^

PRINCETON,

Presented by Mr. Samuel

Agnexv

Coll.

Agnew

on Baptism, No.

N.

J.

-tt

of Philadelphia, Pa.

/en fj

{r/i

^_

f/ Ac't-LfA l^j

Cc.y

^J<

yj a^/l ft- ^ ^

t.-

c^

''<

Cy / f'^i

./

'^i^^e/Zcc.y

/V //a^^C-

^>- Xv.

/^

lii.

"-^

<-

<^/ /^Ley

Z-^-

/^ / C)

/i.j /.^

A02

The Admission ofunhaptized Persons to the Lord's

Supper inconsistent with the
J

New

Testament.

LETTER
TO A FRIEND, (iN 1814,)
BY THE LATt

-REV.

^JVBRE^r 'FULLER.
OF KETTERING.

HonBon
Printed by H. Teape, Towef-51ill

ahd sold by gardiner, princes-street; botton and

gale and co. paternosterkow.

1815.

Price One Shilling.

son,

and

f*'^-

1-

MMtrtietmt

^;^^

@^

That

the

'^^-/.

following

is

*:

a genuine

by the hand of our much

lamented friend Mr. Fuller, no one who
is at all acquainted with bis manner of
Letter, written

writing will deny.

In making war upon the

he was always found

common enemy,

in the

foremost rank,

among the first to take the field.

But when he was called to animadvert on
friends and allies, how strikingly different
always

was

his

conduct

In January

last I

received a parcel from

him, enclosing a Letter, in which he says

Dear Brother,

/ have

Baldwin, tvhich you

you, if

it

he

may

sent you

keep

till

Dr,

I see

for half a year.

Also a
and 1 wish

.Manuscript of my own
none to see it but yourself', and that no
mention be tnade of it.

If any

thing- be

/j

ADVERTISEMENT.

^:

on the other side, it may, if

thought proper^ he printed, hut not else.

tvritten

You received a double Letter from me

last week.

Yours, affectionately,
A. Fuller.
Kettering,

le''^

Jany. 1815.

The above will justify me

in

withholding

now; and the long expected

publication of Mr. Hall, which has just
the Letter

till

appeared, equally requires that I withhold

it

no

lonorer.
CD

The Manuscript has many

and

rections

interlineations,

verbal cor-

exhibiting

proofs of the care and deliberation with

which this Letter was composed. It may

be proper for me to say, the title was
written by the Author himself, and the
whole is printed with that scrupulous
fidelity which I have thought due to the
writer, as to one of the greatest men of
and one of the bri2:htest lumithe acre
naries of the Christian Church.
;

WILLIAM NEWMAN,
Stetney, July

25, 1815,

A LETTER,

Dear

Sir^

THE long and intimate friendship

1 have lived in,

who

are differently

may

subject,

what

in

all

to

spirit,

the

reflection

afforded

repeat

me

this

of any other motive in

been from indulging a sectarian

that

my

desire for

communion

friendly to the Saviour haSj

one instance, led

my

minded from me on

be the mind of Christ.

who were

from

to die in, with several

than a desire to vindicate what

me

have

far

or party

with

acquit

I write^

appears to

So

and hope

that

me

practically to deviate

general sentiments on the subject:

me no

on

which,

satisfaction,

ir.

however,
I

havinff

do not intend

to

You

request

me

objections to the practice in a

endeavour io
that

d,o so.

and

If I

me, I

feel

my

I will

need not prove to you

psedobaptist brethren;

in

letter,

not for want of esteem towards

it is

to me.

grounds of

to state the

many

my

whom are dear

of

have any thing like Christian love

it

towards

all

whom

those in

perceive the image of Christ, whether they be

baptists or paedobaptists

commune
because

and

my

refusing to

with them at the Lord's table,

I consider

them as improper

but as attending to

Many

it

in

is

not

suhjects,

an improper manner.

from Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar

and Zebulun, who partook of Hezekiah's passover, are

supposed by that pious prince to have

" prepared their hearts to seek the

of their fathers;" but having eaten

than
*^

it

was

Lord God
*'

otherwise

written," he prayed the

pardon every one of them,"

Lord

to

and therefore

could not intend that the disorder should be

repeated.*

have been used to think that our conduct

* 2 Chr. XXX.

1719.

on such questions should not be governed by

affection,

any more than by

will of Christ.

a regard to the revealed

A brother
lately

who

mixed communion,

practises

acknowledged

but by

disaffection,

me, that

to

'

he did not

was a question of candour or

charity^

'

think

but simply

an instituted connexion

between Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

'

there was,

charity,

Christ

charity

it

Whether

this,

in the

we ought

not,

divide

them

to

may be

there

was or was

New

not,

Testament
If

under a pretence of
surely Jesus

for

allowed to have had as

and candour as we

!'

much

Yet we hear a

great outcry, not only from pa3dobaptists but

baptists, against

&c.;

all

our want of candour,

which,

concession be just,

if this

mere declamation.

liberality,

To what

purpose

is it

is

too

that such characters as Owen, Watts, Doddridge,

Edwards, &c. are

dispute, unless

it

brought forward

be to kindle prejudice?

were a question oi feeling,

doubtless, have weight

revealed will

in

their

but

this

If

it

names would,

if it

relate to the

of Christ, they weigh nothing.

a2

6
an instituted connexion

Is there, or is there not,

between baptism and the Lord's supper, as

much
be,

between

as

we might

faith

as well

and baptism

If there

How we

be asked,

can

refuse to baptize the children of such excellent

How we

men, as

can refuse to admit them to

the Lord's supper.

I

might

but

allege.

it

The

question respects not men

been painful for

me to

who has walked

nevertheless, I have felt

it

to

be

that

coujm union

be

to

'

If I

right,

happier ihdiW I was;' and

some respects

I might.

but

" withdraw
disorderly;"

my

duty to do

could think free

should be

it is

much

possible that in

If I could think well

of the conduct of a brother

whom

I at present

consider as walking disorderly, or

it

to

was not long since assured by a paedo-

baptist friend,

pass

a bigot,

neither of us prove any thing,

from a brother

me

call

were our want of something better

things. It has

so.

man

him by some other name

in reply call

we should

except

If a

by without being partaker

not but I should be the happier

which he walks be disorder, and

of

if I

could

doubt

if

that in

it,

but

I cannot

pass

f
it

by without being a partaker of it,

had better

be without such happiness than possess

The
tained

it.

question of free communion as main-

by

baptists, is very different

from that

which is ordinarily maintained by paedobaptists.

There are very few of the

latter

who deny

baptism to be a term of communion, or

would admit any man

WHOM THEY

who

the Lord's supper

to

CONSIDER AS UN-BAPTIZED. Some

few, I allow, have professed a willingness to

receive any person

whom

believer in Christ,

whether he be baptized or

not.

But

this is

they consider as a

probably the

effect of the

among

practice,

so prevalent of late

baptists,

of decrying the importance of the

subject.

have never known a paedobaptist

of any note,

who

conscientiously adheres

what he thinks the miud of Christ

this ordinance,

with

it.

The

paedobaptist

is,

can allow

to

to

relative to

who would

thus lightly dispense

ordinary

ground on which a

would persuade us

communion
it

paedo-

to practise free

that their baptism, whether

we

be quite so primitive as ours, or

A 3

8
and that we should

not, is nevertheless valid,

allow

to

it

be

and consequently should

so,

treat

them

them

to the Lord's table.

It is

Mr, Baldwin, pleads

allows that

strate that
in

if

that immersion

mode

ground

open communion.

is

to
is

to

be administered only

one kind of subject

and

not a mere circumstance or

of baptism, but essential to the ordinance,

so that he that

is

not immersed

his sentiment of close

is

not baptized

purpose
JBootJis
to

is

To

the

the drift of the Reviewer of

Apology

communion " would be

sufficiently established," p. 8, 9.

But

this

Mr, Baldwin could demon-

baptism

one mode, and

for

on

Friendly Letter to

that Ml'. Worcester in his

He

by admitting

as baptized persons

in the Evangelical

same

Mr.

Magazine.

admit the validity of paedobaptism would

not overthrow

baptism

strict

itself as

communion

If infant baptism be valid,

;

it

in their infancy.

ought not to be

and he that repeats

ppponents haye been used to

ffaptist.

but

performed upon persons who

have been previously baptized

repeated

only,

it is,

what

call him,

his

an awa_

This ground of argument, therefore.

does not belong to the subject at

Do, acknowledge our

issue.

Its

language

is,

be

and allow that whenever you baptize

valid,

a person

you

who

bapti:im to

has been sprinkled in his infancy

re-baptize

him

that

is,

Do, give up your

order that

principles as a baptist, in

we may

have communion together at the Lord's table !!!'

Very

different

from

this are the

which our baptist brethren plead

munion.
they

As

am

far as I

may be reduced

grounds on

for free

acquainted with them,

two questions.

to

com-

(1.)

Has

baptism any such instituted connexion with the

Lord's supper as to be a pre-requisite to it?
(2.)

Supposing

it

has,

yet

the candidate

if

consider himself as having been baptized, ought

his

not this to suffice for

christian church

being treated by a

as a baptized person

does not an error concerning the

jects

of christian baptism

precepts of the
forbearance,
fully

New
in his

and

or sub-

come within

the

Testament which enjoin

and allow

persuaded

mode

*'

every

own mind

?"

man

to

be

10
Let us calmly examine these questions

in

the order in which they are stated :-^

Has

First,

baptism any such instituted

con-,

nexion with the Lord's supper as to he a prerequisite to it 1

No

baptist will

deny

duty incumbent on believers, but he

sider

it

to

be a

may

con^

it

no more connexion with the

as having

Lord's supper than other duties, and the omission of

it,

where

it

arises

from

error, as re-

sembling other omissions of duty, which are

allowed to be objects of forbearance.

If there

them,

it

be no instituted connexion between

must go

far

towards establishing the

position of Mr. Bunyan, that " Non-baptism

[at least

where

communion."

it

arises

If

tenable, however,

from error]

is

no bar to

Mr. Bunyan's position be

it

is

rather singular that

should have been so long undiscovered

for

it

it

does not appear that such a notion was ever

adv?inced tiU he, or his contemporaries advanced
it.

XYhatever difference of opinion had sub-

Siisted

among

christians concerning the

mod^

11
and subjects of baptism, I have seen no evidence
that baptism

connected
**

was considered by any one as un-

vs^ith,

It is certain,

or unnecessary to the supper.

says Dr. Doddridge, that as far

as our knowledge of primitive antiquity reaches,

no unhaptized person received the Lord's supper'^

See Mr. Booth's Apology,

Lectures, p. 511.

The practice

sect. I.

uniformly against

of christians having been

us, I

acknowledge, does not

prove us to be in the wrong

but an opinion

so circumstanced certainly requires to be well

established from the scriptures,

To

ascertain whether there be any instituted

connexion between the two ordinances,

be proper

to observe the

manner

which such

in

connexions are ordinarily expressed

Testament.

gaged

in

It is

argument

will

it

in the

New

not unusual for persons enlo require that the principle

which they oppose, should,

if true,

have been

so expressed in the scriptures, as to place

beyond dispute. This, however,

nary way in which any thing
]Nor

is it

is

is

it

not the ordi-

there expressed.

for us to prescribe to the

Holy

Spirit

12
what manner he

in

enquire

in

shall enjoin his will,

but to

what manner he has enjoined

A paedobaptist might say,

if

teaching be indis-

why

pensably necessary to precede baptizing,

did not Christ expressly say
disciples to baptize

and forbid his

so,

any who were not previously

A Roman Catholic also,

taught ?

it.

who

separates

the bread from the wine, might insist on your

proving from the

New

Testament, that Christ

them

expressly connected

and

together,

quired the one before, and

re-

in order to the

other.

To

the

answer,

teach

name

of these objections you would

first

" Go,

Let us read the commission,'

all

nations

of the Father, and of the Son, and of the

Holy Ghost*

'Teaching them to observe

things whatsoever I have

and

lo

baptizing them in the

am

commanded you

with you always, even unto the

end of the world."

of things as stated

Is

it

not plainly the order

by our Lord Jesus Christ,

you would add, that we are

by imparting

all

to

first to

them the gospel

teach men,

then on their

13
believing

to instruct

fhem

to baptize

it,

them

Thus

Lord

Jesus, the night in

I delivered

cup^

the

to the

unto you, that the

eat,

this

do

this is

my body

remembrance

in

After the same manner also he look the

when he had supped,

New

Testament

as oft as ye drink

For as often as ye
cup^

institU'

which he was betrayed

Take,

said,

which is broken for you

of me.

Catholic

when he had given thanks, he

took bread: and

and

our

have received of the Lord

which also

it,

Roman

Let us read the

that

brake

go on

for

by the Apostle Paul

tion as repeated

"

by Christ

also to the

you would answer

Corinthians,'

left

to

and com-

in all the ordinances

mandments which are

direction.

and then

my

in

it,

saying, This

in

blood

eat this bread

How

this

do

is

ye,

remembrance of me.
and drink

ye do shew the Lord's death

You would add

cup

till

this

he come."

dare you put asunder

the wine and the bread which Christ hath thus

manifestly joined together?'

answers must,
Baptist,

I think,

and the

last

The

first

of these

be approved by every

by every Protestant.

But

the reasoning, in both cases, proceeds on the

u
way

supposition that the ordinary

mind of Christ
ment,

is

enjoined in the

is

by simply

New

and that

as clear

It is

been

said,

no

this is

less

in the first case

Go,

this,

them on

And

gelical obedience.'

no

less clear

than

as

expressed.
if it

had

teach them the gospel:

first

lead

prac*

binding on us than

and when they have received

and, after

to be

had been more fully

if the connexion

Testa-

stating things in the order in

which they were appointed^ and are

iised:

which the

in

if it

baptize them

it,

in a

course of evan-

in the last case,

had been

said,

it is

First

take the bread, then the cup, and never partake

of the one without the other/

But

be just reasoning with a Paedo-

if this

baptist,

and a

Roman

Catholic,

not be so in the present case?

the ordinary

be

at

mode of

If the

should

ing the duties in question.

is

it

above be

divine injunction,

no loss to know what

facts in the

why

we can

enjoined respectAll the recorded

New Testament place baptism before

the celebration of the Lord's supper.

15

The

first

company who joined together at

Lord's table were

all

That Christ

baptized.

was so himself we are expressly informed

of the disciples
others

;*

we

the

and

are told that they baptized

which would not have been permitted,

had they,

like the Pharisees

and lawyers, refused

to be baptized themselves.

The next mention

supper

the second chapter of the Acts.

in

is

The account

given

was exhorted
that they

baptized

who
;"

of the celebration of the

is,

that every one of

to " repent

them

and be baptized," and

gladly received the

word " were

which they were " added

after

to

the church," and " continued steadfastly in the

apostle's doctrine

and

fellowship,

and

in break-

ing of bread, and in prayers."

The

question put by the apostle Paul to cer-

tain disciples at

Ephesus,

who

said they

had

not heard whether there were any Holy Ghost,

unto what then were ye baptized?

John

iv. 2.

clearly inti-

16
mates that there were no Christians
times

who

in those

He does not

continued unbaptized.

ask whether they had been baptized, taking this

for granted

but merely to what they had been

baptized.

The

nature and design of baptism, as given

us in the

New

Testament, shews it to have been

the initiatory ordinance of Christianity.

not,

indeed,

an

church, seeing

initiation

it

was

instituted prior to the

administered

in

cases, as that of the Ethiopian eunuch, in

which there was no opportunity

any one of them

but

was an

it

for joining to
initiation into

And

the body of professing Christians.

it

was

a particular

into

formation of churches, and

some

It

must be necessary

ticular church,

to

an admission into a par-

inasmuch as what

presupposes what

is

general.

with propriety occupy a place

without having

first

avowed

the oath of allegiance.

does not, indeed,

as one

may

if so,

particular

No man
in

could

the army,

his loyalty, or taken

The

initiate a

is

oath of allegiance

person into the army,

take that oath

who

is

no soldier;

17
but

is

it

Though
yet

a pre-requisite to being a soldier.

all

who

take the oath are not soldiers,

Now

soldiers take the oath.

all

that divine ordinance

by which we

put on Christ, as

king's livery

those

who

thie

enter his service: and,

baptism

is

are said to

put on by

is

by

universal

consent throug'hout the Christian world,

is

con-

To admit

sidered as the badge of a Christian.

a person into a Christian church without

it,

were

equal to admitting one into a regiment

who

scrupled to wear the soldier's uniform, or to

take the oath of allegiance.

There are instances

in

in the

New

Testament

which the word baptism does not mean the

baptism by water, but yet manifestly alludes to

it,

and

it.

e. g.

to the Lord's supper, as connected

Cor. X.

5.

" Moreover,

would not that ye should be

all

ivitJi

brethren,

ignorant,

how that

our fathers were under the cloud, and

passed through the sea

unto

lyioses,

in

and were

all

all

baptized

the cloud and in the sea; and

18
did

all

eat the

same

and did

spiritual meat;

all

driok the same spiritual drink; for they drank

of that spiritual rock that followed them

But with many of them

that rock

was

God was

not well pleased

thrown

Christ*

and

for they

in the wilderness."

The

were over-

Corinthians

had many amongst them who had polluted

themselves with idolatrous practices, and yet

The

presumed on being saved by Christ

design of the apostle was to warn them from the

examples of the Jewish

their having

privileges

of

fathers, not to rely

upon

been partakers of the Christian

baptism and the Lord's supper

while they indulged in

The manner

sin.

in

which these allusions are introduced clearly

shews the connexion between the two ordinances
in the practice of the primitive churches.

Thus
one

also in 1 Cor. xii. 13,

spirit to

be

all

made

may be

are said "

baptized into one

ther jews or gentiles, whether

all

we

bodtf^

bond or

to drink into one spirit"

free

The

by

whe;

and

design

to illustrate the spiritual union of all

true believers in one invisible body> as originat-

19
ing iu the washing of regeneration, and as being

continued by the renewing of the Holy Spirit:

but the allusion

is,

I conceive, to the ordinances

of baptism and the Lord's supper; by the

first

of which they were initiated into the body of

professing Christians,

communion

in

and by the other had

See Poole, Henry, and Scott

it.

on the passage.

From these instances, we have equal

that the

evidence

two ordinances were connected

practice of the
faith being

first

in the

we have

churches, as

of

connected with baptism, or of the

bread being connected with the wine in the

The

supper.
cases

is,

only difference between these

that the one requires a part,

and the

other the whole of a divine institution to be

dispensed with.

Is it for us to

make

light of

the precepts of Christ, under the notion of profiting

and edifying

ground
is

in

his people?

to expect his presence

If

we have any

and

blessing,

it

" teaching them to observe all things

whatsoever he has commanded us."

But

us prc^ceed to the second question-

let

Whether if

the candidate consider himself as

having been baptized

this

ought not to

suffice for

his being treated by a Christian church as

and whether an error concerning

tized person;

mode or

the

subjects

of baptism be

of Christian forbearance^

may

a bap-

7iot

a subject

in tvhich evert/

one

be allowed to be fully persuaded in his

own

mind?

That there are cases

apply

will

certain.

is

eating meats,

to

which

this principle

Concerning eating or not

and observing or not observing

daySy the apostle teaches that every

be
art

man

persuaded in his own mind.

fully

should
" "Who

thou (he asks) that judgest another man's

servant?
falleth.

why

To

his

own master he

standeth or

Why dost thou judge thy brother;

dost

For we

thou set at nought

or

thy brother?

shall all stand before the judgement-seat

Every one of us shall give account

of himself to God. Hast thou faith? have

of Christ.

it

to thyself."

Rom,

xiv.

21
often been alleged

These passages have

communion between

favour of free
paedobaptists

and

the principle laid

if

by the Apostle applies

originally

The

to that subject,

he had no reference

ing of our brethren

is

baptists

to

in

and

down

though

the reason-

it,

just and right.

case, I conceive,

must have

referred to

the prohibition of certain meats, and the ob-

servance of certain days, under the Jewish law

which being no longer binding on

some would

avail themselves

and disregard them;

cient light,
to

of this liberty,

others, not having suffi-

would regard them. Had

any customs of heathen

origin, or

it

referred

which had

never been, nor been understood to be,

divine appointment,

those

it

is

Lord.''

of

not conceivable that

who regarded them, should

to the

Christians,

" regard

In this case every

them

man was

allowed to judge and act for himself, and re-

quired to forbear with his brethren

who might

be otherwise-minded.

That we

are to apply this principle without

restriction

Should the

few will maintain.

first

gospel, for example, be re-

principles of the

jected by a candidate for communion, few

who

pretend to serious Christianity would think of

Yet he might

receiving him.

and ask,

arguments,

*'

allege the

same

thou

that

Who

art

judgest another man's servant?

master he standeth or

Why

falleth.

why

judge thy brother; or

nought thy brother?

for

To

his

dost thou

dost thou set at

we

shall

God.

give

shall

Hast

In this case,

was not

in

state

Every

account of himself to

thou faith? have

we should

it

to

thyself.'*

answer, that the lan-

guage of the Apostle was misapplied

it

and that

his design to affirm that Christians

of religious society had no right

judge of each others avowed principles

so,

he would not have desired some

been cut

stand

all

before the judgement-seat of Christ,

one of us

own

off

who

to

for if

to

have

troubled the Galatians.*

Nor

would the church

at

Pergamos have been cen-

sured for having those amongst them that held

pernicious

doclrines.f

* Gal. V.

12.

Private
tRev.

ii.

judgment
14, 15.

is

23
every man*s birthright, considered as an individual; but as a candidate for admission into

a voluntary society^

an agreement, at
"

it is

least,

how can two walk

essential that there

in first principles

be
for

together, except they

be

agreed ?"

And

we

as

are not so

bearing principle

in

to

apply

this

for-

matters of doctrine, as to

raze the foundations of divine truth, neither

shall

we be

pensing
Christ.

justified in applying

with

it

to the dis-

any of the commandments

The meats and days

of which

of
the

Apostle speaks are represented as not affecting

the

kingdom of God.

(he says)
ness,

is

The kingdom

God

not meat and drink; but righteous-

and peace, and joy

ver. 17.

of

But

commandment

if

in the

Holy Ghost."

they had required a positive

of Christ to be dispensed with,

they would have affected the kingdom of God>

and the Apostle would not have written concerning them as he did.
tx)

In short,

it is

not just

argue from Jewish customs which, though

once binding, had ceased to be

so, to Christian

24
ofdinances which continue in

The

full force.

tone which the Apostle holds in respect of

those Jewish rites which ceased to be obliga-

from that which respects

toryi is very different

commandments

still

in force

" Circumcision is

nothing, but the keeping of the

of God."* " I praise you,

remember me

in

all

commandments

brethren, that

and keep the

things,

you
or-

dinances as I delivered them unto you."t

If to be baptized
to

be a

qualification requisite

Christian communion,

second question

(which under

have a right to assume),

absurd to suppose that

it

principles of

it is

belongs to the can*

didate exclusively to judge of it.

to the

this

It is contrary

all

society for a can-

didate to be the judge of his

own qualifications.

Apply

first

it

to

any other

qualification, as faith in

Christ, for instance, or a consistency of chalacter,

and you

surdity.

We

will instantly perceive its

must return

to the first question.

Is baptism pre-requisite to the Lord's

If

it

be,
* i

it

must belong

Cor.

vii.

19,

ab>

Church

to the
t

Cor.

Supper?
to

xi. 1, *J.

judge

whether the candidate has been baptized ot

But the

not.

on which the Apostle

principle

enforces forbearance

is

often alleged as appli]

cable to this question."

the faith receive ye,

HIM."

for

Him that is weak in

God hath receivei>

doubtful whether receivinsr here

It is

means admission

communion.

to

has shewn that this

Mr. Booth

not the ordinary meaning

is

of the term: but allowing this to be the mean-'*

ing,

and that God's having received a person,

furnishes the ground

him,

still

there

consistent with

is
it.

and rule of our receiving

notliing in

our practice

in-

If receiving a brother here

denote receiving him into Christian fellowship,

the meaning

is,

receive

him to

the ordinances,

We

and not to one of them without the other.

are willing to receive

been received of God,

all

who appear

have

ordinances of bap-

to the

tism and the Lord's Supper

to

if

we

object,

it is

because they wish to be received to the one

without the other ; of which there was no ex-

ample

in the first churches.

ticularly noticed, that

for receiving

Let

it

our brethren

also be par-

who

plead

Christians as Christians, receive

26
them TO THE ORDINANCES AS UNDERSTOOD ANI>
PRACTISED BY THEM,

wc

aiid this

do.

If the

prejudices of a pious Catholic would permit

him

them

to request to join with

Supper, they would, as

receive him: but to

we have

at the Lord's

often been told,

what? Would

they pro-

vide a wafer for him, and excuse him from

we

drinking of the cup? No, they would say,

are willing to receive you to the Lord's Supper,

in the

we

way we understand and

practise

it

but

cannot divide the wine from the bread

without dispensing with an essential part of the

Such

institution.

dobaptist.

We

is

our answer to a pious

are willing to receive

the ordinances of Christ, as

practise

them

but

pae->

you to

we understand and

we cannot

divide the one

from the other without dispensing with an

in-

stitution of Christ,'

Objections.
It

has been said that

we all

mixed communion than

tists

that

we have

practise a worse

that with paedobap-

covetous

and other bad

27
*

characters

amongst

us,

&c/

we

If

" bear

them

that are evil" iu things of a moral nature, this

is

our

and

sin,

to argue that

stance,

we ought
because

we ought

to repent of

we do wrong

do so

to

it,

and not

in

one

in-

in another.

If

we

omit to admonish and exclude manifestly wicked characters,

it is

of but

account that

little

are strict in regard of baptism

we

but, in reprov-

ing us, our Lord would not complain of our

not being alike lax in things positive

as

we

are in things moral, but of our not being alike

strict in both.

and not

" These ought ye to have done^

to leave the other

There

undone."

however, a wide difference between

is,

bearing with individuals, even in things which

are

evil,

where that

evil lies

much

so

in the

motive as to be very difficult of detection, and

making

it

a rule to tolerate

men

in

such vices.

It

was no reproach

to

have had a Judas amongst them, though he

was a "

thief,"

manifested
that

to Christ

and

his Apostles

so long as his theft

but had there been a rule

was not

laid

down

covetousness and even theft should be

28
no bar

to

Communion, the reproach had been

indelible.

It

has been

said,

'

If our practice of strict

communion be

act of self-de?ual, and not of pleasure; inasmuch

as charity

excluding those from communion

consider as Christians.'

relates to

many

rigiit,

ought to be to us an

it

would be unable

men

is true,

to take pleasure in

And

but

this so far as

it is

other duties, in which

whom we

no

it

less true of

we may be

called

and

to re-

to act differently from our brethren,

prove them.

But

in thus

further said,
'

of the

The

denying ourselves,

we deny some

human

it

has been

of the best

feeiinajs

This I cannot admit.

heart.'

best feelings of the

human

of love and obedience to

God

heart are those

and

if I

deny

myself of the pleasure which fellowship with

a Christian brother would afford me,

for the

sake of acting up to the mind of Christ, or according to primitive example, I do not deny
the best feelings of the

human

heart,

but on th^

29
contrary, forego the less for the greater.
ti

greater pleasure to obey the will of

to associate with creatures in a

from

It is

God, than

way

deviating

it.

We may act

from temper, or

in this matter

from prejudice, rather than from a conscientious

regard lo the mind of Christ

and they who

oppose us may act from worldly policy, or a

desire to court applause as candid

men

thing.

The question

not deviate from the

am

may be

whether in admitting

is,

mind of

willing to allow that

its

and

being the

thus,

we do

Christ.

open communion

mind of

they ought to allow the same of

;

table,

from a conscientious per-

practised

suasion of

nion

liberal

but neither of these cases proves any

unbaptized persons to the Lord's

and

Christ ; and

strict

commu-

instead of reproaching one

another with bigotry on the one hand, or carnal

policy on the other,

we

quiries to the precepts

New

should confine our in-

and examples of the

Testament.
I am,

Affectionately, Your's,

A.

An Answer

to

WHY

9i

the Question,

ARE YOU

Bttitt Bapti0t2
A DIALOGUE
BETfVEEN

THOMAS ANB JOHN.

BY WILLIAM BUTTON.

HonDon
Printed by J.

Barfield, No.

91,

Wardour

Street,

FOR W. BUTTON AND SON, PATERNOSTER-ROW,

1816.

PREFACE.

The Reviewer of a Letter to a JBaptist Minister,

written

by the Rev. Richard De Courcy, Vicar

of

Alkmond's,

St.

in

Shi*ewsbury,

observes,

that, " Offences will come, and controversies will

arise

and be continued, even on topics that have

been

The

canvassed.

repeatedly

JBaptism has been

subject of

Sensible and

exhausted.

learned advocates have appeared on each side

of the question.

It

might have been hoped that

both parties should have been

left to

sentiments in peace, but that time

This

come."*
*'

that time

is

last

remark

is

not yet come-"

enjoy their
is

not yet

indeed

for,

verified,

the religious

a state of agitation.

Two

denominations of Christians are engaged

in con-

world

now

is

in

Church and the Dissenters from that establishment, and they are
both debating on one subject, which is, Baptism.
troversy

The

the Established

dispute of the former

is,

whether baptism

be, or be not regeneration, or that

it.

The

question

now

which

discussing

effects

among

* Monthly Review for Sept. 177^, p. 243.

the

latter

is,

whether unbaptized persons should, or

should not be admitted to the Lord's supper.

This, at the present moment, occupies the minds,

and employs the pens of those who are denominated Saptists: and

to this the following

is

it

pages have reference.

It is

a controversy not

altogether new.

This dispute,
of Charles

I.

it

should seem, began in the reign

sometime about the year 1633.

in London,

member of that congregational church

of which Mr. Lathorp was pastor, doubting the

validity of that baptism

which Mr. Lathorp had

administered to his child, carried the child to

the parish priest to be rebaptized.

came

The

affair

before the brethren at a church meeting,

and, of consequence, brought on an inquiry,

first,

concerning the validity of lay-baptism, and next,

concerning the validity of infant baptism

itself.

In the end, several members declared against

infant baptism,
to

and desired

liberty to depart,

form a distinct congregation

in

own

and

such order as

To

vi^as

most agreeable

this

peaceable proposal the church agreed, and

the

new church

to their

sentiments.

being formed, Mr. Spilsbury was

appointed pastor of

it.

In 1034, Mr. Lathorp, with about thirty of his

members,

fled into

New

England from the

per-

secution of the prelates.

After his departure, his

church divided into three

parts,

Mr. Canne was

minister of one, Mr. Baribone of another, and

Mr. Jessey of the

third.

These frequent divisions

did not proceed, as their adversaries affirmed,

from

factious

much

spirit,

less

from

the

nature and constitution of our churches, but

partly from the great increase of their members,

and partly from the danger of being discovered

by their persecutors when large societies met."
In 1638, Mr. Kiffin, and several other members
of Mr. Jessey's churchy having become Baptists,

were dismissed from thence

the care of Mr. Spilsbury.

church under

to the

Mr.

Kiffin,

who was

himself a preacher, and at length removed his

communion

to the

church at Devonshire Square,

He

where he was afterward

settled

published a piece, entitled,

A Sober Discourse of

m^ht

to

Church Communion^

in

pastor.

which he en-

deavoured to prove, that no unbaptized persons

may be

regularly admitted to the Lord's supper.

This

thought to be the

is

first

publication pro-

fessedly on this subject.

Mr. Jessey continued

tism

till

1645,

to practice infant

when he renounced

bap-

that opinion,

and was baptized, by immersion, by Mr. Hanserd

Knollys, who had been the same year ordained
pastor of a Baptist church, assembling in Great
St. Helen's.

Mr. Jessey did not quit

his

former charge, on

being baptized, but continued pastor of the same

church

his death,

till

ber, 1663.

which happened

in

Septem-

His situation naturally led him

to

study the point of right to church fellowship;

and, judging mixed

communion lawful, he wrote a

small piece in defence of

on Rom.

xiv. 1,

it.

It is

a dissertation

Such as are weak

in the faith

VI

receive ye.

It

does not appear that this piece

was printed during the

it

seems

to

life

have gone about

of Mr. Jessey
in

warmly
this,

but

manuscript.

In 1672, Mr. Bunyan, then in prison,

lished his Confession of Failh,

and

in it

pub-

pleaded

mixed communion.
In answer to
Messrs. Kiffins and Paul published a piece,
for

Some serious Reflections on that Part

of Mr. Bunyan s Coifessiofi of Faith touching
Church Communion with unhaptized Believers.
The next year, Mr. Bunyan published an
entitled,

answer, entitled, Differences in Judgment about

Water JBaptism no Bar

to

Communion

and, to

this

he subjoined the above-mentioned piece of

Mr.

Jessey's, to satisfy the call of his opponents,

who had

required him to produce the testimony

of some author.

To

this publication

of Mr.

Bunyan's, Messrs. Danvers and Paul replied;

and Mr. Bunyan answered them in 1674, in

about two sheets in twelves, entitled, Peaceable
Principles^ and true.
Since Mr. Bunyan's time, the controversy has
sometimes subsided, and,
considerable warmth.

at other times, risen into

The

celebrated Dr. James

Foster warmly pleaded the cause of mixed

ship, in a sermon,

fellow-

afterwards printed, entitled,

Catholic Communion, which gave occasion to a

dispute, that lasted eight or ten years, from about

1750

to 1760.

The Rev. Mr.

Charles Bulkley, and

others, supported the Doctor's side of the question

and the Rev. Grantham Killingvvorth, and

others, maintained the contrary opinion.

vu
In 1772, the question was started again, and
the doctrine of mixed

by

communion was

affirmed

the Rev. Messrs. Turner of Abingdon,

land of Northampton, and

Brown

Ry-

of Kettering

and denied by the Rev. Messrs. Turner of Birmingham, Booth of London, Butfield of Thorn,
and several more.
In 1781, Mr. Robinson, of Cambridge, published a piece, entitled,

The General Doctrine

of Toleration^ applied to the particular Case of

Free Communion^ from which the above brief
history of the controversy has been taken.

Of

late, this

controversy has again been re-

sumed, through an admirable written

treatise,

by Mr. Robert Hall, of Leicester, entitled, On

Terms of Communion, with a particular View to
the Case of Baptists and Pcedobaptists ; in which
he ingeniously advocates the doctrine of mixed
This produced a pamphlet, encommunion.
titled.

The Admission of unhaptized Persons

the Lord's Supper inconsistent ivith the

a Letter to a Jbriend,

tament,

in

Andrew

Fuller,

New

to

Tes-

by the late

of Kettering. Then followed a

sensible piece, by an anonymous writer, entitled,

Plea for Primitive Communion, occasioned by

the Kev. Mr. HalCs recent Publication, on Terms
This brought forward a reof Communion.
joinder from Mr. Hall, entitled, The essential
Difference betiveen Christian Baptism and the

Baptism of John, more fully stated and confirmed, in Reply to a Pamphlet, entitled, A Plea
To this has suefor Primitive Comimmion.

VIU

ceedecl a publication, replete with fine reasoning,

whicli bears the

munion at

the

Term of ComLord's Supper, by Mr. Joseph

title

of Baptism, a

Kinghorn, of Norwich.

Since

this,

an ingenious

tract has made its appearance, entitled,

The Decision of a General Congress, convened to

little

agree on Terms of Communion, occasioned by the

Rev. Robert HalVs Pamphlet on that Subject by

Christmas Evans, of Anglesey.
y

The Author of

the following Dialogue pretends

not to enter logically into the question; the more

subtle

mode

His aim

why

is,

those,

of argument he leaves to abler pens.

simply to state a few plain reasons

who

are termed " Strict Baptists,"

adhere to their sentiment, and to vindicate them

from the charges of being bigoted, unnecessarily

and unscripturally corifined. They have

been, by some, stigmatized as madmen, or as
fools ; (but not by Mr. Hall, whose elevated mind
exact,

disdains to defend a hypothesis with the wea-

pons of

scurrility;)

the present publication

is

merely an attempt to show, that they are neither

the one nor the other,

who

but, that they are

men

" speak forth the words of truth and sober-

ness,"

and that

their profession.

their

conduct corresponds with

If this should

any degree, a successful

author the highest satisfaction

leaves the public to judge.
April 10,

i8i(J.

be thought,

effort, it will afford

;

but of

this

in

the

he

CONTENTS.

PAGE
!.

Baptist defined

strict

2. Disciples

3. John's

of

Clirist baptized

by John

baptism authorized by

God

....

the Father

5
5

4. John's baptism stamped by the authority and

example of Christ
5. John's

baptism administered under the teaching

and influence of the Holy Ghost

6.

John baptized on a

....

profession of repentance and

15

faith

7.

The

8.

John baptized

great ends of baptism

in the

18

name of

Jesus and of the

23

Trinity
9. Disciples at Ephesus not rebaptized
10.

12

John and

Christ's

....

baptism of the same nature

26
32

ARGUMENTS AGAINST MIXED COMMUNION.

1.

Baptism a positive

2.

Example of Christ
at the

first

3. Apostolical

institution

of Jesus Christ

in admitting

institution of the supper

examples and

New

39

none but Baptists

....

45

Testament prece-

dents

49

4.

Union and order of a gospel church

5.

Opinion of ancient and modern divines

....

56

...

64

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.
1

Baptism a mere circumstance

2.

Want

of brotherly love

69
76

PAGE
3.

No

4.

Cases which

5.

Texts of scripture which seem to favour

warrant in the word of

make

it

God

to forbid

81

82

84

expedient and necessary

it

CONCLUSION.
1.

Behever's baptism of great importance

2.

Every new convert

to

raged to submit to
3.

To be

be exhorted and encou-

89

90

it

followed with watchfulness, prayer, and

universal obedience
4. Baptized persons

ought

92
to unite with a gospel

church, and attend to the Lord's supper

93

ANSWER

^c.

V'V

QUESTION,

TO THE

ALKING,

SfC.

SfC.

one evening,

meadow

in the

some

contemplation, I perceived, at

little

of

dis-

two persons, apparently sedate, and very

earnest in conversation, I quickened my pace,
tance,

and soon overtook them.

the two recognized me, and
I

am happy

to see

you;

it

I replied,

to see you,

my

old,

My good

"

sir,

and

turning,

finding;

was an old acquaintance who thus ac-

costed me,

came

passing, one of

did I expect to

little

Upon

meet with you here."

that

On
said,

And

worthy

as

did I expect

little

friend, in this place.

hither for retirement,

to meditate in the

and, like Isaac of

field.'

On

which, he

" This com-

immediately thus addressed me.

panion of mine has been proposing a question,

which has led us on

hope

will not

with us ?"

prove unprofitable;
I shall

your conference,
request that I

to conversation,

if it

be no intrusion

may be

only a hearer

you unite

will

be happy,' said

I,
;

which 1
'

but

to hear
1

must

pray, what..

2
may

my

be the subject?'

friend, "

now much

we

To be

"

plain,"

answered

are debating on a point which

minds of the

agitates the

religious

public, particularly those of the Baptist denomination.

nion

It

in

is,

whether mixed or

Gospel Churches be the most agreeable

New Testament."

to the

commu-

strict

I replied,

discussed

A point, my dear

which would give

do

me

Upon which,

begin.'

sir,'

pleasure to hear

farther ceremony, they proceeded,

without any

and the

fol-

lowing Dialogue took place between these two

friends,

whom we

John.

Thomas began:

T.

Why

are

you a

J, Will you favour

Thomas and

shall designate

strict

me

Baptist?

with an explanation of

what am I to understand by a
Saptist, and what by a strict Baptist?

terms?

T.

(i.e.)

By

a Baptist^ 1 mean one

who

denies the

validity of Infant JBaptism, considering

human

it

as a

invention, not to be found in the inspired

Volume, nor practised in the primitive and purest

ages,

and who

also

neither admits sprinkling

because the im-

nor pouring to be baptism;

port of the original word, employed to express

t&e baptismal

rite,

unnatural violence,

cannot,

without the

mean any

thing less

die immersion of the whole body.

is

confessedly Greek, and

posed

to

it?

than

The word

who may be

be best able to interpret

most

sup-

Certainly

the native Greeks must understand their

own

language better than foreigners, and that they

have always understood the word baptism to

signify dipping,

and

from their

first

to this day, they

have

therefore,

embracing of Christianity,

always baptized by immersion.

By

mean one who

a strict Baptist^ I

upon baptism

to the Lord's table,

and

an advocate for what

Having thus

insists

as an indispensable pre-requisite
is

is

therefore considered as

termed

strict

communion.

briefly explained, I freely

my

ledge myself a Baptist, but have

to the propriety of not admitting

acknow-

doubts a$

any other than

Baptists to the Lord's supper.

J. I thank you for being so explicit and as
you have avowed yourself a Baptist^I do frankly
;

declare myself to be a strict Baptist, and for the

following reasons:

1st,

my Lord

Because

and

Master, Jesus Christ, was one; and, 2nd, Because

the Apostles and primitive Christians were evi-

dently such.

T. Very good reasons indeed,

if

they can be

proved.

we

adduce such
I would
plain facts as will satisfy your mind.
hot be ostentatious, or dogmatical, nor would
J.

say

hope, before

any thing

in ill-humour;

rather sanctify the

give a reason of
fear,

part, to

Lord God

my

faith

and a good conscience.

but I would

my

and
with meekness, and
I

in

heart,

venture to assert,

with a humble confidence, that the Lord Jesus

Christ admitted none to that ordinance which he
instituted prior to his death,

B 2

and which

is

very

4
properly termed the Lord's supper, but those

who had been

T.
tion

My

previously baptized.

dear brother, this

me

suffer

is

a very bold asser-

on what ground can

to ask,

this

be established?
J. I have no doubt that

it is

to be established,

Do you not read, that the

and on the firmest basis.

disciples baptized, prior to their

communion with

Christ and one another, in the solemn ordinance

of the Eucharist ?

John,

Jesus himself baptized not, hut his

iv. 2.

Disciples,

The
tized,

disciples

of Christ, you perceive, bap-

and no doubt by the authority and express

command

of their divine master; and did they,

think you, administer that

they had submitted to

rite

to others before

themselves?

it

Would

it

not have been altogether incongruous?

T.

I think

informed

who

would

it

but

request to be

baptized them, and whether their

baptism was Christian baptism,

of the

same

nature with that which they were commissioned

to administer after the resurrection of Christ

J. In answer to your

not to say,

it is

my

first

question, I scruple

opinion, that they had been

and those who are not strict

Baptists allow this; even the acute Mr. Hall

baptized by John
says, " It

is

almost certain, that some, probably

most of them, (the apostles and the one hundred

and twenty disciples assembled with them at the

day of Pentecost,) had been baptized by John."*

As

to the

my

surprize, that there should be the least hesi-

second question,

tation or doubt,

cannot but express

whether John's baptism were a

Christian institute.

T.

admit that they were baptized by John

two of the
to

disciples of Jesus are expressly said

have been the disciples of John, (John,

i.

35.)

and therefore were undoubtedly baptized by him;

but the query still is, and I own that I am one

who

feel

doubtful about John's baptism being

really Christian Baptism.

My

J,

worthy brother, have a

with me, and

I will

endeavour, in the plainest

manner, to remove your scruples,

down

patience

little

by

laying-

the following propositions

was evidently from heaven

he had his commission from God; he had a divine
warrant, and acted by divine authority.
1.

John's baptism

John,

i.

There

6.

ivas a

man

sent

from God,

whose name was John.

He was

sent of

God

the Father,

who

sent his

only begotten Son into the world, that whosoever

believeth in
everlasting

John

him, should not perish,

life.

The same

into the world,

and

divine Father sent

his office

and work were

was the harbinger, the forerunner of

he bare witness of him, and he was the

peculiar: he
Christ,

but have

Terras

of CommuDion, p. 39*

6
first

administrator of the

new ordinance

of bap*

The law and the prophets were till John

then a new dispensation commenced, even the
tism.

John was commissioned to introduce

it by preaching and baptizing.

Christian.
it,

and

to introduce

Hence, Mark the Evangelist,

ment of

his

history, styles

commencethe preaching and

in the

baptism of John, " The beginning of the gospel

of Jesus Christ," Mark,

dispensation

and

this is

every
is

then commenced;

of the gospel

confirmed by Luke,

that time the

man

intimating that the

5.

i.

kingdom of God

presseth into

xvi.
is

By

it.

Since

16.

and
kingdom

preached^
the

undoubtedly meant the gospel dispensation;

and every man pressing into

it,

refers to the

crowds

which attended the ministry of John, who were

and converted under his ministry,
and were baptized by him, and so became subconvicted,

jects

of this kingdom.

And

it

is

worthy of

remark, that after the default of Judas,

proposal was

made

to

make

when a

choice of another

apostle in his room, that the proper person for

was thus pointed out by Peter. " It

should be one of those which have companied
with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus went
election

in

and out among

us,

beginning from the baptism

of John, unto that same day that he was taken

tip from us, must one be ordained to be a witness
with us of his resurrection;"* but,

Acts

i.

21, 22.

why

is it

thus

expressed, beginning

Undoubtedly
choice of

it

from

the baptism of

means, that

who had been

if

John ?

one was made

baptized by John, he

was eligible to the apostolic office; and

surely John's baptism

was considered

if

so,

as Chris-

tian.

John's baptism was stamped by the au-

2.

thority

and the example of Christ.

Matt.

13

iii.

Then cometh Jesus from

15.

Galilee to Jordan, unto John, to be baptized of

him.
But John forbade him, saying, " / have

need to be baptized of

me?"

And

thee,

and comest thou

Jesus ansivering,

to

said unto himy

now : for thus it becometh us

Then he suffered him.
tofidjil all righteousness'
Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan, &c.

Suffer

it to

My good
view of

be so

friend,

pause here a

this brief

and take a

little,

sketch of the history of the

blessed Redeemer.

Jesus came from Galilee,

Mary his
many years

(from Nazareth) where Joseph, and

mother resided, where he

lived for

in great obscurity, in all obedience to

God,

in

Subjection to his parents, exercising a conscience

void of offence towards

God and man, and em-

ploying his time in devotion and business.

came from
(a

He

Galilee to the great river, the Jordan,

three days' journey)

to

be baptized.

He

considered then, that an attention to this ordi-

nance was of importance, and

it

tians to follow his example.

Away

all

behoves Christhen with

supposed obstacles, when a positive

insti-

8
tution

is

and G^od requires an atten-

established,

God

tion to it; start no objections to the will of

and of Christ.

At

when Jesus presented himself

first,

for

John was struck with awe, and expressed himself with humility and reverence,
and said, " I have need to be baptized of thee,
and comest thou to me?" Mark the answer of
our blessed Lord.
It
^^iff^r it to he so now'
is as if he had said,
The question is not whether

baptism,

'

thou or

be the more excellent

baptize, for
It is

my

my

it is

thy duty to

Father has sent thee to baptize.

pleasure and duty to be obedient to

Father, whose will

my

know, though it be hidden

from thee. Baptism is a new law of the gospel
church, of which, though I be the Head, yet I

must be conformed
cerning which

my

to

the

members

Father's will

is,

of

con-

it,

they

that

should be baptized with water, as well as with

For thus it becometh us to fulfil

It became John to administer
all righteousness.'
the ordinance of baptism to Christ, as he was his
forerunner, and the only administrator of it, and
that he might fulfil the ministry which he had
received; and as it became Christ to fulfil all
righteousness, moral and ceremonial, and bapthe

Holy Ghost,

tism being a part of his Father's

will,

became him to fulfil this also and

became Christ, it cannot be unbecoming

came

to do,

since

it

it

in us to submit to this ordinance;

viewed

which he

it

as

and since he

a part of the righteousness to be

9
fulfilled
all

by him,

it

ought

to

be submitted to by

who would be accounted

those

followers of

him.

When

John

clearly understood, that

was the

it

will of the Father, and the will of Christ, he

immersed

his Saviour in the river

solemn exhibition

it

was.

Jordan

Solemn

and a

to Christ, to

John, to his disciples, and to the surrounding

multitude, behold the Son of God, manifest iu
the flesh, immersed in water by his commissioned
harbinger, John, to represent his kind intention
in

coming

into the world, to be bathed

in sor-

rows, in tears, in wrath, and in blood, to redeem

the chief of sinners from the abyss of misery.

Hear the Divine Father, with an audible voice,

expressing his approbation, by proclaiming, " This
is

my

beloved Son, in

and view the Holy

alighting

whom

Spirit,

am

well pleased,"

descending as a dove,

upon him, and abiding with him.

'*

This

divine rubric of baptism," as the venerable Booth

observes, " exhibits to view the infinite source

of

all

our happiness, and the glorious object of

Here the blessed God is revealed, under the paternal name, as the object
of repentance, and the fountain of mercy under
all

our worship.

the FILIAL character, as the immediate object of

confidence for pardon, peace,

and protection

and, under the denomination of the

as the object of dependence
sanctification,

and consolation."

for

Holy

Spirit,

illumination,

Well might the


10
ancients exclaim

"

Go

and there
and who can

to Jordan,

learn the doctrine of the Trinity

;"

take a survey of the wondrous scenes exhibited

on Jordan's banks, when John baptized his

Saviour, and say, his baptism was not Christian
baptism.
It is

worthy of remark, that prior

to the period

of our Lord's submission to the ordinance, that

he appeared present

in the

midst of the numerous

multitude which attended the baptism of John.

John,

i.

unto him.

25

Why

and said

28, Afid they asked him,

baptizest thou, if thou be not that

Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet ?

'

John answered,

saying,

hut there standeth one

noty he

it is,

ivho,

baptize with water,

among you, whom ye know

coming after me,

hefore me, ivhose shoe-latchet

These things

unloose.

ivere

I am

this passage,

7iot

preferred

worthy

to

done in Bethabara,

beyond Jordan, where John was

From

is

baptizing.'*

observe

John was now baptizing at JBethabara, beyond Jordan. Here he received the messengers
from Jerusalem, and bore that testimony of Jesus
1.

which

is

recorded in the

word Bethabara,

signifies

first

of John.

The

a passage-house, and

such there were on both sides of the

river,

near

the fords, and most likely there were houses to

accommodate and direct travellers, in times of

low w ater, and ferry-houses for the convenience
of passage, when floods and high waters rendered

11
Dr. Lightfoot says, " That

boats necessary."*

Bethabara

very

is

commonly apprehended

the place of passage, either where Israel

when they entered

over,

the land, or the

to

be

came

common

ford that people went over from one side to the

other,

from Judea

No

Jericho."!

Perea,

to

at

the fords of

place perhaps could be chosen

more convenient for baptism than this: there

was a gentle descent into water of a sufficient
depth for immersion, and here were houses for
accommodation,

While he was baptizing, a multitude attended, and Jesus made his appearance among^
them, and they knew him not; but John deThis, I suppose,
clared that he was present.
2.

was the

first

time that John

knew him,

personally, or after the flesh, for there

intimacy between them

view,

first

how

in early life.

was somewhat

that

is,

was no
This, at

surprising, considering

nearly related they were, and

how remark-

able the conception and birth of both of them

had

what frequent interviews

been, as well as

they might have had,

Jerusalem

at the yearly feasts

but there seems to have

peculiar providence,

in

thus

been

at

preventing that

acquaintance, that might otherwise have grown

up

to

ship,

familiarity

and tenderness of friend-

which, in the eyes of a prejudiced and

Robinson's tiistory of Baptism, p. 13.

+ Dr. Lightfoot's Works, p. 528.

12
censorious world, might have rendered John's

testimony to Christ somewhat suspected

But,

when Jesus condescended to make

his appearance, which was probably while conversing with the deputation from the Jews, by
some powerful impression on his mind, he preat this time,

sently discerned, that this ivas he

whom

he had

before taught the people to expect, and of

whose

person he had given so high a character.

I

proceed to observe,

was administered under

the teaching and influence of the Holy Ghost.
That Divine Spirit, who descended on Christ at
his baptism, taught, guided, influenced, and as3.

John's baptism

sisted John.

was truly a remarkable and pleasing message

which was sent by an angel to Zecharias, respecting the son which his wife Elizabeth was to
It

He

He shall
shall he great in the sight of the Lord.

bear to him, even John.

Luke,

i.

13

15,

Holy Ghost, even from his moshall go hefore him in the spirit
and power of Elias. Well might our Saviour
he filled tvith the

thers womh. He

exclaim, " Verily, I say unto you, that there has

not risen a greater than John the Baptist."

He
in the

priest

of the Lord : not

His father was an ordinary

shall he great in the sight

view of men.
;

had

as for worldly titles and dignities he

his
John the Baptist was
clothing was not soft raiment, he vvasnotgorgeously

none.

apparelled,

his highest

nor lived delicately,

as

title

in

kings*

: ;

13
he was clothed with a skin, with camels'
and had a leathern girdle about his loins

courts
hair,

he had no palace, no stately habitation

mostly in desert places,

he lived

inhabited

little

and
was

was locusts and wild honey. He

not great, then, in outward dignity and splendour; but, what is infinitely more important,
his food

of the Lord, even Jehovah his God, whose approbation is the highest

he was great

in ike sight

glory.

He

ivasjilled with the

As

a spirit of prophecy, which

Holy Ghost.

dinary gift; and our Lord himself

there

an extraor-

is

testifies,

that

not a greater prophet than John the

is

Luke,

Baptist,

vii.

28.

Yea, he passed a

greater eulogium on this august character,

still

by

was more than a prophet, Matt. xi. 9

as he was, with regard to his moral and re-

declaring he
for

ligious character,

one of the best of men, so he

had some peculiar

honours,

superior to

any

prophet of former generations, on account of his

wonderful conception and

birth,

his

knowledge of gospel mysteries, and

testimony to the Messiah,
as, also,

(John,

excellent

his express

iii.

27

36;)

because he was his immediate harbinger,

and was the subject of ancient prophecies, and

He was filled with the

long expected by Israel.

Holy Ghost,

as a spirit of sanctijication,

that from his conception.

the

Holy

At

that early period,

Spirit took possession of his heart,

an early presage was given of

and

it,

and

when he leaped

14
in his mother's

womb

of a Saviour, (Luke,

for joy, at the

i.

approach

41 and 44,) which

mo-

We

was supernatural.
just remark here,
early an infant, who is shapen in iniquity,
and born in sin, may be wrought upon and made
meet for heaven, through the regenerating and
tion

how

sanctifying influences of the

infants in glory, in his

"

Holy

Spirit.

Erskine

describes the felicity and song of

beautifully

Gospel Sonnets

heavenly choirs a question rose.

111

That

What

stirr'd

up

rank of

all

Owes
" Babes

strife will

never close.

the ransom'd race.

highest praise to sovereign grace.

thither caught

from

womb

and breast,

Claim'd right to sing above the

rest,

Because they found the happy shore,

They

Let

this

heavy

never saw nor sought before."

console the minds of parents under the

loss of their infant children.

He was

filled

of revelation

with the Holy Ghost as a

for

how soon

spirit

did he glorify Christ,

by revealing Him to John. He discovered to

him the dignity of his person, and the gracious
design of his coming into the world, viz. to take

away

sin.

John had made known

John,

the person of Christ.

witness of Him, and

of whom

spake.

preferred before

to him, the dignity of

i.

15,

cried, saying,

He

John bare
This was he

that comelh after

me : for he was

before me.

me

is

15
ministry

John's

centered

in

How

Christ.

meanly did he speak of himself, that he might

magnify Christ; he expresses, that he was not
worthy

unloose his shoe-latchet, or to carry

to

John hare witness of him,

was an open and public testimony that he

his shoes after him.

and

it

was the voice of one crying in the

wilderness; he cried aloud, that all manner of
gave.

It

persons might take notice of

cerned
sured

in

of,

He

it.

it,

cried as one

and well affected

for all are con-

who was

well as-

to the truth, of

which

and what was that truth, " He

THAT COMETH AFTER ME IS PREFERRED BEFORE
ME FOR HE WAS BEFORE ME." The two uaturcs
he bare witness

of Christ are here proclaimed by John.

Christ,

came aftei^ him he was born six months

he made his public appearance after
after him
him. *' As God, he was be/ore him for he was
before Abraham ;'* " yea, he was before all
" His
things, and by him all things consist."^

as man^

goings forth were of old, from everlasting. "J

The Holy

Spirit revealed to

John the great

design of Christ's coming into the world, to ob^

tain redemption, through his blood, the forgive-^

neas of

He

sins,

according to the riches of his grace.

influenced his

mind

was the sum of the

apostle's

pentance toward God, and

John,

viii.

58.

to preach

f Col.

faith

i.

if.

that

which

ministry " Re-f

toward our Lord

Mic,

v.

2.

16
" I baptize you with water, to

Jesus Christ."

repentance," said the glorious harbinger of our

blessed Lord

and, Avhen addressing the Pha-

and Sadducees, he warned them of their

danger, and said, *' Bring forth fruits meet for
risees

He

repentance."

told the people, that the reno-

and the reformation of

vation of their hearts,

their lives,

were of vast importance; that they

must forsake sin, and turn unto God, if ever

He
they came to the enjoyment of eternal life.
preached

remission

the

of

sins,

through the

atoning blood and sacrifice of Christ.

Behold

Lamb

of God, which
taketh aivay the sin of the world ; what a noble
" Behold the Lamb of God !"
testimony this
John,

i.

29,

the

which bespeaks him the great sacrifice, by whom

atonement is made for sin, and man reconciled
to

God.

sacrifice

The Lamb

of

which was

God

typified

offered every

by the daily

morning and

evening continually, and by the paschal lamb,

the blood of which being sprinkled on the doorposts, secured the Israelites from the stroke of

the destroying angel.

The Lamb

of God, ap-

pointed by him, devoted to him, and accepted

him he was well pleased, " which

taketh away the sin of the world :" this was what
he undertook he appeared to put away sin by
the sacrifice of himself, and he accomplished the
gracious, the wondrous work.
The Holy Spirit revealed unto John, the
of him, for in

importance of his administering the ordinance of

17
baptism, which was a new

been

said, that the

on a Jewish

rite

It has,

rite.

know,

baptism of John was founded

many have

of Jewish proselyte baptism

written in defence
in reply to which,

it

has been often remarked, and that justly, that

if

such a

rite

had

existed,

the regular priests,

and not John, would have administered

and
there would have been no need of a new and
extraordinary appointment from heaven, to give
being to an old established custom nor would
it have been decent for John, or any other man,
it;

(especially Jesus Christ,

to treat native Jews,

who had no paganism

to

proselytes were treated.

with great propriety,

if

It

put away,) as pagan

has also been asked,

John's baptism belonged

Jewish dispensation, how came

to the

it

to pass

Jews were so surprisingly ignorant of it,

when Christ asked them, Whether it was from
heaven, or of men? they said. We cannot tell.
And, it is to be observed, that the persons to
that the

that

whom

Christ put the question,

ignorant multitude,

were not the

but the chief priests and

had particular reference to the

authority by which John baptized, which, if received from them, they must certainly have known
would have replied, It was
it, and, no doubt,
elders

and

from men,

it

it

originated

among our

fathers before

John was born. The fact is, that it was a new

rite^ it was unknown in the ritual of Moses, and
no where to be found in the Old Testament.
And, as the baptism of John was a new rite, so
c

18
it

was revealed

important one

Have

it

and

tent sinners,

must be the

him by the Holy Spirit, as an

must be administered to peni-

to

first

to believers io Christ

patience with me,

deavGui" to point out to

nance of God

my

dear

sir,

while I en-

you the design of

this ordi-

be treated with

remarks, that "

and, as

it

not

Abraham Booth, judiciously

Baptism being a gracious appointmust have an important meaning

a positive ordinance, the

it is

it is

That champion

indifference.

of the Baptist cause,

ment of God,

am

which, when duly considered, I

fully persuaded, will convince you, that

to

and he

administrator.

w hole of

its

design must be fixed by Divine institution, for

we have no more
any

tion for

rite

authority to invent a significa-

of holy worship, than w^e have

and the design of baptism must be learned from the New Testament,
to appoint the rite itself;

where the ordinance

itself is to

Some have mistaken

its

man

came
but

it

his

in

out of the

primeval

hand of

and have run

Alas " Baptism,

design,

into very erroneous notions.

like

be learned."*

when it first
was pure;

state,

its institutor,

has been basely contaminated, and per-

verted from

purposes.

its original

It

design, to very different

has become

all

things to all men,

as circumstances seem to require."

It has

been represented as a saving ordinance,^

that there

is

no salvation without

it.

The church

* Booth's Paedobaptisni examined, p. 177.

19
of

Rome

thus speaks by the Council of Trent

" If any one shall say, that baptism

sary to salvation,

Greek church

let

says,

is

not neces-

him be accursed."

The

" It cannot be omitted, in

respect of infants, without endangering their sal-

Some

vation."

Protestant

confessions,

also,

assert the same.

It

has been affirmed to be a regenerating or-

dinance

the established church of this

so, in

when water
and a cross made on
country,

ventures to say,

'*

is

the forehead,

This child

body of

grafted into the

sprinkled on the face,

is

the priest

regenerated, and

Christ's church

;"

and,

very early, are poor ignorant persons taught to

say,

*'

that, in

members of

their baptism, they

were made

God, and inhekingdom of heaven." But nothing

Christ, children of

ritors of the

like this appears in sacred writ.

1.

That which

principally intended,

is

represent the death,

Christ.

"

burial,

The immersion

the great Witsius,

'*

and

is,

to

resurrection of

into the water," says

represents to us,

that tre-

mendous abyss of Divine justice, in which Christ

was plunged for a time, in some measure, in
consequence of his undertaking
is

a very

fit

for

our sins

so

it

representation of the death of Christ

the continuing

how

represents his

burial^

short soever under the water,

and the lowest degree of

when he was thought to be wholly

cut off, while in the grave, that was both sealed
and guarded. The emersion, or coming out of
humiliation,

c 2

20
the water,

us

gives

some resemblance of

or victory obtained, in his death,

resurrection,

over death, which he vanquished within

most

recesses, even the grave.

It is

Rom.

embracing his
iii.

vi. 3, 4.

designed to be a solemn and practical

profession of our

Gal.

its in-

All these par-

ticulars the apostle intimates."*

2.

his

27, "

tized into

homage

to Christ,

Hence, saith the apostle,

religion.

As many of you

Christ,

and of our

as have been bap-

have put on Christ^

Mr.

Thomas Bradbury says, " Baptism is what you

may call the frontispiece of the Christian religion.
It

is

the

first

public declaration of our adherence

to the Messiah.

It is the

badge, the mark, the

signature of our subjection to him.t

communion

3. It is to intimate, that the

believer has with Christ,

in those blessings

God, are the

and the

he has

which flow from the love of

result of the death of Christ,

which are applied by the Holy

baptized in the

interest

the

name of the sacred

and

Spirit.

When

Three,

we pub-

licly declare, that our eyes are directed

to,

and our

hearts affected with, the freeness of the Father's

grace, the all-sufficient atonement of the Son,

the sanctifying influence of the

Spirit.

designed to represent the believer's

4. It is

dying to

Holy

and

sin,

and

to the world,

again to live unto God.

Witsius's

CEconomy of

Thus,

and

it is

introduced.

the Covenants, vol.

t Duty and Doctrine of Baptism,

p.

30 and

his rising

iii.

60.

p. ZUfS.

in the epistles

to the

Romans and

lossians, as a sign of our being

to

the principles and

to the

Co-

dead and buried

pursuits of the present

world, and, by faith in Christ, raised as into a

new world. Rom. vi. 3 12. Col. ii. 12.

Now, my dear Friend, put all these things
together consider baptism as a new and evangelical rite, appointed by God the Father, to be
:

administered by John as a preparation for the

appearance of the prophesied Messiah

reflect

on

Christ himself attending at the baptism of John,

and afterwards submitting to that rite at his hands

take a retrospective view of the Holy Spirit,
anointing John for the purpose of his administering the ordinance as a representation of the

death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, for the

pardon, justification, and salvation of

believe in

him

previous

to

God, and

who

attend to the requisitions of John

baptism,

faith

all

viz.

Repentance toward

toward our Lord Jesus Christ,

what Christ required, and the

apostles demanded; and, then, judge, whether
John's baptism was not Christian baptism.
were

which

T*.

have listened, with attention,

to the ob-

you have made, and, really, I am

staggered, and am, I own, almost persuaded to

servations

believe, that

your ideas are correct with respect

to John's baptism.

you may be not almost a believer on this head, but that you may be altogether convinced, that the remarks which have
J. I

would

that

been suggested set the matter in a clear

light.

m
T. But

me

think

hope you

be displeased, nor

will not

impertinent,

if I

ask two or three more

questions on the subject.

J. Displeased

certainly not

speak out your whole mind

highest satisfaction to

me

be
it

free

and open,

will afford the

to discuss the point

thoroughly.

T, Well,

then,

ask,

shall

appear, that John baptized in the

and you know

tism

tian

most

name

is

bap-

called in ques-

intelligent writer has said, " Chris-

baptism was invariably administered

name

it

of Jesus;

this is essential to Christian

This, I have understood,

tion.

Does

first,

of Jesus

while there

is

in

the

sufficient evidence

was not performed in that name."*

Did John administer the ordinance,
in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost ? because the same writer asserts,
that " none will contend that John immersed his
disciples in the name of the Holy Trinity."t
And, thirdly, I ask, Does it not appear that the
disciples at Ephesus, who had submitted to
John's baptism, were rebaptized by Paul ? Now,
that John's

I ask again,

if

these are facts that can be established, does

it

not naturally lead us to question the validity

of John's baptism as Christian baptism

J.

You

have,

my

good brother, advanced ob-

jections, which, at first view,

appear formidable,

but,

when thoroughly

investigated, I think they

will

appear groundless.

Let us examine them.

* Hall's IVkcms of

Communion,

p. 21,

Ibid< p. 55.
.

23
As

to the

Acts, xix.

4,

Is

first,

that

not expressly said, in

it

John required of the candidates

him

" that they should believe on

for baptism,

which should come

after him, that

is,

on Christ
that he

Jesus:" and,

is

should

on such a profession, and yet not

insist

it

not a strange idea,

name

baptize in his

surely, the very requisition

supposes that such was John's practice. Besides,

the next verse,

in

"

When

the

it

they heard

name

expressly said,

is

that

they were baptized in

this,

of the Lord Jesus."

know

it is

dis-

puted, whether that verse applies to John, or to

the apostle Paul, to which

At

tention very soon.

for granted, as I

to John,

and

if

1 shall call

your

present, I shall take

am

fully

so,

this

persuaded
objection

it

atit

relates

entirely

is

overthrown, and that point, whether he baptized

name

in the

of Jesus,

is

completely settled and

at rest.

As

to the

second query.

his disciples in the

My answer

is,

Jesus, implies

do

it.

That
it,

name

Did John immerse

of the sacred Trinity?

his baptizing in the

name

of

although he might not verbally

I think that Dr. Lightfoot has set this

matter in a clear point of view

his

words are as

follow.

" Three thousand converted are baptized in

the name of the Lord Jesus, Acts, ii. 38, which
no whit disagreeth from the command, Baptize
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
'

of the

Holy Ghost.' " For the form of baptism

in

;;

24
those

first

days of the gospel, of which the

Testament giveth the

story,

may be

New

considered

under a threefold condition.

name of
was then ready to come

John the Baptist baptized

1.

Messias, or Chnsl, that

in the

but that Jesus of Nazareth was he, lie himself

knew not, till he had run a good part of his
course,

The

2.

them

disciples baptizing the Jews, baptized

in the

name of Jesus: upon

this reason,

because the great point of controversy then in

the nation about Messias was, whether Jesus of

All the nation acknow-

Nazareth was he or no.

ledged a Messias, but the most of them abomi-

nated that Jesus of Nazareth should be thought

to be he therefore, those that, by the preaching
:

of the gospel,

Messias,
critical
sias.

3.

came

acknowledge him to be

to

were baptized

badge of

their

into his

name, as the

embracing the true Mes-

But,

Among

was not

the Gentiles, where that question

afoot,

they baptized in the

name

of the

Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;

and,

was

so that

baptizing in the

for a season,

name

of Jesus,

for the settling of the evidence

and when that was thoroughly established, then it was used no more
of his being Messias

but baptism was in the name of the Father, &c.*

* Lightfoot's

Works,

vol.

i.

p. 276.

25
To
Gill,

same purport is the languaire of Dr.

his comment on Acts, ii. 38, " Then

the
ill

Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized,

every one of you, iji the name of Jesus Christ."
" Not to the exclusion of the Father, and of the

whose name,

Spirit, in

be administered
is

ordinance

also, this

name

but, the

is

to

of Jesus Christ

particularly mentioned, because of these Jews,

who had

before rejected and denied him as the

Messiah

but now, upon their repentance and

faith,

they are to be baptized in his name,

his authority, according to his

command

by

pro-

fessing their faith in him, devoting themselves to

him, and calling on his name."

Consider the time when

the

first

sion.

not probable,
first

it is

it

scarcely possible,

administration of the ordinance

the commission given,

omit the most solemn part of

ther, they

was
the great commis-

took place;

act of baptism after

It is

that on the
after

this

could not omit

it.

that they

No,

it.

Be

should

my

bro-

assured, that

Peter, and the rest of the apostles, baptized in

the

name

of the Father, and of the Son, and of

would otherwise have been

a direct violation of Divine law, and a criminal
rejection of the express precept of their Lord
and Master. I hope you clearly perceive this.

the

Holy Ghost.

It

my two first
must acknowledge,
am impatient to hear what

T. Indeed, your observations on

queries are

new

to me, and, I

have weight

you have

advance on

to

but

my

third.

26
happy if the remarks made, appear
and obvious, and of such weight as td

J. I shall be

so plain

overthrow the objections started.

to your third question.

Does

the disciples at Ephesus,

who had

it

proceed

now

not appear that

submitted to

John's baptism, were re-baptized by the apostle

Paul?

Before

to peruse the
1.

And

it

at Corinth,
coasts

make

a reply, I shall beg leave

whole text;
came

it

stands thus: Acts xix.

to pass, that, while

Apollos was

Paul having passed through

came

to

Ephesus

the uppef

and finding

certain

disciples,

2.

He

said unto them.

Holy Ghost
him,

We

he any
3.

received the

And they said unto

have not so much as heard whether there

Holy Ghost.

And

he said unto them. Unto what then were

ye baptized ?
4.

Have ye

since ye believed?

And

they said. Unto John's baptism.

Then said Paul, John

verily baptized ivith

of repentance, saying unto the people,

that they should believe on him ivhich should come
the baptism

after him, that

5.

When

is,

on Christ Jesus.

they heard this, they wete baptized

iri

name of the Lord Jesus,

6. And when Paul had laid his hands upon
them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they
spake with tongues, and prophesied.
7. And all the men ivere about twelve.
the

Respecting
I

am

this

remarkable historical passage,

aware, that there are eminent

pose that

ver. 5, relates to

men who

sup-

an

inti-

Paul, and

is

27
mation, that he, not bein^ satisfied with John's

baptism, not considering it as a Christian institute,

But there

re-baptized the disciples at Ephesus.

are others equally eminent,

who

many

consider that verses 4 and

continued sentence

great critics,
5,

and the learned

make one
3eza exon

presses himself with great confidence,

this

head, and concludes, that Paul did not baptize

these converts anew, but only declared his ac-

quiescence

in the sufficiency

of the baptism they

had already received, by imparting to them the

gifts of the Holy Spirit, as in ver. 6.
Poole, a valuable non-conformist divine, ^nd
celebrated critic, has thrown a clear light on this
somewhat obscure part of apostolic history, and
his reasoning appears, at least to

me, very con-

clusive.*

You

will

observe two questions put

apostle to the disciples,

at

Ephesus,

by

the

and the

answers given:
1.

Have ye

believed

received the

Holy Ghost

since ye

meaning, not the special, regenerating,

and sanctifying grace of the Holy Ghost, for that

is supposed in their being disciples and believers,
but the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost?

They answered,

"

We

have not so

heard, whether there be any

much

Holy Ghost."

as

By

which they could not mean the Person of the

Poole's Annotations on Acts, xix.

28
Holy Spirit, for they must have known that there
was such a divine person, from the writings of
the Old Testament, with which they were conversant, and, from

the

ministry of John, into

w hose baptism they were baptized who saw

;

God

Spirit of

witness of
to

come

Ghost

descending on Jesus, and bore

and declared, that Christ, who was

it,

would baptize with the Holy

after him,

nor could they

the

mean

the special grace of

the Spirit which they had received

for they

experienced his operations on their hearts.

had
But

they had not heard of the effusion of his extraordinary and

miraculous

received opinion

among

gifts

for,

was a

it

the Jews, that, after the

death of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the

of prophecy departed from Israel, and they

spirit

never heard that he was returned, or of his being

anew with

given

his miraculous gifts.

2. Paul asks, "

What

tized?

Unto what then were ye bap-

doctrine did you

make a

profession

of? Into

what name were ye immersed?"

reply,

Unto John's

'

baptism.'

Upon

They

this an-

swer, the apostle proceeds to give an account

of John's baptism, as follows

1.

'*

John

verily baptized with the

repentance.

2.

(that

is,

is,

baptism of

Saying, to the people, that they

should believe on

him; that

Him which

should come after

on Christ Jesus.

3.

When

they

the penitent believers) were baptized

in the

name

strike

you as a very plain narrative of the nature

of the

Lord Jesus."

Does not

this

29
of John's baptism
observes, " It

and from hence, as Poole

manifest, that the baptism of

is

John and of Christ, (which he commanded) is

one and the same. Johns baptism did respect
and obliged the baptized to believe on
him, as also to repent and more, it was a seal
Christ,

them of the remission of sins, Mark i. 4. so

that the baptism of John and the baptism of the

to

had the same

apostles afterwards,

sign,

and the

same thing

signified in them both, as also they

had both the same end, and therefore they were

both the same;

add

and the

Baptist

that

to this,

apostles'

unless the

were the

baptism

same, Christ and his members are not baptized

with the same baptism."

With respect

to the idea suggested

by some of

these disciples being re-baptized by Paul, this

judicious
"

When

name of

commentator thus expounds

ver.

5,

they heard this, they ivere baptized in the

the

Lord Jesus.

When

they heard this,

the disciples, or those that John preached

to,

who, when they heard what the Baptist said on

the foregoing verse, they were baptized
the same terms,

it is

said, chap.

heard what Peter had

their hearts,

ii.

said, they

37,

as in

When

they

were pricked

&c. and were baptized.

As

in
for

Paul's imposing his hands upon them that are said

here to be baptized,

it

might very well

be, that

the twelve disciples (ver. 7,) might have been

baptized, and

extraordinary

now receive the Holy Ghost in

gifts,

those

by the laying on of the hands

30
of St. Paul

for, to

be again baptized

nifestations of the

unto them but

;

if

Avhat

end should these disciples

It is true,

they had further ma-

mystery of the gospel brought

men should be baptized for every

degree of knowledge or grace,

have,

which they do
they need to

how many baptisms had

who ought daily to grow in

acquire,

grace and

knowledge."
Dr. Lightfoot,

who was

and an acute critic, brought

ing to bear on the
light
gical,

a profound scholar,

immense learnsacred volumes, and scattered

on every page:

his

all his

historical,

chronolo-

and topographical remarks on the Old

Testament, and his talmudical exercitations on

the

New,

This great

are invaluable.

man

coin-

He

asks,

1.

What

cides exactly with the learned Poole.

respecting the disciples at Ephesus,

need had they

first

to

*'

be re-baptized, when,

in that

baptism they had taken, they had come into

the profession of the gospel, and of Christ, as far

as the doctrine that had brought them in could

was the change of their profession, from Judaism to Evangelism, that required their being baptized, and not the degrees
of their growth iu the knowledge of the gospel,
into the profession of wliich they had been bapHow many baptisms must the
tized already.

teach them

It

apostles have undergone,

if

every signal degree of

knowledge of the
coming
mystery of Christ, might have required, nay,
their

on to the perfect

might have admitted, a new baptizing?

2.

If

31
men were

these

be concluded of
of John,
Jesus
is

all

that

had received the baptism

to the knowledge of

when they came

which, as

not the least

is it

must the same

re-baptized, then

is

it

incredible, because there

of mention of such a thing,

tittle

unimaginable

in the case of those

apostles that were baptized by John

name

should baptize them again in the

since Jesus himself baptized none?

of the

for

who,

of Jesus,

John,

iv.

3,

These men had taken upon them the baptism

and the professio7i oi Chrifii, in the
baptism of John, that they had received there-

3.

of repentance,

fore, unless

different

we

suppose a baptism of

will

faith

from the baptism of repentance, and a

baptism in the name of Jesus, different from the

baptism

in the

why

find a reason,

new

name

of Christ,

these

will

it

be hard to

men should undergo a

baptizing."*

Dr.

Gill,

another learned

in rabbinical

critic,

who abounded

knowledge, who had clear ideas of

gospel truth, and, moreover,

was a pious and

godly man, unites with the preceding eminent

men,

in considering John's

baptism to be Christian

baptism, and that the disciples at Ephesus were

not re-baptized.

Respecting the former, he writes thus

was the

first

" John

administrator of the ordinance of

baptism, and therefore

way

of emphasis

is

by
com-

called the Baptist,

whereas, had

* Lightfoot's Works, vol.

1,

it

been in

p.

298.

32
moil use, there must have been

many

baptizers

before him, who had a like claim to this title;

and why should the people be so alarmed with
it,

come from

as to

tered,

and

hear

to

in frequent use,

And why
priests

it

parts to see

all

it

preached, when, had

thej'^

must have

whereas, had

it

to John, to

baptized?

been performed by an ordinary

common rabbi

or doctor, priest or Levite,

have been no

in ages immemorial, there could

for

been

often seen it?

know who he was? and why he

room

it

should the Jewish Sanhedrim send

and Levites from Jerusalem

teacher,

adminis-

such questions

but John's baptism was

not a device of men,

but the cou7isel of God,

according to his will and wise determination;

which the Pharisees and lawyers rejected against

themselves.
Luke, vii. 30.
Novi% his baptism, and that of Christ and his

same; Christ was baptized by

John, and his baptism was surely Christian
baptism, of this no one can doubt; and his
apostles were the

disciples also

were baptized by him

else could they

self,

for

be baptized

he baptized none

that the baptism of John,

for,

by

whom

not by Christ him-

and

it

is

observable,

and the baptism of

Mere at the same time,

they were cotemporary, and one did not succeed
the other now, it is not reasonable to suppose
Christ and

his apostles.

there should be two sorts of baptism, administer-

ed at the same time, but one and the same by

both.

33
The baptism

and that which was

of John,

practised by the apostles of Christ, even after his

death and resurrection from the dead^ agreed,

1.

those

In the subjects thereof;

whom John

baptized were penitent sinners, so the apostles

exhorted

men

to repent, to profess repentance,

and give evidence of

John

tism.

it

previous to their bap-

said to the people

who came

to his

baptism, " That they should believe on him which

should come after him, that

and

faith in Christ

is,

on Christ Jesus

was made a

;"

pre-requisite to

baptism, by Christ and his apostles.

In the

2.

John's
manner of the administration of both.
baptism was by immersion, as the places chosen
by him for it show, and the baptism of Christ by
him is a proof of it, and in like manner was

baptism performed by the apostles, as of the

Eunuch by

Philip.

ministration.

and

in

3.

In the form of their ad-

John was sent of God

whose name should he

name

of the one true God,

in the

name

to baptize;

baptize, but in the

who

sent him, even

of the Father, Son, and Spirit

doctrine of the Trinity was

known

common.

The

to John, as it

of John's
Jews
hearers and disciples, that they were baptized in
The
the name of the Lord Jesus, Acts, xix. 4.

was

to the

in

It is said

same form is used in the baptism of those

baptized by the apostles of Christ, (Acts,
which is only a part of
viii. 16, and x. 48,)
the form put for the whole, and

is sufficiently

expressive of Christian baptism.

4.

Jn

the

end

34
and use of baptism. John's baptism, and so the
apostles' was upon repentance for the remission df
sins.
Mark, i. 4. Acts, viii. 38. Not that either
repentance or baptism procures^the pardon of sin
that

only obtained by the blood of Christ

is

baptism

is

but

a means of leading to the blood of

and repentance gives encouragement to

for it, through it.
Now, since there was
such an agreement between the baptism of John,
Christ,

hope

as administered before the death of Christ

between the baptism of the apostles,

and

after the

death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ,

is

a plain case,

it

was not limited

it

to the interval

of time, from the beginning of John's ministry

to the death of Christ

but was afterwards con-

tinued."*

Respecting the re-baptizing of the disciples at

Ephesus, the Doctor's remarks,

judicious.

He

observes, that, "

had never been baptized at

tism,

all,

I think, are

very

some think they

with water bap-

only had received the doctrine preached

by John, concerning repentance and remission of

sins, and so were baptized unto him, professing
the same doctrine he did, just as the Israelites
were baptized into Moses.
Others think they
were baptized, but very wrongly; being baptized

and not in the name of

Jesus Christ, and so, as it was not Christian
baptism they had submitted to, it was right to
in

the

name

* Gill's

of John,

Body of

Divinity, vol.

iii.

p. 313.

35
baptize them again;
probable,

for

is

it

but neither of these are

not likely that they should

receive John's doctrine,

and not his baptism;

that they should be his disciples and followers,

and not attend

of his ministry

more distinguishing branch

and it is still more unlikely that

to the
;

should be

they

baptized

preached Jesus Christ

out to them the
to

to his followers,

Lamb

be greater than he

who

name,

his

in

and pointed

of God, and declared

it

Him

seems rather that they

were baptized, and that they were baptized in

name

the

of Christ, as John's disciples were, as

words

the apostle affirms in the following

When

5.

name of

the

"

Not

sus,

they heard this, they were baptized in

the

Lord

Jesus,

the disciples that Paul found at

but the hearers of John

Ephe-

for these are the

words of the apostle Paul, giving an account of

John's baptism, and of the success of his ministry

shewing that his baptism was administered

name of
words of Luke
in the

Lord Jesus; and not the

the Evangelist, recording what
the

followed upon his account of John's baptism

then he would have

name, as he does

When

in the

for

apostle's

next verse, and have said.

they heard this account, they were baptized

by Paul
historian
said,

made mention of the

in the

name

reports

which

two

lies in

did, in ver. 6,

of the

Lord

things.

ver. 4,

1.

and 5

where he repeats

his

Jesus.

The

What Paul
what he
name, as was

then,

necessary; as that he laid his hands on them,

D 2

36
which was

all

that

was needful

to their receiving

Holy Ghost, having

in the name of the Lord
Jesus.
Which sense is the more confirmed by
the particles ftiv and h, which answer to one
another in verses 4 and 5, and shew the words
to be a continuation of the apostle's speech, and
not the words of the historian, which begin in
the extraordinary gifts of the

been already baptized

the next verse."*

These quotations

have

made from

those

eminent men, Beza, Poole, Lightfoot, and

Gill,

shew that the idea of Paul's not re-baptizing

these disciples is not so absurd as some have

to

imagined.
But, admitting the fact of the re-baptizing of
the Ephesians, the advocates of free communion,

more than they gain by the concession for,

what is the deduction to be drawn from it? Why,
that their first baptism was imperfect, and that
lose

before they could be considered as complete

disciples of Christ,

and qualified

for

communion

was absolutely necessary

that they should be really and truly baptized.
Before I dismiss this subject, I must beg
at the Lord's supper,

it

leave to observe, that

it

appears to me, that

the apostle Paul re-baptized

the

disciples

Ephesus, he would have acted contrary

the conduct and example of Christ,

Gill's Exposition.

in

if

of

to the

proof

37
of which,

would bring

to your recollection

two

him,

on

remarkable anecdotes

When two

taketh

left

Lamb

to Christ, as the "

them

his directing

God which

of John's disciples

away

of

the sin of the world,"

and one of the two fetched in a third, (Simon)

and all the three came to Jesus, w^hich seems
be

the

Christ

did

to

first

fruits

not say to

declared yourselves

Christ's

of

Now

them,

be my

to

disciples,

ye

have

and

disciples,

adhere to me,

you will henceforward strictly

you must be re-baptized, for your former master's
baptism was not Christian baptism; no, he
that

condescendingly received them without giving

any such

direction.

we have an

Again,

account,

that

John and

Christ were preaching and baptizing together at

the same time.

John,

tinued to baptize

till

iii.

22

23,

and John con-

he was cast into prison,

and, after his death, his disciples " took

up

his

and went and told Jesus."

They wished now to become more directly and
strictly his disciples, and Christ cordially adbody, and buried

mitted them

it,

but did he

that John's baptism (to

first

represent to

them

which they were baptized)

was invalid, and that they must be re-baptized

by one or other of his apostles ? No, there is
nothing like

it.

What

a proof

is this

that John's

baptism was, for substance, the same as

and that anabaptism was not his

Thus

Christ's,

will

have endeavoured to prove, and hope

58
your satisfaction, that the
and of Jesus Christ and his
were not two different institutes, but

I have done

it

to

baptism of John,
apostles,

one and the same.

I have, perhaps,

been too

long on

but, I thought

it

necessary

it

could be

this subject,

to be particular

here,

because,

if

demonstrated that Christian baptism was not

instituted

till

the commission given

by our Sa-

viour to his apostles, after his resurrection, our

free

communion brethren would gain one

supper has the

that being

priority,

point

the Lord's

in the controversy, as, in that case,

appointed

before the death of Christ.

T. Really, the exposition you have given of

the historical account, in Acts, xix. and the tes-

timony of those learned and pious men you have

brought forward, has produced a complete conviction in

my

mind, that the twelve disciples, at

must now
request, that you will furnish me with some arguments, if you can, which shall carry equal con-

Ephesus, were not

viction, that

re- baptized.

But

unbaptized persons are inadmissible

to the Lord's table

for I

wish to exercise can-

dour towards those brethren who differ from me

on the point of baptism and I would be per;

suaded, that those

who

act

conscientiously in

admitting such, whom they consider as unbaptized,

to partake of the Eucharist, act rightly, for there
is

something unpleasant, and, apparently, un-

christian, in refusing to hold

communion

at the

39
Lord's table, with those

whom we

consider to be

the Lord's people.

My

J.

good brother,

exercise candour towards

wish, with

all

who

you, to

Lord

love our

Jesus Christ, in sincerity, but not at the expense

of consistency, nor to the setting aside either of
the two positive institutions

Master

mean baptism, and

To countenance any

my Lord

of

and

the Lord's supper.

or treating

in neglecting,

with indifference, either of these two great ordi-

New

nances of the

warrantable

genuine,

as

consider

it

Testament,

consider not

candour

rather

an act of rebellion against the

as

and Royal Legislator of the

Christian church, and as very offensive to God.
T. Indeed, my worthy friend, this is strong-

Head,

glorious

language

and

rebellion,

offensive to

God

You

ought to have some very strong reasons to justify

such expressions.

Pardon me,

J.

warmly; but
King,

my

have expressed myself too

Law-giver, and

now proceed
thinking

if I

am jealous

to

give

right, but,

it

my

you reasons

for

my

not

on the contrary, exceed-

ingly wrong, to admit of

1.

honour of my
Judge and I shall

for the

mixed communion.

consider baptism as a positive institution

of Jesus Christ.

We
tions.

are under both moral and positive obligar

The

former,

we may

consider as com-

prehending those duties which grow out of our

relation to

God and one

another

the latter, as

40
including such rules of conduct as arise merely

from the revealed

will of

The one

God.

im-

is

mutable, as long as intelligent beings exist

the

depending upon the sovereign authority of

other,

may be

Jehovah,

in

But, though moral and

repealed at another.
obligations

positive

may be

so plainly distin-

guished, yet the former binds us to the

exact observance of the latter

most

nor can these be

neglected, without those being violated.

essential part of the

and

force at one period,

It is

an

moral law, that intelligent

creatures should receive every intimation of the

divine

bow

mind with the most

cordial readiness,

every expression of

to

sacred

and

authority

with the most cheerful submission.

have lately been reading, with great

tion,

Circular Letter

from

satisfac-

the Ministers

and

Messengers of the several Baptist Churches of the

Northampton

Associatio7i, assembled at Olney^ in

June,

dratcn up by

The

808

subject

Mr. Andrew Fuller.

On Obedience to Positive

is.

Institutions.

hope you

will

have patience to

hear some of the remarks on that important subject, as

we

are

It

that

they will not appear foreign to the point

now

discussing.

is

justly remarked, in that excellent epistle,

*'

Positive institutions have existed, though

subject to a variety of changes, from the begining to this day.

we

tind

If

we

look back to Paradise,

that the fruit of

garden was given to our

ail
first

the trees of the

parents,

for the

41
support of natural
of

fruit

that

Avas

The

one excepted.

life,

absolutely

and

forbidden,

an awful threatening annexed to disobedience.

Soon

after the fall, sacrifices

were instituted

though Moses has not recorded

yet had they not been

origin,

God,

and,

and

divine

their

commanded

of

probably, their typical import ex-

Abel could not have offered them, in

nor would they have been accepted of
Another positive institution given to the

plained,
faith,

God.

patriarchs, respected the distinction of the beasts

of the
to

field, into

clean and unclean, undoubtedly

mark, what should, and what should not, be

offered in

sacrifice.

positive laws
terity,

After the flood,

were given

to

Noah, and

several
his pos-

particularly with respect to the eating of

animal food, and the shedding of blood.

these relate rather to

civil

But

than religious matters,

and, as such, do not so immediately belong to the

subject under consideration.

We

the rite of circumcision given to

out entering into a disquisition,

next come to

Abraham, withwhether it was

most properly a civil or a religious rite, or both,

one thing is universally granted by Christians,
that

it is

ject,

we

long since abrogated.

body of these laws given to

Mount Sinai, which were to be ob-

find a great

Israel, at

served by the people.

answered

Among

Tracing the sub-

civil,

These, in a partial view,

but principally sacred purposes.

the Jews, as a political body, they con-

tributed towards the maintenance of the priests,

42
who

ministered at the altar, and the defraying of

the expenses incurred by keeping up the worship

of God.
die

Their use

away, when

would naturally
Jews ceased to be a body

in this view,

the

and no longer possessed the city of

Jerusalem, where their holy temple and altars
politic,

But

stood.

grand design was

their

spiritual.

They were shadows of good things to come.

They typified Him, in his character and work,
who, in the fulness of time, came into the world,
The
to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself.
ceremonial law was, in an eminent manner, a
school-master unto Christ, under that dispensa-

but now, the substance being come, the

tion;

shadows have

We

are

all

now

vanished.

arrived at a

new

aera in the dis-

The

pensation of Divine Providence.

now

question

what are the positive institutions, binding upon us under the New Testament dispensation? We answer, Baptism and
fairly

meets us

Unless

the Lord's supper.

ment of the

first

we reckon

the appoint-

day of the week,

for Christian

we know

of no other

worship, an exception,

ordinance in force under the Christian dispensation, to

which the

tion will apply.

definition of a positive institu-

To

these two

ordinances,

all

the Old Testament ceremonies appear to have

been reduced.
neglected?

ence?
either?

And

shall

either of these be

Shall they be treated with indiffer-

Have we any
Surely not.

"

right to

dispense with

Our attention

to positive

43
institutions,

should be peculiarly awakened, by

rejecting on the holy jealousy with which the

Most High watches over them.

Ye

solemn language,

which
from

Ye

it.*

add

shall not

command,

Hear

his

own

word

to the

ye diminish

neither shall

shall not turn aside to the right

For what was man expelled Paradise?

How tremendous the consequences, following on the conduct of our first

hand, or to the

parents,
fruit

in

left.'t

presuming

Does not

Jehovah's curse

all

pluck the forbidden

to

creation bear the impress of

Does not every

feel the direful effects

living creature

of his displeasure, incurred

by the transaction ?

Who

can read, and not be ready to tremble,

how Nadab and Abihu,

for venturing to

incense with unhallowed

fire,

burn

were devoured by

went out from the Lord;J or how

Korah and his companions were cut off for an
effort to invade the priestly office, and dispute
that

fire

the authority with which

If David, the

invested?}
heart,

Divine direction,

tude

let

falling

spot.

II

after

God's own

deviate from the

the displeasure of heaven

is

and Uzza, whose misguided solicihim put forth his hand to prevent its
;

when

the oxen stumbled, dies upon the

If Uzziah,

Deut. iv. 2.
%

man

removing the ark,

in

displayed

Moses and Aaron were

Numb.

xvi.

who

did that which

t Deut.

3133.

v. 3'2.
||

2 Sam.

was

Numb.

iii.

vi. 6, 7.

right

4.

;
!

44
in the tight of the

Lord

for

many

years, at last

disregard the sacred injunction, and will attempt

burn incense upon the

he

is

struck with

the leprosy in the very act, and

is

cut off from

to

the house of the

What

How
God

altar,

Lord unto the day of his death.*

what solemn admonitions!

instructive,

dangerous to lose sight of the

in acts of religious worship,

stances,

command

even in circum-

which are apparently small and

and though,

of

as in the case of Uzza,

trivial

what

is

done may be done with a good intention this is

no apology. Surely God is greatly to be feared
:

in the

assembly of his

reverence of

Now,

if

all

the

saints,

and

to

be had in

them that are about him."-}"

Most High thus, with a holy

jealousy, watches over his positive injunctions,

and expresses

his displeasure at the least devia-

tion from them, let us be careful that

offend him.

JBaptisin, I

not deny

is

it,

have

said,

we do

and you

a positive institution, as

is

not
will

the

Lord's supper, and they are of equal importance

although, as

Mr. Newman

observes, in a

tract he published in 1805, "

Many

little

Christians,

when speaking of the Lord's supper, denominate

it THE ordinance^ as if there were but one ritual
institute, binding upon us; however, from the
beginning it was not so."J;

* 2 Chron. xxvi. l6

21.

t Psalm Ixxxix.

7-

Baptism, a prerequisite to Communion at the Lord's Table,

page

1.

45
my

Thus,
first

dear brother,

have given you

my

reason for not admitting an unbaptized per-

son to the Lord's table, because baptism

Lord Jesus

positive institution of our

Christ,

is

and

no man, or set of men, are entitled to dispense

with

Let

it.

us, therefore, hold it fast

give proof of our loyalty to Christ as

Zion

let

let

us

King of

us bear testimony against every inva-

sion of his royal authority

let

us remember,

that every deviation from a positive institute

unwarrantable

and, however plausible

appear, however

by

bers,

it

may

it

is

may

be patronized, by num-

learning, or piety,

it

will not

be divinely

approved.
2.

The example

Lord Jesus Christ

of our

sufficient directory to his ministers

as

to

the persons

who

is

and churches,

are admissible to

the

Lord's supper.
I

agree with

my

free

that the ordinance of the

by Jesus Christ
liar to

that

it

communion
supper was
is

instituted

an ordinance pecu-

the gospel dispensation

that

it is

ing ordinance in the church of Christ

to continue to the

brethren,

a stand-

that

it is

end of the world.

them respecting the ends and

That it is to show
forth the death of Christ to commemorate the
sacrifice of Christ
to remember the love of
Christ in dying for us to show our love to Christ,
and express our thankfulness to him for the
and to maintain love and
blessings of his grace
I also agree with

designs of the Lord's supper.

