such, even to his life's end; since it imprints an indelible character in such a sense as never to need repeating." --Dr. Whitby: "The end of baptism [is] the remission of sins, and the effect of it justification, or the absolution of the baptized person from his past sins."† -Bp. Wilson: "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. It was upon this declaration of the eunuch, that he was baptized by Philip; and if he was sincere, (which Philip could not tell, nor pretend to know his heart,) his sins were forgiven by that act of Philip, (Acts xxii. 16.)....It would be wicked to say, that the eunuch, by believing in Jesus Christ, would have had his sins forgiven, though he had not been baptized."--Dr. Featley: "Banтw, from whence baptize is derived, signifieth as well to dye, as to dip; and it may be, the Holy Ghost in the word baptism, hath some reference to that signification, because by baptism we change our HUE. For as Varrow reporteth of a river in Boeotia, that the water thereof turneth sheep of a dark or dun colour into white; so the sheep of Christ which are washed in the font of baptism, by virtue of Christ's promise, though before they were of never so dark, sad, or dirty colour, yet in their souls become white and pure, and, as it were, new dyed.” § — The reader will here excuse a remark, by way of query. Would then the doctor have treated the Baptists in such an illiberal manner as he has done, if he had, either by dipping or sprinkling, thoroughly imbibed that excellent dye of which he speaks? Or would his calumniating pen have recorded the following sentence? "The resort of great multitudes of men and women together in the evening, and going naked into rivers there to be dipped and plunged, cannot be done without scandal." || What a pity it is, but the doctor had been soundly * Discourse of Fundamentals, p. 48. Ibid. Acts viii. 41. || Ibid. p. 39. plunged in Varro's Boeotian river! It might have rendered his mind more white, and his language more fair, and then the Baptists would not have been so dirtily handled by him. Mr. Obadiah Wills expresses himself thus: "Baptism is God's sheep-mark, as Mr. Ford calls it, to distinguish those that are of his fold, from such as graze in the wild common of the world."* It is rather dubious, however, whether the excellent mark will prove permanent; for this writer assures us, that "the covenant of grace is not absolute and saving to all that are once within it."†-Mr. Burkitt also, speaking of infants under the notion of lambs, calls baptism "Christ's ear-mark, by which Christ's sheep are distinguished from the devil's goats." Thus happily have these authors provided for the honour of baptism, when the disciples of Christ are considered under the notion of sheep; for it washes their fleeces and marks their ears. § What Pædobaptists may think of such language, from such pens, I cannot pretend to say; but there is reason to conclude, that were any of the Baptists to talk at this rate, their conduct would be exploded with the keenest ridicule. Remarkable is the language of Dr. Scott, when showing the import of Matt. xxviii. 19. Among other things of a similar kind, he says: "By this commission, Christ's ministers are authorized and constituted the legal proxies of the Holy Trinity, in the stead of those blessed persons, to seal the new covenant with the * Inf. Bap. Asserted and Vindicated, p. 273. † Ibid. p. 199. In Mr. Keach's Rector Rectified, p. 98. § Mr. Bingham tells us, from Clemens Alexandrinus, that some of the ancient heretics, "when they had baptized men in water, also made a mark upon their ears with fire; so joining water baptism and, as they imagined, baptism by fire together." Orig. Eccles. b. x. chap. ii. § 3.—The Jacobites and others of the Oriental Christians make, with a hot iron, the figure of a cross on the foreheads of persons baptized. Vid. Hoornbeekii Miseel. Sac. 1. i. c. xvii. § 16. Now these are marks indeed. baptismal sign to those whom they baptize; and thereby legally to oblige the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to perform the promises of it to all those baptized persons who perform the conditions of it.... When once we have struck covenant with him [God] in baptism, we have him fast obliged to us to perform his part of the covenant, whenever we perform ours."* "* Proxies of the Holy Trinity-Legally oblige the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-God fast obliged to us. Peter tells us of some who spake "great swelling words of vanity;" and it seems as if the doctor had copied after them.-Mr. George Whitefield, remarking on John iii. 5, asks and answers in the following manner: "Does not this verse urge the absolute necessity of water baptism? YES, where it may be had; but how God will deal with persons unbaptized we cannot tell."-Mr. John Wesley, among various other things of a similar kind, says: "If infants are guilty of original sin, in the ordinary way they CANNOT be saved, unless this be washed away by baptism."