BAP ;^ CL ^ s^ l^ ^ lo ca. Q_ Iz; QJ o ttO &H <: ^ w o (U « ^ E g M i'j .«o C/0 1- s cq >, ^ ^ ^ ^ ScB Digitized by tine Internet Arcliive in 2011 witli funding from Princeton Tlieological Seminary Library Iittp://www.arcliive.org/details/essayonbaptismin00tyer2 ^1-^^^/J^ AN ESSAY ON BAPTISM. SECOND EDITION. Ptummer and Brewis, FrinterSf l,«ve-Lane, Eastcheap. AN ESSAY ON BAPTISM: IN WHICH IT IS ATTEMPTED TO BE PROVED, THAT BAPTISM i^1imini£teieD i^ ii)( 0prm&ling ot pouting of SSaatet IS A SCRIPTURAL MODE: ANO THAT THE INFANT OFFSPRING OF BELIEVING PARENTS ARE PROPER SUBJECTS OF THIS ORDINANCE. BT DANIEL TYERMAN. SECOJID EDITION, "WlXn ADDITIONS. LONDON: PRINTED FOR AND SOLD DY S. BURTOV, 1 56, LEADEN- HALL street; baynes, paternoster row; anb WILLIAMS AND SON, STATIONERS' COURT. 1814. Published by the same Author^ THREE SERMONS : Youth admonished of the Evils of bad Company : — The importance of domestic Discipline, addressed to the Heads of Families; — and Religion the noblest Employment and the immediate Concern of the Aged. Boards, price 3s. Second EoiTiOX of the Two First Sermons. A LETTER, respectfnily atldressed to Sir L. VV. T. Holmbb, Bait.M.P. fcrtheBoioughofNewpoit, bj Piulo Vectis. Price IS. In the Press, and speedily roill he published^. An essay on EVA.\GELIC L HOPE. PREFACE. -^ -i- HERE is no doctrine without its difficulties; no truth but may be controverted. It is not therefore any difiiculty opposed to the reception of a given truth, that should make us abandon it. Were we to renounce the sentiments V7e have adopted, merely because a few individuals may have determined to start objections against thera, we might be ever learning, but should never come to the knowledge of the truth. Each doctrine of the Gospel is a whole composed of various parts ; and all these parts are to be embraced, in order to a reception of the whole. For instance ; when I acknowledge the truth of the baptism of adults by immersion, it appears to me that 1 acknowledge a part of the doctrine of Baptism only. But if 1 am resolved to re- ceive all the various parts of this doctrine, I shall embrace also the baptism of infants by sprink- ling, as this is only another pari of the same doctrine ; for it by no means follows, that be- cause the former i^ true, therefore the latter M PREFACE. is false.' — It is this part of tiie doctrine which is defended in the following Essay ; for the for- mer requires no proof, as its propriety under certain circumstances is not controverted. A mind determined to exercise its native pre- rogatives, and to close its researches in a ratio- nal decision, will weigh the evidence adduced in the balance of the sanctuary, and receive or reject accordingly. Let us apply this observa- tion to the case before us. Unless the objector can sap the foundation of all the following argu- ments, and produce arguments in favour of the other scheme, more cogent, better supported, and which prove that the baptism of infants by sprinkling is unscripUiral, in order to act with consistency, he ought to receive also that part of the doctrine which is here defended; otherwise he attaches himself to that which, at inosL, is but a part of the truth, w hilst he rejects that which he cannot disprove; than which, nothing can be more absurd. Much talent has heexi employed in this con- troversy, and several books produced worthv the attention of the scholar and the critic. It Is not to decry these works that the author of this Essay has employed his pen. Having devised a method of treating the subject, which, so far as he is acquainted with the controversy, is new, and adapted to common minds, he has pur- sued it; and an impartial public must deter- PREFACE. VU mine witli what success. It is not men, but principles which are opposed : and an opposi- tion to piiixcipi.es, which all hold as non- essential, by no means supposes a want of Chris- tian affection to the persons of those by whom they are maintained. Whatever difference there may be amongst Christians in this respect, bro- therly love should yet conlinue; and it is hoped that nothing in these pagres will have a contrary tendency. ( Firmness, withoui rrogance: deci- sion, without bitterness; and arsrument, without sophistry, have been, at least, attempted through the whole. In stating and illustrating the followingr argu- ments, the utmost brevity, consistent w ith per- spicuity, has been observed. An ornamented style is not the style of controversy. Argument never appears more forcible than when stript of every thing adventitious, it presents itself before us in the simple dignity of reason: — this is the author's apology in modern times for plainness of speech. With respect to the subject, it is necessary to observe, that each argument ap- pears to the writer tonclusive ; but when the \vhole -are collected, like «o many sun beams, into one focus, they will be found, it is hoped, to throw a clearness of evidence on the trutb, which will enable the dimmest eye, if not hood- winked by prejudice, to behold it with ease. It Till preface: was found difficult to compress the discussion within the present limits. However, nothing has been omitted which appeared necessary, whilst every thing was rejected which was deemed superfluous. This Essay was not begun with any view to publication, but merely to gratify the wishes of a kind friend, with whom the author had con- versed on the subject. The favourable opinion of many who have seen it in manuscript, the frequeut solicitations of friendship, an ardent desire of usefulness, and a concern to inform the ignorant and settle the wavering, have united their respective energies to force it into public attention. And should God be glorified, and any of his people benefited by this publication, the author will be amply rewarded. D. T. iftwpoTt, iakqfmght. ADVERTISEMENT TO THE SECOND EDITIOK. w THE approbation which this small work has received from the religions public, has very far exceeded the most sansfuine expectations of the author. The large edition, which he was ad- vised to print, has sold in a much shorter period than his fears had prescribed ; and another edi- tion is loudly demanded : since its publication he has solicited the criticisms of the most intelligent on both sides of this controversy, with whom he has had an opportunity of conversing ; but he has met with nothing to make him question the validity of his arguments, or to render any im- portant alterations or additions necessary. The few which have been introduced tend, however, to set some points in a clearer light, and to give greater effect to some of the conclusions which his data furnish. However important every divine institution may be, so much ^tress ougFit not to have been laid on that in question, as obviously has been by many who take the opposite side. The fre- quent controversy which they have excited, and the zeal whicii they have discovereil in the de- fence and propagation of a favourite tenet, have raised it to a disproportionate elevation, and rendered it more prominent than some other topics of essential moment. By this means it has been made to lake the precedence of those doctrines which lie at the foundation of human hope, in the estimation of the unthinking, to X ADVERTISEMENT. the no small injury of those who only " see men as trees walking." While the author has met with nothing to make him suspect the force, and scriptural energy, of his Argumekt, he feels peculiarly grateful, that as little objection has been raised against the spirit which it breathes. Though he dilfers from many whom he loves, he sin- cerely wishes to preserve the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. He feels, indeed, that decision which every man should feel who meets his antagonist on controverted ground, yet he hopes he can say with confidence, that no un- hallowed passion has guided his pen, nor any im- proper motive influenced his conduct; and he ix happy that the dispositions which he has felt have been rendered sufficiently apparent to be recog- nized by his readers. With what meekness and humility ought those to differ from each other on difficult sub- jects, who see but in part, and know but in part! How incompatible is it with that spirit of love and forbearance which the followers of Jesus mutually owe to unchristianize each other, be- cause they differ on topics not essential to either vital or doctrinal Christianity ; and to make that a condition of church fellowship, which is not revealed as such in the oracles of God! The day is not remote when the disciples of Christ will more wisely appreciate their differences, and when mutual love will be the most prominent characteristic of the church of God. ** Fly swiftly round, ye wheels of time, And bring that welcome day." Neteport, Isle of Wight, THE AUTHOR. March 25i 1814. CONTENTS. THE MODE OF BAPTISM. ARGUMENT I. Page. There is no passage in the sacred Scriptures from which it can be proved, that a single individual Tvas ever baptized bj/ immersion .^...,. l6 ARGUMEVT 11. ^hcre are many passages of Scripture, which re7i- der it exceedingly probable, that Baptism was administered in some other manner, and not by immersion «.. ».... 9,6 ARGUMENT III. The words baptism, baptise, baptized, are used in Scripture, in such connexions, as render it evi- dent, that they do not mean to dip or immerse 31 ARGUMENT IV. The right performance of any instituted ordinance, dejyends not on the (quantity of the element em- ployed, unless that quantity be specified by the Head of the church 39 ARGUMENT V. The spiritual truths signified by Baptism, are gene- rally denoted by the terms sprinkling, pouring, washing, shedding forth, and but seldom, if ever, by dipping 43 ARGUMENT VI. The system which makes immersion essential to Baptism, is contrary to the spirit of the Gospel economy : — as it is in some cases impracticable —as it imposes what scnne proper subjects are unable to bear— '■as it is (fien dangerous-— as Z^xii CONTENTS. tt appears to many highly iKdecent — and as it opposes Christian intercourse 47 Conclusion 51 THE SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. ARGUMENT I. There is nothing in the sacred Scriptures that really opposes infant Baptism 55 ARGUMENT II. ht examining with care and impartiaUty the sacred Scriptures, tve meet with many passages jvhich are much in favour of irf ant Baptism 61 ARGUMENT III. The infant offspring of believing parents stand in the same relaiiun to the Gospel church no7v, as they did to the church of God under the Old Testament dispensation «...~. 67 ARGUMENT IV. Seeing that the infant offspring of believing parents have a right to visible church-membership, a?id that Baptism is the only rite of admission to that state,Baptism ought to be administered to them... 75 ARGUMENT V. Children are capable of being taken into a covenant relation to God; — to them many covenant pro- mises are made — and they are able to partake of the blessings of the covenant: — if so, then it 7vill follow that they are ft subjects of Baptism, which is the seal of the covenant 81 ARGUMENT VI. It can be proved from the clearest historic records, that children have, in all ages of the Christian dispensation, been received into the visible church by Bc.yiism 89 Conclusion 97 An address to those who profess religion,, .#... 39 / I A^ ESSAY, <^c. W H AT is truth ? is a question which every man should propose to himself when he enters the regions of contro- versy. The inquiry implies, or ought to imply, that the mind is open to conviction, and ready to embrace truth on whatever side evidence may bring it to view. Impar- tiality is an essential qualification in this pursuit: the want of it leaves the mind under the dominion of pre- judice, insensible to the force of argument, and the easy prey of error. In all our inquiries, our solicitude should be proportioned to the importance of the sub- ject. Different truths have their different degrees of consequence. Some have an immediate connexion with our present and eternal felicity, such as repen- tance, faith, the atonement, and holiness. In all in- quiries relative to these subjects, the mind ought to feel the greatest concern: — and that soul must be awfully stupified that docs not. — There are other sub_ jects less clear, and more open to controversy, on which the mind may feel abated eagerness, but not indifference, especially if they affect Christian union. B 14 AN ESSAY and the peace of the Christian church: — and such is Baptism, the subject discussed in the following pages. Scarcely has any controversy separated Christians more, and been productive of a smaller portion of good to the church of Christ in modern times, than this. Many books have been written, some to agitate the question, others to send it to repose; but most of them have been too large and abstruse for common readers to give them a clear view of the arguments on either side. Obscurity and virulence have been too often associated, evil tempers generated, and but little done for the cause of the great Redeemer. But truth needs not the unhallowed weapon of angry pas- sion in its defence: it only asks a mind open to con- viction, and a heart in love with its dictates, to ensure a triumph. Laying aside, therefore, all the jargon attendant on unchristian disputation, I shall attempt to give a fair statement of the arguments in favour of that side of the question which I conscientiously em- brace. If candour influence the reader's mind, he will confess, that the writer's conduct is not without support; and that strong arguments indeed must be produced on the other side, to overthrow his system, or eliminate his practice. Before he proceeds on this subject, the reader ought clearly to understand, that there is no dispute betAveen those who practise Infant Baptism', and those who differ from them,*" whether adult believers, * Pffdobaptists. '' AntipaedobaptistP, or Baptists. ON BAPTISM. 