commendatory terms.' 
 
 The Roman Catholics rank confirmation among the sacra- 
 ments, but there is no scriptural warrant to justify this view 
 of it, especially as it was not instituted by Christ, which is 
 deemed an essential constituent of a sacrament. 
 
 Our brethren of the Protestant Episcopal church consider 
 it, not indeed as a sacrament, but as a divine ordinance, which 
 according to their opinion, was instituted and practised by the 
 apostles. They think it probable that our Lord, during the 
 forty days that he conversed with his apostles after his resur- 
 rection, instructed them to institute it. 
 
 Our Presbyterian brethren reject it entirely as a human in- 
 vention, and place it in a category with exurcism, chrismation 
 or anointing with oil in the form of a cross, and the adminis- 
 tration of milk and honey to the candidate ; all which they 
 maintain, were human additions to baptism, introduced about 
 the close of the second or the beginning of the thiid century. 
 
 Not wishing to give this article a controversial character, 
 we shall not stop to investigate the process of reasoning by 
 which these conflicting theeries are attempted to be sustained ; 
 but shall proceed to present the sentiments generally enter- 
 tained in the Evangelical Lutheran church. 
 
 The Lutherans, constituting by far the largest Protestant 
 denomination in the world, occupy middle ground between the 
 Episcopal and the Presbyterian churches. They do not as a 
 
 'See Christian Spectator of December, 1831, p. 652, sqq. m a 
 review of Harvey's Inquiry ; also Prof. Robinson's remarks on con- 
 firmation, Bii). Repos. of .luly, 1831, p. 423, 599 ; an extract from 
 which, as well as some remarks by Prof. Hodge on the same object, 
 will be found at the end of this article. 
 
334 APPENDIX. 
 
 body, believe that confirmation was instituted either by Christ 
 or the apostles, nor do they generally profess to find conclusive 
 evidence in the word of God, to justify the belief that it was 
 even practised by the apostles. The portions of Scripture re- 
 corded Acts viii. 14, 15, and Acts xix. 1, 6, which are usually 
 quoted as apostolic authority for the observance of this rite, 
 are understood by them as referring, not to the ordinary solem- 
 nity of confirmation, as practised in the church at the present 
 day, but to the miraculmts gifts of the Holy Ghost, conferred 
 by extraordinary officers for an extraordinary purpose. There 
 have indeed been some very respectable divines in the Luther- 
 an church, and for aught we know there may be yet, who have 
 inferred from Heb. vi. 1,2. that "the imposition of hands" 
 other light than that in which we have represented it. The 
 may possibly have been continued in the church as an impress- 
 ive mode of invoking the divine blessing on those who were 
 to be received into full communion with the church. The 
 passage from which this deduction is made, reads thus : — 
 " Therefore, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let 
 us go on unto perfection ; not laying again the foundation of re- 
 pentance from dead works and faith towards God, of the doc- 
 trine of baptism and the laying on of hands, and of resurrection 
 of the dead and eternal judgment." The inspired penman 
 here enumerates the laying on of hands, among the rudiments 
 or elementary principles of Christianity, and it is supposed by 
 some, that although the laying on of hands was first designed 
 to accompany the communication of the extraordinary influ- 
 ences of the Holy Spirit, it was nevertheless retained by the 
 early Christians, after those powers had ceased, as a standing 
 solemnity to mark the transition from infant-membership in the 
 church to adult-membership. It will be perceived that this is 
 merely a supposition, — a supposition however, which receives 
 some strength from the consideration, that no other rite what- 
 ever has descended from the apostolic church, to which the 
 above mentioned imposition of hands could allude, if it be not 
 confirmation. But even granting that the apostles and their 
 immediate successors practised confirmation, which the pre- 
 mises in the case are not sufficiently clear to warrant, still as 
 that presumed primitive practice was not enforced b^ a " thus 
 saith the Lord," we are not obligated to conform to it any fur- 
 ther than as its superior adaptation to accomplish good, may 
 commend itself to us. We cannot admit that the example of 
 the first Christians, including that of the apostles unenforced 
 by a command is binding on us, especially in reference to a 
 rite merely external. Such a concession would involve us in 
 inextricable difficulties, not to say absurdities. 
 
 Confirmation, as practised among Lutherans, may be said to 
 present two aspects. 
 
APPENDIX. 335 
 
 1. It is a personal and most solemn assumption and ratifica- 
 tion of the covenant of grace, whicli was recognized and 
 sealed at our baptism. The members of the church are bap- 
 tized in infancy, and though they are then, in a formal man- 
 ner, acknowledged as parties to the covenant and consequently 
 as members of the church, yet being infants and incapable of 
 voluntary action in a moral point of "view, it is not only right, 
 but a positive duty that they should themselves, when tiiey 
 arrive at a proper age, come forward and personally renew and 
 confirm the vows made in their name, by their sponsors or 
 representatives, when at baptism they were recognized as sub- 
 jects of God's gracious covenant. God requires the heart. 
 His deople must be a willing people; and neither our services 
 nor our persons can be an acceptable oSfering to him, if not ac- 
 companied with the full and free consent of the will and the 
 cheerful flowing forth of the affections of the soul. Hence it 
 IS eminently proper and necessary, that there should be some 
 appropriate rite, in which adults may personally take upon 
 themselves and ratify the solemn promises entered into in their 
 behalf in their infancy. To afford an opportunity for the dis- 
 charge of this sacred duty, appears to be one of the principal 
 designs of confirmation. 
 
 Accordingly, when persons present themselves as candidates 
 for this ordinance, (they should always present themselves, and 
 not come merely to gratify the wishes of friends, or in compli- 
 ance with the usage of the church,) they do most solemnly 
 renew the vows made for them at their baptism. They en- 
 gage, in the presence of men and angels, to renounce the devil 
 and all his works, the pomps and vanities of the world ; the 
 lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye and the pride of life; to 
 believe in Jesus, and to serve him in holiness and righteous- 
 ness all the days of their lives. In a word they deliberately 
 "join themselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant, never to 
 be forgotten." 
 
 2. The second aspect in which this rite may be viewed, ex- 
 hibits it to us as a solemn mode of admitting individuals to 
 adult church-membership, or to full communion in the church. 
 The enjoyment of the privileges of membership in Christ's 
 church IS progressive. It commences with baptism and the 
 special prayers of God's people ; next, as the infant member 
 grows older and the powers of the mind are developed, it in- 
 cludes religious instruction from the preaching of God's word, 
 and the private labors of the pastor and members ; to this is' 
 gradually added the society of the faithful followers of Christ, 
 whose example and exhortations will afford the young member 
 important aid in his journey toward the land of blTss ; then 
 ensue the advantages resulting from chureh-discipline, which 
 
336 APPENDIX. 
 
 consist in the watchfulness exercised by the church over the 
 purity of individual members, in exhorting-, admonishing, re- 
 proving, censuring, &c., the member who wanders from the 
 footsteps of the Saviour. And although the latter stages of 
 this discipline may be painful, the erring youth will be greatly 
 benefited by it, and feel thankful to the church that even this 
 severe remedy is employed to lead him to the Saviour of his 
 soul. Finally, having reached mature age and been properly 
 instructed, the last and crowning act, is admission to full and 
 complete membership in the church of Christ, whereby he 
 publicly devotes himself to the service of his Saviour, volun- 
 tarily presenting his soul and body as a living sacrifice upon 
 the Christian altar. He thus, in a public and solemn manner 
 comes out from the world and declares himself to be a member 
 of God's kingdom, a subject of his covenant, and a disciple 
 of his Son. This is equivalent to what is termed in some 
 churches, a public profession of religion. In the Lutheran 
 church, this profession is made at confirmation. 
 
 Every church has some mode of receiving members into full 
 communion, and as Christ did not prescribe any particular 
 form, that which is the most appropriate and impressive, and 
 has the least tendency to nourish superstition, may be regarded 
 as the best. We have no objection to the Presbyterian, or 
 Methodist mode ; nay, we are willing to admit that their modea 
 may be more appropriate than ours for their respective churches ; 
 but at the same time we maintain that ours is decidedly the 
 best for us. Of this, extensive experience has long since con- 
 vinced us. Confirmation, with its antecedent and attendant 
 religious exercises, is in itself adapted to make deep and salu- 
 tary impressions, as well upon the assembled congregation 
 who witness the solemn scenes, as upon those who are the 
 personal participants of them. Moreover, the Master has again 
 and again sanctioned this rite with his smiles, and blessed it 
 on countless occasions, as the means of awakening sinners and 
 reviving and strengthening believers. So long therefore, as 
 any degree of fidelity and spirituality mark the character of 
 our ministers and people, the rite of confirmation with the pre- 
 vious religious instruction connected with it, will be held in 
 very high esteem and be practised in the Evangelical Luther- 
 an churches with great confidence in the promised blessing 
 of God. 
 
 Having admitted that the evidence in support of apostolic 
 example for this rite, is not conclusive, and that if it even 
 were, not being enforced by an injunction, it would form no 
 obligatory rule for us, the question may be proposed : " why, 
 under such circumstances, do you still adhere to it?" — Because 
 the Great Head of the church, having in this case, as well as 
 many other similar ones, given no specific directions, but left 
 
APPENDIX. 337 
 
 US to adopt such form as in consistence with the general prin- 
 ciples of the gospel, might most strongly commend itself, we 
 are of opinion that this rite is peculiarly adapted to the very 
 purpose for which it is employed. It is therefore on grounds 
 of Christian expedience or utility, that we hold to confirmation ; 
 we prefer it decidedly to every other outward mode of renew- 
 ing the covenant of baptism and making a public profession of 
 religion. We know assuredly, that it is acceptable to that 
 God who has so frequently sanctioned and blessed it. 
 
 To this consideration may be added the fact, that confirma- 
 tion lays claim to great antiquity. The laying on of hands 
 was a common usage under the Old Testament dispensation. 
 Thus when Moses constituted Joshua his successor, God ap- 
 pointed him to lay his hands upon him.' Jacob laid his hands 
 upon Ephraim and Manasseh when he gave them his last 
 blessing.2 The high-priest stretched out his hands to the 
 people as often as he pronounced the divine blessing upon 
 them.^ This practice was also frequent in sacrifices ; the per- 
 son bringing the victim, laid his hands on the head, ^c* 
 
 All this was indeed not confirmation, but still it marks the 
 practice of the imposition of hands as ancient and solemn, and 
 always connected with religious or devotional exercises. 
 
 In the New Testament we find, besides that already referred 
 to, (Heb. vi. 1 — 2,) at least four kinds or occasions of the im- 
 position of hands recounted. The first by Christ himself, to 
 express an authoritative benediction ;^ the second, in the heal- 
 ing of diseases f the third, in conferring the extraordinary gifts 
 of the Spirit,^ and the fourth in setting apart persons to sacred 
 office.* 
 
 Though none of these instances affords a clear example of 
 confirmation, nor even alludes to one unless it be that recorded 
 in the Epistle to the Hebrews, yet, if the apostles received into 
 full communion members who had been baptized in their in- 
 fancy, it appears to us to be not improbable that they did so by 
 the imposition of hands and prayer, in ether words, by confir- 
 mation, because this mode of doing it would have fallen in 
 most harmoniously with the well known and long established 
 usages of the Jews, and have precisely coincided with the 
 spirit and custom of the apostolic age. This probability is 
 heightened by the historical fact, that the Jews were in the 
 habit of presenting their children at the age of thirteen years, 
 to the congregation, that they might be publicly examined, re- 
 new the covenant which had been made for them in their in- 
 fancy, and take upon themselves their obligations of obedience 
 
 'Numb, xxvii. 18. *Gen. xlviii. 14. ^Levit. ix. 22. ^Ibid i. 4. 
 ^Matt. xix. and Mark x. 16. "^Mark xvi. 18, Acts xxviii. 8. 
 
