church, though not so ready to anathematize, entertains the same opinion. The reformed churches, and the different denominations of Protestant Pædobaptists, whether bearing the name of Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Independents, Congregationalists, or Wesleyans, while they generally disavow that doctrine, yet they hold opinions, which, when fairly carried out to their consequences, come little short of the same amount. They have seen in the doctrine of the ancients, and of Rome, that no one can be saved without their baptism,' too plain a demonstration of the 'little horn' of antichrist,*—the mystery of iniquity which began to work in the apostles' days,t-to avow that doctrine in the same terms. But let me ask my respected brethren in these communities, If baptism makes its subjects, as some of them say,‡ "children of God and inheritors of the kingdom of heaven;" or, as all of them, by their leading writers, have said, that it brings its subjects "into the church of Christ" or "into the covenant of grace," or "seals to them the benefits of that covenant," and which is "the covenant of redemption, embracing all that Jehovah can impart ;" whether this is not tantamount to the doctrine guarded by Rome's anathema? If baptism brings into, or seals the benefits of, the covenant of grace, it will bring to heaven; for God hath joined these two together. And if there be not another way of bringing into this 'covenant of grace and redemption' what must become of those who are not brought in, and who die in that situation? Thus pressed to consequences, I see no other conclusion to be come at from these premises, but that of Chrysostom, just cited, horrible as it sounds! Let my brethren who would recoil at the thought of that conclusion, examine rigidly and honestly whether the virtues they join to the rite of baptism afford not the just and fair ground of it. And if the conclusion be denied, let them deny the premises from which it is drawn ; but while they avow the premises, I must be allowed to insist upon the conclusion.

23. If no spiritual or saving benefit necessarily attends the ordinance of baptism, (which evidently is, and ever has been, conceived as the basis and reason of infant baptism, by the MAJORITY of those that have practised it,) why is the ordinance administered at all? and of what use is it in the church of Christ?

Answer. "God is his own interpreter." The ritual ordinances appointed of God in his church were never, under any dispensation, intended by him to carry salvation with them. For that purpose "neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision," as the apostle affirms; and the same may be said of baptism and the Lord's supper. Salvation proceeds from a source entirely distinct and separate from these ordinances. It may be fully enjoyed without them; and they may be administered, and repeated a thousand times over, without it. The penitent malefactor was saved without baptism: Simon Magus was baptized without part or lot in salvation.

1

* Daniel vii. 8-21

t 2 Thes. ii. 3—10, + See Authorities at pp. 54, 55.

What, then, you inquire, is the use of baptism? I reply, It is a solemn, sacred institution of Jesus, intended by him, as I have before observed, TO EXHIBIT AND TO TEACH the way of salvation. It saves in no way of itself; but it presents a figurative and an impressive representation of saving,—of that real saving, which is through the purifying merits of a crucified and risen Saviour. As such Christ instituted it; and as such it is the duty and privilege of his followers to observe it, till he come. Thus the apostle Peter, cited p. 49, when he says, Baptism saves; he immediately guards against error upon this subject,—it is not the putting away the filth of the flesh, or impurity, or sin of any kind, which can only be cleansed by the blood of Christ. But it saves as a "figure;" it symbolically presents "the fountain opened for sin and uncleanness," and to that fountain it directs the penitent to flee, and therein by faith "to wash away sin, calling on the name of the Lord." Acts xxii. 16. When this is realized, then baptism affords the answer of a good conscience, satisfied that Christ is obeyed, guilt purged away, and the soul saved through the blord of the Lamb. Pædobaptist divines affirm the same. Thus,

MR. DAVID DAVIDSON, on 1 Peter iii. 21. "Lest any should imagine spiritual deliverance secure by the external rite, in any other sense than figuratively, the apostle adds, that the baptism he chiefly meant was the cleansing of the conscience, which is by faith in Christ. The same figure and reality are repeatedly thus stated. See Fph. v. 26; Tit. iii. 5; Heb. ix. 14." Commentary on the New Test. p. 459.

24. Who is the first Christian writer that defended the baptism of infants?

Answer. The first that mentioned the practice at all was Tertullian, A. D. 204. It was named next by Origen, A. D. 230. But the first writer that defended the practice was CYPRIAN, A. D. 253. At this period the plan of admitting a profession by sponsors became so general, at least in Africa where it commenced, and the security the rite afforded of eternal life was deemed so important, that the practice of it became general. Hence Synods and Councils were held to sanction the practice, and to consider the time after birth when the ordinance may be properly administered. Thus, the very learned writer cited before

REGALTIUS. "Most men thinking this opinion of Tertullian unsafe, were of Cyprian's mind, that even new-born children ought to be made partakers of the laver of salvation; which was pitched upon in the decree of this Synod, AND SO THE DOUBT WAS TAKEN AWAY.”* Stennett's Answer to Russen, pp. 69-73, and in Mr. Wall's Hist. Vol. II. ch. 2.

