/ l 3! 
 
 ? LIBRARY OF CONGRESS.? 
 # — . # 
 
 [SMITHSONIAN DEPOSIT.] 
 
 CM t\ 
 
 # 
 
 I UNITED STATES OF A'METIICA. \ , 
 

 
 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP; 
 
 OR, THE 
 
 tyhxtml anir permanent (%ratfn* 
 
 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 
 
 REY. SAMUEL GREGG. 
 
 EDITED BY REV. D. W. CLARK, D. D. 
 
 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according 
 to the promise.— Galatians m, 29. 
 
 ^#'°^A 
 
 dtnrinnatt: ^~ 
 
 PUBLISHED BY SWORMSTEDT & POE, 
 
 FOR THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AT THE WESTERN BOOK 
 CONCERN, CORNER OF MAIN AND EIGHTH STREETS. 
 
 R. P. THOMPSON, PRINTER. 
 
 1853. 
 
.Ca 1 ' 
 
 
 
 Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1853, 
 
 BY SWORMSTEDT & POE, 
 
 ■ i 
 
 In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the District of Ohio. 
 
 y m 
 
 Tbe Library 
 
 ot Cong k ess 
 
 ^ASHiNQTOM 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 In sending this little volume abroad, custom re- 
 quires that the reading public should be apprised 
 of the circumstances that caused it to be written, 
 and of the objects contemplated by the author in 
 its publication, as well as of the character and con- 
 tents of the book. And what is merely customary 
 in other cases, seems very appropriate and highly 
 important in this. The author is unknown to the 
 literary world, and must, therefore, depend not upon 
 an established and eminent character, but upon the 
 intrinsic merits of his work, and the importance of 
 the subject, to gain for it an extensive perusal. 
 "Good wine needs no bush," said an eminent au- 
 thoress, when asked for a preface, "and ba^l wine is 
 made worse by apologies." We will, therefore, con- 
 tent ourselves with a plain and brief statement of 
 facts. Soon after entering upon the work of the 
 ministry of the Methodist Episcopal Church, now 
 more than twenty years past, our attention was spe- 
 cially directed to the subject of infant baptism, by 
 
 3 
 
4 PREFACE. 
 
 finding in the Church many persons opposed to the 
 baptism of children, and occasionally persons dis- 
 satisfied with their own baptism in infancy. And 
 this diversity of opinion and practice among us is, 
 and has been, in most cases, owing to a want of 
 correct information on this particular subject. And 
 this defect is not the fault of our people, for the 
 means of gaining information suited to their partic- 
 ular wants has not been within their reach. A few 
 tracts, sermons, and treatises, of very limited circu- 
 lation, confined mostly to the abstract question of 
 baptism, constituted our entire Church literature on 
 this subject, except what was found in large and 
 costly volumes, to which the majority of our people 
 could not have access. True, they have their 
 Bibles to read, containing all the doctrines of the 
 Gospel. But it is also true that Christians, gener- 
 ally, instead of making up their minds independ- 
 ently, depend much upon the pulpit and the press 
 for an exposition of the doctrines contained, and the 
 practices enjoined in the sacred Scriptures. And 
 it is also true, that anti-pedobaptists of every de- 
 nomination are constantly engaged, with all the 
 means within their reach, and with all the power 
 and ingenuity of argument they possess, in bring- 
 ing the practice of infant baptism into disrepute. 
 
PREFACE. 5 
 
 And by Methodist ministers preaching, writing, and 
 publishing but little in its favor, treating it as a 
 subject of minor importance, the people are, in 
 many instances, misled, greatly to their injury in 
 this matter. And if the bare question, whether 
 infants were to be baptized, was all that is at stake 
 in this conflict, we might with less danger yield the 
 ground to our opponents. But one error usually 
 drags after it many others; and one duty neglected 
 usually prepares the way for the neglect of many 
 more. There are a great many important Scriptural 
 truths and Christian duties connected with the sub- 
 ject of infant baptism, which either stand or fall 
 with it, as the reader will see by reading the follow- 
 ing pages. A correct and thorough delineation of 
 all the duties which the Bible imposes upon Chris- 
 tian parents in particular, and the ministry and 
 Church in general, in connection with the baptism 
 of their infant children, is the great desideratum of 
 the Church and of the world at the present day, 
 and especially of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
 How far the present work approximates to the ac- 
 complishment of this demand, the intelligent reader 
 must, after reading the work, determine. Such an 
 object can not be attained by one, nor even many 
 partial attempts. Effort after effort will be neces- 
 
6 PREFACE. 
 
 sary, each gathering from the former all that had 
 an important bearing in that direction, and gather- 
 ing by patient investigation new and important facts 
 and arguments till the work is made perfect. In 
 this way we have been employed now more than 
 twenty years. The first treatise we recollect to 
 have read, was one published by Rev. C. Elliott, 
 D. D., now editor of the Western Christian Advo- 
 cate, to whose critical inspection this work has been 
 submitted, and with whose approval it is now pub- 
 lished. We soon after read another, by Rev. E. 
 House, to which we would here acknowledge our 
 indebtedness. All the writings of Dr. Clarke, and 
 of Eev. R. Watson, touching this subject, have 
 been carefully perused. But to none of these are 
 we indebted more than to the Rev. F. G-. Hibbard,' 
 whose truly-learned and able work on " Infant Bap- 
 tism" has been several years before the public. It 
 is impossible now to tell how much we have drawn 
 from any of the above sources, as when we read 
 them we sought to make their arguments our own, 
 and to add to, and to improve upon them so far as 
 it was within our power. Much, however, that will 
 here appear as original matter, has been in this way 
 obtained from others. Several years of our min- 
 istry have been spent in portions of our work where 
 
PREFACE. 7 
 
 the peculiar doctrines of Mr. A. Campbell; an emi- 
 nent anti-pedobaptist, were exerting a popular and 
 controlling influence. And believing that the cause 
 of truth demanded it, we commenced a course of 
 reading and of investigation, embracing all the 
 points of dispute between them and us, especially 
 relating to infants. We became convinced that 
 pedobaptists, as a general thing, did not place the 
 argument upon its true basis. The baptism of 
 infants grows out of the relation which, by Divine 
 appointment, they are made to sustain to the Church 
 of Jesus Christ through all time; which relation 
 secures to them numerous other privileges and 
 blessings closely connected with their baptism. 
 Taking this broad and comprehensive view of the 
 subject, we were enabled successfully to defend the 
 right of infants to Christian baptism. For our own 
 improvement, we commenced arranging in a system- 
 atic form the arguments and facts which had thus 
 accumulated upon our hands, and reducing them to 
 writing, till our manuscript had grown to its present 
 form. This work has been performed at intervals 
 extending through several years, amid the perplex- 
 ities and labors of the itinerant ministry, and most 
 of it without the least expectation that it would 
 ever be seen by any but the author's own eye. 
 
O PREFACE. 
 
 These facts are liere stated; first; as an apology 
 for defects in the style and literary character of the 
 work ; which will meet the eye of the critical reader; 
 second; as an excuse for any failures that may be 
 detected in giving due credit to those authors to 
 whom we confess ourselves much indebted for the 
 general matter contained in the work. We will 
 here only add; that after submitting our manuscript 
 to the inspection of several of the most competent 
 judges; who have unanimously recommended its 
 publication; we have finally determined to send it 
 forth with earnest prayer to the "God of the patri- 
 archs/' and the "Kedeemer of the world/' to make 
 it a lasting blessing to all who may favor it with an 
 attentive perusal. And if any person better quali- 
 fied for the task will take up this subject; and bring 
 out a better argument; and clearer delineation of 
 Scriptural facts and Christian duties; he will not 
 only be welcome to any assistance he may derive 
 from this work; but shall also be entitled to the 
 thanks and patronage of the Church. 
 
 SAMUEL GREGG. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 I art jFtzst.' 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 Different opinions concerning the Abrahamic Covenant — its incipient 
 developments and its unity considered page 13 
 
 SECTION n. 
 
 The Covenant as finally developed with Abraham, and explained by 
 
 St. Paul 30 
 
 section m. 
 
 The permanent character of the Abrahamic Covenant considered.. 46 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 The difference between the Abrahamic Covenant and the Ceremonial 
 
 Law of Moses 57 
 
 SECTION Y. 
 The Church of Jesus Christ was organized in the family of Abra- 
 ham, AND FOUNDED UPON THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT — HAS BEEN PERPETU- 
 ATED, AND WILL BE FOREVER, CONSTITUTING THE TRUE SEED OF ABRA- 
 HAM 69 
 
 SECTION VI. 
 
 THE PERPETUITY OF THE CHURCH ORGANIZED IN THE FAMILY OF ABRAHAM 
 AS FORETOLD BY THE HOLY PROPHETS 79 
 
 SECTION VII. 
 
 What Christ, at his coming, was to do to the Church of the Patri- 
 archs and Prophets which himself had organized in the family of 
 
 Abraham 93 
 
 SECTION VIII. 
 
 The unity of the Church of Christ under the Jewish and Christian 
 Dispensations 1° 3 
 
10 CONTENTS. 
 
 SECTION IX. 
 
 Inconsistencies of those that dent the identity of the Church under 
 
 the Jewish and Christian Dispensations Page 122 
 
 )axi £je.cjou&. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 Mr. Campbell's views of Circumcision corrected, and it proven to be 
 the rite of initiation into the church of god 131 
 
 SECTION II. 
 Circumcision was a "Token" of a Covenant Relation with God, a 
 "Sign" of Inward Purity, and a "Seal of the Righteousness of 
 Faith " 146 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 Proselyte Baptism and the Baptism of John considered 154 
 
 SECTION IT. 
 Circumcision was discontinued, and the Baptism which had accompa- 
 nied it was improved and substituted as the rite of Initiation, etc., 
 by the authority of Jesus Christ 162 
 
 SECTION V. 
 Christian Baptism, like Circumcision, is a " Token " of a Covenant re- 
 lation with God, a "Sign" of Inward Purity, and a "Seal of the 
 Righteousness of Eaith" <. 176 
 
 lari ©jti&« 
 
 SECTION I. 
 The Moral Character of Little Children considered 193 
 
 section n. 
 
 The Infant Children of Believing Parents have the right perma- 
 nently SECURED TO THEM OF MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH OF GOD BY 
 THE RECEPTION OF ITS INDUCTING ORDINANCE 204 
 
 / 
 
CONTENTS. 11 
 
 SECTION m. 
 The Savior of the world did not disfranchise Children of their 
 Membership in his Church, but established it Page 214 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 The Commission given by Christ to his Apostles did not prohibit but 
 provided for the Membership and Baptism of Infants 226 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 How St. Peter understood and practiced the Apostles' commission on 
 
 THE DAT OF PENTECOST 251 
 
 SECTION VI. 
 
 St. Paul baptized Believers and their Households 263 
 
 SECTION vn. 
 
 The Apostles recognized Children as sustaining to God and the 
 Church a relation which implies Membership and Baptism 2S2 
 
 section vin. 
 
 Testimony of the immediate Successors of the Apostles 301 
 
 SECTION IX. 
 Historical argument continued 328 
 
 SECTION X. 
 Objections to Infant Baptism and Membership considered 345 
 
 SECTION XL 
 Address to Christian Parents in behalf of their Children 360 
 
INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 Hart fiui; 
 
 THE COVENANT MADE WITH ABRAHAM WAS CHIEFLY SPIR- 
 ITUAL AND PERMANENT, CONTAINING THE TRUE CONSTITU- 
 TION OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, AND EMBRACING ALL EVAN- 
 GELICAL BELIEVERS, AND THEIR INFANT OFFSPRING AS THE 
 "SEED OF ABRAHAM." 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 DIFFERENT OPINIONS CONCERNING THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT — ITS 
 INCIPIENT DEVELOPMENTS AND ITS UNITY CONSIDERED. 
 
 The relation which the venerable patriarch Abra- 
 ham sustained to the entire Church of God is a 
 subject of the highest interest to all who claim to 
 be in any wise connected with that Church, down to 
 the end of the world. Abraham stands pre-eminent 
 among all the holy men whose history stands re- 
 corded in the Old Testament Scriptures; and, save 
 Jesus Christ, he has no superior in the New Testa- 
 ment. Dignified as a man, " strong in faith "■ as a 
 Christian, and ardent in his devotion to the true 
 God, he was selected by infinite and unerring Wis- 
 dom as a fit model of Christian character, and 
 placed at the head of his Church, and constituted 
 the "father of the faithful." 
 
 18 
 
14 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 This relation was fixed irrevocably in an everlast- 
 ing covenant, which we propose examining, in all its 
 various provisions, in the following pages, for the 
 purpose of ascertaining what privileges are there 
 permanently secured to the infant offspring of be- 
 lievers in Christ. 
 
 Looking at this ancient document from different 
 points of the compass, with different shades of de- 
 nominational prejudice, has led good men to take 
 very dissimilar views of its permanency of char- 
 acter, and of the spiritual bearing of its contents; 
 but these differences all converge into two gen- 
 eral classes, called pedobaptists and anti-pedobaptists. 
 This division, however, is not exactly marked by 
 denominational lines, there being many persons, both 
 in pedo and in anti-pedobaptist Churches, who do 
 not perfectly harmonize with their respective denom- 
 inational views on this particular subject. 
 
 As we intend most sincerely, and to the best of 
 our ability, to advocate the pedohaptist side of this 
 general question, it may here be proper to give the 
 opinions of the opposite party as made public by 
 their most prominent writers. The following are 
 the views of the Rev. Alexander Campbell, founder 
 of the sect called Disciples, or Campbellites : 
 
 " Allow me, then, to give a brief sketch of the 
 whole scheme of the Abrahamic institution. When 
 God called Abraham, he gave him two promises of 
 an essentially-different import and character. The 
 first was personal and familiar; the second spiritual 
 and universal. In other words, the first had respect 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 15 
 
 to Abraham and his natural descendants according 
 to the flesh ; the latter had respect to the Messiah 
 and all his people. Two covenants, sometimes 
 called two Testaments, Old and New, and two 
 schemes of Divine government and special provi- 
 dence are founded on these two promises 
 
 The first is developed in the fifteenth chapter of 
 Genesis. It is a covenant concerning the inherit- 
 ance of Canaan. Some time after these two prom- 
 ises, given to Abraham while yet in Chaldea, when 
 he was in the land of Canaan, at Moreh, the Lord 
 appeared to him and promised him that land. 
 Some years after, on a certain occasion, Abraham 
 asked the Lord, Whereby shall I know [be assured] 
 that I shall inherit this land? The Lord com- 
 manded him to prepare a splendid sacrifice of all 
 clean birds and quadrupeds; and at even the Lord 
 met with him at the altar, and while a burning 
 lamp passed between the severed animals, the Lord 
 revealed the fortunes of his family for the next 
 four hundred years, and made a covenant with him, 
 securing to him and his fleshly seed the whole land 
 from the borders of the Nile to the Euphrates. . . . 
 But the time drawing nigh when the promised son 
 by Sarah, the free woman and wife proper of Abra- 
 ham, should be born, in order that this issue by 
 Sarah might be contradistinguished from that by 
 Hagar, God was pleased to command Abraham to 
 prepare for another covenant. This next covenant, 
 growing out of the first promise, is made especially 
 for the sake of ascertaining, by a fleshly mark, the 
 
16 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 natural offspring of Abraham, and guaranteeing to 
 them the parental blessings conveyed to Abraham 
 by the covenant concerning the inheritance, and 
 also as to the time of its institution, one year before 
 the birth of Isaac. It occasioned a remarkable dif- 
 ference between Ishmael and Isaac, though sons of 
 the same parent — the former being the son of his 
 uncircumcision, the latter of his circumcision, 
 though both circumcised themselves, Ishmael in 
 his thirteenth year, and Isaac on the eighth day. . . 
 The second promise concerning the Messiah is no 
 further developed during the whole Jewish dispensa- 
 tion. It is, indeed, repeated to Isaac and to Jacob, 
 and confirmed by an oath at the virtual sacrifice of 
 Isaac, and is called by Paul c the covenant con- 
 firmed oy God [stj] concerning the Christ, made 
 four hundred and thirty years before the giving of 
 the law/ ... To sum up the whole, the two promises 
 tendered to Abraham at the time of his being 
 called, while he was yet in Ur, of Chaldea, and de- 
 pending on which he consented to leave his own 
 country and become a voluntary pilgrim for life, 
 constitute the basis of two great institutions. The 
 first promise is developed in the covenant concern- 
 ing the inheritance, some ten or twelve years after 
 he had become a pilgrim. The covenant of cir- 
 cumcision was instituted twenty-four years after, 
 and the Sinai covenant, or great national develop- 
 ment, embracing all these other developments, was 
 sealed four hundred and thirty years after the time 
 of these two promises. The second promise, con- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 17 
 
 taming the spiritual blessing of the Gentiles of all 
 nations in Christ, is denominated by Paul — Gal. 
 iii — 'The covenant confirmed by God concerning 
 Christ four hundred and thirty years before the 
 law/" (Debate between Campbell and Rice, pp. 
 289-292.) 
 
 Rev. Mr. Frey, a Baptist minister, says, " A visi- 
 ble Church was not known in Israel;" and then 
 adds, "The blessings promised to Abraham and his 
 natural seed, throughout ail their generations, were 
 all of a temporal nature, and that without any 
 regard to their personal character, conduct, or 
 faith/' Again he says, "Pentecost was the time 
 of the commencement of the Church of Christ." 
 (Pp. 66-69.) 
 
 Mr. Campbell again says, "That the covenant of 
 which it [circumcision] was a sign was not the 
 covenant of the Christian Church, will appear most 
 evident from a fact which I will just now state; 
 namely, that some eight hundred years after its 
 establishment, Jeremiah foretold that it should be 
 abolished, and that God would make a new covenant, 
 and instead of writing his new laws upon marble or 
 upon parchment, he would write them upon the 
 hearts of his people." (Debate between Campbell 
 and Rice, p. 297.) 
 
 1. It will be seen that Mr. Campbell contends, 
 throughout his remarks, for several covenants made 
 at sundry times with Abraham, but furnishes no 
 evidence of the fact, only that the Lord spoke with 
 him at different times on different subjects. 
 2 
 
18 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 2. He tries to identify the covenant with the law 
 of Moses, an error into which anti-pedobaptists gen- 
 erally fall, supposing, also, that the covenant was 
 abolished with the law at the commencement of the 
 new dispensation, 
 
 3. He denies that the Abrahamic covenant was 
 the covenant of the Christian Church. And the 
 same ground is taken by Mr. Frey, and by anti- 
 pedobaptists generally. And, indeed, they deny 
 that the Church of Christ existed before the day 
 of Pentecost. 
 
 4. He claims that all the blessings promised to 
 Abraham and his seed were of a temporal character, 
 except one promise relating to the Messiah, and 
 that they only embraced his natural offspring. 
 
 We have thus presented pretty fully, and I trust 
 fairly, the opinions of our opponents, for the pur- 
 pose of showing their unscriptural bearing. As a 
 pedobaptist we are free to admit that the Abrahamic 
 covenant does contain important temporal blessings, 
 both to Abraham and his natural descendants; but 
 these were not confined exclusively to them. Nor 
 do they destroy the spiritual character of the cove- 
 nant; for Grod has promised great temporal bless- 
 ings to his people in the New Testament; and in 
 both the New and Old Testaments Gentiles who em- 
 brace the true faith, and worship the living God, 
 with their children, are admitted to all the privi- 
 leges of natural -born Jews. While the people of 
 God are connected with this world they are depend- 
 ent upon divine Providence for their subsistence as 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 19 
 
 well as for the means by which Church institutions 
 are supported; and, consequently, provisions for 
 their temporal well-being properly constitute a part 
 of the constitution of the Church through all time; 
 just as we find it in the Abrahamic covenant, with- 
 out, in the least, impairing the general spiritual 
 character of that document. But the point which 
 we propose here to raise for discussion, is the posi- 
 tion taken by Mr. Campbell, that three or more cov- 
 enants were made with the patriarch Abraham. 
 
 We will now introduce the reader to the incip- 
 ient developments of the covenant made with Abra- 
 ham, for the purpose of showing its general spiritual 
 bearing, and at the same time to show the unity of 
 its different parts; for before the Lord presented 
 the covenant in detail, as we find it in the seven- 
 teenth chapter of Genesis, he prepared the mind of 
 the patriarch by sundry partial developments, suffi- 
 cient to excite and strengthen his faith and render 
 him an intelligent party in the covenant. 
 
 I. We commence with Genesis xii, 1-3: "Now 
 the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy 
 country, and from thy kindred, and from thy 
 father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee : 
 and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will 
 bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou 
 shalt be a blessing : and I will bless them that bless 
 thee, and curse him that curseth thee : and in thee 
 shall all families of the earth be blessed. " This 
 occurred when Abram was about seventy-five years 
 of age, and while yet in "Ur of Chaldea." And 
 
20 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 here is wliere Mr. Campbell gets the u two promises v 
 from which so many covenants and great institutions 
 were subsequently developed. 
 
 1. We find here a brief but distinct allusion to 
 the land of Canaan, which was to become his future 
 residence — "a land I will shew thee." Mr. Camp- 
 bell, however, finds his first allusion to this land in 
 the "fifteenth chapter of Genesis," where he at- 
 tempts to make a distinct " covenant concerning the 
 inheritance." 
 
 2. A promise that Abram should be the father of 
 "a great nation," a fact which his name indicates, 
 referring primarily to the Jewish nation; which, in 
 more respects than one, was "a great nation." 
 Here is Mr. Campbell's first promise. 
 
 3. A promise that Abram' s name shall be great — 
 referring to a change which afterward was made in 
 the name of the patriarch, which shall be duly con- 
 sidered when we arrive at the final consideration of 
 the covenant as recorded in the seventeenth chapter 
 of Genesis ) showing, too, the identity of the prom- 
 ise there and here. 
 
 4. A promise that God would "bless" him, and 
 make him a "blessing" to others. Abram, stand- 
 ing at the head of the entire Church of God, and 
 acting in behalf of the Church, enters into a cov- 
 enant with God — receiving the promise of Divine 
 mercy, is blessed; and securing in covenant from 
 the same promise of mercy to others, he is made to 
 them a blessing. 
 
 5. A promise, "I will bless them that bless thee. 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 21 
 
 and curse him that curseth thee." This promise 
 had a primary reference to Abram in his exposed 
 pilgrimage through life, and a secondary reference 
 to his natural posterity in their national relations to 
 other people; but tdtimately to the vicissitudes and 
 exposures of God's Church now represented in the 
 person of Abram. 
 
 6. A promise that from Abram' s natural posterity 
 Messiah should come, and by his death redeem all 
 " nations" and " families" of the earth. Here is 
 where Mr. Campbell gets his " second promise/' 
 which, he says, "is not further developed during the 
 whole Jewish dispensation," notwithstanding all the 
 law and the prophets said concerning him. In Gen- 
 esis xii, 1-3, we claim is the germ from which the 
 different portions of the old Abrahamic covenant is 
 ultimately developed. Nothing, to be sure, is here 
 said of a covenant, nor are all the items ultimately 
 denned as belonging to that covenant very fully set 
 forth; but they are generally alluded to with suffi- 
 cient definiteness to challenge the faith of the 
 patriarch, and to prepare his mind for the grand 
 result. 
 
 II. The next instance in which this subject is 
 introduced is Genesis xiii, 14-16: "And the Lord 
 said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from 
 him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the 
 place where thou art, northward, and southward, 
 and eastward, and westward : for all the land which 
 thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed 
 forever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of 
 
22 INFANT CHUUCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 the earth. : so that if a man can number the dust 
 of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered." 
 The different items promised in Genesis xii, 1-3, 
 are here summed up in two generic promises — the 
 Lord choosing, in this instance, not to particularize. 
 
 1. The land of Canaan is more fully described 
 and secured by promise to Abram and his seed 
 forever. 
 
 2. "Thy seed" embraces both Abram' s natural 
 and spiritual offspring and the Messiah; for St. 
 Paul applies the term "seed" to each of these. 
 The object, in this instance, seems to be to keep 
 the mind of the patriarch awake to this grand pur- 
 pose of the Almighty, and to exercise his faith by 
 presenting the promise in the above comprehensive 
 form. Abram was now residing in the land of 
 Canaan. 
 
 III. The third reference to this same subject is 
 recorded in Genesis xv, 5-7 : "And he brought him 
 forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, 
 and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them : 
 and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And 
 he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him 
 for righteousness. And he said unto him, I am the 
 Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, 
 to give thee this land to inherit it." 
 
 1. Here the whole subject is again embraced in 
 two general promises, precisely as in Genesis xiii, 
 14-16, except their order is reversed, and the figure 
 changed from the "dust of the earth" to the 
 "stars" that glitter in the "heavens." 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 23 
 
 2. If the reader lias a lingering doubt whether 
 the promise concerning the "seed" of Abram em- 
 braced Christ, let him remember that in the next 
 verse it says Abram " believed in the Lord/' as 
 there promised, "and he counted it to him for 
 righteousness." Certainly Abram was not " counted 
 righteous " for simply believing that he should have 
 a very numerous natural offspring. 
 
 3. If he is inclined to apply the term "seed" to 
 the natural offspring of Abram, to the exclusion of 
 the spiritual, let him turn to Romans, fourth chap- 
 ter, where he will find a labored argument by the 
 apostle to prove the contrary. Here, then, is all 
 that was promised to Abram in the beginning, car- 
 ried forward without any particular addition or 
 alteration. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Hibbard truly says, "That it has ever 
 been a prevalent custom among the Orientals to 
 teach by metaphor and allegory, by making sensible 
 objects the representatives of spiritual things. . . . 
 By this means a twofold sense is attached to almost 
 every part of this covenant, a literal and a spiritual 
 sense. Secondly, it is chiefly by the light of other 
 parts of Scripture, and particularly of the New Test- 
 ament, that we are to interpret the true meaning 
 of the words of the covenant. . . . The same inspi- 
 ration that guided Paul's pen in portraying its ex- 
 alted character, doubtless shed its illuminations 
 upon the mind of the patriarch. . . . All admit 
 that these and kindred expressions imply a numer- 
 ous and powerful natural posterity. But it is the 
 
24 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 twofold sense of these expressions to which we call 
 attention; and it is that second and higher sense 
 that they are made to include a promise of Gospel 
 blessings." (Hibbard on Baptism, pp. 16, 17.) 
 
 Notwithstanding Abrani fully believed the prom- 
 ise of God in its twofold sense, embracing a numer- 
 ous natural offspring, from whom the Messiah should 
 come to bless all nations, as well as an equally- 
 numerous spiritual posterity, composed of believers 
 in Christ and their children forever, and that they 
 were to inherit the land of Canaan, yet he seems 
 anxious to have these promises reduced to a more 
 substantial form. Hence he says — Genesis xv, 8 — - 
 "Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall 
 inherit it ¥' In yielding to the request of Abram, 
 as Dr. Macknight says, "God accommodated him- 
 self to the ideas of mankind, who consider what is 
 promised in a covenant as more binding than the 
 simple declaration of one's intentions." 
 
 IV. We now propose an examination of Genesis 
 xv, 9-18 : "And he said unto him, Take me a heifer 
 of three years old, and a she-goat of three years 
 old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtle-dove, 
 and a young pigeon. And he took unto him all 
 these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each 
 piece one against another : but the birds divided he 
 not. And when the fowls came down upon the car- 
 casses, Abram drove them away. And when the 
 sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram; 
 and lo, a horror of great darkness fell upon him. 
 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 25 
 
 thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not 
 theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict 
 them four hundred years. And also that nation 
 whom they shall serve, will I judge; and afterward 
 shall they come out with great substance. And 
 thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be 
 buried in a good old age. But in the fourth gener- 
 ation they shall come hither again; for the iniquity 
 of the Amorites is not yet full. And it came to 
 pass that when the sun went down, and it was dark, 
 behold a smoking furnace and a burning lamp that 
 passed between those pieces. In that same day the 
 Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto 
 thy seed have I given this land, from the river of 
 Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates." 
 
 Thus, we see, the promises previously and repeat- 
 edly made were now reduced to a most solemn cove- 
 nant. And we challenge the advocates of a plu- 
 rality of Abrahamic covenants, to show an instance 
 beside this in which the regular forms of a cove- 
 nant, with the appropriate sacrifices, were made or 
 entered into by the Lord and the patriarch. 
 * Dr. A. Clarke says, " For whatever purpose a cov- 
 enant was made, it was ever ratified by a sacrifice, 
 offered to God; and the passing between the divided 
 parts of the victim appears to have signified that 
 each agreed, if they broke the engagement, to sub- 
 mit to the punishment of being cut asunder ; which 
 we find — from Matt, xxiv, 51; Luke xii, 46 — was 
 an ancient mode of punishment." 
 
 Rabbi Solomon Jarchi says, "It was a custom 
 
26 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 with those wlio entered into a covenant with each 
 other ; to take a heifer and cut it in two, and then 
 the contracting parties passed between the pieces/ 7 
 This being an extraordinary case, several animals 
 were employed. St. Cyril, in his book against Ju- 
 lian, shows that passing between the divided parts 
 of a victim, was used also among the Chaldeans, 
 Abram 7 s countrymen. As the sacrifice was required 
 to make an atonement to God, so the death of the 
 animal was necessary to signify to the contracting 
 parties the punishment to which they exposed them- 
 selves should they prove unfaithful. " See more on 
 this subject in Clarke 7 s Commentary, on Genesis 
 xv, 10. 
 
 "Thus," says Dr. Macknight, "Abram was con- 
 stituted the father of all believers, for the purpose 
 of receiving on their behalf the promises of those 
 blessings which God, of his great goodness, intends 
 to bestow on them/ 7 And hence, as Rev. Mr. Ful- 
 ler says, "This promise has been fulfilling ever 
 since. All the true blessedness which the world is 
 now, or shall be hereafter possessed of, is owing to 
 Abram and his posterity. Through them we have* 
 , a Bible, a Savior, and a Gospel. They are the stock 
 on which the Christian Church is grafted. 77 This 
 covenant, as we shall show when we come to ex- 
 amine its final and most perfect development, in its 
 grandest import, looked forward to Gospel days and 
 Gospel blessings. 
 
 Dr. A. Clarke says: "A covenant always sup- 
 poses one of these four things : 
 
THE ABRAIIAMIC COVENANT. 27 
 
 "1. That tlie contracting parties had been hith- 
 erto unknown to each other, and were brought by 
 the covenant into a state of acquaintance/' This 
 was true in Abram's case, as well as with all those 
 in whose behalf he covenanted. By " nature they 
 know not God;" but by entering into the cove- 
 nant by faith, are brought nigh, and made spirit- 
 ually acquainted with hiin. 
 
 "*2. That they had been previously in a state of 
 hostility or enmity, and were brought by the cove- 
 nant into a state of pacification and friendship." 
 This also is true with regard to Abram and all for 
 whom he covenanted. St. Paul says, " Among 
 whom also we all had our conversation in time past 
 in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of 
 the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the 
 children of wrath even as others. But God who is 
 rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved 
 us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened 
 us together with Christ, . . . and hath made us to 
 sit together in Christ Jesus." Eph. ii, 2-6. 
 
 "3. Or being known to each other, they now 
 agree to unite their counsels, strength, property, 
 etc., for the accomplishment of a particular pur- 
 pose, mutually subservient to the interests of both." 
 In the covenant as finally specified — Gen. xvii — 
 while Abram and his seed were engaged to "walk 
 before God and to be perfect," God engages to be a 
 "God unto him" and to his "seed" in all their 
 "generations;" thus solemnly pledging each other 
 to their mutual interests forever. 
 
28 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 "4. Or it implies an agreement to succor and de- 
 fend a third party in cases of oppression and dis- 
 tress." Hence, Abrain, and, like him, every believ- 
 ing parent, is required to bring bis infant offspring 
 into a covenant relation witb God, the parent bind- 
 ing bimself to teacb, govern, protect, and provide 
 for tbe temporal as well as spiritual interests of tbe 
 cliild, and tbe Lord engaging to be its God in a very 
 especial sense forever. 
 
 Tbus far tbe reader will find but one covenant 
 made witb Abram. And after tbe most careful 
 investigation we bave been able to make, we bave 
 found not a single instance in wbicb two Abrabamic 
 covenants are spoken of. Tbe following Scriptures 
 will illustrate tbis fact: "And God beard tbeir 
 groanings, and God remembered bis covenant witb 
 Abraham, witb Isaac, and witb Jacob," Exodus ii, 
 24; "Be ye mindful always of bis covenant, tbe 
 word wbicb be commanded to a tbousand genera- 
 tions; even of tbe covenant wbicb be made witb 
 Abrabam, and of bis oath unto Isaac; and batb 
 confirmed tbe same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel 
 for an everlasting covenant," 1 Cbron. xvi, 15-17; 
 "Ye are tbe children of the prophets, and of the 
 covenant which God made with our fathers, saying 
 unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kin- 
 dreds of the earth be blessed," Acts iii, 25; "And 
 he gave him the covenant of circumcision; and so 
 Abraham begat Isaac," etc., Acts vii, 8. In all 
 these instances, though different parts of the cove- 
 nant are referred to, the covenant itself is spoken 
 
THE ABRAHAMIO COVENANT. 29 
 
 of as a unit. The only passage of Scripture quoted 
 by Mr. Campbell in proof of a plurality of cove- 
 nants made with Abraham, is — Horn. ix, 4 — "Who 
 are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and 
 the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the 
 law, and the service of God, and the promises." 
 True, Paul here speaks of a plurality of covenants, 
 but to whom do they " appertain?" Not to Abra- 
 ham, but to "the Israelites." Moses tells us — 
 Deut. xxix, 1 — "These are the words of the cove- 
 nant, which the Lord commanded Moses to make 
 with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, 
 besides the covenant which he made with them in 
 Horeb." God made two covenants with "the Israel- 
 ites;" one at "Horeb," and the other at "Moab." 
 To these Paul refers, and not to covenants made 
 with Abraham. There was, then, but one Abra- 
 hamic covenant; embracing, to be sure, some things 
 of a temporal nature, but even these were typical 
 of great spiritual blessings promised. The general 
 character of the covenant was, therefore, spiritual; 
 and circumcision being a part of that spiritual cov- 
 enant, and a token of spiritual things which it con- 
 tained, the token was itself of spiritual import. 
 But as the nature and design of this token will be 
 discussed in another part of this work, we will dis- 
 miss it for the present. 
 
30 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 THE COVENANT AS FINALLY DEVELOPED WITH ABKAHAM, AND 
 EXPLAINED BY ST. PAUL. 
 
 We now approach the final and full development 
 of the Abrahamic covenant, which took place about 
 twenty-four years after the call of Abram to leave 
 his father's house in Haram, where the first promise 
 was made. Gen. xvii, 1-14: "And when Abram 
 was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared 
 to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty 
 God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. And I 
 will make my covenant between me and thee, and 
 will multiply thee exceedingly. And Abram fell 
 on his face; and God talked with him, saying, As 
 for me, behold my covenant is with thee, and thou 
 shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall 
 thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name 
 shall be called Abraham; for a father of many na- 
 tions have I made thee. And I will make thee ex- 
 ceeding fruitful, and will make nations of thee, and 
 kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish 
 my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed 
 after thee in their generations, for an everlasting 
 covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed 
 after thee. Anil I will give unto thee, and thy seed 
 after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all 
 the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession; 
 and I will be their God. And God said unto Abra- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIO COVENANT. 31 
 
 ham, Tliou shalt keep niy covenant therefore, thou, 
 and thy seed after thee, in their generations. This 
 is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and 
 you, and thy seed after thee; Every man-child 
 among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall cir- 
 cumcise the flesh of your foreskin ; and it shall be 
 a token of the covenant between me and you. And 
 he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among 
 you, every man-child in your generations, he that is 
 born in the house, or bought with money of any 
 stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is 
 born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy 
 money, must needs be circumcised : and my cove- 
 nant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting cove- 
 nant. And the uncircumcised man-child whose 
 flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul 
 shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken 
 my covenant." The covenant as here presented is 
 composed of three important parts — a precept, a 
 promise, and a rite, or ordinance, each of which we 
 will now proceed to examine, both as they were un- 
 derstood by the high contracting parties at the time, 
 and by subsequent inspired writers, especially in the 
 New Testament. 
 
 I. It contains a precept. u The Lord appeared to 
 Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty 
 God; walk before me, and be thou perfect." In 
 examining this precept let us ascertain, 
 
 1. Its author. "I am the Almighty God" — a 
 being of infinite perfections. Dr. A. Clarke trans- 
 lates and comments upon this passage as follows: 
 
82 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 "I am the Almighty God — ani el sJiaddai — I am 
 God all-sufficient; from shadah, to shed, to pour out. 
 I am that God who pours out blessings, who gives 
 them richly, abundantly, continually" Now, in 
 speaking of this same covenant, St. Paul uses the 
 following remarkable language: "And this I say, 
 That the covenant that was confirmed before of God 
 in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and 
 thirty years after, can not disannul, that it should 
 make the promise of none effect." Gal. iii, 17. So it 
 appears, from the testimony of St. Paul, that it was 
 "the Almighty God/' in the person of Jesus Christ, 
 that made this covenant with Abraham, and was 
 the author of this precept. This fact is further 
 confirmed by Jesus Christ himself, when he said, 
 "Before Abraham was, I am." St. John viii, 58. 
 
 (1.) The Being that entered into covenant with 
 Abraham was seen by him — Gen. xviii, 1 — "And the 
 Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre;" 
 and also by Jacob — Gen. xxxii, 30 — "For I have 
 seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." 
 
 (2.) The Lord in his relation as Father has never 
 assumed a visible form so as to be seen by the 
 human eye. "Such Divine revelations are always 
 made in the person of his Son." St. John i, 18 : 
 "No man hath seen God at any time; the only-be- 
 gotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, 
 he hath declared him." 
 
 This we deem a very important point in our gen- 
 eral argument, because, if the Abrahamic covenant 
 is the charter, or constitution of the Christian 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 33 
 
 Church, it is important that it be shown that Jesus 
 Christ was the author of that covenant; and as 
 Jesus Christ in his Divine nature is one with the 
 Father, infinite in all his attributes, especially in 
 power, and is the medium through which the Father 
 reveals himself, not only to the human eye, but 
 especially to the human heart, in blessings riclily, 
 abundantly, and continually -, he, it seems, answers 
 the sublime description given by himself when he 
 said, " I am the Almighty G od ) walk before me, and 
 be thou perfect." And what frail, human being 
 would not tremble at receiving such a precept from 
 any source save Jesus Christ, who alone could enable 
 him to obey it ? 
 
 2. The precept itself. This is given in two 
 parts, so nearly allied, however, that neither can be 
 obeyed without obeying the other. 
 
 (1.) "Walk before me." To "walk" means to be 
 active, persevering, to go forward in the discharge 
 of duty. "Before me." Let all you think, say, or 
 do be done as in my immediate presence, and under 
 the constant inspection of my pure and penetrating 
 eye. How could a stronger incentive have been 
 given to an upright, holy, and active religious life 
 than is given in these words ? And yet it is pre- 
 cisely what the apostle enjoins upon all the follow- 
 ers of Christ, when he says, "That ye might walk 
 worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful 
 in every good work." Col. i, 10. 
 
 (2.) And "be thou perfect." The highest pre- 
 cept ever given to mortal man. This implies, first, 
 3 
 
34 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 a negative perfection — ' o "be perfectly free from the 
 guilt, power, practice, and pollution of sin : as the 
 Lord said to the descendants of Abraham many 
 years after ; "Ye shall therefore be holy, for I am 
 holy;" and as Peter said at a still later period, "But 
 as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in 
 all manner of conversation ; because it is written, Be 
 ye holy, for I am holy;" and as St. Paul has said, 
 "Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let 
 us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh 
 and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." 
 This precept implies, secondly, a positive perfection — 
 a perfect consecration of i „ A, body, and spirit to 
 God, or, as St. Paul has it, to be "sanctified wholly;" 
 and in addition to this, to be perfectly "filled with 
 all the fullness of God," and thus be enabled to 
 love God perfectly, or, as Christ describes it, to 
 " love God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, 
 and with all thy strength ; and to love thy neighbor 
 as thyself." This, in short, is the perfection enjoined 
 by the same Being. Matt, v, 48 : " Be ye therefore 
 perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is 
 perfect." And if any person doubts the possibility 
 of attaining to this perfection, we will only point 
 him to the Being who enjoined it upon Abraham, as 
 well as upon all believers: "I am the Almighty 
 God," etc.: speaking of whom the apostle says, 
 "Unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly 
 above all that we can ask or think, according to the 
 power that worketh in us." Eph. iii, 20. The above 
 precept, then, was established by Jesus Christ as a 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 35 
 
 permanent article in the constitution of his Church 
 when that Church was first organized, and he has 
 never repealed or altered it, and probably never will 
 till the Church militant is made to sing the new 
 song in heaven. 
 
 II. It contained a promise. This general promise, 
 as will be seen, consists of several important particu- 
 lars, which we will now examine, describing each 
 separately. 
 
 1. A promise of a numerous natural offspring, 
 especially through the lineage of Isaac and Jacob. 
 This part of the general promise is found in verses 2 
 and 6, " And will multiply thee exceedingly ;" 
 "And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I 
 will make nations of thee, and kings shall come 
 out of thee." That this refers to Abraham's 
 natural descendants through Isaac is proven — Gen. 
 xxi, 12 — "For in Isaac shall thy seed be called." 
 And this natural seed, as we learn from the apostle, 
 was typical of those who should be made "free in- 
 deed" by the Gospel: "But we, brethren, as Isaac 
 was, are the children of promise," Gal. iv, 28; "So 
 then, brethren, we are not children of the bond- 
 women, but of the free," Gal. iv, 31. 
 
 2. A promise that his "seed" should have all 
 the "land of Canaan for an everlasting possession." 
 Gen. xvii, 8. This promise, however, was under- 
 stood to be conditional. Its fulfillment depended 
 upon their fidelity to God, with whom the covenant 
 was made. This land of Canaan was called "an 
 everlasting possession," because as a nation the 
 
36 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 descendants of Abraham were to possess it to the 
 end of the world, but more especially because it was 
 a type of a heavenly Canaan, which, if faithful to 
 God, they were forever to possess, the term everlast- 
 ing covering their possession in both worlds. Dr. 
 Clarke says that the word olam, here rendered 
 "everlasting," means "eternal;" " but when applied 
 to things which, from their nature, must have a 
 limited duration, it is properly to be understood in 
 this sense, because those things, though temporal 
 in themselves, shadow forth things that are eternal." 
 (Clarke's Commentary, Gen. xxi, 33.) And it is 
 evident that Abraham understood the promised land 
 of Canaan to be a type of heaven; for "by faith 
 he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange 
 country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and 
 Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise; for 
 he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose 
 builder and maker is God." Heb. xi, 9, 10. He 
 " looked for a city;" that is, looked by means of 
 the promise of the earthly Canaan as a type, for the 
 heavenly city, as the real substance promised. 
 Again: when the Israelites sinned in the wilder- 
 ness, the Lord interdicted their entrance into the 
 promised land — Num. xiv, 23-30 — and &ve hundred 
 years after this — Psalm xcv — -David admonished his 
 countrymen not to "harden their heart as in the 
 provocation in the wilderness," and speaks of God's 
 oath, by which he excluded them from "his rest;" 
 intimating that if they followed their pernicious 
 example, they too " should not enter into his rest." 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 37 
 
 But in its application to David's countrymen, he 
 could not refer to literal Canaan as "his" rest, for 
 they had long before that time u entered into/' and 
 were then enjoying the "rest" of literal Canaan. 
 But as they were now candidates for a heavenly 
 "rest/' of which Canaan was the divinely-appointed 
 type, they could see, by the chastisement of their 
 fathers in the wilderness, what would be, if they 
 sinned, their ultimate chance for heaven. Here, 
 then, it is quite evident that the Psalmist speaks 
 of the "rest" of Canaan, as a type of the "rest" 
 of heaven; and in the familiar and unceremonious 
 manner in which he employs this figure, shows that 
 it was generally so understood. St. Paul, in his 
 Epistle to the Hebrews — third and fourth chapters — 
 quotes the language of David, and applies it in a 
 way that leaves no doubt on this subject. He says, 
 "Wherefore, as the Holy Ghost saith, To-day if ye 
 will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the 
 provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilder- 
 ness; when your fathers tempted me, proved me, 
 and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was 
 grieved with that generation, and said, They do 
 always err in their heart; and they have not known 
 my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not 
 enter into my rest. Take heed, brethren, lest there 
 be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in de- 
 parting from the living God. But exhort one an- 
 other daily, while it is called to-day; lest any of you 
 be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For 
 we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the 
 
38 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end; 
 while it is said, To-day if you will hear his voice, 
 harden not your hearts ; as in the provocation. For 
 some, when they had heard, did provoke; howbeit, 
 not all who came out of Egypt by Moses. But 
 with whom was he grieved forty years? Was it not 
 with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in 
 the wilderness ? And to whom sware he that they 
 should not enter into his rest, but to them that be- 
 lieved not ? So we see that they could not enter in 
 because of unbelief. Let us therefore fear, lest a 
 promise being left us of entering into his rest, any 
 of you should seem to come short of it. . . . 
 Let us labor, therefore, to enter into that rest, lest 
 any man fall after the same example of unbelief." 
 
 This land, then, being a type of heaven, and the 
 covenant promising both to Abraham's faithful seed, 
 it gives a very high spiritual character to this part 
 of the covenant, and furnishes a good reason for 
 calling it an everlasting covenant. 
 
 3. A promise that the " Almighty God" should 
 be the God of Abraham and of his seed forever. 
 And the Almighty God that makes this promise is 
 the infinite Deity "in Christ." "And I will estab- 
 lish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed 
 after thee, in their generations, for an everlasting 
 covenant, to be a God unto thee and to thy seed 
 after thee." Gen. xvii, 7. 
 
 "How large the promise, how divine, 
 To Abraham and his seed : 
 I am a God to thee and thine, 
 Supplying all their need !" 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 39 
 
 " God is in the midst of them; hence } they are not 
 consumed.^ 
 
 4. A promise that Abraham should be the father 
 of the believing world, with their infant offspring, 
 whether Jews or Gentiles, whether in or out of lit- 
 eral Canaan. 
 
 The promise says, " Behold, my covenant is with 
 thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 
 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, 
 but thy name shall be Abraham ; for a father of 
 many nations have I made thee. . . . And I will 
 establish my covenant between me and thee, and 
 thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an ev- 
 erlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to 
 thy seed after thee," Gen. xvii, 5-7; "And I will 
 make thy seed as the dust of the earth ; so that if 
 a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall 
 thy seed also be numbered," Gen. xiii, 16; "And 
 he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now 
 toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to 
 number them; and he said unto him, So shall thy 
 seed be," Gen. xv, 5. 
 
 We have before referred to the fact of the twofold 
 meaning of the language above employed. We 
 have also shown the literal, or first and lowest signi- 
 fication to be attached. 
 
 We now propose examining the second, higher, 
 and spiritual sense, in which the above language has 
 been understood down through both dispensations. 
 We will not now attempt to show the privileges 
 which this covenant conferred upon infants, as their 
 
40 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 relation to it, and the Church of God, will be care- 
 fully investigated in another part of this work. 
 But we will here confine ourselves principally to the 
 relation this covenant permanently fixed between 
 Abraham and believers in Christ, whether Jews or 
 Gentiles. We will, first of all, examine the mean- 
 ing of Genesis xvii, 5: " Neither shall thy name 
 any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be 
 Abraham ; for a father of many nations have I made 
 thee." In examining this passage, the first thing 
 of importance we find is, the change in the patri- 
 arch's name, from Abram to Abraham. Now, the 
 all-wise Jehovah never acts, even in the most unim- 
 portant affairs of human life, without some design. 
 But what was his design in the above change in 
 the patriarch's name? We claim that it was to 
 indicate a new and very important relation the pa- 
 triarch was henceforth to sustain to the Church of 
 God, which relation the name itself indicates. 
 
 "The word Abram/' says Dr. Clarke, " literally 
 signifies a high or exalted father" A father of " a 
 great nation/' literally. But now the covenant is 
 made, and the Church about to be organized in 
 Abram's family; and he is henceforth to be its 
 spiritual father, and his name must be changed so 
 as to indicate that relation. 
 
 " Abraham," says Dr. Clarke, u differs from the 
 preceding only in one letter; it has n — he — before 
 the last radical." And the reason given for this ad- 
 dition by the Almighty is, " a father of many nations 
 have I made thee/' or, as Dr. Clarke renders it, "A 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 41 
 
 father of a multitude of nations have I made thee" 
 Now, it can not be supposed that the words "many 
 nations/' or, especially, "multitude of nations/' em- 
 brace the other sons of Abraham, with Isaac, and 
 their descendants; for the promise is, "In Isaac 
 shall thy seed be called." But as this whole sub- 
 ject was discussed by St. Paul in his Epistles, we 
 will turn thither for further information. See Eom. 
 iv, 13, 14 : " For the promise that he should be heir 
 of the world, [father of a multitude of nations,] was 
 not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, 
 [did not embrace his lawful seed only,] but through 
 the righteousness of faith. For if they which are 
 of the law [the Jews] be heirs, [alone,] faith is 
 made void, and the promise made of none effect." 
 Here the apostle asserts that the natural seed of 
 Abraham — the Jews — were not the only persons in- 
 terested in the above promise ; that the promise con- 
 stituted Abraham "heir of the world" — meaning 
 the believing world, as will be seen in the 16th and 
 17th verses : "Therefore it is of faith, that it might 
 be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure 
 to all the seed : not to that only which is of the law, 
 [the Jews,] but to that also which is of the faith of 
 Abraham, [believing Gentiles,] who is the father of 
 us all," both Jews and Gentiles. And here comes 
 the promise which secures to him this relation: 
 "As it is written, I have made thee a father of many 
 nations before him whom he believed, even God." 
 Again : in the 11th and 12th verses of this same 
 chapter, he says, "And he [Abraham] received the 
 
42 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of 
 the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised ; 
 that he might be the father of all them that be- 
 lieve, though they be not circumcised, that right- 
 eousness might be imputed unto them also; and 
 the father of circumcision [or of the covenant that 
 contained it] to them that are not of the circum- 
 cision only, [converted Gentiles,] but who also walk 
 in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, 
 which he had being yet uncircuincised." In the 
 eleventh verse it will be seen that the apostle ex- 
 pressly declares that Abraham was the " father of 
 all them that believe, though they be not circum- 
 cised" — are not Jews. 
 
 Dr. Clarke, in his comments upon this chapter, 
 makes the following very appropriate remarks : 
 "Why, then, should the Jews oppose the Gentiles? 
 especially as the Gentiles were actually included in 
 the covenant made with Abraham; for the prom- 
 ise — Gen. xvii, 5 — stated that he should be the 
 father of many nations; consequently, the covenant 
 being made with Abraham, as the head or father of 
 many nations, all in any nation who stood on the 
 same religious principle with him, were his seed, 
 and with him are interested in the same covenant. 
 But Abraham stood by faith in the mercy of God 
 pardoning him; and upon this footing the believing 
 Gentiles stand in the Gospel; and, therefore, they 
 are the seed of Abraham, and included in the cove- 
 nant and promise made to him." These facts are 
 again stated by the same apostle, in his Epistle to the 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 43 
 
 Galatians — iii, 6, 7 — "Even as Abraham believed 
 God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 
 Know ye, therefore, that they which are of faith, the 
 same are the children of Abraham." And in the 
 ninth verse, " So, then, they which be of faith are 
 blessed with faithful Abraham." Believing Gen- 
 tiles, therefore, are not only "blessed with Abra- 
 ham," but they are his "children." 
 
 Bev. , Mr. Taylor, an eminent English divine, 
 referring to the above passages, remarks as follows : 
 "Abraham, when he stood before God and received 
 the promise, did not, in the account of God, appear 
 as a private person, but as a father of us all; as the 
 head said father of the whole future Church of God, 
 from whom we were all — believing Jews and Gen- 
 tiles — to descend; as we were to be accepted p^d 
 interested in the Divine blessing and covenant after 
 the same manner as he was; namely, by faith." 
 But, however valuable may be the opinions of good 
 men on this subject, the declarations of inspiration 
 are only to be relied upon as evidence. 
 
 St. Paul again says: "And if ye be Christ's, 
 then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to 
 the promise." Gal. iii, 29. All that are " Christ's," 
 then, " are Abraham's seed." And who are Christ's ? 
 You will answer, no doubt, all true evangelical be- 
 lievers in Christ. Truly, and their infant offspring 
 with them. Well, then, all true evangelical believ- 
 ers in Christ, with their infant offspring, "are Abra- 
 ham's seed," and "heirs according to the promise, 
 a father of many nations have I made thee." 
 
44 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 In Psalm ii, 7, 8, we read, "Thou art my son; this 
 day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall 
 give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and 
 the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. " 
 Well, when the " heathen" and the " uttermost 
 parts of the earth " become Christ's, then will the 
 "heathen" and "the uttermost parts of the earth" 
 be "Abraham's seed;" for all that are "Christ's, 
 are Abraham's seed." 
 
 Again : Zechariah — ix, 10 — prophesied of Christ, 
 that "he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and 
 his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from 
 the river even to the ends of the earth." Well, 
 when Christ's dominion is thus extended, "from sea 
 even to sea, and from the river to the ends of the 
 earth," then will all those who are subjects of 
 Christ's dominion be "Abraham's seed;" for "if ye 
 are Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs 
 according to the promise." And when this proph- 
 ecy is fulfilled, then truly will Abraham be " heir 
 of the world," or "father of a multitude of na- 
 tions," as the promise reads. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Fuller winds up this subject in the fol- 
 lowing appropriate language: "The first promise in 
 this covenant is, that he shall be the father of many 
 nations; and as a token of it, his name in future is 
 to be called Abraham. He had the name of a high, 
 or eminent father, from the beginning; but now it 
 shall be more comprehensive, indicating a very large 
 progeny. By the exposition given of this promise 
 in the New Testament — Romans iv, 16, 17 — we are 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 45 
 
 directed to understand it, not only of those who 
 sprang from Abraham's body, though these be many 
 nations, but also of all that shall be of the faith of 
 Abraham. It went to make him the father of the 
 Church of God in all future ages, or, as the apostle 
 calls him, the heir of the world. In this view he is 
 the father of many, even a multitude of nations/' 
 
 III. The covenant contains a rite, or Church 
 ordinance. "This is my covenant, which ye shall 
 keep, between me and you, and thy seed after thee; 
 Every man-child among you shall be circumcised." 
 Genesis xvii, 10. 
 
 "This is my covenant/' or token of my covenant, 
 as it is called in the eleventh verse. If circumcis- 
 ion, as Mr. Campbell asserts, was a separate and 
 distinct covenant by itself, of what covenant was it 
 a token? Was it a token of itself? or was one cov- 
 enant a token of another? We would like exceed- 
 ingly to see an answer to these inquiries. And ; 
 then, where were the appropriate covenant sacrifices 
 offered ? Circumcision was n >t itself a covenant, 
 but a token of a covenant previously made. Hence, 
 when Stephen spoke of the "covenant of circum- 
 cision ' ; — Acts vii, 8 — he meant the covenant of 
 which circumcision was a token. And when the 
 Lord said, "This is my covenant, which ye shall 
 keep," he meant, " This is the token of my covenant, 
 which ye shall keep," etc. And this covenant, of 
 which circumcision was a token, is the one spoken 
 of in the fourth verse, where the Lord said, "Be- 
 hold my covenant is with thee;" having been made 
 
46 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 and ratified by appropriate sacrifices in the fifteenth 
 chapter of Genesis, it being the only covenant ever 
 made with the patriarch by the Almighty God. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 THE PEEMANENT .CHAEACTEE OF THE ABEAHAMIC COVENANT 
 CONSIDERED. 
 
 "Beader, attend! ( I am the God of Abraham, 
 the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob : this is 
 my name forever, and this is my memorial to all 
 generations/ And shall not the name, the calling, 
 the blessing, and the history of Abraham always 
 occupy a large space in the records of God's gov- 
 ernment of man, and in all the details of his 
 redemption ! 
 
 " Because of his unprecedented faith in d's 
 promises and exalted piety, he was constituted the 
 father of all believers; and his whole life is made a 
 model for all the children of God, as far as walking 
 by faith in God's promises is an ornament to human 
 character." (Christian System, p. 134.) 
 
 "The blessing of Abraham was then promised in 
 the patriarchal age, antecedent to the Jewish na- 
 tional institution, and independent of it; therefore, 
 that institution can not affect, much less disannul, 
 the blessings promised in the covenant, confirmed 
 before by God, respecting the Messiah, in the time 
 
THE ABRAHAMIO COVENANT. 47 
 
 of family worship, and four hundred and thirty 
 years before the Jewish institution began." (Chris- 
 tian System, p. 188.) 
 
 When Mr. Campbell wrote the above, he was not 
 engaged in controversy against the perpetuity of 
 the Abrahamic covenant; but had probably just 
 read the sublime language in which its perpetually- 
 binding character is so clearly and forcibly described, 
 and gave spontaneous utterance to the truth. What 
 a pity that afterward, in his debate with Mr. Rice 
 and others, he should try to connect the Abrahamic 
 and Sinaitic institutions together, and then to sweep 
 them both from existence at the beginning of the 
 new dispensation! Our object, in this place, is to 
 show that the Abrahamic covenant was not made 
 for any particular dispensation, but for all time. 
 
 I. The covenant provides for and proclaims its 
 own perpetuity in the following language: "And I 
 will establish my covenant between me and thee, 
 and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an 
 everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and thy 
 seed after thee/' Genesis xvii, 7 ; "And I will give 
 unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land 
 wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, 
 for an everlasting possession" Genesis xvii, 8; "And 
 my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting 
 covenant" Genesis xvii, 13. But here we will be 
 met with numerous quotations from the writings of 
 Moses, and even from the New Testament, where 
 the word everlasting is applied to things that have 
 terminated, or will terminate in time; and even it 
 
48 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 may be said that some tilings promised in the Abra- 
 hamic covenant have ended long since. 
 
 The following statement of facts, made by Dr. A. 
 Clarke, will set this whole subject in its true light: 
 "In all languages words have, in process of time, 
 deviated from their original acceptations, and have 
 been accommodated to particular purposes, and lim- 
 ited to particular meanings. This has happened 
 both to the Hebrew o 1 ?)^ olam, and the Greek auo«/; 
 they have been both used to express a limited time, 
 but in general a time the limits of which are un- 
 known; and thus a pointed reference to the original 
 ideal meaning is still kept up. 
 
 " Those who bring any of these terms, in an ac- 
 commodated sense, to favor a particular doctrine, 
 etc., must depend upon the good graces of their 
 opponents for permission to use them in this way. 
 
 "For as the real grammatical meaning of both 
 words is eternal, and all other meanings only accom- 
 modated ones, sound criticism, in all matters of dis- 
 pute concerning the import of a word or term, must 
 have recourse to the grammatical meaning, and its 
 use among the earliest and most correct writers in 
 the language, and will determine all accommodated 
 meanings by this alone. 
 
 " Now, the first and best writers in both of these 
 languages apply olam and aiov to express eternal in 
 the proper meaning of that word ; and this is their 
 proper meaning in the Old and New Testaments 
 when applied to God, his attributes, his operations, 
 taken in connection with the ends for which he 
 
THE ABRAIIAMIC COVENANT. 49 
 
 performs them, for c whatsoever he doeth, it shall be 
 forever, [obiySiTiTj yihyeh leolam,~] it shall be for 
 eternity.' Eccl. iii, 14. Forms and appearances of 
 created things may change, but the counsels and 
 purposes of God relative to them are permanent 
 and eternal, and none of them can be frustrated; 
 hence the words, when applied to things which 
 from their nature must have a limited duration, are 
 properly to be understood in this sense, because 
 those things, though temporal in themselves, shadow 
 forth things that are eternal. Thus the Jewish 
 dispensation, which, in the whole and in its parts, 
 is frequently said to be ttSu? 1 ?, leolam, forever, and 
 which has terminated in the Christian dispensation, 
 has the word properly applied to it, because it typi- 
 fied and introduced that dispensation which is to 
 continue not only while time shall last, but is to have 
 its incessant accumulating consummation through- 
 out eternity." (See Clarke's comments at the close 
 of Genesis xxi.) 
 
 The above remarks were not made in relation to 
 the duration of the Abrahamic covenant, but in 
 reference to the meaning generally to be attached 
 to those particular terms wherever used in the 
 sacred Scriptures; and I think it would be difficult 
 to find a more competent witness in reference to the 
 meaning of words, where he had no other interest 
 at stake than the common interests of sacred and 
 eternal truth. Taking his definitions for our guide, 
 let us see what they prove in relation to the Abra- 
 hamic covenant. 
 
 4 
 
50 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 1. The first instance in which the word everlast- 
 ing occurs is in the seventh verse : " And I will 
 establish my covenant between me and thee, and 
 thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an 
 everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to 
 thy seed after thee." We have elsewhere proven 
 that it was not Abraham's numerous natural seed 
 alone that was here referred to, but a still much 
 more numerous spiritual seed, embracing all be- 
 lievers in Christ with their infant offspring; for 
 "if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed," 
 whether Jews or Gentiles. And God's covenant, 
 as we have previously proven, was with Abraham 
 in behalf of these, in which he promised to be 
 their God forever. Here, then, the term olam, ever- 
 lasting, must be taken in its natural grammatical 
 meaning; for, as the Doctor asserts in his comments 
 on this very passage, "As the soul is to endure for- 
 ever, so it shall eternally stand in need of the sup- 
 porting power and energy of God," as secured in 
 this covenant; "And as the reign of the Gospel 
 dispensation shall be as long as sun and moon 
 endure, and its consequences eternal, so must the 
 covenant be on which these are founded." 
 
