■;''> 
 
 
 
 JJ-^jT 
 
 LIBRA.RY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Theological Seminary, 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 BV 813 .J3 1812 
 Janeway, J. J. 1774-1858. 
 Letters explaining the 
 Abrahamic covenant 
 
'* 
 
 x._,- 
 
 Ct^ 
 
> ' '\. .rFi 
 
 \ 
 
 --^^. 
 
LETTERS 
 
 EXPLAINING 
 
 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT, 
 
 WITH A VIEW 
 
 TO ESTABUSH, ON THIS BROAD AND ANCIENT BASIS, 
 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 INFANT BAPTISM; 
 
 THE QUESTION RELATIVE TO THE MODE OP ADMINIS- 
 TERING THIS CHRISTIAN ORDINANCE: 
 
 ADDRESSED TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SECOND PRESBY" 
 TERIAN CHURCH, IN PHILADELPHIA. 
 
 BY JACOB J. JANEWAY, A. M, 
 
 JUNIOR PASTOR OP SAID CHURCH. 
 
 THIL^ABELPHM: 
 
 PRINTED POR THE AUTHOR, BY J. MAXWEII. 
 
 June, 1812. 
 
DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, to wit. 
 0*:t*4t4n,* Be I r REMEMBERED, That Oil thc sixth (lay of June, 
 5 J in the thirty -sixth year of the Independence of the United 
 
 SsEAL. t States of America, A. D. 1812, Jacob J. Janeway, 
 * * of the said District, hath deposited in the said Office, 
 
 ******** the Title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as au- 
 thor in the Words following, to wit: — 
 
 ** Letters explaining the Abrahamic Covenant, with a view to 
 •* establish, on this inroad and ancient basis, the divine right of Infant 
 ** Baptism; and the Question relative to the Mode of Administering 
 ** this Christian Ordinance: addressed to the Members of the Second 
 ** Presbyterian Church, in Philadelphia. By Jacob J. Jane way, A. M. 
 ** Junior Pastor of said Church." 
 
 In Conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, 
 intituled, "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by securing 
 the Copies of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the Authors and Propri- 
 etors of such Copies during the Times therein mentioned.*' And also 
 to the Act, entitled, " An Act supplementary to An Act, entitled, 
 " An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by securing the Co- 
 pies of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the Authors and Proprietors of 
 such Copies during the Times therein mentioned," and extending the 
 benefits thereof to the Arts of designing, engraving, and etching his- 
 torical and othev Prints." 
 
 D. CALDWELL, Clerk of the 
 
 District of Pennsylvania. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 
 Letter I. Introductory 1 
 
 II. Jlie covenant contains spiritual 
 
 blessings 11 
 
 tlnd external blessings - - - - 28 
 
 III. General observations on the covenant 32 
 
 Its great design - 34 
 
 A twofold seed contemplated - - 46 
 
 IV. TJie covenant perpetual - - - - 49 
 V. Gentile-believers have an interest in 
 
 this covenant 60 
 
 VI. Children have an interest in this cO' 
 
 venant -------^ 74 
 
 Objection -------- 94 
 
 In what respects the Christian sur- 
 passes, in spiritualitiff the Jewish 
 
 dispensation 96 
 
 Vn. Duties of the covenant^ - . _ . i03 
 This covenant and the covenant of 
 grace, in substance, the same - 109 
 VIII. The result: Children have a di- 
 vine right to baptism - - - - 116 
 
 IX. The subject resumed ----- 128 
 
 Baptism a seal of Mraham's co- 
 venant - - - -- - - - 12S 
 
 Observations on the nature of bap- 
 tism " 141 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Letter X. Objections answered - - . 146 
 
 1. Incapacity of children - - - 147 
 
 2. Silence of the J\*ew Testament 155 
 
 3. Source of proof remote - - - 162 
 XI. Objections answered - - - t67 
 
 4. Positive precept and express ex- 
 ample wanting ------ 167 
 
 1 Cor, vii. 14. explained - - - 172 
 
 5. JVo obligation arises from in- 
 fant baptism ------ ±8B 
 
 XII. Mode of baptism - - - - ±89 
 
 Immersion not exclusive - - - 191 
 
 Presumptions against such claims i 91 
 
 XUI. The question fairly stated - - - 20S 
 
 John^s baptism not Christian - - 207 
 
 Cases of aposto lie baptism examined 21 
 XIV. JVo precept in favour of immersion 
 
 as an exclusive mode - - - - 229 
 The original word, baptize, ex- 
 amined -----^-- 230 
 XV. tin inquiinf answered - - - - 249 
 Bom. vi. 4 examined - - - - 253 
 Mecapitulation ----.- 258 
 Import of baptism - - - . - 260 
 Conclusion of the discussion - - 265 
 XVI. An Address to parents - - - - 266 
 XVII* *ln Mdr^s to baptised youth - - 286 
 
LETTERS3 &c 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 Positive ordinances of religion are sovereign 
 appointments of the Great Head of the church. 
 Antecedently to their institution, the actions re- 
 quired hy them may be indifferent or even unlaw- 
 ful; but being ordained, they become as really 
 binding on conscience, as any moral precept. 
 Enjoined by such high authority, they cannot be 
 disregarded, without involving a violation of that 
 fundamental principle on which all laws, whether 
 moral or positive, rest: viz. the obligation of a 
 creacure to obey the will of his Creator. 
 
 No pretence, then, of a high degree of spiritu- 
 ality in divine worship, can release any from the 
 duty of observing all the positive institutions of 
 the Christian church; nor screen those who^ for 
 
 B 
 
% ^ BETTER 1. 
 
 this, or any other reason, disregard them, from 
 the guilt of acting in opposition to the will of God. 
 Being appointed by his authority, it is our indis- 
 pensable duty to observe them; and, as he is per- 
 fectly acquainted with human nature, and can^ and 
 will, add his blessing to every ordinance of his 
 own appointment, it must likewise be our interest. 
 To render obedience to any J)ositive institu- 
 tion acceptable to God, it must flow from a re- 
 gard to his authority. The observance of one 
 not appointed by him, is mere will-worship; and 
 the observance of one expressly appointed by him, 
 from any motive short of conviction of duty, and 
 respect to his authority, is, in fact, no obedience. 
 It concerns, then, every Christian, who desires to 
 render acceptable worship to his God, to see to it 
 that he is duly persuaded, that the positive ordi- 
 nances which he keeps were really instituted by 
 divine authority; and that he observes them 
 agreeably to divine directions. But this persua- 
 sion he cannot have, nor can he act understand- 
 ingly, unless he be acquainted with the nature of 
 these ordinances, and the instructions given con- 
 cerning them. It must, therefore, be his duty to 
 search the scriptures on this subject. This is at 
 all times incumbent; but more especially so when 
 his practice is censured and condemned as being 
 unlawful and unscriptural. Then it behoves him 
 to appeal to the great rule of his faith and prac- 
 tice, the Bible; and examine whether it do not 
 
Inirodiiclovi). " 3 
 
 contain a warrant for wliathe presents to .his God 
 as a part of the worsliip demanded from him. 
 Doubts with respect to duty mar religious service, 
 and render it less pleasing to the Supreme Being. 
 Hence, we are directed to " draw near to God 
 with a true heart, and in full assurance of faith." 
 The more complete our conviction of acting in 
 conformity to divine appointment, the more ac- 
 ceptable will be our worship. Every Christian 
 should, therefore, endeavour to gain full satisfac- 
 tion with respect to positive ordinances^ and to 
 free his mind from those doubts which spring 
 from diversity of sentiments among his fellow 
 Christians. 
 
 There are two extremes to be avoided. Some 
 exalt positive institutions too high in the scale of 
 religion. They insist so much on them, and 
 speak with so much vehemence, that, although 
 they may not intend to represent them as being 
 indispensable to salvation, and as having a saving 
 efficacy, yet they produce, on uninformed minds, 
 wrong impressions with respect to their nature 
 and importance. This is one extreme. On the 
 other hand, we are not to make light of these 
 ordinances, as if it were a matter of indifference 
 whether we understand and observe them or not. 
 Into this extreme many run. Tliey look upon 
 positive institutions with so little regard, that they 
 will not lake the trouble to inquire into their 
 nature and obligation, and examine whether they 
 
* LETTER I. 
 
 / 
 
 comply with them according to their original ap- 
 pointment, and the instructions relative to them 
 delivered in Holy Scripture. An insult to the 
 M'isdom and authority of our great Lawgiver! 
 Every thing in religion has not, we admit, equal 
 importance. Some things are, and others are not, 
 essential. There is a great difference between 
 the foundation and the decorations of a building. 
 Still, however, every appointment of God in the 
 government of his church is of importance. No- 
 thing can be indifferent which bears the stamp of 
 " his authority. Does he speak? we are bound to 
 hear; and assuredly, if we listen to his voice with 
 due regard, we shall derive useful instruction. 
 Hath he recorded his will? it is our duty to read, 
 that we may learn and do it. The order of his 
 house is wise, and good: and if we would stand 
 approved members of it, we must conform to all 
 his regulations and institutions. Positive ordi- 
 nances constitute an important part of this esta- 
 blished order. Every Christian^ therefore, who 
 consults his own comfort and edification, will look 
 at them in this light, and endeavour so to under- 
 stand their nature, design, and import, as to ob- 
 serve them in a due and conscientious manner. 
 
 The remarks which I have made on positive 
 ordinances in general, will apply with all their 
 force to baptism in particular. Few professing 
 Christians venture to deny it to be a standing ordi- 
 nance in the church of Jesus Christ. This truth 
 
Introductory. o 
 
 is taught with such clearness in sacred scripture, 
 that no room is left for douhling. Two questions, 
 liowcvcr — one respectins; the suhjects, the other 
 the mode of haptism — have heen, for a lonj; time, 
 and with great warmtli, agitated among Chris- 
 tians. Whenever these questions hecome a fresh 
 suJycct of controversy, douhts will arise in the 
 minds of persons who have not carefully examined 
 them, whether they are acting agreeahly to the 
 will of their Lord, in the manner in which they 
 observe this Christian rite. These questions have, 
 for a few years past, been made the subject of 
 much discussion, by those who deny the right of 
 infants to baptism, and the validity of that mode 
 in which this ordinance is administered in our 
 church: and as many of you, my brethren, have, 
 at different times, heard our faith and practice 
 condemned as unscriptural, it is not unreasonable 
 to suppose that doubts on these points may have 
 been excited in some of your minds. It requires 
 a mind well established in the truth, to resist, 
 without w avering, the force of objections uttered 
 witli boasting confidence, and urged with incessant 
 repetition. The perpetual dropping of water will 
 make an impression on s- lid rock. 
 
 By these reflections, I shall stand justified in 
 discussing the two questions relative to baptism^ 
 and in laying before you, as briefly as may consist 
 with a just investigation of them, the evidence by 
 which the right of our children to this sacred ordi^ 
 B 2 
 
S LETTER 1. 
 
 nance is supported, and the mode, used by our 
 elmrcli in administering it,Tindicated. My object 
 in doing Ibis, is, to endeavour to remove the doubts 
 vvbich may exist in tlie minds of some, and to con- 
 firm the faith of others. 1 have no ^vish to enter 
 into controversy. These letters are published 
 with no such view. They are published chiefly 
 for the instruction of that people among whom it 
 has pleased Divine Providence to make it my duty, 
 in connexion with my worthy colleague, to labour 
 in the ministry of Jesus Christ. In composing 
 them, I endeavoured to lay aside all asperity of 
 temper, and to exercise the spirit of the gospel; 
 so that none who read them may have just 
 reason to complain of being treated with harsh- 
 ness or iineandid animadversions. In a word, my 
 desire has been to strip them of every appearance 
 of controversy, so far as could consist with a 
 proper vindication of the truth, and necessary 
 defence of our own principles and conduct. 
 
 Some may be disposed to ask, why the publi- 
 cation has been made. The simple truth of the 
 matter is this. Several months ago, I determined 
 to prepare and preach a course of sermons on the 
 subject discussed in these letters. I chose as the 
 ground of them, Gen. xvii. 7. **And I will es- 
 tablish my covenant between me and thee, and 
 thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an 
 everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and 
 to thy seed after thee." Proceeding in the ex- 
 
Introductorif. 7 
 
 eeutioii of the plan Avhich I had sketched out, it 
 soon appeared tliat it would be necessary, either 
 to handle the discussion in a manner so brief 
 as would make it unsatisfactory; or to i>reaeh 
 so many sermons tliat your patience would be 
 exhausted, and the hours of too many sabbaths 
 occupied by tlie same topics. By this considera- 
 tion I was induced to relinquish the idea of preach- 
 ing on the subject, and to pursue it more at large 
 with some view to a publication. Accordingly I 
 employed part of my time not appropriated to 
 preparations for the Sabbath and other duties, in 
 w riting these letters. Having brought them to 
 a close, and Iioping that, by the blessing of God, 
 they may confirm your faith, and direct your prac- 
 tice, I send them to you from the press. 
 
 That view of the questions above mentioned, 
 is here presented, which I judged would place 
 them in the clearest and most convincing light. 
 The arguments might have been increased in 
 number, as well as expanded by elucidations. But 
 I have consulted brevity. Sufficient evidence, 
 however, will, I trust, be found in the ensuing 
 letters to satisfy your minds, that both our faith 
 and practice are scriptural. 
 
 The right of children to baptism, we ground 
 on that well-known covenant made with Abraham, 
 by which the visible church of God was constituted 
 and organized in his family. Since the establish- 
 ment of it, many governments, formed by the wis- 
 
8 LETTER I. 
 
 dom of man, have waxen old and decayed; king- 
 doms have sprung up, flourished, and passed awaj, 
 as flowers of the fleld; and the laws and decrees 
 by which they were managed, have sunk into utter 
 oblivion. But this covenant, this grand constitu- 
 tion of Heaven, unlike to human compacts and 
 human laws, has, by the ravages of time, neither 
 lost its remembrance, nor been diminished in its 
 binding authority. In Holy Scripture, it stands 
 recorded for the instruction and comfort of all 
 generations. Age has contributed to make it the 
 more venerable: and the right secured by it to 
 children has, by long continued enjoyment, be- 
 come the more stable. 
 
 This covenant, constituting the church of God 
 in the patriarch's family, was made with him 
 as the head and representative of Gentile-be- 
 lievers, as well as of his natural descendants, in 
 the line of Isaac and Jacob. It gave to children 
 the right of being members of this holy society: 
 and, remaining to this day unaltered in its grants 
 and provisions, it still secures to them the same 
 invaluable privilege. Hence, it follows, with 
 abundant evidence, that they have a divine right 
 to the covenant-seal, the token of their relation to 
 God, the sign of fellowship in his church, and 
 the badge of citizenship in the great common- 
 wealth of Israel. To favour a doctrine which 
 unjustly deprives children of their long enjoyed 
 right, and expels them from that church of which 
 
lutrodiictorij, 9 
 
 the Great Heail made tliem members; some have 
 spoken contemptuously of this covenant, as pro- 
 misiui^ nothing more than temporal or external 
 blessings. But all >vho understand its true nature 
 and real import, and are acquainted with the unity 
 of God's government over his church, will regard 
 it as the great charter of the privileges, blessings, 
 and hopes, which he has granted to believers, and 
 to their seed. 
 
 The nature of this gracious covenant has, by 
 the controversy carried on with respect to infant 
 baptism, been involved in much obscurity; and 
 every thing in it favourable to the right of children, 
 made a subject of dispute. Hence, it is necessary 
 to prove, by solid arguments, many points which 
 might otherwise be taken for granted; and to ex- 
 tend further than might be expected, the discus- 
 sion of the nature and properties of this cove- 
 nant, in order to establish firmly the several prin- 
 ciples on which the right of our children to baptism 
 rests. I must, therefore, solicit your patient at- 
 tention. By assuming several particulars which I 
 have endeavoured to prove, this discussion might 
 have been much shortened: but then it would 
 have been rendered less satisfactory and convin- 
 cing, to those who know how to distinguish be- 
 tween bold assertions and solid arguments. 
 
 The view of the Abrahamie covenant, present- 
 ed in these letters, will, it is hoped, tend to throw 
 light on the dealings of God with his church, and 
 
10 ^ LETTER I. 
 
 on several important, though difficult, passages of 
 Holj Scripture^ and serve to increase your esti- 
 mation of the blessed privilege of dedicating your 
 children to God in baptism, as well as to confirm 
 your faith in that article of our creed, that they 
 are by right members of his visible church, and, 
 therefore, ought to be recognised as such, by im- 
 pressing on them the seal of his gracious covenant. 
 
 The several leading points which it seemed 
 necessary to prove, and which I have endeavoured 
 to establish, are the following. 
 
 I. The covenant made with Abraham, con- 
 tains both spiritual and external blessings. 
 
 II. It is a perpetual covenant. 
 
 III. Gentile-believers and their offspring have 
 an interest in it. 
 
 "*IV. The covenant imposes very serious and 
 highly important duties. 
 
 V. The grand result of these truths, is, that the 
 children of God's professing people have a divine 
 right to baptism. 
 
LETTER II. 
 
 The Covenant contains hoth Spiritual and External 
 Blessings. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 Two errors are embraced with respect to the 
 Abrahamic covenant. Some insist that it contains 
 no spiritual blessings, but promised to Abraham 
 and his seed only temporal favours. Others, 
 while they admit that it included temporal pri- 
 vileges, prior to our Saviour's incarnation, as- 
 sert that, since that event the reason of them 
 having ceased, it now contains only spiritual bless- 
 ings. In opposition to these opinions, it ^vill be 
 shown that the covenant comprehends both tem- 
 poral and spiritual blessings. 
 
 I. IT COMPREHENDS SPIRITUAL BLESSINGS, 
 
 The first argument in support of this position, 
 Ave derive from the grand covenant-promise. 
 What is this promise? That God will be a God to 
 Abraham and to his seed. How comprehensive! 
 How glorious! Can one more comprehensive and 
 glorious be found in any part of the inspired 
 
12 iETTEK II. 
 
 volume? How similar to that recorded in the 
 epistle to the Hebrews! *< For this is the cove- 
 nant that I will make with the house of Israel, 
 after those days, saith the Lord: I will put my 
 laws into their mind, and write them in their 
 hearts; and 1 7vill he to them a God, and they shall 
 he to me a people,^'^ Do not the very terms in 
 which this grand promise to Abraham is express- 
 ed, constrain us, by their natural force, to con- 
 clude, that it must have respect to blessings far 
 more important than temporal favours? If God 
 had designed by his covenant to secure to hira 
 and to his seed nothing more than the possession 
 of Canaan, and external privileges not enjoyed by 
 other nations, wouUl he have expressed his engage- 
 ments in terms of the sublimest import? " To be a 
 God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee!*' This 
 includes every thing. A promise more compre- 
 hensive cannot be formed into words. On the sup- 
 position that God intended to make the engage- 
 ment, which we contend he did, terms more suita- 
 ble, more expressive, more ample, could not have 
 been selected. 
 
 In opposition to this reasoning, it may be said, 
 the promise is not to be understood in its full and 
 natural import. No sufficient reason, however, can 
 be assigned for this limitation. Neither the con- 
 text, nor the state of the patriarch, will furnish 
 
 * Ch. vlii. 10. 
 
Spiritual Blessings. 13 
 
 one. On the contrary, both unite in supporting our 
 construction. Consider the manner in ^vhicli this 
 wonderful transaction is introduced. To animate 
 the faith, and raise the expectations of Abraham, 
 it is preceded by an assurance very similar to that 
 which preceded the commission and promise given 
 by our blessed Lord to his apostles, when he ap- 
 pointed them ambassadors of peace, and heralds of 
 life and salvation to a guilty and rebellious world. 
 " And when Mram xvas ninety years old and nine, 
 the LORD appeared to Mram, and said unto him, 
 I AM THE ALMIGHTY GOD."^ Now, if God had in- 
 tended, by this covenant, merely to engage to take 
 Abraham and his seed into an external relation, 
 and to bestow on them only temporal blessings, 
 would lie have introduced the transaction by pro- 
 claiming his most glorious title? 
 
 Consider also the patriarch's religious state, 
 when the covenant was established. He was a 
 true believer, reconciled to God by the blood of 
 atonement. There was nothing, then, in his con* 
 dition to lead him to interpret the promise, as it 
 respected himself, differently from the full and 
 natural import of the terms in which it was con- 
 veyed. 
 
 If this promise did not, we ask. Where is the 
 promise given to Abrahani which did, include 
 spiritual blessings? Search the sacred volume, 
 
 * Mat. xxviii. IS — '20. Gen. xvii. 1. 
 C 
 
14f LETTER II. 
 
 and you will not find one expressed in terms more 
 obvious in meaning, or more comprehensive in 
 extent. While those gracious engagements of 
 the Most High which preceded, with the excep- 
 tion of one, in Gen, xv. 18. relating only to the 
 land of Canaan, are delivered in the simple form 
 of a promise; this is delivered, with peculiar so- 
 lemnity, in the form of a covenant, confirmed by a 
 visible and standing token. Let it be considered 
 too, that, in this ever memorable transaction, 
 Jehovah assumed, for the j^?'6t time, the delightful 
 covenant-title of being a God to his people. Never 
 before did he publish to his church that all-cheer- 
 ing promise: «* I will be a God unto thee, and to 
 thy seed after thee." If, on such an occasion, we 
 must fritter away this sublime promise into a mere 
 engagement to confer on Abraham and his de- 
 scendants a few distinguishing favours which 
 perish in the using; if we must explain away the 
 condescension and grace of Jehovah, so as to leave 
 in this glorious covenant-title nothing more than 
 the character of a political sovereign of the patri- 
 areh* s posterity: I ask. when shall we receive this 
 promise as conveying to the church those trea- 
 sures of grace and glory which it assuredly com- 
 prehends? and when shall we consider this title 
 as constituting that relation to his people, which 
 emboldens them to call him, Ahha, Father; and 
 say to others, '< Tkis God is our God for ere er and 
 ever; he xv'dl he our guide even unto deat/i?" 
 
Spiritual Bkssings. 1J5 
 
 Placed in cipcumstances so peculiar, how could 
 Abraham do other^vise than understand the pro- 
 mise according to the natural import of the 
 terms in which it was delivered? Did he receive 
 other promises as comprehending spiritual bless- 
 ings? and could he contract this most glorious 
 promise so as to exclude them, and view the 
 covenant as relating merelv to temporal matters? 
 It cannot be. The believing patriarch doubtless 
 beheld in it a treasure, for himself and for his 
 posterity, infinitely richer than a land flowing 
 with milk and honey, and all its attendant bless- 
 ings of a worldly nature. 
 
 Had not this covenant respected spiritual bene- 
 fits, Jehovah would not have assumed in it the 
 title of being the God of Abraham and his seed; 
 for the import of it is too glorious to belong to any 
 covenant regarding things merely temporal. An 
 apostle has clearly determined this point, in his 
 epistle to the Hebrews; where, speaking of the 
 patriarchs, he affirms, that because God hath 
 prq)aredfor them a heavenly city he is not ashamed 
 to he called their God:^ plainly implying that, if 
 God had not by the covenant dignified with this 
 style, provided for them more than temporal fa- 
 vours, he would not have used it. 
 
 To anticipate an objection, it may be proper 
 to observe, that God styled himself the God of the 
 Hebrews in reference rather to this than to the 
 
 * Heb. xi. 16. 
 
16 , LETTEB II. 
 
 Sinai-covenant. Long before the formation of 
 the latter, he had, by the former, engaged to be 
 their God. Hence, when he came to effect their 
 emancipation from Egyptian bondage, he called 
 them his people^ and himself their God: ** And the 
 Lord said, 1 have surely seen the affliction of my 
 people which are in Egypt. And thou shalt come, 
 thou and the elders of Israel, unto the king of 
 Egypt, and ye shall say unto him, The lord God 
 of the Hthrcws hath met with us: and now let us 
 go, we beseech thee, three days' journey into the 
 wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the lord our 
 God.''* 
 
 In fact, the covenant of Sinai was subsequent 
 to that of the patnareh:f and as it comprehended 
 only temporal blessings, the text referred to in the 
 epistle to the Hebrews, authorizes us to conclude, 
 that it would not have comported with the dignity 
 of Jehovah to have formed a national covenant 
 with Israel, and to have styled himself their God; 
 but on the ground of its connexion with, and sub- 
 serviency to, the covenant made with their fathers, 
 comprehending spiritual blessings. ij: 
 
 There are various passages of sacred scripture, 
 which prove clearly, that the covenant of Abra- 
 ham included spiritual blessings. The first to be 
 cited, in addition to the one already adduced, is 
 that remarkable text, containing our Lord's reply 
 
 * Exod. iii. 7. 18. f Deut. xxix. 13, 25. ■^ Compare Levit. xxvi, 
 12, with 2 Cor. vi. 16. 
 
Spiritual Blessings, 17 
 
 to a question proposed by the Sadducees^ in which 
 he infers fhe resurrection of the body from the 
 grand tiile wliieh God assumed in this covenant. 
 <* ^s touching the dead that they rise; have you not 
 read in the hook of Moses, how in the bush God 
 spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Mraham, 
 and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacobs He is 
 not the God of the dead, but the God of the living; 
 ye therefore do greatly err,'^^ When Jehovah 
 spake to Moses out of the bush, the patriarchs 
 were sleeping in their graves; and, therefore, as 
 he then styled himself their God, it was certain, in 
 our Saviour's judgment, that their souls were 
 living: and, inasmuch as the covenant-relation 
 subsisted between God and their whole nature, it 
 follows, from the same title, that their bodies must 
 be raised from the dead, to share with their im- 
 mortal spirits in divine favours. Now, it is evi- 
 dent, from tlie chapter recording the conversation 
 between the Almighty and his servant Moses, that 
 reference is liad to Abraham's covenant, in which 
 God, for the first time, assumed this glorious 
 name: and, therefore, if it secured to the patriarchs 
 a happy immortality, and a future resurrection 
 from the dead, it follows incontrovertibly, that 
 this covenant included spiritual, as well as tempo- 
 ral blessings. 
 
 The next passage which I submit to your con- 
 
 * Mark xii, 26, 27. 
 
 c 2 
 
18 LETTER II. 
 
 sideratioii, is recorded in the fourth chapter of the 
 epistle to the Romans. Speaking of Abraham, the 
 apostle «ays, " He received the sign of circumcision, 
 a seal of f/ie righteousness of the faith which 
 he had being yet uncircumcised; that he might he the 
 father of axl them that believe, though they 
 be not circumcised; (haf righteousness might be 
 imputed unto them also; and the father of the 
 circumcision to them who are not of the circum- 
 cision only, hut ivho also wall^ in the steps of that 
 faith of our father Mraham, which he had, being 
 yet uncircumcised,^^ 
 
 From this passage it is proposed to prove, that 
 Abraham was constituted father of all believers, 
 by the covenant under examination; and from this 
 fact to infer, that the covenant must necessarily 
 comprise spiritual blessings. Two things are 
 certain: 1, Abraham was constituted father of the 
 faithful, whether Jewish or Christian: for he re- 
 ceived circumcision, as the text states, that he 
 might sustain a paternal relation to them. 2. He 
 is a father to them in a sense in which no other 
 man is so denominated. This is evident from the 
 uniform tenor of sacred scripture. Neither Isaac, 
 nor Jacob, his immediate descendants, nor any 
 other person, how distinguished soever for piety, is 
 ever styled, by an inspired writer, the father of 
 believers. This is an honour belonging exclusively 
 to Abraham. 
 
 We ask, therefore, what constituted the patri- 
 
spiritual Blessings, 19 
 
 arch the father of the faithful? How was his pater- 
 nal relation to believers established? W hat is the 
 proper ground on which it is founded? It is usual 
 to style a person eminent for any particular quality, 
 father of those who imitate him in this quality: 
 and, hence, it has been commonly observed, that as* 
 Abraham was eminent for his faith, so he became, 
 on this ground, the father of all believers, inas- 
 much as he is a model of faith to all generations. 
 But this cannot be the true reason of the appella- 
 tion: because, if it be taken in this sense; if Abra- 
 ham's faith made him the father of the faithful; 
 then the honour is not confined exclusively to him. 
 Enoch and Noah, Moses and David, and a long 
 list of others, were eminent for the strength of 
 their faith, and are exhibited, in holy scripture, as 
 models of this grace; and may, therefore, be de- 
 nominated, for the same reason, fathers of all 
 believers. 
 
 How, then, the question recurs, did the patri- 
 arch become, iu an exclusive sense, the father of 
 believers? We answer. By the appointment of God: 
 who gave him circumcision as a token of that signal 
 honour conferred on him; just as a seal royal is 
 given as a token of an honorary title conferred by 
 a prince on one of his subjects. <* He received," 
 says Paul, "the sign of circumcision, Q.seal of the 
 righteousness of the faith which he had being yet 
 uncircumcised," for this express purpose, '' that 
 he might be the father of all them that believe:^' 
 
W LETTER II. 
 
 plainly importing, that he received his title and 
 circumcision from God as a matter of free dona- 
 tion; and the latter to certify him, that he should 
 sustain a paternal relation to the whole church. 
 The patriarch's faith may have been the reason 
 •why it pleased Jehovah to put on him so great an 
 honour. It ought, however, to be observed, that the 
 covenant which constituted him father of all be- 
 lievers, was made with him many years before that 
 illustrious act of faith, which he exhibited in the in- 
 tended sacrifice of his son Isaac; and even before 
 that act of faith, which the apostle celebrates in the 
 fourth chapter of the epistle to the Romans:* and, 
 indeed, he was virtually made, though notformally 
 constituted such, previously to the display of any 
 very remarkable evidence of this grace. (See Gen. 
 xii. o.) But, admitting that he received this hono- 
 rary title as a reward of his faith, still his faith was 
 not the proper ground on which it rested; because, 
 if God had not constituted him the father of believ- 
 ers, his faith, how great soever, could not have made 
 him such. To reward a subject for some signal ex- 
 ploit, his prince confers upon him a title of nobi- 
 lity. Now, it is evident that, although this exploit 
 operates, in the royal mind, as an inducement to 
 bestow the reward, yet it is the prince's act, and 
 not the subject's exploit, which makes him a no- 
 bleman; and, to prove his right to rank among the 
 
 • Comp. Rom. iv. 19, with Gen. xviii. 11 — 15, and both with 
 Gen. xvii. 1. 
 
spiritual Blessings. 21 
 
 nobility of his country, he must produce the royal 
 grant. Thus stands the matter with respect to 
 Abraham. The act, the donation of Jehovah, 
 made him the father of believers; although he 
 may have received the ennobling title as a gracious 
 reward of his faith. 
 
 Now, if it can be proved, that Abraham was 
 constituted father of the faithful, by the covenant 
 ynder examination, it will follow conclusively that 
 this covenant must comprehend spiritual bless- 
 ings. Of this fiict, there is evidence sufficient to 
 place it beyond any reasonable doubt; for mention 
 is made of this \erj title in the record of the 
 covenant; not, indeed, in the same, yet in terms 
 equivalent in meaning: " JVeither shall thy nnme 
 any more he called Abram; hut thy name shall he 
 called Abraham: for a father of many nations 
 have I made thee.^'^ This promise, we admit, may 
 have some reference to the nations that sprung 
 from the patriarch's loins. But it is to be observed, 
 Abraham was not the natural father of many na- 
 iions: and, therefore, the promise must be consider- 
 ed as looking beyond his natural descendants, and 
 as having a special reference to his numerous, spi- 
 ritual seed, true believers of every age and nation 
 under heaven. This is no conjectur^; it is truth, 
 sanctioned by apostolic authority. For Paul thus 
 
 " Gen. xvii. 5. 
 
28 LETTER II. 
 
 interprets the language of the covenant. In illus- 
 trating and confirming the very argument to >vhicli 
 the text (Rom. iv. 11, 12.) belongs, he subjoins, 
 as a proof of his assertion that Abraham " is the 
 father of us all," these very words of the covenant; 
 *' As it is written, I have made thee a father 
 OF MANY NATIONS."^* Tlijs scttlcs the matter. 
 Apostolic authority has determined the honorary 
 title given in the covenant to Abraham, to have 
 special reference to his spiritual seed, true believ- 
 ers of all nations; and ^^ father of all them that be- 
 lieve,^' and *^ father of many nations,^' to be phra- 
 ses so far equivalent, that the latter includes the 
 former. I 
 
 The fact is now established. Abraham was 
 constituted father of the faithful, by the covenant 
 under examination. From this fact, it follows, 
 that the covenant must contain spiritual blessings: 
 for with what propriety could the patriarch be 
 constituted father of Gentile-helievers in a cove- 
 nant which did not comprehend spiritual blessings? 
 
 This truth receives additional evidence, when 
 we reflect for what purpose Abraham was consti- 
 tuted father of believers. It was not merely to 
 exhibit him as a model of faith, but that he might 
 
 * Rom. xiv. T . 
 
 t Includes,- because the one, as it has respect to Abraham's car- 
 nal seed as well as to believers, is more comprehensive than the other. 
 
Spiritual Blessings. 23 
 
 transmit to them the benefits of covenant-grace; 
 just as a natural father transmits an inheritance 
 to his chiklren. Human law secures to children 
 the property of their parents: so the divine consti- 
 tution or covenant secures to all believers the 
 blessings of their father Abraham. This inter- 
 pretation evidently coincides with the language of 
 an inspired writer: <« Know ye, therefore, that 
 they which are of faith, the same are the children 
 of Abraham. And the scriptures, foreseeing that 
 God would justify the heathen through faith, 
 preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, 
 In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then, they 
 which be of faith, are blessed with faithful Abra- 
 ham."* *• That the blessing of Abraham might 
 come on tJie Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that 
 we might receive the promise of the Spirit through 
 faith." 
 
 By these texts, the following points are plainly 
 establislied: Bdiarers receive blessings from Godf 
 considered as the children vf Mraham. They 
 are expressly called his children: and it is pro- 
 mised that all nations shall be blessed in him; that 
 is, by being united to his family, and brought un- 
 der the operation of his covenant. — Believers enjoy 
 the same hlessings ivhich their covenant-father en- 
 joyed: tliey '< are blessed with faithful Abraham." 
 
 » Gal. iii. 7--9. 14. 
 
24. LETTER II. 
 
 Believers inherit from him, as their covenant-fa' 
 ther, SPIRITUAL blessings; such as justification 
 by faith, and the gift of the Spirit, which are ex- 
 pressly mentioned in these quotations. Can a doubt, 
 then, remain, that Abraham was, by this covenant, 
 appointed their father, for the great purpose of 
 transmitting the blessings of grace and glory to 
 all who by faith become members of his family? 
 
 If additional evidence be required to support 
 this point, and to show that such is the real, scrip- 
 tural import of the patriarch's honorary title; I 
 refer you again to the particular text under inves- 
 tigation. There, you will find the inspired writer 
 specifies the purpose for which Abraham was con- 
 stituted ^* father of all them that helieve,^^ Wliat 
 was it? It follows: That righteousness might 
 BE IMPUTED UNTO THEM ALSO:" In Other words, 
 that he, as the head of his family, might transmit 
 to all its members, the great blessing of justifica- 
 tion by the imputed righteousness of Christ, re- 
 ceived by faith; and consequently all other spiri- 
 tual blessings, because they are inseparably con- 
 nected with this fundamental one. Every justified 
 believer is undoubtedly sanctified, and adopted, 
 and a partaker of all saving benefits. 
 
 This matter may be illustrated by recurring to 
 a comparison already used. A title of nobility is 
 conferred on a subject. By virtue of the royal 
 grant, he becomes the head of a noble family; and 
 
Spiritual Blessings, 25 
 
 as such transmits, according to the tenor of his 
 grant, a title and all the privileges connected with 
 it, to his heirs in their several generations. In 
 like manner, Abraham was ennobled by the King 
 of kings: and, by virtue of his royalgrant, or co- 
 venant, constituting him father of all believers, he 
 transmits to them, his appointed heirs, the bless- 
 ings comprehended in the covenant. 
 
 Let us collect the result of the explanation 
 given of this important passage. It appears, 
 
 1. That Abraham was constituted father of be- 
 lievers by the covenant under examination. 
 
 2. That he, as their covenant-father, transmits 
 to them the benefits of this covenant; and 
 
 3. That believers, as his heirs appointed by 
 this covenant, receive spiritual blessings; particu- 
 larly justification by faith, and the gift of the 
 Spirit. 
 
 From these premises, we draw it as an incon- 
 testable conclusion, That this covenant must con- 
 tain SPIRITUAL BENEFITS. 
 
 The light which has now been thrown on this text, 
 will enable us to see the precise manner in which 
 circumcision operated as a seal of the righteous- 
 ness of faith, in respect to Abraham. Many admit 
 the truth, who do not seem to understand it. Cir- 
 cumcision was given to the patriarch, as an ap- 
 pointed token or seal of the covenant; and as such 
 it was received by him. It was, therefore, to him 
 
 D 
 
26 LETTER II. 
 
 a confirmation of all its engagements^ and, as 
 the covenant contained spiritnal blessings, and 
 among them stood preeminently justification by 
 faith, circumcision was of course a seal of this 
 fundamental benefit. It certified Abraham that^ 
 according to corenant-promise, he should be jus- 
 tified by that righteousness which he had already 
 received by faith. 
 
 I finish this branch of the subject, by showing 
 that this covenant, as already intimated, contains 
 not only some, but all spiritual blessings; and that, 
 from its nature, it must necessarily have respect 
 to Christ, our Redeemer. It has been distinctly 
 proved, that the righteousness of faith, and the 
 gift of the Spirit, or, in other words, justification 
 and sanctification, together with a glorious resur- 
 rection from tlie dead, belong to it; blessings in- 
 separably connected with all others of a spiritual 
 nature. Besides, the grand promise of this cove- 
 nant is expressed in terms the most comprehen- 
 sive; which taken, as we have seen they ought 
 to be, according to their natural import, must 
 comprehend all spiritual blessings. " I will be 
 their God:" this secures, to every believing son 
 ■and daughter of Abraham, pardon, reconciliation, 
 peace, renovation, growth and perseverance in 
 grace, protection against every enemy, victory 
 over death, admission into heaven, resurrection 
 from the dead, and life eternal. We may, there- 
 
Spiritual Slessings. 27 
 
 fore, consider every subsequent promise given by 
 Jehovab to his people, and recorded in sacred 
 scripture, as intended to develop this grand cove- 
 nant promise, virtually including all other pro- 
 mises; and to teach them more distinctly >vhat 
 they may, and ought to, expect from his grace and 
 munificence, who has condescended to engage to 
 be a God unto them. 
 
 This covenant must likewise have respect to 
 Christ; because, only through his mediation, can 
 Jehovah become a God to any of our apostate race. 
 The grand promise of it was founded on the pre- 
 vious promise of a Saviour; and the fulfilment of 
 the one depended on the fulfilment of the other. 
 Had not a Saviour been promised, the Supreme 
 Being could not have engaged, consistently with 
 his glory, to be a God to sinful mortals: and had 
 not Christ made the necessary expiation for sin, 
 covenant-blessings would not have been bestowed 
 on them. Such is the doctrine of an inspired apos» 
 tie: <* Now I say, that Jesus Christ was a minister 
 of the circumcision for the truth of God, to con- 
 firm the promises made unto the fathers. And for 
 this cause, he is mediator of the New Testament, 
 that by means of death, for the redemption of the 
 transgressions that were under the first testa- 
 ment, they which are called might receive the 
 promise of eternal inheritance:"=^ And, in his 
 
 * Rom. XV. 8. Heb. k. 15. 
 
28 LETTER II. 
 
 epistle to the Galatians, the same apostle, speak* 
 ing of this very covenant, tells us expressly, that 
 it " was confirmed of God in (with respect to) 
 ChrisV^ By believing in the Saviour, his pro- 
 mised seed, Abraham was justified, and obtained 
 the other blessings of the covenant: and the fulfil- 
 ment of its gracious engagements, is secured to all 
 his spiritual seed by faith in the same Redeemer. 
 There are several other passages, bearing on 
 the point in hand, which prove the Abrahamic 
 covenant to include spiritual blessings^ but the 
 limits assigned to this discussion, will not allow 
 the introduction of them. Nor is it necessary: the 
 truth we contend for may be confidently rested on 
 the texts submitted to your consideration. 
 
 II. The covenant of Abraham contains 
 
 TEMPORAL OR EXTERNAL BLESSINGS. Tlus is the 
 
 second truth, which we oppose to the second error.- 
 No writer, as far as I know, denies that this 
 covenant did, at its original formation, include 
 benefits of such a nature. All admit the promises 
 relative to Canaan, and the birth of Messiah, to 
 have been external blessings. Still, however, 
 some contend, that, since our Saviour's incarna- 
 tion, engagements of this kind being fulfilled, the 
 covenant has no respect to tempoi*al, and contem- 
 plates only spiritual, benefits. This opinion we 
 believe to be unscriptural. The promise relative 
 
 * Gal. iii. 1 7. 
 
Sinriliial Blessings, 29 
 
 lo the birth of our Redeemer has, indeed, been 
 aeeoiiiplished; and consequently, the Je>vish peo- 
 ple are no longer a consecrated vehicle for intro- 
 ducing him into the world. But, has the donation 
 of Canaan been revoked? Was the right to this 
 land, invested, by the promise of Jehovah, in the 
 descendants of Abraham, to expire at a particular 
 period? We contend that it was not. The promise 
 is part of an everlasting covenant. Perhaps it will 
 be said, that, by dispossessing them of their inhe- 
 ritance, God has, by an act of his providence, 
 plainly intimated the duration of his grant. True 
 it is, they have been driven from that goodly land; 
 but are we not taught to regard this as a judgment 
 for their sins, which will be removed when they 
 shall return to the Lord? They were once before 
 dispossessed of their country, and carried away 
 captives to Babylon; and yet, after having worn 
 out a servitude of seventy years, in a strange land, 
 they were restored to their inheritance: and why 
 may we not conclude that they will, on their re- 
 pentance, be again collected and brought back to 
 the land of their fathers? Their present existence 
 as a separate people evidently favours this expec- 
 tation. Indeed, the prophets of God have clearly 
 foretold, not only the conversion of the Jews to 
 the Christian faith, but also their restoration, as 
 a people, to their ancient country. This opinion 
 is embraced by many able expositors of sacred 
 D 2 
 
oO iETTER II. 
 
 prophecy: and, were we now to enter on the discus- 
 sion, numerous, plain, and decisive predictions 
 might he adduced in support of it. 
 
 But dismissing, for the present, this suhject 
 with these few observations, we intend to show, 
 that all external blessings bestowed on the patri- 
 arch's descendants, came as the fruits of this co- 
 venant. Did the Almighty display his marvellous 
 works in Egypt, and, by his mighty arm, effect 
 their emancipation from cruel bondage? Did he 
 lead them through the Red Sea, feed them with 
 manna forty years in the wilderness, and at last 
 conduct them to a land flowing with milk and 
 honey? These miraculous interpositions of his 
 providence, were granted in fulfilment of his cove- 
 nant with Abraham and his seed. Did Jehovah 
 condescend to enter into covenant with them as a 
 nation? Moses derives the reason of the memo- 
 rable transaction at Sinai, from this covenant: 
 ** That he may establish thee to-day for a people 
 unto himself 9 and that he may he unto thee a God, 
 as he hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn 
 unto thy fathers, to Mraham, to Isaac, and to 
 Jacoh,^'^ Did the Most High become their king? 
 It was to carry into effect his covenant. Having 
 by their emancipation made tliem a separate and 
 independent people, a civil government became 
 necessary: and, for the more effectual accomplish- 
 
 * Deut. xxix. 13, 25. 
 
Spiritual Blessings. 31 
 
 ment of covenant- engagements, God saw it best, 
 not to leave them to the sagacity of human pru- 
 dence, but to give them a system of political laws, 
 emanating from his own wisdom. Did Jehovah 
 make them the depositary of his heavenly oracles, 
 and send them prophet after prophet for their in- 
 struction? It was doubtless to establish his cove- 
 nant with them, and that he might become, in the 
 sublimest sense of the word, a God to his chosen. 
 The divine oracles were the great external benefit 
 included in this covenant. When Paul asks the 
 question, *' what profit is there of circumcision?" 
 that is, what profit in being a Jew, a descendant 
 of Abraham, wearing in the flesh the token of 
 God's covenant? what is his reply? Does he say, 
 the Jews possess the promised land; they are go- 
 verned by civil laws enacted by Heaven? These 
 were indeed temporal favours of great value, 
 which God had bestowed on them. But they en-, 
 joyed blessings of a temporal nature unspeakably 
 more valuable: they had in their possession the 
 sacred scriptures, given to make them wise unto 
 salvation: and, therefore, Paul replies to his ques- 
 tion, " Much every waij; chiejiy because that unto 
 them were committed the oracles of god. For 
 what if some did not believe, shall their unbelief 
 make the faith of God ivithout effects God forbid: 
 yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.^'^ 
 
 * Rom. iii. 1—3. 
 
32 LETTER II. 
 
 Here are two permanent, external benefits 
 of Abraham's covenant. Some of the other fa- 
 vours of this kind, mentioned as flowing from it, 
 have passed away: but the donation of the saered 
 scriptures, and the gift of authorized teachers of 
 divine truth, are as lasting as time, and will be 
 enjoyed by the church as long as the world stands. 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 General observations — Great design of the covenant. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 In my last letter, it was proved that the cove- 
 nant made with Abraham, comprehends in its 
 engagements both spiritual and external blessings. 
 "With a view more fully to illustrate its meaning, 
 and bring into clearer light its precious contents, 
 permit me, in this, to direct your attention to a 
 few additional observations. 
 
General Observations. So 
 
 1. With respect to Abraham personally, the 
 grand promise of the covenant is to be understood 
 in its sublimest import. God engaged to be unto 
 him a God, in the most glorious sense. This has 
 already been proved. 
 
 2. By this covenant, Jehovah stipulated to be- 
 come, in the same glorious sense of his promise, 
 a God unto all those of Abraham's seed, who 
 should imitate his faith, and walk in his steps. So 
 obviously this appears from the preceding discus- 
 sion, that no further confirmation is needed. 
 
 3. The covenant did not insure the conversion 
 of all the descendants of Abraham. It was indeed 
 made with, and the promises of grace were exhi- 
 bited to, all duly circumcised Israelites: but by no 
 means does it follow, from this fact, that God en- 
 gaged to bestow his converting grace on them all. 
 The covenant did not contain a promise so abso- 
 lute and universal. Events have made this certain. 
 Thousands of Abraham's seed, in every age, wore 
 the covenant- token in their flesh, who never de- 
 rived from their relation to God any saving be- 
 nefit, but lived and died in impenitence and unbe- 
 lief: and, from this fact, we may, with certainty, 
 conclude that, although the offers of grace were 
 made to all, and all enjoyed the instructions of 
 inspired and other divinely appointed teachers; yet 
 God did not bind himself, by an absolute promise, 
 to give to all a new heart and a new spirit. A sir 
 
34 LETTER III. 
 
 milar fact occurs under the gospel-dispensation. 
 The grant of eternal life is, in offer, made to all 
 who hear the glad tidings; yet how many thou- 
 sands reject the offer, and, hy their unbelief, de- 
 nying the truth, the infallible testimony of God, 
 bring upon themselves an aggravated condemna- 
 tion? ** If we receive the witness of men, the wit- 
 ness of God is greater; for this is the witness of 
 God which he hath testified of his Son. He that 
 believeth on tlie Son of God hath the witness in 
 himself: he that believeth not God, hath made 
 him a liar; because he believeth not the record 
 that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, 
 that God liath given to us eternal life; and this life 
 is in his Son.'' But 
 
 4<. The covenant did engage, that salvation 
 should he transmitted seminally; and that, in 
 every age, there should he, among the Israelites, an 
 election of grace. It has been asserted, that the 
 carnal seed of Abraham were set apart to God, 
 and circumcised as his peculiar people, to intro- 
 duce into the world the Redeemer, who received 
 his human nature from them; and that, having an- 
 swered this purpose, they had no longer, by birth, 
 an interest in this covenant, and were no longer 
 God's peculiar people. In opposition to this opi- 
 nion, it can, I think, be clearly shown, that the car- 
 nal seed of Abraham were consecrated and circum- 
 eised for another and more lasting purpose; name- 
 
Design of the Covenant. 35 
 
 ly, to be a nursery to the invisible church: and 
 that God did engage his true spiritual church, 
 consisting of real believers, should descend, in the 
 line of Abraham's natural and adopted seed, down 
 to the end of time. In the present stage of discus- 
 sion, it will suffice to prove this truth with respect 
 to the patriarch's descendants, till the commence- 
 ment of the Christian dispensation. 
 
 Here, my brethren, we enter on an important 
 point; and I beg your close attention to the evi- 
 dence that shall be offered to establish it. 
 
 1. The transmission of saving blessings to A- 
 braham's believing seed, appears clearly to have 
 been, so far as human interest is concerned, the 
 covenant's ultimate end, from this consideration 
 that it comprehended such blessings. The im- 
 mediate effect of this divine constitution, Avas the 
 regular organization of God's visible church in 
 the patriarch's family: and, as long as his natural 
 posterity retained their covenant-relation to their 
 God, it perpetuated it among them. When the 
 perpetuity of the covenant, and the interest of 
 Gentile-christians in it, shall have been evinced, 
 it will be also apparent, that this same divine con- 
 stitution perpetuates the visible church among 
 Abraham's adopted seed, till the end of time. 
 This establishment and propagation of the visible 
 church, seminally, Avas, no doubt, one important 
 design of the patriarch's covenant. Let it be re- 
 
36 , LETTER III. 
 
 collected, however, that the visible church has 
 been formed for gathering in the elect of God, 
 and is used as a means for promoting the interest 
 of the invisible church; and it will be evident that 
 this covenant contemplated a higlier and nobler 
 purpose, than tlie establisliment, on earth, of a 
 society bearing certain peculiar relations to God 
 of an external nature. It comprehends, we have 
 seen, both temporal and spiritual blessings; and, 
 hence, the conclusion seems certain, that its great 
 design must be the bestowmentof the latter benefits 
 upon the seed of Abraham: the donation of the for- 
 mer being made in due subserviency. Christianity 
 is conducive to our present, as well as to our future 
 welfare: for, says an inspired writer, ^< Godliness 
 is profitable unto all things, having promise of the 
 life that now is, and of that which is to come." 
 But would it not be deemed utterly inconclusive, 
 were the great design of our holy religion as- 
 serted, on the ground of this text, to be the happi- 
 ness of man in his present state? We derive its 
 great design from a view of its most important 
 blessings: and, as i( secures to every true believer 
 everlasting salvation, we have no hesitation in 
 concluding, that its chief purpose and its ultimate 
 end, witb respect io man's interest, is to save his 
 soul, and make him happy in a future world. For 
 the same reason, we determine the end of Abra- 
 ham's covenant to have been the transmission of 
 
Design of the Covenant, 37 
 
 spiritual benefits to the elect of God, in the line of 
 his natural posterity. 
 
 The manner of expression used in the covenant, 
 confirms this conclusion. " I will establish my co- 
 venant between me and thee, and thy seed after 
 thee, in their generations, for an everlasting cove- 
 nant;" for what purpose? " to he a God unto thee, 
 and to thtj seed after thee,'^^ Here the covenant's 
 great design is manifestly declared. It is nothing 
 less, than the bestowment of all spiritual and sa- 
 ving blessings comprehended in the promise, on 
 Abraham and his seed; not all, but as many as the 
 Lord should call. If, by this divine assurance, no 
 more were meant than, as some contend, that Je- 
 hovah would take them into a near special external 
 relation to himself, and put them in possession of 
 a goodly land, together with many other temporal 
 blessings; it would certainly follow, the covenant 
 had no higher end in view. But his promise means 
 vastly more, and engages that he will be, to the 
 patriarch, and to all his believing seed, a God^ in 
 the most glorious sense of the covenant-title. And 
 hence, it appears evident, this covenant contem- 
 plated, as its great end, the bestowment of spiri- 
 tual blessings, life and salvation, on Abraham and 
 on his spiritual seed, found among his natural de- 
 scendants, with whom the covenant was made, 
 and to whom the promise was directed, ' 
 
 • Gen. xvii. 7. 
 
