Bap 
 
 B6t 
 
/ 
 
 CL 
 
 1 
 
 f 
 
 .2 
 
 JC 
 
 Q. 
 
 
 4 
 
 -a 
 
 03 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 IE 
 
 
 
 CL 
 
 
 
 *S> fe" 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 £ 
 
 
 
 ^ s 
 
 c 
 
 
 1 
 
 <* o 
 
 bfl 
 
 
 . 
 
 & 8 
 
 "75 
 
 =3 
 
 
 
 
 E 
 
 
 .^ 
 
 ^ « 
 
 00 
 
 ^1 
 
 "*■* fk 
 
 . 
 
 ^ 
 
 *** 
 
 S 
 
 cq 
 
 o 
 
 >■, 
 
 si 
 
 
 ja 
 
 <i 
 
 •& 
 
 T3 
 
 ^ 
 
 % 
 
 C 
 
 £ 
 
 % 
 
 (/> 
 
 a> 
 
 CL 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 SC -S n 
 
 
 / 
 
 /d^/r 
 
 
 Ci\ 
 
 I 
 
 
TREATISE 
 
 CHRISTIAN BAPTISM, 
 
 IN FOUR PARTS; 
 
 RELATING TO THE MODE OF BAPTISM; TO THE SUBJECTS 
 TO THE IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES OF INFANT 
 
 baptism; and to close communion. 
 
 BY ENOCH POND, 
 
 Professor of Tlieology in the Theol. Sem., Bangor, Me. 
 
 BOSTON: 
 PEIRCE & PARKER, CORNHILL. 
 
 MDCCCXXXIII. 
 
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1S33, by 
 
 Peir'ce and Parkxr, 
 ia the Clerk's Office of the District Court of Massachusetts. 
 
1 
 
 < 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 Several years ago, the author of the following pages 
 published " A Treatise on the Mode and Subjects of 
 Baptism, in two Parts," in reply to a Sermon by Mr. 
 Judson, on the same subject. This Treatise was ex- 
 tensively circulated, and I am not aware that any an- 
 swer to it has appeared. It has been my intention, for 
 some time past, to revise this work ; throw out of it 
 every thing directly and personally controversial ; 
 strengthen the positions assumed in it by new facts 
 and arguments, such as have occurred in subsequent 
 reading and reflection ; extend the discussion to other 
 connected topics ; and put the whole into a shape to be 
 more permanently useful. To the accomplishment of 
 this design I have been frequently urged by respected 
 brethren, ministers and others ; but have not been able 
 to attend to it until now. 
 
 I shall be disappointed and grieved, if the tendency 
 of what I have here written shall be to excite feelings 
 of asperity and promote dissensions between Orthodox 
 Baptists and Pedobaptists. These denominations of 
 Christians, especially in New England, are united in 
 most points of doctrine and discipline, and are so near- 
 ly allied, in many ways, as to render alienation and 
 bitterness altogether inexcusable. As to the principles 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 and modes of church government, both are in general 
 Congregationalists ; and in their views of doctrine, and 
 manner of preaching, and in labors to promote the 
 kingdom of Christ, they harmonize almost as well as 
 the members of either denomination do among them- 
 selves. They have, in most respects, the same hopes, 
 and fears, and dangers, and interests, — while the sin- 
 gle point of disagreement \ajthe subject of Baptism — 
 a subject, to be sure, of very considerable importance, 
 but not, in the judgment of either party, essential to 
 salvation. Between brethren so situated, there obvi- 
 ously ought to be a good understanding, and as much 
 union and affection as possible ; and all methods should 
 be taken, riot to increase asperities, but to allay them ; 
 not to magnify, bat to diminish find remove remaining 
 differences of opinion, so far at least as they arc a hin- 
 drance to good fellowship, and to the mutual exercisi 
 of Christian love. 
 
 But in what manner shall these differences of opin- 
 ion be treated, so as to secure this important end? Can 
 they be burled in silence, shut out cf sight, and in this 
 way lose their interest, and be forgotten ? I have no 
 confidence that such a course of procedure will be 
 adopted, or that such a result can be realized : For, in 
 the first place, our Baptist brethren manifest no dispo- 
 sition to bury their peculiarities in silence ; and, sec- 
 ondly, the subject does not seem to be of a nature to be 
 disposed of in this way. It is one of daily concern and 
 practice, — which must necessarily lead to thought and 
 inquiry, — and these will lead to conversation and dis- 
 cussion. Discussion, then, there must be, in some 
 form ; and the only question to be determined is, as to 
 the form which it shall assume, and the manfler in 
 
PREFACE. T 
 
 which it shall be conducted. Of angry discussion — of 
 vapid and sarcastic declamation, carried on for the pur- 
 pose of gratifying a party and securing a triumph, 
 there has been enough, and more than enough, alrea- 
 dy. May such warfare come to a final end. But 
 much as has been written on the subject of baptism, I 
 see no reason to despair of the influence of discussion, 
 kindly, calmly, critically conducted, with a view to dis- 
 cover, and a disposition to receive, the truth. At least, 
 I see no other way in which the differences between- 
 Baptists and Pedobaptists are likely ever to be adjusted. 
 
 In respect to the manner in Which the discussion of 
 disputed points is conducted in the following pages, the 
 religious public will decide. That I have expressed 
 ray views, in general, strongly, and written like a man 
 in earnest, I acknowledge. I should have been unjust 
 to my subject, and to my own convictions, if I had 
 done otherwise. But, if I have, in any instance, mis- 
 represented my brethren who differ # from me, or treated 
 them unkindly, or their arguments unfairly, or in any 
 way given them needless pain ; I shall feel that I have 
 injured myself more than them, and shall be ready, on 
 conviction, to make all the reparation in my power. 
 
 The subject of the third part of the following Trea- 
 tise has been with me in years past, as I fear it has 
 been with not a few of my brethren, comparatively an 
 untrodden field. It certainly is a subject of great im- 
 portance, and one demanding increased and prayerful 
 attention. I have endeavored to examine it, uncom- 
 mitted to any theory or hypothesis, and with no object 
 in mind but merely to understand and explain the 
 Scriptures. The views I have expressed, I am satis- 
 fied, are not far from the truth. In regard to this part 
 
V1 PREFACE. 
 
 of the subject, however, I must throw myself on the 
 candor of my brethren, and shall be glad of any sug- 
 gestions which they may offer. 
 
 The subject of close communion I should not have 
 touched in this connexion, could I have been satisfied, 
 without doing it, to have laid down my pen. What- 
 ever may be the result in regard to other points of dif- 
 ference between Orthodox Baptists and Pedobaptists, I 
 do feel that it is high time that close communion was 
 done away. In this nineteenth century, and within 
 sight (as we hope) of the latter day glory, it does seem 
 that persons, who acknowledge each other as true be- 
 lievers and members of the church of Christ-who are 
 embarked in the same great cause and aiming at the 
 same results-who associate in many ways as minis- 
 . tore and private brethren-who agree in all the funda- 
 mentals of godliness, and differ only i n regard to one of 
 the rites of Christianity ; -it does indeed seem that 
 such persons ought to be able to commune together at 
 least occasionally, at the table of the Lord. I am sat 
 isfied that the course of events now in progress is 
 strongly tending to expose and remove close commun- 
 ion ; and that the practice cannot be much longer re- 
 tained without merited injury and disgrace. 
 
 The work, such as it is, I would in conclusion com- 
 mit to those into whose hands it may fall ; only claim- 
 ing for myself the credjt of upright intentions, while I 
 cheerfully leave the event with Him who is head over- 
 all things to His people. 
 Bangor, March 15, 1833. 
 
V 
 
 A TREATISE* &c. 
 
 r^. 
 
 PART I. 
 
 ON THE MODE OF CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. 
 
 Before any thing be offered on the mode of baptism, 
 with a view to reconcile differences between Baptists and 
 Pedobaptists, it is important that the point in debate 
 should be accurately stated and rightly understood. The 
 question between the two denominations is not, whether 
 immersion is valid baptism : This we admit. Nor is it, 
 whether this mode of administering baptism is •preferable 
 to any other : For we are willing that those in our church- 
 es who prefer immersion should be gratified. Nor is it, 
 whether immersion has been a frequent mode of I 
 in some past ages : For this we do not deny. — I do not 
 say that neither of these points is questionable ; but neith- 
 er of them is- die precise question in dispute. 
 
 The point at issue is, in few words, this : — Is immer- 
 sion essential to the ordinance ? Our Baptist breth- 
 ren contend that it is. They tell us that the idea of im- 
 mersion enters into the very " nature of baptism ; that tbe 
 terms baptism and immersion are equivalent and inter- 
 changeable."* " The meaning of the word (baptize) is 
 always the same, and it alioays signifies to dip. It never 
 has any other meaning."i All Baptists hold, that there 
 
 " Judson's Sermon, p. 14. t Carson and Cox on Baptism, pp. 13, 83. 
 2 
 
14 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 can be no baptism without immersion ; that this is essen" 
 tial to the ordinance. To this point, therefore, all their 
 reasonings ought to tend. Whatever they may offer to 
 show that immersion is a valid rode of baptism ; or even 
 the most proper mode; or that it was frequently practised 
 in ancient times, has no direct bearing on the controver- 
 sy, and no tendency to bring it to a close. Let them 
 prove, what we deny, that immersion is essential to bap- 
 tism — so essential that there can be no baptism without it, 
 and our differences on the subject are at an end. 
 
 And here, obviously, the burden of proof lies upon 
 them. Theirs is the laboring oar. It is not necessary 
 for us to urge one argument to prove the negative of the 
 proposition in debate; it is incumbent on them to prove 
 the affirmative. 
 
 I am willing, however, to waive any advantage which 
 might arise from acting merely on the defensive. There 
 should be no special pleading — no dispute for victory on 
 either side. After long and patient examination, I am 
 satisfied that immersion is not essential to baptism, and 
 shall proceed to offer reasons in support of this opinion. 
 
 1. The rite of immers'ion is not calculated for univer- 
 sal practice. It cannot be administered with piudence 
 and convenience, if indeed it can be administered at all, in 
 all situations and to all persons. Portions of the earth 
 have been discovered, and are inhabited, where collec- 
 tions of water sufficient for this mode of baptizing might 
 not once occur in travelling hundreds of miles. There 
 are other portions, where, amidst mountains of ice and 
 almost perpetual snow, immersions must be vf>ry inconve- 
 nient and imprudent, if not impracticable. Yet the re- 
 ligion of Christ will one day penetrate these arid, and 
 these frozen regions. Their inhabitants will be baptized 
 in thn name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Will 
 they be immersed 1 Were thousands to come forward 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 15 
 
 together, in either of the situations to which I have re- 
 ferred, (and such a season of ingathering has once been 
 witnessed under the gospel,) would they, could they be 
 immersed ? The thing speaks for itself.* 
 
 We may suppose another case of frequent occurrence. 
 A person in a declining state of health is brought to the 
 knowledge of the truth/ and wishes to obey his Lord's 
 commands. He wishes to be baptized in the name of 
 Christ, and to come to his table. But in his circumstan- 
 ces, to be immersed is perhaps impossible. He dares not 
 attempt it. He might not survive tlie administration. 
 Hence, on the ground of exclusive immersion, he is ef- 
 fectually debarred from the ordinances of the gospel. He 
 can never receive Christian baptism, or partake of the 
 memorials of his Saviour's death. Can it be, then, that 
 the scheme here controverted is according to the gospel? 
 Is it likely that the Lord Jesus, who designed that his re- 
 ligion should be universal, has appended to it and made 
 essential a rite, so ill fitted for universal practice ? 
 
 2. The signification of water baptism shows the pro- 
 priety of some other mode of administration besides im- 
 mersion. Water baptism is a symbol, an emblem of spir- 
 itual baptism. It sets forth, by an expressive sign, the 
 cleansing, purifying operations of the Holy Spirit. Hence, 
 the mode of water baptism might be expected to accord 
 with 'the mode in which the Divine Spirit is represented 
 as descending upon the heart. But this is uniformly by 
 pouring or sprinkling. "I will pour out my Spirit unto 
 you." " I will pour my Spirit on thy seed." " I will 
 pour out my Spirit upon all flesh." " He shall come 
 down like rain on the mown grass." " I will sprinkle 
 clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean." " So shall 
 he sprinkle many nations. "t This pouring out and 
 
 * See Appendix, Note A. 
 
 f Prov. i. 23 ; Is. xliv. 3 j Joel ii. 28 5 Ps. lxxii. 6 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 25 ; Is. 
 Hi. 15 . 
 
16 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 sprinkling of the Holy Ghost is in Scripture called the 
 baptism of the Holy Ghost, — of which water baptism is 
 the instituted sign. It seems evident, therefore, that 
 pouring or sprinkling must be a proper — not to say the 
 most proper — mode of water baptism. 
 
 The advocates of exclusive immersion have attempted 
 to evade this argument in a variety of ways. Some have 
 said, that none were ever baptized with the Holy Ghost 
 except on the day of Pentecost ; and that then the Spirit 
 was so copiously poured out, that the disciples may be. 
 said to have been immersed in it.* But not to insist on 
 the absurdity of \his representation — the Spirit poured 
 upon the disciples, till they were immersed or plunged into 
 it ! ! — it is certain that all regenerated persons have been 
 baptized with the Spirit. " By one Spirit are we all bap- 
 tized into one body." 1 Cor. xii. 13. 
 
 Others have said, that the pouring out of the Spirit, 
 and the baptism of the Spirit are not the same ; — that the 
 Divine influence is first shed forth, and then the believer 
 is plunged into it.t But this account of the matter is in 
 plain contradiction to the Scriptures. Our Saviour prom- 
 ised his disciples, just before his ascension, that they 
 should " be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days 
 hence." But, speaking of this same event, almost imme- 
 diately after, he describes it as " the Holy Ghost coming 
 upon them." Peter also speaks of this memorable bap- 
 tism with the Spirit, as a fulfilment of the prediction of 
 Joel, " I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh." Acts 
 i. 5, 8, andii. 17. So when Peter preached to Corneli- 
 us and his family, " the Holy Ghost," he says, "fell on 
 them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I 
 the word of the Lord, how he said, John indeed baptized 
 with water, but ye shall be baptized xoith the Holy 
 Ghost." Acts xi. 15. Moreover, Paul represents the 
 
 * See Judson's Sermon, p. 8. t Carson and Cox on Baptism, p. 171, 
 
MODE OP BAPTISM. 17 
 
 baptism of the Spirit, as " the washing of regeneration 
 and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us 
 abundantly." Tit. iii. 5,6. In view of passages such as 
 these, who can avoid seeing and acknowledging, that the 
 falling, the pouring, the shedding forth of the Spirit, and 
 the baptism of the Spirit are the same ? 
 
 It is sometimes urged, that baptism with water is not 
 significant of the baptism of the Spirit, but rather of the 
 burial and resurrection of Christ. " We are buried with 
 him in baptism into death." See Rom. vi. 4, and Col. 
 ii. 12. But if baptism with water is not significant of the 
 baptism of the Spirit, then why are the two baptisms 
 placed by Christ in such immediate connexion ? " Ex- 
 cept a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot 
 enter into the kingdom of God." " John truly baptized 
 with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy 
 Ghost." John iii. 5. Acts i. 5. And why is the re- 
 newing of the Holy Ghost spoken of at all under the 
 figure of a baptism, if this renewal is not the thing signi- 
 fied, shadowed forth, in literal baptism ? — The passages 
 above referred to, in which believers are said to be 
 " buried with Christ by baptism into death," do not seem 
 to me to have any reference to the mode of baptism with 
 water. The thing here spoken of is spiritual baptism* — 
 " the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy • 
 Ghost." In regeneration, believers are said " to die unto 
 sin." . They are spiritually "crucified with Christ," die 
 with him, are buried with him, and rise with him to 
 " newness of life and to new obedience." But what has 
 all this to do with the mode of water baptism 1 And how 
 far can it go towards proving that a total •immersion in 
 water is essential to the ordinance ?t 
 
 * " The Apostle is speaking- of spiritual circumcision, and spiritual bap- 
 tism." Judson's Sermon, p. 28. 
 f See Appendix, Note B. 
 *2 
 
18 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 3. The original words used to denote the ordinance 
 of baptism do not uniformly signify immersion. — It is 
 conceded that the controversy respecting the mode of 
 baptism rests very materially on the meaning of these 
 words. Says a distinguished Baptist writer, " had the 
 Greek word Suttti'qw been translated in the English ver- 
 sion of the New Testament, there would have been no 
 dispute among English readers concerning its import."* 
 And why, then, was not this Greek word translated ? If 
 it has, as is pretended, one plain and uniform significa- 
 tion, why was not this signification given ? On Baptist 
 principles, no answer can be returned to these inquiries, 
 which will not be a reflection on the translators. Will it 
 be said that they did not hww the import of the word ? 
 Then they were inadequate to their great undertaking. 
 Will it be said that knowing it, they chose not to give it? 
 Then they weakly shrunk from the duty assigned them, 
 and are in a measure chargeable with all the evil that has 
 ensued. Why was not this Greek word translated ? On 
 the ground taken by Pedobaptists, the whole matter is 
 plain. It was because the translators knew of no word 
 in our language, which fully answered to it in significa- 
 tion. They did not render it immerse, because they 
 knew it did not uniformly signify immerse. And they 
 •did not render it pour or sprinkle, because they knew 
 that such was not its uniform signification. They chose 
 in most cases to transcribe the word, and not transjate it 
 — to leave it as they found _ it— -and thus leave every one 
 at liberty to practise that mo'de of baptism which he judg- 
 ed to be right.f The fact, that not only the translators 
 
 * Judson's SermfTn, p. 3. 
 
 t Ii should be observed, that our English translators have sometimes' 
 translated the words denoting baptism ; and in every instance have given 
 to them the sense of washing. See Mark vii. 4. Luke xi. 38. Heb. ix. 10. 
 
 In the Peshito, or old Syriac version of the New Testament, BanTiilon 
 is rendered by a word which signifies to confirm or establish. 
 
MODE OP BAPTISM. 19 
 
 of our English Bible, but translators and lexicographers 
 generally, have chosen to transcribe rather than translate 
 this word, is proof enough that they have not considered 
 it as uniformly implying immersion. 
 
 There are three sources from which light may be ob- 
 tained in regard to the signification of disputed terms, 
 viz. etymology, authority, and general use. 
 
 (1.) It appears from the etymology of the word 8ait- 
 xitfi), that it does not uniformly denote immersion. It is 
 a derivative from $amw — a word which, it is now by all 
 admitted, does not always signify immerse. 
 
 Scapula renders (Saitta (inergo, immergo, tingo, lavo,) 
 to immerse, to dye, to wash. 
 
 Coulon renders it (mergo, tingo, abluo) to immerse, to 
 dye, to cleanse by washin 
 
 Ursinus says, j-?«nrw signifies to dip, to dye, to wash, to 
 sprinkle (abluo, aspergo.)t 
 
 Keckerman tells, us that fiamco signifies, not only to 
 dip, but also to sprinkle (aspergo.)$ 
 
 But it is needless to multiply authorities, since Baptist 
 writers admit that Sumco does not uniformly denote im- 
 mersion. Mr. Carson insists, that this word signifies to 
 dye, as well as to dip, and ta dye or color in any man- 
 ner.^, In proof of this, he cites a number of incontesta- 
 ble examples. A learned Baptist, the author of Letters 
 to Bishop Hoadly, also says, '.' that (?«5ttqj signifies to 
 sprinkle" and that it " is not used in the Septuagint in 
 any one place where the very frequent ceremony of wash- 
 ing the whole body occurs." || 
 
 It is obviously used in a number of places where it 
 does not imply immersion. " The priest shall wet (3ui!>ti) 
 his finger uno tov alfiarog with the blood." Lev. iv. 17. 
 
 * Lexic. Homeric. t Explic. Catech. Pars ii. Quest. 69. 
 
 t Syst. Theol. Lib. iii. Cap. 8. § Carson and Cox on Baptism, p. 59. 
 
 || lb. pp. 27, 23. 
 
20 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 " And he (the priest) shall wet (flaipsi) his right finger 
 ano jov elulov with the oil." Lev. xiv. 16. " Wetting 
 it (the bundle of hyssop) with the blood, flaipavrsg ano 
 tov al/naTog." Ex. xii. 22. The preposition ano, used 
 in each of these cases, absolutely forbids the idea of im- 
 mersion. 
 
 In Dan. v. 21, flamu) is rendered by our translators 
 was wet. " His body (£^«<py) was wet with the dew of 
 heaven." Certainly, the body of Nebuchadnezzar was 
 not immersed in the dew. 
 
 In Ezek. xxiii. 15, this word is rendered dyed. " Ex- 
 ceeding in (nagaflamu) dyed attire upon their heads." 
 
 Other Greek writers furnish numerous examples in 
 which fiarcTO) does not signify immerse. 
 
 Sophocles says (tfiay/ag si) " thou hast well stained or 
 glutted thy sword ngog Joyeiwv otquto) with or by means 
 of the Grecian army."* The preposition ngog is incon- 
 sistent with the idea of immersion. 
 
 Callimachus and his commentators use fiamw in the 
 sense of uvileoi, to draw up. " To-day, ye bearers of 
 water, m {tamers draw up none."t Neander, in his note 
 on this passage, says, " uvttjv ala flams draw up the sea 
 water." 
 
 In Suidas de Hierocle we have an account of a person 
 who was severely scourged before the tribunal; and 
 " while flowing with blood, (Saifjag) having filled the hol- 
 low of his hand, he sprinkled the judgment seat."| He 
 surely could not have immersed his hand in the blood that 
 was flowing from his own body. 
 
 Hippocrates, speaking of a certain liquid, says, " when 
 it drops upon the garments, (fiamsiai) they are dyed."\ 
 Here, the word can neither signify immerse, nor dying by 
 immersion. The liquid drops upon the colored garments. 
 
 * Ajax v. 95. t Hymn, in Lavaer. Pallad. 45. 
 
 % In Carson and Cox on Baptism, pp. 26, 60, 61. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 21 
 
 iEschylus says, " This garment (eSa^ey) stained by 
 the sword of iEgisthus, is a witness unto me."* The 
 garment must have been stained by the blood flowing 
 down over it. ■ 
 
 Homer, in his Battle of the Frogs and Mice, says, 
 "He fell, and breathed no more, and the lake (ftfunrero) 
 was tinged with the purple blood. "t " What a monstrous 
 paradox in rhetoric," says Mr. Carson, " is the figure of 
 the dipping of a lake in the blood of- a mouse ! Never 
 was there such a figure. The lake is not said to be dip- 
 ped in blood, but to be di/cd with blood." 
 
 Aristophanes says., that " Magnes, an old comic poet 
 of Athens, used the Lydian music, and shaved his face, 
 {J^anrofiBvog) smearing it with tawny washes." He did 
 not dip his face into the wash, but rubbed the wash upon 
 his face. | 
 
 Aristotle speaks of a substance which, " being pressed, 
 (Junrtt) staineth the hand.")| Here, surely, there is no 
 reference to dipping. The hand is stained or colored, 
 by pressing the coloring substance. 
 
 Buttto was often used by the ancients to signify a col- 
 oring of the hair or beard ; in none of which instances 
 can it denote immersion. 
 
 iElian, speaking of an old coxcomb, says, " He en- 
 deavored to conceal the hoarincss of his hair by (j^oHpj?) 
 coloring it.§ 
 
 Appollonius, disproving the claims of certain false 
 prophets, and ridiculing their attention to dress, asks, 
 " Does a prophet iftameiv} color his hair ?"ff 
 
 Nicolas of Damascus, contrasting the conduct of a par- 
 asite and of his patron, asks, " Does a patron affect to be 
 
 * In Carson and Cox on Baptism, pp. 26, GO, Gl. \ Balrach. v. 248. 
 % Aristoph. Hipp. v. 520. || Aristot. de Hist. Anim. 
 
 \ Lib. vii. Cap. 20. H Euseb. Ecc. Hist. Lib. v. Cap. 18, 
 
22 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 younger than he is? Or does he (Sameiou) color his 
 hair ?"* 
 
 " Some say, Nicylla, that you (fiamsiv') color your 
 hair."t 
 
 " You (Supine) color your head, but you can never 
 (Baipeig) color old age."f 
 
 Lucian speaks of those (Baipovxeg) dying purple ; and 
 Aristophanes of (ogv : g Bunrog) a colored or speckled bird.J 
 
 In view of these examples, the meaning of ^unrto can- 
 not be mistaken. That it is often used to signify im- 
 merse, I have no doubt ; but that this is not its uniform 
 meaning is certain. In the instances above cited, we 
 see it used to denote fillin g ; wetting by distillation ; and 
 coloring, — by the dropping, the sprinkling, the flowing, 
 the rubbing, and the pressing, of the coloring substance. 
 
 Such, then, is the primitive word, Burnt,). And what 
 are we to infer from it respecting the sense of the deriva- 
 tive ^u-mttut, -the word used in reference to the ordinance 
 of baptism ? Pedobaptist writers have generally insisted 
 that fiamilb) is not only a derivative, but a diminutive, of 
 a more general signification than Buttim, and importing 
 less strongly the idea of immersion. Most Baptist writers, 
 on the contrary, allege, that the two words are essentially 
 synonymous; at least, that the latter implies immersion 
 no more strongly than the former. || It is not important 
 to discuss this matter here. It cannot be supposed that 
 
 * Carson and Cox on Baptism, p. 61. 
 
 t Epigram. Collect. Bentlei, p. 139. \ Ewing's Greek Lexicon. 
 
 || Mr. Judson says that " the word denoting baptism is derived from the 
 verbal of the primitive word (Buttim) by a change in the termination 
 which never affects the primary idea." Accordingly he renders << Bumta 
 to immerse, Bunjog immersed, and BumiCw to make immersed, to im- 
 merse." Sermon on Baptism, pp. 3, 4. 
 
 Dr. Gale, in his Reflections on Wall's History of Infant Baptism, decides 
 that Bamta and Bu7nit,w "are (Hjodvvu[icci) exactly the same as to 
 signification." 
 
MODE OP BAPTISM. 23 
 
 the derivative should be stronger than its primitive, or be 
 more particular and limited in its signification ; and we 
 are willing to assume that, so far as relates to the main 
 question at issue, both are of the same import. What, 
 then, is the conclusion in regard to QanxiCfa ? Clearly, 
 that it does not always denote immersion. It may be 
 used, like (tamai, to signify immerse ; but if it is essen- 
 tially synonymous with this latter word, it may be used 
 in other senses, aqd must be capable of a more general 
 signification.. 
 
 (2.) Let us next have recourse to authority in set- 
 tling the signification of QamiX/a, and of the substantives 
 derived from it. 
 
 Stephanus, in his Thesaurus, first gives to ftumCtfa 
 the special import of immersing, and then the more gen- 
 eral one of cleansing or washing. Bunriaung he trans- 
 lates immersion, washing, ablution. 
 
 Scapula renders these words in the same manner as 
 Stephanus. BamiXja-% to immerse, to wash, (abluo lavo.) 
 BanxiafJtoz, immersion, washing, ablution, (lotio, ablutio.) 
 Passor gives a similar rendering to both these words. 
 BaTfxitfa, to immerse, to wash, (abluo, lavo.) BamKrpog, 
 immersion, washing, (lotio.) 
 
 Suidas gives to (Iuttti^o), not only the signification of 
 dipping and dying, but also the more general ones of 
 icetting, washing, purging, cleansing, (madefacio, lavo, 
 abluo, purgo, mundo.) 
 
 Hedericus follows Stephanus and Scapula in rendering 
 Partita) to immerse, to tcash, (mergo, immergo, abluo, 
 lavo.) 
 
 Coulon calls baptism " a sacred mystery of the en- 
 trance into Christianity, administered in the church 
 (mersione, ablutione, et aspersione) by immersion, wash- 
 ing, and sprinkling," 
 
24 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Parkhurst translates (Jamity to immerse in, or wash 
 with water, in token of purification from sin." 
 
 Ainsworth says, " to baptize is to wash any one in 
 the sacred baptismal font, or to sprinkle on him the con- 
 secrated waters." 
 
 Schleusner renders fianji^oj, first, to immerse in wa- 
 ter ; and secondly, to wash or cleanse with water, (abluo, 
 lavo, aqua purgo.) 
 
 Wahl (Robinson's translation) renders the same word, 
 first, to wash, to perform ablution, to cleanse ; secondly, 
 to immerse, to administer the rite of baptism. 
 
 W. Greenfield translates the word, as used in the 
 New Testament, to wash, to ■perform ablution, to cleanse, 
 to immerse, to overwhelm, to administer the rite of bap- 
 tism. 
 
 In the Lexicon of Ewing, fyanxiCfa is said to be used in 
 the following senses : — " I couer with water, or some 
 other fluid, in whatever manner this is done, whether by 
 immersion or affusion, wholly or partially, permanently or 
 for a moment. Hence, the word is used in several differ- 
 ent senses, referring either mediately or immediately to 
 the primary idea; as 1. I plunge or sink completely un- 
 der water. 2. I cover partially with water. 3. 1 over- 
 whelm or cover with water, by rushing, flowing, or pour- 
 ing upon. 4. I drench or impregnate with liquor by 
 affusion. 5 % I oppress or overwhelm, in a metaphorical 
 sense, by bringing affliction or distress upon. C. I wash, 
 in general, without specifying the mode. 7. I wash for 
 the special purpose of symbolical, ritual, or ceremonial 
 purification. 8. I administer the ordinance of Christian 
 baptism, I baptize." 
 
 From the testimony of lexicographers, we may proceed 
 to that of learned critics and theologians. 
 
 Piscator. " Bctmity) signifies not only to be dipped, 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. m )i> ■ 
 
 but also in any other way to be tinged, washed, or rinsed, 
 (lavari et ablui.)* 
 
 Bucaxus. " Buttti^C)) signifies to immerse, to tinge, 
 to toash (abluere.") "Baptism is taken properly in Scrip- 
 ture for simple washing (pro simplici ablutionc) whether 
 Levitical or Pharisaical. "f 
 
 Zanchius. " This word fiaiixiXfa. dpth as well signify 
 to dye, and simply to wash, (lavare) as to immerse."^ 
 
 Maldonat. " With the Greeks, ^anxi^etv signifies to 
 dip, to wash, to wash oft, (lavare, abluere) and as Ter- 
 tullian uses to turn it, to tinge or dye."|| 
 
 Bonavexttjre. " Boanitfa in Greek signifies as much 
 as lai'o in Latin," i. e. to icash.§ 
 
 Petf.r Martyr. " B<(7in±i<> signifies, not only to dip, 
 but in any way to tinge or wet."*i\ 
 
 Wiiitaker. " The word ^anntfii signifies, not only 
 to immerse, but also to tinge or icct."** 
 
 Vorriloxg. " r'urni'^i in Greek is the same that lavo 
 is in Latin." "Baptism, properly speaking, signifies 
 nothing (nisi lotionem) except washing. v tt 
 
 Alstedius. '*The term baptism signifies both immer- 
 sion and sprinkling, (aspensionem) and of consequence 
 ablution. "t| 
 
 Zelenus. " Baptism signifies dipping, and also sprink- 
 
 ^•"iiii .'-.■:"■ 
 
 Mastricht. " Baptism signifies washing, either by 
 
 sprinkling or dipping." j||f 
 
 * Com. Loc.de Baptismo, pp. 157, 158. t Loc. Com. 47. p. 
 
 % De Cultu Dei, Lib. i. Cap. 16. 
 
 || in Matt, xxviii. 19. Tertullian observes concerning' baptism, (de Ani- 
 ma, Cap. 10.) that it means (mergere non tantum, sed et perfittidere) not 
 only to immerse, but also to pour. 
 
 § In Walker's Doctrine of Baptisms, Chap. 3. 
 
 IT In Rom. Cap. x. 
 
 *»Phselect. de Sacram. Baptismi, p. 217. tt Works, L: . iv. . 
 
 XX Encyclop. Lib. xxv. Sec. iii. Loc. 40. 
 
 (Ill In Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part ii. Chap. 9. 
 
 3 
 
.26 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 J. Wickliffe. " It matters not whether persons are 
 dipped once, or three times, or whether water were pour- 
 ed upon their heads."* 
 
 LvNDwoop. " Dipping is not to be accounted to be of 
 the essence of baptism, but it may be given also by pour- 
 ing or sprinkling."* 
 
 Flacius Illyricus. " Baptism properly signifies in- 
 tifiction, a word used by Tertullian ; and, per Metalepsin, 
 it hath the signification of ablution and lotion."i 
 
 * Pareus. "Baptism, with the Greeks, imports any 
 washing or cleansing, whether it be done by dipping or 
 sprinkling vVJ 
 
 Ursinus renders ficinaijarfios washing, as- well as dip- 
 Ping-H ' . • • 
 
 Trelcatius says." baptism, according to the etymolo- 
 gy of it, signifies commonly any kind of ablution or clean- 
 sing.'^ 
 
 Woldebius. "Baptism signifies dipping and sprink- 
 ling, and by- consequence ablution, or cleansing by wash- 
 ing."^ 
 
 Peter Lombard. " Baptism signifies intinction, i. e. 
 a washing of the body (ablutip) with a prescribed form of 
 words."** 
 
 • NinoLAus de Orbellis.' "Baptism is a washing or 
 ablution in water-."ff 
 
 Dan^us. " Baptism signifies not Only immersion, but 
 also lotion and ablution ; and net only are they baptized- 
 who are wholly dipped in Water, but they that are tinged 
 or icettcd with water. "IJ 
 
 * In Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part fi. Chap. 9. + Clavis Soripturae. 
 % In Heb. ix. 10. || Explic. Catech. Ques. 69= 
 
 § Instit. Lib. ii. Cap. de Baptisino. fl Chris. Theol. Lib. i. Cap. 23. 
 
 ** In Walker's Doctrine of Baptisms, Chap. G. 
 tt Ques. i. deBaptismo. 
 
 • %X Responsio ad Bellarm. Tom. de Sacram. Cap. i. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 27 
 
 Lightfoot. " The application of water is of the es- 
 sence of baptism ; but the application of it in this or that 
 manner, speaks but a circumstance."** 
 
 Musculus. " As for dipping the- infant, we judge that 
 not so necessary, but that it. is free for the church to bap- 
 tize either by dippirfg or sprinkling "t 
 
 Thomas Aquinas. "Baptism may be given, not only 
 by immet'sion, but also by affusion of water, or sprinkling 
 with it."| 
 
 Featly. " Christ no where requireth dipping, but on- 
 ly baptizing'; which word Hesychius, Stephanus, Scapula, 
 and Buddaeus, those great masters of the Greek tongue, 
 make good by very many instances out of the classic wri- 
 ters, importeth no more than ablutionox washing."\\ 
 
 Leigh. '[ Baptism is such a kind of washing as is by 
 plunging; and yet it is taken more largely for any kind 
 of washing, where there is no dipping at all'."|| 
 
 Dominicus Sotus. " In baptism, there is something 
 essential, as the washing; and something accidental, 
 namely, the washing in this or the other manner. "§ 
 
 Calvin. " Whether the person baptized be wholly 
 immersed^ and whether thrice or once, or whether water 
 be only poured or sprinkled upon him, is* of no impor- 
 tance."^] 
 
 Beza. " They are rightly baptized who are baptized 
 by sprinkling?'** ■ 
 
 Hemingius. " As often as we see infants sprinkled 
 with the water of baptism, -we are reminded of their secret 
 regeneration. "ft 
 
 * Horae Flebraicae in Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 t Loci Communes de'Baptismo, p. 431. 
 
 \ In Wall's Hist of In. Baptism, Part ii. Chap. 9. 
 
 || In Critica Sacra. § Distiuc. iii. Quest, i. Art. 7. 
 
 IT Institutes Vol. iii. p. 313. ** Tract Th'eol. Vol. iii. p. 19£. 
 
 ft Com. on John iii. 5. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Attersol. "Dipping into water is not necessary to 
 the being of a sacrament. Sprinkling of water is not ne- 
 cessary to the being of a sacrament. But wetting and 
 washing with water are necessary to the being of a sacra- 
 mem."* 
 
 Hammond. -By Christ's appointment, whosoever 
 may be received into his family should be received 
 with this ceremony of water; therein to be dipped three 
 times, or instead of that to-be sprinkled, with it."f 
 
 Wall. "The word (famgifl in Scripture signifies to 
 toash m general, without determining the sense to this 
 or that sort of washing."! 
 
 Pool. " Why does Mark use ^mn^fc or vmrBadm " 
 in Mark vii. 4 ? « Answer. It was lawful to wash the 
 hand in either mode, either by pouring on water, or by 
 
 immersing tfiem so that it is not without reason 
 
 that a word is used which is common to either mode,"|| 
 
 Witsids. " We are not to imagine that immersion is 
 so necessary to baptism, that it cannot be duly performed 
 by pouring water all over, or by aspersion."^ 
 
 Owen. " Baptism is any kind of washing, whether by 
 dipping or sprinkling. "|f 
 
 Tilenus. "'If we regard the etymology of the word 
 baptism, it signifies dipping, and also sprinkling."** > 
 
 Kechekman. Baptism signifies either immersion, or 
 washing or pouring (perfusionem.")ff 
 
 Flavel. "The word baptize signifying as well to 
 wash as to plunge ; a person may be truly baptized that is 
 not plunged-!! 
 
 Glas. ." Immersion cannot be called baptism, any 
 
 * Treatise of the Sacraments p. 108. 
 
 tJVaet. Catechism, p. 154. % Hist/of I„. P ap . Part . S . Ch 8 . 
 
 \\ Synops.s on Mark vii. 4. $ Econ. of Covenants, Vol.iii. p 392 
 
 • I ft om or , Heb ix. 10. ■ « Disput . de BaptUmo> 883 P 
 
 ft Theol. Syst. Disp. 37. {| Works, Vol. ii. p. 432. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 29 
 
 otherwise than as it is a mode of washing with 
 water."* 
 
 Doeuerlein. " The power of the word fiunjity is 
 expressed (in iavando, abluendo) in washing or perform- 
 ing ablation ; on which account we read of the baptism 
 of cups, in Mark vii, 8, and the rite itself is called 
 (xadaQtufipg) a purifying., in John iii. 2o."f 
 
 Moris. "To baptize is in a solemn manner to im- 
 merse sf man in water, or to pour water upon him. "J • 
 
 Adam Clarke. "To say that sprinkling is no gos- 
 pel baptism is as incorrect as to say that immersion is 
 none. Such assertions are as unchristian as they are un- 
 charitable. Those who are dipped in water in the 
 name of the Trinity, I believe to be baptized. Those 
 who are washed or sprinkled with water in the.name of 
 the Trinty, I believe to be equally so ; and the repetition 
 of such a baptism I believe to be profane. Others have 
 a right to believe the contrary, if they see good."|| 
 
 This list of quotations' need not to be enlarged. The 
 reader will see what the opinion of distinguished men — 
 lexicographers,, critics, and theologians^ — has been, in 
 regard to the point before us ; and on a question of this 
 nature", the judgment of the learned ought to have weight; 
 — I know it will be said, that authority is pleaded on the 
 other side ; and that quotations have been given from 
 Pedobaptiit writers, seeming to favor the idoa of exclu- 
 sive immersion. But in making these quotations, our 
 brethren have not always treated either their authors or 
 the public fairly. In selecting single sentences, or parts 
 of sentences, from large works, where saving clauses and 
 
 *» Diss, on In. Bap. p. 25. t Institut. Theol. Chris. Vol. ii. p. 748. 
 
 J Commontarius Ex. His. Vol ii. p. 491. 
 
 j| Comment, on Mat. iii. C. and Mark xvi. 16. 
 
 $ Mr Carson, while endeavoring to show that p"rrT<£<W " always signi- 
 fies to dip," concedes, that lie has " all the lexicographers and comments^ 
 tors against him, in that opinion.'' p. 79. 
 
 *3 
 
30 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 qualifying words and phrases are omitted, authors may 
 easily be made to speak a language which they never in- 
 tended, and wrong impressions may be left upon the pub- 
 lic mind. It is true, that some Pedobaptists have been 
 partial to immersion, and have wished that it might come 
 into more general use ; but where is the Pedobapiist who, 
 (judged of, not by insulated passages, but by the iclwle of 
 his works) has maintained that immersion is essential to 
 baptism 1 For this, it will be recollected, is the "point at 
 issue, Is immersion essential ? Truly, I know of no such 
 Pedobaptist. Whatever the ' preferences of individuals 
 may have been, writers of this class would say, with unit- 
 ed voice, that immersion is not essential to baptism ; that 
 the ordinance, may be validly administered in other 
 modes. 
 