 2. As the term everlasting can only be used in an 
 "accommodated sense," when the object to which 
 it is applied does " shadow forth something that is 
 eternal," we must, therefore, understand the term 
 olam, everlasting, as it occurs in the eighth verse, in 
 connection with the land of Canaan, in this sense. 
 It reads, "And I will give unto thee, and to thy 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 51 
 
 seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stran- 
 ger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting pos- 
 session." We have before proven that the land of 
 Canaan was a type of heaven; hence, although this 
 possession was temporal in itself, yet it " shadowed 
 forth something that is eternal;" and this substance 
 thus " shadowed forth," being the principal thing 
 which the covenant was designed eternally to secure 
 to the spiritual seed of Abraham, a " pointed ref- 
 erence to the original ideal meaning of olam is still 
 kept up" 
 
 3. The third instance in which olam, everlasting, 
 occurs is in connection with the rite, or ordinance, 
 of the covenant, in the thirteenth verse : "And my 
 covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting 
 covenant." It "shall be in the flesh" of all of 
 Abraham's spiritual seed, to the end of time, as a 
 token of a covenant relation, " shadowing forth 
 things that are eternal;" and hence, as all the dif- 
 ferent parts of the Abrahamic covenant either 
 described or "shadowed forth things that are eter- 
 nal," therefore, the Abrahamic covenant, in its 
 spiritual character, remains forever binding upon 
 both the parties between whom this solemn con- 
 tract is made ; and both the God of the patriarch 
 and Abraham and his seed are forever held bound 
 in a most solemn contract to each other. 
 
 II. A few other passages of Scripture assert the 
 perpetuity of the Abrahamic covenant. Gen. xxii, 
 15-18 : "And the angel of the Lord called to Abra- 
 ham out of heaven the second time, and said, By 
 
52 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because 
 thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld 
 thy son, thine only son ; that in blessing I will bless 
 thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as 
 the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is 
 upon the sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess the 
 gate of his enemies. And in thy seed shall all the 
 nations of the earth be blessed." Let us contem- 
 plate the solemn character of the oath by which the 
 covenant previously made is here confirmed. "By 
 myself have I sworn, saith the Lord." The Psalmist 
 refers to the above covenant and oath in the follow- 
 ing language : u He hath remembered his covenant 
 forever, the word which he commanded to a thou- 
 sand generations. Which covenant he made with 
 Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac; and confirmed 
 the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an 
 everlasting covenant." Psalm cv, 8-10. Every 
 sentence here declares, in a most positive manner, 
 the perpetuity of the Abrahamic covenant. It is 
 " forever," "to a thousand generations," "an ever- 
 lasting covenant." St. Paul also refers to it in the 
 following language: "Wherein God, willing more 
 abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the 
 immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath : 
 That by two immutable things, in which it was 
 impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong 
 consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold 
 upon the hope set before us." Heb. vi, 17, 18. 
 God's "immutable counsel" consists in his unalter- 
 able purpose to bless and multiply the seed of Abra- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 53 
 
 ham, and through them to bless the "world with a 
 Messiah. The "two immutable things " by which 
 this was confirmed to Abraham was a covenant and 
 oath, in neither of which was it "possible that God 
 should lie;" that is, fail in the smallest particular 
 to accomplish his purpose. The perpetuity of the 
 covenant could not well be described in stronger 
 terms. 
 
 1. What is promised to Abraham under the 
 solemnities of an oath? He says, "Blessing, I will 
 bless thee." I will send blessings upon thee, richly, 
 abundantly ', continually ', eternally; and "multiplying, 
 I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, 
 and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore." How 
 perfectly this defies all human calculation ! As well 
 might we try to number the multitude which the 
 Kevelator saw in heaven. Again: "Thy seed shall 
 possess the gate of his enemies." By the gate may 
 be meant all the strength, whether troops, counsels, 
 or fortified cities of their enemies. To this same 
 seed, Isaiah — lx, 12 — says, "The nation and king- 
 dom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those 
 nations shall be utterly wasted;" Daniel — vii, 27 — 
 says, "And the kingdom and dominion, and the 
 greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, 
 shall be given to the people of the saints of the 
 Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting king« 
 dom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him." 
 And again : " And in thy seed shall all the nations 
 of the earth be blessed." We have the authority 
 of St. Paul — Gal. iii, 16 — for applying this to our 
 
54 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 blessed Lord ; who was the seed through whom alone 
 God's blessings should be conveyed to all the nations 
 of the earth. 
 
 2. These promises can not apply to Abraham's 
 natural seed, only as they became,, and continued to 
 be, his spiritual children, in which sense it would 
 also embrace truly-converted Gentiles; for "they 
 which are of faith, the same are the children of 
 Abraham." Gal. iii, 7. Now, take a brief view of 
 the history of the children of Israel, in their tem- 
 poral and political character, and see whether in 
 that relation the above promise has been fulfilled. 
 During the first five hundred years they did not 
 possess the first foot of land in Canaan, except what 
 Abraham and Jacob bought and paid for, spending 
 most of their time either in cruel bondage in Egypt, 
 or in homeless solitude in the wilderness. True, in 
 one instance it is said that they were as numerous 
 as the " stars of heaven" — Deut. x, 22 — and in 
 another instance it is said that Israel "were many, 
 as the sand which is by the sea in multitude" — 1 
 Kings iv, 20. It is also true that God gave them 
 to " possess the gate of their enemies," so far as 
 conquering the Canaanites was concerned ; but the 
 above covenant and oath, as we have seen, secures 
 a perpetuation of these " blessings," which we do 
 not find in the temporal history of the Israelites. 
 Though greatly increased in numbers and in wealth, 
 during the reigns of David and Solomon, yet, soon 
 after the death of the latter, the kingdom of Israel 
 became divided, and began to decline ; and after being 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 55 
 
 repeatedly conquered, wasted, and pillaged by their 
 enemies, ten of the tribes were carried away into 
 Assyria, and have never been heard of since, leaving 
 but two tribes in Israel, and they soon became con- 
 solidated in one, and, after being carried into Baby- 
 lon, and cruelly oppressed for seventy years, were per- 
 mitted to return, only to become a fruitful source 
 of contention between the surrounding nations, 
 passing, after a bloody resistance, under the domin- 
 ion of each, and in quick succession from one to 
 the other, seldom enjoying, for any length of time, 
 the least respite from war and oppression, till the 
 Romans were sent upon them, and the last vestige 
 of national freedom was wrested from them. 
 
 Micah — vii, 20 — says, "Thou wilt perform the 
 truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which 
 thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days 
 of old." How, let me ask, do the above histor- 
 ical facts and prophetic declaration agree? Who 
 can look upon the scattered, oppressed, and de- 
 graded condition of the descendants of the venera- 
 ble patriarchs, and then think of the covenant and 
 oath of God, made to Abraham, in which he prom- 
 ised forever to bless and multiply his seed, and say 
 that God is now fulfilling that covenant and oath to 
 Abraham's natural seed? 
 
 3. To Abraham's spiritual seed the covenant and 
 oath are being fulfilled every day before us. Luke 
 i, 72-75. Zechariah says that God visited his peo- 
 ple (t to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, 
 and had remembered his holy covenant; the oath 
 
56 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 which lie sware to our father Abraham, that he 
 would grant unto us, that we ; being delivered out of 
 the hand of our enemies, might serve him with 
 fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all 
 the days of our lives." At the ushering in of the 
 Gospel dispensation, when the natural descendants 
 of Abraham were about to be cat off from their land 
 and national blessings, and scattered throughout all 
 nations by their enemies, and made a hy-word of 
 reproach among all people, we see a man filled with 
 the Holy Ghost, proclaiming the fulfillment of the 
 covenant and oath which the Lord had made with 
 Abraham, not by the advent of Messiah alone, but 
 by its effects in " delivering" his people out of the 
 "hand of their enemies;" enabling them to " serve 
 him with fear, in holiness and righteousness, all 
 the days of their lives." Instead of disfranchising 
 his people, among the Jews, of their ancient Church 
 privileges, valued so highly by them, they were now 
 to enjoy them in the fullest sense specified in the 
 covenant. The coming of Messiah, the ushering 
 in of the Gospel, and the outpouring of the Holy 
 Ghost, with all their blessed results, were but the 
 fulfillment of all God had promised in his covenant 
 and oath. 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COYENANT. 57 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN" THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT AND THE 
 CEREMONIAL LAW OF MOSES. 
 
 The great error of Mr. Campbell and other anti- 
 pedobaptists, consists in regarding the Sinaitic as a 
 final development of the Abrahamie covenant, and 
 in supposing that both were abolished together at 
 the end of the Jewish dispensation. We will now 
 proceed to show that they were entirely-different 
 and distinct documents. 
 
 1. They differ in character. The covenant was 
 elemental and perpetual; while the law was legisla- 
 tive, ceremonial, and temporal. By elemental, we 
 mean that the covenant contained a few primary 
 principles relating to what God obligated himself to 
 do for his people, and their relation and duty to him 
 and each other. By perpetual, we mean that these 
 principles were to extend through all time, and eter- 
 nity also, ramifying in their progressive fulfillment 
 into an infinite variation of duties on the one hand, 
 and of blessings on the other. 
 
 By the law, we mean not the moral, but the cere- 
 monial law of Moses; and by it being legislative, 
 that in accordance with the constitution previously 
 adopted, the legislative power of the Church adopted 
 such a religious directory for the benefit of the 
 Church as its present circumstances required; and 
 by it being temporal, that the entire code was subject 
 
58 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 to alteration, amendment, or abrogation by the 
 same legislative power in the Church. 
 
 While Israel were on their journey from Egypt 
 to Canaan, they fell into numerous grievous sins. 
 And as the covenant was too elemental to specify 
 with sufficient clearness and force to the groveling 
 minds of the people what was pleasing or displeas- 
 ing to Jehovah, Moses was called up into the mount- 
 ain, and received from God himself both the moral 
 and ceremonial law — the latter specifying, in a 
 multitude of cases, moral and relative duties; and 
 also containing a directory of Divine worship, bind- 
 ing only till Christ, the promised seed, should come, 
 when the moral law was re-enacted by the Savior — 
 Matthew v, 17, 18 — and the ceremonial exchanged 
 for laws more suitable to the dispensation of the 
 Gospel — Hebrews ix, 8-14. The difference between 
 the Abrahamic covenant and the ceremonial law of 
 Moses, is portrayed by St. Paul — Gal. iv, 22-31 — 
 by a striking allegory, in which the spiritual, per- 
 manent, and evangelical character of the provisions 
 of the covenant are held in contrast with the tem- 
 porary, oppressive, and obsolete ceremonies of the 
 law, by comparing the former to Sarah, the u free- 
 woman,^ and mother of Isaac, and the latter to 
 "Agar," or "Hagar," Abraham's "bond-woman," 
 and mother of Ishmael. He says, " For it is writ- 
 ten, that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond- 
 maid, the other by a free-woman. But he who was 
 of the bond-woman, was born after the flesh; but 
 he of the free-woman was by promise. Which 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 59 
 
 things are an allegory: for these are the two cov- 
 enants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gen- 
 dereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar 
 is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusa- 
 lem which now is, [present unbelieving Jews adher- 
 ing to the law of Moses,] and is in bondage with 
 her children. But Jerusalem which is above is 
 free, [the Church,] which is the mother of us all. 
 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest 
 not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: 
 for the desolate hath many more children than she 
 which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as 
 Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as 
 then he that was born after the flesh persecuted 
 him that was born after the spirit, even so it is now. 
 Nevertheless, what saith the Scripture ? Cast out 
 the bond-woman and her son : for the son of the 
 bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the 
 free-woman. So then, brethren, we are not children 
 of the bond-woman, but of the free." 
 
 Abraham's believing seed, through Sarah and 
 Isaac, is still perpetuated and blessed, as was prom- 
 ised in the covenant made with Abraham. But as 
 Hagar and Ishmael were not reckoned with that 
 seed, and were " cast out," and in their rage perse- 
 cuted the true seed, so the covenant made on Sinai 
 with Moses constituted no part of the Abrahamic 
 covenant, and had, like Hagar, been "cast out;" 
 and the children of the law, who continued to ad- 
 here to it, were engaged in persecuting the true 
 seed. Thus are the law o£ Moses and the covenant 
 
60 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 made with. Abraham described as distinct and sepa- 
 rate instruments, differing widely in character. 
 
 2. They differed in design. We have already, at 
 considerable length, examined the design of the 
 Abrahamic covenant. That instrument, as we have 
 shown, was designed to be a permanent constitution 
 for the Church of God. All of its provisions, except- 
 ing a few temporal, conditional, and typical prom- 
 ises, which have ceased to be operative, continue 
 the same through all time. We will now examine 
 the design of the law of Moses. Eev. F. G. Hib- 
 bard, in a recent work on infant baptism, makes the 
 following suggestions: "We are not to suppose that 
 all the laws enumerated and enjoined in the Mosa- 
 ical code took their origin at the date of that code. 
 How many of the same were known and practiced 
 by the patriarchs we can not tell; but that many 
 were no more than republications of more ancient, 
 or even primitive laws, handed clown by tradition, 
 we have the fullest evidence. Thus it was with the 
 Sabbath day, with bloody and unbloody sacrifices, 
 with the distinctions of clean and unclean beasts. " 
 
 Moses evidently compiled, increased, and im- 
 proved the Jewish code and ritual; and his object 
 in so doing, or of the Almighty in doing it through 
 him, is briefly stated by St. Paul — Gal. iii, 24 — 
 ¥ Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring 
 us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. " 
 Commenting on this passage Dr. Clarke says, u The 
 law was our schoolmaster. x O vopos TtcuBwyczyos yj^v 
 ysyovsv sis x^d'tov. The law was our pedagogue unto 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 61 
 
 Christ. The rftuSoycoyoj — pedagogue — is not the 
 schoolmaster, but the servant who had the care of 
 the children, to lead thern to and bring them back 
 from school, and had the care of them out of school 
 hours. Thus, the law did not teach us the living, 
 saving knowledge, but by rites and ceremonies, and 
 especially by its sacrifices, it directed us to Christ, 
 that we might be justified by faith. This is a 
 beautiful metaphor, and highly illustrative of the 
 apostle's doctrine." 
 
 Rom. x, 4 : St. Paul says, " For Christ is the end 
 of the law for righteousness to every one that be- 
 lieveth." On this passage Dr. Clarke remarks, 
 u Where the law ends, Christ begins. The law ends 
 with representative sacrifices; Christ begins with 
 the real offering. . . . Christ as an atoning sacrifice 
 for sin, was the grand object of the whole sacrificial 
 code of Moses." A late eloquent author has said, 
 " Sacrifices were appointed; and that wonderful 
 course of sacrificial offerings kept in operation for 
 so many centuries, was designed to set forth and 
 typify Christ, i the Lamb slain from the foundation 
 of the world/ The seed of Abraham must be 
 preserved distinct, because in his seed all the fam- 
 ilies of the earth were to be blessed ; the Jews must 
 not intermingle with other people, because 'of them, 
 as pertaining to the flesh, Christ must come/ The 
 deliverance of the Hebrew nation from Egyptian 
 bondage was significant of another deliverance by 
 an infinitely -higher deliverer than Moses; and the 
 rock smitten at Horeb, from which gushed out a 
 
62 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 stream sufficient to satiate a thirsty people in a 
 parched land, was significant of Christ; for that 
 rock, St. Paul says, was Christ smitten for us. And 
 then the serpent of brass, which by Divine appoint- 
 ment was upraised on the top of a pole in the wil- 
 derness, that the bitten and dying Israelite might 
 be healed, was significant of Him who, in the full- 
 ness of time, was to be lifted up 'for the healing 
 of the nations/ These, and similar events and cir- 
 cumstances, encouraged the faith and strengthened 
 the hope of the people of God from age to age, till 
 at last all these things ripened into actual events, 
 and the Son of God became incarnate, and lived in 
 the world and suffered death in it. . . . And now, 
 ye harbingers of the cross, ye may retire, for your 
 end is fulfilled; altars, ye need no longer stream 
 with the blood of slain victims, for ' Christ our 
 passover' is actually offered up; and ye stars, that 
 somewhat dimly illuminated the moral hemisphere, 
 under the preceding dispensation, may disappear, 
 for the 'Sun of righteousness ' has burst forth upon 
 our world, and while he is in the world, he is the 
 'light of the world/ And thus we see the mean- 
 ing of St. Paul when he said, 'The law is our 
 schoolmaster to bring us to Christ/ M 
 
 But the law of Moses, with its numerous sacri- 
 fices, was also designed to impress the minds of the 
 Israelites with the purity of the character of God, 
 and of his worship, as well as to teach them the im- 
 portance of personal purity enjoyed by his wor- 
 shipers. 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 63 
 
 A late anonymous author makes the following ap- 
 propriate remarks upon this point: "At the period 
 of the deliverance from Egypt, every nation by 
 which they were surrounded worshiped unholy be- 
 ings. Now, how were the Jews to be extricated 
 from this difficulty, and made to understand and 
 feel the influence of the holy character of God? 
 The Egyptian idolatry in which they had mingled 
 was beastly and lustful; and one of their first acts 
 of disobedience, after their deliverance, shows that 
 their minds were still dark and their propensities 
 corrupt. The golden calf which they desired should 
 be erected for them, was not designed as an act of 
 apostasy from Jehovah, who had delivered them from 
 Egyptian servitude. When the image was made, it 
 was proclaimed to be that God which brought them 
 up out of the land of Egypt; and when the procla- 
 mation of a feast, or idolatrous debauch, was issued 
 by Aaron, it was denominated a feast not to Isis, or 
 Osiris, but a feast to Jehovah ; and as such they held 
 it. Exodus xxxii, 4, 5. But they offered to the holy 
 Jehovah the unholy worship of the idols of Egypt. 
 Thus they manifested their ignorance of the holi- 
 ness of his nature, as well as the corruption of their 
 hearts. . . . The plan to originate the idea [of 
 holiness] must consist of a series of compari- 
 sons. ... In the outset, the animals of Pales- 
 tine were divided, by command of Jehovah, into 
 clean and unclean; in this way a distinction was 
 made, and the one class, in comparison with the 
 other, was deemed to be of a purer and better kind. 
 
64 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 From the class thus distinguished, as more pure 
 than the other, was one selected to offer as a sacrifice. 
 It was not only chosen from clean beasts, but, as an 
 individual, it was to be without spot or blemish. 
 Thus it was, in their eyes, purer than the other 
 class, and purer than other individuals of its own 
 class. This sacrifice the people were not deemed 
 worthy in their own person to offer unto Jehovah ; 
 but it was to be offered by a class of men who were 
 distinguished from their brethren, purified and set 
 apart for the service of the priest's office. Thus 
 the idea of purity originated from two sources ; the 
 purified priest, and the pure animal purified, were 
 united in the offering of the sacrifice. But before 
 the sacrifice could be offered, it was washed with 
 clean water, and the priest had, in some cases, to 
 wash himself, and officiate without his sandals. 
 Thus when one process of comparison after another 
 had attached the idea of superlative purity to the 
 sacrifice, in offering it to Jehovah, in order that the 
 contrast between the purity of God and the highest 
 degrees of earthly purity might be seen, neither 
 priest, people, nor sacrifice was deemed sufficiently 
 pure to come into his presence, but was offered in 
 the court without the holy of holies. In this man- 
 ner, by a process of comparison, the character of 
 God, in point of purity, was placed infinitely above 
 themselves and their sacrifices." (Philosophy of the 
 Plan of Salvation, pp. 71-76.) 
 
 Thus it appears that the design of the ceremonial 
 law of Moses was to teach the Israelites, under that 
 
THE ABRAHAMIG COVENANT. 65 
 
 dark dispensation, the sacrificial character of Christ, 
 the pure and holy character of Jehovah, and the 
 purity of the worship he required; and all for the 
 purpose of elevating, enlightening, and purifying 
 the minds and hearts of the worshipers of the true 
 God. 
 
 3. They differed in durability. The ceremonial 
 law of Moses was abolished by Jesus Christ at his 
 crucifixion, without detriment to the Abrahamic 
 covenant, and was succeeded by the Christian code. 
 
 Mr. Campbell says, that "some eight hundred 
 years after its establishment, Jeremiah foretold that 
 it [the Abrahamic covenant] should be abolished, 
 and that God should make a new covenant." Mr. 
 C. did not tell us where in Jeremiah we could find 
 such a prophecy; but we suppose he must refer to 
 Jeremiah xxxi, 31-33, which reads as follows : "Be- 
 hold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make 
 a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with 
 the house of Judah; not according to the covenant 
 that I made with their fathers, in the day xhat I 
 took them by the hand to bring them out of the 
 land of Egypt, (which my covenant they brake,) 
 although I was an husband unto them, saith the 
 Lord. But this shall be the covenant that I will 
 make with the house of Israel : After those days, 
 saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward 
 parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their 
 God, and they shall be my people." St. Paul quotes 
 and explains the above passage as follows — Heb. viii, 
 5-10 — "Moses was admonished of God when he 
 5 
 
66 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 was about to make the tabernacle; for see, saith he, 
 that thou make all things according to the pattern 
 shown to thee in the mount. But now hath he ob- 
 tained a more excellent ministry, by how much also 
 he is a mediator of a better covenant, which was 
 established on better promises. For if that first 
 covenant had been faultless, then should no place 
 have been sought for a second. For finding fault 
 with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith 
 the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with 
 the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah; 
 not according to the covenant that I made with 
 their fathers, in the day when I took them by the 
 hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt. . . . 
 For this is the covenant that I will make with the 
 house of Israel, after those days, saith the Lord; I 
 will put my laws in their mind, and write them in 
 their hearts ; and I will be to them a God, and they 
 shall be to me a people." Our object in quoting 
 both Jeremiah and St. Paul at length is, that the 
 reader might see without difficulty what covenants 
 are referred to by these writers, and with whom 
 both were made. 
 
 1. The covenant called the first, is called so only 
 because it was made before the one called the sec- 
 ond, and not because of its being the first ever made. 
 Jeremiah says it was the covenant made with the 
 " house of Israel, and with the house of Judah," 
 and not with Abraham their father ; and that it was 
 made when the Lord " took them by the hand to 
 bring them out of the land of Egypt," which was 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 67 
 
 "four hundred and thirty years after " the covenant 
 was made with Abraham. St. Paul is still more 
 precise as to the date of this first covenant. He 
 says it was made when Moses was in the mount, 
 receiving directions for the building of the taber- 
 nacle. And in the first verse of the ninth chapter 
 he says, that this "first covenant had also ordinan- 
 ces of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary." 
 There can be no doubt, I think, but that both Jer- 
 emiah and St. Paul had reference to the ceremonial 
 law of Moses contained in the books of Exodus and 
 Leviticus, as the first covenant, which was to be 
 succeeded by a better one. 
 
 2. The new covenant, which all admit to be the 
 Christian code, in which is found a better and more 
 spiritual, and less burdensome directory of religious 
 worship, and which did succeed this first covenant 
 by Divine appointment, was also made "with the 
 house of Israel, and with the house of Judah" — a 
 very striking and forcible argument in favor of the 
 continuance of the Church of the patriarchs in an 
 improved form down through the Christian dispen- 
 sation. Thus the reader must see, that not one par- 
 ticle of testimony is furnished in the above proph- 
 ecy of Jeremiah in favor of Mr. Campbell's theory 
 that the covenant of Abraham should be abolished; 
 but the evidence, so far as it reaches the Abrahamic 
 covenant, is directly to the contrary. It was the 
 covenant made with Moses while on the mount that 
 was abolished, and succeeded by a second, a new, and 
 a better covenant. 
 
68 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 The time when it was abolished, as well as the 
 manner, are thus described by St. Paul — Eph. ii, 
 15 — "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, 
 even the law of commandments contained in ordi- 
 nances;" Col. ii, 14, "Blotting out the handwriting 
 of ordinances that was against us, which was con- 
 trary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to 
 the cross." And that the abolition of the law did 
 not disannul the Abrahamic covenant, is positively 
 asserted by the same apostle — Gral. iii, 17 — "And 
 this I say, that the covenant that was confirmed be- 
 fore of Grod in Christ, the law, which was four hun- 
 dred and thirty years after, can not disannul, that it 
 should make the promise of none effect." Thus we 
 have the law abolished, and a new Christian code 
 established in its stead, but the covenant left unaf- 
 fected by the change, and all its gracious and spirit- 
 ual promises still secure to Abraham's numerous 
 spiritual seed, composed of all that are Christ's. 
 And here we will conclude this section, having 
 proven, I think, in this and preceding sections, that 
 the covenant made with Abraham was a spiritual 
 covenant, containing the permanent constitution of 
 the Church of God in all subsequent ages. 
 
THE ABKAHAMIC COVENANT. 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST WAS ORGANIZED IN THE FAMILY OF 
 
 ABRAHAM, AND FOUNDED UPON THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT 
 
 HAS BEEN PERPETUATED, AND WELL BE FOREVER, AND 
 CONSTITUTES THE TRUE " SEED OF ABRAHAM." 
 
 The word ecclesia, commonly translated Church 
 in the New Testament, is in the Old translated con- 
 gregation, or assembly. Dr. Clarke says, "The word 
 ekklesia simply means an assembly, or congregation, 
 the nature of which is to be understood from connect- 
 ing circumstances ; for the word ekklesia, as well as 
 the terms congregation and assembly, may be applied 
 to any concourse of people, good or bad, gathered 
 together for lawful or unlawful purposes; hence it 
 is used — Acts xix, 32 — for the mob or confused 
 rabble gathered together against Paul. . . . The 
 Greek word sxx%yj6ia seems to be derived from 
 exxoXsco, to call out of, or from; that is, an assem- 
 bly gathered out of a multitude, and must have 
 some other word joined to it to determine its nature; 
 namely, The Church of God} the congregation col- 
 lected by God, and devoted to his service." (See 
 Clarke's comments on Matthew xvi, concluding re- 
 marks.) 
 
 We have no obj ection to the above rule of determ- 
 ining the meaning of the term ekklesia, providing 
 it is applied to both Testaments ; for we are unwill- 
 ing to give any signification to this term in the New 
 Testament that it will not bear with equal propriety 
 
70 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 in the Old. Instance — 1 Cor. i, 2 — "Unto the 
 Church of God which is at Corinth, to them that 
 are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints/' 
 etc. This was the Church of God, composed of 
 persons " sanctified in Christ Jesus/' and u called to 
 be saints. " He, therefore, evidently uses the term 
 ekklesia in its primary and spiritual signification. 
 Well, this is all we ask in the Old Testament foi 
 this term. We admit that ekklesia is there some- 
 times used to describe Israel only as a civil or polit- 
 ical association; for in Israel the civil and eccle- 
 siastical governments were united. Israel was a 
 theocracy; all of her laws, whether civil or relig- 
 ious, came from God; and in general, the same 
 officers were charged with the administration of 
 both; and the congregation of Israel was sometimes 
 convened for political, and sometimes for religious 
 purposes, and sometimes both: hence, it is not 
 strange that the terms congregation or Church 
 should sometimes be applied to Israel in its civil or 
 political capacity. But what we intend here to 
 prove is this, that these terms were so applied to 
 the Israelites, as to imply that they constituted, in 
 the highest spiritual sense of the term, the Church 
 of Jesus Christ. 
 
 David says — Psalm xxii, 22 — U I will declare thy 
 name unto my brethren : in the midst of the con- 
 gregation [Church] will I praise thee." To show 
 that we have rendered the above passage right, we 
 will refer to St. Paul, who has quoted it in the 
 same way — Heb. ii ; 12 — " Saying, I will declare thy 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 71 
 
 name unto my brethren : in the midst of the Church 
 will I sing praise unto thee." And to whom the 
 Psalmist referred by the term Church will be seen 
 in the verse immediately following : "Ye that fear 
 the Lord ; praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glo- 
 rify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel." 
 The pious among the "seed of Israel," constitute 
 the Church, in the midst of which the devout 
 Psalmist promised to "praise" the Lord. And, 
 again, in the twenty-fifth verse, "My praise shall be 
 of thee in the great congregation : [or Church :] I 
 will pay my vows before them that fear him." Now, 
 if we are to determine the signification of the term 
 Church by the connection in which it is used, cer- 
 tainly David uses it in its highest spiritual sense ; 
 for the persons to whom he applied it were his 
 "brethren," the "seed of Israel," who "feared the 
 Lord;" and he uses it too in connection with the 
 highest religious devotions, which were to occur in 
 the Church. Why, then, shall we not understand 
 this term when used by David, just as we do when 
 St. Paul uses it in relation to the "sanctified in 
 Christ Jesus," " called to be saints," etc., at 
 Corinth ? 
 
 But let us examine a few more places, where 
 ekklesia is rendered congregation in the Old Testa- 
 ment. Joshua viii, 34, 35: "And afterward he 
 read all the words of the law, the blessings and the 
 cursings, according to all that is written in the book 
 of the law. There was not a word of all that 
 Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before 
 
72 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 all the congregation of Israel;" 2 Ghron. xxix, 28, 
 "And all the congregation worshiped, and the sing- 
 ers sang, and the trumpeters sounded : and all this 
 continued until the burnt-offering was finished." 
 In both of the above instances, which are only pro- 
 duced as examples out of a vast number that might 
 be adduced, the congregation is spoken of only in 
 its religious character, engaged most devoutly in 
 the worship of the great Jehovah according to his 
 word. 
 
 Mr. Cruden says that u Church signifies a relig- 
 ious assembly, selected and called out of the world 
 by the doctrine of the Gospel, to worship the true 
 God in Christ according to his word." Now, if Mr. 
 Cruden gives us the true primary meaning of the 
 word Churchy which I think no person will pretend 
 to deny, whatever secondary or accommodated mean- 
 ing he may attach to it, then certainly in the 
 above Scriptures we have the Church of God de- 
 scribed in the clearest possible manner; for there 
 we have an u assembly selected and called out of the 
 [Gentile] world, by the doctrines of the Gospel," 
 as preached to Abraham — Gal. iii, 8 — and " called 
 out to worship the true God in Christ." But, in 
 order to clear away every doubt that may linger upon 
 this subject, we will examine each point by itself in 
 detail. 
 
 1. The constitution of the Church was made, the 
 Church organized, built up, protected, and blessed 
 by Jesus Christ, the great founder and builder of 
 the Church of God upon the earthy which St. Ste- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. <3 
 
 plien denominates u the Church in the wilderness/' 
 Acts vii, 25. We have elsewhere proven ; and we 
 need not here repeat the evidence, that it was "God 
 in Christ " that formed and entered into the cove- 
 nant with Abraham concerning his seed, which con- 
 stituted " the Church in the wilderness. " For 
 further information in relation to what Christ did 
 for that " Church in the wilderness, see Heb. iii, 
 1-6 : " Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the 
 heavenly calling, consider the apostle and high- 
 priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; who was 
 faithful to him that appointed him, as also Mo- 
 ses was faithful in all his house. For this man 
 [Christ] was counted worthy of more glory than 
 Moses, inasmuch as he who hath buiided the house, 
 hath more honor than the house. [Christ c buiided 
 the house/ which constituted 'the Church in the 
 wilderness/] For every house is buiided by some 
 man; but he that built all things is God. And 
 Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a serv- 
 ant, for a testimony of those things which were to 
 be spoken after; but Christ as a son over his own 
 house : [that house which Christ built, and consti- 
 tuted 'the Church in the wilderness:,] whose house 
 are we, [Hebrews converted to Christ,] if we hold 
 fast the confidence, and the rejoicing of the hope 
 firm unto the end." The plain meaning of the 
 apostle Paul, taken in connection with the declara- 
 tion of St. Stephen, is, that Christ built "the 
 Church in the wilderness," in which Moses acted as 
 a faithful servant, and that Christ's relation to that 
 
74 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Church, was more honorable and glorious, because 
 he built it, and therefore it was his own Church. 
 
 Again: St. Paul, speaking of Moses leaving the 
 court of Pharaoh, says — Heb. xi, 26 — -"He es- 
 teemed the reproach of Christ greater riches than 
 the treasures of Egypt." Now, in what way did 
 Moses show his esteem for the reproach of Christ in 
 Egypt ? The answer is exceedingly plain and easy 
 after what the apostle had before written. Christ's 
 people, or Church, was then in Egypt, suffering 
 reproach for Christ's sake. And whatever Christ's 
 people suffer for his sake, he regards as his own suf- 
 fering. " Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the 
 least of these ye have done it unto me/' is as true 
 when they are reproached by their enemies, as when 
 they are "administered" unto by friends. And 
 Moses chose to unite himself with, and become a 
 sharer of their reproachful sufferings, rather than 
 to enjoy all the riches of Pharaoh. Hence, he suf- 
 fered "the reproach of Christ." The same apostle, 
 speaking of the passage of the children of Israel 
 through the Red Sea, and through the wilderness, 
 says — 1 Cor. x, 4 — u For they drank of that rock that 
 followed them; and that rock was Christ." So it ap- 
 pears that Christ "followed" his people through the 
 sea and the wilderness, furnishing them with that 
 "spiritual drink" which "endureth unto everlast- 
 ing life," and is figuratively called a rock, because 
 it was from a literal rock, smitten by Moses, that 
 they received water to drink. 
 
 Again: he says — in the ninth verse — "Neither 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 75 
 
 let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted/' 
 etc. Now, we have proven that the Israelites con- 
 stituted " Christ's own house;" that the " reproach " 
 suffered by this people, while in Egypt, was u the 
 reproach of Christ," in such a sense as to imply 
 that they were his people ; that he followed the Is- 
 raelites through the Bed Sea and through the wil- 
 derness, furnishing them with that "spiritual wa- 
 ter" which "endureth unto eternal life;" and the 
 compact thus organized, "built up," blessed, and 
 protected by Christ, is called the "Church in the 
 wilderness," the assembly, or " congregation of the 
 Lord," etc. From all this we gather this simple 
 fact; namely, The seed of Abraham constituted the 
 true Church of Jesus Christ. 
 
 2. Christ called Abraham and his seed out from 
 among the Gentiles, and placed them in the land of 
 Canaan for religious purposes. Heb. xi, 8-10 : "By 
 faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a 
 place which he should after receive for an inherit- 
 ance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither 
 he went. By faith he sojourned in the land of 
 promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in taber- 
 nacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of 
 the same promise J for he looked for a city which 
 hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God." 
 Every sentence in this passage goes to show the en- 
 tirely-religious character of the object of Abra- 
 ham's pursuit, in migrating to the land of Canaan. 
 Moses says, "And the Lord said unto me, Arise, 
 take thy journey before the people, that they may 
 
76 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 go in and possess the land, which I sware unto their 
 fathers to give unto them. And now, Israel, what 
 doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear 
 the Lord thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to 
 love him, and to love the Lord thy God with all thy 
 heart, and with all thy soul?" Deut. x, 11, 12; " Ye 
 are the children of the Lord your God; ye shall not 
 cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your 
 eyes for the dead. For thou art a holy people unto 
 the Lord thy God, and the Lord hath chosen thee 
 to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the 
 nations that are upon the earth," Deut. xiv, 1, 2; 
 "For thou art a holy people unto the Lord thy God; 
 the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special 
 people unto himself, above all people that are upon 
 the face of the earth. The Lord did not set his 
 love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more 
 in number than any people ; for ye were the fewest 
 of all people; but because the Lord loved you, and 
 because he would keep the oath which he had sworn 
 unto your fathers, hath the Lord brought you out 
 with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the 
 house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh, 
 king of Egypt. . . . Wherefore it shall come to 
 pass, if ye hearken to these judgments, and keep 
 and do them, that the Lord thy God shall keep unto 
 thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware 
 unto thy fathers," Deut. vii, 6-12. The above is 
 but a brief specimen of what might be brought to 
 establish this point. 
 
 3. The Lord Jesus Christ revealed his righteous 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 77 
 
 and holy will to this people; in which is found the 
 best and most perfect condensed system of morals 
 the world has ever contained, and is the very system 
 which Christ fifteen hundred years after reaffirmed 
 to be the system by which his Church should con- 
 tinue to be governed, when he said — Matt, v, 17, 
 18 — " Think not that I am come to destroy the law 
 or the prophets \ I am not come to destroy, but to 
 fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and 
 earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass 
 from the law till all be fulfilled." The law must be 
 the moral law of Moses — Exod. xx — which contains 
 ten commandments, written by the finger of God 
 upon "two tables of stone." The first four are sup- 
 posed to have been upon the first stone, and were de- 
 signed to teach man his duty to his God; and the 
 last six, upon the second stone, to teach to man 
 his duty to man. These ten commandments the 
 holy prophets ramify and apply to all the various 
 actions of human life; so that men might under- 
 stand at all times what actions are pleasing and what 
 displeasing to God. 
 
 The Savior indorses and re-establishes both the 
 law and the expositions of it by the prophets. And 
 thus, while the covenant contains a permanent con- 
 stitution for the Church, the moral law of Moses 
 furnishes an equally-permanent code of morals. 
 
 Christ not only re-established the moral law, but 
 he explained its spiritual import — Matt, xxii, 37- 
 40— "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy 
 heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 
 
78 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 This is the first great commandment/' contained on 
 the first table of stone. "And the second is like 
 unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 
 On these two commandments hang all the law and 
 the prophets. " 
 
 4. The Lord Jesus revealed to the holy proph- 
 ets, from Moses to Malachi, the principal doctrinal 
 truths of his Gospel, a belief of which was essen- 
 tial to salvation. And these doctrines were further 
 explained by Christ and his apostles in the New 
 Testament. 
 
 So far, then, as doctrinal truth is concerned, the 
 Church of God in the old dispensation was in pos- 
 session of all the essential elements; so much so 
 that many of them possessed an evangelical faith, 
 which would have been creditable to a brighter dis- 
 pensation. 
 
 5. The Lord Jesus furnished for his Church in 
 the old dispensation a directory for religious worship, 
 appropriate to the dispensation for which it was de- 
 signed, and arranged all the paraphernalia necessary 
 for a typical worship. A tabernacle was erected 
 according to a plan of his own showing in the mount. 
 A class of ministering priests were consecrated for 
 the services of the tabernacle, and to conduct divine 
 worship. Every animal to be offered in sacrifice, as 
 well as the mode of offering them, was pointed out. 
 Religious ordinances, such as the paschal supper, 
 etc., were instituted and made obligatory upon the 
 entire membership of his Church. 
 
 And finally, the same Lord Jesus, as supreme 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 79 
 
 legislator for the Church, abolished the law contain- 
 ing all these ordinances and institutions, and en- 
 acted other laws containing other ordinances and 
 institutions, better adapted to the worship of the 
 same Deity through the same mediator, to be ob- 
 served by the same Church down through the dis- 
 pensation of the Gospel to the end of the world. 
 
 Now, let the reader take all these facts and com- 
 bine them together, and see if they do not prove 
 that the true Church of Jesus Christ was organ- 
 ized in the family of Abraham, and made to con- 
 sist of Abraham's seed, and placed permanently 
 upon the Abrahamic covenant as the charter of its 
 blessings and privileges. 
 
 SECTION VI. 
 
 THE PERPETUITY OF THE CHURCH ORGANIZED IN" THE FAMILY OF 
 ABRAHAM, AS FORETOLD BY THE HOLY PROPHETS. 
 
 We will now search among the prophets, and see 
 what opinion prevailed among these inspired men, 
 in relation to the Church of God to which they be- 
 longed, and which had then existed since the days 
 of Abraham. 
 
 Did they predict its overthrow, or its perpetuation 
 and prosperity, by the coming of Messiah ? They 
 did, to be sure, predict the overthrow of the Jewish 
 nation, polity, and city, in consequence of their pre- 
 vailing wickedness and unbelief. But how was this 
 
80 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 all to effect the covenant and Church of the patri- 
 archs and prophets? We will commence with 
 Moses — Deut. xxxiii, 29 — " Happy art thou, Is- 
 rael. Who is like unto thee, people saved of the 
 Lord, the shield of thy help, and who is the sword 
 of thy excellency! And thine enemies shall be 
 found liars unto thee, and thou shalt tread upon 
 their high places." We will not afflict the feelings 
 of the modern enemies of Israel, by an application 
 of the above language to them. Let it only be ap- 
 plied to the hostile Gentile nations, ancient and mod- 
 ern, which have sought the overthrow of Israel, and 
 you have a prophecy as truthful and immutable as 
 God, securing victory and salvation to Israel through 
 all succeeding time. 
 
 Isaiah — xlix, 13-17 — says : " Sing, heavens, and 
 be joyful, earth, and break forth into singing, 
 mountains, for the Lord hath comforted his people, 
 and will have mercy upon his afflicted. But Zion 
 said, The Lord hath forsaken me. Can a woman 
 forget her sucking child, that she should not have 
 compassion on the son of her womb? Yea, they 
 may forget, yet will not I forget thee. Behold, I 
 have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; 
 thy walls are continually before me. Thy children 
 shall make haste; thy destroyers, and they that 
 made thee waste, shall go forth of thee." 
 
 The prophet does not speak, in the above lan- 
 guage, of individuals, or it would go far to prove 
 unconditional and personal election; a doctrine in 
 proof of which it is often improperly quoted. It is 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 81 
 
 "Zion" that speaks of being "forsaken," and to 
 whom the Lord replies, in language pledging to her, 
 in her corporate capacity, unchanging love, protec- 
 tion, and prosperity; only, however, securing per- 
 sonally the blessings promised to such as maintained 
 their spiritual connection with her. And for this 
 fidelity on the part of the Lord, the " heavens" and 
 the "earth" are called upon to "sing" and be 
 "joyful." 
 
 Again : Isaiah xliii, 1-7, " But now thus said the 
 Lord that created thee, Jacob, and he that formed 
 thee, Israel, Fear not : for I have redeemed thee, 
 I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine. 
 When thou passest through the waters, I will be 
 with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not 
 overflow thee : when thou walkest through the fire, 
 thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame 
 kindle upon thee. For I am the Lord thy God, the 
 Holy One of Israel, thy Savior : I gave Egypt for 
 thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. Since 
 thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been hon- 
 orable, and I have loved thee : therefore will I give 
 men for thee, and people for thy life. Fear not; 
 for I am with thee : I will bring thy seed from the 
 east, and gather thee from the west : I will say to 
 the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not 
 back : bring my sons from afar, and my daughters 
 from the ends of the earth; even every one that is 
 called by my name : for I have created him for my 
 glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him." 
 Now, all this is spoken of "Jacob," or of "Israel;" 
 6 
 
82 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 evidently referring to the "seed" of Israel, and 
 that, too, a spiritual seed, composed of such as be- 
 lieved in and worshiped the God of Israel, whether 
 Jew or Gentiles, with perhaps their infant offspring. 
 They were such as the Lord had "redeemed," and 
 "called," and said, "Thou art mine/' And this 
 spiritual Israel God promises to preserve, though 
 they should pass through "waters," even "through 
 the rivers," and "through the fire" — figures indi- 
 cating the severest afflictions. And her numbers 
 were to be increased by bringing her "seed" from 
 the "east," "west," "north," and "south," and by 
 bringing "sons from far," and "daughters from the 
 ends of the earth" — figures of speech indicating 
 the most extensive ingathering of Gentiles, even 
 those of the greatest distance from the land of 
 Judah. Again: see Isaiah xliv, 1-5, "Yet now 
 hear, Jacob, my servant; and Israel, whom I 
 have chosen : thus saith the Lord that made thee, 
 and formed thee from the womb, which will help 
 thee; Fear not, Jacob, my servant; and thou, 
 Jeshurun, whom I have chosen. For I will pour 
 water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the 
 dry ground : I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, 
 and my blessing upon thine offspring: and they 
 shall spring up as among the grass, as willows by 
 the water-courses. One shall say, I am the Lord's; 
 and another shall call himself by the name of 
 Jacob; and another shall subscribe with his hand 
 unto the Lord, and surname himself by the name 
 of Israel:" 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 83 
 
 Here the facts for which we contend are as plain 
 as language can make them. It is the "seed" of 
 " Jacob" on which the Spirit of heaven shall be 
 "poured/' and the "offspring" of "Israel" that 
 shall be "blessed." And this seed shall be multi- 
 plied, not by natural births, but by pouring out his 
 Spirit like "floods upon the ground/' and causing 
 the seed of Jacob to " spring up as willows among 
 the water-courses." 
 
 Nor will it answer to say, in reply, that the proph- 
 ets also predicted severe punishments upon Jacob, 
 and, indeed, the entire overthrow of Israel. Such 
 punishments were only threatened upon the de- 
 scendants of Israel, when, by sin, they should forfeit 
 the Divine blessing and cease to constitute the spir- 
 itual seed of Israel. But in the midst of all such 
 threatened punishments upon the rebellious in 
 Israel, God promised protection and prosperity to 
 the spiritual seed of Jacob, even if Gentiles had to 
 constitute that seed. An instance of this is found 
 in Isaiah xlix, 18-23, "Lift up thine eyes round 
 about, and behold : all these gather themselves 
 together, and come to thee. As I live, saith the 
 Lord, thou shalt surely clothe thee with them all, 
 as with an ornament, and bind them on thee, as a 
 bride doeth. For thy waste and thy desolate places, 
 and the land of thy destruction, [Israel is to con- 
 tinue to exist, and to receive multitudes from afar, 
 after her 'places' had become 'desolate/ and her 
 'land' was destroyed by the 'loss' of her natural 
 'children/] shall even now be too narrow by reason 
 
84 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 of the inhabitants, and they that swallowed thee up 
 shall be far away. The children which thou shalt 
 have, after thou hast lost the other, shall say again 
 in thine ears, The place is too strait for me : give 
 place to me that I may dwell. Then shalt thou say 
 in thy heart, Who hath begotten me these, seeing I 
 have lost my children; and am desolate, a captive, 
 and removing to and fro ? and who hath brought up 
 these? Behold I was left alone; these, where had 
 they been ? ' Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I 
 will lift up my hand to the Gentiles, and set up my 
 standard to the people : and they shall bring thy 
 sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be car- 
 ried upon their shoulders. And kings shall be thy 
 nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing moth- 
 ers : they shall bow down to thee with their face 
 toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; 
 and thou shalt know that I am the Lord : for they 
 shall not be ashamed that wait for me." 
 
 It was to the Gentiles the Lord was to look to 
 replenish the seed of Israel, after the loss of her 
 national children. For further light upon this sub- 
 ject we turn next to Isaiah li, 2-6: "Look unto 
 Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare 
 you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and 
 increased him. For the Lord shall comfort Zion : 
 he will comfort all her waste places; and he will 
 make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like 
 the garden of the Lord; joy and gladness shall be 
 found therein, thanksgiving, and the voice of mel- 
 ody. Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 85 
 
 unto me, my nation : for a law shall proceed from 
 me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light 
 of the people. My righteousness is near; my sal- 
 vation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the 
 people; the isles shall wait upon nie, and on mine 
 arms shall they trust. Lift up your eyes to the 
 heavens, and look upon the earth beneath : for the 
 heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth 
 shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell 
 therein shall die in like manner : but my salvation 
 shall be forever, and my righteousness shall not be 
 abolished." 
 
 Yery similar to the above is the following — Isaiah 
 lii, 9, 10 — "Break forth into joy, sing together, ye 
 waste places of Jerusalem : for the Lord hath com- 
 forted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem. 
 The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes 
 of all the nations: and all the ends of the earth 
 shall see the salvation of our God." 
 
 Perhaps the reader may say that these prophecies 
 all relate to the commencement of the dispensation 
 of the Gospel, to the great and glorious revivals of 
 religion which should then take place, and to the 
 general ingathering of both Jews and Gentiles from 
 all parts of the earth to the Church of Christ, as 
 the result of those revivals. Truly, but that Church 
 of Christ was the Zion of the prophet's day, com- 
 posed of the seed of Jacob, and of the offspring of 
 Israel, with Abraham and Sarah at its head; and 
 this multiplication of members to the Church of 
 Christ is the fulfillment of the promise to the patri- 
 
86 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 arelis, "Multiplying, I will multiply thee" We will 
 next turn to Isaiah — liv, 1-10 — "Sing, barren, 
 thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, 
 and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child ; 
 for more are the children of the desolate than the 
 children of the married wife, saith the Lord." Be- 
 fore quoting farther from the prophet, let me here 
 introduce a note from Dr. Clarke on the above. He 
 says, " The Church of God under the Old Testament, 
 confined within the narrow bounds of the Jewish 
 nation, and still more so in respect of the very small 
 number of true believers, and which sometimes 
 seemed to be deserted of God her husband, is the 
 barren woman that did not hear, and was desolate. 
 She is exhorted to rejoice, and to express her joy in 
 the strongest manner, on the reconciliation of her 
 husband — see verse 6 — and on the accession of the 
 Gentiles to her family. The converted Gentiles are 
 all along considered \>y the prophet as a new acces- 
 sion of adopted children, admitted into the original 
 Church of God, and united with it." The prophet 
 continues to say, " Enlarge the place of thy tent, 
 and let them stretch forth the curtain of thy 
 habitations; spare not, lengthen thy cords, and 
 strengthen thy stakes ; for thou shalt break forth on 
 the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall 
 inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities 
 to be inhabited. Fear not; for thou shalt not be 
 ashamed : neither be thou confounded ; for thou 
 shalt not be put to shame : for thou shalt forget the 
 shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 87 
 
 reproach of thy widowhood any more. For thy 
 Maker is thy husband; the Lord of hosts is his 
 name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; 
 the God of the whole earth shall he be called. For 
 the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and 
 grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou 
 wast refused, saith thy God. For a small moment 
 have I forsaken thee ; but with great mercies will I 
 gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from 
 thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness 
 will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Re- 
 deemer. For this is as the waters of Noah unto 
 me : for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah 
 should no more go over the earth ; so have I sworn 
 that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke 
 thee. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills 
 be removed ; but my kindness shall not depart from 
 thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be 
 removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee." 
 It would be impossible, in my judgment, to em- 
 ploy language that would more perfectly and uncon- 
 ditionally secure the perpetuity of the Church of 
 the Old Testament till the end of time; for, though 
 "the mountains shall depart, and the hills be re- 
 moved, my kindness shall not depart from thee, 
 neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed." 
 The same prophet says — Isaiah lx, 1-5 — " Arise, 
 shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the 
 Lord is risen upon thee. For behold, the darkness 
 shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the peo- 
 ple; but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his 
 
95 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 glory shall be seen upon thee. And the Gentiles 
 shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness 
 of thy rising. Lift up thine eyes round about, and 
 see : all they gather themselves together, they come 
 to thee; thy sons shall come from far, and thy 
 daughters shall be nursed at thy side. Then thou 
 shalt see, and flow together, and thy heart shall fear, 
 and be enlarged; because the abundance of the sea 
 shall be converted unto thee, the forces of the Gen- 
 tiles shall come unto thee." When that prophecy 
 is fulfilled, the Church, formed in Abraham's tent, 
 on the plains of Mamre, will be in its millennial 
 glory. When "the abundance of the sea," and the 
 "forces of the Gentiles," are all converted and 
 brought unto this Church, then truly the seed of 
 Abraham will be equal in number to the stars that 
 bespangle the blue vault of heaven. The prophet 
 continues: "And the sons of strangers shall build 
 up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto 
 thee ; for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favor 
 have I had mercy on thee. Therefore thy gates 
 shall be open continually; they shall not be shut 
 day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the 
 forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be 
 brought. For the nation and kingdom that will not 
 serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be 
 utterly wasted." Isaiah Ix, 10-12. 
 
 I can never read the above passage without feel- 
 ing thankful that I am not an anti-pedobaptist, and 
 have never refused to serve the Church of the patri- 
 arch to the best of my ability. But again : " The 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 89 
 
 glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir-tree, 
 the pine-tree, and the box together, to beautify the 
 place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place 
 of my feet glorious. The sons also of those that 
 afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee : and all 
 they that despised thee shall bow themselves down 
 at the soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee the 
 city of the Lord, the Zion of the Holy One of Is- 
 rael." Isaiah lx, 13, 14. A very different name 
 is usually given to that Church by anti-pedobaptists. 
 He continues: " Whereas thou hast been forsaken 
 and hated, so that no man went through thee, I will 
 make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many gen- 
 erations." Isaiah lx, 15. "An eternal excellency 
 I will make thee." To that Church let me be at- 
 tached. In the twenty-second verse he says, "A 
 little one shall become a thousand, and a small one 
 a strong nation : I the Lord will hasten it in his 
 time." 
 
 Lest there should be a remaining doubt in the 
 mind of the reader, whether these sublime predic- 
 tions related to the Church in existence before our 
 Savior came in the flesh, I will here introduce the 
 last verses of the preceding chapter — Isaiah lix, 20, 
 21 — "And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and 
 unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, 
 saith the Lord. As for me, this is my cove- 
 nant with them, saith the Lord," etc. "The Re- 
 deemer shall come to Zion" He shall not come to a 
 Churchless world; he shall come to the Zion he had 
 himself created; "unto them that turn from trans- 
 
90 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 gression in Jacob /' and in doing so he shall con- 
 form to his own covenant, which promised the Mes- 
 siah should come from the "seed of Abraham/' 
 of which this Zion was principally constituted. 
 
 And this Zion, to which the Redeemer shall come, 
 is the " city of the Lord, the Zion of the Holy One 
 of Israel/' that was commanded to " arise and 
 shine; for her light had come, and the glory of the 
 Lord had risen upon her. And to whose 'light' 
 the 'Gentiles shall come/ and 'kings to the bright- 
 ness of her rising/ " And this same Zion was to 
 be made an "eternal excellency" the "joy of many 
 generations" And this is the "little one" which 
 "shall become a thousand/' and the "small one/' 
 which shall be a "strong nation/' 
 
 The following will show the opinion of another 
 eminent prophet, in relation to the perpetuation 
 and prosperity of the Zion of the Old Testament, 
 under the superior blessings promised in the new 
 dispensation. Jeremiah iii, 14-18 : "Turn, back- 
 sliding children, saith the Lord; for I am married 
 unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and 
 two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion : and 
 I will give you pastors according to my heart, which 
 shall feed you with knowledge and understanding. 
 And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied 
 and increased in the land, in those days, saith the 
 Lord, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant 
 of the Lord : [the dispensation to which it belonged 
 being ended :] neither shall it come to mind : neither 
 shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 91 
 
 neither shall that be done any more. At that time 
 they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the Lord; 
 and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the 
 name of the Lord, to Jerusalem : neither shall they 
 walk any more after the imagination of their evil 
 heart. In those days the house of Judah shall 
 walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come 
 together out of the land of the north to the land 
 that I have given for an inheritance unto your fa- 
 thers." I am aware that this prophecy is applied 
 by some commentators to the return of the Israelites 
 from Babylon. But when they then returned to 
 Jerusalem, they rebuilt the temple, and reinstated 
 the covenant which accompanied the ark, and revived 
 its worship and ordinances. While in this return, 
 the prophet assures us that " they shall say no more, 
 The ark of the covenant of the Lord : neither shall 
 it come to mind: neither shall they visit it; neither 
 shall that be done any more;" language indicating 
 the entire rejection of the law of Moses as their 
 religious directory. 
 
 After the closest attention we have been able to 
 give to the subject, our opinion is, that God has 
 promised a second return of the children of Israel, 
 of which their return from Babylon was a type; the 
 first being literal, but the second spiritual. And 
 this second return of the Jews is to be produced by 
 their conversion to Christ, which, however, will not 
 take place till after the Gentiles shall generally 
 have received the Gospel. And when so converted, 
 they are to be brought into the same fold to which 
 
92 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 their fathers belonged, and which will still exist 
 and be open for their reception; and the same 
 covenant that was made with their father Abraham, 
 with all its spiritual provisions fully developed, will 
 still embrace them. This is not only the meaning 
 of Jeremiah in the passage quoted, but is also the 
 doctrine taught by Isaiah — xi, 10-12 — "And in 
 that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall 
 stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the 
 Gentiles seek; and his rest shall be glorious. And 
 it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall 
 set his hand again the second time to recover the 
 remnant of his people, which shall be left, from 
 Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and 
 from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and 
 from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And 
 he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall 
 assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together 
 the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the 
 earth P St. Paul, speaking of the same subject, 
 says — Horn, xi, 25-27 — "For I would not, brethren, 
 that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, (lest ye 
 should be wise in your own conceits,) that blindness 
 in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of 
 the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be 
 saved; as it is written, There shall come out of Zion 
 the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from 
 Jacob; for this is my covenant unto them, when I 
 shall take away their sins." 
 
 Thus it appears that the same spiritual compact 
 that was organized in the house and family of Abra- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 93 
 
 ham, acting under the Abrahaniic covenant as its 
 charter, continues to exist at the present day; and 
 into it the Gentiles are being brought from all quar- 
 ters of the globe ; and into which the present out- 
 casts of Israel are to be brought when converted to 
 Christ by his Gospel; proving, as clear as language 
 can make it, the perpetuity of the Church of the 
 patriarchs. 
 
 SECTION VII. 
 
 WHAT CHRIST, AT HIS COMING, WAS TO DO TO THE CHURCH OF THE 
 PATRIARCHS AND PROPHETS, WHICH HIMSELF HAD OR- 
 GANIZED IN THE FAMILY OF ABRAHAM. 
 
 John the Baptist, who was the forerunner, and 
 proclaimed to the Jews the nature of Christ's mis- 
 sion, said — Matt, iii, 9-12 — " And think not to say 
 within yourselves, "We have Abraham to our father; 
 for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones 
 to raise up children unto Abraham. And now 
 also the ax is laid unto the root of the trees; 
 therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good 
 fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. . . . 
 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly 
 purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the gar- 
 ner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquench- 
 able fire." Now, these wicked Jews supposed that, 
 being Abraham's natural seed, they were by that 
 very relation entitled to all the blessings of the 
 
94 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Abrahamic covenant/ and privileges of the Church 
 founded upon it. They had, in fact, embraced the 
 very doctrine "that the blessings promised to Abra- 
 ham and his natural seed throughout all their gen- 
 erations/' whether temporal or spiritual, were theirs, 
 "without any regard to their personal character, 
 conduct, or faith." But John, it seems, duly ap- 
 prised them that God was not dependent upon them 
 to fulfill his promise to Abraham; that he was 
 "able of these stones [a term they usually applied 
 reproachfully to the Gentiles] to raise up children 
 unto Abraham." He also admonishes them that 
 their connection with the Church of Christ must 
 depend wholly upon their faith and piety, and not 
 upon their natural relation to the faithful patriarch. 
 For the "ax was already laid at the root," which 
 was to cut down every unfruitful tree; and John 
 was sent to make one more faithful effort to save 
 them from this calamity. If this failed, Christ, 
 who was shortly to succeed him, would strike the 
 fatal blow which would sever their connection with 
 the Church of God, and thus destroy, at least, their 
 spiritual connection with Abraham and his seed. 
 He also held in his "hand" a winnowing "fan," 
 with which he would "thoroughly purge" the 
 "floor" of his Church, taking the good to heaven, 
 and casting the bad into "fire unquenchable." 
 
 This same doctrine is taught again by Christ him- 
 self — Matt, viii, 11, 12 — "And I say unto you, that 
 many shall come from the east and west, and shall 
 sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 95 
 
 tlie kingdom of heaven. But the children of the 
 kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness ; there 
 shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." The 
 term " kingdom of heaven/' in this passage, can not 
 refer to the future world of glory; because, first, 
 those that get safely to heaven, and are, like Laza- 
 rus, " children of that kingdom/' will never be 
 "cast out into outer darkness/' secondly, those 
 who have remained impenitent till death and the 
 judgment, like the "rich man" in the Gospel, will 
 not then be admitted into Abraham's bosom. Abra- 
 ham assured the rich man that there was a great 
 "gulf" between them, "so that they which would 
 pass from hence to you can not; neither can they 
 pass to us, that would come from thence." 
 
 Hence, the term "kingdom of heaven" must re- 
 fer to Christ's spiritual kingdom on earth; the 
 "many that shall come from the east and west" are 
 the Gentiles who shall be converted to Christ, and 
 admitted into the Church to which the patriarch 
 belonged, and thus "sit down with Abraham, and 
 Isaac, and Jacob;" while the "children of the 
 kingdom" were the Jews, born and bred members 
 of the Church, but were to be "cast out" of it, 
 even "into outer darkness." 
 
 In Matthew xxi, 43, after the well-known parable 
 of the "householder," and of his treatment by the 
 "husbandmen," Jesus says, "Therefore I say unto 
 you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, 
 and given to a, nation bringing forth the fruits 
 thereof." 
 
96 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 The " kingdom of God," in this instance, can not 
 mean heaven, nor even the dispensation of the Gos- 
 pel alone; but must refer to God's spiritual king- 
 dom as it had existed among the Jews, to whom 
 the parable was addressed and applied. They were 
 to be dispossessed of this kingdom, and it given to 
 the Gentiles, among whom it would hereafter find 
 its subjects mostly, and subjects, too, that would 
 " bring forth the fruits thereof." 
 
 We will now glance back at the holy prophets, 
 and see what kind of treatment they predicted the 
 Church to which they belonged should receive from 
 the coming Messiah. 
 
 In Psalm lxxxix, 3, 4, the prophet says, "I have 
 made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn 
 unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish 
 forever, and build up thy throne to all generations." 
 No person at all acquainted with the history of 
 David's literal descendants and throne, will pretend 
 that these promises have ever been literally fulfilled, 
 nor can they be. David's seed, since the coming 
 of Christ, have fared the same fate that befell 
 the other descendants of the patriarchs, and his 
 throne has been cut down, never to rise again in 
 time. These promises, then, must have a spirit- 
 ual signification; they must refer to a spiritual seed 
 which was to be established forever, and a spiritual 
 throne which was to be "built up to all genera- 
 tions," by Jesus Christ, the offspring of David. 
 
 Jeremiah — xxiii, 5, 6 — says, "Behold, the days 
 come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 97 
 
 righteous branch, and a king shall reign and pros- 
 per, and shall execute judgment and justice in the 
 earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Is- 
 rael shall dwell safely; and this is the name whereby 
 he shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness" 
 The seed promised to David, which should be " es- 
 tablished forever," was the " righteous branch" to 
 be raised unto David, who should be called the Lord 
 our righteousness. This seed was Jesus Christ. But 
 how was the throne of David to be " built up to all 
 generations," under the administration of Jesus 
 Christ? and how was Judah to "be saved," and Is- 
 rael to be made to " dwell in safety" in his day ? For 
 Jesus Christ had nothing to do with David's literal 
 throne, nor did he protect Judah and Israel from 
 the power of their enemies, the Romans. This 
 whole subject, I think, will gain additional light 
 from Isaiah ix, 6, 7 : " For unto us a child is born, 
 unto us a son is given ; and the government shall be 
 upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called 
 Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The ever- 
 lasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the 
 increase of his government and peace there shall 
 be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his 
 kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judg- 
 ment and with justice from henceforth even for- 
 ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform 
 this." 
 