38 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 2. The sacred oracles were delivered to the 
 posterity of Abraham. This fact constitutes a se- 
 cond proof, that the covenant made with him en- 
 gaged to perpetuate the true church, and transmit 
 saving blessings, in the line of his natural seed. 
 None will pretend these inspired writings were 
 put into their hands, merely to confer on them 
 some temporal advantages. They were doubtless 
 given to them for the same purpose, for which 
 they have been given to us; namely, to lead them 
 to the knowledge, love, and service of the true 
 God; and that as many as were ordained to eter- 
 nal life might, by faith in their promised Saviour, 
 obtain it. Now, the gift of the holy scriptures 
 was a fruit of this covenant; the chief external 
 advantage which a Jew, a circumcised descendant 
 of Abraham, enjoyed above others:^ and, there- 
 fore, it follows, the covenant engaged, that salva- 
 tion should be transmitted among them from one 
 generation to another; because this eifect actually 
 resulted from the donation of the holy scriptures, 
 which was made in fulfilment of covenant-promise. 
 
 3. The promises of converting and saving grace 
 in the Old Testament, furnish another argument 
 in favour of the tru th for which we contend. That 
 this part of our sacred volume contains such pro- 
 mises, cannot be denied by any acquainted with 
 those heavenly records: nor can it be denied, that 
 
 * Rom. iii. l— 3. 
 
Design of the Covenant, 3» 
 
 they were directed to Abraham's natural seed. 
 See Acts ii. 39. These promises did not, it must 
 he admitted, engage to effect the conversion of all 
 to whom they were exhibited. They pertained to 
 tlie visible church in general: and God fulfilled 
 them to individuals according to his own sovereign 
 pleasure. But the donation of them certainly se- 
 cured an election of grace, and the preservation 
 of God's spiritual church, among Abraham's de- 
 scendants, till, by unbelief, they forfeited their 
 distinguishing privileges. << Salvation," said Je- 
 sus to the woman of Samaria, ^< is of the Jews.^'^ 
 This, then, must have been the original and great 
 design of the patriarchal covenant; because these 
 gracious promises, being a part of the sacred ora^ 
 cles, one of its capital fruits, were given to carry 
 it into effect, and, as we have seen, to develop 
 more fully the meaning of its primary promise, in 
 which all subsequent promises were virtually com- 
 prised. 
 
 The reasoning of St. Paul, in the 9th and 11th 
 chapters of his epistle to the Romans, strongly cor- 
 roborates this interpretation of Jehovah's design 
 in the covenant made with his servant Abraham. 
 He asserts explicitly that the promises pertained 
 to Israel: and, from the train of his argument, it 
 is evident he allows that divine faithfulness to 
 these promises, and to the covenant in which they 
 Avere originally comprehended, demanded their 
 
 * John iv, 25. 
 
^0 XETTER III. 
 
 fulfilment in the conversion of some of that people 
 to whom they were given. The deplorable state 
 of his << kinsmen according to the flesh,'^ excited 
 in the apostle's benevolent soul the tenderest com- 
 passion; and he begins his ninth chapter, with ex- 
 pressing the continual sorrow which oppressed his 
 heart on their account. Having mentioned the 
 distinguishing privileges with which they had been 
 favoured, he proceeds to vindicate the faithfulness 
 of God to his promises and covenant, against an 
 objection grounded on their seeming want of ful- 
 filment. " Are not this j>eople, it might be said, 
 Israelites to whom pertain the promises, and the 
 seed of Abraham to whom Jehovah engaged, by 
 covenant, to be their God? How, then, is their pre- 
 sent state reconcilable with divine faithfulness? 
 Or, is it possible that they should, as intimated, 
 forfeit their privileges, and be cast out of the 
 ehurch? Has ' the word of God taken none ef- 
 fect?' Has its promises failed to be fulfilled?" 
 
 This is the objection, which Paul anticipates 
 and refutes. How does he answer it? By denying 
 the promises to belong to the Israelites, or that 
 God had, in his covenant with Abraham, engaged 
 to bestow on his seed saving blessings? No: ad- 
 mitting both as facts, he removes the apparent 
 difficulty, by stating a grand distinction in regard 
 to the patriarch's natural descendants, which, he 
 shows, from the scriptures, God had very early 
 
Design of the Covenant, 41 
 
 intimated to his church, woiihl ever prevail. Read 
 his own words: " Not as though the word of Gou 
 hath taken none effect. For they arc not all," the 
 true '* Israel which are of Israel; neither hecause 
 they are the seed of Abraham are they all chil- 
 dren: but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called^ that 
 is, they which are the children of the flesh, these 
 are not" all, and merehj on that accoimt, " the 
 children of God. For this is the word of promise. 
 At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a 
 son. And not only this, but when Rebecca had 
 conceived by one, even by our father Isaac, (for 
 the children being not yet born, neither having 
 done any good or evil, that the purpose of God 
 according to election might stand, not of works, 
 but of him that calleth,) it was said, The elder 
 shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob 
 have I loved, but Esau have I hated." Here the 
 sacred writer clearly teaches us, that mere descent 
 from Jacob, and mere connexion with the church 
 to which the promises Avere given, did not make 
 his children true, spiritual Israelites: and that, al- 
 though they derived their desoent from Abraham, 
 and were by birth interested in his covenant, yet 
 their saving adoption as the children of God, was 
 not the necessary result. The covenant did not 
 insure the conversion and salvation of all his na- 
 tural seed: and against such a misconception of 
 
 his promise, Jehovah had very early guarded the 
 
 E 2 
 
4^ LETTER III. 
 
 church, by expelling Ishmaei and his offsprings 
 and establishing the covenant with Isaac and his 
 posterity; and afterwards by ejecting Esau from 
 his birth-right, and bestowing it on his brother 
 Jacob. But, at the same time it must be admit- 
 ted, the apostle does likewise teach us, that the 
 conversion and salvation of a select portion of A- 
 braham's seed was secured by covenant-promise. 
 This evidently appears from the seventh verse; 
 " Neither because they are the seed of Abraham 
 are they all children:" clearly admitting that som& 
 of his seed were children. Isaac, and Jacob, and 
 their descendants, were the seed of Abraham. In- 
 deed, the whole train of Paul's argument, and 
 more especially the distinction which he makes, 
 are founded on this truth. The answer which he 
 gives, in his eleventh chapter, to another objec- 
 tion, places it beyond reasonable doubt: " I say 
 then, hath God cast away his" covenant " people? 
 God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed 
 of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath 
 not cast away his people which he foreknew. — 
 Even so then, at this present time also, there is a 
 remnant according to the election of grace. What 
 then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seek- 
 cth for; but the election hath obtained it, and the 
 rest were blinded."* 
 
 * Chap. xi. 1, 2, 5, 7. 
 
Design of the Covenant, 43 
 
 On the whole, from the apostle's reasoning, we 
 are warranted in drawing this conclusion: By his 
 covenant with Ahraham, God did not engage to 
 convert and save all his natural seed; hut lie cer- 
 tainly did promise that some of them should, by 
 the sovereign application of his grace, become his 
 spiritual children, and participate with their illus- 
 trious father in the saving blessings of his cove- 
 nant: and, therefore, if there had not been found, 
 among his natural seed, a constant succession of 
 true believers, the word of God would have failed 
 to produce its intended effect, and his covenant- 
 promise would not have been fulfilled. 
 
 4. Facts prove the position which has been 
 stated. Grace and salvation actually did descend 
 among Abraham's posterity, from generation to 
 generation; till, like Ishmael and Esau, their 
 unbelief and rejection of the Messiah, deprived 
 them of covenant-privileges. Till that mournful 
 event, among them was constantly found the spi- 
 ritual as well as the visible church of G od. . In a 
 few years after the death of Abraham, true reli- 
 gion expired every where except among his de- 
 scendants. Favoured by repeated communications 
 from heaven, they retained the knowledge and 
 worship of Jehovah, when darkness overshadow ed 
 the nations, and idolatry universally prevailed. 
 Often, indeed, ignorance, wickedness, and idol- 
 atry, spread very generally among this peculiar 
 
4!* , LETTER III. 
 
 people. Yet, in the worst of times, there were 
 always found among them, at least, a few ac- 
 quainted with the true God, and attached to his 
 worship in opposition to that of idols: and even in 
 that gloomy period when the defection was so 
 great, that the prophet Elias complained he was 
 left alone on the side of truth and religion, Je- 
 hovah, as he was assured, had reserved to him- 
 self seven thousand men who had not bowed the 
 knee to the image of Baal.^ Various, indeed, 
 was the aspect of piety. Sometimes it flourished, 
 and at other times it declined. But ia every ge- 
 neration, there was, at least, " a remnant accord- 
 ing to the election of grace,^' The true spiritual, 
 as well as the visible, church, was preserved among 
 Abraham's descendants from age to age, till the 
 calling of the Gentiles. 
 
 Here is an unquestionable fact. In what light 
 is it to be contemplated? Has it no connexion with 
 the covenant? Shall we consider it merely as an 
 act of God's sovereign pleasure? Surely this would 
 not be a correct view of this dispensation toward 
 his church. By a covenant, containing, as has 
 been proved, spiritual and temporal blessings, he 
 had promised to be, in the fullest sense, a God 
 unto Abraham's seed: and, doubtless, his becom- 
 ing, by subsequent communications of his grace, 
 a God to them, was a manifest fulfilment of his 
 
 * 1 Kings xix. 18. Rom. xi, 4. 
 
Design of the Covenant. 45 
 
 covenant-engagement. Sovereign, indeed, is the 
 Supreme Being in dispensing his saving grace. 
 But unquestionably it does not derogate, in the 
 least degree, from his sovereignty, to make a free 
 and gracious promise, and then to fulfil it. He 
 might, had it been his pleasure, have withheld 
 the promise from Abraham, or he might have 
 given it to some other person: but having made it, 
 his veracity was pledged to accomplish it, by per- 
 petuating the church, and transmitting saving 
 blessings among the patriarch's descendants. 
 
 Thus, by various arguments, has been esta- 
 blished this important truth. That the Mrahamie 
 covenant was made, not merely for the purpose of 
 ushering the Saviour into the world, hut also to 
 transmit, seminally, spiritual and saving hless' 
 ings among the patriarch^ s natural descendants, 
 till, by unbelief, they forfeited those peculiar privi- 
 leges, which had so long constituted their boast and 
 glory. For the accomplishment of this great de- 
 sign, they were separated from the world, and 
 impressed with the seal of God's gracious cove- 
 nant. That " the elect may obtain salvation with 
 eternal glory," is the end contemplated by the 
 gospel. But to attain this end, the gospel is, by 
 divine appointment, preached to all promiscuously: 
 and God, by his sovereign grace, gives it an effec- 
 tual application to as many as he hath chosen. So, 
 for the accomplishment of tlie great design of his 
 
*6 LETTER III. 
 
 covenant, God was pleased to establish it with 
 Abraham's seed generally, and direct the appli- 
 cation of its token to them,' that its blessings being 
 exhibited to all, he might, by the secret and sove- 
 reign operations of his grace, give them an effec- 
 tual application to his chosen, and bring the chil- 
 dren of promise to the actual enjoyment of them. 
 The patriarch's posterity were formed into a visi- 
 ble society, bearing peculiar relations to God; 
 they were made the depositary of his heavenly 
 oracles; to them were sent inspired prophets, and 
 divinely commissioned teachers; to them were di- 
 rected all the promises of grace recorded in the 
 Old Testament; on them were poured out the sa- 
 cred influences of the Holy Spirit; and among 
 them were constantly found the saints of God, and 
 the heirs of glory. Such was the effect, and such 
 the design of Abraham's covenant. It constituted 
 his seed into a visible church, to be a nursery both 
 for the invisible church, and for heaven. It drew 
 around them a sacred enclosure, within which Je- 
 hovah stipulated to seek and find the election of 
 his grace; and, in every generation, to renew some 
 by his grace, and prepare them for his eternal 
 glory. 
 
 From the view which has been given of Abra- 
 J*am's covenant, it manifestly appears, that, cor- 
 respondent to the two kinds of blessings compre- 
 hended in its engagements, it contemplated a two- 
 
Design of the Covenant. 47 
 
 J*old seed: natural and spiritual; children bybirtli, 
 and children by promise. Jlotli kinds Avere actu- 
 ally in the covenant; and, consequently, being Je- 
 hovah's peculiar people, were authorized to call 
 him their God. It is manifest, however, that the 
 relations which united them to him, though in 
 some respects the same, vet, in others, were 
 widely difierent. In regard to both, it was a co- 
 venant-relation: but, while the one sustained only 
 an external union to God, the other was united to 
 him also by a spiritual union. The natural seed 
 were really members of the visible church, parta- 
 kers of external covenant-benefits, and invited to 
 accept of its saving blessings. But the spiritual 
 seed actually enjoyed both, and were members of 
 the invisible church: they were renewed by divine 
 grace, sanctified by the Spirit, possessed of the 
 faith of their father Abraham, and, consequently, 
 arrayed in that righteousness by which he was 
 justified. Thus, the ground on which the two de- 
 scriptions of seed rested their claim to Jehovah as 
 their God, was widely difierent. To the one, he 
 was a God by a peculiar relation which he did not 
 bear to the rest of mankind: but to the other, he 
 was a God, by a relation still more peculiar; a re- 
 lation which he did not bear even to the members 
 of his visible church, considered as such. 
 
 The distinction now stated pervades the sacred 
 scriptures. It is a key to certain passages, the 
 
48 lETTER III. 
 
 meaning of which cannot be opened without it. In 
 a controversy with the Jews, our blessed Lord ad- 
 mits them to be Abraham's seed, but denies them 
 to be Abraham's children:'^ meaning that, although 
 they were descended from him by natural genera- 
 ration, yet they were not his children according 
 to the promise, nor imitators of his faith and 
 works. In like manner, St. Paul gives, and re- 
 fuses to the same person, the name of a Jew: ** He 
 is not a Jew which is one outwardly; but he is a 
 Jew which is one inwardly: f teaching us that a 
 man may, in one sense, by external relation, be 
 numbered with God's covenant-people, while, in 
 another sense, in regard to spiritual union, he does 
 not belong to them. 
 
 This distinction prevailed constantly in the 
 church, during the former economy; and it exists, 
 and must exist, under the present dispensation. 
 For it is a fact not to be disputed, that, while true 
 believers sustain to God a spiritual union, and en- 
 Joy the saving blessings of his gracious covenant; 
 there are many who, although, on a profession of 
 faith, admitted into the church, and enjoying the 
 covenant-seals, yet, being destitute of real reli- 
 gion, sustain only an external relation to God. 
 The former are the branches in Jesus Christ the 
 vine, which bear fruit, and shall continue to flou- 
 rish in him: but the latter are the branches, which 
 
 * John viii. 37, 39. f Rom, ii. 28, 29- 
 
Covenant Perpetual. 49 
 
 bear no fruit, and are doomed to be separated 
 from him, and cast into the fire.^ In the parable 
 to which we refer, let it be observed, our Saviour 
 allows, in respect to both classes of persons, a real 
 union to himself: and this amounts to a plain proof, 
 that the distinction formerly existing between the 
 people of God, the members of his church, has 
 not, as some pretend, been abolished by the Chris- 
 tian dispensation. 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 
 The covenant perpetual. 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 The first part of our discussion is now com- 
 pleted. It has been proved, I trust to your satis- 
 faction, that the covenant of Abraham compre- 
 hends in its engagements both external and spiri- 
 tual blessings; and that the great design of this 
 divine constitution was, not only to perpetuate 
 among the patriarch's posterity the visible church, 
 
 * John XV. 1 — 6. 
 F 
 
BO LETTER IT. 
 
 but chiefly to transmit semixally the blessings 
 of salvation, and gather into the invisible church 
 God's elect among that chosen people. You will 
 please to bear in mind these important truths: for, 
 in the course of our investigation, it will be neces- 
 sary to refer to them frequently. 
 
 In this letter, I shall endeavour to establish 
 
 the PERPETUITY OF THE PATRIARCHAL COVENANT. 
 
 This gracious constitution was intended by its 
 glorious author, not merely to answer temporary 
 purposes, and last while the Mosaic economy con- 
 tinued; but to endure as long as the sun and moon, 
 and bless his church with heavenly influence, till 
 he translate her from earth to heaven. We de» 
 monstrate this property of the covenant, by the 
 following arguments. 
 
 1. The covenant is expressly called everlast- 
 ing: <*lwill establish my covenant between me 
 and thee, and thy seed after thee, in their gene- 
 rations, for an creHasfm^" covenant."* This term, 
 it is admitted, has sometimes a more limited 
 sense, and is connected with things which last only 
 for several ages. It is applied to the priesthood 
 of Aaron, and to the great annual atonement made 
 for the Jewish people; both which have long since 
 been abolished. But it will not follow, from this 
 application of the term, in these two instances, 
 and in others of a similar kind, that it should be 
 understood in the same limited sense in its ap- 
 
 " Gen. xvii T. 
 
Covenant Pei^etual. 51 
 
 plication to the Abraliaiuic covenant. It certainly 
 is applied to objects as lasting as time, and to ob- 
 jects absolutely eternal. We read of the everlast- 
 ing hills, the everlasting mountains, the everlast- 
 ing remembrance of the righteous, everlasting 
 life, everlasting kindness, the everlasting God. 
 Why then should we not understand this term, in 
 its apijlication to the covenant, as expressing per- 
 petuity? What just reason can be assigned for 
 taking it in a more limited sense? Will it be said, 
 the term is applied to the land of promise, from 
 which the descendants of Abraham have, forages, 
 been expelled,' and that, therefore, the covenant 
 ought not to be considered as being perpetual, 
 any more than the possession of Canaan? We re- 
 ply. Before a solid objection can be founded on this 
 application of the term, it behooves those who 
 urge it to prove, that the Jewish people shall ne- 
 ver return to their ancient land, and occupy again 
 the inheritance from which, on account of their 
 crimes, they have been ejected. Their expulsion 
 from it no more proves the grant to have termi- 
 nated, at that dreadful period when they became 
 vagabonds over the earth, than their former ex- 
 ile, under the Babylonish captivity, proved the 
 term of donation to be then expired; unless it can 
 be clearly evinced, that they shall never return 
 to their own country. Can this be done? On what 
 grounds shall the reasoning proceed? Can satis- 
 factory proof be derived from the present state of 
 
o2 LETTER IV. 
 
 that unhappy people? They are indeed like dpy 
 bones. But the same Almighty power, which 
 made them live when they themselves thought 
 deliverance impossible, and that there was no 
 more hope of their being reorganized into a na- 
 tion in their own land, than of bones, dry and 
 bleached with the sun, being raised to life again; 
 can, with perfect ease, breathe on them, and cause 
 them to live; collect them out of all the countries 
 whither they have been driven, and reestablish 
 them in the country of their forefathers, in great- 
 er power and glory than ever. Indeed their pre- 
 sent state renders it probable, that the God of 
 Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, their illustrious 
 progenitors, pitying their miseries, will at length 
 redeem them out of the hands of all their enemies. 
 For what purpose have they been, so many ages, 
 preserved, amid innumerable hardships, a sepa- 
 rate people? No other nation in similar circum- 
 stances, ever retained their distinctive character. 
 All captives have, sooner or later, lost the marks 
 which ditinguished them, and become incorpora- 
 ted with their conquerors. But the Jews, not- 
 withstanding all attempts by Christian nations to 
 destroy them as a people, have, in spite of the 
 greatest and most cruel severity employed to sub- 
 due them, retained their distinct character, sen- 
 timents, and worship. How visible the finger of 
 Jehovah in this phenomenon! For what purpose 
 this unusual interposition? Why has God, by his 
 
Covenant Perpetual, 53 
 
 providence, preserved them as a separate people? 
 Only to render their future conversion tlie more 
 conspicuous and remarkahle, and then to amalga- 
 mate them with other Christian nations? Or is it 
 his intention to restore them to their former in- 
 heritance, as well as to convert them to the faith 
 of Christ? If we consult the history of this won- 
 derful people, and the marvellous deliverances 
 effected for them in times past, there appears no- 
 thing incredible in an expectation of their return 
 to their own land. The preservation of them as 
 a distinct people, evidently encourages it. 
 
 But we have more than probability. Scripture 
 prophecy makes their return certain. A careful 
 inspection of the writings of their prophets should, 
 I think, remove from our minds every doubt on 
 this subject, and convince us, that Jehovah has 
 pledged his omnipotence for their future reesta- 
 blishment in the land of their fathers. Permit 
 me to direct your attention to a few prophecies, 
 which cannot be easily understood in any other 
 sense than as certifying this event. Moses, after 
 giving an accurate description of the miseries 
 which have befallen his people^ their overthrow 
 by the Romans, the destruction of Jerusalem, and 
 their dispersion among all nations;* proceeds to 
 foretell theii* return, in the foil. -wing plain words; 
 *< And it shall come to pass, when all these 
 things are come upon thee, the blessing and the 
 
 * Dent. 28, particularly from the forty-fifth verse. 
 T2 
 
54 LETTER IV. 
 
 curse, which I have set before thee, and thou 
 shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whi- 
 ther the Lord thv God hath driven thee, and 
 shalt return unto the Lord thy God, and shalt 
 obey his voice according to all that I command 
 thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine 
 heart, and with all thy soul; that then the Lord 
 thy God will turn thy captivity, and have com- 
 passion upon thee, and will return and gather thee 
 from all the nations whither the Lord thy God 
 hath scattered thee. If an\^ of thine be driven out 
 unto the outmost '^aris of heaven, from thence 
 will the Lord thy God gather thee, and from 
 thence will he fetch thee: and the Lord thy God 
 will bring \\\^q into the land whicli thy fathers 
 possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and he will 
 do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fa- 
 thers."* Speaking of the latter day, Isaiah pre- 
 dicts the return of the Jews to their own land as 
 constituting one part of its glory: ** And it shall 
 come to pass in that day, iUai the Lord shall 
 set his hand again the second time to recover the 
 remnant of his people, which shall be left, from 
 Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and 
 from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, 
 and from Hamath, and from the islands of the 
 sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the na- 
 tions, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, 
 and gather together the dispersed of Judah from 
 
 * Deiit. XXX. 1 — &. 
 
Covenant Fej^petual. 5a 
 
 the four corners of the earth." See Isaiah xi. 
 10 — IC. See also Ezck. xi. 16 — 20. Many other 
 quotations might be added; but these few, so plain 
 and express, are sufficient to establish the truth, 
 that the future return of the Jews to their own 
 land, is an event to which we may look forward 
 with full confidence,* and, consequently, that the 
 €ovenant-grant of Canaan to them is perpetual. 
 
 2. The nature of the blessings promised in this 
 covenant, present us with another proof of its 
 perpetuity. The chief of them, we have seen, are 
 spiritual; and the covenant's great design is, that 
 God might become the God of his elect among the 
 seed of Abraham, by bestowing on them the right- 
 eousness of faith, and what is inseparably con- 
 nected with it, complete salvation. Now, what 
 reason can he assigned for the abolition of a co- 
 venant formed for such a purpose, and compre- 
 hending such blessings? Surely, the present dis- 
 pensation is not too spiritual to admit its conti- 
 nued operation. Were the blessings of righteous- 
 ness and salvation no longer given to the church, 
 Ave might infer that the covenant was abrogated. 
 But, seeingthesehlessingscome, as the scriptures 
 foresaw and predicted, upon the Gentiles,* what 
 reason can any have to assert, that the covenant, 
 which formerly secured them to believers, has 
 been annulled? This is contending against plain 
 matter of fact. 
 
 * Gal. iii. 8, 9. 
 
b& LETTER IV. 
 
 3. In favour of the perpetuity of Abraham's 
 covenant, the express decision of an inspired apos- 
 tle ma^' be produced. " Brethren, I speak after 
 the manner of men; Though it be but a man's co- 
 venant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, 
 or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham and his seed 
 were the promises made. He saith not, And to 
 seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, 
 which is Christ. And this I say, that the cove- 
 nant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, 
 the law, which was four hundred and thirty year» 
 after, cannot disannul, that it should make the 
 promise of none effect."* On this passage audits 
 context, I make the following remarks: 
 
 1. The apostle asserts and proves, that the 
 «ovenant made with Abraham was not annulled, 
 by the giving of the law at Mount Sinai. 
 
 2. He makes an evident and great distinction 
 between the law and the Abrahamic covenant; in- 
 asmuch as he asserts that the law could not give 
 that life and righteousness, which were the proper 
 fruits of the promises or covenant. See ver. 21, 22. 
 
 3. He teaches us, that the law was given, not 
 to make void, but to subserve the accomplishment 
 of the promise or covenant. See verses 21 — 23. 
 
 4. A necessary consequence of this fact is, that 
 the abrogation of the law, in its covenant-form, 
 eould not annul the Abrahamic covenant, from 
 
 * Gal. iii. 15, to the end. 
 
Covenant Perpetual, 57 
 
 wliioli it was entirely distinct, and >vliicli it was 
 intended, not to make void, but to subserve. 
 
 5. Now, if it can be proved, that St. Paul 
 speaks of ihe very covenant of which we are treat- 
 ing, then it will follow that this covenant is per- 
 petual. And need proof be offered in support of 
 so plain a truth? This is the only covenant for- 
 mally made with the patriarch, to which the apos- 
 tle can refers and, as it comprehended spiritual 
 blessing's, it certainly had respect to Christ, the 
 procurer of all saving benefits.^ An objection, 
 against this interpretation, has been grounded on 
 the nuraher of years which the apostle states to 
 have intervened betw een the giving of the law and 
 the formation of Abraham's covenant. As the 
 difference of time is somewhat less than four hun- 
 dred and thirty years, some contend, he cannot 
 mean this covenant. Not to repeat that this is 
 the only covenant made with the patriarch on re- 
 cord, containing spiritual blessings, I reply: they 
 who urge the objection will do well to remark, 
 that the force of the apostle's argument does not 
 depend on the precise number of years, but on the 
 prioritij of the covenant. If, therefore, his argu- 
 ment be correct (which, it is presumed, none will 
 question) on supposing the difference to be four 
 hundred and thirty years, it must be conclusive, 
 although the difference should amount to no more 
 than four hundred, or even a less num])er. But 
 
 * See Letter 2, p. 27. 
 
58 LETTER IV. 
 
 the fact is, the apostle's computation is accurate. 
 Be begins it from the date of the first celebrated 
 promise of this covenant; just as Moses begins his 
 computation of the " sojourning of the children 
 of Israel who dwelt in Egypt,"=^ not from the time 
 when Jacob and his family went to reside in that 
 country, but from the first calling of Abraham to 
 leave his kindred, and go to a distant land.f 
 
 These arguments, my brethren, derived from 
 the term everlasting applied to the covenant — 
 from the spiritual nature of its blessings — and 
 from the positive testimony of an inspired apostle, 
 prove, in my apprehension, conclusively the per- 
 petuity OF Abraham's covenant. 
 
 In opposition to this important truth, it is also 
 contended, that the author of the epistle to the 
 Hebrews proves the abolition of the covenant. 
 See chap. viii. 6 — 13. But the argument, derived 
 from this text, is built on a grand mistake. It 
 confounds the covenant made with Abraham, and 
 the covenant made with his descendants, in their 
 national character, at mount Sinai: tAvo covenants 
 essentially diiferent, as manifestly appears, not 
 only from a view of their respective natures, but 
 from the plain instructions of an inspired w riter, 
 who teaches us carefully to distinguish between 
 the former and the latter which he denominates 
 the law.:f The sacred writer to the Hebrews has, 
 
 * Exod. xii. 40. f See Doddrige's note on Gal. iii. 17. t See page 56. 
 
Covenant Perpetual. 59 
 
 in the context of his disputed passage, expressed 
 himself so fully, that it is perfectly easy to see 
 which of these two covenants he proves to he aho- 
 lished. He describes it sufficiently to guard against 
 the mistake on Avhich the objection proceeds: as 
 the covenant which God made with the Israelites, 
 ** in the day when he took them by the hand, to 
 lead them out of the land of Egypt;" as the cove- 
 nant which appointed the Aaronic priesthood, or- 
 dained the offering of gifts and sacrifices, erected 
 the tabernacle, and set up that whole system of 
 worship which shadowed forth heavenly things, 
 that is, the blessings and privileges of the gospel- 
 dispensation.^ The apostle is evidently speaking 
 of the law or Sinai-covenant, How erroneous, 
 then, to contend, that this passage proves the 
 abrogation of the Abrahamic covenant; a covenant 
 of which it does not, and entirely distinct from 
 that of which it does, treat! As well might it be 
 contended, that it proves the abrogation of Noah's 
 covenant, which engaged the world should never 
 be again destroyed by a flood. 
 
 * Heb. chap. viii. and ix. 
 
LETTER y 
 
 GentUe-helievers have an interest in the covenant. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 A TRUTH of great importance will now claim 
 your attention. In this and the next succeeding 
 letter, I shall endeavour to prove, that both gen- 
 tile BELIEVERS AND THEIR CHILDREN HAVE AN 
 INTEREST IN THE COVENANT OF ABRAHAM. ThC 
 
 proposition to be demonstrated naturally divides 
 itself into two parts. Our first inquiry shall re- 
 spect the interest of believers. Tliat they are in- 
 cluded in this ever-memorable and gracious cove- 
 nant, and have a right to its privileges and bless- 
 ings, can be evinced by plain and conclusive evi- 
 dence. This point was necessarily anticipated, in 
 explaining a particular text, with a view to prove 
 spiritual blessings to be compreliended in the co- 
 venant. But as it is a truth of great importance, 
 I sliall endeavour to place it in diffei*ent lights, 
 and evince it by several distinct arguments. 
 
 1. The first shall be drawn from the continued 
 existence of this covenant. If Gentile-believers 
 have not an interest in it, then this perpetual co- 
 venant has no visible operation. The natural de- 
 
Interest of Believers. 61 
 
 scendants of Abraham, whom it formerly blessed 
 with life and salvation, have been shut out from 
 its heavenly benefits. They are no longer in co- 
 venant with the God of their fathers. As Ishmael, 
 by his profane mockery, and Esau, by despising 
 his birth-rightj so the Jews have, by unbelief, for- 
 feited their ancient privileges. The language of 
 God's providence has, ^or ages 9 been, " Fe are not 
 my people,'' From their apostasy, they will cer- 
 tainly be recovered: for it is written, " There shall 
 come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn 
 away ungodliness from Jacob."* But what be- 
 comes of this perpetual covenant in the mean time? 
 If Gentile-believers have no interest in it, a sus- 
 pension of its visible operation must have taken 
 place soon after the expulsion of the Jewish peo- 
 ple, and must continue until they be restored to 
 their forfeited inheritance. ' 
 
 Is this credible? "Who can believe that Abra- 
 ham's glorious covenant^ instituted to perpetuate 
 the church of God in the world; visibly operating 
 among his descendants for so many ages; and im- 
 parting to circumcised believers the blessings of 
 righteousness, life, and salvation; has been en- 
 tirely suspended, as to any visible operation, by 
 Jewish unbelief, for almost one thousand eight 
 hundred years? Surely this covenant, which wc 
 have seen to be perpetual, cannot thus lie dormant 
 
 * Rom. xi. 26. 
 G 
 
62 LETTER V. 
 
 and inactive. It must, ever since its formation, 
 have been in continual and visible operation; and, 
 since the exclusion of God's ancient people, have 
 imparted to the Christian church light and life, 
 righteousness and salvation. On Gentiles has de- 
 scended, Paul teaches, the blessing of Abraham, 
 through Jesus Christ; even the promise of the 
 Spirit, through faith; the Spirit, that divine source 
 of all spiritual light, and gracious influence. Comp. 
 Gal. iii. 14 with 15. 
 
 2. The Mnity of the Jewish and Christian 
 churches, secures to Geniile-helievers an interest in 
 this covenant. In several respects, these churches 
 maybe distinguished: they bear diflerent names; 
 they occupy different periods of time; and they 
 flourish under different dispensations. But still 
 they are, in all essential points, the same great 
 religious society; one being a continuation of (he 
 other; and their unity is no more affected by tbese 
 circumstantial differences, tban the unity of a na- 
 tion would be destroyed by a change in its name 
 and government, in some distant period after its 
 first establishment. 
 
 Is the Christian church a visible society, bear- 
 ing a special relation to God, and instituted for 
 the maintenance of his worship? Such was the 
 Jewish church: formed to maintain the worship 
 of the true God, in opposition to that of idols; and 
 so nearly related to him, that he calls *' Israel 
 
Interest of Believers, 63 
 
 his first-born son."* Is the Lord Jesus Christ the 
 head of the Christian cluirch? He was the head of 
 the Jewish church; the angel who conducted her 
 through the wiklerness, and Avhom tlie Israelites 
 tempted by their rebellious murmurings. The ob- 
 ject of their worship, dwelling in the Shechinah 
 between the Cherubim, Avas Jesus Christ: and, 
 on this account, when he became incarnate, and 
 manifested himself to Israel, it is said of him, 
 << He came to his oxviif and his own received himi 
 not." Is the Christian church a nursery for hea- 
 ven? Such was the Jewish church; formed, as we 
 have seen, by the covenant established with Abra- 
 ham, for the great purpose of gathering in the 
 elect of God, and preparing them for glory. The 
 political purposes, answered by the national cove- 
 nant made at Sinai, were subservient to this high- 
 er end. Is the Christian church governed by laws 
 enacted by the Most High? So was the Jewish 
 church. The same glorious gospel, which is 
 preached to us, was preached to the Jews; though 
 more obscurely, by types and sacrifices, and cere- 
 monies and darker promises. The same blessed 
 and holy S'pirit, who sheds light, and comfort, and 
 glory on the Christian church, was the source of 
 light and holiness to the Jewish church. The 
 same method of salvation, which is revealed to us, 
 was revealed to the Jews. Abraham, the father 
 of the faithful, and all his spiritual children, un- 
 
 * Exod. iv. 22. 
 
64 LETTER V. 
 
 dep both dispensations^ go to heaven in the same 
 way, by faith in the righteousness of our Lord Je- 
 sus Christ. In these essential points, the two 
 churches agree; and, by this agreement, notwith- 
 standing differences with respect to unessential 
 matters, tliey are constituted one religious society 
 or church. 
 
 "Will it be objected, that the Christian church 
 is composed of Gentiles, and not of the descend- 
 ants of Abraham? The first members of the 
 church of Christ were Jews: and the fact that the 
 mass of its members have, for ages, been Gentiles, 
 no more destroys its unity with the Jewish church; 
 than the fact, that the Christian church is now 
 composed of nations different from those which 
 were originally the component parts of it, destroys 
 its own unity. The cliurch of Christ is still the 
 same; though she has travelled from east to west, 
 and withdrawn her precious privileges from coun- 
 tries first saluted with the tidings of salvation, 
 and bestowed them on others which were then co- 
 vered with pagan darkness: and, if she were to 
 retire from the old, and select this new, world as 
 the only place of her abode, she would still be the 
 same church; founded in the death of Christ, ce- 
 mented by the blood of his apostles, and reared 
 by a long succession of ministering servants, liv- 
 ing in different ages, and in different regions of 
 the earth, but animated by the same heavenly Spi- 
 rit, and pursuing the same glorious end. If such 
 
Interest of Believers, 65 
 
 changes affect not the unity of the Christian 
 churchy if, descending through so many ages, and 
 diffusing herself through so many countries, she 
 remains the same holy society; >vhy should it he 
 imagined, that a breach was made in the unity of 
 God's church, by an exchange of the Jewish for 
 (he Christian dispensation, and the land of Judea 
 for the world at large.* 
 
 * A decisive argument, in favour of the great principle for which 
 Ave contend, may be derived from the Abrahamic covenant, and 
 pleaded against those who admit believing Gentiles to have an inter- 
 est in it. In fact, if the Jewish church possessed the attribute of 
 unity; if she was but one reUgious society; then the Christian church 
 may claim the same attribute, and is the same society continued in 
 the world, under a new dispensation. What constituted the unity 
 of the Jewish church? Not residence in the land of Canaan; for she 
 was the church of God while wandering in the wilderness;-|' and she 
 remained such even when carried away captive, and her prophets, 
 by the I'iver of Babylon, hanging their harps on the willows, refused 
 to sing the songs of Zionin a strange land. Not the temple-worship 
 at Jerusalem, nor the covenant of Sinai; for she existed long before 
 • the erection of the temple, and the memorable transactions at the 
 sacred mount, dwelling in the families of the pati-iarchs. Not de- 
 scent from Abraham; for both Ishmael and Esau, together with their 
 posterity, were lineally descended from him, and yet they formed no 
 part of the church of God: and, in subsequent periods, the gi-eat 
 mass of his natural seed have been excluded from this holy society; 
 first the ten tribes, and then the remaining tribes, denominated 
 Jews. What then constituted the unity of the Jewish church? Uniou 
 to one Supreme Head; just as these United States make one nation, 
 by haA'ing the same rulers in the general government, and living 
 under the same general constitution. The covenant made -with 
 
 t Acts vii. sa« 
 G 2 
 
66 LETTER V. 
 
 The unity of the chuieh of God appears to be 
 taken for granted by the saered >vriters. The 
 figures used by Paul, in illustrating some of his 
 arguments, necessarily imply this important truth. 
 You find one in Gal. iv. 1 — 7; where he compares 
 the church, under the Jewish and Christian dis- 
 pensations, to the different states through which 
 an heir passes. He shows that, under the former, 
 she resembled the condition of a minor, who, al- 
 though proprietor of tlie whole inheritance, yet 
 is, like a servant, under tutors and governors^=^ 
 but that, under the latter, she resembles the heir 
 arrived at full age, and put in complete enjoyment 
 of his inheritance.! Now, from this passage, it 
 is evident that the church, composed both of Jews 
 and Gentiles, which has obtained the adoption of 
 
 Abraham, constituted the church in his family, and united his seed 
 in subsequent ages into one holy society, under Jehovah, their glo- 
 rious Lawgiver and Ruler. 
 
 Now, if Gentile-believers have an interest in this covenant, it 
 must be a necessary consequence, that this constitution produces, 
 •with respect to them, the same result, which it did with respect to 
 Abraham's descendants: It must unite them to one head, Jehovah, 
 and into one holy society, — one visible church. And from this ac- 
 knowledged principle, follows another necessary consequence: name- 
 ly, that the Christian and Jewish churches are but two parts of the 
 same whole, or the same holy society, existing in two different peri- 
 riods, and under some diversity of privilege and government: just as 
 the chuich in the family of the patriarchs, and the church settled ia 
 the promised laud, though occupying different periods and placed 
 under different regulations, were the same church. 
 
 * Verse 3. t Verse 4, 5. 
 
Interest of Belictevs. 67 
 
 sons, is the same church which was formerly un- 
 der bondage to the elements of the world, that is, 
 to the ceremonial law; and that the change of 
 dispensation, which it has undergone, no more af- 
 fects its unity, than the different states of mino- 
 rity and manhood, tlirough which an heir passes, 
 affect the identity of an individual. 
 
 This illustration of Paul constitutes a clear 
 proof of the unity of the church. His comparison 
 assumes it as an acknowledged principle. Deny 
 it, and you destroy the propriety, as Avell as the 
 force of his figure. For, if the Jewish and Chris- 
 tian churches be, not one, but two, entirely dis- 
 tinct and different from each other, it might be 
 consistent to compare one to the state of a minor, 
 and the other to that of an heir arrived at full 
 age: but it would be highly improper to liken the 
 former, which on this supposition continued under 
 bondage till its dissolution, to an heir passing from 
 his minority and subjection to governors to man- 
 hood, and entering on the full possession of his 
 inheritance; and still more improper to represent 
 Gentile-converts as having been in bondage to the 
 ceremonial law. But, admitting this great prin- 
 ciple, the figure is correct throughout,* and the 
 Galatian believers were properly said to have been 
 in subjection to the law, because they were mem- 
 bers of that church which had been in bondage. 
 
 Another clear proof of the church's unity, i& 
 found in Ephes. ii. 1 — :22. There the apostle re- 
 
68 LETTER V. 
 
 presents the Gentiles, formerly " afar off, aliens 
 from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers 
 from the covenant of promise,*'* as being ** made 
 nigh by the blood of Christy so that they are no 
 more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens 
 with the saints, and of the household of God:''| 
 and as parts of that holy temple, which had for 
 its foundation the prophets, as well as the apostles^ 
 of that church united into one by a common Sa- 
 viour, <* Jesus Christ himself being the chief cor- 
 ner-stone." How was this union between Jew and 
 Gentile effected? by destroying that church of 
 God which had existed many ages, and forming 
 another entirely and essentially different? By no 
 means: it was effected by breaking down ** the 
 middle wall of partitioii;^^ by " abolishing the" 
 cause of ** enmity, even the law of commandments, 
 contained in ordinances; by giving the church a 
 new form of government, suited to her enlarge- 
 ment by the conversion of many nations. Gentiles 
 were by faith made citizens of the same common- 
 wealth of Israel, members of the same church, 
 parts of the same household of God, which had 
 existed for ages; and were brought to the enjoy- 
 ment of the same covenant-privileges, the same 
 promised blessings, though greatly increased, 
 which the church, the Israel of God, had enjoyed 
 before the coming of Christ. All this, I think, 
 
 * Verse 12. f Verse 19. 
 
Interest of Believers, 69 
 
 must appear to anyone who examines the passage 
 without prejudice- 
 
 We adduce hut one more passage of sacred 
 scripture, in support of the unity of the church. 
 It is is recorded in Rom. xi. 17 — 24. In this text, 
 St. Paul compares the church to a good olive-tree, 
 planted in a sacred enclosure, and highly culti- 
 vated^ the Jews to natural branches, and believ- 
 ing Gentiles to branches taken from a wild olive- 
 tree, and grafted into the good one, so as to par- 
 take of its root and fatness. Let it he carefully 
 observed, that the good olive-tree of which the 
 Jews were natural branches, and from which they 
 were, in consequence of unbelief, broken off, is 
 the very same tree into which Gentiles were in- 
 grafted; the very same into which the Jews shall, 
 on their conversion, be grafted again. Now, is 
 this comparison reconcilable with the sentiment, 
 that the Jewish and Christian churches are two 
 churches entirely and essentially different? On 
 this supposition, the Gentiles were not grafted 
 into the Jewish olive-tree; nor can the Jews, when 
 converted, be grafted in again; for the tree has 
 perished; the Jewish church has long ago been 
 destroyed. On this supposition, the Jews will be 
 introduced into a church of which they never 
 formed a part; grafted into an olive-tree from 
 which they were never broken off, and of which 
 they never were the natural branches. But ad- 
 mitting the truth for which we plead, the church 
 
70 LETTER ¥• 
 
 of God to be one, and its unity unimpaired by a 
 change in external dispensations, the Christian 
 being only a continuation of the Jewish churchy 
 and the figure appears natural and just, expres- 
 sive and beautiful. The Gentiles do indeed par- 
 take of the root and fatness of that olive-tree, from 
 which the Jews were broken off; enjoying those 
 very covenant-privileges and promises, which the 
 latter forfeited by their unbelief: and when the 
 unhappy descendants of faitliful Abraham shall 
 turn to the Lord, they will be brought into the 
 Christian church; and, by union to it, will be 
 grafted into their own olive-tree, and recover those 
 very covenant-privileges and promises which they 
 formerly lost. 
 
 We may, then, assume the unity of the church 
 of God as a sound and established principle; a 
 principle flowing from the very nature of this holy 
 society, and sanctioned by apostolic authority. 
 
 From this principle, we infer the interest of 
 Gentile-believers in the covenant of Abraham: 
 for, being members of that very church to which 
 this covenant w as granted, they must have a claim 
 to its promised blessings. Christians, by incor- 
 poration into the church of God, have succeeded 
 the Jews in the enjoyment of all privileges and 
 blessings that remain unrevoked, and are bound 
 to observe all general laws which have not been 
 repealed; just as a foreigner, on being made an 
 adopted citizen of this country, acquires all the 
 
Interest of Believers, 71 
 
 rights, and comes under all the obligations of na- 
 tural born citizens. And as this covenant, by 
 which the church was regularly organized in A- 
 braham's family, is perpetual, believers must, in 
 right of their adoption, have a complete interest 
 in all its promised benefits, 
 
 3. Believing Gentiles are denominated the seed 
 and the children of Abraham, They are the 
 children of the promise^ given to Christ by his Fa- 
 ther's promise; and are, therefore, as Paul teach- 
 es, Rom. ix. 8, " counted for the seed;" that spi- 
 ritual seed which the promises made to Abraham 
 especially contemplated. In chapter iv. 16. of the 
 same epistle, we are plainly taught, that the pa- 
 triarch's seed is composed, not only of his natural 
 descendants, who were under the law; but also of 
 Gentiles who imitate his faith, although they are 
 not his children by carnal descent, nor under the 
 law: "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be 
 by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to 
 all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, 
 but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, 
 who is the father of us all." And, in Gal. iii. 7, 
 39, the apostle speaks still plainer, and expressly 
 denominates Gentile-believers the children and 
 seed of Abraham: << Know ye, therefore, that they 
 which are of faith, the same are the children of 
 Abraham." " And if ye be Christ's, then are ye 
 Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the pro 
 
72 LETTER V. 
 
 Now, Gentile-believers, being the seed of A- 
 braham, must unquestionably have an interest 
 in that covenant, which was made with their il- 
 lustrious parent, and with his seedj not, indeed, 
 with ull his carnal, but certainly with all his spi- 
 ritual seed. Children by adoption inherit with 
 children by birth, from their common parent. 
 This point is decided by the text just quoted; in 
 which St. Paul affirms believers to be the seed of 
 Abraham, and heirs according to the promise. 
 What promise ? The great promise of the cove- 
 nant, securing to all his spiritual seed, righteous- 
 ness, life, and salvation; in which God engages to 
 be to him and to his believing seed, a God in the 
 noblest sense of the promise. 
 
 4. This covenant constituted Mrdham the fa-' 
 ther both of the Jewish and Christian churches f or, 
 in other words, of believers in all nations, till the 
 end of time The patriarch must sustain a pater- 
 nal relation to all believers, or they could not sus- 
 tain to him the relation of children. These are 
 correlates. His character as father of both church- 
 es is expressly declared in Rom. iv. 11, 12. In 
 illustrating that text, it was proved, that his pa- 
 ternal relation to believers was constituted by 
 this covenant; that, on account of this relation to 
 his spiritual seed among Gentile nations, as well 
 as among his natural descendants, his name was 
 changed frqm Mram to Mraham; that, as his 
 
Interest of Believers. 73 
 
 children, lientile-believers receive, by inheri- 
 tance, spiritual blessings; such as justification by 
 faith, and the gift of the Holy Spirit; and that he 
 was constituted a father to them, for the very 
 purpose of transmitting to them these benefits of 
 the covenant.^ Can a doubt, then, remain, Avhe- 
 ther Gentile-belicYers have an interest in this 
 covenant, which constituted Abraham their fa- 
 ther in order to convey to them its invaluable 
 blessings? Unquestionably, its benefits must be- 
 long to all his seed contemplated in it: and to con* 
 tend against the interest of any part of them, is 
 as unreasonable and unjust, as it would be to con- 
 tend against the right of an adopted child to a 
 share in his father's estate, although the will of 
 the deceased expressly recognised his right. 
 
 Prejudice, arising from attachment to a fa- 
 vourite tenet, may load some to attempt to dis- 
 prove the right of Gentile-believers to claim, with 
 their Jewish brethren, a portion in their common 
 father's inheritance: but, so long as an inspired 
 writer advocates their cause, all such endeavours 
 must be fruitless. Their right is asserted, and 
 powerfully maintained by the great apostle. lie 
 not only proves, as we have already shown, that 
 Abraham was, by this covenant, constituted fa- 
 ther of Gentile-beiievers to transmit to them its 
 blessiisgs; bat also, that the covenant was design- 
 cdly so contrived as to secure its benefits to them^ 
 
 * See Letter II, pages 17—25, 
 H 
 
T^ ILETTER \I. 
 
 as ^fell as to his natural desceiulants. See Rom. 
 iv. 13 — 17. The promise, mentioned in the thir- 
 teenth verse, is, in no other part of sacred scrip- 
 ture, expressed in the same words. It is, how- 
 ever, equivalent to the quotation, in the seven- 
 teenth verse, taken from this very covenant: " J 
 have made thee a father of many nations:^' and, 
 therefore, we might with propriety substitute, for 
 the term promisef the w ord covenant, throughout 
 the apostle's argument; or use them interchange- 
 ahlifi as he himself does, w hile reasoning on the 
 same subject, justification by faith, in his epistle 
 to the Galatians. See chap. iii. 11 — 29. 
 
 LETTER YI. 
 
 Children have an interest in this covenant, — In 
 tvhat respects the Christian surpasses, in spiri- 
 tuality, the Jewish dispensation. 
 
 Chkistiax Brethhen, 
 
 YoiR right to share in the blessings of your 
 father Abraham, has been established. By argu- 
 ments founded on the continued existence of his 
 covenant, — on the unity of the church, — on the 
 facts, that believing Gentiles are denominated his 
 
Children- s IntcvtsU 75 
 
 seed, and that he was, hy tliis covenant, consti- 
 tuted their father; — by these arguments, all along 
 confirmed by apostolic authority, it has been am- 
 ply proved, That Gentilehelievers have, ivith tht 
 patriarch^ s natural descendants, a common inte- 
 rest in this Messed covenant. 
 
 In this letter, your attention will be directed 
 to that important question relative to the right of 
 children under the present dispensation. That 
 they had formerly an interest in Abraham's cove- 
 nant, is universally admitted. But it is strenu- 
 ously contended by many, that their covenant-in- 
 terest perished with the Mosaic economy. We 
 rise up in defence of our little ones, and maintain 
 their blessing to be as durable as the covenant it- 
 self. Grant me your attention, and I will endea- 
 vour to establish this truth, so dear to every heart 
 that understands its importance, by fair and satis- 
 factory arguments. 
 
 1. Tlie comprehensive import of the term seed, 
 proves the right of children to covenant-blessings. 
 It is certain, that Abraham's natural descendants 
 were comprised under this term; because the to- 
 ken of the covenant was, by divine appointment, 
 applied to them: and it is equally certain, that the 
 term retained its original signification till our Sa- 
 viour's incarnation; not from any error in the 
 opinion prevalent among the Israelites, but from 
 a decision of God himself. <* This is my covenant 9 
 
76 XETTER VI. 
 
 ivhicli ye shall keep between me and i/ow, and thy 
 seed aftei'thee; JBrcri/ man-child among you shall 
 le circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh 
 of your foreskin; and it shall he a token of the 
 covenant betwi.xt me and you. — And the uncircum- 
 cised man-child f whose flesh of his foreskin is not 
 circumcised, that soul shall he cut off from his peo- 
 ple; HE HATH BROKEN MY COVENANT."'^ <' Yc UVt 
 
 the children of the prophets, and oftiie covenant 
 which God made with our fathers, saying unto 
 .Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of 
 the earth be blessed.'^jf 
 
 Thus, the meaning of this term was settled by 
 divine authority, and received and acted on by the 
 church, during many successive ages. 
 
 "Why should not the same original meaning of 
 this term be retained under the Christian econo- 
 my? Why set to its comprehension limits which 
 it never had before; so as to exclude the great 
 body of those who were, from the beginning, in 
 covenant with God, and denominated the seed of 
 Abraham? Has the term undergone a material 
 alteration in its original meaning? When? By 
 what authority? The extent of this term being 
 defined by the Maker of (he covenant, his autho- 
 rity, it is manifest, signified either formally or, at 
 least impliedly, must be necessary to diminish 
 that extent. If he have expressed his will to this 
 effect, it can be shown. Let tlie passage be pro- 
 
 * Gen. xvil. 10, 11, 14. f ^^^^ »"• 25. 
 
Children's Interest. 77 
 
 iliiced. In vain arc Ihe inspired records searched 
 for any intimation of the kind. Surely, it can ne- 
 yer be fairly pleaded, in proof of an important al- 
 teration in this term, that the apostle shows it 
 comprehends true believers among Gentile na- 
 tions; for he cquaiJy proves it to have compre- 
 hended, in a special manner, true believers among 
 Abraham's natural descendants: and, therefore, 
 if the children of Christian parents are, on this ac- 
 count, to be excluded, the children of the Jews 
 too ought, for the same reason, to have been ex- 
 cluded. But this would have contravened a posi- 
 tive determination of God himself. The fact is, 
 from the beginning, the term respected chiefly 
 the spiritual seed, without excluding the natural 
 seed. 
 