15 who have not been baptized in their infancy, be pro- per subjects of baptism; this both parties uiaintaiu, and in such a case, practise. Neither is there any difference between them respecting the validity of Baptism administered by immersion; here also they are agreed. — Let this be well understood, and then it will follow, that any passages of scripture which may be produced relative to the baptism of adults, or to immersion, (if there be any such) have nothing to do with this controversy, as they would only tend to prove what both equally maintain. — The only points in dispute are, Whether Baptism administered BY the sprinkling OR POURING OF WATER, BE A PROPER MODE — AND WHETHER THE INFANT OFFSPRING OF BELIEVING PARENTS PROFESS- ING Christianity, be proper subjects. — It is to these two particulars I shall confine my atten* tion in this Essay. I shall begin. First, with the Mode, or manner in which Chris- tian Baptism may be administered. — Is it essential to Christian Baptism, that it should be administered by dipping or immersion? Or, is not the sprinkling or pouring of water in the name of the sacred Trinity, deemed, with equal propriety, scripturalBaptism? — In defence of the latter, I offer to serious consideration the following arguments, which, taken collectively, I think sufficient to justify the conduct of those who administer this ordinance by sprinkling. B 2 16 ON THE MODE ARGUMENT 1, THERE IS NO PASSAGE IN THE SACREB SCRIPTURES FROM WHICH IT CAN BE PROV- , ED, THAT A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL WAS EVER BAPTISED BY IMMERSION. JL o some, this may appear a bold assertion; but a brief consideration of those passages of scripture which are commonly adduced in favour of Immersion, will establish its truth. — It has, indeed, been frequently said, that it is a positive command of Jesus Christ that adult believers only, should be baptized by dip- ping: but let it be remembered, that there is no such command in all the sacred volume, either expressed or deducible by fair inference. We are aware that it is said, " Repent and be baptized," " He that be- lieve th and is baptized shall be saved," &c. yet here is no mode of baptism mentioned, either dipping or sprinkling. There is no proof that John ever administered baptism by immersion. We see no evidence that he immersed our Lord.^ It is said indeed that after he was baptized of John, " Jesus went up straightway out of the water:" but this proves nothing more, than that he left the water, or went from it ; for the same » Matth. 3. 13—16. OF BAPTISM. 17 word here rendered " out of," is very frequently translated, " from." There is nothing in the whole transaction which proves that Jesus was dipped. — John's baptizing the people in Jordan,'' does not -prove that any of them were immersed. The original preposition signifies AT, as well as in.'' But suppose it were in Jordan, it cannot be inferred, without violence put upon the words, that it was by immer- sion. And when we consider the vast multitudes that came to his baptism, it seems impossible for John to have immersed them. — John's baptizing in Enon,"* because it is said " There was much water there," by no means proves that any were dipped. The learned know that the passage may be translated, " Because there were many waters or rivulets there." The place was undoubtedly convenient for the pur- pose of baptizing, but there is no proof avhatever that any one of those rivulets was sufficiently deep for immersion. Besides, could it be proved that John baptized by immersion, (which is impossible,) it would be no proof that this mode of baptizing ought to be practised now, for nothing is more clear than that John's baptism was not Christian baptism ; this is proved by Acts 19. 1 — 5. It cannot be proved that Philip dipped the Eunuch.^ We know it is said that " They both went b Matth. 3. 5, 6. <= The same preposition ia translated at, Eph. 1. r, 2, 12. Phil. I. 2. Colos. 1. 1. 1 Cor. I. 1. a Cor. 1. i. and iu many «ther places in the New Testament. d John 3. 23. ' Acts 8. 36 — 40- 18 ON THE MODE down into the water, and both came up out of the "Water," but we have no more evidence that the Eunuch was dipped than that Philip was, for what is said of one is said of both. But to suppose that PhiHp was immersed, is to suppose an absurdity. — Besides, it cannot be proved from the words of the original, (and we must criticise upon the original words in cases of difficulty, and not upon those of a translation,) that they even went into the water or came out of the water. Nothing more can be proved than that they went To, and came from the water/ On these words the learned Dr. Lardner makes the following judicious remarks. "I do not see any proof that the Eunuch was baptized by immersion." " He and Philip went out of the chariot to the water, and stood in the water, and Philip poured some of the water upon him. To be baptized in the chariot was unbecoming the solemnity of the ordinance. It was proper to go out and stand, and make a solemn profession of faith, and be initiated by Philip. All the reasonings of Mr. B and others for immer- sion, taken from the Eunuch's getting out of the chariot, have appeared to me inconclusive, not to say weak and trifling. Nor do I see reason to think that John the Baptist used immersion, but rather other- wise." " Among all the washings and purifications (called divers baptisms by the apostle) in the Old Testament, there is not, I suppose, one instance of f Acts 8. 38. OF BAPTISM. 19 any person being dipped or immersed by another. It is contrary to decency, and to the respect we owe to one another."^ Having considered those passages which are usually adduced as proofs that the primitive mode of bap- tizing was by immersion — and shown that they afford no proof whatever that any such mode was prac- tised ; — I shall now notice those texts which have been supposed by some to have an allusion to immer- sion as the mode of baptizing, and shall attempt to make it appear, that they have no allusion to any mode, and consequently, that they afford no proof in favour of dipping. That which is most commonly adduced, is a pas- sage in Paul's Epistle to the Romans.'' In this text, the most superficial observer must see, that the Apostle is treating on the work of sanctification, as a consequence of our union with Christ, which union is considered under the idea of a being grafted or planted into Christ, of which Baptism is the sign and seal. In the third verse, the Apostle says, " Know ye not, that so many of us as were bap- tized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death 1" In understanding this passage, it is of essential importance that we recall to mind the idea of initiation, for which Baptism is administered. For 8 Letters to and from Dr. Doddridge, published by ThomaE StedmaD, page 234. " Rom. 6. I— II. 20 ON THE MODE by Baptism we are initiated into the religion of Christ, and all the blessings procured by his death. This is evidently the idea of the Apostle, for he explains what he means in the fifth verse, where he says, "If we have been planted together^ in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the like- ness of his resurrection." Thus what the inspired Paul considered before, a being baptized into Christ, he here calls a being planted in the likeness of his death. — Carrying on the same idea of initiation, which is done by Baptism, he observes in the fourth verse, " Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into death;" by what are we buried with Christ into death ? — by Baptism. Baptism then is the instru- mental cause merely, or the rite of initiation into all the benefits of the crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ: that "Like as Christ was rais- ed up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also," who have been united to Christ, of which union baptism is an emblem, " Should walk in new- ness of life." Christians being thus united to Christ, are said to be crucified, to be buried, and raised with Christ; and from this consideration, the Apostle enforces the necessity of crucifying the old man, dying to sin, and living to Christ in newness of life.— Though the Apostle alludes to Christian Baptism, he evidently alludes to no mode, either dipping or sprinkling, and therefore this text has nothing to do with the controversy. OF BAPTISM. 21 The sentiments of Beza on this passage, correspond with what has been advanced. " There are (says he) three parts of this sauctification, to wit, the death of the old man or sin, his burial, and the resurrection of the new man descending into us from the virtue of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, of which benefit, our baptism is the sign and pledge." To the same import are the words of Dr. Evans, Mr. M. Henry's continuator. He observes — " It is plain that it is not the sign, but the thing signified in Baptism, that the apostle here calls being buried with Christ ; and the expression of burying, alludes to Christ's burial: as Christ was buried, that he might rise to a new and more heavenly life: so we are in Baptism buried, that is, cut off from the life of sin, that we may rise again to a new life in faith and love." That Baptism is used as a sign or emblem of our introduction to the benefits of the Redeemer's mediation, is clear. " For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ:"' where the word " baptized" is evidently used for initi- ation or introduction to the benefits of Christ's glori- ous undertaking; for in Baptism, the person re- nounced Judaism and Heathenism, and put on a profession of Christianity. The above reasoning applies with equal propriety to another passage in the Colossians ^ of the same ' Gal. 3. 27. " Colos. a. II, 12. 22 - ON THE MODE import, and where the Apostle is treating on the same subject; it is therefore unnecessary to enlarge upon it. Nothing favourable to immersion can be inferred from a passage in Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians,' where he says, " All our fathers (and their little ones were included "') were under the cloud, aud all passed through the sea, and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea." No one, 1 presume, will bring this text as a proof of dipping. For those persons were only baptized unto Moses, not unto Christ. And if there be any allusion to the mode of Baptism, it is certainly iu favour of sprinkling: — the cloud came upon them, and the water stood as a wall on the right hand and on the left. The moisture of the cloud might sprin- kle the people, and the wind might carry some of the spray of the sea upon them; but none were dip- ped on this occasion but Pharaoh and his host who sank like lead in the mighty waters. Some have supposed, with no more evidence, that Peter alludes to the mode of Baptism, when he speaks" of the "Ark, wherein eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto, even Bap- tism, doth also now 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." Peter here evidently speaks of a ' 1 Cor. 10. I, 2. ■" Exodus, lo. 9, 10. " 1 Pet. 3. 20, 21. OF BAPTISM. 23 resemblance between the ark and the ordinance of Baptism, and not between the ark and water. And what Baptism does the Apostle mean? Not mere outward Baptism, or " The putting away of the filth of the flash," but that which is signified by it, that is, a real and spiritual renovation of soul, or, " The answer of a good conscience towards God." The ark, wherein Noah and his family were saved, was a type of the covenant of grace, whereby all the elect of God are saved: — into which they are brought when their hearts are changed by the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, of which, outward Baptism is the sign and seal. " And so it was the ark, and the safety of those which were in it, and not the water, that prefigured the gospel salvation in Christ, as signified by Baptism, by means of which, when the thing signified by it is found in us, through faith in him, we are saved."" Here is, then, no allusion whatever to any mode, but merely to the ordi- nance of Baptism. " I deny not," (says Dr. Owen) " but that there is a great allusion in general between salvation by the ark, and that by Baptism, inasmuch as the one did represent and the other doth exhibit Christ himself. But the Apostle hath a particular design in this com- parison. For judgment by one universal deluge was then coming on the whole church and people of the " See Gnyse oo this place. 24 ON THE MODE Jews ; but God would save a few by Baptism, that i*^ their initiation into Gospel faith and repentance, whereby they were separated from the perishing in- fidels, and were really and actually delivered from the destruction that befel them, as Noah and his family were in the ark." * There are other passages p which some have sup- posed to have an allusion to dipping — but such a construction is so forced, unnatural, and uncertain, that I do not think it necessary to consider them distinctly. The texts which I have noticed, are the strongest that can be brought in favour of immer- sion: — and not one of them amounts to any proof that it was the mode adopted in the days of the Apostles.t » * Dr. Owen on the Hebrew?, vol, 4, p. 39. ^ Luke 13. 50. Mark 10. 38. i Cor. 15. 