free to acknowledge, that we cannot think a person plunged in the Atlantic ocean would be a whit cleaner, either from the guilt or the filth of sin, in the sight of God, than another, on whose face only so much water has been poured, as may be held in the hollow of a man's hand. Paul teaches us, that circumcision avails nothing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature; and Peter-declares, that baptism saves us not by putting away the filth of the flesh a sentiment which that apostle probably learned from his Lord, when he said to him," he that is washed," i. e. spiritually purified, by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, "needeth not save to wash his feet."

:

To conclude, we refer it to every unprejudiced and candid enquirer after truth and duty to judge, on a serious attention to these few pages, whether our practice of baptizing by sprinkling or pouring of water be, as it is often represented, absurd and unscriptural; nay whether it be not our duty to adhere to it as most agreeable to what the word of God teaches us concerning the nature and design of the ordinance.

We shall offer our reasons for administering it to infants in the Second Part.

If, as an ingenious writer supposes, Christ referred in these words to baptism, they are conclusive against the need of a total immersion.---See other thoughts upon the context in "An Inquiry into the nature and design of Baptism," p. 33. ⚫

PART II.

ON THE SUBJECT OF CHRISTIAN BAPTISM.

CHAP. I.

The Children of professing Christians included in the Christian Covenant.

HAVING considered the proper mode of baptizing, we are now to inquire to whom the ordinance is to be administered. Though most, who insist upon the immersion of the whole body in baptism, refuse to administer it to children, we are at a loss to assign any good reason for so universal a connection of these two distinct tenets; and shall endeavour to prove that, whether Christians prefer sprinkling or dipping, they ought to give up their little ones to the Lord in this ordinance. As introductory to which design, we shall first examine the tenor of the Christian covenant.

§. 1. As the children of pious parents are exposed to sufferings and death, in common with. the other descendants of the first Adam, it is reasonable to expect they should derive some pecu

har advantages from the second. They are evidently as feeble and helpless as others; equally liable to infirmities and afflictions, while they are continued in life; and multitudes of them lie down alike in the dust, almost as soon as they are born. We have reason to believe that their times, as well as those of their parents, are in the hands of the Lord, the judge of all the earth, who will do right. But these evils which they suffer cannot be considered as punishments of any actual transgressions of their own, when inflicted upon them before they are capable of knowing either good or evil. They seem, therefore, in such instances, to suffer as descendants from the first human pair; and while we acknowledge, with the apostle Paul,* that "through the offence of one many die who have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," may we not hope, with him, "that the grace of God, and his unspeakable gift of eternal life, shall, through Jesus Christ, abound unto many?" And that as the first man Adam was made to these a living soul, inasmuch as they derive from him a body endued with a principle of animal life, though subject to the power of death, that the last Adam will be to them a quickening Spirit? We know not how to think, that the seed of his servants should be called into being merely to spend a few useless and miserable moments upon earth, and + 1 Cor. xv. 22, 45

* Rom. v. 14, 15.

1

then to be blotted out of existence, or consigned over to everlasting misery. The best of parents, indeed, are unable to communicate grace to their children; but they may recollect the promises with pleasure in which He has engaged to pour out his Spirit upon their seed, and his blessing upon their offspring. They have no merit to be imputed to their beloved babes, but it is their mercy to be informed of One that has freely given Himself for them; of One that is both able and willing to keep this dear important charge which, in the arms of faith and duty, they commit to Him against that day. And if we believe that children owe redemption to this Jesus, baptism is, in this view, properly administered to them as a token of that redemption which He has obtained for them by his precious blood. True, indeed, Jesus has forewarned his disciples that some of the children of the kingdom in that day shall be shut out; yet He did not speak it of such as should be removed in their infancy, but of those who live to renounce the Christian covenant, and despise both the requirements and the privileges of it. Perhaps there are instances of persons baptized, nay plunged, in adult years, and that upon a solemn profession of their Christian faith, who, after having been thus outwardly purified, return with the dog to his vomit, and the sow that is washed to her wallowing in the mire. Now if the minister in these cases be not

F2

chargeable with the guilt of prostituting the ordinance, much less when he applies it to the infant offspring of the people of God. In this case we know there can be no actual defilement. But in the other we are certain there must have been ; and, considering the temptations to hypocrisy and party-attachments in such a day and country as ours, those should be very cautious of baptizing the adult who think the ordinance should be administered to none but true believers. All are not Israel that are of Israel; nor are all real Christians who express a zeal for some peculiar ceremonies as institutions of the gospel. That gospel says much to caution men against such a Confidence. Nor does it by any means encourage the decendants of good men to trust to the religion of their parents in such a manner as to neglect it themselves. "Think not" (said John to the Pharisees) "to say within yourselves we have Abraham to our father." The apostle Paul declared freely of himself and his Christian brethren, that they had no confidence in the flesh." But neither Paul nor John would teach the offspring of pious ancestors to despise a godly parentage. The former expressly asserts of the circumcised Jew, that he had, as such, greatly the advantage of the uncircumcised Gentile every way. It is said, indeed, that children may enjoy those advantages, and even privileges of the

Rom. iii. 2