46
unity with each other

for,

by joining together

in holy fellowship, in this ordinance,

we keep

the

unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

Moreover,
ral,

I also

agree with them, in the gene-

as to the proper subjects of this

ordinance

that no infants have a right to partake of the

bread and wine

their lives

that

that

no persons, scandalous

and conversation, are

Christ, are the only persons

couraged to partake.
this

one point,

to

be admitted

and true believers

penitent sinners,

who

in

in

are to be en-

But, I differ from them in

now under

consideration,

and

maintain, I hope, with meekness and fear, that

none but those who are baptized upon a profession of repentance toward God, and faith to-

ward our Lord Jesus

Christ, are to be admitted

as communicants at this ordinance

I have hinted,

blessed

and

as

it is,

on account of the example of

my

Lord and Master.

Let us

refer to the institution of the Eucharist,

Matt. xxvi. 26, and following verses

-they were eating"

the paschal lamb,

"

And

as

and just

concluding the whole solemnity, before the table

was withdrawn, " Jesus took bread, and blessed

;"
it ;" and he " took the cup, and gave thanks
w^hich

is

not to be understood as merely express-

ing his thanks to

God

for the bread

and wine,

and in treating the Divine blessing thereon, as he

was accustomed to do when he partook of his
ordinary meals, but his sanctifying the one and
the other to be used as a new gospel institution

47
**
remembrance of his death.
Maimoand other rabbins, tell us, that it was a

for the

nides,

rule

among

the Jews, at the end of the supper,

lamb for the last thing they

If this custom was as old as
ate that night.
Christ's time, it would make this action so much
It would plainly show,
the more remarkable.
that the bread here distributed was a very distinct
thing from the meal they had been making togeto take a piece of the

and might

ther,

be, in the first

opening of the

action, a kind of symbolical intimation^ that the

Jewish passover was to give way to another and

nobler divine

Who

institution.''*

Who

were present?

instituted ordinance?

partook of

the great Master

First,

of the family, and Master of the feast.

was He?
flesh

The Son

the great

of

God

And who

manifested in the

Redeemer of

and the
and who had

sinners,

appointed Judge of the world

Yes,

himself been baptized in the river Jordan.

my

worthy

nance
to

friend,

He who

in the Christian

be baptized prior to

And who
Eleven of his

sat

new

this

established this ordi-

church, thought

it

meet

its institution.

down

disciples,

with him at the table?

whom

he had separated

from the world, and called by his grace, and

who

had followed the example of their Divine Master,

in being baptized by John. Such were the guests

* Dr. Doddrid^'s Fam. Expos, od Matt.

xxvi. note.

AVlio

assembled together

prepared guest-

in the

chamber, to witness the

celebration of the

first

solemn ordinance of the supper, and

to partake

of the bread and the wine, consecrated by their

What

adorable Redeemer.
bly

The Divine

a delightful assem-

Master, and his chosen ser-

the Prince of Peace, and his

subjects the glorious Head of the
vants

sanctified

Christian

church,

and

members,

his united

all

holding

sweet communion together at the sacred

What

What a

a glorious sight!

animating festival

The holy

angels,

no doubt,

The solemn

on them with rapture.

looked

feast.

pleasing and

scene might well be closed with a hymn.

"

When

they had sung a hymn, they went out to the

Mount

of Olives."

proper, a seasonable time

God, through

for singing, to express their joy in

our Lord Jesus Christ, by

the atonement.

How

whom

suitable

they received
the

is

Dr. Watts's on such an occasion as

this

" The King himself comes near

And

feasts his saints to-day,

Here we must

And

love,

sit,

and

see

him

" One day amidst

the place

Where my dear God hath

Is sweeter than ten

Of
**

My

pleasurable sin.

willing soul

sit

To

been.

thousand day*

would stay

In such a frame as this.

And

here.

and praise, ami pray.

and sing herself away

everlasting bliss."

hymn

of

49
3.

Apostolical examples, and

precedents, confirm

me

New

Testament

in the opinion, that un-

baptized believers have no right to the privilege

of the Lord's supper.

The

apostles were

men

possessed extraordinary

of eminent grace, and

gifts.

They were imme-

by Christ, and had

and their commission

diately called

their doctrine

from him,

to

They were

peculiarly,

and

infallibly

the Spirit of God, and had a

preach

it.

guided by

power

to

work

miracles for the confirmation of their doctrine.

They had

authority to go every where to preach

the gospel, and plant churches, and to instruct

them in the will of Christ. They were taught
by the Holy Ghost, who guided them in all
truth, necessary to be known, useful to men,
and profitable to the churches, even the whole

The whole

counsel of God.
as

it

which

revelation of truths,

relates to both doctrines

received from

Christ

'

and ordinances,

the

Father,

the

from Christ, the apostles received

Spirit received

and which the churches received

from them in succeeding generations; and for
the keeping of which, Paul commends the Cofrom the

Spirit,

rinthians

Now,

"

ye remember
dinances as

me

I praise

you, brethren, that

and keep the ordelivered them to you;* and it is

in all things,

praise- worthy for the churches of Jesus Christ

* 1 Cor. xi. 2.

50
to

keep

his ordinances pure,

both with respect

to matter and form, as they have been delivered

by him, and
It has

his apostles after him.

been universally acknowledged,

the rise of antichrist was,

croaching by one invention,

to time,

that

by degrees, first enand then, from time

superadding another,

till,

at length, there

was a general dispensing with the laws of Christ,

and new ones made, teaching for doctrines the
commandments of men, and setting up unwritten
Hence, the
traditions before the word of God.
apostle perceiving

the

disposition

of

men

to

swerve from the truth, thus solemnly and earnestly addresses his son Timothy, " I give thee

charge, in the sight of God,

who quickeneth

all

and before Christ Jesus, who, before

Pontius Pilate, witnessed a good profession,
that thou keep this commandment (by which, I

things,

suppose,

we

are to understand, the whole

of his ministry,

all

work

the trust reposed in him, the

various orders he had given him throughout the

epistle, relating

both to the doctrine and disci-

pline of the house of God,) without spot, unre-

bukable, until the appearing of the Lord Jesus

Christ; which, in his times, he shall show,
is

the blessed and only Potentate, the

kings,

and Lord of lords

attention of

all

:"

who

King of

a charge worthy the

the servants of God.

Having made these preliminary remarks, I proceed to consider what was the apostolic practice,
and what are the New Testament precedents


51
And, on examination, we

respecting baptism.

shall find, that the primitive churches

constituted without

recommended and

This wae the

it.

were not

first

thing

insisted upon, after the con-

version of a sinner, and prior to his

member of a gospel church.

The members of the first

becoming a

Christian church at

Jerusalem, were baptized persons. Acts, ii. 41,

42, " Then they that gladly received his word

were baptized

and, the same day, there were

added unto them about three thousand

And

they continued steadfastly in the apostle's

doctrine,

and fellowship,

here

They

first

and

What

bread, and in prayers."

is

souls.

in

breaking of

a plain narrative

gladly received the

word

which Peter preached, and which related to repentance toward God, and faith toward the

Lord Jesus Christ then they were baptized

then were added to the church. Was not this
order expressive of the mind of Christ, and designed as a model for all Christian churches?
in all

It

succeeding ages?
is

think

it

was.

very apparent, from the whole of the

apostolic history, that after sinners had, through

Holy Spirit, received the

became sincere penitents, and believed on
the Lord Jesus Christ, they were directed to be
the influence of the

truth,

baptized without delay.

1.

Peter, in his admirable

sermon on the day

Repent,

and be baptized,

of Pentecost,

said,

E 2

52
one

every

you,

of

name

the

in

Jesus

of

Christ*
2.

When

down to
them
when

Philip went

preached Christ to
Philip,

preaching

the

Samaria, and
they believed

concerning

things

the

kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ,

they were baptized, both men and women.
3. When Philip, by divine direction, went toward the south, unto the way that goeth down
from Jerusalem to Gaza, and met in the desert

man

with the eunuch, a

of great authority, (a

grandee in the court of Candace the queen of the

Ethiopians,) riding in his chariot, he " preached

unto him Jesus ;" and when

this great

man

said,

" I believe that Jesus Christ

is the Son of God,"

he commanded the chariot to stand still and
they went down both into the water, both Philip
and the eunuch, and he baptized him. "J
4. After Saul was brought to sincere repentance, and to believe in Christ, by the extraordinary appearance of Jesus to him in his way to
Damascus, Ananias was sent to him, to inform
;

him

that he

was a chosen

said to him, "

Why

After

baptized."^

vessel

tarriest
this,

thou

and he instantly
?

arise,

and be

" he assayed to join

himself to the disciples."||

5.

When
Acts,

ii.

Peter was sent to Cornelius, and

38.

t Acts,

Acts, xxii. 1^.

viii.

12.
II

Acts,

Acts, ix. 2^.

viii.

53
preached the gospel to him and his household,

and

who were assembled together

the Lord had commanded Peter

his friends,

hear

all

that

deliver, " the

to

Holy Ghost

heard the word

"

to

;"

Can any man

fell on all them which

and Peter immediately said,

forbid water, that these vshould

Holy
Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them
to be baptized in the name of the Lord."*
6, 7. At Philippi, two extraordinary convernot be baptized, which have received the

sions took

the one relates

place;

to

Lydia,

"

whose heart the Lord opened, that she at;"

tended to the things which were spoken of Paul
and it is somewhat remarkable, that her household also were converted at the same time

Whitby
when she, and
as Dr.

those of her household,

of the baptism required hy

and her household."

it,

icere in-

and in the nature

she was baptized,

other relates to the astonishing and mira-

culous conviction, and regeneration of the

and the conversion of

This
Christian faith.
prison,

and made

jailor,

his

household to the

jailor,

by order of the

all

magistrates, thrust Paul

At

and,

paraphrases the passage, " and

structed in the Christian faith,

The

and

Silas into the inner

their feet fast in the stocks.

was a great earthquake,

which shook the foundations of the prison, and
midnight,

opened

all

there

the doors.

This striking event, as

* Acts, X.

54
we may

naturally imagine, alarmed the keeper

of the prison, as he supposed the prisoners were

iied; at that period, the Spirit of
office

on

to

it is

convince of

sin,)

his heart; and, finding

God (whose

wrought conviction

Paul and

Silas

had

not taken the opportunity to escape, he brought

them out, and conveyed them to his house.

There these good men (Paul and Silas) spake to
him and his household, the word of the Lord,
representing to them the nature and the necessity
of repentance toward God, and of faith toward
the Lord Jesus Christ, and of the importance of

making a profession of such repentance and faith

by baptism. " And he (the jailor) took them
the same hour of the night, and washed their
stripes and was baptized, he and all his straightway ;" and " he set meat before them, and re;

God,

joiced, believing in

ivith all his house.''*

There are two other instances in which

8,
baptism was recommended, and practised immediately on the discovery of the subjects being
9.

possessors of

faith.

**

Crispus, the chief ruler

of the synagogue, believed on the Lord, with

his house
believed,

10.

and many of the Corinthians, hearing,

and were baptized.

Another memorable account

is

given us of

the household of Stephanas, which was the

fruits of
first in

all

Achaia.

first

This family was one of the

the regions of Achaia, of which Corinth

* Acts, xvi.

t Acts,

xviii. 8.

55
was the

metropolis, that believed in Christ; they

received the

of the Spirit in these

fruits

first

who, upon their conversion, were bapby Paul.*

And it is worthy of notice, that the apostle
Paul, speaking of himself and others, says,
parts,

tized

**

Know

many

ye not that so

of us as were bap-

were baptized unto his

tized into Jesus Christ,

death ;"f and that, in so doing, they ** put on

Christ ;J as they, thereby and therein, make a
public profession of him, by deeds as well as

words, declaring him to be their Lord and King,

They

had,

as

it

were, put on his livery, and

declard themselves to be his servants and disciples.

They

as

enlisted,

were,

it

and became volunteers

engaging, by the grace of God,
banner,

soldiers in defending his cause,

battles,

and manfully opposing

Mr. Locke here

the world.

their putting on Christ,

under his

in his service,
to act as

and

fighting his

sin,

Satan, and

observes,

it is

good

that

by

implied, " that to

God, now looking on them, there appears wotkiftg hut Christ;

all

they are, as

over with him, as a

he has put on
is said,

man

is

it

were, covered

with the clothes

and, hence, in the next verse,

they are all one in Christ Jesus

as if

they were but that one person''

* 1 Cor. XV. 16,

and

1
X

Cor.
Gal.

\.

l6.

iii.

2r.

Rom.

vi.

it

3.

56
These numerous apostolic examples, and New
Testament precedents, will, I hope, my dear
brother, produce a full conviction in your mind,
that baptism

is

the

ordinance to be attended

first

to after genuine conversion to Christ

that

it is

the door of entrance into the church; and that

none ought

to be admitted to

Lord's table

according to

The

4.

communion

who have not been really

the command of Christ.

at the

baptized

unity and order of a gospel church, ap-

pointed and recommended in the

New

Testa-

ment, are striking arguments in favour of

strict

communion.

A
a

gospel church

holi/

is

To

this

tion,

as

through the

this the description given us of a gospel

How

justly

fection OF BEAUTY

God

building fitly framed together.*

church?
"

styled, a spiritual house

temple; a habitation of

Spirit; a

And

is

is

she styled, "

the per-

!"f

BUILDING FITLY FRAMED TOGETHER."

I must now particularly call your attenimmediately relates to the subject

it

"

are upon.

we

This description of a gospel church,"

conveys, at once, the ideas of union, order, and

heauty.
1.

the

Union.
parts

It is essential to

are united;

and,

a building that

accordingly,

Pet.

ii.

5.

Ephes.

ii.

21, 22.

t Psalm

the

one an-

saints, in this fellowship, are joined to

1.

2.

57
other,

by mutual consent

and they

ought to be, cordially united

love,

having one Lord, one

are,

or

judgment and

in

one baptism;

faith,

becomes them, as those at Jerusalem, to be

of one heart, and one soul.
Every house has its form, and is
2. Order,
raised on some plan, drawn or chosen by the

it

architect;

in

like

manner,

church

not

is

irregular assembly, but a society of

a casual,

believers, fitly

wisdom and

framed together, according to the

will of the

Divine Jesus, the great

Architect and Proprietor, of this spiritual house.

Order, in the house of God,

Good

portance.
to

order

is

is

of vast im-

essentially necessary

an acceptable performance of the revealed will

When

of God.

the good king Hezekiah

came

to the throne, he

opened the doors of the temple,

summoned

and the Levites, and expurge the temple, and restore

the priests

horted them to
the worship of

it

who, accordingly,

set

about

work immediately, and cleansed the temple;

and when they had done, reported it to the
king; upon which he, with the princes, went
the

into

the temple, and offered sacrifices

and

or-

dered singers to sing at the offering of burnt

offerings

and he and

his people oflfered burnt

and peace oflferings, in great abundance.

And, it is worthy of remark, that, at the close
of the whole, it is said, " So the service of the
offerings,

house of the

Lord was set in order. And Hezekiah

58
and

rejoiced,

the people, that

all

God had

pre-

pared the people."*

When Uzza

accompanied David, with

thousand chosen men of

thirty

up the
ark of God from the house of Abinadab, " They
set the ark of God upon a new cart ;" which was
a great error, since

on a

cart, old or

it

Israel, to carry

ought not

new

it

was

to

have been put

be borne upon

to

and carried by Levites only,

men's shoulders,

" It

and those of the family of Kohath.

strange," says Dr. Gill, " that so

and Levites, and of the people of

many

Israel,

is

priests

gathered

together on that account, and David, also,

so

well versed in the law of God, should not advert

to it."
*'

What was

When

the consequence of this error

they came to Nachon's threshing

Uzza put

forth his

hand

to the

floor,

ark of God, and

and the
anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzza, and
God smote him there for his error, and there he
took hold of

died,

it,

for the

by the ark of

ing event, and

oxen shook

This was an

God.""}"

how came

it

it

to pass

affect-

We

are

The Lord our

God made a breach upon us, for that we sought
not after the due order'* Thus we see the im-

expressly told,

Chron. xv. 13,

*'

portance of due order ; for want of attending to

this,

God was

Israel, and, for

dipleased with his ancient people

a neglect of

this,

Uzza was struck

dead.

* 2 Chron. xxix. 35, 36.

t 2 Sam.

vi. 6,

f.

59
an apostolic injunction,

It is

be done decently, and

Let

**

"

in order."*

We

the author of confusion. "|

all

God

things
is

not

cannot suppose

agreeable to the divine mind, that the church

should be, like the grave, " without any order.";]:
it

Thither persons go without any order, no regard

The young

paid to age or sex.

is

before the aged,

frequently go

men and women

are carried

promiscuously to the tomb, the rich and the poor

meet together

there,

their

bones and dust are

mingled, without distinction, without any order.

Hundreds, by a wreck
men, descend
order

to the

at sea,

both

officers

and

watery grave without any

thousands are cut off in war, and are

heaped together in the grave, dug in the field of

It is not so with a
battle, without any order.
gospel church. There is an order to be observed
in going in

we have noticed it is
a few words. The members of

that order

pointed out in
the primitive

church

gladly received the

first

word, then were baptized, and then added to the

church.
ia

and

There

is

this is thus

an order to be observed, when

expressed " They continued
:

steadfastly in the apostle's doctrine,

ship,

and

in

and fellow-

breaking of bread, and in prayers."j|

and there is an order, or ought to be, in going

There may be just reasons for members
out.
leaving one church and going to another, but

Cor. xiv. 40.

Acts,

t
ii.

41.

Cor. xiv. 33.

II

Acts,

J
ii.

42.

Job, x. 22.

60
such removal ought to be orderly.
order

among

the disciples,

It

was the

the church

in

at

Colosse, that afforded the apostle such unspeak"

able pleasure.
in the flesh,

Though

am

yet

(said he) I be absent

with you in the

joying, and beholding your order

your

fastness of

Thus

it

spirit,

and the stead-

faith in Christ."*

appears, that order

of great import-

is

a Christian church and, as the reverend

author of the " Apology for the JSaptists'*
observes, " The order and connection of positive

ance

in

appointments in divine worship, depend as

much

on the sovereign pleasure of the great Legislator,

as the appointments themselves
are equally

bound

and

if so,

to regard that order

we

and con-

nection, in their administration, as to observe the

appointments at

all.

Whoever,

therefore, objects

to that order, or deviates from

sovereign authority,

of worship were

it,

first

all hands, are positive ordinances

for

their

sovereign will of God.

For instance

instituted.

baptism and the Lord's supper,

they depend

opposes the

by which those branches

it is
;

allowed on

and, as such,

very existence

on the

Consequently, which of

them should be administered prior to the other,

(as well as to what persons, in what ivay, and for
what endJ must depend entirely on the will of
their Divine Author.
His determination must

* Goloss.

ii.

5.

61
fix their

order;

and his revelation must guide

our practice.
Here, then, the question

Lord revealed
"

To

is

has our Sovereign

his will, in regard to this matter,

the law, and to the testimony

thou?"

To

determine the query,

how readest
we may

con-

which the two positive

Testament w ere appoint-

sider the order of time, in

New

institutions of the

That baptism was an ordinance of God,

that submission to it was required, and that it
was administered to multitudes, before the sacred
supper was heard of, or had an existence, are
undeniable facts. There never was a time, since
the ministry of our Lord's forerunner commenced,
in which it was not the duty of repenting and
ed.

The

believing sinners to be baptized.

venerable

John, the twelve apostles, and the Son of

God

recommending baptism,
would have been impious to

incarnate, all united in

at a time

when

it

have eaten bread, and drank wine as an ordinance

Baptism, therefore, had the

of divine worship.

priority, in point of institution

sumptive evidence that

it

has,

which

and ever

is

a pre-

will have,

a prior claim on our obedience."

All the recorded facts in the

New

Testament,

(as I have stated to you,) place baptism before

the celebration of the Lord's supper.

that repentance

and

were required before

faith

baptism was administered

It is clear,

and,

is it

not equally

was required before the

administration of the Lord's supper? " Let us,"
says Mr. Fuller,
read the commission, Go,
clear,

that

baptism

*'

62
teach

all

nations

baptizing them in the name of

and of the Son, and of the Holy

Teaching them to observe all things

the Father,

Ghost.

whatsoever

have commanded you

and

lo

am

with you always, even to the end of the world.

Is not the order of things here plainly stated

our Lord Jesus Christ?

We

are

their believing

it,

to baptize

them

to teach

first

men, by imparting to them the gospel

;

by

then,

on

and then to

them in all the ordinances and

commandments which are left by Christ for our
direction.
It is not for us to inquire, in what
manner Christ shall enjoin his will, but to inquire,
in what manner he has enjoined it."*
And the
same celebrated author observes, "My refusing
to commune with them (the Paedobaptists) at
the Lord's table, is not because I consider them
go on

to instruct

as improper subjects, but as attending to

improper maimer.

Many

it

in

an

from Ephraim and

Manasseh, Issacher, and Zebulon, who partook of

Hezekiah's passover, are supposed by that pious
prince to have prepared their hearts to seek the

Lord God of their fathers," but having eaten otherwise than it is written, " he prayed the Lord to
PARDON every one of them," and, therefore, could
not intend that the disorder should be repeated."'}"
But, I had almost forgotten another idea which
I said

was conveyed

ther*'

and that

by the epithet given to

"
a gospel church, as a
building fitly framed toge-

* Mr. Fuller's

to us

is,

Letter to a Friend, p. 12, 13.

f Ibid. p. 4.

63
It has

3. Beautif,

been suggested, that

this

representation imports union and order, and the

several

members thus harmoniously cemented,

which Bunting,

beautiful as Tirzah,"

*'

are

in his

Travels of the Patriarchs, Kings, Prophets,

and

Apostles, says, " was a fair and beautiful city,

si-

tuate on a high and pleasant mountain, in the tribe

of Manasseh,* comely as Jerusalem, the metropolis

of Judea, and seat of the kings of

which was

it,

a city well-built and compact together

for situation, the joy of the

" a

company of

beautiful

whole earth."

Like

horses, in Pharaoh's chariots,"

not only strong and bold, as becomes the warfare

of

being strong in the grace that

faith,

Jesus, but exceedingly beautiful,

drawing together

by

step,

in Christ

in their traces, as it were, step

in the chariot of a gospel profession.

" Some," says Mr. Wallin,

boast,

is

well matched,

in

*'

may

ignorantly

an irregular and confused manner, of

social religion; they

may

despise order, and cen-

sure their brethren, Avho conscientiously keep the

they were

ordinances

as

beginning

but every deviation from the pattern

is

a deformity

in

from

delivered

the building. Order

is

the

the source

of beauty, in the natural and moral world, and

the beauty of the saints

is

in

proportion to their

order in Christ."f

* Bunting's Travels,

4to. edit. p. 213.

t Sermon on the Settlement of a People united

of the Gospel, p.

6.

in the order

64
my prolixity
with me while I

Pardon, good and patient brother,

on the

last

argument, and bear

bring forward

another,

which

consider as a

who conscientiously
communing with unbaptized persons at

collateral evidence that those

decline

the Lord's table, have a warrant for their conduct.

5.

The

opinion of ancient and modern divines

communion.
The importance and propriety of only baptized

is in favour of strict

believers being admitted to the ordinance of the

supper, has struck the minds of the most think-

pious men, of every denomination of

ing and

Christians, from the earliest ages.

And
some

1 shall here take the liberty of extracting

instances, brought forward

Mr. W.

Kiffen, in a

1681, entitled, "

little

Sober Discourse of Right to

Church Communion."

writes " As
:

it

by the excellent

piece he published, ia

for the

This worthy

man

thus

practice of gospel times,

hath been evidently demonstrated, that the

apostles,

and

disciples of Christ, did constantly

baptize such as were converted, and that after

they were taught, the next thing was to baptize

them, neither durst they break that order.

it is

certain,

As

that in the history of the gospel, or

whatsoever relation

we have

ment, as to matter of

fact,

in the

New

Testa-

or precepts, in matter

of right, relating to the order

and administration

of baptism, do clearly hold forth the order to be,

after faith,

and the subject baptized by imme-

65
diate

and

necessary

believer;

so,

that there

is

not the least

terms,

or rational

whole

New

opinion

consequence,

on the other hand,

Testament,

we

oppose.

1.

to

an actual
is

evident,

either in express

tittle,

and plain

it

inference,

in

countenance

There

the

the

no precept

is

commanding us to
receive any member without.
2. Nor one instance to be produced, that ever it was done.
directly, or consequentially,

3.

It is evident,

that the abettors or promoters

much

of such a practice now, do in so

invert

God's order, and lay a dangerous foundation for

the abolition of this great and sacred institution

of our Christian baptism."

As
three

for the ages

hundred

next the apostles, for near

years,

we have examined

the

records of those times, and find that the ordi-

nance of baptism was retained by the churches

in the
is

same order and mode of administration as

recorded

in the

New

practice of the second century,

morable

instance

Apology

to

peror, as

Rest.

in

As

to the

we have

a me-

Testament.

Justin Martyrs Second

Roman Em-

Antoninus Pius, the

Mr. Baxter renders

" I will declare unto you,

ourselves unto God, after that

it

in

his

Saints'

how we offer up
we are renewed

Those among us that are inthe faith, and believe that which we

through Christ.
structed in

teach

is true,

the same,

being willing to live according to

we do admonish

the forgiveness of sins,

and pray for

and we also fast and pray
F

to fast

66
with them, and

when they

by us
unto the water renewed and then calling upon
God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and
the Holy Spirit, they are washed (that is, baptized)
in water
then we bring the person thus washed
and instructed, to the brethren, where the assemare brought

we may pray both for ourselves,

new illuminated, that we may be found,

blies are, that

and the

by

true doctrine,

servers,

that

and by good works, worthy ob-

and keepers of the commandments, and

we may attain

eternal

life

and

salvation."

Dr. Cave, in his Primitive Christianity, says,

**

Our Lord having

instituted

baptism and the

Lord's supper, as the two great sacraments of

the Christian law, they have accordingly been
ever accounted principal parts of public worship
in the Christian church.

Baptism

which persons enter

He

in."

is

the door

further adds, "

by

The

persons communicating at this sacrament, (the

Lord's supper) were, at

first,

the whole church,

body of Christians, within such a space that

had embraced the doctrine of the gospel, and

or

been baptized into the

faith of Christ, these

used

constantly to meet together at the Lord's table."

Mr. Kiffin proceeds

to bring

Extracts from the history compiled

forward some

by the divines

of Magdeburg.
He begins with Sasil, who
"
writes thus :
That there were no others but

Catechumens baptized, who were called together

at Easter
such as were to be baptized in the
churches of Asia, were first for some time in:

67
structed in the doctrine of piety, and were called

Catechumens." This practice of catechising, and

then

and afterwards receiving

baptizing,

into

church fellowship, was so universal among

all

the Christians of those times, as appears from

quoted from Athanasius, Nazianzen,

instances

Optatus, Milevitanus, Epiphanius, Hillarius,

brose,

Jerome, Sozomen, and others,

no opposition at

find

all

Christianity being that

to

that

we

candidates for
" But

all

it,

Am-

way only admitted.

what needs any more of these quotations," saith

Mr. Kiffin, " when all, that know any thing of the

must

practice of antiquity,

opinion

we oppose was

that the

confess,

never in the world for

sixteen hundred years and more."

Yea,

the reformers,

all

or other foreigners

Calvinists,

England, and

own

that

all

is

the

church of

an ordinance of Christ, yea, the

or initiating ordinance

first,

fellowship, without which,

larly

the dissenting congregations

ordinances, have owned, and do own,

that baptism

very

whether Lutherans,

into

church

no man may be regu-

admitted to the Lord's supper.

I shall

now

close all

have to say on this

argument, by directing your attention to two

modern
man,
is

authors.

in high

One is Dr.

esteem

Doddridire, a learned

hearken to his words.

certain, that Christians in general

been spoken

of,

baptized persons
far

as

our

" It

have always

by the most ancient fathers, as

and it is also certain, that, as
:

knowledge of primitive antiquity

f2

68
reaches, no unbaptized person received the Lord's

supper."*
The other is the justly renowned
John Bunyan, who, though he wrote in favour
of open communion, acknowledged, that, in the
first ages, it was not admitted.
In reply to an

opponent who thus writes

standing

that

all

him

to

you have

" Notwith-

water baptism

said,

ought to go before church membership; show

me

one,

in

New

the

all

Testament, that was

received into fellowship without

Replies,

it."

" That water baptism hath formerly gone first

is gi'anted

but that

do, I never
is

saw

it

is

The concession made,

communion the sentence

proof."t

in favour of strict

following

ought of necessity so to

somewhat extraordinary,

as

the

good man seems to be of opinion, that the apostles

and the first churches practised that which was
not necessary to be done. But if one positive
institution of Christ

be not necessary

may be

to attend to

dispensed with,
it,

then

if it

we may, with

equal propriety, give up the other, and so set

aside both baptism and the Lord's supper altogether, which,

I suppose,

will

not meet your

approbation.

T.

have listened,

my

dear

sir,

to the argu-

ments you have brought forward in favour of

strict communion, with great attention, and I

must

confess,

with some conviction;

* Dr. Doddridge's Lectures, vol.

t Bunyan's Works,

folio, vol.

i.

ii.

but yet.

p. 371.

p. 67.

69
there are objections which have been started

those

who are of a different

how to get over.

know

not

J.

My

opinion,

by

that

jections?

worthy brother, what are those obI hope my mind is not pertinacious in

error; do,

by

T.

I will

occurred to

all

then

my

means, state them.

make

free to

mention what has

mind, and what has occupied the

minds of others, and which, at present, has great

weight with me.
1. Baptism is a mere circumstantial thing.
The worthy man you have mentioned, I mean
Mr. John Bunyan, has so described it, and he
says, " In the midst of

remember

your zeal

that the visible saint

with him about

not

stantial,

things

for the

that

Lord,

Quarrel

is his.

are

circum-

but receive him in the Lord, as becometh

saints."*

J.

I have

observed,

that

Mr. Bunyan does

speak of the ordinance of baptism, as an outward circumstantial things a shadow, an outward

and hodily conformity

to

outward and shadoivish

an obedience

circumstances,

to ivater.

Water

water, water, ivater, ivater. Jive times over in

few

And,

lines.

water baptism
is

is

therefore,

no bar

somewhat remarkable,

the Lord's supper in the

his

words

"

to

he maintains, that

communion.

But

it

that he also speaks of

same way,

for these are

That touching shadowish

* Bunyan's Works,

folio, vol.

i.

p. 74u

or figura-

70
tive ordinances, I believe that Christ

but two

his church,

in

the supper of the Lord

has ordained

water baptism and

viz.

both which are of ex-

use to the church in this world; they

cellent

and

being to us representations of the death

resurrection of Christ, and are, as

God

shall

them, helps to our faith therein; but

them not

make
count

the fundamentals of our Christianity,

nor grounds or rule to communion with

saints."*

man sweeps away

Thus, therefore, the good

both these divine institutions as shadowish

cir-

cumstances, and establishes a church in this world

without ordinances, for he counts them not fun-

damentals of our Christianity, nor grounds or

rule to
out,

communion with

but

much

very

Here he speaks

saints.

query,

tently with the order of the

if

he spe ks consis-

New

Testament, in

establishing the churches of Jesus Christ; for,

it

appears to me, that baptism and the Lord's supper are the two ordinances which

^^.ve

fundamental

to the establishment of a true Christian church.

Let

us, for

circumstance,

a moment, consider baptism as a

it is

a circumstance established

by

divine law, and therefore ought to be regarded,

yea, scrupulously regarded.

observation

"

and we cannot
disobedience,
the

Deus

we

same manner

* BuDyaii's

admire Cliarnock's

voluif, is a sufficient motive,

free ourselves

if

from the censure of

observe not his

commands

in

that he enjoins them, in their

Works,

folio, toI.

i.

p. 63.

71
circumstances as well as their substance."*

may be

use of water, in baptism,

cumsta?ice,

but

it is

to that ordinance.

called

The
a cir-

an essential one with regard

But

has been departed from.

this,

in

some

instances,

Near the beginning of

the Reformation, a certain midwife in Thuringia,

under the pretext of necessity, baptized some

sickly children, without water, merely by pronouncing these words, / baptize thee
&c.

certain Jew,

company with

in the

name,

performing a journey in

Christians,

and being suddenly

seized with a dangerous illness, earnestly desired

baptism

at

the hands of his fellow travellers;

they, not having a priest in their

company, and

being destitute of water, were at

first

but,

reluctant;

he conjuring them not to deny him the

favour, they yielded to his request;

on which,

taking off his clothes, they sprinkled him thrice

with

sa7id,

instead of water,

adding, that they

baptized him in the 7iame of the Father, and so on.

when new-bom
unbaptized, were doomed to eternal
infants,
death, the priest was obliged to attend, on the
call of a midwife, and sometimes, when the infant
was likely immediately to expire, they, not having
In the
water prepared, made use of wine.
of
the
Irish
baptized
by
twelfth century, some
In the dark ages of superstition,

plunging their children in milk, and were superstitious

enough

to imagine, that every part

Chamock's Works,

vol. u. 7^6.

so

n
Dr

plunged became invulnerable.

"

We

condemn the

and inventions of

foolish

and ungodly practices

heretics,

water altogether, as the

Willetsays,

that either exclude

Manichees with others

or do use any other element, as the Jacobites,

be baptized with a hot iron

to

them that were

instead of water, burned

that,

or,

as the Ethio-

which are called Abissines, that used fire

instead of water, misconstruing the words of the
pians,

"

gospel.

He

shall baptize

Ghost, and with

fire."

Now, my dear

sir,

you with the Holy

Matth.

1 1 .*

iii.

can you consider that a

person being sprinkled with sand, plunged in

milk, or in wine, or

marked with a hot

iron, is

really baptized with Christian baptism, or

you

clearly perceive that the

presents water (however

it

may be

stance) as essential to baptism

done

appears from

bi/ ivater,

ture has told us.

New

all

re-

called a circum-

That this

do not

Testament
is to

be

that the scrip-

Was not John called the

Baptist,

from that which was to be a principal part of his

Does he not not say, " He sent me to

baptize with water?" Did not Jesus go down
into the water, and when he was baptized, went
ministry

lip

straightway out of the water

apostles act in the

same way

a spiritual baptism, and the other

where that

is

not

Lord designed,

if

yet,

and did not the

Though

there

signifies

nothing

was all that oui'

no outward action,

if this

there w^as

is

* Vide Booth's Paedob. Exam. pp. 295, 296.

73
there had been no occasion for the

Eunuch

to

stop his chariot, and for him and Philip to get

out of it, when they saw water.

That there are various particulars

Mr. Booth

(as

observes) relating to baptism, which are merely

circumstantial,

we

For

readily allow.

the age of the candidate,

instance,

provided he

make a

credible profession of repentance and faith

time of administration

it

may be

the

morning,

in the

at noon, in the evening, or at midnight, as in the

case of the Philippian jailor

in

river,

spectators

the place:

it

may b6

a pond, or a baptistery the number of

:

they

may be many

These,

or few.

and other things of a smilar kind, we look upon

as indifferent,

as,

properly

speaking,

circum"

stances; because, not being included in the

baptism, they

but

it is

water.

make no

law of

part in the institution

quite otherwise as to the solemn use of

For,

wanting;

if

if

that be omitted, baptism itself

used contrary to divine order and

primitive example, the ordinance

so corrupted as not to deserve

Roman

is

its

is

corrupted,

original name.*

Catholics would fain persuade us, that

a participation of wine, at the Lord's table,

is

circumstance; but they have been constantly

mere
told by Protestants, and very

justly, that

an

and J would ask

Whether you think it

essential part of the institution

you this plain question

would be right to admit a person
:

it is

* Booth's Paedob. Exarained,

vol.

to

i.

communion

p. 130.

74
at the Lord's table,

the wine

who

refused to partake of

I shall close

my

reply to the

first

objection

you

have started, by a quotation from 3Ir. Vincent

Alsop^

who

a worthy Nonconformist minister,

was ejected from Wilby, in Northamptonshire,

who was afterwards bound over to the sessions
for preaching at Oakham, and lay six months in
Northampton jail, for praying with a sick perHe was chosen one of the six lecturers at
son.
Pinners-hall.*
He writes thus " Under the
:

JVIosaical law,
offer to

God commanded

that they should

him the daily burnt-offering

and, in this

case, the colour of the beast (provided

it

was

otherwise rightly qualified,) was a mere circumstance; such as

that

God

man had proved

perstitious,

laid

no stress upon, and

himself an arditious, su-

busy body, that should curiously ad-

here to any one colour. But for the heifer, whose

ashes were to

make

thetvater of separation, there

was no circumstance, but made, by

God's command, a substantial part of the service.
To be red'\ was as much as to be a heifer:
for when circumstances have once passed the
royal assent, and are stamped with a divine seal,
they become substantial in instituted worship."

the colour

We

ought not to judge that

God

has

little re-

gard to any of his commands, because the matter

of them, abstracted from his authority,

Nonconformist's Memorial,

vol,

iii.

p. 48.

is little

Numb.

xix. 2.

75
for

we must

not conceive, that Christ sets

by baptism,
water
the

or

because the element

the thin2:s

small, yet his authority

institutions
be,

first,

common bread and

thereof are

Thougli

wine.

plain, fair

by that other sacrament, because

little

materials

is

little

great. If

is

seem necessary

be

themselves

in

any of Christ's

to be broken,

it

will

necessary to decry them, as poor, low,

inconsiderable circumstances

and, then, to

fill

the people's heads with a noise and din, that

Christ lays

little

hereto,

them the

call

stress

on them

and, in order

circumstantials, the acci-

denluls, the minutes, the punctilios, and, if

need

be, the petty John's of religion, that conscience

may not kick at the contemning of them."

Now, my good brother, when we consider,
that baptism

a positive institution of Christ

is

that he himself admitted only those

been baptized,

to partake of the

the

who had

supper at

its

examples and

apostolic

first

institution

New

Testament precedents, which demonstrate,

were encouraged to
the Lord's table; that the unity and

that no unbaptized persons

come

to

order of a gospel church require an attention to

it; in

which opinion both ancient and modern

divines agree.
idea,

that

Does it not seem

baptism

is

and, therefore, to be

T.

to

be a mistaken

merely a circumstance,

little

regarded

have listened, with attention, to the ob-

servations you have

made on my

but hope you will excuse

first

suggestion,

my not making remarks

76
till

have heard what you have to say on a se-

cond.

The

2.

to

It is this

declining to admit unbaptized persons

communion

at theLord's table,

that Christian duty of love which

seems
is

to

oppose

so frequently

inculcated in the sacred scriptures, and, particularly,

by our Lord Jesus Christ and

I will

tles.

John,

his apos-

mention a few passages

xiii.

that ye are

35, "

my

By

this shall

disciples, if

all

men know

ye have love one to

another."

John, XV. 12,

" This

is

my commandment,

That ye love one another."

1 Peter, i, 22, " Love one another with a pure
heart fervently."
1

John,

iii.

14, "

from death unto

We know that we have passed

because we love the bre-

life,

thren."

J. This, I

know,

an argument frequently

is

brought forward in favour of mixed communion.

Our

brethren,

who

differ

from

us, often

plead

the excellency of Christian charity; they urge

the propriety, the

utility,

the necessity of bear-

ing with one another's mistakes in matters that

are not essential, amongst which, they class the

ordinance of baptism.

remember reading John

Bunyan on this subject, who writes thus:

" Love is more discovered, when it receiveth
for the sake of Christ and grace, than when it
refuseth for
tisTYiy

want of water.

It is love,

not bap-

that discovereth us to the world to be

77
Christ's disciples.

law; but he

Love

fulfils

it

is

not

the fulfilling of the

who

and

judgeth,

setteth at

nought his brother; that stumbleth,

offendeth,

and maketh weak

for the

two
let

and

his brother,

sake of a circumstance.

Strange

Take

Christians, equal in all points but this

one go beyond the other

holiness;

far,

for

all

nay,

grace and

yet this circumstance of water shall

drown and sweep away all his excellencies, not

counting him worthy of that reception, that, with
hand and heart, shall be given a novice in religion, because

he consents

to water."*

was the great

ground and foundation on which the excellent
Thus, you

see, brotherly love

author of the Pilgrim's Progress founded his

hypothesis of mixed communion.
is

sandy ground that

is

easily

But, alas

it

washed away, and

a weak foundation which will not support the

edifice.

The Lord's supper was not appointed to be a

test of brotherly love among the people of God.
That mutual Christian
exercised,

is

certain

affection should there

be

and so

all

it

should in

other branches of social religion.

It

has been very properly observed, "

As

to a

proof, a substantial proof, of our love to the chil-

dren of God,

it

is

not given at so cheap and

easy a rate, as that of sitting

down

with them,

either occasionally or statedly, at the holy table.

* Bunyan's Works, vol,

i.

p. 71.

78
The

true test of our love to the disciples of Christ,

not a submission to any particular

is

nance of public worship; for that

is

ordi-

rather an

evidence of love to God, and reverence for his

authority

but a sympathizing with them

feeding

afflictions,

hungry,

the

in their

clothing

the

naked, and taking pleasure in doing them good,

whatever their necessities

Love,

charity,

peace,

may

be."

candour, forbearance,

are pleasing, plausible words

but when applied

to the subject before us, they are delusive ones.

Do

you not know, that there

false charity?

peace, which

of truth

Is that
is

fire

such a thing as

wholesome,

men

with

evangelical

at the

expense

Is this not strange fire that is not

from the Lord,

such

made

is

as that

but detracts from his glory;

which Nadab and x4bihu pre-

sented, and which cost

a passage

is

in

them their lives ? There

Dr. Owen, which has much

pleased me, and in which,

him.
" I can freely say, that
in

England, who

is

hope, I unite with

know

not that

man

willing to go farther in for-

fear

love, and communion with all that

God, and hold the foundation, than I am

but

this is

bearance,

never to be done by a condescension

from the exactness of the

least

apex of gospel

truth."
1

do assure you, that those who are advocates

for
their

communion,

most cordially receive

Christian brethren, who differ from them

strict

79
on

this

their

point, into their affections, their arms,

bosom

that they, at

them

cheerfully, to invite
to their tables

and

all

times, are ready,

to their houses,

and

rejoice in holding friendly

and brotherly fellowship with them. But they

cannot invite them to commune at the Lord's
table; for this sole reason, because the Lord has
not himself done it, nor any of his apostles, nor
any of the primitive churches. Do not, I beseech you do not condemn us as destitute of
;

we adhere

consider as a positive law of Christ,

what we
which has

never been abrogated, and because

we cannot

brotherly love, because

to

countenance the neglect of that law,

doing,

we

should violate our

own

for,

in so

consciences.

We

do love our Psedobaptist brethren, and

who

bear the image of Christ; but

we cannot

love

them so much

positive in-

as to give

stitution of our Divine

up a

Master on

all

their account.

We

remember the question, put by our Lord to

Simon Peter, " Lovest thou me more than

And

these?'

seems

to

although the question, as

be ambiguous

it

stands,

and, perhaps, the pri-

mary sense of the query, is, whether Peter loved

Christ more than his fellow disciples did, as he
seemed to suggest when he declared, that though
all

the disciples should be offended at Christ,

Yet we may
the present subject, and

and forsake him, he would

apply the question to

not.

consider our Lord as asking us,

ine

more than thou

Lovest thou

lovest thy fellow Christians?

80
I have said to you, " If thou lovest me,

keep

my

commandments." But are you willing to

give up one of my most important commandments,

rather than

offend

We

thy brother?

answer; No, Lord, thy commandments we

keep; we

adhere to

will strictly

ments, for thou art to us,

question,

my

all,

all

and

thy appoint-

in

This

all.''

dear friend, has great, very great

weight with us
these

*'

will

" Lovest thou

me more than

T. I thank you

for

your remarks, and

that the collective rays

subject, have altered

that baptism

is

own,

you have thrown on the

views.
I do not think

my

a mere circumstance, or an in-

ceremony but that it is a divine institution, and a positive law, that has not been
repealed to this day; and that we have not,
significant

therefore,
it

any

right to lay

it

aside, or to treat

with indifference, nor to encourage others so

to do; and, I

am now

convinced, that a refusal

to admit an unbaptized Christian to the Lord's

table, arises, not

from a want of brotherly

but from a conscientious principle, and a

love,

warm

the Lord Jesus Christ and his

which
constrain the strict Baptists
appointments,
to say, We will hold them fast, and not let them
1 have, however, a few other things to mengo.

attachment

to

I know, have prevalence with

on
which I should be glad to have
and
some,
tion,

which,

your opinion.
J.

Mention them by

all

means

will give

81
you the best reply

and then leave you ta

can,

judge of the propriety of my remarks.

T.

stress.

make

shall then

free to

It

and

proceed,

on which there has been

has been said,

state that

laid great

in the

word of God

to forbid; no scriptural authority,

no express

3.

That there

command

to

is

no warrant

refuse the admittance of unbap-

tized believers to the Lord's supper;

seems expedient, and

allow of mixed communion

there are cases in which

really necessary, to

and, without which,

be debarred from the

table of the
J.
tion,

My
is

it

many godly persons must

communion of saints, at the

Redeemer.

worthy

your first observano warrant in scripture to

very foreign from the point. Have we
friend, as to

that there

forhidy

and that

is

who profess
repentance and
baptism? Have we not
a warrant to admit only such who believe and

not a warrant to admit only those

faith to

are baptized,

partake of the eucharist, and

to

which warrant

is

founded on the commission of

Christ, and the practice of the apostles, and pri-

mitive churches?

Do we

And

not this sufficient?

is

need any thing more?

It

is

not ne-

cessary to have a prohibition to the contrary.

We

follow the

rule

laid

down, the direction

given, the

examples

set before

Testament.

It

with

lies

us in the

our

New

brethren

to

prove, that they have such rule, such direction,

such examples, to justify their practice.

Pro-

82
Mbition

exam-

precept and

not necessary;

is

we want. We have them they have

not.
Our directions are, to teach then to
baptize then to add to the church we want
nothing more
an express command to the
ple are

all

contrary would be superfluous.

There

express prohibition of admitting

no

is

the doctrine

of the real presence, tran substantiation, of administering only one of the elements, bread, to

the laity, or kneeling at the Lord's supper

is

no positive scripture that says, there

place as purgatory

cream,

or

oil,

justify us in
stitions of

or,

the cross in baptism

embracing

no such

but, will this

the follies and super-

all

Upon

there

we should not use

we should not use

and so on

spittle,

popery?

that

or, that

is

this principle,

we may

countenance every absurd chimera, that every

man's erroneous brain
to the law,

and

may

light in

You

which
to

But we

to the testimony, if they

not according to this word,

no

devise.

it is

say,

speak

because there

is

them.

have suggested, that there are cases in

it

seems expedient, and really necessary,

admit of mixed communion.

have heard

asked, If a Baptist should be situate in a

lage, or town,

where there

is

it

vil-

only an Indepen-

dent church, and he has not an opportunity of

attending a Baptist church, by reason of distance,

must he be deprived of the Lord's supper? And,

again, if a pious Independent resides where there
is

only a Baptist church,

mit him to

commune

is it

not lawful to ad-

at the sacred ordinance ?

83
In reply to
the

Bible,

would observe, that the

Testament, the law, and the
I

this,

New

testimony, are to be adhered

or country.

cumstances,

law

The law

is

to,

whether

in

town

not to bend to local

but rather

cir-

circumstances to the

and, on this point, I will beg leave to re-

few apt observations which have been made

by Paedobaptists themselves, quoted by Mr.
Booth " It is better to omit a positive ordilate a

nance, than to perform

pointment.

had

contrary to divine ap-

who cannot

Persons

drink wine,

better entirely abstain from the Lord's sup-

per, than receive

is

it

it

under one species only.

It

better entirely to abstain from using the holy

supper, than receive

it contrary to the appoint" Omissions," says Mr. Blake,

ment of Christ."
" seem better to me than a

prohibited, or a dis-

expressly against a com-

orderly proceeding,

mand, or ordinance of Jesus Christ. The ark

had better staid where it was, than a new cart
should have carried
place appointed for

it

it.

in that disorder to the

Better that Saul and Uz-

ziah had let sacrifice alone, than any, to

did not appertain,

I never

saw

sufficient

reason given, that a

should break an express

rule, rather

a duty of mere positive institution.

must

whom

should have undertaken

it
it.

man

than omit

Jeroboam
Dan and

rather have no sacrifice, than that

Bethel should be the place for

said good

Thomas Bradbury,

it."

" It

is

" I think, to leave

such a duty (baptism) undone, than not

G 2

better,"

to

have

84
it

God

well done.

never expects

either fron

it

you or me, when he has thrown a bar

we

that

my

should break

good

ings

is

T.
with

Now,

it.*

what say you to these pithy

some weight in them ?

friend,

say-

there not

I think there is

my

or leap over

it,

our way,

in

but

have not quite done

inquiries.

J. Well, go on.

T.

1 then

have to ask, Whether there are not

some passages of scripture, which seem strongly

to favour mixed communion ?
J, This

coming

to the source; all I

scriptural authority.

for is

them

is

overset

me

Come,

let

contend
us have

and

with scripture,

have

done,

T.

Rom.

mention two

I will then
xiv. 1,

Him. that

is

texts, the

weak

one

is,

in the faith re-

ceive you, hut not to doubtful disputations.

J. Then, you suppose, that those

to

be baptized,

or,

who wish

to

Lord s supper without baptism,

the faith? and your supposition,

the

correct.

But, I

am

who

refuse

be admitted to
are
I

weak
think,

in
i^

apprehensive, that you are

greatly mistaken in bringing forward this text to

encourage such weakness, for

do with the

subject.

it

has nothing to

Let us always take texts of

and then we shall

understand them. Observe what follows in the
second and third verses " For one helieveth that
scripture in their connection,

he

may

eat all things; another,

Psedobap. Examin. vol.

i.

who

p. 311.

is

weak,

85
Let not him that eateth, despise
not ; and let not him which eateth

eatetk herbs.

him that eateth

not, judge him that eateth : for God hath received
him" Now, do you not perceive, that the apostle's reference is to those who had not a clear discernment of their Christian liberty in regard to

by the ceremonial
which was now abolished? He refers to
converted Jews, who believed in Christ, and
were not fully satisfied of the rituals of the Moeating of meats, forbidden

law,

These per-

saical dispensation being abrogated.

sons, the apostle advises the believing Gentiles,

and the more enlightened Jews, not

to reject,

because of their scrupulously avoiding to eat

some meats, because now

indifference;
**

for,

The kingdom of God

pensation)

is

became a matter of

it

as he observes,

not meat

(that

and

is,

in ver.

17,

the gospel dis-

drink, but righteous-

and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost

The
laws respecting meat and drink, were set aside
by the Divine Legislator had they remained, it
would have been right to have rejected them
who disregarded the law but now, meat and
drink is become indifferent
and if some yet
choose to abstain from certain food, let them be
indulged, so that they do not make it the ground
of their acceptance before God. But what has
this to do with baptism, which is a standing law,
a remaining, positive institution in the gospel
'^

ness,

church

This text will not apply at

matter in hand

T.

but what

is

your next

all to

the

have to mention another, which,

I think,

86
has great force, and

it is this,

I will give

it

you

at large.

22,

For though I he free from

all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all,
that I might gain the more.
And unto the Jews
Cor.

I
to

19

ix.

I might

became as a Jew, that

gain the Jews;

them that are under the law, that

them that are under the law;

I might gain

them

to

iliat

are

without law, as without law, (being not tvithout law

to

God, but under the law

gaiji

To

them that are tvithout law.

became 1 as weak^ that

am made

I might

to Christ,) that

I might gain

weak

the

the

weak:

men, that 1 might by all

all things to all

means save some.

J.

My

What

good friend, you have produced a text

which demands some consideration, let us ex-
amine it. Observe,
the apostle refers to

of the gospel,

as, in ver. 16,

I have

the gospel,
sity is laid

is

the preaching

For though

I preach

nothing to glory of: for neces-

upon me; yea, wo

is

unto me, if

preach not the gospel

2.

His aim,

in

preaching the gospel, was to

convert souls to Jesus

Christ.

frequently speaks about gaining

might gain the Jews; that

" that I

might gain them

that I might gain the

them
weak

means save some."

Thus,

that are under the law

that are without law

Hence, he so

men

that I might gain

that I might by

all

you

in preaching the gospel "

see,

his

aim

was

not to amass wealth, to gain riches, and treasures of good things to himself, but

many

souls


87
who

to Christ,

otherwise must have been lost;

but, being brought to the

and

salvation,

was

profit to him,

knowledge of Christ,

by him, through
and gain

his ministry,

it

The me-

to Christ.

who

spare no

taphor

is

pains,

but take every method to acquire gain

and
tual

taken from merchants,

profit

the ministers of the

merchants,

of men,

whom

word are

spiri-

their trafBck lies in the souls

they are studiously and anxiously

careful to bring to Christ."

3.

In order to

considered

it

lawful,

different

persons,

" I have

made

vant unto

this,

all,"

to

he would, as

far as

accommodate himself to
both Jews and Gentiles.

myself," saith he, ver. 19,

in

he

faithfully

*'

ser-

and indefatigably

preaching the gospel to them

undergoing

all

manner of affliction and persecution for their

sakes ; behaving towards them with

all

meekness

and humility condescending to their weakness,

and accommodating myself, as far as it was
right, to their capacities and customs.
Yet, he,
as it were, says, I would not have you consider
me as a lawless person; for, as he beautifully
and admirably observes, in a parenthesis, which
is worthy of remark, (being not without laiv to
God, but under the law to Christ.) No he considers himself as bound, by the law, to Christ : he
would transgress no laiv of Christ to please or
humour any man.
;

Now, my

friend,

this is

the very point the

law of Christ.
Baptism they consider as one of the great laws
strict

Baptists adhere

to,

the

88
of Christ, and, therefore, cannot dispense with

it,

on any account whatever.

T.

plainly

had on

now

have

finished

you what

tell

my

mind.

by

I will

effect the conversation

have

has

the force of your

felt

They have wrought

observations.

and

inquiries,

conviction,

and, henceforward, I shall not be ashamed to

declare to
J.
ther,

And

all,

that I

am

am become a

ready,

my

Strict Baptist.

good

and bro-

friend

to declare, that I shall ever consider

of the happiest events of

my

life,

it

one

that I have this

day been the means of convincing you of an

important truth.
But you must expect that
some will express surprize at your declaration,
and others will say, ** And are you become a
bigot? (not knowing the meaning of the term,)
and are you joined with those who are unwilling
to say to an unbaptized brother,

blessed of the Lord,

Come

in,

thou

why standeth thou without?'

'*

Well, be not discouraged; remember, that the

the high priest, were

fellows of Joshua,
*'

wondered

become a follower of Him who

derful,

is called,

lasting Father, the Prince of Peace."|

A truth that

glorifies

the Lord Jesus Christ.

give

it

"

Won-

Counsellor, the mighty God, the everRejoice,

that you have embraced the truth, as

Jesus.

men

Rather rejoice that you are

at."*

up.

Buy

* Jfecb,

the truth,

iii.

8.

is

in

God, and honours

hope you
and

it

sell

Isa. ix.

will never

it

6.

not, says

89
Buy

the wise man.

at

it

any

Truth is the Christian's

crowned this day. " Hold that

price.

hast, that

me

crown
fast

no man take thy crown."*

But, before

mit

it at no
you are
which thou

price, sell

we

conclude our conversation, per-

to say a few things that

blessing of

God,

to

may

tend,

by the

animate us both to holy con-

whenever we discuss
religious subjects, we should endeavour to make
some practical improvement.
versation and godliness

1.

Then,
to

for,

appears that the ordinance

baptism

believer's

ought

it

is

of vast

be attended

to

of

importance, and

with

the

greatest

seriousness.

Dr. Waterland justly observes, that " the true

doctrine of the Trinity and the atonement of
Christ, have been kept

by the

institutions of

up

in the Christian

church,

baptism and the Lord's

supper, more than by other means whatsoever;

humanly speaking, these glorious truths,

which are essential to salvation, would have been
lost long ago, if the two positive institutions had
been totally neglected and disused, amongst
and,

professors of Christianity."

In this point of view,

baptism and the Lord's supper appear

to

be of

unspeakable importance to the glory of God,

and the very being of the true church of Christ

on earth. "t And Mr. John Ryland, in his Six
Views of Believers' Baptism, admirably expresses

* Rev.

ill.

11.

t Beauty of Social Religion,

p. 10.

90
himself, thus

Of

"

these institutions, (baptism

and the Lord's supper,) baptism

regard, as

it is

calls for

our^r*^

appointed to be Jirst performed;

and, however lightly the inconsiderate part of

mankind may

affect

treat this ordinance,

to

it

ought to be remembered, that Christ himself

considered

it,

and submitted

to

it,

part of that righteousness which

the Son of
adds, "

God

to

We ought,

as an important
it

And

fulfil."

became even
he moreover

with the utmost deliberation

and care, to consider its own native dignity^ as

an action of the positive, or ritual kind, the most
great and noble in itself, and well pleasing to God,
that

it is

heaven.

possible

In

for us

this action, Christians,

the counsel of

God

word

it is

it is

and eternal purpose

his

perform on

to

it is

this side

you behold

the result of his wise

commanded in
own example, and

clearly

enforced by his

honoured in the most distinguished and wonderful manner, by every person in the adorable
This ordinance is no trivial affair; it
thing and, whoever is so unhappy as
mean
no
is
to despise it, wants eyes to see its beauty and
Trinity.

excellence."
2.

We

ought not only to set forth the import-

ance of Christian baptism,

every

new

convert

who

is

but to encourage

brought by the Holy

Spirit to believe in Jesus, to attend immediately

to this solemn institution.

What encouragement
cious declaration

is

held forth in the gra-

annexed to the commission

91
Mirhich

our Lord gave to his apostles

therefore,

and teach

&c.; and,

lo,

am

all

"

Go

ye,

nations, baptizing them,

with you alway, even unto

which is not only to be

the end of the world
considered as an encouragement to the adminis;'"

trators of the

solemn

whom

even to those to
I

am

but to the subjects,

rite,

with you alway," to assist you in

services, to carry

" Lo,

administered.

it is

you through

all

your

all

your

diflSculties,

you through the whole of life, and, at

death, I will receive you " unto myself, that where
!"
I am, there ye may be also
to support

How

animating the experience of those

have followed the Lord

my

friend, the

ordinance!

in this

who
Ah!

baptism of serious Christians has

frequently been an interesting and impressive

spectacle

how

often has the falling tear, on such

occasions, been seen, not the tear of sorrow, but

the tear of joy.

my

Cannot you

call to recollection,

dear friend, the transport you

felt

when you

devoted yourself to Christ in baptism?

What

Lord and Master find

when he entered Jordan, and when he went

delightful season did our

it,

up out of the water, and saw the heavens opened

to him, and the Spirit of God descending like a
dove, and lighting on him, and heard the voice of
his Father, saying, " This

^hom

am

is

well pleased."

my

Who

ecstasy of the Eunuch, after he

Philip, in the water they
It

is

expressly said, "

came

He

beloved Son, in

can

tell

the

was baptized by
to,

in the desert!

went on

his

way

92

Who

rejoicing."

can describe the transport of

the jailor and his household, that night in which

they were buried with Christ in baptism

He

"

rejoiced," saith the sacred historian, " believing

God, with

in

by

find,

all his

house."

you

believe

will

inquiry, that, in general, a baptizing time

has been a joyful time

to

both ministers and

candidates, to the administrator and the subjects.

Let, then, an atheistical world reproach, jeer,

and ridicule as they may, we do

and will
which the
people with joy unspeakable, and
rejoice,

rejoice in baptism, as an ordinance in

Lord
full

3.

fills

his

of glory.

We ought

ness, prayer,

There

is

to follow

baptism with watchful-

and universal obedience.

no part of true religion that

speculative, the

whole

is

merely

designed and adapted

So baptism,

to sanctify the soul.

is

as

is

it

an

ordinance of God, and of perpetual obligation in

the church,

it is

of importance to Christian prac-

Baptism was, indeed,

tice.

represent our
in his

chiefly intended to

communion with

death,

burial,

its

great institutor,

should be remembered, that, at baptism,

fess to

At

be dead

baptism,

we

of the ordinance

conformity to

to the world,

and

if

we

we

alive to

it

pro-

God.

" put on Christ ;" one grand end

is

to represent

Him who

and enforce our

lived as one

world, and whose conversation was

and

But

and resurrection.

profess to abide in him,

dead

all in

to this

another,

we ought

to

walk even as he walked, and we should coh-

93
stantly

under a practical sense

live

of

our

obligations to Him, through whose death and

resurrection all spiritual and eternal blessings
are communicated to us.
4.

After the solemn ordinance of baptism has

/been administered, on a profession of faith in

Christ, such persons should be encouraged to

unite with a gospel church,

other sacred institution

Lord's supper
ther,

man

no

The

to attend to the

Jesus

Christ,

what God hath joined

for,

great end of this ordinance

and drink

this bread,

Lord's death

" This

thus ex-

As

often as ye eat

ye do shew the

The duly

enjoined

contained in these words of

is

do

is

this cup,

"

he come."

till

on the believer
:

the
toge-

has a right to put asunder.

pressed by the apostle

Christ

of

and

in

remembrance of me."

encouragement to attend to

it

is

The

held forth in

The cup of blessing, which we

bless, is it not the communion of the blood of
Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the
communion of the body of Christ?" By which
1

Cor. X. 16,

'

I understand, that the believer, partaking of the

bread and wine,

is

a sign, symbol, and token of

fellowship with Christ in his death, and

mean

is

communion with him, and of

enjoying the blessings of grace which come
through his death. And what an honour, what a
privilege is it, to hold communion with Christ at
his table!
How beautifully is it described by
of having

Dr. Watts

94
Jesus invites his saints

To

meet around his board;

Here pardon'd

rebels

Communion with
For food he gives

He

sit,

their

and hold
Lord.

his flesh,

bids us drink his blood;

Amazing favour! matchless grace!

Of

our descending

God!

This holy bread and wine

Maintains our fainting breath.

By union with our living Lord,

And interest in his death.
Let

all

our powers be joiu'd

His glorious name to raise;

Pleasure and love

And

fill

every mind.

every voice be praise.

FINIS.
'

1.

BOOKS,
REMARKS ON

hy the same Author.

a TREATISE,

Christ, worthy of all Acceptation,

2.

entitled.

The Gospel of

by Andrew

NATIONAL CALAMITIES, Tokens

pleasure.
A Sermon, preached on a

Fuller.

of the Divine Disday appointed for a

General Fast.
3.

The CANDOUR of Mr. PETER EDWARDS EXHIBITED, and his Curious Reasons for Renouncing AntiPaedobaptism Examined. (Under the Signature of a Plain
Countryman.)

4.

A REPLY TO THE LAYMAN,

containing Strictures upon

his Notions of Christian Liberty, in opposition to

Authority.

(Under the Signature of Philokosmos.)

Printed by J. BARFIELD,
91, Wardour^Strect.

Church

THOUGHTS ON

BAI'TISJI,

ORDINANCE OF PROSE LYTISM;

INCLVOIVIS
A

OBSERVATIONS ON THE CONTROVERSY

RESPECTING

Bering of CTomimunoit*

Br ACNOSTOS,

speak as

to

wlce men; judge

jre

what

say."

Pait.

LONDON
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY PEWTRESS, LOW,
30, Gracechurck Street.

1S19.

Sc

PEWTRESS,

THOUGHTS ON BAPTISM,

HE

union of Christians of various denomina-

advance the Redeemer's kingdom, chiefly

tions to

Societies,

must

prove highly gratifying to every pious mind.

We

by means of Bible and Missionary

union, so

hail this

far

ceeded,

on account

exhibits

still

We

affords.

period,

as

of

it

the

has hitherto proprospect

that

more than of the pleasure that

regard

when,

it

as

it
it

the harbinger of that

to adopt the language of a justly

celebrated poet,

**

The

And

noise of jarring sectaries shall cease,

e'en the dipt

Each heart

And

Much
object,

and sprinkled

live in

peace

shall quit its prison in the breast.

flow in/ree

communion with the

resti"

has been done to effect this desirable

but

much more

remains

to

be done

;-

we have every

for

reason

to believe

that

ihf

union of Christians with each other, will be

more

cordial

and more complete than

it

has ever

yet been, before the outpouring of the Spirit in the

latter day.

highly

We

appreciating

when we

tinity,

much

danger of too

subject

of Christian

are not in

the

that one great

reflect

the death of Christ

end of

stated to be, " to gather

is

together in one the children of

God who were

This important object lay

scattered abroad;"

very near the heart of the Redeemer, while offering

up

his last intercessory prayer in the presence

of his disciples, just before he suiTcrcd

when he

for these

shall

alone,

but

for

they all
I in

may

he one

as thou. Father, art in

thee, that they also

that the world

me

especially

them also who

(hat
believe on me through their word

pray

and

uttered those emphatic words, " Neither

may

:" intimating

may

me,

be one in us

believe that thou htist sent

by the

latter clause,

which he

urges as a plea to enforce his petition, that he

did not exi>cct to see his mcssiahship universally

acknowledged, nor his kingdom, fully established,

till

this

The

union was completely effected.

prophetic vision of Ezekiei, recorded in

the i37th chapter of his prophecy, suggests the

8ame

idea.

The bones which he saw

open valley, he was

told,

in

the

represented the whole

liouse

of Israel

and

who

that

with the state of Christianity

period,

acquainted

is

present

the

at

but must acknowledge that they furnish

as apt an

emblem of

Christians?

the whole world of professing

very many, indeed, but very dry

while their mutual animosities

together,

have, for ages

tended to widen and perpetuate that

which

separation from each other,

the effect

is

and the evidence of moral and spiritual death.

On

surveying the melancholy scene, one is ready

to exclaim, " Can these bones live ?" Yes, they
can, they shall

spoken

for the

and with

it,

mouth

God

of the Lord hath

nothing

impossible.

is

But how, and under what circumstances shall

this work be accomplished ? Not in a state of
from each other

separation

no, surely

they

must be re-united before they are re-animated.

Bone must come to his bone. Every member
must find his own place in the body of which
he forms a part. The eye must no more say to
the hand,

have no need of thee, nor the head to

I
I

union

fully effected,

is

may we expect
enter into

When

have no need of you.

the feet,

them

then and not

the Spirit of
;

and they

life

till

from

will stand

this

then,

God

to

up an ex-

ceeding gieat army.

This cordial union of Christians

is

necessary

not only for obtaining that combination of eflbrt

which

is

requisite for evangelizing the world, but

also for the purpose of giving

such a view of the

tendency
and
of
genuine
nature
Christianity, as
nothing short of this can exhibit.

To

this, per-

haps, more than to any of the other means employ-

ed in the apostolic age,

may be attributed

the rapid

progress of the gospel during that period,

when

" the multitude of them that believed were of

one heart and of one soul."

It

becomes then a subject of serious enquiry,

What
among

are

the principal obstacles to this union

Christians

which

is

so very desirable,

and what means are best adapted

of these obstacles

On minute

to the

removal

investigation,

it

more than probable that it will appear, in respect of most of the differences subsisting among
is

real Christians,

and such differences

as

have,

bn various occasions, excited the greatest hostility to

each other, that the opposing parties have

been nearly

at

an equal distance from the truth,

which they have both exclusively laid claim.

Such differences very much resemble the ancient
dispute between the Jews and Samaritans, respecting the place where men ought to worship
to

while the nature of true worship, and the important ends for which

it

was

tqually overlooked by both.

instituted,

were

There

perhaps, no subject of controvers}', to

is,

which the above remark

will

more

than to that of Baptism, which,

regretted, has, of late years,

a pertinacity,
that

if

forcibly apply

it is

much

to

be

been revived, with

not with an asperity, equal to

which has accompanied the

agitation of

it

any former period. A by-stander, however,

who is not enlisted under the banners of either
at

of the contending parties, observing

dexterously

they

handle

their

how

very

weapons when

and how extremely

attempting
when
to establish
deficient they appear
their own peculiar views, may be led to suspect
their antagonists,

assailing

that they are both in

error

lies

agree to

in

the wrong, and that the

common ground which

the

they

occupy, and which forms the basis of

him
to the previous question, a question which, however important, seems never to have come properly
before the public, at least not to have met with
that consideration to which it is certainly entitled.
their respective

Was Baptism

systems.

This

will

bring

designed to be a standing ordinance

of the Christian Church, to be perpetuated from

age to age

or

institution, as

which,

(if

was
an

it

appointed, in

its

original

ordinance of proselytism, of

continued at

all)

Missionaries are the

only proper administrators, and Proselytes the

only proper subjects
the latter conclusion

is

To conduct

the reader to

the design of the follow-

ing pages

and should the writer succeed

in (he

attempt, and his views of the subject be generally

adopted, he will consider himself as having renr

dered a very important service to the religious

public,

by removing out of the way, what has

hitherto proved one of the greatest hindrances to

that union of Christians which, as stated above,

seems indispensably requisite

versal spread of the gospel,

to effect the uni-

and usher

in the glory

of the latter day.

We

come now

ately before us

we must

trace

to

but

the subject more immediin order to

Baptism

do justice

to its origin,

the circumstances which attended

tion, the light in

end which

it

which

it

was designed

its

to

it,

and mark
introduc-

was regarded, and the

to answer.

This ordinance was introduced, according to

the account of it which is given us in the New
Testament, by John, the forerunner of our Lord,

who

appears himself to have been a very extra-

ordinary character.

The

length of time which

had elapsed since any prophet had been seen

Israel, the family of

in

John, so well known and so

highly respected, the remarkable circumstances

attending his birth, his rigid austerity and unfeigned piety, the peculiar situation of the people
at that time,

groaning under the

Roman yoke and

9
anxious

for deliverance,

with

togetlier

tlie

uni-

Jews of

versal expectation then entertained b}^ the

the speedy approach of the Messiah, and even by

the Gentiles of the appearance of

dinary personage,

who

should

condition of mankind, and

age

all

extraor-

ameliorate the

restore the golden

concurred to awaken curiosity and ex-

cite attention

his ministry,

and

some

least

so that,

though

when John commenced

was

it

in the

most recluse

populous part of the country,

wilderness, as

it is

him

by the Evangelists

the

he immediately drew

called,

vast multitudes after

in

for

we

are informed

went out

that there

to him,

not the inhabitants of Jerusalem only, but of the

land of Judea, and

And

they were

all

baptized by him in Jordan,

That the Baptism admi-

confessing their sins.

nistered

the region round about.

all

by John was an ordinance of proselytism

The

will not admit of a doubt.

were such

as

subjects of

it

were capable of receiving instruc-

and making a profession upon which, being

baptized by him, they were considered as his
tion,

cjisciples or proselytes.

The growing fame

of John did not escape the

notice of the Jewish rulers.

probable that

it

It

is

more than

excited their envy, and that they

began to entertain serious apprehensions,

respect in

which he was

held,

lest

the

and the influence

10

which he possessed, should

tation,

and

diminish

their

eclipse Iheir repu-

authority.

They

accordingly sent Priests and Lcvites from JeruTheir

salem, to interrogate him on the subject.
object appears to have been, not so

much

to learn

the nature and design of the ordinance which he

administered, for of that they seemed fully aware,

but what were

was not so much, What doest

as who art thou ? and why doest thou
What exalted personage art thou ? what

that ordinance.

thou

thus

his pretensions for administering

It

commission hast thou received from heaven, that thou shouldest baptize and make proThe answer of John is well known.
selytes ?

special

He

disclaimed the character of the Messiah, and

professed to act only as his forerunner, to prepare

his

way agreeably

to ancient prophecy.

Whether

these rulers were satisfied Avith this declaration

of John or not, they well

knew

that he stood too

high in the estimation of the people, to permit

them with safety openly to oppose him. They

would not, however, give him their sanction, as
appears from another part of this history, where
they are said to have rejected the counsel of

God

against themselves, being not baptized by him.

At

this period, a

circumstance took place, too

important to be allowed to pass unnoticed, whatever bearing

it

may have on

the present question.

11

While John was administering the

rite

of Baptism

him from every

to the multitudes that flocked to

quarter, our Lord thought proper to present him-

This excited

a candidate.

self as

who would

be supposed) the surprise of John,

have

declined

honour

the

"

be put upon him.

might

(as

was thus to

that

have need (says he) to be

me

baptized by thee, and comest thou unto

" Suffer
divine

it

fulfil all

now (was

to be so

Redeemer)

for

?"

the answer of our

becometh us to
Our Lord by employ-

thus

righteousness/'

it

ing the pronoun us, on this occasion, includes

the administrator with himself

became him to submit

less becoming in John
quired by him so to
from

when

do.

Many

that

we should

seeing he hath

things

re-

have inferred

present day, ought

Lord and Saviour

left

follow his steps.

us an example,

But

no means a necessary consequence.

many

it,

it

was no

to administer

to be baptized because their

;

surely, if
it

this, that believers in the

was baptized

for,

to the ordinance,

this

is

by

There were

which became our Lord, and which

constituted a part of that righteousness which,

as the

which

Redeemer of
are

not at

there are some, in

his people,

all

obligatory

which

it

he was to

upon us

would be even

for us to attempt to imitate him.

fulfil,
:

nay,

sinful

To accomplish

work of our redemption he took our nature

upon him^ was made under the law, and rendered

the

12
obedience to that law,

ceremonial as

well as

He

was circumcised, kept the passover,

and conformed exactly to the Jewish ritual. Nor
moral.

was

this all

for, in

pleased, by his

the present instance, he

own example,

was

to sanction an or-

dinance which was appointed as introductory to a

dispensation that was afterwards to be more fully

This circumstance, however, affords

established.

no well-founded argument for the perpetuity of

Baptism as an ordinance of the Christian church
;

especially

when

it is

recollected that the baptism

which our Lord submitted, was the baptism of

it is agreed on all hands, was but
local and temporary.
to

John, which,

There was, nevertheless,

this act of condescension,

a peculiar propriety in

on the part of our Re-

deemer, at the precise period in which

took

it

seems to be intimated in the

mode of expression, " Suffer it to be so now.'*
place

An

and

this

opportunity

was afforded

at

this

time,

of which our Saviour thought proper to avail

himself,

while thus bearing testimony

to

the

character of John, of receiving a divine attestation

to his

own character and

mission

and

most solemn manner conceivable,

the assembled multitude, just
to

commence

this, in

in full

the

view of

when he was about

his public ministry.

This august

transaction has frequently and very justly been

li3

affording a striking exhibition dt

as

fconsidered

the doctrine of the sacred Trinity

and

office,

according to the

nant of redemption.

in

which each

own

character

economy of

the cove-

of the Divine persons ap}3ears in his

Behold the Son of God

in

the midst of the flowing stream, receiving the

baptismal
like a

rite

while the Holy Sprit, probably

lambent flame,

dove-like shape,

in a

descending upon and hovering over him

voice from heaven, the voice of
is

heard, saying, " This

whom

am

well pleased

is

my

God

is
!

seen,

and a

the Father,

beloved Son, in

Such were some of

!'*

the ends to be answered by this memorable event

enough, surely, to justify that seeming deviation

from propriety, which so forcibly struck the mind
of John, in the character of one
to confess,

and who was

person to

whom

who had no

sins

infinitely superior to the

he appeared thus

to

submit

himself.

Shortly after this transaction,

sus

made and baptized more

we

read that Je-

disciples than John,

though Jesus himself baptized not, but

ciples.

From

this

we

learn

that the

his dis-

Baptism

administered by our Lord, or rather by his disciples

under his immediate direction, proceeded

exactly upon the same principle as that of John,

his fore-runner, at least in this respect,

ordinance of proselytism

it was an
and when we consider

14
\vhat vast multitudes were baptized at this time

by one

how

or the other, and

small the

number

of true converts before the eflusion of the Spirit

on the day of Pentecost, we are necessarily led to

the conclusion, that an external profession was

deemed

suificient to entitle

any one

to the ordi-

nance, without a rigid scrutiny into the state of

the heart.

From

time

this

Baptism, except as

we
it

metaphorically alluded

hear

on

is

to,

resurrection from the dead

little

certain occasions

till
;

or nothing of

after

our Lord's

when, just before

his

ascension to glory, he commissioned his Apostles

to go into all the world, and preach the gospel to

every creature.

demand our

The terms

of this commission

closest attention, as constituting the

only authority on which the practice

*'

Go

founded.

is

6 therefore, (was the language of our di-

vine Redeemer, as recorded by Matthew) and

teach (disciple or proselyte)

them

in the

and of the
all

you

and

lo,

the end of the

Bible,

is

teaching them to obI

have commanded

am with you always, even unto

world.
Amen." Matt, xxviii.

The word which,

19, 20.

nations, baptizing

Father, and of the Son,

things whatsoever

serve
;

name of the
Holy Ghost

all

in

our version of the

translated " teach," in the

verses, signifies to proselyte, or

first

make

of these

disciples.

Family Expositor, employs

the first of these terms, " proselyte all nations,
&c." It is of exactly the same import with that
Dr. Doddridge,

in his

which occurs in the passage referred to above,

where it is said that Jesus made and baptized
more disciples than John. It appears clearly
from comparing these passages together that, so
far as proselytism is concerned, this commission
of our Lord proceeded on the same principle

with the practice of John, and that of his

disciples during his personal

ministry.

own
Their

sphere of action was, indeed, considerably enlarged,

embracing

extent

it

carried,

is

proselytism

nations

all

is

it

yet to whatever

still

connected with
is

said about

who were

thus to be

while not a syllable

the descendants of those

proselyted and baptized.

From

the promise annexed " Lo,

am

with

you always, even unto the end of the world,"

it

has been inferred that the ordinance of Baptism

must be of perpetual

obligation.

But, neither

the words themselves, nor the situation in which

they are found, will support such an inference

for, it

must be obvious

to

every reflecting mind,

that the spiritual presence of Christ with his

disciples,

would have been equally necessary, and

doubtless would, at this particular period,

his bodily presence

was about

when

to be totally with-

16
drawn, have been made

much

as

the subject of a

special promise, if no such ordinance as that of

Baptism had been appointed.

read the whole passage,

we

Besides,

if

we

shall see that the pro-

mise stands more immediately connected with

those subsequent instructions, which would form
the important topics of the gospel ministry in

succeeding ages,

all

the Apostles had closed

after

even to the end of time, when

their testimony,

Baptism, as an ordinance of proselytism, would

be no longer requisite.

But

if

any just inference can be drawn from a

supposed connexion between the precept and the

promise, on the ground of proximity of situation,
the record of this transaction by the Evangelist

Mark, would lead us

for there,

"

Go

all

the world, and preach the gospel

He

to every creature.
tized, shall

shall
*'

in

be saved

damned

be

and these signs

my name shall

speak with
serpents

;"

that believeth and

and

if

it

is

bap-

immediately added,

shall follow

them

that believe

they cast out devils

;

they drink any deadly thing

them

they shall

they shall take up

it

they shall lay hands on the

and they shall recover."

institution

is

but he that believeth not

new tongues

shall not hurt

sick,

an opposite conclusion

the recital of the commission,

after

ye into

to

Here we

find the

of Baptism closely connected with

17
the promise of miraculous gifts

and indeed, this

connexion seems to coincide with the nature and

desisrn of that

ordinance

than the other.

far better

Miracles and ceremonies were the distinguishingcharacteristics of the Jewish dispensation.

both, an appeal

is

made

They

the senses.

to

In

were, therefore, well adapted to that period of the

church, which
tle

Paul, in

is

justly represented
epistle

his

state of childhood.

Children,

which

affected with that

than that which

is

by the Apos-

the Galatians, as a

to

we know,

are

more

presented to the eye

is

They

addressed to the ear.

are generally better pleased

with pictures than

with books, and learn more from striking exhibi-

Hence, the

tions than from abstract reasonings.

former dispensation was a dispensation of ceremonies,

shadow of good

useful at that period, but not

tual
site,

being, like miraculous

when

come

things to

meant

gifts,

very

to be perpe-

no longer requi-

the Christian dispensation should be

fully established.

Baptism, indeed, seems to partake of the nature of both dispensations, being partly Jewish and
partly Christian,

though not exclusively belong-

ing to either.

was, therefore, well adapted to

It

form the close of one and the commencement of

the other.

In

resembled the

its

mode

of administration,

legal purifications,

it

which,

much

in the

18
epistle to the

Hebrews, are called divers washings,

word is in the original) being a

or baptisms, (as the

part of those carnal ordinances, that were to con-

tinue in force only

while, in respect of
fered from

them

till

its

the time of reformation

subjects,

it

essentially dif-

exacting of every candidate that

which the law

profession of faith and repentance,

never required of those

of those

who

Baptism may,

who

administered

participated, nor even

its

most solemn

rites.

therefore, be considered as a sort

of twilight ordinance, interposing between the

shadows of Jewish ceremonies, which were about

to flee

that

away, and that glorious day of gospel

was

just ready to

dawn on

light

benighted

world.

Our Lord was

pleased

to

adopt this ordi-

nance, which had been introduced by John his

forerunner, instead of instituting a

new

rite,

as

might have been expected, when he commissioned his Apostles to go into

all

the world, and

preach the gospel to every creature.

Viewed

in

which we have hitherto considered

it, there was much wisdom in the appointment.
Baptism, as an ordinance of proselytism, was
the

well

lio^ht in

known

it

had already been practised to a

considerable extent, and the nature and design of

it

could not be misunderstood.

19

But
only

may

it

be asked, If Baptism was ordained

for a particular purpose,

stances then existing,

adapted to circum-

why was

enjoined with

it

such solemnity, and enforced with such strictness,

especially (as recorded

the declaration, "

He

by Mark) connected with

that believeth and is bap-

tized shall be saved ?"

We

reply to this

by ob-

serving, that the declaration referred to, instead

of militating against the sentiment

vanced, tends very

much

we have

to confirm

it

ad-

for it

stamps such an importance on the ordinance of

Baptism

at that period,

attached to

it,

sent day.

Hence

tors

as can

as practised

by no means be

among

us, at the pre-

the difficulty that commenta-

have universally found,

in their attempts to

interpret this passage, and the various

which they have sought to evade

explain away
subject a
clearly

little

how

its

meaning.

more

its

ways

in

force,

or

Let us consider the

attentively,

and we shall see

the matter stands.

In every period of the church, and under every

dispensation, a public profession of religion, in

one way or
tial to

other, has been considered as essen-

the character of the people of God, and, in

proportion to the clearness of the light and the

extent of the privilege, the duty has become

more indispensable. Hence we read (Matt. x.

" Whosoever shall confess me before
32, 33.

20
hien,

him

will I confess before

heaven

in

men, him will

is

in

my

Father

me

but whosoever shall deny

I

my

deny before

also

who

is

before

Father

who

Such was the solemn declaration

heaven."

of our Lord during the period of his public ministry:

but when,

after his resurrection

he commissioned
tions, he

from the dead,

his Apostles to proselyte all na-

was pleased

to require those

who em-

braced their doctrine, to make a public profession

of the same, not by a mere verbal declaration of

by

their faith in him, but

the

act, in

was

name of

a significant

the sacred Trinity.

Words

a great propriety in this.

to different constructions,
in

different senses,

and solemn

There

are liable

and may be understood

conveying more or

less

of

meaning, according to the varying circumstances

of him that utters them.

could

But an

act of this sort,

neither be misunderstood nor retracted.

The rubicon was

passed, and they must abide

was impossible

the consequences.

It

without

the

incurring

charge,

and

to

by

go back

exposing

themselves to the odium, of apostasy from the

faith.
In this view the declaration, " He that
believeth and
too strong.

the

is

baptized shall be saved," was not

Being baptized,

command

in

compliance with

of Christ, was, at that period and

under those circumstances, absolutely necessary

to prove that their faith

was genuine, and that

they were in a state of salvation.

21
This view of the subject

and

illustrated

is

confirmed by the language of the Apostle Peter

on the day of Pentecost, when three thousand

souls appear to have been converted under one

Deeply convinced of the guilt they

discourse.

had incurred, and dreading the vengeance to

which they had exposed themselves, by the

murder of the Lord of

unto Peter and

life

and glory, they said

to the rest of the Apostles, "

and brethren, what

we do

shall

Men

Then Peter

?"

said unto them, "

one of you

Repent and be baptized every

the name of Jesus Christ, for the

in

remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of

the

Holy Ghost

and

to

for

the promise

your children, and

even as many

what

as the

rich

consolation

is

unto you

to all that are afar off,

Lord our God shall call."

what heavenly

encouragement

what divine joy

were these words

adapted to inspire into the hearts of those who,

but a short time before, had clamorously de-

manded

the crucifixion of the Redeemer, impi-

ously saying, " His blood be on us and on our

children !" and

now

to

hear,

that a

way was

open, in which they and their children might

be rescued from that destruction which they had

thus wickedly imprecated, by repenting of their
sins,

his

believing in Christ,

name

It is

words did he

added, "

testify

and being baptized

And

with

many

in

other

and exhort, saying. Save

22
yourselves

from

untoward

this

follows) they

generation/'

that gladly received his

Then (it
and the same day there
word were baptized
were added unto them about three thousand souls.
Here we see Baptism standing in exactly the
same connexion with faith on the one hand and
and salvation on the other, as in the declaration
recorded by Mark, " He that believeth and is
;

Mark

baptized shall be saved."

(it is

generally

understood) wrote his gospel under the direction

of Peter,

who

doubtless recollected the above

knew

expression of our Lord, and

to understand
first

full

This same Apostle

it.

well

how

also, in his

general epistle, referring to the ark, wherein

few, that
adds, "

is,

The

eight souls, were saved by water,

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
conscience towards God) by the resurrection of

Jesus Christ."

It appears

Peter

iii.

20, 21.

clearly from the above statement

that Baptism was, at that period, in a certain

sense, a saving ordinance.

It

appointed means, by which,

and repentance, those

faith

in

was the divinely

connexion with

whom

the Apostle

Peter addressed were exhorted to save them'

selves

the

from the awful judgments denounced against

Jewish nation, which subsequently came

23
upon them,

even

generation

that

before

who

passed away, but from which, those

professed

their

faith

in

Christ were

had
thus

happily

exempt.

When

command

of their risen and exalted Redeemer,

performed

as a fruit of faith,

in

obedience to the

with right views, and under

the influence of proper motives,

it

also furnished

more important and invaluable blessings of spiritual and

satisfactory evidence of interest in the

eternal salyation.

We may

further observe, that

Baptism was then the only door of entrance into

the visible church of Christ, the only means of
access to Christian fellowship and the

of saints;

communion

by which those who were formerly

aliens from the

commonwealth of Israel, and

gers to the covenants of promise, having

and without God

nigh

in

stran-

no hope,

the world, were brought

considered and treated as being no more

strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with

the saints and of the household of

God

a right to partake of // the ordinances

all the privileges to
to 7ione

By

which Christians

having

and enjoy

are entitled,

of which they could before lay claim.

attending to this ordinance,

Christ that those

who were

it

was the

will of

converted to the

by the ministry of the Apostles and Evangelists, should come out from among the unbelieving Jews and idolatrous Gentiles, with whom
faith,

they were previously mingled, and form a distinct

24
community, united among tliemselves and separate
from their former associates.

Such being the nature of Baptism in its original

and such the ends to be answered by

institution,
its

appointment, the

presumption

fair

that,

is,

being ordained under peculiar circumstances, and

corresponding with our

for special purposes, not

present situation,

was not intended

it

be made

to

a standing ordinance of the Christian Church, to

be perpetuated from age to age

obliged so to regard

command

nor are

we

without a clear and explicit

it

Such

to that effect.

command

certainly not to be found in the terms of the

Some have supposed

is

com-

be included
in the words that immediately follow, " Teaching
mission.

it

to

them to observe all things whatsoever I have

commanded you." But if so, we must certainly
find some trace of it, in the subsequent writings
of the Apostles

ence must be

otherwise, the obvious

infer-

either that the perpetuity of the

ordinance of Baptism was not among the n umber

of those things which Christ commanded, and

which they were consequently bound

his people to observe

or,

to teach

that they have been,

in this respect at least, sadly deficient in their

duty
dark

seeing they have

on the subject.

left

This

us so
is

much

the

in

the

more extra-

ordinary as on every other branch of Christian

25
they have been so very explicit, not spar-

chity,

ing to urge

under

it,

But, in

caution.

regard

warning,

and

Baptism, whether

to

addressed

are

epistles

their

the varied forms of pre-

admonition,

exhortation,

cept,

all

ministers,

to

to

churches, or to individuals, there seems, on this

siibject,

one had almost

There

no injunction

is

tion to press

it,

said, a studied silence.

to enforce

danger of delaying or neglecting

against the abuse of

it

nor

no caution

it,

there any intima-

is

from which we can certainly infer that

tion,

was meant
It was not
There,

be continued from age

to

so

Hence we

as such.

that

is,

ordinance to be observed in
w^ere they left to

mode

ter or to

was

it

specified

*'

all

This shall be an

your generations.**

vague conjecture, either as

of performing these ordinances, or

the persons to

whom

it

partake of them.

ture to lay

continue as

to

read so repeatedly, " This

be a statute forever/*

to the

age.

an ordinance was appointed that was

if

long as the dispensation lasted,

shall

to

it

under the former dispensation.

designed to be perpetual

Nor

no exhorta-

it,

no admonition or warning of the

it

down

appertained to adminis-

Indeed,

as a certain rule,

we may

ven-

founded on

the equity of the Divine government, and applicable

to

appointed

all
;

the

ordinances

which

God

has

that the perspicuity with w^hich they

are defined will be invariably proportioned to the

26
which they

strictness with

to their observance.

importance attached
this rule be

and the

are enforced,

Let

once admitted, and we are furnished

with an unanswerable argument against the perpetuity of the ordinance of Baptism.

was any ordinance,

nity, enforced

instituted with such solem-

with such strictness, and having

such importance attached to

enactment

For never

being

it,

at the

time of

its

closely connected, not with

the possession or forfeiture of temporal good, but

wnth the salvation of the precious and immortal

soul

and yet,

in respect

of

its

continued observ-

ance so extremely vague and indefinite

us, (if

we may judge from

nions

entertained concerning

leaving

the contradictory opiin

it)

mist of

obscurity and a labyrinth of perplexity, without

a clue to guide us, either in respect of the description of character

authorised to administcj

the ordinance, the kind of persons wiio are the

proper subjects of
ance.

All this

is

it,

or the

mode

of

its

perform-

perfectly unaccountable

the supposition that

it

was intended

to

standing ordinance of the Christian church.

upon
be

Ad-

mit the contrary, and every difficulty vanishes.

Instead of perplexing ourselves any further on
the subject,

we may

in possession of

rest satisfied

all that

is

being already

requisite for us to

know, on a subject with which personal duty

has no necessary connexion.

S7
notwithstanding, be contended,

It tn-ay,

lliat

an ordinance, once instituted with such solemnity,

and enforced with such

we have

strictness, as

ad-

mitted respecting Baptism, must necessarily be

considered as of perpetual

obligation

unless

repealed by the same authority, and in a

as clear
it

was

and

enacted.

first

and

sible,

definite, as

is

manner
the declaration by which

This

is

certainly very plau-

perhaps the strongest argument that

can be adduced in favour of the practice.

if

we

closely

examine

it,

we

shall perceive that

from being so conclusive, as

it is far

first sight,

imagine.

But,

Happily

precedent set before us in the

we might, at
we have a

for us,

New

Testament

the proper consideration of which will materially

our investigation of this important point.

assist

The

ceremonial law, in

was delivered by Moses

its

branches,

various

to the Israelites

with

all

due solemnity, and the observance of it enforced

It might, therefore,
with the utmost strictness.
have been expected
abrogated,
rity, or

by

it

that,

if

ever

it

should be

would be by the mandate of authocommission from heaven for

a special

the purpose, and that, in terms so explicit, as to

leave no

room

ject, in the

for

doubt or hesitation on the sub-

mind of any who truly feared God.

we knoAv was not the case.

This,

however,

Many

of the believing Jews, for a considerable

time after their having- embraced Christianity,

28
cherished a fond regard for those institutions,

which
tomed

for so long a period

they had been accus-

Now, by what m^ans were

to venerate.

they to be detached from these antiquated

to

which they were so closely wedded

rites,

Not by

the dictate of authority, compelling an immediate,

entire,

and absolute relinquishment of them

by the dint of argument, showing

petual obligation
special

purpose

that

were not designed

instituted, they

but

when

first

be of per-

to

that they were appointed for a

and when that purpose was

fully accomplished,

there existed no longer any

obligation to regard them.

This mode of proceeding, with respect

to the

ceremonial law, serves to establish a very important principle, which will apply to

all

the

com*

mands of God without exception.

It is this.
The moment that the reason for which any command was given, ceases that moment the obligation to obey such command, ceases with it.
;

proper attention to this rule would have pre-

served

many from

those errors into which they

have been betrayed by a servile regard

and examples recorded

in

the

New

to precepts

Testament,

without enquiring the reason of such observances,

the end to be answered by them, and whether
it

is

necessary and expedient for us, in our pre-

sent circumstances,

which ma\ be widely

differ-

29
ent from theirs, to employ

same means

tlie

the attainment of such end.

We may

one or two instances which occur

of the

rical part

New

in

for

refer to

the histo-

Testament by way of

illus-

tration.

When,

an

at

early period of

the Christian

church, a question arose respecting the propriety

of imposing upon Gentile converts the necessity

of conforming to the'Jewish ritual, a consultation of the Apostles

and Elders was held

salem upon the subject

it

when,

after

at Jeru-

much

debate,

was determined that nothing more should be

required of them than those " necessary things'*

as they are called, "

To

abstain from meats of-

and from blood, and from things

fered to idols,

strangled, and from fornication

is

added)

mentioned,

from which

(it

keep yourselves, ye shall do well."

if ye

Now, with

respect to the last of the things here

has always been considered, and

it

very properly, as necessary for us to abstain from

it

as for

ever

is

other,

them

made

we

in

yet,

though no distinction what-

the decree between one and the

have always been accustomed to

gard the rest as deriving

all

their importance

re-

from

peculiar circumstances then existing, and con-

sequently

not

obligatory

upon

who

are

On this subDr. Doddridge observes, that " the reason

placed in different circumstances.

ject,

us,

30
of the prohibition

now

is

ceased^ and the obliga-

tion to abstain from these things ceases

which exactly corresponds with the

teilli it

position

:"

we

have advanced.
Again,
sion,

in

It

pleased our Lord, on a certain occa-

order to incnicate

more

forcibly the

necessity of humility and condescension among

wash the

his followers, first to

ples,

and then to explain

saying, " If

washed your

ye also ought to wash one

feet,
I

that ye should do as

have done to you."

own example

understood to be the

letter of this precept

are

have given you an example

Here

a positive injunction of Christ, sanc-

tioned by his
rally

his reasons for so doing,

your Lord and Master, have

I,

another's feet: for

we have

feet of his disci-

bound

to

and yet
spirit

and example,

it is

and not the

to

which we

conform.

Under the former dispensation, indeed,

were positive

gene-

there

institutions, the propriety or expe-

diency of which was never considered as a proper

subject of enquiry or discussion so long as that
dispensation continued in force

excuse admitted,

nor was the least

any neglect, delay, or devi-

from the prescribed mode of observing

ation

them

for

it

being

(as

we

are told) of the nature of

positive institutions, to require implicit obedience

31
on the

ground of the authority of the Legis-

sole

Hence, we repeatedly find instances of

disobedience to such precepts, though in things
lator.

apparently

punished

trivial,

with

the utmost

severity, as acts of rebellion against the

Now,

Zion.

it

is

many

urged by

King of

that the ordi-

nances of divine service enjoined upon us, though

fewer

in

number, and more simple

in their nature,

than those which belonged to the former dispensation

them, positive institutions,

yet, being like

they proceed exactly on the same principle, and

ought

On

with the same

to be enforced

this

strictness.

ground, the Baptists defend their con^

duct in refusing communion

to Pasdobaptists

nor

is it

easy to see with what

who admit

justice or propriety, those

principle, can censure

at the Lord's table

them

the above

for so doing.