 The points here to be settled, we present to all 
 anti-pedobaptists in the following questions : 
 
 1. What "throne of David " did Christ, the 
 7 
 
98 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Prince of Peace, while on earth, occupy and es- 
 tablish ? 
 
 2. What "kingdom" of David did Christ, the 
 "Wonderful Counselor," "order and establish with 
 judgment and with justice from henceforth, even 
 forever?" To all who deny the spirituality and 
 perpetuity of the Church organized in the family 
 of Abraham, and to which David belonged, and over 
 which he held a temporary government, we present 
 the above questions, and demand an answer, that 
 will agree with their theory, and not involve the 
 utter failure of the above prophecies. There is, I 
 think, but one way in which they can be consist- 
 ently answered, and that way, while it maintains 
 the truth of God, destroys the theory of our oppo- 
 nents. 
 
 David's jurisdiction in Israel was both temporal 
 and ecclesiastical; it extended over both Church 
 and state. Therefore, 
 
 1. The " throne of David" is referred to only 
 as an emblem of spiritual elevation and power, 
 invested for a time in David, but which Jesus 
 Christ, the "Prince of Peace," and "David's seed," 
 was to inherit and establish forever. And this gov- 
 ernment, which "shall be upon his shoulder/' with 
 its peace, shall increase forever, and be "built up to 
 all generations." 
 
 2. The "kingdom of David," spoken of, was the 
 spiritual compact over which David's dominion ex- 
 tended, which was organized in the family of Abra- 
 ham, and which, with the throne of David, was to 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 99 
 
 be inherited by Jesus Christ, and by him " ordered 
 and established, with judgment and with justice 
 from henceforth even forever." And this explains 
 how " Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell 
 safely" in the " days" of " the Lord our righteous- 
 ness." 
 
 Again — Isaiah xvi, 5 — "And in mercy shall the 
 throne be established : and he shall sit upon it in 
 truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and 
 seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness." 
 Amos ix, 11, 12 : "In that day will I raise up the 
 tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the 
 breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and 
 I will build it as in the days of old : that they may 
 possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen 
 which are called by my name, saith the Lord that 
 doeth this." 
 
 Now, let us see how the apostle James explains 
 and applies all these prophecies we have been quot- 
 ing. Acts xv, 13-17: "And after they had held 
 their peace, James answered, saying, Men and 
 brethren, hearken unto me. Simeon hath declared 
 how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take 
 out of them a people for his name. And to this 
 agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 
 after this I will return, and will build again the 
 tabernacle of David which is fallen down; and I 
 will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it 
 up: that the residue of men might seek after the 
 Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is 
 called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things." 
 
100 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Thus St. James applies these prophecies concern- 
 ing the re-establishing^ " raising up/' and enlarge- 
 ment of the tabernacle of David to what was then 
 taking place by the preaching of the Gospel among 
 the Gentiles, by which hundreds of them were be- 
 ing converted to God and added to the Church of 
 Christ. 
 
 Daniel — ii, 44 — says, "And in the days of these 
 kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, 
 which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom 
 shall not be left to other people, but it shall break 
 in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it 
 shall stand forever." This kingdom, which the 
 God of heaven was to "set up" in the days of the 
 Eoman kings, and which was destined to destroy 
 them all and stand itself forever, is the kingdom of 
 David, which had become broken down by the 
 apostasy and expulsion of so many of its former 
 subjects, the Jews; but which the Lord was to "set 
 up," and "establish it in judgment and justice," 
 and of its "increase there was to be no end." Now, 
 this increase had just commenced, and the king- 
 dom was being "set up," elevated, and enlarged, 
 when St. James arose and declared the fulfillment 
 of prophecy in the conversion of the Gentiles. 
 
 But the extent to which the kingdom was to be 
 elevated and enlarged is thus described by the same 
 prophet — Daniel vii, 27 — "And the kingdom and 
 dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under 
 the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the 
 saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an ever- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 101 
 
 lasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and 
 obey him." Again — Zech. ix, 10 — "And he shall 
 speak peace unto the heathen : and his dominion 
 shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river 
 even to the ends of the earth." JNTow, when these 
 prophecies are all fulfilled, then will "all nations 
 of the earth be blessed" by Christ, the promised 
 seed of Abraham; and till then the immutability 
 of the covenant is our guarantee that it will be 
 accomplished. 
 
 Again: when all nations become Christ's, then 
 will they all be "Abraham's seed," and "heirs ac- 
 cording to the promise," a "father of many na- 
 tions have I made thee." Thus, at least, can the 
 promises contained in the Abrahamic covenant only 
 be fulfilled, when the heathen are given to Christ, 
 and the uttermost parts of the earth become his 
 possession. We can now, too, comprehend the 
 meaning of the apostle when he says — Romans iv, 
 13 — "For the promise that he should be the heir 
 of the world was not to Abraham, or to his seed 
 through the law."* To constitute Abraham heir of the 
 world, the world must, in some sense, be infallibly 
 secured to him by promise, covenant, or oath. Now, 
 in what place, and in what sense was the world thus 
 secured to Abraham? In the first place God prom- 
 ised that Abraham's seed should outnumber the 
 "stars in the heavens," and the particles of "dust 
 upon the earth." And, secondly, he covenanted 
 with him that he should be a " father of a multi- 
 tude of nations." And, thirdly, he swore that, 
 
102 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 C{ multiplying, I will multiply thee. " This promise, 
 covenant, and oath, referred not to his seed through 
 the law only ; but it made him the " father of all 
 them that believe ;" and when the world shall believe 
 in Christ, then shall Abraham be heir of the world. 
 The believing world will be his inheritance. 
 
 Dr. Clarke, when commenting on Romans iv, 13, 
 says, " Abraham is represented as having all the 
 world given to him as his inheritance, because in 
 him all the nations of the earth are blessed. This 
 must, therefore, relate to their being all interested 
 in the Abrahamic covenant. And every person, 
 now that the covenant is fully explained, has the 
 privilege of claiming, through faith, justification 
 through the blood of the Lamb, in virtue of his 
 original grant." How it expands the heart of a 
 Christian to know and feel that he belongs to a 
 Church as old as Abraham ! — one, too, that will con- 
 tinue to exist while the sun, and moon, and earth, 
 and time endure, or the cycle of eternity roll ! — a 
 Church, too, as wide as the world on which we live; 
 embracing all true believers of every age, country, 
 and clime, ay, and their infant offspring with 
 them ! — a Church with that broad promise of Je- 
 hovah for its support — u l will be a God unto thee, 
 and thy seed after thee !" How much this doctrine 
 concerning the Church resembles the doctrine of a 
 general atonement! How sweetly they lie together 
 in the same heart! And what a pity that good 
 men will sever what God hath evidently joined 
 together ! Cease to do so, my brethren. Let the 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 103 
 
 doctrine of a limited atonement, a Church only 
 organized on the day of Pentecost, containing no 
 infant children, close communion, and baptism only 
 by immersion, which have so strong an affinity for 
 each other, live and die in each other's company. 
 
 SECTION VIII. 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE CHUECH OF CHEIST UNDER THE JEWISH AND 
 CHRISTDAN" DISPENSATIONS. 
 
 It may be proper, at the outset, to explain what 
 we mean by ecclesiastical identity or unity. We do 
 not mean by it a perfect similarity or sameness in 
 the legislation, or ordinances, or forms of religious 
 worship; or that the same officers govern, or the 
 same persons belong to the Church now that did 
 under the former dispensation; or that the Church 
 is confined to the same country now as formerly. 
 In all these respects changes have occurred; and 
 many of them were anticipated and provided for 
 long before they occurred. If I were to assert that 
 the United States of America was the identical 
 nation that it was fifty years ago, I would not be 
 understood to say, that no changes had occurred in 
 the officers of the government, in the legislation, 
 people, or face of the country. But it would be 
 necessary to prove, and it could easily be done, 
 
 1. That the same Constitution which governed us 
 
104 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 as a nation fifty years since, governs us now; and 
 that the changes which have taken place in relation 
 to officers, people, laws, and the country generally, 
 occurred without any violent change in the Consti- 
 tution; or if even a change has been made in some 
 of the articles of the Constitution, they have been 
 made by the constituted authorities. 
 
 2. That the same political compact that was 
 organized under the Constitution continues to exist, 
 and to act under it; and that whatever additions 
 have been made to this compact, have been made 
 by the constituted authorities, and without violence 
 to the Constitution. 
 
 Well, we have proven in preceding sections, 
 
 1. That the covenant made with Abraham, so far, 
 at least, as it refers to the spiritual precept enjoined 
 upon Abraham and his seed, and the promise of 
 a numerous spiritual seed, embracing all believers 
 in Christ and their infant offspring, whether Jews 
 or Gentiles, was literally and grammatically an ever- 
 lasting covenant, which has never been repealed 
 or altered; that although some of the blessings 
 promised to Abraham's natural seed had failed to 
 be realized by them, it was because these were 
 promised conditionally, and they had failed to live 
 up to the conditions; hence, the failure in these 
 particulars did not destroy the everlasting character 
 of the covenant. 
 
 2. Christ, who formed that covenant with Abra- 
 ham, and who promised him that numerous spirit- 
 ual seed, notwithstanding all the changes that have 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 105 
 
 taken place in relation to the faltering natural seed 
 of Abraham — the changes made in the laws, ordi- 
 nances, and modes of worship enjoined upon this 
 spiritual seed promised — has preserved, perpetua- 
 ted, blessed, and increased it down through both 
 dispensations, and is to bless, govern, and increase 
 it till Abraham, according to promise, is made "heir 
 of the world." 
 
 We will now proceed to examine more closely 
 than we have done, the additions made to the 
 Church of Christ in the New Testament, by the 
 labors of the apostles, and show the identity of 
 these Churches, formed in different sections of the 
 country, with the old Abrahamic stock, or " Church 
 in the wilderness." 
 
 1. We will commence with the day of Pentecost; 
 especially as that is the time when, anti-pedobap- 
 tists say, the Church of Christ was formed. But 
 will they please to show us a Christian covenant intro- 
 duced on that day, or previous to it, by Jesus Christ, 
 on which the Church was founded, and in which 
 the character and privileges of its members are de- 
 fined? No, they can not do it; for none was made ! 
 Acts i, 15, we read, "And in those days Peter 
 stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, 
 (the number of the names together were about a 
 hundred and twenty.") Now, this "hundred and 
 twenty," I suppose, constituted the number of gen- 
 uine believers in Christ which remained together 
 after the Savior had "thoroughly purged his floor." 
 They therefore constituted the seed of Abraham, 
 
106 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 and the Church of Christ. Hence, it was in this 
 Church that Matthias was ordained a minister; and 
 upon it the Holy Ghost was poured out, which 
 caused the unbelieving Jews to "mock/' etc. Now, 
 after Peter preached that remarkable sermon which 
 produced conviction in so many hearts, he said — 
 Acts ii, 88, 39 — "Repent, and be baptized every one 
 of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remis- 
 sion of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to 
 your children, and to all that are afar off, even as 
 many as the Lord our God shall call." "We will 
 here pause and inquire, What promise does the 
 apostle Peter refer to ? A pedobaptist would say he 
 refers to Gen. xvii, 7: "I will be a God unto thee, 
 and to thy seed after thee." If this be true, then 
 Peter evidently reaffirms the Abrahamic covenant 
 as the foundation on which the Church of Christ 
 was still to rest, and as furnishing the very promises 
 through which repenting sinners might look for 
 divine mercy, as well as a visible admission to 
 Church fellowship and privileges, in connection 
 with their infant offspring. But an anti-pedobaptist 
 would say that* Peter referred to Joel ii, 28, 29 : 
 "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will 
 pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons 
 and your daughters shall prophesy," etc. 
 
 The only reason why they suppose he referred to 
 Joel, is because Peter quotes the above passage in 
 the 17th verse. Well, we will not wait for the con- 
 troversy to be settled between the above parties, for 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 107 
 
 the position of the o.nti-pedo is sufficient for our 
 present purpose. To whom, then, did the prophet 
 Joel originally address this language ? In the first 
 verse he says, "Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and 
 sound an alarm in my holy mountain." And then, 
 after describing the most dreadful calamities which 
 should befall the people of Zion, he describes a 
 day of great joy and prosperity to this same people : 
 he says — 23d verse — "Be glad, then, ye children 
 of Zion, and rejoice in the Lord your God;" and 
 in the 27th verse, "And ye shall know that I am 
 in the midst of Israel; and that I am the Lord your 
 God, and none else; and my people shall never be 
 ashamed." And then comes the promise, "And it 
 shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my 
 Spirit upon all flesh ; and your sons and your daugh- 
 ters shall prophesy," etc. Now, this prophet was 
 himself a member of the Old Testament Church, 
 denominated "Israel," or "Zion." And his whole 
 prophecy relates to her adversity, and prosperity 
 in future days. It was to her, then, that the Lord 
 promised to "pour his Spirit" upon all flesh; and 
 her "sons and daughters" were to "prophesy." 
 Now, it was very proper for Peter to apply the above 
 promise to the hundred and twenty on whom the 
 Holy Ghost fell on the "day of Pentecost;" for 
 some of these did "speak with tongues," and 
 prophesy; and they at the time constituted the 
 Zion, or Israel of the prophet. And the declaration 
 on the part of Peter, that this same promise was 
 applicable to those repenting Jews, and to their 
 
108 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 children, and them that were "afar off, even as 
 many as the Lord onr God shall call/' only proves 
 the perpetuity of the Old Testament Zion, with its 
 promises, throughout the new dispensation. Acts 
 ii, 41, it is said, "Then they that gladly received 
 his word were baptized: and the same day there 
 was added unto them about three thousand souls." 
 Added unto them ! Added unto whom ? Why, evi- 
 dently unto the "hundred and twenty" believers 
 on whom the "Holy Ghost" was "poured," and 
 who constituted the Zion to whom it was promised; 
 this was the Church to which the three thousand 
 were added on the day of Pentecost. 
 
 In the 47th verse it is said, "And the Lord added 
 to the Church daily such as should be saved;" thus, 
 evidently, recognizing the Church already in exist- 
 ence as the true one, to which all their young con- 
 verts were added. And thus, on the very day when 
 our opponents say the new covenant and Christian 
 Church was formed, instead thereof, we find St. 
 Peter referring either to the Abrahamic covenant 
 direct, or to a prophecy delivered by the prophet 
 Joel, to the Zion which was organized under it, 
 promising her perpetuity and spiritual prosperity 
 under the new dispensation, as the foundation of 
 hope, and the source from whence to expect the 
 forgiveness of sins, the comforts of the Holy Ghost, 
 as well as a reinstatement in the Church of Christ 
 by baptism, both on the part of penitent adults, 
 their children, and of millions yet unborn, that the 
 Lord in mercy would call by his Gospel. 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 109 
 
 But whether St. Peter refers to the promise con- 
 tained in the Abrahamic covenant, or not, in the 
 above instance, he certainly does immediately after, 
 in Acts iii, 25 : " Ye are the children of the prophets, 
 and of the covenant which God made with our 
 fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed 
 shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." 
 Thus he refers to their relation to the Abrahamic 
 covenant as children, in which covenant they had 
 a promise of Christ, as still securing to them the 
 blessings of the Gospel of Christ; for he immedi- 
 ately adds — 26th verse — "Unto you first God, hav- 
 ing raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in 
 turning away every one of you from his iniquities." 
 Now, why this appeal to the Abrahamic covenant, 
 if that covenant was no longer in force, and its 
 blessings unavailable ? This very appeal, though it 
 relates to but one of its promises and the numerous 
 blessings which it secured, clearly proves the entire 
 instrument yet in force, and all of its spiritual bless- 
 ings yet to be enjoyed. 
 
 And the apostle making this appeal to the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, so soon after referring to the prom- 
 ise which was unto them and their children, etc., 
 together with the fact that his language agrees so 
 much better with the language of the promise in 
 Gen. xvii, 7, than of Joel ii, 28, renders it much 
 more probable, in my estimation, that St. Peter 
 referred directly to the Abrahamic covenant, when 
 he said, "The promise is unto you, and to your chil- 
 dren, and to all that are afar off, even as many as 
 
110 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 tlie Lord our God shall call;" thus, in two instances, 
 confirming the Abrahamic covenant as the charter 
 of the Church of Christ throughout the new dis- 
 pensation; at the very time ; too, when we are told 
 a new covenant was rnade ; and a new church or- 
 ganized. 
 
 2. We will examine St. Paul's Epistle to the 
 Komans. 
 
 Br. Clarke, in his Introduction, says, "The 
 occasion of writing this epistle may be easily 
 collected from the epistle itself. It appears that 
 the Church in this city consisted partly of heathens 
 converted to Christianity, and partly of Jews, who 
 had, with many remaining prejudices, believed in 
 Jesus as the true Messiah, and that many conten- 
 tions arose from the claims of the Gentile converts 
 to equal privileges with the Jews, and from the 
 absolute refusal of the Jews to admit these claims 
 unless the Gentile converts became circumcised : he 
 wrote to adjust this difficulty." 
 
 Br. Paley says that the object of the apostle was 
 to "place the Gentile convert upon a parity of- situ- 
 ation with the Jewish, with respect to his religious 
 condition, and his rank in the Divine favor." Al- 
 though the above object can be seen throughout the 
 epistle, the apostle brings his arguments to a more 
 direct bearing upon it in the fourth, ninth, and 
 eleventh chapters. Having already quoted exten- 
 sively from the fourth chapter, we will pass to chap- 
 ter ix, 3-6 : " For I could wish that myself were 
 accursed from Christ, [expelled from his Church,] 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. Ill 
 
 for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh : 
 who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adop- 
 tion, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giv- 
 ing of the law, and the service of God, and the 
 promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom, as 
 concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, 
 God blessed forever. Not as though the word of 
 God had taken none effect. For they are not all 
 Israel, which are of Israel." The apostle's mean- 
 ing is still plainer in the seventh and eighth verses : 
 "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are 
 they all children : but, in Isaac shall thy seed be 
 called. That is, They which are the children of 
 the flesh, these are not the children of God ; but 
 the children of the promise are counted for the 
 seed." 
 
 Now, the apostle is laboring here to show this 
 simple fact, that many of Abraham's natural chil- 
 dren, on account of their impiety, were not counted 
 among the seed pronounced to Abraham in the cov- 
 enant. Many were of Israel that were not true Is- 
 raelites. Many were the seed of Abraham natu- 
 rally that were not his children spiritually. This 
 was especially true when the apostle wrote, because 
 the Savior's "ax" had been "laid at the root of the 
 trees, and every tree that did not bring forth good 
 fruit was hewn down," etc., leaving only such as 
 were true Israelites connected with Israel. But, to 
 show that God had not cast out of his Church all 
 of the descendants of Israel, he says — Rom. xi, 1, 
 2 — "I say then, hath God cast away his people? 
 
112 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 God forbid. For I am an Israelite, of the seed of 
 Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not 
 cast away his people whom he foreknew." And he 
 might have joined with himself the " hundred and 
 twenty" on whom the Holy Ghost was poured, and 
 the thousands that were added to their number on 
 the day of Pentecost, and afterward, who were the 
 literal descendants of the patriarch, to whom prob- 
 ably he had reference in the fifth verse: "Even 
 so then at this present time also there is a remnant 
 according to the election of grace." In the fifteenth, 
 sixteenth, and seventeenth verses, he says, " For if 
 the casting away of them be the reconciling of the 
 world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life 
 from the dead ? For if the first fruit be holy, the 
 lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are 
 the branches. And if some of the branches be 
 broken off, and thou being a wild olive-tree, wert 
 graffed in among them, and with them partakest of 
 the root and fatness of the olive-tree." 
 
 The apostle evidently borrows the figure of the 
 " olive-tree" from Jeremiah xi, 16: "The Lord 
 called thy name, a green olive-tree, fair, and of 
 goodly fruit." And both Jeremiah and St. Paul 
 evidently design to represent by it the Church of 
 God as it existed among the descendants of Israel. 
 " For if the first fruit," that is, Abraham and his 
 early descendants, Isaac and Jacob, "be holy," 
 that is, were wholly consecrated to God, " the lump," 
 the ecclesiastical compact to which they belonged, 
 "is also holy;" that is, it was the Lord's by conse- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 113 
 
 oration; for in this sense the word holy is generally 
 used by Jewish writers. " And if the root be 
 holy/' that is, the covenant engagements on which 
 the Church rested and grew, "so are the branches/' 
 those that legitimately grew up according to the 
 covenant engagements into which they entered in 
 their infancy. "And if some of the branches be 
 broken off/' that is, some of the Jewish members 
 expelled, "and thou, being a wild olive-tree/'' evi- 
 dently referring to Gentile converts, "wert grafted 
 in among them, and with them partakest of the 
 root and fatness of the olive tree;" that is, brought 
 into the same relation to the covenant and Church 
 that the pious Jew sustains, enjoying with them all 
 the great spiritual blessings promised and made sure 
 to them in their covenant. "And if* the casting 
 away of them be the reconciling of the world," 
 that is, the casting away of the unbelieving Jews, 
 was the occasion of the riches of God's grace and 
 goodness being communicated to the Gentile world, 
 "what shall the receiving of them be, but life from 
 the dead?" thai is, the restoration of the Jews to 
 the favor of God and the privileges of the Church, 
 will be regarded by the Church as the restoration 
 of an intimate friend to life, who had been regarded 
 as dead. In the eighteenth to the twenty-first 
 verses, the apostle says to these new Gentile mem- 
 bers, "Boast not against the branches. But if thou 
 boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 
 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, 
 that I might be graffed in. Well; because of un- 
 
114 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 belief they were broken off, and thou standest by 
 faith. Be not high-Blinded, but fear: for if God 
 spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he 
 also spare not thee." The apostle keeps up the 
 figure. The Israelitish Church, founded upon the 
 Abrahamic covenant, is the olive-tree with its root; 
 the unbelieving Jews, who were the " natural 
 branches," were "broken off;" and these converted 
 Gentiles were grafted into the same olive-tree from 
 which the Jews were " broken off;" and they are 
 exhorted not to be " high-minded," but to "fear," 
 "lest he also spare not thee." In verses twenty- 
 two to twenty-four, he says, "Behold therefore the 
 goodness and severity of God : on them which fell, 
 severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou con- 
 tinue in his goodness : otherwise thou also shalt be 
 cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in 
 unbelief, shall be graffed in : for God is able to graff 
 them in again. For if thou wert cut out of the 
 olive-tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed 
 contrary to nature into a good olive-tree ; how much 
 more shall these, which be the natural branches, 
 be graffed into their own olive-tree?" This olive- 
 tree, representing the Church from which those un- 
 believing Jews were broken off, is called a "good 
 olive-tree" and " their own olive-tree" and "God is 
 able to graff them in again." But, pray, how can he 
 "graff them in again" if he has destroyed that 
 tree, root and branch? 
 
 In verses twenty-five to twenty-seven, he says, 
 "For I would not, brethren, that ye should be 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 115 
 
 ignorant of this mystery, (lest ye should be wise in 
 your own conceits,) that blindness in part is hap- 
 pened to Israel, till the fullness of the Gentiles be 
 come in. And so all Israel shall be saved : as it is 
 written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, 
 and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob : for 
 this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take 
 away their sins." Thus it appears that the word of 
 God is pledged for the readmission of the Jews into 
 the same olive-tree — Church — from which their 
 fathers were excluded. But how is this readmis- 
 sion to take place ? by circumcision ? Certainly 
 not. St. Peter readmitted the Jews into the Church 
 of Christ, on the day of Pentecost, by baptizing 
 them — see Acts ii, 28, 41 : hence, we conclude that 
 baptism will constitute the mode of visibly acknowl- 
 edging the membership of repenting Jews, when 
 u all Israel shall be saved," and grafted into their 
 good old olive-tree. Now, suppose that a repenting 
 Jew should approach an anti-jpedobaptist elder, and, 
 pointing him to the eleventh chapter of Romans, 
 should request him to graft him into the good old 
 olive-tree of the patriarchs, how would the elder 
 manage to accomplish his request without violence 
 to his own Christian faith on that subject? I fear 
 that without a radical change in their views upon 
 this subject, anti-pedobaptists will never be the hon- 
 ored instruments of grafting the returning Jews 
 into " their own olive-tree." 
 
 3. "We will examine St. Paul's Epistle to the Ga- 
 latians, and see with what Church they were identi- 
 
116 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 fied. At an early day Paul visited Galatia, and first 
 planted the Gospel among the people in that prov- 
 ince. Afterward, a certain Judaizing teacher came 
 among them, inculcating the necessity of circum- 
 cision and obedience to the ceremonial law of Mo- 
 ses, as the ground of their Church relations, rights, 
 and privileges, as well as their hopes of pardon and 
 salvation. St. Paul labors to show, especially in 
 the third chapter, that all Church rights and bless- 
 ings are secured to believers in Christ, both Jews 
 and Gentiles, not by the law of Moses, but by the 
 Abrahamic covenant; hence, the drift of the apos- 
 tle's argument goes to show that if justification 
 came "by the law, then Christ is dead in vain/ 7 
 and " that they which are of faith," instead of those 
 that kept the law, were the true " children of Abra- 
 ham." The apostle says — Gal. iii, 6-8 — "Even as 
 Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to 
 him for righteousness. Know ye therefore, that 
 they which are of faith, the same are the children 
 of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that 
 God would justify the heathen through faith, 
 preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, saying, 
 In thee shall all nations be blessed." The idea of 
 believing Gentiles being justified and numbered 
 among the seed of Abraham, was by no means a 
 new doctrine, then for the first time introduced. It 
 was foreseen and provided for when the promise was 
 made to Abraham that in his seed all nations should 
 be blessed. " So then they which be of faith are 
 blessed with faithful Abraham." Gal. iii, 9. Then 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 117 
 
 comes the question whether the observance of the 
 law was not also requisite after the coming of Christ, 
 both to secure their justification and recognition as 
 the seed of Abraham. This question the apostle 
 answers as follows — verses 10-14 — " For as many as 
 are of the works of the law, are under the curse ; 
 for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth 
 not in all things which are written in the book of 
 the law to do them. But that no man is justified 
 by the law in the sight of God, it is evident 5 for 
 the just shall live by faith. And the law is not of 
 faith; but the man that doth them shall live in 
 them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of 
 the law, being made a curse for us; for it is writ- 
 ten, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 
 that the blessings of Abraham might come on the 
 Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might re- 
 ceive the promise of the Spirit through faith." 
 
 The law, at best, could only justify those who 
 obeyed it, as it contained no provision for a pardon. 
 And no person could obey it in every particular with- 
 out grace through Christ ; and grace could only be 
 obtained through faith. Hence, faith in Christ, 
 who was promised and made infallibly sure in the 
 Abrahamic covenant, was the only medium of jus- 
 tification to the descendants of Abraham while un- 
 der the law. But now, Christ having come agree- 
 ably to promise, and having borne the curse which 
 the law pronounced upon all delinquents, they were 
 no longer under either the law or its curse, but, like 
 Abraham, who lived before the law was given, were 
 
118 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 justified by simple faith in Christ. And this same 
 blessing, enjoyed by Abraham before the law was 
 given, and now by his descendants., had also " come 
 on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ;" who also 
 now were justified as Abraham was, by simple faith, 
 without the deeds of the law. And now that the 
 law was abolished, and its curse endured by Jesus 
 Christ, and justification proffered to both Jews and 
 Gentiles upon the simple condition of faith, the 
 apostle proceeds to show the permanent and immu- 
 table character of the covenant in which all this was 
 originally made sure. He says — verses 15-17 — 
 " Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; 
 though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be con- 
 firmed, no man disannulleth or addeth thereto. 
 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises 
 made. He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; 
 but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ. 
 And this 1 say, that the covenant that was con- 
 firmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was 
 four hundred and thirty years after, can not disan- 
 nul, that it should make the promise of none effect." 
 Of the covenant he says, " Though it be but a 
 man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man dis- 
 annulleth or addeth thereto." How much more a 
 covenant made and " confirmed by God in Christ!" 
 Now, the abolition of the law, which was different 
 in character, and so much more recent in its origin, 
 "can not disannul" the covenant, so as to "make 
 the promise of none effect." The apostle continues 
 to the end of the chapter, in the same powerful and 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COYENANT. 119 
 
 conclusive process of reasoning, to show the tempo- 
 rary character of the law and the permanent and im- 
 mutable character of the Abrahamic covenant. And 
 having completely and triumphantly defended the 
 covenant, he winds up the chapter by saying, " And 
 if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and 
 heirs according to the promise." Thus is the per- 
 petuity of the covenant, and of the Church as 
 organized upon it, through both dispensations, 
 clearly maintained by St. Paul, in his Epistle to 
 the Galatians; leaving the Judaizing teacher and 
 the anti-pedobaptist elder both refuted by the same 
 argument. 
 
 4. We will next examine St. Paul's Epistle to 
 the Ephesians, and see if they, too, were not iden- 
 tified with the Church organized among the patri- 
 archs. St. Paul also founded the Church at Ephe- 
 sus, and the same difficulty seems to have existed 
 there, that troubled other places where the converts 
 were partly Jews and partly Gentiles. Dr. Clarke 
 says, "The Jews considered themselves an elect or 
 chosen people, and wished to monopolize the whole 
 of the Divine love and beneficence. The apostle 
 here shows that God had the Gentiles as much in 
 the contemplation of his mercy and goodness as he 
 had the Jews; and the blessings of the Gospel, now 
 so freely dispensed to them, were the proof that 
 God had thus chosen them, and that his end in giv- 
 ing them the Gospel was the same which he had in 
 view by giving the law to the Jews; namely, that 
 they might be holy and without blame before him." 
 
120 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Passing over the first chapter, in which this subject 
 is laboriously discussed, and his reasoning some- 
 what intricate, we pause at chapter ii, where his 
 reasoning is brought more to a point. The apostle 
 says — verses 11, 12 — " Wherefore remember, that 
 ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh; . . . that 
 at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens 
 from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers 
 from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and 
 without God in the world/' The paraphrase of Dr. 
 Macknight on the above verses is as follows : 
 
 "11. Wherefore, to strengthen your sense of 
 God's goodness in saving you, and of the obligation 
 he hath thereby laid on you to do good works, ye 
 Ephesians should remember that ye were formerly 
 Gentiles by natural descent, who are called uncircum- 
 cised and unholy, by that nation which is called cir- 
 cumcised with a circumcision made with men's hands 
 in the flesh, and which esteems itself holy on that 
 account, and entitled to the promises. 
 
 "12. And that ye were at that time without the 
 knowledge of Christ, being by your idolatry alienated 
 from the Jewish nation, which alone had the knowl- 
 edge of his coming, and of the blessings he was to 
 bestow, and unacquainted with the covenants, namely, 
 that made with Abraham, and that made with the 
 Israelites at Sinai, which promised and prefigured 
 Christ's coming to bestow these blessings; so that ye 
 had no sure hope of the pardon of sin, nor of a 
 blessed immortality; and were without the knowl- 
 edge and worship of God, while in the heathen 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 121 
 
 world." The apostle continues to say to these con- 
 verted Gentiles — verses 13, 14, 15 — "But now, in 
 Christ Jesus, ye, who sometimes were far off, are 
 made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our 
 peace, who hath made both one and hath broken 
 down the middle wall of partition between us ; hav- 
 ing abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law 
 of commandments contained in ordinances; for 
 to make in himself of twain one new man, so mak- 
 ing peace." The ceremonial law of Moses, which 
 was the "middle wall of partition" between Jews 
 and Gentiles, being "abolished" by Christ, believ- 
 ing Jews and Gentiles are united now in one 
 Church. And this is in perfect accordance with 
 what Christ said he was going to do — St. John x, 
 16 — "And other sheep I have, [Gentiles,] which 
 are not of this fold, [Jews :] them, also, I must 
 bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there 
 shall be one fold, and one shepherd." The apostle 
 adds — 16th, 17th verses — "And that he might 
 reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, 
 having slain the enmity thereby: and came and 
 preached peace to you which were afar off, and to 
 them that were nigh." The same sentiment is con- 
 tinued in the 18th and 19th verses, "For through 
 him we both have access by one Spirit unto the 
 Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers 
 and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, 
 and of the household of God." And again, in 
 verses 20-22: "And are built [both Jews and 
 Gentiles] upon the foundation of the apostles and 
 
122 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cor- 
 ner-stone; in whom all the building [Jews and 
 Gentiles] fitly framed together, groweth unto a holy 
 temple in the Lord : in whom ye also are builded 
 together for a habitation of God through the Spirit/' 
 Thus we find in St. Paul's letter to the Ephesians 
 evident allusion to the permanent character of the 
 promises made in the Abrahamic covenant; the 
 temporary character of the law of Moses; and the 
 identity of the Christian Church with the Jewish : 
 in other words, the perpetuity of the Church with 
 its covenant as organized in the family of Abraham. 
 We might quote passages from Colossians and He- 
 brews, substantiating the same doctrines ; but were 
 we to embrace all that could be brought forward 
 upon this point, the reader's patience would prob- 
 ably be exhausted: we therefore close this section. 
 
 SECTION IX. 
 
 INCONSISTENCIES OF THOSE WHO DENY THE IDENTITY OF THE CHURCH 
 UNDER THE CHRISTIAN AND JEWISH DISPENSATIONS. 
 
 This, we know, is a delicate point, in our general 
 argument, and likely to give offense. But we can 
 not do justice to our subject without it; and our 
 object is not to offend, but to convince. 
 
 I. They virtually declare that the venerable patri- 
 archs, such as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph; 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 123 
 
 and all the pious kings, such as David, Solomon, 
 and Hezekiah; with all the holy prophets, such as 
 Moses, Isaiah, Daniel, and John the Baptist, both 
 lived and died without any visible connection with 
 the Church of Christ; that all the ministering 
 priests, from Aaron to Zachariah, and all the saints 
 of the Old Testament, now in heaven, lived and 
 died in no other than a heathen state — interested 
 only in a graceless covenant, which proffered only 
 temporal blessings ! Now, here is a dilemma with 
 two horns: the reader can take which he pleases; 
 but one he must take. Either the long list of Old 
 Testament saints, above referred to, were Christians, 
 belonging to the visible Church of Christ, founded 
 upon a spiritual and gracious covenant, or they 
 were not. If the former be the fact, our doctrine 
 is true; but if the latter be the true doctrine, then 
 the Old Testament saints were all in a heathen 
 state, and if saved at all, were saved as pious 
 heathens are — through the uncovenanted mercy of 
 God! Who, let me ask, is prepared for the last 
 horn of this dilemma? No person, I trust, but 
 such as are taught to exclude all persons from the 
 Christian Church and communion, who have not 
 been baptized in a peculiar form. 
 
 Pedobaptists should not complain at being un- 
 churched along with such company. So long as we 
 are classed along with the pious patriarchs, prophets, 
 priests, kings, and other saints of the Old Testa- 
 ment, we should be perfectly satisfied with our posi- 
 tion. We should be willing to serve God, and go 
 
124 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 to heaven with such persons; even if we must, as a 
 consequence, lose the opportunity of communing 
 occasionally with our opponents by the way. 
 
 II. Our opponents generally refer to the baptism 
 of John ; to prove that immersion is the only door 
 into the Church of Christ; while, in opposing in- 
 fant Church membership, they say the Church of 
 Christ had no existence till the day of Pentecost! 
 Here, then, is a most singular phenomenon — a door 
 erected years before the Church, to which it be- 
 longed, existed! Thousands were led by John 
 through the visible door, but, to their utter disap- 
 pointment, found no Church there till several years 
 had elapsed! and many, who entered by the true 
 door, never lived to see the Church erected, or to 
 enjoy a connection with it; and therefore lived and 
 died as Abraham and Moses did, in a heathen state, 
 even after they had entered the true and only door 
 into the Church of Christ ! 
 
 Here, again, is a dilemma, with three horns, on 
 one or other of which our opponents must hang. 
 They must admit, 
 
 1. That the Church of Christ existed before the 
 baptism of John, which is the same as to admit that 
 it existed in the family of Abraham, and that John 
 belonged to it. Or, 
 
 2. That John's baptism was not the true door 
 into the Church of Christ, and was not Christian 
 baptism. Or, 
 
 8. That John instituted the true door into the 
 Church of Christ, before the Church existed; and 
 
THE ABRAIJAMIC COVENANT. 125 
 
 inducted thousands through that door, who, not- 
 withstanding, never belonged to the Church, but 
 died in a heathen state, after receiving regular 
 Christian baptism ! 
 
 The first, in our opinion, is the true position. 
 
 III. Close-communion Baptists say that the reason 
 why they will not commune with pedobaptists is, 
 because they have not been properly inducted into 
 the Church of Christ; consequently, to administer 
 the sacrament to pedobaptists would be carrying the 
 ordinance out of the Church, to accommodate per- 
 sons who refuse to enter it in due form. But if 
 the Church of Christ had no existence till the day 
 of Pentecost, then Christ was never himself properly 
 a member of the Church of Christ \ for he was not 
 only crucified, but ascended to heaven before the 
 day of Pentecost. He must also have instituted 
 the sacrament out of the Church of Christ; and the 
 apostles, to whom it was first administered, were at 
 the time not members of the Church; for this all 
 occurred before the day of Pentecost. Hence, our 
 opponents must either admit that the Church of 
 Christ existed before the day of Pentecost, and be- 
 fore the Lord's supper was instituted, or else say that 
 Jesus Christ, his apostles, and the holy sacrament 
 were all of them out of the pales of the Christian 
 Church. They may take which horn of this dilemma 
 they please; but one of them they must take. The 
 first avoids all difficulty, while the last involves us 
 in most serious inconsistencies. Error not only 
 contradicts truth, but is inconsistent with itself. 
 
126 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 IV. Baptism, as instituted in Matt, xxviii, 19, 
 dates some time previous to the day of Pentecost. 
 And whatever may have been the character and 
 design of the baptism of John, all agree that Jesus, 
 in the above instance, instituted the true Christian 
 baptism ; and that baptism, as he instituted it, was 
 the regular visible door into the visible Church of 
 Christ. But here the same difficulties cluster which 
 we found connected with the baptism of John. 
 Here is a Church ordinance without a Church — a 
 door opened into the Church before the Church ex- 
 isted! Now, either the Church of Christ existed 
 at the time Jesus instituted Christian baptism, or 
 Christian baptism is not an ordinance of the Chris- 
 tian Church. The reader is left to choose his own 
 position. 
 
 V. The apostles, if ever ordained by Jesus Christ 
 to the Christian ministry, received that ordination 
 before the day of Pentecost. Matthias was elected 
 and ordained but one day before. Yet the Church 
 did not then exist. Here were Christian min- 
 isters elected and ordained, and no Church in ex- 
 istence over which their pastoral charge extended. 
 In this connection let me ask the following ques- 
 tions : 
 
 1. Is it essential that a man should belong to the 
 Christian Church in order to be eligible to the 
 Christian ministry? If the doctrine we oppose be 
 correct, it is not; for the apostles were none of them 
 members of the Church of Christ when ordained to 
 the Christian ministry. How would it answer for 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. * 127 
 
 Christian Churches now to elect and ordain men 
 to the ministry who held no connection with 
 them? Let our opponents set us an example of 
 this kind. 
 
 2. Is the election and ordination of Christian 
 ministers entirely independent of the voice of the 
 Christian Church, or are they not, to some extent, 
 subject to the authority invested in the Church? 
 You may answer, not while Christ, the head of the 
 Church, was present himself to officiate. But was 
 he present any more when Matthias was elected and 
 ordained than he is at the present time ? By the 
 authority, then, of what Church was he elected and 
 ordained a minister? You may answer, by the au- 
 thority of the apostles. Truly; but these apostles 
 were not yet members of the Church of Christ by 
 your own showing; for that Church did not yet 
 exist. The position of our opponents, therefore, 
 excludes the Church of Christ from all authority in 
 the election and ordination of the ministry, their 
 practice to the contrary notwithstanding. Thus 
 error contradicts itself. 
 
 VI. Finally, our opponents are compelled to give 
 a different signification to the same words when 
 found in the Old Testament, or even in the New, 
 relating to the Church in the Old Testament, from 
 what they do when applied to the Church after the 
 day of Pentecost. We will here give a few in- 
 stances : 
 
 1. The terms church, congregation, or assembly, 
 when applied to the people of God, before the day 
 
128 Infant church membership. 
 
 of Pentecost, signify only some kind of a civil or 
 judicial compact. "The Jewish institution/' says 
 Mr. Campbell, "was established upon temporal and 
 earthly promises, contained in the first promise 
 made to Abraham. " Wholly a temporal affair ; but 
 when applied to the Church after the clay of Pente- 
 cost, it signifies "a religious assembly, selected and 
 called out of the world by the doctrine of the Gos- 
 pel, to worship the true God in Christ, according to 
 his word." 
 
 2. The Church, under both dispensations, was 
 called by the Lord, "his bride." See Isaiah lx, 5; 
 Jeremiah xxxii, 2; Revelation xix, 7. In the 
 former instance Jehovah was wedded to a temporal 
 corporation, and in the latter to a spiritual compact ; 
 yet both described by the same name, and made 
 to bear the same relation to God. 
 
 3. The Church, in both stages of her history, is 
 called Christ's "own house." See Hebrews iii, 1-6. 
 In the first dispensation we must understand by this 
 term a mere temporal fabric; while in the last, a 
 spiritual edifice; both, however, described by the 
 same term, and both sustaining the same relation to 
 Christ as "his own house." 
 
 4. The Lord calls the members of his Church, in 
 both dispensations, "his people," "his chosen peo- 
 ple." In the first they were only "his people" in 
 a temporal sense; while in the last they were "his 
 people" in a spiritual sense. Now, in order that 
 these inconsistencies may be carried out to their 
 fullest extent, I would suggest that some one com- 
 
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 129 
 
 petent to the task publish two Bible dictionaries; 
 one for the old and the other for the new dispensa- 
 tion; showing that the same terms used by Divine 
 inspiration have one signification when applied to 
 the Church before the day of Pentecost, and an- 
 other and very different signification when applied 
 to the Church after that period. Why is it that 
 Christians will subject themselves to such glaring 
 inconsistencies ? Is it for the singular gratification 
 of depriving their own infant offspring of the privi- 
 lege of a visible connection with the Church of 
 God, and of enjoying the blessings secured to them 
 in God's gracious covenant? Singular gratification, 
 indeed ! And yet we can trace their opposition to 
 the Abrahamic covenant, and to the " Church in 
 the wilderness/' to no other cause than a fixed and 
 determined opposition to infant Church membership, 
 acknowledged by Christian baptism. 
 
 How much good it does a Christian's heart to cut 
 loose from all such fetters, and plant himself upon 
 the broad and towering rock of promise as revealed 
 in the Abrahamic covenant — "I will be a God unto 
 thee, and unto thy seed after thee, in their genera- 
 tions, for an everlasting covenant" — and from thence 
 look abroad upon the different tribes of God's celes- 
 tial host, scattered over land and sea, dwelling 
 peacefully each in their own tent, or acting effi- 
 ciently under their own banner, and each rejoicing 
 in the prosperity of the other! — the eye running 
 back to Abraham, under God, as the father and 
 head of this numerous sacramental host, and then 
 9 
 
130 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 pushing the vision of faith forward by the aid of 
 prophecy, and see, in each successive age, their 
 number increasing, their glory brightening, till, 
 crossing the Jordan of death, they reach the blessed 
 Canaan above ! 
 
f mi Suflnfr* 
 
 CIRCUMCISION WAS A RELIGIOUS ORDINANCE IN THE CHURCH 
 OF GOD, AND, BY THE AUTHORITY OF JESUS CHRIST, WAS 
 CHANGED IN FORM TO CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 am. Campbell's views of circumcision corrected, and it proven 
 
 TO BE THE RITE OF INITIATION INTO THE CHURCH OF GOD. 
 
 The unity of the different parts of the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, embracing circumcision, has already 
 been considered, and, we trust, established. The 
 evangelical character of the covenant has been, we 
 think, fully proven. Circumcision being a token 
 of that evangelical covenant, must of necessity par- 
 take of its nature; and if no further proof could 
 be adduced, this fact is sufficient to establish for- 
 ever the evangelical character of circumcision. 
 
 But as the spiritual character of circumcision is 
 an important point, and meets with the most de- 
 termined opposition from all classes of anti-peclo- 
 baptists, we deem it important to examine this sub- 
 ject at length, and with all the care its importance 
 demands. If circumcision was instituted, as our 
 opponents say, for temporal, civil, or political pur- 
 poses, they are in duty bound to show what inter- 
 ests of the above character it was designed to 
 
 131 
 
132 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 subserve in Israel. The "burden of proof, the reader 
 will observe, falls here upon our opponents, and not 
 upon us. And we are not disposed to receive, on a 
 point of so much importance, any but positive proof. 
 
 We can not, without impiety, suppose that the 
 God of the patriarchs would, in a covenant in which 
 he had promised so many, and such rich and lasting 
 blessings, at the same time impose upon the nu- 
 merous descendants of these patriarchs an institu- 
 tion the most burdensome, painful, and inconvenient, 
 without subserving some great and general interest, 
 by its observance, in Israel. 
 
 I. We will now attend to the best statement of 
 facts and array of arguments that can be brought 
 by the opposition. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, who is a leader on this subject, says, 
 " This next covenant growing out of the first prom- 
 ise, [keeping up his idea of two or more cove- 
 nants,] is made especially for the sake of ascer- 
 taining, by a fleshly mark, the natural offspring of 
 Abraham, and guaranteeing to them the particular 
 blessing .conveyed to Abraham by the covenant con- 
 cerning the inheritance, and also as to the time of 
 its institution, one year before the birth of Isaac; 
 it occasioned a remarkable difference between Ish- 
 mael and Isaac, though sons of the same parent — 
 the former being the son of his uncircumcision, the 
 latter of his circumcision, though both circumcised 
 themselves, Ishmael in his thirteenth year, and 
 Isaac on the eighth day." (Debate between Camp- 
 bell and Eice, p. 291.) 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 133 
 
 Again lie says, "God is determined to identify 
 and preserve this flesh, commanding fathers to 
 brand their sons before they knew any thing about 
 it, while they were yet as passive as a stone, that 
 the world might recognize it, and know that God 
 keepeth covenant and mercy forever, and that his 
 word standeth fast for a thousand generations." 
 (Debate between Campbell and Rice, p. 308.) 
 
 1. Mr. Campbell says circumcision was instituted 
 " especially for the sake of ascertaining, by a fleshly 
 mark, the natural offspring of Abraham;" but, un- 
 fortunately for this assumption, as has already been 
 proven, others beside the natural offspring of Abra- 
 ham were circumcised. The son of the u stranger," 
 as well as the natural offspring of Abraham, was to 
 be circumcised. "And when a stranger shall so- 
 journ with thee, and will keep the passover to the 
 Lord, let all his males be circumcised. . . . One 
 law shall be to him that is home-born, and to the 
 stranger that sojourneth among you." Exodus xii, 
 48, 49. And the history of the Jews abundantly 
 shows that thousands of Gentiles were converted to 
 the Jewish faith, and were identified with the nat- 
 ural seed of Abraham, each bearing the same 
 " fleshly mark." How, then, could circumcision 
 aid in " ascertaining the natural offspring of Abra- 
 ham?" 
 
 2. He says that circumcision was "the guaran- 
 teeing to them the parental blessing conveyed to 
 Abraham by the covenant concerning the inherit- 
 ance," meaning, I suppose, the land of Canaan. 
 
134 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 And yet, although they all were circumcised, not 
 one of the natural descendants of the patriarchs 
 possessed a foot of land in Canaan, but what they 
 paid for, for the space of near five hundred years; 
 and, although no complaint was ever made of their 
 not being circumcised, yet, about seven hundred 
 years after their settlement in Canaan, ten of the 
 tribes were carried captive into Assyria, and have 
 never returned or possessed their land unto this 
 day. And again: although we hear no complaint 
 upon this subject, the tribes of Judah and Benja- 
 min were carried away captive to Babylon, where 
 they remained " seventy years " deprived of their 
 "inheritance." Furthermore, the Jews were never 
 more strict in the observance of this rite than when 
 the Roman army invaded their country, destroyed 
 their city and temple, overthrew their national 
 polity, and left a million of their inhabitants dead 
 in their streets, while they sold into slavery about 
 ninety-five thousand more, who have never since 
 returned to their inheritance, their land being pos- 
 sessed ever since by the Gentiles. How, then, was 
 circumcision "the guaranteeing to them of the in- 
 heritance," when they have so faithfully observed 
 this painful duty, and yet have been deprived of 
 their land ? We would suggest whether it was not 
 in consequence of failing to "walk before God," as 
 enjoined by the covenant of which circumcision 
 was a "token," which deprived the seed of Abra- 
 ham of their inheritance ? 
 .3. He says that circumcision "occasioned a re- 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 135 
 
 markable difference between Ishmael and Isaac, 
 though sons of the same parent — the former being 
 the son of his uncircumcision, the latter of his cir- 
 cumcision, though they both circumcised them- 
 selves." A more confused and contradictory sen- 
 tence could not well be written than the above. 
 How circumcision could cause Ishmael to be the 
 son of his — Abraham's — uncircumcision, and Isaac 
 to be the son of his circumcision, both having cir- 
 cumcised themselves, is something rather beyond 
 our comprehension. The above serves only to show 
 how utterly impossible it is for anti-pedobaptists, 
 denying the spiritual design of circumcision, to 
 furnish any satisfactory reason for the entailment 
 of this institution upon the posterity of the Jewish 
 patriarchs by the Almighty God. 
 
 II. We will now show the important religious 
 interests subserved by circumcision. The visible 
 Church of God was organized for the especial benefit 
 of those who are invisibly connected with Christ, and 
 sustain to him a justified relation; and so far as 
 it is possible such persons should be connected with 
 the Church visibly, so that their connection with 
 Christ's body may be seen and known of all men, 
 by the world as well as the Church. But, in order 
 that this connection with the Church may be known, 
 there must be some specified form of publicly and 
 visibly receiving them as members. Now, we do not 
 claim that circumcision, or any other Church ordi- 
 nance, can bring the receiver into a justified state; 
 but that such as were already in that state were to 
 
136 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 be circumcised as a visible acknowledgment of 
 Church, relation and privileges : hence it is said of 
 Abraham, "And he received the sign of circum- 
 cision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which 
 he had yet being uncircuincised." Eomans iv, 11 
 And thus, too, his children were to be circumcised, 
 at an age when they all sustained a justified relation 
 to Christ — a relation which Christ declares all little 
 children sustain, when he says, "Of such is the 
 kingdom of heaven." The Lord says, " He that is 
 eight days old shall be circumcised;" "Every man- 
 child among you shall be circumcised;" "And 
 the uncircumcised man-child shall be cut off from 
 his people; he hath broken my covenant." 
 
 To be cut off simply means excision from the 
 Church, or congregation of the Lord, as will be 
 seen by consulting Exodus xii, 15; Num. xv, 30; 
 xix, 13; Exodus xxx, 33, 38; Lev. vii, 20, 21, 25, 
 27; xvii, 4, 9; xix, 8: so that even the natural 
 children of Abraham were not to be visibly acknowl- 
 edged as members of the Church, or congregation, 
 of the Lord, without the reception of the rite of 
 initiation. The idea of being born into the Church 
 has no authority from Scripture, as no child had a 
 right to Church privileges on account of being born 
 of believing parents till circumcised. 
 
 Again: the "stranger" — not of Abraham's natu- 
 ral seed — with his infant offspring, upon giving evi- 
 dence of possessing the requisite spiritual qualifica- 
 tions for membership, must be circumcised. The 
 covenant reads, " He that is born in thy house, or 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 137 
 
 bought with money of any stranger which is not of 
 thy seed/' Gen. xvii, 12; "And when a stranger 
 shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover 
 to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and 
 then let him come near and keep it; and he shall 
 be as one born in the land : for no uncircumcised 
 person shall eat thereof. One law shall be to him 
 that is home-born, and to the stranger that sojourn- 
 eth among you." Exodus xii, 48, 49. The pass- 
 over being a sacrament of the Church, designed, at 
 the same time, to remind them of their deliverance 
 from Egypt, and to typify the Savior yet to be cru- 
 cified and slain for sinners, was strictly reserved for 
 the benefit of the members of the Church : hence 
 all persons wishing to enjoy these Church privileges 
 must be regularly inducted into the Church by cir- 
 cumcision. 
 
 Maimonides, a learned and ancient Jewish writer, 
 says, "The second sort of converted Hebrews were 
 called Proselytes of Justice. They were so called 
 because they embraced the whole law of Moses, and 
 engaged themselves to live holy and justly; and 
 they, therefore, had the rank and privileges of nat- 
 ural Jews. In order to become proselytes of jus- 
 tice there were three things to be performed, the 
 first of which was circumcision. The blood that 
 was spilt in the performance of this was called the 
 blood of the covenant; and these new converts 
 were thought to be children of it. And as to the 
 necessity of it, the command of God to Abraham is 
 very express : circumcision was, as it were, the seal 
 
138 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 which sealed the covenant which the proselyte 
 entered into with God. The second ceremony was 
 washing, or baptism, which must have been per- 
 formed in the presence of at least three Jews of 
 distinction. 
 
 "At the time of the performance of it, the prose- 
 lyte declares his abhorrence of his past life, and 
 that it was neither ambition nor avarice, but a sin- 
 cere love for the law of Moses, which prevailed on 
 him to be baptized. And he was then instructed in 
 the most essential parts of the law of Moses. He 
 promised, at the same time, to lead a godly life, to 
 worship the true God, and to keep his command- 
 ments.^ (See Manners and Customs of the An- 
 cient Israelites.) 
 
 From the above it will be seen : 
 
 1. That the Gentile proselyte was required to 
 renounce all worldly or temporal motives upon his 
 reception into the Church of Israel. This shows 
 conclusively that Israel was not merely a temporal 
 compact, nor was circumcision wholly a temporal 
 ceremony. 
 
 2. Religion and religious privileges were the only 
 motives which were allowed to incline them to the 
 reception of this ordinance. "It was neither am- 
 bition nor avarice, but a sincere love for the law of 
 Moses, which prevailed on them." 
 
 3. The preparatory instruction was all of a re- 
 ligious character. 
 
 4. The pledges were all religious. The candi- 
 date was required to e( declare his abhorrence of his 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 139 
 
 past life, to profess faith in the law of Moses, and 
 engaged to live holy and justly/' and promised to 
 worship the true God, and to keep his command- 
 ments. 
 
 5. Upon receiving circumcision and baptism, they 
 were supposed to sustain precisely "the rank and 
 privileges of natural Jews." But certainly these 
 ordinances could not constitute Gentiles the natural 
 children of Abraham ; they could only become his 
 spiritual seed, and thus stand in the same spiritual 
 relation to Abraham and the covenant, of a natural 
 Jew. Indeed, they were " thought to be children 
 of the covenant." 
 
 6. The first and principal ordinance by which 
 tjiis rank of a natural Jew and child of the cov- 
 enant, was publicly and visibly acknowledged, was 
 circumcision; and the u blood that was spilt in 
 the performance, was called the blood of the cov- 
 enant '/' and " circumcision was, as it were, the 
 seal which sealed the covenant with the proselyte." 
 
 7. The infant children of these converted Gen- 
 tiles were circumcised with their parents, and upon 
 the faith and pledges of their parents, just as 
 though they were the children of Jewish parents. 
 To believers, and their infant offspring, whether 
 Jew or Gentile, was the ordinance of circumcision 
 administered as a rite of initiation into the Church 
 of God, and by which their right to Church mem- 
 bership and privileges was secured. And without 
 the reception of this ordinance, neither Jew nor 
 Gentile, nor their children, were regarded as mem- 
 
140 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 bers, or entitled to the religious privileges of the 
 Church of God. 
 
 III. But here a most formidable objection meets 
 us — one which, in some minds, will overthrow all 
 the testimony we have brought, or can bring, to 
 prove that circumcision was a rite of initiation of 
 believers and their children into the Church of God. 
 We will give the objection in the language of Mr. 
 Campbell: " Males only were the subjects of cir- 
 cumcision. All females were excluded from the 
 blessings, if blessings they were, in the sign of 
 whose flesh a man was clothed. I argue that there 
 were no spiritual blessings in circumcision, else 
 females had not been at all excluded. The God of 
 Abraham never would, by a covenant seal, exclude 
 them from spiritual blessings — from any thing tend- 
 ing to their sanctification and salvation. Baptism 
 certainly has not come in the room of circumcision 
 in this particular." (Debate between Campbell and 
 Bice.) 
 
 1. In replying to the above, we would say, it is 
 not claimed that there were any " blessings in cir- 
 cumcision," itself considered. And this fact must 
 have been known to Mr. C. Pedobaptists do not 
 generally rely upon religious ordinances of any kind 
 to bless them. They only regard these as types, or 
 figures of good things promised in the covenant to 
 which they belong, and as furnishing externally 
 and visibly a legal evidence of their right to the 
 "spiritual blessings" specified in the covenant. 
 Circumcision, therefore, only contained "spiritual 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 141 
 
 blessings," so far as it secured to the candidate the 
 right to the "spiritual blessings" promised in the 
 Abrabaniic covenant. 
 
 2. Although females were not circumcised, yet 
 females did, through their male relatives, as repre- 
 sentatives in this matter, conform to this ordinance, 
 so as to be legally entitled to membership in the 
 Church of God, and to the "spiritual blessings" en- 
 joyed by that Church, and secured to them by the 
 covenant on which it was based. 
 
 We have a very good parallel, from which to draw 
 an illustration, in our state and national govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Females are subjects of this government. Their 
 persons, property, and rights are protected by it; 
 their civil and religious privileges are secure under 
 it, and they are numbered in the general census 
 when taken. And yet females never take an oath 
 of allegiance to the government, and never vote for 
 its officers, nor are they themselves eligible to office. 
 They are, in these particulars, represented by their 
 male relatives. And so it was in the Church of 
 God under the old dispensation. Abraham was 
 required to circumcise himself and his son, and to 
 instruct, govern, and represent that son in the 
 Church till old enough to be himself responsible to 
 represent his wife and daughters in the Church, so 
 as to secure their membership, and entitle them to 
 its blessings and. privileges without circumcision. 
 In all heathen countries the female is the slave of 
 the father first, and of the husband next. In no 
 
142 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 instance is she allowed; either in civil or religious 
 privileges, to stand upon a level with her male rela- 
 tives. It was the design of the Creator in the es- 
 tablishment of his Church to elevate mankind by 
 its agency, civilly, morally, and religiously; and es- 
 pecially to do so with females, who, it seems, stood 
 more particularly in need of elevation. But all such 
 improvements must of necessity be gradual. Hence, 
 the Jewish dispensation stands about midway be- 
 tween heathenism, with which it was preceded and 
 surrounded, and the Gospel dispensation, with which 
 it was succeeded. And hence, all the ordinances 
 and institutions of Judaism contemplated the grad- 
 ual elevation of mankind from the exceedingly low 
 and wretched condition in which they had previ- 
 ously lived, to a state preparatory to the dispensa- 
 tion of the Gospel. And when the Gospel dispen- 
 sation succeeded to Judaism, her ordinances and 
 institutions were modified for the purpose of giving 
 a still higher scale of character to mankind than 
 they had ever before enjoyed. And as this dispen- 
 sation continues, that elevating process will con- 
 tinue. 
 
 Females were elevated under the Jewish dispen- 
 sation very far above their sex in the surrounding 
 heathen world, although they were dependent upon 
 their male relatives to represent them both in 
 Church and state, and through whom they enjoyed 
 all the blessings of a Church relation, as well as 
 civil privileges in the government. 
 
 Females, therefore, were not, as Mr. Campbell 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 143 
 
 asserts, excluded from the u spiritual blessings of 
 circumcision." They enjoyed all the blessings, 
 without any of the burdens of this ordinance. 
 
 3. As the Gospel dispensation was designed to 
 elevate the members of the Church of God, and 
 especially the female members, and to make them 
 more responsible personally for their privileges in 
 the Church, it was important that the ordinance of 
 initiation should be changed in form, so that both 
 sexes could personally receive it. Hence the sub- 
 stitution of baptism instead of circumcision. So 
 that the objection so often raised by anti-pedobap- 
 tists, and the one on which they mostly rely, when 
 fully understood, turns directly against them, and 
 furnishes us with an obvious reason for the change. 
 But we must pay our respects to Mr. Campbell once 
 more on this point, for it is one to which he clings 
 with great pertinacity. He says, " Circumcision was 
 not the door into any Church or religious institu- 
 tion. It was no initiatory rite into any moral insti- 
 tution. The Ishmaelites, and Edomites, and many 
 other nations by Keturah were circumcised. Into 
 what Church did they enter ? The Jews were mem- 
 bers of the politico-ecclesiastico Church by natural 
 birth. Circumcision was no initiatory rite or door 
 to them. But none can enter Christ's Church un- 
 less 'born again ' — 'born from above/ How, then, 
 are the two Churches identical?" 
 
 (1.) Mr. Campbell asserts that u circumcision was 
 not the door into any Church or religious institu- 
 tion," because "the Ishmaelites, and Edomites, and 
 
144 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 many other nations by Keturah were circumcised f % 
 and then asks, "Into what Church did they enter?" 
 
 I answer, without hesitancy, that Ishmael and 
 Ezra entered the Church of God, instituted by 
 "God in Christ," in the house and family of Abra- 
 ham. And from what we can learn of their moral 
 and religious character, they were, at the time, 
 among its brightest ornaments, believing in, and wor- 
 shiping, with their venerable father, the God of the 
 patriarchs; and although their descendants aposta- 
 tized into the grossest idolatry, retaining only the 
 initiatory sign, and were evidently disowned of 
 Heaven, and cast out of his Church, this was no more 
 than what happened to thousands of the descendants 
 of Isaac, and of Israel, and has happened a thousand 
 times among baptized Christians under the dispen- 
 sation of the Gospel ; for circumcision, no more than 
 baptism, can constitute a person a member for life, 
 in the Church, unless his moral and religious con- 
 duct corresponds with the requirements of the 
 Abrahamic covenant, which were, to "walk before 
 God" and "be perfect." 
 
 (2.) Mr. Campbell was very unfortunate in assert- 
 ing that "the Jews were members of the politico- 
 ecclesiastico Church by natural birth" — unfortu- 
 nate, because it is not true. The covenant says, 
 "And the un circumcised man-child whose flesh of 
 his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be 
 cut off form his people." Gen. xvii, 14. 
 