 (3.) We come now to consider the import of p'unr^'w, 
 and the kindred terms, as exhibited in their general use. 
 My object will be to show, that these words are often used 
 by writers, sacred and profane, to signify something less 
 than a total immersion. * 
 
 The Sibylline verse concerning the city of Athens, as 
 quoted by Plutarch in his life of Theseus, is as follows : 
 Aayoz BastTity], de joi Os/Jig sari. 
 
 " Thou mayest be baptized, O bladder, but it is not 
 permitted to thee to go under the water." — The represen- 
 tation is that of a leathern bottle or bladder cast upon the 
 water, but which can hardly be pressed under it ; — import- 
 ing that though the Athenian state might be brought into 
 great dangers, it could not be destroyed. The idea of 
 immersion is of course precluded. 
 
 Aristotle says, "The Phenicians who inhabit Cadiz re- 
 late, that, sailing beyond Hercules' pillars with the wind at 
 East, in four days they came to aland uninhabited, whose 
 coast was full of sea weeds, and is not ^ami^eodui) cov- 
 ered with water at ebb ; but when the tide comes in, it is 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 31 
 
 entirely overwhelmed."* — He»e is a baptism, but no. im- 
 mersion. The coast was not pigged into the tide, but 
 the tide flowed over Ihe coast. 
 
 Homer, representing the death of one of his heroes, 
 says, " He struck him across the neck with his heavy 
 sword, and the sword became warm with blood." One 
 ancient Greek critic remarks on this passage thus; " The 
 sword is represented as (tflitnTiodi,) baptized with blood." 
 Another says, " In this phrase Homer expresses himself 
 with the greatest energy, signifying that the sword was so 
 (JtanTiodevtog) baptized in blood, that it was even heated 
 by it."* But how could a sword be plunged into the blood 
 of a man, in cutting off his head? Doubtless it was more 
 or less stained with blood. By a strong figure, it might 
 be said to be bathed in blood. But in this case, the bath- 
 ing must have been effected by the blood flowing over the 
 sword, and not by the sword being plunged into the 
 blood . 
 
 In his account of the Platonic Banquet, Aristophanes 
 acknowledges that he had been ((teSqimaftevaip) baptized 
 with wine on the preceding day.t Surely he had rrot 
 been, either literally or figuratively, plunged into wine ; 
 but the wine had been poured into him. Figuratively, he 
 had been overcome by it. 
 
 Mr. Ewing, in his greek Lexicon (Art. ; i'«.7n>) has 
 several examples of the same kind." BeSamiadm toj 
 u/quto), to be baptized with wine." Otva 3s nollo) Ake%- 
 uvSqov SuTinauoa. Having baptized Alexander with 
 much wine." 
 
 A few examples of the figurative use of Sann^oi by pro- 
 fane authors will show, that this word is not altogether so 
 determinate in its signification, as some men seem to im- 
 agine. 
 
 * In Carson and Cox on Baptism, pp. 17, 86. 
 ^ In Quarterly Review, Vol. xxiv^p. 431. 
 
32 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Djodorus Siculus says, i' On account of the abundant 
 supply from these sources, they do not (^unii^ovoi) op- 
 press the common people with taxes."* 
 
 JosepTius speaks of some who, without engaging in 
 faction, afterwards (sfiamiouv) oppressed the city."t 
 
 Plutarch says " (^eSaniiofiEvoi) oppressed with a debt 
 of five thousand myriads."! 
 
 Joseplius, speaking of the' purification from defilement 
 by a dead body, says, " and (fictTtnoavTe g) having baptized 
 some of the ashes with spring water, they sprinkled," &c.|| 
 From the direction in the ceremonial law, we know how 
 this baptism was performed. " They shall take of the 
 ashes of the burnt heifer, and running water shall be put 
 thereto in a vessel, and a clean person shall sprinkle it." 
 Numb. xix. 17. This putting of running water to the 
 ashes is called by Josephus a baptizing of the ashes. 
 
 In Ecclesiasticus xxxiv. 30, we have a similar use of 
 the word @ami,tf>). " He (@anTit,o[ievog) that is baptized 
 or purified from the touch of a dead body, and again 
 tou'eheth it, what is -he profited (zw Xovigw) by his wash- 
 ing?" Here, the purification from the touch of a dead 
 body, which consisted (in part at least) in being sprinkled 
 and washing the clothes,^ is called a baptism. It is also 
 called {Iovtqov} a washing, making baptizing and wash- 
 ing to be of the same import. 
 
 In Judith xii. 7, Judith is said to have gone out " in 
 the night, and (e6unnc,szo) baptized herself in the camp 
 (em T-ng irrjyrjg} at the fountain of water." The preposi- 
 tion here used, (em,) as well as the circumstances of the 
 case, forbid the supposition that Judith plunged herself 
 into the fountain. She went and washed herself at it ; 
 and this washing is called a baptism. 
 
 * Lib. 50. Cap. 73. t Joseph, de Bellp, iv.3. 
 
 % In Carson and Cox on Baptism, p. 131. || Antiq. Lib. iv. Cap. 4. 
 
 § See Numbers xix. 19. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 33 
 
 The use of the words denoting baptism by the Christ- 
 ian Fathers is decisive against the idea of exclusive im- 
 mersion. 
 
 Justyn Martyr, in his Apology to Antonius, whan 
 describing the baptism of the early Christians, repeatedly 
 calls it (lovigov) a washing; ami he quotes Isaiah as 
 predicting this rite in the following words ; " Wash you, 
 make you clean," &c. Chap: i. 1(>. Indeed, this mode 
 of representing the subject is very common in the wri- 
 tings of the Fathers. The words Iovtqov, Iavandi, ablu- 
 endi, diluendi, la'vationis, laeacri, &c. importing - no more 
 than in the general, were in perpetual use 
 
 among them, in connexion with the administration of bap- 
 tism. 
 
 Tertullian speaks of baptism being administered by 
 sprinkling. Who will accommodate you, a man whose 
 penitence is so little to be trusted (asperginem unara 
 aquae) with one sprinkling of water V* 
 
 Origen represents the wood on the altar, over which 
 water was poured at t ho command of Elijah (1 Kings xviii. 
 33) as hating been baptized.t This baptism, we k*how 
 was effected by pouring. 
 
 Lactantius says that Christ received baptism, " that 
 he might save the Gentiles by baptism, that is (purifici 
 roris perfusione) by the distilling of the purifying dew."| 
 In this instance, the water of baptism is represented as 
 falling like the dew. 
 
 Cypria , Jerome, and some other ofthe fathers, under- 
 stood the prediction, " 1 will sprinkle clean water upon 
 you, and ye shall be clean," (Ezek. xxxvi. 25 ) as having 
 reference to water baptism. § 
 
 Clemens Alexandrinus, speaking of a backslider 
 
 * De Poenit. Cap. 6. t In Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part ii. p. 302. 
 
 $ Opera. Lib. iv. Cap. 15. 
 $ C\ era. Cyp. Lib. ii. Fpis. 7. Ep's, 83 Hit ron • 
 
34 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 whom John was the means of reclaiming, says, " he was 
 baptized a second time toith tears."* 
 
 Athanasius reckons up eight several baptisms ; 1. that 
 o/ the flood ; 2. that of Moses in the sea ; 3. the legal 
 baptism of the Jews after uncleanness; 4. that of John 
 Baptist ; 5. that of Jesus.; 6. of tears ; 7. of martyrdom ; 
 and 8. of eternal' fire. "t 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen says, " I know of a. fourth bap- 
 tism, that by martyrdom and blood;' and I. know of a 
 fifth, that of tears."i 
 
 Basil- tell us of a martyr that " was baptized into 
 Christ with his own blood."i 
 
 The author of the Responses to Antiochus (attributed 
 to Athanasius) says; " God hath granted unto man three 
 purging baptisms ; that of water, that of the testimony of 
 one's own blood, and that of terns "t 
 
 The baptism of tears and blood was a favorite phrase- 
 ology with the early Christians. It is needless to remark, 
 that these baptisms, whether understood literally or figu- 
 ratively, are altogether inconsistent with the idea of im- 
 mersion. 
 
 The word (2a?rr*£<» occurs in the Septuagint in the fol- 
 lowing connexion : Naaman came*to the prophet Elisha 
 to .be cleansed of his leprosy ; " and Elisha sent a mes- 
 senger unto him, saying, Go and (lovaai) toash in Jordan 
 seven times, and thy flesh shall come again unto thee, and 
 thou shalt be clean." " Then he went and (zGutttio-ccto)' 
 baptized himself seven times in Jordan, according to the 
 saying of the man of God, and his flesh came again as 
 the flesh of a little child, and he was clean." 2 Kings v. 
 10, 14. It is obvious that (3umi'Cw is here used as synon- 
 ymous with Iovm, a word which signifies, in the general, 
 to wash. Naaman was directed by the prophet to wash 
 
 * Euseb. Ecc. Hist. Lib. iii. Cap. 20. 
 
 t In Walker's Doctrine of Baptisms, Chap. 6, 
 
• MODE OF BAPTISM. 35 
 
 himself in Jordan ; and he went and washed according 
 to the saying of the man of God. Yet this last washing 
 is expressly called a baptism. 
 
 The apostle Paul informs us that the congregation of 
 Israel " were baptized unto Moses in the cloud, and in 
 the sea.-' 1 Cor. x. 2. But how were this great congre- 
 gation haptized ? Certainly not by an immersion in the 
 waters ; for we read expressly that " they went into the 
 midst of the sea upon dry ground." Ex. xiv. 22. We 
 may be told of the -propriety of representing their situa- 
 tion, with the sea on each side, and the cloud covering 
 them, as an immersion in the cloud and in the sea ; but 
 until it can be explained how they could be plunged into 
 the water, while they were walking on dry ground, it will 
 remain certain' that their baptism was not by immersion.*. 
 
 The .same Apostle also informs us, that the service of 
 the sanctuary under the former dispensation consisted, 
 among other things, in {Siatpoqoig ^anrta/wie) " divers 
 washings" or baptisms. Heb. ix. 10. In the verses fol- 
 lowing, he relates how the unclean were at that time 
 sprinkled with water and with blood ; and that " Moses 
 took the blood of calves, and of goats, with water, and 
 scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and 
 all the people." Is it not evident, then, that among the 
 " divers baptisms" practised by the Jews, the Apostle in- 
 cluded these divers sprinklings? If Ave suppose him to 
 refer to their purifications generally, some of. which con- 
 sisted in bathing, he must have referred to their sprink- 
 lings as well as their bathings ; and, consequently, must 
 
 • Professor Robinson thinks that, by the viatt of waters on each side of 
 the Israelites, during' their passage through the sea, we are to understand, 
 that there wJs a body oftcater above them, and below them.; while by the 
 ebbing of the tide, and the miraculous driving back of the sea by a strong 
 east wind, the fording place over which they passed was dry ground. See 
 Biblical Repository for Oct. 1832, p. 755. 
 
36 MODE OF BAPTISM. . 
 
 have used the word baptisms to denote other modes of 
 applying water besides a total immersion. 
 
 It is said " of the Pharisees and all the Jews," that 
 " when they come from the market, except they {Jtanxi- 
 t,MVTtti) be baptized, they eat not." Mark vii. 4. And 
 when a certain Pharisee invited our Lord '*' to dine with 
 him, he marvelled that he .had not first (tGumtrrfti]) been 
 baptized before dinner." Luke xi. 38. But was it a 
 custom with all the Jews to be immersed before eating ? 
 Or did the Pharisee marvel, that our -Lord, before he sat 
 down to meat, was not immersed? If the case is not suf- 
 ficiently clear of itself, it is easy to prove, and from the 
 highest authority, that the Jews did not' practise immer- 
 sion previous to their meals, but merely a washing- of the 
 # hands. " Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition 
 of the elders, for they' wash not their hands when they eat 
 bread ?" Matt. xv. 2. " The Pharisees and all the Jews, 
 except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the 
 tradition of the elders." Mark; vii. 3. Maimonides says, 
 " A man shall not need to wash his hands as oft a-s he 
 eats,, if he do not go abroad, or meddle with business, or 
 gfo to the market, or avert his mind another way ; but if 
 he do, he is bound to wash his hands as oft as there is 
 need of washing."* In view of these representations, is 
 it not certain, that the baptisms which the Jews practis- 
 ed previous to their meals, and which the Pharisee mar- 
 velled that our Saviour should neglect, were merely «., 
 washing of the hands ? 
 
 It is also said that " there be many other things which 
 the Jews havej-eceived to hold, as the (fiamiafiovg) bap- 
 
 • In Scott on Mark vii. 3. Kuinoel says, " It is not probable that the 
 Pharisees imposed this burthen upon themselves, that whenever they came 
 m from abroad, they laid aside their garments, and immersed their bodies 
 in water 5 neither can it be proved, by sufficient arguments, that they had 
 such a custom." Com. on Mark vii. 4. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 37 
 
 iisms of cups, and pots, and brazen vessels, and of tables." 
 Mark vii. 4. If it is likely that, in washing, the Jews 
 immersed their small cups., is it at all likely that they im- 
 mersed their pots and kettles, their brazen vessels and 
 their tables ? Do we find this the most convenient meth- 
 od of washing such articles ? And especially should we, 
 if, after the Jewish custom, we reclined at our meals, and 
 of consequence were obliged to construct our tables much 
 larger than they are at present ? .Accordingly, Pool de- 
 termines, in view of the word baptism in this place, that 
 "it does not always denote immersion, but sometimes 
 washing only, or even sprinkling. 1 
 
 I have noticed, in another connexion, those passages 
 which speak of the baptism of the Spirit. . It is impor- 
 tant that they be adverted to again, as exhibiting the 
 manner in which the sacred writers use the words bap- 
 tize and baptism. These writers evidently speak of the 
 pouring out of the Spirit, as synonymous with the bap-- 
 tism of the Spirit; and, consequently, it would seem that 
 pouring mast be a significant and proper mode of bap- 
 tizing. 
 
 We have now fully examined the words denoting bap- 
 tism. We have considered their etymology, adduced 
 numerous and respectable authorities*, and traced them 
 in their general use. And we are brought irresistibly to 
 the conclusion, that they do not uniformly signify or im- 
 ply immersion. This conclusion places another on an. 
 immoveable" basis — immersion is no/ essential to Christian 
 baptisin. 
 
 4. The circumstances attending most of the baptisms 
 recorded in the New Testament indicate some other 
 mode besides immersion. 
 
 The first in order are the baptisms by John. That 
 • 
 
 * Synopsis in loc. 
 4 
 
38 MODE OF baptism! 
 
 this great reformer and prophet baptized at Jordon and 
 Enon is no certain evidence that he baptized by immer- 
 sion. The convenience of the multitudes by which he 
 was thronged made it necessary that he should reside, 
 for the most part, in the*«vicinity of " much water." 
 Many circumstances of his baptism seem inconsistent 
 with immersion, and render it probable that he practised' 
 oidinarily some other mode. He baptized " in the des- 
 ert," as well as at Jordon. He baptized with water, as 
 well, as in it.* He baptized in the open fields, where 
 there were no accommodations for a change of apparel. 
 And more than all, he baptized vast multitudes in a lit- 
 tle time. His ministry could not have continued more 
 than a year and a half; in which time he baptized " Je- 
 rusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about 
 Jordan." Matt. iii. 5. Some Baptists have thought it 
 "probable that he baptized, at least, 500,000 persons. But 
 • to immerse these in a year and a half, allowing only a 
 minute for the immersion of each, he must have been 
 constantly in the water, every day, for more than fifteen 
 hours. Is it credible that h§ should do this ;• especially 
 since we are assured that he " did no miracle ?" John 
 x. 41. Is it credible, then, that, in ordinary cases, John 
 baptized by immersion ?f 
 
 * ' EOuTTTiaet' ev vdaji,. Acts i. 5. John traces an analogy between 
 his baptism, and that of the Spirit. " I indeed baptize you with water, but 
 he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.'' Matt. iii. 11. If 
 the word baptize may be translated immerse in the former part of this sen- 
 tence, doubtless it may in the latter part. But what translator would be 
 satisfied to say.. " He shall immerse you in the Holy Ghost and in' fire ?" 
 
 + Not a few of the ancients entertained the opinion that John baptized by 
 pouring'. After this manner, Aurelius Prudentius, who wrote A. D. 390, 
 represents him as baptizing " Perfundit fluvio," &.c— A few y-ears later, 
 Paulinus, bishop of Nola, says, " He (John Baptist) washes away the sins 
 of believers (infusis lymphis) by the pouring of water. — Numerous ancient 
 pictures represent Christ as having been baptized by pouring. — Bernard 
 speaks of John as having baptized his Lord after this manner. " Infundit 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 39 
 
 The baptism of the three thousand next claims atten- 
 tion. The Scriptures furnish not an incident that would 
 lead to the conclusion that this multitude were immersed. 
 Many circumstances, on the contrary, seem to indicate 
 that some other mode must have been adopted. The oc- 
 casion was sudden ; the multitude were principally stran- 
 gers, who had made no previous preparation for a change 
 of garments; they were in Jerusalem, several miles from 
 Jordon and Enon ; no public baths had been engaged, 
 or could be, as the rulers were violently opposed to the 
 Christians ; no mention is made of their leaving the place, 
 not even the house, wheid they were assembled ; and 
 above all, the time was short. The Apostles came togeth- 
 er at the third hour, or nine o'clock. Besides the dis- 
 course, of which we have an epitome in the acts, it is said 
 they " testified and exhorted with many other ivorels." 
 Three thousand were awakened, convinced, converted, 
 professed their' faith in Christ, and concluded to be bap- 
 tized. These various important transactions must have 
 occupied at least four hours. Five hours of the day now 
 remained, and three thousand were to be baptized by 
 twelve men. Could they be immersed? The circum- 
 stances of the case, as it seems to me, plainly forbid the 
 supposition. Besides, they had all just been baptized by 
 the pouring out of the Holy Spirit. They had received 
 spiritual baptism, the thing signifitd, under the similitude 
 of pouring. How natural to suppose that they received 
 water baptism, the sign f in the same way ? 
 
 I know it is said, that it is not recorded that the three 
 thousand were baptized the same day, but only that they 
 were added to the number of the disciples. But it is re- 
 
 aquam capiti Creatoris creatura. See Walker's Doctrine of Baptisms, 
 Chap. 10. Lightfoot says, " As it is beyond a doubt that John took those 
 whom he baptized into the riser, so it is scarcely less certain that he there 
 sprinkled them with water."- Com. on Luke iii. 16. 
 
40 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 corded that " they who gladly received the word were 
 baptized ;" and I would inquire whether any were added 
 to the number of the disciples who did not gladjy receive 
 the word V 
 
 It is also said, that the whole hundred and twenty dis- 
 ciples might have been employed in baptizing on this 
 ^reat occasion. But it remains to be proved, that the 
 whole of this number, females as well as males, were offi- 
 cially qualified to administer baptism. 
 
 On the whole, I cannot entertain a doubt that the three 
 thousand were baptized by the Apostles the same day 
 they believed, and that' the <ndinance was administered 
 by pouring or sprinkling .* 
 
 The baptism of the eunuch is usually cited in proof of 
 immersion. And suppose it be admitted that the eunuch 
 was immersed. This would be only admitting that im- 
 mersion is baptism, a point which we have never called 
 in question. I see no great reason, however, to suppose 
 that the eunuch was immersed. No circumstance indi- 
 cates it, except its being said that, both he tfnd Philip 
 went down into, or (etg) to the water, and afterwards 
 came up out of, or (?*) from it ; and this they might and 
 probably would have done, had the eunuch been sprink- 
 led. 
 
 In the baptism of Paul, nothing looks like immersion, 
 but every circumstance appears against it. He had been 
 three days in Damascus " without sight, and neither" ate 
 nor drank." Acts ix. 10. . Ananias comes in and salutes 
 him as a Christian brother. Immediately he rises up, 
 'and is baptized. And after baptism, " when he had re- 
 
 * In this opinion I am happy to concur with many ancient and learned 
 writers. Zanchy, in his " Cultu Dei Externo," Lib. i. says, " The three 
 thousand were baptized, non alia ratione quam aspersione aquce." Lyn- 
 wood, and Bonaventure, and Nicolaus de Orbellis, and Chamier, and many 
 others, say the same. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 41 
 
 ceived meat, he was strengthened." He does not repair 
 to a river, or bath, or so much as leave the house. In-. 
 deed, m his weak state, it is hardly probable that he was 
 able to leave it. With the precise mode of Paul's bap- 
 tism I pretend not to be acquainted ; but I do think it in 
 the highest degree improbable that he was immersed. 
 
 The instance of Cornelius and his family is equally 
 convincing. They believed on the preaching of Peter ; 
 the Holy Ghost fell on them ; and the astonished Apostle, 
 perceiving the event, exclaimed, "Can any man forbid 
 water, that these should not be baptized, who have re- 
 ceived the Holy Ghost as weir as we?" Acts x. 47. 
 " Can any man forbid water — that is, that it should be 
 brought I "Is not this the most natural and obvious 
 meaning — an idea which the form of words and mode of 
 expression instantly and. fully excite in the mind ? Ac- 
 cordingly, there *is no hint of their going abroad, or of 
 any other preparation being made in order to baptism, than 
 that of bringing water into the room. The history leads 
 us to believe, that they were" baptized at the very junc- 
 ture when Peter commanded it, and in the very apart- 
 ment where they were at the time assembled." They 
 had just received the thing signified in baptism, by the de- 
 scent of the Holy Spirit upon them ; and in all probability 
 they received the external sign by the pouring or sprink- 
 ling of water. 
 
 The circumstances of .the jailer's baptism prove as con- 
 clusively as evidence of this nature will admit, that he 
 and his family were not immersed. They were baptized 
 at home, at midnight, at the same hour in which they^e- 
 lieved. Acts xvi. 33. We have much reason to suppose 
 that, during the whole transaction, Paul and Silas never 
 left the prison. They would not leave it the following 
 day, till those who had unjustly apprehended and beaten 
 them came and honorably brought them out. Is it like- 
 *4 
 
42 .- MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 ly, then, that they left it in a clandestine manner the 
 night before, regardless of the strict charge which the 
 jailer had received to keep them safely, and this, .too, at 
 a moment wlren every one was awake, and the whole city 
 had just been roused and terrified with an earthquake? 
 Is it likely that, under these circumstances, and in their 
 bruised and distressed condition, they went abroad, and 
 into the water, for the purpose of immersion 1 To me, I 
 must acknowledge, the thing appears altogether incredi- 
 ble. 
 
 The circumstances of some of the principal instances 
 of baptism recorded in the New Testament — those cal- 
 culated to afford light in regard to. the mode of adminis- 
 tration, have now been examined ; and the reader must 
 judge whether they do not satisfactorily indicate some 
 other mode besides immersion. 
 
 5. Immersion was never considered as essential to 
 baptism, till subsequent to the reformation in the sixteenth 
 century. — That immersions have been frequent in the 
 Christian church, and that they have been more general- 
 ly practised at some periods, than* they now are among 
 the Pedobaptists of this country, or than they were in the 
 days of the Apostles, I see no reason to doubt. There is 
 a disposition in men to overdo in the externals of religion, 
 while they underdo, and perhaps do little or nothing, in 
 things more essential. The Pharisees, not satisfied with 
 the. yoke' of the ceremonial law, must add to it " the tradi- 
 tion of the elders." Peter, not satisfied with that degree 
 of washing which his Master judged to be sufficient, said, 
 " Slot my feet only, but also my hands and my head." 
 And Christians, in some past ages, not satisfied to be 
 baptized by pouring, washing, or sprinkling, which is as 
 much, I think, as the Saviour requires, must be plunged 
 completely under water. Indeed, at some periods they 
 have not been satisfied even with this. They must be 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 43 
 
 immersed three times. They must be immersed naked. 
 They must have water applied to the face, and be mark- 
 ed with a cross, and anointed with oil, subsequent to im- 
 mersion. They must be robed in white, a certain num- 
 ber of days after baptism, in' token of their purity.* I 
 mention these facts to show the propensity there is in 
 man to be superstitious, and to attempt more than is need- 
 ful in the externals of religion. It is oVving to this pro- 
 pensity, that immersions have at some periods more gen- 
 erally prevailed, than it can be made to appear they did 
 under the ministry. of the -Apostles. 
 
 I propose it, however, as an indubitable fact, that im- 
 mersion never was considered as essential to baptism, till 
 the rise of the Anabaptists (as they were then called) in 
 the sixteenth century. I say essential; for this, it will 
 be recollected, is the point at issue. 
 
 The case of the clinics, so often referred to, is proof 
 conclusive th,at immersion was not deemed essential in 
 the primitive church. The clinics (so called from the 
 Greek xAtvi?) were those who were baptized in sickness.; 
 and it is admitted on all hands that they were baptized 
 by pouring or sprinkling. It is admitted, too, that, in 
 case of recovery, they were not re-baptized. The con- 
 clusion is inevitable, that ppuring or sprinkling was re- 
 garded, in the primitive church, as valid baptism ; and of 
 course that immersion was not considered essential. 
 
 It has been objected, indeed, that the clinics were ca- 
 nonically prohibited the priesthood. But why were they 
 prohibited ? Not because of the informality of their bap- 
 tism ; but because their sincerity had not been sufficient- 
 ly tested. Baptism, at that "period, exposed persons to 
 the most dreadful persecutions, especially if they under- 
 took the work of the ministry. If, therefore, any person 
 
 * See Witsius' Econ. of Cov. Vol. iii. p. 394, and Vossii Disput. i. de 
 Bap. th. 9. 
 
44 MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 neglected baptism until visited with sickness, this neglect 
 rendered his character liable to suspicion. Accordingly, 
 the council of Neocesarea decreed, A. D. 313, as fol- 
 lows : — " He who is baptized when sick ought not to be 
 made a priest, unless his diligence and fidelity do after- 
 wards prove commendablej or the scarcity of men fit for 
 the office require it ; for his coming to the faith is not 
 voluntary, but from necessity." 
 
 It was made a question by Magnus to Cyprian, about 
 the middle of the third century, " whether they are to be 
 esteemed right Christians who "have been only sprinkled 
 with water, and not washed or dipped."* In reply, Cyp- 
 rian thus writes : — " I would use so much modesty and 
 humility, as not to prescribe so positively, but that every 
 one should have the freedom of his own thoughts, and do 
 as he thinks best. For the contagion of sin is not, in the 
 sacrament of salvation, washed off by the same means as 
 the dirt of the skin and of the body is washed away. 
 There is no necessity of soap, or of a large pool, or fish 
 pond. It is in another way that the breast of the believ- . 
 er is washed ; after another manner, that the mind of man 
 is by faith cleansed. In the saving sacraments, when 
 necessity obliges, and God grants his indulgence, the 
 shortest ways of transacting -divine matters confers the 
 whole on believers. Neither ought any one to be dis- 
 turbed because the sick are baptized by sprinkling or 
 washing; since they obtain the favor of the Lord." Cyp- 
 rian here quotes the- language of the prophet, " I will 
 sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean," 
 and adds, " From hence it appears that the sprinkling of 
 water is of equal validity with the laver of salvation A 
 
 * There was no question, it seems, at this time, as to the validity odcash- 
 ing ; and why should sprinkling have "come in question, if this mode of bap- 
 tism were not in use ? 
 
 t Opera Cyp. Lib. ii. Epis. 7. 
 
MODE ^)F BAPTISM. 45 
 
 Dr. Cave says, the primitive Christians " did not hold 
 sprinkling to be unlawful, especially in cases of necessi- 
 ty, of weakness, danger of death, or where conveniency 
 of imrrterging could not be had." He further says, that 
 they thought the martyrs " sufficiently qualified for heav- 
 en, by being baptized in their own blood."* ^ 
 
 Mr. Walker tells us of a Jew who, while travelling 
 with Christians in the time of .Marcus Aurelius Antoni- 
 nus, about sixty or seventy years after the Apostles, was 
 converted, fell sick, and desired baptism. Not- having 
 water, ." they sprinkled hrm thrice with sand, in the name 
 of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, lie recov- 
 ered, and his case was reported to the Bishop, who de- 
 cided that the man was baptized ("si modo aqua denuo' per- 
 funderetur) if he only had water poured on him again. "t 
 T mention this case, not as approving. of baptism without 
 water, but-to show how far the primitive Christians were 
 from considering immersion as essential. 
 
 Irenaeus mentions a sect of Christians who baptized 
 " by an affusion of water mixed with oil."| 
 
 Athanasius represents the Arians as administering 
 baptism (qteiciiofuior) by sprinkling. He does not cen- 
 sure the mode, but blames them for their violent proceed- 
 ings, and for attaching a different meaning to -the words 
 used in baptism, from that given them by the church. || 
 
 Theodoret reJates that the Eunomians, in baptism, wet 
 themselves only to the breast. § 
 
 Lawrence baptized two persons, Romanus and Lucil- 
 lus, by affusion. " A little while before he suffered," he 
 also " baptized, with a pitcher of water, one of his execu- 
 tioners."^ 
 
 * Primitive Christianity, Part i. Chap. 10. pp. 300, 321. . 
 
 f Doctrine of Baptisms, Chap. 10. 
 
 { Advers Haeres. Lib. i. Cap. 23. 
 
 || Orat. iii. against the Arians. $ Haer. Fab. Lib. iv. 
 
 IT Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part ii. pp. 353;356. 
 
46 MODE OP BffctiSM. 
 
 Novatian became a Christian about 120 years aftef the 
 apostles ; and " when visited with sickness, baptism was 
 administered to him, according to the cusfom of those 
 times, by affusion or sprinkling."* 
 
 Basilides is mentioned by Eusebius as having been 
 baptized^in prison.* 
 
 Constantine the Great, " being clothed with a white 
 garment, and laid upon his bed, was baptized in a solemn 
 manner by Eusebius of Nicomedia."t 
 
 Jerome speaks of a mode of baptism as common in the 
 ancient church, which was not lo dip the whole body, but 
 (in lavacro ter mergitare caput) a thrice dipping of the 
 hcad.\ Augustine, as quoted by Gratian, mentions the 
 same. " After that you have promised to believe, {tertio • 
 capita vestra in sacro fonte demersimus) thrice- we dip 
 your head in the sacred font."|| 
 
 In the year 390, Aurelius Prudentius, a man of Consu- 
 lar dignity, a Christian and a poet, thus sings in one of 
 his evening hymns : " Worshipper of God, remember 
 that thou didst go under the (Rorem sanctum) the holy 
 dews of the font and laver ;" — in other words that thou 
 wast sprinkled in baptism. "§ 
 
 The Centuriators (quoting from Socrates. Lib. vii. Cap. 
 17.) tell us of a celebrated Font, " out of which (baptizato 
 equa superfusa). the water is poured from above on the 
 baptized person." They also speak of a hypocritical 
 Jew, who had offered himself for baptism in different 
 places for mercenary purposes, but " when he came to 
 this font, and there offered to be baptized, and held his 
 head over the font, the water vanished away once and 
 again ; whereupon his fraud was discovered." 
 
 * Euseb. Ecc. Hist. Lib. vi. Cap. 5 and 43. 
 
 t Dupin's Ecc. Hist. Vol. ii. p. 84. J Advers. Luciferian. 
 
 || See Gratian de Consecrat. Dist. 4. 
 
 § In Walker's doctrine of Baptisms, Chap. 10. 
 
MODE OF BAPTISM. 47 
 
 Gennadius of Marseilles, who flourished about the year 
 490, says, " The person to be baptized makes confession 
 of his faith before the priest ; and after confession, 
 he is (vel aspergkur vel intingitur) either sprinkled tcith 
 water, or dipped in it."* 
 
 Fabian tells us that Augustine, the first missionary to 
 England, baptized ten thousand persons in a river, near 
 York, on a Christnras day.t He certainly could not have 
 baptized them by immersion. 
 
 In the year 499, Clodovaius king of the Franks was 
 baptized by Remigius, Arch-bishop of Rheims, not by 
 immersion, but (per infusionem aquae) by the pouring of 
 water.f 
 
 Bede frequently uses the terms tingo, abluo, perfundo 
 aqua, in relation to baptism ; and represents one Heri- 
 baldus speaking of himself as baptized in this way. 
 " Unda perfusus sum," &c.t 
 
 Stephen II.,. Bishop of Rome, decreed, A. D. 753, 
 that pouring should be considered as valid baptism. || 
 
 Walafridus Strabo, who flourished about the year 850, 
 says, " Many have been baptized^ not only by immersion, 
 but also' (desuper fundendo) by pouring water on them 
 from above ; and they may still be so. baptized. "§ 
 
 In the year 858. Nicetas Serronius speaks' of those (qui 
 purifica aqua perfusi sunt) have been baptized by pouring.^ 
 
 Liudgerus is said by Mabillon to have " baptized a lit- 
 tle infant, by pouring on holy water." ** 
 
 * De Dogmat. Ecc. Cap. 74. 
 
 t In Walker's Doctrine of Baptisms, Chap, 10: 1.3. 
 
 t Ecc. Hist. Lib. v. Cap. G. Baronius in his Annals (An.Chr. 826) speaks 
 of die baptism of this Heribaklus, king" of the Danes, in St. Alban's Church 
 at Mentz, " by having the water of holy baptism poured upon him." 
 
 || Concilia Labbei, Tom. vi. p.^650. 
 
 § De Rebus Ecc. Cap xxvi. p. 415. 
 
 f Comment, on Greg. Naz. Orat. 40. 
 • ** Acta Sanctorum P. ii.Cap. 7. 
 
48 MODE OP BAPTISM. 
 
 " Estius, referring to times long before the year 1300, 
 vvitnesseth that pouring had been much in use."* 
 
 Bernard, A. D. 1-120, speaks of baptism as administer- 
 ed by pouring (corpus perfusum visibiij elemento.)f 
 
 Otho, Bishop of Bamberg, a cotemporary of Bernard, 
 prescribes that baptism be administered in his diocese, 
 not by immersing the whole body, but (trina immersione 
 capitis) by a trine immersion of the head.| • 
 
 In the year 1140, Gratian speaks of baptism as admin- 
 istered by sprinkling. " The blessed waters with which 
 men (asperguntur) art sprinkled, avails to their sanctifi- 
 cation."|| 
 
 Hego, A. D. 1245,*says, "If there cannot be had a 
 sufficiency of water for the infant to be wholly dipped in 
 it, let the baptizer pour some water upon the infant and 
 say, 1 baptize tliee> &c.§ 
 
 About the year 1255, Thomas. Aquinas discusses the 
 question, whether immersion be of the necessity of baptism, 
 and answers it in the negative ; for, says he, " as a wash- 
 ing with water may be made, not only by immersion \ but 
 also by aspersion or affusion, so a baptism may be made 
 by way of sprinkling or pouring on wetter."^] . ' 
 
 A few years later, Bonaventure discusses the same 
 question', (an immergeu/lus, vel tantummodo aspergendus 
 sit baptizandus) and answers it in the same way. " It is 
 to be presumed, says he, " that the apostles baptized by 
 sprinkling; which, way is still kept in many churches, 
 but mostly in the Gallican."^j 
 
 Durant, A. D. 12§0, says, " sometimes baptism is given 
 by immersion, so that the Whole child is dipped in water; 
 
 * In P. Clark's Scrip. Grounds of In. Bap. pp. 128, 129. 
 t Epis. 77. t In Waller's Doc. of Baptisms, Chap. 10. 
 
 1| De Consecrat. Dist. 4. § Magdeberg, Hist. Cent. xiii. Col. 596. 
 
 IF In Walker's Doc. of Baptisms, Chap. 10. 
 
MODE OP BAPTISM. 49 
 
 and gometimes it is given by aspersion, when the child is 
 sprinkled, or water is ■poured upon it."* 
 
 About the same time, "the. Synod of Angiers speaks of 
 dipping or pouring as used indifferently in baptism."! 
 
 • Angelus Clavasius says,' (A. D. 14S0.) "The infant, 
 in what way soever he be touched" (with water) " is bap- 
 tized. A sprinkling, how little soever it be, is sufficient 
 in case of necessity."! 
 
 Erasmus says, " With us," (the Dutch) " they have 
 the water poured on them in baptism ; in England they 
 are dipped. "|| 
 
 Martin Bucer, about the year 1520, says, " God com- 
 manded unto men such a rite, as that either by the in- 
 tinction, ablution, or sprinkling of water, they should re- 
 ceive remission of sins."§ 
 
 Sebastian, Arch-bishop of Mentz directs (A. D. 1551,) 
 ''that the priest, holding the child over the font in his left 
 hand, shall take water out of the font with his right hand 
 and pour it upon the head of the child three times." 
 
 The form of baptism among the English Exiles in the 
 reign of Queen Mary, was for the minister to " take 
 water in his hand, lay it on the child's forehead, and say, 
 J baptize thee," &c.fl 
 
 Waloeus says, " It hath always been held indifferent in 
 the Christian church, whether baptism were administered 
 by a single or a trine immersion, or whether immersion or 
 sprinkling were used."** 
 
 Chemnitius says, " Whether the washing be performed 
 by mersion, tinction, perfusion, or sprinkling, it is a bap- 
 tizing."-^ 
 
 * De Ritu Baptizandi, Cap. 2. 
 
 t In Wall's Hist. ofln. Bap. P. ii. Chap. 9. 
 
 X In Walker's Doctrine of Baptisms, Chap. 10. 
 
 11 In Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part ii. Chap. S). 
 
 § Com. on Epis. to the Rom. Chap. vi. ^ Book of Forms. 
 
 ** Synopsis Theol. Disput. 44. ft Exam. Concil. Trident. P. ii. p. 122. 
 
 5 
 
50 MODE OP BAPTISM. 
 
 Danaeus says, " At this day, they who are to bejbap- 
 tized are mostly sprinkled only with water, and not dip- 
 ped into it."* 
 
 . Calvin tells us that, " The substance of baptism being 
 retained, the church, from the "beginning, enjoyed a liber- 
 ty of using somewhat differant rites. "t 
 
 Zelenus says, " Dipping was formerly more used, es- 
 pecially in the hot countries of Judea ; but this mode was 
 not universally practised, or essential to the ordinance of 
 baptism."! 
 
 Zanchius says, " As in a matter of liberty and indiffer- 
 "ency, the church sometimes followed one ceremony, and 
 sometimes the other, as she judged most expedient."! 
 
 Dr. Wall, who had a partiality for immersion, says, 
 " On extraordinary occasions, baptism, by affusion of 
 water on the face, was by the ancients counted sufficient 
 baptism. Of this there are many proofs."\\ ■ 
 
 The author of Letters to Bishop Hoadly, a learned and 
 professed Baptist, admits that, " for thirteen hundred 
 years successively after the apostles, sprinkling was per- 
 mitted upon extraordinary occasions. "§ 
 
 Mr. Rohinson, also a learned Baptist, admits that, " be- 
 fore the reformation, sprinkling was held valid, in cases 
 of necessity. "fl 
 
 In view of the foregoing authorities, the public will be 
 able to form a judgment as to the opinions and practices 
 which, in different ages, have prevailed in relation to bap- 
 tism. That immersion is baptism, I do not doubt ; .and 
 
 * Isagoge Christiana P. iv. Cap. 29, p. 522. 
 
 t In Reed's Apology pp. 240, 113. 
 
 X In P. Clark's Scrip. Grounds of In. Bap. p. 128. 
 
 || Hist, of In. Pap. Part. ii. Chap. 9. § Plain Account, &e. p. 16. 
 
 11 Hist, of Baptism, p. 116. This necessity is denned by Lyndwood, 
 who wrote An. 1420, to be " danger of death ; a state of hostility ; an in- 
 cursion of thieves ; an obstruction of the road ; a legal disability," &c. 
 Provinciale, Lib. iii. tit. 25. 
 
MODE OP BAPTISM. 51 
 
 that this mode of baptizing, at some periods and in some 
 places, has been more common than any other, I see no 
 reason to deny- But until the rise of the Anabaptists (as 
 they were called) in the sixteenth century, I find no ac- 
 count of any church, or sect of Christians, which held 
 that immersion was essential to the ordinance. Some 
 seem to have practised this mode (connected with various 
 idle ceremonies) ujiiformly, except in cases of necessity ; 
 others immersed less frequently, but generally ; others 
 still, baptized indifferently, by immersion, pouring, or 
 sprinkling, according to circumstances ; while all agreed 
 that immersion was not essential, bat. that" baptism in 
 •other modes was equally valid. 
 
 To the arguments adduced in the foregoing pages I 
 know of but one objection of any importance, which has 
 not been noticed. The Greeks, it is said, understand 
 their native language better than foreigners, and in their 
 church baptism is uniformly administered by immersion. 
 To this I reply, 
 
 1. That while it»isiikely the modern Greek may under- 
 stand his native language better, in some respects, than 
 foreigners, it is not likely that he better understands the 
 meaning of ; '«-rr(>>, as used by ancient Greek authors, 
 and by the writers of the New Testament. But, 
 
 2. The Greeks do not consider immersion as essential 
 to baptism. This is evident from the fact that, although 
 they ordinarily baptize in .this way,, still when sickness or 
 other circumstances occur to prevent, they administer 
 the ordinance in other modes.* Of course they must re- 
 gard immersion as not essential ; and this is all for which 
 Pedobaptists contend. 
 
