^51 
 

 
 
 *€/% 
 
 
 '***s»^"' 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/defenceofbaptistOOgibb 
 
u^iL^ 
 
 
 2.^7 
 
 DEFENCE OF THE 
 
 OR, THE 
 
 BAPTISM OF BELIEVERS 
 
 vr?^?v*«* 
 
 gfmmet^ion 
 
 THE ONLY BAPTISM OF THE 
 
 CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION 
 
 GEORGE 'GIBBS, 
 
 MINISTER OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH, ST. CLEMENT'S, 
 NORWICH. 
 
 NORWICH : 
 
 PUBLISHED BY S. WILKIN ; AND BY BALDWIN, CRADOCK AND JOY, 
 LONDON ; AND WAUGU AND INNES, EDINBURGH. 
 
 1821. 
 
Printed by S. Wilkm, Norwich. 
 
TO THE 
 
 Members of the Baptist Church and Congre- 
 gation, MEETING IN St. ClEMENT's, NoRWICH. 
 
 I KNOW not to whom I can dedicate the following sheets, 
 with so much propriety, or with such lively feelings of 
 interest and respect, as to you my christian friends, at 
 whose earnest and affectionate solicitation they are made 
 public. 
 
 They contain the substance of four Sermons delivered 
 to you previous to the administration of the ordinance of 
 baptism ; and while passing in review before me for the 
 press, have been necessarily enlarged in consequence of 
 arguments recently advanced by the Independents of this 
 city. The diffidence I feel in thus appearing to public view, 
 is in some degree obviated by the sanction of your authority, 
 and the hope that my feeble attempt to defend the princi- 
 ples we maintain, will at least meet with your approbation. 
 
 If I have failed to bring forward new arguments, let it 
 be remembered that this subject has been so repeatedly 
 examined by able and experienced controversailists, that 
 there is little scope left for the display of novelty. If, in 
 
IV 
 
 the warmth of my zeal for an important institation (almost 
 sunk into contempt through the corruption of Christianity), 
 I have offended against the spirit or the precepts of that 
 religion which teaches us to bear with the infirmities of the 
 weak, I desire not to shelter myself under the protection 
 of your name. My object in publishing at your request, 
 is not to excite a contentious spirit about what some have 
 denominated our Shibboleth, nor to weaken any bond of 
 charity that unites the church of Christ, but to support 
 a divine ordinance, and to vindicate our practice from 
 those opprobrious charges which have been lately brought 
 against it. 
 
 Let us, my friends, contend earnestly for the authority of 
 Christ in his positive institutions, as well as for that form 
 of doctrine once delivered to the saints — and let us be 
 careful in our practice to regard the law of his command- 
 ments, as well as to embody the spirit of his precepts in 
 our lives. 
 
 Wishing you grace, mercy, and peace, from God our 
 Pather, and the Lord Jesus Christ, 
 
 I am your willing Servant in the Gospel, 
 
 GEORGE GIBBS. 
 
 Norwich, 
 
 July 9, 1821. 
 
MATT. XXVIII. 18, 19, 20. 
 
 And JESUS came and spake unto them, saying, all power 
 
 IS GIVEN UNTO ME IN HEAVEN AND IN EARTH. Go YE, THERE- 
 FORE, AND TEACH ALL NATIONS, BAPTISING THEM IN THE NAME 
 OF THE FATHER, AND OF THE SON, AND OF THE HOLY GHOST ; 
 TEACHING THEM TO OBSERVE ALL THINGS WHATSOEVER I HAVE 
 COMMANDED YOU : AND, LO, I AM WITH YOU ALWAY, EVEN UNTO 
 THE END OF THE WORLD. AmEN. 
 
 These words, which contain onr Lord's com- 
 mission, were addressed by Him to his apostles 
 just before he ascended into heaven to take 
 possession of his mediatorial kingdom. They 
 exhibit the nature of his government, the terms 
 of admission into his church, and the very 
 important part his apostles were to take in its 
 establishment, by preaching the Gospel among 
 all nations. Jesus had appeared unto them 
 three several times, accompanied by those de- 
 monstrations of power that convinced them of 
 his divine authority, and animated them in the 
 prospect of their arduous undertaking ; for he 
 furnished them with satisfactory evidence of his 
 
 B 
 
resurrection, confirmed tlieir faith in Him as 
 tlie true Messiah, and having delivered to them 
 his final commands, He was received up into 
 heaven. 
 
 As our Lord's commission was the authority 
 by which the apostles acted in the affairs of his 
 kingdom, and especially in the formation of the 
 first churches, it ouglit to be our guide at the 
 present day, since the spirit of it remains 
 unrepealed : " See that thou make all things 
 according to the pattern shewed to thee in 
 the mount" (TIeb. viii. 5.) was the command 
 given to Moses the minister of the law; and 
 ministers of the gospel should be equally care- 
 ful to do all things according to the order of 
 Christ's commission delivered on the mount, 
 " Go ye therefore and teach all nations, bap- 
 tising them in the name of the Father, and of 
 tlie Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching 
 them to observe all things whatsoever 1 have 
 conunanded you". 
 
 By this commission the apostles were autho- 
 rized to go into all the world to preach the 
 gospel ; they were to preach it as the means of 
 converting men to the faith of Chi'ist, they were 
 to baptise those icho helievedj in the name of the 
 sacred Three, and they were to instruct these 
 baptised believers to observe the command- 
 ments and ordinances of the Saviour. In the 
 order of the commission, and in the manner the 
 
apostles executed it, preaching preceded faith, 
 and faith preceded baptism ; hence the first 
 churches of the christian dispensation were 
 composed of baptised believers ; nor does it 
 appear that any persons, during the apostolic 
 age, were partakers of baptism and church fel- 
 lowship except those who professed faith in 
 our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 As we are about to administer an ordinance 
 which, in the purest ages of the christian church, 
 belonged exclusively to believers in Christ ; 
 and as our mode of administration differs so 
 widely from that of various denominations of 
 British christians, it is needful that we should 
 explain and defend both our opinion and our 
 practice. For this purpose we call your atten- 
 tion to the important passage before us. In 
 Matthew, the words of the commission are, 
 " Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptis- 
 ing them" ; and in Mark, " Go ye into all the 
 world, and preach the gospel to every creature"'. 
 The one is illustrated by the other ; w^ien Mat- 
 thew uses the term, " teach all nations", Mark 
 uses the phrase, " preach the gospel to eveiy 
 creature": thus are we informed how the nations 
 are to be taught, which is by the preaching of 
 the gospel. 
 
 The phrase ,aa^nrfjffars rrdira za sSvr;, UScd by 
 
 Matthew, might have been rendered, make dis- 
 ciples among all nations. In doing which three 
 
things were enjoined upon the apostles ; first, 
 they were to preach the gospel with a view to 
 the conversion of sinners unto God ; secondly, 
 they were to introduce the converted into the 
 church by baptism ; thirdly, they were to in- 
 struct these baptised persons in all the duties 
 of the christian profession. This is so obviously 
 and strictly the meaning of the passage, that it 
 is acknowledged by most critical expositors. 
 
 Dr. Doddridge says : " 1 render the word 
 iMa^riTi-jGan, proselyte, that it may be duly distin- 
 guished from MaemvTii, teaching, (in the next 
 verse) with which our version confounds it. 
 The former seems to import instruction in the 
 essentials of religion, which it was necessary 
 adult persons should know and submit to, 
 before they could regularly be admitted to 
 baptism ; the latter may relate to those more 
 particular admonitions in regard to christian 
 faith. and practice". — see Fam. Exp, in loc. 
 
 Dr. Whitby: '* fia^nrivnv, here, is to preach the 
 gospel to all nations, and to engage them to 
 believe it, in order to their profession of that 
 faith by baptism ; as seems apparent, first, 
 from that parallel commission, Mark xvi. 15. 
 *' Go preach the gospel to every creature ; he 
 that believeth and is baptised shall be saved" : 
 secondly, from the scripture notion of a disci- 
 ple, that being still the same as a believer. If 
 here it should be said that 1 yielded too much 
 
to the Antipaedobaptists, by saying, that to be 
 made disciples here, is to be taught to believe 
 in Christ that so they might be his disciples ; I 
 desire any one to tell me how the apostles could 
 fj^a^nnvuv, make a disciple of an heathen, or unbe- 
 lieving Jew, without being fj^a^yirai, or teachers 
 of them ; whether they were not sent to preach 
 to those that could hear, and to teach them to 
 whom they preached that Jesus was the Christ, 
 and only to baptise them when they did believe 
 this". — see Comment, in loc. 
 
 Grotius : " Since there are two ways of 
 teaching, the one, by introduction to the first 
 principles — the other, by more extensive in- 
 struction : the former seems to be intended by 
 /j.a:)r,rvjstv, for that is, as it were, to bring into dis- 
 cipline, and is to precede baptism ; the latter, 
 is pointed out by Maa-Miv, which is to follow bap- 
 tism". — see Aunot. in loc. 
 
 Mr. Poole's continuators : " Go ye therefore 
 and teach all nations". Tlie Greek is /xa^^irsucrars, 
 make disciples all nations ; but that must be by 
 preaching, and instructing them in the princi- 
 ples of the christian faith ; and Mark expounds 
 it, telHng us our Saviour said. Go ye into all 
 the world and preach the gospel to every crea- 
 ture ; that is, to every reasonable creature capa- 
 ble of hearing and receiving it. I cannot be of 
 their mind, who think that persons may be 
 baptised before they be taught : we want pre- 
 
6 
 
 cedents of any sucli baptism in scripture ; 
 though indeed we find precedents of persons 
 baptised, who had but a small degree of the 
 knowledge of the gospel ; but it should seem 
 that they were all first taught that Jesus Christ 
 was the Son of God, and were not baptised till 
 they professed such belief (Act. viii. 37 j ; and 
 John baptised them in Jordan confessing their 
 sins". Matt. iii. 6. — see Annot in loc. 
 
 Bishop Burnet observes : " The institution of 
 baptism, as it is a federal act of the christian 
 religion, must be taken from the commission 
 that our Saviour gave to his disciples ; to go 
 preach and make disciples to liim in all nations, 
 (for that is the strict signification of the word,) 
 baptising them in the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching 
 them to observe all things whatsoever I have 
 commanded you. By the first teaching or 
 making disciples, that must go before baptism, 
 is to be meant the convincing the world, that 
 Jesus is the Christ, the true Messias, anointed 
 of God, with a fullness of grace and of the spi- 
 rit without measure ; and sent to be the Saviour 
 and Redeemer of the world. And when any 
 were brought to acknowledge this, then they 
 were to baptise them, to initiate them into this 
 religion, by obliging them to renounce all idol- 
 atry and ungodliness, as well as all carnal and 
 secular lusts, and then they led them into the 
 
water ; and ^vith no other garments but what 
 might cover nature, they at iirst laid them down 
 in the water, as a man is laid in the grave, and 
 then they said these words, I baptise or wash 
 thee in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy 
 Ghost : then they raised them u|3 again, and 
 clean garments were put on them : from whence 
 came the phrase of being baptised into Christ's 
 death, of being buried with him by baptism 
 into death : of our being risen with Christ, and 
 of our putting on the Lord Jesus Christ ; of 
 putting off the old man, and putting on the 
 new". — see JExp. Art. 27. 
 
 Venema : " Go, says our Lord to the Apos- 
 tles, teach all nations, baptising them in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
 the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all 
 things whatsoever I have commanded you. 
 This is an excellent passage, and explains the 
 whole nature of baptism. Before persons were 
 baptised, it was necessary for them to believe 
 the preaching of the apostles, which faith they 
 were to profess in baptism. For the word fia^nrs-osiv, 
 in the style of the New Testament, does not sig- 
 nify barely to admit into a school and instruc- 
 tion, but to admit after the doctrine is believed, 
 and after a previous subjection to the fundamen- 
 tal laws of the school : fj^a^nnviiv nva, is to teach a 
 person effectually, so that he may learn, obey 
 and receive the doctrine bv faith. It includes 
 
8 
 
 ■'Jlierefore, to hear, understand and to admit for 
 true". — see Sootlis Pcedohap. exam, 
 
 Baxter : " Go disciple me all nations, baptis- 
 ing them. As for those that say they are dis- 
 cipled by baptism, and not before baptism, 
 they speak not the sense of that text, nor that 
 which is true or rational, if they mean it as ab- 
 solutely spoken. This is not like some occasi- 
 onal historical mention of baptism, but it is the 
 very commission of Christ to his apostles, for 
 preaching, and baptising, and purposely ex- 
 presseth their several works, in their several 
 places and order. Their first task is by teach- 
 ing to make disciples, who are by Mark called 
 believers — their second work is to baptise them, 
 whereto is annexed the promise of their salva- 
 tion — the third work is to teach them all other 
 things which are afterward to be learned in the 
 school of Christ. To contemn this order is to 
 renounce all rules of order ; for where can we 
 expect to find it, if not here?" — see Bootlis 
 PcBclohap. exam. 
 
 The above quotations from the writings of 
 some of the most eminent and learned paedo- 
 baptist divines, plainly prove their agreement 
 with us, that the word iMa^nrihuv, signifies to make 
 disciples by convincing men of the truth of 
 Christianity, and bringing them over to the faith 
 of Jesus — it is not baptism that makes disciples, 
 but instruction in the doctrines of the gospel. 
 
Baptism is the outward ceremony by which 
 we testify our faith in Christ, and our wil- 
 lingness to submit to his authority. The 
 command says, " teach and baptise", not *' bap- 
 tise and teach" ; or what is too frequently the 
 case, baptise children in their infancy, and 
 omit to teach them when they come to years 
 of understanding'. This explanation of our 
 Lord's commission is supported by the tes- 
 timony of the early christian fathers, by the 
 most learned expositors of modern times, and 
 what is of infinitely higher importance, by the 
 whole authority and analogy of the sacred 
 scriptures. 
 
 Before we proceed in the investigation of 
 this subject, we shall lay down two propo- 
 sitions ; first, that the word of God is the 
 only rule of faith and practice in matters of 
 religion ; secondly, that what is not there com- 
 manded is not binding upon the consciences 
 of men. These are the principles upon which 
 we wish to act, and it is by these principles we 
 desire that others should judge of our conduct. 
 
 First. We believe the bible to be the only 
 infallible guide in matters of religion, because 
 it comes with divine authority, " thus saith the 
 Lord"; and therefore we believe that all the 
 commandments and ordinances of Christ should 
 be observed both in their spirit and letter, with 
 a fidelity proportionate to their high importance. 
 
 c 
 
10 
 
 The bible, and the bible alone, is the reli2;io}i 
 of protestant dissenters : the magna charta of 
 non-conformity. Animated by its sacred spirit, 
 and guided by its unerring truth, our forefathers 
 successfully resisted that spiritual usurpation 
 and priestly domination, which was destructive 
 of civil and religious liberty ; and we, acting 
 under the direction of the same divine records, 
 baptise adults by immersion, on a profession of 
 their faith in Christ. We adopt this plan, be- 
 cause it was the uniform practice of the apostles 
 and first ministers of the gospel : thus they un- 
 derstood and obeyed the commission of their 
 risen Lord, and the churches which they formed 
 were composed exclusively of persons of this 
 description. 
 
 Secondliji. We believe that what i& not com- 
 manded in the word of God, is not binding 
 upon the consciences of men. As nothing 
 should be excluded from the worship of God 
 which Christ hath appointed, so nothing should 
 be added by human authority ; He alone, as 
 legislator of his own kingdom, can alter or 
 annul what He hath himself commanded — to 
 interfere with the economy of things established 
 m his church, is to be wise above what is writ- 
 ten, and to invade the prerogative of his office, 
 who is " head over all things to his church, 
 which is his body, the fulness of Him who 
 filleth all in all." 
 
11 
 
 Believing- then that the doctrines of men are 
 of no authority in the church of Christ, we 
 reject them as derogatory from the glory of 
 the Saviour, and injurious to the interests of 
 pure and undefiled religion : but we know that 
 the spirit, which in very early times introduc- 
 ed innovation and will-worship, is gratifying 
 to the depraved principles of human nature ; 
 and fi'om this source has arisen that mass of 
 error which has beclouded the moral hemis- 
 phere of Europe, which tends to destroy the 
 vital religion of all national establishments, and 
 which must eventually work their overthrow. 
 Let those churches who profess to hold the 
 faith once delivered to the saints, be upon their 
 guard how they receive for doctrines of divine 
 appointment, the commandments and tradi- 
 tions of men; lest by entangling themselves 
 with the carnal ceremonies of antichristian 
 churches, they imbibe their spirit and share in 
 their final ruin. 
 
 Acting under the influence of these senti 
 ments, we not only dissent from the establish- 
 ed church in points of discipline, but we differ 
 from all paedobaptists, whether of the hierar- 
 chy or among the dissenters, on the subject 
 of infant sprinkling ; and we believe they are 
 alike erroneous respecting the nature and design 
 of christian baptism. 
 
 In considering the words of our text, we 
 
12 
 
 shall inquire into the nature, mode, subjects, 
 and DESIGN of baptisbi, as they appear in the 
 New Testament. 
 
 First, we shall inquire into the nature of 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 In considering- the nature of christian baptism, 
 we shall begin with its origin, and shew that it 
 is an ordinance of divine appointment, and not 
 a Jewish or Heathen rite introduced into the 
 gospel dispensation. 
 
 The first instance in which this ordinance as 
 a public profession of personal religion is spoken 
 of in the sacred writings, is in the New Testa- 
 ment, where it stands in immediate connexion 
 with the introduction of the gospel. *' The be- 
 ginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of 
 God, John did baptise in the wilderness and 
 preach the baptism of repentance for the remis- 
 sion of sins ; and there went out unto him all 
 the land of Judea and they of Jerusalem, and 
 were all baptised of him in the river of Jordan 
 confessing their sins". — Mark i. 44, 45. 
 
 That there were divers washings under the 
 law, no one will dispute, and from this acknow- 
 ledged fact, some have inferred that the baptism 
 which Christ enjoined, was a rite in frequent 
 practice among his countrymen, and being well 
 adapted to the simplicity and purity of that 
 order of things which he was about to intro- 
 duce, he retained it as a ceremony of his dis- 
 
13 
 
 peiisation : but if we examine the divers baptisms 
 practised by the Jews, we shall find no analogy 
 between any of them, and the baptism of the 
 New Testament. 
 
 The Jewish washings were appointed on ac- 
 count of ceremonial defilement and pertained to 
 things as well as i^ersons ; we read of the wash- 
 ing of cups, and pots, and brazen vessels, and 
 garments ; and these washings are called bap- 
 tisms by Mark. There was also the ceremonial 
 baptism or washing of persons ; as of the priests, 
 the lepers, and those who had contracted any 
 ceremonial impurity : but in those washings 
 which were to be repeated as often as fresh de- 
 filement was incurred, there was no administra- 
 tor, no profession of faith, no baptising in the 
 name of the God of Abraham, nor of the pro- 
 mised Messiah, nor of any person whatever ; 
 nor is there one point of agreement between the 
 washings under the law, and the baptism under 
 the gospel, except the mere circumstance of 
 the use of water. Surely it will be allowed by 
 every candid inquirer that this is not a sufficient 
 ground for the supposition that Christ borrowed 
 his ordinance from any preceding rite. 
 
 It has been asserted that christian baptism 
 was borrowed from Jewish proselyte baptism. 
 Where is this proselyte baptism to be found ? 
 Not in the old Testament, for though we read 
 of persons who undoubtedly were proselytes, 
 
14 
 
 as the Sliechemites in the time utMacul^, Jetluo 
 the father-in-law of Moses, Rahab and Ruth, 
 yet not a word is said of their being baptised ; 
 it is not to be found in the apocrypha — and 
 though Chj-ist adverts in the New Testament 
 to the zeal of the Jews in making proselytes, 
 no mention is made of their being baptised. 
 Neither PhilunorJosephus, two celebrated Jew- 
 ish writers, notice any such rite as practised by 
 their couutrymen ; nor is it referred to by any 
 of the fathers of the first three centuries. The 
 silence of such authorities is a strong proof 
 against the existence of the ceremony in the 
 apostolic age, and it is the opinion of some of 
 the most learned pcedobaptists, that there is no 
 evidence that proselyte baptism was practised 
 by the Jews till after the destruction of their 
 city : they allow that the earliest account of it 
 is in those labyrinths of error, the talmudical 
 and Rabbinical writings. Of this opinion were 
 Owen, Jennings and Knatchbull at home — Ve- 
 nema, Vitringa, Carpzovius and Wenisdortius, 
 abroad ; all padobaptists. 
 
 Dr. Owen, when speaking of the ceremony 
 of washing among the Jews, says ; " From this 
 latter institution which was temporary and occa- 
 sional, (and of this kind they had many grant- 
 ed tothem, whilst they were in the wilderness 
 before the giving of the law,) the Rabbins have 
 framed a baptism for those that enter into their 
 
15 
 
 synagogue ; a fancy too greedily embraced by 
 some christian writers, Avho would have the 
 holy ordinance of the church's baptism to be 
 derived from thence. Nor are there the least 
 footsteps of any such usage amongst the Jews 
 until after the days of John the baptist, in imi- 
 tation of whom it was first taken up by some 
 anti-mishnical Rabbins". (See Exercit. 19. 35.^ 
 And again, " The institution of the rite of 
 baptism is no where mentioned in the old Tes- 
 tament. There is no example of it in those 
 ancient records, nor was it ever used in the ad- 
 mission of proselytes, while the Jewish church 
 continued. No mention of it occurs in Philo, 
 in Josephus, in Jesus the Son of Syrach, nor 
 in the evangelical history. This Rabbinical 
 opinion therefore owes its rise to the Taunerai 
 or anti-mishnical doctors after the destruction 
 of their city. The opinion of some learned men 
 therefore about the transferring of a Jewish bap- 
 tismal rite, (which in reality did not then exist") 
 by the Lord Jesus for the use of his disciples is 
 destitute of all probability." — see Tlieologonme- 
 na. Lib. 5. Digress. 4. 
 
 Dr. Jennings observes : " But after all, it 
 remains to be proved, not only that christian 
 baptism was instituted in the room of Jewish 
 proselyte baptism, but that the Jews had an\ 
 such baptism in our Saviour's time. The ear- 
 liest accounts we have of it are in the Mishna 
 
16 
 
 and Gemera, the former compiled, as the Jews 
 assert, by Rabbi Jnda in the second century, 
 though learned men in general bring it several 
 centuries lower ; the latter not till the seventh 
 century. There is not a Avord of it in Philo, nor 
 yet in Josephus, though he gives an account of 
 the proselyting of the Idumeans by Hyrcanus. 
 Indeed on this occasion he mentions only cir- 
 cumcision as the rite of initiation, and saith 
 that upon receiving this rite and living accord- 
 ing to the Jewish law, they from that time be- 
 came Jews. And notwithstanding he speaks 
 of John's baptism, yet it is under a veiy differ- 
 ent notion from the proselyte baptism spoken 
 of by the mishnical Rabbins". (See Jewish Ant. 
 B.l.c. m.p. 136. j And again, page 138 : " Up- 
 on the whole it is more likely the Jews took the 
 hint of proselyte baptism from the christians 
 after our Saviour's time, than that He borrow- 
 ed his baptism from theirs, which, m henever it 
 came into practice, was one of those additions 
 to the law of God, which He severely censures. 
 However that may be, there wants more evi- 
 dence of its being as ancient as our Saviour s 
 time, than I apprehend can be produced, to 
 ground any argument upon it in relation to 
 christian baptism". 
 
 Dr. Benson, another eminent psedobaptist 
 says : " I have not in the old Testament found 
 any instance of one person's washing another by 
 
17 
 
 way of consecration, purification, or sanctifica- 
 tion : except that of Moses, his washing Aaron 
 and his sons when he set them apart unto the 
 office of priests. (Lev. viii. 6.) 1 cannot find 
 that the Jews do at present practice any such 
 thing as that of baptising the proselytes that go 
 over to them, though they are said to make 
 them wash themselves. Where is there any 
 intimation of such a practice among the Jews 
 before the coming of our Lord ? If any one 
 could produce any clear testimony of that kind 
 from the old Testament, the apocrypha, Jose- 
 phus, or Philo, that would be of great moment. 
 In former times proselytes coming over from 
 Heathenism to the Jewish religion used to wash 
 themselves ; which is a very diflferent thing from 
 baptism, or persons being washed by another. 
 I do not absolutely deny that the Jews initiated 
 proselytes by baptism, but I mention these diffi- 
 culties and objections with regard to the fact". 
 See Paraphrase and Notes on Epist. of Paul, 
 p. 641, 642. second edit. 
 
 But notwithstanding the powerful arguments 
 adduced against this opinion by some of the 
 most eminent paedobaptist writers ; if Jewish 
 proselyte baptism is to be the foundation of 
 christian baptism, it is most certain that the 
 latter ought not to be administered by sprink- 
 ling, since the Jews required their proselytes, 
 whether men, women or children, to dip them- 
 
18 
 
 selves — this is allowed on all hands. Maimo- 
 nides, who wrote in the twelfth century, says ; 
 " There must be water sufficient for the clipping 
 of the whole body of a man at once, and such 
 the wise men reckon to be a cubit square, and 
 three cubits in depth". And again : " Where- 
 ever washing of the flesh, and w ashing of clothes 
 are mentioned in the law, nothing else is meant 
 but the dipping of the whole body in a conflu- 
 ence of water, and that if he dip his whole body 
 except the tip of his little finger he is still in his 
 uncleanness : and that all unclean persons who 
 are dipped in their clothes, their dipping is right, 
 because the waters penetrate to them, not being 
 separated by their clothes". 
 
 The divine origin of New Testament baptism, 
 is I think clearly proved by the questions which 
 were put, first, by the Priests and Levites to 
 John, and secondly, by Christ to the chief 
 Priests and Elders respecting John's baptism. 
 We are told, that " The Jews sent Priests and 
 Levites from Jerusalem to John, saying. Who 
 art thou1 And he confessed and denied not, 
 but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they 
 asked him, Who then, art thou Elias ? And 
 he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet ? and 
 he answered, no. Then said they unto him, 
 Who art thou, that we may give an answer to 
 them that sent us, what sayest thou of thyself? 
 Now they who were sent were of the Pharisees ; 
 
19 
 
 and they asked him and said unto him, why 
 baptisest thou ? If thou be not that Christ, &c. 
 &c." From this passage it is evident that a 
 considerable sensation had been produced 
 among the inhabitants of Jerusalem, by a 
 report that some remarkable person was bap- 
 tising in the wilderness of Judea, and that they 
 sent Priests and Levites to ascertain who he 
 was, and what were his claims. The Jews 
 universally were looking for that prophet whose 
 coming had been foretold by Moses, and who, 
 according to general expectation, was to efiect 
 a great change in their political and ecclesiasti- 
 cal condition ; when therefore they lieai-d that 
 John administered a rite so truly original, they 
 sent to know who this person could be ; and 
 when he confessed that he was not Elias, nor 
 that prophet, they immediately said, Why bap- 
 tisest thou? Where are your credentials for 
 introducing and practising this new ceremony? 
 Now if proselyte baptism had been so com- 
 mon a thing among the Jews, as some suppose, 
 can it be imagined that the inhabitants of Jeru- 
 salem would have been surprised at hearing 
 that John was baptising in the wilderness — or 
 that they would have sent Pjiests and Levites, 
 to inquire of him wlio he Avas — or that these 
 Priests, who also were Pharisees, and of 
 course well acquainted with the laws and cus- 
 toms of the Jews, would, upon seeing liim 
 
20 
 
 baptise, ask liim if he were the Christ, or tliat 
 great Prophet expected by all Israel ? No; it is 
 evident from these very circumstances, that the 
 ordinance of baptism, was an innovation ; the 
 novelty of which, led these people to suspect 
 that it might be one of the rites of that new dis- 
 pensation of things which was to attend the 
 introduction of iVIessiah's kingdom, then so 
 generally expected. 
 
 Again : Our Lord's question to the chief 
 priests and Elders, pleads strongly for the 
 divine authority of John's Baptism. " The bap- 
 tism of John, whence w^as it, from heaven or of 
 men? And they reasoned among themselves, 
 saying, if we shall say from heaven, He will 
 say unto us, why did ye not then believe him ? 
 But if we shall say of men, we fear the people, 
 for all men hold John as a Prophet. And they 
 answered Jesus and said, we cannot tell". Now 
 had the baptism of John been borrowed from 
 any similar rite existing among the Jews, the 
 priests would have been at no loss to have an- 
 swered our Lord's inquiry; they might have 
 said with justice, it is taken from the traditions 
 of the Elders — nor need they have feared the 
 indignation of the people, in openly declaring 
 a circumstance which must have been well 
 known to the Jews, and highly gratifying to 
 their national vanity : that they did not so reply 
 is an unanswerable argument against the opinion 
 
21 
 
 that proselyte baptism prevailed among the 
 Jews in the days of Christ ; and because they 
 had no such plea, they were silent, for they did 
 not choose to condemn themselves for not be- 
 lieving- the testimony of one, whose message 
 and ordinance were of divine appointment. 
 
 Secondly, we shall shew that baptism is a 
 positive duty binding upon all who profess faith 
 in Jesus Christ. 
 
 The duties which Christianity enjoins upon its 
 discij)les are classed under two heads ; moral 
 and positive. The former arise from the moral 
 relation or fitness of things, and approve them- 
 selves to the consciences of all intellectual 
 beings ; the latter, are founded upon an ex- 
 press command, and derive their obligation 
 from the authority by which they are enforced : 
 such are the two ordinances of the christian 
 church — baptism and the Lord's supper. 
 
 To love God with all our heart and our 
 neiglibonr as ourselves are moral duties, origi- 
 nating in our relation to God and man ; and 
 cannot be violated without dishonoring the 
 divine character and disturbing the laws of 
 social order and happiness : but positive duties 
 have a very different aspect — they do not arise 
 from the moral relations of men, nor are they 
 discoverable by the light of reason. Emanating 
 from the sovereign will of the legislator, they 
 must of necessity be revealed before they can 
 
22 
 
 be known, and when known, they demand 
 obedience from those only of whom they are 
 required. The authority of moral duties is 
 universal and immutable, while the influence 
 of positive duties is of a particular and tempo- 
 rary nature. 
 
 Thus to do justice, and to love mercy, are 
 moral duties binding upon all men ; but to offer 
 a lamb of a year old for sacrifice, to circumcise 
 a male child on the eighth day, to dip seven 
 times in the river Jordan, were positive duties : 
 the propriety of which would never have been 
 known without an immediate revelation, and 
 the obligation to perform which rested with 
 those only of whom they were required. The 
 command given to Abraham to take his son, 
 his only son Isaac, and to offer him up for a 
 burnt offering upon Mount Moriah, obliged him 
 to obey that extraordinary injunction. So like- 
 wise those precepts of a more general nature 
 which were given to the Israelites, as circumci- 
 sion and the passover, imposed upon tliat peo- 
 ple the obligation to observe them with fidelity 
 through ail their generations. But these laws 
 were not binding upon the surrounding nations 
 lying in heathen darkness, nor did they incur 
 the threatened penalty by not observing them, 
 since they were given to the Israelites as the 
 people whom God had chosen, and they were 
 required of those only who worshipped Jehovah 
 
23 
 
 the God of Israel. Had an Israelite been 
 asked why he circumcised at all ? why he cir- 
 cumcised only his male children? why he cir- 
 cumcised them on the eighth day? — or concern- 
 ing the passover why he killed a lamb ? why he 
 sprinkled the blood upon the posts of his door? 
 why he eat the flesh roasted with fire, with un- 
 leavened bread and bitter herbs ? he would 
 have answered immediately, *' these are the 
 ordinances which Jehovah hath commanded us 
 to observe through all our generations. 
 
 Upon the introduction of Christianity a new 
 order of things took place, in which the moral 
 purity of the Mosaic dispensation was preserv- 
 ed, while its ceremonial rites were superseded 
 by ordinances less burthensome indeed, but 
 not less obligatory. Baptism is one of these 
 ordinances. It is founded upon the command 
 of God, and cannot be neglected without incur- 
 ring his displeasure. The law of the case is 
 simple, yet positive : every thing is expressed 
 with clearness and nothing is left to the judge- 
 ment or pleasure of the administrator. 
 
 As the authority of new Testament ordinan- 
 ces consists in their being instituted by a divine 
 command, so the validity of them depends upon 
 their being administered according to the rides 
 laid down in the command. To depart from 
 the law of an institution, is to depart from the 
 institution itself, and to administer a rite of our 
 
24 
 
 own in the room of that which God has ordain- 
 ed. Had an Israehte presumed to deviate from 
 the rules given respecting the passover — had he 
 chosen to sprinkle the blood upon the floor 
 rather than upon the door posts — to boil the 
 lamb instead of roasting it — to eat it with sweet 
 instead of bitter herbs — he would not have kept 
 the Lord's passover, but a rite of his own and 
 in so doing he would have incurred the divine 
 displeasure. 
 
 In the celebration of the Lord's Supper, 
 Christ has ordained that bread and wine should 
 be taken in remembrance of him. Should any 
 society of christians substitute water for wine, 
 or meat for bread ; such a ceremony, though they 
 might call it the Lord's supper, would bear no 
 relation to the institution appointed by the re- 
 deemer, nor would it be an ordinance of the 
 New Testament : so likewise baptism to be 
 valid must be performed agreeably to the laiv of 
 the institution. The subjects as well as the 
 mode must accord with the precept and prac- 
 tice of the New Testament ; to alter either of 
 these is to perform a new rite, and not the one 
 which Christ has ordained. 
 
 Had our Lord commanded us to sprinkle 
 infants, it would be our duty to do it, and it 
 would be a direct violation of his law to change 
 either the mode or the subject : but he has not 
 given such a command, and therefore we reject 
 
_ 25 
 
 infant sprinklini^ as an ordinance of men. To 
 plead for this practice as some do on the ground 
 that what is not prohibited, is lawful, is to 
 open a wide door indeed for the admission of 
 human inventions into the worship of God. It 
 is by this negative mode of reasoning- that pa- 
 pists defend the use of the wafer, the crucifix, 
 the holy water, &c. &c., and episcopalians 
 those numerous ceremonies once so burdensome 
 to the consciences of non-conformists. Surely 
 every rite practised in the christian church 
 should be founded upon an express divine com- 
 mand ; and what is not supported by a new 
 Testament statute is of men and not of God. 
 
