( 
 
M 
 
 
 ! 
 
 55 
 
 nj 
 
 
 
 » ^ 
 
 CL 
 
 
 J^ 
 
 
 
 1 ' 
 
 .^ 
 
 
 _w 
 
 
 ,^ 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 « 
 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 .»^^ 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 1 
 
 •** 
 
 Hi 
 
 Q. 
 
 
 1 
 
 ^-W 
 
 
 
 
 
 *^ 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 $ 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 
 bfl 
 
 r\ 
 
 ^ 
 
 &^ 
 
 <t 
 
 ^ 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 5^ 
 
 
 S 
 
 E 
 
 .^ 
 
 •c^ 
 
 M 
 
 CJ 
 
 "»«2 
 
 J^ 
 
 rt 
 
 C/) 
 
 1^ 
 
 -»-' 
 
 s*-* 
 
 P4 
 
 :s 
 
 "! 
 
 <k 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 « 
 
 
 -0 
 
 c 
 
 8 
 
 >* 
 
 
 a> 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 2 
 
 s 
 
 ^ 
 
 d: 
 
 S) 
 
 '^ 
 
 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/attempttoanswerqOOvanv 
 
AN ATTEMPT 
 
 TO ANSWER THE QUESTION 
 
 WHOSE CHILDREN ARE EN- 
 TITLED TO BAPTISM? 
 
 BY 
 
 I. A.I^AN vra: 
 
 NKEN, 
 
 PASTOR OF THE REFORMED DTJTCH CHURCH IN BHOOME-StREET, 
 NE W-YO RK. 
 
 new-york: 
 john moffet, 112 canal-street. 
 
 1841. 
 
H. LUnWIG, PEINTEK, 
 
 72 Vesey-st., N. Y. 
 
\5p> 
 
 PREFATORY REMARlS. ^ 
 
 The importance of the subject discussed 
 in the following chapters will hardly be de- 
 nied. If it be important that our children be 
 baptized at all, it is important that all should 
 be, that are entitled to the ordinance. The 
 question of right has greatly agitated our 
 churches, and notwithstanding the signal de - 
 feat that was sustained by the advocates of 
 the exclusive system, in the decision of the 
 Synod of '34, opinions remain unchanged. 
 Many are still grieved that their children are 
 refused a place in the church, while they 
 consider them entitled to that privilege. On 
 the other hand, conscience is pleaded for re- 
 jecting them, as if it would be a profanation 
 of holy things to receive them. Nothing can 
 produce uniformity of practice, but uniformity 
 in the principles adopted ; and any thing that 
 looks like an approximation to this, must be 
 the result, not of S3aiodical decisions, but of 
 free and friendly discussion. 
 
4 PREFATORY REMARKS. 
 
 Under this conviction, the writer was dis- 
 posed to commence such a discussion in the 
 cohimns of the Christian Intelhgencer. But 
 the prudent Editors, fearful of the strife of 
 pens, apprehended inconvenience from the 
 design, and it was abandoned. The subject, 
 however, continued to occupy a portion of at- 
 tention, and the following essay is the result. 
 It would perhaps be a piece of vanity to an- 
 ticipate more from its publication, than the 
 calling of the minds of our ministers and peo- 
 ple in some degree to the claims of our chil- 
 dren. The truth lies somewhere, and although 
 w^e have no reason to look for entire uniformi- 
 ty of opinion on any subject, yet I see noth- 
 ing to forbid the hope, that candour, judgment, 
 and the love of truth, applied to the investiga- 
 tion, may do much towards effecting a greater 
 degree of unity on this question, than at pre- 
 sent exists. 
 
 It is somewhat surprising, that on a subject 
 so important, and on which so much feeling 
 has been enlisted, so little should have been 
 written. It has so happened, that nothing has 
 come under my observation on that side of the 
 
PREFATORY REMARKS. 5 
 
 question which I advocate, besides what is 
 contained in the '' Magnaha." I have conse- 
 qiiently been compelled to pursue my way, 
 without the benefit of those helps, which re- 
 sult to writers from the labours of predeces- 
 sors in the same cause. This rer^ark is sub- 
 mitted to the consideration of those who may 
 feel the desirableness of greater fulness of ar- 
 gument and illustration, than they will find in 
 the essay. I have done the best I could in 
 the circumstances ; and if some one, or more, 
 better qualified to do justice to the cause, 
 should give that completeness to the discus- 
 sion, wliich it may be thought I have failed to 
 give, I shall be content to be forgotten ; and 
 shall cheerfully join with others in a vote of 
 thanks, to whomsoever shall so defend the 
 cause of our children, that the injustice of re- 
 fusing them a place in the congregation of the 
 Lord, shall be universally felt, and the practice 
 of rejecting them shall cease from the church. 
 In support of the opposite view of the 
 question, more has been written. But even 
 here, the great mass of writers on the gene- 
 ral subject of infant baptism, appear to have 
 
b PREFATORY REMARKS. 
 
 taken for granted, that none but the children 
 of the truly pious were entitled to be receiv- 
 ed into the church. This has not been the 
 case with all ; and to two of this class I have 
 paid some attention. The high character of 
 the Doctors Wardlaw and Cuyler, entitle 
 them to the unqualified respect and affection 
 of the Christian public. The former I know 
 only from his writings : the latter I know per- 
 sonally, and I esteem it a privilege thus to 
 know him. Placed by the providence of God 
 in a situation to trace his footsteps as a man 
 and a minister, I have more than his public 
 reputation to inspire my affection. He would 
 rebuke me for saying more, and I cannot be 
 satisfied with saying less, than that I could 
 hardly respect myself if I did not love him. 
 
 Still, I have spoken of the sentiments of 
 these standard-bearers, as I should have spo- 
 ken of them, had they proceeded from the 
 mere rank and file of the host of God. And 
 is not this right ? Sentiments in philosophy 
 or politics, in morals or religion, are distinct 
 from their authors. They must exist by their 
 own principle of vitality, or die. Their pro- 
 
PREFATORY REMARKS. 7 
 
 perties too, are just what they are, beautiful 
 or deformed, wholesome or pernicious, true 
 or erroneous ; and as they are, so should their 
 treatment be. 
 
 These remarks are offered in place of an 
 apology, for any thing that might appear too 
 free, in the manner in which I have spoken of 
 the sentiments of others. I have spoken 
 after my own way, which it would have cost 
 me an unpleasant effort to avoid. If the 
 reader camiot justify, he may forgive. If he 
 camiot forgive, he may condemn. I shall not 
 appeal from his judgment. No one can ask 
 more than to have his ow^n way. This I am 
 willing to grant ; and with such a feeling, in 
 connection with an earnest prayer and hope, 
 that some good may be done, I submit what 
 I have written to the judgment of the Chris- 
 tian public. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 The foundation of the visible clmrcli is 
 laid in the promise, '' I will be a God to thee, 
 and to thy seed after thee in their generations, 
 for an everlasting covenant." By this pro- 
 mise, a peculiar relation was established be- 
 tween God and the family of the Patriarch. 
 Circumcision Avas established as a sign, token, 
 or seal of the covenant ; and those who re- 
 ceived it, were henceforward to be considered 
 as in the enjoyment of church privileges. 
 The family of Abraham was organized into 
 a chu7xh. 
 
 What is the nature of the relation implied 
 in the promise, " I will be a God to thee ?" 
 This promise, if it stood alone, would very 
 naturally be understood to express the rela- 
 tion, w^hich is established in the regeneration 
 of the soul to God. But in the first place, it 
 is to be observed, that the promise is made 
 with direct reference to the establishment of 
 
OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. -.V, ^ ft 
 
 a visible church. In the liighest spiritual 
 sense, God was as much the God of Lot, as 
 of Abraham. Lot belonged to the body of 
 true believers, but with the visible church, or 
 that body which was organized in the family 
 of Abraham, he had no connection. In re- 
 ference to it, therefore, God was not his God; 
 no such promise having been made to him. 
 And secondly, the same relation, as that es- 
 tablished by the promise with Abraham, was 
 also established with his children. " I will 
 be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee^ 
 It will not be pretended, that the children of 
 Abraham, at eight days old, when the cove^ 
 nant was to be ratified by the application of 
 the seal, exercised the faith of their father ; 
 or that universally, at any subsequent age, 
 they were the regenerated sons of God. It 
 was enough that they were the sons of Abra- 
 ham, to bring them within the scope of the 
 covenant. The church was not constituted to 
 be an immaculate body of saints, but an 
 organized community, acknowledging the 
 true God, as the only proper object of reli' 
 gious worship — a community to which revC' 
 
10 OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 lations of the divine will were to be made ; 
 and which was to preserve, and hand down 
 these revelations, through successive genera- 
 tions. " To them were committed the ora- 
 cles of God." With the preservation of the 
 divine oracles, was connected their use, which 
 would be blessed to the salvation of many in 
 Israel. 
 
 In the administration of the initiatory rite 
 to those who were entitled to receive it, the 
 church received its formal organization. The 
 circumcised coinjwsed the chu7xh as much 
 theU) as they ever did afterwards ; and as 
 much as the baptized do now. The favours 
 which w^ere subsequently conferred through 
 the ministry of Moses, in specific directions 
 for the w^orship of God, and in various signifi- 
 cant appointments, adjusted to the promise, 
 and which in their influence when rightly 
 used, would concm' with the word in the pro- 
 motion of spiritual ends, were conferred upon 
 the chw'ch as already organized. The du- 
 ties enjoined were enjoined upon the church. 
 The promises made, were made to the church. 
 The fundamental laws of the community 
 
OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 11 
 
 were not altered nor modified ; no new reli- 
 gious qualifications w^ere enjoined — no new 
 tests of any kind established for the admis- 
 sion of members. In these respects, Moses 
 left the chiu-ch as he found it, bomid to God 
 in the original and everlasting covenant. 
 
 By the law, or promise, establishing the 
 visible church, an inclosure was made, in 
 which were to be found, not only polished 
 stones, but also a mass of rude materials, 
 placed there to be subjected to the action of 
 the instrumentalities of the Spirit of God. 
 Such materials w^ere the Jewish children, 
 brought m at eight days old ; and such many 
 of them always remained. The instrumen- 
 talities were the word and ordinances of the 
 church ; and by the action of these, under the 
 influence of the Spirit, many " lively stones" 
 were produced, and assigned to their place in 
 the spiritual temple. Such was, and such is, 
 the precise nature of the visible church. 
 With regard to all who are within the inclo- 
 sure, the circumstance of their being there, 
 and having God's mark upon them, implies 
 that they are in covenant in the sense of the 
 
12 OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 promise ; and consequently, that they sustain 
 the relation intended to be estabUshed by it, 
 as the charter of the visible church's organi- 
 zation. God is their God. He receives them 
 in w^hile infants, and puts his mark upon them, 
 as those to whom he designs to secure the 
 enjoyment of the means of grace ; not be- 
 cause they are believing, but that they may be 
 placed in the enjoyment of those means, by 
 which faith is produced and strengthened. 
 If, after they have arrived at maturity of 
 years and understanding, they are found no 
 better than when first admitted, the end of 
 their admission is yet to be answered; and 
 the same general reason, which at first existed 
 for admitting them, exists now for retaining 
 them. I say general i^eason^ because we are 
 engaged with general principles of ecclesias- 
 tical organization^ and not in pursuit of spe- 
 cial rules of ecclesiastical discipline. 
 
 Thus far in the view taken of the visible 
 church, the initiated are considered as admit- 
 ted to privileges^ with reference to their own 
 personal advantages. In addition to this, 
 they are to be considered as parts of an or- 
 
OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 13 
 
 ganization, designed for general religious 
 purposes, to luliich the unregenerate may he 
 made subservient, loliile the saving advanta- 
 ges are confined to the regenerate. 
 
 The emblem of an olive — a fruit tree, em- 
 ployed by the Apostle in Rom. ii., is beauti- 
 fully illustrative of that feature of the church, 
 to which the readers's attention is invited. A 
 tree, besides its roots and trunk, has branches, 
 buds, leaves, and fruit. It grows, and extends 
 itself, by the springing of successive branches 
 from those already in existence, just as the 
 church is enlarged by the multiplication and 
 growth of her children, those infant buds of 
 the tree of the Lord's planting. If you re- 
 quire the Baptists to apply this emblem to 
 the illustration of their idea of the church, 
 you appear to be little short of unmerciful. 
 Paul certainly never intended to w^orry Dr. 
 Gill, yet he has been the occasion of his wri- 
 ting the most egregious nonsense. Let any 
 one read the Doctor's commentary on Rom. 
 xi. 17, and if he can make out a tree, it is 
 one, the fellow of which, is not to be found 
 in all the vegetable universe. It has neither 
 2 
 
14 OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 bud nor natural branches, stock nor roots — ' 
 a mere congregation of scions. It admits of 
 branches being taken from it, which never 
 belonged to it, and of exotic branches being 
 grafted upon it ; but to w^hat these branches 
 are attached, the learned Commentator, with 
 all the Rabbinical doctors of Jerusalem and 
 Babylon to help him, has not been able to 
 tell us. 
 
 Some of our Pedo-Baptist brethren, al-^ 
 though they do not make quite such work 
 as this with the 'planting of the Lord, yet 
 they go very far, in the process to which 
 they would subject the church, to mar it in 
 those respects, in which a fruit-bearing tree 
 is emblematic of its nature. As soon as 
 a branch has grown to a size to bear fruity 
 if it yield none, it must either be cut off en* 
 tirely, or so far dismembered as to lose all 
 share " of the root and fatness of the olive.'* 
 At all events, the huds are all to be torn off, 
 and there is death to the whole branch. 
 They would have none but fruit-bearing 
 branches, with very little buds on them ; and 
 these are to be watched very closely. If they 
 
OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 15 
 
 give indications of producing nothing but 
 leaves, they are at once to be broken off. A 
 natural tree dealt with after this manner, 
 w^ould be likely to resemble one that had been 
 standing in the neighbom'hood of the house 
 of Job's eldest son, in the day when it w^as 
 smitten on the four corners thereof, "by a 
 great wind from the wilderness." 
 
 A fruit tree is not a mass of fruit, but an 
 apparatus for the production of fruit. All its 
 branches are not productive ; some not at 
 first, some never. But they belong to the 
 tree, and have their place in the general eco- 
 nomy. Each branch, each leaf, while it is 
 sustained by the tree^ contributes to its health, 
 and vigour, and fruitfulness. The processes 
 of natiu-e in the case, are too well understood 
 to need proof or explanation. From year to 
 year, fruit is produced and gathered. The 
 leaves having performed the part assigned to 
 them in the general economy, are first nip- 
 ped by the frost, and then driven away by 
 the blasts of autumn, to be seen no more. 
 
 I am aware that by the help of a httle ima- 
 gination, resemblances may be carried to an 
 
16 OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 extreme, that detracts from the beauty of 
 simihtude, and from the dignity of language. 
 But we are in Httle danger here ; for the things 
 themselves in the church, of which the proper- 
 ties of the tree just spoken of are emblematic, 
 are so obvious that, Avithout the help of the 
 emblem, they could not fail to attract our at- 
 tention. Not only is the visible church per- 
 petuated and extended by a succession of in- 
 dividuals, proceeding one from another, after 
 the manner of the successive branches of a 
 tree, but it is an apparatus for the production 
 of piety, as the other is for the production of 
 fruit. The maintainance of the public ordi- 
 nances of religion will hardly be denied to be 
 essential to the interests of personal piety. 
 Without such ordinances believers themselves 
 lose their vigour, and become unfruitful. Ac- 
 commodations for worshipping assemblies, 
 and for the support of the ministry, are not 
 to be dispensed with, if religion is to prosper 
 in the world. 
 
 From the nature of the case, as well as from 
 the fact, that infants are received into the 
 church, in a way to ensure her perpetuity, 
 
OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 17 
 
 and to promote her enlargement, in a degree 
 commensm-ate with the increased demand for 
 the pubhc offices of rehgion, it is perfectly 
 natural to infer, that such an organization was 
 originally designed, as would secure the pro- 
 vision necessary for their maintainance. The 
 fact is certain, that the pious alone have sel- 
 -dom been able to sustain those means, which 
 are essential to their own spiritual welfare. 
 They have ever been more or less dependent 
 for them upon others, less favoured by the 
 grace of God than themselves. Let those 
 who will subject them, by their idea of the 
 church, to the taunt of " Corban,^^ from those 
 who build their churches, and support their 
 ;ininisters ; for one, I must believe, that so far 
 as the circumcised or baptized have lent their 
 aid to these objects, they have only contribut- 
 ed tow^ards carrying out an important end con- 
 templated in the organization of the visible 
 <)hurch. The many ten thousands of Israel 
 Tvere necessary to support the institutions of 
 Moses in safety and efficiency. The temple 
 with its magnificence, the altar with its vic- 
 tims, and the priesthood with its dependen- 
 2* 
 
18 OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 cies, could not have been sustained (miracles 
 apart) w^ithout the strength of the nation. And 
 vi^hat Mrould become of a vast majority of our 
 churches now, if those who have only been 
 baptized were to withhold from them their 
 support ? It would be like tearing from the 
 fruit tree every limb that was not productive, 
 and the effect would be the same in the sad- 
 ness of its character. The tree would lose 
 large supplies of nourishment from the sur- 
 rounding atmosphere, by which its vigour and 
 fruitfulness had been promoted, and the means 
 of grace would cease to be maintained in the 
 churches — the organizations themselves would 
 pass out of existence. 
 