 * Dr. Wall tells us, that the Greeks " hardly count a child, except in case 
 of sickness, well baptized without immersion ;' which implies that, in cases 
 sickness, if not in others, they do count their children well baptized although 
 they have not been immersed. 
 
PART II. 
 
 ON THE SUBJECTS OF CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. 
 
 There is a difference of opinion between Baptists and 
 Pedobaptists respecting, not only the mode, but the sub- 
 jects of Christian baptism ; and in entering on the discus- 
 sion before uSj it is important that the precise point of 
 difference should be stated. It is not, whether unbaptiz* 
 ed addlts, who give no evidence of faith, are proper sub- 
 jects of the ordinance. We agree with our brethren that 
 they are not. Hence, we agree with them in admitting 
 the full force of those precepts which enjoin repentance 
 and faith on adults in order to baptism. Neither is it the 
 question, whether those unbaptized adults, who give evi- 
 dence of faith, are proper subjects. , We agree with our 
 brethren that they are. The sole point of difference be- 
 tween us and them, in respect to the proper subjects of 
 baptism, is this: — We affirm, and they deny, that chil- 
 dren, ivho are under the care of believing, covenanting pa- 
 rents should be baptized* 
 
 To establish and defend what is here affirmed will be 
 my object in the following Sections. It will be necessa- 
 ry, in some of the first of them, to attend to subjects 
 which have an indirect though important bearing on the 
 point under consideration. 
 
 * It will be said, perhaps, that we differ from Baptists in another impor- 
 tant point :—They affirming and we denying that believers who have been 
 baptized in infancy should be r&baptized. But as they affirm this, because 
 they think infant baptism wrong ; and we deny it, because we think infant 
 baptism right ; the difference obviously respects infant baptism only ; 
 and the question is left as .before stated. 
 
SUBJECTS Or BAPTISM. 53 
 
 Section I. 
 
 The Visible Church the same under both Dispensations. 
 
 i% My Dove, my undefiled is but one ; she is the ODly one of her 
 Mother." — Cant. vi. 9. 
 
 The relation subsisting in ancient times, between the 
 congregation of.Israel and the Divine Being was very In- 
 timate and peculiar. They had entered into solemn cov- 
 enant with him, and he with them. They had ' avouch- 
 ed the Lord to be their God, to walk in his ways, to keep 
 his statutes, his commandments, and his judgments, and 
 to hearken to his voice ; and the Lord had avouched 
 them to be his peculiar people, as he had promised them.' 
 Deut. xxvi. 17, 18. Accordingly, God speaks of the Is- 
 raelites throughout the Old Testament as his people, his 
 own people ; and they speak of him^as in a peculiar sense 
 their God. They were the depositaries of the true reli- 
 gion.; had made profession of this religion ; and were 
 manifestly, a church — a visible church. They are.spoken 
 of as a church in the New Testament. " This {Moses) 
 is he who was in the (ey.yj.eaiu) church in the wilder r 
 ness." • Acts vii. 38. 
 
 It will be my object here to show, that the visible 
 church,. under both dispensations, has been substantially 
 the same; or. that the general, visible, Christian commu- 
 nity is but a continuation and enlargement of ' the com- 
 monwealth of Israel.' 
 
 I do not mean, indeed, that there have been no changes : 
 there certainly have been changes,, in aocommodationto 
 the altered state of things. While the people of God 
 were looking, forward.to a 'promised Saviour, they needed 
 types, and rites, and bloody sacrifices which, since his 
 appearance, have, for the best reasons, been taken out of 
 the way. Still, the abolishing of these rites, and the 
 
54 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 ushering in' of the new dispensation, did not affect the 
 identity of the church.* 
 
 1. The* identity of the visible church under both dis- 
 pensations may be argued from the identity of the real 
 church. — The real church on earth comprises all the true 
 friends of God existing in the world. It embodies all the 
 true religion, the piety, which is to be found among men. 
 It is admitted, that this body has been, at all periods, the 
 same. The true friends of God have always sustained 
 the same spiritual relations to him, and to one another ; — 
 they have always belonged to the same holy family, and 
 this family is the church. But if the real church has 
 been, in all periods, the same, so has the visible church. 
 What is the visible church ? It consists of those who, by 
 a credible profession, appear to belong to the real church 
 — appear to be truly sanctified persons. It -is nothing 
 more than the real church bodied forth, made visible to 
 the apprehension of men ; — so that we can no more con- 
 ceive of two distinct visible churches, while we admit the 
 identity of the real church, than we can conceive of any 
 thing else as visibly two, which yet appears to be one and 
 the same. 
 
 2. Under both dispensations, the church has . profess- 
 ed the same religion. — No one doubts that true religion 
 has bedn in all periods the same. 
 
 There has been but one path from earth to heaven — 
 but .one way of salvation by a Redeemer. This religion 
 is revealed and inculcated in the Bible ; and the r-eligion 
 of the Bible is one. The religion of the Old Testament 
 is not distinct fr*bm that of the New, like the religion of 
 
 * John the Baptist and our Saviour preached, "Repent ye, for the king- 
 dom of heaven is at hand." Matt. iii. 2, and iv. 17. The phrase, kingdom 
 of heaven, is used by the Evangelists in a variety of significations. In the 
 places referred to, it imports, not a new visible church, but the gospel dis- 
 pensation, which was about to be introduced, and to displace the dispensa- 
 tion of the law. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 55 
 
 Brumha or Mahomet ; — in all essential points it is the 
 same. But the Israelites were professors of this religion 
 as truly as Christians are. The Old Testament was com- 
 mitted to them, and they professed to receive and follow 
 it. Both the Old Testament and the New are committed 
 to us, and we profess to make them the rule of our faith 
 and practice. It follows, therefore, that the church, un- 
 der both dispensations, has professed the same religion — : 
 the religion of the Bible. 
 
 This argument may be presented in a. somewhat differ- 
 ent light. —The religion of the Bible, consists essentially 
 in its doctrines; and what doctrines are how professed in 
 the church, which were not professed in the church of 
 Israel 1 What important doctrines' are taught in the New 
 Testament, which are omitted in the. Old ? In the New 
 Testament, to be sure, the doctrines of religion are set 
 forth with greater clearness, particularity, and force, but 
 it would be difficult to show, except in mntters of inferior 
 importance, that it 'contains any new truths. 
 
 Another essential part of .the religion of the Bibje is 
 its requisitions ; and in these there is a striking uniform- 
 ity. — The demands of the law have been the same under 
 both dispensations. " Thou sjialt love the Lord thy God, 
 with all thy heart, and with all thy soul) and with all thy 
 strength, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thy- 
 self." — The demands of the gospel, too, have been the 
 same.. Repentance, faith, submission, hope, all the holy 
 affections towards God, and all the benevolence and kind- 
 ness to man, which are required of Christians now, were 
 as strictly required of Israelites under fhe former dispen- 
 sation. — Indeed, those directions which go to constitute 
 the discipline of the church, are inculcated in the New 
 Testament almost precisely as in the Old. The direc- 
 tion of Christ now is, " If thy brother .tiespass against 
 thee, go and tell him his fault." Formerly it was, " Thou 
 
 
56 SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 
 
 shalt. not hate thy brother in thine heart; thou shalt in 
 any wise rebuke thy neighbor, and not suffer sin upon 
 him." Lev. xix. 17. The direction now is, " If thy 
 brother repent, forgive him." Formerly it was, ' When 
 the offender shall bring his sin offering, and in token of 
 repentance lay his hand upon its head, the victim shall 
 be slain, and he shall be forgiven.' Lev. Chap. iv. The 
 direction now is, ' If the offender will not hear the church, 
 but continues obstinate, let him be cut .off and become to 
 you as an heathen.' Formerly it was, 'The soul that do- 
 eth aught presumptuously, and will not he'arken to the 
 priest, nor the judge, the same hath reproached the Lord, 
 and that soul shall be cut off from his people.'* 
 
 Still another part of the religion of the Bible is its prom- 
 ises ; and what* better promises has the church under the 
 present dispensation, than those which it formerly enjoy- 
 ed 1 Indeed, are not the identical promises to the- an- 
 cient Zion still relied on as valid, and-as applicable to the 
 existing church of Christ ? . "•BeholU I have graven thee 
 upon the palms of my hands.;' thy walls are continually 
 before me. ' Kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and 
 queens thy nursing' mothers. They shall bow down to 
 thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the 
 dust of thyfeet; and thou sfialt know that" I am the 
 Lord." _ Is. xlix. 16, 23. 
 
 It is plain, I trust, to every reader, that the religion of 
 the two Testaments is the same ; and that the church, 
 under both dispertsations. has actually professed the same 
 religion. Of course, in regard to its outward religious 
 profession — its visibility, it has been the same church. 
 
 3. Numerous declarations, which in the Old Testa- 
 ment were made to the ancient church, are in the New 
 Testament applied to the Christian church. For in- 
 
 * Compare Matt, xviii. 17, and Numb, xv, 30, and Deut. xvii. 12. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 57 
 
 stance, it is said in the Psalms, " I will declare thy name 
 unto my brethren ; in the midst of the congregation (ex- 
 xh; attic Sept.) I will praise thee." Ps. xxii. 22. But in 
 the New Testament we learn, that* this is a declaration 
 of Christ, made in reference to his church. " Both he 
 that sanctifieth and they who are-sanctified arc all of one; 
 for which cause he (Christ) is not ashamed to call them 
 brethren, saying, I will declare thy name unto my breth- 
 ren ; in the midst of the church (exxl^aiuz) will I sing 
 praise unto thee." Heb: ii. 11, 12. It follows, that ''the 
 congregation," spoken of in the Psalms, and "the church" 
 spoken of in this latter passage, are the same body. 
 
 God said of his ancient church, "I will walk among 
 you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people." 
 Lev. xxvi. 12. The Apostle quotes this language, to- 
 gether with other expressions from the Old Testament, 
 and applies them to the church at Corinth. " As God 
 hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I 
 will be their God, and they shall be my people ; and I 
 will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and 
 daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. Having, therefore, 
 these promises, let us cleanse ourselves," fyc. 2 Cor. vi. 
 16 — 18. How could Paul represent the Corinthian breth- 
 ren as having these promises, and as being under conse- 
 quent obligations, to cleanse themselves, unless he consid- 
 ered them as belonging to the same church to which these 
 promises were originally made ? 
 
 In the following language, God addressed his church 
 under the former dispensation : " If ye will obey my voice 
 and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treas- 
 ure unto me above all people ; and ye shall be unto me a 
 kingdom of priest's, and a holy nation." Ex. xix. 5, 6. 
 In almost the same language, he addresses his church 
 under the Christian dispensation ; " Ye are a chosen 
 
58 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar 
 people." 1 Pet. ii. 9. 
 
 4. The prophecies of Scripture clearly show, tlfat the 
 present visible church is the same with the church of Is- 
 rael. 
 
 John the Baptist predicted of him win was to come 
 after him, not that he should destroy, but that he should 
 " thoroughly purge his floor." Matt. iii. 12. Accord- 
 ingly, the church was purified, but not destroyed, at the 
 introduction of the Christian dispensation.* 
 
 Christ predicted that many should " come from the 
 east, and from the west, and sit down with Abraham, 
 Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven," while "the 
 children of the kingdom should be cast out into outer 
 darkness." Matt. viii. 11, 12. What are we to under- 
 stand here by the phrase, " kingdom of heaven 1" Not 
 the kingdom of glory, surely ; for none of the children of 
 that kingdom will ever be cast out. The phrase must 
 denote in this place, as it does in others, the visible 
 church. And the prediction of our Saviour was, that 
 when the Jews were ejected for their unbelief, the Gen- 
 tiles should come and sit down in the same church " with 
 Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." 
 
 In the parable of the vineyard, Christ also predicted, 
 that the same vineyard or church, in which the Jews had 
 done so wickedly, should be taken from them and given 
 to the "Gentiles. " The kingdom of God shall be taken 
 from you, and given to a nation-bringing forth the fruits 
 thereof." Matt. xxi. 43. 
 " In proof of the point under consideration,- 1 might ad- 
 
 * The introduction of the new dispensation is s'poken of in the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews as " the time of (dioiodwcrsws') reformation" or emendation. 
 Chap. ix. 10. On the theory here opposed, it must have been to the an- 
 cient church a time, not of reformation, but destruction. Reformation nec- 
 essarily implies a continuance of the thing reformed. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 59 
 
 cluce numerous quotations from the Old Testament. In- 
 deed, all the anciept predictions oflhe ingathering of the ■ 
 Gentiles, and of the future prosperity and glory of the 
 church, were made, not to a new church to be established 
 under the gospel, but to the Zion of the Old Testament, 
 the church at that time existing in Israel.* " The Lord 
 shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon 
 thee, and the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings 
 to the brightness of thy rising. Lift up thine eyes round 
 ab*out and see : all they gather themselves together, they 
 come to thee. Thy sons shall come from far, and thy 
 daughters shall be nursed at thy side. Then thou shalt 
 see and llow together, and thine heart shall fear and be 
 enlarged, because the abundance of the sea shall be con- 
 verted unto thee ; the forces of the Gentiles shall come 
 unto thee. The sons also of them that afflicted .thee shall 
 come bending unto thee ; and all them that despised thee 
 shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet ; and 
 they shall call thee the city of the Lord, the Zion of the 
 Holy One of Israel." Is. Chap. ix. 
 
 There is no resisting tl?e conclusion to be drawn from 
 these and similar passages, many of which might be quot- 
 ed from the Old Testament, but by supposing that it is 
 the real, and not the visible church, which is here ad- 
 dressed. But how will those who adopt this hypothesis 
 interpret predictions like the following? *' The children 
 which thou shalt have, after thou hast lost the other, shall 
 say again in thine ears, The place is too strait for me ; 
 give place .to me that I may* dwell. Then thou shalt say 
 in thine heart, Who hath begotten me "these, seeing I 
 have lost my children, and am desolate, a captive, remov- 
 ing to and fro ?" Is. xli'x. 20,21. Will it be pretended 
 that this prediction belongs to the real, as distinct from 
 
 * See Appendix, Note C. 
 
60 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 the visible church of God ? Has the real church ever lost 
 .any of her children? ' Has any true believer ever fallen 
 finally away? — It cannot be denied tliat this and similar 
 predictions relate to the visible, church in Israel) and es- 
 tablish the fact that converted Gentiles under the new 
 dispensation are gathered into the same church. 
 
 5. The identity of the church under both dispensa- 
 tions is certain from the declarations of Scripture. — The 
 Apostle Paul teaches (Rom. xi. 17 — 24.) that believing 
 Gentiles are graffed into the same olive tree, from which 
 the unbelieving Jews were broken off, and into which the 
 restored Jews shall be grafFed again. What are we to 
 understand by this olive tree ? Not Christ : for none 
 who are truly interested in him are ever broken off. Not 
 the real, spiritual church ; for the same reason. The 
 olive tree plainly represents the visible chufch, the branch- 
 es of which are attached to it by a profession of godliness.* 
 From this, the unbelieving Jews were broken off. Into 
 the same, the believing Gentiles are graffed. And into 
 the same, the .restored posterity of Abraham will at length 
 be graffed again. Hence, the "sameness of the church, 
 under both dispensations, is in this Chapter incontestably 
 established, f 
 
 * Jeremiah, addressing the church, says, " The Lord called thy name a 
 green olive tree" Chap xi. 16. Of the church in Israel the prophet Hosea 
 says, " His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the olive tree." 
 Chap. xiv. 6. 
 
 t "The (aqyisluiog\ wild olive," says Professor Stuart, was often 
 grafted into the fruitful one, when it.began^to decay, and thus not only 
 brought forth fruit, but caused the decaying olive to revive- and flourish. 
 The image which the Apostle here employs is, therefore, a very vivid one. 
 Hie Gentiles had been grafted in upon the Jewish church, and had caused 
 this decayed tree to revive and flourish. But still the Apostle means to 
 hold in check any exultation of the Gentiles on account of this. He reminds 
 them, that after alLthey are not the stock, but only grafts; that the root 
 and fatness of the good olive have been transferred to them, only because 
 they have been grafted into it. — All this shows that, in the Apostle's view, 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 61 
 
 In further proof of this point, I shall adduce but one 
 passage more. The Apostle, addressing his Ephesian breth- 
 ren, says, " Wherefore remember, that ye, being in time 
 past Gentiles in the flesh were without Christ, be- 
 
 • ing aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers 
 from the'covenants of promise, having no hope, and with- 
 out God in the world." Eph. ii. 11, 12. Does the form 
 
 *-of expression here used necessarily imply, that the Ephe- 
 sian brethren were no longer " without Christ, having no 
 hope, and without God in the world !'•' Cut it equally 
 implies, that they were no longer " aliens from the com- 
 monwealth of Israel." It i# just as plain from this pas- 
 sage, that thes :> Christians were now mtnibcrs of the com- 
 monwealth or church of Israel, as it is that they belonged 
 to Christ, enjoyed the comforts of hope, or loved and 
 served the God of heaven. 
 
 6. There is evidence from fact, that the church, un- 
 der both dispensations, is the same. Dflring Christ's pub- 
 lic ministry, his disciples were members of the Jewish 
 Church. They attended the festivals and other instituted 
 services of that church, and " walked in all its command- 
 ments and ordinances blameless." After tl»e ascension 
 of Christ, we find them pillars in the Christian church. 
 Had they, in the mean time, been cat off from one church 
 and gathered into another ? And if so, when and how 
 was this done? And what record have we, in the Now 
 .Testament, of any such proceeding ?^-In the hour of 
 Christ's death, important changes were^ indeed accom- 
 plished. The old dispensation was abolished, the new 
 one ushered in, and the church was purged of its un- 
 believing members ; but the stock of the olive tree, with 
 
 there has been, in reality, bid one church ; the ancient Jewish one being the 
 foundation, the Christian one the superstructure and completion of the 
 building." Comment, on Rom. xi. 17. 
 
 6 
 
62 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM, 
 
 its few green branches, remained the same, and into it 
 multitudes were speedily engrafted. ' 
 
 In short, nothing can be more evident, than that the 
 disciples belonged to the same church, on the day. of 
 Pentecost and afterwards, to which they belonged on the 
 night when they partook of the fassover-^a. sacrament of 
 the old dispensation — with their blessed Lord. And from 
 this fact, it follows conclusively, that the church, under . 
 both dispensations, "has been the same. 
 
 Section IL 
 
 T.he Covenant of the Visible Church the same under both dispensations. 
 
 That the covenant of the visible church has been the 
 same under both dispensations is an incontestable infer- 
 ence from the truth established in the previous section. 
 The church is constituted by its covenant ; and the con- 
 nexion between cnurch and covenant is of such a nature, 
 that if the one is essentially changed, the other must be : 
 or if one can be shown to remain unchanged, the same 
 must be true respecting the other. But it has been prov- 
 ed that the ohurch continues the same. It may be safely 
 concluded, therefore, that the covenant of the church is 
 essentially the same. • 
 
 What was the covenant of the church of Israel ? Not 
 the Sinatic covenant ; for God had promised to be the 
 God of Israel, and when speaking of them, uniformly calls 
 them his people, long previous to the promulgation of the 
 covenant from Sinai.* The covenant of the ancient 
 church was unquestionably the covenant ivith Abraham. 
 Here, God first promises to be the God of Abraham and 
 his seed. Immediately after the giving of this covenant, 
 God begins to designate the family of Abraham as his 
 
 * See Exodus iii. 6, 7 
 
SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 63 
 
 people^ And in subsequent Scripture, when speaking of 
 them as his people, he usually annexes some express re- 
 ference to his covenant dealings with Abraham.* 
 
 That the covenant with Abraham was the covenant of 
 the church of Israel, is evident from the Mosaic institu- 
 tions themselves. The design of these institutions was, 
 not to separate a people with whom God had no previous 
 covenant relation, and form them into a church,- but to 
 establish Israel to be -his people, and that he might be 
 their God, as he had "sworn unto their fathers, to Abra- 
 ham, to Isaac, and to Jacob." Deut. xxix. 13. Since, 
 then, the covenant with Abraham was the covenant of 
 the ancient visible church ; and since the church has 
 been* under both dispensations, the same ; it follows that 
 the covenant with Abraham must now be the covenant of 
 the visible Christian church. t 
 
 That the covenant with Abraham still exists, as the 
 covenant of the church, may be shown from other con- 
 siderations. 
 
 1. It still exists, because it has never been abolished. 
 As God established this covenant, and gave it to his 
 
 * •' Blessed be the Lord God of Israel ; for l.c liath visited and redeemed 
 his people to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to re- 
 member his holy covenant; the oath which he sware to our father Abraham," 
 &c. Luke i.68— 1:1 
 
 t Some Pedobaptists have considered this covenant as the covenant of 
 Grace; but I prefer to speak of it. as the covenant of the church. The cov- 
 enant bf grace is strictly this, ' Repent, and ye shall be forgiven ; believe, and 
 ye shall be saved 5' and all who enter into it are of course, pious persons. 
 It is believed that the covenant of the church, under both dispensations, 
 comprises the covenant of grace ; but it also comprises certain other things, 
 to denote its visibility. Many have lived and died in the covenant of grace 
 who have not entered ijito the covenant of the visible church ; and more, 
 probably, under both dispensations, have entered professedly into the cove- 
 nant of the church, who have had no interest in the covenant of grace. — I 
 make these remarks, for the purpose of distinguishing between these cove- 
 nants, and to show the propriety of considering the covenant with Abraham 
 as #e covenant of the church. 
 
64 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 church, it must continue till it is abolished by the same 
 authority. Where, then, is the evidence that God has 
 abolished his covenant with Abraham? Suffice it to say 
 that there is no such evidence in the Bible. 
 
 It has been said, indeed, that in the change of the dis- 
 pensations — the removal of the Levitical law — the cove- 
 nant with Abraham was doubtless abolished. But Paul, 
 it seems, judged differently. He assures us that the cov- 
 enant with Abraham, "which was confirmed before of 
 God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and 
 thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make 
 the promise of none effect." Gal. iii. 17. 
 
 It has been said, too, that the removal of circumcision, 
 the ancient token of the covenant with Abraham, affords 
 evidence of the abolition"of the covenant itself. But a 
 visible token is no essential part of a covenant. Mutual 
 engagements may be binding without any token. Con- 
 sequently, God may have removed the ancient token of 
 his covenant, or may have exchanged it for another of 
 similar import, and still the covenant remain the same as 
 before. 
 
 2. That the covenant with Abraham is still the cove- 
 nant of the church, is evident from its promises and re- 
 quirements, or from its very nature. Every literal cove- 
 nant consists essentially in promises and requirements. 
 If, therefore, the covenant with Abraham shall be found 
 to present the same general promises and requisitions 
 which are held forth to believers under the gospel, the 
 conclusion cannot be avoided, that this is still the cove- 
 nant of the church. 
 
 The covenant with Abraham, like the gospel, exhibits 
 a Saviour as the grand object of faith. " In thy seed" 
 (which is Christ) " shall all the nations of the earth be 
 blessed." Gen. xii. 3, and xxii. 18. This covenant con- 
 tains promises of all needful temporal blessings, Gen. xvii. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. ' 65 
 
 8 : and promises of the like description are found in the 
 gospel. Matt. vi. 33. 1 Tim. iv. 8. Here are promises 
 of great prosperity to the church, Gen. xvii. 2; and such 
 promises- are repeated throughout the Bible. Here, too, 
 are promises, in which Abraham saw his title to heaven, 
 Gen. xvii. 8, and Heb. xi. 10 ; and the same precious 
 promises are still good to believers. In this covenant are 
 promises of distinguished honor for the seed of Abraham, 
 Gen. xvii. 6; and his spiritual seed find such promises in 
 the New Testament. In short, God here promises to be 
 a God to his people and their children after them, Gen. 
 xvii. 7 ; and a greater promise never has been made, nor 
 can be, in this or in the coming world. Ileb. viii 10. 
 Rev. xxi. 7.* 
 
 Let us now look at the requirements of the covenant 
 under consideration. In promising to be the God of 
 Abraham, God virtually required Abraham to accept of 
 hirh as his God and portion. In holding up the Messiah 
 as an object of faith, he required him to believe in the. 
 promised Messiah. In requiring circumcision, he re- 
 quired that of which circumcision was an emblem, viz. a 
 renewal of the heart to holiness. And he expressly re- 
 quired Abraham to walk before him and be perfect. Gen. 
 Xvii. 1. Has God ever ceased to make these require- 
 ments? Or will he cease to make them to the end of the 
 world 1 — We see, then, from the promises and require- 
 ments of the covenant with Abraham, or from its very 
 nature, that it still exists as the covenant of the church. 
 
 Among the promises of the covenant with Abraham, I 
 have included the memorable promise, first recorded in 
 the twelfth Chapter of Genesis, " In thee shall all the fam- 
 ilies of the earth be blessed." It is admitted by the more 
 
 * In the interpretation above given to the covenant with Abraham, I am 
 fully supported by Mr Carson, a late distinguished Baptist writer on the 
 subject. For his statements at length, see Appendix, Note D. 
 
 *6 
 
66 ' SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 intelligent Baptists, that this is a " gospel promise," and 
 " the ever memorable charter of all the blessings which 
 Jewish and Gentile believers enjoy through. Christ." But 
 then it is insisted that " this promise is not contained in the 
 covenant of circumcision, but in a covenant made with ' 
 Abraham twenty-four years before."* 
 
 It would seem that the controversy, so far as the cove- 
 nant with Abraham is concerned, is here brought within 
 narrow limits. If it can be shown that the promise above 
 quoted is a part of this covenant, it can never more be 
 disputed that this covenant comprises the covenant of 
 grace. It will be proved, that the covenant with Abra- 
 ham is " the ever memorable charter of all the bless- 
 ings, which Jewish and Gentile believers enjoy through 
 Christ." 
 
 It is manifest that God made but one covenant with 
 Abraham. His covenant transactions with the patriarch 
 are spoken of throughout the Scriptures in the singular 
 .form. "The Lord thy God will not forget the covenant 
 of the fathers." Deut. iv. 31. "To remember his holy 
 covenant, the oath which he aware to Abraham." Luke 
 i. 72. " Ye are the children of the, covenant which God 
 made with our fathers." Acts iii. 25. In these and the 
 parallel passages, the covenant with Abraham is spoken 
 of as one. 
 
 There is as much reason to suppose that God made 
 eight distinct covenants with Abraham, as that he made 
 more than one. God appeared to him and addressed him 
 in covenant language at eight different times ;t nor is 
 there anything in the subjects on which he addressed 
 him, which would lead us to fix on two covenants, rather 
 than on eight. Those, therefore, who do not believe that 
 
 * Judson's Sermon, p. 24. 
 
 t Gen. xii. 1 and 7; xiii. 14; xv. 1 ; xvii ; xviii ; xxi. 12; xxii. 15. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. G7 
 
 God made eight distinct covenants with Abraham, have 
 no reason to suppose that he made more than one. 
 
 It is evident from the similarity of the promises which 
 at different times were made to Abraham, that they all 
 belong to one and the same covenant. The promise of a 
 numerous posterity was made and repeated to him, a< no 
 less than seven different times.* The promise of the land 
 of Canaan was made at four different times, t The prom- 
 ise of God to be. his portion was also made to Abraham, 
 impliedly or expressly, <aifour different times.! Andthe 
 promise that in him all nations and families should be 
 blessed, was made at three different times. || Is it likely 
 that promises so similarly repeated and intermingled 
 should be considered as belonging to more than one cove- 
 nant ? And is it posible to form more than one cove- 
 nant from them; without putting asunder things which 
 God hath joined together, and doing violence to the 
 sacred text ? 
 
 These promises of the covenant seem to have been re- 
 peated at different times, for the trial and confirmation 
 of the patriarch's faith. Before he was finally constituted 
 the father of believers, and the covenant was sealed and 
 confirmed with an oath ; it was necessary that his faith 
 should endure severe trials. And it was highly proper, 
 amidst these trials, that he should be strengthened and 
 •supported by repeated promises and encouragements. § 
 
 * Gen. xii. 2 ; xiii. 1G ; xv. 5 ; xvii. 2; xviii. 18 ; xxi. 13 ; xxii. 17. 
 
 t Gen. xii. 7 ; xiii. lo ; xv. 7 ; xvii. 8. 
 
 % Gen. x'u. 3 ; xv. 1 ; xvii. 7 ; xxii. 17. 
 
 H Gen. xii. 3 ; xviii. 18 ; xxii. 18. 
 
 § The process of these covenant transactions, says Dr. Reed, " exhibits 
 a most striking and beautiful climax. In (he first instance, we see the bless- 
 ing confirmed to Abraham and his seed by promise. Gen. xii. 1 — 3; 
 secondly, the promised blessing is confirmed by covenant, Chap. xv. 18; 
 thirdly, the covenanted blessing is confirmed, by annexing the token of dr 
 cumcision , Chap. xvii. 10; and fourthly, by the oath of Almighty God, 
 Chap. xxii. 16." Reed's Apology, p. 66. 
 
68 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 God's covenant transactions with Abraham were re- 
 newed with both Isaac and Jacob; and it is certain from 
 these renewals of them; that they constitute but one cov- 
 enant. In both instances, those promises, which from 
 time to time had been made to Abraham, and which some 
 have endeavored to separate into two distinct covenants, 
 are brought together within the compass of three verses. 
 " The Lord appeared unto Isaac and said, Go not down 
 into Egypt; sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee 
 and bless thee : For unto thee, "and unto thy seed, I will 
 give all these countries. And I will .make thy seed to 
 multiply as the stars of heaven, and I will give unto thy 
 seed all these countries ; and in thy seed shall all the na- 
 tions of the earth be blessed." Gen. xxvi. 2 — 4. To 
 Jacob also God said, "I am the Lord God of Abraham, 
 thy father, and the God of Isaac. Tire land whereon 
 thou liest, to thee will I give it, arid to thy seed. And 
 thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth; and thou shalt 
 spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the 
 north, and to the south ; and ire thee, and in thy seed, 
 shall all the families of the earth be blessed." Gen. xxviii. 
 13—15. 
 
 It is most manifest, indeed, that God never made but 
 one covenant with Abraham. And if he never made but 
 one covenant with him, then certainly the promise, that 
 in him all the nations of the earth should be. blessed con- 
 stituted a part of this covenant. Indeed, this is expressly 
 asserted by the Apostle Peter. "Ye are the children 
 of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made 
 with our fathers, saying, unto Abraham, And in thy seed 
 shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." Acts iii. 
 25. This promise is here expressly quoted, as belonging 
 to the one covenant which God made with Abraham. 
 
 It further appears that this promise is included in the 
 covenant with Abraham, since it is of the same import 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 69 
 
 with some of the promises which were made at the time 
 when circumcision was instituted. God repeatedly 
 promised, at this time, that Abraham should be "the 
 father of many nations;" or tbat many nations should be 
 his children. And how does this differ from the other 
 promise, ' In thee shall the nations of the earth be bless- 
 ed V Can the nations be blessed in Abraham in any 
 other way, than by becoming his spiritual children ? Or 
 can they have him for- their father, and become his spirit- 
 ual children, and not be blessed in him 1 — Evidently, the 
 two promises, ' I win make thee a father of many na- 
 tions,' and ' Many nations shall be blessed in thee,' are 
 of the same import ; and consequently, what has been 
 denominated, by way of eminence, the "gospel promise" — * 
 "the ever memorable charter of all the blessings which 
 Jewish and Gentile believers enjoy through Christ," is 
 included in the covenant with Abraham. 
 
 3. I shall endeavor to show from various representa- 
 tions of Scripture, that the covenant with Abraham still 
 exists, as the covenant of the church. — 1 begin with a 
 declaration of the Apostle, which has been already quot- 
 ed for a different purpose. " This I say, that the cov- 
 enant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the 
 law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, can- 
 not disannul, that it should make the promise of none- 
 effect." Gal. fir, 17. It is evident from this passage, 
 not only that the covenant with Abraham was not abolished 
 with the Levitical law, but that it was a gospel covenant, 
 and as such still exists, and is valid. It " was confirmed 
 of God in Christ." And not only so, it was a covenant 
 of promise, — that promise, according to which all the 
 spiritual children of Abraham are represented in a fol- 
 lowing verse as bejpg heirs of the heavenly inheritance." 
 " If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and 
 heirs according to the promise," 
 
70 
 
 SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 
 
 In various parts of the New Testament, Abraham i? 
 spoken of as the father of believers, -and they are repre- 
 sented as his children. The Apostle Paul accounts for 
 this, by referring us directly to the covenant WiJh -Abra- 
 ham,— of which circumcision was the seal or token. 
 "He (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision, a seal 
 of tlie righteousness of the faith which he had yet being 
 uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all them 
 that believe' though they be not circumcised." Rom. iv. 
 11. In other words, he received the sign of circumcision, 
 and the covenant of which this was a part, that he might 
 be the father of believers, and that 'they might be his spi- 
 ritual children. 
 
 • In a following verse, the Apostle justifies himself in 
 speaking of Abraham, as the father of believers, and of 
 them as his seed, by quoting a part of the covenant with 
 Abraham, recorded in the seventeenth chapter of Gen- 
 esis. " Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace, 
 to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed ; not 
 to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is 
 of the faith of Abraham, ivho is the father of us all; as 
 it is written, T have made thee a father of many nations." 
 
 From these representations it is evident, that the pe- 
 culiar relation between believers and Abraham is founded 
 on the covenant with Abraham - T and so long as this rela- 
 tion exists — so long as Abraham continues to be the father 
 of believers, and they are his children — so long this cov- 
 enant must remain in force. 
 
 In the passage above quoted from Rom. iv. 11, circum- 
 cision is called " a seal of the righteousness of faith." It 
 made sure to all who received it, that faith like that of 
 Abraham, and like that required in the covenant with 
 Abraham, ivas imputed for rightcous/tps, and stood con- 
 nected with justification* It follows, therefore, that 
 * " It (circumcision) seals the truth of the gospel, viz, that there is 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. • 71 
 
 true faith was required, and justification promised, in the 
 covenant with Abraham ; and consequently that this was 
 a gospel covenant, comprising the covenant of grace. 
 
 When the tongue of Z.acharias was loosed, on the birth 
 of his son, he " prophesied saying, Blessed be the Lord 
 God of Israel, for he hath visited and redeemed his peo- 
 ple to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, 
 
 and to remember his. holy covenant, the oath which lie 
 sware to our father AbrahaiiS <Scc. Luke i. 6T — 75. 
 Zacharias here speaks, like the more ancient prophets, 
 of events future, as though they .were already past. " He 
 hath visited and redeemed his people," i. e v he wHl visit 
 and redeem them. And it is evident from this whole 
 passage, that the covenant with Abraham, so far from be- 
 ing abolished, must continue in unabated force, till God 
 has completed the redemption of his people. 
 
 The existence of this covenant under the gospel dis- 
 pensation is clearly established by the Apostle Peter. • 
 Addressing the people soon after the day of Pentecost, he 
 says, " Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the 
 covenant which God made with our fathers saying unto 
 Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the 
 earth be blessed." Acts iii. 25. The old dispensation 
 had now ceased, and the new one had been ushered in. 
 Yet those whom the Apostle addressed are represented as 
 still the children of the prophets, and of the covenant 
 wi^h Abraham. 
 
 The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews says, " When 
 God made premise to Abraham, because he could swear 
 by no greater, he sware by himself, saying, Surely bless- 
 ing, I will bless- thee, and multiplying, I will Vnultiplv 
 
 thee that by two immutable things, in which it 
 
 was impossible for God to lie, we might have strong con- 
 righteousness in the faith of Abraham, or that all who have Abraham's faith 
 have righteousness." Carson and Cox on Baptism, p. 359. 
 
72 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 solation, who have fled for refuge, to lay hold upon the, 
 hope set before us." Heb. vi. 13 — 18. In this passage, 
 we have an express reference to a promise of the cove- 
 nant with Abraham, as'recorded in the seventeenth chap- 
 ter of Genesis ; and it is evident from "the whole sentence, 
 that the promises of this covenant, being afterwards con- 
 firmed by an oath, are now the covenant in which Chris- 
 tians stand. We are told that it was confirmed by an 
 oath, that " we" — professing Christians — " might have 
 strong consolation." But how should the confirmation of 
 this covenant by an oath .afford strong consolation to pro- 
 fessing Christians, unless this is in' fact the covenant of 
 the church now, as it was of the church under the former 
 dispensation 1 
 
 I have now proved the continued existence of the cov- 
 enant with Abraham, by inference — from its having never 
 been abolished — from the nature of the covenant itself — 
 and from the concurrent testimony of the word of God. 
 I only add, 
 
 4. That it is expressly and frequently declared to be 
 an everlasting covenant. " I will establish my covenant 
 between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, for an 
 everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee and to thy 
 seed after thee." Gen. xvii. 7. This covenant is also 
 spoken of in the New Testament as to exist forever. 
 " He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of 
 his mercy, as he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, Q,nd»to 
 his seed forever. Luke i. 55. I know it will be objected, 
 that the terms everlasting and forever are often used in 
 Scripture to express a limited duration. But to this it 
 may be replied, that the duration expressed by these terms 
 is never limited but by the nature of the subjects to which 
 they are applied ; and that to suppose it limited by the 
 nature of the subject under consideration is to take for 
 granted the very point in dispute. It has been shown 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. • 78 
 
 that Ae covenant with Abraham comprises the covenant 
 of grace. ' So* long, therefore, as the redeemed subjects of 
 grace continue in glory, the covenant of Abraham will 
 not be forgotten. It will doubjless be stripped of its ex- 
 ternal appendages, when these shall be no longer needful ; 
 but in its more spiritual essential parts, it will be literally 
 everlasting. 
 
 Section III. 
 
 Tlie Relation of the Children of Covenanting Parents to the Church. 
 
 Under the Christian dispensation, as under the Jewish, 
 the infant children of covenanting parents sustain a pecu- 
 liar relation to the church. What this relation is, or 
 whether it may with propriety be denominated member- 
 ship, I do not now inquire. This branch of the subject 
 will be. considered in another pkce. But that there sub- 
 sists an intimate and peculiar relationship between such 
 children and the church, I have no doubt. 
 
 This is an incontestable inference from what has been 
 already established. No one doubts that children stood 
 in a very near relation to the church of Israel ; but if the 
 church, -under both dispensations, has been the same, 
 then this relation continues. It is indubitable, that chil- 
 dren were formerly interested in the covenant with Abra- 
 ham. Its requirements respected them. Its promises 
 ieached them. Abraham must circumcise his children, 
 as well as himself. He must "command his children 
 and his household after him," as well as pursue for him- 
 self the path of duty. And on the other hand, God prom- 
 ised to be their God, as well as his. But this covenant is 
 still the covenant of the church ; and whatever connexion 
 it established formerly between the child and the church, • 
 it establishes now. The Christian parent, like the Jew- 
 ish, is bound in covenant to train up his children for God. 
 
74 • SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 
 
 And if the Jew could plead a promise in favor of Ms off- 
 spring, the Christian can do the same : " The promise is 
 to you and to your children." Acts ii. 39. 
 
 But the relation of children to the church under the 
 new dispensation does not stand on the mere ground of 
 inference. It is recognized in many parts of the sacred 
 volume. — The ancient prophets, when looking forward to 
 the times of the gospel, assume the continued relation of 
 children to the church. Thus Jeremiah, speaking with 
 an ultimate reference to the restoration of Israel in the 
 latter days, says, " Their children shall be as aforetime, 
 and their congregation (or church) shall be established 
 before me." Chap. xxx. 20. And Isaiah, predicting the 
 future blessedness of God's people, says, " They are the 
 seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with 
 them." Chap. Ixv. 23. 
 
 Some of the friends of our Saviour, at a certain time, 
 " brought unto him infants, that he would touch them. 
 And when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But 
 Jesus said, suffer little children to come unto me, and 
 forbid them not ; for of such is the kingdom of God." 
 Luke xviii. 15, 16. It cannot be denied that these were 
 literally little children. They are expressly called (Soeqr/) 
 infants ;. they were brought to Christ in their parents' 
 arms ; and were taken up in his arms and blessed. Com- 
 pare Matt. xix. 13 and Mark x. 16.. But " of such is the 
 kingdom of God ;" or more properly, to such belong the 
 privileges of this kingdom. 
 