 'Acts viii. n, and .xix. 6. ^Acts vi. 6, xiii. 3, 1 Tim. iv. 14. 
 
 29* 
 
338 APPENDIX. 
 
 to the divine law.' On these occasions the elders of the Syn- 
 agogue laid their hands upon them and pronounced them the 
 sons of the congregation of Israel, The objection that the laying 
 on of hands by the apostles (Acts viii. 17, and xix. 6,) was 
 accompanied hy the extraordinary influences of the Holy Ghost, 
 does not appear to be a solid one, because the ceremony was 
 attended by the same miraculous effects in cases of ordination 
 to the gospel ministry, (1 Tim. iv. 14, and 2 Tim. i. 6,) and yet 
 the practice of ordaining in the same mode is still retained in 
 churches that reject confirmation, though they make no pre- 
 tensions to confer the Holy Ghost on such occasions. To con- 
 demn confirmation then, simply because we cannot thereby 
 impart those supernatural gifts, would be no less fatal to min- 
 isterial ordination. 
 
 As our Lord, when he instituted the new seal of his cove- 
 nant, did not introduce a novel rite, but selected baptism which 
 had long been used among the Jews in the reception of prose- 
 lytes, and appointed it to a new purpose, is it not very reason- 
 able to suppose that the imposition of hands accompanied by 
 prayer, — a practice so well understood among the Jews, should 
 be adopted as the mode of admitting members to full commu- 
 nion in his church ] But whether or not, it is certain that 
 confirmation can be traced to a very early period in the church. 
 Dr. CampbelP thinks it arose in the second century from the 
 right which the bishop claimed to confirm the baptisms that 
 were administered by the presbyters and deacons of his church. 
 Towards the close of the second century, it was undoubtedly 
 in vogue, for TertuUian mentions a number of superstitious 
 practices that were associated with it about that period. The 
 ceremony was performed immediately after baptism,- provided 
 the bishop was present, and in his absence, was deferred until 
 the candidates could present themselves, or if children, until 
 they could be presented by others to him. In that age the 
 imposition of hands was regarded as essential to the comple- 
 tion of baptism, and was usually performed by the bishops, 
 who professed to be the successors of the apostles, and as 
 such, empowered to communicate the Holy Ghost through the 
 act of confirmation. " For their convenience the two festivals 
 of Easter and Whitsuntide were chosen as the proper seasons 
 for adults and children, when the candidates were required to 
 assemble from all places in the bishop's church, and the part 
 which the bishops then performed was that of the imposition 
 of hands, while the act of baptism, might be done by presby- 
 ters and deacons. Such as had been baptized in the interval, 
 and converts from heresy who had received baptism in their 
 
 'SeeBuxtorf Syn. Jud. cap. 3. 
 
 ^See Lectures on Ecclesiastical History. 
 
APPENDIX. 339 
 
 own sects, now received only the imposition of hands with its 
 
 accompanying ceremonies." 
 
 But whatever superstitious frippery may have disfigured 
 the rite in question in the second and third centuries, and in 
 later ages among the Roman Catholics ; in the Lutheran 
 Church it is regarded, so far as our knowledge extends, in no 
 other light than that in which we have represented it. The 
 apology of the Augsburg Confession contains the following 
 declaration on this subject : Oonfirmation is a rite which xoas 
 transmitted to us from the fathers, but which the church never 
 regarded as essential to salvation ,- for it is not supported by a di- 
 vine command.^ We make no pretension to impart the Holy 
 Ghost by confirmation, we ascribe no magic virtue to the 
 laying on of hands, nor to the form of words accompanying 
 that act ; we claim for them no other than their appropriate 
 moral influence, and are convinced that they had not anciently, 
 and have not at present, any other in the hands of bishops. 
 The testimony of the illustrious Calvin on this subject, well 
 deserves a place in this article. He speaks of it in the highest 
 terms, (Institutes, book iv. chap. 19, §. 4.) It deserves, he 
 thinks, " to be regarded as sacred and solemn." He adds, 
 that he " highly approves of it, and wishes it were restored to 
 its primitive use, uncorrupted by superstition." In Book iv. 
 chap. 19, §. 13, he again says : " I sincerely wish that we 
 retained the custom (of confirming) which I have stated was 
 practised among the ancients" — and his principal argument in 
 his subsequent remarks is founded on the catechetical instruc- 
 tion which was connected with it, and by which such salutary 
 effects are produced, as we have already had occasion to re- 
 mark. 
 
 No. m. 
 CONFIRMATION. 
 
 CONTINUED. 
 
 THE BENEFITS OF CONFIRMATION, AND THE QUALIFICATIONS NEC- 
 ESSARY TO A PROFITABLE RECEPTION OF IT. 
 
 Having examined the nature and design of confirmation, we 
 shall proceed to set forth its benefits, and the qualifications 
 necessary to a profitable reception of it. 
 
 The great value of this rite consists, not in the simple act 
 of laying en of hands, nor even in the form of words uttered 
 
 'Formula Concordise, p. 201. 
 
340 APPENDIX. 
 
 by the minister; for, apart from the knowledge of divine truth, 
 and the impression which it is designed to make upon the 
 heart, the whole ceremony, so far as the recipient of it is con- 
 cerned, is little else than a solemn mockery. Confirmation 
 then, must be considered in connection with the course of in- 
 struction which precedes it, and as the closing act of a series 
 of religious efforts intended, and with the divine blessing 
 adapted to prepare the candidates for "the communion of 
 saints ;" that is, for their communion with Christ as their Head, 
 and with God's people as members, of which communion the 
 Lord's supper is the visible sign. 
 
 Some time before a Lutheran minister intends to administer 
 confirmation, he invites all who desire to take up the cross 
 and follow the Redeemer, to meet him in the church or lec- 
 ture-room. Among those invited, are particularly such as are 
 religiously disposed, or awakened to a sense of their sins, and 
 others, whether baptized or not, who are old enough to make a 
 personal profession of religion. In order to enforce his invita- 
 tion, he seeks a private interview with all whose duty it is to 
 attend his public ministrations, but have not yet been admitted 
 to full membership, and urges upon them the necessity of this 
 duty. All are exhorted to attend the contemplated course of reli- 
 gious instruction, with the understanding however that no one 
 will be required or even permitted by the discipline of the church, 
 to be confirmed, unless the religious instruction is blessed as 
 the means of awakening his heart and producing a sincere de- 
 sire to consecrate himself to God. 
 
 The "catechetical lectures" now commence; each catechu- 
 men is provided with Luther's Smaller Catechism, which, so 
 far as may be deemed advisable, is committed to memory to- 
 gether with accompanying proof-texts. The minister explains 
 the object of the instruction, the nature and design of baptism, 
 of confirmation and the Lord's supper ; he aims at making 
 them acquainted with themselves and with God, with their 
 own character as fallen and hell-deserving creatures, and the 
 character of Christ as the only Saviour of a perishing world; 
 the Holy Spirit is represented as the only efficient agent, and 
 the inspired word of God as the instrumental means of renew- 
 ing and sanctifying their nature. The whole plan of salva- 
 tion, every important doctrine and precept of the gospel, espe- 
 cially the nature and indispensable necessity of repentance 
 and faith, of thorough conversion to God and of newness and 
 holiness of life, are elucidated and inculcated in as simple and 
 earnest a manner as possible, so that the youngest and weak- 
 est may fully understand. No scriptural efforts are unem- 
 ployed, to prevail on them to turn to the Lord with their whole 
 heart ; to yield without delay to the claims of God and to be- 
 
APPENDIX. 341 
 
 come and forever remain his humble and obedient children. 
 1 he meetings are opened with singing and prayer, and closed 
 in the same manner; the catechumens themselves, amply in- 
 structed on the subject of prayer, if qualified publicly to lead 
 in this duty, are sometimes called on to offer up the closincr 
 prayer, 1 he Sacred Scriptures are made the only basis of all 
 these lectures; they are the polar-star of the Lutheran minis- 
 ter in imparting religious instruction; with them he lays the 
 toundation, rears the superstructure and adds the cap-stone ; 
 the catechism he also uses faithfully, not however to determine 
 me sense of God s word, but as a summary of it, to direct him 
 in his general course and facilitate and simplify his lectures. 
 For every meeting with his beloved pupils, he is careful to 
 prepare himse f previously in his closet, and by prayerfully 
 reading the Bible and other devotional works calculated to in- 
 terest aiKl instruct his own heart and solemnize his own feel- 
 
 S i^^ff" "" ^"'■'^''^ '"' ^'^^P^y interesting and important 
 work, he takes occasion to converse with every catechumen on 
 the great subject of his personal salvation. At these inter- 
 views he ascertains from each, the state of his heart, the meas- 
 ure of his doctrinal knowledge, his religious experience his 
 peculiar trials and difficultiel', &c., and^s enabled to ?o ma 
 tolerable estimate of the qualifications of every one for the ap- 
 proaching solemnities This course of instruction is continued 
 at hrst once, and subsequently, twice or thrice a week, for 
 two or three months, and often longer. 
 
 "Such is the course of instruction substantially pursued bv 
 the great mass of our divines, with the variations which the 
 
 lf^tich\r'—r i^r^^ "^^^ ^^^^^^^«' ^"^ ^he exercise 
 ot which the principles of Christian liberty, so hio-hly prized 
 and so fully enjoyed in the Lutheran church secure to^U ; ye^ 
 has 1 not unfrequently been the theme of invidious clamor to 
 
 e' Informed " B^^'^' T' ^' -"-dversion from others beN 
 ter informed. But we have never heard, nor do we expect 
 
 "fZ ? ^^y'.°^^ «i»?l« t-^^ly pious pastor, who 1^% at- 
 tended to this instruction, and did not regard it as a hi^ht 
 blessed means of bringing souls to Christ. By unconverted 
 ministers, this duty, like all others, will be perfonned as a 
 Zt SuS."Y' T'% '!"''' ^^-^^- tho'seX attend 
 nothincr ekp ?h. '"^-^ '^l^' -'"'?"' ™^^^ '^ °"^ P^^'ors, it is 
 nothing else than a series of meetings for prayer, sino-in^ ex- 
 hor ation and individual personal interview, betw;en them and 
 
 adonri^^tl^ ''',' '°"'"^? ^^^ ^^'^^^^«"' ^^ ^^^^^h, wWiout 
 adopting the novel nomenclature of the day, they can eniov 
 al the facilities and afford to their heare/s al/the benefiti 
 aimed at, and doubtless often attained by others, in what are 
 termed anxious meetings, inquiry meetings, clas meeting 
 private conferences, &c. &c. ^Indeed, the friends of This go?d 
 
342 APPENDIX. 
 
 old custom are delighted to see the several denominations, un- 
 der different appellations, adopting the substance of the same 
 thing; nor do we care by what name the thing is known, so 
 that God is glorified, and sinners are saved.'" 
 
