4>^. t^^ie>^ 
 
 LIBRA^RY 
 
 ®!u0t0j)ical Seminary, 
 
 BV 811 .M545 
 
 Miller, Samuel, 1769-1850 
 
 Infant baptism scriptural 
 
 and reasonable ^ „ 
 
 The John M. Krebs Donation. 
 
INFANT BAPTISM 
 
 SCRIPTURAL AND REASONABLE 
 
 BAPTISM BY SPRINKLING 
 
 AFFUSION 
 
 THE MOST SUITABLE AND EDIFYING MODE 
 
 IN FOUR DISCOURSES. 
 
 BY SAMUEL MILLER, D.D. 
 
 Professor of Ecclesiastical History and Church Government, in the Theological 
 Seminar}' at Princeton, 
 
 PHILADELPHIA: 
 
 PUBLISHED BY JOSEPH WHETHAM. 
 
 1835. 
 
Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1834, by Wm. 
 M. Engles, in the Office of the Clerk, of the District Court, of 
 the eastern district of Pennsylvania. 
 
 Printed by 
 William S. Martien, 
 No. 9 George street. 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 Page. 
 Sermon I. — Infant Baptism established, - 13 
 
 Sermon II. — Objections answered, - - 45 
 
 Sermon III. — The mode of administering Baptism, 80 
 
 Sermon IV. — The same subject continued, - 102 
 
 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 Note A. — Giving a name in Baptism, - - - 125 
 
 Note B. — Baptismal Regeneration, - - 126 
 
 Note C. — Sponsors in Baptism, - - - , 136 
 
 Note D. — Confirmation, - - - - 140 
 
 Note E. — Vote of the Westminster Assembly respect- 
 ing Baptism, 147 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 The substance of the following discourses 
 was delivered, in two sermons, in the Church 
 in Freehold, Monmouth county, New^ Jersey, 
 on the 29th of September 1833. A desire for 
 their publication having been expressed by some 
 who heard them, I have thought proper to re- 
 vise and enlarge the whole, and present it in 
 the present form. The subject is one which 
 has given rise to much warm discussion, and it 
 would seem, at first view, to be a work of su- 
 pererogation, if not of still more unfavourable 
 character, to trouble the Christian conmiunity 
 with another treatise upon it. But our Anti- 
 poedobaptist brethren appear to be resolved that 
 it shall never cease to be agitated ; and as, in- 
 deed, the constant stirring of this controversy 
 seems to furnish no small share of the very ali- 
 ment on which they depend for subsistence as 
 a denomination, they cannot be expected to let 
 it rest. The great importance of the subject, 
 in my estimation ; and the hope that this little 
 volume may reach and benefit some, who are in 
 danger of being drawn into the toils of error, 
 and have no opportunity of perusing larger 
 
6 
 
 works, have induced me to undergo the labour 
 of preparing it for the press. 
 
 My object is, not to write for the learned, but 
 to present the subject in that brief, plain, popu- 
 lar manner which is adapted to the case of those 
 who read but little. I have, therefore, design- 
 edly avoided the introduction of much matter 
 which properly belongs to the subject, and 
 which is to be found in larger treatises; and 
 have especially refrained from entering further 
 into the field of philological discussion, than was 
 absolutely necessary for the accomplishment of 
 my plan. 
 
 If I know my own heart, my purpose is, not 
 to wound the feelings of a human being ; not to 
 stir up strife ; but to provide a little manual, 
 better adapted than any of this class that I have 
 seen, for the use of those Presbyterians who 
 are continually assaulted, and sometimes per- 
 plexed, by their Baptist neighbours. May the 
 Divine benediction rest upon the humble oflfer- 
 
 ing ! 
 
 SAMUEL MILLER. 
 
 Princeton, Nov. 1834. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM 
 
 SERMON I. 
 
 And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, 
 saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into 
 mine house and abide there. Acts xvi. 15. 
 
 As man has a body as well as a soul, so it has pleased 
 infinite wisdom to appoint something in religion adapted to 
 both parts of our nature. Something to strike the senses, 
 as well as to impress the conscience and the heart; or 
 rather, something which might, through the medium of the 
 senses, reach and benefit the spiritual part of our constitu- 
 tion. For, as our bodies in this world of sin and death, 
 often become sources of moral mischief and pain, so, by 
 the grace of God, they are made inlets to the most refined 
 moral pleasures, and means of advancement in the divine 
 life. 
 
 But while the outward senses are to be consulted in 
 religion, they are not to be invested with unlimited domi- 
 nion. Accordingly the external rites and ceremonies of 
 Christianity are few and simple, but exceedingly appro- 
 priate and significant. We have but two sacraments, the 
 one emblematical of that spiritual cleansing, and the other 
 of that spiritual nourishment, which we need both for en- 
 joyment and for duty. To one of these sacramental ordi- 
 nances there is a pointed reference in the original commis- 
 sion given by their Master to the apostles : " Go ye into all 
 the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature, — bap- 
 tizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things 
 whatsoever I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you 
 always, even unto the end of the world." (Matt, xxviii. 
 19, 20.) And, accordingly, wherever the Gospel was re- 
 ceived, we find holy baptism reverently administered as a 
 
 B 
 
14 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 sign and seal of membership in the family of Christ. 
 Thus on the occasion to which our text refers, " a certain 
 woman," we are told, "named Lydia, a seller of purple, of 
 the city of Thyatira, heard Paul and Silas preach in the 
 city of Philippi ; and the Lord opened her heart, so that 
 she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul. 
 And when she was baptized, and her household, she be- 
 sought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to 
 the Lord, come into mine house and abide there." 
 
 I propose, my friends, from these words, to address you 
 on the subject of Christian Baptism. You are sensible 
 that this is a subject on which much controversy has ex- 
 isted, in modern times, among professing Christians. It 
 shall be my endeavour, by the grace of God, with all can- 
 dour and impartiality, to inquire what the Scriptures teach 
 concerning this ordinance, and what appears to have been 
 the practice in regard to it in the purest and best ages of 
 the Christian church, as well as in later times. May I be 
 enabled to speak, and you to ?iear as becomes those who 
 expect, in a little while, to stand before the judgment seat 
 of Christ ! 
 
 There are two questions concerning baptism to which 
 I request your special attention at this time, viz : Who are 
 the proper subjects of this ordinance 1 And in what man- 
 ner ought it to be administered ? To the first of these 
 questions our attention will be directed in the present, and 
 the ensuing discourse. 
 
 L Who are to be considered as the proper subjects of 
 Christian Baptism? 
 
 That baptism ought to be administered to all adult per- 
 sons, who profess faith in Christ, and obedience to him, 
 and who have not been baptized in their infancy, is not 
 doubted by any. In this all who consider baptism as an 
 ordinance at present obligatory are agreed. But it is well 
 known that there is a large and respectable body of pro- 
 fessing Christians among us who believe, and confidently 
 assert, that baptism ought to be confined to adults ; who 
 insist, that when professing Christians bring their infant 
 oflTspring, and dedicate them to God, and receive for them 
 the washing of sacramental water in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, they en- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 15 
 
 tirely pervert and misapply an important Christian ordi- 
 nance. We highly respect the sincerity and piety of 
 many who entertain these opinions ; but we are perfectly 
 persuaded that they are in error, nay in great and mis- 
 chievous error ; in error which cannot fail of exerting a 
 most unhappy influence on the best interests of the church 
 of God. We have no doubt that the visible church is made 
 up, not only of those who personally profess the tnie reli- 
 gion, but also of their children ; and that we are bound not 
 only to confess Christ before men for ourselves, but also to 
 bring our infant seed in the arms of faith and love, and pre- 
 sent them before the Lord, in that ordinance which is at 
 once a seal of God's covenant with his people, and an 
 emblem of those spiritual blessings which, as sinners, we 
 and our children equally and indispensably need. 
 
 Our reasons for entertaining this opinion, with entire 
 confidence, are the following : 
 
 1. Because in all Jehovah's coveyiants with his profes- 
 sing people, from the earliest ages, and in all states of 
 society, their infant seed have been included. That this 
 was the case with regard to the first covenant made with 
 Adam in paradise, is granted by all; certainly by all with 
 whom we have any controversy concerning Infant Bap- 
 tism. And, indeed, the consequences of the violation of 
 that covenant, to all his posterity, furnish a standing and 
 a mournful testimony that it embraced them all. The 
 covenant made with Noah, after the deluge, was, as to this 
 point, of the same character. Its language was, " Be- 
 hold, I establish my covenant with thee and with thy 
 seec?." The covenant with Abraham was equally compre- 
 hensive. " Behold," says Jehovah, " my covenant is 
 with thee. Behold, I establish my covenant with thee, 
 and with thy seed, after thee." The covenants of Sinai 
 and of Moab, it is evident, also comprehended the child- 
 ren of the immediate actors in the passing scenes, and 
 attached to them, as well as to their fathers, an interest in 
 blessings or the curses, the promises or the threatenings 
 which those covenants respectively included. Accordingly 
 when Moses was about to take leave of the people, he 
 addressed them as " standing before the Lord their God, 
 with their little ones, and their wives, to enter into cove- 
 
16 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 nant with the Lord their God." (Deut. xxix. 10 — 12.) 
 And when we come to the New Testament economy, still 
 we find the same interesting feature not only retained, but 
 more strikingly and strongly displayed. Still the promise, 
 it is declared, is " to us and our children, even as many as 
 the Lord our God shall call." 
 
 Now, has this been a feature in all Jehovah's covenants 
 with his people in every age ? And shall we admit the 
 idea of its failing in that New Testament or Christian 
 covenant, which, though the same in substance with those 
 which preceded it, excels them all in the extent of its 
 privileges, and in the glory of its promises ? It cannot be. 
 The thought is inadmissible. But further, 
 
 2. The close and endearing connection between parents 
 and children affords a strong argument in favour of the 
 church-membership of the infant seed of believers. The 
 voice of nature is lifted up, and pleads most powerfully in 
 behalf of our cause. The thought of severing parents 
 from their offspring, in regard to the most interesting rela- 
 tions in which it has pleased God in his adorable provi- 
 dence to place them, is equally repugnant to Christian 
 feeling, and to natural law. Can it be, my friends, that 
 when the stem is in the church, the branch is out of it? 
 Can it be that when the parent is within the visible king- 
 dom of the Redeemer, his offspring, bone of his bone, and 
 flesh of his flesh, have no connection with it? It is not so 
 in any other society that the great moral Governor of the 
 world ever formed. It is not so in civil society. Children 
 are born citizens of the State in which their parents re- 
 sided at the time of their birth. In virtue of their birth 
 they are plenary citizens, bound by all the duties, and en- 
 titled to all the privileges of that relation, whenever they 
 become capable of exercising them. Prom these duties 
 they cannot be liberated. Of these privileges they cannot 
 be deprived, but by the commission of crime. But why 
 should this great principle be set aside in the church of 
 God? Surely it is not less obvious or less powerful in 
 grace than in nature. The analogies which pervade all the 
 works and dispensations of God are too uniform and 
 striking to be disregarded in an inquiry like the present. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 17 
 
 But we hasten to facts and considerations still more expli- 
 citly laid down in Holy Scripture. 
 
 3. The actual and acknowledged church-membership of 
 infants under the Old Testament economy, is a decisive 
 index of the Divine will in regard to this matter. 
 
 Whatever else may be doubtful, it is certain that infants 
 were, in fact, members of the church under the former 
 dispensation ; and, as such, were the regular subjects of a 
 covenant seal. When God called Abraham, and estab- 
 lished his covenant with him, he not only embraced his in- 
 fant seed, in the most express terms, in that covenant, but 
 he also appointed an ordinance by which this relation of his 
 children to the visible church was publicly ratiiied and 
 sealed, and that when they were only eight days old. If 
 Jewish adults were members of the church of God, under 
 that economy, then, assuredly, their infant seed were 
 equally members, for they were brought into the same 
 covenant relation, and had the same covenant seal im- 
 pressed upon their flesh as their adult parents. This 
 covenant, moreover, had a respect to spiritual as well as 
 temporal blessings. Circumcision is expressly declared, 
 by the inspired apostle, to have been "a seal of the righte- 
 ousness of faith." (Rom. iv. 11.) So far was it from being 
 a mere pledge of the possession of Canaan, and the enjoy- 
 ment of temporal prosperity there, that it ratified and 
 sealed a covenant in which " all the families of the earth 
 were to be blessed." And yet this covenant seal was so- 
 lemnly appointed by God to be administered, and was ac- 
 tually administered, for nearly two thousand years, to in- 
 fants of the tenderest age, in token of their relation to 
 God's covenanted family, and of their right to the privi- 
 leges of that covenant. Here, then, is a fact, — a fact in- 
 capable of being disguised or denied, — nay, a fact acknow- 
 ledged by all — on which the advocates of infant baptism 
 may stand as upon an immoveable rock. For if infinite 
 wisdom once saw that it was right and fit that infants 
 should be made the subjects of "a seal of the righteousness 
 of faith," before they were capable of exercising faith, 
 surely a transaction the same in substance may be right 
 and fit now. Baptism, which is, in like manner, a seal of 
 the righteousness of faith, may, without impropriety, be 
 
18 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 applied equally early. What once, undoubtedly, existed 
 in the church, and that by Divine appointment, may exist 
 still, without any impeachment of either the wisdom or 
 benevolence of Him who appointed it. But, 
 
 4. As the infant seed of the people of God are acknow- 
 ledged on all hands to have been members of the church, 
 equally with their parents, under the Old Testament dis- 
 pensation, so it is equally certain that the church of God 
 is the same in substance noiv that it was then; and, of 
 course, it is just as reasonable and proper, on principle, 
 that the infant offspring of professed believers should be 
 members of the church now, as it was that they should be 
 members of the ancient church. I am aware that our 
 Baptist brethren warmly object to this statement, and as- 
 sert that the church of God under the Old Testament 
 economy and the New, is not the same, but so essentially 
 different, that the same principles can by no means apply 
 to each. They contend that the Old Testament dispensa- 
 tion was a kind of political economy, rather national 
 than spiritual in its character; and, of course, that when 
 the Jews ceased to be a people, the covenant under which 
 they had been placed, was altogether laid aside, and a 
 covenant of an entirely new character introduced. But 
 nothing can be more evident than that this view of the 
 subject is entirely erroneous. The perpetuity of the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, and, of consequence, the identity of the 
 church under both dispensations, is so plainly taught in 
 Scripture, and follows so unavoidably from the radical 
 scriptural principles concerning the church of God, that 
 it is indeed wonderful how any believer in the Bible can 
 call in question the fact. Every thing essential to ecclesi- 
 astical identity is evidently found here. The same Divine 
 Head ; the same precious covenant ; the same great spiri- 
 tual design ; the same atoning blood ; the same sanctifying 
 Spirit, in which we rejoice, as the life and the glory of the 
 New Testament church, we know, from the testimony of 
 Scripture, were also the life and the glory of the church 
 before the coming of the Messiah. It is not more certain 
 that a man, arrived at mature age, is the same individual 
 that he was when an infant on his mother's lap, than it 
 is that the church, in the plenitude of her light and privi- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. . 19 
 
 leges, after the coming of Christ, is the same church 
 which, many centuries before, though with a much smaller 
 amount of light and privilege, yet, as we are expressly told 
 in the New Testament, (Acts vii. 38.) enjoyed the presence 
 and guidance of her divine Head "in the wilderness." 
 The truth is, the inspired apostle, in writing to the Gala- 
 tians, (iv. 1 — 6.) formally compares the covenanted people 
 of God, under the Old Testament economy, to an heir 
 under age. '* Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is a 
 child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord 
 of all ; but is under tutors and governors, until the time 
 appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were chil- 
 dren, were in bondage under the elements of the world. 
 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth 
 his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem 
 them that were under the law, that we might receive the 
 adoption of sons." 
 
 Hence, the inspired apostle, in writing to the Hebrews, 
 (iv. 2.) referring to the children of Israel, says — " Unto 
 us was the Gospel preached, as well as unto them." 
 Again, in writing to the Corinthians, (x. 1 — 4.) he de- 
 clares, " They did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did 
 all drink the same spiritual drink ; for they drank of that 
 spiritual rock which followed them, and that rock was 
 Christ." "Abraham," we are told, (John viii. 56.) "re- 
 joiced to see Christ's day; he saw it, and was glad." 
 And, of the patriarchs generally, we are assured that 
 they saw Gospel promises afar off, and embraced them. 
 The church under the old economy, then, was not only 
 a church — a true church — a divinely constituted church — 
 but it was a Gospel church, a church of Christ — a church 
 built upon the " same foundation as that of the apos- 
 tles." 
 
 But what places the identity of the church, under both 
 dispensations, in the clearest and strongest light, is that 
 memorable and decisive passage, in the 11th chapter of 
 the epistle to the Romans, in which the church of God is 
 held forth to us under the emblem of an olive tree. 
 Under the same figure had the Lord designated the church 
 by the pen of Jeremiah the prophet, in the 11th chapter 
 of his prophecy. The prophet, speaking of God's cove- 
 
20 . SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 nanted people under that economy, says — " The Lord 
 called thy name a green olive tree, fair and of goodly 
 fruit.'' Bat concerning this olive tree, on account of the 
 sin of the people in forsaking the Lord, the prophet de- 
 clares, — " With the noise of a great tumult he'hath kindled 
 a fire upon it, and the branches of it are broken." Let 
 me request you to compare with this, the language of the 
 apostle in the 11th chapter of the epistle to the Romans: 
 "For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of 
 the world, what shall the receiving of them be but life 
 from the dead ? For if the first fruit be holy, the lump is 
 also holy ; and if the root be holy, so are the branches. 
 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being 
 a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with 
 them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree ; 
 boast not against the branches; but if thou boast, thou 
 bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say, 
 then, the branches were broken off, that I might be grafted 
 in. Well, because of unbelief they were broken off, and 
 thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear. 
 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest 
 he also spare not thee. Behold, therefore, the goodness 
 and the severity of God! on them which fell severity; 
 but toward thee goodness, if thou continue in his good- 
 ness. Otherwise, thou also shalt be broken off. And 
 they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted 
 in, for God is able to graft them in again. For if thou 
 wert cut out of the olive tree, which is wild by nature, and 
 wert grafted, contrary to nature, into a good olive tree, 
 how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, 
 be grafted into their own olive tree ?" 
 
 That the apostle is here speaking of the Old Testament 
 church, under the figure of a good olive tree, cannot be 
 doubted, and is, indeed, acknowledged by all; by our 
 Baptist brethren as well as others. Now the inspired 
 apostle says concerning this olive tree, that the natural 
 branches, that is the Jews, were broken off because of 
 unbelief. But what was the consequence of this excision ? 
 Was the tree destroyed? By no means. The apostle 
 teaches directly the contrary. It is evident, from his lan- 
 guage, that the root and trunk, in all their " fatness," re- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 21 
 
 mained; and Gentiles, branches of an olive tree "wild 
 by nature," were "grafted into the good olive tree;" — the 
 same tree from which the natural branches had been broken 
 off. Can any thing be more pointedly descriptive of iden- 
 tiiy than this ? But this is not all. The apostle apprizes 
 us that the Jews are to be brought back from their rebel- 
 lion and wanderings, and to be incorporated with the 
 Christian church. And how is this restoration described? 
 It is called " grafting them in again into their own olive 
 treey In other words, the " tree" into which the Gentile 
 Christians, at the coming of Christ were " grafted," was 
 the " old olive tree," of which the ancient covenant people 
 of God were the "natural branches;" and, of course, when 
 the Jews shall be brought in, with the fulness of the Gen- 
 tiles, into the Christian church, the apostle expressly tells 
 us they shall be ^'•grafted in again to their own olive 
 treeJ*^ Surely, if the church of God before the coming of 
 Christ, and the church of God after the advent, were 
 altogether distinct and separate bodies, and not the same in 
 their essential characters, it would be an abuse of terms to 
 represent the Jews, when converted to Christianity, as 
 grafted in again into their own olive tree. 
 
 5. Having seen that the infant seed of the professing 
 people of God were members of the church under the Old 
 Testament economy ; and having seen also that the church 
 under that dispensation and the present is the same; we 
 are evidently prepared to take another step, and to infer, 
 that, if infants were once m,embers, and if the church re^ 
 mains the same, they undoubtedly are still members, unless 
 some positive divine enactment excluding them, can be 
 found. As it was a positive divine enactment which 
 brought them in, and gave them a place in the church, so 
 it is evident that a divine enactment as direct and positive, 
 repealing their old privilege, and excluding them from the 
 covenanted family, must be found, or they are still in the 
 church. But can such an act of repeal and exclusion, I 
 ask, be produced ? It cannot. It never has been, audit 
 never can be. The introduction of infants into the church 
 by divine appointment, is undoubted. The identity of the 
 church, under both dispensations, is undoubted. The per- 
 petuity of the Abrahamic covenant, in which not merely 
 
22 SERMONS ON BAPTISBf. 
 
 the lineal descendants of Abraham, but " all the nations of 
 the earth were to be blessed,'^ is undoubted. And we find 
 no hint in the New Testament of the high privilege 
 granted to the infant seed of believers being withdrawn. 
 Only concede that it has not been formally withdrawn, and 
 it remains of course. The advocates of infant baptism are 
 not bound to produce from the New Testament an express 
 warrant for the membership of the children of believers. 
 The warrant was given, most expressly and formally, two 
 thousand years before the New Testament was written; 
 and, having never been revoked, remains firmly and indis- 
 putably in force. 
 
 It is deeply to be lamented that our Baptist brethren 
 cannot be prevailed upon to recognise the length and 
 breadth, and bearing of this great ecclesiastical fact. Here 
 were little children, eight days old, acknowledged as mem- 
 bers of a covenanted society — a society consecrated to God, 
 for spiritual as well as temporal benefits — and stamped with 
 a covenant seal, by which they were formally bound, as 
 the seed of believers, to be entirely and forever the Lord's. 
 Can infant membership be ridiculed, as it often is, with- 
 out lifting the puny arm against Him who was with " his 
 church in the wilderness, and whose ways are all wise and 
 righteous?" 
 
 6. Our next step is to show that baptism has come in 
 the room of circumcision, and, therefore, that the former is 
 rightfully and properly applied to the same subjects as the 
 latter. When we say this, we mean, not merely that cir- 
 cumcision is laid aside in the church of Christ, and that 
 baptism has been brought in, but that baptism occupies the 
 same place, as the appointed initiatory ordinance in the 
 church, and that, as a moral emblem, it means the same 
 thing. The meaning and design of circumcision M'as 
 chiefly spiritual. It was a seal of a covenant which had 
 not solely, or even mainly, a respect to the possession of 
 Canaan, and to the temporal promises which were con- 
 nected with a residence in that land ; but which chiefly 
 regarded higher and more important blessings, even those 
 which are conveyed through the Messiah, in whom "all 
 the families of the earth" are to be blessed. So it is with 
 baptism. While it marks an external relation, and seals 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM, 23 
 
 outward privileges, it is, as circumcision was, a " seal of 
 the righteousness of faith," and has a primary reference to 
 the benefits of the Messiah's mission and reign. Circum- 
 cision was a token of visible membership in the family of 
 God, and of covenant obligation to him. So is baptism. 
 Circumcision was the ordinance which marked, or pub- 
 licly ratified, entrance into that visible family. So does 
 baptism. Circumcision was an emblem of moral cleansing 
 and purity. So is baptism. It refers to the remission of 
 sins by the blood of Christ, and regeneration by his Spirit ; 
 and teaches us that we are by nature guilty and depraved, 
 and stand in need of the pardoning and sanctifying grace 
 of God by a crucified Redeemer. Surely, then, there is 
 the best foundation for asserting, that baptism has come in 
 the place of circumcision. The latter, as all grant, has 
 been discontinued; and now baptism occupies the same 
 place, means the same thing, seals the same covenant, and 
 is a pledge of the same spiritual blessings. Who can 
 doubt, then, that there is the utmost propriety, upon prin- 
 ciple, in applying it to the same infant subjects? 
 
 Yet, though baptism manifestly comes in the place of 
 circumcision, there are points in regard to which the 
 former differs materially from the latter. And it differs 
 precisely as to those points in regard to which the New 
 Testament economy differs from the Old, in being more 
 enlarged, and less ceremonial. Baptism is not ceremo- 
 nially restricted to the eighth day, but may be adminis- 
 tered at any time and place. It is not confined to one sex; 
 but, like the glorious dispensation of which it is a seal, it 
 marks an enlarged privilege, and is administered in a way 
 which reminds us, that " there is neither Greek nor Jew, 
 neither bond nor free, neither male nor female, in the 
 Christian economy; but that we are all one in Christ 
 Jesus." 
 
 7. Again; it is a strong argument in favour of infant 
 baptism, that we find the principle of family baptism 
 again and again adopted in the apostolic age. We are 
 told, by men learned in Jewish antiquities, that, under the 
 Old Testament economy, it was customary, when prose- 
 lytes to Judaism were gained from the surrounding nations, 
 that all the children of a family were invariably admitted to 
 
24 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 membership in the church with their parents, and on the 
 faith of their parents; that all the males, children and 
 adults, were circumcised, and the whole family, male and 
 female, baptized, and incorporated with the community of 
 '•God's covenanted people.* Accordingly, when we ex- 
 amine the New Testament history, we find that, under the 
 ministry of the apostles, who were all native Jews, and 
 had, of course, been long accustomed to this practice, the 
 same principle of receiving and baptizing families on the 
 faith of the parents, was most evidently adopted and acted 
 upon in a very striking manner. When " the heart of 
 Lydia was opened, so that she attended to the things 
 which were spoken by Paul," we are told that " she was 
 baptized and her household." When the jailor at Philippi 
 believed, " he was baptized, he and all his, straightway." 
 Thus also we read of " the household of Stephanas" being 
 baptized. Now, though we are not certain that there were 
 young children in any of these families, it is highly pro- 
 bable there were. At any rate, the great principle of 
 family baptism, of receiving all the younger members of 
 households on the faith of their domestic head., seems to 
 be plainly and decisively established. This furnishes 
 ground on which the advocate of infant baptism may stand 
 with unwavering confidence. 
 
 And here let me ask, was it ever known that a case of 
 family baptism occurred under the direction of a Baptist 
 minister ? Was it ever known to be recorded, or to have 
 happened, that when, under the influence of Baptist minis- 
 
 * I consider the Jewish baptism of proselytes as a historical fact 
 well established. I am aware that some Pedobaptists, whose judg- 
 ment and learning I greatly respect, have expressed doubts in refer- 
 §nce to this matter. But when I find tlie Jews asking John the Bap- 
 tist, " Why baptizest thou, then, if thou be not the Christ?" &c. I 
 can only account for their language by supposing that they had 
 been accustomed to that rite, and expected the Messiah, when he 
 came, to practice it. We have the best evidence that they baptized 
 their proselytes as early as the second century; and it is altogether 
 incredible that they should copy it from the Christians. And a 
 great majority of the most competent judges in this case, both Jewish 
 and Christian, from Selden and Lightfoot down to Dr. Adam Clarke, 
 have considered the testimony to the fact as abundant and conclu- 
 sive. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 25 
 
 trations, the parents of large families were hopefully con- 
 verted, they were baptized, they and all their's straight- 
 way ? There is no risk in asserting that such a case was 
 never heard of. And why? Evidently, because our Bap- 
 tist brethren do not act in this matter upon the principles 
 laid down in the New Testament, and which regulated 
 the primitive Christians. 
 
 8. Another consideration possesses much weight here. 
 We cannot imagine that the privileges and the sign of in- 
 fant membership, to which all the first Christians had been 
 so long accustomed, could have been abruptly withdrawn, 
 without vjounding the hearts of parents, and producing in 
 them, feelings of deep revolt and complaint against the 
 new economy. Yet we find no hint of this recorded in 
 the history of the apostolic age. Upon our principles, 
 this entire silence presents no difficulty. The old prin- 
 ciple and practice of infant membership, so long conse- 
 crated by time, and so dear to all the feelings of parental 
 affection, went on as before. The identity of the church 
 under the new dispensation with that of the old, being well 
 understood, the early Christians needed no new warrant 
 for the inclusion of their infant seed in the covenanted 
 family. As the privilege had not been revoked, it, of 
 course, continued. A new and formal enactment in favour 
 of the privilege would have been altogether superfluous, 
 not to say out of place ; especially as it was well under- 
 stood, from the whole aspect of the new economy, that, 
 instead of withdrawing or narrowing privileges, its whole 
 character was that it rather multiplied and extended them. 
 
 But our Baptist brethren are under the necessity of sup- 
 posing, that such of the first Christians as had been Jews, 
 and who had ever been in the habit of considering their 
 beloved offspring as included, with themselves, in the 
 privileges and promises of God's covenant, were given to 
 understand, when the New Testament church was set up, 
 that these covenant privileges and promises were no longer 
 to be enjoyed by their children; that they were, hence- 
 forth, to be no more connected with the church than the 
 children of the surrounding heathen; and this under an 
 economy distinguished, in every other respect, by greater 
 light, and more enlarged privilege: — I say, our Baptist 
 
 c 
 
26 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 brethren are under the necessity of supposing that the Ursi 
 Christians were met on the organization of the New Tes- 
 tament church, with an announcement of this kind, and 
 that they acquiesced in it without a feeling of surprise, or 
 a word of murmur! Nay, that this whole retrograde 
 change passed with so little feeling of interest, that it was 
 never so much as mentioned or hinted at in any of the 
 epistles to the churches. But can this supposition be for 
 a moment admitted? It is impossible. We may con- 
 clude, then, that the acknowledged silence of the New 
 Testament as to any retraction of the old privileges, or any 
 complaint of its recall, is so far from warranting a conclu- 
 sion unfavourable to the church membership of infants, 
 that it furnishes a weighty argument of an import directly 
 the reverse. 
 
 9. Although the New Testament does not contain any 
 specific texts, which, in so many words, declare that the 
 infant seed of believers are members of the church in 
 virtue of their birth ; yet it abounds in passages which 
 cannot reasonably be explained but in harmony ivith this 
 doctrine. The following are a specimen of the passages 
 to w^hich I refer. 
 
 The prophet Isaiah, though not a New Testament 
 writer, speaks much, and in the most interesting manner, 
 of the New Testament times. Speaking of the "latter day 
 glory," of that day when "the wolf and the lajnb shall 
 feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bul- 
 lock, and when there shall be nothing to hurt or destroy 
 in all God's holy mountain;" speaking of that day, the in- 
 spired prophet declares, " Behold, I create new heavens, 
 and a new earth, and the former shall not be remembered, 
 nor come into mind. For as the days of a tree are the 
 days of mv people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the 
 work of their hands. They shall not labour in vain, nor 
 bring forth for trouble ; for they are the seed of the blessed 
 of the Lord, and their offspring with them.'" Isaiah Ixv. 
 17. 22, 23. 
 
 The language of our Lord concerning little children 
 can be reconciled with no other doctrine than that which 
 I am now endeavouring to establish. " Then were there 
 brought unto him little children, that he should put his 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 27 
 
 haiids on them and pray; and his disciples rebuked them. 
 But Jesus said, "Suffer little children to come unto me, 
 and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 
 And he laid his hands upon them, and departed thence," 
 Matt. xix. 13 — 15. On examining tlie language used by the 
 several Evangelists in regard to this occurrence, it is evi- 
 dent that the children here spoken of were young children, 
 infants, such as the Saviour could "take in his arms." 
 The language which our Lord himself employs concerning 
 them is remarkable. " Of such is the kingdom of heaven." 
 That is, theirs is the kingdom of heaven; or, to them be- 
 longs the kingdom of heaven. It is precisely the same form 
 of expression, in the original, which our Lord uses in the 
 commencement of his sermon on the mount, when he 
 says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the 
 kingdom of heaven;" "Blessed are they that are perse- 
 cuted for righteousness sake, for theirs is the kingdom of 
 heaven." This form of expression, of course, precludes 
 the construction which some have been disposed to put on 
 the passage, in order to evade its force, viz. that it implies, 
 that the kingdom of heaven is made up of such as resemble 
 little children in spirit. We might just as well say, that 
 the kingdom of heaven does not belong to those who are 
 "poor in spirit," but only to those who resemble them; 
 or, that it does not belong to those who are "persecuted 
 for righteousness sake," but only to those who manifest a 
 similar temper. Our Lord's language undoubtedly meant 
 that the kingdom of heaven was really theirs of whom he 
 spake ; that it belonged to them ; that they are the heirs of 
 it, just as the "poor in spirit," and the "persecuted for 
 righteousness sake," are themselves connected in spirit 
 and in promise with that kingdom. 
 
 But what are we to understand by the phrase " the 
 kingdom of heaven," as employed in this place? Most 
 manifestly, we are to understand by it, the visible Church, 
 or the visible kingdom of Christ, as distinguished both from 
 the world, and the old economy. Let any one impartially 
 examine the Evangelists throughout, and he will find this 
 to be the general import of the phrase in question. If this 
 be the meaning, then or Saviour asserts, in the most direct 
 and pointed terms, the reality and the Divine warrant of in- 
 
26 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 fant church membership. But even if the kingdom of 
 glory be intended, still our argument is not weakened, but 
 rather fortified. For if the kingdom of glory belong to the 
 infant seed of believers, much more have they a title to 
 the privileges of the church on earth. 
 
 Another passage of Scripture strongly speaks the same 
 language. I refer to the declaration which we find in the 
 sermon of the apostle Peter, on the day of Pentecost. 
 When a large number of the hearers, on that solemn day, 
 were " pricked in their hearts, and said unto Peter, and to 
 the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we 
 do?" The reply of the inspired minister of Christ was, 
 ^' Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name 
 of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall re- 
 ceive the gift of 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." The apostle 
 is here evidently speaking of the promise of God to his 
 covenant people ; that promise in which he engages to be 
 their God, and to constitute them his covenanted family. 
 Now this promise, he declared to those whom he ad- 
 dressed, extended to their children as well as to themselves, 
 and, of course, gave those children a covenant right to the 
 privileges of the family. But if they have a covenant 
 title to a place in this family, we need no formal argument 
 to show that they are entitled to the outward token and 
 seal of that family. 
 