 If, instead of confounding the churches vis- 
 ible and invisible, a just regard were paid to 
 the subserviency of the one to the other, we 
 should be far from turning out men from the 
 one because they did not belong to the other ; 
 or from saying to them, you have no business 
 here ; when without their aid, we should have 
 neither minister nor sanctuary. When God 
 gave them privileges, he laid them under obli- 
 gations — obligations for their own sake,tobe- 
 
OF THE VISIBLE CHURCH. 19 
 
 lieve in Jesus, and thus become united with 
 the invisible church ; obhgations for the sake 
 of others, to sustain the institutions of rehgion 
 for the saving benefit of the elect; among 
 whom would be many of their own children, 
 if not themselves. 
 
 The church is a good olive tree. The 
 branches that bear not fruit, the Husbandman 
 will attend to in due time, as he will to the 
 tares of the field. 
 
 Should any find this last observation pro- 
 ducing disagreeable symptoms in their minds, 
 they are affectionately entreated not to suffer 
 themselves to be overcome. It may prevent 
 impleasant consequences, to revert to an ob- 
 servation already made, that "we are engaged 
 with general principles of ecclesiastical orga- 
 nizatiorij and not in pursuit of special rules of 
 ecclesiastical disciplmey 
 
CHAPTER 11. 
 
 OF THE NATURE OF THE INITIATORY RITE. 
 
 The initiatory rite under the old dispensa- 
 tion, is called a sign, or token, and a seal. 
 Paul (in Rom. iv.) says that Abraham "re- 
 ceived the sign of circmncision, a seal of the 
 righteousness of faith, which he had, being yet 
 uncircumcised." Pedo-Baptists have little 
 need to be affected by the attempts that have 
 been made to establish a distinction betw^een 
 the significancy of the ordinance as applied to 
 Abraham, and as it was applied to his seed. 
 By referring to the original transaction, it w^ll 
 be seen that the ordinance was administered 
 to the father and the children, upon the same 
 principle. " I will be a God to thee ;" there- 
 fore be circumcised. '' I will be a God to thy 
 seed ;" therefore let them be circumcised. If 
 the ordinance was a seal of the righteousness 
 of faith to Abraham, it was the same to his 
 children. The second part of the apostle's 
 language is exegetical of the first, as if he had 
 
THE INITIATORY RITE. 21 
 
 said, " the sign of circumcision, ivhich was a 
 seal of the righteousness of faith." This gives 
 the most natural sense to the language, and 
 avoids the incongi'uity of representmg a stand- 
 ing ordinance of the church, as one thing at 
 one time, and another thing at another time. 
 
 The righteousness of faith, is the great dis- 
 tinguishing benefit of the covenant of grace, 
 as opposed to the righteousness of the law, 
 under the covenant of works ; and the ap- 
 pointment of an ordinance, which signified 
 and sealed it to the heirs of promise, was a 
 glorious attestation to the doctrine of salvation 
 by grace. As a great distinguishing benefit 
 too, with which the other saving benefits of 
 the covenants are inseparably connected, it 
 very naturally, and in strict conformity with 
 Scripture usage, represents them all. Or, as a 
 learned professor of the present day expresses 
 it, " the various grace of the covenant.''^ 
 
 Cruden, in explaining the term sign, says, 
 " circumcision was a sign, evidence, or assu- 
 rance, both of the blessings promised by God, 
 and of man's obligations to the duties re- 
 quired." Under the article seal- he says, 
 
22 OF THE NATURE OF 
 
 "circumcision was a seal, and an assurance 
 on God's part to Abraham and his spiritual 
 seed, that he would give them Christ the 
 promised seed out of the loins of Abraham ; 
 and in him accept of them as his peculiar peo- 
 ple, pardon their sins, and cleanse them from 
 their natural corruption. It was a confirma- 
 tion of the covenant of grace, and of the 
 righteousness therein promised, upon believ- 
 ing in Christ." These quotations are made 
 for two reasons : First, because they express 
 the truly spiritual signification of circumcision; 
 and secondly, because they give the proper 
 extension to the blessing included in the 
 righteousness of faith. Baptism cannot have 
 a more spiritual meaning, nor can any claim 
 for it a meaning more extensive. The "wash- 
 ing aw^ay of sins," of which it is the immedi- 
 ate sign and seal, is to be received in the ordi- 
 nance in its connection with the other bene- 
 fits of the covenant, in the same manner as 
 the righteousness of faith is received in cir- 
 cumcision. In point of fact, the two sacra- 
 ments have precisely the same signification. 
 Cnxumcision and baptism, as ordinances of 
 
THE INITIATORY RITE. 23 
 
 the visible church, (and so also the others,) are 
 seals in a more qualified sense, than that in 
 which the term is applied to the act of the 
 Spirit; m his sealing work. The sealing of 
 the Spirit always implies the personal grace 
 of the subject. The divine agent often makes 
 his impression, in the absence of the visible 
 ordinance. And none who will be likely to 
 take an interest in this discussion, will contend 
 that gracious exercises have always attended 
 the administration of the initiatory rite, either 
 under the present or the former dispensation. 
 The blessing of the righteousness of faith, 
 Abraham had long possessed ; and it had long 
 been sealed to him by the Holy Spirit. But 
 though he had the thing symbolized by cir- 
 cumcision, he received the ordinance itself in 
 his new relation ; and as has already been ob- 
 served, it was administered to /izm, upon the 
 same principle as it was to his seed, who had 
 not been sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise 
 unto the day of redemption. To Abraham 
 and to his seed, circumcision was mi attestation, 
 an evidence, or assurance, as Cruden expresses 
 it, of the blessings promised by God in the 
 
24 OF THE NATURE OP 
 
 covenant of grace ; and of the connection be- 
 tween the actual possession of those blessings, 
 and the exercise of faith. In this sense alone, 
 can any external ordinance be properly regard- 
 ed as a seal. When so considered, its charac- 
 ter is not affected by the personal qualities of 
 the subject to whom it is applied. A believer 
 w411 make use of it, and w^ill appropriate to 
 himself the assurance of the grace of w^hich it 
 is the sign and the seal. But this does not 
 alter the nature of the thing itself, or make it 
 more a seal of the righteousness of faith, than 
 it was before, or than it is to those whose 
 want of faith incapacitates them for making a 
 similar use of it. 
 
 Although the sprinkling of blood was not a 
 sacrament, nor called a seal, yet as an attesta- 
 tion to a gracious truth, it possesses analogies 
 sufficiently strikino- to afford an illustration of 
 
 J o 
 
 the general nature of a sacrament. When 
 God commanded blood to be sprinkled upon 
 the people, and upon the altar, and upon the 
 furniture of the tabernacle, and upon almost 
 everything pertaining to the Israelites and 
 their worship, he gave an attestation to the 
 
THE INITIATORY RITE. 25 
 
 doctrine, not only that "without shedding of 
 blood there was no remission," but also that 
 in " the blood of sprinkling " there was remis- 
 sion of sins. As this application of blood, 
 whether made to a man believing, or to a child 
 incapable of believing, or to the insensate 
 stones of the altar, or furniture of the taber- 
 nacle, was equally significant of the same so- 
 lemn truth ; and afforded an equally strong at- 
 testation of it, in every instance in which the 
 application was made, so the sacraments do 
 not lose their significancy nor sacredness, by 
 the character of the subjects to whom they 
 are applied. From their very nature they can- 
 not. They consist of two things, connected 
 not by mere resemblances, but by the authori- 
 ty and appointment of God. The outward 
 act or ceremony, which may be called the ma- 
 terial; and the spiritual grace, doctrine, or 
 truth designed to be attested, which may be 
 called the engraving upon the material, and 
 is consequently always present, definite, 
 uniform, and unchangeable. 
 
 The importance of carefully considering 
 this part of the subject, is enhanced by the 
 
26 OF THE NATURE OF 
 
 prevailing want of care to confine the office 
 of baptism, as administered by men, to the 
 ends for which it was instituted. Composed 
 as the visible church is, of materials introduced 
 for the most part at an age when there can be 
 no understanding of spiritual things, it should 
 be borne in mind that in the administration of 
 the initiatory rite, men push their views so far 
 as to interfere with what does not belong to 
 them, whenever they insist upon such connec- 
 tions between the rite and personal grace, as 
 God has not established. The sealing of the 
 soul is an inivard action of the Spirit, and be- 
 longs to the invisible kingdom. Sealing the 
 grace or truth of the covenant to an individual 
 by baptism, is an outward action^ and belongs 
 to the visible kingdom. Each of these actions 
 has its appropriate place, and is assigned to its 
 appropriate administration. Ordinances be- 
 long to the visible church, and they are limited 
 in that respect to the ends of a visible organi- 
 zation. They seal the grace or truth which 
 God promises, and which the church receives 
 by faith. When any thing beyond this is as- 
 cribed to them, they are taken out of their 
 
THE INITIATORY RITE. 27 
 
 place, and are thrust into a province over 
 which God has reserved the administration to 
 himself. 
 
 If the views which have been given of the na- 
 ture of the initiatory rite be conformable to the 
 truth, then it is manifestly improper to represent 
 the faith of the parent as being sealed to the 
 child in baptism. Such a represention involves 
 not only inaccuracy of language, but an error in 
 point of fact ; and the unavoidable inference to 
 be deduced from it is, that baptism, instead of 
 being a seal of definite, fixed, and unalterable 
 signification, may prove to be any thing, and 
 every thing, that the endless diversities of hu- 
 man imaginings can make it. 
 
 Neither is it correct to say that the faith of 
 the church is sealed in the ordinance to the 
 child. This is a popular mode of speaking 
 on the subject, even with some whose views 
 on the main question are conceived to be cor- 
 rect. It is not the faith of the church that is 
 sealed, but the grace or truth of the covenant, 
 which the church is supposed to receive and 
 rely upon. The faith of the church itself 
 may be marred by many corruptions; but 
 
28 OF THE NATURE OF 
 
 these cannot affect the true signification of a 
 divine ordinance. God's righteousness, which 
 is the righteousness of faith, shall not be 
 abolished ; and his salvation, v^^hich is the con- 
 summation of the grace of the covenant, shall 
 be forever. 
 
 The views that have been given expose the 
 inaccuracy of another sentiment. I do not 
 know that the idea has been formally adopt- 
 ed by any, that baptism contains an attestation 
 to the faith of an adult receiving it, or to that 
 of the parent of a child receiving it. Yet, 
 such an idea appears to mingle with those 
 conceptions on the subject, by which the 
 practice of many is regulated. The righte- 
 ousness of faith was sealed to Abraham ; and 
 that he was a believer when he was circum- 
 cised we know very well. But that such a 
 fact should be made the subject of a sealing 
 ordinance— a holy sacrament, is past all belief. 
 The subject does not rise to the dignity 
 of a sacrament. Any man's fidelity is too 
 small a matter to admit of being associated, 
 even in idea, with the truth and grace of 
 God in a standing ordinance of his house. 
 
THE INITIATORY RITE. 29 
 
 In such an ordinance God testifies for liim- 
 self, and not for man. The duties which 
 are imposed constitute another subject. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 OF THE RELATION OF THE BAPTIZED TO THE 
 CHURCH. 
 
 Are those who have been baptized in their 
 infancy members of the church? The con- 
 stitution of the Reformed Dutch Church says 
 expressly that they are ; and that they are 
 subject to her government and disciphne. 
 The same doctrine is interv^^oven with the 
 whole texture, so far as it relates to the sub- 
 ject, of the platform, agreed upon by the Pu- 
 ritans of New England at the Synod of Cam- 
 bridge, Anno Domini, 1649. As far as certain 
 writers are understood, however, this doctrine, 
 so consonant to every rational idea of the 
 operation of an initiatory rite, is received by 
 some in a very qualified sense. Dr. Ward- 
 law remarks of those who have been baptized 
 in their infancy, " If on growing up they do 
 not hold the truth in the knowledge of which 
 they have been instructed, and on the princi- 
 ples of which they have been nurtured and 
 admonished, they must be treated according- 
 
BAPTIZED TO THE CHURCPI. 31 
 
 Iv. They cannot be admitted to the commu- 
 nion of the church. If on the contrary they 
 abide in the truth, holding fast the faithful 
 word as they have been taught, then they are 
 at liberty to unite in fellowship wherever their 
 judgment and conscience, on examination of 
 the word of God, may direct them. I do not 
 go so far as to speak of their being separated 
 from the church at any particular age, by a 
 formal sentence of exclusion when they do 
 not give evidence of the reception and influ- 
 ence of the gospel, for the reason just assign- 
 ed, that their baptism has not constituted 
 them p)roperly members of a particular socie- 
 ty, hut only disciples of Christ, under train- 
 ing for the duties and enjoyments of his 
 kingdom. 
 
 I am not siue that I understand the Rev. 
 author in these remarks. It would seem that 
 baptism constituted a kind of general church 
 membership, a membership which is defec- 
 tive, because it is not with a particular so- 
 ciety ; and which is not such as to warrant a 
 formal sentence of exclusion. The baptized 
 are only disciples of Christ, under training 
 for the duties and enjoyments of his kingdom. 
 
32 RELATION OF THE 
 
 Can any one tell from these representations? 
 whether the baptized, with the seal of the 
 covenant upon them, are in covenant or not '? 
 Is it so much smaller a thing to be a disciple 
 of Christ, than to be a member of a church, 
 that while the latter subjects to discipline, the 
 former does not ? And to how little consi- 
 deration is baptism entitled, when it does not 
 admit its subject far enough into the church, 
 to allow of his being thrust out of it? It 
 would afford some satisfaction to know, 
 whence the doctor's idea of discipleship was 
 derived. Was it from the character of those 
 against whom Saul breathed out tlueatenings 
 and slaughter 1 Did he derive it from those 
 disciples, full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, 
 who were chosen and ordained deacons, on 
 account of their exalted spiritual qualifica- 
 tions ? Perhaps the seventy, and the twelve 
 also, who are called disciples, as they were 
 not " properly members of a particular church, 
 were under training for the duties and enjoy- 
 ments of the kingdom of Christ." But leav- 
 ing particular cases out of the question, it is 
 somewhat surprising, that these should have 
 
BAPTIZED TO THE CHURCH. 33 
 
 been employed to express something less than 
 church membership ; a term which is the 
 common designation of the members of the 
 church. But a thing was to be expressed 
 which had no existence but in the writer's 
 imagination; of course it had no name in 
 the Scriptures ; a new term had to be in- 
 vented, or an old one employed out of its 
 usual signification. 
 
 The highly esteemed Dr. Cuyler, speaking 
 of those who have been baptized in their in- 
 fancy, employs the following language : — 
 " They are members of the church, as born 
 of believing parents ; and baptism is a sign 
 and seal of it. But they are infant members, 
 and can consequently be entitled only to the 
 privileges of infant members." The next 
 sentence is calculated to arrest particular 
 attention. " They change this relation for 
 adult membership, only by a credible profes- 
 sion, and in no other way." There must be 
 some pretty old infants in the church accord- 
 ing to this doctrine. Many, alas, remain per- 
 petual babes. One would think, that if as 
 infants they are entitled only to the privileges 
 
34 RELATION OF THE 
 
 of infant members, they would also, as infants, 
 be held free from all those responsibilities, 
 which are binding only on adults. If they 
 must be infants, why should not their infan- 
 tine imbecility be recognized in every aspect 
 in which they are contemplated? While 
 infants indeed^ they could have neither a 
 good nor a bad standing in the church ; and 
 as their relation as infants, with its standing, 
 such as it is, is changed for adult member- 
 ship, only by a credible profession, and in no 
 other way, how comes it to pass, that those 
 who have made no profession, and conse- 
 quently have not changed their relations, are 
 represented in the very next paragraph by 
 our author, as in had standing? There are 
 a great many things, which a great many 
 people don't understand. Dr. Wardlaw's dis* 
 cipleship has been seen to be one of them ; 
 here we have another. The manner in which 
 our distinguished authors write of the rela- 
 tions of the baptized to the church, proves 
 that when a thing is not, it is hard telling 
 what it is ; and that in the attempt the ablest 
 men appear to great disadvantage. 
 
BAPTIZED TO THE CHURCH. 35 
 
 Another thing is observeable here. Those 
 who are generally consistent, are yet capable 
 of speaking very diiFerently of the same 
 thing, from what they had spoken of it be- 
 fore, when an unvarying course would lead 
 to some undesirable result. The switches in 
 the rails get shifted, and the more rapid the 
 motion, the sooner and the gi'eater do the 
 effects of the divergency become manifest. 
 When the question is, shall baptism be ad- 
 ministered to certain children? the ordinance 
 is spoken of as a thing so sacred and holy, 
 and so full of meaning, that a caution becomes 
 necessary, lest it should be considered to be 
 the washing away of sin itself. But when the 
 ordinance is once administered, and the ques- 
 tion is, to what does it amount ? then it pos- 
 sesses scarcely meaning and virtue enough to 
 give to its subject a local habitation and a 
 name, even in a house where there are vessels 
 to dishonour as well as to honour. 
 