Let

us hear their reasoning on this subject, as preus by

Mr. Booth, in his

for the Baptists
in which they are
vindicated from the charge of laying an unwar-

sented
*'

to

the

late

Apology

rantable stress on

the ordinance of Baptism."

In the third section of his treatise on this subject,

he thus expresses himself:

God

" As the

sovereign

more concerned and manifested in

positive ordinances than in any other branches

will of

is

of holy worship

so

it is

evident from the history

of the Jewish church, that the divine jealousy

32
was never sooner inflamed, nor ever more awfully
expressed, than
in their

when God's

ancient peop]efailed

obedience to such commands, or devi-

ated from the prescribed rule of such institutions.

The

Nadab and Abihu by fire

breach that was made upon

destruction of

from heaven

the

Uzzah the stigma fixed and the curses denounced on Jeroboam

together with the fall
and ruin of all mankind by our first father's dis;

obedience to a positive command, are among the

many

authentic proofs of this assertion."

In

show how the above remarks apply to

the object that he has in view, which is to prove

order to

the necessity and importance of Baptism, as a

term of communion, he adds, " The clearer light

which God has afforded, and the richer grace

which Christ has manifested, under the present
dispensation

are so far from lessening, that they

evidently increase

every divine
ship.

command

is

the

to

perform

relating to Christian wor-

Accursed, then,

bellious

who

our obligations

is

conduct

the principle, and

of

those

re-r

professors

think themselves warranted by the grace of

the gospel, to

trifle

with God*s positive appoint-

ments, any more than the priests or the people

were of

old.'*

Another author,

whom

Mr. B. quotes with

approbation, after stating, in respect of the ordi-

33
nances of the gospel, " that the pritnilive mode
of administration should be strictuf and conscientiously adhered to,^' adds, " In a former dispensation, in which the ritual was numerous and
burdensome, the great Jehovah was particularly
jealous of his honour as supreme lawgiver, and

looked upon the least innovation as a direct op-

Moses,

position to his authority.

we are

informed,

was admonished of God to make all things accordto the pattern showed him in the mount.
And
alter
unfortunate
youths
to
w^ho presumed
those
the form of his religion, and worship him in a
way he had not commanded, fell under the severwhich shows that
est marks of his displeasure
he looked upon the least innovation in the cere^
monial part of his precepts, as an impious and
daring opposition and contempt of his authority,
;

and deserving of as peculiar and distinguished

vengeance, as a direct and open violation of the

And

moral law.

as the great

King of the uni-

verse required such strictness and punctuality,

and insisted on such scrupulous exactness

in

the performance of the minutest rite belonging

to the legal dispensation
difficult to

assign a

more lax and

careless,

it

reason

would be extremely

why

and allow

human discretion, under the

nom3^ The greater light which
to

religion, the

small

number and

he should be

a greater scope

Christian ecoshines in our

simplicity of

its

34
ceremonials, and

the end

institutions being

mnre clearly revealed^

and design of those

ar<e

rea-

ye

sons which strunglif indicate the contrary.'*

then proceeds to point out the absurdity (as he

pleased to term it) of supposing " that the

is

sublime author

of our religion

dispense

will

with the jjerforniance of his positive laws, or ad-

mit of the

least variation.''

Mr. Booth,

in

" Paedobaptism

work, entitled,

his celebrated

examined,

on

the

principles,

concessions, and reasonings of the most learned

Paedobaptists," insists upon

as really

is

that "

Baptism

and entirely a positive institution,

any that were given

to the

" the disciples of

that

it,

chosen tribes

Christ are

;'*

as

as

and

much

obliged to regard the positive laws of the

New

Testament, with

Jews

strict

punctuality

as the

which is conIt must be

acknowledged, however, in justice to Mr. ,B.
that he is by no means singular in his view of the
were

to

observe that divine

tained in

the books of

ritual,

*."

Moses

nature of positive institutions, and the obligation

of Christians to regard gospel ordinances as such

proof of which

in

ous

quotations

we need only
with

which

refer to the vari-

the

above

work

abounds, from learned doctors and eminent prelates

*

who

have expressed their ideas on the

Spp " PwpdobaptisiH examiiiefl. kc." Pajf 13 and 165.

'"fe

3j
terms nearly as strong

subject in

em-

as those

ployed bv Mr. H. himself.

Now,

the above sentiments are just, and Mr.

views of the ordinance of Baptism are correct,

B.'s

what

in

if

those

we

are

light

who have

to

regard the conduct of

not only deviated from the mode,

without any scriptural authority

have absolutely chailged the ordinance

was

instituted

which

in its administra-

bears no resemblance whatever to that

it

ordinance which our Lord

administer

to

tles

in

so that (except in the name,

and the form of words employed

tion)

itself,

nature, arid the design and end for

its ver}''
it

but

for so doing,

for

commanded his Aposamong Paedobaptists,

Baptism, instead of being the appointed token

of a personal and individual profession of
as originally

intended,

than a certain

God

which

is

neither

mode of dedicating

Baptism

was

would never be

of a sincere inquirer
of ascertaining

ment

less

children

to

purpose very different from that

it

instituted

originally

purpose, the idea of which,

say,

faith,

more nor

we

hesitate

after truth,

who

not to

likely to enter into the

but such as the

for

mind

had no means

New

Testa-

affords.

With

these views of the subject,

who

shall

dare to charge the Baptists with laying an univar-

36
raniahlc stress on the ordinance of Baptism

wonder

at their refusing to

hold

Paedobaptists at the Lord's table

wonder
with them

at all

gree of respect

or

positive institution

show them the

'\^

for,

the greater

have any communion

that they will

is,

is

smallest de-

the least innovation in a

and

a crime as heinous,

deserving a punishment as severe, as a direct

open violaifon of

(lie

moral

sentiment advanced above

Baptists

would be

or

communion with

late,
;

and

according to the

then,

the

surely,

fully justified in refusing to

unite with such flagitious offenders in any

reli-

gious exercise whatever, as well as in the celebration of the Lord's supper: yea,

it

would be

their duty (however painful to their feelings) to

testify,

every possible way, their abhorrence

in

of such atrocious conduct; instead of acknowledging such to be Christians, and treating

as

brethren

and
For,

liberality,
let

it

as,

them

through an excess of candour

they are sometimes disposed to do.

be recollected that the offence with

which Paedobaptists stand charged,

is

not merelij

a single deviation from the prescribed rule of a

positive institution

but

a line

of conduct which

they are habitually and invariably pursuing

is

this all

for

nor

they not only violate this positive

precept themselves, but actually teach

to do.

men

so

37
WliaL then

we

ci>n

think of the Divine con-

duct towards such characters

We

do

not, in-

deed, in the present day, expect to see transgres-

however aggravated the offence may be,

consumed by fire from heaven, as Nadab and
Abihu were, or visited with instant death, like
sors,

Uzzah, when he presumptuously touched the ark.

But

if their

crime, as stated above,

is

as heinous,

and deserving a punishment as severe,

and open

violation of the

as a direct

moral law, we should

expect to behold some tokens of the divine

dis-

we have repeatedly witnessed

those who have disgraced their

pleasure, such as
in

the case of

profession

some
racter,

by

conduct grossly immoral.

such instances,

eminent the

however

In

dignified the cha-

talent, exalted the title,

extensive the influence, which they

may

and

previ-

ously have possessed, no sooner has the fact been

indubitably ascertained,
like a millstone in
rise

no more.

have attempted

sunk

the mighty waters,

to

Others, in similar circumstances,

to

continue

their profession, having

port

they have sunk

than

in

the exercise of

no other means of sup-

but they have only dragged out

a miserable

existence, without credit and without comfort,

their respectability gone,

their

influence at an

end, and a fatal extinguisher put over

prospects of future usefulness.

The

all

their

effect has

been nearly the same, where the fundamental

35
doctrines of

In

resfarded.

gospel have been denied or dis-

tlie

these cases, that solemn declara-

all

fully verified, "

Them
will
me
I
honour
but they that
that honour
that despise me shall be lightly esteemed."
Such
is God's method of dealing with those who incur
tion of

Jehovah has been

his displeasure

But

Vv'hat

by walking contrary

do we behold

Just the reverse of

linquents,

to him.

in the case before

us

We see a class of de-

all this.

whose offence is exactly of the same

which called down fire from

description with that

heaven on the guilty heads of the culprits

no

less

being

than a deviation from the prescribed rule

of a positive institution : and nothing, according

to Mr.
B. can be conceived more horriblv
provoking to God, or more adapted to excite his
keenest indignation, and the most awful displays
of his vengeance

and

this oflTence, too, attended

with circumstances of deeper aggravation, because

committed under

a dispensation of clearer light

and richer grace than that with which the sons

of Aaron were favoured.

we

Yet, strange to

mark whatever of the divine

So
sure towards them on this account.
it,

see no

that

we may

servants of

ments and

venture to say, that

God, who walk

in all his

been more enriched

tell

displeafar

from

none of the

in all his

command-

ordinances blameless, have

Avith

the gifts and graces of

39
the Spirit, or have had their labours for the conversion of sinners, and the edification of saints,
crowned with more abundant success than they.

Paedobaptist, however,

say, "

You

may be supposed

labour under a very great mistake,

you think of charging us

Avith deviating

is

the Baptists

This

not on our part, but on the part of

;

for

we

are fully persuaded,

and do
Baptism was praQtised

verily believe, that Infant

We

by the Apostles themselves.

in this

if

from the

prescribed rule of a positive institution.

deviation

to

are confirgied

sentiment by a learned friend of ours,

who

has recently taken a great deal of pains to prove,

in a

that

work that he has published on this subject,

the Greek word oikos, which, in our translarendered household or houses signifies /a-

tion, is
7Wi/y,

and consequently 7nust include infants

on

the supposition that infants were actually to be

found

in

baptism

We

those families, (few in number)

is

are sorry that

it is

to ascertain this fact.

not in our power exactly

It

must, therefore, rest on

conjecture or probability.

Had

it

so

that there had been infants in the ark,

certainly

have considered

the idea, that the ark

is

happened

we should

circumstance as

this

pleading strongly in our favour

tle

whose

recorded in the Acts of the Apostles.

especially under

represented by the Apos-

Peter, as a figure of Baptism.

Nay, had the

40
matter been

left

vague and undetermined,

should have concluded, as

us, that infants 7nnst

We

in the instances before

have been there

seeing the

same term is employed for the Lord said unto

Noah, " Come thou, and ail thy house into the
:

ark/*

The Apostle Paul

also, in

his epistle to

the Hebrews, referring to the same transaction

tells us that " Noah, being warned of God of

moved with

things not seen as yet,

fear,

prepared

an ark for the saving of his house.'' In this case,

we should have urged the extreme absurdity of

supposing that no infants were to be found

in

whose inhabitants were destined to

people the whole world with their future progeny.
that ark,

As

it is,

however,

we

are fully disposed to pass

the matter over in silence, and, should

it

at

any

-time be referred to, strenuously to maintain that

it

But to
Taking it for granted,
do for want of proof, that

has nothing to do with the subject.

return from this digression.

as

we

are compelled to

there were infants in the families alluded to, our

argument stands thus. Every general term must

which that term is em-

necessarily include all

ployed to express in
tion.

But

mits of so

its

this rule (if

many

most extended
it

may be

significa-

so called) ad-

exceptions, and the cases occur

must be
made, or we must violate all the dictates of common sense, that we scarcely know what to say.

so frequently where these exceptions

41
There

is

one instance puzzles us extremely,

the more so, as

it

the ordinance in question.

his

commission

to

its

literal

our Lord gave

to preach the gospel

The term

to every creature.
in

When

Apostles, as recorded by

his

Mark, he commanded them

known,

creature,

it is

well

signification, includes irra-

and even inanimate beings.

tional

arid

stands closely connected with

In short,

it

extends to every person and every thing that

i$

But

the subject of creating power.

it in

this sense, in reference

mand, would be

to understand

above com-

to the

grossly absurd.

"

Not more

ab-

surd, however, (say the Baptists) than to under-

stand the term famili/, where Baptism

cerned, as necessarily including infants

and blocks are

as

is

con-

for brutes

capable of understanding and

receiving the gospel, as infants are of making that

profession of faith and repentance,

which

is

indis-

pensably requisite to the due administration of

the ordinance of Baptism.

this, rather,

be

your rule of interpretation, a rule which will

in-

variably apply to

all

Jl.et

cases that

may occur

Every

must necessarily admit of those exceptions, which the nature of the subject and the
dictates of common sense demand,"

general term

"

One

Who

shall decide

when Doctors disagree ?"

thing, however,

ing, that the

we cannot

forbear remark-

continued existence of

this contra-

42
among wise and good men,

riety of opinion

very

much

tends

Baptism was

to confirm the idea, that

not intended to be a standing ordinance of the

Christian church, or
left so

We

never would have been

it

extremely vague and indefinite.

may

further observe that the dispensations

of God, as the

God

of providence, and as the

of grace, form an infallible

comment on

word, especially the preceptive part

find the divine

God

his sacred

wherein

we

conduct repeatedly exhibited, as

furnishing the most exact pattern for imitation,

and the most powerful motive to obedience.

The Apostle

Paul, in his exhortations to the

exercise of mutual

forgiveness, brotherly love,

conjugal affection, and other relative duties, enforces all

upon

you, and loved you

manner
another.

ground

this

to forgive

God hath

therefore ye

forgiven

ought in

one another, and

to

like

love one

John, the beloved disciple, pursues a

similar course in his

God

from the love of

love one another.

first

general epistle, inferring

to us, that

If he laid

we ought also

down

to

his life for us,

ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

Our Lord himself also adopts precisely the same
mode of reasoning when he says, " Love ye your

w^e

^'lemies,
ag;:>ii,

and do good, and lend, hoping

for

nothing

and your reward shall be great, and ye shall

43
he the children of the Highest: for he

unto the unthankful, and

to

who

Bo ye
is

is

merci-

therefore perfect, even as your Father

heaven

in

kind

Be ye

the evil.

therefore merciful, as your Father also

ful.

is

perfect."

is

This was precisely the principle upon which

the Apostle Peter proceeded on a very remarkable

When

occasion.

charged with having acted im-

properly in holding yVee

communion and intimate

fellowship with Gentile converts, and admitting

them

to the full

enjoyment of

all

the privileges

of the Christian church, without requiring them

he rests his defence on this

to be circumcised,

ground, and on this ground alone

for

he uses no

other argument in vindication of his conduct.

^'

F'orasmuch then as

as he did

Christ,

unto us

what was

And God,

who
I,

God gave them

the like gift

believed on the Lord Jesus

that

God

could withstand

w^ho knoweth the hearts, bare them

them the Holy Ghost, even as he

and put no difference between us
did unto us
and them, purifying their hearts by faith.'* Acts
witness, giving
;

The scope of his reasoning

where God has made no
is evidently to show
Paul, in his
difference, we should make none.
xi. 17.

and xv.

8, 9.

that

Romans, urges the duty of mutual

sumforbearance exactly on the same ground
ming up the whole in this short seiitence,
epistle to the

44
*'

Wherefore receive ye one another,

hath also received us to

When

tlie

Christ

as

glory of God."

the opponents of free

communion

are

with these and similar passages,

closely pressed

they generally attempt to evade their force by

al-

leging that they relate to the ceremonial law,

which is now completely abrogated that they

must therefore be considered as irrelevant, having
;

nothing to do with the positive institutions of the

New

Testament.

But,

it

ought

be remem-

to

bered that, however clear the subject

to

us,

ritual

was not

fully

may seem

abrogation of the Jewish

the complete

understood by those

whom

Peter addressed, any further than they might draw

the inference from the transaction which he narrated.

many
w^ere

They might

reason thus, and no doubt,

of them did so.

Those

once enjoined with so

enforced with so

much

with indifference, and

fully

which

solemnity, and

strictness, are
that,

Surely, the purpose for

must have been

much

services

even by

now treated
God himself.

which they were ordained

accomplished

and the

rea-

son of their enactment having ceased, the obligation to regard

ricft

believe,

them has ceased with

were they

still in

it

force, that

So jealous of his honour, would suffer

totally neglected

with impunity;

much

for

we

can-

He, who is
them to be
less that

he

^vould bestow his favours as liberally on those

45
tliein at all, as

\\\m {)ay no r^gartl to

on those who

making
observe them with the utmost strictness
no kind of difference between the one and the
;

other.

we

and

this to the subject before us,

Let us apply

shall see that

same situation

Baptism stands exactly

day, that circum-

in the present

days of the Apostles.

cision did in the

in the

If the

Baptists are right in their views of the ordinance,

nothing can be more

clear.

Infant Baptism

Baptism

nullity.

is

'no

According to them,
at all

In their esteem, the

far

it is

mere

greater part

of the Christian world, including some of the

men now on

wisest and best

are,

to all intents

appears

then

the face of the earth,

and purposes, unbaptized.

that

God

graces of his Spirit alike

bestows the

It

and

gifts

upon the baptized and

the unbaptized, just as he did in the primitive

ages of the Christian Church, on the circumcised

On

and the uncircumcised without distinction.

the supposition that Baptism ought to be regarded

as a standing ordinance,

of communion, this

is

and insisted on

as a

term

most unaccountable.

Mr. Booth himself,

in his defence of exclusive communion, adopts
the very principle for which we contend, and

Now,

it

so happens,

rests the chief

that

weight of his argument upon

it

46
he evidently considers the dealings of God
with his professing people, when they Ml in
for

their observance of his

statutes, as furnishing a

whereby we may infallibly determine the

nature and quality of the offences with which
criterion,

they stand chargeable, and the judgment v/hich

we ought to form of them. Hence he infers from
the awful visitations of divine Providence on the

two

eldest sons of Aaron, and others

who com-

mitted similar transgressions, the heinous guilt

of deviating from the prescribed rule of a positive

But, it is worthy of note, that every

which he adduces is taken from the Old

institution.

instance

Testament, not one from the

more extraordinary,
Paedobaptists, he
surdity of this
to
to

by them,
Baptism

is

as

This

is

the

with

his controversy

perpetually exposing the ab-

mode of proceeding, when

in order to
;

in

New.

resorted

prove the right of infants

considering

it

weak-

as betraying the

ness of the disputant, or the want of substantial

evidence

as a tacit confession that Evangelists

and Apostles afford but slender evidence

of the point which they wish to establish
wise, there would be no need
to

obsolete

ceremonies,

to

in
:

proof

other-

send us back

antiquated

rites,

the

Old Testament, and the former dispensation, to

know the meaning of the commission which our
Lord gave

to his Apostles,

ture of an ordinance,

and

which

is

to learn the na-

pecidiar to the

47

New

Testament, and belongs solely to the preBut,

sent dispensation.

absurd

for a

we would ask.

Is

it

more

Peedobaptist to conclude from the

God made

promise which

God

to

fore

Christian

him and

to

Abraham,

parents ought

to

be a

him, that there-

to his seed after

baptize their

to

children, than for the advocate of exclusive communion to infer from the circumstance of the sin
of Nadab and Abihu being punished by fire from

heaven, that therefore Baptists are justifiable in

communion
We may here,

refusing to admit Paedobaptists to

with them

at the

Lord's table

mutatis mutandis,
language,
that

retort

and say,

"

on Mr. B.

May we

his

own

not conclude

he would never have produced any pas-

sage from the

sentiment,

Old Testament

were he not

in favour of his

keenly

sensible

that

the apostolic writings do not furnish him with

in its defence ? But, as Dr. Watts
Through the influence which our own
schemes or hypotheses have upon the mind, we
sometimes become so sharp-sighted as to find
these schemes in those places where the sacred
writers never thought of them, nor the Holy Spirit

solid

argument

observes,

ever intended them."

Mr.

B.'s reasoning on this subject, however,

perfectly correct, so far as

it

is

goes to establish the

general principle, that the conduct of God towards

48
offenders forms a proper test, by which

we may

judge of the magnitude of the offence.

But the

due application of this

rule

must ever have respect

to the nature of the dispensation under which

the offence
merit

is

committed, and the actual

which such

treats

offenders, or supposed offenders,

hand of God. In this view of

the subject, the justness of which is incontrovertible, Mr. B.'s argument may be turned comr
pletely against himself for the principle which
receive from the

he has taken so

much

pains to establish,

if

pror

perly applied, proves the truth of the sentiment

directly

opposed

establish.

to

that

which

The argument

it

is

adduced

to

will then stand thus

If the awful judgments, above referred to,

evince

the heavy guilt incurred by the slightest infraction

of the ceremonial law, the seal of divine approbation

which has been so evidently

affixed

to the

labours of the faithful servants of Christ, notwith-

standing their differing so widely from each other

in

modes of worship and

disc'ipline,

and the adr

ministration of gospel ordinances, incontestably

proves that such differences, however they

be magnified by

sects, are of little or

of

no account

in the estimatioi)

Him whose judgment is according

But how

that

is it,

may

the partisans of their respective

to truth.

some may be disposed

to inquire

such astonishing latitude should be allowed

49
respecting- the institutions of the gospel,

those of the law were enforced

There

rigour?

is

adequate reason

no

difficulty

with so
in

much

assigning an

Theologians, indeed,

for this.

have involved the subject

whilst

in

perplexity,

by em-

ploying the same term to designate the ordinances

of the gospel, and the ceremonies of the law,
calling

them

'

positive

institutions;'

and then,

having thought proper to give the same name to

both, they have immediately supposed

them

to,

be alike, and have argued from the one to the

other, as

if

there were the most perfect resem-

when, in fact, they differ

nature and design, as much as

blance between them

from each other

the

in

dispensations

to

which

they respectively

belong.

If

we would

entertain correct ideas of these

must be, not by comparing them

together, but by contrasting them with each
other.
The former dispensation was external,
dispensations,

it

Its ordinances are expressly

"
called
carnal ordinances,'* the place where they
were administered " a worldly sanctuary," and

carnal and worldly.

the law by which they were enforced, " the law

of a carnal commandment."
nies

were essential

its

They

whole texture, and

very being. They were " shadows
G

were interwoven with

constituted

Rites and ceremo-

to this dispensation.
its

b^ good things to come/' " patterns of things

This rendered

the heavens."

thfe

ance of them so extremely

small defect

exact observ-

important

may

a pattern

in

We

otherwise.
selves

in

meats

atices,

the

but

far

is

have the heavenly things them-

shadow

The

Semblance.

de-

is

it

But with us the case

not the type but the antitype

stance, not the

for

an erro-

lead to

neous conception of the thing which

signed to represent.

ill

the sub-

the reality, not the re-

religion of Christ, consists not

atid drinks,

not

in

in righteousness,

The

Holy Ghost.

altogether spiritual

ceremonial observ-

and peace, and joy

present dispensation

for in

in
is

Jesus Christ neither

circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision,

but faith which worketh by love.

It is

hot being baptized, or unbaptized, but being a

heW

anew

creature, created

in Christ

Jesus unto

good works, that constitutes any one a child of

God and

member

of Christ

received him, to them gave

he

for,

as

many

power

as

be-

to

come the sons of God, even to them that believe

on his name who were born, not of blood, nor
;

bf the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man,

but of God.

Hence, says the Apostle Paul

Ye

are all the chil-

in Christ

Jesus: and if

his Epistle to the Galatians,

dren of

God by

faith

in

^E BE Christ's, then are ye Abraham's

^feEbj and heirs according to the promise.

It

is

51
by a

spiritual, not

come

entitled

to

by a carnal
spiritual

birth, tliat

privileo^es.

we

be-

Indeed,

the diiTcrence between the two dispensations

such, that

if,

our minds,

is

without bearing the distinction in

we

attempt to prove any controverted

point by inferences drawn from the one to the

other,

we

are almost sure to be led into error.

There are ordinances of divine service, it

true, under the present dispensation as well

is

as

under the former one; but, congenial with the

nature of that gospel which they are designed to

unfold and exhibit, they

may be

considered rather

means of grace than acts of duty. They are

the means of communicating the grace which
God has promised, and the means of improving
and strengthening the grace which he has imIn a devout attendance upon them, we
parted.
are encouraged to expect that spiritual knowledge
as

will be increased, spiritual dispositions exercised,

aud spiritual blessings enjoyed, to the glory of

God. They are, therefore, set before us, rather
under the idea of privileges of which we are
invited to partake, than of duties which we are

commanded
dency

to

to

perform.

Their manifest

ten-

promote our instruction, edification and

comfort, the great purposes for which they were

instituted, will be found to supply the best

most

efficient

motives

for

and

a constant regard to

52
them

same time, to furnish an unby which we may distinguish

and, at the

erring criterion,

between such appointments

as were ordained
under peculiar circumstances, and for a special

purpose, and those which should be regarded as

standing ordinances of the Christian church.

The

between the

difference

legal

and the evan-

more

gelical dispensation will appear yet

we

fully, if

consider the condition of the people of

God

under each, and the relative characters which they

are consequently represented as sustaining.

der the former

economy they were

comparative darkness and bondage

present, of light and liberty.

then was that of a servant,

to do,

is

under the

Their condition

who

is

told

what he

is

without being informed, or even permitted

to inquire,

now

Un-

in a state of

why

he

to

is

do

Their condition

it.

that of a son, and of a son arrived at years

of maturity,

who

is

supposed

to

understand his

father's interest, and to be able to form a correct

judgment of the way in which that interest may
be best promoted.
Our Lord, in allusion to this
" Henceidea, says to his disciples, John xv. lo.
forth,

call

you not servants

knoweth not Avhat

called you friends
heard of

you,"

my

his
;

Father

for
I

Such language

for the servant

lord doeth
all

but

things that

have

have

have made known unto

certainly does not

comport

53
with the views which
to entertain of

'

we have

hitherto been led

According

positive institutions/

to the definition usually given of that term, there

can be no place for them under the present dis-

They belong

pensation.

rather to the law,

which

was given by Moses, than to the gospel of grace

and truth, which came by Jesus Christ. Rites
and ceremonies make no essential part of his reli-

He

gion.

did not abrogate one ceremonial law to

room of

establish another ceremonial law in the

We

are

Mount

now come,

We

Zion.

der grace.

The

not to

are not

mount

it.

Sinai but to

under the law but un-

gospel dispensation

is

a dispensa-

tion,

not of the letter which killeth, but of the

spirit

which giveth

life.

In relation to this subject, a modern writer thus

expresses himself, " The Jewish and the Christian

ceremonies, are represented by the Apostle Paul,

as possessing the perfect correspondence of a sha-

dow

with the substance, of a type with the reality;

but as exhibiting
est

in all

The

contrast.

other respects the strong-

institutions

of the

Jewish

church were positive, and agreeably to their design,

national,

Christianity
sality

temporary.

local,

we

and permanence.

nature merely positive

tutes of the

New

In

those

of

perceive the character of univer-

is

Scarcely any thing of a

to be

Testament.

found

The

in the insti-

will of Christ,

54
so

far as it

deeming

respects his ultimate purpose in

his church,

is

revealed with the utmost

one might imagine, the

clearness, so as to prevent,
possibility of mistake

enable us

whicii

to

but the directions are few,

determine or arrange

means of accomplishing
by a careful reference to

made

it

much

rcr-

his will, otherwise

the

than

that design, Vv^hich he has

our duty to regard as our end.

How

would an attention

useless controversy

to

this simple truth have obviated !"*

we

Yes,

will venture to say that a

tion to this simple truth,

any other consideration

termination those
still

due

atten-

would tend more than

to bring to

an amicable

unhappy controversies which

continue to separate Christians from each

other, and prevent their cordial union in the

fel-

lowship of the gospel.

" True it is (says the
above cited Author in another place) that there is
no book of Leviticus in the New Testament, for
nothing Levitical in Christianittj."-\ We
cannot however, forbear remarking, that those
there

is

who would

enforce a Christian ordinance with all

the rigour of the Jewish ritual, and attempt to

justify their
to the

conduct

punishments

in so

doing by referring us

inflicted for offences against

* See Conder on Protestant Nonconformity. Vol,

t Ibid.

Vol. II.

Page 350.

I.

Pages 20, 21.

'

55
the Levitical law, seem to act as
to the tribe of Levi.

The

if

they belonged

which they
certainly more congenial

principle on

found their proceedings, is

with the former than with the present dispensa-

Were

tion.

the simplicity and spirituality of the

Christian system clearly understood, and the greaS

end

which

was instituted properly regarded,

no difference of opinion that might be entertained
for

it

by Christians respecting external services could

ever be considered as a proper ground of separation, or prevent their union and communion with
each other.

The

dissimilarity

between the two dispensa-

tions will further appear,

if

we

consider the nature

of the respective covenants which constitute the

foundation of each.

The

legal dispensation

was

founded on the covenant originally made with

Abraham, but afterwards renewed and confirmed
with the whole people of Israel at Mount Sinai,
according to the declaration of Moses, " The Lord
our God made a covenant with us in Horeb."
This covenant included not only the ten com-

mandments

Mount

delivered with such awful

Sinai, but all those statutes

pomp

at

and ordinances,

which were subsequently made known to Moses,

and by him communicated to the people. It was

made with

the nation of Israel as auch^ and con-

tained promises and threatenings

but, exactly

56
corresponding with the dispensation to which they
belonged, the promises were promises of temporal
threatenings were threatenings of

the

blessings,

The whole is summed up

manner by the prophet Isaiah,

temporal judgments.
in a very concise

" If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the

good of the land, but

if

ye refuse and

rebel,

ye

mouth of

the Lord hath

enjoyment of the promised blessings depended on their performance of

shall be cut off; for the

spoken

Thus

it."

their

the prescribed conditions.

But the evangelical dispensation is founded on

another and a better covenant
yes, infinitely
;

better.

It

is

covenant ordained

ia

for a better

purpose, put into better hands, and established

on better promises.
to its

extent and

its

a better purpose.

It is better, also, in reference

ordained for

perpetuity.

It is

Not

purpose of con-

for the

ducting the sons of Abraham, according to the

flesh, to the possession of

but

for a

an earthly inheritance

that of bringing the sons of

pleased

to

call

to

God

whom

he

is

out of a worse than Egyptian

bondage into the glorious

children

purpose infinitely more exalted, even

liberty of his

own

future and everlasting glory

dear
that

having their sins pardoned, and their persons

accepted, through the atoning sacrifice, perfect
obedience, and

prevalent intercession

of

their

57
divine Rctleeiiier

made meet

to

be partakers of the inheritance of

the saints in light

brought

to

tlic

being, by his Spirit and grace,

they might,
possession

full

in

due time, be

of that heavenly

inheritance.

Again,
hands.

The new covenant

The vSinai covenant

hands of

jNIoscs,

is

put into belter

vras

and with the approbation of God

was

faithful in all his house.

of grace

Nvho

is

put into the

the request of the

at

Moses

But the covenant

the hands of Jesus

])ut into

people,

for

Christ,

not merely a servant in the house, but a

is

son over the house

Avhich house

is

his

own

being the purchase of his precious blood, and the

residence of his indwelling Spirit.

Moses was

constituted the Mediator of the Sinai covenant,

but

he

was nothing more than Mediator.

that capacity, he

made known

the will of

God

In
to

the people, offered up prayers and supplications

on their behalf, and set before them, in the most

impressive manner, the consequences that would

inevitably follow from their obedience or disobedience to the statutes and ordinances, which he
had delivered to them at the command of God.

But
utmost that he could do.
Christ is not only the Mediator but the Surety
which stamps an unof the covenant of grace
This

Avas the

speakable value upon

it,

and gives the firmest

58
stability to the

in

hopes of those

blessings

its

who

are interested

who

seeing that He,

Mediator and Surety has undertaken on

conduct through

them the

this

wilderness w^orld

them

to his everlasting

We

till

he has brought

kingdom and

proceed to observe that the

established

afford-

that he will

stronsrest assurance

never leave nor forsake them,

is

their

to provide all things reo,uisiie for their safe

half,

ins:

is

their be-

glory.

new

covenatit

on better promises, not only

in

respect of the superior nature of the blessings

promised, which

are spiritual

and

eternal, not

merely temporal

but,

the

security af-

also,

in

forded for the complete and final enjoyment of

these blessings.

is

a very important consi-

and the Apostle does not

due prominence, when treating on

deration
it

This

in the eighth chapter of his epistle to the

where he
Christ, "

says,

He

is

in

if

that

Hebrews^

reference to our Lord Jesus

the mediator of a better covenant,

which was established upon

(adds he)

to give

fail

this subject,

first

better promises

covenant had been

For, finding fault with them,

(alluding to the prophecy of Jeremiah,

for

faultless,

then should no place have been sought

second.

for

he

the

saith,

whence

he makes the following quotation) Behold, the

days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a
hfew cbvenant With the house of Israel and with

59

not according to the

COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS, in the da^^ when I took them by the

tho house of Judrih

them out of the land of Egypt

because they continued not in my covenant, and
For this is
1 regarded them not, saith the Lord.
the covenant that I will make with the house
hand

to lead

of Israel after those days, saith the Lord

put

my

their

laws into their mind, and write them in

hearts

and

they shall be to

I will

me

be to them a God, and

a people.'*

same prophecy,

ter of the

it is

In the next chapsaid, " I will make

an everlasting covenant with them, that

not turn away from them to do them good

I will

put

my

fear in their hearts,

not depart from me."

those
their

will

but

that they shall

Thus we see
by apostasy

forfeiture of these blessings

falling

will

that the
;

or the

short of them, through a deficiency in

dispositions,

which

were

necessary for

enjoyment, was precluded by promises as

absolute as those which relate to

This

themselves.
in all things

is,

and sure.

Once more. The new covenant

the old in

the blessings

indeed, a covenant ordered

its

extent and in

covenant which

its

God made with

is

better than

perpetuity.

The

his ancient people

was local and temporary. The blessings which

it promised extended not beyond the borders of

60
JudeiT, Avhicli

Nor was

promise."
It

therefore,

is,

was only meant

it

called "

designed

to prepare the

place

it

to all nations,

people, and tongues

That

eternal ages.

of

continue.

should give
should

and kindred, and

and be perpetuated beyond

of this

period

luiid

for a better,

a covenant, the blessings of M'hich

be communicated
the

to

way

an everlasting covenant, to which

The

mortal existence,
this

covenant

even

to

not to be

is

considered as a mere continuation of the former,

with a few modifications, which circumstances

might render necessary, but as one altogether

new, whose introduction was to

removal of that which preceded

effect the entire

it,

is

abundantly

evident from the language of the Apostle,

adduces the very term by which

in confirmation of this idea,

new

Now

covenant,

he

hath

it is

who

designated,

" In that he saith,

made

the

first

old.

which decayeth and waxeth old

that

is

ready to vanish away."

But

it

may be

of the subject

objected. If this

if,

is

a correct

view

under the former dispensation,

nothing was required but external obedience, and

nothing promised but temporal blessings, what,

on the one hand, can

of the law

we make

of the spirituality

and how, on the other, are we to un-

derstand those exceeding great and precious promises, which are to be found in the

Old Testa-

61

New ? To the first part of

we reply that the law of Ten
Commandments, commonly called the Moral
Law, which is summed up in that comprehensive
precept, " Thou slialt love the Lord thy God
uient as well as in the
this

objection

with

all

thy heart, and thy neighbour as thyself"

though
sitaries

delivered to the Israelites, as the depo-

of revealed truth, was not intended for

them only, nor

tion

to be confined

to that dispensa-

but should rather be considered as the ge-

neral rule of

God's moral government, exhibiting

a specimen of his requirements as Creator and

Governor of the universe, from all his intelligent

creatures, and consequently, from the Israelites
in

common with

the rest of mankind.

whatever was peculiar

here,

was external and temporal.

ten

commandments

ance

connexion

is

as a nation,

preface to the

temporal deliver-

refers to a

which

'-elate

to the fifth comoutward prosperity, in

a promise o^

with

above remark

My

them

The

and the promise annexed

mandment,

"

to

But, even

an

earthly

will apply
to

son, give

inheritance.

to all

internal dispositions, such

me

The

those precepts

thy heart."

"

as,

Rend your

hearts and not your garments," &c. &c.

With

respect to those promises of spiritual and

eternal blessings,

which we

of the Old Testament,

find in the Scriptures

we would

observe, that

62
the dispensation under which they were revealed,
whilst

was

it

typical of a better state of things,

whereby the people of

continuance, obtained the knowledge and enjoyment of those things
which,

furnished

means,

the

God, during

its

nevertheless,

made no

part of the dispensation

but rather belonged

itself,

to gospel times

gospel blessings, which were therein

and prefigured.

nomy may

be

In this view, the Jewish eco-

building,

compared

fitly

upon which we
ture edifice

and

predicted

to a scaffolding,

often see the materials of the fu-

but those materials belong

which

is

and not

to continue,

to the

the

to

which must be removed as soon as the

which it was erected is accomplished
may not encumber or disfigure the build-

scaffolding,

purpose
that

ing

it

for

when

progress,

The

finished, to
it

was

which, while

in a state

of

attached.

difference

sent dispensation

between the former and the preis also evinced by the language

of John the Baptist, in his address to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his Baptism.
*'

Think not

Abraham

God

is

to say within yourselves.

to our father

for I say

And now

the root of the tree

also the

ax

up children
is laid

therefore every tree

bringeth not forth good fruit

is

have

unto you, that

able of these stones to raise

unto Abraham.

We

unto

which

hewn down and

63
These expressions clearly indispensation was coming forward,

cast into the fire."

timate that a

which

siiould proceed on a principle totally dif-

Here, not the

ferent from that of the former one.

outward conduct merely, but the internal state of

the heart, from which that conduct emanated

would become the subject of severe scrutiny for

the ax was 7iow to be laid to the roof of the trees.
We perceive, also, that this was to be an indivi:

dual not a national concern

every tree,

for

which bringeth not

hewn down and

we

are told that

good

forth

fruit is

It is likewise

cast into the fire.

evident, that descent from godly parents

not be taken into the account.

SAY

WITHIN YOURSELVES,
Abraham to our father." It
TO

would

Think not
We HAVE

"

is

not pious

ancestry but personal religion, not relative con-

nexions but spiritual dispositions, which can be

of any avail under the dispensation of the gospel.

The above statement will appear peculiarly entitled to our regard, when we recollect that it is
the statement of John the Baptist

was delivered by him, while

and that

it

in the very act of ad-

ministering that ordinance, which was appointed

for the express

purpose of introducing the present

dispensation into the world.

Such were the

bur Lord,

declarations of the forerunner of

at this

remarkable period.

Had

these

64
declarations been clearly understooci, and ihvafra^

bly acted upon, in the successive periods of the

Christian church, we are fully of opinion that the
dispute respecting the proper subjects of Baptism

would never have

who have engaged

tists

whole force

their

And

existed.

to

in

had the Bap-

this controversy,

this point, instead of

bent

main-

taining a sort of bush fighting, with Greek verbs

and Greek prepositions,

blishing a particular

for the

7o(/<?

purpose of esta-

of administering Bap-

making the ordinance so administerm of communion, it is presumed that

tism, and then

tered, a

the contest might long since have been brought

to a successful

present plan

termination, which,

of proceeding,

it

is

upon

their

never likely

to be.

But
to

Had Baptism

to return.

been intended

have been perpetuated from age to age,

as a

standing ordinance of the church of Christ, retaining

the

all

importance with which

originally invested,

it

was

and which the Baptists

still

that,

we might
when God was

Spirit

upon

attach to

we

it

reasonably have expected

pleased to pour

his servants, to

whom,

out his

as instruments,

are indebted for the glorioul^ reformation from

he would certainly have enlightened

minds on this as well as on other important

popery,
their

subjects

to the end, that an ordinance, the

due

65
administration of which

deemed

is

essential to

the enjoyment of Christian fellowship, might be

restored to
freed

the corruptions

from

that thus, being

pristine purity;

its

grand apostasy,

it

introduced by the

might have been transmitted

in its native simplicity

through

down

ages of the church

to

all

the end of time.

was too much

If this, however,

the successive

for thejirst re-

attempt, considering the difficulties

formers to

which they had

to encounter,

it

might, at least,

have been expected from their successors,

who

were not so circumstanced especially from such

of them as have deliberately renounced all regard
to human authority in respect of worship and
;

discipline as well as of doctrine

consider the

and practice

professing

to

Scriptures as the onli/ rule of faith

except paring off some of the

grosser superstitions of the church of Rome,
:

yet,

Baptism nearly as they

not only admitting but even vindicat-

they have generally

found

it

left

ing that application of the ordinance,

regarded by

many

This, however,

its

that ordinance
to

its

due
is

There the reformation seems

effect.

is

In Protestant churches

generally administered according

original design

authority

is

it.

not the case in respect of

is

the Lord's supper.

to have had

which

as a corrupt perversion of

and, where civil or political

not allowt'd to interfere,

I

it

appears

only circumstance
Apostle of

Corinthians
its

"

As

not

this is

differs

from Bap-

eminently

it

gives

particular

in his first epistle to the

it,

account

the

detailing

in

he introduces the following

often as ye eat this bread, and

drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death

he come

mode

peculiar

occasion.

We may

solemnity of his

He

likewise remark
address on

unto you.''

language when Baptism

ftrst

God

this

speaks as having had a special

" For

commission from Christ for the purpose

I have received of the Lord that which
delivered

till

of expression never employed

respecting Baptism.

the

tlip

who was

Gentiles,

where,

institution,

declaration

Paul,

the

directions respecting

of

which

in

The Apostle

tism.

the

But

original simplicity.

its

But how

also

different

his

In

the

the subject

is

chapter of the same epistle, after thanking

that he had

baptized so few of them, he

adds, " For Christ sent

me

not to baptize but to

preach the gospel."

It is also

worthy of notice

that,

in

the tenth

chapter of his epistle to the Romans, when

particularly pointing out those things which con-

he makes no mention
whatever of Baptism, but only says, " If thou
stitute a state of salvation,

shalt confess with

and shalt believe

in

thy mouth the Lord Jesus,

thine heart that

God

hath

67
laised liim iVoin

the dead,

thou

be saved

slialt

man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made
unto salvation/' Here we see confession with
the mouth occupying exactly the same place
for

with the heart

.

which Baptism occupied

at the

time of

its origi-

nal institution, according to the declaration, " lie

that believeth and

is

baptized shall be saved."

The language of the Apostle forms

comment on that of our Lord, and

a complete

points out

the sense in which alone his solemn declaration

on the subject can be properly understood the

letter of it being confined to the age in which it
was delivered, whilst the spirit of it, as of every
;

other precept,

extends through each successive

period of the church

much

It is as

down

to the

the duty of believers

end of time.

now

to

avow

attachment to Christ by an explicit decla-

their

ration

of their faith in him (the end for which

It is

no

less essential to the Christian character, and

is

Baptism was instituted)

as

it

ever was.

equally necessary to constitute a state of salva-

any former period though the precise

which that profession should be made

tion, as at

mode

may

in

vary according to times and circumstances.

There have been periods when

it

would be im-

possible for a Christian to prove his faith to be

genuine, or his profession sincere, without sealing that profession with his blood.

This, indeed,

6S
is

cup of which the Saviour drank,

be baptized with the Baptism wherewith

to drink of the

and

to

he was baptized.

All are not called

manifest their faith in and love to him

are required

them

to

adverting to the

if

considered Baptism, chiefly

mode of

is,

all

a sacrifice.

in respect of the subject of the ordinance,

reason for this

but

would con-

nedessary,

it

make such

we have

Hitherto

to

a disposition which,

to cherish

circumstances rendered
strain

thus

its

that, as

without

One

administration.

we do

not regard gospel

ordinances in the light of positive institutions,

such as were prescribed by the ceremonial law,

we cannot

attach importance to the mere

of performing any external

As,

dispensation.

such a
to

stress

the

their

way

at
;

all

and

itself,

but those
as

under the present

however,

on the mode

ordinance

baptized

rite

mode

the

as to

Baptists

make

it

considering

who

lay

essential

none as

are baptized in

most of them make the

ordi-

nance thus performed indispensably requisite to

communion with them at the Lord*s table, it

maybe worth while to show that, however plausible their argurnents on this subject may appear,
they do not amount to proof.
Now, as this
relates to

what they term a positive

institution,

and as they have annexed so much importance

to it, we have certainly a right to demand real,

6
positive proof in
fail

to require

its

support

such as they never

when Infant-baptism

is

the subject

is

immersion

of controversy.

According

them, " Baptism

to

Jmd Christian Baptism is neither more nor less

than an immersion of the whole body in water,
solemnly performed
the Son, and the

gument

in the

Holy

name of

Spirit/'*

in favour of this

the Father,

Their chief

sentiment

is

founded on

the meaning attached to the original term by

Baptism

is

ar-

w hich

designated.

The principle on which they proceed, and

which they consider as an established rule of criticism,

in

its

is

this

" that every word should be taken

primary, obvious, and ordinary meaning,

unless there be something in the connexion, or in

the nature of things, which requires

it

to be taken

otherwise." f

In order to ascertain this point, on

which,

view, so

in their

much

depends, Lexicons

and Lexicographers have been diligently consulted

the works of almost every author that
;

has written in the Greek language, whether pious

or profane, Jew, Heathen, or Christian, have been

* See Dr. Ryland's

**

induce the Baptists to

many
t

Candid Statement of the Reasons which

differ in

Opinion and Practic from so

of their Christian Brethren."

Ibid, Notes,

Page

xvi.

Page

7.

70
ransacked

and every signification that could

possibly attach to the word, pointed out.

The

result has been, that the

above authors appear to

have generally employed the term, to signify the
act of dipping, immersing, or plunging; M'hence
it

has been concluded, that such

primary,

is its

obvious, and ordinary meaning.

But we apprehend
have been saved.

that

this trouble

all

might

In regard to any expression

that relates to a religious ordinance,

that the shortest and the surest
right understanding of

it,

is

we

way

conceive

to obtain a

to inquire in

what

sense such an expression was likely to be under-

among whom the ordinance originated and when a scriptural expression is the
subject of discussion, we must search the ScripIn the
tures, if we would ascertain its meaning.
present case, we should also do well to remem-

stood by those
;

ber that the ordinance referred

Jewish extraction.

to, is

evidently of

was introduced before the

abrogation of the ceremonial law, and was, in the
We
first instance, confined to the Jewish nation.

may,
it is

It

therefore, expect to

see the term

by which

designated, employed in allusion to

some of

the services that were familiar to that people.

Nor

shall

we

cording to

be disappointed.

Mark we

when reproving

find

it

In the gospel ac-

used by our Lord,

the Pharisees for their neglect of


7\
the law of God, whilst they paid a superstitious
regard to
in the

tlic

traditions of the elders, particularly

washing, or baptism, of cups, pots, brasen

vessels and tables.

pose, nor

were

is it

It

is

not necessary to sup-

likely, that the articles here speci-

washed exactly in the same way.

Some might be cleansed by having water poured
upon them, others by being dipt in water. In
either case, they were washed or baptized.
The
same object was attained, and the same term is
employed to designate that object The act of
fied

all

seems to be the thing intended, by

whatever mode that act might be performed.

purification

We

view of the subject

by the language of the Apostle Paul in his epistle
to the Hebrews, when speaking of the ancient
ceremonies of the Jews, he says, " Which stood
only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, (or
baptisms) and carnal ordinances, imposed on them
are confirmed in this

The expression
" divers washings," or baptisms, seems to refer to
until the time of reformation.''

the various modes of purification in use

among

the Jews, such as dipping, pouring, and sprinkling.

The

last of these is particularly referred to in this

connexion, as denoting the application of the

blood of Christ to the conscience, to cleanse

from the guilt of

Hence

it is

sin.

called in the

(See

same

Heb.

ix.

10

it

S3.)

epistle (chap, xii.

72
24.)

" the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh bet-

ter things
first

than that of Abel."

epistle (chap.

2.)

i.

Peter, also, in his

speaks of the " sprinkling

The same term

of the blood of Jesus Christ."

employed

to signify the renewal of the heart to

holiness, as in that precious promise of the

(Ezek. xxxvi. 25, ?6.)

covenant.

I sprinkle clean

clean

from

idols will
I give

you."

all

your

new

Then

you, and a

and from

filthiness

cleanse you.

new

new

will

is

your

put within

is

evidently the

all

these places,

frequently used to ex-

Thus we

press that idea.

all

heart also will

spirit will I

Purification, or washing,

and the term washing

5.

^'

water upon you and ye shall be

idea meant to be conveyed in

\.

is

find

it

employed Rev.

" Unto him that loved us, and washed us

from our sins

in

his

own

epistle to Titus, (chap.

iii.

blood.*'
5.)

we

And

in

the

read of " the

washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the

Holy Ghost." In perfect accordance with this
idea, we hear Ananias thus addressing Paul just
immediate reference to the
ordinance of Baptism, " Arise, and be baptized,
after his conversion, in

and wash away thy

sins, calling

on the name of

the Lord."
It appears, then, that the primary ^ obvious,

and

ordinary meaning of the word Baptism, in respect

of religious institutions,

is

that of purification, or

73
washing'

whicli, as

we have seen above, might

the most literal sense,

by pour-

be pertbrmed,

in

ing, and, in its

moral and spiritual signification,

sprinkling, as well as by immersion.

by-

It is not,

we can certainly
mode Baptism was

therefore, from the term itself that

conclude

what

in

particular

administered as a Christian ordinance.

But, as

examples

may

the
for a

Baptists

us

refer

to

scripture

confirmation of their views,

be proper to attend to them

and see

it

we

if

can obtain additional light on the subject of our

by examining the circumstances connected with the Baptisms recorded in the New
Testament.
There are but two instances, in
inquiries,

which we have any particular account of the

transaction
that of our Lord b}^ John, his forerunner, and that of the Ethiopian Eunuch by
;

Philip the Evangelist.

In both these cases,

should seem that the subject went

it

down with

the administrator into the water, where he received

the baptismal

rite

after

which,

the}'

up out of the water.

But how

administered wliile they

were

in

both came

that rite

the water,

ther by dipping, pouring, or sprinkling,

was
whe-

we

are

The most probable conjecture is,

There
was by pouring water on the head.
certainly more dignity and solemnity attached

not informed.
that
is

it

to this

mode

of administering the ordinance than

74
to that

which

is

act of plunging

practised by the Baptists.

persons backwards beneath the

surface of the water; while

natural feelings,

The

is

but

ill

is

it

revolting to the

adapted to excite the

feelings of devotion, either in the subject or in

the spectators

nor

is

it

at

all

congenial with

the nature of a solemn act of worship, performed

in the

If

name

we

of the sacred Trinity.

right in our ideas of the

are

way

in

which Baptism was administered, it exhibited

at one view all the various modes in which puriwhether
fication was performed among the Jews
;

by dipping, pouring,
have partial

or sprinkling

of pouring water on the head

poured on one

part,

it

we

found better adapted

than that of Baptism

and

No

to designate this
;

water

is

term could be
ordinance

which, to the mind of a

Jew, would convey the idea of

various modes.

if

must of necessity be

sprinkled on other parts.

all its

for here

immersion, combined with the act

Our

purification in

translators, therefore,

acted very properly in retaining this term, instead

of putting any English word

room of it;
as there is no word in our language which would
suggest precisely the same idea.

Once more.
figuratively.

in the

The term Baptism

Let us inquire then

is

in

often used

what sense

73

this

may

this

employed;

so

lur

materially assist us in our investigation

of the subject.

more

when

be iniderstood

to

is

Tliere

is

nothing more frequently,

more directly alluded to by

term, than the communication of the Holy
strongly, or

Spirit in his gifts

Now,

and graces.

the influ-

ences of the Spirit are uniformly represented as

coming down from above,

falling,

descending,

down, on those
who were the subjects of them like tiie holy
oil (by which the same thing was intended)
which was poured on the head of those who,
under the former dispensation, were anointed
being poured out,

poured

or

If the

to the office of prophet, priest, or king.

of

rite

allusion

Baptism
is

thus

M'as

just and striking;

administered,

the

otherwise,

we

if

are at a loss to conceive of its propriety.

Let

language of John the Baptist on

" 1 indeed baptize you with
subject,

us hear the
this

water unto repentance

me

is

mightier

worthy

to

bear

I,

Holy Ghost, and with

with a

little

but he that cometh after

whose shoes I am not

he shall baptize you with the

than

fire."

This declaration,

diversity of expression,

is

repeated

Our Lord
by every one of the Evangelists.
language
similar
employs
at the near
himself
approach of the period when the predicted event
should take place.

Just before his ascension, he

says to his disciples, "

John

truly }>aptized with

76
water

but ye shall be baptized with the

Ghost not many days hence."

on the day of

find,

Accordingly

blem of which, cloven tongues,

upon each of them. In reference
event,

Peter,

we

was
an em-

Pentecost, the Spirit

poured out upon them from on high

able

Holy

when

as

as of fire, sat
to this

memor-

narrating the circum-

stances that attended the opening of the door

of faith to the Gentiles, thus expresses himself,

*'

As

began

to

speak the Holy Ghost fell on

them as on us at the beginning. Then rememI the word of the Lord, how he said, John

bered

indeed baptized

with water

but ye shall be

baptized with the Holy Ghost."

This ordinance

is

also emblematical of the suf-

which our Lord

ferings to

M'as

exposed, while

accomplishing the redemption of his people for

thus he himself speaks, (Luke xii. oO.) " I have
;

a Baptism to be baptized with

straitened

till it

am I
To those who

and how

be accomplished ?"

had witnessed the administration of

this rite, in

the midst of the river Jordan, such an expression

must convey
cumstances

when,

for

in

a very impressive

idea of the cir-

which the Redeemer was placed

encompassed with

our sakes, while

sorrows on every side, the wrath of God was

poured out upon him, and the vengeance of
heaven /e// on his devoted head.

77
.

The Aposlle Paul

the

subject

(1

gives us the

Cor. x.

2.)

1,

same view o(

when,

referring to

the case of the ancient Israelites, he says, "

Our

under the cloud, and all passed

and were all baptized unto
through the sea

fathers

were

With the

the cloud and in the sea."

jNIoses in

waters of the cloud above them and of the sea on

either side of them, they

must appear

tion very similar to that of those

tized

by John

in

But the most

in a situa-

who were

bap.

Jordan.

striking representation of

that of Peter, in a passage already quoted

having spoken of the ark,

ail,

which Noah and

in

is

where,
his

family were preserved daring the flood, he adds,

The

like figure

also

now

whereunto^ even Baptism doth

save us.

represented as a

Here the ark

figure

is

of Baptism,

expressly said to be like unto

it.

It

is

not only

but

it

is

impossible

to conceive of any fact or circumstance that could

be set before us which could look more like Baptism, or give us a clearer

which

(as

we

view of the mode,

in

apprehend) that ordinance was

originally administered, than

bited

what is here exhiwhere we see the ark partially immersed

in the waters of the flood, while

IS

pouring down upon

There

is

water from above,

it.

one expression, however, of which

it

is

necessary to take some notice

lay very great stress

upon

it,

conclusive in their favour.

Rom.

epistles of Paul.
vi'here

the

in Baptism.

them

In the

vi.

and consider
occurs twice

4.

and Col.

as buried

first

it

in
ii.

as

the
12.

in

with him by or

of these places, the scope

of his reasoning evidently

tions

as the Baptists

speaking of believers

Apostle,

Christ, represents

It

is,

to

show

the obliga-

which devolved on those, who, by Baptism

had made a profession of the name of Christ, to

" Know
act consistently with that profession.

ye not (says he,

many

in the

preceding verse) that so

of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ,

were baptized into his death." The death of Jesus Christ, connected with his resurrection, while
it

formed the basis of their hope, constituted both

the motive and the pattern of their obedience.

By Baptism

they professed themselves the sub-

jects of that change of heart,

which

is

sometimes

represented as a new, spiritual and heavenly birth;

at

other times, as a resurrection from the dead.

In that passage in the prophecy of Ezekiel, to

which we have already adverted,

" Then will

after

it is

said,

upon you, and

from all your filthiness and
ye shall be clean
from all your idols will I cleanse you ;" it is imI

sprinkle clean water

:

mediately added, "

you, and a
*'

Except a

new

heart also will I give

new spirit will I put within you."

man be born of water and of the Spi-

79
Lord to Nicodemus) he cannot entep
Peter, in his first
kingdom
of God/'
the

(says our

lit,

into

general epistle, (chap.

'*

3.)

i.

speaks of believers as

begotten again to a lively hope, by the resur-

rection of Jesus

But

Christ from the dead."

Paul, in the passage under consideration, represents this important change as having taken place,

not only in consequence

the

and

death

of,

but

" Therefore (says he)

baptism into death

we

in

conformity

of Jesus

resurrection

to,

Christ.

him by
Christ was raised

are buried with

that like as

from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so

we

also should

walk

in

newness of

have been planted together

death,

we

life:

for if

we

in the likeness of his

shall be also in the likeness of his re*

surrection."

Mr. Scott,

in his excellent

passage, writes thus

" It

is

commentary on

this

here shown, that a

Christian's profession implied this death to sin,

God. The Apostle inquires

of the Romans, whether they did not understand,
that all, who had been baptized into the name
and religion of Jesus, had received the sign, and
that he

made

live to

the profession, of

formity

dying

may

to,

him

in his

for their sins,

communion

death

they should die

from, the love and practice of

done with

with, and con-

that in virtue of his

their former

unholy

all

to,

and cease

sin,

and have

satisfoctions, pur-

80
suits, habits

and connexions.

equivalent to being

with him

'

This profession

is

buried with Christ,' as dead

for, as his

burial

was

a manifestation

that he was really dead, and an introduction to his

immediate resurrection, by the glorious power of

the Father, or for the display of his glory

baptism of a converted

Jew

so the

or Gentile,

was a

professed manifestation of his death to sin, and to

all his

carnal expectations, affections and pursuits,

from which he meant to be entirely secluded, as

one buried

is

from the

affairs

of

life

and

it

was

a professed introduction to his entrance upon a

'

walk with God

to

in

newness of

not only as

life,'

his outward actions, but with respect to his

in^

ward principles,"
It appears, then, to

of Christianity,

be the import of a profession

rather

wherein that profession

than
is

the precise

mode

made, on which the

Apostle founds his exhortation to die unto

and

to live

unto righteousness

and the actual death and

sin,

between which

burial, resurrection

and

ascension of Jesus Christ, he points out a very

striking resemblance.

The above

observations will equally apply (o

the corresponding passage Col.

ii.

12.

where

appears to be the object of the Apostle, to

it

wean

the Colossians from a superstitious attachment to

81
external

institutions

seeing

that

might be deemed valuable and important

M^as

be tound

to

faith in,

them,

account, but as a token of their

of any

itself

in

nor was Baptism

Christ:

in

which

all

and conformity to him

whom

in

alone

ihey were complete.

We
to

further proceed to

Baptism

inquire, if

who

be viewed as a standing ordinance,

the

persons

authorised

administer

to

under what description of character

sage

sent

shows

John by the

to

clearly

for that

Jews,
special

as absolutely necessary

commission John had

he himself declares (John i. 3:j).
He

purpose.

received as

Such

and

The mes*

rulers of the

considered

they

that

commission from heaven

it,

is

are

Such a
commission was also given to the Apostles by
our Lord himself, who, when he authorized them
to baptize, furnished them at the same time with
the power of working miracles in confirmation
of the authority with which he had invested them.
It may be said that Philip baptized who was
was

'"

not an

sent

to

baptize

Apostle.

It

is

with

true

M'ater.**

but Philip also

wrought miracles, and who shall dispute the

authority of him who can produce such credentials ? Besides, Philip appears to have been one
of those on

hands, by

whom

which

the Apostles had laid their

significant

act,

accompanied

82
with prayer, extraordinary powers were usually

But

imparted.

to those

who,

in the present day,

baptize without a special commission, and powers

to

verity

we may

such commission,

propriety,

By what

say with

authority do ye this thing,

The Apostles,

and w ho save you that authority

as such, have left no successors,

and

if

they have

notdeieiiated the authority which they possessed

to

any other person or persons

which

this service
it

in

any part

designated the characters to

of their writings,

whom

nor,

and by

properly appertains

should subsequently be performed, the

obvious inference

is,

that

expired wi'h them

it

and their contemporaries, no provision being made

for its

future continuance.

This work has generally been considered as

peculiarly belonging to the pastoral

forming one of
really the case,

particular

its

one

of which
to

Titus.

which

there are

meet with
it,

in

are addressed to

two

to

were

If this
to

concerning

instructions

epistles especially
ters,

essential duties.

we might expect

and

office,

those

Minis-

Timothy, and

These Ministers of the gospel

were the companions of Paul

in his travels,

and

were employed under his directions, in watering

the seed which he had sown, and organizing the
churches which he had planted
the

choice

of proper

officers,

aiding

them

ordaining

in

their

83

To

elders, aiKJ superintending their affairs.

them more

lity

tlilly

for these various

qua-

and im-

portant duties, as well as to assist and encourage

them

own

in their

ministerial labours, and in the

exercise of personal religion, appears to be the

great aim of the Apostle in these epistles.

cordingly,

we

Ac-

find particular directions respecting

the office of a Bishop or Pastor, and that of a

Deacon, pointing out the qualifications requisite

due discharge of

for the

There

are

pline,

their respective duties.

sundry rules

also

and the

infliction

regard to disci-

in

church censures,

of

according to the nature of the offence and the

quality

of

the

remarkable

offender

predictions

together with
the

to

relative

some
grand

apostasy, and various practical exhortations and

admonitions.

But,

throughout

the

whole

these epistles, from the beginning to the end,

are not favoured with

Baptism.

We

it

wholly

much

as

in the dark, as to

office in the

Nor

should be attached.

so

we

any directions respecting

are left

any department, or

of

is

church, to which
the sul jert itself

once mentioned, or any hint given

that might furnish a clue to our inquiries concern-

ing

it.

With
it is

respect to the preaching of the gospel,

quite otherwise.

Here we

Bishop should be " apt

are told,

to teach."

Tim.

that a
iii,

2.

84
the second chapter of the second

rind in

episitlt-

to Timothy, the Apostle says, "

The things that

many witnesses,
the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall
be able to teach others also." Thus a provision
is directed to be made for the perpetuity of a gospel
thou hast heard of me, among'

ministry,

The

l>ut

none

for the perpetuity of

sauiC silence on this subject

other parts of scripture, and

we might have expected

Paul,

large.

in

his

in

18 3o.)

Ephesus, (Acts xx.

those parts where

find

to

address

Baptism.

observed in

is

it

treated of at

the

to

of

Elders

exhorts them to

" take heed to themselves, and to

the flock,

all

which the Holy Ghost had made them

overseers, to feed the church of God, which he

over

hath purchased with his

own

blood

says not one Avord about Baptism.

observes a similar silence

his

in

;"

but he

Peter, also,
fust general

epistle, where he particularly exhorts the Elders

to feed the flock of God, which was among
them, taking the oversight thereof, not by con-

straint

So

but willingly, &c. (See

whether the address

that,

Peter v.
is

to

4).

Elders,

Pastors, or Bishops, immediately, or to Evangelists,

whose business

it

was to ordain such, as

well as to assist churches in the selection of suitable characters

nothing

Baptism

is

as

said,

to

fill

these departments

nor any hint given

one of their

still

respecting

official duties.

There

85
passages in

are various

(such as Horn.

Ephes.

iv.

xii. 6

in

II.)

8.

fices are specified,

Cor.

some of which

enumerated, while

Spirit are

exercised

the epistolary writings,

in

wherein these

xii.

10.

the gifts of the

others, the ofgifts

were

to be

but Baptism finds no place in either

the one or the other.

Now,

was given
as

command

as the

to the Apostles

we never

find

in

this

miraculous

by our Lord himself;

any presuming to baptize but

Apostles, or Evangelists,
ates

and baptize

to proselyte

who were

their associ-

important work, being endued with

gifts for that

purpose, or such as acted

under their own personal authority

as the

work

of baptizing has never been consigned to any description of Ministers,

Evangelists

inferior

to

Apostles

or

we cannot but conclude that Pas-

tors of churches,

or Ministers in general, in the

present day, have no scriptural warrant for per-

forming that work, any more than Deacons or

even laymen

seeing that the office of Pastor or

Minister of the gospel, differs so materially from

that of Apostle or Evangelist, that

no command

given to the one, can be considered as conveying

authority to the other.

But,

it

may be observed

tion of Ministers

that there

is

a descrip-

employed, as instruments,

in the

86
conversion of the Heathen, who, though not designatpfj Apostles or Evangelists, are engacred in a
very similar to theirs

service^

preachers of the gospel were

tize those

sonable to

whom

these offices,

commanded

they proselyted,

such

infer, that

may

first

to bap-

seems but

it

as are called to

There

is

much

weight,

were

this observation, and,

in

the call to proselyte the Heafhen, whatever

of miracles, as

stance, the

call,

argument might be deemed unanswer-

But the state of the world

able.

different from
try

it

is

may

accompanied with the

certainly was in the first in-

be understood by that
gift

rea-

one of

consider themselves as autho-

rized to perform the other.

we acknowledge,

the

a:id, as

what

it

was

at

laroe

at that period,

far

is

idola-

not now, as formerly, seated on the throne

of universal dominion, with

all

the power and

wealth, science and literature, of the most polished

nations,

combined with the deep-rooted

prejudices of every class of society, enlisted on

side,

and engaged

in

its

Miraculous

defence.

powers were found necessary

its

such a

to break

for-

midable phalanx, and an initiatory ordinance was

appointed to distinguish those

dominion from such

its

authority.

changed

for

as

Now,
though

who renounced

continued

in subjection to

however,
idolatry

its

the

still

scene

is

lamentably

prevails over a large portion of the habitable globe,

it is

over that portion only which

is

sunk

in bar-

87
harism, or, at best, very partially civilized

aud

the diffusion of general knowledge, together with

Christian princinles, has so direct a tendency to

expose the absurdity of the system,

to prevent

its

regaining

its

as effectually

former ascendancy over

the minds of men.

We

may

dered of
as if to

further remark, that

late, in

show

it

has been so or-

the course of divine Providence,

Baptism

that

is

not so necessary or

important as some might imagine,

heathen world

Sea Islands,
braced

that

whole nations,

even

the

in

in the

South

have renounced idolatry and em-

Christianity,

without having this ordi-

nance introduced among them.*

may be

cause this omission

tract-d,

To whatever
it is

abundantly

evident that the influence of the Spirit, accom-

panying the word preached, has not been withheld

on

account

however,

as

it

of such

m;iv.

we

sfill

omission.

Be

this,

maintain that, could

be incontroveriibly proved to be the duty of

it

Missionaries to baptize those

by

their ministry,

it

who were

proselyted

would by no means

that this ordinance should be. entailed o

follow,

tleir

de-

scendants, or continued in countries where Chris-

* See a

"

Narrative of the Mission at Otaheite, and other

Islands in the South Seas," lately published

rectors of the

London Missionary Society.

by order of the Di-

88
tianity

universally professed.

is

be administered,

Missionaries only,

which we have

If

it is still

to

be by Missionaries, and by

let it

in

short,

from every view

hitherto taken of the subject,

we

derive additional conviction of the propriety of

considering Baptism as an ordinance of proselvtism, of which,

the only

if

continued

Missionaries are

at all.

proper administrators, and

Proselytes

the only proper subjects.

some may be disposed to ask, if

the promise of miraculous gifts was co-extensive
But how

with the
latter

is it,

command

to administer

the former has ceased.

it

Baptism, that the

should have continued to exis: so

been as

much

To

this

we

after

reply, that,

had

human

abi-

within the compass of

lo:

lity to

perform miracles as to dispense ceremonies,

there

is

every reason to believe that the former

would have continued quite as long as the latter.

Those whoare acquainted with human nature must
have observed, that men

in

general are

pleased ^ith that, in religion, which

and

visible,

spiritual;

thaw with that which

is

much
is

better

outward

inward and

and prefer that which makes an appeal

to the senses, before that

cise of faith.

Hence

ish Christians to the

which requires the exer-

the attachment of the Jew-

law of Moses

by the destruction of the temple and

and when,
city of Jeru-

salem, they were driven from that ground, thev

89
immediately set

work

to

to

make

the present dis-

pensation as nuich like the former one as possible.

Christian ordinances were supposed to bear an

exact resemblance to such of the Jewish cere-

monies

as appeared to

have the same spiritual

Thus Baptism

signification.

is

positive institutions

told,

have come

room of Circumcision, and the Lord's sup-

in the

per in the place of the Passover

'

said to

our nature,

much

being, like them,

so,

we have been

this

to the

strong propensity in

need not excite surprise that Bap-

it

some form

ceremony,

which

With

ritual.

tism, in

as

any that belonged exclusively

as

Jewish

;'

long

or other, should continue as a

after

the

end and design

for

was instituted had ceased to exist.

for the extreme import-

it

This also will account

ance attached to
Apostles,

it

soon after the days of the

consequent

its

and

perversion,

superstitious and absurd ceremonies, with

it

the

which

was so quickly encumbered.

when
turned

the
into

bereft of

its

retaining a

it

its

and now,

beauty and vigour, incapable

lineament of those features

originally

impressed

a jusl object of regard,

not only useless

former functions, and scarcely

single

which were

is

mass of corruption

pristine

of exercising

rendered

spark

vital

Like the body

extinct, it was soon

upon
it is

it

and

become

but injurious, not merely an

90
idle

ceremony, but a root of

error,

and a bone of

contention.

The Apostle
brews, in

Paul, in his epistle to the

He-

order more fully to show the impropriety

of continuing the observance of ceremonies, after

the end for which they were instituted had been
fully accomplished,

compares the Jewish

with the covenant on which

ritual,

was founded,

it

a garment in a state of decay through age.

may

apply the idea, with additional force,

Baptism, as practised in the present day.

is,

indeed, a garment

not only worn with

it,

it

the errors cleaving to

occasioned by
for use,
it

We
to
It
age,

insomuch
appears, with the ceremonies patched upon

but sadly torn, soiled and disfigured

that

to

it,

to

and the dissentions

it,

be rendered totally unfit

and the disgrace of that family of which

was once the ornament.

If our views of the nature and design of the

original institution are correct,

Baptism

is

not

now

it

is

virtually

it

way, and

for the pur-

was specially appointed, so that

abolished.

but the thing intended by

With

will follow that

by any denomina-

practised,

tion of Christians, in the

pose for which

it

respect to the mode,

stance, that although

all

We

have the name,

is

not to be found.

it

it is

a singular circum-

the pictures, prints and

91

whether ancient or modern, which

engravings,,

we

have seen, of the baptism of our Lord by

John, or of the Eunuch by Philip, exhibit pre-

which we have suggested (except

only one or two prints of very recent date,
cisely the idea

and evidently manufactured

pose)

we know

et

who

professing Christians,
this

manner.

for a particular pur-

not any denomination

administer the

All either dip or sprinkle.

of

rite in

The

introduction of Infant Baptism rendered a deviation from the original plan, in

sary

some

sort, neces-

though infants may be either sprinkled

for

they cannot walk down, with the

or dipt, yet,

administrator, into

the water, and

both are standing

it,

in

have

it

there, while

poured upon their

heads.

With

respect

infants

pose

for

as

it

to

the

practice

of baptizing

certainly does not answer the pur-

which Baptism was originally appointed,

that of a personal, individual profession of Christianity

as

it

does not appear to have been com-

manded by our Lord, and we have no

proof that
as there

is

it

satisfactory

ever was practised by the Apostles

nothing

in

congenial with the nature

it

of the present economy, or with the constitution

of those churches which are formed on the plan
of the
sity of

New

TQstament

concluding that

we
it

are

under the neces-

owes

its

origin to an

98
manifested at a very

overweening attachment,
period,

early

abrogated dispensation,

an

to

of

M'hich infant circumcision was one of the carnal

Its

ordinances.
effect,

is

tendency, and general

obvic us

to blend the church and the world, and

to substitute nominal for real religion.

It

has by

many, to their soul's eternal ruin, been put in the

place of that righteousness, which alone can

make

the sinner just, and of that change of heart,

without which, according

to the express declara-

man

tion of our Saviour, no

can enter into the

kingdom of God.
But,

it

may be

said

that

we

cannot, from the

abuse of any thing, deduce a just argument against

the true and proper use of

What

it.

should be glad to know,

is

use of Infant Baptism

What

are

we have

parts,

we

the special

advantages resuliing from the practice

own

then,

the true and proper

For our

not yet been able to discover

any one good end, supposed to be answered by

but what may be and is attained full as well

it,

without

it

as

with

it.

We

sentiment by observing

where

it

is

are confirmed in this

that,

not practised,

in

those families

the children

are as

piously educated, and as frequently become, in

early

life,

the subjects of converting and sancti-

fying grace, as where they are s^id, while in a

state of infancy,

to

be dedicated to

God by Bap-

93
All the ordinances of Christ are designed

tism.

and adapted

promote the instruction, comfort

to

and edification of those who rightly partake of

But what

them.

infant

is

edification,

the subject

the doctrines,
?

It is often called

what does

ask, Into

Christianity

when an
an

initial'

But, under such circumstances,

tory ordinance.

we would

what comfort, what

Baptism administer,

can

instruction

it

initiate

duties, or the

the

Into

of

privileges

Doctrines which an infant cannot

understand, duties which an infant cannot perform, privileges

which an

Notwithstanding

the

infant cannot enjoy

easy to

fill

inseparably

absurdities

connected with the practice, (and

it

would be

volume on the subject,) it appears

some of whom might have

that there are those,

been expected to have

known

with astonishing tenacity,

rite.

An

better,

to this

who

cling,

uncornmanded
was

eminent Paedobaptist Minister

lately heard to say,

quish his pastoral

tism of infants.

piously exclaims,

would sooner relincharge than give up the Bapthat he

Another,
''

no

less respectable,

Thank God, we can

entiously inculcate Infant Baptism

position to this sentiment,

!"

we presume

consci-

If, in

the idea, that the ordinance of Baptism,

administered to infants,

is

op-

to suggest

when

not adapted to answer

any valuable purpose, we are imniedintely

told,

94
that " nothing can be

what we have never

the utility of

tradiction to those

have

tried

Persons

that

who

who have

tried

without finding

it,

not prove

more absurd than

others

have

it

Even

it.

deny
conif

we

useful, this can-

not found

reason in this way,

to recollect, that

to

tried, in

it

so."

would do well

the grossest superstitions that

ever were practised under the

have been defended upon

name

this

of religion,

very

principle.

Tell a

Roman

crifice

of the mass, auricular confession, penances,

Catholic, for instance, that the sa-

and pilgrimages

to holy wells

and holy mountains,

answer no valuable purpose whatever, he

probably reply, "

we have found

We

will

have tried these things

the benefit of

them and nothing

deny the utility of
;

can be more absurd than to

what you have never tried, in contradiction to
Even if you had tried
those who have tried it.
it, without finding it useful, this would not prove
With respect
that others had not found it so."
to the comfort and edification which some profess
to

have experienced

in

dedicating their children

God by Baptism, we may adopt the language

of Mr. Greatheed, in his letter to the Editor of
to

the Evangelical Magazine, on External Christian

Institutions

where,

in reference to the

Baptism

of adults w^ho have been educated as Christians,

he says, " I do not question, that pious people

may have

received spiritual benefit in the devo-

95
engagements connected with it, as in any
other solemn religious service: but this they
might surely as well have done in Christian 'doctrine and fello\vshi|), and breaking of bread and
tional

without perverting Baptism from

prayer,'

its

ori-

ginal purpose."

Though some, on mistaken

principles,

thus tenaciously adhere to Infant Baptism,

it

may
will

be found on examination that the greater part of

those who retain the practice, hold it with a very

Even such of them

loose hand.
tism, of
as

some

entertain

table,

to

communion

no scruples

at

the kind of

to

as

the Lord's

Any

Baptism which may have been employed.

thing that

administered
years

called

is

their purpose

Bap-

sort or other, absolutely necessary,

preliminary

as consider

by that name

answer

will

whom

no matter when, how, or by

whether

in

infancy

or

by sprinkling or by immersion

in
;

riper

by the

hands of a Baptist or Independent Minister; by

the Parson of the Parish, or by a

Romish

Priest,

with ceremonies as absurd and unscriptural as any

of the

rites

of Paganism.

Baptism seems to be

regarded by such, as a certain indescribable something, of

which they can give no

which they,
attended

to,

rational account:

nevertheless, conceive, ought to be

some how

or other,

by

all

be thought Christians; but then, as

who would

it is

univer-

95
admitted

sally

that

Baptism

once performed

should never be repeated, having been baptized,

as they suppose, in infancy, they think they

give themselves no further trouble about

which they cherish on

feeling

very similar to that of a person

small-pox
lation or

age,

whether

by vaccination,

in

complaint,
that he

ma}'^,

The

has had the

way, by inocu-

infancy or at mature
as

secure

any future period of

at

need

this occasion, is

who

in the natural

he considers himself

it.

from

the

life,

and

his

therefore, safely dismiss the subject

from his thoughts.

Adult Baptism,

it

quite another sort of

much

must be acknowledged,
ihiiig.

is

It certainly bears a

greater resemblance to the Baptism of pri-

mitive Christians than what

we have

just been

But then, in respect of the important end for which the ordinance was appointed
at that period, it may, as practised among us, be
of
fitly compared, to a body recently deprived
considering.

should retain the features,

incapable of exercising the functions, with

life,

is

which, though

which

it

was

it

originally

endowed.

indeed, an ordinance of proselytism

stead of being used
it

in

It

is

still,

but, here in-

proselyting to Christianity,

proselytes to a particular sect of Christians.

Hence,

as

we

have often witnessed, when a truly

pious character, who. for a series of years, has

9/

made an honourahle

profession

and

religion,

ol"

even been eminently useful as a preacher of the

gospel, adopts these views of the ordinance and

the general impression

acts accordingly,

he

that

become a Christian, but

is

is,

that he

His personal Christianity

turned Baptist.

not
is

was

previously too well established to need such evi-

dence

to

support

Baptism,

in

it.

such cases, appears

end whatever, except

may

concern, that he

now

was

whom

it

formerly a Church-

a Methodist, or a

Thus

a Baptist.

answer no

to tell all

be,

who was

man, an Independent,
is

it

to

Quaker,

which

that ordinance,

originally the distinguishing badge of Chris-

tianity,

become the mere badge of

is

adapted to excite a sectarian

Now we

sectarian views.

cannot persuade our-

Baptism was ordained

purpose as

this

to furnish

least of all, that

table of the

Lord

it

any such

was designed

that are

model with

sit

down

at the

while they refuse to acknow-

ledge, as churches of Christ,

ciple

for

one particular sect with the arrogant

claim of an exclusive right to

ties

sect,

and promote

spirit,

selves that

any Christian

socie-

not formed precisely on the same

their

own.

That

this

is

the prin

on which the Baptists proceed, their conduct

sufficiently evinces.

They hold no communion

with any churches but those of the same faith

98
and order with themselves.

They

give no dis-

missions to them, and receive no dismissions from

Nor

them.

is

the operation of this act of exclu-

sion from Christian fellowship confined to Paedobaptists.

It

denomination

extends

who

to

churches of their

allow of free

communion,

who

of a single individual,

in

such a connex-

their esteem, the admission, into

ion,

own

has not been

baptized as they have been baptized,

is

sufficient

whole body, and render the

society, of which he forms a part, unworthy to
be designated a church of Chrir,t, or treated as
to contaminate the

such.

circumstance which

fell

under the observa-

tion of the writer of these remarks,

who was acmay serve

quainted with the parties concerned,

and confirm what is advanced above.

man,
of respectable connexions, havyoung

to illustrate

A
ing

become

member

went, shortly

in the metropolis,
in a neighbouring

of a strict Baptist church

village,

to

after,

where he

sat

reside

down

as

an occasional member, with a church of the same

denomination, which admitted of mixed communion.

Conceiving

fix his

abode there, he sent

but

it

it

probable

could not be granted.

for

that

he should

his dismission

The church with

which he had occasionally communed, though of

the same faith was not of the same order with that

99

Some

Avhioli lie origiiiiilly joined.

tliere

time after

appeared to be an opening for one

of business,

town

in a

He

the metropolis.

he found
thought

strict

nor

sion,

urged

for

at a greater distance

Now

church.

any pretence,
withholding

7iot

member

as

it.

conceived,

lie

How

having sat

The

down

fact was,

was

that he

at the Lord's table

a crime,

that

his first

circumstance of his

the

disclosed

tized persons

be

greatly then

of the church, and therefore could

be dismissed.

application

he

the

in

was he mortified on being informed,

not a

from

Here

must be right.
No obstacle
way of obtaining his dismis-

he

tliat

could remain

in his line

accordingly went.

Baptist

tliis,

it

with unbafi-

should seem,

in

the

estimation of this church, of sufficient magnitude

to procure his expulsion from their society.
as

Now

both these churches were as respectable, and

the ministers
for piety

and

the inference
fair

who

talents, as

specimen of

any

that this

is,

them

presided over

their

in the

may

mode

eminent

denomination,

be consitlered as a

of proceeding in simi-

Churches acting upon

lar cases.

and pursuing a different

as

line of

a diflTerent plan,

conduct, would,

of course, be regarded as irregular and disorderly.

And

Baptism which was commanded

by our Lord, and practised by his Apostles }
is

this the

Surely not.

That was, indeed,

a noble mstitu-

100
tion, while, as the

of faith,

under

one

all

who

Jews and

both

Christ,

token of a personal piofession

united

it

bore the

Gentiles,

as

name of
one

fold,

But Modern Baptism,

Shepherd.

whether, as on the one hand, administered to

unconscious babes,

on the other, made the

or, as

engine of a party, and the standard of sectarian-

ism

while

separate,

unites such

it

and separates such

should be kept

as

as should be united,

instead of claiming our regard, as a standing or-

dinance of the Christian church, rather merits

our reprobation

as

a standing disgrace

to

the

Christian name.

That Baptism \^ as originally of Divine appointment is readily acknowledged, and so was the
serpent which Moses lifted up in the wilderness.
That serpent, in the hands of him to whom the
com.mand was given, to exhibit it to the view of the
whole camp of
purpose.

Israel,

answered a

verj'

important

But, after that purpose had been fully

accomplished,

when, coming

period into other hands,

perstitious uses,

it

at

subsequent

was perverted

to su-

and became the object of idola-

Irous veneration, liezekiah very properly ordered

it

to be destroyed.

prove as effectual

in

And

luthority did in the other,

dern Baf)tism, Let

could our feeble voice

one case,
this

as the

we would

mandate of
say of

Mo-

superstitious C(Memoiiv,

101
this

ro(jt

of error, this boiic of contentiou,

completely removed out of sight; and

of

uo trace

except on the records of the sacred

it reiiiair),

page

let

be

where, like the brazen serpent,

it

may

prove the vehicle of instruction, without becoming an engine of mischief.

The

disputes which

exciting

it

has been the means of

and perpetuating,

not

Peedobaptists, but

Haptists and

only between

among

Baptists

themselves, tend, in no small degree to stamp

importance

on

plead, as the

the

sentiment

for

which we

most effectual means of reconciling

these jarring disputants, and uniting them in the

bonds of Christian fellowship; it being acknow-

ledged on

all

hands,

that,

could

it

be

appear that the ordinance of Baptism

perpetual

obligation,

made
is

to

not of

no ground of contention

would remain between them.

I'he controversy recently agitated on "

of

communion" may be considered

between Christian principles and Baptist

ples.

Like two

Terms

as a contest

princi-

hostile armies set in battle array,

Both
cannot maintain their ground one or other must
yield.
Either the letter of the law of Baptism
must be sacrificed, or the spirit of the gospel of
Christ must be violnJcd.
Ft is the unhappy
lot
they are directly opposed to each other.
:

102
advocate the cause of exclusive

of those wiio

communion

to differ not

only with their brethren

own avowed princommunion at the

but with themselves, and their

By

ciples.

refusing to hold

Lord's table, with persons of undoubted, yea, of

eminent piety, whose characters they revere, and

the success of
Christ,

fills

whose labours

their souls

in

the cause of

with unfeigned joy, they

act as inconsistent a part

can well be con-

as

They plead apostolic precedent. But

when were the Apostles, or primitive Christians,
known to deuv access to the table of the Lord, to
ceived.

such

they acknowledged

as

be

to

Christians,

walking consistently with their profession, and of

whose genuine piety not the

least

doubt could be entertained

It

shadow of

may be

said

that such a case could not occur in the primitive

church, as no unbaptized Christians were then to

be found.

Be

it

so.

It

seelris,

no precedent
subject

at all.

for, it

It

then, that the

much

precedent on which they lay so

stress,

is

does not appl}^ to the

appears, by their

own

showing,

that such a case could not exist at the period referred to.

It is, therefore,

not a case in point,

and consequently can yield no support to the

argument which they attempt

The

to

practice of the Apostles

found upon

it.

was doubtless in
which they

perfect unison with the princifijc by

103
have directed us

" Re-

our conduct.

to regulate

ceive ye one another, as Christ hath received us

to the glory of

Some have

God."

objected to

the application of this rule to the subject before

us,
is

because Baptism

is

not mentioned in

there any ground to conclude that

it

it,

was

contemplation of the writer at the time.

pears,

nor

in the
It ap-

however, to have been his intention on

this occasion, to lay doM'u a

maxim which should

apply to those minor differences of sentiment and

practice

which might

at

any time be found among

Respecting Baptism there could

real Christians.

be no such difference at that period

vious reasons.
principle

record

it

for

But He, by whose authority the

was established, directed the Apostle

his

in

epistles

well

knowing

though the dispute which occasioned

tion

very ob-

would soon be buried

in

its

to

that,

sugges-

the ruins of the

temple and city of Jerusalem, never to

rise again

other grounds of difference, not then existing,

would make

their appearance, to

maxim would

properly apply

which the above

and, by a due at-

tention to which, Christians might be preserved

from violating the

spirit

of the gospel while zea-

lously contending, as they might conceive, for

the letter of

It is

its institutions.

an additional objection to exclusive com-

munion

that,

while

it

unduly magnifies the

ordi-

1U4

nance of Baptism,

perverts that of the

also

it

Lord's supper, and defeats one great end of

institution

rendering that

bar of separation, which the

as the

bond of union among

To make

lowers.
for a

very ordinance

its

the

Redeemer appointed
and

his disciples

fol-

this apparent, let us consider,

moment, the important event which

it

was

designed to bring to our remembrance, connected

with the circumstances attending

"

bration.

its

often as ye eat this bread, and

As

drink this cup, (says the apostle) ye do

Lord's death

pose did

till

he come."

this great

was the end

But

for

event take place,

be accomplished by

to

we have

in

one the children of

This,

only end, but

it

nent as

we

It was,

it ?

God who were

see

scattered

we acknowledge, was not

it

certainly

it,

in

the

was a very important

would not have been made

one, or

show the
what purand what

already observed, " to gather together

as

abroad."

cele-

first

so promi-

the passage above alluded

Let us then attentively peruse the history of

this transaction, as recorded by the Evangelist
John, together with the discourse which our
to.

Lord delivered to his disciples on

lemn occasion. What are its principal
and what is the scope of the whole ?

this

so-

features,
It is re-

plete with heavenly wisdom and divine conso-

But the duty which

lation.

joins,

is

that of brotherly love.

it

particularly en-

No

where

in all

105
the Bible

is

this

duty so repeatedly urged, and so

powerfully enforced

was

to give effect to the

on no other occasion

for

view so well calculated

a scene presented to

Let us hear

exhortation.

the words of our divine Redeemer, at this very

"
new commandment I
period.

interesting

give unto you, that ye love one another

as I

have loved you, that ye also love one another.

By

this shall all

ples, if
*'

men know

ye have love one

This

is

my

that ye are

Again,

to another."

my commandment

disci-

love one

that ye

another, as I have loved you.

Greater love hath

no man than

lay

this, that

Ye

for his friends.

are

man

down

my friends,

if ye

his life

do what-

command you." Once more, " These

things I command you, that ye love one another."
(See John xiii. 34, 35. xv. 1214, 17-) To this
may also be added the remarkable petition in the

soever

intercessory prayer of our Lord, which,

close of this discourse, he offered

at

the

up on behalf of

his disciples, saying, " Neither pray

for these

them also who shall believe on

me through their word that they all inay be

alone,

but

for

one
tJial

as thou, Father, art in me,

they also

may

and

I in

thee,

be one in us."

In this view of the subject,

how admirably

is

the ordinance of the Lord's supper adapted to

promote Christian unity, by reminding

o

us,

that

106

when the Saviour shed

when he hiid down his life
for the

purpose

sified tlieir

his

precious

for the siieep,

blood,

was

it

vniting them, (however diver-

o\^

circumstances) to himself and to one

another, as one fold, under one Shepherd

and

that his last prayer, and dying exhortations,

all

tend to the accomplishment of this great and important object.

What

we

then shall

ordinance

who

say to those

brethren of a different denomination, with

they

nevertheless

can

cordiality,

in

as

though,
fully

Christians
in

unite,

their

whom

with the utmost

every other act of social worship

and spiritual intercourse

such

in this

conmiunion with

refuse to hold

at

who

the

will not recognise

table

of the Lord,

any other situation, they

acknowledge

The language

will cheer-

their claim to the character

of our Lord,

when, on

a certain

occasion, foretelling his sufferings and death, is

very significant " And I, if 1 be lifted up from
:

the earth, will

draw

all

men unto me."

Now

where and when is the influence of this heavenly

magnet so likely to be sensibly felt, as at the
table of the Lord, round which his people meet
to partake of the

when Jesus

Christ

eves, as crucified

memorials of his dying love

is

evidently set forth before their

among them

And

yet. strange

107
to tell

then.' urc

discovered

tUo^v uliu

unhappy

the

seem

as

il"

ihcy had

of investing

art

this

centre of attraction with the poM-er of repulsion,

and rendering-

tlie

very focus of union the point

of separation.

In

acting thus, they do violence

Christian principles but

to

not only to

Christian

feelings.

Every affection of the renewed mind revolts at

such a line of conduct. Do they appeal from

we have not the

we plead tried

the feelings to the judgment,

least objection to

have the cause

before that tribunal, and are willing to stand or

by

fall

its

decision

beina;

fully persuaded that

the dictates of an enlightened understanding will

concur with the affections of a oracious heart to

pronounce a verdict in our favour. Is it then,

we would

refuse to hold
tians in

we

consistent with just reasoning to

ask,

communion with our

fellow-chris-

one ordinance, on the subject of which

are perfectly agreed, because there

is

another

ordinance, M'hich has no necessary or immediate

connexion with

it,

respecting

views are entertained.

that

we

If so, then

ousfht not to maintain

our brethren

in

ani/

tiling

which different
it would follow,

communion with

that relates to the

duties or privileges of Christianity, unless there

was an exact conformity between us

and

in

practice,

with respect

to

in

sentiment

crcrif tliinj; be-

108
which would render all
the apostolic exhortations to mutual forbear-

longing to the system

ance

in regard to difference

of opinion completely

nugatory.

That there

is

no more connexion between Bap-

tism and the Lord's supper than between Baptism

and any other branch of Christian worship

even Mr. Kinghorn himself seems

No

abundantly evident.

more

admit)

is

two ordinances can be

from each other.

distinct

to

(as

They were

ap-

pointed at different times, and for different purposes

is

and where one

silent

respecting

is

enjoined,

the other.

the Scripture

We

are

told,

indeed, in the history of the proceedings on the

day of Pentecost, that they who gladly received

the word, were baptized, and that they continued
stedfastly in

the Apostle's doctrine, and fellow-

ship, and

breaking of bread, and

in

in prayers.

This appears to be the only place where Baptism

is

associated with the Lord's supper (supposing

that the expression

understood

in

'

breaking of bread'

is

relation to that ordinance).

to

be

But

even here,

it is
no less intimately connected
with the Apostle's doctrine, and fellowship, and

prayers
so that, if the want of Baptism would
exclude from the table of the Lord, it would
equally exclude from those other exercises of
;

devotion and instruction, which arc represented

109

We

as desigiiatiijg the Christian character.

ceive, therefore, that

we

con-

are perfectly justified in

the inference, that the practice of exclusive com-

munion

is

both irrational and unscriptural, stand-

ing opposed

judgment

as

to the

most correct dictates of the

well as

the best affections of the

heart.

Mr. Booth, in his Apology for the Baptists,

seems very much hurt at the idea suggested by
one of his opponents, that their conduct in refus-

communion with
" greatly prejudicial to the honour and

ing to admit Paedobaptists into

them,

is

interest of true religion,

Luting

to

the

cause of injidelity

how much

consider

and not a

little

contri-^

But

if

we

the interest of true religion

promoted by the cordial union of real Christians, and that of infidelity by their contentions,
is

divisions,

and separation from each other, the

expression, however harsh

scarcely

If,

seem too

may

it

sound,

will

strong.

however, exclusive communion

is

com-

pletely at variance with Christian principles, the

opposite practice

Baptist

is

principles.

no

less

incompatible with

Here,

the

opponents of

mixed communion have the advantage of their

For, what can be more inconsistent
antagonists.
than to maintain that Baptism

is

a positive insti-

no
tutioii, ai)d a

standing ordinance

church, and yet treat

it

and countenance the

the Christian

ot"

as a matter of indifference,

total nes^lect of it;

by ad-

mitting to an equal participation of all the privileges of

church fellowship, those who are unbap-

who

tized with those

ordinance

have paid a regard to that

church so constituted, Baptism not being

the door of entrance, it will sometimes happen,
with respect to persons who have not turned their
Ill

attention to the subject, or duly considered

it,

at

the time of their joining the church, that, after a

minds power-

lapse of years, they will feel their

fully impressed

have neglected

command

with the idea, that hitherto they

to yield

of Christ.

come forward and

obedience to a positive

Under

this conviction,

were

are baptized, as if they

but just setting out

in the Avays of

God

they

though

they hav^e been, not only professors of religion,

but members of that very church, many years before.

Now, we

conceive that,

necessity for Baptism at

mencement and not

fession.

but

Every thing

this is

all,

it

at the close
is

out of season.

if

there

is

at the

any

com-

of a religious pro-

beautiful in
It is like

we ought to reap, and casting in

we should thrust in the sickle.
spectacle does such a church

is

its

season

sowing when

the seed

when

And what a
exhibit, the mem-

Ill

which have some of them been baptized

before they joined the church, some on their
forming- a connexion with it, others, ten, fifteen,
or, it may be, twenty years after that event has
bers of

taken phice, and others

tized at

church
tion,

all
!

we

Yet

What

who

this is

right

it

have never been bap-

denominated, a Baptist
has to such an appella-

leave others to determine.

Mr. Hall contends that the universal adoption

of the plan of mixed

communion would

consider-

ably promote the Baptist interest.

But, with due

deference to his superior judgment,

we must con-

fess that

we

are

much

inclined to think that the

opposite effect would be produced

when we

consider that what, in

many

especially
instances,

constitutes a powerful motive for paying a practical regard to

Baptism

is,

on this principle, taken

completely out of the way.