 The instruction ended, an examination of the catechumens 
 takes place, at which the pastor presides and the church-offi- 
 cers are witnesses.^ After the examination, the minister re- 
 commends to the officers, as many of the applicants for full 
 communion in the church, as he thinks are qualified; and their 
 cases decided, all who have been deemed worthy, are con- 
 firmed, that is, they are permitted publicly to renew and ratify 
 their baptismal promises and by a public profession, to dedi- 
 cate themselves to the service of Him who loved them and 
 gave himself for them. Those of the candidates who had not 
 been baptized, enter into the same engagements preparatory to 
 their baptism, which are made by such as are confirmed In 
 these cases, some of our ministers do not deem confirmation 
 necessary while others do. As the Christian cannot renew 
 his vows to God too often, even though it should be every day, 
 there is certainly no impropriety in administering confirmation 
 to those adults who have just heen babtized, and it may have 
 a beneficial effect. 
 
 The ceremony of confirmation is thus performed. — First, 
 several appropriate questions are proposed ; these being an- 
 swered in the affirmative, (which with the prayer of the offici- 
 ating minister, is considered the essential part of the act itself,) 
 the catechumens kneel at the altar, and the pastor laying his 
 hands on each one as he passes around, solemnly invokes the 
 blessing of God upon him in a short prayer. He then extends 
 to each the hand of brotherly fellowship, and in the name of 
 the whole congregation, acknowledges him as a member of 
 the church and entitled to all its privileges, so long as his de- 
 portment shall correspond with the solemn promises which he 
 has just made. 
 
 It is accordingly the public and solemn renewal of the bap- 
 tismal covenant, as the concluding act of a previous and full 
 course of religious instruction, which is regarded as confirma- 
 tion, and not the imposition of hands ; indeed the latter, though 
 an appropriate religious practice, always connected with it, is 
 not even considered essential. 
 
 'Pop. Theol. 
 
 -In some neighborhoods this examination is held in the church in 
 the presence of tlie whole congregation, but experience as well as the 
 nature of the exercise has shown, that the object can be much better 
 accomplished, if conducted more privately and by a personal inquh'y 
 ivith each indii-idual respedivg the evidence of his ov:n personal piety, 
 instead of a general examination on the doctrines and duties of 
 Christianity. 
 
APPENDIX. 343 
 
 ■ The foregoing view of confirmation, including the prepara- 
 tory course of instruction and the attending circumstances, 
 will enable the intelligent and unbiased mind to form some 
 idea of its advantages. We will only yet remark, that in ad- 
 dition to the special prayer of the officiating pastor for the 
 subject of this rite, the fervent supplications of the assembled 
 congregation of God's people, are also enlisted in his behalf. 
 His religious obligations, though not increased, are more 
 deeply impressed upon his mind, and this will have a tendency 
 to keep him faithful and diligent in the duties ot Christian life, 
 to make him watchful and prayerful, and we may justly hope, 
 to prepare him the better for the reception of those influences 
 of the Holy Spirit, which are necessary to aid and guide him 
 in all the ordinances and commandments of the Lord, blame- 
 less. As he confirms the obligations arising from his covenant- 
 relation to Jehovah, and willingly renews his vows of self- 
 consecration to him; so God, by his ministering servant, con- 
 firms all his promises of grace and mercy, so that when this 
 rite is duly administered, and duly received, it can hardly fail 
 to prove the occasion of the richest blessings. It would be a 
 most dishonoring reflection on the divine faithfulness and 
 goodness, to suppose that a surrender of all we are and have, 
 to the great Head of the church, in a manner so solemn and 
 serious, and withal, so intelligent and voluntary, should not be 
 highly acceptable to him. He has declared that he will honor 
 those who honor him ; that he will confess before his Father 
 and his holy angels, all who sincerely confess him before men, 
 and though heaven and earth should pass away, not one jot or 
 tittle of his promises shall fail. Often has his sanctifying 
 and comforting grace descended like the dew of heaven, on 
 occasions of confirmation ; and thanks to his unmerited grace, 
 many humble believers can testify, from happy experience, 
 that when they sealed their covenant with God, by renewed 
 vows of fidelity, they found themselves "sealed with the 
 Holy Spirit" unto the day of eternal redemption. 
 
 "The orthodox and pious Knapp speaks advisedly, when 
 be remarks that confirmation, in the cases of many, is fol- 
 lowed, as experience teaches, by the most blessed eflfects, 
 through their whole life. ' And if,' he continues, ' its advan- 
 tages do not always immediately appear, they often manifest 
 themselves in after years ; for the seed which was sown in 
 the heart frequently lies concealed a long time ere it comes 
 up.' Both he, and Morus, (in the Epitome, &c. p. 238 of 
 Schneider's German translation,) exhort the pastor to be care- 
 ful and conscientious in the performance of the duties which 
 arc connected with this ' laudable custom.' Many, says Dr. 
 Lochman, in his History, &c. of the Evan. Luth. church, p. 
 
344 APPENDIX. 
 
 158, date the beginning of their real conversion to God from 
 their confirmation."' 
 
 The qualifications requisite to a profitable reception of this 
 rite, remain to be stated. Believing that our excellent For- 
 mula of Discipline, corresponds on this point with the princi- 
 ples of the gospel, we shall be guided by that in our remarlis. 
 
 "It shall be the duty of the Council to admit to member- 
 ship adults, who make application, and whom on mature exam- 
 ination, they shall judge to be possessed of the qualifications 
 hereafter specified. They shall be obedient subjects of divine 
 grace, that is, they must either be genuine Christians, or sat- 
 isfy the Church Council that they are sincerely endeavoring to 
 become such. Also to admit to communion of the church, all 
 those who are admitted to church-membership in their infancy, 
 and whom on like examination, they shall judge possessed of 
 the above mentioned qualification. No one shall be consid- 
 ered a fit subject for confirmation, who has not previously at- 
 tended a course of religious lectures, delivered by the pastor 
 on the most important doctrines and principles of religion; 
 unless the pastor should be satisfied that the applicant's at- 
 tainments are adequate without this attendance."* 
 
 It accordingly appears, that the candidates for confirmation, 
 must be "obedient subjects of divine grace, that is, they must 
 either be genuine Christians, or satisfy the Church Council 
 tliat they are sincerely endeavoring to become such." 
 
 All mankind are the subjects of divine grace, for all are 
 more or less the recipients of his unmerited favor. Those 
 who have been born in a Christian land and have an opportunity 
 to enjoy Christian privileges, are the special subjects of God's 
 grace, being favored with the special grace of his gospel. 
 But candidates for confirmation must be " obedient subjects of 
 divine grace, that is. they must either be genuine Christians, 
 or satisfy the Church Council that they are sincerely endea- 
 voring to become such." Now, individuals who are awakened 
 to a sense of their religious duties and anxious to be reconciled 
 to God, have, to a certain extent, been obedient to divine grace, 
 or they would not be in this awakened and anxious condition. 
 It will not be maintained that persons of this description are 
 converted, that they have "saving faith," or are genuine 
 Christians. The most that can be said of them is, that they 
 are penitent, inquiring, seeking sinners ; they are, as it were, 
 in a state of transition from darkness to light, and from the 
 kingdom of Satan to the glorious liberty of the children of 
 God. Such persons then, though not radically converted, are 
 nevertheless, according to our Discipline, suitable candidates 
 
 'Essays on Confirmation in Lutheran Observer, June 15th, 1832. 
 'Formula of Discip. chap. iv. § 5. 
 
APPENDIX. 345 
 
 for confirmation, and therefore bound to present themselves for 
 admission to adult-membership in Christ's church, and his min- 
 isters have no right to repel them. If the Lord himself were per- 
 sonally on earth, and they should humbly approach him con- 
 fessing and mourning over their guilt, and promising a faithful 
 use of the measure of grace, however small, already bestowed 
 upon them,' the general benevolence of his character and the 
 superabounding riches of his mercy, are a pledge that He would 
 not reject them. No verily. He who in the days of his flesh 
 so often fulfilled the prediction : " A bruised reed shall he not 
 break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench,"' and who, 
 in the plentitude of his unsearchable grace deigned to eat 
 with publicans and sinners in the hope of recovering them 
 from the error of their ways; would welcome them to his com- 
 munion, and diligently employ the occasion to strengthen their 
 good desires and establish them in their upright ellbrts to be- 
 come his obedient followers. 
 
 This view of the question before us, so obviously in accord- 
 ance with the practice and theory of the Lutheran church, falls 
 in no less with the system of our Methodist brethren, which 
 prescribes an anxious "desire to flee from the wrath to come" 
 as the pre-requisite for admission to the table of the Lord. 
 But what is best of all, it harmonizes with the spirit of the 
 gospel and with examples of admission to church-member- 
 ship recorded on its inspired pages. To refer to and examine 
 those examples, would extend this article, already too long, be- 
 yond our prescribed limits. 
 
 However desirable it therefore is, that all who are received 
 into full communion in the church, should have bright evi- 
 dences of their conversion, and undoubted assurance of faith 
 and of their acceptance with God, yet we think these high at- 
 tainments are not essential to a profitable reception of confirm- 
 ation, or of any religious ordinance. Christ invited all who 
 'labor and are heavy laden to come unto him," and never re- 
 jected the trembling penitent, though that penitent was merely 
 " framing his doings to turn unto the Lord," and had advanced 
 no further than to place his foot, as it were, upon the thresh- 
 hold of the sanctuary. Moreover, the gospel of Christ with 
 all its promises, his church with all her institutions, are de- 
 signed for the encouragement and salvation of the humble and 
 contrite. "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken 
 and a contrite heart, God, thou will not dispise."^ " But 
 to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a con- 
 -trite spirit and trembleth at my word."^ Do you therefore 
 mourn in bitterness of soul for your sins, and feel that God 
 would be just, if he were to punish you with everlasling de- 
 struction from his presence and the glory of his power? 
 
 'Isa. xlii. 3. ^pg. jj^ j^, sjsa. ixvi. 2. 
 
346 APPENDIX. 
 
 Christ bids you come to him just as you are, — with all your 
 misery and all your guilt, — to take his yoke upon you, — to 
 profess him before men, and to follow him in the way of his ap- 
 pointment. He urges you to come to his ordinances, and with 
 joy to draw water from these wells of salvation. And all his 
 invitations are accompanied with the gracious promise, that 
 " him that cometh, he will in no wise cast out."* Fear not, 
 trembling sinner, to approach the altar, and renew your bap- 
 tismal vows in the rite of confirmation ; you may there find 
 the Lord Jesus Christ, whose good pleasure it is to administer 
 unto those who mourn in Zion, and to appoint unto them 
 " beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, and the gar- 
 ments of praise for the spirit of heaviness." 
 