 This is not the way in which the initiatory 
 ordinance is spoken of in the Scriptures. 
 God's people of old were distinguished pre- 
 eminently by their interest in the Abrahamic 
 covenant. Whatever special privileges they 
 
36 RELATION OF THE 
 
 enjoyed, their great distinction and honour 
 consisted in their being in covenant with God ; 
 and that in their circumcision they had re- 
 ceived the seal of the covenant. They were 
 as much organized, as much in covenant, and 
 as much members of the church, before the 
 institution of the passover as after it. They 
 were distinguished not as Passoverans^ but 
 as "the Circumcision." And if baptism be 
 come in the place of circumcision, if it entitle 
 to as high and sacred privileges as were 
 secured by the former, it will be difficult to 
 discover the true idea of baptism in the lan- 
 guage under review, or the true nature of the 
 relation of the baptized to the church. 
 
 If we are to form our idea of the Christian 
 church as to its constituent parts, from the 
 order given to the Apostles, baptism is as 
 much the badge and test of church member- 
 ship, as circumcision was of old. " Go ye 
 teach or disciple all nations, baptizing 
 them^ The Lord's Supper enters no more 
 into the constitution of church membership 
 now, than the passover did in the beginning. 
 The baptism of an adult makes him a mem- 
 
BAPTIZED TO THE CHURCH. 37 
 
 ber of the church most assuredly, or the ini- 
 tiatory act does not initiate him. But as we 
 have but one baptism^ even as we have but 
 one God and Father, so the baptism of an 
 infant goes just as far, and makes it as much 
 a member, as the other. To commune is 
 the duty of those w^ho are members^ and con- 
 fession is a suitable means to satisfy the offi- 
 cers of the church that the duty is about to 
 be performed, and the privilege about to be 
 enjoyed, with understanding and acceptance. 
 The idea of a discipleship that does not 
 amount to membership, and the idea of an 
 infant membership, that may last to the end 
 of the longest life, are as derogatory to the 
 true dignity of baptism, as they are fanciful 
 in themselves. A person belongs to the 
 church, or he does not. He is in visible 
 covenant with God, or he is not. If he be 
 not in covenant after he has been baptized, 
 no matter at what period of his life, it can 
 only be because his baptism signified and 
 sealed nothing to him. But Holy Baptism 
 does signify and seal the grace of that cove- 
 nant which gives to the church her existence, 
 
38 RELATION, ETCr 
 
 and which estabhshes the relation of the sev 
 eral parts to the whole body. It is true of 
 all that have had the seal of the covenant put 
 upon them, that " of such is the kingdom of 
 Heaven.'^ 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 OF THE GROUND UPON WHICH THE INITIA- 
 TORY RITE IS TO BE ADMINISTERED TO 
 INFANTS. 
 
 The thing sealed in an ordinance, and the 
 ground or warrant for applying the seal of that 
 thing, are distinct subjects. In the case of 
 adults, the right to the ordinance, and the 
 administrator's warrant to dispense it, are also 
 distinct. The right is in the faith of the 
 subject. " If thou believest with all thine 
 heart, thou mayest." But until the eunuch 
 made confession of his faith, Philip had no 
 warrant to baptize him. So also the war- 
 rant may exist for administering the ordinance, 
 when the subject offering himself has no right 
 to receive it. Peter undoubtedly acted upon 
 a sufficient warrant when he baptized Simon, 
 because the sorcerer professed to believe. 
 Yet though the warrant was there, the right 
 to the ordinance did not exists Simon was not 
 ■a behever. 
 
40 THE INITIATORY RITE 
 
 In the case of infants, who are never bap- 
 tized on account of the spiritual quahties 
 which they are supposed to possess, no dif- 
 ference between their right and the adminis- 
 trator''s warrant can exist, if the covenant 
 relation of the parent be admitted to be the 
 ground of the infant's title to be received 
 into the church, or rather to have its mem- 
 bership acknowledged by its baptism. On 
 this principle the right is knowable in itself, 
 and not the subject of uncertain inference, 
 like the faith of an adult from his profession. 
 
 That the church-membership, or baptism 
 of the parent is essential, and contributes 
 largely to the infant's right, will hardly be 
 denied by a Pedo-Baptist. The important 
 question is. whether the church-membership 
 of the parent does not itself constitute the 
 ground of the child's church- membership, 
 and consequent right to baptism? The affir- 
 mative side of this question presents the 
 subject in its simplest form ; and the adop- 
 tion of it relieves from the endless embar- 
 rassments which must attend the practice of 
 those who, while they are administering a 
 
ADMINISTERED TO INFANTS. 41 
 
 sacred ordinance, are in doubt whether tlie 
 subject be entitled to it or not. This observa- 
 tion is particularly applicable to the practice 
 of those Avho do not insist upon the full com- 
 munion of the parent, as a test of the eccle- 
 siastical rights of the child. The system 
 which requires such a test, inconsistent as 
 I beheve it to be, and as I hope to show it 
 to be, w^th the constitution of God's covenant, 
 has at least some consistency with itself. It 
 admits of a rule, and the decisions upon that 
 rule are conformable to the professed belief 
 of those who are concerned. But to make 
 Christian character the ground of right, and 
 then to be compelled to infer that character 
 against the convictions of those to whom it 
 is supposed to belong, and against their refu- 
 sal to obey the dying command of the Mas- 
 ter, either because they do not consider them- 
 selves entitled to the privileges of believers, 
 or for any other reason, exhibits charity run 
 mad, and so expounding the law from the 
 place of judgment, as to make private opinion, 
 entertained ao;ainst both the confession and 
 4* 
 
42 THE INITIATORY RITE 
 
 evidence, the rule for the pubhc administra- 
 tion of the house of God- 
 According to the covenant to which all 
 appeal for the confirmation of infant privileges 
 in the church, relation, and not state-, desig- 
 nated the individuals upon whom the seal 
 was to be placed. Neither the spiritual state 
 of the child, nor of the parent, was appealed 
 to for the decision of the question, whether 
 the right existed to a place within the inclo- 
 sure, and to the advantages of the means of 
 grace. It was a question of privilege, the 
 law of which was settled by the highest au- 
 thority, and as definitely as the law of de- 
 scent. Was he of the seed of Abraham in 
 the line of Isaac and Jacob, then the promise 
 was directly to him. God was his God, and 
 the seal of the covenant must be passed upon 
 him. What has charity to do here ? Not a 
 whit more than censoriousness itself. 
 
 How far the relation of the children to 
 Abraham operated as a reason in the Divine 
 mind, for designating t^iem^ rather than oth- 
 ers ; or whether it operated as a reascn at 
 all, belongs not to us ; nor is it of conse- 
 
ADxMINISTERED TO INFANTS. 43 
 
 quence to the present argument. The 
 ground, or authority for applying the seal to 
 any others, had others been designated, would 
 have been the same that it is now, namely, 
 the divine command. This is definite and 
 imperative, in every case where the desig- 
 nated relation exists. '• Every man child 
 shall he circumcised.''^ 
 
 In Mather's Magnalia (vol. II. p. 250,) 
 the sentiments of the New England church, 
 in her piu-est days for faith and practice, are 
 thus expressed : " Interest in the covenant is 
 the main ground of title to baptism; for as 
 in the Old Testament, this was the ground of 
 title to circumcision. Gen. xvii. 7. 9, 10, 11, 
 to w^hich baptism now answers, Col. ii. 11, 
 12; Acts ii. 38, 39, they are on this gi'ound 
 exhorted to be baptized^ because the promise 
 or covenant was to thetji and to their children. 
 That a member, or one in covenant, as such, 
 is the subject of baptism, was further cleared 
 before, propos. 1. 2. That these children 
 have interest iii the covenant appears ; be- 
 cause if the parent be in covenant, the child 
 is also ; for the covenant is to parents, and 
 
44 THE INITIATORY RITE 
 
 their seed in their generations^ Gen. xvii. 7. 
 9 ; the pi'omise is to you and to your children^ 
 Acts ii. 39. If the parent stand in the church, 
 so doth the child, among the Gentiles now, 
 as well as amoncr the Jews of old. Rom. xi. 
 15. 20, 21, 22. It is unheard of in the 
 Scriptures, that the progress of the covenant 
 stops, at the infant child." 
 
 In conformity with these views, the chm'ch 
 insisted upon the baptism of those children 
 whose parents were not communicants, and 
 were not " fit for_the Lord's Supper." On 
 the following page this language is employed : 
 *' Confederate visible believers, though but 
 in the lowest degree such, are to have their 
 children baptized-" And again: ''Yet it 
 does not necessarily follow that these persons 
 are immediately fit for the Lord's Supper, 
 because, though they are, in a latitude of 
 expression^ to be accounted visible believers, 
 or in numero fidelium^ as even infants in 
 covenant are, yet they may w^ant that ability 
 to examine themselves, and that spiritual ex- 
 ercise of faith, which is requisite to that or- 
 dinance." 
 
ADMINISTERED TO INFANTS. 45 
 
 In these passages, relation, without regard 
 to the faith or confession of the parent in 
 covenant, is clearly stated, and maintained 
 as the ground of the infant's right to baptism. 
 A child born of a parent in covenant, whether 
 that parent be a believer in the evangelical 
 sense of the term or not, is a child of the 
 church, a child of Abraham, to whose seed 
 the promise was made ; and is consequently 
 entitled to the seal of the covenant. With 
 regard to any immediate parent, it is more 
 proper to say that the child derives his right 
 through him, than from him. The Hebrews 
 were an aggregation — a mass — collectively 
 the seed of Abraham ; and the relation of 
 each individual to him, was that of a part 
 of the common mass, which was his in its 
 aggregation. If the wicked Manasseh de- 
 rived his right to circumcision from his father 
 the worthy Hezekiah, from whom did the 
 good Josiah. the son of the unworthy Am- 
 nion, derive his right? It would perhaps be 
 unfair, to assume that the circumcision of 
 Josiah was as canonical as that of Manasseh, 
 though I doubt whether many would be wil- 
 
46 THE INITIATORY RITE. 
 
 ling to deny it. But this is not material. If 
 it can be established that each individual of 
 the Jewish family is to be regarded in the 
 matter of the covenant, as the immediate child 
 of Abraham, and that his right to the seal is 
 designated by that relation, small concern 
 need be felt about Josiah's right to the initia- 
 tory ordinance, or the rights of thousands, 
 who are ignominiously cast out of the con- 
 gregation of the Lord. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THAT THE COVENANT 
 RELATION OF THE PARENT IS THE SOLE 
 GROUND OF THE CHILd's RIGHT TO THE 
 INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 As the point under consideration is the one 
 upon which the Avhole subject must turn, so 
 far as it is to be decided by the tenor of the 
 Abrahamic covenant, the remarks upon it will 
 be somewhat extended. This chapter will 
 consequently be pretty long. For the con- 
 venience of the reader, it shall be divided into 
 sections, answerable to the several arguments 
 to be submitted. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 The rights and privileges of the Jews, as 
 they come down to them by descent, are al- 
 ways referred to Abraham^ without any re- 
 gard to intervening parentage. The only 
 exception to this remark is in favour of Isaac 
 and Jacob, who are sometimes mentioned. 
 
48 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 All will understand the reason of this, in the 
 special entailment of the promise upon these 
 two, to the exclusion of the son of the bond- 
 w^oman, who was cast out by authority ; and 
 of the brother of Jacob, of whom it is WTit- 
 ten, " Esau have I hated." With these ex- 
 ceptions, the tenor of Scripture is uniform in 
 referring the peculiar rights, privileges, and 
 honours of each member of the Jewish fami- 
 ly, to his comiection with Abraham himself. 
 In the Jews themselves, Ave may regard the 
 claim of being Abraham's seed, in the sense 
 in which they made it, as an empty boast. 
 So it was in reference to any saving advan- 
 tages to be derived from it, while they pos- 
 sessed not the faith of their father. But it is 
 not the less true, that in all that respected 
 their connection with the visible church, and 
 the many mercies they experienced as a cove- 
 nant people, their reference to Abraham was 
 just. They were beloved for their father's 
 sake. When the people were ready to perish 
 in the wilderness, " God remembered his holy 
 promise, and Abraham his servant, and open- 
 ed the rock, from which the waters ran like a 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 49 
 
 river." In an after age, when they were in 
 danger of being swallowed up by their ene- 
 mies, '• God was gracious to them, and had 
 compassion on them, .... because of his 
 covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and 
 would not destroy them." And what tender- 
 ness does not Christ infuse into his justifica- 
 tion of himself for healing a woman on the 
 Sabbath-day, by the consideration, that she 
 was " a daughter of Abraham." 
 
 Passages could be adduced to almost any 
 extent, to evince that neither nearness, nor 
 remoteness, in the line of descent, is ever re- 
 garded as affecting the relation of the Jews 
 to Abraham ; or their claims to the benefits 
 Avhich resulted from that relation. And why 
 should not the principle which operated upon 
 the mass, be allowed to operate upon the par- 
 ticular individuals who compose the mass? 
 If the people in their collective capacity were 
 beloved for Abraham's sake, for whose sake 
 w^ere the individuals beloved ? Under whose 
 favour was Josiah admitted to the privileges 
 of the covenant of his fathers ? 
 
 But leaving this train, and reverting to the 
 5 
 
50 OP THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 fact that God repeatedly delivered the Jews 
 from merited destruction, because he remem^ 
 bered his holy covenant and Abraham his 
 friend, it can escape the observation of none, 
 that the principle upon which the wicked were 
 spared on account of the righteous in their 
 case, differs essentially from that which is in- 
 volved in other instances in the course of di- 
 vine providence. The common principle i& 
 expressed in the case of Sodom. God will 
 spare the wicked for the sake of the righteous 
 that are among them. Not so with the Jews. 
 For although there were among them, at every 
 period of their impending destruction, righte- 
 ous persons — fathers, for whose sake, if for 
 any, judgment might be averted from the 
 children, yet it is never said that the wicked 
 were preserved on their account, but always 
 from regard to Abraham, and the covenant 
 made with him. The inference is, that nothing 
 had occurred to break the covenant relation 
 between any portion of the seed, and the com- 
 mon head and parent of all ; notAvithstanding 
 their remoteness from him in the genealogi- 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 51 
 
 cal lincj or the want of fidelity in many of the 
 intervening parents. 
 
 SECTION IL 
 
 The principle that the covenant relation 
 between Abraham and each individual of his 
 seed, is to be considered as immediate, with- 
 out regard to subordinate parentage, receives 
 strong confirmation from the unquestionable 
 prevalence of the same principle, in all other 
 covenants, which transmit their results from 
 father to son by natural generation. 
 
 Look at the covenant of works with Adam. 
 The terrible nature of that which is entailed, 
 does not alter the principle upon which it is 
 transmitted. What that principle is, none 
 need be at a loss to know. Not an individual 
 even of the present day, after so many genera- 
 tions from the common father of the race, has 
 had his covenant relations with that father 
 modified in the slightest degree, by the good 
 or bad qualities of intervening parents. All 
 are begotten in Adam's likeness, as much as 
 was Seth his immediate son. It is only as 
 
52 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 the children of the^r^^ transgression, that any 
 are " the children of wrath." " By one man 
 sin entered." " By the offence of one, judg- 
 ment came upon all." It is the relation to 
 Adam alone that produces these terrible con- 
 sequences. Imputation of guilt is direct from 
 him to us. But if under an economy, in 
 which justice with all its sternness reigns, 
 none are placed in a worse condition by the 
 sins of their immediate parents, is it to be 
 conceived that such an effect was intended to 
 be produced, by the operation of an economy 
 of light and truth, and the means of grace ; 
 in direct repugnance to the gracious spirit of 
 its conception, and the gracious ends of its 
 establishment? Shall even deeper shadows 
 than those of the ministration of death be 
 made to rest upon the ministration of life ? 
 God forbid. 
 
 The principle contended for receives a sig- 
 nal illustration and confirmation, from the 
 covenant of royalty with David. Manasseh's 
 birth-right to the throne did not receive its 
 confirmation from the virtues of his father, 
 Hezekiah ; nor was that of Josiah impaired 
 
OF THE ns'ITIATORY ORDINANCE. 53 
 
 by the vices of his father Anion. Each was 
 indebted for the honour to which he was rais- 
 ed to his relation to David the head of the 
 'Covenant. Rehoboam succeeded his father^ 
 not that Solomon might have a successor, but 
 -" that David might always have a light be- 
 fore God in Jerusalem." And although Abi- 
 jam his son "walked in all the sins of his 
 father, nevertheless, for David's sake, did the 
 Lord his God give him a lamp in Jerusalem, 
 to set up his son after him, and to establish 
 Jerusalem." Comment is mmecessary here. 
 It is clear as the sun shining in his strength^ 
 ■.that no regard is paid to intermediate persons 
 in the line of conveyance, and that each king 
 succeeded to the throne, as if he were the 
 first from David. So the venerable monarch 
 himself undoubtedly understood the matter. 
 In view of the unpromising character of his 
 •sons, he comforted himself with this reflec- 
 •tion, " though my house be not so with God, 
 yet hath he made with me an everlasting 
 .covenant, ordered in all things and sure." 
 In estimating the regard that ought to be 
 
 jpaid to tliis covenant in its bearing upon the 
 5* 
 
54 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 principle of the Abrahamic covenant, which 
 is noAV under consideration, it should be dis- 
 tinctly borne in mind, that church-membership 
 was involved in the right to reign — that none 
 but a member of the church could sit upon 
 the throne in Jerusalem. What then if con- 
 current principles, or rather wdiat if one com- 
 mon principle, had not governed the rights of 
 the same individual in both respects, would 
 have been the consequence ? Clearly, if the 
 operation of the Abrahamic covenant would 
 have cut off from the church that unhappily 
 large portion of kings, that walked not in the 
 way of David their father, the tw^o covenants 
 must have conflicted in their operation, in the 
 most fatal manner. By the one, God ivould 
 have these men itpon the throne. By the 
 other, he would not have them in the church 
 at allj much less upon the top of his holy hill 
 of Zion. Is it in two systems which thus dash 
 against each other, to their mutual destruc- 
 tion, that we see the products of his wisdom, 
 all whose works reveal the exactest unity of 
 design, and the most exquisite harmony of 
 operation ? In order to avoid so manifest and 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. OO 
 
 absurd a contradiction, we have only to admit 
 that each individual of the Jewish family, was 
 entitled to his ecclesiastical privileges, as a 
 son of Abraham — as a part of the common 
 mass, or aggregation, to which the promise 
 was made — in a word, as the child of the 
 church. 
 