29. -j^ If this statemeut be just, and I will venture to say, that QO one will prove to the contrary, the consequence must be that those who adopt dipping as tlie mode of baptizing:, do 80, not because they can prove it from Scripture, but be- cause it is their opinion that sush was the mode. If it be a mere opinion, then thsse who assert it to be a fact «rr either through ignorance, or with design. If the formei-, then it follows that such persons ought to be silent, and difter from others with modesty, if the latter, then they deserve the severest reprehensionj and forfeit their character as honest men. or BAPTISM. ^S ARGUMENT II. TMEIE ARE MANY PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE, WHICH RENDER IT EXCEEDINGLY PROBABLE, THAT BAPTISM WAS ADMINISTERED IN SOME OTHER MANNER, AND NOT BY IMMERSION. Jtx AVijiG shown that there is no positive evidence im Scripture for immersion, I shall proceed to show that there is something which favours some other mode. In this argument, I shall consider the slightest evidence- that of PROBABILITY. Had John baptized by immersion, his whole time must have been spent in it, and that would not have been sufficient. " There went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins,"*— No mode is here mentioned; but from the vast multitudes baptized by him, it is certainly most probable, that he baptized them by sprinkling or pouring. When the people came to John in the wilderness, the^ had no idea of being baptized by him, and therefore would not bring that change of clothing which was necessary for immersion. Imagi- natiou, indeed, would build a house on the banks of t » Matth. 3. 5« 6. c t6 ON THE MODE Jordan, and provide it with all sorts of accommoda- tious fit for immersion : — but, alas ! this is only a castle in the air, the Scriptures give it no founda- tion. On the day of Pentecost, " They that gladly re- ceived the word were baptized. And the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." '' A considerable part of the day must have elapsed before the baptizing commenced : and be- sides this, we hear nothing of their retiring from the place where they were met together, to any river or situation convenient for immersicKi. And is it not exceedingly improbable that about three thousand should be immersed in so short a time as part of a day? — When Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto the people, they believed, and " Were baptized, both men and women."* They came to hear Philip in a state of Heathenism, with various designs, and from various motives, — some to persecute, others to hear what the babbler should say, but none, I suppose, with any view of receiving the truth, or being baptized. We cannot imagine, therefore, that they brought suitable gar- ments with them : — it is not conceivable that holy Philip would immerse " Men and women" indiscri- minately, without clothing; neither can we think t that they would be plunged in the clothing in which ^ Acts 2. 41. ' Acte «. 12. OF BAPTISM. J7 they came, as it would have been highly dang*rou« to have worn it afterwara. /\Uaiit iiiai they were baptized by the sprinkling or pouring of water, and the whole becomes easy and plain : this solves every diffi- cilty. Admit this or not, the mind unshackled by prejudice, will readily acknowledge, that strong pro- bability favours sprinkling. The next passage I shall mention, is that which relates to the baptism of the Jailor and his family.** The earthquake having shaken the prison, and waked the Jailor, " He sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas ; and brought them out. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes, and was baptized, he and all his straight- way ; and when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced in God with all his house." — Here we meet with nothing that countenances the idea of immersion. This Baptism (it appears most likely) took place in the Jailor's house; for they were evidently brought into his house before, or how could they have spoken the word to all that were in his house? " He took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes;" there is every reason to think that this kindness would be performed in his own house ; which is a further ^*,Acts 16. V] — 34. c 2 fS ON THE M0D8 proof that they were baptized there, as this circum- stance preceaea lUeu tapusui. "We heai uoiLing of thfeir going to a river, neither can we suppose that the Jailor had conyeniences for immersion in his house.— Besides, it was midnight; the Apostles were sore with Ae. wounds they had received a few hours before; and can we think it probable that they would go and stand in a river in such circumstances, to baptize this family I If we examine the circumstances attending the baptism of Paul,'' we shall see every reason to believe that he was baptised by sprinkling in a private house. Af)er his conversion, he was taken to the house of Judas in the street which was called Straight, in the city of Damascus. Ananias having in a vision re> ceived a positive command from Christ to go to him there, he went, and found him in a very abject condi- tion — blind, emaciated with three days hunger io which he neither did eat nor drink, and weakened by distress of soul. As soon as Ananias came into the house, " Putting his hands on him, he said, Brother Saul, the Lord (even Jesus that appeared unto thee ill the way as thou earnest,) hath sent me, that thon mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales; and he received sight forthwith, ahd arose and was baptized. And when « Actt 9. S-'ig. OP BAPTISM. 99 he had received meat, he was strengthened." From all this it is evident, that Saul was in the house of Judas when Ananias came to him ; that through the agitation of his mind, and three days hunger, his body was exceedingly weakened, and in a very unfit state to be immersed in cold water ; that there is no proof that he went out of the house to be baptized, but merely rose up from his seat, and stood up upon his feet, that the ordinance might be administered with due solemnity ; and that as soon as he was bap- tized, he received proper refreshment, and was strengthened : not a word is said intimating that he left the house to be immersed, or that Judas had any conveniences in his house for immersion. Surely here is every reason to believe that he was baptized by sprinkling ; at least, this is far more probable. I shall only mention another instance, which is related in the next chapter/ After his remarkable vision, Peter was sent for by Cornelius to his house. As soon as he came, he entered in, " And found mauy that were come together." Cornelius having related the reason of his sending for him, Peter began to address them, and preached to them the salvation of the Gospel. " While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. Then answered Peter, can any man forBid water, that these should not be baptized, which have f Acts 10. 19 — 48. c3 50 ON THE MODE received the Holy Ghost as well as wc? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord/* These persons were in the house of Corne- lius; nothing is said about their leaving the house to go to a river to be baptized ; nothing is mentioned about a baptistry in the house of Cornelius ; Peter's observing — " Can any man forbid water/' seems to intimate that water was brought to them into the house; and as they had just been baptized by the Holy Ghost, by his falling rPON them, I see no leason to doubt but that sprinkling or pouring water UPON them, was the mode here used, as this most resembled the thing denoted by it, that is, the Bap- tism of the Holy Spirit. Surely the mind that takes an impartial view of this passage will confess, that the strongest probability is on the side of sprinkling. From all these instances it appears exceedingly probable, that Baptism was administered in some- other way, and not by dipping. All I plead for from these quotations is, that strong probability favours sprinkling or pouring, and opposes immersion.* ♦ Some have referred to the authority of the Church of England in order to prove the necessity of immersion. But let any one only read over the Service of Baptism in her l^ayer-Book, and he will see that the Church of England maintains that Baptism administered by sprinkling is scrip- lural, and consequently valid. OF BAPTISM. 31 ARGUMENT IN. THE WORDS BAI^TISM, BAPTIZE, BAPTIZED, ARE USED IN SCRIPTURE IN SUCH CONNEX- IONS, AS RENDER IT EVIDENT, THAT THEY DO NOT ALWAYS MEAN TO DIP «R IMMERSE. XVESPECTING the import of the original word, the great Dr. John Owen makes the following observa- tions, which deserve to be remembered. " No one instance (says that wise critic) can be given in Scrip- ture, wherein BAptizo doth necessarily signify either to dip or to plunge. — It doth not signify properly to dip or plunge; for that in Greek is Embapto* and Embaptizo. It no where signifies to dip, but as a mode of, or in order to washing.*"' This being a just statement of the import of the word, then it follows, that washing either by dipping, or sprinkling, or pouring, is baptizing. It has often been said that the word Baptizo, the word always used by the sacred penmen when treat- ing on the ordinance of Baptism, comes fromBAPTO ' Embapto is translated lo dip, Matth. 26. ■23. Mark 14.30. John 13. 26. N.B. This word is never used in reference to the ordinance of Baptism. * Collection of Sermons and Tracts, p. 581. * 32 ON THE MODE to dip; and that as Bapto always signifies to dip, therefore Baptizo which comes from it, signifies always to dip also. This however is not true. Many instances might be adduced to prove that even Bapto is often used by various authors in such connexions as render it certain, that they did not mean immer- sion. But let one instance suffice; it is taken from the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament into Greek, which is generally supposed to have been made about three hundred years before the Christian ^ra. In this translation the word is evidently used to denote sprinkling, for it is employed to describe the manner in which Nebuchadnezzar's body was " Wet (ebaphe) with the dew of heaven."*^ This was certainly done by sprinkling, and not by dipping. And it is equally certain that the word Baptizo to baptize, is often used when it cannot mean to im- merse. This even the learned themselves confess, who oppose baptizing by sprinkling. To prove this, I cannot quote better authority than Dr. Gale, who was unquestionably the most learned man who has stood forward to advocate the opposite sentiment. On ob- serving that Aristotle describes a thing as baptised which was not put into the water, but the water came upon it, he remarked, " The word Baptize, per- haps, does not so necessarily express the action of putting under water, as in general, a thing being in that condition, no matter how it came so." And in * Dan. 4. 33. OF BAPTISM. 33 another place the thing baptised v^as only partially wet. On this fact the Doctor declares, " That the word does not always necessarily imply a total im- mersion of the whole thing spoken of, all over."'^ Af- ter even Dr. Gale yields the point, who will be bold enough to maintain it ? Let us now see how these words are used in the New Testament. The Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the HebrewSjS speaking of the various Jewish cleans- ings, calls them " divers washings;" in the original it is " divers baptisms," or baptisms of different sorts ; but if dipping were the only mode, there could not be DIVERS baptisms, but one only, and the Apostle is mistaken. No one can maintain with any show of probability, that the word denotes immersion in the Gospel of Mark,' where it is said, " When they come from the market, except they wash (in the original it is bap- tize,) they eat not; and many other things there be which they have received to hold, as the washing (baptizing) of cups and pots, brazen vessels and tables." — Some think that the word here rendered tables, signifies beds: — but whether it signify tables or beds it matters little, for v.e may consi- der it certain that they were not washed by dip- ping, but by pouring or sprinkling water upon them. Neither can we suppose from the above pas- sage, that when they came from market they always * See Dr. Gale's Answer to Dr. Wall. • Heb. 9. 10. f M«rk 7. 4. 34 ON THE MODE dipped themselTes in water before they eat. — " The Pharisees marvelled that Jesus had not first washed (baptized) before dinner." ''—What sort of washing was that which the Pharisees expected Christ to perform? I answer, only the washing of his hands. This is evident from Mark 7. 3 — 5. " The Pharisees and all the Jews, except they wash (nipsontai) tlieir hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the Elders. And when they come from market, except they wash (baptizontai) they eat not. And many other tilings there be which they have received to hold, as the washing (b aptismous) of cups and pots, braseu vessels and tables. Then the Pharisees and Scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples ac- cording to the tradition of the Elders, but eat bread with unwashen (aniptois) hands." In this passage we have a positive proof that nipto to wash, and BAPTizo to baptize (the root from which the above words are derived) signify the same thing; and are used indiscriminately for each other: — the inference is plain, that washing is baptizing in whatever way it is done, either by dipping, or pouring, or sprinkling. It appears from " jB/is/"" and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh." Baptizing with the Spirit is performed by pouring the Spirit upon those who were baptircd : the natural inference is, that pouring is baptizing. — To illustrate the nature of this Baptism of the Holy Ghost still further, Peter observes," "He hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear." Here the Apostle calls the same Baptism, a " shed- ding forth," and not immersion. In reference to the same Baptism, Peter says," " As I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the begin- ning." Here the same Baptism is called a " falling on us." — Again. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.''^ The use of water in the ordi- nance of Baptism is undoubtedly an emblem of the mfluences of the Holy Ghost on the soul : and tke Scriptures speak of a similarity in the mode of ap- ' Ver. 17. •" Joel 2. 28, 32. " Acts 2. 3,3. ° Acts II. 15, 16. P Acts 10. 44, 45. OF BAPTISM. 37 plication, as well as of llie thing. Tin J — "I indeed have baptized you with water; but lit (Christ) shall baptize \ou with the Holy Ghost."'' But baptizing WITH water, is not applying the body to the water, but the water to the body of the baptized. This man- ner of speaking is very frequently used in the Scrip- tures.' If the word " baptize" signify invariably " to dip," then on all occasionis, wherever the word occurs in the Scriptures, we may substitute dip, dipped, &:c. and that substitution will make as good sense as bap- tize, baptized, tVc. Let us then read a few passages where the word " baptize" is used, with this change. " I have dipped you with water, but he shall dip you with the Holy Ghost and with fire."* " For by one spirit are we all dipped into one body."' " As many as have been dipped into Christ have put on Christ."" *' John did preach the dipping of repentance."* — " Preached the dipping of repentance for the remis- sion of sins.' " To change the words would make a great many texts speak language as absurd as the 1 Mattl). 3. II. ' Matth. 3. II. Mark 1. 8. Luke 3. 16. John i. :6 Acts 1. 5. IX. 16. I am aware that the preposition en, in, is used in the above passages. But tlie Translators rendered it "w^ith," beiup: aware of the similarity between Baptism and the thing signified by it, and the absurdity that would follovr upon translating it in : in water, in tlie Holy Ghost. •Matlh. 3. II. ' 1 Cor. n. 13. " Gal. 3. 37, * Mark 1.4. " Luke 3 3. ^ D 38 ON THE MODE above. The obvious reason is, the texts to which 1 have alluded, and a variety of others, have no refe- rence to any mode, but simply and alone to the design of Baptism, namely, initiation, or an introduction into the church as its visible members. From the w^hole I conclude, that the word " bap- tize" is often used in such connexions as render it evi- dent, that it does not mean to dip or to immerse, but " to pour upon" — " fall upon" — " sit upon," &c. Therefore immersion is not essential to Chi-istian Bap- tism ; and it is properly and scriptitrally administered by pouring or sprinkling. OF BAPTISM. 59 AllGUMENT IV. THE RIGHT PERFORMANCE OF ANY INSTITUTED ORDINAXCEj DEPENDS NOT ON THE QUANTITY OF THE ELEMENT EMPLOYED, UNLESS THAT QUANTITY BE SPECIFIED BY THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH. J. HE question here is, do tile Scriptures speak of a cjuantity of water, sufficient for immersion, as being of essential importance to the right performance of the ordinance of Baptism ? Surely not. Let us here notice tlie other standing ordinance of the Christian Charch, where visible elements are employed, I mean the Lord's Supper. Do the Scriptiu'es speak of any given quantity of bread to be eaten, or wine to be drunk, in order to an accept- able pei-fbrmance of this important duty .'' No. If any given quantity had been of importance, the Head of the Church would certainly haAe inscribed it on the page of truth. But here the Scriptures are silent; excepting that they caution us against the abuse of that solemn institution by the use of so large a quan- tity, as would tend to gluttony and drunkenness. However small the portion, only" let it be eaten and b2 410 ON THE MODE drunk in renieinbrance of Christ, and it is well done.* Had it been essential to tlie right administration of Baptism, that there shoidd be water enough fcJr the iiumersion of tl-e subject, we may certainly infer, that it woukl Iia\e been recorded. To suppose such a quantity e.^seritia], but left unspecified by the Clinstiah ' Lavvgiver, would be a reflection on his wisdom, Ills justice, and his goodness. But the sacred Scriptures are perfectly silent on this subject also. Besides; there are reasons to suppose tliat Baptism was administered in pri^■ate houses, as well as at rivers; where there could be but Httle, as well as where there was much water ; and therefore we natu- rally and properly conclude, that whether there be enough for immersion, or only sufiicient for sprinkling, is of no moment : only let it be administered in the name of the Father, and of iLe Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and it is all the Scriptures require. On this subject, the famous WiTSirs makes the following remarks : " The conmmniou in the thing signified, should not be rated by the quantity of the external sign. A very small * Tliis ordinance is calltil a SiiPi'ER, wliitli in rommoii languajje conveys tbc idea of a .Mfai. ; and we are said to par- take of the Loni's Sii|>|)ci-, tiioui^b we eat and drink tl»e smal- lest quantity of Inead and wine. On the same principle, Why may we nut consider a person baptized, tliougb but a little ^ater be applied by sprinkling r OF BAPTISM. 41 portion of water may no less seal the abundance of divine grace in Baptism, than a small morsel of bread, and a sparing draught of wine in the holy supper."* To make that essential to an ordinance which the oracles of God do not, argues the greatest pride in the person who makes the daring attempt.— If this argument be good, and who will prove it is not ? then the use of a small quantity by sprinkhng, is as valid as a great deal, which is all I contend for.* * VViUius't Economy of the Covenants, Vol. II. p. 436. ♦ It is not uiifiequently said — " Of what use ia a little walejr •priuklf-d upon the face ? — To answer this question I need only propos*' *notl'.*r — Of «ihat use is a grest deal ? dS 42 om THE modi: ARGUMENT V. THE SPiniTCAL TRUTHS INTJMA'IED BY BAPTISM", ARE GENERALLY DENOTED LY THE TERMS SPRINKLING, POURING, WASHING, SHEDDING FORTH ON, AND BUT SELDOM, li' EVER,* BY DIPPING. JlJaptism presupposes tJie sinful, iVpraved state of than ; it expresses the necessity of ici^eneratioii, and * I know but of onw place whtietiie woicJ " ili^i" is used with any ap|>ai'('nt reiuliosi to piir.t'yin;;', au^l < veil I here it is very doubtful 1 mean lh<' c■a^«• of Naaii;;i:i ll.c lejur, o-Kii'flfs 5. 10 — 14. The Prophet J^lisha tolii him 10 go aiul WAbii in (or at) Jordan. The Septuaoiiit trans':it!i>n niakfs use of the proprr «oid louo, v.hich is coniinoiiiy usf'd to denote " to wash" by the application of water in any mode ^ and the same word is used tl-.ree times in this shojl history. Wlien he complied with the Pioph'l's (in* ; tion, he washed the part whi( li was leprous, in ll;e manner he was directed. And this is all that is meant by its being said " That he went and dipped himself seven timcSj according to the sajiiig of the mau of God." And the alio»e transl-^tion uses the word BAPTZo to denote this wasbin,?. N B. This is a fuither evidence that the v.oid uaptizo s!giiifits to wash in any mode, as baptizo aiid lovo are used to denote the same thin^, i. e. to wash. OF BAl'Tlf^M. 43 tlte removal of the im|jiirity of sin by the sanc- tirying operations of the Spirit; and is the sign of especial dedication to God. If we open the sacred Scriptures, we shall see that these part'culars are ex- pressed by sprinkling, pouring, wasliing, shedding forth, &c. Thus by sprinklixg. " Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them ; SPRINKLE water of purif^'ing upon thein, and let them shave all their flesh, and let tliem wash their clothes, and so make themselves clean."* " So shall he SPRINKLE many nations."'" '' Then will I sprin- kle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean."' " If the blood of bulls and of goats," and the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the piu*ifying of the flesh, how much more shall the bl'Xid of Cln-ist, purge your conscience from dead works."** " Almost all things are by the law purged with blood ;" * — In what manner applied ? — " By SPRINKLING." '^ — " Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." ^ " Through sanctification of the Spirit, un- to obedience, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ."'' — " 'We are come to the blood of sprixk- * Numbers 8. 6. 7. ^ Isaiah 52. 15. ' Ezek. _^6. 25. * Heb. 9. 13, 14. * Ver. 22. ^ Ver. 19. ar, » Heb. 10. aa. ^ I Pet. i. 3. ' Heb. 12. ■24. # 44 ON THE MO&E LING, that speaketh better things than the blood of Abel."* The same things are expressed by pourino upon. " He shall poiir (the oil) upon the head of him that is to be cleansed."'' " I will pour water upon him that is tliirsty, and floods upon the dry ground; I will pour my spirit upon thy seed."' " And I will pour upon the house of Da\ad, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and suppUcation."" ♦ The follow iiig serious observations made by the pious and It-arned Dr Owen, deserve the atteution of those wbo treat the idea of Bprinklint; with such sovereign coutenopt as we find many do. " Tliis rite or way of »prii)kling:, (says he) was chosen of God as an expressive token or sign of the cffecttiai coiumuuication of the benefits of ll»e corenant unto them that were sprinkled. (Andchildren were amongst them.) Heuce the communication of the benefits of the death of Christ unto sanctification is called the sprinkling- of his blood, i Pet. 1. 3. And our Apostle cotnprizeth ail the effects of it unto that end under the name of the biood of sprinkling, Heb. 12, 24i And I fear that some who have used the expression ivith some contempt, when applied by themselves unto the sign of the commuuieatton of the benefits of the death of Christ in Baptism, have uot observed that reverence of holy things that is required of us. For this symbol of sprinkling was that which God hiaiself chose and appointed, as a meet and apt token 0/ the coiaraunication of covenant-mercy, that is, of hit jrace in Christ Jesus unto our souls." Owen ou the Hebrews, ¥0l. 3. page 435, folio edition. * Lcvit. 14, j«. • Isa, 44. 3. ™ Zecb. 13. 10. OF BAPTISM. 45 " Oh the Gentiles was poiu'ed out the gift of the Holy Ghost." ° The same things are expressed by washing. " Such were some of you, but ye are Avashed, but ye are sanctified — by the Spirit of ovn- God."** " Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins."P " Having our bodies waslaed with pure water."** " Christ loved the cliiu-ch and gave himself for it, that he niiglit sanctify and cleanse it with the wash- ing of water by the Avord."' " He saved us by the washing of regeneration."' " Simon Peter said unto him. Lord, (wash) not my feet only, but also my hands and my head."' The same things are expressed by shedding forth, on us. " He hath shed forth this (the Holy Ghost, the Baptism promised) which ye now see."" " The renewing of the Holy Ghost, M-hich he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savioiu*."" Several of the above passages have an allusion to the mode of Baptism by sprinkling, pouring, washing, shedding upon, &c. all wliich are called baptizing.* If there be a similarity between the " Acts 10. 45- ° I Cor. 6. II. p Act 2X i6. "i Heb. lo. 21. ■■ Eph. 5. 25, 26. »Tit. 3. 5. 'Johuij. 9. " Acts 2. 33- * Tit, 3. 5, 6- • That shedding forth, falling upon, &c. are called baptizing is clear. Cuoiparc Acts I. 5, with Acts 11, 15, 16. " As I 46 OxN THE MODE mode of administering the ordinance of Baptism, and the manner of communicating the spiritual tnitha denoted by it, (which we ma^^ naturally expect there should be,) then we ma) conclude, that, when the Scriptures speak of the communication of these bles-. sings it will be in tenmis of allusion to that ordinance by which they are represented : — this is done : — but the mode alluded to is sprinkling, pouring, washing, sliedding forth : — we may therefore safely conclude, that water administered in any of these modes, is pro- perly Baptism. began to sjuak (said Peter) the Holy Ghost fell on them, ai ON us at tbe begiiiuin?. Theu remembered I the word of th« Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghest. OF BAPTISM. 47 ARGUMENT VI. THE SYSTEM WHICH MAKES IMMERSION -ESSEN- TIAL TO BAPTISM, IS CONTnAUY TO THE SPIRIT OF THE GOSPEL ECONOMY : AS IT IS IN SOME CASES IMPRACTICABLE AS IT IMf OSES WHAT SOME PROPER SUBJECTS ARE UNABLE TO BEAR AS IT IS OFTEN DANGEROUS AS IT APPEARS TO MANY HIGHLY INDECENT AND AS IT OPPOSES CHRISTIAN INTERCOURSE. Immersion is in some cases impracticable. There are places so destitute of water, excepting in deep wells, and that in very small quantities, that enough for immersion could not be obtained. This is evident from, the testimony of travellers, who have penetrated the interiors of Africa and other liot countries, where tlie Gospel might be preached, and where souls might be converted to Christ, and made fit subjects for the kingdom of grace. Malthus, in his Essay ofi the Principle of Population,* has the folloA^-ing remark : " The tribes of the desert (of Arabia) deny that the religion of Mahomet was made for them. For how, say they, can we perform ablutions, when * Page 93, second edition. 