 But we must return to the point from which we have some- 
 what wandered ; and here a very important question presents 
 itself for consideration, viz. How are we to know whether a 
 man is a genuine christian, or whether he is sincerely and actu- 
 ally endeavoring to become one 1 Can we short-sighted 
 mortals read the hidden thoughts or explore the secret motives 
 of our neighbor 1 If any minister or set of church-officers lay 
 claim to such profound wisdom, let them produce their cre- 
 dentials from the Most High, under his broad seal of miracles ; 
 but if they cannot do this, their pretensions are entitled to no 
 more credit than those of the astrologer who casts nativities 
 from the aspect of the planets. God has wisely reserved to 
 himself the prerogative of discerning spirits. "I, Jehovah, 
 search the heart. I try the reins. "• It appears then, that the 
 REALITY of conversion, or even of sincere anxiety to be con- 
 verted, cannot be laid down as the ground of admission to 
 adult-membership, because we have not the means of positively 
 ascertaining the existence of that reality. We often cannot 
 detect a perjury in the custom-house, or dishonesty in the 
 common affairs of life ; how then can we decide whether he 
 who recounts his religious experience, or asserts his anxiety 
 to become a christian, is not a hypocrite 1 If it be answered : 
 " By their fruits ye shall know them ,-" we reply, — even so, by 
 THEIR FRUITS, that is, by their external life, — their walk ' and 
 conversation,' — but not by their inward experience, their secret 
 exercises, or that which passes in their own breasts and is 
 known only to God and themselves. The ehurch of God, so 
 far as its outward ordinances are concerned, is altogether 
 visible ; and it would be absurd to make an invisible quality 
 the criterion of visible communion. If then we are incompe- 
 tent to determine with certainty who is and who is not a genu- 
 ine Christian, and cannot therefore in the nature of things, 
 make the reality of conversion the test of admission, what is 
 to be done 1 — Answer : The gospel informs us that " faith 
 
 'Jer. xvii. 10. 
 
APPENDIX. 347 
 
 worketh by love," or in other words, that regeneration of heart 
 exhibits itself by corresponding acts of obedience ; when 
 therefore, according to our best knowledge, we perceive that 
 love to God and man, which is the legitimate fruit of living 
 faith in Jesus Christ, or those acts of obedience which are the 
 known and regular effects of regeneration, we are bound to 
 account their possessor a brother and to embrace him accord- 
 ingly. So also when we have reason to believe that we be- 
 hold those endeavors which necessarily result fram sincere 
 anxiety to become a Christian, it is our duty to regard him 
 who puts forth such endeavors, as sincere in his professions, 
 as an " obedient subject of divine grace," and to extend to 
 him all the facilities at our disposal and encourage him in his 
 sincere intentions. 
 
 From all these remarks we accordingly conclude, that a 
 credible profession of Christianity, in relation to the one class of 
 individuals, and a credible prof ession of sincere anxiety to become 
 a Christian, in reference to the other, is all that we have a right 
 to require from candidates for confirmation. We may be de- 
 ceived ; our utmost caution may be, and often has been, inef- 
 fectual to prevent hypocrites and other unworthy individuals 
 from entering into the church ; — we are not omniscient. But 
 we have no right to suspect sincerity, to refuse privileges, or 
 to inflict censure, where we can put our finger upon nothing 
 repugnant to the love of Ged and the fruits of faith, or to the 
 diligent efforts of upright desire. 
 
 We have great pleasure in assuring our readers that the con- 
 clusion at which we have now arrived, accords very nearly 
 with the result of a discussion on the " Visible Church," by 
 one of the ablest theological writers of our country ; we allude 
 to the late distinguished Dr, Mason, of New York. He sums 
 up his ideas on this point, in the following language : — " A 
 profession, then, of faith in Christ, and of obedience to him, not 
 discredited by other traits of character, entitles an adult to the 
 privileges of his church.''''^ 
 
 No. III. 
 CONFIRMATION. 
 
 CONTINUED. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO CONFIRMATION ANSWERED, AND TESTIMONY 
 IN ITS FAVOR. 
 
 Many objections have been urged against confirmation, but 
 for the most part they proceed from a want of acquaintance 
 
 'See Christ. Mag. v. i. p. 22. 
 
348 APPENDIX. 
 
 with its nature and advantages, from its occasional abuse and 
 from sectarian prejudices. They mostly need little more than 
 a simple statement, to expose their fallacy. We shall there- 
 fore dispose of them in a very sumary manner. 
 It is objected — 
 
 1. That confirmation consists principaUij in committing the 
 catechism to rnemory, and in beinir pronounced viorthy to partake 
 of the Lord'^s supper. From what has been said, it is abundantly 
 evident that tliis is altogether an unfounded assertion, without 
 even the shadow of truth to extenuate the enormity of its tur- 
 pitude. 
 
 2. That it is an assumption of nev) and burdensome duties. 
 This objection evinces a total misajiprehension of the rite, and 
 involves gross ignorance of the general relation which we sus- 
 tain to God. Whether we are confirmed or not, we are 'all 
 solemnly bound to repent and be converted and live wholly 
 unto God, and confirmation contemplates no more than this, 
 and therefore imposes no obligations that were not previously 
 upon us. 
 
 3. That it is the means of introducing people into the chwrch 
 at too early an age. — 7'his objection lies not against the rite 
 itself, but against its application. Under the Old Testament 
 dispensation tbe custom was, to receive candidates into church- 
 membership at the age of twelve and thirteen ; in latter days 
 our Presbyterian and Methodist brethren have frequently ad- 
 mitted thern at an earlier period. The great majority of those 
 who receive confirmation in the Lutheran church in this coun- 
 try, are from fiftf;en to twenty years of age ; too many of them 
 alas, defer it to a later period. Are those who are old enough 
 deliberately and voluntarily to engage in the service of sin and 
 Satan, and to prepare themselves to lie down in " everlasting 
 burnings," too young to covenant with God, and dedicate 
 themselves to his service ? We never confirm them at an age 
 earlier than this. 
 
 4. That it in a mere external ceremony submitted to liy com- 
 pukion, or as a matter of course. This is an argument against 
 its abuse, and may be employed with equal force against bap- 
 tism, against a puhlic profession of religion as it is sometimes 
 practised in sister churches, against every religious ordinance 
 and indeed against religion in general. But the abuse of a 
 religious ritf; does not abolish its proper use. 
 
 5. That it is a scheme for making proselytes. If the 
 " scheme" succeeds well in making proselytes to Christ the 
 objection is one of the highest commendations, and we would 
 on this ground alone warmly recommend it to others. But 
 our " proselytes" are generally the lambs of our own flocks, 
 but if we can also gather in those who are "wandering on the 
 
APPENDIX. 349 
 
 dark mountains of sin," every true Christian vrill bid us 
 »• God sperd." But for one church to charge another with 
 eudeavorinir to make proselytes, in litis a^e of unparalleled 
 seotarisin, is venturinsr on lUiicatc grrouud. It rather behooves 
 all to lay their hands upon their mouths, and their moudis into 
 the dust, and plead guilt i/.' 
 
 t>. That it is a remnant (f popery. Tlvis is an unfortunate 
 objection ; for if contirmation \\"as not practised by the apos- 
 tles, it certainly was in use in the sccoiui century. Every one 
 acquainted with church history, knows this. But popery was 
 not introduced until the beginniiiir of the seventh century. Is 
 it a relic of popery because in the tit"teenth century. Pope Eu- 
 genius erected it into a sacrament ? then matrimoity and minis- 
 terial onlinatiou are also nnnnants of popery : for both are 
 reo;arded as sacraments in that corrupt church. Then Calvin 
 also countenanced popery, for he \\-as a warm advoi-ate of the 
 rite of contirmation. 
 
 7. That persons conjirmed, frequetUltf violate thtir promises in 
 after life. So do those who make a profession of religion in 
 any other mode ; shall all relioious profession therefore for- 
 ever cease ? ^lany who enter into the matrimoitial covenant, 
 violate ihtjir eng-aoements in subsequent life, must that holv 
 and divinely instituted sutte therefore be abolished. But the 
 objection is too frivolous to deserve notice. 
 
 8. That it was not ap^hu'i}teti bi/ Christ nor practised by the 
 apostks. Neither were Sunday schools, tract societies, 6ible 
 and temperance societies, &c.; nor do we read that thev r*^ 
 commended special days of thanksoivin<j, and of humiliation 
 and prayer. S'eiiher the ••Westminster Confession," so much 
 revered by one branch of Christ's chua^h: nor tlte •• Book of 
 Common Prayer," so warmly connnendedby another; nor the 
 '• Book of Discipline," so highly esttxnnevl by a thinl. was ap- 
 pointed by Christ or observed in all their derailed minutia' by the 
 apostles. Tliert" are many practices in the churv^h of God at pre- 
 sent, which are in themselves excellent, and worthy of all pnuse. 
 but yet cannot claim the authority of specilic divine appoint- 
 m«nt or of apostolic ex-ample. The objtvtion acconlinirlv 
 proves too much, and therefou^ entindv tails. Whether con- 
 firmation was practised by the apostles or not, is <j mot>ted 
 point; many good and wise men of dirteriMit denominations, 
 especially in the church of England, think it w;\s.' But in 
 tl\e Lutheran chuudi the custom rt^sts upon a ditlerent basis ; 
 we value it highly and adhere to it with divided pnnVrtMtce, 
 on tlte ground of utiiiti/. If candidates are suitably prepartxi 
 
 'Wo would here take occasion toobsojve that the views and prac- 
 tice of the Gornum Refonneil church on tliis subject, >-erv much or 
 eutirely resemble Uioso of tlie Lutherans. 
 
 30 
 
3'50 APPENDIX. 
 
 personally to renew the covenant of grace and enter into full 
 communion, we can think of nothing more appropriate as a 
 mode of receiving them, than the rite of confirmation. It is so 
 simple and at the same time so solemn, so significant and 
 affecting, that it cannot fail to impress both the new members 
 and the whole congregation with a deep sense of God's infinite 
 mercy and their own obligations to love and serve him. 
 
 9. That it is indirectly elevated above the rank of a sacrament i 
 hishops perform conjirmaiion, while baptism and the eucharist are 
 administered by the inferior clergy. This indeed strikes us as 
 an inconsistency, but the objection applies not to the Lutheran 
 church. We have no " inferior clergy" in point of grade or 
 privilege. We are all bishops in our own churches, belon^ng 
 io the same order and enjoying the same rights ; the principal 
 differences existing among us, are those which arise from in- 
 herent personal advantages, such as superior talents, learning, 
 piety, usefulness, &c. This difficulty then does not attach to 
 us, and must be settled with " diocesan episcopacy." 
 
 10. That it is superfluous, inasmuch as the Lord''s supper 
 answers every purpose contemplated by confirmation, and is liable 
 to no exception. Among all the objections urged and dwelt 
 upon with so much emphasis by Dr. Miller, of Princeton, 
 this is the only one that can apply to the Lutheran church. 
 In reply, we ask, if we have in the Lord's supper just such a 
 solemnity as we need for the end in question, why have our 
 brethren of the Presbyterian church introduced a ceremony of 
 their own, whereby a profession of religion is made i Do 
 they not require candidates for adult-membership to appear 
 before their "church-session," and enter into certain engage- 
 ments, preparatory to receiving the holy supper? — do they 
 not also in some churches, call forth candidates in the presence 
 of the whole congregation, and exact certain promises from 
 them, as pre-iequisite to their admission to full communion? 
 now what is this else but a specific " transaction or solemnity 
 by which young people who have been baptized in infancy, 
 may be called to recognize their religious obligations, and, as 
 it were, take upon themselves the profession and the vows 
 made on their behalf in baptism]"— in a word, what is it but 
 another mode of confirmation, with the exception that it is not 
 accompanied by the laying on of hands and all those solemn 
 and affecting circumstances, nor preceded by that protracted 
 and highly beneficial course of religious instruction, which 
 characterize and give so much interest and value to the usage 
 observed among Lutherans ] If accordingly, the Lord's sup- 
 per renders confirmation needless and useless in the Lutheran 
 church, why does it not supersede certain forms or usages, 
 preliminary to the celebration of the supper among Presbyte- 
 rians ? It would seem therefore that a special solemnity as a 
 
 ^ Infant Baptism, p. 117. 
 