 I know it is said that the phrase " of such" imports not 
 
 " such in age and size, but such in the moral temper of 
 
 heart; in humility, and docility of disposition."* But 
 
 this interpretation cannot be admitted. It stamps ab- 
 
 " surdity on the reasoning of the Saviour. Why should he 
 
 * Judson's Sermon, p. 30. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 4i> 
 
 be displeased with his disciples for forbidding infants in 
 years to be brought to him, because a humble disposition 
 was necessary in grown persons, to fit them for his king- 
 dom ? Or, as Storr and Flatt express it, " the proposi- 
 tion, the kingdom of heaven belongs to humble adults, 
 would be no reason why children should not be prevent- 
 ed from coming to Jesus."* 
 
 On another occasion, our Saviour, having taken a little 
 child in his arms, said, " Whosoever shall receive one of 
 such children in my name, receiveth me." Mark ix. 87. 
 The phrase, " in my name," as interpreted by our Lord 
 himself in a. following verse, imports a belonging to 
 Christ, or sustaining some peculiar relation to him. 
 " Whosoever shall give you a cup -of water to drink in my 
 name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, 
 he shall not lose his reward." From these passages, tak- 
 en together, it is certain that our Saviour regarded the 
 children of his friends, who were brought to him for his 
 blessing, as in some sense belonging to him, and entitled 
 to the privileges of his kingdom. 
 
 Paul wrote to his Corinthian brethren as follows : — 
 11 The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and 
 the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband ; else 
 were your children unclean, but now are they («*/<«) 
 holy." 1 Cor. vii. 14. It is obvious to remark on this 
 passage,, that if the children are holy when only one pa- 
 rent is a believer, they certainly must be when both are 
 believers. Hence all the children of believing parent's, 
 not only at Corinth, but throughout the earth, are here 
 virtually declared, on divine authority, to be holy. But 
 in what sense ! I am not aware that the word holy is 
 
 • * Dr. Gale admits that the phrase, " of such" refers to infants in years. 
 Reflections on Wall, p. 421. — Augustine interprets the passage above con- 
 sidered as having reference to the baptism of children. See Wall's Histo- 
 ry, Chap* 15. . 
 
76 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 used in more than two senses in the sacred writings. It 
 uniformly expresses either an internal or external, a real 
 or relative holiness. That the children of believers are 
 really, internally holy, is not pretended. The holiness 
 ascribed to them is, therefore, a visible or relative holi- 
 ness. They are called holy, because of their consecra- 
 tion to God ; and because of the relation which they sus- 
 tain to his people.* 
 
 But it is objected, that.the'same holiness which belongs 
 to the child is also ascribed to the unbelieving parent : 
 He (iiytacncu) " is sanctified" by the believer. — A correct 
 interpretation of the passage will be a sufficient ansvver 
 to this objection. The sanctification of which the unbe- 
 lieving parent is the subject, and the holiness attributed 
 to the children, are both relative. They pertain to a re- 
 lation, and not to the moral characters of the individuals. 
 The word sanctify is sometimes used to express a rela- 
 tion to a religious society. So in the passage before us : 
 " The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife," &c. 
 That is, the unbelieving husband, because of his believ- 
 ing wife, is brought into a near, peculiar, and in some 
 sense sacred relation to the community of Christians ; on 
 account of which his children are not regarded as un- 
 clean or pagan, but are holy, consecrated to God, and 
 connected with the society of his people. 
 
 Some of our Baptist brethren have insisted, that the 
 Apostle, in this passage, is proving to the Corinthians, 
 from the acknowledged fact that their children were not 
 unclean but holy, that the co-habitation of the believer 
 with the unbeliever was lawful marriage. But in respect 
 to what law had the legitimacy of their marriage been 
 
 * " They are considered as members of the Christian church*" Schleus— 
 ner. 
 
 " They are to be considered as belonging to the Christian cominunity.'* 
 Wahl. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 7T 
 
 called in question 1 Not, surely, in respect to the laws 
 of Corinth. The believer never supposed he violated 
 these laws, by continuing his connexion with the unbe- 
 liever. The question (if there was any)^ must have re- 
 spected the laws of God. The Corinthians knew that 
 God's ancient people were forbidden, not only to be join- 
 ed with strangers, but to continue such connexions after 
 they were formed. Ezra x. 3. They knew also that the 
 offspring of these prohibited connexions had been consid- 
 ered unclean, out of covenant, and as not belonging to 
 " the holy seed." Ezra ix. 2. It is not unlikely, there- 
 fore, that the Corinthian believers, who were married to 
 unbelievers, called in question the legality of continuing 
 such connexions; and that the Apostle, fortheir satisfac- 
 tion, referred them to the well known fact, that their 
 children had not been rejected as unclean, and out of 
 covenant, but had "been publicly recognized as holy. 
 
 The Epistles of Paul are in most instances addressed 
 to particular churches ; as the church at Rome, the 
 church at Corinth, the churches in Galatia, &c. But we 
 find, on examination, that several of these Epistles con- 
 tain directions for children. " Chifdren obey. your pa- 
 rents in -the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father 
 and mother, that it may be well with thee, and thou may- 
 est live long on the earth." See Eph. vi. 1, and*Col. iii. 
 20. Is it not evidentfrom these passages, that the Apos- 
 tle regarded the children of church members as in some 
 way connected with the churches, or as sustaining a very 
 near and peculiar relation to them 1 Else, why should 
 he so particularly address himself to children, in Epistles 
 directed expressly to the churches ? 
 
 At the commencement of the new dispensation, the 
 followers of Christ were a body by themselves, and their 
 property was vested in a common stock. They " that 
 believed," we are told, " were together, and had all things 
 
78 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted 
 to all men, as every man had need." Acts ii. 44. But 
 where were their children at this time ? Were riot they 
 associated with their parents? Would the Christian pa- 
 rent vest all his property in the common stock, and cast 
 his infant children upon the world ? It is beyond all 
 controversy that the children. of Christians in those days 
 were associated with their parents, and sustained a near 
 and peculiar relation to the church of Christ. 
 
 Another fact which deserves notice in this connexion 
 is, that the Jewish converts continued, for many years, 
 to circumcise their children,. and to do it under the imme- 
 diate charge and direction of the Apostles. We are told 
 that the great church at Jerusalem, which consisted of 
 " many thousands," and was under the pastoral care of 
 the Apostle James, were not a little displeased when they 
 heard of Paul, that he taught the Jews " not to circum- 
 cise their children." Acts xxi. 20. Now what does this 
 fact of circumcision prove ? Undoubtedly, that the chil- 
 dren of believing parents were at that time regarded as 
 holding some connexion with the church of Christ. Had 
 the covenant with Abraham been abolished, and had it 
 been the intention of the Apostles to separate in future 
 between children and the church, they never would have 
 countenanced, or so much as tolerated, the circumcision 
 of children. They would as soon have tolerated the 
 Gentiles in the worship of their idols. 
 
 From the Apostles' times to the present, the cqnnexr 
 ion of children with the church has been 'sanctioned by 
 the general voice of professing Christians. Such was 
 clearly the understanding in the primitive church, as -all 
 who are acquainted with the writings and doings of the 
 early fathers very well know. Thus, the Council of Eli- 
 beris, which assembled about two hundred years after the 
 Apostles, speaks of infants being carried over from the 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 79 
 
 Catholic church to heresy, before the fault could be their 
 ■own.* And at a much earlier period, Hennas saw cer- 
 tain stones taken out of the deep-, and fitted into the 
 building, the church, and was told by an angel that these 
 represented members in the first or infant age.t 
 
 Indeed, the peculiar relation of children to the church 
 (wiih some diversity of explanation and practice) has 
 been constantly maintained, by Greeks, Catholics, Epis- 
 copalians, and by most denominations of Protestant Dis- 
 senters, even to our own times. 
 
 Section IV. 
 
 The Substitution of Baptism in the place of Circumcision. 
 
 That baptism is now substituted in the place of cir- 
 cumcision is an incontestable inference from the fact, 
 that the church, under both dispensations, has been the 
 same. Baptism is now, what circumcision was in ancient 
 times, an instituted pre-requisite to a regular standing in 
 the visible church.. If, therefore, the church has been,, 
 under both dispensations, the same, the conclusion can- 
 not be resisted that baptism has come in the place of cir- 
 cumcision. 
 
 The same conclusion results also from the fact, that 
 the covenant with Abraham is still the covenant of the 
 church. Of this covenant, circumcision was formerly the 
 token. " It (circumcision) shall be a token of the cove- 
 nant betwixt me ana" thee." Gen. xvii. 11. But circum- 
 cision lias been abolished, and baptism, an ordinance of 
 the same church, and of course, under the same cov- 
 enant, has been instituted. How plain, therefore, that 
 baptism has taken the place of circumcision, as the visi- 
 ble token of the covenant of the church ? 
 
 * Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part i. Chap. 7. 
 t Similitude be. Chap. 15. 
 
80 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM, 
 
 This conclusion is confirmed by the consideration that 
 circumcision and baptism are of precisely the same import. 
 Circumcision, as a token of the covenant, was both a 
 sign and a seal. . As a sign, it represented the circumci- 
 sion of the heart, or regeneration. " Circumcision is of 
 the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter." Rom. ii. 
 29. As a seal, circumcision confirmed "the righteous- 
 ness of faith," or the covenant of grace. Rom. iv. 11. 
 Such was the import of circumcision. And is not that 
 of baptism precisely similar ? This, too, is both a sign 
 and a seal. As a sign, it is an emblem of the washing 
 of regeneration, or the baptism of the Holy Ghost. It 
 therefore signifies the same as circumcision. Does it not 
 also seal the same 1 Does it not assure those who receive 
 it that, if their characters arc conformed to its sacred 
 import, their faith shall be imputed to them for righteous- 
 ness, and they be interested in all the blessings of the 
 covenant of grace.? — But if, when the ancient token of 
 the covenant was abolished, an ordinance was established 
 in the same church, a.nd appended to the same covenant, 
 of precisely similar import; how is it possible to resist 
 the conclusion, that this latter is substituted for the for- 
 mer 1* 
 
 The Scriptures clearly countenance the idea, that bap- 
 tism is substituted in the place of circumcision. Writing 
 to the Philipjpians, the Apostle says, " Beware of the con- 
 cision," (those persons who lay an exorbitant stress on 
 the rite of circumcision) "for z^e"— we who have been 
 baptized — " are the circumcision, whteh worship God in 
 the spirit." Phil. iii. 2, 3. And to the Colossians he 
 says, " Ye are circumcised with the circumcision made 
 without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the 
 flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with him in 
 
 * See Appendix, Note E. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 81 
 
 baptism." Col. ii. 11, 12. In other words, ' Ye are cir- 
 cumcised, having been baptized.' 
 
 If it be objected, that spiritual circumcision and spir* 
 itual baptism are here intended, I admit that they are ; 
 and the Apostle represents them to be the same. And if 
 these two ordinances are spiritually the same, and if the 
 one was. instituted in the church on the removal of the 
 other, is it not plain that the one is substituted for the 
 other? 
 
 The primitive Christian fathers considered b'aptism as 
 having come in the place of circumcision. 
 
 Justin Martyr says, " We have not received this carnal 
 circumcision, but the spiritual circumcision ; and we 
 have received it by baptism. It is allowed to all persons 
 •to receive it in the same way."* 
 
 In the Questions to the Orthodox, attributed to Justin, 
 we have the following Question and Answer : " If cir- 
 cumcision be a good thing, why do not we use it as well 
 as the Jews?" Ans. " We are circumcised by baptism 
 with Christ's circumcision. "t 
 
 The question of Fidus to Cyprian and the Council of 
 Carthage, whether it be lawful to baptize an infant sooner 
 than the eighth day, necessarily supposes it to have been 
 an established opinion that baptism had come in the place 
 of circumcision. Indeed, Cyprian says expressly, that. 
 " Christ has given us baptism, the spiritual circumcis* 
 ion."* 
 
 Basil says, " A -Jew does not delay circumcision, bet- 
 cause of the threatening, that every soul that is not cir- 
 cumcised, the eighth day shall be cut off from his people ; 
 and dost thou put off the circumcision made without 
 hands, which is performed in baptism, when thou hearest 
 
 * Wall's Jlist. of In. Bap. Vol. i. Chapters ii. vi. yi, 
 f Parti. Chap, 2, 
 
82 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 the Lord himself say, except one be born of water and the 
 Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God ?"* 
 
 •Ambrose clearly speaks of baptism as having come in 
 the place of circumcision.* 
 
 Augustine says, " W.e may make an estimate how, 
 much baptism avails infants, by the circumcision which 
 God's people formerly received.* 
 
 Chrysostom says, <c Our communion, I mean the grace of 
 baptism, gives cure without pain, and procures to us a 
 thousand benefits. And it has no determinate time, as 
 the ancient circumcision had ; but one in the very begin- 
 ning of his age, or one tlrat is in the middle of it, or one 
 that is in his old age, may receive this circumcision made 
 without hands."* 
 
 • To the sentiment inculcated in this Section there have*, 
 been objections, which it may be proper briefly to con- 
 sider. 
 
 1. It is said that the substitution of baptism in place of 
 circumcision "was not urged, as might have been expect- 
 ed, in reply to those Judaizing teachers, who were for en- 
 forcing circumcision on the Gentile converts. Acts xv. 
 But these teachers wished to enforce on the Gentiles, not 
 only circumcision, but the whole ritual laic ; and to en- 
 force it all as a condition of salvation,. "' Ye must be cir- 
 cumcised, and keep the law of Moses, or ye cannot be 
 saved." It would, then, not have satisfied them in the 
 least, to have urged that baptism had been substituted for 
 Gircumcision. The grand difficulty had still remained, 
 ' Ye must keep the law, or ye cannot be saved.' — It ap- 
 pears that, as far as the proposed answer would have 
 
 * Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Vol. i. Chapters xii-^-xv. It will be observed • 
 that several of the fathers speak of baptism (in- the language of the Apostle, 
 Col. ii. 11, 12.) as " the circumcision made without hands." It is evident 
 from this, that they understood the Apostle, in the passage referred to, as- 
 teaching the substitution of baptism in place of circumcision. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM, 83 
 
 availed with these teachers, it was virtually given. For 
 it was authoritatively determined in Apostolic councilj that 
 .the Gentile brethren — those who had been baptized — 
 had no need to be circumcised". 
 
 2. It is objected that the Jewish believers knew noth- 
 ing of the substitution of baptism in place of circumcis- 
 ion, as they continued, under the direction of the Apos- 
 tles, to circumcise their children. But why did the Apos- 
 tles^ or any of them, permit the Jewish converts to cir- 
 cumcise their children ? Not, surely, because they re- 
 garded circumcision as still binding. They acted in this 
 case, # as in many others, from a commendable regard in 
 things indifferent, to the long established customs and pre- 
 judices of the Jews. As the import of the two ordinances 
 was. the same, and the relation of children to the church 
 was intended to be continued, they saw, no inconsistency 
 in yielding, for a time, to this feeling of the Jewish con- 
 verts. But this same feeling of regard, which led the 
 Apostles to tolerate .circumcision, would prompt them not 
 to enlarge on the substitution of baptism in its place. 
 
 8. It is urged that baptism cannot have come' in the 
 place of circumcision, since the latter was applied to none 
 but males. But why was circumcision applied to none 
 but males 1 t Not because of anything in its internal im- 
 port, which rendered it improper that it should be ad- 
 ministered to females ; for these were included in the 
 covenant with Abraham, and were really of the circum- 
 cision, as much as the males.* The reason lay in the 
 peculiar nature of the external ceremony. God, in his 
 wisdom, instituted a token of his covenant, under the for- 
 mer dispensation, which could be applied to but one of 
 
 * No uncircumcised person was allowed to partake of the Passover 
 Yet females partook of it as. well as males ; (See Luke ii. 41.) which shows 
 thai though they bore not the external mark, they were regarded as of the 
 circumcisioiu 
 
84 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 the sexes. In the exercise of the same wisdom, he has 
 appointed a token under the present dispensation, which 
 can be applied to both. And to use the language of Mr. • 
 Flavel : " Cannot baptism stand in the place of circumcis- 
 ion, because it answers all its'ends, with an advantage V 
 — We know that, under the former dispensation, a 
 distinction obtained between the sexes in regard to most 
 divine institutions. But this distinction is now in gen- 
 eral abolished ; so that under the Gospel, " there is 
 neither Jew nor Greek, neither bond nor free, neither 
 male nor female." Both sexes participate equally in Christ, 
 and have equal access to the ordinances of his kingdom. 
 
 4. It is objected again, that if baptism has come in 
 the place of circumcision, then servants as well as children 
 must be baptized. Abraham was commanded to circum- 
 cise him that was " bought with- money of any stranger, 
 which was not of his seed." — To this it may be replied, 
 that certain practices were tolerated under .the former 
 dispensation, which are at present disallowed. Such 
 were polygamy, slavery, &c. Unless it can be shown 
 that the New Testament authorizes the purchase and 
 holding of slaves, and of consequence the slave trade, the 
 case so far as it is objectionable, can no more lawfully 
 occur.* 
 
 5. It is farther .objected that, on the ground we have 
 taken, baptism cannot be lawfully administered to chil- 
 dren sooner or later than the eighth day. " He that is 
 eight days old shall be circumcised among you." — The 
 reason why circumcision was enjoined on the eighth day 
 
 * It is believed that children, who are taken permanently into the fami- 
 lies and under the care and govemmei.t of professing Christians, may with 
 propriety be baptized. Christians may consistently be sponsors for such 
 children. They may enter into covenant respecting them that they will 
 train them up for God, and may seal their engagements in the water of 
 baptism. 
 
SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 85 
 
 is clearly expressed in the law of Moses. " If a woman 
 have borne a man child, she shall be unclean seven days, 
 and on the eighth day he shall be circumcised." Lev. xii. 
 2, 3. On account of the mother's uncleanness, her child 
 could not lie at her breast, or so much as touch her, until 
 after seven days, without contracting ceremonial pollution. 
 And on the eighth day it must be circumcised. The lan- 
 guage of the covenant was then virtually this, * Let the 
 child be circumcised as soon as possible.' And. such is 
 still its language in respect to baptism. 
 
 The principles which have been here established fur- 
 nish a reply to an objection which is sometimes urged 
 against the baptism of children. ' If baptism signifies re- 
 generation, then why should it be applied. to children, or 
 to any but hopefully regenerated persons V But circum- 
 cision signified regeneration as much as baptism ; and 
 yet this was expressly commanded to be applied to chil- 
 dren. The truth is, that while both circumcision and 
 baptism shadow forth regeneration, and import its neces- 
 sity, they do not of themselves certify that all those to 
 whom they are applied are regenerated persons. Baptism 
 was administered by Philip to Simon the sorcerer ; but 
 this did not prove him to be regenerated. And neither 
 does circumcision or baptism, when applied to infants, 
 indicate that they are, at the time, the subjects of a re- 
 generating influence. * 
 
 Section V. 
 
 The Infant Children of believing, covenanting parents are to be baptized. 
 
 This is the great point in controversy, in relation to 
 the subjects of baptism. And it is a proposition, the truth 
 of which may be inferred from what has been established 
 iu each of the preceding Sections. 
 
86 
 
 SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 
 
 If the Christian church is the same with the church of 
 Israel, in which children were visibly dedicated to God ; 
 then doubtless they are to be dedicated still 
 
 If the covenant with Abraham, the token of which be. 
 longed to the offspring of those interested in it, is still the 
 covenant of the visible church ; then the members of this 
 church are still under obligations to apply the token to 
 their infant children. 
 
 If the children of covenanting parents sustain a rela- 
 tion to the visible church, as they did to the church of 
 Israel ; then they must be proper subjects of that rite by 
 which this relation is established. 
 
 And if baptism is substituted in place of circumcision 
 which was applied, by a divine command, to the seed of 
 covenanting parents ; then the same divine command now 
 binds the covenanting parent to apply baptismal water to 
 his infant offspring. 
 
 Here is the foundation of infant baptism ; — a founda- 
 tion as sure as the word of God, — and on which the ordi- 
 nance, I doubt not, will rest, till the end of time. 
 
 What remains is to' introduce some collateral evidence 
 in support of the proposition, that the children of believ- 
 ing covenanting parents are to be baptized. And, 
 
 1. The sentiment contained in this proposition, is rea- 
 sonable in itself, and in accordance with our best affec- 
 tions. In the. children of those v^ love, we all naturally 
 feel a peculiar interest. A good Prince would wish and 
 provide, that the children of his beloved and faithful 
 friends should be placed in a near relation to himself. 
 And shall it be supposed that the Prince of life will not 
 regard with tokens of peculiar favor the children of his 
 covenant people 1 Will he not grant them some special 
 pledge of love ? Will he take his people under the shad- 
 ow of his wings, and make no special provision for their 
 offspring. In his care of the sheep,* will he forget the 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. CT 
 
 • 
 
 Jambs of his flock ? — And how reasonable that the pious 
 parent, who loves his children -and is chiefly concerned 
 for their spiritual welfare, should wish to place them un- 
 der the particular care and protection of Jehovah ; — 
 should wish publicly to dedicate and devote them to God, 
 and bind himself by solemn vows to train them up for 
 him ?* 
 
 2. The analogy of God's covenant dealings in past ages 
 is in favor of the doGtrine of infant baptism. In all the 
 covenants which God has hitherto made with men, chil- 
 dren have been connected with their parents. Thus it 
 was in the covenant with Adam ; and in the covenant 
 with Noah ; and in the covenant with Abraham ; and in 
 the covenant'with David. God dealt favorably with .the 
 children of Lot for their father's sake ; and he declares 
 himself to be a God, keeping covenant with those that 
 love him " to a thousand generations." How unlikely 
 then, let the covenant of the Christian church be what it 
 may, that God has swerved from the invariable economy 
 of his-covenant dealings in past age3, and cut off children 
 under the gospel from any kind of connexion with their 
 covenanting parents. 
 
 3. If infant baptism is not according to Scripture, 
 then the privileges of believers under the present dispen- 
 sation are less than tkey were formerly under the law. It 
 is a precious privilege to the enlightened Christian parent, 
 to bring his beloved children to Christ; publicly to re- 
 sign them into his hands ; promise to educate them ac- 
 cording to his precepts ; and to see affixed to them the 
 token of his holy covenant. It is a privilege " to do this 
 in the temple of God, where the prayers of many will as- 
 cend with his own to the Lord of heaven and earth, for a 
 blessing." As believing parents formerly enjoyed this 
 privilege, it is unreasonable to suppose that they are de- 
 
 * Sfi Appendix, Note F. 
 
88 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 prived of it now. Under this last and best dispensation 
 of the gospel, when it might be expected that privileges 
 would be uniformly increased, and burthens diminished, 
 how unreasonable the supposition that believers are cut 
 off from an inestimable privilege, which was secured to 
 them by the Mosaic ritual. Lev. xii. 3. 
 
 4. Had children been deprived of their interest in the 
 covenant under the gospel dispensation, believing Jewish 
 parents in the primitive church would have undoubtedly 
 complained. In the days of the Apostles, many thousands 
 of the Jews believed, who were all zealous of the law. 
 They were tenacious even of their former burthens ; and 
 can we suppose they would cheerfully relinquish their ac- 
 customed privileges? Prepared, as Mr. 'Edwards ex- 
 presses it, " to wrangle for a rite, quarrel for a fast, and 
 almost fight for a new moon ;" would they see their chil- 
 dren cut off from the covenant of promise, and denied its 
 token, without a struggle? Yet we hear not a word of 
 complaint on the subject. There was no objection to the 
 gospel, by friend or foe, on this ground. It is morally 
 certain, therefore, that under the. present dispensation, as 
 under the ancient, the children of covenanting parents 
 are to be publicly dedicated to the Lord. 
 
 5. The Jewish prosolyte baptism furnishes a conclu- 
 sive argument iri favor of the baptism of children with 
 their parents. At the time of our Saviour's appearance, 
 and for ages previous, the Jews had been accus- 
 tomed, not only to circumcise their proselytes, but to 
 baptize them, together with their children. — As the ex- 
 istence of such a practice among the Jews has been dis- 
 puted, and as much has been made to depend upon it, it 
 will be necessary to establish it by proof. And, 
 
 (1.) The baptism of proselytes comports entirely with 
 the genius of the Mosaic institutions, and with the views 
 which the Israelites were accustomed to entertain of the 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 89 
 
 Gentile nations. Nothing was more common among this 
 people than lustrations, and purifications by washing, or 
 baptism. In these, the external part of their religion in 
 no small degree consisted. See Heb. ix. 10. And as 
 they considered all the Gentiles to be impure, unclean, 
 how natural was it for them to insist, when any of these 
 came over to their religion, that they should be ceremoni- 
 ally purified by the application of water? 
 
 (2.) That the Jews were familiar with baptism, previ- 
 ous to the coming of Christ, is implied in the question 
 addressed to John by those who were sent to him from 
 Jerusalem : " Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not the 
 Christ, neither Elias, neither that prophet ?" John i. 25. 
 The inquiry was not, ' What new rite is this V but ' Why 
 do you administer it?' They had been long acquainted 
 with the ordinance of baptism, but if John was " not the 
 Christ, neither Elias, neither that prophet," they under- 
 stood not by what authority, or for what reason, he had 
 undertaken to baptize. 
 
 (3.) All the Rabbins, ancient and modern, bear tes- 
 timony to the custom of baptizing proselytes. Thus in 
 the Babylonian Talmud, the text of which was composed 
 as early as the close of the second century, it is written : 
 " When a proselyte is received, he must be circumcised ; 
 and when he is cured, they baptize him in the presence 
 of two wise men. Or if it be a woman, the women lead 
 her to the waters." 
 
 " The proselytes enter not into covenant, but by cir- 
 cumcision, baptism, and sprinkling of blood." 
 
 " He is no proselyte, unless he be circumcised and 
 baptized. If he be not baptized, he remains a Gentile." 
 
 " Your fathers did not enter into covenant but by cir- 
 cumcision, and baptism, and sprinkling of blood ; so 
 neither do proselytes enter into covenant but by circum- 
 cision, and baptism, and sprinkling of blood." 
 
90 SUBJECTS OF BAPf ISJf. 
 
 " They baptize an infant proselyte (parvulum) accord- 
 ing to the judgment of the Sanhedrim ;" and " if it has 
 been bereaved of its father, three men must be present at 
 the baptism, who may be as a father to it." 
 
 " If a Gentile woman is made a proselyte, cum jam est 
 gravida, her child has no need of baptism ; because the 
 baptism of the mother answers for the child. Otherwise', 
 it must be baptized."* 
 
 In the Jerusalem Talmud, it is said, " Behold one 
 finds an infant cast out, and baptizes him in the name of 
 a servant. Do thou also circumcise him in the name of 
 a servant. But if he baptize him in the name of a free- 
 man, do .thou also circumcise him in the name of a free- 
 man, "t 
 
 Maimonides gives us the following account of the forms 
 of initiation among the Jews : " In all ages, when a Gen- 
 tile is willing to enter into the covenant of Israel, and 
 place himself under the wings of the. Divine Majesty, and 
 take upon him the yoke of the law, he must be circum- 
 cised, and baptized, and bring a sacrifice ; or if it be a 
 woman, be baptized and bring a sacrifice : As it is writ- 
 ten, ' As ye are, so shall the stranger be.' Numb. xv. 15. 
 How are ye? By circumcision, and baptism, and bring- 
 ing a sacrifice. So likewise the stranger, through all 
 your generations, by circumcision, and baptism, and 
 bringing a sacrifice." 
 
 " An Israelite that takes a little heathen child, or that 
 finds an heathen infant, and baptizes him for a proselyte, 
 behold he is a proselyte. "t 
 
 (4.) Other writers besides Jews, ancient and modern, 
 who have paid most attention to the subject, and been in the 
 most favorable circumstances to form an opinion, have 
 
 * In Wall's Introduction to Hist, of In. Bap. and Lighlfoot's Horse He- 
 braicae on Matt. iii. C. 
 
 f In Wall's Introduction to Hist, of In. Bap. 
 
SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 91 
 
 been generally agreed in maintaining that the Jews bap- 
 tized their proselytes. 
 
 Arrian, a heathen philosopher at Rome, A. D. 140, 
 reproaches those who turned proselytes to the Jews, call- 
 ing them (p'sPa/iftevovg) the baptized ones.* 
 
 Cyprian, a Christian father' of the third century, says, 
 " The case of the Jews who were to be baptized by the 
 Apostles was different from that of the Gentiles; for the 
 Jews had already, and a long time ago, the baptism of' 
 the law and of Moses, and were now to be baptized in 
 the name of Jesus Christ. "t It is evident from this, that 
 Cyprian supposed the Jews to have administered baptism 
 to one another and to their proselytes, even from the time 
 of Moses. 
 
 Leo Modena, in his History of the Modern Jews, 
 speaking of their manner of admiting a proselyte, says, 
 " They take and circumcise him, and as soon as he is 
 well of his sore, he is to wash himself all over in water ; 
 and this is to be done in the presence of three Rabbins. 
 From thenceforth he becomes as a natural Jew."f 
 
 Lightfoot says, " You see baptism inseparably joined 
 to the circumcision of proselytes." " The baptism of in- 
 fants was a thing as well known in the church of the 
 Jews, as ever it has been in the Christian church. "|| 
 
 Reiskius, who wrote a treatise on the baptisms of the 
 Jews, says, " Jewish baptism is a solemn rite instituted 
 by God, in which proselytes of both sexes, in the presence 
 of three credible witnesses are dipped in water, that be- 
 ing legally cleansed and regenerated, they may enter on 
 the profession of a new religion.^ 
 
 Jahn treats the subject somewhat at length, and is de- 
 cidedly of the opinion that the initiation of the proselyte 
 was not complete until after baptism. fl 
 
 * Dissert, in Epiclet. Lib. ii. Cap, 9. 't Epis. 73, ad Jubianum. 
 
 % Part v. Chap. 2. |j Horse Hebraicae in Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 § Diss, de Bap. Judcorum. 1T Archaeology, Sect. 3:25. 
 
92 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Rosenmuller and Kuinoel both say, that " the traces 
 of this rite (baptism) are found in the baptism of prose- 
 lytes : As it is handed down by the Jews with an entire 
 agreement, that if any one should come over from the 
 Gentiles to the religion of the Jews, both himself, with 
 his wife, and children, and infants, were to be baptiz- 
 ed."* 
 
 It would be needless to multiply authorities in proof of 
 this point. Those who are not satisfied, and wish to in- 
 vestigate the subject farther, may consult the authors re- 
 ferred to in the margin.t Suffice it to say, that with the 
 exception of a few individuals, whose opinions were 
 founded, not on any positive evidence against the prac- 
 tice in question, but merely on the silence of certain Jew,- 
 ish writers respecting it,| the judgment of the learned 
 has been given with singular explicitness and unanimity 
 in its favor. 
 
 (5.) I only add, that the existence of baptism among the 
 Jews can hardly be accounted for, unless it be traced to 
 a period anterior to the commencement of the Christian 
 era. We certainly know that they baptized their prose- 
 
 * Scholia in Matt. iii. G. 
 ' t Selden de Jure Nat. et Gent. Lib. ii. Cap. 4. p. 158. item de Synedriis ; 
 item de Successionibus ; Jacob. Alttngii de Proselytis, Praelectio vii. Thes. 
 27 j Michaelis Dogm. Sec. 180; Ernesti Vindiciae Arbit. Div. Sec. 49; 
 Ainsworth on Gen. 17 ; Dr. Hammond's Annotations on Matt, iii, xix, xxiii ; 
 also his Six Queries ; also his Defence of In.- Baptism; Godwin's Moses 
 and Aaron ; Wetstein's, Henry's, and Scott's Comment, on Matt. iii. 6; 
 Clarke's Comment, on Matt, xxviii. 19; Doddridge's Lectures, Prop. 154; 
 Calmet's and Brown's Dictionary of the Bible, Art. Proselyte ; Witsius' 
 Economy of Covenants, Vol. iii. p. 381 ; Prideaux' Connexion, Vol. iii. p. 
 411 ; Stackhouse's Hist, of the Bible, Vol. v. p. 286 ; Wall's Introduction 
 to Hist, of In. Baptism; Wood's Lectures on In Bap. p. 48; Priestly's 
 Monthly Repository, Vol. vii. p. 12; Chris. Observer for 1819, p. 604. 
 
 \ Josephus' Account of the Proselyting of the Idumeans by Hvrcanus, if 
 it does not imply, is very consistent with, the idea of their baptism. They 
 submitted, it is said, not only- to circumcision, but to "the rest of the Jew- 
 ish customs." Antiq. Lib. xiii. Cap. 9. Sec. 1. 
 
SUBJECTS Or BAPTISM. 9$ 
 
 lytes in the second century, and have continued to do so 
 in all periods since. But how did they come in posses- 
 sion of this rite ? Did they copy it from the Christians ? 
 Is it likely that, so early as the second century, when 
 Christianity was " every where spoken against," and not 
 sufficiently established to invite the imitation of any, the 
 Jews, its most inveterate enemies, should copy one of the 
 sacraments of the despised Nazarene, and incorporate it 
 among the institutions of their venerated lawgiver ? To 
 those who have any knowledge of Jewish prejudices, the 
 supposition is utterly incredible. It follows, therefore, 
 that the Jews must have received the custom of baptizing 
 proselytes (as they profess) from the patriarchs of their 
 nation, and'that it was in common use at the coming of 
 the Saviouf. 
 
 When John commenced baptizing in the wilderness of 
 Judea, he introduced no new rite into the religion of the 
 Jews, nor was he ever complained of as an innovator. 
 And when our Saviour directed his disciples to go and 
 baptize the nations, he. instituted no new rite, but mere- 
 ly adopted and sanctioned a previously existing Jewish 
 institution. " The work of proselyting men to the true 
 religion had before been carried on within narrow limits. 
 It was now to be carried on extensively, and baptism (as 
 before) was to be administered to all proselytes. ' Go ye, 
 and proselyte the nations, baptizing them in the name of 
 the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' " 
 Clearly, the disciples must have understood their Master 
 to intend here that kind of baptism to which both they 
 and he had been accustomed, viz. the baptism of children 
 icith their parents. Under these circumstances, instead 
 of needing an express command to authorize the baptism 
 of children, they must have needed a prohibition to pre« 
 vent their doing it.* 
 
 ^ See Appendix, Note Cr, 
 
04 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISIvL 
 
 But this leads me to observe, 
 
 6. That Christ and his Apostles taught and practised 
 jti'st as we might expect, on supposition they intended that 
 children should be baptized ; and just as we should not 
 expect, on the contrary supposition. In order to deter- 
 mine what we might or might not expect of Christ and 
 his Apostles, it will be necessary that we keep in mind 
 the established customs of the period in which they lived. 
 In the Jewish church", children had always been connect- 
 ed with their parents. They were early given up to God, 
 and received the seal of his everlasting covenant. Also 
 the children of proselytes were connected in covenant 
 with their parents, and entitled to the initial rites of cir- 
 cumcision and baptism. What then might be expected 
 of Christ and his Apostles, on supposition they intended 
 to put an end to this state of things ? Not silence, surely. 
 Silence would have been a virtual approbation of it. The 
 further connexion of children with their parents they 
 would have constantly condemned. They would have 
 lost no opportunity of insisting on the great change, in 
 this respect, which had taken place under the new dis- 
 pensation, and of pressing a conformity to it in the prac- 
 tice of Christians. Did they pursue such a course? 
 Never, in any instance.* 
 
 But what might be expected of Christ and his Apostles, 
 on suppositition they intended that the connexion of 
 children with their parents should be continued ?. Not, 
 indeed, that they should enjoin it by express precepts ; 
 for this would be to enjoin expressly what every one al- 
 ready understood and practised. But they would be like- 
 ly often to allude to it with approbation, and to drop ex- 
 pressions. which implied it. They would be likely also, 
 as occasions occurred, to baptize households, when those 
 
 * See Appendix, Note H, . 
 
SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 95 
 
 at the head of them made profession of their faith. And 
 this is the precise course pursued by our Saviour and his 
 Apostles. The peace of Christ is promised to rest upon 
 that house or family over which a son of peace presides. 
 Luke x. 6. Salvation came to the house or family of Zac- 
 cheus, when he became a true child of Abraham. Luke 
 xix. 9. Pur Saviour applauded the practice of bringing 
 infants to receive his blessing, and declared that " of 
 such is the kingdom of God." Luke xviii. 15. He 
 spoke of little children being received in his name, or as 
 belonging to him. Mark ix. 37, 41. Peter taught con- 
 verted parents, that the promise was to them and to their 
 children. Acts ii. 39. Paul affirms that " the blessing 
 of- Abraham" — an important part of which consisted in 
 the covenant connexion of his children — " has come on 
 the Gentiles through Jesus Christ." Gal. iii. 14. He 
 denominates the children of believing parents holy, 1 Cor. • 
 vii. 14; and addresses them as being in some way con- 
 nected with the churches.* He repeatedly baptized 
 households on the profession of parents, or of those who 
 presided over them. Lydia believed, and she and her 
 household were baptized. The jailer believed, and he 
 and all his were baptized straightway. Acts xvi. 15, 33. 
 Paul also baptized the household of Stephanas. 1 Cor. 
 i. 16.. 
 
 I know it will be said that the term household does not 
 necessarily imply infants ; and perhaps it does not neces- 
 sarily. Still, few instances can be found, among the 
 many in which this word is used in Scripture, where 
 children are not evidently included. And " the stress of 
 the business," as Dr. Lightfoot remarks, " lies not so 
 much in this, whether it can be proved there were chil- 
 dren in these households, as that, if there were, they cer- 
 tainly were baptized." 
 " Compare Eph. i. 1 with Eph. vi. 1 ; and Col. i. 2 with Col. iii. 20. 
 
96 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 It must have been very extraordinary, even in Apos- 
 tolic times, if each of these households was composed 
 entirely of adults, who were all converted and baptized 
 together on a personal profession of faith. It may be 
 doubted whether there have been three other such in- 
 stances from that day to the present.* And why, if these 
 remarkable events took place, were they not distinctly 
 recorded? If the conversion of merely the heads of these 
 families was of sufficient importance to have place in the 
 sacred history, why should the simultaneous conversion 
 of each of their households be passed over in silence ? 
 
 It is urged as evidence that the family of Lydia were 
 all professing believers, that before Paul and Silas left 
 Philippi, they entered into her house and saw and com- 
 forted the brethren. Acts xvi. 40. But who were the 
 brethren ? Doubtless, the whole infant church. The 
 members would all wish to come together, to hear the 
 instructions and receive the parting blessing of their spir- 
 itual father ; and what more convenient place than the 
 house of Lydia? It is evident, on the face of the record, 
 that of the family of Lydia she only was a believer. Her 
 " heart the Lord opened." And after she and her house- 
 hold had received baptism, she said, " If ye have judged 
 me to be faithful, come into my house." Acts xvi. 14, 
 15. 
 
 The jailer, it is said, " rejoiced, believing in God, with 
 all his house" — If there is an ambiguity in this English 
 phrase, there is none in the original ; iiyalXtaaaTo nuvoixl 
 nertiazevxoig. It is certain from the Greek, as every one 
 acquainted with the language must perceive, that the be- 
 lieving and rejoicing here spoken of, being in the singu- 
 lar number, can refer to the jailer only. 
 
 The Apostle, we are told, testifies of the household of 
 
 * See Appendix, Note I. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 97 
 
 Stephanas, that "they have addicted themselves to the 
 ministry of the saints." 1 Cor. xvi. 15. But when the 
 Apostle wrote this, they had been baptized several years. 
 Shall we suppose, then, that, for years after their conver- 
 sion, they were unmindful of the necessities of saints? 
 Or is it not far more probable that they were not all con- 
 verted at the time when they were baptized ? 
 
 In the cases here considered, we have full evident of 
 the baptism of the households of Christians, in connex- 
 ion with that of their parents, or guardians. It is worthy 
 of remark, that we have no instance in the New Testa- 
 ment of the baptism of the children of professing Chris- 
 tians, except in such connexion. In other words, we 
 have ho instance of the baptism of such children, on their 
 oion jnofession. Is not this a remarkable circumstance, 
 and one hard to be accounted for on the principles of 
 those who' reject infant baptism ? The children of pro- 
 fessing Christians, during the Apostolic age, had become 
 very numerous ; and in all probability, thej were often 
 converted. And why is it, if they were* ngt baptized 
 with their parents, that we have no intimation, in any in- 
 stance, of their subsequent baptism ? 
 