48 ON THE MODE we have no water ?" Might they not make the same objection to Christianity, if it were essential that they should be immersed in water, before they become members of the visible climxh ? Immersion is a yoke which some proper subjects are unable to bear. Suppose a person afflicted Avith certain complaints, in which plunging in cold water woidd endanger life : — And there are such cases : — Suppose such a person converted to Clii'ist, and a proper subject for church fellowship, yet, on the exclusive immersion system, that felicity would be denied this real disciple, however holy ; no place woxdd be allowed in the chm*ch — no seat granted at the table of the Lord, to such an one. Would not this be afflicting the afflicted, by making that essen- tial to communion, which the Scriptures do not, for the crime, pardonable at least, of not being able to endure inmiersion? — And is it not often dangerous also to the minister, who must fi-equently stand in the water a considerable time, to immerse, as well as to those who are to be immersed, as in cases of the above natvire ? * The practice of immersion appeal's to many highly indecent. This would be universally confessed, • Could it however be proved tliat immersion is es<^ential to this ordinance, which has never yet been done, all these dangers must be risked, and every thin^ unpleasant attached to immersion endured. OF BAPTISM. 4§ were the practice of dipping men and vomen indis- a-iminately, introduced into the piibhc Theatres, and performed before the gazing thousands. And how much more so in a rehgious assembly, where all shoidd be done " decently and in order/' and every thing excluded which would generate a single dispo- sition conti-ary to tlie purity of the Gospel. May we not say with Dr. Lardner, in th.e quotation before made — " It is contrary to decenc}', and to the respect we owe to one another ?" And does not this system oppose Christian inter- coiu-se ? * In heaven, all barriers to Christian commu- nion are for ever done away. Nothing ought to be considered as essentially necessaiy in the church mihtant, which would separate those who are united to Christ, who agree in all essential points, and whose ether sentiments are not contrary to peace and love. This serious objection lies against the system that makes immersion essential to Baptism and church fellowship, as it separates those whom the Lord hath joined. For though it is impossible to prove that sprinkling is not baptizing, yet a pious person thus baptized, and fully persuaded that it is a scriptural jnode, would not be suffered to participate the * 1 here make au honourable exception of those few churches of the Baptist denomination, which admit of inixe«l communion. E 50 ON" THE MODE Lord's Supper vlth those who support this system. Sui'ely this is to keep out those whom the Gospel iu\ites in ; and it throAvs a stumbling block in the way of the communion of saints, which is at once uncharit:ible, and coiitriay to the divine economy of that Gospel, Tvhicli is designed to unite, and not to separate chief friends. " In my simple opinion," said good John Bunyan, who was himself an Antiptedobaptist,* " your rigid, church-disquieting principles, are not fit for any age and state of the church. I say they are babes, and carnal, that attempt to break tlie peace and commu- nion of churches, though upon no better pretences than water. — I am still of that muid, and shall be, so long as I see the effects that follow, viz. the breach of LOVE, taking off Christians from the more Aveighty things of God, and to make them quarrel and have heart biu-nings one against another."'' * He did not consider irmncrsioii as esseatinl to chnroh fel- lowship — for be adaiitted of an open rommiiiiion. '' \Vorks, vol. I. p. 151, 153. OF EAi'TI.SM. S\ CO>7CLUSION. J. Hus we sce — ti^at it is impossible to prove from the Scriptures th;:t any individual wa? ever baptized by iixmiersior. — thf:t many passages of Scripture render it exceedingly probable that Bapti&in uas adntiiniitered in seme other wa}'^, and not by immer- sion — that the word " baptize," is freq>aently used wliere it cannot mean to dip, but to pour or sprinkle — tliat the right performance of this ordinance does not require a qviantity of the element sutTicier.t for tlie inmiersion cf tlje subject — that the spirituiil trutlis denoted by Baptism ai'e generally iiitunated by the terms spriniding, poui-ing^wasliing, and sliedciing forth, on VIS, which apjiear to be allusions to the ancient mode of baptizing, but seldom, if ever, by dipping — RTid tJiat the system ■s\aich makes immersion essen- tial to Baptism, is eontraiy to the spirit of the Gos- pel economy. From trte v/lioie I iuier, that dipping the subject under water is not essenti;d to Cinustian Baptism; and that Baptism adjiiinirftered by sprink- hng or pouring is a scriptiirul moA1»T1>5M. 63 pies;*" and parents^ when they devote their children to God in tJiis institudor;, stand engaged to train them up " In tlie way they should go," " In the Junture and admonitiop. of the I>crd." The plain sense of the words of our Lord appears to be, " Go — disciple, put ir.to ti.e condition of my disciples, all nations, Jews and (}entiles, old and young, parents and children, by tiie rite of Baptism, which is the sign and means of admission into my school ; and then teach them the principles of my religion, as their several capacities enable them to receive in- struction. Anodier passage whicli favours the baptism of in- fants is tiiat recorded in the Acts of the Apostles,'' where Peter alludes to the promise which God made to Abraham,* in ■wlJch co\ cuarst blessings were assured to him, and his seed, to be signified and sealed to luja and them by circumcision, A^•hich thet\ became a sti'.nding religious ordinance of initiation into the cliurch of the Jews. Peter, speaking of die gift of tke Holy Ghost, witli all his saving influences, the remission of sins, and (>ojpel rcjjentance, the great blesiirgs of tJie covenasit of grace, to be sealed and signified by Baptism as coi^ung in ilie place of ■^ Cliildrcti art c;illi'il the Loid's rifivailts, i critiouf. :; 41. .4;, and ilisciijles, Acts 15. jo. "• Acts a. 38,39. ' Gen. 17. r 3 64 ON THC ?*UB.IKCTS circumcision, (which was t\\e seal of the covenant under the Law,) cays to Iiis htarers who were con- vinced of their sins, and inquiring wh^t they should do, " The promise is to you and to yoiir children." Let it be remembered that Peter w;ts addressing a very numerous audience, many of whom, without any doubt, had cliildren. As they knew that the same promise was made to Abraham and his infant seetl, they would certainly understand that this pro- .inise belonged as much to tJieir children, as the promise made to Abraham did to his seecl. For the pro- mise IS to you and to your chikhen ; not, shall be, when they are converted, but is now to them, in their present state. The promise is to you, therefore be ye baptized; the promise is to yom' children, therefore let them be baptised. And the promise is not confined to you and your children ; no : — but it is made to " As many as the Lord your God shall call," and their children ; let them be baptized. So far from any exception being made to children in refer- ence to Baptism, they are expressl}^ mentioned, and die promise is as much made to them as their con- verted parents, and therefore they liave as valid a claim to Baptism. The Scriptures give us an account of the baptizing of three whole families — that of Lydia*^ ; that oi' tlu^ ' Acts i6. 14, 15. ON BAPTisar. 65 Jailor;* and that of Stephanas.^ Ancient fam3ies were often very large ; how large these were, we can- not say ; but they were famihes ; and whether larger or smaller, they were all baptized ; the heads of the family, the children, if there were any, and the ser- vants. The weight of argument arising: from this circumstance, is certainly on the side of probability'. It camiot indeed be said there were children ; for it is a possible case that there might not be any ; neither can it be said that there v/ere not children ; for it is very probable that there Vv'-ere some : the question then is, Wliich is most probable, that there were not, or that there were children in these three famihes ? Every un- prejudiced mind, I conceive, will give it in favour of children. And if there was but one child in these faxnilies, that child was certainly baptized, and the • Arts i6. 33. I here anticipate an objection which some Boay bring against the suppositiuu that there were children iu the household of the Jailer, because it is said that after they were baptized, " He rejoiced, bt-lieving in God with all his house." To refute this objectiuo, I need only quote a passage from Guyse's Paraphrase, in a nate on this text. He says " It may be read, He, believing in God, rejoiced all the house over j (PANOiKi) he Htiit to every ap:;rtineut expressing his joy. And it ia evident that the words (egalliabato fefisteu- K08) he having believed, rejoiced, expresses only his oU'ti, and not his family's faith and joy."" * I Cor. 1, 16. 66 ON THE SUBJECTS cause I plead is gained. The strength of argument is clearly in favour of infants. If the Apostle^ in his Epistle to the Corintliians,'' has any reference to Christian BaptisiTij it is strik- ingly in favour of infants. " For (said he) they were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea." And it is said their little ones were with them ; they were also baptized, for all were baptized unto Moses.' '" There were six hundred tliousand on foot that were men, besides children." All these considerations argue strongly in favour of infant baptism. ' 1 Cor. TO. a ' Exodus la- 37' OF BAl'TfSM. 67 ARGUMENT III. THE INFANT OFFSPRING OF BELIEVING PARENT-S STAND IN THE SAME RELATION TO THE GOSPEL CHURCH NOW, AS THEY DID TO THE CHURCH OF GOD UNDER THE OLD TESTAMENT DISPENSA- TION. J- HAT God had a church under the Old Testament, no one can deny without at once rejecting the Scrip- tures, and dooming to perdition all the generations of foiu" thousand years, including the most eminent saints, of whom the world was not worthy. That chiu-ch did not differ essentially from the church of God now. There M'as, without doubt, a difference in the external form ; but this did not affect the nature of the church : — it was spiritual ; the blessings promised were the same, and on the same gracious terms; be- lievers were saved in the same way, by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and by virtue of his atonement. Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ, he saw it and was glad. Let it then be remembered, that the church under the Old Testament dispensation, and that under the New, are not two churches, but oiily two parts of the same church, under the government of the 6d ON THE SUBJECTS same Lawgiver. Under tlie former dispensation, be- lieving parents, that is, Jews, who professed to embrace the true religion, and their infant offspring were visible members* of the church. To deny that mfants were members, we must maintain that adults were not; for there is the same evidence for both, and that evidence is the testimony of the Scriptures, in which God pro- mises that he will be a God to Abraliam and his seed after him: — both parents and children were initiated into that church by the rite of circumcision. It is undeniable then that infants enjoyed the privi- lege of visible membership in the church of God un- der the law: children were an important part of that church. Now, when Chiist came into the world, if he had intended to alter the constitution of the chm'ch so materially as to reject infants entirely, and to admit adults only, we must suppose that he would have given us some information on so important a change. To leave us uninformed of this, would be to leave us igno- rant of what was of the greatest concern in his chm'ch. But where does he teach us that children are to have • A church is a society of peiseus, iDstitated for religious purposes, and standing related to Jesus Clirist the Head of the church: and hy visible Membkrship, we mean, an open or visible relation to that church, which supposes that tliose persons hare bec-u initiated into this visible relation, by the rite which s appointed for that purpose: for till that rite is performed, -the visible relation is not effected. OF BAPTISM. 69 no place in his chiirch? And where do his Apostles enforce an attention to any intimations of that nature? Tliere is nothing in all the Sacred Oracles that for a moment countenances such a rejection. But on the other hand, both the Redeemer and his Apostles give the clearest information that children have the same place in the church of Christ now, that tliey had under the Law. Jesus said, " Suffer little children and forbid them not to come lu^to me, for of such is the king- dom of heaven. And he laid his hands on them," * Sec. Similar expressions are used in other places.'' In these passages our Lord evidently speaks of in- fants ; for they are brought to him, and he takes them into his arms. He speaks of them as having a place in his church in this world. For the expres- sions, " The kingdom of heaven," and " The king- dom of God," we so frequently meet with in the Gospels, most generally mean the New Testament church;'^ and Christ declares that those infants were of that kingdom. We cannot refer these expressions to the kingdom of gloiy, %vithout virtually admitting this. For if the church triumphant be composed, in part, of such as these, it would be absurd to deny them a place in the church mihtant, which is an in- ferior state of the same church. From our Lord's * Watth. 19, 13 — 15. '' Mark 10. 13. — 16. 'Matlb. 21. 