 Aaron stands at the head of another cove- 
 nant, whose privileges and honours were trans- 
 mitted from father to son by natural descent. 
 In view of the ends contemplated in this con- 
 stitution, all feel that the priests' hearts should 
 have been right with God, and that the most 
 admirable sanctity of life became their high 
 vocation. They should have been perma- 
 nently instructed, and holy. " Whose lips 
 should keep knoAvledge," if not the priest's ? 
 *■ W^iose hands should be clean," if not theirs 
 who " bear the vessels of the Lord ? " But 
 Scripture is full of testimonies against multi- 
 tudes of their order ; so full that it would be 
 disrespectful to the reader to adduce a single 
 passage to confirm what is said. But who 
 was ever kept from the priesthood on account 
 of the sins of his father ? Hophni and Phi- 
 
56 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 neas were cut off for their own shameless 
 abominations ; and the house of Eh became 
 extnict. But while a son of Aaron lived, his 
 title was unquestionable, though his father 
 was as vile as the wretched sons of Eli. The 
 question of title was to be settled by the 
 genealogical records, and by nothing else. 
 When the Jews had returned from the cap- 
 tivity in Babylon, and the public worship of 
 God was to be restored, dependence was 
 placed upon those records, to decide who 
 were to execute the priest's office in the se- 
 cond temple, and not upon any j)Ost-mo7'tem 
 examination into the religious character of 
 those who had departed from the line of the 
 visible priesthood on earth, to glory or to 
 shame in the world unseen. Whatever that 
 character in any instance might have been, it 
 deprived no one in the priestly line of the mi- 
 tre and the ephod ; for he was a son of Aaron 
 still. Now if the relation to Aaron of any one 
 in the priestly line, was not broken by the 
 defective character of any intermediate pa- 
 rent, but he was treated as if he had been the 
 immediate son of that '' saint of the Lord^^'' 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 57 
 
 shall not the same principle apply to each in- 
 dividual of the seed of Abraham ? A fortiori 
 it should apply- For why should a man be 
 excluded from the outer court, for that which 
 would not exclude him from the place of the 
 ark and the cherubim — from the holy of 
 holie s? 
 
 In adducing these covenants, and in stating 
 the facts connected with them, the simple pur- 
 pose has been to show, that in representing 
 the covenant connection of each individual of 
 the Jewish family to be direct with Abraham, 
 without reference to any intervening parent- 
 age, and that his right to the seal resulted 
 from that relation, nothing has been advanced, 
 which is not in strict conformity with a prin- 
 ciple pervading all covenants, which transmit 
 their results by natural descent. With what 
 success the attempt has been made, is sub- 
 mitted to the judgment of the reader. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 For another argument to the same purpose, 
 appeal is made to the effect which the oppo- 
 site principle would have upon the general 
 
58 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 design of the covenant. The church was or- 
 ganized, not merely for the benefit of those 
 who at any one time composed its members, 
 but also for the extension of truth and privi- 
 lege in continuity, through successive genera- 
 tions. Now if the principle had been adopt- 
 ed that there could be no transmission, save 
 through a pious parentage, multitudes would 
 have been cut off for whom the blessing was 
 intended, and who, in after ages, exhibited 
 some of the highest examples of the faith and 
 patience of the saints — some of the worthiest 
 members of the church of God. Besides the 
 cases suggested by names that have already 
 been mentioned, others will occur to the mind 
 of every reader. It is to be presumed that it 
 entered into the design of the covenant, that 
 the rights of the wicked, who were honoured 
 with a pious parentage, should be unquestion- 
 able, and that no alternative remained for the 
 righteous descending from unworthy parents, 
 but to be ignominiously cast out of the con- 
 gregation of the Lord? If we regard the 
 covenant in the largeness and benevolence of 
 its design, and each one entitled to the seal, 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 59 
 
 as being designated to that right by liis im- 
 mediate relation to Abraham, we shall escape 
 from the revolting necessity of answering this 
 question in the affirmative. 
 
 A covenant which contemplates general re- 
 sults, extending through the entire range, and 
 onward tlnrough the prolonged existence of a 
 nation and a church, and which conveys its 
 rights and privileges through the channels of 
 natural relations, would infallibly defeat the 
 ends of its own creation, if it allowed the de- 
 fective character of those w^ho might be found 
 in the line of conveyance to put a stop to the 
 conveyance itself. On this principle, the 
 Jewish church would have become extinct 
 before the expiration of the days of the patri- 
 archs. " Grace does not run in the blood." 
 It is but reasonable, in contemplation of the 
 design of a church organization, that we 
 should look down, as well as up — -forward, as 
 well as backward, from some Anion, a rusty 
 link in the chain of conveyance ; forward to 
 the good Josiahs, as well as backward to the 
 good Hezekiahs, that may be found in the 
 general line. In many of the chains too, the 
 
60 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 rusty links are found so near the beginning, 
 that whole generations would be cut off by 
 the fault of one individual^ far less worthy 
 than themselves. This would be visiting the 
 iniquities of the fathers upon the childi'en, 
 not only to the third and fourth generation, 
 but to the thousandth ; and not only of them 
 that hate God, but of them also that love 
 him. 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 The practical commentary on the Abra- 
 hamic covenant furnished by the history of 
 the church, is entirely conformable to the 
 views which have been given. Of those 
 who were born in Abraham's house, and who 
 were brought up with his money, and who 
 were circumcised, we know nothing beyond 
 the fact, that they received the ordinance. 
 What became of them we know not, and any 
 guess that may be made respecting them, 
 can be of no consideration in an argument 
 upon the general principles of the covenant. 
 We know more of Ishmael, and of Esau ; 
 but their cases are so disposed of as to place 
 
OP THE IXITIATORY ORDINANCE. 61 
 
 thcni entirely out of the way of our subject. 
 With the exception of the general non-obser- 
 vance of the ordinance in the wilderness, it 
 is presumed there can be no dispute as to the 
 imiversality of the practice. The command 
 w^as strictly obeyed. Every man child was 
 circumcised. The circumstances of " the 
 church in the wilderness " were peculiar. All 
 from twenty years old and upwards, of those 
 that came out of Egypt, save Caleb and 
 Joshua, were condemned to die in the region 
 of their wandering and rebellion. The peo- 
 ple were under discipline. " God had sworn 
 in his WTath that they should enter into his 
 rest." But it does not appear that even this 
 cut off their children from their interest in 
 the covenant. It only deferred the applica- 
 tion of the seal ; for at Gilgal, Joshua circum- 
 cised all who were born in the wilderness. 
 Of this number, there must have been many 
 of all ages under forty years. Of confession 
 of faith w^e read nothing, and the thing itself 
 is incredible. To believe that there was faith 
 in the whole mass, is more than the most 
 credulous will find it in his power to do. 
 6 
 
62 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 Upon what principle then were these multi- 
 tudes admitted to the seal of the covenant? 
 If not upon faith, which they did not profess ; 
 if not upon confession, which they did not 
 make ; if not upon the rights of their imme- 
 diate parents, which had been forfeited by 
 transgression, what could it have been, but 
 their relation to Abraham, as the seed, to 
 whom the promise was given ? 
 
 With respect to the general practice of the 
 church, till some one can be found to believe 
 that evidence of piety in the parent, was con- 
 sidered requisite to entitle the child to the ini- 
 tiatory ordinance, I shall be content to say 
 that it was 7iot, simply adding, that there 
 was no difference in this respect between the 
 practice under the worthiest monarchs, and 
 the holiest priests, and that under men of the 
 very opposite character. 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 The principle that the children of wicked 
 parents, who are themselves in covenant, are 
 to be regarded as members of the church, 
 and consequently entitled to their initiatory 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 63 
 
 rite, is uneqiuvocally recognized in Scripture. 
 As a general Scriptural rule, it will be ad- 
 mitted, that " the childi'en's teeth are not to 
 be set on edge because the fathers have eaten 
 sour grapes." But something more specific 
 will be demanded, and it shall be fmiiished. 
 Ezekiel will furnish the text, and a worthy 
 divine Avho differs with me in toto on the 
 general doctrine of these chapters, w411 fur- 
 nish the commentary. In the 16th chapter 
 of the Prophet, it is thus vn:itten: " Moreover 
 thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters 
 whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast 
 sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this 
 thy whoredom a small matter, that thou hast 
 slain my childi'en, and delivered them to cause 
 them to pass through the fire for them ? " 
 
 The Commentator in a sermon entitled 
 " The Question Answered," and designed ex- 
 pressly to prove that none but the children of 
 believers, are entitled to the ordinance of bap- 
 tism, thus writes : "They belong to the Lord. 
 He claims them for his own. By his gracious 
 appointment, they are relatively in a holier, 
 and nearer relation to him, than the children 
 
64 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 of unbelievers. They not only viay, but they 
 must be devoted to hhn, for they are holy to the 
 Lord. This is evident from Jehovah's lan- 
 guage to the children of Israel, v^hen having 
 charged them with offering their children to 
 idols, he adds, ' Thou hast slain my children.' 
 This is the only Scriptural sense in which they 
 can with propriety be called lioly^ as God 
 claims them for himself. As we may and do 
 devote them to the Lord, the epithet is properly 
 applied. It certainly relates neither to holi- 
 ness of heart nor life." This passage is full 
 of strong sense, yet perplexity attends the 
 contemplation of its position. The object of 
 the discourse is to prove that the church ought 
 not to acknowledge as her's^ a class of chil- 
 dren, which the text quoted from the Prophet 
 pronounces to be owned by the " Maker and 
 Husband" of the church as his ! " Thou hast 
 slain my children." The circumstance that 
 the author makes use of this text only in refer- 
 ence to the general subject of infant rights, 
 does not relieve him from the embarrassment 
 produced by the Prophet's language, and his 
 own commentary. For if the children of those 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 65 
 
 who were so depraved as to have become the 
 most ciTiel idolaters, are 7iot to be acknow- 
 ledged as " relatively in a holier and nearer 
 relation to God," than any other children, then 
 is the text without force and meaning on the 
 general subject of infant rights. On the other 
 hand, if the children of such parents^ being 
 themselves in covenant, are hohj, i. e. rela- 
 tively in a holier and nearer relation to God, 
 than the childi'cn of those who are not in cove- 
 nant with him, then the text proves too much 
 for the design of our author, and a vast deal 
 more than all the rest of the sermon can dis- 
 prove. Assume that the personal piety of 
 parents is essential to the children's covenant 
 holiness, and then the children of the idolatrous 
 Jews were not God's children — they did not 
 stand in a relatively holier and nearer relation 
 to him than others — they were not Jioly, all 
 which amounts to a flat denial of the text. By 
 making the rights of the children to depend 
 upon the promise made to Abraham and to his 
 seed as a mass — an aggregation, each of the 
 parts of which, sustain the same relation to 
 
 Abraham, as any other part, both the text and 
 6* 
 
66 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 the commentary are duly honoured ; the same 
 principle is seen to pervade this covenant, which 
 has been shown to pervade the other covenants 
 which transmit their stipulations by natural 
 generation ; the covenant holiness of the chil- 
 dren of these idolatrous Jews is explained, and 
 the doctrine of this essay is established. 
 
 It will not do to say that the argument by 
 proving that the children of the worst of pa- 
 rents are entitled to the seal, proves too much, 
 and therefore proves nothing. No more is 
 proved than God declares to be fact ; and if 
 that be too much in the judgment of any, they 
 must carry the controversy before a higher 
 tribunal than ours. But where God leads the 
 way, let none refuse to follow. They may 
 rest assured that they will be safely conducted 
 to the dwelling place of holiness and truth. 
 But the terror is needless on another account. 
 The argument does not prove that the idola- 
 trous Jews did not deserve to be disciplined ; 
 it only proves that they had not been cut off 
 from the comrrefration of the Lord — that there 
 is no such thing as virtual, or self-discipline 
 known in the Scriptures — and that no power 
 
OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 67 
 
 under heaven (I use the language of another) 
 can exclude a child from the church, whose 
 parent was in covenant at the time of its birth. 
 
 The five arguments presented in these sec- 
 tions are beheved to afford a sufficient founda- 
 tion on which to rest the conclusion, that each 
 individual of the Jewish family is to be re- 
 garded in the matter of the covenant, as the 
 immediate child of Abraham, or in other words 
 a child of the church ; and that his right to the 
 seal is established by this relation. The pro- 
 mise is to the seed, and the child of an unwor- 
 thy parent is just as much of the seed, as if 
 the parent were worthy. And in the chain 
 which connects such a child with the common 
 parent, the links may be fewer, and many of 
 them brighter than are to be found in those, 
 which connect the children of the pious with 
 the same covenant head. 
 
 It will occur to most readers, yet it will still 
 be proper distinctly to notice, that in the above 
 conclusion, there is involved the idea that the 
 child's covenant rights are its own rights. It 
 is manifestly improper to represent the right 
 as the parent's, of which he avails himself 
 
68 OF THE INITIATORY ORDINANCE. 
 
 when he presents his child to receive the ini- 
 tiatory ordinance. The promise is not to the 
 parent to be handed down by him, provided he 
 be a suitable person to make the conveyance 
 to the child. The promise is direct to the 
 child itself as a part of the seed ; and so soon 
 as it is born, it is as independent of the parent 
 in regard to ecclesiastical rights, as the parent 
 is of it. By depriving it of its rights, you 
 deprive the parent of none. You discipline 
 it^ if you will call it discipline, not him ; and 
 you make yourself responsible to God for re- 
 jecting those, of whom he has said they are 
 ''my children.^^ 
 
j CHAPTER VI. 
 
 i OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE COVENANT RELA- 
 
 TION OF THE PARENT UPON THE RIGHTS 
 OF THE CHILD UNDER THE NEW DISPEN- 
 SATION. 
 
 By going to the Abrahamic covenant for our 
 doctrine of infant church-membership, we 
 bind ourselves by the principles and rules of 
 that covenant. The Baptists reject the cove- 
 nant altogether, and although they are believed 
 most capitally to err in this, yet it is due to 
 them to say, that there is far less inconsistency 
 in their plan, than there is in that of those, who 
 receive it in some respects, and reject it in 
 others. This is certainly done by those who 
 refuse to apply its principles to the extent of 
 the terms, in which they are expressed,- and 
 after the pattern furnished by the history of 
 the initiatory ordinance in the word of God. 
 
 If the covenant be still in force, it certainly 
 cannot be competent for us to weave into the 
 doctrine of baptism, or into the warrant for its 
 
70 INFLUENCE OF THE 
 
 application, any confessions or personal quali- 
 fications, which are unknown to that original 
 charter of the church. Our privileges, and 
 the privileges of our children, are as great as 
 those of the ancient Jews. And unless the 
 New Testament Church be that bundle of 
 sticks, w^hich Dr. Gill makes it, unsupported 
 by stock or root, and wholly incapable of pro- 
 ducing a single bud, even " though the scent 
 of xoater^'' we shall undoubtedly partake of 
 "the root and fatness of the good olive tree." 
 Even those children of the church, whose pa- 
 rents are no better than the untoward Jews 
 were, are as much of tlie seed ecclesiastically 
 as theirs were ; they will be as certainly owned 
 of God as his children; and should as unhesi- 
 tatingly be owned of the church as hers. 
 
 These remaks are entitled to full influence, 
 unless it can be shown that there is somethins; 
 to forbid it, either in the nature of the case, or 
 in some express New Testament provision. 
 