 No one, whether Jew or Gentile, infant or adult, 
 was entitled to the privileges of the Church till he 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 145 
 
 was circumcised. And if even the son of believing 
 Abraham was not circumcised, he was to be "cut* 
 off from his people." Where, then, was membership 
 by natural birth? 
 
 (3.) But the most unhappy assertion of all was, 
 that " circumcision was no initiatory rite into any 
 moral institution." What, does he not consider the 
 " Church in the wilderness," built by "God in 
 Christ," requiring its members to "walk before God 
 and be perfect," and to whom was given the moral 
 law, the purest rule of life ever given to man, not 
 a moral institution ! 
 
 But perhaps he did not mean to say that the 
 "congregation of the Lord" was not a moral insti- 
 tution, but that circumcision was not the "initia- 
 tory rite into this moral institution." But if so, 
 we would ask, what was the initiatory rite into it ? 
 iFor even a "politico-ecclesiastico Church," without 
 any initiatory rite, would be a strange affair. If 
 circumcision was not that rite, why did he not show 
 what it was? This was impossible; for no other 
 institution of the Old Testament bears any such 
 relation to the "Church in the wilderness." 
 
 But we think the evidence already adduced suf- 
 ficient on this subject. Circumcision was the rite 
 of initiation into the Church of God from its forma- 
 tion down to the commencement of the new dispen- 
 sation. 
 
 10 
 
146 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 circumcision was a " token" of a covenant relation with 
 
 god; a "sign" of inward purity; and a "seal" 
 
 of the righteousness of faith. 
 
 Circumcision subserved a variety of important 
 religious purposes, a few of which we will now de- 
 scribe. 
 
 I. It was a token of a solemn covenant relation 
 to God: "And it shall be a token of the covenant 
 betwixt me and you." G-en. xvii, 11. The solemn 
 import of the token depends upon the grave char- 
 acter of the subjects and interests in reference to 
 which the high contracting parties bound them- 
 selves in the covenant. These subjects are pre- 
 sented in detail in Part I, Sec. II, of this work. 
 Other instances are on record of covenants, with 
 their appointed tokens, calculated to illustrate this. 
 Thus, when the Lord had drowned the world with 
 a flood of water, he appeared to Noah, and said, 
 "I will establish my covenant with you; neither 
 shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of 
 a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to 
 destroy the earth. And God said, This is the token 
 of the covenant which I make between me and you, 
 and every living creature that is with you, for per- 
 petual generations : I do set my bow in the cloud, 
 and it shall be for a token of a covenant between 
 me and the earth." Gen. ix, 11-13. Here the 
 Lord obligates himself in a most solemn covenant 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 147 
 
 made with Noah, not again to "cut off all flesh by 
 the waters of a flood f and his "bow in the cloud 
 shall be a token" of the above covenant engage- 
 ment. And, whenever the glittering rainbow is 
 seen, by the descendants of Noah, encircling the 
 heavens, it betokens to them the faithfulness of a 
 covenant-keeping God. And so in the Abrahamic 
 covenant, as developed in the seventeenth chapter 
 of Genesis. In this covenant we have seen, 
 
 1. A precept, obligating Abraham, and whoever 
 else should stand in the same relation to it, to 
 "walk before God" and to "be perfect." 
 
 2. A promise, obligating the "Almighty God" to 
 be the God of Abraham, and of his seed forever, 
 etc., specifying various things embraced in the 
 promise. 
 
 8. A rite, betokening to Abraham and his seed, 
 on whom this token was forever to be found, the 
 above solemn engagements. In a subsequent period 
 in their history, we see the "blood" sprinkled upon 
 the "door-posts" of the tents of Israel, furnishing 
 a "token" of God's engagement to pass over the 
 camp of Israel, in the destruction of the first-born 
 of Egypt, 
 
 In each of the above cases, the subjects, or inter- 
 ests, about which the covenant is made, determine 
 the character, both of the covenant and of its token. 
 If these interests are temporal, civil, or spiritual, 
 the token must be of the same nature. Therefore, 
 as the interests embraced, both in the precept and 
 promise of the Abrahamic covenant, are of the 
 
148 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 highest spiritual character, so must the token, also, 
 be of the highest spiritual nature. 
 
 II. It was a sign — an outward sign in the flesh — ■ 
 of inward holiness of heart. Hence, St. Paul says, 
 "he [Abraham] received the sign of circumcision," 
 etc. The term sign is so familiar to the Bible stu- 
 dent as scarcely to need an illustration. In reveal- 
 ing his will to man, Grod accommodated himself to 
 man's weakness, by employing the most striking 
 and appropriate figures, or signs of heavenly things; 
 thus presenting to our minds his spiritual truth, by 
 descriptive temporal things. This is especially 
 true of the Old Testament Scriptures. 
 
 And indeed nearly all of the religious ordinances 
 and worship of the Old Testament were typical, or 
 figurative, of good things promised to the faithful. 
 Now, we find that holiness of heart, such as was en- 
 joined upon Abraham and his seed, in the precept 
 of the covenant, was frequently urged upon the 
 congregation of Israel, through the means of cir- 
 cumcision, its divinely-appointed sign. "Circum- 
 cise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no 
 more stiff-necked." Deut. x, 16. "And the Lord 
 thy Grod will circumcise thine heart, and the heart 
 of thy seed, to love the Lord thy Glod with all thy 
 heart and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live." 
 Deut. xxx, 6. An ancient Jewish author has said, 
 "Circumcision is a divine sign, which Grod has 
 placed on the member of concupiscence, to the end 
 that we may overcome evil desire. (Liber Cosri, 
 Part I, C. 115, p. 70.) 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 149 
 
 In the above Scriptures Moses describes a very 
 high state of Christian holiness, a complete change 
 of the heart, that they might "be no more stiff- 
 necked/' as well as the filling the heart with divine 
 love, so that they could "love the Lord their God 
 with all their heart, and with all their soul/' and 
 that they might "live" spiritually here, and eter- 
 nally with God hereafter. And all this is de- 
 nominated " circumcising the heart," etc., simply 
 because circumcision was its divinely-appointed 
 covenant sign. The familiar manner, too, in which 
 the term is used, without explanation, shows how 
 perfectly well the descendants of the patriarchs un- 
 derstood the import of this sign in their flesh. It 
 was not to designate them as Abraham's natural 
 seed, but to remind them of the holiness of heart 
 and life of which it was the appropriate sign. 
 Jer. iv, 4 : " Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and 
 take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Ju- 
 dah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; lest my fury 
 come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench 
 it, because of the evil of your doings." Circumcis- 
 ion could not change the heart, nor turn away Di- 
 vine wrath, or save the inhabitants of Judah or 
 Jerusalem; but the grace of God upon the heart 
 could do all this, which grace was then at their 
 command; hence, the term circumcise is here again 
 used in its true figurative sense, as a sign of inward 
 holiness. Romans ii, 28, 29 : "For he is not a Jew, 
 which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcis- 
 ion, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, 
 
150 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 winch, is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of 
 the heart." Christians in all ages have been prone 
 to rest in outward ordinances, and to neglect the 
 inward grace of which they are but the sign. This 
 was the condition of the Jews in the days of Christ 
 and of his apostles. Hence the admonition in the 
 above passage, and the effort to direct the attention 
 of the Jews through the sign to the spiritual sub- 
 stance signified. And other similar efforts were 
 made by the same apostle — Colossians ii, 11 — "In 
 whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision 
 made without hands, in putting off the body of the 
 sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." As 
 Dr. Clarke says, "All that was designed by circum- 
 cision, literally performed, is accomplished in them 
 that believe through the Spirit and power of 
 Christ." Enough testimony, I trust, has been pro- 
 duced to show that circumcision was not only an 
 outward sign in the flesh of Abraham, directing his 
 attention to the inward holiness, by the possession 
 of which alone he could be enabled to "walk before 
 God and to be perfect," but also to show that it was 
 a "sign" of the same in the flesh of all his seed. 
 
 III. It was a seal of the righteousness of faith. 
 Romans iv, 11: "And he received the sign of cir- 
 cumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith 
 which he had being yet uncircumcised." Genesis 
 xv, 6, we read, "And he [Abraham] believed in 
 the Lord, and he counted it to him for righteous- 
 ness." Abraham was accounted righteous before 
 God in consequence of his faith in God, as much 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 151 
 
 so as though lie had never sinned. And then in 
 Genesis — xvii, 26 — after the covenant was made, 
 confirmed, and explained to him, Abraham, as a 
 believer in God, received the rite of circumcision, 
 not only as a rite of initiation to Church privileges ; 
 a token of a most solemn covenant relation to God; 
 a sign of inward holiness ; but also as a seal or con- 
 firmation of the previous faith by which he was 
 accounted righteous. 
 
 A celebrated Jewish rabbin, in the book of Zohar, 
 as quoted by Ainsworth, gives the following account 
 of circumcision as a seal, not only as applied to 
 Abraham, but also to his seed. "At what time a 
 man is sealed with this holy seal, [of circumcision,] 
 thenceforth he seeth the holy and blessed God prop- 
 erly, and the holy soul is united to him. If he be 
 not worthy, and keepeth not this sign, what is writ- 
 ten ? By the breath of God they perish — Job iv, 
 9 — because this seal of the holy blessed God was 
 not kept. But if he be worthy and keep it, the 
 Holy Ghost is not separated from hirn." 
 
 1. The candidate must be "worthy;" that is, 
 righteous. If an adult, he is made righteous 
 through faith in God. If a child, he is made 
 righteous without faith, through Christ's atonement 
 and grace. 
 
 2. If worthy r , the "holy soul is united to God," 
 and by faith "thenceforth he seeth the holy and 
 blessed God properly," and the Holy Ghost is not 
 separated from him. And circumcision was the 
 "holy seal" of this righteousness. 
 
152 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 In closing this section we will invite the close 
 attention of the reader to the following important 
 facts : 
 
 1. It has been proven that the Abraharnic cov- 
 enant provided for its own perpetuity, including its 
 rite. Genesis xvii, 13: "And my covenant shall 
 be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant." In 
 the flesh of Abraham's spiritual seed, embracing all 
 believers in Christ, and their infant offspring, must 
 the token of God's covenant with Abraham forever 
 be seen. The God of Abraham obligates himself 
 here never to abrogate that token, and Abraham's 
 seed are never to neglect its observance; it " shall 
 be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant." 
 
 2. Although circumcision was appointed as the 
 form of that token at the time the covenant was 
 made by the high contracting parties, yet it is not 
 said that circumcision should be the form of this 
 token forever. The same authority, therefore, that 
 made the covenant and appointed circumcision its 
 token, could change so as to improve the form of 
 the token, but could not disannul either the cov- 
 enant or its token. The token, in some form, must 
 continue with the covenant through all time; so 
 that all of Abraham's spiritual seed can have it in 
 their flesh for an everlasting covenant. 
 
 3. Inasmuch as circumcision was laid aside by 
 the authority of Christ and his apostles, some other 
 and more appropriate form of the covenant must 
 have, by the same authority, succeeded it. The 
 truth, the covenant, and oath of God require either 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 153 
 
 the continuance of the old form of the token, or in 
 its stead a better one. 
 
 4. If Christian baptism does not succeed cir- 
 cumcision as an improved form of the token of the 
 everlasting covenant; what ordinance now in prac- 
 tice among the spiritual seed of Abraham has taken 
 its place ? And by what means can Abraham's seed 
 show the token of their covenant relation to God 
 in their flesh? We demand an answer to this 
 inquiry. 
 
 5. It will not answer to cavil, as our opponents 
 sometimes do, by pointing to the differences existing 
 between these two forms of the token. Mr. Camp- 
 bell presents sixteen particulars in which circum- 
 cision and baptism differ. But differing in a thou- 
 sand little particulars does not prove that the one 
 does not succeed and take the place of the other, 
 answering in a few general particulars the same 
 ends and signifying the same things that the other 
 did. Why, let me ask, should a change be made, 
 if the one that succeeds must, in every particular, 
 resemble the former? Why not continue the old 
 one? We have supposed that it was because cir- 
 cumcision was, in many respects, an unsuitable 
 institution to accompany the Gospel throughout the 
 world; that it was succeeded by one much more 
 appropriate, and, therefore, in some respects, differ- 
 ing from its antecedent. If so, where, then, is the 
 propriety of so much harping upon the difference 
 between the two ordinances. It looks very much 
 like an effort to draw attention from arguments that 
 
154 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 are unanswerable. But we can not devote further 
 time to this point in the general argument, and 
 shall close by simply reminding the reader that we 
 have presented very important spiritual interests 
 subserved by circumcision, thereby establishing its 
 spiritual character and design. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 PROSELYTE BAPTISM AND THE BAPTISM OF JOHN CONSIDERED. 
 
 The origin of proselyte baptism is very much 
 vailed in obscurity; the Jews, however, claim that 
 the practice among them was very ancient, probably 
 from Moses. 
 
 I. The first Scriptural baptism on record, is the 
 baptism of the Israelites, and is thus described by 
 St. Paul: " Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye 
 should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were 
 under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 
 and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and 
 in the sea." 1 Corinthians x, 1, 2. Mr. Wesley 
 explains the second verse thus: " And ivere all, as 
 it were, baptized unto Hoses — initiated into the relig- 
 ion which he taught them." Dr. Clarke says, 
 " Rather into 3Ioses — into the covenant of which 
 Moses was the mediator; and by this typical bap- 
 tism they were brought under the obligation of act- 
 ing according to the Mosaic precepts, as Christians 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 155 
 
 receiving Christian baptism are said to be baptized 
 into Christ, and are thereby brought under obliga- 
 tion to keep the precepts of the Gospel." (Com- 
 ments on 1 Corinthians x, 1, 2.) Thus was the 
 whole congregation of Israel, male and female, par- 
 ents and children, baptized at once into Moses. 
 
 II. Different baptisms were instituted by Moses 
 while in the wilderness, and subsequently practiced 
 by the Israelites. St. Paul thus speaks of them : 
 "Which, stood only in meats and drinks, and divers 
 washings" — partita pots, baptisms. These baptisms 
 were, some of them, religious, and some of them 
 were only designed for cleanliness and health. But 
 none of them constituted the true proselyte bap- 
 tism, so long and so frequently administered among 
 the Jews to Gentile converts. 
 
 III. Moses says, " One law shall be to him that 
 is home-born, and to the stranger that sojourneth 
 among you." Ex. xii, 49. Israel was initiated into 
 the Abrahamic covenant by circumcision, and into 
 the religion of Moses by baptism in the cloud, after 
 which she offered sacrifices. Hence, as the same 
 law must be applied to the " stranger," all converted 
 Gentiles were from this time both circumcised and 
 baptized } confirming both by a sacrifice. These 
 facts are recorded by Maimonides, the great inter- 
 preter of Jewish law, as follows : 
 
 "Israel was admitted into the covenant by three 
 things; namely, by circumcision, baptism, and sac- 
 rifice. Circumcision was in Egypt; as it is said, 
 None uncircumcised shall eat of the passover. 
 
156 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Baptism was in the wilderness, before the giving of 
 the law, as it is said, Thou shalt sanctify them to- 
 day and to-morrow, and let them wash their gar- 
 ments. . . . And so in all ages, when a Gentile is 
 willing to enter into a covenant, and gather himself 
 under the wings of the majesty of God, and take 
 on him the yoke of the law, he must be circumcised, 
 and baptized, and bring a sacrifice, as it is writ- 
 ten, <As you are, so shall the stranger be/ How 
 are you? By circumcision, and baptism, and bring- 
 ing a sacrifice. So also the stranger, [or proselyte,] 
 through cdl generations ; by circumcision, and bap- 
 tism, and bringing a sacrifice." 
 
 Again, he says, "The second sort of converted 
 Hebrews were called Proselytes of Justice. They 
 were so called, because they embraced the whole 
 law of Moses, and engaged themselves to live holy 
 and justly; and they, therefore, had the rank and 
 privileges of natural Jews. In order to become 
 proselytes of justice, there were three things to be 
 performed; the first of which was circumcision. 
 The blood that was spilt in the performance of this 
 was called the blood of the covenant, and these new 
 converts were thought to be children of it. And 
 as to the necessity of it, the command of God to 
 Abraham is very express: circumcision was, as it 
 were, the seal which sealed the covenant with the 
 proselyte entered into with God. The second cere- 
 mony was washing, or baptism, which must have 
 been performed in the presence of at least three 
 Jews of distinction. At the time of the perform- 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 157 
 
 ance of it, the proselyte declares liis abhorrence of 
 his past life, and that it was neither ambition nor 
 avarice, but a sincere love for the law of Moses 
 which prevailed on him to be baptized/' etc. (Man- 
 ners and Customs of the Ancient Israelites.) 
 
 11 Whenever any heathen will betake himself and 
 be joined to the covenant of Israel, and place him- 
 self under the wings of the divine Majesty, and 
 take the yoke of the law upon him, voluntary cir- 
 cumcision, baptism, and oblation were required; 
 but if it be a woman, baptism and oblation. That 
 was a 'common axiom, h)2W) L AW iy 1J JV8 — no man 
 is a proselyte till he be circumcised and baptized." 
 (Jevamoth, fol. 46.) 
 
 "They assert that an infinite number of prose- 
 lytes, in the days of David and Solomon, were ad- 
 mitted by baptism. The Sanhedrim received not 
 proselytes in the days of David and Solomon; not 
 in the days of David, lest they should betake them- 
 selves to proselytism out of a fear of the kingdom 
 of Israel; not in the days of Solomon, lest they 
 might do the same by reason of the glory of the 
 kingdom. And yet abundance of proselytes were 
 made, in the days of David and Solomon, before 
 private men : and the great Sanhedrim was full of 
 care about this business; for they would not cast 
 them out of the Church, because they were bap- 
 tized." (Maimonides Issure Biah, C. 13.) 
 
 Dr. Lightfoot, speaking of John's baptism, says : 
 "But yet the first use of baptism was not exhibited 
 at that time; for baptism, very many centuries back, 
 
158 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 had been both known and received in most frequent 
 use among the Jews; and for the very same end as 
 it now obtains among Christians ; namely, that by 
 it proselytes might be introduced into the Church; 
 and hence it was called jTTJ fi L ?'Ot9, baptism for prose- 
 lytism, and was distinct from D1J fiboft, baptism, 
 or to ashing from uncleanness." (See the Babylonian 
 Talmud in Jevamoth.) 
 
 Again, he says, "You see baptism inseparably 
 joined to the circumcision of proselytes. There 
 was, indeed, some little distance of time; for they 
 were not baptized till the pain of circumcision was 
 healed, because water might be injurious to the wound, 
 but certain baptism ever followed. We acknowledge, 
 indeed, that circumcision was plainly of Divine in- 
 stitution; but by whom baptism, which was insepa- 
 rable from it, was instituted is doubtful. And yet, 
 it is worthy of observation, our Savior rejected cir- 
 cumcision, and retained the appendix baptism; and 
 when all the Gentiles were now to be instructed into 
 the true religion, he preferred this proselytical intro- 
 ductory — pardon the expression — unto the sacra- 
 ment of entrance into the Gospel. One might ob- 
 serve the same almost in the eucharist. The lamb 
 in the passover was of Divine institution, and so 
 indeed was the bread; but whence was the wine? 
 But yet, rejecting the lamb, Christ instituted the 
 sacrament in the bread and wine." A very appro- 
 priate and striking parallel, indeed. 
 
 The same author, speaking of the difference be- 
 tween the Jewish baptisms for cleansing, and this 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 159 
 
 proselyte baptism, says, " If you compare the wash- 
 ing of polluted persons prescribed by the law with 
 the baptism of proselytes, both that and this im- 
 ply uncleanness : however, something different; that 
 implies legal uncleanness, this heathen, but both 
 polluting. But a proselyte was baptized not only 
 into the washing away of that Gentile pollution, 
 nor only thereby to be transplanted into the religion 
 of the Jews, but that, by the most accurate rite of 
 translation that could possibly be, he might so pass 
 into an Israelite that, being married to an Israelite 
 woman, he might produce a free and legitimate 
 seed, and an undefiled offspring." (See Clarke's 
 comments at the end of Mark.) 
 
 1. We learn from the above the most probable 
 origin of proselyte baptism — it is clearly traced back 
 to Moses, with whom it most likely originated — 
 to bring Gentile proselytes into the same relation 
 to the religion of Moses, that the Israelites were 
 brought by being baptized unto Moses. 
 
 2. That baptism accompanied circumcision from 
 Moses to Christ as the associated rite of initiation, 
 covenant token, sign, and seal, and for these purposes 
 was administered especially to females, to whom cir- 
 cumcision was not applicable. 
 
 3. That proselyte baptism differed essentially from 
 the " diverse washings," or baptisms, practiced by 
 the Jews for various legal purifications. 
 
 IV. The baptism of John differed from both 
 proselyte and Jewish baptisms. Dr. Lightfoot, on 
 this subject, says, "The baptism of proselytes was 
 
160 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 the bringing over of Gentiles into the Jewish relig- 
 ion ; the baptism of John was the bringing over of 
 the Jews into another religion ; and hence it is the 
 more to be wondered at that the people so readily 
 flocked to him when he introduced a baptism so dif- 
 ferent from the known proselytical baptism, the 
 reason of which is to be fetched from hence, that 
 at the coming of the Messiah they thought, not 
 without cause, that the state of things was plainly 
 to be changed, and that from the oracles of the 
 prophets, who with one mouth described the times 
 of the Messiah for a new world. 
 
 "The baptism of proselytes was an obligation to 
 perform the law; that of John was an obligation to 
 repentance . . — Mark i, 4 — which being undertaken, 
 they who were baptized professed to renounce their 
 own legal righteousness, and, on the contrary, ac- 
 knowledged themselves to be obliged to repentance 
 and faith in the Messiah to come. 
 
 "John's baptism was either an entirely new insti- 
 tution, designed only for a particular purpose, and 
 was discontinued when that object was accomplished, 
 or it was taken from some of the numerous baptisms 
 practiced among the Jews, and modified so as to 
 suit the peculiar mission of John, and which ceased, 
 with other Jewish baptisms, at the commencement 
 of the new dispensation." 
 
 We incline to the opinion that John's baptism 
 was a new institution, differing from any baptism 
 with which it was preceded. It was the preparing 
 the way of the Lord by enjoining repentance and 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 1G1 
 
 faith in the Messiah at hand. Nothing like it was 
 practiced in the Old Testament times, with or with- 
 out Divine appointment. Like John himself, it had 
 a peculiar mission. 
 
 V. John's baptism was not the true Christian bap- 
 tism. 
 
 1. John baptized Jews only, while Christian bap- 
 tism is for both Jews and Gentiles. 
 
 2. John baptized in the name or authority of 
 God, while Christian baptism is applied in the name 
 of the Holy Trinity. 
 
 3. John baptized into no name; Christian baptism 
 is into as well as in the name of the Holy Trinity. 
 
 4. John's baptism did not initiate his subjects 
 into the Church of either dispensation; all of them 
 nominally belonged already, while Christian baptism 
 is the ordinance of initiation under the Gospel. 
 
 5. Though all Judea and Jerusalem received bap- 
 tism of John in Jordan, not one of them, on that 
 account, was exempt from Christian baptism. See 
 Acts xix, 1-5. St. Paul at Corinth said, "Have 
 ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed ? And. 
 they said unto him, We have not so much as heard 
 whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said 
 unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized ? And 
 they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, 
 John verily baptized with the baptism of repent- 
 ance, saying unto the people, that they should be- 
 lieve on him which should come after him, that is, 
 on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were 
 baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. " 
 
 11 
 
162 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 "I know/' says Mr. Campbell, "to what tortures 
 this passage has been subjected by such cold, cloudy, 
 and sickening commentators as John Gill. But no 
 man can, with any regard to the grammar of lan- 
 guage, or the import of the most definite words, 
 make Luke say, that when these twelve men heard 
 Paul declare the design of Christian baptism, they 
 were not baptized into the name of the Lord 
 Jesus. " 
 
 We have now examined all the different baptisms 
 practiced among the Jews, from Moses to John the 
 Baptist, and have ascertained their probable origin 
 and design. The question which we here leave for 
 the reader to ponder, is, from which of these did 
 Jesus Christ most probably take the baptism insti- 
 tuted in his Gospel ? 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 CIRCUMCISION WAS DISCONTINUED, AND THE BAPTISM WHICH HAD 
 
 ACCOMPANIED IT WAS IMPROVED AND SUBSTITUTED AS 
 
 THE BITE OF INITIATION, ETC., BY THE 
 
 AUTHORITY OF JESUS CHRIST. 
 
 We now approach a very important point in the 
 present discussion, the connecting of the two ordi- 
 nances. We have already proven their parallel 
 connection from Moses to Christ, in their applica- 
 tion to Jewish proselytes; but the most critical point 
 is to show their successive connection, that baptism 
 was not only made to succeed, but also to supersede 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 163 
 
 circumcision, as a different form of the same ordi- 
 nance, under the same covenant, and signifying the 
 same thing. 
 
 We claim not that the same names were applied; 
 that baptism was called a token, a sign, or a seal. 
 Names are only important as they aid in describing 
 the character and relation of an object; and other 
 modes of proof are equally conclusive. 
 
 Jesus Christ was the only being clothed with 
 authority to make the change, and he only at lib- 
 erty to change so as to improve the former covenant 
 token. We have proven the continuance of the 
 covenant, the fulfillment of its promise, and the per- 
 petuity of its rite under the dispensation of the 
 Gospel. The Gospel, in fact, was but the consum- 
 mation of all the blessings and privileges, so far as 
 this world can experience their fulfillment, prom- 
 ised in the Abrahamic covenant in behalf of the 
 Church of God. 
 
 We are not merely to show that a resemblance is 
 traceable between the two ordinances, but to prove 
 that the one succeeds to the place and office of the 
 other. Remote analogies are not sufficient; an exact 
 unity of purpose and import must be traced between 
 them, and baptism must be shown to come in the 
 place of circumcision. 
 
 As this is an important link in the general argu- 
 ment, it is not surprising that it has been strongly 
 contested. H The reader is admonished of the im- 
 portance of enlarged views of the Divine economy in 
 treating subjects of this nature. He should bring 
 
164 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 to the investigation a disciplined and candid mind. 
 Nothing is more pitiful, or unworthy the dignity, or 
 irrelevant to the weakness and dependence of our un- 
 derstandings, than for us, on our first approach to a 
 subject, or on a merely-partial knowledge of its con- 
 nections and bearings, and before we have entered 
 into the wide and extensive designs of Grod, to de- 
 mand or expect the same posture of things with re- 
 spect to clearness and evidence, as if the present had 
 no connection with the past, by which it might re- 
 ceive explanation. The great Author of all things 
 acts upon a wise, established plan, wherein one part 
 has relation to the other. To understand, therefore, 
 any part of the works or ways of Grod, we must un- 
 derstand others which stand connected with it. 
 G-od has not seen fit, in the world of nature, or in 
 the dispensations of his moral government, to es- 
 tablish each particular fact upon a separate and 
 independent ground of proof, but by establishing a 
 just connection between all the several parts of a 
 vast economy, one thing is thus made, by the nature 
 of the case, to prove and illustrate the other. Thus, 
 in directing to a certain line of duty, he does not 
 always lay down that formal proof of facts, as if 
 nothing had subsisted in all his former dispensa- 
 tions to establish faith and enjoin obedience touch- 
 ing this particular thing, but evidently takes into 
 account the just amount of information that may 
 be derived from his former acts, and adduces only 
 what may be lacking to complete the revelation. 
 Nothing can be more prejudicial to just views of 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 165 
 
 God and his works, than to suppose his successive 
 acts and dispensations are but so many unconnected 
 and independent effects put forth from time to time 
 to meet existing exigencies, and not constituting a 
 regular, progressive development of one wise, broad, 
 comprehensive plan." (Hib. on Bap., pp. 61, 62.) 
 
 "The wisdom of God, in the arrangement of suc- 
 cessive dispensations, seems averse to sudden and 
 violent innovations, rarely introducing new rites 
 without incorporating something of the old. As, 
 by the introduction of the Mosaic, the simple ritual 
 of the patriarchal dispensation was not so properly 
 abolished, as amplified and extended into a prefigu- 
 ration of good things to come, in which the worship 
 by sacrifices, and the distinction of animals into 
 clean and unclean, reappeared under a new form , 
 so the era of immediate preparation was distin- 
 guished by a ceremony not entirely new, but de- 
 rived from the purifications of the law, applied to a 
 special purpose. Our Lord incorporated the same 
 rite into his religion, newly modified and adapted 
 to the peculiar views and objects of the Christian 
 economy, in conjunction with another positive insti- 
 tution, the rudiments of which are perceptible in 
 the passover. It seemed suitable to his wisdom, by 
 such gentle gradations, to conduct his Church from 
 an infantine state to a state of maturity and per- 
 fection." (Robert Hall's Works, vol. i, p. 303.) 
 
 The great commission given by Christ to his apos- 
 tles, which we will now proceed to investigate, will 
 throw some light upon this subject: " And Jesus 
 
166 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 came, and spake unto them, saying, All power is 
 given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, 
 therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in 
 the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost ." Matt, xxviii, 18, 19. 
 
 1. Christ says, "All power is given unto me 
 in heaven and in earth/ ' When he appeared to 
 Abram, and entered into covenant with him, he 
 said, "X am the Almighty God." Here, then, is 
 the same being that made the covenant with Abra- 
 ham, clothed with omnipotence. And that omnip- 
 otence pledged to Abraham, to "pour out blessings 
 upon his seed, richly, abundantly, continually" is 
 now employed in the fulfillment of this stupendous 
 pledge. 
 
 2. He says to the apostles, and to all that suc- 
 ceed them, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all na- 
 tions," etc. On the word fia^tsvaats — teach — Dr. 
 Clarke says, "Make disciples of all nations." Mr. 
 Wesley says, "Go ye, and disciple all nations." Mr. 
 Campbell also translates it, "Disciple all nations." 
 (Debate between Campbell and Rice, p. 380.) The 
 apostles were commissioned, then, to " disciple all 
 nations" to Christ. And St. Paul says, "If ye be 
 Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs ac- 
 cording to the promise." Gal. iii, 29. " The 
 promise" was, a "father of many nations have I 
 made thee." When, therefore, the commission of 
 the apostles is fulfilled, and "all nations are disci- 
 pled to Christ," then will the promise made to 
 Abraham be fulfilled; he will be a "father of many 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 167 
 
 nations/' even all nations. Christ, then, was simply 
 providing for the full development and fulfillment 
 of the covenant made with Abraham, concerning 
 his seed, in the commission given to his apostles to 
 " disciple all nations/' 
 
 3. He says, " Baptizing them/' etc. Now, let 
 the reader carefully review the following proven 
 facts : 
 
 (1.) When Christ appeared to Abraham, he cov- 
 enanted with him, that all that Christ should par- 
 don and adopt as his, in all nations, and through all 
 time, should constitute his "seed." 
 
 (2.) That seed must forever bear in its flesh a 
 token of this covenant engagement. 
 
 (3.) Circumcision was, then, appointed as said 
 covenant token, without saying how long it should 
 continue to subserve that interest. 
 
 (4.) As the children of Israel were crossing the 
 Eed Sea, they were "baptized unto Moses/' and 
 the same law being binding upon the stranger, all 
 converted Gentiles were both circumcised and 
 baptized. 
 
 (5.) This same Jesus Christ appears among men 
 at the time appointed, connected with the seed of 
 Abraham, and dies for the sins of the world, ac- 
 cording as he had obligated himself to do in the 
 covenant with Abraham, and now convenes his apos- 
 tles for the very purpose of making provision for 
 the enlargement of Abraham's seed, as he had also 
 promised in the covenant to do; and charges those 
 apostles most solemnly, as they discipled all nations, 
 
168 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 to "baptize theni," they being the very seed that 
 must forever exhibit in their flesh the token of the 
 Abrahamic covenant. True, he says nothing here 
 about circumcision. Nor was it necessary to incum- 
 ber the apostles' commission with an explanation of 
 each particular point, when he had before promised 
 them the "Spirit" which should "lead them into all 
 truth/' etc. 
 
 A case exactly parallel to this is found in the 
 paschal supper. In that supper, as instituted by 
 Moses, and practiced by the Jews till Christ came, 
 the first thing of importance was the killing and eat- 
 ing of the paschal lamb. Next came the "unleav- 
 ened bread," the " bitter herbs," etc. But the use 
 of pure, unfermented wine — whether by Divine ap- 
 pointment or not, we can not tell, any more than we 
 can the baptizing of proselytes — was connected, as 
 an appropriate appendage, with the lamb and the 
 unleavened bread, etc. And yet, at the last paschal 
 supper before his death, "as they were eating, Jesus 
 took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it 
 to the disciples and said, Take, eat; this is my 
 body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and 
 gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this 
 is my blood of the new testament, which is shed 
 for many for the remission of sins." Matt, xxvi, 
 26-28. Here no mention is made of the paschal 
 lamb, either continuing or discontinuing it, any 
 more than circumcision is mentioned in the former 
 case. And yet this fact, together with the manifest 
 inappropriateness of the use of the lamb as a Gos- 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 169 
 
 pel ordinance, has ever since been regarded as suf- 
 ficient evidence that it was to be discontinued, as a 
 type of the Savior's death; and as the wine is a more 
 befitting emblem, and is expressly enjoined for that 
 specific purpose, the Church of Christ has universally 
 asked no further proof that wine, in the sacrament, 
 takes the place of the paschal lamb. On precisely 
 similar testimony do we claim that Christ, in his 
 commission to his apostles to disciple all nations, 
 thereby constituting them Abraham's seed, accord- 
 ing to the covenant promise, and enjoining baptism 
 upon all these persons, put it in the place of cir- 
 cumcision, which, up to this time, was, by Divine 
 appointment, received by all the seed of the patri- 
 arch. This is certainly the view of this whole sub- 
 ject taken by St. Paul: "For as many of you as 
 have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 
 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there, is neither 
 bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for 
 ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be 
 Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs ac- 
 cording to the promise. " 
 
 1. The apostle here describes the spiritual seed 
 of Abraham; that it embraced all that are Christ's. 
 
 2. He contrasts their condition under the two 
 dispensations. Now, there is no distinction, as for- 
 merly, between Jew and Greek; no such relation as 
 bond and free; nor any difference between male and 
 female; they were "all one in Christ Jesus ;' ; and, 
 being his, were "Abraham's seed." 
 
 3. This joint relation to Christ and Abraham was 
 
170 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 entered into by baptism, being " baptized into 
 Christ." The identical relation to Christ and 
 Abraham, into which, under the former dispensa- 
 tion, the same class of persons were inducted by 
 circumcision and baptism as its appendage. 
 
 "It seems not to have been duly considered by 
 our opponents, that from the earliest records of 
 history God has delivered his commands to men 
 through various means, and in somewhat varied 
 kinds of evidence. If we attentively examine into 
 the ground of evidence we have for various beliefs, 
 we shall find that, while for some we have the war- 
 rant of a Divine positive precept or declaration, for 
 others we have only the authority of historical tes- 
 timony and inductive reasoning. And these re- 
 marks apply not merely to forms and accidental 
 usages, but to cardinal and important subjects. We 
 make these remarks, not to intimate a suspicion that 
 there is any want of evidence in any part of reve- 
 lation, but to direct attention to the fact that all 
 duties are not sustained by the same kind of evi- 
 dence." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, pp. 83, 84.) 
 
 "Admitting, as we must, that all positive relig- 
 ious rites are originally founded on a Divine com- 
 mand, we can not safely conclude that such a com- 
 mand will be repeated to all those who shall after- 
 ward be under obligation to observe such rites, or 
 even that the original command will be preserved 
 and communicated to them in the sacred writings. 
 Neither of these can be considered as indispensable, 
 because sufficient evidence of a Divine institution 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 171 
 
 may be afforded in some other way." (Dr. Woods 
 on Infant Baptism, p. 17.) 
 
 Now, if circumcision was not abolished by sub- 
 stitution, by what authority was it ever abolished ? 
 and by whom was it done ? It will not answer to 
 say, that circumcision terminated with the Jewish 
 dispensation, like the institutions of Moses, without 
 any repealing act; for even the ceremonial law of 
 Moses did not terminate without introducing its 
 substitute in the Gospel institutions, and that, too, 
 by Divine authority. And circumcision, as we have 
 before proven, was not an institution of Moses, only 
 as he copied it from the Abrahamic covenant. And 
 that covenant was not only itself everlasting, but 
 requires an everlasting token, making circumcision 
 that token, without fixing its duration. Either, 
 therefore, circumcision terminated in Christian bap- 
 tism, or it continues to this day, binding upon all 
 of Abraham's spiritual seed. 
 
 That circumcision was discontinued we fully be- 
 lieve, because the apostles did not administer it but 
 in a few cases, evidently to conciliate the prejudices 
 of the Jews — see Acts xvi, 3; and in the fifteenth 
 chapter of Acts they discard the use of it through- 
 out all the Churches, especially in the case of con- 
 verted Gentiles. Nor did they claim to act in this 
 matter upon their own authority, any more than in 
 releasing them from "keeping the law of Moses." 
 The conduct of the apostles throughout indicates 
 some previous authority by Christ, thus to treat the 
 subject. But when and where was it given, unless 
 
172 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 by substituting baptism in the stead of circum- 
 cision ? 
 
 But still it may be said, the apostles did not re- 
 gard baptism as a substitute for circumcision, be- 
 cause, on the day of Pentecost, and subsequently, 
 they administered baptism to those who had been 
 previously circumcised. This was virtually a repe- 
 tition of the same ordinance, if both are of the 
 same import. To this we reply : 
 
 1. These Jews had been previously excluded from 
 the Church by the authority of Jesus Christ — see 
 Matt, xxi, 43 — " Therefore say I unto you, The king- 
 dom of God shall be taken from you, and be given 
 to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." And 
 while thus excluded, the rite of initiation was 
 changed. See Matt, xxviii, 19. Now, as these 
 Jews desired to return to the Church of God, they 
 must not only give evidence of repentance and 
 faith, but receive the new rite of initiation, the old 
 one being dead. The apostles, and others that had 
 not been excluded from the Church, were not re- 
 quired to receive the new token; at least, there is 
 no account of their ever being baptized. 
 
 2. It was the more important that these repenting 
 and returning Jews should be baptized, because, by 
 so doing they would not only acknowledge his Mes- 
 siahship, but also his right as the God of Abraham 
 to change the form of the covenant token — a very 
 important point to be gained with Jewish converts. 
 Hence all pedobaptist Churches, adopting the prac- 
 tice, and following the example of the apostles, 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 173 
 
 invariably baptize Jews when converted to Christ, 
 and ask admission into his Church. The Jews were 
 a hard people to convert, and, after conversion, were 
 unwilling at once to renounce their old-established 
 usages. They were very tenacious of circumcision, 
 and quite reluctant to exchange it for baptism as 
 the ordinance by which their membership was here- 
 after to be acknowledged. Hence, when the apos- 
 tles baptized Jews, they simply baptized them "in 
 the name of the Lord Jesus." As Dr. Lightfoot 
 says, "The apostles baptized the Gentiles according 
 to the precept of our Lord, in the name of the Father , 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Matt, xxviii, 
 19. For since it was very much controverted among 
 the Jews about the true Messias, it was not without 
 cause, yea, nor without necessity, that they bap- 
 tized in the name of Jesus; that by that seal might 
 be confirmed this most principal truth of the Gos- 
 pel ) and that those that were baptized might profess 
 it — that Jesus of Nazareth was the true Messiah. 
 But among the Gentiles the controversy was not 
 concerning the true Messias, but concerning the 
 true God. Among them, therefore, it was needful 
 that baptism should be conferred in the name of 
 the true God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." 
 
 We have thus, I think, given a good and suffi- 
 cient reason why the apostles administered Christian 
 baptism to Jews as well as Gentiles on and after the 
 day of Pentecost, and in perfect agreement, too, 
 with the doctrine here advocated — that circumcision 
 as a tolcen of the covenant terminated in Christian 
 
174 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 baptism, by the authority of Jesus Christ. "We 
 have already stated that the form of the initiating 
 ordinance was temporary. It was adapted to a non- 
 proselytic form of religion, such as was that of the 
 Jews, but not to the Gospel plan. But the purpose 
 of G-od in regard to admitting members into the 
 Church by some ceremony remained unaltered. 
 The order of the Church, in this respect, is per- 
 petual. The great Lawgiver never intended to 
 abolish the practice of admitting members to the 
 Church, or annexing them to the covenant — which 
 is the same thing — by an external sign or ceremony 
 of some sort. When circumcision was established 
 it fixed the form of the ordinance for the time; 
 when it was abolished it left the order of the Church, 
 which was in this respect settled and perpetual, un- 
 altered; it still remained that an external mark or 
 sign of Some kind must be put upon all the children 
 of the covenant. And we say that the design of 
 God, in reference to admitting members into his 
 Church by some external ceremony, is not tempo- 
 rary, but perpetual. It can no more pass away than 
 the Church itself can fail; it involves a principle 
 that not merely affects the external character of the 
 Church, but strikes at its very existence. . . . And 
 after the abolishment of circumcision it must be 
 evident that, in whatever form the initiatory ordi- 
 nance was to be continued, the essential order and 
 settled constitution of the Church, in this respect, 
 would remain unchanged. The dress, only, of the 
 ordinance was changed/ 7 (Hibbard on Infant Bap- 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 175 
 
 tism, pp. 76 ; 77.) In the apostolic commission the 
 formula of the rite of initiation was changed so as 
 to make it signify more fully than before the rela- 
 tion in which the subject was placed to God: 
 " Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." By a careful 
 examination of the Greek text it will be perceived 
 that our translators have not fully given the mean- 
 ing of the original formula. As it now. stands it 
 must mean that the administrator is to baptize "in 
 the name/' that is, by the authority of the Holy Trin- 
 ity, which is true enough so far as it goes. But the 
 expression in the original — s^ *6 ovopa — should be 
 rendered into or unto the name of the " Father, 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;" which 
 implies not only that it is done by Divine authority, 
 but that the subject is brought into a new relation 
 to the Divine Trinity, and unto the enjoyment of 
 new rights and blessings in consequence of that 
 relation. The Church of Christ is denominated 
 Christ's body. (See 1 Cor. x, 17; Eph. iv, 16; 
 Col. i, 18.) Hence, being initiated into the Church 
 by baptism is called being baptized "into Christ." 
 "For ye are all the children of God by faith in 
 Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been 
 baptized into Christ have put on Christ." To "put 
 on Christ" is to take upon us the profession of 
 Christianity, as the ancient proselyte took upon him 
 the profession of the religion of Moses, by receiving 
 the rite of circumcision; and being "baptized into 
 Christ' ' can but mean a visible connection with his 
 
176 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 mystical hody, the Clmrcli ; and this is done by re- 
 ceiving Christian baptism. On the "day of Pen- 
 tecost/' it is said that "they that gladly received 
 his word were baptized : and the same day there 
 were added unto them about three thousand souls." 
 Acts ii, 41. Baptism here stands practically in its 
 true place, as the ordinance of initiation to Church 
 privileges; for the company of believers to which 
 they were added, by baptism, then constituted the 
 Church. Again it is said — Acts ii, 47 — "And the 
 Lord added to the Church daily such as should be 
 saved." 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 CHRISTIAN BAPTISM, LIKE CIRCUMCISION", IS A " TOKEN" OF A COV- 
 ENANT RELATION WITH GOD, A SIGN OF INWARD PURITY, 
 AND A SEAL OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF FAITH. 
 
 We do not claini, nor shall we attempt to prove, 
 that baptism is described in the New Testament by 
 all, or even any, of the above names. This is not 
 necessary. The true characteristics of the institu- 
 tion is what we are seeking; and other circumstan- 
 ces beside names will aid us in making this dis- 
 covery. 
 
 L Christian baptism is a "token" of a covenant 
 relation with God. 
 
 The Scriptures already quoted to prove that bap- 
 tism succeeds circumcision as the rite of initiation, 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPT1S3I. 177 
 
 also prove it to be a token of a covenant relation; 
 for all who become members of God's Church are 
 also in a covenant relation to the divine Head of 
 that Church. The Church in both the Old and 
 New Testaments is described as having entered in- 
 dividually into a marriage covenant, so as to render 
 her collectively the Lord's wife, or the Lamb's 
 bride. And the rite by which individuals are rec- 
 ognized as members of the Church, must at the 
 same time betoken the above covenant relation. 
 " Baptizing them into the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," therefore 
 means not only being inducted into the mystical 
 body of the Holy Trinity, but also being placed in 
 a solemn covenant relation to the Triune God; and 
 being " baptized into Christ " implied to the con- 
 verted Jew both an induction into Christ's mystical 
 body, and a solemn covenant relation to Christ. 
 St. Paul says, "If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abra- 
 ham's seed." Gal. iii, 29. And Abraham's seed 
 were all required to receive the token of the cove- 
 nant in their flesh forever ; and since the abolition 
 of circumcision, baptism is the only remaining in- 
 stitution which betokens at the same time a con- 
 nection with "Abraham's seed/' and a consecration 
 to Abraham's God. 
 
 II. Christian baptism is an outward sign, in the 
 flesh, of inward purity of heart. 
 
 1. Water, being cleansing and refreshing in its 
 nature, is used in both Testaments as an emblem of 
 the divine Spirit by which the believing soul is 
 12 
 
178 INEANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 purified and refreshed. Ezekiel xxxvi, 25-27: 
 "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye 
 shall be clean ; from all your filthiness and from all 
 your idols will I cleanse you .... And I will put 
 my Spirit within you/' etc. Isaiah xliv, 3 : "I will 
 pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon 
 the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, 
 and my blessing upon thine offspring/' Psalm li, 
 2, 7: "Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and 
 cleanse me from my sin . . . Purge me with hyssop 
 and I shall be clean ; wash me, and I shall be 
 whiter than snow." John iii, 5: "Except a man 
 be born of water and of the Spirit, he can not enter 
 into the kingdom of God." 1 Cor. vi, 11: "But 
 ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are jus- 
 tified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the 
 Spirit of our God." Titus iii, 5 : "By the washing 
 of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." 
 In several of the above instances "washing" with 
 "water" is first introduced as the figure, and after- 
 ward the Spirit is spoken of as the real cleansing 
 agent. 
 
 2. This ceremonial use of water is to be seen in 
 the typical baptism of John. "The baptism of 
 John was a visible token of reformation on the part 
 of the recipient. But in addition to this, it was 
 also manifestly typical of the dispensation of the 
 Holy Ghost, which was ushered in with so much 
 power on the day of Pentecost. Hence, when John 
 baptized with water, he exhorted the people to look 
 forward through the shadowy medium of that out- 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 179 
 
 ward ordinance to the more important baptism of 
 the Holy Ghost. i I indeed baptize you with water, 
 but he [Christ] shall baptize you with the Holy 
 Ghost/ Acts i, 5. 'For John truly baptized with 
 water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost 
 not many days hence/ " (Hibbard on Baptism, 
 p. 118.) 
 
 The object of the Savior in referring his disciples 
 to declarations of John, as above quoted, was to 
 revive the expectation which John's typical ordi- 
 nance had created in reference to the baptism of 
 the Holy Ghost. And so strongly was the connec- 
 tion of the two fixed in the mind of Peter, that 
 when he saw the Holy Ghost descend upon the con- 
 gregation assembled in the house of Cornelius, he 
 said, "Then remembered I the word of the Lord, 
 how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; 
 but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost." 
 Acts xi, 16; also x, 44. Now, why, we would ask, 
 is the baptism of John and the baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost so constantly connected together, unless 
 the former is a type of the latter? 
 
 3. When Christian baptism was instituted by the 
 Lord Jesus, it was designed to be the standing type 
 through all subsequent ages of the inward washing 
 performed by the Holy Ghost upon the heart. And 
 here let me add, that before the coming of Christ 
 all typical ordinances looked into the future for 
 their antitype. But after Christ came all typical 
 ordinances look to something that has already oc- 
 curred as their antitype. And "all those that possess 
 
180 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 the substance should also receive the outward sign; 
 for it is in this way they evince to the world its pos- 
 session. We have seen many pious persons who, 
 possessing the substance, decline receiving the type, 
 supposing that with a regenerate heart they can not 
 be lost. This light estimation of baptism is partly 
 owing to the unreasonable and unscriptural stress 
 that is laid upon it. But Christians should learn, 
 that "what God hath joined together, let no man 
 put asunder f nor can it be fully determined now 
 how far the neglect of a known positive duty may 
 ultimately militate against the salvation of the soul 
 once regenerated. 
 
 The relation which baptism sustains to regenera- 
 tion is very properly described by the Church of 
 England, as follows: 
 
 " Ques. How many parts are there in a sacrament? 
 
 "Ans. Two. The outward visible sign, and the 
 inward spiritual grace. 
 
 a Q. What is the outward visible sign, or form in 
 baptism ? 
 
 "A. Water, wherein a person is baptized, in the 
 name of the Father , oind of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost. 
 
 "Q. What is the inward spiritual grace? 
 
 "A. A death unto sin, and a new birth unto 
 righteousness; for being by nature born in sin, and 
 the children of wrath, we are hereby made the chil- 
 dren of grace. " 
 
 1. The first instance in which this relation be- 
 tween the outward ordinance and the inward grace 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 181 
 
 is described, after Christian baptism was instituted, 
 is Acts ii, 38: " Repent and be baptized every one 
 of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remis- 
 sion of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost." The signification of this passage 
 depends upon the meaning attached to the word si$, 
 for. Mr. A. Campbell says, "Peter, to whom was 
 committed the keys, opened the kingdom of heaven 
 in this manner, and made repentance, or reforma- 
 tion, and immersion equally necessary to forgive- 
 ness. ... I am bold, therefore, to affirm, that 
 every one of them who, in the belief of what the 
 apostle spoke, was immersed, did, in the very instant 
 in ivhich he was put under the water, receive the for- 
 giveness of his sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost." 
 (Christian Baptist, pp. 416, 417.) 
 
 (1.) Mr. Campbell evidently regards baptism "for 
 the remission of sins," in the light of a positive 
 condition of forgiveness, infallibly and universally 
 accompanied with the remission of sins and the gift 
 of the Holy Ghost. But how does this agree with 
 facts recorded in the eighth chapter of Acts ? Philip^ 
 a newly and regularly-ordained evangelist, went down 
 to "Samaria," and there preached the Gospel to 
 multitudes. And in the twelfth verse we are in- 
 formed that "when they believed Philip preaching 
 the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the 
 name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both 
 men and women." Now, these persons "believed 
 Philip," and then were baptized. But in the four- 
 teenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth verses we are told, 
 
182 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 that ''when the apostles which were at Jerusalem 
 heard that Samaria had received the word of God, 
 they sent unto them Peter and John: who, when 
 they were come down, prayed for them, that they 
 might receive the Holy Ghost : for as yet he was 
 fallen upon none of them : only they were baptized 
 in the name of the Lord Jesus." How long it was 
 between their baptism by Philip and the reception 
 of the Holy Ghost in answer to the prayers of Peter 
 and John, we are not informed; but evidently long 
 enough to show the entire falsity of Mr. Campbell's 
 declaration. Even " Simon believed" and "was 
 baptized;" and yet Peter declares in the twenty- 
 third verse that he was "in the gall of bitterness, 
 and in the bond of iniquity." It may be said that 
 remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost 
 were not necessarily connected, and, therefore, the 
 former may have been received without the latter. 
 But if remission is given without the agency of the 
 Holy Ghost, through what particular agency was it 
 given 1 Certainly not through the sole agency of 
 ^ater. Mr. Campbell himself would not dare say 
 so ; for then might the Holy Ghost be entirely dis- 
 pensed with in saving men from sin, and water 
 alone relied upon. 
 
 (2.) Mr. Campbell makes "remission of sins" 
 and the "gift of the Holy Ghost" dependent upon 
 the previous reception of baptism, as though the 
 former could not be possessed without the previous 
 reception of the latter. But how does this agree 
 with facts recorded in Acts, tenth chapter ? In the 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 183 
 
 forty- fourth verse it is said, that " while Peter yet 
 spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them 
 which heard the word." Referring to this same 
 circumstance subsequently, Peter says that the Lord 
 "put no difference between us and them, purifying 
 their hearts by faith." Acts xv, 9. And after the 
 Holy Ghost had thus fallen on all of them, " puri- 
 fying their hearts by faith," Peter says, "Can any 
 man forbid water, that these should not be bap- 
 tized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well 
 as we?" Acts x, 47. Baptism, in this instance, 
 was not administered till after the "purification of 
 their hearts by the Holy Ghost, through faith." 
 
 (3.) Facts show, in opposition to Mr. Campbell's 
 whole theory, that even on the day of Pentecost, 
 the remission of sins and the reception of the Holy 
 Ghost preceded baptism by water. Acts ii, 41, we 
 read, "Then they that gladly received his word 
 were baptized" — acfpsvus, gladly, means joyfully, 
 readily, or willingly ; indicating a state of mind 
 which no unforgiven sinner can possess. Peter's 
 practice, then, must explain his words. But can 
 an explanation be given to the language of Peter 
 which will place the remission of sins and the gift 
 of the Holy Ghost antecedent to baptism? 
 
 (4.) We have said that the meaning of this pas- 
 sage depended entirely upon the sense attached to 
 the word s*£ for. This word is translated in the 
 New Testament in at least a dozen different ways; 
 translators usually depending upon the connection 
 in which it stood for the meaning to be attached; 
 
184 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 but most frequently, in connection with baptism, it 
 is translated to, unto, in, into, or in relation to. A 
 word thus variable in signification, is rather a dan- 
 gerous foundation on which to risk the salvation of 
 millions in time and eternity. John the Baptist 
 says — Matthew iii, 11 — "I indeed baptize you with 
 water, [a**,] unto repentance. " Now, John's bap- 
 tism, according to his own description, stood in the 
 same relation to repentance that Christ's baptism 
 stands in to remission, as described by Peter; the 
 same word, s^, being employed in both places. But 
 who ever thought of John's baptism being admin- 
 istered to make men penitent, or as a condition "for 
 repentance Y 9 No; John required those coming to 
 his baptism first to " bring forth fruits meet for 
 repentance." Nor did Peter contemplate placing 
 baptism as an infallible condition of remission and 
 of the reception of the Holy Ghost John baptized — 
 £t$ — in Jordan; and both Philip and the eunuch 
 went down — £i$ — into the water. Suppose we trans- 
 late £i$, in these places, for instead of in and into, 
 where would' be Mr. Campbell's strongest argument 
 for immersion? If St. Peter's language was trans- 
 lated £ i$, unto, or in relation to remission, his meaning 
 would have heen. plain and his doctrine evangelical. 
 Dr. Clarke translates the sentence, "for the re- 
 mission of sins/' Etj a^scrco apaptLuv — in reference to 
 the remission or removal of sins. " Baptism," he 
 adds, " pointing out the purifying influence of the 
 Holy Ghost; and it is in reference to that purifica- 
 tion that it is administered, and should, in consid- 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 185 
 
 eration, never be separated from it; it only points 
 out the grace by which this is to be done." As an 
 outward sign it typifies the inward pardon and 
 purity effected by the Holy Ghost : hence, the peo- 
 ple, on the day of Pentecost, who heard Peter, and 
 who' " gladly , or joyfully received his word," by re- 
 penting, believing, and receiving its promised bless- 
 ings, "were baptized" unto, or in reference to remis- 
 sion and the gift of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 2. The second place in which baptism is clearly 
 spoken of as a figure or sign of inward holiness, is 
 Acts xxii, 16 : " And now why tarriest thou ? Arise 
 and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on 
 the name of the Lord." 
 
 Mr. Campbell says, "Now, the washing away of 
 his sins was certainly to be accomplished through 
 the water of baptism." (Debate between Campbell 
 and Rice, p. 439.) 
 
 Mr. Campbell must have forgotten a rule which 
 he has made for the exposition of such passages as 
 the above. " The active participle, in connection with 
 an imperative, either declares the manner in which 
 the imperative shall be obeyed, or explains the mean- 
 ing of the command." (Christian System, p. 198.) 
 There are three things imperatively commanded in 
 the above passage : 1. " Arise;" 2. " Be baptized;" 
 3. "Wash, away thy sins:" there is but one active 
 participle — " calling on the name of the Lord" — ap- 
 plicable, however, only to the third imperative — 
 "declaring the manner in which it shall be obeyed;" 
 "wash away thy sins; calling on the name of the 
 
186 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Lord." According to Mr. Campbell's own rule, 
 sins were to be " washed away," not by " the water 
 of baptism/' but by " calling on the name of the 
 Lord." The only relation, therefore, that baptism 
 can have to the " washing away of sins/' is a figura- 
 tive relation, as was the case with circumcision — 
 Deut. x, 16 — " Circumcise therefore the foreskin 
 of your heart, and be no more stiff-necked." Nor 
 does the mention of baptism first require that it 
 should be first received. 
 
 3. The third instance is found in 1 Peter iii, 20, 
 21 : " Wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by 
 water. The like figure whereunto, even baptism, 
 doth also now save us, (not the putting away of the 
 filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good con- 
 science toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus 
 Christ." 
 
 (1.) St. Peter speaks of a salvation which Noah 
 and his family experienced, not by the ark, but 
 "by water/' but from what were they "saved by 
 water?" — not saved from personal sin, for he was 
 already righteous. They were not saved in heaven, 
 for they were yet on earth. Nor yet were they 
 saved from hell; the righteous are not in danger of 
 going there. Nor did the water save them from 
 death by drowning, for the ark saved them from 
 this. Still, the question is unanswered, From what 
 was Noah and his family "saved by water?" The 
 only answer which can be given to this inquiry is, 
 that they were "saved by water" from the filthy 
 conversation and corrupting example of the wicked, 
 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 187 
 
 being separated from them by the waters of the 
 flood, a figure of salvation in heaven. 
 
 (2.) Baptism is called a "like figure" and "now 
 saves us." "The like figure whereunto, even bap- 
 tism, doth also now save us;" "not the putting 
 away the filth of the flesh." Nor is baptism able 
 to save us from death, or hell, or sin ; or to save us 
 in heaven. In like manner as water saved Noah 
 and family in the ark, baptism now saves us from 
 the corrupting example of the wicked, by inducting 
 us into Christ's Church, and obligating us to re- 
 nounce the world, the flesh, and the devil; and this it 
 does as a "figure" — a figure of that salvation which 
 secures heaven when the wicked are all destroyed. 
 Baptism answers to salvation as figure does to sub- 
 stance, as soul to impression, as type to letter, or as 
 the face in the glass represents the face out of the 
 glass; or, as the apostle describes it, "Let us draw 
 near with true hearts, in full assurance of faith, 
 having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, 
 and our bodies washed with pure water." In this 
 way it "answers," or betokens "a good conscience 
 toward God." 
 
 4. Before we close this section, we must intro- 
 duce St. Paul once more. Col. ii, 11, he says, " In 
 whom also ye are circumcised with the circum- 
 cision made without hands, in putting off the body 
 of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of 
 Christ." Circumcision of Christ! What circum- 
 cision did Christ possess or institute ? It could not 
 have been the circumcision of the Abrahamic cove- 
 
188 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 nant; that was here called the " circumcision of 
 Christ; for it was made with hands in the flesh." 
 What other circumcision, then, did Christ institute ? 
 It may he said that the apostle only referred to 
 circumcision here figuratively, to describe spiritual 
 regeneration, which is made " without hands, in the 
 heart, and not in the flesh." True, circumcision 
 then was a figure of regeneration; but what circum- 
 cision does the apostle here refer to as a figure of 
 regeneration, which he so positively denominates 
 the circumcision of Christ? The Abrahamic cir- 
 cumcision, even as a figure, does not answer the 
 description given. Let the apostle explain himself. 
 He says, in the next verse, "Buried with him in 
 baptism," etc. "Baptism," then, is "Christ's cir- 
 cumcision." True, baptism is spoken of also figu- 
 ratively ; but as a figure of regeneration, it is de- 
 nominated the "circumcision of Christ," or the 
 circumcision Christ instituted. How certain it is, 
 then, that St. Paul understood Christian baptism to 
 be instituted by Christ as a " figure of regeneration" 
 in lieu of circumcision, which formerly occupied 
 that same position ! What other reason can be of- 
 fered for denominating baptism "the circumcision 
 of Christ?" We have proven, I think, to the satis- 
 faction of the candid reader, that baptism has taken 
 the place of circumcision, not only as the rite of in- 
 itiation, and as a covenant token, but also as an out- 
 ward sign in the flesh of inward holiness. 
 
 5. This same use of baptism is probably made by 
 St. Paul to the Romans — vi, 3, 4 — "Know ye not 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 189 
 
 that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus 
 Christ, were baptized into bis death? Therefore 
 we are buried with him by baptism into death : that 
 like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the 
 glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in 
 newness of life/' The term "buried" has often 
 been interpreted to signify immersed, and this im- 
 mersion is a type of the death and resurrection of 
 Christ, and is, therefore, often referred to as settling 
 the mode in which baptism is administered. The 
 words of the apostle must either have a literal, spir- 
 itual, or figurative signification, and we must first 
 determine which before we can quote him in proof 
 of any doctrine. If the apostle spoke of a literal 
 burial, either in Jordan by baptism, or in the grave 
 at death, then these Roman Christians must have 
 been in Jordan or the grave "with Christ." It 
 does not read, buried like him, or as he was buried, 
 but "with him." This, I think, is a little more 
 than literal interpreters of the Scripture will dare 
 to claim. The context, from the first to the eleventh 
 verses, clearly shows that the apostle was speaking 
 of a spiritual death unto sin, a spiritual burial, a 
 spiritual resurrection, and a spiritual life. To be 
 dead unto sin implies sin's destruction ; to be 
 "buried with Christ" implies the most perfect in- 
 itiation into all the merits of Christ's death; to be 
 u raised in his likeness" implies an entirely-renewed 
 and elevated spiritual character; to live with him 
 implies the constant life of faith in Christ. These 
 facts being settled, it is left positively certain that 
 
190 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 the apostle referred to a spiritual baptism, not as a 
 type of Christ's death and resurrection, but as the 
 grand agent by which all those believers were inter- 
 ested in Christ. If any allusion is here made to 
 water baptism it is figurative of the baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost. 
 