 2. When a Gentile was converted from idolatrij 
 to the worship of the true God, his children, he- 
 ing cireumcised as well as himself, became incor- 
 porated with the Jewish people^ and were admitted 
 to the enjoijment of all their privileges. " And when 
 a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep 
 the passover to the Lord, let all his males be cir- 
 cumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; 
 and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for 
 no uncjrcumcised person sliall eat thereof. One 
 law shall be to him that is home-born, and unto the 
 stranger that sojourneth among you.''* That eir- 
 
 • Exod. xii. 48, 49. 
 h2 
 
7S XETTER VI. 
 
 cumcision confirmed to strangers an interest in 
 Abrsiliam's covenant, as Avell as in the national 
 compact, is evident from the provision originally 
 made in the former? for the admission of children 
 born of Gentile parents. The patriarch was com- 
 manded to apply the token of his covenant to such 
 as were not his natural seed: <* He that is born in 
 thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, 
 must needs be circumcised."^^ 
 
 Now, may we not infer, from this fact, that 
 children have, in common with Christian parents, 
 an interest in the covenant? For if, under the for- 
 mer dispensation^ the offspring of Gentiles were 
 received into . it, :aVd4>iid it confirmed to them by 
 the application of its seal; why are they to be ex- 
 cluded from it under thf Christian dispensation? 
 Was not their admissioH: formerly a plain intima- 
 tion, that they would be admitted, when Gentile 
 nations should, by the gospel of Jesus Christ, be 
 brought into the church? Had Jehovah directed 
 their exclusion, we should have bowed to his sove- 
 reign authority. But, as it appears he has given 
 no such direction, it follows conclusively, that the 
 long continued practice, founded on positive pre- 
 ceptf should still prevail; and that we are bound to 
 recognise children as being in the covenant toge- 
 ther with their parents. In confirmation of this 
 right of our infant offspring, may be adduced the 
 following text: ** And the scripture, foreseeing 
 
 * Gen. xvii. 13. 
 
Children's Interest* 79 
 
 that God would justif;^ Ihe licatlien through faith, 
 pi cached beiore the gospel unto Abruhiim, sayingf 
 In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they 
 \yhiv:h be ol* faith are blessed with faithtul Abra- 
 ham.'"* How was Abraham blessed: iiy personal 
 justification undoubtedly : and so are Gentile-be- 
 lievers. But was he not also blessed by the inte- 
 rest of his children in that covenant which exhi- 
 bited to them the righteousness of faith? Certainly. 
 If, then, his blessing reached to his offs\wingf 
 must we not conclude, that the blessing of Chris- 
 tian believers, who are blessed with faithful Abra- 
 ham, terminates not in themselves, but extends to 
 their offspring^ 
 
 3, Jf children have no interest in the covenant, 
 then it will follow f that an important privilege 
 of it has been revoked^ under the gospel dispensa- 
 tion. That (he admission of children into the cove- 
 nant, and the application of its seal to them, under 
 the Jewish economy, was a privilege granted to 
 parents, will not, we presume, be denied by any. 
 Nor can it be denied, by those who understand the 
 nature of this covenant, to have been an important 
 privilege. F'or what did it import? What did the 
 covenant exhibit? It exhibited the righteousness 
 of faith, and all saving blessings to every cove- 
 nantee. It gave him a solemn pledge, that God 
 
 * Gal. iu. 8, 9. 
 
so ^1 LETTER VI. 
 
 was willing to be reconciled to him, through the 
 anticipated merits of his Son,-. that he was willing 
 to become his God, not only by extersal relation, 
 but by spiritual union and communion. It assured 
 all who wore the seal, that they formed a part of 
 that holy society, which Jehovah had set apart for 
 himself, and on which he was bestowing the bless- 
 ings of salvation; not indeed on all, but on as many 
 of them as he, in exercise of his sovereign grace, 
 should be pleased to select. Was not this a pri- 
 vilege, and a great privilege? One might as well 
 deny it to be a blessing to live in a society where 
 the gospel is preached, and the institutions of it 
 are observed; as deny the covenant-interest of Jew- 
 ish children to have been an important blessing. 
 
 The principle just contended for being as- 
 sumed, it will follow, that the people of God are 
 deprived of a very important privilege, under the 
 Christian economy, if their children be excluded 
 from the covenant. To admit this, would be to 
 violate all analogy in the government of God over 
 his church. Is it not plain matter of fact, that 
 his people have been favoured, as with a gradual 
 increase of revealed knowledge, so with a gradual 
 increase of privilege? When God commenced the 
 patriarchal dispensation with Abraham, he re- 
 voked no privilege previously granted to his 
 church. Abraham and his descendants continued 
 to enjoy what had been conferred on their prede- 
 
Childrm^s Interest. 81 
 
 cessors, together with additional light and privi- 
 leges vouchsafed to them. When the national 
 compact was made, it abrogated no former privi- 
 lege^ hut was, as Moses (see Deut. xxix. 12, 13) 
 and Paul (see Gal. iii. 15^-19) concur in teaching, 
 intended to aid in accomplishing the promises 
 made to Abraham and his seed. And shall we, in 
 opposition to the analogy of former dispensations, 
 believe that, under the Christian economy, which 
 has so much increased the light and blessings of 
 the church, tlie great privilege of children has 
 been revoked; that they are no longer permitted 
 to stand, with their parents, in a covenant-relation 
 to God? Surely, those who contend against a right 
 secured to them by solemn compact, and confirmed 
 by an appointed seal, ought to produce some re- 
 pealing act of our heavenly Lawgiver; before they 
 deprive them of this precious privilege, enjoyed 
 through many successive generations, from Abra- 
 ham to Christ; and reduce the offspring of God's 
 covenant-people to a level with the children of 
 aliens from his covenant-promises! But in vain 
 will search be made for such a repealing act. So 
 far from being abrogated, the pen of inspiration 
 has proved that the covenant remains in full and 
 unabated force.* 
 
 4. The accomplishment of the grand purpose 
 ftfthis covenant, renders the interest of children in 
 
 * See Letter IV. p^rricularly from page 56 to 58, 
 
82 LETTER VI. 
 
 itf as necessary under the present, as under the pre- 
 ceding dispensation. It has already been proved, 
 that the great design which God had in view when 
 he condescended to make this covenant, was, not 
 only to introduce his Messiah into the world, but 
 also to perpetuate, in the line of Abraham's pos- 
 terity, his spiritual church, and gather, from 
 among them, a people to his praise; and that this 
 constituted a special reason, why the patriarch's 
 carnal seed were generally admitted into the co- 
 venant, and impressed with its seal,* 
 
 If, then, it can be proved that Jehovah's ori- 
 ginal design abides unaltered, the interest of chil- 
 dren in his covenant will be firmly established: 
 and it will be in vain to urge as an objection, that 
 the great purpose of introducing Messiah into the 
 world, has been accomplished; because another 
 important purpose, to which our Saviour's incar- 
 nation was subservient, remains yet to be fulfilled; 
 namely, that of bringing, to the enjoyment of sav- 
 ing blessings, the elect of God among the seed of 
 his covenant-people. 
 
 Much need not be said to make out this point. 
 The covenant, as has been evinced, remains in full 
 force; unimpaired, either by the introduction, or 
 by the abrogation, of the law or Sinai-covenant.f 
 It cannot, then, be reasonably supposed, that the 
 great design of it has been laid aside, or materially 
 and essentially altered. Did the spiritual church 
 
 * See Letter in. f See Letter IV. 
 
Children's Interest. 83 
 
 descend, from generation to generation, among 
 the descendants of Abraham, natural and adopted; 
 and was an election of grace always found among 
 them? and can it be imagined that the spiritual 
 church no longer descends in the line of God's 
 covenant-people's seed; that the blessings of grace 
 no longer flow down among them, as in their ap- 
 pointed and steady channel? Did the Most High 
 show such a regard to his people's offspring, under 
 the Jewish economy, and bind himself by covenant- 
 engagement thus to treat them? and does he, 
 under the present economy, act so differently, as 
 to show no more regard to them than to the chil- 
 dren of aliens from his church? Has the covenant 
 undergone an alteration so important and essen- 
 tial, that the infant children of Abraham's adopt- 
 ed seed are cast out; although from its original 
 establishment, through a long course of ages, till 
 the birth of our Redeemer, they were admitted to 
 share in its blessings, and had their interest in 
 them confirmed by an appointed seal? Who can 
 believe this; especially when it is considered that 
 sacred scripture speaks not a word about any such 
 change? An alteration so great and important, 
 would indeed have set aside the original and grand 
 design of this covenant; and, in doing so, would 
 have affected its essential engagements to that de- 
 gree, as almost to destroy the very existence of 
 the covenant itself. Such a change is utterly at 
 variance with that lucid and decisive argument, 
 
S* BETTER VI. 
 
 which Paul urges, with great force, in the third 
 chapter of his epistle to the Galatians. 
 
 When the Jews shall have heen converted to 
 the Christian faith, they will recover all their for- 
 mer covenant-rights and privileges^ and their chil- 
 dren will, by virtue of God's unrevoked promise, 
 be brought again into the same relation tc hira 
 which they so long enjoyed; and will again become 
 a nursery to the spiritual ehureh, descending 
 among them from generation to generation. This 
 statement cannot be controverted, without proving 
 the covenant, either to have been abolished, which 
 can never be done, while the decision of an inspired 
 aposile maintains its authority; or to have under- 
 gone, in a most important point, such an altera- 
 tion as deprives children of their chartered rights. 
 But where, we repeat the question where are we 
 taught, that the covenant has been thus changed, 
 aad that its original design has been abandon«^d? 
 No instruction to this effect is to be found in holy- 
 scripture. 
 
 ladeed, to apply to the covenant a meaning eo 
 different from what it formerly had, is to resist 
 the evidence of plain fauts. For if it no longer 
 require, that God should ever again show a regard 
 to Abraham's *?arnal seed, why are they preserved 
 a distinct people? Why have they not been lost 
 among the nations with whom they have lived? 
 From their preservation, is it not apparent, that 
 Che covenant has still a favourable aspect toward 
 
Children's Interest, 85 
 
 ihem, considered as the seed of Abraham, the 
 friend of God? and that the intention of this mar- 
 vellous interposition of divine providence, is, to 
 make it the more conspicuous, at their conver- 
 sion, that *< the gifts and calling of God,^' as the 
 apostle affirms on this very point, " are without 
 repentance;''^ and that, although they are enemies 
 concerning the gospel, for the sake of us Gen- 
 tiles; yet, ** as touching the election, they are be- 
 loved for the Father's sakef^"j The language of 
 their famous prophet concurs, with divine provi- 
 dence, in supporting our statement: " Thus saith 
 the Lord, Jls the new wine is found in the cluster, 
 and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in 
 it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may 
 not destroy them all. And I will bring forth a 
 SEED out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor 
 of my mountains: and mine elect shall inherit it, 
 and my servants shall dwell thereJ'^ From an in- 
 spection of the chapter, in which these words are 
 recorded, it will be found to contain a prediction 
 of the present dispersion of the Jews, and of 
 their future restoration. In this quotation, then, 
 we have assigned the reason why they have not 
 been utterly destroyed: it is because an elect seed 
 are yet to descend from them, who shall, in due 
 time, be collected together and reestablished in 
 their ancient inheritance. And in the twenty- 
 third verse of the same chapter, we are assured, 
 
 * Rom. xi. 29. f Chap. xi. 28. i Isaiah Ixv. 8, 9. 
 
 I 
 
86 LETTER YI. 
 
 that the children of tlie Jewish people, when re- 
 covered from their dispersion, shall share with 
 their parents in their long forfeited privileges; 
 « For they are the seed of the Uessed of the Lord, 
 and their offspring ivith themv' 
 
 Now, if Jewish children shall, at the restora- 
 tion of Israel, be brought into their ancient cove- 
 nant-relation to God, it will follow as an indubita- 
 ble consequence, that the children of Gentile-pa- 
 rents must share in the same privilege. For it 
 cannot be supposed, that, after the breaking down 
 of the middle-wall of partition between Jew and 
 Gentile, there should be raised between them, 
 when united into one church, such a distinction 
 as would exist, if children of the latter were ex- 
 cluded from the covenant, while those of the for- 
 mer were admitted. This would contradict Paul's 
 doctrine with respect to unity of privilege under 
 the gospel: '< There is neither Jew nor Greek f &c, 
 for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be 
 ChrisVs, then are ye t^lhraham^s seed^ and heirs ac- 
 cording to the^^ full import of the ^* promise,^'^ 
 Hence we conclude. That Gentile-children will 
 sustain a covenant-relation to God, in that happy 
 period when Jew and Gentile shall be united into 
 one church; and, therefore, that they have, at 
 present, an interest in the covenant: for the pro- 
 mise cannot hereafter acquire a meaning different 
 from what it has constantly borne under the Chris- 
 tian dispensation. 
 
 * Gal. iii. 28, 29. 
 
Children's Interest, 87 
 
 Thus, the great design of this covenant, it ap- 
 pears, remains unaltered. Hence it follows, that 
 the covenant-right of children now, stands on the 
 same ground on which it always stood: namely, Je- 
 hovah's engagement to transmit saving blessings in 
 the line of Ids covenant-people's seed, A nursery 
 for his spiritual church is as necessary at present 
 as it ever was. The gospel, owing to the mixed 
 state of mankind, is preached to all indiscrimi- 
 nately, that the elect of God may he gathered: 
 so the covenant, in its external form, embraces all 
 the offspring of God's people, that the spiritual 
 blessings of it may be secured, and, in due season, 
 applied, to his elect seed among them. 
 
 5. Christian children enjoy^ in an improved 
 state, all the other privileges formerly enjoyed hy 
 Jewish children; and the church actually descends 
 AMOSTG THEM, from oue generation to another. 
 Were the latter placed under a dispensation of 
 grace, and made the depositary of the divine ora- 
 cles? The former live under the new and better 
 dispensation, superior in light and power,- and pos- 
 sess, in addition to those of the Old, the clearer 
 oracles of the New, Testament, the glorious gos- 
 pel of Jesus Christ. Were Jewish children blessed 
 with the instruction of inspired prophets? Chris- 
 tian children are blessed with the teaching of 
 ministers, uninspired indeed, but knowing un- 
 speakably more of the mystery of salvation, than 
 
88 LETTER VI. 
 
 prophets the most celebrated. '* Among them 
 that are born of women, there hath not,'^ said our 
 Lord, "risen a greater than John the Baptist: 
 notwithstanding, he that is least in the kingdom 
 of heaven, is greater than he." Were the parents 
 of the former solemnly charged to instruct them 
 carefully and diligently in religious truth and 
 duty?^ The parents of the latter are equally 
 bound to attend to their Christian education: for 
 they are solemnly commanded to bring them up 
 in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.f Did 
 Jehovah bless the means of grace, under the old 
 dispensation, to the offspring of his covenant-peo- 
 ple? He blesses the means of grace to them, un- 
 der the new dispensation, more abundantly and 
 extensively. 
 
 Thus, it appears, from this parallel, that Chris- 
 tian children enjoy, in an improved state, all the 
 privileges enjoyed by Jewish children. Yet the 
 former have, contend some, been deprived of that 
 ennobling privilege, a covenant-relation to God, 
 from which resulted, and by which were secured 
 to the latter, all their other blessings! How incre- 
 dible this opinion! The foundation is subverted, 
 but the building stands! 
 
 Another fact worthy of your attentive consi- 
 deration, is, the PERPETUATION of the church 
 among Christian children, from generation to ge- 
 neration. None acquainted with the history of 
 
 * Deut. -vi. 6. f Ephes. vi. 4. 
 
Children's Interest* 89 
 
 tlie church universal, or of particular churches, 
 can deny this fact. When God is ahout to ex- 
 tend the limits of his Zion, he necessarily steps 
 beyond the habitations of his people, and pours 
 out his Spirit on heathen families. But it is an in- 
 controvertible fact, that the church has uniformly 
 descended among the posterity of Christians^ and 
 that multitudes of them, in successive generations, 
 have been called by the grace of God, and made 
 partakers of eternal life, and all intermediate 
 blessings of the covenant. 
 
 In particular churches, who constitute the 
 mass of true believers? — the children of strangers, 
 or the children of God's people? We do, indeed^ 
 and blessed be God for it, see instances of sove- 
 reign grace displayed in converting persons de- 
 scended from ungodly and unbelieving parents. 
 But, may Ave not assert it as a fact not to be dis» 
 proved, that the mass of true believers are ordi» 
 narily the children of God's covenant-people? 
 
 Grace, it is true, descends not Avith the blood, 
 from father to son, as an inheritance: yet it does 
 descend from one generation of Christians to ano- 
 ther; for the prayers and instructions of the ge- 
 neration preceding, like the seed from which 
 springs the harvest, is sure to be followed by fruit 
 in the generation succeeding. Indeed, were the 
 fact otherwise, it would militate against the use 
 of means. Means, we admit, are not always suc- 
 cessful with respect 'to reiigion| nor are they in 
 i2 
 
90 LETTER VI. 
 
 natural things: in both cases they often prove in- 
 effectual; and this, no doubt, happens to teach us 
 our dependence for success on the divine blessing. 
 Hence, among the most profligate, are sometimes 
 found children born of the most pious parents. 
 But, although there is no necessary connexion 
 between the use of means and the communication 
 of grace to our children, yet there is unquestion- 
 ably established between them a connexion suffi- 
 cient to show their importance, and encourage 
 parental diligence; but not enough to weaken our 
 sense of dependence on God's blessing for success. 
 *• Train up a child in the way he should go; and 
 when he is old he will not depart from it."* ^< But 
 the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to ever- 
 lasting upon them that fear him, and his right- 
 eousness unto chiUlren's children; to such as keep 
 his covenani, and to those that remember his 
 commandments to do them.^f Means, in all other 
 matters, are generally successful; and it would be 
 strange if, in the more important concerns of re- 
 ligion, they should not be attended with success. 
 God certainly does bestow his blessing on the 
 use of appointed means, parental instruction, dis- 
 cipline, and example, and render them effectual 
 to the conversion of children: and this furnishes 
 conclusive proof, that religion is still transmitted, 
 from father to son, in the successive generations 
 of his professing people. 
 
 * Prov. xxn. 6. Psal. ciii. 17, 18. 
 
Children's Interest* 91 
 
 Here are two remarkable and incontesta- 
 ble FACTS, The children of believers enjoy, in 
 an improved condition, all the privileges formerly 
 enjoyed by Jewish children; and the promised 
 blessings of God's covenant come uniformly upon 
 them, from generation to generation. What con- 
 clusion shall we draw from these facts? How shall 
 we account for this steady state of things, through 
 a long course of ages? It results, no doubt, from 
 the will of divine providence: and so did that simi- 
 lar state of things which uniformly prevailed un- 
 der the ancient economy. Then, however, it was 
 produced by the superintending care of Jehovah, 
 in fulfilment of his covenant-engagements with 
 his church: and can it be admitted that, under the 
 present dispensation, this remarkable state of 
 things has no connexion with that same unaltered 
 covenant? that the children of his people continue 
 to receive its blessings, although they have been 
 deprived of the promise by which these blessings 
 were formerly entailed on them? What agreement 
 would there be, between such inferences and the 
 premises from which they must be drawn? You 
 might as well attempt to reconcile light and dark- 
 ness. 
 
 If the promise be recalled; if children be cast 
 out of God's covenant; Avhy do we not see a cor- 
 responding change in his providence? Can another 
 occurrence like this be shown in the history of his 
 church; in which expulsion from a covenant-rela- 
 
03 LETTER YI. 
 
 tion to him, was attended by no forfeiture of pri- 
 vileges connected with tliis relation? The Jews 
 Lave been ejected from the covenant of their fa- 
 thers: What has followed? God frowns upon 
 them, and upon their children. They have the 
 scriptures of the Old Testament; but it is to them 
 A sealed book. They read it with the veil upon 
 their hearts. Those very writings of Moses and 
 the prophets, which were formerly made, by the 
 blessing of God, ^«a savour of life unto life," are 
 now, ^* a savour of death unto death." The Spi- 
 rit of the Lord has departed from them. Thus, 
 the providence and the word of God speak the 
 same language; they both proclaim the same awful 
 sentence: " Fe are not mypeople,'' God hath given 
 to Judah a bill of divorcement. In like manner 
 he treated Israel. By their idolatries, the Ten 
 Tribes broke covenant with him: and He, after 
 bearing, with much long suffering patience, their 
 unfaithfulness, cast them entirely off; deprived 
 them of the instructions of his prophets, and sent 
 them far away from the land of their fathers into 
 strange countries, where they have been lost for 
 ages. When Esau, for contempt of his birth- 
 right, was deprived of it, and the covenant was 
 established in the family of Jacob, God, by his 
 providence, marked the difference in the religious 
 condition of these two brothers; displaying the 
 truth, long before the mouth of his prophet ut- 
 tered it: <f Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I 
 
Children* s Interest. 93 
 
 hated,- '^ In a similar way, God dealt with Abra- 
 ham's eldest son, after he was excluded from the 
 covenant. Ishmael and his children were deprived 
 of those external religious privileges, and of those 
 gracious visitations of the Holy Spirit, which the 
 covenant secured to Isaac, and to his seed, in the 
 line of Jacob. 
 
 Thus, from the history of God's dealings with 
 his church, it appears that, whenever any branch 
 of his people were cast out of his covenant, he 
 ahvays marked the forfeiture which they had in- 
 curred, by froAvning upon them in his providence — . 
 by depriving them of their religious advantages — 
 and by withholding the influence of his blessed 
 Spirit. Is it possible, then, that the children of 
 his people, under the Christian dispensation, with 
 whom he deals in a way of mercy directhj the op- 
 posite, should have been shut out of his covenant? 
 His providence smiles upon them; his grace de- 
 scends upon them. They enjoy all the external 
 privileges of his covenant; and the blessings of 
 Abraham, saving covenant-blessings come upon 
 them. How plainly both the providence and the 
 Spirit of God contradict the sentiment, that our 
 children are aliens from the commonwealth of Is- 
 rael, and strangers from the covenant of promise! 
 
 These two facts, stated and illustrated, autho- 
 rize us to conclude, from the undeviating proce- 
 dure of divine providence in regard to the church, 
 
 * Rom. ix. IS. Mai. i. I 
 
9* LETTER VI. 
 
 That children have still an interest in Jehovah's 
 unrevoked covenant; and that the God of Ahra- 
 ham continues to fulfil his ancient promise, by be- 
 stowing on the seed of his people covenant-bless- 
 ings, life and salvation,* and by raising up children 
 in place of their fathers, as a generation to serve 
 him, and maintain his cause in the world. 
 
 On grounds so firm, my brethren, rests the 
 right of children. The settled meaning of the term 
 «eed;--the admission of children born of Gentiles 
 proselyted to the Jewish religion, to an interest in 
 the covenant, confirmed to them by an application 
 of its seal;-the importance of thisprivilege;-and the 
 great design of the covenant,*-have each furnished 
 us with a solid argument in favour of the right of 
 our offspring. Combined, they present a body of 
 evidence which cannot be resisted; especially when 
 contemplated in connexion with the facts, that 
 Christian children enjoy, in an improved state, 
 all the other privileges which Jewish children 
 enjoyed, and that the great covenant-promise is 
 uniformly fulfilled to them, from generation to 
 generation. 
 
 Against the covenant-interest of children, it is 
 objected. That the present dispensation is too spi- 
 ritual to admit them to that near relation to God 
 which they formerly sustained. The objection is 
 plausible. But, when investigated, it will be found, 
 that its whole force depends on begging the ques- 
 tion in dispute. For what is the question? It is 
 this: Have children a covenant-relation to God 
 
Children's Interest. 95 
 
 under the present dispensation? Now, to affirm 
 the present dispensation to be too spiritual to ad- 
 mit them to such a relation, amounts indeed to a 
 denial of their ancient right, but it presents no 
 'proof. It is bare assertion; a simple begging of 
 the question. To establish the conclusion, which 
 the affirmation pretends lo prove, it ought to be 
 evinced, by solid arguments, either that the cove- 
 nant has been vacated, or that the right of chil- 
 dren under it has been revoked. But, without 
 any proof of tbis kind, to assume ft as a principle, 
 that the present dispensation is too spiritual to 
 allow them to hold their ancient chartered right, 
 is illogical in the highest degree. It is inverting 
 the order in the argument. It is substituting the 
 conclusion for the premises, and the premises for 
 the conclusion: because it ought, first, to be pro- 
 ved, that the covenant-right of children has been 
 taken away from them, by that high authority 
 from which it was derived; and, then, from this 
 - established fact, it might be fairly inferred, that 
 the present dispensation is inconsistent with the 
 continued enjoyment of their ancient right. 
 
 This fact, however, can never be established. 
 The right of children rests, as we have evinced, 
 on a sure and solid basis; unaffected by the change 
 which has taken place in the economy of God's 
 government over his church. It is secured to 
 them by that irrevocable covenant, in which it 
 was originally granted by supreme authority. 
 
^6 LETTER VI. 
 
 The principle, thus gratuitously assumed, on 
 which this objection depends, is pushed by others 
 to a greater length. One sect of Christians af- 
 firm, that the present dispensation is so spiritual, 
 as to forbid the use of baptism and the Lord's 
 supper, and to be inconsistent with the ministry 
 of an order of men specially set apart to preach 
 the gospel: and they have as good ground for their 
 assertion, as those who affirm the covenant-right 
 of infants to be incompatible with the spirituality 
 of the Christian dispensation. Both, however, 
 assume, as a settled maxim, what ought first to 
 be proved: and, therefore, the conclusions drawn 
 from it are mere assumptions, and entirely falla- 
 cious. Were this mode of reasoning allowed, 
 what ordinance could withstand its attacks? Per- 
 mit me thus to assume my principle, and I can, with 
 a dash of my pen, overturn the whole external 
 order of the church. I can prove improper, not 
 only the use of sacraments, but also public wor- 
 ship; nay, an open profession of religion to be 
 unchristian: merely by affirming, that all these 
 things are inconsistent with the spirituality of the 
 present dispensation. 
 
 The fallacy of the objection is apparent. It 
 may, however, he useful here to detain you, by 
 making some remarks toward elucidating the dif- 
 ference, with respect to spirituality, in the two 
 economies. That the Jewish is surpassed by the 
 Christian dispensation, in spirituality, is an un- 
 
Children's Interest. 97 
 
 questionable fact: the former being suited, as an in- 
 spired writer teaches, to the church in a state of 
 minority, and the latter adapted to her condition 
 when arrived at mature age.* The ideas, however, 
 entertained by some divines with respect to the Jew- 
 ish church, are entirely unwarrantable, and degra- 
 ding to her character in the highest degree. Au- 
 thors of respectable name have represented her as 
 little more than a political society, and contended 
 that God required of her members only external 
 obedience: a sentiment directly opposed to the grand 
 design of the covenant under which she existed, and 
 contradictory to express precepts and texts of sa- 
 cred scripture. Have we not seen, that the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, by which the Jewish church Avas 
 constituted, contemplated, as its grand design, the 
 calling of God's elect seed to the enjoyment of him- 
 self, and the preparing of them for a state of hea- 
 venly glory? Does not our Lord make the sum of 
 that law, which was given to his church, to consist 
 in love to God and love to man^ Were not God's 
 ancient people required to rend their hearts, and 
 not their garments; to make them new hearts, and 
 new spirits^ j Did David imagine he had done his 
 duty, merely by yielding an external obedience to 
 divine precepts? Far from it. "Behold,'' he ex- 
 claims, <« thou desirest truth in the inward parts: 
 and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know 
 wisdom. For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would 
 
 * Gal. iv. 1— r. t Joel ii. 15. Ezek. xviii. 31. 
 
 K 
 
99 LETTER VI. 
 
 I give it: thou deliglitest not in burnt offering. The 
 sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and 
 a contrite heart, O God, tbou wilt not despise."* 
 How can a notion so degrading be reconciled with 
 the majesty, the purity, and the omniscience of the 
 great Head of the church? Was not the Son of God 
 as glorious in majesty, as spotless in purity, as in- 
 finite in knowledge, when he governed his church 
 by the former economy, as since he commenced his 
 new and better dispensation? How was it possible, 
 for Him who looketh on the heart, and trieth the 
 reins of the children of men, even to issue laws re- 
 quiring nothing more than bare external obedience, 
 and institute a church merely for political ends! 
 That the Son of God was king of Israel, and that 
 he gave them, as a nation, a code of civil and poli- 
 tical laws, is readily admitted. But, from this fact, 
 to .nfer the church, under the Jewish economy, to 
 have been a mere political society, is as absui'd, as 
 it would be to infer that the church under the 
 Christian dispensation is of the same nature, be- 
 cause Jesus Christ is now styled ** King of kings," 
 and king in Zion. The truth is, the Jewisli people 
 were both a nation and a church: societies inii- 
 mately blended, but entirely distinct, in their laws 
 and ends; just as the corporate and church-states 
 of any religious society, are distinct, although closely 
 united: and as the constitution of the former state 
 is subservient to the spiritual purposes and ends of 
 
 * Psal. li. 6, 16, 17. 
 
Cliildren's Interest. 99 
 
 the latter; so the political state of the Jewish na- 
 tion was intended to be subservient to the great 
 ends of tlie church. Our Lord assumed the cha- 
 racter of king to accomplish, the more eflTectually, 
 liis views as Head of his church. The Sinai-consti- 
 tution being abolished, the church exists now as she 
 did during the whole period intervening between the 
 date of it and that of Abraham's covenant, in a sepa* 
 i^te capacitij: and she exists under the identical co- 
 venant, by which she was constituted and organized 
 in the patriarcli's family. This is not, and never 
 was, as some intimate, an ecclesiastieo-political con- 
 stitution,* but a divine co»:stitution adapted to the 
 nature of God's church; that holy society wliich he 
 has separated from the world, for the maintenance 
 of his ivorship, the promolion of his glory, and the 
 salvation of his elect. 
 
 Again: The difference of the two dispensations, 
 in regard to spirituality, does not consist in an en- 
 tire abolition of external form and ordinances under 
 the present. Such there must be while man re- 
 mains what he is: and certainly baptism, the Lord's 
 supper, and public worship, which belong to the 
 Christian dispensation, are external ordinances. 
 
 Nor does the difference consist in an entire ex- 
 elusion of unsanctified members from the Christian 
 church. A Judas, called a devil, was a member of 
 our Saviour's little family: Simon Magus, a man 
 *'yet in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of 
 
 * Booth 
 
100 LETTER VI. 
 
 iniquity," was baptized by Philip the evangelist:* 1 
 and an incestuous person was a member of the Co- 
 rinthian church, founded by Paul.f In every age, 
 there have always been, even in the purest churches 
 of any size, hypocrites and other unworthy charac- 
 ters. Perfect purity cannot possibly be obtained, 
 while the door of admission is intrusted to the hands 
 of fallible mortals, who look, not on the heart, but 
 on the outward appearance. Our Lord, in his pa- 
 rable of the tares growing with the wheat, plainly 
 intimates that a corrupt mixture will ever be found 
 in his church; guards his servants against such at- 
 tempts to purify her, as might endanger the privi- 
 leges of real believers; and assures us, that a per- 
 fect separation between the righteous and the wick- 
 ed will not take place, till the end of the world; 
 <* when he will send forth his angels to gather out 
 of his kingdom all things that offend, and them that 
 do iniquity.^ij: 
 
 In what, then, consists the superior spirituality 
 of the Christian dispensation? Simply in the aboli- 
 tion of that burdensome ritual, instituted by the 
 Sinai-covenant, and adapted to the minor-state of 
 the church; and in the introduction of an external 
 form and ritual suited to a state in which the church 
 has arrived at mature age, and is permitted to en- 
 joy the adoption of sons. Her members are no lon- 
 ger obliged to repair to the temple at Jerusalem; 
 but enjoy the liberty of erecting, in any place that 
 
 * Acts viii. 13, 23. f 1 Cor, v. 1. * Mat. xxiv. 13—30, 36—43. 
 
CliildreiCs Interest, 101 
 
 may suit their convenience, houses of worship. No 
 longer restricted to one altar on which to offer their 
 sacrifices, ihey may every where lift up Jioly hands, 
 and present, with acceptance, their sacrifices of 
 prayer, thanksgiving, and praise. The severe au- 
 thority of Moses, who suhjected the church to nu- 
 merous rites, costly sacrifices, oppressive ceremo- 
 nies, *• a yoke w hich" she was ** unahle to hear;" 
 has given place to the mild reign of Jesus Christ, 
 who governs lier hy ordinances few in number, sim- 
 ple in meaning, and easy to be understood. The 
 splendid service of the temple has been succeeded 
 by the simplicity of a Christian assembly; the mi- 
 nistry of Aaron and his sons, adorned with gems 
 and costly robes, by the ministry of apostles and 
 their successors, officiating in plain attire; the bon- 
 dage of *• beggarly elements," by the freedom of 
 gospel worship; the servile distance at which the 
 church stood from her glorious Head, by that near 
 approach which she makes, in virtue of the blood 
 of Jesus; coming not once in a year, but daily; not 
 with dread} but with boldness into the holiest, even 
 to the mercy-seat of her God. The gospel preached 
 in types and ceremonies, has been succeeded by the 
 gospel preached plainly and fully; ** the ministra- 
 tion of condemnation," by " the ministration of 
 righteousness;" the '< spirit of bondage," by *<tbe 
 spirit of adoption." In a Avord, the obscurity, re- 
 straints, and servile fear of the Mosaic, have given 
 k2 
 
102 lETTER VI. 
 
 place to the light and freedom, love and joy, of tlie 
 Christian dispensation. 
 
 In such respects, the present economy surpasses 
 the former, in spirituality. But the exclusion of 
 children from church-membership, forms no part 
 of its superiority. The constitution of the church 
 is such, at present, that it does not prevent the ad- 
 mission of hypocrites, and other vile characters, 
 making a credible profession of religion; why, then, 
 should it be thought unbecoming the purity and 
 majesty of God, to permit children to retain that 
 external relation to himself, which they derived 
 from his express appointment, and enjoyed, without 
 interruption, for so long a period? How unreasona- 
 ble to suppose, that an alteration in religious cere- 
 monies should cut off from the church a whole class 
 of members! destroy a right secured by a perpetual 
 covenant; a covenant which originally contemplated 
 the admission of Gentiles, as well as the natural 
 descendants of Abraham; a covenant affected, nei- 
 ther by the formation, nor by the abolition, of the 
 Sinai-covenant, with all its appendent laws and ce- 
 remonies! 
 
LETTER VII. 
 
 Duties of the covenant 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 From the nature of this covenant, containing, 
 as evinced, blessings so invaluable, and formed for 
 purposes so important,^ it is obvious, that very se- 
 rious duties muBt be imposed on every covenantee. 
 Permit me to present you with a brief view of them. 
 
 The bestowment of any favour by the Most 
 High, lays the recipient under a corresponding obli- 
 gation to gratitude, praise, and obedience. Have 
 we derived our existence from God? and do we de- 
 pend on him for life, and breath, and all things? 
 We are bound to worship him as our Creator, Pre- 
 server, and Benefactor; and to express our grati- 
 tude, by employing, in his service and to his glory, 
 ail the powers with which he has endowed our na- 
 ture. Had this covenant, then, been granted in an 
 absolute form, and insured to us promised blessings, 
 without requiring the performance of any duty on 
 our part in order to a participation in them; it would 
 have laid us under obligations to gratitude and 
 praise. Such is the covenant made with Noah and 
 
 * Letter U and III. 
 
104 LETTER VII. 
 
 all flesh. It engages that the earth shall never be 
 again destroyed by a deluge, and that seed-time and 
 harvest, day and night, summer and winter, shall 
 alternately succeed each other, till the expiration 
 of time: and the benefits of it are secured by an 
 absolute promise, the fulfilment of which depends 
 not at all on the performance of any duty by man- 
 kind. But although, in this view, no duty is re- 
 quired by it, yet the bestowment of so great fa- 
 vours, certainly imposes on us the duties of grati- 
 tude and praise. 
 
 The Abrahamic covenant is of a different kind. 
 It requires from every covenantee particular duties, 
 repentance ffaithf and universal holiness. 
 
 Enjoyment of its temporal or external blessings, 
 does not depend on the performance of these duties 
 by every individual: for thousands of Abraham's 
 descendants enjoyed them, who lived and died im- 
 penitent and unbelieving. A full enjoyment of them, 
 however, did depend on the prevalence of a certain 
 measure of piety in the Israelitish nation. That 
 generation which came out of Egypt was, on ac- 
 count of their unbelief, excluded from the land of 
 promise: and when idolatry and wickedness pre- 
 vailed among the Jewish people, after their settle- 
 ment in Canaan, they were sent into captivity to 
 Babylon; and, many times previous to that event, 
 were they sorely chastised for their sins, by the in- 
 cursions of neighbouring nations. A similar state 
 of things has existed since the establishment of the 
 
Duties of the Covenant. 105 
 
 Christian dispensation. Tliousands have, without 
 repentance and faitli, enjoyed external covenant- 
 blessings, tlie gospel, and the means of grace: but, 
 when impiety has prevailed much in churches, God 
 has sometimes destroyed them, and removed their 
 candlestick out of its place. The seven churches 
 of Asia furnish mournful illustrations of this trutli. 
 Participation, however, in the spiritual benefits 
 of this covenant, does depend on the exercise of re- 
 pentance and faith. They are exhibited and offered 
 to every covenantee; yet none come to the actual 
 enjoyment of them, but (hose who repent and be- 
 lieve. Let me not be misunderstood to mean, that 
 the performance of these duties is, strictly speak- 
 ing, the condition of receiving covenant-blessings; 
 for, in this respect, they depend on the glorious 
 Mediator of the covenant, the Lord Jesus Christ, 
 whose merits alone are the procuring cause of them. 
 Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith:^ 
 and if he, the father of the faithful, the head of 
 the covenant, was justified, not by works, but by 
 that faith which appropriates the righteousness of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ; tlien, surely, all believers, 
 his spiritual seed, must be justified in the same free 
 and gracious manner. " If there had been a law 
 given which could have given life, verily righteous- 
 ness should have been by the law. But the scrip- 
 ture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise 
 by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to all them 
 
 * Rom. iv. 1^3. 
 
106 LETTER VII. 
 
 that believe."* "Therefore it is of faith, that it 
 might be by grace; to the end the promise might 
 be sure to all the seed; not to that only >vhich is of 
 the law, but to that also which is of the faith of 
 Abraham, who is the father of us ail."f 
 
 But the fact, that justification, and other spiri- 
 tual blessings of the covenant, are conferred by a 
 gracious donation, excluding all merit; does not 
 militate against the truth, that these benefits are 
 bestowed only on those who repent and believe. 
 The necessity of faith and repentance, imposed on 
 every covenantee, is apparent from the very nature 
 ef the covenant. Consider what is its great pro- 
 mise. By it Jehovah engages to be a God to us. 
 Now, does He condescend to make so merciful an 
 offer? Is he ready to become reconciled to us, guilty 
 rebels, through Jesus Christ; blotting out all our 
 sins, and giving us the adoption of children? Surely 
 the very offer binds us to deep humiliation and un- 
 feigned penitence? Should we not repent, heartily 
 repent, of those offences which we have committed 
 against a God so holy, and yet so merciful? This is 
 one of the first steps to be taken in that upright 
 walk or life, which the covenant expressly re- 
 quires.j: For a sinner, a rebel, can never walk 
 uprightly before God, until he humble himself at 
 his feet, and repent of the insults which he has, in 
 the course of his rebellion, dared to offer to infinite 
 Majesty. 
 
 * Gal. iii. 21, 22. f Rom. iv. 16. ^ Gen. xvii. 1. 
 
Duties of the Covenant, 107 
 
 Equally plain is it, ihsii faith is demanded of 
 every covenantee. Without faith, there can be no 
 reconciliation between God and the sinner, nor true, 
 evangelical re|ientance; and, consequently, no ac- 
 ceptable walking before God; because it must com- 
 mence with the healing of that unhappy breach of 
 friendship, which sin has made between him and 
 the sinner. Besides, faith is necessary to enable 
 us to accept the great blessing of this covenant, I 
 mean the righteousness of faith. This righteous- 
 ness, even the righteousness of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, is exhibited and offered to every covenantee; 
 but it can be appropriated only by a true and living 
 faith. See Rom. x. 5 — 10. 
 
 Further: The covenant imposes the great duty 
 of universal holiness. Had we no other proof of 
 this, it miglit be inierred from the obligations with 
 which it binds us to repentance and faith, the seeds 
 of a new and holy life. But we have positive proof; 
 for it is expressly required. The covenant is intro- 
 duced in these comprehensive words: ** Walk thou 
 
 BEFORE ME, AND BE THOU PERFECT,"* Or, as the 
 
 original miglit be translated, *• Be thou uprigut." 
 This injunction is as broad, as the apostolic exhorta- 
 tion grounded on the great promises of the gospel: 
 Having, therefore, these promises , let us cleanse our- 
 selves from all fiUhiiiess of the flesh and of the 
 spirit, pevfccting holiness in the fear of the Lord, 
 And in fact, these pi^oniises belong to the Abra- 
 
 * Gen. Kvii. 1. 
 
lOS LETTER VII. 
 
 hami(^ covenant. Compare 2 Cor. vi. 16, vii. 1, with 
 Levit. xxvi. 9 — 12. 
 
 Moreover: The covenant, it is manifest, impo- 
 ses a particular duty on parents toward their chil- 
 dren. That they should endeavour to train them 
 up for God, and lead them to the exercise of that 
 repentance and faith which are necessary to the en- 
 joyment of spiritual blessins^s, is unquestionably a 
 solemn and an indispensable covenant-duty. Were 
 an opulent person to adopt a poor man's child, and 
 engage to make him, if his conduct should be cor- 
 rect, heir to his estate; would it not be a duty in- 
 cumbent on the child's parent, consenting to his 
 adoption, to endeavour to give him, while remain- 
 ing under his care, such instruction, and subject 
 him to such discipline, as might help to form his 
 character, and prepare him for the inheritance in 
 prospect? Apply this to the case before us. God 
 has adopted our children; he has brought them into 
 a special relation to himself, and made them mem- 
 bers of his visible church; he exhibits to them his 
 gracious promises, and engages to make every one 
 of them that shall believe, an heir to a heavenly 
 inheritance; and, for a time, he commits them to 
 our care. Can we misunderstand his meaning? Does 
 he not plainly signify it to be his will, that w^e 
 should bring up our children for him, and endea- 
 vour by instruction, discipline, and example, to se- 
 cure to them the enjoyment of every covenant-bless- 
 ing? Abraham felt his obligations in reference to 
 
Duties of the Covenant, 109 
 
 liis children: and his zeal to perform his duty, and 
 realize to them covenant-promises, received honour- 
 able notice from the Almighty: " I know him, that 
 he will command his children and his household af- 
 ter him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, 
 to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring 
 upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him."^ 
 From this passage it is evident, that God suspends, 
 in some degree, the fulfilment of his promises, on 
 parental diligence. The patriarch was sensible, 
 that the promises or covenant of God imposed on 
 him the great duty of educating his children in re- 
 ligious knowledge; and that the appointed way for 
 securing to himself and to them the enjoyment of 
 promised blessings, was diligently to perform this 
 great duty. If Christian parents wish to see the 
 blessing of Abraham descending on their children, 
 let them imitate him, by training them up in reli- 
 gious knowledge and practice. 
 
 From the view, my brethren, which has been 
 presented, in these letters, of Abraham's cove- 
 nant, I infer. That it is in substance the same 
 as the covenant of grace. To evince this truth, let 
 us run a parallel between the two covenants. Did 
 the latter originate in infinite wisdom? The former 
 had the same origin: being devised, exhibited, and 
 offered to mankind by Jehovah. Does the covenant 
 of grace contain spiritual blessings, and particu- 
 larly engage, that the Almighty will be a God to 
 
 * Gen. xviii. 10. 
 I.- 
 
110 LETTER VII. 
 
 every believer? The Abrahamic covenant contains 
 spiritual blessings, and is distinguished by the same 
 glorious promise. Does the former exhibit to sin- 
 ners the righteousness of faith, as the only way of 
 obtaining acceptance with an immaculate Being? 
 The latter exhibits the same righteousness, and for 
 the same purpose: and, hence, circumcision, its an- 
 cient token, is denominated ** a seal of the right- 
 eousness of faitliy'^ Is it Jehovah's great design, 
 in making an external manifestation of his covenant 
 of grace, to call, convert, and save his elect? Is 
 this the principal reason why it is exhibited and 
 preached to sinners promiscuously? The same great 
 design he proposed in the Abrahamic covenant: and 
 this constituted the principal reason why it was 
 made with the carnal, as well as with the spiritual, 
 seed of his faithful servant. Was the former esta- 
 blished through the mediation of Jesus Christ? The 
 latter, an inspired writer tells us, was confirmed in 
 Christ;! who, consequently, is the mediator of it. 
 Must not, then, Ihese two covenants, agreeing 
 tlius in essential points, be the same in substance'^ 
 Against this position, will any object, that the 
 covenant of grace contains only spiritual blessings? 
 This sentiment is sanctioned by liigh authority. But, 
 in opposition to it, I am bold to assert, that it is a 
 sentiment which cannot be supported; a sentiment 
 contradicted by tlie very nature of tJiis covenant, and 
 by plain scripture-promises. This covenant certain- 
 
 *Roiii.iv. U. fGal. iii. ir. 
 
Duties of the Covenant. Ill 
 
 ly contains external, as well as spiritual blessings. 
 I speak confidently; because the evidence is full and 
 decisive. 
 
 How does the covenant of grace contemplate 
 man? Just as he is: as a creature made up of soul 
 and body; as fallen into a state of sin and misery; 
 as struggling with wants both external and spiri- 
 tual. And what is the design of this covenant? To 
 relieve the wants of man; to redeem him out of all 
 his miseries. Now, can it be admitted, that such a 
 covenant makes no provision for supplying his ex- 
 ternal wants? Is his body beneath notice? Are tem- 
 poral favours unworthy of his reception? Has God, 
 in his covenant, provided amply for the necessities 
 of his soul, and overlooked entirely those of his 
 body? secured to him by promise blessings for the 
 next, and none for the present world? AVhy should 
 wants of an external kind be thus neglected? Are 
 they not the consequences of sin, of breaking the 
 covenant of works? and is not the covenant of grace 
 intended to do away all the penal effects arising 
 from sin, or the violation of the other? How, then, 
 can it be admitted, that this covenant contains no 
 external blessing? 
 
 This sentiment is contradicted, in plain terms, 
 by the promises of the covenant. Let us hear them. 
 " Godliness is profitable unto all things, having 
 promise of the life that now is, and of that which is 
 to come."* " Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and 
 
 * 1 Tim. iv, 8. 
 
IJta XETTBR VII. 
 
 his righteousness; and all these things shall he added 
 unto you."^ <' All things are yours; whether Paul> 
 or ApoUos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or 
 death, or things present) or things to come; all are 
 yours; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is God*s»"f 
 '<Be content with such things as ye have: for he 
 hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake 
 thee.":|: <* My God shall supply all your need, ac- 
 cording to his riches in glory, by Christ Jesus."§ 
 Is not this the language of the covenant of grace? 
 Are not these its promises? If not, to what covenant 
 do they belong? 
 
 But, it may be said, temporal blessings are be- 
 stowed on unbelievers, as well as on believers. Ad- 
 mitted: the fact, however, affords no evidence, that 
 we are not to consider temporal favours, when con- 
 ferred on believers, as the fruit of covenant-promi- 
 ses. The head of a family gives food and raiment 
 to his domestics, as well as to his children: but 
 would it be correct in the latter to conclude, that, 
 because domestics participate with them in their 
 father's kindness, they ought not to regard such fa- 
 vours as any evidence of parental love? Can it, then, 
 be correct in believers, the children of God, to con- 
 clude that, because the munificence of their liea- 
 venly Father permits unbelievers to share with 
 them in blessings of an external nature, they have 
 no reason to regard such as fruits of his covenant- 
 love? Highly dangerous it would indeed be, to con- 
 
 * Mat. vi. 33. 1 1 Cor. iii. 2t— 23. t Ileb. xiii. 5. § Phil. iv. 1?. 
 
Duties of the Covenant. 113 
 
 sidcr these blessini^s as sufficient evulence of their 
 divine adoption. But, liaving ascertained their filial 
 relation to God, by other scriptural marks, they 
 are authorized to receive every blessing, temporal 
 as well as spiritual, as coming to them through the 
 channel of the covenant, and as tokens of divine love. 
 
 Many afflictions are of an external nature: be- 
 lievers and unbelievers are alike subject to them: 
 yet are we assured, by two inspired writers, that* 
 when sent as chastisements to the former, they pro- 
 ceed from parental love, and are to be regarded as 
 covenant-mercies. " Whom the Lord loveth he 
 chasteneth, and scourgeth everj son whom he re- 
 ceiveth. If his children forsake my law, and walk 
 not in my judgments^ if they break my statutes, 
 and keep not my commandments; then will I visit 
 their transgressions with a rod, and their iniquity 
 with stripes. Nevertheless my loving kindness will 
 I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faith- 
 fulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor 
 alter the thing that is gone out of my lips."^ 
 
 The covenant of grace, it is not to be doubted, 
 contemplates especially spiritual blessings; and, 
 therefore, it abounds with promises respecting them. 
 But certainly it condescends to provide for man in 
 his present state, and to supply him with food, and 
 raiment, and comforts pertaining to his mortal life. 
 Beside these, there are other more important bless- 
 ings of an external nature, Avhich result from this 
 
 * Heb. xii. 6. Psal. Ixxxix. 30 — 3i. 
 L2 
 
114 LETTER VII, 
 
 covenant. The sacred scriptures, — the preaching 
 of the gospel, — an order of men consecrated to the 
 ministry, and other officers of the visible church, — 
 the means of grace, — baptism and the Lord's sup- 
 per, — and public worship; — all these are external 
 blessings, intimately connected with spiritual bene- 
 fits: and all, it must be confessed, are fruits of the 
 covenant of grace, which mankind would never have 
 enjoyed, had not this covenant been devised and re- 
 vealed for the salvation of God's elect. 
 
 How striking the resemblance between the two 
 covenants! What follows? The conclusion at which 
 we aimed in pointing out their agreement^ namely. 
 That they are in siihstance the same,^ 
 
 * In explaining the covenant, I have purposely avoided giving to 
 it any other name, than that derived from the great patriarch's name, 
 >vith whom it was made. By doing so, I have saved myself the trou- 
 ble of answering objections, that would have occurred from another 
 denomination to which it appears justly entitled. My object has been 
 to show what it really is in itself: and I have contented myself with 
 proving it to be, in substance, the same as the covenant of gi-ace. This 
 ■was sufficient for my argument; and, therefore, I choose to express 
 my full opinion in this note, that it may not be considered as any part 
 of the discussion. 
 
 Abraham's covenant appears to be a new dispensation of the 
 covenant of grace, intended by Jehovah to constitute and orga- 
 aize 1ms church in that patriarch's family. Before this memorable 
 transaction, the covenant of grace, as revealed to mankind, had sub- 
 sisted in the simple form oi st. promise. But, at this period, the Most 
 High condescended to present it to the faith of his people, in the 
 more encouraging form of a regular covenayit, confirmed by a visible 
 sign and seal; and to engage to transmit the invaluable blessings of it, 
 in the line of Abraham's seed, natural and adopted, till the end of 
 
Duties of the Covenant. 115 
 
 This trutli is certainly admitted by an inspired 
 writer^ for he rests on it an argument of great im- 
 portance to the faith and consolation of believers.^ 
 Treating of God's counsel or covenant of grace, he 
 conducts his readers to the memorable transactions 
 with Abraham; and, from the oath >vhich the Most 
 High condescended to interpose for the confirmation 
 of his promises to the patriarch, he evinces the im- 
 mutability of that covenant to which every believer 
 has fled for refuge to his guilty soul. But, if the 
 covenant of Abraham and the covenant of grace, be 
 entirely and essentially different, with what propri- 
 ety could the apostle infer from the oath confirming 
 the former, that the latter was confirmed by the 
 same amazing stoop of infinite condescension? Deny 
 these covenants to be in substance the same, and 
 you subvert the very foundation on which the sa- 
 ered writer has built his argument. But admit this 
 truth, which he takes for granted, and the propri- 
 ety of his reasoning is immediately perceived, and 
 its energy felt, 
 
 the world. This I express as aa opinion. In support of it I shall offer 
 BO other evidence, than what arises from the explafnation which has 
 been given of the nature of the covenant; because, as already men- 
 tioned, I do not wish it to be considered as forming any part of the 
 disfeussion contained in these letters. 
 