We

suaded that there are hundreds,

are

if

fully per-

not thousands,

who have been

baptized by immersion, where

Baptism is made a term of conmiunion, that nev^^r
would have submitted to that ordinance, if they
had not been influenced by a strong desire of

being closely united with those churches of which

" What
they are now members.
(perhaps some
!

may

be ready to reply, with a tone of indignation)

do you suppose, then, that such persons have

acted contrary to the

conviction

of their

own

112
?"

minds

By no means

ing such a

we have no

idea of bring-

that,

we do

But,

charge against them.

beUeve

verily

had they not been prompted

by the motive above

stated, they

never would

have paid that attention to the subject, which

We

issued in their conviction.

human

acquainted with

nature to

are sufficiently

know

that the

disposition has a considerable influence over the

When

judgment.

the same object

there are

one

two ways to attain

and troublesome,

difficult

the other plain and easy

no hard task

it is

to de-

termine which will be generally preferred.

Who
would wade through the pool before the house,
in order to enter at the front door, when, by taking
a few steps to the right or to the

left,

he might be

admitted at a side or a back door, be received with

a hearty welcome, and have free access to every

room, with

The

all

the privileges of an inmate

strict Baptists are fully

aware of

this,

and

might have been expected, tremblingly alive to the interests of their denomination
well knowing that in proportion as Mr.
have

felt,

as

Hall's system

prevails,

have espoused must sink.

tance, bereft of

its

the

cause

Stripped of

worn out garment be

No wonder,

its

impor-

utility, and no longer subser-

vient to any valuable purpose

like

which they

it

would soon,

totally laid aside.

then, that they should take the alarm,

113

summon

all

ground

when

their forces,

one,

who

and dispute every inch of

a host of himself, brings

is

the whole weight of his mighty artillery to bear,

not merely on their outworks, but on the very
citadel of their strength

threatening, at least in

crowned with

their esteem, should his efforts be

them of that which is peculiFor what can be supposed to

success, to deprive
arly dear to them.

much

hold a

larger place in the affections of

than Baptism

tists

ever manifested in

Bap-

The

its

defence sufficiently evinces

zeal

which they have

the reality and strength of their attachment.

is,

It

indeed, their distinguishing characteristic, the

name

,very

which

is

which they

after

marked

(so

are called

to speak)

their ecclesiastical commodities.

nation

is

ministers

Baptist churches

may

their

their minis-

churches are

abroad, are Baptist socie-

and their magazine

In short, you

name

their societies for propagating

home and

the gospel at
ties

Their denomi-

the Baptist denomination

are Baptist

ters

on every bale of

is

as well

the Baptist magazine.

expect a Christian to

renounce Christianity, as a Baptist to give up

Baptism.

Mr. Hall, indeed,

in effect assure
is

as if to allay their fears, does

them, that exclusive communion

the exclusive object of his attack.

surrendered,

\ct

Let

this be

mixed communion be allowed

to

114
occupy

The

Its

place,

and there

no ground

is

for

alarm.

Baptist interest, which they hold so dear,

would be
wonderfully strengthened and enlarged by the
instead of being impaired or diminished

Psedobaptists, being brought under the

changie.

ministry of Baptists, would have their minds enlightened on the subject

they have so

much

and

But the

prevail.

at heart

and the cause which

would mightily grow

strict Baptists are

very far

from perceiving the justness of this inference.

They

Are at a loss to cohceive

cumstance

of Paedbbaptists

how

the mere cir-

attending on

the

ministry of a Baptist should effect such a change

a?5 to overcome thieir objections to
Baptism by immersion, and induce a practical re-

in their vilsWs,

gard to that ordinance

likely

to see or hear

in

when

all

that they are

relation to the subject,

would rather tend to confirm them ih the ideas

which they had previously entertained, that it
was of little or no importance, and altogether unnecessary.

For,

it

should be observed that, in

those churches where Baptists and Paedobaptists

are indiscriminately associated, in a sort of copartnership,

it is

generally understood,

solutely stipulated, as a term of

tioned,

that

it

not ab-

communion,

Baptism should be kept out of sight

possible

if

as

that

much

as

should scarcely ever be men-

and never insisted on,

lest

the peace of

113
the churclj

of

its

blioiiltl

members be

This

be disturbed, and
interrupted.

a subject for serious consideration.

is

certainly

constitutes

very

mixed communion

against

harmony

tlie

strong

objection

since a minister

It

is

thereby exposed to the temptation of shunning to

what he

declare the whole counsel of God, or

teems to be such,
to

some of the members of

Nor

peace.
habit

and

it is

mode

indulgence

of,

may induce

We

Thus

the desire of

are the creatures of

impossible to say what injurious

may

of proceeding

both

in

may

in things

lead to the

and people.

ministers

in ministers a habit

which, beginning
importance,

church.

his

sacrificed to

is

this all.

is

habits this

It

avoid giving offence

in order to

the love of truth

es-

of temporizing,

of comparatively small

be gradually extended to sub-

jects of far greater

moment.

The

people, also,

being accustomed to see an acknowledged duty

treated as a matter of indifference,

excuse themselves, while living

or neglect of

kept alive in

in

may

be led to

the omission

more important duties not having

theif minds a due regard for the au^
;

thority of Christ, and the necessity of rendering

implicit obedience to all his

There
nion,

is

commands.

another objection to mixed commu-r

which should not be

lightly passed

over.

116
In

some

Baptist churches,

been admitted

such numbers

in

have

Paedobaptists
that,

on the de-

mise of their Pastor, they have formed the majority of the

members, and chosen a Ptedobaptist

Thus,

minister to succeed him.

tion of those

who

the estima-

frequently occurred

is

Such circumstances have

out of the church.

lost

in

are outvoted, the ordinance

in relation to

which, Messrs.

Bogueand Bennett, in their IListory of Dissenters

make the following remarks " Some Baptists,
upon the liberal consideration that those who
:

differ

from them conceive themselves baptized,

admit them to the Lord's supper, which

open, or more properly,
those Independents,

who practise

generally admit Baptists to their

some churches,
ture,

is

called

As

mixed communion.

Infant Baptism,

communion

there has been such an intermix-

both of pastors and of members, that

would be

in

difficult to

it

know wider which dcJionmiaSuch churches

tion they should be placed."

seem very much

animals who, by

living somcliiiics in

and

out of the

at other times

to

resemble those amphibious

watei',

the water

render

it

very

questionable to which class they really belong.

But the mischief is not confined to the actual

change which may thus be made in the constitution of the

should

church.

Supposing such an event

never take place

still

the possibilitv,

if

117
not probability, that
has

period,

it

may occur

some future

at

tendency to excite a

of

spirit

jealousy and dissatisfaction between the opposite

parties, \vhich, in proportion as

it

prevails,

must

prove destructive of that peace and unity, which

ought

among members

subsist

to

same

of the

Thus, one of the strongest arguments

church.

favour of mixed communion,

brotherly

love,

is

this object being

in

that of promoting

turned against the practice

completely defeated, and a con-

trary effect produced.

review of some of the leading

points of the controversy relative to terms of

From

this brief

communion,

it

clearly appears that,

whether

we

adopt the

system of Mr. Hall, or that of Mr.

Kinghorn,

we

arc

surrounded with

All these difficulties,

however,

difficulties.

we cannot

for-

bear observing, arise from the admission, on both

sides of the question, that the

tism

is

ordinance of Bap-

of perpetual obligation, and as binding

on the followers of Christ now as when it was

first
appointed.
Let but this be conceded,
and every difficulty vanishes. If, on the other
hand,

we

are determined to hold

are

that

our
his

church, which he has

his people

we

a standing ordinance in

inevitably brought to this

Lord has appointed

it fast,

conclusion

left in

such a

state,

under such circumstances, as

and

to ren-

118
der

impossible for them

it

to enforce

as

it,

it

was originally enforced, or to pay that regard to

which ought to be paid to every injunction

it,

of

Him who

is

King

Zion, without acting

in

inconsistently with Christian principles, or doing

violence to Christian feelings

God

down

has laid

ment of

in

his people,

and

Many

principles

word

his

he has implanted

Spirit,

for

feelings,

which

the govern-

which, by his

in their hearts.

have been ready to conclude, that Bap-

tism must be a standing ordinance, because those

who

have differed the most concerning

it,

in

every other point of view, have agreed in acjinowr

ledging

its

tical

period

perpetuity.

Such

follows.

history

when

But

may

recollect,

a dispute arose

and Western

this

by no means

as are acquainted with ecclesias-

that there

between the Eastern

churches, respecting

time of keeping Easter

a separation took place,

the present day.

But

it

in

was a

the

proper

consequence of which,

which has continued

to

does not appear, during

the utmost heat of the discussion, to have entered

into the
to call in
all,

minds of the disputants, on either

question the necessity of keeping

and thus

settle the point at once.

time, however, the obligation to regard

only been

by

questioned,

side,
it

at

Since that
it

has not

but absolutely denied

numerous and respectable portion of the

119
the whole body of Pro

Christian world, even

Now, what

Dissenters.

testant

has happened

of the keeping of Easter,

in respect

may happen

should this revolution take place in the

the religious public,

we should

And

Baptism.

in regard to the administration of

hail

as

it

the most auspicious signs of the times

ing the near approach of that period,

mind of

one of

indicat-

when Judah

no more vex Ephraim, nor Ephraim envy

shall

Judah.
however, this

?f,

at the present

is

too

moment,

much

to

it is

pUt an end

to

which, so long as

cannot

suffered to continue,

high timej

at least,

it is,

that something should be done,

to the present state of things

be expected

fail

to prove a

source of incalculable mischief, injury, and disgrace,

the

to

common

cause of

While Baptists and Paedobaptists

Christianity.

persist in hold-

ing one another at arm's length, and regarding

each other with an eye of jealousy

not go the

full

he

who

can-

length of either of the parties,

almost sure to be repulsed by both.

If,

is

after

he can find no authority in

Testament for the practice of Infant

close investigation,

the

New

Baptism

should

congenial

the

with

it

the

by the way,

totally un-

and constitution of

spirit

present dispensation,

nullity (and,

to him,

appear

and, in fact, a mere

it

requires no superior

120
talent to

such a conclusion

arrive at

it

being

one of those subjects of which we may say,

in

the language of the poet, " All heads can reach

it,

and

all

hearts conceive")

if,

under these im-

most do, that Jiaptism

a standing ordinance, and an indispensable

pressions, concluding,
is

as

duty, he should unite in sentiment and practice

with the Baptists

their spirit,

party,

unless,

he imbibes

indeed,

and becomes exclusively one of

their

he will probably not have been long in

communion with them,

self assailed

Avith."

half a Baptist

before he will find him-

You

a Baptist

you*re not

you're more of a Methodist than

a Baptist !"

If,

offended with their want of liberality and

assumption of superiority over

their groundless

other sects, he leaves them, and goes

Independents
probable,

Methodists,

sentiment

it

is

among

is

the

more than

he will be repelled on

Unless he

ground.

tists,

that

or

another

prepared to renounce the

as well as the

communion

of the Bap-

and acknowledge the validity of Infant

Baptism, his new friends will soon make him feel

The tocsin of alarm
that he is not one of them.
will

be sounded.

It will

be heard throughout

A Baptist a Baptist a
whole camp.
You must beware of him, or he will
Baptist
Thus, he,
certainly drag you into the water."
"

their

121
unhappily, becomes the object of suspicion and

and

flrciid,

shunned,

is

as if

a contagious distemper.
strate

vain does he appeal to the general

in

he were infected with

\u vain does he remon-

tenor of his conduct

refer to those

in vain does he protest, and

have the best means of know;

who

ing the truth of the assertion,

that he has never

obtruded the subject of Baptism on such as were

minded

differently

regard to that ordinance.

in

He

It signifies nothing.

is

That

a Baptist.

is

enough.

Another
dency

to

inseparably connected with the

evil,

present system,

is

direct

its

and immediate ten-

preclude free inquiry.

There

are,

we

have no doubt, among the professors of religion

in

the present day, thousands, and tens of thou-

sands,

who

cling to Infant Baptism, as a tradition

which they can

give no rational account
knowing no scripture
to warrant it, no reason to enforce it, and no
advantage to recommend it
except, when the

received from their

fathers, of
;

service

of

is

performed

referring

to

the

subsequent period,

if

in

parish church,

official

register

necessary, to

at

verify

transaction.

But why

a practice, in

favour of which they have so

to

advance

Baptism

is

The

any
the

so tenaciously adhere to

reason

a nullity,

that

it

is

obvious.

follows,

little

If Infant

as a necessary

122
consequence,

they are unhaptized.

tliat

being

It

deeply rooted in their minds, that Baptism, of

some

sort,

is

ance with

indispensably requisite, in compli-

the

command

of our Saviour, they

seem to be pretty well aware that, should they

examine the subject, for the purpose of attaining
full satisfaction respecting it, the result might
that they

be,

must either

living in the omission of

themselves from

ate

relinquish,

it

may

violate conscience,

known duty

their

be

in

by

or, alien-

present connexions,

some

an ex-

instances,

tensive sphere of usefulness, and unite themselves

with a

which they have ever been accusThey,

regard with disgust and aversion.

sect,

tomed^ to

shut their eyes and stop their ears

therefore,

against every thing that might possibly produce

such an

effect.

'

They do not wish

hear any thing about Baptism.

for

them

to attend

and,

dutj/,

indeed,

for themselves,

and that

is

to

it

thei/

It

that see

to read or

very well

is

it

ought to do

to
it

be their
;

but as

they were baptized in infancy,

enough

baptized over again

they do not want

and, after

all

be

to

you can

say,

mere non-essential.' The uneasiness of

the^mind, on such occasions, is generally visible
it

is

in the

countenance

pressed any farther,

ance.

and were the subject

it

They would be

to

be

would be beyond endurseized with a sort of hi/-

drophohia, and the dread of being hurried into

123
the water

would take

full

possession of their dis-

ordered imaginations.

And must
state

things

Surely not.

continue

for

ever in this

Those party walls which

have so long separated Christians from each other,

built of incongruous materials, and with

pered mortar,

The dew

are

hastening to

their

untemdownfal.

of heavenly grace, with an irresistible

though secret influence, is, even now, pervading

and dissolving the substance of which they are
composed. Our business, at the present moment,
is

to clear

mouldering

away

with which their

the rubbish

ruins

have overspread our

while, in the confidence of faith,

the period,

when

we

path

anticipate

the Spirit, being poured out

from on high, shall carry them away, as with a

mighty

torrent,

and not leave one stone upon

another.

We

encouraged

are

in

this

expectation,

by

considering the effects actually produced by the

outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost,

when

a church

which were
Gentiles

to

was formed, the

privileges

of

be enjoyed equally by Jews and

without distinction.

The foundation

of this union of characters, previously so opposite

to

each other, was

laid in the

death of Christ, by

whose blood thev who had been

far oif

were made

124

who

For he (says the Aposllc)

*'

riigh.

hath

made both

is

our peace,

one, and hath broken

the middle wall of partition between us

abolished

in

his

enmit}^

the

flesh

law of commandments contained

make

for to

in

making peace
unto

God

in

having

even

the

ordinances

in

himself of twain one

down

new man,

so

and that he might reconcile both

one body by the cross, having slain
;

the enmity thereby."

We

learn from

the above statement, not only

the cause of this important event, but the

means

whereby it was accomplished. The enmity subsisting between Jews and Gentiles was taken
away by abolishing the occasion of that enmity,
even the law of commandments contained
nances.

And who can

to reconcile

tell

but

may

it

in ordi-

please

God

Baptists and Paedobaptists by abo-

Baptism or, rather, by

showing both the one and the other of the con-

lishing the ordinance of

tending parties that that ordinance was not designed for perpetuity
ceased, so soon as

which

it

it

and that

its

obligation

ceased to answer the end for

was appointed

We

do not expect such

a change in public opinion to be suddenly eflected.

Customs long

established

and

universally ob-

served, are not quickly laid aside.

The ceremo-

law was held in high veneration by the believing Hebrews, for a considerable time after its

nial

125
abrogJition

The

by the death of Christ.

difl'er-

ence of opinion which then prevailed respecting

their obligation

observe

to

suffered to take place,

ing scope

to

the

doubtless

the purpose of giv-

exercise of that

bearance, which was

them, and which

for

was

it,

mutual

so forcibly inculcated

it is

the duty of

all

for-

upon

Christians,

under snch circumstances, invariably to regard.

And can a better reason be assigned for the permission of those differences that subsist

among

us,

or a greater benefit be derived from their continu-

ance

But the

practice of exclusive

feats this end,

and deprives us of

only benefit which can,

which

sate for that

in

communion
this benefit

dethe

any degree, compen-

is in itself

so great an evil.

It

affords consolation, however, to reflect that this

antichristian practice cannot continue long.

must fade and

before

pear,

fail,

the

It

and, at length, totally disapbright

shining

of that light,

which has already dawned upon us, and which

will shine yet more and more unto the perfect

The

day.

pensation,
spirit

nature and design of the present disthe

genius of the gospel,

of the times, are

weighed

in

all

against

it.

It

and the
has been

the balances, and found wanting.

Its

days are numbered, and will shortly be finished.

We

have seen how directly

it

stands opposed to

126
Christian principles and Christian feelings; and,
as for apostolic precedent, when properly ex-

amined,

appears on the other side of the ques-

it

But we

tion.

will

go a step further.

We do not hesitate to assert that exclusive communion

is

contrary, not only to the

example of

the Apostles, but to the express injunction of our

When

Lord himself.
supper

it

was

he instituted the sacred

for all his disciples to

partake of it,

and, in administering the cup,

he particularly

said, "

Protestants, on

Drink ye

The

all of it."

this ground, censure the

Roman

Catholics, and

very justly, for withholding the cup from the

What then must we

of those who withhold both
laity.

think of the conduct

bread and wine from

the whole Christian world, except their own narrow denomination ? Like the church of Rome,

advancing the arrogant claim of being the

true apostolic church, they unchurch
tian

societies

what do we mean by

to treat a person as if he

do

who

does

We say unchristianize

not belong to their party.

this they

Chris-

all

but their own, and unchristianize

every individual professor of religion,

for

oiilif

that term, except

were no Christian

in regard to

every person to

it

be,

And

whom

they deny access to the table of the Lord. They

do, in effect, say to such, " You may be outward
court worshippers.

You may

attend those

reli-

127
gious exercises, which arc open to

all,

whether

pious or profane, Jew, Heathen, or Infidel; but

this

is

an ordinance designed for Christians only

within this sacred inclosure you must not enter."

If this

not treating a person as

is

which

Christian, or,
tianizing him,

They may

he were no

the same thing, unchris-

is

we know

if

not what

is.

say in reply, that they are very far

from entertaining such an unfavourable opinion

of those

who

differ

from them on the subject of

Baptism, though they refuse to hold communion

with them

They may

at the Lord's table.

allege,

the circumstance of their

in proof of this,

fre-

quently attending on the ministry of such, and

even

them

inviting

Strange inconsistency

to
!

whom

occupy the pulpit

to approach the table.

to sit

under him

as

occupy

To

their

invite a

pulpits.

person

to

they do not deem worthy

They have no objection
preacher of the gospel,

though they scruple to sit beside him as a fellowcommunicant. Now we do think that if any distinction should be

the table pew,

it is

made between

the pulpit and

the former rather than the

ter that requires the exercise of caution.

lat-

We can

easily conceive of a truly good

man, who, having

embraced some strange notions, and being in the
habit of using unguarded expressions, may often
injure the cause

which he means

to

promote by

128
his pulpit discourses

but what harm even such

down

a one can do by sitting

Lord,

we

therefore,

may

cannot conceive.
into a situation

at the table of the

To admit a person,
where much mischief

be and often has been done, and refuse him

a seat where, in the nature of things, no mischief

can be done,

And

can

is

it

preposterously absurd

be supposed that the ordinance of

Baptism was instituted

duct as

this

Is

it

to

not

countenance such con-

far

more

rational to con-

was appointed solely for the introduction of a new dispensation into the world and
that it was for this express purpose that the com^
clude that

it

mission to administer

We

to his Apostles.

by observing
this

was given by our Lord

it,

are confirmed in this idea,

that though, in the execution of

work, they associated others with themselves,

yet they never delegated the authority by which

they performed

them

is

any that should come

The command

ately followed

mer

to

in the successive periods of the

Again,

there

it

is

is

church.

to baptize being

immedi-

by the promise of miraculous

no more reason

to

after

gifts,

conclude that the

for-

of perpetual obligation than that the latter

of perpetual duration

limit assigned to the

And, indeed,

if

we

seeing that there

one more

is

no

than to the other.

consider Baptism in respect of

129
the nature and design of the institution,

not hesitate to afllrm that

the age of miracles.

name,

called by that

but

did not^long survive

it

superstitious ceremony,

we
down

has,

from the above period

admit, been practised

to the present

no resemblance

this bears

we need

to the

time

pointed by our Lord and administered by

Apostles, whether

its

attempt has been made, of

cover Baptism, and bring

design.

it

it

to

administration.

late years, to re-

back to

But what has been the

of restoring

his

in reference to the

it

mode, or the end of

subject, the

An

we view

ordinance ap-

result

its

original

Instead

the churches of Christ, as the

the doctrines of the gospel were restored at the re-

formation from popery, the only effect has been,

to detach a small

portion of Christians from the

rest of their brethren,

tinct

sect,

and form them into a

maintaining principles

dis-

incompatible

with the principles^of Christianity, and manifesting a spirit diametrically" opposite to the spirit

of the gospel
of religion,

excommunicating* every professor

who

does not entertain their views,

and adopt their plans.

Against this system

we

feel

it

of

exclusive

communion

necessary to enter the most decided

* Se Hall's reply to Kinghorn, Part

III.

Chan.

ix.

130
protest

as

its

direct

aad immediate tendency

is,

to cherish that spirit of bigotry and intolerance,

which we cannot but

Be

detest and abhor.

that bigotry far from our breast,

Which would
Which by blind
The offspring

Names,

With

parties,

Christian from Christian divide

party zeal

is

caress'd.

of folly and pride.

and sects disappear,

their separate interests

and laws

No name but of Christ would we hear.

No interest but that of his cause.

We

think

it

necessary, however, to say that,

while thus strongly reprobating the practice of exclusive

communion, we would not be supposed

to give an unqualified approbation to the plan of

mixed communion

which we think

serious objections, as stated above.

a broad

liable

to

We conceive

line of distinction

between

that there

is

the two,

though that distinction has not been

clearly pointed out

the controversy on

by those who have engaged

either side.

may be, the custom

among Independents as well
this

One

generally

in

reason of
prevailing

as Baptists, of

mak-

ing the circumstance of being actually admitted a

member

of some regular church, as it is called, an

indispensably requisite qualification for sitting

down

at the table of the

Lord.

Now, we must

131

we

own,

see no orouncl lor this

and we are fully

persuaded that the Scriptures give no countenance

to such a mode of proceeding.
The Lord's supper was instituted for the Lord's people.
the birthright of those

who

are the children of

(Jod by faith in Jesus Christ

which none of

when they

cepted)

a privilege from

have any right to

their brethren

exclude them, except

It is

must always be ex-

(as

are chargeable with deuN'ing

the fundamental doctrines of the gospel, or acting

in a

manner

grossly inconsistent with their Chris-

With

tian profession.

this

exception only, Ave

have every reason to believe that primitive Chris*

tians never denied access to the Lord's table, to

those

whom

they considered as belonging to the

household of

we

faith

nor

is

there any reason

why

should.

It

may, indeed, be expedient, so long

as a di-

of opinion prevails respecting modes of

versit\^

worship and discipline, and minor

])oints

of doc-

members of the same church should, as

possible, be of the same mind and of the

trine, that

much

as

same judgment.
Baptists,
vinists

J>et

Baptists

Paedobaptists with

then unite with

Paedobaptists,

with Calvinists, and Arminians with

minians

but

let

fectly distinct,

CaU
Ar-r

these communities, though per-

recognise each other as churches

of Christ, receiving dismissions from one to the


132
other without scruple; and

let

individuals ^us-

taining the Christian character, be freely invited

Lord's supper, whenever and

to partake of the

wherever that ordinance

may

without

or

regard

sect

to

be administered,

denomination.

It

would then be, what it was originally designed to

be, a bond of union and not a bar of separation

among

We

the followers of Christ,

appeal to Christian

common

sense,

if

such

would not better accord with the spirit of

the gospel than that which has been adopted of
late, particularly by the various tribes of Sandea plan

manians, whose divisions and subdivisions are

Hence, we

endless.

some

fresh

are

repeatedly hearing

of

commander
which he formerly belonged,

of a petty squadron, quit-

ting the regiment to

and marching

off,

with his

remote part of the camp

must be

company,

where a separate

sit

down

company

at that table

let

table

but such as belong

If difference of opinion, on various topics,

subsist

to a

kept, and none, on any account, be per-

mitted to
to his

little

among

real Christians,

never,

must

never,

those points of difference be so magnified as

to prevent such as are children of the

same family,

redeemed with the same blood, partakers of the

same Spirit, and heirs of the same inheritance

133
from

sitting^

down

same

at the

table,

to

comme-

morate that great and glorious transaction, on which

all their hopes are founded, and whence all their
comforts spring.

We

aware that sentiments which stand

are

opposed

difficulties

must have many

current opinion,

to

encounter before they can be ex-

to

Old prejudice is commonly

young conviction, and is frequently

pected to prevail.
too strong for

known

to stifle

easily

dispossessed

it

the birth.

in

Persons are not

of ideas which

have

they

cherished with fond attachment for twenty, thirty,

or

years

forty

together

which have

'

grown

with their growth, and strengthened with their

strength

;'

which are interwoven with

all

their

views and feelings, and entwined round every

fibre

of the heart; and,

what

more erroneous these ideas

verseness of

human

their hold of the

with vice

task to induce

still

are (such

nature!)

worse, the
is

the per-

the firmer will be

mind, and the greater the

culty of eradicating them

it is

is

nor shall

him

for

we

it is

find

to think right

diffi-

with error as

a much easier
who has been in

it

the habit of thinking wrong, than to prevail on

him

to

do good who has been accustomed

to

do

evil.

What presumption

then (some

may be

ready to

134
sa}')

must possess the

writer, to obtrude his sen-

timents on the public, without a

mend them

name

to

recom-

when, under the most favourable

circumstances there are such difficulties to be

surmounted
all

He

is,

notwithstanding

however,

these disadvantages, encouraged to proceed,

under a

full

that,

if

his

they will ultimately prevail.

correct,

slow

persuasion

in its

march, but

it is

views

are-

Truth

is

progressive, and will

And, what if God, M'ho delights

to abase that which is high, and exalt that which
who sometimes employs things which
is low
not
to
bring to nought things that are
should
are
finally

triumph.

please, in order to secure the

self, to

make use of an

whole glory

to

him-

obscure, an iinknowti indi-

vidual, as an instrument in his hands, for effecting

which learning and talent, combined with

known respectability, have attempted in vain.
There was a period, when a certain man dre\v a
that

bow

at a

venture, and

it

so happened, doubtless

under Divine direction, that the arrow, shot from

unknown hand, was made the

means of accomplishing a more valuable and ima

bow drawn by

])ortant

an

purpose,

than

appears

to

have

been

by any that issued from the (juivers of

the most renowned, the most mighty, or the most

effected

skilful,

among

all

the hosts of Israel, or of Syria.

Whatever construction may be put on the


135
foregoing remarks,

uffords, at least,

it

solation to reflect, that

duced by

this

from

It creates

it.

if

no good should be pro-

work, no harm

no

sect,

likely to

is

ensue

forms no party, and

On

and excites no divisions.

obvious tendency

some con-

the contrary,

its

put an end to those diviwhich still subsist among

Christians, by removing the cause of them
showing that true religion, the religion of Jesus,
consists not in modes and forms and rites and
ceremonies, but in the knowledge and enjoyment
is

to

sions and contentions,

of

God

faith in

and love to Christ; communion

with him, and conformity lo him

that the cir-

cumstantials of religion are of no account what-

any further than they are adapted to promote

and that this constitutes the test or
these ends
rule, by which we are to judge of their importance

ever,

" For (says the great

and of their permanence.

Apostle of the Gentiles)
circumcision availeth
sion,

an}'^

but a new creature.

in

Christ Jesus, neither

thing, nor uncircumci-

And

according to this rule, peace

as

many

as

walk

be on them, and

mercy, and upon the Israel of God."

To

Should these thoughts and observations, which the writer committed to paper,
conclude.

as they occurred to his

to the public, prove the

mind, and

means of

now

presents

pre noting peace

and unity among the people of God

that in one

13(5

spirit,

with one mind, they may henceforth

strive

together to diffuse the savour of evangelical truth,

and

advance the kingdom

Redeemer

he

munerated

shall consider himself

for the

them, and to

and interest of the

God

time and pains

be

all

the glory.

amply

bestovi'ed

upon

Amen.

THE END.

Ppwlress, F.ow

&

re-

Pfwfres?, Prin<er?, 30, Grnccrlmrrh-ilreff.

DEFENCE
OF

"

BAPTISM A TERM OF COMMUNION

IN

ANSWER TO THE

REV. ROBERT HALL'S REPLY;

BY JOSEPH KINGHORN.

" AMONG ALL THE ABSURDITIES THAT EVER WERE HELD, NONE EVER MAINTAINED THAT, THAT ANY PERSON SHOULD PARTAKE OF THE COMMUNION
BEFORE HE WAS BAPTISED." WaLL; History of Infant Baptistn.

NORWICH
PUBLISHED BY WILKIN AND YOUNGMAN, MARKET PLACE; BY BALDWIN,

CnADOCK, AND JOY, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON J

AND BY WAUGH AND INNES, EDINBURGH.

1820.

CONTENTS.
Preface

Pa<jc

CHAPTER

I.

Introductory Observations

CHAPTER
On

II.

the Statement of the Controversy

CHAPTER
Mr.

ix

19

in.

Hall's Reasonings, in the second and third chapters of

his

Reply, examined

Section

I.

33

Statement

of

Principle

the

on which the

present discussion depends,

Mr.

Hall's

arguments respecting our Lord's Couiuiission

Section

II.

examined

Mr. Hall's

33

arg-uments respecting Apostolic

Precedent, examined

Section

III.

Mr. Hall's assertion

libihty,

Section IV.

Mr.

Section V.

Mr.

we assume

that

infal-

examined and repelled

Hall's

make

42

concessions

his

oO
attejiipt

to

the Apostles parties against us

Hall's

misrepresentation of the

ment, that Baptism

is

60
state-

a term of christian

profession, exposed

Section VI.

Tlie dift'crence of sentiment

59

among christians

the proand the imposition of

hands on the baptisedexamined as
respecting the doctrine of Election

hibition to cat blood

to their

.supposed bearing on this controversy

74


VI

Section VII.

Mr. Hall's

on the use of the term

criticisms

"evidence" examined

He does not recog-

nise the scriptural design of baptism

his

system subverts the

CHAPTER
An

and
82

institution

IV.

examination of Mr. Hall's third chapter on the connection

between the two positive

Section

I.

92

institutes

His statement of the question examined

;

his

92

reasoning refuted

Mistakes of Mr. Hall respecting Mr. Fuller

the Unities, Eph.
and, Dr. Whitby.
Section III. Mr. Hall's reasoning concerning
law
Section

II.

iv.

99

positive

and

Section IV.

prohibition,

Mr. Hall's

examined

105

evasion of the argument on the

connection of the two ordinances

sations confronted

the " Spottish Baptists",

Section

his accu-

his mistakes concerning

&c

109

V. A Review of the general subject: the amount

of Mr. Hall's

argument

the

he gives to the Padobaptists

lation

of

proved

what has been

consequences

advantage
:

recapitu-

conceded and

resulting from our

127

author's system

CHAPTER
On

V.

Dispensing with a christian ordinance

132

CHAPTER VI.
Mr. Hall's misrepresentations of the argument respecting the
144

ground of dissent exposed

CHAPTER
The Piedobaptists
troversy

VII.

necessarily parties in the present con-

157

Vll

CHAPTER
The

VIII.

scripture injunction respecting forbearance

CHAPTER
Mr. Hall's argument

for

examined

...

164

IX.

communing with Panlobaptists,

because they are part of the true church, examined .... 183

CHAPTER
The

cliarge of excluding,

X.

excommunicating, and punishing

other denominations, considered ..,,

CHAPTER
Mixed Communion unknown

Conclusion

XI.

in the ancient

CHAPTER

188

church

193

XII.
199

PREFACE.

Although controversy has often been

of many evils, and has given great
humiliation before God, yet

we

avoidable, and

is

it

productive

reason for

frequently un-

are indebted to

portion of important information.

it

for a large

It is

a very

remarkable expression of the Apostle Paul, when

speaking of the different opinions which existed
in the

church of Corinth, " there must be also

among you, that they which are approved

may be made manifest among you." (1 Cor.xi. 19.)
The departure of some from the faith once delivered
to the Saints, tried others, and shewed who were,
and who were not willing to adhere to the doctrine of the Apostles; and those who did adhere
heresies

to

the

to

contend

When

truth

in

for

its
it

simplicity,

apostacy from the

become

were compelled

with earnestness and vigour.

faith

of the Gospel had

general, every attempt to bring

men

to a

Lord occasioned
opposition and controversy, so that when the Reformers began the great work of turning men's

just view of

attention

to

the will of the

the

truth

as

it

is

in

Jesus,

they

X
were obliged

in the first

preme authority of the

the Baptists

came

place to establish the su-

New

forth

When

Testament.

from the obscurity

in

which they, in common with other protestants,

had been concealed, they had to contend in the

same

field

severe.

midst of

in the

They

difficulties peculiarly

called the attention of the world to

what they considered a nearer approach to apostolic truth than other protestants had admitted
and they found enemies in the very men, who, in
opposition to the

Roman

New

conformity to

Catholics, pleaded for

Testament doctrine, and

for

the ordinances of the Gospel as practised in the

apostolic church.

by

all parties

They were esteemed

Heretics

they were induced by their hard

circumstances to study the

New Testament close-

ly, and to suspect the truth of many sentiments

which were generally received without suspicion.
Hence they were led to mark the difference

between the church of Christ as he formed

it,

and a church established by the power of the

state
first

and from

this investigation

they caught the

glimpse of that important principle of reli-

gious LIBERTY which

it

was

their

honour

to bring

forward to notice, and to defend in the midst of

censure and obloquy.

The

source of their sorrows, and the cause of

Deriving their opinion from the New Testament, and

appealing to that volume in their own defence,
they found themselves fortified beyond the power

their success,

was

their

view of Baptism.

of successful attack, because they could prove

XI

that they did

no more than obey

In doing' what Christ

that they

injunctions.

commanded

were acting

satisfied that

its

rightly,

they were sure

and they were

opponents could not bring

their

equal evidence in favour of sentiments and practices

which were neither enjoined by Jesus

Christ,

nor illustrated by the example of the apostolic

church.

who

Like those

of old were zealous in building

the temple of the Lord, they and their fellows

were men w ondered

at. {Zecli.

iii.

8.)

All the ex-

pedients which persecuting rage, scorn, bitterness,

and misrepresentation could devise, Avere employed to sink them in public estimation, and to
run them

down

as a despicable party,

neither supported
talents

and

by

truth,

literature

who were

nor possessed of the

necessary for their

own

defence.

How vain is the

storm that is raised by passion!

and strong wind passed by, and
rent the mountains, and broke in pieces the rocks
before the Lord,
the Lord was not in the Avind."
Kings
xix.
Dr. Featly, a man of talent,
11.)
(1
of learning, and of considerable popularity in his
day, took up his pen against the Anabaptists, and
gratified himself by abusing them. He was honest
enough to confess that he could hardly dip his
pen "into any other liquor than the juice of
gall"; but if he had not made this confession, his
book was a sufficient evidence of his temper. His
work was so popular that it passed through six

When

" a great

editions in as

many

years

and doubtless many

Xll

would

think,

and

literature,

that between

his

arguments,

hijs

would be

his severity, the Baptists

so overpowered, that they would never raise their

The

heads again.
fact

" the

more"

contrary, however,

their

opponents "

was the

afliicted

them,

the more they multiplied and grew"; and could

Dr. Featly now rise from his grave, he would

find them increased beyond his greatest appre^
hensions, and have the mortification of hearing

book as a curiosity, on acvirulence, and often amused them-

that they bought his

count of

its

selves by observing the violent explosions of

his

temper.

A specimen
Mr. Flavel,

of a better kind was exhibited by

a

man

of a difterent

quite opponent to the Anabaptists.

spirit,

but

still

Mr. Philip

Cary, a Baptist minister at Dartmouth^ had published a book on baptism, entitled,

A Solemn
CalV; Flavel thought well of the author, yet he
*

deemed

it

He

necessary to reply to his work.

treated him, however, respectfully, and appears

to

have been very desirous of not misrepresenting

But it is curious

him.

him

to observe

how

to consider the situation in

he intreats

which he had

placed himself by venturing to plead the cause of

"As for your pretended solutions

of the incomparable Mr. Baxter's, and the learned
^

Anabaptism\

and accurate Dr. Burthogge's arguments,

mire at

your confidence therein.

Alas!

ad-

my

you little know what it is to have such

weak and inartificial discourses as yours, brought
under the strict examen of such acute and judi-

friend,

Xlll

Between two such millstones, poor

Philip Cary was doubtless to he ground to

cious eyes."*

Some things,

powder.

and

in their

however, resist

all

attacks,

nature are too hard to be crushed by

human power.
tinues to make

Carys sentiment still conappeal to men on the ground of

3Ir.
its

the New Testament representations, and spreads

more and more the reason is manifest, it is to be
:

found

in that

sacred volume, and

supported by

is

There it is seen that those only who believed

weie baptised and that neither precept

it.

in Christ

nor precedent can be discovered

favour of the

in

administration of baptism to persons of any other

description.

The debate which engages our

attention

at

present, does not lead us to inquire either into

the

mode

or subjects of baptism, but

regard to a question which

in

it

directs our

point of importance

takes the precedence of every other in the baptismal controversy

which

is,

whether baptism

an ordinance to be maintained in the church

whether

it

is

is

or,

one of those indifferent and unim-

portant things which the church has no right to

consider as requisite to

can

communion

discover what will be the

attempts

now made,

Time alone
of

the

to justify the introduction of

persons professedly unbaptised.

the verge of a

effect

new system

We may

be upon

of corruption, and

may

see the most unscriptural propositions and practices

become popular
* Flavel's

Works,

but so long as the

vol. viii. p. 202.

Ed. 8vo, 1770.

New

XIV

Testament

is

of authority,

acknowledged

we

to

be the source

shall say to those

who adopt

Mr. Hall, as we do to our friends,

go to the scripwho
tures and find it there, and then we shall be
the theory of

plead for infant baptism

satisfied.

We do not intend
diency,

to rest the

argument on expe-

but as Mr. Hall brought forward

this

consideration himself (though he blamed us for

the notice

we took

of

it

it),

may

not be amiss

to mention a few facts which our forefathers

have preserved, and which shew what was the

tendency of the system of mixed communion in
their day.

Every one acquainted

in

any degree with Non-

conformist History, has often met with the

of

Mr. John Tombes, who

name

strenuously pleaded

the cause of the baptists in his day, and by this

means, was of eminent service to the body at

large

but he held

shewed

its

this sentiment,

tendency

for

and

though

his

conduct

after the

act

of uniformity had passed, he did not choose to

conform and hold a living in the Establishment,
yet he not only frequented the church of England, but actually died in her communion, and
thus his conduct tended to neutralize his argu-

ments.

Mr. Baxter

informs us of two "Anabaptists",

(as he calls them) who were induced by his arguments and persuasion to adopt the plan of mixed

he says they both " turned from

anahaptistry and separatioii^; and he adds, that

communion

XV
" in sense of their old error," they " ran into the
other extreme".*

The eminent John Bunyan, who

zealously

advocated the cause of mixed communion, seems

have had no great success

to

in

We

terests of the Baptists.

promoting the

in-

hardly ever find an

allusion to the ordinance of baptism in his works,

except in his controversial pieces,

undermines

practically

its

in

which he

Nor

authority.

Avas

the efiect of his favourite system conducive to

tlie

for

such was

the state of the church with which he

was long

spread of his opinion as a baptist

connected, that on his death they chose a Pa;do-

and from the year 1688, in which he died,

to the year 1788, when Mr..IoshuaSymonds died,
the ministers who succeeded him were Pcedohapbaptist;

tists,

except the

last,

who some

years after his

settlement with the churcli, changed his sentiments

and became a
but though

was on
'

it

Baptist.

This took place

Mr. Symonds continued

at

in

1772

Bedford,

the conditions that he should not intro-

duce the controversy into the pulpit, nor into conversation, unless

We

it

was

first

in the

year 1700, and another

which the church refused

to

members who desired

tist

others.'

have also been informed, that one instance

occurred
in

mentioned by

churches in

in 1724,

to grant a dismission

two BapLondon, because they were strict

to unite with

communion churches.
* See his Life and Times, by Sylvester,

The two

persons were,

fact of their

VERS

pt.ii. p.

I80,andpt.iii.p. 180.

Mr. Thos. Lamb and Mr. W. Allen

change of sentiment on

in the postscript to his

'

this subject is

the general

confirmed by

Treatise of Baptism', p. 53, 54.

Dan-

XVI

Dr. James Foster, who was more

tlian

twenty

years pastor of the General Baptist church in

Barbican, London, and

who

day advocated the cause of mixed communion, left the

General Baptists, and accepted the pastoral
in

his

charge of the Independent church at Pinner's Hall,

But, thoagh he had pleaded the expe-

London.

mixed communion as the means of leading men to consider what the Baptists had to urge
in defence of their sentiments, yet Mr. Grantham
dience of

KiLLiNGWORTH

iufomis US, that in conversation

with him upon the point,

*'

say, that one single person

Hall before his

at Pinner's

he could not pretend to

who was

in

communion

over to them, had

o'oino-

since submitted to that institution, [of baptism]

or

shewn the

The

least inclination to

instances above recited

be baptised".*

mark

the tendency

now considerably distant

Mr. Booth shews what was his

of the system in times

at a later period

view of

its

tendency, and his manner of expression

drew his remarks from

would also take the liberty
He
facts.
here to observe, that some of those churches in
which free communion has been practised, have
clearly evinces that he

says, " I

not been the most remarkable for brotherly love,

or christian peace and harmony.

Has

the pastor

of a church so constituted, being a Baptist, never

found, that his Psedobaptist brethren have been a
little

speak

when he has ventured freely to

mind on the mode and subject of

offended,
his

Answer to
Communion, p. 35.

* Killiugworth's

Catholic

the

Defence of Dr. Foster's Sermon of

xvu
baptism?

When

Paedobaptist candidates for com-

munion have been proposed

those

have

to such a church,

members who espoused the same sentiment

never discovered a degree of pleasure, in the

thought of having- their number and

influence

increased in the community, that has excited the

Wlien, on the

jealousy of their Baptist brethren?

contrary, there lias been a considerable addition

to the

number of Baptist members, has not an

equal degree of pleasure

in

them, raised similar

suspicions in the minds of their Pa^dobaptist brethren

And

are not suspicions

and jealousies of

this kind, the natural effects of

No one who is acquaintof Abraham Booth,

tion?" (Apol.p. 131, 132.)

ed

with

character

tlie

will for a

such a constitu-

moment suppose

that he

was

writing

from imagination: his concluding observation

too forcible to be denied

is

also,

" now, as our oppo-

nents must allow, thattlieir communities are liable

to all those other imperfections
to the

churches of Christ

which are

so,

common

presume, the

reader will hardly forbear concluding, that free

communion exposes them

to

some

additional dis-

advantages, which are peculiar to themselves."*

One

effect

clude those

it

will

who

always |)roduce

it

will ex-

think that the primitive consti-

tution of the church ought to be j)reser\ ed

invite

those

either to

who

for

and
any reason are opponent,

baptism as an ordinance of Christ,

or, to.

the form and order of the christian church as

*

Some

observations on the

experience of the American

churches, the reader will meet with

in the

a2

progress of the work,

it

Baptist

XVUl

was established by the Lord.

Whether they

come

contrary, they

as persons baptised, or

are equally accepted,

and

tlie

tliose

who

receive

them

practically declare, that though our view of bap-

tism
yet

by " overwhelming evidence,'

does not now hold the situation in which it
justified

is

it

was placed by Jesus

To

Christ.

us this consi-

deration forms an unanswerable objection to the

scheme

it

eventually strikes at the permanency of

the institution of the

Lord

and no acuteness that

has yet been brought into the discussion, can

prove that

it

needs be regarded at

all,

if

Mr.

Hall's principles are admitted.

An anonymous

author has lately shewn the

tendency of these principles

in

an indirect but

marked manner, in a pamphlet entitled, " Thoughts

on JBaptism as an Ordinance of Prosefyt ism, including observations on the controversy respecting terms

of Conwiunion ; by Agnostos!' This writer is the

opponent of all parties, for his sentiment is, that
if

baptism was designed to be a standing ordinance

of the church, Missionaries are the only proper

administrators, and their proselytes the only pro-

per subjects.

Hence

it

follows, on his plan, that

Baptists and Psedobaptists are

and

if

his theory

equally wrong,

were admitted, the controversy

communion would immediately termiWith his sentiments, it is to be expected

nate.
that he would treat the principle of strict communion as a mistake and that practically, he
would be on the side of Mr. Hall yet so far as
respecting

the tendency of the sentiment

is

concerned, he


XIX

throws

He

weight into the opposite scale.

liis

observes juslly,

"wliat can be more inconsistent

than to maintain that Baptism

is

a positive

insti-

and a standing ordinance of the christian

church, and yet treat it as a matter of indifference
and countenance the total neglect of it, by admittution

ting to an cqval participation of all the privileges

of church fellowship those

are unbaptised,

who have paid a regard to that ordiThe controversy he calls a

with those

nance

who

?" (p. 109.)

*'

contest between Christian principles and JBaptist

pruiciples";

and he says

law of baptism
of the Gospel of

either the

must be sacrificed, or the spirit

Christ must be violated", (p. 101.)
this statement, what the author

According to
calls christian

principles,

cannot admit that our Lord appointed

a positive

rite

enter on

to

be obeyed, when his disciples

a public profession of his Gospel.

This, however, he must be aware,

call

what he calls " Daptist

are supported by the New Testament,

an assumption
principles"

we should

but

if

" Christian principles" will never be in opposition

to

Christian institutions.

It

therefore,

is,

only

needful to shew that " Baptist principles" are

scripturaf,

proved

to

and then the subject

is

be also scriptural that

at rest,

till it is

we should form

a church of persons unbaptised.

It is

no part of our business to enter the

lists with-

" Agnostos" respecting his main argument, but

his observations

on the tendency of mixed com-

munion deserve the more attention as they proceed

from a writer who was not led to make them from

XX
any

He

partiality to the

cause we are advocating.

grants that the objections urged against Mr.

system are well founded

Hall's

that in

portion as

it

must sink

(p. 112.) that the effect of

munion,

instead

the cause of the Baptists

prevails,

Baptists, will tend in the

rection,

and M'hat they see and hear,

little

mixed com-

of inducing Pa^dobaptists

become
them

pro-

in their former ideas, that

to

contrary di-

conhrm
Baptism is of
will

or no importance, and altogether unneces-

Besides, he observes that where

sary, (p. 114.)

Baptists and
associated, "

Pa^dobaptists are indiscriminately

it is

^eneraWy imdersiood,

if not

abso-

communion, that
baptism should be kept out of siglit as much as possible ; that it should scarcely/ ever be mentioned, and
lutely stipulated,

7tcver

as a term of

be insisted on,

lest the

peace of the church

should be disturbed, and the harmony of

members be
he observes,

interrupted." (p. 114, 115.)

it

God

in

Farther,

exposes a minister to the temp-

tation of shunning to declare the

of

its

whole counsel

order to avoid giving offence; and

accustoms the people

treated as a matter

to see an

acknowledged duty

of indifl'erence.

a tendency to excite a

spirit

it

And it

has

of jealousy between

the two parties, destructive of peace and unity,

and thus, he observes, one of the strongest arguments in favour of mixed communion is turned
against the practice,

The tendency

(j).

117.)

of Mr. Hall's reasoning

is

also

marked by a writer of a different description, who

asks him how he can justify his dissent from the

XXI
church of England, on the principles of

work

Chohham,

in a

volume

entitled,

He

gether

Vicar of
"Conversations on

Church of the United Kingdom,"

against the

brings the sul^ject forward

that

own

and some popular objections

Baptism,

Infant

&c.)

liis

The Rev. Charles Jerram,

classes Dr.

ma long note. (p. 152,

Mason and Mr. Hall

he compliments them

he

can

appeal

He

authorities.

to

l)oth,

such

and

is

to-

glad

uliexceptionable

argues from Avhat they have each

and contends that on their prinDissenters ought not to have left the Esta-

brouglit forward;
ciples.

He

blishment.

observes, that

Mr. Hall challenges

the Baptists to produce a single instance of with-

drawing from the ancient church on the account

of Infant baptism

sentiment o^

on

this

ANNUL
is

that

Mr. Hall,

important

lite,

this

shews

at least the

that difiiTence of opinion

a difference so great as to

the ordinance in the

minds of the

not a legitimate cause of separation.

Baptists,

That

if

any thing may be considered as of such minor

importance, that
peace,

tlie

it

may be merged

sake of

circumstantials in the administration

of the Lord's supper

and he

for the

tells

may be viewed

in

that light

us that " the doctrine which Mr. Hall

down as the foundation of a more extended

communion among the various denominations of

lays

christians

sionr

would undouhlcdly lead

That

for asserting,

"we

to this conclii-

have the authority of Mr. Hall

that nothing less than a radical

defection from the purity of apostolical doctrine

and

discipline

can

authorise the principle

of

XXll

commu-

separation or exclusion from christian

nion." Tbis Mr. Jerram says

concession! and he adds,

"a most important

is,

" we may challenge the

world to substantiate such a charge against us, as

would render it improper, on these principles, to

make

continue within her pale, or

it

a matter of

indifference to desert her community.'Yi^. 10*0. 162.)

The

reasoning that can dispose of an institution

of Christ, by removing

it

from

its

primitive station,

introduces so lax a principle, that no precept

which we do not consider

can maintain
adhere
is

its

ground.

to a positive

essential to salvation,

we

If

confessedly permanent in

in vain assert, that

bound

are not

to

appointment of Christ, which

it

is

its

obligation,

we

of consequence to form

the church according to the plan which Christ

has furnished;

what

avails

reason

away

institutes

for

it

may always

your pleading scripture, when you

the authority of one of

Mr. Jerram

is

have now
I

of sense, he

time to conclude this long preface.

will use

is

it.

owed to the
am an unworthy member;

discharged a dutv which

denomination of which

and

plainest

we

doubt not he
it is

man

its

given him, and

sees the advantage which

But

be retorted,

commit the following pages

to the reader's

attention, asking for nothing more, than that

will consider

how

far the observations

with, agree with the

accuse

me

he

New Testament.

of repeating the

ferent parts of the work,

he

may meet

Should he

same arguments

in dif-

my

that

apology

arose from following the detail

is,

of Mr.

it

Hail's

XXIU
reasonings, which, in

my

apprehension, were con-

tinually in opposition to a few plain principles

which

tiie

by

controversy must eventually be decided.

Repetition was therefore (to a degree at least)

I had adopted a totally differwould
have been open to the
ent plan, which
the objection, that I had not examined my oppo-

unavoidable, unless

arguments

nent's

in their

has been awakened to

order.

tliis

As my

attention

subject hj a variety of

any fair and ccmdzd

argument which may yet be presented from any

circumstances,

quarter

shall listen to

but unless something should be urged,

far superior to
is

any thing that has yet appeared,

it

not likely that I shall trouble the world with a

reply.

Contention

is

not desirable

but, if

we

are

not willing tamely to surrender the cause of truth,

it

sometimes unavoidable.

is

what
I

I believe is

In pleading for

the will of the Lord, I hope that

earnestly desire to keep an eye on his character

and

glory, while I intreat his forgiveness of

weakness and imperfections

in this

my

attempt to di-

rect the attention of professing christians to the

ordinances of the Gospel, as Chiist and his Apostles

delivered them unto us.

Norwich,
September, 1820.

CHAPTER

I.

INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.

HE

controversy respecting

Terms

Communion

of

has

various bearings on subjects not immediately connected

with the original question.

disposition minutely to ex-

amine the principles on which Dissenting churches ought

to

proceed in the regulation of their internal concerns,

has of late been very manifest

tigation will
for nothing

and,

promote the cause of

more than what they

we

trust, the inves-

They who plead

truth.

find in the

New

Testa-

ment, need not fear the result of the inquiry, so long as

that

volume

preserved entire, and

is

for the use of the

is

freely circulated

Church.

If then, in the progress of the examination,

it is

asked,

on what terms persons were admitted into the Church in

apostolic times, and
tive discipline
us, that

fession

we

what was the platform of the primireply, the

New

Testament informs

he who professed faith in Christ, and whose pro-

was considered worthy of

credit,

was baptised, and

then took his place in the assembly of the faithful as one

who had "put on

rious duties to

Christ."

which

So long

God had

appear that he was subjected

as he filled

called
to

it

does not

further examination,

or required to renew his profession.

him,

up the va-

It

was taken

for

granted, that

lie

who continued

walk in the wavs

to

ul'

the

Lord, was acting on the principles he had already professIf he changed his residence, and went where he was

ed.

not known, "letters of commendation" were an introduction to other churches, on the ground of which, the stran-

ger was received, and treated as a brother.

in any period of his profession,

If,

however,

he deviated from the path

of duty, he was warned and admonished

conduct

if his

rendered further severity needful, he was excluded

if

but

he repented and turned again to the Lord, he was again

admitted to the privileges of Communion.

The

New

directions which the

Testament gives us on
which should

this subject, relate only to the great points

ever be kept in view

and not to those minutias for which

no general rule could make provision.

was necessary

It

that the question, "dost thou believe on the

should be answered
that

whoever wished

to unite with

to give a reason of the

ness and fear:" but the

is left

cerning which

we have no
if

to expect,
them, would be " ready

hope that was

mode

in

relates to particulars con-

we

dation, wood, hay, and stubble

or, lest

we

reject gold, silver, and

But while we agree

tices to fair

open

rule given, is fairly

needful, to alteration.

take care lest by any unwise haste

caution,

him with meek-

of making such a profession

Whatever

undetermined.

examination, and

Son of God?"

and the church had a right

to give

up

examination, and to

their respective merits, the case

all

build

We

upon the founby a suspicious

precious stones.

uncommanded

let them stand or

is totally

as

King

our obedience.
that

we may

the question

of his Church

We

prac-

fall

by

different with

regard to institutions which the Lord has appointed.

came

to

ought to

He

he gave laws which demand

are not authorized to set these aside,

regulate the church by the taste of the times:

is

not,

what are our terms, but what are the

terms required by the Lord.

Here

the Baptist takes high ground.

He

asks for no

more than was required

in the Apostolic church.

In the

instance, he asks for a declaration of faith in Christ.

first

This,

it

granted, he has a right to expect from every

is

one who

But

communion.

solicits

if

he and his

bre-

thren have pressed their inquiries on this subject with

needless or distressing minuteness, and thus have hindered, rather than helped those

who were

ing in the ways of the Lord

point

is

proved, to acknowledge that he was in an er-

He

ror.

desirous of walk-

he ought, whenever the

has no right to ask for more than a credible

Xew-Testament profession. In the next place, he adds,

New Testament requires that believers should be

the

baptised.

In

he

this sentiment,

supported by nearly

is

That small part except-

the whole christian community.

who deny the perpetuity of baptism, there is not one

be found, who will venture to assert, that the believer

ed,
to

has discharged his duty to his Lord,

if

he

is

not baptised.

On

this

ground then, we take our stand.

the

New

Testament, a profession of faith and baptism on

that

profession, took place previous to a person's being

Member of the

considered as a

we

authority

church.

In following such

are not raising a wall of separation which

Christ has not raised

own

According to

devising

we

we

are not requiring terms of our

are doing nothing

We

word.

find in the divine

more than what we

maintain that

we have no

authority to call in question the appointments of our di-

vine legislator, and since

He

requires believers

to

be

baptised, on their becoming the visible subjects of his

Kingdom,
porary in
plan.

unless

be proved

that

baptism was tem-

we are bound to act upon the same

Dr. Campbell justly observes, " when

duration,

its

For

it

as

once a fence

is

established by statute,

order to support

its

it

necessary, in

authority, that the letter of the statute

should be the rule in

We are aware

it is

all

will

cases" *.

be said, that

this plan

of receiving

Preliminary Dissertations to his translation of ths Gospels. Diss.vi.p.4.. 11.

b2'

Members

some

into the Church, keeps

at a distance

who

deserve to be esteemed, and does not always prevent im-

proper characters from entering.

has any force,

But

if this

objection

proves that Jesus Christ was the author

it

of an imperfect system, and that time has discovered

Our

defects.

dom

object, however,

is

of his appointments: though

that his plans are

that wherever

more

likely to

it

iti?

not to defend the wis-

might

easily

be shown,

be correct than ours,

men have departed from

and

them, evils inabun^

dance have poured themselves into the christian church.

Here, our
that

ject,

we

Paedobaptist

brethren

will

probably ob-

are assuming, at least a part of the question

under consideration

that

we

are not

contending for an

Institution of Christ, but for that Institution as

tice

it

we

prac-

that they think, neither the age of the subjects,

nor the mode of administration essential to the ordinance

and that therefore the question concerning baptism

vieio, and in their view, practically involves very

in our
differ-

ent consequences.

We reply,

we admit

whether we ought
is

that the questions are different

to receive those

who

allow that baptism

an Institution of Christ, and who plead that they have

obeyed the command, though we think they have not

and

whether we

ought

who either opNor do we blend

to receive those

pose or neglect the institution altogether.

these questions

they admit of a separate investigation,

and are to be met by arguments entirely

the controversy

Psedobaptism
for

it is

now before

is

distinct.

the query

us,

is

distinctly stated

p. 5J:

give up Baptism as no

in its original situation

to

is

and therefore the present

ought we to

longer necessary to

with the Christian Church

seems

in

whether

by Mr. Hall that Infant baptism

discussion unavoidably leads to the inquiry,

it

not,

But

a valid administration of the ordinance,

A NULLITY (Rephj,

sight

or,

communion

ought we to maintain

an inquiry which,

though at

concern us only, yet in the issue,

it

first

will

involve principles,

in

which

all

who acknowledge

the

permanency of the ordinances of the gospel are deeply

interested.

Since Mr. Hail began the present controversy, Dr.

son of

New

"

entitled

*'

of

title

Plea

The

of God."
the

York has published a second

Communion

for Catholic

first

edition of a
in the

Ma-

work

Church

Edition was printed in America under

Plea for Sacramental

Communion on Ca-

The second was

printed in London^

tholic Principles."

while the author was visiting this country.

him

hails

as a brother, quotes his

bation, tells us that Ur.

M. acknowledged

of his leading principle, and

new

ally,

Mr. Hall
work with high appro-

is

the justness

lavish in the praise of his

expence of those Baptists who do not

at the

adopt the system of mixed communion.

Yet whoever

reads the Doctor's work with attention, will perceive that

neither his reasonings nor his authorities, touch the present question.
that,

He

has written a large volume to prove,

"portions of two denominations" did right in "com-

ing together on the broad ground of one body, one spirit^

one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one

Father of

all."

Introd. p.

ciliate,

are

His work proceeds on

xiii.

the supposition that the parties

God and

whom

he designs to con-

members of Churches, which have "the

right-

possession of the Sacraments;" ( p. 9, 10.) which,

he obsers'es, " is essential to the existence of a true
ful

church."

These, he informs

us,

are two, Baptism

and

the Lord's Supper; he quotes the definition of the "Sa-

craments" given in the Wesminster Confession of Faith;

his whole argument supposes that both these " Sacra-

and

ments

" are

viewed by each party

practically regarded for the

of his

in the

same ends.

same

light,

and

In the progress

work he brings

forth a long list of authorities to

men

of various ages, have pleaded the

prove, that good

cause of Christian union, and have zealously urged their

brethren who practised

the

same institutions

in

their

who agreed

respective Churches, and

same general system of doctrine, to

These

the

in the belief of

commune

together

were well adapted to Dr, Mason's pur-

authorities

pose in justifying his uniting with Dr.

Romeyn

at

New

York; because the Churches under the pastoral care of

these two ministers, were on the

both

doctrine

respecting

would have applied,

if

same general ground

and practice

the opinion of the other unhaptised. Dr.

Every person

inform us.
astical

how

but

they

one of these Churches had been

in

Mason does not

at all acquainted with Ecclesi-

History knows, that communion in the Lord's sup-

per always supposed the previous baptism of the parties

and that the

tor's

authorities, so abundantly quoted in the

Doc-

" Plea," are perfectly nugatory, when applied to the

case of those

who

believe that the parties to

whom

they

object are not baptised.

Dr. Mason thinks he has furnished " a sure and easy

no

rule of conscience in regard to church fellowship, viz.

particular act of

ing beyond

communion

itself,

is

to

be interpreted as reach-

unless coupled with other acts by an

We

known condition."

p. 329. )
have no
(
"
sure and easy rule" to the case
objection to apply this
which concerns our present enquiry. T!he " express" ot
" known condition" which is " coupled" with every " act

express or

of communion

"

between Baptists and Pffidobaptists must

necessarily be " interpreted" as a declaration

either

the Baptist acknowledges Psedobaptism to be valid

that he does not regard baptism to be at

Communion.

The

first,

all

or,

requisite to

no Baptist can acknowledge

the

the subject of the present inquiry, and, in our

second,

is

view,

attended with unanswerable objections

is

that
;

but nei-

ther of them concerns Dr. Mason's great object, which

to the last, to

profoss

is

recommend communion among "those who

one Lord, one

faith,

one baptism, one hope of

their calling'." (p. 395.)

Notwithstanding

this constant reference

to a state of

from that before us in

opinions perfectly distinct

Mason

controversy, Dr.

in

the preface to

edition, alludes to the present debate,

to say,

that

this

second

his

and thinks proper

such differences, he they what they may,

all

are insufficient to justify the want of

those that mutually

ty."

How

p. viii.)

communion between
own and honor each otlier's Christianihe can reconcile

this

system with the

own church does not appear. If the

Associate Heformed Church, of which he is a member,
sentiments of his

acknowledge

theory in

his

its

all

extent, they have

departed from the opinions of their forefathers

far

and

if

they do not see a difference between the communion of

persons

who use

same

the

rites

of baptism and the same

formularies in other things, and the admission of those to

communion who

without

are

baptism,

they

have

lost

their former acuteness.

From Dr. Mason's work Mr. Hall

important results.

where our pious ancestors found an asylum

of freedom,

from the oppression of intolerance,

auspices of such

on the parent

men

as Dr.

many

What

will exert

still

cherished and retained

British Churches." {Preface, p.

the

American Baptists

alone can discover.

will

viii, ix.)

do in future, time

In times past, we are told that many

of their churches acted on the plan of mixed

but they found that

under the

Mason, a powerful reaction

and aid her emancipation from the

state,

relics of that pestilential evil,

in too

anticipates very

" Let us hope that America, that land

it

communion

so often both destroyed their peace

and impeded their prosperity, that in a great variety of

instances they have adopted the practise of

with baptised believers only.

BENEDICT,

communing

in his

General

History of the Baptist Denomination in America, printed

a number of cases of
some churches, he says, have been " split
in 1813, mentions

embarrassing

policy.''

It

England, by the friends

this kind,
to pieces

and

by the

commonly supposed here in

of that system, that if it was
is

once admitted

would retain

it

reads Benedict's History,

its influence

will see that

but whoever

American experi-

ence does not favour such an expectation.

Mr. Hall observes, that " sorae whose character com-

mands the deepest

known

respect, are

to deprecate the

agitation of the present controversy from an apprehension

of the injury the denomination

sure of
bly

by

Proba-

so far, at least, as relates to the pre-

sent effect of the discussion

were afraid

that they

sustain by the expo-

time they are satisfied that their apprehensions

this

were well founded

ever side

may

intestine divisions." (Preface p. xiii.)

its

it

lest the

for it

cannot be imagined

cause of truth, on which-

was found, would ultimately be injured.

Tlie opponents of our denomination seem to think that

they have gained an advantage they never had before;

they consider Mr. Hall's work as sacrificing one impor-

common system

tant part of our

and as making a con-

cession which reduces the practical

With

tism to nothing.

importance of bap-

their views of baptism, the case

of the unbaptised soliciting communion with them will be

of such rare occurrence, that
consideration

but

we

Mr. Hall's sentiment

if

shall

be expected practically

the baptism for which

we

longer to be retained in
is,

who

that all

are inimical

Mr. Hall

prevails, they

to the

to unite

to declare, that

plead, however conformable to

the primitive institution, has lost

result

very seldom require

whenever a Paedobaptist wishes

clearly see, that

with us,

it will

its

its

authority,

original station.

dislike the

institution

Baptists,

of

baptism

and

is

no

Hence the
and all who
itself,

with

at their

head, are loud in their exclamations

and

they go as far as he does, in the ex-

against us

tent and

severity of their accusations, they can at least

if

plead the sanction of his example in their defence.

writings clearly

those

shew that he

is

in

His
avowed friendship with

who oppose his own denomination; and that, accordown statement, the points in which he differs

ing to his

from them are

trifling,

both agreed.

are

compared with those

Is

it

surprising that

which they

in

men

of discern-

ment, " whose character commands the deepest respect",

and who knew the extent of Mr,

the effect

should

Ilall's theory,

have deprecated a system of which they saw

Perhaps they were also afraid

this

would be

lest

it

should

separate the Baptists and Paedobaptists to a greater dis-

tance than before, or render their intercourse less confi-

But

dential.

ces

the

may follow,

die

cast,

is

and whatever consequen-

those who according to the

believe that baptism should precede

to bear the

blame of exciting

this controversy

had no other option, but either

or

to sit

down

New Testament

communion, have not

to

and they

defend their cause

and bear the stigma of having

in silence,

nothing to say, or of not daring to speak: they have

their election,

and leave the

They were compelled

tional reason, that they

result to

made

God.

defend themselves for the addi-

to

viewed the opinion which Mr. Hall

advocates, as in the end attacking the permanency of Baptism

and since he attempts

law of the
question,
tions, or

With

New

Testament,

to establish his theory as the

leads us directly to the

it

has the sacred volume

does

it still

respect to

own

nullified its

continue to support them

institu-

the effect which the discussion has

produced on the dispositions of the Baptists and Paedobaptists

towards each other, as far as

conduct

is

my

still

they did

their

not altered towards the members of other de-

nominations, and I hope their temper

are

observation has ex-

Baptists stand where

tended, the strict

is

not injured; they

willing to unite with their fellow christians on

common ground
doubt not many

in

promoting a

common

cause

and I

of the Paedobaptists will go as far with

us as they did before, and with the same general feeling.

Some

of them are aware that Mr. Hall's favorite theory

relieves

neither party

different language

from any

and

in

difiiculty.

Others hold

proportion as they adopt his

10
opinion, they occupy a

be

new

How

station.

by the change, time alone

affected

far

tbey will

will discover.

Mr. Hall thinks that a " simple expedient " might

tle

set-

the difficulty which arises from the divided opinion of a

church, where the majority are in favor of mixed commuwhich is, to " admit pious Pa^.dobaptists, without

nion

hesitation, and to let those

from joining-

in

apart." {Preface p. xviii.)

more than

What

doubtful.

ister is of a different opinion

this should

a system as

the sentiments

whose principles deter them

such communion receive the Lord's supper

now

The
is

to

success of this plan

is

be done where the min-

from the majority

become popular, every

described, whatever

If such

minister, of

may have been

the length or importance of his services, would feel his

confidence

in

those with

whom he had

long acted in unity,

so sensibly weakened, that he would not be surprised at

the rising of a storm that would drive him away.

But

besides the effect which this expedient might have on the

minister,

it

vrould also

produce an

effect

on the mem-

bers whose sentiments did not agree with those of the

majority.

The

older

members

who had been

common cause, would

especially,

labouring for a course of years in a

themselves deeply affected by such an alteration.

feel

"What would they think, when they saw the constitution of

that church subverted, the prosperity of which had been
intimately connected with their purest enjoyments, and

most vigorous exertions? How admirably would

"
this
expedient" promote the unity of the church, when
those who maintain its original principles would in realtheir

ity

be expelled, instead of continuing to be recogniWhat would

?

sed as joined to the Church in one body

they think of a scheme which under the pretence of increasing the

haptists,

Mr.

members of Baptist Churches, admitted PcsdoNotwithstanding

and dissevered BAPTISTS
!

Hall says this can be done

slightest

" without

inflicting the

wound on these amiable and exemplary per-

u
son.^" (p. xviii)

it

and of those

who would not repeat it.

that did, several would be found

They would

Ma-

would be found an impossibility.

ny would never submit to the experiment

pow-

too strongly recollect past days, and too

erfully feel the alteration forced

upon them, not

to

be

fill-

ed with retlections which they would not wish to have

Though Mr. Hall attempts

excited again.

plan into smooth language, and

ciliate,

one would suppose

fessing to treat those

it

if

to

put his

ever he means to con-

would be, when he was pro-

members of our Churches who

differ

from him with marked respect, as "amiable and exemplary

characters,'^ yet there is a

manner

in

which he speaks of

them, which ought not and cannot escape their notice.

*'
By this simple expedient," we are told, " the views of all
parties will be met

the majority will exert their prero-

and act consistently with their avowed principles

gative,

the PffiDOBAPTiSTS will obtain

abettors of strict

communion

<//etV

rights

and the

will enjoy that state of sepa-

and secbision which they covet!" (p. xviii, xix.)

Such expressions need no comment, and such doctrines
ration

We are

require no elucidation.

told,

that

Paedobaptists

have a right to membership in Baptist Churches; the

*'

majority" are instructed in defence of their " 2Jrerogative'*

and "principle" to admit that right

and the " abettors of

communion" are held up to view, as if they coveted

" separation and seclusion," and would " enjoy" it, even
though the churches of which they had been members were
strict

rending

in pieces

lent revolution

so; silence

is

"By

this

means" says Mr. Hall

may be effected in our Churches

:"

'*

si-

perhaps

often produced by astonishment: one conse-

quence would certainly

follow,

which

at first takes place in

silence; and that is, a want of confidence in those who were

known to be the projectors or abettors of such a revolution.
But in time, those who had been silent would speak,

and

it

requires no sagacity to foresee what they would say.

But what would be the

effect

of this revolution

To

T
12
exclude more members than would be added by the means
of

Generally speaking, the number of Paedobaptists

it.

who are
Member
what

is

found in

Churches

Baptist

is

When

small.

communion

of a Church holding mixed

is

the state of the society to which he belongs, the

answer is frequently

in the

tone of Apology;

" we are on

but we have very few in our

the plan of open communion,

Thus

church except those who have been baptised."

they endeavour to justify themselves, and
their

asked,

brethren,

would be a

may, with

they

that

those Paedobaptists

who wish

to

persuade

admit

security,

to unite with

them (whom

it

pity to lose) because they are so few,

that

Mr. Robinson

says,

they cannot possibly do any hurt.

"probably mixed fellowship and great majorities of unbaptised

believers tending to alter the constitution of the

church,

may have been

may have happened

nection

is

not good

the minister

is

in

associated ideas.

some few particular

for in

a baptist,

But whatever
cases, the con-

most mixed churches where

the proportion

is

not so great

as five to a hundred*

Our denomination

is

supposed to

lie

under the "frown

of the great head of the Church," as the consequence of

strict

communion. (Preface,p.'s.x'\n,

iLxiy.)

If so,

it

may

reasonably be expected, that those churches which are

upon the plan of open communion, are eminently

blest with

the divine presence, and that their success can be visibly traced to this cause.

It may be expected, that in pro-

portion to the congregations, the churches are larger, that

the conversion of sinners

amount of the

is

more frequent, and that the

and congregation

is

In these congregations

it

real piety of the church

greater than in other places.

may be expected,

that the " advantage of overwhelming-

evidence in favour of our sentiments" {Preface, p. xxiii),

is felt in all its

power, and that there

between the blighted and withered

is

a striking contrast

state of a congregation

Doct. of Toleration in Miscel. Works,

vol. III. p. 188.

13
and church where

strict

fruitful condition of that

draws down the divine

communion

is

mjiintuined,

and the

which open communioa

church in

Mr. Hall has thrown out

blessing-.

an insinuation, but has brought nothing to justify

What
and

authority, as one of the denomination,

his

quoted in
fence

we
is

is

support;

its

while

both delicate and

it

own

In a former treatise

difficult.

stated an opinion on the fact

may be

evident, that the de-

is

and though that opinion

not altered, but confirmed, yet

our

it.

he has said stands as an accusation against the body,

we would

rather bear

share of any man's censure, than excite the un-

pleasant and painful feelings, which would unavoidably be

the effect of such a detail of facts and reasonings, as the

defence of
rily

require

and we are

common
sure many

of our

this part

cause would necessaof our brethren would

do the same.

But since it is commonly found, that

of mixed communion sets baptism aside,
moment,

not adopting that system, the inference

more
It

as of very little

our supposed want of success arises from our

if

nor unfair,

the intioduction

that if

useful

we ceased

to

is

neither distant

be Baptists we should be

still!

seldom happens that a controverted subject continues

long stationary.

ground

will

viewed in

more

its

In the progress of the discussion, the

or less be changed, and the subject

difierent bearings.

"When John

Bunyan

pleaded for mixed communion, he said, the rule by which

he would receive persons into fellowship,, was " by a discovery of their faith and holiness, and their declaration
of their willingness to subject themselves to the laws and

government of Christ
baptism of so

little

in his

Church."

But he thought

consequence, that when urged with

the priority of baptism to communion, as recorded in the

New

Testament, he replied, " that water baptism hath

formerly gone
sity to

do

so,

first is

granted

I never

but that

saw proof."

it

ought of neces-

In consistency with

14
he pleaded for the reception of those who

this theory,

his opinion

did not see

ly to

were pious characters; and

their duty to

it

be baptised, he was ready not on-

accept of their apology, but to come forward in their

Alluding to the Israelites in the time of Jo-

defence.
shua,

who had not been circumcised

in the wilderness,

he says, " they could not have a bigger reason than

'

I have no light

that

in

they said, they

if

many a

man

faithful

But

of baptism.

which

therein,'

I say

this,

the cause at this day

is

denieth to take up the ordinance

whatever the hindrance was

it

mat-

fereth not; our brethren have a manifest one, an invincible one, one that

all

ven cannot remove

for

them

to

do

men on earth, nor angels in heafor it is God that created light, and

the

without

it

God*."
ought

The

question however,

to act hypocritically

led by the

word of God

would but prove them

light,

and make them sinners before

unfaithful to themselves,

not,

is

whether a person

we

but, whether

to receive those as

are compel-

members, who

do not fulfil its directions, and give

" we have no light therein,"

in our estimation,
this as a reason,

BuNYAN

also says,

"the person that

member

stands by that, a

the visible, nor yet of the invisible.

is,

but not made so by baptism

saint before, else he

is

of no church at

ought not

to

be baptised

to

neither of

all,

visible

saint

he must be a

for

he

visible

Baptism

be baptised.

makes thee no member of the church, neither particular

nor universal
it

neither doth

it

make

thee a visible saint

therefore gives thee neither right to, nor being

bership at

all

:"

Baptism

is

"none of

those

of,

mem-

laws, nor

any part of them, that the church as a church should shew

her obedience by

I find not that baptism

is a sign to any
" If water baptism,

but to the person that is baptised J

as the circumstances with which the churches were pes:"

tered of old, trouble their peace,

wound the consciences

*Bunyan's Confession of faith, andraisonsof hispractice,

p. 128, 135, 136, Svo.

Ed. 1769.

ibid.

p. 130.

^'c.

Works,

vol. I.

Xp. 155, 156.

; ;

15
of the godly, dismember and break their fellowships,

an ordinance,

althou()h

shunned:
anon,

it is,

for the present, to be prudently

shew

for the edification of the church, as I shall

is to

be preferred before

it |;."

Dr. James Foster, who pleaded

the

same cause

in

sermon on " Catholic Communion," raised the controversy

afresh,

and used arguments similar

to those of

Mr. Hall

but though Dr. Foster's popularity and talents were of a

distinguished order, yet his system

made no

lasting im-

pression on the public mind.

After that time mixed communion seems to have been

commonly defended on the ground, that a person who
himself

believes

have been baptised, ought to be

to

admitted to the Lord's Supper by those

who may not

think his views of baptism correct either with respect to

the

on

mode
this

Baptists

In opposition to arguments built

or subject.

Mr. Booth

basis,
:"

in

wrote his ''Apology for the

which he pressed

opponents with the

his

consequence, that in consistency with their method

reasoning, they ought to receive those

of

who were acknow-

ledyed to be unhaptised : an inference which at that time

very few were bold enough to admit.

When Mr. Robinson

appeared

in the field,

he con-

structed his argument on a ground considerably different

iVom that of any of

his predecessors

and Mr. Hall

dis-

tinctly states that his work " rests on principles more lax

and latitudinarian than

to adopt."

it is

in his

power conscientiously

(Terms of Communion, Pref.

j).

ix.J

But he takes the consequence which Mr. Booth pressed

on those who contended for mixed communion
he admits that

we may

receive those

in his

to

institution

in force, yet

day

are unhaptised,

be such; and that although baptism

knowing them
still

who

is

an

baptism and coramunioH have

no connection whatever.
This theory places the inquiry on a basis, which, though
t ut siipru,

j.

136.

10

we

not altogether new, yet,

was never so boldlj

believe,

at present.
The
we have now to examine lies essentially in
if we make the New Testament
this single question
our rule, ought the church to be composed of persons who

and

forward as

brought

distinctly

subject which

If the rule once given to the Church, once

are unbaptised?

acknowledged

universally obeyed, and

may be passed
But

be

to

still in force,

Mr. Hall's theory may be admitted.

over,

then, the consequence will necessarily be, that the

New Testament

as the rule of our

conduct in the church,

immediately become a useless book.

will

ble authority can

we

aside one of

plain and universal

its

we plead

shall

to the spirit

its

attach to

For what

directions, if

its

possi-

we can

commands?

sanction in favour of any thing contrary

and taste of the times, when

that according to the

New

should be baptised, but

it

may be replied,

Testament, church members

it is

now acknowledged

that such

antiquated practices are not suitable to modern days.

plan

this

set

In vain

we have no ground

of reasoning

left,

On

except that

of mere expedience.

The whole

spirit

of the argument against us, strikes at

the root of every thing by which both dissenting and pro-

Charges of assump-

testant churches are distinguished.

tion,

of

Had

and of intolerance, are plentifully

These we consider not at all formidable.

infallibility,

heaped upon

us.

our forefathers been awed by such accusations, their

posterity might
perstition.

have been wearing the chains of su-

still

The dominion

of truth and evidence disdain

We assume nothing

such attempts to confine their sway.

we
we mistake

but the right of doing what

New

Testament.

volume,

we

we ought

If

fiud

in the

regret our misfortune: but the principle, that

to follow that infallible rule as our guide,

can never give up.

For

this principle

should be reviled for maintaining

we

commanded

the sense of the sacred

it is

we

plead: that

we
we

nothing new; but

defy the ingenuity of any one to shew,

how

christians

17
of any description can form a church according to the

New

Testament, without being liable to similar charges,

from those who may choose to attack them.

When we urge the directions and precedents of the

Testament

in favour of

met by the

reply,

ought not

to

adopt a plan which

drawn by other

sions

Roman

New

are sometimes

is

and the

is,

you

contrary to the conclu-

A reply

people'.

result

which would serve

Catholic in opposition to every Protestant argu-

ment against Popish

The

we

doubtless you think the inference cor-

'

but others think differently'

rect,

our practice,

authority.

question of the tendency of any opinion must in

the end

become a question of experience: but

in the pre-

sent instance, there are manifest consequences which

Many

ought to anticipate.

we

think (we doubt not sincerely)

mixed communion would promote our common cause.

They imagine that it would bring a numerous accession of
that

Paedobaptists into our congregations and churches: and

this expectation increases the earnestness with

plead

for

Lest,

it.

which they

however, we should suppose, that

their earnestness for the admission of persons unbaptised

arises

from indifference to the institution of baptism, they

assure us,

that indeed they are Baptists,

indifferent to

During the period of

Lord.
its

what they think

favour

may be

a duty which

is

and are not

command

the

the

of

discussion, their zeal in

preserved alive by various causes; but

let the controversy pass

that baptism

is

not

calls

away

now

let it

be generally admitted,

a term of communion

that

it is

a person's attention only as an indivi-

dual, but at present has no connection either with the right

or

privilege of being a

there

with

is

it

member

as ready an access to

of a church

and that

communion without

and what must be the result ?

it,

as

It will soon

be

considered a very unfortunate thing to have any discnsaion excited

about an external

rite.

Those who are so

deeply impressed with the propriety of believers' baptism,

18
that they cannot be satisfied without

obtain peace of mind.

less

be advised

will

it,

to follow the dictates of their conseiences,

that they

But though the Baptists

be gratified by such occurrences, }et

will

its

influence, that they

will

hearing their peculiar sentiment defended,

doubt-

they embrace

if

with ardour the system of mixed communion, they

so neutralized by

may

wiil

be

be afraid of

lest

any thing

who are
may continue for a

should be said that might hurt the minds of those

not Baptists.
time, but

it

Such a

state of things

cannot be permanent.

tutions of the

Lord

debate respecting

it

Either, one of the insti-

will

disappear from the church; or the

will

be revived. Churches composed of

persons whose sentiments

widely

differ,

long in peace, except one of the parties

never continue
is

so decided a

minority as to be kept entirely in the back ground.

When

the English Baptists began to explain and defend their sentiments, they found
for the

mon cause: and

will

it

necessary to act by themselves, both

enjoyment of peace, and the promotion of a comthe consequences of the present discussion

be unlike those that have gone before,

if

our brethren

are not ultimately convinced, that, unless they are dispos-

ed to sacrifice their principles, they must continue

reproach and persevere.

to

bear

CHAPTER

II.

ON THE STATEMENT OF THE CONTROVERSY.

Mr. Hall

acknowledges

point

the

that

debate

in

between the advocates of open communion, and those

who oppose
tism a

is

it,

Term

of

the only question

to he

fairly stated in the

Communion," and

work

"Bap-

entitled

that " the question

and

whether those who are acknoxoledged

is,

unbaptised ovght to come to the Lord's Table." (Re-

To

ply p. l.J

this explicit

concession

we

particularly

request the reader's attention.

The

inquiry next in order ought to be, by what rule the

now

question, and the only question

termined.

by the

If

New

be de-

in debate is to

Testament, we then ask,

does that volume sanction the admission of the unbaptised

to

communion

quire

is,

If

it

evidence that

controversy

will

we ought

be finished.

sufficiently justified in

of communion

does, all that

for

reasonably re-

and the

admit them,
it

does

not,

maintaining that Baptism

no one who has read the

we

are

is

a terra

New

Testa-

pretend to deny that the members of the Primi-

ment

will

tive

Churches were baptised

esteemed essential

we

to

If

we can

are referred

to

to

communion

and that

baptism was

in the apostolic age.

any other authority than the

.

c2

If

New

20
any reasons for admitting- "those who are

Tcstameut, or

to

acknowledged

to be

there,

we

object

is

wibaptised" which are not to be found

Our

our leave of the controversy.

shall take

not to follow the wisdom of man, but the direc-

To use the words of Dr.

" desist from expatiating- further on

word of God.

tions of the

Campbell we
the absurdity of

with which the

shall

making

New

that a doctrine of the Gospel,

Testament does not acquaint us

commence

a christian institution, which did not

till

or

after

the decease of the last of the Apostles." *

But though Mr. Hall grants

debate

general view which

work now mentioned.

ed,

scarcely

is

in

given of the controversy in the

The

outline which

is

there sketch-

The

needs either explanation or defence.

the controversy,

parties in

the question

that

he finds great fault with the

correctly stated,

is

was observed, are Pcedo-

it

The

baptists on the one side, and Baptists on the other.

p;eneral sentiments of the Paedobaptists on the subjects of

Baptism and Communion are

first

noticed

and then, the

general sentiments of the Baptists as a body, on the same

points

and the controversy

parties, both with respect

Here

it

classes

was

that arose between the two

to

baptism and

to

to

be unbaptised,

believe, that admitting the unbaptised is not according

to the direction of Christ,

tles

two

some oppose the admission of Pasdobaptisls

communion, because they consider them

and

communion.

stated, that the Baptists are divided into

and the practice of

his

Apos-

others are willing to admit them, and plead for their

admission by various arguments.

By
though

this

statement

it is

following

him step by

ought not

to

He
is

Mr. Hall

is

much

offended

and

not desirable to protract the discussion, by

step, there are a

few things which

be passed over in silence.

objects, in the first place, to the account

given of the sentiments of

Led. on Ecc. Hist.

the

Baptists,

Vol 1. p. 103.

which

It

was

^1
observed,

that

view, the subjects of baptism

their

in

should be believers, that the ordinance should be administered by immersion;

"and

and not before, they

then,

consider such persons properly qualified, according to the

for the reception of the Lord's Sup(Baptism a Term of Com. p. 11, Jirst Ed.) But,
we arp told, "the last position Mr. K. is aware is not
maintained by the Baptists as such, but by a part of them

NeMT Testament,

per."

only

it

may be doubted whether

the majority. &c." {Reply p. 2.)

was altered

this "position"

it

be the sentiment of

In the second edition,

manner

in the following

as a body, they believe that such persons are not

according to the

fully qualified

New

till

"and
then,

Testament, for the

reception of the Lord's supper." {2d. Ed. p. 11.)

this

would not remove Mr. Hall's objection,

alteration

since

the

But

passage

continued

still

to

state,

the

that

mixed communion Baptists are a minority of the denomination.

It

was not suspected that on

difference of opinion, since

ledged

all

we

that

Communion,

stated.

this point there

Mr. Hall had

fully

was any
acknow-

In his treatise on Terms of

he has described the sentiments of the

Baptists, he adds, " On this ground they have for the

MOST PART

after

confined their

own persuasion,

communion

in which, illiberal as

to persons of their

it

may

appear, they

GENERAL PRACTICE of the Christian TForW, ^c. (p. ll.J "The advocates of strict communion are the most numerous it is the GENERAL PRAC-

are supported by the

TICE of our Churches." {p. 12.

Agreeably to

statement, he afterwards speaks of strict

the sentiment

of "the

MAJORITY

this

communion

as

of the Baptists"; and

adds that he has 'presumed to

resist the current of opinion*

In the preface to his Reply, the same thing is
clearly confessed. " From the appearance of Mr, Bunyan's

{p. 87.)

treatise, entitled

Water Baptism no bar to Communion^

of the celebrated Mr. Bobinson, a

to the publication

22
whole century elapsed, with few or no

check the

eftorts to

progress of the prevailing system, which had gained so

Mr. Booth's writing, that he

firm a footing previous to

defence of that practice,

felt

no scruple in entitling

An

Apology for the Baptists.

have carried

to

The majority appear

with so high a hand, that the

it

CHURCHES who

his

FEW

ventured to depart from the established

usage were very equivocally acknowledged to belong to the

general body,

and seem

to

have been content

purchase

to

peace, at the price of silence and submission."

Preface

p, 11, 12.)

Thus we

when Mr. Hall wrote his Terms of

when he wrote the Preface of his
"
Reply to Baptism a Term of Communion', the strict
Baptists were acknowledged to be the majority.
But
when he was writing the second page of his Reply, his
see,

that

Communion, and

also

changed, and, the ** position" already noticed,

he says, " Mr. K. is aware, is not maintained by the
tone

is

Baptists as such, but by a part of them only

doubted whether

Let the reader keep

in

may

it

Hall why " Mr. Booth

felt

[strict

no scruple

in entitling

communion]

An

his

Apology

which was, the ' firm footing"

Baptists'',

he

of
view the reason given by Mr,

defence of that practice

for the

THE majority"!

he the sentiment

it

obtain-?

by the prevailing system

and compare it with the
" it is but just however to remark,
following passage
ed

that this disposition to eidarge

zans,

not

is

engaged

in

peculiar

to

minate his performance

know

number of his partiT

Mr. Booth when

defending a thesis, about which the Baptists

had long been divided, chose

(Reply p.

the

this writer.

2.)

How

An

?/i

the

same

spirit to deno^

Apology for the Baptists."

these differences are to be reconciled

not.

Mr. Hall adds, "Our author proceeds

arises a controversy

between the two

to observe,

'Here

parties, not only

res-^

pecting baptism, but also respecting their conduct to each

23
Where,

other on the subject of communion.'

let

me

ask,

are the traces to be found of this imaginary controversy

between the Baptists and Pajdobaptists on that subject ?"

(Repli/ p. 3.)

We

been agitated

wherever Paedobaptists have sought admit-

tance among-

attempted

been

answer, wherever the question has

Baptists

wherever their

them

to introduce

which had not

mixed communion.

in the practice of

have

friends

into churches

Such circum-

stances have frequently taken place, and they have seldom

produce some degree of discussion.

failed to

Mr. Hall
to

"what are the names of the

asks,

what publications did

it

dobaptists are "parties" in opposition to our views of

munion he himself acknowledges afterwards

has

"no doubt

quiry"

to

favour of his

the publications to which

we need mention

DEFENSIVE

that the

gave

it

Booth's Apology for the

proves all that we have

only

That one work

fully

In the Preface, Mr. Booth says, "

stated.

the

sentiments would be in

As

opinion, p. 10.
birth,

Com-

he says, he

the result of an accurate and extensive en-

into their

Baptists.

and

parties,

That the Pae-

give birth ?"^. 3.

Author takes up

it is

his

entirely on

pen

for

not the principles and practice of those professors

had

who

are invidiously called Strict Baptists, been severely cen-

sured by

MANY THAT MAINTAIN,

and by some who deny

the divine authority of Infant Baptism, these pages would

never have seen the light."

Mr. Hall continues

his

attack

informed us at the distance of a few

baptists in general

believe that

who

we may indeed

easily conceive of

this

lines,

are not baptised.

with us for deeming them upbaptised

author had

that the Paedo-

If

to

come

to

this is correct,

their being offended

;

but

how

our refusal

admit them to conomunion should become the subject

of debate,

" If this
it

"

none ought

the Lord's table

to

is

is

utterly mysterious." (p. 3.)

is

correct"

not correct!

Does

Mr. Hall mean

If

not,

it

is

to say that

Mr. Hall was

either

24
incorrect

when he wrote

on Terms of Communion", or a

*'

change in the sentiments of the Paedobaptists

" have

that the Baptists

stated,

fined their

communion

in which,

illiberal as it

own

ilistinctly

part con-

for the inosi

to persons of their

may

has taken

There he

place since he published that work.

pe"suasion,

fhey are supported

appear,

by the general practice of the christiari world, which,

whatever diversities of opinion may have prevailed, have
pretty generally concurred in insisting upon baptism as an

INDISPENSIBLE PREREQUISITE
(

Tet^tns

the Lord's table."

to

Again, he confesses that the

of Coin. p. 11.)

conduct of the baptists arises

**

from a rigid adherence to

a principle almost universally adopted, that baptism

under

all

circumstances,

a necessary prerequisite to

is,

the

Lord's Supper." (p. 12.)

But, says Mr, Hall in the latter part of his sentence,

how our refusal to admit them [the Paedobaptists] to

communion should become the subject of debate is utterly
mysterious." The mystery is easily explained
the Paedo^'

baptists have taken two grounds of

argument

in general

precede

they have agreed with us, that baptism should

communion, but they

say,

this

so far, as to

make a

essential

the ordinance.

to

ought not

immersion

Hence
that

This

They do not

not necessary

they complain of us,

the
is

is

sprinkling of

the ground of

intolerance,

many

to its

administration.

is

Christian

which are preferred against us

we would

their practice to be
:

;able

principles,

amount

baptism, the two parties

but because we cannot go

length, they instantly see the consequence,

own

the

give up our sentiments and

and allow

might unite very well

baptism.

of the charges of bigotry and

is

if

baptism

say,

but they maintain,

because we cannot admit

Infants

of which

be pressed

profession of faith, and immersion,

cannot be administered by immerssion

that

to

a separation of communion

this

that on their
is

unavoid-

Others have adopted the wider theory of out

25
author; that joining iu coinmunion neither supposes a

person

have been baptised nor the contrary

to

Mr. Hall

believes that this

of the Panlobaptists.
short time

for

has been adopted only a

it

manifestly not the sentiment which

they have been accustomed to profess

whether

their consideration,

from those of

the Pajdobaptist

all

and

in admitting

as far depart from the principles of the

as

and

the opinion of the majority

If so,

is

it

is

it,

New

it

deserves

they do not

Testament,

Churches of the

Reformation.

Mr. Hall thinks proper

pecting communion existed

and

in that only."

call

" the dispute,"

"the truth

to add,

could the ivriter he ignorant of

it,

nor

What Mr.

3, 4,)

not easy to determine

is

is,

the dispute res-

own denomination,
Hall may

our

in

{Reply p.

that

but I shall

only observe in addition to the evidence already adduced,

that no one acquainted

since the year 1G44,

confession of faith,

with

when
is

exposed them
If
will

the

excited

Mr.

history of Dissenters,

of communion, have at different

attention

of the Psedobaptists,

all

is

admitted, the christian world

the churches of which

overturned.

He

seems

consequence when writing

first

work.

ken

if

it

and

to a variety of censures.*

Hall's principle

undergo a complete Revolution

nearly

their

ignorant that their opinions and

practice, on the subject

times

the

the Baptists published

He

to

it

and

the

basis of

composed

will \s9

is

have completely seen

his introductory

there says, {p. 12.) " I

be possible to bring

it

am

remarks

this

to hi

greatly mista-

to a satisfactory issae.

without adverting to topics in which the christian world

n</e John Goodwin's Water dipping no firm footing for churc'
commuuioD, or considerations proving it not simply lawful, but necessarjf
also in point of dnty, for persons baptised in the neic mode of dipping to
continue communion with those churches, or embodied societies of saint*
of which they were members before the said dipping, &c. Lond. 105*
And, a long answer to the question " Whether it be our duty to seek peaCff
with the Anabaptists," in Baxters Life and Times, by Sylvester, part S,
p. 181. Aho, Cotton Mather's Ecclesiastical History of New England,
(book vii. ch. A.) for a view of the subject taken by the American divines
and, Dr. Mason on Commnniun, p. 2al.

26
nre

interested than

riot less

we

elusions
partial

the

in

If the cou-

appear on imfollow that

will

it

communion have

pre-

Christian Church."

In

respecting terms of

a wide extent

to

Baptists.

to establish

be well founded,

inquiry to

serious errors

vailed

the

endeavour

shall

prosecuting this design, he begins by an attack upon us

we

are

plainly

be the

to

but the above passage

sacrifice,

first

shews that we are not to be the

To

last.

say

therefore, that the Paedobaptists " have no interest in the

inquiry

"

(jtj,

which we plead

for strict

it

is

The

absurd.

principle on

communion, they have asserted

with( ut number; and

can be proved that they " have no interest in the

s a scriptural
before

before us

9. )

inquiry, " they

principle, times

must unsay, what

and

confessions

their

elementary works on the subject of theology, have said in

every variety of lorm
sition

and a doctrine

in

complete oppo-

what has been admitted with unprecedented

to

universality,

must be brought forward,

as the

happy

dis-

covery of modern times.