 III. Baptism succeeds circumcision as a seal of 
 the righteousness of faith, testifying to the fact 
 that the bearer, being made righteous, is an heir of 
 eternal salvation. Markxvi ; 16: a He that believ- 
 eth and is baptized shall be saved." Through faith 
 we are made righteous and retained in a righteous 
 state. Baptism is the Divine seal or approving wit- 
 ness of this character; and such shall be saved. 
 Circumcision was a sign and a seal of the righteous- 
 ness of the faith Abraham had before he was cir- 
 cumcised. Take the following illustration: The 
 king is informed that one of his subjects, who had 
 been condemned to die for his sin, had also become 
 penitent, and furnishes reliable evidence of a thor- 
 ough reformation, and had applied to his majesty 
 for a pardon. The pardon is graciously granted, 
 written with his own hand; but to give assurance 
 to the public that the instrument is authentic, he 
 orders the application of his own seal, used only for 
 such purposes. During the old dispensation this 
 holy seal was circumcision. But has the King of 
 heaven a seal for the new dispensation? If so, it 
 must be baptism. Nothing else is found in the 
 New Testament bearing that character; and as St. 
 Mark, in describing the apostles' commission, places 
 
CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 191 
 
 baptism in precisely the relation to the righteousness 
 of faith that circumcision before occupied, espe- 
 cially in the case of Abraham; and as baptism is 
 called by the apostle Paul the " circumcision of 
 Christ," we have no hesitancy in giving baptism 
 this peculiar character, notwithstanding it is no 
 where called a seal. But it may be said that 
 neither circumcision nor baptism could be to in- 
 fants a seal of the righteousness" of faith, because 
 infants are incapable of faith. True; but infants 
 are not incapable of the righteousness of faith, or 
 which the adult receives by faith ; for when adults 
 repent, believe, and are converted, they become "as 
 little children " — Matt, xviii, 3 — and, as the Savior 
 said in reference to " little children," "of such is 
 the kingdom of heaven." Their character must, 
 without either repentance or faith, be righteous, not 
 by nature, but by the gracious atonement : hence, 
 being capable of the righteousness of faith, they 
 are also deserving the seal. 
 
f**i flfjfij:*. 
 
 THE SPIRITUAL COVENANT MADE WITH ABRAHAM, CON- 
 TAINING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH OF GOD, PERMA- 
 NENTLY SECURES TO THE INFANT CHILDREN OF BELIEVING 
 PARENTS THE RIGHT TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH, 
 AND TO A COVENANT RELATION WITH GOD, TOGETHER WITH 
 RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION AND WATCH-CARE, AND TO HAVE 
 THESE RELATIONS ACKNOWLEDGED AND RATIFIED BY THE 
 COVENANT TOKEN. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 THE MORAL CHARACTER OF LITTLE CHILDREN CONSIDERED. 
 
 Haying ; in other parts of this work, examined 
 the spiritual and permanent character of the Abra- 
 hamic covenant, and of the Church of God founded 
 upon it, with the religious ordinance which it con- 
 tained, we now intend to examine the permanent 
 provision which it makes for its infant membership; 
 and especially, in this place, the moral character 
 which, in consequence of its provisions, all infants 
 sustain. 
 
 I. The covenant secures to the infant world a Re- 
 deemer, through whose vicarious death alone they 
 are justified and saved from original guilt and its 
 punishment. 
 
 The promise reads — Gen. xii, 3 — "And in thee 
 shall all families of the earth be blessed." Again — 
 13 193 
 
194 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 G-en. xxii, 18 — "And in thy seed shall all nations 
 of the earth be blessed." 
 
 St. Paul says — Gal. iii, 16 — that this ""Seed" 
 promised^ "is Christ." Through Christ, therefore, 
 all nations and families of the earth were to be 
 blessed. In what sense they are all blessed through 
 Christ, will appear in Romans v, 18, 19: "There- 
 fore, as by the offense of one, judgment came upon 
 all men to condemnation, even so by the righteous- 
 ness of one the free gift came upon all men unto 
 justification of life. For as by one man's disobe- 
 dience many were made sinners, so by the obedience 
 of one shall many be made righteous." 
 
 This elliptic sentence means, simply, that, as by 
 the sin of Adam himself and posterity were right- 
 eously condemned to death, which would have cut 
 off the whole human race in embryo, so, by the 
 death of Jesus Christ in their stead, all men are 
 redeemed and restored to life; so that all men are 
 now born in a justified state, here called "justifica- 
 tion of life." 
 
 This arrangement was barely intimated to our first 
 parents, soon after they had sinned, in these words — 
 G-en. iii, 15 — "And I will put enmity between thee 
 and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; 
 it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his 
 heel." A very obscure promise, indeed, that Christ, 
 the seed of the woman, should, by his death, de- 
 stroy the effect of Adam's sin upon his posterity, 
 sufficiently, at least, to give them a temporal exist- 
 ence commenced in innocency. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 195 
 
 This fact, thus dimly asserted, was embodied in 
 the covenant made with Abraham, as one of its per- 
 manent provisions. Hence, in the fulfillment of 
 that covenant, the infant world have a Redeemer, 
 and are justified and saved. 
 
 II. Through the same covenant provisions, infants 
 are made fit for Christ's kingdom on earth and in 
 heaven. 
 
 He says — Matt, xix, 14 — " Suffer little children, 
 and forbid them not, to come unto me ; for of such is 
 the kingdom of heaven. " Or, as Dr. Clarke renders 
 it, "The kingdom of heaven is composed of such." 
 A similar declaration is found in Matthew — xviii, 2, 
 3 — "And Jesus called a little child unto him, and 
 set him in the midst of them, and said, Verily I say 
 unto you, except ye be converted, and become as lit- 
 tle children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven." 
 
 The term, " kingdom of heaven," in both of the 
 above instances, must refer either to Christ's spirit- 
 ual kingdom on earth, or his kingdom in heaven, or 
 to them both, as one. If the first be his meaning, 
 then are little children fit for membership in Christ's 
 Church. But if the second be his meaning, then, 
 as no subject is fit for heaven, who is not first made 
 by his grace fit for his kingdom or Church on earth, 
 then still are little children fit subjects for the 
 Christian Church. And if the third is the sense in 
 which he is to be understood, then, also, are little 
 children fit subjects for Christ's Church on earth or 
 in heaven; so that the moral qualifications for mem- 
 
196 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 bership in the Church of Jesus Christ is fully de- 
 clared, by the founder of the Church himself, to ex- 
 ist in little children. 
 
 Nor is this fitness enjoyed by one class of infants 
 alone, but by all little children, without an excep- 
 tion; for the term rtcnSta — children — has nothing to 
 limit it to any class of children. We do not claim 
 for infants a state of holiness in the highest sense, 
 either natural or evangelical. But we do claim, in 
 their behalf, a state of evangelical innocence, or 
 justification, such as adults must be made to enjoy 
 by being converted, or pardoned, through the me- 
 dium of faith in Christ, by which they are made 
 subjects of Divine grace and of the kingdom of 
 heaven — a state which will insure salvation in case 
 of death. 
 
 And it is for the purpose of retaining them in 
 this justified state, that they are placed within the 
 embrace of the Church, and in a covenant relation to 
 God; at once securing to them a religious educa- 
 tion, ministerial and Christian watch-care, with the 
 special blessing of a covenant-keeping God. 
 
 Now, if there was so much advantage every way 
 to the infant children of the Israelites, under the 
 old dispensation, to be placed in covenant with God, 
 why may it not also be of as much advantage to the 
 infant children of Christians to be placed in the 
 same covenant relation to God, by the application 
 of the token in its new and improved form, under 
 the new dispensation ? 
 
 III. Infants are capable of being obliged relig- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 19? 
 
 iously by a covenant entered into by their parents 
 in their behalf. 
 
 This certainly is true in temporal things. When 
 the parent enters into a contract concerning the 
 homestead, he binds and obliges not only himself, 
 but his heirs, etc., who are compelled in law to 
 abide the contract, or endure its penalty, if they 
 fail to conform to the obligations entered into in 
 their behalf by the father. Nor does the parent 
 trespass upon the rights of his children in so doing. 
 Nor yet is the law an unjust or oppressive law for 
 giving him this power, or in obliging the children 
 to the contract of the father; for the law is right- 
 eously founded in the very nature of the relation 
 existing between the parent and the child. Now, 
 why can not the parent bind and oblige his chil- 
 dren religiously, without invading their rights? 
 Does he not sustain precisely the same relation to 
 them in religious that he does in temporal things ? 
 Is not the parent as much in duty bound to furnish 
 his children with a pious example, religious instruc- 
 tion, Christian watch-care and government, as he is 
 to furnish them food, raiment, and a parental home ? 
 And are they not as much dependent upon him for 
 the former as for the latter? Why, then, does not 
 the natural relation between the parent and the child 
 empower the former to bind and oblige the latter in 
 religious as well as in temporal things? 
 
 Now, we claim it as an indisputable position, that 
 while the law of man authorizes the parent to bind 
 and oblige his children in temporal things, the law 
 
198 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 of God authorizes him to do the same in religious 
 things; and the one law is as just, and as much 
 founded in the natural relation existing between 
 theni, as the other. 
 
 How perfectly unreasonable and unbecoming the 
 Christian, are those complaints which we often hear 
 made by professed believers in Christ, because their 
 parents obligated them to a godly life in their 
 infancy ! We have already quoted the language of 
 the covenant to show that it permanently conferred 
 the above right upon believing parents. We will 
 now show that this same right was subsequently 
 recognized and renewed. Deut. xxix, 10-13: a Ye 
 stand this 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, 
 your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy camp, 
 from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy 
 water; that thou shouldst 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 establish 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 fa- 
 thers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob." 
 
 This is but a renewing of the former covenant 
 made with the patriarchs; and yet how careful the 
 Lord is to embrace their little ones as obligated in 
 the covenant with their parents ! 
 
 The same principle is acknowledged by Christ in 
 its fullest extent — Matt, xix, 13 — " Then were there 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 199 
 
 brought unto him little children, that he should put 
 his hands on them and pray." 
 
 I suppose that it was the parents of these chil- 
 dren that brought them to Christ; and that their 
 object in bringing them was, that they might con- 
 secrate them to God. For laying on of hands, and 
 prayer, was a most solemn mode of consecration to 
 God among the Jews, the pesstn, or object, being 
 ever afterward regarded sacredly as the property of 
 God. 
 
 St. Luke — xviii, 15 — calls them fa j3p«^ — very 
 young children; perhaps less than eight days old, 
 which probably was the reason why the " disciples 
 rebuked them" that brought them, supposing them 
 to be too young to be thus solemnly and publicly 
 consecrated to God. Christ, to be sure, did not ap- 
 ply any water to them, for the very good reason that 
 he had not .yet constituted baptism with water the 
 token of his covenant. Jesus did " suffer" the little 
 children to "come unto him;" he did "take them 
 into his arms," and "laid his hands on them," and 
 "blessed them," and consecrated them to God, as 
 solemnly as infants were ever consecrated to him in 
 baptism. The application of water could not have 
 made the consecration any the more perfect, nor the 
 withholding of it, under the circumstances, did not 
 render it any the less effectual. 
 
 Infants, then, are not only fit for and entitled to 
 membership in the Church of God, but they are 
 capable of being bound and obligated to God by the 
 act of their parents. 
 
200 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 IV. Infants are capable of receiving good, as the 
 result of this covenant relation to God, in which 
 they are placed by their parents. 
 
 This is certainly true in temporal things. An 
 infant may be crowned king in his cradle ; and the 
 kingdom may be as much his, and ultimately of as 
 much value to him, as though the crown was with- 
 held till he could appreciate its value. An infant 
 may be freed from slavery in its mother's arms, and 
 that freedom prove as rich a boon as though it had 
 been withheld for years. An infant may receive 
 the deed of an estate worth millions before he is 
 competent to know from what beneficent source it 
 came. 
 
 And it is quite as certain that infants are capable 
 of, and do actually enjoy, the spiritual blessings 
 promised in the Abrahamic covenant. 
 
 1. That covenant secures to the world a Redeemer. 
 And it is from the death of that Redeemer, without 
 their knowledge, or act, or desert, that the infant 
 world receive their justification. 
 
 And can it be possible that infants are capable of 
 receiving redemption, justification, and life eternal, 
 through Christ, as provided for in the constitution 
 of the Church of God, and yet are not competent 
 to be visibly connected with that Church, nor to 
 receive the sign which she, in her constitution, pro- 
 vides, outwardly to signify and seal the very thing 
 they possess? Preposterous in the extreme! The 
 sign and the thing signified, in our opinion, ought 
 never to be separated. And as infants are capable 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 201 
 
 of receiving redemption, justification, and heaven, 
 they are certainly competent to receive the sign 
 that betokens, and the seal which evidences the 
 above state. 
 
 2. That covenant secures God himself, in all his 
 power and rich grace, to children. It reads, "I 
 will be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." 
 As this "seed" constitutes the Church, God, there- 
 fore, promises by covenant to give himself to his 
 Church. And that Church being composed, in 
 part, of infants, God promises himself to infants as 
 well as to adult members of his Church. 
 
 And in promising himself to the Church, he 
 promises, through Christ, to become their redeemer; 
 and through the Holy Ghost to become their sanc- 
 tifier, comforter, preserver, and whatever else they 
 may need of grace to fit them either to die or to 
 live. And inasmuch as infants as well as adults 
 need all the above spiritual influences, as they grow 
 up to maturity, to preserve them from error, tempta- 
 tion, and sin, they certainly can be benefited by, 
 and should be placed in, a covenant relation to God, 
 where all the above gracious influences are perma- 
 nently secured to them. It is impossible to tell how 
 far the Lord can operate upon, either the heart of 
 an adult Christian, or upon the heart of a child, 
 either to preserve them from sin, or to reclaim them 
 after falling into sin, without interfering with the 
 freedom of the will, or impairing the agency of 
 the creature, or destroying the conditionality of sal- 
 vation. But it is certain that so far as he can do 
 
202 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 so ; without infringing upon the above immovable 
 points, or fixed principles, in the system of grace, 
 the Lord God of heaven and earth stands solemnly 
 bound in covenant to enlighten, seek after, and 
 incline them to the reception and retention of the 
 grace of life eternal. And although it is proper 
 and right that children, dying in infancy, should 
 sustain this relation to a covenant-keeping Grod, yet 
 we deem it infinitely more important that those that 
 live and grow up to manhood, surrounded, as they 
 constantly are, with innumerable temptations to 
 evil, should enjoy all the benefits growing out of 
 that relation to them. Nor will it answer to say 
 that the Lord, being impartial, will employ the same 
 means, and to the same extent, to save others, that 
 he does to save those in covenant with him. For 
 this assertion is not only without proof, but is in 
 direct opposition to both Scripture testimony and to 
 the whole history of mankind; for Grod promised 
 himself to Abraham and to his seed in a sense and 
 to an extent in which he never promised to be the 
 God of the heathen world with which they were 
 surrounded. And the whole history of the Israel- 
 ites goes to prove that Grod was with his covenant 
 people in a sense and to an extent he was with no 
 other cotemporary nation or people. And he em- 
 ployed, in their behalf, means of grace more numer- 
 ous, and to a much greater extent, than was em- 
 ployed any where else upon earth. And hence St. 
 Paul truly says, in answer to the inquiry, "What 
 advantage, then, hath a Jew ? or what profit is there 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 203 
 
 in circumcision ?" " Much, every way." "Chiefly," 
 to be sure, " because that unto them were committed 
 the oracles of God" — the holy Scriptures, in which 
 the Lord revealed himself, and communicated the 
 blessings of his grace and of his salvation to Abra- 
 ham's seed according to the covenant. We do not 
 say that none were saved in heathen countries, but 
 such as were brought into covenant with God by 
 circumcision. Unquestionably there have been 
 many pious heathens saved who knew but little of 
 the plan of salvation, and that were never in cov- 
 enant with God according to its outward form. But 
 yet their chance for salvation was comparatively 
 small, and the number saved comparatively few. 
 
 Nor do we claim that all who were placed in this 
 covenant relation to God in their infancy were 
 finally saved; for there were always conditions, con- 
 nected with the salvation of adults, with which the 
 mercy of God could not interfere, and, conse- 
 quently, by an obstinate refusal to perform those 
 conditions, on the part of those once in covenant 
 with God, their salvation would be forfeited, not- 
 withstanding that relation. 
 
 But as St. Paul says, "What if some did not be- 
 lieve ? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God 
 without effect ? God forbid." Notwithstanding all 
 that has happened to some of those in covenant 
 with God, yet more have been saved who stood in 
 this relation, in consequence of the powerful means 
 employed for that purpose, than have been saved 
 among those that stood not in this relation, and, 
 
204 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 consequent! y, enjoyed none of the means of grace 
 which it secures. The fact is indisputable, that 
 there was a much greater number of the Israelitish 
 nation saved in heaven, between Abraham and 
 Christ, in proportion to their whole number, than 
 in any other nation cotemporary with them, and not 
 in covenant with God. Why, then, may it not con- 
 tinue to be so with those families and nations who 
 consecrate their children to God in infancy? So 
 in reference to the children of Christian parents, 
 though some do not believe; yet this should not 
 destroy the confidence of others in their covenant- 
 keeping God, so as to withhold their children from 
 his covenant token. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 THE INFANT CHILDREN OF BELIEVING PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT 
 
 PERMANENTLY SECURED TO THEM OF MEMBERSHIP IN 
 
 THE CHURCH OF GOD BY THE RECEPTION 
 
 OF ITS INDUCTING ORDINANCE. 
 
 That part of the Abrahamic covenant which 
 secures to infant children membership in the Church 
 of God by the reception of the inducting ordinance 
 of the covenant, is found in Genesis xvii, 12-14 : 
 u And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised 
 among you, every man-child in your generations, he 
 that is born in the house, or bought with money of 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 205 
 
 any stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is 
 born in thy house, and he that is bought with 
 money, must needs be circumcised; and my cov- 
 enant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting cov- 
 enant. And the uncircumcised man-child, whose 
 flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul 
 shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken 
 my covenant." 
 
 Accordingly it is said — Genesis xvii, 23 — "And 
 Abraham took Ishmael, his son, and all that were 
 born in his house, and all that were bought with 
 his money, every male among the men of Abraham's 
 house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin, 
 in the self same day, as God had said unto him." 
 Here we have not only the covenant with its provi- 
 sions in behalf of children, but also the organization 
 of the Church under those provisions, embracing 
 children with their believing parents. And the ex- 
 ample of the patriarch was faithfully followed by 
 all his descendants till Christ came, and was cir- 
 cumcised. 
 
 In Part Second of this work we have proven that 
 from the time of the giving of the law of Moses 
 down to the ascension of Jesus Christ, baptism was 
 administered in connection with circumcision to 
 Gentile proselytes upon their reception to Church 
 privileges. We will now prove that their infant 
 children were received with them by the same proc- 
 ess — just as the children of the Israelites were 
 baptized, with their parents, "unto Moses in the 
 cloud and in the sea." 
 
206 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Dr. Lightfoot says, "They baptized also young 
 children — for the most part with their parents. 
 Tliey baptize a little proselyte according to the judg- 
 ment of the Sanhedrim ; that is, as the gloss ren- 
 ders it, If he be deprived of his father, and his 
 mother bring him to be made a proselyte, they baptize 
 him — because none becomes a proselyte without cir- 
 cumcision and baptism — according to the judgment, 
 or rite of the Sanhedrim ; that is, that three men be 
 present at the baptism, who are now instead of a 
 father to him. And the Gemara, a little after, says, 
 if with a proselyte, his son and his daughters are 
 made proselytes also, that which is done by their 
 father redounds to their good." " R. Joseph saith, 
 When they grow into years, they may retract : where 
 the gloss writes thus, this is to be understood of 
 little children, who are made proselytes with their 
 father. (Bab. Cherub., fol. 11.") 
 
 u If an Israelite take a Gentile child, or find a 
 Gentile infant, and baptize him in the name of a 
 proselyte, behold he is a proselyte. (Maim, in Ava. 
 dim. c. 8.") 
 
 "H. Hezekiah saith, Behold a man finds an infant 
 cast out, and he baptizeth him in the name of a 
 servant; in the name of a freeman do you also 
 circumcise him in the name of a freeman. Heiros 
 Jevam., fol. 8." (See Dr. Clarke's comments at the 
 close of Mark.) 
 
 From the above quotations it will be seen, 
 
 1. That infant children, at eight days old, both 
 of Jewish and Gentile parentage, were to be cir- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 207 
 
 cumcised; and those of Gentile parentage were 
 both circumcised and baptized. 
 
 Now, having proven that circumcision to the lit- 
 eral descendants of Abraham, and circumcision 
 with baptism to the Gentiles, constituted the rite 
 of initiation to the Church of Jesus Christy from its 
 commencement down to the time of his ascension, 
 the conclusion is inevitable, that infants were, from 
 the beginning, constituted members of the Church of 
 Jesus Christ, either by circumcision alone, or by 
 circumcision and baptism together. 
 
 2. It was only the children of believing parents, 
 guardians, and masters, that were to be admitted in 
 this way to membership in the Church. 
 
 (1.) Abraham is personally addressed: "Thou 
 shalt keep my covenant therefore; .... every man- 
 child among you shall be circumcised. " Gen. xvii, 
 9, 10. 
 
 (2.) Abraham's seed were required to do the same : 
 "Thou and thy seed after thee in their genera- 
 tions." Gen. xvii, 9. "And I will establish my 
 covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after 
 thee in their generations." Gen. xvii, 7. "This 
 is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and 
 you, and thy seed after thee; every man-child 
 among you shall be circumcised." Gen. xvii, 10. 
 
 (3.) This seed embraced all believers in Christ, 
 whether Jews or Gentiles: ''For the promise that 
 he should be the heir of the world was not to Abra- 
 ham or to his seed, through the law, but through 
 the righteousness of faith." Rom. iv, 13. "That 
 
208 
 
 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 lie might be the father of all thero. that believe. " 
 Kom. iv, 11. "Know ye therefore that they which 
 are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham." 
 Gal. iii, 7. Abraham and his believing seed were 
 to bring their children with them into the Church 
 of God through all their generations. 
 
 3. But why was the privilege confined to believ- 
 ing parents of bringing their children with them 
 into the Church of God? We answer, the differ- 
 ence is wholly owing to the parents. And that dif- 
 ference is felt not by those children of unbelieving 
 parents who die in infancy, but by such us live to 
 manhood. The reasons why they are not placed in 
 the Church, and in a covenant relation with God, 
 are, 
 
 (1.) Because their parents do not sustain that 
 relation, and, therefore, can not enter into a cove- 
 nant with God in behalf of their children. Every 
 covenant made must have two parties, each under- 
 standing the part he has to act, and pledging him- 
 self solemnly to perform his part in the covenant. 
 The child is not competent to understand what the 
 covenant enjoins; namely, to walk before God and 
 be perfect. Therefore the parent, guardian, or mas- 
 ter must act as the party in the covenant in behalf 
 of the child, till the child becomes competent to 
 understand and to act for itself; when, if the par- 
 ent has done his duty as defined in the covenant, 
 the responsibility is transferred to the child. 
 
 (2.) The unbelieving parent, etc., is not compe- 
 tent to perform the duty to the child which, as a 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 209 
 
 party in the covenant, he engages to perform. For 
 the parent not only represents the child as a party 
 in the covenant, but he also engages to teach and 
 govern "his children and his household after him/' 
 so that (i they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do 
 justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring 
 upon Abraham [and upon all that do like him] 
 that which he hath spoken of him" — in the cove- 
 nant. For an unbelieving parent, or for " spon- 
 sors," as is done in some Churches, to make 
 engagements which they can not and will not even 
 try to perform, is, in our judgment, a most solemn 
 mockery, and ought not to be tolerated in the 
 Church of Grod. Nor will it answer to say that 
 many of the Jews who circumcised their children, 
 did not understand the covenant engagements which 
 they took upon themselves in this solemn spiritual 
 light; nor did they try to bring up their children 
 in this pious and godly manner. The fact is too 
 plain, and its existence called forth too frequently 
 the reproof and chastenings of the Almighty, to be 
 denied. 
 
 But the same may be said of thousands within 
 the pale of the Church of Christ in our day. They 
 have brought their children into the Church simply 
 because their fathers have done so before them, 
 and because their Church rules require it, and are 
 as ignorant of its spiritual import, of the binding 
 character of the pledges they have made, and are as 
 neglectful of their performance as the Jews of the 
 old dispensation ever were. Hence the reproach 
 14 
 
210 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 with winch the Cliurcli lias been loaded; the dis- 
 satisfaction of many of the children who have been 
 placed in a covenant relation, with what their par- 
 ents have done for them; and the hesitancy of 
 many good Christians about the propriety of placing 
 their children in that relation. 
 
 There is, in our opinion, no subject in relation to 
 which the Church needs to be enlightened more 
 than upon this. 
 
 4. Nor is it left optional with believing parents 
 whether or not they will place their children in this 
 covenant relation to God. 
 
 The command is imperious: " Thou shall keep my 
 covenant therefore," is the language of the Al- 
 mighty to Abraham, and to all believers in their 
 respective generations. And the command is as im- 
 perious upon believing parents to place their children 
 in this covenant relation to God, as it is to place 
 themselves there. "He that is eight days old shall 
 be circumcised;" "And my covenant shall be in 
 your flesh for an everlasting covenant." Now, 
 when, and where has God ever released believing 
 parents from the performance of this duty? If he 
 has never released them in terms as plain and une- 
 quivocal as the language in which he enjoined the 
 duty, then it must continue binding. And before 
 any Christian parent should make up his mind to 
 defer bringing his child to God, and placing it in 
 the sacred covenant relation here secured to it, he 
 should be able to show that God has not only 
 changed the form of the token, but also that he 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 211 
 
 has changed the covenant so as to authorize the 
 delay. 
 
 Persons may be ignorant in relation to their duty 
 on this point, or they may listen to opposing views 
 till they may not know what is their duty; and, un- 
 der such circumstances, may not feel particularly 
 condemned for the neglect or delay. But we firmly 
 believe that well-informed Christians can no more 
 neglect, or delay, placing their children in a cove- 
 nant relation to God, without feeling remorse, than 
 if they neglected, or delayed placing themselves 
 there. 
 
 Some persons will say, I know that it is my duty 
 to consecrate my children to God, and this I have 
 tried to do a thousand times in secret and family 
 prayer. But would this answer the requisition of 
 the law in your own case ? After being converted, 
 and becoming like a little child, will it be sufficient 
 that you have consecrated yourself a thousand times 
 to God in secret, or at the family altar? Why not? 
 Why, clearly because in addition to all this, God 
 requires you publicly to connect yourself with his 
 Church, and place yourself in a covenant relation to 
 him, by receiving the token of the covenant in your 
 flesh. And does he not require you to do the same 
 thing to your children ? And is it not as wrong to 
 violate the law in their case as in your own ? Why 
 not? It is an old and true saying, that " whatever 
 is done unconstitutionally is not done at all." Now, 
 the constitution of the Church no where directly 
 enjoins it upon you to consecrate either yourself or 
 
212 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 your child in secret or at the family altar. The 
 law of Grod, to be sure, does. But the constitution 
 stands above all law, and therefore has the highest 
 claims; and till your children are brought and 
 consecrated to God, according to his directions in 
 the constitution of the Church, they are not conse- 
 crated at all. Other consecrations are good in their 
 place, but can never take the place or answer the 
 purpose of the regular consecration enjoined in the 
 covenant. 
 
 5. Nor is the provision of the covenant respect- 
 ing children a temporary arrangement, bounded by 
 the Jewish dispensation. The temporal and typical 
 blessings, promised in the covenant, were condi- 
 tional, and have been exchanged for others better 
 suited to the wants of the Church. And the token 
 of the covenant, for reasons good and sufficient, has 
 been changed in form, so as to be less painful and 
 burdensome ; but the spiritual precept and promise 
 of the covenant, and the token in the flesh in its new 
 form, continues, and is to continue forever; for, 
 u my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlast- 
 ing covenant," gives to the everlasting covenant an 
 everlasting token. 
 
 We have elsewhere examined the import of ever- 
 lasting, as used in this covenant, and have proven 
 it to signify endless duration, even when applied to 
 things temporal in themselves, because they shadow 
 forth things which are eternal; and the word everlast- 
 ing embraces both. But when applied to things spir- 
 itual, that do not shadow forth any thing, either in 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 213 
 
 heaven or in earth, then the primary meaning of 
 the word must be attached, which is endless dura- 
 tion in that form. Now, it can not be claimed that 
 those provisions in the covenant, which relate to 
 Abraham's spiritual seed, are typical, or shadow 
 forth any thing in heaven or in earth : hence their 
 perpetually-binding obligation. "I will establish 
 my covenant," make it permanent, "between me 
 and thee," God and Abraham, " and thy seed after 
 thee in their generations," between all believers in 
 Christ, in all their generations, and me their God, 
 "for an everlasting covenant," running through 
 both dispensations, through time and the endless 
 cycles of eternity. u I will be a God unto thee and 
 to thy seed after thee." And in their infancy is 
 the time prescribed for entering into this covenant, 
 and the believing parent is the responsible agent to 
 act for and represent the child: hence, the ever- 
 lasting covenant was designed to embrace all of the 
 children of the Church of God through time and 
 eternity; and if it does not, the Church or parents 
 of the children are to blame. 
 
214 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 THE SAVIOR OF THE WORLD DID NOT DISFRANCHISE CHILDREN OF 
 
 THEIR RIGHT TO MEMBERSHIP IN HIS CHURCH, 
 
 BUT ESTABLISHED IT. 
 
 Haying established the right of infants to mem- 
 bership in the Church of God, by the everlasting 
 provisions of the covenant, or constitution of the 
 Church ; and having proven, too, that this relation 
 to the Church, on the part of infants, was to be per- 
 manent, and was to be acknowledged by the applica- 
 tion to them of the covenant token, which was, first, 
 circumcision, and, second, baptism into the name of 
 the Divine Trinity, it now belongs to our opponents 
 to take the affirmative, and advance the proof that 
 infants, by some alteration of the provisions of the 
 covenant, have been disfranchised of their ancient 
 rights. Inferences, or circumstantial evidences, will 
 not answer in a case like this. Even positive law, 
 could it be pointed out, must yield to the superior 
 claims of a constitutional provision. An actual 
 change, positively made, in the Abrahamic cove- 
 nant, touching this point, must be clearly proven. 
 If this can not be done, we adjure them to stop 
 their unreasonable and unjustifiable crusade against 
 infant baptism. 
 
 When the constitution of a state or nation, in 
 one of its articles, has positively defined what kind, 
 or class, or classes of persons are to enjoy the privi- 
 leges of citizenship, and by what particular process 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 215 
 
 or ceremony this right shall be acknowledged or 
 secured; the class of persons described, by conform- 
 ing to the regulations prescribed, will be entitled to 
 those rights as citizens so long as the state or nation 
 continues to exist, and to act under the constitution 
 unaltered. Nor has any town, city, county, or fac- 
 tion of the people, or officer of the government, 
 any right to deprive them of the rights guaranteed 
 in the constitution; nor has the legislature any right 
 to pass a law interfering with these rights. Nothing 
 but an alteration of the constitution, or the adoption 
 of a new one, can disfranchise them. Now, we 
 defy anti-pedobaptists, who are making so much 
 bluster about the baptism of infants, to show an 
 alteration of the Abrahamic covenant so as to ex- 
 clude infants from the reception of its token or any 
 of its gracious spiritual provisions, or to prove the 
 adoption of a new constitution containing a prohibi- 
 tion of infants from its gracious and spiritual pro- 
 visions. 
 
 Now, we admit that the form of the inducting 
 ceremony was changed at the commencement of 
 the new dispensation; but that either believers in 
 Christ, or their infant offspring, were, by any enact- 
 ment of Jesus Christ, excluded from the Church, 
 or deprived of the reception of the new inducting 
 ceremony, we most positively deny; and those per- 
 sons who exclude infants from the Church, and 
 deny them Christian baptism, are in duty bound to 
 prove that infants were thus disfranchised by Jesus 
 Christ. Instead, therefore, of demanding of us a 
 
216 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 positive " thus saith the Lord" for infant baptism, 
 they must show a positive "thus saith the Lord" 
 against it. 
 
 Dr. Lightfoot, speaking upon this very point, re- 
 marks as follows: "To the objection, it is not com- 
 manded to baptize infants, therefore they are not 
 to be baptized; I answer, it is not forbidden to bap- 
 tize infants, therefore they are to be baptized. And 
 the reason is plain; for when pedobaptism in the 
 Jewish Church was so known, usual, and frequent 
 in the admission of proselytes, that nothing almost 
 was more known, usual, and frequent, there was 
 no need to strengthen it with any precept, when 
 baptism was now passed into an evangelical sacra- 
 ment. For Christ took baptism into his hands and 
 into evangelical use as he found it; this added that 
 he might promote it to a more worthy end and a 
 larger use. The whole nation knew well enough 
 that little children used to be baptized; there was 
 no need for a precept for that which had ever, by 
 common use, prevailed." (See more on this subject, 
 in Clarke's Commentary, at the end of Mark.) 
 
 This point has been illustrated by the following 
 homely, yet appropriate similitude : 
 
 " A man orders his servants to mark the sheep of 
 his flock with a bloody sign, and is careful to add, 
 ' See that you apply this sign to all the lambs also/ 
 Afterward he sees fit to dispense with the bloody 
 sign, made with a knife in the flesh, and ordains 
 that his servants shall mark his sheep with painty 
 but he says nothing about the lambs. Now, the 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 217 
 
 question is, will these servants, because the marking 
 is a 'positive institution/ argue that the lambs are 
 no longer to be marked because they are not speci- 
 fied, in so many words, in the second order? As 
 they purchase more sheep with lambs, will they 
 mark the sheep, but say they have no order for 
 marking the lambs? Every man must see that the 
 case would be just the contrary. All the natural 
 force of circumstances would tend to establish the 
 conviction that no change was intended in the 
 mark further than its external character. Its appli- 
 cability to the lambs, as well as to the sheep, would 
 not be considered as being at all affected by such a 
 change in the mark or sign. And it is wholly un- 
 natural to suppose that they would reason from 
 such a fact to the exclusion of the lambs. So in 
 the case before us. The fact of the external form 
 of the initiating ceremony, or mark of discipleship, 
 being changed, is not a sufficient ground for infer- 
 ring the change of the applicability of that ordi- 
 nance to infants; and it is wholly unnatural and 
 forced to suppose the apostles would have drawn 
 such an inference. " (See Hall on Baptism, pp. 
 156, 157.) 
 
 To those who continue to demand a positive com- 
 mand in the New Testament for the baptism of in- 
 fants, we recommend the following from the pen of 
 Eev. F. G. Hibbard : 
 
 "That God has no where directly authorized 
 female communion by any express precept; and as, 
 from the reasonableness of the case, we are fully 
 
218 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 convinced it is the Divine will that thej should be 
 admitted to the communion table, therefore we are 
 warranted in believing that positive duties are some- 
 times left to the direction of inference and analogy 
 without explicit written command; and if such a 
 subject as the right of females to the communion- 
 table has been left to inference, analogy, and the 
 reasonableness of things, so also may the subject 
 of infant baptism — a subject, we repeat it, no more 
 likely than the former to be misunderstood. And 
 all this may serve to show how futile are the claims 
 which some persons put forth to that highest kind 
 of moral evidence, explicit command, as a condition 
 of their faith. This point is so clear and evident, 
 and so obviously parallel to the case of infant bap- 
 tism, that it needs not to be amplified. '■' (Hibbard 
 on Baptism, p. 82.) 
 
 The same author again says : 
 
 "The fact of the change of the Sabbath from the 
 seventh to the first day of the week, rests upon the 
 same kind of evidence as that which we claim for 
 the support of infant baptism. It seems not to 
 have been duly considered by our opponents, that 
 from the earliest records of history God has deliv- 
 ered his commands to men through various means,* 
 and in somewhat varied kinds of evidence. If we 
 attentively examine into the grounds of evidence 
 that we have for various beliefs, we shall find that 
 while for some we have the warrant of a Divine 
 positive precept or declaration, for others we have 
 only the authority of historical testimony and 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 219 
 
 inductive reasoning. And these remarks, too, apply 
 not merely to forms and accidental usages, but to 
 cardinal and important subjects. We make these 
 remarks, not to intimate a suspicion that fhere is 
 any want of evidence in any part of revelation, but 
 to direct attention to the fact that all duties are 
 not sustained by the same kind of evidence/' 
 (Hibbard on Baptism, pp. 83, 84.) 
 
 " Is it not wholly unaccountable that the Baptists 
 should reject infant baptism on the ground of a 
 want of express precept, and then turn directly 
 about, and advocate the first day of the week as the 
 true Sabbath? They are forced to defend their 
 practice in the observance of the first day of the 
 week as the Sabbath day, on exactly similar grounds 
 of evidence to those from which we argue the obli- 
 gation and validity of infant baptism. Why do 
 they accept this sort of evidence in the one case, 
 and reject it, nay, hoot at it, in the other? The 
 Seventh-day Baptists alone are herein consistent 
 with themselves, and must necessarily possess great 
 advantage of their brethren who keep the first day 
 of the week, in argument on their respective pecul- 
 iarities. 'They must either keep the seventh day/ 
 says a Seven-day Baptist, <or reject the principles 
 on which they reject infant baptism; they must 
 give up their argument, or keep the seventh day, or 
 else determine to act inconsistently and absurdly/ " 
 (Eev. E. Hall on Baptism, p. 124.) 
 
 "But the New Testament is not silent on the 
 subject of infant baptism, but makes just such 
 
220 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 mention of it as, in view of the state of opinion at 
 that tinie, proves it to have been enjoined and uni- 
 versally practiced. It makes just such mention of 
 the subject as the circumstances of the case re- 
 quired. It is not the ordinance of baptism itself 
 that we now speak of, but it is the application of 
 this ordinance to infants. 
 
 "The institution of Christian baptism required 
 and received an express sanction from the lips of our 
 Savior, and this command is registered. But the 
 application of this rite to infants is a point that be- 
 comes so obvious to the mind of the Jew, and to all 
 who were conversant with the ancient usage of the 
 Church, as to require no direct precept, or, at least, 
 that the precept should be recorded. The light of 
 analogy, and the force of ancient habit, precluded 
 any such necessity. They had only need of being 
 informed what was the initiatory rite of the new 
 dispensation, and the fact of its applicability to 
 infants would follow as a matter of course, unless 
 prohibited; or, at most, would require only private 
 direction. Under these circumstances, what men- 
 tion may we suppose the New Testament would nat- 
 urally make of this subject? We answer, it is 
 reasonable to suppose that it would merely recognize 
 facts and principles in relation to it, in an inci- 
 dental way, without any intimation of their being 
 new, or controverted, or doubted. And this we find 
 to be the fact in the case. 
 
 "The New Testament makes just such allusion to 
 infants — recognizes all those facts and principles in 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 221 
 
 reference to them — as supposes them still to retain 
 their ancient rights to the seal of the covenant; and 
 their ancient relation to the Church. Infants are 
 spoken of in a manner wholly inexplicable on any 
 other supposition than that of their eligibility to 
 baptism, and in a manner to clearly indicate that 
 there was no controversy on this point in the New 
 Testament times. The reader will readily perceive, 
 therefore, on a little reflection, the proper distinct- 
 ive character of our position. He will be at no loss 
 to appreciate the distinction between a positive com- 
 mand, directing a certain line of conduct, and a 
 recognition of principles and facts which imply such 
 conduct, between an ordinance newly issued under 
 sanction of positive authority, and an ordinance of 
 ancient date, newly recognized in its principles, and 
 in the fact of its existence." (Hibbard on Bap- 
 tism, pp. 88, 89.) 
 
 Fully indorsing the sentiments of Mr. Hibbard, 
 we will here take the liberty to illustrate some of 
 them. 
 
 1. He says, " The New Testament makes just such 
 allusion to infants — recognizes all those facts and 
 principles in reference to them — as supposes them 
 still to retain their ancient rights to the seal of the 
 covenant, and their ancient relation to the Church." 
 The following is an example: "Then were there 
 brought unto him little children, that he should put 
 his hands on them, and pray; and the disciples re- 
 buked them. But Jesus said, Suffer little children, 
 and forbid them not, to come unto me, for of such is 
 
222 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 the kingdom of heaven. And he laid his hands 
 on them and departed thence." Matt, xix, 13-15. 
 
 The following facts are worthy of special consid- 
 eration. 
 
 (1.) The persons who brought these " little chil- 
 dren" to Christ ; were Jewish parents, themselves 
 connected with the Church of God in infancy, and 
 cherishing the highest veneration for all the provi- 
 sions of the Abrahamic covenant, which secured to 
 children a visible as well as a spiritual connection 
 with the Church of God, and consecration to him 
 by the application of the covenant token. They had 
 learned, through John the Baptist, and others, that 
 Jesus was the long-looked-for Messiah promised in 
 the covenant, and they partially believed it. Their 
 principal concern at this time was, to know what 
 disposition the Messiah would make of their " little 
 children" under the new dispensation. Hence, 
 they brought them to Christ, and asked him to lay 
 his " hands upon them, and pray." "It was a com- 
 mon custom among the Jews," says Dr. Clarke, "to 
 lay their hands on the heads of those whom they 
 blessed, or for whom they prayed. This seems to 
 have been done by way of dedication or consecra- 
 tion to God — the person being considered as the 
 sacred property of God ever after." Their object 
 in bringing these children to Christ, and asking 
 him to "put his hands on their heads, and pray," 
 was to settle an important principle; and that prin- 
 ciple related not so much to the ordinance as to the 
 fact of consecrating little children to God. They 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 223 
 
 knew not that any change in the ordinance of con- 
 secration was contemplated: nor did they care or 
 inquire about this; their minds grasped an object 
 infinitely more important — it was, whether "little 
 children" were to continue to enjoy a consecration 
 to God, a covenant relation to him and his Church, 
 or not, under the reign of the Gospel. 
 
 (2.) "The disciples rebuked them/' supposing, 
 as many parents now do, that these "little children" 
 were too young to be benefited by the consecration 
 and prayer of the Savior. St. Luke — xviii, 15 — 
 calls them to, ppsyii — infants, or very young chil- 
 dren. 
 
 (3.) "But Jesus," knowing better than they did 
 the object for which the children were brought, and 
 fully approving of that object, and wishing to cor- 
 rect the error and hasty action of his disciples, 
 " said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to 
 come unto me." He refers to "little children" 
 generally, as well as to these in particular. He set- 
 tles a principle for all time to come, that "little 
 children" are to be brought to Christ, and conse- 
 crated to God, and then assigns the reason, "for of 
 such is the kingdom of heaven." 
 
 (4.) "The kingdom of heaven," in this place, 
 must refer either to his spiritual, invisible Church 
 on earth during the dispensation of the Gospel, or 
 his glorious spiritual reign in heaven, or he means 
 both, as two departments of one kingdom. In 
 either case the "kingdom of heaven" is composed 
 of characters morally resembling those of "little 
 
224 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 children." And it is because they sustain this 
 character, and stand thus related to the divine 
 kingdom, that they were visibly and publicly to be 
 consecrated to God. And this is precisely the char- 
 acter the Jews had always given to " little children/' 
 and this character was what constituted them 
 " Abraham's seed/' and was the reason that they 
 were connected with adult believers in the Abra- 
 hamic covenant. The exact relation, therefore, 
 which little children had sustained from the begin- 
 ning to God and his Church, they are forever to 
 continue to sustain. And this agrees perfectly with 
 the declaration made by the prophet Jeremiah — 
 xxx, 20 — " Their children [under the dispensation 
 of the Gospel] also shall be as aforetime/' as they 
 had been from the organization of the Church. 
 Christian baptism was not yet instituted ; hence, the 
 Savior did not baptize them, but he settles import- 
 ant principles which others were to act upon, when 
 baptism was instituted. This passage must be con- 
 nected with the one containing the apostle's com- 
 mission, for the mutual understanding of each; 
 the first declaring what the relation of " little chil- 
 dren" is to be to God and his Church forever, and 
 the other showing how, under the new dispen- 
 sation, this twofold relation is henceforth to be 
 visibly and publicly acknowledged by "baptizing 
 them." 
 
 2. Mr. Hibbard speaks of the difference "be- 
 tween an ordinance newly issued under sanction of 
 positive authority 7 and an ordinance of ancient date, 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 225 
 
 newly recognized in its principles, and in the fact 
 of its existence." 
 
 The difference is seen in the following particulars : 
 
 (1.) A new positive institution should not be 
 carried into practice beyond the plain letter of the 
 language in which it is described, or the manifest 
 example of those who authorized it. " See thou do 
 all things according to the pattern showed thee in 
 the mount," is as true in its application to New Test- 
 ament positive institutions, as it was to those insti- 
 tuted by Moses. 
 
 (2.) An old institution, newly modified and estab- 
 lished, should be made to differ from its former 
 character only so far as the language in which it is 
 described, or the example of those making the 
 change, will justify. 
 
 The fact has been fully settled, I think, that 
 Christian baptism was not a new positive institu- 
 tion, but was an old institution newly modified; 
 that from Moses to Christ it was an adjunct of cir- 
 cumcision, and was then, in an improved form, made 
 to succeed it. The question, then, pertinent to this 
 subject is, in what did he change the former char- 
 acter and design of baptism ? Did he so modify it 
 as to exclude infants ? This point will be investi- 
 gated in its proper place. We have seen, however, 
 that in advance of any interference with baptism, 
 Jesus Christ did re-establish every thing in relation 
 to infants that they had previously enjoyed. And 
 unless there is some positive prohibition, the infer- 
 ences are most decidedly in our favor. 
 15 
 
226 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 SECTION IV, 
 
 THE COMMISSION GIVEN BY CHRIST TO HIS APOSTLES DOES NOT 
 
 PROHIBIT, BUT PROVIDES FOR THE MEMBERSHIP 
 
 AND BAPTISM OF INFANTS. 
 
 We will examine that commission as given by 
 Christ to his apostles and their successors in the 
 ministry. 
 
 I. As recorded by Matthew — xxviii, 19, 20. It 
 reads, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, 
 baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of 
 the Son, and of the Holy G-host." 
 
 1. The first thing to be ascertained is, whether 
 the commission as here described presents any in- 
 superable barrier to the baptism of infants. For, 
 while anti-pedobaptists admit that the Savior did 
 not expressly forbid the baptism of infants, he did, 
 they say, lay down principles, and give directions, 
 in reference to the ordinance of baptism, which, of 
 necessity, excludes infants. 
 
 (1.) They claim that Christ commanded the apos- 
 tles to "teach all nations" and then to "baptize 
 them." Consequently, teaching must, of necessity, 
 in every case, precede baptism. 
 
 (2.) Infants can not be taught before baptism; 
 therefore infants should not be baptized. 
 
 To this we remark, 
 
 First. That the order of words in Scripture does 
 not always point out precisely the order of things. 
 St. Mark— i, 4— says, " John baptized in the wilder- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 227 
 
 ness, and preached the baptism of repentance." 
 But it can not be supposed that John invariably 
 baptized first, and preached repentance afterward. 
 Again — Mark i, 5 — "They were baptized of him 
 in Jordan, confessing their sins." But were they 
 baptized first, and then did they confess their sins 
 afterward? The Lord's supper was instituted be- 
 fore Christ's crucifixion, and baptism after it; but 
 does the Church invariably administer the sacra- 
 ment before baptism ? Again: if the language of 
 the great commission is arbitrary as to time, then 
 the apostles and their successors should not have 
 baptized any till they had "taught all nations;" 
 nor should they have taught any persons after bap- 
 tizing them; for if the rule is arbitrary it must 
 work both ways. It would be as unlawful to teach 
 after baptism as to baptize before teaching them. 
 But no such arbitrary rule was intended. 
 
 Now, in all these cases the order of time is made 
 to yield to the apparent relation and fitness of 
 things. And this is all we ask in the case before 
 us. All are to be taught, and all are to be bap- 
 tized; and when teaching is necessary before bap- 
 tism, let it be given; and where it is not necessary 
 to constitute the candidate a fit subject for the ordi- 
 nance, let baptism be administered first, teaching 
 them afterward. Infants, as we have shown, are fit 
 for the Church and for heaven, as well as for bap- 
 tism, without teaching; therefore, let them be 
 baptized first, and taught subsequently. 
 
 Second. The word teach is not the best translation 
 
228 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 of the original that could be made. a Go ye, there- 
 fore, and y,a0?i't6v6a't£ — matheteusate — make disciples 
 or proselytes of all nations, baptizing them/' etc. 
 "The translation we have given is, to say the least, 
 as consistent with the original as the one in our 
 common English version. This the Baptists them- 
 selves will not deny. Beside, the specific duty of 
 teaching is referred to in the- very next verse, and 
 is expressed in another word. Our English pre- 
 sents a perfect tautology: 'Go teach all nations, . . . 
 teaching them/ etc. It will not be argued that 
 this is either a smooth or forcible sense. The two 
 words are not the same in the original, and cer- 
 tainly can not be supposed, with any propriety, to 
 bear exactly the same sense here. The first, which 
 occurs in verse 19, enjoins upon the apostles to 
 bring persons over to the Christian profession, 
 which, in an adult, would imply some elementary 
 teaching. But the second word, which occurs in 
 verse 20, enjoins upon them to instruct these con- 
 verts. The former word is more general, the latter 
 more specific. Doddridge renders it, 'Go forth, 
 therefore, and proselyte all the nations, . . . teach- 
 ing them/ etc. This makes the same sense as the 
 marginal reading, ( Qo make disciples or Christians 
 of a-11 nations/ etc. Now, it is incontestible that 
 they were commanded to (jLaO^Tfsv^aTfe — make disci- 
 ples — before they were commanded to SiSaaxsw — 
 teach. If not, why are these commands enjoined in 
 this order? and if both these words mean the same 
 thing in this place, why are the two employed, instead 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. * 229 
 
 of one word, which would have been more simple? 
 It is therefore absurd to suppose they mean the same 
 thing. They were to perform the first command — to 
 make disciples — before; they were to perform the 
 second command — to teach, indoctrinate — after bap- 
 tism. 
 
 " Furthermore, the verb bears this sense else- 
 where. Thus, Matt, xxvii, 57: i Joseph . . . who 
 was efiaOrj-tsv^e — made a disciple of Jesus/ Acts 
 xiv, 21 : ' And when they had preached the Gospel 
 in that city — xao ^ad^'tEv^av'tB^ ixavov$ — and having 
 made disciples of many/ That these persons of 
 Derbe were not only taught, but actually discipled, 
 and brought under the denomination of Christians, 
 is evident, for in verse 22 they are called fiaO^tcav — 
 disciples — and in verse 23 are spoken of as Church 
 members. " (Hibbard on Baptism, pp. 95, 96.) 
 
 If you would induce an adult to enter your school, 
 you must first convince him that it is his interest to 
 do so ; but children may be placed in the school by 
 their parents; and in both cases you speak of them 
 as scholars or disciples; and the children sustain 
 that relation as really as do the adults. 
 
 And inasmuch as infants without instruction sus- 
 tain a moral character precisely similar to adults 
 who have been taught and even converted — see 
 Matt, xviii, 3 — they are therefore disciples by the 
 action of their parents, in the fullest sense of the 
 text, and are consequently as fit to receive baptism. 
 The commission, therefore, in this instance, pre- 
 sents no obstacle in the way of baptizing infants, by 
 
230 * INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 requiring them first to be discipled, or taken as sub- 
 jects of instruction. 
 
 2. The apostles would naturally understand the 
 words of this commission as authorizing and direct- 
 ing infant baptism. 
 
 (1.) The word ixad^'tsvaa'ts — disciple — as used in 
 the commission, signifies the same as proselyte among 
 the Jews ; the former describing a convert to Christ, 
 while the latter describes a convert to the law of 
 Moses. 
 
 "The word — ^afl^^ — matlietes, disciple, primarily 
 signifies a scholar, that is, one who has placed him- 
 self under the tutorage of another. A person who 
 left his idolatry and heathen worship and came to 
 Moses, adopting him as his authoritative teacher 
 and guide in religion, was called a proselyte ; a per- 
 son who 'forsook all/ and came to Christ, accept- 
 ing him as his only religious teacher and guide, 
 was called a disciple. The primary idea in both 
 words is the same. Our Savior used the word dis- 
 ciple, instead of proselyte, probably for no other 
 reason than to avoid the confusion that would result 
 from adopting a strictly Jewish vocabulary, although 
 that vocabulary might otherwise have equally served 
 his purpose." (Hibbard on Baptism, p. 97.) 
 
 (2.) The practice of making proselytes to the Jew- 
 ish religion was well understood by the apostles, 
 who were commissioned to disciple or make prose- 
 lytes of "all nations." Dr. Clarke says, "The term 
 proselyte, from the Greek stpoa^vto^ — a stranger, or 
 foreigner, one who is come from Ms own people or 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 231 
 
 country to sojourn with another. All who were not 
 descendants of some of the twelve sons of Jacob ; or 
 of Ephraim, or Manasseh, the two sons of Joseph, 
 were reputed strangers or proselytes among the Jews. 
 But of these strangers or proselytes there were two 
 kinds, called among them proselytes of the gate, and 
 proselytes of justice or of the covenant. The former 
 were such as wished to dwell among the Jews, but 
 would not submit to he circumcised; they, however, 
 acknowledged the true God, avoided all idolatry, 
 and observed the seven precepts of Noah, but were 
 not obliged to observe any of the Mosaic institu- 
 tions. The latter submitted to be circumcised, 
 obliged themselves to observe all the rites and cer- 
 emonies of the law, and were in nothing different 
 from the Jew but merely their once having been 
 heathens. The former, or proselytes of the gate, 
 might not eat the passover or partake of any of the 
 sacred festivals ; but the latter, the proselytes of the 
 covenant, had the same rights, spiritual and secular, 
 as the Jews themselves." (See comments on Exo- 
 odus xii, 43.) It is to this second class of proselytes 
 we now refer; and it will be easy, I think, to con- 
 vince the reader that the spirit of making prose- 
 lytes was never higher among the Jews than when 
 the Savior commissioned his apostles to make dis- 
 ciples or proselytes of "all nations." Christ says — - 
 Matt, xxiii, 15 — "Ye compass sea and land to make 
 one proselyte." Josephus tell us — Ant. b. 13, c. 9, 
 sec. 1 — that Idumea was wholly proselyted over as a 
 nation. Again : wherever the apostles went, preach- 
 
232 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 ing the Gospel, they found Jewish proselytes. (See 
 Acts ii, 10 ; vi, 5 ; and xiii, 43.) The apostles, there- 
 fore, must have been familiar with this class of per- 
 sons among the Jews as well as with the process by 
 which they were made, themselves being Jews. 
 
 (3.) These proselytes were baptized as well as cir- 
 cumcised — a fact, too, with which the apostles 
 must have been familiar. In addition to what has 
 been said on this point — see Part II, Sec. I, and 
 Sec. II — we will here give the testimony of a few 
 more Jewish authorities : 
 
 The Talmud of Babylon says, "When a proselyte 
 is received, he must be circumcised; and when he is 
 cured, they baptize him in the presence of two wise 
 men, saying, Behold he is an Israelite in all things." 
 
 The Talmud of Jerusalem agrees with the above, 
 only, like Maimonides, it speaks of a " sacrifice" in 
 addition to circumcision and baptism. 
 
 The Gemara of Babylon, a Jewish commentary 
 on the Mishna, says, "The proselytes entered not 
 into covenant but by circumcision, baptism, and 
 sprinkling of blood." 
 
 And hence Arianus, who wrote about A. D. 147, 
 calls the Jewish proselytes, in derision, "the bap- 
 tized." (See Lightfoot's Horae Hebraiae Talmudicge; 
 also, his Harmony of the New Testament. Dr. 
 Hammond's Annotations; also, his Six Queries on 
 Infant Baptism, quoted by Wall's History, Part I.) 
 
 The following very appropriate remarks are from 
 the pen of Dr. Woods. We commend them to those 
 who deny that baptism was practiced by the Jews 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 238 
 
 in making proselytes before it was instituted by our 
 Savior. 
 
 " First. The rabbins unanimously assert that the 
 baptism of proselytes had been practiced by the 
 Jews in all ages, from Moses down to the time when 
 they wrote. Now, these writers must have been 
 sensible that their cotemporaries, both Jews and 
 Christians, knew whether such a practice had been 
 prevalent or not. And had it been known that no 
 such practice had existed, would not Jesus have 
 been found bold enough to contradict such a ground- 
 less assertion of the rabbins ? At least would there 
 not have been some Christians, fired with the love 
 of truth, jealous for the honor of the sacred rite, 
 first instituted by Christ, who would have exposed 
 to shame those who falsely asserted that a similar 
 rite had existed for more than a thousand years ? 
 But neither of these things was done. 
 
 " Second. Had not the Jews been accustomed to 
 baptize proselytes previously to the Christian era, 
 it is extremely improbable that they would have 
 adopted the practice afterward. For their contempt 
 and hatred of Christianity exceeded all bounds, and 
 must have kept them at the greatest possible dis- 
 tance from copying a rite peculiar to Christians. 
 
 "Third. It seems to have been perfectly consist- 
 ent and proper for the Jews to baptize proselytes. 
 For their divine ritual enjoined various purifications 
 by washing, or baptism. And as they considered all 
 Gentiles to be unclean, how could they do otherwise 
 than understand the Divine law to require, that 
 
234 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 when any of them were proselyted to the Jewish 
 religion, they should receive the same sign of puri- 
 fication as was, in so many cases, applied to them- 
 selves?" (Lectures on Infant Baptism, pp. 48, 49.) 
 
 (4.) When Gentile parents were converted and 
 made proselytes, their children — males under the age 
 of twelve, and females under thirteen — were regarded 
 as proselytes, and, accordingly, were baptized. 
 
 "Boys under twelve years of age, and girls under 
 thirteen, could not become proselytes till they had 
 obtained the consent of their parents, or, in case of 
 refusal, the concurrence of the officers of justice. 
 Baptism, in respect to girls, had the same effect as 
 circumcision in respect to boys. Each of them, by 
 means of this, received, as it were, a new birth." 
 (Robinson's Calmet, Art. Proselyte.) 
 
 After the reader has again examined what has 
 been said in another place on this subject — Part 
 III, Sec. I — he will examine the following addi- 
 tional testimony. Rab. Honna says, "They bap- 
 tize an infant proselyte by the command of the 
 bench. Upon what is this grounded? On this, 
 that baptism becomes a privilege to him. And 
 they may endow an absent person with a privilege; 
 or they may bestow a privilege upon one, though he 
 be ignorant of it." (See Lightfoot's Horse He- 
 braise in Matt, iii, 28.) 
 
 (5.) We will now briefly sum up what has been 
 proven, as the grounds of our argument. We have 
 proven that disciple, in the Christian vocabulary, is 
 equivalent to proselyte with the Jews; and that 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 235 
 
 proselyte was a name applied by the Jews to all con- 
 verted Gentiles and their infant children; and that 
 all such proselytes, whether adults or infants, were 
 both circumcised and baptized; and that their 
 mode of proselyting was extensively practiced by 
 the Jews in the days of Christ and of his apostles; 
 and knowing what customs did prevail, and what 
 power early education and long-continued habit ex- 
 ert upon the mind, Jesus said to his apostles, "Go 
 and disciple" — make proselytes of "all nations/' and 
 omitting to circumcise them as the custom had been, 
 "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of 
 the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," without the 
 slightest intimation that infants, of converted par- 
 ents, were not now, as formerly, to be regarded as 
 proselytes, and, consequently, baptized. 
 
 We will be greatly aided in arriving at the truth 
 in relation to the above passages by the following 
 rules. Mr. Horn says, "1. Ascertain the notion af- 
 fixed to a word by the persons in general, by whom 
 the language either is now or formerly was spoken, 
 and especially in the particular connection in which 
 such notion is affixed." He adds, "The meaning 
 of a word used by any writer, is the meaning affixed 
 to it by those for whom he immediately wrote. For 
 there is a kind of natural compact between those 
 who write and those who speak a language; by 
 which they are mutually bound to use words in a 
 certain sense : he, therefore, who uses such words 
 in a different signification, in a manner violates that 
 compact, and is in danger of leading men into error, 
 
236 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 contrary to the design of God." (Horn's Introduc- 
 tion, p. 114.) 
 
 Now, we have seen what notion the Jews of our 
 Savior's day, and, consequently, the apostles, at- 
 tached to making disciples, or proselytes. Their no- 
 tion was, that infants were embraced; consequently, 
 if Christ did not design infants to. be baptized, he 
 was in duty bound to apprise them of the fact; and, 
 therefore, by not excluding infants, he evidently 
 designed them to be baptized with their parents, as 
 was the custom. 
 
 "It is common," says Mr. Wall, "for a rule or 
 law to be so worded as that one may perceive that 
 the lawgiver has supposed, or taken for granted, 
 that the people to whom it was already given did 
 already know some things which were previous to 
 the apprehending of his meaning, so that it was 
 needless to express them. But though these things 
 were ordinarily known to the people of that time 
 and place, yet we, who live at so great a distance 
 of time, do not know them without an inquiry made 
 into the history of the state of that time as to those 
 things which the law speaks of, and, consequently, 
 without such inquiry, the rule or law that was plain 
 to them, will, in many particulars, be obscure to us. 
 So, for example, many of the Grecian and Roman 
 laws, whereof we have copies yet extant, would not 
 be well understood by us unless they were explained 
 to us by such as have skill in the history of the 
 state of affairs in those empires. And so, many 
 passages in the books of the New Testament of our 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 237 
 
 Savior are not rightly apprehended without having 
 recourse to the books of the Old Testament, and 
 other books, wherein the customs of the Jewish 
 nation are set forth, for understanding the state of 
 religion among the people at that time when our 
 Savior gave his rules. " (History of Infant Baptism, 
 Introduction.) 
 
 "It is a matter of no importance to the present 
 argument, whether the Jews fairly derived their 
 authority for baptizing proselytes from the Bible, 
 or only from their doctors. The truth is, they had 
 such a practice, and they quoted the Old Testament 
 Scriptures as their authority. Whether, therefore, 
 the practice were rightly or wrongly founded on 
 the sacred Scriptures, they fully believed it to be of 
 divine authority; and hence, it is easy to perceive 
 that it would have the same influence over their 
 minds, in determining the sense of their commis- 
 sion, as though it had been indisputably of divine 
 authority ; that is, without a prohibition, they would 
 naturally have understood it as authorizing and 
 directing them to baptize infants. The question is 
 not, whether the baptism of Jewish proselytes — 
 infants as well as adults — was right ? but whether 
 the disciples, and all the Jews, believed it to be 
 right? for the influence it would exert over their 
 minds is not to be measured by the absolute fitness 
 or obligation of the practice, but by their views of 
 its fitness and obligation." (Hibbard on Baptism, 
 pp. 103, 104.) 
 