 * Heb. vi. 13, 20. Gen. xxii. 16, 17. 
 
LETTER VIII. 
 
 The result: Children have a divine right to bap- 
 tism. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 The explanation of that ever memorable cove- 
 nant, which Jehovah condescended to make with A- 
 braham, is now finished. Permit me, previously to 
 leading you to consider the grand result, briefly to 
 recapitulate the truths that have been established 
 and illustrated. In the course of these letters, we 
 have proved the following points; 
 
 1. That the covenant comprehends both spiritual 
 and external blessings.* 
 
 2. That its design was and is, not only to con- 
 stitute the visible church in Abraham's family, but, 
 also and chiefly, to perpetuate among his seed the 
 spiritual church, and to transmit to God's elect 
 among them, from generation to generation, the 
 blessings of life and salvation, till time shall end.f 
 
 3. That the covenant is perpetual.:}: 
 
 * Letter II. f Letters III, V, and VI. + Letter IV. 
 
Children's Right to Saptism, 117 
 
 *. That Gentile-believers, and their children, 
 have an interest in it, being the seed and heirs of 
 their father Abraham, ^i^ 
 
 5. That this covenant imposes on every cove- 
 nantee the great duties of repentance, faith, and uni- 
 versal holiness; and special obligations on parents 
 to train up their children in the fear and service of 
 God.f 
 
 6. Finally, That this covenant is, in substance, 
 the same as the covenant of grace.:]: 
 
 These several truths are intimately connected, 
 and depend one upon another, as stones in a build- 
 ing. They are all essential to a correct knowledge 
 of that gracious covenant, >vhich secures to belie- 
 vers and their children privileges and blessings more 
 valuable than rubies, and much fine gold. Take 
 away either of them, and you obscure its glory; if 
 not endanger its existence, as when a pillar is re- 
 moved by which an edifice is supported. It was ne- 
 cessary, therefore, to place each of these truths 
 distinctly before you, and endeavour to establish 
 your faith in them, by solid and satisfactory argu- 
 ments. The way is now prepared to consider the 
 important consequence, deducible from the discus- 
 sion through which you have been conducted. 
 
 The grand result, my brethren, of all these 
 
 truths, is, THAT CHILDREN HAVE A DIVINE RIGHT 
 TO BAPTISM. 
 
 * Letter V and VI. f Lettter VH :^ Idem. 
 
118 LETTlEIl VIII. 
 
 1. Their interest in Mraham^s covenant entitles 
 them to baptism. Why is this Christian rite admi- 
 nistered to adults? Because they are professed be- 
 lievers? Granted. But who are believers? Children 
 of Abraham, who, having by faith gained an inte- 
 rest in his covenant, receive, as his appointed heirs, 
 all its spiritual blessings, as an inheritance,^^ If, 
 then, adults are baptized because they appear to be 
 believers, and, consequently, children of Abraham; 
 why should not infants, who are, as well as their 
 parents, the patriarch's seed, be baptized? When 
 Gentiles were proselyted to the Jewish religion, 
 circumcision was applied, not only to themselves, 
 but also to their children; signifying that both had 
 an interest in this covenant, and sustained a filial 
 relation to Abraham. And why should not the same 
 practice prevail under the Christian dispensation? 
 Why should a token of their relation to the patri- 
 arch, and of their interest in his covenant, be given 
 to adults, and refused to infants? 
 
 2. Children are members of the church, and, 
 en this account too, they ought to he hapti^ed. 
 
 The visible church of God was constituted in 
 Abraham's family, by the covenant established with 
 him; and as an interest in it was expressly granted 
 to children, they were, of course, made members of 
 this holy society. Thus they remained, through 
 many successive generations and ages, till the com- 
 
 * See pages 22 — 25. 
 
thildren's Bight to Baplisnu 119 
 
 Hiencement of the Christian dispensation. During 
 that long period, no one disputed tlieir special rela- 
 tion to God; all admitted it: and, according to di- 
 vine direction, they were circumcised as regular 
 jnemhers of his church. Nor do the opponents of in- 
 fant baptism deny this fact. They too confess the 
 church-membership of Jewish children, and allow 
 that they had a right to the covenant-token. AVhy, 
 then, should any deny that children, under the pre- 
 sent dispensation, are members of the church of 
 God? Had the covenant, constituting this sacred 
 society in Abraham's family, been abolished, or had 
 God deprived them of their covenant-interest, their 
 membership would certainly have been lost. But 
 neither has heen done. God has not taken away 
 their ancient privilege; nor has he abolished his 
 gracious covenant with the father of the faithful. 
 On the contrary, he has expressly taught us in his 
 word, that it remains in full force, and, consequent- 
 ly, that children retain their covenant-relation to 
 liim. It follows, then, from these facts, that chil- 
 dren, under the present dispensation, are memhers 
 of the church. For certainly their relation to God, 
 arising out of their covenant-interest, is the very 
 same relation which was constituted between God 
 and Jewish children, by their covenant-interest: 
 and as this relation made the latleVf so it must make 
 iheformeVf members of his church. 
 
 ArVhen Gentile children were brought into the co- 
 venant; by the conversion of their parents from idols 
 
120 LETTER nil, 
 
 to the God of Israel, their right to be members of 
 his church, was acknowledged by circumcision. 
 How unreasonable, then, to dispute the member- 
 ship of Christian children, who, like Abraham's 
 natural seed, are born in the covenant! The church, 
 it is true, is no longer under the law of Moses, and 
 has experienced in her form of government, and 
 modes of worship, a most beneficial and glorious 
 change. But, she is still, as has been proved, the 
 same .church; the Christian being only a continua- 
 tion of the Jewish church, in a state highly im- 
 proved with respect to light, privileges, and grace. 
 And shall we, merely on account of this great, but 
 advantageous alteration in external matters, cast 
 our dear oifspring over her sacred enclosure, as ali- 
 ens; although her glorious Head assures us, that 
 they retain their ancient relation to himself, and 
 enjoy an interest in that very covenant, by which 
 his church was established in the family of Abra- 
 ham, <* who is the father of us all,"* and which still 
 remains as her grand constitution? Surely the in- 
 crease of privilege was intended for the benefit of 
 every class of her members; and children have a 
 right, as well as their parents, to share in favours 
 bestowed by our Lord on his whole church. 
 
 Is not this sufficient to evince the membership 
 of children in the church of Christ? Will any re- 
 solve not to be satisfied, unless a passage be pro- 
 duced, saying, in so many words, Children are 
 
 * Rom. iv. 16- 
 
Children's Right to Baptism, 121 
 
 members of the church? We confess no such text 
 can be found: and these persons must be left to conse- 
 quences resulting from their unreasonable demands. 
 But we can produce a passage, which ought to be 
 regarded as equivalent. Here it is: ** Jesus said. 
 Suffer the little children to come unto me, and 
 forhid them not: for of such is the kingdom of 
 GOD."* The kingdom of God means the church of 
 God. See Mat. xii. 28, xxi. 43. Mark i. 14. Acts 
 viii. 12. XX. 25. xxyiii. 31. Here, then, our Lord 
 tells us, that little children belong to his church. 
 Change, in this text, only one word for another of 
 the same meaning, and it will read thus: <* Jesus 
 said, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and 
 forbid them not: for of such is the church of God." 
 Is not this a plain scriptural proof of the church- 
 membership of children? Can any reasonably ask 
 for a plainer one? Are they determined not to be 
 satisfied, unless inspiration use words which they 
 choose to dictate? 
 
 I am aware, that some endeavour to set aside 
 this explicit testimony of our Lord in favour of the 
 right of his people's offspring. But the construc- 
 tion which they put on his words, is wholly inad- 
 luissiblc. It destroys the force of his argument. 
 They assert he does not mean, that little children 
 belong to the kingdom or church of God, but adult 
 believers, who resemble little children in their tem- 
 per. Apply this interpretation to tlie argument. It 
 
 * Mark x. 14. 
 M 
 
122 1.ETTER VIII. 
 
 will stand thus: Suffer little children to come unto 
 me, and forbid them not: for such adults as re- 
 semble them, belong to tlie kingdom of God. What 
 an argument! Is the likeness of believers, in humi- 
 lity and meekness, to cliildren, a reason why little 
 children should be brought to' Christ? Believers, in 
 their disposition, resemble sheep and doves; and 
 therefore, it will, according to this argument, fol- 
 low, that these animals should be brought to Christ. 
 This construction, you see, destroys both the force 
 and the propriety of our Lord's reason, for permit- 
 ting children to have access to him. 
 
 Now, try the argument by our interpretation of 
 his words, and you will perceive his reason to be 
 just, forcible, and conclusive. Suffer little children 
 to come unto me, and forbid them not: for they be- 
 long to the kingdom of God. They are members 
 of my church; and, therefore, they have a right to 
 come to her glorious Head: their parents may, with 
 great propriety, bring tlicm to me for my blessing; 
 and those who forbid them to come, and prevent 
 their access to me, deprive them of a right which 
 I have granted. 
 
 Besides, the original will not bear the other 
 construction. *' I cannot," says the candid and 
 learned Doct. Doddrige, on this text, ^« approve of 
 rendering ro/«>» such as resemble these. It is the 
 part of a faithful translator not to limit the sense 
 of the original, nor to fix what it leaves ambiguous." 
 These two important points have, I think, been 
 fairly and solidly established: 
 
ChilAreiCs Right to Baptism, 123 
 
 1. Children have an interest in tlie covenant of 
 Abraham; 
 
 2. Children are members of the church of Christ. 
 From these premises, Ave infer their divine right 
 
 to baptism. . But, before I advance in my argument, 
 an objection must be refuted. 
 
 We are denied the privilege of deducing our 
 children's right from fair principles. You have no 
 express precept, nor plain apostolic example for in- 
 fant baptism, say its opponents: and, as baptism is 
 a positive ordinance, you may not prove the right 
 of children to it by inference and moral considera- 
 tions. Yet these very persons often find it very con- 
 venient, and sometimes really necessary, to reason 
 in this way: and, when it serves their purpose, do 
 not hesitate to use the privilege denied to us. A 
 writer of reputation* has published two duodecimo 
 volumes on the subject of baptism: although he has 
 laid it down as a maxim, that, with respect to this 
 ordinance, it is unlawful to deduce consequences 
 from remote principles; and that the right of no 
 person, not established by express precept, or plain 
 apostolic example, may be made out by inferential 
 considerations. You may well wonder, how he could 
 contrive to make his work so bulky, while he 
 cramped his reasoning faculties by such a maxim! 
 The fact is, he has not regarded it: he has violated 
 it in many instances, 
 
 * Booth 
 
1S4 I.ETTER VIIJ. 
 
 Tliis rule, laid down by writers on the opposite 
 side of the question, is highly unreasonable and ar- 
 bitrary. A right establislied by inference from solid 
 principles, is not to be disputed. Our opponents ad- 
 mit it, in fact, with regard to female communi- 
 cants. No express precept, nor plain apostolic ex- 
 ample, can be pleaded for the admission of women 
 to the Lord's supper. Their right to approach is 
 deduced from moral considerations: it is inferred 
 from their qualifications. They are believers, and 
 have, therefore, as good a right to commune with 
 their Saviour, as male believei's. On this ground, 
 and no other, arc they admitted to the holy table." 
 And, indeed, this maxim is daily violated by its 
 avowed friends. A, B, and C, apply for baptism. 
 The question is. Have they a right to it? How is 
 this question to be determined? It will not be pre- 
 tended, that A, B, and C, are mentioned, hy name, 
 in scripture, as having a right to the ordinance. 
 The scriptures recognise, with respect to adults, 
 only the right of believers. Hence, the advocates 
 of this maxim are compelled to examine these ap- 
 plicants, on their religious experience, Avith a view 
 to ascertain whether they be believers. The exa- 
 mination being finished, they conclude, that A, B, 
 and C, have experienced a work of grace on their 
 hearts, have repented of their sins, and exercised 
 a true faith. On this discovery they reason thus; 
 The apostles baptized believers^ these applicants 
 are believers^ therefore, they have a right to bap- 
 
Children's Right to Baptism, 125 
 
 tism. The reasoning is short; but not shorter than 
 ours in favour of children. AVc reason thus: The 
 apostles baptized members of the church; infants 
 are members of the church; therefore, infants have 
 a right to baptism. 
 
 Who can deprive us of the privilege of pleading 
 the cause of our offspring by fair arguments? Surely 
 we have as just a right to reason on the subject of 
 baptism, as others who use it, their own maxim not- 
 withstanding. We know that our practice is cor- 
 rect, because an apostle has set us the example. 
 When the Holy Ghost fell on Cornelius, the Roman 
 centurion, and his friends, a new case occurred, in- 
 volving a question relative to baptism. What shall 
 be done to these men? Shall they be baptized? Pe- 
 ter determines the question. How? By pleading the 
 original commission to baptize all nations^ No: he 
 appears to have forgotten it, or, at least, not to 
 have understood its extent: for if he had, there 
 would have been no necessity for a vision to induce 
 him to comply with the centurion's invitation to vi- 
 sit him.^ It is certain, Peter does not determine 
 the question, by recurring to his commission; for 
 the sacred narrative says not a word about it. How, 
 then, is it done? By violating this maxim, invented 
 to excommunicate infants from the church of God; 
 by urging an argument founded on the qualifications 
 of these heathen for baptism. He sees them to be 
 fit subjects for this ordinance; and from their fit« 
 
 * Acts X. 9--20, 28. 
 M 2 
 
126 lETTER VIII. 
 
 iiess, he infers their right. " Can any man forbid 
 water, that these should not he baptized, which 
 have received the Hohj Ghost as ivell as weT^^ His 
 argument is: All Jewish converts, receiving the 
 Holj Ghost, have a right to baptism; these mea 
 have received the Holy Ghost; therefore, they have 
 a right to baptism. This argument satisfied Peter 
 and his circumcised companions. " He commanded 
 them to be baptized in the name of the Lord."f 
 
 Authorized by apostolic example, We are deter- 
 mined to assert our privilege. Our principles are 
 sound; and our conclusion is incontrovert^ible. In- 
 fants are in covenant with God, and members of his 
 church. Hence, we infer their divine right to bap- 
 tism; because it is our Lord's will, that all mem- 
 bers of his church should be baptized. Adults, not 
 descended from Christian parents, having by faith 
 gained an interest in this covenant, and become the 
 children of Abraliam, and made a credible profes- 
 sion of religion, are regularly introduced to church- 
 fellowship by baptism; (Compare Acts ii. 41 with 
 the i7th verse;) and shall we refuse baptism to in- 
 fants horn in covenant with God, horn children of 
 Abraham, horn members of the church? Shall we 
 refuse to them the token of the covenant, the seal 
 of their father, the sign of fellowship in Christ's 
 church? How unjust would it be thus to deprive 
 helpless infants, who cannot plead their own cause, 
 of their hirth-rightJ to cast them out of that holy 
 
 * Acts X. 47. t Acts X. 48. 
 
Children's Right to Baptism. 127 
 
 society, in which their heavenly Father has recorded 
 their names/ to deny their relation to God, secured 
 to them by his immutable covenant! We dare not 
 treat, in this cruel and unjust manner, those little 
 children who, Christ assures us, belong to his king- 
 dom, his visible church on earth. We joyfully ac- 
 knowledge their relation to him, and publicly re- 
 cognise it, by " baptizing them in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'* 
 
 Here, my brethren, the matter might be rested. 
 The conclusion in favour of our children is built on 
 solid principles. Permit, me, however, to strength- 
 en it, by presenting you with additional evidence in 
 support of their right. We undertake to prove. 
 That haptism is, in fact, the christian seal of 
 Abraham's covenant. If this point be established, 
 should not every objection against infant baptism be 
 jj^nt? We oifer the following arguments: 
 
 If baptism be not a seal to this covenant, it has 
 no initial seal: — Baptism seals the grand promise 
 and leading benefits, and imposes the duties, of this 
 covenant: — -An inspired writer teaches us, that bap- 
 tism has come in place of circumcision: — Baptism 
 is a seal of the covenant of grace. The discussion 
 of these points, I reserve for my next letter. 
 
LETTER IX. 
 
 The subject resumed. Children have a divine right 
 to baptism, — Baptism a seal of Mraham^s cove- 
 nant,'^Ohservations on the nature of baptism. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 In my last was laid before you the result of 
 the several truths, illustrated and established in the 
 preceding letters. It was evinced, front the cove- 
 nant-interest, and the church-membership of chil- 
 dren, that they have a divine right to baptism. I 
 now undertake to prove baptism to be the Christian 
 seal of Abraham's covenant. 
 
 1. Baptism must be its seal, or it has no 
 INITIAL seal. Circumcision was originally appen- 
 ded to this covenant as its token or seal. But, the 
 use of circumcision having, by express direction 
 from heaven, been abolished, it has, under the pre- 
 sent economy, no seal; unless baptism have assumed 
 the place of circumcision. Can this be admitted, 
 by any one acquainted with God's gracious dealings 
 with the church — that his covenant, so long con- 
 firmed by an appointed seal, has been deprived of it, 
 and left to operate without such an assistance to his 
 people's faith? How contrary would this be to all 
 former analogy! Did God make a covenant with our 
 
Children's Might to Baptism. 129 
 
 lirst parents? It was confirmed bj suitable seals: by 
 « the tree of Hfe,^' and «« the tree of knowledge of 
 good and evil.-*^ Did he make a covenant with 
 mankind and witli all flesh, that the earth sliould 
 never be again destroyed by a deluge? He appointed 
 his hoivinthe cloud as aeonfirming sign; that, when- 
 ever mankind beheld it arching the sky, tliey might 
 be reminded of his gracious promise, and be as- 
 sured of its faithfulness.! Did he make a covenant 
 with Abraham? It was confirmed by the rite of cir- 
 cumcision. Did he make a covenant with his peo- 
 ple Israel, at Mount Sinai? It was confirmed to 
 them by the blood of calves and of goats.ij: Has he 
 made a covenant of grace with his church? It was 
 confirmed, under the former economy, by appointed 
 signs; and, under tlie present, it is confirmed by bap- 
 tism and the Lord's supper. 
 
 Now, when we consider, that it has been the uni- 
 form practice of the Most High in his dealings with 
 mankind, to annex to every covenant made with 
 them a confirming sign; can it be admitted, that he 
 has not substituted, in the place of circumcision, 
 abolished by the introduction of Christianity, a seal 
 to confirm his covenant with Abraham and his seed? 
 What reason could be assigned for such a strange 
 anomaly in divine procedure? Not the abolition of 
 visible signs and seals under the Christian dispensa- 
 tion: for baptism and the Lord's supper are both 
 visible signs; and, being signs, they must be seals. 
 
 * Geii. ii. 9, 16, ir. f (^eu. ix. 9—17. * Heb, ix. 18—20. 
 
loO LETTER IX. 
 
 The cup, used in the latter ordinance, is expresslj^ 
 called " the new testament in the Mood of 
 Christ;^'^ that is, a sign and seal of it: for, as the 
 emblem of his blood, it does in a figure what his 
 blood did injfacf,-ratify and seal the New Testament. 
 There are, then, two visible, confirming signs un- 
 der the present economy: and yet, as some say, the 
 covenant of Abraham has no seal! Strange indeed! 
 Who can believe it? 
 
 If this be fact, then has God put it out of the 
 power of his church to obey an express command 
 of his covenant: <• My covenant shall be in your 
 flesh for an everlasting covenant.''! Observe, it is 
 not said, Circumcision, but " My covenant,''* that 
 is, the tohen of it, " shall be in your flesh." Now, 
 as long as circumcision was in use, this command 
 made it the church's duty to circumcise her mem- 
 bers. But circumcision has been abolished by po- 
 sitive precept. If, therefore, baptism be not the 
 covenant-token, obedience to this command, in re- 
 gard to children, is impossible. The covenant is 
 everlasting,* it exists under the present economy: 
 but the impression of it is not seen in the flesh of 
 God's people! But admit baptism to be the Christian 
 seal of it, and obedience to this explicit command 
 becomes practicable. The covenant of Jehovah ap- 
 pears still, in the flesh of his people, as an everlast- 
 ing covenant: they are impressed with its new token, 
 being washed with the water of baptism.^: 
 
 * 1 Cor. xi. 25. T See Witsius on the covenants, 
 
 t Gen, xvii. 13 vol. III. p. 3S5. 
 
Children- s Right to Baptism* 131 
 
 2. Baptism, in pact, seals the grand pro- 
 mise AND leading benefits OF THIS COVENANT, 
 AND IMPOSES THB VERY DUTIES AVHICH IT RE- 
 QUIRES. The administration of it is accompanied 
 with these solemn and significant words; <' I baptize 
 thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost J' What is the import of this sa- 
 cred form? "Here," a writer justly observes, "the 
 blessed God is revealed, under the Paternal name, 
 as the object of repentance and mercy; under the 
 Filial character, as the immediate object of confi- 
 dence for pardon, peace, and protection; under the 
 denomination of the Holy Spirit, as the object of 
 dependence for illumination, sauctification, and con- 
 solation.'*''^ Here God exhibits himself as recon- 
 ciling sinners to himself through Jesus Christ, his 
 Son. His language to every baptized person, is, I 
 will, according to the tenor of my covenant, be a 
 God to thee: for, surely, the exhibition which Jeho- 
 vah here makes of himself as the fountain of hap- 
 piness and source of pardoning mercy, is the same 
 as that which he makes of himself in the gospel; 
 and the promise, sealed by tliis rite, must be that 
 which is made known by the gospel. What is this 
 promise? "I will dwell in them, and walk in them; 
 and J will he their God, and they shall be ray peo- 
 ple. Wherefore come out from among them, and 
 be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the 
 unclean thing; and I will receive you; and will be a 
 
 * Booth, vol. II, p. 306. 
 
13^ LETTER IX. 
 
 / 
 
 Father unto you, and je shall be my sons and daugh- 
 ters, saith the Lord Almighty."^ It is plain, then, 
 from the obvious import of the saered form in which 
 it is administered, that baptism makes precisely the 
 same exhibition of God, which is made in the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, and seals the very promise which 
 it contains. 
 
 More particularly: Baptism signifies aud seals 
 the leading benefits of this covenant. Is union to 
 the church of God one of its benefits? Baptism is 
 connected with it: " Then they that gladly received 
 his word, were baptized: and the same day there 
 were added unto them (the church. Acts ii. 47) 
 about three thousand souls. '-| For by one Spirit 
 are we baptized into one bodij^ Avhether we be Jews 
 or GGnliles>::|: that is, externally into the visible 
 church, by water-baptism; ^nd spirituulhj ^ into the 
 mystical body of Christ, by the baptism cf the Holy 
 Ghost. Is the righteousness of faiih, or the for- 
 giveness of sins, a benefit o^this covenant? Baptism 
 is connected with it: <* Repent, and be baptized, 
 every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for 
 the remission of sins." Arise, and be baptized, and 
 wash away th^ sins, calling on the name of the 
 Lord."*§ Is sanctiiication a benefit of this covenant? 
 Baptism is connected with it: *« But according to 
 his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regenera- 
 tion, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.*'*^ Is tliG 
 
 * 2 Cor. vi. 16 — 18. f Acts ii. 41, 42. ^ 1 Cor. xii. 13. Rom. \i. 3. 
 § Acts ii. 58, and xxii. 16. ** Tit. iii. 5. 1 Pet. lii. 21. 
 
ehildren's Right to Baptism. 13S 
 
 gift of the Holy Spirit a benefit of this covenant? 
 Baptism is connected with it: ♦< Repent and be bap- 
 tized—and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy 
 Ghost.''^ \ 
 
 From these quotations, it appears, that the in* 
 spired writers have established a connexion between 
 baptism and the leading benefits of Abraham's co- 
 venant. But what is the nature of this connexion? 
 Unquestionably that which subsists between a bless- 
 ing and a sign; for baptism is a visible sign: and be- 
 ing a sign of these benefits, it must be a seal of them; 
 because a sign is given to confirm any promise or 
 grant to which it is applied. f 
 
 Let us consider the duties imposed by this sa- 
 cred rite of our holy religion. What are they? None 
 
 * Acts ii. 38. 
 
 •j- The last text quoted is followed by these memorable words; 
 '* For the promise is urito you, and to your children, and to all that 
 are afar off, even as many as the Lord oiir God shall call.'* In 
 explaining this passage, some maintain, that Peter i-efers to the 
 grand promise in Abraham's covenant, and, consequently, that an 
 immediate connexion is here established between this covenant and 
 baptism. But those who would destroy this connexion, so fatal to 
 their cause, contend that the apostle refers to the promise of the 
 Spirit. Let us grant what they demand; let us admit that Peter is 
 speaking of this promise: still the connexion between baptism and 
 Abraham's covenant, can be fairly demonstrated from this text, 
 because the promise recorded in Joel was included In that covenant, 
 and, when delivered by the prophet, was only a development of its 
 unsearchable riches. St. Paul, treating of this covenant, enume- 
 rates among the blessings of Abraham, the promise of the Spirit: 
 *'That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through 
 Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit 
 
 N 
 
iSi LETTER IX. 
 
 will deny the subject to be dedicated to that Su- 
 preme Being, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in 
 whose name he is baptized; and that baptism binds 
 upon him, in a most solemn manner, the great duties 
 of a living faith, repentance unfeigned, and new obe- 
 dience. Now, these are the Tery duties which the co- 
 venant, made with the father of the faithful, imposes 
 on every covenantee.! They were summarily stated, 
 in those emphatical words with which the Most High 
 introduced this memorable transaction: " Walk be- 
 foreme, andbe thou pevfect:^' and they are stated, by 
 a writer of the New Testament, in language equally 
 emphatical, and somewhat similar, as the known 
 obligation of baptism: " Know ye not, that so many 
 of us as were baptized into Christ, were baptized 
 into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by 
 baptism into deatli; that like as Christ was raised 
 up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even 
 so we also should w .vlk in neivness of life.^^\ 
 
 Now, can a doubt remain whether baptism 5s a 
 seal of Abraham's covenant? It seals its grand pro- 
 mise and leading benefits; and it imposes its great 
 duties. It must, therefore, be a seal to this cove- 
 nant. 
 
 3. We are taught hy an inspired instructer, that 
 baptism has come in place of circumcision: 
 
 through faith.* Baptism, then, heing connected with this promise, 
 must necessarily be connected with the covenant to which the pro- 
 mise belongs. 
 
 * Gftl. iii. 14, 
 t See Letter VH. * Rom. vi. 6, 4^ 
 
Children's Bight to Baptism, 135 
 
 In whom also ye arc circumcised icith the circumci- 
 sion made without hands, in jniiiing off the body of 
 the sins of the jiesh, by the circumcision of 
 
 CHRIST; BURIED >VITH HIM IN BAPTISM, ivhcreiu 
 
 also ye are risen with him through the faith of the 
 operation of God, who hath raised him from the 
 dead.* 
 
 That we may take a fair view of the evidence 
 contained in this text, it will be necessary to consi- 
 der the object and scope of the apostle's reasoning. 
 The Colossian converts were, like other primitive 
 believers, exposed to danger arising from two quar- 
 ters; the influence of Judaizing teachers, who cor- 
 rupted the simplicity of the gospel, by compounding 
 it with the law of Moses; and the influence of pro- 
 fessing Christians, who corrupted it, by mixing it 
 "with the tenets of Pagan philosophy. Hence, the 
 great object of Paul was to preserve their faith 
 unadulterated by the errors of either class of teach- 
 ers. To gain his object, he exhibits the Lord Jesus, 
 in all his mediatorial glories, as " the image of the 
 invisible God;" as the Creator of all things, visible 
 and invisible; as reconciling heaven and earth, by 
 the blood of his cross: and then assures them, that, 
 in so glorious a Mediator, in whom " dwells all the 
 fulness of the Godhead bodily," they were com- 
 plete; not needing the aid of those dependencies 
 which false teachers proposed, but which the gos- 
 pel, so far from recommending, discountenanced and 
 
 * Col. ii. 11, 12. 
 
4^3^ 3LETTER IX. 
 
 Goiide toned. And he particularly disproves the ihj 
 eessity of circumcision, an which the advocates of 
 Moses, so inueh and so earnestly, insisted; by show- 
 ing, jirst^ that they had the thing signified by cir- 
 tumeision: " In wliom ye also are circumcised,^' &c. 
 y. 11 — and, then, that the external rite, bajftism, is, 
 under the new, what circumcision was under the 
 ©Id, dispensation; namely, a sign and a seal of the 
 covenant: '^ Buried with him in haplism,'^ &c. v. 12. 
 Both parts were necessary to complete his argu- 
 ment, and make it conclusive. For had the apostle 
 only said, that believers in Christ have the thing 
 signified, the circumcision of the heart; the advo- 
 oates of Moses might have replied. Admitting this 
 truth, it does not, in the least, militate against the 
 outward rite, the sign of a work af grace in the 
 heart, Abraham was a gracious person, circum- 
 cised in heart, long before the institution of circum- 
 cision: and, if possession of the thing signified, by 
 the father of the faithful, did not supersede the use 
 of an external sign, how can it prove a sign to be 
 unnecessary to his children? This objection the 
 apostle anticipates; and he removes it, by showing, 
 tliat baptism now does the office of circumcision, 
 exhibiting and sealing the same covenant-benefits. 
 
 We find, in this text, a further confirmation of 
 the substitution of the Christian for the Jewish rite. 
 Baptism is denominated the circumcision of Christ. 
 That the inspired writer means by this phrase, 
 neither our Lord's j>ersonal circumcision, nor tht 
 
Children-s Right to Baptism, ±57 
 
 spiritual eircuracision of his disciples, but Christian 
 baptism, is evident from the twelfth verse, in which 
 he explains this to be the signification. I am aware, 
 that to this interpretation it may be objected: Bap- 
 tism is made by hands; and the apostle is speaking 
 of a circumcision made without hands. But the 
 force of the objection will be dissipated, if it be con- 
 sidered that he speaks, first, of the thing signijied, 
 a work of grace on the heart, denominated ^' cir- 
 cumcision made without hands;" and, then, of the 
 sign of this work, which he terms. The circumci- 
 sion of Christ, 
 
 This passage is similar to one in Peter. Speak- 
 of the ark, he says, " The like figure whereunto 
 even baptism doth also now save us, (not the putting 
 away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a 
 good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection 
 of Jesus Christ." Here baptism is considered as 
 instrumental in effecting the answer of a good con- 
 science; which is as much a work made without 
 hands, as spiritual circumcision, **the putting off 
 the body of the sins of the flesh." In the text un- 
 der discussion, baptism is presented in the same 
 light; as instrumental in producing the circumcision 
 of the heart. 
 
 This passage may be paraphrased thus: *' In 
 whom," that is, Christ, to whom you are united by 
 faiih, <»ye are circumcised with the" spiritual "cir- 
 cumcision" of the heart, *• made without hands," by 
 the grace of God, which consists '* in putting off* the 
 n2 
 
±SS LETTER IX. 
 
 body of the sins of the flcsli:" aud this spiritual 
 work, although wrought by the immediate agency 
 of God's Holy Spirit, yet is instrumentally effeeted 
 hy that external ordinance which exltihits and seals 
 this benefit of the covenant; and which, being in 
 import the same with the Jewish rite, may very 
 properly be called, " The circumcision of Christ,'^ 
 I mean the ordinance of baptism, in which you 
 were <* buried with him, and wherein also ye are 
 risen with him through the faith of the operation of 
 aod,'' &c. 
 
 i. Baptism must be a seal ot Abraham's co- 
 venant, BECAUSE IT IS A SEAX OF THE COVENANT 
 
 or GRACE. To prove baptism to be a seal of the 
 latter, I refer you to those texts quoted in page 132, 
 to evince that it signifies and seals union to the 
 church, the righteousness of faith, sanctification, 
 and the gift of the Holy Ghost; acknowledged bene- 
 fits of the covenant of grace. Now,, if this Chris- 
 tian* rite be a seal to these its leading^ benefits, i( 
 must be a seal of the covenant itself. 
 
 There h yet another passage of sacred scrip- 
 ture that strongly confirms this truth. It records; 
 the commission Avhich Jesus Christ gave to his apos- 
 tles:. <* Go ye, therefore, and teach (disciple) all na- 
 tions, baptizing them m the name of the Father, 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teacliing 
 them ta observe all tilings whatsoever I have com- 
 atandcd you." Here, baptism aiid teaching are 
 
Children* s Right to Baptism, ts^ 
 
 closely connected. Baptism is a sensible and visible 
 sign. Of what is it the sign? Unquestionably of 
 something exhibited and inculcated in the teaching 
 of these divinely commissioned instructcrs. AVhat 
 did they exhibit? The covenant of grace, and its glo- 
 rious benefits. These they held forth to the view of 
 mankind, as the astonishing result of the contri- 
 vance and love of the sacred three, in whose 
 name they baptized, displayed in man's redemption; 
 and these they pressed mankind to accept, by de- 
 claring how freely they were offered, and that the 
 vilest of our apostate race might make them hi& 
 own, by receiving them with a cordial faith: and ta 
 eoniirm their belief in the covenant, and encourage 
 them to confide in the mercy, grace, and love of 
 God, they applied to believers that visible, confirm- 
 ing sign, appointed by the great Redeemer. What 
 did they inculcate? In general, obedience to that 
 Supreme Being, whose name is Father, Son, and 
 Holy Ghost; m particular, all the duties of the co- 
 venant of grace, as Ave find them specified, recom- 
 mended, and enforced in the gospel: and to bind 
 these upon the consciences of mankind, with the 
 greater solemnity and force, they applied to theiii 
 the appointed, visible, confirming sign* Thus, the 
 heavenly messengers baptized their converts, in token 
 of those benefits of the covenant of grace which theiji 
 exhibited f and of those duties of it which they incul- 
 cated*. 
 
140 LETTER IX. 
 
 Baptism, then, is a seal of the covenant of grace; 
 and, consequently, a seal of Abraham's coyenant: 
 because they are in substance the same.* 
 
 On the supposition of these being hvo covenants, 
 it may be objected, that, although baptism is a seal 
 of one, it cannot be, at the same time, a seal to 
 both. But the objection is unfounded; because, on 
 the very same ground, it might be contended, that 
 circumcision could not have been a seal both of the 
 Abrahamic, and of the Sinai-covenants: whereas it 
 is certain, from scripture testimony, that it did, in 
 fact, perform this twofold office. And if circum- 
 cision sealed two covenants, so widely different, why 
 may not baptism seal two, suhstantially the same; 
 especially when it is considered, that the church is 
 now placed under the operation of both? 
 
 Let me, my brethren, recall to your recollection 
 the important points established in the two last, and 
 in a preceding letter,| and present to your view 
 their combined evidence. 
 
 It has been proved, 
 
 1. That children have an interest in Abraham's 
 covenant: 
 
 2. That children are members of Christ's church: 
 and 
 
 3. That baptism is a seal of this covenant, and 
 a token of church-membership. 
 
 Now, from these premises, the conclusion fol- 
 lows, with the evidence of a demonstration, That 
 children have a divine rigut to baptism. 
 
 * See Letter VU. page 109—115. f Letter VL 
 
CIdldven's Might fo Baplism. 1*1 
 
 Jfere is Ihe foundation on which >ve place lliis 
 j^reat truth, so precious to those who understand 
 the nature of that all-gracious covenant, which, 
 from the day of its estahlishnient, with our father 
 Ahrahani, has looked, with benignant smiles, upon 
 the offspring of God's people. A truth, not to be 
 overturned by petty objections, springing fi'om con- 
 tracted views of Jehovali's dispensations towards 
 his church. A^'Iiile the foundation remains, the 
 building is secure. For, to allow the premises, and 
 deny the conclusion; to admit the covenant-interest, 
 and church-membership of children, and dispute 
 their right to the token of the ane, and seal of the 
 other; would hjB utterly inconsistent. These things 
 are inseparably connected, and must exist or perish 
 together: and, before children can be deprived of 
 their right to baptism, it must be proved, that God 
 has excluded them from his church, and cast them 
 out of his covenant. But to prove this, it may, I 
 think, in view of the evidence submitted in these 
 letters, be, without presumption, pronounced, not 
 only impracticable, but impossihle. 
 
 I close this letter, by deducing from what has 
 been said, a few observations on the nature of bap- 
 tism. 
 
 In all cases, whether applied to adults, or to in- 
 fants, baptism is a seal of the covenant. It is wrong 
 to consider it on God's part, as sealing the recipi- 
 ent's faith, or, in other words, as certifying him 
 that be is a true Ijelieyer. The ordinance may m- 
 
14^ BETTER IX. 
 
 divedhf serve to strengthen a person's persuasioa 
 that he has a true faith, hy proving the means of 
 exciting this grace into more vigorous exercise: but, 
 then, let it be observed, liis evidence is derived, not 
 from the ordinance, but from the spiritual exercises 
 of his own heart. He concludes himself to be a be- 
 liever, not because he has been baptized, but be- 
 cause he feels in himself, the holy workings of a 
 living faith. Baptism was not given by our Lord to 
 his church to be a seal of faith in any. The question 
 whether we are believers or not, must be decided by 
 other evidence. He gave baptism simply as a seal 
 of his covenant; both to assure us of the faithful- 
 ness of his promises, and to impress, the more deeply 
 on our hearts, a sense of the duties which we owe 
 to our covenant-God. 
 
 Hence we see, that, in all cases, baptism seals 
 the truth. It can never be affixed to a falsehood; 
 because it is always affixed to Jehovah's covenant, 
 which contains nothing but truth. Viewed in this, 
 its proper, light, we feel no difficulty in explaining 
 its import. It certifies the subject, that he is in 
 covenant with God; that he is a member of the vi- 
 sible church; that Jehovah will certainly fulfil his 
 covenant-engagements. It certifies, that covenant- 
 obligations are on the person baptized; that he is 
 bound to repent of his sins, believe in Christ, and 
 walk uprightly before God: and it certifies, that if 
 he, by the aids of divine grace, fulfil these duties, 
 Jehovah will certainly be his God, in the highest 
 
Vhildren^s Bight to Bnptisiiu 143 
 
 sense of his promise; by forj^iving liis sins, justifying 
 him freely thioiigh the righteousness of Christ, 
 sanctifying him by his Spirit, and finally receiving 
 him to glory. All this it certifies; because all this 
 is included in that covenant >vhich it, as a seal, 
 confirms. 
 
 But, it may be asked, Did not Abraham receive 
 circumcision as a seal of the righteousness of faith? 
 Did it not certify him, that he Avas a justified per- 
 son and a true believer? The apostle's phrase to 
 which these questions refer, seems to be greatly 
 misunderstood by some. The sacred ^vriter, I ap- 
 prehend, does not intend to teach us, that circum- 
 cision was given to the patriarch as a seal of his 
 faUhi and as such to certify him directly that he 
 was a true believer: for, you will observe, he does 
 not say, he received it as a seal of his faith, but 
 he received it as a seal of the righteousivess of the 
 faith ivhich he had. Between these forms of ex- 
 pression, there is a manifest ditterence. 
 
 If we recur to Moses' account of the original 
 institution of circumcision, we shall find not the 
 slightest intimation given that it was proposed to 
 the patriarch as a stal of his faith. It was pre- 
 sented to him simply as a seal of the covenant then 
 made with him: *' It shall be a token,'' says God, 
 «< of the covenant hclwixt me and thee,'' The trans- 
 action of that memorable day, no doubt, served to 
 confirm Abraham In the persuasion ol" his being a 
 true believer, lie was then taken into a covenant 
 
14i LETTER IX. 
 
 with Almighty God, formally made and ratified by 
 a visible sign; and, in that covenant, he was consti- 
 tuted father of an innumerable spiritual seed, for 
 the great purpose of transmitting to them the bless- 
 ings of salvation. Such was the honour conferred 
 upon him. From these distinguishing favours of 
 Jehovah, he might, and certainly did, derive addi- 
 tional assurance of his having the grace of faith, and 
 consequent reconciliation with God. But of this 
 fact, which might be thus inferred, circumcision 
 was not intended to be the seal. 
 
 How, then, it may be asked, was this sign to 
 Abraham, ** a seal of the righteousness of the faith 
 which he had?*' The question has already been an- 
 swered. It sealed the hlessing to him, by sealing 
 the covenant which contained it. This covenant ex- 
 hibited, among other benefits, the righteousness of 
 faith, or, in other words, justification by faith in 
 the righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ: it en- 
 gaged, that Abraham and all true believers should 
 be made righteous, by this glorious righteousness 
 of Christ, received by faith. This truth, this be- 
 nefit, this covenant-engagement, circumcision sealed: 
 and, thus, it was to Abraham ** a seal of the right- 
 eousness of the failh which he had." 
 
 This construction of the apostlc*s phrase, evi- 
 dently accords with the scope of his reasoning in 
 the context. He is proving the great doctrine of 
 justification by faith, without works. In confirma- 
 tion of it, he adduces the case of Abraham, and 
 
ChiUren^s Bight to Baptism, 145 
 
 shows that he was justified in this way: and to evince 
 that the benefit of justification did not belong ex- 
 clusively to his natural descendants, he shows that 
 Abraham had received it when uncircumcised, and 
 that circumcision was given to him, not to intro- 
 duce a new, but to confirm the old, method of sal- 
 vation: *< for the promise," or covenant', which cir- 
 cumcision sealed, " that he should be the heir of 
 the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, 
 through the law, but through the righteousness 
 
 OF FAITH."* 
 
 Hence, it appears that the import of circumci- 
 sion was to Abraham and to his seed tlie same: be- 
 ing to both a token of the covenant, a seal of all its 
 engagements and ohligations, and especially a seal 
 of the great docirine or promise of justification hij 
 faith, or, to use the apostle's words, by the right- 
 eonsness of faith,^' It exhibited to all this great 
 blessing: it certified all, that God Mould justify 
 every true believer througli the merits of Christ. 
 
 Baptism, being substituted for circumcision, ex- 
 hibits the same bU'ssing; it certifies the same truth; 
 it confirms the same covenant-engagements and ob- 
 ligations: it is a seal of the righteousness of faith 
 to every baptized person. 
 
 We, therefore, repeat it: In no case can baptism, 
 considered as God's seal, be a seal to a falsehood. 
 It may be erroneously applied; it may be adminis- 
 
 * Rom. iv. 13. See page 74. 
 
146 liETTER X. 
 
 tered, through mistake, to persons not entided to it: 
 but it always seals the truth; because it is always 
 the seal of God's covenant, the engagements and 
 promises of which are ** true and righteous alto- 
 gether." 
 
 Viewing baptism in this light, it is evident that 
 no objection against its application to infants, can 
 be derived from the nature of the truth and promi- 
 ses which it certilies. 
 
 The language of this Christian rite is the same 
 to every recipient, whether adult or infant: Jeho- 
 yah justifies, through the merits of his Son, every 
 true believer, and becomes to him a God in the su- 
 bliniest sense of his covenant-promise. 
 
 LETTER X. 
 
 Objections answered. 1. Incapacity of chil- 
 dren. — 2, Silence of the JV'eic? Testament. — 
 3. Source of proof remote. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 In the course of our discussion, several im- 
 portant objections have been answered. There arc 
 others on which great dependence is placed, by those 
 who controvert the right of infants, and condemn the 
 
Objections Answered, 147 
 
 application of baptism to them as an unscriptural 
 practice. Tlie principal of these will now be ex- 
 amined. 
 
 1. An objection, of a plausible nature, is derived 
 from the incapacity of children to act in this ordi- 
 nance. * Infants,' say our opponents, * cannot repent, 
 nor exercise faith; how absurd, then, to apply to 
 them a rite which requires the performance of these 
 sacred duties?' 
 
 Wereply, that if, on account of the incapacity 
 of infants, their baptism is absurd, for the same 
 reason their circumcision must have been absurd; 
 because the former is now the token of that very 
 covenant, and the seal of those very duties, which 
 the latierf while in use, signified and sealed. The 
 incapacity of infants under the Jewish economy, 
 was the same as under the Christian dispensation. 
 No one will pretend that they could perform duties 
 thetif for which they are incompetent now. Are our 
 tender offspring unconscious of what is done to 
 them, when we dedicate tliem to God in baptism? 
 Equally unconscious were Jewish infants, when de- 
 dicated to him by circumcision. Are our children 
 unable to accept of covenant-mercy? So were Jew- 
 ish children. Are our infants incapable of perform- 
 ing the great duties of repentance, faith, and new 
 obedience, imposed by the covenant, and confirmed 
 by baptism? Circumcised infants were under the 
 same obligations, and as incapable of doing these 
 momentous duties. We, therefore, conclude, that, 
 
144 JiETTER X. 
 
 if the circumcision of children was not absurd, then 
 their baptism is not absurd; and that, if the appli- 
 cation of the ancient covenant-token to them, was 
 a reasonable service, then the application of the 
 new covenant-token must be a reasonable service. 
 
 " But," it will be said, " faith is required in or- 
 der to baptism." This we admit to be true with re- 
 gard to adults; but we deny it with respect to in- 
 fants. The rule for applying the covenant-token, 
 is the same under the Christian, as it was under the 
 Jewish, dispensation. Faith is now the door by 
 which the heathen enter into Abraham's covenant; 
 and, as this covenant is precisely what it ever was, 
 faith must always have been the door of admission 
 to adults.^ Of adults, then, faith was required in 
 order to circumcision: but was this qualification re- 
 quired, under the Jewish economy, from infants in 
 order to their being ranked among the patriarch's 
 seed? Every body acquainted with the subject knows 
 and admits, that it was not; and that they entered 
 with their parents into the church of God, and re- 
 ceived the sign of circumcision. Why, then, should 
 we exact from infants ^ow, what was not formerly 
 exacted? Why refuse to apply to them baptismal 
 water, because they are incapable of performing an 
 act, which is demanded, not from them, but from 
 adults, as a prerequisite to the reception of this 
 Christian rite? 
 
 * See Witsins concerning proselytes, p. 3G3, vol. ili. 
 
Objections Jlnsivered. 149 
 
 This is perfectly tenable. But in order to sup- 
 port our conclusion with still greater evidence, let 
 us take ground which Done can dispute. It is ad- 
 mitted, that before an adult heathen could be cir- 
 cumcised and received into the Jewish church, it 
 was required of him to renounce idolatry, and pro- 
 fess himself a worshipper of the God of Israel. 
 Less than this, all must confess, could not have 
 been exacted, with any consistency with the nature 
 of Abraham's covenant. But were Gentile-children 
 capable of making this renunciation, and this pro- 
 fession? or were these demanded from them as pre- 
 requisites to an interest in the covenant, and union 
 with the church? To assert the latter would be 
 grossly false; and to maintain the former would be 
 an offence against common sense. Here, then, is 
 decisive evidence that, under the Jewish dispensa- 
 tion, something was demanded of adults as indis- 
 pensably necessary to the reception of circumcision, 
 when nothing was required of infants to entitle them 
 to it, except the covenant-right of their parents. 
 Thus stands the matter under the Christian econo- 
 my. Faith in Jesus Christ is necessary to give an 
 adult a just claim to baptism; but it were absurd to 
 exact this from new-born children. They now ac- 
 quire a right to the token of the covenant, just as 
 they did formerly, — through their parents. And it 
 is as unjust to demand from them faith, as a neces- 
 sary qualification for this Christian rite, because it 
 is required as such from adultsj as it would have 
 
 o 2 
 
150 LETTEK X. 
 
 been/iii the Jewish church, to refuse to circumcise 
 them, until they made a renunciation of idolatry,, 
 and a profession of being worshippers of Jehovah, 
 because these were the requisite qualifications in 
 their parents. 
 
 The very passage on which our opponents take 
 their stand, furnishes additional proof in favour of 
 our position. The text is this: " He that helieroethf 
 and is haptixed, shall he saved; hut he that helieveth 
 not shall he damned,^'^ Here, say they, faith is 
 demanded as a necessary prerequisite to baptism. 
 But how do they prove this round assertion? The 
 passage itself does not say, that haptism shall he ap- 
 plied to none hut helievers; but only, *< He that he- 
 lieveth, and is haptizedf shall he saved,^' Tlie differ- 
 ence between these two forms of expression, is great 
 and manifest. How, then, I repeat it, do our oppo- 
 nents attempt to prove their position? By inference! 
 In this text mention is made, first, o^ faith, and then, 
 of haptism; the latter, in the order of arrangement, 
 following the former: hence, tliey conclude, that 
 baptism in the administration, should always follow 
 faith in the recipient. TIius, in laying down one 
 rule, they are compelled to violate another, and a 
 favourite too, that it is not lawful to reason on the 
 subject of a positive ordinance! But, granting them 
 the liberty of reasoning, although they deny it to 
 us, let us try the soundness of the rule deduced from 
 this text. 
 
 * Mark xvl. 16. 
 
Ohjections Ansxvered. 1 51 
 
 Look again, my brethren, at the passage, and 
 you will see believing standing before, not only bap- 
 tism, but also salvation. If, therefore, it be cor- 
 rect to conclude, from this arrangement, that none 
 may be baptized but those >vho believe; it must 
 likewise be correct, for the same reason, to con- 
 clude, that none can be saved but tliose who believe. 
 What, then, becomes of all who die in infancy? They 
 cannot exercise faith. Are they lost? 
 
 Read once more this text, and you will see bap- 
 tism placed, in order, before salvation. It follows, 
 therefore, according to the reasoning of our oppo- 
 nents, that none can be saved, unless they be bap- 
 tized. Then all belonging to that society of Chris- 
 tians who renounce baptism, perish! i^nd faith itself 
 cannot save them! And what is still more deplora- 
 ble, this reasoning will prove fatal to the mass of 
 professing Christians; for they are unbaptizcd, if 
 immersion be, as our brethren say, the only valid 
 mode of administering this sacred rite! What con- 
 sequences, fairly deducible from the principle, on 
 which the rule we combat is founded! 
 
 You will not, my brethren, imagine that T can, 
 for a moment, believe, that our opponents carry their 
 principle so far, as to adopt these consequences as 
 articles of their creed. My object has been to prove 
 the rule, which is connected with such terrible re- 
 sults, to be erroneous and absurd. In fact, merely 
 from the order in which the particulars, in this text, 
 are distributed, we cannot, with certainty, conclude 
 
152 iETTEU X. 
 
 even that faith is a requisite qualification for adult 
 baptism. This we learn from other parts of holy 
 scripture. 
 
 Further: Let it be observed, that the very ad- 
 vocates of this rule are compelled to depart from 
 the literal meaning of the passage on which it is 
 founded. Why do they baptize an adult person? 
 Because they know him to be a true believer? This, 
 it is impossible for tliem to know with certainty, 
 without an immediate revelation from heaven. God 
 alone can search the heart. Tliey, as the apostles 
 of our Lord did, must administer the ordinance on 
 a credible profession of faith: and, hence, as the 
 apostles, they are liable to be deceived by a false 
 profession. Alas! how many lamentable proofs have 
 occurred among that, as well as other denomina- 
 tions, to show how easy it is for dishonest men to 
 impose on the ministers of Christ! It is absolutely 
 necessary to accept of a credible profession of faith, 
 as sufficient to entitle to baptism^ because if this 
 were rejected, and certain evidence of grace re- 
 quired, the ordinance would never be administered; 
 owing to the utter incapacity of mortals to discover 
 such evidence, and act under such a rule. From 
 the nature of the case, we and others are compelled 
 to judge of the state of applicants for baptism by 
 external evidence; and to admit them to it, on a 
 profession of religion supported by a consistent con- 
 duct. This is our rule; and it a gox)d and scriptural 
 rule. 
 
Objections Ansxvercd. 153 
 
 But observe, my brethren, the text under consi- 
 deration speaks, not o^ o. prof ess ion of faith, but of 
 real faith. It does not say, He that professes to 
 believe, but he that beliereth, and is baptized, shall 
 be saved. Evidently, then, our opponents depart, 
 in administering baptism, from the literal sense of 
 this passage, on wJiich they ground a rule to ex- 
 clude infants from an important privilege. And 
 Avhat is still more remarkable, they take this liberty 
 ^ith a text, which, in reference to adults and their 
 salvation, will admit of no deviation from its strict 
 and proper meaning: for it is certain, that, although 
 a profession of faith is, and must necessarily be, 
 accepted, as sufficient to entitle a person, in the 
 view of man, to baptism, yet nothing less than a 
 real and living faith can save his soul. It will not, 
 however, follow, that, in reference to this ordi- 
 nance, we are to interpret the text in the same ri- 
 gorous way, as if baptism were absolutely necessary 
 to salvation; because our Saviour himself guards 
 against this construction, by leaving out mention of 
 baptism in the close: " He that believeth not shall 
 be damned.'^ 
 
 On the whole, from this passage, as already 
 intimated, no general rule, in respect to qualifica- 
 tions for baptism, to direct the conduct of those who 
 administer it, can be deduced. We can only infer, 
 that, as our Lord has spoken of this ordinance in 
 such solemn connexion with faith and salvation, 
 none should venture to make light of it; but all 
 
154 LETTER X. 
 
 should seek the application of it to themselves ia a 
 due and scriptural manner. 
 