 Should it be asked why we baptise at all ? 
 why we baptise believers only? why we baptise 
 by immersion? why we receive the baptised 
 into the church to teach them the way of God 
 more perfectly ? we reply because such is the 
 command of Christ, and such was the practice 
 of the apostles. Ministers are first to preach 
 the gospel — they are then to baptise those who 
 make a credible profession of faith — and they 
 are to instruct those whom they baptise in the 
 doctrines of Christ's kingdom — dMg-Mvng amwc, 
 rri^siv Tavra teaching them to observe with all dili- 
 gence and fidelity, the commandments of our 
 saviour. Tri^uv signifies to observe with care, or 
 to keep with diligence and fidelity — thus Matt, 
 xxiii. 3. " All therefore whatsoever they bid 
 
 E 
 
you mgitv observe, m^sin %a.i mnin', that observe, 
 and do". See also Matt. xix. 17, and John xv. 
 10, and xvii. 6, in which places the word sig- 
 nifies to keep the commandments of God. When 
 therefore we read that Christ commanded the 
 apostles tQ teach those whom they baptised to 
 observe his precepts, we naturally conclude 
 that they were capable of understanding and 
 practising the things commanded. 
 
 When we consider the decided manner in 
 which the scriptures speak of believer's bap- 
 tism, it is surprising that any persons professing- 
 to teach Christianity, should be so ignorant or 
 so prejudiced, as to assert, that the " Baptists 
 have not in scripture either precept, pattern, 
 precedent or example to rest upon", and to 
 boast of attempting " to put them and their 
 system out of the hihle\ What is there in our 
 system that is opposed to the purity and honour 
 of religion, that we should be thus threatened 
 with expulsion ? we preach repentance and re- 
 mission of sins in the name of the Lord Jesus, 
 for so we are commanded Luke xxiv. 47. We 
 baptise those who do repent and believe the 
 gospel agreeably to the injunction in Mark xvi. 
 16. We baptise them by immersion, because 
 such was the practice of the first administrators 
 of the ordinance ; Matt. iii. 6, John iii. 22, 23, 
 Acts viii. 36, 39. And yet our opponents de- 
 clare that we have neither precept, pattern nor 
 
t7 
 
 example in the bible for our practice". — in plain 
 language, that there is no command to baptise 
 believers, nor any instance of persons being 
 baptised on a profession of faith in the new 
 Testament. But we ask, did not our Lord com- 
 mand the apostles to baptise those who believ- 
 ed ? Did not Peter call upon the Jews who 
 were converted through his ministry to be bap- 
 tised, and ^id they not immediately receive 
 this ordinance ? Was not Ananias sent with a 
 divine command to Saul bidding him to arise 
 and be baptised, and did he not immediately 
 obey ? If these things are so, (and who can 
 deny them ?) what becomes of the charge so 
 confidently brought against us ? 
 
 Can the Paedobaptists produce such authori- 
 ty for the sprinkling of babes ? Can they pro- 
 duce any plain testimony from scripture? If 
 they can, why do they not furnish us with one 
 express command, one solitary example in sup- 
 port of this rite? Bishop Burnet, Wall, Fuller, 
 Palmer, and many more paedobaptists, con- 
 fess that there is neither precept, iiile, nor 
 example in the new Testament for infant bap- 
 tism. Why then do modern paedobaptists assume 
 this high tone and accuse us of unscriptural 
 conduct ? They must forget surely that their 
 practice of sprinkling unconscious babes has 
 been allowed by their own partizans to be with- 
 out new Testament authority, to be derived 
 
28 
 
 from tradition, to be inferred from an old Tes- 
 tament ordinance, and to be practised on the 
 ground of expediency. 
 
 Whatever differences of opinion may exist 
 among the baptists on other points of doctrine, 
 they are all agreed that baptism is founded 
 upon a positive divine law, and is binding on 
 believers only; and we challenge our opponents 
 to disprove this statement from scrij)tural testi- 
 mony : nor are there wanting many in com- 
 munion with independent churches, who are 
 compelled to acknowledge that we are right ; 
 yet from motives of policy or self-indulgence, 
 they decline to follow the Lord through this 
 despised ordinance. The number of these dry 
 baptists, as they may be called, is by no means 
 inconsiderable, they are to be found in almost 
 all societies of professing christians, and we 
 not unfrequently hear them vindicate their neg- 
 lect of an institution, which their judgements 
 approve, on the ground that it is a non-essential 
 — a ceremony of very minor imjjortance — and 
 that they cayi he saved without it. To such we 
 reply that there are no non-essentials in the 
 religion of Jesus, for though baptism is not 
 necessary to salvation, it is essential to that 
 perfect obedience to the will of Christ, which 
 recognises his authority, nor can that be trivial 
 and unimportant which he instituted and sanc- 
 tioned by his example. 
 
29 
 
 Thirdly, in further considering the nature of 
 baptism, we observe that it is an ordinance of 
 initiation. 
 
 We do not mean by this expression that bap- 
 tism makes a person partaker of those spiritual 
 blessings which accompany regeneration, for he 
 is supposed to be regenerated before he is bap- 
 tised ; nor do we believe that a man is more fit 
 for church-membership after baptism than he 
 was before, in consequence of his receiving any 
 moral or spiritual qualification by attending 
 to this ordinance : but we believe that it is a 
 rite by which believers publicly profess their 
 renunciation of the world, and their subjection 
 to the authority of Christ; and that all who 
 thus acknowledged Him, were received into 
 the church in the days of the apostles. " Then 
 they that gladly received his word were bap- 
 tised ; and the same day there were added 
 unto them about three thousand souls. And 
 they continued stedfastly in the apostle's doc- 
 trine, and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, 
 and in prayers". — see Acts ii. 41, 42. 
 
 This was a public authoritative illustration of 
 our Lord's commission. It took place at Jeru- 
 salem, when the apostles and disciples were 
 assembled to the number of about one hundred 
 and twenty, and was the act of t/iat body whose 
 conduct was to form a precedent of the highest 
 authority to the ministers and churches of Christ 
 
30 
 
 in future ages ; we therefore inquire what the 
 apostles did with those persons whom they 
 baptised ? The scriptures inform us that they 
 received them into communion with the church. 
 Here then we perceive that the baptism of be- 
 lievers possesses a positive significance, that it 
 has a close relation to the external privileges of 
 the church : but the sprinkling of infants among 
 dissenters, as far as we can ascertain, is attended 
 with neither external nor internal religious be- 
 nefit. The supposition that any spiritual bless- 
 ing is conveyed by baptism, cannot be support- 
 ed without allowing the popish doctrine of bap- 
 tismal regeneration ; determinately as we reject 
 this hydra-headed dogma of anti-christian su- 
 perstition, we fear it is more deeply intrenched 
 in the theological system of paedobaptists than 
 they are willing to confess — and they must par- 
 don us if we suspect them on this ground. 
 How can we do otherwise, when we hear so 
 many of them talk so gravely of putting their 
 children into covenant by baptism I 
 
 Viewing baptism as an initiatory ordinance, 
 by which those that receive it publicly acknow- 
 ledge themselves the disciples of Christ, and 
 are recognized as such by the church, let us 
 inquire how the case stands in relation to the 
 infants of paedobaptist dissenters. 
 
 The paedobaptists in England may be ranked 
 under three classes; papists, episcopalians, and 
 
31 
 
 dissenters, and these all hold baptism to be an 
 ordinance of initiation. 
 
 The church of Rome says : " Sin, whether 
 contracted by birth from om- first parents, or 
 committed of ourselves, by the admirable vir- 
 tue of this sacrament (baptism), is remitted and 
 pardoned ; by baptism we are joined and knit 
 to Christ as members to the head ; by baptism 
 we are signed with a character which can never 
 be blotted out of our souls ; it opens to every one 
 of us the gate of heaven". Dr. Milner, a popish 
 dignitary, when comparing the church of Rome 
 and the church of England together in refer- 
 ence to their ordinances, in his letters on the 
 sacraments, says, " Look on the other hand 
 at the Catholic church ; you will find the same 
 importance still attached to this sacred rite 
 (baptism) on the part of the people and the 
 clergy, which is observable in the acts of the 
 apostles, and in the writings of the holy fathers; 
 the former being ever impatient to have their 
 children baptised, the latter equally solicitous 
 to administer in due time, and with the most 
 scrupulous exactness : thus as matters stand 
 now, the two churches are not upon a level 
 with respect to this first and common mean of 
 sanctification — the members of one have a much 
 greater moral certainty of the remission of that 
 sin in which we are all born, and of their hav- 
 ing been heretofore actually received into the 
 
32 
 
 church of Christ, than the members of the other 
 liave". — ^j«o-e 53, part 2. 
 
 Here regeneration, sanctification, union to 
 Christ, and eternal life are all represented as 
 flowing" from infant baptism. 
 
 The church of England declares that '* by 
 baptism the subject is made a member of Christ, 
 a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom 
 of heaven." — This is coming very near to the 
 declaration of the church of Rome. Firsts 
 the child baptised is said to be made " a mem- 
 ber of Christ," which denotes personal union 
 to the Saviour. Secondly, he is called " a child 
 of God," and is said to be regenerated ; thirdhj, 
 he is styled " an inheritor of the kingdom of 
 heaven," and all this in virtue of his baptism — 
 so says the church of England, and so she 
 believes, and in consequence refuses what she 
 is pleased to denominate christian burial to all 
 children who have not been baptised. 
 
 Paedobaptist dissenters say that baptism puts 
 the child into the covenant — thus good Mr. 
 Henry — " The Gospel contains not only a 
 doctrine, but a covenant, and by baptism we 
 are brought into that covenant ;" and Mr. Hor- 
 sey says, '* We being baptised are regularly 
 admitted into the christian dispensation." 
 
 Mr. Geo. Clayton says, " Such full assurance 
 of hope have 1 in the efficacy of this saa-ament 
 (infant sprinkling), that I doubt not but it will 
 
33 
 
 appear in that day when the secrets of divine 
 operation shall be disclosed, that the seeds 
 and principles of the better life were in some 
 instances infused into the mind at the very 
 hour when baptismal water was externally 
 applied in the name of the Father/' 
 
 Dr. Williams says, " was I baptised in 
 infancy? then have I an additional incentive 
 to gratitude ; for from that early period has 
 pardon of sin, free salvation, eternal life, with 
 every new covenant blessing been sealed to 
 me." " I was then added to the church, that 
 r 7mgJit be saved. 1 was then constituted a 
 visible member of Christ, that I mio^ht he con- 
 formed to Him, I was then put in the way I 
 should go, that, when grown up, 1 might not 
 depart from it. I was then visibly ingrafted 
 into Christ, that I might bring forth much 
 fruit, and thus be found his approved disciple. " 
 " From a state of distance I was brought near. 
 From a stranger 1 was made a fellow-citi- 
 zen with the saints, and of the household of 
 God." ( Antipcsdohaptism exam. vol. ii. j)p. 299, 
 300, 301.; 
 
 So say the independents — so say the epis- 
 copalians — and so says the church of Rome ! 
 They all unite in ascribing grace and salvation 
 to infant baptism, they all rally round this cere- 
 mony which is the pillar of popery and the 
 prop of that stupendous system of will- worship 
 
 F 
 
34 
 
 which has so long opposed the progress of 
 divine truth. 
 
 But let us ask, into what covenant are infants 
 introduced by baptism ? That which is called 
 in the New Testament, " The old covenatit,'' 
 (see Heh. viii. 13. J was external, national, and 
 temporary ; it belonged to the Jews and their 
 infant offspring, was a yoke of bondage, and 
 has long since been abolished. The new cove- 
 nant is peculiar to the christian church, and is 
 that covenant of grace which is "ordered in all 
 things, and sure" with respect to its subjects as 
 well as its blessings ; both being chosen and 
 appointed of God himself — Is this the covenant 
 into which infants are introduced by baptism ? 
 
 Again, What infants are brought into this 
 covenant? are all? this seems to be implied in 
 those cases where all are baptised — or only the 
 infants of believing parents ? If so, why bap- 
 tise the children of unbelievers, and give to 
 them the sign and the seal of a covenant to 
 which their parents are avowed strangers? 
 But are all the infants of believers in the cove- 
 nant ? If this is contended for, and their right 
 to baptism inferred from thence, how does this 
 correspond with after circumstances. 
 
 Again, how come they into this covenant ? Is 
 it by natural descent, as the offspring of be- 
 lieving ]3arents ? Are they born in it as the 
 children of the Jews were born in the Abra- 
 
35 
 
 hamic covenant ? Jf so, do we not maintain 
 that persons are christians by natural gene- 
 ration — a position at awful variance with the 
 testimony of divine revelation, which declares, 
 that everi/ child of Adam is conceived in sin 
 and shapen in ini(|uity ; and says of the true 
 children of the covenant, that " they are bom, 
 not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of 
 the will of man, but of God." 
 
 Or, are they actually put into this covenant 
 by baptism ? Do the few dro[)s of water 
 sprinkled upon the face of the child bring him 
 into covenant-relation with God ? We read 
 (Heb. viii. Q.) that it is the prerogative of God 
 himself to enter into covenant with his people ; 
 but upon this principle it is made to be the 
 work of man : or does the Holy Ghost intro- 
 duce the child into this covenant when he is 
 sprinkled ? In how many instances then, does 
 he forsake the work of his own hand, and 
 leave the covenant infant an everlasting stranger 
 to covenant blessings ! 
 
 Again, as admission into this covenant ne- 
 cessarily supposes the enjoyment of certain 
 privileges, let us inquire what are the peculiar 
 benefits resulting to the children of pajdo- 
 baptist dissenters by virtue of their baptism ? 
 Those who were baptised by tiie Apostles 
 were admitted to the [irivilcges of the church — 
 does this consequence follow the baptism of 
 
36 
 
 infants by dissenters? — certainly not. Are they 
 holier than other children? are their under- 
 standings more enlightened, their Mills better 
 regulated, their affections more sanctified ? the 
 many awful instances of degeneracy and de- 
 pravity in children who have been duly baptised 
 in infancy loudly answer, no! Do psedobaptist 
 dissenters receive any into their communion 
 upon the mere circumstance of their having 
 been baptised in infancy ? does any man plead 
 his baptism when an infant as a sufficient 
 ground for his admission to the communion of 
 the saints ? 
 
 By the church of Rome and by the chujch of 
 England, baptised infants are declared to be 
 members of those communities, and have an 
 undisputed right to all church privileges ; this 
 is rational, and accords with the professed prin- 
 ciple that baptism regenerates its subject; hence 
 confirmation, church-membership, pious death, 
 christian burial, and assumed glorious resur- 
 rection, all follow upon baptism as the pro- 
 curing cause : but what external or internal 
 benefit do the children of dissenting parents 
 enjoy by baptism, and what is the nature of 
 that covenatit into which they are said to be 
 introduced ? 
 
 We come then to the unavoidable conclusion, 
 that paidobaptist dissenters, to be consistent 
 with themselves, ought to admit infants to 
 
37 
 
 communion ; indeed there me many of them 
 Avho feel the force of our statement, that to 
 consider chiklren proper subjects for baptism, 
 and to deny that they are fit for church-mem- 
 bei'ship, is a paradox not to be reconciled upon 
 the principles of reason or revelation. 
 
 If we look back to the earliest ages of the 
 christian church, we shall find that baptism 
 and the Lord's supper were concomitant ordi- 
 nances ; that the persons who received the 
 former were always admitted to the latter — 
 and in after times, when infant baptism crept 
 into the church, the great patrons of that 
 uiiscriptural rite, Cyprian, Jerom, Austin, and 
 Pope Innocent, were strenuous for infant com- 
 mnnion, because they saw that both ordinances 
 were equally important; and that if infants 
 were fit subjects for the one, they were worthy 
 partakers of the other. This conviction actu- 
 ally led to infant communion, which prevailed 
 in the Latin church during several centuries, 
 and is practised in the Greek church to the 
 present day; and it ought certainly to be 
 observed in every church that admits of infant 
 baptism, for are not the ordinances of baptism 
 and the Lord's supper commanded by the 
 same authority, are they not of the same religi- 
 ous importance, are they not the standing institu- 
 tions of the Gospel system, and equally rec^uired 
 of those who enter into the visible church ? 
 
38 
 
 If infants are really, as it is said they are, 
 taken into covenant by baptism, ivhy not bring; 
 them to the LorcVs table ? if it be replied that 
 by reason of their tender age they cannot 
 discern the Lord's body, nor partake of the 
 elements in remembrance of him, this very 
 objection we make to their being baptised ; they 
 cannot exercise faith and repentance, v.hich 
 are required of all who receive baptism, and 
 without which no one has a right to the ordi- 
 nance : " He that believeth and is baptised shall 
 be saved." " If thou believest with all thine 
 heart thou mayest." ''Repent and be baptised 
 every one of you in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus." \et baptism is administered to infants 
 notwithstanding that they are devoid of its pre- 
 requisite qualifications ; why then hesitate to 
 administer to them the supper of the Lord, 
 simply because they are incajiable of perceiving 
 the nature and design of that institution ? 
 
 The time must come when paedobaptist dis- 
 senters will see the absurdity of their system, 
 and when they will either explode infant bap- 
 tism, or introduce infant communion ; by this 
 means alone can they give the appearance of 
 consistency to a practice which in its present 
 form is as destitute of foundation in reason, as 
 of support from divine revelation. 
 
 There are other consequences connected 
 with infant baptism which are overlooked by 
 
39 
 
 the calviiiistic paedobaptist, and which are at 
 variance with the whole of his religious system. 
 It destroys the distinction between the church 
 and the world maintained in the scriptures. 
 It practically denies the doctrines of personal 
 election and particular redemption, for there 
 can be no election to a particular benefit when 
 all are partakers : this universality of grace is 
 strongly implied in the administration of infant 
 baptism, and it is the prominent doctrine of 
 those national establishments which pronounce 
 every subject of their spiritual jarisdiction, a 
 member of Christ, a child of God, and an in- 
 heritor of the kingdom of Heaven. Thus it is 
 that we find personal election, particular re- 
 demption, and justification by faith, denied by 
 the Romish and episcopalian clergy in general 
 — for how can they hold doctrines so subversive 
 of the opinion that every child is made a subject 
 of grace by baptism ? The fact is that infant 
 baptism, traced to its source, and followed to 
 its legitimate consequences, will be found to 
 arise out of the most subtle system of Arminiau 
 policy ever devised ; and to be the most pow- 
 erful practical expedient for supporting and 
 propagating the doctrines of universal grace 
 and general redemption, within the compass 
 of human agency. It jnoceeds upon the ge- 
 neral principle, not only that all men are alike 
 eligible to salvation, but that grace^ of which 
 
40 
 
 baptism is the outward sign and seal, is given 
 to all men. 
 
 Should the calvinistic paedobaptist, who sees 
 the connection between the practice of infant 
 baptism and the two grand points of Arminian 
 theology, assert, that he does not admit the bap- 
 tismal regeneration of the church of England, 
 710)' yet the baptismal covenant relation so zea- 
 lously maintained by the Independents, but 
 that he regards the ordinance as affording an 
 opportunity of addressing parents on the duties 
 of their parental character — then we declare 
 that the application of water to the infant for 
 such a purpose mereli/, is not infant baptism ; it 
 is a service, called indeed by that name, but 
 not practised till of late by any body of pro- 
 fessing christians in any age or country. It is 
 the mere act of sprinkling a child's face : it is 
 a ceremony sui generis, dift'eriug in its nature, 
 use, and design, from that general system of 
 psedobaptism which is a rite instituted as " an 
 outward and Aisible sign of an inward and 
 spiritual grace ;" and not to teach parents their 
 duties in i-elation to their children ! 
 
 Fourthly, We shall consider the perpetuity of 
 baptism as an ordinance of the christian church. 
 
 As baptists we have not only to defend the 
 ordinance of baptism from those innovations, 
 which, by changing the primitive mode and 
 subject, have changed its nature and design; 
 
41 
 
 but, strange to say, we have now to contend 
 for the perpetuity of an ordinance which has 
 been recognised, in the practice of the whole 
 christian church, for nearly two thousand years! 
 Perha}3s this is only one of the first fruits of 
 that temporising spirit which would amalgamate 
 the world with the church, and, under the mask 
 of liberality and charity, sacrifice the doctrines 
 and ordinances of the gospel to the carnal 
 objections and prejudices of fashionable pro- 
 fessors. 
 
 Is there any thing in the word of God which 
 renders the perpetuity of this institution doubt- 
 ful ? Is there any thing in the institution itself 
 inconsistent with the spirit of Christianity, and 
 which pleads for its abolition ? Is the church 
 invested with a discretionary power to rescind 
 at pleasure a doctrine or commandment which 
 may be deemed obsolete ? Is the ordinance so 
 completely a non-essential, that the neglect of 
 it involves no guilt and merits no reproof? 
 Can it 'be said that the ends and objects of 
 baptism are not the same at all times and 
 throughout all ages ? To these inquiries we an- 
 swer in the negative, and we declare, that so 
 far from finding any thing in the ordinance 
 itself, or in the word of God to justify its dis- 
 continuance, we are furnished from those very 
 sources with the most convincing evidence of 
 its high authority and lasting obligation. 
 
 G 
 
42 
 
 It is principally objected against the perpe- 
 tuity of baptism, that it was instituted as a local 
 and temporary rite on the first promulgation 
 of the gospel, in order to distinguish those who 
 had come over from Judaism or idolatry to the 
 faith of Christ ; and that, being merely an ordi- 
 nance of proselytism, it was not intended by its 
 divine founder to be perpetuated from age to 
 age with the christian dispensation : this is an 
 assertion without proof; mere conjecture, un- 
 supported by evidence deduced from the 
 oracles of God ; a principle of assumption by 
 which the truth and permanency of the whole 
 gospel system might be assailed with as much 
 force as any one of its peculiar doctrines. 
 
 Is it rational to conclude, that our Lord 
 would have introduced an institution of such 
 short duration to the notice of the Apostles, in 
 the solemn and dignified language of the text? 
 " All power is given unto me in heaven and in 
 earth : go ye therefore and teach all nations, 
 baptisitig them in the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching 
 them to observe all things whatsoever 1 have 
 commanded you : and lo, I am with you even 
 unto the end of the world. Amen. " Had bap- 
 tism been instituted as a " local and temporary 
 rite'" would Christ have connected it with the 
 general promulgation of the gospel ? Would 
 he have made a " local and temporary rite" a 
 
43 
 
 pioiniiient part of a permanent system? Would 
 he have given to it so distinguished a place 
 in a dispensation which was to be published 
 among all nations to the end of time ? Why 
 did he promise to be with his ministers to the 
 end of the world, to encourage them in the 
 administration of an ordinance, that was not 
 designed to be as extensive and permanent as 
 the system, of which it makes so conspicuous 
 a part ? 
 
 May we not rather believe, that, had Christ 
 intended baptism to be nothing more than " a 
 local rite", he would have explained this circum- 
 stance to his Apostles, and that they would 
 have made known, to the first ministers and 
 churches, his mind on this subject ? And 
 would not some of those churches at least, have 
 ceased the practice, had they understood from 
 apostolic authority that it was only a "tempo- 
 rary ordinance" ? But in direct opposition to all 
 this, the command was clearly given by Christ; 
 it was constantly practised by the Apostles ; 
 and it has continued in the christian church, 
 without interruption, down to the present time. 
 These are powerful evidences in support of the 
 perpetuity of believer's baptism. 
 
 We may further observe, that the perpetuity 
 of this ordinance is founded upon the continued 
 authority of our Lord's commission. I presume 
 it will be admitted on all sides, that when a law 
 
44 
 
 enforces the observance of two or more duties, 
 except there be some command to the contrary, 
 it enjoins the performance of each, and renders 
 the fulfilment of the one as indispensable as the 
 other : now in the apostolic commission there 
 are three things enjoined — preacliing, baptising, 
 and teaching, in the faithful discharge of which 
 duties, the divine influence is promised to the 
 end of the world. Why then is baptism to be 
 discontinued, while preaching and teaching are 
 still observed as essential parts of the christian 
 system ? 
 
 To obtain satisfaction on this important sub^ 
 ject we shall notice a few particulars connected 
 with our Lord's commission. First, it was given 
 by Christ when he was invested with all power 
 in heaven and in earth, and when he was about 
 to ascend to the right hand of God ; certainly 
 implying- that it was not to be superseded by 
 any authority among men. Secondly, it was 
 given to the Apostles as the chief ministers of 
 Christ, but not to them exclusively, for w^e find 
 others acting upon it who were not Apostles ; 
 Philip the deacon, the disciples who were scat- 
 tered abroad upon the persecution which arose 
 about Stephen, and Silas, who preached and 
 baptised in company with Paul at Philippi : by 
 all which it is evident that the commission was 
 understood to be a general rule for all whom 
 tjie Jioly Spirit might call to the work of 
 
45 
 
 the ministry, whether Apostles, Evangelists, 
 Pastors, or Teachers. Thirdly, the commis- 
 sion strictly enjoins preachins:, baptising, and 
 teaching ; placing them on one equal footing. 
 Fourthly, as the duties of the commission were 
 not exclusively attached to the apostolic office, 
 so neither was the conthmance of the commis- 
 sion itself confined to the apostolic age : this is 
 manifest from the promise of Christ, " Lo, I am 
 with you alway, eveti to the end of the world." 
 
 The words are 'iug r^g ewnXslag rou aiuvoc. '''■ EvCll WltU 
 
 the end of TimeT Now had Christ intended to 
 restrict his commission to the apostolic age, 
 would he not have expressed himself so defi- 
 nitely that the precise period of its termination 
 might have been known ? That the words sig- 
 nify " to the end of time" Avill appear from other 
 places where they occur. (il7«//. xiii. .39.) "The 
 harvest, ewTsXua roZ aiZiwc, kriv is the end of the 
 world." (Verse 40. j " So shall it be svrfi guvriXsia 
 roZ aiunog rovTov in the end of this world." {F. 49.) 
 ■'So shall it be iv rf gwTiXua rou a/'wi/oc. at the end 
 of the world. ' (3Iatt. xxiv. 3.) " What shall 
 
 be the sign of thy coming, xai T^g ewnXiiag roD a/ww?; 
 
 and of the end of the world." 
 
 Fifthly, There is nothing in the commission 
 that renders one part of more doubtful authority 
 than another: whatever argument is adduced 
 against the continuance of one of the injunctions 
 must equally affect the rest, for they all stand 
 
46 
 
 or fall together. Jf baptism is to be discon- 
 tinued, so must preaching and teaching, for they 
 were ordained at the same time, by the same di- 
 vine legislator, and in precisely the same form; 
 and therefore to reject baptism is to invalidate 
 the whole commission, and to leave the church 
 of Christ without any authority for the publi- 
 cation of the gospel. Sixthly, The connection 
 between faith; baptism, and salvation, main- 
 tained in the commission, strongly implies that 
 baptism was not instituted as a " local or 
 temporary ordinance ;" for the hope of salvation 
 by faith was professed by all the primitive con- 
 verts, and ivas a prereq^iisite to their baptism : 
 nor do we hesitate to affirm, that, if indeed 
 baptism can be proved to have been only " local 
 and temporary," then the obligation to believe 
 the gospel was binding only on those who lived 
 in the apostolic age, and salvation itself is a 
 temporary and local blessing. 
 
 Seventhly, Neither can the baptism enjoined 
 in our Lord's commission refer to that divine 
 influence, called elsewhere the baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost ; which, contrary to the plain 
 testimony and strict analogy of scripture, some 
 have affirmed. The Apostles, to whom the 
 command was given to preach and to baptise, 
 were not to enter upon the execution of their 
 office until they were endued with the Holy 
 Spirit ; thereby showing that the commission 
 
47 
 
 was to be fulfilled under his immediate agency. 
 ** And ye are witnesses of these things. And 
 behold, I send the promise of the Father upon 
 you, but tarry ye in the City of Jerusalem until 
 ye be endued with power from on high.'Y^wA"^ 
 xx'iv. 48, 49.) '* And being assembled together 
 with them he commanded them that they would 
 not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the 
 promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have 
 heard of me. For John truly baptised with water, 
 but ye shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost not 
 many days hence." (Acts i. 4, 5.) " Ye shall 
 receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come 
 upon you ; and ye shall be witnesses unto me 
 both in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and in 
 Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the 
 earth." (Acts i. 8.) "The same is He who shall 
 baptise you with the Holy Ghost." fTJ/a/^.iii. 11.^ 
 These latter words were spoken by John the 
 baptist when baptising some who were after- 
 ward Apostles. They contain a remarkable 
 prediction of the increase of Messiah's kingdom, 
 of the institution of the Apostolic office, and 
 of the gift of the Holy Ghost; and they are 
 applied by our Lord himself to the day of pen- 
 tecost, when the Apostles were as completely 
 immersed in the Holy Spirit as the body is 
 immersed in water at baptism ; they were over- 
 whelmed with his glorious presence and influ- 
 ences, w hich tilled the house where they were 
 
46 
 
 assembled. Dr. Campbell, though apaedobap- 
 tist, very properly renders the words of John 
 " he will baptise you in the Holy Spirit and 
 fire ; " and this agrees with the circumstances 
 of the fact as recorded by Luke. (See Acts 
 ii. 2, 3, 4.J " And suddenly there came a 
 sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty 
 wind, and it filled all the house where they 
 were sitting. And there appeared unto them 
 cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it sat upon 
 each of them ; and they were all filled with 
 the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other 
 tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. " 
 
 This miraculous communication of the Holy 
 Ghost, figuratively styled a baptism, relates 
 to Christ as the administrator, and to the Apos- 
 tles as the subjects; and we do not find the 
 inspired writers describing the extraordinary 
 operations of the Spirit as a baptism, except 
 in a figurative sense. 
 
 Again, in opposition to the notion that the 
 baptism specified in our Lord's commission 
 signifies the baptism of the Spirit, we observe, 
 that the Apostles on the day of pentecost went 
 forth and preached, boptising in ivater three 
 thousand who were converted to Christ ; that 
 they certainly understood the baptism in the 
 commission to mean ivater baptism, and did 
 accordingly immerse their converts in water ; 
 that they exhoited all who heard them to 
 
4d 
 
 believe in the Lord Jesus, and to be baptised 
 in water for the remission of sins ; (Acts ii. 37, 
 42. viii. 12. xxxv. 40.) ; that they even bap- 
 tised in ivater those who had previously re- 
 ceived the Holy Ghost ; (Acts x. 44, 48.) ; 
 that they continued to preach and to baptise 
 to the end of their days : and that when they 
 departed, they left their successors acting on 
 the commission as on a statute which was 
 in full vigour. These facts clearly shew that 
 they considered the reception of the Holy 
 Ghost and of water baptism to be two distinct 
 things ; and that the possession of the former 
 to any degree, did by no means destroy the 
 obligation to attend to the latter. " When Paul 
 was filled with the Holy Ghost, he arose and 
 was baptised." (Acts ix. 17, 18.) 
 
 Besides which, did the Apostles ever profess 
 to baptise in the Holy Ghost ? Did they ever in- 
 sinuate that they had power to bestow^ the Spirit? 
 and must they not have possessed that power, 
 if the baptism they were commanded to admi- 
 nister referred to the communication of divine 
 influence ? Have they in their epistles, in which 
 they have largely tieated on the work of the 
 Spirit, represented this work, in any of its forms, 
 as the baptism enjoined by Christ ? If water 
 baptism was not intended in the commission, 
 how came the Apostles to practise it, in con- 
 nexion with the other duties enjoined ? Why 
 
 H 
 
50 
 
 did they baptise in water the three thousand 
 on the day of pentecost, and especially, why 
 baptise those who had already received the 
 Holy Ghost? In a word, if the baptism com- 
 manded by our Lord is not to be understood lite- 
 rally, then were the Apostles the first broachers 
 of an error which promises to run parallel with 
 the progress of Christianity in our world ! 
 
 But the nature of the ordinance strongly 
 pleads on behalf of its perpetuity. If it be ad- 
 mitted, as in fact it is, by the church of Christ, 
 that external ordinances are not incompatible 
 with the spirit of Christianity, then I know of no 
 institution so fit to be the accompaniment of 
 faith, and the distinctive mark of a christian 
 profession, as baptism. It is both significant 
 and impressive ; it accords with the great end 
 of our religion, to separate men from the world 
 and to bring them into fellowship with God ; it 
 is a solemn act of divine worship ; a public 
 recognition of the Lord Jesus in his office of 
 Prophet, Priest and King in Zion; it is an open 
 avowal of our belief in that great mystery of 
 the gospel, the trinity of equal persons in the 
 unity of the Godhead. And shall this in- 
 structive rite be restricted to proselytes from 
 Judaism and idolatry ? Shall we take away 
 from any member of Christ's kingdom that 
 moral motive to propriety and holiness of con- 
 duct which is so forcibly urged by the Apostle, 
 
51 
 
 " shall we continue in sin that grace may 
 abound ? God forbid ! How shall we who are 
 dead to sin live any longer therein ? Know 
 ye not that so many of us as were baptised into 
 Jesus Christ were baptised into his death ? 
 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism 
 into death, that like as Christ was raised up 
 from the dead by the glory of the Father, even 
 so we also should walk in newness of life.'' 
 (Rom. vi. I, 2, 3,4.) 
 
 There are other consequences which result 
 from making baptism an ordinance of prose- 
 lytism. A line of distinction would be thereby 
 drawn between one class of professors and 
 another ; plainly implying that those who come 
 over from idolatry are less likely to be sin- 
 cere, and are therefore required to submit to a 
 severer test than others : upon this plan the 
 laws of Christ would be unequal in their 
 operations, and partial in their exactments, 
 and that equality in the moral condition of all 
 men, which the scriptures so decidedly main- 
 tain, would itself be rendered doubtful. "For 
 ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ 
 Jesus. For as many of you as have been bap- 
 tised into Christ, have put on Christ. There is 
 neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond 
 nor free, there is neither male nor female : for 
 ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. iii. 26, 
 27, 28.) " There is neither Greek nor Jew, 
 
52 
 
 circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, 
 Scythian, bond, nor free, but Christ is all and 
 in all.'YCo/. iii. 11.) 
 