 Mr. Wall illustrates these views in the following 
 
238 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 way: " Suppose our Savior had ordered the apostles 
 to require the nations to keep the Jewish feasts. 
 If he had meant that they should not keep the 
 i feast of the dedication ' — for which there is no 
 positive Divine command — as well as the passover, 
 and the rest which had been commanded in the 
 law, he would doubtless, in that case, have excepted 
 that. And there is the same reason in the case 
 before us ;; — Wall's History, Part I, Introduction — 
 to suppose that, if the Savior designed that the apos- 
 tles should not baptize infants, they would have been 
 excepted by him in the commission. 
 
 We will here introduce one more quotation from 
 Dr. Woods. He says, " Christ ordained that this 
 rite, which had thus been used among the Israel- 
 ites for purification, and thus applied to converted 
 Gentiles, and to Jews who repented under the 
 preaching of John, should, from that time, be 
 applied to all, in every part of the world, who em- 
 braced Christianity. The work of proselyting men 
 to the true religion had before been carried on 
 within narrow limits. It was now to be carried on 
 extensively; and baptism, in the Christian form, 
 was now to be administered to all proselytes. i Go 
 ye and proselyte all nations, baptizing them in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost/ In judging of the true meaning and 
 intent of this commission, the apostles would natu- 
 rally consider in what manner baptism had been 
 administered, and particularly its having been ap- 
 plied to proselytes and their children. This last cir- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 239 
 
 cumstance, in addition to the other, with which 
 they were so familiar, namely, that of having chil- 
 dren, as well as parents, consecrated to God by cir- 
 cumcision, must have had a direct and decisive 
 influence upon the construction which the apostles 
 put upon their commission, and must have left 
 them to conclude that, under the Christian dispen- 
 sation, children, as well as parents, were to be de- 
 voted to God by baptism, unless some contrary 
 instruction was given to prevent such a conclu- 
 sion." (Woods's Lectures on Infant Baptism, pp. 
 50, 51.) 
 
 In addition to the above facts and arguments, the 
 reader will remember that but a short time before 
 this commission was given, the apostles were repri- 
 manded for refusing to suffer little children to come 
 to Christ, and the relation which little children had 
 long sustained, both to the Church and to God, was 
 in their presence reaffirmed by the Savior; conse- 
 quently, as Knapp says, "If Christ, in his com- 
 mand to baptize all — Matt, xxviii — had wished 
 children to be excepted, he must have expressly 
 said this; for since the first disciples of Christ, as 
 native Jews, knew no other way than for children 
 to be introduced into the Israelitish Church by cir- 
 cumcision, it was natural that they should extend 
 this to baptism — when baptism took the place of 
 circumcision — if Christ did not expressly forbid it, 
 especially after declaring them fit for the kingdom 
 of heaven. Had he, therefore, wished that it 
 should not be done, he would surely have said so 
 
240 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 in definite terms." (Woods's Lectures on Infant 
 Baptism, p. 51.) 
 
 3. The apostles could not fulfill the commission 
 given them without baptizing infants. They were 
 commanded to a disciple all nations, baptizing 
 them/' etc. Mr. Campbell says, " The active par- 
 ticiple, baptizing, in connection with an imperative, 
 disciple them, either declares the manner in which 
 the imperative is obeyed, or explains the meaning 
 of the command." (Christian System, p. 198.) Con- 
 sequently, according to his own showing, no person 
 can be a disciple unless he is baptized; and as 
 every nation is composed in part of infant chil- 
 dren, no nation can be discipled till its infant 
 children, as well as its adults, are baptized. Ac- 
 cordingly, to " disciple all nations, baptizing them," 
 etc., the apostles and their successors must con- 
 tinue to "disciple" parents and children, " baptiz- 
 ing them" till all the parents and children in "all 
 nations" are "discipled" and "baptized." If it be 
 said that they were commanded to " disciple all na- 
 tions, baptizing them" only as they become adults, 
 we answer this is adding to the commission a sen- 
 tence and a thought which it does not contain, and 
 which is no where authorized in either the New or 
 Old Testament, nor in the practice of the Church 
 in either dispensation, and therefore can not be 
 regarded as being the true sense of the commission. 
 Besides all that, a very large portion of every nation 
 dies before arriving at adult years, and, conse- 
 quently, if their baptism be deferred, a large por- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 241 
 
 tion of every nation can never be "discipled, bap- 
 tizing them/' etc., in this world. The apostles, 
 therefore, received a commission which they conld 
 not fulfill unless they baptized infants. From the 
 facts we have proven, and the reasons we have ad- 
 duced, we will leave the reader to judge whether 
 the apostles would not, in view of all the circum- 
 stances, be likely to understand the commission 
 given them by their divine Master to authorize the 
 baptism of infant children. 
 
 II. We will examine the commission as recorded 
 in Mark xvi, 15, 16: "Go ye into all the world, 
 and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that 
 believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he 
 that believeth not, shall be damned." 
 
 We would here remind the reader that infant 
 Church membership, acknowledged by a visible 
 Church ordinance, had been practiced from the be- 
 ginning; and the question now is, whether the 
 Savior, in the above language, prohibited its con- 
 tinuance ? Anti-pedobaptists amrm, while we deny. 
 
 Mr. Jewet says, " But the terms of the commis- 
 sion, while they enjoin the baptism of believers, do 
 most certainly exclude the baptism of any but believers. 
 If I commission my agent to purchase for me a lot 
 of Webster's large Dictionaries, does he not violate 
 his instructions if he also buy on my account a lot 
 of the abridgments? 'But/ he says, 'you did not 
 forbid the purchase of the abridgment/ Did not 
 forbid the purchase ! I answer, it was not neces- 
 sary for me to insert in your commission a prohi- 
 16 
 
242 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 bition against purchasing other books. Your in- 
 structions were definite; and when I directed you 
 to buy the large books, you must have known that 
 you had no authority to buy small books; you have 
 clone it at your own risk." (Jewet on Bap., p. 91.) 
 But, conclusive as the above argument at first 
 appears, a moment's investigation will show that 
 the cases are not parallel. To make them parallel, 
 we must suppose that Mr. Jewet' s agent had been 
 long in his employ, and that others had preceded 
 him in the same service; and that in all previous 
 cases, when the employer was at all specific in his 
 instructions, he had invariably commanded them to 
 bring both the large and the small editions of Web- 
 ster's Dictionary. And now Mr. Jewet informs his 
 servant that he had greatly enlarged his storehouse, 
 and he intended engaging in the trade of dictiona- 
 ries much more extensively than ever before, and 
 that he must bring him hereafter a much larger 
 number of books than before, without specifying at 
 all whether he wanted the large or small kind, or 
 both. Would not the agent, under these circum- 
 stances, look at the previous custom on this sub- 
 ject, and get the same kind of books that agents 
 had always previously gotten ? And if any of Mr. 
 Jewet' s other agents should take it upon them- 
 selves to complain, at his arrival, because he had 
 brought some small books, would he not plead with 
 propriety that if his employer intended to stop the 
 trade in the small books, he should have told him 
 so definitely? and that in the absence of such a 
 
EIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 243 
 
 definite prohibition lie was justified in purchasing 
 the small books ? Still, it may be argued that the 
 term "believeth" does sufficiently define the sub- 
 jects of baptism to amount to a prohibition of all 
 that do not or can not believe. Says Mr. Jewet, 
 " These directions command none but believers to 
 be baptized." (Jewet on Baptism, p. 90.) But 
 it is much easier to assert than to prove this propo- 
 sition. 
 
 We have before proven that the simple order of 
 words by no means formed an arbitrary rule as- to 
 the order of things. The word "believeth," being 
 antecedent to " baptize," no more proves that faith 
 must necessarily precede baptism, than does the 
 word " teach" placed before " baptism," in Matt, 
 xxviii, 19, prove that instruction, whether they 
 need it or not, must precede baptism; or than " bap- 
 tism" being placed before the "confessing of sins," 
 in Matt, iii, 6, proves that baptism must, in all 
 cases, necessarily precede confession; nor yet that 
 "baptism" being spoken before "repentance," in 
 Matt, iii, 11, renders it necessary that baptism 
 should invariably precede repentance. If we un- 
 dertake to make an arbitrary rule in one place, 
 fixing the order and relation of things by the order 
 of words, we may do so universally, and thus rule 
 would conflict with rule till the Bible would present 
 a worse confusion of rules than there was of 
 "tongues" on the "tower of Babel." 
 
 But it may be said that this is an exception, be- 
 cause the Savior fixes faith as a necessary prerequi- 
 
244 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 site to baptism. Certainly no more than he does to 
 salvation. "He that believeth and is baptized, shall 
 be saved. " If faith is a necessary prerequisite to 
 baptism, then both faith and baptism are necessary 
 to salvation; and as infants can neither "believe" 
 nor be "baptized/ 7 they certainly can not be "saved." 
 This is a very hard argument for anti-pedobaptists 
 to dispose of. Mr. Jewet attempts it in the fol- 
 lowing rather ingenious manner: "With reference 
 to Mark xvi, 16 — 'He that believeth and is baptized, 
 shall be saved; and he that believeth not, shall be 
 damned 7 — it is said, 'If we infer that a person must 
 actually believe, else he can not be baptized, we 
 must also infer that he must actually believe, else 
 he can not be saved; hence infants can not be 
 saved. 7 Certainly, if there were no way of saving 
 infants but by the Gospel, this conclusion is inevi- 
 table. The Gospel saves none but by faith. But 
 the Gospel has nothing to do with infants, nor have 
 Gospel ordinances any respect to them. The Gos- 
 pel has to do with those who hear it. It is good 
 news; but to infants it is no news at all. They 
 know nothing of it. The salvation of the Gospel 
 is as much confined to believers as the baptism of 
 the Gospel is. None shall ever be saved by the 
 Gospel who do not believe it; consequently, by the 
 Gospel no infant can be saved. Infants are saved 
 by the death of Christ, but not by the Gospel, not 
 by faith. They are to be regenerated, but not by 
 the Gospel; they are to be sanctified for heaven, 
 but not through the truth revealed to man. The 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 245 
 
 position is, therefore, good; none can be saved by 
 the Gospel but such as believe the Gospel; none 
 can be baptized with the baptism of the Gospel, but 
 such as believe the Gospel. There is no exception 
 in either case." (Jewet on Baptism, p. 93.) 
 
 1. Mr. Jewet says, "None can be saved by the 
 Gospel but such as believe the Gospel." V7hat is 
 meant by being ^ saved by the Gospel," we do not 
 fully understand. Can he mean that the Gospel has 
 power to save independent of Christ, or of his 
 death ? This can not be possible. He only meant, 
 perhaps, that the Gospel saved instrumentally. The 
 Gospel, which consists in the simple proclamation 
 to men that have sinned that Christ has died for 
 them, has no power in itself to save; but by excit- 
 ing faith in Christ, through which he saves us, it 
 becomes instrumental in our salvation. The death 
 of Christ, therefore, is the efficient agent by which 
 we are all regenerated, sanctified, and saved. And 
 baptism, though a Gospel ordinance, is not a type, 
 sign, or figure, either of the agent or of the instru- 
 ment, but of the thing accomplished — of regener- 
 ation and of sanctification. 
 
 2. Mr. Jewet admits that infants are capable of 
 receiving regeneration, sanctification, and salvation, 
 though not through the instrumentality of the Gos- 
 pel, but through the direct and efficient agency of 
 the death of Christ. He says, "Infants are saved 
 by the death of Christ, but not by the Gospel, not 
 by faith." Again: "They are to be regenerated, 
 but not by the Gospel ; they must be sanctified for 
 
246 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 heaven,, but not through the truth as revealed to 
 man." But as baptism is not a sign of the Gospel, 
 nor of truth, nor yet of the death of Christ, but of 
 a regenerate heart, and of a sanctified spirit; and 
 inasmuch as infants are capable of receiving, and 
 do receive, the very thing signified by baptism, what 
 difference does it make, whether it comes direct 
 from the agent, or indirectly through one or more 
 instrumentalities ? 
 
 If a shepherd upon one of the mountains of Is- 
 rael, having purchased a flock of sheep, some old 
 and some young, and, being anxious that others 
 should be able to designate them as well as himself, 
 should send a servant with an instrument in his 
 hand for the purpose, and should command him to 
 mark them; but, before marked, his sheep must be 
 washed with the water of a certain fountain him- 
 self had prepared hard by the sheepfold; and that 
 the mark should both indicate that they were his 
 sheep, as well as signify that they had been washed. 
 But the old sheep, having escaped from the fold, 
 and having fled into the wilderness, must be searched 
 after, and brought back, as well as washed. The 
 searching, bringing back, and marking of the sheep, 
 he assigns to his faithful servant, while he himself 
 undertakes the washing, both of the young sheep 
 at home and of the old ones as they return. Would 
 the old sheep, when returned and washed, be any 
 better qualified, or any more deserving of the mark, 
 in consequence of the extra labor that had been 
 instrumentally bestowed on them, than the young 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 247 
 
 sheep, on whom no such instrumentalities had been 
 employed, they, too, having been washed by the same 
 hands, and in the same fountain ? The above illus- 
 tration the reader will be able himself to apply. 
 
 3. Mr. Jewet says, "None can be baptized with 
 the baptism of the Gospel, but such as believe the 
 Gospel." But why is this ? Has he not admitted 
 that, without faith, infants possess all that baptism 
 signifies? And if they can have the substance 
 without faith, why not the figure ? But does he not 
 know that what he here asserts is the very thing in 
 dispute, which he should, at least, have tried to 
 prove? Or did he think that his ingenious play 
 upon words — that adults were u saved by the Gos- 
 pel," and that infants were " regenerated by the 
 death of Christ" — would turn the attention of the 
 reader from the main point at issue, so that a bare 
 assertion would be sufficient? It certainly looks 
 like it. What connection is there between faith 
 and baptism, which makes the one a necessary prere- 
 quisite to the other? A direct and rational answer 
 to this inquiry, would be worth more to the Bap- 
 tist cause than a thousand ingenious shuffles. True, 
 in the case of adults, faith is necessary as a condi- 
 tion of regeneration; but in the case of infants, it 
 is not necessary. They are regenerated without 
 faith; and, consequently, as fit for baptism without 
 faith, as adults are with it. Mr. Jewet knew bet- 
 ter than to quote as Scripture what has often been 
 quoted, "Believe and be baptized." He knew there 
 was no such Scripture, 
 
248 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 4. But why does Mr. Jewet try to make tlie lan- 
 guage of the Savior arbitrary in the first part of the 
 passage, and not arbitrary in what remains? re- 
 quiring faith as a universal prerequisite to baptism, 
 so as to exclude infants from this ordinance, and yet 
 not require both faith and baptism as necessary 
 universal prerequisites to salvation, so as to exclude 
 infants from it also ? If the first part of the pas- 
 sage is arbitrary, the remainder must be doubly so. 
 If infants can not be baptized because they can not 
 believe, then, certainly, they can not be saved, for 
 the double reason that they can neither believe nor 
 be baptized; for "he that believeth and is baptized 
 shall be saved." All we ask is fair play; and if 
 the passage is arbitrary in the one case, let it also 
 be in the other; and if our opponents fix a rule for 
 others, let them stand by the same rule themselves. 
 Mr. Jewet evidently feels this pinch of his own 
 rule; hence he says, "If there were no way of sav- 
 ing infants but by the Gospel, this conclusion is 
 inevitable." "Infants," he says, "are saved by the 
 death of Christ." Very true; but why not give us 
 the same latitude of argument? When pedobap- 
 tists refer to the "death of Christ" to show that 
 infants are by it regenerated, and, consequently, fit 
 for baptism without faith and without the G-ospel, 
 anti-pedobaptists fly back to the above arbitrary 
 rule, and attempt to tie us up by it, making faith 
 indispensable to baptism. We admit that if there 
 were no way of preparing them for baptism but by 
 the Gospel and J)y faith, infants could not be bap- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 249 
 
 tized; just as lie admits that "if there were no way 
 of saving infants but by the Gospel, they could not 
 be saved." But as he claims that infants are regen- 
 erated and saved by the death of Christ, without 
 the Gospel, and without faith, so we claim that 
 infants are regenerated and fitted for baptism, by the 
 death of Christ, without the Gospel, and without 
 faith. It is said to be "a poor rule that will not 
 work both ways." It is also a poor argument that 
 will not give to an opponent grounds of argument 
 which it claims for itself. All we want of our Bap- 
 tist friends is the same latitude of argument which 
 they claim for themselves. And if the commission 
 as recorded by St. Mark is to be an arbitrary rule 
 between faith and baptism, carry it out so between 
 faith, baptism, and salvation; but if they can resort 
 to other sources of argument to show that infants 
 are saved, let us have access to the same source for 
 evidence to prove that infants are prepared for 
 baptism. 
 
 5. But instead of faith being an arbitrary pre- 
 requisite to baptism, the commission reverses it; 
 and both in the original and in the English trans- 
 lation, baptism is placed first in order, and should 
 be first in practice. A careful analysis of the lan- 
 guage employed, I think, will satisfy the impartial 
 reader of this fact. The word pa7ttiaSs^, baptis- 
 theis, is in the aorist passive form, and the sen- 
 tence literally and properly means, " He that believ- 
 eth, having been baptized, shall be saved." And 
 this is the sense our English translation now gives. 
 
250 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 The verb "is," is a neuter verb, present tense. It 
 describes not an action or passion received or en- 
 dured in the present tinie, but a relation which the 
 subject sustains at the time he believes — "he is 
 baptized;" and to sustain a baptized relation at the 
 time he believes, the subject must have been bap- 
 tized previously; and if previously, it must have 
 been done in infancy. If we connect "is baptized/' 
 as most grammarians are inclined to do, we then 
 have a passive verb, indicative mood, present tense; 
 the subject "he" becoming a neuter nominative, 
 and the verb retaining its neuter form, so that it 
 still describes a state of being in which the subject 
 exists at the time he believes. Or, if we call "is 
 baptized" a perfect participle, it still describes a 
 neutral relation, in which the subject exists, and 
 the action that placed him there perfected at the 
 time he believes. 
 
 The sentence is so constructed in both the Greek 
 version and the English translation of the Scrip- 
 tures, as to give a decided preference to baptism 
 before belief, and, consequently, to in/ant baptism. 
 Still we do not believe that there is any thing in it 
 that is arbitrary; and if a person has not been 
 baptized before, he certainly should be baptized 
 soon after he professes faith in Christ. So perfectly 
 satisfied are we of the truth of what we are here 
 advocating, that if we had to be baptized a thousand 
 times, we would wish to be an infant every time. 
 We have seen many a day, since we believed, in 
 which, if required to be baptized, we would ever 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 251 
 
 afterward have liad reason to doubt whether we 
 were fit for the ordinance; but we can claim before 
 Grod and man never seriously to have doubted the 
 validity of our infant baptism ; since we gave the 
 subject a careful investigation. 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 HOW ST. PETER UNDERSTOOD AND PRACTICED THE APOSTLES' COMMIS- 
 SION ON" THE DAY OE PENTECOST. 
 
 If the apostles had so understood their commis- 
 sion, that infants were thereafter to be disfranchised 
 of their ancient Church 'rights, we might naturally 
 expect to find them, on all suitable occasions, de- 
 nouncing, as anti-pedobaptists now do, this old ob- 
 solete Jewish practice. But when or where in all 
 their writings or sermons do we find them thus em- 
 ployed ? The history of the Church shows that in 
 every instance where a new sect has been formed by 
 a branch broken from an old denomination, that 
 every thing believed and practiced by the parent, 
 from which the child dissents is made to pass 
 through the closest scrutiny of controversy. But 
 on this subject the apostles wrote and spoke not one 
 word in opposition, but in several instances sanc- 
 tioned the Church rights of children for which we 
 plead. 
 
 On the day of Pentecost we hear St. Peter pro- 
 
252 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 claim to the multitude, " Repent, and be baptized 
 every one of you in the name of Jesus 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, and to all that are afar off, 
 even as many as the Lord our God shall call." 
 Acts ii, 38, 39. 
 
 I. St. Peter was himself a Jew, educated accord- 
 ing to their ancient faith and practice. 
 
 II. His hearers were mostly Jews, and, conse- 
 quently, would understand Peter according to their 
 own well-understood modes of interpretation ; espe- 
 cially when he employed language in common use 
 among them, and were not informed that he was to 
 be understood in any different sense. They had 
 been accustomed for many* hundreds of years to re- 
 ceive infants into the Church, both by circumcising 
 and by baptizing them; and would of course under- 
 stand every allusion made by Peter to their children 
 as agreeing with this custom, unless positively in- 
 formed to the contrary. 
 
 III. Consider the relation which the conjunctive 
 particle yap, gar, "for," in verse 39, bears to the 
 preceding part, of the discourse. rap, gar, is what 
 is called, in the language of grammarians, a " causal 
 conjunction" and in Latin signifies enim, quippe, 
 igitur ; and in English, for, or because. (See 
 Buttnian's Greek Grammar; Robinson's Greek and 
 English Lexicon.) "It always expresses the reason 
 of what has been previously spoken or implied, in 
 the same connection. Now, the question is, to 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 253 
 
 what word or words in the preceding part of the 
 discourse does yap, gar, refer? If we can fix its 
 proper causal relation, we shall be at no loss to 
 comprehend the force of Peter's argument. There 
 are but three facts to which it can allude, and of 
 which it can be considered as assigning a reason. 
 Does it refer to either of these facts separately? 
 and if so, to which one? or does it refer generally 
 to all the preceding part of Peter's discourse, con- 
 tained in verse 38 ? After mature reflection, I am 
 inclined to adopt the latter opinion. I will lay be- 
 fore the reader an analysis of the whole argument, 
 so as to enable him to judge for himself. If yap, 
 gar, be referred back to pst avowant s, metanoesate — 
 repent ye — then the sense would be indicated by 
 the following grammatical connection : Repent ye, . . 
 because the promise is unto you" etc. 
 
 If yap relate to jSart^tG^T'co, baptistlieto — be bap- 
 tized — then the grammatical connection would stand 
 thus: " Be baptized every one of you, . . . BECAUSE 
 the promise is unto you," etc. 
 
 If yap refer to the declaration, "Kq^ectQs i^v 
 Sioptav tov dyiov Uvsvfjia'to^ — Ye shall receive the gift 
 of the Holy Ghost — then the grammatical relation 
 would stand thus : " Ye shall receive the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost, BECAUSE the promise is unto you" etc. 
 
 The first of the foregoing constructions would re- 
 quire yap, gar, to be understood as expressing the 
 reason for their repentance ; the second, the reason 
 for their baptism ; and the third, the reason why they 
 should expect to receive the Holy Ghost. 
 
254 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Now, either of these constructions would make a 
 good doctrinal sense; but we consider yap to refer 
 to all that is advanced in the thirty-eighth verse; 
 first, because it better suits the plan of Luke by 
 giving very general statements of Peter's argument; 
 secondly, yap no more fitly relates to one of the 
 above-mentioned antecedents than another. It is 
 as really a reason for their baptism, or their repent- 
 ance, as for their receiving the Holy Spirit: and 
 vice versa. Thirdly, it better suits all the circum- 
 stances of the occasion to fix the causal relation of 
 this conjunction to all the facts mentioned in the 
 thirty-eighth verse. 
 
 For instance, the preaching of Peter had pro- 
 duced a powerful effect: "They were pricked in 
 their heart, and said unto Peter, and to the rest, . . . 
 Men and brethren, what shall we do?" The first 
 emotions of their remorse had produced a temporary 
 despair; truly, they thought, we have forfeited not 
 only Church rights, but all hopes of mercy. Peter 
 exhorts them to repentance; to assume Church ob- 
 ligations in the Christian form; and encouraged 
 them to look for the gift of the Holy Spirit. All 
 these directions suited the urgency of the moment; 
 and he proves their appropriateness and adaptation 
 to his Jewish brethren by adding, " Because the 
 [ancient covenant] promise [Gen. xvii, 7, to the 
 fullness of which Joel has referred in chap, ii, 28] 
 is unto you, and to your children," etc. (Hibbard 
 on Baptism, pp. 147, 148.) 
 
 IY. To what "promise" does Peter refer in verse 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 255 
 
 39 ? Anti-pedoba/ptists claim that Peter referred, in 
 this instance, as he evidently did in verses 17, 18, to 
 Joel ii, 28. But "it does not appear that they 
 were in any particular need of encouragement in 
 order to enable them to embrace the promise of 
 Joel ii, 28. On the contrary, it does seem plain 
 that their immediate concern was to know whether 
 they might expect pardon and a restoration to cov- 
 enant, or Church blessings — for which the Abra- 
 hamic promise directly provided — thinking, proba- 
 bly — and certainly with much reason — that if they 
 were not excluded from the covenant, they might 
 yet hope for the Spirit's effusion .... If the apostle 
 had intended a direct quotation from, or an exclu- 
 sive allusion to, Joel ii, 28, he would undoubtedly 
 have adopted a phraseology more closely answering 
 to the words and doctrine of that passage. In de- 
 scribing the persons upon whom the ' Spirit 7 should 
 be 'poured out' in the latter — that is, Gospel — - 
 days, Joel speaks only of adults. He speaks of 
 'sons and daughters/ of 'old men and young 
 men/ of 'servants and handmaids/ It will not 
 be doubted that the prophet intends only adults 
 by these descriptions, unless the words 'sons and 
 daughters' should be supposed to include infants. 
 But it is evident that he uses D1J3, banim, and 
 DUD, banoih, as they are often used, to designate 
 age, just as we would say youth and maidens, to des- 
 ignate an age advanced from childhood, though 
 yet tender; and so the seventy understood them, 
 and rendered them by the corresponding Greek 
 
256 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 vvoij ivhioi, and Qvyafspss, thugateres — sons and daugh- 
 ters, But Joel determines the question of the age 
 of these sons and daughters by immediately add- 
 ing, 'they shall prophesy .' . . . 
 
 "But the apostle Peter does not employ a proper 
 phraseology to designate adults only, and, therefore, 
 can not be supposed to intend a direct quotation 
 from Joel. Peter says, c The promise is [ypiv xav 
 tots texvoti] to you [adults] and to your [infant] 
 children. 7 If he had intended adults only, as Joel 
 unquestionably did, he would have employed an- 
 other phraseology. Ts xva, tekna, never means adults 
 only, without being connected with qualifying and 
 definitive circumstances. In verse seventeen, where 
 Peter intends a quotation from Joel ii, 28, he uses 
 the exact phraseology of the prophet, and says, c ot 
 vioi vfuov xtxi <u 6vyateps$ v/xov' — your sons and your 
 daughters shall prophesy, etc. But the intelligent 
 reader need not be informed that tsxva — children — is 
 not sufficiently explicit to be a quotation of viol xai 
 Ovyatspss — sons and daughters- — and those, too, that 
 are old enough to 'prophesy.' ;; (Hibbard on Bap- 
 tism, pp. 148, 149.) 
 
 The promise made to Abraham, recorded in Gen- 
 esis xvii, 7, "And I will establish my covenant 
 between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, in 
 their generations, for an everlasting covenant; to be 
 a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee/' is the 
 promise here referred to. 
 
 1. Because of its exact similarity in expression 
 to the language of Peter. The promise made to 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 257 
 
 Abraham says, " To thee and thy seed:" the promise 
 quoted by Peter says, to you and to your children. 
 How striking tbe resemblance! while that of 
 Joel lias none ! 
 
 2. The promise made to Abraham stood con- 
 nected with the rite of initiation to Church privi- 
 leges, which, under the old dispensation, was cir- 
 cumcision; and the promise referred to and quoted 
 by Peter stands in direct and immediate connection 
 with the rite of initiation to Church privileges in 
 its new form, which is baptism; while Joel refers 
 to no rite of initiation under either dispensation. 
 
 3. The promise made to Abraham says, "I will 
 be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." 
 This promise contains a pledge of all spiritual bless- 
 ings, both general and particular. The promise of 
 Joel — ii, 28 — though based upon the one made to 
 Abraham, refers to a more mature and perfect de- 
 velopment of the system of human redemption and 
 general illumination peculiar to the dispensation of 
 the Gospel, and was referred to by Peter, in verse 
 seventeen, for the defense of the pious few, who, 
 under the influence of the Holy Ghost, were ac- 
 cused of drunkenness by these same Jews. But 
 when these Jews became penitent and earnest seek- 
 ers of salvation, Peter refers to the Abrahamic 
 promise in its particular and personal character — 
 containing the elemental principles of the system 
 of redemption, as repentance, pardon, etc., for the 
 encouragement of these now penitent Jews. Thus 
 the object of Peter in quoting Joel, in verse seven- 
 
 17 ^ 
 
258 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 teen, and in quoting Genesis xvii, 7, in the thirty- 
 ninth verse, are widely different. 
 
 Upon the whole, there appears to be not the least 
 resemblance between the promise referred to in the 
 thirty-ninth verse by Peter, and the one previously 
 quoted from Joel, but in every particular a striking 
 similarity between it and the one contained in the 
 Abrahamic covenant; sufficient, at least, to fix it in 
 the mind of e\ ?ry Jew as the one referred to. 
 
 V. Let us ascertain the meaning of the word 
 tsxva, tehna — children — as used in the thirty-ninth 
 verse. 
 
 "The usus loquendi sheds a perfectly clear and 
 unequivocal light. Tsxvov, tehnon, means a child, 
 whether male or female. It sometimes answers to 
 the Hebrew ID, ben, as, in the plural form, in Gen- 
 esis iii, 16 : i God said to the woman, . . in sorrow 
 shalt thou bring forth [DUD, banim, tehna'] chil- 
 dren/ This is the proper meaning of ^wm, tehna; 
 but it has also a wider sense, and is used Hebrais- 
 tically for descendants, posterity , without any determ- 
 inate reference to age. But the primary meaning 
 of tsxvov is a child; and this is indicated by its 
 etymology, being derived from tixtco, tihto, to bring 
 forth. . . The question is, therefore, does tsxva mean 
 children proper, or only posterity in general ? To 
 determine this, we ask, Is any thing affirmed of the 
 tsxva, tehna, in the text that is inapplicable to chil- 
 dren proper? The answer is certainly in the nega- 
 tive. There is nothing absurd or unsuitable in the 
 supposition that children should be made the sub- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 259 
 
 jects of a spiritual promise; in other words, that 
 they should be made the subjects of Divine grace. 
 Then it follows that tsxva, telcna, may be under- 
 stood in its literal and more simple acceptation, as 
 denoting children proper, although the more general 
 idea of posterity is not excluded. 
 
 "This is the more probable, because in Genesis 
 xvii, 7, when Jehovah promises to 'be a God unto 
 Abraham, and to his seed/ — ^jmj, d7tspu,atos — the 
 Jews understood the promise as applying to them- 
 selves and their infant children; and hence also the 
 token of the covenant — circumcision — was applied 
 to their infant children, as indicating their right to 
 the promise. Every Jew, therefore, would unques- 
 tionably understand the words of the apostle Peter 
 as applying to himself and his infant offspring. 
 
 But if we take tsxva, tekna, in its broadest appli- 
 cation, to denote posterity, the result will be the 
 same ; for what is our idea of posterity but that of 
 a generation, or of generations of human beings, 
 comprising adults and infants? To say that the 
 word posterity means only adults, is to assume a 
 position in the argument too absurd and ridiculous 
 to merit a serious refutation." (Hibbard on Bap- 
 tism, pp. 143, 144, 145.) 
 
 " How idle a thing it is for a man to come with a 
 lexicon in his hand to inform us that tsxva, tehna — 
 children — means posterity ! Certainly it does ; and 
 so, consequently, means the youngest infants." 
 (Edwards on Baptism.) 
 
 VI. The applicability of the whole passage to chil- 
 
260 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 dren as well as adults. It will be said, of course, 
 that if *£xva } tekna, means infant children, and 
 yap, gar, refers to the previous verse as a causal 
 reason, etc., then infants, as well as adults, must 
 repent as well as be hajptized, receive the Holy 
 Ghost, etc. 
 
 As it regards repentance, although it, like bap- 
 tism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, are all em- 
 braced as duties and privileges, applicable, like the 
 promise, to both classes of candidates, yet there is 
 no arbitrary rule requiring repentance invariably to 
 precede baptism, only where repentance is necessary 
 to qualify them for baptism. Infants are not com- 
 petent to repent, nor do they need repentance to 
 qualify them for baptism. But as soon as repent- 
 ance is necessary it is their duty to repent, and 
 their previous consecration to God in baptism con- 
 templates and enjoins this duty as soon as they are 
 able to perform it. Peter did not pause to give 
 this explanation, nor was it necessary to the people 
 he was addressing. Every sentence, therefore, and 
 word in this passage is applicable to infant chil- 
 dren. "The Jews had been accustomed, for many 
 hundred years, to receive infants by circumcision 
 into the Church; and this they did, as before ob- 
 served, because God had promised to 'be a God to 
 Abraham and to his seed/ They had understood 
 this promise to mean parents, and their infant off- 
 spring; and this idea was become familiar by the 
 practice of many centuries. What, then, must 
 have been their views, when one of their own 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 261 
 
 community says to theni, 'The promise is unto you 
 and to your children V If the practice of receiv- 
 ing infants was founded on a promise exactly simi- 
 lar, as it certainly was, how could they possibly 
 understand him but as meaning the same thing, 
 since he himself used the same mode of speech? 
 This must have been the case, unless we admit this 
 absurdity; namely, that they understood him in a 
 sense to which they had never been accustomed. . . 
 Certainly all men, when acting, will understand 
 words in that way which is most familiar to them; 
 and nothing could be more familiar to the Jews 
 than to understand such a speech as Peter's to mean 
 adults and infants; so that if the Jews, the awak- 
 ened Jews, had apprehended the apostle to mean 
 only adults when he said, 'to you and your chil- 
 dren/ they must have had an understanding of such 
 a peculiar construction as to make that sense of a 
 word, which to them was totally unnatural and 
 forced, to become familiar and easy." (Edwards on 
 Baptism, pp. 67, 68.) 
 
 " When a positive institute is connected with a 
 promise, all who are contained in the promise have 
 a right to the institute. I think any one may be 
 compelled to grant this, as it is certainly an unde- 
 niable truth ; for if parents must, therefore, be cir- 
 cumcised because they are included in the promise, 
 then infants are also included in the promise; they, 
 too, must be circumcised. All this is evidenced by 
 the history of circumcision, and is, indeed, a self- 
 evident case, because, if a promise give a right to 
 
262 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 an institute, the institute must belong to all who 
 are interested in the promise. And, therefore, we 
 may reason thus : If parents must be baptized be- 
 cause the promise belongs to them, then must their 
 infants be baptized, because the promise belongs to 
 them also. This mode of reasoning is the more 
 certain, as it is confirmed, beyond all doubt, by the 
 Divine procedure; for if you ask, Who are the cir- 
 cumcised ? the reply is, Those to whom the promise 
 was made. If you inquire again to whom the prom- 
 ise was made, we answer, To adults and infants. 
 Again : if you ask, Who are the baptized ? the 
 answer is, Those to whom the promise is made. 
 But to whom is it made? The apostle says, 'To 
 you and your children/ Now, what proof more 
 direct can be made or desired for infant baptism V 
 (Edwards on Baptism, pp. 74, 75.) 
 
 Bishop Burnett says, "When the apostles, in 
 their first preaching, told the Jews that the prom- 
 ises were made to them and to their children, the 
 Jews must have understood it according to what 
 they were already in possession of; namely, that 
 they could initiate their children into their religion, 
 bring them under the obligations of it, and procure 
 to them a share in those blessings that belonged to 
 it. ;; (Exposition of the twenty-nine Articles, Art. 
 27.) Thus did Peter recognize the right of infants 
 to membership, and consequently authorized their 
 baptism on the day of Pentecost. 
 
BIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 263 
 
 SECTION 71. 
 
 ST. PAUL BAPTIZED BELIEVERS AND THEIR HOUSEHOLDS. 
 
 Both St. Paul and St. Luke were Jews by birth, 
 education, and religion, till converted to Christ; 
 and when converted, their religious views were 
 changed only so far as Christ, or the Holy Ghost, 
 positively dictated a change. We are therefore un- 
 der the necessity of interpreting their language, in 
 every instance, according to the Jewish modes of 
 interpretation. Having ascertained that it was an 
 established custom, from the days of Abraham 
 down, to admit believing parents and their infant 
 children, by the rite of initiation, into the Church 
 of God; and having proven that when the Lord 
 Jesus Christ changed the form of the rite, he did 
 not deprive infants of their right of initiation into 
 the Church, these facts will greatly assist us in 
 getting a correct understanding of some facts con- 
 nected with the ministry of St. Paul. 
 
 I. We will examine Acts xvi, 14, 15 : "And a 
 certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of 
 the city of Thyatira, which worshiped God, heard 
 us : whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended 
 unto the things which were spoken of Paul. And 
 when she was baptized, and her household, she be- 
 sought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faith- 
 ful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide 
 there," etc. 
 
 1. Lydia was a native of Thyatira, a city famous 
 
264 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 for the manufacture of purple, but now residing in 
 Philippi, and engaged in the sale of the purple 
 manufactured in Thyatira. This woman, it is said, 
 previously to hearing the apostle, " worshiped G-od ;" 
 that is, she was a proselyte to the Jewish religion, 
 and, consequently, had previously received baptism 
 in the Jewish form. 
 
 2. Let us examine the term "household" as used 
 in this connection. We have no proof other than 
 this term, understood according to Jewish phrase- 
 ology, to prove that Lydia's household contained 
 infants. 
 
 The question, therefore, which we are now to 
 decide is, Does oixo$, oikos — translated household — 
 properly include infants? u Oixo$, oikos, primarily 
 denotes a house; that is, a building or edifice, domus; 
 but by a very common rule of language it also sig- 
 nifies all that dwell in a house ; that is, a family, 
 including parents, children, etc., . . . all those per- 
 sons which we range under the general title of 
 family, or household. The point to be ascertained 
 is, whether infants are naturally, and, as a matter 
 of course, included in this phrase ? The opponents 
 of infant baptism take the ground that infants can 
 not be proved to have been included in the c house- 
 holds ' which the apostles baptized, because they 
 are not specified, and it is well known there are 
 households, or families, without infant children. 
 We take the ground that, although oixos, oikos, 
 does not specify children, yet children are properly 
 included within the term, as much as parents, etc. ; 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 265 
 
 .... and the presumption is, that they are always 
 thus included, unless there is a specification to the 
 contrary. The word family does not necessarily 
 specify parents; a family may be constituted, or 
 subsist, without the relation of parents; but does 
 this authorize us to infer that parents are never in- 
 cluded in this word unless they are specified by a 
 distinct and appropriate appellation? . . . From 
 this we conclude that, as children are properly in- 
 cluded under the general term household, therefore 
 the presumption is, children were baptized. 'Not 
 so/ says a Baptist; 'the term household does not 
 specify infants; there are many households that 
 do not include infants; therefore, the baptism of 
 households does not in any way prove the baptism 
 of infants/ Well said ! Admirable logic ! But 
 hold ! Will this principle of interpretation hold 
 good in other cases ? Let us try. The term house- 
 hold does not specify domestics of any kind. There 
 are many households without any servants whatever. 
 Nor does the term specify children that are grown 
 up. There are many households that are composed 
 of the husband and wife, or only one of them, and 
 the servants; therefore, the baptism of households 
 does not prove the baptism of servants of any kind, 
 or of children of any age, unless they are specified 
 by a distinct and appropriate name; therefore, 
 there were no domestics of any kind, or children of 
 any age, baptized by Paul in the households of 
 Lydia, the jailer, and Stephanas, because no specifi- 
 cations to this effect appear. Finally, as no individ- 
 
266 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 uals but Lydia, tlie jailer, and Stephanas are speci- 
 fied — as the term ( household ? specifies no particular 
 persons, or class of persons — therefore, it can not be 
 proved that any particular persons but those three 
 • were baptized on those occasions. . . . But we 
 maintain that we have the same authority for sup- 
 posing that children were included in those house- 
 holds, and were consequently baptized, as for sup- 
 posing that any other individuals were included in 
 them and were baptized." (Hibbard on Baptism, 
 pp. 153-155.) 
 
 Children are a much more natural and common 
 branch of a household than servants of any kind or 
 age. It is more natural and much more in accord- 
 ance with previous custom, to suppose that children 
 belonged to the household of Lydia — especially 
 when she is spoken of separately from the " house- 
 hold" — and were consequently baptized with her, 
 than to suppose any other persons are referred to 
 by the term " household." 
 
 3. Anti-pedobaptists have tried hard to make up a 
 u household" for Lydia without children. It has 
 been supposed that Lydia brought her merchandise 
 from Thyatira in an unfinished state, and conse- 
 quently had in her employ several journeymen dy- 
 ers to prepare her goods for market. There is not 
 only no proof, but no probability of this being true. 
 
 Dr. Clarke says, "Lydia probably had her name 
 from the province of Lydia, in which the city of Thy- 
 atira was situated. The Lydian women have been 
 celebrated for their beautiful purple manufactures. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 267 
 
 Now, in the absence of proof, is there the slight- 
 est probability that this woman left her native city, 
 where purple was extensively manufactured by the 
 women, with her goods in an unfinished state, and 
 then employed help in a foreign city, among stran- 
 gers, to prepare her unfinished goods for market? 
 Again : it has been said, " that there is no evidence 
 that Lydia was ever married, and if not, her house- 
 hold could not have been composed of her own 
 children." We answer, St. Luke does not attempt 
 to give a perfect history of Lydia and of her family 
 connections. Her husband might have been dead, 
 or he may have been absent from home, or he may 
 have been present; but not being converted with 
 his wife, St. Luke had no occasion to mention him 
 in connection with his wife or her household. These 
 numerous conjectures, in our opinion, only show 
 the weakness of their cause, and the absence of all 
 substantial proof on the opposite side of the ques- 
 tion. 
 
 It will be recollected that we do not claim the 
 proof to be positive that Lydia' s " household" did 
 contain children, but we claim that the term oixov, 
 oikon — house — when figuratively used to describe a 
 family, naturally embraces the young children, as 
 well as other members of the family. It is thus 
 used in 1 Timothy iii, 4 : "One that ruleth well his 
 own [chxo*/] house, having his [^^a] children in 
 subjection," etc. 
 
 4. The circumstances mentioned in connection 
 with the baptism of Lydia' s household, favor the 
 
268 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 idea of the household being composed of young 
 children. 
 
 (1.) It is said that while Paul was discoursing to 
 the women, on the bank of the river, among them 
 was Lydia, " whose heart the Lord opened, that she 
 attended unto the things which were spoken of 
 Paul." 
 
 Now, if Lydia 7 s household was composed of 
 adults, who were converted to Christ, is it not a lit- 
 tle remarkable that Lydia is the only person spoken 
 of as having her " heart opened," or of u attending 
 to the things which were spoken of Paul V Lydia 
 was the only convert made, and she was a Jewish 
 proselyte; and upon the profession of her faith, 
 Lydia' s household — children — as had long been the 
 custom in the Church of God, was baptized. How 
 perfectly consistent the whole transaction appears 
 upon the supposition that Lydia' s household were 
 children, and baptized with her on the profession 
 of her faith ! 
 
 (2.) " Another point that perhaps is worthy of 
 mention, as indicating that Lydia only, of all the 
 members of her house, believed, is, that when she 
 invites the apostle and Silas to tarry for a time at 
 her house, she says, 'If ye have judged me to be 
 faithful, come into my house/ etc. Had there 
 been other believing adults besides herself, it might 
 seem most modest for her at least to have hinted it, 
 and to have said, 'If ye have judged us to be 
 faithful/ etc. This might seem especially suitable, 
 as there appeared a strong reluctance in Paul and 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 269 
 
 Silas to comply with her entreaties." (Hibbard on 
 Baptism, p. 156.) 
 
 These facts are presented, not as proof positive, 
 abstractly considered, but as furnishing, in connec- 
 tion with the previous history of the Church upon 
 this point, very clear presumptive evidence that 
 infants were baptized by the apostles, and received 
 into the Church with their believing parents, as 
 provided for in the everlasting covenant. 
 
 II. The next, in course, is the jailer's house, 
 recorded in Acts xvi, 31-34: "And they said, Be- 
 lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be 
 saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him 
 the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his 
 house. And he took them the same hour of the 
 night, and washed their stripes, and was baptized, 
 and all his, straightway. And when he had 
 brought them into his house, he set meat before 
 them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his 
 house." 
 
 For the sake of system, we will examine each 
 verse in the above passage separately : 
 
 1. The thirty-first verse: "And they said, Be- 
 lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be 
 saved, and thy house." 
 
 (1.) The word oixo$, oikos — house — literally signi- 
 fies a dwelling-place. See Matt, xx, 11 : "Murmured 
 against the good man of the [o<,*o$] house." Matt, 
 xxiii, 38: "Your [otxoj] house is left," etc. 
 . (2.) But its most frequent use in the New Testa- 
 ment is metaphor iced j in which case it generally sig- 
 
270 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 nifies the family; and if the parents are otherwise 
 specified, the children of the family dwelling in a 
 particular house. 1 Tim. v, 14: "I will, therefore, 
 that the younger women marry, bear children, guide 
 the [chkos] house," etc. 2 Tim. i, 16: "The Lord 
 give mercy to the [ot*$>] house of Onesiphorus," 
 etc. Acts xvi, 14: "And when she was baptized, 
 and her [Wos] household," etc. 
 
 (3.) The verb Tttcetsvaov, pisteuson — believe — is in 
 the singular number, and was addressed only to the 
 jailer, which would not have been the case if other 
 adult persons were embraced. The jailer, as will be 
 seen in the thirtieth verse, had taken the apostles 
 out of the prison into the house, when Paul said to 
 him, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou 
 shalt be saved, and thy house." Now, one of the 
 following statements must be true — the reader can 
 take his choice: First, the jailer's dwelling-house 
 was to be saved by his faith ; or, second, adult per- 
 sons living in his family were to be saved by his 
 faith; or, third, his "house" is to be understood 
 metaphorically for his children, who were to be 
 saved by the faith of their parent. We confess 
 ourselves incapable of seeing any Scriptural and 
 spiritual sense in which the faith of the jailer could 
 save either his dwelling-house or adult persons dwell- 
 ing with him, while it is certain that there is a very 
 important sense in which the faith of a father con- 
 verted from heathenism does save his little children. 
 He saves them from the darkness, idolatries, and 
 crimes peculiar to a heathen state; he saves them 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 271 
 
 by placing them in a solemn covenant relation with 
 God in which he has promised to be a "God to 
 fchein" forever; he saves them by bringing them 
 into the Christian Church, where there are secured 
 to them all the instruction, watch-care, and other 
 religious privileges of the Gospel; he saves them 
 by governing, instructing, and praying for them, ac- 
 cording to the direction of the Gospel. And if the 
 word of God can be relied upon, there are but few 
 children thus "trained/' that, when "old/' will 
 "depart from it." Now, till our opposers can show 
 that the faith of one adult person will thus save 
 other adult persons, we shall consider the point es- 
 tablished, or, at least, rendered quite probable, that 
 the jailer's "house" was composed of "little chil- 
 dren," which the apostle wanted him to bring with 
 him to Christ. 
 
 2. The thirty-second verse: "And they spake 
 unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were 
 in his [oixiu, oikia] house." The word here em- 
 ployed by the historian — otxta, oikia, house — signi- 
 fies a dwelling -place. Whether there were any other 
 adults present than the jailer, is not said; but per- 
 haps it is not taxing the imagination too much to 
 suppose that some of the children may have been 
 old enough to understand in some measure what was 
 said, and yet be suitable subjects for baptism. To 
 suppose that there were servants and other adults 
 present, is all imaginary, without one word to sup- 
 port it. They were not now in the prison, wjiere 
 the inmates of that department could be embraced, 
 
272 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 but in the jailer's own house, with none but its 
 ordinary and proper occupants present. To all these 
 the apostle " spake the word of the Lord;" to what 
 effect we are not informed. 
 
 3. The thirty-third verse: "And he took them 
 the same hour of the night, and washed their 
 stripes, and was baptized, he and all his, straight- 
 way." Who was meant by "all his," we have pre- 
 viously shown to have been his family. And these, 
 being baptized upon the faith of the jailer, must, 
 therefore, have been "little children." And this 
 was in perfect accordance with the practice of the 
 Church since the days of Abraham, and fully au- 
 thorized by the everlasting covenant with its modi- 
 fied token; and whenever the jailer's children be- 
 came believers, it could be said of each, "he be- 
 lieveth and is baptized," according to the commis- 
 sion given to the apostles. 
 
 4. The thirty-fourth verse : "And when he had 
 brought them into his house, he set meat before 
 them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his 
 house." 
 
 (1.) The word oixov, oikon — house — in the first 
 instance, refers literally to the jailer's dwelling, to 
 which they returned after baptism; the second 
 instance, at the close of the verse, is supplied by 
 our translators without any word in the original an- 
 swering to it. This word, therefore, proves nothing 
 on either side. 
 
 (2.) The word "with," in tfie last sentence, also 
 has nothing answering to it in the original, being 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 273 
 
 only supplied by our translators to give what they 
 supposed to be the sense of the passage; it, there- 
 fore, proves nothing on either side. And yet it is 
 not a little remarkable that our opponents rely more 
 upon these words than any other, to make out a be- 
 lieving adult household for the jailer. 
 
 (3.) H£7tt,Gi?£vxoi>s, pepisteukos — believing — is in the 
 perfect tense, and signifies having believed. It is 
 also in the singular number, referring only to the 
 jailer. With these facts understood, we will give 
 the following, as we consider, the exact translation 
 of the passage : Having believed in God, lie rejoiced 
 over all his. Havooxu — all his — all that belonged to 
 him personally; as his family, or children. "How 
 natural it is for a man newly converted, and whose 
 children also are newly ingrafted into the covenant 
 of promise, and consecrated to Grod, to rejoice in 
 the conversion of his family; especially when he 
 reflects upon the peculiar benefits they are hereafter 
 to enjoy in their new relation to the Church of God, 
 and the greatly-increased prospect of meeting them 
 all in heaven ! 
 
 "I know that it is said in the English version 
 that the jailer 'rejoiced, or believed with all his 
 house/ thus indicating that all the members of his 
 house actively united in his rejoicings, or faith. 
 But there is no such word as 'with' in the Greek 
 text. It is not in the sentence, and it does not nec- 
 essarily appear in the composition of rtavoixl, pa- 
 noilci. The truth is, that 'with/ or 'in/ or some 
 other ^particle, is left to be supplied by the sense. 
 18 
 
274 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 'He rejoiced in all his house f that is, 'over his en- 
 tire family." From an attentive observation, there- 
 fore, of all the particular circumstances connected 
 with the baptism of the jailer and his household, 
 we find nothing to impair the force of the natural 
 probability that Ttwoixi, panoiki, and the phrase 6* 
 o/vtov rtavtss — all ivho were of him — imply and 
 include children; and, as they were all baptized, 
 the force of this scrap of history is evidently in 
 favor of infant baptism." (Hibbard on Baptism, 
 p. 159.) 
 
 III. The third instance of household, or family 
 baptism, is recorded in 1 Cor. i, 16: "And I bap- 
 tized also the [o^ov] household of Stephanas." 
 But it is argued by our opponents, that this family 
 could not have embraced infant children, because — 
 in chapter xvi, 15 — St. Paul says that they had 
 u addicted themselves to the ministry of the 
 saints," and that they took "a lead" in the affairs 
 of the Church, and, consequently, the other mem- 
 bers of the Church were commanded to " submit 
 themselves unto such," etc. We reply, Stephanas 
 himself, with Fortunatus and Achaicus, were now 
 on a visit to the apostle, and probably were the 
 bearers of the charity of the Church to him, which 
 called forth this expression in relation especially to 
 the household of Stephanas. " These families were 
 the oldest Christians in Corinth; and as they were 
 foremost in every good word and work, they were 
 not only to be commended, but the rest were to be 
 exhorted to serve under them as leaders in those 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 275 
 
 works of charity. This appears to be the obvious 
 sense of this otherwise obscure passage. . . . Still 
 it is to be remembered that the baptism of the 
 oldest children took place several years before. The 
 house of Stephanas was the ' first-fruits of Achaia/ 
 in which St. Paul began to preach not later than 
 A. D. 51, while this Epistle could not have been 
 written earlier, at least, than A. D. 57, and might 
 be later. Six or eight years taken from the age of 
 the sons and daughters of Stephanas, might bring 
 the oldest to the state of early youth; and as to the 
 younger branches, would descend to the ternT of 
 infancy, properly so called. Still further, all that 
 the apostle affirms of the benevolence and hospital- 
 ity of the family of Stephanas is perfectly consist- 
 ent with a part of his children being still very 
 young at the time he wrote this Epistle. An equal 
 commendation for hospitality and charity might be 
 given at the present day, with perfect propriety, to 
 many pious families, several members of which are 
 still in a state of infancy." (Watson* s Institutes, 
 Vol. II, pp. 642-644.) 
 
 Furthermore, if these persons were adults when 
 St. Paul baptized them, they would not now, six or 
 eight years afterward, have been members of the 
 household of Stephanas. 
 
 "The familiar, and, as we may say, matter-of- 
 course manner of mentioning these cases of family 
 baptisms, clearly indicates that it was in perfect 
 harmony with the universal custom of the apostles. 
 Had it been any unusual thing, had infant baptism 
 
276 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 been unknown to the apostolic Church, and as ab- 
 horrent to God as it is to our Baptist brethren, it is 
 not at all probable that these cases would have 
 been thus registered by the direction of the Holy 
 Spirit, without unequivocal intimation that no in- 
 fant children were included in the number of the 
 baptized. As it is, however, it leaves upon the 
 mind of the unbiased reader the impression of a 
 strong probability not only that infants were in- 
 cluded in those baptized households which are 
 mentioned, but that hundreds, perhaps thousands, 
 of families, were baptized in the same way, which 
 is an advance of the argument that falls little short 
 of the highest Scriptural authority. ... It is 
 true that our Baptist brethren tell us they have 
 baptized households. Mr. Pengilly tells us in his 
 work on Baptism, that he 'has baptized households, 
 and, among others, a "Lydia and her household," 
 and yet never baptized a child f and concludes that 
 Ho infer the baptism of infants from the word 
 "household" is completely begging the question/ 
 (Scripture Guide, p. 53.) 
 
 "But the point upon which I wish to fix the 
 reader's attention here, is the incongruity of such 
 registers and such historic accounts, in the easy, 
 familiar, and matter-of-course style of Luke, to the 
 hypothesis that infant baptism was unknown and 
 unpracticed by the apostles. A Baptist disputant, 
 for the sake of giving effect to his argument, may 
 record a household baptism which he himself had 
 performed; but would he be likely, in sending home 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 277 
 
 missionary reports, for instance, to return an ac- 
 count of family baptisms in the same open, unquali- 
 fied manner as that of Luke, in recording the bap- 
 tism of Lydia's family? Or, furthermore, were a 
 Baptist writing a history of the Baptist missions, or 
 of the general Baptist denomination — a history that 
 was to be read by future generations, when its au- 
 thor, and all who now might have any personal 
 knowledge of the facts recorded, would be no 
 more — a history, one prominent object of which 
 was to set forth the validity and true character of 
 water baptism, as held and practiced by the Bap- 
 tists — were a Baptist, I say, to write such a history, 
 would he be likely to mention family baptisms in 
 such an indefinite, familiar, and unqualified man- 
 ner as to leave the impression upon thousands of 
 minds that infants, being a natural part of a family, 
 were to be baptized? Does it accord with our 
 knowledge of the Baptists' views on this subject, 
 to suppose that they would be likely to write so 
 unguardedly as to leave the impression on the 
 minds of many of their ingenious readers that they 
 practiced infant baptism? And if the apostles, 
 and the author of the book containing an account 
 of their 'acts/ and the primitive Church, had all 
 been opposed to infant baptism, or had been wholly 
 ignorant of any such practice, I ask, would they 
 have been likely to leave such an unguarded ac- 
 count of their baptisms as to give the impression 
 to thousands that they practiced infant baptism? 
 Would an intelligent Arminian nowadays write 
 
278 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 concerning the doctrine of i free grace ' in terms that 
 would be likely, from the natural force of words, to 
 leave the impression that he was a believer in the 
 ( five points of Calvinism V And yet, absurd as would 
 be the affirmative of these suppositions, it would not 
 fully illustrate the absurdity of an anti-pedobaptist 
 construction of the household baptisms of the New 
 Testament; for here, according to the theory of 
 our opponents, we not only have anti-peolobaptist 
 authors — for such the Baptists suppose Luke and 
 Paul to have been — writing about baptism in terms 
 exactly calculated to leave the impression that in- 
 fant baptism was an apostolic practice, but we are 
 bound to believe that such an absurdity was sanc- 
 tioned by the authority of the Holy Ghost." (Hib- 
 bard on Baptism, pp. 162, 163.) 
 
 Take the following as an illustration: "Two mis- 
 sionaries have for a number of years been success- 
 fully laboring for the conversion of a particular 
 tribe of savages in the wilderness of America. We 
 have heard of their labors and of their success, and 
 have rejoiced in it, but have never learned, and 
 have never to this day inquired, whether they prac- 
 ticed infant baptism or not. For special reasons 
 this now becomes a subject of inquiry; and the 
 only means of information which we have at hand 
 is a brief history which those missionaries have 
 published of their labors. In that history, which is 
 now subject to a careful examination, we find that 
 they speak of several instances in which individu- 
 als embraced Christianity and received baptism. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 279 
 
 And they inform us that at such a time they bap- 
 tized one of the chiefs and his family; and that at 
 another time they baptized such a man and all his; 
 and again another man and his household. This is 
 all the information they give. They mention, with- 
 out explanation, the baptism of several persons and 
 their households, and so make family baptisms a 
 noticeable circumstance in the history of their mis- 
 sions. Would not such a circumstance lead us to 
 think it probable that they practiced infant bap- 
 tism?" (Woods on Infant Baptism, pp. 81, 82.) 
 
 But to make the two cases parallel, and to give 
 the illustration its full force, we must, upon inquiry, 
 find that these missionaries were themselves bap- 
 tized in infancy, were educated within the pales of 
 a Church which, from time immemorial, practiced 
 it, while the constitution and all the standard wri- 
 ters of the Church to which they belonged were in 
 favor of it; and no evidence whatever could be 
 found showing that they had ever renounced this 
 particular doctrine or practice of the Church; for 
 we have proven every one of the above facts to have 
 existed in the case of the apostles, except that they 
 were circumcised instead of baptized in infancy. 
 If, without a knowledge of the facts last mentioned, 
 the evidence for the baptism of little children in 
 those households would be strongly presumptive, 
 with them it is almost if not positively certain; 
 for "the apostles wrote and spoke of them just as 
 the Jews would in reference to household prose- 
 lyting. The idea of proselyting households among 
 
280 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 the Jews was perfectly familiar, by which they un- 
 derstood the bringing of the parents and children 
 over to Judaism by circumcision, baptism, and sac- 
 rifice. The practice of discipling and baptizing 
 households among the early Christians appears 
 equally familiar and equally common to record. 
 We say, therefore, that family baptisms, as re- 
 corded in the New Testament, exactly coincide 
 with, and strongly corroborate, the doctrine of 
 infant baptism." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, pp. 
 164, 165.) 
 
 The fact that the instances of family baptism on 
 record are but few, though often referred to by our 
 opponents, is of no weight at all as an argument; 
 for the truth of any doctrine does not depend upon 
 any definite number of texts of Scripture support- 
 ing it. Three are as good as a dozen. And when 
 a doctrine of importance, or a Christian duty hav- 
 ing an important bearing, is once fully established 
 upon Scriptural authority, as has been done with 
 the doctrine and practice of inducting infant chil- 
 dren into the Church of Christ with their believing 
 parents, it is not necessary to follow down the 
 stream of Divine revelation and prove over and 
 over again the continuation of that doctrine or 
 practice; but it is for the opposers of that doctrine 
 or practice to show conclusively that they have 
 been disannulled by the same authority that first 
 established them. Take for example the Sabbath 
 day. "The Sabbath was instituted at the creation; 
 and though toeehs are mentioned in the sacred his- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 281 
 
 tory, the Sahbatli is not again mentioned till Mo- 
 ses — a period of more than two thousand four hun- 
 dred years — yet how important the Sabbath was 
 considered in the sight of God is well known. 
 Again : it is not mentioned from the time of 
 Joshua till the reign of David — a period of about 
 four hundred years — and yet, as says Dr. Hum- 
 phrey, 'it will be admitted that, beyond all doubt, 
 the pious judges of Israel remembered the Sabbath 
 day to keep it holy/ Moreover, the Bible says 
 nothing of circumcision from a little after Moses 
 till the days of Jeremiah, a period of eight hun- 
 dred years; yet, doubtless, circumcision was prac- 
 ticed all the while. " (Rev. E. Hall on Baptism, 
 pp. 168, 169.) 
 
 If the baptism of infants had been new, or a sub- 
 ject of dispute, we would have heard of it more 
 frequently, and in more express terms. But being, 
 from time immemorial, in constant practice, the 
 apostles thought it necessary to speak of it but sel- 
 dom, and in an incidental, familiar way; so that, 
 instead of the few incidental, familiar instances, in 
 which the sacred history refers to family baptisms, 
 weakening, it strengthens the evidence that infant 
 Church membership was continued in the Church 
 of Christ by the authority and example of the 
 apostles. 
 
282 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 SECTION VII. 
 
 THE APOSTLES RECOGNIZED CHILDREN AS SUSTAINING TO GOD 
 
 AND TO THE CHURCH A RELATION WHICH IMPLIES 
 
 MEMBERSHIP AND BAPTISM. 
 