43, 7t) ON THE SUBJECTS words it is evident that he considered infants as standing in the same relation to his chiu'ch then^ as' they ditl under the LaAT. Ignorance indeed may sneer at the thought, and say, Childrrn are inrnpa- citated for ChmTh-membership : bnt it cnigiit not to be forgotten that all such opp* .sition is made against a positive divine institution; for God himself instituted the Church-membership of infants;'* if God made them members, then, I suppose, they were capable : — and it is impious to deny it: " Who art thou that repliest agamst God ?" If childi*en were capaci- tated for visible membership in the cliiu-cli of God under one dispensation, where is the propriety of- denying them a place in the same church mider another — a more gracious dispensation? To do thift,. il is necessary to prove that some impoilant radical change has happened to infants, which has deprived them of their original capacity for visible Church-mem- bership. But who will make so vain an attempt? The Apostle Peter is of the same mind with his divine Master. Addressing a large assembly, pricked in theii' hearts*, he said — " Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesvis Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you and to your children (infants) and to all them that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." I ■i Gen. 17. ^ Acts 2. 38. 39. OF BAPTISM. 71 h;ive before noticed this passage, but with a different view. This text is the same for substance as that promise wliich God made to Abraham and his seed/ The promise was as nmch made to Abraham's seed as to himself, and sealed to botli by the ordinance of circumcision. Peter considered the children of the belie- vers whom lie adtlressed, as standing in the very same jelation to God and to his church, and as having the same right to Baptism as the seal of the new covenant, that Abraham's seed had to circumcision, which was another seal of the very same covenant ; for tliough the seals ai-e different, the covenant is the same. Hence said Peter, " The promise is to you and to yoiur children." Baptism, therefore, ought to be ad- ministered to parents, who have not been baptized JH their infancy, and to their infant oirspring, for the promise is made equally to both. Treating on the privileges of the infant offspring of believers, Paul declares,^ that the children of parents, one only of whom is a believer, are holy. " For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband, else were your children unclean, but now are they holy. The term " Unclean" evidently refers to tlie state of those who are without the limits of the visible church of Christ, as was the case of the Heathen ; hence Peter in his vision calls them un- ^ Geu. 17. ^ I Cor. 7. 14. 72 ON THE SUBJECTS clean. The term " Holy," does not refer to their pu- rity, but to their visible relationship to the church of Christ. If both parents were unbelievers, then their children were unclean, that is, Heathen, Gentiles, out of the chiu'ch of Christ : but if one only of their pa- rents was a believer, visibly related to the church of Christ, all their children were considered as " Exter- nally, relatively and federally holy, as a seed visibly separated and appropriated to the Lord, and so entitled to all the privileges of tlie covenant that tliey are capable of in their infancy, as niucli as if botli Father and Mother were professing believers."'' The Apostle speaking on the same subject in another place,' observes, " If the first-fruit be holy, the himp is also holy : and if the root be holy, so are the branches :" — that is, if the parent or pareiits belong- to the church of Christ, so do the children. In his Epistle to the Ephesians,'' the Apostle proves that Christ has broken down the middle wall of parti- tion that stood between Jews and Ct entiles, whom lie calls the circumcision (the Jews) and the uncircum- cision (the Gentiles,) and made both one family. Here is no rejection of either the children of tlie Jews, or those of the Gentiles : — the Jews and their families, the converted Gentiles and their funilies are embraced, and constituted one body, of which Christ is the head : one family, of which Christ is the * See Dr. Guyse on this text. ' Rom. ii. 16. " Eph. 2. II — 22- OF BAPTISM. 73 Master. The unbelieving Jews and their families were broken off iVom the church, which is meant by the true olive tree, but the same description of persons shall be grafted in again,' which was broken off^ that is, both adults and their infant offspring. As pai'ents and children had a place in the visible chm-ch of God, before they were broken off thi'ough imbelief, so we naturally conclude, that when they are re- admitted it will be as extensi\'ely — that is, both parents and chilch-en. Under the Jewish dispensa- tion, -vNhen the head of a fainily was converted from Heathenism to the true religion, he and his family \\ere taken into tlie visible churcli by the rite of circumcision, wliich was then the initiating ordinance. Under the Gospel di.spensHtion, we see the Apostles acting in the same manner, ba])tizing whole families, and thus taking them into the visible church of Clirist, on the professed faith of the heads only of those families — knowing " That if the root be holy, so are the branches." From the whole we conclude, that children under the Law had a place in the vi-ible church of God in common with their parents : — that the Scriptm'es so far from speaking against the Church-membership of in- fants under the Gospel economy, plainly declare it; and therefore the children of believing parents under the New Testament dispensation^ stand in the ' Koin. u. 74 ON THE SUBJECTS same relation to the chiirch of God^ as under the LaWj that of membership, to whom the promise is made. To suppose the contrary, and exclude childi-en, under the present dispensation, from pri- vileges which they enjoyed under the Law, is to narrow the privileges of the Gospel church, and make that of the Jews exceed it in glory, — which is con- trary to matter of fact. On this subject Mr. Matth. Henry makes the folloAs-ing remarks, " Though God's covenant was not established with Ishmael, yet he was circumcised; for childi-en of beheving parents, as such, have a right to the privileges of the ^dsible church, and the seals of the covenant, whatever they may prove afteiwai'd: Ishmael is blessed, and therefore circmncised."™ The eminent Dr. Owen observes — " That a pri\dlege once granted by God to any, cannot be changed, disannxdled, or abrogated without, first, an especial di^dne revocation of it; and, secondly, the substitution of a greater mercy and privilege in the room of it." — " All this contest (made by those who oppose infant baptism) therefore, is to deprive the children of believers of a privilege once granted to them by God, never re- voked as to the substance of it, assigning nothing in its room ; which is contrai-y to the goodness, love, and covenant of God, especially derogatory to the honoui of Jesus Christ and the Gospel."" "■■ Ou Geu, 17. 23— * Sermons and Tiacf";, p. 576, OF liAl'TtSM. ARGUMENT IV. SEEING THAT THE INPaNT OFFSPRING OP BE' LIEVING PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO VISIBLE MEMBERSHIP, AND THAT BAPTISM IS THE ONLY RITE OF ADMISSION TO THAT STATE, BAPTISM OUGHT TO BE ADMINISTERED TO THEM. It is nn established fact that infants were members of the cliurch of God under the former dispensation ; and it is equally evident that they were admitted by a religious rite, wbicli God had instituted partly for that purpose ; that rite was circui.acision. If infants under the one dispensation had a right to the initiat- ing^ ordinance, who can say that tlxey have lost their right under the other? If they have a right to visible Ch-urch-inembershlp, wliich has been proved, then it foiio^vs that they must be baptized ; for till then they cannot properly be considered members. A right of membership, and tlie nzeans of member- ship stand inseparably connected — wliat God hath joined, let no man put asunder. And these the Head of the Church has joined, for he said of in- fants — " Of sudi is the kingdom of heaven" — but, " Except tliey be born of water (thut is, baptized) g9. 76 ON THE SUBJECTS they cannot eiiter the kingdom of heaven" — and therefore infants must be baptized. In order to resist tliis conchiRicn, we shall be put to thc^ necessity of maintaininar, that Baptism is not that under tlie Gospel whicli circumcision * was under the LaAv, which conti-adicts the Apostle^ who calls Baptism circumcision, and at the same time robs the Christian cimrch of an instituted ordinance : for if Baptism be not in tlie room of circumcision, and the door of admittance into the church of Christ, nothing is. The learned Wrrsius remarks — " We argue from this, that Baptism has succeeded in the room of circumcision ; the Apostle declares this Coloss. 2. 11, 12, wlicre he proves the abrogation of the ceremonial law, and especially of circujncision "wdth respect to believers oi' the New Testament, from this consideration, that the spiritual thing foiTnerly signified and sealed by Circumcision, is now signified and sealed by Baptism; intimating, that what circumcision was to the Old Testament church, the same is Baptism to the Ncm-, and in- ♦ There are some so cxccedinu- meaning wben we speak of Bapiisni as foniiii'^ in flie ^iace of circum- cision, that they are very nnich alainikd fur the safety of the Gospel, thinking: that we want to revive Old 1 estainait rites, under New Testament pr;vilcg;ts. Such pci-eoBs need not be afraid. We design only to run a paralkl betwiun the two ordinauces. In this there can be nolhiiig unf;iir, :i<. the di.sivHi of both institutions is nnque^'tionnbly the satoc. OF BAPTISM. 77 deed in a far more eminent and perfect manner, because Baptism is an introduction at once into the liberty and grace of the New Testament, whereas circumcision contained the profession of a bondage and yoke. Put it is evident, that circvuncision -was administered to infants ; it therefore follows, that we are to have the same sentiment concei*ning Baptism. And indeed noticing cart be advanced against the baptism of infants, which may not equally militate against their circumcision." » Under the Law there were two standing ordi- nances; the Passover and Circimicision. It is con- fessed on all hands, tliat the Lord's Supper takes the place of the Passover, and yet it is denied by some, that Baptism comes in the place of Circumci- sion, though it is granted that both are initiating ordinances. The ordinance of Baptism agrees as well with that of Circumcision as the Lord's Supper does with the Passover, if not better. Baptism corresponds with circumcision both in nattu*e and design. Circumcision implied natural depravity, and the necessity of regeneration: — 80 does Bap- tism. Circamcision was the sea] of the covenant, so is Baptism. Circumcision was the ordinance of initiation into the Jewish ciiurch, so is Baptism into the Christian ch-orch, or we have no initiating rite ;■— in * EcoDomy of tbc Covesauts, EogUsb traDslation, 2(3. edit. Tol. a. p. 442. o3 7B ON THE SUBJECTS circumcision the subject was devoted to God, so ift Baptism the person is devoted to God, — Father, Son and Spirit. Circumcision was administered to adults and their intant offspring, when pi'osclyted to the Jewish religion : so ought Baj.tism to be granted to believing adrJts and their infant ofFsj^ring. It would be very singular if these two ordinances agieed in every thing, except in this one> viz. the applicu.tion of Baptisnti to infants : — that though circumcision was applied to infants, yet Baptism must not, for no reason, except that it does not agree with a favourite doctrine. Aware of the propriety of devoting their children to God, some, who oppose infant baptism, have re- cently done it in public, witli every ceremony which ■we use in baptizing children, excepting the applica- tion of waters This practice is as unscriptural as it is novel. — The pious custom indeed of devoting chil- dren in their infancy to God^ in a public manner, is Very ancient : we find many instrmces of it recorded in the Old Testam.ent, and have reason to think that it was very general, if not strictly universal, amongst the professing people of God ; but I know not one case of a child's being publicly given up to the Lord, WITHOUT SOME SIGN. I shall mention a few in- stances. Thus Hannah : " When Elkanah her husband, and all his house v.'ent up to offer unto the Lord, the yearly sacrifice, and his vow ; Hannah went not up ; for she said unto her husband, I will OF BAPTISM. 79 ni)t go u\i until the child be weaned, and then I will bring liim, that he may appear before the Lord, and there abide for ever." And when he was weaned, she presented hini to the Lord, " With three bul- locks, and one ephah of flour, and a bottle of wine,"'' Ever after the institution of circumcision, all the male children of the Jews were devoted to God on. the eighth day by its application to them. This is indisputable. And on the eighth day our Lord him- self was devoted to God in this ordinance. It is remarkable, that in all cases of especial dedication to God, not only of persons, but also of things, some sign was used. Thus when the priests and kings were initiated into their office, oil was poured upon their heads. When pillars were built and consecrated to record divine inter^jositions, it was with the pouring of oil, or some other ceremony ; many instances might be produced to establish the above fact. And it shall be proved afterv/ards, that the application of water to children, has been customary in all ages of the Cliristian church, when their parents have devoted them to Gi d. It is universally confessed that chil- dren ought to be devoted to God. Then it must be either with, or without a sign. To maintain that a sign is unnecessary, would be contrary to the custom of all ages, from the earliest periods of the church of God to the present day. If we say it ought *> I Sam. 1, io — a8. 