 As for the children themselves, to whom 
 privileges are to be sealed, without at all add- 
 ing to those already enjoyed by the parents, 
 who conceives of a difference betw^een them, 
 
COVENANT RELATION. 71 
 
 either from nature or from grace? It might 
 be wellj if an inquiry were instituted into the 
 precise nature of the reason, why spiritual 
 quahties in the parent who is in actual cove- 
 nant, should be insisted on in order to give his 
 child aright to the initiatory ordinance. What- 
 ever right a child has, is derived to it, through 
 its natural 7'elation to its parent. Through 
 this relation alone it is transmitted, and no right 
 is conveyed, but such as is conveyable through 
 this channel. We can conceive of a right to 
 an external ordinance, or a right to external 
 privileges, being thus conveyed ; because they 
 result from i^elations, but of the conveyance of 
 spiritual things, or grace in such a way, we 
 can form no conception. If then the children 
 of the two classes in the covenant of the 
 church, the children of the pious, and the chil- 
 dren of those who are not pious, are all alike, 
 confessedly in a state of nature — if the privi- 
 leges proposed to be sealed to them, are con- 
 veyable by natioral relations — and if these 
 privileges are to be sealed to the children 
 themselves, without adding to those already 
 enjoyed by the parents, from what can the 
 
72 INFLUENCE OF THE 
 
 influence proceed which demands a distinc- 
 tion, unless it be from some vague, confused, 
 indefinable conception of spiritual qualities, 
 transmissible, and transmitted from the pious 
 parent to his offspring ? As far as the exclu- 
 sive doctrine deserves favour from a mere 
 feeling of fitness and congruity in the plan, 
 which excludes from the church the children 
 of all who are not supposed to possess piet}^, 
 just so far is this mystic fancy allowed to inter- 
 fere with the constitution of the church of 
 God. It would perhaps be deemed unkind 
 even to suggest a suspicion, that in any case 
 the idea is intended to be entertained, that gra- 
 cious qualities are conveyed by natural gene- 
 ration ; but besides that there may be many 
 things floating in the imagination, and produc- 
 ing efl'ects without our consciousness, it may 
 be said that of so wonderful an ante-type, the 
 necessity of personal piety to give validity to 
 a right conveyed by natural generation, is a 
 most suitable and worthy type. 
 
 The gi-and peculiarity of the covenant, is the 
 conveyance of the right to the seal, by natural 
 relation from the parent to the child. The 
 
COVENANT RELATION. 73 
 
 principle involved in this peculiarity, which 
 excludes, as has been seen, the idea of the 
 transmission of grace, together with the child's 
 own acknowledged destitution of grace in 
 itself, coniii'ms to the church under the New 
 Dispensation, all the essential attributes, which 
 distinguished her under the Old. While she 
 acts upon the principle of receiving the great 
 body of her members at an age, when the 
 dream of their being in a gracious state, what- 
 ever may be the piety of their parents, would 
 be the wildest of all dreams, there may be 
 benevolence in the desire, that she should be 
 holier than she is, but the wisdom is more than 
 questionable that attempts to make her so, by 
 casting out of her pale vast multitudes, as good 
 as those she receives, and whose right of 
 admission by the strictest construction of the 
 charter, are as unquestionable as theirs. By 
 an universal law, as large rights can be con- 
 veyed by natural relations under the New 
 Economy, as under the Old. And by an 
 equally extensive law, which like the other, is 
 simply the nature of the case, grace is as un- 
 transmissible now as it was then. As a con- 
 7 
 
74 INFLUENCE OP THE 
 
 sequence of this, where we might otherwise 
 look for fruit, we find it not. When we go 
 about to purify the church of God, by distin- 
 guishing between children that are exactly 
 alike in themselves, and bom of parents in 
 covenant, we probably make out about as well 
 as mortals generally do, when they attempt to 
 improve upon the ordinances of Heaven. 
 Whether some peculiar glory may not be 
 thrown around this " special eifort," by the 
 fact, that while the children who by no act of 
 theirs could forfeit their rights, are thrust outj 
 the parents, who are judged to have forfeited 
 theirs by their sins, are left within the church, 
 is submitted to the consideration of the wise, 
 the just, and the benevolent. Be their judg- 
 ment what it may, a sound will linger on our 
 ears— "As the newAvine is found in the clus- 
 ter, and one saith destroy it not, for a blessing 
 is in it ; so saith the Lord will I do for my 
 servant's sake, that I may not destroy them 
 all ;'' and as we listen, the question from the 
 action of our noblest sentiments rises, why 
 should not the spiritual husbandman do so 
 
COVENANT RELATION. 75 
 
 also, with the tender ckistcrs in the vineyard 
 of the Lord? 
 
 There is a sovereignty of grace in God's 
 designation of the heirs to the external inheri- 
 tance of the church, which is closely anala- 
 gous to that by which " the joint heirs with 
 Christ " are appointed to their everlasting re- 
 ward. We interfere with this sovereignty of 
 grace, when we insist upon the merits of a 
 pious parentage, as necessary to secure an 
 interest to the children in a dispensation of 
 mercy. The plan is not God's. Abraham 
 was called from an idolatrous country and 
 kindred. The great mass of the immediate 
 parents of the Abrahamic tribes, were rebel- 
 lious to a proverb. Yet the seed God owned 
 as his. . As none were chosen for their own, 
 or their father's merits ; so those merits could 
 not secure what gi'ace had not resolved to give. 
 Isaac was a man of God, yet of his children 
 is it written, " Jacob have I loved, but Esau 
 have I hated." '' He hath mercy on whom he 
 will have mercy." For myself, when I see a 
 number of children presented for the holy 
 ordinance of baptism, some the offspring of 
 
76 INFLUENCE OF THE 
 
 pious parents, and others not, instead of trem- 
 bling at the profanation of holy things, which 
 a portion of the service appears to present to 
 some, I think I see, andAvith a rejoicing spirit 
 too, that which is analagous to the movements 
 of God, as he goes forth for the accomplish- 
 ment of the purposes of his grace. Here 
 he takes the child of many prayers and tears ; 
 there he quickens and saves the offspring of 
 the Christless and profane. Do you ask the 
 reason ? It is the very same as that, which 
 designated the subjects of the external means 
 of grace. " He hath mercy on whom he will 
 have mercy." And surely the New Testament 
 Dispensation furnishes as ample a field for the 
 manifestation of the sovereignty of grace, in 
 all its varied forms, as imagination can con- 
 ceive. And here it will reign, in spite of our 
 ungracious doctrine of the merit of parental 
 piety. 
 
 The only difficulty with which many minds 
 are plagued, arises from the doings of the 
 church herself. The form of baptism of the 
 Dutch Church, goes far to incorporate the 
 action of the parent, with the rite of baptism 
 
COVENANT RELATION. 77 
 
 of the child. With all my veneration for her, 
 whom I shall rejoice to call my mother till my 
 d)ring day, I could wish that the way was 
 opened to make the act more exclusively the 
 act of the church. The promises which are 
 now required, and which form no part of the 
 baptism itself, are often required under cir- 
 cumstances, which give offence to the consci- 
 entious. Were such an arrangement made as 
 would do away with this difficulty, and present 
 the church in the attitude of a mother offering 
 her own cliild to God, and binding herself to 
 take care of it for him, as she is unquestion- 
 ably bound to do, a spectacle would be pre- 
 sented, which instead of appearing to profane 
 the holy things of the sanctuary, would pre- 
 eminently magnify, and illustrate the grace 
 which reigns in the constitution of the visible 
 chm'ch. But even as it is, the chm-ch's wrong 
 in the circumstance of baptism, should not be 
 -allowed to cancel rights, which are secured 
 by the everlasting covenant of God. 
 7* 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 QUALIFICATIONS FOR ADULT BAPTISM THE 
 
 SUPERIOR SPIRITUALITY OF THE CHRISTIAN 
 CHURCH CHRISTIAN EDUCATION. 
 
 If there be no express modification of the 
 covenant in regard to the proper subjects of 
 the seal, and if there be nothing in the nature 
 of the case requiring a different rule under 
 the New Testament, from that under the Old, 
 something most undoubted and unequivocal 
 in the way of inference is required to justify 
 a departure from the practice of receiving in- 
 to the church, all that are bom of parents in 
 covenant — i. e. parents who have been bap- 
 tized, and who have notbeen excluded from the 
 church, by regular discipline, 
 
 1. For the purpose of justifying such a 
 departure, great stress has been laid on the 
 requirement of faith in Adults, in order to 
 their own baptism. "I am not aware,'' says 
 one, ^'from any facts, or principles in the 
 
ADULT BAPTISM. 79 
 
 New Testament, of any profession of faith 
 being sufficient for admission to Baptism, 
 that is not sufficient for admission to the 
 Lord's Supper, and the full fellowship of the 
 church of Christ." After referring to the 
 Eunuch, "from this case it is evident," says 
 another, "that a refusal to confess his faith, 
 would have debarred him from the ordi- 
 nance." Others pursue the same strain; and 
 all are unquestionably in the right. So far 
 are those who differ from these writers on 
 the main question under consideration, from 
 disputing the statements here made, that 
 they take pleasiue in expressing their entire 
 conviction of their truth. They insist as strenu- 
 ously as any others, on the necessity of a cre- 
 dible confession of faith in all adults, in order 
 to entitle them to baptism; but they never 
 imagined that the qualifications necessary in 
 an adult candidate for baptism, could be made 
 a rule by which to settle the rights of an in- 
 fant, which are secured to it by covenant. 
 The cases appear to be too manifestly differ- 
 ent, to admit of their being subjected to the 
 same rule. The adult claims privileges on 
 
80 QUALIFICATIONS FOR 
 
 the ground of his owm personal qualifications ; 
 but these are excluded from the case of the 
 infant. To asswne that the claim is on the 
 personal qualifications of the parent, which is 
 the very point at issue, affords a specimen of 
 logic, which there is no particular necessity of 
 attempting to refute. 
 
 Whethej- the Jews reasoned as we do on 
 this subject or not, they came to the same 
 conclusion. For while they circumcised all 
 the males according to the command of God, 
 they observed the most scrupulous care with 
 all whom they received from without. " Prose- 
 lytes of justice," says Calmet, "were those 
 converts to^ Judaism, Avho had engaged to 
 receive circumcision, and to observe the 
 whole law of Moses. Thus they were ad- 
 mitted to all the prerogatives of the people of 
 God, as well in this life, as the other. The 
 Rabbins inform us, that before circumcision 
 was administered to them, and they were ad- 
 mitted to the religion of the Hebrews, they 
 were examined about the motives of their 
 conversion ; whether the change was volun- 
 tary, or whether it proceeded from interest, 
 
ADULT BAPTISM. 81 
 
 fear, ambition, &c." It is manifest that the 
 demand of a confession from a convert, in or- 
 der to his reception of the initiatory seal, has 
 never been considered as having anything to 
 do with the covenant rights of the children of 
 the church. 
 
 2. The promise of the increased spirituality 
 of the church in New Testament times, is re- 
 lied upon by some as having an important 
 bearing on the question imder consideration. 
 The argument seems to be, that the loose way 
 of acting upon the covenant, after the manner 
 of the Jews, might do very well for their 
 times of formality and spiritual barrenness, 
 but that such a course is entirely inconsistent 
 with the increased spirituality of the Chris- 
 tian church. I would not be guilty of injus- 
 tice ; and if in stating the argiunent in this 
 way, I have wronged the brethern, I humbly 
 beg their pardon. I have done the best I 
 could ; for I can understand the argument in 
 no other way, than as most unhappily reflect- 
 ing upon the character of the constitution of 
 the church of God. That constitution was 
 designed to be perpetual ; but if it be not suit- 
 
82 QUALIFICATIONS FOR 
 
 ed to the condition of the churcli in her pre- 
 sent state, then does it not bear the usual 
 mark of his hand, who is wonderful in coun- 
 sel, and mighty in work. 
 
 But man cannot mend it ; and he need not, 
 if he could, in order to suit it to any condition 
 of the church, which the most ardent piety 
 can desire. The spiritual prosperity of the 
 kingdom is to be effected by the grace of the 
 Sovereign. The church shall prosper, when 
 God shall "pour out his spirit upon our seed, 
 and his blessing upon our offspring." " They 
 shall then grow up as willows by the water 
 courses." But a consummation so devoutly 
 to be wished, and so ardently to be prayed for, 
 is. not likely to be the result of rooting up our 
 children from beside the streams of salvation, 
 and casting them out of the heritage of the 
 Lord. I do not say that God will refuse the 
 blessing wherever the' tender plants are 
 thrust out ; but I do say, that the mamier in 
 which its bestowment is usually expressed 
 by the prophets, is most consonant to the 
 idea, that the blessing will be in proportion to 
 the multitudes of those who by virtue of the 
 
ADULT BAPTISM. 83 
 
 covenant, are brought directly under the in- 
 fluence of the means of grace which it pro- 
 vides. 
 
 3. Another idea is, that the rehgious edu- 
 cation of the children by the parents, is so 
 much the reason and end of baptism, that 
 when the character of the parent is such, as 
 to afford no reasonable hope that the proper 
 instruction will be afforded, the ordinance 
 ought not to be administered. The more in- 
 telhgent, and considerate, coimect the Chris- 
 tian education of children, with other uses of 
 baptism. There is, however, but little doubt, 
 that the failure of many parents in the matter 
 of instruction, constitutes the grand difficulty 
 in multitudes of minds, against an administra- 
 tion of baptism, commensurate with the terms 
 of the covenant. 
 
 The general argument from the uses of a 
 divine appointment, is of the most doubtful 
 and unsatisfactory character. It supposes that 
 we are far more intimately acquainted with 
 the reason, and end of the institutions of God, 
 than true modesty will allow us to consider 
 ourselves to be. Besides, there is no satisfying 
 
84 QUALIFICATIONS FOR 
 
 even pious and intelligent minds on topics of 
 this kind. When a pious Baptist asks what 
 is the use of infant baptism? or a Quaker 
 what is the use of water baptism at all? the 
 true way to answer both, is to tell them that 
 the validity of ordinances, depends not upon 
 the judgment we may form of their uses, but 
 upon the appointment of God. They should 
 therefore be referred to the institution itself; 
 if that be unquestionable, though we were 
 unable to designate a single valuable end to 
 be accomplished, the argument would be com- 
 plete for the validity of the ordinance, and 
 the propriety and duty of administering it, 
 whether they were satisfied or not. 
 
 These remarks are not designed to dis- 
 courage investigation into the ordinances of 
 God's house ; but only to evince the impro- 
 priety of allowing our conception of their 
 useSf to bear upon the question of fact, whe- 
 ther an appointment has been made or not . 
 or upon the question of right, whether an ordi- 
 ance is to be administered or not. 
 
 So far as the Christian education of children 
 is concerned, if the probability that it will 
 
ADULT BAPTISM. 85 
 
 be neglected by the parent, offering his child 
 for baptism, is to have any thing to do in de- 
 termining the question, whether the right to 
 the ordinance exists in the case or not, we are 
 entertained with this wonderful proposition ; 
 that the present rights of one, are to be de- 
 termined by the probable future doings of 
 another. This proposition needs much ex- 
 planation, in order to be miderstood; and 
 much proof, to entitle it to be believed. For 
 one, I despair of ever arriving at the under- 
 standing, or the belief. 
 
 But whence was the idea derived that the 
 validity of the initiatory rite, is affected by the 
 amount, or character of the instruction which 
 the initiated is likely to receive ? Does the 
 covenant order the rite to be administered, 
 whenever a fair prospect is presented, that the 
 proper instruction will be afforded ? What is 
 the character of the right itself? Is it a seal 
 of the righteousness of faith? Must it de- 
 pend upon what may be done through a series 
 of years after the administration, whether such 
 is the real character of the ordinance when 
 
 administered, or whether it be something else, 
 8 
 
86 QUALIFICATIONS FOR 
 
 or nothing at all ? Does the institution specify 
 any difference between the baptism of an adult, 
 and that of an infant, either as to the signifi- 
 cancy, or the duties that are involved ? There 
 is but "one baptism." 
 
 The duty of parents to bring up their chil- 
 dren in the knowledge and fear of God, and 
 which is m-ged as fully and forcibl}'" under the 
 Old Dispensation where every man child was 
 circumcised, as under the New, is binding on 
 all parents, whether their children are baptized 
 or not. Baptism does not originate or create 
 the obligation. A parent who dedicates his 
 child to God, will be brought; if rightly dis- 
 posed, to feel the force of a new motive to 
 fidelity ; but neither the doctrine of intention, 
 nor the doctrine of performance on his part, 
 is necessary to give validity to a divine ordi- 
 nance, nor to determine the right or propriety 
 of its application. 
 
 There is another feature of the sentiment 
 under review, which is as exceptionable as 
 any that has been considered. The importance 
 which it assigns to parental instruction, and 
 the manner in which that instruction ig some- 
 
ADULT BAPTISM. 87 
 
 times spoken of, goes far to screen the church 
 from Aer ow7i obligations. The parent has 
 his own pecuhar obhgations to perform as a 
 parent. The chiu-ch, which as a body claims 
 the ecclesiastical maternity of his child, has 
 her duty to perform. She is bound to furnish 
 instruction in the doctrines and duties of the 
 covenant, whose seal she has placed upon her 
 offspring. If she leave this duty to be per- 
 formed alone by any parent, however pious, 
 she is guilty of a dereliction of duty. The 
 church is ihe principal — the parents, as mem- 
 bers of the church, are only subordinate 
 teachers. Christ directed his disciples to bap- 
 tize all nations, teaching them to observe all 
 things that he had commanded. This order 
 is given to the teachers, and rulers of the 
 house of God; and it makes no distinction 
 between adults, and the younger subjects of 
 the Christian ordinance. The spirit of this 
 order and the nature of the ecclesiastical in- 
 stitution, demand that in addition to all that 
 can be expected from the piety and affection 
 of the parent, the children of the church 
 should, as such, be instructed by the church. 
 