 But again, the j3erpetuity of believer's baptism 
 is proved by the intimate relation it sustains to 
 the most important and permanent truths of 
 the christian dispensation. " There is one body, 
 and one spirit, even as ye are called in one 
 hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, 
 one baptism, one God and Father of all. ' 
 (Eph. iv. 5, 6.j Here the doctrine of baptism 
 stands like one of the seven pillars, which are 
 the strength and glory of the christian fabric. 
 Here it is presented to our view in connexion 
 with truths, which must constitute essential 
 parts of Christianity as long as Christianity shall 
 exist. Here it is adduced as a powerful mo- 
 tive to unity among the brethren. For there is 
 *' one body,'' or church, which comprehends all 
 the elect: there is '^ one spirif that animates 
 this body by his sacred influences, and by 
 whom all its members are called to be par- 
 takers of the glory of Christ : there is " otie 
 hope' of this calling which is common to the 
 whole : there is " one Lord," even Jesus, who 
 is the head of the body the church, and to 
 whom every member is required to render wqj-- 
 ship and obedience : there is " one faith," one 
 great rule and doctrine of faith, the gospel of 
 the ever blessed God : there is " one baptism' 
 
53 
 
 designed to accompany the profession of this 
 faith, as the outward sign : and there is " one 
 God and Father of all, who is above all and 
 through all," — the supreme ruler and disposer 
 of men and things, "who is in all" that believe, 
 by liis vital energies and grace, to afford them 
 strength and consolation. 
 
 It is the opinion of some that this passage 
 refers to the baptism of the Spirit, and not to 
 baptism in its literal sense ; it will be difficult, 
 however, to prove this, so long as it remains 
 upon record that the Apostles and primitive 
 ministers did actually baptise their converts, 
 anil that all who entered the church in those 
 times did enter it by baptism : besides, it may 
 be strongly argued that the Apostle is here 
 enumerating several distinct propositions, each 
 of which constitutes a first principle of the 
 christian profession — that he had just before 
 adverted to the divine influence and ministry 
 of the Holy Ghost in the church, " there is 
 one body and one spirit," which would render 
 a recurrence of the subject unnecessary — that 
 the order in which baptism stands, is opposed 
 to such an interpretation, for it succeeds to 
 faith, "one Lord, one faith, one baptism"; and 
 if faith be an effect of the spirit's agency, bap- 
 tism certainly cannot refer to that divine in- 
 fluence by which faith is produced, since this 
 would be to place the cause after the effect. — 
 
54 
 
 Besides, the supposition that this baptism refers 
 to the influences of the Spirit induces one or 
 more of the following consequences. Either, 
 1. that if water baptism was not laid aside in 
 the days of the Apostles, it was not to continue 
 after their decease; or 2. that this rite, so posi- 
 tively enjoined by our Lord upon all who believe 
 in his name, was in the estimation of the Apostle 
 of such minor importance as not to deserve a 
 distinct enumeration among the first principles 
 of the oracles of God ; or, 3. that the Apostle 
 had been guilty of an omission in mentioning 
 but one baptism, when in fact there were two^ 
 one of water, and another of the spirit, alike 
 applicable to all believers. On a close ex- 
 amination, however, of the New Testament, 
 T think it will not be found that the ordinary 
 influences of the spirit are ever called baptism ; 
 and //^«^ interpretation of the sacred text which 
 is opposed to the general analogy of the scrip- 
 tures, and which tends moreover to weaken the 
 authority of a divine law, must be suspicious. 
 When, therefoj'e, we hear the Apostle say that 
 there is " one baptism," when w^e know that he 
 administered water baptism, and that he di'ew 
 thence the most powerful moral motives to holi- 
 ness of life, what can we suppose the Ephesians 
 understood by the expression, " one baptism," 
 except that solemn ordinance which Jesus insti- 
 tuted, when he said, " 2,0 and teach all nations. 
 
oo 
 
 baptising- ihem in the nanne of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." 
 
 Secondly. We shall consider the mode of 
 administering this ordinance. 
 
 Whenever errors exist either in faith or prac- 
 tice, they will be found to originate, not in the 
 paucity or obscurity of our Lord's commands, 
 but in the predominance of certain principles 
 which bias the mind in its inquiry after truth : 
 the prevailing cause of mistakes in religion, is 
 the want of an impartial investigation of the 
 scriptures ; they are not allowed to speak their 
 own language, they are not treated as infallible 
 guides, with a simple intention of abiding by 
 their decision. How many peruse them fettered 
 by educational prejudice>, and determined to 
 find evidence to support their own theory, and 
 justify their own practice ! Hence that violence 
 which has been offered to the sacred text, and 
 that palpable disregard to the natural order, and 
 plain signification of words, which is manifest in 
 so many expositors. 
 
 No passage in tVie New Testament appears 
 more obvious in its meaning, than that now 
 under consideration ; and none has been more 
 perverted by the reasonings of disputatious 
 theologians : what can be more intelligible than 
 the statement given by the inspired penmen, re- 
 specting our Lord's commission to his Apostles? 
 What can be more manifest than that faith and 
 
56 
 
 baptism are the unalterable terms of admission 
 into the visible kingdom of Christ ? What can 
 be more evident than that the Apostles were 
 required to preach, and to baptise all who 
 believed in their word, whether brought from 
 under the veil of Judaism, the iron bondage of 
 idolatry, or the influence of that more refined, 
 but not less destructive degeneracy, under 
 which so many millions are to be found, in 
 what are called christian countries ? All have 
 sinned and come short of the glory of God, 
 therefore all must be born again, and saved, if 
 saved at all, precisely through the same me- 
 dium, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. To 
 all is this proclamation to be made, " he that 
 believeth and is baptised shall be saved." — 
 The question then arises, what is that baptism 
 which is required of all who believe in Christ, 
 and how ought it to be administered. 
 
 We maintain that baptism means immersion, 
 and that immersion alone is consistent with the 
 nature and design of the ordinance, with the 
 will of its divine founder, and with the practice 
 of the Apostles. This we shall endeavour to 
 prove. 
 
 First, From the signification of the word. 
 
 Baptism is a Greek word, and therefore we 
 must refer to Greek writers for its proper 
 meaning. It is formed from ^a'^rncij.og a verbal 
 noun, derived from the perfect passive ^iZa/KrisfMu 
 
57 
 
 from the verb SaTrit^u to immerse, a derivative 
 
 from /3avrrw tO cHp. 
 
 That the verbs (Suttu and (SaTri^u are not generic 
 terms, denoting the application of water in any 
 ivay, but that they are confined to the specific 
 mode, dipping, may be proved by a reference 
 to their use in the works of classical Greek 
 writers, who certainly understood their own 
 language better than any other in later times ; 
 and the pa3dobaptist cannot cite one authority 
 from these writers in defence of his explana- 
 tion of the terms. To argue that "it is not 
 necessary that the biblical sense of the words 
 should be the same as the classical, or that 
 which is commonly found in profane writers," 
 is to acknowledge a want of support from those 
 authorities, and to attempt to nullify that mass 
 of evidence to which the highest importance 
 would have been attached, had it been as 
 strong on the side of our opponents as it is 
 on ours. 
 
 Neither is it probable, that the writers of the 
 New Testament, who used the popular lan- 
 guage of the day, and wrote as much for the 
 instruction of Greeks as Jews, would have 
 employed the term in a sense contrary to its 
 etymological and usual signification. A native 
 of Corinth, of Athens, or of Ephesus, would 
 understand the word (SarrTt^u when used by the 
 inspired penmen, as having precisely the same 
 
 I 
 
5B 
 
 meaning that it has in the writings of their own 
 countrymen ; and in point of fact, the Greek 
 christians did so understand the term, for they 
 constantly administered the ordinance of bap- 
 tism by immersion. 
 
 In addition to the mass of evidence derived 
 from classical authors, philologists of the first 
 eminence have shewn that the radical, primary, 
 and natural meaning of the verb /Sa^r/^w, is the 
 same as ^airru, which is to dip or immerse ; to 
 dye by dipping. 
 
 Thus Stephanus; "jSaTr/.^w, to dip or immerse; 
 also to dye ; because we immerse in water those 
 things which are to be dyed or washed." 
 
 Scapula ; " /SaTr/^w, to dip or immerse ; to 
 plunge under water; to overwhelm in water." 
 
 Suicerus ; " /3aTrw signifies to dip, to dye by 
 dipping, hence he is said ^dmnv id^iav to dip the 
 bucket, who draws water out of a well or river, 
 which cannot be done unless the whole bucket 
 is immersed under water. Wool and garments 
 when dyed are said j^avne&ai to be baptised or 
 dipped, because they are entirely immersed in 
 the dying vat, that they may imbibe the colour; 
 /3aTr/^w has very properly the same signification 
 in the best writers." 
 
 Hederic; "i8aTr/(^w to dip, to immerse, to over- 
 whelm in water." 
 
 Parkhurst, " ^avri^w from ^dmu to dip, im- 
 merse, or plunge in water. The Seventy use 
 
59 
 
 ^aWiZpiia' (mid.) for washing oneself by immer- 
 sion, answering to the Hebrew ^2,^ 2 Kings, 
 V. 14. comp. V. to. Thus also it is applied in 
 the apocrypha] books; see Judith xii. 7. and 
 Eccles.xxxiv.25. Figuratively, to be baptised, 
 or plunged in a flood or sea, as it were, of 
 grievous aftlictions and sufferings." 
 
 Schleusner; "/3a7rr/(^w properly signifies to im- 
 merse, to dye by dipping, to dip into water; it 
 is derived from /3a7rrw to dip, and agrees in its 
 signification with the Hebrew word 'p^JO which 
 is to dip." 
 
 Grotius, in his annotations on Matthew iii. 6. 
 says, "that baptism was accustomed to be 
 performed by immersion, and not by perfusion, 
 is evident both from the meaning of the word, 
 from the places chosen for the administration 
 of this rite, (Johnm. 23. ActsVm. 38.) and from 
 the many allusions of the Apostles which can- 
 not refer to sprinkling. (Rom.Vi. 3, 4. Col.'ii. 12.) 
 The custom of pouring or sprinkling appears 
 to have been resorted to some time later, in 
 favour of those, who, lying dangerously ill, 
 desired to dedicate themselves to Christ; these 
 were called Clinics by the rest : see Cyprian's 
 Epistle to Magnus. Nor ought we to wonder 
 that the ancient Latins used tingere for bap- 
 tizare, since the Latin word tingo properly and 
 generally signifies the same as mergo, which is 
 to dip." The celebrated Vossiqs, the most 
 
60 
 
 admired critic of his age, says, " (Bd-xru and 
 ^aTTi^a are rendered by merino, or mergito and 
 tingo, yet they properly signify mergo to im- 
 merse ; and tingo to dye only hy a metalepsis ; 
 for dying follows immersion, and is that which 
 takes place when the thing is dipped." See 
 JEtymo. in voc. baptismus. 
 
 These men, whose accurate knowledge of 
 the Greek language has never been doubted, 
 are all agreed that the primary and true mean- 
 ing of iSaTr/^w is to immerse ; and that it signifies 
 to dye, only in a secondary sense, as expressing 
 the consequence of dipping. 
 
 This word also occurs in the Septuagint, or 
 ancient Greek version of the Old Testament, 
 where it is used in a ceremonial and sacramental 
 sense, and we shall now proceed to shew that it 
 has precisely the same signification in these 
 writings that it has in the Greek classics. 
 
 The verb /Smtttw is used in the Septuagint about 
 eighteen times ; in fourteen of these instances it 
 is rendered to dip in the English version ; once 
 to plunge, (Jol) ix. 31.) once to put into water, 
 (iei;.xi.32)and twice to wet, (Daw. iv. 33. v. 21.) 
 In the two last places our translators have not 
 kept up the force of the Greek word JCaf»j, nor 
 of the Chaldee word^2DV% both of which sig- 
 nify to immerse, to soak, or thoroughly imbue. 
 These words are here used in a figurative, and 
 not in a literal sense ; yet their primary idea is 
 
61 
 
 preserved in the circumstance to which they 
 refer; for had Nebuchadnezzar's body been 
 baptised in water, he could not have been more 
 completely drenched, than he was by being 
 surrounded with, and enveloped in the dews 
 to which he was exposed. 
 
 We learn from the book of Judges that Gideon 
 Avrung a bowl-full of water from the fleece which 
 he had exposed all night to the dew. The 
 copiousness of the dews in the East is described 
 by travellers as being so great that any body 
 exposed to their influence would be as com- 
 pletely wet as if immersed under water: Shaw 
 says " The dews, particularly as we have the 
 heavens only for our covering, would frequently 
 wet us to the skinj" And Niebnhr remarks, "In 
 the most sandy tracts near the sea, the dews 
 are singularly copious ; but notwithstanding the 
 humidity, the air is so pure that the inhabitants 
 sleep abroad : I never slept sounder than when I 
 found my bed all ivet ivith dew in the morning." 
 The verb /Sacrr/i^w occurs but twice in the Sep- 
 tuagint; first, in 2 Kings, v. 14, "Then went he 
 
 down, -ml iZa'XTkaTO Iv TiZ lo^havr\ aud (lippccl Mmself 
 
 in Jordan," as our, translators have very pro- 
 perly rendered it. Some have contended, in 
 order to weaken the force of the original word, 
 that Naaman was commanded to ivash himself \ 
 very true, but we ask in what ivay would it be 
 most natural for him to wash himself with a 
 
62 
 
 view to be cleansed from so loathsome a disease 
 as the leprosy — by sprinkling himself, by pour- 
 ing water on himself, or by dippiiig himself 
 seven times in Jordan, according to the pro- 
 phet's direction ? And there can be no valid 
 objection against this mode, that it would be 
 inconvenient for want of change of raiment, be- 
 cause it appears that Naaman travelled with a 
 considerable wardrobe. 
 
 Again, we find it in Isaiah xxi. 4; the clause 
 which our translators have rendered "■ fearful- 
 ness affrighted me,'' is in the Septuagint xa/;j aw/i/a 
 lit (3a-r-j^si, "and iniquity baptises me," evidently 
 meaning that a man's sins overwhelm, and 
 entirely cover him, and not that they merely 
 sprinkle him ! 
 
 We shall now proceed to examine, in a few 
 instances, the signification of the words as they 
 stand in the New Testament. The verb /Saa^w 
 is used three times ; first, in Luke xvi. 24 ; in 
 this parable, it must of necessity signify to dip. 
 and our translators have so rendered it, " Send 
 Lazarus that (Sd-^^ri he may dip the tip of his 
 finger in water and cool my tongue." Again, 
 in John xiii. 26, our Lord, describing him who 
 should betray Him, says, " He it is to whom I 
 shall give a sop ^d-^ag having dipped it ; and 
 l/xCa%}^; having dipped it, he gave it to Ju- 
 das." In Rev. xix. 13. the word undoubtedly 
 means to dip ; " And he was clothed Mith 
 
63 
 
 a vesture ^iZaiMiihov dipped, or dyed, in blood." 
 Whether this garment were emblematical of 
 Christ's sufferings for the sins of his people, or 
 of the dreadful slaughter of his enemies in his 
 final triumph over them, the figure is alike ex- 
 pressive of the extent of His sufferings, or of 
 the overwhelming nature o^ their overthrow. 
 
 According to Stephanus the verb ^a'rri^M 
 occurs more than seventy times in the New 
 Testament, in reference to this ordinance. We 
 shall notice the following passages as con- 
 firming the meaning for which we contend ; 
 Matt. iii. 5, 6. — ■"■ then went out to him Jeru- 
 salem, and all Judea, and all the region round 
 
 about Jordan, and s^aTrl^ovTO h rOJ lo^havri uiT aurou 
 
 were baptised of him in Jordan, confessing 
 their sins :" see also the parallel passage, Mark 
 i. 5. In both of these places, the phrase has 
 the same signification, allowing for the differ- 
 ent inflection of the verb, as in 2 Kings v. 14. 
 which our translators hiVe rendered to dip. 
 Marki. 9. — " and it came to pass in those days 
 that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and 
 JCaffr/ffSyj was baptised of John ug in Jordan. And 
 straightway coming up out of the water, &c.'* 
 The account here given of this ceremony abun- 
 dantly supports that sense of the word for 
 which we contend. Jesus is said to have been 
 baptised or immersed in the river, and to have 
 come up out of the water; this mode of expression 
 
64 
 
 would surely not have been adopted, had he 
 stood at the brink of the river, and had John 
 only sprinkled or poured water upon him. This 
 however the great body of learned psedobap- 
 tists themselves concede, for they confess that 
 our Lord ivas immersed in the river Jordan — 
 we believe so too, and we consider his exam- 
 ple as defining; and illustrating" the precise mode 
 of that baptism which he afterwards instituted 
 in his church. 
 
 But it is contended by some, and those 
 principally Independents, that the verb jSa-rr/^w 
 signifies to sprinkle as well as to immerse ; and 
 that sprinkling was not only a mode, but pro- 
 bably the mode of primitive baptism. Let us 
 then see how the use of the word sprinkle, in 
 those passages where our translators have re- 
 tained baptise, agrees with the sense intended 
 to be conveyed. Mark i. 4, 5. — " John did 
 sprinkle in the wilderness, and preach the 
 sprinkling of repentance for the remission of 
 sins." "And there went out unto him all the 
 land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and 
 w^ere all spri?ikled of him i?i the river Jordan." 
 Mark i. 9. — " And Jesus came from Nazareth 
 of Galilee, and was sprinkled of John in Jor- 
 dan. And straightway coming up out of the 
 water, &c." Acts ii. 38. — "Then Peter said 
 unto them, repent, and be sprinkled, every 
 one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ." 
 
Ibid, /'. ^ I— " 'I'licii llicy tli;it i;l;i(lly i(;(:<;iv(:(l 
 liis word, were; sprinldcdy Acts xxii. IfJ - "And 
 now, why liinicsl llioii? Arise, and \>(' sprin/c- 
 /('(/, and wasli away fliy sins." Koni. vi. .'J, 4. — 
 " Know y(; nol, llial; so many of us ;ih wcjrc 
 sprinkled, inio Jesus (Jhrisl,^ were spiinkied into 
 his dcalii ? 'V\\{'\v,Un'i\ w<' arc hnried willi iiirn 
 Ijy spiinldinij; into dcalli ; llial. like as (Jlirist 
 was raised m|) (Voni \\\v (i< a<l l»y tlie i^lory of 
 tli(! I'allier, even so we also slioidd walk in 
 li(3vvn(;ss of lile." (jlal. iii. '27. -" lM»r as many 
 of yon as have; been spiiiilded inl.o (Hirisl have 
 [)nt on Christ." (yol. ii. VI. "■ liuried ivilli. him 
 in sprinldino-, wherein also ye are risen vvilli 
 him lhrouL;h ilie faith of fh<; o|)eralion of (lod, 
 who hath raised liim from lh<; dea<l. ' Are not 
 tlw^se ()nr)tations sntlieient to ])rove the ntter 
 inadetjualeness of tin; term sprinkle, to convey 
 the meanini!, of the saered text? Does not tin; 
 sn])stitntion of this word destroy the foree ;nid 
 beauty of the iunj^ua<^<; of scripture? 
 
 Moreover, when the act of sjirinklinjj; is re- 
 fern;d to in the sacred volume, it is (;x[)ressed 
 by the verbs 'iWi/w or •p</i/r/(^w to sprinkle, which 
 verbs arc; {generally found in connexion with the 
 preposition Wi \\\w\\, }>nt never with the [)reposi- 
 tion j/V into. Whereas the verb fSarrri^o) wliicfi 
 signifies to immerse, is accompani(;d with the 
 appropriate |)repositions, tv in and t/'s into: Jesus 
 was ifrimersed in Jordan : the inhabitants of 
 
 K 
 
66 
 
 Jerusalem were immersed in the river Jordan : 
 Phili|) and the eunuch went down ilg into the 
 water, and he baptised him. 
 
 The verb ^airr't^M is used twice by our Lord in 
 reference to his own sufferings. First, in Mark 
 X.38, 39. — "But Jesus said unto them, ye know 
 not what ye ask; can ye drink of the cup that I 
 
 drmk of, %«/ ro /SaTr/C/xa, iyui (Ba-Trri^ofj^ai joa-TTTK^rivai and 
 
 be baptised with the baptism that I am baptised 
 with ? And Jesus said unto them, ye shall 
 indeed drink of the cup that I drink of, and 
 with the baptism that I am baptised withal, 
 shall ye be baptised. And again in Luke xii. 
 50. — " But I have a baptism to be baptised 
 with, and how am I straitened till it be accom- 
 plished !" Dr. Campbell, though a paedobap- 
 tist, has confirmed our opinion of the meaning 
 of this word, by using the terms immersion and 
 immerse, in his translation of these passages ; 
 indeed, who would venture to substitute the 
 word sprinkling or pouring, as an equally apt 
 illustration of Christ's sufferings ? 
 
 There are two places where this verb is trans- 
 lated to wash, which are adduced by the Inde- 
 pendents as strong evidence against us. Mark 
 vii. 3, 4. — "For the Pharisees and all the Jews, 
 except vi-^uvrai they wash their hands oft, eat not, 
 holding the tradition of the elders. And when 
 they come from the market, except ^aTrleuvrai they 
 wash, they eat not." Also Luke xi.38. — "And 
 
67 
 
 when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that 
 he had not first li^avr'K^n washed before dinner." 
 There is an obscurity about the former passage 
 as it stands in the English Testament, occa- 
 sioned by our translators not having preserved 
 the distinction which exists in the original. 
 Mark evidently refers to two different anodes of 
 ablution, practised by those Jews who held the 
 tradition of the elders, and by the Pharisees in 
 particular. The one included the washing of 
 the hands in the ordinary way, before sitting 
 down to meat, and is expressed by the verb 
 wVrw. The other included a higher degree of 
 purification observed on returning from market, 
 or any place of public resort, and is expressed 
 by the verb fSaTri^u. If a distinction be not in- 
 tended by the use of these two different verbs, 
 then there is a needless repetition; for certainly 
 those who always scrupulously washed their 
 hands before meat, would not omit the practice 
 on returning from the market — a circumstance 
 which would render it more necessary; and the 
 historian has shewn that ///ry irere more par- 
 ticular on this occasion, than in the ordinary 
 course, by using the verb /3aer/^w to dip, instead 
 of wVrw to wash the hands. 
 
 This explication is defended by paidobaptist 
 critics of the highest celebrity : Dw Lightfoot 
 says, "The Jews used the washing of the hands 
 and the plunging of the hands; and the word 
 
68 
 
 vi'^uvrai ivdsh, iu oui" evangelist seems to answer 
 to the former, and Ba'Trrimvrai baptise to the lat- 
 ter." Dr. Campbell also, " For the Pharisees, 
 and indeed all the Jews who observe the tra- 
 dition of the Elders, eat not until they have 
 washed their hands by pouring a little water 
 upon them ; and if they be come from the 
 market, by dipimig tliemr Hammond expresses 
 himself to the same purport ; " The word sig- 
 nifies the washing of any part, as the hands 
 here, by way of immersion in water, as that 
 is opposed to affusion or pouring water upon 
 them." And Grotius asserts that immersion is 
 the sense of this passage, for he says, " They 
 purified themselves with greater care from pol- 
 lution contracted at the market, not only by 
 washing their hands, but by immersing their 
 whole body." Whether this immersion extend- 
 ed to the wrists only, as supposed by Pocock, 
 Hammond, AVhitby, and some few others, or 
 to the elbows, as maintained by Theophylact, 
 Drusius, and Capellus ; or whether the whole 
 body was immersed, according to the opinion 
 of Vatablus and Grotius, is of little import- 
 ance to the subject in hand, since they are all 
 agreed that the word ^SaTr/^w signifies to dip. 
 
 We shall further prove that this was the 
 primitive mode : 
 
 Secondly^ From the places where the first 
 christians administered it. 
 
69 
 
 We are told that John and his disciples bap- 
 tised in Jordan, the chief river in Palestine. 
 In this river Jesus was baptised, and it is ex- 
 pressly said concerning him, that " When he 
 was baptised, he went up straightway out of the 
 water." Here are two particulars, which we 
 shall notice — first, the place where John bap- 
 tised ; in the river Jordan. It is not said that 
 he baptised on the banks of the river ; nor 
 that he took water out of the river, and sprink- 
 led or poured it upon his converts ; but that 
 he baptised in the river : no form of words 
 can be more perspicuous: had sprinkling or 
 pouring been the mode, or even a mode, why 
 did he sprinkle them in a river? No admi- 
 nistrator of infant baptism at the present day, 
 chooses a river as the fittest place where to 
 perform the ceremony of sprinkling ; he knows 
 very well that a little water in a basin is all 
 that he needs, and he wisely directs it to be 
 brought to him : — surely John and his disci- 
 ples, and Jesus and his Apostles, would have 
 followed a similar plan, had they been in the 
 habit of sprinkling ; but if they uniformly bap- 
 tised or immersed their converts, there is a 
 propriety in the places which they selected. 
 
 Again, it is said of Christ, "And Jesus when 
 he w as baptised went %ip straightway out of the 
 waterT It has been objected that these words 
 mean no more than that Christ went away from 
 
70 
 
 the water, that is, from the banks of the river ; 
 Dr. Campbell has rendered the passage "Jesus 
 being baptised no sooner arose out ojthe water'; 
 if he arose out of the water, it is evident he must 
 first have gone down into it ; — and thus accord- 
 ing to the rendering of that eminent critic, the 
 paedobaptists are driven from one of their strong 
 holds ! 
 
 That airh has the sense of out of, is plain from 
 Matt. vii. 4, " Let me pull out the mote a.'xh out 
 of thine eye," and again, chap. xiv. 29, " And 
 when Peter was come down d.-rh out of the 
 ship'." Dr. Whitby has the following remarks 
 on this subject, "The observation of the Greek 
 church is this, that He who ascended out of the 
 water, must first descend down into it ; baptism 
 therefore is to be performed not by sprinkling, 
 but by washing the body; and indeed it can be 
 only from ignorance of the Jewish rites in bap- 
 tism that this is questioned." 
 
 It is also said that " John was baptising at 
 Enon near to Salem, because there was much 
 water there.'' This is a confirmation of what 
 we have already advanced respecting his bap- 
 tising in the river Jordan : nor does the objec- 
 tion made by certain paedobaptists to the phrase 
 much water, weaken the evidence which we 
 derive from it in favour of our opinion. For, 
 
 > See also Mark xvi. 7, Luke iv. 35, 41, Acts ii. 9, xvii. 2, xxviii. 23. 
 
71 
 
 admitting that the words l8ara croXXa signify many 
 waters, it does not necessarily follow that these 
 were shallow streams: the expression is idiom- 
 atical, while the sense is to be taken in the Jew- 
 ish acceptation of the terms ; and for this, we 
 must turn to the Old Testament. Here we 
 shall find vdara, 'ttoTOm corresponding with Qi^l CD 
 (majim rabbim) many waters. The Hebrews 
 applied this phrase to all large collections of 
 water — t/ie sea is called by the Psalmist in the 
 77lh and 107th Psalms, D^l") U^^ great waters, 
 and by the seventy u3ara toaXcc many waters\ And 
 again, Psalm xviii. 16, — " He sent from above, 
 he took me, he drew me out of D''31 D'^D 
 Harm itoWm many icatersT Ps. xciii. 4, — " The 
 Lord on high is mightier than the noise of D'^D 
 QiQ") many watersT Rev.i. 15, — " and his voice 
 as the sound Iharm irtjWm of many ivaters'' Cer- 
 tainly it must be conceded that the phrase, 
 as used in the foregoing instances, refers to a 
 large body of water: a shallow brook, a narrow 
 stream, or many of these pursuing their course 
 in one direction, could never be an apt illustra- 
 tion of the voice of Jehovah, which breaketh 
 the cedars — could not illustrate the deep afflic- 
 tion from which the Psalmist was delivered 
 by the arm of omnipotence ! And why should 
 the very same phrase, when used in the New 
 
 ' See also Is. xvii. 12, 13. Ezec. xliii. 2. 
 
72 
 
 Testament, be supposed to mean small springs, 
 and shallow rivulets, when the whole connexion 
 in which it stands in the Old Testament, proves 
 that it must mean a considerable body of water? 
 The history of Philip baptising the eunuch, 
 is strong evidence in favour of immersion. We 
 are told that "they came to a certain water, and 
 the eunuch said, see here is water, what doth 
 hinder me to be baptised ? And they went 
 down both of them into the water, both Philip 
 and the eunuch, and he baptised him ; and 
 when they were come up out of the water, &c." 
 Here, as in other passages to which we have 
 referred, they both went down into the water, 
 and when Philip had baptised the eunuch, they 
 both came up out of the water. The historian 
 is very particular in describing the circumstance 
 of their descent into the water, as well as of 
 their ascent out of it. The attempts which 
 have been made to overthrow the fact here re- 
 corded, by disputing the proper signification 
 of the Greek prepositions, is puerile in the 
 extreme ; and desperate must be that cause 
 which requires to be supported by such an ex- 
 pedient. That the prepositions si; and £x do, in 
 some instances mean to and from, no one will 
 deny ; yet they more frequently and necessa- 
 rily signify i7ito and out of: their true meaning, 
 however, must be decided by their connexion ; 
 and it will be found, on an impartial survey of 
 
73 
 
 this passage, that the preposition s/g must have 
 the force cf i7ito, in order to give the meaning 
 intended by the historian ; for he says, that 
 Phihp and the eunuch being come Jtt/ to a 
 certain water, they both of them xariZrieav went 
 down or descended sig into it. 
 
 In the following scriptures also, the preposi- 
 tion i'lg necessarily means into. Eph. iv. 9; — 
 " Now that he avKn ascended, what is it but that 
 he also %««£»] descended first e/'s into the lower 
 parts of the earth." Matt. ii. 13 ;— " Take the 
 young child and his mother, and flee s/; into 
 Egypt." Mark xvi. 25 ; — "And very early in 
 the morning, they came J^' to the sepulchre at 
 the rising of the sun, and entering s/g into the 
 sepulchre," John v. 7 ; — " Sir, I have no man, 
 when the water is troubled, to put me ug into 
 the pool." John vi. 16, 17 ; — "And when even 
 was come, his disciples xad£9)(rai/ went down, not 
 s/'s into, but s'TTi to the sea ; and entered j/g into a 
 ship," Acts xii. 10 ; — " When they were past 
 the first and the second ward, they came It) to 
 the iron gate that leadeth s/g into the city." 
 
 From these and other passages it is evident 
 that the preposition in Acts vii. 38. ought to be 
 rendered into, according to our translation, 
 shewing that Philip took the eunuch into the 
 water and immersed him. 
 
 The practice of baptising in rivers has been 
 very common in various countries, and was per- 
 
 L 
 
■^4 
 
 formed in the first ages of the christian church, 
 in imitation of the apostolic mode. Bede, in 
 his ecclesiastical history, gives an account of 
 Paulinus baptising king Edwin at York in the 
 year 627, and afterwards of his baptising the 
 king's son, and many of the nobles and other 
 persons at different times in the rivers Glen, 
 Swale, and Trent. St. Austin also used to bap- 
 tise his converts in the rivers in this country. 
 Dr. Wall justly says, (chap. ix.p. 292.) "Before 
 the christian religion was so far encouraged as 
 to have churches built for its service, they bap- 
 tised in any river, pond, &c." So TertuUiau 
 says; "It is all one whether a person is washed 
 in the sea, or in a pond, in a fountain, or in a 
 river, in a standing, or in a running water : nor 
 is there any difference between those whom 
 John baptised in Jordan, and those that Peter 
 baptised in the river Tiber." This early Father 
 makes no quibble about the preposition so 
 much disputed by some in our day ; he says, 
 'John did baptise in the river Jordan,' and that 
 they baptised, not bi/ ponds and rivers, but in 
 them. 
 
 In after ages, when places of worship were 
 btlilt, and churches formed, baptisteries were 
 made large enough for the immersion of adults; 
 of this kind, were the baptisteries at Constanti- 
 nople, RaVenna, Venice, Florence, and Milan. 
 These buildings contained, besides the bath in 
 
7^ 
 
 which the converts were immersed, separa,te 
 apartments where the men and women changed 
 their clothes. They continued in use till about 
 the sixth century, when baptisteries were erect- 
 ed in the places of worship ; but when dipping 
 was changed for pouring, the baptistery gave 
 place to the font ; and since pouring has been 
 succeeded by sprinkling, the font has in its tym 
 made way for the basin. 
 
 Thirdly, Baptism by immersion is also snp- 
 ported by the constant practice of the Greek 
 church. 
 
 The Greek church, which took its rise in 
 the first ages of Christianity, has to this day 
 invariably baptised by immersion ; its practice 
 therefore, is of some authority in the present 
 controversy. That body of christians, which 
 goes under the general denomination of the 
 Greek church, is scattered throughout Europe, 
 Asia, and Africa, and is, according to Dr. 
 King's account, of greater extent than the La- 
 tin church, with all the branches that have 
 sprung from it'. That these christians have 
 constantly administered baptism by immersion 
 is acknowledged by the whole testimony of 
 ecclesiastical history. Dr. Wall, when speak- 
 ing of the introduction of pouring and sprink- 
 .ing, says, " What has been said of this custom 
 
 • See Rites and Ceremouics of the Greek clnuch. 
 