 To me, the New Testament appears, in this respect as 
 in others, precisely what tte might expect it would be, on 
 supposition that the covenant connexion of children with 
 their parents was intended to be continued and perpet- 
 uated.- 
 
 7. It only remains that I adduce the testimony of 
 history in favor of the practice of infant baptism. The 
 pertinence and weight of this kind of evidence may be 
 seen in the following quotation from an eminent Baptist 
 writer : " I will grant it is probable, that what all or most 
 of the churches practised immediately after the Apostles' 
 times, had been appointed or practised by the Apostles 
 themselves ; for it is hardly to be imagined that any con- 
 
y~ SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 
 
 siderable body of these ancient Christians, and much less 
 that the whole, should so soon deviate from the customs 
 and injunctions of their venerable founders, whose author- 
 ity they held so sacred. New opinions or practices, are 
 usually introduced by degrees, and not without opposition. 
 Therefore, in regard to baptism, a thing of such universal 
 concern and daily practice, I allow it to be very probable 
 thaf the primitive churches kept to the Apostolic pattern."* 
 
 Among the immediate successors of the Apostles, there 
 were but few writers whose works have come down to us 
 with unquestioned authority ; and in these, the baptism 
 of infants is rather alluded to and implied as an existing 
 and approved practice, than expressly inculcated. I have 
 shown already that the Christian fathers considered bap- 
 tism as having come in the place of circumcision ; and 
 also that they considered the infant children of believing 
 parents as in some way connected with the church. t But 
 in both these propositions, it is implied, that such children 
 were regarded as the proper subjects of baptism. 
 
 Hermas,. whose name is mentioned by Paul, Rom. xvi. 
 14, and who is thought by some to have written his Pas- 
 tor before John wrote his Gospel, says: "All infants are 
 in honor with the Lord, and are esteemed first of all." 
 And again : " The baptism of water is necessary to%ill"\ 
 
 Justin Martyr, who wrote about forty years after the 
 Apostolic age, says : " There are many among us of both 
 sexes, some sixty, and some seventy years old, who were 
 made disciples of Christ (&e natdu>r} from their child- 
 hood."^. These children must have been made disciples, 
 years before the death of the Apostle John. They were 
 doubtless made such by baptism ; for the same word is 
 used by Justin which was used by Christ in the commis- 
 
 * Gales Reflections on Wall, p. 398. f Sections iii. and iv. 
 
 \ In Wall's Hist, of In. Baptism, Part i. Chap. 1—3. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 99 
 
 sion, " Go ye and disciple all nations, baptizing them." 
 Matt, xxviii. 19. 
 
 Irenaeus, who wrote a few years later than Justin, says : 
 '•' Christ passed through every age. For infants he be- 
 came an infant, that he might sanctify infants."* 
 
 Again : " Christ came to save all persons who by him 
 (renascuntur in Deum) are baptized unto God, infants, 
 and little ones, and children, and youths, and elder per- 
 sons. "* 
 
 The only objection to this testimony is, that Irenaeus 
 here expresses baptism by a word which literally denotes 
 regeneration, putting, by a common figure, the thing sig- 
 nified for the sign That he really intended to express 
 baptism by this word, is evident from his use of it in other 
 instances. " When Christ gave his apostles the com- 
 mand of regenerating unto God, he said,. Go and leach 
 all nations, baptizing them." — This mode of expression 
 was common in the primitive church. Justin Martyr, de- 
 scribing the manner in which persons were admitted to 
 the church, says : " They ate regenerated in the same 
 way of regeneration in' which we are regenerated ; for 
 they are -washed with water, in the name of the Father, 
 the Son, and the Holy Ghost." Dr. Wall, who better 
 understood the phraseology of the early Christian writers 
 jn relation to this subject than any author with whom I 
 am acquainted, says : " Any man, who has been at all 
 conversant with the Fathers, will be satisfied that they 
 as constantly meant baptized by the word regenerated, as 
 we mean the same by the word christened." Accordingly, 
 he does not hesitate to speak of the passage above cited 
 from Irenaeus as an " express mention of baptized infants." 
 Whiston a learned Baptist, admits the same. " This," 
 says he, " is a thing undeniable , by any modest arguer."f 
 
 * In Wall's Hist, of In. Baptism, Part i. Chap. 1 — 3. 
 t In Wall's Defence, p. 41» 
 
100 
 
 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Tertullian was cotemporary with Irenseus, though a lit- 
 tle later. His testimony on the subject before us is as 
 follows : " They whose office it is to administer baptism 
 should know that it is not to be given rashly." Therefore, 
 according to every persons' condition, and disposition, 
 and age, the delay of baptism is more profitable, espe- 
 cially in the case of little children. For why is it neces- 
 sary that the sponsors should incur danger ? For they 
 may either fail of their promises by death, or may be dis- 
 appointed by a child's proving to be of a wicked dispo- 
 sition. Our Lord indeed says, Forbid them not to come 
 to me. Let them come, then, when they are grown up ; 
 when they understand ; when they are taught whither 
 they are to come. Let them become Christians, when they 
 are able to know Christ. Why should -their innocent age 
 make haste to. baptism ? Men act more cautiously in 
 temporal concerns. Worldly substance is not committed 
 to those to whom divine things are entrusted. Let them 
 know how to ask for baptism, that you may seem to give 
 to him that asketh. — It is for a reason of no less impor- 
 tance, that unmarried persons, both those who were never 
 married, and those who have been deprived of their part- 
 ners, should, on account of their exposure to temptation, 
 be kept waiting, till they are either married, or confirmed 
 in a habit of continency. They who understand the 
 importance of baptism, will be more afraid of hastening 
 to receive it, than of delay."* • 
 
 It cannot be doubted that the children* spoken of in 
 this passage were literally infants. ' They are called (par- 
 vulos) little children ; were brought by sponsors ; and are 
 represented throughout as not yet arrived to years of un- 
 derstanding. Neither can it be doubted, in view of the 
 above testimony, that it was in the days of Tertullian, 
 
 * De Baplismo, Cap. xviii. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 10 L 
 
 within a hundred years of the Apostles, a general custom, 
 sustained as was supposed by the command of Christ, to 
 bring such children to baptism. Tertullian evidently 
 speaks of it as a general custom, and quotes the injunction 
 of our Lord. ' Forbid them not to come unto me,' as 
 having reference to it. But then he advises a delay. 
 Why ? Not because he thought infant baptism unauthor- 
 ized, or an innovation ; this is not intimated : But be- 
 cause of certain erroneous opinions which he entertained 
 in regard to the mystical efficacy of baptism. He sup- 
 posed that with baptism was connected the forgiveness of 
 sins; and that sins committed after baptism were next to 
 unpardonable. He therefore urged, that "to every one's 
 condition, disposition, and age, the delay of baptism is 
 more profitable ; especially in the case of little children," 
 and " unmarried persons." He advised, that all persons 
 should delay baptism, till they were either brought to the 
 verge of the grave, or were in some way released from 
 the temptations of life.* 
 
 With the absurd opinions of this father, we have noth- 
 ing to do. It is merely as a witness to a fact that he is 
 introduced. And there is no father whose testimony, as 
 to the general practice of infant baptism in the primitive 
 age, is more convincing than that of Tertullian. He 
 was an honest but fanciful, whimsical writer ; embraced 
 many strange and peculiar notions ; and was finally eject- 
 ed from the communion of the church. 
 
 Cotemporary with Tertullian was Clement of Alexan- 
 dria. In the follovving passage from his writings, we 
 have a striking allusion to the baptism of children by the 
 
 * In the third and fourth cenlury, this delay of baptism prevailed to an 
 alarming extent. " Men lived in sin,'' says Milner, " as long as they thought 
 they could safely, and deferred baptism till their near approach to death, 
 under the groundless hope of washing away all their guilt at once." Ecc. 
 Hist. Vol. ii. p. 276. 
 
 *9 
 
102 
 
 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Apostles, which he seems to think was ordinarily per- 
 formed by immersion. He is giving directions respecting 
 the rings to be worn on the fingers of Christians, and the 
 seals suitable to be engraven on them, and says : "Let 
 your seal be a Dove,- or a fish, or a ship under sail, or a 
 harp, or an anchor (which Saleneus made his choice ;) 
 and if any one be a fisherman, let him think of an Apos- 
 tle, and the children taken from the water."* He recom- 
 mends the figure of an Apostle baptizing a little child, as 
 a suitable one to be engraved. 
 
 Origen was born A. D. 185,'or 85 years after the Apos- 
 tles. His testimony to the baptism of infants is direct 
 and convincing. " According to the usage of the church, 
 baptism is given (etiam parvulis) even to infants ; when 
 if there were nothing in infants which needed' forgive- 
 ness and mercy,- the grace of baptism would seem to be 
 superfluous." 
 
 Again : " Infants are baptized 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, un- 
 less it be according to the sense mentioned above, that 
 no one is free from pollution, though he has lived but one 
 day Upon earth; and because by baptism native pollution 
 is taken away, therefore infants arc baptized." 
 
 Still again : " The church received a tradition from the 
 Apostles to give baptism even to infants."t 
 
 Respecting the traditions of the Apostles and the 
 practice of the church, Origen had the best possible means 
 of information ; for his grandfather, Or at most his great 
 grandfather (both of whom were Christians) must have 
 been cotemporary with the Apostles themselves. Be- 
 sides ; he was one of the most learned men of his time ; 
 had travelled in various countries; and was acquainted with 
 
 # Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part i. Chap. 3. 
 
 t Horn. viii. on Lev. 12; Horn, on Luke 14 ; and Com. on Rom. Lib. 5. 
 
SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 103 
 
 the usages of Christians throughout the world. He not 
 only makes mention of infant baptism, but argues from it 
 in proof of original sin. His argument would have had 
 no weight, had infant baptism been a new or questionable 
 practice. 
 
 There is no escaping from the testimony of Origen, but 
 by depreciating Ruffinus's translation of his works. But 
 some of the passages usually quoted from Origen have no 
 connexion with this translation. They are taken', in part 
 from a translation by Jerome, and in part from the origin- 
 al Greek. The authenticity of the passages above cited 
 has been satisfactorily vindicated by Dr. Wall.* 
 
 I shall next adduce the testimony of Cyprian and the 
 Council of Carthage. Cyprian was for a short time co- 
 temporary with Origen. The Council of Carthage over 
 which he presided, was convened A. D. 253, or 153 years 
 subsequent to the Apostles. This Council consisted of 
 sixty-six bishops, who were called together to determine, 
 among other things (so prevalent was the idea that bap- 
 tism had come in the place of circumcision,) whether it 
 was lawful to administer baptism to infants before they 
 were eight days old. The following passage is from the 
 Letter of the Bishops, or what would now be called the 
 Result of the Council : 
 
 " Cyprian and the rest of the bishops who were pre- 
 sent in Council, sixty-six in number, to Fidust our broth- 
 er 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 circumcis- 
 ion is to be observed ; we were all of a very different opin- 
 ion. Not one ivas of your mind, but we all rather judged 
 that the mercy and grace of God is to be denied to no hu- 
 
 * Defence, pp. 373 — 383. Jerome testifies expressly that Origen held to 
 infant Baptism. 
 
 f The name of the Bishop who proposed the question. 
 
104 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 man -being that is born." — " This, therefore, dear broth- 
 er, 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 all. And this rule, as it holds 
 for all, is, we think, more especially to be observed in re- 
 ference to infants, even to those newly born." 
 
 " Here," says Mr. Milner, " is an assembly of sixty-six 
 pastors, men of approved fidelity and gravity, who had 
 stood tlfe fiery trial of some of the. severest persecutions 
 ever known ; who had testified their love to the Lord 
 Jesus in a more striking manner than any Anti-Pedobap- 
 tists have had an opportunity of doing in our days; and 
 who seem not to be wanting in any fundamental of godli- 
 ness. Before this assembly a question is brought, not 
 whether infants should be baptized — none contradicted 
 this, — but whether they should be baptized immediately, 
 or on the eighth day. To a man they determine to bap- 
 tize them immediately. Let the reader consider."* 
 
 Among these pastors, there were some, undoubtedly, 
 who were advanced in age ; whose ancestors had lived in 
 the first century, and were well acquainted with the 
 practice of the Apostles. If infant baptism were an inno- 
 vation, is it possible to conceive that not one of these 
 men should be acquainted with the fact ; or if acquainted 
 with it, that none should have the fidelity to oppose the 
 error 1 
 
 In the Apostolical Constitutions, by some ascribed to 
 Clement of Rome, and known to have been extant in the 
 early ages of the Christian Church, it is said : "Baptize 
 your infants, and bring them up in the nurture and admo- 
 nition of the Lord."f 
 
 In the Questions and Answers to the Orthodox, an 
 ancient work, which some have ascribed to Justin Martyr, 
 
 * Ecc. Hist. Vol. i. p. 402. 
 
 t Wall's Hist, of In. Baptism, Part i. pp. 426, 432. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 105 
 
 we have the following passage : " The difference between 
 those (B§eq>i]) infants that have been baptized, and those, 
 that have not, will be, that the baptized will be made 
 partakers of the blessings granted by baptism, and the un- 
 baptized not. And those blessings are granted for the 
 sake of the faith of those that bring them to baptism."* 
 
 About 260 years after the Apostles lived Optatus Mile- 
 vitanus. Comparing Christ put on in baptism to a gar- 
 ment, he exclaims, " Oh ! what a garment is this, 'which 
 is always one, and which fits all ages and shapes. It is 
 neither too large for infants, nor too small for young men, 
 nor does it need any alteration for women?'* 
 
 Basil the Great was cotemporary with Optatus, or per- 
 haps a little earlier. Theodore! relates that he, " coming 
 into the palace" (of Valens, an Arian) " and seeing the 
 Emperor's child at the point of death, undertook that he 
 would recover, if he had baptism given him by the hands 
 of the godly ; and having said this, he went away. But 
 the Emperor gave order to some that were present of the 
 faction of Arius to baptize {to nadkov} the child."t 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen, in his Oration on Basil, represents 
 him as having been consecrated to God, and carried to 
 the baptismal font, in his infancy. — In his Oration on 
 Baptism, Gregory reasons thus : " Hast thou an infant 
 child? Let not wickedness have the advantage of time. 
 Let him be sanctified from his infancy. Let him be ded- 
 icated from his cradle to the Spirit. Thou as a faint- 
 hearted mother and of little faith, art afraid of giving him 
 the seal, because of the weakness of nature. Give him 
 the trinity ,' that great and excellent preservative." % 
 
 Ambrose, who flourished 274 years after the Apostles, 
 says : " Those (parvuli) little children who are baptized, 
 
 * Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part i. pp. 426, 432. 
 
 f Hist. Ecc. Lib. iv. Cap. 17. 
 
 t See Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. P. i. Chap, ii, 
 
106 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 are reformed from a wicked state to the primitive state of 
 their nature." 
 
 Again, having quoted the words of Christ, ' Unless any 
 one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into 
 the kingdom of God,' he says: "You see that he excepts 
 no one, not even an infant."* 
 
 Chrysostom, who lived 2S0 years after the Apostles, 
 says : " Some think that the heavenly grace (of baptism) 
 consists only in forgiveness of sins : but I have reckoned 
 up ten advantages of it. For this cause ioe baptize in- 
 fants, though they are not defiled with sin" (or, as 
 Augustine has quoted it from the Greek of Chrysostom, 
 "though they have not any actual sins") "that there 
 may be superadded to them saintship, "righteousness, 
 adoption, inheritance," &c* 
 
 Jerome, who was cotemporary with several of the fa- 
 thers last quoted, says : " The children of Christians are 
 not themselves only under the guilt of sin, if they do not 
 receive baptism ;" but " the wickedness is also imputed 
 to those who would not give it them."* 
 
 Augustine (or Austin) flourished 288 years after the 
 Apostles, and is styled by Milner "the great luminary" 
 of the age in which he lived. 'His testimony in favor of 
 infant baptism, as having been handed down from the 
 Apostles, is express and abundant. — In his. book against 
 the Donatists, speaking of the efficacy of baptism where 
 faith, by necessity, is wanting, he says : " This, the whole 
 body of the church holds, as delivered to them (cum par- 
 vuli infantes baptizantur) in the case of little infants who 
 are baptized, who Certainly cannot believe with the heart 
 unto righteousness ; and yet no Christian will say they are 
 baptized in vain." 
 
 In his book on Genesis, Augustine says : " The custom 
 of our mother, the church, in baptizing infants must not 
 
 * Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Part i. Chap. 13, 14, 15.' 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. . 107 
 
 be disregarded, nor accounted useless; and it must by all 
 means be believed to be (apostolica traditio) a tradition 
 of the Apostles." 
 
 Again, be says, that infant baptism "came not by any 
 general council, or by any authority later or less than that 
 of the Apostles." 
 
 Still again, he speaks of baptizing infants " by ihe au- 
 thority of the whole church, which was undoubtedly de- 
 livered by our Lord and his Apostles." 
 
 And finally he says : " I do not remember that I ever 
 heard any other thing from any Christians that received 
 the Old and New Testament, neither from such as were 
 of the Catholic church, nor from such as belonged to any 
 sect or schism ; I do not remember that I ever read other- 
 wise in any writer that I could find treating of these mat- 
 ters, wrro followed the canonical Scriptures, or pretended 
 to do so," " that infants are not baptized for that reason, 
 viz. that they may receive remission vf sins."* 
 
 Pelagius and Celestius flourished at the same time 
 with Augustine. They were distinguished for their 
 acuteness and learning, and had personally visited nearly 
 every part of the Christian world. They were the foun- 
 ders and promoters of the noted Pelagian heresy. They 
 denied the doctrine of original sin. In opposition to the 
 errors of these men, the whole Orthodox church, with 
 Augustine at its head, constantly and victoriously urged 
 the baptism of infants : " Why are infants baptized for 
 the remission of sins, if they have none ?" With this ar- 
 gument, Pelagius and his abettors were much embar- 
 rassed ; and had recourse to a variety of evasions in 
 order to escape from it. Sometimes they affirmed, that 
 infants had actual sins, which needed forgiveness ; — some- 
 times, that they had pre-existed, and that it was for sins 
 
 • See Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Vol. i. pp. 187—302. 
 
108 . SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 committed in some former state that they were brought to 
 baptism ; — sometimes they said that infants were not bap- 
 tized for the forgiveness of sins, but that they might be 
 sanctified ; — and sometimes, that they were baptized for 
 forgiveness, not that they had any sin, but because they 
 Were baptized into a church where forgiveness was to be 
 had: To such straits were these ^earned heresiarchs re- 
 duced, in order to reconcile their opinions with the bap- 
 tism of infants. How easily had all their difficulties been 
 removed, and the battery which so much annoyed them 
 been demolished at once, by simply denying that infants 
 were to be baptized. So strong were their temptations to 
 make such a denial, that Pelagius complained at one time 
 of its being slanderously reported that he had made it. It 
 is morally certain that he would have made it, if jvith all 
 his learning, and in his various travels, he had discovered 
 the slightest evidence to justify him in such a course. 
 Yet he never did make it. On the contrary, he asserts 
 the right of infants to baptism in the strongest terms. 
 " Baptism," says he, " ought to be administered to infants 
 with the same sacramental words which are used in the 
 case of adult persons." Again : " Men slander me, as if 
 I denied the sacrament of baptism to infants." And 
 again : " J never heard of any, not even the most impious 
 heretic, tcho denied baptism to infants. . For who can be 
 so impious, as to hinder infants from being baptized, and 
 born again in Christ, and so make them miss of the king- 
 dom of God?" 
 
 The language of Celestius, his coadjutor, is equally de- 
 cisive. " As for infants, I always said they stand in need 
 of baptism, and ought to be baptized."* The testimony 
 of these men, considering the circumstances under which 
 it was given, is in the highest degree convincing and sat- 
 isfactory. 
 
 * See Wall's Hist, of In. Bap. Vol. i.pp. 62, 356—370. 
 
SUBJECTS Of* BAPTISM. 109 
 
 To these testimonies from the early Christian writers, 
 it should be added, that Catalogues of all the different 
 sects of professing Christians in the four first centuries 
 (the very periqd when infant baptism must have been in- 
 troduced, if it were not of divine original) were carefully 
 written, and are still extant.* " In these catalogues, the 
 differences of opinion which obtained in those respecting 
 baptism are particularly recounted and minutely designat- 
 ed. Some sects are mentioned which made no use of 
 water baptism ; and the different ways in which baptism 
 was administered by different sects' are distinctly describ- 
 ed. Yet there is- no mention of any except those who 
 denied water baptism altogether, who did not consider in- 
 fant baptism as a* divine institution." 
 
 It would be useless to multiply testimonies from ancient 
 writers, or to trace the history of infant baptism to a later 
 period than that to which we have now arrived ; as it is 
 indisputable that, for the next five hundred years, this 
 practice universally prevailed. Dr. Wall, who has so 
 thoroughly investigated the subject as to leave little to be 
 done by those who come after him, assures us, that the 
 first body of men, of which he can find any account, 
 who denied baptism to infants, were the Petrobrussians 
 (the followers of Peter de Bruys) a sect of the Albigenses, 
 who appeared in the former part of the twelfth century. 
 And Milner says that, " a few instances excepted, the ex- 
 istence of ariti-Pedobaptism seems scarcely to have taken 
 place in the church of Christ, till a little after the begin- 
 ning of the reformation. "t 
 
 In opposition to the mass .of testimony which has been 
 given, as to the practice of the church in the first four 
 centuries, it is idle to bring forward the opinions of cer- 
 
 * The authors of these Catalogues were Irenseus, Epiphauius, Philastri- 
 us, Augustine, and Theodoret. See Wall's Hist. P. i. Chap. xxi. 
 "t See Appendix, Note J. 
 
 10 
 
110 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 tain modern writers, that " in primitive times none were 
 baptized but adults." Such opinions have no weight 
 with us ; and ought to have none with any person. We 
 have- the means of examining the subject for ourselves: 
 and have as much reason to believe, as we have to believe 
 anything on the testimony of history, that in the early 
 ages of the Christian church, infant baptism, so far from 
 being unknown, was a universally approved and establish- 
 ed custom. 
 
 It has been said, by way of objection, that there are 
 instances of persons — as Jerome, Gregory, Ambrose, 
 Chrysostom, Augustine, and Constantirte the great — who 
 were born of Christian parents, but who were not baptiz- 
 ed but upon their own profession. It will appear, however, 
 on examination, thtit not one of these instances is ■ in 
 point. " With respect to Jerome," says Dr. Wall, "there 
 is no evidence that he was not baptized in his infancy." 
 The father of Gregory was a determined and bitter ene- 
 my to Christianity, till his son, probably, had' become of 
 age. He belonged to a " sect," says Milner, " most re- 
 sembling the Samaritans, who professed a mixture of Ju- 
 daism and Pagariism. To this opinion he was extremely 
 devoted," and was not converted to the Christian faith till 
 many years subsequent to his marriage. He would, with- 
 out doubt, prohibit the baptism of his son in infancy.* 
 As to Ambrose and Chrysostom, their parents, according 
 to Dr. Wall, were heathens, at the time of their birth? 
 and for many years afterwards. f That the father of Au- 
 gustine was a Christian is not pretended ; and that his 
 mother was not a Christian by profession, till he had pass- 
 ed the period of childhood, is certain from his own words. 
 For he says of her, that when he was learning oratory 
 at Carthage, " she had lately begun to feel God's holy 
 
 * See Milner's Ecc. Hist. Vol. ii. pp. 272, 309. 
 t Hist, of In. Bap. Part ii. Chap. iii. 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. Ill 
 
 love, and had beeu washed in the laver of baptism.""* Of 
 Constantine, Eusebius says, that he " was the only one of 
 all those that ever were emperors, who was perfected by 
 baptism. "f Consequently, his father, though a friend to 
 the Christians, could not have been by profession of their 
 number. 
 
 The case of infant communion is often brought forward, 
 as completely invalidating the argument from history in 
 favor of infant baptism. — It is true, that in some churches 
 infant communion has been practised, and by some per- 
 sons it has been advocated, both in ancient and modern 
 times. " In Cyprian's time," says Wall, " the people of 
 the church of Carthage did oftentimes bring their chil- 
 dren younger than had been ordinary to the communion. "\ 
 Or, as another expresses it; they were accustomed " to 
 give a piece of the bread soaked in wine to children and 
 the sick. "|| In later periods, when, from a perversion of 
 our Saviour's words, " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son 
 of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you," it 
 was believed that a partaking of the supper was essential 
 to salvation, infant communion more generally prevailed. 
 It. is mentioned by Photius, Augustine, and Paulinus, 
 and continues to be practised among the Greeks to the 
 present day. " They crumble the consecrated bread into 
 the wine, take it out with a spoon," and put it into the 
 mouths of infants.|| 
 
 If infant baptism were founded on mere historical evi- 
 dence ; and" if this evidence were as clear in favor of in- 
 fant communion as of infant baptism ; the two practices 
 would then stand on equal ground. But neither of these 
 suppositions is founded in truth. The baptism of infants 
 
 * See Milner's Ecc. Hist. Vol. ii pp. 272, 309. 
 t Life of Constantine, Lib. iv. Cap. 12. 
 t Hist of In. Bap. P.art ii. Chap. 9. : - 
 
 y Witsius' Econ. of Gov. Vol. iii. p. 432. 
 
112 SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 
 
 rests upon the Scriptures. The communian of infants, to 
 say the most of it, receives no countenance from Scripture. 
 Nor is the argument from history, in the two cases, by any 
 means equal. We have clear intimations of infant bap- 
 tism in the Apostolic age. We have no intimations of 
 infant communion, till the middle of the third century. It 
 appears that infant baptism was universally practised in 
 the Christian church. We have no evidence that infant 
 communion ever was universal. The fathers Speak con- 
 fidently of infant baptism, that it came from the Apostles. 
 Those who make mention of infant communion never 
 speak of it, that I can learn, after this manner. In short, 
 infant baptism bears decisive marks of a divine original. 
 Infant communion is manifestly an innovation in the 
 church. On what grounds/then, can infant commun- 
 ion be urged, as invalidating the argument in favor of 
 infant baptism 1 
 
 Without doubt, all the churches planted by the Apos- 
 tles were- established upon the same plan. Either they 
 all baptized infants, or they all rejected them. And the 
 practice of the Apostles in this matter must have been 
 universally and certainly known. All the Christians, 
 among whom Paul travelled and -preached, knew whether 
 or not he and his companions baptized their children. 
 
 ' And if the Apostles and their coadjutors did not bap- 
 tize children — if they established churches upon the plan 
 of adult baptism only; at what period, I ask, was infant 
 baptism introduced ? And how must the persons who 
 first attempted to introduce it have been received 1 
 " Would not ail their brethren," says an eloquent writer,* 
 whose language I shall freely use, " immediately cry ouf 
 upon them, and demand, ' By what authority do you pre- 
 sume to perform this new, this unheard of, and strange 
 
 * Mr. Tovvgood. • 
 
SUBJECTS OP BAPTISM. 113 
 
 ceremony of baptizing an infant?' Suppose the innova- 
 tors to have urged in support of their practice the same 
 Scriptures which we now urge, would it not presently 
 have been replied upon them with unanswerable strength, 
 ' Did not the Apostles and first preachers of Christianity 
 understand the true sense and force of these Scriptures ? 
 Yet we all perfectly know, and you cannot but own, that 
 not one of them ever baptized an infant. Look into all 
 the churches throughout the ea/th, and you will find that 
 there never was such a thing known or heard of before 
 amongst Christians.' 
 
 "What, under these circumstances, could the first 
 baptizers of infants possibly reply ? Could they think to 
 justify themselves on the ground of Apostolic injunction 
 and practice? But every Christian then living could 
 have stepped forth, and borne witness to the falsehood of 
 such a pretence. Or could they hope to establish this in- 
 vention of their own, and was it actually established, in 
 direct opposition to Apostolic authority ? Impossible to 
 imagine! What then, I ask again — (if all the churches 
 in the world were constituted by the Apostles upon a di- 
 rectly opposite plan) — what could the first baptizers of 
 infants urge in favor of their practice ? And how was it 
 possible it should be received and prevail, yea, so univer- 
 sally prevail, that the learned and acute Pelagius, about 
 three hundred years after, had never heard of a church, 
 amongst either Catholics or heretics, which did not ad- 
 minister baptism to infants ? 
 
 " Could we suppose a few persons of so singular a dis- 
 position, as to run into this novel and unheard of prac- 
 tice, can it be imagined that whole churches would be led 
 blindly away after them ? Or if whole churches might 
 be thus seduced, could whole nations be so too ? Or if 
 whole nations might, can it enter into the heart of any rea- 
 sonable being, that all the nations of the Christian world 
 *10 
 
114 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM; 
 
 should, in the course of a few years, fall in entirely with 
 this anti-Apostolic and newly invented ceremony of reli- 
 gion, and apostatize from the primitive and pure doctrine 
 Of Christ? 
 
 ".The extravagance of the supposition is greatly in- 
 creased, by remembering that the church was early divid- 
 ed into a number of sects, which were severe and watchful 
 spies upon each other's conduct. If arty of them had in- 
 novated in the matter oi baptizing infants, how loudly 
 would the rest have exclaimed upon the innovation ! But 
 so far, it seems, were they from this, that laying aside 
 their prejudices and animosities, they all surprizingly 
 agree, in respect to infant baptism, to depart from the 
 Apostolic practice, and by an unaccountable confederacy, 
 connive at one another in this dangerous superstition ! 
 Strange, beyond all belief, that amidst their mutual accu- 
 sations, reproaches and complaints, We meet not, in all 
 antiquity, with one upon this head !" 
 
 I could more easily account (unaccountable as it may 
 be) for the introduction and universal spread of infant 
 baptism in two or three centuries, than I could for its 
 prevalence without altercation and controversy among 
 Christians. Large bodies of men never change either 
 their sentiments or practice all at once, without disputes. 
 "And if infant baptism had been an innovation, a cor- 
 ruption of one of the special ordinances of the gospel, it 
 'would not have been introduced in the early days of 
 Christianity, without commotions, controversies, and di- 
 visions. But, strange to tell, the pen of history has not 
 transmitted to us the least intimation of any controversy 
 about it ; though it has furnished us with catalogues of 
 all the heresies, and has recorded a dispute of far less 
 consequence, respecting the proper time of baptizing in- 
 fants !" 
 
 The argument, therefore, comes to this : If infant bap- 
 
SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 115 
 
 tism is an innovation, it confessedly entered the church 
 soon after the canon of Scripture closed ; and in a few 
 years more, " without a single precept to warrant or an 
 example to encourage it, yea, with the well known prac- 
 tice of the Apostles, and of all the churches they planted, 
 directly, openly, palpably against it, — under all these dis- 
 advantages it so universally prevailed, that upon the face 
 of the whole earth there was not a church found, where 
 it was not practised !" Yea more, it entered the church, 
 prevailed, and became universal, without a whisper of 
 opposition,* without a word of dispute, all parties agree- 
 ing to connive at the error, to blot every trace of its ori- 
 gin from the page of history, and never to utter a single 
 word from which it could be discovered that they were 
 conscious of having departed from gospel rules ! To him 
 who believes this, what can be incredible ! 
 
 Is it not, then, morally certain, that infant baptism is 
 not an innovation in the church, but was sanctioned by 
 the Apostles themselves? On this ground, and this only, 
 " all sacred and profane history, relating to the subject, 
 appears plain and consistent, from Abraham to Christ, 
 and from Christ to this day." 
 
 * I make this assertion, with a perfect recollection of the testimony of 
 Tertullian. He did not consider infant baptism as new or unauthorized, but 
 merely advised to delay it, as he did that of unmarried persons, on the 
 ground of expediency. * m ^ 
 
PART III. 
 
 ON THE IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES OF INFANT BAP- 
 TISM. 
 
 In the foregoing pages, I have endeavored to vindicate 
 the propriety of Infant Baptism, and to show that it is of 
 divine* institution. But if this rite is of divine institution, 
 it doubtless has a meaning, — which may be gathered 
 from the Scriptures, and which ought to be distinctly un- 
 derstood. . Until it is understood, the duties growing out 
 of it will not be discovered, and consequently will not be 
 performed. 
 
 Besides ; the covenants of our churches often require, 
 not only that parent's bring their children to baptism, but 
 that they "instruct them, in the nature, use, and end of 
 that ordinance." But how shall parents perform this 
 duty, and fulfil this important part of their covenant en- 
 gagements, unless they are themselves instructed, as to 
 "the nature, use, and end" of the ordinance in question? 
 
 This subjectassumes additional importance from the 
 banner in which it has been hitherto treated. I speak 
 according fo my most sincere convictions when I say, 
 that no subject of equal claims, within the whole circle 
 of Christian theology ^ has been so much neglected as 
 this. And when it has been discussed, it has not been, 
 in all instances, in the most happy manner. The labors 
 of some have tended rather to involve it in mystery, and 
 thus guard it against the exceptions of Baptists, than to 
 open the real sense of Scripture, and afford satisfaction to 
 impartial minds. 
 
IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES OF INFANT BAPTISM. J 17 
 
 • 
 
 It may be remarked further, by way of introduction, 
 that this subject is one in which Pedobaptists alone are 
 directly interested. Until our brethren of other denomi- 
 nations admit the propriety of administering baptism to 
 children, they can have no particular interest in ascer- 
 taining the import of the transaction, or the relation of 
 baptized children to the church of Christ. 
 
 It has been observed, in a former part of this work, 
 that baptism, like-circumcision, is both a sign and a seal* 
 As a sign it is significant of important truths. As a seal, 
 it is connected with a covenant, involving duties to be 
 performed, 'and promising important blessings. This is 
 true of baptism generally,; and it is equally true of bap- 
 tism when applied to children. 
 
 It will be necessary" to contemplate infant baptism in 
 the twofold view which has been here presented. 
 
 And, first, as a sign. What is signified in the baptism 
 of children ? What facts, what truths, is the ordinance 
 calculated to teach and impress f 
 
 I. It plainly teaches that infants are moral beings, 
 and capabre of receiving spiritual blessings. — Some there 
 are, who regard infants as mere animals, without intel- 
 lectual immortal souls, and having no moral capacities 
 more than the brutes. But if infants are without intel- 
 lectual and moral capacities, without souls ; why are they 
 
 * " He (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the right- 
 eousness of faith," &c. Rom. iv. 1J. Lightfoot says, that the Je\vs*have 
 always considered Mrcumc'ision as both a sign and a seal ; and that when 
 in the act of circumcising a child, the administrator was instructed' to say, 
 " Blessed be he who hath sanctified you, beloved from the womb, and hath 
 placed the sign in your flesh, and hath sealed our sons with the seal of his 
 holy covenant." Horae Hebraicae on Matt, xxviii. 19. 
 
 The Christian Fathers were accustomed to represent baptism as a seal 
 Hernias, speaking of " the seal of the Son of God," says, (illud autem si- 
 gillum aqua est) " but that seal is water." Gregory Nazianzen, reproving 
 a mother for delaying to baptize her child, says: " Thou art afraid of giving 
 him the seal." Wall's Hist, of In. Baptism, Part i. Chapters 1 and 11. 
 
118 t IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 •baptized 1 What propriety in baptizing a mere animal 1 
 And for such an application of the ordinance, what mean- 
 ing or reason could be assigned ? 
 
 When our Saviour was upon earth, little children were 
 brought to him that they might receive his blessing. But 
 can we suppose that he would have suffered mere animals 
 to be brought to him in this way ? Would he have lajd 
 his hands on little animals without souls, and prayed over 
 them, and pronounced them blessed, and said that " of 
 such is the kingdom of God 1" — It is certain from the 
 transaction here referred to, that infants have immortal 
 souls ; — that they are moral beings, capable of receiving 
 spiritual blessings, and are to be regarded and treated in 
 this light. And whenever we see a child presented for 
 baptism, we have a visible manifestation of this interest- 
 ing truth. God is here virtually assuring us, that in the 
 breast of the seemingly unconscious infant there is a 
 flame lighted up which is to burn forever. He is assur- 
 ing us, that the little subject of baptism, though at pres- 
 ent feeble and helpless, is capable, in the progress of its 
 being, of unbounded attainments in holiness -and bliss ; 
 and is capable even now, of being brought into a cove- 
 nant relation to God, and becoming an heir of. eternal 
 life. 
 
 2. We see in the baptism of infants that they are der 
 proved beings. — It is not necessary here to go into any 
 discussion respecting the nature of human depravity. 
 Whether this attaches to something in thcconstitution of 
 the soul, or only its exercises, or whether there is any 
 other sense in which we may be said to be depraved, I 
 design not now to inquire. Evangelical Christians have 
 always held to native as well as total depravity ; and this 
 melancholy truth is clearly taught in the baptism of in- 
 fants. Why are they baptized for the remission of sins, 
 if they have none 1 was the triumphant interrogation of 
 
OP INFANT BAPTISM, 1 19 
 
 Augustine to Pelagius? And* the question is equally per- 
 tinent, and equally unanswerable, now as then. The ap- 
 plication of water is a fit and appointed emblem of purifi- 
 cation. But why purify that which is not defiled? Why 
 apply baptismal water to those who are not in any way 
 the subjects of mora} pollution ? 
 
 Some there are, who call infant children "little inno- 
 cents ;" and think them fit subjects of baptism, because 
 they are innocent. But if they are innocent, they need 
 no spiritual cleansing, no purification ; and why should 
 the symbol of purification be applied to.them? — The lan- 
 guage of infant baptism, however humiliating to proud 
 nature, is too plain to be easily perverted or misunder- 
 stood : ' Your children- are polluted ; they are depraved 
 from their birth ; they need to be regenerated, to be spir- 
 itually. cleansed and purified ; and it is on this account, 
 and not because they are innocent, that the symbol of 
 purification is applied to them.' 
 
 3/ The baptism of infants, like that of adults, "sets 
 forth the cleansing of the soul from sin " by. the washing 
 of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost." This 
 ordinance does npt indeed import, that all those to whom 
 it is applied arc actually cleansed ; but that there is 
 cleansing for them in the gospel, and that this is to be 
 effected through the special operations of^he Holy Spirit. 
 " Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins." Acts 
 xxii. 16. "Christ loved the church, and gave himself 
 for it, that he inight sanctify and cleanse it with the wash- 
 ing of ivatcr by the word." Eph. v. 25. " Then will I 
 sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean." 
 Ezek. xxxvi. 25. 
 
 Whenever we see a little child presented for baptism, 
 we have a striking illustration of the glorious truth, 'that 
 though we are polluted from our birth, still there is 
 cleansing for us in th*3 gospel. There is the " blood of 
 
120 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 . sprinkling, which speaketb better things than that of 
 Abel." There is an almighty Spirit, by the shedding 
 forth of whose influence the darkened "mind may be en- 
 lightened, the stubborn will bowed, the depraved heart 
 purified, and the whole soul transformed into a meetness 
 for heaven. 
 
 4. The 'baptism of an infant is calculated to impress 
 on all who witness it, that the cleansing, the healing, and 
 salvation of the gospel are entirely gratuitous. In the 
 case of a little child, these blessings must be gratuitous. 
 What has he done to merit them ? What can he do ? 
 But, says our blessed Saviour, " Whosoever shall not re- 
 ceive the kingdom of God as a little child, he' shall not 
 enter therein. 1 ' The adult person "who receives the. 
 kingdom, must receive it on the same terms as the child ; 
 t— not for a life of virtue, — not for his faith;, his'repent- 
 ance, his obedience, as if these could merit any thing 
 from God. He must, as to the ground of his title tc 
 spiritual. blessings, be divested of every thing. — Now this 
 is one of the essential articles of gospel truth; one of the 
 immutable laws of Christ's kingdom; one of the indis- 
 pensable characteristics of his genuine subjects. And 
 this truth is constantly exhibited, and affectingly impress- 
 ed, in infant baptism. Every time- the ordinance is ad- 
 ministered to a child-, all who witness it may be consid- . 
 eied as having the words of Christ symbolically repeated 
 in their ears : " Verily I say unto you, whosoever shall 
 not receive the kingdom of heaven as a little child, he 
 shall not enter therein.' It is not the fault of the ordi- 
 nance, but of its administrator and witnesses, if such im- 
 pressions are not made." 
 
 5. Infant baptism is a significant token of discipleship, 
 affixed to those who are early consecrated to Christ, and 
 pledged to him as his future followers. " All societies 
 need some mark of distinction, by which the members 
 
OF INFANT BAPTISM. 121 
 
 shall be known to each other ; so that each individual 
 shall feel, that he is himself required, and may justly re- 
 quire others, to perform the duties incumbent on him, 
 and them, as members of the fraternity. This sign ought 
 to be publicly known, to be definite, unequivocal, solemn, 
 significant, established by authority, and acknowledg- 
 ed by all the members. The power of such a sign, to 
 unite the members in affection, in a common interest, 
 and in corresponding pursuits, is very great." Now the 
 sign of "discipleship in the school of Christ is baptism : 
 and our gracions Master has provided, that it shall be 
 affixed, not only to his actual followers, but to their chil- 
 dren. *He has required that little children should be 
 brought to him for his blessing, committed to his guid- 
 ance, and pledged and devoted to his care and service ; 
 and that the token of discipleship should be placed upon 
 them. In this view, what an interesting spectacle is the 
 baptism of a child ! A little immortal, just placed in the 
 hands of its earthly guardians, is publicly resigned back 
 to the guardianship of Christ ; and ho is represented as 
 taking it into a covenant relation to himself, and fixing 
 upon it the token of his faithfulness and love ' 
 
 Having thus contemplated infant baptism as a sign, 
 and glanced at some. of the great truths which it is fitted 
 to teach and impress ; let us, secondly, consider it as a seal. 
 