88 QUALIFICATIONS FOR 
 
 Of that usage which puts upon an individual 
 the duties of the whole body, I have spoken 
 before. In addition to the objection then 
 made, I object to it here, as it is calculated 
 to produce the impression, that the parent is 
 the principal party in the transaction, on the 
 score of responsibility ; whereas, from the na- 
 ture of the transaction, he is relinquishing, to 
 a certain extent, and for certain religious pur- 
 poses, his natural claim to the exclusive con- 
 trol of his own child, giving it up to the church ; 
 which becomes the proper sponsor for its 
 Christian education. Were these principles 
 adopted in practice, we should hear no more of 
 parents perjuring themselves by the baptis- 
 mal vows which they make, nor of the church 
 making herself accessory to the abomination, 
 by allowing the vows to be made. Those 
 children of the church whose parents neglect 
 their spiritual interest, would not be left as 
 if there were none to care for their souls ; 
 and the presentation of such a child to be re- 
 ceived into the maternal arms of the church? 
 instead of furnishing an occasion of offence 
 to any, would present a scene which angels 
 
ADULT BAPTISM. 89 
 
 would love to look upon; and which would 
 awaken in the bosoms of all, who remember 
 from what they had been brought to the hopes 
 of the Gospel, sentiments, miderthe influence 
 of which, it would be felt that God did not 
 forget the congregation of his poor forever; 
 and that he had respect unto the covenant 
 though the dark places of the earth were full 
 of the habitations of cruelty ; and the church 
 herself were marred by many imperfections. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 1. Cor. vii. 14. 
 
 WHAT IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD BY BELIEVERS 
 
 NO CASE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 APPOSITE TO THE PRESENT QUESTION. 
 
 The text — "The unbelieving husband is 
 sanctified by the wife, and the unbeheving 
 wife is sanctified by the husband, else were 
 your children unclean, but now are they 
 holy," is much relied upon, to prove that 
 faith in the parent, is clearly required to war- 
 rant the baptism of the child. 
 
 One would think that there could be no 
 difficulty in correctly reading the 16th verse of 
 the 15th chapter of Judges. Yet a trial made 
 many years ago is recollected, in which it 
 appears that the majority even of good readers, 
 failed in the first attempt, and sometimes in a 
 second. Not content with jaw they would 
 insert hone^ in the latter part of the sentence. 
 A similar illusion seems to rest upon the 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PROOFS. 91 
 
 reading, or it may be only on the recollection 
 of the Corinthian text. A very prevalent idea 
 is, that in the passage it is said, that the sanc- 
 tifying parent is the believing parent ; where- 
 as the word believing does not occur at all. 
 The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the 
 wifej and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by 
 t]ie husband. In order to a correct under- 
 standing of the passage, it is according to the 
 plainest possible dictate of common sense, 
 that we have only to learn from the Scriptures, 
 what parents they are, whose children are ac- 
 counted holy. 
 
 The reader will recollect the proof that has 
 been adduced by a writer in favour of the cove- 
 nant holiness of children under the new dis- 
 pensation, from the covenant holiness of those 
 children whose imbeheving and wicked pa- 
 rents offered them in sacrifice to idols. These 
 children were holy, as they were the children 
 of the church's Maker and Husband, being 
 the children ofjparents in covenant, unbeliev- 
 ing though they were. It is true, the same 
 writer, in the same discourse, declares it to 
 be a fact^ that the children of unbelieving 
 
92^ WHAT IS TO BE 
 
 parents, meaning by that, not infidel, but only 
 not pious parents, are not the children of the 
 church! Similar meetings of sentences in 
 mortal conflict, are not unusual in attempts 
 at the vindication of error. The thing is 
 very well, for truth always gains by the en- 
 counter. So it is in the present instance. 
 Nor could it be otherwise. If a force be tak- 
 en from the camp of the circumcised, for the 
 purpose of driving the children of the cove- 
 nant from their inheritance, when the battle 
 comes, something is sure to take place, that 
 demonstrates the energy of that principle to 
 which the princes of the Philistines paid such 
 a philosophical and prudent regard, when 
 they refused to let David accompany them 
 to the battle against Israel. As David in the 
 camp of the uncircumcised, so is the text from 
 the Prophet in the discourse of our author; 
 and it produces all the discomfiture here, that 
 was apprehended by the wary princes, from 
 the presence of the Israelitish captain then. 
 But the consequence cannot be avoided. 
 The text from the prophet is genuine, and 
 the proof infallible. Whatever the personal 
 
UNDERSTOOD BY BELIEVERS. 93 
 
 cliaracter of those in covenant may be, their 
 childi-en are holy. The idea is in harmony 
 with the whole current of Scripture. The 
 covenant people of God were "formed for 
 himself, a peculiar treasure unto him — a holy 
 nation — a kingdom of priests." The plain 
 and obvious meaning of the passage under 
 consideration then, is this — the husband who 
 is not in covenant, is sanctified by the wife 
 who is in covenant ; and the wife who is not 
 in covenant, is sanctified by the husband who 
 is in covenant, else were the children unclean, 
 or aliens; but now are they holy, or the 
 children of the covenant. This is good sense, 
 and good theology. The parts are homogene- 
 ous, and unite in the conclusion designed to 
 be established by the Apostle. 
 
 But suppose we grant to the love of antithesis, 
 what any thing short of a perfect spirit of ac- 
 commodation would be unwilling to yield, that 
 the term believing, ought to be understood in 
 the passage ; nothing would be gained by the 
 concession, unless two things can be estab- 
 lished. 1. That the term always expresses 
 in the Scripture, what is usually understood 
 
94 WHAT IS TO BE 
 
 by evangelical faith. AH, however, know that 
 such is not its uniform signification. Simon 
 Magus is said to have believed, only because 
 he professed to believe. Many of the rulers 
 are said to have believed, merely because 
 they had a rational conviction of the truth, 
 though they did not confess, for fear of the 
 Pharisees. And the theologians speak en- 
 tirely to the purpose, when they represent 
 even infants as believers, inasmuch as they 
 are ^^ in numero jideliiwi,^^ baptized into the 
 faith, and members of the body, possessing, 
 and professing the true doctrine of salvation. 
 This view of the subject gives significancy 
 and beauty to that expression of Christ, — 
 *' these little ones that believe in me;" and 
 should put to rest the struggles of the Bap- 
 tists, to give age to infancy, and to impute 
 faith where there is no capacity for its exer- 
 cise. Circumstances must determine the 
 specific idea to be attached to the term he- 
 lieving ; and whenever the reference is to 
 ecclesiastical privileges, actually enjoyed, we 
 are under no obligations to believe more than 
 what is imphed in ecclesiastical relations, 
 
UNDERSTOOD BY BELIEVERS. 95 
 
 and a rational acknowledgment of the system 
 of truth, professed by the church. 
 
 These observations will explain the sense, 
 in which, I cannot entertain the shadow of a 
 doubt, we ought to understand the language 
 of our standards. The terms Christians, 
 Believers, Faithful, Beloved in the Lord Jesus 
 Christ — do 7iot beyond all controversy, de- 
 note the children of God, in the evangelical 
 sense ; but are frequently to be understood in 
 the sense ecclesiastical, impl3ring church re- 
 lations, and a rational acknowledgment of 
 the truth of those doctrines, which the church 
 maintains. It would require a melancholy 
 change, in the conceptions which I have 
 hitherto entertained of the benevolent charac- 
 ter of the institution of the church, were I 
 compelled to regard it as consistent with her 
 nature, as a visible organization, and her 
 spirit as the "mother of us all," to cast off, 
 and treat as unbelievers and infidels, those 
 whom she received professedly in a state of 
 nature, only because on arriving at maturity, 
 they do not give evidence that they belong to 
 the invisible church, of which herself is but 
 
96 WHAT IS TO BE 
 
 an imperfect emblem. As well might it be 
 expected that the gracious Lord would treat 
 as castaways, all whom he fomid in the 
 kingdom of grace, who were not as yet meet 
 for the kingdom of glory. Why did He re- 
 ceive them into his favour, or why did the 
 church take her children in her arms ? Wliat 
 has become of the virtue of baptism, 
 which "is used as a token of the divine 
 favour to believers and their seed," which 
 makes to them an exhibition of Gospel 
 grace, and gives them a sign and seal of their 
 right to it?" Is this right a valid one, only 
 when it cannot be used ? and does it grow 
 weaker and weaker, as the mind increases 
 in capacity to comprehend its nature, till at 
 the point of mature understanding, the right, 
 with the favour which it embraces, vanishes 
 into nothing? Shall it be said of the "little 
 ones of the Kingdom, that they believe in 
 Christ," when they cannot believe at all; 
 and shall they be accounted " infidels and un- 
 believers," when, having arrived at maturity, 
 they are ready to declare that they believe 
 " the doctrine contained in the Old and New 
 
UNDERSTOOD BY BELIEVERS. 97 
 
 Testament to be the true and perfect 
 
 doctrine of salvation?" 
 
 The church does indeed make a difference 
 between those who profess, and whom she 
 considers to be regenerated, and those who 
 have not attained to the hope of so divine a 
 blessing. But it is not such a difference as 
 brands the latter with infidelity. When chil- 
 dren are presented for baptism, the questions 
 propounded, so far as belief is concerned, are 
 adjusted to the idea, that if the presenting 
 parents assent to the perfection of the Chris- 
 tian doctrine in general, and to the doctrine 
 of original sin in particular, they are be- 
 lievers ; and have not renounced the covenant. 
 These questions can be affirmatively an- 
 swered with a good conscience, by thousands 
 who have no reason to believe that they have 
 been bom again, nay they would do violence 
 to their consciences, if they answered them in 
 the negative. But why, if these questions 
 furnish no test of belief, and if after they have 
 been affirmatively answered, the church re- 
 gards the respondents as infidels and unbe- 
 lievers still, does she not, or rather, why did 
 9 
 
98 WHAT IS TO BE 
 
 she not from the beginning, address the pa- 
 rents presenting their children for baptism, as 
 she addresses those who present themselves 
 for that holy ordinance ? In the latter case, 
 faith, as an appropriating act, is supposed to be 
 present; and because this is supposed, the 
 candidate is required to declare his belief, 
 that Christ "is given him of God to be 
 his Saviour — that he receives by this faith 
 remission of sins in his blood ; and that he is 
 made by the power of the Holy Ghost, a 
 member of Jesus Christ and his church." 
 He who can believe that all this difference is 
 made, without any reference to a difference in 
 the requirements of the two cases, must be in 
 the use of some mysterious method of gather- 
 ing meaning from words ; or must conceive 
 the church as so doatingly fond of variety, in 
 the mode of expressing herself, as to be in 
 perpetual danger of being misunderstood. It 
 were better to acquit the church of this bias 
 towards rhetorical fancies, and to consider 
 her as intending all the difference, which her 
 carefully chosen language implies. It will 
 then be acknowledged, that she does not re- 
 
UNDERSTOOD BY BELIEVERS. 99 
 
 gard as indispensable the sa?ne faith in the 
 parent presenting a child, as she does in the 
 aduh presenting himself for baptism. 
 
 Still she addresses the parent as "beloved 
 in the Lord Jesus Christ." And why should 
 she not? Has he not been baptized into the 
 faith of Christ? Does she not own him as a 
 member of the chmxh of Christ, which is 
 beloved by her Lord. The apostles address 
 the churches by every endearing and gracious 
 title ; and by so doing, they address all who 
 are incorporated with the visible body in the 
 same manner ; though many of them are no 
 better than " tares," whose end is to be burn- 
 ed. Acknowledged relations afford a better 
 ground, on which to found Christian titles and 
 addresses, than professions do. Of the for- 
 mer, we can know all that we need to know ; 
 of the latter we can know but little. Even 
 fruit may be fair to look upon, which yet may 
 be rotten at the core. We are always in 
 danger, when we affect to take cognizance of 
 secret things. And if a greater guard were 
 set against confounding the things of the 
 invisible, with those of the visible kingdom 
 
, 100 WHAT IS TO BE 
 
 of God, we should be in far less danger of 
 usurping the prerogatives of Him, to whom 
 it belongs to cast out whatever shall offend. 
 
 Admitting that the word believing ought 
 to be understood in connection with the sanc- 
 tifying parent ; and even admitting it to be 
 expressive of evangelical faith, it would not 
 thence follow, that the right of the child 
 ought to be ascribed to that faith. The be- 
 liever may be assumed to have been bap- 
 tized. Suppose however he had not, would 
 faith alone entitle to the privilege in question? 
 I once heard such an idea suggested, but as 
 I never expect to hear it again, I shall be 
 excused from attempting to expose its absur- 
 dity. Let it be supposed then, with the ex- 
 ception alluded to, that it is agreed on all 
 hands, that the covenant relation of the parent 
 is indispensable, whatever his religious cha- 
 racter may be, is it not safe to place the right 
 upon that relation^ rather than upon another 
 thing, which is the great matter of dispute ? 
 A believer is supposed to be in covenant; 
 and therefore we may consider the term be- 
 lieving, as a very proper one to be used in 
 
UNDERSTOOD BY BELIEVERS. 101 
 
 connection with a right, founded on tliat rela- 
 tion. It had never been known that the faith 
 of a parent, not in covenant, had entitled his 
 child to the seal of the covenant. The appli- 
 cation of the seal, where the only thing re- 
 quired, was the covenant relation of the 
 parent, had been according to the unifoiTn 
 practice of the church for generations. 
 
 I conclude this chapter, with the notice of 
 a consideration of no small importance in 
 this controversy. Those who entered the 
 church in the time of the apostles, were con- 
 verts from the Jews who had been cast out, or 
 from the Gentiles. They joined upon a con- 
 fession of their faith. No question respect- 
 ing any of their childy^en^ could arise like the 
 one under consideration ; and a decision upon 
 any of them, could have no more effect in 
 deciding the rights of a child, resulting to it 
 from the baptism of its parents, in their in- 
 fancy^ than a decision upon the case of a con- 
 vert to Judaism, w^ould have upon the cove- 
 nant rights of a child, bom of Jewish parents. 
 This we have seen to be just nothing at all. 
 The apostles were a generation too early to 
 9* 
 
102 WHAT IS TO BE, ETC. 
 
 be called to tlie decision of , cases in the 
 situation of those contemplated in this essay. 
 Had it been the design to establish any new 
 law, in the place of that which had been in 
 operation from the beginning in relation to 
 children, born of parents who had themselves 
 been baptized in their infancy, the case would 
 have been anticipated; and provision would 
 have been made for it, by a positive enact- 
 ment, as clear and unequivocal as that which 
 we demand from the Baptists, for the repeal 
 of the Abrahamic covenant itself. But no 
 such enactment exists, and consequently we 
 are left to make application of the original 
 law, to successive cases as they come under 
 the cognizance of the church. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 OF THE BEARING OF THE PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 OF THE PASSOVER ON THE PRESENT 
 
 SUBJECT. 
 
 There is no argument against the claims 
 of those children, whose cause this little book 
 is intended to plead, that appears to afford 
 greater satisfaction to those who use it, than 
 the one attempted to be drawn from the 
 promiscuous use of the Passover by the mem- 
 bers of the Jewish church. It is everywhere 
 employed in conversation, and the brethren 
 seem to regard it as a fortress, within which, 
 when a lodgment is once made, they are as 
 much out of the way of danger, from the logi- 
 cal or theological artillery of our men, as they 
 are of amioyance from the cries of our chil- 
 dren. " All the parents," says no less a man 
 than Dr. Wardlaw, " who had their children 
 circumcised, were admitted to the Passover, 
 and other institutions of the Jewish church. 
 If therefore the alleged parallehsm in the 
 
104 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 one case, justifies the admission of children to 
 baptism, to the same extent to which they 
 were admitted to circmiicision, it must equally 
 justify the admission of their parents to the 
 Lord's Supper, and all the institutions of 
 Christian fellowship. I do not see how this 
 inference is to be evaded." In these obser- 
 vations the Doctor does not evince his usual 
 perspicacity. 
 
 It would seem to be obvious in contempla- 
 tion of the penalty, that if the law of the Pass- 
 over is to extend its influence into the new 
 dispensation, the only rule that can be drawn 
 from it, is applicable not to the reception, but 
 to the expulsion of members. But as other 
 use is assigned to be made of it. it is right 
 that the further reasoning of the Doctor should 
 be heard. "It will not do," he says, "to 
 say that there is not the same established 
 parallelism, between the Passover and the 
 Lord's Supper, as there is between circumci- 
 sion and baptism. For supposing this to 
 be true, my argument does not rest on any 
 such parallelism. It would be the same, 
 though there vrere no resemblance between 
 
OF THE PASSOVER. 105 
 
 the two former institutions. It rests simply 
 on the fact of the admission of the ordinances, 
 whatever they might be, which formed the 
 outward distinction of the Jews, as the pro- 
 fessors of faith in the God of Abraham ; 
 and of such Gentile proselytes, as adopted 
 that faith — the admission to these ordinances, 
 of all parents whose children were admitted 
 to the initiatory rite of circumcision. Let an 
 instance be pointed out, of a parent whose 
 child was admitted to circumcision, while he 
 himself was not to all the ordinances of the 
 Jew^ish church. If no such instance can be 
 produced, let the parallelism be fairly follow- 
 ed on both sides. Admit to the ordinances 
 for adults, all the parents whose infant oiF- 
 springyou admit to the ordinances for children. 
 This is precisely what I contend for. It was 
 what was actually done then ; it is what in 
 my judgment ought to be done now." 
 