In

* Regaltius here refers to a SYNOD, the decision of which took away any farther doubt as to the propriety or necessity of infant baptism. The reader should be informed that during the lives of the African Fathers, Cyprian and Augustine, several general meetings of the ministers of that district, which were called COUNCILS or SYNODS, were held at Carthage, and Milevis, to consult and decide on certain ubjects. At the first of these, held at Carthage, A. D. 253, sixty-six of those mi aisters, or bishops as they are called, being present, with Cyprian for their president, ne Fidus, a country bishop, submitted two questions for decision, the latter of which was "Whether an infant. before it was eight days old, might be baptized, it

APPENDIX, PART II.

ON THE SCRIPTURAL MODE OF BAPTISM.

IN my first section, I promised my reader to refer again to the MODE of Baptism, and expressed my hope to satisfy any candid inquirer on the subject; and this I conceive I shall do, not by the quantity of what I shall write on the subject, for I shall be very brief, but by stating arguments, which I consider irresistibly convincing and decisive. In this part, as in the former, I shall suppose my reader disposed to put inquiries involving all the leading points of the controversy.

1. Question. Are the most learned and competent writers agreed, that the sense you have given, at p. 13, of the words chosen of God to express this ordinance, (baptize and baptism,) is their ordinary and most proper sense?

Answer. More competent authority the learned world does not afford than the following:

:

WITSIUS. "It cannot be denied that the native signification of the words Burley and Burligaw, is to plunge, to dip." Econ. of the Cov. L. IV. c. xvi. § 13.

CALVIN. "The word baptize, signifies to immerse, and the rite of immersion was observed by the ancient church."*

ZANCHIUS. "The proper signification of baptize is to immerse, plunge under, to overwhelm in water."

ALSTEDIUS. "To baptize, signifies only to immerse; not to wash, except by consequence."

need required?" He urged his objections, from which the reader may form some idea of these African bishops, 1. "That an infant in the first days after its birth is unclean, so that any of us abhors to kiss it!" This kiss of peace was an African accompaniment of baptism. 2. He questioned "Whether so young an infant be a PERFECT HUMAN CREATURE!" The Council decided against him, as seen in Cyprian's Letter to Fidus, of which, at p. 67, is an extract.

In the councils over which Augustine presided, from A. D. 416 to A. D. 420, the bishops were disposed to go much farther than at any former period. They enacted their canons, and pronounced their anathemas, in the pure spirit of antichrist. Thus in the Milevitan council, fourteen or fifteen being present, as deputies from the whole, they decreed "Placuit ergo omnibus episcopis," &c. "It is therefore the pleasure of all the bishops, that whosoever denieth that infants newly born of their mothers are to be baptized... let him be accursed." And in the "Synodial Epistle of the Council of Carthage to Innocent" of Rome, the same imprecation occurs. "Quicunque negat parvolos per baptismum Christi a perditione liberari," &c. Whoever denies that infants are by Christian baptism delivered from perdition, and brought to eternal salvation, let him be anathema." In Mr. Wall's Hist. of Inf. Bapt. Vol. I. chap. xix. § 28. Robinson's Hist. of Bapt. chap. xxii. Mr. Gill's Argument from Apost. Trad. considered, p. 22. The authority of these canons being admitted at Rome, "the doubt of infant baptism" yielded co-extensively with that authority.

* See this author and those that follow cited at greater length and their works referred to in Booth's Padob. Exam. Vol. I. pp. 44 to 65. EIGHTY-TWO such autho rities are there adduced.

BEZA. "Christ commanded us to be baptized; by which word it certain immersion is signified."

VITRINGA. "The act of baptizing is the immersion of believers in water. This expresses the force of the word."

H. ALTINGIUS. "The word baptism,-properly signifies immer rion, improperly, by a metonomy of the end, washing."

SCAPULA. "To baptize, to dip or immerse, as we immerse any thing for the purpose of dying or cleansing in water."

MR. LEIGH. "The native and proper signification of it [baptize] is, to dip into water, or to plunge under water."

BOSSUET, bishop of Meaux. "To baptize signifies to plunge, as is granted by all the world."