76 
 
 of pouring" and sprinkling water, in the ordinary 
 use of baptism, is to be understood only in 
 reference to these western parts of Europe, for 
 it is used ordinarily no where else. The Greek 
 church, in all the branches of it, does still use 
 immersion ; and they hardly count a child, 
 except in cases of sickness, well baptised with- 
 out it. And so do all other christians in the 
 world, except the Latins. That which I hinted 
 before is a rule that does not fail in any parti- 
 cular that I know of; viz. All the nations of 
 christians, that do now, or formerly did submit 
 to the authority of the Bishop of Rome, do 
 ordinarily baptise their infants by pouring; or 
 sprinkling; and though the English received 
 not this custom till after the decay of popery, 
 yet they have received it from such neighbour- 
 ing nations as had begun it in the times of the 
 Pope's power : bnt all other christians in the 
 world, who never owned the Pope's usurped 
 power, do and ever did dip their infants in the 
 ordinary use. And if we take the divisions of 
 the world from the three main parts of it, all 
 the christians in Asia, all in Africa, and about 
 one third part of Europe, are of the last sort, 
 (ivho baptise hy dipping,) in which third part 
 of Europe, are comprehended the christians 
 of Graecia, Thracia, Servia, Bulgaria, Rascia, 
 Walachia, Moldavia, Russia, Nigra, &c. and 
 even the Muscovites, who, if coldness of the 
 
77 
 
 counti-y will excuse, might plead for a dispen- 
 sation with the most reason of any." (chap. ix. 
 pt. 2.) What is this, but an acknowledgement 
 of one of the grand principles for which the 
 baptists contend, which the Greeks, who of 
 course must have understood the language for- 
 merly in common use among them, have from 
 the earliest times through all succeeding ages, 
 maintained, that immersion is the scriptural, 
 and only proper mode, and that sprinkling is a 
 popish innovation. And this learned paedo- 
 baptist distinctly confesses that the church of 
 Rome has changed the original mode by intro- 
 ducing sprinkling in the room of dipping. 
 
 Not only has the Greek church continued 
 the practice of immersion, but all those different 
 bodies who have seceded from it. The Nesto- 
 rians, and the Monophysites, who separated in 
 the fifth century, — the Georgians, the Arme- 
 nians, with numerous other sects, scattered 
 throughout Egypt, Nubia, Abyssinia, and the 
 more distant parts of Africa and Asia, have 
 constantly adhered to this mode : but this 
 practice has been peculiar to the Greek and 
 Eastern churches only during the last five cen- 
 turies ; for before that time, according to the 
 testimony of both papists and protestants, it 
 was the custom of the whole Latin church and 
 all its branches to baptise by immersion ; and 
 this they did till the thirteenth century. The 
 
78 
 
 French church seems to have been the first 
 that practised sprinkling ; from them it spread 
 into Italy, where, about the year 1250, dipping 
 as the general mode M'as discontinued ; from 
 thence, it was admitted into Germany, and 
 other countries under the authority of the 
 Pope ; and last of all, it was introduced into 
 the English church in the sixteenth century, 
 where it was practised in direct opposition 
 to the ritual, which prescribed the following 
 mode, — "Then the priest shall take the child in 
 his hands, and ask the name ; and naming the 
 child, shall dip it in the water thrice ; first dip- 
 ping the right side, secondly the left side, the 
 third time dipping the face toward the font'." 
 How different is this account from those repre- 
 sentations which are made by a certain class 
 of psedobaptist teachers in our day, who labour 
 to impress the minds of their hearers with the 
 notion that dipping is a modern custom, ob- 
 served only by a very small and despised sect, 
 called Baptists, who sprang up quite recently in 
 Germany, Holland, and England ; while their 
 own mode of administering baptism, by sprink- 
 ling, is, they say, of the highest antiquity, and 
 of universal practice ! 
 
 Fourthly, We shall now notice the testimony 
 of learned paedobaptists : 
 
 1 See WaU's Infant Baptism, chap ix. pt. 2. Also Gibson's Codex Juris 
 Ecclesiastici Anglicani, vol. i. p. 440. 
 
79 
 
 It is remarkable, that while some paedobap- 
 tists, ill their zeal for sprinkling, represent our 
 practice as without foundation in the precepts 
 of the New Testament, and the example of the 
 Apostles ; there are others, distinguished for 
 their piety and learning, who candidly confess 
 that our mode is the most consistent with scrip- 
 ture precept and primitive practice, and who 
 deplore the introduction of sprinkling. Such 
 a discrepancy of opinion, among persons who 
 agree in espousing the same cause, may at the 
 first view appear singular, yet it is only the 
 natural consequence of departing from the prin- 
 ciples so clearly defined in the oracles of God ; 
 and it serves to prove, both that the validity of 
 the present practice of paedobaptists is, in their 
 own estimation, doubtful, and that there are 
 some points in their system, which are not 
 founded upon that high authority, and sup- 
 ported by that indubitable evidence which ren- 
 der them invincibly conclusive to a thoughtful 
 and reasoning mind. In proof of this we refer 
 to the following authorities. 
 
 Dr. Wall, speaking of the primitive christians, 
 says, " Their general and ordinary way was to 
 baptise by immersing or dipping the person, 
 whether it were an infant, or grown man, or 
 woman, into the water. This is so plain and 
 clear, by an infinite number of passages, that 
 as one cannot but pity the weak endeavours of 
 
80 
 
 such paedobaptists as would maintain the nega- 
 tive of it; so also we ought to disown, and 
 show a dislike of the profane scoffs which some 
 people give to the English antipa^dobaptists, 
 merely for their use of dipping. 'Tis one thing 
 to maintain that that circumstance is not abso- 
 lutely necessary to the essence of baptism ; and 
 another to go about to represent it as ridicu- 
 lous and foolish, or as shameful and indecent ; 
 when it was in all probability the way by which 
 our blessed Saviour, and for certain was the 
 most usual and ordinary way, by which the 
 ancient christians did receive their baptism. 
 'Tis a great want of prudence, as well as of 
 honesty, to refuse to grant to an adversary 
 what is certainly true and may be proved so : 
 it creates a jealousy of all the rest that one 
 says." — vol. ii. chap ,9. 
 
 Dr. Whitby says, " It were to be wished that 
 this custom, of immersion, might be again of 
 general use ; and aspersion only permitted, as 
 of old, in case of the Clinici, and in present 
 danger of death." — Comment, on Rom. vi. 
 
 Mr. D. Rogers says, " IN one of old were 
 wont to be sprinkled ; and I confess myself 
 unconvinced by demonstration from scripture 
 for infants' sprinkling. It ought to be the 
 church's part to cleave to the institution, which 
 is dipping ; and he betrays the church, whose 
 officer he is, to a disorderly error, if he cleave 
 
81 
 
 not to the institution, which is to dip. That 
 the minister is to dip in water as the meetest 
 act, the word )Sarrr/^w notes it. For the Greeks 
 wanted not other words to express any other 
 act besides dipping, if the institution could 
 bear it. What resemblance of the burial or the 
 resurrection of Christ in sprinkling. All an- 
 tiquity and Scripture coiijirm that way. To dip, 
 therefore, is exceedingly material to the ordi- 
 nance ; which was the usage of old, without 
 exception to countries, hot or cold." 
 
 Sir Norton Knatchbull, Dr. Towerson, Mr. 
 Mede, Bishop Taylor, and others, express 
 themselves as strongly on this subject as Mr. 
 D. Rogers. 
 
 Dr. Cave, in his Primitive Christianity, ob- 
 serves, " that the party baptised, was wholly 
 immersed, or put under water ; which was the 
 almost constant and universal custom of those 
 times ; whereby they did most notably and sig- 
 nificantly express the great end and effect of 
 baptism. As in immersion there are in a man- 
 ner three several acts, the putting the person 
 into water, his abiding there for a little time, 
 and his rising up again ; so by these were 
 represented Christ's death, burial, and resur- 
 rection ; and in conformity thereunto, our dying 
 unto sin, the destruction of its power, and 
 our resurrection to a new course of life. By 
 the person being put into water, was lively 
 
 M 
 
82 
 
 represented the putting- off the body of the sins 
 of the flesh, and being washed from the filth 
 and pollution of them ; by his abode under it, 
 which was a kind of burial in the water, his 
 entering into a state of death or mortification, 
 like as Christ remained for some time under 
 the state or power of death ; therefore as many 
 as are baptised into Christ, are said to be bap- 
 tised into his death, and to be buried with him 
 by baptism into death, that the old man being 
 crucified with him, the body of sin might be 
 destroyed that henceforth he might not serve 
 sin ; for that he that is dead is freed from sin, 
 as the Apostle clearly explains the meaning of 
 this rite. And then by his emersion or rising 
 up out of the w^ater, was signified his entering 
 upon a new course of life differing from that he 
 lived before : that like as Christ was raised up 
 by the glory of the Father, even so we also 
 should walk in newness of life." — pt. i. chap. 10. 
 Venema declares, ''It is without controversy 
 that baptism in the primitive church was admi- 
 nistered by immersion into water, and not by 
 sprinMing ; seeing John is said to have baptised 
 in Jordan and where there was much w^ater ; 
 as Christ also did by his disciples in the neigh- 
 bourhood of those places. Philip also going 
 down into the water baptised the eunuch ; to 
 which also the Apostle refers, Rom. vi. Nor is 
 there any necessity to have recourse to the idea 
 
83 
 
 of sprinkling in our interpretation of Acts ii. 
 41. where three thousand souls are said to be 
 added to Christ by baptism, seeing it ynigkt be 
 •performed by immersion equally as by aspersion, 
 especially as they are not said to have been 
 baptised at the same time. The essential act 
 of baptising in the second century, consisted 
 not in sprinkling, but in immersion into water in 
 the name of each person in the Trinity. Con- 
 cerning immersion, the words and phrases that 
 are used sufficiently testify ; and that it was 
 performed in a river, a pool, or a fountain. To 
 the essential rites of baptism, pertained, in the 
 third century, immersion, and not aspersion ; 
 except in cases of necessity, and it was ac- 
 counted a half perfect baptism. Immersion, in 
 the fourth century, was one of those acts that 
 were considered as essential to baptism, never- 
 theless aspersion was used in the last moments 
 of life, on such as were called clinics ; and also 
 where there was not a sufficient quantity of 
 water." 
 
 Bishop Taylor says, *' The custom of the 
 ancient churches was not sprinkling, but immer- 
 sion ; in pursuance of the sense of the word 
 baptise in the commandment and the example 
 of our blessed Saviour. Now this was of so 
 sacred account in their esteem, they did not 
 account it lawful to receive him into the clergy 
 who had been only .sprinkled in his baptism, as 
 
84 
 
 we learn from the epistle of Cornelius to Fabiiis 
 of Antioch apud lEaseb.''— D actor chibit. b. iii. c. 4. 
 
 Curcellccus ; " Baptism was performed by 
 plunging the whole body into water, and not 
 by sprinkling a few drops as is now the prac- 
 tice ; for John was baptising in En on near to 
 Salem, because there was much water ; and 
 they came and were baptised. Nor did the 
 disciples that were sent out by Christ adminis- 
 ter afterwards in any other way : and this is 
 more agreeable to the signification of the ordi- 
 nance. (Rom. vi. 4.) I am therefore of opinion, 
 that ive should endeavour to restore and introduce 
 this primitive rite of immersion.'' 
 
 Martene declares " that in all the ritual books 
 or pontifical manuscripts, ancient or modern, that 
 he had seen, immersion is required'^ except by 
 the Cenomanensian, and that of a more modern 
 date, in which pouring on the head is men- 
 tioned. In the Council of Ravenna also, held 
 in the year 1311, both immersion and pouring 
 are left to the determination of the administra- 
 tor : and the council of Nismes, in the year 
 1284, permitted pouring if a vessel could not be 
 had, therefore only in case of necessity. The 
 councilor Celichith, in the beginning of the 9th 
 century, forbade the pouring of water on the 
 heads of infants, and commanded that they 
 should be immersed in the font. Baptism 
 was administered by immersion in the twelfth 
 
85 
 
 century. In the thirteenth century, baptism 
 was administered by immersion thrice repeated, 
 yet so that one immersion was esteemed suffi- 
 cient, as appears from Angerius de Montfau- 
 con. That was a singular synodal appointment 
 under John de Zurich, Bishop of Utrecht, in 
 the year 1291, which runs thus ; — 'We appoint, 
 that the head be put three times in the water, 
 unless the child be weak, or sickly, or the sea- 
 son cold ; then water may be poured by the 
 hand of the priest on the head of the child, 
 lest by plunging, or coldness, or weakness, the 
 child should be injured and die.' This is a 
 statute of the Synod of Utrecht, with my Lord 
 Bishop John de Zurich at the head of it — The 
 Sook says nothing about baptising sickly in- 
 fants, nor of pouring water upon the head !" 
 
 Witsius says. First, "it is certain, that both 
 John, and the disciples of Christ, ordinarily 
 used dipping; whose example was followed by 
 the ancient church, as Vossius and Hornbrook 
 in their treatises on baptism, have shown from 
 many testimonies both of the Greeks and Latins. 
 Secondly, it cannot be denied but the native 
 signification of the words ^dmuv and ^a'XTi^iiv is 
 to plunge or dip, so as to be altogether some- 
 thing more than iTimxdZiiv to float on the surface ; 
 but less than dvvnv to go to the bottom and perish : 
 as Vossius remarks, however, I have observed 
 that the term xarddOatg going to the bottom is 
 
86 
 
 frequently used by the ancient church in the 
 matter of baptism ; Athanasius, Quest. 94. — 
 
 y.a.Tah\jeai rh rraihm h rn xoXu/iCjj^sa the going down Or 
 
 dipping the child in the bath; and so Sozomen, 
 lib. vi. cap. 26, has charged Eunomius with 
 heresy for teaching that "the sacrament of bap- 
 tism ought to be performed by once dipping." 
 Similar examples are every where to be met 
 with. Salmasius, in his observations on Sul- 
 pitius Severus de vita Martini, c. xv. has made 
 the following observation, " ^anmiv from which 
 ^a/sr'i^in signifies immersion and not aspersion : 
 nor did the ancients baptise any but by dipping 
 either once or thrice; except Clinics or persons 
 confined to a sick bed, because these were bap- 
 tised in a manner they could bear ; not in an 
 entire font, as they who put their head under 
 water, but their body was sprinkled all over.'' 
 Cypr.iv. Epist. 7. — "Thus when TVovatus, in his 
 sickness, received baptism, he was but sprink- 
 led all over." Thirdly, Nor are we to conceal 
 that there is a greater copiousness of significa- 
 tion, and a fuller similitude between the sign 
 and the thing signified, in immersion." 
 
 In another place the same author observes, 
 " With respect to the ceremonies in the admi- 
 nistration, we are distinctly to take notice, first 
 of the immersion into the water, and the wash- 
 ing that is the consequence of it ; secondly, 
 the continuing under the water ; thirdly, the 
 
87 
 
 emersion out of the water. These rites refer- 
 red, either to the remembrance of those things 
 which Christ underwent, or signify the benefit 
 which Christ bestows upon us, or put us in 
 mind of our duty. First therefore, the immer- 
 sion into the water represents to us that tre- 
 mendous abyss of divine justice in which Christ 
 was plunged for a time in some measure, in 
 consequence of his undertaking for our sins ; as 
 he complained under the type of David. (Ps. 
 Ixix. 2.) 'I sink in deep waters where there 
 is no standing ; I am come into deep waters, 
 where the floods overflow me.' But more par- 
 ticularly, an immersion of this kind deprives us 
 of the benefits of the light, and the other enjoy- 
 ments of this world ; so it is a very fit represen- 
 tation of the death of Christ, The continuing, 
 how short soever, under the water, represents 
 his burial and the lowest degree of humiliation, 
 when he was thought to be wholly cut off, 
 while in the grave. The emersion, or coming- 
 out of the water gives us some resemblance of 
 his resurrection or victory obtained in his death 
 over death, which he vanquished within its in- 
 most recesses, even the grave : all these parti- 
 culars the Apostle intimates Rom. vi. 3, 4.'" 
 
 Dr. Campbell says, *' I am sorry to observe 
 that the popish translators from the Vulgate 
 
 ' See Econ. Gov, vol. ii. book 4. chap. 16. 
 
88 
 
 have shown greater veneration for the style of 
 that version than the generaUty of protestant 
 translators have shown for that of the original : 
 for in this, the Latin is not more explicit than 
 the Greek : yet so inconsistent are the inter- 
 preters last mentioned, that none of them have 
 scrupled to render h rz loibavr, in the 6th verse, in 
 Jordan, though nothing can he plainer than that 
 if there be any incongruity in the expression in 
 water, this in Jordan, must be equally incongru- 
 ous. But they have seen that the preposition 
 in could not he avoided there, without adopting 
 a circumlocution, and saying, with the icater of 
 Jordan, which would have made their deviation 
 from the text too glaring. The word Bairri^in 
 both in sacred authors, and in classical, signi- 
 fies to dip, to plunge, to immerse, and was 
 rendered by Tertullian, the oldest of the Latin 
 Fathers, tingere, the term used for dying cloth, 
 which was by immersion. It is always con- 
 strued suitably to this meaning : thus it is kvulan 
 in water, h tOj lofdavri in the Jordan ; but I should 
 not lay much stress on the preposition h, which 
 answering to the Hebrew 3, may denote tcith 
 as well as m ; did not the whole phraseology 
 in regard to this ceremony, concur in evincing 
 the same thing. Accordingly the baptised are 
 said avaZoutny to urisc, emerge, or ascend, verse 16. 
 
 a-xb rcZ 'Jjaro;, and ActS viii. 39. jV. rou ibarc; frOm OUt 
 
 of the uater. Let it Ije observed further, that 
 
89 
 
 the verbs Pa/vw and 'Pavrilu used in scripture for 
 sprinkling-, are never construed in this manner. 
 " I will sprinkle you with clean water," says 
 God, Ezek. xxxvi. 25. or as it runs in the 
 English translation, literally from the Hebrew 
 *' I will sprinkle clean water upon you", is in 
 the Septuagint Pavu sf ifMas jca^a^oi/ vduo and not as 
 
 (3a-zri^ui is alwayS construed Pavw vfj,ag iv xaSagw vdocn, 
 
 I will sprinkle you in clean water. See also 
 Exod. xxix. 21. Lev. vi. 27. xvi. 14 ; — had /Sa^r- 
 r/^w been here employed in the sense of 'Pahu I 
 sprinkle, which as far as I know, it never is, in 
 any use, sacred or classical, the expression 
 would doubtless have been lyu fnv /Sao-r/^w if O/^as 
 v6ui^, or wTTo Tou vdarog I indeed baptise water upon 
 you, agreeably to the examples refeiTed to. 
 When therefore the Greek word is adopted, I 
 may say rather than translated into modern 
 language, the mode of construction ought to be 
 preserved so far as may conduce to suggest its 
 original import. It is to be regretted that we 
 have so much evidence that even good and 
 learned men allow their judgements to be 
 warped by the sentiments and customs of the 
 sect which they prefer. — Noteoii Matt. iii. 11. 
 
 The same writer observes in another work, 
 ** I have heard a disputant of this stamp, in 
 defiance of etymology and use, maintain that 
 the word, rendered in the New Testament 
 baptise, means more properly to sprinkUf than 
 
 N 
 
90 
 
 to plunge; and in defieince of all antiquity, that 
 the former method was the earliest, and for 
 many centuries, the most general practice in 
 baptising. One who argues in this manner, 
 never fails, with persons of knowledge, to be- 
 tray the cause he would defend ; and though, 
 with respect to the vulgar, bold assertions ge- 
 nerally succeed as well as arguments, some- 
 times better ; yet a candid mind will disdain to 
 take the help of a falsehood even in support of 
 the truth." — Led. o?i Pulpit Eloquence, p. 480.* 
 The above quotations from the writings of the 
 most eminent pa^dobaptists, fully demonstrate 
 that immersion was the ancient and universal 
 practice of the Christian Church in the admi- 
 nistration of baptism ; and that it is that mode 
 which is still most agreeable to the meaning of 
 the word, the spirit of the commission, and the 
 design of the institution. After such conces- 
 sions, how truly pitiable it is to see Protestants 
 torturing the language of Scripture, to extort 
 evidence in favour of a popish innovation — an 
 innovation which the church of Rome candidly 
 confesses to be founded on human tradition. 
 Well might Dr. Campbell express his regret 
 that " the generality of protestant translators 
 have shown less veneration for the style of the 
 Greek text, than the popish translators have for 
 
 ' Some of the above quotations are from Booth's Pasdobaptism Examined, 
 where the Reader will find the works mentioned from which they are taken. 
 
91 
 
 that of the Vulgate." In fact, the Papists are 
 willing to admit the truth of those scriptural 
 statements, which so many protestants are 
 either ashamed or afraid to own; *' That Christ 
 was baptised in the river Jordan," and that 
 " PhiH[) and the eunuch went down into the 
 water ;" nor have they any thing to fear from 
 this avowal, since they do not rest infant sprink- 
 ling upon any command or example in the New 
 Testament, but upon the tradition and practice 
 of the church; which they hold to be of equal 
 authority with the Scriptures. And can pro- 
 testants, with all their ingenuity, obtain for this 
 favorite rite a higher precedent than the church 
 of Rome ? Let the church of Rome speak for 
 herself, on this subject, in the person of one of 
 her Bishops ; — " Indeed protestants are found 
 to have recourse to the tradition of the church, 
 for determining a great number of points which 
 are left doubtful by the sacred text, particularly 
 with respect to the two sacraments which they 
 acknowledge. From the doctrine and practice 
 of the church alone (the church of Rome) they 
 learn, that although Christ our patterii was 
 baptised in a river, (Mark i. 9.) and the Ethi- 
 opian eunuch was led by St. Philip into the 
 water (Acts viii. 38.) for the same purpose ; yet 
 the application of it by affusion or aspersion, 
 is valid ; and that although Christ says, " He 
 that believeth and is baptised shall be saved," 
 
92 
 
 (Mark xvi. \Q.) infants are susceptible of the 
 benefits of baptism, who are not capable of 
 snaking an act of faith : with what pretensions 
 to consistency then can they reject her doc- 
 trine and practice in the remaining particu- 
 lars, &c.'.'" 
 
 Hence we see that infant sprinkling is ac- 
 knowledged to be a human ordinance, taken 
 from the tradition and practice of the most 
 corrupt church in the world ! Could it have 
 been found in any of the precepts of Christ, 
 could it have been deduced from the practice 
 of the Apostles, could it have been elicited by 
 the laws of just criticism from any of those pas- 
 sages which relate to the ordinance of baptism, 
 would not the Romish clergy have discovered 
 it ages ago, possessed as they were of all the 
 necessary means, — and would they in that case 
 have grounded their practice on tradition ? In 
 vain then do protestants attempt to found their 
 scheme of paedobaptism on higher authority than 
 that of the church of Rome ; in vain do they 
 try to explain away the true signification of the 
 sacred text, in support of their hypothesis ; 
 and they may continue to argue from notions 
 of expediency, fitness, and utility — yet after all, 
 it remains, what the church of Rome says it is, 
 a rite founded on tradition, and we know one 
 
 ' See Dr. Milner's End of all Controversy, Letter S9. 
 
93 
 
 who hath said " Thus do ye transgress the 
 commandment, and make the word of God of 
 none effect, through your traditions." 
 
 Since then it has been acknowledged by 
 papists and protestants, that the mode has been 
 changed from dipping to sprinkHng, is it not 
 extremely probable that the subject has been 
 changed also ? We shall now proceed to the 
 examination of this point by inquiring. 
 
 Thirdly, Who are the proper subjects of 
 baptism. 
 
 This branch of our discourse relates to an 
 important part of the revealed will of Christ, 
 stands intimately connected with the primitive 
 constitution of the christian church, and has 
 been greatly obscured by the prevailing prac- 
 tice of sprinkling infants ; for these reasons it 
 is needful that we should consider it minutely. 
 
 We have already shown from the testimony 
 of paedobaptists themselves, that immersion 
 was the primitive mode, and that this was ex- 
 changed for sprinkling by the usurped authority 
 of the church of Rome ; is it not then highly 
 probable that the same despotic spirit which 
 produced the hierarchy, changed also the sub- 
 jects ? — for that these have been changed, as 
 well as the mode, we shall proceed to prove by 
 an attentive examination of the several parti- 
 culars stated in the New Testament respecting 
 those whom the Apostles baptised. 
 
94 
 
 Consider first, the persons of whom our Lord 
 speaks in his commission. 
 
 It is remarkable that the passage from which 
 we derive our authority for baptising believers, 
 is that from which our opponents attempt to 
 deduce arguments for sprinkling infants. Each 
 party may feel persuaded that the truth is on 
 his side, yet one must be wrong ; for it is im- 
 possible that the sacred text can authorize two 
 systems so irreconcilably opposed to each other 
 in principle, spirit, and consequences ; nor can 
 two rites which are at such extreme points of 
 variance be both of divine appointment. 
 
 If it be contended that the words "teach all 
 nations baptising them", include infants, yet 
 do not the several particulars, mentioned by 
 the other Evangelists, expose the fallacy of 
 such an idea ? Each of the historians, who has 
 recorded the commission, exhibits some promi- 
 nent feature of our Lord's command: let us har- 
 monize their statements, and we shall find that 
 the subjects of baptism are as plainly designated 
 as the ordinance itself. Matthew says, "go ye 
 therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them 
 in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost ; teaching them to observe 
 all things whatsoever I have commanded you." 
 Mark says, " Go ye into all the world, and 
 preach the Gospel to every creature ; he that 
 helieveth and is haptised^ shall be saved" ; and 
 
95 
 
 though Luke does uot mention baptism, yet he 
 clearly shows what was included in preaching 
 the Gospel, for he informs us that the Lord 
 commanded "repentance and remission of sins 
 to be preached in his name, among all nations, 
 beginning at Jerusalem". These writers agree 
 as to the substance of Christ's command ; only 
 Mark and Luke mention some things which 
 Matthew omits. He simply says, that the 
 Apostles were to go and teach all nations ; but 
 Mark shows hoiv they were to teach them^ by 
 *' preaching the Gospel" ; and Luke mentions 
 the particular doctrines on which they were 
 to insist, — " repentance and remission of sins 
 through faith in the name of Jesus." Again, 
 while Matthew says that they were to baptise 
 as well as teach, Mark fills up the ellipsis by 
 observing that the persons whom the Apos- 
 tles were to baptise were believers. Thus the 
 phrase " baptising them", used by the former 
 Evangelist, and so widely interpreted by paedo- 
 baptists, is by Mark expressly limited to them 
 that believe ; and can therefore by no means be 
 supposed to include all nations. In support 
 of this opinion we observe that the pronoun 
 avToug them is masculine, and does not agj^ee with 
 cravra ra s^vtj all nations, whicli is neuter, but with 
 /MaStriTcci disciples, a masculine noun, understood 
 in connexion with the verb /jba'^rinvgan make dis- 
 ciples. "Go ye therefore, make disciples among 
 
96 
 
 all nations, baptising them (the disciples) in the 
 name of the Father, &c." 
 
 Independent of the grammatical construction, 
 which is sufficient to decide the case, nothing 
 can be more preposterous than to imagine that 
 our Lord sent forth his Apostles to baptise 
 whole nations, irrespective of their believing in 
 his name; or that he intended by the command 
 *' teach all nations", that his ministers should 
 sprinkle the face of every child as soon as it 
 is born, and thereby constitute it a partaker 
 of covenant blessings ! We therefore contend 
 that whatever inferences the paedobaptists may 
 draw in favour of their theory from the words 
 of Matthew, they are rendered perfectly nuga- 
 tory by the words of Mark, who restricts the 
 ordinance to believers only : nor can any sys- 
 tem of reasoning, however specious, founded 
 upon the principles of analogy, expediency, or 
 the moral fitness of things, overthrow the ob- 
 jection which this Evangelist opposes to the 
 practice of infant sprinkling, since he most 
 unequivocally makes faith an essential condi- 
 tion of christian baptism. 
 
 The admission of this fact led to that vicar- 
 ious profession which in the primitive church 
 always accompanied the baptism of babes, and 
 which has attended the administration of this 
 ceremony from its commencement to the pre- 
 sent time : hear Dr. Wall on this subject, "But 
 
97 
 
 the most material thing by far that was done at 
 baptism was the professions, the sincerity where- 
 of is more to be regarded than the external 
 baptism itself, as St. Peter testifies I. Pet. 
 iii. 21. They were constantly and universally 
 required, in the case of grown persons, to be 
 made with their own mouth in the most serious 
 manner; and, in the case of infants, by their 
 sponsors in their name. That a man may justly 
 wonder at the spirit of contradiction in those 
 people" (we presume Independents and Pres- 
 byterians,) " that pretend baptism does better 
 without them, and do practise accordingly." 
 And again, " There is no time or age of the 
 church in which there is any appearance that 
 infants were ordinarily baptised without spon- 
 sors or Godfathers; and Austin calls the pro- 
 fessions, words of the sacrament without which 
 an infant cannot be baptised'". Thus then, 
 according to the decided opinion of the groat 
 historian of paedobaptism, the baptism of Inde- 
 pendents and Presbyterians is invalid ! 
 
 As this vicarious profession is one of the 
 original, so it is one of the most absurd features 
 of psedobaptism. What can be more opposed 
 to the dictates of reason, and the solemnities 
 of religion, than the baptismal service of eccle- 
 siastical establishments ? When an infant was 
 
 1 See Wall on Infaut Baptism, part I. cliap. ix. p. 'i'li, 353. • 
 O 
 
98 
 
 brought to a minister of the church of England 
 to be baptised, he prays that " the infant coming 
 to his holy baptism may receive remission of sins 
 by spiritual regeneration ; that God, according 
 to his promise, would give to those who ask, let 
 them that seek, find, and open the gate unto 
 them that knock; that this infant may enjoy the 
 everlasting benediction of his heavenly wash- 
 ing, and come to his eternal kingdom." Then 
 he addresses the sponsors, " Ye have brought 
 this child here to be baptised. As Christ will 
 most surely keep and perform his promise, this 
 infant must also faithfully for his part, promise 
 by you that are his sureties, (until he come of 
 age to take it upon himself,) that he will re- 
 nounce the devil and all his works, and con- 
 stantly believe God's holy word, and obediently 
 keep his commandments : I demand therefore, 
 dost thou in the name of this child renounce 
 the devil and all his works, the vain pomp and 
 glory of the world, and the carnal desires of 
 the flesh, &c. ?" To which they severally reply, 
 " / will renounce themr " Dost thou believe 
 in God the father, and in Jesus Christ, and in 
 the Holy Ghost?" ''All this I stedfastly believer 
 " Wilt thou be baptised in this faith ?" " This 
 is my desire.'' Remember it is the unconscious 
 habe who is about to be baptised, and by the law 
 of the church of England it is he that is required 
 to profess faith in the Lord Jesus, but because 
 
99 
 
 of his entire incapacity to fulfil this requirement 
 she provides sponsors who present themselves 
 as sureties to God for the faith and obedience 
 of the child. Who, that was a stranger to this 
 mysterious plan of substitution, would not con- 
 clude that the sponsors were the persons about 
 to be baptised in the faith they had so solemnly 
 professed ? Is not this lying in the presence of 
 God ? Is it not trifling with his ordinance ? Is 
 it not offering insult to the dignity of the chris- 
 tian religion ? Yet this is called holy baptism^ 
 and is professedly grounded upon the words 
 of our Lord, " Go ye, teach all nations, bap- 
 tising them"; but do these words indeed coun- 
 tenance the practice of sprinkling babes on the 
 faith of sponsors or of parents ? We would 
 appeal to men of common sense, let them 
 decide this matter. 
 
 If this text proves any thing in favour of 
 paedobaptisra, it proves too much. If it can be 
 shown that it contains a law for the baptism of 
 infants, undoubtedly the infants of all nations 
 are included, pagan and mahometan, as well as 
 christians; and that system must be unjust and 
 arbitrary which makes their right to this ordi- 
 nance to depend upon the faith of parents or 
 sponsors. "Teach all nations, baptising themf 
 if it can be proved that this means "baptising the 
 infants of all nations," why do not paedobaptist 
 missionaries make the sprinkling of babes the 
 
100 
 
 first object of their attention ; why do they not 
 bring- all they can into the pale of the visible 
 church, and bestow on them covenant bless- 
 ings ? It wonld be difficult to show, even upon 
 their own ground, why some infants are thus 
 favoured, and others excluded. Are not the 
 children of all nations alike naturally and mo- 
 rally capacitated for baptism ? Do they not 
 equally need the spiritual benefits said to be 
 conveyed by this ordinance ? Would it not be 
 quite as eflectual to the salvation of infants 
 born in heathen lands, as to others? Should it 
 be replied, that baptism belongs to believers 
 and their seed only, (and this we know is said by 
 many,) we ask, why then in so many instances 
 administer it to the offspring of unbelievers? If 
 the children of merely nominal christians in this 
 country are fit subjects for baptism, if the unbe^ 
 lief and immorality of their parents does not 
 invalidate the ordinance to them, why should 
 the children of Pagans, Mahometans, Jews, 
 and infidels, be excluded from the benefits 
 of this rite, in cases where it could be ad- 
 ministered to them ? We are at a loss to 
 imagine upon what principle the seed of un- 
 believers in England, France, or Rome, are 
 entitled to baptism, more than the children 
 of the Heathen, seeing that their parents are 
 alike enemies to God, and in a state of con- 
 demnation ! 
 
101 
 
 Consider secondly, the persons whom the 
 Apostles baptised. 
 
 Had the baptism of babes been practised 
 by Christ, or included in the commission, the 
 ApostJes would have left upon record some 
 testimony of the fact: but in examining the 
 history of apostolic baptisms, children are riot 
 once mentioned. If the Apostles did baptise in- 
 fants, how utterly unaccountable is this silence, 
 in a history so minute, definite, and important, 
 and in which the administration of this ordi- 
 nance is recorded no less than nine times ! 
 
 On the day of pentecost when Peter preached 
 his memorable sermon;— "Now when they heard 
 this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said 
 unto Peter and to the rest of the Apostles, men 
 and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter 
 said unto them, repent and be baptised every 
 one of you in the name of the Lord Jesus, for 
 the remission of sins : and ye shall receive the 
 Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and 
 to your children, and to all that are afar off, 
 even as many as the Lord our God shall call. 
 Then they that gladly received his ivord ivere 
 baptised.' (Actsu.3li-42.) Peter and the rest of 
 the Apostles were now entering- upon the work 
 assigned them in the commission. Mark how 
 they began. fMo^nn-juv to teach, or make disciples, 
 not by baptising, but by preaching: they pro- 
 claimed salvation through a crucified Saviour; 
 
102 
 
 they Avarned the Je^s of their awful condition; 
 they exhorted them to repent ; and they bap- 
 tised those who believed, to the number of three 
 thousand. Observe what is said of those whom 
 they baptised, "they gladly received the word — 
 they then continued stedfastly in the Apostle's 
 doctrine, and in fellowship, and in breaking- of 
 bread, and in prayer ; and were continually in 
 the temple, praising God." 
 