 I shall adduce only one more passage of Scripture, at 
 present, in support of the doctrine for which I contend. 
 I refer to that remarkable, and, as it appears to me, con- 
 clusive declaration of the apostle Paul, concerning children, 
 which is found in the seventh chapter of the first Epistle 
 to the Corinthians, in reply to a query addressed to him 
 by the members of that church, respecting the Christian 
 law of marriage: "The unbelieving husband is sanctified 
 by the wife ; and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the 
 husband; else were your children unclean, but now are 
 they holy." The great question in relation to this passage 
 is, in what sense does a believing parent " sanctify" an 
 unbelieving one, so that their children are "holy ?" It cer- 
 tainly cannot mean, that every pious husband or wife that 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 29 
 
 is allied to an unbelieving partner, is always instrumental 
 in conferring on that partner true spiritual purity, or, in 
 other words, regeneration and sanctification of heart; nor 
 that every child born of parents of whom one is a be- 
 liever, is, of course, the subject of Gospel holiness, or of 
 internal sanctification. No one who intelligently reads 
 the Bible, or who has eyes to see what daily passes around 
 him, can possibly put such a construction on the passage. 
 Neither can it be understood to mean, as some have 
 strangely imagined, that where one of the parents is a 
 believer, the children are legitimate ; that is, the offspring 
 of parents, one of whom is pious, are no longer bastards, 
 but are to be considered as begotten in lawful wedlock ! 
 The word " holy" is no where applied in Scripture to 
 legitimacy of birth. The advocates of this construction 
 may be challenged to produce a single example of such an 
 application of the term. And as to the suggestion of piety 
 in one party being necessary to render a marriage covenant 
 valid, nothing can be more absurd. Were the marriages 
 of the heathen in the days of Paul all illicit connections ? 
 Are the matrimonial contracts which take place every 
 day, among us, where neither of the parties is pious, all 
 illegitimate and invalid ? Surely it is not easy to conceive 
 of a subterfuge more completely preposterous, or more 
 adapted to discredit a cause which finds it necessary to re- 
 sort to such aid. 
 
 The terms "holy" and "unclean," as is well known to 
 all attentive readers of Scripture, have not only a spiritual, 
 but also an ecclesiastical sense, in the word of God. 
 While, in some cases, they express that which is inter- 
 nally and spiritually conformed to the Divine image ; in 
 others, they quite as plainly designate something set apart 
 to a holy or sacred use ; that is, separated from a common 
 or profane, to a holy purpose. Thus, under the Old Tes- 
 tament economy, the peculiar people of God, are said to 
 be a "holy people," and to be "severed from all other peo- 
 ple, that they might be the Lord's;" not because they were 
 all, or even a majority of them, really consecrated in heart 
 10 God ; but because they were all his professing people, — 
 his covenanted people ; they all belonged to that external 
 body which he had called out of the world, and established 
 
30 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 as the depository of his truth, and the conservator of his 
 glory. In these two senses, the terms "holy" and "un- 
 clean" are used in both Testament's times, almost innu- 
 merable. And what their meaning is, in any particular 
 case, must be gathered from the scope of the passage. In 
 the case before us, the latter of these two senses is evi- 
 dently required by the whole spirit of the apostle's rea- 
 soning. 
 
 It appears that among the Corinthians, to whom the 
 apostle wrote, there were many cases of professing Chris- 
 tians being united by the marriage tie with pagans ; the 
 former, perhaps, being converted after marriage ; or being 
 so unwise, as, after conversion, deliberately to form this 
 unequal and unhappy connection. What was to be 
 deemed of such marriages, seems to have been the grave 
 question submitted to this inspired teacher. He pro- 
 nounces, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, that, in 
 all such cases, when the unbeliever is willing to live with 
 the believer, they ought to continue to live together ; that 
 their connection is so sanctified by the character of the be- 
 lieving companion, that their children are "holy," that is, 
 in covenant with God ; members of that church with which 
 the believing parent is, in virtue of his profession, united: 
 in one word, that the infidel party is so far, and in such a 
 sense, consecrated by the believing party, that their chil- 
 dren shall be reckoned to belong to the sacred family with 
 which the latter is connected, and shall be regarded and 
 treated as members of the Church of God.* 
 
 "The passage thus explained," says an able writer, 
 "establishes the church membership of infants in another 
 form. For it assumes the principle, that when both pa- 
 rents are reputed believers, their children belong to the 
 Church of God as a matter of course. The whole diffi- 
 culty proposed by the Corinthians to Paul, grows out of 
 this principle. Had he taught, or they understood, that 
 no children, be their parents believers or unbelievers, are 
 
 * It is worthy of notice that this interpretation of the passage is 
 adopted, and decisively maintained by Augustine, one of the most 
 pious and learned divines of the fourth century. Z?e Sermone Domini 
 in Monte, ch. 27 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTIS3I. 31 
 
 to be accounted members of the church, the difficulty- 
 could not have existed. For if the faith of both parents 
 could not confer upon the child the privilege of member- 
 ship, the faith of only one of them certainly could not. 
 The point was decided. It would have been mere imper- 
 tinence to teaze the apostle with queries which carried 
 their own answers along with them. But on the supposi- 
 tion that when both parents were members, their children 
 were also members; the difficulty is very natural and seri- 
 ous. "I see," would a Corinthian convert exclaim, "I 
 see the children of my Christian neighbours, owned as 
 members of the Church of God ; and I see the children of 
 others, who are unbelievers, rejected with themselves. I 
 believe in Christ myself: but my husband, my wife, be- 
 lieves not. What is to become of my children? Are they 
 to be admitted with myself? Or are they they to be cast 
 off with my partner?" 
 
 "Let not your heart be troubled," replies the apostle, 
 *'God reckons them to the believing, not to the unbelieving 
 parent. It is enough that they are yours. The infidelity 
 of your partner shall never frustrate their interest in the 
 covenant of your God. They are holy because you are so." 
 
 " This decision put the subject at rest. And it lets us 
 know that one of the reasons, if not the chief reason of 
 the doubt, whether a married person should continue, 
 after conversion, in the conjugal society of an infidel part- 
 ner, arose from a fear lest such continuance should ex- 
 clude the children from the Church of God. Otherwise, it 
 is hard to comprehend why the aposde should dissuade 
 them from separating by such an argument as he has em- 
 ployed in the text. And it is utterly inconceivable how 
 such a doubt could have entered their minds, had not the 
 membership of infants, born of believing parents, been un- 
 disputed, and esteemed a high privilege \ so high a privi- 
 lege, that the apprehension of losing it, made conscientious 
 parents at a stand, whether they ought not rather to break 
 the ties of wedlock, by withdrawing from an unbelieving 
 husband or wife. Thus the origin of this difficulty, on the 
 one hand, and the solution of it, on the other, concur in 
 establishing our doctrine, that, by the appointment of God 
 
32 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 himself, the infants of believing parents are born members 
 of his church."* 
 
 10. Finally; the history of the Christian Church, from 
 the apostolic age, furnishes an argument of irresistible force 
 in favour of the divine authority of infant baptism. 
 
 I can assure you, my friends, with the utmost candour 
 and confidence, after much careful inquiry on the subject, 
 that, for more than fifteen hundred years after the birth of 
 Christ, there was not a single society of professing Chris- 
 tians on earth, who opposed infant baptism on any thing 
 like the grounds which distinguish our modern Baptist 
 brethren. It is an undoubted fact, that the people 
 known in ecclesiastical history under the name of the 
 Anabaptists, who arose in Germany, in the year 1522, 
 were the very first body of people, in the whole Chris- 
 tian world, who rejected the baptism of infants, on the 
 principles now adopted by the Antipoedobaptist body. 
 This, I am aware, will be regarded as an untenable posi- 
 tion by some of the ardent friends of the Baptist cause ; 
 but nothing can be more certain than that it is even so. 
 Of this a short induction of particulars will afford conclu- 
 sive evidence. 
 
 TertuUian, about two hundred years after the birth of 
 Christ, is the first man of whom we read in ecclesiastical 
 history, as speaking a word against infant baptism; and 
 he, while he recognizes the existence and prevalence 
 of the practice, and expressly recommends that in- 
 fants be baptized, if they are not likely to survive the 
 period of infancy; yet advises that, where there is a pros- 
 pect of their living, baptism be delayed until a late period 
 in life. But what was the reason of this advice? The 
 moment we look at the reason, we see that it avails nothing 
 to the cause in support of which it is sometimes produced. 
 TertuUian adopted the superstitious idea, that baptism was 
 accompanied with the remission of all past sins ; and that 
 sins committed after baptism were peculiarly danger- 
 ous. He, therefore, advised, that not merely infants, but 
 young men and young women ; and even young widows 
 
 * Essays on the Church of God, by Dr. J. M. Mason. Christian's 
 Magazine^ ii. 49, 50. 
 
SERMONS ON BA.PTISM. , 83 
 
 and widowers should postpone their baptism until the 
 period of youthful appetite and passion should have 
 passed. In short, he advised that, in all cases in which 
 death was not likely to intervene, baptism be postponed, 
 until the subjects of it should have arrived at a period of 
 life, when they would be no longer in danger of being led 
 astray by youthful lusts. And thus, for more than a cen- 
 tury after the age of Tertullian, we find some of the most 
 conspicuous converts to the Christian faith, postponing 
 baptism till the close of life. Constantine the Great, we 
 are told, though a professing Christian for many years 
 before, was not baptized till after the commencement of 
 his last illness. The same fact is recorded of a number of 
 other distinguished converts to Christianity, about and after 
 that time. But, surely, advice and facts of this kind make 
 nothing in favour of the system of our Baptist brethren. 
 Indeed, taken altogether, their historical bearing is strongly 
 in favour of our system. 
 
 The next persons that we hear of as calling in question 
 the propriety of infant baptism, were the small body of 
 people in France, about twelve hundred years after Christ, 
 who followed a certain Peter de Briiis, and formed an 
 inconsiderable section of the people known in ecclesiastical 
 history under the general name of the Wcddenses. This body 
 maintained that infants ought not to be baptized, because 
 they were incapable of salvation. They taught that none 
 could be saved but those who wrought out their salvation 
 by a long course of self-denial and labour. And as infants 
 were incapable of thus "working out their own salvation,*' 
 they held that making them the subjects of a sacramental 
 seal, was an absurdity. But surely our Baptist brethren 
 cannot be willing to consider these people as their prede- 
 cessors, or to adopt their creed. 
 
 We hear no more of any society or organized body of 
 Antipoedohaptists, until the sixteenth century, M^hen they 
 arose, as before stated, in Germany, and for the first time 
 broached the doctrine of our modern Baptist brethren. As 
 far as I have been able to discover, they were absolutely 
 unknown in the whole Christian world, before that time. 
 
 But we have something more than mere negative testi- 
 mony on this subject. It is not only certain, that we hear 
 
34 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 of no society of Antipoedobaptists resembling our present 
 Baptist brethren, for more than fifteen hundred years after 
 Christ ; but we have positive and direct proof that, during 
 the whole of that time, infant baptism was the general 
 and unopposed practice of the Christian Church. 
 
 To say nothing of earlier intimations, wholly irrecon- 
 cileable with any other practice than that of infant baptism, 
 Origen, a Greek father of the third century, and decidedly 
 the most learned man in his day, speaks in the most un- 
 equivocal terms of the baptism of infants, as the general 
 practice of the church in his time, and as having been re- 
 ceived from the Apostles. His testimony is as follows — 
 "According to the usage of the church, baptism is given 
 even to infants; when if there were nothing in infants 
 which needed forgiveness and mercy, the grace of baptism 
 would seem to be superfluous."* Again; " Infants are 
 baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Of what sins ? Or, 
 when have they sinned? Or, can there be any reason for 
 the laver in their case, unless it be according to the sense 
 which we have mentioned above, viz : that no one is free 
 from pollution, though he has lived but one day upon earth? 
 And because by baptism native pollution is taken away, 
 therefore infants are baptized."! Again: " For this cause 
 it was that the church received an order from the Apostles 
 to give baptism even to infants. "J 
 
 The testimony of Cyprian, a Latin Father of the third 
 century, contemporary with Origen, is no less decisive. 
 It is as follows : 
 
 In the year 253 after Christ, there was a Council of 
 sixty-six bishops or pastors held at Carthage, in which 
 Cyprian presided. To this Council, Fidus, a country 
 pastor, presented the following question, which he wished 
 them, by their united wisdom, to solve — viz. Whether it 
 was necessary, in the administration of baptism, as of cir- 
 cumcision, to wait until the eighth day; or whether a child 
 might be baptized at an earlier period after its birth? The 
 question, it will be observed, was not whether infants 
 
 * Homil. VIII. in Levit. ch. 12. 
 
 t Homil. in Luc. 14. 
 
 X Comment, in Epist. ad Romanos. Lib. 5. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM* 35 
 
 ought to be baptized ? TTidt was taken for granted. Butj 
 simply, whether it was necessary to wait until the eighth 
 day after their birth? The Council came unanimously 
 to the following decision, and transmitted it in a letter to 
 the inquirer. 
 
 ^'Cyprian and the rest of the Bishops who were present 
 in the Council, sixty-six in number, to Fidus, our brother, 
 greeting : 
 
 " As to the case of Infants, — whereas you judge that 
 they must not be baptized within two or three days after 
 they are born, and that the rule of circumcision is to be 
 observed, that no one should be baptized and sanctified 
 before the eighth day after he is born; we were all in the 
 Council of a very different opinion. As for M^hat you 
 thought proper to be done, no one was of your mind; — but 
 we all rather judged that the mercy and gi-ace of God is to 
 be denied to no human being that is born. This, there- 
 fore, dear brother, was our opinion in the Council; that 
 we ought not to hinder any person from baptism, and the 
 grace of God, who is merciful and kind to us all. And 
 this rule, as it holds for all, we think more especially to be 
 observed in reference to infants, even to those newly 
 born."* 
 
 Surely no testimony can be more unexceptionable and 
 decisive than this. Lord Chancellor King, in his account 
 of the primitive church, after quoting what is given above, 
 and much more, subjoins the following remark — "Here, 
 then, is a synodical decree for the baptism of infants, as 
 formal as can possibly be expected ; which being the judg- 
 ment of a synod, is more authentic and cogent than that 
 of a private father; it being supposeable that a private 
 father might write his own particular judgment and opinion 
 only ; but the determination of a synod (and he might have 
 added, the unanimous determination of a synod of sixty-six 
 members) denotes the common practice and usage of the 
 whole church. "t 
 
 The Famous Chrysostom, a Greek father, who flourished 
 towards the close of the fourth century, having had occasion 
 
 * Cyprian. Epist. 66. 
 
 t Inquiry into the Constitution, «fec. Part II. Chap. 3. 
 
36 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 to speak of circumcision, and of the inconvenience and pain 
 which attended its dispensation, proceeds to say — "But our 
 circumcision, I mean the grace of baptism, gives cure with- 
 out pain, and procures to us a thousand benefits, and fills us 
 with the gi'ace of the Spirit ; and it has no determinate time, 
 as that had ; but one that is in the veiy beginning of his age, 
 or one that is in the middle of it, or one that is in his old age, 
 may receive this circumcision made without hands; in which 
 there is no trouble to be undergone but to throw off the load 
 of sins, and to receive pardon for all past offences."* 
 
 Passing by the testimony of several other conspicuous 
 writers of the third and fourth centuries, in support of the 
 fact, that infant baptism was generally practised when they 
 wrote, I shall detain you with only one testimony more in 
 relation to the history of this ordinance. It is that of ^li- 
 gustine, one of the most pious, learned and venerable 
 fathers of the Christian Church, who lived a little more 
 than three hundred years after the Apostles, — taken in 
 connection with that of Pelagius, the learned heretic, 
 who lived at the same time. Augustine had been pleading 
 against Pelagius, in favor of the doctrine of original sin. 
 In the course of this plea, he asks — "Why are infants bap- 
 tized for the remission of sins, if they have no sin ?" At 
 the same time intimating to Pelagius, that if he would be 
 consistent with himself, his denial of original sin must 
 draw after it the denial of infant baptism. The reply of 
 Pelagius is striking and unequivocal. "Baptism," says 
 he, "ought to be administered to infants, with the same 
 sacramental words which are used in the case of adult per- 
 sons." "Men slander me as if I denied the sacrament 
 
 of baptism to infants." ''^1 never heard of any, not even 
 
 the most impious heretic, who denied baptism to infants; 
 for who can be so impious as to hinder infants from being 
 baptised, and born again in Christ, and so make them miss 
 of the kingdom of God?" Again: Augustine remarks, in 
 reference to the Pelagians — "Since they grant that infants 
 must be baptized, as not being able to resist the authority 
 of the whole church, which ivas doubtless delivered by 
 our Lord and his Apostles; they must consequently grant 
 
 * Homil. 40. in Genesin, 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 37 
 
 that they stand in need of the benefit of the Mediator ; that 
 being offered by the sacrament, and by the charity of the 
 faithful, and so being incorporated into Christ's body, they 
 may be reconciled to God," &:c. Again, speaking of cer- 
 tain heretics at Carthage, who, though they acknowledged 
 infant baptism, took wrong views of its meaning, Augustine 
 remarks — "They, minding the Scriptures, and the autho- 
 rity of the tohole church, and the form of the sacrament it- 
 self, see well that baptism in infants is for the remission of 
 sins." Further, in his work against the Donatists, the 
 same writer speaking of baptized infants obtaining salva- 
 tion without the personal exercise of faith, he says — 
 ** which the tvhole body of the church holds, as delivered 
 to them in the case of little infants baptized ; who certainly 
 cannot believe with the heart unto righteousness, or con- 
 fess with the mouth unto salvation, nay, by their crying 
 and noise while the sacrament is administering, they dis- 
 turb the holy mysteries : and yet 7io Christian man will 
 say that they are baptized to no purpose." Again, he 
 says — "The custom of our mother the church in baptizing 
 infants must not be disregarded, nor be accounted needless, 
 nor believed to be any thing else than an ordinance deliv- 
 ered to us from the Apostles.'^'' In short, those who will 
 be at the trouble to consult the large extracts from the 
 writings of Augustine, among other Christian fathers, in 
 the learned WalVs history of Infant Baptism, will find that 
 venerable father declaring again and again that he never 
 met with any Christian, cither of the general church, or 
 of any of the sects, nor with any writer, who owned the 
 authority of Scripture, who taught any other doctrine than 
 that infants were to be baptized for the remission of 
 sin. Here, then, were two men, undoubtedly among the 
 most learned then in the world — Augustine and Pela- 
 gius; the former as familiar probably with the writings 
 of all the distinguished fathers who had gone before 
 him, as any man of his time ; the latter also a man of 
 great learning and talents, who had travelled over the 
 greater part of the Christian world; who both declare, 
 about three hundred years after the apostolic age, that they 
 never saw or heard of any one who called himself a 
 Christian, not even the most impious heretic, no nor any 
 
 D 
 
38 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 writer who claimed to believe in the Scriptures, who de- 
 nied the baptism of infants.* Can the most incredulous 
 reader, who is not fast bound in the fetters of invincible 
 prejudice, hesitate to admit, first, that these men verily be- 
 lieved that infant baptism had been the universal practice of 
 the church from the days of the apostles ; and, secondly, 
 that, situated and informed as they were, it was impossible 
 that they should be mistaken ? 
 
 The same Augustine, in his Epistle to Boniface, while 
 he expresses an opinion that the parents are the proper 
 persons to offer up their children to God in baptism, if 
 they be good faithful Christians ; yet thinks proper to men- 
 tion that others may, with propriety, in special cases, per- 
 form the same kind office of Christian charity. *' You 
 see," says he, " that a great many are oflTered, not by their 
 parents, but by any other persons, as infant slaves are 
 sometimes offered by their masters. And sometimes when 
 the parents are dead, the infants are baptized, being offered 
 by any that can afford to show this compassion on them. 
 And sometimes infants whom their parents have cruelly 
 exposed, may be taken up and ofiered in baptism by those 
 who have no children of their own, nor design to have 
 any." Again, in his book against the Donaiists, speak-'' 
 ing directly of infant baptism, he says — " If any one ask 
 for divine authority in this matter, although that which the 
 whole church practises, which was not instituted by coun- 
 cils, but was ever in use, is very reasonably believed to be 
 no other than a thing delivered by the authority of the apos- 
 tles ; yet we may besides take a true estimate, how much 
 the sacrament of baptism does avail infants, by the circum- 
 cision which God's ancient people received. For Abraham 
 was justified before he received circumcision, as Cornelius 
 was endued with the Holy Spirit before he was baptized. 
 And yet the apostle says of Abraham, that he received the 
 sign of circumcision, "a seal of the righteousness of 
 faith," by which he had in heart believed, and it had been 
 ^' counted to him for righteousness." Why then was he 
 commanded to circumcise all his male infants on the eighth 
 day, when they could not yet believe with the heart, that 
 
 * See Wall's History, Part. I. ch. 15—19. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 39 
 
 it might be counted to them for righteousness; but for 
 this reason, because the sacrament is, in itself, of great 
 importance? Therefore, as in Abraham, " the righteous- 
 ness of faith" went before, and circumcision, "the seal of 
 the righteousness of faith, came after;" so in Cornelius, 
 the spiritual sanctification by the gift of the Holy Spirit 
 went before, and the sacrament of regeneration, by the 
 laver of baptism, came after. And as in Isaac, who was 
 circumcised the eighth day, the seal of the righteousness 
 of faith went before, and (as he was a follower of his 
 father's faith) the righteousness itself, the seal whereof had 
 gone before in his infancy, came after ; so in infants bap- 
 tized, the sacrament of regeneration goes before, and (if 
 they put in practice the Christian religion) conversion of 
 the heart, the mystery whereof went before in their body, 
 comes after. By all which it appears, that the sacrament 
 of baptism is one thing, and conversion of the heart 
 another." 
 
 So much for the testimony of the Fathers. To me, I 
 acknowledge, this testimony carries with it irresistible 
 conviction. It is, no doubt, conceivable, considered in 
 itself, that, in three centuries from the days of the apostles, 
 a very material change might have taken place in regard to 
 the subjects of baptism. But, that a change so serious and 
 radical as that of which our Baptist brethren speak, should 
 have been introduced without the knowledge of such men 
 as have been just quoted, is not conceivable. That the 
 church should have passed from the practice of none but 
 adult baptism, to that of the constant and universal bap- 
 tism of infants, while such a change was utterly unknown, 
 and never heard of, by the most active, pious, and learned 
 men that lived during that period, cannot, I must believe, 
 be imagined by any impartial mind. Now when Origen, 
 Cyprian, and Chrysostom, declare, not only that the baptism 
 of infants was the universal and unopposed practice of the 
 church in their respective times and places of residence ; 
 and when men of so much acquaintance with all preceding 
 writers, and so much knowledge of all Christendom, as 
 Augustine and Pelagius, declared that they never heard of 
 any one ivlio claimed to be a Christian^ either orthodox or 
 heretic, who did not maintain and practice infant bap- 
 
40 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 tism; I say, to suppose, in the face of such testimony, 
 that the practice of infant baptism crept in, as an unwar- 
 ranted innovation, between their time and that of the apos- 
 tles, without the smallest notice of the change having ever 
 reached their ears is, I must be allowed to say, of all in- 
 credible suppositions, one of the most incredible. He who 
 can believe this, must, it appears to me, be prepared to 
 make a sacrifice of all historical evidence at the shrine of 
 blind and deaf prejudice. 
 
 It is here also worthy of particular notice, that those 
 pious and far famed witnesses for the truth, commonly 
 known by the name of the Waldenses, did undoubtedly 
 hold the doctrine of infant baptism, and practice accord- 
 ingly. In their Confessions of Faith and other writings, 
 drawn up between the twelfth and sixteenth centuries, and 
 in which they represent their creeds and usages as handed 
 down, from father to son, for several hundred years before 
 the Reformation, they speak on the subject before us so 
 frequently and explicitly, as to preclude all doubt in regard 
 to the fact alleged. The following specimen of their lan- 
 guage will satisfy every reasonable inquirer. 
 
 " Baptism," say they, "is administered in a full congre- 
 gation of the faithful, to the end that he that is received 
 into the church, may be reputed and held of all as a Chris- 
 tian brother, and that all the congregation may pray for 
 him, that he may be a Christian in heart, as he is out- 
 wardly esteemed to be a Christian. And for this cause 
 it is that we present our children in baptism, which ought 
 to be done by those to whom the children are most nearly 
 related, such as their parents, or those to whom God has 
 given this charity." 
 
 Again; referring to the superstitious additions to bap- 
 tism which the Papists had introduced, they say, in one of 
 their ecclesiastical documents, — "The things which are 
 not necessary in baptism are, the exorcisms, the breath- 
 ings, the sign of the cross upon the head or forehead of the 
 iyifant, the salt put into the mouth, the spitde into the ears 
 and nostrils, the unction of the breast, &c. From these 
 things many take an occasion of error and superstition, 
 rather than of edifying and salvation." 
 
 Understanding that their Popish neighbours charged 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 41 
 
 them with denying the baptism of infants, they acquit 
 themselves of this imputation as follows : 
 
 *' Neither is the time or place appointed for those who 
 are to be baptized. But charity, and the edification of the 
 church and congregation ought to be the rule in this 
 matter. 
 
 " Yet, notwithstanding, we bring our children to he bap- 
 tized; which they ought to do to whom they are most 
 nearly related; such as their parents, or those whom God 
 hath inspired with such a charity." 
 
 *' True it is," adds the historian, " that being, for some 
 hundreds of years, constrained to suffer their children to be 
 baptized by the Romish priests, they deferred the perform- 
 ance of it as long as possible, because they detested the 
 human inventions annexed to the institution of that holy 
 sacrament, which they looked upon as so many pollutions 
 of it. And by reason of their pastors, whom they called 
 Barbes, being often abroad travelling in the service of the 
 church, they could not have baptism administered to their 
 children by them. They, therefore, sometimes kept them 
 long without it. On account of which delay, the priests 
 have charged them with that reproach. To which charge 
 not only their adversaries have given credit, but also 7nany 
 of those who have approved of their lives and faith in all 
 other respects y* 
 
 It being so plainly a fact, established by their own un- 
 equivocal and repeated testimony, that the great body of 
 the Waldenses were Poedobaptists, on what ground is it 
 that our Baptist brethren assert, and that some have been 
 found to credit the assertion, that those venerable witnesses 
 of the truth rejected the baptism of infants? The answer 
 is easy and ample. A small section of the people bearing 
 
 * See John Paul Perrin's account of the Doctrine and Order of 
 the Waldenses and Albigenses ; Sir Samuel Morland's do. ; and also 
 Leger's Histoire Generale des Eglises Vaudoises, Mr. William 
 Jones, a Baptist, in a work entitled, a History of the Waldenses, in 
 two volumes octavo, professes to give a full account of the Faith and 
 Order of these pious witnesses of the truth ; but, so far as I have ob- 
 served, carefully leaves out of all their public formularies and other 
 documents, every thing which would disclose their Poedobaptist prin- 
 ciples and practice ! On this artifice comment is unnecessary. 
 
4^ SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 the general name of Waldenses, followers of Peter de 
 Bruis, who were mentioned in a preceding page, while 
 they agreed with the mass of their denomination in most 
 other matters, differed from them in regard to the subject 
 of infant baptism. They held, as before stated, that infants 
 were not capable of salvation ; that Christian salvation is 
 of such a nature that none can partake of it but those who 
 undergo a course of rigorous self-denial and labour in its 
 pursuit. Those who die in infancy not being capable of 
 this, the Petrobrussians held that they were not capable of 
 salvation ; and, this being the case, that they ought not to 
 be baptized. This, however, is not the doctrine of our 
 Baptist brethren; and, of course, furnishes no support to 
 their creed or practice. But the decisive answer is, that 
 the Petrobrussians were a very small fraction of the great 
 Waldensian body ; probably not more than a thirtieth or 
 fortieth part of the whole. The great mass of the denomi- 
 nation, however, as such, declare, in their Confessions of 
 Faith, and in various public documents, that they held, and 
 that their fathers before them, for many generations, always 
 held, to infant baptism. The Petrobrussians, in this res- 
 pect, forsook the doctrine and practice of their fathers, and 
 departed from the proper and established Waldensian 
 creed. If there be truth in the plainest records of eccle- 
 siastical history, this is an undoubted fact. In short, the 
 real state of this case may be illustrated by the following 
 representation. Suppose it were alleged, that the Baptists 
 in the United States are in the habit of keeping the seventh 
 day of the week as their Sabbath? Would the statement 
 be true? By no means. There is, indeed, a small section 
 of the AntipcBdobaptist body in the United States, usually 
 styled " Seventh day Baptists" — probably not a thirtieth 
 part of the whole body — who observe Saturday in each 
 week as their Sabbath. But, notwithstanding this, the pro- 
 per representation, no doubt, is — (the only representation 
 that a faithful historian of facts would pronounce correct) — 
 that the Baptists in this country, as a general body, ob- 
 serve " the Lord's day" as their Sabbath. You may rest 
 assured, my friends, that this statement most exacdy illus- 
 trates the real fact with regard to the Waldenses as Poedo- 
 baptists. Twenty-nine parts, at least, out of thirty, of 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 43 
 
 the whole of that body of witnesses for the truth, were 
 undoubtedly Poedobaptists. The remaming thirtieth part 
 departed from the faith of their fathers in regard to bap- 
 tism, but departed on principles altogether unlike those of 
 our modern Baptist brethren. 
 
 I have only one fact more to state in reference to the 
 pious Waldenses, and that is, that soon after the opening 
 of the Reformation by Luther, they sought intercourse with 
 the Reformed churches of Geneva and France ; held com- 
 munion with them ; received ministers from them ; and 
 appeared eager to testify their respect and affection for 
 them as "brethren in the Lord." Now it is well known 
 that the churches of Geneva and France, at this time, were 
 in the habitual use of infant baptism. This single fact is 
 sufficient to prove that the Waldenses were Poedobaptists. 
 If they had adopted the doctrine of our Baptist brethren, 
 and laid the same stress on it with them, it is manifest 
 that such intercourse would have been wholly out of the 
 question. 
 
 If these historical statements be correct, and that they 
 are so, is just as well attested as any facts whatever in the 
 annals of the church, the amount of the whole is conclu- 
 sive, is demonstrative, that, for fifteen hundred years after 
 Christ, the practice of infant baptism was universal; that 
 to this general fact there was absolutely no exception, in 
 the whole Christian church, which, on principle, or even 
 analogy, can countenance in the least degree, modern Anti- 
 poedobaptism ; that from the time of the apostles to the time 
 of Luther, the general, unopposed, established practice of 
 the church was to regard the infant seed of believers as 
 members of the church, and, as such, to baptize them. 
 
 But this is not all. If the doctrine of our Baptist bre- 
 thren be correct; that is, if infant baptism be a corruption 
 and a nullity ; then it follows, from the foregoing his- 
 torical statements, most inevitably, that the ordinance of 
 baptism was lost for fifteen hundred years : yes, entirely 
 lost, from the apostolic age till the sixteenth century. 
 For there was, manifestly, " no society, during that long 
 period, of fifteen centuries, but what was in the habit of bap- 
 tizing infants." God had no church, then, in the world 
 for so long a period.' Can this be admitted? Surely 
 
44 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 not by any one who believes in the perpetuity and indes- 
 tructibility of the household of faith. 
 
 Nay, if the principle of our Baptist brethren be correct, 
 the ordinance of baptism is irrecoverably lost altogether ; 
 that is, irrecoverably without a miracle. Because if, dur- 
 ing the long tract of time that has been mentioned, there 
 was no true baptism in the church ; and if none but bap- 
 tized persons were capable of administering true baptism 
 to others ; the consequence is plain ; there is no true bap- 
 tism now in the world ! But can this be believed ? Can 
 we imagine that the great Head of the church would 
 permit one of his own precious ordinances to be banished 
 entirely from the church for many centuries, much less to 
 be totally lost? Surely the thought is abhorrent to every 
 Christian feeling. 
 
 Such is an epitome of the direct evidence in favour of 
 infant baptism. To me, I acknowledge, it appears nothing 
 short of demonstration. The invariable character of all 
 Jehovah's dealings and covenants with the children of 
 men ; his express appointment, acted upon for two thou- 
 sand years by the ancient church ; the total silence of the 
 New Testament as to any retraction or repeal of this 
 privilege ; the evident and repeated examples of family 
 baptism in the apostolic age ; the indubitable testimony of 
 the practice of the whole church on the Poedobaptist plan, 
 from the time of the apostles to the sixteenth century, 
 including the most respectable witnesses for the truth in 
 the dark ages ; all conspire to establish on the firmest 
 foundation, the membership, and the consequent right to 
 baptism of the infant seed of believers. If here be no 
 divine warrant, we may despair of finding it for any insti- 
 tution in the Church of Cod. 
 
SERMON II. 
 
 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED, 
 
 " And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, 
 saying — if ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into 
 mine house, and abide there." Acts xvi. 15. 
 
 Having adduced, in the preceding discourse, the direct 
 evidence in support of Infant Baptism, let us now attend 
 to some of the most common and popular objections^ 
 brought by our Baptist brethren, against the doctrine which 
 we have attempted to establish. And, 
 
 1. The first is, that we have no direct warrant in the 
 New Testament, in so many words, for Infant Baptism. 
 " We are no where," say our opponents, "in the history 
 of the apostolic age, told, in express terms, either that in- 
 fants ought to be baptized, or that they were, in fact, bap- 
 tized. Now is it possible to account for this omission on 
 the supposition that such baptism was generally prac- 
 tised?" This objection has been urged a thousand times, 
 with great confidence, and with no inconsiderable effect, 
 on the minds of some serious persons of small knowledge, 
 and of superficial thought. But when thoroughly exam- 
 ined, it will, I am persuaded, appear destitute of all solid 
 foundation. 
 