APPENDIX. 351 
 
 mode of admission to the Lord's supper, is necessary ; the 
 want of it is sensibly felt and provided for in most churches, 
 and the solemnity which commends itself most strongly to the 
 understanding and hearts of Lutherans, is the very rite that 
 we now advocate. 
 
 Moreover, with all deference for the learning of our venera- 
 ble and justly venerated opponent, we would ask, whether 
 there is not a difference between admission to church-privileges 
 and the enjoyment of them 1 The person who is to be con- 
 firmed is in a course of reception into full communion, but he 
 who partakes of the Lord's supper is already in the possession 
 of that blessing. Confirmation designates transition from 
 infant to adult membership, as als9 does the making of a pro- 
 fession of religion among our Presbyterian brethren ; but sac- 
 ramental communion publishes the completion of that transi- 
 tion, and is to be regarded rather as one of the privileges of 
 the new relation for which application is made, than as the 
 mode of conferring that relation. If we are mistaken, why do 
 not our dissenting brethren at once admit applicants to the 
 Lord's supper, without any intermediate form whatever ] — 
 While they then in theory deny the propriety of this rite, does 
 not their own procedure seem to indicate that in practice they 
 feel its necessity, and have therefore adopted a substitute 1 
 
 But there is another reason why we are compelled to oppose 
 the doctor's view. The hold which this ancient custom has 
 upon our members, enables us to bring within our reach and 
 under the influence of our instructions, a class of youth whose 
 attention we could not otherwise so fully procure. We thus 
 have opportunities to adapt our religious teaching to the ca- 
 pacities and wants of the young and inexperienced which we 
 could not do in the pulpit. We can create and keep alive 
 attention by the questions we propound, and bring our pupils 
 into immediate contact with saving knowledge, and oblige 
 them to feel that they alone are now the persoiis who are concerned. 
 These opportunities are such as every faithful minister of 
 Christ will rejoice to find, and will conscientiously improve ; 
 and wo that minister of the church Avho, possessing them, 
 does not make the most of them? If we relinquish the cus- 
 tom of confirmation, it will in all probability be an abolition of 
 the annual catechizing of youth, and we should thus deprive 
 ourselves of one of the most effective and successful instru- 
 mentalities which God Almighty has placed in our hands, and 
 that too in reference to a class of individuals who have attained 
 to an age, which is peculiarly interesting, and renders special 
 attention particularly necessary.' 
 
 'See a very able and lucid article on confirmation, by the Rev. 
 Dr. Mayer, of the Ger. Ref. church, which appeared in the paper 
 of that church (if we mistake not) in the year 1832. 
 
352 APPENDIX. 
 
 The testimony of the Rev. Professors Robinson and Hodge 
 on this subject, shall conclude this article : 
 
 " It is moreover not to be denied, that this system of in- 
 struction, in the hands of a faithful pastor affords one of the 
 most powerful means that can be devised of operating upon 
 the youthful mind, and forming it, under God, to habits, and 
 feelings, and principles of virtue and religion. The usual 
 time for confirmation is about the age of puberty, or from the 
 thirteenth to the sixteenth year;^ and custom has ordained that 
 every one shall take upon himself the solemn obligations im- 
 posed by this rite. The youthful mind is at this period in its 
 most susceptible state, and most open to conviction, and to the 
 influence of the thrilling motives and tender remonstrances, 
 which a good shepherd knows how to urge in behalf of Him 
 who was ' meek and lowly of heart.' He meets his youthful 
 flock frequently, and has the opportunity, if he does his duty, 
 of becoming thoroughly acquainted with their different charac- 
 ters and dispositions; so that it is his fault alone, if he be not 
 able to apply to each the instructions and exhortations which 
 the nature of the case requires. In its present shape, this sys- 
 tem owes its birth to the pious Spener; and through this insti- 
 tution that godly man still exerts an amount of influence that is 
 incalculable : Have not the churches of our own land reason to 
 blush, when they look upon what is thus done in other lands 
 for the religious education of the young?" — Prof. Robinson. 
 
 "In the Lutheran church, you probably know, it is custom- 
 ary that boys at the age of fourteen, and girls at fifteen, should 
 be confirmed ; that is, be called upon to assume their baptismal 
 vows, and solemnly recognize themselves as members of the 
 church. That there are serious evils attending this usage, is 
 very obvious, but that much good is effected by the pastoral 
 attention to the young, which it occasions, cannot be denied. 
 The candidates for confirmation, each year, are formed into a 
 class or classes, to which it is the pastor's duty to devote sev- 
 eral hours in every week, instructing them in the principles of 
 the gospel and of their own particular church. This course of 
 instruction continues through the year ; and as every child 
 must be confirmed, the whole mass of the people, rich and 
 poor, from the king's son to the children of the peasant, are 
 regularly indoctrinated in the Christian system. The degree 
 of fidelity with which this duty is performed, depends on the 
 character of the pastor; but it may be remarked that even the 
 rationalists, in general, retain the fuse of Luther's cate- 
 chism and other evangelical formulas in the instruction of the 
 young. I have witnessed few scenes more impressive than 
 the induction of one of these little flocks of the lambs of 
 
 'In the United States the usual time is from the fourteenth to the 
 twentieth year. 
 
APPENDIX. 353 
 
 Christ, into his sacred fold. On the day appointed for this 
 service they came to the church, with their pastor at their head. 
 Their entrance was greeted with a burst of cheerful music, in 
 which all hearts and voices joined. Arranged before the 
 pulpit, the pastor proceeded to explain to them the situation in 
 which they stood. Consecrated to God in baptism, they had 
 been given to the church by their parents ; but now having 
 attained an age at which they were capable of acting for them- 
 selves, having been instructed in the doctrines and require- 
 ments of the Christian religion, and in the faith and discipline 
 of their own church ; they were to decide whether they would 
 remain in that church, receive its doctrines, and submit to its 
 watchful care. For the satisfaction of those present, their 
 pastor examined them on the history and doctrines of the Bible, 
 received their profession of faith, and solemn assent to be re- 
 garded as under the guardianship of the church. They knelt 
 before him, the name and the blessing of God was invoked 
 upon them, and they arose in a new relation to the household 
 of faith."— Pro/. Hodge. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 BAPTISMAL REGENERATION.! 
 
 " I. The doctrine referred to, as held by some Protestants, 
 in its most objectionable form, appears to be this : — that the 
 spiritual change which the Scriptures designate by the term re- 
 generatiun, is always attendant upon and effected by, the rite 
 of baptism when duly administered ; that on the one hand, 
 every person, infant or adult, who has been baptized by an 
 authorized minister, is a regenerated person; and that, on the 
 other, every person who has not been baptized, however deep 
 or mature his penitence and faith, is still unregenerate. In 
 short, the pssition is, that the inward grace of regeneration 
 always accompanies the outward sign of baptism ; that they 
 are inseparable; that the one cannot exist without the other; 
 that he who has been thus regenerated, if he die without fall- 
 ing from grace, is certainly saved ; that baptism is essential to 
 salvation; and that to call by the name of regeneration any 
 moral change, from the love of sin to the love of holiness, 
 which takes place either before or after baptism, is unscriptural 
 and absurd. This, as I understand tliem, is the doctrine 
 maintained by Bishop Tomline, Bishop Marsh, Bishop Mant, 
 and a number of other writers, of equal conspicuity, in the 
 church of England, and by not a few divines of the Protestant 
 Episcopal church in our own country. 
 
 'This essay, as well as the succeeding one, is abbreviated and some- 
 what altered from " Additional Notes" by Dr. Miller. See liis 
 Infant Baptism, p. 102, sqq. 
 30* 
 
S54 APPENDIX. 
 
 "This doctrine, we apprehend, is contrary to Scripture; con- 
 trary to experience; contrary to the declared opinion of the 
 most wise, pious, and venerated divines ; and adapted to generate 
 the most dangerous errors with regard to Christian cliaracter, 
 and the gospel plan of salvation. 
 
 "1. It is contrary to Scripture. Without regeneration, the 
 Scriptures declare, it is impossible to enter into the kingdom 
 of heaven. But the penitent malefactor on the cross undoubt- 
 edly entered into the kingdom of heaven, if we are to credit 
 our Lord's express declaration. Yet this penitent, believing 
 malefactor was never baptized, therefore he was regenerated 
 without baptism ; and of course, regeneration and baptism are 
 not inseparably connected. Again, Simon Magus received the 
 outward and visible ordinance of baptism, with unquestionable 
 regularity, by an authorized administrator ; yet who will ven- 
 ture to say, that he received the 'inward and invisible grace' 
 signified and represented in that ordinance'? He was evidently 
 from the beginning a hypocrite, and remained, after baptism, 
 as before, ' in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.' 
 Therefore tlie outward and sensible sign, and the inward and 
 invisible grace are not in all cases, or necessarily, connected. 
 Again : it is evident that the Apostle Paul, Lydia, the Ethio- 
 pian eunuch, the Philippian jailor, &c. 'believed with the 
 heart,' and were, consequently, brought into a state of accept- 
 ance with God before they were baptized. But we are told 
 (John i. 12, 13) that as many as believe have been 'born 
 of God,' and made the 'sons of God.' Of course regenera- 
 tion mai/ take place in the case of adults, ous;kt to take place? 
 and in these cases, did take place, before baptism ; and, conse- 
 quently, is not the same thing with baptism, or inseparably con- 
 nected with that rite. Once more; we are assured in Scrip- 
 ture, that ' he who is born of God, or regenerated, doth not 
 commit sin (that is deliberately or habitually), for his seed re- 
 maineth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God ;' 
 and farther, that every one that loveth is ' born of God' and 
 'knoweth God;' and that 'whosoever believeth that Jesus is 
 the Christ, is born of God.' But can it be said that this char- 
 acter belongs to all who are baptized ] Or, that none who 
 are unbaptized manifest that they possess it. Surely no one 
 in his senses will venture to make the assertion. Therefore a 
 man may be 'born of God' before he is baptized, and, conse- 
 quently, the administration of the outward ordinance, and that 
 work of the Holy Spirit, called in the word of God regenera- 
 tion, are not always connected. 
 