That the Paedobaptists and ourselves

both the mode and subjects of baptism,

They

present purpose.

either

have,

differ
is

respecting

nothing to the

or they have not

founded their churches on the professed principle, that

Mr, Hall has

baptism ought to precede communion,

confessed that this was " a principle almost universalbj

adopted"

interest in

how then can he affirm

the inquiry", when one

principles of their churches

theory

is

received

that they

of the

" have no

constitutional

must be surrendered,

if his

In the Apostolic age, Mr. Hall confesses no such thing

existed as an unbaptised

Member

of the Church,

In the

succeeding ages prior to the introduction of Popery, he

acknowledges that the unbaptised were not admitted,

At

the Reformation,

the

principle acted

purest ages was again recognised in

churches

all

upon

the

the Protestant

and the Non-conformists so generally declared

27
their full .icquiescence in
find a single exception.

no interest

it,

in tlie inqiiiry"

that

it

would be

"have

with Mr. Hall, they assert^

if,

that partakiTig" of the Lord's

to

cliflicult

then, the Paedobaptists

If,

Supper neither supposes a per-

son to be baptised, nor the contrary; they will indirect terms

oppose a principle on which their churches have generally

been founded; and render further evidence of their being

j)ariies entirely unnecessary.

Undoubtedly

and

who agree

it

with him,

Hall,

if all

this

TJut that is impossible. It is deeply engra-

in the records of

Should
that

would be very agreable to Mr.

to those Paedobaptists

was forgotten.
ven

it

time

be said that

and cannot be denied.

this relates to a point of

History,

does not decide the question of right, and that the

it

now comiug round to Mr.

reply, if so, we admit that one of

new

Pjedobaptists are

Hall's

system

the aspects

Ave

of the present controversy will be changed

sequence
result

will be, that

we

shall

we

have

is to

the institution

itself.

but the con-

soon arrive at the predicted

contend not only for the place

to

have

which baptism

shall

in the christian

Church, but

for

Mr. Hall objects to our detail of the difterent reasons

advanced in favour of mixed communion and says, " of
;

this diversity in the

mode of defending our

practice, the

writer of these pages confesses himself totally ignorant^"

(Reply p.

4.)

He

goes so far as to say,

*'

it is

easy to per-

ceive that the alledged disagreement in our principles

is

We

shall trouble the reader

a mere phantom" {p. 5.)
with only two remarks on these singular assertions.

First,

Mr. Hall seems

self said in his

He

" because

hijs

have forgotten what he him-

Communion."

(Pre/, p. ix.)

why he does not

notice

the

Mr. Robinson on mixed communion, which

dinarian, than

^y

to

of

there assigns a reason

treatise of
is,

"Terms

own

it

rests

it is

on principles more lax and

in his

confession,

latitu-

power conscientiously to adopt."

he and Mr. Robinson

" coD'

28

structed defences" of their

'

ples

common

sentiment on princi-

" Baptism a

In

dissimilar."

totally

Term

of

Communion" it was stated, that the friends of mixed

communion pleaded for their practice by various arguments; among others, "that as their Paedobaptist brethren
think themselves baptised, they are willing to admit

them

on that ground, since they do not object to baptism

itself,

but only

differ

from others

This

ordinance."

Hall has quoted

is

*,

in the circumstantials of

the

one of the two passages which Mr.

and the only one

mode

of a diversity in the

to

which

his

charge

defence can attach

of

for

remaining quotation contains his own theory on the

the

subject.

In a letter intitled

"A modest

plea for free communion,"

who

said to be written by a venerable minister

years ago,

is

the following passage

be considered, who

Baptism

and not one

himself,

Most

else

we

right of private judgment, and go about

Popish

infallibility

is,

certainly every

for the other

many

died

" besides,

be the judge of what

to

is

in this dispute

it

should

or

not

is

man for

destroy the

to establish

against the liberty of the Gospel.

a
I

have no business with any man's conscience but

my own,

unless by endeavouring better to instruct

where

it

Paedobaptist brother

is

appears to be wrong.

If

satisfied in his mind, that

my

he

is

it,

rightly baptised, he

is

so

fa himself, and while the answer of a good conscience

attends it, God will, and does own him in it, to all the

ends designed by

it,

so that while he considers

him under the same obligations

and

life,

not he

Lord

as I consider

commune

r The

with

signed " pacificus".

lished his "

Apology

as laying

to holiness of heart

my baptism
me at the

date of this letter

it

is

to

and

do me, why should

table of our

common

June, 1772, and

it

is

In the year 1778 Mr. Booth pubfor the Baptists ;"

in that

work he

frequently refers to this letter, and quotes part of the

A sligJU

eiror excepted, which occurred probably im transcribing.

29
Seep. 59 of the

above passage.

79

edition, p, 78,

first

In his " Defence of Paedo-

of the edition printed in 1812.

baptisni examined," in answer to Dr. Williams, printed

in 1792,

he again refers to the same passage,

Subsequent
stated the

same mode of reasoning

Toleration,"

(See p. 50.)

Mr. Booth's "Apology," Mr. Robinson

to

first

lowing passages; the

in

of which

first

his

" Doctrine of

There we

printed in 1781.

is

find the fol-

quoted, chiefly for

the purpose of enabling the reader to perceive the

*

bearing of the second.

and agreable

We

affirm that

it

is

full

just, right,

to the revealed will of Christ, that

Baptist

Churches should admit into their fellowship such persons

as desire admission on profession of faith and repentance,

although they refuse to be baptised by immersion, because

they sincerely believe they have been baptised by sprinkMiscell. Works, Vol. Ill, p. 154.
"
we do not plead, then, for the admission of
Again,

ling in their infancy."

such a person, because

for in our

own

we

think he hath been baptised,

opinion he hath not

he has been baptised, and

but because he judges

we have no

authority to deprive

him of the right of private judgement, but on the contrary,

we

commanded

are expressly

to allow

inform us on what subjects

and

it

refer to

is

all

possible that he

lie is

may

the above authorities

liberty of

Mr. Hall has a right

determining for himself." (p. 168.)

to

him the

" totally ignorant

;"

not have had occasion to

;

but

it

cannot be forgot-

Mr. Robinson's
work, but that he distinctly professes " to answer" the
ten, not only that

treatise of

" the

he expressly refers

late venerable

Mr. Booth

writings of both these eminent

"mode

men we

;"

yet from the

learn, that

the

communion in their day,

adopted by Mr. Hall.

Avas

of defending" mixed

very different from that

Mr. Fuller furnishes us with

similar evidence,

Letter on the subject of Communion.

grounds of argument
says,

to

"As

far as I

in favour of

am acquainted

in

his

Speaking of the

mixed communion, he

with them, they

may be

30
reduced to two questions, which are these; 1

any

such instituted

Has baptism

connexion with the Lord's Supper as

2

to be a prerequisite to it?

Sujyposing

it

has, yet if the

candidate consider himself as having heen baptised, ought

for his being treated by a christian

church as a baptised person and does not an error con-

not this to

suffice

cerning the

mode

within the precept of the

New

forbearance, and allows every

in his

own mind

questions,

?"

Testament which enjoins

man

to

be

fully

persuaded

The second

Letter, p. 9.

of these

we had

contains precisely the reason which

Mr.

stated.

come

or subjects of Christian baptism

knowledge of the

Fuller's extensive

state

of religious opinion few will deny; and he expressly

us he was

tells

" acquainted" with an argument, of the exist-

ence of which Mr. Hall confesses his ignorance.

This is a suflTicient refutation of his assertions, that?
" whatever prejudices our cause may sustain, it has not

been injured
tion":

by that which results from intestine dissen-

and "

disagreement

it

in

is

easy

to

is

a.

mere phantom "{Reply

V5.)

p.

But, Secondly, even

if I

had not been able

such clear evidence of a diversity

communion from
I

the alledged

perceive that

our principles

in the

printed authorities,

have asserted would

the truth of what

have been aflected.

not

heard the arguments which

still

to refer to

defence of mixed

have mentioned

in

I have

"Baptism

a term of communion," urged against the practice which I

have advocated.

I have also heard other arguments, less

honourable to the cause of mixed communion pleaded in

defence,

its

but which in a cool investigation of the sub-

ject did not appear deserving of examination, and were

passed over without notice

and therefore

in the consci-

ous integrity of not having alledged phantoms,

my

reply

is

"

What

but facts,
I

have

close this chapter by a short sketch of

a few

brief.

I have written,

written."

We shall

31
of

leading

the

confesses

Mr.

of

features

baptism was,

that

universally retjuired previous to

days of the apostles

He

system.

Hall's

the

in

primitive

church,

communion, and that

in

the

was indispensihle as a term of

it

fellowship

hut

purpose;

and he contends, that a church which acknow-

that

now

is

it

nut necessary for

that

ledges baptism to be one of the ordinances of the gospel,

may

and an ordinance of perpetual obligation, not only

neglect to require obedience to it; but

New

doing by the directions of the

His system

is

communion as

fulfilled this j)art

he

rejects,

ought

to

we ought to receive those to

who believe themselves baptised,
their own estimation they have

that

not,

baptised,

on the ground,

that in

of the will of Christ

aware of
receive

But

invalidity.

its

for

this

argument

is

that we

it

knowing them

the unhaptised

be

to

provided we believe that they are conscientious

so,

refusing to be baptised, and that

in

in so

justified

is

Testament.

obedience to

to receive those

manifest that

we ought

the exhortations in

who

such

all

weak

are

the faith

in

exhortations

were aheadij baptised, and

admit them

to

New

the

Testament

though

respect those

who had

in

been

it

is

who

previously

admitted into the Christian Church,

Again,
in order to

Mr. Hall has thought proper

to assume, that

prove the necessity of baptism prior to the

" it is necessary to shew

reception of the Lord's Supper,

the depcndance of one [institution] on

merely

that

injoined

they

both

are

but that the one

clearly

is

the other." {Reply p. 13.)

So

and unequivocally

that neither the autho-

by which they were enjoined,

nor

the obligation

which they are placed,

not

prescribed with a vieic to

rity

to attend

the other;

to

nor their
both,

perpetuity,

nor the order in

nor the constant practice of the

whole apostolic church, either separately or unitedly, justify

us in requiring what the apostles required,

be proved,
with a

if it

cannot

that either of the ordinances was prescribed

vietv to the other.

S'2

Finally,

Mr. Hall requires, that "some declaration

of scripture be exhibited, which distinctly

celebration of the

from a misconception of

its

nature,

tismal ceremony." {Rephj p. 14.)

upon
is

to

applied to

Such
such

is

many

mode

Thus we

the bapare called

because

of reasoning which might

in

order

practice of the
parts of our

it

be

other things with equal force.

the system which our author has avowed

are the singular

produce,

who

person,

has omitted

admit the unbaptised to communion,

not prohibited!

the

jjrofiihits

Lord's Supper by any

proofs that

to

Apostles

plan.

justify
!

In the

our

we

and

are required

to

conformity to the

We

now proceed to other

mean time, we request the

reader seriously to consider, as a general inquiry affecting

the whole of the system which Mr. Hall advocates,
far the reception of those to

communion who

edly unbaptised, can agree with

are piofess-

the eulogium which

Apostle Paul bestowed on the Corinthians,

praise you, brethren, that ye

remember me

how

"

the

Now

in all things,

and keep the ordinancesy AS 1 delivered them unto you"

1 Cor,

xi, 2.

CHAPTER
Mr. Hall's reasonings,

in

III.

the second and third

chapters of his reply, examined.

SECTION

I.

SlatemCnt of ihe principle on which

sion

depends,

3Ir.

th^ present discus-

Hairs alignments respecting our

Lords Commission examined.

The

second

and third chapters

of Mr.

Hall's

work

and laboured discussion, professing to

examine the arguments alledged in " Baptism a term of
contain a

long

Communion"

in favour of the connection

New

positive institutions of the

between the two

Testament

but in reality

passing them over.

For the purpose of keeping

the controversy,

it

work

to

that in the

in

view the true state of

necessary to remind the reader,

is

which Mr. Hall replied, the

New

Testament representations were brought forward as the

ground of our argument
the commission which the Lord
;

gave
tism

to his disciples
;

the

first

adduced

as the Laio of bap-

practice of the Apostles was exhibited

it

as a

the Law
the baptism of the primitive
was observed " was the terra of professing

Commentary on
Christians,

was

34
by the special appointment of the Lord himself;""
and after various observations on the subject, it was added,
**
From the whole, we derive one o5i'fo?;s principle, that
their faith,

baptism was intended to be a

the Christian Church." {Baptism

tion with

This

21.)

is

a brief outline of the

ment, terminating

S^c.

p. 17, 18,

part of the argu-

first

a proposition generally allowed, and

in

which,

if

quence

in the present discussion.

From

evidence of connec-

visible

not proved to be a mistake,

the place assigned

which the Lord gave

to

of material conse-

is

baptism in the commission

to his Apostles,

it

unless
to

can be proved, either, that

it

be a

visible

body of Christians
situation

is

and of

was not intended

it

his

being united with the

or, that the

design and place of the

by time,

altered

This

still.

is

it

ought to hold the same

difficult

made

so evidently the impression

on the minds of serious thoughtful meu, that

a

and

evidence of a person's entering upon a

Christian profession,

institution

pre-

necessarily

ceded both Church membership, and Communion

it

would be

thing to find a single conscientious professor of

the Gospel,

who acknowledges the perpetuity

to come to the Lord's

that would attempt

of baptism,
table if

he

considered himself to be unbaptised.

The great point contended for in the second Chapter of

" Baptism a term of Communion," is, that an examination
of

New

Testament language, and

New

Testament

facts,

conducts us to the principle already mentioned.

It

is

worthy of remark, that Mr. Hall does not take any notice
of this principle

his object

was a very

different one

he

employed himself in

criticising

used

but the hinge on which the whole

in that chapter,

some of the expressions

of that part of the discussion turned, he thought proper

to overlook.

But

unless

he can disprove

this principle,

he must defend his system on a ground on which he

has not ventured to place
principle, however,

is

it,

or his cause

so direct an

is

ruined.

The

inference from the

35

New

Testament representations that

kind of

bear every

will

it

may raise objections

system and prejudice may obscure it
Ingenuity

fair investigation.

against

it

but

so evidently the native dictate of the sacred vol-

it is

ume, that

false

it

despises opposition

and however

may be

it

trampled upon, will in time regain the ascendancy.

On

tills

point the strict Baptists and the great body of

the Paedobaptists

have been hitherto agreed

mixed communion

Baptists are left in a singular predica-

and the

ment, pleading for a right of access to the Lord's table

on a ground, which no thoughtful mau, who believes the

venture to act upon for

perpetuity of baptism, dares

himself.

This single consideration suggests a general, but a

He

powerful objection against Mr. Hall's reasoning.

and receive them as un-

says, receive the Pasdobaptists,

baptised

but

we

we receive them

how can

ask,

in that

they come, and

Character

Before

how can

this

can be

done, each party must agree to a plan, which both admit

is

contrary to the tenour of the

To

the

that

are the same

communion,

but what

we admit

of

conditions

.position,

.salvation

.before

New Testament,

bring them to this point, Mr. Hall lays

Communion and

so that nothing
is

down a

is

to salvation.

essential

of

essential to

But

he must prove that we are

this position,

not bound to follow the directions of the

New

Testament

as rules of conduct, except in relation to duties which, in

the strongest sense of the terms, are essential to salvation.

Unless
is

this

can be demonstrated, Mr. Hall's argument

of no force

rule, it

for if the will of Christ

ought to be our

ought to be obeyed in the least as well as in the

greatest of his

commandments

and

that,

we

not because

esteem both to be of equal importance, but because we

are bound to obey whatever

So

the

we

question which

revealed

will.

settle is,

not whether baptism

that

clearly perceive to

d2

is,,

or

is

be

his

we have

to

not essential to

30
salvation
it

whether accdrdiug

but,

the will

to

of Christ

ought not to precede communion.

In many parts of Mr. Hall's work, he labours hard torepre-

sentus as unchristianising the Pidobaptists

cannot compel us to give up what we think

so that if h^

he

truth,

is

will

at least, to the utmost of his power, exhibit us as objects

Every one who has read " Baptism a term of

Communion," has had the opportunity of seeing, that the
argument is there placed on a footing perfectly consistent
of hatred.

with our maintaining a good opinion of

from

us.

There

tlie

mode and

we

defective that

We have

said,

is

it

saying,

your

is

do not

that

feel

S^c.

we

so

in either party to

the

command

let us

p. 40.) hut vfe have

are at

all

of the

walk in that

path which we each think most agreeable to the

tdiment;' {Baptism

is

incompatible with your Salvation.

but without judging each other,

we cannot

profession

"it would be criminal

give up what they are convinced

Lord

differ

think you wrong both respecting

subjects of baptism and therefore

with you; and

unite

who

a wide difference between saying to

is

the Paedobaptists,

thtise

New

woif said,

Tes-

and we

compelled to say, that the

Psedobaptists are cut off from the hope of Salvation, as

Hie result of any of the principles which

we have advo-

cated.

Tlie reader ought to be reminded, that it

makes some of
said

is

in connection

one of those representations on which Mr. Hall

witli

his

most severe animadversions, that

it is

"here I am particularly desirous of not being mis-

understood

it is

the principle for

which I now contend,

my own

and not

its

application

observed,

if

the Paedobaptists could prove infant baptism

to be the will of Christ,

to

ideas."

"still

the principle

remain unimpeached, that baptism ought

once held, as a

it

is

and could convince the Baptists that

they have been in the wrong,

it

For,

visible evidence

Christian Church, {p. 21, 22.)

will

to hold the place

of connection with the

In consistency with

this

n?
our endeavours were chiefly directed

seutiment,

3Ir. Hall's |3osition that the

ted to the Lord's Supper

upon ground held

in

against

UNB\1>TISKD might be admitand the argument was built

common

by us and the general body

That the difference between us and

of the Piedobaptists.

them produces a separation of Communion we own; and

ive

contend that

them

it

ought to do

so,

not bepause

baptism, but because

we

conceive, that

we

think,

by maintaining

in

to

not only

faith,

but

our churches the ordinances of the

Lord, as they were

first

delivered.

Mr. Hall

we

will

criticises

bound

are

adhere to what we believe is the primitive rule

by being ourselves baptised on a profession of
also

we

a fatal error, in consequence of their views of

in

The

expressions which
examine; and hope we shall

be able clearly to show that his interpretation is not the

and that there is no connecof fair exposition

result

between the reasonings of the

tion

Baptists,

strict

and

the inferences which he draws from thenj.

The

first

Mr. Hall

thing in order, and the

is

first

the Laio of Baptism, as

that

is

noticed by

appears in the

it

commission which the Lord delivered to the Apostles.

Mr, Hall says, " we are as ready to allow as Mr.

Kinghorn, that baptism was enjoined by the Apostolic

commission

we

are perfectly agreed with

the law of baptism, and

nature,

and inforce

as he himself

its

authority, by the

institution,

its

same arguments

The mode,

would employ."

and the perpetuity of the

him respecting

accustomed to explain

are

the subjects,

he states in the

manner that is done by baptists in general, *' But," he

says, "where the inquiry turns, not on the nature or
obligation of baptism, but

of another institution upon

in

what

manner

the

on the necessary dependence

it,

we

are at a loss to perceive

quotation" [of

" applies to the question before us.

able

how any

baptism, than

thing more
its

is

To

the
us

commission]

it is

deducible from

inconceivthe l^w of

present and perpetual obligation,

The

38
existence of

law,

establishes

the

obligation

correspondent duty and nothing more."

of

Reply p. 16,

17.

Here

is

it

granted, that the law of baptism establishes

we may know what

law be considered. The first thing

a correspondent duty
is,

let

the

strike the

that

mind of an inauirer

is,

that

that duty

that will

accordino- to the

appointment of Jesus Christ, baptism was

to

be adminis-

tered to those who believed the Gospel

and that the
Apostles were then directed to teach them " to observe" all
:

Lord commanded them. If there

be any meaning in words, baptism was the first ritual
service which the believer was required to obey.
Whatthings, whatsoever the

ever Ordinances the Lord had

commanded

his disciples

he himself places after baptism

observe" besides,

"to

and no

ingenuity can reverse the order.

Previous to a person's submitting to baptism, he might,

or he might not

know

the extent of that obedience which

the Gospel required of

circumstances in which

he had professed
tised in his

its

professors,

according to the

he had been placed

his faith in Christ,

name, he then

but

when

and had been bap-

visibly subjected himself to his

to obey him in all those commands which followed the acknowledgement of him aa

authority, and

was bound

his Lord.

Thus

in the

law

itself

we

see the priority of baptism,

both to a regular connection with the Christian Church,

and

to the Lord's Supper

it was prescribed in that order,
and we have no choice we must either give it that place,
;

or practically declare that

we do

not act according to the

One

direction of the primitive institution.

of the ordi-

nances must necessarily precede the other, and no one

will

contend that on any interpretation. Communion was

intended to come before baptism.

Mr. Hall has asserted that a participation of the Lord's

supper neither implies that a person

is

baptised nor the


n9
contrary.*

If the

Xew Testament
who

the baptism of those

implied

is

for

Institution in

how

taken as our guide,

is

are found at the Lord's supper

could they

come

which a profession of

there to partake of an
his

name

they have not attended to that ordinance

if

from the

nature, as well as

its

preceded a

necessarily

the Christian

Church

Oi^der of its

visible,

supposed,

appointment,

connexion with

declared

He who denies

is

which, from

the

perpetuity of

baptism, must be encountered with arguments which establish

tian

but

continuance,

its

ordinance

is

if its

perpetuity as a chris-

acknowledged, the inference

is

imme-

diately seen, that he cannot consistently come to the Lord's

table, unless

he believes himself baptised.

Persons who

have not had their minds directed to the subject, or have

been influenced by those, who thought baptism of no con-

may have

sequence,

acted otherwise; but these are excepti-

ons of a class against which no rule could

If the Apostolic Commission
of our conduct,

the rule

ought
For,

it

make

provision.

of any importance as

also follows that no

church

unbaptised person to communion.

receive an

to

is

the qualifications of candidates for Membership,

if

be examined by the directions given by the Lord himself,

how can

it

be imagined, that submission to an institution

which he commanded
is

not requisite.

his

disciples universally to obey,

The Church depends

for

its

existence

on the Appointment of Christ, and the commission contains

its

constitutional

principles.

No

class of persons

whatever, has any authority to unite and act as a Church,

except according

to

the rule which

he has given

and

any member is justified in objecting to the

admission of " those who are acknowledged to be unbap-

therefore,

tised,"

because

it

would be

in manifest opposition

to the

direction of the head of the church.

*

" It neither implies that they [the Psedobaptists] are baptised, nor the
it has no retrospective view to that ordinance whatever."

contrary

Tenns of Com, p.07

40
The commission was designed

be a guide

to

Apostles, as Ministers of Christ, and unless

that

it

no guide

is

succeeding Ministers,

it

their

is

ever difference of opinion has arisen

Whatconcerning the mode

and subjects of baptism, the order

which the ordinances

duty to examine
.

to

the

to

be proved,

it

and

it,

of the Gospel are placed,

how

tisedl

whom

Whenever

follow

its

in

directions.

as intelligible as ever

is

by

are those guided

receive persons

to

it

they

who reverse its

it

was; but

and

directions,

acknowledge are unbap-

plairily

they cease to folio nv the prescribed order,

they ought to shew that the authority of the commission has

passed away, so that they have deviated from

only because

it

no longer demands

directions,

its

their attention.

In the progress of Mr. Hall's observations we meet

with a singular deviation from the

when he

is

fair

use of the term

laic,

criticising the expression before quoted, " the

law of baptism."

At

the

first,

he seems

to consider

it

as

meaning, the direction and command which were contained in the commission

so far he

is

we

him on

find

failed

adds, " if

in

we

all

to

wa^

He

denominations

a certain part of their duty"

are immediately

this

different ground.

acknowledges that " Paedobaptists of

Lave

But before he has

the intended sense of the term.

finished his page,

connect

" but" he

conclude from thence

Communion, we
of members who have

that they are disqualified for Christian

must seek a church which

consists

failed in no hranth of their obedience

quently despair of finding

Spirits of just

men made

fit

and must conse-

communicants apart from the

perfect.

law with the utmost rigour, turn

it

Examine
on

the idea of

all sides,

and

it

will

present nothing beyond the obligation to a certain species

of conduct, so that

if

Paedobaptists are really disqualified

for the Lord's Supper,

tljan

their

must

insist

it

must be

for

some other reason

non-compliance with a law, or otherwise

upon the

refusal of every individual

we

who has

not discharged all his obligations.^' Reply p. 17, 18.

41
In

I understand

this quotation, (if

him) he argues as

if

the debate related to a question of obedience to the whole

moral law, and

as if perfect

of reasoning-

we must

obedience was the required

But according

of membership.

condition

to

that

has laid down as a rule of conduct in his Church

in

every instance

for the

it

same reason,

mode

not urge any thing that Christ

;

since

may be alledged against us, that

" we must insist on the refusal of

every iifdividual who has not discharged all his obli^ations"

we must

Thus we are

left

not follow

of no

is

without a rule, for a law that

ed

it,

his

Apostles did obey

on perfection

we

in

Jesus Christ

practical use.

however, did give such a precept

it.

and because he

enjoiii-

we "must insist"
Communion, because

If then

the candidate for

consider the Apostolic Commission a law

they doubt-

upon

less did the

same

as such,

submission to the authority, of their Lord.

in

for

it is

Let then Mr. Hall apply

we

they acted

his objections

are content to take our

pany.

clear that

to their

it

conduct

share of blame iu such com-

SECTION

Mr. Hairs arguments,

II.

respecting Apostolic Precedent^

examined.

The

next subject of discussion

and a laboured attempt

is

made

is

to

Apostolic Precedent,

weaken

its force.

It

camiot be denied, that the Apostles and primitive Ministers did

require baptism, previous to

the Lord's Supper,

Mr. Hall therefore thinks it necessary to account for their

conduct in a manner that may sanction the admission of the
unhaplised to communion now, and thus liberate us from
all

obligation to

apology

we

are

period no good
nature,

that

follow their example.

told,

it

men

In

the style of

" that" [as to baptism] "

at

that

entertained a doubt respecting

was impossible they should, while

it

its

was

exemplified before their eyes in the practice of the Apostles

and Evangelists

that he who refused to abide by the

decision of inspired men. would necessarily have forfeited

claim to be considered as a christian

his

state of things has arisen, in

the doctrine of baptism has been involved

that

some of the best men put a

new

in obscurity

different construction

on

and

is

the language of scripture from ourselves

great presumption

that a

which from a variety of causes,

that

it

to claim the same deference with the

Apostles, and treat those

who

differ

from us on the sense

of scripture, as though they avowedly opposed themselves

to Apostolic authoriity." (Rejjly

j^-

20.)

From

all

which,

it is

designed that the reader should draw the inference,

that

we need not

follow

the Apostles as our guides, but

may admit the unhaptised, although we are certain that

they did not.

Again,

it is

asserted, that

we

**

think differently of the

43
;"

from what the Apostles thought

asked, whether we " form the same judg-

state of the unbaptised

(p. 27J and it is

ment of the present Padohaptists as the apostles would

have entertained of such as continued unbaptised in their

day."(j[;. 2(3, 27.)
Farther, that " to be unbaptised at
present

is,

mural view, a very distinct thing, and

in a

very different consequences, from being in that

involves

predicament in the times of the Apostles."(p. 29.) Hence

Mr. Hall would bring us

to a confession, that his practice

"is not opposed to Apostolic precedent, because that

precedent respects a different thing" {Reply, p. 30.) Thus

he

attempts

cut

to

the whole

off

endeavouring to persuade
Apostles
it

is

after

all,

by

stroke,

the conduct of the

that

us,

at

not a precedent for us

and although

shews how they understood and applied the command

respecting baptism, yet we are not

are not in

way of

bound

in submission

same path, because we

the same circumstances.
A short and effectual

to their authority, to

walk

in the

freeing ourselves from obligation to follow their

example,

in every thing,

which does not

suit our inclination.

All these statements are mere palliations of a line of

conduct, undeniably opposed to that which was universal
in Apostolic times.

before quoted a
(in the

little

But let us attend to the expressions

more particularly. " At that period"

Apostolic age) " no good

respecting
possible

its

This will be granted by

the

primitive

victions.

sion
liis

a doubt

who

it

that

was im-

all

parties,

are satisfied that

church ought not

"That

of inspired

he who refused

men would

but

Evangelists."

offers

no reason

their views agree with

to
to

follow

their

con-

abide by the deci"

necessarily have forfeited

claim to be considered as a Christian,"

who

it

was exemplified before

practice of Apostles and

their eyes in the

those

entertained

nature," [viz. of baptism]

they should, while

why

men

is

true

and he

should at 2iresent refuse to abide by their decision, no

church would admit on any pretence whatever.

But

if

the

44
decision of the primitive ministers was of such consequence

known and acknowledged conduct

then, is their

Was

nowl

authority

conduct

the

of no

of the Apostles

designed to be the guide of the Church, and intended to be

held forth as an explanation of the will of Christ
it

not ?

If

was we are bound

it

how

see by repeated examples,

to follow

they interpreted a general

and perpetual rule of their Lord

we

are satisfied

same.

If

we do

in

on examination

if

consistency bound

we

not,

and

they did require baptism prior to

that

communion, we are

or was

whenever we

it,

to require the

declare that inspired guides are

of no use.

If the conduct of the Apostles ought not to be

our guide,

let

it

opinion of

its

importance,

be proved that we are mistaken

trouble of examining that which

On the

in our

we may not have

that

the

after all of no authority.

is

plan for which Mr. Hall pleads, the rule of our

conduct

expediences

we

gone,

is
;

and the

are left to

New

act

on a system

Testament rather exhibits the

Antiquities of the Christian Chui'ch, than an example

the Apostles followed

of

Christ and

how we

how

are to follow

them.

But we
in

are told,

*'

that a neio state of things has arisen,

which from a variety of causes, the doctrine of baptism

has been involved in obscurity."

is

true

when

it is

those

In a certain sense

who acknowledge

the divine appointment and

the permanency of baptism, argue that

to

Communion, and

that

is

it

is

not necessary

Church fellowship, even where

the perpetuity of baptism

that a person

this

a new state of things indeed which has arisen,

is

believed,

baptised, nor

neither supposes

the contrary.

This was

not the case in the primitive times, nor in any succediug

till
we arrive at discoveries of modern date,
" Some of the best of men put a different construction on
the language from ourselves :" suppose they do, are we
bound to adopt their " construction " in opposition to the

period,

f'

overwhelming evidence

iu

favour of our seutiaicuts

"
I

45
But, liow far liave " the best of

men put

a ilKTerent con-

struction on the language from ourselves ?" All

when

the permanency of baptism,

who

alloA^

minds have not

their

by controversy, have sliewn, that in one

important particular they did not entertain " a doubt re-

been

aft'ected

nature

specting

its

Saviour

that

However

but saw

;"

generally agreed

precede

should

it

they dilTered
;

in

was the design of the

it

Lord's Supper.

the

other things, in

calls their attention is,

appointed
the

fore us in

in

which

lu other words, ought the pattern

have

whether the institution ought, or

ought not to be excluded from the place

first

this they

and therefore the plain question which

New Testament,

to

was

it

laid be-

be regarded, or disre-

garded.

This single enquiry

properly considered, would bring

if

the discussion to a point.

New Testament

If

it

can be proved, that

pattern of a church

is

We

loth parties will be instantly silenced.

plead the authority of the Sacred volume

show of reason plead

not be

shall

because we can no longer

able to maintain our position

and those baptists who adopt

tlie

not to be copied,

his theory,

for the

and Mr. Hall,

cannot with any

baptism of believers by

immersion, as an ordinance of continued obligation

for

arguments it will be alledged, that on

their own confession, " a new state of tilings has arisen ;"

against

baptism

their

all

is

not requisite for

its

original purpose,

old state of things in the primitive church,

For

if it is

not necessary to preserve an institution, in

primitive station,

be preserved at
Again,

**

we

it is

do

why

not possible to show,

think differently

we form

sent Psedobaptists

state

should

of the state of the nn-

as

the

same judgment

the Apostles

"

of the " present

and (he

of the pre-

would have enter-

tained of such as continued unbaptised in

The

it

its

all.

baptised from what the Apostles thought

asks,")

and the

of no force.

is

Paedobaptiats,"

their
is

day?'

not

the

4(>

same with

of those

that,

who

refused

to

be baptised in

the Apostles' days, for the parties stand on very different

ground.

The " present

do regard the

will

Pajdobaptists " plead,

that they

of Christ and the examples of the pri-

mitive Church on the very point of baptism

believe the law has been obeyed

they

that

own

in their

persons,

that in their view, the rite of baptism ought to be admi-

nistered to infants, and that their

mode of

administration

Such an opinion places

them in a very different situation from those who were
unbaptised in the Apostles' days, and who "refused to

is

according to the will of Christ.

abide by the decision of inspired

fies

we have

us in treating them as

follow, that

we

men ;" and

done.

it

But

himself calls a "

the Psedobaptists are concerned in

narrow bounds, for

lies iu

approach to the Lord's table

justly

is

not a

we

blame us

us both.

does not

nor admit that what Mr. Hall

nullity," should take

the place of a

divine appointment in the Church of the Lord.

been baptised

it

are to accept a good man's mistake for an

ordinance of Jesus Christ

question

fully justi-

is

if

So

far as

this discussion,

the

they plead that their

regular, because they have

answer, on this ground you cannot

Baptism

If they renounce

is

a term of

this

plea,

term of Communion, we

Communion with
and say, baptism

will

common with Mr. Hall, and ask both

meet them, in
parties,

what

evidence they can produce, that the unbaptised as suck,

either ever were, or ever
as

members

New

of the

were designed

to be, considered

Christian Churich, according to the

Testament.

In further apology for mixed communion Mr. Hall

says, " our practice is not opposed to Apostolic precedent
because that precedent respects a different thing" (p. 30J
Had he told us how far Apostolical precedent differed

owe to the command

of Christ, we might have formed a judgment of his
statement with more accuracy. Is baptism now a different
from that obedience which we

still

47
thing-

in

formerly

nature and

its

Is

its

end from what

New

than those which are mentioned in the

If

why attend

it is,

to

any instance

in

it

no Scriptural reason can be given

no other

is

are not

to

worth consideration.

Testament?
In that case

for regarding

it,

we

and

If Apostolic precedents

be viewed as interpretations of the

Christ by which

was

it

be administered for other purposes

to

it

in

we have no

prece-

for precedents

which

are to be guided,

dent for the baptism of any person

of

will

respect " a dilferent thing," from what can

take place

Thus by a rapid but certain process, the Christian Church will be spared the
labour of discussing one controversy, for he who takes
Mr. Hall's view of the case, may avoid the trouble of
inquiring into the subjects, or mode of baptism in the

among

us, are of

no authority.

primitive age, since he supposes that so different

situation

precedents

Thus
single

our

is

from that of the early Christians, that " apostolic

respect a different tliingT

the debate

is

brought

to a close

example of baptism applicable

we have

not a

to our circumstances

and the command of Christ, explained only by instances

which have nothing

common

in

dern times becomes useless

tably follows from

with our situation in mo-

An

inference which inevi-

Mr. Hall's principles; which

be

will

embraced by many and which also clearly shows

that those who plead for mixed Communion on this ground,
readily

readily allowed, and

if

That
it

that apostolic precedents are

a moral view a

"

very

different consequences

to

this is

not the

is

because men's common sense

It is also said, that

important part of

theory, an

are sacrificing to a favorite

their system as Baptists.

will

not their design

effect,

it

not suffer them to believe

become of no

use.

be unbaptised at present

distinct

is

be,

will

thing and

is

in

involves very

from being in that predicament

in the times of the Apostles."

( 2ie/>/y.

presents this to our notice, and offers

p. 2D.)
it

Mr.

llall

as an alternative.

4d
we may

that

thinks

it

He who

is

is

either

deny, or affirm

we suppose

ed in a different moral state from

But he who admits

day.

the

who believes

man ought

is

mean

to

to

be baptis-

not in the situation of those

acknowledge that

his infant

and

if

he does not

baptism

is

unscriptu-

he pleads also that their dictates were obeyed

to

in the

was baptised before he came forrequest communion. We differ from him we ac-

required order, that

ward

He

obey the dictates of inspired men.

to

pleads that they have been obeyed,

ral,

not be consider-

unbaptised in their

that he has been a subject of that riteirt

a valid form in his infancy,

who refused

will

tlie

escape.

opposition to the

permanency of baptism, who

confesses that erery conscientious

ed,

we Cannot

unbaptised at present, from

dictates of the Apostles,

and doubtless

it,

a dilemnia from which

knowledge, and

lie

we do

not intend to represent the point

of difference as less than

of the difference

is

has ever been, but the nature

it

very distinct from what

it

would be,

if

he denied the authority of the Apostles. For

treat him, not

as a person

this reason we
who designedly opposes the

dictates of the Apostles, but as a mistaken

But

good man.

neither will his excellencies in other parts of his

still,

character, nor our favourable opinion of him on the whole,

fulfil

the duty he has mistaken, or set aside our obligation

to attend to the will of Christ,

as he delivered them.

and support

his ordinances

Granting, then, that on the prin-

now laid down, there is a difference in amoral view,

between one who allows both the perpetuity and order of
the first christian rite, and another who opposes apostolic
authority
still it will not follow that we ought to deviate
from the conduct of inspired guides. Those who do not
agree in the interpretation of a law, may agree that the
ciples

authority of the lawgiver

attention

but that

is

demands

their

most respectful

a very different thing from their

uniting in a declaration, that since they vary in their interpretation, they will pursue the

same course

as if the

law

49
Yet

had not been enacted.

consequence

this is the

which Mr. Hall's reasoning" would conduct

If he

that

be baptised,

was then essential

to

the

demonstrated that

we

was agreeable

there would

salvation,

colour of probability in his reasonings

mand

it

but only because

given,

liad

required their

apostles

because

not

which Christ

to the rule
it

prove

coukl

disciples to

but

be more

till it is

clearly

are not bound to adhere to the com-

we

of Christ as a rule of conduct, except so far as

believe

it

essential

is

t6

us.

to salvation,

against apostolic precedent

is

all

that he has said

His reasoning

nugatory.

proceeds on the assumption, that the apostolic precedents

were precedents only on one point, and are no authoritaexcept when the converts of our time are

tive guide,

situation similar

to

the examples in

the

illustrations of

throughout

them

New

of the

Testament were intended as

succeedinji; ages,

all

we

apostles,

there were

are safe in following

we

agree to admit

will

all

that, in

the days

exemptions

special

general rule, which required church

tised,

a
if

au institution which was to continue in force

and when Mr. Hall has proved,

in

But

primitive age.

those of the

members

to

to

the

be bap-

similar cases

on that

authority.

Could

it

be proved

apostolic times,

baptism was in force only in

that

or only in the case of those

who turned

from Judaism, or Heathenism to the profession of

anity (as

Mr. Emlyn supposed), Mr. Hall's argument

would have weight.

But

baptism

if

perpetual obligation, and especially

believer,

dents

as

he has acknowleged

demand every good man's

the

will

of his

is

an ordinance of

if it is

the duty of every

it

apostolic prece-

is,

attention

Lord

them he sees how it

they shew what was the

In

was understood and applied

situation of baptism in the apostolic church

not authorise

him

they bring the

he has, or has not conformed

question home, whether

to

Christi-

to conclude, that
li

but they will

ho follows apostolic

50
example,

if

he adopts an order opposite

he can

to all that

find in the sacred volume.

In

all

we

cases where

precedent,

we must

are left without either precept or

act on such general principles as ap-

pear to us to be correct, and conducive to the purpose

have

in

view

but when

we have authorised

dents before us, reasoning

we

that

is

we

inspired prece-

wasted in the attempt

to

shew,

are justified in proceeding in a contrary course.

For if this can be proved, a similar train of argument may

be applied to other things, and we ehall soon be told,
thdit

new cases have

set aside the application of o/cf rules.

SECTION

Mr.

HaWs

assertion

mined and

that

we assume

exa-

infallibility,

repelled.

We are told,

"that

it is

same deference with the

difier

III.

great presumption to claim the

apostles,

and

who

to treat those

from us on the sense of scripture, as though they

"
avowedly opposed themselves to apostolic authority.
Again "the psedobaptists," Mr. Hall tells us, " avow

on
he asks, " on that

their inability to discern the justice of our conclusions

the subject of baptism," and are they,

account, to be viewed in the same light as though

intentionally rejected the decision of inspired

men ?

they
(

Re-

ply p. 20, 21.) These are strange sentiments from the

pen of a Protestant Dissenter. Wherein do we " claim
the

same deference with the

them our guides, and

apostles

in following their

Is

it

in

example!

making
This

is

61
we

grant, deferring to their authority,

ino-

the same deference with them

but

That we do not view the " pa3dobaptists"

light as

not claim-

the reverse of

is

it

it is

in

the

it.

same

though they intentionalhj rejected the decision of

inspired men,"

evident from Mr. Hall's book.

is

our treating "those

who

A.s to

from us on the sense of

differ

though they avowedly opposed themselves

this high sounding charge does
to apostolic authority,"
Mr. Hall more hurt than it does us. Will he allow it,
as

scripture

when applied

whom

treats those with

and openly confess that he

he cannot unite, " as though they

own

to his

case,

confess, I should

be

much

he answer, that he applies

munion with such

to

assume,

as

it

surprised, if he did.

whose introduction

them

to

would be

this

right to object to a

the church, would in

into

Should

who oppose com-

to those only

would come

we have no

that

authority"?

to apostolic

avowedly opposed themselves

man

our view,

subvert the regard due to one of the institutions of Christ,

and

to a principle

sacred

every christian society.

in

he thinks

we

are

which, in our esteem, ought to be held

it

commanded

and with
different

" whether

right to say,

to act

thus, such

we

this persuasion,

manner."

In
it

his

our opinion, and

is

Has he a
?

Does

none but himself, and those who adopt

it

patent for

belong to

his sentiments

has thought proper to say, in his treatise on

Communion,

defence,

are not at liberty to act in a

Reply p. IIG.)

the sole application of this principle

He

own

be true or not, that

Terms of
who

{p. 93,) that, " in the eyes of the world,

judge by sensible appearances, and are strangers

to subtile

distinctions, such a proceeding[asthatof the strict baptists]

will

that

invariably

be considered as a practical declaration,

whom

the persons from

christians

".

If so,

charge, that his

how

will

own conduct

separate

are

not

he clear himself from the

will invariably

as a practical declaration, that

he separates are not christians".

E 2

they

be considered

"churchmen from whom"

52
we

Further,

hility

We

are charged with an assumption of Infalli" set up a claim to inspiration, or at least to

such an infallible guidance in the explanation of Scripture

exempt from the 'danger of

equally

as

is

if

we examine

claim to

knowledge of
This
tion

can

is

accurately,

it

infallibility

amounts

to

more than a

and more than

On

mean ?

claim to inspira-

infallibility"

you claim

New

Testament

infallihility

any practical

to

for the exercise of

ment, are open to the same reproach.

therefore claim infallibility

he views churchmen "

New

Mr. Hall

in the establishment

same

we

any

Testarejects

does he

to

conclude that

light as

though they

Or, are

in the

may be

it

species of discipline on the principles of the

communion

of ap-

All our arguments for the

independence of our churches, and

the terms of

What

plan, there is an end

this

purpose; for against every such application

the pasdobaptists

"A

an absurd charge!

truly

plying a rule of the

said,

this extraordinary fact." {Rej}hj p. 21.)

to infallibility,

this

it

implies in

it

error or mistake

intentionally rejected the. decision of inspired

men

He

?"

opposes the dictates of the church of Rome, does he then as-

sume equal infallibility

own

applied to his

he

affix

it

He deems the charge invalid, when

how

then in

common justice can

?
He says, ( Terms of Com. p. 140.)
" cognisance of doctrine is justified by apos-

on others

the church's

tolic authority

reject; nor

case,

a heretic after two or three admonitions

is it

any purpose

to

to urge, the difference

between ancient heretics and modern,

to distinguish truth

of

infallibility.

of

difficulty

error,

While the

fundamental error

mining what

from

is so,

is

is

to

pretend

possible,

and the

affirms to

the

import

of

to the

revelation,

be insurmountable, ascribes

correct, h?is

the

difficulty of deter-

must be exactly proportioned

such an obscurity as must defeat

If this

or, that

a practical assumption

truth of the gospel remains,

ascertaining

which he who

is

to it

its primary purpose."

church a " cognisance of

53
<Ioctrine,"

and not of practice also

Or, does that cogni-

sance cease, when the point in question relates to the

Lord

positive precepts of the

Are we justified

in form-

ing a judgement on things which affect the expulsion of

an unsound member, or the

and are we

date,

we judge
-difficulty

from a practical application of

to refrain

what we conceive

to

an improper candi-

refusal of

be the direction of the Lord

the greater matters, and not the less

Can

If "the

of ascertaining the import of revelation" be "in-

surmountable," respecting the manner in which members

are to be admitted into the church,

an obscurity as must defeat

its

leave us without a rule, though

sion of Christ, and

we have both

situation.

have

(in

it

such

and thus

the commis-

it.

If Mr. Hall's reasonings are correct,

lar

"ascribe to

numerous examples which show how

apostles understood

the

it will

primary purpose"

We must

we

are in a singu-

not separate from others,

our esteem) mistaken the will of Christ

who

for if we

we are charged with treating them as though they

" intentionally rejected the decision of inspired men."

do,

We

must not follow what we conceive

dictates of inspiration

a claim to inspiration

for this,

it

be the clear
seems, is " to set up

We must not

"

directions and guidance of infallible

we

claim "

bility

infallibility,"

and even "

men

to

conform
;

for

if

wjore " than

to the

we

do,

infalli-

On

one occasion Mr. Hall can acknowledge that

" the church is a society instituted by heaven
it is the
;

visible seat of that

kingdom which God has

laws by which

governed are of Ins prescribing

the

purposes

which

it

and ascertained

limited

255, '256.

terms

it is

He

is

by

designed to
infinite

goes farther

still,

set

up; the
;

and

accomplish, are

wisdom." ( Reply p.
" he who alters the

of communion, changes the fundamental laws of

Christ's

kingdom.

ought,

in

order to

He

assumes a legislative power,

and

justify that conduct, to exhibit his

54
credentials, with a force

at

least

those

to

and splendour of evidence, equal

which attested the divine legation of

Moses and the prophets." (Reply p. 255.)

that the

has

It

seems then

Church has its laws, fundamental laivs, which God

and which ought not

^;;-e5cr6ef/,

it follows,

he altered.

to

from Mr. Hall's own statement,

tism never was a term

If so

either, that bap-

of communion, or, that he

who

introduced the UNBAPTISED, altered the terms of com-

munion, and ought

to those of

have exhibited credentials equal

to

Moses and the prophets

We certainly have

not heard, that either Mr. Hall, or any of his friends,

ever did bring forward such evidence
fore do no

more than examine the

terms which are

we read

therefore act on

who

But,

this,

the plan

there laid

Christ's
to

down.

the
find

Mr. Hall

AVe

we

grant,

communion, changes the

kingdom.

This

the

is

Mr. Hall's system, which

is

on the supposition that the terms are altered.

till it is

proved, that the original terms are altered by

the same authority by which they were enacted,

no reason for altering our practice

easy,

we

of no alteration of terms

alters the terms of

fundamental laws of
ground of our objection
formed

In that volume

recorded.

was a term of communion

that baptism

acknowledges
that he

thei'e

and we can there-

New Testament, for

we

see

and our defence is

for the crime alledged against us, " our enemies

themselves Leing judges,"

is,

that

we

refuse to deviate

Whether the
laid down by the Saviour.
who always themselves acted on our principle,
have given authority to those who live many years after-

from the plan

apostles

wards to act on a new system,

proper place.

will

be examined

in

its

SECTION

Mr. HalTs

IV.

his attempt

concessions

to

make

the

Apos-

tles

parties against us,

Mr

Hall has made explicit concessions respecting the

fact, that

the primitive converts were baptised prior to

their reception into

the christian church";

"the prior

claim which baptism posseses to the attention of a christian convert,"

for the

is

acknowledged

he does not " contend

propriety of inverting the natural order

christian sacraments"

**

it is

sincere believer to follow their

tive christians]

and

that,

at present

example

of the

the duty of the

[that of the primi-

supposing him to be clearly con-

vinced of the nature and import of baptism, he would be

guilty of a criminal irregularity
to

it,

who neglected

to attend

previous to his entering into christian fellowship."

Terms of Com. p. 71, 58.) He supposes his opponent

would evade one of his arguments by a distinction, and
would " affirm, that though baptism onght, agreeably to

the institution of Christ, to

of religion, yet

when

it

or mistake, the omission

prevent

PRECEDK

the other branches

from a misconception

is

omitted

is

not of such magnitude as

[the persons spoken of]

But should our author explain

to

from being accepted.

manner he
will not only coincide with us, but his argument for strict
communion will be relinquished." ( Reply p. 83.) Let
himself, in this

the reader weigh these concessions

claim"

"the natural

baptism has

a.

order of the christian sacraments"

" a criminal irregularity

in neglecting to attend to bap-

tism previous to entering into christian fellowship"

tism ought, agreeably

prior

to

bap-

tht institution of Christ, to

56
PRECEDE

the other branches of religion"

the inference?

What

then

is

That the two christian ordinances are con-

nected, that the " order" in which they are arranged

so

is

"natural," and the duty so clear that baptism " ought to

precede other branches of religion," that even Mr. Hall

compelled to confess

is

To

it.

say, that the obligation to

place baptism previous to communion, depends on the

supposition that

saying nothing
before
there

its

" nature and

its

is

understood,

soon as

this

**

no one would

their

nature and import"

understood, " he would

is

who neglected

criminal irregularity'

say,

concession which our author

that baptism
tion, clearly

has a

but as

to attend to bap-

shows the whole of his labour

for setting

whom

those

for

compelled to make,

prior claim" on the convert's atten-

*'

more than an apology

tion

is

till

be guilty of a

tism previous to his entering into christian fellowship"

The

is

import" must exist

for surely

no connection between the two ordinances,

a person discovers

**

nature and import"

can be perceived

it

is

**

to be

nothing

aside a divine institu-

he would introduce, he confesses

are nnhaptised, and he pleads for their admission in that

So

character.

that according to his system, Jesus Christ

gave a rule for the formation and regulation of

all

his

its

extent, and binding throughout

ages, but which his

church ought not to maintain.

church,

universal in

However

it

may be covered by words

that prevent

real nature from being perceived, yet the result of

it

its
is,

Jesus Christ

left in his

really, only

one

be

not of sufficient consequence to be preserved

in

his,
its

On

yet

is

church, nominally, two ordinances,

for the other,

though acknowledged to

primitive station.

every view of the subject, there

propriety of admitting to

been baptised,

if his

tent with the Gospel

prove from the

New

is

no doubt of the

communion a person who has

character and profession are consis;

but

it

is

a very different thing to

Testament, that the

title

of any other

57
person

is

The way we know

equally clear.

rigbt,

is

mind gain an instant preference

in every wise man's

were there no other argument than

this,

it

will

and

would have

great weight in determining him, not to hasard the adop-

which he would have

tion of a system, in

Testament

against him.

facts

the

all

If however,

New

Mr. Hall

should succeed in proving, that although according to the

" natural order of the christian sacraments", baptism has

a " prior claim" to attention, and "ought agreeabhj to
the institution of Christ to jtrecede the other branches of

yet that partaking of the Lord's supper neither

religion,"

supposes a person "baptised nor the contrary," he might so

far demolish the outworks of Christianity, that there

be no security

in

any of

would

The

exterior appendages.

its

Lord's supper also might undergo any alteration which fancy

if we attempted to appeal to the apostowe should be told that" apostolic precedent respected a different thing." The same mode of argument
that can remove an institution of Christ from its place,

might suggest and

;

church,

lic

and throw

it

back ground, may

into the

change that might be desired

the christian

maybe put

church

Mr, Hall attempts

He says " we

cases,

which agree

external

most

rite,

make

the apostles parties against

never submit

to

two

identify

nothing but the omission of an

in

while that omission arises from causes the

dissimilar,

contrary.

to

will

any other

on a new footing, and

modelled according to the taste of times

us.

effect

and the whole practice of

We

and

is

combined with characters the most

will not

could not bear those

refused to tolerate

conclude that because the apostles

that

the

were

evil,

they would ha^^e

good; or that they would have

comprehended under the same censure, the contumacious

opposer of their doctrines, and

whose only crime consists

one particular." p, 25, 2G.

What

he will

either

the myriads of holy

in mistaking

"not submit

their

to,"

men

meaning
or

in

"not

58
conclude,"
read

these

is

of no consequence to us

we

high sounding words,

but after

ask, does

we have
he then

believe that the apostles would have received the unhap-

If he does, where

iisedl

why does he attempt

with equal

is

his

proof?

force to

his

own opinion

contained in the above paragraph

the conclusion from

on

to fix a charge

it

is

If he does not,
us,

which attaches

The

supposition

an impossibility, and

Assuming

has no force.

for the

sake of the argument, that the apostles justified our senti-

ments respecting baptism, what evidence have we, that

they would not have required such as had mistaken
their meaning, to be baptised before they

none

had any further

Mr. Hall has produced

connection with the church.

nor have we any reason to think that candid

men

of any party, whose minds are not heated and warped by

controversy, would ever think of denying, that the apostles

would enjoin conformity

gospel as tliey delivered them.

to

the ordinances of the

Mr. Hall acknowledges

that this

was the conduct of the apostle Paul

when he

visited that city, he found disciples

and had been baptised unto John's baptism

thor pleads, that the apostle

and directed them

to

deemed

their

be baptised again

at

Ephesus;

who

believed^

yet our au-

baptism invalid,

in the

name of

Lord Jesus.
" The principle of open communion" Mr. Hall
*'

the

says,

would have compelled us to act precisely in the same

manner

as the apostles did,

circumstances."

The

had we been placed in their

reason of which

is,

that

*'

while

there was no diversity of opinion on the subject, the voluntary omission of the baptismal ceremony could arise from

nothing but a contumacious contempt of a divine precept,

of which no sincere christian could be guilty." {p. 24, 26.)

We grant,
baptist,

that in

this case,

Mr. Hall's principles a* a

would have compelled him to act as the apostles

did, not in

consequence of his principle of open communion,

but in spite of

it,

since at that time there

was no room

59
for

its

exercise.

But when the question of " opinion"

candidly examined, there

one point, the

fair consideration

ity of baptism, necessarily

New Testament for

to

little

of which

Is

"diversity" on
will

settle the

Every one who admits the perpetu-

present controversy.

ought

very

is still

acknowledges, that, taking the

our guide, the members of the Church

On

be baptised.

the pfedobaptists agree

this particular

Mr. Hall and

but here arises a difficulty

he

"nullity", and cannot receive

them as persons who are baptised they cannot come in
any other character, if they believe their own declared
declares their baptism a

sentiments

what then

is to

be done?

He

he sinks the authority of the

pleads that

may be received and thus

Lord's command, and annihi-

persons avowedly unbaptised

lates the use of apostolic precedents.

SECTION

Mr. Halts
tism

is

V.

misrepresejitations of the statement, that

Bap-

a term of christian profession, exposed.

In the chapter on " the terms of christian profession

and

communion pointed out

in

the

New

some expressions were used which Mr. Hall

turn

to

his advantage.

We

shall

notice

Testament,"
thinks he can
the passages

which he has attacked, and then how he has attacked

them.

The following paragraph contains three quotations,

which have excited the principal part of his opposition.
" In order to show that baptism is a necessary term of
communion, he labours hard to prove that baptism is a

60
term of profession.

'

he says,

It is obvious,'

'

that

their

baptism [that of believers] was the term of professing their

the same purpose, he afterwards adds,
that

To

by the special appointment of the Lord himself.'

faith

make a

pleased the Lord to

it

the fact

exists

still

visible ritual observ-

ance, the appointed evidence of our believing in him.

obedience to a

one supposes) yet

If

be not a term of Salvation (which no

rite

was ordered by the highest authority

it

as an evidence of our subjection [submission] to the author

of salvation,
Christ's

and a christian profession

own way without

he observes,

topic,

'

Recurring

it.'

made

not

in

the same

to

whatever may be the conditions of

a plain question

salvation,

is

which

here occurs,

is,

ought

the terms of christian cominunion to he different from those

of christian profession ? The only answer which one

would think could be given to this question would be no ;

communion must require whatever the Lord

required as a mark of christian profession ." {Reply p. 31,

Christian

32.)

The two

from

first

are taken

of the preceding quotations

Baptism a term of Communion,

the third

18,

from p. 20,

Let any reader, of common candour and common sense,

examine the expressions quoted by Mr. Hall, and

let

him

judge, whether in the sense in which they were obviously

used, they are not true.

Take

the

first

of them, that the

" was the term of profess-

baptism of the

first

ing their faith

by the special appointment of the Lord

With

himself."

other

the

conclusion

christians

New

Testament

examples which are there recorded

that the

as oar guide,

what

can we draw from the directions and

?

Can

it

be proved

Lord did pot require the baptism of those who

professed to receive his gospel

ed, yet

it

?
Or, that if it was requirwas neither viewed by the person baptised, nor

by the church that received him, as a

declaration, of his

making a

visible,

practical

' christian profession" in the

manner which Jesus Christ had commanded

Could these

61

we

positions be demonstrated,
to

change our ground, but

should be obliged, indeed,

baptism tvas necessary

than

on the

that " in the apostolic age,

salvation !" p. 43.

to

held a higher station

not attempted

this is

contrary Mr. Hull confesses

we

If so,

ever ventured to assign

and unless our author can prove, that

it

it
it

obtained such con-

sequence not from the appointment of the Lord, but from

some other cause, the obnoxious quotation, on

acknowledgement,

the second passage, " the fact

Take

make

pleased the Lord to

own

his

correct.

is

exists, that

still

Let

the appointed evidence of our believing in him, &c."

the preceding observations be applied here.

the

New

true?

Testament

If

be not,

it

for our guide,

New

which no candid reader of the

If

we take

not the proposition

is

Mr. Hall disprove

let

it

a visible and ritual observance,

it.

It

Testament

is

a fact

will think

of denying, that the baptism of a convert was viewed as

an " evidence" of
tution

dence of
nature,

what

is

the perpetuity of the insti-

if

an external, visible sign or evi-

But

was in

it

denied

and

baptism

if

its first

is

not now

appointment,

for in that case

which the Lord appointed

rite called

sed

it

faith, still.

is in reality

tion

faith

admitted,

is

it is

it is

its

in its

perpetuity

not the

institu-

nothing more than

by the same name, and attempted to be pas-

same

off for the

thing, but with

church was unacquainted.

which the primitive

So evident however,

is it

that

tbe institution can, and does answer the purpose already

mentioned, that
those

who

baptism

is

the universal sentiment expressed by

their duty, as the evidence

appointed them

That
upon

it is

are baptised on the profession of their faith, that

which the Lord hath

to give of their submission to his authority.

this is the ow/y evidence,

to give of their receiving,

was never contended

which believers are called

and professing the gospel,

but that

it

was required on the

one hand, and yielded on the other, as an evidence of

is too plain to

be questioned.

faith,

The commission and

the

62
directions which the apostles gave
verts

show

this fully

Paul makes
in a

and the appeal which the apostle

to his brethren at

forcible

to the primitive con-

Rome,

Know

"

manner.

sets forth the subject

ye not, that so many of

you as were baptised into Jesus Christ were baptised into

his 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." Rom. \i 3 4, In this impres-

sive passage,

they

knew

the baptism of the

Rome;, as an acknowledged evidence that

believers at

tion of the

the apostle appeals to

the ends answered by the death and resurrec-

Lord

not only that they believed

but the doctrine exhibited by the facts

the facts,

and "therefore",

in consequence of their faith, and as a solemn declaration

of

it,

they were ''buried with him by baptism unto death".

Such was the case with

christians of old

and the

in-

quiry naturally follows, whether our profession, and our

to resemble theirs. If obedience to the baptismal ceremony was not " ordered by the

baptism ought, or ought not

highest authority as an evidence of our submission to the

author of salvation,"

let it

be proved, either that baptism

was not designed

for this end, or that

nent institution.

It

fession

is

not

was

made "in

it is

not a perma-.

also stated, that a christian pro-

Christ's

own way" without baptism.

If this be an error, if Christ did not require a profession

to be made in this manner,
however is not attempted.

The
ceding
is

third quotation
;

the

is

let the error

of the

words are used

we

Of

This

same nature with the pre-

in

capable of the same defence.

be shown.

the same sense

Of

and

it

the term " profession",

soon have occasion to speak more particularly.

baptism as " a mark of christian profession," we shall
shall

only observe, that when Mr. Hall has proved, that baptism
was NOT required as a mark of christian profession,

we

will agree

no longer

to

defend the paragraph.

now remains

It

to

be shewn hoiv Mr. Hall has attacked

thtse passages.

He

new ground

begius by taking

be now says, " we

freely acknowledge that if the principle can be establish-

ed, that baptism

invariahhj essential to a christian pro-

is

the cause

fession,

we

pleading must be abandoned,

are

being confident that a true profession of the christian

inseparable from church communion." p. 32, 33.

religion

is

Again,

"now

the

that

profession of Christ

pensible term of salvation,

is

an Wi-

is

so undeniably evident from

the

New

like

an insult on the understanding of the reader." ;. 34.

Testament, that to attempt to prove

it,

seems

Here be conducts the unwary

reader, to a proposition of a
from
any
thing that we have stated.
very different nature

The

substance of what

ing to the

New

we had

alledged was, that accord-

Testament, baptism was required at our

entrance on a visible profession, as a testimony of faith in

Christ,
called

and of devotedness to him; and for this reason, we

the " term" and " mark of christian profession,"

it

Mr. Hall leads the

reader's attention

from

this object,

and insinuates that we make baptism essential to the

christian character

that " the necessary inference

the

is

hope of future happiness to members of

and that " the paedobaptists are
our own denomination"

restriction of the

on our principles cut

salvation

is

off

from the hope of eternal

confined to ourselves." (p. 36.)

life,

Since

and

it

is

never advanced such opinions as these,

we
may ask, on what ground they are so confidently charged upon us ? The answer is, on the applica^
tion which Mr. Hall now thinks proper to make of the
term profession. Time was, when he could use it in the
sense in which it has been commonly understood among
baptists, and in which sense we had used it.
He could

manifest that
the reader

on a former occasion, speak of " such as professed their

faith in Christ

persons

under the ministry of the apostles", as

who "were baptised on

that profession."

He could

64
" the profession required in a candidate

us, that

tell

fot"'

christian baptism involved a historical faith, a belief in

an

individual,

certain

illustrious

personage,

He

&"c."

could speak.of " ihe profession demanded in the baptism

it from "the faith required by
he called John's baptism " the rite intend-

of John", and distinguish

the apostles"

ed

anounce the future, though speedy appearance of

to

the Messiah", and christian baptism, " the ceremony expressive of a firm belief in an identical person, as already

He

manifested under that illustrious character."

when giving reasons why

then say,

could

the disciples of the

Lord were not baptised with what he

calls christian

bap-

tism, that " such as had professed their faith

in Christ

from the period of

not with-

out palpable

"By

his first manifestation, could

recommence that

incongruity

orthodox christians

union to Christ

is

distinguished by

it is

formed by

j)>'ofession."

uniformly maintained that

faith,

and as the baptists are

demanding a profession of

it

at baptism,

they are at least precluded from asserting that

have any concern in effecting the

question."

spiritual

fully

profession of faith was required, and was

But now he quotes a number of

us are of the same meaning

inferences he thinks

fit

to

But,

much

which a

given at bap-

which he

tells

and he charges us with the

draw from them,

as

ii

we were

deny the Christianity of those, who differed from

us in their view of the

ought

to

in

orice

texts in which the

words confession and profession occur,

to

in

show, that Mr. Hall could

acknowledge, that there was a correct sense

bound

to

Terins of Com. p. 38, 19, 20, 21, 42, 119.)

These passages

tism.

rite

alliance

manner

in

which such a profession

be visibly expressed.

argument proves any thing,

proves too

if

his

for

according to his own acknowledgement, the

it

baptism of the primitive converts was the commencement

of their j^i'^ession

so that

all

the passages he quotes, in

which the words ptofession and confession are used, relate

C5
who made their profession

to persons wliowerebaptised, and

at their baptism

and when these passages were written,

acknowledges that baptism

On

own system therefore,

mean different things by

his

ters

his

argument

is

either he and the sacred wri-

the same word, or the force of

against himself; for there

inspired writer

who

lie

teas essential to their salvation

is

not a single

enforces the necessity of a christian

who did not mean a profession visibly made by

But Mr. Hall does not mean a profession made by
since, in his view, baptism either may or may not

profession,

baptism.

baptism

be included in
tion

it.

If however, during the period of inspira-

baptism was always a part of christian profession,

it

remains with him to explain, how that ordinance, which he

tells

us was once essential to salvation,

such insignificance, that

church

it

now dwindled into

is

not to be retained in the

is

in its original station, and, that

" communion nei-

ther supposes a person baptised, nor the contrary

!"

So

that

according to his view of the subject, the religion of the primitive church has undeigoiie a complete alteration
tism does not answer

means a

its

different thing

original purpose,

now, from what

it

bap-

and profession
did in the time

of the Apostles

We

we

expressly stated, that

did not consider obedi-

be a term of salvation. In our estimation

therefore, baptism did not hold the same place that " pro-

ence

to

rite to

fession" does in the estimation of Mr. Hall; for he says

that

"the profession of Christ

is

an indisputable terra of

His design, however, is to involve us in the

charge of making these two the same thing, in direct oppo-

salvation".

sition to the statement already

his reasoning

obedience to
fession".

a rite to he

He

mentioned; for the whole of

depends on the supposition, that we affirmed

what he now calls a." proargument which we urged " turns

essential to

says, the

on the principle that baptism

is

a term of christian profes-

True; but in what sense? that baptism

(jj. 36.)
was the appointed, visible manner in which Christ directed

sion",

66
the christian professor to testify his faith in him: and can

Mr. Hall deny

this?

We

never imagined that good

men

might not through prejudice or misapprehension mistake

the directions of the

New

Testament; we explicitly ac-

knowledged this, and therefore placed our arguraenton aba-

common

sis

to the great

body of professing

But

christians.

when

the inquiry concerns the obedience due to institu-

tions,

which in their nature are external and

and

in

question then

what are the directions of the

is,

tament concerning them?

it is

Tes-

him, and prior

in

to a regular connection with his church;

tution was designed to be perpetual,

having required

New

If Jesus Christ did require

baptism in the visible profession of faith

/lis

visible things,

which we can have no guide but positive law, the

and

if

we must

a rule for us

the directions

or,

the insti-

either say,

which he has given us are so defective that they are

sufficient for our guidance.

pleases; the

first

in-

Mr. Hall may take which he

destroys his system, the second exposes

true nature.

its

It also deserves attention, that

all our

observations on this

part of the subject, were drawn to a point in one comprehensive, " obvious pri7iciple;" which

is

that

"baptism was

intended to be a visible evidence of connection with the

{Bapiism a term of Com, p. 21.) This

christian church".

principle of

(and especially

itself,

planation given of
Hall's inferences

it) is

when taken

a complete contradiction to Mr.

and the terms in which

that the system for which

we

it is

couched shew

pleaded, had no alliance with

The

those violent charges which stain his pages.

ple
all

is

will

perceive,

that the

argument hinges on the truth or falsehood of

If it

is false, let its

be shown what the

be
for

true, all that

its

princi-

brought to a practical issue, and when he has said

he can, a calm inquirer

ple.

with the ex-

we

ask

is,

princi-

falsehood be proved; and let

institution

designed purpose.

this

whole

was intended

for.

But

it

if it

that the ordinance be regarded

Here however, Mr. Hall has


07
deserted the

Far from meeting the argument, he

field.

leaves his readers without iuformation whether baptism

answers any important purpose or whether

;

tiquated ordinance of

The

authority,

little

"position" that the terms of

and

it is

not an an-

less utility.

communion and of

sal-

vation are the same, was briefly examined in our former

work,

19

p.

20. We

denied

its

few queries and observations, as

accuracy, and stated a

difliculties

arising from

Part of these remarks Mr. Hall quotes;

the position.

he calls them extraordinary and intreats the reader to "pause

and meditate'
sent",

we

"The

design of producing them at pre-

are told, "is to

shew the tendency of the

and the reader is requested

ple";

to consider

princi-

"whether they

are susceptible of any other sense than that the terms of sal-

communion are commensurate with each

But if any of our readers should suppose

vation and of
other", {p. 38.)
this, after

tracts

he has read the paragraph from which the ex-

we should

are taken,

either be sorry for his preju-

dices or lament his incapacity.

One of the difliculties arising from the "position" already mentioned was, " if baptism was once necessary to communion, either

was then essential

it

which was not essential

To

munion?

this

to salvation,

Mr. Hall

replies,

to salvation, or that

was essential

age, baptism was necessary to salvation", (p, 43.)

then succeeded, "if

salvation,

To

this

because

how can

it

it

[baptism] was then essential to

it is

unnecessary to attempt

admitted by Mr. K. himself; and

terous to attempt the proof of what

parties", p. 43.

ing

it.

It

This

A query

be proved not to be essential now^l

our author says, "

it is

com-

to

"that in the apostolic

is

is

it is

it,

prepos-

acknowledged by both

evading the inquiry, not answer-

would nof have been "preposterous"

for

Mr.

Hall to have shewn how, when, and by lohat means, a duty

still

obligatory,

and once

essential to salvation,

now

occu-

pies, according to his system, a situation so depressed, that

it 15

made

to give

way

to

every opinion which intrudes on

08
Instead of doing

original claims.

its

removefrom

his

" the

by saying,

it,

own system

difficulty

of a change in the terms

propriety, by one to

little

"a change

thesis"

in the

he attempts to

urged

is

with

whose hypothesis they apply

means

that on our

in

"hypo-

terms of salvation" has taken

he shews that he does not understand

place,

upon

attending the supposition

of salvation,

If he

their full force", {p. 44.)

this,

the weight which pressed

Far from

it.

entangling ourselves in speculations about variable essentials,

or attempting to determine in what circumstances a

duty might, or might not be essential to salvation,

the

New

it

was allowed

of

its

to

directions,

we had

After

we

took

Testament account, and on the supposition that

be our guide, we pleaded the authority
its

examples, and

its

general principles.

explicitly stated that obedience to

rite

no

one supposed was a term of salvation, and then opposed

Mr.

Hall's "position", that the terms of

salvation were the same,

we

communion and of

shall leave the reader to

judge

with what consistency he attempts to press this "difficulty"

upon

The

us.

fact

is, it

attaclies

exclusively to Ins

hypothesis. If he can prove that anciently

men were saved

on one "condition', but now are saved on another,

him do so; but

if

he cannot, the inference which we urged

against him, continues in

After

all,

all its

force.

he grants that " owing to the incurahle amhi-

guity of language,

many

truths founded on

evidence assume an appearance of paradox

nature

is

the clearest
;

and of

this

the proposition which affirms that the terms of sal-

vation are not unalterable

be affirmed and denied

is

let

then on his

pleads for

own

which may with equal propriety

There

in different senses", (p, 44.)

confession, a sense in which

may be "denied" with

quite as

much

all

that he

propriety

as he has thought proper to " affirm" it. In the next page

Le is compelled to confess, that " there are certain doctrines

which are revealed because they are necessary

and

others which are necessary only because they are revealed.''

6D

Of this

he informs us, are "the few and simple

nature,

ceremonies" of the Gospel

its first

"the

publication,

were exhibited with a

mind could

(jf^.

45.)

visible

We are then told that on

appendages of Christianity
which no honest

lustre of evidence,

M'ithstand; and

that

no pretence for their

among such as possessed religious

Such was eminently the case with the two

neglect could subsist

integrity.

institutions

which have occasioned the present contro-

Admitting for the sake of argument thai

versy", (p. 46.)

was the case,

this

if

the decease of the Apostles has les-

sened "the lustre of evidence" with which the "visible

appendages o^ Christianity were exhibited,"

the

same

lost the

on them

effect

all;

and, however

it has

produced

much

they have

" lustre" of their evidence, the directions of the Lord

and the practical explanations given us

inspired

men

are

visible.

still

in the

conduct of

If these continue in our

bibles for any useful purpose, the least that they can

supposed
if

we

This
all

to

answer

is,

to

are not to follow them as our rule,

is

his

be

form the rule of our conduct; but

we have no

rule.

the issue to which Mr. Hall would conduct us, for

reasonings are nothing more than excuses for

not

following the Apostles and the primitive church!

AVedo not
may not in all cases consist
integrity", or how far evidence must be
can be asserted that "wo honest mind can

pretend to say what may, or

with "religious
carried before

withstand

it"

it

but

if it

be granted that baptism and the

Lord's supper were "the visible appendages of Christian-

but that now the unbaptised ought to be admitted

ity",

how can a man of plain common sense

avoid the conclusion, that on this system, one of these " viinto the church,

appendages"

sible
that,

once

cause

it

it

set aside.

is

We

was indispensable as a

was then necessary

anticipate the reply,

^'visible

to salvation,

appendage", be-

but

it is

not so now.

An apology of no weight, unless the obligation

to attend to

became not necessary

to salvation.

baptism ceased when

But whether

it is

it

or

is

not necessary to eternal happi-

70
ness, unless

repealed,

it is

it is still

the

command

of the

Lord, and has the same appointed station in his church

This

ever had.
to

it,

is

the plain reason

why we

it

should suhniit

it in its place; and this argument retains

however the speculations of men, respecting

and preserve

all its force,

either the ancient or

the present consequence of the

may terminate.
To sum up all that we think necessary on the subject of
essentials, we allow in the words of Mr. Hall, that "union

institution,

to Christ

formed by

is

and that the "baptists are

faith",

distinguished by demanding a profession of

it

at baptism".

We grant therefore his conclusion, that we ai*e

"precluded

from asserting that

rite to

have any concern in effecting

the spiritual alliance in question". (^Terms of Com. p. 119.

120.)

On

this

ground we

say, strictly speaking,

never was essential to salvation ; for whatever

takes place in
faith,

we do

all

know no one who

tism.

good men.

Without union

man can be

not conceive any

will say the

is

baptism
essential

to Christ

by

saved, but

wc

same thing concerning bap-

New

In the instances on record in the

Testament,

baptism was the effect of professing to receive the truth in

the love of it: such a reception of the truth,
essential to salvation,

arose from

it.

We

and obedience to the

allow that no good

we

allow icas

will of Christ

man would

refuse

submitting to this part of the Lord's will in the days of the

Apostles, and
lieves in the

we maintain

according to the

ought

come

to

that no such person

perpetuity of baptism can

New

Testament

all

now

who be-

deny, that

professing believers

be baptised, and that they cannot consistently

to the Lord's table

except in that character.

Whe-

ther therefore he agrees with us respecting the proper mode

and subjects of baptism or

our general principle.

not,

But

if

he

he

is

compelled to act on

solicits

communion with

us on the ground of his infant baptism, he asks us to ad-

mit the validity of that ceremony.

If he requests us to
admit him as unbaptised, he then asks that we would join

71
with him in practically denying what both confess
will

of Christ;

ought

to

for

be baptised

yet

we are

is

the

members

both admit that church

to receive a person

who

is

unhaptised, and he agrees to be accepted under that cha-

Should he say, I acknowledge the propriety of the

general rule, but I wish you would consider my case as an
exception
we reply, so we will, provided you can show,

racter

either that such an exception

is to

be found in the

New

Testament, or that we need not be guided by that volume.

In few words,

we

consider baptism not essential to salva-

tion in the proper meaning- of the terms; but

it is

essential

to correct obedience, and to the testimony of a good con-

science, in every instance in which the

Whoever

institution is admitted.

that he

apprehends

unbaptised, should give this subject a seri-

is

ous consideration

though some

for

well, deceive themselves

is

permanency of the

therefore,

men

of

whom we hope

by inconsistent reasonings, yet

the plain rule of God's word, and not a good man's

gularities that

it

irre-

ought to be our guide,

Mr. Hall thinks proper to represent us as stating, "that

tjie limits of communion must be the same with those of
profession; that the Piedohaptists have none, or at least

none that

valid "

is

and that on

reason, they are precluded from a

ship".
is

not

(2>.

38

made

for this

in

The expression " a christian profession

Christ's own way" without baptism, he takes

argument obliged us

and says, the scope of our

" prove that adult baptism is essen-

to torture;

to

a christian profession :" butwe are now content " with

saying that without that ordinance,

He

right way".

they

and

title to christian fellow-

39.)

more than usual pains

tial to

this account,

is

not

then twists the words

till

mean "perfect

this is not

"the

this is the only

cannot for a

made

in the

he supposes

profession", and after declaring that

lot of

a mortal", he adds, "but though

interpretation consistent with truth,

moment suppose

of the writer.

it

He

we

that such was the meaning-

must have intended to assert, that the

72
parties

to

whom

they are applied,

deem a

Christ himself would

make what

to

fail

A number of

profession".

consequences are then deduced by Mr, Hall, and the con-

Psedobap-

that our reasoning "will consign the

clusion

is,

tists to

destruction "

{p.

39

42.)

To

these charges and

the rest of the same class, a reference to the work from

which they are taken

that

all

is

reader examine the argument as

him form

and then

let

As
made

the expression

to

in Christ's

his

own
'*

is

it

Let the

necessary.

was

originally stated,

conclusions.

a christian profession

own way without baptism

;"

if

observes the words which immediately follow

is

not

the reader

he can

it,

then judge whether Mr. Hall's inferences are correct. "It

is

now

too late to say, this

ment has enjoined

what

and

it

enacted by infinite wisdom.

is

New

not what the

is

Testa-

does not become us to alter

There may

be,

and

there are, differences of opinion respecting the subjects

and mode of baptism

scribed by the Lord,
bis

but as the ordinance itself was pre-

it

ought

to

be

visibly recognised in

Church", (Baptism bic p. 18, 19.)

Whether our mode

a basis common

of reasoning, which was placed on

to all that

admit the perpetuity of bap-

tism, did consign ' the Ptedobaptists to destruction," is

Whatever were its defects that is

not fairly to be charged upon it. After having guarded our statement, by saying that we did not esteem
easily

determined.

obedience to a rite a terra of salvation, but that we considered it as " an evidence of our submission to the author
of salvation"; after having explicitly declared, that the
Baptists " do not consider baptism necessary to salvation;
they do not depend upon

God

it

for their acceptance before

nor do they view any as

nance,

who

fit

subjects for that ordi-

are not previously believers in Christ, and

justified in the sight of

God by

their faith"

(Baptism a

term of Com. p. 31.) we need not say any thing farther in

ypply to

]VJr,

Hall's arguments on this part of the cojitro-.

73
They have nothing

versy.
it

to

do with the subject as we stated

and they are founded on such complete misrepresenta-

we

tions, that

are not involved in their consequences.

Since however, he has thought proper to notice some

expressions which

we made

what he

" meaning",

calls their

use

of,

we

and

to investigate

also shall notice

one

thing intimately connected with them which he has omitted.

We need not repeat what

has been already observed

respecting the sense in which " baptism

fession",

nor

have used,
all

if

it

says

Nothing.
be designed
ask then,
if it is

is

a term of pro-

we
They

necessary to defend the terms

they 'are taken in their connection.

had a relation

But what

if

is

Yet
to

if it is

to the visible, designed

Mr, Hall on
if

this

end of baptism.

part of the subject

baptism continues in force,

answer some

it

intelligible purpose.

must

We

not a visible profession of faith in Christ,

no evidence of connection with the Christian church,

a profession of our

faith

is

Christ required without baptism

what ground does

it

made
;

in the

what

way which

is its use,

now claim any attention^

and on

SECTION

The

difference of sentiment

the doctrine of Election

VI.

among Christians

the prohibition

lespecliug

to eat blood

and the imposition of hands on the baptised examined

as to their supposed bearing on this controversy.

In the progress of

work, Mr. Hall reminds us of the

his

among christians on the doctrine of

some takingthe Calvinistic and others the Armin-

difference of sentiments

Election,

ian view of

it.

We are informed that such

a difference of

and that
" were these parties to exclude each other from commu-

opinion could not exist in the primitive church

nion under the pretence that the primitive christians were

would reason

Calvinists, or all Arminians," they

all

same manner that we

would our author repel

liberal

conduct?

He

in the

He adds, "how

do. {Reply p. 48, 49.)

this reasoning, or justify

a more

certainly cannot allege the original

obscurity of the apostolic injunctions, and the possibility of

primitive converts

mistaking their meaning

he would

'unquestionably insist on the different degrees of import-

ance attached to revealed truths, and

ence

between mistaking the

tlie

meaning,

palpable

opposing the sentiments, of inspired writers.

is

differ-

and avowedly

But

this

mode of defence." {p. 49.)

however altogether mistaken; we should not

precisely our

He

is

think of placing the decision of the ultimate

question,

whether Calvinists and Arminians might hold fellowship

together on such a ground as this
the

New

ought to be received to baptism.

baptised into a creed which

posed

to

we

should appeal to

Testament respecting the terms on which persons

be taught

in the

is

If

we ought

to include all that

New

Testament,

it

is

to

be

sup-

would be

to

rii^ht

examiue whether

was an

it

creed ur

/Viiniiiian

or a Calvinistic creed, and then the question would be

we be

high importance, into which creed shall

But

we

if

we

derive our information from the sacred volume,

be baptised on a profession of
the

ought to

that the proper subjects of baptism,

find,

ol"

baptised,

Christ as

their faith in

Son of God, and the saviour of

Whatever

sinners.

any person considers as necessarily and essentially iucludt

in believing in Christ,

communion, because

he must,

v/e grant,

view,

in his

it

is

make a term of

a necessary part

make

of the confession which a candidate ought to

On

baptism.
nistic

ground, he who

this

at his

conceives the Calvi-

view of the doctrine of election, essential to a

persoii s faith in

communion

Christy must

make Calvinism

a term of

and so on the opposite side of the question,

he who believes that the Calvinistic sentiment

sistent with

faith

in

Christ,

is

incon-

must necessarily exclude

" Orthodox christMr. Hall informs us, consider " the explicit belief
of the doctrine of the atonement" indispensably necessary
Calvinists from church fellowship.

ians "

He

to salvation.

that the immediate followers

also says,

of Christ did not embrace this truth.

is

seems that

this

given as an instance of a new essential arising in

the church.

made

at a

**

The

full

development of the gospel scheme,

subsequent period, has

ed that essential to salvation,

subject

is

because

it

could

atonement

is

is

previously

view of the

this

why the belief

now necessary to

comes within the

that helieveih and

which

the reason

correct,

trine of the

in this instance render-

Suppose that

subsist without it."fp. 46.)

is

It

limits of the

of the docsalvation

is,

direction " he

Whatever

baptised shall be saved."

an essential part of a reply to the question," dost thou

believe on the

of communion

Son of God," we acknowledge

;

because

it is,

ment, a term of baptism.

according to the

Such were the

principles of the church in the purest

ages,

is

a term

New Testa-

constitutional

when every

7(-)

tiling

was regulatod by unerring uispiration.

be proved that

is

we need not tremble

If

but

till

can

it

not rtow what

we must change our ground

originallyy

done,

constitution

its

it

was

that

is

onr

for the ultimate success of

cause.

An

attempt

by bringing

it

made

perplex the question before us,

to

Apostles and Elders at

in the decision of the

Jerusalem prohibiting the eating of blood

Mr. Hall
tolical

selects

Council,

this

withotit at

it

has greatly divided

Commentators.

It

seems

noticing

all

attending the passage at large

that

difficulties

though he must know,

the

the

most learned and acute

to us, that the

view given of the

decision recorded in this chapter by the learned

is

rational,

the reason

Acts xv.

in

part of the decision of the Apos-

Spencer

and supported by very strong evidence

why the Gentile

" abstain from pollutions of

Christians were
idols,

that

required to

and from fornication,

and from things strangled, and from blood," ( Acts xv.

20,) was, because these things were *' the causes, the
attendants,
therefore,

and the signs

was

defiled

Idolatry."*

of

Whoever,

by these practices, was to be con-

sidered as sanctioning Idolatry, and equally opposing the

religion of

Moses and of

He who

Christ.

in these things

symbolized with Idolaters, would be excluded from the

communion of the
been received

christian church

or if he

into the church, for the

would not be admitted

to baptism.

had not

same reason he

Such practices would

be considered as proving that the man was a Heathen,

and while he continued such, he could not be received

into the christian community.

But Mr. Hall

selects the

prohibition of blood as an article of food, which he affirms

was once a term of communion, and he says that

**

the

precept of abstaining from blood, was invariably observed

hy

the faithful from the time of

Noah." (Reply, p. 50.)

Vide Dissert, in Act. xv, 20, Cap. III.

^ i, at the eud of the second
book of his workj De kgibus ritualibus Hebraorum.

/ /

Nay

further,

that

it

he says, " I have not the smallest

of perpetiuil

is

however

force,

little

regarded in modern practice." {p. 50.)

iloultt,

may he

it

For the sake of

consistency then, he ought not to admit into the niimher

of " the faithful" any

precept

this

itive

and

man who,

in his estimation, violates

he does not mean to say, that pos-

if

he ought to reject such a

precepts are of no force,

person from a participation of Christian ordinances.

He

seems

to

the precept

consider

given

Noah,

to

and the advice of the apostles to the Gentile christians

abstinence from blood,

respecting

concerning

junction

He

baptism.

He

same.

the

as

thinks proper to put this advice, on a par with

the in-

acknowledges that

the " precept respecting blood was not promulgated by

the Saviour himself

but resulted from the solemn and

unanimous decision of
origin than

Here

and

is

said to

any other christian

christian institute,

far

we

than

This

this

itself.

point in the best

this

is no room to
meaning of the precept;

susceptible but of one interpretation."

is

(Reply p. 50.)
a mistake: Jewish writers understand the precept

^iven to

Noah

to

mean, that he was not

with the flesh of the animal while

off

Christianity

are farther told, that "there

allege a misapprehension of the

it is

seems then, that

It

older

Jlut leaving the reader to settle

can,

{Reply p. 51.)

called a christian

is

be of more ancient origin than

institute.
is

of more ancient

is

institute.'*

supposed prohibitory precept

institute,

way he

and

his apostles,

any other christian

any part and instantly using

creature was properly slain.

It is

M'as alive,

by cutting

it

for

food,

before the

This barbarous custom was

not'only practised anciently, but

parts of the World.

eat the blood,

to

it

is

still

in

use in some

remarkable that the Jews, who

have been always distinguished for their abhorrence of

blood, should
cept,

have given

and they seem

attention

to

to

Hebrew

this

interpretation of the

have been led to

phraseology.

it,

Dr.

pre-

by an accurate
Gii.i.,

whose

73
extensive acquaintance with Jewish literature cannot be
denied, says, "it

is

law

the constant sense of the Jewish syna-

be understood of the member

of a living creature torn from it and eaten whilst alive.'*
gogue, that

this

is

("Expos. OH Acts XV.

to

29.

Many

christian writers

of

distinguished eminence have adopted the same sentiment.

Hence
tion

they have drawn a clearly marked line of distinc-

between the precept given

precepts given to the Jews,

to

and

Noah,

to different things

first

given hr

They have shewn

the apostles to the Gentile christians.

that in their estimation, the

the ceremonial

the advice

and the two

last,

related

and that the precepts given

Jews, and the advice of the apostles were

distinguished

from each other by two important circumstances

member

every

Moses were

of

the precepts

absolute,

the

to

that

and binding on

of the Jewish dispensation

but that the

directions given by the apostles, arose from the peculiar

state of the church,

and did not mark the precepts

res-

pecting meats offered to idols, things strangled, and blood,

as universally

and perpetually binding.

Whoever will

take the trouble to examine the writings

of our most learned christian commentators and

will see that there is not

rant

Mr. Hall's

that uniformity

that " there

assertion,

allege a misapprehension of the

it is

which
is

critics,

will

war-

no room to

meaning of the precept

susceptible but of one interpretation", (p. 50.)

am no

advocate for eating blood

cept given to

but since the pre-

Noah which Mr. Hall supposes

to this practice, is

tion, the reader will, I

hope, pardon one observation more

which may tend

to elucidate that precept.

the law of Moses,

"Ye

it

unto the stranger that

THAT HE may eat

unto an alien". Deut. xiv. 21.

the blood was

still

We

read in

not eat of any thing that dieth

shall

of itself ; thou shalt give

gates,

has a relation

unnecessarily forced upon our ntten-

it, or thou

is

mayest

If an animal died of

in the system,

and the

flesh

in thy
sell

it

itself,

could not

79
be eaten without eating the blood
strangled

animals that are

case with

also, as is the

but though Israelites might

not eat such food, strangers were permitted to eat

even hy the

Law of

How

God.

that the precept prohibiting " the use of blood

**

was enjoined expressly on the Gentiles",

in force

?"

from the period of the deluge

precept

bis sense of the

is

it

then can Mr. Hall prove

correct,

in food",

and,

(J>.

" was

49. 50.)

If

inconceivable

it

is

that such a permission as that which

is

recorded

in

law of Moses, should have been given

and

fails in

if

he

establishing the universal obligation of the precept

cording to his interpretation of

Jewish dispensation, he
establish

its

it,

ac-

during the time of the

not find

will

the

it

an eagy task, to

universal and perpetual obligation under the

dispensation of the gospel.

Besides, the prohibition of

blood stands on the same basis with that of " meats offer-

ed to idols", but

it

is

certain

that the

eating of meat

was not universally unlawful

offered to idols,

therefore

it

follows of course that in the present case, the decision of

the apostles

will

not of itself prove the prohibition of

blood to be universally, and permanently binding.

But

the end our author has in view,

imaginary

difficulty

thinks proper

to

on

us,

is

press an

to

from the comparison which he

draw, between the injunction which

and that which commanded baptism.

" As Pffidobaptists profess their conscientious adherence

prohibited blood,

which they merely demand the

to the baptismal precept,

right of interpreting for themselves

is it,
is

that a mistake in the

deemed more

upon what principle

meaning of a positive injunction,

criminal than

its

avowed neglect

or

why

should an error in judgment which equally affects the

practice in both cases, be tolerated

it

in the one,

the ground of exclusion in the other ?"

The answer

to this is easy

he who believes that

cept of a former dispensation,

present, that obedience to

and made

(Reply p. 51,

it

is

52.)

a pre-

of so great authority at

now, ought to bo required by

80
must make

a christian church,

term of baptism,

and of course a term of communion.

But he who con-

siders
this

not supported

it

by such evidence as gives

may

importance, though he

individually

it

think

not feel himself compelled to insist upon

right, does

He

it

it
it.

can retort Mr. Hall's argument

and
"
"
"
"
marrow
pith
and
of his
very
cause is, that
since the
therefore,

baptism

is

in his turn

not necessary to connnunion, such a person

may

" upon what principle

ask,

that

is it,

mistake in the meaning of a positive injunction not belonging to the christian dispensation, should be deemed
"
of equal consequence \/ii\\ the " avowed neglect of an

ordinance peculiar to

that

dispensation

tempts to place the injunction

against eating

command which

the same level with the

Mr. Hall

at-

on

blood,

enjoins baptism,

and hence the inference unavoidably follows, that, according to his mode of reasoning, baptism is of no more

consequence than the precept against eating blood

The

effect of such a mode of lowering a christian ordinance,

is

easily seen

will afford

and

will

be very agreeable to many

them an excellent excuse

for it

for neglecting,

what

they do not wish to obey.

In addition to what our author has alleged concerning

the eating of blood, he thinks proper to say, " the argu-

ment equally applies

and baptism.
universally

It

to laying

is

practised

on of hands after ordination

acknowledged that
the

in

primitive

this

times,

claims the sanction of apostolic example, and

rated by St. Paul

doctrine".

among

rite

it is

was

that

it

enume-

the Jirst principles of christian

{Reply p. 52.)

That imposition of hands took place after baptism

when an apostle was present, and when miraculous gifts
were conferred, is acknowledged that it was used as a
necessary appendage to baptism, when an apostle was
not present, and when extraordinary gifts were 7iot given,
;

has not been proved

and we believe cannot be proved.

81

When

Mr. Hall has demonstrated that imposition of

hands was constantly practised by apostolic authority

cases where

in

spiritual

gifts

were not conferred

so

that this usage was a regular part of christian baptism

when he has proved,

no

that apostles directed those

who had

spiritual gifts to bestow, to use the imposition of

after baptism,

sidered incomplete without

will

it;

argument have any

his

the present enquiry, that

it

but not

then,

As

force.

of hands after ordination,

sition

hands

and that the christian ordinance was con-

it

may be

then,

till

impo-

the

to

from

so distant

is

dismissed as wholly

irrelevant*.
It

is

not a

little

remarkable, that Mr. Hall should urge

two arguments, taken from passages concerning which

the christian world has

been much divided, and apply

them

was clear and undisputed.

as if their sense

explain that which

disputed
that

is

which

is

rational

difficult,

is difficult

by what

is

To

clear and un-

but to perplex what

is

plain,

by

and uncertain, cannot promote the

cause of truth.
*

The

following note of

Dr; DoDDRiDCE on Heb.

vi. 2.

deserves

attention

" The

imposition of hands.']

This answered such great purposes in the

method of communicating important

christian church, as the appointed

gifts, that it

might well be mentioned among frst

principles.

But

it is

by

a very precarious consequence, that any can infer from hence the universal
obligation of this rite, in admitting persons into full churcJi-membership, or

even to the

ministry.

See Pierce's Vindication, p. 463.

Family Expositor."

SECTION

Mr.

JJalTs criCicisms on tJw use of the term "evidence"

nynhted

VII.

He does not

hcqjtlsin

and

communion/

of

his system subverts the institution.

Two expressions are next selected from

of

f.r-

recofjnise the scriptural desiyn

sages" {Reply p. 53.)

the next I suppose

the

first

has been noticed already

taken from

is

'Baptism a term

" remarkable pas-

whicli 3Ir. Hall calls

p.

30

both are brought

forward because the term evidence occurs in them.

The

in his book it
latter Mr. Hall quotes imperfectly
"
the appointed evidence of our putting on Jesus Christ":
is
the original words are, " i\\e first, visible, appointed evi;

dence of our putting on Jesus Christ".

Our author begins

by saying, "

his scrutiny

let us first

ascertain the precise 7ere2rt^oftbese remarkable passages";

but

how

By

viewing " these remarkable passages"

in their connection,

by observing the terms which are used,

by comparing the paragraphs where the same or

similar ex-

pressions are employed, for the purpose of discovering the

common
common
Hall's

No;

sentiment which runs through the whole?

place

way of examining

a subject

method he plays on the term

;

is

far

this

from Mr.

evidence, turns

it

into a

variety of shapes, at last having found one which he thinks

will
*'

answer

his purpose,

precise meaning"!

"meaning must

he declares that

Observe

he, that

his

mode

this

must be

of discussion.

its

The

the ordinance in question forms a

necessary par^ of the evidence o/ya7/?, insomuch that in the

absence of
valid,"

it

our Lord intended no other should be deemed

He then adds,

"that

this

was the case

in the primi-

we feel no hesitation in affirming." (Reply, p. 54.)