 To set the matter in clearer light, it may be ob- 
 served, that before the abolition of circumcision, it 
 might, with truth and propriety, have been said, 
 " He that believeth," and is circumcised, *< shall be 
 saved." But would this mode of expression have 
 established it as a rule, that infants were not to be 
 impressed with the covenant-sign, or that adminis- 
 trators of it could not act, unless they certainly 
 kn»w the intended subject to be a true believer? 
 Unquestionably not. Such a declaration would have 
 produced no alteration in existing rules relative to 
 circumcision. To learn, therefore, our Lord's will 
 in regard to the application of baptism, we must 
 consult other passages of his statute-book, and the 
 conduct of his apostles, in connexion with the uni- 
 form practice of his church, under the ancient eco- 
 nomy, in applying the token of his covenant. 
 
 Finally: In reply to this objection, it may be 
 justly observed, that it is, not only unfounded, but 
 rash; because, as we have seen, it applies with 
 equal force against infant circumcision which was 
 expressly ordered by iufinite wisdom. Indeed, if 
 the principle on which it depends, were correct, it 
 would deprive children of membership in all other 
 societies, as well as of fellowship in the church of 
 God. Duties certainly result from the relations, 
 which members of a family and members of a civil 
 community, sustain to each other; duties, which in- 
 
Ohjeetions Anstvered, 153 
 
 fants are as incapable of performing;, as they are thai 
 of faith: and, therefore, it will follow that, if, on 
 account of their incapacity to do this great duty, 
 they cannot be received as members of the church, 
 nor be impressed with the sign of its fellowship; 
 they ought not to be accounted members of any so- 
 ciety, the general duties of which they are unable 
 to perform. IIow absurd would this be! Infants, 
 the moment they come into the world, are members 
 of a family, and citizens of a commonwealth, as 
 really as adult persons: and although, for the pre- 
 sent, th(^y can make no return in gratitude, or in 
 doing any other duty, yet they have an indisputable 
 claim to the guardian care and watchful protection 
 of both societies, natural and civil. In like man- 
 ner, infants are, from their birth, members of the 
 church, and entitled to baptism, the appointed to- 
 ken of her fellowship. This objection, then, is ut- 
 terly groundless. 
 
 2. An objection against infant baptism, is drawn 
 from the supposed silence of the New Testament on 
 the subject. Taking this fact for granted, it is 
 asked, «< If children have a right to be admitted to 
 baptism, why do we not find it expressly recognised 
 in the inspired writings? Surely, their admission 
 must be unwarrantable, until it can be justified by 
 some proof that the practice prevailed in apostolic 
 ehurches. 
 
 In reply to this objection, we contend that, if 
 the Ne^*^ Testament be silent w ith respect to infant 
 
156 LETTER X. 
 
 baptism, this silence makes in favour of our senti- 
 ment and practice. Let it be recollected, that chil- 
 dren were, by express direction of the Most High, 
 admitted members of his church, and had applied 
 to them the token of his covenant, to seal the rela- 
 tions which they sustained to him, and to his peo- 
 ple: let it be recollected, that they continued to en- 
 joy this distinguishing privilege, from the time of 
 Abraham to that of our Lord, none venturing to 
 call in question a right so explicitly granted to them 
 by divine authority: and let it be also recollected, 
 that when a Pagan became a convert to the Jewish 
 religion, both he and his children were circumcised 
 in token of their being in covenant with God, and 
 members of his church. Now, it must be conceded, 
 that no human power was competent to deprive 
 children of their covenunt-privilege; and that, if it 
 have not been revoked by our Sovereign Lord, from 
 whom it was received, it must remain in iheir pos- 
 session as an inalienable inheritance. Has he de- 
 clared such a revocation? Search the Bible, from 
 beginning to end, and you will not find a single pas- 
 sage, certifying it to his church to be his will, that 
 children should no longer sustain their ancient co- 
 venant-relation to his Divine Majesty. 
 
 AVe are required to produce an express command 
 for the baptism of infants. This demand we con- 
 tend to be highly unreasonable: and, with great pro- 
 priety, retorting it upon our opponents, gay to ihem. 
 Produce you an expreiss command for casting infants 
 
Objections JlnswereiL 157 
 
 ©ut of the cliurcli, and denying them baptism. For 
 we take it to he a position which cannot be fairly 
 refuted. That, unless our Supreme Lord have plain- 
 ly signified it to be his will, it would be unjust to 
 children, as well as presumptuous opposition to es- 
 tablished order in our Master's house, to deprive 
 them of their chartered right, and expel them from 
 his family. How unreasonable, then, to maintain 
 the silence of the New Testament to be a sufficient 
 warrant, for taking away from them an important 
 privilege, enjoyed through a long succession of ages! 
 Material changes have been made in God's go- 
 vernment over his church, and in the prescribed 
 forms of her worship. The Sinai-covenant has pas- 
 sed away, and circumcision been abolished. How 
 were these alterations effected? How was Jehovah's 
 will, relative to these important points, made known 
 to his church? ^yihe silence of the New Testament? 
 By no means. He has signified his pleasure plainly 
 and fully. Circumcision was abolished by positive 
 I)recept; and, although intimations had been given 
 in the Old Testament, that the Levitical priesthood, 
 and the whole economy established by the Sinai-co- 
 venant, were of a temporary nature, and designed 
 to last only till they ushered into the world the great 
 High Priest of our profession, and introduced his 
 better dispensation; yet the church was not left to 
 educe the truth from these intimations: An inspired 
 apostle was directed to collect the evidence, and, by 
 his authority, to render the conclusion resulting 
 
158 LETTER X. 
 
 from it certain. So plainly has our Lord revealed 
 his will on these points. Dare we, then, depr.ve 
 children of their ancient inheritance, without a de- 
 claration of his will equally plain and express? Who 
 can helieve the silence of the New Testament, with 
 respect to their haptism, to he sufficient to autho- 
 rize the conclusion, that our Master has taken from 
 them a privilege granted by himself, and enjoyed by 
 them during many ages? 
 
 *«But the apostles," it maybe said, <« taught 
 the church, that children were no longer to be re- 
 cognised as her members." Where is the proof? 
 Is this, too, found in the silence of the New Testa- 
 ment? The Mosaic economy was vacated by express 
 precept; yet how hard Wtis it to divorce the hearts 
 of Jewish converts from it, although a yoke which 
 they could not bear. W hat a noise the change ex- 
 cited! How obstinately did the prejudices of educa- 
 tion rise in opposition to apostolic authority! Cir- 
 cumcision was abolished; but what a length of time 
 was required to wean Jewish converts from this 
 painful rite! and how had the apostles to exert their 
 authority to prevent the imposition of it on Gentile- 
 Christians! But, with respect to the disfranchise- 
 ment of children, no difficulty was experienced. 
 The Jews, who had been long accustomed to see 
 them impressed with the seal of God's covenant, 
 numbered among his people, and regarded as mem- 
 bers of his church; saw them deprived of their fair- 
 est inheritance, refused the sign of the covenant^ 
 
Objections Answered. 159 
 
 and treated as strangers to it, and aliens from the 
 eonmioiiwealtli of Israel, without murmuiing, and 
 without feeling a shock given to their prejudices! 
 So easily was this great revolution in the church 
 effected; a revolution in opposition to parental af- 
 fection, and the tenderest feelings of the human 
 heart! So easily, that it w as unnecessary for the 
 apostles to record a single word on the abolition of 
 children's covenant-privileges! They met with vio- 
 lent and lasting opposition in setting aside the rites 
 of Moses, and the use of circumcision; so that they 
 had to declare, explicitly and often, Jehovah's will 
 on these subjects; hut, with respect to cutting oft* 
 children from the people of God, and denying them 
 the privilege of baptism, they found prejudices fos- 
 tered by education and daily practice, prejudices 
 that founded themselves on divine authority; so pli- 
 ant, so yielding, as to render it unnecessary to guard 
 the church, by a written document, against suppo- 
 sing that children were to be treated under the 
 Christian economy, as they had been under the Jew- 
 ish, and to continue in the enjoyment of their an- 
 cient privileges! The silence of the New Testament, 
 (if it be silent,) with respect to infant-baptism, 
 makes, it is evident, strongly in favour of our sen- 
 timent and practice; and justifies us in sealing with 
 this ordinance the children of believing parents, as 
 members of the Christian church. 
 
 Thus far, I have reasoned on the supposition of 
 tins objection being founded on fact. I shall new 
 
160 I»ETTER X. 
 
 endeavour to show, that the New Testament is B«t 
 silent with respect to infant-baptism, and, conse- 
 quently, that the objection is entirely groundless. 
 We are ready to concede, no passage can be produ- 
 ced from the inspired writers, saying, in so many 
 words. Baptize infants as well as adults. But be- 
 cause this, or a like form of words, is not used by 
 them, shall we conclude they are entirely silent on 
 the subject; and, because our heavenly Lawgiver 
 has not chosen to employ terms which human wis- 
 dom might dictate, he has not signified his will with 
 respect to the privileges of children under the 
 Christian dispensation? This would be most unrea- 
 sonable and unwarrantable. For, certainly, he has 
 more ways than one in which to communicate his 
 sovereign pleasure; and it is our duty, as obedient 
 subjects, to endeavour to learn his will, however 
 made known; and to obey it when revealed in one 
 form, as well as when revealed in another. 
 
 Suppose a king were, by a particular instrument 
 of writing, to declare who should be acknowledged 
 as citizens of a distant province, and to set up a 
 certain form of government over them; suppose this 
 king, many years after, should be induced, from 
 kind regard to his subjects, and with a view to their 
 benefit, to change the form of his government; and 
 suppose that, at the same time, he should declare 
 the instrument relative to citizenship to be unre- 
 pealed: would it not be false in any to pretend, that 
 kis majesty was silent with respect to a cei^tain 
 
Objections tlnswered. 161 
 
 class of citizens under his former goyernment? 
 Would not all reasonable persons admit the will of 
 their sovereign to be signified with sufficient clear- 
 ness, to determine that no class of his subjects was 
 disfranchised, and that no alteration with respect 
 to citizenship was effected, by the change of his 
 government? 
 
 The glorious King of Zion has done all this. In 
 this w ay has he made known his pleasure in regard 
 to children. The covenant of Abraham is the in- 
 strument declaring the right of citizenship, and as- 
 certaining who should be considered as members of 
 God's church. The Mosaic economy was the go- 
 vernment once set up by his authority over this dis- 
 tant province of his universal empire; which, after 
 continuing many ages, was exchanged for the Chris- 
 tian dispensation; a new and better form of govern- 
 ment, designed, not to abridge, but to increase the 
 privileges and happiness of his subjects. To secure 
 the rights of every class of his citizens, and prevent 
 the Exclusion of infants from his church, our sove- 
 reign Lord has taught us expressly that the Abra- 
 hamic constitution is still in force, and that, in this 
 covenant, his servant was constitoted father of all 
 the faithful, Gentiles as well as Jews. Moreover, 
 we are informed in sacred writ, that baptism has 
 come in place of circumcision, and is the Christian 
 seal of that very covenant in which children had, 
 from the beginning, and still have, an interest. We 
 conclude, therefore, that the New Testament is not 
 
 P2 
 
t€2 LETTER X. 
 
 silent with respect to infant baptism. Much addi- 
 tional evidence, in favour of this conclusion, will 
 appear, when we come to reply to the objection, 
 that the apostolic writings contain neither express 
 mention of children having been baptized by the 
 founders of the Christian church, nor any positive 
 precept enjoining their baptism. But, previously 
 to taking up tliat objection, we choose to answer an 
 intermediate one. — It is objected, 
 
 2. <«That the source of our proof is remote. 
 Why go, say our opponents, to the Old, to learn 
 how to apply an ordinance belonging to the New, 
 Testament? Can that application of it be correct, 
 the justification of which makes it necessary to tra- 
 vel as far back into past ages as the time of Abra- 
 ham?" 
 
 We reply, that the best foundation for the sup- 
 port of any truth, is that which is formed by first 
 principles. Aware of this, an inspired writer, treat- 
 ing of human depravity, contents not himself with 
 tollecting the proofs of his doctrine arising from 
 the actual state of mankind in his own day, but as- 
 cends to the beginning of the world; and there, in 
 Paradise, lays open the original source of the guilt 
 and sinfulness of our race, by showing that by one 
 man sin entered into the world, through the viola- 
 tion of that gracious covenant which the Almighty 
 condescended to make with Adam, our first parent, 
 as the federal head and representative of all his 
 posterity.* In confirmation of that fundamental 
 
 • Rom. V. 13—21. 
 
Objections tlnswered. 16S 
 
 doctrine of the gospel, jiistiiicatiou by faith without 
 works, the same sacred writer traces up the sub- 
 ject in debate to the time of Abraham, and esta- 
 blishes the invaluable truth by evincing, that this 
 patriarch, the friend or God, was justified in 
 this free and gracious manner.^ Now, it is pre- 
 sumed, no one who has due regard for apostolic au- 
 thority and inspired wisdom, will pretend that these 
 arguments have little or no weight, because they are 
 derived from sources so remote in regard to time. 
 
 The great apostle of the Gentiles Paul, that 
 correct reasoner, and divinely inspired teacher, has 
 set this example. We humbly endeavour to imitate 
 it. To establish the right of children to member- 
 ship in the church of God, we trace it up to that 
 memorable period, when it was solemnly granted to 
 them by her glorious Head: we show it to be a right 
 certainly enjoyed by them from the time of our fa- 
 ther Abraham; a right, not impaired, but rendered 
 venerable by the lapse of ages, and originally se- 
 cured to them by a perpetual and unchangeable co- 
 venant. And in doing so, we not only imitate the 
 apostle's method of reasoning in the cases just spe- 
 cified, but follow him in that very path which he 
 has marked out for us in regard to a part of our 
 subject. To evince that the blessing of Abraham 
 comes on Gentiles, through Jesus Christ, he, in his 
 epistle to the Galatians, proves the perpetuity of 
 the patriarch's covenant.f Here, then, we have an 
 
 * Rom. iv. 1—3. t Gal. iii. 13—18. 
 
164 LETTEJt X. 
 
 infallible guide. We have gone no farther than he 
 leads us. We have followed him to the patriarch's 
 day, when the grand constitution of the church was 
 formed, and the glorious charter of her privileges 
 granted: and, having ascertained that the member- 
 ship of children was then established, by an unal- 
 tered instrument, the pages of which time can never 
 efface; we justly conclude, no mortal power can de- 
 prive them of a blessing conferred by the IMost 
 High, and that they have a scriptural claim to bap- 
 tism, the Christian seal of the covenant. 
 
 We have more to say in answer to this objection. 
 It depends on a supposition of our having but little 
 to do with the Old Testament; a supposition, which 
 finds no countenance in the apostle's writings, and 
 is productive of errors of very injurious tendency. 
 Against such a sentiment, we enter our solemn pro- 
 test. What is the rule of faith and practice? The 
 New Testament only^ By no means. The scriptures 
 both of the Old and of the New Testaments, the 
 writings of the prophets, together with the writings 
 of the apostles, constitute this rule. The bible, 
 containing a divine revelation, delivered to the 
 ehurch by " holy men of God, who spake as they 
 were moved by the Holy Ghost," under both dis- 
 pensations, is the divine standard given to form our 
 sentiments, and to regulate our actions. Against 
 neglecting the first part of this heavenly volume, the 
 writers of the second have cautiously guarded, by 
 referring to it on various occasions;* not only t© 
 
Objections Answered, 165 
 
 prove the accomplishment of prophecies, and the 
 fulfilment of tvpes, but also to establish important 
 doctrines and duties. A promise r^'cordcd in the 
 Old, is as much an object of our faith, as a promise 
 recorded in the New, Testament: and laws of a ge- 
 neral nature published in the former, and not re- 
 pealed in the latter, retain all their oi'ij^inal autho- 
 rity. To endeavour, then, to diminish the respect 
 due to the oracles of divine truth contained in the 
 first part of our sacred volume, is extremely wrong: 
 and that opinion, which cannot be supported but by 
 such unhallowed means, must be false. 
 
 Further: The objection which we combat, is 
 grounded on another notion equally erroneous, — 
 that age lessens the authority of divine laws. The 
 obligations arising from statutes enacted by mortals, 
 whose breath is in their nostrils, time may affect: 
 it may at last render them obsolete, and deprive 
 them of all their power. But it were treating with 
 disrespect the majesty of Jehovah, whose nature 
 changes not, and whose authority is ever the same, 
 to imagine that the lapse of ages can impair the 
 obligation resulting from a law given hy him to his 
 creatures. They may neglect it, and forget it: but 
 he will neither forget it, nor sufter the violation of 
 it to go unpunished. In the records of heaven, it 
 is written with indelible characters. The moral 
 law, first published in Paradise, speaks to us, their 
 remote descendants, with as much authority as it 
 spoke to our original parents. The penal conse- 
 
166 LETTER X. 
 
 quences of breaking the covenant made with them, 
 run parallel witli time, and stain with guilt and pol- 
 lution everj child of Adam. Several times, indeed, 
 has the moral law been repeated, and new editions 
 of it given to the world; not, however, because its 
 obliga ion was weakened bv age, but because de- 
 praved man is so apt to forget the commandments 
 of God. 
 
 Finally: In regard to the particular law in ques- 
 tion, which ordained the application of the cove- 
 nant-seal to infants, let it be observed, that, being 
 in constant operation, it eould not be forgotten: and, 
 therefore, when circumcision was abolished and 
 succeeded by baptism, nothing more was necessary 
 to make known to the church the will of her Su- 
 preme Head, than for an inspired writer to prove 
 her ancient constitution unrepealed. 
 
LETTER XT. 
 
 ©BjECTioxs AxswEPvED. — 4. PosUhe pvecc'pt and 
 express example waliting-^l Cor, \ii. 14, ex- 
 pl allied — 5, JVo ohUgation arises from infant 
 haplism. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 Let lis resume tlie subject of our last, and pro- 
 secute, in this letter, our answer to objections. 
 
 4. Against the practice of infant-baptism, it is 
 objected, ** That the New Testament contains nei- 
 ther posiiire precept, nor express example, to war- 
 rant it." 
 
 In reply to this objection, it might be sufficient 
 to remark, that neither positive precept nor express 
 example can be found in the New Testament to jus- 
 tify the admission o{ femoles to participate in our 
 Lord^s Slipper. Yet, no one is extravagant enough 
 to contend, that they should be debari'cd from the 
 enjoyment of this pi'ccious ordinance. Believing in 
 Jesus Christ, women have the qualifications requi- 
 site to a worthy approach to his holy table: and, 
 therefore, they ought to be admitted to hold fellow- 
 ship with that divine Bedeemer whom they love, 
 and with his people of whom tliey constitute so 
 large apartj and, from their manifest right, we just- 
 
168 XETTER XI. 
 
 ly infer, notwithstanding the want of a particular 
 kind and degree of evidence, that the apostles did 
 not hinder their enjoyment of this important privi- 
 lege, hut freely admitted them to it. 
 
 I am aware that the opponents of infant bap- 
 tism attempt to make out a positive precept for 
 female communion. But the attempt is vain. The 
 whole process of their reasoning, affords demon- 
 strative proof that no such precept exists; because, 
 if it did, no reasoning would be required; it would 
 be sufficient to produce the precept, and let it speak 
 for itself. 
 
 Let us now^ take a different view of this objec- 
 tion. To what, my brethren, does it amount? To 
 nothing more than this: That God has not given as 
 much evidence, or the particular kind of evidence 
 which some wish, and others are unreasonable 
 enough to demand! But, surely this cannot prove, 
 that he has not afforded, in his holy word, evidence 
 which ought to convince us that infant haptism is an 
 appointment of his sovereign will. Jesus Christ, 
 ■says the infidel, did not, after his resurrection, show 
 himself to the Jewish people; but, can it be fairly 
 inferred from this fact, that he did not show him- 
 self to chosen witnesses, and satisfy them, by many 
 hvfalUble proofs, of his being indeed alive from the 
 dead? Miracles, say they again, are not wrought 
 in our day; but, is it a legitimate conclusion from 
 this fact, that miracles were never wrought; — that 
 tlie heavenly commission of Christ and his apostles, 
 
Ohjections Answered. 161> 
 
 was not attested " by signs and wonders, and by di- 
 vers miracles, and gifts of tlie Holy Ghost?" The 
 sacred scriptures are not accompanied with evidence 
 so irresistible, as to overpower all unbelief, and 
 compel the assent of all men to their divine origi- 
 nal: but, does it follow from this fact, that they are 
 not attended by evidence suflicient to convince every 
 candid and inquiring mind, and to leave every unbe- 
 liever without excuse? 
 
 On every subject in religion, the question should 
 be, not what evidence is not given, but what evi- 
 dence is given, and wliether it be satisfactory. Tak- 
 ing this rule for our guide, it appears highly im- 
 proper, first, to determine in our mind that the right 
 of infants to baptism ought to be supported by such 
 and such evidence; and, then, to conclude that they 
 have not a right to it, merely because the particular 
 kind and degree of evidence which we fancy, is not 
 found in sacred scripture. Our duty is, to receive 
 the truth in whatever way it may please God to 
 make it known: and, in regard to the question un- 
 der consideration, it is our manifest duty to collect 
 all the evidence contained in the great rule of our 
 faith and practice; and, if it be sufficient to deter- 
 mine the question in favour of children, to acknow- 
 ledge their rig!it; alihough unsupported by evidence 
 as strong as we could wish, or of that kind which 
 we should prefer: ever remembering, that it Mould 
 be presumptuous, in a high degree, to prescribe to 
 the Sovereign of the universe, whose infinite wisdom 
 
170 XETTER XI. 
 
 Jias adjusted the various parts of his revelation, as 
 uell as other things, so as most cflTeetualij' to sub- 
 serve the accomplishment of his own adorable pur- 
 poses. 
 
 On this correct and reasonable principle, we 
 have conducted our inquiry in regjard to the privi- 
 leges of children. Instead of determining what tne 
 holj scriptures ought to say, we have diligently en- 
 deavoured to learn what they do say, on this inte- 
 resting question. Far from prescribing to our au- 
 gust Sovereign how to make known his will, we 
 liave searched after the intimations of it with re- 
 spect to our beloved offspring. And what has been 
 the result of patient and humble investigation? We 
 have discovered, that, in the time of Abraham, the 
 Supreme Being gave to his people's children a seal- 
 ed interest in his covenant, which, beyond all dis- 
 pute, they continued to enjoy till our Saviour's ad- 
 vent; that this perpetual covenant secui'es to chil- 
 dren a special relation to the Most High, consti- 
 tuting them members of his church, under the 
 Christian, as it did under the Jewish dispensation; 
 and that baptism is now, what circumcision was jfor- 
 inerly, a seal to this covenant. These important 
 particulars are revealed with sufficient plainness; 
 and, in favour of them, we have seen our Lord, his 
 prophets and apostles, and the providence and Spi- 
 rit of God, all unite in bear ng testimony. On these 
 truths we have founded the conclusion, that chil- 
 dren have a divine right to baptism, the seal of 
 the covenant, and the token of church-felIo\^ship. 
 
Objections Answered. 171 
 
 While, therefore, we admit the New Testament 
 to contain neither positive precept, nor express ex- 
 ample in favour of our practice, we maintain con- 
 fidently, that our Sovereign Lord has signified his 
 will wiih sufficient plainness, to make it our duty 
 both to acknowledge the membership of infants in 
 his cliurcb, and to mark them with the seal of his 
 covenant, by washing them with baptismal water. 
 
 In replying to the second objection, it was shown 
 that the New Testament is not silent on this sub- 
 ject. We now intend to evince, that, although it 
 does not state, in direct terms, the baptism of in- 
 fants by the founders of the Christian church, yet 
 it does use such language as makes it highly proba- 
 ble they did baptize them. 
 
 The sacred historian informs us, that Lydia and 
 her household were baptized; — that the jailor was 
 baptized and all his straightway; and Paul tells us, 
 he baptized the household of Stephanas. =^ Is this 
 the language of antipoidobaptism? Were one op- 
 posed to the administration of this rite to infants to 
 baptize a whole family, would he not, in writing an 
 account of it, use language diiTerent from that of 
 tlie inspired penman, and speak of the recipients of 
 the ordinance, not as a househotdf but as individu- 
 als"} Surely the sacred phraseology accords best 
 with the sentiment and practice of pcedobaptism. 
 
 On this presumptive argument, I shall not dwell. 
 Nor will I detain you by reasoning on Acts ii. 38, 39, 
 
 * Acts xvi. 15, S3. 1 Cor. i. 16. 
 
1''2 LETTER XI. 
 
 or on Mat. xxviii. 19. From both these passages, 
 considerable evidence might be drawn. But 1 pur- 
 posely pass them by, in order to lay before you a 
 text containing evidence of a more decisive charac- 
 ter. You will find it in 1 Cor. vii. 14. The text 
 reads thus: For the unbelieving husband is sancti- 
 fied by the tvife, and the tinbeliemng w^feis sanctified 
 by the husband: else were your children unclean^ 
 hut now are they no J.Y, 
 
 To set aside the evidence arising from this pas- 
 sage in favour of infant-baptism, it is contended, 
 that the apostle is here treating of the legitimacy 
 of a believer's marriage with an unbeliever, and 
 the consequent legitimacy of their children, in re- 
 ference to the civil law."^ This construction is 
 wholly inadmissible, and highly absurd on various 
 accounts. 
 
 1. It is not conceivable how persons, having been 
 lawfully married previously to tlieir conversion to 
 Christianity, should, in consequence of that event, 
 be led to doubt the legitimacy of their marriage. 
 
 2. If, in some unaccountable way, such doubts 
 arose in the mind of any believer at Corinth, why 
 did he apply to the apostle to remove them? P.aul 
 was a preacher of the gospel, not an interpreter of 
 the civil law. The proper source of information 
 was the civil law itself: and the doubting Christian, 
 if unable to interpret it for himself, should have 
 taken counsel of some authorized legal character. 
 
 * Booth. 
 
Qhjections Answered. 173 
 
 Admitting that such difficulties actually sprung 
 up in the minds of some memhcrs of the Corinthiaa 
 church, and that they were ahsurd enough, instead 
 of applying to the proper sources of information at 
 home, to write on tlie subject to the apostle at a 
 distance from them; let us examine how logical this 
 interpretation will make Iiis reasoning. The belie- 
 ver says to him, I have doubts about the validity of 
 my marriage; I wish you to satisfy my mind on this 
 important and delicate subject, and counsel me what 
 ought to be done by a person in my circumstances. 
 ^Vhat is the apostle*s reply? <* You and your unbe- 
 lieving partner have been lawfully married." And 
 how does he prove this assertion? You will observe, 
 that the latter part of the text is otFered by the in- 
 spired writer as a proof of the/onner. In confir- 
 mation of this assertion, does he appeal to the civil 
 law, and show from it that the marriage of these 
 Christians was legally contracted and celebrated? 
 No; he barely makes another assertion, that their 
 children were legitimate, and (hat too in terms ne- 
 ver found in the civil law among the heathen: "Else 
 were your children unclean; but now are they holy,'' 
 A strange proof! If a man doubt the legitimacy of 
 his marriage, he must necessarily doubt the legiti- 
 macy of his children: and, therefore, when he asks 
 for evidence to remove his difficulties, to tell him 
 his cliildren are legitimate, and, consequently, his 
 marriage, would be trifling with a tender inquiring 
 conscience. The only way to remove such doubts 
 
 ^2 
 
174j LETTEK XI, 
 
 in the minds of the Coiintliians, would have been 
 to convince tliem, that their marriages had been 
 contracted agreeably to the prescriptions of the ci- 
 vil law. Satisfied as to tlieir marriage, their doubts 
 with respect to their children, would of course have 
 vanished. 
 
 4. This construction gives to the terms sanctify, 
 and holiji a sense in which they are never used in 
 scripture. Legitimacy in regard to a divine law, 
 they may and do express; but they never bear this 
 signification in reference to human law.* 
 
 * Mr. Booth, at the close of his laboured interpretation of this 
 text, artfully endeavours to make his readers beheve, that the diffi- 
 culty arising from the sense which he gives to the term sanctified, 
 is the very difficulty which those who reject this sense have to re- 
 move. His words are as follow: " For where, I demand, where is 
 it (the terra sanctified) employed in the tvhole sacred code, to ex- 
 press that act, or engagement, between a man and a woman, which 
 renders it lawful for them to cohabit as husband and wife? ThiSf 
 Jioxvever, is manifestly the case /ie?'e."f Truly, this is a strange 
 demand. Mr. B. attaches a most extraordinary idea to the term; 
 such an idea as it never expresses in the Bible: and, then, feeling 
 embarrassed, and unable to justify his interpretation, by a similar 
 use of the term in the sacred writings, he boldly demands help from 
 his opponents, insinuating it to bp incumbent on them, who reject 
 this signification as unscriptural, to remove the difficulty attending 
 it. For he adds immediately after the above quotation: " When, 
 tl^erefore, our brethren produce a parallel text, respecting the terra 
 sanctified, we will engage to retui-n the favour, with regard to the 
 word /i&/?/." Here, it is manifest, Mr. Booth concedes that he ap- 
 l»lies to the terms sanctified and holy, a sense in which they are not 
 used in any other passage of sacred scripture. But he makes a roost 
 
 ' t Booth en Baptism, vol. u. p. 4ie. 
 
Objections Answered, 175 
 
 Having thus exposed the iuconsisteney of the 
 above mentioned interpretation, I proceed to lay be- 
 fore you wJiat is conceived to be the true meaning 
 of this important text. To render the explanation 
 the plainer, it shall be given in the following steps. 
 
 1. From the context, it is evident, that the ques- 
 tion proposed to the apostle,* ^nd answered by him, 
 related, not to the children of the Corinthians, but 
 to the lawfulness of cohabiting with unbelieving 
 partners: for the text assigns the reason, why a 
 Christian man should not put away his unbelieving 
 w ife, and why a converted w oman should not leave 
 her unbelieving husband. 
 
 2. It is also manifest, that the apostle removes 
 the difficulty in the minds of the Corinthians, or 
 proves the lawfulness of living in a marriage-con- 
 nexion with unbelieving partners, by referring them 
 to the state or holiness of their children: and, if wc 
 respect Paul as a correct reasoner, we shall believe 
 the Corinthians were acquainted with the fact which 
 he adduced in proof of his doctrine. Had they been 
 ignorant of this fact, although it amounted to de- 
 monstration in his mind, it could not have been any 
 evidence to them. 
 
 equitable demand! He insists that his opponents shall lielp him out 
 of his first difficulty; and then he promises to return the kindness, 
 by helping- HI hisis.hF out of the second! But, alas! having fallen 
 mto the pit which he dug for himself, it is hardly probable they will 
 have charity enough to assist him, especially as he seems to consi- 
 der his own case as hopeless. 
 
 * 1 Cor. >ii. 1. 
 
176 LETtER Xf, 
 
 3. The cause of the difficulty was a Jewish law 
 relative to marriage. The douhts, which the Co- 
 rinthians entertained about the lawfulness of living 
 in a marriage-state with unbelievers, unquestiona- 
 bly sprung from some law which they were appre- 
 hensive forbade such a connexion: for, if they knew 
 ©f no law of tbis character, it was impossible for 
 any suspicions on the subject ever to arise in their 
 minds. What law could this have been? Not the 
 moral law; for it contained no such prohibition. Not 
 the civil law; for it authorized persons, in these cir- 
 eumstanccs, living together. From what law, then, 
 «ouId the difficulty have sprung? The Jewish law, 
 which forbade the people of God to contract mar- 
 riage with heathen s.=^ By this law, the offspring 
 of marriages violating it, were rendered unclean or 
 unholy f and excluded from religious privileges to 
 which other children were admitted. The breach 
 of this law was considered as a high offence; which 
 could not be expiated but by dissolving the marri- 
 age-relation, and putting away both the strange 
 wives, and their children, j 
 
 Now. it is well known, that many Judaizing teach- 
 ers disturbed the peace of the primitive churches, 
 by inculcating the necessity of obedience to. the law 
 of Moses. It is also a notorious fact, that, although 
 a council of apostles, convened at Jerusalem, for 
 the express purpose, gave, on this question, a so- 
 lemn judgment, which exonerated Gentile-Chris- 
 tians from the burdens imposed by the Jewish law- 
 
 * Deut. vii. 3, 4. f Ezra, chap, ix and x. 
 
Ohjcciions Ansivcrcd, 17f^ 
 
 giver; yet Ihesc corrupt toacliers ceased not to per- 
 plex the churches, and to endeavour to bring thera 
 into bondage. Sucli men, it is obvious, could not 
 overlook so important a precept of Moses, as that 
 prohibiting certain marriages: and, it is highly pro- 
 bable, tliey inculcated it as a duty resulting from 
 it, for Christians to put away their unbelieving 
 wives, and to leave their unbelieving husbands. 
 Here, then, we see the true cause of the difficulty 
 removed by the apostle in the text; — the real source 
 of those doubts, on a most delicate subject, whick 
 afflicted the Corinthian converts. 
 
 ^, St. Paul answers the question, probably pro- 
 posed to him on this interesting case of conscience,* 
 by showing, that the Jewish law relative to marri- 
 age, whence the perplexity had arisen, was not 
 obligatory on Christians. This is not done, it is 
 true, by asserting in so many words. The law is 
 repealed; but it is taught in language easily under- 
 stood by those who keep in view the cause of the 
 difficulty. This law^ pronounced the heathen un- 
 clean, unholy. It forbade Jews to marry them; 
 and, if violated by any, it required the transgress- 
 ors to dissolve their marriages, and separate from 
 their husbands or wives. Had this la\v, as certain 
 teachers affirmed, been binding on Christians, it 
 would have required from them the same painful 
 separations. But it was not obligatory: and the 
 apostle declares the truth, in language consonant 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 1. 
 
178 LETTER XI. 
 
 to scripture-phraseology: " The unbelieving hus- 
 band, is sanclijied by the wife and the unbelieving 
 wife is sanctified by the husband." Is not this intelli- 
 gible language? The law pronounced persons, in the 
 circumstances contemplated, unclean, unhohj: and 
 is not an apostolic affirmation that they are now 
 sanctified, the same, in amount, as saying, The law 
 is no longer obligatory? 
 
 In like manner, Avas the repeal of the law dis- 
 tinguishing meats into clean and unclean, and re- 
 stricting the intercourse of Jews with Gentiles, 
 made known. By a vision, in which Peter was di- 
 rected to kill and eat unclean animals, and by this 
 reply to his objection, *< What God hath cleansed, 
 that call not thou common^" was meal, formerly 
 prohibited, sanctified hy the word of God, and free 
 intercourse with Gentiles, opened.* 
 
 Here, then, the apostle might have rested the 
 matter. But he chose to support his affirmation, 
 by referring them, as decisive proof, to a fact with 
 which they were acquainted, — the holiness of a be- 
 liever's children: « Else," saye he, "were your 
 children unclean; but now are they holy,^^ You in- 
 quire, " Whether it be the duty of Christians to 
 separate from their unbelieving partners. I answer, 
 JVo; and to satisfy your minds, I refer you to th« 
 condition of children born of parents in such cir- 
 cumstances. They are hoJij; and acknowledged by 
 the church to be so; for they are baptized. Now, 
 
 * Acts X. 9—20, 28. 
 
objections Ansioered. 17^ 
 
 lliis fact, duly reflected on, \\V\ convince von, that 
 the law which has occasioned your perplexity, 
 is not binding on Christians: for, if it were, such 
 children, ^sformerJij, would now be unclean, and 
 treated accordingly by the church: — they would be 
 denied the privilege of bn[)ti«im. It is, therefore, 
 lawful for a Christian man or woman to cohabit 
 with an unbelieving wife or husband. 
 
 That this is the inspired writer's meaning, is 
 apparent from (his consideration, that the Corin- 
 thians could not understand his terms in any other 
 sense. As stared already, it must, in deference to 
 ihe apostle's skill in argument, be admitted, they 
 knew the fact to which he refers as decisive proof 
 of his affirmation; namely, that the childsen of the 
 marriages conlemplat^MK were not unclean, but 
 holy. The question, then, is, What ideas did the 
 Corinthians attach to these terms? Did they under- 
 stand Paul as telling them, that their children were 
 legitimate, and not heist anW Thh cannot be ad- 
 mitted for reasons already assigned,* and for this 
 additional one, that if he had urged such a fact, it 
 could not have removed a difficulty springing, not 
 from a human, but fi'om a divine law. Did they 
 understand him as meaning the internal holiness of 
 Christian children? By no means: for he never 
 taught such a doctrine, but, on the contrary, de- 
 clared all. by nature, ♦* dead in trespasses and sins, 
 and cidldren of wratli,^-'^ 
 
 » Ephes. ii. 1—3. 
 
iSO tETTER XI. 
 
 ITow, tlicn, did the Corinthians understand the 
 aposde? Just as a Jew, married to a hea(hen, and 
 afterwards eonv< rted to Christianity, wouUl have 
 understood his lanj^uai^^e. Had Paul said to such a 
 convert, Your chihlren arc not unclean; they are 
 holy; he would have concluded the apostle designed 
 to teach him, that tJie law, prohihiting the connex- 
 ion \\hich he had formed, was repealed, and. con- 
 sequently, tliut his chiidi'cn were admissible to 
 church-privileges. And this signification the Co- 
 rintliians were necessarily led to adopt; because the 
 terms unclean and Iwhj^ stood in such close connex- 
 ion with that Jewish law wliich, had it been obli- 
 gatory on tliem, would have rendered their children 
 unclean, shut them out of the church, and denied 
 them baptism. 
 
 Tlius, the apostle was understood: and the Co- 
 rinthians saw his doctrine carried into practice, and 
 the churches acting on the principle of children ha- 
 in^ federallij /io/j/, by dedicating tliem to God in 
 the ordinance of baptism, the seal of his covenant. 
 This interpretation gives to the apostle's argument 
 propriety, consistency, and strength. 
 
 As an objection to this construction of the text} 
 it may be asked, ** If the federal holiness, or bap- 
 tism of children, was a fact known to the Corinthi- 
 ans, how came they to doubt of the lawfulness of a 
 Christian's remaining in a nrarriage-connexion with 
 an unbeliever? From this fact, could they not have 
 iiiferred the repeal of the prohibitory Jewish sta- 
 
Objections Answered. 181 
 
 tute?" We have already stated how their perplexity 
 arose:— it was occasioned hy the influence of corrupt 
 teachers, insisting on obedience to the laws of Mo- 
 ses, and to this one in particular. And none need 
 be surprised at their success, in filling with doubts 
 on a point, though important, yet not essential, 
 nilnds but imperfectly instructed and grounded in 
 the truths of our holy religion; who recollect, that 
 teachers of the same stamp, had influence enough 
 to shake the faith of the church of Galatia in fun- 
 damental doctrines of the gospel, so as to excite in 
 St. Paul fears of having laboured among them in 
 
 vain 
 
 # 
 
 Another objection against this interpretation, is, 
 " That the federal holiness of children goes to re- 
 vive the abrogated covenant of Sinai." The objec- 
 tion is founded on a capital mistake, — that all rela- 
 tive holiness depended on the existence of that co- 
 venant. This kind of holiness existed long before 
 the memorable transactions which took place at the 
 foot of the sacred mount; as must appear to any 
 one who reflects on the nature of it. For what does 
 it mean? Simply, that the person, denominated holy 
 in this sense of the term, stands in a special relation 
 to God, and is dedicated to his service. Now, did 
 not the covenant made with Abraham, bring him 
 and his seed into a special relation to Jehovah? 
 Were they not visihUj set apart and consecrated to 
 his service? Unquestionably. They were, then, re- 
 
 • Gal. ui. 
 
182 LETTER XI. 
 
 laiively holy: and, consequently, external holiness 
 existed ages hefore the formation of the Sinai-co- 
 yenantj and Abraham's covenant, being perpetual 
 with the church, must, of course, make all who 
 have an interest in it federally or relatively holy. 
 In fact, as long as a profession of religion shall be 
 inade, and men sustain a visible, covenant-relation 
 to God, this kind of holiness will necessarily exist. 
 Zeal for a favourite tenet may aim at abolisliing the 
 name; but tlie thing itself cannot be destroyed: and 
 even persons who disdain to be thus denominated, 
 are externally holy to the Lord, as certainly as they 
 have been baptized in his name, and profess to have 
 entered into covenant with him. They are visibly 
 set apart to (he service and honour of Jehovah: and, 
 consequently, whether renewed in heart or not, are, 
 in fact, specially related to him; that is, they are 
 relati-vely hoJij. Whoever, then, would prove the abo- 
 lition of federal holiness, must undertake to prove, 
 tliat, under the Christian dispensation, there is no 
 external administration of the covenant; — that no 
 profession of religion is required; — and that men no 
 longer consecrate themselves Tisihly to God. In a 
 word, while Abraham's covenant exists, this kind 
 of holiness must exist; and, while infants retain an 
 interest in it, tlieif must be federally holy.^ 
 
 One more objection to our interpretation of the 
 disputed textf it seems necessary to notice. It is, 
 ** That this construction applies to the terms sancr 
 
 * See Letter III. d. 46—49. 
 
Ohjections Answered. ±&o 
 
 tifled and liohj different significations; ^vhereas, it is 
 observed, they both must denote the same thing." 
 
 You will remark, my brethren, Ihat the latter 
 word is an adjective, expressing quality; and the 
 former, a verb, signifying action: and, therefore, 
 that this real difference in the terms themselves, 
 would authorize, if required, the application of dif- 
 ferent senses to them. Indeed, although both were 
 the same word, yet it would not be indispensable to 
 affix to them precisely the same idea: for there are 
 texts in holy scripture, in which it is absolutely ne- 
 cessary to give to the same term, occurring twice 
 in the same verse, two different meanings. Take the 
 two following as examples: "For their sakes, I 
 sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified 
 through the truth. And Moses said unto the people. 
 Fear not: for God is come to prove you, and that 
 his fear may be before your faces, that ye sin not."^ 
 
 Although, therefore, our interpretation applied 
 to the terms sanctified and holy senses very differ- 
 ent, yet, if they were warranted by scripture-au- 
 thority, and comported with the apostle's argument, 
 it could be no reasonable objection. But this is not 
 fact. We give to both words the same general idea; 
 namely, freedom from that kind of uncleannesSf 
 which the prohibitory precept attached to adults 
 and children in the circumstances contemplated. 
 
 By no means, however, will it follow, that un- 
 believers connected by marriage with believers, 
 
 * John xvii. 19. Exod. xx. 2©, 
 
184 LETTER Xf. 
 
 ought to be baptized, as well as their children. For 
 the holiness, communicated to the former by the 
 abolition of this law, although the same in the ge- 
 neral idea, yet differs in degree from the holiness 
 communicated to the latter: the sanctification of 
 adults being such as to authorize believers continu- 
 ing to perform towards them matrimonial duties; 
 but the sanctification of children reaching so far 
 as to render them fit subjects for baptism. In a 
 word, the eflTect resulting from the repeal of this 
 law, is the same as would have taken place under 
 the Jewish economy, had it been then annulled. 
 What effect would in that case have followed? Would 
 the church have been authorized to circumcise Pa- 
 gan adults remaining attached to idolatry? Cer- 
 tainly not: for other reasons than sprung from this 
 law, would have prohibited the application of the 
 covenant-token to such characters. Their children, 
 however, would have acquired a title to circum- 
 cision, and been put in the same condition as to 
 church-privileges, which such children enjoyed pre- 
 viously to the enacting of the prohibitory statute. 
 It is, then, unreasonable to object against our con- 
 struction of the passage, that it warrants the bap- 
 tism of unbelieving adults; because the repeal of 
 this law, even under the Mosaic economy, would 
 not have communicated to them such a degree of 
 holiness as to authorize their circumcision. 
 
 On the whole, this text contains a clear apos- 
 tolic testimony in favour of tlie federal holiness of 
 
Ohjections AnswemL 185 
 
 infants born of believing parents, and ibeir conse- 
 quent rigbt to baptism; and an inspired record of 
 tbe facts, that they were viewed in this light by 
 apostolic churches, and freely admitted to the Chris- 
 tian seal of Abraham's covenant. 
 
 5. Another objection urged against the admis- 
 sion of infants to baptism, and the last which I 
 shall notice, is, " That, being unconscious of what 
 is done, and not giving their consent, no obligation 
 can result from applying the ordinance to them; 
 and, consequently, it is a useless ceremony. 
 
 Had the advocates of this objection lived under 
 the Jewish dispensation, they might, with equal 
 propriety, have opposed tlie c/rcw?nmioTi of infants 
 as a useless ceremony. Infants of eight days old 
 were then as ignorant of the meaning of the sign 
 applied to them, as children are now: and, if no 
 obligation result from their baptism, none cotild 
 have resulted from their circumcision; because they 
 neither gave, nor were asked their consent. 
 
 This objection is founded on a principle the most 
 absurd; a principle which, admitted as just, Avould 
 exonerate us from obligations the most tender, in- 
 disputable, and solemn. Birth was given us in 
 our native land, without our consent, or putting 
 it at our option in what country to be born: there- 
 fore, the civil compact has no authority over us, 
 until we give our consent to live under it! We were 
 connected with parents whom we did not choose; 
 they brought us into the world, without consulting 
 
186 LETTER XI. 
 
 our wishes; they nourished and educated us, with- 
 out deigning to solicit our consent: it follows, from 
 these facts, that we owe to them no gratitude, no 
 ohedience; we may, at our pleasure, dissolve the 
 connexion, and refuse to be their children! The 
 great progenitor of the human race w as constituted 
 our federal head, previously to our existence, and, 
 of course, without our consent: therefore, it was 
 unjust to bring upon us, his unoffending offspring, 
 the consequences of his fatal apostasy, in which, 
 «very day presents painful evidences that we are in- 
 volved! Indeed, the principle, carried to its full 
 extent, will go to prove, that we owe no gratitude, 
 no obedience to our glorious Creator; because he 
 gave us existence, without asking us whether Ave 
 were willing to be created! 
 
 How absurd the principle, from which conse- 
 quences so shocking to common sense, maybe fairly 
 deduced! The fact is, an obligation of a most seri- 
 ous and solemn nature, does result from infant bap- 
 tism. A child is bound by every lawful act of his 
 parents, which involves his interest. Both by hu- 
 man and by divine law, they are constituted his na- 
 tural guardians: and, therefore, if they enter into 
 any compact in his behalf, not exceeding their just 
 authority, he is as much bound by it, as though he 
 had entered into it by his own voluntai*y choice. 
 Can it, then, be doubted whether children are laid 
 under solemn obligations of duty, by that dedication 
 •f them to God, which their parents make in bap- 
 tism? Is not this a lawful act; an act required by 
 
Ohjeelions Jinsivcrcd, 187 
 
 divine authority? Is it not also an act, not of seve- 
 rity, but of love; an act, securing to children rela- 
 tions to Jehovah and to his people, of an invaluable 
 nature? The Creator, having an unlimited propriety 
 in all his creatures, possesses an indubitable right 
 to command parents to dedicate the children which 
 he gives them to his service and glory, and to ac- 
 company the surrender with a signilicant ceremony: 
 and, the command being issued, parents are bound, 
 indispensably bound to obey. Is it not highly ab- 
 surd, then, to imagine, that an act required by the 
 Creator, and done in obedience to his will by our 
 natural guardians, imposes on us no obligation; 
 •uerely because it was performed without our con- 
 sent? Many, no doubt, baptized in infancy, when 
 arrived at mature age, feel no sense of obligation 
 arising from baptismal engagements: but this mourn- 
 ful fact proves, not the nullity of them, but only 
 depravity of heart, and stupidity of conscience, or, 
 at best, mistaken views of duty. Samuel was, be- 
 fore his birth, dedicated to the Lord, by his mother; 
 but, not having imbibed the spirit of this objection, 
 he felt himself bound by her vow to wait upon the 
 Almighty in the service of his house. Had he been 
 disposed to indulge a disobedient temper, he might 
 have pleaded, not only that the vow had been made 
 without his consent^ but also that it was a voluntary 
 one, not expressly required by the law of God. But 
 happily the inclination of this pious child coincided 
 with duty; and he diligently and faithfully served 
 the Lord all the days of his life, agreeably to his 
 
188 LETTER XI. 
 
 mother's consecrating promise. And had all bap- 
 tized youth as correct yiews, and as holy disposi- 
 tions, as young Samuel, they would, not only feel 
 the obligations arising from their infant baptism, 
 but bless the Lord, that they have been dedicated to 
 his service in that sacred ordinance, and impressed 
 with the seal of his gracious covenant. 
 
 The right of infants to baptism has now, it is 
 presumed, been fairly and solidly established on 
 scriptural grounds; and the principal objections 
 urged against it have been refuted. Other passa- 
 ges of sacred scripture, purposely omitted for the 
 sake of brevity, might have been explained apd 
 brought in support of this important truth, and the 
 accumulation of evidence made greater. Testi- 
 monies too in favour of infant baptism, might be 
 adduced from the writings of the fathers of the 
 Christian church. But, as an examination of them 
 would extend these letters, already reaching be- 
 yond the limits originally contemplated, I shall omit 
 them. This may be done with great safety to our 
 cause: and, indeed, it is unnecessary to call in the 
 aid of human authority for the support of a truth, 
 which is so clearly and amply taught, in the divine 
 records of our faith and practice. 
 
 Here, therefore, I close my discussion of the 
 right of infants to baptism. In my next, I shall, 
 my brethren, solicit your attention to an examina- 
 tion of that question which regards the mode of ad- 
 ministering this Christian ordinance. 
 
LETTER XIJ, 
 
 Mode of baptism. — Immersion not exclusive — Pre- 
 sumptions against such claims. 
 
 Christian Brethrex, 
 
 WuEN I commenced the exposition of the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, in order to establish, on this an- 
 cient and permanent basis, the divine right of in- 
 fant baptism, it was not my intention to discuss the 
 question relative to the mode of administering that 
 ordinance. But afterwards reflecting how frequent- 
 ly and openly the mode adopted by our church has 
 been censured and condemned, it occurred that si- 
 lence, on this subject in these letters, might be con- 
 strued into a supposition, that we believe our prac- 
 tice to be incapable of being justified on scriptural 
 principles. Influenced by this consideration, I de- 
 termined to enter on our defence in regard to the 
 mode of baptism. 
 
 To Christian baptism, three things are necessa- 
 ry; namely, a suitable subject, — the application of 
 water, — and the use of that sacred form of words 
 prescribed by our blessed Lord. If, by an autho- 
 rized administrator, water be applied to a rational 
 creature, in the name of the Father, and of (he 
 
190 LETTER XII. 
 
 Son, and of the Holy Ghost; that person is truly 
 baptized, whether water be applied by effusion, by 
 washing, by sprinkling, or by immersion. The par- 
 ticular manner of using the significant emblem, is 
 not essential: it is only a circumstance of the ordi- 
 nance, which may be varied without effecting its 
 validity. For wise reasons, our divine Redeemer 
 has restricted his church to no single mode, but left 
 her at liberty to adopt that which circumstances 
 may at any time render expedient and edifying. 
 