 " 2. The doctrine before us is as contrary to experience as it 
 is to Scripture. 'It is asserted,' says an eminent divine of the 
 church of England, now living — ' It is asserted, that the spirit- 
 ual change of heart called regeneration invariably takes place 
 
APPENDIX. 355 
 
 in the precise article of baptism. If this assertion be well 
 founded, the spiritual change in question will invariably take 
 place in every adult at the identical moment when he is bap- 
 tized ; that is to say, at the very instant when the hand of the 
 priest brings his body in contact with the baptismal water; at 
 that precise instant his understanding begins to be illumina- 
 ted, his will to be reformed, and his affections to be purified. 
 Hitherto he has walked in darkness ; but now, to use the scrip- 
 tural phrase, he has passed from darkness to light. Hitherto 
 he has been wrapped in a death-like sleep of trespasses and 
 sins; but now he awakes, and rises from the dead, Christ him- 
 self giving him life. Hitherto he has been a chaos of vice, 
 and ignorance, and spiritual confusion ; the natural man re- 
 ceiving not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are fool- 
 ishness unto him : but now he is created after God in right- 
 ousness and true holiness ; being in Christ he is a 'new crea- 
 ture;' having become spiritual, the things of the Spirit of God 
 are no longer foolishness to him; he knows them because they 
 are spiritually discerned. Such are the emphatic terms in 
 which regeneration is described by the inspired writers. What 
 we have to do, therefore, we apprehend, is forthwith to inquire, 
 whether every baptized adult, without a single exception, is 
 invariabl}'' found to declare, that in the precise article of bap- 
 tism, his soul experienced a change analogous to that which is 
 so unequivocally set forth in the above mentioned texts of 
 Scripture."' We need not dwell long on the inquiry. The 
 fact is notoriously not so. Does experience evince, that every 
 subject of baptism, who has reached an age capable of mani- 
 festing the Christian character, does, at the moment of receiving 
 the baptismal water, show that he is the subject of that regen- 
 erating power of the Holy Spirit, bj' which ' old things are 
 passed away, and all things become new in the Lord V No one 
 who has a particle of intelligence or candor can imagine that 
 any such fact exists ; but if it do not, then the doctrine under 
 consideration falls of course. 
 
 " 3. The doctrine of baptismal regeneration is contrary to 
 the declared opinion of the most pious, judicious, and venera- 
 ble Protestant divines, including those of the very highest au- 
 thority in the church of England. In support of this asser- 
 tion, the most explicit quotations might be presented from the 
 writings of those distinguished martyrs and prelates, Cran- 
 mer, Latimer, Ridley, and Hooper; and after them from the 
 writings of the eminent bishops, Jewell, Davenant, Hall, 
 Usher, Reynolds, Leigh ton, Hopkins, Tillotson, Beveridge, 
 Burnet, Seeker, and a host of other divines of the English 
 church, of whose elevated character it would be little°less 
 than an insult to any intelligent reader to attempt to offer testi- 
 
 ^Faber''s Sermons, Vol. i. p. 145, 146. 
 
356 APPENDIX. 
 
 mony. All these men declare in the most solemn manner, 
 against the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, in the sense 
 which we are now considering. Indeed, we cannot call to 
 mind a single writer of that church, from the time of Arch- 
 bishop Cranmer to the present hour, who had the least claim 
 to the character of an evangelical man, who did not repudiate 
 the doctrine which we are now opposing ; and not a few of 
 them denounce it as popish, and adapted to subvert the whole 
 system of vital and spiritual religion. 
 
 "4. The last argument which we shall urge against the 
 doctrine of baptismal regeneration, is, that it is adapted to 
 generate the most fatal errors with regard to the gospel plan 
 of salvation. 
 
 " So far as this doctrine is believed, its native tendency is, 
 to beget a superstitious and unwarranted reliance on an exter- 
 nal ordinance ; to lower our estimate of that inward spiritual 
 sanctification which constitutes the essence of the Christian 
 character; in fact, to supersede the necessity of that spiritual 
 change of heart, of which the Scriptures speak so much, and 
 for which the most holy and eminent servants of Christ have, 
 in all ages, contended. The truth is, the doctrine now under 
 consideration is the very same in substance, with the doctrine 
 of the opus operatum of the Papists, which all evangelical Pro- 
 testants have been opposing for more than three hundred years, 
 as a mischievous delusion. Accordingly, the popish charac- 
 ter and fatal tendency of this error have been unreservedly ac- 
 knowledged by many bishops, and other pious divines of the 
 church of England, as well as by many of the same denomi- 
 nation in this country. 
 
 " Further ; if regeneration, which is the commencement of 
 holiness in the soul, is always communicated in baptism, then 
 it follows, as indeed, those who entertain this doctrine dis- 
 tinctly avow, — that baptism invariably places its subject in a 
 state of salvation ; so that every baptized person who dies im- 
 mediately after the administration of this sacrament, is infalli- 
 bly sure of entering the kingdom of heaven. If this doctrine 
 were fully believed, would not every thinking, anxious parent 
 refrain from having his child baptized in infancy, and reserve 
 the ordinance for an hour of extremitj^ such as the approach 
 of death, that it might serve as an unfailing passport to glory? 
 Would it not be wise in every adult who may be brought to a 
 knowledge of the Saviour, from paganism, or from the world, 
 to put off his baptism to the last hour of his life, that he might 
 be sure of departing in safety 1 This is well known to have 
 been one of the actual corruptions of the fourth century, grow- 
 ing out of the very error which we are now opposing. 'It 
 was the custom of many,' says Dr. Mosheim, ' in that century, 
 to put off their baptism till the last hour ; that thus immedi- 
 ately after receiving by this rite the remission of their sins, 
 
APPENDIX. 357 
 
 they might ascend pure and spotless to the mansions of lite 
 and immortality.' This is no far-fetched or strange conceit. 
 It is the native fruit of the doctrine before us. Nay, if we 
 suppose this pernicious theory to take full possession of the 
 mind, would it not be natural that a tender parent should anx- 
 iously desire his child to die immediately after baptism; or 
 •even, in a desperate case, to compass its death, as infallibly for 
 its eternal benefit ? And, on the same principle, might we not 
 pray for the death of every adult, immediately after he had re- 
 ceived baptism, believing that then 'to die would certainly be 
 gainl' In fine, we see not, if the doctrine be true, that a re- 
 generating and saving efficacy attends every regular baptism 
 — we see not how we can avoid the conclusion, that every 
 pagan, whether child or adult, that can be seized by force, and 
 however thoughtless, reluctant or profane, made to submit to 
 the rite of baptism, is thereby infallibly made 'a child of God, 
 and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven]' 
 
 "These consequences, which appear to me demonstrably to 
 flow from the theory in question, afford sufficieni evidence that 
 it is an unscriptural and pernicious error, even if na other 
 means of refutation could be found. 
 
 "It is not forgotten that language which seems, at first 
 view, to countenance the doctrine which we are opposing, is 
 found in some of the early fathers. Some of them employ 
 terms which would imply, if interpreted literally, that baptism 
 and regeneration were the same thing. But the reason of this 
 is obvious. The Jews were accustomed to call the converts to 
 their religion from the gentiles little children, and their intro- 
 duction into the Jewish church, a netu birth, because they were 
 brought, as it were, into a neiv moral world. Accordingly, cir- 
 cumcision is repeatedly called in »Scripture ' the covenant,'' be- 
 cause it was the sign of the covenant. Afterwards, when bap- 
 tism, as a Christian ordinance, became identified with the re- 
 ception of the gospel, the early writers and preachers began 
 to call this ordinance regeneration, and sometimes illumination, 
 because every adult who was baptized, professed to be born of 
 God, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, By a common figure of 
 speech, they called the sign by the name of the thing signified. 
 In the truly primitive times this language was harmless, and 
 well understood ; but as superstition increased, it gradually 
 led to mischievous error, and became the parent of complicated 
 and deplorable delusions. 
 
 "II. But there is another view of the doctrine of baptismal 
 regeneration, which is sometimes taken, and which, though 
 less pernicious than that which has been examined, is still, I 
 apprehend, fitted to mislead, and of course, to do essential 
 mischief; It is this : That baptism is that rite which marks 
 and ratifies the introduction of its subject into the visible king- 
 
358 APPENDIX. 
 
 dom of Christ; that in this ordinance the baptized person is 
 brought into a new state or relation to Christ, and his sacred 
 family; and that this new state or relation is designated in 
 the Scripture by the term regeneration, being intended to ex- 
 press an ecclesiastical birth, that is, being " born" into the vis- 
 ible kingdom of the Redeemer. Those who entertain this 
 opinion do not deny, that there is a great moral change, wrought 
 by the Spirit of God, which must pass upon every one, before 
 he can be in a state of salvation. This they call conversion, 
 renovation, &c. ; but they tell us that the term ^'■regeneration''^ 
 ought not to be applied to this spiritual change ; that it ought 
 to be confined to that change of stale and of relation to the visi- 
 ble kingdom of Christ which is constituted by baptism ; so that 
 a person, according to them, may be regenerated, that is, regu- 
 larly introduced into the visible church, without being really 
 born of the Spirit. This theory, though by no means so fatal 
 in its tendency as the preceding, still appears to me liable to 
 the following serious objections. 
 
 "1. It makes an unauthorized use of an important theologi- 
 cal term. It is vain to say, that, after giving fair notice of the 
 sense in which we use a term, no misapprehension or harm can 
 result from the constant use of it in that sense. The plea is 
 insufficient. If the s^nse in question be an unusual and es- 
 pecially an unscriptural one, no one can estimate the mischief 
 which may result from the use of it in that sense. Names are 
 so closely connected with things, that it is of the utmost im- 
 portance to preserve the nomenclature of theology from per- 
 version and abuse. If the sense of the word "regeneration" 
 which is embraced in this theory, were now by common con- 
 sent admitted, it would give an entirely new aspect to all those 
 passages of Scripture in which either regeneration or baptism 
 is mentioned, making some of them unmeaning, and others 
 ridiculous ; and render unintelligible, and in a great measure 
 useless, if not delusive, nine-tenths of the best works on the 
 subject of practical religion that have ever been written. 
 
 "2. But there is a more serious objection. If men be told 
 that every one who is baptized, is thereby regenerated — 
 "born of God" — 'born of the Spirit," — made a "new crea- 
 ture in Christ," — will not the mass of mankind, in spite of 
 every precaution and explanation that can be employed, be 
 likely to mistake on a fundamental point ; to imagine that the 
 disease of our nature is trivial, and that a trivial remedy for it 
 will answer ; to lay more stress than they ought upon an ex- 
 ternal rite ; and to make a much lower estimate than they 
 ought of the nature and necessity of that holiness without 
 which no man shall see the Lord ] 
 
 "But it maybe asked, is there any beneficial influence, 
 physical or moral, necessarily and in all cases, connected with the 
 
APPENDIX. 359 
 
 due administration of this sacrament 1 I answer, none at all. 
 The washing with water in this ordinance is an e//i6/eniand <\.sign 
 of precious benefits ; it holds forth certain great truths, which 
 are the glory of the Christian covenant, and the joy of the 
 Christian's heart; it is a seal affixed by God to his covenant 
 with his people, Avhereby he certifies his purposes of grace, 
 and pledges his blessing to all who receive it with a living 
 faith ; nay, it is the seal of valuable outward privileges, even 
 to those who are not then, or at any other time, ' born of the 
 Spirit;' as a solemn rite appointed by Christ, it is adapted to 
 make a solemn impression on the serious mind ; but when it 
 is administered to the persons, or the offspring of those Avho 
 are entirely destitute of faith, there is no pledge or certainty 
 that it will be accompanied with any blessing. They receive 
 the ivater, but not the Spirit. They are engrafted into the 
 visible church, but not into the spi itual body of Christ, and 
 are after baptism, just as they were before, like Simon the 
 sorcerer, ' in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of 
 iniquity.'" 
 
 No. V. 
 
 THE WESTMINISTER ASSEMBLY RESPECTING BAPTISM. 
 