 For, in the first place, even if it were as our Baptist bre- 
 thren suppose ; that is, even if no express warrant, in so 
 many words, were found in the New Testament, author- 
 izing and directing infant baptism, could this reasonably be 
 considered, upon Poedobaptist principles, unaccountable, or 
 even wonderful? The Poedobaptist principle, let it be 
 borne in mind, is, that the church under the New Testa- 
 ment economy is the same with the church under the Old 
 Testament dispensation ; that the former was the minority 
 or childhood, the latter the maturity of the visible king- 
 
46 
 
 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 dom of the Messiah ; that one of the most striking features 
 in the New Testament character of this kingdom is, a great 
 increase of light, and enlargement of privilege; that the 
 infant seed of believers had been born in covenant w^ith 
 God, and their covenanted character marked and ratilEied 
 by a covenant seal, for two thousand years before Christ 
 appeared; and that, if this privilege had been intended 
 simply to be continued, no new enactment was necessary 
 to ascertain this intention, but merely allowing it to pro- 
 ceed without interposing any change. This is the ground 
 we take. Now, taking this ground ; assuming as facts 
 what have been just stated as such, can any thing be 
 more perfectly natural than the whole aspect of the New 
 Testament in relation to this subject? Very little, explicit 
 or formal, is said in reference to the covenant standing of 
 children, on the opening of the new economy, simply because 
 no material alteration as to this point, was intended. All the 
 first Christians having been bred under the Jewish eco- 
 nomy, and having been always accustomed to the enjoy- 
 ment of its privileges, would, of course, expect those privi- 
 leges to be continued, especially, if nothing were said 
 about their repeal or abridgement. To announce to these 
 Jewish believers, that the covenant standing, and covenant 
 advantages of their beloved children, were not to be with- 
 drawn or curtailed, if no other alteration in reference to 
 this matter, than an increase of privilege were intended, 
 would have been just as unnecessary as to inform them 
 that the true God was still to be worshipped, and the aton- 
 ing sacrifice of the Messiah still regarded as the only 
 ground of hope. In short, assuming Poedobaptist princi- 
 ples, we might expect the New Testament to exhibit pre- 
 cisely the aspect which it does exhibit. Not to say, in so 
 many words, that the privilege in question was to be con- 
 tinued ; but all along to speak as if this were to be taken 
 for granted, without an explicit enactment ; to assure the 
 first Christians that " the promise was still to them and 
 their children;" and not to them only, but also to "as 
 many as the Lord their God should call" into his visible 
 church; to tell them that, in regard to this matter, the ad- 
 ministration of his New Testament kingdom was to be 
 such as to abolish all distinction of sex in Christian privi- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 47 
 
 lege ; that, in Christ, there was to be no longer a differ- 
 ence made between "male and female;" and, in confor- 
 mity with this intimation, and as a practical comment upon 
 it, to introduce whole families with the converted -parents 
 into the church, by the appropriate New Testament rite, 
 as had been invariably practised under the Old Testament 
 economy. 
 
 But now turn, for a moment, to the opposite supposi- 
 tion ; to that of our Baptist brethren. They are obliged, 
 by their system, to take for granted, that, after the children 
 of the professing people of God had been, for nearly two 
 thousand years, in the enjoyment of an important cove- 
 nant privilege ; a privilege precious in itself, and pecu- 
 liarly dear to the parental heart; it was suddenly, and 
 without explanation, set aside : that on the opening of the 
 New Testament dispensation, a dispensation of larger 
 promises, and of increased liberality, this privilege was 
 abruptly and totally withdrawn; that children were ejected 
 from their former covenant relation; that they were no 
 longer the subjects of a covenant seal, or of covenant pro- 
 mises ; and that all this took place without one hint of any 
 reason for it being given ; without one syllable being said, 
 in all the numerous epistles to the churches, by any one 
 of justification or apology, for so important a change ! 
 Nay, that, instead of such notice and explanation, a mode 
 of expression, under the new economy, should be through- 
 out used, corresponding with the former practice, and 
 adapted still to convey the idea that both parents and chil- 
 dren stood in their old relation, notwithstanding the pain- 
 ful change ! Is this credible ? Can it be believed by any 
 one who is not predetermined to regard it as true ? 
 
 But if the New Testament economy does not include 
 the church membership of the infant seed of believers, 
 such a change, undoubtedly, did take place, on the com- 
 ing in of the new economy. The Jewish disciples of 
 Christ saw their children at once cut off from the covenant 
 of promise, and denied its appropriate seal, to which they 
 had always been accustomed, and in which the tenderest 
 parental feelings were so strongly implicated. Yet we 
 hear of no complaint on their part. We find not a word 
 which seems intended to explain such a change, or to allay 
 
48 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 the feelings of those parents who could not fail, if such 
 had been the fact, both to feel and to remonstrate. 
 
 I must say, my friends, that, to my mind, this conside- 
 ration, if there were no other, is conclusive. Instead of 
 our Baptist brethren having a right to call upon us to find 
 a direct warrant in the New Testament, in favour of infant 
 membership, we have a right to call upon them to produce 
 a direct warrant for the great and sudden change which 
 they allege took place. If it be, as they say, that the 
 New Testament is silent on the subject, this very silence 
 is quite sufficient to destroy their cause, and to establish 
 ours. It affords proof positive that no such change as that 
 which is alleged, ever occurred. That a change so im- 
 portant and interesting should have been introduced, with- 
 out one word of explanation or apology on the part of the 
 inspired apostles, and without one hint or struggle on the part 
 of those who had enjoyed the former privilege ; in short, 
 that the old economy, in relation to this matter, should 
 have been entirely broken up, and yet the whole subject 
 passed over by the inspired writers in entire silence, is 
 surely one of the most incredible things that can well be 
 imagined ! He who can believe it, must have a mind 
 " fully set in him" to embrace the system which re- 
 quires it. 
 
 So much on the supposition assumed by our Baptist 
 brethren, that there is no direct warrant in the New Tes- 
 tament far infant membership, and of course, none for in- 
 fant baptism. Admitting that the New Testament is silent 
 on the subject, their cause is ruined. No good reason, I 
 had almost said, no possible reason, can be assigned for 
 such silence, in the circumstances in which the Christian 
 church was placed, but the fact that things, as to this point, 
 were to go on as before. That the old privilege, so dear 
 to the parent's heart, was to receive no other change than 
 a new seal, less burdensome ; applicable equally to both 
 sexes ; in a word, recognizing, extending, and perpetuat- 
 ing all the privileges which they had enjoyed before. 
 
 But it cannot be admitted that the New Testament con- 
 tains no direct warrant for infant membership. The testi- 
 mony adduced in the preceding discourse is surely worthy, 
 to say the least, of the most serious regard. When the 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 49 
 
 Master himself declares concerning infants, " Of such is 
 the kingdom of heaven ;" when an inspired apostle pro- 
 claims — "The promise is to us and our children;" and 
 when we plainly see, under the apostolical administration 
 of the church, whole families received, in repeated in- 
 stances, into the church, on the professed faith of the indi- 
 viduals who were constituted their respective heads, just 
 as we know occurred under the old economy, when the 
 membership of infants was undisputed: when we read 
 such thmgs as these in the New Testament, we surely 
 cannot complain of the want of testimony which ought to 
 satisfy every reasonable inquirer, 
 
 2. A second objection, often urged by our Baptist bre- 
 thren, is drawn from what they insist is the general law of 
 positive institutions. " In cases of moral duty, say they, 
 we are at liberty to argue from inference, from analogy, 
 from implication; but in regard to positive institutions, our 
 warrant must be direct and positive. Now, as we no 
 where find in the New Testament any positive direction 
 for baptizing infants, the general law, which must govern 
 in all cases of positive institution, plainly forbids it. Here 
 no inferential reasoning can be admitted." 
 
 This argument, I am persuaded, will not be regarded as 
 forcible by any who examine it with attention and impar- 
 tiality. The whole principle is unsound. The fact is, in- 
 ferential reasoning may be, and is in many cases, quite as 
 strong as any other. Besides, if it be contended, that in 
 every thing relating to positive institutes, Ave must have 
 direct and positive precepts, the assumed principle will 
 prove too much. 
 
 Upon this principle, females ought never to partake of 
 the Lord's Supper ; for we have no positive precept, and 
 no explicit example in the New Testament to warrant 
 them in doing so, and yet our Baptist brethren, forgetting 
 their own principle, unite with all Christians who consider 
 the sacramental supper as still obligatory on the church, in 
 admitting females to its participation. This dractice is, no 
 doubt, perfectly right. It rests on the most solid inferen- 
 tial reasoning, which may be just as strong as any other, 
 and which, in this case, cannot be gainsayed or resisted. 
 But every time our Baptist brethren yield to this reason- 
 
 E 
 
60 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 ing, and act accordingly, they desert their assumed prin- 
 ciple. 
 
 3. A third objection frequently urged is, that if infant 
 baptism had prevailed in the primitive church, ive might 
 have expected to find in the New Testament history some 
 examples of the children of professing Christians being 
 baptized in their infancy. Our Baptist brethren remind 
 us that the New Testament history embraces a period of 
 more than sixty years after the organization of the church, 
 under the new economy. "Now," say they, "during this 
 long period, if the principle and practice of infant baptism 
 had been the law of the church, we must, in all probability, 
 have found many instances recorded of the baptism of the 
 children of persons already in the communion of the 
 church. Whereas, in all that is distinctly recorded, or oc- 
 casionally hinted at, concerning the churches of Jerusalem, 
 Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, Gallatia, Colosse, &;c., 
 we find no mention made of such baptisms. We, there- 
 fore, conclude that none such occun*ed." 
 
 This objection, when examined, will be found, it is be- 
 lieved, to have quite as little weight as the preceding. 
 The principal object of the New Testament history is to 
 give an account of the progress of the Gospel. Hence it 
 was much more to the purpose of the sacred writers to 
 inform us respecting the conversions to Christianity, from 
 Judaism and Paganism, than to dwell in detail on what oc- 
 curred in the bosom of the church itself. Only enough is 
 said on the latter subject to trace the disturbances which 
 occurred in the churches to their proper source, and to 
 render intelligible and impressive the various precepts in 
 relation to these matters which are recorded for the in- 
 struction of the people of God in all ages. Hence all the 
 cases of baptism which are recorded, are cases in which 
 it was administered to converts from Judaism or Pagan- 
 ism, to Christianity. To the best of my recollection, we 
 have no example of a single baptism of any other kind. 
 Now this, upon Pcedobaptist principles, is precisely what 
 might have been expected. In giving a history of such 
 churches, who would think of singling out cases of infant 
 baptism? This is a matter so much of course, and of 
 every day's occurrence, that it is in no respect a remark- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 51 
 
 able event, and, of course, could not be expected to be re- 
 corded as such. No wonder, then, that we find no in- 
 stance of this kind specified in the annals of the apostolical 
 church. 
 
 But this is not all. There is connected with this fact, 
 a still more serious difficulty, which cannot fail of bearing 
 v/ith most unfriendly weight on the Baptist cause. Though 
 it is not wonderful, for the reason just mentioned, that we 
 read of no cases of infant baptism among the Christian 
 families of the apostolical age; yet, upon Baptist princi- 
 ples, it is much more difficult to be accounted for, that we 
 find no example of persons born of Christian parents being 
 baptized in adult age. Upon those principles, the chil- 
 dren of professing Christians bear no relation to the church. 
 They are as completely " without" as the children of 
 Pagans or Mohammedans, until by faith and repentance 
 they are brought within the bond of the covenant. Their 
 being converted and baptized, then, we might expect to be 
 just as carefully noticed, and just as minutely detailed, as 
 the conversion and baptism of the most complete " aliens 
 from the commonwealth of Israel." Yet the fact is, that 
 during the whole three score years after the ascension of 
 Christ, which the New Testament history embraces, we 
 have no hint of the baptism of any adult born of Christian 
 parents. In my judgment, this fact bears very strongly 
 in favour of the Poedobaptist cause. 
 
 4. It is objected, that Jesus Christ himself was not bap- 
 tized until he was thirty years of age; and, therefore, it 
 is inferred, that his disciples ought not to be baptized un- 
 til they reach adidt age. To this objection I reply 
 
 (1.) Christ was baptized by John. Now it is certain, 
 that John's Baptism was not Christian baptism: for it is evi- 
 dent, from the Acts of the Apostles, (chap. xix. 1-5.) that 
 those who were baptized by John, were baptized over 
 again, "in the name of the Lord Jesus." Besides, it is 
 evident, from the whole passage, that the baptism of 
 Christ by John was an essentially different thing from 
 baptism as now practised in the Christian church. The 
 ministry of John the Baptist was a dispensation, if we 
 may say so, intermediate between the Old and the New 
 Testament economies. And, as our blessed Lord thought 
 
52 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 proper to " fulfil all righteousness," he submitted to the 
 baptismal rite which marked th?t dispensation. Be- 
 sides, under the Old Testament economy, when the 
 High Priest first entered on his holy office, he was so- 
 lemnly washed with water. And that ofiicer, Ave know, 
 was wont to come to the discharge of his functions 
 at " about thirty years of age," the very age at which our 
 Saviour was baptized, and entered on his public ministry. 
 In like manner, when the "great High Priest of our pro- 
 fession," Christ Jesus, entered on his public ministry, he 
 thought proper to comply with the same ceremony ; that 
 he might acccomplish the prophecy, and fulfil all the typical 
 representations concerning the Saviour, which had been 
 left on record in the Old Testament Scriptures. The bap- 
 tism of Christ, then, has no reference to this controversy, 
 and cannot be made to speak either for or against our prac- 
 tice in regard to this ordinance. But 
 
 (2.) If this argument have any force, it proves more 
 than our Baptist brethren are willing to allow, viz : that 
 no person ought to be baptized under thirty years of age. 
 So that even a real Christian, however clear his evidences 
 of faith and repentance, though he be twenty, twenty- 
 Jive., or even twenty-nine years of age, must in no case 
 think of being baptized until he has reached the full 
 age of thirty. A consequence so replete with absurdity, 
 that the simple statement of it is -enough to insure its refu- 
 tation. 
 
 5. A fifth objection continually made by our Baptist 
 brethren is, that infants are not capable of those spiritual 
 acts or exercises which the New Testament requires in 
 order to a proper reception of the ordinance of Baptism. 
 Thus the language of the New Testament, on various oc- 
 casions, is — " Repent, and be baptized. Believe, and be 
 baptized. If thou believest with all thine heart, thou may- 
 est be baptized. They that gladly received the word were 
 baptized. Many of the Corinthians, having believed, 
 were baptized." In short, say our Baptist brethren, as 
 baptism is acknowledged on all hands to be a " seal of 
 the righteousness of faith ;" and as infants are altogether 
 incapable of exercising faith ; it is, of course, not proper 
 to baptize them. 
 
8t:RM0NS ON BAPTISM. 53 
 
 In answer to this objection, my first remark is, that all 
 those exhortations to faith and repentance, as prerequisites 
 to baptism, which we find in the New Testament, are 
 addressed to adult persons. And when we are called to 
 instruct adult persons, who have never been baptized, we 
 always address them precisely in the same way in which 
 the apostles did. We exhort them to repent and believe, 
 and w^e say, just as Philip said, "If thou belie vest with all 
 thine heart, thou mayest be baptized." But this does not 
 touch the question respecting the infant seed of believers. 
 It only shows that when adults are baptized, such a quali- 
 fication is to be urged, and such a profession required. 
 And in this, ail Pcedobaptists unanimously agree. 
 
 But still, our Baptist brethren, unsatisfied with this 
 answer, insist, that, as infants are not capable of exercising 
 faith ; as they are not capable of acting either intelligently 
 or voluntarily in the case at all, they cannot be considered 
 as the proder recipients of an ordinance which is repre- 
 sented as a "seal of the righteousness of faith." This 
 objection is urged with unceasing confidence, and not sel- 
 dom accompanied with sneer and even ridicule, at the idea 
 of applying a covenant seal to those who are incapable of 
 either understanding, or giving their consent, to the trans- 
 action. It is really, my friends, enough to make one shud- 
 der to think how often, and how unceremoniously language 
 of this kind is employed by those who acknowledge that 
 infants of eight days old, were once, and that by express 
 Divine appointment, made the subjects of circumcision. 
 Now circumcision is expressly said by the apostle to be 
 a "seal of the righteousness of faith," as well as baptism. 
 But were children of eight days old then capable of exer- 
 cising faith, when they were circumcised, more than they 
 are now when they are baptized? Surely the objection 
 before us is as valid in the one case as in the other. And, 
 whether our Baptist brethren perceive it or not, all the 
 charges of "absurdity" and "impiety" which they are so 
 ready to heap on infant baptism, are just as applicable to 
 infant circumcision as to infant baptism. Are they, then, 
 willing to say, that the application of a " seal of the righte- 
 ousness of faith" to unconscious infants, of eight days old, 
 who, of course, could not exercise faith, was, under the 
 
 E* 
 
54 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 old economy, preposterous and absurd? Are they pre- 
 pared thus to "charge God foolishly?" Yet they must 
 do it, if they would be consistent. They cannot escape 
 from the shocking alternative. Every harsh and contempt- 
 uous epithet which they apply to infant baptism, must, if 
 they would adhere to the principles which they lay down, 
 be applied to infant circumcision. But that which una- 
 voidably leads to such a consequence cannot be warranted 
 by the word of God. 
 
 After all, the whole weight of the objection, in this case, 
 is founded on an entire forge tfulness of the main principle 
 of the Poedobaptist system. It is forgotten that in every 
 case of infant baptism, faith is required, and, if the parents 
 be sincere, is actually exercised. But it is required of the 
 parents, not of the children. So that, if the parent really 
 present his child in faith, the spirit of the ordinance is 
 entirely met and answered. It was this principle which 
 gave meaning and legitimacy to the administration of the 
 corresponding rite under the old dispensation. It was 
 because the parents were visibly within the bond of thei 
 covenant, that their children were entitled to the same 
 blessed privilege. The same principle precisely applies 
 under the New Testament economy. Nor does it impair the 
 force of this consideration to allege, that pai'ents, it is feared, 
 too often present their children, in this solemn ordinance, 
 without genuine faith. It is, indeed, probable that this is 
 often lamentably the fact. But so it was, we cannot 
 doubt, with respect to the corresponding ordinance, under 
 the old dispensation. Yet the circumcision was neither 
 invalidated, nor rendered unmeaning, by this want of sin- 
 cerity on the part of the parent. It was sufficient for the 
 visible administration that faith was visibly professed. 
 When our Baptist brethren administer the ordinance of 
 baptism to one who professes to i^epent and believe, but 
 who is not sincere in this profession, they do not consider 
 his want of faith as divesting the ordinance of either its 
 warrant or its meaning. The administration may be regu- 
 lar and scriptural, while the recipient is criminal, and 
 receives no spiritual benefit. It is, in every case, the pro-^ 
 fession of faith which gives the right, in the eye of the 
 church, to the external ordinance. The want of sincerity 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 55 
 
 in this profession, while it deeply inculpates the hypocriti- 
 cal individual, affects not either the nature or the warrant 
 of the administration. 
 
 6. Again; it is objected, that baptism can do infants no 
 good. " Where," say our Baptist brethren, " is the benefit 
 of it? What good can a little 'sprinkling with water' do 
 a helpless, unconscious babe?'' To this objection I might 
 reply, by asking, in my turn — What good did circumcision 
 do a Jewish child, helpless and unconscious, at eight days 
 old? To ask the question is almost impious, because it 
 implies an impeachment of infinite wisdom.* God ap- 
 pointed that ordinance to be administered to infants. And, 
 accordingly, when the apostle asked, in the spirit of some 
 modern cavillers, "What profit is there of circumcision?" 
 He replies, much, every ivay. In like manner, when it 
 is asked, "What profit is there in baptising our infant 
 children?" 1 answer. Much, everyway. Baptism is a 
 sign of many important truths, and a seal of many impor- 
 tant covenant blessings. Is there no advantage in attend- 
 ing on an ordinance which holds up to our view, in the 
 most impressive symbolical language, several of those 
 fundamental doctrines of the Gospel which are of the deep- 
 est interest to us and our offspring; such as our fallen, 
 guilty, and polluted state by nature, and the method ap- 
 pointed by infinite wisdom and love for our recovery, by 
 the atoning blood, and cleansing Spirit of the Saviour? Is 
 there no advantage in solemnly dedicating our children to 
 God, by an appropriate rite, of his own appointment? Is 
 there no advantage in formally binding ourselves, by cove- 
 nant engagements, to bring up our offspring "in the nur- 
 ture and admonition of the Lord?" Is there no advantage 
 in publicly ratifying the connection of our children, as well 
 as ourselves, with the visible church, and as it were bind- 
 ing them to an alliance with the God of their fathers ? Is 
 there nothing, either comforting or useful in solemnly re- 
 cognising as our own that covenant promise, " I will 
 
 * A grave and respectable Baptist minister, in the course of an 
 argument on this subject, cundidJy acknowledged that the adminis- 
 tration of circumcision to an infant eight days old, would have appear- 
 ed to him a useless, and even a silly rite I An honest, and certainly 
 a very natural confession I 
 
56 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 establish my covenant between me and tliee, and thy seed 
 after thee, to be a God to thee and thy seed after thee? Is 
 it a step of no value to our children themselves, to be 
 brought, by a divinely appointed ordinance, into the bosom, 
 and to the notice, the maternal attentions, and the prayers 
 of the church, "the mother of us all?" And is it of no 
 advantage to the parents, in educating their children, to be 
 able to remind them, from time to time, that they have 
 been symbolically sanctified, or set apart, by the seal of 
 Jehovah's covenant, and to plead with them by the solemn 
 vows which they have made on tlieir behalf? Verily, my 
 dear friends, those who refuse or neglect the baptism of 
 their children, not only sin against Christ, by disobeying 
 his solemn command; but they also deprive both them- 
 selves and their children of great benefits. They may 
 imagine that, as it is a disputed point, it may be a matter of 
 indifference, whether their children receive this ordinance 
 in their infancy, or grow up unbaptized. But is not this 
 attempting to be wiser than God? I do not profess to 
 know all the advantages attendant or consequent on the 
 administration of this significant and divinely appointed 
 rite; but one thing I know, and that is,, that Christ has 
 appointed it as a sign of precious truths, and a seal of rich 
 Messings, to his covenant people, and their infant offspring; 
 and I have no doubt that, in a multitude of cases, the bap- 
 tized children, presented by professing parents who had no 
 true faith, but who, by this act, brought their children 
 within the care, the watch, and the privileges of the 
 church, have been instrumental in conferring upon their 
 offspring rich benefits, while they themselves went down 
 to everlasting burnings. If I mistake not, I have seen 
 many cases, in which, as far as the eye of man could go, 
 the truth of this remark has been signally exemplified. 
 
 Let it not be said, that such a solemn dedication of a 
 child to God, is usurping the rights of the child to judge 
 and act for himself, when he comes to years of discretion; 
 and that it is inconsistent with the privilege of every ra- 
 tional being to free inquiry, and free agency. This ob- 
 jection is founded on an infidel spirit. It is equally op- 
 posed to the religious education of children ; and, if fol- 
 lowed out, would militate against all those restraints, and 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 57 
 
 that instruction which the Word of God enjoins on pa- 
 rents. Nay, if the principle of this objection be correct, 
 it is wrong to pre-occupy the minds of our children with 
 an abhorrence of lying, theft, drunkenness, malice, and 
 murder ; lest, forsooth, we should fill them with such pre- 
 judices as would be unfriendly to free inquiry. 
 
 The truth is, one great purpose for which the church 
 was instituted, is to watch over and train up children in 
 the knowledge and fear of God, and thus, to "prepare a 
 seed to serve him, who should be accounted to the Lord 
 for a generation." And I will venture to say, that that 
 system of religion which does not embrace children in its 
 ecclesiastical provisions, and in its covenant engagements, 
 is most materially defective. Infants may not receive any 
 apparent benefit from baptism, at the moment in which 
 the ordinance is administered ; although a gracious God 
 may, even then, accompany the outward emblem with the 
 blessing which it represents, even " the washing of re- 
 generation, and the renewing of the Holy Spirit." This, 
 indeed, may not be, and most commonly, so far as we can 
 judge, is not the case. But still the benefits of this ordi- 
 nance, when faithfully applied by ministers, and faithfully 
 received by parents, are abundant — nay, great and impor- 
 tant every way. When children are baptized, they are 
 thereby recognized as belonging to the visible church of 
 God. They are, as it were, solemnly entered as scholars 
 or disciples in the school of Christ. They are 1 rought 
 into a situation, in which they not only may be trained up 
 for God, but in which their parents are bound so to train 
 them up ; and the church is bound to see that they be so 
 trained, as that the Lord's claim to them shall ever be re- 
 cognized and maintained. In a Avord, by baptism, when 
 the administrators and recipients are both faithful to their 
 respective trusts, children are brought into a situation in 
 which all the means of grace ; all the privileges pertain- 
 ing to Christ's covenanted family ; in a word, all that is 
 comprehended under the broad and precious import of the 
 term Christian education, is secured to them in the most 
 ample manner. Let parents think of this, when they 
 come to present their children in this holy ordinance. 
 And let children lay all this to heart, when they come to 
 
58 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 years in which they are capable of remembering and Eeal- 
 izing their solemn responsibility. 
 
 7. A seventh objection which our Baptist brethren fre- 
 quently urge is, that, upon our plan, the result of baptism 
 seldom corresponds with its professed meaning. We say 
 it is a symbol of regeneration ; but experie7ice proves that 
 a great majority of those infants who are baptized ^^ never 
 partake of the grace of regeneration. The practice of 
 Poedobaptists, they tell us, is adapted to corrupt the church 
 to the most extreme degree, by filling it with unconverted 
 persons. To this objection we reply : 
 
 That baptism is not more generally connected or fol- 
 lowed with that spiritual benefit of which it is a striking 
 emblem, is indeed to be lamented. But still this acknow- 
 ledged fact does not, it is believed, either destroy the sig- 
 nificance of the ordinance, or prove it to be useless. If it 
 hold up to view, to all who behold it, every time that it is 
 administered, the nature and necessity of regeneration by 
 the Holy Spirit; if it enjoin, and, to a very desirable ex- 
 tent, secure, to the children of the church enlightened and 
 faithful instruction, in the great doctrines of the Gospel, 
 and this doctrine of spiritual cleansing in particular; and 
 if it is, in a multitude of cases, actually connected with 
 precious privileges, and saving benefits ; we have, surely, 
 no right to conclude that it is of small advantage, because 
 it is not in all cases followed by the blessing which it 
 symbolically represents. How many read the Bible with- 
 out profit ! How many attend upon the external service 
 of prayer, without sincerity, and without a saving bless- 
 ing! But are the reading of the Scriptures, and the duty 
 of prayer less obligatory, or of more dubious value on that 
 account? In truth, the same objection might be made to 
 circumcision. That, as well as baptism, was a symbol of 
 regeneration, and of spiritual cleansing : but how many re- 
 ceived the outward symbol without the spiritual benefit ? 
 The fact is, the same objection may be brought against 
 every institution of God. They are all richly significant, 
 ?ind abound in spiritual meaning, and in spiritual instruc- 
 tion ; but their influence is moral, and may be defeated by 
 unbelief. They cannot exert a physical power, or convert 
 and save by their inherent energy, Hence they are often 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 59 
 
 attended by many individuals, without benefit ; but still 
 their administration is by no means, in respect to the 
 church of God, in vain in the Lord. It is daily exerting 
 an influence of which no human arithmetic can form an 
 accurate estimate. Thousands, no doubt, even of baptized 
 adults receive the ordinance without faith, and, of course, 
 without saving profit. But thousands more receive it in 
 faith, and in connexion with those precious benefits of 
 which it is a symbol. This is the case with all ordi- 
 nances ; but because they are not always connected with 
 saving benefits, we are neither to disparage, nor cease to 
 recommend them. 
 
 But if baptism be a symbol of regeneration ; if it hold 
 forth to all who receive it, either for themselves or their 
 offspring, the importance and necessity of this great work 
 of God's grace ; if it bind them to teach their children, as 
 soon as they become capable of receiving instruction, this 
 vital truth, as well as all the other fundamental truths of 
 our holy religion ; if, in consequence of their baptism, 
 children are recognized as bearing a most important rela- 
 tion to the church of God, as bound by her rules, and 
 responsible to her tribunal ; and if all these principles be 
 faithfully carried out into practice ; can our children be 
 placed in circumstances more favourable to their moral 
 benefit ? If not regenerated at the time of baptism, (which 
 the nature of the ordinance does not necessarily imply) 
 are they not, in virtue of their connexion with the church, 
 thus ratified and sealed, placed in the best of all schools for 
 learning, practically, as well as doctrinally, the things of 
 God? Are they not, by these means, even when they 
 fail of becoming pious, restrained and regulated, and made 
 better members of society? And are not multitudes of 
 them, after all, brought back from their temporary wan- 
 derings, and by the reviving influence of their baptismal 
 seal, and their early training, made wise unto salvation ? 
 Let none say, then, that infant baptism seldom realizes its 
 symbolical meaning. It is, I apprehend, made to do this 
 far more frequendy than is commonly imagined. And if 
 those who offer them up to God in this ordinance, were 
 more faithful, this favourable result would occur with a 
 frequency more than tenfold. 
 
60 SERMONS ON BAPl'lSM. 
 
 8. A further objection often urged by the opponents of 
 infant baptism is, that we have the same historical evi- 
 dence for infant communion that we have infant bap- 
 tism; and that the evidence of the former in the early- 
 history of the church, altogether invalidates the historical 
 testimony which we find in favour of the latter. 
 
 In reply to this objection, it is freely granted, that 
 the practice of administering the eucharist to children, 
 and sometimes even to very young children, infants, has 
 been in use in various parts of the Christian church, 
 from an early period, and is, in some parts of the 
 nominally Christian world, still maintained. About the 
 middle of the third century, we hear of it in some of the 
 African churches. A misconception of the Saviour's 
 words — " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and 
 and drink his blood, ye have no life in you;" led many to 
 believe that a participation of the Lord's supper was essen- 
 tial to salvation. They were, therefore, led to give a 
 small portion of the sacramental bread dipped in wine to 
 children, and dying persons, who were not able to receive 
 it in the usual form ; and, in some cases, we find that this 
 morsel of bread moistened with the consecrated wine was 
 even forced down the throats of infants, who were reluc- 
 tant or unable to swallow it. Nay, to so revolting a length 
 was this superstition carried, in a few churches, that the 
 consecrated bread and wine united in the same manner as 
 in the case of infants, were thrust into the mouths of the 
 dead^ who had departed without receiving them during life ! 
 
 But it is doing great injustice to the cause of infant bap- 
 tism to represent it as resting on no better ground than the 
 practice of infant communion. The following points of 
 difference are manifest, and appear to me perfectly conclu- 
 sive. 
 
 (1.) Infant communion derives not the smallest counte- 
 nance from the Word of God; whereas, with regard to 
 infant baptism, we find in Scripture its most solid and deci- 
 sive support. It would rest on a firm foundation if every 
 testimony out of the Bible were destroyed. 
 
 (2.) The historical testimony in favour of infant commu- 
 nion, is greatly inferior to that which we possess in 
 favour of infant baptism. We have no hint of the former 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 61 
 
 having been in use in any church until the time of Cy- 
 prian, about the middle of the third century ; whereas 
 testimony more or less clear in favour of the latter has 
 come down to us from the apostolic age. 
 
 (3.) Once more : Infant communion by no means stands 
 on a level with infant baptism as to its universal or even 
 general reception. We find two eminent men in the 
 fourth century, among the most learned then on earth, and 
 who had enjoyed the best opportunity of becoming ac- 
 quainted with the whole church, declaring that the bap- 
 tism of infants was a practice which had come down from 
 the apostles, and was universally practised in the church ; 
 nay, that they had never heard of any professing Chris- 
 tians in the world, either orthodox or heretical, who did 
 not baptize their children. But we have no testimony ap- 
 proaching this, in proof of the early and universal adoption 
 of infant communion. It was manifestly an innovation, 
 founded on principles which, though, to a melancholy de- 
 gree prevalent, were never universally received. And as 
 miserable superstition brought it into the church, so a 
 still more miserable superstition destroyed it. When 
 transubstantiation arose, the sacred elements, (now trans- 
 muted, as was supposed, into the real body and blood of 
 the Saviour) began to be considered as too awful in their 
 character to be imparted to children. But in the Greek 
 church, who separated from the Latin before transubstan- 
 tiation was established, the practice of infant communion 
 still superstitiously continues. 
 
 9. Again : It is objected that Pcedobaptists are not con- 
 sistent with themselves, in that they do not treat their 
 children as if they were members of the church. " Pcedo- 
 baptists," say our Baptist brethren, " maintain that the 
 children of professing Christians are, in virtue of their 
 birth, members of the church — plenary members — exter- 
 nally in covenant with God, and as such made the subjects 
 of a sacramental seal. Yet we seldom or never see a 
 Pcedobaptist church treating her baptized children as 
 church members, that is, instructing, watching over, and 
 disciplining them, as in the case of adult members. Does 
 not this manifest that their system is inconsistent with it- 
 self, impracticable, and therefore unsound ?" This objec- 
 
&i SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 tion is a most serious and weighty one, and ought to en- 
 gage the conscientious attention of every Poedobaptist who 
 wishes to maintain his profession with consistency and to 
 edification. 
 
 It cannot be denied, then, that the great mass of the 
 Poedobaptist churches, do act inconsistently in regard to 
 this matter. They do not carry out, and apply their own 
 system by a corresponding practice. That baptized chil- 
 dren should be treated by the church and her officers just 
 as other childen are treated : that they should receive the 
 seal of a covenant relation to God and his people, and 
 then be left to negligence and sin, without official inspec- 
 tion, and without discipline, precisely as those are left who 
 bear no relation to the church, is, it must be confessed, 
 altogether inconsistent with the nature and design of the 
 ordinance, and in a high degree unfriendly to the best in- 
 terests of the Church of God. This distressing fact, how- 
 ever, as has been often observed, militates, not against the 
 doctrine itself, of infant membership, but against the in- 
 consistency of those who profess to adopt and to act 
 upon it. 
 
 If one great end of instituting a church, as was before 
 observed, is the training up of a godly seed in the way 
 of truth, holiness, and salvation; and if one great purpose of 
 sacramental seals is to "separate between the precious and 
 the vile," and to set a distinguishing mark upon the Lord's 
 people ; then, undoubtedly, those who bear this mark, 
 whether infant or adult, ought to be treated with appropri- 
 ate inspection and care, and their relation to the Church 
 of God never, for a moment, lost sight of or neglected. 
 In regard to adults, this duty is generally recognized by 
 all evangelical churches. Why it has fallen into so much 
 neglect, in regard to our infant and juvenile members, 
 maybe more easily explained than justified. And yet it is 
 manifest, that attention to the duty in question in reference 
 to the youthful members of the church, is not only impor- 
 tant, but, in some respects, pre-eminently so ; and pecu- 
 liarly adapted to promote the edification and enlargement 
 of the Christian family. 
 