 This is our sentiment. But it is condemned as 
 unscriptural; and the practice which Ave ground up- 
 on it, reproached as being inconsistent with plain 
 apostolic example, and a violation of a positive pre- 
 cept of our Sovereign Lord. Were our brethren, 
 who thus treat our sentiment and practice, merely 
 to give a preference to that mode which they use in 
 baptism, it would be unnecessary to say any thing 
 in our defence. Both parties might then salute 
 each other as baptized members of the Redeemer's 
 church: and the difference between them would be 
 so inconsiderable, as to furnish no excuse for angry 
 disputes. But this unhappily is not the case. Our 
 opponents not only give a preference to immersion, 
 but affirm it to be the only laAvful mode of admi- 
 nistering baptism; and that the use of any other 
 destroys the ordinance, as well as departs from 
 recorded precedents established by inspired men, 
 and contravenes the will of our Lord plainly re- 
 vealed in his word. They maintain that we are un- 
 
Fresumplioiis against Immersion, 191 
 
 baptized Christians, and, consequently, not mem- 
 bers of (he churcli of Jesus Christ. All this is 
 openly affirmed, and frequently inculcated. Thus we 
 are put upon our defence. This I now undertake: 
 and Ijope to be able to prove our opinion correct, 
 and our practice consonant both to apostolic prac- 
 tice, and to the will of the Lord our Redeemer. In 
 vindicating the mode which we have adopted, I 
 have no wish to condemn that of our brethren. 
 They use the appointed, significant emblem, as well 
 as we: and, therefore, as water is applied to the re- 
 cipient of the ordinance, the essence of it is pre- 
 served. But the justification of our own practice, 
 and the proving of our baptism to be really scrip- 
 tural, wilU by necessary consequence, evince, that 
 they have no warrant for the censures which they 
 so freely pass upon us. To the law and to the tes- 
 timony, we make our appeal. 
 
 Previously, however, to an examination of the 
 divine precept relative to Christian baptism, and of 
 the practice of the apostles under it, I beg leave to 
 detain you, by laying before you some presumptive 
 arguments in our favour. The consequences which 
 result from the exclusive claims of our opponents to 
 this divine ordinance, are so serious in their nature, 
 as to furnish several presumptions against these 
 claims; which, when viewed collectively, amount 
 to decisive proof that they cannot be well founded, 
 
 1. The first consequence resulting from their 
 sentiment, is, that it reduces vast numlfers of pi^o- 
 
192 XETTER XII. 
 
 J^essin^ Christians to the state of unbaptized per- 
 sons. It is well known, that, while only one deno- 
 mination of Christians* baptize by immersion, all 
 other denominations in this country use a different 
 mode: and it is also notorious, that the latter are in- 
 comparably more numerous than the former. From 
 this fact, which cannot be denied, a fair presump- 
 tion may be drawn, that the great mass of Chris- 
 tians cannot have misunderstood their Lord's in- 
 structions with respect to a positive rite, so greatly 
 as to have deprived themselves of the enjoyment of 
 it. Far be it from me to lay it down as a maxim, 
 that the truth is always to be found with the majo- 
 rity. Often it happens that the majority do not ex- 
 amine the subject about which a difference in opi- 
 nion prevails, and suffer themselves to be misguided 
 by favourite leaders: thus they run into error, while 
 the minority, by careful investigation, discern and 
 embrace the truth. But, in the present case, when 
 we consider the nature of the question, and the cha- 
 racters found among those who hold other modes 
 than immersion to be valid; we may fairly presume, 
 the majority of Christians cannot be in an error so 
 essential as this objection imports. The design of 
 our Lord in appointing this sacred rite, was, that 
 it should be worn, by his disciples, as a distinctive 
 
 * The Dunkers use immersion. But they are a sect so small, 
 and so little known, that it seemed unnecessary to take notice of 
 them above. Besides, they are entitled to the name derived from 
 baptism equally with those who have assumed it; and may, there™ 
 ^(jre, be, with propriety, ranked under the same general name. 
 
Presumptions against Immersion, 193 
 
 uiark; — that it should he a solemn introduction of 
 them into his visible church; — and that it sliould be 
 enjoyed as an important privilege, signifying and 
 scaling to them the blessings of his gracious cove- 
 nant. Can it, then, be admitted, that all other de- 
 nominations of professing Christians, except one, 
 have so grossly misconstrued the rule of their faith 
 and practice, as to have deprived themselves of this 
 important pnvilege? lost the substance, \\hile they 
 retain the shadow? imagining themselves impressed 
 with the seal of their Great Master, wliile they 
 have only a counterfeit impression of it? If this be 
 fact, how has it happened? What untoward cause 
 has produced this mournful deception; thus defraud- 
 ing them of an important privilege, and seducing 
 them from the path of duty? Want of learning^ 
 None dare assert this to be the cause. The highest 
 honours which genius and learning could merit, 
 have been due to those who combated the exclusive 
 claims of immersion. They have flourished at the 
 head of colleges and universities; they have filled 
 the theological chair with the greatest applause; 
 tliey have walked through the circle of the scien- 
 ces; they have enlightened the world by their ge- 
 nius, and instructed it by their incomparable wri- 
 tings; tliey have adorned the pulpit by their elo- 
 quence and learning; their praise has been in all the 
 churches. Want of picty^ We number in our ranks 
 the brightest luminaries of the church; men who 
 have made the greatest sacrifioes iu favour of true 
 
19i LETTER XII. 
 
 religion; men of apostolic spirit and zeal; men <*of 
 whom the world was not worthy;" spirits that rank 
 high among their kindred spirits in glory, and are 
 distinguished by the brilliant crown of martyrdom. 
 Want of candid investigatiori^ Who can bring this 
 opprobrious accusation against such holy men, the 
 first wish of whose heart, was to know and do their 
 Master's will; who, by their writings on the sub- 
 ject, prove that they had maturely examined it. 
 Thus possessing every requisite quality for search- 
 ing after and finding the truth, who can believe 
 that these Christians were, with respect to an im- 
 portant rite, in an error so essential as to have 
 lived and died without it? Had their characters 
 been different; had they been destitute of learning 
 and piety, or had they neglected to investigate their 
 duty; sufficient reasons might be assigued for this 
 great mistake. But when we consider the excel- 
 lence of their characters; that they were eminent 
 for learning and genius; that they loved the truth, 
 and searched for it as for hidden treasure; that they 
 were models of piety: it appears incredible, that 
 they should have lived and died without the seal of 
 that covenant, which was all their salvation, and 
 all their desire! Was Luther, that great reformer; 
 was Calvin, that incomparable genius; was Knox, 
 that intrepid servant of Christ; was Owen, tha 
 1 arned and profound divine; Mas Baxter, so fer- 
 vent in piety, and acute in his investigations; and 
 were thousands of other divines, eminent for their 
 
Presumptions against Immersion. 195 
 
 piety and learning, and belonging to the reformed 
 churches, both in Europe and in America: were all 
 these, together with the myriads of Christians whom 
 they instructed and edified by their discourses, wri- 
 tings, and examples, so mistaken in their views of 
 duty, that they lived and died without baptism; with- 
 out a regular introduction into the visible church of 
 Christ; without that mark appointed by our Lord 
 to distinguish his disciples from the world; without 
 the enjoyment of a privilege designed by him for 
 the benefit of all his followers? incredible! 
 
 2. The next presumption against immersion, as 
 an exclusive mode, is, That it reflects on the ivisdom 
 and goodness of our heavenly Lawgiver . I am ful- 
 ly aware, that, when speaking about a line of con- 
 duct becoming divine perfections, we may, unless 
 the bold decisions of human reason be duly and cau- 
 tiously restrained, be guilty of unpardonable irre- 
 verence and arrogance. Yet there are cases so 
 plain, that we may confidently assert, such proce- 
 dure would not comport with the character of an 
 infinitely perfect being. For example: The state 
 of this world is so disordered, and tlie distribution 
 of rewards and punishments, so unequal, that it is no 
 presumption, but due respect to the attributes of our 
 Supreme Ruler, to affirm that this confused state 
 of things cannot always remain, and that the glory 
 of his holy name requires his interposition to cor- 
 rect the prevailing disorder, by rewarding every 
 man according to his works. 
 
196 IBTTER XII. 
 
 Of this kind is the case before us. Two points 
 we may take for granted: first, that our Lord insti- 
 tuted baptism for all his disciples, to be worn by 
 them as a mark of distinction, from the rest of man- 
 kind; and, secondly, that he foresaw the disputes 
 which have arisen on this subject, and the different 
 modes of administering the ordinance which have 
 prevailed in his church. Neither of these positions 
 ean be disputed by any reflecting on the omniscience 
 of our Redeemer; and on the commission given to 
 his apostles to baptize all nations. 
 
 Now, from these premises, the conclusion is ob- 
 vious and incontestible, that, if Jesus Christ had ap- 
 pointed immersion as the only lawful mode of bap- 
 tism, he would have delivered his instructions on 
 the nature of this positive rite, so plainly as to have 
 enabled his disciples, desiring to know and do his 
 will, to acquire the knowledge of the true mode of 
 applying baptismal water; so plainly as to have 
 preserved from running into an error destructive of 
 his ordinance, the millions of his disciples, who, on 
 this supposition, have adopted so great an error, 
 and continued in it through successive ages, and in 
 the most flourishing periods of his church. If im- 
 mersion be essential to baptism, and every other 
 mode incompatible with its very nature, then the 
 mass of christians have, many centuries, been des- 
 titute of an ordinance, which our blessed Lord de- 
 signed for all, and as a source of instruction and 
 comfort to them. How can such a fact be reeonci- 
 
Presumptions against Immersion. 197 
 
 led with his infinite wisdom and goodness? He fore- 
 knew the consequences, whicli have actually result- 
 ed from his instructions on this point of duty: and, 
 surely, it appears a fair conclusion, — a conclusion 
 which his honor demands from us, that if he had 
 intended to make immersion essential to baptism* 
 he would have delivered his instructions so plainly 
 as to have kept, at least, sincere and inquiring 
 Christians, from an error so radical, as the objec- 
 tion imputes to those who do not use this mode of 
 baptism. 
 
 But, it is asserted, our Lord has, by positive pre- 
 cept, and by apostolic practice, plainly determined 
 immersion to be the only lawful mode. The exa- 
 mination of this assertion, I reserve for another 
 place in these letters, where it will be shown to be 
 groundless. Here, to destroy its force as an objec- 
 tion to the presumption illustrated, it is sufficient 
 to state the fact, that the great body of Christians 
 have interpreted both the precept of our Lord, and 
 the practice of his apostles, otherwise than those 
 who urge the objection. It cannot then be made ap- 
 pear, that Jesus Christ has revealed his will con- 
 cerning immersion so plainly as to do away the force 
 of my remarks, unless one of these tw o points can 
 be proved; namely, either tliat he has, in regard to 
 baptism, legislated only for a part of his church, op 
 that Christians not using immersion, act against 
 their own convictions of truth and duty. If our 
 Lord legislated only for a part of his church, for 
 s2 
 
i9S LETTER XII. 
 
 that section >vhieh practises immersion, then it must 
 be allowed, they being judges, that his instructions 
 with regard to the mode of baptism, are plain and 
 decisive. But if this idea cannot be admitted; if he 
 legislated for his wliole church; then, allowing other 
 denominations the moderate praise of being sincere 
 in their inquiries after truth, and acting honestly 
 up to their conviction of duty, and taking their ca- 
 pacity as the criterion of plainness, it will follow, 
 the instructions of our Lord are not plainly in favour 
 of imm?Tsion. The fact, that they believe he has 
 not determined immersion to be the only way of ad- 
 ministering baptism, incontrovertibly decides the 
 question. 
 
 That their capacity is, in this case, the true cri- 
 terion by which we are to judge, is obvious. Were 
 I teaching a number of children, and found that on- 
 ly a few understood my instructions, how ought the 
 question, whether I were sufficiently plain in com- 
 municating my ideas, to be determined? By an ap- 
 peal to the capacity of the few who did, or to that 
 of the majority who did not, understand my mean- 
 ing? Certainly to the latter. So, in determining the 
 question, whether our Lord have plainly taught im- 
 mersion to be the only lawful mode of baptism, we 
 must appeal, not to the apprehensions of one deno- 
 mination of Christians who think he has, but to the 
 apprehensions of the many denominations who think 
 he has not. 
 
Presumptions against Immersion. ±99 
 
 The instructions of our Lord, it appears, are not 
 plainly and decisiveli) in favor of immersion as the 
 only mode of baptism. From this fact, we may 
 conclude, that it is not the only latcful mode; be- 
 cause his wisdom and his love to the church would 
 have disposed him, had he intended immersion to be 
 essential to the valid administration of this ordi- 
 nance, to deliver his mind in such a way, as would 
 have preserved so many millions of his followers 
 from adopting and continuing in a practice ut- 
 terly repugnant to his revealed will, and fixing on 
 the larger part of his people the reproach of being 
 
 UNBAPTIZED. 
 
 3. A third presumption against immersion as 
 an exclusive mode, is. That it pays no regard to 
 Qlimate, circumstances, and the mild genius of Chris- 
 tianity. The Jewish economy was suited to the 
 ehurch of God, while confined to one country, and 
 to one nation; but the Christian dispensation is suit- 
 ed to her state in that period in which she is not 
 thus confined, but is to spread herself over the 
 whole globe, and diffuse herself among all nations 
 The rigorous bondage of Moses has given place to 
 the mild reign of Jesus Christ. The church serves 
 no longer in the spirit of a servant, but in the spi- 
 rit of a son. Formerly, she resembled an heir 
 «* under tutors and governors, until the time ap- 
 pointed of the father;" now, she resembles the heir 
 arrived at mature age, and put in possession of his 
 
300 LETTER XII. 
 
 inheritance. This characteristic difference hetween 
 the two economies, is discernible in their doctrines, 
 precepts, promises, and ordinances. 
 
 Had immersion been prescribed as the only valid 
 mode of baptism, it would have been a departure 
 from the genius of the present dispensation. Such 
 a mode may be practised in a warm climate without 
 inconvenience; but it is not adapted to the severe 
 and icy winters of a northern region. Excessive at- 
 tachment to immersion has impelled some, to the 
 vain attempt of proving it is not prejudicial to 
 health, even in cold climates. In support of this 
 opinion, they have adduced the authority of physi- 
 cians recommending the frequent use of the cold 
 bath. Now, admitting, in deference to the judg- 
 ment of professional characters, that, by daily use, 
 persons become accustomed to the cold hath, and 
 gain greater vigour of constitution^ yet, before the 
 position, in proof of which this medical opinion is 
 pleaded, can derive any aid from it, it should he 
 shown to be a fact, that the people of this country 
 are in the habit of immersing themselves daily in 
 cold water. But, while this is not their habitual 
 practice, it might, with equal truth, be maintained, 
 that a person long confined to his chamber hy sick- 
 ness, could, witliout danger, go abroad in rainy 
 weather, because others, hardened by frequent ex- 
 posure, experience no inconvenience; as be con- 
 tended, that a single application of cold water is ne- 
 ver likely to be hurtful to any, although wholly unac- 
 customed to it. Can weak, infirm people, unable to 
 
Presumptions against Immersion. 261 
 
 bear a few drops of rain, endure tlie plunging of 
 their whole body into a river during the winter-sea- 
 son, without receiving an injury to their health? 
 To affirm this, serves only to prove how far zeal for 
 a favourite tenet, can impel even men of sense and 
 learning. There are diseases, it is well known, the 
 subjects of which could not be thus immersed with- 
 out manifest danger to their lives: and, therefore, if 
 immersion be the only lawful mode of baptism, they 
 must run this great risk, or die unbaptized. And 
 can we imagine, that our gracious Lord, who has 
 suited his dispensation to €>\ery climate, and conde- 
 scends to bear the infirmities of his people, has pre- 
 scribed a mode of administering his ordinance, at- 
 tended often with danger to the health, and some- 
 times even to the lives of his disciples? The cross 
 must indeed be borne, whenever our master is plea- 
 sed to lay it on our shoulders: but, let it never be 
 forgotten, the crosses, which fidelity to his cause 
 requires us to bear, are such as he prepares and ap- 
 points, not those which a rash and impetuous zeal 
 occasions. On the one hand, we must not allow 
 ourselves in any thing prohibited by our Lord, how- 
 ever pleasing to our natural inclinations; and, on 
 the other, we should not surrender the liberty 
 which he has granted, but thankfully enjoy it. 
 
 The ideas of delicacy which prevail in this coun- 
 try, receive a shock, when females are seen plunged 
 into a river, before a promiscuous concourse of peo- 
 ple. But, not to insist upon this, we may assert. 
 
202 LETTER XII. 
 
 without fear of contradiction, that the mode of bap- 
 tism in use among us, is abundantly more favoura- 
 ble than immersion to the preservation of that de- 
 vout and holy frame of soul, and the exercise of 
 those spiritual and believing meditations, which so 
 well accord with the nature of tliat solemn transac- 
 tion in which the recipient of the ordinance is en- 
 gaged. On the bank of a river, how many things 
 concur to distract the thoughts! The croud, the ad- 
 justment of clothes, the dread of cold water, shi- 
 Tcring limbs, and a subsequent change of dress; all, 
 and many other incidents, unite to disturb the com- 
 posure, particularly of female minds, and divert 
 them from spiritual and eternal objects. But, iu 
 the house of God, the solemnities of public worship, 
 the devout attention of spectators, and the previous 
 retirement of the candidate, are all calculated to 
 assist the soul in making that solemn surrender to 
 God, and keeping up those holy exercises of heart 
 and mind, which the ordinance demands. 
 
 Such strong presumptive arguments oppose the 
 exclusive claims of immersion. Bring them, my 
 brethren, into one view, and unite their force. 
 These claims reduce vast numbers of professing 
 Christians to the reproachful state of iinhaptized 
 persons: — they pay no regard to climate, circum- 
 stances, and the mild genius of Christianity; — and 
 they reflect upon the wisdom and goodness of our 
 Lord .Tesus Christ. Now, I ask, whether a senti- 
 ment, from which such serious consequences result, 
 
Cases of J^postolic Baptism. £03 
 
 can be founded in truth; and whether these pre- 
 sumptions, collectively considered, do not amount 
 to conclusive evidence, that immersion cannot he 
 prescribed in holy scripture, as the only laurful 
 mode of administering baptism? 
 
 LETTER XIIL 
 
 The question in dispute fairly stated — John's bap- 
 tism not Christian — Cases of apostolic baptism 
 examined. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 The consequences resulting from immersion, 
 considered as an exclusive mode of baptism, have 
 furnislied us with strong presumptive arguments 
 against the pretensions of its advocates. But they 
 profess to establisli tlieir cJaims on firm ground. 
 They plead apostolic example, and positive precept. 
 Tliis is high and commanding authority; and, if it 
 warrant their exclusive claims, we must submit, 
 and allow them to be well supported. I propose in 
 this and the next succeeding letters, to examine the 
 principal argument of our opponents, and to show 
 
284 LETTER XIII. 
 
 you the grounds on which they venture to call all 
 who use a mode different from theirs unhapti^ed 
 Christians. 
 
 1. They adduce apostolic practice, as authori- 
 zing no other way of applying baptismal water than 
 immersion. We unite with them in professing to 
 entertain great reverence for those honoured foun- 
 ders of the Christian church, who were led hy the 
 Holy Spirit of God; and in maintaining, that their 
 practice in the administration of religious ordi- 
 nances, should be duly imitated. 
 
 Let us hear, then, what our opponents have to 
 say in regard to apostolic example. They bid us 
 open the New Testament, and look at certain cases 
 of baptism, recorded by the pen of inspiration; 
 which they affirm proves clearly that the apostles 
 baptized by immersion. 
 
 Before entering on the examination of these ca- 
 ses, I shall make one remark, which I wish you to 
 recollect throughout the whole discussion. It is 
 this: That, to support the exclusive pretensions set 
 up by our brethren, it is by no means sufficient for 
 them to show that the apostles sometimes used im- 
 mersion in administering baptism. For the ques- 
 tion in debate is, not whether immersion be a laxv- 
 ful, but whether it be the onlif lawful, mode of bap- 
 tism. Were they proving merely the lawfulness of 
 this mode, it would indeed be enough to justify it, 
 if they could adduce one or more instances in which 
 it was used by apostolic administrators. But this 
 
Cases of Jipostolic JBajUisvi* 2QB 
 
 is not the case. \Ve make no attack on their prac- 
 tice; we allow the validity of immersion. They at- 
 tack us, by denouncing our practice as unscriptural 
 and unwarrantable: and, therefore, it is incumbent 
 on them to prove, not only that the apostles, in a 
 few instances^ immersed their subjects of baptism, 
 but that, in all cases, they immersed them, and never 
 used any other mode of administering this Chris- 
 tian rite. 
 
 To illustrate this matter, let us suppose a dis- 
 pute between two persons with regard to the pos- 
 ture proper in prayer. In performing this holy du- 
 ty, the one kneels, and the other stands, before the 
 Lord. The former, not only gives a preference to 
 his posture, but maintains it to be the only proper 
 posture for a sinner: he insists that to stand in 
 prayer, is to pray in an unscriptural and unwar- 
 rantable manner. To support his opinion, this zeal- 
 ous Christian turns over the leaves of his bible to 
 collect the several cases on record, in which it ap- 
 pears holy men prayed in a kneeling posture; and 
 then, with an air of triumph, produces them to con- 
 vince his opponent, that he is acting against the 
 authority of scripture, and the practice of ancient 
 saints. His opponent replies. These cases by no 
 means settle the question in dispute. They are suf- 
 ficient, I acknowledge, to prove kneeling before 
 God in prayer a becoming posture; which I do not 
 pretend to deny: but, surely, they do not establish 
 your position, that it is the only lawful attitude of 
 
^06 LETTER XIII. 
 
 body in performing this duty. To make out your 
 pointy and justify the censures which you have ta- 
 ken the liberty to pass on me and others, M'hose 
 practice varies from yours; you ought, at least, to 
 prove the sacred scriptures to contain no case, in 
 which the kneeling posture was not used by holy 
 wen. But this can never be done. From experience 
 I find, that, by using a different attitude, I can pray 
 more to my own edification. On this account, I 
 prefer standing before the mercy-seat of my God; 
 and, in the practice of ancient saints, who often 
 used this posture, I find a complete warrant for my 
 conduct, and feel assured that, if the heart be en- 
 gaged in prayer, it is of little consequence what at- 
 titude may be assumed by the body. It is obvious, 
 which of the two disputants would have the best in 
 this argument. 
 
 Thus, stands the matter in the case before us. 
 Although the advocates of immersion could adduce 
 recorded instances of baptism, which made it indu- 
 bitable, that, on those occasions, this mode was 
 used by the apostles; yet it would, by no means, be 
 sufficient to prove it the only lawful one, and the 
 use of any other destructive to the ordinance. To 
 support their exclusive claims, it is incumbent on 
 them, at least, to show that there is not on record, 
 in the whole New Testament, a single case of bap- 
 tism, in which it was administered by a different 
 mode: because a solitary case would decisively prove 
 against their pretensions, that our Lord has not re- 
 
Cases of JlpostoUc Baptism, 207 
 
 stricted the administration of his sacred rite to any 
 one mode, exclusive of all others* 
 
 I make this statement, not to concede recorded 
 cases to be evidently in favour of immersion, while 
 only one or two can be urged in justification of our 
 practice^ but simply to give you a correct view of 
 the question in debate, and to let you see, that evin- 
 cing the validity of immersion, is utterly insufficient 
 to prove the unlawfulness of all other modes of bap- 
 tism. Neither truth nor candour requires us to 
 make such a concession: because the cases of apos- 
 tolic baptism found in sacred history, furnish pro- 
 bable evidence of the ordinance having, on these 
 occasions, been administered, not by immersion, but 
 in some other way. 
 
 The question being thus fairly stated, let us pro- 
 ceed to examine these cases, and see on which side 
 the evidence preponderates j whether in favour of 
 immersion, or in favour of some other mode. For 
 the sake of shortening these letters, already ex- 
 tended far beyond my original intention, I shall for- 
 bear to treat of the baptism of John, our Lord's 
 forerunner: not, however, because we have any rea- 
 son to fear his practice as looking at us with an un- 
 friendly aspect, but for this plain reason, his was 
 not Christian baptism. 
 
 In support of this assertion, various considera- 
 tions, drawn from the station occupied by this sin- 
 gular man, might be urged. But I may safely wave 
 them, and rest the truth on an appeal to evidence 
 
308 BETTER Xra. 
 
 arising from a fact recorded by an inspired histo- 
 rian. Paul, he informs us, rebaptized, at Ephesus, 
 in the name of the Lord Jesus, certain disciples 
 who had been previously baptized by John, Acts 
 xix. 1 — 7. Ihis fact presents decisive proof, that 
 John's baptism was not Christian baptism: for, if 
 it had been, where was the necessity or propriety 
 of administering again the sacred rite, to persons 
 who had already received it agreeably to our Lord's 
 appointment? 
 
 By a forced construction of the passage referred 
 to, it has been attempted to make it appear these 
 disciples were not rebaptized. The fifth verse, it is 
 said, must be considered as part of Paul's address 
 to them; and as stating that, as John taught the 
 applicants for his baptism to « believe on him which 
 should come after him, that is, on Christ," he vir- 
 tually baptized them in the name of the Lord Je- 
 sus. But examine, my brethren, the narrative, and 
 you will see this to be a very forced construction 
 indeed. There is nothing in it about a virtual bap- 
 tism. It is stated expressly, that these disciples 
 " were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus;" 
 not virtually f but really: and, it is evident, the fifth 
 verse must be considered as the words of the histo- 
 rian; for the expression <* When they heard this,^^ 
 proves that this verse cannot, witliout doing vio- 
 lence to the narrative, be made a part of Paul's 
 address; but must be regarded as the language of 
 the historian, informing us of the act that followed 
 
Cases of tlpostolic Baptism* 209 
 
 the apostle's instruction. Paul speaks in the second, 
 third, and fourth verses: and the explanation which 
 he gave of the nature of John's haptism, was in- 
 tended to show these disciples, how it imposed an 
 obligation on them to be baptized in the name of the 
 Lord Jesusj whom his forerunner John taught the 
 people to expect, and duly to receive at his mani- 
 festation. The historian then proceeds to declare 
 the effect of this address; that these men, convinced 
 of their duty, readily received Christian baptism 
 at the hands of Paul. Had the fifth verse been in- 
 tended as part of the apostle's address, his inter- 
 pretation of the instruction given by John to the 
 people, would not have been interrupted by the 
 phrase, <* When they heard this," with which that 
 verse begins; but the remainder of it, excluding 
 this unnecessary phrase, would have been immedi- 
 ately connected with the fourth verse by means of 
 a copulative conjunction. The baptism of John was 
 ** a baptism of repentance," (v. 4) attended with 
 some instruction relative to the promised Messiah; 
 he did not, however, baptize in the name of the 
 Lord Jesus: but Paul and his fellow apostles bap- 
 tized explicitly in this divine name. See v. 5. 
 
 On the whole, it appears evident, these disci- 
 ples were really baptized by Paul, although they 
 had been previously baptized by John: and this fact 
 furnishes decisive evidence of the baptism esta- 
 blished by our Lord for his church being essenti- 
 
 t2 
 
^10 1.ETTER XIII. 
 
 ally different from that administered by his harbin- 
 ger John. 
 
 This truth settled, we proceed to examine the 
 cases of baptism which occurred after our Lord's 
 ascension into heaven; without stopping to inquire 
 what mode was used by John in administering his 
 rite. Suffer me, however, to make this passing ob- 
 servation, that, considering the great multitudes 
 which flocked to him for baptism, it appears highly 
 improbable that even he baptized by immersion. 
 See Mat. iii. 5, 6. 
 
 The first instance of baptism after the ascension 
 of our Lord, was that of the three thousand on the 
 day of Pentecost. Concerning them it is expressly 
 stated, that they were baptized the nery day on 
 which the Holy Ghost descended upon the apostles; 
 " Then they tliat gladly received his word were bap- 
 tized: and the same day there were added unto them 
 about three thousand souls." In contemplating this 
 ease, the question occurs. How were these nume- 
 rous converts baptized? Consult the sacred narra- 
 tive, and you will find it silent with regard to the 
 mode used on this occasion. It simply states that 
 they were baptized: and we are left to infer the 
 mode from a view of circumstances connected with 
 the case. Let us consider these circumstances. 
 
 It was about nine o'clock in the morning,* when 
 Peter began to preach. We may reasonably suppose 
 
 * Acts ii. 15. As the Jews began their day at six in the raorn- 
 ing, their third corresponds with our ninth hour. 
 
Cases of Jpostolic BapVism. 211 
 
 that, on this ever-memorable day, ^vlicn such glo- 
 rious success attended the preacliing of a once cru- 
 cified, but now exalted Saviour, he and his fellow 
 apostles occupied a considerable space with their 
 discourses to the listening and astonished crouds. 
 The sacred historian has not given us the whole 
 even of Peter's sermon. Nothing more than the 
 great outlines of it are recorded. In the close of 
 his narrative we find it written: " With many other 
 words did he (Peter) testify and exhort, saying, 
 Save yourselves from this untoward generation." 
 We may, therefore, conclude it to have been twelve 
 e'clock before the apostles ceased preaching, and 
 proceeded to the baptism of their converts. 
 
 The administrators of the ordinance, on this 
 occasion, were in number twelve. It appears from 
 the narrative, we confess, that the Holy Spirit was 
 shed down upon other disciples of our Lord, beside 
 his apostles. The mere reception of miraculous 
 gifts, however, did not empower those who had not 
 received a commission to that effect, to administer 
 sacred rites. Cornelius, the Roman centurion, and 
 his friends, convened at his house when Peter 
 preached the gospel to them, received similar 
 gifts;* but it cannot be supposed that they were, 
 by this heavenly donation, invested with power to 
 baptize and administer the Lord's supper. Before 
 a man, how enriched soever by gifts spiritual or 
 miraculous, can lawfully undertake the administra* 
 
 * Acts X. 44, 46. 
 
212 LETTER XIII. 
 
 tion of these Christian ordinances, he must receive 
 a regular commission; either from the great Head 
 of the church, or from the hands of his ministering 
 servants empowered to give it in his name. 
 
 Desirous of increasing the number of persons 
 officiating on this occasion, some take the liberty of 
 supposing the apostles were assisted by a part of the 
 seventy, whom our Lord had once sent out to preach 
 the gospel. But the narrative affords no ground for 
 such a supposition. It makes but one distinction 
 between the disciples: it divides them into two 
 classes; one formed by the apostles, and the other, 
 by the rest of our Saviour's followers. It tells us 
 expressly, that Peter, rising to preach, stood up 
 "with the eleven."* The commission of the seventy 
 was temporary: it expired when they returned and 
 gave to Christ an account of its fulfilment. It was 
 a commission to preach, not to baptize: the account 
 of it by Luke contains not a word about baptism.j 
 They were sent out before Jesus to preach in cities 
 and places which he intended to visit in person; and, 
 for the confirmation of their doctrine, they were 
 empowered to work miracles. While our Saviour 
 remained on earth, none of his disciples, except 
 the twelve apostles who constantly attended on his 
 person, were authorized to administer baptism: and 
 the grand commission to preach and to baptize, 
 given just before his ascension into heaven, was li- 
 mited to his apostles, now reduced, by the death of 
 
 • Acts ii. 14. t i-uke k. 
 
Cases of tApostoUc Baptism, 21S 
 
 Judas, to eleven.* Admitting, then, tlie presence 
 ef some of the seventy on the day of Pentecost, we 
 can find nothing, either in the sacred narrative of 
 its memorable events, or in the tempoi*ary cliarac- 
 ter as preachers sustained by these men, to Avarrant 
 the supposition that they assisted in the administra- 
 tion of baptism to the three thousand converts. 
 But, on the contrary, as their commission did not 
 invest them with authority to baptize, and as the 
 commission given by our ascending Redeemer, was 
 limited to the apostles, we have reasonable ground 
 for concluding, that none of the sevenfy were com- 
 petent to aid in administering the ordinance on this 
 glorious day. 
 
 Now, compare the number baptized with the 
 number of administrators of the rite, and you will 
 see it highly probable that immersion was not used 
 on this occasion. Divide the former by the latter, 
 and the result will give to each apostle two hundred 
 and fifty subjects of baptism. Allow to each appli- 
 cation of the ordinance, by immersion, not more 
 than three minutes, and you will find, even suppo- 
 sing the apostles took no rest after the fatigue of 
 preaching, but proceeded without delay to adminis- 
 ter baptism, and continued in the duty without in- 
 termission, that the baptizing of so many individu- 
 als, must have employed them till some time in the 
 morning of the next day. I ask, then, whether it 
 can appear credible to any reasonable person, that 
 
 * Mat. xxviii. 16—20. Mark xvi. 14— 18. 
 
21jjf LETTER XIII. 
 
 the apostles consumed so many of their precious 
 hours by adopting a tedious mode of applying bap- 
 tism, wlien, by using a more expeditious one, the 
 work might have been performed in a much less 
 time? It is highly improbable. The very circum- 
 stances of the case constrain us to believe, that 
 these holy men, i\ho, to use the expression of one 
 of them, were ^' sent, not to baytici>€, but to preach 
 the gospel,"* administered baptism on this memo- 
 rable day, in a way more convenient and expeditious 
 than immersion. 
 
 Our reasoning has hitherto proceeded on a 
 supposition the most favourable to immersion; on 
 the supposition of the apostles having had easy 
 access to a collection or stream of water large 
 enough for using this mode. But, it is a well known 
 fact, there was no river near Jerusalem of depth 
 sufficient for the purpose. To get rid of this diffi- 
 eulty, some have supposed that the apostles were 
 allowed to use the water belonging to the temple. 
 The supposition is unreasonable. This water was 
 appropriated to sacred purposes, and accessible only 
 to Priests and Levites: and it cannot be imagined, 
 with any shadow of probability, that those who had 
 the charge of it, diverted it to a common use, by 
 granting the apostles liberty to baptize with it in 
 the name of Jesus, whom the priests regarded as 
 an impostor, and had very lately crucified as a blas- 
 phemer. And although we suppose some of these 
 
 ♦ 1 C»r. i 17. 
 
Cases of Apostolic Baptism* 215 
 
 bitter enemies of our Saviour to have been, on tbis 
 triumphant day, subdued and converted to the Chris- 
 tian faith, yet we cannot believe, that they allowed 
 the apostles and their converts to come within the 
 sacred enclosure around the brazen sea and lavers; 
 because it was lawful only to themselves and the 
 Levites to enter that court, and make use of the 
 consecrated water.* Years elapsed before Jewish 
 believers, excessively attached to the rites and laws 
 of Moses, could receive the truth, that the Sinai- 
 covenant, and all that system of typical worship es- 
 tablished by it, were abolished by the introduction 
 of Christianity. 
 
 From the circumstances, then, of this case, we 
 may fairly conclude, that immersion was not used 
 in baptizing the three thousand converts on the day 
 of Pentecost. 
 
 The next instance of baptism is that of the E- 
 thiopian eunuch. Acts viii. 26 — iO. This is sup- 
 posed to furnish decisive evidence in favour of im- 
 mersion. He went down into the water, and he 
 came up out of the water, say its advocates^ and, 
 with an air of triumph, they ask, "Who can deny 
 that this man was immersed? 
 
 Allowing eveiT^ thing which can in reason be de- 
 manded, and even admitting for a moment that the 
 eunuch was immersed; we may, with perfect confi- 
 dence, retort upon our opponents, and demand of 
 
 them, how this case can support their position 
 
 . or- 
 
 * 6ee descriptioa ef the temple by Brewn aad Frideatui. 
 
210 XETTER XIII. 
 
 Lose not sight, my brethren, of the question in de- 
 bate. It is not whether immersion be a lawful 
 mode, but whether it be the onhf lawful mode of 
 baptism: for those who denounce our conduct, con- 
 tend, not only that their practice conforms to apos- 
 tolic example, but also that ours contravenes divine 
 authority. We, therefore, demand, Does this case of 
 baptism afiirm our mode to be unscriptural? Does 
 the sacred historian state it as a fact, that the apos- 
 tles always administered the ordinance by immer- 
 sion? Does he pronounce effusion, washing, and 
 sprinkling, to be so repugnant to the very nature of 
 baptism as to render it a nullity? Read the passage 
 again, and you will discover not a word of all this. 
 Allowing, then, the eunuch to have been baptized 
 by immersion, what will it prove? Simply, that this 
 is a lawful mode. But, assuredly, it cannot prove 
 it to be the only lawful way in which baptism can 
 be administered. 
 
 Candor, how^ever, does not demand from us this 
 concession. It may fairly be made appear proba- 
 ble, that immersion was not used on this occasion. 
 
 Certain it is, that the narrative is silent with re- 
 gard to the particular manner in which the eunuch 
 w as baptized. The words of the historian, on which 
 so much reliance is placed by the advocates of im- 
 mersion, contain no statement of the mode. He does 
 indeed say, <* They wenl down into the water, both 
 PHILIP AND THE EUNUCH.*' But was this act of go- 
 down into the water baptism? If it were, then 
 
Cases of Jipostolie Baptism. 217 
 
 Viiilip) as well as the eunuch, was baptized; for both 
 performed the same act. If it were, why was it ad- 
 ded by the historian immediately after his account 
 of this act, << And he baptized liimT^ The fact is, 
 and it will appear to any one attentively reading the 
 sacred narrative, that the baptism of the Ethiopian 
 was subsequent to his being in the water: both lie and 
 the Evangelist were in the water, before the latter ad- 
 ministered the ordinance to his convert. How he did 
 it, whether by plunging his whole body under water, 
 or by applying a small portion of the significant ele- 
 ment to his face, we are not informed: and to deter- 
 mine the question, we must, as in the case already 
 examined, reflect upon the circumstances of this bap- 
 tism, and, after a candid and impartial view of 
 them, decide in favor of that mode which may ap- 
 pear to be supported by the strongest probable evi- 
 dence. 
 
 What were the circumstances of this case? The 
 Ethiopian was on a long journey, returning to his 
 own country from Jerusalem, whither he had gone 
 to worship the true God. Philip was directed by 
 the Spirit to meet him at a certain place. At his in- 
 vitation, he ascended his chariot, and ^reached to him 
 the gospel, by expounding a passage in the Old Testa- 
 ment, referring to Christ, which this man happened to 
 be then reading. The eunuch believed. Seeing water 
 near the road, he expressed a desire to be baptized: 
 and, on the profession of his faith, Philip yielded to his 
 request, and administered to him the Christian or- 
 
 u 
 
218 LETTER XIII. 
 
 dinance. Now, in order to a decent administration 
 of baptism, it was natural for them to descend from 
 the chariot, and go to the water. It would have been 
 unbecoming the humility required on such an occa- 
 sion, to have remained in the chariot, and directed 
 a servant to bring the element to them. As the an- 
 cients wore sandals, not shoes, it was no inconve- 
 nience to them to walk through any small streaip: 
 we may, therefore, grant to our brethren the most 
 that can be reasonal)ly requested — that Philip and 
 his convert went into the water.* 
 
 But to conclude, from this single circumstance, 
 that the eunuch was baptized by immersion, will 
 appear unwarrantable, if we impartially consider 
 the other circumstances connected with this case. 
 They make it probable a more convenient mode was 
 used. Before such a conclusion be drawn, it ought, 
 at least, to be proved, that the water was deep 
 enough for immersion. This, however, cannot be 
 done. The manner in which the Ethiopian speaks of 
 it, intimates the contrary to have been the Imct: for 
 he does not say, See, here is a river, or here is deep 
 
 * The prepositions uc and m, here, and in the next verse, render- 
 ed into and out of the water, frequently signify u7ito and Jrom, as 
 every one must allow who understands the Greek language; and 
 tlius they are often used in the style of the New Testament, and 
 particularly of Luke: as for example, tic signifies W7i^o in Matth. xv. 
 £4. Luke iv. 5. and vi. 12. and ix. 28. Acts xiv. 21. and Colos. i. 20. 
 And 6» signifies /row, Luke xx. 4. John xix. 12. Acts xiv. 8. and 
 X\, 21, 29- i^nJ xvii. 3, 31. and xxvii, 34. Guyses note on tliis place 
 
Cases of tRpostoUc Baptism. 219 
 
 water; but, See^ here is xvater: implying that, fop 
 the due administration of baptism, is required only 
 water, and that a small quantity will answer the 
 purpose, as well as a greater. This interpretation 
 receives confirmation from the testimony of travel- 
 lers, who represent this water as a spring, issuing 
 from the foot of a mountain.* 
 
 Besides, if the water had been sufficiently deep, 
 other circumstances forbid the supposition of im- 
 mersion having been used. Is it reasonable to sup- 
 pose, that this man, while prosecuting a long jour- 
 ney, was plunged into the water with all his clothes 
 on, and subjected to the inconvenience of changing 
 them in a desert place^ when a different mode, such 
 as was used in baptizing the three thousand on the 
 day of Pentecost, would have answered the purpose? 
 Surely this would be going against probability. 
 
 The Evangelist, in his mode of administering 
 this Christian rite, we presume, happily alluded, as 
 Henry observes, to a passage in Isaiah, which the 
 ennuch had doubtless just read; for it stands in the 
 
 * Acts viii. 36. Ti vcToig, a certain tvatery seems to be of diminu- 
 tive signification, and to intimate, that it was not water of any consi- 
 derable depth: and Jerome, Sandys, and other travellers, speak of 
 it as a certain spring or fountain, that rises at the foot of a mountain 
 in the tribe of Judah or Benjamin, whose waters are sucked in by 
 the same ground that produces them; and they report that this was 
 the place where the eunuch was baptized by Philip. Vide HieroH. 
 de Locis. Hebr. pag. 41. and Sandy's Travels, lib. ii. p. 142. 
 
 Guyse's note on this place. 
 
320 LETTiiR XIII. 
 
 prophet but a few verses before the two specified by 
 the historian as being under the eye of this man, 
 when Philip came up to his chariot. lie was then 
 reading the 7th and 8th verses of the 53th chapter 
 of Isaiah; the passage to which we refer, is the last 
 verse of tlie chapter next preceding. The words 
 are these: ** So shall he (Christ) sprinkle many na- 
 tions." Howhas this prophecy been fulfilled? Christ 
 has sprinkled many nations with his atoning bloody 
 and with the influence of his Holy Spirit shed down 
 upon them: and these nations have, by his minister- 
 ing servants, been sprinkled with baptismal water, 
 as an appointed visible &ign of the blessing so be- 
 stowed on them. 
 
 Considering, then, all the circumstances of this 
 case, I ask you, my brethren, whether candor re- 
 quire us to yield it favoring immersion; and whe- 
 ther it do not appear propable the eunuch was bap- 
 tized in a more convenient way, as by applying wa- 
 ter to his face? In my view, the latter corresponds 
 with circumstances much better than the former: 
 and, consequently, the conceding of this case to our 
 opponents, by some who do not admit their exclu- 
 sive claims, seems to have resulted from want of 
 careful investigation. 
 
 The baptism of Paul comes next in order. Acts 
 ix. 17, 18. The circumstances attending his case 
 make strongly against immersion. In the narrative, 
 we find no intimation of his having been conducted 
 to a place convenient for using this mode: but, on 
 
Cases of Jlpostolic Baptism, 221 
 
 the contrary, we discover several circumstances to 
 render it probable, that he was baptized in the very 
 apartment in which Ananias found him sitting, when 
 he delivered to him his message from Jesus Christ: 
 ♦« And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had 
 been scales; and he received sight forthwith, and 
 arose, and was bapti'zed. The narrative, you will 
 observe, is rapid, and implies strongly, that bap- 
 tism was administered to him immediately after the 
 restoration of his sight. During three days, he had 
 been blind, and had taken neither meat nor drink: 
 (v. 9) it cannot, therefore, be doubted that, when 
 Ananias addressed him, he was sitting or lying dowu 
 in his apartment. Now, the narrative, concise and 
 rapid as it is, notices the change made in his pos- 
 ture previously to his baptism: "He arose, and was 
 baptized:*' and it informs us of another circumstance 
 worthy of remark, that notwithstanding his long 
 fasting, which, together with anguish of mind, must 
 have weakened him greatly, he was baptized before 
 he had taken any nourishment,* for^ immediately 
 subsequent to the account of his baptism, the nar- 
 rative states, " And when he had received meat, he 
 was strengthened.'* But not the slightest Jiint is 
 given of his having been conducted by Ananias even 
 from one apartment to another, for the purpose of 
 baptizing him; much less, of his having been led out 
 of the house to some river or large collection of 
 water, for the sake of immersion. 
 
 u 3 
 
222 tKTTER XIII. 
 
 In view of these cii-ciimstances, can it be ima- 
 gined, that this case of baptism was performed by 
 immersion? If the ordinance had been thus admi- 
 nistered, would not the historian, who notices the 
 act of rising, liave given, at least, some hints of 
 more important circumstances? Would he not have 
 hinted at some preparation made for a mode of bap- 
 tism so inconvenient to one in Paul's situation? 
 Would he not have given some intimation of his 
 having been conducted by Ananias from the house 
 in which he found him, to some other place,, or from 
 one apartment to another, that water sufficient for 
 immersing him might be obtained? Can it, then, in 
 the total absence of the slightest hints of this kintl, 
 be credited, that Paul, in such circumstances, so 
 enfeebled by long fasting and bitter distress of mind, 
 was, previously to his taking any nourishment, led 
 forth by Ananias to a river or other large collection of 
 water, for the purpose of administering baptism to 
 him by immersion? Is it not reasonable to suppose, 
 if this mode had been used, Ananias would, before 
 proceeding to baptize his convert, have directed 
 him to sit down to meat, in order to recover a little 
 strength? But the reverse took place: and, there- 
 fore, in view of this fact, and other circumstances, 
 ^e conclude, that Paul was not immersed, but bap- 
 tized in a way more suitable to his enfeebled con- 
 dition. 
 
 The baptism of the Roman centurion and his 
 friends, stands next on record. Acts x. 44?— i8. No- 
 
 1 
 
Cases of Aiwstolic BaptisDu 223 
 
 thing to favour immersion can be found in tliis case. 
 The sacred historian gives not the slightest hint of 
 their having been led to some river or large col- 
 lection of water. On tlie contrary, it may be in- 
 ferred from the narrative, that these first fruits 
 of the Gentile-world were baptized in Cornelius's 
 house, in which they were assembled to hear Peter 
 preach the gospel, and where the Holy Ghost fell 
 on them; and that, for the administration of the 
 ordinance, water was brought into the apartment 
 which they occupied. " Can any man," exclaimed 
 Peter, astonished at the miracle wrought in their 
 favour, " Can any man forbid water, that these 
 should not be baptized, which have received the 
 Holy Ghost as well as we?" Weigh, my brethren, 
 the apostle's expression: Can any man forbid iva- 
 ter^ Does the form of this question favour the idea 
 of Cornelius and his friends having been conducted to 
 some stream or river? May we not fairly infer from 
 it, that water was brought to them in some vessel, and 
 that they were baptized by an application of the 
 element to their faces? The historian's silence about 
 any change of place, and the form of Peter's ex>- 
 pression, while they discountenance the supposition 
 of the use of immersion on this occasion, furnish a 
 degree of probable evidence, that the ordinance was 
 administered in some more easy and convenient way. 
 Nor does the case of Lydia favour immersion.* 
 She was at the river's side, when Paul preached the 
 
 Acts xvi. 13 — 15. 
 
224 LETTER XIII. 
 
 ^spcl to her and other women, assembled in a 
 proseucha* or an oratory: and, if she were baptized 
 there, we confess there was no want of water suffi- 
 cient for the use of this mode. Let us concede it 
 as a fact, that the ordinance was administered to 
 her at the river's side, and see what will be the re- 
 sult of a fair examination of all the circumstances 
 of her case. This woman went thither, not for the 
 purpose of bathing, but to perform her devotions 
 in the proseucha: and, as her purpose in going to 
 that place did not require it, she took no change of 
 apparel, either for herself, or for her household. 
 How, then, were they baptized? Because the ordi- 
 nance was administered at the side of a river, shall 
 we infer that they were immersed? What! did the 
 apostle immerse them, although they had no change 
 ©f raiment at hand? Was this woman, together with 
 her family, sent back to the city completely wet, to 
 be gazed at by every one that saw them in such a 
 plight! Who can believe that Paul placed them in 
 a condition so ridiculous, when, by the use of ano- 
 ther mode of baptism, such as was adopted on oc- 
 casions already considered, it was so easy to avoid 
 it? To get over this difficulty, it may be supposed^ 
 that some one of the family was dispatched to the 
 
 * What is translated, ** WJiere prayer was -wont to be madey^ 
 means a Jewish proseucha, or place made for prayei*. It was an 
 open court or enclosure, like those about the temple at Jerusalem; 
 and it appears from history that, in many heathen countries where 
 the Jews resided, they built theta for private devotions. Prideaux, 
 vol. i. p. 387 — 9. 
 
Cases of t^ipostolic Baptism. 225 
 
 city, for a change of apparel for each candidate for 
 baptism. But, my brethren, the narrative affords 
 no ground for this supposition. The historian speaks 
 not a >vord about any person liaving been sent on such 
 an errand; nor does lie give tlie slightest hint, frojii 
 which it can be fairly inferred that a change of rai- 
 ment was procured. It is also worthy of remark, 
 that it does not appear there was any convenient 
 place, in which females could, with decency, make 
 a change of their dress. The JcAvish proseuchfe 
 were open courts or enclosures, accessible to men 
 as well as to women; and not at all fit for perform- 
 ing an act requiring so much concealment. 
 
 Taking all the circumstances of this case into 
 riew, we are constrained to give it as our judgment, 
 that Lydia and her household were not baptized by 
 immersion. 
 
 The baptism next occurring, and the last men- 
 tioned in the Acts of the apostles, is that of the 
 jailor and his family. Acts xvi. This case, fairly 
 considered, presents strong evidence against im- 
 mersion. Paul and Silas were bleeding with stripes 
 just inflicted; the city was thrown into confusion and 
 consternation by an earthquake; the violence of its 
 shock was so great as to force open the prison-doors, 
 and to loose the prisoners' bands; and it occurred at 
 midnight. These circumstances plainly forbid the 
 supposition, that the jailor conducted his heavenly 
 instructers to a river for the purpose of receiving, 
 for himself and family, baptism by immersion. This 
 
226 LETTER XIII. 
 
 would have been a hazardous deed: for had be been 
 seen leading through (he streets, at midnight, his 
 prisoners, whom he was charged to keep safely, it 
 might have cost him his life. 
 
 Discarding a supposition so extravagant, let us 
 observe attentively the sacred narrative. From the 
 narrative, then, it is evident, that the Philippian 
 jailor brought Paul and Silas out of that inner pri- 
 son, where he had made their feet fast in the stocks 
 to some other apartment; that in this apartment he 
 made his solemn inquiry, and they answered it by 
 preaching the gospel to him and to others. It like- 
 wise appears from the narrative, that in this room, 
 after having washed their stripes,* he and his fa- 
 mily were baptized; and that, subsequently to the 
 administration of the sacred ordinance, he conduct- 
 ed them to his house, and set << meat before them." 
 
 In view of these circumstances, we ask, How 
 were these heathen baptized? No river flowed 
 through the prison. Yet, say the advocates of an 
 exclusive mode, they were immersed; and, that wa- 
 ter sufficient may not be wanting, they provide a 
 bath in this prison! Here they resort to mere sup- 
 position, for which the sacred liistorian furnishes no 
 ground. We have carefully read his account, but 
 cannot learn that he was acquainted with the sup- 
 posed fact. Certain it is, he speaks not a word 
 
 * ** ffe took them," (verse 33) means not that he conducted 
 them to some other apartment; for that act is expressed by another 
 word, Ife brought them out: (verse 30) but »nly his proceeding to 
 wash their stripes. 
 
Cases of t^lposloUc Baptism, 227 
 
 about it: nor is tliere, in any of those other cases 
 where a hath must be provided in order to surmount 
 the difficulties in the way of immersion, any men- 
 tion made of one, or the slightest hint given to lead 
 to such a supposition. 
 
 Surely, such unauthorized suppositions are not 
 allowable, in supporting an opinion which not only 
 asserts the lawfulness of immersion, but denounces 
 every other mode of administering baptism as ut- 
 terly unlawful; and thus reduces to the state of un- 
 baptized persons, atleast, more than half the Chris- 
 tian world, and deprives myriads and myriads of 
 the seal of that covenant, which is all their salva- 
 tion, and all their desire! Surely, an opinion at- 
 tended with consequences so serious and important, 
 and fixing on the great body of professing Chris- 
 tians a reproach, similar in import to that in the 
 mouth of a Jew when he called the heathen uncir- 
 cumcised, should disdain receiving support from 
 mere supposition; a suppobition too which can find 
 no countenance from the passage it proposes to ex- 
 plain! 
 