 It is evident to a demonstration that the 
 three thousand baptised on this occasion, were 
 all of them adults, for they are said to have per- 
 formed acts of which infants are incapable. 
 If then the infants of these converts were ad- 
 mitted to the ordinance on the faith of their 
 parents, as pcedobaptists would induce us to 
 believe, there must, upon a moderate calcula- 
 tion, have been some thousands more baptised 
 than the Apostles have stated. How is this 
 omission, which impeaches the accuracy of the 
 historian, to be accounted for ? 
 
 We are told that the baptism of the children 
 is expressly referred to in the 39th verse, where 
 it is said " the promise is unto you, and to your 
 children'; and that in order to overthrow this 
 decisive testimony in favour of paedobaptism, 
 we are compelled to have recourse to a *' most 
 grossly absurd", if not a wilful perversion, of 
 the sacred text. Now this absurd perversion 
 of scripture which is charged upon us, consists 
 
103 
 
 in our referring " the promise", here spoken of, 
 to the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost : 
 but we are not the only persons who come 
 under this charge ; many paidobaptist com- 
 mentators have adopted the same heretical 
 opinion. 
 
 Dr.Doddridge, in a note upon this passage, 
 says, " Considering that the gift of the Spirit 
 had been mentioned just before, it seems most 
 natural to interpret this, as a reference to that 
 passage in Joel, which had been so largely 
 j'ecited above, (verse 17, mid fol.) where God 
 promises the effusion of the spirit on their sons 
 and on their daughters ; and accordingly, I 
 have paraphrased the latter clause of this verse 
 as referring to his extraordinary gifts ; and the 
 rather, as the sanctifying influences of the Spirit 
 must have already been received, to prepare 
 them for entering into the church by baptism." 
 
 And Dr. Whitby observes, '* These words 
 will not prove a right of infants to receive bap- 
 tism : the promise mentioned here, being that 
 only of the Holy spirit, mentioned in verses 16, 
 17, 18. and so relating only to the times of the 
 miraculous effusion of the Holy Ghost, and to 
 those persons who by age w ere made capable 
 of those extraordinary gifts." 
 
 But if this application of the passage were 
 peculiar to the baptists, it does not merit the 
 epithets employed against it : for it agrees with 
 
104 
 
 the event Mhich liad so recently transpired ; 
 with the grand subject of the Apostle's dis- 
 course ; and with the order he pursues. The 
 glorious manifestation of the Spirit to the 
 church of God, was predicted as a distinguish- 
 ing blessing of the new Covenant : to this great 
 and invaluable promise of the Father, Christ 
 frequently referred in his discourse at the last 
 supper ; (John, c. xiv, xv, xvi.) and just before 
 his ascension, he told his disciples to wait at 
 Jerusalem (or this promise, which, saith he, "ye 
 have heard of me;' and Peter himself declares 
 what he meant, by referring immediately to the 
 gift of the Holy Ghost, as that which the Father 
 had promised to bestow^ in the last days. v. 16, 
 17, 18, a?id Sti. 
 
 But this o})inion which, let it be remembered, 
 is as prevalent among paidobaptists, as among 
 ns, is nevertheless held uj) to public ridicule, 
 as one of the false glosses by which we endea- 
 vour to weaken every species of evidence, 
 which militates against our " darling hypothe- 
 sis". " What can be more absurd", say our 
 opponents, " than to suppose that the promise 
 mentioned by Peter refers to the extraordinary 
 gifts of the Spirit, w hen every one know s that 
 infants arc naturally and morally incapable of 
 receiving and exercising such gifts ?" True ! 
 but what baptist ever supposed for a moment, 
 that Peter had anv reference whatever to 
 
uiicoiiscioiis l>;iljf'S? And who, that is not l)<;nt 
 upon estahlishinj; a syntern, in dofiance of plain 
 truth and ri;;ht nasoii, f:oul(J find any thinj; 
 aljout infant baptism in the words of tJiis Apos- 
 tle ? Tht; plwase '^ -/mI r',T; rr/Mii 1//,^ and your 
 childreiL' does not mean haf>es or infants, as 
 the independents say it does, wlien defe-ndinj^ 
 their practice of sprinkling ehihlren: tv/mv sij^ni- 
 fies a descendant, ojie of any degree of age or 
 consanguinity, and not merely infants; indeed 
 it will he found most generally to mean poste- 
 rity. 7'!jus, -Matt. iii. 9; "Tliink not to say 
 within yourselves, we have Ahrahani to our 
 Father; for I say unto you, thot God is ahle of 
 these intones iyi7xM riy-va T'jj ' Kf^ti&fh to raise up a 
 7)a5/m//y to Ahrafiam." Matt, xxvii. 2o; — "then 
 answered ail the people and said, Ijis blood 
 be on us vMiir:] ra Tv/Mj. r,yZ)i and on ()\iY posterity. ' 
 Luke xxiii. 28; — "Daughters of Jerusalem, 
 weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, -mA irri 
 ra rkwt H-xiii. and for vour posterity y^ Vint the 
 passage which serves to illustrate very strongly 
 the one under coni^ideration is Acts xiii.32, 33; 
 "And we declare unto \ou glad ti(Jing-, how 
 that the promise which was made unto the- la- 
 thers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us, t«> 
 TjxK,/; a>iv their descendants^ certainly y<o/ their 
 infants. So when it is -lid, " The promise is 
 
 ■ S«:e alio Joba tiii. 39- 
 P 
 
lOG 
 
 unto you, and to your cliildren^^ it does not 
 mean your hahes, but jour descendants, your 
 posterity^ and is happily expounded by the 
 succeeding clause, "even as many," not as shall 
 be horn, but " even as many of them as the Lord 
 your God shall call.'' 
 
 But how shall we account for the conduct of 
 those who charge us so loudly with adopting 
 an absurd interpretation for the support of our 
 sentiments, when the most celebrated paedo- 
 baptists themselves, (such men as Hammond, 
 Whitby, Limborch, &c.) pronounce the argu- 
 ments taken from this text in favour of infant 
 baptism, to be entirely nugatory ? 
 
 The next account of baptism we meet with, 
 is in Acts viii. 12 ; — " Then Philip went down 
 to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ 
 unto them. And the people, with one accord, 
 gave heed unto the things which Philip spake, 
 hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. 
 And there was great joy in that city. But ivhen 
 they believed Philip, preaching the things con- 
 cerning the kingdom of God, and the name of 
 Jesus, they were baptised, rnen and women.''' 
 
 Here we find Philip, like the Apostles, pro- 
 ceeding according to the rules of the commis- 
 sion. He began by preaching the gospel, and 
 testifying to the Samaritans the things concern- 
 ing the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus; 
 when they believed his word, he baptised them, 
 
107 
 
 both men and women. Surely it is evident 
 that the ordinance of baptism was restricted 
 on this occasion at least, to those who were of 
 age to hear, understand and believe the gospel: 
 but according to the paed ©baptists, the seed of 
 believers, the children of those Samaritan con- 
 verts, must also have had a right to the ordi- 
 nance, and if so, why did not Philip baptise 
 them, or if he did, why is it not said that he 
 baptised men, women, and children ? 
 
 The fact is, that a personal profession of faith 
 was an absolute condition of christian baptism; 
 nor is there an instance recorded of any being 
 baptised who were not capable of exercising 
 and professing faith in the Lord Jesus. This 
 was manifest in the case of the eunuch; "Then 
 Philip opened his mouth, and began at the 
 same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 
 And as they" (Philip and the eunuch) " went 
 on their way, they came unto a certain water ; 
 and the eunuch said, see here is water, what 
 doth hinder me to be baptised ? and Philip 
 said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou 
 mayest." Here, as before, the Evangelist be- 
 gan with preaching Christ : and he did not 
 baptise him, till he had professed faith in the 
 Lord Jesus ; — " I believe that Jesus Christ is 
 the Son of God"; then "Philip commanded 
 the chariot to stand still, and they both went 
 down into the water, both Philip and the 
 
108 
 
 eunuch, and he baptised him." We do not 
 read of any other receiving the ordinance at 
 this time ; neither children nor servants are 
 said to have been baptised on the faith of this 
 individual. 
 
 In the 9th chapter of Acts, we have a record 
 of the baptism of Saul. — " And Ananias went 
 his way, and entered into the house ; and put- 
 ting his hands on him, said, brother Saul, the 
 Lord, even Jesus, who appeared unto thee in 
 the way as thou earnest, hath sent me that thou 
 mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with 
 the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell 
 from his eyes as it had been scales, and he re- 
 ceived sight forthwith, and arose and was bap- 
 tised." This is additional evidence in favour 
 of our opinion, that none but those who profes- 
 sed faith in Christ, were baptised in primitive 
 times ; and that it was the indispensable duty 
 of all who believed, to comply with the com- 
 mand, " Why tarriest thou ? arise, and be 
 baptised." 
 
 We now proceed to examine the circum- 
 stances connected with the baptism of Cornelius 
 and his friends. Acts x. 34, &c. — " Then Pe- 
 ter opened his mouth and said, of a truth I 
 perceive that God is no respecter of persons : 
 but in every nation, he that feareth him and 
 worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. 
 The word which God sent unto the children of 
 
109 
 
 Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ, — he is 
 Lord of ail — that word I say you know, which 
 was published throughout all Judea, and began 
 from GaHlee, after the baptism which John 
 preached : and he commanded us to preach 
 unto the people, and to testify, that it is he 
 who was ordained of God to be the judge of 
 quick and dead ; to him give all the prophets 
 witness, that through his name, whosoever be- 
 lieveth in him, shall receive remission of sins. 
 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy 
 Ghost fell on all them ivho heard the ivord. And 
 they of the circumcision who believed, were 
 astonished, as many as came with Peter, be- 
 cause that on the Gentiles also was poured out 
 the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard 
 them speak ivith tongues, and magnify God. 
 Then answered Peter, can any man forbid 
 water, that these should not be baptised, who 
 have received the Holy Ghost ? And he com- 
 manded them to be baptised in the name of the 
 Lord." 
 
 Let the impartial reader carefully notice each 
 particular recorded in this history, and then let 
 him say whether he can find the shadow of 
 evidence in favour of infant sprinkling. It is 
 said of Cornelius himself that he was a "de- 
 vout man," given to much prayer and to alms 
 deeds ; and of his household, that "they feared 
 God:" he deputed two of his household, and a 
 
110 
 
 " devout soldier," to go to Joppa, to fetch 
 Simon ; and he assembled his religious friends 
 and acquaintances together, to hear the word 
 of the Lord from the mouth of the Aj30stle ; 
 " we are all here," said he, " present before 
 God, to hear all things that are commanded 
 thee of God." Now observe how exactly the 
 Apostle's present conduct accords with his 
 former practice, and with the rules prescribed 
 in the commission ; to which he appeals for his 
 authority, as the messenger of the Lord ; "And 
 he commanded us to preach unto the people, 
 and to testify, that through his name, whoso- 
 ever believeth in him shall receive remission of 
 sins." While this Apostle was thus preaching 
 pardon throu^ll faith in a ciucified Saviour; 
 and while Cornelius and his friends, were list- 
 ening with ardour to this sacred truth ; the 
 Holy Ghost descended upon them, and endued 
 them with miraculous gifts— and those persons 
 who heard his word, and who were endued with 
 the Holy Ghost, are the persons whom Peter 
 commanded to he baptised in the name of the 
 Lord. Is there any possible mode of reasoning 
 which can infer the baptism of infants, from 
 this statement? Does not every word tlirough- 
 out tiie whole, militate against the system 1 
 
 We find the sixth example of apostolic bap- 
 tism. Acts xvi. 13 — 16; — "And on the sabbath 
 we went out of the city by a river side, where 
 
Ill 
 
 prayer was wont to be made : and we sat 
 down, and spake unto the women who resorted 
 thither. And a certain woman, named Lydia, 
 a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, who 
 worshipped God, heard us ; whose heart the 
 Lord opened, that she attended to the things 
 which were spoken of Paul. And when she 
 was baptised, and her household, she besought 
 us, saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful 
 to the Lord, come into my house, and abide 
 there : and she constrained ns." 
 
 Facts are stubborn things — and it is a fact^ 
 that there is not one word about children, from 
 the beginning to the end of this history! Before 
 the psedobaptists profess to derive support in 
 favour of their theory from this document, they 
 should prove that Lydia was a married woman, 
 that she had young children, that they were 
 with her at Philippi, and that they were bap- 
 tised by the Apostle, — //// they have demon- 
 strated these things, (and the onus probandi lies 
 on them) we deny that they can derive from 
 this example any authority for their practice of 
 sprinkling infants. 
 
 Whitby says, in his paraphrase of this pas- 
 sage, that *' when Lydia and those of her house- 
 hold were instructed in the christian faith, and 
 in the nature of baptism required by it, she was 
 baptised, and her household." This explica- 
 tion completely excludes infants, for they could 
 
112 
 
 not have received that instruction, which ac- 
 cording to this psedobaptist commentator, was 
 imparted to her household, as well as to herself! 
 
 The baptism of the jailor, and his household, 
 is recorded in the same chapter, from the 30th 
 to the 34th verse ;— " And he said, Sirs, what 
 must I do to be saved ? And they said, believe 
 on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be 
 saved, and thy house. And they spake unto 
 him the word of the Lord, and to all that icere 
 ill his house. And he took them the same hour 
 of the night and washed their stripes ; and was 
 baptised, he and all his, straightway. And 
 when he had brought them into his house, he 
 set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in 
 God with all his house." 
 
 It appears from this statement that the jail- 
 or s family consisted of persons in the full exer- 
 cise of their understandings, that they believed 
 the testimony of the Apostle, and were capable 
 of professing faith in the doctrines which he 
 preached. " Paul and Silas spake the word 
 of the Lord unto him, and to all that ivere in his 
 house ; they exhorted him, and all that were 
 with him, to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, 
 and he, a?id all that ivere in his house, believed, 
 were baptised, and rejoiced in God." The 
 argument drawn from the use of the singular 
 participle (Tjc/ff^uxw? he believing) that his house- 
 hold were baptised on /</.s profession of faith, is 
 
113 
 
 reildered nugatory by the recnrrence of the 
 singular form of the verb in the subsequent 
 relation. He and his house Timanuxug believing ; 
 he and his house sQaTriST} were baptised ; he and 
 his house rr/aXkidmro rejoiced. Neither can it be 
 supposed that eternal salvation was secured to 
 his household, upon his believing the testimony 
 of the Apostle. Dr. Doddridge's observations 
 on this passage are much to the purpose; "The 
 meaning cannot be that the eternal salvation of 
 his family would be secured by his faith ; but 
 that his believing in Christ, would be the best 
 security of his family from present danger; and 
 that if they also themselves believed, they 
 would be entitled to the same spiritual and 
 everlasting blessings with himself." If then, 
 the jailor's faith did not give his family a title to 
 eternal life ; if it did not secure to them, the 
 enjoyment of spiritual blessings ; upon what 
 principle could it give them a right to baptism, 
 which, according to the independents, is the 
 outward seal of those blessings ? 
 
 We conclude, therefore, from the whole ac- 
 count, that he and his household believed ; and 
 that on their individual profession of faith in 
 the Lord Jesus, he and his household were 
 baptised. 
 
 In Acts xviii.8. we read of certain Corinthians 
 who were baptised by Paul ; — " And Crispus, 
 the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the 
 
 Q 
 
114 
 
 Lord, vvitii all his house : and many of the Co- 
 rinthians hearing, believed, and were baptised/' 
 
 And in I. Cor. i. 14 — 16. he says, " I thank 
 God that I baptised none of you, but Crispus 
 and Gaius ; lest any should say that I had 
 baptised in mine own name. And I baptised 
 also the household of Stephanus ; besides, I 
 know not whether I baptised any other." And 
 again, in the 16th chapter; — "Ye know the 
 house of Stephanus, that it is the first fruits of 
 Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves 
 to the ministry of the saints." 
 
 In these cases, as in those already adduced, 
 we find a strict regard to the order laid down 
 ill commission, — teaching preceded baptism ; 
 and none were baptised but those who pro- 
 fessed faith in Christ. It is said that the Co- 
 rinthians *' heard the word, that they believed, 
 and were baptised." Of the household of Cris- 
 pus it is said, that " he believed on the Lord, 
 ivith all his oixtfi family " (so Grotius, Doddridge, 
 and others have rendered ohoi in a variety of 
 instances). And of the household of Stepha- 
 nus it is said, "that they were devoted to the 
 ministry of the saints" ; being employed, either 
 in preaching the gospel, or in succouring the 
 saints under trial and affliction. 
 
 Dr. Macknight observes upon this passage, 
 that " the family of Stephanus seem all to have 
 been adults, when they were baptised T And 
 
115 
 
 surely what is said of the family of Crispiis 
 aftbrds us strong evidence of their being adults, 
 when they were baptised ; for they all believed 
 in the Lord ! 
 
 We shall only notice further the baptism of 
 certain disciples at Ephesus. Acts xix. 1--7 ; — 
 " And it came to pass, that while ApoUos was 
 at Corinth, Paul having passed through the 
 upper coasts, came to Ephesus ; and finding- 
 certain disciples, he said unto them, have ye 
 received the Holy Ghost since ye believed ? 
 And they said unto him, we have not so much 
 as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. 
 And he said unto them, unto what then were 
 ye baptised ? and they said, unto John's bap- 
 tism. Then said Paul, John verily baptised 
 with the baptism of repentance, saying unto 
 the people, that they should believe on him 
 which should come after him, that is, on Christ 
 Jesus. When they heard this^ they were bap- 
 tised in the name of the Lord Jesus. And 
 when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the 
 Holy Ghost came on them ; and they spake 
 with tongues, and prophesied. And all the 
 men were about twelve." 
 
 It is not our present purpose to enter into the 
 controversy respecting these disciples who were 
 baptised a second time ; (about this the most 
 learned commentators are divided,) but we 
 shall briefly remark that they possessed those 
 
116 
 
 qualifications, which rendered them proper 
 subjects for the ordinance; they were adults; 
 they were called disciples; they had been in- 
 structed under the ministry of John ; and they 
 are said to have believed. 
 
 We have before stated the theory of paedo- 
 baptism, as it has been laid down by its various 
 advocates ; and we shall now proceed to exa- 
 mine the consequences which flow from it, the 
 period when the practice first appeared, and 
 the principles on which at different times it has 
 been defended, 
 
 In the first place, this theory tends to lessen 
 the importance of the Christian revelation. To 
 us it appears evident that the ordinances of 
 Christ's church are founded upon his authority 
 and are illustrated by precedents drawn from the 
 New Testament; this the paedobaptists virtu- 
 ally deny, by appealing to an abrogated rite of 
 the Old Testament dispensation in defence of 
 their practice : but why draw an argument from 
 this source, if the validity of infant sprinkling 
 can be proved from the christian Revelation ? 
 Is it not fair to infer that a rite which cannot be 
 established on this ground, is not an ordinance 
 of the gospel dispensation ? We estimate as 
 highly, and believe as firmly, as any of our op- 
 ponents, the truths of the Old Testament scrip- 
 tures ; but we deny their sufficiency to direct 
 us in the administration of gospel ordinances. 
 
117 
 
 Christ is the sole legislator of his church, and 
 he has given his word, " whereunto we do well 
 to take heed, as unto a light that sliineth in a 
 dark place." 
 
 Tlie church of Rome borrows her mitred 
 priests, and smoking incense from the splendid 
 ceremonies of the Mosaic economy: the church 
 of England, her vestments, her altar, and her 
 tythes, from the same source: and paedobaptist 
 dissenters profess to derive their reasons for 
 sprinkling infants from a rite of the same abro- 
 gated system : but neither of them recognize 
 the principle, to its full extent, that the New 
 Testament scriptures contain within themselves 
 every thing that is essential to our faith and 
 practice. 
 
 Surely to maintain that paedobaptism is a 
 divine rite of the Neiv Covenant, and yet to 
 appeal to the writings of Moses for its authority, 
 is to question the sufficiency and importance of 
 the christian Revelation ; and implies that it is 
 not competent to direct us in the administration 
 of its own institutions. We consider the law 
 of baptism to be as independent of the law of 
 circumcision, as the Lord's supper is of the 
 passover ; and in both cases, it appears to us, 
 that Christ has given perfect instruction to his 
 followers : and, therefore, it is not only unne- 
 cessary, but presumptuous, to go to any other 
 quarter. Such appeals from Christ to Moses 
 
118 
 
 have tended materially to adulterate the truth, 
 to corrupt the practice of the church, and to 
 rob Christ of his glory, as Legislator in Zion. 
 
 Again, the arguments adduced in support of 
 this theory are not discoverable by the illiterate. 
 
 It is an inherent excellence of the christian 
 revelation, that its precepts are expressed in 
 terms and illustrated by examples, familiar to 
 the ignorant as well as the learned: a man of 
 plain understanding, and very limited informa- 
 tion, has only to open these sacred records, and 
 attend to the obvious meaning of the words in 
 which their injunctions are delivered, and he 
 will obtain a perfect knowledge of the institu- 
 tions of Christ, without the aid of commentators 
 or critics. It is a fact in which we glory, and 
 which our opponents, with all their sophistry, 
 cannot refute, that the directions for the obser- 
 vance of believer's baptism, and the arguments 
 for its support, are to be found in the New 
 Testament. 
 
 If infant sprinkling were of Christ, would it 
 not admit of proof «5 readily as believers' bap- 
 tism ? Should we not find it supported by some 
 tangible scriptural evidence, that would carry 
 conviction to the mind of the illiterate ? But in 
 vain does a reader of this description come to 
 the New Testament to establish the right of his 
 infants to baptism ; in vain does he seek from 
 thence, authority for the administration of this 
 
119 
 
 ceremony ; he cannot find it among the laws of 
 Christ ; he has no precedent for it in the Acts 
 of the Apostles ; and unlike every institution of 
 the gospel, it rests upon a species of evidence, 
 not within the grasp of ordinary capacities. 
 
 It is manifest from the mode of defence 
 adopted by the advocates of this theory, that 
 it can only be made to appear plausible by a 
 laborious process of moral reasoning, and by 
 inferences drawn from very remote premises. 
 The man who can read the New Testament in 
 no language bat his own, whose early preju- 
 dices and habits so strongly favour infant sprink- 
 ling, that he either cannot or will not believe 
 the plain record of the fact, that men and wo- 
 men only were immersed by the Apostles, must 
 follow the learned through many perplexed 
 and doubtful discussions : he must study the 
 nature and design of the Abrahamic Covenant, 
 the relation it bears to the present dispensation, 
 and the points in which they are agreed ; he 
 must understand the law of circumcision, why 
 it was given, who were the subjects of it, and 
 what were the blessings it sealed to them ; and 
 then draw this logical conclusion, that because 
 Abraham,hj a positive divinecommand, circum- 
 cised his male children on the eighth day, he with- 
 out a command is to sprinkle his female children 
 on any day he pleases : he must be acquainted 
 with the different modes of purification used 
 
120 
 
 under the law ; know Avhat things were made 
 clean by sprinkling, and what by immersion ; 
 and because Moses sprinkled the vessels of the 
 tabernacle, he is to infer that sprinkling is 
 the proper mode of administering baptism : he 
 must inquire diligently about proselyte baptism 
 from the works of those learned men who have 
 read the Talmud and Maimonides; and finding 
 by their account that the children of proselytes 
 were baptised with their parents, he is to re- 
 ceive this opinion, as a warrant for the baptism 
 of his own children : he must learn from some 
 one, who will read the fathers for him, when 
 this practice arose, and by what arguments they 
 defended it; and he must be careful to observe 
 and remember, that the terms, to proselyte, to 
 regenerate, to sanctify, in those places where an 
 infant is the relative, are used figuratively for 
 baptise, and are always to be construed in favour 
 of infant baptism. And finally, he must believe, 
 what is contrary to truth, and to the opinion of 
 learned men in all ages, that the original word 
 from which we derive baptism, signifies not 
 only to immerse, but also to pour and to 
 sprinkle ; and that this last is as genuine a sig- 
 nification as the first. 
 
 This is no exaggerated account of the argu- 
 ments by which we have heard Independents 
 labour to establish the divine right of infant 
 sprinkling ; their having recoiirse to such, abun- 
 
121 
 
 dantly proves, that this system is unsupported 
 by scriptural evidence. Are these arguments 
 discoverable by the great bulk of professing 
 Christians? Can that institution be of Christ 
 which requires such a circuitous method of 
 proof ? The baptism of believers needs no such 
 defence; it occupies a distinguished place among 
 the ordinances of divine vrorshii), and brings 
 with it directions for its observance, as well as 
 evidence of its authority! 
 
 Again, the theory of psedobaptism is only 
 adapted to the constitution of a national church; 
 it has a manifest tendency to unite the church 
 and the world, and is therefore necessarily op- 
 dosed to the spirit and principles of dissent. 
 Why do we dissent from the church of England? 
 becauseit is an ecclesiastical political institution, 
 which in its constitution and government is di- 
 verse from that kingdom which is not of this 
 world. We believe that the church of Christ is 
 congregational, composed of persons professing 
 faith in his name; that its laws are derived from 
 the sacred canon of the New Testament ; that 
 its jurisdiction is spiritual ; and that the Lord 
 Jesus is its head : but not so a national church 
 — she records as her members, all the subjects 
 of the realm, the greater part of whom are stran- 
 gers to God, and enemies to true religion; her 
 Christianity is political; her dominion is secular; 
 her laws emanate from some worldly prince or 
 
 R 
 
122 
 
 ambitious pontiff, who is constituted her head ; 
 his sceptre is the organ of government; his 
 creed the standard of her faith. 
 
 To such a churchy paedobaptism is an appro- 
 priate, nay an essential appendage. It is that 
 mystic rite by which the king and the subject, 
 the saint and the infidel, are incorporated into 
 one body, and are alike pronounced children of 
 God, members of Christ, and inheritors of the 
 kingdom of heaven! It is the charm, whose 
 magic spell holds in unison these remote and 
 jarring elements; it is the seal of priestly domi- 
 nion over the consciences of men ; the mark by 
 which they are recognized as belonging to that 
 chartered ecclesiastical corporation, which de- 
 nounces all who dare to question her infallibility 
 as schismatics, heretics and apostates ; as wor- 
 thy of pains, penalties and death! 
 
 And it is quite natural to suppose, that any 
 rite introduced into the christian system upon 
 the broad principle of circumcision, should pro- 
 duce such results as these ; paedobaptism has a 
 direct tendency to augment the power of the 
 church, by an unhallowed confederation with 
 the world ; to destroy that individuality of cha- 
 racter and profession, which it is the design of 
 the gospel to maintain ; and to make Christi- 
 anity, what Judaism was, a national religion. 
 It lessens the importance, and in effect, de- 
 nies the necessity, of faith and repentance, as 
 
123 
 
 pre-requisites to church membership ; and fl 
 opens a wide door indeed for the admission of 
 profligate characters into the visible kingdom 
 of Christ — nay, by constituting them members 
 of the cluu'ch, before they can discern between 
 good and evil it ensures a succession of unrege- 
 nerate profane professing christians. 
 
 That such results as these are not visible 
 among paedobaptist dissenters, is simply be- 
 cause they do not pursue their system to its 
 legitimate consequences : 07ily let them receive 
 the subjects of bajjtism into church fellowship, 
 (and why not ? — they are as fit for the one as 
 for the other,) the moral qualifications of their 
 members wouiyrl be of precisely the same cha- 
 racter, as are those of the church of England ; 
 and let their power be equal to their zeal for 
 this rite, and they w ould speedily grow into a 
 national church. 
 
 Again, another objection to the theory of 
 infant baptism, is the contrariety of opinion 
 which exists among those who yet most cordi- 
 ally espouse its general principle. This implies 
 a deficiency of scriptural evidence to guide 
 their decisions, as well as a want of scriptural 
 law to regulate their practice : nor is this an 
 unfounded assertion ; for though they all agree 
 in the general conclusion, that infant baptism 
 is necessary, it is well known that they differ 
 materially as to the premises from which they 
 
124 
 
 draw this conclusion ; and that they flatly con- 
 tradict each other as to many particulars con- 
 nected with this ceremony. So palpable is 
 this difference of opinion in the history of the 
 present controversy, that we frequently find the 
 most expert and zealous defenders of paedo- 
 baptism, not only admitting the great facts 
 from which we reason, but strenuously opposing 
 and laboriously disproving the principles laid 
 down by some of their own party. 
 
 They differ among themselves respecting the 
 mode of baptising infants. The Greek and 
 oriental churches, which inchide one half of the 
 christian world, maintain that immersion is so 
 essential to the validity of baptt^m, that a man 
 who has been sprinkled only in his infancy is deem- 
 ed by them unbaptised, and is not admitted to 
 their communion till he has been immersed ; 
 and many protestant paedobaptists have been 
 anxious that baptism should be again per- 
 formed by immersion, from an avowed convic- 
 tion, in direct opposition to other psedobaptists, 
 that this was the primitive mode, that this 
 alone answers to the design of the ordinance, 
 and that sprinkling is a popish innovation. 
 
 Nor is it in reference to the quantity of water, 
 and the manner of its application only, that 
 they differ, but about the ceremonies which are 
 to accompany this rite. The church of Rome 
 consecrates the baptismal water by pouring 
 
125 
 
 into it oil ; she exorcises the child ; puts salt 
 into his month, spittle upon his eyes, nose, and 
 ears; and crosses him on the forehead, neck and 
 breast : the church of England, and all protes- 
 tant established churches, require a profession 
 of faith to be made by sponsors ; and that the 
 child should be signed with the cross at his 
 baptism ; independents simply sprinkle a little 
 water on the child's face, without regard to any 
 profession of faith : and each of these contend 
 earnestly for their own particular practice in the 
 administration of this rite. 
 
 Paedobaptists differ among themselves, as to 
 whose children are proper subjects of baptism. 
 Some say that the offspring of pagans, infidels, 
 Jews and Turks, have as just a claim, as the 
 seed of believers ; and that if they fall into the 
 hands of christians, they ought to be introduced 
 into the visible church by this ceremony : others 
 deny this, and maintain that baptism should be 
 restricted to children born in christian countries, 
 because their parents, if not believers, are never- 
 theless nominal professors of Christianity. A 
 third class contend that the offspring of belie- 
 vers, in the evangelical sense of the term, are 
 the only legitimate subjects of baptism ; and 
 that to depart from this rule, is to take the chil- 
 dren's meat, and to cast it unto dogs. 
 
 From the concessions of paedobaptists, it 
 appears that the authority for infant baptism is 
 
126 
 
 the most perplexing part of their theory --it is 
 not surprising therefore, that on this point also, 
 they are much divided among themselves. 
 
 Some affirm that this rite rests upon our 
 Lord's commission to disciple all nations, which 
 say they, includes the baptism of infants. Others 
 deny this, and allow that neither the letter nor 
 the spirit of this commission will admit of such 
 an interpretation. A supposed universality of 
 grace, is assigned by some, as a sufficient rea- 
 son for baptising infants ; while those padobap- 
 tists who believe the doctrine of particular 
 redemption, deny this position altogether, and 
 in their turn bring forward circumcision as scrip- 
 tural w arrant for the practice : others reject 
 circumcision as their authority, and profess to 
 administer this rite on the ground of Jewish 
 proselyte baptism — while many discard these 
 Jewish ceremonies, and declare, that the child's 
 perso7ial interest in the covenant of grace, gives 
 him an undoubted right to baptism : again, this 
 covenant relation is questioned, and the faith 
 of the jmrents is considered as the child's only 
 title to this privilege. 
 
 There is yet another party of paedobaptists 
 who disclaim all these authorities, and who 
 consider that the efficacy of the ordinarice itself 
 which they believe conveys salvation to its sub- 
 ject, affords an unanswerable reason for its 
 administration ; and by others the authority of 
 
127 
 
 the church is pleaded as an infallible guide in 
 this, as in other matters of faith and practice. 
 
 Further, paedobaptists differ among them- 
 selves, not only about the mode, the ceremonies 
 which should accompany, and the authority for 
 practising, infant baptism, but also about the end 
 or design of this rite. Upon this point Witsius 
 remarks, "The question relating to the efficacy 
 and usefulness of christian baptism, in reference 
 to the elect infants of parents who are in the 
 covenant, is peculiarly arduous and abstruse : 
 and, as of old, so very lately, it is embarrassed 
 by the subtilty of curious disputes." If it be so 
 difficult to answer the inquiry, "what benefit 
 does baptism confer on elect infants ?" it must 
 be tenfold more difficult, if not impossible, to 
 shew what end is answered by the baptism of 
 non-elect infants. We humbly conceive, that if 
 they are in the covenant, it is \he\Y election, and 
 not their baptism, that gives them a federal re- 
 lation to Christ, and makes them one in cove- 
 nant with God ; and to talk of putting elect 
 i)fa?its into covenant, those whom God hath of 
 his own sovereign will and pleasure, taken into 
 covenant with himself, is something worse than 
 darkening counsel by words without know- 
 ledge. And to profess to put those into the co- 
 venant by baptism, who are not the children of 
 the covenant, and who prove this but too 
 clearly, by determinately rejecting God to the 
 
128 
 
 end of their days, is a presumptuous absurdity ! 
 Viewing either side of the question, the end 
 to be answered by this ceremony appears inex- 
 plicable. It is this very difficulty, which has 
 produced the great diversity of opinion, prevail- 
 ing among paedobaptists on the subject ; and 
 it has led their different denominations to assign 
 to it, different degrees of importance, according 
 to the spirit of their individual creeds, and the 
 several forms of their church government. 
 