 If it be asked, what more can be done for the moral cul- 
 ture and welfare of baptized children, than is done ? I an- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 63 
 
 swer, much, that would be of inestimable value to them, 
 and to the Christian community. The task, indeed, of 
 training them up for God, is an arduous one, but it is prac- 
 ticable, and the faithful discharge of it involves the richest 
 reward. The following plan may be said naturally to 
 grow out of the doctrine of infant membership ; and no one 
 can doubt that, if carried into faithful execution, it would 
 form a new and glorious era in the history of the Church 
 of God. 
 
 Let all baptized children, from the hour of their receiv- 
 ing the seal of God's covenant, be recorded and recognized 
 as infant disciples. Let the officers of the church, as well 
 as their parents according to the flesh, ever regard them 
 with a watchful and affectionate eye. Let Christian in- 
 struction, Christian restraint, and Christian warning, en- 
 treaty and prayer ever attend them, from the mother's lap 
 to the infant school, and from the infant school to the semi- 
 nary, whatever it may be, for more mature instruction. 
 Let them be early taught to reverence and read the Word 
 of God, and to treasure up select portions of it in their 
 memories. Let appropriate Catechisms, and other sound 
 compends of Christian truth, be put into their hands, and 
 by incessant repetition and inculcation be impressed upon 
 their minds. Let a school, or schools, according to its 
 extent, be established in each church, placed under the 
 immediate instruction of exemplary, orthodox, and pious 
 teachers, carefully superintended by the pastor, and visited 
 as often as practicable by all the officers of the church. 
 Let these beloved youth be often reminded of the relation 
 which they bear to the Christian family; and the just claim 
 of Christ to their affections and service, be often presented 
 with distinctness, solemnity, and affection. Let every 
 kind of error and immorality be faithfully reproved, and as 
 far as possible suppressed in them. Let the pastor con- 
 vene the baptized children as often as practicable, and 
 address them with instruction and exhortation in the name 
 of that God to whom they have been dedicated, and every 
 endeavour made to impress their consciences and their 
 hearts with Gospel truth. When they come to years of 
 discretion, let them be affectionately reminded of their duty 
 to ratify, by their own act, the vows made by their parents 
 
64 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 in baptism, and be urged, again and again, to give, first 
 their hearts, and then the humble acknowledgment of an 
 outward profession, to the Saviour. Let this plan be pur- 
 sued faithfully, constantly, patiently, and with parental 
 tenderness. If instruction and exhortation be disregarded, 
 and a course of error, immorality, or negligence be in- 
 dulged in, let warning, admonition, suspension, or excom- 
 munication ensue, according to the character of the indi- 
 vidual, and the exigencies of the case. "What!" some 
 will be disposed to say, " suspend or excommunicate a 
 young person, who has never yet taken his seat at a 
 sacramental table, nor even asked for that privilege?" 
 Certainly. Why not? If the children of professing 
 Christians are born members of the church, and are bap- 
 tized as a sign and seal of this membership, nothing can 
 be plainer than that they ought to be treated in every res- 
 pect as church members, and, of course, if they act in an 
 unchristian manner, a bar ought to be set up in the way 
 of their enjoying Christian privileges. If this be not 
 admitted, we must give up the very first principles of 
 ecclesiastical order and duty. Nor is there, obviously, 
 any thing more incongruous in suspending or excluding 
 from church privileges a young man, or young woman, 
 who has been baptized in infancy, and trained up in the 
 bosom of the church, but has now no regard for religion, 
 than there is in suspending or excommunicating one who 
 has been, for many years, an attendant on the Lord's table, 
 but has now forsaken the house of God, and has no longer 
 any desire to approach a Christian ordinance. No one 
 would consider it as either incongruous or unreasonable to 
 declare such a person unworthy of Christian fellowship, 
 and excluded from it, though he had no disposition to enjoy 
 it. The very same principle applies in the case now under 
 consideration. 
 
 It has been supposed, indeed, by some Poedobaptists, 
 that although every baptized child is a regular church 
 member, he is a member only of the general visible 
 church, and not in the ordinary sense, of any particular 
 church; and, therefore, that he is not amenable to ecclesi- 
 astical discipline until he formally connects himself with 
 some particular church. This doctrine appears to me sub- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 65 
 
 versive of every principle of ecclesiastical order. Every 
 baptized child is, undoubtedly, to be considered as a mem- 
 ber of the church in which he received baptism, until he 
 dies, is excommunicated, or regularly dismissed to another 
 church. And if the time shall ever come when all our 
 churches shall act upon this plan ; when infant members 
 shall be watched over with unceasing and affectionate 
 moral care ; when a baptized young person, of either sex, 
 being not yet what is called a communicant, shall be made 
 the subject of mild but faithful Christian discipline, if he 
 fall into heresy or immorality ; when he shall be regularly 
 dismissed, by letter, from the watch and care of one church 
 to another; and when all his spiritual interests shall be 
 guarded, by the church, as well as by his parents, with 
 sacred and affectionate diligence ; when this efHcient and 
 faithful system shall be acted upon, infant baptism will be 
 universally acknowledged as a blessing, and the church 
 will shine with new and spiritual glory. 
 
 The truth is, if infant baptism were properly improved; 
 if the profession which it includes, and the obligations 
 which it imposes, were suitably appreciated and followed 
 up, it would have few opponents. I can no more doubt, 
 if this were done, that it would be blessed to the saving 
 conversion of thousands of our young people, than I can 
 doubt the faithfulness of a covenant God. Yes, infant 
 baptism is of God, but the fault lies in the conduct of its 
 advocates. The inconsistency of its friends, has done 
 more to discredit it, than all the arguments of its opposers, 
 a hundred fold. Let us hope that these friends will, one 
 day, arouse from their deplorable lethargy, and show that 
 they are contending for an ordinance as precious as it is 
 scriptural. 
 
 10. Another objection, often urged with confidence, 
 against infant membership and baptism, is, that, z/* they be 
 well founded, then it follows, of course, that every bap- 
 tized young person, or even child, ivho feels disposed to 
 do so, has a right to come to the Lord's table, without 
 inquiry or permission of any one. Upon this principle, 
 say our Baptist brethren, as a large portion of those who 
 are baptized in infancy are manifesdy not pious, and many 
 of them become opendy profligate ; if their caprice or their 
 
66 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 wickedness should prompt them to go forward, the church 
 would be disgraced by crowds of the most unworthy com- 
 municants. 
 
 This objection is founded on an entire mistake. And 
 a recurrence, for one moment, to the principles of civil 
 society, will at once expose it. Every child is a citizen of 
 the country in which he was born; a plenary citizen : there 
 is no such thing as half-way citizenship in this case. He 
 is a free born citizen in the fullest extent of the term. 
 Yet, until he reach a certain age, and possess certain quali- 
 fications, he is not eligible to the most important offices 
 which his country has to confer. And after he has been 
 elected, he cannot take his seat for the discharge of these 
 official functions, until he has taken certain prescribed 
 oaths. It is evident that the State has a right, and finds it 
 essential to her well being, by her constitution and her 
 laws, thus to limit the rights of the citizen. Still no one 
 supposes that he is the less a citizen, or thinks of repre- 
 senting him as only a half-way citizen prior to his com- 
 pliance with these forms. In like manner every baptized 
 child is a member — a plenary member of the church in 
 which he received the sacramental seal. There his mem- 
 bership is recognized and recorded, and there alone can 
 he regularly receive a certificate of this fact, and a dismis- 
 sion to put himself under the watch and care of any other 
 church. Still the church to which this ecclesiastical minor 
 belongs, in the exercise of that "authority which Christ 
 has given, for edification and not for destruction," will not 
 suffer him, if she does her duty, to come to the Lord's 
 table, until he has reached an age when he has "know- 
 ledge to discern the Lord's body," and until he shall mani- 
 fest that exemplary deportment and hopeful piety which 
 become one who claims the privileges of Christian commu- 
 nion. If he manifest an opposite character, it is lier duty, 
 as a part of her stated discipline, to prevent his enjoying 
 these privileges; just as it is her duty, in the case of one 
 who has been a communicant for years, when he departs, 
 from the order and purity of a Christian profession, to 
 debar him from the continued enjoyment of his former 
 good standing. In short, the language of the apostle Paul, 
 though originally intended for a diflferent purpose, is strict-. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 67 
 
 iy applicable to the subject before us: "The heir, as long 
 as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though 
 he be lord of all ; but is under tutors and governors, until 
 the time appointed of the Father." In a word, in the 
 Church, as well as in the State, there is an order in which 
 privileges are to be enjoyed. As it is not every citizen 
 who is eligible to office ; and as not even the qualified have 
 a right to intrude into office uncalled ; so youthful church 
 members, like all others, are under the watch and care of 
 the church, and the time and manner in which they shall 
 recognize their baptismal engagements, and come to the 
 enjoyment of plenary privileges, Christ has left his church 
 to decide, on her responsibility to himself. No one, of 
 any age, has a right to come to her communion without the 
 consent of the church. When one, after coming to that 
 communion, has been debarred from it for a time, by regu- 
 lar ecclesiastical authority, he has no right to come again 
 until the interdict is taken off. Of course, by parity of 
 reasoning, one who has never yet come at all, cannot come 
 without asking and obtaining the permission of those who 
 are set to govern in the church. 
 
 This view of the subject is at once illustrated and con- 
 firmed by the uniform practice of the Old Testament 
 church. The children of Jewish parents, though regular 
 church members in virtue of their birth, and recognized as 
 such in virtue of their circumcision, were still not allowed 
 to come to the Passover until they were of a certain age, and 
 not even then, unless they were ceremonially clean. This 
 is so well attested by sacred antiquarians, both Jewish and 
 Christian, that it cannot be reasonably called in question. 
 Calvin remarks, that "the Passover, which has now been 
 succeeded by the sacred Supper, did not admit guests of all 
 descriptions promiscuously; but was rightly eaten only by 
 those who were of sufficient age to be able to inquire into 
 its signification." The same distinct statement is also 
 made by the Rev. Dr. Gill, an eminent commentator of 
 the Baptist denomination. "According to the maxims of 
 the Jews," says he, "persons were not obliged to the 
 duties of the law, or subject to the penalties of it in case of 
 non-performance, until they were, a female, at the age of 
 twelve years and one day, and a male at the age of thirteea. 
 
68 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 years and one day. But then they used to train up their 
 children, and inure them to religious exercises before. 
 They were not properly under the law until they were 
 arrived at the age abovementioned; nor were they reckoned 
 adult church members until then ; nor then neither unless 
 worthy persons: for so it is said, " He that is worthy, at 
 thirteen years of age, is called" a "son of the congregation 
 of Israel."* 
 
 The objection, then, before us is of no force. Or ra- 
 ther, the fact which it alleges and deprecates has no exist- 
 ence. It makes no part of the Poedobaptist system. Nay, 
 our system has advantages in respect to this matter, great 
 and radical advantages, which belong to no other. While 
 it regards baptized children as members of the church, and 
 solemnly binds the church, as well as the parents, to see 
 that they be faithfully trained up "in the nurture and ad- 
 monition of the Lord," it recognizes the church as possess- 
 ing, and as bound to exercise, the power of guarding her 
 communion table from all the profane approaches, even of 
 her own children, and so regulating their Christian culture, 
 and their personal recognition of Christian duty, as shall 
 best serve the great purpose of building up the church as 
 " an habitation of God through the Spirit." 
 
 II. The last objection which I propose to consider is 
 this : " If baptism," say our opponents, " takes the place 
 of circumcision, and if the church is the same in substance 
 now as when circumcision was the initiating seal, then 
 why is not baptism as universal in the New Testament 
 churchy as circumcision was under the old economy? 
 Why is not every child, under the light of the Gospel, 
 baptized, as every Israelitish child was circumcised." I 
 answer, this, undoubtedly, ought to he the case. That is, 
 all parents, where the Gospel comes, ought to be true be- 
 lievers ; ought to be members of the Church of Christ 
 themselves ; and ought to dedicate their children to God 
 in holy baptism. The command of God calls for it ; and 
 if parents were what they ought to be, they would be all 
 prepared for a proper application of this sacramental seal. 
 Under the Mosaic dispensation, a single nation of the great 
 
 * Commentary on Luke ii. 42. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. OH 
 
 human family, was called out of an idolatrous world to be 
 the depository of the word and the ordinances of the true 
 God. Then all who belonged to that nation were bound 
 to be holy; and unless they were at least ceremonially 
 clean, the divine direction was, that they should be " cut 
 off from their people." The obligation was universal, and 
 the penalty, in case of delinquency, was universal. Mul- 
 titudes of parents, no doubt, under that economy, pre- 
 sented their children to God in the sacrament of circum- 
 cision, who had no true faith ; but they professed to be- 
 lieve ; they attended to all the requisitions of ceremonial 
 cleanness, and that rendered the circumcision authorized 
 and regular. So in the New Testament church. This is 
 a body, like the other, called out from the rest of mankind, 
 but not confined to a particular nation. It consists of all 
 those, of every nation, who profess the true religion. 
 Within this spiritual community, baptism ought to be as 
 universal as circumcision was in the old " commonwealth 
 of Israel." Those parents who profess faith in Christ, 
 and obedience to him, and those only, ought to pressnt 
 their children in baptism. There is, indeed, reason to fear 
 that many visible adult members are not sincere. Still, as 
 they are externally regular, their children are entitled to 
 baptism. And were the whole infant population of our 
 land in these circumstances, they might, and ought to be 
 baptized. 
 
 I have thus endeavoured to dispose of the various objec- 
 tions which our Baptist brethren are wont to urge against 
 the cause of infant baptism. I have conscientiously aimed 
 to present them in all their force ; and am constrained to 
 believe that neither Scripture, reason, nor ecclesiastical 
 history afford them the least countenance. The longer I 
 reflect on the subject, the deeper is my conviction, that 
 the membership and the baptism of infants rest on grounds 
 which no fair argument can shake or weaken. 
 
 From the principles implied or established in the fore- 
 going pages, we may deduce the following practical con- 
 clusions : 
 
 1. We are warranted in returning with renewed confi- 
 dence to the conclusion stated in advance, in the early part 
 of our first discourse, viz : that the error of our Baptist 
 
70 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 brethren in rejecting the church membership and the bap- 
 tism of infants, is a most serious and mischievous error. 
 It is not a mere mistake about a speculative point ; but is 
 an error which so directly contravenes the spirit of the 
 whole Bible, and of all Jehovah's covenants with his peo- 
 ple, in every age, that it must be considered as invading 
 some of the most vital interests of the body of Christ, and 
 as adapted to exert a most baneful influence on his spiri- 
 tual kingdom. On this subject, my friends, my expres- 
 sions are strong, because my convictions are strong, and 
 my desire to guard every hearer against mischievous error 
 increasingly strong. I am, indeed, by no- means disposed 
 to deny either the piety or the honest convictions of our 
 respected Baptist brethren in adopting an opposite opinion 
 from ours. But I am, nevertheless, deeply convinced that 
 their system is not only entirely unscriptural, but also that 
 its native tendency is to place children, who are the hope 
 of the church, in a situation less friendly to the welfare of 
 Zion, and less favourable, by far, to their own salvation, 
 tuau that in which they are placed by our system ; and 
 that its ultimate influence on the rising generation, on fa- 
 mily religion, and on the growth of the church, must be 
 deeply injurious. 
 
 2. Again; it is evident, from what has been said, that 
 the baptism of our children means much, and involves 
 much solemn tender obligation. We do not, indeed, as- 
 cribe to this sacrament that kind of inherent virtue of 
 which some who bear the Christian name have spoken and 
 inferred so much. We do not believe that baptism is rege- 
 neration.* We consider this as a doctrine having no 
 foundation in the Word of God, and as eminently fitted to 
 deceive and destroy the soul. We do not suppose that 
 the ordinance, whenever legitimately administered, is ne- 
 cessarily accompanied with any physical or moral influ- 
 ence, operating either on the soul or the body of him who 
 receives it. Yet, on the other hand, we do not consider it 
 as a mere unmeaning ceremony. We cannot regard it as 
 the mere giving a name to the child to whom it is dis- 
 pensed. Multitudes appear to regard it as amounting to 
 
 * See Additional Notes. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 71 
 
 little, if any more than one or both of these. And, there- 
 fore, they consider the season of its celebration as a kind 
 of ecclesiastical festival or pageant. They would not, on 
 any account, have the baptism of their children neglected ; 
 and yet they solicit and receive it for their offspring, with 
 scarcely one serious or appropriate thought ; without any 
 enlightened or adequate impression of what it means, or 
 what obligation it imposes on them or their children. A bap- 
 tism, like a marriage, is regarded by multitudes as an appro- 
 priate season for congratulation and feasting, and very little 
 more, in connexion with it, seems to occur to their minds. 
 This is deeply to be deplored. The minds of the mass of 
 mankind seem to be ever prone to vibrate from superstition 
 to impiety, and from impiety back to superstition. Those 
 simple, spiritual views of truth, and of Christian ordinances 
 which the Bible every where holds forth, and which alone 
 tend to real benefit, too seldom enlighten and govern the 
 mass of those who bear the Christian name. Now, the 
 truth is, little as it is recollected and laid to heart, few 
 things can be more expressive, more solemn, or more in- 
 teresting, more touching in its appeals, more deeply com- 
 prehensive in its import, or more weighty in the obliga- 
 tions which it involves, than the baptism of an infant. I 
 repeat it — and oh, that the sentence could be made to thrill 
 through every parent's heart in Christendom — the bap- 
 tism of a child is one of the solemn transactions pertain- 
 ing to our holy religion. A human being, just opening 
 its eyes on the world ; presented to that God who made 
 it ; devoted to that Saviour without an interest in whose 
 atoning blood, it had better never have been born; and 
 consecrated to that Holy Spirit, who alone can sanctify 
 and prepare it for heaven ; is indeed a spectacle adapted 
 to affect every pious heart. In death, our race is run; 
 worldly hope and expectation are alike extinct ; and the 
 destiny of the immortal spirit is forever fixed. But the 
 child presented for baptism, if it reach the ordinary limit 
 of human life, has before it many a trial ; and will need all 
 the pardoning mercy, all the sanctifying grace, and all the 
 precious consolations which the blessed Gospel of Christ 
 has to bestow. And even if it die in infancy, it still 
 needs the pardoning mercy and sanctifying grace which 
 
72 
 
 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 are set forth in this ordinance. On either supposition, the 
 transaction is important. A course is commenced which 
 will be a blessing or a curse beyond the power of the hu- 
 man mind to estimate. And the eternal happiness or 
 misery of the young immortal will depend, under God, 
 upon the training it shall receive from the hands of those 
 who offer it. 
 
 Let those, then, who bring their children to the sacred 
 font to be baptized, ponder well what this ordinance 
 means, and what its reception involves, both in regard to 
 parents and children. Let them remember that in tak- 
 ing this step, we make a solemn profession of be- 
 lief, that our children, as well as ourselves, are born in 
 sin, and stand in indispensable need of pardoning mercy 
 and sanctifying grace. We formally dedicate them to 
 God, that they may be " washed and justified, and sanc- 
 tified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of 
 our God." And we take upon ourselves solemn vows to 
 train them up in the knowledge and fear of God; to in- 
 struct them, from the earliest dawn of reason, in the prin- 
 ciples and duties of our holy religion; to consider and 
 treat them as ingrafted members of the family of Christ; 
 and to do all in our power, by precept and example, by 
 authority and by prayer, to lead them in the ways of truth, 
 of holiness, and of salvation. Is this an ordinance to be 
 engaged in as a mere ceremony, or with convivial levity? 
 Surely if there be a transaction, among all the duties in- 
 cumbent on us as Christians — if there be a transaction 
 which ought to be engaged in with reverence, and godly 
 fear; with penitence, faith, and love; with bowels of 
 Christian compassion yearning over our beloved offspring; 
 with humble and importunate aspirations to the God of all 
 grace for his blessing on them and ourselves; and with 
 solemn resolutions, in the strength of his grace, that we 
 will be faithful to our vows, — this is that transaction I O 
 how full of meaning ! And yet how little thought of by 
 the most of those who engage in it with external deco- 
 rum! 
 
 3. The foregoing discussion will show by whom chil- 
 dren ought to be presented in holy baptism. The an- 
 swer given by the old Waldenses to this question is, un- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 73 
 
 doubtedly, the wisest and best. They say, as before 
 quoted, *' Children ought to be presented in baptism by 
 those to whom they are most nearly related, such as their 
 parents, or those whom God hath inspired with such a 
 charity." If parents be living, and be of a suitable char- 
 acter; that is, if they have been baptized themselves, and 
 sustain a regular standing as professing Christians, they, 
 and they alone, ought to present their children in this ordi- 
 nance. And all introduction of godfathers and godmothers, 
 as sponsors, either instead of the parents, or besides the 
 parents, is regarded by the great majority of Pcedobaptist 
 churches, as superstitious, unwarranted, an(^., of coiirse, 
 mischievous in its tendency. Whatever tends to beget 
 erroneous ideas of the nature and design of a Gospel ordi- 
 nance ; to ^hift off the responsibility attending it from the 
 proper to improper hands ; and to the assumption of 
 solemn engagements by those who can never really fulfil 
 them, and have no intention of doing it, cannot fail of ex- 
 erting an influence unfriendly to the best interests of the 
 church of God. 
 
 But if the parents be dead ; or, though living, of irre- 
 ligious character; and if the grand-parents, or any other 
 near relations, of suitable qualifications, be willing to un- 
 dertake the office of training up children " in the nurture 
 and admonition of the Lord," it is proper for them to pre- 
 sent such children in baptism. Or if deserted, or orphan 
 children be cast in the families of strangers, who are no 
 way related to them according to the flesh, but who are 
 willing to stand in the place of parents, and train them up 
 for God; even these strangers, in short, any and every 
 person, of suitable character, who may be willing to as- 
 sume the charitable office of giving them a Christian edu- 
 cation, may and ought to present such children for Chris- 
 tian baptism. Not only the offspring of Abraham's body, 
 but " all that were born in his house, and all that were 
 bought with his money," were commanded to be circum- 
 cised. Surely no Christian, who has a child, white or 
 black, placed in his family, and likely to be a permanent 
 member of it, can doubt that it is his duty to give it a 
 faithful Christian education. And as one great object of 
 infant baptism is to secure this point, he will not hesitate 
 
 G 
 
74 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 to offer it up to God in that ordinance which he has ap- 
 pointed, provided no valid objection in regard to the 
 wishes of the parents of such a child interpose to pre- 
 vent it. 
 
 4. This subject shows how responsible, and how so- 
 lemn is the situation of those young persons ivho have 
 been in their infancy dedicated to God in holy baptism! 
 This is a point concerning which both old and young are 
 too often forgetful. It is generally conceded, and exten- 
 sively felt, that parents, by dedicating their children to 
 God in this ordinance, are brought under very weighty 
 obligations, which cannot be forgotten by them, without 
 incurring great guilt. But young people seldom lay to 
 heart as they ought, that their early reception of the seal 
 of God's covenant, in consequence of the act of their pa- 
 rents, places them in circumstances of the most solemn 
 and responsible kind. They are too apt to imagine that 
 they are not members of the church, until by some act of 
 profession of their own, they are brought into this relation, 
 and assume its bonds ; that their making this profession, 
 or not making it, is a matter of mere choice, left to their 
 own decision ; that by omitting it, they violate no tie — 
 contract no guilt; that by refraining, they leave them- 
 selves more at liberty ; and that the only danger consists 
 in making an insincere profession. This is a view of the 
 subject, which, however common, is totally, and most 
 criminally erroneous. The children of professing Chris- 
 tians are already in the church. They were born mem- 
 bers. Their baptism did not make them members. It 
 was a public ratification and recognition of their member- 
 ship. They were baptized because they were members. 
 They received the seal of the covenant because they were 
 already in covenant by virtue of their birth. This 
 blessed privilege is their "birth-right." Of course, the 
 only question they can ask themselves is, not — shall we 
 enter the church, and profess to be connected with Christ's 
 family ? But — shall we continue in it, or act the part of 
 ungrateful deserters? "Shall we be thankful for this 
 privilege, and gratefully recognize and confirm it by our 
 own act; or shall we renounce our baptism; disown and 
 deny the Saviour in whose name we have been enrolled 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. T5 
 
 as members of his family; and become open apostates 
 from that family?" This is the real question to be de- 
 cided ; and truly a solemn question it is ! Baptized young 
 people ! think of this. You have been in the bosom of 
 the church ever since you drew your jfirst breath. The 
 seal of God's covenant has been placed upon you. You 
 cannot, if you would, escape from the responsibility of 
 this relation. You may forget it ; you may hate to think of 
 it; you may despise it; but still the obligation lies upon 
 you; you cannot throw it off. Your situation is solemn 
 beyond expression. On the one hand, to go forward, and 
 to recognize your obligation by a personal profession, 
 without any love to the Saviour, is to insult him by a 
 heartless offering; and, on the other, to renounce your al- 
 legiance by refusing to acknowledge him, by turning your 
 backs on his ordinances, and by indulging in that course 
 of life by which his religion is dishonoured, is certainly, 
 whether you realize it or not, to " deny him before men," 
 and to incur the fearful guilt of apostacy; of "drawing 
 back unto perdition." 
 
 "According to this representation," I shall be told, "the 
 condition of many of our youth is very deplorable. It is 
 their duty, you say, to profess the name of Christ, and to 
 seal their profession at a sacramental table. This they 
 cannot do ; for they are conscious that they do not possess 
 those principles and dispositions which are requisite to 
 render such a profession honest. What course shall they 
 steer? If they do not profess Christ, they live in rebel- 
 lion against God : if they do, they mock him with a lie. 
 Which side of the alternative shall they embrace ? Con- 
 tinue among the profane, and be consistently wicked? 
 Or withdraw from them in appearance, and play the hypo- 
 crite?" 
 
 The case is, indeed, very deplorable. Destruction is 
 on either hand. For " the unbelieving shall have their 
 part in the lake of fire; (Rev. xxi. 6.) and the hope of. the 
 hypocrite shall perish:" (Job viii. 13.) God forbid that 
 we should encourage either a false profession, or a refusal 
 to make one. The duty is to embrace neither side of the 
 alternative. Not to continue with the profane, and not to 
 act the hypocrite ; but to receive the Lord Jesus Christ in 
 
76 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 truth, and to walk in him. " I cannot do it," replies one: 
 and one, it may be, not without moments of serious and 
 tender emotions upon this very point: "I cannot do it.'* 
 My soul bleeds for thee, my unhappy ! But it must be 
 done, or thou art lost forever. Yet what is the amount 
 of that expression — in the month of some a flaunting ex- 
 cuse, and of others, a bitter complaint — I cannot? Is the 
 inability to believe in Christ different from an inability to 
 perform any other duty ? Is there any harder necessity of 
 calling the God of truth a liar; in not believing the record 
 which he hath given of his Son, than of committing any 
 other sin? The inability created, the necessity imposed, 
 by the enmity of the carnal mind against God? (Rom. 
 viii. 7.) It is the inability of wickedness, and of nothing 
 else. Instead of being an apology,, it is itself the essen- 
 tial crime, and can never become its own vindication. 
 
 But it is even so. The evil does lie too deep for the 
 reach of human remedies. Yet a remedy there is, and an 
 effectual one. It is here — " I will sprinkle clean water 
 upon you, and ye shall be clean; from all your filthiness 
 and from all your idols will I cleanse you. A new heart 
 also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within 
 you ; and I will take away the stony heart out of your 
 flesh ; and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will 
 put my spirit within you> and cause you to walk in my 
 statutes ; and ye shall keep my judgments and do them. 
 (Ezek. xxxvi. ^5-27.) Try this experiment. Go with 
 thy " filthiness," and thine " idols;" go with thy " stony 
 heart," and thy perverse spirit, which are thy real ina- 
 bility, to God upon the throne of grace ; spread out before 
 him his "exceeding great and precious promises; impor- 
 tune him as the hearer of prayer, in the name of Jesus, for 
 the accomplishment of it to thyself. Wait for his mercy, 
 it is worth waiting for, and remember his word — There- 
 fore will the Lord wait, that he may be gracious unto you ; 
 and therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy 
 upon you: for the Lord is a God of judgment; blessed are 
 all they that wait for him.* 
 
 * The two preceding paragraphs? are from the powerful and elo- 
 quent pen of the late Rev. J. M Mason, D. D. See Christian's Maga- 
 zine, Vol. II. p. 414-416. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 7? 
 
 5. Finally ; from the foregoing principles and considera- 
 tions, it is evident, that the great body of Foedobaptist 
 churches have much to reform in regard to their treat- 
 ment of baptized children^ and are bound to address 
 themselves to that reform with all speed and fidelity. It 
 has been already observed, that one great end for which 
 the church of God was instituted, was to train up, from 
 age to age, a seed to serve God, and to be faithful wit- 
 nesses in behalf of the truth and order of his family, in 
 the midst of an unbelieving world. If this be so, then, 
 surely the church, in her ecclesiastical capacity, is bound 
 carefully to watch over the education, and especially, the 
 religious education of her youthful members ; nor is there 
 any risk in asserting, that just in proportion as she has 
 been faithful to this part of her trust, she has flourished in 
 orthodoxy, piety, and peace ; and that when she has neg- 
 lected it, her children have grown up in ignorance, and 
 too often in profligacy, and wandered from her fold into 
 every form of error. If the church wishes her baptized 
 youth to be a comfort and a strength to their moral mo- 
 ther ; if she wishes them to adhere with intelligence, and 
 with dutiful affection to her distinctive testimony ; and to 
 be a generation to the praise of Zion's King, when their 
 fathers shall have gone to their final account ; then let her, 
 by all means, watch over the training of her young people 
 with peculiar diligence and fidelity ; and consider a very 
 large part of her duty, as a church, as consisting in con- 
 stant and faithful attention to the moral and religious cul- 
 ture of the rising generation. 
 
 What is the reason that so many of the baptized youth, 
 in almost all our Poedobaptist churches, grow up in ignor- 
 ance and disregard of the religion of their parents ? Why 
 are so many of them, when they come to judge and act 
 for themselves, found embracing systems of gross error, if 
 not total infidelity, and wandering, in too many instances, 
 into the paths of degrading profligacy I It is not enough 
 to say, that our children are by nature depraved, and 
 prone to the ways of error and folly. This is, doubtless, 
 true ; but it is not the whole truth. It cannot be ques- 
 tioned, that much of the reason lies at the door of the 
 church herself, as well as of the parents of such youth. 
 
79 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 The church has too often forgotten that baptism is as really 
 a seal to the church, as it is to the pai-ents and the chil- 
 dren who receive it. And, therefore, while in many in- 
 stances, a superstitious regard has been paid to the mere 
 rite of baptism,, a most deplorable neglect of the duties 
 arising from it has been indulged, even by some of our 
 most evangelical churches. Parents, while most vigilantly 
 attentive to the literary, scientific, and ornamental educa- 
 tion of their children, have slighted, to a most humiliating 
 degree, their moral and religious training. They have 
 sent them to schools conducted by immoral, heretical, or 
 infidel teachers, who, of course, paid no ^regard to that 
 part of their education which is unspeakably the most im- 
 portant of all ; or who rather might be expected to exert 
 in this respect, a most pestiferous influence. And, after 
 this cruel treatment of their offspring, have appeared to 
 be utterly surprised when they turned out profligates ! 
 What other result could have been expected? 
 
 While it is granted that the primary movements in the 
 great work of Christian education, are to be expected from 
 the parents; — indeed, if the work be not begun on'the mo- 
 ther's lap, a most important period has been suflered to 
 pass unimproved ; — yet the church has a duty to perform 
 in this matter which is seldom realized. It is hers, by 
 her pastor and eldership, to stimulate and guide parents in 
 this arduous and momentous labour ; to see that proper 
 schools for her baptized youth are formed or selected ; to 
 put the Bible, and suitable Catechisms, and other com- 
 pends of religious truth into their hands ; to convene them 
 at stated intervals for instruction, exhortation, and prayer; 
 to remind them from time to time, with parental tender- 
 ness, of their duty to confess Christ, and recognize their 
 relation to his church, by their own personal act ; and, if 
 they fall into gross error, or open immorality, or continue 
 to neglect religion, to exercise toward them, with pa- 
 rental affection, and yet with firmness, that discipline 
 whicli Christ has appointed expressly for the benefit of 
 all the members, and especially of the youthful members 
 of his covenanted family. If this plan were faithfully 
 pursued with our baptized youth, I am constrained to con- 
 pur with the pious Mr. Baxter in believing, that in niae^ 
 
SERMON?) ON BAPTISM. 79 
 
 teen cases out of twenty, our children, consecrated to 
 God in their infancy, would grow up dutiful, sober, or- 
 derly, and serious, and before they reached mature age, 
 recognize their membership by a personal act, with sin- 
 cerity and to edification. Happy era! When shall the 
 church of God be blessed with such fidelity, and with 
 such results ? 
 
SERMON III. 
 
 THE MODE OF ADMINISTERING BAPTISM. 
 
 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized ? — 
 Acts X. 47. 
 
 Having endeavoured, in the preceding discourses, to 
 show that the baptism of infants is a scriptural and reason- 
 able service, I now proceed to inquire into the mode in 
 which this ordinance ought to be administered. 
 
 And here, it is well known, that there is a very serious 
 diversity of opinion. On the one hand, our Baptist brethren 
 believe that there is no true baptism unless the whole body 
 be plunged under water. While on the other hand, we, 
 and a very great majority of the Christian world, maintain 
 that the mode of baptism by sprinkling or affusion is a 
 method just as valid and lawful as any other. It will be 
 my object, in the present discourse, to support the latter 
 opinion; or rather to maintain, from Scripture, and from the 
 best usage of the Christian church, that baptism by sprink- 
 ling or affusion not only rests on as good authority as 
 immersion ; but that it is a method decisively more scrip- 
 tural, suitable, and edifying. 
 
 From the very nature of this subject it will require some 
 little extent of discussion to place it in a proper light, and 
 some closeness of attention to apprehend and follow the 
 arguments which may be employed. Let me then request 
 from you a candid and patient hearing. If I know my own 
 heart, it is my purpose to exhibit the subject in the light 
 of truth ; and to advance nothing but that which appears to 
 rest on the authority of Him who instituted the ordinance 
 under consideration, and who is alone competent to declare 
 liis will concerning it. And,. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 81 
 
 1. Let us attend to the real meaning of the orighial 
 word tvhich is employed in the New Testament to express 
 this sacramental rite. 
 