 It is not the abstract question of baptism that 
 has engrossed our attention from the commencement 
 of this work; but it is the relation in which the 
 divine Being has placed them to himself and to 
 his Church, and the blessings and privileges con- 
 nected with those relations. Baptism is but the 
 divinely-appointed mode of publicly and visibly ac- 
 knowledging these relations. And unless Christian 
 parents and the Christian Church are sufficiently 
 enlightened to understand the solemn duties and 
 weighty obligations which these relations imply, 
 and which, by the baptism of their children, they 
 assume; and unless they feel disposed, yea, determ- 
 ined, by divine grace to perform those duties, it 
 would certainly be more to the credit of Christian- 
 ity to dispense with baptizing them. But we must 
 now proceed to point out the different relations to 
 God and his Church assigned to children by the 
 apostles, which imply baptism and Church mem- 
 bership. 
 
 I. St. Paul says — 1 Cor. vii, 14 — "For the unbe- 
 lieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the 
 unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; else 
 were your children unclean, but now are the} 
 holy." 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 283 
 
 When we understand the subject of which an 
 author is treating, no difficulty can occur in determ- 
 ining the sense in which he employs words, if he 
 employ them according to their usual acceptation. 
 
 1. What, then, was the occasion of the apostle's 
 remarks. In the first verse of the above chapter 
 the apostle says, "Now concerning the things 
 whereof ye wrote unto me/' etc. ; from which it ap- 
 pears that the Corinthians had fallen into trouble 
 over certain subjects about which they had written 
 for his official decision. One of these questions 
 was, whether a believing husband or wife may con- 
 tinue to live in conjugal relations with an unbeliev- 
 ing partner, innocently, and without forfeiting mem- 
 bership in the Church. To this question the apos- 
 tle responds from the tenth to the sixteenth verse. 
 ic The uninformed reader will not fully appreciate 
 the true character of this question, or the import- 
 ance which it assumed in the Corinthian Church, 
 unless the nature and occasion of the controversy 
 be fully explained. It was this: the Jews re- 
 garded even the touch of a Gentile as unclean, and 
 as producing such a legal defilement as to unfit them 
 for any of the solemn ceremonies of their religion. 
 It was, hence, unlawful for a Jew to company with 
 them in any way. The Pharisees, who were the 
 most rigid in their observance of the law of any of 
 the Jewish sects, adding many superstitions to their 
 religion, always lustrated themselves after having 
 returned home from the market, or any public way 
 or thoroughfare, lest they should have contracted 
 
284 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 uncleanness by having touched some unclean per- 
 son or thing. They also frequently purified their 
 household furniture. It was this kind of sanctity 
 that led them to complain of Jesus for receiving 
 'sinners and publicans/ and eating with them. It 
 was this scrupulous state of opinion that caused 
 Peter to hesitate, at first, to go with the messen- 
 gers of Cornelius, they being Gentiles. The whole 
 history of that transaction is a striking illustration 
 of the power which these Jewish notions still held 
 over the consciences of many Christian converts 
 from Judaism. 
 
 "From very ancient days God had warned his 
 people against intermarriages with idolatrous and 
 unbelieving nations. 'Neither shalt thou make mar- 
 riages with them ; thy daughter shalt thou not give 
 unto his son/ and the reason for this prohibition 
 is thus given : i For they will turn away thy son 
 from following me, that they may serve other gods/ 
 Deut. vii, 3, 4; Exod. xxxiv, 15, 16. This was an 
 important requisition, issued in order to secure the 
 distinct preservation of the Hebrew people, as well 
 as to preserve the purity of their religion. A re- 
 markable instance is recorded in the book of Ezra — 
 chapters nine and ten — of an extensive breach of 
 this command, when, after the return of the cap- 
 tives from Babylon, 'the people of Israel, and the 
 priests, and the Levites, did not separate themselves 
 from the people of the land, but took of their 
 daughters for themselves and for their sons ; so that 
 the holy seed mingled themselves with the people 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 285 
 
 of those lands/ Chap. ix, 1, 2. The sequel shows 
 that they were obliged to 'put away' these heathen 
 partners, although in some instances the dissolution 
 of the marriage union occasioned not only a separa- 
 tion of husband and wife, but of parents and chil- 
 dren. Chap. x, 44. 
 
 "Such were the prevalent notions of the Jews 
 relative to marriage in the days of Paul. And as 
 they had colonized themselves every-where before 
 the Christian era, so the apostles found them in all 
 the cities of note, and countries where they traveled. 
 Many of these Jews were converted to Christianity, 
 and incorporated into the Christian Church, bring- 
 ing with them frequently their Jewish prejudices, 
 and fomenting controversies among the Gentile con- 
 verts on many points of doctrine, which had their 
 origin in the now obsolete forms of the Jewish 
 ritual. Thus was it with the Church at Corinth. . . . 
 And here I wish the reader to remark, that the 
 question did not at all relate to the lawfulness of 
 marriage, or the continuance of the marriage cove- 
 nant, in a civil sense. It was a question to be set- 
 tled by ecclesiastical, not by civil law." (Hibbard 
 on Infant Baptism, p. 124.) 
 
 The answer of the apostle is as follows : If u any 
 brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be 
 pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 
 For the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the hus- 
 band," etc. According to the principles of the 
 Gospel, unbelief in one of the parties furnishes no 
 good reason for a separation, but furnishes an 
 
286 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 opportunity for the believing party to accomplish 
 much good, both to the unbelieving party and to 
 the children. So far the apostle is easily under- 
 stood. 
 
 2. Let us ascertain the signification of the fol- 
 lowing words used by the apostle : 
 
 (1.) "Hyiaa-tcu, liegiastai, is a conjugated form of 
 the verb oytafw, hagiazo, which means to separate, 
 consecrate, sanctify, make holy, etc." (Robison's 
 Grr. and Eng. Lexicon, art. Aytafio.) 
 
 From the above significations, our translators have 
 selected the third — sanctify — and this has thrown 
 controversialists into great confusion, to find some 
 sense in which either the Lord or the believing par- 
 ent could sanctify the unbelieving parent; whereas, 
 to us it seems quite certain that the first, "to sepa- 
 rate," gives the true meaning of the apostle; that 
 is, the believing party should remain with the un- 
 believing, so that by the example, the admonitions, 
 and active faith of the believer, the unbelieving 
 may be induced to separate " from the worship of 
 idols, and the practices of the heathen;" all of 
 whom were regarded as being " common," or "un- 
 sanctified." The reformation of the unbelieving 
 was regarded by the apostle as being far more cer- 
 tain by continuing the conjugal relation, than by 
 separation. And inasmuch as the ecclesiastical im- 
 pediment was now removed, and the parties could 
 remain together without sin, or even the least im- 
 propriety, therefore, "if any brother hath a wife 
 that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 287 
 
 him, let him not put her away. And the woman 
 which hath a husband that believeth not, and if he 
 be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 
 For the unbelieving husband is" separated — ^yuxtf- 
 tai — from heathenism "by the wife/ 7 "and the un- 
 believing wife is," in like manner, "sanctified/' or 
 separated, "by the husband." 
 
 In addition to the above,, it may be said with pro- 
 priety, "that, by reason of the connection of the 
 believing party with the Church, the unbelieving 
 partner was thereby placed more directly before the 
 religious sympathies of the Church, made more 
 especially the subject of prayer and religious con- 
 cern by them, and that they were obligated more 
 directly to look after his spiritual welfare, than was 
 the case in reference to the general mass of irrelig- 
 ious persons; and that in this sense, the sanctity 
 of the believing partner operating to enhance the 
 religious privileges and prospects of the unbeliev- 
 ing, the latter might be said to be sanctified, or, in 
 some sense, brought under religious influence by 
 the former." (See Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
 p. 129.) 
 
 Again : the words *Jyca<jtfa& . . . ev ty ywcuxai, hegi- 
 astai en te gunaikai, might, with the utmost propri- 
 ety, be translated, is sanctified to the wife; that is, 
 the unbelieving husband is sanctified to the believ- 
 ing wife; and, also, the words riyicxG-tai . . . sv tfco 
 avBptj hegiastai en to andri, is sanctified to the hus- 
 band ; that is, the unbelieving wife is sanctified to 
 the believing husband. In which case, the meaning 
 
288 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 of the apostle would be, let the believing partner 
 remain with the unbelieving, because God hath con- 
 secrated the unbelieving partner to the believing, 
 by the removal of those ecclesiastical impediments 
 which existed under the former dispensation. 
 
 "The distinctions of clean and unclean were, at 
 first, purely artificial, and were established by the 
 will of God, not in the nature of the things them- 
 selves. It is plain, therefore, that to sanctify these 
 unclean things to the use of Christians, no positive 
 change was required in the things themselves, but 
 only that the arbitrary prohibition of the lawgiver 
 be taken off. This sanctification, then, was, after 
 all, merely of a negative character. After the ab- 
 rogation of the Levitical code, all things reverted 
 back to their original character. It then could be 
 said, c Nothing is unclean of itself;' i All things are 
 pure/ Levitically; ' Every creature of God is good, 
 and nothing to be rejected/ " (Hibbard on Infant 
 Baptism, p. 128.) 
 
 While the servants of Cornelius were on their 
 way to Joppa, in search of Peter, the apostle went 
 upon the "house top," and there, in "a trance/' 
 " saw a vessel descending unto him/' containing a 
 great variety of animals, such as had been pro- 
 nounced "unclean" by the law of Moses. Ha was 
 commanded to "rise, kill, and eat." But Peter 
 refused, because they were "common, or unclean." 
 "And the voice spake unto him again the second 
 time, What God hath cleansed, that call thou not 
 common/' a clear intimation that the great law- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 289 
 
 giver of the Jews had entirely abrogated those laws 
 making a distinction between different animals, and 
 between the Jews and Gentiles, calling the one clean 
 and the other unclean. 
 
 This sanctification " merely extends so far as to 
 sanction the external intercourse of Christians with 
 unbelievers. They might now dwell together in 
 any of the natural or civil relations — as parents and 
 children, as husbands and wives, as fellow-citizens, 
 as neighbors, etc. — without any detriment to Church 
 relations on the part of the believer, so long as his 
 spirit and deportment accorded with the Gospel." 
 (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, p. 127.) 
 
 (2.) AxaOaptos — unclean. Groves defines it to 
 signify " impure, unclean, defiled, unfit for receiv- 
 ing the rites of religion." Dr. Robinson says it is 
 "spoken of persons who are not Jews, or who do 
 not belong to the Christian community." Schleus- 
 ner says, "It signifies that which is prohibited 
 by the Mosaic law, or from which the people of God 
 were required to separate themselves." 
 
 " In Acts x, 14-28, axaOaptos, ahathartosy is used 
 to designate a Gentile, or ( a man of another nation' 
 besides the Jews. Thus is it elsewhere used. So 
 Isaiah lii, 1 : ' For henceforth there shall no more 
 come to thee [Jerusalem] the uncircumcised and the 
 unclean y — KD£)j (xxaB^toq. Here, the words un- 
 clean and uncircumcised are perfectly synonymous, 
 and apply to one and the same description of per- 
 sons ; namely, all who were not Jews, all who were 
 not in covenant with God. So, also, an unclean or 
 19 
 
290 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 polluted land is a land inhabited by Pagans or idol- 
 aters. Thus Amos vii, 17 : f And thou [Israel] shalt 
 die in a polluted or unclean land' — Ki3D,a#a0aptfo$. 
 This 'polluted land' was Assyria. It was in contra- 
 distinction from all such idolatrous, or Pagan coun- 
 tries, that Canaan was called the ( holy land/ . . . 
 It is plain, therefore, that when the apostle says, 
 'Else were your children unclean/ it is in perfect 
 accordance with the usus loquendi to understand 
 him to say, 'Else were your children Pagans, with- 
 out the covenant/ This sense, the advance of the 
 argument, and the nature of the subject, require us 
 to understand." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
 p. 134.) 
 
 (3.) "Aytoj, hagios — holy — is here used in con- 
 trast with axaOaptos — unclean. A holy person, in 
 the language of the text, is the exact opposite of 
 an unclean person, and vice versa." (Hibbard on 
 Baptism, p. 134.) 
 
 But if unclean means a heathen, a holy person 
 must be a Christian. If an unclean person is unfit 
 for Church privileges, then a holy person must be 
 entitled to these privileges. If an unclean person 
 is one not in covenant with God, a holy person is one 
 that is in covenant with God. 
 
 "We have seen that the word sanctify, as applied 
 to an unbeliever, in the former part of the verse, is 
 restricted in its sense by the nature of the subject, 
 to signify merely the abolishment of Jewish cere- 
 monial distinctions, with regard to clean and un- 
 clean persons, so as to render it now lawful for a 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 291 
 
 believer and unbeliever to dwell together in mar- 
 riage union, or in any other relation innocent in 
 itself. This is perfectly plain. But the nature of 
 the subject does not bind us to fix the same limited 
 construction on the term lioly in the concluding part 
 of the passage, and we appeal to the natural force 
 of the apostle's argument, and the general Scrip- 
 tural use of the term, in support of the sense above 
 given. I will give the reader some examples of the 
 use of this word in Scripture : 
 
 "Matthew xxvii, 52: 'And many bodies of the 
 [dyttti/, hagion] saints that slept arose/ Acts ix, 
 13: 'Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by 
 many of this man [Saul] how much evil he hath 
 done to thy [aytotj, hagiois] saints at Jerusalem/ 
 (See also chap, xxvi, 10.) Acts ix, 32: 'Peter 
 came down also to the [dytoi^, hagious] saints that 
 dwelt at Lydia/ Verse 41 : 'And when he had 
 called the [ayiov^ hagious] saints and widows, he 
 presented her alive/ Rom. i, 7: 'Grace to all that 
 be at Rome . . . called to be [ayoois, hagiois] saints/ 
 Rom. xv, 25: 'But now I go unto Jerusalem to 
 minister unto the [dytot$, hagiois] saints/ Yerse 
 xxvi : ' For it hath pleased them of Macedonia . . . 
 to make a contribution to the poor [dywov] saints at 
 Jerusalem/ (See also verse 31.) Rom. xvi, 2 : 
 'That ye receive her [Phebe] in the Lord as be- 
 cometh [dytcov] saints;' that is, Christians. Yerse 
 15: 'Salute ... all the [dy«n^] saints/ etc. 1 Cor. 
 i ; 2 : 'To them that are . . . called to be [oytotj 
 saints/ that is, Christians. Chapter vi, 1 : 'Dare 
 
292 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 any of you ... go to law before the unjust and not 
 before the [ayuooT] saints?' that is, Christians, the 
 members of the Church. Chapter xiv, 33 : i God 
 is the author of peace, as in all the Churches of 
 the [oyccov] saints ' — Christians. Chapter xvi, 1 : 
 'Now concerning the collections for the [ay«n;s] 
 saints/ that is, Christians, Church members, who 
 are poor. (See also verse 15; 2 Cor. i, 1; viii, 4; 
 ix, 1-12.) 2 Cor. xiii, 13; 'All the [ay tot,] saints 
 [Christians] salute you/ 
 
 '•Besides these passages cited, the word occurs, 
 where it is translated saints, about forty-one times 
 in the New Testament; the signification in all these 
 places being substantially the same. Here, also, I 
 wish the reader to understand and appreciate the 
 corroborating testimony drawn from the use of the 
 corresponding Hebrew words. I have before men- 
 tioned that, although the apostles spoke for the 
 most part, and wrote wholly in the foreign Greek 
 dialect, still they were Hebrews, educated in the 
 Jewish religion and customs, and accustomed to 
 think and to speak according to the Hebrew idiom. 
 Hence, they sought out and employed those Greek 
 words that more fitly conveyed Hebrew ideas; and 
 hence we often are obliged to resort to the use of 
 certain Hebrew words that were used to express the 
 same idea, in order fully to establish the sense of 
 the New Testament language. 
 
 "Aytoj, hagios — holy — says Dr. Robinson, 'is 
 used every-where in the Septuagint for £5hD, kodesh, 
 and &TVQ, Jcadosh. Hence, the ground idea is 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 293 
 
 pure, clean" (Greek and English Lexicon, art. 
 
 Ayco$.) 
 
 "Take a few examples. Exod. xix, 6: 'Ye shall 
 be to me a holy nation ' — ssrpD, 07 «w — that is, a na- 
 tion of saints, a consecrated nation. Exod. xxii, 
 31: 'And ye shall be holy men unto me' — isno, 
 ayio$ — that is, ye shall be saints, consecrated men. 
 (See, also, Lev. xi, 44, 45; Num. xvi, 3, et alibi.) 
 The Israelites were declared a holy people, not be- 
 cause they were all morally holy; far from it; but 
 because by profession they belonged to God, who 
 had separated them from all other nations, and 
 sanctified them unto himself by external rites; be- 
 cause they professed the true religion, which many 
 among them really attained in an illustrious degree ; 
 and because 'to them were committed the oracles 
 of God/ 'the covenant/ 'and the giving of the law 
 and the promises/ " (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
 pp. 135, 136.) 
 
 The above Scriptures abundantly prove that the 
 apostle, in saying that "children/' where one of the 
 parents "believed/' were, in consequence, [dytoj,] 
 holy, meant something more than ceremonial purity, 
 such as was asserted of the unbelieving parent; 
 while, at the same time, he did not mean that they 
 were personally, evangelically pure. In but very 
 few of the above instances can the word be thus 
 understood. And the assertion would not be true, 
 nor would it agree with other Scriptures in relation 
 to the moral condition of children, who, though 
 justified, are not morally holy. Therefore, avoiding 
 
294 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 these extremes, and yet giving the word holy the 
 opposite signification from unclean, we are driven 
 to the conclusion that he meant simply, that in con- 
 sequence of the faith of the one believing parent, 
 the "children" were entitled to a holy consecrated 
 relation to God — a lioly covenant relation to the 
 Church — that they stood as the children of believ- 
 ing parents had ever stood, in covenant ivith God 
 and his people. 
 
 3. The reason assigned by the apostle why the 
 believing partner should remain in conjugal connec- 
 tion with the unbelieving : " Else were your children 
 unclean; but now are they holy." 
 
 Having asserted that there was no law now to 
 prevent the two partners, one " believing," and the 
 other "unbelieving," from innocently remaining 
 together, he assigns the above as a reason why they 
 should by all means thus remain. The effect it 
 would have upon the children in each case has al- 
 ready been fully explained by the signification of 
 the terms employed; but in close connection with 
 this, the following facts are worthy of the special 
 attention of the reader: 
 
 (1.) "The passage thus explained establishes the 
 Church membership of infants in another form; 
 for it assumes the principle that when both parents 
 are reputed believers, their children belong to the 
 Church of God as a matter of course. The whole 
 difficulty proposed by the Corinthians to Paul grows 
 out of this principle. Had he taught, or they un- 
 derstood, that no children, be their parents believ- 
 
KIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 295 
 
 ers or unbelievers., are to be accounted members of 
 the Church, the difficulty could not have existed; 
 for if the faith of both parents could not confer 
 upon the child the privilege of membership, the 
 faith of only one of them certainly could not." 
 (Dr. J. M. Mason's Essay on the Church of God, 
 Christian Magazine, xi, 49.) 
 
 (2.) "The simple circumstance," continues Mr. 
 Mason, "that Paul cites the relation of infants to 
 the Church in proof of another subject, and one, 
 too, of such grave importance as to involve the per- 
 petual union of husband and wife, and the good 
 order of families, clearly proves that the member- 
 ship of infants was a point which was not only be- 
 lieved, but it was universally believed; there ivas no 
 difference of opinion, or dispute concerning it y in the 
 Christian Church. The force of this argument I 
 wish the reader to feel. In proving any doubtful 
 point, the only rational method to be pursued is to 
 advance facts or deductions from principles which 
 are themselves established and undisputed, and 
 which have a relation to the point to be proved. 
 No satisfaction could ever be realized — no approach 
 to truth and certainty could ever be made — by ad- 
 vancing one disputed point to prove or establish 
 another. In a court of justice the witnesses are 
 called upon to state what they do know — what is, 
 with them, clear and undisputed — that has a rela- 
 tion to the question pending. In reasoning no ar- 
 gument can be deemed valid, or as entitled to any 
 importance whatever, unless it be itself drawn from 
 
296 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 facts and principles well established, and which 
 have a relation to the point at issue. We can not, 
 by the mere accumulation of doubtful or disputed 
 arguments, add- any weight of certainty to the doc- 
 trine which we would establish by them. To ad- 
 vance one disputed fact to establish another, is but 
 to shift the ground of the difficulty, not to diminish 
 it. If the testimony itself can be overthrown, it 
 proves nothing. All the proof that arises from any 
 given fact, in any given case, is based on the single 
 circumstance that the fact itself is unquestioned by 
 the parties who are to be judges, remembering, of 
 course, that it must have a proper relation to the 
 point at issue. Now, suppose infant baptism and 
 membership had been disputed topics in the early 
 Christian Church; suppose, when Paul declared 
 'your children are not unclean, but holy' — the pre- 
 cise phraseology which a Jew would employ to 
 assert their membership — that by this announce- 
 ment he had touched a disputed point among the 
 Corinthians; and suppose he had advanced — as he 
 certainly does — the fact that these children were 
 thus clean, or holy, [by which the Jewish disciples 
 would understand that they were the converted 
 seed, the lawful members of the Church,] to prove 
 another point, I ask, would the argument have any 
 weight whatever? If they had doubted that chil- 
 dren themselves belonged to the Christian commu- 
 nity, they certainly could not have received the 
 assertion that they did thus belong as the proof of 
 any other disputed point. They might very prop- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 297 
 
 erly have said to the apostle, i True, your reason is 
 very plausible and forcible to those who admit your 
 premises. We readily grant that if children of be- 
 lieving parents, or of those who have one parent a 
 believer, and the other an unbeliever, do really be- 
 long to the Christian community, then it must fol- 
 low that the unbelieving was considered as ceremo- 
 nially clean; but this reasoning takes for granted a 
 disputed and unsettled point. We deny that chil- 
 dren are members of the Christian community; and 
 as your whole argument is built upon this mooted 
 point — as it assumes for an action that which itself 
 wants proof, at least in our estimation — it can, of 
 course, with us, have no force whatever/ But no 
 such reply was made to St. Paul. The fact on 
 which his argument was based was too long and 
 universally admitted. This passage, therefore, 
 proves positively the continuation of the member- 
 ship of children of believing parents, a privilege 
 secured to them through all time by the Abra- 
 hamic covenant. Having assumed this fact as the 
 basis of his argument, that all children of believ- 
 ing parents were holy in consequence of their con- 
 secration to God, how natural to conclude that if 
 pne of the parents believed even then the children 
 should be holy; that is, consecrated to God! And 
 having gained this point, how proper the next con- 
 clusion at which he arrives; namely, that the be- 
 lieving parent, securing this privilege to the chil- 
 dren, should remain with the unbelieving, espe- 
 cially when it could be done innocently and greatly 
 
298 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 to their benefit ! We think that we have thus ar- 
 rived at the true and exact meaning of the apostle 
 in the above passage ; and though infant baptism is 
 not mentioned; yet the holy relation to God and the 
 Church which children are said to sustain clearly 
 implies it." 
 
 II. Children are said to be "in the Lord/' or "in 
 Christ/' in a sense which implies their Church 
 membership, and, as a consequence, their baptism. 
 
 1. The Church is called the body of Christ. 
 "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even 
 the law of commandments contained in ordinances; 
 for to make in himself of twain [Jews and Gentiles] 
 one new man, so making peace; and that he might 
 reconcile both [of the above parties] unto God in 
 one body [Church] by the cross/' etc., Eph. ii, 15, 
 16; "So we being many are one body in Christ, and 
 every one members one of another/' etc., Romans 
 xii, 5 ; " For we being many are one bread and one 
 body," etc., 1 Cor. x, 17. 
 
 2. All that are Christ's spiritually should be 
 gathered into that "body," or Church. As has 
 been already quoted, "We being many are one body 
 in Christ," of course as "many" as are "in Christ" 
 should belong to his "body;" and, as the apostle 
 again says, it was from the beginning the "purpose " 
 of God, "that in the dispensation of the fullness of 
 time he might gather together in one [body] all 
 things in Christ, [that is, that belong to Christ,] 
 both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; 
 even in him." 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 299 
 
 3. " Little children" are ; in virtue of the atone- 
 ment, "in Christ/' in the above sense, and, there- 
 fore, should be visibly connected with his "body/' 
 for "all things in Christ" are to be thus connected. 
 If any person doubts whether little children are in 
 Christ, let him read Ephesians vi, 1: "Children, 
 obey your parents in the Lord; for this is right." 
 These "children," though very young yet to re- 
 ceive their training, or "bringing up" — see fourth 
 verse — were, nevertheless, "in the Lord/' and as 
 "all things in Christ" were to be gathered into 
 "one body," these children were, undoubtedly, mem- 
 bers of that body, just as " Adronicus " and "Junia," 
 "Onesimus" and the "household of Narcissus," 
 were "in the Lord," or "in Christ," and conse- 
 quently members of his body. 
 
 " But it must not escape attention how exactly 
 the sequel of the apostle's address accords with the 
 commencement; the injunction being given as to 
 those in express covenant: ' Honor thy father and 
 thy mother; for this is the first commandment with 
 promise.' Had those addressed been out of the 
 Christian pale this language would have been inap- 
 plicable. In that case they would have been, art- 
 rfk'ko't pitofisvov tys 7io%ft£i<xs niov lorpow^ — aliens from the 
 commonwealth of Israel — therefore, not within the 
 range of the Divine commandments; and tzvoi iw 
 dtad^xcov tys £7tar/ysfaa$ — strangers from the covenant 
 of promise — consequently, not warranted to assume 
 an interest in the promise. As, then, the pressing 
 of the sacred injunction supposes the persons on 
 
300 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 whom it is urged to be 6vii7to\i>tcki tw ayiw — -fellow- 
 citizens with the saints — their acknowledged interest 
 in the promise proves them to be ooxsioi tov deov — of 
 the household of God. Eph. ii, 12." (Mr. Knox's 
 Eemarks on Infant Baptism, at the end of Clarke's 
 Commentary on Mark.) 
 
 The promise the apostle is speaking of directly, 
 is found in Exodus xx, 12 : " Honor thy father and 
 thy mother : that thy clays may be long upon the 
 land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." But 
 this is not the first instance in which the Lord prom- 
 ised a long life in the land of Canaan. Hence 
 Moses refers directly, and St. Paul ultimately, to 
 Genesis xvii, 8: "And I will give unto thee, and 
 to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a 
 stranger, all the land of Canaan for an everlasting 
 possession; and I will be their God." This promise 
 of the covenant Moses was subsequently divinely 
 authorized especially to connect with the fifth com- 
 mandment. And this promise, as we have previ- 
 ously shown, had two parts; the land of Canaan as 
 the immediate, and the heavenly Canaan as the 
 ultimate portion of the faithful. Till children 
 become proper subjects of the divine government, 
 they are placed under the government of parents, 
 specially charged with their religious training; and 
 they are commanded to "honor" that government 
 as the condition on which the covenant promise will 
 be fulfilled, thereby showing that they were in a 
 covenant relation. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 301 
 
 SECTION VIII. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF THE IMMEDIATE SUCCESSORS OP THE APOSTLES. 
 
 The practice of admitting the children of believ- 
 ing parents into the Christian Church, authorized 
 by the Abraharnic covenant, and again sanctioned 
 by the apostles' commission, was continued as a uni- 
 versal custom in the Church for the first eleven hun- 
 dred years. 
 
 What amount of reliance should be placed upon 
 the testimony of the early Christian fathers? It 
 must be admitted, that while the apostles were yet 
 living, various errors began to make their appear- 
 ance, which, in process of time, became destructive 
 of the vital interests of Christianity. And the best, 
 and wisest, and most influential men of that period 
 show, by their writings, that they were seriously 
 tinctured with those errors; so that it is very un- 
 safe to rely upon the traditions of the early Chris- 
 tians on points of faith, or in relation to religious 
 forms or ceremonies. But whatever may have been 
 the peculiar errors of these times, men who will- 
 ingly sacrificed their lives in vindicating the Gos- 
 pel, are certainly competent witnesses when they 
 attempt merely to state facts, or to narrate customs 
 then universally prevalent, about which they claim 
 to have personal knowledge. 
 
 Mr. Campbell says, " Though no article of Chris- 
 tian faith, nor item of Christian practice, can, legit- 
 imately, rest upon any testimony, reasoning, or 
 
302 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 authority, out of the sacred writings of the apostles, 
 were it only one day after their decease, yet the 
 views and practices of those who were the cotem- 
 poraries, or the pupils of the apostles and their im- 
 mediate successors, may be adduced as corroborating 
 evidence of the truths taught, and the practices en- 
 joined by the apostles, and, as such, may be cited; 
 still bearing in mind that where the testimony of 
 the apostles ends, Christian faith necessarily term- 
 inates." 
 
 Bishop Onderdonk of Pennsylvania, in his charge 
 to his clergy, says: "If there be an absolutely-un- 
 questioned tradition, clearly traceable to the apos- 
 tolic age, the matter of which is asserted in Scrip- 
 ture also, the authority in the case must be accounted 
 twofold; that of the written word, however, being, 
 from its nature, the more excellent of the two." 
 
 "This, then, is the nature of the agreement we 
 propose to consider in this chapter. We adduce 
 the testimony of the Christian fathers, and early 
 councils, to prove the fact of the antiquity of infant 
 baptism; and having fixed the date of the practice 
 coeval with the times of the apostles, we then ad- 
 vance from this ascertained fact to the argument; 
 namely, if it was handed down to us from the time 
 of the apostles, all the circumstances of the case 
 combine to prove that it was delivered to the first 
 Churches by apostolic authority." (Hibbard on In- 
 fant Baptism, p. 182.) 
 
 For the twofold purpose of illustrating and of 
 proving what we have said concerning the ancient 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 303 
 
 fathers, we here introduce the testimony of Dr. 
 Gregory: "Baptism," says the Doctor, "was per- 
 formed in the second century publicly twice a year. 
 The catechumens, or probationers for baptism, 
 assembled in the Church on the great festivals of 
 Easter and Whitsuntide; and after a public decla- 
 ration of their faith, and a solemn assurance from 
 their sponsors that it was their intention to live con- 
 formably to the Gospel, they received the sacrament 
 of baptism. This rite was performed by three im- 
 mersions, and the body was divested of clothes. In 
 order to preserve decency in the operation, the bap- 
 tismal font of the women was separated from that 
 of the men, and they were as much as possible 
 attended by the deaconesses of the Church. Bap- 
 tism by aspersion was permitted to the sick, and in 
 cases where a sufficient quantity of water for im- 
 mersion could not be procured. The sign of the 
 cross was made use of in this rite; and a solemn 
 prayer was uttered on consecrating the baptismal 
 water. Confirmation immediately succeeded the 
 performance of this rite." (Bingham's Ecc. Antiq., 
 p. 121.) 
 
 "The earliest and most express records testify 
 that infant baptism was usual in the Church. Par- 
 ents were originally sponsors for their infant chil- 
 dren; and one sponsor was the same with that of 
 the person baptized; but in infants no respect was 
 paid to this circumstance." (Ibid, XI, 8. See 
 Gregory and Ruter's Church History, p. 53.) 
 
 By the above statement of facts, it will be seen, 
 
304 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 that, even in the second century, various supersti- 
 tious appendages were connected with baptism, for 
 the purpose of rendering it more efficacious; the 
 Church in that day being generally inclined to place 
 entirely too much stress upon ordinances as means 
 of salvation. Hence, they baptized mostly by im- 
 mersion, and repeated the ordinance three times, 
 applying the cross, and required the candidate to be 
 naked, etc. But great as was their departure from 
 the simple truth of the Gospel, in these respects, 
 they, at least, prove conclusively that infant baptism 
 was generally practiced among them. Whether this 
 was a superstitious appendage also, the reader must 
 determine from other evidences. No serious inno- 
 vation has ever been made in either the doctrine or 
 the economy of the Church, without exciting at 
 least sufficient controversy to enable the subsequent 
 historian to fix not only its date, but also the cir- 
 cumstances that led to it, as well as to detect the 
 innovators. But infant baptism, if an innovation, 
 is an exception; for no trace can be found of the 
 time when it was commenced, or the circumstances 
 which led to its introduction, or yet to the persons 
 who effected so important a change in the economy 
 of the Church of Christ. Each individual of im- 
 portance, from St. John down, gives some evidence 
 of its existence in his day, but no evidence that it 
 was then commenced. 
 
 The following statements, made by Mr. Campbell, 
 are important admissions in some respects, though 
 not quite true in others He says: "To discredit 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 305 
 
 the testimony of these venerahle ancients, as they 
 are called, my friend alleges their opinions on other 
 matters, showing how whimsical they were in some 
 things. Grant it; and what then? Does any 
 man's private opinion discredit his testimony on any 
 question of fact? If so, how do we receive the ca- 
 nonical books of the New Testament? Upon the 
 very testimony here adduced, so far as regards hu- 
 man testimony at all. Andrew [his opponent] does 
 not know where his imputations terminate. But he 
 admits them to be competent witnesses of facts, and 
 would take them out of our hands by his question, 
 'When Origen testifies that infants were baptized 
 for the remission of sins, does he not as clearly tes- 
 tify that infants were baptized, as that they were 
 baptized for the remission of sins?' I say, yes; and 
 who says, no? And have I not always admitted 
 that, in Origen 7 s time, infants were immersed? 
 Have I not affirmed, upon the testimony of Tertul- 
 lian and Origen, that in Tertullian's time, infants, 
 in some cases, began to be immersed?" (Debate 
 between Campbell and Rice, p. 417.) 
 
 Mr. Campbell admits that infants were baptized 
 in the time of Origen and Tertullian, the close of 
 the second and beginning of the third centuries; 
 but neither he nor any one else can prove that it 
 was commenced then. 
 
 1. Justin Martyr, of whom Dr. Gregory makes 
 the following just remarks: "This eminent person 
 was born at Sichem, in Palestine; and after wan- 
 dering in pursuit of truth through every known 
 20 
 
306 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 philosophical system, he at length embraced Chris- 
 tianity, and, without laying aside his philosopher's 
 habit, taught the doctrines of the Gospel at Rome/' 
 He was born A. D. 103 ; converted to Christ A. D. 
 133; wrote, as is supposed, about forty years after 
 the death of St. John. 
 
 Justin says, "We also, who by him have had ac- 
 cess to God, have not received this carnal circum- 
 cision, but the spiritual circumcision, which Enoch, 
 and those like him, observed. And we have re- 
 ceived it by baptism, by the mercy of God, because 
 we were sinners; and it is enjoined tfpon all per- 
 sons to receive it in the same way." Again: "We 
 are circumcised by baptism with Christ's circum- 
 cision." (Dialogue with Trypho.) And again: 
 "Many persons among us, of sixty and seventy 
 years old, of both sexes, who were [^fiad^tsvOsaav] 
 discipled to Christ in their childhood, [sx rfcufoov,] 
 do continue uncorrupted." (Apologia Prima.) 
 
 (1.) The first thing that strikes the attention of 
 the reader in the above quotation, is the fact that 
 Justin evidently substitutes "baptism" for "carnal 
 circumcision," and that he employs both as types 
 of spiritual regeneration. As Dr. Wall, speaking 
 of this language of Justin, and of St. Paul's lan- 
 guage in Col. ii, 11, 12, says, that in both places 
 circumcision "refers both to the inward and outward 
 part of baptism," and consequently the ancients were 
 accustomed to call baptism "the circumcision made 
 without hands," because it typified the inward work 
 of grace upon the heart. And if the primitive 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 307 
 
 Christians believed that baptism took the place of 
 circumcision literally and typically then they must 
 have believed in, and practiced, infant baptism; 
 for infants were certainly circumcised previously to 
 the change. It must be remembered, also, that 
 Trypho was a Jew, and that Justin was showing 
 him the reason why Christians were not circum- 
 cised. They had a "spiritual circumcision," which, 
 though not made with human "hands," was every way 
 superior, and that "spiritual circumcision" was typi- 
 fied by baptism. Would not Trypho, or any other 
 Jew, infer from such language that while Christians, 
 for the above reasons, refused to circumcise their 
 children as formerly they now baptize them ? This 
 inference would certainly be legitimate. 
 
 (2.) Justin says that "many persons among us, 
 of sixty and seventy years old, of both sexes, who 
 were [sfiaOyjtzvOsaav'] discipled to Christ in their [zx 
 rta^wv] childhood, do continue uncorrupted." 
 
 First. To disciple implies baptism. "Go ye and 
 disciple all nations, baptizing them," etc. Although 
 to be discipled implies, in the case of adults, espe- 
 cially, something more than baptism, yet no person, 
 adult or infant, can, in the full Scriptural sense, be 
 a disciple till baptized. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, speaking of the apostles' commis- 
 sion, says, "The construction of the sentence fairly 
 indicates that no person can be a disciple, accord- 
 ing to the commission, who has not been immersed, 
 [baptized;] for the active participle, in connection 
 with an imperative, either declares the manner in 
 
308 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 which the imperative shall he obeyed, or explains the 
 meaning of the command." (Chris. System, p. 189.) 
 
 We do not indorse Mr. Campbell to the full ex- 
 tent of his evident meaning in the above remarks. 
 An adult may be pardoned or regenerated without 
 baptism, but without this ordinance he can not pos- 
 sess the true visible badge of discipleship. These 
 persons, therefore, having been — E^aO^EvOsaav — dis- 
 cipled to Christ in their childhood, were evidently 
 baptized unto Christ in their childhood. And by 
 s x rtcuScov — childhood — he must refer to the innocency 
 of childhood; for they do continue uncorrupted — 
 a clear intimation that they were discipled before 
 they became defiled with personal sin; and, by the 
 blessing of God, having been " trained up in the 
 way they should go/' they had never " departed 
 from it" — they "do continue uncorrupted." 
 
 Seconal. These persons that had been "discipled 
 to Christ in their childhood," were, at thje time Jus- 
 tin wrote, "sixty or seventy years old." Now, in- 
 asmuch as Justin wrote about forty years after the 
 death of St. John, they must have been " discipled 
 to Christ" as much as twenty or thirty years before 
 the death of that apostle, and several years before 
 the death of St. Paul. These persons were disci- 
 pled, therefore, by the apostles themselves; and as 
 the Savior commanded them to baptize all they dis- 
 cipled, just so certain as the apostles obeyed his 
 command in making disciples, so certain is it that 
 these persons were baptized by the apostles in child- 
 hood. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 309 
 
 2. Ireneus, who was born about the time of St. 
 John's death, and was the disciple of Poly carp, and 
 Bishop of Lyons, in France, wrote about seventy 
 years after the death of the apostles. The follow- 
 ing statement, made by himself, will show his supe- 
 rior opportunities for obtaining and transmitting a 
 correct knowledge of apostolic usages : 
 
 "I remember," said he, "the things that were 
 done then better than I do those of later times, so 
 that I could describe the place where he [Poly- 
 carp] sat, and his going out and coming in; his 
 manner of life, his features, his discourse to the 
 people concerning the conversation he had with 
 [the apostle] John, and others that had seen the 
 Lord; how he rehearsed their discourses, and what 
 he had heard them that were eye-witnesses of the 
 word of life say of their Lord, and of his miracles 
 and doctrine, all agreeable to the Scriptures." 
 (Wall's History of Infant Baptism, p. 21.) 
 
 On the subject we are now discussing, Ireneus 
 says of Christ, " Therefore, as he was a Master, he 
 had also the age of a master. Not disdaining, nor 
 going in a way above human nature, nor breaking, 
 in his own person, the law which he had set for 
 mankind; but sanctifying every several age by the 
 likeness that it has to him ; for he came to save all 
 persons by himself — all, I mean, who by him are re- 
 generated [baptized] unto God, infants and little 
 ones, children and youths, and elder persons. 
 Therefore, he went through the several ages; for 
 infants being made an infant, sanctifying infants; 
 
310 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 to little ones he was made a little one, sanctifying 
 those of that age, and also giving them an example 
 of godliness, justice, and dutifulness; to youths he 
 was a youth/' etc. (Wall's History of Infant Bap- 
 tism, Vol. I, p. 72.) 
 
 The only point in dispute relating to the above 
 quotations, is the meaning of the phrase regenerated 
 unto God; but it will not be a difficult task to prove 
 that the Christian fathers used this phrase to de- 
 scribe baptism. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, whose testimony will not be inap- 
 propriate here, says that u all the apostolical fathers, 
 as they are called, all the pupils of the apostles, and 
 all the ecclesiastical writers of note, of the first four 
 Christian centuries, whose writings have come down 
 to us, allude to, and speak of, Christian immersion 
 [meaning Christian baptism] as the 'regeneration' 
 and c remission of sins ' spoken of in the New Test- 
 ament" (Christian System, p. 218.) 
 
 Again : u On a more accurate and strict examina- 
 tion of their writings, and of the use of this term in 
 the New Testament, I am assured that they used the 
 term regenerated as equivalent to immersion, [bap- 
 tism,] and spoke of the spiritual change under other 
 terms and modes of speech," etc. (Millen. Harb., Yol. 
 II, Extra, p. 29.) 
 
 It is due Mr. Campbell to say that the above re- 
 marks were penned in an effort to prove baptismal 
 regeneration, not thinking, perhaps, that it was 
 yielding a very important point in favor of infant 
 baptism. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COYENANT TOKEN. 311 
 
 Dr. Wall says, " The Christians did, in all ancient 
 times, continue the use of this name 'regeneration* 
 for baptism; so that they never use the word 'regen- 
 erate] or 'born again] but they mean or denote by 
 it baptism" (Fourth London Edition, p. 116, Vol. 
 1, 1829.) 
 
 The following, with many more, are given by 
 Wall as instances corroborating the above fact : 
 " Justin Martyr, showing how Christian disciples 
 were made, in his first Apology, says, 'We bring 
 them to some place where there is water, xao tportov 
 avay£vvi]<3£co$ 6v xao 7}(A£L$ avtoi av£y£vv^9?jfi£v, avay£vi^iov- 
 tat — and they are regenerated by the same way of re- 
 generation by which we were regenerated — for they 
 are washed with water in the name of God the Fa- 
 ther, and Lord of all things, and of our Savior, Jesus 
 Christ, and of the Holy Spirit; for Christ says, 
 u Except ye be regenerated, you can not enter into 
 the kingdom of heaven." . . . And that we shall 
 obtain forgiveness of the sins in which we have 
 lived, by or in water, there is invoked over him that 
 has a mind to be regenerated, the name of God, the 
 Father, and Lord of all things; . . . and this wash- 
 ing is called the enlightening/ etc. 
 
 "Ireneus says, 'When Christ gave to his apostles 
 the commission of regenerating unto God, he said 
 unto them, "Go and teach all nations, baptizing 
 them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Spirit." ' 
 
 "Gregory Nazianzen, exhorting persons that had 
 been baptized not to fall into sin again, says, 'Ovx 
 
312 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 ovcf?]$ Ssvtspus avayswyGstos, there is not another regen- 
 eration afterward to be had, though it be sought 
 with never so inuclf crying and tears/ while he ad- 
 mits that repentance and forgiveness may be expe- 
 rienced even after baptism. It is, therefore, only 
 baptism that can not be repeated. 
 
 "St. Austin, in answer to the inquiry whether 
 carrying a baptized child to a heathen sacrifice would 
 destroy the benefit derived from baptism, says, "An 
 infant does never lose the grace of Christ, which 
 he has once received, but by his own sinful deeds, 
 if, when he grows up, he proves so wicked; for then 
 he will begin to have sins of his own, quae non re- 
 generatione auferantur, sed alia curatione sanentur, 
 which are not removed by regeneration, [baptism,] 
 but will be healed by some other method/ 
 "St. Hierom says that 'Christ was born of a vir- 
 gin, and regenerated by a virgin/ referring in the 
 last instance to John the Baptist, who was unmar- 
 ried." (Wall's History of Infant Baptism, Part I, 
 Chap. II, Sec. IV, V, and Chap. Ill, IV.) 
 
 The above are sufficient to show, I think, the 
 sense in which Ireneus used the term "regenerated 
 unto God;" and fully justifies us in saying that he 
 meant "all who by him are baptized unto God, 
 infants and little ones," etc. 
 
 "Now, the question is, had Ireneus the opportu- 
 nity to know the fact concerning which he testifies ? 
 For let it be distinctly understood, we appeal to the 
 ancient Christian fathers, not for their opinions on 
 theology — from these we honestly dissent — but, as 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 313 
 
 Dr. Rice says, c I call them up as witnesses to a mat- 
 ter of fact; namely, that in their clay, and, so far 
 as they knew, to the days of the apostles, the bap- 
 tism of infants was universally practiced. y The indi- 
 rect, yet clear testimony of Ireneus, so near the 
 apostle John, goes very far indeed to prove not only 
 that it was generally practiced, but that it was of 
 Divine authority." (Debate between Campbell and 
 Rice, p. 389.) 
 
 3. Tertullian, of whom Dr. Gregory says, he 
 " lived in the latter end of* the second and the be- 
 ginning of the third century. He was by birth a 
 Carthaginian, and possessed all the constitutional 
 fervor natural to the sons of the warm climate of 
 Africa. Disgusted with some affronts he had met 
 with from the ecclesiastics at Rome, and incited by 
 his own vehement and rigid disposition, he em- 
 braced the opinions of Montanus, and attacked his 
 adversaries with rather more warmth of temper than 
 strength of argument. He was, however, learned, 
 acute, and ingenious, but severe, enthusiastical, and 
 rather credulous." (Gregory and Ruter's Church 
 History, p. 61.) 
 
 Tertullian was opposed to infant baptism. He 
 says : "But they whose duty it is to administer bap- 
 tism, are to know that it is not to be given rashly. 
 Give to every one that asketli thee, has its proper 
 subject, and relates to almsgiving; but that com- 
 mand rather is here to be considered, Give not that 
 which is holy to dogs, neither cast your pearls before 
 swine j and that, Lay hands suddenly on no man, 
 
314 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 neither he partakers of other men's faults. . . . 
 Therefore, according to everyone's condition and dis- 
 position, and also their age, the delaying of baptism 
 is more profitable, especially in the case of little 
 children. For what need is there that the god- 
 fathers should be brought into danger? because 
 they may either fail of their promises by death, or 
 they may be mistaken by a child proving of a wicked 
 disposition. Our Lord says, indeed, 'Do not forbid 
 them to come to me/ Therefore, let them come 
 when they are grown up; let them come when they 
 understand; when they are instructed whither it is 
 they come; let them be made Christians when they 
 know Christ. What need their guiltless age make 
 such haste to the forgiveness of sins? Men will 
 proceed more warily in worldly things; and he that 
 should not have earthly goods committed to him, 
 yet shall he have heavenly? Let them know how 
 to desire this salvation, that you may appear to have 
 given to one that asketh. For no less reason un- 
 married persons ought to be kept off, who are likely 
 to come into temptation, as well as those that were 
 never married, upon account of their coming to ripe- 
 ness, as those in widowhood, for the miss of their 
 partner, till they either marry or be confirmed in 
 continence. They that understand the weight of 
 baptism, will rather dread the receiving it than the 
 delaying of it. An entire faith is secure of salva- 
 tion.^ (Wall, Vol. I, pp. 93, 94.) 
 
 Now, notwithstanding Tertullian wrote against 
 infant baptism, yet, as Mr. Hibbard says, a The 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 315 
 
 simple fact that lie speaks of infant baptism as a 
 well-known and general practice in his day, proves 
 it to have been instituted long before his day. If 
 Tertullian opposed infant baptism, then it is incon- 
 testable that infant baptism existed* This is the 
 best kind of proof we could possibly have. But if 
 the practice of infant baptism existed before the 
 days of Tertullian, that is, within less than one 
 hundred years after the death of the apostle John, 
 when, we ask, did it commence, and with whom did 
 it originate ? Can our opponents tell us ? Could 
 such a practice, which affects — in the estimation of 
 our opponents, at least — the essential character of 
 the ordinance, as well as that of the Church, could 
 such, a practice, I say, originate in merely-human 
 authority, and become general over Europe, western 
 Asia, and northern and eastern Africa, within less 
 than a single century after the apostles, and yet its 
 novelty not be objected to by one who opposed the 
 practice ? Tertullian was, as we have seen, oppos- 
 ing, under certain circumstances, infant baptism. 
 Now, whatever would make for his argument, we 
 know he would have had no scruples in using. 
 Many fitful and puerile things we know he did say, 
 for want of better material to work with. Could he 
 have found more powerful and plausible weapons at 
 hand, unquestionably he would have used them. 
 Suppose, then, infant baptism had been an. inven- 
 tion of some doctor or doctors in the Church since 
 the days of St. John, such a circumstance, had it 
 been true, could not have escaped the knowledge of 
 
316 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 such a man as Tertullian, and had he been know- 
 ing to such a fact, he certainly would not have failed 
 to urge it. Why, then, did he not come out at 
 once, and say, * First of all, this doctrine of infant 
 baptism is a novel thing, and without any authority 
 whatever from Christ and his apostles; therefore, 
 it ought to be abandoned, and baptism deferred to 
 adult age V Why, I say, did he not urge its nov- 
 elty, and its utter want of Scriptural authority, 
 against its being practiced ? Why did he not point 
 out the innovator who first introduced the custom, 
 and brand him as a heretic ? All this would have 
 been directly to his purpose, and would have 
 weighed a thousand times more in argument than 
 the contemptible puerilities over which he makes a 
 pitiful display of reasoning. Why, then, did he 
 not use these important facts — why ? To this there 
 can be but one answer; because no such facts ex- 
 isted in truth; because infant baptism bore a date 
 and an authority coeval and coequal to the date and 
 authority of adult Christian baptism." (Hibbard 
 on Infant Baptism, pp. 191, 192.) 
 
 But as Tertullian is relied upon, and often quoted, 
 by anti-pedobaptists, let us examine a little further 
 the principles on which his opposition was based. 
 "His opposition to it rested, primarily, on the 
 ground that it was better to defer baptism, in all 
 cases, till just before death, or till the individual 
 was beyond the reach of peculiar temptation; and 
 this notion arose out of the prevailing belief that 
 baptism washed away ail previous guilt, and not from 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 317 
 
 any objection to infant baptism per sc. This made 
 sin, after baptism, appear to them the more terrible, 
 inasmuch as the ordinance could not be repeated. 
 On the same principle, Tertullian advises all single 
 persons, widows, etc., to defer baptism till they are 
 either married or confirmed in continence, lest they, 
 being exposed to temptation, should fall into sin 
 c They that understand the weight of baptism/ says 
 he, 'will rather dread the receiving it than the de- 
 laying it/ In this connection he is not speaking 
 of infant baptism exclusively, nor of the delay of 
 infant baptism only, but of the delay of baptism in 
 all cases where there is no immediate expectation of 
 death, and where there is any peculiar danger from 
 temptation. Hear him : i Therefore, according to 
 every one's condition and disposition, and also their 
 age, the delaying of baptism is more profitable! 
 But where there is an approach of death, or a case 
 of necessity, he strongly advocates even lay-baptism, 
 and says if a person 'neglects at such a time to do 
 what he lawfully may, [that is, to baptize, or to dis- 
 charge the office of a bishop toward the person in 
 necessity,] he will be guilty of the person's perdi- 
 tion/ From this view, then, of Tertullian' s pe- 
 culiar notions respecting the ordinance of baptism, 
 the character of his far-famed opposition to infant 
 baptism assumes quite another aspect/' (Hibbard 
 on Infant Baptism, pp. 192, 193.) 
 
 But the reader must remember that we did not 
 quote Tertullian to show the character of his the- 
 ology, but merely for the purpose of showing that 
 
318 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 infant baptism was generally practiced in the Church 
 in his day; and his feeble and irrelevant arguments 
 against infant baptism prove it as fully, and even 
 more so, than if they had been employed in its 
 favor. The skeptical writings that were sent forth 
 during the first centuries against Jesus Christ and 
 his apostles, are now invaluable documents to prove 
 the antiquity of Christianity; and modern infidels 
 can dispose of the testimony of all the Christian 
 fathers easier than they can one of these; for 
 Christ and his apostles must have lived before these 
 enemies wrote, or else how could they have had any 
 knowledge of them ? And so infant baptism must 
 have been prevalent in the Church before Tertul- 
 lian's day, or else how came he to oppose it, or to 
 know any thing about it ? And as he lived so near 
 the apostles, and was so well informed, if it had 
 been started during the interval he certainly would 
 have made that fact known to the world. 
 
 4. Origen, who lived and wrote during the early 
 part of the third century. " His attention to the 
 sacred Scriptures was early and indefatigable; but 
 though the principal, they were not the only objects 
 of his studies; he was conversant in philosophy and 
 polite literature, published several doctrinal and 
 moral treatises, and entered the field of controversy 
 with vigor and success. The number of his literary 
 performances exceeds that of any other Christian 
 writer in the early ages, and is, indeed, very consid- 
 erable." (Gregory and Ruter's History of the 
 Church, p. 78.) 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 319 
 
 In his homily on Leviticus, Origen says, "Hear 
 David speaking: 'I was/ says he, 'conceived in in- 
 iquity, and in sin did my mother bring me forth ;' 
 showing that every soul that is born in the flesh is 
 polluted with the filth of sin and iniquity, and that, 
 therefore, that was said, which we mentioned be- 
 fore, that none is clear from pollution, though his life 
 he but the lengtli of one day. Besides all this, let it 
 be considered what is the reason that, whereas, the 
 baptism of the Church is given for the forgiveness of 
 sins , infants also are, by the usage of the Church, 
 baptized, when, if there were nothing in infants 
 that wanted forgiveness and mercy, the grace of 
 baptism would be needless to them." 
 
 In the above quotation, you see that it was the 
 doctrine of original sin, especially in infants, that 
 he was laboring to prove. How far his theology 
 was defective, or how irrelevant the argument may 
 have been, is not the question. He certainly labors 
 to prove that infants are guilty, and need forgive- 
 ness; from the fact that "the baptism of the Church 
 is given for the forgiveness of sins, infants also are, 
 by the usage of the Church, baptized." Now, no 
 approach to truth could be made by advancing one 
 disputed point to prove another: hence, we infer, 
 not only from the language employed, but from the 
 manner in which infant baptism is introduced in 
 the argument, that it was the universal practice of 
 the Church in his day to baptize hey infant mem- 
 bers. 
 
 Again : in his homily on Luke, Origen says, " Hav- 
 
820 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 ing occasion given in this place, I will mention a 
 tiling that causes frequent inquiries among the 
 brethren. Infants are baptized for the forgiveness 
 of sins. Of what sins? or when have they sinned? 
 or how can any reason of the law, in their case, 
 hold good but according to that sense we mentioned 
 even now — none are free from pollution, though his 
 life be of but the length of one day upon the earth ? 
 And it is for that reason, because by the sacrament 
 of baptism the pollution of our birth is taken away, 
 that infants are baptized." 
 
 Again: in his homily on Romans, he says, "For 
 this, also, it was that the Church had from the apos- 
 tles a tradition [or order] to give baptism even to 
 infants; for they to whom the Divine mysteries were 
 committed knew that there is in all persons the 
 natural pollution of sins, which must be done away 
 by water and the Spirit, by reason of which the 
 body itself is called the body of sin." (Wall, Vol. 
 I, pp. 104, 105, 106.) 
 
 Here it is expressly said that the " Church" re- 
 ceived u infant baptism" from the " apostles;" and 
 considering the opportunities of this witness to 
 know the truth, his great intelligence, and his prox- 
 imity to the apostles, he puts the subject beyond a 
 reasonable doubt. The Church did, in his day, 
 generally baptize her infant children ; and she re- 
 ceived authority to do so from the apostles. 
 
 5. Cyprian, Fidus,* and the Council of sixty-six 
 Bishops, assembled A. D. 253. " Cyprian," says 
 Dr. Gregory, "who, in the year 248, attained to the 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 321 
 
 Episcopal See of Carthage, acquired a degree of 
 admiration and applause from his cotemporaries, 
 which has not been denied to him by posterity. 
 Affable, virtuous, and charitable in his private char- 
 acter, he was zealous, spirited, and active in his 
 public station, and possessed all those qualities 
 which are calculated to attach friends and excite 
 the jealousy of adversaries." (Gregory and Ruter's 
 Church History, p. 80.) 
 
 A council of bishops to the number of sixty-six 
 was convened at Carthage in 253, to which Fidus, a 
 country bishop, addressed a letter, soliciting their 
 opinion in relation to the propriety of baptizing 
 children till they were eight days old, and giving it 
 as his opinion that their baptism should be deferred 
 till the age in which it was originally lawful to cir- 
 cumcise them. The following is their answer : 
 
 " Cyprian, and the rest of the bishops who are 
 present at the Council, in number sixty-six, to Fi- 
 dus, our brother, greeting : 
 
 " We read your letter, most esteemed brother, in 
 which you write of one Victor, a priest, etc. . . . 
 But to the case of infants; whereas, you judge 
 i that they must not be baptized within two or three 
 days after they are born, and that the rule of cir- 
 cumcision is to be observed, so that none should be 
 baptized and sanctified before the eighth day after 
 he is born/ we were all in our assembly oe a 
 contrary opinion; for as for what you thought 
 fitting to be done, there was not one that was of 
 your mind, but all of us, on the contrary, judged 
 21 
 
322 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 that the grace and mercy of God is to be denied to 
 no person that is born; for, whereas, our Lord, in 
 his Gospel, says, 'The Son of man came not to de- 
 stroy men's souls, [or lives,] but to save them/ as 
 far as lies in us, no soul, if possible, is to be lost. . . 
 So that we judge that no person is to be hindered 
 from obtaining the grace by the law that is now ap- 
 pointed; and that the spiritual circumcision [that 
 is, the grace of baptism'] ought not to be impeded 
 by the circumcision that was according to the flesh, 
 [that is, Jewish circumcision ;] but that all are to 
 be admitted to the grace of Christ, since Peter, 
 speaking in the Acts of the Apostles, says, 'The 
 Lord has shown me that no person is to be called 
 common or unclean/ If any thing could be an 
 obstacle to persons against their obtaining the 
 grace, the adult, and grown, and aged, would be 
 rather hindered by their more grievous sins. If, 
 then, the greatest offenders, and those that have 
 grievously sinned against God before, have, when 
 they afterward come to believe, forgiveness of their 
 sins, and no person is prohibited from baptism and 
 grace, how much less reason is there to refuse an 
 infant who, being newly born, has no sin, save that 
 being descended from Adam according to the flesh, 
 he has from his very birth contracted the contagion 
 of the death anciently threatened, who comes, for 
 this reason, more easily to receive forgiveness of 
 sins, because they are not his own but other's sins 
 that are forgiven him." (Cyprian's Epistle to Fi- 
 dus, in Wall, Vol. I, p. 129.) 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 323 
 
 (1.) The question in dispute, as the reader will 
 see, was not whether infants were to be baptized, 
 for even Ficlus did not dispute this fact, but were 
 they, in extreme cases, to be baptized earlier than 
 eight days after birth ? 
 
 (2.) The answer of these sixty-six bishops, with 
 Cyprian for their scribe, unanimously agree that 
 they were fit for, yea, entitled to baptism at any 
 time after they were born. 
 
 The reader will see, in the above epistle, evidence 
 of a fact of which we apprised him at the commence- 
 ment of this section; namely, that the Christian 
 fathers generally fell into error in laying too much 
 stress upon Christian baptism as a means of forgiv- 
 ing sin; but this does not injure the testimony 
 when unitedly given, as in the above instance, of 
 men of the best means of knowing the truth, as- 
 sembled from different and distant portions of the 
 Church, concerning what was, and had ever been, 
 the custom of the Church in relation to the baptism 
 of infant children. 
 
 Dr. Milner says, "Here is an assembly of sixty- 
 six pastors, men of approved fidelity and gravity, 
 who have stood the fiery trial of some of the sever- 
 est persecutions ever known, and who have testified 
 their love to the Lord Jesus Christ in a more strik- 
 ing manner than any anti-pedobaptists have had an 
 opportunity of doing in our days; and if we may 
 judge of their religious views by those of Cyprian — 
 and they are all in perfect harmony with him — they 
 are not wanting in any fundamental of godliness. 
 
324 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 No man, in any age, more reverenced the Scriptures, 
 and made more copious use of them on all occasions 
 than he did; and, it must be confessed, in the very 
 best manner. For he uses them continually for 
 practice, not for ostentation; for use, not for 
 sake of victory in argument. Before this holy 
 assembly a question is brought, not whether infants 
 should be baptized at all — none contradicted this — 
 but whether it is right to baptize them immediately 
 or on the eighth day. Without a single negative 
 they all determined to baptize them immediately. 
 This transaction passed in the year two hundred and 
 fifty-three. Let the reader consider, if infant bap- 
 tism had been an innovation, it must have been now 
 of a considerable standing. The disputes concern- 
 ing Easter, and other very uninteresting points, 
 show that sucn an innovation must have formed a 
 remarkable era in the Church. The number of her- 
 esies and divisions had been very great. Among 
 them all. such a deviation from apostolic practice 
 as this must have been remarked. To me it ap- 
 pears impossible to account for this state of things, 
 but on the footing that it had ever been allowed; 
 and, therefore, that it was the custom of the first 
 Churches." (History of the Church, Cent. 3, 
 Chap. XIII.) 
 
 This opinion we fully indorse. 
 
 6. Oplatus, Bishop of Melevi, of considerable 
 note in the Church, who wrote about A. D. 370, 
 makes the following novel but interesting remarks, 
 in relation to "putting on Christ" by Christian bap- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 325 
 
 tisrn, and wearing him as a garment: "But lest any 
 one should say I speak irreverently in calling Christ 
 a garment, let him read what the apostle says : ' As 
 many of you as have been baptized in the name of 
 Christ, have put on Christ/ what a garment is 
 this, that is always one, and never renewed; that 
 decently fits all ages and all forms ! It is neither 
 plaited for infants nor stretched for men, and, with- 
 out altering, is suitable to women ¥' (Fifth Book 
 Concerning the Schism of the Donatists.) 
 
 7. Gregory Nazianzen, who was bishop success- 
 ively of Sasimi, Nazianzus, and Constantinople, 
 wrote about A. D. 380 as follows : 
 
 "Art thou a youth? fight against pleasures and 
 passions with this auxiliary strength; list thyself 
 in God's army. Art thou old? let thy gray hairs 
 hasten thee; strengthen thy age with baptism. . . . 
 Hast thou an infant child? let not wickedness 
 have the advantage of time; let him be sanctified 
 from his infancy; let him be dedicated from his 
 cradle in the spirit. Thou as a faint-hearted mother, 
 and of little faith, art afraid of giving him the seal, 
 [that is, baptism,] because of the weakness of na- 
 ture. Hannah, before Samuel was born, devoted 
 him to God, and as soon as he was born consecrated 
 him, and brought him up from the first in a priestly 
 garment, not fearing on account of human infirm- 
 ities, but trusting in God. Thou hast no need of 
 amulets, or charms. . . . Give to him the Trinity, 
 that great and excellent preservative. Ao$ avtu n^v 
 
 tfptaSa, 'to iisya xao xaXov (pvhaxit'qpiov. 
 