80 OiS THE SUBJECTS to be with a certain sign, then that sign must be what Goi has appointed. Circumcision was the instituted sign under the Law, but this is now abolished. No- thinsf now remains but Baptism. Therefore as be- lievers ought to devote their children to God by the application of a sign, and as no sign but Baptism exists in the New Testament church, it follows that cliiidren are to be baptized. The whole argument assumes the following form : all those who have a right to visible church member- ship, have a right to Baptism, which is the only initi- ating ordicance ; — adult believers and their infant oflfspring have a right to visible church membership ; therefore adult believers and their infant offspring have a right to Baptism. To invalidate this argument, to resist this conclusion, it must be proved, either that children are incapacitated for visible membership under the Gospel, though they were not under the Law ; or that Jesus Christ has cast them out of thic <^urch, or commanded his Apostles to do so ; but to jHTOve either is impossible. Till this is done, both the argument and conclusion will maintain their ground i^ainst air exposition. OF BAPTISM. 81 ARGUMENT V. CHILDREN ARE CAPABLE OF BEING TAKEN INTO A COVENANT RELATION TO GOD ; TO THEM MANY COVENANT PROMISES ARE MADE AND THEY ARE ABLE TO PARTAKE OF THE BLESS- INGS OF THE covenant: IF SO, THEN IT WILL FOLLOW THAT THEY ARE FIT SUBJFCTS OF BAP- TISM, WHICH IS THE SEAL OF THE COVENANT. VyHiLDREN are capable of being taken into a cove- nant relation to God. — Henry observes, " That those may be taken into covenant with God, and re- ceive the benefits of it, who yet are not capable of restipulating, or gi\'ing their own consent. For this covenant (v/hich God made with Noah) is made with every living creature, eveiy beast of the earth."* — But we have a more sure word of prophecy unto which we do well that we take heed ; the sacred Scriptures are decisive in their testimony on this subject. " Ye stand tliis day all of you before the Lord your God; your captains of your tribes, your elders and your officers, with all the men of Israel, your little ones, * See Henry on Gen. 9. 8 — II. O-S' ON THE SUBJECTS your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy camp^ from the hewer of thy wood vmto the drawer of thy water ; that thou shouldest enter into covenant with the Lord thy God, and into his oath, which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day : that he may estabhsh thee to-day for a people unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abra- ham, to Isaac, find to Jacob."'' — The little ones thus taken into covenant, God claims as his o'^•n pro- perty ; for when the people had so far forsaken God as to sacrifice their childi-en to Moloch, he expostulates with them and says, " Thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters whom thou hast born unto me, and THESE thou hast sacrificed unto them to be devoured ; is this of thy whoredoms a small nnatter ? That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire."*^ Dr. Owen ob- serves — " It was the way of God from the beginning, to take cliildren of covenanters into the same cove- nant with their parents ; so he dealt with this people in the establishment of the fii'st covenant, and he hath made no alteration herein in the establislunent of the second." ^ Further. As childi-en are taken into covenant with *> Deut, 29. 10—13. "^ Ezek. 16. 20,21- <* Owen on the Hebrews, vol. 3. p. 432, fol. OF BAPTISM. 83 God. in common with their parents, the promises of the covenant ai-e made to botli. In the covenant wliich God made with Abraham, he promises that " He will be a God to him and his seed,"^ What- ever reference might be had to his spiritual seed in this promise, his natural seed was included ; for Isaac find Jacob and Joseph were blessed with faith- ful Abraham. — By Isaiah God promises '* I wiU pour out my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring/ — The Apostle declares that the promise of repentance, remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Ghost, and Baptism as the sign and seal of them, is made to believers and their children/ Again. Children are able to participate in the blessings of the covenant, even all the blessings pro- mised in the passages which I have just quoted. The blessings are such as regeneration, pardon, justification, hohness, the kingdom of heaven^ eter- nal life. That infants are capable of partaking of these blessings, no one can deny, without at once defying the power of God, and sentencing every infant that dies to eternal misery : for, in admitting their salvation, we at the same time adroit whatever is necessary to it ; and it is essential to the salvation of infants that they should be partakers of the graces ' Gen, 17. 7. ' lia. 44. 3. 84 ON THE SUBJECTS of the Spirit, faith, love, repentance, &c. Though they are unable actually to exercise them, yet that divine nature, in which they are included, must be possessed in order to theii- salvation. Not only so, but their original sin must be pardoned, their persons must be justified, their natures must be regene- rated and sanctified, before they can be made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light. — The truth of the proposition which I ani endeavouring to prove, appears further evident from the very consideration, that they are taken into covenant relation with God, and that he has made them special promises of covenant blessings ; for it is absurd to suppose that God would make promises of spiritual blessings to creatures who were incapa- citated for tlie reception of them. But in order that these blessings may be conferred, and tliis meetness for glory effected, it is essentially necessary that the Holy Ghost should be poured out; children must partake of his divine influences ; and the Apostle shews** that those who are partakers of the Holy Ghost are fit subjects of Baptism, whetlier they are infants or adults. But infants must be partakers of the Holy Ghost m order to be holy, Szc. ; if so^ then it follows, that infants are proper subjects of Baptism. Besides ; the kingdom of heaven is promised to * Acts, 10. 47. OF BAHTISM. 85 infants, and the Redeemer declares that it belongs to such. Take the expression "The kingdom of heaven/' as meaning either the kingdom of grace or tlie kingdom of glory, it makes little difference : — to deny children Baptism then, would be to make it of greater moment tlian the kingdom of heaven ; for if children have a right to the gi'eater, it is absiuxi to deny them the less. As all those to whom the king* dom of heaven belongs must be proper subjects of Baptism, and as the kingdom of heaven belongs to infants, it therefore follows that infants are to be baptized. In two passages, at which I have before glanced, thte Apostle declares, that the cliiklren of belie\'ing parents are " Holy." ' The tei-m " Holy," must be under- fctood as referring either to real purity of nature, or to viable relationship to God. \'iew it in either ac- ceptation, and it makes equally for the baptism of the infant offspring of professing parents. If we take it in the former sense, as denoting purity, then it fol- lows that children have a right to Baptism ; for to with-hold the sign from those who possess the thing signified by it, would be the height of folly and ab- surdity. If we understand it in the latter meaning, as intending visible relationship to God, or the being set apart to him, then the consequence will be the same ; because Baptism is essential to tliat relationship, as it ' J Cer. 7. 14. Rom. 11, 16. H 86 ON THE SUBJECTS does not visibly exist till the rite of initiation is per- formed. — I am aware that some have understood the term " Holy," when applied to children here, as meaning that they were legitimate, and not bastards. But such a construction is too contemptible to de- serve further notice. No one can deny, that those whom the Scrip- tures call the servants of God and disciples, are proper subjects of Baptism. But that the children of pro- fessing parents are spoken of as such, is certain, God, giving direction concerning the conduct of the rich Israelites towai*ds their brethren, who might be reduced to a state of servitude, says to the master — '* Then (in the year of jubilee) shall he depart from thee, both he and his chilcben with him ;" and the reason is assigned in the next verse, " For tliey are my servants."'' Here it is evident that God calls both the Father and the Children his servants. That they are called disciples is equally ccrtiiin. Hence said Peter, when contending against the introduction of circumcision under the Gospel dispensation, " Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neitlier our fathers nor^ we were able to bear?" Which words Dr. Guyse paraphrases thus ; " And why should ye attempt to put a yoke of bondage upon Gentile believers, and their seed, by obliging them to be circumcised, who, " Levit. 35. 41, 4'J- OF BAPTISM. 87 under the Gospel state^ are to be considered as dis- ciples of Christ, in like manner as children Avere reckoned with their parents, to belong to the church of Israel under the Mosaic ecoi.oniy ?" Whom does the Apostle mean by the fathers, on whom this yoke was imposed ? Undoubtedly the Jews, both parents and chiMien ; for both were circumcised. And now it was tlie wish of the believers who had been brought from the sect of the Pharisees, to impose this yoke also upon tlie Gentiles who had embraced the Gos- pel, and their seed, whom the Apostle here calls dis- ciples.' — ^As those whom tlie Scriptures call the ser- vants of God and disciples are confessed to be proper subjects of Baptism ; and as the professing people of God and their infant seed are thus denominated ; it imavoidably follo-vi's, that both are equally the subjects of this ordinance. The wliole of the argument may be placed in the following form. Tliose w!ic are taken into a cove- nant relation to God, to v/hoiii special covenant promises are made, and on when the blessings of the covenant are conferred, are proper subjects of Baptism ; this no one can deny : but such are the privileges of the infant oif-pring of belie\^ng parents, or they cannot be saved : it i'( llcws therefore that the infant offspring of believers are proper subjects of Baptism. ' Acts, 15 ic. H 2 88 ON THE SUBJECTS To get rid of tliis conclusion, we must deny that infants stand in any covenant relation to God, or that any covenant promises are made to them, or that they can possibly partake of the blessings of grace and of glory, which I presume none but those who deny the authority of the Scriptures, or those who axe ignorant of their contents, will venture to attempt. OF BAPTISM, 89 ARGUMENT VI. IT CAN BE PHOVED FROM THE CLEAREST HIS- TORIC RECORDS^ THAT CHILDREN HAVE, IN ALL AGES OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION, BEEN RE- CEIVED INTO THE \aSIBLE CHURCH BY BAPTISM. In making the- follo^ving quotations from the writ- ings of the Fathers, it is not to be understood that we place the least dependence on their authority in this ordinance : — the Fathers, as they are called,- have no authority -whatever to introduce or decree rites and ceremonies for the future observance of the church of Jesus Christ : — vre refer to them merely to estabhsh an historic fact, and to ascertain what was the custom of the primitive chvirch, in the respec- tive periods in wliich they wrote. Several attempts have been made to invalidate the antiquity of the following quotations, but these attempts have been vain, and they yet stand the test of all opposi- tion. It is utterly unnecessary to produce any historic eridence after the sixth century, because no one can for a moment deny, that infant baptism has pre- H 3 §0 ON THE SUBJECTS vailed since that period.'' I shall therefore begin from that time, and go down to the days of the Apostles, and show, that infant baptism prevailed generally in the Ciiristian church in its earliest and most pnre periods.'* I begin with Austin, who lived about three hun- dred years after the Apostles. He writes against Pelagius, who maintained that children Avere born free from any defilement. Austin pleads against him the universal practice of baptizing infants, which im- plied their depravity, and observes — " That infants are by all Christians acknowledged to stand in need of Baptism, Avhich must be for original sin, since they have no other." — Again ; he saj^s — " If they have no sin, why are they accepted to tlie usage of the church baptism ? Wliy are tliey washed with the laver of regeneration,'^ if they have no defilement?" — Pela- * It has been sometimes objcctefl to infant baptism, that it was the iuveution of Popery. But the following; testimo- nies will prove, that infants were baptized before Popery existed! Therefore, it is as -absurd to say, that this prac- tice originated in Popery, as to say, that the effect existed before the cause. •> For the foUowing ai4hor!ties, see Dr. Wall's History of Infant Baptism, and his Defence. * Let it be observed, that the term regeneration is often nsed by the fathers fur Baptism ; with what propriety is no concern of mine I need only quote the words of two of them to prove this. Thus 1ren;eus — " Wbeu Christ gave OK BAPTISM. 