 The Greek word fSartft^u, which we translate baptize, 
 from the circumstance of its having been so constantly and 
 so long the subject of earnest discussion; and from its near 
 resemblance to the English word which we employ to 
 render it, (or, we might rather say, its identity with that 
 word) has become so familiar with the public mind, that it 
 may almost be regarded as a naturalized term of our lan- 
 guage. 
 
 Now, we contend, that this word does not necessarily, 
 nor even commonly, signify to immerse ; but also implies 
 to wash, to sprinkle, to pour on water, and to tinge or 
 dye with any liquid ; and, therefore, accords very well with 
 the mode of baptism by sprinkling or affusion. 
 
 I am aware, indeed, that our Baptist brethren, as before 
 intimated, believe, and confidently assert, that the only 
 legitimate and authorized meaning of this word, is to im- 
 merse ; and that it is never employed, in a single case, in 
 any part of the Bible, to express the application of water 
 in any other manner. I can venture, my friends, to assure 
 you, with the utmost confidence, that this representation is 
 wholly incorrect. I can assure you, that the word which 
 we render baptize, does legitimately signify the application 
 of water in any way, as well as by immersion. Nay, I 
 can assure you, if the most mature and competent Greek 
 scholars that ever lived may be allowed to decide in this 
 case, that many examples of the use of this word occur in 
 Scripture, in which it not only may, but manifestly must 
 signify sprinkling, perfusion, or washing in any way. 
 Without entering into the minute details of Greek criticism 
 in reference to this term, which would be neither suitable 
 to our purpose, nor consistent with our limits ; it will suf- 
 fice to refer to a few of those passages of Scripture which 
 will at once illustrate and confirm the position which I have 
 laid down. 
 
 Thus, when the Evangelists tell us that the Scribes and 
 Pharisees invariably " washed (in the original, baptized) 
 their hands before dinner;'* when we are told that, when 
 they come in from the market, " except they wash, (in the 
 
82 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 original, 'except they baptize') they eat not;" when we 
 read of the Pharisees being so scrupulous about the " wash- 
 ing (in the original, the ' baptizing') of cups, and pots, and 
 brazen vessels, and tables;" when our Saviour speaks of 
 his disciples being "baptized with the Holy Ghost," in 
 manifest allusion to the pouring out of the Holy Spirit on 
 the day of Pentecost; when John the Baptist predicted, 
 that they should be " baptized with the Holy Ghost, and 
 with fire," in reference to the Holy Ghost sitting upon 
 each of them as with " cloven tongues of fire" on the same 
 day : when we find the apostle representing the children of 
 Israel as all baptized by a cloud passing over without 
 touching them ; and also as baptized in the Red Sea, when 
 we know that none of them were immersed in passing 
 through, or, at most, only sprinkled by the spray of the 
 watery walls on each side ; for we are expressly told that 
 they went through '•''dry shocW'' when Judas, in celebrating 
 the Paschal supper with his Master, in dipping a morsel of 
 bread on a bunch of herbs in the " sop" in the dish, is said^ 
 by Christ himself, to " baptize his hand in the dish," (as- 
 it is in the original, Matt. xxvi. 23.) which no one can 
 imagine implies the immersion of his whole hand in the 
 gravy of which they were all partaking ; I say, when the 
 word *' baptize" is used in these and similar senses, it 
 surely cannot mean in any of these cases to immerse or 
 plunge. If a man is said by the inspired Evangelist to 
 be baptized, when his hands only are washed; and if 
 " tables" (or couches, on which they reclined at meals, as 
 appears from the original) are spoken of as "baptized," 
 when the cleansing of water Avas applied to them in any 
 manner, and when the complete immersion of them in 
 water is out of the question ; surely nothing can be plainer 
 than that the Holy Spirit who endited the Scriptures, does 
 not restrict the meaning of this Avord to the idea of plung- 
 ing, or total immersion. 
 
 Again; the New Testament meaning of this term appears 
 from the manner in which it is applied to the ablutions of 
 the ceremonial economy. The apostle, in writing to the 
 Hebrews, and speaking of the Jewish ritual, says, "It 
 stood only in meats and drinks and divers washings," (in 
 the original, "divers baptisms.") Now we know that b-y 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 83 
 
 far the greater part of these " divers washiiigs" were accom- 
 plished by sprinkling and affusion, and not by immersion. 
 The blood of the Paschal Lamb was directed to be 
 ** sprinkled" on the door-posts of the Israelites, as a token 
 of Jehovah's favovn*, and of protection from death. When 
 they entered into covenant with God at Sinai, their solemn 
 vows were directed to be sealed by a similar sign. After 
 Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according 
 to the law, and they had given their consent, and promised 
 to obey ; he took the blood of the sacrifice, and water, and 
 "sprinkled" both the book and the people, (Heb. ix. 19.) 
 On the great day of atonement, when the High Priest went 
 into the most Holy Place, he ''sprinkled" the blood of the 
 sacrifice on the Mercy Seat, as a token of propitiation and 
 cleansing. When any individual was to be cleansed, and 
 delivered from legal guilt, the blood of the sacrifice was to 
 be " sprinkled" upon him seven times. In like manner at 
 other times, the consecrated oil was to be sprinkled upofi 
 him who applied for deliverance from pollution. 
 
 Thus the people were to be ceremonially delivered from 
 their uncleanness.* When Aaron and his sons were set 
 apart to their office, they were sprinkled with blood, as a 
 sign of purification. When tents or dwelling houses were 
 to be cleansed from pollution, it was done, among other 
 things, by sprinkling them with water. When the vessels, 
 used in domestic economy, were to be ceremonially 
 cleansed, the object was effected in the same manner, by 
 sprinkling them with water.t In a few cases, and but a 
 few, the mode of cleansing by plunging into water is pre- 
 scribed. Now, these are the " divers baptisms" of which 
 the apostle speaks. It is worthy of notice that they are 
 divers, (6ta9opotj. ) If they had been of one kind — immer- 
 sion only — this term could not with propriety have been 
 used. But they were of diflferent kinds — some sprinkling, 
 others pouring, some scouring and rinsing, (see Leviticus 
 vi. 28.) and some plunging; but all pronounced by the 
 inspired apostle to be baptism. 
 
 * See Exodus, xxix. 40 ; Leviticus, i. 3, 4, 5. 8, 9. 14 and ]5 chap- 
 ters; Numbers, 19th chapter, and Deuteronomy, 12th and 15th chap- 
 ters. 
 
 t See Numbers, xix. 17 — ^22. 
 
84 SER3I0NS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 But, happily, the inspired apostle does not leave us in 
 doubt what those "divers baptisms" were, of which he 
 speaks. He singles out and presents sprinkling as his 
 chosen and only specimen. "For, (says he, in the 13th 
 19th and 21st verses of the same chapter, explaining what 
 he means by ' divers baptisms,') if the blood of bulls, 
 and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer, sj)rinkling the un- 
 clean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much 
 more shall the blood of Christ, &c. For when Moses liad 
 spoken every precept to all the people, according to the 
 law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, 
 and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book 
 and all the people. Moreover, he sprinkled likewise with 
 blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the minis- 
 try." If the apostle understood his own meaning, then, it is 
 manifest that in speaking of " divers baptisms," he had a 
 principal reference to the application of blood and of water 
 by sprinkling. 
 
 In short, it is perfectly manifest, to ever}'- one competent 
 to judge in the case, that the Greek words which we trans- 
 late baptize and baptism, do undoubtedly signify, in a num- 
 ber of cases, in both the Old and New Testaments, the 
 washing Avith water, or the application of water in any 
 way. To immerse, is, undoubtedly, one of the senses 
 which may be applied to the words. But it is so far from 
 being the universal, the necessary meaning, as our Baptist 
 brethren assert, that it is not even the common meaning. 
 And I am well persuaded that the venerable Dr. Owen, 
 certainly one of the greatest and best men of the day in 
 which he lived, is borne out by truth when he pronounces, 
 " That no one instance can be given in Scripture, in which 
 the word which we render baptize, does necessarily signify 
 either to dip or plunge." In every case the word admits 
 of a diflferent sense ; and it is really imposing on public 
 credulity to insist that it always does, and necessarily must 
 signify immersion.* 
 
 * See this point set in a clear and strong- light by the Rev. Dr. 
 Woods, in his " Lectures on Infant Baptism ;" by the Rev. Professor 
 Stuart, in the "Bibhcal Repository," No. 10; by the Rev. Professor 
 Pond, of Maine, in his "Treatise on Christian Baptism;" in the 
 ♦' Biblical Repertory," Vol. III. p. 475, &-c. &c. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTIS»I. 85 
 
 In like manner, if we examine the senses manifestly- 
 attached to jSarttoi and jSartT't^tu, by the best Greek classical 
 writers, as shown by the ablest lexicographers and critics, 
 the same result will be established ; in other words, it will 
 appear that these words are used, and often used, to express 
 the ideas of cleansing, pouring, washing, wetting, and 
 tinging, or dyeing, as well as immersion: and, of course, 
 that no certain evidence in favour of the doctrine of our 
 Baptist brethren, can be derived from this source. Indeed, 
 a late eminent anti-poedobaptist writer, while he strenu- 
 ously maintains that /BaTtft^co, always signifies to immerse, 
 acknowledges that he has " all the lexicographers and 
 commentators against him in that opinion."* How far the 
 confidence which, in the face of this acknowledgment, he 
 expresses, that they are all wrongs and that his interpreta- 
 tion alone is right, is either modest or well-founded, must 
 be left to the impartial reader. 
 
 It is evident, then, that our Baptist brethren can gain 
 nothing by an appeal to the original word employed in the 
 New Testament to express this ordinance. It decides 
 nothing. All impartial judges — by which I mean all the 
 most profound and mature Greek scholars, who are neither 
 theologians nor sectarians— agree in pronouncing, that the 
 term in question imports the application of water by 
 sprinkling, pouring, tinging, wetting, or in any other way, 
 as well as by plunging the whole body under it. 
 
 2. There is nothing in the thing signified by baptism 
 which renders immersion m,ore necessary or proper than 
 any other mode of applying loater in this ordinance. 
 
 Our Baptist brethren suppose and insist that there is 
 something in the emblematical meaning of baptism, which 
 renders dipping or plunging the only proper mode of 
 administering the ordinance. And hence nothing is more 
 common, among the brethren of that denomination, than to 
 pour ridicule on all other modes of baptizing, as entirely 
 deficient in meaning and expressiveness. I am persuaded, 
 my friends, that the slightest examination of the subject 
 will convince every impartial inquirer that there is no solid 
 ground for this representation. 
 
 * Carson on Baptism, p. 79. 
 H 
 
86 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 It is granted, on all hands, that the thing principally sig- 
 nified by baptism, is the renovation and sanctification ol" the 
 heart, by the cleansing influences of the Holy Spirit. 
 This was, undoubtedly, the blessing of which circumcision 
 was an emblem. It signified, as the inspired apostle tells 
 us, " the putting off" the body of the sins of the flesh."* 
 " He is not a Jew," says the same apostle, " who is one 
 outwardly ; neither is that circumcision which is outward 
 in the flesh ; but he is a Jew which is one inwardly ; and 
 circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in 
 the letter. "t In like manner, baptism signifies the reno- 
 vation of the heart by the special operation of the Spirit of 
 God. It is intended ever to keep us in mind, by a very 
 significant and striking emblem, that we are all by nature 
 polluted and guilty, and that we stand in need of the 
 pardoning and purifying grace of God by a crucified Re- 
 deemer. 
 
 Now, when the inspired writers speak of imparting the 
 influences of the Holy Spirit to the children of men, by 
 what kind of figure is that blessing commonly expressed? 
 I answer — as every one who is familiar with the Bible will 
 concur in answering — much more frequently by sprinkling 
 and pouring out, than by any other form of expression. 
 Thus the prophet Isaiah speaks again and again of the 
 spirit being poured out upon the people from on high.J 
 Take a single specimen — I will pour water upon him that 
 is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground ; I will pour my 
 spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine oflspring. 
 The prophets, Ezekiel, Joel, and Zechariah, repeatedly 
 employ the same language ;§ and this form of expression 
 is also found more than once in the New Testament. || 
 Indeed it seems to be the favourite language of the Spirit of 
 God when speaking on this subject. In other places the 
 term sprinkling is employed to express the same idea. 
 Accordingly, Jehovah says, by the prophet Ezekiel, 'I 
 will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean : 
 
 * Colossians, ii. 11. 
 t Romans, ii. 28, 29. 
 
 I Isaiah, xxxii. 15 ; xliv. 3. 
 
 § Ezekiel, xxxix.29. Joel, ii. 28, 29. Zechariah, xii. 10. 
 
 II Acts, ii. 17, 18; x. 45. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 87 
 
 from all your filthiness, and from all your idols will I 
 cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new 
 spirit will I put within you ; and I will take away the stony 
 heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of 
 flesh.* And, in like manner, the prophet Isaiah, when 
 speaking of the coming of the Messiah, and the benefits 
 accruing to the church in New Testament times, foretels — 
 "So shall he sprinkle many nations."! Again, this divine 
 sanctifying influence in its application to men, is represent- 
 ed by the Psalmist, and by the prophet Hosea, under the 
 similitude of rain, which we know descends in drops, 
 sprinkling the earth, and its verdant furniture. :j: " He shall 
 come down like rain upon the mown grass ; as showers 
 that water the earth." 
 
 But to come still nearer to the point in hand. We have 
 not only seen that whenever the inspired writers wish to 
 express the idea of the Holy Spirit being imparted to men, 
 either to sanctify their hearts, or to furnish them with mi- 
 raculous powers, the figure of "pouring out" is, in almost 
 all cases, adopted, and that of immersion never ; but, fur- 
 ther, when they use the specific term which expresses the 
 ordinance before us; when they speak of the "baptism 
 of the Spirit," how do they explain it ? Hear the expla- 
 nation by the Master himself. The Saviour, after his 
 resurrection, told his disciples, that " John truly baptized 
 with water, but they should be baptized with the Holy 
 Ghost" not many days from that time, (Acts i. 4, 5.) and 
 directing them to remain in Jerusalem until this promise 
 should be fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. And how did 
 the Holy Spirit baptize the people then? By immersion?' 
 Not at all; but by being "poured out." Accordingly, the 
 apostle Peter, in giving an account to his brethren of what 
 occured in the house of Cornelius, declares: "And as I 
 began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them,, as on us at 
 the beginning, (that is at the beginning of the New Testa- 
 ment economy, on the day of Pentecost.) Then remem- 
 bered I the words of the Lord, ho\A- he said, John, indeed 
 baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the 
 
 » Ezekiel, xxxvi. 25, 26. t Ezek. lii. 15. 
 
 t Psalm, Ixxii. 6. Hosea, vi. 3. 
 
88 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 Holy Ghost." (Acts xi. 15, 16.) The baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost, then, consisted in the pouring out^ or effu- 
 sion of the Holy Ghost. This was the baptism predicted 
 by the prophets. This was the baptism which our Lord 
 himself promised. And this was the baptism realized on 
 the day of Pentecost. I ask, again, was this immersion? 
 Yet it was baptism. And here^ we may add, is an indubi- 
 table example of the word baptism being used in a sense 
 which cannot possibly imply immersion. 
 
 Surely it is not without design or meaning, that we find 
 language of this kind so generally, I might almost say, so 
 uniformly used. Can a single instance be produced from 
 the Word of God in which the cleansing influences of the 
 Holy Spirit are symbolized by dipping or plunging into 
 water, or into oil or blood ? Or can a single example be 
 found in which believers are represented as being dipped 
 or plunged into the Holy Ghost ? No such example is 
 recollected. Whenever the inspired writers speak of the 
 Holy Spirit being imparted to the children of men, either 
 in his sanctifying power, or his miraculous gifts, they 
 never represent the benefit under the figure of immersion; 
 but always, unless my memory deceives me, by the figures 
 of "sprinkling," "pouring out," "falling," or "resting 
 upon" from on high. Now, if baptism, so far as it has a 
 symbolical meaning, is intended to represent the cleansing 
 of the Holy Spirit, as all agree ; it is evident that no mode 
 of applying the baptismal water can be more strikingly 
 adapted to convey its symbolical meaning, or more strongly 
 expressive of the great benefit which the ordinance is in- 
 tended to hold forth and seal, than sprinkling or pouring. 
 Nay, is it not manifest that this mode of administering the 
 ordinance, is far tnore in accordance with Bible language, 
 and Bible allusion, than any other? Surely, then, bap- 
 tism by sprinkling or affusion, would have been treated 
 with less scorn by our Baptist brethren, if they had recol- 
 lected that these are, invariably, the favourite figures of 
 the inspired writers when they speak of the richest cove- 
 nant blessings which the Spirit of God imparts to his be* 
 loved people. Surely all attempts to turn this mode of ap- 
 plying the sacramental water in baptism into ridicule, is 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 89 
 
 really nothing less than shameless ridicule of the state- 
 ments and the language of God's own word ! 
 
 3. The circumstances attending the several cases of 
 baptism, recorded in the New Testament, render it highly 
 probable, not to say morally certain, that the immersioti 
 of the whole body could not have been the mode of bap- 
 tism then commonly adopted. 
 
 The baptism of the three thousand converts made by 
 the instrumentality of Peter's preaching, on the day of 
 Pentecost, is the first remarkable instance of Christian 
 baptism which occurs in the New Testament history. 
 Christ had promised, before he left his disciples, that he 
 would send to them his Holy Spirit, and the favourite ex- 
 pression by which he was accustomed to designate this 
 gift, was that he would pour out the Holy Spirit upon 
 them. Accordingly, in ten days after his ascension to 
 heaven, he was pleased, in a most extraordinary manner, 
 to fulfil his promise. The spirit was poured out with a 
 power unknown before. And, what is remarkable, the 
 apostle Peter assures the assembled multitude, that what 
 they then witnessed was a fulfilment of the prediction by 
 the prophet Joel, that the Holy Spirit should be imparted 
 in a manner prefigured by the term pouring out, or affu- 
 sion. Three thousand were converted under the over- 
 whelming impression of divine truth, dispensed in a single 
 sermon; and were all baptized, and "added to the 
 church" in a single day. From the short account given 
 of this wonderful transaction, we gather, that the multitude 
 on whom this impression was made, was convened in some 
 part of the temple. They seem to have come together 
 about the third hour of the day, that is, nine o'clock in 
 the morning, according to the Jewish mode of computing 
 time. At least, when Peter rose to commence his sermon,, 
 that was the hour. Besides the discourse of which we 
 have a sketch in the chapter containing the account, we are 
 told he exhorted and testified with many other words. All 
 these services, together with receiving the confession of 
 three thousand converts, must unavoidably have consumed 
 several hours ; leaving only four or five hours, at the ut- 
 most, for baptizing the whole number. But they were 
 all baptized that same day. We read nothing, however^ 
 
90 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 of the apostles taking the converts away from " Solomon's 
 Porch," or wherever else they were assembled, to any 
 river or stream for the sake of baptizing them. Indeed, at 
 that season of the year, there was no river or brook in the 
 immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem, which would ad- 
 mit of immersing a human being. Besides, is it likely 
 that this great multitude, most of whom were probably 
 strangers in Jerusalem, could have been furnished with 
 such a change of raiment as health and decorum required ^ 
 or that they could have been baptized without clothing 
 altogether; or remained on the ground, through the public 
 exercises, in their wet clothes? Surely all these supposi- 
 tions are so utterly improbable that they may be confi-- 
 dently rejected But, above all, was it physically possible,, 
 supposing all the apostles to have officiated in the adminis- 
 tration of this ordinance, for twelve men to have immersed 
 three thousand persons in four or five hours ; which we 
 have seen must have been the case, if, as is evident, the 
 preaching, the examination of candidates, and the baptiz- 
 ing of the whole number took place after nine' o'clock in 
 the forenoon? Those who have witnessed a series of 
 baptisms by immersion know how arduous and exhausting 
 is the bodily effort which it requires. To immerse a sin- 
 gle person, with due decorum and solemnity, will un- 
 doubtedly require from five to six minutes. Of course, to 
 immerse one hundred, would consume, at this rate, be- 
 tween nine and ten hours. Now, even if so much time 
 could possibly be assigned to this part of the work, on the 
 same day, which is plainly inadmissible, can we suppose 
 that the twelve apostles stood, for nine or ten hours, them- 
 selves, in the water, constantly engaged in a series of ef- 
 forts among the most severe and exhausting to human 
 strength that can well be undertaken?* To imagine this, 
 
 * " A gentleman of veracity told the writer, that he was once pre- 
 sent when forty-seven were dipped in one day, in tlie usual way. 
 The first operator began, and went through the ceremony, until he 
 had dipped twenty-Jive persons; when he was so fatigued, that he 
 was compelled to give it up to the other, who with g'-eat apparent 
 difficulty dipped the other twenty-two. Both appeared completely 
 exhausted, and went off the ground into a house hard by, to change 
 their clothes and refresh themselves." Scripture Directory for Bap- 
 tism by a Layman^ 14. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 91 
 
 would be among the most improbable, not to say extrava- 
 gant imaginations that could be formed on such a subject. 
 Yet even this supposition, unreasonable as it is, falls far 
 short of providmg for even one half of the requisite num- 
 ber. The man, therefore, who can believe that the three 
 thousand on the day of Pentecost were baptized by im- 
 mersion, must have great faith, and a wonderful facility in 
 accommodating his belief to his wishes. 
 
 With regard to the baptism of John, many of the same 
 remarks are entirely applicable. Our Baptist brethren uni- 
 versally take for granted that John's baptism was per- 
 formed by immersion ; and on the ground of that assump- 
 tion, they speak with great confidence of their mode of 
 baptism as the only lawful mode. Now, even if it were 
 certain that the forerunner of Christ had always baptized 
 by immersion, still it would be little to the purpose, since 
 it is plain that John's baptism was not Christian baptism. 
 Had this been the case, then, it is evident, that a large 
 part of the population of " Jerusalem and Judea, and of 
 the region round about Jordan," would have been profes- 
 sing Christians. But was it so? Every reader of the 
 New Testament history knows it was not; that, on the 
 contrary, it is apparent from the whole narrative, that a 
 great majority of those whom John baptized, continued to 
 stand aloof from the Saviour. But what decides this 
 point, beyond the possibility of appeal or cavil, is the 
 statement in the nineteenth chapter of the Acts of the 
 Apostles, where we are told that some who had received 
 John's baptism, were afterwards baptized in the name of 
 the Lord Jesus. Some opponents of this conclusion have 
 suggested that in the narrative given of this transac- 
 tion, (Acts xix. 1-6.) we are to consider the 5th verse, 
 not as the language of the inspired historian, but as a 
 continuation of Paul's discourse, as recorded in the 4th 
 verse. Professor Stuart, in his remarks on the '' Mode of 
 Baptism," in the " Biblical Repository," (No. X. 386.) has 
 shown conclusively that this gloss is wh(>lly inadmissible ; 
 and even leads to the most evident absurdity. But there 
 is no evidence, and I M^ill venture to say, no probability, 
 that John ever baptized by immersion. The evangelists 
 informs us thai he baptized great multitudes. It appears. 
 
92 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 as before suggested, that "all Jerusalem, and all Judea, 
 and the region round about Jordan,'' flocked to his minis- 
 try, and " were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing 
 their sins." Some have supposed that he baptized two 
 millions of people. But suppose the number to be one- 
 twentieth part of this computation. The smallest estimate 
 that we can consider as answering the description of the 
 inspired historians is, that he baptized one hundred thou- 
 sand individuals. And this, in about one year and a half. 
 That is, he must have immersed nearly two hundred, 
 upon an average, every day, dnting the whole of the 
 period in question. Now, I ask, is it possible for human 
 strength, day after day, for more than five hundred days 
 together, to undergo such labour ? It cannot be imagined. 
 The thing is not merely improbable ; it is impossible. 
 To accomplish so much, it would have been necessary 
 that the zealous Baptist should spend the whole of every 
 day standing in the water, for a year and a half, and even 
 this would have failed altogether of being sufficient. I say 
 again, with confidence, it is impossible. 
 
 But that John baptized by immersion is utterly incredi- 
 ble on another account. Can we imagine that so great a 
 multitude could have been provided on the spot with con- 
 venient changes of raiment to admit of their being plunged 
 consistently with their health ? Or can we suppose that 
 the greater part of their number, Avould remain for hours 
 on the ground in their wet clothes ? And if not, would de- 
 cency have permitted multitudes of both sexes to appear, 
 and to undergo the administration of the ordinance in that 
 mode, in a state of entire nakedness? Surely we need 
 not wait for an answer. Neither supposition is admissible. 
 
 Nor is this reasoning at all invalidated by the statement 
 of one of the evangelists, that John " baptized at Enon, 
 near Salem, because there was much water tliere;'* or, as 
 it is in the original, *' because there were many waters 
 there. For, independently of immersion altogether, plen- 
 tiful streams of water were absolutely necessary for the 
 constant refreshment and sustenance of the many thou- 
 sands who were encamped from day to day, to witness the 
 preaching and the baptism of this extraordinary man; 
 together with the beasts employed for their transportation. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 93 
 
 Only figure to yourselves a large encampment of men, 
 women, and children, consisting almost continually of 
 many thousand souls, continuing together for a number of 
 days in succession ; constantly coming and going ; and all 
 this in a warm climate, where springs and wells of water 
 were comparatively rare and precious ; only figure to your- 
 selves such an assemblage, and such a scene, and you will 
 be at no loss to perceive why it was judged important to 
 convene them near the banks of abundant streams of water. 
 Had not this been done, they must, in a few hours, have 
 either quitted the ground, or suffered real distress. 
 
 It is evident, then, that often and confidently as the bap- 
 tism of John has been cited as conclusive, in favour of im- 
 mersion, it cannot be considered as afibrding the least solid 
 ground for such a conclusion. There is not the smallest 
 probability that he ever baptized an individual in this man- 
 ner. As a poor man, who lived in the wilderness ; whose 
 raiment was of the meanest kind ; and whose food was 
 such alone as the desert afforded ; it is not to be supposed 
 that he possessed appropriate vessels for administering 
 baptism to multitudes by pouring or sprinkling. He, 
 therefore, seems to have made use of the neighbouring 
 stream of water for this purpose, descending its banks, and 
 setting his feet on its margin, so as to admit of his using a 
 handful, to answer the symbolical purpose intended by the 
 application of water in baptism. 
 
 The circumstances attending the baptism of our blessed 
 Saviour by John, have been often adduced by our Baptist 
 brethren as strongly favouring the practice of immersion ; 
 but when they are examined, they will be found to afford 
 no real aid to that cause. In our common translation, 
 indeed, the Evangelist Matthew tells us, (ch. iii. 16.) That 
 Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of 
 the water, &c. ; and the Evangelist Mark tells us, (ch. i. 
 9, 10.) That Jesus was baptized of John in Jordan ; and 
 straightway, coming up out of the water, he saw the 
 heavens opened, &c. This is considered by many super- 
 ficial readers as decisive in establishing the fact that .im- 
 mersion must have been used on that occasion ; but the 
 moment we look into the original, it becomes evident that 
 the language of both the Evangelists imports only that 
 
94 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 Jesus, after he was baptized, went up from the water, that 
 is, ascended the banks from the river. Nothing more is, 
 unquestionably, imported by the terms used ; and this leaves 
 the mode of administering the ordinance altogether unde- 
 cided. Laying aside his sandals, he might only have 
 stepped a few inches into the river, or he might have gone 
 merely to the water's edge, without stepping into it at all.* 
 
 The baptism of Paul, by Ananias, is another of the 
 scriptural examples of the administration of the ordinance 
 in question, which yet affords not the smallest hint or pre- 
 sumption in favour of immersion ; but rather the contrary. 
 
 We are told that Paul, the infuriated persecutor, while 
 " breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the 
 disciples of the Lord," was met on his way to Damascus, 
 and by the mighty power of the Saviour whom he perse- 
 cuted, was stricken down, and fell prostrate and blind to 
 the ground. In this feeble state he was lifted up, and "led 
 by the hand, and carried into Damascus ; and he was there 
 three days Avithout sight, and did neither eat nor drink." 
 In these circumstances, Ananias, a servant of God, is di- 
 rected to go to him, and teach him what to do. "And 
 Ananias," we are told, " went his way, and entered into the 
 house; and putting his hands on him, said, Brother Saul, 
 the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way, 
 as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive 
 thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And now, 
 why tarriest thou ? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away 
 thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. And immedi- 
 ately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales ; and he 
 received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. 
 And when he had received meat he was strengthened."! 
 
 The attentive reader will, no doubt, take notice that in 
 this narrative there is not a single turn of expression which 
 looks like baptizing by immersion. There is no hint that 
 Paul changed his raiment ; or that he and Ananias went 
 out of the house to a neighbouring pond or stream. On 
 the contrary, every part of the statement wears a different 
 
 * See a very luminous and satisfactory view of the record of this 
 baptism, by Professor Stuart, of Andover, in the Biblical Repository, 
 No. X. p. 319, 320. 
 
 t Acts, ix. and xxii. compared. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 95 
 
 aspect. Paul, when Ananias went to him, was evidently 
 extremely feeble. He was sitting or lying in the house, 
 perfectly blind, and having taken no sustenance for three 
 days. Can it be imagined that a wise and humane man, 
 in these circumstances, would have had him carried forth, 
 and plunged into cold water, which, in his exhausted state, 
 would have been equally distressing and dangerous ? It 
 cannot be for a moment supposed. Nothing like it is 
 hinted. Ananias simply directs him to " stand up and be 
 baptized." " And immediately there fell from his eyes as 
 it had been scales ; and he received sight forthwith, and 
 arose, and was baptized." It was after the baptism, as 
 we learn, that he received sustenance and was " strength- 
 ened." It would really seem as if no impartial reader 
 could receive any other impression from this account, than 
 that Paul stood up, in the apartment, in which Ananias 
 found him, and there received baptism by pouring or 
 sprinkling on him a small quantity of that water which is 
 applied in this ordinance as a symbol of spiritual cleansing. 
 Again, the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch, when duly 
 considered, will be found equally remote from affording the 
 smallest countenance to that conclusion in favour of immer- 
 sion, which has been so often and so confidently drawn 
 from it. 
 
 The eunuch was travelling on the public high way, when 
 Philip met him. They had been reading and commenting 
 on a prophecy of the Messiah, in which mention is made 
 of his sprinkling many nations. When they came to a 
 rivulet of water, the eunuch said, ' See, here is water, what 
 doth hinder me to be baptized?' Philip had, no doubt, 
 been explaining to him the nature, design, and obligation 
 of this ordinance, or he would not have been likely to ask 
 such a question. The servant of God consented to baptize 
 him; and, as they were travelling, and probably destitute 
 of any convenient vessel for dipping up a portion of water 
 from the stream, they both went down to the water, proba- 
 bly no further than to its margin ; far enough to take up a 
 small portion of it to sprinkle or pour on the eunuch. The 
 narrative, in the original, ascertains nothing more than that 
 they both went to and from the water. In our translation, 
 indeed, it is said, they both went down into the water, and 
 
96 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 came up out of the water. But, when we look into the 
 original text, we find the strict meaning of the terms em- 
 ployed, to be, that Philip and the eunuch went down the 
 banks to the water, and coming from the water, reascended 
 the banks again, to the place where the chariot in which 
 they rode had been left. The same form of expression is 
 used as in the case of Peter and the tribute money, (Matt. 
 xvii. 27.) " Go thou to the sea, and cast an hook," &c. 
 Here we cannot suppose that our Lord meant to command 
 Peter to plunge into the sea, but .only to go to the water's 
 edge, and cast in a hook. The same form of expres- 
 sion is also employed in many other passages of the 
 New Testament, where immersion is wholly out of the 
 question : As in John, ii. 12, where it is said, Jesus went 
 down to Capernaum ; Acts vii. 15, Jacob went down into 
 Egypt; Acts xviii. 22, He went down to Antioch, &c. 
 Surely, no one will dream of immersion in any of these 
 cases. There is nothing, then, in any of the language here 
 used, which necessarily, or even probably, implies immer- 
 sion. At any rate, the terms employed apply equally to 
 both. There is the same evidence that Philip was plunged, 
 as that the eunuch was. It is said they both went to the 
 water. Nor can we consider it as at all likely that, in the 
 circumstances in which they were placed as travellers, they 
 were either of them immersed. It is plain, therefore, that 
 all the confidence which our Baptist brethren have so often 
 expressed, that the case of the Ethiopian eunuch is a cer- 
 tain example of immersion, must be regarded as presenting 
 no solid evidence in their favour, and as really amounting 
 to a gross imposition on popular credulity. 
 
 The next remarkable instance of baptism recorded in the 
 New Testament, is that of Cornelius and his household. 
 Cornelius, a " devout man, who feared God," was directed, 
 in a vision, to send for Peter, the apostle, who should im- 
 part to him the knowledge of the Gospel of Christ. Peter, 
 on his arrival, having ascertained wherefore Cornelius had 
 sent for him, unfolded to him, and to all who were con- 
 vened in his house, the way of salvation. " While he was 
 yet speaking, the Holy Ghost fell upon all of them which 
 heard the word. Then answered Peter, Can any man 
 forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 97 
 
 received the Holy Ghost as well as we ? And he com- 
 manded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." 
 
 In this passage, there is nothing that has the remotest 
 appearance of immersion. No hint is given of the candi- 
 dates for baptism being led out of the house, to a river or 
 pool, for the purpose of being dipped. The language of 
 Peter has an entirely different aspect. " Can any man 
 forbid water ^ that these should not be baptized?" That 
 is, " Can any man forbid water being brought in a conve- 
 nient vessel, to be applied by pouring or sprinkling ?" He 
 had just spoken of the Holy Ghost being poured out upon 
 them ; and what could be more natural than that he should 
 apply water, the emblem of spiritual cleansing, in con- 
 formity with the same striking figure? "They were not 
 dipped into the Holy Ghost; but the Holy Ghost was 
 poured upon them. They were not applied to the Holy 
 Ghost; but the Holy Ghost was applied to them. He 
 "fell upon them;" and the introduction of water, to be 
 applied in a corresponding manner, was immediately au- 
 thorized. 
 
