our old

us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death?' we enter by this means into the experience of its efficacy in effecting a mystical death in us; in other words, we DIE with him, or, as it is expressed in verse 6, man is crucified with him;' still further, 'by baptism,' through, or by means of, baptism, we are buried with him;' we not only die to sin and the world, but we are separated wholly from it, as the body of Christ was separated from the living world when laid in the sepulchre. The connexion between sin and the world and us is completely broken, as those who are buried and put out of sight are no longer reckoned among men; nay, as the slave (for the apostle brings in this figure also) is by death and burial wholly put out of the power of his former master, so that we should not serve sin; for he that is dead is freed from sin.' But we also mystically RISE with him, that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life,' having new connexions, new habits, new enjoyments, and new hopes. We have a similar passage in Col. ii. 12, and it has a similar interpretation. In the preceding verse the apostle had been speaking of the mystical death of Christians, under the phrase, 'putting off the body of the sins of the flesh;' then, as in his Epistle to the Romans, he adds, our mystical burial with Christ, which is a heightened representation of death, and then also our rising again with Christ. Here too all these three effects are attributed to baptism as the means. We put off the body of sin by the circumcision of Christ,' that is, as we have seen, by Christian circumcision or baptism; we are buried with him by baptism; being obviously used here, like, to denote the instrument; and by baptism we rise with him into a new life.

"Now, to institute a comparison between a mode of baptism and the burial of Christ, wholly destroys the meaning of the passage; for how can the apostle speak of baptism as an emblem of Christ's burial, when he argues from it as the instrument of our death unto sin, and separation from it by a mystical burial? Nor is baptism here made

use of as the emblem of our spiritual death, burial, and resurrection. As an emblem, even immersion, though it might put forth a clumsy type of burial and rising again, is wanting, in not being emblematical of DEATH; and yet all three, our mystical death, burial, and rising again, are distinctly spoken of, and must all be found represented in some TYPE. But the TYPE made use of by the apostle is manifestly not baptism, but the death, the burial, and the resurrection of our Lord; and in this view he pursues this bold and impressive figure to even the verge of allegory, in the succeeding verses. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more: death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God: LIKEWISE reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.'

"In the absence, therefore, of all proof, that, in any instance found in the New Testament, baptism was administered by immersion; with so many presumptions against that indecent practice as have been stated; with the decisive evidence also of a designed correspondence between the baptism, the pouring out, of the Holy Spirit, and the baptism, the pouring out, of water; we may conclude, with confidence, that the latter was the apostolic mode of administering that ordinance; and that first washing, and then immersion, were introduced later, towards the latter end of the second century, along with several other superstitious additions to this important sacrament, originating in that will worship,' which presumed to destroy the simplicity of God's ordinances, under pretence of rendering them more emblematical and impressive. Even if immersion had been the original mode of baptizing, we should, in the absence of any command on the subject, direct or implied, have thought the church at liberty to accommodate the manner of applying water to the body in the name of the Trinity, in which the essence of the rite consists, to different climates and

manners; but it is satisfactory to discover that all the attempts made to impose upon Christians a practice repulsive to the feelings, dangerous to the health, and offensive to delicacy, is destitute of all scriptural authority, and of really primitive practice. To say that it figures our spiritual death and resurrection, has, we have seen, no authority from the texts used to prove it; and to make a sudden pop under water to be emblematical of burial, is as far-fetched a conceit as any which adorns the Emblems of Quarles, without any portion of the ingenuity.

TENTH WITNESS.

I, the TENTH WITNESS, beg to state that, "It was far from my intention to have" come before this Court to give my testimony, "had not the officious zeal and triumphs of" our opponents "become quite intolerable. To be attacked as an individual, and that publicly from the press, I cannot help calling unhandsome. The principles (of the mode of baptism') no doubt may be attacked in this way, if they be thought wrong; but" as I am "only one of thousands who hold them," I cannot surely for this be a sinner above all that dwell round me.-"Necessity, therefore, is upon me; and I am obliged either to defend them, or submit to be trampled under foot.-Nothing has been preached by me, but what I publicly profess to believe, and am solemnly bound by my ordination vows to declare.-To provoke a controversy is by no means my desire, and especially a religious wrangling like this.

Our opponents "always begin by trusting to an arm of flesh; they take care not to quote Scripture texts in support of this opinion (that Barrio signifies to dip, and that signifies into), nor yet to give Matt. xxviii. 19, according to" their "translation, and tell the people what it says they are to be dipped into. They are never informed that the baptismal statute (which is considered by men of" their "persuasion as containing a complete directory for every thing necessary to the right administration of baptism,) contains not one word about water, nor any thing like dipping into water. No, this would make discoveries, and therefore common men, who always understand the element to be water, are left in pious ignorance about these things. Thus the system is patched out, and becomes passable.

"As Pædobaptists maintain that a person may have all

that is essential to baptism by being either sprinkled or dipped, it will not be of much consequence, on my principles, whether an instance of this kind can be given or not. If BaT can be shewn to signify sometimes one thing, and sometimes another; and if it can be shewn that in the New Testament it will neither bear to be translated to dip, nor to sprinkle, when employed to express the ordinance of baptism; it will be quite enough for my purpose, but it will not do for" theirs. "Dipping is of such importance, according to" their "system, that there can be no Christian baptism, unless the whole body be immersed in water. Baw, then, the particular word which the Spirit of God employs to express this ordinance, must signify to dip, and always to dip, when expressive of this ordinance, or their cause is lost. This is plain, for if it signifies sometimes to dip and sometimes to sprinkle, baptism may be administered either way, at least so far as this word is concerned. And if in relation to this ordinance it will neither bear to be translated to dip, nor to sprinkle, then this leading word in the baptismal statute leaves us at liberty, unless we have a positive command for dipping somewhere else; and this I believe they will not so much as pretend is the case. On the scriptural meaning then of this particular word the controversy turns, and without its aid they have nothing left that can support their system. Going down to the water and coming up from the water will do nothing, if BaT does not dip the whole body when the person is there." I shall "then proceed to examine whether the New Testament meaning of this word be to dip or immerse the whole body, and whether it always signifies so when connected with baptism. And pray, recollect, that if it does not, and if but one instance can be found against" them, "dipping as the only mode of baptism is a lost cause.

"Now in the New Testament we may find plenty of passages where this particular word occurs, and so need not perplex poor people with quibbling about the criticism of learned men. This word Baπ occurs about seventy times in the New Testament. It is the only word, so far as I can