 A seal is an appendage to a covenant; and implies the 
 existence of a covenant.* Baptism, in the case of an 
 adult, is the seal of a covenant between God and the per- 
 son receiving it. It seals his engagements to be the 
 Lord's, and seals to. him the divine promises of justifica- 
 tion and salvation. 
 * 
 
 * In the word seal, as here used, and as. used by the Apostle, Rom. iv. 
 11 ; there is an allusion, says Professor Stuart, e ' to the practice of confirm- 
 ing written instruments (contracts or covenants) by seals placed on them in 
 token of ratification." Comment, in loc. 
 11 
 
122 
 
 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 Baptism, in the case of an infant, is not the seal of a 
 covenant between God and the infant ; for the infant is 
 incapable of personally entering into covenant, or of en- 
 gaging in any covenant transaction ; — but baptism, in 
 this case, is the seal of a covenant bctioeen God and the 
 parent, respecting the child. 
 
 If we look into the Bible, we shall find this covenant, 
 in both parts of it ; — its promises, and its requisitions. 
 It is in fact no other than the covenant of the church — the 
 covenant with Abraham. God promises Abraham, in the 
 seventeenth chapter of Genesis, " I will establish my 
 covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, 
 to be a God to thee, and to thy seed, after ihee."^ We 
 find similar promises in every part of the Bible. " I will 
 pour my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon 
 thine offspring." " They are the seed of the blessed of 
 the Lord, and their offspring with them." "Is. xliv. 3 ; 
 Ixv. 23. "-The promise is to you, and to your children." 
 Acts ii. 39. 
 
 It is indubitable, from these passages, that the promises 
 of the covenant extend to the children of believers. They 
 extend to them as truly as to their parents. God prom- 
 ises to be the God of the one, as really as of the other. 
 
 It will be observed, however, tha.t these are covenant 
 promises, and are connected with requirements to be ful- 
 filled on the other part. There are requirements for the 
 believer to fulfil in respect to himself, or he is entitled to 
 no promise. He must endure to the end, or he has no 
 promise of salvation. He must be faithful unto death, or 
 he has no promise of a crown of life. . 
 
 So there are requirements for the believing parent to 
 fulfil in respect to his children, or he is entitled to no 
 promise for them. " Walk before me, and be thou per- 
 fect, and I will establish my covenant between 
 
 me and thee, and thy seed after thee, to be a God unto 
 
OF INFANT BAPTISM. 123 
 
 thee, and to thy seed after thee." " I know. Abraham, 
 that he will command his children and his household after 
 him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do jus- 
 tice and judgment." " Know, therefore, that the Lord 
 thy God is the faithful God, keepjng covenant and mercy 
 trith them that love him and keep his commandments, to a 
 thousand generations." " When thou shalt return unto 
 the Lord thy God, and shalt obey his voice, according to 
 
 all that 1 command thee this day \,\ the Lord thy 
 
 God shalt circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy 
 seed." " He established a testimony in Jacob, and ap- 
 pointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers 
 that they should make them known to their children, .... 
 .... that (hey might set their hope in God, and not for- 
 get the works of God, but keep his commandments." 
 " The mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlast- 
 ing upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto 
 children's children, to such as keep his covenant, and to 
 those that remember his commandments to do them." 
 " The generation of the upright shall be blessed." "The 
 just man walkcth in his integrity; and his children are 
 blessed after him." " Train up a child in the way he 
 should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from 
 it."* 
 
 From these passages, out of the many which might be 
 quoted, the import of the covenant may be gathered. God 
 promises to be the God of believers, if they will be faith- 
 ful to themselves; and he promises to be the God of their 
 "children, if they -will be faithful to them. If they will 
 walk before him and be perfect, he promises to establish 
 his covenant with them, to be a God to them and to their 
 seed. If they will command their children and their 
 households after them, he promises that they shall k^ep 
 
 * Gen. xvii. 1,7; xviii. 19. Deut. vii. 9; xxx. 6. Ps. lxxviii. 5, 7; ciii. 
 17, 18 ; cxii. 2. Prov. xx. 7 j xxii. C. 
 
124 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment. If 
 they and their posterity will continue in his love, he 
 promises that his mercy shall descend from parents to 
 children, even to a thousand generations. If they will 
 return unto the Lord and obey his voice, according to all 
 that he commands them ; he promises to circumcise the 
 heart of their seed, that they may love him with all the 
 heart. If they will make known unto their children the 
 praises of thejLord, and his strength, and the wonderful 
 works that he has done, he promises that they shall set 
 their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but 
 keep his commandments. If they will keep his cove- 
 nant, and remember his commandments to do them, he 
 promises that his righteousness shall descend to their 
 children's children. If they will sustain consistently the 
 character of the upright, their generation shall be bless- 
 ed. If they will be just and walk in their integrity, their 
 children shall be blessed after them. If they will train 
 them up in the way they should go, when the}- are old 
 they will not depart from it. Or to sum up these vari- 
 ous Scriptural representations, -if covenanting parents ivill 
 be faithful to their children, and bring the/it tip in the 
 nurture and admonition of the Lord; he promises to be- 
 stow upon them converting grace, and to be their God and 
 portion in this world and forever. 
 
 Such is the obvious meaning of the covenant of the 
 church in respect to children ; — a meaning, not put upon 
 it for the purpose of sustaining a favorite hypothesis, but 
 shining forth from all the Scriptures relating to the sub* 
 ject. When the believing parent enters into-this cove- 
 nant, he engages to be faithful to his children, and seals 
 the engagement in their baptism. • 
 
 £5uch, then, is the import of infant baptism, as a seal. 
 It is the seal of a covenant between God and the parent. 
 It is a visible confirmation of this covenant by both the 
 parties concerned in it. God virtually and most gra- 
 
OF INFANT BAPTISM. 125 
 
 ciously addresses the parent in this transaction, and says, 
 * I will be a God to your child, if you will be faithful to 
 it.' And the parent responds, ' I engage to be faithful 
 to the child. I here publicly give it up to thee, and 
 promise to train it up for thee.' 
 
 From the view here taken, the relation of the baptized 
 infant to the church is very obvious. It is not, indeed, at 
 present, an actual church member: Still, it holds an im- 
 portant place in the covenant of the church. Both the 
 promises and requisitions of the covenant have respect to 
 it. The parent consecrates the child to Christ, and 
 promises to train it up for him according to covenant. 
 And God says, '-This do, and your child shall live.- This 
 do, and your child is secured to Christ and the church 
 forever.' 
 
 It may be asked here, whether the covenant of the 
 church in respect to children, demands entire fidelity of 
 the parent; whether it is broken by every instance of im- 
 proper treatment, by every failure in point of duty ? — 
 And in reply, I would ask, whether God does not de- 
 mand entire fidelity in all his covenant dealings with 
 men? In what covenant that he has ever ' made with 
 them has he left them at liberty to sin ? Could Abraham 
 fall into sin, and not violate that covenant in which it 
 was said, ' Walk before me, and be thou perfect?' When- 
 ever the children of Israel fell into sin, were they not 
 charged with violating covenant engagements? And is 
 it not an aggravation of all the sins of God's people now, 
 that they are offences, not only against the law of God, . 
 but against his covenant? 
 
 It is one thing, however, to come short of the entire 
 requisitions of a covenant, and quite another, so to break 
 it and trifle with it, as to lose all interest in its promised 
 blessings. The former is often done by the professing 
 people of God ; the latter, it may be hoped, is of rare o<> 
 *11 
 
126 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 currence. It cannot be supposed that Abraham was en- 
 tirely perfect with his children — that he performed all 
 his duty towards them. Yet he obtained a promise in 
 respect to them, that they should " keep the way of the 
 Lord to do justice and judgment." The Israelites often 
 failed of fulfilling the demands of God's covenant with 
 them ; yet it was long before they lost all interest in the 
 covenant, and were finally rejected. And how is it with 
 believers under the gospel? They are not perfect. They 
 are often chargeable with sin. Still, they do not, with 
 every sin, lose all interest in the covenant of grace; If 
 they " repent of their sins, and turn to God, and do 
 works meet for repentance ;" he graciously returns to 
 them, and permits them to confide in his love. 
 
 Without doubt, the covenant, into which the believing 
 parent enters respecting his children, requires him to be 
 faithful to them. It can require no less. Neither is it 
 likely that any parent in this life comes up to the full im- 
 port of this requisition. The most watchful parent often 
 sins, and fails of doing his whole duty to his children. 
 Still, he may not so fail, and trifle with the obligations of 
 the covenant, as to forfeit all interest in its blessings. If 
 he is sensible of his failures, and mourns over them, and 
 strives not to repeat them, and returns with new zeal to 
 the performance of duty ; God will not at once forsake 
 him, - and cut him off from his interest in the promises. 
 The whole history of God's covenant dealings with men 
 forbids such a supposition.* — The covenanting parent, 
 
 * " If they shall confess their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers . . 
 . . . then will 1 remember my covenant with Jacob, and also myvovenant 
 with Isaac, and ah?o my covenant with Abraham wi" I remember, and I 
 will remember the land." Lev. xxvi. 40 — 45. ".They provoked him with 
 their counsel, and were brought low for their iniquity ; nevertheless, he re- 
 garded their affliction, when he heard their cry, and he remembered for them 
 his covenant.'! Ps. cvi. 43 — 45. " Thou hast despised the oath in break- 
 ing the covenant ^nevertheless, J will remember my covenant ivith thee in 
 the days of thy youth." Ezek. xvi. 59, 60. 
 
OP INFANT BAPTISM. 127 
 
 having once failed, may not be abl« to demand the entire 
 fulfilment of the promises ; but he may reasonably Jwpc 
 for their fulfilment, and. this hope will be just in propor- 
 tion to the degree of his penitence, and his future dili- 
 gence in the performance of duty. 
 
 It may be objected to the principles established in the 
 foregoing pages, that they make the salvation of children 
 to depend rather on their parents, than on themselves ; 
 and represent those who are lost as condemned for their 
 parents' iniquity, rather than their oivn. — But this objec- 
 tion arises entirely from misapprehension. The piety of 
 children I suppose is connected in covenant with parent- 
 al fidelity ; but then, when they come to- experience it, 
 it is their own piety, and they are rewarded according to 
 their own works. So the final impenitence and ruin of 
 children are connected in many ways with the wicked- 
 ness of parents. Still, the impenitence of such children 
 is their own, and they are punished for their own sins. 
 
 It may be further objected, that, according to the rep- 
 resentation which has been given, the relation of children 
 to the Christian church is very different from their rela- 
 tion to the Jewish church. — But how were children con- 
 nected with the Jewish church ? Not by the possession 
 of true holiness, for this they did not possess. Neither 
 by having entered personally into the covenant of the 
 church; for they were incapable in their infancy, as chil- 
 dren now are, of any such personal transaction. So far 
 as the church under the former dispensation possessed a 
 national character, its constitution and the ground of 
 connexion with it could not be the same as that which 
 prevails under the gospel. But so far as this church was 
 properly spiritual, it is believed that the relation of chil- 
 dren to it did not differ materially from that which now 
 subsists. I can conceive of no ground of spiritual rela- 
 tion to it, but that which has been explained ; — parents, 
 
128 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 entered into covenant respecting their children, and the 
 Jehovah of Israel promised, on condition of parental 
 fidelity, to be their God.* 
 
 The principles which have been established furnish 
 ground for several important conclusions. 
 
 1. From what has been said of infant baptism, as a 
 seal, it appears that it is most wisely adapted to secure 
 the religious education and consequent conversion of the 
 children of believing parents. This is, -yideed, the .great 
 object and end of infant baptism ; .and the rite, as it has 
 been explained, is fitted obviously, in the best manner, to 
 secure it. 
 
 It is fitted to do this, by reminding covenanting parents 
 o.f their duty to their children. Every time they look 
 upon them, and behold the seal of God upon their fore- 
 heads, they are reminded of the engagements into which 
 they have entered, and the duties which they have cove- 
 nanted to perform. 
 
 Infant baptism is also fitted to quicken and strengthen 
 parents in the performance of their duties. In this re- 
 spect, it is not unlike a public profession of religion. A 
 public profession imposes no new duties. The same re- 
 ligious duties, in general, are binding on all men, wheth- 
 er they make a profession or not. But a profession furn- 
 ishes ncio inducements to the performance of duty, and 
 new strength with which to resist the temptations to neg- 
 lect it. So infant baptism imposes no new duties. All 
 parents are bound to be faithful to their children, whether 
 they baptize them or not. But by a public recognition of 
 parental duties, and a solemn, sealed engagement to per- 
 form these duties, infant baptism greatly increases the 
 motives in favor of their performance, and furnishes addi- 
 tional security that they will be performed. 
 
 * See Appendix, Note K. 
 
OF INFANT BAPTISM. 129 
 
 The promises of God, too, will be a great encourage- 
 ment to parents, in the difficult and responsible work of 
 training up their children. Was it not an encourage- 
 ment to Abraham, that God had promised to be the God 
 of his sa:d? And should it rfot afford encouragement to 
 the Christian parent, that this promise is still to him, and 
 to his children ? As he looks upon his beloved offspring, 
 with an ever watchful anxiety for their spiritual good, 
 will it not encourage and comfort him, that he may re- 
 gard them as already the subjects of promise, and may 
 humbly plead the provisions of God's gracious covenant 
 on their behalf? 
 
 2. It appears from what has been said,- that there is a 
 propriety in administering baptism, not 'only to the natu- 
 ral children of believing parents, but to such as have 
 been adopted by them, and with whose education they 
 are entrusted. Infant baptism is the seal of a covenant, 
 or of mutual en -rag emails, entered into by God and the 
 parent respecting the child. The engagement of the pa- 
 rent is in substance this: ' I will, train up this child in 
 the nurture and admonition of the Lord.' 
 
 It is plain, that the parent may properly enter into such 
 an engagement respecting his own children ; and it is 
 equally plain that he may enter into a like engagement in 
 respect to any child or children whom he has adopted, or 
 with whose education he is entrusted. With the utmost 
 propriety, therefore, he may present such child or chil- 
 dren before God and say, ' Here are the little ones whom 
 thou, in thy righteous providence, hast committed to my 
 care. • I desire to yield them up to thee, and promise to 
 train them up for thee. I desire to seal this promise in 
 their baptism, and thus take hold of thy gracious cove- 
 nant on their behalf.' 
 
 3. It may be inferred from the principles which have 
 been established, that children are not entitled to baptism 
 
130 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 on their parent's account after they have passed the peri- 
 od of their minority. As parents cannot with propriety 
 engage to train up their children' for God, when they are 
 already trained up ; so they cannot with propriety apply 
 to them the seal of such an engagement. The period 
 when children cease to be entitled to baptism on the ac- 
 count of their parents, is the period when they pass from 
 under the control of their parents, and are no longer sub- 
 ject to their discipline and care. 
 
 4. From the view we have taken, it appears that the 
 baptism of children furnishes no reason for their admission 
 to the communion of the church, without a credible profes- 
 sion of piety. — In the opinion of some, when baptized chil- 
 dren arrive at a certain age, and have passed what may be 
 termed their religious minority, they are entitled, on the 
 mere ground of their baptism, to the communion of the 
 church. And if, at this or at any subsequent period, they 
 request admission to communion ; unless their lives are 
 scandalously immoral, the church, it is said, have no right 
 to refuse them. But opinions such as these are obviously the 
 result of incorrect notions respecting the import of infant 
 baptism, and the relation which it establishes between the 
 child and the church. Baptism alone does not qualify any 
 person for communion ; nor will the baptized child, on the 
 mere ground of his baptism, be at all more fitted, at any peri- 
 od of life, for the holy ordinance of the supper. Infant bap- 
 tism is the seal of a covenant, in which the child ispromi- 
 sed to the church. It seals engagements, which (if fulfilled) 
 render it certain, that he will at some period be qualified 
 for communion at the Lord's table. But how qualified 1 
 — Not by having arrived at a certain age, but by becom- 
 ing a subject of converting grace. God promises his peo- 
 ple, if they will give up their children to him, and train 
 them up for him, that he will be their God and portion ; 
 — he will prepare them for his church on earth, and for 
 
. OP INFANT BAPTISM. 131 
 
 his kingdom in heaven ; and when this promise begins 
 to be fulfilled, and baptized children begin to believe with 
 the heart and confess- with the mouth the religion of the 
 Son of God, then, and not before, may they with proprie- 
 ty become partakers of the memorials of his death. 
 
 5. It may be inferred from what has been said, that bap- 
 tized children are not subject directly to the discipline of 
 the church. — Some have supposed that, if the conduct of 
 those who have been baptized becomes irregular, or if 
 they long neglect to profess religion, the church is bound 
 to interfere, and make them the subjects of direct eccle- 
 siastical labor and discipline. But the view we have 
 taken of the connexion between such children and the 
 church, furnishes no ground for such a procedure. 
 
 The pious in our churches will, of course, feel a pecu- 
 liar solicitude for the spiritual welfare of those who have 
 been baptized. They will make frequent mention of 
 them in their prayers; and if individuals are disposed to 
 associate for the purpose of united prayer in regard to this 
 object, and to strengthen one another's hands in the dif- 
 ficult work of training up their children ; or if parents 
 are disposed to assemble their children with the church, 
 or to seek the advice and praye'rs of the church, — to 
 measures such as these there can be no objection. On 
 the contrary, they may be commendable and useful. — But 
 all this comes far short of making baptized children the 
 subjects of direct church discipline and censure. As 
 such children have never personally entered' into the cov- 
 enant of the church, they have never placed themselves 
 under its discipline. Nor have their parents placed 
 them there. They have covenanted with God, and with 
 with their brethren, that they would be faithful to their 
 children, and train them up in the nurture and admoni- 
 tion of the Lord ; but they have never placed them di- 
 
132 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND CSRS 
 
 rectly under the watch and care of the church. Hence, 
 the church have no right directly to interfere. 
 
 It is the right of the churches, ahd it is their duty, to 
 watch over covenanting parents — to watch over them in 
 respect to the manner in which they train up their chil- 
 dren — and, in case of palpable default or negligence, to 
 admonish, censure, or exclude, as the case may require. 
 In this indirect manner,' churches may extend their 
 supervision to the conduct of baptized children. But to 
 do more than this; to interfere with the government of 
 families; and to endeavor, on their own responsibility, 
 and by a direct application of discipline, to deal with and 
 reclaim refractory children, it is believed they have no 
 authority ; and that to attempt it might be attended with 
 the worst of consequences. 
 
 The opinion has been advanced, that when baptized 
 children arrive at a certain age, if they neglect a public 
 profession of religion, they ought to be admonished by 
 the church ;.and if not brought to a satisfactory perform- 
 ance of duty, they ought to be publicly disowned and re- 
 jected. But'such a procedure I must think both inexpe- 
 dient and unwarranted. Baptized children are, indeed, 
 connected with the church. Its covenant has respect to 
 them; and God has promised, on condition of parental 
 fidelity, that they shall one day be prepared for all the or- 
 dinances of his kingdom. But he has nowhere revealed 
 at what period this promise shall be fulfilled. lie may, 
 in righteous judgment, delay it long. Or if the condi- 
 tion on. which it is suspended is perseveringly trifled with, 
 he may never fulfil it. It is impossible for the church to 
 ascertain his designs, and it rather becomes them to wait 
 upon him, in a humble and prayerful use of means, than 
 rashly to disown and cast off those who are connected 
 with them by the ordinance of baptism. 
 
 6. It is a recommendation of the views here exhibited, 
 
OF INFANT BAPTISM. 133 
 
 that they open a plain, safe and easy path in respect to 
 the treatment of baptized children. This cannot "be said 
 of all the 'plausible theories which have been advanced in 
 relation to this subject. Some have led confessedly to 
 such a mode of treatment as their abettors would not have 
 •dared to put in practice ; and which, if it had been put in 
 practice, must have produced unhappy results. But the 
 views here advocated leave children, where God and na- 
 ture designed they should be left, under the immediate 
 direction and control of parents ; while they bind parents, 
 by motives the most powerful and engagements the most 
 solemn, to do their duty. The parent may seek direction 
 and aid from his brethren individually, or from the church 
 as a body, -or- from any other source whence they can be 
 obtained ;• but the care and control are primarily his. 
 And he is in a sense responsible to God and the church, 
 for the good education and consequent conversion of those 
 entrusted to his hands. 
 
 7. From what has been said, it appears that infant 
 baptism is not an unmeaning ceremony, but a very sig- 
 nificant and important ordinance. — Those who reject this 
 ordinance usually think and speak of it as a thing of jid 
 value. " It is a cause that produces no effect ; a means 
 connected with no end ; a cJoud that affords no rain ; a 
 tree that yields no fruit."*. 
 
 But in view of what has been said, I must be allowed 
 to ask, Is this true? Is infant baptism of no benefit as a 
 sign? Is it not clearly significant of some of the most 
 important spiritual " truths ?" Where can we so plainly 
 read, that toe are morally polluted beings from our birth ; 
 that we need cleansing ; that there- is cleansing for us 
 in the gospel; and that this (if bestowed at all) must come 
 in a way of mere grace, — as in infant baptism 1 And is 
 it of no benefit to the church and world, that Christ has 
 
 * Bin's Strictures, p. 10. 
 
 12 
 
134 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 appointed a standing symbol, an ordinance, by which 
 these, and the kindred important truths, are shadowed 
 forth ? Was it of no benefit to the church in the days of 
 Pelagius, that she could appeal triumphantly to infant 
 baptism, in opposition to the errors which then were 
 broached ? Is it of no advantage to the church, that she 
 still retains the same argument? 
 
 But infant baptism is full of meaning and interest, not 
 only as a sign, but as a seal. It is the seal of a solemn 
 covenant between God and the parent. It binds the pa- 
 rent, by everything sacred, to be mindful of the spiritual 
 interests of his children, and to do all in his power to 
 train them up for heaven ; and seals the consequent gra- 
 cious promise, that God will be their portion forever. 
 And now is not a covenant, so framed and sealed, calcu- 
 lated to have an important influence ? Will not those pa- 
 rents who have sincerely entered into- it be more likely 
 (other things being equal) to engage, with persevering 
 diligence, in the important work of religious education, 
 than those who have made no such engagements?* And 
 will not God remember his covenant, and bless their la- 
 bors, and cause the fruits of them to appear in their chil- 
 dren ? 
 
 I am far from considering infant baptism as a saving 
 ordinance, or from attaching to it any mysterious efficacy 
 in the concern of salvation ; but if it stands connected 
 with the religious education of children, and brings them 
 within the scope of the promises, in the manner we have 
 seen ; then baptized children maybe expected to enjoy pri- 
 vileges beyond others, and will be more likely to become 
 the objects of the divine favor and blessing. And this 
 view of the case, 1' am confident is justified by facts. The 
 church has been in a great measure perpetuated in the 
 
 * See Appendix, Note L. 
 
OF INFANT BAPTISM. 135 
 
 line of children who have been religiously educated, and 
 mostly in the line of those who have been circumcised, or 
 baptized. A large proportion of those who have been con- 
 verted and gathered into the churches in our own times, i 
 has been from among this class ; and so it has been in all 
 former periods. And when we consider the impyt of in- 
 fant baptism, the promises sealed by it, and the influence 
 which it ought to have on those parents who practice it; 
 there is. nothing strange in this. The wonder rather is, 
 that such parents have not been more mindful of their 
 covenant, and more devoted Jo the spiritual interests of 
 their children,— 'that so the value of the rite in question 
 mrght be more manifest, and the faithfulness of God in 
 respect to it might more illustriously appear. 
 
 8. In vie\^of what has been said, the responsibility of 
 parents, who have given up their children to God in bap- 
 tism, is very great. The charge committed to-them is 
 immense — the charge of souls. To thejni it is entrusted, 
 in great measure, to form the characters and decide the 
 destinies of their children, for time and eternity. 
 
 When you presented- your children for baptism, Chris- 
 tian parents, you wore regarded,*not only as giving them 
 to God, but as promising to train them up for him. When 
 your covenant respecting th'etn was sealed in baptismal 
 water, in the name of the Fatlfer, Son, and Holy Ghost, 
 you were understood as binding yourselves, by the most 
 solemn obligations, to make their conversion and final 
 salvation the leading object of your lives. Remember, 
 then, that this is a subject in regard to which you stand 
 sacredly pledged. The vows of God are upon you, and 
 you cannot go back. And why should you desire to go 
 back ? Have you bound yourselves to. do more than your 
 duty— more than the honor of God, and your own happi- 
 ness, and the best interests of your children demand ? 
 No, Christian parent, you eannot think so. " The cove- 
 nant into which you have entered is perfect. "Its require- 
 
136 IMPORT, DESIGN, AND DSES 
 
 ments are strict, but, its promises are precious — too pre- 
 cious to be easily sacrificed and lost. Will you not, 
 then, endeavor to be" faithful ? A thousand considera- 
 tions are pressing iipon you to be faithful. If you can 
 consent to trifle with your own souls, do hot trifle with 
 the soul* of those little immortal beings entrusted to your 
 eare. Neglect not to "feed daily, with oil from the sanc- 
 tuary, "those lights lighted for eternity, that they may* burn 
 with a pure and lovely radiance. befqre the throne above." 
 Neglect not to " cherish and cultivate those tender plants 
 pf immortality, bringing dewn upon them by prayer the 
 dews and the rains. of heaven, that they may flourish and 
 bear fruit forever in the Paradise of God." 
 
 But you feel, perhaps, that you have been already un- 
 faithful. On a review of the past, you see Tittle else but 
 imperfection. Your covenant has been often broken, and 
 your obligations have been violated. — And what are ypur 
 feelings, Christian parent, in view of this dark picture? 
 Do you sincerely 'mourn over it? Do you feel disposed 
 to humble yourself before God, and confess .your sins, 
 and implore forgiveness for the past, and resolve in the 
 strength of Christ to be Taithful in time to come.? Can 
 you in this way return to God, "and take hold again of his 
 holy covenant ? -If so, you may hope that God will re- 
 turn to you, and verify to- you the promises of his grace? 
 You may hope that the God. of Abraham will not refuse 
 to be your God, and that of your children. — But if you 
 feet none of these relentings in. view of past unfaithful- 
 ness; if you mean still to neglect duty and trifle, with 
 obligation, as you acknowledge you have done ; then dark 
 indeed' is the prospect before you. Your broken vows 
 must plead against you. at the last r and the solemnities 
 through which you have past with your children will be 
 worse than in vain both to them and to you. 
 
 This subject should be an impressive * one to baptized 
 
OP INFANT BAPTISM. 137 
 
 children, especially to those who have arrived to years of 
 understanding, and have not yet given their hearts to 
 God. I shall take it for granted, my young friends, that 
 your parents have done something more than merely to offer 
 you in baptism ; — that they have often told you of that 
 solemn hour, when you werfc publicly consecrated to God, 
 and his name was put upon you, and the covenant respect- 
 ing you was ratified and sealed ; — that they have kept 
 this covenant in mind, and labored, in accordance with 
 it, to train you up in a meetness for heaven. How great, 
 then, have been your privileges ! How great your con- 
 sequent obligations. And how great your sin and guilt, 
 if these obligations have not been fulfilled ! — You may 
 have trusted in your privileges, and felt that these were 
 •so great, that they could hardly fail to issue in your salva- 
 tion. So did some of the inhabitants of those cities in 
 which our Saviour most frequently preached, and in 
 which most of his mighty works were done. But w hat 
 said the benevolent Saviour to these favored but ungrate- 
 ful cities? ■" Woe unto thee, Chorazin ! Woe unto thee, 
 Bethsaida ! for if the mighty works which were* done in 
 you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have 
 repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say 
 unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon 
 at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou Caperna- 
 um, which art exalted unto heaven, shall be brought down 
 to hell ; for if the mighty works which have been done 
 in thee had been done in Sodom, it would have remained 
 until this day. But I say unto you, that it shall be more 
 tolerable for the* land of Sodom in the day of judgment, 
 than for thee." Take care, my young friends, how you 
 incur these fearful denunciations. Take cape how you 
 trifle with your privileges, lest it be more tolerable for 
 Tyre, and Sidon, and Sodom, in the day of judgment 
 than for you. Resisted light, and violated obligations, 
 *12 
 
138 ' IMPORT, DESIGN, AND USES 
 
 and abused privileges, so far from doing, you any good, 
 can only aggravate your final condemnation. Your pa- 
 rents, I am willing to suppose, have . endeavored to per- 
 form, their duty towards you. But they never can repent 
 ■ind believe for you. They cannot have religion in your 
 stead. Every thing is now depending, under God, upon 
 yourselves. " If thou be wise,' thou shalt be wise for 
 thyself; but if thou scorncst, thou alone shalt bear it." 
 Your parents have committed you into the hands of God ; 
 be willing to commit yourselves there. Take hold of the 
 promises for yourselves, and enter personally into cove- 
 nant with yOur Maker. Nothing short of this can save 
 you ; or can prevent your distinguished privileges from . 
 rising up in the judgment to condemn you. 
 
 I shall conclude this discussion with a kw words to 
 the "churches. I have said that it is not the business of 
 churches to interfere with the government of families, 
 and iake the discipline of children out of the hands of 
 parents. The Bible nowhere makes this the duty of 
 churche^ ; it would be an objection to it, if it did.* But 
 the churches are not to infer that there is nothing for 
 them to do. It is their part to watch .over covenating 
 parents ; and to take notice of the manner in which they 
 perform their duty to their children. If such parents are 
 ignorant, they should be instructed. If they have pecu- 
 liar difficulties and trials, their hands should be strength- 
 ened and their hearts encouraged. Or if they are inex- 
 cusably negligent and unfaithful, they should be admon- 
 ished and reclaimed, or else excluded. Their Christian 
 brethren must not suffer sin upon them, and suffer duty 
 to be openly neglected, in regard to this important matter. 
 
 The churches should feel a deep and peculiar interest 
 in baptized children, and this interest should be mani- 
 
 . * See Appendix, Note M. 
 
OF INFANT BAPTISM. . 139 
 
 fested in all proper ways. Especially should it be mani-. 
 fested in earnest and persevering prayer, that the God of 
 grace would remember his covenant, have mercy upon 
 them, and save their souls. 
 
 This subject should be one of particular interest to the 
 churches at the present period. They are expecting 
 great things of the rising generation. They are expecting 
 a va'st accession of members, to be taken chiefly from 
 those now in the morning of life. It is high time, then, 
 that the hearts of the fathers were turned to th.e children ,- 
 and that the hearts of all professing Christians were en- 
 gaged to seek the "salvation of the young:. that, when 
 those now on the stage are summoned to leave it, a gen- 
 eration may rise up — not only to call them blessed — but 
 to stand in their lot, and enter into their labors. 
 
PART IV. 
 
 ON CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 Those Christians, who reject infant baptism, and con- 
 tend for the* exclusive validity of immersion in that ordi- 
 nance, have, for the most part, confined their communion 
 to persons of their own persuasion, considering those of 
 other denominations as unbaptized. Their practice in 
 this respect has been termed close or strict communion; 
 while the opposite practice is styled free, open, or mixed 
 communion. 
 
 1 design, in the following pages, to offer some consid- 
 erations in opposition to close communion. I would pre- 
 mise, however, that I entirely agree with the strict or 
 Calvinistic Baptists in the sentiment that none but profes- 
 sed believers in Christ-. — who give creditable evidence of 
 having been regenerated by the influences of the Holy 
 Spirit — are entitled to communion at the sacred supper. 
 Those only who give evidence of being the children of 
 God are entitled to a seat at their Father's table. Those 
 only who are prepared to enjoy real, spiritual commun- 
 ion with Christ and his people, are entitled to receive the 
 the emblems of such communion. " The cup of blessing 
 which, we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of 
 Christ 1 The bread which we break, is it not the com- 
 munion of the body of Christ?"* 
 
 * Hence, in advocating what is sometimes called open communion, we 
 cannot perceive that we justly expose ourselves to the charge of latitxtdina- 
 rianism ; — a charge usually urged in this connexion. 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 141 
 
 But while I am thus confident in the pei suasion that 
 the sacrament of the supper is the exclusive property of 
 those who give evidence of having been born of God, I 
 am equally confident that it is the property of all of this 
 character; and that to. withhold it, as many do, from 
 multitudes whom they acknowledge to be true Christians, 
 is a proceeding which, however pure and kind may be 
 their intentions, they are wholly unable to justify. 
 
 1. The practice of close communion is, in the first 
 place, unscriptural. — The.re "were differences of opinion 
 in the apostolical churches, and some of them of as great 
 importance as those now agitated between Baptists and 
 Pedobaptists. Such, for instance, was the question re- 
 specting the obligation of practising circumcision, and 
 observing the Jewish law. Yet neither party was tole- 
 rated in. excluding or denouncing the other. So far from 
 this, they were expressly exhorted to receive one another, 
 on the ground of both being supposed to belong to Christ. 
 " Wherefore receive ye one anuther, as Christ also receiv- 
 ed us, to the glory of God." Rom. xv. 7. " Him that is 
 weak in faith" — or whom ye este^n weak, he not being 
 able to see things in the same light with yourselves — 
 " receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations." ' Who 
 art thou that judgest another man's servant, in respect to 
 such matters? He is a servant of Christ; he is in the 
 faith ; he is conscientious in his opinion, as you are in 
 yours; and why do 'you judge him? To his own Master 
 he standeth or falleth. Let us not therefore judge one 
 another any more.' See Rom. xiii. 1 — 13. 
 
 It will be'said, perhaps, that the Apostle is here speak- 
 ing of things indifferent ; things not to be compared with 
 the modern questions respecting baptism. But what are 
 we to understand by '■ things indifferent,' as tins phrase-* 
 ology is here used ? Not things of no importance, or 
 about which the Apostle had formed no opinion ; but 
 
142- CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 things which he regarded as unessential to Christian 
 character, and to final salvation ; — as the questions re- 
 specting baptism confessedly are. Paul certainly had 
 formed an opinion in regard to the matters referred to in 
 the above quotations, and he did consider them as of very 
 considerable importance — important enough frequently 
 to occupy his thoughts and his pen ; but as he did not 
 think them essential to Christian character, he was de- 
 cided in affirming that they ought to be no bar in the 
 way of Christian fellowship and communion. 
 
 It will be said, again, that those to whom the Apostle 
 wrote were all baptized persons, members of the church ; 
 and consequently his directions to them are no evidence 
 of the manner fn which he would decide questions relat- 
 ing to baptism. — It might be difficult to prove, that all 
 those to whom directions are given in the Epistles of 
 Paul had been baptized in any way, — and especially, that 
 theyhad all been immersed. Bat suppose they had been : 
 it is still true, confessedly so, that the modern questions 
 respecting baptism are unessential to Christian character 
 and- a hope of heaven, 4 and consequently that they rest on 
 the same general ground with the questions agitated in 
 the days of Paul. It could not be expected that the di- 
 rections of the Apostles would meet all the particular 
 cases which might occur in the church, from that period 
 to the end of the world. They laid down general princi- 
 ples, and applied them to cases immediately in hand ; but 
 left it to the wisdom of other ages further to use and ap- 
 ply them, as there might be occasion. 
 
 Nothing is more certain from the New Testament, than 
 that the church of Christ is one body. " As we have 
 many members in one body, and all members have not 
 the same office, so we, being many, are one body in 
 Christ, and every one members one of another." Rom. 
 xii. 4, 5, And this is true, not only of the real, spiritual 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION". "143 
 
 chdrch of Christ, but equally so of the visible church. 
 For what is the visible church? It is the real church 
 bodied forth, made visible, by a credible profession of 
 godliness ; so that if Christ's spiritual church is one, his- 
 visible church must be equally so; and if the former may 
 with propriety be represented as his -body, the latter is his 
 visible body. " By one Spirit are we all baptized into 
 one body." " Now ye are the body of Christ, and mem-" 
 bers in particular." 1 Cor. xii. 13,27. To divide the 
 church of Christ, therefore, is to divide his body. To 
 separate a portion of the acknowledged members of his 
 church, and refuse to hold communion with them, is, a? 
 Mr. Baxter expresses it, to " separate" the members of 
 Christ's Body, and tear his fles.h, and break his bones." 
 This, it hardly need be said, is as unscripturai as it" is 
 unnatural. "Is Christ divided?" 
 
 The Scriptures represent the human family as belong- 
 ing to two general classes, believers and unbelievers, 
 saints and sinneis; 'and to those of the former class — all 
 who give evidence of belonging to the number of God's 
 children, they uniformly appropriate the privileges of his 
 children. These are the members of his family, and en- 
 titled, as such, to the provisions of his house. Hence, to 
 make a separation between persons of this character, and 
 exclude a part. of them from the table of their Lord, is a 
 proceeding, not only unknown to the Scriptures, but 
 manifestly contrary to the general spirit and current of 
 the sacred writings. 
 
 It is' evidently the will of Christ as revealed in the 
 Scriptures, that his followers should be one. " Neither 
 pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall be- 
 lieve on- me through their word, — that they all may be one ; 
 as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also 
 may bo one in us." John xvii. 20, 21. Hence, those 
 Christians may be sure that they best perform the will of 
 
144* CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 Christ, who strive most earnestly and successfully to pre- 
 vent divisions, and promote unity and peace among his 
 true followers. But how shall this important object be 
 -best promoted 1 By drawing lines of separation between 
 the disciples of Christ, and excluding a part of them from 
 their Master's table 1. Or by bearing with one another's 
 mistakes and infirmities, in things unessential to Chris- 
 tian character, and receiving one another, even as Christ 
 has- received them ? 
 
 In every view which can be taken of the subject, . I am 
 constrained to "regard what is commonly called close com- 
 munion as unscriptural. It was entirely unknown in the 
 first age of the church. The Apostles seem not to have 
 contemplated such a thing as possible. Of course, they 
 did not expressly prohibit it ; and yet they established 
 principles which, by a fair and general application, go 
 decidedly to condemn it. 
 
 2. * The practice of close communion is contrary to 
 that of the .church in the ages succeeding the Apostles. 
 There were differences of opinion among the primitive 
 believers in regard to points not deemed .essential ; but 
 these were not suffered to break the unity of the church. 
 Such was the dispute about the time and manner of cele- 
 brating Easter. This may be deemed a trifling matter to 
 Christians of the present age ; but in primitive times, it 
 was a question of high interest and importance. And 
 when Victor, one of the bishops of Rome, undertook to 
 excommunicate his Eastern brethren, because they would • 
 not yield to his opinion on the subject, he was rebuked 
 for so unchristian a procedure, and obliged, to retrace^his 
 steps. Says Irenceus, writing to him, "The Presbyters 
 who before ruled the church which you now. govern, 
 neither observed themselves, nor permitted their people 
 to observe, the day which is kept by the Asiatic Chris- 
 tians ; nevertheless, while they did not observe that day, 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 145 
 
 they maintained peace with the other Presbyters who did ; 
 and never were any on account of this diversity cast out 
 of the church ; but the Presbyters who preceded you, and 
 did not keep the day, sent the Eucharist to those toho did. 
 And when blessed Polycarp went on a journey to Rome, 
 in the time of Anicetus, and they had some little differ- 
 ence about other matters, they immediately dropped it 
 for the sake of peace, and would by no means cherish 
 contention on this head. Anicetus could not, indeed, 
 persuade Polycarp to relinquish his observance as having 
 always kept it with John,* the disciple of the Lord, and 
 the other Apostles with whom he had been conversant. 
 Nor did Polycarp persuade Anicetus to adopt it, as he 
 pleaded for the necessity of retaining the custom of the 
 Presbyters who had gone before him. Yet, while things 
 were in this state, they held communion with each other. _, 
 And in the church, Anicetus, from pure respeci, yielded 
 to Polycarp the dispensation of the Eucharist, and they 
 amicably separated from each other, and the peace of the 
 whole chinch was preserved, both by those who kept the 
 day, and those who did not.''* 
 
 Another dispute with which the church in those times 
 was agitated, related to the validity of certain baptisms, 
 and was not altogether unlike modern questions touching 
 the same subject. Many doubted concerning the bap- 
 tisms administered by heretics, and whether it was proper 
 to receive persons so baptized into the church, without a 
 repetition of the ordinance. But neither was this matter, 
 for a considerable time at least, permitted to interrupt the 
 fellowship of the church. "Many things," says an ex- 
 cellent man, writing to the celebrated Cyprian at this pe- 
 riod — " many things vary according to the diversity of 
 place and people ; but nevertheless, these variations have 
 
 * Euseb. Ecc. Hist. Lib. vi. Cap. 24. 
 