Let the reader compare our statements with Mr. Hall's

tive age,

inference.

In the

first

of the pasages

quoted,

we

said

83
**

obedience to a

if

one supposes),

iio

be not a term of salvation (which

rite

yet

it

by the highest

ordered

yaxs

authority as an evidence of our subjection to the author

of salvation".
is,

In

this sentence, the supposition laid

that obedience to a rite

is fiot

down

a term of salvation, Tiie

parenthesis which follows "(ivhich no one supposes)", clearly

shows, that

we

that baptism

was an evidence of faith essential

nor did

neither intended to argue on the ground

we imagine

upon that ground.

to salvation,

we had to contend with any one

Here then we ask, on what pretence

that

it be inferred that the "precise meaning" of the lirst

"
of
these remarkable passages, 7nust he, that the ordi-

could

nance

in question

forms a necessary part of the evidence

of faith, insomuch that in the absence of

our Lord

it,

intended no other should be deemed valid"; since the

passage

itself contains a distinct denial

inference

of our author's

Further, in the short paragraph from whence Mr. Hall

makes his second quotation, baptism was denominated
" the Jirsf, visible, appointed evidence of our putting on

Jesus Christ.
whether, in

Gal.

iii.

27."

Here again,

fair interpretation,

drawn from the words used,

let

any one judge

Mr. Hall's inference can be

for he has

quoted them so

inaccurately, that Ave do not refer to his quotation.

the question, whether the Lord will

faith

valid,

no opinion

if

baptism

and what

be absent,

it

deem no evidence
this

asserts^ our

liberty to disprove as soon as he

is

On

opponent

able.

of

statement offers
is at

A duty

full

may be

required, as a visible evidence of subjection to Christ,

without

its

being supposed that

or a mistake which

subject a

man

our sentiment

condemnation.

cise

fit

it,

would

this is

not

yet notwithstanding, he

to assert, that the contrary

meaning

That

evident even from the "remarkable pas-

sages" which Mr. Hall quotes

thinks

absence in any case,

may be made concerning

to eternal
is

its

/"

G 2

must be

their

"pre-

84

The

sense which Mr, Hall attempts to aflix on our

words, he confesses expressed the true state of things in

the primitive age; but
is

not true now.

*'a

We

it

seems that what was true then,

are charged with making baptism

necessary part of the

that in the absence of

be deemed valid."

it,

evidence of

Mr. Hall adds, " That

So

insomuch

this

was the

we feel no hesitation in
said was, on Mr.

the case in the jirimitive age,

affirming." {p. ^ii.)

faith,

our Lord intended no other should

we had

that all

Hall's confession, a correct state of the case in the days of

the Apostles, and according to the accounts given in the

New Testament.
In his progress, Mr. Hall quotes half a sentence from
p.

67 of

'

Baptism a term of Communion'

the whole, especially had he taken

every one would have seen that

But now he grows bolder than

it

had he quoted
connection,

in its

did not suit his purpose.

it

before, and

we

are accused

of the inconsistency of admitting the piety of those "

who

are destitute of that which Jesus Christ prescribed as

the

evidence of faith." {Reply p. 55.)

The next

thing

is

quotation from another place Cp. 140), taken also in his

manner, neither noticing the design, nor the explanation

given of the words and then he finishes the paragraph by

talking about " palpable contradictions."
;

But the view which we have given of our sentiments on

world; with those who are not
convinced, on comparing our statements with Mr. Hall's

this subject is before the

interpretations, that instead of ascertaining our " precise

meaning," he has laboured

to affix to

what they were never designed

contend

the

to

our words precisely

mean, we

shall not

interests of truth are not likely to be pro-

moted by striving with persons of that description.

According to Mr, Hall's reasoning, our former arguments are of no force, unless it could be demonstrated tliat
baptism " occupies the same place at present, and that
is

STILL necessary

to constitute

it

a valid evidence of faith

85
in the

Redeemer"

an inquiry of

vital

(Reply p. 54.)
importunce to

Tliis brings

and that

it

occupies

which our author has most completely neglected

what place does haptism

is,

now

forward

present controversy,

tlie

occupy

If

same place it did in apostolic times, his system is

If it occupies a different
ruined by his own confession.
the

place,

what

tism?

Is

is

that place

now a "

it

the days of inspiration

prudently

silent.

What

On

bap-

Avas the design of

from what

different thing"

it

was in

subject Mr. Hall

this

is

Whatever the design of baptism was,

the institution ought either to be administered for the pur-

pose

first

appointed, or

If baptism ought not to be con-

Testament ordinance.
tinued for
the better

its

primitive purpose, the sooner

for

we cannot pretend

We

tural authority.

of an institution,

Whenever
and "

is

New

cannot be maintained as a

it

we

lay

to practise

it

it

aside

on scrip-

can have no idea of the perpetuity

when

ends are no longer answered.

" it decayeth and waxeth old,"

its

this is the case,

ready to vanish away."

Herethen the question comes

to a point;

it

must either

be disproved, or acknowledged, that we ought now

tise for the

same reasons

to

bap-

as the apostles baptised. If they

administered this ordinance for one reason, but

to administer it for another,

reasons to be discovered

where
If

it

is

this

we ought

twofold set of

be proved that the same

ends are not answered by the institution, and the same

reasons do not

now

apply that were in force in the days of

inspiration, then the scriptural reasons for its admini-

stration are
the'

New

stitious

given up

Testament;

it

it

is

is

no longer the baptism of

nothing more than a super-

ceremony, and has no more claim on our attention

than an abrogated Jewish

ledged that

we ought

rite.

still

reasons assigned in the

But,

if it

must be acknow-

to administer baptism for the

New

Testament

all

we

ask

is,

that the inspired rule be followed, and the present contro-

versy will instantly terminate.

80
difference between the state of things now, and
age of inspiration, has brought forward " a new
so that baptism does not occupy " the same place"

But the
in the

case

;"

once did

it

taken place,

Whatever

is

as a rule

tinue

difference of circumstances has

the rule invalidated, or does

If

it

admitted

is

still

it

con-

baptism was

that

essential to salvation in the days of the apostles, to the

whole extent of Mr. Hall's idea, and that the circumstances

of the times then gave
is

more

it

peculiar importance, yet nothing

clear than that our reasonings

be guided by the rule which

is

and conduct should

permanent, and not by

those circumstances which from their nature could^be only

temporary.

If then,

how

guide,

we

are

we

to

take the

New

Testament

for our

admit the unhaptised, unless we

either plead for " inverting the natural ort^er of the christ-

ian

sacraments

;"

suppose that the directions given

or,

us are not urged with legislative authority, but are only

general advice, submitted to our prudence, and

inclination

left to

our

Mr. Hall

denies, that baptism

was "more

specifically

intended as a test of faith than compliance with any other

part of the mind of Christ

or that

was

it

sense an evidence of that attainment, than as

in

any other

was neces-

it

sary to evince the possession of christian sincerity." {Reply

p. 54.)

To

the

of these assertions

first

we

reply,

statement was not that baptism was " more

our

specifically

intended as a test of faith than compliance with any other

part of the
visible,

Christ."
let it

for

mind of Christ

appointed
If this

is

be disproved.

;"

but that

it

of our putting

evidence,

New

not agreeable to the

As

was " the

to the

first,

on Jesus

Testament,

second assertion, suppose

the sake of the argument that

we admit

it,

and say

with Mr. Hall, that baptism was required " to evince the
possession of christian sincerity
its

design at

first, is it

not

its

;"

we

ask then,

design now

the hard things which he has thought

fit

if this

But

was

if so, all

to say against


87

who view baptism

those

as

tlie first,

visible,

appointed

evidence of putting on Jesus Christ, he might urge against

such as adopt his

own

words, and plead the importance of

the institution for the purpose of evincing " the possession

If

of christian sincerity,"
end, but
sent,

is

it

was once " necessary"

for that

not "necessary" for the like purpose at pre-

what end

answered by

is

It is " a duty of per-

it?

petual obligation," (Replt/ p. 98.) " founded on the express

injunction of the legislator," fp- 99,) but, on our author's
principles, neither the " duty" nor the " injunction," how-

ever " perpetual" or " express," form a rule for the con-

duct of the church; and though

yet

it

'Uvas necessary" formerly,

it

does not occupy "the same place at present."

such an opinion
aside; for

its

is

admitted,

we ought

purpose

original

is

If

to lay the institution

no longer answered

a consequence which always follows Mr. Hall's theory, on

whatever side we view

But we have an

it.

additional objection to urge.

stated in any part of the

New

was an evidence of

" as

faith

is

granted

is

not

Testament, that baptism

it

was necessary

the possession of christian sincerity."

christian sincerity"

It

That

it

but that this

to evince
did " evince

is

the scrip-

never be proved.

tural description of its design, can

The

baptism of the primitive converts was viewed as a practical

declaration of their faith

guage of the Apostles:

faith in Christ Jesus.

this is

"Ye

are

manifest from the lan-

all

the children of

For as many of you

baptised into Christ have put on Christ."

as

Gal.

God by

have been
iii.

26, 27.

Inspired writers treat this subject in a style very different

from that of our author.

Tiiey point the attention of the

primitive christians to the great sentiments which they professed to bolieve at their baptism

to that

holiness which was acknowledged by their

obligation to

baptism and

to

the hope which they derived from the truths they had professed,

an impressive image of which was presented to

their view in baptism.

Hence,

as

many

as

were baptised

88
into Christ wei'e baptised into his death.

Faith in the

death of Christ, not only as a fact, but as the

^ound

of

our justification before God, was the source of their hope,

and the great support of

their christian life

believers looked forward to

we

hence

also,

the blessings which are

all

" Therefore,"

procured by the resurrection of their Lord.

says the apostle, "

are buried with

him by baptism

into

death, that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the

glory of the Father, even so

" We

we

also should

walk

new-

in

have been planted together," intimately united with him, " in the likeness of his death,"
and hence, " we shall be also in the likeness of his resur-

ness of

life."

So

rection." Ro7n. vi. 3, &c.

Colossians, {chap.

also in the epistle to the

12.) " Buried with him in baptism,

ii.

wherein also ye are risen with him, through the faith of the

who hath

operation of God,

Now, however
manifest, that

and

as

him from the dead."

raised

the latter expression i& understood,

it

was

in

consequence of a

an expression of

his faith,

it

is

christian's ybiV//,

that he

was buried

with his Lord, when he was baptised in his name.

The Apostle
express.

Peter's words are, if possible,

Baptism

1 Pe^.iii.21.

is

still

more

"the answer of a good

conscience towards God, through the resurrection of Jesus

Christ." It

is

the "answer," the promise, or the stipulation

of a good conscience, in consequence of faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

engagement

into

command, and

It is the expression of a solemn,

which we enter,

in obedience to a divine

as the effect of faith in the

Lord Jesus.

If baptism either ought not, or cannot be administered

it is

time that we should drop the prac-

if believers

can, and do express these senti-

with these views,

tice

but

ments, hopes,

and engagements, the ordinance

in

occupy the same place

that

essential parts, does

novo,

its
it

did in the times of the apostles."

Why our author so carefully avoids stating the scriptural

design of baptism,

is

best

known

to himself,

but

it is ira-

89
possible not to suspect that he

He

would not

say, that

baptism ought not to be adminis-

tered on a profession of faith

him both with the

saw the danger of so doing.

apostles,

that would have involved

and himself.

choose to allow, as he had done before, that

be administered on a profession of

faith

He

did not

ought to

it

that would

be

He

followed by an inference opposite to his purpose.

therefore took a different course, and then he could cari-

cature every thing that came in his way, as he pleased.

Before he finished
thrust,

second chapter, he made a bold

and doubtless he thought

He

effect.

who

his

it

would be mortal

in its

closed one paragraph by speaking of those

are destitute of " f/M/< baptism," and professing to

quote what we had said, the next begins thus

{Reply

p. 56,) **No church, he assures us, acting agreeably to the

rules of Christ, can recognise thi*m as his disciples."

reference at the bottom

nion, p. 140."

is,

The

" Baptism a term of Commu-

If the reader turns to the passage, he will

see that these are

not

our words.

But passing

this for

the present, Mr. Hall takes no notice of the object of that

paragraph from which he professes to quote an expression.

He

does not inform his reader that the point there in hand

was, the obligation

as a

commanded

to be": for this

we were under

duty,

to

attend to baptism

"whatever that

rite shall

would have spoiled the

intended to produce.

Nor

does he at

effect
all

prove

which he

refer

to the

evidence adduced in the connection, that the proposition

as

we had

stated and explained

it,

had been generally ad-

mitted not only by Baptists, but also by

for they

P^edobaptists

had both agreed that the unhaptised, according to

the plan of the

New

Testament, were not openly, and

in

an acknowledged sense, disciples. The general sentiments

of those " myriads of holy men," who are sometimes placed
in array against us,

are brought to view in the words of

Dr. Williams and Richard Baxter, both of whom

it will

be allowed, are high authorities.

Tliese eminent

90
men go

farther than even the Baptists in aflTirniing the

proposition which
it

we had

laid

down,

in the sense in

which

If Mr. Hall did perceive the author's

was adduced.

design, in the paragraph from which he professes to select

a single expression, and especially,

if

he ever read the

succeeding paragraph, how could he, in

common

justice,

bring forward an expression with the intention of impress-

on the minds of his readers a sentiment not con-

ing

tained in the passage he pretends to quote?

perceive the author's intention,

how

are

we

If he did not

account for

to

such a misconception? But hence an occasion is found for

exclaiming, " what strange magic lies concealed in the word

churchr{Reply2).57,) Again, "in the broad daylightof the

world, notwithstanding their minor difterences, they (the

Pagdobaptists) are recognized with facility, but the moment we enter the somhrous gloom of a Baptist Church,

we

are lost from each other's view."

(2^.

What

58.)

ad-

vantage Mr. Hall expects from these bitter words, we

know not

be

it

to himself:

we

ask no participation in

reproach so indiscriminate and unjust,

who

may

it.

gratify those

dislike the Baptists, but effectually discredits all our

author's boasted pretensions to liberality.

He

talks about

" a wound on the very heart of charity

inflicting

p. 87.) what this

is

we

leave others to decide.

;"

(Reply

To

such

an accusation we reply in the words of an ancient and high

authority, " the Lord rebuke thee:" (Jude v. 9.) and were
the controversy merely with

But

should end.

Mr. Hall, here our reply

as a heavy charge is publicly brought

forward against a general body,

mination.

What

Baptist

C/mrc/t"?

it

demands a

farther exa-

occasions this " somhrous (/loom of a

Nothing, but their belief that pro-

fessing christians ought to be baptized, before they are

acknowledged members of the church.

common
ages

An

to all the churches of the apostolic

to

all

article of faith

and primitive

the established churches in the world

on our author's own confession, nearly

and,

to all the churches

91
"

of Paedobaptist dissenters.

Mr. Hall, " we

come not thou

niiglit

Of

such societies," says

be tempted to exclaim,

'

My

soul

into their secret, and to their assembly

Here we

not thou united"!

ask, to

then, should

we be "united"?

can conceive

is,

to that

The

only reply that

we

which admits the unhaptised : an

assembly evidently of recent date, notwithstanding

Mr. Hall can say

be

what "assembly",

to the contrary; and,

on

his

all

that

own acknow-

ledgment, an assembly formed of the minority of christian

professors.

In

all

the rest

we

are compelled to enter the

same "sombrous gloom", which Mr. Hall

exclusively over

Baptist Churches

asserts
It

is,

is

thrown

therefore,

very little to the purpose, that he professes to be "shocked

at such illiberality;"

and

still

less that

he pretends to "sup-

press the emotions which naturally arise on the occasion,

remembering (strange

as

it

may seem) how often

it is

asso-

ciated with talents the most respectable, and piety the

most fervent". (Rephj p. 59.) The wound which he in-

tended to
as this,

inflict

can never be healed by such treatment

CHAPTER
An examination

IV.

of Mr. Hall's third chapter

ON the connection between the two positive

institutes.

SECTION
His statement of

the question

I.

examined;

his reasoning

refuted.

In

the progress of his work, our author frequently directs

the reader's attention to what he calls the "real question,"

(p. 61.) which, he informs us,
tive ordinances of the

is,

"whether the two

New Testament

posi-

are so related to

each other, either in the nature of things or by express

command,, that he

whom we deem

not baptised,

is,

ipso

facto, or from that circumstance alone, disqualified for an

" This," he

attendance at the Lord's table.

says,

" and

which we are concerned,"

sources of evidence are mentioned, " the nature of

this only is the question in

Two

things," and, " express

command

;"

no notice

of the order and design of the institutions

is

here taken

should

said these are included in the "nature of things,"

not object to the arrangement; but

we contend

if

we

it

be

shall

they are not included,

that they ought to be added to the sources of

evidence by which the question

is to

be decided.

93
According

to

Mr. Hall, "

that there

is

not a necessary

connection in the nature of things betwixt the two rites,

appears from the slightest attention to their nature.

will not

be pretended that the Lord's supper

baptism, or that

longing to

It

founded on

recognises a single circumstance be-

{Reply p. 61, 62.)

it."

According

it

is

to

Jesus Christ,

baptism show, that

it

was intended

the order and design of

to

precede an attention

which he commanded the mem" to observe ;" and according to the

to every other institution

bers of his church

APOSTLE Paul, baptism is "putting on

iii. 27.
The Lord's supper is designed for

Christ." Gal.

believers

who

are members of his church, and recognises a previous pro-

What,
how was it made

fession of their faith.

profession

then,

was included

what was

in this

the visible ap-

pointed rite by which a submission to Jesus Christ was

manifested, according to the directions and examples of
the

New

Testament

Let

this

question be answered and

the connection will be established.

But by

his

own

concessions,

Mr, Hall has already an-

swered the question and established the connection. He

has allowed that " baptism OUGHT, agreeably to the institution of Christ, to precede the other branches of religion;"
C]). 83.)

and that " supposing [the sincere believer] to be

clearly convinced of the nature

and import of baptism, he

would be guilty of a criminal irregularity who neglected

to attend to

it

previous to his entering into christian

fel-

lowship." {Terms of Com. p. 58.)

sincere believer, there

is

In the view of this

consequently a " necessary con-

nection" between the two ordinances, which he perceives

" clearly convinced of the nature and import

of baptism ;" otherwise he could not be guilty of a " cri-

when he

is

minal irregularity" in seeking communion without being

On what

principle then, can it be maintained

such a "connection" when the " nature and
import" of baptism is understood, but no " connection"

baptised.

that there

is

94
between the

institutions themselves

nection exist before

Does not the con-

Is

perceived

is

it

or

it,

is

it

not

correct that baptism has a "prior claim" on the christian's

Such

attention?

acknowledged,

however, Mr. Hall has distinctly

he admits that " baptism ought,

priority,

for

precede

agreeably to the institution of Christ to

Thus he confesses

other branches of religion."

he

is

to

shew that there

trying to prove does not exist

is

He

then says, "

arguments
no connection between the two insti-

by

tutions, are repelled

it

all

his

own words.

his

remains to be considered whether

we

the necessary connection

positive prescription.

and

the

that which

are seeking, can be found in

Here, when we ask

give us a stone," (p. 63.)

Perhaps so

for bread, they

there

is

a " pre-

scription" so " positive" in the terms of the commission of

our Lord, that

it is

" a stone" of stumbling to our author's

system which cannot be removed. Let the reader observe

his statement,

where there

apostles,

which

" They quote Christ's commission to

so remote from establishing the essential connec-

is

tion of the

them only

is

two ceremonies, that the mention of one of

included. "(p. 03.) "

low

its

and there

directions,

" Of the two ceremonies

is

Remote" as the commission

according to Mr. Hall's account, we have only to

is,

his

not a word upon the subject, and

is

included."

It

is

will

be an end of

fol-

his system.

the mention of one of them only

allowed that

07ie

is

mentioned; the

most unfortunate circumstance possible for our author's

argument for, as the " only" ceremony which our Lord
;

thought

it

necessary to "mention" was baptism, the

tion" of that " one" institution gave

minency.
authority

It was,
;

it

"men-

distinguished pro-

however, mentioned

in

the style of

the Saviour enjoined his apostles to baptise

those that believed, and he then directed them to teach

who believed and were baptised, " to olserve" all

commanded them. Matt, xxviii.
19,20. Let Mr. Hall therefore either acknowledge, or deny.
those

things whatsoever he had

95
was one of those things which the
were commaucleci " to ohserve." If he acknow-

that the Lonl's supper

disciples
ledo-es

it.

the " connection"

practical purposes.

all

is

sufticientlv established for

If he denies

we

it,

shall calmly

If that

wait for the proof of so extraordinary a position.

" one" institution, which it is granted our Lord did

" mention", is obeyed, neither party will doubt the propriety of admitting any person applying for
if in

that

other respects he

eligible; if

is

oiK/ht io be obeyed, there is

it

deliver an opinion, for Mr. Hall

a " prior claim" to attention.

He

adds,

thoup^h

it

is

no occasion for us to

tells

us that baptism has

apostles,

not only suificiently accounted for on our

it is

their circumstances

(p.

communion,

acknowledged

" they urge the conduct of the

principles, but

63.)

it is

such as those very principles would in

have absolutely compelled us

to adopt."

This argument has occurred before, and M-e

have already replied

only observe, that

to it

if in

at present, therefore,

we

shall

the apostles' days Mr. Hall must

have refused the unbaptised, but now ought to receive

them, the authority and permanency of baptism is gone.

For

if it is

not the will of Christ that his church should

support an institution of his appointment, in

station, the inevitable inference

is,

that

it

its

primitive

was either tem-

porary, or so connected with the peculiar circumstances

of the primitive times, that afterwards

it

became of no

practical consequence.

Again, " They [the apostles] baptised, because they

were commanded to do so

they administered the Lord's

supper, because our Saviour enjoined

it

on his disciples

and both these duties were prescribed to the societies they

formed, because the nature and obligation of each were

and perfectly understood T (p. 64.) Now, without

why " both these duties were
prescribed" ^is, or is not correct, it is manifest, that when
the " nature and obligation of each [of these duties] were

equally

inquiring whether the reason

96
equally

and perfectly understood" the Lord's supper was

own

never administered to the unhaptised, on Mr. Hall's

But how could a perfect understanding of

" nature," place them in such an order, if there was

confession.
their

not some reason

The

why

that order ought to be followed

which he

on the "nature and obligation"

of these injunctions being " equally and perfectly understress

stood," will avail

lays

him nothing.

discuss the subject with a person

of baptism, our object

the Lord that

it

is

to

For when we have to

who denies the perpetuity

prove that

it

was the design of

should be continued in his church

whenever the perpetuity of both ordinances

ledged, their

*'

nature"

is

suflBeiently

the present controversy ; for

ing to the

New

who

is

but

acknow-

understood to settle
that' accord-

will aflSrm,

Testament, baptism was not designed to

precede the Lord's supper? Even on Mr. Hall's principles,

should any one come forward and say, he admitted the
perpetuity of these institutions, but though unbaptised,
yet he requested communion, such an application ought
to be rejected.

may be said, there is no "necessary connection",

"
immutable relation" between the two ordinances.
no
Still it

Here we would

ask,

what

is

meant by the

terras! Positive

precepts depend on the will of the legislator

expressed with

sufficient clearness, so that

if that

is

according to

the " natural order of the christian sacraments," baptism

has the " prior claim"; there

of the

man who

is

enough

to guide the

with simplicity of heart inquires

mind

what

is

the will of Christ, and to form in his view a "connection"

so " necessary", a " relation" so " immutable", that he

dares not break

it.

The only remaining supposition is, that though there

may be some connection between the two institutions, yet
they are not " so related to each other" that he whom we
deem not baptised, is, ipso facto, or from that circum-

stance alone, disqualified for an attendance at the Lord's

97

We

table", (p. 61.)

sion

then inevitably come to this conclu-

the revealed will of Christ

ought

be obeyed

to

in the order

down, but conformity

not necessary

is

we

what

to

is,

thatboth the ordinances

in

which they are laid

confessed to be his will

is

proposition whicl), if proved, would

grant, settle the controversy

but

it

would be, by

would dissolve
our guide,

all

eitlier

make

obligation to
in

dis-

conduct; and

annulling- the authority of the rule of our

New Testament

the

the i'ormation or constitution of the

christian church.

We
upon

therefore take the consequence which

He whom we deem

"

us.

unbaptised

is,

pressed

is

from that

circumstance alone, disqualified for an attendance at the

Lord's table", with those

who deem him unbaptised.

For

they cannot admit him, without acknowledging-, that baptism

now become

is

that

a matter of great indifference

whatever have been

claims, they have

its

and

so far

vanished, that the original importance of the institution

gone,

authority

its

once a leading
church,

it is

has thought
little

repealed

virtually

fit

sufficient for us to

to enjoin,

and what was

away

its

But, " in the pre-

finite

God

know, that whatever

must be a matter of duty

becomes weak and

or explain

article in the constitution of the christian

no more of any consequence.

is

sent case

is

is

mortals to limit

obligation, by refined

its

and

it

sphere,

and subtle

dis-

tinctions". Cp. G3.)

We

are also informed, that "it surely requires but

attention to perceive that

it

is

little

one thing to tolerate, and

another to sanction ; that to affirm that each of the positive

rites of religion

ought to be attended to

and that they

are so related, that a mistake respecting one, instantly disqualifies for another,

61.)

" An

are not the

attention to

this

same propositions". Cp.

distinction,"

we

are

told

" would have incredibly shortened the present debate."

We have no objection to view the subject in any light
which

will at

once enable us to see

its

proper issue.

We

98
shall

have occasion in our progress

our

to notice at large

author's reasoning respecting ''toleration"; for the present

we shall only ask, if we " tolerate" the admission of those

who are acknowledged to be unbaptised, do we not
**
The
sanction" their communion in that character ?
question thus practically comes to a single point

can
Mr. Hall prove that we act according to the New Testament rule and examples, in forming a church of unhaptised

members ?

We say to

him

as

we

say to the Paedobaptists,

produce a single instance from the word of

of your theory, and
It has

we

will

be

God

in proof

silent.

been said by some persons,

that,

"as the apostolic

commission was only the law of baptism, nothing respecting

a subsequent institution can be inferred from it."*
the commission itself asserts the contrary.

But

It directed the

Apostles to teach the baptised, "to observe

all

things

commanded" them thus it was

not, " only the law of baptism", it was more it was a law
enjoining those who by baptism had " put on Christ," to
obey all his commands. Whether that ordinance, here
called " a subsequent institution,^^ was among the number,
we leave the common sense of men to determine. But if
whatsoever" the Lord

**

the apostolic commission continues as a rule, the only ques-

we have to settle is, whether

" the law of baptism," has been obeyed, or not? for the

tion which, in any instance,

Lord's supper

is

"a subsequent

in5<i<M<ion,"

the concession of our opponents.

* Congregational

Mag. June

1818. p. 324.

even on

SECTION

Mistakes

of Mr.

Mr. Fuller

Hall respecting

Eph.

Unities,

II.

the

and, Dr. Whitby.

iv.

In "Baptism a term of communion" an argument is adduced, which was borrowed from " Mr. Fuller's Letter to
a Friend," intitled "

The

to the Lord's supper,

We

ment."

admission of unbaptised persons

inconsistent with the

New

Testa-

Mr. Fuller's
words. Mr. Hall

stated the substance of one of

arguments, though

we

did not copy his

quotes our words, as if they were Mr. Fuller's: we then

added some observations on the Unities mentioned Eph. iv.
3,

These he

&c.

tliey are

not

his,

Mr.

also considers as

nor

is

Fuller's,

though

there any thing in the connection

that would lead an attentive reader to this conclusion.

We

then find a critique on Mr. Fuller's pamphlet, in

which he speaks of
It

Mr.

it

in a very

degrading manner, and

on the editor for publishing

reflects

it.

was not unnatural for Mr. Hall

work on

Fuller's

theory

a point opposed to his

but why he should say, Mr.

trust of the

to think lightly of

own

**

felt

favourite

some

dis-

ground he was treading, which for several

reasons I strongly suspect,"

we know

not.

In conver-

sations which the writer of these pages had with

him on

the subject some months before his death, he appeared

satisfied that his

views were correct

attested by the advertisement which

pamphlet.
letter

and

prefixed to the

is

In that advertisement there

is

sent with the manuscript to Dr.

this is strongly

an extract of a

Newman, dated

Jan. 16, 1815, in which Mr. Fuller says, "if any thing be
written on the other side,

it

may,

if

thought proper, be


100
Mr. Fuller died before Mr. Hall'.s
"
was published when
of
Communion"
Terms
on

printed, but not else."

treatise

work appeared, Dr. Newman justly thought that he

ouffht no lon2:er to withhold Mr. Fuller's letter.
Those who read only what Mr. Hall has said concerning

that

it, will suppose that Mr. Fuller's work contains nothingmore than the arguments he has noticed. But they who
read the work for themselves, will find many things which

and which, though they are stated

bear on the point,

briefly,

deserve consideration: and they will then judge of

the accuracy which Mr. Hall displayed,

when he brought
together, an argument which we borrowed from Mr. Fulsome observations of our own for which he is not
ler,
and then added " such is the substance
accountable,

of Mr. Fuller's argumentation on this subject"!

But

to return

Mr.

f/>.

68.)

argument was drawn from

Fuller's

passages he had quoted, in which allusions were

made

to

baptism and the Lord's supper in a manner which shewed

the two ordinances were connected together in the mind

of the S.pos{\e, (Fuller a Letter,]}. 17

ofCom.p. 27,28.)
" It

is freely

In

his

19. Baptism a term

" Reply," p. 65, Mr. Hall says,

admitted that these, and perhaps other texts

which might be adduced,

afford

examples of an allusion

to

the two ordinances at the same time,

whence we may be
together in the mind of the

certain that they were 2)resent

But whoever considers the laws of association,

must be aware how trivial a circumstance is sufficient to
writer.

unite together in the mind, ideas of objects

no

essential relation exists."

among which

Again, "In fact the warmest

advocates of our practice would feel no sort of difficulty in

adopting the same

style, in

consisted ow/y of baptists

be inferred than that the

an epistle to a church which

consequently nothing more can

societies

which St. Paul addressed

were universally of that description : a fact we have already

The only light in which it bears on the
fully conceded.
subject

is

that which

makes

it

perfectly coincide with the

101
argument fiom primitive precedent, the
has been sufficiently demonstrated."

Here
It

is

('y?.

futility

of which

Go, 60.)

observe what our author has conceded.

let us

allowed that the societies

whom Paul

addressed were

universally Baf'I'ISTS, and that in his address, the two

ordinances tvere jjresent iogelher in his mind: nay farther,

Mr.

that
feel

11.

and the advocates of his practice, would

difficulty in addressing- " a church which

no sort of

consisted oyihj of Baptists' in the

is

same

style.

So

that

it

only in a Baptist church the expressions of the Apostle

can be used with propriety, Mr. Hall himself beins^ judge!

As an apology for the Apostles' alluding to the two ordi-.

nances at the same time, we are told that " whoever conmust be aware how

siders the laws of association,

a circumstance

is

ideas of objects

among which no

We
place

trivial

sufficient to unite together in the

are told, that

"the mere coincidence of time and

abundantly sufficient for that purpose."

is

mind,

essential relation subsists."

iorce of this reasoning

is,

The

that because a vagrant imagi-

nation will connect things which have no relation, but

which are united by a "

so might the Apostle

trivial

and for

circumstance" therefore,
this

reason

we should not

suppose that there was any "essential relation" subsisting

between the two ordinances, though we are certain that

" they were present together" in his mind.
But it is not enough to assert, that a "
stance"

is

sufficient to unite together in the

of objects not related to each other

that in the present instance

it

it

trivial

circum-

mind the ideas

should be proved

was only a "

trivial

circum-

stance" that did associate the two ordinances in the view

of the Apostle.

It should

be

/?rot'gc?

that notwithstanding

the prominency given to baptism in the commission, and

in the practice of the christian

on our author's own confession,

communion but
with the Lords supper
only to

church
it

notwithstanding,

was then

to salvation, yet it
in

the Apostle's

essential, not

was connected

mind by

so slight

102
a bond, that

it is

by

time completely broken.

But be

may, baptism appears the

first in

this

the connection what

it

the order here before us

was commanded

whatever
one side

is

be administered

to

the weight of this argument,

and wherever a church

is

be accounted

it

both the facts and allusions place

for, that
it

and how can

it

thus, unless

So that

first.

it lies

entirely

on

formed on Mr. Hall's

must be

principles, the apostolic style of address

dis-

continued.
the " Unities,'' enumerated in

The next attack is made on

Eph.

ment."

made

iv. 4, 5,

Mr. Hall

particularly the " one baptism", ver. *.

calls this text

(/?.

" irrelevant

His reasons

66.)

of the Lord's supper,

are,

it

firm, or illustrate, the relation

'

to the present argu-

since no mention

which baptism bears

The Apostle was speaking

ordinance."

by which the church was distinguished

was baptism.

is

cannot be intended to conto that

of the unities

and one of these

But, according to the description before

us, how could a person become a member of the church

who was not baptised ? and how could he who was not a
member be admitted to the Lord's supper ? Besides,

there

if

is

any force in Mr.

against himself

Lord's

supper,"

it

not included

is

necessary to be found in

society

may bear

a christian church, though

of the Lord's supper

tion of the Apostle if

Again, "it

is

reasoning,

but
it

made

is

among

it

it

all

made

of

it,

it

is

of the

the unities

the christian church

tism, from the distinct mention

A christian

Hall's

"since no mention

for,

is

but bap-

necessary.

the marks here given of

may

for a time

be deprived

does not answer the descrip-

has not baptism.

very uncertain [says Mr. Hall] whether

the Apostle refers to water baptism, or to the baptism of

the spirit; but admitting that he intends the latter, [per-

haps a misprint for the former] he asserts no more than

we

firmly believe,

that there are not two or

more

valid

baptisms under the christian dispensation, but one only

103
a deviation from which, either with respect
or the mode, reduces
it

to

conceded that there

is

and

it

is

one

to the subject,

Here

(p. G6, 67.)

only one valid baptism

Pcedohaptism

virtually, that

He

a nullity"

is

a nullity.

adds, " Lastly, since his [the Apostle's]

avowed

object in insisting upon these unities, was to persuade his

reader to maintain inviolate that unity of spirit to which

they were all subservient,

adduce
volves

this

passage

in

it is

subversion." (p. 67.)

its

extremely unreasonable to

defence of a practice which in-

So then, the

effect

which

the Apostle had in view, and to which all the enumerated

be better produced by leav-

unities tvere subservient, will

ing one of them out

Pleading for one of these

and we hope, not improperly pleading

of faith and of

spirit

from making

arises

practice,

But

is

it

unities,

for that unity

both

with the primitive church, which

our model both as to sentiment and

subverting that unity

the system of the Apostle and that of our author

are widely different.

Paul expressly mentions baptism

Mr. Hall excludes baptism

and omits the Lord's supper.

as unnecessary to unity, and would have us turn our attention peculiarly to the latter institute.
distinctly, the primitive

author,

it is

church had "

true, allows that there are not

valid baptisms, but one only"; yet the

is to

bring in those who, on his

had NO baptism!
that

it is

To

The two

or

is

more

his labour

own acknowledgment, have

theories are so far asunder,

impossible to adopt both.

"the

celebrated

and an Episcopalian,"

is

Whitby,
;

com-

a Pfpdobaptist,

brought against us

quoted with great approbatiuu

and a pas-

the principal part

"that no error in judgment, or mistake in

of which

is,

practice,

which doth not tend

spirit

"two

whole of

close the whole, the authority of a " learned

mentator,"

sage

The Apostle says

one baptisni"; our

to deprive

a christian of the

of Christ, can separate him from the church of

Christ."

'*

Thus

it is,

that this learned

commentator con-

104
ceives himself to have discovered a demonslration of
principles

we are

abettiug-, in the very

t!ie

words our opponents

urge for their overthrow." Q).67, 6S.)

no part of our intention

It is

undervalueDr. Whitby.

to

Though many

of the Baptists do not on certain points

agree with this " learned commentator," yet he shall have

full credit for all his

his

own

statement.

excellencies.

Let

us,

however, hear

In the paraphrase which he gi\es of

the chapter previous to the Annotations, he says, on verse

the 5th,

"There

is

also to us

christians

one Lord, one

bi/ which we do i>t'oJess

Dr. Whitby s evident design in the Annofrom which Mr. Hall has copied the ** demonstra-

Lord, one baptism

faith in this

this faith."

tations

tion" of his principles,

is to

oppose the arguments of the

Catholics, and to prove that " no church governors, jointly

or severally, can be by

God

appointed to be the living

But

judges, or the infallible directors of onr faith."

urging

this

conclusion, did he intend to deny his

Paraphrase?
church

how

If not,

Dr. Whitby

tells

did christians

us

there

is

come

this instance

cate

Dr.

W.

pleaols the

into the

" one faith in this

Lord, and one baptism hy which we do profess

In

in

own

this faith."

cause which we advo-

and his inferences are denied by no protestant of

any party.

Our

controversy

is

not, on Avhat

grounds a

person should be separated from the church of Christ, who

has become a

member

of that body according to the

Testament plan, but on what grounds he ought

admitted.

New

to

be

SECTION

3Ir.

III.

Hairs reasoning concerning

and pro-

positive law

hibition, examined.

Mr. Hall next

institutions of the

Is there a single

professes to inquire whether the two

Gospel " are connected by positive law.

word

in the

New Testament which,

fairly

interpreted, can be regarded as a proJiibifion of the ad-

mission of unbaptised persons to the Lord's supper?" (p.

69.)

Here Mr. Hall attempts

expression in

which

is,

'

" the

advantage of an

to take

Baptism a Term of Communion,'

New

p. 32,

Testament does not prohibit the un-

baptised from receiving the Lord's supper, because no

circumstance arose which rendered such prohibition neces-

We

sary,"

stated three things

Mr. Hall chooses

one, and blend the other two together.

to

omit

If the reader will

refer to the above-mentioned treatise, he will find that the

sentence quoted by Mr. Hall, was preceded by

vation, "surely

it

will

not be pleaded, that a

not binding, except there be a prohibition of

command
its

enough."

Here an appeal

is

made

it,

is

opposite.

who hear

If a direction be plainly delivered, and those

conceive that they clearly understand

this obser-

that ought to

to positive

law

it

be

and a

prohibition was stated not to be necessary, whenever the

sense of that positive

however men may

command which

la\^

differ

was

in

clearly perceived.

their

who admit

need such a prohibition.

permanency of the institution, will

petuity,

obeyed

and

to assert, that

if it
it

interpretation of the

enjoins baptism, there

for saying, that those

its

is

not a pretence

authority and per-

Who
say,

it

that allows the

ought not to be

ought to be obeyed, who

will

venture

should be placed after communion.

I

For

.106
Mr. Hall thinks proper

to say, that the only reason

" for an express prohibition not being then

assigned
necessary,

that the ordinance of baptism

is,

understood:" and he then adds, "surely

reason, the necessity must return

when

was perfectly

if this

be the only

that reason ceases

or in other words, there will be a necessity for an express

prohibition of the unbaptised whenever the precept re-

specting baptism ceases to be understood." {p. 71.)

If the reader will attend to a few plain observations, he
will easily

be able

to

judge of Mr. Hall's correctness

examining a statement, or
the

ONLY

reason which

in

we

reasoning upon
assigned

why

in

lie says

it.

a prohibition

was not necessary, was that the ordinance was perfectly

If any person will examine what

understood.

he

will find

1st.

It

we did

say,

was supposed, that a prohibition

would not be deemed necessary

to give force to a clear

command. 2dly. It was observed, " That the New Testament does not prohibit the unbaptised from receiving the
Lord's supper, because no circumstance arose which ren-

dered such prohibition necessary''

It does

that any of the principles on which the

not appear

moderns have

advocated the cause of mixed communion had been heard

of.

There was no need

of doing.

mode

Had

to prohibit

what no one thought

there been a tendency to our author's

member

of reasoning in the minds of any

of the

primitive church, the subject might have excited attention.

It

might have been

is

there no reservation

none of

this

said,

extreme cases sometimes occur;

made

in their favour

kind occurred, or

if

But

they did occur,

no evidence that the rule was dispensed with on

account.

It

was then added, 3dly. "It

that the law of baptism

was

is

either

we have
their

acknoicledyed,

clearly understood,

and that

the unbaptised could not be received into the church.

There was therefore no reason why a prohibitory decla(Baptism a term of Com. p. 32.)
be remarked, our observation was founded

ration should exist."

Here

let

it

107

He therefore could

on what Mr. Hall had acknowledged.

any share of reason, demand a prohibition of

not, with

what he himself confessed could not exist.

Leaving the reader to judge how far our author

him

rect in his statement, let us follow

"

if this

be the only reason, the necessity must return when

that reason
anil/

cor-

is

argument,

in his

ceases ;" &c. (p. 71.)

AVhether

reason can easily be determined

but

was the

it

if

no other

had been assigned, the inspired writers did not anticipate

arguments which,

might be urged against

in future ages,

what was understood and practised

deemed

it quite sufllcieut to

shew how they

who

they acted, and to rectify those

attempting

to

They
reasoned, how

in their time.

times choose to act a different part, are left to

please.

As Bishop Burnet says,

which the Papists made in

alterations

" All reasoning upon

institution

as

if

enough considered

this

head

is

in after

do as they

(speaking of the
the Lord's supper)

an arguing against the

Christ and his apostles had not well

it

but that twelve hundred years after

them, a consequence should be observed that

not been thought

day were

in their

Those who

introduce innovations.

of,

which made

till

then had

reasonable to alter the

it

{Expos, of the Articles, Art. 30.) If we

" an express prohibition of the
unbaptised," a Paedobaptist may demand " an express

manner of

it."

are required to bring

prohibition" of infant baptism; a

at the Lord's supper

ceremonies of

and a

his church.

Churchman, of kneeling

Roman

Should

Catholic, of

be

it

all

said, these prac-

tices are inconsistent with the obvious intention of

parts of the

New

the

Testament, we reply, and so

is

many

the ad-

mission of the unbaptised.

But, on our author's

bition"

mode

of reasoning, even a "prohi-

might with the greatest ease be

set aside.

It could

not be more plainly prohibited that the christian convert

should partake of the Lord's supper
tised,

than

it is co7/Man</ec/

before he was

that he should be

bap-

baptised.

108

Yet

if

any one should say, that he believed baptism

was a temporary

institution,

communion without

principles, be admitted to

itself

he might, on our author's

hesitation.

For, however strongly the prohibition was expressed, that

the imbaptised should not partake of
replied,

all this

it,

it

might

was true once while baptism was

still

but now the connection between the two ordinances

dissolved,

who

and the prohibition abrogated.

then,

If,

who

is

he

may be

denies the authority of baptism altogether

received, he

be

in force,

denies the force of a prohibition (which

could not last longer than the ordinance to which

What,

should not be rejected.

it

related)

then, would either the

directions or the prohibitions of Scripture avail, when

maxims which lead to such results are set in high places
Doubtless Mr. Hall expects to confound us by his succeeding argument. " Has it, [the precept respecting
i

baptism] or has

it

not, ceased (in our apprehension) to

understood by modern Pa^dobaptists

that

it

has, then, on his

own

If

it

be

be admitted

principle, an express prohi-

hition of the nnhaptised to receive the Lord's supper has

become necessary."

but

to

powerful appeal indeed

use the words of Bishop Taylor, "

harangue, which upon

nothing

{p. 71.)

it

pretends

strict

fairly

it is

a g"OodIy

examination will come to

and

signifies little."*

what has^ from what has not

Mr. Hall endeavours to perplex
the argument by drawing off his reader's attention from
It

is

right to separate

ceased to be understood.

the important consequences arising from this distinction.

We retort therefore
it

not, ceased to

his

own reasoning

" Has

that according to the

New

precede the Lord's supper?

or has

Testament, baptism ought to

On

we have had
we expect any.

this point

as yet, no controversy with them, nor do

For

it,

be understood by modern Paedobaptists,"

unless they were to introduce infant comjnunion, and

were

to give the Lord's

supper before they administered

Liberty of Prophesying, 18. p. 228.

Ed. 1647410.

109
baptism, their conduct shews that they and

So

part of the suhject alike.

this

we understand

that if there were a

"prohibition" in terms ever so

"express", they would

reply, this does not afl'ect us

we

baptised.

for

Should they, however,

their sentiments,

believe that

we

and declare that the baptised and the

we

unbaptised have an equal right to communion,

consider their arguments as soon as we hear them.

Mr. Hall's question, bold

then,

are

profess an alteration in

as

it is,

will

Till

does not require

an answer.

SFXTION

3Ir.

IV.

HalVs evasion of the argument on the connection of

the

two ordinances

We

now come

his

his

accusations confronted
mistakes concerning the " Scottish Baptists", S^c.

sions in
tion

'

to

Mr.

Hall's attack on a few expres-

Baptism a term of Communion,' on the connec-

between baptism and the Lord's supper.

passage

is

taken from p. 30

justly stated, there

is

"

if

The

first

the above evidence be

a real instituted connection between

baptism and the whole succeeding christian profession.

So

that there

is

no reason why the connection between

baptism and the Lord's supper should be more distinctly

marked than between baptism and any other duty or

In

vilege."

this

passage the connection pleaded

stated as an inference from evidence which had

adduced

made

the appeal (as

to the

New

we have

Testament:

pri-

for,

is

been

before stated) had been

to ihe principle

which runs

110
through the whule body of fact recorded
writings

and

in the apostolic

to those collateral evidences

which arose

from the notice taken of the ordinances of the gospel in

Baptism was a

the Epistles of Paul.

servance

visible,

ob-

ritual

was commanded by the Lord, and had

it

Among the various

appointed place.

duties which

its

marked

the visible profession of Christianity, baptism took the

lead.

It laid the christian

serve'

all

that the

under an obligation

Lord had commanded

"ob-

to

was the

it

first

link in the chain, and the rest followed in their order.

Here Mr. Hall

that the

New

flies

He

from the subject.

seems aware

Testament says nothing that favours com-

munion with persons unbaptised, and that it is in vain to

go to that volume for proof of what was unknown till
centuries after it was written.
No objection is therefore

made

to the

set the

evidence produced

whole by an inference:

do they confine

munion
feel

in

be the case, why

if this

their restriction to the

at the Lord's table

no scruple

but he attempts to over-

"

mere act of com-

In every other respect they

acknowledging the members of other

denominations as christians," &c. {p. 73.)

Mr.

The whole

we

Hall's attack pi'oceeds on the assumption, that

ought not

to consider

do not think

it

right to

those as christians with

commune

We

might refer

that

we

whom we

an opinion which pro-

testants justly treat as an absurdity,

no where in so much vigour as

of

and which flourishes

in the

church of Rome.

preceding observations, which shew

to

did not place the argument on a ground that un-

christianised

those

who

differ

with

us

we adopted

theory so different from that imputed to us, that

if

the

reader peruses the two pages of " Baptism a term of

Communion", which

Mr.

lie

open when he

refers

to

one of

Hall's quotations on this subject, he will usually find

some material part flatly

not worth following him in his

that his representations are in

contradicted.

But

misrepresentations.

it

is

He

may, as long as he pleases,

stig-

'

Ill

who do not

matise those

but

seriously injure liim,

exclaim

" what

think as he does

and ancient precedent

practice

He may

mean time becomes of

in the

How

may

this

cannot hurt them.

it

apostolic

admirably are

these illustrated by their judicious selection of the Lord's

the spot on which to suspend the ensigns of

as

table,

and

many people think this is

But may not the same thing- be
said in every instance in which any body of christians,
taking the New Testament for their guide, have left a

party." {p. 75)

an admirable stroke

doubtless

church which they thought had departed from the primi-

and formed one which they deemed more

The same imputation
the will of Christ?

tive standard,

agreeable to

on every protestant community

falls

in the

world

whatever produces a separation of communion

purpose of

fulfilling the will of Christ,

such harsh terms applied to

if

may always have

it.

at

is

full

liberty to

"which existed in the days of inspiration

walk

for

brand us as a " party"

"
we are a similar
party" to that body of christians

Mr. Hall
but

for the

in the

" Apostle's doctrine and

them we have

**

one Lord, one

them we

if like

in fellowship

faith,

;" if

like

one baptism," we are

and we accept the censure which he, or any

man casts upon us, as the consequence of our holding
contented

fast

" the faith

once delivered

to

the

Saints."

It is

nothing more than a repetition of the Jewish reproach,

" as concerning this sect, we know that every where it is

spoken against.

Ever since the commencement of

the Reformation the

how far ought chrisplatform laid down in the New

question has often been discussed,

tians to

conform

Testament,

That

to the

in the structure

and regulation of the church?

portion of the inquiry

now

in

hand, contains only

a small part of the general (juestion, and

compass.

Jesus Christ

in his church,

left

lies in

a narrow

onhj two visible institutions

and the present discussion practically leads

112
as to ask, shall
or shall

we

wc support

neglect

church of one of

quence whether

it

authorit}^^

we ought

ordinances

its
it

the

If

if

of one of them,

dismantle the

to

it is

of

conse-

little

obeyed correctly, or incorrectly, or

is

even denied altogether if a plan confessedly opposite to

the constant practice

of apostolic

ought to be

times

adopted, and that which visibly appears on the face of the

New

Testament ought

we acknowledge we

then

tian,

be violently opposed as unchris-

to

But

are wrong.

unless

these particulars are proved against us from a clear and

sound interpretation of the

New

Testament, we need not

be solicitous about our defence.

"Apostolic practice and ancient precedent" are not
Expressions of ours Mr. Hall can

aside.

set

easily

torture and pervert

the body with which he

is

connected

he can degrade, and treat with great contempt

but the

undeniable practice of the inspired servants of the Lord

remains, and will remain, as a stumbling block in his

still

And

way.

while he

compelled

is

ground M'hich we occupy

the

to confess that the

bap-

are the only body of christians that are baptised, the

tists

New

Testament

is

is

to

instantly seen to be strong, if

be our guide

in the formation

of the church.

The provocation which he

feels

is

increased by our

continuing not to condemn those as destitute of Christianity,

who

in our opinion are not correct in their

ment and practice on

efforts are

of

made

the point of baptism.

to accuse us of inconsistency.

this irritation of spirit

common
sions

Hence

was

effect of controversy

to
;

judg-

violent

portion

be expected from the too

but when both the expres-

and argument of an opponent are distorted, and

turned to purposes which were never designed,

it is

then

some unmanageable impediment

which cannot be removed
some argument adduced,
evident, that there

is

which

if

not noisy,

is

distinct and forcible, and

attempted to be run down because

it

which

is

cannot be answered.

113

passa;ie

Mr. Hall's " Reply,"

occurs in

which clearly marks the state of

He

subject.

says,

"when we read

but had

75,)

of Priscilla and Aquila

home, and instructing him in the way of

takinjj Apollos

the Lord more perfectly,

rative

(/?.

mind on the present

his

%ve

give full credit to the nar-

we been informed

that these excellent

pe.sons, after hearing him with great delight, refused his

admission to the supper of the Lord, on account of some

diversity of opinion, or of practice, the consent of all the

manuscripts and versions in the world would have been

insufficient to

overcome the

instantaneous conviction of

maxims and

incredulitij arising
its

from an

total repugnance to the

principles of primitive Christianity.

Yet

this

would have been nothing more than an anticipation of the

practice of our opponents."

Bring the case

point; suppose that Apollos,

who knew

to its

proper

"only the bap-

tism of John," {Acts xviii. 25.) was in the same circumstances with the

disciples

at

Ephesus, who were also

baptised " unto John's baptism" {Acts xix. 3.)

would

Priscilla

and Aquila have received him to the Lord's

supper

If they would not,

we

see

how

their

conduct

would be condemned by Mr. Hall if they would, how

can he account for the conduct of Paul to the Ephesian
;

I
He believes that the Apostle commanded them
be " baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus"; but

disciples
to

does he believe, or can he prove, that he received these

disciples to the Lord's supper before they

On

were baptised

own interpretation of the passage, the conduct of

the Apostle in commanding those " to be baptised in the
name of the Lord Jesus," whose baptism he considered as
imperfect and invalid, was " nothing more than an anticihis

pation" of that practice, which, had

it

existed in the case

before mentioned, Mr. Hall says, would have been in

"total repugnance to the

maxims and

principles of primi-

tive Christianity"!

He

deserves, however, our thanks for his frankness

114
he

fair ry tells us, that if Priscilla

strict

communion, (which

is

and Aquila had practised

nothing more than not uniting

church membership with persons acknowledged to be

in

unbaptised) the consent of all the 7na7iuscri]jts and versions

would have no weight with

in the world,

hi7n

settled point in his mind, that such conduct is

it is

repugnant

" to the maxims and principles oi primitive Christianity";

and had

it

been practised by the most "excellent persons"

in the times of inspiration,

to

be agreeable
Besides

to

all

to the will of Christ

which the preceding observations

charge

is

first

it

that has been urged against us of a nature

forward "a

brought

precedent" !(jt?. 78.)

the

he would not have believed

What is this

will

new

apply, a

deviation from ancient

"deviation

?" It is,

"that

christians did not interchange religious services

with those with

whom

they refused to communicate"!

curious accusation indeed. Mr.

H. allows

that

all

the prim-

churches were baptised; he will not deny that they

"
had
one Lord, one faith, one baptism": and the time
itive

was not arrived when any one imagined the two christian
ordinances were independent of each other. That "deviation" from the one baptism of the christian dispensation,

"which, either with respect

reduces

it

to

nullity,'^

to the subject or the

according to his

ledgment had not taken place.

So

mode,

own acknow-

that the question had

not occurred, how far we might act with those who had
made such a " deviation." It is therefore in vain to charge
us with departing from " ancient precedent",

till

our author

has produced a precedent which applies to the present

case.

There

are,

however, some cases on record which,

as far as they resemble the present state of things, deserve

consideration, since they furnish us with analogies.

conduct of Paul

The

in directing the Jlphesian disciples to

baptised, has been noticed, both in this work, and

be
in

Baptism a term of Communion and no one will venture

an " ancient precedent" against us. The

to say this is

;'

115
Apostle thought difterently of these disciples than he did
of

So

men

in general, yet

he commanded them to be baptised.

also Priscilla and

Aquila did not treat Apollos as a

The conduct

schismatic, but as a mistaken good man.

of

the Apostles in attending the temple worship, furnishes

another case in our favour,

together into the
the ninth hour."

" Peter and John went up

temple at the hour of prayer, being

(Ads

iii.

1,)

They

did not forsake the

house of prayer whither they had been habituated to go, so

long as they had
also,

many

The Apostle Paul

the opportunity.

years afterwards, went up to Jerusalem to

worship: {Acts xxiv. 11.)

This

is

his

defence for being

found in the temple: and he contended, that though

way which the Jews call heresy,

I the God of my fathers ," ver.
they worshipped

yet said he,

"

in the

so ivorship

same God whom

14. the

thus declaring that though he differed

from them, yet since there was one great point of union,
he acceded to their worship as far as he could

and

his

taking the vow of a Nazarite upon him, and being found

in the
rites,

temple for the purpose of

Jewish Priests according

far as

fulfilling

the

part of which consisted in an offering

to the law,

commanded
made by the

was a proof

that, as

he thought them right, he gave them such complete

made use of

countenance, that he

Indeed

this part

their ministrations.

of his conduct was designed as a public

God according
know that his senti-

testimony that he could, and did worship

to the rites of the

Jews

and yet we

ments as a christian would necessarily prevent him from

holding complete communion with that people.

So

far,

therefore, as cases existed which have any resemblance to

our having a partial connection with those with whom we

cannot altogether agree, the spirit of " ancient precedent"
is

not against us but /or us.

you can

differ,

views of the

only

Our maxim

when you

unite where

are compelled

New Testament pattern of a

and when a better maxim than

is,

this

is

by your

christian church

discovered, and

11(5

proved to be consistent with the sacred

will gladly

A
Mr.

adopt

volume,

we

it.

curious specimen of quotation occurs in that part of

Hall's

to think

work now under examination, and

as he

seems

he gains an advantage from what he brings

ward, and recurs afterwards to the same thing,

it

for-

may

be proper to notice it in detail.

He says, (p. 78.)
" Mr. Kiughorn himself deprecates the vei'i/ suspicion of
placing even baptism on a

level

with the least of the moral

Again, (p. 105)

" Our author
acknowledges that baptism is not to be compared in imr

precepts of Christ."

'

portance with the

of Christ's jnoral precepts'"

equalizing bapris far from

least

(p. 107)rT-**he tells us that he

'

tism with the least of Chris fs moral precepts'." (p. 108)

**the omission of a moral

he

affiiins, is

precept

the least of lohich,

of greater moment than baptism."

In none of tRe above pretended quotations does Mr.

Hall refer to any page, where such expressions may be

found

in

commas,

two of them he puts certain words with inverted

as if these

The

used.

were the very words which we had

reader will observe that they are not the same

words; but this would probably lead him to suppose, that the
sentiment was repeated with some variation of expression.

The

question however returns, where did Mr. Hall find

any of the professed

forward?

The

Communion.' It

is

which he has brought

quotfitions

answer

is

not in 'Baptism a term of

there acknowledged, "that

many other

things are of greater consequence than baptism" {p. 164.)

It

is

there also said,

Mr. Hall had

(j5,

87) (which

in his view)

to preceding observations]

is

" these

probably the passage

remarks," [referring

"are not made

of raising this institution to an undue height

any respect designed to exalt

it

purpose

for the
;

nor in

in the place of the Sa-

viour, or of faith in him, pr of obedience to the least of

his

moral precepts

New

but as they

lie

on the surface of the

Testament, and have a strong bearing on the pret

117
sent subject,

Here

let

we ought

not to pass them without notice."

compare Mr. Hall's professed quor

the reader

tations with our proposition

lie

w different

are

t lie

and

let

him observe both

words which he has pat with inverted

commas, from those which are copied from the work

and how different

self;

regard due to the

is

their design.

We

it-

plead for the

positive christian institute, in the

first

station in

which the Lord appointed

station

but we have no wish to displace the least of

is

make baptism a

the moral precepts, and

stead.

been

But supposing

that

Mr.

to be less than

substitute in

Hall's interpretation

and that the ordinance

just,

whatever that

it,

in question

its

had

was allowed

any of the moral precepts, and even the

least of the precepts

which Christ commanded,

still

is

it

no part of our ambition to " break one of these least com-

mandments and teach men so," lest we should be

*
the least in the kingdom of heaven." Matt. v. 19.

A train

of confident assertions

Mr. Hall,

(p. 80,) in

is

which we are

called

brought forward by
told,

that the advo-

cates of the restrictive system must change their ground

they 7nust either go forwards or backwards.

" They have

most unreasonably and capriciously stopped where no

moment

mortal before ever thought of staying for a

It

is

before ever thought of staying for a moment".

The ground

on which we have fixed our " encampment,"

described

we

tions and examples.

"stopped"; and

all

This

who

History know, that for

"no mortal"
us,

easily

is

New

Testament

the place at which

direc-

we have

are acquainted with Ecclesiastical

many

centuries after the primitive

ever thought of quitting this ground.

We acknowledge that
from

is

maintain the priority of baptism to the

Lord's supper, according to the

age,

!"

not true that we have "stopped" "where no mortal

we think

better of those

who

differ

than has sometimes been the case with contend-

ing parties in past days

Ihis part of our

great crime indeed

If in

conduct we avoid any portion of the mis-

118

men made

takes which excellent

assume no merit

we have been

to ourselves

we

former times,

in

but

we

are thankful that

led in any measure into a better way.

Mr. Hall thinks proper to call our conduct unreasonable

and capricious. If it is unreasonable, because we will not
walk even with good men in a path which we conceive is
from that pointed out by the Legislator of the
is brief, " whether it be right in the sight

different

church, our reply

of

God

to

hearken unto you, more than unto God, judge

ye." {Acts iv. 19.)

If

be capricious to lay down the

it

New

Testament as our rule, and to

draw the outline of our " encampment," with that volume

plain directions of the

in our hand,

we had

better be reproached for such capri-

ciousness, than for the

want of

it.

Our author reiterates his stroke " they have already

made such near approaches to the great body of those
whom we deem unbaptised, as places them at an immea;

surable distance from the letter of the apostolic precedent,

though in perfect harmony with

while they

spirit;

its

preposterously cling to that letter as the reason for refusing to go an inch farther." {p. 80.)

Here we

ask,

what

is

meant by an " immeasurable

tance from the letter of apostolic precedent"?

*'

letter' of the

" apostolic precedent" aflord a single

instance of membership and

If

tised?

it

does, let

communion with

Mr. Hall produce

example we have no precedent that will

men
from

in displacing
its

dis-

Does the

it.

the unbap-

In apostolic

justify uninspired

one of the ordinances of the Gospel

primitive station

but

we have precedents which

shew how they understood them, and how they practised

them.

Here we have

the option either of declaring the

letter of the precedents useless, or of

an inspired interpretation of the law

conforming to
:

it

as

we have adopted

the latter, and are satisfied with our choice.

But

is it

true, that

we can be

at an " immeasurable dis-

tance from the letter of the apostolic precedent," while

we

119
"

are

perfect liarmony with

in

confess

Again,

information.

is

it

its

If

spirit."
if

we

we

so,

are at an

**

im-

measurable distance from the letter of the apostolic precedent," how is it that we " preposterously cling to that
letter as a reason for refusing to
**

immeasurable distance" has

and

same sentence we

in the

from

moment

Our

figure,

we

we were

still

" pre-

it

" they remain immoveable, to

author proceeds,

change the

disappeared,

are told, that, far as

the " letter of apostolic precedent,"

posterously cling to"

basis,

go an inch farther"? This

in

not because they rest on any solid

but because they are suspended betwixt the love of

and the remains of intolerance ; just as

Mahomet's tomb is said to hang betwixt two magnets of

the brethren,

We

equal powers in opposite directions." {p. 80, 81.)

will not oflFer

any opinion respecting the assertion that

do not " rest on any

Mr. Hall
to

says,

examine

it.

solid basis,"

given us in

is

Two

cedent

*' o.

fgure"

it is

necessary

things had been mentioned

diately before, the spirit,

and the

we

imme-

letter of apostolic pre-

two things are mentioned

review, between which

we

but as the force of what

in the

"figure" under

are said to be " suspended,"

" the love of the brethren, and the remains of intolerance."

There we are told that we " preposterously cling" to the
letter of apostolic

precedent

magnets between which we

mains of intolerance

What

one of the two

are suspended is, " the rehere, that

inference can

these passages, except this, that

it

is

we draw from

intolerant to be

attracted by apostolic precedent

"The

Scottish Baptists" are then brought forward by

Mr. Hall

We

{p. 81.),

and he

tells

us they " act consistently."

suppose these are the same persons he had before

called,

"Sandemanian

Baptists,"

who

shelter themselves,

" by a stern and consistent process of intolerance." (/>. 74.)

He

says,

" conceiving

a profession of faith

is

with Mr. K. that immersion on

a necessary introduction to the

;
^

120
christian profession, they uniformly abstain from a parti-

cipation in sacred offices with the

and without pretending

ties,

treat them on

pretensions are

EVERY

members

of other socie-

judge of their final state,

occasion as men, whose religious
to

doubtful,"

It

is

not necessary

should defend the " Scottish Baptists,"

they

tliat

we

are able to

explain the reasons of their conduct, and they do not want

come forward

the necessary talent, if they choose to

own

their

But one

defence.

in

thing- is manifest, the picture

drawn by Mr. Hall is not a likeness their own writings

contradict what he thinks proper to say respecting them.
:

Mr. M" Lean,*

nion, you say,

an objection urged against his

reciting-

sentiments, says, "

it

By making baptism a term of commubecomes an occasion of dividing the

real children of God.'

AVe freely admit that

there are

multitudes of God's dear children unenlightened as to baj)tism

many of them have not attended

others, through the influence of

tion,

to the subject

custom and

have seriously taken up with infant sprinkling

stead.

We are grieved to think that so many of

God

children of

wood, one
part, I

am

and

in its

the

7'eal

are living in the neglect of the very first

ordinance of the Gospel." &c.

which 3Ir.

false instruc-

Mr. William

Braid-

of the present pastois of the church with

Mc Lean

was connected,

says,

" for

my own

not only persuaded that the Lord's people are

in national churches,

but that they are

all

jection to his will.

and

in the

church of

Rome

one in the faith of Jesus, and

They

know

in

some

essential leading

particulars, the spiritual nature of Christ's

love one a,nother for the truth's sake

the fruits of righteousness. "f

itself

in sub-

kingdom; they

and they bring forth

Other testimonies might be

* In A Letter, intitlcd Baptism must precede Church Fellowship

Works,vol iii.p.261,262. See also his Sermons, published by W. Jones,
p 99, 100, where the same sentiment occurs.
t

Letters on a variety of subjects, relating chiefly to Christian Fellow-

ship and

Church Order.

12mo.

p. 8.

121
added, but these

it is

presumed are

The reader

sufficient.

can now judge of the accuracy of Mr.

specting the " Scottish Baptists."

Ilall's assertion re-

But why, it may be asked, shoukl he attempt to involve

them in this controversy? Have they been intermeddling,

and by

this

means brought down upon themselves the

praise of consistency for their " stern process of intoler-

ance

Nothing- of this nature

?"

is

laid

to their charge.

But the reason is manifest Mr. Hall intends by their

means to inflict a deeper censure on us in England and
while they and we in some points are not agreed, his de:

sign

to involve us all in

is

common condemnation.

one

After the sentence on which the above remarks are made,

our author adds, " whoever considers the import of the
following passage, will be surprised Mr. Kinghorn should
feel

us

any hesitation

now observe

quotation
tism

is

"

it

in

adopting the same system."

his progress

Let
he begins by an inaccurate

granted" says our author, that bap-

is

not expressly inculcated as a preparative to the

Lord's supper, neither

any thing

is it

But the

else.

inculcated as a preparative to
act of christian obedience

first

is

of course succeeded by the rest; and the required acknow-

ledgment of our

faith in Christ,

in tlie nature of things,

ought to precede the enjoyment of the privileges which

arise

from

faith."

Whoever

which the above passage

of the words

'

to

examines the work from

quoted, will find that instead

is

any thing

else,'

which appear

Hall's work, the original terms are " to

privilege separately considered."

great,

both in

words and

in

in

Mr.

any other duty or

difference sufficiently

meaning,

to

demand ob-

servation.

la commenting on this short paragraph, he says, the

author " designs to assert, that iSuch is the prescribed order
of religious actions,
is

first

attended

that whatever

it

to,

that unless that ordinance [baptism]

every other performance

may be

in itself, not

is

occupying

invalid;

its

proper

122
place,

cannot lay claim

it

Again, "

He

expressly

7nust succeed, that

is,

come

spect to the Pc'Bdobaptists

whence

it

the character of a duty"!

to

tells

that every other duty

us,

after baptism, which with re-

impossible on our principles,

is

necessarily follows, that while they retain their

sentiments, they are disqualified for the performance of

Again, " The assertion he makes

dutijy

a general proposition, which

Christianity

must succeed baptism

going before

it." (/?.

Our author

in the

is

contradiction

in

adds,

"thus much

Baptism, which he styles

for

\}i\Q

duties

let

us

of Christianity.

pi'ivileffes

the required acknowledgment

of our faith in Christ,' he

tells

us

'

ought

to

enjoyment of the privileges which arise from

ought to precede, but do they in fact?*
all

to

82, 83.)

next hear what he says of the

that

form of

that all the duties of

is,

Is

precede the
faith'.
it

They

his opinion

other sects, as a punishment for their disobedience

in one particular, are left destitute of the spiritual i7nmunities

which flow from

to reflect

which

faith

If

it is

not,

it

behoves him

on the presumption of such a mode of speaking,

is little less

than arraigning the wisdom of the great

head of the church, who dispenses

his favours in a

manner

so different from thatwhich he ventures to prescribe.'\p.S4.)

Of

this

dilemma, the

thing that I have said

suggestion insinuated

my

ed

first
;

part does not follow from any

and,

in

the

thank God, the impious

second part, never enter-

mind.

We have

given Mr. Hall's interpretation at the above

length, that the reader

paragraph in

'

may compare

it

with the original

Baptism a term of Communion,' and see

whether such consequences can be drawn from

most distant shadow of

fairness.

If,

it

with the

in addition to this

opportunity of comparison, he should refer to the other

parts of the work, and observe the general objects in view

to

What he means by the expression, as it is here printed, "They ought

know not but perhaps it was a grammatical oversight.

precede," &c. we

123

in the connection of tlie

scarcely think

it

above quoted passage, we should

necessary to add a single word, either of

But

explanation or defence.

as

some readers might deem

such conduct an acknowledgment of Mr. Hall's interpretation, we will add few short observations.

Seldom has a more complete misrepresentation been

exhibited to public view, or more pains taken to extract
a meaning which was never thought
discussion was NOT, in any part of
dift'ered

The

of.

subject of

whether those who

it,

from us on the subject of baptism were, or were

not disqualified, either for the performance of duties or

the enjoyment of privileges, in the sense in which

Hall chooses to apply these words; but

it

Mr.

so clearly related

to the order, and connection of the external, visible, duties

and privileges of the christian church, that

surprising

it is

either a defence or explanation should be necessary.

cording to Mr. Hall's interpretation,

we must have

Ac-

asserted

that persons could not be christians if they were not baptised

but

most manifest, that whenever the point

it is

in

debate was stated, such an assertion was never either made

or supposed

Mr.

and sojne other reason must be found for

Hall's remarks, different from the current of any sen-

timents which

we expressed on

To

the subject.

apply

the terms " duty" and " privilege" in the manner he has

done, might in his view answer a purpose; but for such a

misapplication he alone

is

answerable.

If the reader turns to our former treatise, he will find

that while that part of the subject which

review was

reply to an objection which

made baptism
which he

now under

some might make,

of more importance than

will find, not

proper to assert

(jo.

and

88),

really

is,

we

and in

but an explanation of the author's

condensed

had stated

in different parts of the

in

it

is

as if

a contradiction, as Mr, Hall thinks

sentiments

tists

is

hand, on the very next page, there

in

fact a

recital of what be
work, " that the bap-

frequently declare, that they do not consider baptism

1-24

necessary to salvation

they do not depend upon

God

their acceptance before

subjects for that ordinance,

lievers in Christ,

and

it

for

nor do they view any as

who

fit

are not previously be-

God

justified in the sight of

by their

{Baptism a term of Com. p. 31.)

faith."

After such a declaration, made for the express purpose

of obviating misapprehension,

it

is

presumed no farther

Mr. Hall's charges can be necessary.

The case of Cornelius is alleged, and Peter's admitting
him and his household to all the "privileges of the church,"
is represented as decisive in the present controversy. Mr.

refutation of

Hall says,

*'

conduct

his

the principle on which he [Peter] justified

is

when

plainly this, that

that an individual

would be impious

is

to withhold

vilege." {p. 86, 87.)

it is

once ascertained

the object of divine acceptance,

Is

it

from him any religious priprinciple on

not this the very

which we admit those, who we believe are objects of

divine acceptance to baptism,

" Until

tised before?

if

they have not been bap-

be shewn that

it

was not the

this

principle on which he rested his defence, or that the practice of strict

communion

is

consistent with

it,

we

shall feel

ourselves compelled to discard with just detestation, a

system of action which St. Peter contemplated with horror,

as ivithsianding

command

That

not have been

omitted
to the
it

is

this

God.

(p. 87.)

they should

did Peter

AVould he

be baptised."^

God

of withstanding

guilty

command

But what

if

he had

Would he have admitted them

communion of the church without baptism

When

proved, either that Peter did admit the house of

Cornelius to the Lord's supper before they were baptised,

or would have done so had they required

enough
while,

to

we

reconsider

this

shall follow the order

to adopt, lest

and

will

be time

In the

mean

which Peter directed them

we should " ivithstand God" by neglecting

to place one of the ordinances of his

station,

it, it

" principle."

Gospel

to regard it for its proper end.

in its

designed

Here also we

125
and Mr. Hall are completely

In addition to

at issue.

that he has said before, he tells

communion "

ragraph, that the practice of strict

with worse consequences, and

is

far more

is

replete

offensive to

God, than that corruption of a christian ordinance

which

it is

all

us at the close of his pa-

to

This explicit declaration

opposed." (p. 87.)

shews the tendency of Mr. Hall's sentiments. It

seems then, that " a corruption" of a christian ordinance
clearly

a less evil than an adherence to the plan on which

is

was practised by inspired Apostles

baptism

is

That though

New

not according to the

it

infant

Testament, but

is

confessed to be a " nullity," yet the adoption of the plan

down

laid

God

to

upon

it

in the apostolic writings is

than the neglect of

must be content

ners above

all

men

to

it

offensive

and that those who act

bear the blame of being " sin-

No wonder

that dwell in Jerusalem."

that Paedobaptists are so attached to

met with such a

"far more

baptist before

Mr. Hall, they never

" This nev) doctrine," adds Mr. Hall, "that the tenure
by which religious privileges are held,
the

members of

is

inconsiderable sect,

ojie

serious reader with astonishment.

appropriated to

must

Are we

common

sal-

From
we have not

said

only persons ivho possess an interest in the

vation T' (p.S7.)

author's
this

Who

own book

we have

it

is

has

said

we are?

manifest that

strike the

in reality the

our

This " new doctrine" is

"
The doctrine" that baptism

said the contrary.

a discovery of Mr. Hall's.

precedes in order and design, and ought to precede in fact

the participation of the visible privileges of the christian

church,

is

so far from being new, that

apostolic commission, and has been so

universally admitted, that

by Mr. Hall that

But

as old as the

the opposite doctrine held

new, and has been hitherto main" inconsiderable" proportion of the

is

tained by only an
christian

it is

it is

commonly and so

community.

the grand stroke which

is

to finish the business, is

1-iG

reserved to the last part of the chapter, and terminates

what Mr. Hall

tells us,

comprehends "

He

in the controversy,"

all

that

asserts, that he has

essential

is

" examined

with the utmost care and impartiality whatever our author

has advanced in order to prove the necessary connection

betwixt the two positive ordinances under consideration."

He had thought proper to say before, " we
{p. 92,)
should be extremely concerned at imposing a false construction on his words

;" (/.

Let

82.)

it

how

be observed

these excellent and amiable qualities are displayed.

The charge now under review

is this

" let

it

also

be

we have been

seriously considered, whether the positions

examining, do not coincide with the doctrine of the opus

operatum, the opprobrium of the Romish church"! (/). 88.)
These " positions," so pregnant with danger, Mr. Hall
has discovered lurking in the sentence
christian obedience

is

" the

act of

first

of course succeeded by the rest

and the required acknowledgment of our

faith in Christ,

in the nature of things, ought to precede the

enjoyment of

the privileges which arise from faith"! {Baptism a term of

Com. p.

30.)

Who

lay concealed the

Romish church"^

"

would ever have suspected that here

o/>ms

We

operatum, the opprobrium of the

have already shewn that Mr. Hall's

is

not only contrary to the

to convey,

but contrary to the con-

interpretation of the passage

meaning we intended

nection, and to the statements of the nature of the question

at issue

again.

so that

it is

not necessary to go over that ground

Indeed the whole tenor of the argument

in

'

Bap-

tism a term of Communion,' proceeded on principles so

different

from those which Mr, Hall professes to extract

from the sentence now under

his

no easy matter honourably

account for his misre-

to

criticism, that

it

is

presentations.

In an examiner in the Inquisition, whose business

to exert his acuteness

in finding heresy

it is

where none was

intended, and where by the fair construction of words

127
none existed, such an accusation would have been
per character

a talent does more injury to

against >vhom

Whenever

it is

its

possessor, than to

for

called for by any

violent statements, not

reason

is

Without pretending

it.

in

all

him

exercised.

suHicient occasion, are exhibited, there

reason

in pro-

but in any other person, the display of such

its

one thing

parts,

must be some
say

to
is

what that

evident

that

notwithstanding the scorn with which Mr. Hall affects

had they not been

to treat the passages he has criticised,

a serious

obstacle in the

way

of his system, he never

would have adopted the hazardous plan of pretending

that they contained the opus
it

was needful

to dispose of

attempted, and the success of the

But
how this was
experiment we leave

operatum of popery

them

we

see

to the decision of others.

SECTION

V.

the amount of Mr.

Review of the general subject
HalFs argument
the advantage he gives to the Pado-

haptists:

recapitulation

and proved

of what has been conceded

consequences resulting from our author's

system.

We

have thus endeavoured

his three first chapters.

a review

Of

may be

A.s

to follow

Mr. Hall through

the discussion has been long,

of use, and can be given in few words.

the great principle laid

down

in

'

Baptism a term of


128
Communion,' to which the reader's attention was distinctly
and repeatedly directed as the turning point of a great part
of the present controversy, Mr. Hall has said

Of

New Testament

according to the

directions and examples,

to which also the reader's attention

was directed as a sub-

jectof consequence in this inquiry, he has said

Of

nothing.

the nature and constitution of the christian church,

the

nothing.

on which

of baptism,

scriptural design

was

it

stated the hinge of one material part of the

distinctly

Of the purpose
answered by baptism (except when an expression seems
debate turned, he has said nothing.

to

have escaped him

moment of
nothing.

in a

he has said amounts

to

forgetfulness)

A.nd

that

all

his distortions,

both of the statements and of the reasoning which he

thought

NOTHING.

to notice, are worse than

fit

What-

ever was the strength of the argument in the two

chapters of

'

Baptism a term of Communion,'

it

Mr. Hall has busied himself by

vnimpaired.

incorrect quotations

first

remains

criticising

by torturing expressions to obtain

from them a sense which they were never intended

convey; and by caricaturing statements

might make them hideous

his system,
all

in order that

and (whatever were his reasons) has

their force

he

but he has avoided the prin-

argument which were directed against

cipal parts of the

in

to

left

them

"Whatever can be called argument

Mr. Hall's book

in

proceeds on the practical absurdity of supposing that the

unbaptised can, in that character, have a right to com-

munion.

The

discussion occasioned by

must always come

to the inquiry;

which

the old system of apostolic times,

tliis

is

to

controversy
give way

or the neiv system of

Mr. Hall? No reasoning can prove the two plans to

be alike drawn from the word of God and in vain we
;

pretend to
laid

down

make
in

it

our rule,

precept and

if

we

neglect the plan there

illustrated

adopt another not contained in

it.

by examples, and

;
!

129
Every one must, have observed how eagerly Paidobaphave pleaded Mr. Hall's authority

tists

They

see that

tliey

else could give them.

think baptism (as they view

gain an advantage

into the church persons

of any importance, must

it) is

who would introduce

who are declared to be unhajilised

and say, see what these Baptists are driven

their ^eal

all

"overwhelming evidence,"
system

is

and

all

conscious

so

Mr, Hall has conckded that

baptism

iras a

concede

their

all

their boast of

are they

that

of no practical consequence, that they will

admit those who have had no baptism at

sion,

to

about a divine institution

appeals to primitive Christianity

their

who

Pa;dobaptists

the inconsistency of tiiose

hiiigh at

With

favour.

clearly perceive that if

are vidnerable on that side,

which nothing

own

and Ihns made a concession

They

they can improve.

Aviiicli

in their

has lowered the practical obligation to

the law of baptism,

ol)ey

we

lie

all

in the apostolic

church

uas a term of profes-

term of conjinunion

that the Apostle Paul did allude

to the

two christian

ordinances, so that they were both together in his mind,

that his expressions
to a society

there

is

were correct,

as they

were addressed

which consisted only of Baj)tisls,

and

that

a " natural order" in the christian institutions.

" order" appears,

has also been proved that this

first

It

in

the apostolic commission; next in the apostolic conduct;

"order"; that every view

that nothing can reverse this

which we can take of

the

New

tlie

design of baptism, according to

Testament statements, shews

rally preceded the Lord's supper;

can receive a person who

rule of the

New

is

ns,

and

that

it

natu-

that no church

unbaptised, according to the

Testament.

Since then, on the one hand

it

has been granted, and

j^roverf, that both the command and design of

baptism shew " the natural order of the christian sacraments", was this " order" the effect of accident, or of

on the other

design

None

will say that it

was the

effect of accident

130
and

was the result of design, what right have we

if it

an established, and designed order

alter

we had no

If then

farther information, than that in this

order the commission of our Lord placed his

and

tions,

own

institu-

this order the Apostles constantly adniinis-

in

we ought

tered them,

to follow

it

or else,

should

it

proved that there was wo design in the arrangement

our Lord intended that, in succeeding times,
first

to

become members of

his

be

that

men might

church and remember his

death and then profess their faith in him by their baptism,

or pursue a different course as accident might lead them.

proved that the Apostles didnci on

It should be

or would have acted

and then we
till

reason for

vered to

this plan,

in circumstances like ours,

it

will allow that the question is at rest

done,

this is

upon

it

will

be impossible

but

to give a satisfactory

not keeping the ordinances as they were deliThe order used in the administration of Ihe

us.

Lord's supper,

first

breaking and distributing the bread,

and then handing round

to the

communicants the wine,

stands on evidence precisely of the same kind with that

which

is

change

now under

this order,

consideration

If the

New

do we obey

Testament was intended

binding

rule, it is
its

injunctions if

directly contrary to
this

all

to

we adopt

be a

ride,

and

But

obligation.

in its

a line of conduct

the directions and examples which

inspired rule exhibits

station,

to introduce, as for ad-

to persons professedly unbaptised.

it

an inspired

and Mr. Hall might

and plead with as much reason, for

any alteration that he might wish

ministering

Here, then, we take our

and we contend that the plan of requiring baptism

previous to communion,

by the natural

justified both

is

interpretation of the commission delivered

by the Lord,

and by the whole weight of apostolic example.

If in following such

authority

misled by inspired teachers

us wrongly

and our duty

is

we go

infallible

astray,

we

are

guides have guided

to take care

lest

we

follow

131
Christ and the Apostles too exactly

have given us

not sufficient

is

most precise, we
is

shall err if

farther

we

the nearer

Lord

tlic

them.

If

in the order in

member,

that

but

we

it

it

appears the

On

this plan it

to

it,

the

will arise

to place the institutions

this

order

is

erroneous,

cannot be effected,

if tiiis

more

are far

we conform

which he himself had arranged

can be proved that

it

be done

let it

the rule which they

and our error

from imagining that we are bound

of

where

we adopt

be from truth

shall

tor

Neio Testament for the pattern

in vain to look to the

of the christian church

likely to err

let

us re-

by deviating"

from inspired precedents, or practically setting aside a

divine

command, than by

submitting- our

weak and

often

Mandering" reasonings to that plain rule, which was laid

down by him, " in whom

wisdom and knowledge."
But then it is said, here
this

are hid

is

the law and

new

direction,

make one

treasures

if so, either

we have no

and the case must be decided by

precedents which are already recorded.

case"

is

we make

to set aside

the

of

oW rule, or it requires

If no such rule can be found,

authority to

the "

the

a " new case":

"case" must be adjudged by the

a new rule.

all

New

If

obedience to an express

Testament

like the statute

books of the realm, which contain laws that are obsolete,

and which

We

it

shall

would be a shame

now proceed

to

to enforce.

examine some of Mr. Hall's

observations and reasonings on other parts of this controversy.

This however we intend

to

do with brevity.

of them are mere misrepresentations

\o

do with the subject before us

Many

many have nothing

we con-

but none which

ceive to be of vital consequence shall be passed over.

CHAPTER
On
The

dispensing with a christian ordinance.

chapter concerning " the charge of dispensing with

a christian ordinance",
It

V.

is

marked with peculiar

infelicities.

not more distinguished by the gentler features of

is

the christian character than those which preceded

not superior in
first

it

it is

reasoning, or in that fairness which

its

the sense and bearing of an opponent's

ascertains

argument, and then

tries its strength;

fur the accuracy of

its

nor

reniarivable

is it

quotations, of which there

may be

occasion to adduce instances.

Air,

me

Hall seizes an opportunity of finding fault with

for saying, that I

apprehended the expression

'

dispensing

power' was suggested by a circumstance in English History,

when Charles

Dissenters an indulgence

II. granted

He

beyond the then existing law.

into an error,

and

is

surprised

tlat

accuses

me

I should not

of falling

know

that

the doctrine of dispensation was familiar to preceding

ages. (p. 96.)

If on this point I had been in an error,

would have been of no consequence

a matter of opinion

gave of

my own

question

if it

it

to the

debate

it

it

was

occurred in an illustration which I

view of the sense of the expression in

was

a mistake,

the argument would

still

have remained where it was before, and the conjecture

that had been hazarded, would have been thrown aside

among thousands more of the same kind.

But an attentive reader will observe that
respecting the

''

I said nothing

doctrine of dispensation."

Popes had claimed

it,

and Mr. Hall

is

knew

the

correct in stating


1.33

power of

that tliey assumed a

an " error" of

is

this nature to a great

what appeared

own.

liis

was stated was,

Tliat wliicli

he the occasion which brought the ex-

to

pression " dispensing- power" into

common

Tiiough Mr. Hall thinks prober

currency.

find

lo

faidt,

not shew that I was wrong, by proving that

was
it

ex-

Tlie "error" at wliicli be pretencl;i lo be stirprised,

tent.

common use

in

it

became

expression

tlie

he/ore the period mentioned.

had been brought forward

liament,

he does

in

After

a marked manner in par-

who were

familiar, especially to those

interested in the discussions then in debate.

was there-

It

fore often recited in the detail of events which concerned

and was circulated through the general

the Dissenters,

By

body.

means, as a well known phrase,

this

into use in theohigical controversy,

by Mr. Booth and others

1 shall

was
I did

now

justified

leave

came

in the present inquiry.

with the reader to judge

it

it

and has been employed

in stating ivhat I did,

and

how

in stating

far I
it

as

namely, that " the expression 'dispensing power'

was suggested, I apprehend, by a circumstance

in Englisii

History," {Bap. a term of Com. p, 90.)

Unwilling either to equivocate, or

to

encourage equivo-

cation under the shelter of ambiguous language, an expla-

nation was given, and

we

stated ivhat, in our view was

exercising a dispensing power, and what was not.

reader will find

he

it

in p. 90, 91,

will neither iind

it,

of our former treatise, but

nor any reference to

Reply, but on the contrary a repetition of

that this argument

owed

terms."

In

his

(j).

100.)

its

The

Mr. Hall's

it,

in

his

own remark,

force to the "equivocal use of

strict justice, therefore, this part of

book might be passed over.

But

as he has thought

fit

to bring this part of the discus-

sion forward again, a few observations

unnecessary.

He

says,

the

may

exercise

not be

of a

deemed

dispensing

power "always implies a known and conscious departure

from the law."

He

who

claims such a power, " asserts a

134
right

deviate

to

from the

Hence our author

(p. 97.)

dispensing power.
tice

letter of

So remote," he

legal enactments."

denies that he lays claim to a

"

says,

is

our prac-

from implying the claim of superiority to law, that

it

our view, the necessary result of obedience to that

is in

comprehensive precept,

'

receive ye one another even as

Christ has received you to the glory of the Father'."

He

then adds,

all,

it

'

must have

the practice of toleration

if

where there

some supposed deviation from

for its object

or failure of duty

truth,

and

admitted at

is

no transgression

as there is

no law, and every such deviation must be

is

opposed

to a rule of action, if the forbearance

towards

it is

equally lies against

except such as

parties,

all

an absolute uniformity."

together,

who dispenses with a

who have not fulfilled

lows, that he

In both cases

a law, that the law

is in

law,

and he who

it is

is

same

situation as if he
in

both cases

ought not

we can
tent,

similar

admitted that there

force, that the

had obeyed

and

to claim the

yet go quite as

law
is

is

is

not obeyed,

acknowledged

power
far,

it.

The

facts are the

according to Mr. Hall,

if,

wo

of cUspenslnc/ with the law,

by toleratimj those who do not

But

since he pleads for a toleration of such ex-

that an

acknowledged positive command can be

it.

passed by, as
ask,

in very

notwithstanding received, and placed in precisely the

same

obey

toler-

" a duty of perpetual

and that he whose deficiency of obedience

upon

necessarily fol-

it

obligation", (p. 98,) are, to say the least,

circumstances.

insist

100.)

(]).

Comparing these passages

ates those

exercised

assuming a dispensing power, the accusation

if it

what precept

was either of no force or of no

enjoins,

toleration of this kind

can our author

find

use,

we

and what example warrants a

Or,

if

we admit

analogies,

where

a single instance, in which any direct

injunction of Christ was omitted, for the purpose of open-

ing a door to those

importance of

New

who

otherwise would not enter

Testament toleration we

fully

The
admit.

135
and would not knowingly narrow the system on which the
Apostles acted

but

it

has not yet been proved, that either

their instructions, or their example, authorise us in break-

insi-down the precepts which were raised by the authority

of the head of the church.

But says Mr. Hall, " we contend that the law is in our
favour" (p. 98.) If so, it is both needless and delusive to
plead for the unbaptised on the ground of toleration
that term supposes that there

for

a known and acknow-

is

ledged deficiency in their conduct, contrary to the meaning

of some existing- law

but

if

there

is

a posterior luw which

allows their admission, they should be introduced on the

broad basis of law

the paragraph containing the law

should be read at the church-meeting on their being proposed, and entrance

Where, however,

is

demanded

for

them on

this law to be found.

-*

It

its

authority.

was evidently

not the intention of the original law to admit the unbap-

nor was this considered to be its meaning, when it

"
ask then, what subsewas perfectly HUiderstood."

tised,

We

quent Act of Toleration has passed into a law for the

who do not obey the primitive statute and

relief of those

when did such an Act receive the Royal Assent ?

Our author brings forward the supposed authority of a
"comprehensive precept

receive ye one another, even as

Christ received you to the glory of the Father."

precept, by our author

own

confession,

But

this

was addressed

to

persons already in the church, and not to those who had

not been admitted.

How

precept" include those

Our author

then can this " comprehensive

who were not comprehended

talks about forbearance

distinguished class, which

we wish

extent recorded or required in the

what

to cultivate, to all the

New

Testament.

the forbearance enjoined in that volume

is

in it?

an excellence of a

But
Is

it

foroearing to require what Christ required by positive ap-

pointment

manded

If

it

is,

where

is

this

forbearance com-

Let one instance of the kind be produced,


136
and the system may then be carried

an inlerminnhle

to

If no snch specimen can be found, and no law

extent.

requiring such a disregard of a previously existing statute

can be discovered, the forbearance required

Testament cannot be urged

in the

New

in opposition to our practice

for of all the faults which were the subjects of reproof,

never find the primitive church rebuked for standing

and holding the traditions which

whether by word or apostolic

Our author

says,

we

fast,

had been taught

tjjey

epistle, (2 Thess.

ii.

15,)

"in every controversy, the medium of

proof by which a disputed point

attempted to be dis-

is

proved, should contain something distinct from the posior no progress

tion itself,

granted

is

and had he attended

cussion would have been in a

he canvassed the

first

made."
to his

(^j.

This

102.)

own renmrk,

more advanced

is

the dis-

state.

Had

leading principle presented to his

notice, that according to the

New

Testament baptism was

intended to be a mark of connection with the christian

church had he shewn us what was the desif/n of tliat

ordinance

had

he investigated the constitutional prin-

ciples of a christian church according to the scriptures

to all

which

his attention

was directed; there would have

been mediums of proof brought forward, which might have

been applied

to the present discussion

but he thought

proper to take a different course.

"Near

akin to this

is

the charge of " sanciioning" a

corruption of a sacred ordinance."

of this sentence and the inverted

(/?.

103.)

commas

By

the tenor

before and after

the word sanctioning , the reader will suppose Mr. Hall

part?

no reference

to the

page

is

given, nor indeed any

If the reader

hint whereby the place can be discovered.

takes Mr. Hall's word for

further trouble

but

if

it,

he may go on without

he wishes

to see

quotation stands, and of what words

sides

that

one,

(" sanctioning")

is

But from what

quoting something from our treatise.

how

it is

anj^

the supposed

composed, be-

which Mr. Hall has

U7
marked, ho must take considerable pains
In time he

faction.

as

safife

Where

tliat

he obtained

we

sanctioning,

be convinced that no such pas-

will

Mr. Hall professes

Nvhich

believe

is

participle,

never used except

in quoting;

not.

our author's own words

{see

the verb to sanction,

used a few times

we can

stance that
sition as

Mr.

II.

need not support

The
sage,

is

quote exisls!

to

The

we know

it

to obtain satis-

Baj^tism a term, ^c. p. 5G):

we

find, luive

laid

but in no in-

down such a propo-

we

has brought forward, and of course

it.*

succeeding' parac^raph brings forward another pas-

which Mr. Hall thinks

to inform his

tit

reader,

"is marked in Italics, and delivered with the solemnity

of an oracle"

and "

characterised hy the same spirit

Here we

of extravagance.'"
page is referred to
the quotation

is

are on safer ground,

Our words were, "

the

but the reader will find two errors in

the supposition

itself,

that toleration and forbearance will justify us in allowing

an omission of a law of Christ in his church, operates as a

repeal of that law

and introduces a rule of action which

would generally be deemed unreasonable."

{Baptism a

term of Communion, p. 53.)

In the next paragraph Mr. Hall says " he illustrates
his assertion

by referring to the legal qualification

re-

quired in a candidate for a seat in Parliament." {Reply

p. 105, lOG.)
find that

it is

If the reader examines for himself, he will

another " assertion" which is illustrated in

the passage referred to

we

therefore dismiss Mr. Hall's

observation on this illustration without farther notice.

*

Wheu we

have no reference we are

left to

conjecture

in

Baptism a

term of Communion, p. Ci, it is said, "The Protestants and Protestant

Dissenters refuse to unite with Roman Catholics and the Establishment,

because

in so doinsr,

appendages
those

whom

to the

they v.ould sanction what they believe are corrupt

law of

tiie

The

Saviour.

strict Baptist refuses to

he considers as unbaptised, because

sanction the omission of an express part of the

what Mr. Hall intended

as he

addnces

bnt

to

quote

we have had

If so,

it

law

in so

itself."

admit

doing he would
Could this be

contains no such proposition

instances of a similar mistake before.

138
But
says

as he returns to the former proposition, which he

is

we

"untenable',

He

tions.

will attend

briefl\

to his objec-

attempts to set the Apostle Paul in opposition

and could he succeed, we should have a

to our statement;

more formidable opponent to deal with than any who has

But the Apostle has not supported Mr.
yet appeared.
Hall's theory, nor

His meaning

is

is

quoted to his point.

the passage

the Apostle

censured the backbitings,

v/hisperings, swellings, tumults, in the Corinthian church

here

was an omission of a law of Christ

yet the

Apostle did not iutinmte "an intention to exclude'' the

offenders

therefore,

on the principle which we had laid

down, Mr. Hall says, "he was guilty of repealing the com-

mands of God." (p.