 The Greek and Romish churches representin- 
 fant baptism as absolutely essential to salvation. 
 The church of England, with her Calvinistic 
 creed, and Arminian clergy, denies that it is es- 
 sential to salvation, yet boldly affirms that it 
 makes its subject, "a child of God, a member 
 of Christ, and an inheritor of the kingdom of 
 heaven." The independents, who are tenacious 
 of the principles of dissent, who maintain Cal- 
 vinistic doctrines, and seek to promote the pu- 
 rity of their churches, contend that baptism 
 brings children into the covenant, but not into 
 the church. Even some of these appear to make 
 this rite necessary to salvation, by accusing us 
 of criminal indifference to the everlasting in- 
 terests of our children, because we refuse to 
 sprinkle them in their infancy. 
 
 We shall now inquire into the origin of this 
 theory. When did the baptism of babes come 
 into practice ? Did it constantly and universally 
 
129 
 
 prevail in the first ages of the christian dispen- 
 sation? 
 
 Upon the closest examination of the inspired 
 writings, we cannot find one passage which leads 
 us to infer, that Christ or his Apostles practised 
 or enjoined this ceremony. It was altogether 
 unknown to the christian church during the 
 first century, according to the concessions of 
 paedobaptists themselves. Luther says, "it can- 
 not be proved by the sacred scriptures, that 
 infant baptism was instituted by Christ, or begun 
 by the first christians after the Apostles." Cur- 
 cellaeus observes, "the baptism of infants in the 
 first two centuries after Christ was altogether 
 unknown ; but in the third and fourth centuries 
 was allowed by some few: in the fifth and 
 following ages it was generally received." Epis- 
 copius and Limborch maintain that " the neces- 
 sity of paedobaptism was never asserted in any 
 council, till about the year 418." Nor is the 
 testimony of Suicerus less decided; "no one 
 received baptism during the first two centuries, 
 except he who was instructed in the faith, 
 initiated into the doctrines of Christ, and able 
 to testify that he believed, because it is written 
 " Ae that believeth and is baptised shall be saved:'* 
 therefore it was necessary in the first place to 
 believe — hence arose the order of catechumens 
 in the church. At that time also, the custom 
 was universally and constantly observed, to 
 
 s 
 
give llic eucliaiist to catechuiDens immediately 
 alter their baptism." 
 
 Such is the testimony of men who were piedo- 
 baptists ; men of profound learning', extensive 
 research, and well acquainted with the records 
 of early ecclesiastical customs. Such testimony 
 is of itself sufficient to repel the charge of igno- 
 lance, bigotry and intolerance, which some 
 independent ministers, with an air of haughty 
 confidence, cast upon us, because we dare to 
 affirm that infant baptism is not to be found 
 among the institutes of Christ. 
 
 Since the paedobaptists are anxious to prove 
 the early practice of this rite, with a view to 
 establish its divine authority, we shall examine 
 the nature and force of the evidence which they 
 adduce in favour of its primitive antiquity. 
 
 The only fathers of the first century whose 
 writings are extant, are Barnabas, Clemens Ro- 
 manus, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp : these 
 were cotemporaries with the Apostles ; yet, it 
 is manifest from Dr. Wall's history, that nothing- 
 can be gathered from them in support of this 
 practice. 
 
 Justin Martyr, who lived in the second cen- 
 tury, is the first author quoted in defence of this 
 theory. From him, and he wrote about the 
 year 1(50, the following passage is selected by 
 Dr. Wall, and I have copied his translation, 
 "1 will now declare to you after what manner 
 
1.31 
 
 we, being made new by Christ, have dedicated 
 ourselves to God ; least if I should leave out 
 that, I might seem to deal unfairly in some part 
 of my apology. They who are persuaded and 
 do believe that these things which are taught by 
 us are true, and do promise to live accordingly 
 to them, are directed first to pray, and ask of 
 Ciod with fasting, the forgiveness of their former 
 sins; and we also pray and fast together with 
 them : then we bring them to some place where 
 there is water; and they are regenerated by 
 the same way of regeneration by which we were 
 regenerated, for they are washed with water in 
 the name of God the Father, and of our Savi- 
 our Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Ghost." Dr. 
 Wall, after quoting this passage, adds these 
 remarkable words — "if I am asked to what 
 purpose I bring in tliis, in a discourse of infant 
 baptism, my answer is, that I do not produce it 
 as making directly, or immediately either for, 
 or against it : but I bring it in because it is the 
 most ancient account of the way of baptism, 
 next the scriptures, and shews the plain and 
 simple manner of ad ministering it." An impar- 
 tial reader will draw a different inference ; he 
 will perceive that this passage not only makes 
 against infant baptism, but that it furnishes us 
 with a powerful argument in favour of our prac- 
 tice. Justin is speaking of those who had at- 
 tained to the full exercise of their understanding; 
 
132 
 
 he describes them as converted, or made new 
 by Christ; he says that they dedicated them- 
 selves to God, not that they were dedicated 
 by parents or sponsors ; he represents them as 
 being persuaded of the truth of what they heard, 
 as beHeving that truth, as praying, fasting and 
 promising to live according to the gospel, and 
 he adds, we take them to a place where there is 
 water, and baptise them in the name of the 
 sacred Three. 
 
 Now we ask, does this account favour the 
 theory of infant baptism? Does it not on the 
 contrary, most decidedly support the practice 
 of the baptism of believers by immersion ? In- 
 fants can neither fast, nor pray, nor promise 
 obedience ; nor, if they are to be sprinkled, 
 need they be taken to a place where there is 
 water ; a little water may easily be brought to 
 them, as is the custom at the present day. As 
 Justin in his apology intended to give the Roman 
 authorities an impartial account of the senti- 
 ments, worship and practices of the christians, 
 would he not have mentioned the baptism of 
 infants, if, at the time in which he wrote, such 
 a rite existed ? 
 
 There is another passage of the same writer, 
 which Dr. Wall has thus translated: "Several 
 persons among us of sixty or seventy years old, 
 of both sexes, who were discipled to Christ 
 in their childhood, do continue uncorrupted." 
 
133 
 
 From which it is inferred that the discipling 
 of these persons in childhood, means, that 
 they were baptised in their infancy, Justin's 
 
 words are, 6/ h rrdihoiv sfia^ririJ^riCav rSj ^g/ffriJ who 
 
 from their childhood have been discipled to 
 Christ, or instructed in his doctrines. The 
 verb fia^nrsuu as used in the New Testament, 
 and in the writings of the Greek fathers, is 
 declared by the first critics, to include the act 
 of teaching, to make disciples by instruction. 
 Thus Schleusner renders it, " To instruct any 
 one in the first principles of the christian religion." 
 And the word is so used. Matt. xiii. 52 ; " every 
 scribe fia^r^Tiv^sig instructed in the kingdom of 
 heaven." The constant practice of teaching cat- 
 echumens, who passed through various classes, 
 and underwent many examinations, before they 
 were received to baptism, manifestly shews that 
 the early christians were exceedingly solicitous 
 that persons should be instructed in the faith, 
 before they were admitted to the ordinances 
 of the gospel. 
 
 Irenaeus, who wrote towards the close of the 
 second century, about thirty years after Justin, 
 does not mention the baptism of infants : nor 
 do the quotations cited by Dr. Wall from his 
 writings, prove that it was practised in his time. 
 In his work against heresies, wnitten after his 
 election to the bishopric of Lyons in 178, under 
 the pontificate of Eleuthenis, he says, "For 
 
134 
 
 Chiist came to save all persons by himself; all 
 I mean, who by him are born again to God, 
 infants and little ones, and children and youths, 
 and aged persons." Now admitting the genu- 
 ineness of this passage, which has been disputed 
 by papists and protestants, it proves nothing in 
 favour of infant baptism : nor can an inference 
 in support of this practice be drawn from it, 
 without allowing, what we presume the inde- 
 pendents do not believe, that baptism and rege- 
 neration are the same thing. 
 
 Had Dr. Wall proceeded in his quotation 
 from Irenaeus, he would have destroyed the im- 
 pression which the above passage was calcula- 
 ted to make upon the minds of his readers in 
 favour of his theory ; since what Irenaeus says 
 afterwards, proves that he did not refer to the 
 baptism of infants. His words are " for this 
 end he passed through every age (of man) and 
 was made an infant for the sake of infants, 
 sanctifying infants ; he was made a little one, 
 for the sake of little ones sanctifying that age ; 
 and was at the same time an example to them 
 of the effect of piety, justice, and subjection. 
 He was a youth for the sake of youths, being 
 an example to youths, and sanctifying them to 
 the Lord. And so also he became a senior for 
 the sake of seniors, that he might be a perfect 
 master to all ages, not only by an exposition of 
 the truth, but with regard to their age, sanctify- 
 
135 
 
 ing- likewise the aged, and being to them also a 
 pattern : and even until he died, that he might 
 be the first-born from the dead, that in all things 
 he might have the pre-eminence, the prince of 
 life, the first of all, and preceding all.'"* 
 
 The meaning of this passage appears to be, 
 that Christ came to save all who through grace 
 were born unto God, whether they were young 
 or old ; and that by passing through the several 
 stages of human life, he became an example to 
 them all. This testimony, which Dr. Wall and 
 the independents have thought so conclusive a 
 proof of the existence of infant baptism in tiie 
 time of Irenseus, Venema has declared to be 
 doubtful and insufficient to prove the fact. In 
 his ecclesiastical history, he says "concerning 
 the custom of the church before the time of 
 Tertullian, nothing can be affirmed with cer- 
 tainty, since no where among the preceding 
 writers, as far as my knowledge extends, does 
 an indubitable statement of paedobaptism ap- 
 pear. Justin Martyr, in his apology, speaking 
 of baptism, mentions that of adults only. Ire- 
 naeus alone, in his book against heresies, has 
 been supposed to have pointed to it as with a 
 finger, where he says, " that Christ passed 
 through all ages of man, that he might save all 
 by himself, all, I say, who by him are born unto 
 
 ' Vide Ireii. adv. Uirr. lib ii. cap. xx.xix. p. 161. Oxon. 1702, 
 
136 
 
 God ; infants, little ones, children, youths, and 
 the aged." The word (renasci) to be regene- 
 rated, was wont to be used respecting baptism, 
 and that it may be taken in that sense here, I 
 willingly admit ; nevertheless, I do not think 
 it certain, since it is not always used in this 
 sense, particularly when no mention of baptism 
 either precedes or follow s it, as is the case here : 
 and in this place, to be regenerated by Christ, 
 may mean to be sanctified or saved by Christ. 
 The sense therefore may be, that in passing 
 through all the various ages of man, Christ de- 
 signed by his example to shew, that he came 
 for the purpose of saving men of every age, and 
 to sanctify, or save even infants. I conclude 
 therefore that before the time of Tertullian, pse- 
 dobaptism cannot with certainty be demonstra- 
 ted to have been practised ; but that in his time 
 there were some who desired to have their 
 infants baptised, especially since through fear 
 of death, they dreaded lest they should die 
 unbaptised ; an opinion which Tertullian oppo- 
 sed, but in a manner which shewed that infant 
 baptism then began to prevail. These circum- 
 stances respecting the antiquity of paedobap- 
 tism, after the times of the apostles, we may 
 assert with certainty : but we cannot go farther 
 if we would build on a solid foundation".' 
 
 '•' Vid, VenemiB Hist, Ecoles. Christ. Secul. 2. p. 477, Lug. Bat. 1779. 
 
137 
 
 TertuUian is the next author mentioned. He 
 was a native of Africa, a presbyter of the 
 Carthaginian Church, and flourished at the 
 commencement of the third century. He is 
 the first writer who mentions the baptism of 
 babes; and the vague and undecided manner 
 in which he speaks of it, proves that in his day 
 the practice was novel, by no means popular, 
 and far from being general. Dr. Wall, who 
 has made the most of his authority, confesses 
 that " he knows not how to reconcile his state- 
 ments, and therefore leaves them to his readers 
 to pick out what coherent sense they can." That 
 our readers may judge for themselves, we give 
 Tertullian's w^ords. " What necessity is there 
 to expose godfathers to the hazard of answer- 
 ing for those whom they hold at the font ; since 
 they may be prevented by death from being- 
 able to perform those promises which they 
 have made for the children, or else may be 
 disappointed by their evil inclinations ? Jesus 
 Christ says indeed, hinder not little children 
 from coming to me, but that they should come 
 to him as soon as they are advanced in years, 
 as soon as they have learnt their religion, when 
 they may be taught whither they are going, 
 when they become Christians, when they be- 
 gin to be able to know Jesus Christ. What is 
 there that shall compel this innocent age to 
 receive baptism ? And since they are not yet 
 
 T 
 
138 
 
 allowed the disposal of temporal goods, is it 
 reasonable that they should be entrusted with 
 the concerns of heaven ? Let them know how 
 to desire this salvation, that you may appear 
 to have given to him that asketh." 
 
 This passage shews that the baptism of babes 
 was beginning to be used in Tertullian's day, 
 but we plainly see that he did not advocate 
 the practice, that he condemned it as absurd 
 and pernicious, that he could not trace its 
 authority to apostolic appointment, and that it 
 was not openly recognised as a tradition of the 
 Christian church. 
 
 What this father says in another place, clearly 
 proves that he considered infants unfit for bap- 
 tism ; and that administering it to them, was in 
 his opinion, a departure from the original, as 
 well as the general custom of the church. 
 " Baptism is the seal of faith ; which faith is 
 begun and evidenced by the faith of repentance; 
 we are not therefore washed that we may cease 
 to sin, but because we have ceased to do it, 
 and are already purified in the heart." * 
 
 Here he plainly declares, that those who 
 then were members of the church, were not 
 baptised till they professed to be the subjects 
 of faith, repentance, and inward holiness. 
 Should it be replied that Tertullian w as a con- 
 
 * Vide de Poenitentla, Cap. vi. p. 125. 
 
139 
 
 vert from heathenism, and therefore was not 
 baptised till he had given evidence of faith 
 and repentance ; we answer, if it were so, would 
 he have spoken in this manner of his brethren, 
 if they had been baptised in their infancy? And 
 in that case is it likely that he would have op- 
 posed infant baptism at all? The way in which 
 he speaks of this ceremony, shews that in his 
 esteem, it was an innovation ; of this our oppo- 
 nents seem conscious, when they endeavour to 
 lessen his authority, by impugning his character. 
 We are as little disposed as they can be, to 
 adopt the opinions of any of the early fathers 
 on points of doctrine ; for we believe that in 
 many instances they have darkened counsel by 
 words without knowledge : but as narrators of 
 historical facts, their testimony is of importance. 
 From them, and from Tertullian in particular, 
 we discover, that at the close of the second 
 century, when the practice of infant baptism 
 began to appear, the church of Christ had lost 
 much of its primitive simplicity, and congrega- 
 tional independence ; that the seeds of episco- 
 pacy long secretly sown were ripening into 
 popery, which in succeeding ages, has, like the 
 deadly upas, been spreading its deleterious 
 shade over the vineyard of the Lord. 
 
 We now come to Origen, another African 
 presbyter, who lived about the year 230. His 
 testimony in favour of paedobaptism has been 
 
140 
 
 deemed explicit, and we should allow the 
 assumj3tion, could it be proved that the works 
 from which it is taken were his genuine produc- 
 tions : but on this point there are many strong 
 and reasonable doubts. The evidence which 
 the independents, upon the authority of Dr. 
 Wall, have urged as decisive, is collected from 
 the Latin translations of Ruffinus and Hierom, 
 which are so interpolated, that most learned 
 men have disputed their authenticity. Dupin 
 says "We have hardly any of the homilies (of 
 Origen) in Greek, and those which we have in 
 Latin are translated by Ruffinus and others, 
 with so much liberty, that it is a difficult matter 
 to discern what is Origen's owai from what has 
 been foisted in by the interpreter." In his notes 
 he observes, "and besides, this appears by the 
 translation itself, which is full of figures, and 
 allusions to Latin words, and terms, taken in 
 another sense than what they were in Origen's 
 time, where the Trinity, and other mysteries, are 
 expressed in such terms as were not used till 
 after the council of Nice ; and where there are 
 points of discipline more modern than Origen's 
 age ; which has given occasion to those who 
 have not considered the liberty that Ruffinus 
 took of adding or leaving out what he pleased, 
 to doubt whether the greatest part of these 
 works were Origen's or no. The liberty which 
 Ruffinus has given himself is still more evident 
 
141 
 
 by what he has written in the prologue to his 
 version of the commentary upon the epistle to 
 the Romans, which he says he has abridged by 
 above the half. Hierom's versions are not more 
 exact." ' Erasmus, Grotius, Huetius and others 
 who were well acquainted with the writings of 
 Origen, have condemned these Latin versions 
 as full of interpolations ; and even Dr. Wall 
 himself, who has shewn more candour than any 
 of the later defenders of paedobaptism, confesses 
 that "all the world have blamed the method of 
 Ruffinus, for it is fit for a translator to give a 
 true account of what his author says, be it good 
 or bad ; whereas now in these translations of 
 Ruflinus, the reader is uncertain whether he 
 read Origen or Ruffinus." Does not this con- 
 cession invalidate the whole mass of evidence 
 which the Dr. has selected from these corrupt 
 translations ? And since nothing can be col- 
 lected from the genuine Greek works of Origen, 
 in favour of infant baptism, are we not justified 
 in concluding, that those passages attributed to 
 him, are the interpolations of Ruflinus, a popish 
 monk, who lived at the close of the fourth cen- 
 tury, and who wished to make it appear upon 
 the testimony of Origen, that infant baptism 
 was a custom of the church grounded upon 
 Apostolic authority. That neither Cyprian noi- 
 
 * See Eccles. Hist. Vol. i. p. 100. 
 
142 
 
 Augustine, both strenuous advocates for infant 
 baptism, refer to this supposed testimony of 
 Origen, is another reason why we reject it as 
 spurious. 
 
 We shall now notice the testimony of Cyprian, 
 bishop of Carthage. This African father, who 
 lived in the middle of the third century, was 
 the earliest writer who expressly pleaded for the 
 baptism of infants, and consistently with this 
 sentiment, he admitted them to the Lord's sup- 
 per. If then his opinion be of any weight in the 
 one case, it ought to be of equal weight in the 
 other ; and those who refer to his authority for 
 the baptism of their babes, should recollect that 
 the custom of administering to infants the Lord's 
 supper, originated in the same age, and was 
 practised and defended by the same parties. 
 
 From the days of Tertullian it is evident that 
 psedobaptism gained ground in Africa, where, 
 according to general opinion, most of the early 
 innovations took their rise ; and the circum- 
 stance, that the African writers of the third 
 century, are the first who mention the baptism 
 of infants, is in strict conformity with this sen- 
 timent. 
 
 The universal practice of this rite among the 
 African churches originated in the celebrated 
 council assembled at Carthage, by Cyprian, 
 A. D. 253, when he, at the head of 66 bishops, 
 enacted a law for its regular observance. This 
 
143 
 
 transaction has a very suspicious aspect ; espe- 
 cially as it stands in immediate relation to the 
 first historical documents on the subject of in- 
 fant baptism — if it were indeed a divinely insti- 
 tuted ordinance, uninterruptedly transmitted 
 from the Apostles, what need for the enactments 
 of a council to regulate its administration ? 
 
 The attempt of a late writer, to cast a veil 
 over the broad episcopal features of this Cartha- 
 ginian synod, by designating it *'a council con- 
 sisting of sixty six ministers,'' ® is futile in the 
 extreme, and betrays, either a want of candour 
 or of information. It was to all intents and pur- 
 poses, an assembly of ecclesiastical legislators^ 
 convened by Cyprian, the great Apostle of the 
 high church party in his day, to pass an act of 
 uniformity. To represent the persons who com- 
 posed this council, as fninisters, a term denoting 
 among dissenters a perfect equality in office, is 
 to insinuate what is not true respecting them ; 
 for they were neither in the nature, nor in the 
 exercise of their office, equal and independent. 
 Dr. Campbell very justly remarks, "was it ever 
 observed of writers in the fourth and fifth cen- 
 turies, to come no lower, that they in this man- 
 ner confounded the different ecclesiastical offices 
 of the third ? Is Cyprian for instance, in any 
 succeeding age, styled a presbyter of Carthage, 
 
 ® See Henry Burder's sermon on the liglit of infants to baptism. 
 
144 
 
 or Rogation the bishop? Are not their respective 
 titles as uniformly observed in after ages, as in 
 their own ?" ' The same learned writer observes 
 in another place, "thus we have advanced from 
 the perfect equality, in respect of ministerial 
 powers, in the stated pastors of the churches 
 planted by the Apostles, to that parochial epis- 
 copacy, which immediately succeeded it ; and 
 which, though it arose gradually from an incon- 
 siderable cause, seems to have assumed the 
 model of a proper episcopate, as the word is 
 now understood, before the middle of the se- 
 cond century. And this I consider as the first 
 step of the hierarchy." ' 
 
 The ecclesiastical records of the third cen- 
 tury, the time when infant baptism was first 
 mentioned, serve to prove, that the great apos- 
 tacy predicted by the Apostle in his epistle to 
 the Thessalonians, was even at this early period 
 assuming a decided and portentous aspect. 
 That system of spiritual despotism which has 
 been denominated the hierarchy, and which for 
 so many ages, has imposed upon the consciences 
 of the people the most erroneous doctrines, and 
 the most degrading ceremonies, arose from 
 small and apparently trivial innovations upon 
 the primitive constitution of the church of Christ. 
 Among the first christian societies a perfect 
 
 ' Lect, on Eccles. Hist. A^ol. I. p. 192. « Vol. I. p. 242. 
 
145 
 
 equality and distinct independency prevailed : 
 they chose their own officers, and directed their 
 own affairs, according to the rules prescribed in 
 the New Testament. This state of things ap- 
 pears to have been but of short continuance ; 
 for soon after the death of the Apostles, the 
 churches which they had planted, and entrust- 
 ed with their writings, were considered as pos- 
 sessing superior authority ; they were consult- 
 ed on matters of importance, and were fie- 
 quently constituted arbitrators on subjects of 
 religious controversy. This appeal to the opi- 
 nion of the apostolic churches, though at first 
 voluntary, formed a precedent on which those 
 churches afterwards claimed an exclusive right 
 to discuss and to decide all questions of diffi- 
 culty. 
 
 As one innovation prepares the way for 
 another, so this preeminence of certain churches 
 was followed by an assumption of power on the 
 part of their ministers ; who, looking upon 
 themselves as the legitimate successors of the 
 Apostles, exercised an authority, as hostile to 
 the interests of true religion, as it was to the 
 liberties of the people. Hence the origin of those 
 various ecclesiastical orders, diocesans, metro- 
 politans, pontiffs, &c. introduced with a train of 
 pompous ceremonies, foreign from the nature 
 and design of the gospel. The numerous 
 councils held in the third century, materially 
 
 u 
 
146 
 
 tended to exalt these ecclesiastical dignities, 
 and to stamp them with the broad seal of public 
 approbation. These assemblies were composed 
 of bishops and presbyters, who, though the re- 
 presentatives of distinct communities, yet by 
 their voice in council, passed decrees, which 
 gradually abridged the liberty of the people, 
 and at length brought them under the bondage 
 of an episcopal usurpation. 
 
 It is acknowledged by all parties that many 
 innovations had crept into the christian worsh.ip 
 previous to this period. Mosheim when speak- 
 ing of the internal history of the church during 
 the second centwy, says "these councils of which 
 we find not the smallest trace before the middle 
 of this century, changed the whole face of the 
 church, and gave it a new form ; for by them 
 the ancient privileges of the people were consi- 
 derably diminished, and the power and autho- 
 rity of the bishops greatly augmented. The 
 humility indeed and prudence of these pious 
 prelates prevented their assuming all at once the 
 power with which they were afterwards invested. 
 At their first appearance in these general coun- 
 cils, they acknowledged that they were no more 
 than the delegates of their respective churches, 
 and that they acted in the name and by the 
 appointment of their people. But they soon 
 changed this humble tone, imperceptibly ex- 
 tended the limits of their authority, turned their 
 
147 
 
 influence into dominion, and their councils into 
 laws, and openly asserted at length that Christ 
 had empowered them to prescribe to his people 
 authoritative rules of faith and manners. Ano- 
 ther effect of these councils was, the gradual 
 abolition of that perfect equality which reigned 
 among all bishops in primitive times. For the 
 order and decency of these assemblies required 
 that some one of the provincial bishops, met in 
 council, should be invested with a superior 
 degree of power and authority, and hence the 
 rights of Metropolitans derive their origin." 
 Pursuing the same subject in another place, he 
 observes, " the christian doctors had the good 
 fortune to persuade the people that the minis- 
 ters of the christian church succeeded to the 
 character, rights, and privileges of the Jewish 
 priesthood ; and this persuasion was a new 
 source both of honor and profit to the sacred 
 order. And accordingly the bishops considered 
 themselves as invested with a rank and charac- 
 ter similar to those of the high priests among 
 the Jews, while the presbyters represented the 
 priests, and the deacons the levites. It is in- 
 deed highly probable that they who first intro- 
 duced this absurd comparison of offices, so 
 entirely distinct, did it rather through ignorance 
 and error, than through artifice or design. The 
 notion, however, once introduced, produced its 
 natural effects, and thoge effects were pernicious. 
 
148 
 
 The errors to which it gave rise were many and 
 one of its immediate consequences was, the 
 estabhshment of a greater difference between 
 the christian pastors and their flocks, than the 
 genius of the gospel seems to admit." ® 
 
 This early assumption of the character and 
 rights of the Jewish priesthood, by the minister 
 of the christian church, is clearly asserted by 
 Dr. Campbell, who says, " It w^as the same 
 spirit (referring to the spirit of innovation) that 
 prompted in the pastors, the affectation of epi- 
 thets added to their names, expressive of their 
 virtues, and of the esteem and veneration of 
 those that approached them; such as most holy, 
 most blessed, most religious, most worthy of 
 God, beloved of God, reverend, venerable, and 
 many others, wiiicli it were tedious to enume- 
 rate — together with certain ceremonies, such as 
 bowing the head, kissing the hand, and the 
 like. At no time could the pharisaical scribes 
 be accused of greater ostentation, or more de- 
 sire of greetings in the markets, and to be called 
 of men Rabbi, Rabbi, than were a few ages 
 afterwards the ministers of the humble Jesus, 
 who had so expressly warned his followers 
 against the imitation of their vain-glorious 
 manner." See Sect. 10. 
 
 All the authentic ecclesiastical remains of the 
 
 9 Ecc!cs. Hist. \ ol. i. ji. 178. 
 
149 
 
 first ages supporttbetestimony of these writers; 
 and prove, not only the reality, but the early 
 rise, and vast extent of this episcopal usurpa- 
 tion. The influence of that spirit of innovation, 
 which led the ministers of Christ to assume the 
 dignities of the levitical priesthood, gradually 
 spread through the whole church, till the nature 
 and design of the gospel were concealed; and 
 numerous ceremonies were introduced, which 
 increased the power of the bishops, and gave to 
 the christian religion the pompous splendour of 
 the Jewish worship. Lest these things should 
 be opposed as unauthorised by the New Test- 
 ament, they were defended under the imposing 
 title of Apostolic traditions — that is, unwritten 
 authoritative rules of faith and practice, deli- 
 vered by the apostles to the first ministers, and 
 handed down by them to their immediate suc- 
 cessors. There was a twofold purpose answered 
 by this title — vvhile it emboldened the advocates 
 of the hierarchy to prescribe what rites they 
 pleased, it insured the adoption of those rites 
 by the church, because they were delivered 
 to them under the high sanction of apostolic 
 authority. 
 
 Can any consistent dissenter imagine, that 
 the great founder of Christianity, who condem- 
 ned the effects of tradition on the minds of the 
 Jews in turning them from the commandments 
 of God, would himself authorise this method of 
 
150 
 
 instruction under the gospel dispensation, and 
 thus prepare the way for the subversion of his 
 own system ? The nature and consequences of 
 traditionary instruction, are arguments against 
 its having originated with any inspired instruc- 
 tor. When we recollect the variety of opinions 
 which men hold on the same subject, the liabi- 
 lity of the best of men to misconceive the 
 plainest truths, and the propensity in all men 
 to propagate truth in the form under which 
 they embrace it ; is it not manifest that this 
 scheme of regulating the faith and practice of 
 the church, must inevitably tend to corrupt its 
 doctrines and to change its worship ? If then 
 tradition, in the hands of men of upright minds 
 and honest intentions, be productive of evil, 
 what might it not effect when used as a tool by 
 crafty and ambitious teachers ? Besides which, 
 the mere alteration, or omission of a single word 
 might change the whole design of a traditionary 
 law, and lay the foundation of a most danger- 
 ous error. 
 
 As the independents have appealed of late 
 to apostolic tradition in support of their theory, 
 we shall examine what claims it has to be con- 
 sidered an authentic rule to the church of Christ. 
 During the second century, a variety of doc- 
 trines and ceremonies were introduced into the 
 christian worship, by certain of the fathers, 
 who claimed a personal acquaintance with the 
 
151 
 
 Apostles, or with those who had been their 
 intimate associates. These opinions and prac- 
 tices, coming recommended by persons thus 
 honoured, had considerable weight; and resting 
 upon their verbal testimony, were received as 
 simple traditioti. In process of time, when it 
 had become uncertain with whom these things 
 originated, or when their general adoption ren- 
 dered an appeal to personal testimony needless, 
 they passed under the name of ancient, and se- 
 cret tradition: but it wa^ not until the close of 
 the third, and the beginning of the fourth cen- 
 turies that they received the imposing title of 
 apostolic tradition. 
 
 Tertullian mentions tradition, as the autho- 
 rity upon which many rites were performed in 
 his day. " Now to begin with baptism. When 
 we come to the water, we do there (and we do 
 the same a little before in the whole congrega- 
 tion) under the hand of the pastor make a pro- 
 fession, that we renounce the devil, and his 
 pomps, and his angels. Then we are plunged 
 three times in the water ; and we answer some 
 few words more than those which our Saviour 
 in the gospel has enjoined. When we are taken 
 out of the water, we taste a mixture of milk and 
 honey, and from that time we abstain a whole 
 week from bathing ourselves, which otherwise 
 we use every day. The sacrament of the eucha- 
 rist, which our Lord celebrated at meal time. 
 
152 
 
 and ordered all to take, we receive in our as- 
 semblies before day : and never but from the 
 hands of the pastor. We give oblations everj' 
 year for the dead, on the day of their martyr- 
 dom. We account it an unfit thing to keep any 
 fasts on the Lord's day, or to kneel at our pray- 
 ers on that day. The same liberty we take all 
 the time from Easter to Pentecost. We are 
 troubled at it, if any of our bread or wine fall 
 to the ground. At every setting out or entry on 
 business, whenever we come in, or go out fi'om 
 any place ; when we dress for a journey, when we 
 go into a bath ; when we go to meat, when the 
 candles are brought in ; when we lie down, or 
 sit down ; and whatever business we have, we 
 make on our foreheads the sign of the cross. If 
 you search in the scriptures for any command 
 for these, and such like usages, you shall find 
 none. Tradition will be urged to you as the 
 ground of them ; custom as the confirmer of 
 them ; and our religion teaches to observe 
 them."^ 
 
 This quotation affords an affecting proof of the 
 fatal influence of tradition ; and the farther we 
 pursue the subject, the more shall we be con- 
 vinced that it was not the design of Christ that 
 any part of his worship should be regulated by 
 rules derived from oral testimony. To expose 
 
 ' Sec Wall's Hislorj of lufaut Baptisui, part ii. c. 9. 
 
153 
 
 the folly of adopting any practice recommended 
 by such authority, we need only take a view of 
 some of the customs to which it gave rise. 
 
 The sign of the cross in baptism, observed at 
 the present day by the principal ecclesiastical 
 establishments, was in general use in the days 
 of Tertullian and Cyprian. The former says, 
 "The flesh is washed, that the soul may be 
 unspotted ; the flesh is anointed, that the soul 
 may be consecrated ; the flesh is signed, that 
 the soul may be fortified." And the latter de- 
 clares that " they only can be saved who are 
 regenerated, and signed with the sign of Christ." 
 All this Basil and Austin defended, in the 
 fourth century, on the authority of apostolic 
 tradition. 
 
 The consecration of baptismal water, as still 
 practised in the Greek and Roman churches, 
 was an early ceremony. Tertullian mentions 
 it, and Cyprian says " the water must first be 
 cleansed and sanctified by the priest, that it 
 may, by his baptising in it, wash away the sins 
 of the man that is baptised." In the following 
 age this consecration was considered an apos- 
 tolic tradition. 
 
 The anointing of the baptised with oil is thus 
 noticed by Tertullian ; " When we come out of 
 the laver, we are anointed with a blessed oint- 
 ment, according to the ancient practice, by 
 which men used to be anointed for the priest's 
 
 X 
 
154 
 
 office with oil out of a horn." Cyprian says 
 " The baptised person must also be anointed, 
 that by having the chrism, or anointing oil, he 
 may be the anointed of God." This ceremony 
 was confirmed by the council of Laodicea, 
 which decreed in their forty-eighth canon, that 
 "baptised persons must after their baptism re- 
 ceive the holy anointing." Basil, Austin, and 
 Ambrose plead for it as the universal custom of 
 the church, received hy apostolic tradition. 
 
 Imposition of hands, renunciations, and ex- 
 orcisms, were all considered essential parts of 
 baptism by the ancients, and were observed 
 with great exactness. Tertullian remarks "when 
 we enter into the water we profess the faith of 
 Christ in the words of his law ; we protest with 
 our mouth that we renounce the devil, and his 
 pomps and his angels." Origen, about 30 years 
 after says "let every one of the faithful remem- 
 ber when he first came to the waters of baptism, 
 when he received the first seals of faith, and 
 came to the fountain of salvation, what words 
 he then used, and what he denounced to the 
 devil ; that he would not use his pomps, nor 
 his works, nor any of his service, nor obey his 
 precepts." And after infant baptism had crept 
 into the church, the same ceremonies accompa- 
 nied it, as appears from Tertullian's objection 
 to it, and from what Austin asserts, " that in- 
 fants do profess repentance by the words of 
 
155 
 
 those that bring them, when they do by them 
 renounce the devil and his works." These 
 things were practised and defended on the 
 ground oi apostolic tradition. 
 