 13 
 
146 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 at no time infringed the peace and unity of the Catholic 
 church.'"* 
 
 There were differences' of opinion among the primitive 
 Christians in regard to the subject of church government. 
 Originally, the church was governed by Presbyters, the 
 words Presbyter and Bishop designating the same office. 
 But in the course of a few centuries, Episcopal govern- 
 ment was introduced, and the primitive order of things 
 was changed. In proof of this, the following quotation 
 from Jerome is decisive. " A Presbyter is the same as a 
 Bishop ; and before there were,, by the instigation of the 
 devil; dissensions in religion, and it was said among the 
 people, I'ajn of Paid, and I of Ap olios, and I of Cephas, 
 the churches were governed by the joint counsel of the 
 Presbyters. But afterwards, when every one accounted 
 those whom he baptized as belonging to himself, and not 
 to Christ, it was decreed throughout the whole world, 
 that one chosen from among the Presbyters, should be 
 put over the rest, and that the whole care of the 
 church should be committed to him, and the seeds of 
 of schism be taken away." — Again this learned father says, 
 after having quoted and commented on several passages 
 of Scripture in proof of the same point, " Among the 
 ancients, Presbyters and Bishops were the very same. 
 But by degrees, (paulatim) that the plants of dissensions 
 might be plucked up, the whole concern was devolved 
 upon an individual. As the Presbyters, therefore, know 
 that, by the custom of the church,, they are subjected to 
 him who is set over them, so let the Bishops knovV, that 
 they are greater than Presbyters, more by custom, than by 
 any real appointment of Christ."t 
 
 Such is the language of one who lived within a few 
 
 * Cypriani Opera, Part ii. p. 220. See also Murdock's Mosheim, Vol i. 
 p. 226. 
 t Hyronymi Opera, Tom. vi. p. 168, 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 147 
 
 centuries of the Apostles, testifying to the changes which 
 had taken place in the government of the church. Yet 
 the changes, and the differences of opinion and discus- 
 sions which must necessarily have grown out of them, did 
 not produce, and were not thought sufficient to warrant 
 separate communions. Those who were the most stren- 
 uous in opposition to the prevailing innovations were en- 
 tirely averse, as Jerome tells us in another place, to 
 "cutting asunder the harmony of brotherly union." 
 
 Our Baptist brethren believe that, in the times of the 
 Apostles in f ant baptism was unknown ; but that in a few 
 centuries it was introduced, and prevailed, and became 
 almost or altogether universal, — so that in the age of Au- 
 gustine, the learned and acute PeKHgius was constrained 
 to declare, that he " never heard of any, -not even the 
 most impious heretic, who denied baptism to infants."* It 
 is natural to suppose that so great an innovation (if an in- 
 novation it be,) must have led to differences of opinion 
 and disputes ; and yet we ask — not for the evidence of 
 such disputes (this would be out of place here) — but for 
 the evidence that these disputes, if they did exist, were 
 suffered to break the unity of the church. Where were 
 the churches which on account of this alleged innovation, 
 withdrew from their brethren, and refused to have com- 
 munion with thefh at the table of the Lord ? Suffice it to 
 say, that we have no trace of any such churches in ancient 
 times, and no reason to believe that any existed ; and this 
 fact, were there no other, ought to satisfy the abettors of 
 close communion, that they have departed from the ex- 
 ample of the primitive Christians. 
 
 It is claimed, too, by our Baptist brethren, that there 
 were many of their sentiments previous to the reformation 
 from Popery, but that they mingled promiscuously with 
 the other pious dissenters, and were closely concealed 
 
 * See Wall's Hist, of In Baptism, Vol. i. p. 62. 
 
148 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 from the eyes of their persecutors. Thus it is said by 
 Benedict, in his history of the Baptists, that " before the 
 rise of Luther and Calvin, there Jay concealed in almost 
 all the countries of Europe, particularly in Bohemia, Mo- 
 ravia, Switzerland, and Germany, many persons who ad- 
 hered tenaciously to the doctrine which the Waldenses, 
 Wickliffites, and Hussites had maintained. These con- 
 cealed Christians," he adds, " we have good reasons for 
 believing, were mostly Baptists." And Crosby says 
 that, previous to the year 1633, the Baptists in England 
 " had been intermixed with other Protestant Dissenters 
 without distinction, and shared with the Puritans in the 
 persecutions of those times."* Here are express admis- 
 sions on the part of learned Baptist historians that previ- 
 ous to the reformation, their brethren toere 'intermixed 
 with other dissenters,' and of course that close communion 
 was unknown. 
 
 3. The practice of close communion necessarily leads 
 those who adopt it into various and palpable inconsisten- 
 ces. — It would seem from their principles, that what are 
 commonly called Pedobaptist churches are not, in any 
 proper sense, churches of Christ. Baptism, we are told, 
 is " the divinely appointed mode of entrance into the vis- 
 ible church ;" and Pedobaptists have not been baptized. 
 Of course, they have not so much as Shtered the visible 
 church ; and hence their associations in covenant cannot 
 with any propriety be denominated churches. If the 
 premises are admited, the conclusion would seem inevita- 
 ble. And yet most of the close-communionists with whom 
 I am acquainted admit that the Pedobaptist churches are 
 churches of Christ; and that their ministers are ministers 
 of Christ. t Indeed, the ministers of the two denomina- 
 
 * See Benedict's Hist, of the Baptists, Vol. i. pp. 138, 197. 
 
 t See an Article in the Boston Recorder of May 25, 1322, adopted by an 
 extensive union of Baptists and Pedobaptists, in which the churches of the 
 two denominations are recognized as churches of Christ, and their ministers 
 as ministers of Christ, qualified to perform ministerial acts, 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 149 
 
 tions freely associate as ministers of Christ, in religious 
 meetings, Ecclesiastical councils, an exchange of services, 
 &x. 
 
 But then again, if the Pedobaptist churches arc 
 churches of Christ, why not commune with them as such ? 
 And why not admit their members at least to occasional 
 communion ? Why present the strange anomaly of ac- 
 knowledged church members, who cannot be received to 
 an ordinance of the church; ajid of those who are admit- 
 ted to fellowship in every other mode, as members of 
 Christ's church and ministers of his kingdom, who are not 
 admitted to a seat at his table ? 
 
 In reply to what is here urged, it is insisted by Mr. 
 Fuller, in his Conversations on Mixed and Strict Com- 
 munion, (pp. 100 — 110,) that the office of a gospel minis- 
 ter does not belong to the church relation, or at lea"st is 
 not peculiar to it, so that a person may consistently be re- 
 ceived as a preacher of the gospel, who is not regarded as 
 a church member. But is the gentleman serious in this 
 matter? And if he is, are the~ Baptists of our own 
 country prepared to adopt his views ? It would be doing 
 them great injustice to suppose it. In licensing a man 
 to preach the gospel, and especially in ordaining him, no 
 people would be more likely than they to inquire into his 
 church relation and standing ; nor do I believe they 
 'would admit one, on any account into their pulpits, to 
 declar*to them the truth of God, who they did not sup- 
 pose was a member of the church of Christ. 
 
 It has been said by some, that as the Lord's supper is a 
 positive institution, it rests on different ground from that 
 of other religious services, in which unbaptized persons 
 may consistently unite. But I would ask, in reply, 
 whether the gospel ministry is not a positive institution ; 
 and one of as great importance, and demanding as high 
 qualifications, as the Lord's supper ? Indeed, does it not 
 *13 
 
150 CLOSE COMMUNION, 
 
 demand much higher qualifications? How many thou- 
 sands are there in the churches, worthy partakers of the 
 Lord's supper^ whom no one would think qualified to 
 preach the gospel? — I would inquire, too, whether the 
 Apost e did not consider preaching as a more important 
 work, than even administering ordinances ? ' The latter 
 could be done by ordinary helpers ; but " Christ," says he 
 " sent me, not to baptize, but to preach the gospel." 1 Cor. 
 i: 17. 
 
 The advocates of close communion are willing to ad- 
 mit, that many Pedobaptists are real Christians. But if 
 they are real Christians, they are in the number of God's 
 children and have aright to sit at their Father's table. If 
 they are real Christians, they have spiritual communion 
 with Christ and his people, and ought to be permitted to 
 have visible communion. God communes with them, if 
 they are real Christians ; and why should any of the pro- 
 fessing people of God be more strict in their communion, 
 than he is? If Pedobaptists are real Christians, they are 
 among those who feed upon Christ by faith ; and why 
 are they not permitted to feed upon the appointed emblems 
 of his body and blood ? They are partakers really and 
 spiritually ; and why should they not be sacramentally ? 
 If Pedobaptists are real Christians, they are heirs of 
 heaven, and will shortly be received to heaven ; and why 
 should it be made more difficult to obtain a seat at cer- 
 tain sacramental tables on earth, than to procur% admis- 
 sion to the marriage supper of the Lamb above? Heaven 
 is certainly the great object and end of the Christian's 
 pilgrimage, and earthly ordinances are but the means of 
 obtaining it ; and why should it be made more difficult 
 to secure the means than the end ? Why should the 
 Lord's table be barred against the approach of those, to 
 whom the gate of heaven is open ? 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 151 
 
 The advocates of close communion are not a little em- 
 barrassed with the question, whether it is right for Pedo- 
 baptists to celebrate the Lord's supper in their own 
 churches. . As this ordinance is a positive divine institu- 
 tion, it must be the same under all circumstances ; so that 
 if it is right for Pedobaptists to celebrate it in one place, 
 it is right in another ; or if it is wrong in one place, it is 
 wrong (other things being equal) in another. Hence, if 
 it is wrong for them to celebrate the supper in connexion 
 with Baptists, it is wrong, and no less a profanation of 
 the ordinance, for them to celebrate it by themselves. 
 Accordingly, when pressed with the argument in this di-' 
 rection, our brethren commonly speak out, and declare it 
 to be 'a departure from the traditions of the Apostles, 
 and a pouring contempt on one of the positive institutions 
 of Christ,' for us to come to the communion in the man- 
 ner we do.* Yet, on the other hand, they appear to 
 manifest no great uneasiness at the continuance of this 
 alledged profanation ;. will consent to preach our sacra- 
 mental lectures ; and by their conduct seem to say, that 
 if we will only keep at a distance from them, and cele- 
 brate the ordinance by ourselves, they are satisfied. In- 
 deed, Mr. Fuller, in the work already referreil to, ex- 
 pressly says, that " on their own principles, Pedobaptists 
 do right in partaking of the Lord's supper." p. 32. 
 
 It affords me no pleasure to urge these inconsistencies 
 upon my brethren of the strict communion ; butas their 
 practice necessarily involves them, and many more, it is 
 important that they should be able to appreciate some of 
 the difficulties with which, in the judgment of others, 
 their system is encumbered. 
 
 4. I object again to the practice of close communion, 
 that it is an interruption of mutual charity, and a hin- 
 
 * See Andrews's Strictures, &c, p. 40. 
 
152 
 
 CLOSE COMMUNION, 
 
 drance to Christian love. It leads those who adopt "it to 
 judge the hearts of their brethren, and impugn their mo- 
 tives, as they would not do, were it not for the difficulties 
 with which they feel themselves pressed in -relation to 
 this subject. Although they are willing to admit, as" al- 
 ready stated, that many Pedobaptists are pious persons — 
 some of them eminently so — yet when they come to apol- 
 ogize for not admitting them to the Lord's table on the 
 ground of their alleged mistakes in regard to baptism, 
 .they almost uniformly assail their motives. Thus in the 
 work of Fuller, the excellent Baxter is charged with 
 " avowing his conviction of one system, and acting on 
 another," p. 134 ; and Pedobaptists generally are said to 
 live in voluntary error, which is to live in allowed sin, p. 
 126. Even Professor Ripley, with all his Candor (and in 
 general he is very candid) cannot help insinuating, that 
 many are prevented from adopting Baptist principles, be- 
 cause they " fear to examine ;" or " hastily think them- 
 selves incompetent to form an opinion ;" or " are under 
 the influence of prejudice from various quarters;" or are 
 deterred by " the inconveniences attending the adoption 
 of such sentiments."* Now I am far from saying that 
 no person was ever kept back from becoming a Baptist 
 or a Pedobaptist by considerations like these; but I sup- 
 pose they are as likely to operate one way as the other, 
 and that it is not very charitable, in either party, to at- 
 tribute, the alleged mistakes of the other to the influence 
 of such motives 
 
 The principles of close communion tend to interrupt 
 charity, as they lead those who embrace them, and have 
 sufficient hardihood of consistency to carry them out, to 
 wage a war of extermination upon other sects. The con- 
 sistent close-communionist regards the entire mass of the 
 
 * Review of Dr. Griffin's Letter. 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 153 
 
 members of Pedobaptist cburches as unbaptized, and 
 consequently as disqualified for Christian communion ; 
 and he is prompted by what he thinks a zeal for God to 
 do what he can to diminish their number. If he can se- 
 duce a sheep from tile fold of his Pedobaptist neighbor, 
 he thinks it so much gained to the cause of truths ; and 
 he will feel strong inducements, under such circumstan- 
 ces, to draw away as many as possible. I do not say that 
 our ministerial brethren of the strict communion actually 
 pursue the course here described ; far from it. A great 
 majority of them at the present day are under the influ- 
 ence of so many counteracting principles, that they would 
 not consent, on any account, to violate the courtesies of 
 Christian intercourse, or entrench upon the duties or the 
 rights of others*. But I am endeavoring to exhibit the 
 legitimate tendency of close communion, when carried 
 into full and consistent operation ; and it cannot be 
 thought strange that those who practise it should be re- 
 garded often with suspicion, and that a sad interruption 
 to the overflowings of Christian love should be the conse- 
 quence. 
 
 The principles of close communion are a hindrance to 
 the exercise of Christian love, as they tend to foster pride 
 in those who embrace them, under the idea of having 
 done more than others, and of possessing superior quali- 
 fications; and to wound the feelings of Pedobaptists, un- 
 der the impression of being set aside as disqualified for 
 the communion of saints. These principles also lead to 
 disputes and separations, which too often terminate in 
 excited feelings, alienation, and enmity. Christians, for- 
 get that they are engaged in a common cause, and have 
 a common interest, and fail to afford each other that 
 sympathy and support which circumstances demand, and 
 the laws of Christ require. They fail to bear one anoth- 
 
154 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 er's burthens, and to co-operate as they ought in prayers 
 and labors to promote the religion of the Saviour. 
 
 It is evidence of the truth of what is here stated, that 
 when religion is revived in a community, and Baptists 
 and Pedobaptists are accustomed to meet together, till 
 their love is enkindled and their hearts are warmed, the 
 attachment of the former to close communion almost uni- 
 formly diminishes. The hearts of numbers who had pre- 
 viously practised it are pained ; and not a few indignant- 
 ly reject it. So often have scenes of this nature been 
 witnessed, that there can be no mistake in regard to 
 them. 
 
 It is a remarkable fact, too, that Missionaries who have 
 left their native country in the belief of the principles of 
 close communion, have not unfrequently renounced them, 
 after laboring for a time among the heathen. This was 
 the case with Mr. Hough, of the American Baptist mis- 
 sion in Burmah. It was the case with the celebrated 
 William Ward, so long a Missionary in Bengal. It was 
 the case, too, with the excellent Mr. Chater, oT the Bap- 
 tist mission in Ceylon. Christian Missionaries among 
 the heathen are in a favorable situation to feel the influ- 
 ence of Christian love, and the strength of those ties 
 which ought to bind the hearts of Christians together ; 
 and if the principles of close communion are no hindrance 
 to the exercise of love and charity, in what way are the 
 facts on this subject to be accounted for ? 
 
 Of the same general bearing is the fact, that close 
 communion is not unfrequently renounced in sickness, 
 and«in near views of death* I am far from attaching an 
 
 * " In S. B. lived a man of the Baptist church, who for many years had 
 not called in question the correctness of that article of the Baptist faith 
 which excludes acknowledged Christians from communion. When sick, as 
 there was no church of the same faith in the place, a minister of the Con- 
 gregational order was sent for. After conversation and prayer suited to 
 
cLOSE COMMUNION. 155 
 
 undue importance or authority to what is said or done on 
 beds of sickness ,- but Christian love often flows purer 
 and rises higher at such times than before — so high as to 
 break over sectarian barriers, and embrace with full af- 
 fection all who bear the image«of the Saviour. 
 
 5. I object to the principles of close communion that, 
 • under the consistent operation of them, there will often 
 occur cases of real hardship. — Those who have been 
 born of God and truly love him, usually set a high value 
 upon their seasons of sacramental communion. They 
 love to sit down' with their fellow disciples at the table of 
 their Lord, lean upon his breast at supper, and feed upon 
 the memorials of his body and blood. But circumstances 
 may be supposed, and are likely often to occur, in which 
 individuals may be deprived of this privilege foe years, 
 perhaps during the greater part of their lives, unless they 
 are admitted to communion in the Baptist churches. 
 Here is a pious, devoted mother, a member of a Pedo- 
 baptist church, whose lot Divine Providence has cast 
 
 the sick, the love of God so filled the soul, as to break over all sectarian 
 bounds. The tongue of the sick was loosed, to expatiate upon that charity 
 which limits its complacency only by the want of evidence of genuine piety. 
 After much self-examination and deep regret, for not walking in love with 
 those whom Christ receives to his fellowship, and expressing a lively hope 
 that this and all other sins were forgiven, the eyes were closed in death." 
 [See Boston Recorder, March 1, 1823.] 
 
 " In Roxbury, Vt., A. D. 1821, Mr. R., an aged member of the Baptist 
 church, when on his death bed, sent for a member of the Congregational 
 church to visit him. He had been decidedly against communing with Pe- 
 dobaptists ; but after a little conversation, when his neighbor was about to 
 return, he told him that he had something more to say. He tarried; and 
 the sick man told him that he had a desire to commune with him and his 
 brethren before he left the world. There was no minister in the place, and 
 to appearance, he could not live till they could obtain one. His anxiety, 
 however, was so great, that a part of the Congregational church was col- 
 lected, one of the deacons consecrated the elements, he partook with them, 
 and soon after died. — It is easier for Christians to reject each other in life, 
 than when they are entering into the immediate presence of God, and going 
 to join the general assembly above." [Brooks's Reply, p. 58.] 
 
156 ulosIs COMMUNION. 
 
 where she can have Christian intercourse only with 
 Baptists. And her intercourse with them is in gen- 
 eral pleasant. She listens to their preachers, and is 
 instructed and edified. She meets with them in the pray- 
 ing circle, and her heart «is warmed. She co-operates 
 with them in works of faith and labors of love, and in 
 promoting various objects of Christian benevolence. Her 
 affections mingle with theirs, and theirs with hers, and 
 they are spiritually of one heart and soul. But when the 
 table of the Lord is spread, and she asks permission to 
 approach, she is grieved to find herself excluded. ' And 
 why,' she asks, ' am I excluded ? Do T not give you sat- 
 isfactory evidence of being a child of God — of being one 
 with you in spirit — of being one with whom the Saviour 
 communes ? And why can I not have communion with 
 you T — 'Why, dear sister,' it is replied, ' you have not 
 been baptized.' — ' Bnt I have been baptized,' she rejoins. 
 ' I have given myself up to God in baptism, according to 
 his appointment, and in that manner which I think most 
 agreeable to his will.' — 'Ah, but you are mistaken on 
 that subject; we know you are ; you must renounce your 
 pretended baptism, and go with us into the water, and 
 then we can receive you.' — ' Renounce my baptism,' she 
 exclaims. ' I can never do that. It was the most sacred 
 action of my life. I might almost as well renounce my 
 Saviour.' — 'Well, sister, we are sorry for you; but un- 
 less you can comply with our terms, we cannot receive 
 you.' And so this child of God, because she will not do 
 violence to her conscience, and renounce what she deems 
 the most sacred act of her life, is driven away from her 
 Father's table ; and this, too, under circumstances in 
 which it is known that she can have communion with no 
 other church, but must pass her life, and perhaps end her 
 days, and never more have the privilege of coming to the 
 sacramental board. And is there no hardship in all this? 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 157 
 
 Is Jhere nothing revolting to the pious heart"?* And let 
 it not he thought that this is wholly an imaginary case. 
 It is drawn from the life. There are many such instan- 
 ces now in existence. And if the principles of close 
 communion were piore widely diffused, they would be 
 proportionally multiplied. Can these principles, then, be 
 in accordance with the gospel? Can they be a part of 
 that religion which says. expressly to its professors, when 
 differing on points not essential to salvation, ' Receive ye 
 one another, as Christ also received us. Who art thou 
 that judgest another man's servant?' 
 
 But instances like that above described are not-the on- 
 ly cases of hardship 'growing out of. close communion. 
 There are others of a different character. It is a fact, 
 that no inconsiderable proportion of the members of the 
 Baptist churches are opposed to close communion ; their 
 
 . consciences are pained with it, and their souls are in 
 bondage on account of it. Mr. Hall, says, " It frequent- 
 ly happens that the constitution of a church continues to 
 sanction strict communion, while the sentiments ofa vast 
 majority of its members are decidedly in favor of a con- 
 trary system." In another place he expresses the opin- 
 ion that a majority of the present Baptists are in favor of 
 open communion. Works, Vol. i.- pp. 396, 401. A Bap- 
 tist minister of our own country also says, ■' It is 
 
 ' not known by the close communion Baptists how many 
 there are of their own denomination who believe, in their 
 
 » * There is reason to believe, that the operation of the principles of close 
 communion is often as painful to those who exclude, as to those who are 
 excluded. A brother in the ministry (not a Baptist) who had acted upon 
 these principles, and had excluded a female_ under circumstances not alto- 
 gether unlike those above detailed, writes, " She put her kerchief to her 
 eyes, and turned away, struggling- with anguish, and the tears streaming 
 down h^er cheeks. How did my heart smite me ! I went home exclaiming 
 to myself, ' Can this be right ? Is it possible (hat such is the law of the Re- 
 deemer's house V " [Mason's Plea, &c. p. 7.] 
 
 14 
 
158 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 hearts, in open communion. I was surprised, after di- 
 vulging my sentiments, to find so many who entertained 
 the same belief — some of them for years." Brooks's 
 Essay, p. 22. This testimony is in accordance with my 
 own observation. I am acquainted with not a few indi- 
 viduals, members of Baptist churches, who -freely ac- 
 knowledge that they are not satisfied with close commun- 
 ion — that they believe it unscriptural — and that they 
 would abandon it at once, were it not for displeasing. 
 some of their brethren. — But is it. no hardship for a 
 Christian to live in this way — habitually trifling with his 
 conscience, and conniving at that which he thinks is 
 wrong, from a fear of giving offence to his brethren 1 Is 
 such a state of mind favorable to Christian enjoyment? 
 Is this the liberty wherewith Christ makes his people 
 free ? 
 
 6. I object to the practice of close communion, that 
 it is upheld and continued, in part at least, from sectarian 
 motives. I should not feel warranted in making this as- 
 sertion, however clearly facts might seem to justify it, 
 were it not that the truth of it is acknowledged. In the 
 work already referred to, Mr. Fuller says, " -The tenden- 
 cy Of mixed communion is to annihilate, as. such, all the 
 Baptist churches in Christendom." And he asks, <( Do 
 you wish to promote the dissolution and ruin of the Bap- 
 tist denomination, as such ? If you do not, take heed to 
 your ways." pp. 24, 25. • Thus close communion is con- 
 fessedly to be retained, because its continuance is deerm- 
 ed necessary to the existence of a sect. One of the lines 
 of separation between the members of Christ's mystical 
 body would be gradually worn out and disappear, were it 
 not for close communion; and therefore the practice 
 must be vigorously maintained. 
 
 In reply to this I will only say, that I have no fears for 
 the denomination to which I belong, in consequence of a 
 
CLOS^ COMMUNION. 159 
 
 free and fraternal intercourse with other denominations 
 of real Christians. If we -cannot mingle freely with 
 brethren of other names, who agree with us in holding 
 the Head, and look candidly and closely into their pecu- 
 liarities, and suffer them to look into ours, without losing 
 our existence as a sect, then toe desire to lose it. The 
 sooner we incur the loss, the better. — The time has come, 
 when Christians must think less about their peculiar 
 sects, their denominations " as such," and more about the 
 general interests of truth and the kingdom of Christ. 
 And it is objection enough to any practice in the church, 
 that it requires to be sustained by fomenting a sectarian 
 spirit. 
 
 • 7. I object again to close communion, that it is op- 
 posed to the spirit of the age, and operates in various 
 ways to retard the progress of Christ's kingdom. — The 
 age in which we live is one of peculiar interest. The 
 Christian world is awaking from its slumbers to unwont- 
 ed efforts ; and Satan is coming out in great wrath, know- 
 ing that he hath but a short time. The people of God 
 are beginning to move and operate together; and the en- 
 emies of truth and righteousness are doing the same. 
 On every hand, lines are drawing, and sides are taking, 
 preparatory to the conflict of tiie last days. The aspect 
 of the times obviously demands the utmost practicable 
 union among Christians, and that every thing tending to 
 obstrucfthis union should be speedily taken out of the 
 way. One of these obstructions, unquestionably, is close 
 communion. This tends, as we have seen, to break the 
 unity of the church, to interrupt mutual charity, to hin- 
 der the exercise of Christian love. It divides the affec- 
 tions, and insulates and weakens the efforts of those, who 
 ought to love as' brethren, and to go hand in hand to their 
 appropriate work. It leads those often to waste their 
 strength upon each other, whose united strength ought to 
 
160 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 be directed against a common enemy. It causes them to 
 interfere and contend with* each other, between whom 
 there should be no strife, except who shall be most fervent 
 in love, and most zealous in efforts for promoting the Re- 
 deemer's kingdom. 
 
 An incalculable amount of time, labor, and money, 
 which is now expended for sectarian purposes, might be 
 directed to the common interests of Christianity, were it 
 not for close communion. In how m9ny places in the 
 United States, where there are now two or three socie- 
 ties, all feeble, struggling for existence, and aided per- 
 haps by public charity, might there be one strong, effi- 
 cient society, able to support itself and to assist others, if 
 those who regard each other as real Christians could only ■ 
 consent to commune together at the table of the Lord ? 
 I earnestly wish my brethren of the close communion to 
 take this subject into serious consideration, and would in- 
 . quire whether — wherever there are now two or three so- 
 cieties or meeting houses where, but for their principles, 
 there need be but one — the whole of.this needless ex- 
 pense is not justly chargeable to their account ;■ — and 
 whether — wherever there are now two or three ministers 
 stationed where, but for close communion, there need be 
 but one — nearly the whole of this superfluous labor, 
 which might be expended in building up the wastes of 
 Zion, is not now lost to the general cause of Christ ?* 
 
 On the whole, I have no doubt that the principles of 
 close communion are wrong; — that they are contrary to 
 
 * Evangeftcal Baptists and Pedobaptists have found" already that they 
 can worship together with mutual satisfaction ; and if they could but -com- 
 mune together at' the table of the. Lord, they might be associated, wherever 
 there should be occasion, in the same congregation j the Pastor might be 
 of either denomination, according to the wishes of the majority ; and noth- 
 ing would be wanting in such an establishment, but a spirit of forbearance, 
 accommodation and love — a zeat_/br God, and not for a sect — to promote 
 its prosperity and peace. 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 161 
 
 the Scriptures, and to the practice of the church in the 
 purest times ; that they tend to involve those who hold 
 them in great inconsistencies; and are, in various ways, 
 of injurious influence to the cause of Christ. I say this, 
 not to reproach any of my Baptist brethren or to give 
 them pain; but to. bring them, if possible, to considera- 
 tion, and to devising ways and means by which the evil 
 in question may be removed. There can be no doubt 
 that the most of them are conscientious arid sincere. 
 They are those with whom, so far as permitted, we can 
 take sweet counsel now ; and with whom, were it not for 
 close communion, our fellowship might be complete. 
 The obvious tendency of tilings, at present, is to remove 
 this difficulty ; and I have no doubt that, previous to the 
 Millennium, it will be taken entirely out of the way ; but 
 .hoiv shall (his be clone? How shall the. grand obstacle in 
 the way of free and open communion be removed ? 
 
 It will be seen that this is a point on which it does not 
 become a Congregationalist to dictate — perhaps not to 
 advise ; and yet (if it may be permitted) 1. should like to 
 offer a few remarks. 
 
 The grand dffficulty in the way of open communion, 
 as hinted at the. commencement of this discussion, is a 
 difference of opinion respecting baptism. Our Baptist 
 brethren insist — on the ground of the Apostolical com- 
 munion and practice, the significancy of the two ordinan- 
 ces, and the general suffrage of the church — that bap- 
 tism is necessary, previous to communion. They also 
 insist, that the members of our churches have not been 
 baptized. Consequently they infer, as they think, con- 
 clusively, that these members cannot with propriety be 
 admitted to the table of the Lord.* The question now is, 
 
 * I have called the difficulty, as above stated, the grand difficulty; but 
 with many of the advocates of close communion it seems not to be the only 
 one. There are those who insist that we must be not only immersed, but 
 
 *14 
 
162 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 How shall this objection be obviated ? How shall the dif- 
 ficulty be removed ? 
 
 I see no probability that this difficulty will be soon re- 
 moved by a general change of sentiment in our churches, 
 and by our members becoming Baptists. There has 
 been an expectation of this sort among Baptists — perhaps 
 there is still ; but I see no prospect of its speedy accom- 
 plishment. The difference of opinion between us and 
 them has long been a subject of solicitude and study ; 
 and for one I can truly say, that the more I consider of 
 it, the more I am convinced that I shall never be a Bap- 
 tist. And so far as I know, my own experience on this 
 head is conformable to that of my brethren generally. 
 The relative strength and position of the two denomina- 
 tions, and the progress which each is making from year 
 to year, also show, that no general changes are to be ex- 
 pected. 
 
 Besides ; if the other denominations are ever to become 
 Baptists, it is scarcely possible that the change should be 
 effected under thepresent system. of operations. Entire- 
 ly separate, as we now are, in our public worship and or- 
 dinances, and under the influence of a variety of causes 
 tending to foment and perpetuate sectarian prejudices, 
 how can it be expected that either party should make any 
 great approaches towards the other 1 I agree entirely 
 with Mr. Hall, that if the peculiarities of the Baptist de- 
 immersed by one vvlio has been himself immersed ; and more than this, we 
 must pledge ourselves to have no communion with those who have not been 
 qualified in the same way. But close communionists of this stamp may (I 
 trust without offence) be denominated ultras,. The-y. would not have com- 
 muned with Roger Williams himself. They would have excommunicated 
 such Baptists as John Bunyan, and William Ward, ond Robert Hall. In- 
 deed, according to their principles, it is hot likely that there is now a Bap- 
 tist in America (not excepting themselves even) who is suitably qualified 
 for sacramental communion ; as it is not likely there is an individual, who, 
 if his baptism were traced back, would not find the succession originating in 
 one who had not himself been canonical!]] immersed. 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 163 
 
 nomination are true — if they will bear the test of examin- . 
 ation — and if those who hold them are desirous to pro- 
 mote them ; their past policy has been a miserable one, 
 and it is high time they were pursuing a .more liberal 
 course. Instead of holding themselves so entirely sepa- 
 rate, and keeping their brethren at a distance, they should 
 seek the fellowship, of other denominations who agree 
 with them in holding the Head and mingle with them as 
 freely and fraternally as possible. In this way they may 
 disarm prejudice, invite candid examination and discus-, 
 sion, and if the truth is with them, it will be likely to pre- 
 vail. For one, I can truly say that I desire to pursue a 
 course like this, and am perfectly willing to risk the late 
 of my Pedobaptist peculiarities on the issue of it. If 
 these peculiarities are not founded in truth, the sooner 
 we become convinced the better ; and it is greatly to be 
 desired that the whole Pedobaptist community may be 
 placed in circumstances to look at the subject without pre- 
 judice, and give it as thorough an examination as possi- 
 ble. 
 
 'But how shall we admit yon to communion,' it is ask- 
 ed, ' so long as we regard you as' unhaptized ?'— If our 
 brethren are in earnest in proposing this question, I am 
 very willing to confer with them on the subject. And 
 with due deference I would, inquire, why we may not be 
 admitted, at least to occasional communion, on the ground 
 proposed by Mr. Hall. Allowing that baptism should, as 
 a general thing, precede. the supper, -is the connexion be- 
 tween the two institutions of such a nature, that the or- 
 der of them may, under no circumstances, be changed 1 
 If the baptism of John was not Christian baptism, as was 
 held by the ancients,* and is now conceded by the most 
 
 * Ori^n says, "Christ himself was baptized by John, not with that bap- 
 tism which is in Christ, but with that which is in the law." Comment on 
 Roin. vi. Chrysostom says, "It (the Baptism of John) was as it were a 
 
164 CLOSE COMMUNION.. 
 
 intelligent Baptists,* is it not certain that the Apostles 
 had not received Christian Baptism, at the time of the 
 first celebration of the Lord's Supper? And if it be said 
 that their's was an extraordinary case, will it not be law- 
 ful to follow their example, at least in extraordinary cases? 
 There is a natural order in which most of .the duties'in- 
 cumbent on us should be attended to; but it does not 
 follow usually, because the first in a series has been neg- 
 lected, that the remainder cannot be performed. For in- 
 stance, it is according to the established order in our 
 public worship, that singing should precede the principal 
 prayer, and the prayer the sermon ; but because a person 
 is not present to unite in the singing, may he not unite in 
 the prayer ? Or because he is not present to unite in 
 the prayer, may he not listen to the sermon ? It is Christ's 
 direction that those who are capable of instruction should 
 be taught before they are baptized. But suppose a min- 
 ister of the Gospel is requested to baptize a believer who 
 he is satisfied knows four times as much as himself; must 
 he pause and go through the formality of teaching such an 
 one, before he ventures to administer the ordinance? So 
 if, from misapprehension or any other cause not affect- 
 ing his religious character, a sincere Christian has not 
 received baptism, and yet desires to be admitted to the 
 Lord's Table, who shall say J.hat he may not come ? Be- 
 cause lfe has been prevented from obeying one command 
 of Christ, who shall prohibit him from obeying another? 
 — But on this branch of the subject it is not necessary to 
 enlarge. The works of Mr. Hall are before the public, 
 
 bridge which, from the baptism of the Jews, made a way to that of the Sa- 
 viour. It was superior to the first, but inferior to the second." Homil. 24. 
 "John's Baptism did not serve for Christ's. Paul baptized the disci- 
 ples of John the Baptist, because they had not been baptized into the faith 
 of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and because they had been baptized on- 
 ly in the faith of a Messiah to come." Carson and Cox on Baptism, p. 284. 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 165 
 
 in which everything which need be said in support of this 
 theory is urged with a surpassing eloquence. 
 
 To the advocates of strict communion I will venture to 
 suggest another way in which the difficulties between us 
 may he consistently got over. Let them cease to judge an- 
 other man's servant, and leave him to stand or fall to his 
 own Master. We who differ from them on the subject of 
 baptism, are. not conscious of neglecting or trilling with 
 the ordinance more than they. We profess to hold it in 
 as high estimation as they do. We observe it according to 
 the dictates of our own consciences — according, as we 
 •think, to the institution and will of Christ. Wo find great 
 satisfaction in the ordinance, and believe that our Sa- 
 viour approves and blesses us in it. And now; brethren, 
 why can you not meet us on this ground? Unless you 
 are infallible, you cannot know we are wrong, any more 
 than we know you are. And why can you not consent to 
 say, "If you love and prize the ordinance of. baptism as 
 you understand it, and really think that you observe it 
 according to .the institution of Christ, then enjoy your 
 own opinion. It is not within our province to judge you. 
 We think indeed that you are mistaken ; but the mis- ' 
 take is yours, not ours; and as it is not of a nature to 
 prevent us from loving and embracing you as Christians, 
 it shall not longer interrupt our Christian communion. 
 Here, brethren, is the table of our common Lord. Come 
 and partake of it if you choose ; and if you have mistaken 
 the nature of the. previous ordinance, you must settle it 
 with Christ, and not with us.' — With an invitation such 
 as this, Pedobaptists would be perfectly satisfied. If they 
 are in error, they do not wish their brethren to be partak- 
 ers with* them in the error. If they have in anything 
 mistaken the will of Christ, they choose to assume the re- 
 sponsibility themselves, and to refer the matter directly to 
 him. 
 
166 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 It may be inquired here, whether' Pedobaptists would 
 not act on the same principle with those of the strict 
 communion, and exclude from the Lord's Table, under 
 all circumstances, those whom they regarded as unbap- 
 tized 1 And if I may be allowed to speak in the name 
 of my brethren, I answer confidently, no. Were a per- 
 son to request communion with us, who professed to love 
 and prize the Ordinance of baptism ; who sincerely 
 thought he had been baptized ; and who gave evidence of 
 being prepared to enjoy spiritual communion with Christ; 
 we should certainly admit him, although wc might regard 
 his baptism as a .nullity. And such cases not unfrequent- 
 ly occur at the present time in our churches. Some of 
 our brethren consider the baptisms which were formerly 
 administered on the ground of the half-way covenant as 
 invalid ;. and more have the same opinion. in regard to 
 the baptisms of Catholics and Unitarians. But should a 
 pious*godly professor of religion, who had been bap'tized 
 in either of these ways, and was satisfied with what had 
 been done, request to come to the Lord's Table with us, 
 we should certainly admit him, whatever opinion we 
 might entertain respecting the validity of his baptism. 
 If he was seriously and conscientiously satisfied on the 
 subject, we should not undertake to judge betwixt him 
 and his Master, but should leave the question of his bap? 
 tism to be determined at a higher tribunal. 
 
 But it will be inquired again by- those on the other 
 side, ' As we regard baptism, both in the order of nature 
 and by divine appointment, as pre-requisite to commun- 
 ion, and regard Pedobaptists, however sincere they may 
 be, as unbaptized ; how can we receive them to com- 
 munion, without becoming partakers of their sin V And 
 to this question I reply by asking another, Are you sure 
 that Pedobaptists commit siri'm coming to the Lord's Ta- 
 ble, even on supposition that they have misapprehended 
 
CLOSE (JOMMUNION. 167 
 
 » 
 
 the nature of baptism 1 They have received what they 
 most seriously believe to be Christian baptism, and feel 
 under solemn obligations to come to the Lord's table in 
 remembrance of him. And now what shall they do? 
 Can you in conscience affirm that it will be sinful for 
 them to come ? On the contrary, *as they view the sub- 
 ject, will it not be sinful for them to stay away ? — Bat I 
 hardly need ask questions such as these, as the more re- 
 cent and intelligent advocates of close communion have 
 already decided them. Mr. Fuller says expressly, "On 
 their own principles, they (Pedobaptists) do right in par- 
 taking of the Lord's Supper, though in our opinion un- 
 baptized ; their conviction, and not ours, being their 
 proper directory."* Mr. Kinghorn, in his reply to Hall, 
 takes" the same ground. Now. this is all which need be 
 said in the case. . If Pedobaptists were admitted to the 
 Lord's table with Baptists, they would come ".on their 
 own principles," and in compliance with their own con- 
 victions of duty ; and consequently, as Mr. F, says, they 
 would " do right" — they would not sin — and their breth- 
 ren in admitting them, need be in no fear of becoming 
 partakers in other men's sins. 
 
 But say our Baptists friends again, 'Should we not, by 
 such a procedure, at least give countenance to what we 
 conceive to be an error V And I answer, Not necessuri* 
 hj. It being known at the time that you do not coincide 
 in opinion on the subject of Baptism with your Pedobap- 
 tist brother, but merely consent that he shall come to the 
 table with you— on his own principles and responsibility, 
 and in compliance with his own convictions of duty — be- 
 cause you believe he is one who has communion with the 
 Saviour ; I do not perceive that you would be yiejding 
 any sinful or dangerous countenance to what you believe 
 to be his errors. And I would with deference inquire, 
 
 * Conversations, «Scc. p. 32. 
 