326 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Again : u Some of them live like beasts, and re- 
 gard not baptism. Some have a value for baptism, 
 but delay the receiving it, either out of negligence 
 or a greediness longer to enjoy their lusts. But 
 some others have it not in their own power to re- 
 ceive it, either because of their infancy, perhaps, 
 \yi hux vTjTiiot^-taTfvyovj] or, by reason of some accident, 
 utterly involuntary. . . . And I think of the first 
 sort, [that is, those who despise baptism,] that they 
 shall be punished, as for their other wickedness, so 
 for their slighting of baptism; and that the sec- 
 ond shall be punished, but in a less degree, because 
 they are guilty of their own missing it, but rather 
 through folly than malice; but that the last sort 
 [those who omit baptism involuntary, as infants] 
 will neither be glorified nor punished by the just 
 Judge, as being without the seal, [that is, baptism,] 
 but not through their own wickedness, and as hav- 
 ing suffered the loss rather than occasioned it." 
 "We must, therefore, make it our utmost care that 
 we do not miss of the common grace," etc. " Some 
 may say, Suppose this to hold in the case of those 
 who can desire baptism, what say you of those that 
 are yet infants, and are not in capacity to be sensible 
 either of the grace or the want of it, shall we bap- 
 tize them too? Yes, by all means, if any danger 
 make it requisite. For it is better that they be 
 sanctified without their own sense of it, than that 
 they should be unsealed and uninitiated. Ka& tovtov 
 Tioyoj r^/Liv t] oxTfcf^fjispo^ Ttspnfofiy], a.nd our reason for this 
 is circumcision, which was performed on the eighth 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 327 
 
 day, and was a tj^pical seal, and was practiced on 
 those who had no use of reason. As for others, I 
 give my opinion that they should stay three years, 
 or thereabouts, when they are able to hear and an- 
 swer some holy words ; and though they do not per- 
 fectly understand them, yet they form them ; ovtut 
 
 and that you then sanctify them in soul and body with 
 the great sacrament of consecration" (Discourse on 
 Baptism.) 
 
 Gregory and Tertullian, as the reader will have 
 observed, are the only persons we have yet found 
 who even advised a delay of infant baptism, and 
 that only when there was no immediate danger. 
 And this very advice shows how very prevalent 
 infant baptism was in their day. 
 
 8. Ambrose, who was a native of Graul, and was 
 elected bishop of Milan in A. D. 374, and became 
 a writer of some note. He says: "But perhaps 
 this may seem to be fulfilled in our time, and in the 
 apostles' time. For that returning of the river 
 waters backward toward the spring-head, which was 
 caused by Elias when the river was divided, [as the 
 Scripture says, Jordan ivas driven back,~] signified 
 the sacrament of the laver of salvation, which was 
 afterward to be instituted; per quae in primordia 
 naturae, suae qui baptizati fuerint, parvuli a malitia 
 reformantu, by which those infants who have been bap- 
 tized are reformed from perverseness to the primitive 
 state of their nature" (Comment on Luke i, 17.) 
 
 Other quotations equally to our purpose might be 
 
328 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 made from this father if necessary, to show his 
 opinion as to whether infants were baptized in his 
 day. In the above he clearly intimates that they 
 were, as well as in the apostles' time. " Fulfilled 
 in our time/' he says, "and in the apostles' time." 
 
 9. Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, a man 
 of great eloquence, about the close of the third 
 century, says : " But our circumcision — I mean the 
 grace of baptism — gives cure without pain, and pro- 
 cures to us a thousand benefits, and fills us with the 
 grace of the Spirit; and it had no determinate time 
 as that had, out one in immature age, or in middle 
 life, or that is in old age, may receive this circum- 
 cision without hands, in which there is no trouble 
 to be undergone." (Homily XI on Genesis.) 
 
 Again : St. Austin quotes from a work of his now 
 
 lost, the following: "Am* tovto xac *a Tiavdoa parttfMy- 
 o/jlev xanfoo a^aptf^ fisTfa fX7j szovta, for this reason we 
 baptize infants also, although they have no sins" 
 
 SECTION IX. 
 
 HISTORICAL ARGUMENT CONTINUED. 
 
 We will now strengthen the testimony already 
 adduced from the Christian fathers, by the following 
 additional quotations: 
 
 10. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, "was or- 
 dained coadjutor to Valerius in 395. . . . His 
 works, which are more numerous than any other 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 329 
 
 writer of this period/' furnish evidence of great 
 learning, especially in the holy Scriptures. He 
 was much engaged in controversy with the Do- 
 natists and Pelagians. Augustine thus comments 
 upon 1 Cor. vii, 14 : 
 
 "For an unbelieving husband has been sanctified 
 by his believing wife, and an unbelieving wife by her 
 believing husband. 
 
 "I suppose it had then happened that several 
 wives had been brought to the faith by their believ- 
 ing husbands, and husbands by their believing 
 wives. And though he does not mention their 
 names, yet he makes use of their example to con- 
 firm his advice. 
 
 "Else were your children unclean, but now are they 
 holy. For there were then Christian infants that 
 were sanctified; [or made holy; that is, that were 
 baptized;] some by the authority of one of their 
 parents, some by the consent of both; which would 
 not be, if, as some of one party believed, the mar- 
 riage was dissolved." (De Sermone Domini in 
 Monte.) 
 
 Again: "So that many persons, increasing in 
 knowledge, after their baptism, and especially those 
 who have been baptized either when they were 
 infants, or when they were youths; as their under- 
 standing is cleared and enlightened, and their 
 inward man renewed day by day, do themselves de- 
 ride, and with abhorrence and confession renounce 
 their former opinions which they had of God, when 
 they were imposed on by their imaginations. And 
 
330 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 yet they are not, therefore, accounted either not to 
 have received baptism, or to have received a baptism 
 of that nature their error was." (Wall, p. 251.) 
 
 " And as the thief, who of necessity went with- 
 out baptism, was saved, because by his piety he 
 had it spiritually, so where baptism is had, though 
 the party by necessity go without that [faith] which 
 the thief had, yet he is saved ) which the whole 
 body of the Church holds, as delivered to them, in 
 the case of little infants baptized, who certainly 
 can not yet believe with the heart to righteousness, 
 or confess with the mouth to salvation, as the thief 
 could, etc. . . . And if any one do ask for Divine 
 authority in this matter, though that which the 
 whole Church practices, and which has not been in- 
 stituted by councils, but was ever in use, is very 
 reasonably believed to be no other than a thing de- 
 livered [or ordered] by an authority of the apostles, 
 yet we may, besides, take a true estimate how much 
 the sacrament of baptism does avail infants by the 
 circumcision which God's former people received." 
 (De Baptismo cont. Donatistas — Wall, p. 254.) 
 
 " Therefore, as in Abraham the righteousness of 
 faith went before, and circumcision, the seal of the 
 righteousness of faith, came after, so in Cornelius 
 [the centurion] the spiritual sanctification by the 
 gift of the Holy Spirit went before, and the sacra- 
 ment of regeneration by the laver of baptism came 
 after; and as in Isaac, who was circumcised the 
 eighth day, the seal of the righteousness of faith 
 went before, and [as he was a follower of his father's 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 331 
 
 faitli] the righteousness itself, the seal whereof had 
 gone before in his infancy, came after, so in infants 
 baptized the sacrament of regeneration goes before, 
 and [if they put in practice the Christian religion] 
 conversion of the heart, the mystery whereof went 
 before in their body, came after. 
 
 "And, as in that thief's case, what was wanting 
 of the sacrament of baptism the mercy of the Al- 
 mighty made up, because it was not of pride or 
 contempt, but of necessity that it was wanting, so 
 in infants that die after they are baptized, it is to 
 be believed that the same grace of the Almighty 
 does make up that defect, that by reason not of a 
 wicked will, but of want of age, they can neither 
 believe with the heart to righteousness, nor confess 
 with the mouth unto salvation; so that when others 
 answer for them, that they may have this sacrament 
 given them, it is valid for their consecration, be- 
 cause they can not answer for themselves ; but if 
 for one that is able to answer for himself, another 
 should answer, it would not be valid. 
 
 "By all which it appears that the sacrament of 
 baptism is one thing, and the conversion of the 
 heart another; but that the salvation of a person 
 is completed by both of them. And if one of these 
 be wanting we are not to think that it follows that 
 the other is wanting, since one may be without the 
 other in an infant, and the other was without that 
 in the thief, God Almighty making up both, in one 
 and the other case, that which was not willfully 
 wanting; but when either of them is willfully want- 
 
332 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 ing it involves the individual in guilt." (Fourth 
 Book against the Donatists concerning Baptism.) 
 
 (1.) The reader will observe that Augustin, like 
 several others whom we have quoted, places baptism 
 as a seal in the place of circumcision ; and so, in 
 fact, did all the ancient fathers, so far as we have 
 any knowledge. 
 
 (2.) He declares the practice of baptizing in- 
 fants, and the belief in its utility, to be universal 
 in the Church in his time, which was but three 
 hundred years from the apostles. He says "the 
 universal Church practices it;" and who could 
 have had a better opportunity of knowing ? 
 
 (3.) He claims for it direct authority from the 
 apostles. He says it was "not instituted by councils, 
 but has always been observed, and is most justly be- 
 lieved to be nothing else than a thing delivered by the 
 authority of the apostles" 
 
 Again, after quoting some passages out of St. 
 Hierome on Iona relating to this subject, he pro- 
 ceeds: 
 
 "If we could with convenience come to ask that 
 most learned man how many writers of Christian 
 dissertations, and interpreters of holy Scripture in 
 both languages could he recount who, from the time 
 that Christ's Church has been founded, have held 
 no otherwise, have received no other doctrine from 
 their predecessors, nor left any other to their suc- 
 cessors ? For my part — though my reading is much 
 less than his — I do not remember that I ever heard 
 any other thing from any Christian that received 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 333 
 
 the Old and New Testament, neither from such as 
 were of the Catholic Church, nor from such as be- 
 longed to any sect or schism. I do not remember 
 that I ever read otherwise in any writer that I could 
 ever find treating of these matters, that followed 
 the canonical Scriptures, or did mean or did pre- 
 tend to do so." 
 
 The above may be regarded as the combined tes- 
 timony of two of the most learned, eminent, and 
 influential fathers in the primitive Church, relative 
 to the universal practice and faith of the Church 
 from their time up to that of the apostles. No con- 
 troversy, no denial of the right of infant baptism, was 
 ever made, to the best of their knowledge, by any one 
 man, or sect, or party of men. Tertullian and Greg- 
 ory had, to be sure, just preceded them, as eminent 
 fathers and ecclesiastical writers, with whom they 
 must have been familiar; but even these fathers 
 were not regarded by their cotemporaries, or suc- 
 cessors, as being opposed to the baptism of infants. 
 On what authority, then, is it said by Mr. Campbell 
 that infant baptism u began to be practiced about 
 the time of Tertullian and Origen ?" Certainly no 
 authority for such a remark is found in any of the 
 writings of the ancient fathers ; but all testify to 
 the contrary who say any thing about it. 
 
 11. Jerome, the cotemporary and friend of Au- 
 gustine, says: 
 
 "But he that is a child, and thinks as a child, his 
 good deeds, as well as his evil deeds, are imputed 
 to his parents; unless you will think the children 
 
334 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 of Christians are themselves only under the guilt 
 of the sins if they do not receive baptism, and that 
 the wickedness is not imputed to those also who 
 would not give it them, especially at that time, 
 when they that were to receive it could make no 
 opposition against the receiving of it," etc. (Epis. 
 ad Latam.— Wall, Vol. I, p. 240.) 
 
 His meaning evidently is, that if children were 
 not baptized their parents were guilty in conse- 
 quence of the neglect. 
 
 12. Councils of the Church. While we yield to 
 Church councils no authority to institute, or abol- 
 ish, or change Church ordinances, we may with 
 safety look to them for testimony touching the prac- 
 tices of the Church in the particular period which 
 they represent. With this view, we refer to a 
 council held at Carthage A. D. 397, where the fol- 
 lowing was adopted as its forty-eighth canon : 
 
 "In reference to the Donatists, it is resolved that 
 we do ask the advice of our brethren and fellow- 
 bishops, Ciricius and Simplicianus, concerning those 
 only who are in infancy baptized among them, 
 whether in that which they have not done with 
 their own judgment, the error of their parents shall 
 hinder them, that when they, by a wholesome pur- 
 pose, shall be converted to the Church of God, they 
 may not be promoted to be ministers of the holy 
 altar." 
 
 Four years after the above council, another was 
 held at Carthage, when the following address, which 
 clearly indicates to what conclusion they had arrived 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 335 
 
 on the above subject, was delivered by Aurelius ; 
 Bishop of that city : 
 
 " You remember that in a former council, it was 
 resolved that they who were, in their infancy, before 
 they were able to understand the mischief of that 
 error, baptized among the Donatists, and when 
 they came to age of understanding, acknowledged 
 the truth, etc., they were received by us. All will 
 grant that such may, undoubtedly, be promoted to 
 Church offices, especially in times of so great need/ 7 
 
 At the fifth council, held in Carthage about A. D. 
 400, the following was adopted as their sixth canon : 
 
 "It is resolved, concerning infants of whose hav- 
 ing been baptized there are no positive witnesses 
 that can give certain evidence, and they themselves 
 are not capable of giving any account of that sacra- 
 ment having been administered to them, by reason 
 of their age, that such be, without any scruple, 
 baptized," etc. 
 
 The only question was in reference to whether an 
 individual that could give no positive evidence of 
 being baptized in infancy, should, in adult years, 
 be baptized? The answer was in the affirmative, 
 
 13. Pelagius, the great opponent of original sin, 
 and consequently of infant depravity, the author of 
 the doctrine called Pelagianism, who lived and 
 wrote in the forepart of the fourth century, in his 
 famous letter to Innocent, Bishop of Home, says: 
 
 "Men do slander me as if I denied the sacra- 
 ment of baptism to infants." Again, he says: 
 "That he never heard even an impious heretic who 
 
336 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 would affirm this concerning infants." And again 
 lie says, " For who is so ignorant of the reading of 
 the evangelists as to attempt — not to say to establish 
 this — but to speak of it heedlessly, or even have 
 such a thought ? In fine, who can be so impious 
 as to hinder infants from being baptized and born 
 again in Christ, and thus cause them to miss of 
 the kingdom of heaven, since our Savior has said 
 that none can enter into the kingdom of heaven 
 that is not born again of water and the Holy Spirit ? 
 "Who is there so impious as to refuse to an infant, 
 of what age soever, the common redemption of 
 mankind, and to hinder him that is born to an un- 
 certain life from being born again to an everlasting 
 and certain one?" 
 
 "We beg the reader to pause," says Mr. Hibbard, 
 "and consider that this man [Pelagius] who affirms 
 his belief of infant baptism, and complains of be- 
 ing slandered, when it is reported that he denies 
 it — that declares he never heard of any person so 
 impious, or so ignorant of the Gospel, not even 
 among heretics, that presumed to deny the doc- 
 trine or even call it in question — this very man, 
 we say, would have found it greatly to his interest 
 to have been able to cast discredit upon the prac- 
 tice. Could he have proved that infant baptism 
 was of human invention, or any thing short of apos- 
 tolic authority, it would have made more in favor of 
 his cause than almost any other argument he could 
 have advanced." 
 
 Again : " As Pelagius and Celestius denied 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 337 
 
 original sin, it would seem that they would of course 
 deny the necessity of infant baptism, for all the 
 Christian world believed that baptism was 'for the 
 remission of sins/ Infants, indeed, were not sup- 
 posed to have any actual sin, but yet there was that 
 liability to punishment, that unfitness for heaven, 
 that, without the atonement of Christ, is an insep- 
 arable property of our nature, and this the ancient 
 Christian Church held was removed by or at bap- 
 tism. A denial of the doctrine of this innate de- 
 pravity, therefore, appeared to carry with it, neces- 
 sarily, a denial of the fitness and obligation of infant 
 baptism. And so it did. Accordingly, the great 
 spirits in the Church who opposed Pelagius, ceased 
 not to press him with this argument, c If infants are 
 without fault in their nature, as you affirm, why, 
 then, are they baptized V Now, any person can 
 perceive how it became the interest of Pelagius to 
 invalidate the practice and obligation of infant bap- 
 tism, if he could." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
 p. 215.) 
 
 And yet, such was his regard for truth, and such 
 his convictions that the institution was apostolical, 
 that, instead of attempting to deny that infants 
 were to be baptized, he considered himself slandered 
 because such an inference was attached to his doc- 
 trine. 
 
 14. Celestius, who, though he did not exactly 
 agree with Pelagius, would have found it quite as 
 convenient to have denied infant baptism if it could 
 have been done in truth. He says: 
 22 
 
838 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 "But we acknowledge infants ought to be bap- 
 tized for the remission of sins, according to the rule 
 of the universal Church, and according to the sen- 
 tence of the Gospel, because our Lord has ordained 
 that the kingdom of heaven shall be bestowed upon 
 no person except he be baptized; which, as men do 
 not receive it by nature, it is necessary to confer by 
 the power of grace." 
 
 Dr. "Wall, speaking of Pelagius and Celestius, 
 makes the following true remarks : 
 
 "If there had been any such Church of anti- 
 pedobaptists in the world, these men could not have 
 missed an opportunity of hearing of them, being so 
 great travelers as they were. For they were born 
 and bred, the one in Britain, the other in Ireland. 
 They lived the prime of their age [a very long time, 
 as St. Austin testifies] at Borne, a place to which 
 all the people of the world had then a resort. They 
 were both for some time at Carthage in Africa. 
 Then the one [Pelagius] settled at Jerusalem, and 
 the other [Celestius] traveled through all the noted 
 Greek and eastern Churches, in Europe and Asia. 
 It is impossible there should have been any Church 
 that had any singular practice in this matter, but 
 they must have heard of them. So that one may 
 fairly conclude that there was not at this time, nor 
 in the memory of the men of this time, any Chris- 
 tian society that denied baptism to infants. This 
 cuts off at once all the pretenses which some anti- 
 pedobaptists would raise from certain probabilities, 
 that the Novatians, or Donatists, or the British 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 339 
 
 Church of those times, or any other whom Pelagius 
 must needs have known, did deny it." (Wall's 
 History of Infant Baptism, Part I, Chapter IX, 
 Sec. 36.) 
 
 15. A council held in Carthage A. D. 418, com- 
 posed of two hundred and fourteen bishops, con- 
 vened for the purpose of deciding certain points 
 raised by the Pelagian controversy concerning 
 infants, etc., decreed as follows : 
 
 "Also, we determine that whosoever does deny 
 that infants may be baptized when they come re- 
 cently from their mother's womb; or does say that 
 they are indeed baptized for the forgiveness of sins, 
 and yet that they derive no original sin from Adam, 
 [from whence it would follow that the form of bap- 
 tism for forgiveness of sins is in them not true, but 
 false,] let him be anathema." 
 
 Now, if we add to the above the fact that Ireneus, 
 Epiphanius, Philistrius, St. Austin, and Theodoret, 
 all wrote histories of the origin and character of 
 the different sects that separated from the apostolic 
 Church, each tracing them down to their own time 
 respectively, embracing in all a space of nearly five 
 hundred years, and not one of them speaks of a 
 single sect that discarded the doctrine of infant 
 baptism, nor one that introduced it as an innovation 
 upon the practices of the Church, the conclusion is 
 almost irresistible, that, however much individuals 
 and whole parties, large or small, differed upon other 
 points, and however much they may have differed 
 as to the design of the ordinance, yet all persons, 
 
840 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 parties, and sects, agreed in this point; namely, 
 that the infant children of the Church should be 
 baptized. 
 
 16. Mr. John Paul Perrin, a descendant and his- 
 torian of the Waldenses and Albigenses. The 
 Waldenses, according to Mosheini, took their name 
 and origin from Peter Waldus, a rich merchant of 
 Lyons, in France, who commenced his reformation 
 about the year A. D. 1160. 
 
 "They accordingly," says Dr. Gregory, " formed 
 religious assemblies, first in France, and afterward 
 in Lombardy, whence they propagated their tenets 
 throughout the other countries of Europe, with 
 incredible rapidity, and with such invincible forti- 
 tude that neither fire, nor sword, nor the most cruel 
 inventions of merciless persecution, could damp 
 their zeal, or entirely ruin their cause." (Gregory 
 and Ruter's Church History, pp. 340, 341.) 
 
 Among other slanderous reports raised by the 
 Roman clergy against this remarkable people, was 
 this, that they refused to baptize their children. 
 Taking their report without investigating the facts 
 in the case, anti-pedobaptists have claimed them as 
 the propagators of their faith, and have claimed for 
 them an antiquity almost apostolic, while they are 
 their legitimate descendants. It was to disabuse his 
 countrymen and kindred that Mr. Perrin wrote his 
 history, gathering from their creeds, and other 
 writings, their real sentiments. Mr. Perrin says : 
 " The fourth calumny was touching baptism, which, 
 it is said, they [Waldenses] denied to little infants, 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 341 
 
 but from this imputation they quit themselves as 
 followeth : The time and place of those that are to 
 be baptized is not ordained, but the charity and ed- 
 ification of the Church and congregation must serve 
 for a rule therein, etc. ; and, therefore, they to whom 
 the children were nearest allied, brought their 
 infants to be baptized, as their parents, or any other 
 whom &od hath made charitable in that kind." 
 (Book I, Chap. IV, p. 15.) 
 
 Again: "King Louis XII, having been informed 
 by the enemies of the Waldenses, dwelling in Prov- 
 ince, of many grievous crimes which were imposed 
 [charged] upon them, sent to make inquisition in 
 those places, the Lord Adam Fume, Maister of Be- 
 quests, and a doctor of Sorborn, called Parne, who 
 was his confessor. They visited all the parishes and 
 temples, and found neither images nor so much as 
 the least show of any ornaments belonging to their 
 masses and ceremonies of the Church of Borne, 
 much less any such crimes as were imposed 
 [charged] upon them; but, rather, that they kept 
 their Sabbaths duly, causing their children to be 
 baptized according to the order of the primitive 
 Church* teaching them the articles of the Chris- 
 tian faith and the commandments of God." (Per- 
 rin, Book I, Chap; VI, pp. 30, 31.) 
 
 °Mr. Jones, an anti-pedobaptist historian of note, quotes the 
 language of Perrin in the following way, leaving out children en- 
 tirely: "On the contrary, they kept the Sabbath clay, observed the 
 ordinance of laptism according to the primitive Church," etc. (His- 
 tory, p. 352.) 
 
342 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 Again, lie says: " Touching the matter of the 
 sacraments, it hath been concluded by the holy 
 Scriptures that we have two sacramental signs, the 
 which Christ Jesus hath left unto us; the one is 
 baptism, the other is the eucharist, which we re- 
 ceive to show what our perseverance in the faith is, 
 as we have promised when we were baptized, being 
 little infants; as also in remembrance of that 
 great benefit, which Jesus Christ hath done unto 
 us, when he died for our redemption, washing us 
 with his most precious blood. " (Confession of 
 Faith, Art. XVII; Perrin, Book II, Chap. IY, pp. 
 GO, 61.) 
 
 He continues: "Among others there appeared a 
 poor, simple, laboring man, whom the president 
 commanded to cause his children to be rebaptized, 
 which had lately been baptized by the minister of 
 St. John, near Angrongue. This poor man re- 
 quested so much respite as that he might pray unto 
 God before he answered him, which being granted 
 with some laughter, he fell down upon his knees in 
 the presence of all that were there; and his prayer 
 being ended, he said to the president that he would 
 cause his child to be rebaptized, upon condition that 
 the same president would discharge him by a bill 
 signed with his own hand, of the sin which he 
 should commit in causing it to be rebaptized, and 
 bear one day before God the punishment and con- 
 demnation which should befall him, taking this 
 iniquity upon him and his; which the president 
 understanding, he commanded him out of his 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 343 
 
 presence, not pressing him any further." (Perrin, 
 Book II, p. 64.) 
 
 Doctrines of the Waldenses and ATbigenses y Book 
 I, Chapter VI, p. 43 : "Now this baptism is visible 
 and materiall, which maketh the partie neither good 
 nor evill, as it appeareth in the Scripture by Simon 
 Magus and Saint Paul. And whereas baptisme is 
 administered in a full congregation of the faithfull, 
 it is to the end that hee that is received into the 
 Church shall be reputed and held of all for a Chris- 
 tian brother, and that all the congregation might 
 pray for him that he may be a Christian. And for 
 this cause it is that we present our children in bap- 
 tism, which they ought to doe to whom the chil- 
 dren are nearest, as their parents, and they to whom 
 God had given this charitie. 
 
 " The things that are not necessary in the admin- 
 istration of baptisme, are the exorcisms, breathings, 
 the sign of the cross upon the forehead and breast 
 of the infant, the salt put into his mouth, spittle 
 into his ears and nostrills, the anoynting of the 
 breast," etc. (Book III, Chap. IV, p. 99.) 
 
 We have now a connected chain of testimony, 
 extending from the apostles down to the twelfth 
 century, showing that it was the universal practice 
 of the Catholic Church, as well as of all the sects 
 which were, from time to time, broken off from her 
 communion to admit infant children into the Chris- 
 tian Church by baptizing them. This fact is fur- 
 ther established by the following statements by Dr. 
 Wall: 
 
334 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 of Christians are themselves only under the guilt 
 of the sins if they do not receive baptism, and that 
 the wickedness is not imputed to those also who 
 would not give it them, especially at that time, 
 when they that were to receive it could make no 
 opposition against the receiving of it/' etc. (Epis. 
 ad Latam.— Wall, Yol. I, p. 240.) 
 
 His meaning evidently is, that if children were 
 not baptized their parents were guilty in conse- 
 quence of the neglect. 
 
 12. Councils of the Church. While we yield to 
 Church councils no authority to institute, or abol- 
 ish, or change Church ordinances, we may with 
 safety look to them for testimony touching the prac- 
 tices of the Church in the particular period which 
 they represent. With this view, we refer to a 
 council held at Carthage A. D. 397, where the fol- 
 lowing was adopted as its forty-eighth canon : 
 
 "In reference to the Donatists, it is resolved that 
 we do ask the advice of our brethren and fellow- 
 bishops, Ciricius and Simplicianus, concerning those 
 only who are in infancy baptized among them, 
 whether in that which they have not done with 
 their own judgment, the error of their parents shall 
 hinder them, that when they, by a wholesome pur- 
 pose, shall be converted to the Church of God, they 
 may not be promoted to be ministers of the holy 
 altar/' 
 
 Four years after the above council, another was 
 held at Carthage, when the following address, which 
 clearly indicates to what conclusion they had arrived 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 335 
 
 on the above subject; was delivered by Aurelius ; 
 Bishop of that city : 
 
 " You remember that in a former council; it was 
 resolved that they who were ; in their infancy; before 
 they were able to understand the mischief of that 
 error ; baptized among the DonatistS; and when 
 they came to age of understanding; acknowledged 
 the truth; etc.; they were received by us. Ail will 
 grant that such may; undoubtedly; be promoted to 
 Church offices; especially in times of so great need." 
 
 At the fifth council; held in Carthage about A. D. 
 400; the following was adopted as their sixth canon : 
 
 "It is resolved; concerning infants of whose hav- 
 ing been baptized there are no positive witnesses 
 that can give certain evidence; and they themselves 
 are not capable of giving any account of that sacra- 
 ment having been administered to theni; by reason 
 of their age ; that such be ; without any scruple; 
 baptized;" etc. 
 
 The only question was in reference to whether an 
 individual that could give no positive evidence of 
 being baptized in infancy, should; in adult years ; 
 be baptized? The answer was in the affirmative, 
 
 13. PelagiuS; the great opponent of original sir); 
 and consequently of infant depravity; the author of 
 the doctrine called Pelagianism, who lived and 
 wrote in the forepart of the fourth century; in his 
 famous letter to Innocent; Bishop of Borne; says: 
 
 "Men do slander me as if I denied the sacra- 
 ment of baptism to infants." Again ; he says: 
 "That he never heard even an impious heretic who 
 
346 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 sires to know what have been the operations of the 
 unhallowed alliance of Church and state, and of 
 infant membership, the main pillar of it, had better 
 make himself master of Italian, Spanish, and Portu- 
 guese history; but to ascertain its operations at home 
 we have documentary evidence enough to show that 
 it tends rather to the carnalizing and secularizing: 
 
 o O 
 
 than to the purification or elevation of the Church's 
 character. . . . How many baptized infidels are 
 there in the bounds of all the pedobaptist commu- 
 nities? Of the nominal members of the Christian 
 profession, perhaps one half are the veriest sinners 
 in Christendom. And does not pedobaptism claim 
 its own children initiated and dedicated by this 
 rite? Does she not claim them, I say, as members 
 of her Churches 1" (Debate between Campbell and 
 Rice, p.' 305.) 
 
 We will try to analyze these statements of Mr. 
 Campbell, and show their irrelevance to the subject 
 now under discussion. 
 
 I. He refers to the history of the Roman Catho- 
 lic Church, especially in u Italy, Spain, and Portu- 
 gal," to show the effect infant baptism, or as he is 
 pleased to term it, " infant rantism," has upon the 
 Church of Christ. 
 
 The deep and wide-spread depravity of the 
 Church of Rome, especially in those countries men- 
 tioned, is fully admitted; but would it not be as ap- 
 propriate to attribute all the immorality of the 
 Romish Church to her erroneous views of the holy 
 sacrament, or of the way sins were remitted, or to 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 347 
 
 any other error in faith or practice, as to infant 
 baptism? We confess her views of the nature of 
 infant baptism at a very early period became erro- 
 neous, which contributed to favor erroneous practi- 
 ces, and thus to a general degeneracy of morals in 
 the Church; but is it right to attribute all the 
 wickedness of the Roman Church to this one ordi- 
 nance, and that, too, without apprising the reader 
 that the views of most Protestant denominations of 
 Christians differ as widely from the Roman Church 
 on this subject as he does himself? Nor are we 
 disposed to adopt or advocate the peculiar doctrines 
 or practices of any particular Protestant denomina- 
 tion, not even our own; for it is the doctrine incul- 
 cated, and the practices enjoined in the Holy Bible, 
 that we would enforce on this s.ubject. We have 
 not in these pages, and never shall while we have 
 our senses, advocated the practices of the Romish 
 Church, and of several prominent Protestant 
 Churches, of retaining in their communion per- 
 sons of immoral habits because they were baptized 
 in infancy. If proper Church discipline is main- 
 tained, the Church will be pure whether infants 
 afe baptized or not; and if it is not maintained, 
 the Church will degenerate with or without infant 
 baptism. The purity of the Church depends upon 
 her evangelical faith and holy spiritual attainments 
 enjoined and maintained by a thorough discipline, 
 and not upon the baptism of infants or the want of 
 it. And we are, furthermore, of the opinion that 
 if a strict and impartial investigation was made, 
 
348 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 facts would show that among Protestant denomina- 
 tions pedobaptists are as pious, zealous, and moral, 
 as their opponents, and yet all of them are suscep- 
 tible of great improvement. The same argument, 
 in all its bearings, might have been brought against 
 the " Church in the wilderness," who also prac- 
 ticed, from the days of Abraham, the induction of 
 infants into the Church, and who also became at 
 times very corrupt; but was their degeneracy at 
 any time, by any of the holy prophets, or by Christ 
 himself, or by any of his apostles, charged upon 
 this one practice ? • No, never ! They were com- 
 plained of frequently, and truly, for not having car- 
 ried out the true spiritual import of the ordinance 
 of initiation. 
 
 1. They were required to " command their chil- 
 dren," and their " households" after them, to "keep 
 the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment;" 
 and it was upon the fulfillment of these conditions 
 that the Lord was to " bring upon Abraham that 
 which he had spoken of him" concerning his seed. 
 u And these words which I command thee this day, 
 shall be in thy heart : and thou shalt teach them 
 diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them 
 when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou 
 walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and 
 when thou risest up." Deut. vi, 6, 7. The most 
 "diligent" efforts were to be made to educate and 
 train all their consecrated children in the knowledge 
 of God's truth. They were also required to re- 
 strain their children from vice. 1 Sam. iii, 13, 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 349 
 
 And this legislation being made by the only power 
 in the Church authorized to legislate, and made, 
 too, under the proper constitution of the Church, 
 with a knowledge of its provisions, and evidently to 
 secure their accomplishment, are, unless repealed, 
 still binding upon all who claim membership under 
 the Abrahamic covenant in the Church of God; 
 and instead of repealing these binding require- 
 ments, the prophet Isaiah, looking directly to the 
 new dispensation, said, "All thy children shall be 
 taught of the Lord," or taught the knowledge of 
 the Lord. JSTow, we have Divine authority for say- 
 ing that God's great antidote for youthful depravity 
 consists in the following particulars : 
 
 (1.) Consecration to him in early infancy. 
 
 (2.) Diligent instruction in Divine truth. 
 
 (3.) Parental restraint from vice. 
 
 And upon the fulfillment of these duties God has 
 promised, in a very special and important sense, to 
 " be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee ;" 
 and he has also declared that children thus " trained 
 up in the way which they should go, when they are 
 old they will not depart from it." Now, all this 
 was contemplated in the Abrahamic covenant, was 
 implied in circumcision, and is now implied in in- 
 fant baptism; but the Jews failed in a great degree 
 to accomplish in behalf of their children what they 
 had, from time to time, obligated themselves to do; 
 and hence the depravity of many of their children. 
 The same is true of the Roman Catholic Church, 
 and of other Christian Churches, or of individual 
 
350 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 families in them. The wrong, therefore, consists 
 not in baptizing infants, but in failing to educate 
 and govern them. 
 
 2. They were required to cut off from the congre- 
 gation of Israel all who became wicked. "But the 
 soul that doeth aught presumptuously, whether he he 
 born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth 
 the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from among 
 his people. Because he hath despised the word of 
 the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that 
 soul shall be utterly cut off; his iniquity shall be 
 upon him." Numbers xv, 30, 31. 
 
 If children who have been inducted into the 
 Church in their infancy prove recreant to religion, 
 and to morals in riper years, they should be expelled 
 as other apostates are. No circumstance should 
 prevent the execution of the above rule. In this 
 the Jewish people utterly failed ; and so have the 
 Romish Church; and Protestant Churches are some 
 of them entirely too lax in this particular. It was, 
 therefore, not for baptizing her infant children, at a 
 time in which they were fit for a connection with 
 the Church, but for retaining them in the Church 
 when they were entirely unfit for that relation, that 
 these Churches are severally to blame. 
 
 II. Mr. Campbell asserts that " infant member- 
 ship is the main pillar of the unhallowed alliance 
 between Church and state." It is true that several 
 Churches practicing the baptism of infants have 
 also been allied to the state; and it is also true that 
 various Churches practicing infant baptism have 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 351 
 
 never formed any such alliance, and are as little in- 
 clined to form such an alliance as their modest op- 
 ponents are. We are, therefore, utterly unable to 
 see the least evidence to support the above asser- 
 tion, and are inclined to pronounce it false, and to 
 attribute it, like many other things from the same 
 source, to the prejudice of one hard up for both 
 evidence and argument. Do you say that infant 
 membership has a tendency to fill the Church with 
 unconverted men, and these will aspire to places of 
 honor and profit in the government, and will use 
 the influence of the Church for that especial pur- 
 pose, till the Church will become allied to the state ? 
 We answer, that the best things G-od has ever given 
 to man have been, and may again be abused, and 
 real reformers will seek to bring back the Church 
 to the proper use of the means of grace as divinely 
 appointed, and not attempt their destruction on ac- 
 count of the abuse they have suffered. 
 
 Martin Luther, for instance, found the holy sacra- 
 ment of the Lord's supper so perverted as to be 
 rendered an occasion of great mischief to religion 
 and to the Church. He did not, however, foolishly 
 array himself against that Divinely-appointed insti- 
 tution, and seek its overthrow on that account; but 
 like a true friend to divine truth, he sought with 
 all his might, and with wonderful success, to strip 
 it of its Popish flummery which had been accumu- 
 lating for ages. Now, if Mr. Campbell and his 
 friends were seeking to remove from infant Church 
 membership the many abuses it has suffered, and is 
 
352 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 now suffering, we would unite with him with all our 
 might and soul; but to attempt to annihilate one 
 of the most ancient, and when practiced according 
 to its true Scriptural import, one of the divinely- 
 appointed means of grace, we can but demur at so 
 shocking a sacrilege. But instead of infant Church 
 membership filling the Church with unconverted 
 men, as is- alleged, if reduced to its original Scrip- 
 tural design, it would have directly the opposite 
 effect. Could Christian parents be brought to feel 
 the amount and character of the obligations they 
 assume in the baptism of their children, and could 
 they be induced faithfully and fully to discharge 
 these solemn duties, what a change would we see in 
 a few years in the moral and religious aspects of 
 Christendom ! What the Church needs is not 
 tirades of invectives, or sneers, or caricatures of the 
 ordinance, nor the magnifying of the evils growing 
 out of erroneous views of the character of the in- 
 stitution of infant baptism; but she needs light to 
 make her duty plain, and pious zeal for God and for 
 souls to produce necessary action, and with the 
 blessing of high Heaven upon her efforts, Isaiah's 
 prediction will soon receive its fulfillment: "And 
 thy seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and 
 their offspring among the people : all that see them 
 shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed 
 which the Lord hath blessed." Isaiah Ixi, 9. 
 
 III. Mr. Campbell says " that it tends rather to 
 the carnalizing and secularizing than to the purifi- 
 cation or elevation of the Church's character/' 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 353 
 
 What, consecrating a little infant to God, and 
 bringing it within the embrace of the covenant of 
 promise, teaching it diligently the truth of God, and 
 restraining it from evil, have a H tendency rather to 
 the carnalizing and secularizing" of the Church's 
 character ! How could a statement be made farther 
 from truth ? How different from this was the opin- 
 ion of the pious Hannah of sacred memory, whose 
 son Samuel was literally " given unto the Lord all 
 the days of his life/' commencing with his birth, 
 placing him in the temple under the instruction of 
 Eli, that he might be thoroughly taught and trained 
 to the service of God ! Nor was she disappointed 
 in finding that all this " tended rather to the secu- 
 larizing and carnalizing" of her son; for as " Sam- 
 uel grew the Lord was with him ■ i till " Samuel was 
 established to be a prophet of the Lord." 
 
 In proof of his statement, Mr. Campbell adds, 
 "How many baptized infidels are there in the 
 bounds of all pedobaptist communities? Of the 
 nominal members of the Christian profession, per- 
 haps one half are the veriest sinners in Christen- 
 dom." And is it not equally true that there are 
 "many baptized infidels in the bounds of" anti- 
 pedobaptist communities ? and as true of them, too, 
 as of pedobaptist Churches, that "of the nominal 
 members of the Christian profession, perhaps one 
 half are the veriest sinners in Christendom ?" And 
 what in their case shall we assign as the reason of 
 this? Shall we attribute it to their practice of 
 baptizing only by immersion? Smile not at the 
 23 
 
354 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 prejudice that would make such an intimation; for 
 it contains as much truth, and furnishes a conclu- 
 sion as logically drawn from the premises, as does 
 the assertion of Mr. Campbell, above quoted. 
 
 The truth requires us to admit that apostasies do, 
 and will occur, from any or all Christian Churches, 
 no matter how perfect or apostolic the ordinances 
 may be administered, without any particular blame 
 being attached to the Church. We also are com- 
 pelled, with great regret, to admit that many who 
 are baptized in infancy are lost to the Church and 
 to heaven forever, in consequence of the Church 
 and of Christian parents neglecting to perform the 
 duties they have so solemnly promised in baptism 
 to perform to their children. And we again de- 
 clare, that any well-directed effort to arouse the 
 Christian Church to a proper sense and energetic 
 practice of her duty in this matter, would receive 
 our most hearty approval and zealous co-operation. 
 But there is another aspect to this whole subject 
 that we must not lose sight of; one, too, on which 
 our opponents are not accustomed to look. 
 
 1. How many millions of human beings are saved 
 in heaven, and are now on their way thither, who 
 will forever attribute their salvation to the intelli- 
 gent and pious manner in which their godly parents 
 carried out the vows, and performed the solemn ob- 
 ligation, assumed by them in the baptism of their 
 children in infancy ? This can only be fully seen 
 at the judgment day. But why is it that our oppo- 
 nents never look upon this bright side of the 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 855 
 
 picture? and, consequently, never feel disposed to 
 give any credit to infant baptism, as the agent of 
 good to mankind? Every subject, it is said, has 
 two sides, and good men will defer judgment till 
 they have examined both, and will be as free to 
 give credit in the one case as to attach blame in the 
 other. Now, while it is true that there is a great 
 amount of ignorance, ancl neglect of duty, and con- 
 sequent apostasy and irreligion, and even infidelity 
 in Christian communities who practice infant bap- 
 tism, it is equally true that there is a great deal 
 of enlightened zeal and pious effort to be found, 
 together with glorious success, which may be traced 
 directly and indirectly to infant baptism in pedo- 
 baptist Churches. And the true way is, to hold 
 fast to the good and correct the evil as speedily 
 as possible. This, with the Divine blessing, we 
 will do. 
 
 2. But how much ignorance pervades all anti- 
 pedobaptist Churches in relation to what is implied 
 in infant baptism, generally supposing that it is 
 merely a human superstitious practice ; and often, 
 without a blush at their own ignorance, inquire, 
 "What good will it do to sprinkle a little water 
 upon the face of an infant V } And is not this igno- 
 rance, to a great extent, occasioned by the manner 
 in which their ministers preach and write on this 
 subject? Instead of exciting the minds of parents 
 to a careful investigation of the subject, calculated 
 to unfold and impress duty, they seek to turn it into 
 ridicule, and make it the subject of violent preju- 
 
856 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 dice. And how much of the indifference mani- 
 fested by anti-pedobaptist Churches toward the 
 religious instruction and restraining government of 
 their children, can be traced to this conduct on the 
 part of their spiritual guides, the judgment day 
 alone can determine. If infant baptism is a Bible 
 institution, what a fearful account will those minis- 
 ters of the Gospel have to. render in the final judg- 
 ment, who have devoted their eminent talents, 
 learning, and influence, to bring it into disrepute 
 with their people ! We verily believe that millions 
 of little children are now suffering in morals and in 
 their religious training, and many of them will suf- 
 fer eternally in consequence of the neglect on the 
 part of anti-pedobaptist ministers to enlighten their 
 people, and to arouse them to duty in this respect. 
 By this we do not mean to say that they are indif- 
 ferent to the spiritual training of their children. 
 No, it is far otherwise. We mean, however, to say, 
 that they are not doing all they should do, and, 
 especially, are neglecting and holding in ridicule 
 one of the most useful and important means of 
 grace and salvation for the young high Keaven has 
 ever instituted, simply because it seems to conflict 
 with their favorite dogma of u immersion the only 
 mode of Christian baptism." 
 
 IV. Mr. Campbell continues: "And does not 
 pedobaptism claim its own children, initiated and 
 dedicated by this rite? does she not claim them, 
 I say, as members of her Churches?" Most cer- 
 tainly they do, so long as they continue in a justi- 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 357 
 
 fied relation to God, as they were when baptized. 
 Christ claimed them as fit for his kingdom, and why 
 should we not claim them for our Churches ? After 
 they have forfeited their justification, they are no 
 longer to be retained more than adult apostates. St. 
 Paul says, " Now we command you, brethren, in the 
 name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw 
 from every brother that walketh disorderly/' 2 
 Thess. iii, 6. But why does Mr. Campbell make this 
 taunting inquiry? How often we hear it proclaimed 
 from the pulpit and the press, that "pedobaptists 
 will not commune with their own baptized mem- 
 bers V 9 One minute they complain of those pedo- 
 baptist communities or Churches who, like the Bo- 
 roan Catholics, retain their baptized children, and 
 commune with them, after they have become the 
 "veriest sinners in all the land/' and attribute all 
 the evil to their infant baptism, and the next min- 
 ute they complain of those other pedobaptist 
 Churches who do not retain their baptized children 
 nor commune with them after they have become 
 unfit for communion and fellowship; turning this 
 fact, too, to the discredit of infant baptism: thus 
 showing by their conduct that they are actuated by 
 a blind and determined prejudice toward an insti- 
 tution Divinely appointed, of ancient date, and of 
 numberless blessings to the young. Mr. Campbell 
 first refers us to Italy, Spain, and Portugal, to show 
 the evil infant Church membership has produced in 
 the Church ; and then, coming to our own country, 
 where an entirely-different practice on this subject 
 
358 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 is known to prevail, he tauntingly inquires, "And 
 does not pedobaptism claim its own children, initi- 
 ated and dedicated by this rite J" He would, no 
 doubt, rejoice to see us following the example of 
 those countries and Churches of which he renders 
 such hideous complaints, that the same might be 
 applicable to us. 
 
 Finally, it has not been our purpose in these 
 pages to answer every caviling objection that is 
 brought against infant Church membership, but to 
 show its Scriptural authority, and to awaken atten- 
 tion to the privileges it confers, and the solemn 
 duties it enjoins; believing that the best argument 
 against these objectors, is a practical demonstration 
 of its utility by reducing to practice the original 
 design of its great and glorious founder. 
 
 "We therefore recommend the following important 
 facts to the consideration of all believing parents, 
 which we think have been fully developed in this 
 work. 
 
 1. It is your sacred and solemn duty to place your 
 infant offspring under the shadowing wings of the 
 everlasting covenant; induct them visibly into the 
 Church of Jesus Christ, and consecrate them to the 
 service and protection of the Almighty God of 
 Abraham, that he may be a God unto them as he 
 has promised to be. 
 
 2. It is no less your duty to educate them relig- 
 iously for God, exercising over them in their minor- 
 ity the most vigilant watch-care, restraining them 
 from all that is forbidden in the word of God ; in 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 359 
 
 short, " train them up in the way in which they 
 should go." We entreat you, as you regard the 
 most solemn vow ever taken upon you before God, 
 to do this. As you desire the salvation of those 
 you love as your own life, fail not in this particular 
 duty. As you desire your own acquittal before the 
 tribunal of your final Judge, be not there found de- 
 ficient in this duty. Better leave body and mind 
 both unprovided for, than be deficient in the train- 
 ing of the heart in the knowledge and love of 
 divine truth. 
 
 3. Such of them as manifest a due regard for 
 their duty to God, and the salvation of their souls, 
 should be kept within the pale of the Church, en- 
 joying every means of grace and salvation, so be- 
 nevolently furnished in the Gospel. By no means 
 treat with lightness their early pretensions to piety. 
 These are the lambs of the flock, which are entitled 
 to the most tender and constant watch-care both of 
 the Church and of the pastor. These are the 
 u lambs " which Christ especially commanded Peter 
 to "feed." 
 
 4. Those of them that evince a contrary dispo- 
 sition, become reckless in duty and in morals, 
 should, in due time, after suitable labor has been 
 bestowed, be "cut off" from Church privileges, as 
 was commanded to Israel, the Church withdraiciiig 
 fellowship, as St. Paul directs. The failure to do 
 this is what has rendered infant baptism so odious 
 in the eyes of so many professed Christians. Infant 
 Church membership, thus reduced to its original 
 
360 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 design, will soon redeem itself, with the blessing of 
 God, from all the aspersions cast upon it by its en- 
 emies. 
 
 SECTION XI. 
 
 ADDRESS TO CHRISTIAN PARENTS IN BEHALF OF THEIR CHILDREN. 
 
 Brethren beloved, in concluding the subject 
 which has so long and so earnestly engrossed our 
 attention, we beseech you to hearken briefly to the 
 word of exhortation. If we have succeeded in con- 
 vincing you that it is your duty to have your chil- 
 dren baptized, you can not have failed to see the 
 great responsibilities which you as parents must 
 assume in the performance of this duty. In the 
 faithful discharge of the duties subsequently in- 
 volved, is to be found much of the benefits of 
 the institution of infant baptism. And negligent 
 as many Christians are in relation to the baptism 
 of their children, it is to be lamented that a vastly- 
 greater number are more criminally negligent in 
 the performance of these subsequently-binding ob- 
 ligations. Here, it is to be feared, are the most 
 failures. 
 
 I. Parents are apt to be too much engrossed in 
 providing for the temporal wants and mental devel- 
 opments of their children, to be able to give that 
 attention to their spiritual training that the case 
 imperiously demands. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 361 
 
 We would not knowingly undervalue or teach you 
 to be indifferent to either of the above important 
 interests. Convenient food and comfortable raiment 
 they must have. Physical and mental development 
 can not, without manifest injury, be dispensed with. 
 But no one of these, nor all of them put together, 
 bear any comparison to the proper religious culture 
 of the mind and heart; consequently, if either 
 must be neglected, or left but imperfectly accom- 
 plished, let the failure fall any where, or even every- 
 where, except upon the last-mentioned duty. We 
 heartily commend to all concerned the following 
 from the pen of the lamented Dr. Olin : 
 
 "The duty of bestowing careful, timely culture 
 upon infancy and childhood, is clearly indicated by 
 their exceeding delicacy and susceptibility. Phys- 
 ical developments will, indeed, proceed very well 
 with only the slightest attention on the part of the 
 parent, or with none at all. The nursery, the play- 
 ground, the field, and the workshop, invite the 
 bodily organs into due action, and impart vigor, 
 skill, and activity. The intellect, too, however neg- 
 lected by the teacher, imbibes knowledge from a 
 thousand sources. Each of the senses becomes an 
 inlet for valuable ideas. Business, social converse, 
 human example, even inanimate nature, the sky, 
 the air, and the earth, the elements in all their 
 changes and activities, the vegetable kingdom; in 
 a word, the visible world, and all that is, or is trans- 
 acted in it, become sources of instruction, which 
 freely tender their lessons to the opening mind in 
 
362 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 contact with them, and force their teachings upon 
 it, in its most passive states, and even in spite of 
 indifference or reluctance. From all this it occurs, 
 that every human being who grows up in a civilized 
 community attains a measure of intelligence suffi- 
 cient for the common purposes of life — of the intel- 
 ligence that guides the race in the satisfaction of 
 its most pressing wants, and which must, on that 
 account, rank high in comparison with that class of 
 acquisition and accomplishments which we are wont 
 to dignify with the name of education. Divine 
 Providence has thus mercifully insured to the hu- 
 man being such degrees of physical and mental de- 
 velopment as are indispensable in the performance 
 of those functions which pertain to self-preserva- 
 tion, and on which society is dependent for its be- 
 ing and material prosperity. For the higher culture, 
 which gives the mind enlargement, and elevation, 
 and refinement, and opens before it a career of 
 worthy occupations and enjoyments, years of patient 
 labor and assiduous teaching are requisite ; and par- 
 ents are, unquestionably, bound by all the motives 
 which duty and affection impose, to give to their 
 offspring the best education which their providen- 
 tial positions and circumstances will allow. With- 
 out stopping to enforce, by argument or inculcation, 
 one of the plainest and least controverted of duties, 
 we proceed to add, that the highest of the parent's 
 obligations finds its sphere in the moral and relig- 
 ious training of his offspring. The superior import- 
 ance of this department of education is sufficiently 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 363 
 
 apparent, from the consideration already suggested, 
 that while both the mind and the body, left to 
 themselves, and wholly neglected by parent and 
 teacher, spontaneously acquire, from their own ac- 
 tivity, and from the business and conflicts of the 
 world, the discipline, as well as the knowledge and 
 skill, most valuable in the pursuits of after life, 
 the moral susceptibilities, if neglected, are always 
 perverted and corrupted. The most careful and un- 
 remitted culture is requisite to preserve them from 
 the most irreclaimable deterioration. They come 
 to no good by any spontaneous, unguided efforts or 
 essays of their own ; they will not remain in a state 
 of embryo or torpor, till genial influences and a 
 plastic hand woo and guide them into kindly mani- 
 festations. To let the child alone, is to insure both 
 precocity and proficiency in evil. It affords demon- 
 strative evidence of the constitutional depravity of 
 man, as well as of its universality, that early child- 
 hood ever betrays a strong proclivity to wrong; that 
 it never fails of growing up in sin, except under de- 
 cided counteracting influences." (Methodist Quar- 
 terly Review, Vol. I, fourth series, April No., pp. 
 304,305.) 
 
 If the Christian Church could generally view this 
 subject in its true light, as described by the sainted 
 Olin, and could be induced to act accordingly, to 
 place the moral and religious training of their chil- 
 dren above and in advance of every other interest, 
 what a moral change a few years would bring over 
 the Christian part of the world ! And yet all this 
 
364 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 was contemplated and enjoined by the great Head 
 of the Church from the beginning, and made a part 
 of the constitution of the Church, and is embraced 
 in Christian baptism. Christian parent, how will 
 the excuse you now render, that you have not time 
 to attend to the religious culture of your children, 
 appear in your final account ? — time to attend to all 
 the less important duties of providing for their 
 temporal wants, their physical developments, and 
 mental culture, but no time to devote to an interest 
 infinitely more important, the turning of the open- 
 ing desire and expanding thought toward heaven, 
 for the purpose of securing there an unfading crown 
 of glory ! As you fear God, and value your soul, 
 make no excuse now that will be unavailing then. 
 Pray over this subject, and meditate upon it, till 
 your hearts become as full of feeling and of desire 
 in relation to it as they now are in reference to their 
 temporal well-being, and time in abundance will be 
 at your command. 
 
 II. Parents complain that they are not competent 
 to discharge the duties assumed by the baptism of 
 their children, and, consequently, refuse to assume 
 them. But the fact of incompetency has been dis- 
 covered quite too late. The responsibility already 
 exists. The fact that you have become a parent 
 brings with it the responsibility. And having vol- 
 untarily placed one's self in this condition, and then 
 to refuse to recognize, or to assume, or to try to dis- 
 charge, the duties implied in it, is adding sin to 
 sin, and will render their account doubly fearful. 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 365 
 
 How much, more of the spirit of the true Christian 
 it would display, cheerfully to assume these respon- 
 sibilities, and then try to the very best of their 
 ability to discharge the duties implied, continually 
 asking Divine aid to supply their lack both of wis- 
 dom and strength! Many persons refuse to take 
 upon themselves the profession of faith, in Christ, 
 and plead, in justification of this criminal neglect, 
 their inability to discharge the duties such a pro- 
 fession imposes, and point to others whose failure 
 has brought upon the cause much reproach, as an 
 extenuation of their own guilt. But all this is sol- 
 emn trifling with eternal things. Christ says truly, 
 "If a man love me he will keep my words/ 7 as 
 much those "words" which describe his duty to 
 his children as to Christ, to the Church as well as 
 to the world. His apostle, too, has said, "If any 
 of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth 
 to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall 
 be given him." 
 
 III. Parents are inclined to undervalue the im- 
 portance of religious instruction, especially in early 
 childhood. Christ said that "while men slept," an 
 " enemy sowed tares." Never did he utter a truth 
 more applicable than the above is to the case of 
 children. Parents sleep away the very best season 
 for religious culture. But Satan is up early. He 
 knows the advantage of prepossessing the heart; 
 hence his vigilance in exciting propensities to evil 
 in early childhood. The wise man says, "In the 
 morning sow thy seed j w referring, evidently, to early 
 
366 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 childhood, before Satan with his tares gains the 
 prepossession of his heart, and surrounds it with 
 evil influences, and before the winds of passion rise 
 to scatter the good seed. A moment's reflection 
 will convince any person that the first impressions 
 made upon the mind of a child, are the most abid- 
 ing. There is not a spot upon the green earth the 
 geography of which a person will remember so well 
 as the place where they first opened their little de- 
 lighted eyes upon the beauties of nature. Every 
 rock, and rill, and brook, and vale, and tree, and 
 shrub, and blooming flower, are fresh in the man's 
 memory till advanced old age, which clustered 
 around and constituted the scenery of the first 
 family homestead. The anecdotes and tales we first 
 learned, the acquaintances and friendships we first 
 formed, the books we first read and learned, have 
 outlived in our heart's memory a thousand later ones 
 of more importance to us. And the writer of this 
 knows well a minister of the Gospel of many years' 
 standing, who, though he has forgotten many a val- 
 uable sermon which cost him days of hard labor, 
 retains distinctly and vividly in his heart's memory 
 the first time he heard from the lips of a pious 
 mother that there was such a place as heaven. Nor 
 will the cares of this life, nor the duration of the 
 next, erase from that memory the impressions then 
 formed, or the desire to live in heaven then created. 
 Call it child's play if you choose, eternity will reveal 
 the stubborn fact that by far the greatest number 
 that reach heaven heard of that place, and formed 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 367 
 
 favorable purposes in relation to it, as the mind was 
 just emerging from a state of infancy. On this 
 point Dr. Olin again remarks : 
 
 "This susceptibility to both moral and demoral- 
 izing influences, exists to an extent, and at an age, 
 little suspected by inattentive observers. We give 
 no countenance to the extravagant speculations of 
 those who teach us that the character of the man, 
 both moral and mental, is fixed in infancy, even an- 
 terior to the clear dawn of reason; but we think it 
 demonstrable that the bias which shapes our earthly 
 and eternal destinies is usually received in early 
 childhood. This is the obvious teaching of the 
 holy Scriptures; and all careful observation goes to 
 confirm it. The mind at that early period is ex- 
 quisitely sensible to moral impressions. The deli- 
 cate surfaces on which the daguerreotype so exactly 
 portrays the human countenance, with no pencil or 
 colors but reflected sunbeams, are not half so im- 
 pressible as the unsophisticated spirit of childhood. 
 The mind at that tender age is not only open to 
 all influences, good and bad, but it spontaneously 
 invites them to write upon its expanding capacities 
 their own image and superscription. It longs for 
 impressions, as the parched cornfield for genial 
 showers. It spreads out its tender leaves to receive 
 them, as the green plant to the dews of heaven/' 
 (Methodist Quarterly Review, fourth series, Yol. I, 
 p. 305.) 
 
 IV. Some parents will say that we are imposing 
 too much upon them; we are ascribing too much to 
 
368 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 a feeble human agency. They are expecting God, 
 in his own time, in answer to prayer, to convict their 
 children of sin, convert them to himself, and bring 
 them to heaven. But are there not appointed means 
 to be used beside prayer? And are we not pre- 
 sumptuous in looking for the end without the use 
 of the means? "This objection fails to compre- 
 hend our meaning. We devoutly ascribe all effi- 
 ciency to God, and only claim for human agency 
 such power as the divine grace imparts to it. Let 
 us seek the light of an analogy. Children do ap- 
 parently, and in so far as we can perceive, derive 
 life and being from their parents alone; and yet we 
 know that God claims life and being as his special 
 gifts and peculiar prerogatives. No intelligent 
 Christian is ever puzzled or scandalized by such dif- 
 ficulties. They find their solution in this truism: 
 Man is the acting, God the efficient cause. So of 
 the case under consideration. The right training 
 and godly nurture which insure piety in our chil- 
 dren are the parents' duty and work; but they only 
 produce this spiritual result because God wills it 
 and works it in this particular way." (Methodist 
 Quarterly Review, fourth series, Vol. I, p. 311.) 
 
 The same author again says: "It is, beyond all 
 question, the will of Christ that the children of 
 Christian parents should themselves become Chris- 
 tians. It is remarkable that all the promises of God 
 to his people are formally and avowedly extended to 
 their children as well as themselves. This was a 
 fundamental idea in his covenant with Abraham : 
 
RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 369 
 
 'I will establish my covenant between me and thee, 
 and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an 
 everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to 
 thy seed after thee/ . . . The same principle reap- 
 pears in the Mosaic dispensation; and so entire was 
 God's reliance upon the children to fill up the ranks 
 of the Jewish Church, that, while proselytes from 
 the heathen were not rejected, no provision was 
 made for replenishing it from any foreign source. 
 The prophetic promises guarantee the same high 
 privilege to the children of pious parents under the 
 Christian dispensation: 'The promise is unto you 
 and your children / 'I will pour out my Spirit upon 
 all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall 
 prophesy/ Indignant that any should pretend to 
 doubt or limit the plenitude of his grace toward 
 those who were yet unstained by transgression, 
 Christ rebuked the narrow faith of his disciples, 
 and bade them 'suffer little children to come unto 
 him/ because 'of such is the kingdom of heaven/ 
 Whoever might reject them, as incapable or un- 
 worthy of the Christian dignity, he whose own child- 
 hood i increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor 
 with God and man/ had resolved to perfect praise 
 'out of the mouths of babes and sucklings/ To 
 children the apostles, now better taught than before 
 in the mysteries of their Master's large compassion, 
 freely extended the rite of baptism, the sign and 
 the seal of the acceptance and sanctification to which 
 they conceded to them a recognized title, as part 
 and parcel of those believing ' households ' which 
 24 
 
370 INEANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 so early became the nucleus and model of the 
 Churches of the living God. The children of 
 Christian parents were thus openly and explicitly 
 recognized as members of the apostolic Church. . . . 
 To this end he intends the Christian family to be a 
 school of Christ — to live in a holy atmosphere, in 
 which the children shall be bathed, and baptized, 
 and nurtured as in a divine, genial element. He 
 would have them put on the Lord Jesus Christ with 
 the first garments of their childhood, and drink in 
 Christian sentiments from the mother's loving, 
 beaming eyes, as they hang upon the breast. He 
 intends them to learn religion, as they learn a thou- 
 sand other things, from the spirit and tone of the 
 family; from its vocal thanksgivings and songs of 
 praise; from its quiet, joyous Sabbaths; from the 
 penitent tear, the humble carriage, the tender ac- 
 cents, the reverent look and attitude of the father, 
 when, as a priest, he offers the morning and evening 
 sacrifice." (Methodist Quarterly Review, fourth 
 series, Vol. I, pp. 308, 309.) 
 
 Christian parent, cease that skeptical inquiry, 
 "What good will it do?" Remember, for your en- 
 couragement, that God hath said, "He that goeth 
 forth, and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall 
 doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his 
 sheaves with him." God grant to each reader of 
 this an abundant harvest ! 
 
 THE END. 
 
6«/