 Abandoning suppositions not warranted by the 
 narrative, let us determine the question by a candid 
 regard to the circumstances which it presents for 
 consideration. The jailor, as already observed, 
 brought Paul and Silas out of the inner prison int« 
 another apartment; and, so far as a judgment can 
 be formed from the narrative and the circumstances 
 before noticed, it appears, that in this apartmint 
 
328 LETTER XIII. 
 
 the ordinance was administered. The conclusion, 
 then, seems highly probahle, that this heathen and 
 his family were baptized, not by immersion, but in 
 some other mode, more convenient, and better cor- 
 responding to the condition of the apostles and their 
 converts, and to the circumstances of time and 
 place. This conclusion receives additional proof, 
 when we reflect that the jailor brought his prison- 
 ers out of the inner prison to another apartment, 
 not for the purpose of being baptized, but in order 
 to propose that all-important question which so 
 greatly agitated his mind. His grand inquiry was 
 made to them after he had changed their apartment: 
 He " brought them out, and said. Sirs, what must 
 I do to be saved?" This apartment to which they 
 were conducted, was not selected because it contain- 
 ed water for the administration of baptism; for the 
 jailor, having as yet neither proposed his question, 
 nor received an answer to it, could then have enter- 
 tained no idea of being baptized. 
 
 On the whole, considering that this heathen and 
 his family were baptized at midnight, not in a river, 
 but in an apartment of the prison; that this apart- 
 ment had been selected with no view to the adminis- 
 tration of baptism; and that the supposition of a bath 
 having been used for the purpose, is utterly unwar- 
 rantable: we may fairly conclude that they were not 
 immei^sedf but baptized by applying water to the face. 
 
 I have now examined the several cases of bap- 
 tism on record, which occurred after the ascension 
 
The term baptize examined. 229 
 
 9f our Lord into heaven: and I confidently appeal 
 to the candid reader, whether it does not appear, 
 from a fair and impartial survey of the circum- 
 stances attending them, that these baptisms were 
 performed, not by immersion, but in some other 
 mode, as washing, sprinkling, or effusion. The case 
 of the eunuch has been, incautiously and without 
 necessity, given up as being decisive in favour of 
 immersion: but a careful inquiry into the circum- 
 stances of his case, renders it probable that he was 
 not immersed. 
 
 LETTER XIV. 
 
 .Yo precept in favour of immersion as an exclusive 
 mode, — The origiiial word, baptize, examined. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 In my last was submitted to your consideration, 
 a fair investigation of the circumstances connected 
 w itfi the several cases of apostolic baptism, recorded 
 in ihat part of our inspired volume which is styled, 
 T e Acts of the Apostles. The result was, that, 
 so iap as a judgment can be formed from the history 
 
230 LETTER XIV. 
 
 of them, it does not appear, in a single case, to be 
 certain, or even probable, that immersion was used 
 in administering this religious rite. 
 
 But, to all our reasoning on these cases, the ad- 
 vocates of immersion will object, that it must be 
 false, because this mode is enjoined by positive 
 precept. Immersion enjoined by positive precept! 
 Where? Let the precept be produced, and we sub- 
 mit; we shall renounce our reasoning on the subject, 
 and acknowledge our error. And where, my bre- 
 thren, do you imagine this positive precept is to be 
 found; — this precept, which is to set aside the com- 
 bined testimony of all the circumstances that have 
 been examined and compared together, in order to 
 ascertain apostolic practice in relation to baptism? 
 Would you not expect to fmd it so plain and express, 
 that "he who runs may read it?" Could you ima- 
 gine this boasted precept couched in a si7igle word, 
 the meaning of which has been a subject of dispute 
 among the learned for several centuries? Yet, 
 strange as it may appear, this is fact! The only pre- 
 cept which can be produced, or which any pretend 
 to offer, is the Greek term BxttIk^u, which our En- 
 glish bible properly translates Baptize, 
 
 It is contended that this word signifies to im- 
 merse. That it sometimes bears this signification, 
 is not denied. It has, however, we maintain, other 
 significations: it signifies to wash, to pour, and to 
 sprinkle. But, say the advocates of an exclusive 
 mode, the primary sense of the word, is to immerse. 
 
The term baptize examined, 231 
 
 This is irrelevant to the point in dispute. Keep, my 
 brethren, the question in view. What is it? Not 
 whether immersion be a lawful mode of baptism. 
 Were this the question, an endeavour to prove that 
 the word primarily signifies to immerse, would be 
 pertinent. But this is not the question: it is one 
 wholly different; namely. Whether immersion be 
 the only lawful mode in which baptism can be ad- 
 ministered. This being the question, what can it 
 avail to prove the primary meaning of the word to 
 be that of immersion, while, like a thousand other 
 terms, it has several different significations? Were 
 our brethren able to demonstrate their point in the 
 most satisfactory manner, it would still be fair to 
 ask. Which of its several significations does the 
 word bear in connexion with Christian baptism? 
 For words, it is well known to those who have stu- 
 died the nature of human language, undergo, in the 
 course of years, great alterations in their meaning; 
 and sometimes they obtain current, popular signi- 
 fications very different from their original import. 
 Thus, in our own language, the word to let has two 
 opposite meanings. It signifies to permit: as. Let 
 me do it; and it signifies to hinder: "For the mys- 
 tery of iniquity doth already work: only he who 
 now letteth will ?ef, until he be taken out of the way." 
 The word church signifies both a Christian society, 
 and a building consecrated to religious worship. 
 The term house is used in sacred scripture as the 
 name both of a common dwelling, and of the church 
 
232 LETTER Xiy. 
 
 of Christ.* The Greek word ^etpojonx, properly oi 
 primarily signifies a stretching out of the hand: yet the 
 eommon meaning of it is an election of magistrates. 
 The ancient way of choosing them was by stretch- 
 ing out the hand, and hence called x^tpolouec: but af- 
 terwards the word was applied to any election of 
 rulers, without regard to the mode. Ek»a»)o-/«, Church, 
 signifies, in general, an assembly of people: and ac- 
 cordingly, in the New Testament, it means both an 
 assembly lawfully convened by the civil magistrate: 
 as in Acts xix. 39; and one unlawfully gathered: as 
 in Acts xix. 33, 40, where it signifies what we 
 call a moh. But most generally the writers of the 
 New Testament mean by this word the church of 
 God; that holy society, separated, by his word and 
 Spirit, from the rest of mankind, for his worship 
 and glory. 
 
 This list of terms, having various significations, 
 might be greatly enlarged: but these few will serve 
 as a specimen to show how words depart from their 
 original meaning, and sometimes acquire, in com- 
 mon use, a sense that loses their primary ideas. 
 
 Admitting, then, it could be fairly proved, that 
 ;b<««-7<^«, baptize, in its primary sense, means to im- 
 merse, it would not settle the dispute; it would not 
 prove immersion to be the only lawful mode of bap- 
 tizing, and this term to contain a positive precept, 
 enjoining the use of it. The question would still 
 occur. Which of its several significations does the 
 word bear in connexion with Christian baptism? 
 
 * Ileb. iii.. 4 — 6. 
 
The term baptize examined. 233 
 
 And, surely, it is unreasonable to contend, that a 
 positive precept in favour of immersion, is couched 
 in a single term, with respect to the meaning of 
 which a question of this kind may, with the great- 
 est propriety, he proposed; because an investigation 
 might show it, in connexion with baptism, to be 
 used, not in its primary, but secondary sense. To 
 decide this question, an appeal must be made to 
 apostolic practice: and, unless it can be shown that, 
 on every occasion, the apostles baptized by immer- 
 sion, the primary sense of the word will be little 
 better than a rotten pillar in a building: It is ut- 
 terly unable to bear the weight laid upon it. It can 
 never prove, that every mode varying from the fa- 
 vourite one for which it is pleaded, renders baptism 
 void, and that all who do not use it are unbaptized 
 persons. This appeal has been made to apostolic 
 practice: and the result is entirely unfavourable to 
 immersion as an exclusive mode. There is not a 
 single case of baptism on record, in the Acts of the 
 Apostles, from which the use of immersion by these 
 inspired guides, can be inferred with certainty, or 
 even with a high degree of probability: much less 
 can it be sliown, that the apostles always adminis- 
 tered baptism in this way, and never used any other. 
 Were we, then, to yield the point, and allow BxttV^iu, 
 baptize, in its primary signification, to mean to im- 
 merse, our practice would still be defensible: be- 
 cause apostolic example proves this word, in con- 
 nexion with Curistian baptism^ not restrained to its 
 x2 
 
^0% LETTER XIV. 
 
 primary sense; and not only ^varranting Ihc use of 
 washing, pouring, or sprinkling; but that it is ra- 
 ther to be taken in one of these meanings, than in 
 that of immersion. 
 
 But we are under no necessity of yielding this 
 point. Much might be said to show, that to immerse 
 is not the primary meaning of this controverted 
 word.=* It is, however, unnecessary to perplex your 
 minds by entering into this difficult philological in- 
 vestigation. From the observations already made 
 you may perceive, that the dispute is not to be set- 
 tled by determining the primary meaning of this 
 word; and that, at last, we must appeal to apostolic 
 practice, in order to ascertain, whether, in connex- 
 ion with Christian baptism, the term be restricted 
 to one particular sense, or may be considered as 
 comprehending its several meanings, and authori- 
 zing different modes of applying baptismal water. 
 I shall, therefore, wave this discussion. 
 
 That you may not be misled by any show of ar- 
 gument on this much debated word, I shall state 
 what ought to be proved with respect to its mean- 
 
 * Mr. Williams, in answer to Mr. Booth, has written largely, to 
 prove that the primary signification of this term, is to tinge ^ to dyey 
 to xvet; and that to immerse is a secoiidary idea. The learned and 
 justly celebrated Doct.Owen asserts: I. ** It doth not signify properly 
 to dipt ov plunge; for that in Greek is i/uCetTrree and i/uSaTrri^o). 
 2. It no where signifies to dip, but as a mode of, and in order to, 
 washing. 3. It signifies the dipping of 2ijingery or the least touch 
 of the water, and not plunging the whole. 4. It signifies to wash 
 also in all good authors." Owen's Discourses, p. 581. 
 
The term baptize examined, 235 
 
 ing, in order to support the exclusive claims to bap- 
 tism founded on it. One of these three points should 
 be established by fair and decisive proofs: 1. Either 
 that the word nerer had any other signification than 
 to immerse; — 3. Or that this is the only sense, in 
 which it is used by the New Testament-writers; — 
 Or that, in connexion with Christian baptism, it 
 has, by divine authority 9 been limited to this single 
 meaning. Now, if either of these points could be 
 fairly made out, the question would be decided in 
 favour of immersion. 
 
 Let it, however, be observed, that the question 
 would then be decided only in favour of immersion 
 generally, not in favour of a total immei'sion. To 
 immerse signifies to dip any thing into water; which 
 may be done either partially or totally. If I dip my 
 finger, or hand, or foot, or body, I immerse it. The 
 proving, therefore, of either of the particulars spe- 
 cified, would only evince that immersion was to be 
 used in baptism, not that the whole body was to be 
 plunged under water: and room would still be left 
 for the question, Is the whole body, or a part of it, 
 to be immersed? — to decide which, it would be ne- 
 cessary to consult the practice of the apostles: and, 
 if it could not be shown that they immersed the 
 ^hole body, the immersion of a particular part 
 would be as lawful a mode of baptism, as covering 
 every particle of it with water. 
 
 We are confident, that neither of these points 
 can be established. 
 
236 LETTER XIV. 
 
 1. It cannot be proved, that B«9r7/^« has but one 
 meaning, and that it always signifies to immerse. 
 
 Unquestionably it signifies to wash, as well as to 
 immerse, I am acquainted with no Greek Lexicon 
 which does not give the word this meaning. That 
 learned man, that profound divine. Doctor Owen, 
 after citing in favour of this signification, the au- 
 thority of Scapula, Stephanus, and Stiidas, whom 
 he styles the p^eat treasury of the Greek tongue, 
 makes the following declaration: " I must say, and 
 will make it good, that no honest man who under- 
 stands the Greek tongue, can deny the word to sig- 
 nify TO WASH, as well as to dip."* In addition to 
 these unexceptionable authorities, might be cited 
 many other learned authors, who bear an unwaver- 
 ing testimony to this sense of the word. The au- 
 thority of such writers, well skilled in that language 
 to which the term belongs, is certainly decisive: it 
 should satisfy the mind of every unlearned person, 
 that B««;r7/^<y, baptize, does unquestionably signify to 
 wash, as Avell as to immerse. The first point, then, 
 must be given up as wholly indefensible. Indeed, I 
 do not recollect that any learned writer, skilled in 
 the Greek language, has, in contending for an ex- 
 clusive mode of baptism, ventured to restrict the 
 term to one meaning, and endeavoured to show that, 
 always, and in all writings, it signifies to immerse. 
 2. It cannot be proved, that /3<«^7/^<w is used by 
 the New Testament-writers, in one sense only, and 
 that this is to immerse. 
 
 * Owen's Discourses, p. 581. 
 
The term baptize examined. 257 
 
 Were authorities demanded in settling the point, 
 the concurrent opinion of hundreds of learned and 
 pious divines, who have examined this word, might 
 be produced to show that, in the New Testament, 
 it bears several meanings, and signifies to wash, to 
 pour, to spnnklc, as well as to immerse. But the 
 trouble of collecting quotations from the writings of 
 these great men, is unnecessary; because no one can 
 doubt this to have been their opinion, when he re- 
 flects that they were in the constant practice of bap- 
 tizing, not by immersion, but by washing, effusion, 
 or sprinkling; which conscience would not have al- 
 lowed, had they been convinced that the word never 
 signifies, in sacred scripture, any thing but to im- 
 merse. 
 
 Now, is it to be imagined, that all the learned, 
 profound, and pious divines, who held this opinion, 
 and acted on it in the administration of a solemn 
 rite, were so grossly mistaken with respect to the 
 meaning of an important word, as to have gone in 
 opposition to the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 and lost, by their error, the very ordinance itself? 
 Is it to be imagined, that, after all their frequent 
 and mature investigations of the meaning of this 
 word, and after all their repeated and fervent sup- 
 plications to the great Head of the church for the 
 teaching of his Holy Spirit, they failed in their 
 search for truth, and still remained in this mourn- 
 ful error? That God should leave in error those who 
 wiil not examine into the truth of their opinions, or 
 
238 LETTER XIV. 
 
 those wlio, confident of being right, pray, not that 
 themselves, but that others may be led to know the 
 truth, is not extraordinary. Nor is it extraordi- 
 nary, that he should leave in unimportant errors, 
 even sincere and praying Christians. But that he 
 should suffer so many of his people, after all their 
 inquiries about this matter, and prayers for the il- 
 lumination of his Holy Spirit, to remain in a very 
 important error; an error in its consequences so 
 mischievous, as to deprive the larger part of his 
 church of an ordinance designed for common use, 
 and appointed as the mark of their separation from 
 the world, is wholly incredible. But, my brethren, 
 there is no necessity for resting this matter on the 
 ground of authority. It may be set in such a light, 
 as to let persons, unacquainted with the Greek lan- 
 guage, see for themselves, that the word /s^^r?/^*, 
 baptize, signifies in the New Testament, to wash, 
 to pour, and to sprinkle. 
 
 1. It signifies to xvash. This appears from a 
 passage in Luke's gospel. At the invitation of a 
 Pharisee to dine with him, Jesus went in and sat 
 down to meat, without previously washing himself. 
 This, being contrary to Jewish custom, and a tradi- 
 tion of the elders, excited great surprize: " And 
 when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he had 
 not first washed" (Greek baptized) " before din- 
 ner."* It would be extravagant to contend, that 
 the word here means immersion of the whole body, 
 
 • Luke xi. 38. 
 
The term baptize examined. 23d 
 
 and that neglect of this act excited the surprise of 
 ©ur Saviour's host. — Superstitious as the Jews 
 •were, they did not carry matters to such an extreme, 
 as to hohl it a duty to phmge their entire bodies 
 into water before every meal. The washinj^ deem- 
 ed necessary, referred to the hands, as appears very 
 evident from Mark vii. 2 — 5. ** And when they 
 saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled 
 (that is to say, Avith unicashen) hands, they found 
 fault;" — and *< asked him. Why walk not thy disci- 
 ples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat 
 bread with unwashen lianAsT^ 
 
 In this passage, then, (Luke xi. 38.) the Greek 
 word ^cc7r'U<^6), is correctly translated by the word 
 ■wash; because the reason why the Pharisee marvel- 
 led, was, not that our Saviour had not immersed his 
 hands, but that he had not washed them. The 
 «ause of wonder was the supposed uncleaiiness of the 
 thing: and it will presently appeat, that mere im- 
 mersion of the hands into water, was not suffi- 
 cient to comply with the Jewish custom. The de- 
 filement could be removed only by washing. Ac- 
 cordingly we find this very act, for the omission of 
 which our Lord was censured, expressed in Mark 
 vii. 2, 3. by a different word, NittU; which signifies to 
 ivashf and not to immerse: and, therefore, it is plain 
 that ^ctTliiv, haptize^ in one place, and vi'Trlof, wash, 
 in the other, must be equivalent terms. And that 
 in both is meant washing, and not immersion, is fur- 
 ther evident from the whole context of each pas- 
 
24d LETTER XIV. 
 
 sage; for it presents the idea of cleansing by wash- 
 ing:* ** JDeJiled, (that is to say, with unwashen) 
 hands.'' Now, do ye Pharisees make clean the out- 
 side of the cup and the platter." 
 
 Hence, it appears that the Jewish custom re- 
 garded, not the particular mode in Avhich water 
 was first applied to the hands, but the washing of 
 them so as to make them clean. Had, therefore, 
 our Lord and his disciples carefully washed their 
 hands before eating, they would have complied with 
 the tradition of the elders; and no surprize would 
 have been excited, nor reproach called forth, by the 
 particular mode of applying water, whether by taking 
 it up in their hands out of a bason, or by having it 
 poured upon them.j This circumstance was a 
 matter of indifference. 
 
 In Mark vii. 3. we find another convincing proof, 
 that the act prescribed by Jewish custom, was, not 
 immersion, but washing. "For the Pharisees, and 
 all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft,'' 
 (in our translation, but literally, with the Jist,^ 
 «< eat not." The word ^vyi^n has occasioned much 
 perplexity to commentators: some translating it 
 oftf others, diligently; some, to the wrist, and others, 
 to the elbow. The literal translation, with the fist, 
 is preferable to any of these; and no doubt suggests 
 the true meaning. "Wash with the list! What is 
 
 * Mark vii. 2, 3, 4. and Luke xi. 38, 39. 
 
 ■j- Pouring water on the hands for the purpose of washing them* 
 ■was, it seems, customary among the Jews. Elisha is described as 
 one who poured water on the hands of Elijah. 2 Kings iii. !1. 
 
The term baptize examined. 241 
 
 meant? How shall we understand the import of this 
 phrase? Reflecting on the difficulty, it occurred that 
 our common mode of washing removes it, and satis- 
 factorily explains the phrase. How do we was.'i 
 our hands? Uvyf^f^, with the jisU First, water i s 
 poured upon the hands, or we take it up with them; 
 and, then, closing the one upon the other, we rub 
 them against each other, with the back of one shut 
 against the palm of the other. This, in fact, is 
 washing Trwy/ttJ, with thejist. On examining Park- 
 hurst's Lexicon, I was gratified to find that he ex- 
 plains the phrase in the same way.* 
 
 The kind of washing, then, which the Jews 
 held to be a duty before eating, was that particular 
 one which is effected by Xh^jist, or by rubbing the 
 back of one closed against the palm of the other, so 
 as to cleanse them thoroughly from every pollution. 
 Hence, it appears, that mere dipping them into wa- 
 ter would not have been regarded by the Jews, as ft 
 compliance with the tradition of the elders; and 
 that, in Luke xi. 38. the baptizing which our Sa- 
 viour omitted before dinner, means, not immersion 
 of the hands, but wasliing them with water. 
 
 From all that has been said on this passage 
 compared with a parallel one, it is undeniable, that 
 
 * " If you shut your hand, the outside is called Truyfxn. Hence 
 the dative 7ruyfx}t being used, as it were adverbially, Trvyfjm 
 viTrrta-Bctt T«t? X^'S*?» literally to -wash the hands with the fist, i. c. 
 by rubbing water on the palm of one hand with the double fist of 
 the other.'* Parkhurst. 
 
 T 
 
2^2 LETTER XIV. 
 
 fiofrliia, laptizCf in Luke, is equivalent to vM^y, wash, 
 in Mark; and signifies to ivash, without any regard 
 to immersion. 
 
 We are furnished, in Mark vii* 4. with another 
 proof, that this word signifies to wash: for there a 
 substantive derived from it, is correctly translated 
 washing. The passage reads thus: <* And many 
 other things there be which they have received to 
 hold, as the washing*' (Greek Bcc^l lo-f^ni, baptisms) 
 "of cups and pots, of brazen vessels, and tables,'^ 
 The last word, in the original, means couches, on 
 which the ancients reclined while eating. Some of 
 the articles mentioned might be washed by dipping 
 them into water; but it cannot be supposed, that the 
 Jews washed their couches in this way: these, it is 
 highly probable, were washed by sprinkling or pouring 
 water on them. Witli regard to one, at least, of the ar- 
 ticles enumerated, tlie word BccptIit/lco^, buiitism, must 
 signify, not immersion, but ivashing. Besides, it is 
 to be considered in reference to all, that in whatev- 
 er way water was applied, it was done w ith a view 
 to wash them. The leading idea of the term, there- 
 fore, is washing; and, whether water were, in the 
 Jirst act, applied by dipping, or by pouring, or by 
 sprinkling, the cleansing of these articles was 
 BctTrliG-f^oi. a baptism, a washing. 
 
 2. The word signifies to pour, "I indeed baptiae 
 you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh 
 after me is mightier than 1, whose shoes 1 am not 
 wortliy to bear; he shall baptize you with the Holy 
 
Thefcerm baptize examined, 243 
 
 Ghost, and with fire. For John truly hajitixed with 
 water; but ye shall be hajitized with the Holy Ghost 
 not many days hence."* A precious promise! How 
 wasitfulfilled? Howdid Jesus Christ baptize his apos- 
 tles with the Holy Ghost, and with fire? AVere they 
 immersed in the Holy Ghost? Were they immersed 
 in fire? How harshly this sounds! In Acts ii. 1 — *, 
 16 — 18, 33, an account is given of the manner in 
 which this promise was fulfilled. We are informed, 
 that *^ there appeared unto them cloven tongues, 
 like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them;" that 
 << they were JiUed with the Holy Ghost, and began 
 to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them 
 utterance;" that the miraculous infl^uence of the Spi- 
 rit was f'shedforth;^' and that this was a fulfilment 
 of JoePs prophecy, in which God had promised to 
 *' pour oiU" his " Spirit upon all flesh." 
 
 Here is nothing like immersion. The apostles 
 were neither immersed in the Holy Ghost, nor im- 
 mersed in fire. But the Holy Spirit was shed down, 
 poured out upon them, like rain from heaven. And 
 it is worthy of remark, that, although the influen- 
 ces of this blessed agent, are often in scripture com- 
 pared to water, yet in no place are persons ever said 
 to be immersed in them. The sacred writers uni- 
 formly represent these heavenly influences under 
 the idea of being shed down, poured out, and sprin- 
 kled. " I will pour water upon him that is tliirsty, 
 and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my Spi- 
 
 ♦ Mat. iii. 11. Acts i. 5. 
 
24* tETTBH XIV. 
 
 Tit u^on thy seed, and my blessing upon thine off- 
 spring.'' Then will I sprinkle clean water iipon 
 you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, 
 and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. — And I 
 will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to 
 walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judg- 
 ments, and do them."*" 
 
 It is evident, from the address of .John, and the 
 promise of our Saviour quoted above, that there is 
 a connexion between baptism and the Holy Spirit; 
 that this rite is to those who receive it a sign of his 
 purifying influences; and that they are bound by it 
 to look and pray for them. It appears too that 
 these divine influences are, in various places, repre- 
 sented as being shed down or poured out, like water 
 or rain; and the reception of them is called a being 
 baptized with the Holy Ghost. Hence, it follows, 
 those who baptize by pouring water upon the sub- 
 ject, use a very apt emblem of the thing signified; 
 and, by the application of the Greek term, baptize, 
 in these two passages, they are fully authorized to 
 use a mode so very significant. 
 
 The attempt to derive an argument from Acts 
 ii. 2, in favour of immersion, is futile. " It filled 
 all the house where they were sitting:" thus, say 
 some, the apostles were, as it were, immersed. But 
 we ask them. What filled the house? Not the Spi- 
 rit; not the wind; but the sound. If, therefore, the 
 apostles were immersed, they were immersed iiei- 
 
 * Isaiah xliv. J. Ezek. xxxvi. 25, 27. 
 
The term baptize examined, 246 
 
 ther in the Spirit, nor in the wind, but in the sound. 
 A noble argument indeed! There is nothing, we re- 
 peat it, in (his narrative like immersion. The Spi- 
 rit is represented as being poured out, and shed 
 down, like water. This is baptizing with the Holy 
 Ghost. 
 
 3. The word BxTrlt^u, haptixe^ signifies to sprin- 
 kle. " All our fathers," says St. Paul, " were un- 
 der the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and 
 were all baptized unto (into) Moses in the cloud, 
 and in the sea."^ What does the apostle mean in 
 this passage? Evidently this, that our fathers were 
 thus initiated into the profession of the Mosaic re- 
 ligion, as Ave are initiated into the profession of 
 Christianity by baptism. Baptism binds us to re- 
 ceive the new covenant, and to yield obedience to 
 the precepts of Jesus Christ, who has made it 
 known, and delivered it to us ratified by his blood: 
 so the miraculous passage of our lathers through 
 the sea, and the suspension of the cloud over their 
 heads, bound them to receive the old covenant, and 
 yield obedience to the laws of Moses, by whom it 
 was delivered to tj|^em, ratified by typical << blood of 
 calves and goatsi^f Thus, they were baptized into 
 Moses, as we are <^ baptized into Jesus Christ.":j: 
 This appears to be the meaning of St. Paul. He 
 alludes, not to the mode, but to the obligation of 
 baptism. 
 
 • 1 Cor.x. 1, 2. t Heb. |x. 18— 2S, t Rom. vi. 3. 
 
246 LETTER XIV. 
 
 If', however, the mode in which water was ap- 
 plied to our fathers, when they were haptized, must 
 foe discovered, it is easy to show that it was not dip- 
 ping. But some imagine they can find proof of their 
 favourite mode even in this historical fact. The 
 cloud, say they, was over their heads, and the sea 
 on each side; and thus they were immersed. A cu- 
 rious kind of immersion or dipping! Allow such an 
 extravagant license to fancy, and every person bap- 
 tized in this city, may be proved to have been im- 
 mersed: for clouds were suspended over his head, 
 and a river flowed on each side. Away with such 
 ridiculous trifling. 
 
 It is certain, that the Israelites were not im- 
 mersed in the sea; because, as Moses informs us, 
 they <* went into the midst of the sea upon the dry 
 ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on 
 their right hand, and on their left."^ If water were 
 applied to them, it could have been in no other way 
 than by drops from the cloud, and by a spray from 
 the sea. Is this immersion? or is it sprinkling? 
 Justly has it been observed, in reply to that licen^ 
 tiousness in which some indulge ^eir fancy, while 
 torturing this passage to make it%peak for them, 
 that the Israelites were sprinkled, but the Egyptians 
 immersed: for, Moses says, *' The waters returned, 
 and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all 
 the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after 
 them.*— But the children of Israel walked upon dry 
 land in the midst of the sea,"t 
 
 ♦ Eiod. xiT. 31, 22. t Exod. xiv. 28, 29- 
 
The term baptize examined, 247 
 
 You will find, ray brethren, in Ileb. ix. 10, a 
 solid proof, that the word under consideration sig- 
 nifies to sprinkle. There the apostle informs us, 
 that to the first covenant pertained divers wasliings; 
 (Greek BecrliT/^oiq, haptisms,) and, then, selects, as 
 one standing preeminently among these divers bap- 
 tisms, that ordinance which prescribed the sprink- 
 ling of the unclean with the blood of bulls, and of 
 goats, and the ashes of an heifer.* This instance 
 may be ranked under the head, " carnal ordinan- 
 ces;" a head so general as to comprehend all the 
 Levitical ceremonies: but let it be observed, that, 
 as all those divers washings or baptisms to which 
 the sacred writer refers, were purifying rites, this 
 purification by sprinkling of the blood of bulls, and 
 of goats, and the ashes of an heifer, has just claims 
 to be considered as one of those divers washings 
 or baptisms, which belonged to the first covenant. 
 Purification, in whatever way effected, whether by 
 a total or partial washing, or by sprinkling, was a 
 baptism, a washing: it took away ceremonial un- 
 cleanness, as water, when applied to our persons or 
 clothes, takes away from them any natural unclean* 
 ness which they may have contracted. 
 
 Sprinklings then, is one of the significations com- 
 prehended under the general term BxttIi^cj, baptize. 
 
 Thus, it has, I think, been fairly proved, that 
 the Greek term, baptize, is used, by the writers of 
 
 * Heb. ix. 13. See Levit. xvi. 14, 18, 19. Numb. xix. 4, 20, and 
 the whole chapter. Heb. ix. 18—22. 
 
2*8 tETTER Xir. 
 
 the New Testament, in different senses, and that it 
 inchides different modes of applying water; namely, 
 washing, effusion or pouring, and sprinkling, as » ell 
 as immersion. 
 
 III. Nor can it be shown, that divine authority 
 has determined this disputed word shall, in connex- 
 ion with Chi'istian l)aptism, signify only to immerse* 
 This restriction in its meaning, cannot be proved 
 from the word itself, as used by the sacred writers; 
 because, as we have just seen, they use it in diffe- 
 rent senses: it cannot be proved from the instances 
 of baptism on record; because a fair and full exami- 
 nation of the circumstances of those narrated in the 
 Acts of the Apostles, makes it probable some mode 
 more convenient than immersion was used: nor can 
 it be proved, from any particular passage of scrip- 
 ture, that our great Lawgiver has determined this 
 word, although possessing different significations^ 
 yet shall, in connexion with baptism, bear only one: 
 none will venture to assert a thing so utterly desti- 
 tute of proof. It is, then, impossible to bring any 
 satisfactory evidence to show, that the meaning of 
 this word should be thus restricted. 
 
LETTER XV. 
 
 An inquiry answered. — Rom. \i. 4. examined. — Be- 
 cwpitulation. — Import of baptism. — Conclusion 
 of the discussion. 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 Recollect for a moment what has been said 
 with respect to the Greek term haptizCf and collect 
 all the evidence to one point. It has been proved, 
 
 1. That this word has more significations than 
 one; 
 
 2. That it is used by the sacred writers, in dif- 
 ferent ways, and signifies, in tlie New Testament, 
 to washf to pour 9 and to sprinkle: 
 
 3. That, in connexion with baptism, it has not 
 been limited, by any positive precept of our great 
 Lawgiver, to one particular sense. 
 
 This we have also proved to have been the deli- 
 berate opinion of many of the greatest, most learned, 
 and pious divines that ever flourished in the Chris- 
 tian church: and that, on this opinion, they acted in 
 the administration of baptism, which they could not 
 have done with a good conscience, had they believ- 
 ed the term to signify only to immerse. 
 
250 LETTER XV, 
 
 On the whole, >ve conclude it to be impossible 
 to find, in a word signifying to washf to pour, 
 to sprinklCf as well as to immerse^ a precept pre- 
 scribing, in all cases, the use of immersion. The 
 nature of this term is such, that it authorizes the 
 administration of baptism in different ways, corres- 
 ponding with its different meanings; by washing, by 
 effusion, by sprinkling, or by immersion. 
 
 Perhaps, my brethren, it may occur to you to 
 ask, Why a more definite word was not selected, 
 that would have allowed of only one mode of apply- 
 ing water, and thus made the practice of the church 
 in administering baptism uniform? Such a term 
 might doubtless have been chosen: and had the 
 mode been a matter of moment, our Lord would 
 have determined it, either by the selection of such 
 an unequivocal word, or by some other clear ex- 
 pression of his will. He was pleased, however, to 
 do neither: and, from this fact, we may safely in- 
 fer the mode to be unimportant, and that, if water 
 be applied in the name of the Sacred Three, bap- 
 tism is duly and lawfully administered. 
 
 A writer of reputation in favour of immersion, 
 reasons in a manner very illogical and unjustifiable. 
 He seems, first, to fix in his own mind what our 
 Lord ought to have done; and, then, attempts to 
 prove that he has done so. His reasoning goes on 
 the supposition, that the use of a word having more 
 meanings than one, in a precept relative to baptism* 
 ivould reflect on the wisdom of our great Lawgiver: 
 
tin inquiry answered* 251 
 
 which supposition must necessarily imply ano- 
 ther, that to allow more than one mode in applying 
 baptismal water, is absurd. Is this legitimate rea- 
 soning? Shall any man be permitted, first, to assume 
 his premises, and, then, to draw his conclusion? 
 Grant this liberty, and what may not be proved? In 
 all eases, this way of reasoning is unlawful; and 
 more especially so when applied to the procedure 
 of our glorious Legislator, in regard to a positive 
 rite, the obligation and utility of which depend en- 
 tirely on his sovereign will. Surely it behoves us 
 to inquire, first, what he has been pleased to ap- 
 point, and, then, to submit to it as wise and good. 
 But by no means does it comport with the duty 
 which we ^we to his infinite Majesty, to imitate 
 this author; by, first, settling in our own minds what 
 it became onr Lord to appoint, and, then, persuad- 
 ing ourselves that he has made the appointment, 
 under the notion that a different procedure would 
 reflect on his wisdom. This^would be to dictate to 
 our sovereign Ruler, instead of yielding implicit 
 obedience to his high appointments. There are, 
 we admit, cases so clear, that, in regard to them, 
 we may, with humble confidence, assert and contend 
 such a particular line of procedure to be incompati- 
 ble with the infinite perfections of God, This, how- 
 ever, is not one of the kind. It is a case of pure so- 
 vereignty. The institution of baptism resulted 
 fi'om the good pleasure of Jesus Christ; and, there- 
 fore, it is our duty to observe it, in every particular 
 
252 lETTER XV. 
 
 in regard to which he has signified his will. But 
 wliere he has left us at liberty, no mortal has a 
 right to bind our conscience. Has he appointed bap- 
 tism? It is our duty to submit to the ordinance. 
 Has he directed the use of water? It is our duty to 
 use this element. Has he commanded his minis- 
 ters to baptize " in the name of the Father, and of 
 the Son, and of the Holy Ghost?" It is their duty 
 to pronounce this name of God, this sacred *• form 
 of sound words." Has he limited the application 
 of water to one mode? No: we are at liberty, there- 
 fore, to use more than one; to baptize by washing, 
 by pouring, by sprinkling, or by immersion. And 
 why should any mortal dare assume the boldness of 
 asserting, that to allow such a liberty in regard to 
 the mode, and to use a word, in the precept enjoin- 
 ing this rite, which secures it, would reflect on the 
 character of our great Lawgiver; nay, that a pro- 
 cedure like this would disgrace the legislative wis- 
 dom of a British parliament?* 
 
 Jesus Christ has not appointed the use of one 
 mode, exclusive of all others. The different significa- 
 tions of the generic term, baptize, and the cases of 
 baptism on record, firmly establish this fact. 
 
 And where is the absurdity, or impropriety of 
 allowing this liberty in the application of watei-? It 
 is a matter of pure sovereignty. Had it pleased 
 him, our LurJ might have substituted any other li- 
 
 * Booth on baptism. 
 
Bom, vi. 4. examined, 253 
 
 quid in place of water; or made the whole ordinance 
 very different from what it is. What he has ap- 
 pointed is wise and good: and unliinited obedience 
 due to his will, prohibits, on the one hand, adding to, 
 and, on the other, taking from, his ordinance. The 
 use of any other matter than water, or of any other 
 form of words than that in the precept, would be to 
 take from the ordinance; because Christ has pre- 
 scribed both: but to insist on immersion as the on- 
 ly lawful mode of baptism, and to treat Christians 
 administering this rite in a different way as unbap- 
 tized, is adding to it. Let us shun both these ex- 
 tremes; because they are alike contrary to the will 
 of our sovereign Lord. To this subject we may ap- 
 ply the apostolic exhortation: " Stand fast, there- 
 fore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us 
 free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of 
 bondage." 
 
 The arguments, founded on the terra ^eAxli^cj, 
 baptise, and on the cases of apostolic baptism, in fa- 
 vor of an exclusive mode, have now, I trust, been 
 fairly refuted. These are the principal which the 
 advocates of immersion plead. There is, however, 
 another of imagined importance, grounded on a sup- 
 posed allusion to this mode, in Rom. vi. 4. which I 
 shall briefly consider. 
 
 Admitting, for a moment, what is claimed by 
 our brethren, an allusion in this text to immersion, 
 to what will the argument amount? Will it prove im- 
 
HB^ l^ETTER XV. 
 
 mersioii to be the only lawful mode of baptism? 
 This it ought to prove, or it can be of no service in 
 a contest, not merely for the lawfulness of im- 
 mersion, but against the lawfulness of every other 
 mode of baptism. Does Paul deny the validity of 
 sprinkling, washing, and pouring? Does he say the 
 church must baptize by immersion only? and that, 
 if any presume to use a different mode, they will act 
 contrary to the authority of her glorious Head, and 
 deprive themselves of baptism? Not a word, not a 
 hint to this effect, can be found in the passage. The 
 titmost to be gained from it, is, that immersion was 
 sometimes used by the apostles. But how absurd 
 the attempt, from a bare allusion to a particular 
 mode of baptism, to prove all others unlawful! 
 
 But why should this point be conceded? Logical 
 reasoners, using any allusion as an argument, refer 
 to facts well known to those to whom they write. 
 Before, therefore, we can be required to grant, in 
 this argumentative passage, an allusion to the mode 
 of baptizing by immersion, it ought first to be pro- 
 ved to us that such a mode was really used in the 
 apostolic church. But, so far as I can learn from 
 recorded cases of baptism, it does not appear the 
 apostles used immersion. Yet, I have admitted, 
 and do admit this to be a lawful mode: because wa- 
 ter may be applied in different ways, without affect- 
 ing the validity of baptism. The mode is not essen- 
 tial. Still, however, no positive proof can be deri- 
 ved from holy scripture, to evince the use of immer- 
 
Bom, vi. 4?. examined, 2bB 
 
 sion by the apostles. So far as a judgment can be 
 formed, by an impartial view of circumstances con- 
 nected with the cases stated in sacred history, the 
 probability is that they used a diiferent mode. I 
 ask, then. Does candor require us to admits in this 
 passage, an allusion to immersion? 
 
 In the next verse, the sacred writer says, ** We 
 have been planted together in the likeness of his 
 death. Is there in the mode of baptism any resem- 
 blance to planting? In the sixth verse, he affirms 
 that our old man is crucified with Christ. Is there 
 in the mode of baptism any resemblance to crucifix- 
 ion? Yet these figurative phrases are the same in 
 meaning with that of being '» buried with him bj 
 baptism into death." 
 
 The text can be explained without supposing io 
 it an allusion to any particular mode of baptism* 
 The apostle's object, in his whole argument, ex- 
 pressed in terms highly figurative, is, to prove that 
 Christians may not live in sin. How does he establish 
 this point? By pressing the obligations of baptism. 
 What is its general obligation? Faith, obedience, 
 and conformity to Christ: for we are ^< baptized in- 
 to Christ," In what respects must we be conform- 
 ed to him? In all things in which he is proposed as 
 our example. He is our example, not only in his 
 life, but in his death, in his burial, in his resurrec- 
 tion, and in his ascension: and, therefore, we are, 
 by baptism, bound to imitate him in these points of 
 his history;* by dying to sin as he died for it^ by 
 
256 LETTER XV. 
 
 giving proofs of the mortification of sin, as he did 
 of death by his burial; by rising and walking in 
 newness of life, as he rose from the dead to die no 
 more; and by setting our affections on things above, 
 where Chiist sitteth on the right hand of God. 
 
 Baptism is the seal of our engagements to be 
 thus conformed to our glorious Head and Redeem- 
 er. We are, therefore, baptized into his life, his 
 death, his burial, his resurrection, and his ascen- 
 sion into heaven; or, in other words, it may be said 
 that, by baptism, we live with him, we die with him, 
 we are buried with him, and so on. 
 
 It being the apostle's object to show, that Chris- 
 tians are bound by baptism to be conformed to 
 Christ, both in his death and in his resurrection; 
 why, if he alluded to immersion, did he not allude 
 to that part of it which consists in rising from under 
 w^ter, as well as to that of being put under it? Both 
 parts according to this plan of interpreting the text 
 would have suited his purpose. This, however, is 
 not done. The sacred writer does not say. We are 
 buried with him by baptism into death, and raised 
 with him hy haptismfrom the deadj but omitting the 
 latter, he uses only the former, phrase; which is fol- 
 lowed by one in which baptism is not mentioned: 
 « That like as Christ was raised from the dead by 
 the glory of the Father, even so we also might" (not, 
 vise by baptism, but) " walk in newness of life.'^ 
 
 The passage and the context may be paraphras- 
 ed thus: " Shall we continue in sin that grace may 
 
Horn. vj. 4. examined, 257 
 
 abound? God forbid:'' we abbor the tboiigbt as the 
 height of impiety, and indignantly reject it, as an 
 illegitimate inference from the doctrine which we 
 have inculcated. For <« how shall we that are," by 
 profession and obligation, " dead to sin, live any 
 longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us 
 as were baptized into Jesus Christ;" that is, dedica- 
 ted by an appointed ordinance to his service and 
 glory, brought into communion with his mystical 
 body, the church, and, symbolically, into commu- 
 nion with himself; " were bajitized into his death?" 
 devoted to a conformity to his death, and laid under 
 obligations to die unto sin, as Christ died for it, and 
 derive influence from his death for the mortifica- 
 tion of every evil propensity? Therefore, to pursue 
 this idea, I may, with propriety, say, <* We are bu- 
 ried with him by baptism into death:" the engage- 
 ments of this holy ordinance make it our duty, not 
 only to resist sin, but to prosecute the contest with 
 a full determination to destroy it; and thus to give 
 proofs of its mortification, as Christ did of his deaths 
 by being buried. The obligations of this Christian 
 rite extend still further: we must rise with our 
 Lord, « that like as Christ was raised from the dead 
 by the glory of the Father, even so we also should 
 walk in newness of life." 
 
 On the whole, from this passage, acknowledged 
 to be difficult in its intrepretation, no clear proof 
 can be drawn to establish the use of immersion by 
 the apostle s^ and certainly no evidence al all to 
 
^BH LETTER XV. 
 
 prove it to be the only lawful mode of administei ing 
 Christiau baptism. 
 
 The sum of what has been said on the mode of 
 baptism, is briefly this: 
 
 1. The eonsefjuences resulting from immersion, 
 considered as exclusive of all other modes, are such 
 as to constitute strong and decisive presumptive evi- 
 dence that this opinion cannot be founded in truth. 
 
 2. Apostolic example, of which our brethren 
 boast as being on their side, affords no countenance 
 to those exclusive claims to baptism which they 
 liave ventured to set up. The circumstances attend- 
 ing the baptisms, performed by the founders of the 
 Christian church, and recorded by an inspired his- 
 torian, so far from proving the ordinance to have 
 been always administered by immersion, do not 
 furnish eve» prohahle evidence, much less certain 
 proof, of their having used this mode on either ot 
 those occasions. A fair and impartial examination 
 of tlicse cases, makes it probable, that, in every 
 instance^ they baptized their candidates in a mod^ 
 more convenient, and better adapted to time, place, 
 and other circumstances. 
 
 S. The term B^^rV^C'*', baptize, which our brethren 
 imagine to contain a positive precept in favour of 
 immersion, is utterly unfit ta answer the purpose 
 for which it is pleaded: because it is certainly used, 
 by the i^few Testament-writers, in different senses; 
 and, tl>ercfore, as it has not been restricted, in con- 
 
Recapitulation, 259 
 
 iiexion with baptism, to one meaning, it authorizes 
 tlie administration of this rite in diftereut ways, by 
 washing, effusion, and spriulvling, as well as by im- 
 mersion. 
 
 4. That particular text (Rom. vi. 4.) in which 
 St. Paul is supposed plainly to allude to immer- 
 sion, furnishes no argument in favour of the exclu- 
 sive claims of its advocates: for, in the first place, 
 it can be explained, consistently witii the scope of 
 his reasoning, without admitting it to contain an al- 
 lusion to any particular mode of baptism; and, in 
 the second place, if such an allusion were really 
 found in the text, it would only prove immersion to 
 have been sometimes used by the apostles, but by 
 no means evince the unlawfulness of other modes. 
 
 On this review of our arguments, it appears, I 
 trust to your satisfaction, that the exclusive claims 
 to baptism set up by those who practise immersion, 
 can find no support from sacred scripture; — neither 
 in our Lord's precept instituting the rite, nor in the 
 practice of his apostles, nor in any particular pas- 
 sage of holy writ: and, therefore, that they are to 
 be rejected as wholly unwarrantable. And it also 
 appears, that, for the use of the mode adopted by 
 our church, in which water is applied to the face 
 of the person baptized, we find a complete warrant 
 in the word of God; and, therefore, that we may 
 repel the condemnatory censures passed upon it, as 
 the fruit of error, and springing from misguided 
 zeal. 
 
260 lETTER XV. 
 
 Before I close this discussion on the mode, per- 
 mit me? my brethren, to direct your attention to the 
 grand import of Christian baptism. Its leading idea 
 is that of purification; an idea conveyed by it in 
 whatever way administered. In support of this po- 
 sition, the following considerations are submitted. 
 
 1. This was the import of those divers haptisms 
 used under the former dispensation. By whatever 
 mode administered, they were all appointed to 
 cleanse from ceremonial pollution, and thus to teach 
 the necessity of internal purification from the de- 
 filing nature of sin. 
 
 2. It is evident, from John iii. 25, 2(5. that puri- 
 fication was the import of John's baptism: for there 
 the terms purifying and haptizeth are used synoni- 
 mously. Both the Jews and John's disciples, it ap- 
 pears, considered baptism in the same light as a 
 purifying rite. The subject in dispute between them, 
 was, not the nature of baptism in general; for in 
 this, as just observed, they were agreed: but the 
 authority of John and of our Lord, to adminis- 
 ter this rite, which the Jews seem to have contested. 
 They contended for the baptisms or purifications 
 appointed by Moses: and probably represented both 
 the baptism of John and that of Christ, as innova- 
 tions of dangerous tendency, and unnecessary, in- 
 asmuch as various purifications had been already 
 prescribed. Your Master assumes the liberty to 
 baptize: and lo! now, another, one lately baptized 
 by him, takes the same liberty; and multitudes flock 
 
Import of Baptism. 261 
 
 to his baptism. Where will these innovations on 
 established order end? By what authority does your 
 Master purify? 
 
 Unable to answer this rcasonin,^, and jealous for 
 the honour of their Master, his disciples refer the 
 matter to him: <*They came unto John, and said 
 unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jor- 
 dan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same 
 baptizeth, and all men come to him." The baptist 
 replies to their inquiry, and removes their difficulty, 
 by declaring the preeminent dignity of Jesus Christ. 
 Thus he asserts, in the strongest manner, his au- 
 thority to administer baptism, a purifj ing rite; and 
 shows their jealousy for his own reputation to be 
 highly improper.* The inquiry, and the answer to 
 it, evince that the dispute between John's disciples 
 and the Jews, related to the authority of John and 
 of Christ to administer baptism. In the general na- 
 ture of it they were agreed: they considered it as a 
 purification, 
 
 3. Various passages of the New Testament, sug- 
 gest this as the grand import of Christian baptism: 
 <^And now, why tarriest thou? arise, and be bap- 
 tized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name 
 of the Lord.'^ "Not by works of righteousness 
 which we have done, but according to his mercy he 
 hath saved us, by the ivashing of regeneration, and 
 the renewing of the Holy Ghost.'* " That he might 
 sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water^ 
 
 * John iii. 27, 3Q, 
 
5262 lETTER XV. 
 
 by the word." " Let us draw near with a true heart, 
 in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprin- 
 kled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed 
 with pure water." *< The like figure whereunto bap- 
 tism doth now save us, (not the putting away of the 
 filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience 
 toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."* 
 In all these passages, baptism is alluded to as im- 
 porting purification from sin. 
 
 4. Purification is the grand effect produced by 
 the blood, and by the Spirit of Christ. The former, 
 being sprinkled on the conscience, cleanses it from 
 guilt; the latter, being shed down upon the heart, 
 cleanses it from defilements: and thus the eflicacy 
 of Christ's blood, and the operations of his Spirit, 
 unite in producing one grand result, purification of 
 the human soul from all the stains and pollutions of 
 sin. Now, baptism, in which water, that great pu- 
 rifier of nature, is used, was evidently intended to 
 exhibit to us this grand result of the blood and Spi- 
 rit of Christ. No ordinance more emblematical of 
 purification could be devised. The sign represents 
 very clearly the thing signified. This apt corres- 
 pondence between the two, decisively proves bap- 
 tisnl to have been instituted to exhibit to us, in a 
 sensible and visible manner, that purification from 
 sin which is effected by the blood and Spirit of 
 Christf. 
 
 * Acts xxii. 16. Tit. iii. 5. EpheS. v. 26. Hcb. x. 22. iPet. iii.21. 
 t Rev. i. 5. Acts ii. 38. 
 
Import of Baptism. 263 
 
 These considerations discover the grand import 
 of this sacred ordinance. The divers baptisms in 
 use among the Jews, were purifications; John's bap- 
 tism was a purification; various texts of scripture 
 exhibit Christian baptism as a purification; and the 
 great effect of the blood and Spirit of Christ, is pu- 
 rification: baptism, therefore, must be a purifying 
 rite. Administer it as you please; by immersion, or 
 by washing, or by pouring, or by sprinkling: you 
 cannot change the import oi* that ordinance in which 
 water, the great purifying element of nature, is 
 used. It remains still the same; it is an emblematU 
 sal inirijication. Hence it follows, that to contem- 
 plate baptism aright, we should not confine our view 
 to any particular mode; but consider it as an ordi- 
 nance, in which, by the application of water, in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost, the Lord our Redeemer represents to our 
 faith, and lays us under solemn obligations to seek, 
 that inestimable blessing, — purification from sin by 
 his blood and Spirit. 
 
 Such being the import of this Christian rite, the 
 quantity of water used in its administration, is 
 wholly immaterial. A small quantity will represent 
 the great benefit intended, as effectually as a larger. 
 Baptism, be it remembered, is "not the putting 
 away of thejillli of thejlesh:^^ it is not designed to 
 be a real washing, so as to cleanse the body from 
 defilements;! but only a symbolical washing, to sig- 
 
 * 1 Pet. Hi. 21. 
 
 ■J- Were baptism a real washing, it is clear, neither of the modes 
 
264* tETTER XV» 
 
 nify, by the application of water, an apt emblem, 
 the internal purification ©f the soul. Such being; 
 the design of this ordinance, it is manifest, that a 
 small quantity of the significant element applied to 
 the face, will answer this design as fully as plunging 
 the whole body into a river: and as the blood of Christ, 
 which eleanseth us from the guilt of sin, is repre- 
 sented in holy scripture as being applied by sprink- 
 lings and the influences of the Holy Spirit, Avho 
 cleanses us from the pollution of sin, are represented 
 as being poured out or shed down upon us; it is like- 
 wise evident, that sprinklng or pouring water on 
 the face, is very emblematical of the thing signified, 
 and of the manner in which our purification is ef- 
 fected. The application of water to a principal 
 part of the body, is a significant sign of universal 
 cleansing. A certain woman, having poured oint- 
 ment on our Lord's head, was reproved for wasting 
 a precious article. Jesus justified her conduct, and 
 said, in reply to the censures passed upon her, among 
 other remarks, "She is come to anoint my body to 
 the burying." Mark xiv. 3 — 9. 
 
 In a review of what has been said on the mode 
 of baptism, we are authorized to deduce this as a 
 
 in use would answer the purpose. Certainly immersing a persoa 
 with all his clothes on, and taking him immediately out of the water, 
 is not sufficient to cleanse him from bodily defilements. When we in- 
 tend really to wash ourselves, we strip off our garments, and bathe 
 the body by remaining in water, and rubbing it with the water. 
 