1'68 CLOSE COMMyNION. 
 
 whether you do not come to the same conclusion, in re- 
 gard to most other unessential points of difference 1 
 Some of your brethren believe the' seventh day of the 
 week to be the Christian Sabbath, to be observed accord- 
 ing to the -fourth commandment. Others believe that 
 there is no weekly Sa*bbath under the new dispensation, 
 but that (except from considerations of custom and ex- 
 pediency) every day .should be regarded alike* Others 
 still believe, that if God has called a person to preach the 
 Gospel, he will give him the requisite qualifications, and 
 that the whole system of educating young men for the 
 ministry, is needless, if not pernicious. Now would you 
 refuse communion to these several classes of persons, 
 however pious they might seem to* be, and however un- 
 questionable the validity of their baptism, for fear oT giv- 
 ing countenance to their errors ? I hope not. I pre- 
 sume not. Because, your own views on these subjects 
 being known and understood, you would not necessarily 
 give any countenance to their errors. It would* be seen, 
 that you merely tolerated the persons, because you be- 
 lieved they belonged to Christ, while you disapproved and 
 rejected what you conceived to be their errors, and pray- 
 ed that they might be instructed in the way of the Lord 
 more perfectly. And on the same ground, why may you 
 not receive the pious Pedobaptist, without giving any im- 
 proper countenance to his supposed errors ? On no sub- 
 ject are your views more fully understood, than on that 
 of baptism ; and the only inference which could justly 
 be drawn from the fact of your receiving the Pedobaptist 
 would be, that you were willing to have communion with 
 him, because you believed he belonged to Christ, at the 
 same time that you deplored what you deemed his errors, 
 and prayed that he might be instructed in the way of the 
 Lord more perfectly. And I may leave it to your own 
 consciences to decide, whether such an inference would 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 169 
 
 be disgraceful to you as Christians, or dishonorable to re- 
 ligion, or of dangerous consequence to the church of 
 Christ. 
 
 In conclusion, I can assure my Baptist readers, that I 
 have pressed this subject upon their consideration, not 
 from motives of personal or sectarian interest, but solely 
 from a regard to the cause of religion, and the general 
 interests of Christ's kingdom. I dwell among my own 
 people, and have no expectation that I shall ever have 
 occasion to ask or receive communion with a Baptist 
 church, — though I would gladly do it, should the occa- 
 sion be presented. And when I look at the Pedobaptist 
 churches, and consider their increase, their numbers, 
 and strength ; I feel under no apprehension of their rela- 
 tively suffering from a continuance of the present sys- 
 tem. I have no doubt that they can live separate from 
 the Baptists, as well as the Baptists can while separate 
 from them. And I have no doubt that both denomina- 
 tions can live, and act, and do some good, with a brazen 
 wall towering between them from earth to heaven. But 
 I as little doubt, that both denominations might live a 
 great deal better, and act more efficiently, and accomplish 
 more in the cause of Christ, if this brazen wall could be 
 demolished ; or at least if pass-ways could be opened 
 through it, so that there might be occasional communica- 
 tion one way and the other. What God has joined to- 
 gether seems now to be unwarrantably put asunder. The 
 body of Christ is divided and dismembered. Those who 
 ought to have a common interest, have separate interests. 
 Those between whom there ought to be the best under- 
 standing, and a spirit of mutual accommodation and sym- 
 pathy, are often seen interfering with each other's plans, 
 and running in each other's way. Those who ought to 
 put forth their united strength ' against principalities and 
 powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, 
 15 
 
170 CLOSE COMMUNION. 
 
 against spiritual wickedness in high places,' are too often 
 found turning away from the common enemy, and wast- 
 ing their energies one upon another. God has indeed 
 been very gracious to us in pouring out his Spirit upon 
 our churches ; but not unfrequently, in the midst of 
 a revival of religion, a sectarian spirit shows itself, and 
 the Comforter is grieved away. 
 
 Christian brethren on both sides, these things ought 
 not so to be. And the period, as I think has arrived, 
 when they cannot so continue but a little longer. We 
 are obviously living in the near approach of the Millen- 
 nium, — in the last days, when a tremendous conflict is to 
 be expected between the friends and the enemies of God. 
 Things are manifestly preparing, not only in our own 
 country, but in Europe, and in heathen lands, for such a 
 conflict. In our present divided state, are we prepared 
 to meet it ? And is it not high time that effectual meas- 
 ures were taken, to bring down the mountains, and raise 
 the vallies, and thus prepare the way of the Lord ? If 
 we longer neglect to take such measures ourselves, God 
 may be expected in righteous judgment to take them for 
 us. He may so heat the furnace of his providence, as to 
 melt down all our minor distinctions. He may draw a 
 band of fire around his church, till its members come to 
 feel and act as one body. 
 
 As Evangelical Baptists and Pedobaptists seem not 
 likely to agree at present in regard to one of the special 
 ordinances of the Gospel, but do agree in regard to the 
 nature and obligations of the other, I can see no good 
 reason why they should not, occasionally at least, partake 
 of the latter ordinance together. In this way they would 
 wipe off much of the reproach which now attaches to 
 them, and manifest to the world that, notwithstanding re- 
 maining differences, they do feel, and are resolved to 
 act, as the disciples of a common Saviour. I know, in- 
 
CLOSE COMMUNION. 171 
 
 deed, if this point were gained, that much wisdom and 
 grace would still be needed, in order to secure and per- 
 petuate peace. For combustible materials would remain 
 on both sides, in the midst of which discordant spirits 
 might scatter their firebrands, and easily blow them to a 
 flame. But Christian love would overcome all difficulties, 
 and quench the latent sparks of contention before they 
 were kindled. By the removal of close communion, one 
 source of contention in the church would be dried up, 
 and one effectual step would be taken towards a complete 
 and final union. The parties, by being brought into 
 more intimate relations, would be in a better situation to 
 dispose of remaining differences; and the Saviour, who 
 prayed so fervently while on earth for the peac,e of his 
 followers, might be expected to approve and bestow his 
 blessing. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 [Note A.] 
 
 The following pertinent remarks are from Dr. # Samuel 
 Austin's Rejoinder in his controversy with Mr. Merrill. 
 " In beseiged cities, 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 procur- 
 ed. Now suppose God should, according to his predic- 
 tions, 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." p. 41. 
 
 [Note B.] 
 
 The following remarks of Professor Stuart, on Rom. 
 vi. 4, will be read with interest by every candid inquirer. 
 
 " We have been buried with him, then, by baptism into 
 his death ; i. e. we are (by being baptized into his death) 
 .buried as he was, owej6.(pr)nep t where ow means like, in 
 like manner with. 
 
 " Most commentators have maintained, that ovvst&cpri~ 
 f*et> has here a necessary reference to the mode of literal 
 *15 
 
174 APPENDIX. 
 
 baptism, which, they say, was by immersion; and this, 
 they think, affords ground for the employment of the im- 
 age used by the Apostle, because immersion (under water) 
 may be compared to burial (under the earth.) It is diffi- 
 cult, perhaps, to procure a patient re-hearing for this sub- 
 ject, so long regarded by some as being out of fair dispute. 
 Nevertheless, as my own conviction is not, after protract- 
 ed and repeated examinations, accordant here with that 
 of commentators in general, I feel constrained briefly to 
 state my reasons. 
 
 " The first is, that in the verse before us there is a plain 
 antithesis ; one so plain that it is impossible to overlook 
 it. If now avrsTucpij/iiEv is to be interpreted in a physical 
 way,"i. e. as meaning baptism in a physical sense, where 
 is the corresponding -physical idea, in the opposite part of 
 the antithesis or comparison ? Plainly there is no such 
 "physical idea or reference in the other part of the antith- 
 esis. The' resurrection there spoken of, is entirely a 
 moral, spiritual one ; for it is one which Christians have 
 already experienced, during the present life ; as may be 
 fully seen by comparing vs. 5, 11, below. I take it for 
 granted, that after ^)fi^? in v. 4, tyegdivieg is implied ; 
 since the nature of the comparison, the preceding ck: 
 fyyigdr} Xgtoiog, and v. 5, make this entirely plain. 
 
 " If we turn now to the passage in Col. ii. 12, (which 
 is altogether parallel with the verse under examination, 
 and has very often been agitated by polemic writers on 
 the subject of baptism,) we shall there find more conclu- 
 sive reason still, to argue as above respecting the nature 
 of the antithesis preseuted. "We have been buried with 
 him [Christ] by baptism." What now is the ojyposite of 
 this 1 What is the kind of resurrection from this grave 
 in which Christians have been buried 1 The Apostle 
 tells us: ."We have risen with him [Christ,] by faith 
 wrought by the power of God [rfjc ivsgyelag tov 0£oO,].who 
 raised him [Christ] from the dead." Here, there is a 
 resurrection by faith, i. e. a spiritual, moral one. Why 
 then should we look for a. physical meaning in the antith- 
 esis 1 If one part of the antithesis is to be construed in 
 a manner entirely moral or spiritual, why should we not 
 construe the other in the like manner 1 To understand 
 ovvei<b<p7][xep, then, of a literal burial under water, is to 
 
APPENDIX. 175 
 
 understand it in a manner which the laws of interpreta- 
 tion appear to forbid. 
 
 "Nothing can be plainer, than that the word awex&- 
 xpftftev, in Rom. vi. 4, is equivalent in sense to the word 
 bned'crouev in v. 8. It seems to be adopted merely for 
 the sake of rendering more striking the image of a resur- 
 rection, which the Apostle employs in the other part of 
 the antithesis. A resurrection from the grave is a natu- 
 ral phrase, when one is speaking with respect to the sub- 
 ject of a resurrection ; see John v. 28, 29; comp. Dan. 
 xii. 2. In accordance with this statement, the context 
 does most plainly speak, both in respect to Rom. vi. 4, 
 and Col. ii. 12. For in respect to Rom. vi. 4, the Apos- 
 tle goes on in the very next verse, (as is usual with him,) 
 to present the same idea which is contained in v. 4, in a 
 different costume. V. .5 (which is a mere epexegesis of 
 v. 4) says : If toe have been homogeneous (trtifHpvtoi like, 
 of the same kind) with Christ in his'death, then shall 
 we be in his resurrection. The same- idea 'and explana- 
 tion is repeated in v. 8 — inedivoftev — avtrfoofiev , and the 
 whole is summarily explained in v. 11; So reckon ye 
 yourselves to be vexqoiig (ihv trji dfiagjlcf, tjStvzag Si kS 
 
 " Exactly in the same manner has the Apostle gone on 
 to explain avfiTatp&vreg in Col. ii. 12. In v. 13 he adds: 
 You vexQoig in your offences*. . . . crvvetpmnolijcre, has he 
 [God] made alive with him [Christ] having forgiven us 
 all our offences. 
 
 " There can be no real ground for question, then, that 
 by ovftBT(kqnj/j,ev , in both cases, is meant neither more nor 
 less than by unduro/ifr, vexgol, etc. The epexegesis ad- 
 ded in both cases, seems to make this quite plain. 
 
 " The only reason, then, which I can find, why ows- 
 T&q>t](tev is preferred in Rom. vi. 4, and in Col. ii. 12, is, 
 as has been suggested above, that the language may be a 
 fuller antithesis of the word resurrection, which is em- 
 ployed in the corresponding part of the comparison. 
 " You who were [dead] buried with Christ," gives ener- 
 gy to the expression. • 
 
 (c) " But my principal difficulty in respect to the usual 
 exegesis of awexutp^nev is, that the image or figure of im- 
 mersion, baptism, is, so far as I know, no where else in 
 Scripture employed as a symbol of burial in the grave. 
 Nor can I think that it is a very natural symbol of burial. 
 
76 APPENDIX. 
 
 The obvious import of washing tvith water, or immersing 
 in water, is, that it is symbolical of purity, cleansing, pu- 
 rification. But how will this aptly signify burying in the 
 grave, the place of corruption, loathsomeness, and de- 
 struction ? 
 
 " For these reasons, I feel inclined to doubt the usual 
 exegesis of the passage before us, and to believe that the 
 Apostle had in view only a burying which is moral and 
 spiritual ; for the same reasons that he had a moral and 
 spiritual (not a physical) resurrection in view, in the cor- 
 responding part of the antithesis. 
 
 " Indeed, what else but a moral burying can be meant, 
 when the Apostle goes on to say : We are buried with 
 him [not by baptism only, but] by baptism into his 
 death? Of course, it will not be contended, that a lite- 
 ral physical burying is here meant, but only a moral one. 
 And although the words, into his death, are not inserted 
 in Col. ii. 12; yet, as the following verse there shows, 
 they are plainly implied. In fact it is plain, that refer- 
 ence is here made to baptism, because, when that rite 
 was performed, the Christian promised to renounce sin 
 and to mortify- all his evil desires, and thus to die unto 
 sin that he might live unto God. I cannot see, there- 
 fore, that there is any more necessary reference here to 
 the modus of baptism, than there is to the modus of the 
 resurrection. The one may as well be maintained as the 
 other. 
 
 " I am aware, however, that one may say : ' I admit 
 that the burial with Christ has a moral sense, and only 
 such an one ; but then the language in which this idea 
 is conveyed (av/neiucpij/nev,) is evidently borrowed from 
 the custom of immersion.' In reply to this, I would refer 
 to the considerations under (c) above. The possibility 
 of the usage I admit; but to show that the image is nat- 
 ural, and obvious, and that it is a part of Scripture usage 
 elsewhere, is what seems important, in order to produce 
 entire satisfaction to the mind of a philological inquirer. 
 At any rate, I cannot at present think the case to be 
 clear enough, to entitle any one to employ this passage 
 with confidence, in a contest respecting the mode of bap- 
 tism." — Commentary on Romans, p. 252 — 255. 
 
APPENDIX. 177 
 
 [Note C] 
 
 " It is very common," says Dr. Wardlaw, "to speak 
 of the Old and New Testament churches, as if they were 
 quite distinct from each other ; as if, when the latter was 
 introduced, the former had been entirely removed, and 
 succeeded by something totally new. But this is far from 
 being the style in which the matter is represented, either 
 in the Old Testament Scriptures, or in the New. In 
 both, the ancient church is spoken of, not as annihilated, 
 and succeeded by another, but as visited, comforted, pu- 
 rified, raised up, and gloriously restored from decline and 
 corruption. If in some passages the idea of complete 
 renovation appears to be suggested, we need not be sur- 
 prised that such language should be applied to a change 
 in the state of the church so remarkable, — to a revival so 
 eminently glorious. The prosperity of the church in the 
 latter days is represented by the " creation of new hea- 
 vens and a new earth, so that the former should not be 
 remembered, nor come into mind." — If such language is 
 employed to elevate our conceptions and anticipations of 
 that blessed era, we might surely expect terms somewhat 
 similar to be used, in reference to the time when "God 
 was to be manifested in the flesh," " a light to lighten 
 the Gentiles, and the glory of his people Israel." 
 
 " The fact is, that when the prophets of the Old Tes- 
 tament predict the calling of the Gentiles at the fulness 
 of time, they represent them as brought in to the previ- 
 ously existing church, although in its renovated and re- 
 modelled state : — and when the prophets of the New 
 Testament foretell the restoration of the Jews, it is under 
 the idea of being brought in again to the same church 
 from which, on account of their unbelief, they had been 
 ejected." — Dissertation on Infant Baptism, p. 63, 
 
 [Note D.] 
 
 " I entirely agree," says Mr. Carson, " with those who 
 consider this covenant (the covenant with Abraham) as 
 having a letter and a spirit. For the accomplishment of 
 the grand promise, that all nations should be blessed in 
 
178 APPENDIX. 
 
 Abraham, three promises were given to him. First, a 
 numerous posterity which was fulfilled in the letter, in 
 the nation of Israel. It was fulfilled in the spirit, by the 
 divine constitution, that makes all believers the children 
 of Abraham. The unbelieving Jews were Abraham's 
 children as to the flesh, yet there is a sense in which 
 Jesus denies that they were the children of Abraham. 
 The second promise was to be a God to him and his seed, 
 which was fulfilled in the letter by his protection of Isra- 
 el in Egypt, — his delivering of them from bondage, — his 
 taking them into covenant at Sinai, — and all his subse- 
 quent dealings with them in their generations, till they 
 were cast off by their rejection of Christ. This promise 
 is fulfilled in the spirit, by God's being a God to all be- 
 lievers, and to them alone, Rom. iv. 11, 12, in a higher 
 sense than he was to Israel, Jer. xxxi. 33". The third 
 promise was of the land of Canaan, fulfilled in the letter 
 to Israel, and in the spirit fulfilled to the true Israel in 
 the possession of the heavenly inheritance. In accord- 
 ance with this double sense of the promises of this cove- 
 nant, the kingdom of God in Israel, with its officers, 
 laws, worship, &c. is a visible model of the invisible 
 kingdom of Christ. The typical ordinances, which ex- 
 hibited the truths of the gospel in figure, form one of the 
 most conclusive evidences of Christianity ; and present, 
 spiritual things to the mind in so definite and striking a 
 manner, that they add the greatest lustre to the doctrines 
 of grace. What a striking emblem of the incarnation 
 have we in God's dwelling in the tabernacle and temple ! 
 How clearly do we see substitution and imputation in the 
 laying on of hands on the victim ! How blind must they 
 be, who do not see the atonement by the blood of Christ, 
 in the sacrifices of Israel ! 
 
 " This appears to me to be the only view of the cove- 
 nant of Abraham, that will suit every thing said of it in 
 the word of God. That it has a letter and a spirit, is 
 true, and analogous to every part of the Old Testament," 
 Carson and Cox on Baptism, p. 344. 
 
APPENDIX. 179 
 
 [Note E.] 
 
 The following remarks are from the pen of Rev. 
 George S. Faber. " Circumcision and baptism are two 
 sacramental signs of exactly the same import. They 
 must, therefore, to all affective purposes, be mutually the 
 same with each other : For a sign being altogether arbi- 
 trary, if it had pleased God to shadow out regeneration 
 by a hundred different signs, all these hundred signs 
 would still constitute but a single sacrament." Sermons, 
 Vol. i. Sermon ix. 
 
 Dr. Wardlaw supposes, that besides its import as de- 
 noting the "putting off the body of the sins of the flesh," 
 circumcision was, in all probability, intended as a sign 
 that the seed, in whom all nations were to be blessed, 
 should come from the loins of Abraham. Of this it was a 
 significant emblem and remembrancer. The promise of 
 the Messiah was restricted to the line of descent by Isaac. 
 In this line, therefore, it became a memorial of the pro- 
 mise that Messiah should be made flesh amongst them. 
 And I doubt not that, in other lines also of descent from 
 Abraham, this rite, originally, by the command* of God, 
 administered to all his family, had its influence, in a gen- 
 eral way, in preserving the idea and expectation of the 
 promised seed. If this be well founded, we at once per- 
 ceive a good reason why circumcision should be abolished 
 when this seed came; and why another rite should be 
 substituted in its place, which continued to signify as 
 expressly, or more so, the " putting off the body of 
 the sins of the flesh," wJiile it was not all significant of 
 that part of the meaning of the former symbol, which had 
 now received its fulfilment. Dissertation on Infant Bap- 
 tism, p. 28. 
 
 [Note F.] 
 
 " The rite of Infant Baptism," says Dr. Woods, 
 " manifestly corresponds with the natural relation between 
 parents and children. It is not enough to say that there 
 is no inconsistency between the two things, and that the 
 relation of parents and children can afford no objection 
 
180 APPENDIX. 
 
 against Infant Baptism. For nothing is more evident 
 than that this rite has a perfect suitableness to the rela- 
 tion of parents and children. This relation is of such a 
 nature and attended with such circumstances, that Infant 
 Baptism becomes obviously, and in the highest degree, 
 just and proper. I acknowledge that this argument does 
 not, by itself, prove Infant Baptism to have been appoint- 
 ed by God, and to be obligatory upon Christians. But it 
 shows at least, that, if God was pleased to appoint it, the 
 appointment must be regarded as having a perfect fitness 
 and propriety." Lectures on Infant Baptism, p. 26. 
 
 Some of the wiser heathen nations, instructed only by 
 nature and reason, were led to practice a rite resembling 
 infant baptism, " It was the custom of the Romans, on 
 the ninth day from the child's birth (which was called the 
 lustfical, or day of purification) for its friends and rela- 
 tives to bring it to the temple, and before the altars of the 
 gods to give it a name, and recommend it to the protec- 
 tion of some tutelar deity." A ceremony of the like na- 
 ture was also common among the Greeks. See Middle- 
 ton's Life oj Cicero, Vol*, i. p. 6. 
 
 [Note G.] 
 
 Lightfoot, after having established the fact of Proselyte 
 baptism, in -his Horre Hebraicae on Matt. iii. 6, con- 
 cludes his argument with the following pertinent remarks. 
 " Hence we see the reason why,- in the New Testament, 
 the subjects of baptism are not prescribed by a more ex- 
 plicit rule. The Anabaptists object, It is not commanded 
 that infants should be baptized ; therefore they should not 
 be baptized. But I say, It is not prohibited that infants 
 should be baptized ; therefore they should be baptized. 
 And the reason is plain ; for since the baptism of children 
 was familiarly known and very often practised in the Jew- 
 ish church in the admission of proselytes, there was no 
 need that it should be confirmed by an express precept, 
 when baptism came to be an evangelical sacrament. For 
 Christ took baptism into his hands, and into evangelical 
 use as he found it ; with this diffeuence only, that he pro- 
 moted it to a more worthy end, and a more important 
 
APPENDIX. 181 
 
 purpose. The whole nation knew perfectly well that lit- 
 tle children had always been baptized. That he had no 
 need of an express command, which was in common and 
 uniform practice. 
 
 Suppose Christ had published an edict in these words, 
 Let all persons assemble on the Lord's day for public wor- 
 ship in the church ; he would be insane who should thence 
 infer that prayers, and preaching, and singing of praises 
 were not to be celebrated on the Lord's day, in the pub- 
 lic assemblies, because there was no mention of them in 
 the edict. For" the edict provides for the public observ- 
 ance of the day in the general ; and concerning the par- 
 ticular forms of worship, there was no need that it should 
 make provision, these being well known and in constant 
 use at the time when the edict was given. But this pre- 
 cisely illustrates the case of baptism, when established by 
 Christ for an evangelical sacrament, by which all should 
 be admitted to a profession of the gospel, as proselytes had 
 been admitted to the religion of the Jews. In regard to 
 particulars, such as the mode of baptizing, and the age 
 and sex of those to be baptized, there was no need of an 
 express rule, because these were sufficiently known from 
 common use. 
 
 On the contrary ; there was need of a plain and 
 open prohibition, if our Saviour designed that infants 
 should not be baptized. For when through all preceding 
 ages, their baptism had been in common use, if he had 
 intended that the custom should be abolished, he would 
 have expressly prohibited it. His silence, therefore, and 
 that of Scriptute in this matter, confirms Ptdobaptism and 
 establishes it, in all succeeding ages." 
 
 To the same purpose are the following remarks of Wet- 
 stein, in his Commentary on Matt, xxviii. 19. " In this 
 passage, which contains the institution of baptism, a lax 
 and mild exposition of the word (ladrjie^aare is to be pre- 
 ferred to a rigid, straight-laced interpretation ; and that 
 this kind of interpretation was adopted by the Apostles, I 
 make no doubt. For since they could not be ignorant 
 that the boys and infants of Jews were to be circumcised, 
 so as to become Jews, and be brought into covenant, and 
 that the boys and infants of Gentile proselytes were not 
 only themselves called proselytes, and circumcised, but 
 were also baptized, as I have before fully proved ; I do 
 16 
 
182 APPENDIX. 
 
 not see how it could enter into their thoughts to expunge 
 boys and infants from the list of disciples, or from baptism, 
 unless they had been cxclucleel by the express injunctions of 
 Christ, which we nowhere find 1" 
 
 [Note H.] 
 
 It will be said, perhaps, that the command to teach, or 
 (juadevTeauT?) disciple the nations, in Matt, xxviii. 19, 
 necessarily limits the subsequent command to baptize 
 them. None can properly be baptized, but those who. 
 have already become disciples. And what is it to be- 
 come a disciple ? Is it not to become a pupil, a learner 1 
 Those, therefore, who have become learners, or are 
 placed in a situation to be learners, in the things per- 
 taining to the kingdom of Christ (and such certainly are 
 all the children of faithful, covenanting parents) may with 
 the strictest propriety be denominated disciples. Thus 
 Timothy was a disciple ((moftgecpovg) from his infancy. 
 2 Tim. iii. 15. And Justin Martyr speaks of some, " who 
 had been made disciples to Christ (fx nuiduu ) from their 
 childhood." Apol. i. Among the Jews, not only were 
 those called disciples who had been taught, but those who 
 came into a situation to be taught. " Make me a prose- 
 lyte, said a Gentile to Hillel, that thou mayest teach me." 
 Bab. Talmud. 
 
 Wetstein makes three classes of disciples, viz : (rav 
 fuadi»i'Th)v, rwv ftui'doi'TD)!' , y.uv twv fiadrjaofievwv) those 
 having been taught, those being taught, and those to be 
 taught. " Certainly," he says, " a person may be made 
 any one's disciple, either when he knowingly and volun- 
 tarily, of his own judgment and will, commits himself to 
 any one for instruction ; or when, by his parents or 
 guardians, in whose power he is placed, he is so committed 
 and entrusted. And he who is receiving„his^/?V.s£ lesson is 
 as much a disciple, as he who has attended on the whole 
 course of instruction. Nay, he who is committed by his 
 father to the care of any master, is already his disciple, 
 before he has been taught his first lessons." Com. on 
 Matt, xxviii. 19. 
 
 But if this sense of the term disciple should be reject- 
 
APPENDIX. 183 
 
 ed, it is believed the command of our Saviour is perfectly 
 consistent, and (considering the circumstances under 
 which it was -uttered) is alone consistent, with Pedobap.- 
 tism. 'Go ye and disciple all nations, baptizing them 
 and their children (according to the known and establish- 
 ed custom in the case of circumcision, and in the recep- 
 tion of proselytes) into the name of the" Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' Situated as the 
 Apostles were, it seems they must have understood their 
 Lord's precept with this latitude. I see not how they 
 could have interpreted it in any other manner. 
 
 It has been said, also, that the requisition of faith in 
 order to baptism necessarily limits the command to bap- 
 tize. But of whom is this requisition made ? Of adult 
 •persons or infants? Of adults certainly, as they alone 
 are capatffe of understanding and complying with it. Of 
 course, it has no respect to infants; and it is just such a 
 requisition as all Evangelical Pedobiptists make, when 
 addressing that class of persons to whom it was addressed 
 by the Apostles, We all say, when addressing on baptiz- 
 ed adults, " Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in 
 the name of the Lord Jesus." " If thou belie vest with 
 all thine heart, thou mayest." Acts ii. 38: viii. 37. 
 
 It is admitted, on all sides, that "Cyprian, the-renerable 
 Bishop of Carthawe, was a Pedobaptist. Yet he ur^ed 
 the necessity of faith and repentance in order to baptism, 
 just as the apostles did, and as Evangelical Pedobaptists 
 do in our own times. He says those out of Christ will 
 perish, " unless they co.me with repentance to that only 
 salutary sacrament of the churchj" — meaning baptism." 
 Epis. 75. 
 
 The remarks of Dr. Woods, in reply to this objection, 
 are judicious and conclusive. "Of whom was faith re- 
 quired iq order to Baptism 1 ■ Of those, evidently, who 
 were capable of understanding the nature of the requisi- 
 tion. The command. to believe could relate to no other. 
 This was so perfectly obvious, that no teacher of Chris- 
 tianity could- have any occasion* to mention it. This 
 command, or any . other command, coining from a just 
 God, must be understood as relating to those only, who 
 were capable of complying with it. So that the fact, 
 stated exactly, was this ; those who were capable of believ- 
 ing, that is, adult persons were required to believe, in order 
 
184 APPENDIX. 
 
 to be baptized. A requisition, not unlike this, was made 
 under the former dispensation. Adult persons, in order 
 to be admitted by circumcision into the society of God's 
 people were required to renounce idolatry, to believe in 
 the God of Abraham, and to submit to the institutions 
 and laws which he gave by Moses. Such faith as this, 
 under the 316suic economy, answered to the faith which 
 is required under the Christian economy. The requisi- 
 tion of faith, then, in order to Baptism, has nothing new 
 in it, but this, that the faith required is to be adapted to 
 the circumstances of the Christian dispensation. 4Vhere- 
 as the faith required before, was to be adapted to the Mo- 
 saic dispensation. Thus, in regard to adult persons, the 
 case is very similar under both dispensations. How then 
 can the fact, that Christ required adult persons to believe- 
 in order to be baptized, prove that Baptism *was to be 
 more limited in its application, than circumcision 1" 
 Lectures on Infant Baptism, p. 157. 
 
 [Note I.] 
 
 " It is-a remarkable fact," says Dr. Wardlaw, " that 
 we have no mention of any thing resembling the baptism 
 of households or families, in the accounts of the propa- 
 gation of the gospel by our Baptist brethren. That the 
 apostles baptized families, no believer of • the scripture 
 history can doubt ; and we have seen, that the manner in 
 which such baptisms are recorded, or referred to, indi- 
 cates no extraordinary thing. Now it surely is an extra- 
 ordinary thing, that in the journals and periodical ac- 
 counts of Baptist missions 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 household. When do we find a Baptist 
 missionary saying, " When she was baptized and her 
 family" — or, " I baptized the family of Krishnoo," or any 
 other convert? We have the baptism of individuals ; 
 but nothing corresponding 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, 
 
APPENDIX. 185 
 
 there might surely be expected some little correspondence 
 in the facts connected with it." Dissertation on Infant 
 Baptism, p. 109. 
 
 [Note J.] 
 
 It has been often said that the ancient Britons did not 
 baptize their children ; and that they were persuaded to 
 commence baptizing them by Augustine, a Benedictine 
 monk, in the sixth century. But these assertions have 
 been shown to be without foundation. The mistake 
 arose from an imperfect quotation of the history of the 
 venerable Bede. Bede represents Augustine as requir- 
 ing the Britons to " perform the office of baptizing, ac- 
 cording to the custom of the Romish church." But he is 
 falsely quoted by Fabian as saying, that Augustine re- 
 quired the Britons to "give Christendom to their chil- 
 dren ;" — from which quotation it has been inferred that, 
 previously, they did not " give Christendom to their chil- 
 dren.". 
 
 If this pretence needed further refutation, we might 
 recur to the testimony of Pelagius, who was born and 
 bred in Britain, and was perfectly acquainted with the 
 customs of Christians in that country. Yet he affirms 
 that he " never heard of any, not even the most impious 
 heretic, who denied baptism to infants." 
 
 It has been said, also, that the Wahlenses did hot bap- 
 tize their children. This assertion is founded chiefly on 
 the testimony of the Romanists, and may have arisen 
 from the unwillingness of that persecuted people to suf- 
 fer their children to be baptized by the Romish priests. — 
 That the great body of the Waldenses practised infant 
 baptism, we have conclusive evidence in their own stand- 
 ard writings. The following passages are from a Wal- 
 densian Catechism, supposed to have been written as ear- 
 ly as A. D. 1100. " There are two sacraments, one of 
 water, and the other of aliment, that is, of bread and 
 wine. The first is called baptism, or in our language a 
 icashing with water, whether of a river or a fountain ; 
 and it must be administered in the name of the Father, 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." " Children are 
 *16 
 
186 APPENDIX. 
 
 to be presented for battism ; and this should be 
 done by them to whom they are most nearly related, such 
 as parents, or those to whom God has given this office of 
 love." 
 
 Dr. Murdock, in the notes to his translation of Mos- 
 heim's Ecclesiastical History, says, " That the Mennon- 
 ites" (or Continental Anabaptists) " in most of the points 
 in which they appeared singular among Protestants, hore 
 a nearer resemblance to the proper Waldenses, the Wick- 
 liffites, and the Hussites, than the other Protestants, or 
 the Lutherans and the Reformed did, is very far from 
 being true. On the contrary, it is a well known historic 
 fact, that in the sixteenth century, the genuine descend- 
 ants of the old Waldensians, Wickliffites, and Hussites, 
 who were numerous in France, England, Bohemia, Mo- 
 ravia, &c. readily united with the Lutheran and Reform- 
 ed communities, and at length became absorbed in them ; 
 and that very few, if any, of them ever manifested a 
 preference for the Mennonites, or for any of the Antipe- 
 dobaptist sects of that age. The history of the Refor- 
 mation, in all the countries where these ancient sects 
 were found fully establishes this fact, which is so adverse to 
 the supposition of a legitimate descent of the Mennonites 
 from the pure Waldensians. The first Mennonites were 
 not persons who had before borne the name of Walden- 
 sians, or who were known descendants of Waldensians ; 
 nor did they originate either in or near the countries 
 where the Waldensians in that age resided. And if we 
 endeavor to trace the history of that grand peculiarity of 
 all Mennonites, their confining baptism to adult believers, 
 and rejecting infant baptism altogether, we shall find, 
 that at the time Menno first embraced it, it existed among 
 the numerous German Anabaptists, but not among the 
 Waldenses of France or Bohemia, wlio were then univer- 
 sally believers in infant baptism, and were in fraternal 
 communion with the Lutheran and reformed churches. 
 These Waldensian Pedobaptists moreover declared, that 
 they held the same belief which their fathers had main- 
 tained for several centuries, and they appealed to their old 
 books to make good their assertions. Nor does Ecclesias- 
 tical history appear to me to disprove the truth of their 
 assertion. There were indeed various mystical sects, 
 tinctured more or less with Manichean views, in the 
 
APPENDIX. 187 
 
 twelfth and following centuries, who rejected all water 
 baptism, on much the same grounds as the Quakers still 
 do; and some of. these assailed infant baptism especially, 
 as being peculiarly unsuitable and absurd. There is also 
 pretty good evidence that, early in the twelfth century, 
 Peter de Brays, and his successor Henry, with their fol- 
 lowers, the Petrobrussians and Henricians, did at first 
 reject infant baptism, without discarding all baptism. 
 But Peter Waldo arose soon after, and gave birth to the 
 proper Waldensiaus ; and we hear no more of the Petro- 
 brussians and Henricians. They probably gave up their 
 opposition to infant baptism." See Leger's Gen. Hist, 
 of the Churches of the Waldenses ; Jo. Paul Perrin's 
 Hist, of the Waldenses; Wall's Hist, of Infant Baptism, 
 P. ii. chap. 7; and Milner's Ecc. Hist. Vol. iii. p. 426. 
 
 [Note K.] 
 
 It has been said that the infant children of Jewish pa- 
 rents were church members in full communion, and were 
 taken, with their parents, to the Passover and other festi- 
 vals. (See Judson's Sermon, p. 39.) But this, we have 
 good reason to believe, was not the case. When our 
 Saviour was twelve years old, he went up to Jerusalem to 
 the Passover, according to the custom of the feast. Luke 
 ii. 4:2. The most respectable commentators, and others, 
 decide, that this was as early as the Jewish children were 
 permitted to be present on such occasions. 
 
 •Hyrcanus in Josephus. " The law forbids the son 
 to cat of the sacrifice, before he has come to the temple, 
 and there presented an offering to God."* 
 
 Calvin. " The Passover, which has been succeeded 
 by the sacred supper, did not admit guests of all descrip- 
 tions promiscuously, but was rightly eaten only by those 
 -who were of sufficient age to be able to inquire into its 
 meaning.' t 
 
 Bp. Patrick. " When children were twelve years old, 
 their parents were bound to bring them to the temple at 
 
 * Antiq. Lib. xii. Cap. iv. Sect. 8. 
 f Institutes, Lib. iv. Cap. xvi. Sec. 30. 
 
188 APPENDIX. 
 
 the Passover, where, seeing what was done, they would 
 be led to inquire, " What mean ye by these things?"* 
 
 Poole. " Children, at the age of twelve years, were 
 brought by their parents to the temple ; and from that 
 time, they began to eat of the Passover and other sacri- 
 fices.' 'i 
 
 Rosenmuller. " The Jews were accustomed to bring 
 their sons, who had attained to their twelfth year, to the 
 festivals at Jerusalem. "| 
 
 Kuinoel. " Jt was a custom of the Jews in those 
 times (the time of Christ) that youths who had attained 
 to the age of twelve years, should be brought to the festi- 
 vals at Jerusalem. "|| 
 
 Bloo.miiki.d. " The custom was, not to take them 
 (the Jewish children) to the Passover, until they should 
 have attained the years of puberty, a period which the 
 Rabbins tell us was fixed at the twelfth year, when they 
 were held amenable to the law, and were called sons of 
 precept. Then were they also introduced into the 
 church, initiated into its doctrines and ceremonies, and 
 consequently were taken with their relations to Jerusalem 
 at the festivals."^ 
 
 The following extract from Dr. Gill, an eminent Bap- 
 tist commentator, is much to the purpose. " According 
 to the maxims of the Jews, persons were not obliged to 
 the duties of the law, or subject to the penalties of it in 
 case of non-performance, until they were, a female, at 
 the age of tire /re years and one day, and a male, at the 
 age of thirteen years and one day." " They were not 
 reckoned adult church members till then; nor then 
 either, unless worthy persons ; for so it is said, ' He that 
 is worthy is called, at thirteen years of age, a son of 
 the congregation of Israel,' that is, a member of the 
 
 CHURCH. "1| 
 
 [Note L.] 
 
 " Let it not be said," says Dr. Ward la '.v, " that parents 
 may have a sufficiently strong feeling of their duty to 
 
 * Com. on Ex. xii. t Synopsis on Ex. xii. 26. 
 
 \ Com. on Luke ii. 42. || Com. on Luke ii. 42. 
 
 § Critical Digest on Luke ii. 42. IT Com. on Luke ii. 42. 
 
APPENDIX. 189 
 
 their children, and may fulfil that duty equally well with 
 others, although they do not see the Scripture authority 
 for their baptism. I do not deny, that a Baptist may be 
 exemplary in the Christian tuition of his family, and that 
 many a Pedobaptist may be very much the contrary. But 
 this is not the question. I can conceive of a Christian, 
 from certain conscientious but unscriptural and ground- 
 less scruples, living for successive years in the neglect of 
 the ordinance of the Lord's supper, and yet, to all ap- 
 pearance, influenced as much as others, in his general 
 character, by the habitual remembrance of his Redeemer. 
 We should never infer from such a case, that the ordi- 
 nance was useless. Neither ought we in the other. If 
 God has given promises to his people and their seed, 
 promises fitted to stimulate believing parents to the ful- 
 filment of their sacred trust, and has instituted an ordi- 
 nance in which these promises are recognized and pledg- 
 ed to them, it does not become us to neglect the gracious 
 and pleasing rite, on the ground that we can keep the 
 promises sufficiently well in mind without it. It is kind 
 in that God who " knoweth our frame," not only to give 
 us his word, but to embody, as it were, that word to our 
 senses, to -confirm it to our faith, and to impress it upon 
 our memories and hearts, by significant outward institu- 
 tions." — Dissertation on Infant Baptism, p. 140. 
 
 [Note M.] 
 
 " When the Apostle, in his epistles, addressing himself 
 to the churches, introduces the subject of the instruction 
 and spiritual care of children, it is evident, that he de- 
 volves the important charge, not upon the associated body 
 of believers, but on the parents amongst them to whom 
 the children belonged. The very address, it is true, to 
 children, as connected with the community of God's peo- 
 ple, testifies the interest felt in them by the Apostle him- 
 self, and contains a virtual admonition to the churches, 
 to take care that they were not neglected. By connect- 
 ing this with the immediately-subjoined charge to pa- 
 rents, we are naturally led to the conclusion, that the 
 principal way in which the care of the churches for the 
 
190 APPENDIX. 
 
 spiritual interest of the children connected with them 
 ought to show itself, is their seeing to it that the parents 
 discharge their duty faithfully. The parents have, by 
 apostolic authority, as well as by the dictate of nature, 
 the immediate charge of the children ; and the church, 
 by the same divine authority, has the immediate oversight 
 of the parents. The discipline of the churches ought 
 certainly to be considered as extending to every descrip- 
 tion of sin. The violation, or neglect, of the parental 
 trust, is a sin, of which cognizance ought to be taken, as 
 well as of others. If parents, u ho are members of a 
 church, are allowed to go on in sucli violation and neg- 
 lect, the church is chargeable with an omission of duty. 
 " Bring up your children in the nurture and admonition 
 of the Lord," is as plain and explicit a command, as 
 " Thou shalt not steal," or " Thou shalt not take the 
 name of the Lord thy God in vain." The violation of 
 the one may not be of so easy detection, as that of the 
 others. There may even, in certain cases, be circum- 
 stances of delicacy and difficulty, that require any cogniz- 
 ance of parental conduct to be gone about with great 
 prudence, and cautious discrimination. But the princi- 
 ple of discipline is, in both cases, the same. We must 
 not allow sin to be committed, and persisted in, without 
 endeavoring, by scriptural means, to bring the offender to 
 repentance. And, surely, there is no sin which it is of 
 more consequence to have corrected by repentance, than 
 one which affects the best interest of the rising genera- 
 tion, and thus tends deeply to injure the prosperity of the 
 church, and the cause and glory of Christ." — Wardlaic's 
 Dissertation on Infant Baptism, pp. 155, E56.