 The baptism of the jailer and his household, at Philippi, 
 still more decisively leads to the same conclusion. If we 
 examine the circumstances which attended this baptism, 
 they will be found to preclude, not merely the probability, 
 but I may say with confidence, the possibility of its having 
 been performed by immersion. Paul and Silas were close- 
 ly confined in prison when this solemn service was per- 
 formed. While they were engaged in " praying and sing- 
 ing praises to God," a great earthquake shook the prison 
 to its foundation, and the bonds of the prisoners were 
 immediately unloosed. The jailer, awaking from his 
 sleep, called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, 
 and fell down before Paul and Silas, and 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, and to all that were in 
 his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, 
 and washed their stripes, and was baptized, he and all his, 
 straightway." This whole transaction, you will observe, 
 occurred a little after midnight, and in a prison, that is, in the 
 outer prison, for the jailer seems to have brought them out 
 
 I 
 
y© SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 of the dungeon, or " inner prison," into some other apart- 
 ment of the edifice. For it was not until next morning, 
 some hours after the baptism, that the magistrates gave the 
 keeper permission to let them out of the prison. He and 
 his family were evidently baptized " the same hour of the 
 night," that is, between midnight, when we are expressly 
 told the earthquake occurred, and day ; and while yet in the 
 place of confinement. Now, I ask, how can we imagine 
 it possible that the jailer and his family should be baptized 
 by immersion, in the circumstances in which they were 
 placed ? We cannot suppose that there was a river, or a 
 pool of water, or a baptistery within the walls of the prison, 
 adapted to meet an occasion as unexpected as any thing 
 could be, which had never occurred there before, and was 
 never likely to occur, in like circumstances again. He 
 who can believe this, must be ready to adopt any supposi- 
 tion, however extravagant, for the sake of an hypothesis. 
 As little can we imagine that Paul and Silas would be 
 dishonest enough to steal out of the prison by night, 
 and accompany the jailer and his family to the river 
 which runs near the city of Philippi, for the purpose of 
 plunging them ; especially as we know, on the one hand, 
 how backward they were, the next morning, to quit the 
 prison, unless brought out by the magistrates who had ille- 
 gally imprisoned them; and, on the other hand, how much 
 terrified the jailer was at the thought of the prisoners 
 escaping from confinement, and of his being responsible 
 even with his own life, for their safe keeping. 
 
 In like manner, we might go over all the other cases of 
 baptism recorded in the New Testament, and show that, 
 in no one case, have we any evidence that the ordinance 
 was administered by immersion. Now, as the disciples of 
 Christ baptized such great multitudes — even more, at one 
 period than John; can we imagine, if the constant, or 
 even the common mode of baptizing had been by plung- 
 ing the whole body under water, and especially, if they 
 had laid great stress on adherence to this mode ; can we 
 imagine, I say, that amidst so many cases of baptism, 
 some term of expression, some incidental circumstance 
 would not have occurred, from which the fact of immer- 
 sion might have been clearly manifested, or irresistibly 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTIS3I. 99 
 
 inferred ? One thing is certain. The inspired writers of 
 the New Testament could not possibly have regarded 
 immersion in baptism in the same light in which it is re- 
 garded by our Baptist brethren. The latter, consider their 
 mode of applying water, as essential to the ordinance. 
 They dwell upon it with unceasing fondness ; introduce it 
 into every discussion ; and lose no opportunity of recom- 
 mending and urging it as that, without which an alleged 
 baptism is a nullity ; nay, an offence to the Head of the 
 church. While the former, though speaking, directly or 
 indirectly on the subject, in almost every page of the New 
 Testament, and under a great variety of aspects, have not 
 stated a single fact, or employed a single term, which 
 evinces that they either preferred or practised immersion in 
 any case. They have stated, indeed, some facts which 
 can scarcely, by possibility, be reconciled with immersion ; 
 but in no instance, have they made a representation which 
 is not entirely reconcileable with the practice of perfusion 
 or sprinkling. On the supposition that the doctrine of our 
 Baptist brethren is true, this is a most unaccountable fact ! 
 What ! not one evangelist or apostle, though taught by the 
 Spirit of God what to say — kind enough, or wise enough, 
 to put this matter beyond a doubt! The unavoidable in- 
 ference is, that the inspired writers did not deem the 
 mode of applying water in baptism, an essential matter ; 
 and did not think it necessary to state it precisely; and, of 
 course, that they differed entirely from our Baptist bre- 
 thren. 
 
 4. Even if it could be proved (which we know it can- 
 not be,) that the mode of baptism adopted in the time of 
 Christ and his apostles, was that of immersion ; yet if that 
 method of administering the ordinance were not signifi- 
 cant of some truth, which the other modes cannot repre- 
 sent, we are plainly at liberty to regard it as a non-essen- 
 tial circumstance, from which we may depart when expe- 
 diency requires it, as we are all wont to do in other cases, 
 even with respect to positive institutions. For example, 
 the Lord's Supper was, no doubt, originally instituted 
 with unleavened bread ; and this was, probably, at first, the 
 common custom. But as being leavened or unleavened 
 
100 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 had nothing to do with the design and scope of the ordi- 
 nance ; as bread of either kind is equally emblematical of 
 that spiritual nourishment which it is intended to repre- 
 sent; most professing Christians, and our Baptist brethren 
 among the rest, feel authorized to celebrate the Lord's Sup- 
 per with leavened bread without the smallest scruple. 
 
 Again: the manner of sitting at the Lord's Supper, was, 
 in conformity with the then prevailing posture at feasts,, 
 to recline on the elbow on a couch. There can be no 
 doubt that this was the uniform posture at the convivial 
 table, at that time ; and in the narratives of the evangelists, 
 we have abundant evidence that the same posture was 
 adopted by our blessed Lord in the institution of the sacra- 
 mental Supper. But as it was only a circumstance con- 
 nected with the habits of those days, we do not feel 
 bound ; and our Baptist brethren among others, do not feel 
 bound, in administering this ordinance, to conform to the 
 original mode. We consider the sacrament as completely 
 and validly dispensed, if bread and wine be reverently re- 
 ceived, in commemoration of the Saviour's death, with any 
 posture of the body. Nay, the example of our Saviour 
 himself, plainly shows that, under a change of circum- 
 stances, non-essential modes, originally used, may be dis- 
 pensed with. The prescribed ritual of the Passover re- 
 quired that the lamb should be eaten with shoes on the 
 feet, and with staves in the hand ; but this custom was not 
 followed by Him or his disciples, and, perhaps, never was 
 observed after the entrance into Canaan. But was the 
 Passover rendered either less perfect, or less useful, for all 
 practical purposes, by this omission ? Surely we need not 
 wait for an answer. 
 
 Now, unless it can be proved, that plunging the body 
 into water, and lifting it out again, was designed to be em- 
 blematical of something which cannot be otherwise ex- 
 pressed, we have full liberty given us by the example of 
 our Lord himself, to consider this mode as an unimportant 
 circumstance. If the cleansing element of water be ap- 
 plied, in any reverential mode, to the human body, the 
 whole symbolical expression of the ordinance is attained, 
 provided convenience and decorum be duly consulted. If 
 
SERMONS OK BAPTISM. 101 
 
 the cleansing or purifying quality of the element used, be 
 the idea intended to be set forth in the emblem ; and if the 
 greater part, as we have seen, of the typical purifications 
 prescribed under the ceremonial economy were effected 
 by sprinkling; it is plain that the emblem is complete, 
 however the cleansing element may be applied. 
 
SERMON IV. 
 
 THE MODE OF ADMINISTERING BAPTISM. 
 
 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized ? — 
 Acts X. 47. 
 
 5. The difficulties attending the administration of 
 baptism by immersion^ in m,any cases, ought to satisfy us 
 that this mode of administering the ordinance cannot be 
 the only valid mode, and is not the most proper and edi~ 
 fying mode. 
 
 It is perfectly evident, to every reflecting mind, that the 
 obstacles which may be conceived, and which very fre- 
 quently, in fact, occur, to render baptism by immersion 
 difficult, if not impracticable, are very many, and very 
 serious. It will be sufficient to hint at a few of the more 
 familiar and obvious. It is well known that some very 
 large districts of country, in various parts of our globe, 
 are so parched and dry, and streams of water so rare, or 
 rather, in many cases, so unknown, for many miles together, 
 that the means of immersing a human body, in any natural 
 stream or pool of water, cannot possibly be obtained but 
 with great trouble and expense; a trouble and expense 
 impracticable to a large portion of every community in- 
 habiting those countries. There are other parts of our 
 globe, near the polar regions, where, during the major por- 
 tion of every year, the constant reign of severe frost, seals 
 up every natural stream and fountain, and renders the im- 
 mersion of a human body not merely difficult, but imprac- 
 ticable, without great labour and cost. Nor is this all ; even 
 in the temperate and well watered latitudes, there are sea- 
 sons of the year, often of four or five month's continuance, 
 when baptism by immersion is generally dangerous, and. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 103 
 
 in many cases, highly so, to the health, and even the lives 
 of both those who administer, and those who receive the 
 ordinance.* And, finally, at all seasons, persons labouring 
 under disease, can never be baptized in this mode, with 
 safety, at all ; and, of course, must be deprived entirely of 
 the privilege of receiving this seal of the Christian cove- 
 nant, so reasonable in itself, and so gratifying to the pious 
 mind. It is also certain, that Baptist ministers who are 
 aged and infirm, can never safely officiate in baptizing in 
 any case; and when they are men remarkably frail and 
 feeble in body, they can never undertake, without manifest 
 danger, to baptize individuals of large stature, or more than 
 common corpulency. To all which may be added, that 
 the public baptism of females, with all the delicacy and 
 care which can possibly be employed, is certainly, as thou- 
 sands attest, a practice little in keeping with those religious 
 feelings and impressions with which it is desirable that 
 every Christian solemnity should be attended. 
 
 Now, contrast all these difficulties, which, surely, form 
 
 * The Rev, Dr. Austin, in his answer to Mr. Merrill, speaks thus — 
 " In besieged cities, where there are thousands, and hundreds of thou- 
 sands of people ; in sandy deserts, like those of Africa, Arabia, and 
 Palestine ; in the northern regions, where the streams, if there be any, 
 are shut up with impenetrable ice; and in severe and extensive 
 droughts, like that which took place in the time of Ahab; sufficiency 
 of water for animal subsistence is scarcely to be procured. Now, 
 suppose God should, according to his predictions, pour out plentiful 
 effusions of his Spirit, so that all the inhabitants of one of these regions 
 or cities, should be born in a day. Upon the Baptist hypothesis, there 
 is an absolute impossibility that they should Lie baptized, while there 
 is this scarcity of water ; and this may last as long as they live." p. 41. 
 
 So also, Mr. Walker, in his " Doctrine of Baptisms," (chapter 10) 
 speaks of a Jew, who, while travelling with Christians, in the time of 
 Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, about sixty or seventy years after the 
 apostles, was converted, fell sick, and desired baptism. Not having 
 water, they sprinkled him thrice with sand, in the name of the Father, 
 the Son, and the Holy Ghost. He recovered, and his case was re- 
 ported to the bishop, (or pastor, there being no prelates then) who de- 
 cided that the man was baptized, {si modo aqua denuo perfunderatur) 
 if he only had water poured on him again. This record shows, not 
 merely that the " difficulties" referred to, are far from being ideal ; 
 but also that when the defect of the baptism by sand was attempted 
 to be supplied, it was not by any sort of immersion, but only by the 
 pouring on of water. 
 
104 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 a mass of no small magnitude, with the entire absence of 
 every difficulty in baptizing by sprinkling or aflusion. 
 According to our plan, which, we have no doubt, is by far 
 the most scriptural and edifying, baptism may be performed 
 with equal ease and convenience in all countries ; at all 
 seasons of the year ; in all situations of health or sickness ; 
 with equal safety by all ministers, whether young or old, 
 athletic or feeble ; and in all circumstances that can well be 
 conceived. How admirably does this accord with the 
 Gospel economy, which is not intended to be confined to 
 any one people, or to any particular climate ; but is equally 
 adapted, in all its principles, and in all its rites to every 
 *' kindred, and people, and nation, and tongue !" 
 
 Accordingly, it is a notorious fact, that, in consideration 
 of the difficulties which have been mentioned as attending 
 immersion, a large body of Baptists, in Holland, I mean 
 the Mennonites, who were once warm and uncompromising 
 contenders for this mode of administering baptism, at 
 length gave it up, and, while they still baptize none but 
 adults, have been, for more than a hundred years, in the 
 practice of pouring water on the head of the candidate, 
 through the hand of the administrator. They found that 
 when candidates for baptism were lying on sick beds ; or 
 confined in prison ; or in a state of peculiarly delicate 
 health ; or in various other unusual situations, which may 
 be easily imagined ; there was so much difficulty, not to 
 say, in some cases, a total impossibility in baptizing by 
 plunging ; that they deliberately, as a denomination, after 
 the death of their first leader, agreed to lay aside, as I said, 
 the practice of immersion, and substituted the plan of affu- 
 sion. 
 
 There is one difficulty more, in reference to the mode of 
 baptism by immersion, of which it is not easy to speak, on 
 an occasion like the present, without appearing to intend 
 ridicule of an ordinance so solemn and important. Fidelity 
 to the subject, however, demands that I speak of it ; and I 
 trust no one will suspect me of a design to make any other 
 than a perfectly grave and fair use of the matter to which I 
 refer. The circumstance to which I allude is, that in the 
 third, fourth, and immediately following centuries — in the 
 days of Cyprian, Cyril, Athanasius, and Chrysostom — 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 105 
 
 when, as all agree, the mode of baptizing by immersion 
 was the most prevalent method ; there is no historical fact 
 more perfectly established, than that whenever baptism was 
 thus administered, the candidate, whether infant or adult, 
 male or female, was entirely divested of all clothing: not 
 merely of outer garments, but, I repeat, of all clothing. No 
 exception was allowed in any case, even when the most 
 timid and delicate female importunately desired it. This 
 fact is established, not only by the most direct and unequiv- 
 ocal statements, and that by a number of writers, but also 
 by the narration of a number of curious particulars connect- 
 ed with this practice.* Among the rest, we are told of 
 scenes of indecorum exhibited in the baptisteries of those 
 days, which convinced the friends of religion that the prac- 
 tice ought to be discontinued, and it M^as finally laid aside. 
 Perhaps it will be asked, whether this fact in the history 
 of Christian baptism is adverted to for the purpose of re- 
 flecting odium, in a sinister and indirect manner, on the 
 practice of immersion ? I answer, by no means ; but sim- 
 ply for the purpose of showing that in tracing the history 
 of baptism by immersion, we have the very same evidence 
 in favour of immersing divested of all clothings that we 
 have for immersing at all ; that, so far as the history of the 
 church, subsequent to the apostolic age, informs us, these 
 two practices must stand or fall together ;t and that an ap- 
 
 * The zealous Baptist, Robert Robinson, bears, on this subject, the 
 following testimony : " The primitive Christians baptized naked. 
 Nothing is easier than to give proof of this by quotations from the 
 authentic writings of the men who administered baptism, and who 
 certainly knew in what way they themselves performed it. There is 
 no ancient historical fact better authenticated than this. The evidence 
 does not go on the evidence of the single word, naked; for then a read- 
 er might suspect allegory; but on facts reported, and many rejisons 
 assigned for the practice." History of Baptism, p. 85. He then 
 quotes several examples dated in the fourth century. 
 
 t The learned Wall speaks on the subject thus: "The ancient 
 Christians, when they were baptized by immersion, were all baptized 
 naked ; whether they were men, women or children. The proofs of 
 this, I shall omit, because it is a clear case. The English Antipoedo- 
 baptisls need not have made so great an outcry against Mr. Baxter 
 for his saying that they baptized naked ; for if they had, it would have 
 been no more than the primitive Christians did. They thought it 
 better represented the putting off the old man, and also thenak^ness 
 
106 
 
 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 pendage to baptism so revolting, so immoral, and so entire- 
 ly inadmissible, plainly shows that those who practised it, 
 must have been chargeable with a superstitious and extra- 
 vagant adoption of a mere form, which, from its character, 
 we are compelled to believe was a human invention, and 
 took its rise in the rudeness of growing superstition, per- 
 haps from a source still more impure and criminal. 
 
 Besides, if the principle for which our Baptist brethren 
 contend, be correct ; if the immersion of the whole body be 
 essential to Christian baptism, and if the thing signified be 
 the cleansing and purifying of the individual by an ablu- 
 tion which must of necessity extend to the whole person ; 
 it would really seem that performing this ceremony, divest- 
 ed of all clothing, is essential to its emblematic meaning. 
 Who ever thought of covering the hands with gloves when 
 they were about to be washed ; or expected really to cleanse 
 them through such a covering ? No wonder, then, when 
 the principle began to find a place in the church, that the 
 submersion of every part of the body in water ; that the 
 literal bathing of the whole person was essential both to the 
 expressiveness and the validity of the emblematical trans- 
 action ; no wonder, I say, that the obvious consequence 
 should soon be admitted, that the whole body ought to be 
 uncovered, as never fails to be the case, with any member 
 of the body which we wish to be successfully cleansed by 
 bathing. And we have no hesitation in saying, that, if we 
 fully adopted the general principle of our Baptist brethren 
 in relation to this matter, we should no more think of sub- 
 jecting the body to that process which must, in order to its 
 validity, be strictly emblematical of a complete spiritual 
 bathing, while covered with clothes ; than we should think, 
 in common life, of washing the hands or the feet, while 
 carefully covered with the articles of dress with wdiich they 
 are commonly clothed. Whereas, if the principle of Poedo- 
 baptists on this subject be adopted, then the solemn appli- 
 cation of water to that part of the body which is an epitome 
 of the whole person, and which is always, as a matter of 
 
 of Christ on the cross. Moreover, as baptism is a washing, they 
 judged it should be the washing of the body, not of the clothes." 
 Wall, Chapter XV. Part II. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 107 
 
 course, uncovered, is amply sufficient to answer every 
 purpose both of emblem and of benefit. 
 
 Besides, let me appeal to our Baptist brethren, by ask- 
 ing, if they verily believe that the primitive and apostolic 
 mode of administering baptism was by immersion, and that 
 this immersion was performed in a state of entire naked- 
 ness; how can they dare, upon their principles, to depart, 
 as to one iota from that mode? Let them not say, that 
 they carefully retain the substance, the essential characters 
 of the plan of immersion. Very true. This is our plea; 
 and it accords very well with what we consider as the 
 correct system ; but in the mouth of a Baptist it is altogether 
 inadmissible. The institute in question is a " positive" 
 one ; and, according to him, we must not depart one jot or 
 tittle from the original plan. 
 
 These considerations, my friends, strike me as affording 
 decisive evidence, that a mode of baptism, attended with so 
 many real and formidable difficulties, cannot be of divine 
 appointment; at any rate that it cannot be universally bind- 
 ing on the Church of God ; and that laying so much stress 
 upon the completeness of the submersion, is servility and 
 superstition. We may say of this ordinance, as our Lord 
 said of the Sabbath, Baptism was made for Tnan, and not 
 mmxfor baptism. Where a particular mode of complying 
 with a religious observance would be, in many cases, " a 
 yoke of bondage," and one, too, for which no divine war- 
 rant could be pleaded, it would surely argue the very sla- 
 very of superstition, to enforce that mode of the observance 
 as essential to a regular standing in the visible family of 
 Christ. 
 
 6. As a further objection to the doctrine of our Baptist 
 brethren in relation to the mode of baptism, let us examine 
 some of the figurative language of Scripture which refers 
 to this ordinance; and especially certain passages on 
 which they are accustomed to place the greatest reliance 
 for the support of their cause. 
 
 Perhaps no passages of Scripture have been more fre- 
 quently and confidently pressed into the service of baptism 
 by immersion than those which are found in Romans vi. 
 3, 4, and Colossians ii. 12. In the former we find the 
 following: "Know ye not, that so many of us as were 
 
108 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ? 
 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death ; 
 that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the 
 glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in new- 
 ness of life." Corresponding with this, in Colossians ii. 12, 
 the following passage occurs : " Buried with him in bap- 
 tism ; wherein also ye are risen with him through the 
 faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from 
 the dead." 
 
 Now, our Baptist brethren, believing and insisting that 
 baptism and immersion ought to be considered, in all cases, 
 as synonymous terms, take for granted that the expression, 
 " Buried with him in baptism," is intended to refer to the 
 resemblance between the interment of a dead body, and its 
 subsequent resurrection from beneath the surface of the 
 earth; and the immersion of a baptized person entirely 
 under the water, and raising him up again from beneath the 
 surface of the fluid. In a word, our Baptist brethren assure 
 us, that the design of the apostle in these passages is to 
 say, that " the baptized person's communion with Christ 
 in his death and burial, is represented by his being laid 
 under the water; and his communion with him in his re- 
 surrection, by his being raised out of it." In this general 
 interpretation of the figure many Pcedobaptists have agreed; 
 and have thus not a little confirmed the confidence of anti- 
 poedobaptists in their cause. I am persuaded, however, 
 that a candid examination of the real import of the figura- 
 tive language before us, will show that this confidence is 
 entirely unfounded. 
 
 The aposde, in the preceding part of the Epistle to the 
 Romans, had shown that Christians are justified by faith 
 in the righteousness of Christ. He proceeds in the sixth 
 chapter to obviate the objection, that this doctrine tends to 
 licentiousness. ** What shall we say, then ? Shall we 
 continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid !" He 
 rejects with abhorrence the odious thought. *' How shall 
 we that are dead to sin live any longer therein ?" He then 
 adverts to the significance of baptism, which, being the 
 ordinance which seals our introduction into the family of 
 Christ, may be considered as exhibiting both the first prin- 
 ciples of Gospel truth, and the first elements of Christian 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 109 
 
 character. "Know ye not, that so many of us as were 
 baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ?" 
 He then infers, that since baptism has so immediate a 
 reference to the death of Christ, it must, by consequence, 
 be connected also with his resurrection ; and that, as in the 
 former view, it teaches the regenerated the abandoning of 
 the old life of sin ; so, in the latter, it equally teaches them 
 the pursuit and progress of the new life of righteousness. 
 '* Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death ; 
 that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the 
 glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in new- 
 ness of life." 
 
 The obvious design of the apostle is to illustrate the cha- 
 racter and obligations of believers, from the circumstance, 
 that they are, in a certain respect, conformed to Christ's 
 death: that as he died /br sin, so they are dead, or are 
 under obligations to be dead, to sin ; that is, they are holy, 
 or are, by their profession, obliged to be holy. " So many 
 of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into 
 his death." And this is explained by what follows. " In 
 that Christ died, he died unto sin (or on account of sin) 
 once ; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise 
 reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, (or in 
 respect to sin,) but alive unto God through Jesus Christ." 
 This is what was signified by baptism. And so believers 
 were baptized into Chrisfs death: not that baptism was a 
 symbol of death, or the state of the dead ; for water, or 
 washing in water, never was a symbol of this. But water, 
 used in ceremonial, whether by washing or sprinkling, and 
 afterwards in Christian baptism, always signified the fact, 
 or the acknowledged necessity of 'purification. Now being 
 dead, or in a state of death to sin, is the same thing as to 
 be spiritually purified, or made holy. And this is the very 
 thing that baptism, coming in the place of absolutions under 
 the former economy, is exactly adapted to signify. Or, to 
 say all in a word, water used in baptism is a sign of that 
 moral purification of believers, which the apostle means to 
 express by their being crucified, dead and conformed to 
 Christ's death." Their being dead in conformity with 
 Christ, is the expression which contains the metaphor. 
 And baptism, as an appointed token or symbol, denotes 
 
 K 
 
110 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 what is signified by the metaphor, not the metaphor itself."* 
 The sum of the apostle's illustrations, then, so far as the 
 point before us is concerned, is simply this — That in bap- 
 tism, as a rite emblematical oi moral purification ^ Christians 
 profess to be baptized into the death of Christ, as well as 
 into (or into the hope of) his resurrection ; that they are 
 dead and buried in respect to sin, that is, in a moral and 
 spiritual sense ; so that every Christian can say, with Paul 
 — " I am crucified with Christ ; I have been made conform- 
 able to his death; being dead indeed to sin, and alive 
 to God by Jesus Christ." 
 
 But besides all this, which is sufficient of itself to show 
 how little reliance is to be placed on the gloss of this pas- 
 sage adopted by our Baptist brethren — the burial of Christ 
 was by no means such as the friends of this exposition 
 commonly suppose. The body of our Saviour was never 
 buried in the manner in which we are accustomed to inter 
 human corpses, that is by letting it down into the bosom of 
 the earth, and covering it with earth. It was placed in a 
 tomb hewn out of a rock ; not a tomb sunk in the earth, 
 but hollowed out of a rock, above ground, and containing 
 separate cells for the reception of bodies, " as the manner 
 of the Jews was to bury." Even supposing, then, that it 
 were yielded to our Baptist brethren that the design of the 
 apostle is to teach the mode of baptism, by comparing it to 
 the burial of Christ, it would by no means serve their pur- 
 pose. There was not in fact any such subterranean im- 
 mersion, if the expression may be allowed, as they imagine. 
 The body of the Saviour was evidently laid in a stone cell, 
 above ground, in which no earth came in contact with it, 
 and in which, when the stone which closed up the door 
 was taken away, the body was distinctly visible. In short, 
 the burial of Christ no more resembled the modern inter- 
 ment of a dead body among us, than the depositing such a 
 body, for a time, in an apartment in the basement story of 
 
 * See Dr. Woods' Lectures on Infant Baptism, p. 188, 189. See 
 this interpretation of Bom. vi. 3, 4, and the corresponding passage in 
 Colossians ii. 12, well illustrated in the Essay on Baptism, by Greville 
 Ewing, D. D. of Glasgow, and also in a Dissertation on Infant Bap- 
 tism, by Ralph Wardlaw, D. D. of Glasgow ; and still more recently, 
 by Professor (S^Mart, in the Biblical Repository, p. 327. 332. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. Ill 
 
 a dwelling house, the floor of which was either not sunk 
 below the surface of the earth at all, or, if any, not more 
 than a few inches ; admitting of free ingress and egress as 
 a common inhabited room. The figure in question, then, 
 does not serve the turn of our Baptist brethren ; thus 
 affording another proof, that nothing more was intended by 
 its use, than to set forth that, by being baptized into the 
 death of Christ, we profess to be dead and buried in 
 respect to sin, without any reference whatever to the mode 
 in which either the burial or the baptism might be per- 
 formed. 
 
 Accordingly, in the verse immediately preceding that 
 before commented on, in the second Epistle to the Colos- 
 sians, the following passage occurs, evidently intended to 
 teach the same lesson : " In whom also ye are circumcised 
 with the circumcision made without liands, in putting off 
 the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of 
 Christ." And in the verse immediately following that in 
 which the burial of Christ is alluded to, the figure of cir- 
 cumcision as an emblem of spiritual cleansing, is still pur- 
 sued : " And you being dead in your sins, and the uncir- 
 cumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with 
 him, having forgiven you all trespasses." Here, it is plain, 
 the same general idea is meant to be conveyed, as in the 
 reference to baptism, which has come in the room of cir- 
 cumcision. In both the putting away sin ; the " putting off 
 the sins of the flesh," is emblematically represented and 
 sealed : as a man dead and buried is cut off from all tempo- 
 ral connections and indulgences; so the baptized man is 
 really, or at least by profession, dead to sin, and in 
 this way made conformable to the death of Christ, in its 
 great design and efficacy, which are to purify to himself a 
 peculiar people, dead to the world, dead to carnal ambition, 
 and secluded from every unhallowed practice. 
 
 Another signal example of the figurative language of 
 Scripture applied to baptism, occurs in 1 Corinthians, x. 
 1, 2. " Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be 
 ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, 
 and all passed through the sea ; and were all baptized unto 
 Moses in the cloud and in the sea." Now, when we turn 
 to the narrative given by Moses, in the fourteenth chapter 
 
112 SERMONS ON BAmSM. 
 
 of Exodus^ we find that the Red Sea, through which the 
 Israelites passed, was divided before them ; that the waters 
 stood up like a wall on each side ; and that they passed 
 through ON DRY GROUND. We are also informed, that the 
 cloud by which their line of march was divinely directed, 
 did not even fall upon them in the form of a shower, much 
 less submerge them ; but that it alternately went behind 
 them and before them ; now hanging in their rear, for the 
 purpose of concealing them from their enemies ; and then 
 preceding them in their course, presenting a face of splen- 
 dour to them, and a face of darkness to their pursuers. In 
 all this, there was evidently nothing like immersion. The 
 utmost that could have happened, in consistency with the 
 inspired narrative, was their being sprinkled by the spray 
 of the sea, or by drops from the miraculous cloud, when it 
 passed over their heads. 
 
 The last passage of the class under consideration to 
 which I shall advert, is that found in the first Epistle of 
 Peter, iii. 20, 31 : " 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. The like 
 figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not 
 the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of 
 a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Je- 
 sus Christ." The principle implied in this passage is 
 plain ; and it affbrds not the smallest countenance to the 
 doctrine of our Baptist brethren. Every one sees, that in 
 the case of Noah and his family," and of all the animals 
 preserved with them in the ark, there was no immersion in 
 the waters of the flood. Nay, this was the very evil from 
 which the ark preserved them. Of course, whatever else 
 the passage may prove, it is impossible that it should be 
 legitimately considered as favouring baptism by plunging 
 the whole body under water. 
 
 7. Further ; that immersion is not necessary in bap- 
 tism ; and that to insist upon it, as indispensable, is super- 
 stition, appears from the indisputable fact, that both the 
 significance and the effect of baptism are to be considered 
 as depending, not on the physical influence of water, or 
 upon the quantity of it employed, but on its symbolical 
 meaning, and on the blessing of God upon its application 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 113 
 
 as a symbol. There has always been a tendency in human 
 nature to lay more stress than the Bible warrants upon out- 
 ward forms ; and to imagine that external rites have a vir- 
 tue inherent in themselves, by which their recipients are of 
 course savingly benefited. It is generally granted by en- 
 lightened Protestants to be one of the mischievous errors of 
 Popery, that baptism, and the other appointed rites of our 
 religion, when administered by authorized hands, have an 
 inherent efficacy ; a sort of self-operating power on those 
 to whom they are administered. This we consider as a 
 superstitious and dangerous error. We believe that no exter- 
 nal ordinance has any power in itself; but that its power to 
 benefit those who receive it, depends altogether upon the in- 
 fluence of the Holy Spirit of God, making it effectual ; 
 and that this influence may accompany or follow the ordi- 
 nance, whatever may be the outward form of its adminis- 
 tration. If, indeed, we had reason to believe that the 
 benefit of baptism was caused by the physical influence of 
 water on any or every part of the body, and depended 
 upon that influence : if the least intimation of this kind 
 were given us, either by the Avord of God, or the nature of 
 the case ; it would be wise to insist on a rigorous adherence 
 to that form. But as the benefit of the ordinance has no 
 connection, so far as we knoAv, with the operation of water 
 on the animal frame ; but is the result, solely, of a divine 
 blessing on a prescribed and striking emblem ; and as the 
 word of God has no where informed us of the precise 
 mode in which that emblem shall be applied — we infer that 
 the divine blessing may attend upon any mode of applying 
 it. The language of our blessed Saviour, on a memorable 
 occasion, is full of instruction on this subject. In order to 
 give his disciples a striking lesson both of humility and 
 purity, he condescended, on a certain evening, when they 
 were assembled under solemn circumstances, to wash their 
 feet. Simon Peter, when his Master came to him, like too 
 many at the present day, misunderstanding the nature and 
 significance of the symbolical action, at first strongly ob- 
 jected, and said, " Thou shalt never wash my feet." Jesus 
 answered, " If I wash thee not, thou hast no part in me." 
 To which Peter, in the fulness of his fervent zeal, replied, 
 " Lord, not my feet only, but also ray hands and my head.** 
 
114 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 Jesus, however, meaning to convey the idea that the whole 
 action M^as symbolical, and that the application of water to 
 any part of the body was abmidantly sufficient, rejoins to 
 Peter, " He that is washed needeth not save to wash his 
 feet, but is clean every whit:" as much as to say, *'It is 
 not the physical ablution, but the symbolical meaning, to 
 which I now wish to call your attention ; and for this pur- 
 pose the application of water to the feet only, carries with 
 it all the fulness of meaning, and all the richness of benefit, 
 that could have resulted from the most plentiful application 
 of it to the whole frame." 
 
 8. Another, and in my view, conclusive reason for 
 believing that our Baptist brethren are in error, in insisting 
 that no baptism unless by immersion is valid, is, that the 
 native tendency of this doctrine is to superstition and 
 abuse. The tendency here alleged has been often observed 
 and lamented by serious people, as likely to be connected 
 with a false hope, and to destroy the souls of multitudes. 
 Facts in support of this remark have fallen under my own 
 painful observation. I have known many Baptists, who 
 appeared to feel as if there was some inherent efficacy in 
 being " buried under the water," and that those who sub- 
 mitted to that "self-denying" rite, were, of course, real 
 Christians. They have evidently appeared to think that 
 that was the great step in religion ; and that, having taken 
 it, all was secure. Now, I contend, that this is the natural 
 tendency of the Baptist doctrine ; that their laying so much 
 stress upon " going under the water," and holding it up, 
 with unceasing zeal, to the popular view, as the great, dis- 
 tinguishing, and indispensable badge of discipleship, is, 
 unavoidably, adapted to betray "unwary souls" into a de- 
 lusive confidence. There is no disposition in depraved 
 human nature more deeply inwrought, or more incessantly 
 operative, than the disposition to rely upon something done 
 by us for securing the divine favour. It is this disposition 
 which has led to all that enormous mass of superstitious 
 observances, which distinguishes the Pa,pal system, and 
 which we have every reason to believe is built upon by 
 millions, as the foundation of hope, instead of Christ. 
 Whenever, therefore, any external rite becomes the grand 
 distinction of a sect, and the object of something approach- 
 
SEftMONS ON BAPTISM. 115 
 
 ing to sectarian idolatry, we may be sure there exists not 
 only the danger, but the actual commencement, to some ex- 
 tent, of that superstitious reliance, which he who has not 
 learned to fear, " knows nothing of the human heart yet as 
 he ought to know." 
 