 " In opposing baptism as practised among us, our Baptist 
 brethren frequently refer to the Westminister Assembly of 
 divines, asserting that when the question was put in that As- 
 sembly, whether baptism should be performed by sprinkling 
 or immersion, it was carried in favor oi sprinkling, by a major- 
 ity of one only. This is wholly incorrect. When the com- 
 mittee who had been charged with preparing a ' Directory for 
 the worship of God,' brought in their report, they had spoken 
 of the mode of baptism thus: ^ It is lawful and sufficient to 
 sprinkle the child.'' To this Dr. Lightfoot, among others, ob- 
 jected; not because he doubted ofthe entire sufficiency of sprink- 
 ling ; for he decidedly preferred sprinkling to immersion ; but 
 because he thought there was an impropriety in pronouncing 
 that mode lawful only, when no one present had any doubts 
 of its being so, and when almost all preferred it. Others 
 seemed to think, that by saying nothing about dipping, that 
 mode was meant to be excluded, as not a lawful mode. This 
 they did not wish to pronounce. When, therefore, the clause, 
 as originally reported, was put to vote, there were twenty-five 
 votes in tavor of it, and twenty-four against it. After this 
 vote, a motion was made and carried, that it be recommitted. 
 
360 APPENDIX. 
 
 The next day, when the committee reported, and when some 
 of the members still seemed unwilling to exclude all mention 
 of dipping. Dr. Lightfoot remarked, that to say that pouring 
 or sprinkling was lau'fuJ, would be ' all one as saying, that 
 it was laivful ,to use bread and wine in the Lord's supper.' 
 He, therefore, moved that the clause in the ' Directory' re- 
 specting the mode of baptism, be expressed thus : 
 
 " ' Then the minister is to demand the name of the child, 
 which being told him, he is to say [calling the child by his 
 name] — 
 
 " ' 1 baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost: 
 
 " ' As he pronounceth these words, he is to baptize the child 
 with water, which, for the manner of doing it, is not only 
 lawful, but sufficient, and most expedient to be, hj pouring or 
 sprinkling of the water on the face of the child, without adding 
 any other ceremony.' This was carried. See Lightfoofs 
 Life, prefixed to the first volume of his Works, (folio edition), 
 p. 4 ; compared with Neale^s History of the Puritans, vol. ii. 
 p. 106, 107, compared with the Appendix, No. II. (quarto 
 edition), where the 'Directory,' as finally passed, is given at 
 full length. 
 
 "We do not learn, precisely, either from Lightfoot's biogra- 
 pher (who was no other than the indefatigable Strype), or 
 from Neale, by what vote the clause, as moved by Lightfoot, 
 was finally adopted ; but Neale expressly tells us, that ' the 
 Directory passed the Assembly with great unanimity.'' 
 
 " From this statement, it is evident, that the question which 
 was carried in the Assembly, by a majority of one, was not 
 whether affusion or sprinkling was a lawful mode of baptism ; 
 but whether all mention of dipping, as one of the lauful modes 
 should be omitted. This, in an early stage of the discussion, 
 was carried, by a majority of one in the affirmative. But it 
 would seem that the clause, as finally adopted, which certainly 
 was far more decisive in favor of sprinkling or affusion, was 
 passed " with great unanimity J'"' At any rate, nothing can be 
 more evident, than that the clause as it originally stood, being 
 carried by one vote only, and afterwards, when recommitted, 
 and so altered as to be much stronger in favor of sprinkling, 
 and then adopted without difficulty, the common statement of 
 this matter by our Baptist brethren is an entire misrepresenta- 
 tion." 
 
 THE END. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 PART FIRST 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 BAPTISM IN GENERAL. 
 
 Pasre 
 
 A definition of — is a sacrament, — means of grace, — sign and 
 seal of a covenant, — recognition of church-member- 
 ship, — illustrated by " Traveller's Society," — not strict- 
 ly initiatory, — true version of the words of the institu- 
 tion, — by whom and how to be administered, — private 
 baptism (noth-taufe) — why water was selected as an 
 emblem, — how to be applied, — baptizing inanimate 
 objects, — profession of religion, — required of adults 
 but not of infants, — should be sincere, — objection an- 
 swered, — corroborative evidence . . . 5 — 19 
 
 CHAPTER H. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF GOD. 
 
 Scriptural significations of this plirase, — never means a 
 house of worship, — different relations of a baptized 
 person to the church in its several senses, — illustration 
 drawn from ministerial ordination, — baptism is not 
 initiatory ...... 20 — 24 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 
 ARGUMENTS AND OBJECTIONS ON THE SUBJECT OF 
 INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 First Argument. — Christ has commanded it, which com- 
 mand is of universal application, — infant baptism pre- 
 vailed prior to the Christian era, — testimony of Mai- 
 31 
 
362 
 
 Page 
 
 monides in reference to adult proselyte-baptism, — Dr. 
 Gill's assertion, — evidence from Epictetus, — Calmet, 
 —Dr. Wall,— Stackhouse,— Witsius,— Dr. A. Clarke 
 and others, — Dr. Wood's argument, — infant proselyte- 
 baptism, — testimony of Maimonides, — Selden, Light- 
 foot, Dr. A. Clarke, Mr. Bootli, — infant church-mem- 
 bership, — existed mrder old dispensation, — never re- 
 voked ...... 25 — 32 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO PRECEDING ARGUMENT. 
 
 First Objection — The command of Christ does not ex- 
 pressly require the baptism of infants, — answer to this 
 
 objection, — Lightfoot .... 33 — 34 
 
 Second Ojection. — Children cannot be instructed and can- 
 not believe, therefore preposterous to baptize them, — 
 answer to this objection, — Dr. Mason's mode of treat- 
 ing it, — also Edwards' exposure of its fallacy . 34 — 44 
 
 Third Objection. — Teaching, repenting, believing, &c., 
 
 must always precede baptism ; answer to this objection 44 — 45 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Second Argument. — Baptism is the appointed token of 
 I church-membership. (1) Children were entitled to 
 membership in the church under the old dispensation, 
 and circinncision was the sign of it; (2) the church 
 under the Old and New Testament substantially the 
 .same, — Rev. Doct. Schmucker's (jun.) argument; 
 (3) children are members of the church under the new 
 dispensation by virtue of their birth from Christian pa- 
 rents, — Dr. Mason on this subject; — (4) baptism is the 
 appointed token, &c. — doctrine of substitution ex- 
 plained and vindicated, — Justin Martyr - - 46 — 56 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO PRECEDING ARGUMENT. 
 
 First Objection. — Baptism is a positive institution, and 
 nothing short of a rfhrci mid explicit command can jus- 
 tify its administration to infants, — answer to this ob- 
 jection _._-_. 57 — 5S 
 
 Second Objection. — If baptism was substituted for cir- 
 cumcision, how came it that both were in full force at 
 the same time, that Timothy received both, and that 
 both were practised among some of the Hebrew Cliris- 
 tians ? — answer to this objection - - . 68 — 62 
 
INDEX. 363 
 
 Page 
 
 Third Objection. — Tf baptism succeeded in the place of 
 circumcision, why is the former not as imiversal in the 
 Christian as the latter was in the Jewish church? — 
 answer to this objection .... 62 
 
 Fourth Objection. — If baptism has been substituted for cir- 
 cumcision, why is not the former limited to male infants 
 as the latter was 1 — answer to this objection . 62 — 64 
 
 Fifth Objection. — If infants are members of God's church 
 in virtue of their birth from Christian parents, why are 
 they not treated as members? — answer to this objec- 
 tion, — duty of the church towards children, — duty of 
 parents, — Dr. Miller of Princeton . . . 65 — 69 
 
 Sixth Objection. — If infants are bom members of the 
 church, what is to hinder them from coming to the 
 Lord's supper ? — answer to this objection, — illustrations 69 — 72 
 
 Seventh Objection. — If the children of Christian parents 
 are bom members of the church, what need have they 
 of baptism? — answer to this objection . . 72 — 73 
 
 Eighth Objection. — On the Pedol)aptist principle all un- 
 baptized children are excluded from the church, and 
 therefore lost, — answer to this objection, — what is 
 meant by being cut off from God's people? — the 
 Friends, commonly called Quakers . . . 73 — 75 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Third Argument. — There are numerous passages in the 
 Sacred Scriptures, which cannot be consistently ex- 
 plained without admitting the right of infants to baj}- 
 tism; Matt. xix. 13 — 15 explained, — Dr. Schmucker, 
 jun'r, — Robert Hall, — Acts ii. 38 — 39 explained, — 
 Edwards, — 1 Cor. vii. 14 explained, Dr. J. M. Mason 76 — 85 
 
 CHAPTER Vm. 
 
 Fourth Argument. — The'ancient practice of family-bap- 
 tism, which was continued in the apostolic age, affords 
 very strong presumptive evidence on this subject, — 
 Lydia's family, — testimony of Clemens Alexandrinus, 
 the jailor's flvmily, — that of Crispus and that of Ste- 
 phanas, and of a number of others, — no less than eleven 
 believing and no doubt baptized families, — the Greek 
 church, — criticism on omoa- and ow/a, — meaning of the 
 term family in Scripture,— editor of Calmet,— draft 
 of a house as usually constructed in ancient ages . 86 96 
 
364 INDEX. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO THE LAST ARGUMENT. 
 
 Page 
 
 First Objection. — In reference to the case of the jailor 
 and his family, — this objection answered, — C. Taylor, 
 — D. Isaac ...... 97— 9S 
 
 Second Objection. — In reference to Lydia's family, — this 
 objection answered, — the Syriac and Coptic versions, — 
 Rev. Mr. Sheer,— Dr. Miller,— Dr. Wardlaw . 98— lOS 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 Fifth Argument. — The uniform practice of the Chris- 
 tian church, from the earliest period down to the 
 present time, affords an unanswerable argument in 
 favor of infant baptism, — history of infant baptism, 
 Peter de Bruis, a Frenclunan, the first opponent of 
 infant baptism, lived in the twelfth century, — deriva- 
 tion of the word Anabaptist, — appeared first in Eng- 
 land 1640, — TertuUian, — Constantine the Great, 
 Waldenses, — Origen, — Cyprian, — Council of sixty- 
 six bishops at Carthage in the third century, — Fidus, 
 — Lord Chancellor King,— Chrysostom,— Augustine, 
 — Pelagius, — Wall's History, — tlie Waldenses, — Pe- 
 trobrussians ..... 104 — 120 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 OBJECTIONS TO THE LAST ARGUMENT. 
 
 First Objection. — Infant baptism is a relic of papacy, 
 so says Rev. Mr. Broaddus, — was engrafted on the 
 church at the close of the second century, according 
 to the Rev. Mr. Judson, — but took its rise in Africa, 
 according to other Baptist writers, — answer to this 
 objection,— TertuUian,— Mr. Benedict . . 121—123 
 
 Second Objection. — There is equally as good authority 
 for infant communion as for infant baptism, — answer 
 to this objection, — how and where infant communion 
 took its rise and was discontinued . . . 123 — 126 
 
 CHAPTER XH. 
 
 Sixth Argument. — The names applied in the New Tes- 
 tament to small children afford evidence of their 
 baptism,-r-the several appellations given to the early 
 Christians, such as holy persons, faithfub, neivly 
 
INDEX. 365 
 
 Page 
 planted, &c. — ancient application of these terms in- 
 discriminately to infants and adults, — as found in 
 ancient sepulchral inscriptions . . . 126 — 130 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 ADDITIONAL OBJECTIONS. 
 