 The following observations will illustrate 
 in part, the logical strength and beauty of 
 these sentences ; as well as their consistency 
 with sentiments advanced in other parts of 
 Dr. Wardlaw's work on Baptism: 
 
106 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 1. The right to partake of the Passover is 
 constantly spoken of as if it were something 
 peculiar, by which one Jew was distinguished 
 from another, whereas the doctor very well 
 knows it was common to them all. Nothing 
 but the fact of participation or non-participa- 
 tion, could by possibility be brought to bear 
 upon the rights of children to the initiatory 
 ordinance. If a person who was not labour- 
 ing under some natural, or legal disability, 
 refused to partake of the Passover, whatever 
 his religious or moral character might he, he 
 was to be cut off from the congregation of the 
 Lord — condemned, as Calmet thinks, to death 
 — or as others suppose, only excommunicated. 
 Following "the parallelism," all who have 
 been baptized, whatever their moral or religi- 
 ous character may be, ought to partake of the 
 Lord's Supper, or be cut off from the congre- 
 gation of the Lord. But Dr. Wardlaw's idea 
 of the relation of the baptized to the church, 
 they being not properly members, but only 
 " disciples under training," leads him to reject 
 the idea of their being cut off from the church. 
 Were he to abandon this idea, and admit 
 
OP THE PASSOVER. lOt 
 
 what the " pai'allehsm" demands, he would 
 still have an important explanation to make. 
 For while a Jew would not, I could not ad- 
 mit to privileges an excommunicated person. 
 Dr. Wardlaw loould, '• I do not say," says 
 he, "that I would not baptize the child of 
 any man who is not a member of a chwrch ; 
 or who does not immediately join oneP 
 '' Let the parallelism be fairly followed on both 
 sides," says the doctor. What beautiful con- 
 sistencies result from the process ! 
 
 2. Would not one suppose from the lan- 
 guage employed in the passage under re- 
 view, that the right of the child to circum- 
 cision, grew out of the right of the parent 
 to partake of the Passover ? And yet every 
 body knows, that from the circumcision 
 of the Jew, resulted both his right to the 
 Passover, and his right to present his child 
 for the initiatory ordinance. They were con- 
 current rights, proceeding from a common 
 origin. I do not recollect to have seen the 
 rule of logic, which authorizes a reasoner to 
 assume that one of these rights resulted from 
 the other. If there be such a rule, it must be 
 
108 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 ^ good one, and of course work both ways. 
 After giving to Dr. Wardlaw the privilege of 
 founding the right to present a child for cir- 
 cumcision, upon the right to partake the Pass- 
 over, it cannot refuse to me, the privilege of 
 founding the right to partake of the Passover^ 
 upon the right to present a child for circum- 
 cision. But I could adopt no course of rea- 
 soning from premises acquired in this way, 
 which the doctor would not brand with the 
 mark of absurdity ; and I should be particu- 
 larly uiureasonable to think of asking more, 
 than the loan of the remark that he would 
 make on my logic, to be used as a commenta- 
 ry upon that which he has given as his own. 
 If it was intended that the reader should un- 
 derstand, that the right to present a child for 
 circumcision, resulted from the right to par- 
 take of the Passover; a more poorly dis- 
 guised assumption of the very thing to be 
 proved, has seldom been presented to a think- 
 ing community. If such was not the intention 
 what could have induced that vicious and 
 perverted mode of speaking of rights, which 
 goes so far to confound the relations, and de- 
 
OF THE PASSOVER. 109 
 
 pendencies established by God, and does so 
 much to keep out of sight the very fact upon 
 which the argument is professedly founded? 
 3. The fact on w^hich the Doctor founds his 
 argument is, that all parents who had a right 
 to present their children for the ordinance of 
 circumcision, were admitted to the Passover. 
 This is but a partial statement. Why does 
 he not give us the whole fact 1 The whole 
 fact was, that all who presented their children, 
 partook of the Passover, and all who partook 
 of the Passover, if they had children, pre- 
 sented them. The rights were co-extensive, 
 and they were universal, and the practice 
 was in conformity with the rights. Will Dr. 
 Wardlaw still contend, that '' what was done 
 then, should be done noio ?" He may if he 
 choose it. If he attempt to limit the conclu- 
 sion to what he contemplates in his argmnent, 
 he will certainly have to go beyond the fact, 
 for a reason to justify his limitation. Will he 
 appeal to the law in the case ? I doubt not 
 he will find the attempt to deduce special 
 disabilities from a law, establishing common 
 and universal rights, to be among the most 
 10 
 
110 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 Herculean of all the logical labours in which 
 he has ever yet been engaged. 
 
 Further, if the conclusion aimed at, is 
 to be estabhshed from the " fact" without the 
 " parallelism," it can only be upon the princi- 
 ple, that the constitution of the church, under 
 the New Dispensation, is so far identical with 
 that under the Old, that whatever was the 
 rule in relation to the sacraments under the 
 one^ must be the rule under the other. A 
 change of the law involves a change of prac- 
 tice. But Dr. Wardlaw takes care to con- 
 tradict this principle, upon which alone he 
 can establish the conclusion, which he has so 
 much at heart, by saying, that the " constitu- 
 tion (of the church) was to be remodelled " 
 under the New Dispensation. 
 
 Now he is both right and lorong, in the 
 principle involved in the statement of his ar- 
 gument, and in the passage in which he con- 
 tradicts it. He is right in supposing the con- 
 stitution to remain unchanged ; and if he be 
 allowed to use the word " constitution," in 
 an extended and loose sense, he is right in 
 saying that it has been " remodelled." But 
 
OF THE PASSOVER. Ill 
 
 he is wrong, egregiously wrong, in placing 
 change where there is permanency, and per- 
 manency where there is change. The only 
 constitution of the church which affects the 
 rights of children, is the Abrahamic covenant. 
 I deny that this has been remodelled, in any 
 thing to impair those rights ; and so does 
 Dr. Wardlaw, when arguing with the baptists. 
 The remodelhng that has taken place, respects 
 the ordinance for adults. And I hope to show 
 before I have done, that the law of the Pass- 
 over is so unlike the law of the Supper, that 
 it is entitled to no consideration whatever, in 
 determining who are the proper subjects of 
 either of the Christian ordinances. 
 
 4. In dispensing with the parallelism be- 
 tween the Passover and the Lord's Supper, 
 Dr. Wardlaw does not dispense with '• paral- 
 lelisms" in his reasoning. He turns the lines 
 another way, running them back, professedly 
 upon the relations existing between the Pass- 
 over and circumcision, between the Lord's 
 Sapper and baptism. 
 
 If the reader will indulge me with a sort 
 of mathematical illustration, I promise to pass 
 
112 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 by the minute steps usually required for ma- 
 thematical exactness ; and then if the illus- 
 tratiorij (though none the less a demonstration 
 of the weakness of a strong man's argument) 
 prove to be either dry or tedious, the fault 
 will lie not in the plan, but in the execution. 
 
 Circumcision and Baptism exactly coincid- 
 ing in signification and design, they occupy 
 the same place — they rest upon a single 
 point : let this point be represented by B. 
 The Passover and the Supper, by supposi- 
 tion and in fact, not having the same coinci- 
 dence in signification and design, that exists be- 
 tween the other two ordinances, are different, 
 the one from the other, and occupy different 
 places, — they rest upon different points. 
 Let these be represented by P, and S. Now 
 from the point P, let a line be drawn connect- 
 ing P and B, and from the point S, let a line 
 be drawn, parallel with the line P, B, " let 
 the parallelism be fairly followed," I declare 
 that the line S, though infinitely extended, will 
 not touch the point B, because, (fee. It will 
 keep as clear of it, as Dr. Wardlaw's argu- 
 ment does of the point at which he aims in 
 
OF THE PASSOVER. 113 
 
 his second parallel ; and will push right on, 
 carrying the Doctor's argument, conclusion 
 and all along with it, into blank infinity ; 
 whither, as I have neither the inclination 
 nor the ability to follow, I leave it to pursue 
 its interminable and harmless course. 
 
 What Dr. Wardlaw says on another page, 
 about the " restriction" under tlie New Testa- 
 ment, of the principle he has assumed, will in 
 fact, if not in form, receive all the considera- 
 tion which it deserves, in the following gene- 
 ral argument, in answer to the main objection. 
 
 If the objection to the doctrine of these 
 chapters, which is urged from the fact, that 
 all parents who had a right to present their 
 children for the ordinance of circumcision^ 
 were admitted to the Passover, have any force, 
 it must depend upon the establishment of two 
 positions. 1. That the Lord's Supper has 
 succeeded the Passover, on the same princi'- 
 pie as that upon which " baptism has come 
 in the place of circumcision." And 2. the 
 signification of the ordinances must in all re- 
 spects be so much the same, that no reason 
 could exist for an indiscriminate participation 
 10* 
 
114 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 of the Passover, which does not exist for an 
 equally indiscriminate use of the Lord's Sup- 
 per. How the truth stands in both these re- 
 spects, it is worthy of our profoundest vene- 
 ration for the institutions of God to inquire. 
 
 1. For the first, — All Pedo-baptists ground 
 the doctrine of infant chiu-ch membership 
 upon the Abrahamic covenant; the perpe- 
 tuity of which they establish, by incontrover- 
 tible testimonies from the word. And when 
 they are charged by the opposers of the doc- 
 trine, with clinging to an institution of an 
 abolished system, they repel the imputation 
 by the very considerations which put to rout 
 the objection before us. They say that they 
 have nothing to do with the institutions of 
 Moses, ' — that these institutions were ordain- 
 ed to answer temporary purposes, until the 
 establishment of a better economy under 
 the Messiah, — that they have decayed, wax- 
 ed old, and have vanished away. They say 
 too, and they say rightly, that the abolishing 
 of all this, has nothing to do with the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, — That had its own inde- 
 pendent existence as the ctmstitution of the 
 
OF THE PASSOVER. 115 
 
 church's visible organization, for centuries be- 
 fore Moses w^as born ; and that as it had 
 effect before^ so it has effect after the exist- 
 ence of the institutions of the Jevv^ish law- 
 giver. But in the objection before us, there 
 is a pious raking among the dust and frag- 
 ments of a ruined fabric, for something v^ith 
 which to adorn the temple, in its new form of 
 beauty and magnificence. Christ did not 
 establish infant church-membership, he found 
 it ; and because he did not abolish it, it re- 
 mains ; and must be governed by those laws, 
 which regulated it in its original establishment* 
 The Passover ceased by its own limitation 
 as a part of a temporary system. With it 
 passed away the laws by which it was regu* 
 lated ; and now we have nothing more to do 
 with it or tliem^ than we have with the sprink- 
 ling of blood, or with the water of jealousy. 
 If any thing is to take its place in the church 
 under the new economy, it must be an origin- 
 al institution, deriving neither authority, nor 
 character, from its obsolete predecessor. It 
 must be governed by its oion laws exclu- 
 sively. Such an institution is the Holy Sup- 
 
116 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 per of our Lord. And lie who should en- 
 gage himself in efforts, to discover the laws 
 by which it is to be governedj from the Old 
 Testament, would be about as well employ- 
 ed, as if he were looking there for the history 
 of the Apostle to the Gentiles. 
 
 2. Let us see whether the significancy of 
 the ordinances, is in all respects so much the 
 same, that no reason existed for an indiscri- 
 minate participation of the Passover, which 
 does not exist for an equally indiscriminate 
 use of the Lord's Supper. 
 
 All are agreed as to the exalted spiritual 
 signification of the Holy Supper of our Lord. 
 The knowledge, faith, and affection of a re- 
 generated soul, are all included in a worthy 
 participation. He approaches it unworthily, 
 who does so without examining whether he 
 be in the faith ; he partakes of it unworthily, 
 who does not discern the Lord's body. 
 
 But is not Christ called '' our Passover^^^ 
 and does not this exalt the Jewish Passover 
 into a sacrament, as significant of the death 
 of Christ, as the Supper itself? undoubtedly 
 it does. Nor do we doubt that the pious 
 
OP THE PASSOVER. 117 
 
 sons of Abraham, saw through it the sacrifice 
 of the Lamb of God, and rejoiced in the hope 
 which that vision inspired. But while the 
 pious used it in tliis mamier, and were re- 
 freshed by it, is it to be supposed for a mo- 
 ment, that there were no other associations, 
 upon which could be grounded a command 
 for an indiscriminate participation by the na- 
 tion ? There were such associations ; while 
 to the Lord's Supper none such belong. Let 
 any one read the 12th chapter of Exodus, and 
 he will soon discover that we have not spoken 
 without authority. '' And ye shall observe 
 the feast of unleavened bread, for in this self 
 same day have I brought your armies out of 
 the land of Egypt ; therefore shall ye observe 
 this day in your generations, by an ordinance 
 forever." ..." And it shall come to pass, 
 when your children shall say imto you what 
 mean ye by this service? that ye shall say it 
 is the sacrifice of the Lord's Passover ; when 
 he passed over the houses of the children of 
 Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyp- 
 tians, and delivered our houses." This is the 
 account that was to be given to the multitude, 
 
118 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 whose only understanding of it would be that 
 which the words hterally convey. They 
 were to consider the service as commemora- 
 tive of a national deliverance. That deliver- 
 ance it is true had a t3rpical signification, 
 more or less understood by the pious. But 
 of the feast, by which it was commemorated, 
 and which was to be indiscriminately observ- 
 ed, the people were told no more about it, 
 than they could understand. So far the 
 mere youth as well as the more mature, could 
 consistently keep the Passover ; and it was 
 an offence which God would punish, if they 
 refused. From the reason given for observ- 
 ing the day, and from the character of those 
 who were required to participate in the ser- 
 vices, it would necessarily result, that the na- 
 tional jubilee of the Passover, would present 
 a very diiferent scene from that presented by 
 our celebration of the Holy Supper. Some 
 there would be, whose minds, intent upon the 
 mysteries of God's providence and grace, 
 would see from afar the coming of the Just 
 One ] while they rejoiced in the salvation 
 which he would procure. Others would be 
 
OF THE PASSOVER. 119 
 
 wholly occupied with the wonderful histori- 
 cal recollections of the nation, — the night of 
 terror to the Egyptians, and of deliverence to 
 Israel, — the passage of the sea, — and in 
 subsequent ages, the countless instances of 
 the out-stretched arm of Jehovah, in behalf of 
 his chosen. The youth would indulge in all 
 those sallies, which are the joint production 
 of undisciplined feelings, and the inspirations 
 of a national Jubilee. Let no one complain 
 of this. It was the natural and necessary result 
 of the law of the Passover ; and when an aspect 
 like this shall be given to our communion,' and 
 a command given for its promiscuous observ- 
 ance, and for a reason as purely national as that 
 which was given for the observance of the 
 Passover, it will be time enough to press us 
 with the objection we are considering, — till 
 then, it will remain without the shadow of a 
 reason to give it weight. There is nothing 
 in the institution of the Supper, at all answer- 
 able to that very peculiarity in the Passover, 
 upon which its promiscuous observation was 
 enjoined. And would any have us now, to 
 deprive children of their covenanted privi- 
 
120 PROMISCUOUS USE 
 
 leges, because their parents have not done 
 that, the very law for which is abolished — 
 which they cannot do — and for the very at- 
 tempt to do which, on the principle upon 
 which it was formerly enjoined, we should 
 drive them from the church ? 
 
 Since then it is manifest, that the Lord's 
 Supper does not take the place of the Pass- 
 over, by the operation of the law of that insti» 
 tution, which is utterly abolished ; but is an 
 entirely new and independent ordinance, to be 
 regulated by its own laws ; and since the laws 
 of the two institutions are so different, that a 
 promiscuous use of the one is enjoined, on 
 national principles, and a similar use of the 
 other is positively unlawful, on spiritual prin- 
 ciples ; and since nothing of this is true with 
 respect to baptism and circumcision, the in- 
 stitution of the one being the warrant for the 
 other, and the same law governing both ; we 
 wonder if there are any who can see how Dr. 
 Wardlaw's inference can be evaded, though 
 he could not '? The question has been asked 
 in reference to our doctrine, " is not the ana- 
 logy between the former and the present dis- 
 
OF THE PASSOVER. 121 
 
 pensation too rigorously carried out ?" It is 
 added " the former was comparatively carnal, 
 the present spiritual. The church was then 
 a theocracy, and in her institutions, ci^'il and 
 religious matters were blended. The cove- 
 nant with Abraham laid a basis for spiritual 
 blessings, as well as for ecclesiastical privi- 
 leges. Circumcision was a seal of the righte- 
 ousness of faith." That as sin of the kind 
 has been committed, is past all dispute. But 
 who, in the name of consistency, we ask, are 
 guilty of it 1 They who ivill confound all 
 distinction between the Passover and the 
 Supper — between things national and things 
 spiritual ; or we, who place our defence, in 
 arresting that very analogy, which is adopted^ 
 and carried to the height of extravagance, in 
 the objection before us 7 Let all men judge. 
 