 That this suggestion has something more than mere 
 fancy on which to rest, is evident from facts of recent and ' 
 most mournful occurrence. A large and daily increasing 
 sect has arisen, within a few years, in the bosom of the 
 Baptist denomination, which maintains the delusive and 
 destructive doctrine, that baptism is regeneration ; that no 
 man can be regenerated who is not immersed ; and that all, 
 without exception, who have a historical faith, and are im- 
 mersed, are, of course, in a state of salvation. This per- 
 nicious heresy, so contrary to the plainest principles and 
 facts of the word of God, and so manifestly adapted to 
 destroy the souls of all who believe it, has been propagated 
 to a melancholy extent, by a plausible, reckless, and im- 
 pious demagogue, and is supposed to embrace one half of 
 the Baptist body in the western country, besides many in 
 the east. In short, the Baptist churches, in large districts 
 of country, are so rent in pieces, and deluded by the mise- 
 rable impostor referred to, that their prospects, for many 
 years to come, are not only gloomy, but, \7it'hout a special 
 interposition of the King of Zion in their f:ivour, altogether 
 desperate. 
 
 Now I maintain that this wretched delusion is by no 
 means an unnatural result of the doctrine and practice of 
 our Baptist brethren, in regard to the baptismal rite. Mul- 
 titudes of them, I know, reject and abhor the heresy in 
 question as much as any of us. But have they duly con- 
 sidered, that it seems naturally to have grown out of their 
 own theory and practice in regard to baptism ; their attach- 
 ing such a disproportioned importance to the mode of ad- 
 ministering that ordinance ; often, very often, directing the 
 attention of the people more to the river than the cross ; ex- 
 cluding all from Christian communion, hoAvever pious, who 
 have not been immersed ; and making representations 
 which, whether so intended or not, naturally lead the weak 
 and the uninformed to consider immersion as a kind of 
 talisman, always connected with a saving blessing ? This^ 
 
116 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 I sincerely believe, is the native tendency of the doctrine 
 of our Baptist brethren, although they, I am equally confi- 
 dent, neither perceive nor admit this to be the case. If 
 pious Christians who have not been immersed, cannot be 
 admitted to communion in the church below, there would 
 seem to be still more reason for excluding them from the 
 purer church above. And so far as this principle is received 
 and cherished, though far from being alike mischievous in 
 all cases, it can scarcely fail of predisposing many minds 
 in favour of that awful delusion, by which we have reason 
 to believe that not a few, under its higher workings, have 
 been blinded, betrayed, and lost. 
 
 9. Finally; that immersion cannot be considered, to 
 say the least, as essential to a valid baptism, is plain from 
 the history of this ordinance. 
 
 It is not denied that, for the first few centuries after 
 Christ, the most common mode of administering baptism 
 was by immersion. But it is maintained, that affusion and 
 sprinkling were also practised, and when used, were consi- 
 dered as perfectly valid and sufficient. Of this the proof 
 is so complete and indubitable, that no one really acquainted 
 with the early history of the church, will think, for a moment, 
 of calling it in question. The learned TVall, whose " His- 
 tory of Infant Baptism" is generally considered, by com- 
 petent judges, as one of the most profound and faithful 
 works extant, on the subject before us ; after showing con- 
 clusively that Pcedobaptists ought not to refuse the admis- 
 sion, that baptism ^^y dipping, was the most prevalent mode, 
 even in the western church, for a number of centuries after 
 Christ; goes on to remark that, on the other hand, the 
 Antipoedobaptists will be quite as unfair in their turn, if 
 they do not grant, that in cases of sickness, weakliness, 
 haste, want of a sufficient quantity of water, or any such 
 extraordinary occasion, baptism by the affusion of water 
 on the face, was, by the ancients, counted sufficient bap- 
 tism. Of the testimony which he offers in support of this 
 statement, a specimen will be presented.* 
 
 Eusebius states, (Book 6. chapter 43.) on the authority 
 of preceding writers, that Novatian being sick, and near 
 
 » Wall^ Part IL chapter ix.p. 352, «&c. 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 117 
 
 death, as was supposed, was baptized on his bed by affu- 
 sion. He, however, recovered, and was afterwards ordained 
 to the work of the ministry. And although some questioned, 
 whether a man who had been brought to make a profession 
 of religion only on a sick bed, and when he considered him- 
 self as about to die, ought to be made a minister ; yet this 
 doubt arose, we are assured, not from any apprehension 
 that the baptism itself was incomplete ; but on the princi- 
 ple, that he who came to the faith not voluntarily, but from 
 necessity, ought not to be made a priest, unless his subse- 
 quent diligence and faith should be distinguished and highly 
 commendable. 
 
 Of the character of Cyprian, who flourished in the for^ 
 mer part of the third century, enough has been said in a 
 preceding discourse. A certain Magnus, a country minis- 
 ter, consulted him on the question, whether those who 
 had been introduced into the Christian church, by baptism, 
 on their sick beds, and, of course, by affusion, or sprink- 
 ling, ought to be baptized again, if they recovered ? Cy- 
 prian's answer to this question is as follows : 
 
 " You inquire, my dear son, what I think of such as at- 
 tain grace in time of sickness and infirmity : whether they 
 are to be accounted lawful Christians, because they have 
 not been ivashed all over with the water of salvation, but 
 have only had some of it poured on them. In which mat- 
 ter I would use so much modesty and humility, as not to 
 prescribe so positively, but that every one should enjoy the 
 freedom of his own thought, and do as he thinks best. 
 I do, however, according to the best of my mean capacity, 
 judge thus : That the divine favours can in no wise be mu- 
 tilated or weakened, so that any thing less than the whole 
 of them is conveyed, where the benefit of them is received 
 with a full and complete faith, on the part both of the giver 
 and receiver. For, in the sacrament of salvation, the con- 
 tagion of sin is not washed off in the same manner as the 
 filth of the body is in a carnal and secular bath. It is en- 
 tirely in a different way that the heart of a believer — it is 
 after another fashion that the mind of man is by faith 
 cleansed. In the sacraments of salvation, through the in- 
 dulgence of God, when necessity compels, the shortest 
 way of transacting divine matters, conveys the whole 
 
lis SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 benefit to those who believe. Nor let any be moved by the 
 fact, that the sick, when they are baptized, are only per- 
 fused or sprinkled, since the Scripture says, by the prophet 
 Ezekiel, (chapter xxxvi. 25. 36.) "I will sprinkle clean 
 water upon you, and ye shall be clean ; from all your filthi- 
 ness and from all your idols will I cleanse you; a new 
 heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within 
 you." It is also said in the book of Numbers, (chap, xix.) 
 " And the man which shall be unclean until the evening, 
 shall be purified on the third day, and on the seventh day, 
 and he shall be clean. But if he shall not be purified on 
 the third day, and on the seventh day, he shall not be clean, 
 and that soul shall be cut oflf from Israel, because the water 
 of aspersion hath not been sprinkled upon him." And 
 again, the Lord spake unto Moses, in the book of Numbers, 
 (chap, viii.) " Take the Levites from among the children 
 of Israel, and cleanse them ; and thus shalt thou do unto 
 them to cleanse them ; sprinkle water of purifying upon 
 them." And again, " the water of aspersion is purifica- 
 tion." From which it appears that sprinkling is sufficient 
 instead of immersion ; and whensoever it is done, if there 
 be a sound faith, on the part both of the giver and receiver, 
 it is perfect and complete." 
 
 From these passages, as well as from a number of 
 others, which might be quoted, found in the works of Cy- 
 prian, it is evident, that, in a little more than one hundred 
 and fifty years from the death of the last apostle, cases of 
 baptism by perfusion or sprinkling had notoriously, and in 
 repeated instances, occurred; that such examples were 
 found among the heretics, as well as in the orthodox 
 church ; that a man so learned and pious as the venerable 
 Cyprian, was decisively of the opinion that they were to 
 be justified ; and, finally, that he considered this as a point 
 concerning which Christians were at liberty to entertain 
 their own opinion, and to do as they judged best. Plainly 
 implying that he did not consider it at all as an essential 
 matter. 
 
 Origen was contemporary with Cyprian. He wrote in 
 the Greek language. It was his vernacular tongue ; and he 
 was, probably, the most learned man of the century in 
 which he lived. This venerable Christian father, com-^ 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 119 
 
 menting on 1 Kings, xviii. 33, in which we read of Eli- 
 jah's ordering water to be poured on the burnt sacrifice, 
 tells us that he baptized the wood on the altar. Was not 
 Origen a good judge of the meaning of a Greek word? 
 Can we imagine that he would have used the word baptize 
 in this sense, if he had regarded immersion as its exclusive 
 meaning ? 
 
 When Laurentius, a Roman deacon, about the middle of 
 the third century, was brought to the stake to suffer martyr- 
 dom, a soldier who had been employed to be one of his 
 executioners, professed to be converted, and requested bap- 
 tism from the hands of him whom he had been engaged to 
 assist in burning. For this purpose d, pitcher of water was 
 brought, and the soldier baptized at the place of exe- 
 cution.* In circumstances so solemn as these, surely no 
 conscientious man would have sported with a divine ordi- 
 nance, or subjected it to any essential mutilation. It was, 
 doubtless, deemed a sufficient mode of administermg bap- 
 tism. 
 
 Gennadius, a distinguished ecclesiastic of Marseilles, in 
 the fifth century, speaks of baptism as administered in the 
 French church indifferently, by either immersion or affu- 
 sion, or sprinkling. For having said, " We believe the 
 way of salvation to be open only to baptized persons "; he 
 adds, "except only in the case of martyrdom, in which all 
 the sacraments of baptism are completed." Then, to show 
 how martyrdom has all in it that baptism has, he says, 
 " The person to be baptized, owns his faith before the 
 priest; and when the interrogatories are put to him, makes 
 his answer. The same does a martyr before the heathen 
 judge. He also owns his faith ; and when the question is 
 put to him, makes answer. The one, after his confession, 
 is either wetted with the water, or else plunged into it ; and 
 the other, is either wetted with his own blood, or plunged 
 into the fire." This language plainly evinces that, in the 
 time of Gennadius, both modes of baptism were in use 
 and deemed equally valid. 
 
 Thomas Aquinas, and Bonaventura, are well known as two 
 learned ecclesiastics of the twelfth century. In their time it 
 
 * Walfridius Strabo, De Rebus Ecclesiast. as quoted by Wall. 
 
120 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 is evident that both plunging and affusion were used in the 
 churches of Italy, in the administration of baptism. Aqui- 
 nas, in writing on the subject, expresses himself thus : 
 " Baptism may be given not only by immersion, but also by 
 affusion of water, or by sprinkling with it. But it is the safer 
 way to baptize by immersion, because that is the most 
 common custom." On the other hand, his contemporary, 
 Bonaventura, observes, " The way of affusion in baptism 
 was probably used by the apostles, and was, in his time, 
 used in the churches of France, and some others ;" but re- 
 marks, " The method of dipping into the water is the more 
 common, and therefore the fitter and safer." 
 
 The Synod of Angiers, A. D. 1275, speaks of dipping 
 and pouring as indifferently used ; and blames some igno- 
 rant priests, because they dipped, or poured on water, but 
 once ; and at the same time declaring that the general cus- 
 tom of the church was to dip, or to pour on water three 
 times. The Synod of Langres, A. D. 1404, speaks of 
 pouring or perfusion only. " Let the priest make three 
 pourings or sprinklings of water on the infanfs head," &c. 
 The Council of Cologne, in 1536, evidently intimate that 
 both modes were constantly practised. Their language is, 
 *' The child is thrice either dipped, or ivetted with water." 
 Fifteen years afterwards, in the Agenda of the church of 
 Mentz, published by Sebastian, there is found the follow- 
 ing direction : " Then let the priest take the child on his 
 left arm, and holding him over the font, let him, with his 
 right hand, three several times, take water out of the font, 
 and pour it on the child's head, so that the water may wet 
 its head and shoulders." Then they give a note to this 
 purpose ; that immersion, once or thrice, or pouring of 
 water may be used, and have been used, in the church ; 
 that this variety does not alter the nature of baptism ; and 
 that a man would do ill to break the custom of the church 
 for either of them. But they add, that it is better, if the 
 church will allow, to use pouring on of water. " For sup- 
 pose," say they, " the priest be old and feeble, or have the 
 palsy in his hands ; or the weather be very cold ; or the 
 child be very infirm ; or too big to be dipped in the font ; 
 then it is much fitter to use affusion of the water." Then 
 they bring the instance of the apostles baptizing three thou- 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 121 
 
 smid at a time ; and the instance of Laurentius, the Roman 
 deacon, before spoken of — and add, " That, therefore, there 
 may not be one way for the sick, and another for the 
 healthy ; one for children, and another for bigger persons ; 
 it is better that the administrator of this sacrament do ob- 
 serve the safest way, which is, to pour water thrice ; un- 
 less the custom be to the contrary."* 
 
 One more historical record, which, though apparently 
 inconsiderable in itself, is, in my view, decisive,'shall close 
 the present list of testimonies. It is one referred to in a 
 former discourse, when speaking of Infant baptism. I 
 mean the undoubted fact, that the Waldenses, those far- 
 famed and devoted witnesses of the truth, who maintained, 
 during the darkness and desolation of the Papacy, " the 
 testimony of Jesus," very soon after the Reformation 
 opened, approached, with the most cordial friendliness, the 
 Reformed churches of Geneva and France ; recognised 
 them as sisters in the Lord ; received ministers from them ; 
 and maintained with them the most affectionate communion. 
 Now it is certain that, at that time, in the churches of both 
 Geneva and France, the baptism of infants, and the admi- 
 nistration of the ordinance by sprinkling, were in constant 
 use. On such an incontestible fact, the argument is this : 
 The Waldenses either baptized by sprinkling or by immer- 
 sion. If by sprinkling, an important testimony is gained 
 in favour of that mode, from ecclesiastical history. If by 
 immersion, they plainly laid no such stress upon the mode 
 as our Baptist brethren now do ; since they were willing 
 to commune with, and to receive ministers from, churches 
 which were in the habit of using sprinkling only. In my 
 view, as I said, this argument is decisive. We know that 
 the Waldenses habitually baptized infants; but in what 
 mode they administered the ordinance is not quite so cer- 
 tain. But one thing is unquestionable ; and that is, that 
 those pious witnesses for Christ, even if they did immerse, 
 did not consider the mode as essential, but were ready to 
 hold the most unreserved communion with those who prac- 
 tised aspersion. 
 
 These testimonies, and many more to the same purpose, 
 
 * Wall, Part II. chapter ix. p. 360, 361. 
 
122 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 which might be presented if it were necessary, must, it 
 appears to me, satisfy every impartial mind, that, from the 
 days of the apostles, down to the Reformation, affusion 
 and sprinkling in baptism, as well as immersion, have been 
 in constant use ; that some of the gravest and most sober- 
 minded writers have firmly defended the two former, as 
 well as the latter ; that the strong arguments in favour of 
 affusion or sprinkling, as the preferable mode, have been, 
 in all ages, distinctly appreciated; and that it has ever been 
 considered as a part of Christian liberty to use either 
 mode, as may be conscientiously preferred. 
 
 Suffer me now to close this discussion by presenting two 
 or three practical inferences from the view which has been 
 given of this latter part of the subject. And, 
 
 1. If our statement of evidence as to the mode of bap- 
 tism be correct, then the conduct of our Baptist brethren, 
 in not only denying to the infant seed of believers all right 
 to membership in the church, but also making immersion 
 indispensable to a valid baptism, are chargeable with 
 taking ground w^hich is plainly unscriptural, and with 
 dividing the body of Christ, for a mere uncommanded cir- 
 cumstance ; a circumstance in regard to which all reason- 
 ing, and all history are, on the whole, against them. We 
 do not deny that the baptisms of these brethren are valid ; 
 but we do deny that they rest upon any more solid ground 
 than ours ; and we are persuaded that, without the least 
 authority, they lay on the recipients of baptism " a yoke of 
 bondage," which has no warrant from the Word of God ; 
 and which the whole genius of the Gospel forbids. Surely, 
 if the inspired writers had regarded immersion in the same 
 light with our Baptist brethren, we should have had some 
 explicit statements on this subject in the instructions given 
 to the churches in the infancy of their New Testament 
 course. And, surely, the attempt to lay burdens which the 
 Spirit of God has no where authorized, is to incur the 
 guilt imputed to those who "add to" the things which are 
 contained in the book of life. On this subject I feel that 
 it is no longer our duty to content ourselves with standing 
 on the defensive. Our opponents in this controversy, I 
 verily believe, are chargeable with " teaching for doctrines 
 the commandments of men ;" and, of course, I consider 
 
SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 123 
 
 them as equally sinning against the Head of the church, 
 and against " the generation of the righteous." 
 
 2. These things being so, we may see how the conduct 
 of some of our Baptist brethren, in particular states of the 
 church, ought to be regarded by the friends of Zion. The 
 conduct to which I refer is, their having so often intruded 
 into churches in which some religious attention has existed, 
 and in which scarcely a family of their own denomination 
 was to be found ; and when the minds of many individuals 
 were anxious respecting their eternal interest, immediately 
 broaching the controversy respecting infant baptism, and 
 immersion, and distressing the consciences of serious 
 inquirers — not with the great and momentous question, 
 *' what they shall do to be saved ?" but — before their minds 
 are at all settled as to their personal hope in Christ, or their 
 fitness for any sacramental seal ; perplexing them with the 
 controversy about an external rite, which they themselves 
 grant is not essential to salvation. I have personally known 
 such proceedings to occur, with a frequency as wonderful 
 as it was revolting ; and with an obtrusive zeal worthy of 
 a better cause. Young and timid consciences have been 
 distressed, if not with the direct assertion, at least by the 
 artful insinuation, that their particular mode of baptism was 
 all in all ; that there could be no safe Christianity without 
 it. Tlie river, the river, really seemed, by some, to be 
 placed in the room of the Saviour ! 
 
 There is something in all this so deeply offensive to 
 every enlightened and judicious Christian ; which involves 
 so much meanness ; and which manifests so much more 
 concern for the enlargement of a sect, than the salvation of 
 souls, that it is difficult to speak of it in terms of as strong 
 reprobation as it deserves, without infringing on the limits 
 of Christian decorum and respectfulness. It is conduct of 
 which no candid and generous mind, actuated by the spirit 
 of Christ, will ever be guilty. And, I am happy to add, 
 it is conduct in which many belonging to the denomination 
 to which I allude, have souls too enlarged and elevated 
 to allow themselves to indulge. 
 
 3. Once more ; let us all be careful, my Christian 
 friends, as a practical deduction from what has been said, 
 to forbear " returning evil for evil," on this, or any other 
 
124 SERMONS ON BAPTISM. 
 
 point of ecclesiastical controversy. However other deno- 
 minations may treat usj let us never be chargeable with 
 treating them in an unchristian manner. We are conscien- 
 tiously compelled to differ from our Baptist brethren. We 
 believe them to be in error ; in important and highly mis- 
 chievous error. But what then ? They are still brethren 
 in Christ. Let us, therefore, love them, and, however they 
 may treat us, treat them with fraternal respectfulness, and 
 seek their welfare. Let us never indulge a spirit of unhal- 
 lowed proselytism. Let us never employ any other wea- 
 pons against them than those of candid argument, and fer- 
 vent prayer. Instead of " doting about questions, and 
 strifes of words, whereof come envy, railings, evil surmis- 
 ings, and corrupt dispu tings ;" let us follow after patience, 
 forbearance and charity; ever remembering that all who 
 really belong to Christ, however they may differ in externals, 
 are " one body in Him, and members one of another." 
 May we all be deeply imbued with the spirit which ought 
 to flow from this precious truth ; and may all that we do 
 be done with charity ! Amen ! 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 (Note A.) 
 
 Giving a Name in baptism. 
 
 In administering the rite of circumcision, it was cus- 
 tomary to give a name to the child. This is evident from 
 the circumstances attending the circumcision of John the 
 Baptist, as related in the Gospel according to Luke, i. 59- 
 64 ; and also those attending the circumcision of our blessed 
 Saviour, as found recorded in the next chapter of the same 
 Gospel. The same practice probably existed, from the 
 earliest period of the New Testament church, in the admi- 
 nistration of baptism. It makes, however, no necessary, 
 or even important, part of the rite. A baptism adminis- 
 tered without a name, would, of course, be just as valid as 
 if one were announced. And there is nothing in the es- 
 sential nature of the case, which would forbid a name given 
 to a child in baptism being reconsidered and altered after- 
 wards. Yet, inasmuch as a child, when baptized, is 
 announced to the church as a new member, subject to its 
 maternal watch and care, it ought, in common, for obvious 
 reasons, to be introduced and known under some name, so 
 that each child may be distinguished, and may receive its 
 appropriate treatment. To introduce a nameless member 
 into any society, would be both unreasonable and inconve- 
 nient. Moreover, it is of great consequence, both to civil 
 and religious society, that the birth and baptism of every 
 child be recorded in regular church books. The formation 
 of this record requires, it is evident, the use of a name; 
 and after the name is adopted and recorded in this public 
 register, it is plain that frequent alterations of the name, 
 and tampering, in a corresponding manner, with the public 
 
 L* 
 
126 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 register, would lead to endless confusion and mischief. 
 Thus we are conducted, by a very obvious train of reason- 
 ing, to the conclusion that the name announced in baptism, 
 ought, in general, to be carefully retained, without subtrac- 
 tion or addition. Sometimes, indeed, the civil law requires 
 such registers to be made and preserved, in regard to every 
 birth and baptism. "Where this is the case, there is, evi- 
 dently, an additional reason for adhering strictly to the 
 name announced in baptism, recorded in the appropriate 
 register, and thus brought under official notice, and recorded 
 as the property of the state. See a number of curious 
 questions proposed and resolved, concerning the names im- 
 posed in baptism, in the Politics^ Ecclesiasticse of the 
 learned Gisbertus Voetius. Tom. I. p. 714-724. 
 
 (Note B.) 
 Baptismal Regeneration. 
 
 This unscriptural and pernicious doctrine is not confined 
 to the Roman Catholics, in whose system it may without 
 impropriety be said to be indigenous ; but is also frequently 
 found in the pulpits and the manuals of some Protestants^ 
 in the midst of whose general principles, it ought to be re- 
 garded as a poisonous exotic. 
 
 I. The doctrine referred to, as held by some Protestants, 
 in its most objectionable form, appears to be this : — that 
 the spiritual change which the Scriptures designate by the 
 term regeneration, is always attendant upon, and effected 
 by, the rite of baptism, when duly administered ; that, on 
 the one hand, every person, infant or adult, who has been 
 baptized by an authorized minister, is a regenerated person ; 
 and that, on the other, every person who has not been bap- 
 tized, however deep or mature his penitence and faith, is 
 still unregenerate. In short, the position is, that the inward 
 grace of regeneration always accompanies the outward 
 sign of baptism ; that they are inseparable ; that the one 
 cannot exist without the other ; that he who has been thus 
 regenerated, if he die without falling from grace, is cer- 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 12*7 
 
 tainly saved; that baptism is essential to salvation; and 
 that to call by the name of regeneration any moral change, 
 from the love of sin to the love of holiness, which takes 
 place either before or after baptism, is unscriptural and ab- 
 surd. This, as I understand them, is the doctrine main- 
 tained by Bishop Tomline, Bishop Marsh, Bishop Mant, 
 and a number of other writers, of equal conspicuity, in the 
 church of England, and by not a few divines of the Pro- 
 testant Episcopal church in our own country. 
 
 This doctrine, I apprehend, is contrary to Scripture ; 
 contrary to experience ; contrary to the declared opinion of 
 the most wise, pious, and venerated divines even of the 
 Episcopal denomination ; and adapted to generate the most 
 dangerous errors with regard to Christian character, and 
 the Gospel plan of salvation. 
 
 1. It is contrary to Scripture. AVithout regeneration, 
 the Scriptures declare, it is impossible to enter into the 
 kingdom of heaven. But the penitent malefactor on the 
 cross undoubtedly entered into the kingdom of heaven, if 
 we are to credit our Lord's express declaration. Yet this 
 penitent, believing malefactor was never baptized, therefore 
 he was regenerated without baptism ; and, of course, rege- 
 neration and baptism are not inseparably connected. Again ; 
 Simon Magus received the outward and visible ordinance 
 of baptism, with unquestionable regularity, by an author- 
 ized administrator ; yet who will venture to say, that he 
 received the " inward and invisible grace" signified and re- 
 presented in that ordinance ? He was evidently from the 
 beginning a hypocrite, and remained, after baptism, as be- 
 fore " in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.*' 
 Therefore the outward and sensible sign, and the inward 
 and invisible grace are not in all cases, or iiecessarily, con- 
 nected. Again ; it is evident that the apostle Paul, Lydia, 
 the Ethiopian Eunuch, the Philippian Jailor, (fee. " be- 
 lieved with the heart," and were, consequently, brought 
 into a state of acceptance with God before they were bap- 
 tized. But we are told (John i. 12, 13.) that as many as 
 believe have been " born of God," and made the " sons of 
 God." Of course, regeneration may take place, in the 
 case of adults, ought to take place, and in these cases, did 
 take place, before baptism ; and, consequently, is not th^ 
 
128 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 same thing with baptism, or inseparably connected with 
 that rite. Once more ; we are assured in Scripture, that 
 " he who is born of God, or regenerated, doth not commit 
 sin, (that is, deliberately or habitually,) for his seed re- 
 maineth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of 
 God ;" and farther, that " every one that loveth is ' born of 
 God' and knoweth God;" and that " whosoever believeth 
 that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God." But can it be 
 said that this character belongs to all who are baptized? 
 Or, that none who are unbaptized manifest that they possess 
 it ? Surely no one in his senses will venture to make the 
 assertion. Therefore a man may be " born of God" before 
 he is baptized, and, consequently, the administration of the 
 outward ordinance, and that work of the Holy Spirit, 
 called in the word of God regeneration, are not always 
 connected. 
 
 2. The doctrine before us is as contrary to experience as 
 it is to Scripture. " It is asserted," says an eminent 
 divine of the church of England, now living — " It is as- 
 serted, that the spiritual change of heart called regenera- 
 tion invariably takes place in the precise article of baptism. 
 If this assertion be well founded, the spiritual change in 
 question will invariably take place in every adult at the 
 identical moment when he is baptized ; that is to say, at 
 the very instant when the hand of the priest brings his 
 body in contact with the baptismal water ; at that precise 
 instant, his understanding begins to be illuminated, his will 
 to be reformed, and his affections to be purified. Hitherto 
 he has walked in darkness ; but now, to use the scriptural 
 phrase, he has passed from darkness to light. Hitherto he 
 has been wrapped in a death-like sleep of trespasses and 
 sins ; but now he awakes, and rises from the dead, Christ 
 himself giving him life. Hitherto he has been a chaos of 
 vice, and ignorance, and spiritual confusion ; the natural 
 man receiving not the things of the Spirit of God, for they 
 are foolishness unto him : but now he is created after God 
 in righteousness and true holiness ; being in Christ he is 
 a ' new creature ;' having become spiritual, the things of 
 the Spirit of God are no longer foolishness to him; he 
 knows them because they are spiritually discerned. Such 
 are the emphatic terms in which regeneration is described 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. l29 
 
 by the inspired writers. What we have to do, therefore, 
 I apprehend, is forthwith to inquire, whether every bap- 
 tized adult, without a single exception, is invariably found 
 to declare, that, in the precise article of baptism, his soul 
 experienced a change analogous to that which is so unequi- 
 vocally set forth in the above-mentioned texts of Scripture."* 
 We need not dwell long on the inquiry. The fact is noto- 
 riously not so. Nor does it diminish the difficulty, in ad- 
 mitting the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, to say, as 
 the Arminian advocates of this doctrine invariably do say, 
 that those who are once regenerated may fall from grace, 
 and manifest a most unhallowed temper. This is not the 
 question. The question is, does experience evince, that 
 every subject of baptism, who has reached an age capable 
 of manifesting the Christian character, does, at the moment 
 of receiving the baptismal water, show that he is the sub- 
 ject of that regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, by 
 which " old things are passed away, and all things become 
 new in the Lord ?" No one who has a particle of intelli- 
 gence or candour can imagine that any such fact exists ; 
 but if it do not, then the doctrine under consideration falls 
 of course. 
 
 3. The doctrine of baptismal regeneration is contrary te^ 
 the declared opinion of the most pious, judicious, and 
 venerable Protestant divines, including those of the very 
 highest authority in the church of England. Nothing can 
 be more certain than that the mass of the English re- 
 formers distinctly taught that baptism is a sig7i only of re- 
 generation, and that the thing signified might or might not 
 accompany the administration of the outward ordinance, 
 according as it was received worthily or otherwise. In 
 support of this assertion, the most explicit quotations 
 might be presented from the writings of those distinguished 
 martyrs and prelates, Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley, and 
 Hooper ; and after them from the writings of the eminent 
 bishops, Jewell, Davenant, Hall, Usher, Reynolds, Leigh- 
 ton, Hopkins, Tillotson, Beveridge, Burnet, Seeker, and a 
 host of other divines of the English church, of whose ele- 
 vated character it would be litde less than an insult to any 
 
 * Faber's Sermons, Vol. I. p. 145, 146. 
 
130 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 intelligent reader to attempt to offer testimony. All these 
 men declare in the most solemn manner, against the doc- 
 trine of baptismal regeneration, in the sense which we are 
 now considering. Indeed, I cannot call to mind a single 
 writer of that church, from the time of Archbishop Cran- 
 mer to the present hour, who had the least claim to the 
 character of an evangelical man, who did not repudiate the 
 doctrine which I am now opposing ; and not a few of them 
 denounce it as Popish, and adapted to subvert the whole 
 system of vital and spiritual religion. 
 
 4. The last argument which I shall urge against the doc- 
 trine of baptismal regeneration, is, that is it adapted to gene- 
 rate the most fatal errors with regard to the Gospel plan of 
 salvation. 
 
 So far as this doctrine is believed, its native tendency is, 
 to beget a superstitious and unwarranted reliance on an ex- 
 ternal ordinance ; to lower our estimate of that inward spi- 
 ritual sanctification which constitutes the essence of the 
 Christian character ; in fact, to supersede the necessity of 
 that spiritual change of heart, of which the Scriptures 
 speak so much, and for which the most holy and eminent 
 servants of Christ have, in all ages, contended. The truth 
 is, the doctrine now under consideration is the very same, 
 in substance, with the doctrine of the opus operatum of the 
 Papists, which all evangelical Protestants have been oppos- 
 ing for more than three hundred years, as a mischievous 
 delusion. Accordingly, the Popish character and fatal ten- 
 dency of this error have been unreservedly acknowledged 
 by many bishops, and other pious divines of the church of 
 England, as well as by many of the same denomination in 
 this country. 
 
 Further ; if regeneration, which is the commencement 
 of holiness in the soul, is always communicated in baptism, 
 then it follows, as, indeed, those who entertain this doctrine 
 distinctly avow,— that baptism invariably places its subject 
 in a state of salvation ; so that every baptized person who 
 dies immediately after the administration of this sacrament, 
 is infallibly sure of entering the kingdom of heaven. If 
 this doctrine were fully believed, would not every thinking, 
 anxious parent refrain from having his child baptized in 
 infancy, and reserve the ordinance for an hour of extremity, 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 131 
 
 such as the approach of death, that it might serve as an 
 unfailing passport to glory ? Would it not be wise in 
 every adult who may be brought to a knowledge of the 
 Saviour, from Paganism, or from the world, to put off his 
 baptism to the last hour of his life, that he might be sure of 
 departing in safety ? This is well known to have been one 
 of the actual corruptions of the fourth century, growing 
 out of the very error which I am now opposing. " It was 
 the custom of many," says Dr. Mosheim, " in that century, 
 to put off their baptism till the last hour ; that thus imme- 
 diately after receiving by this rite the remission of their 
 sins, they might ascend pure and spotless to the mansions 
 of life and immortality." This is no far-fetched or strange 
 conceit. It is the native fruit of the doctrine before us. 
 Nay, if we suppose this pernicious theory to take full pos- 
 session of the mind, would it not be natural that a tender 
 parent should anxiously desire his child to die immediately 
 after baptism ; or even, in a desperate case, to compass its 
 death, as infallibly for its eternal benefit ? And, on the 
 same principle, might we not pray for the death of every 
 adult, immediately after he had received baptism, believing 
 that then " to die would certainly be gain ?" In fine, I see not, 
 if the doctrine be true, tliat a regenerating and saving efiicacy 
 attends every regular baptism — I see not how we can avoid 
 the conclusion, that every Pagan, whether child or adult, 
 that can be seized by force, and, however thoughtless, re- 
 luctant or profane, made to submit to the rite of baptism, is 
 thereby infallibly made " a child of God, and an inheritor 
 of the kingdom of heaven !" 
 
 These consequences, which appear to me demonstrably 
 to flow from the theory in question, afford sufficient evi- 
 dence that it is an unscriptural and pernicious error, even if 
 no other means of refutation could be found. 
 
 It is not forgotten that language which seems, at first 
 view, to countenance the doctrine which I am opposing, is 
 found in some of the early Fathers. Some of them do 
 employ terms which would imply, if interpreted literally, 
 that baptism and regeneration were the same thing. But 
 the reason of this is obvious. The Jews were accustomed 
 to call the converts to their religion from the Gentiles, 
 little children, and their introduction into the Jewish 
 
132 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 church, a new birth, because they were brought, as it were, 
 into a new inoral world. Accordingly, circumcision is re- 
 peatedly called in Scripture " the covenant,''^ because it 
 was the sign of the covenant. Afterwards, when baptism, 
 as a Christian ordinance, became identified with the recep- 
 tion of the Gospel, the early writers and preachers began 
 to call this ordinance regeneration, and sometimes illumi' 
 nation, because every adult who was baptized, professed 
 to be born of God, illuminated by the Holy Spirit. By 
 a common figure of speech, they called the sig7i by the 
 name of the thing signijied. In the truly primitive times 
 this language was harmless, and well understood : but 
 as superstition increased, it gradually led to mischievous 
 error, and became the parent of complicated and deplorable 
 delusions. 
 