+ These extracts bring to remembrance an observation of Buxtorf, relating to the opinion of Jewish rabbies about the efficacy of circumcision, "It is almost incredible," says he, "how highly they extol circumcision; how arrogantly and impiously they are frequently boasting of it; while they despise and condemn us, and all that are uncircumcised, Among innumerable other things they say, That circumcision is the cause why God hears their prayers, but overlooks and neglects ours, we being uncircumcised." " A pernicious opinion, doubtless deserving the keenest censure. Nor was it without reason that Mr. Walter Marshall gave the following caution: "Beware of making an idol of baptism, and putting it in the place of Christ." || * Christian Life, vol. iii. p. 236, 238. Edinb. 1754. + Works, vol. iv. p. 355, 356. Preservative, p. 160. § Apud Basnagium, Exercit. Hist. Crit. p. 591. Myst. of Sanctificat. direct. xiii. The necessity of this caution will farther appear, by the following extracts from Mr. Matthew Henry's Treatise on Baptism, lately published. When speaking about the ordinance itself, its obligation, and the privileges of baptized persons, he has the following remarkable words: "Such are the privileges which attend the ordinance, that if our Master had bid us do some great thing, would we not have done it, rather than come short of them? much more when he only saith unto us, wash and be clean; wash and be Christians....The gospel contains, not only a doctrine but a covenant, and by baptism we are brought into that covenant.... Baptism wrests the keys of the heart out of the hands of the strong man armed, that the possession may be surrendered to him whose right it is.... The water of baptism is DESIGNED for our cleansing from the spots and defilements of the flesh.*....In baptism our names are engraved upon the breast-plate of this great High Priest....This then is the efficacy of baptism; it is putting the child's name into the gospel grant....We are baptized into Christ's death; i. e. God doth in that ordinance, seal, confirm, and make over to us, ALL the benefits of the death of Christ.... Infant baptism speaks an hereditary relation to God, that comes to us by descent. ... Baptism seals the promise of God's being to ME a God, and that is greatly encouraging; but infant baptism increases the encouragement, as it assures me of God being the God of my fathers, and the God of my infancy."† * Whether Mr. Henry confines the cleansing efficacy of baptismal water to the pollution of actual sin, or whether he considers its admirably purifying virtue as extending to innate depravity also, is not very clear. If he includes both ideas, he attributes more to baptism than Ambrose did; who represents actual sin as taken away by baptism, but hereditary depravity, by washing of the feet. Apud Venem. Hist. Eccles. tom. iv. p. 122. † Treatise on Bap. p. 12, 40, 42, 43, 59, 130, 170, 193, 201. Mr. Bradbury says, That your children shall be sanctified" from their mother's womb, upon their being received in this ordinance, is Such are the language and sentiments of Mr. Henry, respecting the utility of baptism! Upon which I would here observe, that we should not have been much surprised, if after all this he had asserted, with the Council of Trent, that baptism "opens to every one of us the gate of heaven, which before, through sin, was shut;* or if he had maintained, with many of the ancient fathers, and with Mr. Dodwell of late, that it is by baptism the soul is rendered immortal.† But as our Brethren often refer us to the ancient rite of circumcision, and to the writings of the Talmud, for instruction about the proper subjects of baptism; so, who can tell, but the opinion of Jewish rabbies, concerning the utility of circumcision, may be of use to direct our enquiries in regard to that of baptism? and then, perhaps, we may have all Mr. Henry says confirmed in a few words. Well, you have their opinion, as expressed by one of them, in the following extract : "So great is the virtue of the precept concerning circumcision, that no circumcised person goes down to hell or to purgatory."-But what would our opposers have said, had a posthumous work of the late Dr. Gill, for instance, appeared, if it had been fraught with such high-flown expressions as those of Mr. Henry, concerning the vast importance and various utility of baptism? They would have spoken, there is reason to think, in some such manner as this: "The doctor might well plead for his beloved immersion with all his learning and zeal, while he imagined that such were its making the blessing of the new covenant come by the will of men, and of the will of the flesh, and not of God. But 'be not deceived; God is not mocked.' Do not think so idly of those favours that come by his Spirit." Duty and Doctrine of Baptism, p. 19. * Catechism of the Council of Trent, p, 175. "Many of the primitive fathers in the church explicitly maintained the natural mortality of the soul, which, according to them, was only exempt from dissolution by baptism." Dr. Blacklock's Paraclesis, p. 298. Apud Witsium, Miscel. Sac. tom. ii. exercit. xxi. § 9. |