To the above I might add many living authors :

MR. EWING, of Glasgow. "Baliw, in its primary and radical sense, 1 cover with water. It is used to denote, 1st. I plunge, or sink completely under water." Gr. Lexicon, sub voce.*

EDINBURGH REVIEWERS. "They tell me, (says Mr. Carson,) that it was unnecessary to bring forward any of the examples to prove that the word signifies to dip,—that I might have commenced with this as & FIXT POINT UNIVERSALLY ADMITTED." In Carson's Answer to

Edin. Presbyt. Review, p. 9. A. D. 1832.

2. As in one branch of the Christian church, the Greek language has been continued from the age of the apostles, and with them the words Bag and Broμa (baptize and baptism), remain unaltered, and in common use to this day, let me ask, How do they understand the words? and how administer the ordinance?

MR. R. ROBINSON. "The native Greeks must understand their own language better than foreigners, and they have ALWAYS understood the word baptism to signify dipping; and, therefore, from their first embracing of Christianity to this day, they have always baptized, and do yet baptize, by Immersion. This is an authority for the meaning of the word infinitely preferable to that of European lexicographers, In this case the Greeks are unexceptionable guides." Hist. of Bapt. pp. 5, 6.

*MR. EWING, the author of a very useful Greek lexicon, gives several other senses to the word, and at length contends that it will admit of sprinkling. If this were true, it would not materially affect our present inquiry; because we cannot admit that our Lord would employ a word to express this ordinance, which, in the first, plain, and most common use of it, signifies immersion, if he intended sprinkling, supposing the word would bear that sense in a distant and unusual interpretation of it. But it is demonstrated by MR. CARSON, in his recent elaborate work en baptism, that the word has but one proper sense, namely, that which MR. EWING admits above as its first sense.-Mr. Cox makes the following appeal to Mr. E.:"I now once again demand of MR. EWING to point me out the lexicon, which does NOT give dipping, plunging or immersing as the unquestionable, settled, and universally admitted PRIMITIVE SIGNIFICATION of the contested terms." On Baptism, p. 83.

+ Mr. Robinson was an Anti-pædobaptist.

3. But what is denominated the "Greek Church" is now extended over an immense portion of the globe; is the same mode of baptism observed in all the nations included in it?

The PANTALOGIA, under the article 'Greek Church,' thus explains→→ "That part of the Christian church which was first established in Greece, and is now spread over a larger extent of country than any other established church. It comprehends in its bosom a considerable part of Greece, the Grecian isles, Wallachia, Moldavia, Egypt, Abyssinia, Nubia, Lybia, Arabia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Cilicia, Palestine.... It may be observed, that amid all their trifling rites, they practise trineimmersion, which is unquestionably the primitive manner.'

MR. WALL. "The Greek church, in all the branches of it, does still use immersion." Hist. of Inf. Bapt. Vol. II. p. 376, Ed. 3.

SIR P. RICAUT. "Thrice dipping or plunging, this church holds to be as necessary to the form of baptism, as water to the matter." In Pæd. Exam. Vol. I. p. 268.

4. Is there any evidence in the writings of the first Christian fathers after the apostles, respecting the mode of baptism as administered by them, and in their times? for it is not likely that the mode observed by Christ and the apostles would be immediately changed.

Answer. The first Christians after the days of the apostles could never bring themselves to make so great a change in an institution of Christ, as to substitute sprinkling for immersion. Such a change would require several ages to bring the public mind to receive it; as every one, acquainted with church history, knows was the case. There was a disposition early manifested to make ceremonial additions to Christ's appointments, such as consecrating the water, &c., but there is no evidence whatever of altering the mode of this ordinance, except as a recourse or expedient for dying persons, &c., for above 1000 years, as I shall attest presently.

If then we can ascertain the mode of baptism in the first centuries following the apostles, without doubt it will be what the Lord ordained. And happily there is abundance of evidence upon this subject. I shall cite a few short passages, and the references may lead the reader, if disposed, to a deeper investigation:

BARNABAS, Paul's companion. An epistle ascribed to him has escaped the ravages of time. Two passages refer to baptism; in one he says, "Blessed are they, who, fixing their hope on the cross, have gone "down into the water." The other, "We descend into the water,... "and come up out of it, bring forth fruit, having in our hearts reverential fear, and hope through Jesus." Epist. cap. xi.

*Trine-immersion,' or immersing the person three times, once in the name of each of the Divine Persons, was in use in the beginning of the third century. It was practised in England till the sixteenth century; and is still rigidly observed in the eastern churches.