 II. But there is another view of the doctrine of baptismal 
 regeneration, which is sometimes taken, and which, though 
 less pernicious than that which has been examined, is still, 
 I apprehend, fitted to mislead, and, of course, to do essen- 
 tial mischief. It is this : That baptism is that rite which 
 marks and ratifies the introduction of its subject into the 
 visible kingdom of Christ ; that in this ordinance the bap- 
 tized person is brought into a new state or relation to 
 Christ, and his sacred family ; and that this new state or 
 relation is designated in Scripture by the term regene- 
 ration, being intended to express an ecclesiastical birth, 
 that is, being " born" into the visible kingdom of the Re- 
 deemer. Those who entertain this opinion do not deny, 
 that there is a great moral change, wrought by the Spirit of 
 God, which must pass upon every one, before he can be 
 in a state of salvation. This they call conversion, renova- 
 tion, &c.; but they tell us that the term " regeneration''^ 
 ought not to be applied to this spiritual change ; that 
 it ought to be confined to that change of state and of rela- 
 tion to the visible kingdom of Christ which is constituted 
 by baptism ; so that a person, according to them, may be 
 regenerated, that is, regularly introduced into the visible 
 church, without being really born of the Spirit. This 
 theory, though by no means so fatal in its tendency as the 
 preceding, still appears to me liable to the following serious 
 objections. 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 133 
 
 1. It makes an unauthorized use of an important theolo- 
 gical term. It is vain to say, that, after giving fair notice of 
 the sense in which we use a term, no misapprehension or 
 harm can result from the constant use of it in that sense. 
 The plea is insufficient. If the sense in question be an 
 unusual, and especially an unscriptural one, no one can es- 
 timate the mischief which may result from the use of it in 
 that sense. Names are so closely connected with things^ 
 that it is of the utmost importance to preserve the nomen- 
 clature of theology from perversion and abuse. If the 
 sense of the word *' regeneration" which is embraced in 
 this theory, were now by common consent admitted, it 
 would give an entirely new aspect to all those passages of 
 Scripture in which either regeneration or baptism is men- 
 tioned, making some of them unmeaning, and others ridi- 
 culous ; and render unintelligible, and in a great measure 
 useless, if not delusive, nine-tenths of the best works on 
 the subject of practical religion that have ever been written. 
 
 2. But there is a more serious objection. If men be told 
 that evfery one who is baptized, is thereby regenerated — 
 "born of God," — "born of the Spirit," — made a "new- 
 creature in Christ," — will not the mass of mankind, in 
 spite of every precaution and explanation that can be em- 
 ployed, be likely to mistake on a fundamantal point; to 
 imagine that the disease of our nature is trivial, and that a 
 trivial remedy for it will answer ; to lay more stress than 
 they ought upon an external rite ; and to make a much 
 lower estimate than they ought of the nature and necessity 
 of that holiness without which no man shall see the Lord ? 
 
 After all, however, although the doctrine of baptismal 
 regeneration, in the first and most objectionable sense, 
 is known to be rejected by all the truly evangelical divines 
 of the church of England, and by the same class in the 
 Protestant Episcopal church in this country ; yet it cannot 
 be denied that something, to say the least, very like this 
 docti'ine is embodied in the baptismal service of that deno- 
 mination on both sides of the Atlantic. The following spe- 
 cimens of its language will at once illustrate and confirm 
 my meaning : " Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that 
 this child is regenerate, and grafted into the body of Chris fs 
 church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these 
 
134 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 benefits, and with one accord make our prayers unto him, 
 that this child may lead the rest of his life according to this 
 beginning." And again : " We yield thee hearty thanks, 
 most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to regene- 
 rate this infant by thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for 
 thine own child by adoption, and to incorporate him into 
 thy holy church," &c. The same language is also repeated 
 in the baptismal service for " those of riper years." They 
 are represented as being *' regenerated ;" as being "born 
 again," and "made heirs of salvation;" and as having 
 " put on Christ." This language is differently interpreted, 
 by the Episcopal ministers who employ it, according to the 
 opinion which they adopt with regard to baptism. Those 
 who coincide in opinion with Bishop Mant, and others of 
 similar sentiments, make no scruple of avowing, that these 
 expressions literally import, what they fully believe, that 
 every one who is duly baptized, is, in and by that rite, born 
 of the Spirit, and brought into a state of grace and salvation. 
 A second class of interpreters, however, consider this lan- 
 guage of the Liturgy as merely importing that the person 
 baptized is brought into a new state, or a new relation to 
 the visible church. While a third class, although they ac- 
 knowledge that the language before us, literally interpreted, 
 does certainly express more than a mere visible relation, 
 even the participation of truly spiritual and saving blessings ; 
 yet say, that they can conscientiously employ it, because a 
 Liturgy intended for general use, ought to be, and must be, 
 constructed upon the principle, that those who come to re- 
 ceive its offices are all to be considered as sincere, and as 
 having a right, in the sight of God, to the ordinance 
 for which they apply ! And thus it happens, that those 
 who reject as Popish and delusive, the doctrine of baptis- 
 mal regeneration, as taught by Mant, and those who concur 
 with him, feel no difficulty in publicly and solemnly re- 
 peating this language, every time they administer the ordi- 
 nance of baptism. 
 
 It is not for one of another communion to interpose 
 between the consciences of Episcopal ministers, and the 
 import of their public formularies. In fidelity to my own 
 principles, however, and as a warning to those of my own 
 church who may be assailed by the proselyting efforts of 
 some of this denomination, I may be permitted to say, that 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 135 
 
 if I believed with Bishop Mant, and his associates in senti- 
 ment, the language of the baptismal service would be en- 
 tirely to my taste ; but if not, I could not, on any account, 
 conscientiously employ it. It would not satisfy me to be 
 told, that the language of one of the Thirty-nine Articles, 
 and some of the language found in the Book of Homilies, 
 bears a different aspect. This is, no doubt, true. Still 
 this does not remove or alter the language of the baptismal 
 service. There it stands, a distress and a snare to thou- 
 sands of good men, who acknowledge that they could wish 
 it otherwise, but dare not modify it in the smallest jot or 
 tittle.'*^ Had I no other objection to ministering in the 
 church of England, or in the corresponding denomination 
 in this country — this part of the Liturgy would alone be 
 an insurmountable one. I could not consent continually to 
 employ language, which, however explained or counter- 
 acted, is so directly adapted to deceive in a most vital point 
 of practical religion. I could not allow myself to sanction 
 by adoption and use, language which, however explained 
 and counteracted in ray own ministry, I knew to be pre- 
 sented and urged by many around me in its literal import, 
 and declared to be the only true doctrine of the church. 
 
 As to the plea, that a Liturgy must necessarily be con- 
 structed upon the principle that all who come to its offices 
 must be presumed to be sincere, and be solemnly assured, 
 in the name of God, that they are so, nothing can be more 
 delusive. Cannot scriptural truth be as plainly stated, and 
 as wisely guarded in a liturgical composition as in any 
 other ? Our Methodist brethren have a prescribed form 
 for baptism; and so far as I recollect its language, they 
 have succeeded, without apparent difficulty, in making it 
 at once instructive, solemn, appropriate, and unexceptiona- 
 ble. And I have heard Presbyterian ministers a thousand 
 times tell their hearers, with as much distinctness in admi- 
 nistering sacraments, as in ordinary preaching, that " the 
 sacraments become effectual to salvation, not from any vir- 
 tue in them, or in him that doth administer them ; but only 
 
 * An evangelical and deeply conscientious minister of the Episco- 
 pal church, who, after struggling for some time with the most distress- 
 ing scruples, as to this very feature in the baptismal service, ventured 
 to alter a few words, was forthwith, by his diocesan, dismissed from 
 the ministry. 
 
136 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 by the blessing of Christ, and the working of his Spirit in 
 them that by faith receive them.^^ 
 
 But it may be asked, what kind or degree of efficacy do 
 Presbyterians consider as connected with baptism? Do 
 they suppose that there is any beneficial influence, physical 
 or moral, in all cases, connected with the due administra- 
 tion of this sacrament ? I answer, no7ie at all. They 
 suppose that the washing with water in this ordinance is an 
 emblem and a sig7i of precious benefits ; that it holds forth 
 certain gi-eat truths, which are the glory of the Christian 
 covenant, and the joy of the Christian's heart; that it is a 
 seal affixed by God to his covenant with his people, 
 whereby he certifies his pm-poses of grace, and pledges his 
 blessing to all who receive it with a living faith ; nay, that 
 it is the seal of valuable outward privileges, even to those 
 who are not then, or at any other time, " born of the 
 Spirit;" that, as a solemn rite appointed by Christ, it is 
 adapted to make a solemn impression on the serious mind ; 
 but that when it is administered to the persons, or the off- 
 spring of those who are entirely destitute of faith, there is 
 no pledge or certainty that it will be accompanied with any 
 blessing. They receive the water, but not the Spirit. 
 They are engrafted into the visible church, but not into the 
 spiritual body of Christ, and are, after baptism, just as 
 they were before, like Simon the Sorcerer, " in the gall of 
 bitterness and in the bond of iniquity." 
 
 (Note C.) 
 
 Sponsors in Baptism. 
 
 It is well known that the Presbyterian church differs 
 from the Episcopal in regard to the subject announced at 
 the head of this note. We differ in two respects. First, 
 in not requiring or encouraging the appearance of any 
 other sponsors, in the baptism of children, than ihe parents, 
 when they are living and qualified to present themselves in 
 this character : and, secondly, in not requiring, or even ad- 
 mitting any sponsors at all in cases of adult baptism. My 
 object in the remarks which I am about to make on this 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 137 
 
 subject, is, not to impugn either the principles or practice 
 of our Episcopal brethren ; but simply to state, for the in- 
 struction of the members of our own church, why we can- 
 not think or act with them in relation to this matter. 
 
 It is curious to observe the several steps by which the 
 use of sponsors, as now established in the Romish and 
 some Protestant churches, reached its present form. Within 
 the first five or six hundred years after Christ, there is no 
 evidence that children were et^er presented for baptism by 
 any other persons than their pareitts, provided those pa- 
 rents were living, and were professing Christians. When 
 some persons, in the time of Augustine, who flourished 
 toward the close of the fourth^ and beginning of the fifth 
 century, contended that it was not lawful, in any case, for 
 any excepting their natural parents to offer children in bap- 
 tism ; that learned and pious Father opposed them, and 
 gave it as his opinion, that, in extraordinary cases, as, for 
 example, when the parents were dead; when they were 
 not professing Christians ; when they cruelly forsook and 
 exposed their offspring ; and when masters had young 
 slaves committed to their charge ; in these cases, (and the 
 pious Father mentions no others,) he maintains that any 
 professing Christians, who should be willing to undertake 
 the benevolent charge, might, with propriety, take these 
 children, offer them in baptism, and become responsible for 
 their Christian education. This, every one will perceive, 
 is in strict conformity with the principles maintained in the 
 foregoing essay, and with the doctrine and habits of the 
 Presbyterian church. 
 
 The learned Bingham, an Episcopal divine of great 
 learning, seems to have taken unwearied pains, in his " Ec- 
 clesiastical Antiquities," to collect every scrap of testimony 
 within his reach, in favour of the early origin of sponsors. 
 But he utterly fails of producing even plausible evidence to 
 that amount ; and at length candidly acknowledges that in 
 the early ages, parents were, in all ordinary cases, the pre- 
 sentors and sureties for their own children; and that 
 children were presented by others only in extraordinary 
 cases, such as those already alluded to. It is true, indeed, 
 that some writers, more sanguine than discriminating, 
 have quoted Dionysius, Tertullian, and Cyril of Alexan- 
 
139 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 dria, as affording countenance to the use of sponsors in 
 early times. Not one of those writers, however, has 
 written a sentence which favours the use of any other 
 sponsors than parents, when they were in life, and of a 
 proper character to offer their children for the sacramental 
 seal in question. Even Dionysius, whose language has, at 
 first view, some appearance of favouring such sponsors ; 
 yet, when carefully examined, will be found to speak only 
 of sponsors who undertook to train up in the Christian re- 
 ligion some of the children of Pagans, who were delivered, 
 for this purpose, into the hands of these benevolent sure- 
 ties, by their unbelieving parents. But this, surely, is not 
 inconsistent with what has been said. And, after all, the 
 writings of this very Dionysius are given up by the learned 
 Wall, and by the still more learned and illustrious Archbi- 
 shop Usher, as a " gross and impudent forgery," unworthy 
 of the least credit. 
 
 It was not until the council of Mentz, in the ninth cen- 
 tury, that the church of Rome forbade the appearance of 
 parents as sponsors for their own children, and required 
 that this service be surrendered to other hands. 
 
 Mention is made, by Cyril, in the fifth century, and by 
 Fulgentius in the sixths of sponsors in some peculiar cases 
 of adult baptism. When adults, about to be baptized, 
 were dumb, or under the power of delirium, through dis- 
 ease, and of course unable to speak for themselves, or to 
 make the usual profession ; in such cases it was customary 
 for some friend or friends to answer for them, and to bear 
 testimony to their good character, and to the fact of their 
 having before expressed a desire to be baptized. For this, 
 there was, undoubtedly, some reason ; and the same thing 
 might, with propriety, in conceivable circumstances be 
 done now. From this, however, there was a transition 
 soon made to the use of sponsors in all cases of adult bap- 
 tism. This latter, however, was upon a different principle 
 from the former. When adults had the gifts of speech and 
 reason, and were able to answer for themselves, the spon- 
 sors provided for such never answered or professed for 
 them. This was invariably done by the adult himself. 
 Their only business, as it would appear, was to be a kind 
 of curators or guardians of the spiritual life of the persons 
 baptized. This office was generally fulfilled, in each 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 139 
 
 church, by the deacons, when adult males were baptized ; 
 and by the deaconesses, when females came forward to 
 receive this ordinance. 
 
 Among the pious Waldenses and Albigenses, in the mid- 
 dle ages, no other sponsors than parents seem to have been 
 in common use. In one of their catechisms, as preserved 
 by Perrin, and Morland, they ask, " By whom ought 
 children to be presented in baptism ?" Answer, " By their 
 parents, or by any others who may be inspired with this 
 charity ;" which is evidently intended to mean, as other 
 documents respecting them show, that where the parents 
 were dead, or absent, or could not act, other pious profes- 
 sors of religion might take their places. 
 
 According to one of the canons of the church of Eng- 
 land, " parents are not to be urged to he present when their 
 children are baptized, nor to be permitted to stand as spon- 
 sors for their own children." In the Protestant Episcopal 
 church in this country, parents " may be admitted as spon- 
 sors if it be desired." But in both countries it is required 
 that there be sponsors for all adults, as well as for infants. 
 
 The baptismal service of the Methodist church in the 
 United States, for infants, does not recognise the use of any 
 sponsors at all, excepting the parents, or whatever other 
 " friends" may present them. 
 
 It is plain, then, that the early history of the church, as 
 well as the Word of God, abundantly sustains the doctrine 
 and practice of the Presbyterian church in this matter. We 
 maintain, that as the right of the children of believers to 
 baptism, flows from the membership and faith of their parents 
 according to the flesh ; so those parents, if living, are the 
 only proper persons to present them for the reception of 
 this covenant seal. If, however, their proper parents, on 
 any account, cannot do this, they may, upon our principles, 
 with propriety, be presented by any professed believers, 
 who, quoad hoc, adopt them as their children, and'are willing 
 to engage, as parents, to " bring them up in the nurture and 
 admonition of the Lord." 
 
 If, indeed, nothing else were contended for in this case, 
 than that, when believing parents have pious and peculiar 
 friends who are willing to unite with them in engagements 
 to educate their children in the true religion, such friends 
 might be permitted to Btand with them ; there might not be 
 
140 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 SO much to condemn. Even then the solemn question 
 might be asked ; *' Who hath required this at your hands ?" 
 But when the system is, to set aside parents ; to require 
 that others take their places, and make engagements which 
 they alone, for the most part, are qualified to make ; and 
 when, in pursuance of this system, thousands are daily 
 making engagements which they never think of fulfilling, 
 and in most cases, notoriously have it not in their poAverto 
 fulfil, and, indeed, feel no special obligation to fulfil; 
 we are constrained to regard it as a human invention, 
 having no warrant whatever, either, from the Word of 
 God or primitive usage ; and as adapted, on a variety of 
 accounts, to generate evil, much evil, rather than good. 
 
 (Note D.) 
 Confirmation. 
 
 In the apostolic church, there was no such rite as that 
 which under this name has been long established in the 
 Romish communion as a sacrament, and adopted in some 
 Protestant churches as a solemnity, in their view, if not 
 commanded, yet as both expressive and edifying. It is not 
 intended in this note to record a sentence condemnatory of 
 those who think proper to employ the rite in question : 
 but only to state with brevity some of the reasons why the 
 fathers of the Presbyterian Church, thought proper to ex- 
 clude it from their ritual ; and why their sons, to the present 
 hour, have persisted in the same course. 
 
 1 . We find no foundation for this rite in the Word of 
 G od. Indeed our Episcopal brethren, and other Protestants 
 who employ it, do not pretend to find any direct warrant 
 for it in Scripture. All they have to allege, which bears 
 the least resemblance to any such practice, is the statement 
 recorded in Acts viii. 14 — 17 : Now when the Apostles, 
 which were at Jerusalem, heard that Samaria had received 
 the AVord of God, they sent unto them Peter and John, 
 who when they were come down, prayed for them, that 
 they might receive the Holy Ghost. (For as yet he was 
 fallen upon none of them ; only they were baptized in the 
 name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 141 
 
 tliem, and they received the Holy Ghost. That there is 
 here a reference to the extraordinary or miraculous gifts 
 of the Holy Ghost, and these conferred by extraordinary 
 officers, is so perfectly apparent, that it is no wonder the 
 advocates of Confirmation do not press it as proof of their 
 point. The only wonder is, that they ever mention it as 
 aflbrding the most remote countenance to their practice. 
 Tlie diligent reader of Scripture will find four kinds, or 
 occasions of laying on hands recounted in the New Testa- 
 ment. The first, by Christ himself, to express an authori- 
 tative benediction. Matt. xix. Mark x. 16; the second, in 
 the healing of diseases, Mark xvi. 18. Acts xxviii. 8 ; the 
 third, in conferring the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, 
 Acts viii. 17. xix. 6; and the fourth, in setting apart per- 
 sons to sacred oflice. Acts vi. 6. xiii. 3. 1 Tim. iv. 14. The 
 venerable Dr. Owen, in his commentary on Heb. vi. 2, 
 expresses the opinion, that the laying on of hands there 
 spoken of, is to be considered as belonging to the third class of 
 cases, and, of course, as referring to the extraordinary gifts 
 of the Holy Spirit. Others have supposed that it rather 
 belongs to the fourth example above enumerated, and there- 
 fore applies to the ordination of ministers. But there is 
 not a syllable or hint in the whole New Testament which 
 looks like such a laying on of hands as that for which the 
 advocates of Confirmation contend. 
 
 2. Quite as little support for Confirmation can be found 
 in the purest and best periods of uninspired antiquity. 
 Towards the close of the second century, several uncom- 
 manded and superstitious additions had been made to the 
 ordinance of baptism. Among these were anointing with 
 nil, in avowed imitation of the Jewish manner of consecra- 
 tion ; administering to the baptized individual a mixture of 
 milk and honey, as the symbol of his childhood in a new 
 life, and as a pledge of that heavenly Canaan, with all its 
 advantages and happiness, to which the hopes of the bap- 
 tized were directed ; the laying on of the hands of the 
 minister officiating in baptism, for imparting the Holy 
 Spirit; to all which may be added, that immediately 
 after the close of this century, we find the practice oi exor- 
 cism introduced as a preliminary to baptism, and as a means 
 of expelling all evil spirits from the candidate for this ordi- 
 nance. These superstitious additions were made to sue- 
 
142 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 ceed each other in the following order ; exorcism, confes- 
 sion; renunciation; baptism; chrismation, or anointing 
 with oil, which was done in the form of a cross ; and final- 
 ly, the laying on of hands, or confirmation, which imme- 
 diately followed the anointing with oil, and the administra- 
 tion of the simple element above mentioned. " As soon as 
 we are baptized," says Tertidlian, " we are anointed with 
 the blessed unction." And he adds, "This unction is 
 according to the Jewish dispensation, wherein the high 
 priest was anointed with oil out of a horn." The laying 
 on of hands, or confirmation, immediately followed the 
 unction. " As soon as we come from the baptismal laver," 
 says Tertidlian, " We are anointed, and then hands are 
 imposed." This was considered as essential to the com- 
 pletion of the ordinance. "We do not receive the Holy 
 Ghost," says the same father, " in baptism, but being puri- 
 fied by the water, we are prepared for the Holy Ghost, and 
 at the laying on of hands, the soul is illuminated by the 
 Spirit." The exorcism, then, the anointing with oil, the 
 sign of the cross, the imposition of hands for conveying 
 the Holy Spirit, and the administration of milk and honey 
 to the candidate, were all human additions to baptism, 
 which came in about the same time, and ought, in our 
 opinion, to be regarded very much in the same light ^vith a 
 great variety of other additions to the institutions of Christ, 
 which, though well meant, and not destitute of expressive- 
 ness, are yet wholly unauthorized by the King and Head 
 of the Church. 
 
 3. When the practice of the laying on of hands, as an 
 ordinary part of the baptismal service, was added, by human 
 invention, to that ordinance, it always immediately followed 
 the application of water, and the anointing with oil. " As 
 soon as we come from the baptismal laver," says Tertid- 
 lian " we are anointed, and then hands are laid on." And 
 it is further acknowledged by all, that every one who was 
 competent to baptize, was equally competent to lay on 
 hands. The two things always went together ; or rather 
 formed parts of the baptismal ordinance, which was not 
 thought to be consummated without the imposition of hands 
 by him who had applied the water and the unction. And 
 this continued to be the case, throughout the greater part 
 of the church, for the first three hundred years. Then the 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 143 
 
 term bishop signified the pastor or overseer of a flock or 
 congregation. Every pastor Avas a bishop, as had been the 
 case in Apostolic times. And then, in ordinary cases, none 
 but the bishop, or pastor of each church, administered bap- 
 tism. Of course, he only laid on hands. But afterwards, 
 in the progress of corruption, when Prelacy was gradually 
 brought in, it became customary, for the sake of doing 
 greater honour to the prelates, to reserve this imposition of 
 hands to them, as a part of their official prerogative. 
 Jerome (Dialog. Adv. Lucifer.) expressly declares, that the 
 committing this benediction wholly to the bishop;?, was 
 done *' rather in honour of the priesthood, than from neces- 
 sity imposed by any law." Even now, throughout the 
 Greek Church, this rite is administered, for the most part, 
 in close connection with baptism, and is dispensed by any 
 priest who is empowered to baptize. In like manner, in 
 the Lutheran and other German churches, in wiiich con- 
 firmation is retained, it is administered by every pastor. 
 Still, even when confined to prelates, this imposition of 
 hands was not, in ordinary cases, long separated from the 
 baptism : for the children were commonly carried to the 
 bishop to have his hands laid upon them as soon as conve- 
 nient. After a while, however, it became customary to 
 separate the two things much more widely. Confirmation, 
 or the laying on of the bishop's hands, began to be post- 
 poned for a number of years, according to circumstances ; 
 until, at length, it was often left till the arrival of adult age, 
 and even, in some cases, till the decline of life. All these 
 progressive steps evidently marked a mere human invention, 
 for which there is no divine appointment or warrant what- 
 ever. 
 
 4. The rite of confirmation is superfluous. As it was 
 plainly a human invention, so it is unnecessary ^ and an- 
 swers no purpose which is not quite as well, to say the 
 least, provided for in the Presbyterian Church, which rejects 
 it. Is it said to be desirable that there should be some 
 transaction or solemnity by which young people who have 
 been baptized in their infancy, may be called to recognize 
 their religious obligations, and, as it were, to take upon 
 themselves the profession and the vows made on their 
 behalf in baptism ? Granted. There can be no doubt that 
 such a solemnity is both reasonable in itself, and edifying 
 
144 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 in its tendency. But have we not just such a solemnity in 
 the Lord's Supper ; an ordinance divinely instituted ; an 
 ordinance on which all are qualified to attend, and ought 
 to attend, who are qualified to take on themselves, in any 
 scriptural or rational sense, their baptismal obligations ; an 
 ordinance, in fact, specifically intended, among other things, 
 to answer this very purpose, viz. the purpose of making a 
 personal acknowldgement and profession of the truth, the 
 service, and the hopes of Christ: — have we not, I say, in 
 the Sacramental Supper just such a solemnity as we need 
 for the end in question — simple, rational, scriptural, and to 
 which all our children may come, just as soon as they are 
 prepared in any form to confess Christ before men ? We 
 do not need confirmation, then, for the purpose for which 
 it is professed to be desired. We have something better, 
 because appointed of God; quite as expressive; more 
 solemn ; and free from certain objectionable features which 
 are now to be mentioned. 
 
 5. Finally; we reject the rite of confirmation in our 
 Church, because, in addition to all the reasons which have 
 been mentioned, we consider the formula prescribed for its 
 administration in the Church of England, and substantially 
 adopted by the Episcopal Church in this country, as liable 
 to the most serious objections. We do not think it a duty 
 in any form, to practise a rite which the Saviour never 
 appointed ; but our repugnance is greatly increased by the 
 language with which the rite in question is administered 
 by those who employ it. In the " Order of Confirmation," 
 as prescribed and used in the Protestant Episcopal Church 
 in the United States, the following language occurs. Be- 
 fore the act of laying on hands, the officiating bishop, in 
 his prayer, repeats the following language : " Almighty 
 and ever living God, who hast vouchsafed to regenerate 
 these thy servants, by water and the Holy Ghost, and 
 hast given unto them forgiveness of all their sins," &;c. &lq. 
 And again, in another prayer, after the act of confirma- 
 tion is completed, he speaks to the Searcher of hearts 
 thus — " We make our bumble supplications unto thee 
 for these thy servants, upon whom, after the example 
 of thy holy Apostles, Ave have now laid our hands ; to cer- 
 tify them by this sign of thy favour and gracious goodness 
 towards them," &c. And also, in the act of laying on 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 145 
 
 iiands, assuming that all -who are kneeling before him 
 already have the holy sanctifying spirit of Christ, he prays 
 that they " may all daily increase in this Holy Spirit more 
 and more." 
 
 Such is the language addressed to large circles of young 
 people of both sexes, many of whom there is every reason 
 to fear, are very far from having been " born of the Spirit," 
 in the Bible sense of that phrase ; nay, some of whom mani- 
 fest so little seriousness, that any pastor of enhghtened piety 
 would be pained to see them at a communion table : yet 
 the bishop pronounces them all — and he appeals to heaven 
 for the truth of his sentence — he pronounces them all 
 regenerate, not only by ivater, but also by the Holy Ghost ; 
 certifies to them, in the name of God, that they are objects 
 of the divine '■'■ favour f' and declares that, being already 
 in a state of grace and favour with God, they are called to 
 " grow in grace ;" to "increase in the Holy Spirit more 
 and more." 
 
 There are many who have long regarded, and who now 
 regard this language not only with regi-et, but with shud- 
 dering ! as adapted to cherish false hopes, nay, to deceive 
 and destroy souls by w^holesale ! I must again say, that 
 if there were no other obstacle to my consenting to minis- 
 ter in the Protestant Episcopal church, this alone would 
 be an insurmountable one. For it must come home to the 
 conscience and the feelings, not of the bishop only, but of 
 every pastor in that church who has, from time to time, a 
 circle of beloved youth to present for confirmation. It is 
 vain to say, that the church presumes that all who come 
 are sincere, and of course born of the Spirit, and in a state 
 of favour with God. This is the very point of objection. 
 She so presumes, and undertakes to " certify''^ them of it. 
 Presbyterian ministers do not, dare not, use such language. 
 They do not, and dare not, undertake to " certify" to any 
 number of the most mature and exemplary communicants 
 that ever gathered round a sacramental table, that they are 
 all in a state of grace and salvation, and that they have 
 nothing to do but to "follow on," and "increase in the 
 Holy Spirit." Nor is it a sufficient answer, I repeat, to say, 
 that a liturg}^, being a fixed composition, cannot be so con- 
 structed as to discriminate between different characters. 
 
146 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 This is denied. Every enlightened and faithful minister^ 
 of whatever denomination, who is at liberty to employ such 
 language as he approves, knows how to express himself, 
 both in prayer and preaching, in discriminating and impres- 
 sive terms ; and how to avoid modes of expression adapted 
 to deceive and betray unwary souls. It is surely not im- 
 practicable to address the largest and most promiscuous 
 assembly in a manner which, though not adapted to the 
 precise case of every individual, shall be at least free from 
 error, free from every thing of a deceptive and ensnaring 
 character. Our Methodist brethren, it was before remarked, 
 have a prescribed liturgical form for baptism ; which they 
 have rendered sufficiently discriminating, and at the same 
 time unexceptionably safe. And, what is not unworthy of 
 notice in this place, though the liturgy of the Protestant 
 Episcopal church is evidently the model which, to a certain 
 extent, they have kept before them in constructing their 
 own, they have wisely discarded altogether the ceremony 
 of confirmation from their ritual. 
 
 The advocates of confirmation, as a separate ecclesiasti- 
 cal rite, seldom fail of quoting Calviyi as expressing an 
 opinion decisively in favour of it. This is doing great in- 
 justice to that illustrious man. Calvin directly and warmly 
 opposes the idea of confirmation being considered as a dis- 
 tinct ordinance, claiming divine authority in the Church of 
 God. This he reprobates ; and especially the practice of 
 confining the administration of it to prelates ; but adds, 
 " that he has no objection to parents bringing their children 
 to their minister, at the close of childhood, or the commence- 
 ment of adolescence, to be examined according to the cate- 
 chism in common use, and then, for the sake of greater dig- 
 nity and reverence, closing the ceremony by the imposition 
 of hands. " Such imposition of hands, therefore, says he, 
 as is simply connected with benediction, I highly approve, 
 and wish it were now restored to its primitive use, uncor- 
 rupted by superstition." (Institutiones. Lib. iv. cap. xix. § 4.) 
 But what serves to throw light on Calvin's real sentiments 
 on this whole subject is that, in commenting on Acts viii. 
 17, he reproaches the Papists for pressing that pasaage into 
 the support of their sacrament of confirmation ; and not 
 only asserts, but proves, that the laying on of hands there 
 spoken of, relates, not at all to the ordinary and sanctifying, 
 
ADDITIONAL NOTES. 147 
 
 but to ttie miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, which have 
 long since ceased in the church; and, of course, that the 
 passage in question ought never to be quoted in favour of 
 confirmation, or of any other permanent rite in the Chris- 
 tian Church. 
 
 (Note E.) 
 Vote of the Westminster Assembly respecting Baptism. 
 
 It has been sometimes ignorantly, and most erroneously 
 asserted, that the Westminster Assembly of divines, in put- 
 ting to vote, whether baptism should be performed by 
 sprinkling or immersion, carried it in favour of spi'inklijis^, 
 by a majority of one only. This is wholly incorrect. The 
 facts were these. When the committee who had been 
 charged with preparing a " Directory for the worship of 
 God," brought in their report, they had spoken of the mode 
 of baptism thus: "/^ is lawful and siifficient to sprinkle 
 the chilciy To this Dr. Lightfoot, among others, objected; 
 not because he doubted of the entire sufficiency of sprink- 
 ling ; for he decidedly preferred sprinkling to immersion ; 
 but because he thought there was an impropriety in pro- 
 nouncing that mode lawful only, when no one present had 
 any doubts of its being so, and when almost all preferred 
 it. Others seemed to think, that by saying nothing about 
 dipping, that mode was meant to be excluded, as not a law- 
 ful mode. This they did not wish to pronounce. When, 
 therefore, the clause, as originally reported, was put to vote, 
 there were twenty-five votes in favour of it, and twenty -four 
 against it. After this vote, a motion was made and carried, 
 that it be recommitted. The next day, when the committee 
 reported, and when some of the members still seemed un- 
 willing to exclude all mention of dipping, Dr. Lightfoot 
 remarked, that to say that pouring or sprinkling was law- 
 fid, would be " all one as saying, that it was lawful to use 
 bread aiid wine in the Lord's Supper." He, therefore, 
 moved that the clause in the "Directory" respecting the 
 mode of baptism, be expressed thus : 
 
 " Then the minister is to demand the name of the child, 
 
148 ADDITIONAL NOTES. 
 
 which being told him, he is to say (caUing the child by his 
 name) — 
 
 " I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the 
 Son, and of the Holy Ghost. '^ 
 
 " As he pronounceth these words, he is to baptize the 
 child wath water, which, for the manner of doing it, is not 
 only laivful but sufficient, and most expedient to be, by 
 pouring or sprinkling of the water on the face of the child, 
 without adding any other ceremony." This was carried. 
 See LightfooVs Life, prefixed to the first volume of his 
 Works, (folio edition,) p. 4 ; compared with NeaVs History 
 of the Puritans, Vol. 11. p. 106, 107, compared with the 
 Appendix, No. II. (quarto edition,) where the " Directory," 
 as finally passed, is given at full length. 
 
 We do not learn, precisely, either from Lightfoot's bio- 
 grapher, (who was no other than the indefatigable Strype,) 
 or from Neal, by what vote the clause, as moved by Light- 
 foot, was finally adopted ; but Neal expressly tells us, that 
 *' the Directory passed the Assembly with great unani- 
 mity.''^ 
 
 From this statement, it is evident, that the question 
 which was carried in the Assembly, by a majority of one, 
 was, not whether affusion or sprinkling was a lawful mode 
 of baptism ; but whether all mention of dipping, as one of 
 the laivful modes should be ojnitted. This, in an early 
 stage of the discussion, Avas carried, by a majority of one 
 in the affirmative. But it would seem that the clause, as 
 finally adopted, which certainly was far more decisive in 
 favour of sprinkling or affusion, was passed " with great 
 unanimity.''^ At any rate, nothing can be more evident, 
 than that the clause as it originally stood, being carried by 
 one vote only, and afterwards, when recommitted, and so 
 altered as to be m,uch stronger in favour of sprinkling, and 
 then adopted without difficulty, the common statement of 
 this matter by our Baptist brethren is an entire misrepre- 
 sentation. 
 
4 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 
 ■mm- 
 
 
 
 1**''*^^!^^^ 
 
 y-.'- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD 
 
 
 
 PRINTED IN U.S A. 
 
*M