Conclusion^ 265 
 
 conclusion of the whole: That, although immersioB 
 is to he recognised as a lawful way of administer- 
 ing this holy rite, yet the application of water to the 
 face by washing, sprinkling, or pouring, is to he 
 preferred. This mode agrees best with recorded 
 cases of apostolic baptism, is more convenient, and 
 may be safely used to the sick and dying, or the 
 tenderest infants: it is more congenial with the na- 
 ture of our climate, and the genius of the present 
 dispensation; and affords better opportunity fop 
 those devotional exercises, which claim the atten- 
 tion of adult recipients of this rite: — and, finally, it 
 is more emblematical of the manner in which that 
 great benefit, signified by baptism, purification by 
 the blood and spirit of Christ, is represented as con- 
 veyed to us. 
 
 The discussion is now finished. Two important 
 points, I have endeavoured to establish; namely, 
 tliat children have a divine right to baptism, and 
 that our mode of administering this holy ordinance 
 is both lawful and scriptural. The evidence col- 
 lected and exhibited, in support of these interesting 
 truths, is submitted to your consideration, in con- 
 fident expectation of its being sufficient to satisfy 
 your minds, that the censures of our brethren are 
 unwarrantable; and tl}at the word of Go*! affords a 
 complete justification of our conduct in dedicating 
 children to liie Lord, and in baptizino^. not by im- 
 mersion, but by applying water to the iacc of the 
 recipient. 
 
266 LETTER XTI. 
 
 But, my brethren, I must not close tliese letters, 
 without leading you to some improvement of the 
 important truths >vhich have been illustrated and 
 confirmed. Every religious truth has respect to 
 practice; and, when embraced with a true faith, will 
 have more or less influence on the temper and con- 
 duct. It is not sufiicient to know the truth; we must 
 reduce it to practice. In the ensuing letters, I pro- 
 pose to make, both to Christian parents, and to bap- 
 tized youth, such an address as the principal subject 
 discussed requires. This address, by bringing into 
 riew the important purposes contemplated hy infant 
 baptism, will serve to strengthen the evidence by 
 which the right of children has been supported. 
 
 LETTER XVI. 
 
 tS.n Address to Parents, 
 
 Christian Brethren, 
 
 The letters, which you have read, make it 
 evident, that the baptism of your children is a se- 
 rious duty; a duty which you owe both to them, and 
 to God. 
 
 Fou owe it to your chUdren. By birth they ob- 
 tained an interest in Abraham's covenant, and, con- 
 sequently, a right to baptism, its appointed seal. 
 You, therefore, whom God has made their natural 
 
An Address to Parents. 267 
 
 guardians, are bound to put them in the enjoy- 
 ment of tliis covenant-privilege. Parents feel it as 
 an obligation, which it would be criminal and unna- 
 tural to disregard, to manage any estate belonging 
 to their children, until they arrive at age and take 
 personal possession of it; and to secure to them any 
 tempord advantage which may be in their power. 
 And should they not feel it as a most weighty obli- 
 gation, to bring them in the arms of faith, in order 
 to have applied to them the seal of a covenant con- 
 taining most glorious promises, and blessings of in- 
 estimable value? On you, parents, remember, it de- 
 pends, whether your children shall, or shall not, en- 
 joy their covenant-right; whether they shall wear 
 the mark certifying the possessor to belong to the 
 kingdom of Jesus Christ, or remain as unbaptized 
 heathens. How willingly soever the church may- 
 open her bosom to receive them among her acknow- 
 ledged children, and how ready soever her minis- 
 ters may be to apply to them the appointed token of 
 fellowship in her privileges; yet, if you be negli- 
 gent of your duty, or unwilling to present them for 
 baptism, they must grow up without this seal of 
 God's gracious covenant, and will, through your 
 fault, forfeit their birthright. And can a Christian 
 parent be so cruel to his children, so negligent of 
 their best interests, as to bring upon them so great 
 a forfeiture? AVliere then are his bowels of love fop 
 his dependant offspring? Will parents labour, night 
 and day, to lay up for their children an earthly trea- 
 
^8 IiETTER XVI, 
 
 sure? and will any refuse to do an act so easy, si» 
 reasonable, and so incumbent, as dedicating them 
 to God in baptism, toward enriching them with a 
 treasure in heaven? 
 
 By what I have just said with respect to the du- 
 ty which a Christian parent owes to his children, 
 let me not be understood to mean, that a neglect of 
 this duty will throw an insuperable obstacle in the 
 way of their salvation. I entertain no such idea: 
 for, as thousands perish although baptized in infancy, 
 so, on the other hand, a person, after having for- 
 feited his covenant-relation to God, through his pa- 
 rents' neglect, may, by sovereign grace, recover it, 
 and be finally saved in consequence of his personal 
 repentance and faith. But it is impossible to tell what 
 disastrous effects, a righteous God may suffer to 
 spring from an omission of this incumbent duty. 
 The sins of parents, being imitated by their children, 
 often become the unhappy and guilty cause of their 
 eternal ruin: and, in this way, a contempt or disre- 
 spect of a religious ordinance by parents, may be 
 productive of consequences the most pernicious and 
 lasting to their children. At any rate, neglect of 
 their baptism sets children free from the restraints, 
 arising from their dedication to God in this 
 Christian rite; and free from the authority and 
 discipline of the church, and the influence of those 
 appropriate motives w hich it is incumbent on minis- 
 ters to address to baptized youth, derived from their 
 baptism and sealed relation to the church of Christ. 
 
«.1m Mdress to Parents, 269 
 
 It is true tlicy can never be released from the obli- 
 gation* resulting from dependanee on God, tlieir 
 Creator and Governor. But this militates not at all 
 against the propriety of laying them under addi- 
 tional obligations; because, if the former obliga- 
 tions rendered the latter unnecessary, it ^vould prove 
 the baptism of adults an unnecessary institution. 
 The fact is, the natural depravity of man is such, 
 that he needs restraints multiplied, his obligations 
 increased, and motives of every kind addressed to 
 his hopes and fears. 
 
 Fou oxve the baptism of your children as a duty 
 to God, He has not, it is true, said in so many 
 words, Dedicate your children to me in baptism; but 
 he has said what is equivalent. For he expressly 
 commanded his ancient church to circumcise her 
 infant members: he has plainly taught us that the 
 covenant containing this positive precept, is still in 
 operation; and that children, under the present dis- 
 pensation, retain their interest in it, and member- 
 ship in his church: and he has appointed baptism as 
 the substitute of circumcision, the former token of 
 his gracious covenant, and sign of church-member- 
 ship. Thus has he signified his will in this matter: 
 and surely it carries with it an authority little less 
 than an express command. 
 
 No Christian parent, then, can neglect the bap- 
 tism of his children, without incurring the guilt of 
 acting in opposition to the divine will. Ignorance 
 may lessen his guilt; but it cannot keep his con- 
 
 ^ A. .^ 
 
370 LETTER XTI. 
 
 science free from its stains: and, therefore, when- 
 ever any person heeomes convinced of his duty, he 
 ought to ask forgiveness of this sin of omission, as 
 well as of his other offences. By neglecting the 
 baptism of their infants, parents withhold from Je- 
 hovah his own property: for the children of his co- 
 venant-people, he claims as his children;* and he 
 commands their parents to have them impressed 
 with the seal, by which he designates his own trea- 
 sure. You have borne children unto God: and, sure- 
 ly, it must be your duty to acknowledge them to be 
 his, by presenting them to his Majesty in that ordi- 
 nance which he has appointed for this purpose. 
 
 With pleasure and gratitude, my brethren, should 
 you comply with the divine will, in dedicating your 
 children to the Almighty in lioly baptism. It is a 
 privilege highly to be estimated. Painful as was 
 that rite, the Jews regarded circumcision as an in- 
 valuable favour: and justly too; for it certified them, 
 that their children constituted a part of God's pe- 
 culiar people, and were interested in the covenant 
 made with their illustrious progenitor. Baptism 
 certifies Christian parents of the same interesting 
 truths: and the reception of it for their children 
 should be regarded as an inestimable privilege; for 
 unquestionably it must be so, to have our infants 
 enrolled and sealed, with the broad seal of heaven, 
 as members of that holy society to which God has 
 made the promises of grace and salvation; a society 
 formed on earth as a nursery for heaven, from which 
 
 "* Ezek. xvj. 20, 21. 
 
ein Mdress to "Parents. 271 
 
 trees of righteousness are transplanted to better 
 climes, to flourish and bloom with immortal vigour 
 and beauty. Baptism is a badge of distinction 
 more honourable, and, therefore, more to be desired 
 for our children, than any that would mark them 
 as members of a human society, though composed 
 of men the most honourable, and invested with the 
 greatest privileges. It distinguishes them as the 
 citizens of Zion, as the disciples of Christ, as the 
 subjects of his kingdom, and as candidates for hea- 
 ven: it places them under the care, instruction, and 
 discipline of his church, and gives them a peculiar 
 claim to an interest in her prayers and blessings. 
 
 But, let it not be supposed that I inculcate 
 as proper an indiscriminate admission of all chil- 
 dren born of baptized parents to this Christian rite. 
 The covenant-interest, ratified by baptism, may be 
 forfeited by the misconduct of individuals; and, con- 
 sequently, having lost their own connexion with the 
 church, they cannot transmit to their children any 
 right to her initiating ordinance. There are cer- 
 tain qualifications requisite in parents in order to 
 entitle their infants to baptism: which not posses- 
 sing, they have no claim to this covenant-seal for 
 them; and ministers are in duty bound to refuse the 
 application of it, although they should demand it as 
 a right. But it ought never to be forgotten, that 
 it is incumbent on all parents to seek these qualifi- 
 cations, with a view to secure to their children the 
 §reat privilege of being received into the church 
 
272 LETTER XVI. 
 
 by baptism. In this particular, the matter stands 
 in reference to this ordinance, as it does in regard 
 to the Lord's supper. The command to commemo- 
 rate the death of our Redeemer, is binding on all 
 persons; yet many have no right to sit down, and 
 partake of his sacred feast appointed for that pur- 
 pose; because they have not the required qualifica- 
 tions: still, however, the want of tliese qualifications 
 does not exempt them from the obligation imposed 
 by the Saviour's dying injunction; fortius injunc- 
 tion makes it their immediate duty, to seek ear- 
 nestly that preparation which will entitle them to 
 commune with his people at the sacred table. 
 
 Improper applications for baptism are often 
 made. Some imagine that, having been baptized in 
 infancy, they have of course a right to present their 
 children for the reception of this ordinance, al- 
 though their conduct is so irregular and unchristian, 
 as justly to exclude them from the privilege: and, 
 because their application is not complied with, they 
 think they are deprived of a right, and their chil- 
 dren cruelly treated. These are false notions, which 
 ought to be corrected. In the administration of bap- 
 tism, ministers must be governed by the instructions 
 of their Lord and Master, to whom they are re- 
 sponsible for their conduct in this as well as in every 
 other particular. Whenever they apply the cove- 
 nant-seal, it should be done, not as a favour to any 
 individual, but as a duty the performance of which 
 he has a right to claim. To excite the displeasure 
 
•in Address to Parents, 27d 
 
 of applicants for this ordinance by refusing to bap- 
 tize their children, is indeed no grateful act: but it is 
 a far less evil, than to fall under the frowns of their 
 Supreme Lord, by profaning his holy ordinance in 
 giving it an application which he does not authorize. 
 
 Ministers may not administer baptism to those 
 children, whose parents have brought upon them a 
 forfeiture of this privilege: and such parents should 
 reflect, that the exclusion of their infant offspring 
 is occasioned, not by cruelty in ministers, but by 
 their own unchristian behaviour. Willingly would 
 we number these little ones among the members of 
 Christ's church, had not their parents, by theip 
 misconduct, made it inconsistent wi(h our duty. But, 
 while they persist in a neglect of Christian institu- 
 tions and in immoral behaviour, it would ill become 
 our sacred and responsible office to partake of theip 
 sins, by giving them the countenance which would 
 result, from a profane application of a holy ordi- 
 nance to their infants, who have no title to it. 
 
 ** But shall the innocent child," it may be asked, 
 *' suffer through the fault of its parents?" I answer, 
 Fes: such is the will of God. When Ishmael was 
 shut out of his father's covenant, the curse lighted 
 on his children in their successive generations. The 
 Jews have been excommunicated from the church, 
 and their eliildren with them. The same law still 
 governs. Whenever parents incur a forfeiture of 
 their covenant-relation to the Most High, the loss 
 terminates not in themselves, but extends to their 
 infants. 
 
274 BETTER XVI, 
 
 In this particular, the government of God over 
 his church, harmonizes with his government over 
 the world. Under both, the interest of parents and 
 the interest of their children, are most closely uni- 
 ted. If a parent squander away his property, his 
 innocent children become impoverished: or if a pa- 
 rent lead an ungodly and impious life, his children 
 will be exposed to the danger of imitating his wick- 
 ed example, and may, consequently, lose their souls. 
 On the other hand, if a parent, by industrious apc 
 plication to business, acquire a fortune, his children 
 will reap the benefit of his labour: or if a parent 
 lead a virtuous and pious life, his children will en- 
 joy the signal advantage of religious instructions 
 enforced by a good example, and be thus placed in 
 circumstances the most propitious to their eternal 
 salvation. Such is the state of things, under God's 
 general government over mankind; and the state of 
 things, established by his government over the 
 church, is similar. The right of children to bap- 
 tism stands or falls with the covenant-interest of 
 their parents. 
 
 This being the order which God has been pleased 
 to establish in his own house, it were presumptuous 
 in his ministering servants to violate it, by giving 
 the covenant-seal to infants not entitled to it. The 
 order is wise and good. A conscientious regard to 
 it will maintain such a salutary discipline in the 
 church, as w ill enlist the natural affection of parents 
 on the side of duty; and tend to impress delinquents 
 
e3n Address to Tarents, 275 
 
 with a conviction, that the interest of their infant 
 offspring concurs with Iheirown welfare, in demand- 
 ing from them a return to the path of duty. And 
 it ought to he recollected, that administering bap- 
 tism, through mistaken compassion, to infants not 
 having just claims to it, is not only contrary to the 
 divine will, hut real cruelty to others; because it 
 lays aside that discipline which God has appointed 
 for the benefit of his church, and is calculated to 
 weaken the obligations which this ordinance imposes 
 on parents to instruct their children, and set before 
 them a Christian example. 
 
 The views and motives of parents in presenting 
 their children for baptism, should correspond with 
 the nature and design of this ordinance. Many, it 
 is to be feared, have no correct views of their duty, 
 and are influenced by very improper motives: some 
 designing only to comply Avith the custom prevail- 
 ing in the country or place in which they live; others 
 being actuated by a superstitious dread, that, if 
 their children were to die without baptism, they 
 would be lost; and others imagining the grace of 
 regeneration conveyed by this ordinance to its reci- 
 pients, and of course their children made by it re- 
 newed Christians. These motives, founded in error 
 and in ignorance, should have no influence. The 
 first overlooks the authority of Jehovah, while it 
 offers homage to the opinions and practices of men. 
 The second lays undue stress on this rite: for, al- 
 
276 BETTER XVI, 
 
 though parents should endeavour to present their 
 children for baptism at an early day, yet the idea 
 of a child's salvation depending on the application 
 of water to it, should be entertained by none: " Bap- 
 tism doth save us (not the putting away of the filth 
 of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience 
 towards God^) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." 
 The last supposes, between the ordinance and the 
 thing signified by it, a connex'o?i which God has not 
 established. The former may be, and often is, used 
 as a channel for conveying the latter: but still there 
 is no certain connexion between the reception of 
 baptism and the bestowment of grace. S mon Ma- 
 gus, shortly after having been baptized l^y Philip 
 the evangelist, was thus addressed by the apostle 
 Peter: ** I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitter- 
 ness , and in the bond of iniquity. Acts viii. 23. 
 
 The true and proper motive that should induce 
 you, my brethren, to apply for the baptism of your 
 children, is obedience to the divine will. Jehovah 
 demands from you the dedication of those little ones 
 which he hath given, to himself in this holy ordi- 
 nance. He instituted baptism as a part of his wor- 
 ship; that, by performing it, we might acknowledge 
 him, as Head of the church, to have a sovereign 
 right to prescribe the forms of his own worship. 
 Your motive, then, in complying with this rite, 
 should correspond with its nature and design: yoa 
 should approui'h it, under a deep sense of the Irgh 
 authority by which it was instituted. A regaiu to 
 
Jin Address to Parents. 277 
 
 the authority of its institutor, exalts the baptism of 
 your children into an act of acceptable worship: 
 but the same act, performed with a different mo- 
 tive, sinks into mere will-worship. 
 
 The reception of this ordinance should be ac- 
 companied with an unfeigned dedication of your 
 children to God. To afford you an opportunity of 
 doing this reasonable act, in a manner interesting, 
 solemn, and impressive, baptism was instituted. 
 The language, therefore, of your heart in drawing 
 nigh to Jehovah in his holy ordinance, should be as 
 follows: Creator, God of my life and the life of my 
 child, thou God of mercy in Christ, our Redeemer, 
 in obedience to tliy sovereign will, I come to make 
 a solemn surrender of my child to thee^ from whom 
 I have received him. Influenced by thy grace, I 
 cheerfully and joyfully dedicate him to thy service 
 and glory, in this holy ordinance appointed for the 
 purpose: and henceforth I would look upon him as 
 thy property, and feel myself under renewed and 
 augmented obligations to train him up in thy nur- 
 ture and admonition, that he may consider himself 
 as thy devoted servant, and act worthy of that ho- 
 nourable relation which he sustains to thee and to 
 thy church. This sacred rite, I receive as a token 
 of his dedication, and of my engagements to edu- 
 cate him according to the true import of the solemn 
 transaction. 
 
 Moreover: In receiving this ordinance, you. 
 
 should endeavour to exercise faith iu that great pro- 
 
 2b 
 
278 LETTER XVI. 
 
 mise which it seals. The original promise made to 
 Abraham and to his seed, is directed to Christian 
 parents; and baptism is the new instituted token of 
 it. It must, therefore, be the duty of parents to 
 give honour to God's faithfulness, by believing this 
 gracious promise when they receive its confirming 
 sign. 
 
 You are not required to believe, that your chil- 
 dren will certainly become partakers of the saving 
 blessings of the covenant; for the promise does not 
 insure the salvation of all the seed to >Ahich it is 
 exhibited. But it is your duty to believe, that the 
 blessings of life and salvation will certainly descend, 
 from one generation to another, in, that visible so- 
 ciety, the church, to which all baptized persons be- 
 long; and, therefore, inasmuch as your children are 
 members of this society, you should cherish a hope 
 of their becoming sharers in these saving blessings, 
 and being selected, by its Sovereign Head, as heirs 
 of heavenly glory. 
 
 In language like the following, should you breathe 
 out the desires of your hearts: I bless thee, hea- 
 venly Father, and God of all grace, for thy merci- 
 ful promise to be my God, and the God of my seed: 
 and now, believing this glorious promise, I receive 
 for my child that sacred rite which is intended to 
 certify his covenant-relation to thy Supreme Ma- 
 jesty. How great an honour for him to be called 
 thine, though by an external relation! How great 
 his privilege, in having it certified to him by bap- 
 
Jin J.ddress to Parents. 279 
 
 tism, that thou art ready, in the appointed and re- 
 vealed way, through faith in thy Son, our Redeemer, 
 to admit him to a spiritual and invisihle relation to 
 thyself, and to become his God in the fullest and no- 
 blest senseof thy promise! Hence, I would draw en- 
 couragement to hope, that my child will by grace 
 be advanced to this intimate union with his God; 
 and that membership in thy visible church, will 
 prove the happy means of introducing him into that 
 invisible and holy society, the members of which 
 share in all the saving blessings of thy grace. As 
 thou, O most merciful God, hast been pleased to 
 make him thine in covenant: so be pleased to make 
 him thine, by imparting to him its grace, life, and 
 salvation. Lethimbe ofthat happy number, who imi- 
 tate the faith of Abraham, thy friend, and rejoice 
 with them in being made partakers of the promise 
 in its most glorious extent. Believing thy promise, I 
 look upon my child as a sealed candidate for heaven- 
 ly glory: and most fervently do I beseech thee not 
 to suffer him to fail of receiving grace, nor to lose, 
 by unbelief, the inestimable prize set before him. 
 
 Never should you forget. Christian parents, that 
 the baptism of your children lays you under solemn 
 obligations to train them up in such a religious man- 
 ner, as may, by God^s blessing, bring them to the 
 enjoyment of the saving benefits of the covenant. 
 The language of Jehovah in the ordinance, is. This 
 is my child; take him and educate him for me, that, 
 when grown up, he may love and delight in my ser- 
 
28a LETTER XVI. 
 
 \'ice. Your first care, then, should be to histruct 
 your children in the knowledge of God, and to bring 
 them to an acquaintance with the doctrines, pre- 
 cepts, and promises of our holy religion. This im- 
 portant business of instruction, should be begun 
 very early, and continued as long as your children 
 vemain under your government: and that it may be 
 done effectually, you should teach them personally, 
 as well as employ the assistance of others. Put the 
 bible and other religious books into their hands^ 
 and lead them to the house of God, that they may 
 hear his holy word expounded and enforced. Teach 
 them early their native depravity, and their abso- 
 lute need of a Saviour. Talk to them about the di- 
 vine person and mediatorial character, the wonder- 
 ful work and gracious offices of Jesus Christ. Ex- 
 plain to them the nature of repentance, faith, and 
 regeneration^ and, while you press on them the ne- 
 cessity of these graces, fail not to inform them, that 
 they must look to the Holy Spirit for them, who 
 alone can work them in the human heart. Disco- 
 ver to them a future state of rewards and punish- 
 ments, the happiness of the righteous, and the mi- 
 sery of the wicked. Urge them, by motives addres- 
 sed both to their hopes and to their fears, to pre- 
 pare for death and eternity: and to give weight to 
 these motives, labour to impress their minds with a 
 sense of the shortness and uncertainty of life. 
 Teach them their duties, and guard them against 
 temptations and dangers. Let all your instructions 
 
An Mdrcss to Parents. 281 
 
 be enforced, by admonisbing your cbildren tbat, 
 being dedicated to God in baptism, tbey are not 
 tbeir own, but are bound, by covenant-engage- 
 ments sealed in that ordinance, to live for God. 
 Let them be encouraged to seek divine grace, by 
 explaining to them the nature of Jehovah's gracious 
 covenant, and informing them that baptism certifies 
 his willingness to become their reconciled God, and 
 portion in Christ Jesus. Communicate to them the 
 precious truth, that, while all who hear the gospel 
 have encouragement afforded to hope for success in 
 the diligent use of means appointed for obtaining 
 divine grace, they have more than others; because 
 they are members of the church — of that holy socie- 
 ty to which all the promises belong by covenant- 
 grant, confirmed by a visible sign. 
 
 Remember, too, parents, that the exercise of a 
 prudent and salutary discipline over your children, 
 is an incumbent duty. SuflScient authority is given 
 to you for this purpose. Be careful, therefore, to 
 admonish, to reprove, to rebuke, and, when necessa- 
 ry, to correct them. To the duty last mentioned, 
 some parents have strong objections: but they ought 
 to recollect that, if through excessive indulgence, 
 or careless indifference, they do not correct their 
 children for misconduct calling for chastisement, 
 they fail in kindness to them, as well as in duty to 
 God. To imagine children can, before they obtain 
 the exercise of reason, be governed without correc- 
 tion, is to entertain a notion false in itself, and re- 
 ^ B ^ 
 
382 LETTER XVI. 
 
 pugnant to inspired truth. <« Foolishness," says the 
 wise man, « is bound in the heart of a child; but the 
 rod of correction shall drive it far from him. He 
 that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that 
 loveth him chasteneth him betimes.''* The severe 
 calamities brought on Eli's family, for his not re- 
 straining the licentious conduct of his sons, by the 
 exercise of that authority with which he, as a magis- 
 trate, was clothed; should excite in parents a sa- 
 lutary fear, lest, by a criminal indulgence of their 
 children, and a mistaken tenderness in withholding 
 correction, they should expose both themselves and 
 their children to the mournful consequences of neg- 
 lected duty.f 
 
 Once more: Prayer must accompany all your 
 endeavours to educate your children in religious 
 truth and practice. Depraved in heart and natu- 
 rally prone to evil, their corrupt propensities, un- 
 less subdued by divine grace, will render ineffectual 
 your instruction, discipline and influence: and, there- 
 fore, for this grace you ought, fervently and perse- 
 veringly, to pray, both in private and with your 
 children. 
 
 From the covenant-promise, be it remembered. 
 Christian parents, you may, and should, derive at 
 once a precious encouragement to pray for your 
 children, and a powerful argument to enforce your 
 prayers: an encouragement, because they may be 
 of that happy number to whom God intends to com- 
 
 * Prov. xxii. 15. and xiii. 24. t ^ Sam. Hi. 11—14, 
 
ein Mdress to Parents. 283 
 
 manicate, saving blessings; and an argument, be- 
 cause he directs you to plead it, and put him in 
 remembrance of his engagements. Arguments 
 drawn from God's o>vn promises, are the strongest 
 and the most effectual that can be urged in prayer. 
 With this truth Moses was well acquainted; 
 and, with holy skill, he pleaded, on sundry occa- 
 sions, Jehovah's promise, covenant, and oath.* 
 Hence, the great success which attended the prayers 
 of this illustrious saint. 
 
 Carry, then, my brethren, your dear offspring 
 in the arms erf faith, to a throne of grace, and be- 
 seech the Lord your God to remember his covenant, 
 and graciously fulfil to them his great promise, by 
 imparting to them saving benefits. Beseech him, 
 by his covenant-engagements with the church, to 
 admit them to an intimate and spiritual union with 
 his divine Majesty; that, in the highest sense of the 
 relation, he may be their God, and they, his sons 
 and daughters. 
 
 Finally: It is an incumbent duty to set before 
 your children a pious example. Mere instruction 
 is not sufficient. To render it effectual and truly 
 profitable, it must be enforced by consistent per- 
 sonal practice. You must live religion before 
 your children, as well as teach it; and thus convince 
 them you really believe the doctrines, and feel bound 
 to observe the precepts, which you inculcate. A 
 
 * Exod. xxxii. 11—14, and xxxiii. 12 — 17. 
 
284 LETTER XVI. 
 
 pious example will give authority to your in- 
 structions. Jt will impress the truth on your chil- 
 dren's minds, powerfully, though imperceptibly. It 
 will soften hearts, which instruction cannot pene- 
 trate. It will also explain the truth, and make it 
 intelligible to the dullest comprehension. Let your 
 children see religion living and reigning in your 
 temper and conduct, and they will gain such a view 
 of its nature and tendency as words can never im- 
 part. 
 
 These, Christian parents, are the duties which 
 the baptism of your children imposes. Perform 
 them with fidelity, diligence, and perseverance; and 
 then you may look forward with encouraging hopes 
 to the future conversion and salvation of your dear 
 offspring. It is a maxim, written with the pen of 
 inspiration: " Train up a child in the way he should 
 go; and when he is old he will not depart from it."* 
 The great design of Jehovah's covenant is ex- 
 pressed in these cheering words: ** I will establish 
 my covenant between me and thee — to he a God unto 
 thee, and to thy seed after thee.\ These truths, 
 smiling benignantly on children, should give life to 
 parental faithfulness, and inspire with hope, when 
 want of success would lead to despondency. For a 
 long time, your efforts for the conversion of your 
 children may seem fruitless. The charms of this 
 vain, fascinating world, may lead them astray from 
 duty; and, impelled by youthful and intemperate pas^ 
 
 * ProT. xxii. 6. f Gen. xvii. 7. 
 
An Mdress to Parents. 285 
 
 aions, they may run into great excesses of vice: but 
 still you should not despair of their salvation; they 
 may yet be reclaimed, and you enjoy the happiness 
 of hailing them as new-born heirs of eternal glory. 
 Or should their profligacy bring your gray hairs 
 with sorrow to the grave, yet your instructions, for a 
 w hile apparently lost, may hereafter operate on their 
 hearts, and lead them to repentance and faith, when 
 the lips which now impart them shall have ceased to 
 admonish and entreat. How many pious parents 
 have had the felicity of welcoming to the mansions 
 of eternal blessedness, children of whose salvati(m 
 they, while on earth, almost despaired! This may 
 be your felicity. Seed sown by the hand of dili- 
 gence, watered by tears of parental affection, and 
 cherished by the prayers of faiths is not likely to be 
 lost. For a time it may lie buried in dust; but at 
 length it may vegetate and bring forth abundant 
 fruit. 
 
LETTER XVIL 
 
 An Mdress to Baptised Foutlu 
 
 My young friends. 
 
 Permit me aftectionately to direct your atten- 
 tion to those important duties, resulting from your 
 baptism in infancy, the fulfilment of which should 
 now engage your most diligent endeavours. When 
 your parents presented you in this ordinance, you 
 were, it is true, entirely passive in the transaction, 
 and unconscious of the meaning of it. But do not, 
 on this account, imagine the act of dedication to be 
 a nullity. No: it is binding; it is recorded in hea- 
 ven: and all the reluctance of a rebellious spirit can- 
 not annul the obligation; nor can the sophistry of 
 error prove it to be of no force. You were, be it 
 remembered, the property of Jehovah antecedently 
 to the surrender which your parents made; because 
 from him you had received your being, and all its 
 endowments. Being his property by right of crea- 
 tion, it was perfectly just in him to require your 
 parents to acknowledge this fact by a significant ce- 
 remony: and the recognition of it in baptism was a 
 reasonable service, which they could not refuse 
 without rebellious ingratitude. To dedicate you to 
 God, they were in duty bound: and, had they not 
 
An Address to Fonth, 2S7 
 
 done it. you deceive yourselves, if you ima|^inc you 
 would have been leff at liheHy to act as you please. 
 Far from it: every huriiiin being, baptized or not, is 
 subject to that holy law which demands perfect and 
 unsinning obedience, under penally of eternal death. 
 You have, then, no j^round to complain of the con- 
 duct of your parents in this act; and we hope you 
 will never allow such a thought to enter your minds: 
 for they have done you no iiyury in giving you up 
 to your rightful Lord and IMaster, whose unlimited 
 propriety in you can never be impaired. The mo- 
 ment you received existence, you were his; and as 
 long as you shall retain your being, you will be his. 
 Complain of being baptized! of an invaluable 
 privilege! Complain of being planted in the nursery 
 of heaven! of being entered into that school of 
 Christ, in which the pupils are trained up for the 
 employments and pleasures of the heavenly state; 
 where they are taught a divine philosophy, consist- 
 ing in the knowledge of God, and of his Son Jesus 
 Christ; the mystery of redemption, and the way to 
 glory; the science that makes man wise unto salva- 
 tion! Complain of being united to that visible soci- 
 ety, separated from the world, by Jehovah's cove- 
 nant; a society which he has enriched by iaestinja- 
 ble promises, and visits with his saving grace; and 
 in which he seeks and finds the heirs of his heavenly 
 kingdom! Complain! Your hearts should overflow 
 with gratitude to God for granting you the great 
 privilege of infant baptism. Thankful you certainly 
 
S88 LETTER XVII. 
 
 will be, if ever you receive his converting grace. 
 You will bless his holy name, for requiring your pa- 
 rents to dedicate you to his service. You will look 
 back with pleasure to that hour, when, by the wash- 
 ing of water, you were sealed as Jehovah's pix)- 
 perty: and you will regret that any time since has 
 been spent, in a way inconsistent with the import 
 and obligation of your baptismal dedication to Al- 
 mighty God. 
 
 The duties, my young friends, imposed on you 
 by baptism, are threefold: they relate to your pa- 
 rents, to the church, and to God. 
 
 1. Baptism imposes on you duties with respect 
 to your parents. These duties correspond with those 
 which your parents owe to you. Are they bound, 
 by baptismal engagements, to instruct you in reli- 
 gion? Then you must be bound to receive their in- 
 structions, with a teachable disposition. Never turn 
 away your ears from them; but, at all times, listen 
 attentively to their words. Study those excellent 
 summaries of divine truth, our shorter and longer 
 catechisms. Read the holy scriptures daily. You 
 are pupils in the school of Christ: and, being fa- 
 voured with so divine a teacher, it is surely incum- 
 bent on you to receive that heavenly knowledge 
 which he imparts. The acquisition of this know- 
 ledge is, not only highly important, but absolutely 
 necessary to your salvation. You should, therefore, 
 be anxious to obtain it, and carefully improve, for 
 
till Mdress to routh, 289 
 
 the purpose, all the means with which you are fa- 
 voured. " This is life eternal," said our Redeemer, 
 <« that they might know thee the only true God, and 
 Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent/' Sucli being 
 the inestimable value of the prize set before you, 
 how vigorous should be your endeavours to secure 
 it! How diligently should you learn tlie doctrines 
 and precepts of our divine religion, that you may 
 know how to live for God, and find the way to his 
 heavenly kingdom! Here let me remind you of a 
 truth which ought never to be forgotten, that with- 
 out the teaching of the Holy Spirit, you cannot gain 
 a spiritual, experimental, and saving acquaintance 
 with the sacred scriptures. Most earnestly, there- 
 fore, implore his gracious aid and divine illumina- 
 tion; and, whenever you open your bible, or other 
 religious book, offer up David's devout ejaculation: 
 <^ Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous 
 things out of thy law." 
 
 Is it the duty of your parents to maintain order 
 and exercise discipline in their families? Then it 
 must be your duty to conform to their established 
 rules, to submit to their restraints, and to profit by 
 their reproofs. 
 
 Are your parents bound to set before you a pious 
 example? Then you must be bound to copy afier 
 their piety. Do they fulfil this part of their bap- 
 tismal engagements? Bless God for giving you such 
 valuable parents; and let it be your prayer to be 
 enabled to profit by this signal advantage, and to 
 
390 XETTER XVII. 
 
 imitate their Christian deportment. But if they 
 prove delinquent, and set you a had, instead of a 
 good, example, you may not imitate their wicked- 
 ness. You are to follow them, only when, and as 
 far as, they follow your heavenly P^'ather. In cir- 
 cumstances so unfavourable, you should cry the 
 more earnestly to God for his gracious assistance, 
 to enable you to do your duty, and set an example 
 of piety before your unhappy parents. 
 
 2. Baptism imposes on you duties with respect 
 to the church. You are her children. As an affec- 
 tionate and faithful mother, she is bound to treat 
 you, by instructing, watching over, and subjecting 
 you to suitable discipline when you go astray from 
 the path of duty: and, consequently, you are bound 
 to conduct yourselves as her sons and daughters, by 
 revering her autliority, attending upon and profit- 
 ing by the instructions which she provides for you, 
 submitting to her discipline, and conducting your- 
 selves in such a pious manner, as to reflect honour 
 upon her holy character. 
 
 The interest of the church, my young friends, 
 should lie very near to your hearts: and, by every 
 means in your power, you should be ready to pro- 
 mote her welfare. It is the duty of members of 
 human societies to desire, and to advance their pros- 
 perity: and surely it must be the duty of members 
 of God*s church to display au active zeal for her 
 prosperity: a society, in its design and effects, un- 
 speakably more important than auy society ever in- 
 
•iw Address to Youth. 291 
 
 stituted by the wisdom of man. Let, then, the wel- 
 fare of Zion engage your earnest solicitude. Care- 
 fully endeavour to qualify yourselves for managing 
 her concerns, in your several stations: and, on all 
 occasions, be ready to contribute by your prayers, 
 your counsels, your pecuniary aid, to maintain her 
 influence, to extend her limits, and to exalt her 
 glory. This is that heaven-born society, instituted 
 by infinite wisdom for the salvation of God's chosen; 
 at the head of which reigns his own Son, to which, 
 angels are ministering servants, and which shall 
 survive the wreck of states, nations, and empires. 
 To be made instrumental in advancing the prospe- 
 rity of this glorious society, is an honour Avortliy 
 the ambition of any mortal, however illustrious by- 
 birth, or dignified by title, or elevated in his sta- 
 tion. Baptized as members of the church, it is your 
 duty, remember it, my young friends, to qualify 
 yourselves for filling the places now occupied by 
 your parents, when they shall be gathered to their 
 fathers in the dust. The zeal which ancient saints 
 discovered for the interest of the church, should 
 certainly be imitated by her members living under 
 the new and better dispensation. " Pray for the 
 peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper who love 
 thee. Thy servants take pleasure in her stones, 
 and favour the dust thereof. If I forget thee, O 
 Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. 
 If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to 
 the roof of my mouthy if I prefer not Jerusalem 
 
292 LETTER XVII. 
 
 above my chief joy." Such is the spirit which 
 should animate every member of the church of our 
 exalted Redeemer. 
 
 Finally: Baptism imposes on you duties which 
 respect God. It binds you to ratify the dedication 
 of yourselves to his service and glory, — to accept 
 the grace of his promise, — and to lead a holy and 
 unblamable life. 
 
 Baptism lays you under obligations to ratify the 
 dedication of yourselves to God. His you are; and 
 he claims you as such. Justice, gratitude, and self- 
 interest unite in requiring you to recognise his pro- 
 priety in you, and unlimited dominion over you, by 
 some personal and explicit act. This you cannot 
 refuse to do witjiout contracting aggravated guilt: 
 for he has bound you to his service by peculiar ties, 
 and favoured you with very distinguishing religious 
 advantages, by placing you under the care of his 
 church, and imposing on youi* parents solemn obli- 
 gations to attend carefully to your Christian educa- 
 tion; ties which cannot be broken through, and ad- 
 vantages which cannot be abused, without incurring 
 the guilt of much presumption, and great ingrati- 
 tude. We, therefore, remind you of your duty, and 
 press you to perform it. All are bound to love and 
 serve the Lord their Creator; but you are under pe- 
 culiar obligations. To live without God in the 
 world, is in any rebellion against lawful authority: 
 but in you it is an aggravated kind of rebellion; re- 
 bellion against the authority of Jehovah, wlio has 
 
•In Address to Fotitlu 29* 
 
 favoured you with such special privileges, and 
 numbered you among the people whom he has sepa- 
 rated from the world for his own worship and glory. 
 And will you act a part disgraceful to this holy so- 
 ciety? AVill you endeavour, as far as depends on 
 your conduct, to frustrate God's design in forming 
 his church? Will you live in such conformity to this 
 world, that there shall be no perceptible difference 
 between you and unbaptized youth? "Will you extort, 
 from the lips of unbelief, a question reproachful to 
 our Redeemer's ordinance?— What profit is there in 
 baptism? God forbid. 
 
 Remember, baptized youth, that you are not 
 your own, and whose you are. Be sensible of the 
 obligations arising from baptismal dedication to Je- 
 hovah, and fulfil them. Seal the dedication of your- 
 selves to your covenant-God by a personal act, — by 
 a believing and holy participation of that Christian 
 ordinance specially instituted for this purpose. Take 
 the consecrated symbols of our Lord's broken body, 
 and shed blood; and thus, by an appointed seal, ra- 
 tify your covenant-relation to the Most High. In 
 the presence of the church, and before the world, 
 make it knoAvn, that you esteem it a high privilege 
 to have been devoted to him in baptism, and that, 
 by his grace, you are determined to be his true and 
 faithful servants, his holy and obedient children. 
 
 Another duty, arising out of your baptism, 
 
 which you owe to God, is, to accept the gi ace of 
 
 his promise. Baptism, as stated ia the preceding 
 2c^ 
 
29* LETTEIl XVII. 
 
 letters, is a seal of Jehovah's covenant, certifying 
 every recipient that, according to its tenor, he is 
 willing to be reconciled to him through Jesus Christ, 
 and to be his God in the noblest sense of his pro- 
 mise. The same invaluable offer is made to everj 
 one w ho hears the gospel: but it is your peculiar 
 happiness to receive this all-gracious offer in a pro- 
 mise of that covenant which has been sealed to you 
 by a visible sign. Already has Jevovah taken you 
 into a special external relation to himself, and con- 
 descended to style himself your God: and he nowin- 
 vites and presses you to receive his proffered grace, 
 presented in a way calculated to destroy every 
 doubt with respect to his sincerity, that he may be 
 your God, in a nobler sense, by dwelling in you, and 
 you in him. It must, then, be your duty, as it cer- 
 tainly is your inestimable privilege, cordially and 
 thankfully to accept this all-gracious offer; an offer 
 which you cannot refuse without contracting the 
 guilt of most offensive disobedience to the divine 
 will, signified in a manner the most condescending 
 and persuasive, nor without sacrificing your own 
 best and eternal interests. 
 
 Be not, my young friends, contented with that 
 external relation to God which you sustain, and 
 wiih wearing the signature of his property. To 
 imagine that baptism and its attending privileges 
 Avill save you, would be to indulge a hope the most 
 deceptive and ruinous. " Circumcision verily pro- 
 fiteth, if thou keep the law^ but if thou be a breaker 
 
Jin Address to routh. 295 
 
 of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumci^ 
 sion." The Jews, ignorant of the nature of true 
 religion, boasted of being descended from Abraham, 
 and of wearing in their flesh the mark of God's co- 
 venant-people; and concluded, that the special pri- 
 vileges bestowed on them secured to them divine 
 favour and future happiness. A fatal mistake! for 
 privileges, not improved, but abused, instead of pro- 
 curing safety, increase guilt, and occasion ruin. 
 This prevalent error, John, our Redeemer's fore- 
 runner, exposed; and warned his countrymen of its 
 destructive consequences. '< Think not to say with- 
 in yourselves, "We have Abraham to our father: for 
 I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to 
 raise up children unto Abraham. And now also the 
 axe is laid unto the root of the trees; therefore, every 
 tree which bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn 
 down and cast into the fire.'* Unbelief brought 
 upon the Jews the displeasure of Almighty God; it 
 was the cause of their excommunication from his 
 church: and the tremendous judgments of heaven 
 upon this unhappy people, formerly so highly favour- 
 ed, proclaim to the world how criminal and dan- 
 gerous it is to misimprove distinguishing religious 
 privileges. 
 
 This Jewish error, it is to be feared, is adopted by 
 many nominal Christians. They rely on their de- 
 scent from pious parents, their infant baptism, and 
 their connexion with the church, as a security 
 against deserved puDii»hmeat; alihough their con- 
 
296 lETTER XVII. 
 
 ducti^ unworthy of the name by which they are cal- 
 led, and inconsistent with the obligations imposed 
 on them by their baptism. Vain refuge! They sin 
 against superior light, and special advantages for 
 religious improvement: and shall augmented guilt 
 plead for their pardon and salvation? Your external 
 privileges, baptized youth, will, unless you repent, 
 afford you no shelter from the wrath of Almighty 
 God: and, in the day of judgment, you will find your 
 descent from pious parents and your infant baptism 
 serve no other purpose, than to make his indignation 
 wax hotter against you. 
 
 Would you stand with boldness before his awful 
 tribunal? You must rest your hopes on a better foun- 
 dation than external privileges; you must be wash- 
 ed in the laver of regeneration, and be clothed with 
 the righteousness of Jesus Christ. <* For the king- 
 dom of God is not meat and drink; but righteous- 
 ness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." The 
 essence of religion consists, not in outward ceremo- 
 nies or forms, but in those inward graces which are 
 wrought in the soul by the Spirit of God. Hence, 
 the apostles declares this important truth, worthy of 
 your most serious consideration: <* In Christ Jesus, 
 neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncir- 
 cumcision, but a new creature." 
 
 With affectionate desires for your salvation, I 
 beseech you not to rest in any external privileges, 
 but to seek the enjoyment of the saving blessings of 
 the covenant. Let the honourable relation which 
 
An Address to routh. 297 
 
 you sustain to Jehovah, he the means of leadmg you 
 to that near spiritual union to him, >yhieh will make 
 him your God in the highest sense of his promise. 
 What a dreadful misfortune would it he, if, after 
 having been in covenant with him, you sliould he 
 finally rejected by him! if, after having enjoyed the 
 honour of being called the children of his kingdom, 
 you should be excluded from the kingdom of heaven! 
 if, after having had sealed offers of salvation, you 
 should fall under the sentence of everlasting damna- 
 tion! From the depths of hell, you would then look 
 back to this world, with inexpressible anguish: and 
 the recollection of the state so favourable to your 
 salvation in which you are now placed, and the re- 
 peated offers of mercy now made to you, would be 
 in you a worm that never dies, and a fire which is 
 never quenched. 
 
 This the scriptures assure us Avill be the terri- 
 ble condition of sinners who abuse their covenant- 
 privileges, and finally perish. Believing the testi- 
 mony of God in his word, it would be unfaithfulness 
 to him and cruel tenderness to you, were we not to 
 set the danger before your eyes, and urge you to flee 
 from it. " Knowing, therefore, the terrors of the 
 Lord, Ave persuade men." By the coming of the 
 Son of God to judge the world, — by the unavailing 
 cries of tliose who shall then be found unprepared 
 to meet him, — by the awful solemnities of the final 
 day, — and by the eternal miseries of the wicked, we 
 affectionately beseech you to seek the saving grace 
 
298 LETTER XVn. 
 
 of God, that you may stand with acceptance before 
 his august tribunal. 
 
 Having pointed out your danger, we would al- 
 lure and captivate your hearts, by exhibiting the 
 rich and everlasting mercies of God contained in 
 his covenant. The design of the covenant is thus 
 expressed: « To be a God unto thee, and to thy 
 seed! What a glorious promise! Did you ever weigh 
 its meaning? Did you ever reflect what it is to have 
 Jehovah for your God in the subliniest sense of his 
 promise? In this relation are comprehended heaven 
 and all its glories. The treasure is so immense, 
 that an angel from paradise could not tell you its 
 value: the blessings are so vast, that eternity alone 
 can display them. And who can make light of such 
 a promise? Can you refuse blessings which, as sin- 
 ful and immortal beings, you so much need? the 
 pardon of all your sins, the renovation of your 
 nature, the justification of your persons, adoption 
 into the family of the Most High, a title to a hea- 
 venly inheritance? Can you refuse blessings, which, 
 being accepted, will heighten the enjoyments, as 
 well as sweeten the bitterness of life, — soften the bed 
 of death,— shed the light of hope upon your tomb, — - 
 open to you the gates of paradise, — and last while 
 your being lasts? 
 
 Reflect, my young friends, on the inestimable 
 value of this sealed promise; and let not the perish- 
 ing vanities of tlie world induce you to slight and re- 
 ject the iafinitely condescending offers of your co- 
 
ain Mdress to Toi/fh. 299 
 
 Tenant God. With a tender solicitude for your sal- 
 vation, he presses you to accept them. O turn not 
 away from his mercy, which waits patiently on you, 
 and seems unwilling to give up to perdition. Pro- 
 fit by that signal privilege, your infant baptism. 
 Accept the grace which it seals. Lay hold, by faith, 
 on the grand covenant-promise, that Jehovah may 
 be indeed your God, and you his spiritual children. 
 Finally: Baptism, my young friends, imposes 
 on you the duty of leading a holy and an unblamable 
 life. The grand, comprehensive injunction of the 
 covenant is, <« Walk before me, and be thou per- 
 fect." You are solemnly bound to live as Jehovah's 
 peculiar people; and, by yielding a sincere, hum- 
 ble, universal, constant, and growing obedience to 
 his commandments, to testify your gratitude for his 
 marvellous and distinguishing kindness. It is in- 
 deed a truth never to be forgotten, that the blessings 
 of salvation are freely offered, and freely to be ac- 
 cepted. Let not, however, the imagination enter 
 your minds, that the freeness of divine grace re- 
 leases us from obligatiens to obey our Creator's 
 will. Our obligation to punishment, and our obliga- 
 tion to keep the law with a view to merit eternal life, 
 it does indeed cancel: but the requirements of the law, 
 as a rule of life, it diminishes in no degree; and, 
 instead of exempting us from them, it increases our 
 obligations to obedience. While, therefore, you re- 
 ceive, with a thankrjil heart, the free grace of God, 
 yield, as a tribute of honor due to his Majesty from 
 
300 LETTER XVII. 
 
 all his creatures, and as a testimony of gratitude 
 justly demanded by him from redeemed sinners, sin- 
 cere and growing obedience to his good and right- 
 eous commandments. Remember that it is written, 
 ^* Without lioliiiess no man shall see the Lord." 
 
 Often recall to mind the obligations resulting 
 from baptism, the seal of Jehovah's covenant. En- 
 deavour to awaken those active principles of obedi- 
 ence, gratitude and love, by meditating in a strain 
 like the following: How interesting that transac- 
 tion, when my parents dedicated me an infant to 
 their God and my God! Then the Most High con- 
 descended to take notice of me, by nature ** a child 
 of wrath." Then he admitted me as a member of 
 his visible church, numbered me as one of his fa- 
 mily, and sealed me as his peculiar property. He 
 has made to me a tender of all saving blessings: 
 and, by baptism, he has, from my earliest days, 
 certified me of his readiness to become my God 
 in the fullest and noblest sense of liis promise. A- 
 mazing condescension of the King of Glory to a 
 worm of the dust! Wonderful grace of a holy and 
 just God to an apostate rebel! What fervent love, 
 what lively gratitude to liim, should reign in mj 
 heart! What shall f render unto the Lord for bis 
 marvellous kindness? W ill he deign to accept the 
 poor, defective returns of love and obedience, wliich, 
 by his grace, I may be enabled to make? Then let 
 me I'cnounce every false way, and endeavour to walk 
 in all his commandments and ordinances blamelessly. 
 
Jin Mdress to routh. 301 
 
 Be it my great business to do liis will, and approve 
 myself in his siglit. 
 
 But, before I finish this address, let me remind 
 you, my young friends, that new obedience implies 
 a new heart. The heart is the fountain of action. 
 Actions are, in the sight of God, good or bad, ac- 
 cording to the intention or principle from which 
 they proceed. Man looks on the outward appear- 
 ance; and if this be fair, he will approve of your 
 character: but God, remember, looks on the heart, 
 and demands truth, integrity in the inward parts. 
 Love to your Creator is the great principle of obe- 
 dience on which his law insists. This wanting, your 
 life, how usefully and honourably soever it may be 
 spent, will not be acceptable to God. And this 
 great, necessary principle is wanting in every unre- 
 newed person. <* The carnal mind is enmity against 
 God. — They that are in the flesh cannot please 
 God."* 
 
 Your first duty, then, is to endeavour to obtain 
 a new heart, as the necessary principle of evange- 
 lical obedience. Enslaved by sin, you certainly are 
 unable to renew your own heart, and create love 
 where enmity has hitherto existed. But never in- 
 dulge the imagination, that this inability can dis- 
 charge you from obligation to perform a most im- 
 portant and essential duty: because this inability 
 was induced by man's wilful apostasy from God, and 
 is itself the great sin of our race, and the parent of 
 
 * Rom. viii. 7, 8. 
 3D 
 
302 LETTER XVII. 
 
 all other sins. This lamentable truth, that you are 
 unable, owing to deep depravity of nature, to cre- 
 ate in yourselves a new heart, you should duly re- 
 alize, confess, and bewail. But let uot a sense of 
 native weakness discourage you in seeking this great 
 and necessary change: for God, in boundless mercy, 
 has promised to bestow it on sinners, and is daily 
 fulfilling his promise. AVhile, therefore, you ac- 
 knowledge your duty, and confess your inability to 
 perform it, as your crime, seek Irom God, in the 
 use of appointed means, the renewing and sanctify- 
 ing influences of his Holy Spirit. Plead the cove- 
 nant-promise on this subject,^^ and intreat the Lord 
 to fulfil it to you. Plead with all the importunity 
 of perishing sinners fur a new heart, and a new spi- 
 rit: — for grace to walk worthy of your higli voca- 
 tion, and to fuliil the duties imposed by your infant 
 baptism. 
 
 And that God may incline your hearts t;* keep 
 his commandments, make you comforts to your pa- 
 rents, useful in the world, and ornaments to the 
 church; and'that, when, by his grace, you shall have 
 done his will on earth, he may send his holy angels 
 to carry you to tlie bosom of your father Abraham, 
 and to the blissful society of the sons of God, is the 
 prayer of 
 
 Your sincere friend, 
 
 And affectionate pastor, 
 
 JACOB J. JANEWAY. 
 
 * Ezek. xxxvi. 25—27. Gal. iii. H. 
 

 ■'S^ 
 
 d 
 
m{ ,. \^^ 
 
 n;m-^r^.^^-^^^^^:mm-:^^ 
 
 * 
 
f^'' ■■■ '.^^Sf 
 
 -«v> 
 
 'm^ 
 
 
^heotogic 
 
 1101201021 3769