 First. — Clirist was not baptized mitil he was thirty years 
 of age, — answer to this objection, — the natui'e and 
 design of tlie baptism administered to Christ, and of 
 Jolin's baptism as administered to others, — points of 
 difference between it and Christian baptism, — under 
 what law or ordinance Clirist was baptized, — Der be- 
 siegte Wiedertaeufer .... 131 — 135 
 
 Second. — Baptism being the seal of a covenant, it is 
 wrong to bind a child in a covenant without its Imow- 
 ledge or consent, — answer to tliis objection, — this ob- 
 jection lies against God, and not against Pedobaptists, 
 — is the offspring of infidelity, and at war with the 
 coimnon usages of life, — illustrations from the Bible, 
 — baptism does not involve new obligations, — an ex- 
 ample from the Scriptures of little children's being 
 bomid in covenant without their knowledge or con- 
 sent ...... 135— 13S 
 
 Third. — We cannot find in the whole history of the 
 New Testament, a single example of the baptism of 
 children of professing Clu-istians, — answer, — there is 
 no case on record of the baptism of adults born of 
 Christian parents, — how to be accounted for . 13S — 140 
 
 Fourth. — Baptism can be of no benefit to children ; what 
 good, says the Antipedobaptist, can it do an " uncon- 
 scious babe" to sprinkle a little water upon its head? 
 — answer, — circumcision .... 140 — 141 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 BENEFITS OF INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 First Benefit. — It is a sign of many interesting truths, 
 and a seal of numerous and inestimable blessings, — 
 what these truths and blessings were, — the latter 
 were, according to the original stipulations of the 
 covenant, both temporal and sqnrttual, — the want of 
 faith on the part of children forms no just ground of 
 objection ...... 143 — 147 
 
 31* 
 
366 INDEX. 
 
 Page 
 
 SEC0>fD Benefit. — It is a solemn dedication of our chil- 
 dren to God by an appropriate rite of his owa ap- 
 pointment, — the advantages arising from this dedi- 
 cation ..... 147 — 149 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Third Benefit. — It is a recognition and ratification of 
 the right of membership in the visible church, 
 which secures several inestimable benefits, viz. — 
 ( 1 ) the special instruction and supervision of the 
 church and its pastor, — (2) the exercise of church- 
 disciplme ...... 150 — 153 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 
 Fourth Benefit. — It secures to infants the immediate 
 and especial blessing of the Saviour, — Clu-ist's la)'ing 
 his hands on children, — the gift of the Holy Spirit, — 
 considerations favoring the idea of the comminiica- 
 tion of the ordinary influences of the Spirit at bap- 
 tism ...... 154—157 
 
 Fifth Benefit. — It renews the assurance to them that 
 God is not only their God, but also " the God of 
 their seed after them" . . . . • 157 
 
 PART THIRD. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Difference in opinion between Baptists and others, — di- 
 versity of sentiment among the Baptists themselves, 
 — proportion of submersionists exceedingly small, — 
 the Greek church, — Deylingius, — infant Baptism 
 and sprinkling usually go together, — ancient Clu-is- 
 tians baptized in a state of nudity, — Dr. Stuart, Cyril 
 of Jerusalem, — Robinson, — James Basnage, — Dr. 
 Wall ...... 158—163 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The mode of treating the subject proposed, — the sense 
 in wliich submersion and sprinkling with kindred 
 
INDEX. 367 
 
 Page 
 
 terms are used, — the literal terms used in the New 
 Testament in reference to baptism, — Battto, — the 
 meaning of this word, — ilhistrated by Rev. xix. 13; 
 Matt. xxvi. 23; Dan. iv. 33,— Dr. Jowett,— Mr. 
 Rich, — Taylor, — illustrated also by a reference to 
 profane authors, — Mr. Carson, — Dr. Gale, — Hippo- 
 crates, — Nearchus,— Mr. Edwards,— Dr. John Dick, 
 — Rev. John Graves, — Parkhurst . . 164 — 171 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The signification of Bairn^te, — words often depart from 
 their primitive ideas, — President Beecher, — illus- 
 trated by the English word spring, — the editor of 
 Calmet mentions more than eiglity examples in 
 which Bu.TTTi^-Tir implies less than submersion, — its 
 import illustrated by a reference to Mark vii. 4, — Dr. 
 Fisk and Dr. Clarke; John iii. 25-26 ; Hebrews vi. 
 2, — Pitts, — D'Ohsson, Mr. Oscanyan, — John ii. 6, 
 — Home, — 1 Cor. x. 1-2 .... 172 — 182 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 The argument derived from 1 Cor. x. 1-2 continued, — 
 the import of BciTm^ai proven by reference to profane 
 authors, — Origen, — Diodorus Siculus, — Josephus, — 
 tlie word itself affords no clue whereby we can de- 
 termine the mode of applying water in baptism, — 
 this illustrated by a reference to the English term 
 wash, — the copiousness of the Greek language, es- 
 pecially in words signifying entire immersion, but 
 none of them used in reference to baptism, — Rev. 
 Mr. Hibbard,— JsivTi/ov,— Rev. R. Watson . 183—193 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 The Greek Prepositions. — The several significations 
 
 of sii in connection with baptism . . . 194 — 198 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The meaning of it<r, — illustrated as used Mark i. 9 . 199 — 200 
 
 CHAPTER VH. 
 
 The consideration of the preposition no- continued, — Acts 
 viii. 38 ; Pliilip and the eunuch, — reasons why the 
 eunuch could not have been submersed . . 201 — 205 
 
368 INDEX. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Page 
 
 The mode practised liy John the Baptizer, — the Baptist 
 argument derived from the circumstances of his bap- 
 tism, — counter argument, — considerations proving 
 that he did not submerse .... 206 — 215 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 The consideration of John's baptism continued, — it would 
 liave been impossible for him to submerse all whom 
 he baptized, — the duration of his ministry and the 
 number he baptized, investigated . . • 216 — 221 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 The apostles' mode examined, — as illustrated in a nimi- 
 ber of cases, — Acts ii. 41, — not only improbable but 
 impossible that the three thousand converted under 
 Peter's preaching, could have been submersed . 222 — 229 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 
 The examination of the apostles' mode continued, — the 
 case of the eunuch, Acts viii. 38, — Dr. Cave's Apos- 
 tolici 230—232 
 
 CHAPTER Xn. 
 
 The foregoing subject continued, — the case of Lydia, 
 Acts xvi. 13, — of Cornelius, Acts x. 41 — 48, — Dr. 
 Wood on this case, — of Saul of Tarsus, Actsix. 18, 
 of the jailor, Acts xvi. 32 — 33, — of Paul baptizing 
 at Corinth, Acts xA'iii. 1 — 8, — and also at Ephesus, 
 Acts xix. 1—5 233—238 
 
 CHAPTER XIH 
 
 The figurative language of the New Testament in refer- 
 ence to baptism, — Rom. vi. 3 — 5, — eight objections 
 to the interpretation put on this passage by Baptists, 
 and the true exposition given, — Mr. Robinson's and 
 Rev. Mr. Judson's opinion, — Dr. Wardlaw's . 239-247 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 The same subject continued, — Col. ii. 12; 1 Cor. xv. 29, 
 
 —1 Cor. X. 1-2,-1 Pet. iii. 20—21 . . 248—251 
 
INDEX. 369 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 Page 
 
 The mode of baptism not of such essential importance 
 that the example would be binding on us ; could it 
 be conclusively shown that either mode constituted 
 the primitive practice? — proneness to attach undue 
 weigiit to mere forms, — this proneness severely re- 
 buked in the Old and New Testament, — no particu- 
 lar mode has been pointed out in the Bible to the 
 exclusion of every other mode . . . 252 — 256 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 Same subject continued, — analogy, — the passover, — Gro- 
 
 tius, — Henry, — the Lord's supper . . 257 — 262 
 
 CHAPTER XVn. 
 
 Same subject continued, — God equally approves of sin- 
 cere Christians, whether baptized by submersion or 
 sprinkling, — Dr. Wood, — the early Cliristians liable 
 to err, and to be influenced by their peculiar educa- 
 tion and habits, — the practice of the church inclined 
 to shape itself according to climate and habits of 
 people, — feet-washing .... 263 — 270 
 
 CHAPTER XVm. 
 
 The mode of baptism by affusion decidedly more scriptu- 
 ral, appropriate and edifying than that by submei^ 
 sion, — it falls in more harmoniously with the cir- 
 cumstances attending the several examples of baptism 
 recorded in the New Testament, — is the fittest em- 
 blem of tlie blessings intended to be represented by 
 baptism, — the baptism of the Spirit . . 271 — 276 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 Same subject continued, — the practice of baptizing by 
 affusion is adapted to the designed universality of the 
 Christian religion, — Christianity intended to extend 
 over the whole world, — submersion presents invinci- 
 ble obstacles, — hence the Baptists in Holland have 
 given up the practice of submersing, — Dr. Miller . 277 — 282 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 Same subject continued, — baptism by pouring is more 
 consistent with the simplicity and spirituality of the 
 gospel than plunging .... 283 — 284 
 
370 INDEX. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. Page 
 
 Same subject continued, — the practice of affusion not 
 calculated, like the doctrine of submersion, to give 
 rise to any thing that is indecorous or indecent, — 
 tlie submersion of females in public, — the baptism of 
 persons in a state of nakedness, — Cyprian, Cyril, 
 Athanasius and Chrysostom, — affusion accords bet- 
 ter with Peter's definition, 1 Pet. iii. 21, — no connec- 
 tion between the efficacy of baptism and the quantity 
 of water used, — affusion has no tendency to super- 
 stition and abuse, — ancient abuse of submersion, — 
 modern abuse, — a miserable impostor . . 285 — 293 
 
 CHAPTER XXH. 
 
 Same subject continued, — affusion does not interfere with 
 and destroy devotional feeling, — a revival of religion, 
 — the appearance of a Baptist brother, — effects there- 
 of . . . . . . . 294—297 
 
 CHAPTER XXm. 
 
 Same subject continued, — affusion leads not, like sub- 
 mersion, to glaring absurdities, — a theorem, — ax- 
 ioms, — corollaries, postulates . . . 298 — 303 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO BAPTISM BY AFFUSION. 
 
 First Objection. — Sprinkling is an insufficient mode of 
 baptism, — answer to this objection, — it proceeds from 
 a false assumption, — is contradicted by the coirunon 
 sense of mankind, — scriptural evidence . . 304 — 308 
 
 Second Objection. — There is no " cross" in sprinkling, 
 
 — errors in respect to bearing the cross of Christ . 308 — 310 
 
 Third Objection. — Luther was opposed to sprinkling 
 and disapproved of infant Imptism, — answer to this 
 objection, — extracts from Luther's works respecting 
 the baptism of infants, and the mode of administer- 
 ing the ordinance ..... 310 — 315 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 The spirit in which this work was written, — exhortations 
 to parents and others, — to young people who have 
 not yet personally made a profession of religion . 315 — 323 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 I. Why a name is given at baptism . . . 325 — 327 
 
 II. Sponsors at Baptism .... 328—332 
 
 III. Confirmation, — its nature and design . . 333 — 339 
 " The same,— benefits of it— qualifications of candidates 339 — 347 
 " The same — objections to it considered . . 347 — 353 
 
 IV. Baptismal Regeneration .... 353 — 359 
 
 V. Westminster Assembly .... 359—360 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 
 
 
 ^^ N^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD #3523PI Printed in US;