Now,
exist

and

107.)

granted that backbitings and other evils did

it is
it

is

granted also, that those who were guilty

of them did omit a part of the law of Christ

were

evils

which the Apostle was labouring

but they

to rectify,

which he was determined should not continue.

and

Before

the existence of such evils becomes a parallel case to the

admission of the unbaptised, these backbiters, whisperers,

&c. should be admitted

supposed

to

have

some people pleaded

for,

they must be
:
communion which

that character

in

said, that the terms of

weie

fcir

too strict

that they

were not convinced by any thing they had heard that

backbiting was a crime

and that they wished

to

come

to

the Lord's table notwithstanding they indulged themselves

in this gratification.
liberal

It

must be supposed

also,

that the

Corinthians received them on that ground, and

that they

were so attached

system of mixed com-

to the

munion, that they declared backbiting and whispering,

&c. were no bar to communion.

This supposition

is

necessary, or the case of the lamented imperfections of

these Corinthians will not apply as a reason

why

law of Christ should be set aside in his church.

it

correct that the Apostle

did

known
Nor is

not give the slightest

139
intimation of an intention to " exclude" them.

was to reduce them

to consider their

repentance

to

ways

would be found such

he expressed his fears that they

would not, and that

as he

humble him among them, by bringing

tempers and

the

afl'air

God would

light the

to

evil

conduct of those who he once hoped

evil

But he was coming the third

in the mouth of

were better characters.

time

His wish

hence he intreated them

should be investigated

two or three witnesses should every word be established

and he gave the oifenders solemn warning by saying, " I

told

you before, and

second time

foretell

you as

if

were present the

and being absent, now I write

which heretofore have sinned, and

them

to

to all other, that if I

come again I icill not spare. (See 2 Cor. xii. 20, 21. and
Such a threatening clearly intimated, that
those who did not repent might expect from the Apostle
a discipline, of which their exclusion from communion

xiii. 1, 2.)

would be the smallest part.

The
be says

proposition which Mr. Hall criticises, and which

of mistakes,

is full

is

not only plain in

cation to the case before us,

has said about

it

is

it

it

is

true

merely a perversion of

View

and intended meaning.

spective parts

but

appli-

its

what he

obvious

its

the proposition in

its

re-

supposes that Jesus Christ has given

us laws for the regulation of his church at large

it

sup-

poses also that the plea of toleration and forbearance was

urged by some as a reason why one of these kiws should

be omitted.

If in consequence of such a plea that law

ivas omitted,

and the church which acted ou

received

members who

ever intended to do so

same course
their

making

as

if

neither
;

had obeyed

plan

this

that law, nor

they then pursued exactly the

the law was virtually repealed

toleration and forbearance reasons

and

why they

omitted the law, was a practical declaration that such

reasons were, in their view, sufficient to suspend
ration.

How

then can

it

its

ope-

be denied, that such reasoning,

140
as far as

had iafiuence, would eventualhj operate as a

it

repeal of the laivl

it is

true,

It

was

in his time dift'eront from

turely considered

obedience

in fact saying, Jesus Christ,

did enact such a law, but the state of things was

what

the point,

it is

we have maHere

omitted by a deliberate act, and in

is

consequence of reasoning which

Whenever

law ought not now to be required.

to the

the law of Christ

it.

now

and have concluded, that

this

instance in which

is

it is

the case, as

supposed

will justify

must be

it

every

in

Baptists plead for the introduction of

persons professedly unbaptised, the law of baptism, as a

law given
it

was

for the regulation of his church, is treated as if

actually

tion as if the

repealed, and placed in the

same

situa-

Lord himself had declared, that though bap-

tism was once essential to communion,

it is

now necessary

no longer.
After this explanation, which

is

nothing more than

calling the reader's attention to the terms and evident

meaning of the proposition, it will not be necessary to

refute what Mr. Hall calls a " 7)iistake," namely, " By
affirming that to endure under
sion of a rule of action,

is

any circumstances the omis-

to repeal

it,

he has reduced the

very conception of toleration to an impossibility."

If Mr.

H. means

our proposition,

He thinks

(^/>.

108.)

that this sentence expresses the sense of

it is

a " niistale" of his own.

the errors and evils of the Corinthians exhibit

But

such a proof of toleration as admits of no reply.

there

is

no similarity between Paul's conduct towards the

Corinthians, and the admission of

unbaptised.

Mr. Hall pleads

Avho de7iy that baptism

is

communion with the

for the admission of those

obligatory, or

who have no

baptism than that which he denominates a nullify

he would
this,

say,

other
:

and

admit them into the church notwithstanding

and even though you never expect

did not plead for the admission of

to see

them change

The Apostle Paul

those who denied that

either their opinion or their practice.

141
ought to be sober,

tliev

and temperate

just,

but wlieu

they shewed, by displaying^ their evil passions, that they

vere not what he expected, he lamented over them and

But, says Mr. Hall, these evils did "not

reproved them.

prevent his forbearance".

have already seen

How

he forbore with them we

whilst absent he wrote an epistle, in

which he warned and exhorted them

but he told them,

that he intended to visit them, and that

iiont

he would not spare.

when he was pre-

AVould Mr. Hall advise the

ministers of mixed churches to adopt such language

if they did,

The

what would be the consequence?

which he attempts

have no

to identil'y

The

similarity.

Apostles would judge whether the profession of

made by

those

who

and

cases

faith

offered themselves for baptism, was,

or was not suflicient, and whether the fruits which they

brought forth were, or were not meet for repentance.

When

churches were formed, and

ciples

which the Apostles had

act on the prin-

left to

laid

down, the ministers

and members of which they were composed, would naturally

determine whether the candidates for fellowship had

a just claim on their attention

judge, whether their conduct
tjupport that claim.

and they would equally

in after life did, or did

But then

it

not

should be remembered,

that they were admitted into the church on the ground,

that they were ready to obey the laws of Christ; not on

the

avowed

principle, that

though some of these laws not

only were not obeyed, but were woi intended to be obeyed,

still

they might be received with as

Ihcy had obeyed them

3Ir. Hall

that

we

all.

would have us

will

Yet

much

to adopt;

and he thinks

it

which

strange

not acknowledge that this was Paul's prin-

ciple of forbearance with the Corinthians

Mr, Hall

cordiality as if

this is the principle

says, (jj.

fallacy of the

110.) " the

rrouTov

-^ivbog,

the radical

whole proceeding, consists in confounding

our interpretation of the law, however just, with the law

itself: in affirming of the first

whatever

is

true of the last;

142
and o^ subverting under that pretext the right of private

judgment" The first part of this sentence is explained

by Mr. Hall himself in the following- words " tlie interpretation of a rule is, to him who adopts it, equally binding
;

with the rule

itself,

because every one must act on his own

He

responsibility".

who

then,

deliberately thinks, that

the only conclusion deducible from the law of baptism

that

it

own concession,

require baptism before the reception of

Thus

the Lord's supper.

ceeds

"but

we

far

Our author

agree.

he has no authority whatever to bind

it

not, as

Had

lator."

far also

we

proit

who

the conscience of his brother, and to treat him

ceives

is,

ought to precede communion, must on Mr. Hall's

though he were at issue with the

on
re-

legis-

he stopped here we should have said, thus

coincide

we

address the reasons which weigh

with us, both to the understandings and consciences of

We

men.

we ought

are conscious

have we any

right to use

consciences

of others, than

own

and

as to our

any

oilier

to go no
means "

farther, nor

bind"

to

tlie

exhibiting what binds our

conduct towards those who do not

we allow that we ought not to

we hope we do not
we believe that
good men, though we think them mis-

atrree with us in our views,

treat

them harshly

many

of them are

taken.

of

But

it

is

added
this

infallibilitg,

"

to place our

dates, that

which has

is

this

presmiqoluous claim

assumption of the prerogalive of

Christ, this disposition

and

it is

to

identify ourselves

icith

him,

conclusions^n a footing with his man-

the secret spring of

all

that intolerance

so long bewitched the world with her sorceries,

from the elevation of papal Rome, where she thunders

and lightens from the Vatican, down

ties,

Here we cannot help

Baptist

asking, what does this

"This presumptuous claim of

is

to

Socie-

where she v/hispers feebly from the dust"! (7^. 110, 111 .)

that; and

to those

who makes

who maintain

it?

infallibility"!

What

If this "claim"

that the

New

is

mean

"claim'
ascribed

Testament requires

143
baptism

precede

to

we can draw

that

mode

cominuuion,

that according-

is,

of reasoning, though such persons

must neither speak

their opinion,

this

we

to

our author's

may

ihink, they

nor act upon

if they unite together as a church on

and declare,

inference

only

the

tiieir

own

For

it.

principles,

believe to he according to the law of

and we do not think proper

ting the unbaptised, they are open to

to

break

all

the violent charges

CJifist,

it

by admit-

They are, however,

own words " whecommanded to act thus,

which are here urged against them.

furnished with a reply in Mr. Hall's

ther

such
at

be true or not, that we are

it

is

our opinion; and icllh this persuasion

ive

libertij to

act in a different manner." (p. 116.)

Besides,

the charge

could form his

not think

it

are not

may be retorted if Mr. Hall

church on his own principles, would he
;

right to do so?

terms of communion with

his

If he did, would not the

church be, the admission,

that the unbaptised have a right of access to the Lord's

table

and

if so,

would not he " bind"

tion" on the conscience of his

those

him?

who

brethren

his
;

" interpreta-

since

many of

did not think him correct, could not join with

In forming his own church on

this plan,

he would

act on what he conceived was the will of Christ

what do

his

opponents do more?

such charges

is

and
But the absurdity of

their best refutation.

tuous language in which

may God preserve

all

Baptist

As

to the

contemp-

Societies are spoken of,

who.4:;ompose the7n from treating

the meanest of their christian brethren in such a manner

CHAPTER

VI.

Mr. Hall's misrepresentations of the argument RESPECTING THE GROUND OF DISSENT

EXPOSED.

The

first

thin^ that should be done in any controversy

understand what the argument of an opponent

to

this plain

reply to

The

position

Mr.

we need

granted,

is

not say

is

is.

If

much

in

Hall's fifth chapter.

stale trick of

making bad

syllogisms, and attempt-

ing to pass them off as containing the arguments of another

party, which occupies the

worthy of notice

churchman

is

communion,
nion,

first

part of this chapter,

supposed

in chapter

to use against the patron of

viii.

of Baptism a term of

Mr. Hall has not thought proper

The argument

is

that chapter

in

to

is,

mixed

Commu-

meet.

that the

Baptists

have a ground of their own, distinct from that held

common

not

and the point of the reasoning which a

in

with other nonconformists, and which by a clear

and brief argument,

from the Esta-

justifies their dissent

blishment, in consequence of the view they take of the

natui-e of a christian church,

the

New

and of the description which

Testament gives of

its

members

but that on

the plan adopted in the Establishment, a class of

bers

is

mem-

systematically introduced into the church of a

description so different from that in the sacred volume,

as to form a

body of a

distinct nature.

doctrine of the Establishment, infants are

the church in their baptism

and except

According

to the

made members of
in

extreme cases,

145
remain such

tlieir

all

tament, those

New

Tes-

of the church,

first

According

days.

who became members

to the

believed, were baptised on the profession of their faith,

and then were added

to the church.

The

strength of the

arguments urged by the Baptist against the Churchman,

was

it

observed, consisted in the directions of Christ, the

examples of the Apostles, and the precedents set before us

by the Apostolic church

It

was

stated, that

in

New

the

Testament.

however a churchman might be per-

plexed by arguments derived from such sources, yet

if

he

discovered that his opponent wf uld admit to communion

who had never been

those
this

was

baptised, he might retort, that

taking a liberty with the injunctions of Jesus

Christ which he never thought of doing.

OMIT
tion,
if

which he believed was

oi!

side,

and

if this is suflicient to set

of an ordinance

injunc-

is

pleaded on the

aside the operation

in force, the spirit of the injunction

still

respecting 'order

ANY

perpetual obligation; that

the precept respecting forbearance

one

That he did not

or practically disannul the authority of

will surely justify the other party in

pleading for the practices of the Establishment respecting

those points on which nothing

is

commanded

The churchman's defence proceeds on

that the

in scripture.

the principle,

acknowledged omission of one of the ordinances

of Christ,

is

New

a greater departure from the

Tes-

tament, than the appointment of those rites and cere-

monies, which he does not pretend to place on the ground

of divine command, but which were adopted by his church
at the Reformation,
(in his

To
reply

and are

still

continued, as desirable

view) for the preservation of decency and order.

the general design of this reasoning nothing like a

is

fault with

attempted.
;

Particular expressions

some strange mistakes are made

things are so misrepresented, that, from

Mr.

are
;

found

and other

Hall's state-

ments, no person, however acute, would ever conceive

what had been urged by

his

opponent.

14()

He

thinks proper to state the case thus

"

if

the

mem-

bers of the Establishment inquire on what ground do you

receive a Paedobaptist, we reply, because we are expressly

commanded to receive him. But if we inquire in our turn,
why do you kneel at the Sacrament, is it affirmed that they
will reply in

We
lisl

the same manner?" (p. 117.)

Padohapand we

are expressly comjitanded to receive a

says

Mr. Hall

let

him prove

point,

this

But will he inform us

whether we are expressly commanded to receive him as

grant, the debate will be ended.

baptised or as w/jbaptised

troversy concerning baptism

If the former, then the conis

finished

absurd to assert that believers ought to

the

would be

for it

be immersed

in

name of Christ, (which Mr. Hall does in express terms,

we are commanded to receive a person who has

J). J)8) if

only been sprinkled in his infancy as a baptised person.

If he says

we

are expressly

baptist as Mwbaptised, the

wiih good reason, this

is

commanded to receive a PtedoChurchman would reply, and

DISSENTING indeed, not only

from our establishment, but from the primitive church itself,

and even from that pattern which our opponents acknowledge was drawn by the finger of the Lord

He

would

add, that he acknowledged iico ordinances in the church

but was not inclined to adopt a system which supposed

that Christ began with two, but designed to end with one

and

if

the principles of the

New Testament were

of so lax

and compliant a nature, that they would not support

in its

authority an institution whicli the Lord himself had ap-

pointed,

it

would be impossible

condemn him

to

prove that they would

conforming to ceremonies, the end of

for

which was not the subversion of any divine

institution,

but only the promotion of peace and unity.

" But", he
pose to

do the Pasdobaptists when they procommune with us, expect us to join with them in
says,

*'

their practice of infant baptism ?" (p. 121.)

they do not; but

if

we

We

grant

agree to their proposal, they justly

147
infer,

either thai

which Mr. Hall

we

allow the validily of their baptism,

us

tells

nion

or

a " nullity"-^ or that baptism

is

New

not required in the

Testament previous

that the law which once required

else,

become a dead

letter,
its

we prepared

make.

None of these

due.

to

to our sentiments as Baptists,

and tendency suhversive of those

tlieir spirit

principles by which

concessions are

Separate from the opposition

which one of them makes

we esteem

is

it,

and no longer claims the observance

that was formerly

to

is

commu-

to

tlie

cause of primitive Christianity

is

be promoted.

Occasion has occurred before of noticing Mr. Hall's

accuracy

and

this

chapter presents us with additional

Observe what he

specimens.

lays to our charge

" He

largely insists on the superiority of his system to ours, on

account of

its

being at a greater remove from the prin-

ciples of the established church.

he observes,

'

The

can set the churchman at defiance', &c."

Here

{Reply, p. 121, 122.)

a term of Communion,

p.

the reference

What we

127.

is

to

Baptism

did state the

He

reader will find in p. 127, 128, of our former work.

will

'

Baptist

strict

there see, that the position laid

down was,

that

we

as Baptists had a visible and forcible reason (arising from

our views of baptism) for leaving the Establishment, in

addition to the motives operating on dissenters in general.

For on the supposition that we were

that ordinance, the inference

ed church

is

wrong

was

right in our ideas of

clear, that the establish-

its members
who were members of

in its constitution

of a different class from those

primitive church, and they are united together in a

different

from that appointed by the Saviour.

consideration,
in

the

it

was observed,

controversy, which

is,

This one

whether the established

ferent character from

that

Testament

church of Christ

the

way

settled the great question

church, taken iu the aggregate amount,

called

are

the

body which

is

not of a
the

is

in

And

it

dif-

New
was

148
farther observed,

we

that (though

allow there are other

grounds of dissent, yet) nothing had such a tendency to

give the established church that peculiarity of character

which compelled our

dissent, as

its

general outline of the statement

is

caricatured

to the

half a sentence

meaning of the whole,

is

it

purpose of making

but

it is

not disproved.

own

Besides, Mr. Hall reasons from his

quotation

the

is

misrepresented

taken, without regard

for the

what was said appear ridiculous

Such

baptism.

it is

inaccurate

with the formality of inverted commas, and a

reference to the page, he professes to copy the words

*'

the strict Baptist can set the

&c. (Reply, p. 122)

but

if

Churchman
the

reader

at defiance,"

turns

the

to

find that we did not say " the s^nc^ Bap-

passage, he will
tist":

He

was brought forward merely

that our argument, in that paragraph, did not

suppose either that " the Baptist" was strict or not strict.
in the

character of a

Baptist defending himself on his own ground

ground which

is

was observed

in

common

to Baptists

and on that

at large.

But

the succeeding paragraph, that

if

it

he

quitted his strong hold of scripture direction and pre-

cedent, he would then lay himself open to objections for

want of consistency
difficulty

that the

when he met him

as

him with a powerful objection

Churchman would be

in a

a Baptist, but would press

if

he found him a disciple

of Mr. Hall.

quotation

Brownists,'

is

from Bishop

Plall's

Apologie against

next the object of our opponent's censure,

and the good Prelate's mode of reasoning

(p. 127.)

He

clearly

is

called 'futile.'

saw that a society without baptism

(such a society as might be formed on Mr. Hall's theory),

was not a church with a constitution according

New

to the

Testament; but, he contended, that a christian

assembly which did possess the baptism required in the

Gospel, was a church, though
errors,

and needed

to

it

might contain many

be reformed

and he defended

149
tlie

Reformation, not because the church of

his view, not a church,

and

it

but because

was therefore necessary

it

Rome

was,

in

was a corrupt church,

to leave that society for the

sake of greater conformity to the primitive standard. "This,"

he says, " is our case, we did not make a neio church, but

mended an old". {Apol.p. 533. G.) Other authorities from

the same treatise might be quoted, were it needful, in
illustration

of the opinion which the Bishop expressed

passage which we had copied. The Bishop

was opposing Ptedobaptist " Separatists," who objected

in the short

church of England because of

to the

Some

of this

number had

fled to

its

constitution.

Amsterdam on account of

ihe persecution at home, and a party of Baptists rose up

among them who had not long

before urged, that neither

the " Separatists" nor the Establishment had the true constitution

of a christian church, because the baptism of

both these bodies was

The

last

(to

."
use Mr. Hall's term) " a nullity

mentioned opinion had been boldly brought forin a pamphlet entitled, " The

ward by Mr. John Smyth,

character of the Beast, or the false constitution of the

Church discovered;' printed

this

in 1609.

pamphlet before him, and quoted

but as

it

it

The Bishop had

in his 'Apologie';

was another pamphlet written by Padohaptists

that was the

more immediate object of

he did

his attack,

not enter into a detailed opposition to Mr. Smyth's argu-

ments.

Against the Pcedohaptists he urged, that they

could not deny the constitution of the Established church,

since they allowed the validity of
still

its

insisted that the Establishment

baptism

he told them that they " must goe forward

tisme."

This

of the subject

is
;

but

and Avhen

it

instantly appear, that nothing

Our

they

to

Anabap-

the outline of his reasoning on this part

is

viewed

in

connection

with the state of the controversy at that time,

to the

if

had no constitution,

shadow of a

Mr. Hall has

proof, that the

said,

it

will

amounts

good Bishop was wrong.

author deduces an inference from the Bishop's words,

150
which doubtless

in his esteeisis

refutation, because

it

valid,

but

needs

it

no

has no concern with the Bishop's

proposition.*

In addition to the attack made on us throush

medium of Bishop

Hall,

we

the

are led back to some obser-

vations on the Reformation, which occur in

Baptism a

term of Communion, p. 55, Mr. Hall thinks fit to say,

" Not satisfied with asserting that our principles militate
against

are

lawfulness of Dissent, he maintains that they

tlie

inconsistent with

protestantism, and that by neces-

sary consequence they convict

Luthf.R and

oi schism and rehellion.'^Repli/,

jj.

127.)

a passage from the page above mentioned

a part of the paragraph which

is

his associates

He

then quotes

he leaves out

of consequence to the

conclusion that was drawn from the whole

begins his

reasoning from these imperfect premises, and ends by

professing that he has "detected"

Mr. Hall

calls

in the first place, let us inquire

that "

"palpable sophistry."

our argument " nugatory,"

what

(^p.

It

it is.

129.) but

was stated

communion of
us, till they conform to what we are convinced is the will of Christ, we had no right to leave them
because they deviated from his will. The ground in both
cases is the same. Once take away the obligation of conif

we had no

right to refuse" the

good men " with

forming to the will of Christ, and the

*

Mr. Hall

says,

"if the

reasoDiiig extolled

[Bishop Hall] was guilty of schism,

same time with

Heretics,

Roman

REFORMATION
by Mr. K.

in refusing to unite at

Catholics,

is

just,

one and

is

he
tlie

and DissentcTs!" (p.\27.) Such

an inference has no connection with the Bishop's sentiments. With

his views, he would have said to each of the above parties, 1 leave you,
not because your churches have no constitutional principles for you all
maintain the christian ordinance of baptism, and you each have a portion
of truth but I leave you because you maintain so many tenets which I
;

think wrong, that I cannot hold

communion with you

and since

leave

charge of schism. But if he had

found among any of the above parties some who opposed the necessity .of
baptism, it is fairly to be inferred from his own statements, that he would
have told ^/lem, that if ever he and they had commuuiou on earth, they

you for the

must

firit

tnith''s

sake, I fear not

tlie

be initiated into the church by baptism.

1.51

declared a iimcliievous insurrection, in which

all

protest-

ants are included in aiding and abetting a needless and

So

schisraatical project."

we had

" But,"

used,

far

it

Mr. Hall quotes the

added, "

is

leave good men, because they have

Tight not to admit them
this

till

they

be right to

if it

Jesus Christ,

left

come

worcfs

to

it is

his terms.

If

be not granted, we have to place the Reformation

from popery, and our dissent from the Establishment of

our country, on a basis entirely new and a basis very
;

difterent from the obligation to obey the will of Christ, as

New

expressed in the

Testament;

for the law of the

Lord, and the practice of the primitive church, are not to

be accounted our

The

staftdard."

latter part o: the

{Bap. a termof Com. p,

%jb.)

above paragraph, which Mr, Hall

omits, furnishes a suflicient reply to his reasonings.

Ne-

glecting the evident design of the preceding argument, he

says, " if he

means

that

we

are obliged to

others a perfect compliance with

communion, he takes away the

{Reply,

J).

position.

l'^8,

If

Here

129.)

we

his will,

demand

possibility of toleration."

our author changes the pro-

ask for no more than that

men come

Christ's tervis, are his terms liable to this charge?

there any intolerance in requiring nothing

terms which the

Lord

in

as a term of

required

If,

to

Is

more than the

according to the

supposition which Mr. Hall has made, Luther admitted a

Roman

Catholic to

admit him on

this very

acceded

tholic

communion

to

terms

it

If our author should

not be on the same suppo-

But here the question returns, what

When Christ made them known to his

baptism was one of them

of his appointment

is

he not

ground, that he believed the Ca-

Christ's terms?

admit a churchman, would

sition?

in his church, did

let it

be shewn that

abrogated, and

we

are these
disciples,
this part

will agitate the

present controversy no longer.

Mr. Hall concludes

his chapter

by professing

to retort

the argument, and to remind us " of the striking resem-

152

blance between the system of strict coiiimuttiun, and that

which

maintained by the churches of England and

is

Rome." (Reply, p.

His

131.)

first

proach about " the assumption of

correct,

we and

it alike.

But

we

charge

the old re-

is

If he

iufallibity."

is

members of the church of Rome claim

church had never done more than

the

if that

do, the debates concerning her infallibility would never

The

have existed.

principles on

church we ever knew, avowedly

which every

Baptist

act, are so diametrically

opposite to those of the Catholic community, that

surprising-

any

man

Roman Catholic

church maintains that the scripture

the sole rule of faith

judge of

it

that

for themselves,

and practice from

it

men have

The

not

is

not the right to

and form their religious opinions

for this (the Catholics assert)

most pernicious maxim

is

it

should say, they are the same.

it

destroys

all

is

obedience to the

Wheie

church which we are commanded to hear,*

will

Mr. Hall find any protestants oi any party who will adopt
such maxims as these?
What can he mean by the insinuation " when not sa-

tisfied

with this

insists

upon forcing

(i,

e.

confining baptism to adults) he

Jus interpretation on the conscience

of his brother, and treats him precisely in the same manner as though he avowedly contradicted Christ and his
Apostles, what

is

this

but an assumption of

Is our saying to those

{p. 132.)

ledges are not baptised

whom Mr.

infallibity ?"

Hall acknow-

we believe that the church should

be composed only of persons who are baptised, and

this

reason

we cannot

receive

tation on their consciences

think you mistaken,

youforcing

When we

do we treat

say to them

them precisely

as

they avoivedly contradicted Christ and his Apostles

ever

is

capable of believing

the conviction of evidence.

this,

There

is
is

for

our interpre-

we

though

Who-

beyond the reach of

not a church in

tlie

* Vide Con. et Decret. Concil. Trident, sessio iv. Mannock's Poor

Man's Controversy, p. 17 22. Printed permissu mpmomm.


153
world where any species of order of any kind

is

preserved,

the charge of " imposing

their oicn

that may not be accused in the same way.

Simihir to this

is

sense of scripture on their hrethreii (p. 133.).

seems

It

we must either bear the reproach of " imposing" our

" own sense of scripture" upon others, or we must have

then,

Mr. Hall's " sense of scripture" " imposed" upon

are not to act for ourselves while

we

liberty of doing the same, without being"

tyrannical assumption of popery

We

us.

leave others the full

charged with the

" Both the church of Home, and the church of England,"

says Mr. Hall, " have devised terms of communion of their
own, and rendered

..

necessary for the members to comply

it

with innumerable things besides those which Christ has

The

and
palmarium argumentum, the
and support of strict communion"! {p. 135.)

enjoined as requisite to salvation.

jxropriety of doing so,

main
This

and

pillar
is

Rome

baptism

is

Leaving the churches of England

answer

to

the

is

new charge.

laxifulness

for themselves,

requisite to

WE, who

plead that

communion, are charged with main-

taining the Imofulness and propriety of devising terms of

communion of our own. If so, it will be no difficult matter

who will avow the principle. We do not

to find those

presume

to

know

the extent of

Mr.

Hall's information,

but as far as our own observation has reached,

safely affirm, that

we never met with

which any man, either

we can

a single instance in

in writing or conversation,

ledged the " lawfulness and propriety" of

*'

acknow-

devising terms

of communion" to be " the main pillar and support of

strict communion."
In the present controversy such a
,

principle was never stated, nor has any thing been adduced,

which was intended

That

this is the

to sanction that idea.

main

from being true, that

which

we

consider

pillar of

it

as

is

our

our argument

was "devised" by the Lord himself

p

is

so far

opposite principle.
support.
That baptism

the

was

a term of com-

154
munion

and

has been

regarded by nearly

so

christian churches in the world, and throughout

Mr. Hall has been compelled

right to alter it;

and assert that

it

**

church in

to the

it

was a

we have no

we therefore boldly retort the charge,

is Mr. Hall who contends for "the "law-

fulness and propriety" of

unknown

the

ages,

Because

to allow.

term of Christ's devising', we maintain that

all

all

io j)rove his right to

devising terms of communion"

purest ages

its

make new

and

terms, his cause

if
is

he

fails

ruined.

Could we conceive that we were justified in devising terms

of " our own," we might be tempted to listen to what he

Yet even then we

has alleged.

whether the plan formed by

likely

many

are

clevisings.

devices in a man's

that shall stand.

and of

all

churches

they please

and

carried

but the counsel of the

Prov. xix.21.

namely

We

say in the words

the safety of

lies

to

men pretend what

of God, let

heai't,

written, "there

it is

all

believers

keep themselves precisely

complete revelation of divine truth in the word

to the first

safe

wisdom, was not more

We remember

Dr. Owen, " Herein'

of

infinite

answer the ends of our great lawgiver, than

to

any of our

Lord

should pause, and inquire

in

will,

and bluster while

an adherence to this principle we are

we depart from

if

they

it,

we

shall

be hurried and

about through immeasurable uncertainties into

ruin."*

Farther, " the church of England and the church of

Rome", who
munion of
the

are accused of having "devised terms of

their

members

own," have also "rendered

to

it

com-

necessary for

comply with innumerable things besides

those which Christ has enjoined as requisite to salvation."

If Mr. Hall means that these things were " enjoined" by

Christ, but were not " enjoined as requisite to salvation,"

we

ask for a

list

of them, that

we may compare them with

the present subject of debate, and see whether the authority

Expos, on the Hebrews, abridged by Dr. Williams,

vol. iv. p. 401.

155
which "enjoined" one precept,
regard that

is

due

will

not elucidate

If he means

to another.

the

that these

"innumerable things" were not "enjoined" by Christ;

then

we

reply, there

is

a great difference between

mak-

ing those things " terms of communion" which Christ

never " enjoined," and making that rite " a term" which
Christ " devised," which Christ " enjoined," which once

was a term of communion, and which Mr. Hall confesses

is still in force, and ought to be " restricted to believers."
(Reply, p. 132.)

We

ask, then,

when

which Christ " devised,"

that term

became a term which we " devised?"

Our author ought

which he

to shew, that Jesus Christ abrogated the terms

himself appointed, and that then we devised the same

terms, and enforced them on the ground of " the lawfulness and propriety" of devising terms of our
fails in this

attempt

According

charge

his

is

own

If he

unsupported.

preserving an ordiprimitive situation, is " devising^

to his representation,

nance of Christ

in

its

terms of our own : and following the example of the church

in its purest days in our regard to an institution

which the
"
Lord enjoined," is put on the same ground with an adherence to " innumerable things which he never enjoined
!

But a

farther exposure of so unfounded a statement, will

probably be deemed needless.

mind

we

will instantly see that the

Every sober, reflecting

question

is

not

whether

have, or have not a right to devise terms of

nion of our

own

but

Christ devised do not

commu-

whether the terms which Jesus

still

continue in force,

A consider-

able part of Mr. Hall's reasoning depends on the assumption, that

we ought not

to require

obedience to a precept

of Christ, as a term of communion, unless such obedience

be requisite
the church

to salvation.
is

So

that on this plan, though

necessarily a visible body, and

requires visible institutions,

yet

we

therefore

are not bound by

those precepts which were given for the regulation of

156
the church, unless

it

can be proved that they are requi-

Hence

site to salvation.

it

number

of christians

that the directions

follows

of the Gospel are attended with so

authority, that a

little

united as a church, have no right

to say, these are the ordinances of the Lord,

we ought

fore

to us.

to

however, Mr. Hall should succeed in esta-

If,

blishing his assumption,

innovation

and there-

keep them as they were delivered

may

be

it will

not be established

difficult to

for there

is

say what
more evi-

dence that the primitive churches were composed of

members who were

baptised, than there

is

of any other

circumstance respecting their visible form and constitution

and

if it

not needful for us in

is

this instance

to follow

their example, and adopt their interpretation of the direc-

tion of their Lord, a similar train of

that

we may

rity in

divest ourselves of

any thing

Towards the
fit

all

argument

will

prove

regard to their autho-

else.

close of the chapter, our author has thought

to resort to violent representations

com-

to repeat the

parison of our system with the opus operatum of Popery

and

to

charge us with "faithfully" copying the "arro-

gance'' of the Catholic church.

be in holding up
ought

to

his

be remembered that

statement,

it

Whatever

his design

may

opponents in these dark colours,

if

there

is

any truth

it

in his

equally applies to nearly the whole protestant

One of these
we promise to ex-

church of every name and denomination.

attacks has been noticed already, and

when

shewn that hard words and

hard arguments are the same things.
amine the

rest,

it

is

CHAPTER
The

VTI.

pjedobaptists necessarily parties in the

present controversy.

Much

offence has been taken with our former treatise,

because

was there stated that Pcsdobaptists were parthis controversy, and because some observations

in

ties

it

were made relative

to the

view which they would probably

members of a
Mr. Hall begins by descanting on the
" majesty of truth," and the evils of falsehood, and cor-

take of their situation were they admitted

Baptist church.

rupt suffrages
to notice,

who wishes
appeal to

but after what we have been compelled

" he

rather surprising that he should say,

to enlighten the

its

of his

tion

it is

human mind,

opinion,

than

press

corollary from misconcejitions

Our

will disdain to

prejudices, and will rather hazard the rejec-

author's intention

in

them

as

a necessary

and mistakes" !

these

remarks

(p. 136.)

is,

however,

sufficiently manifest.

He

repeats what he had asserted before, that Paedobap-

are not parties, and that

tists

it

only interests them in the

who may be desirous of communing with

us. (p. 137.)
But this is a very partial view of the subject
and had not Mr. Hall shewn how completely he
could overlook the bearings of the inquiry, we should have
case of those

been surprised
It
tist

is

at his observations.

manifest that by far the majority of the Psedobap-

churches were founded on the acknowledgment of

various principles
requisite to

one

communion,

of which was,

Some

that baptism was

evidence of

this position

158
was presented

to the reader's notice in

'Baptism a term of

Commuuiou'; more might be adduced were

it

needful.

who possess only a moderate share of

acquaintance with their own history, know that it is
fact; and whether they do, or do not agree with their
Pa?dobaptists

venerable predecessors, they

will

not deny that

it

has been

who were

the general opinion in their churches, that those

On

admitted to communion ought Jlrst to be baptised.

ground we said that they were parties

this

All those

assertion.

who continue

we repeat

the

to maintain the senti-

ments which have been hitherto generally believed among

them, will allow that the principle laid down

in the

former

was common to them as well as to us, that baptism

was a " visible evidence of connection with the christian
treatise

church." If they declare themselves converts to Mr. Hall's

system, and assert that baptism

they will

still

become

will

body of

be parties; they

parties against us

is

term of communion,

not only oppose

but

must then

set themselves

they must place what they have

new

hitherto held to be an institution of Christ on a

ing

iis,

and by deviating from the

their predecessors, they

against their arguments

not, a.

will

foot-

they will, with Mr. Hall, practically lower the im-

portance of what they have esteemed the

and prepare the way for

its

him, endeavour to produce a

neglect

rite of

and they

revolution

world of an unexampled nature.

baptism,
will,

with

in the christian

These consequences are

so obvious, that they are not to be put

down by

the ridi-

cule which Mr, Hall attempts to throw upon them.

Endeavouring

view the subject on

to

all sides,

on the

ground hitherto acknowledged by both parties, we marked

the natural and necessary consequences of Mr. Hall's sys-

tem.

In doing

no candid Paedobaptist would mistake

this,

us, or think us surrendering

Mr. Hall to say, "

our sentiments.

we should suppose him

It pleases

as tremblingly

alive to the consistency of Paedobaptists, as Eli to the pre-

servation of the ark.

He

adjures

them by every thing they

159
tleem sacred not to forsake him in

them

tlie conflict,

reminding

they must abandon a multitude

that if they do so,

of positions which they have been accustomed to maintain

against the Baptists (that

peMed
to

be

against himself), and be com-

to relinquish the field.

faithful unto death

take care that no

them

is

arts,

He

therefore exhorts them

in the defence of error,

blandishments, or

artifices,

and

to

seduce

concessions which would embarrass them in their

to

the cause of infant

warfare, and render

baptism

less

Let the reader observe, here is

no reference no quotation nothing but what Mr. Hall
tenable." {p. 138, 139.)

thinks

to say,

fit

and

to colour as

We

he pleases.

ask,

however, for no other indulgence, than that any reader of

common

sense and

common candour would compare what

our author has said with any paragraph we ever wrote, and
then draw his own inference.
the Paedobaptists

former

treatise,

distinct.
illustrate

In the

and

from

first,

\>.

a[ply a principle
;

in

view

21

24,

in

principle

each part was

our object was to

common
which

thought proper entirely to overlook.

said concerning

two parts of our

occurs principally in

and the end

and Paedobaptists

What we

both to Baptists

Mr. Hall has

In the second refe-

rence to the Paedobaptists, our object was to

attention

to the views

own conduct

if

which they ought

to take of their

communion with

Baptists, and

which they must encounter

in justifying

they sought

to ihe difficulties

call their

own procedure, if they were thoroughly convinced

own sentiments were right. This part of the
discussion was in reply to the charge of bigotry which they
their

that their

urged against

us,

and was intended

to shew, that unless

they give up those views of baptism which hitherto they

have generally retained (some of which are common to

both parties, and some peculiar to themselves)
difficult for

them

it

would be

to prove their consistency. {Baptisin

ierm of Com, p. 114118.)

In opposition to those observations, Mr, Hall gives us

160
the passasfe already quoted; which was obviously intended

make an impression so different from the fair interpretation of what we did say, that the mildest term that we
to

can apply

to it

that

is,

it is

altogether a misrepresentation.

His defence of what he has asserted

accuracy

style of

in the

is

same

he culls an expression here, and another

there, without any regard to the design of the author, or

the object of his reasoning and then gives us two pretended

;

quotations, from p.

22 and 23 of Baptism a term of Com-

munion, which are not copied with accuracy for two

lines

together.

Among

other misrepresentations, there

gular kind.

is

one of a sin-

Mr. Hall quotes one word, "degrading": he

then connects

it

with an expression from the succeeding

jyaragraph, which relates to a different view of the subject

there he finds

refuses to

commune

it

said

"that

tacitly allows himself to

P^^dobaptist

is,

acts a part which

not so complete a disciple of Jesus as he thinks he

and then he
is,

tells

us that " the

amount of

his brother

entertains a less favourable opinion of his conduct in

communion because
;

bound

ang

to

renounce

in every such instance

he must

particular, than he himself does, he

his

is*';

this reasoning:

whenever a christian perceives that

that

is

Part of this passage suits Mr.

he connects " degrading" with " he is

and dignified."

Hall's purpose

who

be considered as not so complete

a disciple of Jesus as he thinks he

justifiable

with Baptists, because in so doing he

is

be considered as not so complete a disciple as he thinks he

is,

and

to allow himself to

{Reply, p. 142,)

be so considered

Not content

with

from hence another consequence

two christians ought

whom

this,

is a meanness."
he adds, " and

infallibly results, that

to continue in

no

communion, between

there subsists the smallest diversity of

judgment

for since

each

of them, supposing them sincere, must believe his

own

respecting any point of practical religion

practice

more agreeable

to the will of Christ

than his

IGl
brother's, that brother

must be aware that he

is

considered

as not so complete a disciple as he judges himself to be,

to which

seems

it

is

it

degrading to submit," {p. 143.)

This recurs again in another form, and is represented as

" a tine engine, truly, for dissolving every christian society
into atoms :" {p. 144)

and repeating the expression that in

"so doing he allows himself

to

be considered as not so com-

Mr. Hall

plete a disciple as he thinks he is,"

the next paragraph, that

asserts in

a sufficient reason for a

if this is

Paedobaptist's refusing to join with us, the consequence

which he has deduced

ciple,

{Reply, p. 144.)

will follow.

As Mr. Hall imagines he

has got hold of a general prin-

which he can apply against

may be thought by some,

what he has urged

us,

The

to require consideration.

paragraph from which he has selected a short member of

one sentence, appears

In the

inference.

to us a sufficient refutation of his

first

part,

said, "let

it is

them

PaedobaptistsJ consider whether" their joining with

tists is

their

[the

Bap-

not acting in a manner altogether inconsistent with

views of the law

of Christ.

received, in the characterof persons

They agree to be
who have not fulfilled

the will of their Lord, in the very point in which they

believe they have fulfilled it" &c. {p. 115.)

To

this sen-

tence the expression refers which Mr. Hall repeats, that

the Paedobaptist allows himself " to be considered as not
so complete a disciple as he thinks he is," and by this

sentence

its

propriety

is

to

be

tried.

Here

the inquiry

related to baptism as a positive ordinance, which,

by the

supposition, the Paedobaptist believed he had obeyed; the

importance of which he was

supposed

to maintain,

usually been supported

ground the

difficulty

also, in this

view of the subject,

according to the opinion which has

among

Paedobaptists.

was put with

fairness.

one inquiry, and, properly speaking,

it

On

this

It involved

involved no more

which was, what degree of regard a person ought to pay to

those appointments which related to a visible connection

162
with the christian body, and by which the visible church

was intended

to

be separated from the

Whoever

Avorld.

thought the visible ordinances of the Lord were of importance, would necessarily feel reluctant in adopting any

measure from which

one of them of

little

must be inferred that he thought

it

contended) was placed

He

Paedobaptist

(it

Mas

when he solicited
knew considered him to

in this situation

admission amonjr those wh.o he

be unbaptised.

consequence.

must form a

ordinance of baptism

on the

slight opinion of the

plan which

he himself

thought right, or he would not agree to be received as an

unbaptised person.

baptism
that
al.-io

is

If he adopted the broad ground, that

not necessary to communion,

fresh

train

consequences

of

it

was observed,

followed

were traced under a separate head,

on the Paedobaptist

for

his

consideration

and

these
urged

on his own

principles.

man on either side of the

we have unfairly stated the case

If any sober, intelligent

question, will shew that

between us and the Predobaptists,

them the

difficulties

or unfairly pressed on

which arise from their own system,

the subject shall be reviewed.

necessary to lengthen the

But we do not

think

it

discussion by defending our

statement, since Mr. Hall has done nothing more than

avoid the argument, and torture expressions to a meaning

which they did not convey.

If in the same

spirit,

an interpretation was given of many

passages in the apostolic epistles, such

as,

"Now,

beseech

you brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye

all

speak the same fhiny, and that there be

?io

divisions

among you; but that ye he perfectly joined toyether in the

same mind and the samejudyment," (1 Cor. i. 10) with other
texts of similar import, nothing would be easier than to

draw

a train of ridiculous consequences from them, and then to

add our author's flourish, " a fine engine truly, for dissolving every society into atoms, and for rendering

thie

1G3
cliurcli of

lious of

He

Christ the most proud, turbulent, and couten-

all

human

pretends to

associations"! (p. 144.)

make out a

contradiclio/i

passages which occur in Baptism a term of

in

between two

Communion

one of which we had said that the Ptedobaptists " sa-

no principle"; and in the other, that if their conduct was " connected with a sacrifice of principle, they
crificed

will confess that it is indefensible."

words

is

true

That we used these

but they were not used in relation to the

same, but to different things.

It suits

Mr. Hall's pur-

pose at certain times to talk about logic: surely he must

know, that

it is

diction,

is

it

a rule in logic, that to

true and false at the same time, in

itt

make a

contra-

necessary to assert that a proposition

the same respect.

tlie

same

sense,

is

and

CHAPTER

Vlll.

The scripture injunction respecting

for-

bearance EXAMINED.

We

are

now

arrived at that part of the discussion which

relates to the scriptural directions respecting forbearance,

particularly those which are found in the epistle to the

Romans,

ch. xiv

the principles on which that chapter

is

explained and applied in 'Baptism a term of Communion,'

Mr. Hall shews he

but whether he

dislikes,

in his attempts to disprove them,

we

will

A
his

and

is

own,

now examine.
concession

singular

occurs

towards the end of

seventh chapter, which materially affects his whole

argument: he acknowledges, that "whatever

any part of

in

successful

to establish his

it

New

[the

is

affirmed

Testament], respecting the

privilege of primitive believers,

was asserted primarily of

such only as were baptised, because there were no others

originally in
christians

the

church

were in the

first

all

the

reciprocal duties of

instance enjoined on these

among which we find precepts enforcing without a

shadow of limitation, the duty of cultivating christian
fellowship." (p. 184.)
It seems then, that

it

cannot be concealed that the

exhortation to receive those

was not

who were weak

to receive the unhaptised, as

in the faith,

Mr. Hall would

have us do but to receive those who were already baptised, for " there were no others originally in the church"
;

So

that the exhortation

those
the

who were

Roman

was

not, receive into the church,

not then admitted

believers

for the persons

were exhorted

whom

to receive, were.

165
Htcording lo our author's owTi confession, in the churclj.

The

question at that time was not,

how

ought persons

enter the church according to the directions of the

to

Lord?

hut how should we treat those who had entered

in the way which the Lord required ?

doubt that such persons, though weak

Nor

in the faith, should

be the objects of great forbearance.

granted, to all the extent that the

we

are as far from

There

is

But when

own

concession, no similarity in

between the Jewish converts who were

in faith" in the days of the Apostles,

*'

this is

New Testament requires,

Hall's conclusion as ever.

then, on his

circumstances

weak
who at

Mr.

it

any one

will

the present time are nnhaptised.

and those

Let us next

inquire, whether the principle of the exhortation to receive

Jewish converts at that time,

to

will justify

communion the unhaptised now.

Apostle's exhortation

receive these

is,

us in receiving

If the ground of the

weak

brethren,

although they neglect an institution which Christ delivered,

and which was designed

church

and

christian

let

to

be universally observed

in his

a desire to do them good and increase

communion, induce you

to

give up in their

favour what you believe was an appointment of the Lord

then we admit that the

is

established.

But

if

principle of

mixed communion

the practices and sentiments of the

Jewish weak brethren, which the Apostle exhorted the

Gentile christians to tolerate, did not set aside any com-

mand

of Jesus Christ, but arose merely from their remain-

ing attachment to abrogated

rites,

or to refinements on

the law of Moses, which had never been divine appoint-

ments

then

we contend

that the case before the Apostles

and the case of the unhaptised

in

any subsequent age, are

so different in their nature, that the

hortation of the Apostle, in

to both

Romans

argument and ex-

ch. xiv, cannot apply

and that Mr. Hall must obtain evidence from

some other quarter

if

ever he establishes his point.

In Baptism a term of Communion we stated our view


106
of the debate between the Gentile and Jewish christian.s,

and the principle on which the Apostl grounded

his

principle did not apply to

we then shewed that this

the cause now in hand.
Mr.

Hail thinks proper

our "account" " egregiously

cxliortation to forbearance

partial"

"palpably

to call

designed to serve an hypothesis"

" a long and entangled dissertation"

{p. 161)

stowing a few hard words upon

is

the deed

own
"

is

He

done.

it,

he will reply, that

still

and

be-

if

then subjoins an "account" of his

and afterwards he returns

a sufiicient reply,

to the charge,

and says,

his error, [the error of the

Jewish

convert] is of a different kind from that of the Pii^dobaptists

he

is

guilty of no omission of a revealed duty; while

they set aside a positive institute of Christianity.

and

this distinction

It

the conclusion to which this example conducts us."

how Mr. Hall

the reader remark

"There

tion.

not understood,

less

is

omit a branch of duty

an object of forbearance, than to

maintain the obligation of abrogated

to,

is

Let

nothing however in reason or in scripture,

is

infer, that to

he

by

disposes of this distinc-

from which we can

if

is

he attempts to evade

this alone, that

able, a single reason

why

rites.

it is less

Let him assign,

criminal to add

than to take away from the law of Christ, to receive

an obsolete economy than to mistake the meaning of a

New

Testament

worship to be

institute.

How Avill

less offensive to

neglect of a revealed precept

Doubtless these

will

he demonstrate

God, than the

?" (/?.

will-

involuntai'y

165, 166.)

be thought by some persons, en-

tangling requisitions: the reply, however,

is

easy, scripture

has shewn, and fact has demonstrated, that attention to

the ritual observances of the Jewish law, was compatible

with obeying

all

that Christ

had commanded

but the

scripture has given us no lyrecedent, by which the church

is

authorised to receive those to communion,

who oppose

any precept of universal obligation which the Lord has

enjoined.

167

A
is

direct atlack then follows:

"the above

distiiiclicn

uot only unfounded iu the nature of things;

at

it is

He

variance with the reasoning of Paul on the subject.

enjoins the practice of forbearance on the ground of the

on the assump-

conscie7itiousuess of the parties concerned,

tion not only of their general sincerity, but of their being

equally actuated in the very particulars in which they

differed

by an unfeigned respect to the authority of

Christ

and as be urges the saute consideration as the

ground on which the toleration of both parties rested, it

must have included a something which was binding on the
conscience of each, whatever was his private judgment of

The Jew was

the points in debate.

much bound

as

to

Jew." After
(juoting some verses from Rom.xiv. he adds, " now in the
as the Gentile the

tolerate the Gentile,

Judgment of the Jew,

still

attached to the Mosaic

rites,

he who made no distinction of meats, or of days, must

Lave been considered as violating, or neglecting, a precept

still in

force, or

the injunction to refrain from judging

He must

him, would have been devoid of meaning.

have

consequently been regarded by him, in precisely the same

light in

which our Pasdobaptist brethren are considered,

that

as violating,

is,

institute.

Still

St.

though not intentionally, a positive

Paul absolutely

insists

on the duty of

forbearance," &c. {p. 166, 167.)

As

there

examine

in this

is

it.

passage a show of argument, we

Mr, Hall

says,

"the above distinction

only unfounded in the nature of things

it is

will

is

not

at variance

The reader
" distinction," as stated by

with the reasoning of Paul on the subject."

will

keep

in

mind

Mr. Hall was,

that this

that the error of the Jewish christian

of a " different kind from that of the Paedobaptists

guilty of

no omission of a revealed duty

aside a positive institute of Christianity

is

while they set

and our author

" by this distinction, and by this

it is
have attempted " to evade the conclusion"

has asserted, that

alone", that \ve

was
he

168
which he derives from the example under consideration.
** The above distinction" he tells us, " is
unfounded in

Does Mr. Hall mean

the nature of things."

" nature of things" admits of no such

it is

he

not supported by fact

will

not find

But since he

it

Which

We are told

or, that

ever be his meaning,

easy to prove either of these positions.

gives us what he thinks

on the subject,

distinction

that the

is

Paul's "reasoning"

open to examination.
Paul " enjoins the practice of forbear-

this is

that

ance on the ground of

tlie

conscientiousness of the parties

concerned, on the assumption not only of their general

but of their being equally actuated in the very

sincerity,

particulars in which they differed, by an unfeigned respect

to the authority of Christ." (p. 166.)

That he enjoined

forbearance, that he supposed both parties were conscientious,

and that he wished

ground

is

But

granted.

to

conciliate

them on

this

the peculiarities of each party

were not binding on the other

and

this

was the reason

why both were exhorted to follow the dictates of their

own consciences.
The Gentile had no right to re-

Jew to adopt his law of liberty, for the Gospel

did not command the Jew to change his food when he
became a christian. So also, the Jew had no right to

quire the

demand

that the Gentile should conform to his habits;

the Gospel had not required

it;

and the Apostles conti-

nually resisted the encroachments which the

to
it

make on

Jews wished

the liberty of the Gentiles, because they

was contrary

to the will of

informed us, that the

**

the Mosaic dispensation

God.

supreme
;

knew

Mr. Hall himself had

legislator

had repealed"
" St. Paul

that in this chapter

was testifying, the Lord Jesus had shewn him that nothing
was unclean of itself;" and before this time "Peter had
proclaimed the vision by which he was instructed, that the
distinction of clean

165.)

and unclean was abolished."

{p. 164,

It therefore necessarily followed, that as there

was

no rule by which either party could bind the other to adopt

16f)
hit practice, nolliiug

obey the dictates of

neral observation,
integrity, they

remained but to leave his brother to

his

own conscience; and

if

from ge-

they were satisfied with each other's

were then directed to practise mutual

Now,

tol-

Mr. Hall can prove, that the principle

on which the Apostle settled the difference between the
eration.

if

Jewish and Gentile converts, applies to the case now

before us

if

he can prove that Baptists, Paedobaptists,

and those who are

authority

from

for

no baptism at

the Apostles,

respective opinions, that the

all,

have the same

for persevering in their

Jews and Gentiles had

continuing in their different modes of living

for

that the

we are to use any baptism or none, as

little concerns the Kingdom of God, as that of meat and
drink, we will instantly grant, that it ought to take its
place among those things for which there is no binding,
question whether

universal rule, but which must be left to the decision of

private feelings, of prejudice, of taste, or of inclination.

Our author

adds, that since the Apostle " urges the same

consideration as the ground

both parties rested,

it

on which the toleration of

must have included a something

which was binding on the conscience of each, whatever

was

judgment of the points

in debate."
Suppose we admit this statement, that " something" was, that

his private

they had no right to require of their fellow christians a

subjection to what Christ had not

commanded; and

things which did not interfere with his

commands,

their duty to leave their brethren to act in the

own feelings.
"The Jew was as much bound

it

in

was

way most

agreeable to their

a$ the Gentile the

Jew."

We

to tolerate the Gentile,

grant he was, for he could

not bring forward a law which required the Gentile to

adopt the manners of a Jew, and therefore must leave him

" Now in the judgment
to the dictates of his conscience.
of the Jew,

made no

still

attached to the Mosaic

distinction of meats or of days,

rites,

he who

must have been

170
considered as violating or neglecting a precept
force, or the injunction to refrain

have been devoid of meaning

was plain

it

The

convict.

all

Not

in

still

liim,

would

at all, the "injunction"

was, do not condemn the

man you cannot

christian church could not with consistency

censure any of
laiu

"

from judging

members

its

for not

keeping the Jewish

him was, " let

that could be said concerning

man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

The A-postle tells the Jew in a variety of ways through

every

the whole of this chapter, that the Mosaic law was not in
force

that

submit to

it

the Gentiles were not under obligation to

that

if

he felt

it

binding on his conscience,

he had no right, by the authority of Christ, to impose

that

it

on

to

judge another man's servant

a Gentile

belieA'er

stand eth or falleth

make him

able to

"

to his

own master he

yea, he shall he holden up, for

stand."

A.

it

he had no business

gentle

God

is

way of informing the

Jew, that he was altogether mistaken: and though he had

imagined that his zeal would promote the honour of the
Lord, and that he was " actuated by an unfeigned respect
for the authority of Christ," yet

Gospel

and

must

he had misunderstood the

not repeat his former arguments, for

they were not founded on fact.

But, says Mr. Hall, the Gentile must consequently have

been regarded by the Jew " in precisely the same light in

which our Paedobaptist brethren are considered, that

as violating,
still

St.

though not intentionally, a positive

Paul absolutely

ance." {p. 167.)

This

insists

is

wishes to bring the whole.

is

bound

on the duty of forbear-

Mr. Hall

the point to which

The

is,

institute

inference

is,

the Baptist

though their con"

positive institute,"
a violation of a

to tolerate the Paedobaptists,

duct in his esteem

and the Apostle

is

is

quoted as authority for

this

practice-

But when we examine what he has written, we find, that

the Jew was exhorted to tolerate the Gentile, because he
was

told, that the

" positive institute" which he imagined

171
the Gentile had " violated." was not binding on the
tile

for

was no part of the

it

Gen-

of Christ that he should

will

conform to the law of Moses, and therefore he ought to

have the liberty of following the dictates of

Now, we

science.

boldly ask,

his

own

con-

the Baptist bound by

is

limilar authority to admit that his sentiment stands on the

that

same footing
is

it

no part of the

is

but

will of Christ,

Have the
and Elders" as much

only an attachment to an abrogated rite

" Holy Ghost" and " the Apostles

sanctioned Pcsdohaptism, as they sanctioned the Gentile

meat and drink ?

in his christian liberty respecting

have, let

we

be proved, and

it

will yield the

then the baptism of believers, and the Mosaic

If they

cause
rites,

for

may

be set aside together.

all

According
the Gentile,

ed to be

" weak

to this comparison, the Psedobaptist

who

violated a precept which the

and the Baptist,

in force,

still

Jew

like the

is

like

esteem-

Jew,

is

in thefaitJi", scrupulously attached to a needless

except his " conscienti-

institution, while in every point

ousness", he

is

told that he

is

an error

in

Of course

Pasdobaptist occupies the place of the ^'strong",

the

who

is

exhorted to tolerate his weak brother, and not bear hard

upon him.

admit, but

how

conclusion which some people will instantly

we adopt
Jew to be

others will relish

the opposite

If
the

of the

the

weak

brother,

we

Peedobaptists,

it,

shall

applying the principles of the

is

true

this

there

is

and conceive

and a representative

not succeed better in

chapter before

something in the

first

he may be tempted
that the Apostle

and that he

is

is

communion, looks
to

on

think
his

it

It

us.

appearance of

plan of interpretation, which to a Baptist

favourable to mixed

the

remains to be proved.

hypothesis,

who

plausible,

He

correct.

is

and

sup[)o,ses

side with respect to baptism,

directed to receive the Paedobaptists on

same ground that the Gentiles were

Jewish converts, as iceak brethren, who,

to receive the

it is

true,

were

to

172
be tolerated, but who were very much prejudiced, aud
very deficient

iii

the extent and accuracy of their views.

Reading the chapter with

this idea, the Baptist

that throughout the whole the

is

Jew

is

observes

plainly told that

wrong, though the Apostle says, receive him

he

and he

does not forget to make the proper application.

But examination soon dissipates this theory. The Jew

did not attempt to come into the church without paying
the required regard to the ordinances of the Gospel

he

did not say, I have been initiated into the true religion by

circumcision, I have frequently fulfilled the rites of bap-

tism as required by the law

I therefore see no need of

repeating any ceremony of initiation or profession, and I

hope you

will receive

me, without pressing an attention to

mere ceremonies, of the importance of which

convinced.

No

Paedobaptist, however, can

am

come

not

into a

He

Baptist church except on terms precisely of this kind.

asks to be received, either on the ground of his Pasdo-

baptism (which Mr. Hall himself

and cannot be

called

tells

us

is

"a

nullity"

baptism), or on that broad

basis

which would admit a person without baptism at

He

all.

therefore stands in a very different situation from that

of the Jewish converts, not only

in its principle

for

in its

circumstances, but

we have no evidence

institutions of Jesus Christ

were

that any of the

set aside, either for the

purpose of receiving them, or any other persons whatever.

Farther, the practical exhortation which
gives {ver. 13,

Sfc.

the

to the end), proves that the

Apostle

ground of

the Apostle's reasoning in this chapter cannot apply to

the case in hand.

He

intreats the strong to give

way

to

the prejudices of the weak, and so to conform their habits

to the wishes of their erring brethren, as not to hurt their

minds by eating that food which they might eat consist" It is good neither to eat

ently with christian liberty.

flesh,

nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy bro-

ther stumbleth, or

is

offended, or

is

made weak.

Hast

173
thou faith

have

Though you

to thyself before

it

are

yet

right,

God."

(ver. 21, 22.)

tenderness

iu

to

others

do not openly act upon your opinion. So also ch. xv. 1.

"
then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of

We

Hence,

the weak, and not to please ourselves."

we apply

if

the principle to the case before us, neither party ought tq

administer what they believe

whenever

it

is

an ordinance of Christ,

would hurt the minds of those who think

departure from the primitive

An

institute.

it

inference,

urged upon us from different quarters, but the direct ten-

dency of which

exclude one of the ordinances of

to

is

Christ from his church.

If on Mr. Hall's interpretation of the Apostle's directions,

we ought

brother, for the

to

receive a

a weak

Paedobaptist as

same reason that the Gentile

exhorted

is

not to grieve his brother by his meat, but to walk chariBaptist ought not to plead for that baptism

tably, the

which grieves
he

his Pa:;dobaptist brother

much

above

all

things, he

ought not to administer

friend or relation of the Paedobaptist, for this

want of charity

in the

extreme

it

sacrifice

On

be

and

to

any

but on the old plea, the

for peace,

we

we may

are quietly to

an institution of Jesus Christ!

this

mark more,
not,

make

it

would be a

ordinance should be prudently shunned, and that

follow the things that

ought

less

shock his feelings by attempting to practice

to

it

part of the subject

Mr. Hall

we

shall only

add one re-

says with great positivity

'

it is

remembered, by a peremptory decision of the

controversy, or by assigning the victory to one in prefer-

ence to the other, that the Apostle attempts

reconciliation."

(jo.

am.PERSUADED by

168.)
the

But

Paul

Lord Jesus,

unclean of itself {Rom. xiv. 14.)

convert wanted

says,

common

to effect a
"I know, and

that there

is

nothing

Unless the Jewish

must see that the "dewas given against him ; and

sense, he

cision of the controversy"

though the Apostle was tender to his feelings, gave way

174
to
**

and acknowledged that

scruples,

his

to

estcemeth any thing to he wiclean, to him

Jew

hiiu

it is

who

unclean",

understand that the

precept which he imagined the Gentile " violated", had

yet he clearly intended the

no

authority.

Hence,

to

whatever view

in

chapter

this

considered, the most that can be inferred from

christians

should

it is,

is

that

each other in things which

tolerate

do not interfere with the precepts and

institutions of

Jesus Christ.
Hitherto
subject,

we have proceeded on Mr.

and have offered nothing

interpretation.
will not,

Hall's view of the

in defence of our

own

A few short observations in its justification

we hope be deemed improper.

It is manifest that the Jewish converts

did

obey the

Mosaic ceremonies, and probably considered themselves

under obligation
xxi. 21

24.)

to

walk orderly and keep the law. {Acts

In Rom.

ch. xiv. the question which

had

been agitated, was not v/hether the weak brother should

eat that which the law of

Moses denominated unclean

but whether he might eat animal food

might give

at all.

rise to this difficulty; a sect of the

Two

causes

Jews

called

the Essenes refrained from animal food altogether, and if

any of them were converted to Christianity, they would

probably be under the influence of their former prejudices,
at least for a time.

Some

very learned

men have thought

that these were referred to by the Apostle in this chapter.

Besides,

we know

animal food at

that conscientious

Rome

was considered by

so

about

Jews did

this time,

refrain

from

and that their doing

their brethren as acting consistently

with their profession as Jews.*

The probable

which was on account of the numerous

in that city; so that they

were

reason of

idolatries practised

afraid of being polluted by

eating meat which had been offered to idols, or which had

not been prepared for their use, and declared to be clean

An

iustauce of this kind occurs in the Life of Josephus, the JcTvibh

Historian.

175
by their

own couutrymen.

Such scruples might

who might be

tend to Gentile christians,

pollution of idols

and

also ex-

afraid of the

in proportion to their

own

tender-

ness of mind, would be hurt at seeing others do what they

The

thought wrong.

eighth and tenth chapters of the

epistle to the Corinthians are devoted to this subject

and

and candidly considers the instruc-

whosoever carefully
tions

first

which the Apostle gave

to the christians at Corinth,

can scarcely help seeing a great similarity to those which

he gave

to his brethren at

Rome, and

will

that the clear and important distinctions

in writing to the Corinthians,

his directions to the

Romans

assist us in
;

acknowledge

which he made

comprehending

and that there was a great

resemblance between the cases described in these epistles.

These general observations might be supported by a considerable body of proof, were it needful and which would
;

also confirm the interpretation of

term of Communion.

But

since

Rom.

it is

xiv. in

Baptism a

no part of our desire

needlessly to lengthen the present controversy,

we

shall

leave the reader to consider the evidence laid before him,

and

to

form

his

own

opinion

only reminding him, that

Mr. Hall condemned what he did not

like,

summary process, but did not disprove it.

However, to make assurance doubly

after a very

sure,

he does

not content himself with the answer he had already given,

but adds, " we accept Mr. Kinghom's challenge, and

engage

to

produce an instance of men's being tolerated

the primitive church,

in

who neglected an express command

of Christ, and that of the highest moment." (p. 171,)

As

he quotes no page, and copies no words that we have used,

he leaves the reader

we

to

guess at what he refers.

But,

i^uppose he had in his eye, an observation in

tism a term of Communion, p. 50, where

lieve the truth

is,

that iheie

is

it is

said,

Bap-

" I be-

not a case on record, in

which forbearance and toleration were urged as reasons

for setting aside

any

divine institute, tvhich at the time

176
was
is

Now what is Mr. Halls " instance"? It

Apostles ! He says, " it will not be denied that he

in force.'*

the

[Christ] directed

them

to

go forth immediately after the

descent of the Spirit, to preach the Gospel to every crea(jtj. 171.)

Because they did not proceed immediately^
Mr. Hall attempts to justify his own theory by a bold

ture."

crimination of inspired Apostles

It does not, however,

appear that they neglected the dictates of their divine

They were to

master.

The Lord

them just before

said unto

shall receive

begin at Jerusalem. (Lukexxiv. 47.)

power

"ye

his ascension,

the Holy Ghost

after that

come

is

upon you, and ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the
uttermost parts of the earth." (Acts

was

to

i.

8.)

large field

be the scene of their labours, before they went to

the Gentile nations

Nor

order.

and they occupied every part

did Peter resist the

in its

command given him

to

go with the messengers of Cornelius, and open the door of

faith unto the Gentiles, as soon as he understood that this

was the

will

But Mr.

of God.

Hall's inaccuracy in saying

that the Apostles were directed to go forth to the heathen

immediately,

is

not his only failure in the instance he pro-

He

fesses to bring forward.

the requisition.
to set aside the

Is

it

command

fulfil

to preach the

Gentiles, and that toleration

urged by them, or urged

they

does not

the terms of

upon record that they endeavoured

and forbearance were

either

in their defence, as reasons

might evade that precept

instance proves nothing

Gospel to the

it

why

Mr. Hall's

If not,

does not agree with the con-

ditions of the case required.

Not

content with one " instance" destitute of proof, he

gives us another,

'*

m which

Mr, Kinghorn himself will be

found to approve of the toleration of such as have habituwhich is,

ally neglected a positive command" (p. 173)
;

that

Dr. Gill and Mr. Brine

denomination to believe that "

it

influenced

many of our

was improper

to

urge

177
sinners to repentance, or to enjoin

believing on the

upon them the duty of

So that, these

Lord Jesus Christ."

" eminent persons, in declining

to

perform what our Lord

commanded his Apostles, neglected or broke a divine

precept." The inference is, that if we do not mean to
" pass a sentence of excommunication" on Dr. Gill,
Mr. Brine, and those whom Mr. Hall calls our "precursors in this controversy," we " must acknowledge that
the right of toleration extends to such as neglect or violate

a revealed

precept."

(/?.

He

174.)

then

adds,

"it

is

unnecessary to remind the reader of the magnitude of the

error in question, which would at once have annihilated

the apostolic commission, by rendering

it

impossible to

preach the Gospel to any creature, since there were in

whom on

the Gentile world, none to

this principle it

could

be addressed." (p. 174.)

Without noticing the singular proposal

municate the dead,

now

" not only into Judea not

Empire but into every known and
go

whole universe, to
heaven

all

and besides,

criticism

the

Jews by

proceeds,

creatures,' in

to these Christ

preached, as well as to the Jews

distinction

Ministers of the Gospel

all

end of the world."

that term frequently

" Now

Roman

commission not only included

the Apostles, but reaches to

only into the

habitable part of the

the nations of the world under

this

in succeeding ages, to the

on the word

Dr.
commanded

deserve excommunication.

Gill distinctly states, that the Apostles were

to

excom-

inquire whether, if they were

let us

they would

alive,

to

After some

which he shows that

meant the heathen, he

would have the Gospel
even

to all,

of people, Jews and Gentiles,

without any
Barbarians,

Scythians, bond and free, male and female, rich and poor,

greater or lesser sinners, even to all mankind.^'

{See hia

Exposition on Mark xvi. 15.) So also on iJfa^.xxviii. 19,

he says, " teach all nations, Jews and Gentiles, first the

one and then the other, the doctrines of the Gospel, and
s

178
the ordinances of

it

whatever they had learned from

were ordered by him."

Christ, or

A part of
Brine

is,

Dr. Gill

ance."
says,

Mr. Hall's chargeagainst Dr. Gill and Mr.

that " it was improper to urge sinners to repent-

"men

of

certainly

all

was not of

nations,

subjects of repentance

this opinion.

He

Jews and Gentiles, are the

for all are under sin, under the

power of it, involved in the guilt of it, and liable to punishment for it and God hath commanded all men every where
to repent.
During the time of John the Baptist, and of
;

our Lord's being upon earth, the doctrine of repentance

was only preached

to the

Jews

but after the resurrection

of Christ, he gave his Apostles an instruction and order,

that repentance and remission of sins should be preached
in his

name among

in consequence of

all

nations, beginning at Jerusalem

which the Apostles

exhorted the

first

Jews, and then the Gentiles to repent^ and particularly

the Apostle Paul testified both to the

Jews and

also to

the Greeks, repentance towards God, as well as faith

towards our Lord Jesus Christ." {Body of Div.

book

1. ch. 25. p. 33, 34.

Oct. ed.)

It

add farther testimonies, but these are

vol.

would be easy

sufficient.

iii.

to

Let then

the candid reader judge, whether there be any ground for

excommunicating Dr. Gill, on the charge of annihilating

**

the apostolic commission, by rendering

preach the Gospel to any creature"?

it

The

impossible to

speculations of

Dr. Gill and Mr. Brine, on the nature of what they

termed special faith, formed the great peculiarity of their
sentiments

for this they considered as an effect of the

mediation of Christ, and the duty of those only who received

**

an internal revelation of Christ," which they

called also

"a

supernatural revelation,"*

But they both

was the duty of men to give credit to any

Hvelation which God had made, or should think fit to

declared that

it

* Brine's Refutation of Arminian Principles, p.

6. 19.

179

make unto them

at any time

and whether they did or

did not reason correctly on the nature of faith, they did

not set aside the divine institute, that the Gospel should
all men, as the means of bringing sinbut acknowledged, that " every truth should

be preached unto
ners to

God

none

concealed

and

no duty omitted."
So that when we examine Mr. Hall's second " instance" it
be preached

does not comply with the terms of the requisition, better

than the former.

In the preceding observations,

we have taken no

notice

of one of Mr. Hall's violent misrepresentations, which

the basis of

many animadversions.

Communion

it

was pleaded, that the Apostle's argument

we considered Jews,

applied equally, whether

as

the parties received

[God] receives them on

Gospel

and

it is

and

is

it

or Gentiles

added, " but then he

their believing

and obeying

his

not stated, that he receives them not-

withstanding they
unless this

is

In Baptism a term of

disobey one of

its

precepts.

Yet

be proved, the cause of mixed communion

not promoted." Q>.45. 2ded,)

thinks proper to say,

**

On

we have

this passage,

is

Mr. Hall

here an explicit avowal

that he considers none besides the Baptists as received of

Christ,

in the sense the Apostle intends,

accompanied

with a concession that to prove they were, would furnish

an irrefragable argument

So

also in

for our practice." (p. 153, 154.)

p. 207, " he professes

of the Supreme Legislator,

whom

to imitate the

conduct

he affirms, not to have

received the unbaptised into the gospel dispensation."

Had we

not seen instances of a similar kind, such state-

ments would have excited surprise. It is easy to perceive,

that if it could be proved that God had received either
party into his visible church without baptism, or while

they were opposing any universal precept which he had

promulgated, Mr. Hall's argument for receiving the unbaptised would have been established by the precedent
which was furnished by the divine conduct but as this
:

180
was not the

how

ing

fact, the cases

were not

the argument then

parallel.

stood,

In examin-

nothing more was

necessary, than to satisfy a fair inquirer, that the Gentiles

were not received

into the

which Mr. Hall pleaded

church on the principle for

for admitting the unbaptised

the

inference therefore followed, that his cause could not be

promoted by such reasoning.

But here he takes occasion

to talk

about an "explicit avowal," where nothing was

avowed

that agrees with his representation.

Whoever examines the New Testament on this subject,

God testified by the miracles he wrought,

will see, that

that the Gentiles could be received into the

of the blessings of the Gospel

full

enjoyment

and when the Apostle

Peter saw that on the Gentiles was poured out the

Holy Ghost, he commanded them to be

Then they would be considered as received

the

Now

church, but not before.

if

gift

of

baptised.
into the

the reception of the

Gentiles into the christian church on their being baptised,

is

authority for our receiving into the church the unbap-

tised, the

prove

argument

is

finished.

He would persuade us
for

is

Mr. Hall

to

that persons unbaptised, applying

in the same
when
they were
believing Gentiles

church-membership with Baptists, are

situation with the

baptised: but

manifest that the cases are dissimilar,

it is

and every attempt

to

But how

this position ?

no purpose

to

that,

make them

It

alike utterly fails.

is

under the pretence of " sifting the

matter to the bottom," he should attempt by wire-drawing

and misrepresentation, to build up his cause. Lethim prove

that the Gentiles refused to be baptised, or that they re-

fused to comply with any other positive, universal precept

of Jesus Christ, and then

we

will allow, that

whatever

is

the principle of the Apostle's reasoning, will apply in both

cases.

done,

But

we

since, for the best of all reasons,

this

is

not

hold Mr. Hall's violent distortions of the argu-

ment very cheap

they

may

hurt himself,

they

do not

181

But the

hurt our cause.

chapter of the

ment

for

Romans

truth

that as the fourteenth

is,

the great storehouse of argu-

is

mixed communion, every thing which shows that

the principles of the apostolic church and of modern inno-

must be disposed of, and if an

must be run down.
Mr. Hall requests the reader to advert to the " interminable discord and dissention with which this principh
vation are not the same,

answer cannot be found,

is

The

replete.

deems another

it

principle

is,

that

whenever one

to live in the neglect

christian

and violation of a

command, however conscientious and sincere, he

must renounce the communion of the party which he sup-

positive

Let the reader observe

poses erroneous." {p. 174, 175.)

that this principle which

of his own.

He

Mr. Hall adduces,

is

an inference

had been pressed to produce a case,

if

such a case was on record, in which forbearance and

toleration

were urged as reasons

for setting aside

divine institute, which at the time was in force.

reply

proclaims

an instance.

We

to

inability

his

are then

bring
that

told

forward

the

any

Hi?
such

"principle"

which he thinks proper to draw from the fact urged

against his reasonings, " is replete with interminable
discord

:"

as if

we were

to

be frightened from an attention

to the directions of Christ, because

Mr. Hall chooses

to

say, that pleading for the primitive order of the ordinances

of the Gospel,

is

the

way

to

produce dissention

To make

his own cause look better, he enumerates various differences of sentiment respecting the " minuter details of

christian discipline and worship"

they are cases

difficult to settle

he acknowledges that
and he says, " there are

no questions involved in greater obscurity than these

none on which the evidence

is less

satisfactory,

and which

more elude the researches of the learned, or administer

more aliment of dispute to the contentious," (j9. 175, 176.)
Such is his opinion of the systems which be himself brings
forward. Now observe his ipference: " however they may

182
differ in other respects,

principle

we

they agree in

that upon the

this,

are attempting to expose, they furnish to

such as adopt them, just as reasonable a pretext for sepa-

communion, as the disagreement concerning bap-

rate

tism," &c. (p, 177.)

Here the
we pleaded

appeal

common

to the

lies

for the regard that

the various arguments which

Mr. Hall himself confessed

as Baptists, have

**

all

was due

we have

sense of
to

own

before recited

that our views of the subject,

the advantage of overwhelming

evidence" {Pref. p. xxiii.); but yet he would

us, that those persons

men

baptism from

persuade

whose opinions, according

to his

statement, are not supported by satisfactory evidence,

but are involved in the greatest obscurity, have as much

reason for requiring that others should adopt their peculiarities, as

Christ,

we have

for pleading

from the commission of

and the acknowledged, universal practice of the

apostolic church, that baptism

is

requisite to a partici-

pation of the Lord's supper

On

this plan,

the

tism, considered

LESS

as^

command

and the precept

of private opinion

is

some may be

be confessed
reasoning.

to

is

USE-

now become merely an

affair

consequence which meets us in

every part of this discussion

ling

of Christ respecting bap-

a regulation for his church

to

and which, however unwil-

acknowledge

be the

it,

will

at length

natural result of our author's

CHAPTER

IX.

Mr. Hall's argument for communing with

piedobaptists, because they are part of the
true church, examined.

That

part of the discussion which next comes forward to

notice

is,

in our view, deserving of very little attention

but were

it

wholly omitted,

it

might be thought that

Many

arguments were unanswerable.

open

to exception,

of brevity

others

we
we

shall pass over,

its

things which are

merely for the sake

shall leave to the decision of the

reader, who, if he has read both sides, will be able to

form

own

his

Some few

opinion.

assertions of

Mr. Hall

must, however, be noticed, and some of the usual accom-

paniments of his work pointed out.

We
of
his

shall say

nothing concerning Mr. Hall's notions

the church';

theory,

we

we comprehend

are not sure that

and would not, knowingly, draw an

founds things which are distinct

expression which

is

infer-

In our apprehension he con-

ence from false premises.

open

and uses a manner of

to exception.

If any person

who had read Baptism a term of Communion, should

declare that we did not acknowledge that many who differed from us were christians,

we

should probably not

attempt to convince him of the contrary

Hall's inference about schism,
itself.

He

we

and as

to

Mr.

leave that to refute

maintains a schism, and will only take those

who come

to his terms

things he

can of

us,

and after he has said the worst

we do no more.

But passing

the reader observe the ground on which Mr.

this,

let

Hall

justifies his

own

separation from other christians.

184
" Whenever we are invited

we esteem

to

concur

practices which

in

erroneous, or corrupt, our refusal to comply

is

by a principle the most obvious and the most

justified

God

urgent, the previous obligation of obeying

rather than

Again, " owing

to a diversity of judgman." (p. 192.)

ment, respecting the proper organization of churches,

obstacles, at present invincible,

poration; and

An

their incor-

the conscience of each individual

it is left to

to determine, to

may prevent

which he

will

permanently unite himself.

enlightened christian will not hesitate for a moment,

in declining to join with that society,

whatever he the piety

commuof
nion involve his concurrence in religious observances of
its

individual memhers, in which the terms of

Hence

whose lawfulness he entertains any doubt.

arises,

in the present state of religion, an impassable barrier to

the perfect intercommunity of christian societies." (^^.193,

It seems then, that there may be societies, composed of individual memhers of acknowledged piety,

194.)

persons
parts

whom

of the

our author would certainly consider to be

church,

true

with

whom

an enlightened

christian not only would not join, but would not hesitate

for a moment

in declining to join.

this enlightened christian

that the terms of

So

doziht.

would act so promptly, would be

communion involved

religious observances of

The ground on which

his

concurrence in

whose lawfulness, he entertained

that in the absence of certainty, even

on the propriety of

his

a douht

conduct would make him pause.

After having thus plainly conceded the principle on

which we rested one part of our cause, Mr. Hall

**

to

hut

it is

NOT upon

the practice

reader refers to
find in

this

ground that my opponent

add.s,

objecti

for which we are contending," If the

Baptism a term of Communion, he will

that chapter which relates to the present part oi

the argument, a variety of passages which

on which

it

Mr. Hall

is

shew the ground

was placed, and he can then judge

correct in his assertion.

how

far


185
" The friends of

communion do not object

strict

to

mixed communion, because the individual act of their

communion with Paedobaptists would produce an immediate unpleasant effect on their worship
it

but because

would be the acknowledgment of a principle which

they cannot admit; which

is,

church of Christ, there

no occasion

is

that in forming a part of the

to

regard the term

of christian profession which he himself has appointed

thus the introduction of

mixed communion, would

and

itself

immediately alter the constitution of every church that

adopts it." (p. 58.)

Again, " The Protestants, and Protestant Dissenters,

refuse to unite with

ment, because

Roman

Catholics, and the Establish-

in so doing, they

would sanction what they

believe are corrupt appendages to the law of the Saviour.

The

strict

siders

as

whom he

Baptist refuses to admit those

unbaptised,

because in

so

con-

doing he would

sanction the omission of an express part of the law

itself;

though he grants the individual excellency of many men

in all the churches

Farther,

from which he

differs." (p. 64.)

the objection of the strict Baptists to com-

munion with them

[the Paedobaptists] does not arise from

suspicions attaching to their christian character, to which,

they trust, they are always willing to render ample justice,

but from the necessary consequence of such communion

as a practical deviation from

what they believe was the

original constitution of the church." (p. 67, 68.)

Once more,
**

the question

is

brought to

this point,

whether the admission of mixed communion does not

of itself introduce into the church a system of action which

is NOT a true interpretation of the rule given by the Lord,

and NOT a copy of the precedents of the

NOR

New Testament,

maxims." (p. 76.)

All these passages are copied from one chapter
a just application of

its

and

that chapter in which the present part of the discussion

expressly

examined.

The

reader can

now judge

is

for

186
himself on what ground

we

He

Mr. Hall advocates.

object to tbe practice which

can also judge

how far

the next

makes is supported by truth,

our " refusal to communicate with

assertion which our author

which

that

is,

we

rest

members of other denominations, on the

principle of their

not being entitled to be recognised as christians." (p.ldA.)

The argument

repeatedly urged, that

communion with

the unbaptised altered the constitution of the church

unknown in the
Mr. Hall has never encountered. If he

of Christ, and introduced a line of conduct

purest ages,

imagines that we esteem either his silence, or the contempt

with which he treats this part of the subject a sufficient

he

refutation,

is

He

mistaken.

says himself, " let the

smallest error imaginahle be so incorporated with the terms

of communion, that an explicit assent to

in that act
if

he

is

and he who discerns

it to

it

be an

is

implied

error, must,

conscientious, dissent, and establish a separate

communion." (p. 211.) On his own ground, then, the

question is, whether in communion with the unbaptised
we do not give an " explicit assent" to the right of admitting

them

in that character into the church

basis our objection to

and pressed on the reader's

that there

On

this

mixed communion was founded,

attention,

was necessarily and

and we contended,

explicitly implied in

it

the

But when the

admission of an unscriptural proposition.

principle on which our argument rested was urged against

Mr. Hall, he passed it by, and the reader is told that onr
objection to mixed communion is not placed on this
ground
Still it is said,

we are not invited to concur in those "

ligious observances"

ship with Paedobaptists

but
to

we

reply,

is

only a "transient act"; (p. 192.)

we understand our ground

be deceived by such expressions.

sufficiently not

We

to concur," in an act the consequences of

be permanent

in

re-

which we disapprove, and that fellow-

are " invited

which would

the admission of a principle which

187
yie

be

believe to

thority of Christ,

Were we

to

unscriptural,

opponent

and subversive of one of his

adopt

to

the

au-

institutions.

we should instantly be told we had

communion; and the charge would be

it,

altered our terms of

we should then have introduced a " new ieiin" y/hich

Christ did not make, which was unknown in the apostolic
church; and we should sacrifice one of the ordinances of

just;

the Gospel, for the professed purpose of gaining a greater

number of persons to attend with us to the other.

Whenever the question is asked, what are the terms of
communion mentioned in the New Testament, we cannot
give a scriptural answer
queries

may be

if

we

Many

leave out baptism.

raised respecting the best

manner of pro-

cedure in the admission of members into the church, which

do not admit of a direct reply from the sacred volume

but which must be decided by the application of general

But every

principles to particular cases.

the

child that reads

New Testament with attention is capable of perceiving,

it was those who were baptised
number of the faithful, and treated
While we act on the same plan we
of the body.
for we require no more than Christ required

that in the apostolic age

that

were added

as parts

are safe

to the

and unless Mr. Hall can prove that according

to

the

directions of the Lord, a church can be formed without

baptism, he labours in vain

for the facts of the

Testament are against him, and

favQurite theory are of no force.

all

his

arguments

New

for his

CHAPTER

X.

The charge

of excluding, excommunicating, and

punishing other denominations, considered.

In

this part of the inquiry

our author adopts a violence of

language and an excess of misrepresentation that cannot

The

ultimately benefit his cause.

notice

tends

He

it.

his criticism

is

is

thing that

first

on the use of words.

"humiliating"; perhaps

it is

so

we

shall

This he pre-

we

will

examine

He

objects to our use of the word " exclusion,"

says that we deny " the propriety of applying the term

We

hare refusal of admission." {p. 198.)

definition by
if

we were

was

**

to

have then a

Now

our great Lexicographer" Johnson.

incorrect in the use of the word, our author

guilty of the

same

fault.

He

"

asks, {p. 104,)

will

they assert that St. Paul was prepared to exclude the

members of
larities

the church of Corinth, against whose irregu-

he so warmly protested?"

Again,

{p. 109,)

"he

continued to exercise forbearance without the slightest

In both these

intimation of an intention to exclude them,"

instances Mr. Hall thinks

the sense which

fit

we had given

Then comes another

it.

j.

criticism relating to the

son

told, is

highest authority"

quotes for his definition of the term

is

a passage taken

We

the theological sentiments of Johnson and

:

To John-

referred, and find the authority which he

from the Ecclesiastical Polity of Hooker.

the same

ex-

we have " the

brought forward, with a note, " see Johnson."

we have

word

" synonimous with

communication; which, we are

exclusion," and again

term precisely in

to use the

and we are

certain,

rations, that in his view

from Hooker

know that
Hooker were
s

own

decla-

baptism was necessary to church

189
membership.

lie says, " entered

we

are not into the visible

church, before our admittance by the door of baptism."

{EccL Pol. book

with

us, that

ii.

He

clearly

would have agreed

who was never

in the church, could

1.)

a person

not be expelled /;-owi

it.

In his view, excommunication,

At

supposed previous membership.

length

Mr. Hall

employs words, the meaning of which are not disputed,

and intimates that we "withhold privileges and immunities

from him who

On

(/>.201.)

this

is

legally entitled to their possession.

ground we meet him;

if

he can prove

that the unhaptised are " legally entitled" to the privileges

and immunities of the church, the argument

ed, and
all his

He

we

shall not think of replying: but

be

will

till

finish-

this is done,

reasoning proceeds on mere assumption.

talks about

"punishment", but

him prove that

let

we withhold from those who he confesses are unbaptised,

what they can claim according to the New Testament.
Let him prove from that volume that our Lord intended
that he designed
one of his institutions to vanish away
;

to alter the terms of

ed

let

communion which he himself

him shew how the

institution of

tinue in force, while

it

and then, but not

then, will

cedure.

till

We know that

has lost

tions of the

we

its

we

a clamour

the excellence of the persons

our churches. But

is

station in the church

depended on our opinion of

alter our plan of pro-

raised against us about

whom we

refuse to admit into

reply, our concern

New Testament.

establish-

baptism can con-

is

with the direc-

If the admission of

members

their piety, exclusive of any

regard due to an institution which Christ placed at the door

of his church, the case would be different

but Mr. Hall

has not succeeded in shewing that this should be our guide,

instead

volume.

of the directions and

examples of the sacred

Unfortunately for his system, the rule exists;

and as we have stated before, according

the rule which the Saviour had given,

it

to our views of

was not

WE

that

excluded the unbaptised, but the plain interpretation o(

wo
the will of Christ

author himself
rule

Bap. a term of Com. p. 61); and our

that

us,

him who adopts

to

is,

(iS^ee

tells

(p. 110.)

Mr. Hall attempted

baptist

to

confound the expulsion of the

Corinthian with

incestuous

equally binding- with the

one must act on his own re-

rule itself, because every

sponsibility",

it,

" the interpretation of a

the rejection

claration of the parties being

unworthy

is

a de-

it

was answered,

"

in

one case the

declared unworthy from moral delinquency

the other he

We

fisd".

to

communicate".

61.) that the cases v,ere not similar

(/>.

a Faedo-

to "

In Baptism a term of Communion,

party

of

and asserted, that both amounted "

answer the purpose for which

to

In the

moral kind

in

should have supposed this statement was suf-

ficiently clear

brought.

not declared unworthy, but only unquali-

is

instance

first

it

swas

the objection was of a

second no such objection was adduced,

in the

or supposed to exist

but the reason why the party was

not received, was on the acknowledged ground that he

was unbaptised, on which account, he was

" unqualijied": and
this be, or

the

New

On
fit

it

be not true,

our view
"
whether
was immediately added,

be settled by an appeal

is to

to

Testament."

the occasion of this plain passage, Mr. Hall thinks

to play on

qualified,

and

terms

the

moral delinquency unworthy,

unqualified,

as if

been brought forward which was

absurd.
scarcely

some proposition had

either unintelligible or

After the explanation given above,

more than

re-stating

leave the paragraph to the

men.

in

What Mr,

what was

common

which

said before,

is

we

sense of reasonable

Hall says concerning

it

we

think "ww-

ivorthy" any farther notice.

Enough has been

justly stated in
It

is

'

said to prove that the question

Baptism a

terra of

was

Communion,' p, 65.

there observed, that this part of the discussion rests

on an answer

to the inquiry, "

whether an institution of

191
Christ

be given up"? JtJr.

them an " evasion", and

be maintained, or

to

is

Hall quotes a few

lines,

to

is

calls

In the paragraph which

attempts a reply, (p. 212, 213.)

he had before him

it is

stated, that the question

is

NOT

M^hether the Ptedobaptists were chargeable with nothing

more than a misconception of a positive institute; nor,

whether the members of a church have fully and properly
considered the nature of the institute to which they have
submitted,
basis

this

our author does not rest his system on

for

on the contrary, he asserts that they have

not submitted to

misconceive
that

it

at

it

all.

he gives

it,

it

But

to

up

for

whatever extent

has a claim on a christian's attention in his iudivi-

dual capacity, yet the whole of his labour

is

On

was placed by Jesus Christ.

who

also

though they misconceive

and oppose

ridicule

of his system, as far as

it is

either

received,

is,

clined plane,

down which

and
is

ivill be,

trifle

the minds of those

disinclined to obey the injunctions of the

descend to a neglect

but those

the tendency

of, at least,

to

which

His works form an

be regarded, or not.

it

who venerate
it,

Hence

it.

encourage the popular notion that baptism

may

which

his plan of reasoning,

the church ought to receive not only those

institution

an attempt

to exclude the institution from the station in

the

tket/

though he may admit

who

in-

are

New Testament,

one of the ordinances of

the Gospel, and quiet themselves in the assurance, that

if

they do not believe baptism requisite to communion, tliey

ought

So

to

have

all

the privileges of the church without

that instead of calling on

men

to

it.

" search the scrip-

tures," his system holds out a bribe to the

mind

to

pay the

subject no attention.

The manner
ations
'

if

in

which our author

finishes his observ-

on the quotation before him, deserves notice

they [the

Paedobaptists]

thing more than

are

chargeable with any

misconception,

the matter of that

charge must be deduced from their acting like upright

192

men an accusation, which we hope for ike honour of

human nature, will proceed from none hut strict Baptists."
The first part of this passage needs no reply,
{p. 214.)
;

because the preceding- observations shew that

to the point

for

differed from us

we have never supposed

were not " upright men";

we

formly proceeded on the opposite hypothesis.

part

is

not

it is

that those

who

have uni-

The second

an indiscriminate and unjust censure on a large

body, and deserves no regard except as a specimen of that

temper with which Mr. Hall's work so much abounds.

CHAPTER

XT.

Mixed communion unknown

in

the ancient

CHURCH.

We now come to the state of opinion in the ancient church,

which we are

The

may be

told

distributed into three periods.

includes the time during which, correct senti-

first

ments on the subject of baptism prevailed, and in which,

our author informs us, " a punctual compliance with it

was expected and enforced by the presidents of the

christian societies." (p. 217.)
This period is supposed
to

extend

end of the second century, or the be-

to the

ginning- of the

third.

The second

period begins from

that date and proceeds to the close of the fourth century,

during which time the baptism of infants was introduced

and gradually extended.

The

third period includes the

long course of years from thence to the

During the

the Reformation.

first

commencement of

of these periods,

allowed there could be no mixed communion

it is

but in the

second, Mr. Hall contends, there must have been Baptists

and Paedobaptists

in the

same

society, unless

it

could be

proved that the Baptists maintained a separate communion.

Here he takes his stand, and asserts, that " no sooner
did a difference of opinion on the subject of baptism
arise,

than the system of forbearance recommended

self at once,

the

to all

who adhered

to

it-

the sentiments of

modern Baptists throughout every part of the world

and that
tend with

it is

all

innovations."

the opposite principle which has to conthe

(/>.

odium and suspicion attached

219, 220.)

to recent

" Hence", he says, " the

concurrent testimonies of the Fathers of the three or

194
four

centuries, in proof of the necessity of baptism

first

church fellowship, are urged to no purpose whatever, un-

to

less it

commu-

could be shewn that there was no mixed

nion, no association of the advocates of adult, with the

patrons of psedobaptisra,

known

in those ages." {p. 221.)

This statement has, we grant, the merit of novelty.

But

it

cannot escape the observation of the attentive

reader, that our author brings forward a representation,

which

words appears

in

unknown

fact was

but in

favour of his system,

in

to all antiquity.

Did the Baptists of

commu-

that period receive the Peedobaptists into their

nion as persons unhaptised

Did they admit them, while

they declared their baptism invalid, and a nullify

Did

they plead for their reception on the ground of forbear"

ance

We never

met with the

ihey did : nor with any one

dence

exists.

slightest evidence

who imagined

that

that such evi-

Before Mr. Hall's statement can be ad-

mitted to have any force, he ought to prove that those

who were received

into

the church

in

were considered by the other members

community

ian
his

cause

is

as persons

unhaptised.

of the christ-

Till this

is

done

not advanced a single step, and the state-

ment which we before made continues

that his theory

vention of

infancy,

their

was unknown

modern

in its full strength,

in antiquity,

and

is

an

in-

date.

made by degrees: when infants were

mode of baptism was continued they were baptised on a profession of faith made
by proxies, who answered the usual questions in their
name, and who engaged that as they grew up they should
believe.
The infants who were baptised in the early
Innovations are

introduced, the original

;

some time

ages, for
tice,

after

the introduction of the prac-

appear to have been few

tions then entertained

especially

high in

and the extravagant no-

of the consequence of

when received from

administrators

baptism,

who were

public estimation, and were supposed

to

have

195
spiritual

blessings

general to believe

were baptised
tism received

baptism

such

would have been

induced

communicate,

to

materially

in adult years

had

formed that opinion of bap-

infancy, which Baptists

in

in

But the case

those who

valid.

different

men

now form

of

paedobaptism.

In our former treatise Cyprian was referred

to, in

con-

sequence of Mr. Hall's having turned the reader's attention

to that celebrated

Father,

We

stated our view of the

difference of opinion in ancient and

modern

times, on the

point in hand, which our author thinks proper to neglect

and we then brought the question

to this issue,

" did the

ancient church ever admit those to the Lord's table

who

then were considered as unbaptised ?" (Baptism a term of

Communion, p. 153, 154.)

It

sons were not admitted

it is

but

is

acknowledged such peralleged Cyprian admitted

Baptists and Pcedobaptists, which, for the reasons already

given,

nothing to the purpose.

is

Mr. Hall
*

says,

we

forget the importance which Cyprian

attached to baptism as a regenerating ordinance." (p,

" In ancient times the necessity of baptism as a

229.)

qualification for

communion, was avowedly founded on

its

supposed essential connection with salvation." (p. 235.)

know that Cyprian called baptism regeneration ; but

We

it is

evident he did not

stand by

it;

in his view a person

was not regenerated

blessings

before

mean by

till

that term what we underwho repented and believed

he was baptised

certain spiritual

were then conveyed which were

not given

and the African Father thought, that these bless-

ings could not be enjoyed unless the one baptism which he

considered of so

much consequence, was

received in that

part of the christian community which he asserted was

alone the church of Christ.

In baptism, he informs us,

children were born to God, and the church

The Apostle Paul

saying, there

is

is

their mother.

teaches us the sacrament of Unity,

one body, and one

spirit,

one hope of


196
your calling one Lord, one

faith,

one baptism, one God.