 11 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 
 
 The last objection is, that the doctrine at- 
 tempted to be estabhshed, leads to the most 
 lamentable laxness in the government and 
 discipline of the church. In answer to this 
 objection, I offer the following considerations : 
 
 1. If it is to be miderstood, that an objec- 
 tion to any truth, doctrine or ordinance, from 
 its supposed tendency to practical evil, is to 
 invalidate the direct testimony in favour of 
 such truth, doctrine or ordinance, I utterly 
 deny the right to make it. Whatever is ad- 
 vanced upon the divine testimony ; if it can 
 be sustained by such testimony, is not the less 
 true, nor sacred, on account of any objections 
 which we may have to make against it. Ob- 
 serve where the principle of this objection 
 leads. The Universalist professes to re- 
 gard it as utterly repugnant to all ideas of 
 the goodness of God, that smners should be 
 eternally punished ; and therefore he concludes 
 
THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 123 
 
 that the doctrine of eternal punishment can- 
 not be true. The Armenian professes to 
 beheve, that the doctrine of the divine decrees 
 is utterly subversive of all practical holiness ; 
 and therefore he concludes that the doctrine 
 of the decrees is not true. The Baptist con- 
 siders it as a piece of solemn mockery, de- 
 structive of the purity of the church, to bap- 
 tize an infant, who has no knov^ledge of a 
 religious ordinance : and therefore he rejects 
 the doctrine of infant baptism. Others regard 
 the baptism of children whose parents are 
 not real believers, or such at least by confes- 
 sion, as tending to lamentable laxness in the 
 discipline of the house of God ; and therefore 
 they rely upon their objections, as a proof 
 that what we contend for cannot be true. 
 Pray what is the difference in the principle of 
 these objections ? It were idle to talk of 
 any. We must go back to the law and the 
 testimony ; if here the matter be confirmed, 
 the cognizance of consequences belongs not 
 to us. If there be any evil in the case be- 
 fore us, it is inseparable from the transmis- 
 sion of rehgious privileges by natural gene- 
 
124 THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 
 
 ration ; but if God saw none in this, not even 
 in the holy priesthood, nothing better becomes 
 us than to say, " even so," and then close our 
 mouths in silence. But — 
 
 2. We deny that the rejection of infants, 
 by refusing them baptism, belongs to the 
 discipline of the church, in the common accep- 
 tation of that term. Discipline has to do with 
 moral agents, and their actions as such. 
 Casting out those who have no moral respon- 
 sibilities is a strange way of punishing the 
 guilty. Still it is called disciplining the delin- 
 quent parents. How is this ? Here is a vast 
 number of members of the church, who are 
 deemed to have forfeited- their privileges. 
 Are they tried, and condemned for their ill 
 deserts, in compliance with the constitution 
 of the church, which declares that they are 
 "subject to its government and discipline?'' 
 No. Are charges preferred against them? 
 No. Are they so much as cited to appear 
 before the proper ecclesiastical tribunals? 
 Not at all. They are left in the church just 
 where they were — not a personal right is 
 denied them. If they happen to be without 
 
THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 125 
 
 children, they pass on without notice to the 
 end of hfe. If they become to be parents, 
 and do not show regard enough for the in- 
 stitutions of rehgion, to wish to have their 
 childi-en received into the church of God, 
 then too, they escape the animadversions of 
 ecclesiastical authority. But let them pre- 
 sume to present their offspring before the 
 Lord, to receive the token of his favour, and 
 forthwith they are told that they are virtually 
 excommunicated. Nay, that they have ex- 
 communicated themselves ! The church in 
 her zeal to discharge with fidelity the sacred 
 trust committed to her by her Lord, resolves 
 that those who ought to be disciplined, are 
 disciplined ; and having committed the ad- 
 ministration of the laws for the punishment of 
 the guilty, to the guilty themselves, she gives 
 them notice of the fact, as soon as they be- 
 come parents, and offer to do their duty to 
 their children. This done, she cries out, 
 " Come, see my zeal for the Lord." Let the 
 parent mourn that a man child is born into 
 the world ; for now he is cut off from the 
 congregation of the Lord. He obtains a 
 11* 
 
126 THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 
 
 new power of self-condemnation, by the joint 
 action of God's blessing on his house, and his 
 own desire to acknowledge it. 
 
 Or take it the other way, and call it the 
 discipline of the church. Why should she 
 discipline a parent, where she thinks of 
 nothing of the kind, towards one who has no 
 children, to present for her prayers, and for 
 the blessing of Him who said, " Suffer little 
 children to come unto me ?" Let those 
 whom it may concern, call this consistency if 
 they please. They will have no ingenuity to 
 spare in its vindication. But how is the 
 thing we speak of discipline ? The church, 
 though she says in effect, that something has 
 been done, has done nothmg with the delin- 
 quent. . She has refused baptism to one, born 
 within her enclosure, and by so doing may 
 have thrust some Josiah, some heir of glory, 
 from her bosom. The most amiable way as 
 to the manner, though in reference to sound 
 principles of government, decidedly the worst, 
 in which I recollect to have heard the busi- 
 ness represented, proceeds somewhat in this 
 way. " The delinquent, it is true, has not 
 
THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 127 
 
 heen formally disciplined ; but when he comes 
 to ask iox peculiar privileges from the church, 
 the occasion is a very proper one, on w^hich 
 to remind him of his failures in duty, and to 
 let him know that he has forfeited those 
 privileges, which he might otherwise have 
 enjoyed." 
 
 Not to insist upon the principles, which we 
 thinlv we have fully established, that the privi- 
 lege solicited, is not the parentis privilege 
 but the chilcTs ; we ask, what is there pecu- 
 liar in it? It is the common privilege of all 
 the children of the church ; one to which he 
 was admitted, when he was no better than the 
 child he offers ; and in the undisputed pos- 
 session of which he had been living up to 
 the very hour. It may be well too, to glance 
 at the peculiar suitableness of the occasion 
 for the manifestation of peculiar zeal for the 
 honour of our holy religion. The complaint 
 is, that the man has entirely neglected the 
 duties to which he is bound, as a baptized 
 member of the church — "that he has done the 
 things that he ought not to have done, and 
 left undone the things that he ought to have 
 
128 THE PRACTICAL RESUL . 
 
 done." All the time, however, he passed 
 without rebuke. Now he comes forward in 
 his first motion, that evinces some degree of 
 regard for the institutions of God's house, and 
 on the occasion of this his only act of obe- 
 dience, he is thrust aside, and told that he 
 has no part nor lot in the matter. How the 
 idea of the peculiar suitableness of this act 
 to the occasion^ strikes other minds, we can- 
 not tell ; for ourselves, we cannot but regai'd 
 the whole thing, as entirely indefensible upon 
 any principle, that ought to be allowed to have 
 influence in the government of the house of 
 Ood. It is not discipline ; it is a wrong 
 against right, and a turning of an occasion of 
 joy into one of rebuke, that withers hope in 
 the bud of its promise. 
 
 Discipline ! what if some brother, who dif- 
 fers from us on this subject, should prove to 
 be remiss in duty, (pardon the supposition) and 
 Avhat if when about to proceed to the perform- 
 ance of some act, enjoined upon him by the 
 Master, he should be thrust back by the 
 Classis, with this amiouncement ; you are 
 disciphned — you have deposed yourself — or, 
 
THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 129 
 
 the Classis has deposed you ; not indeed on 
 the ordinary Avay of trial, but by virtue of 
 certain occult prerogatives, which sub-selentioj 
 accomplish their work without the aid of 
 those perplexing technicalities, which are al- 
 most sm-e to work the other way, whatever 
 may be the justice of the case. What amaze- 
 ment would take hold upon the delinquent ! 
 yea " what indignation !" But, it is only a 
 layman^ that is involved in the other case. 
 
 Lastly, we deny the consequences which 
 are charged upon our principles. It would 
 seem that the most effectual way to maintain 
 the government and discipline of the church, 
 is to cast out the unoffending children, while 
 the offending parents are retained in their 
 places ; miless, perchance, they discipline 
 themselves, or the minister and consistory do 
 it, in a way that admits of no one's knowing 
 it; no, not even themselves, till a child is 
 horn. But this looks so much like no govern- 
 ment at all, that we think we can show " a 
 more excellent way." To this way belongs 
 
 The faithful preaching of the Gospel^ in 
 the clearness and fulness of its doctrinal 
 
130 THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 
 
 principles — in its adaptation to the condition 
 of a lost world, and in the application of it to the 
 hearts and consciences of all, by the most direct 
 and pungent appeals. To this way belongs — 
 
 The utmost care and faithfulness, in the 
 reception of members to the communion of the 
 church ; using all proper means, to ascertain 
 the amount of their knowledge, and the de- 
 gree of influence which the truth exerts upon 
 their hearts — letting them understand, that 
 ** that heavenly meat and drink is ordained 
 only for the faithful" — that while children are 
 baptized " by virtue of the covenant," without 
 any idea that they profess faith, or are capa- 
 ble of it, the Holy Supper is provided for 
 those who can " discern the Lord's body," 
 and feed by faith upon him. To this more 
 excellent way belongs — 
 
 A most faithful watch over the lives of the 
 communicating members. They should be 
 animated to all holy living ; and deterred 
 from running into forbidden paths, by the 
 certainty of ecclesiastical censure in case of 
 delinquency. 
 
 It will hardly be denied, that where these 
 
THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 131 
 
 things are faithfully attended to, the church 
 will exhibit a fair specimen of purity and 
 order. Neither do we think it can be denied, 
 that a minister acting on the principles of this 
 essay, will find himself entirely free, in a 
 course of the strictest fidelity, in relation to 
 each, and all of these things. Should any choose 
 to refer us to congregations, where in con- 
 nection with what is improperly called the lax 
 plan of baptism ; the whole system of discip- 
 line has fallen into decay ; we will respond to 
 their moimiing by our own lamentations. But 
 we hope they will not refuse to lament, while 
 we mourn over large districts of the church, 
 in which the other plan of baptism has been 
 adopted ; where whole armies have been ad- 
 mitted to the communion, with scarcely any 
 knowledge of the first principles of the ora- 
 cles of God, or any satisfactory evidence of 
 being bom again. Where the Table of the 
 Lord is deserted by hundreds, who had pledg- 
 ed themselves to be fomid there ; and who 
 are no more looked after, than if discipline 
 were a mere sound without meaning; and 
 where the pious that remain, are in sackcloth, 
 
132 THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 
 
 for the desolations of Zion. Some of the 
 goodhest specimens of purity and order, are 
 at this very day to be foimd in those churches 
 in which the principles we advocate, have 
 been adopted in practice. We have seen too, 
 in former days, exemplifications of the same 
 thing, which are cheering in the very recollec- 
 tion. We feel it the more, as we converse 
 with the lingering remains of the worthies of 
 those times, in which not the side which the 
 minister might take on the question before 
 us, but the holy and faithful spirit of his 
 ministrations, was looked to, under the bless- 
 ing of God, for the promotion, and maintain- 
 ance of the order, the spirituality, and the 
 glory of the church. It is in this way, that 
 the church is to realize the superior spiritu- 
 ality, of which one speaks, as promised to the 
 church under the New Dispensation; and 
 not from any curtailment by us, of the privi- 
 leges of the covenant with her God. The 
 spirits administration^ not ours, will make 
 her a praise in the earth. We may cast the 
 children of the covenant out of the church, 
 she will be none the more spiritual for that ; 
 
THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 133 
 
 even though we call the act by the name of 
 discipline, and bless our souls for our fidelity. 
 Neither will this expulsion amoimt to that se- 
 paration of the precious from the vile, of which 
 another speaks ; for what is the difference in 
 the spiritual condition of a church, whether 
 there are more children in it or less ? Her 
 character is to be drawn from other considera- 
 tions, and will be to the end of time. 
 
 Another thing belongs to the .more' excel: 
 lent- way that has been indicated. The bap- 
 tized members of the church should be most 
 faithfully reminded of the duties which grow 
 out of their covenant relations, and affection- 
 ately and earnestly urged to their perform- 
 ance. One of these duties, is the religious 
 education of their children. In the failure 
 here, lies the ground of the sad complaint ; 
 and sad enough it is we own. The question 
 is, how is the evil to be remedied ? Some 
 appear to us to refuse all remedy. In the 
 first place they w^ll not consent that the 
 church should bind herself to do any thing for 
 the children. She must refuse to receive 
 
 them into her family. And then, in the next 
 12 
 
134 THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 
 
 place, by representing the obligation, piously 
 to educate children, as so much the end of 
 baptism, as almost to reduce to nothing the 
 general obligation to that duty ; and then by 
 turning the baptism of the parents into no 
 baptism, by the doctrine of virtual expulsion, 
 they in effect say to them, your obligations 
 are at an end. The end of baptism is to se- 
 cure the pious education of the children 
 of the church ; we will not own your 
 children as belonging to the church ; nor 
 will we own your baptism, which binds you 
 to bring them up in the nurture and admoni- 
 tion of the Lord. If there be much promise 
 of good to the church, or to the children, 
 either on the philosophy or theology of this 
 system, we humbly own that there is too 
 much of a penumbra about our senses to 
 admit of our perceiving it. The same mist 
 envelopes us, in regard to the effect upon 
 the parentis sense of religious obligations 
 in general, from the church's heaving him, 
 and his, so far from her maternal bosom. 
 If instances can be named, in which this 
 course of dealing has given rise to exercises 
 
THE PRACTICAL RESULT. 135 
 
 of mind, that have terminated in piety ; simi- 
 lar references can be made to anxious-seats 
 and dreams, to hobgobhns and to thunder. 
 Leaving the hidden virtues of this system to 
 those who can draw them out, and apply them 
 to spiritual ends, we must be content with the 
 more common-place doctrine, of holding the 
 parents to their duty, and by all the motives 
 we can draw from the justice and the grace 
 of God, bind them to the obligations of the 
 everlasting covenant. 
 
 If the reasonings of this essay be correct, 
 then it is proper to baptize the children of all 
 parents, who have been baptized; and who 
 had not, at the birth of the children, been ex- 
 cluded from the church by regular and formal 
 discipline. 
 
JOHN MOFFET, 
 BOOKSELLER, 
 
 JVo, 112, Canals treeif 
 
 Near Laurens-street, 
 N E W - Y O R K , 
 
 KEEPS CONSTANTLY ON HAND AN ASSORTMENT OF* 
 
 JUVENILE, CLASSICAL, 
 
 ANO 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS BOOKS. 
 
 HE HAS CONSIDERABLV ENLARGED HIS 
 
 THEOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT. 
 12* 
 
The following are some of the more promi- 
 nent Standard Works : 
 
 SCOTT AND HENRY'S COMMENTARY, 
 
 DR. WATTS' COMPLETE WORKS, 
 
 STUDENT'S BIBLE, Greek and English. 
 
 JAHN'S ARCHEOLOGY, 
 
 HEBREW BIBLES, 
 
 STACKHOUSE'S HISTORY of the BIBLE, 
 
 BLOOMFlELD'S GREEK TESTAMENT, 
 
 HORNE'S INTRODUCTION, 
 
 LOWTH ON ISAIAH, 
 
 HANNAH MORE'S WORKS, 
 
 DICK'S THEOLOGY, 
 
 CALVIN AND HODGE ON ROMANS, 
 
 CRUDEN'S CONCORDANCE, 
 
 GILLIES ON NEW TESTAMENT, 
 
 JAY'S WORKS, 
 
 HALL'S WORKS, 
 
 PALEY'S WORKS, in six volumes* 
 
 HERVEY'S WORKS, 
 
 BUCK'S WORKS, 
 
3 
 
 HUNTER'S SACRED BIOGRAPHY, 
 STUART ON HEBREWS AND ROMANS, 
 ROMAINE'S WORKS, 
 BURKITT ON THE NEW TESTAMENT, 
 BUNYAN'S COMPLETE WORKS, 
 NEW^TON'S WORKS, six volunips, 
 GURNALL'S CHRISTIAN ARMOUR. 
 
 ALSO, AN ASSORTMENT OF 
 
 JBlanks^ JPaper^ Quills^ 
 
 STATIONERY IN GENERAL.. 
 
 ITT Clergymen, Students, and others, wishing 
 tJheap and Valuable Works, are invited to call 
 Und examine for themselves. 
 
A 
 
 BODY OF DIVINITY, 
 
 IN A SERIES OF SERMONS 
 
 ON THE 
 
 SHORTER CATECHISM, 
 
 Composed by the Reverend Assembly of Divines at 
 Westminster : 
 
 TO WHICH ARE APPENDED 
 
 SELECT SERMONS 
 
 ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS, 
 
 BY THOMAS WATSON, 
 
 Formerly Minister at St. Stephen^s, Wolbrooh, London, 
 
CHRISTIAN RETIREMENT; 
 
 OR, 
 
 SPIRITUAL EXERCISES 
 
 OF THE HEART : 
 
 By the Author of " Christian Experience, as Dis- 
 played in the Life and Writings of St Paul." 
 
 SECOND AMERICAN, FROM THE EIGHTH LONDON 
 EDITION. 
 
 AN INTRODUCTION 
 
 CRITICAL STUDY AND KNOWLEDGE 
 
 HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 BY THOMAS HARTWELL HORNE, B.D. 
 OF ST. John's. 
 
THE PULPIT ASSISTANT: 
 
 CONTAINING MORE THAN 
 
 THESE EUNPED OUTLINES 01 SERMON 
 
 CHIEFLY 
 
 EXTRACTED FROM VARIOUS AUTHORS. 
 
 WITH AN 
 
 Essay on the Composition of a Sermon : 
 
 BY THE 
 
 REV. THOMAS HANNAM. 
 
 DISCOURSES 
 
 UPON THE 
 
 EXISTENCE AND ATTRIBUTES 
 
 OF 
 
 GOD. 
 
 BY STEPHEN CHARNOCK, B. D. 
 
 Fellow of New College, Oxford. 
 
0k 
 
^