 Immersing the baptised three times, and giv- 
 ing them a mixture of milk and honey when 
 they came out of the water, were customs of 
 early origin. In addition to these, there were 
 prayers for the dead, oblations to the martyrs, 
 bowing to the east, the superstitious observance 
 of times and seasons, as Easter, Whitsuntide, 
 &c. All these were defended by Cyprian, Je- 
 rom, and Austin, as ancient and universal rites 
 of the church, founded upon apostolic tradition. 
 
 It is among these customs, let it be remem- 
 bered, that we first meet with infant baptism, 
 and its appropriate appendage infant commu- 
 nion. We cannot but think that the time when 
 this practice began, the ceremonies which ac- 
 companied it, the principle upon which it was 
 performed, and the authority by which it was 
 supported, prove it to be an episcopal innova- 
 tion. The first paedobaptists did not appeal to 
 tiie scriptures for their authority, nor have they 
 given us the oral testimony of any of the apos- 
 tles ; their refuge is a secret and undefined tra- 
 dition. How unaccountable is this circumstance 
 in relation to a ceremony of such supposed im- 
 portance ! Has it any parallel in the history of 
 scripture ordinances ? Did any institution come 
 
166 
 
 from God, and the church not know how, or 
 by whom it came ? If any of the apostles had 
 enjoined the baptism of babes, certainly some 
 of the primitive fathers would have known 
 which of them, and would have recorded the 
 particulars of the fact : but no such fact is re- 
 corded — and strange to say, this mighty Babel 
 of popular superstition can boast no higher 
 authority than the most degrading rites that 
 disgrace the annals of popery. Like them it is 
 derived from tradition, and like them must 
 sink into oblivion, when tradition shall give 
 place to the written testimony of God ! 
 
 It may perhaps be contended, that the au- 
 thority of tradition is still good, though many 
 practices ascribed to it, are confessedly errone- 
 ous ; and that the abuse of any principle is no 
 argument against the principle itself: but if it 
 can be proved, that apostolic tradition was not 
 sufficient to direct the church even in the second 
 century, we cannot consider it competent au- 
 thority in the nineteenth ; and to do this, we 
 need only refer to the controversy between the 
 eastern and western churches, respecting the 
 time of keeping Easter. The Asiatic churches 
 celebrated that festival on the fourteenth day 
 of the moon of March, on whatever day of the 
 week it happened, while the western churches 
 observed it on the Sunday following the full 
 moon. Both parties pleaded the custom of their 
 
157 
 
 predecessors, and the authority of apostolic 
 tradition. The bishops of the Asiatic churches 
 said they derived their tradition from John and 
 PhiHp. The bishop of Rome and his adherents, 
 professed to have received theirs from Paul and 
 Peter. This dispute, in which fathers were 
 opposed to fathers, and tradition to tradition, 
 began at a very early period, even while some 
 were living who had seen the Apostles. If it 
 was so difficult at that time to decide the pecu- 
 liar circumstances of a public festival, how shall 
 we in this age, select from the great mass of 
 traditionary laws any one, and invest it with 
 apostolic authority ! Who will undertake to 
 assure us, which is the genuine apostolic enact- 
 ment, episcopacy or paedobaptism ? The Inde- 
 pendents reject the former, and retain the latter, 
 but by what rule do they thus decide, for if 
 tradition be an infallible directory it ought to 
 be obeyed in all things — if it be not infallible, 
 its authority should be excluded from the church 
 of Christ. The question then is — do the Inde- 
 pendents believe the infallibility of this tradition 
 by which they defend infant baptism ? If they 
 do, let them act according to their belief, and 
 where are they ? — within the pale of the Romish 
 church. If they do not believe it, of what value 
 is its authority in support of their practice, and 
 what becomes of peedobaptism? 
 
 When there is strong evidence against the 
 
158 
 
 truth of a principle, it is extremely hazardous to 
 make that principle a guide in divine worship ; 
 especially when God has given us a written 
 testimony, so definite and perspicuous. To leave 
 this unerring rule, for that tradition which has 
 been the refuge of early innovators and modern 
 papists, is to follow the example of Esau, who 
 sold his birth-right for a mess of pottage. 
 
 We shall proceed to examine the principles 
 upon which this theory has been defended. 
 The practice of baptising infants arose out of a 
 belief that baptism was absolutely necessary to 
 salvation ; and upon this principle it was strenu- 
 ously defended by all the early paedobaptists : 
 they ascribed to the baptismal water the power 
 of illuminating, sanctifying, and regenerating 
 the soul, and thus they led the people to con- 
 clude, that unless they and their children were 
 baptised, they could not be saved. Justin says 
 "baptism can cleanse, and purify only a peni- 
 tent ;" * he also calls it ' the water of life.' ^ Irenae- 
 us says, " Christ gave to his disciples the power 
 of regenerating to God, when he sent them to 
 baptise." * Clemens Alexandrinus declares that 
 " being immersed, we are illuminated ; being 
 illuminated, we are adopted as sons ; being 
 adopted, we are made perfect ; being made 
 perfect, we are rendered immortal."* And in 
 
 = Contra Trjph. p. 231. s Idem p. 2G1. * Ad?. Hacres. iii. 17. 
 * Pa;da^. c. i. C. 
 
159 
 
 another place, " thus we who are baptised, hav- 
 ing our sins cleansed, which in some measure 
 darkened the divine spirit, are free and deliver- 
 ed from every impediment, and have the clear 
 vision of the Spirit, by which alone we see what 
 is divine, the Holy Spirit from heaven being 
 poured into us." Tertullian held the same opi- 
 nion; he says, "neither do I deny that a divine 
 benefit (that is the blotting out of sins) is sure, 
 to those that are about to enter the water :" " 
 again, " for all waters, by an ancient prero- 
 gative, become a sacrament of sanctification 
 through prayer ; for the spirit immediately comes 
 from heaven and rests upon the waters, sancti- 
 fying them by himself; and so being sanctified, 
 they imbibe the power of sanctifying."' And 
 again, " whereas it is ordained, that no one 
 can be saved without baptism, by that weighty 
 declaration of our Lord, who says, except a 
 man shall be born of water he has no life." * 
 
 This opinion, respecting the necessity of 
 baptism, originated probably in a misconception 
 of our Lord's words, " except a man be born 
 of water, and of the spirit, he cannot enter 
 into the kingdom of God." The early fathers 
 evidently considered, that to be born of water, 
 referred to baptism ; and that the kingdom of 
 Cod, meant a state of future happiness ; and 
 
 6 De pa'nit. c. ft. "> Do Baptismo. 'Idem. 
 
160 
 
 hence they concluded that no man could be 
 saved unless he was baptised — an inference 
 which is correct, if the premises are admitted : 
 but though it is highly probable that our Lord 
 did refer to baptism, under the expression 
 
 * born of water', yet I think it very unlikely 
 that he used the phrase ' kingdom of God', in 
 relation to eternal life ; for such an explication 
 of the words would render the work of the 
 spirit nugatory, and make our salvation depend 
 upon an external ceremony. That the phrase 
 
 * kingdom of God' does in some places refer to 
 a state of future glory, I readily grant ; but in a 
 general way, it applies to that spiritual consti- 
 tution of things, which was then about to be 
 established in the world, under the government 
 of Christ, called in the language of prophecy, 
 " a kingdom which God should set up." It 
 is in allusion to the reign of grace, or our 
 Lord's spiritual dominion upon earth, that the 
 terms are used in the following passages — 
 *' Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel 
 of the kingdom of God." ^ — " Whereunto shall 
 we liken the kingdom of God ?" ' — ** And he 
 said unto them, verily I say unto you, that 
 there be some of them that stand here, who 
 shall not taste of death, till they have seen the 
 kingdom of God come with power." = See also 
 
 9 See Mark, I. 1-1. 15, > See Mark, iv. 30. = See Mark, is. 1. 
 Also Luke, xvii. 'JO, il ; and MaU. -wi. 43. 
 
161 
 
 the 13th chapter of Matthew, which is full of 
 parabolical allusions to the gospel dispensation, 
 under the title of the kingdom of God. 
 
 These passages prove that the phrase fre- 
 quently relates to Christ's spiritual dominion in 
 this world. May not our Lord's words then, 
 " except a man be born of w ater and of the 
 spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of 
 God," be designed to shew, that no man can be 
 a consistent subject of his kingdom, who is not 
 both regenerated and baptised ; the former being 
 necessary to salvation, the latter to that pro- 
 fession of faith which he requires of all, before 
 they are admitted to the privileges of the gospel 
 church. The expression, " except a man be 
 born of water and of the spirit," is very similar 
 in its construction to that in Matthew iii. 11, 
 " He shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost 
 and fire." The fire is the visible representation 
 of the spirit ; and may not the water be consi- 
 dered as the outward symbol of regeneration ? 
 
 The doctrine of baptismal regeneration was 
 generally believed by the fathers of the second 
 century ; and upon this principle the first paedo- 
 baptists introduced and defended their practice. 
 Hear what Cyprian says in his epistle to Dona- 
 tus. He declares that " previous to his conver- 
 sion, it appeared impossible to him, that a man 
 should instantly put off sin in the laver of 
 salutary water ; but he could testify that he 
 
 Y 
 
162 
 
 had experienced it, saying, by the help of the 
 regenerating water, the polkition of the former 
 Ufe is washed away, a serene and purer Hght 
 from above flows into the purified heart ; after- 
 wards, a second birth ; the spirit being derived 
 from heaven made me a new man." In his 
 7 1st epistle to Quintus, he says, "there is one 
 water in the holy church which makes men 
 (Christ's) sheep." In his 73rd epistle to Jubai- 
 nas, he says, " hence (from the time of baptism) 
 begins the origin of all faith, an introduction to 
 the hope of eternal life, and a divine authority 
 for purifying and quickening the servants of 
 God." Gregory Nazianzen declares,^ that "they 
 who die unbaptised, without their own fault, go 
 neither to heaven, nor hell ; but, if they have 
 lived piously, to a middle place." * 
 
 Chrysostom says "it is impossible to be saved 
 without baptism ; and if an infant die v/ithout 
 baptism, through the negligence of the pres- 
 byter, woe to that presbyter ! But if, through 
 the negligence of the parents, woe to the parents 
 of that infant!" Again in another place,^ "if 
 sudden death seize us, which God forbid, before 
 we are baptised ; though we have a thousand 
 good qualities, there is nothing to be expected 
 but hell." Austin, throughout his writings, 
 defends infant baptism on the ground of its 
 
 3 Orat. xl. p. 653. ^ vid. Venema; Hist. Eccles. (oni. 3. p. 185.061. 
 * Hoin. xxiv. in Jcanu. 
 
163 
 
 necessity. He says " let us not therefore of our 
 own head promise any eternal salvation to in- 
 fants without the baptism of Christ." " It may 
 well be said that infants departing this life with- 
 out baptism, will be under the mildest con- 
 demnation of all ; but he that affirms, that they 
 will not be under condemnation, does much 
 deceive us, and is deceived himself."® "The 
 Christians of Africa do well call baptism itself 
 one's salvation ; and the sacrament of Christ's 
 body, one's life. From whence is this, but as 
 I suppose from ancient apostolical tradition, by 
 which the church of Christ do naturally hold that 
 without baptism, and partaking of the Lord's 
 table, none can either come to the kingdom of 
 God, or to salvation and eternal life." Austin 
 then refers to the celebrated passages, Tit. iii. 5, 
 1. Pet. iii. 21, and John vi. 53 to 57, and con- 
 cludes by remarking, " If then, so many divine 
 testimonies do agree, that neither salvation, 
 nor eternal life is to be hoped for by any, without 
 baptism, and the body and blood of our Lord, 
 it is in vain promised to infants without them!"^ 
 In another place he says, " the whole christian 
 church has constantly held, that infants are 
 baptised for forgiveness of sins ; and that he 
 never read nor heard of any christian, catholic, 
 or sectary, that held otherwise, or denied it to be 
 necessary^ 
 
 « WaU's Hist. Inf. Bap. pL 2, c. G. "> Idem. pt. 2. c. 9. 
 
164 
 
 Such then is the avowed prmciple upon which 
 infant baptism was originally practised, and 
 long defended ! When did any baptist, in the 
 warmth of his zeal, for what has been styled his 
 " darling hypothesis," utter such language ? 
 With what consistency can modern paedobap- 
 lists charge us with " making a mere ritual 
 ceremony of greater importance than moral 
 virtues," when their predecessors regarded it as 
 the fountain of grace and salvation ? Why do 
 the independents of the present day adopt the 
 practice, while they renounce the principle of the 
 early paedobaptists ? If they should reply, that 
 they have discovered this principle to be erro- 
 neous, and therefore they discard it ; we w ould 
 ask them to consider how far that practice can 
 be worth retaining, which w^as introduced, and 
 defended for so long a period, upon a principle 
 so manifestly absurd and unscriptural ? 
 
 While the ancients pleaded for paedobaptism 
 on the ground of its necessity, the more modern 
 advocates of this theory defend it by arguments 
 deduced from the Abrahamic covenant, and 
 the rite of circumcision. 
 
 Though we deny that the abrogated rites of the 
 old covenant, are either a law, or a precedent 
 to the church under the gospel dispensation, yet 
 as our opponents affirm the contrary, and de- 
 fend their practice upon this principle, we will 
 examine the evidence produced in its support. 
 
165 
 
 The propositions they endeavour to establish are 
 
 First, That the covenant which God made 
 with Abraham and his seed, was the covenant 
 of grace, the same in its nature as that under 
 which we live. 
 
 Second, That circumcision was the sign 
 and seal of this covenant of grace, confirming 
 all its blessings to Abraham, and to all his 
 posterity. 
 
 Third, That circumcision is superseded by 
 baptism, which is in the present dispensation, 
 what circumcision was in the former, the sign 
 and seal of spiritual blessings. 
 
 As mistakes frequently arise from a misap- 
 plication of terms, or from a misconception of 
 the sense in which those terms are used, it may 
 not be amiss to ascertain, first, what is meant 
 by the covenant of grace. A covenant was a 
 voluntary agreement between two or more per- 
 sons, generally ratified by an offering, of which 
 the contracting parties partook before they 
 separated, in token of mutual concurrence. 
 Such were the covenants between Isaac and 
 Abimelech,* and between Jacob and Laban.^ 
 In this view the word is used in reference to 
 those solemn engagements between God and his 
 people, which were confirmed by sacrifices ; 
 hence they are said to have " made a covenant 
 
 8 Gen. xxvi. 28, 31. » Gen. xxxi. 44, 30. 
 
166 
 
 with him by sacrifice." ' The most important of 
 these federal transactions, were the covenants 
 with Noah, Abraham, and the children of 
 Israel at Sinai; all of which were ratified by 
 the shedding of blood. These are never called 
 covenants of grace, but covenants of promise.^ 
 
 The covenant of grace, as it is called, refers 
 to the eternal counsel between the Father and 
 Son, respecting the salvation of those who were 
 chosen in Christ before the foundation of the 
 world. This transaction is called by the apostle, 
 *' the purpose of God according to election," ^ 
 *' the eternal purpose which he purposed in 
 Christ Jesus,"* and is I think referred to in the 
 89th Psalm, as the covenant which Jehovah had 
 made with his chosen, and which should stand 
 fast with him for ever. This covenant of grace 
 was between the Father and the Son, not be- 
 tween God and Abraham. God indeed reveal- 
 ed it to men in the various covenants which he 
 had made with them ; but we must be careful 
 to distinguish between the covenants which God 
 makes with men, concerning the coming of 
 Christ, and that everlasting covenant which he 
 made with Christ, concerning the salvation of 
 the elect. 
 
 The revelation of this purpose of mercy, or 
 covenant of grace, has formed a primary and 
 
 » Psalm, I. 6. ' Eph. ii. 12. Gal, iii. 16, 19. 3 Rom. ix. 11. 
 * Eph. iii. 11. 
 
167 
 
 important feature in all the great transactions, 
 which have taken place between God and man, 
 in every age of the world. It was hrst made 
 known to Adam, in that obscure but merciful 
 promise, " the seed of the woman shall bruise 
 the head of the serpent,"^ and was very pro- 
 bably accompanied with a sacrifice as its irre- 
 vocable seal. It was then renewed to Noah, 
 and his sons : " and God spake unto Noah, and 
 to his sons with him, saying, and I, behold, I 
 establish my covenant with you, and with your 
 seed after yoii,"^ The sacrifice that Noah offer- 
 ed to God on tliis occasion, was not merely an 
 expression of his gratitude for past deliverance, 
 but of his faith in the first promise ; and was 
 designed to tipify the true sacrifice of Christ, 
 which had been prefigured in the earliest sacri- 
 ficial institutions. The renewal of this covenant 
 with Noah, was accompanied with an additi- 
 onal revelation ; for the Lord assured him that 
 the first promise should be accomplished in the 
 seed of his first-born. " I will enlarge Japheth, 
 and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem."^ 
 
 In process of time, this covenant of grace 
 was more distinctly revealed to Abraham, and 
 was confirmed by a federal engagement between 
 God and him. This engagement constitutes 
 what is called the Ahrahamic covenant, the 
 
 5 Gfii. iii. 15. « Gen. ix. 8, 9. ^ See the 27th verse. 
 
168 
 
 nature of which is distinctly pointed out in its 
 history. The first communication made to 
 Abraham, was in the land of Haran, when the 
 Lord commanded him to leave his father's 
 house, saying, " I will bless thee, and thou 
 shalt be a blessing, and in thee shall all the 
 families of the earth be blessed.'" No sooner 
 had Abraham obeyed this injunction, and en- 
 tered the land of Canaan, than God said unto 
 him, " unto thy seed will I give this land." » 
 Eight years afterwards God appeared unto him 
 again, and promised that " he should have a 
 son, who should be his heir, that his seed should 
 be more in number than the stars of heaven, and 
 that they should have the land of Canaan for 
 an inheritance." These promises were ratified 
 by sacrifice; for "in the same day the Lord 
 made a covenant with Abraham." ' 
 
 Sixteen years after this transaction, the co- 
 venant of circumcision was made, — " And when 
 Abraham was ninety years old and nine, the 
 Lord appeared unto him and said, I am the 
 Almighty God ; walk before me, and be thou 
 perfect. And I will make my covenant be- 
 tween me and thee, and will multiply thee ex- 
 ceedingly. And I will establish my covenant 
 between me and thee, and thy seed after thee 
 in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, 
 
 '{.CD. \ii. 2, 3. 9 Gen. xji. 7. i Geu. .w. 4—19. 
 
169 
 
 to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. 
 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after 
 thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the 
 land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession ; 
 and I will be their God. And God said unto 
 Abraham, thou shalt keep my covenant there- 
 fore, thou and thy seed after thee in their gene- 
 ration. This is my covenant, which ye shall 
 keep, between me and you, and thy seed after 
 thee ; every man-child among you shall be cir- 
 cumcised, and it shall be a token of the cove- 
 nant betwixt me and you. He that is born in 
 thy house, and he that is bought with thy money 
 must needs be circumcised : and my covenant 
 shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. 
 And the uncircumcised man-child, that soul 
 shall be cut off from his people : he hath broken 
 my covenant."' 
 
 Here are three distinct transactions recorded, 
 which took place at three different periods. The 
 first was a revelation of God's purpose of grace 
 to Abraham, and to all the nations of the earth 
 through him. "I will bless thee, and in thee 
 shall all the families of the earth be blessed." 
 This was not a covenant entered into with Abra- 
 ham, but a renewal of the promise made to our 
 first parents, in more clear and decisive language : 
 in this promise Abraham believed, and by his 
 
 -Gen, xvii, 
 Z 
 
170 
 
 faith he was justified. So the apostle speaks — 
 " even as Abraham believed God, and it was 
 accounted to him for righteousness : and the 
 scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the 
 heathen through faith, preached before the gospel 
 unto Abraham ; saying, in tiiee shall all nations 
 be blessed. Now to Abraham and his seed, 
 were the promises made. He saith not unto 
 seeds, as of many ; but as of one, and to thy 
 seed, which is Christ.'"' Thus the apostle informs 
 us, that the first promise made to Abraham, 
 was the gospel, or covenant of grace, preached 
 to him : in which he, and all who believe, 
 whether Jews or Gentiles, have an everlasting 
 interest. 
 
 In order to fulfil this promise, now so clearly 
 revealed, it was necessary that Abraham should 
 have a seed according to the flesh, from whom 
 the Messiah should spring ; and also that the 
 posterity of this seed should be kept distinct and 
 separate, till the object of the promise should 
 appear. In perfect harmony with these designs, 
 observe the second communication from God 
 to Abraham — " he that cometh forth out of 
 thine own bowels, shall be thine heir. Look 
 now toward heaven and tell the stars, if thou 
 be able to number them ; and he said unto him, 
 so shall thy seed be."* The first promise, " in 
 
 ■i Gal. iii. (i, 8, 16. ' Ceii. xv. 4, 5. 
 
171 
 
 thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed," 
 was spiritual and eternal, referring to the salva- 
 tion of the elect : this second promise, *' he that 
 Cometh forth out of thine own bowels shall be 
 thine heir," was earthly and temporal, applying 
 to the descendants of Abraham, according 
 to the flesh ; through whom, as instruments, 
 the first was to be accomplished. Thus these 
 two promises pointed to two objects very dis- 
 tinct from each other, yet, in the economy of 
 the divine government, intimately and necessa- 
 rily connected, as means and end : — Abraham 
 and his natural seed, Christ and his spiritual 
 seed. These two promises, the one spiritual, 
 the other temporal, laid the foundation of those 
 distinct relations which were peculiar to the 
 Jewish dispensation. Jehovah sustained a two- 
 fold relation to the Jews — spiritual and political ; 
 the first included those only, who were chosen 
 to eternal life ; the second pertained to the 
 whole nation, and ceased when the purpose in 
 which it originated was fulfilled. Abraham 
 likewise held a two-fold relation : for while he 
 was the spiritual head and representative of 
 those who, like himself, believed in the first pro- 
 mise, he was the father of all the Jews according 
 to the flesh. The Jews too, as a people, sustain- 
 ed a two-fold character, for while some of them 
 were the spiritual seed of Abraham, and child- 
 ren of God by faith in him who was to come, 
 
172 
 
 they were all the natural descendants of Abra- 
 ham, and they all had a political relation to the 
 God of Abraham. 
 
 There are certainly no such natural and 
 political relations under the gospel dispensation. 
 
 These two promises, which constituted Abra- 
 ham the father of two distinct seeds in one 
 visible political body, led to the third transac- 
 tion between God and him, recorded in Gen. 
 xvii. " And I will establish my covenant be- 
 tween me and thee, and thy seed after thet i n 
 their generations. This is my covenant whi^^n 
 ye shall keep between me and thee, and thy 
 seed after thee ; every male child among you 
 shall be circumcised." This is the true Abra- 
 hamic covenant, and that it is 7iot the pure co- 
 venant of grace, as affirmed by the independ- 
 ents, is evident from an appeal to the facts of 
 the case. In this federal transaction, there 
 were certain stipulated conditions, the faithful 
 observance of which constituted the very bond 
 of the covenant. Abraham was to circumcise 
 every male born in his house, or bought with 
 his money: he was to walk before God, and to 
 be perfect — while God engaged, on his part, 
 to "be a God to Abraham, and to his seed 
 after him." If this reciprocal engagemeut was 
 the covenant of redemption, then salvation to 
 the Jews was made to depend upon obedience 
 to a positive command. 
 
173 
 
 Again, this covenant with Abraham related 
 to the temporal, or second promise ; — " thon 
 shalt be a father of many nations — I will make 
 thee exceeding- fruitful — I will make nations of 
 thee — kings shall come out of thee — 1 will give 
 imto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land 
 wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of 
 Canaan." Here is no mention of the first 
 promise, " in thee shall all the families of the 
 earth be blessed ;" but a particular enumeration 
 of events which received a literal accomplish- 
 ment. 
 
 Again, this covenant included the ivhole pos- 
 terity of Abraham; — can this be said of the 
 covenant of grace ? The scriptures declare that 
 " they are not all Israel, which are of Israel ; 
 neither because they are the seed of Abraham, 
 are they all children." The covenant of cir- 
 cumcision, in direct opposition to this decla- 
 ration, did belong to all Abraham's children 
 according to the flesh ; and they who were not 
 partakers of his faith, were nevertheless par- 
 takers of the promise. 
 
 Again, the sentence pronounced against the 
 transgressor, proves that this was not the co- 
 venant of grace, "the soul that is not circum- 
 cised shall be cut off from his people ; he hath 
 broken my covenant." This is not the spirit 
 and language of the gospel, but of the law. 
 Nor can the principles, here laid down, be 
 
174 
 
 admitted as applicable to the covenant of grace, 
 without maintaining sentiments subversive of 
 the truth. The Abrahamic covenant was liable 
 to be broken ; it was frequently broken by the 
 Jews ;' and its promised blessings belonged to 
 all who were circumcised, irrespective of their 
 faith. Are these the principles of the present 
 dispensation ? Can the gospel covenant be 
 broken ? Does the possession of its blessings 
 depend upon baptism ? Is the neglect of its 
 ritual ceremonies threatened with capital pun- 
 ishment? If not, then was there a material 
 difference between the Abrahamic covenant and 
 the covenant of gi'ace ! 
 
 Secondly, The independents maintain that 
 circumcision was the sign and seal of the co- 
 venant of grace, confirming all its blessings to 
 Abraham, and to all his posterity. 
 
 Here we remark, that circumcision is never 
 called a seal of the covenant of grace, by any 
 inspired writer — yet, as our opponents affirm 
 that it was such, we ask them, what spiritual 
 blessings did it seal ? Was it the pledge of 
 adoption, pardon, justification, and redemption 
 to the Jews ? Were they circumcised because 
 they had been chosen to eternal life, or, were 
 they chosen to eternal life because they were 
 circumcised ? certainly, if circumcision was a 
 
 ^ Ezek. xliv. 7. 
 
175 
 
 seal of grace, then grace must either have pre- 
 ceded, or succeeded this ceremony. 
 
 When the independents assert that circum- 
 cision was the seal of the covenant of grace, do 
 they really believe, that this rite was an infallible 
 token of personal interest in spiritual blessings, 
 to every one who received it ? If they do, it fol- 
 lows of course, that they believe grace to have 
 been universal, and redemption general, to all 
 Abraham's seed ; and how is it, that they main- 
 tain grace to be sovereign in its display, and 
 redemption particular in its application, under 
 the present dispensation, since in their opinion, 
 the Abrahamic covenant and the covenant of 
 grace are one and the same thing? 
 
 If they do not believe, that circumcision was 
 an infallible token of grace to all who received 
 it, we are utterly at a loss to imagine what they 
 mean, by sealing with the seal of grace — and 
 they themselves must confess, that for a man to 
 receive this seal, and yet not possess the grace 
 so sealed, would be a fearful anomaly in the 
 divine conduct ! 
 
 Moreover, they must know, that God com- 
 manded many to be circumcised, who did not 
 enjoy the blessings promised to Abraham ; upon 
 their own ground then, circumcision was not in 
 many instances a seal of the covenant of grace, 
 unless it be supposed that God gave the pledge, 
 where he withheld the blessing. Let them tell 
 
176 
 
 us, what benefit either spiritual or temporal, 
 was secured to Ishmael, Esau, and the sons of 
 Abraham by Keturah. If the Abrahamic cove- 
 nant was the covenant of grace, circumcision 
 should not have been administered to Ishmael, 
 as a token of his interest in it, since he was 
 positively excluded. Neither could it have been 
 a token to him, or his posterity, of temporal 
 possessions in the land of Canaan, because they 
 never realised an interest in that inheritance. 
 The same may be said of Esau, and of the 
 children of Keturah, and of many of the Israel- 
 ites — they who came out of Egypt were all 
 circumcised, but not as a seal of grace, for many 
 of them perished in the wilderness, through 
 unbelief; and for more than four hundred years 
 after this rite was instituted, not one of Abra- 
 ham's descendants, inherited the promised land : 
 nor was the land of Canaan conveyed to the 
 Jews by circumcision, but by a promise made 
 to Abraham, more than twenty years before he 
 was circumcised. 
 
 Circumcision has both a literal and a spiritual 
 signification, as had all the typical ordinances 
 of the legal dispensation. It was a permanent 
 sign, or standing memorial of two important 
 facts — first, of God's promise to Abraham, to 
 multiply his seed, and to give unto them the land 
 of Canaan, for a perpetual inheritance. " I will 
 make thee exceeding fruitful ; and ye shall 
 
177 
 
 circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and it 
 shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me 
 and you." Hence circumcision was to be an 
 indelible mark in the flesh of all the Jews, prov- 
 ing their descent from Abraham, and the faith- 
 fulness of God, in the fulfilment of this promise; 
 and it served to keep them a distinct people till 
 the Messiah came. No aliens could obtrude 
 into their community without being discovered ; 
 neither could they mix with other nations with- 
 out being" known. In all their revolutions they 
 continued a separate people ; " lo, the people 
 shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned 
 among the nations." 
 
 Again, Circumcision was a perpetual me- 
 morial that righteousness could not be obtained 
 by the works of the law, but by faith in the 
 promised Messiah. Thus the Jews were taught, 
 that if they would be righteous in the sight of 
 God, they must have the faith of their father 
 Abraham. The apostle calls it " a seal of the 
 righteousness of the faith which he had being 
 yet uncircumcised ; that he might be the father 
 of all them that believe, though they be not cir- 
 cumcised ; that righteousness might be imputed 
 unto them also." If Dr. Lightfoot's version of 
 this passage be correct, then the arguments 
 adduced from it in favour of paedobaptism are 
 perfectly fallacious. He renders it, ** and he 
 received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the 
 
 A a 
 
178 
 
 righteousness of faith, which should hereafter he 
 in uncircumcision. Which should be, not which 
 had been. Not what had been to Abraham as 
 yet uncircumcised ; but v/hich should be to his 
 seed uncircumcised ; that is, to Gentiles that 
 should hereafter imitate the faith of Abraham."* 
 This eminent critic shews that circumcision was 
 not a seal of Abraham, s faith and personal right- 
 eousness, but of that righteousness, which was 
 imputed to him through faith, prior to circumci- 
 sion; and which should be imputed to the Gen- 
 tiles also who believed though uncircumcised. 
 This view of the passage agrees with the whole 
 of the apostles reasoning. If then this rite was 
 not a seal of faith to Abraham who actually be- 
 lieved before he was circumcised, how could it 
 have been such to his natural descendants ? If 
 on the contrary it ivas a seal of Abraham's faith 
 and righteousness, it must have been so in rela- 
 tion to himself alone ; and not to infants of eight 
 days old, who were incapable of believing : 
 neither could it seal that righteousness to them 
 which was imputed to those on! yv/ho believed. 
 To make circumcision therefore, the seal of the 
 righteousness of faith to those who did not 
 believe, implies that they inherited this blessing 
 in virtue of their descent from Abraham, though 
 destitute of his faith ; nor upon any other ground 
 
 6 Uorrc Heb. i Cor. 7, 19. 
 
179 
 
 can an argument be supported from this passage 
 in favour of infant baptism. 
 
 Thirdly, The independents assert that cir- 
 cumcision is superseded by baptism, which is 
 in the present dispensation, what circumcision 
 was in the former, the seal of spiritual blessings. 
 
 *' Circumcision," says a late psedobaptist 
 writer, " is abolished, baptism is established. 
 What then aretheplain, thedirect, the legitimate 
 inferences? Circumcision is superseded by bap- 
 tism. Baptism is under the New Testament, 
 what circumcision was under the old — this is 
 the first inference — the second is, that baptism 
 is to be administered to infants."^ 
 
 Infant baptism, according to the independ- 
 ents then, rests upon mere infereiice drawn from 
 a supposed analogy between circumcision and 
 baptism. Is not this mode of analogical reason- 
 ing contrary to the nature of positive instituti- 
 ons? Is it not a tacit confession, nay a direct 
 proof, that they have no authority from Christ 
 or his apostles, for their practice? When did 
 God authorise the church to establish ordinan- 
 ces upon inferential laws ? Is not such a method 
 contrary to the whole economy of his govern- 
 ment? The church of Rome, by this process 
 of analogical reasoning, has transplanted nearly 
 all the ceremonies of the old covenant into her 
 
 ' See Henry Burdei's Sermon, p, 12. 
 
180 
 
 worship, till it is become a pseud o-judaic sys- 
 tem. And if the independents infer that because 
 Abraham circumcised his children, therefore 
 they are to sprinkle their offspring, why may not 
 the Papists also infer, that because the Jewish 
 church had a visible head in the person of the 
 high priest, therefore the christian church should 
 have a visible head in the person of the pope; 
 and why may not the Episcopalians also infer, 
 that because the priests under the former dis- 
 pensation received tythes, therefore the ministers 
 of the sanctuary may now demand a tenth of 
 the produce of the land ? Is not the inference 
 in these latter instances, at least as plain, as 
 direct, as legitimate, as in the former ? 
 
 But surely analogical evidence, which can 
 never amount to more than possible presumption, 
 or mere probability, should not be admitted as 
 authority in the worship of God; and we main- 
 tain that no ordinance should be recognized as 
 divinely appointed, upon any evidence, short 
 of demonstrative proof. 
 
 As infant baptism, however, is practised and 
 defended upon a supposed analogy between the 
 old, and the new covenant, the more numerous 
 the points of agreement, the stronger will be the 
 evidence in its support ; if, on the contrary this 
 analogy be found to be incomplete, the ground 
 on which paedobaptism rests, is proportionally 
 weak. Let us examine the case. 
 
181 
 
 The covenant of circumcision was made with 
 Abraham, and all his seed according to the 
 flesh. The covenant of grace was made with 
 Christ and all his spiritual seed. At the com- 
 mencement then, here is a discrepancy in the 
 constitution of the two covenants, for they were 
 made with two distinct seeds; and before they 
 can be analogous, Christ, like Abraham, must 
 have a seed according to the flesh. 
 