91 Gius, being charged by some with denying infant baptism, was highly offended, and said, " Men slan- der me, as if I denied Baptism to infants ;" this he calls a SLANDER, because a thing he abhorred. The same Austin, writing against the Donatists, says, " If any ask for divine authority' in the matter of infants being baptized, though that which the whole diurch practises, and Avhich has not been instituted by Coimcils, but was ever in use, is very reasonably be- lieved to be no other than a thing delivered by the authority of the Apostles ; yet (continues he) we may take a true estimate how much Baptism avails in- fants, by the circixmcision which God's former people received,"'' It is e^^dent then that the Baptism of infants was imiversally practised in the days of Austin, about three himdred years after the Apostles. The martjT Cyprian was made overseer of the churches at Carthage, about two himdred and forty- his disciples the command of regeuerating unto God, be said, go teach (make disciples of) all nations, baptiziug them ia the Dame of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." — The following are the words of Justin Martyr, who was contemporary with Iren.£us — " They are regene- rated in the same way in which we have been regenerated, for they are washed with water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." <* Here it is plain, that the fathers considered Christian Baptism, as coming in the place of, and signifying the same thing as circumcision. 92 ON THE SUBJECTS eight years after the birth of Christ. A question was started in his time, whether infants might be baptized before they were eight days old. To decide this question, he called a council of ministers, sixty-six in number, all of whom unanimously agreed, that Baptism ought not to be delayed till the eighth-day. A long letter was written to this purpose, to satisfy all who were in doubt respecting this question, signed by Cyprian, in the name of all the rest. Infant Baptism was therefore universal about one hun- dred and fifty years after tlie Apostles. Tertullian, who lived about one hundred years after the Apostles, entertaining an idea that sin& committed after Baptism, were nearly, if not utterly unpardonable, speaks against infant baptism on this. account, and advises that it should not be adminis- tered till after marriage. But had it not been a prevaihng custom to baptize infants at that period, he could not have spoken against the pi*actice : — ^besides, even he allows it in certain cases, as when the child was in danger of death. Origen was born about the year of Christ, one hundred and eighty-three, within one hundred years of the Apostles ; both his father and grandfather were Christians, who must have lived, either at the time of the Apostles, or a very few years after. Origen was a man of profound learning ; he preached the Gospel at Rome, in Greece, . in Palestine, and in Syria; and therefore must have been acquainted OF BAPTISM. 93 with the custom of the church in the days of the Apostles. He uses the argument of the baptism of infants to prove original sin, in a controversy on that subject. Tliis he could not have done^ if the prac- tice had not been imiversally prevalent. His words are these — " The baptism of children is given for tlie forgiveness of sins ; but a\ hy, says he, ai'e infants by the usage of the church baptized, if they have nothing that wants forgiveness ?" And he further adds — " It is because, by the sacrament of Baptism the pollution of our birth is taken away, that infants are baptized." And in his comment on the Epistle to the Romans, declares that they received it from the Apostles. His remarkable words are — "The church had also from THE Apostles an order to give Baptism to in- fants ; for they to whom divine mysteries were com- mitted, knew that there was in all persons, a natural pollution, which ought to be washed away by water and the Spirit." — In the above passage, this learned man takes it for granted, being a universal custom in the church, that infants were baptized, and makes use of it to prove another doctrine — that of original sin. The next I shall mention, is IrenjEUS, who, as is generally supposed, was bom before the death of John, and was acquainted with Polycarp, who was John's disciple : it was impossible that he could be mistaken about the usage of the church in reference to the baptism of infants. The doctrine not having 94 ON THE SUBJECTS then been a matter of contention, he only mentions it transiently. His words are these — " Christ came to save those who by him are regenerated unto God (that is, baptized), both infants,, and little ones, and young men, and elderly persons." Justin Martyr wrote about forty years after the apostohc age; he says — " Several persons among us, both men and women, of sixty or seventy years old,^ who were proselyted, or made disciples to Christ in or frcan their infancy, do continue uncorrupt." — They could not be proselyted to Chi-ist without being bap- tized, for this is our Lord's express command, " Dis- ciple, or proselyte all nations, baptizing therr." — Seventy years back from Justin Martyr, brings us nearly into the middle of the apostolic age. " Now, if all the churches throughout the world were really established by the Apostles upon the plan, of only adult baptism, and they every where rejected infants, and forbad them to be baptized, it wiH appear a thing absolutely inconceivable, and even a moral IMPOSSIBILITY, that the baptism of infants should so early, so widely, so universally prevail throughout the whole world, as we have now seen it to have done."' The same sensible author, from whom I have made the above quotation, in another place observes — " Suppose a few persons were of so odd a turn of mind, as to run into this novel, and unheard-of practice of baptizing infants, can it be imagined that whole * Towgood. OF BAPTISM. 95 CHURCHES would be led blindly away by them? Or if whole churches might be thus seduced, could WHOLE NATIONS be SO too ? Yea, if whole nations might, can it enter into the heart of any reasonable man, that all the nations of the Christian world, both the eastern and western churches, in the space of about two hundred years, universally fell in with this anti-apostolic, and new-invented rite of worship : and so strangely aposfcitized from the primitive and piu-e doctrine of Christ as to this matter ! It were the height of absurdity even to surmise such a thing." The testimony of the fathers is decidedly in favoiu* of infant baptism, even from the days of the apostles. If uifant baptism had been an innovation, a doctrine Kcwly invented, those holy men of God would have treated it as such. But the way in which they speak of it, is an evidence that no one disputed the fact. They certainly considered themselves as walking in the steps, and following the example of the Apostles in this particular. Should it be said — *' Is it not strange that we no where find children mentioned, if it were the Apostles' custom to baptize them with their parents ? — And is it not equally strange that we no where find that the children of believers were baptized after they were grown up ? There is no example of this kind." " The history of the Acts contains a period of above thirty years ; and the New Testament a much longer period. There was time enough for two or three generatiOTis of infants to grow up to adult age. We 96 #N THE vSUBJECTS have all along accounts of Baptism. But it is remark- able^ that in all this time there is no intimation of any ONE of the children of the early believers being bap- tized after he was grown up ; or that any one of those adults whom the Apostles baptized, was born of be- lieving parents." f These are facts of great importance in this contro- versy, and which ought to be well considered. In the above quotations from the writings of the Fatliers, we meet with some uncouth sentiments respecting other things — but respecting the facts of an historic nature, to which they are called in to give their evidence, they are all of one mind in proving, that i>.ifant bap- tism universally prevailed in the Christian church in its earliest and most pure periods — even from the days of the Apostles. As it was impossible for infant bap- tism, had it been an error, to have obtained so uni- versally, in so short a period as a century or a little more, we must conclude, that it was practised by the Apostles themselves^ aixl therefore it ought to be prac- tised by U3- ' Dr. Lalhrop 97 CONCLUSION. JT* ROM a review of the evidences which have been produced in support of infant baptism, we see — that there is nothing in all the Scriptures that reallv opposes the practice — that there are many passages of Scriptm-e much in favour of it — ^that the infant offspring of believing parents stand in the same rela- tion to the Gospel church, as they did to the church of God under the Law, that of visible membersliip — that as they have a right to visible church member- ship, and as Baptism is the only rite of initiation, they must be baptized — tiiat children are capable of partaking of the blessings of the covenant, and therefore have a right to the seal of the covenant, which is Baptism — and that this has been the prac- tice of the church of Christ in all ages, even from the days of the Apostles. This fact is supported by the testimony of Austin, tliree hundred years after the Apostles : — Cypria?:, one hundred and fifty years after the Apostles : — Tertullian, one hunda-ed years after the Apostles : — Origen, within one himdred years aJBter the Apostles: — Iren.«us, who was born before the deatli of John the Apostle and Evangelist : —and Justin Martyr, who wrote about forty I 98 ' CONCLUSION. years after the Apostles. — Such is the e\'idence on which y»'e restj in administering Baptism to infants ; evadence^ which never has been^ which never can be bvvalidated.* -* Mr. Bicheno, in his Glance at the History of Christia- nity, p. II, infoi ms us, that the foiiiK'atiun of the first Bap- tist church which was furmed in England, was laid Sept. 12, 16.33, one hundred and eighty jtars ■^g^» c.iiy. 99 AN ADDRESS TO THOSE WHO PROFESS RELIGION. 1 HE preceding pages contain tlie reasons for our administering Baptism to tlie infant offspring of pa- rents professing Christianity, by the sprinkling of water upon them in the name of the Sacred Trinity : rea- sons Avhichj after ti.e most mature and candid re- flection, I deem sufficient to justify our conduct. Taking it for granted, that my readers are professors of the religion of Jesus, I shall close this Essay by addressing to them a few observations suited to their circumstances — as CANDinATES for an eternal world: — as standing at the head of families: and as bearing a sacred relation to each OTHER. The subject which has been discussed sug- gests a train of thoughts suited to each of these parti- culars. First. Ye are candidates for an eternal WORLD, and must shortly appear before the Judge of quick and dead. Personal, experimental, and practical religion is essential both to your present peace and your futm*e felicity ; — ^%^ithout this you would be ashamed and confounded before God, and must perish for ever as his enemies. It is lamentable that though the doc- 100 ADDRESS TO THOSE WHO trine of Baptism most loufliy teaches the necessity of a renovation of soiil by the mighty operations of the Spirit of God, yet it is too generally considered as a matter of bai'e speculation^ and discussed in the spirit of contei^tion and vain jangling. Thus speculation ' is substituted in the place of vital religion, and a vain-glorious spirit taiies the precedence of humble Solicitude that the soul may be created ^new in Christ Jesus. Tliese tJii;ip;s ought not to be. — Professors of reh'gion, while you are justly concerned to be rooted and grounded in your principles, and to be able to give a reason for the !^ope that is in you, recollect, that unless your principles be implanted in a renew- ed heart, and influence you to the love and prac- tice of holines'S, they v/ill be of no saving advantage to you, however ti'ue ih themselves. You were baptized. Yoiu' parents devoted you to God. It M'as believed that you were depraved by ftature, that it was essential to your salvation that you sh.ould be baptized with the Holy Ghost, and that God had an equitable claim upon you. Your parents discharged, so fai*, tlie duty of their high vocation. But Baptism is not re[>;eneration ; a profes- sion of the Christian name may be supported without possessing the true image of the Son of God ; pious prvrents may conscientiously discharge their obliga- tions to their offspring, and yet their oSspring may perish for Ava?"'t of the faith of their pious parents. — I therefore solenmly warn you of the insufficiency of PROFESS RELIGION. 101 a form of godliness without its power, and of your danger in having a name to live, wliile you are dead in trespasses and sins. — Suffer me to pr<;pose a few serious interrogations to your consideration. You were conceived in sin and shapen in in^'quity ; but what reason have you to hope that your pollution has been removed by the renovating influences of the Holy Spirit ? You were devoted to God in Baptism ; but have you presented yourselves as living sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God, which is your reason- able service ? You were instructed in the first prin- ciples of the Oracles of God ; but have these prin- ciples taught you that, denying ungodhness and worldly lusts, you should live soberly, and righteously, and godly in tliis world. You name the name of Ghi-ist ; but do you depart from all iniquity ? It is appoiate