 Abraham was the federal head and represent- 
 ative of a particular nation, a body politic, to 
 whom the old covenant was restricted. Christ 
 is not the head of a politically organised king- 
 dom — his people are not a body politic, nor is 
 the covenant of grace confined to any particular 
 nation. 
 
 The covenant of circumcision brought all the 
 Jews into an external and temporal relation to 
 God — the covenant of grace eflects no such 
 union ; nor are any people politically related to 
 God, merely because the gospel is dispensed 
 among them. 
 
 Circumcision was positively enjoined on all 
 the male posterity of Abraham, to identify them 
 as his children — but where is it said, under the 
 new covenant, " ye shall baptise your children 
 in all their generations ?" If God had designed 
 the baptism of all infants born under the gospel 
 dispensation, would he have been entirely silent 
 on the subject, when he gave so express a 
 
182 
 
 command to the Jews respecting circumcision ? 
 Could this he established, then we should not 
 hesitate to say, that the gospel is not so clear 
 and definite in its enactments as the law. 
 
 Circumcision was to be administered to males 
 only, and those of every class and condition ; 
 and it was not to be dispensed with, under the 
 severest penalty — *' he that is born in thy house 
 and he that is bought with thy money, must 
 needs be circumcised. The soul that is not 
 circumcised, shall be cut off from his people." 
 Where is baptism commanded to be administer- 
 ed in this indiscriminate way ? Is any believer 
 under a solemn obligation to baptise every male 
 in his house, whether converted to God, or not ? 
 
 Had circumcision been restricted to the child- 
 ren of believing Jews, the inference drawn by the 
 independents would be analogical : but the law 
 of the case is against them here — for if circum- 
 cision is to be the rule of baptism, then should 
 the latter be administered universally, without 
 respect to moral or spiritual qualifications ; be- 
 cause an infant that was born in fornication, and 
 an adult who had no faith, were legitimate 
 subjects of circumcision. Can this be said of 
 baptism ? Do the independents themselves 
 maintain this sentiment ? If not, the supposed 
 analogy between the two ^•dinances is destroy- 
 ed. The churches of Rome and England 
 certainly understand the doctrine of analogy 
 
183 
 
 better than the independents, at least they act 
 more conformably to its spirit : they know that 
 circumcision was a universal national rite, ap- 
 pHcable to every man who dwelt in the land of 
 Canaan ; and because they believe that baptism 
 supersedes circumcision, they baptise every one 
 within the pale of their respective churches. 
 This is consistent, for it must be allowed, that 
 if indeed circumcision prefigured baptism, there 
 ought to be an agreement between the type 
 and the antitype ; and if the one ceremony is to 
 guide us in the administration of the other, the 
 law of the case will be as follows : — 
 
 Circumcision was administered universally 
 throughout the land of Canaan — baptism should 
 be administered universally in England, or any 
 other country where the gospel is preached. 
 Only males were circumcised — only males 
 should be baptised. Faith, neither personal 
 nor relative, was a condition of circumcision. 
 Faith as a prerequisite to baptism, should not 
 be required either in the child or in the parent. 
 All children who were circumcised, partook of 
 the passover — all children who are baptised, 
 should receive the Lord's supper. All children 
 who were circumcised, were thenceforth con- 
 sidered members of the Jewish church ; and 
 without any subsequent conversion or profession 
 of faith, were entitled to all its privileges — all 
 children who are baptised, should be received 
 
184 
 
 as members of the visible church of Christ, and 
 have a right to its privileges, independent of 
 any work of grace, or profession of faith, in 
 their future lives. 
 
 Such are the consequences of pursuing this 
 course of analogical reasoning — and if the in- 
 dependents are not prepared to follow it in all 
 its practical results, they had better leave it to 
 papists and episcopalians, and turn unto the 
 word of the Lord. 
 
 That the old covenant had a typical meaning, 
 and was a shadow of good things to come, we 
 believe ; and we believe also, that the analogi- 
 cal evidence, as it is called, is on our side, when 
 the law of comparison is fairly pursued. Abra- 
 ham was the head and representative of the 
 Jewish church — Christ is the head and repre- 
 sentative of the christian church. Abraham 
 had a numerous seed according to the flesh — 
 Christ has a numerous seed according to the 
 spirit. Abraham, and all his seed were circum- 
 cised — Christ was baptised himself, and has 
 commanded his seed to be baptised also. Cir- 
 cumcision introduced the children of Abraham 
 into the Jewish church — baptism introduces the 
 seed of Christ into his visible church. All who 
 were not of Abraham's seed, were aliens, and 
 strangers — all who are not of the seed of Christ, 
 are excluded from the blessings of the covenant 
 of grace. 
 
185 
 
 Having- examined the nature, mode, and sub- 
 jects of baptism, we shall proceed, 
 
 Fourthly, to inquire into the design and signi- 
 fication of this ordinance. 
 
 In addition to the body of critical and histpri- 
 cal evidence that has been produced in favour 
 of believers baptism^ we may plead its perfect 
 agreement with the scriptural design of the ordi- 
 nance. Positive institutions are siguSj deriving 
 their use from the end they prefigure ; there 
 must necessarily therefore be a similitude be- 
 tween them^ and the objects which they are 
 intended to represent — for as Austin remarks, 
 *' if sacraments bear no resemblance of the 
 things, of which they are sacraments, they are 
 no sacraments at all." As the design which 
 God had in view in the appointment of positive 
 ordinances, is only to be gathered from an 
 attentive regard to what is revealed concerning 
 them ; the laws of their institution should be 
 our guide respecting their true meaning : nor 
 are we at liberty to administer such ordinances 
 for the purpose of accomplishing another de- 
 sign, any more than we are to set aside, or to 
 alter the ordinances themselves. Baptism is 
 a positive institution — baptism then has a precise 
 and important signification; and if we appeal 
 to the New Testament, we shall find that it 
 was intended to be an expressive emblem of 
 the great doctrines of our faith. 
 
 B h 
 
186 
 
 That any alteration ia the mode of administer- 
 ing gospel ordinances, destroys the analogy 
 between them, and the things they are designed 
 to illustrate, is evidenced in the Romish com- 
 munion. Christ appointed bread and wine to 
 be taken in remembrance of Him — the bread to 
 be broken, as an emblem of his body broken 
 for us, and the wine to be poured out, as an 
 emblem of his blood shed for our sins.' But 
 what resemblance is there between the wafer of 
 the church of Rome, and the crucifixion of the 
 son of God? Baptism likewise has a spiritual sig- 
 nification ; it is an emblematical representation 
 of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection — and 
 of the believer's death unto sin and resurrection 
 to newness of life ; but if we substitute sprink- 
 ling for immersion, what similitude is there be- 
 tween the sign and the things signified ? May 
 we not say in this, as in the case of Romish 
 communion, that the scriptural design of bap- 
 tism is entirely lost. 
 
 This is so obviously true, that there are few 
 among the paedobaptists that have any definite 
 idea of the end which the ceremony answers. 
 And how should they, since there is no corres- 
 pondence between the sign, as they practice it, 
 and the things signified by the ordinance insti- 
 tuted by Jesus Christ. It is upon this principle 
 
 • I Cor. ii. 24, 26, 26. 
 
187 
 
 alone, that we can account for the ignorance 
 and contradiction which prevail among the 
 great body of christian professors respecting 
 the design of infant baptism ; and this has led 
 papists, episcopalians, and independents, mu- 
 tually to recriminate each other, on the ground 
 of some alleged absurdity in their respective 
 views of this subject. Can this be said of us? 
 Are we at a loss to give a scriptural reason for 
 our conduct ? Are we divided in opinion res- 
 pecting the design of baptism ? No — nor do we 
 on this account assume to ourselves any supe- 
 riority of judgment or of perception, for it is 
 the result of adhering to the command of our 
 Lord, and observing the law of his institution : 
 indeed the analogy between baptism and the 
 things signified by it, is so plain and intelligi- 
 ble, that it is readily recognised by all who 
 practice it in its primitive simplicity. 
 
 In considering the design and signification of 
 baptism we observe — 
 
 1. That it is a solemn act of divine worship, 
 in which the persons baptised profess their faith 
 in that great mystery of revelation — the Triune 
 God. 
 
 The words which our Lord commanded his 
 disciples to use in the administration of baptism, 
 " in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost," are not a mere form 
 to grace a ceremony, but exhibit an important 
 
188 
 
 truth — a truth which constitutes the basis of 
 the christian revelation, and the only founda- 
 tion of our hope — the Triune Jehovah. To 
 baptise therefore in the name of the sacred 
 Three, is to baptise in the faith of that doctrine 
 the belief of which, forms the distinguishing 
 mark between the christian and the deist. " Ye 
 believe in God," said our Lord, " believe also 
 in me. "9 And this faith must be produced by 
 the Holy Spirit, for " no man can say (s/Vs^r) 
 declare or testify that Jesus is the Lord, but by 
 the Holy Ghost." ' In the ordinance of believ- 
 ers' baptism, as in the whole of the New Testa- 
 ment, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are 
 represented as executing respective parts in the 
 economy of human redemption, and are recog^ 
 nised by the believer in their several offices : 
 -' Truly our fellowship is with the Father, and 
 with his Soil Jesus Christ." * And we have fel- 
 lowship with the Holy Ghost; " the Spirit itself 
 beareth witness with our spirit that we are the 
 children of God"."* The persons whom we bap- 
 tise, sincerely desire to attend to this ordinance 
 from a conviction, founded on an examination 
 of the New Testament, that it is their duty to 
 follow the Lord in the w^ay of his command- 
 ments. They publicly avow their faith in the 
 one living and true God — their subjection to his 
 
 » John xiT. 1. ' I Cor. xii. 3. « I John i. 3. » Phil, ii. 1. n Cor, 
 xiii. 14. Rom. viii. 16. 
 
189 
 
 authority, and their willingness to devote them- 
 selves to the service of Father, Son, and Holy 
 Ohost. The administration of baptism to believ- 
 ers accords with the design of Christ, and with 
 the meaning of the words which he prescribed. 
 They are baptised in the name of the Father ^ 
 and thereby acknowledge one God and Father 
 of all, who is above all, and through all, and in 
 all. They are baptised in the name of the Son^ 
 and thereby acknowledge that he is equal with 
 the Father, the Lord of life and glory, the Re- 
 -deemer of his people, and that they receive him 
 as prophet, priest and king. They are baptised 
 in the name of the Holy Ghost, and thereby ac- 
 knowledge him in all his offices, as the teacher, 
 sanctifier, comforter and preserver of the elect. 
 Thus the baptism of believers is an act of wor- 
 ship in which they profess faith in the one God 
 — Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and solemnly 
 devote themselves to the service of the triune 
 Jehovah. Can this be said of infant sprinkling ? 
 What declaration of faith, what acknowledge- 
 ment of God in Christ, what demonstration of 
 the spirit's work is there in this ceremony ? 
 Surely paedobaptist ministers cannot even affect 
 to use our Lord's words as expressive of the 
 faith of those whom they sprinkle, because they 
 are not of age to receive the testimony of reve- 
 lation — neither can they presume to believe 
 that all, or even the greater part of them will 
 
190 
 
 hereafter embrace this testimony. Do they not 
 then adopt them as a mere form without any 
 regard to their relative importance or emblema- 
 tical signification? and would it not be right 
 in them to consider how far such conduct is 
 consistent with the solemnities of religion. 
 
 2. The baptism of believers is an outward sign 
 of the work of the Holy Ghost in regeneration. 
 
 To be baptised in the name of the Holy Ghost, 
 is to profess that we are the subjects of his 
 regenerating power. Baptism was strictly en- 
 joined upon all who were born of God, and in 
 the days of the apostles they faithfully obeyed 
 the command, hence in after times some mistook 
 the sign for the thing signified, and considered 
 the ordinance as regenerating the subject. This 
 error, which at an early period, had an exten- 
 sive and fatal influence, is still maintained by 
 the great majority of paedobaptists. In our view, 
 baptism is a symbolical representation of the new 
 birth, and so far from its having any regenerating 
 efficacy, we think that no one has a right to be 
 born of water, who has not been previously born 
 of the spirit. To receive Christ's ordinances is 
 to profess that we have received Christ, and 
 that we acknowledge him as our Lord and 
 master — no man can do this, that is not born 
 of God, therefore regeneration must precede 
 faith, even as faith ought to precede baptism. 
 " Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ 
 
191 
 
 is born of God."* "To as many as received 
 him, believing in his name, he granted the pri- 
 vilege of being children of God, who derive 
 their birth not from blood, nor from the desire 
 of the flesh, nor from the will of man, but from 
 God."* This work of grace is also necessary 
 to a just apprehension of the nature of gospel 
 ordinances, *' for the natural man receiveth not 
 the things of the spirit of God, for they are 
 foolishness unto him, neither can he know them 
 because they are spiritually discerned. But he 
 that is spiritual discerneth all things."" Our 
 Lord himself insisted upon this truth in his dis- 
 course with Nicodemus ; " verily, verily, I say 
 unto you, except a man be born again, he can- 
 not discern the reign of God."' This spiritual 
 change is the spring of every act of faith and 
 obedience ; and it is our only title to the ordi- 
 nance of baptism. If any man have not the 
 spirit of Christ, he is none of his ; and if he be 
 not Christ's, he can have.no right to his institu- 
 tions. We find in the New Testament that they 
 who were washed, or baptised, were also sanc- 
 tified, and justified in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus, and by the Spirit of God.* And are said 
 to be saved by the ivashing of regeneration, and 
 renewing of the Holy Ghost.' The persons wham 
 
 4 I John r. 1. s John i. 12. 13. See Dr. Campbell's Translation. 
 " I Cor. ii. 14. "< See Dr. Campbell's Translation. 8 i Cor. vi. 11. 
 » Dr. Maoknight renders it the buth of regeneration, and has tlie followiu! 
 
192 
 
 ue baptise profess to have experienced that re- 
 newing of the Holy Ghost, of which this wash- 
 ing is a significant emblem — hereby declaring 
 that they have put off concerning the former 
 conversation the old man which is corrupt, 
 according to the deceitful lusts, and have put 
 on the new man, which after God is created 
 in righteousness and true holiness : but the 
 unconscious subjects of pcedobaptism know no- 
 thing of the agency of the spirit on their hearts, 
 and the sign, as administered to them, fails alto- 
 gether of illustrating the work of regeneration, 
 of which primitive baptism was undoubtedly a 
 symbolical representation. 
 
 3. Baptism is designed to illustrate the 
 purifying nature of the blood of Christ. The 
 scriptures proclaim the entire pollution of man, 
 and the absolute necessity of the blood of 
 Christ to remove his guilt. Baptism by im- 
 mersion is a striking illustration of these impor- 
 tant truths---the persons whom we baptise pro- 
 fess to feel a deep and humbling conviction of 
 their utter sinfulness, and they desire to be 
 
 remarks upon this passage. " TJirottgh hapihtn, called the bath of regenera- 
 tion, not because any change in the natare of the baptised person is produced 
 by baptism, but because it is an emblem of the purification of the soul from 
 sin. Hence Ananias, in allusion to the emblematical meaning of baptism, said 
 to our Apostle, (Acts xxii. 16.) ' arise, and be baptised, and wash awar thj 
 sins.' Be baptised in token of thy resolution to forsake thy sins. The real 
 change in a believer which entitles hira to be called a Son of God, is not ef- 
 fected by baptism, but by the renewing of the Holy Ghost, mentioned in the 
 next clause. Hence our Lord, whom the Apostle has followed here, joined 
 the two together, in his discourse to Nicodemns ; John iil. 5. Except a man 
 be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." 
 See Notes on Titus iii. 5. 
 
193 
 
 washed in the laver of baptism, as a lively em- 
 blem of their having been washed in the fountain 
 which is opened to the house of David and to 
 the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for un- 
 cleanness. It is on account of its symbolical 
 meaning, that we find baptism so frequently 
 spoken of as taking away sin — Peter, when 
 addressing those Jews, who were converted 
 under his ministry, commanded them to be bap- 
 tised in the name of the Lord Jesus, for the 
 remission of sins ;' not that he believed, that the 
 application of water to their bodies could remove 
 their moral defilement, but because baptism ex- 
 hibits an impressive image of that purification 
 by the blood of Christ, which they enjoyed 
 through faith in his name. This he shews in his 
 epistle, where he says, " when once the long- 
 suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, 
 while the ark was preparing, wherein few, that 
 is eight souls, were saved by water. To which 
 water, the antitype baptism, (not the putting 
 away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of 
 a good conscience towards God), now saveth us 
 also through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." * 
 The death of Christ for the sanctification of his 
 people, is more forcibly set forth by immersion 
 than it can be by any other mode. Our high- 
 est idea of natural purification arises from an 
 
 ' AiMs ii. lis. -1 Peter iii. 21. See Mscknight's TranslHtioB. 
 C C 
 
id4 
 
 immersion of the whole body in water ; surely 
 therefore this mode must be the most appropriate 
 figure to illustrate the purity of the saints, who 
 are, said to "be washed from their sins in the 
 blood of Christ." ' Sprinkling might be a suit- 
 able representation of that imperfect purification 
 which obtained under the law, but it by no 
 means expresses the sanctification of believers 
 under the gospel, of whom it is said, that " Christ 
 gave himself for them that he might sanctify and 
 cleanse them with the luashing of luater by the 
 word."^ 
 
 That baptism was designed to be an emblem 
 of the sanctification of believers through the 
 blood of Christ, is a truth admitted by p^edo- 
 baptists. Dr. Boys says, " the dipping in 
 holy baptism has three parts ; the putting into 
 the water, the continuance in the water, and 
 the cpming out of the water. The putting into 
 the water, doth ratify the mortification of sin 
 by the power of Christ's death, as Paul — - 
 " know ye not that all we, which have been bap- 
 tised into Jesus Christ, have been baptised into 
 his death, and that our old man is crucified 
 w ith him ?"* The continuance in the water, notes 
 the burial of sin ; to wit, a continual increase of 
 mortification by the power of Christ's death and 
 burial. ° The coming out of the water, figured 
 
 3 Rev. i. 5.— vii. 14. < Epli. v 25, 2G, 27. * Rom. vi. 3. « Rom. ri. 4. 
 
195 
 
 our spiritual resurrection and vivification to 
 newness of life, by the power of Christ's resur- 
 rection." ^ Tilenus also observes, that " the 
 ceremony in baptism is three-fold : immersion 
 into the water, a continuance under the water, 
 and a rising out of the water. The internal and 
 essential form of baptism is no more than that 
 analogical proportion of the signs, already ex- 
 plained, with the things signified. For as it is 
 a property of water to wash away the filth of the 
 body ; so it represents the power of Christ's 
 blood in the cleansing from sin. Thus immer- 
 sion into the water declares, by the most agree- 
 able analogy, the mortification of the old man ; 
 and emersion out of the water the vivification of 
 the new man." ' Thus according to paedobaptists 
 themselves, our mode is the only one that is con- 
 sistent with the scriptural meaning of the ordi- 
 nance. 
 
 4' Baptism is a lively emblem of the death, 
 burial, and resurrection of Christ. 
 
 As these truths constitute the only foundation 
 on which oiu- hope is built, they form prominent 
 parts of the gospel revelation, and it is evidently 
 the design of baptism to present us with an 
 emblematical illustration of them. 
 
 When our Lord submitted himself to this 
 ordinance, his immersion in the water, typically 
 
 7 Dr. Bojs' Works, p. 294. Edit. 1629. s See Booth's Pa-do. E\ara. 
 Vol i. p 158. 
 
196 
 
 represented his death and burial ; his rising up 
 out of the water, and the spirit resting upon him, 
 strikingly prefigured his resurrection from the 
 dead, his ascension to the throne of his glory, 
 and the gift of the Holy Ghost, as the first fruit 
 of his intercession. 
 
 The element in which he was immersed was 
 an emblem of that dreadful abyss of dilline jus- 
 tice in which he was overwhelmed ; and like a 
 drowning man, he sunk imder the waters of deep 
 affliction — " save me, O God ; for the waters are 
 come in unto my soul : I sink in deep mire, 
 where there is no standing : I am come into 
 deep waters, where the floods overflow me."° 
 In the prospect of this woeful scene of distress 
 his soul being in an agony he exclaimed, " 1 
 have a baptism to be baptised with, and how 
 am I straitened till it be accomplished !" 
 
 The baptism of believers also is designed to 
 keep in view the important facts of the sufferings 
 and triumphs of the Son of God. This the 
 apostle clearly shews — " know ye not, that so 
 many of us as were baptised into Jesus Christ 
 were baptised into his death ? Therefore we are 
 buried with him by baptism into death ; that 
 like as Christ was raised up from the dead by 
 the glory of the Father, even so we also should 
 walk in newness of life. For if we have been 
 
 •Psalm Ixix. 1, 2. 
 
197 
 
 planted together in the likeness of his death, we 
 shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection." • 
 And again, "buried with him in baptism, where- 
 in also ye are risen with him, through the faith 
 of the operation of God, who hath raised him 
 from the dead." These expressions, buried with 
 Aim in baptism — whereifi ye are risen with him — 
 so decidedly favour immersion, that indepen- 
 dent of the signification of the ordinance, Ihey 
 are of themselves sufficient to decide the mode. 
 Bishop Hoadly declares that if baptism had 
 been performed by the apostles, as it is now by 
 the paedobaptists, we should never have heard 
 of this form of speech. * 
 
 But it is asserted by some in our day, that we 
 labour under an egregious mistake respecting 
 the meaning of this passage — for that the apos- 
 tle is not speaking of the mode, but of the design 
 of the ordinance — which is the death and resur- 
 rection of Christ; and that so long as this design 
 is kept in vieiv, pouring or even sprinkling is as 
 valid as immersion. That man must be strangely 
 warped by prejudice, who will venture such an 
 opinion, in opposition to the plain meaning of 
 the words, and the universal consent of the most 
 able expositors.' But in point of fact, the 
 apostle is not only speaking of the emblematical 
 
 < Rom. vi. 3, 4, 6. 3 See his Works, Vol. 3. p. 890. 3 See Grotias, 
 Wfaltby, Macknight, Hammond, Barkit, Dr. Wells, ail of them pe- 
 dobaptists, on this subject. 
 
198 
 
 relation of baptism to the death and resurrection 
 of Christ, but also of the obligations it imposes 
 upon the baptised — he therefore necessarily 
 refers to the mode, as exemplifying the ends 
 which should follow, in the believer's life and 
 conversation. He says, we are buried in baptism 
 and are raised up again, that we should walk in 
 newness of life. Here the mode of baptism is 
 specified, and the end which should succeed it 
 pointed out ; and we trace without difficulty the 
 analogy between the sign and the thing signifi- 
 ed — but what emblematical representation does 
 sprinkling afford of the death, burial and resur- 
 rection of Jesus Christ? What sign does it 
 exhibit that the infant is dead unto sin and alive 
 unto God ? Would he not remain for ever a 
 stranger to the fact of his having received this 
 ceiemony, unless told of it — how then can it 
 furnish him with motives to future holiness of 
 life ? 
 
 The spiritual signification of baptism is so 
 entirely obscured by the substitution of sprink- 
 ling in the place of immersion, that many 
 learned paedobaptists have been of opinion that 
 immersion should be restored. No one has ex- 
 pressed sentiments more decided on this sub- 
 ject, than Dr. Wall — he says, *' the immersion 
 of the person (whether infant or adult) in the 
 posture of one that is buried, and raised up 
 again, is much more solemn, and expresses the 
 
199 
 
 design of the sacrament, and the mystery of the 
 spiritual washing much better, than pouring a 
 small quantity of water on the face ; and that 
 pouring of water is much better than sprinkling, 
 or dropping a drop of water on it." ' Again, 
 when addressing the clergy he says, *' to those 
 who use sprinkling instead of dipping, or even 
 of pouring water, (which last is enjoined by our 
 church even in the weakest child's case) I would 
 humbly represent the consideration of the duty 
 of obedience which they owe, not only to the 
 rulers of the church to which they have prom- 
 ised to conform ; but also and chiefly to our 
 Saviour himself^ ivhose ivorcl of command is^ 
 baptise. I wish they would study the notion 
 and emphasis of that word. We are forced to 
 some pains in defence of our practice against 
 those who pretend that it does necessarily and 
 absolutely include dipping in its signification — 
 I think we must not, and cannot deny that it 
 includes washing in its signification. They will 
 do well to consider whether they shall be able 
 to justify before our Saviour, that a drop, or a 
 sprinkle or two, of water, can be so fairly un- 
 derstood to be a washing of a person, in his 
 sense."' Venema maintains that " washins: is 
 neither the only, nor the principal idea connected 
 with the ordinance ; but more truly that of 
 
 * See Dcf. of Iiif. Bnp. p. 40,3. * Idem. p. .407. 
 
200 
 
 suffocating, and of producing death on the 
 flesh, seems to be intended, not only as an 
 effect which water produces, but because the 
 apostle asserts it in express words."" 
 
 This opinion is also maintained by that emi- 
 nent bibHcal critic Schleusner. When stating 
 the metaphorical signification of the expression 
 (FiivSd'^mffdai rSi Xf/ffrw. To be buried with Christ, he 
 says, " the origin of this singular mode of 
 speaking, which is peculiar to the books of the 
 New Testament, must be sought for in baptism, 
 which in the apostolic churches was performed 
 by immersion. For submersion which was for- 
 merly used in baptism on account of its simili- 
 tude to a burial, (because the whole body of the 
 person baptised, which was immersed in water 
 or a river, was as if buried in a sepulchre) 
 not only had this signification, that it might 
 represent the death of Christ ; but by the same 
 symbolical rite the baptised were understood to 
 profess and to promise, that they were willing 
 in future, after the likeness and resemblance of 
 the death of Christ, to renounce all wickedness ; 
 and even to suffer death for the sake of the 
 christian rehgion, as Christ gave up his life for 
 the sake of the truth : and as the body which 
 w as immersed in water at baptism, again emerg- 
 t'd or was raised out of the water, by this 
 
 « Venemae Disscrtat Sac. 1. 2. c. 14 Seoti 9. 
 
201 
 
 symbolical rite was represented the resurrection 
 of Christ, the hope of the future resurrection of 
 the dep,d; and men were admonished that the 
 whole purpose of life should be regulated by the 
 doctrines and examples of Christ." ' 
 
 Thus are our opinion and practice defended 
 by learned paedobaptists ; very many of whom, 
 maintain, as firmly as we can, that baptism is 
 intended to exhibit the death, burial and resur- 
 rection of the Lord Jesus Christ ; and that im- 
 mersion is absolutely essential to the symbolical 
 representation of these facts — with what propriety 
 this is denied by the advocates of paedobaptism 
 at the present day, it remains with them to 
 shew — it is something in our favour, that we 
 have the testimony of the most eminent of their 
 body, on our side in this particular. 
 
 5. Baptism is intended to illustrate the believ- 
 er's spiritual conformity to the death and resur-r 
 rection of Jesus Christ. 
 
 That spiritual change, of which only the 
 believer is the subject, and which constitutes him 
 a new creature ^ is prefigured in the ordinance of 
 baptism ; *' for as many of you as have been 
 baptised into Christ, have put on Christ." Here 
 the apostle shews that baptism was the outward 
 sign of spiritual conformity to Christ ; and the 
 whole of his reasoning in the 6th chapter of 
 
 ^ Vide Lex. Nor. Test, sub voce Suv^ct^WW, » IF Cor. v. 17, 
 Dd 
 
202 
 
 Romans is founded on thismiion and communion 
 of believers with Christ. He begins by saying 
 that we are dead to sin, and that we are huried 
 with Christ hy baptism into his death — being thus 
 dead and buried with Christ in baptism, ive are 
 free from sin.^ He then proceeds to point out 
 our spiritual conformity to his resurrection, and 
 our consequent communion with him in newness 
 of life. "Now if we be dead with Christ, we 
 believe that we shall also live with him. Know- 
 ing that Christ being raised from the dead, dieth 
 no more ; death hath no more dominion over 
 him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once ; 
 but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Like- 
 Avise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead in- 
 deed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus 
 Christ our Lord.'" The great mystery of our union 
 to Christ is here unfolded — He, as the head of 
 the body, and the first fruits of them that sleep, 
 is represented as having comprehended all the 
 elect in the death and resurrection of his body; 
 and they, by their interest in his vicarious suffer- 
 ings, are represented as dying in his death, and 
 rising in his resurrection — his death being a 
 complete satisfaction for their sins, and his re- 
 surrection the certain pledge and pattern of their 
 own. Here also we have the mystery of the 
 Christian life explained. That life which we 
 
 » See verses 2, 4, 7. > Sec verses 8, 9, 10.11. 
 
203 
 
 live by the faith of the Son of God, and which 
 is said to be hid with Christ in God . The apos- 
 tle describes it as consisting of two things — dy- 
 ing unto sin, and living unto holiness. 
 
 Our dying unto sin is prefigured in our being 
 immersed in water; *' ye are buried with him by 
 baptism, likewise reckon ye yourselves to be 
 dead indeed unto sin." This expression may not 
 only signify our freedom from the dominion of sin 
 that we should no longer live under it ; but our 
 having endured the punishment due on account 
 of it, by virtually suftering and dying with Christ 
 as our great surety. Thus all the elect were 
 included in Christ's death, and his death was 
 imputed to them as though they had suffered the 
 penalty which the law enacted, and they are 
 consequently regarded as just in the sight of 
 God " for he that is dead Mr/Miurai is justified 
 from sin."" 
 
 Again, our living unto holiness, is prefigured by 
 our rising out of the water; " that like as Christ 
 was raised up from the dead by the glory of the 
 Father, even so we should walk in newness of 
 life." 
 
 Baptism is an apt illustration of these things ; 
 and the subjects of this ordinance confess that 
 they were born in sin, and that they were the 
 willing servants of iniquity ; but that they have 
 
 * A'erse 7. 
 
204 
 
 put off the old man with his deeds, and have put 
 on the new man^ which is renewed in knowledge 
 after the image of him that created him. * 
 
 6. Baptism prefigures the death of the be- 
 lievers bodv, and his resurrection to eternal 
 life. 
 
 We have shewn that baptism is an emblem of 
 death — of the death of Christ for the sins of his 
 people, and of the believer's death unto sin : we 
 shall now shew that it points to the final disso- 
 lution of the body. In this view of the ordinance 
 it possesses indeed much practical utility, teach- 
 ing us that we must shortly lay aside this frail 
 and degraded tabernacle, which is so opposed 
 in the tendencies of its very nature to the enjoy- 
 ments which the spirit seeks in communion 
 with Christ. *' For we that are in this tabernacle 
 do groan being burdened; not for that we would 
 be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality 
 might be swallowed up of life." The believer 
 sees in baptism, a lively figure of the putting off 
 his earthly tabernacle — he realises in this ordi- 
 nance, the burial of his body in the dust of the 
 earth, when the indwelling of sin will be des- 
 troyed, and he will be for ever freed from 
 all those corruptions which at present war 
 against his soul — " for he that is dead is free 
 from sin." 
 
 s Col. ill. 10. 
 
205 
 
 Having thus passed through death in a figure, 
 he is taught the necessity of praying and watch- 
 ing with all perseverance — he is stimulated to 
 activity in the ways of the Lord ; to the diligent 
 performance of all his revealed will — to the pa- 
 tient endurance of the inflictions of his righteous 
 providence ; and he lives in the habitual expect- 
 ation of his last change ; having his loins girt 
 about, and his lamp burning, and his hope in 
 exercise that he shall be found of his Lord in 
 peace ! 
 
 The believer's descent into the water at bap- 
 tism does not more forcibly exhibit the humili- 
 ation of his body when he shall return to his 
 original dust, than his rising again out of the 
 water prefigures the final and complete victory 
 which he shall obtain over death in the morning 
 of the resurrection, by virtue of his union to 
 Christ. 
 
 We have the sentence of death in ourselves, 
 our bodies must undergo a change before they 
 can participate in the joys of the heavenly 
 world ; but our future felicity is not the less 
 secure, because the circumstances of our nature 
 require that our flesh should see corruption. 
 He who hath enstamped his image upon the 
 hearts of his people, will also set his seal 
 upon their graves; and will give his angels 
 charge to watch their sleeping dust ; and he 
 shall call in the morning and they shall come 
 
206 
 
 forthwith joy and singing; for "he will have 
 a desire to the work of his own hands." 
 
 Does the ordinance of baptism exhibit these 
 important and consolatory truths ? Does it 
 evince our faith in the Triune Jehovah — does it 
 set forth the work of the spirit and the purifying 
 efficacy of the blood of Christ — does it illustrate 
 his bitter sufferings, deep humiliation, and com- 
 plete triumph over sin and death — does it 
 enforce a spiritual conformity to his example — 
 does it prefigure our death, and direct our 
 hopes to that blissful period, when these bodies 
 shall rise to immortality in the perfect likeness 
 of their Redeemer? What manner of persons 
 then ought ive to be, in all holy conversation 
 and godliness, who profess to believe these 
 truths, to enjoy these privileges, and to antici- 
 pate this blessedness ! 
 
 While we conscientiously observe this ordi- 
 nance, as an act of our Lord's divine authority, 
 and an evidence of his consummate wisdom 
 and goodness — ^while we zealously defend it 
 from the false glosses, which the ignorance of 
 some, and the perverse reasonings of others 
 have cast over it — let us be solicitous to deduce 
 from it for ourselves, at least some of the many 
 spiritual lessons it is designed to teach us — and 
 since we know by experience, that while we 
 practice it in scriptural simplicity, even paedo"*- 
 baptist professors will unite with men of the 
 
207 
 
 world in branding us with reproach — let us 
 endeavour to adorn our profession, by the 
 consistency of our walk and conversation ; — 
 to cherish and exercise those graces which are 
 the brightest ornaments of the christian charac- 
 ter ; — to enjoy the consolations the gospel is 
 calculated to afford, and to wait in patient 
 expectation of ultimately beholding the glory 
 of the Triune God, — Father, Son, and Holy 
 Ghost. 
 
 FINIS, 
 
 Printed hy S. Wilkin, Market Place, Norwich. 
 
4> 
 
 <3^/*^,/o 
 
 ^ 
 
 
t * 
 

 ^'t