The

unity of the church subsisted by celestial sacraments.*

We

are aware that the term sacrament was often used in

a wide sense, but however

sion,

and

baptism

in the

is

it

be applied,

at least included

second,

it

in the first

expres-

the sacrament of unity;

As

cannot be excluded.

in the esti-

mation of Cyprian, baptism could only be obtained in the

true church,

church

so

it

was essential

and nothing,

or heretical,

to the existence of that

be more absurd

in his view, could

than to imagine that a church might be

formed on Mr. Hall's plan without baptism, or that the

unbaptised might communicate with those who were baptised

under the notion of promoting uniiy

He

supposed

that whoever did not hold the tinily of the church, did not

maintain the faith of the church

for the

one

faith

one baptism of the church he considered as essential

and

to its

That these notions were extended a great way too

unity.
far,

every one except a

but

all

Roman

considerate men,

Catholic will acknowledge;

who have no system

to serve, will

grant with equal freedom, that the excess to which they

were carried, and the principles on which they were

founded, are strong presumptions that such reasonings as
those of Mr. Hall were altogether unknown.

Yet notwithstanding

the length to which the African

Father carried his theory, he granted that there were cases

in
*'

which persons might be saved who died without the

He

regenerating ordinance" of baptism.

allowed that

Catechumens who were slain before they were baptised,

and the thief on the cross, were of this description. He
went still farther when some of his brother Bishops had
;

admitted persons into their churches

who had been bap-

tised

by Heretics, he did not venture to deny that even

these

would partake of divine mercy.

He

thought his

brethren ought not to have admitted them; yet, though he

* Vide Epist. ad Jubian. ad

Pomp,

et,

De

Unit. Eccl. 4, 6, &c.

197
strongly stated his

own

opinion,

lie

did not prescribe

a law which other ministers were bound to follow.

Epist. ad Jubian. 19,

But suppose we

as

&:c.)

sulTer

Mr. IlaU'to explain Cyprian's ex-

pressions so as to suit his hypothesis,

maxims
who differed from

it

{Vide

of antiquity inflexible; for

we

shall still find the

though there were sonic

the African Father, and seemed

more

nearly to approach Mr. H.'s sentiments, by admitting that

in

some cases

the baptism administered by Schismatics and

Heretics might be valid, and by pleading for the admission

of those whose baptism Cyprian disapproved, yet neither

thought of admitting persons unlaptised.

party

Mr.

Hall thinks he has obtained a general principle which

suits his purpose,

late

and he repeats

"more maxims

record."
quity'7

than this

his

charge that we vio-

of antiquity than any other sect upon

But what are " the maxims of antiIs there any one more ancient or more universal
that communicants at the Lord's supper should

(/j.

24G.)

be baptised
held," says

"

Among

the ahsurdiiies that ever were

all

Dr. Wall, " none

ever maintained that, that

any person should partake of the communion before he

was baptised." {Hist, of Inf. Bap. ed. 2. ]). 518.)

We
who

go farther, we retort the charge

the

violates

"

maxims

of antiquity."

it is

Mr. Hall

How

can he

describe the unity of the church, in agreement with Cyjwian's "maxims," without condemning his own? How can
he shew that any of thoss "maxims" which declared baptism to be the sacrament of unity that kept the church in

one body, can be applied

ciples?

a "

How

new case"

in

which the

promoted by holding

How

a church formed on his prin-

uniti/ of the

different oj)inions,

one baptism, and those

body

lo

can he prove that the ancients anticipated

who had

can he carry

church was to be

and those who had

none, were to

become one

his theory into practice,

by opposing the whole primitive church?

his " maxims" and their's be the same
?

How

except

then can

198

He

thinks proper to find fault with our quoting the

Donatists as acting on our general

conduct proves

all

that

it

was brought

principle.
to prove.

them and the Catholic church, there was no

difference

of opinion on the general doctrines of the gospel

they thought the procedure of the

Their

Between
but

Cathohcs had de-

stroyed the spirit of their religion, and invalidated the

Hence

ordinances of their church.

the Donatists urged

the necessity of baptising those who, entering into their

views and feelings, desired to hold communion with them.

This single circumstance clearly shews, that instead of

acting on Mr. Hall's principle, they acted on a principle
diametrically opposite

when they believed

for

the con-

verts to their system to be deficient in nothing else, they

still deemed it requisite to baptise them, before they became members of the Donatist church.

The

discussion respecting the opinion and practice of

the ancient church,

lies in

a narrow compass.

Great

found with our view of the sentiments of Cyprian

is

fault
;

but

whether we were correct or not, neither Cyprian nor

those

who opposed him acted on the theory

nor do we recollect an instance

Mr. Hall

laid

in

down by

which any

person whose baptism was considered invalid, was ever

admitted on our author's favourite argument derived from

forbearance.

That we, however, might not know of such

an instance, nor be acquainted with any ancient writer

who reasoned on

his principles

may not appear

surprising;

but what we never met with, his diligence and acuteness

might have discovered.

produced

that his theory

adopted.

Yet no such

The

was even known

presumption, then,

much
is

is

his opposition, the result

is

confessed, there cowWJe no

less that it

was

stronger than ever,

that he can find no support in antiquity.

all

writer has been

nor a single instance brought forward in proof

Notwithstanding

during the apostolic age,

it

mixed communion; and, dur-

ing the succeeding early ages,

it is

manifest, there ivas none.

CHAPTER

XII.

Conclusion.

In bringing our own work

led to

rally

to a termination,

we

observe how Mr. Hall finishes

are natu-

Near

his.

the beginning, and at the close of his last chapter, he talks

about a religion of love ; but whether the representations

with which he concludes his Reply, either proceed from
love, or are calculated to

Our author

says,

"

it

promote

it,

demands a doubt.

has been frequently observed on

that every voluntary society possesses the

this occasion,

power of determining on the qualifications of its members;

and that for the same reason, every church is authorised
of admission as
"
when therefore from
Again,

to enact such terms

255.)

societies,

it is

inferred that

right to organise itself at

its

it

shall see ft." (p.

it
its

analogy to other

[the church] has an equal

more
That a

pleasure, nothing can be

But who asserted this ?

word of God before them,

fallacious." (p. 256.)

religious society, laying the

must necessarily judge of a candidate's

and

qualifications,

determine whether they do, or do not accord with the

requisitions of the scriptures,

is

Hall can prove that we have no

can pursue

But this
church
fit,"

sition

is

is

is to

the only course

to our ability

we

by the rule.

a totally different thing from saying, that "every

authorised to enact such terms as

and, "

it

to organise itself at its pleasure";

which we never

author alone
that

judge according

evident; for unless Mr.

rule,

is

laid

down

accountable.

" the church

is

shall see

propo-

a charge for which our

We allow, to use his words,

a society instituted by heaven,

the visible seat of that kingdom which

God

it

is

has set up.

200
the laws by which
(p. 255)

To

us

it

and for

governed are of

is

it

reason

this

his prescribing,'

we oppose Mr.

Hall's system.
appears inconsistent with our obligation " exactly

co-nform to the mandates of revelation," (p. 25G) to

" organise" the church at our pleasure, and to " enact"

to

that one of
shall

"

tiie

ordinances which Christ has appointed,

be removed from

The

its

place,

Mr. Kingliorn informs

Baptists,

consider

us,

themselves as holding to notice one neglected truth."

The

Baptism a term of Communion, p. G9."

reference
What does Mr. Hall infer from hence? '* it is the prinis,

ciple thus

'

avowed,

distinctly

to

we

^vhich

object

the

principle of organising a church with a specific view to

some

the. propagation of

grant that

we

particular truth." (p. 257.)

did say, the Baptists

We

" hold up to notice

Will Mr. Hull deny either that they

one neglected truth."

do so, or that they ought to do sol As to what he calls

" the 2J^'incij)le," that is an inference of his own, and not
deducible from any thing we said, except by the same

means which have distinguished

on many

his inferences

other occasions.

"

What

is

the consequence which must be expected

from teaching an

illiterate

assembly that the principal

extend the jyractice of a particular ceretnong, but to invest it with an undue importance
design of their union

in their eyes,

is to

and by tempting- them

to look

selves as christians of a higher order,

weening- self conceit," &c. (p, 258.)

that this
that

is

is

If

the inference from any thing

necessary

is

deng

to

it

for if

upon them-

to foster

we

an over-

Mr. Hall means

we have

said, all

are not to state

our sentiments, nor to point out the connection which they

have with the different parts of the christian system, without being exposed to such a charge as
will be, that
if

we must

he means to charge

the denomination

this,

the next step

not state our opinions at

this inference

who

all

and

on those members of

are averse to his sentiments, in

201
consciousness that

tlie

altogether unfounded, they will

it is

not think the imputation worthy a detailed refutation.

We

are called upon to reflect

priety of" various things, and

'*

on the enormous impro-

among

"of

the rest,

invest-

ing every Utile Baptist teacher with the prerogative of

communion a Howe, a Leighton, or a

Brainerd, whom the Lord of glory will welcome to his
presence:" and we are then told, that " transubstantiation
presents nothing more revolting to the dictates of common
repelling from his

This passage strongly shews the contempt

sense." (p. 265.)

in

which Mr. Hall holds Utile Baptist teachers, and informs

them with how much scorn he thinks

We

need not turn

their apologists.

how important

shew,

but

teachers

it is

who

those
to

how much our

and unwearied exer-

least of ihese little

who

will plead his cause,

treated

hnn

Baptist

and prove that

as if he deserved nothing but

be trampled upon and despised

least,

to

serving his Lord with humility of mind,

is

who have

The

needless.

has an advocate

faithful

treat them.

would be easy

are their labours, and

denomination owes to their

tions

to

fit

It

might,

to

say the

have found better employment.

Besides, suppose these

Utile as

little

Baptist teachers are as

Mr. Hall's degrading expressions represent them,

have they forfeited the prerogative of judging

selves,

for

them-

and of acting on what they conceive the plain

directions of God's

word

Are they not

.''

to venture

an

opinion, or to act on their convictions in the presence, or

in

opposition to

Brainerd?

the wishes of

Howe, Leighton, and

But even these men with

all

their excellencies,

whatever they were, would not have given the objects of

Mr. Hall's scorn any trouble, for we know of no evidence
that any of

them adopted

his sentiments, or ever thought

either of receiving persons

tised, or of soliciting

them

their

Some

whom

they declared not bap-

communion with any who would

own baptism was no

tell

better than a nullity.

assertions arc too extravagant to have any other

202
effect than
is

to secure their

own

rejection

of this nature

the preceding, that " transubstantiation presents nothing

more revolting

to the dictates of

common sense", than the

Whoever knows what

system which we have advocated.

the doctrine of transubstantiation

is,

and

continue to

will

repeat such an assertion, will probably meet with none

who

will controvert bis position, or

him that he
before

endeavour to convince

charge which occurs a little

not much better, that we are " pretending to

is

is

wrong.

render a christian society more sacred, and more

difficult

of access, than the abode of the divine majesty." (p. 265.)

To
we

however, and to every attack of a similar kind,

this,

reply in the words of our author, " peace should

be

anxiously sought, but always in subordination to purity,

and therefore every attempt to reconcile the differences

among

christians

which involves the

sacrifice

of truth, or

the least deliberate deviation from the revealed will of

Christ,

is

spurious in

its

origin,

and dangerous

in its

{Terms of Com. p. 5.) Such was his statement

on a former occasion. But if Christ made an "inclosure,"
tendency.''

and

left it

on record that

it

was designed

the whole period of his dispensation,

from

his

why we

" revealed will" by removing

Nor have we heard any

to stand through

satisfactory

should deviate

we know not.
reasons why we ought
it,

not to raise again the ancient inclosure where

thrown down, and to build

it

it

it

had been

exactly in the place in which

formerly stood, in reliance on his wisdom

who

is

the

great architect of his church.

" The reader

is

requested to remember the extraordi-

nary positions which Mr. Kinghorn has been compelled

to advance in defence of his restrictive system." {p. 268.)

list

then follows, given in Mr. Hall's usual manner.

In our turn

we

request the reader to remember, that not

one of these positions have we ever advanced.

are

so

garbled

and misrepresented,

disown them, and leave our author

to

that

we

They
entirely

answer for them.

203
They have

been examined

in general

pages, and the observations already

the preceding

in

made we commit

to

the reader's consideration.

Mr. Hall "trusts"

that a "discerning public" will be

convinced that no attempt has been made to evade the

force of his opponent's arguments, {p. 278.)

us to say what a " discerning public"

It is not for

may

think,

but a

part of that "public" are Baptists, and they have discern-

ment enough

to see the

manner

which he has treated

in

the denomination to which they belong.

No
not

To

opinion can

obvious

the

be

permanent which

ultimately

impression

of the

support our author's theory

New

is

Testament.

should be proved, that

it

our general sentiment and practice are a misinterpre-

But

tation of its language and its facts.

can be said against

us, it is

if,

after all that

clearly seen that

we do no

more than the Lord commanded and the Apostles practised, the

reproaches of which our author

is

so profuse,

will

only sour the minds of some, and convince others

that

we

are right, for they will immediately conclude that

such language would not have been used

but in the

Mr. Baxter,

absence of scriptural argument.

in his

Infant Church-viemhership and Baptism, (p. 24,) having

briefly stated the

"

all

evidence in support of the position, that

members must be bapadds, "I know not what in any shew of

that must be admitted

tised"; forcibly

reason can be said to

visible

this,

by those that*renounce not

For what man dare go in a way which hath

neither precept nor example to warrant it, from a way that
scripture.

hath a full current of both ? Yet they that will admit

members into the visible church without baptism, do so."
Again,

in reply to the objection, that

members " must be

baptised after they are stated in the church, (and that

many

years,

as

they would have

scripture for that if you can.

ture example.'^

Such

It

plain and

I answer,

shew any

contrary to

all scrip-

it)

is

open appeals direct the

204
mind

at once to the only authority that can decide the

controversy.

We

are continually urged with the consideration, that

our sentiments are opposed to the unity of the church,

and our present defence

the

increase

spirit

will

be accused of tending to

Yet

of division.

sincerely

we

as

lament every thing which occasions painful feeling in the

family of God,

still

divisions themselves are less evils than

We

that unity which arises from the sacrifice of truth.

men to

seek unity by endeavouring to call the attention of

Mr. Hall proposes the same end,

primitive Christianity.

by discarding what the great body of christians has

We

always believed to be a part of the will of Christ.

acknowledge

method of promoting

this is one

unity,

might be applied to an endless variety of cases

to say,

is difficult

in the

set aside,

same principle?
alone that

is

if

which

since

it

might not be cashiered

difference

For

same way.

Lord can be

society

what

the direct injunctions of the

what may not be given up on the

But one thing

is

evident;

it is

not unity

a blessing of such high consequence

no

was more united than the Roman Catholic church

during her long reign over the nations

but at no period

was either the world or the church in such an awful condition.

The

Mr. Hall

unity for which Cyprian contended, and which

praises so highly, was continued in the

Romish

hierarchy, and extended over the whole western world

instead of being a blessing,

baneful kind.

The

its

tions of the gospel are simple

influence was of the most

and

our Lord himself in

The

we have not had

to

contend

for

declara-

and they are

plain,
faith

obedience to what he has commanded.

inquiry

but

only unity worth seeking arises from

being of the same mind with Jesus Christ,

summed up by

baptism and
In the present

minufia which

supposed were concealed in the general expression,

things whatsoever

might be

said,

I have commanded

you, and which,

were open to endless debate

we
all
it

we have bad

205
to

to call the reader's attention

named by

an ordinance expressly

Lord himself, and which was

tlie

tlie

only visible

institution he thought proper to specify in his commission.

Singular as

may appear

it

to

some persons, whoever ad-

that the commission contains the principles which

raits

the christian church should recognise, always places himself

on the ground which we have been maintaining.

may

differ

he may apply

and

call it

from us

baptism

would allow us

if

he does,

sprinkling to infants

we

all

ask

that he

is,

But while he makes

whenever we come in contro-

from him.

to differ

the commission his guide,

versy with him, the point of difference

meaning of the

He

injunction,

relates

the

to

and the interpretation

it

receives in the conduct of the Apostles, but not to the

situation in which
to

it is

placed, and

first

tation,

christian ordinance,

New

the facts of the

consequent priority
different course

command

grants our interpretation of the

specting the

its

Mr. Hall pursues a

communion.

he

of Christ re-

he allows that

all

Testament agree with our interpre-

and that in primitive times they agree also with

our system on the subject of communion

that persons unbaptised have

the church, and that

to dispute

If,

it.

we

now

yet he contends

a right to a place ia

are doing them great injustice

however, any of his reasonings establish

that right in the face of such directions and such facts as

exist in the

New

they

will

rule,

our duty

where
shall

but

is

we

But

stop.

the

have to
shall

Testament,
if

it

is

not easy to say where

the sacred volume

is

to

be our

we must ask for the old paths,

good wag, and walk therein. We know we
bear the reproaches of many on this account,
is

plain,

more promote the cause of Christ

by acting in conformity

by adopting maxims, the

amputate one of
of the church

we

in the end,

to his primitive appointment, than

first

operation of which

his positive ordinances.

is

to

In the history

have seen the mischief arising from a

corruption of the institutions of the Gospel, and

we ought

206
to take

warning from former times. The deviations of the

early ages

were occasioned by one

and the system of Mr. Hall

is

class of assumptions,

derived from another, but

both are, in our esteem, deviations from the word of

Christ

and

as his guide,
nate.

to

him who

it

signifies

His business

is to

travels with the

keep

tive Saints, holy Apostles,

remember

New

Testament

nothing from whence they origiin the

path trodden by primi-

and the Son of

God

and

to

the admonition, Wherefore seeing ive are also

compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us

lay aside every weight, and the siji which doth so easily
beset us,

and

us, looking

let

us run with patience the race set before

unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith,

who, for the joy set before him, endured the cross, despising

and is set down on the right hand of the throne

For consider him that endured such contradic-

the shame,

of God.

tion of sinners against himself,

faint in your minds^ {Heb.

xii,

lest

ye be tcearied and

3,)

THE END.

WILKIN AND YOCNGMAN, PRINTERS, NORWICH.

Works

Address

to

by the same Author

a Friend on
Second Edition.

Church Communion.

Price dd.

Scriptural Arguments for

Christ.

the Divinity of

Second Edition. Price

Is,

Advice andEncouragement to Young Ministers,

two Sermons,

Academies of

to

the

Students of the two

Bristol and Stepney.

Price

Baptist

Is.

Praciical Cautions to Students and Young

Ministers, a Sermon, preached
shire, at the

at Bradford, YorkAnnual Meeting of the Northern Baptist

Education Society.

Price Is.

Baptism a Term of Communion.

Price

As.

Second

Edition.

THE

DUTY AND IMPORTANCE

OF

FREE COMMUNION
AMONG REAL

CHRISTIANS OF EVERY DENOMINATION,

ESPECIALLY

WITH
/

SOAfE NOTICES OF

Messrs.

THE WRITINGS OF

BOOTH, FULLER, AND

R.

HALL,

ON THIS SUBJECT.

"

have been

in Scotland.

The

great points in dispute

among

the lodependentt (here,

are Church gOTeniment and discipline.

I wish I could sound a retreat to them; and that all

the armteB of the Lamb, there and here, wonld concentrate their forces against the common

enemy." Letter from

the Ret. A. Fuller to the Rev.

W.

Bennet.

(Rennet's Gos. Constitut. Life, p. S9.)

HLotition:

PRINTED FOR

W.

SIMPKIN AND

R.

MARSHALL,

STATIONERS' HALL COURT, LUDGATE HILL.

Price

Is.

6d.

CONTENTS.

PAGE

Introduction

I.

II.

III.

Of the Unity of the Church

Communion ....
Of the One Baptism
Of the alleged Connection between Baptism and
as " one body" ....

essential to

4
9

15

the Lord's Supper

On Mutual Toleration among Christians ........

V. The Question of exclusive Communion,

IV.

23

historically

26

considered
VI.

On the Assumption of a

Right of Exclusion, and

the Evils arising from the exclusive Principle..

32

an infringement of Christ's Authority

33

of the " royal law" of love

ib.

It is

2.

It is a violation

3.

It offers

violence to the finer feelings of the

34

Christian character
4.

It is

the parent of schism

the ground of

5.

It is

6.

It

7.

It

It

religious persecution

divides Christian families

M/ichurches
in

8.

all

37

all

Christian Societies, except

one Communion

40

presents serious impediments to the universal propagation of the Gospel

VII.

38
39

Objections answered Conclusion

41

45

ErhaTUM.

The

following mistake affecting the sense, the reader

quested to correct

Page 17,

it

with his pen.

line 20, for hands read kitub,

is

rei

DUTY AND IMPORTANCE

FREE COMMUNION.
After

so

much has been

question of open and strict

lately written

Kinghorn, and others,

Hall,

on the

communion by Messrs.
a small anonymous

pamphlet on the subject may well be thought to require some apology that apology may be founded
on the circumstance now mentioned. The controversy above referred to has become voluminous
and expensive so much so, as to render it inac;

cessible to the great

mass of

Christians,

neither afford the purchase nor the time.

ject is also here discussed

who can
The sub-

on a more extended

ground not merely as a question among different

denominations of Baptists,* practising strict or free
may

perhaps be told that I should use the term Anlibut it is both a long word and a liard word, two
decided objections with me against its frequent use.
When
I speak of strict and free, or mixed, communion, I mean no
I

pcedobaptist

reproach.

By

strict

mean those who restrict their

who have submitted to adult baptism by

Baptists I

communion

to persons

immersion

under the other term

all

those

(free, or

mixed)

who admit Paedobaptists also and,

tians of all denominations.

comprehend

in short, true Chris-

communion, but as extending

tions also

communion, occasional or
our Lord, with

recommend

stated, in the

his visible family

all

denomina-

to other

the writer's object being to

Supper of

with

"

all

who

love our Lord Jesus," both theirs and ours;

and

this

churches

on the

that

principle

of Christ

all

on earth are

the

visible

but parts or

branches of that one catholic or universal church

" the

Lamb's wife."
pamphlet like this cannot be supposed
to comprehend all the arguments which might be
adduced, or all the texts by which those arguments might be supported much less can it be
expected to enter into the pro and co7i of controversy.
All that is attempted is, to furnish materials for those who are able and desirous to think
bride, the

A small

'

'

for themselves.

The

writer has also chosen to be anonymouSy at

least for the present, that all personalities

avoided.

He

may be

brings no charge of bigotry, or im-

proper motives, against either Christian societies

or individuals. There are, probably, bigots on both
sides;

but he addresses good and upright men,

equally conscientious with himself.

This, however, will not prevent the use of strong

and decided language,

in a point

which he con-

siders of great importance, especially at the present

time,

when

tion,

are using their utmost exertions for the en-

Christians, of almost every denomina-

largement of the Redeemers kingdom, and to

hasten the glorious period of the Millennium;
exertions which,

cramped by

he conceives, must be greatly

strict or sectarian

the sequel he

will

communion, as

attempt to prove.

in

That, in referring to writers on the exclusive

side of this question, the author has chiefly con-

Booth and Fuller, it

no unworthy motive.

fined himself to Messrs.

hoped

is

It

will be ascribed to
because they are the chief writers on that side of
and
the question with whom he is acquainted
because, as he believes, the one is considered as

is

the most complete, the other as the most forcible

writer on the subject.

entered into rest from

And though
all

they have

now

controversies, if

their

any instance they are here misunderstood or

misrepresented, of which the writer is not conr
scious, there are others living of the same sen-

in

timent, well able to defend them.

Should any advocate of strict communion condescend to notice these few pages, the writer does
not pledge himself to reply but if he should see
it necessary, it will be with studied brevity, being
fully determined not to be drawn into the vortex
of an angry or protracted controversy.
For this
reason he has avoided, as much as possible, both
the subject and
parts of the Baptist controversy
the mode.
He has indeed read on both sides, and
made up his mind and his opinion is not likely to
be altered, except by evidence he has not yet seen.
He has judged for himself, and is quite willing that
all his fellow Christians should do the same
and
is not aware of any material evil arising from such
differences of opinion, when not made the ground
of exclusive communion nor is he sensible of any
diminution of affection in his own mind on account
;

of them,

when they

affect only the

Christianity.

b2

minor points of

SECTION

Of the

The unity

I.

Unity of the Church.

of the church

is

a principle generally
It has been

admitted, but greatly misunderstood.

commonly supposed

too

opinions,

and

This subject,

therefore,

requires

harmony of

and ceremonies.

some explana-

And,

tion.
1

to consist in

in uniformity of rites

When

church,

speak of the unity of the Christian

refer not to

church, but to

all

any national or particular

the congregations of the faithful

throughout the world

for I

cannot for a

moment

think of confining the Christian character, or the

benefits of salvation, to a party, or to a nation, but

" who in every place call upon the name

of the Lord Jesus ;" and perfectly agree with the
doctrine of our English reformers, as expressed in
the 20th Article of the Establishment, that " The
include

visible

all

church of Christ

is

a congregation of

faith-

which the pure word of God is

preached, and the sacraments be duly administered,
ful

men,

in the

according to Christ's ordinance, in

all

those things

that of necessity are requisite to the same."

may

add, in the words of Dr. Mason, of New York

" None whom these pages address will pretend
that there are no true Christians in the world but

themselves, and no true churches but their

that

all

others are

mere heathens, and all their

The very idea of
abhorred by those whose feel-

churches synagogues of Satan.

such arrogance

is

own

ings and practice are most adverse to free com-

munion." *
2.

When

speak of the unity of the church,

I refer to a unity of faith and devotion

not

of

opinions and religious rites.

a unity oi faith, and not of opinions;

is confined to first and fundamental prin-

(1.) It is

that

is, it

ciples.

may be

This

the Bible Society and

by a reference to
difterent members, who,

illustrated
its

though of a variety of sects and parties, have all

one object, the dissemination of the vs^ord of God.
Or we may refer to the Bible itself, in which all
believers recognize certain fundamental principles,
though on going into a minute detail scarcely two
individuals would, perhaps, explain themselves

same terms. So, in defending these

fundamental articles, some would prefer, in proof,
one text of scripture, and some another, with conexactly in the

siderable variety.
(2.) It is

Some

a unity of devotion, and not of

rites.

Christians chuse to worship with a form,

and some without.

others standing, &c.

Some pray
But

it

kneeling,

and

has often been re-

marked, that, in the extemporaneous devotions of

good men, (and I presume there are none but do
sometimes pray extemporally,) there is much greater

harmony than

in either their public discourses or

private controversies.
I

conceive,

And whence

is this ?

Partly,

because they confine themselves in

prayer more closely to the simple language of the

but chiefly because, in the exercise of
devotion, they are under the more immediate inScriptures

Plea for Catholic

Communion, page

9.

6
fluence of the Spirit of God, the author of

all

true

concord and genuine devotion.

In reflecting on the diffusion and general perusal
of the Scriptures,
is

more

in their

The

truth than

have sometimes thought there

some have been

willing to allow,

tendency to produce a variety of opinions.

is,
those who are debarred from the

fact

Scriptures seldom inquire into religious subjects.

They
faith

think as the church thinks, and pin their

on the

priest's sleeve

think for themselves, on

but when they come to

the minor points of

all

Christianity they will form a variety of opinions,

and perhaps discover the unsuspected fact, that

among thinhing persons there are no two who
think in all points perfectly alike, even upon religion
and yet there may be a perfect harmony in
first principles and fundamentals.
There is a passage of Scripture which on this
subject ought to be attentively considered.
It is
a part of the office of the Holy Spirit to lead believers into truth; and our excellent translators,
:

through a slight inadvertence, by overlooking the

article in the original, have rendered the text, *' he
shall lead

you

into

all

truth;" that

is,

as

many

have understood it, into every branch of religious

truth
whereas (as the learned Bishop Lowth long
since observed) the passage should be rendered,
" into all THE truth;''* that is, into a knowledge
of the gospel method of salvation. This is commonly called ** the truth ;" | and so far, sooner or
;

* Lorvth's Eng. Gram, note,

Campbell on John xvi. 13.

t Gal.

iii.

1.

that ye should not

(O

p. 12,

foolish Galatians,

obey the truth

!)

(ed. 1764.)

who
ct

See also

hath bewitched )'ou

al.frcq.

iater, all true Christians are

of

brought into a unity

faith.

(3.)

But there

is

another point of union prin-

cipally referred to in the Scriptures, a unity of

heart.
all

Our Lord had

men know

have

love

Christians

that

foretold

ye are

my

one to another."
it is

said,

" By

this

disciples,

And

of

the

shall
if

ye

first

they " were of one heart and

one soul."* This is a union of Christian charity:

and is a principal ground, though certainly not
the primary one, of their holding

each other

in the Lord's

Supper

communion with
and the elements

partaken are tokens, not merehj representative of

the

body and blood of

Christ, but also of the union

For we, (says the Apostle Paul,)

being many, are one bread, and one body for we
are all partakers of that one bread." f How strange
is it, then, that any Christians, who are parts of
this mystic bread, members of " the body of
Christ," whose death is thus commemorated,
should be considered as incapacitated for communion with each other ?
In speaking of the unity of the church, Mr. Hall
says, " Whoever forms his ideas of the church of
Christ from the New Testament, will perceive
that unity is one of its essential characteristics
and that though it be branched out into many
" The church
distinct societies, it is still but one.
of believers.

**

" (says Cyprian)

is one, which by reason of its

" fecundity is extended into a multitude, in the
" same manner as the rays of the sun, however
" numerous, constitute but one light
and the
;

John

xiii.

55.

Acts

iv. 32.

Cor. x. 17.

" branches of a tree, however many, are attached

to one trunk, which is supported by its tena" cious root
and when various rivers flow from

**

though number is diffused by

" the redundant supply of waters, unity is pre" served in their origin." Nothing more abhorrent
*'

the

same

fountain,

from the principles and maxims of the sacred

oracles can be conceived, than the idea of a
plurality of churches, neither in actual

communion

with each other, nor in a capacity for such communion.

Though this rending of the seamless
garment of the Saviour, this schism in the members of his mystical body,

is

by

far the greatest

calamity which has befallen the Christian interest,

and one of the most

fatal

effects

of the great

apostacy foretold by the sacred penman,

been so long familiarised to

it,

we have

as to be scarcely

enormity nor does it excite surprise or concern in any degree proportioned to

what would be felt by one who had contemplated
sensible of

its

the church in the

first

ages." *

Terms of Communion,

p. 1, 2.

SECTION

Of

the

ONE Baptism

II.

essential to Christian

Communion.

Here

I fully

admit that there is a baptism necesI contend also that it is

sary to communion, and

equally necessary to salvation

for I consider the

terms of communion and of salvation to be the

same; and that Christian churches are bound to
receive into their communion all whom they
have

sufficient

reason to believe the Lord Jesus

has received into communion with himself. *

Formerly, indeed, there were divers baptisms;

Moses and of the Jews, of John and of the

as of

apostles,

prior to the institution of the

Lord's

Supper but with these, I conceive, we have now

no immediate concern. Certainly the baptism of
Moses was not Christian baptism, nor even that of
John or the disciples at Ephesus would not have
been re-baptized *' in the name of the Lord Jesus,"
;

as

it

appears they were.

I"

That baptism which can alone with strictness be

denominated " the baptism of Christ," is the baptism of the Holy Ghost.
So said John, emphatically called the Baptist
after

me

shall baptize

" He

that cometh
you with the Holy

* Mr. Booth (Apol. p. 106) objects to this the case of persons

excluded from church communion for " scandalous backslidings,"
(as the incestuous Corinthian,) of whom yet there might be
hope but the question is not here of hope; but whether we can
have " reason to believe" Christ has received into communion
with himself " scandalous" backsliders, while living in incest or
adultery ? Mr. Booth surely would not answer in the affirmative?
t Acts xix. 5.

10

Ghost, and with

revealed

And

fire."

" Upon

whom

again, to

John

it

was

thou shalt see the Spirit

descending, and abiding on him, the same

which baptizeth with the Holy

Ghost." *

Jesus after his resurrection, said,

he

is

Again,

" John truly

baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with

many days

hence." t The
accomplishment of this promise on the day of

the Holy Ghost, not

full

Pentecost

well known, and need not here be

is

insisted on

but some have, on the other hand,

confined the baptism of the Spirit to his miraculous

powers

only,

which

is

equally inconsistent, since

both our Lord and his apostles

insist

upon the ne-

cessity of divine influences to form a Christian

" Except a

man be born

again, he cannot see the

If

any man have not the

none of his." f
The fact is, the evangelists and apostles were
popular writers, and were easily understood by
the common people
but they often mixed the
figurative style with the literal, in a manner per-

kingdom of heaven
Spirit of Christ

he

is

fectly familiar to the inhabitants of eastern coun-

but which appears to us unnatural and ob-

tries,

In studying the sacred writers, however,

scure.

we

should endeavour rather to enter into their

style than to reduce

them

to our standard of pre-

The baptism of the Holy Ghost intends an

abundant portion of his influences, which are to be
understood as either miraculous or moral, accordcision.

ing to the context, or the subject spoken of: the

former aflbrding those extraordinary aids required

in

the

first

propagation of the Gospel

Matt

iii.

John

iii.

11.
5.

John i. 33.
Rom. viii. 9.

t Acts

i.

the
5.

lat-

11
ter that

moral or

influence

sjiiritual

necessary

end of

to the conversion of every sinner to the

time.

But

let

us inquire more particularly into the one

baptism necessary both to communion and salva-

The Apostle Paul

tion.

says,

Ephesians " There

in

addressing the

is one body, and one Spirit,

even as you are called in one hope of your calling
one Lord, one faith, one baptism one God and
;

Father of

and

all,

you

in

who

all."

above

is

Here

it

all,

and through

appears to

ingly incongruous to class a

me

all,

exceed-

mere external

nance among these great essential truths,

ordi-

in pre-

ference to the sovereign influences of the Holy

who

Spirit,

is

of the text.

named

expressly
St.

in the tirst

member

Paul confirms our interpretation

when speaking of circumcision and, comparing it

with baptism, he says, " in whom (Christ) ye are
circumcised :" but mark, it is *' with the circum;

made without hands, in

of the sins of the flesh by
cision

putting

off"

body

the

the circumcision of

here the analogy seems to war"

without hands also, for one is as
rant us to add
Christ

buried"

'

capable of a spiritual interpretation as the other,

and the following words require it " Buried with

him

(Christ) in baptism, wherein also ye are risen

with him through the

faith of the operation of

who

hath raised him from the dead."t

that

it

know

has been commonly supposed, even by

Paedobaptists, that here

ginal

God,

mode

of baptism

is

an allusion to the

but

if so,

think

ori-

it is

very distant one, and refers rather to the manner

Ephes.

iv.

t Col.

-(5.

c 2

ii.

II, 12.

12

which Christ was baptized than to the practice

of the church
as if he had said
that, like as
Christ was baptized by John with (or in) water,
that he might '* fulfil all righteousness," so believers
are baptized with the Holy Spirit, in which baptism (not of water, but of the Spirit) " ye (says the
in

Apostle) are risen with him,"

not

but " through

through the

washing of water,
the faith of the
operation of God, who hath raised him from the
dead."

In another Epistle, the same sacred writer seems

more

explicit.

It

must be recollected that the

union of Christ with his Church was a favourite

" They are one body he is
topic of this apostle.

the head and they are the

fore partake with
torial

him

work

him

members

:"

they there-

in all the parts of his

media-

they suffer and are crucified with

they die and are buried with him they are

raised,

ascend and

sit

with him in heavenly places;

and why one branch only of this communion with

him is to be explained in allusion to an external rite,
namely burial, is what I do not understand* for

certainly there

is

no

allusion,

in

speaking of his

form of our Lord's extension on

But let us hear the Apostle. " Know

crucifixion, to the

the cross.

ye not that so many of

tized

death

into
?

us, as

were

(or are)

bap-

Jesus Christ, were baptized into his

Therefore

we

are buried with

him by bap-

* If as Mr. Robinson insists, (History of Baptism, p. 7-) and

think with great appearance of reason, baptism in its original
form was an act of worship the subject bowing forwards as he
entered the water, and not being bent backward, as is the modern practice then the allusion to the form of burial wholly
disappears ; for I know of no nation, which buries their dead
upon their faces and certainly neither the Greeks nor Romans
I

did

so.

13
tlsm 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. For if we
have been planted together in the likeness of his
death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection
knowing this, that our old man is crucified
with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed,
:

that henceforth

we

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.* Now all this is the effect, evidently not of
water baptism, nor of any external rite but of the
should not serve

sin.

baptism of the Holy

Spirit,

whereby we are

fied with Christ, die unto sin, are buried

pleasures of the world

cruci-

from the

raised unto newness of

life

the New Jerusalem

are brought
and
communion with the general assembly of the
God the Judge of Jesus
into

in fact

to

first-born

to

all

the Mediator of the

new Covenant,"t

pare this with the passage,

reasoning, and

is it

to

Comon which we are now

&c.

not conclusive, that the " one

baptism" essential both to salvation and communion,

is

the baptism of the Holy Ghost

is rendered still clearer by comwith the language of the Apostle Peter,

speaks also of Baptism as saving us but is

This passage
paring

who

it

particularly careful to guard against supposing

he

meant water baptism. Before I quote that verse,

however, I beg to refer to the preceding context,
as calculated to throw light upon the whole subject.
The Apostle is speaking of Noah and his family
being " saved by water the like figure whereunto
:

Rom.

vi.

J 8.

t Heb.

xii.

S2, 23.

14

baptism doth

now

But here

save us."*

is

no

allu-

sion to the form of baptism.

*'

down

into" the water,

Noah neither went

:"
nor came up " out of it

he was borne above it, and never left the ark till
it rested on dry land
but the point of comparison
rests here
as the Patriarch was borne above every
for

danger by the water supporting the ark so Chrisand death " by baptism;"
but by what baptism ? "Not the putting away
;

tians are raised from sin

the

filth

of the flesh"

which water baptism might

do but the baptism of the Holy Spirit, affording

" the answer (or confession) of a good conscience
towards God;" and this is as Paul also saith,
" through the resurrection of Christ, who is gone
;

into heaven," &:c.

And

then he reasons on the same

principles as the Apostle of the Gentiles, for the

necessity of dying to

Thus

sin,

and

living to

God.

have endeavoured to shew that the ** one

baptism" on which the New Testament writers
I

much

merely the baptism of

water, though sometimes alluded to, or accompanied with it but the baptism predicted by John,
promised by Jesus, and bestowed on all believers,
at once qualifying them for communion, both with
Christ and with his Church.
These observations, will perhaps, best account for
the stress very early laid upon baptism as essential
to salvation
some confounded water-baptism with
the baptism of the Spirit calling the former " relay so

stress, is not

generation, illumination," &c. and, substituting the

sign for the thing signified

the internal grace

they
*

Pet.

the

external rite for

falsely inferred the neces-

iii.

21.

15
sity of the one,

from the acknowledged necessity

of the other.

To

return to water baptism, as a term of

commu-

be not necessary to constitute a Christian, neither, can it be absolutely necessary to

Christian communion for what is Christian communion, but the communion of Christians with

nion

if it

each other, and with their Lord? of which **the

breaking of bread, and of prayers," are equally
constituent parts, as will be seen under the next
section.

SECTION

On

III.

the alleged Connection between

Baptism and the

Lord's Supper.

Explaining

the one Christian baptism, of the

baptism of the Holy Ghost, as done in the preceding section, I cannot object to this being considered as a pre-requisite to church communion:
I

am now,

however, to consider the opinion of the

strict Baptists (as

sake)
that,

they are called for distinction

that the external

rite

of water baptism, and

administered by immersion and to adults

only, is equally essential to such

communion.

This

leads us to the important inquiry, as stated

Mr.

Fuller,

and other able advocates of

munion, " Has baptism

[literally

strict

by

com-

understood] any


16

such instituted connection with the Lord's Supper

as to be a pre-requisite to

it ?"

Could this be proved, however, I am not sure it

would decide the question. It might prove it to be
the duty of all believers to be baptized previously
to their

must

mode

approaching the Lord's table

rest with their

own

but

still it

consciences, to adopt that

which they conceive to be of divine

and most certainly if they, on candid inquiry, conceive themselves to have been
or form

appointment

validly baptized in infancy, this

connection will

not prove that they ought to receive adult baptism

they approach the holy table much

"
less will
such instituted connection" prove that
also, before

their

fellow

Christians have a right to exclude

them from the Lord's table, because they do not

view the question respecting baptism in the same
light

Let us, however, enter

with themselves.

little

farther into the inquiry

and here

would

remark
1.

Neither in the institution of John's baptism,

nor in that practised by the disciples of our Lord

Jesus during his ministry, do

we

find the

most

which indeed
and though the Lord's
Supper was instituted prior to the commission under wdiich the apostles, and their successors in the
ministry, have since continued to baptize, yet was
there no distinct mention of it in that commission
neither was there any reference to baptism in the
distant allusion to the Lord's Supper,

was not then

instituted

institution of the Lord's Supper.

* Fuller's Letter on the admission of unbaptised persons to the
Lord's table, p. 10.

17

The

2.

two

objects of the

institutions are per-

baptism being an initiatory ordi-

fectly distinct;

nance, professing discipleship

commemorative

the Lord's

having

institution,

Supper
retro-

spective view to the death and atonement of the

Saviour

the one

adapted

may be

other

the

dividual,

administered to an inan institution expressly

is

communion
the one rework of the Redeemer,
operations of the Holy Spirit.

for Christian

ferring to the mediatorial

the other to the

3.

have

said, the institution of baptism, after

our Lord's resurrection, contains no express reference to the Lord's Supper.

This

Let us hear Mr. Fuller, than

whom

able to state an argument

more

disputed.

no man was
urge it

clearly, or

forcibly.

This excellent

man

argues, that, as in the admi-

nistration of the Lord's

cup

more

is

Supper the delivering of the

bread proves the necessity of administering the sacrament in *' both hands," so the
after the

manner

in

servance of

which teaching, baptizing, and the ob-

commanded, are arranged in

shew the order in which

all things

the original commission,

these ordinances are to be connected. " Let us (says

Mr.

F.) read

nations

the

commission

baptizing them

in the

" Go teach

name

all

of the Father,

and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost teaching

to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and lo I am with you always, even
unto the end of the world." " Is it not (adds
Mr. F.) plainly the order of things, as stated by our
Lord Jesus Christ that we are first to teach men,
by imparting to them the Gospel then, on their
and then to go on to
believing it, to baptize them
D

them

18

imtruct them in

ordinances and com-

the

all

mandments which are

left

by Christ

our

for

direction ?" *
I

perfectly agree with Mr. Fuller, that, on every

we must content ourselves

with the information which the Scriptures give, and
theological question,

have no right to ask

more, or to complain of its

for

we

not being so explicit as

could wish

also, that

the order in which circumstances are placed

may

sometimes throw light upon their connection and

dependances but here I can find no such arrangement, farther than the undisputed fact, that the
Gospel was to be preached to the heathen pre;

vious to their being proselyted,

and that

after-

wards they were to be farther instructed in the

doctrines and duties of Christianity.
But it is
a mere assumption that this instruction refers first
and principally to the Lord's Supper, which is not
even named, though doubtless included in the all
things commanded.
But if we look back to our
Lord's last discourses with his disciples on this

very occasion,

we

think

shall find

more emphatically enjoined

men know

my

that ye are

" By

something
shall

this

disciples, that

far
all

ye love

one another.**

Mr. Fuller here remarks, as evidently,

view, conclusive on this subject

corded facts

"

All

in his

the re-

New

Testament place baptism

But such
also is the order in which Paedopabtists place
them and supposing them to be mistaken as to
the validity of infant baptism, yet here is no inin the

before the celebration of the Supper."

* Fuller's Letter, p.

2.

t Letter,

p. 4.

19

version of the order, as they do not baptize after

admitting to the Holy Supper.

Here, therefore,

is

no contradiction to the primitive example.

But
ler

to advert again to

indeed mentions

it

recorded facts Mr. Fulas an unquestionable fact,

:

company who joined together at the

were all baptized." * But Mr. Hall

that " the first

Lord's table

denies

many

this,

as to Christian baptism, believing that

of the apostles and

had reand Mr. Fuller

disciples

first

ceived no baptism but that of John

has not attempted to prove the contrary

is

to

therefore at least questionable.

be certain;

the fact

But suppose

it

Peedobaptists are conscientiously

that they

satisfied

have also received Christian

and who shall deny them the right of

private judgment ?
This champion of strict communion, however,
proves, what is indeed literally asserted by St.

baptism

Luke, the first church historian, that all those who

were " added to the church" by conversion, " continued steadfast" in the apostle's doctrine, in break-

ing of bread, and in prayers;" and though this will

not absolutely prove, that they had all received
Christian baptism (although
the contrary)

who were

it

does prove, as

do not contend to

I
I

conceive, that

all

admitted to fellowship with the apostles

and in prayers," were admitted also

to communion with them " in breaking of bread ;"
which is contrary to the practice of strict Baptists
they admit Peedobaptists to communion in all other
devotional exercises, and to preach for them even
on communion days, and yet exclude them from
*'

in doctrine

Letter, p. 15.

d2


20
" the breaking of bread" with them. But if the
mention of baptism before the Lord's Supper, or
**
breaking of bread" proves, that it must necesprecede it, then assuredly the mention of
breaking of bread" before " prayers," (meaning

sarily
**

doubtless, social prayers,) will equally exclude

unbaptized persons (so considered) from

all

commu-

nion in prayers, as well as the Lord's Supper

which

presume, than any of our Baptist

This argument, therefore,
friends wish to carry it.
of the order of the terms, by proving too much,
is farther, I

proves in fact nothing.

But our excellent opponent

(as others

have done

before him) conceives, that he has found such a

above supposed, in the following

** Moreover,
of St. Paul
brethren, I would not ye should be ignorant, how
tliat all our fathers were under the cloud, and all
and were all baptized
passed through the sea
unto Moses, in the cloud and in the sea and did
and did all drink
all eat the same spiritual meat
the same spiritual drink for they drank of that
rock that followed them, and that rock was

connection as
well

is

known passage

Christ."*

In the

first

place, the occasional

men-

tion of two ordinances in the same paragraph will

not prove their dependance on each other, any

more than our naming together the Missions

Greenland and

to India, will

to

imply a similar con-

nection or dependance.

Again, baptism "unto Moses"

tian baptism

to

it,

nor had, as

except very remotely.

Cor. X.

was not

Chris-

conceive, any allusion

Still

5.

more remote

is

the

21

supposed reference to the Lord's Supper, in speakWhat

ing of the manna and the miraculous water.
then is the spiritual import of the passage ? Baptism in the cloud unto Moses, I suppose, refers to
baptism unto Christ by the Holy Spirit, which was
promised to be poured out from on high upon beIf immersion in water had been here
lievers.
intended, surely the Egyptians, and not the
The figure here
Israehtes were thus immersed.

me somewhat

analogous to that of St.

Peter, in comparing the ark to baptism in a pas-

appears to

sage above considered.

The

Israelites like

Noah's

family were saved, not hy immersion, but from

it.

But how did the cloud save them ? We are told,

that the Lord sent a strong east wind, that caused
a retrocession of the sea all night ; and the cloud
which had gone hitherto before them, was now
placed behind them; and while to the Egyptians
it carried storm and darkness, to the Israehtes it
was a cloud of fire and of light they were then
not baptized with water, but with Jire, which the
apostle here, in harmony with our Lord's own language, compares with the baptism of the Holy
Spirit.
As to the manna and the water, our Lord
himself explains them without any allusion to the
Supper, which was not then instituted, and to
:

which, therefore, he could not refer in his conversation with the Jews; though he might and did
refer to that atonement,

on which the

latter ordi-

nance was founded.*

But is there not such ** an instituted connection"
between baptism and the Lords Supper, as to

John

vi.

51.

22

make the last in

by the former?

improper unless preceded

A Paedobaptist might indeed
trace an analogy between these ISew Testament
ordinances, and the Old Testament sacraments of
circumcision and the passover but an anti-paedobaptist cannot consistently attempt this; nor
would he admit any force in the argument, when
urged by the Paedobaptist.* Baptism is indeed
an entrance on the Christian profession and, when
itself

applied to children, with a view to initiating

them

into a Christian education, is so far in conformity

with the injunction of " teaching them."

ever, is only

meant as an

incidental

This,

remark

howit

not

being, as already stated, the author's design to enter

on the Paedobaptist controversy. But supposing

Paedobaptism to be a nullity, it is not so considered

by those who practise it, and, therefore, does not annul the duty of commemorating their Lord's death,
as

we

We

shall

have farther occasion

are bound

to observe.

to act in all cases, to the best of

our judgment, according to the evidence before

us

and

if

our error be unintentional, and affect not

things necessary to salvation,

but a Master,

who

we

serve not Moses,

graciously accepts our imper-

and atones for our mistakes.

There are many points, indeed, on which we
could wish for clearer and more decided evidence
but instead of complaining of this circumstance, it
should teach us to be candid, and not dogmatical,

fect services,

since all the truths of revelation, generally speaking, are revealed

with a clearness proportioned to

system and in

their importance in the Christian

the

same proportion do they demand our credence.

* Booth's Apol. p. 85.


23

SECTION

On Mutual

We
and

Toleration

must here distinguish

internal.

The former

IV.

amomr

Christians.

toleration into external

resting on secular autho-

has no right to interfere with mental error,

unconnected with moral pravity the latter, restrity,

ing between

members

of the

same society is mutual,

and consists in " bearing one another's burdens"

whether they be infirmities or griefs " and so fulfilling the law of Christ."
It extends to every
infirmity that is not sinful, and to every error that

affects

neither the foundation, nor the

vitals

of

religion.
its nature is a tolerant and comnot sectarian or exclusive.
system
This is indeed its great and distinguishing feature,
and places it in opposition to Judaism, which was
the religion of a particular nation, and the divine
authority of which ceased only just before that
But Chrisnation was broken up and scattered.

Christianity in

prehensive

tianity,

consisting

not in

external observances,

may be connected with it, is equally

adapted for all ages and countries, and is not liable
to be superseded by any other dispensation.

though such

The Apostle Paul

particularly

insists

on the

tolerant character of Christianity, in speaking of

the patriarchal rites of circumcision and the Sabbath,

and of clean and unclean food, which laws though

afterwards incorporated in the Jewish system,

24

were of much higher antiquity, and some of them

human

antient as the

" Circumcision (says

race.

is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing,

but the keeping of the commandments of God" *
that is every thing.
So had the apostle lived at a
period of the church, when baptism by a particular
form had been made the term of communion, I persuade myself he would have said, * Adult baptism is
nothing, and infant baptism is nothing immersion
is nothing, and sprinkling is nothing, comparatively
speaking but keeping the commandment of God
is every thing, " and this is his commandment, that

St. Paul,)

we

love one another." f

It is the object of the Gospel, not to separate or

" gather together in Christ

scatter, but to

(or persons)
in heaven."

all

things

redeemed by him, whether in earth or

The church militant and church trium-

phant, are, in fact, not two churches, but one

church " the bride, the Lamb's wife ;" for Christ

Now, this is. not urged as a

but a presumptive argument against principles of unnecessary exclusion
and in favour of
is

not a polygamist.

direct,

a comprehension, as large as Christian charity requires.

It is

Christians,

the very spirit of the Gospel to unite

and

it is

the spirit of heresy and schism

to separate them.

The grounds

communion are laid in

is shown in a precedbeing received as members

of Christian

the union of the church, (as

ing section

;)

believers

is made both the

ground and measure of their receiving one another.
We are to receive those whom " God hath re-

of Christ's mystical body, this

Cor.

vii.

John

iii.

23.

25
ceived,"*

and that " not

to doubtful disputations"

not to enter into controversy with them on points

unessential to salvation.

Again,
ther

;"

it is

that

is,

commanded, " Receive ye one anothose

who

are strong in faith are or-

dered to receive their weak brethren,

the Apostle,

was

that

"as Christ received

*'

even," saith

us."

And how

Certainly, with infinite kindness and

compassion to weak and mistaken brethren.

It has, indeed, been doubted, whether the receiving above mentioned has any relation to communion with the church
but what else can it
mean here, when this is the very subject in question, and when the reception of the party by Christ
is made the ground and argument of their recep;

tion

among

We

their brethren

are ready to admit, indeed, that the recep-

tion of Christian brethren, as enjoined in the

New

Testament, was not confined to the act of Christian

communion, but included every other act of broyet, surely, there is no instance
of receiving a Christian brother or sister, which
therly kindness

did not include that act of

designed

and

to

communion

specially

express their union with each other,

with their

Lord.

Was

Phebe,

or

Epa-

phroditus, or Onesimus, or the Apostle himself,

(which are the cases mentioned by Mr. Booth,!)

to be received only in the way of charity, or friendship, and to be excluded from the Lord's table ?

great deal has been also said about the strict-

ness required in conformity to the positive institutions of the Levitical law,

* Rom. xiv.

3.

in order to

deter us

t Apol. p. 101-2.

26
from varying any circumstance of a positive instiBut we are not under Moses; and yet,
even Moses allowed of a trespass offering in all
tution.

cases of involuntary error,

ment

or ceremonial defile-

and in cases where circumstances prevented

an exact attention to the Mosaical ritual; when
;

was prepared," those ritual irregularities

were "winked at," to use a scriptural expression,
and the offenders were were not " cut off from the
congregation."
Nor is there any example, that I am
aware of, in the New Testament, where the omission
**the heart

made a ground of exclusion

communion of the Christian church.

of a ritual observance

from the

full

is

SECTION
The Question

V.

as

hhtoricalli/ considered

to

mixed

strict

Bap-

or exclusive Communion.

In viewing the question

historically,

our

contend that no persons were admitted

primitive church without
previous baptism on the other hand, the advocates
tist friends

into the

communion of the
;

of mixed or Catholic
fident, that

communion

are equally con-

none were excluded from that commu-

nion for any difference of opinion, not affecting the

vitals or

Both

fundamentals of Christianity.
parties presume, that during the lives of

the Apostles, no difference of faith or practice could

obtain

among

the primitive Christians

and yet

it

appears, both from the acts and apostolical epis^

ties,

that

certain questions did arise,

on which

even their authority was reluctantly submitted

to.

27

though their decision was always in favour of

There does
toleration, amity and forbearance.
not appear, however, to have been any question
then raised as to the subjects or

But

it is,

on

mode

of baptism.

hands, admitted, that such dif-

all

ferences arose early in the third century,

if

not

before; and they are accounted for on principles

diametrically opposite.

Peedobaptists,

believing

infant baptism to be an apostolical practice, ac-

count for

its

disuse from a superstitious notion of

the unpardonable nature of sins after baptism,,

which we know influenced many

ordinance to a late period of their
case even with the

On

to

postpone the

lives, as

was the

Emperor Constantine.

the other hand, our Baptist friends maintain,

that the baptism (or sprinkling, as they call

infants,

it,)

of

arose from a mistaken opinion of the ne-

cessity of water-baptism to salvation,

and thus

originated the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

Wishing as much as possible

to avoid the question

of the right of infant baptism,

fact that
call

upon the advocates of

show,

simply state the

such a difterence of opinion did exist

strict

that, at this early period, those

to baptise infants, banished from their

those

who

On

did.

this subject,

quote the words of Mr. Hall, who,

who

and
to

refused

communion

however,
it

communion

I shall

must be

recol-

avowedly a Baptist.
" Supposing the modern practice (so Mr. Hall

lected, is himself

calls infant baptism,) to have been first introduced

towards the end of the second, or the beginning of
the third century, (which corresponds to the time

at

which

first

it is

writer

distinctly noticed

who

by

explicitly mentions

Tertullian, the
it,)

we

cannot

28
suppose a shorter space was requisite to procure it
that complete establishment and ascendancy, which
it

possessed in the time of St. Austin. During

must have been some who

that long interval there

adhered to the primitive practice, and others

favoured and adopted the more recent inno-

still

who

vations; there must, in other words, have been

Baptists and Psedobaptists cotemporary with each

What became of that portion of the another.

which refused to adopt the baptism

of infants? Did they separate from their brethren, in order to form distinct and exclusive sociecient church,

ties

to

Of

this not the faintest trace or vestige is

be found

in ecclesiastical history

and the sup-

position is completely confuted by the concurrent

testimony of ancient writers to the universal incorporation of orthodox Christians into one grand

community. We challenge our opponents to produce the shadow of evidence in favour of the existence, during that long tract of time, of a single

society, of which adult baptism

was the

distinguish-

it is acknowledged,
and unequivocally adverts to the contrary practice and as he expresses

TertuUian,

ing characteristic.
is

the

first

who

distinctly

disapprobation of

it

at the

same

time, without the

remotest intimation of the propriety of making

it

the ground of separation, he must be allowed to

form one instance of the practice of mixed communion; and unless we are disposed to assert,
that the modern innovation in the rite of baptism
supplanted the original ordinance at once, multitudes must have been in precisely the same situation."*
* Hall's Reply to

Kinghom,

p. 219.

29
" For two centuries, therefore, (says Mr. Hall,)
the predecessors of the present Baptists unani-

mously approved and practised a mixed commumunion

a communion in which Baptists and
Paedobaptists united in the same societies."*

" After the

down

tury,

commencement

of the fourth cen-

to the era of the Reformation, (pro-

ceeds Mr. Hall,t) the baptism of infants was firmly

established, and prevailed to such an extent, that

few traces of the ordinance, in its primitive state,

Many of the Waldenses;
are to be discerned.
however,

with great appearance of

are judged,

evidence, to have held opinions on that subject,

by which we,

coincident with those

nation, are distinguished.

By

as a denomi-

their persecutors of

Romish community, they were usually

the

stig-

matised and reproached for holding the Anabaptists'

heresy; while

that there

who

it

appears, on the contrary,

were not wanting among them some

These op-

practised the baptism of infants.

posite statements, exhibited with equal confidence

on

this

obscure branch of ecclesiastical history,

are best reconciled and accounted

ing

them divided

No

ticular.

in their

for,

by suppos-

sentiments on that par-

indication, however, is discoverable

of a rupture in external

communion having

curred on that account;

and from the acknow-

ledged

oc-

difficulty of ascertaining the separate exist-

ence of Baptist societies, during the middle ages,

and until the period of the Reformation, the necessary inference

is,

during that interval,

institute,

or,

as

is

either that there

who adhered
far

to the primitive

more probable,

* Hall's Reply to Kinghorn, p. 21 9.

were none
that they

t Ibid.

p.

221.


30

were mingled and incorporated with persons of

another persuasion."

some form or other, was considered as a pre-requisite to communion, may, as

That baptism,

in

a general position, be admitted

but that a

differ-

mode,
was made a ground of exclusive communion, is
what I have never yet seen proved, and therefore
cannot admit.
On the contrary. Dr. Mason, of
New York, contends, and I think successfully,
that no difference " in rites and customs in worship
nor imperfections in moral discipline nor
nor disdiversities in the form of government
sonant views on subordinate points of doctrine"
ence of opinion, as to either the subject or

divided the

communion

He

and purest ages.

of Christians in the

and on the

validity of

and quotes Firmilianus,

Cappadocia, about A. D. 256,

addressing the celebrated Cyprian

Bishop of Caesarea,
as follows, in

first

instances, particularly, in

the time of keeping Easter

the baptism of heretics

in

That they who are at Rome do not entirely

observe all things which have been handed down
from the beginning and that they appeal in vain
to apostolic authority for their own usages, any
one may know from the fact of his seeing that
there are some differences among them about the
days on which the Pascal Feast is to be kept, and
**

about

many

other particulars of divine worship;

and that they have not precisely the same obSo likeservances there as prevail in Jerusalem.
wise, in a very great

many

number of other

provinces,

things vary, according to the diversity of

place and people

but nevertheless, tkese varia-

tions have at no time infringed the peace

and unity

31

of the Catholic church, which Stephanus [Bishop

of Rome] has now dared to do
breaking that
peace in regard to you, which his predecessors
always maintained with you [the African churches]
in mutual love and honour." *
To the same effect
;

M. quotes

Dr.

was observed, not only among

the Waldenses, which

vertible fact

Bishop of Hippo.

also Augustine,

like tolerance

t but,

is

a strong and incontro-

even in later times, the Church

of England received to

its

highest honours, as in

the instances of Tillotson and Seeker, persons baptized

far,

by

ministers not episcopally ordained.

therefore,

is

it

from true, as Mr. Booth suporiginated with John

communion

posed, that free

Bunyan and

So

his contemporaries in the 17th cen-

was not till about that time that

communion was broken on that account. Archbishop Laud's rejecting communion with the
Hugonaut churches in France, in 1634, is the
tury,

J that

it

Mason, of such
a breach of communion among Protestants; and

first

this

instance, according to Dr.

was

followed,

ten years afterwards,

English Baptists, then called Anabaptists,

first,

at that period, so far as I

upon

strict

by the

who

can learn, insisted

communion.

* Plea for Catholic

Communion,

p. 51.

t That part of the Waldenses rejected infant baptism, is

largely proved by Mr. Jones, in his History of that excellent
people ; and that part of them practised it, is also admitted by
him, (see his letter, Evan. Mag. vol. xxvii. p. 504) ; but where is
the proof that they separated communion on that account }
X Apol. for the Baptists, p. 24, 31, &c.
Plea, p. 209,

25 J.

;:

32

SECTION

On the Assumption of a
Evih

VI.

Right of Exclusion, and the

arising from the exclusive Principle.

The

reverend authors of the History of Dissenters

have ventured to say, " It is little less than high
treason,
**

nay

make

to

it is

more than high treason"

for

men

the laws of Christ of none effect

their canons

and

by

to exclude from the benefit of

his institutions, those

whom

he commands them to

receive."*
I

am

strict

very far from charging the advocates of

communion with intentional usurpation of

Christ's authority

nor indeed would

charge this

even on the Pope himself, who may very possibly

persuade himself, that the keys of the kingdom of
heaven are given to him, as they were to Peter
but

conceive conversion to be a ticket of ad-

which any door-keeper of a Chrischurch turns the key at his peril, unless he

mission, against
tian

has reason to suspect a forgery.

I

have already shewn that the church of Christ

this it is self-evident, that I do not

ONE but in
mean one local
is

society

that

is

clearly impossible

but that every converted person every one baptized with the Holy Ghost, (which is emphatically

becomes thereby a member of

the church of the first-born, whose names are
written in heaven;" and is also rendered eligible to
be a member of any particular church on earth, by
Christ's baptism,)
**

giving credible evidence of that important change.

* History of Dissenters, vol.

i.

p.

294.

33

Now, 1 st, It appears to me to be an infringement of the right of our Lord Jesus Christ, as King
in Zion, for any persons, forming a Christian society,
to reject

from their church, those

has received into

weak

*'

It

his.

may be

whom

Christ

they are

said,

brethren," and possibly mistaken brethren

St. Paul
and that not to
doubtful disputations, (as we have already seen,)
but in Christian love and charity to the communion of his church and of his table. Indeed,
the late Mr. Robinson, (though sufficiently zealous
for baptism,) if I mistake not, resolves the whole

but

if

they are brethren,

it

is

enough.

requires that they be received,

into this question,

Whose

*^

table

is it ?"

It is the

Lord's table, and spread for the Lord's people.

2. It is a violation of the " royal law," as St.

law of love. " By this shall all

men know that ye are my disciples, if ye love one

James

calls the

another."

But, to exclude our Christian brethren

from that ordinance, which was appointed at once

as a memorial of the Saviour's love and as a

of cementing their love to each other,

way

to induce the

world to say of us

these Christians love

is
**

means
not the

See how

!"

Mr. Booth, indeed, denies that the Lord's Supper was ** appointed to be a test of brotherly love
among the people of God ;" and certainly this was
but when
made an image of Christ's
church, and when the different

not the primary object of the institution

the loaf of

communion

mystical body, the

members,

is

in participating together of that bread,

are represented as cemented into one body thereby, * the union and communion of Christians in

Cor. X.

See above,

7.

p. 7-

34
that oFdinar>ce

must be admitted

to

be a secondary

its appointment.
Nor should Christians
ever forget that precept, which was not only given,

object of

but often repeated

and made

table,

in the

conversation at the holy

to arise out of the

of the institution

" This

3.

my commandment,

is

have loved you." *

Strict or separate communion does violence

That ye love one another, as

also

primary design

to the finer

racter.

am

feelings

of the Christian

cha-

not charging the friends of strict

communion with

want of Christian

feeling

so

doubt not that they sacrifice their

Gladly would they
feelings to their consciences.
embrace their Peedobaptist brethren in every mean
of Christian communion, were they not deterred
far

from

by

the fear of violating a positive institution

-it,

but

may

I not beg them to consider, whether it be not.

a strong presumption against their interpretation
of the divine law, that it does violence, not indeed

to our natural feelings only, but to those

arise

which

from principles of Christian charity, implanted

in the heart

Mr.

by

the

Holy

Spirit himself?

Fuller, in reasoning

on

this point, is guilty

of an inconclusiveness in argument, with which he

and at the same time

rather confirms than weakens the above train of
Mr. F. admits that the exclusion of
observation.
pious and eminent Paedobaptists from their com" But in thus
munion is an act of self-denial.
denying ourselves, (he says,) it has been farther
we deny some of the best feelings of the
said,
human heart.' This (adds Mr. F.) I cannot ad-

is

not often chargeable

'

mit.

The

best feelings of the

*

John

XV. 12.

human

heart are

those of love and obedience to God and if I deny

myself of the pleasure which fellovvship with a
Christian brother woidd afford me, for the sake
:

of acting up to the mind of Christ, or according

to primitive

example,

best feelings of the

trary forego the less for

.a

do not deny myself the

heart, but on the conthe greater." *
Now had

human

Socinian thus reasoned, the

acumen of this excelit in a moment.

man would have detected

For how stands the argument ?

lent

deny "some of the best

heart," because its

Baptists do not

feelings of the

human

very " best feelings are those

of love and obedience to

God !"

But are not love

and charity to our fellow Christians

for Christ's

sake, also " sotne of the best feelings of the hu-

man heart?" And do these not arise from love

and obedience to a command given on this very
occasion, and repeated in a variety of forms
" See that ye love one another ?"
If we say, love
to God is the first and great command, then must
we say that the second, to love our neighbour as
ourselves, "is like unto it;" and love to God and
man, to Christ and his people, are certainly the best
feelings of the human
and of the renewed heart

But what sort of a self-denying doctrine is

to deny ourselves the pleasures of brotherly love and Christian communion
Surely,
this is not the self-denial enjoined upon us in the
Gospels.
But I cannot conclude this point without introducing an anecdote from Dr. Mason, of
this?

New

York,

respecting himself,

which,

while

it

fact that exclusive communion does

violence to " the best feelings of the human heart,"

proves the

* Fuller's Letter, p. 28.

F 2

;;

36

shews

also

what should be the consequence of

a conviction of this

fact.

" One of these occasions (says the Doctor) it is

impossible for him to forget. He had been distributing tokens of admission to the Lord's Supper.
After the congregation had retired, he perceived a

young woman

end of an

at the lower

aisle reclin-

pew in a pensive attitude. As he approached her she said, " Sir, I am afraid I have
done wrong?" Why what have you done? *' I
went up with the communicants, and received a
token, but am not a member of your church
and I could not be at rest till I spoke to you about
it."
To what church do you belong ? " To the

ing on a

Dutch church and, if you wish it, I can satisfy

you of my character and standing there."
But
what made you come for a token without men"I had not an optioning the matter before ?
:

not know in time that your

be (the) next Lord's Day. I am
sorry if I have dong wrong but I expect to leave
the city on Tuesday, and to be absent, I cannot
tell how long, in a part of the country where I
shall have no opportunity of communing; and I
wished once more before I went away, t^yi|l?ii^.wjth
Christians in showing forth my Saviour's d^eltWportunity, as I did

communion was

to

He

consulted a

who were

still

moment

with the churcU-offic^jj^,^

present, and

it

was thought 'ii^t

expedient not to grant her request.

He'iionimu-

nicated this answer as gently as possible to the

She said not another word

but with one hand giving back the token, and with
the other putting up her kerchief to her eyes, she
turned away struggling with her anguish, and the
modest

petitioner.

37
tears streaming

down

How

her cheeks.

did his

He went

home, exclaiming to
be right? Is it possible that
such is the law of the Redeemer's house?' It
quickened his inquiries, his inquiries strengthened
his doubts, and have terminated in the conviction,
that it was altogether wrong."*
heart smite him!

himself

Can

this

Exclusive communion

4.

is

the parent of schism

and however slightly we may think of it, the New

Testament speaks of this as a great evil. Believers
are

members of Christ exclusive communion rends

members from each other tears the body

these

of Christ limb from limb

hand, or the hand to the eye

need of thee

Some

the eye says to the

" Begone,

have no

"
!

persons, indeed, contend, that a union of

many points as possible, and especonduces to the peace of the Church.

A cutting off the arms and legs of the Church may
prevent them from injuring the trunk but it leaves
It is by such means, that
a mutilated trunk only.
certain congregations have refined, one point after
another, till they have been reduced to the compass of a pew and their faith to the belief of their
opinion on as

cially

on

this,

own

infallibility.

The fact, however, deserves to be enquired into,

whether there is actually more peace and harmony
in Churches which maintain strict communion,
than in others which admit of free or mixed communion. My personal knowledge on this subject
is, I confess, very contracted.
So far as I have
been able to learn, experience is in favour of the
latter.
But to name Churches on the one side and
* Mason's Catholic

Comm.

note, p. xviii.

38
the other, and to place
other,

charity
is

my

in opposition to

each

would not be the way to promote Christian

and would lead to personalities which it
;

study to avoid.
reasoning, on

Our

5.

them

still

farther.

nion

is

The

this point,

the ground of

all

commu-

the persecutions that have

What was

the Christian Church.

arisen in

must be carried

principle of exclusive

the

source of the controversy between the Arians and

Athanasians
testants

between

the Papists and the Pro-

between the High-church party and the

and in many other

cases, it has arisen from the mistaken notion,
that all the members of the same Church must be
a position that never can be conof one opinion
sistently maintained by a Church that is not infallible
nor found in practice among any but those
who believe as the Church believes, without troubling themselves to enquire what that may be.
In fact, no two thinking men can, in nil points, be
The agreement of Christians
of the same opinion.
Nonconformists

In

all

these,

is

only to be expected, as already stated, in those

principles in

first

cularly clear

which the Scriptures are

and which, by the

parti-

Spirit's teaching,

are engrafted into every renewed heart.

Far be
tist

it

from me, however,

to

charge our Bap-

brethren, as such, with the spirit of persecu-

tion.

Some

among

the

them have had the honour

to rank
and ablest advocates of religious
liberty and if any of them practice persecution,
1 am sure it must be an act of great self-denial.
Still, however, the exclusive principle is the prin-

of

first

ciple

of persecution;

but the

infliction

and

what

is

persecution

of punishment without a crime

39
I

know

it

may be

said, that

it is

no punishment

from a particular
contended by members of

to exclude a Christian brother

Church
the

and so

it

Establishment,

is

that

is

it

no punishment to

exclude Dissenters from corporate bodies.

many

But

of our Baptist friends will not admit this

am, that to some good Christians it

is a much greater punishment to be excluded from
a Church, where the ministry is acceptable and
profitable, and especially where there is no other
congregation within their reach, than it would be
to be excluded from the Common Council, or
even the court of Aldermen. And it is highly inconsistent, in Dissenters, to exclude their fellowChristians from communion, for a difference in
ritual observances, when they themselves comand, sure

being excluded,

plain of

or,

at least,

of their

forefathers

(the Nonconformists) being excluded,

on the

ground, from

like

communion

in

the Es-

blished Church.
6.

There

is

a farther evil arising out of this ex-

clusive system.

It is in

many

cases a cause of

but also in Christian

and separates those " whom God hath

division, not only in churches,

families

joined together," both in the bonds of matrimonial

faith
and this by
means of that very gospel, which was designed to
unite them all into one body under Christ their

union and of the Christian

head.
It is true, indeed, that the Gospel has often
been the means of dividing families, through the opposition which some of their members have raised
against it but this divine dispensation is in itself
'*
the Gospel of peace " and is made the instru:

40
ment of contention only through the

human

pravity of the

heart

and separation

case, division

of the Gospel, as understood

It is

ists.

natural de-

whereas, in the other

arise out of the

by

terms

communion-

strict

how much

hardly necessary to point out

prayer in the

this is in opposition to our Saviour's

garden, immediately after the institution of the

Holy Supper. " Neither pray I for these alone,

(namely, his then disciples,) but for them also w^hich

shall believe
all

may be
may

through their w^ord

may be

one in us

communion

is strict

divide families and churches

churches

that they

as thou Father art in me, and I

that the

believe that thou hast sent me."*

Not only

7.

me

that they

in thee,

world

on
one

all

but

calculated to

it,

in fact, un-

the Christian Societies in the world,

except those within the small circle of one communion.

It also

supersedes the last dying

of the Redeemer, to

and

love.

For

if

commemorate

command

his sufferings

Psedobaptists are not proper

subjects to receive the Lord's Supper ivith their

Baptist brethren, neither are they without them

and they have no

alternative, but either to live in

the total neglect of that institution, or to conform

which they consider has

and the
repetition of which would not only be inconsistent,
but a violation of principle which no conscientious
Baptist could advise.
It is true that some of this

to another ordinance, the

been, in their case, already complied with

denomination

may

find

that Psedobaptists act

We

are

all

it

very

difficult to believe

upon deliberate

conviction.

too apt to suppose that our opponents

are influenced

by the prejudices of
*

John

xvii. 20, 21.

education, for-


41

we ourselves are subject to the Hke

infirmities.
And though it is granted, that the
names of fallible men do not weigh a feather in

getting that

point of evidence, yet those of Calvin and Luther,;

Usher and Hooker, Owen and Baxter, Watts and

Doddridge, (to name no more,) do surely prove,
that

it is

possible for persons to examine the ques-

tion with the greatest abilities,

and the best dispo-

and yet remain Paedobaptists.*

Exclusive communion presents serious impe-

sitions,
8.

diments to the universal propagation of the Gospel,

and

to the establishment of Christ's millenial king-

dom

Many

in the earth.

of the promises of the

latter-day glory, are connected with the principle

communion. " In that

day there shall be oxe Lord, and his name oNE."t
So another Prophet " I will set up oxe Shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, eveitfrray
servant David:";}; meaning the Messiah, who "was
both David's son and lord. And when this " srood
Shepherd " came in the flesh, Himself says, speaking to his disciples " Other sheep I have, which
are not of this fold them also I must bring, and they
shall hear my voice and there shall be o\ e fold and
ONE shepherd." John also, the beloved disciple,
tells us, that it was the office of this good Shepherd

of Christian union and

to " gather together in

one

were scattered abroad."

our Lord's

last hours,

||

the children of

And

God

that

to advert again to

praying for their union with

* The author well remeuibers once hearing a very amiable and

pious Baptist miniater say, in preaching ou adult baptism
** Don't tell
me you can't see you rvon't see." This is mentioned not by way of reproach, but caution.
+ lizek. xxxiv. ii.^.
Zech. xiv. <).
Jolin x. 18.

I-

11

John

xi. .VJ.


42
each other and with himself, that they " all " might
be " ONE," he adds, as the great argument to enforce that request, " that the world may believe
me " * strongly implying that

that thou hast sent

nothing would go so

far,

as a

mean

or motive, in

the conversion of the world, as the union of Christ's

disciples in

him and with each

men know that ye are

have love one to another."!
shall all

other.

my

**

By

this

disciples, if

ye

Now, nothing is more certain in point of fact, than

that the differences among Christians, wherever
they are known, form a great objection to the
spread of the Gospel, both at home and abroad
those differences I

mean which

divide

them

into

sects and parties, and produce angry controversies

between them. And though I have the highest

esteem and veneration for the Baptist Missionaries
in India, and rank them with the greatest and best
of mankind, I cannot but feel some alarm for
the consequences of the fact being

known

to the

heathen world, that they form a separate caste

from their fellow Christians. To see Missionaries

who have forsaken all to

and traversed so many thousand

of equal zeal and piety,

follow

Christ,

same cause, yet not daring

communicate with each other in the most sacred
ordinances of religion, is indeed an anomaly most
singular and unexampled.
In propagating the Gospel in Catholic countries,
as in Ireland, and on the continent, the Jesuits,

miles to labour in the

to

who have

often urged this objection against the

Protestants, will certainly not

* John xvii. ?1.

fail

t John

to avail thera-

xiii.

35.

43
selves of the

Popery

The strong hold of

and
union under a living head

same

its

is

objection.*

though we know that the objection

among

ignorance,

the multitude

it

is

founded in

cannot

fail

to

have great influence.

The Scriptures teach us

church,

state

of the

than

we have

to look forward to a

exceedingly more glorious

yet seen, namely, the Millenium,

which Christians, after long disputing about it, are

now more wisely exerting themselves to forward.
In that period, I believe, it has been generally supposed that Christians will be all of one mind
and a very wise and good man, (repeatedly quoted
in these pages,) some few years ago, assured me
they will

all be Baptists.

not quite certain

that while
will

we

Of

however,

this,

am more

am

inclined to think,

inhabit this sublunary world, there

always be

of

differences

opinion

among

Christians, sufficient to exercise the graces of for-

bearance, love, and candour

thereby

God

will be far

and,

more

conceive that,

glorified,

than by

any unanimity of sentiment on minor questions.

The opinion above referred to, has, I believe,
been drawn from an expression of the prophet
Isaiah:
"Thy watchmen
shall see eye to
eye, when the Lord shall bring again Zion ;" that

according to the

is,

Chaldee,

"

when he

shall

his presence to Zion."t

Now the
phrase of seeing " eye to eye" has been generally

bring back

The author had

this

argument once urged upon him

in

conversation, with great earnestness, by a person educated

among the Jesuits, and who, afterwards, went abroad as a Catholic Missionary.

+ Isa.

lii.

8.

See Bp. Lowth's and the Assembly's Ann. in he.

44
explained of seeing things clearly, and without
bbscurity; but this the Hebrews would express
by seeing " face to face," without a veil.* The
expression " eye to eye," appears to me, an allusion to the office of
walls,

watchmen, placed upon the

looking out for a messenger, or courier,

bringing good tidings;

each other, and

calling,

and then looking toward

or making signals, to in-

The

timate the circumstance-t

therefore,

figure,

expresses, not coincidence of opinion, but activity

and

zeal

and

if

explained in reference to the ap-

proach of the Messiah's kingdom, (as I think it

should be,) it may express Missionary zeal, and a
readiness to

co-operate

tidings

of salvation

among

Missionaries,

in

glad

the

spreading

Now,

through the world,

appears to me, that minor

differences of opinion, relative to baptism, church
government, &c. are of very little consequence'
it

when they do not create a schism

munion.
I

am

in

church com-'
-.ifisd

well aware, that these differences of opi-

nion disturb the peace of the church;

but

it

is

only by laying undue stress upon them. While

and Psedobaptists, Independents and

Baptists

Presbyterians, are considered as equally entitled

to a place at the Lord's table, there

of contention
peace,

is

is

no ground

but, on the contrary, peace, eternal

there cemented

by the blood of the

cross.

I
* See

Cor.

xiii.

12.

t In the Avails of some ancient cities, if I mistake not, pipes

have been found from one watch-tower to another, through
which the watchmen might see each other, literally " eye to
eye;" and, either by signals, or b}' the voice, convey intelligence
without the knowletlgc of a besieging enemy.

'

45
'-;-'''
-

'Oils mf"'

SECTION

bofasa-,

6i9rfJ

Ohjectioiis ansioered,

Having

VU.

Concluswn,

offered, as briefly as possible, the argu-

ments on which my own opinion rests, it might

be thought disrespectful to conclude, without enquiring into some of the principal objections which
may be urged against it. Those founded on certain passages of Scripture have been already considered; but; there are two or three others, of a
general nature, that should not be passed in total
silence.

In the

first

communion

is

place,

it

may be

said, that

by no means necessary,

Psedobaptist churches.

It is

mixed

as there are

however,

difficult,

(as already observed,) for a strict Baptist to allow

those to be Christian churches in which the sacra-

ments are not duly administered.

But waving
answer, there are many cases to which it
will not apply, and where there is no evangelical
Psedobaptist congregation and even where there
is one, is it no serious inconvenience for a person
to be, driven from the ministry that may, perhaps,
have been made instrumental to his conversion,
this

to seek that of a stranger?

a good shepherd to
pastures.
2.

It

may be

said

drive

'

It is not the part

his

flock

to

If Paedobaptists

of

strange

be ad-

we then stop?' Where the

Bible stops.
When we receive all, who, in a
principle of Christian charity we think
God has
received/' we are required to go no farther.
But
mitted,

where

shall

'*

'


46

may

not some apply

who

consider baptism alto-

gether as a temporary institution, and superseded

by the baptism of the Spirit?'* Perhaps, there

may; and if Christ has baptized them, and received them into his church, what evil can arise

from receiving them into yours ?

But suppose,
like the Society of Friends, they form the same
opinion as to the Lord's Supper ?' Then, certainly,
'they will not apply for admission to it and so you
*

need not be alarmed.

3.
But would it not prevent many from submitting to adult baptism, if they could be admitted without so doing?' Perhaps probably
it might
but our Baptist friends know best as
*

to this fact.

'And would
Perhaps

this injure the Baptist cause?'

might
and perish e\ery cause that
interferes with the cause of Christ
My opinion
is, that free communion, among Christians, would
put an end to many controversies
and, as Mr.
Fuller once devoutly wished, lead " all the armies
it

Lamb to concentrate
common enemy." t

of the
the

Here

their forces against

should close, having said more than

intended ; but, in examining this question, I have

found one circumstance of a most appalling nature.

By

the fundamental principle of congregational

churches, every question relative to church go-

vernment, or discipline,
the

Minister

is

decided by a majority;

himself usually being Moderator.

Thoughts on Baptism, by Agnostos.

i Sec motto

in

our

title

page.


47

The Baptist churches

ciple

and

are

questions

all

founded on

this prin-

among them

are thus

all

determined save and except orUy, the question of

mixed communion. In that case, the advocates of
exclusive communion insist, that no alteration can

be made while one of their sentiment remains.

Thus, as Mr. Hall observes " while the present

plan

is

pursued, while

we

are waiting for the last

sands of intolerance to run out, the dominion of

error and injustice may be prolonged to an intolerable period;

since,

of

all

creatures. Bigotry is

the most tenacious of life."*

These are not my words.

would

attribute this

tenacious principle to any thing rather than to

Bigotry;

but

cannot apologize for a principle

and so injurious in its

And this conduct appears to me the
effects.
more glaringly absurd, where the Minister himself
happens to be on the liberal side of the question,
and would gladly administer the ordinance of the
Lord's Supper to his Paedobaptist friends, as well
as others, if he dared.
In such cases, however,
and especially where the majority of the church
are for free communion, it might be well for him

so inconsistent in

itself,

to put the question to himself

refuse

them

" How dare

The plan of Mr. Robert Hall appears

just, as well

as liberal, that I

am

to

administers the ordinance in question, (as

first to

and afterwards
friends to free

me

so

surprised any

friend to religious liberty should object to

formed,)

I to

?"

it.

am

He
in-

the strict Baptists in his church,

to the

Paedobaptists,

communion

and such

as choose to partake

Hall's Reply to Kinghorn, pref, p. xix.

48
with them.
liberty

are

Thus

the laws of Christian love and;

maiatained

sciences are not wounded,

the most

by

their less enlightened brethren

the feast
for

is

tender con-'^

sitting at table
;

with

and the Lord of

pleased to give his presence to both

he hath said

"Wherever two or three are ga-

thered together in

my

name, there

midst of them."*
It is not, however, for

am

in the
^'

me

to dictate.

portion as Christians associate and co-operate

Christ's great cause, their hearts will

ni'l'-l

In proin

be enlarged

toward each other sectarian peculiarities will die

away, and they will find it impossible to banish
from their communion, those whom they have re;

ceived into their hearts.

Head

May

it

please the great

down such an effusion

may bear down all our pre-

of the church to pour

Holy Spirit, as
judices, and open the doors of every Christian
of the

church
all

(like the heart of the Saviour) to receive

who come, by

admission

faith

and penitence,

Matt, xxviii. 20.

THE END,

J. Dnaell. I'riiiler.

LeaiLrr Lane. LoiiJua.

to request

SHORT STATEMENT

REASONS

CHRISTIAN,
IN OI'POSITION TO

PARTY COMMUNION

BY ROBERT HALL,

M. A.

UonUon

HAMILTON, ADAMS, &

SOLD ALSO BY JAMKS, BRISTOL

CO.

AND COMBE, LEICESTER,

MDCCCXXVl.

yULLIK, PBINTER, BRISTOL,

PREFACE.

A.FTER

having discussed so largely, in some

former publications, the question of

munion, that

is

strict

com-

the prevailing practice in the

baptist denomination of confining their fellow-

ship to

was not

members

my

of their

intention

own community,
trouble

to

the

it

public

with the subject any farther, not having the

least ambition for the last

But

it

word

in controversy.

has been suggested to me, that

not be difficult to condense the

the
as

argument within a smaller

to

render

it

accessible

to

it

would

substance of

compass,
such

as

so

have

neither the leisure nor the inclination to peruse

a large performance.

vour

has been

It

my

endea-

cut off every thing superfluous, and,

to

without doing injury to the merits of the cause,

to present the

reasoning which sustains

and popular form

concise

must be

succeeded,

left

how

far

in a

it,

have

the judgment of

to

the reader.

would only remark here, that

have

me

that

all

seen and heard concurs to convince

the practice of strict communion, rests almost

entirely on authority,

and that were the

ence of a few great names withdrawn,

sink under

its

own

Among

weight.

it

influ-

would

those of

recent date, none has been more regarded than

and as he

that of the late venerable Fuller;

left

a manuscript on this subject to be published

after

his

death,

he

is

considered

deposed his dying testimony in

he

felt

some

its

as

favour.

predilection to a practice to

having

That

which

he had been so long accustomed, and whose

propriety

was very

early days,

is

rarely

questioned

freely admitted;

in. his

but that he

all

v.,

along

some

felt

that his

hesitation

on the subject, and

mind was not completely made up,

am

induced to believe from several circumstances.

First,

from the fact of his proposing himself to

commune

at

Cambridge, with the

full

of there being paedobaptists present.

Secondly,

many

years

between him and the writer of these

lines.

from a conversation which passed,

ago,

knowledge

In reply to his observation that

we

act precisely

on the same principle with our paedobaptist

brethren, since they also insist on baptism as

an essential pre-requisite to communion,

remarked, that

hominem :

it

this

it

was

was a mere argumentum ad

might serve to silence the clamours

of those paedobaptists, who, while they adhered

to

that

principle,

but that
the
curs,

still

since

previous

whether any thing more

communion, on

is

ventured

attack

to

is

inquiry ocrequisite to

scriptural grounds, than a vital

union with Christ

communion

did not touch the merits of

it

question,

charged us with bigotry

his

answer was, WJien mixed

placed on that footing,

it.

Hence

never yet

X am compelled

consider his posthumous tract rather as a

to

trial

VI

of

what might be adduced on

controversy,

that side of the

with a view to provoke further

inquiry, than the result of dehberate and settled

Be

conviction.

as

this

it

may, great as

his

merits were, he was but a man, and as such

liable to err,

even on subjects of

importance.

All I wish

to

human names

debate

is,

much

greater

that without regard

or authorities, the matter in

may be entirely

determined by an unpre-

judiced appeal to reason and scripture.

The prevalence
authority,

and

of this disposition to

strikingly illustrated

upon

to receive opinions

by the

bow

to-

trust,

is

following anecdote.

highly respected friend of mine, on asking

one of his deacons, a

integrity,

man

of primitive piety

what objections he had

to

and

mixed com-

munion, he replied with great simplicity, that

in

he had two^

not approve of

the

first

and

it,

declares, that he

serpent shall bite

place,

Mr. Fuller did

the scripture

in the next,

who

pulls

him.

a hedge, a

The good man very

properly placed that reason

the greatest weight with

down

it.

first,

which carried

Vll

In short, there

and subtlety

is

a certain false refinement

the argument for strict com-

in

munion which would never occur

man, who was
In

scripture.
error,

it

left

a plain

solely to the guidance of

common

derived

to

its

with almost every other

origin

from

the public

teachers of religion, and with a change of sen-

timent in them,

nor will

it

it

will

gradually disappear

be long ere our churches will be

surprised that they suffered themselves to be

betrayed,

by specious but hollow

sophistry, into

a practice so repulsive and so impolitic.

Amicus Plato, amicus

Veritas.

October 7th, 1826.

Socrates, sed magis arnica

SHORT STATEMENT',
Sfc.

XT

is

by

admitted,

Christians,

denominations of

all

with the exception of one,

the sacrament of the Lord's supper

petual obligation,
its

Founder

for

and that

it

was designed by

fraternal affection

ought to distinguish his followers.

communion

of saints

prehending

all

those

by which Christians

is

are especially united,

whole
li

is

the

universally ac-

an important branch

So important a part has

been considered, that

of the

com-

sentiments and actions,

to constitute

of that communion.

which

Though the

of larger extent,

joint participation of this rite

it

that

of per-

one of the principal indications

and expressions of that

knowledged

is

it

has usurped the

and when any

dis])ute

name
arises

respecting the terms of communion,

nerally understood to

it

ge-

is

relate to the terms

of

admission to the Lord's table.

Whether

real

all

Christians are entitled to

share in this privilege, whether

it

forms a part

of that spiritual provision which belongs to the

whole family of the

faithful, or

whether

exclusive patrimony of a sect, who,

it is

(on the

ground of their supposed imperfection,)

authorized to repel the rest,

which
briefly

it is

my

is

are

the question

purpose, in the following pages,

and calmly

to discuss.

we

clusion to which

The

first

con-

should naturally arrive,

would probably favour the more

we

the

system

liberal

should be ready to suppose that he

who

is

accepted of Christ ought also to be accepted of

and that he whose right

his brethren,

to the

was not questioned, possessed

There
are some truths which are so self-evident, that
a formal attempt to prove them has the appearance of trifling, where the premises and the
thing signified

an undoubted right to the outward sign.

conclusion

so

nearly coincide,

that

it

is

not

easy to point out the intermediate links that

at once separate

the

assertion

and connect them.

that

all

sincere

entitled to a place at the Lord's table

description,

will

more

clearly

Whether

Christians
is

are

of that

appear as

we

3
advance

but

must be permitted

to say,

that

a feeling of the kind just mentioned, has occasioned the greatest difficulty

have experienced

in this discussion.

It is well

known

that a diversity of sentiment

has long subsisted in this country, in relation

to the proper subjects of baptism, together

the

mode

of administering that

rite.

with

While the

body of the Christian world administer

baptism to infants, and adopt the practice of
great

sprinkling or pouring
there are

the sacramental water,

some who contend that baptism should

be confined to those who are capable of understanding the articles of the Christian religion,
or in other words, to adults,

mode is the immersion

They who maintain the

and that the proper

of the

whole body.

last of these opinions,

were formally designated by the appellation of

Anabaptists, but as that term implied that they

assumed a

when

right of repeating baptism,

reality their only reason for baptizing

had been sprinkled

in their infancy,

in

such as

was

that

they looked upon the baptism of infants as a

mere human invention, the candour of modern

times has changed the invidious appellation of
Anabaptist, to the more simple one of Baptist.
It is

not

my

intention to attempt the defence

though their views

of that class of Christians,

are

entirely

accordance

in

with

my own

one consequence, however, necessarily results.

We

by virtue of them, to look

upon the great mass of our fellow Christians
are compelled,

On

as unbaptized.

no other ground can

we

maintain our principles, or justify our conduct.

Hence

has been inferred, too hastily in

it

we

my

bound to abstain from

their communion, whatever judgment we may
form of their sincerity and piety. Baptism, it
opinion,

is

an

that

alleged,

is

are

under

indispensable

all

possible circumstances

term

and

communion,

of

however highly we may esteem many of our

we

yet as

peedobaptist

brethren,

deem them

unbaptized,

we must

cannot but
of necessity

consider them as disqualified for an approach

Lord's table.

to the

It

is

evident

that this

reasoning rests entirely on the assumption, that

baptism

communion
it

world,

an

the

prising

since

invariably a necessary condition of

is

which

opinion

should

baptists

not sur-

is

have embraced,

has long passed current in the Christian

and been received by nearly

The

nominations of Christians.
never

it

till

nor could

of late
it

become

while

all

is,

it

de-

has

a practical question,

parties

acknowledged

was only when a

denomination arose, whose principles

each others baptism.

religious

truth

all

It

compelled them to deny the validity of any

other baptism besides that which they themselves practised, that the question respecting

the relation which that ordinance bears to the

Lord's supper,

But a doctrine which can have no

practice.

on

influence

possible

with

any influence on

could have

little

practice,

or no examination

be imputed the

facility

and

with which

it

so generally admitted that baptism

cessarily
to

the

received

is

must

to this

has been

must ne-

and invariably precede an admission

Lord's

table.

The wide

circulation,

however, of this doctrine, ought undoubtedly

to

have the effect of softening the severity of

censure on that conduct (however singular

may appear,) which is

is

its

necessary result

they

communion to
deem baptized wherein they
;

on the same principle with

who assume
essential

it

for

all

those

whom

act precisely

other Christians,

granted that baptism

is

an

preliminary to the reception of the

sacrament.

in

such

that of the great majority of the baptists,

in confining their

is

it

The

point on which

the nature of that institution

immersion, and of which

difter,

which we place

we suppose

and accountable agents the only

this opinion,

they

fit

rational

subjects

combined with the other generally

received one, that none are entitled to receive

the Eucharist but such as have been baptized,

so singular,

the practice which seems

and gives so much offence the

restricting of

communion

leads inevitably to

Let

tion.
all

it

to our ow^n

be admitted that baptism

admitted, but
opinion

it is

under
of

impossible for the

it is

That

baptists to act otherwise.

in this particular is

is

a necessary condition

circumstances

church fellowship, and

the

denomina-

harsh and

their practice

illiberal, is freely

the infallible consequence of

generally entertained

respecting

communion, conjoined with

their peculiar views

The

recollection of this

of the baptismal

may

rite.

and silence

suffice to rebut the ridicule,

the clamour of those, who loudly condemn the

baptists

for

a proceeding,

which, were they

but to change their opinion on the subject of

baptism,

them

their

to adopt.

from which the practice deemed so

principle,

offensive

own principles would compel

They both concur in a common

is

the necessary result.

Considered as an argumentum ad hominem, or

an appeal to the avowed principles of our opponents, this reasoning

may be

sufficient to shield

us from that severity of reproach to which

we

are often exposed, nor ought

for acting

upon a system which

by our accusers.
of the

to

Still it

we

be censured

is

sanctioned

leaves the real merits

question untouched

for

the inquiry

remains open, whether baptism

an indis-

is

pensable pre-requisite to communion

in other

words, whether they stand in such a relation

each other, that the involuntary neglect of

to

the

incurs a forfeiture of the

first,

title to

the

last.

The

chief,

might say the only argument

for the restricted plan of communion,

is

derived

from the example of the apostles, and the practice of the primitive

church.

some appearance of
duty enjoined on
Christianity

was

with

plausibility, that the first

the

to

It is alleged,

converts to

primitive

be baptized, that no repeal

of the law has taken place since, that the apostles

uniformly baptized their converts before

they admitted them to the sacrament, and that

and purest ages, the church

during the

first

knew

members who had not submitted

of no

that rite

and that consequently,

in declining

to

union with those, who, however estimable in

other
as

respects,

unbaptized,

we are obliged
we are following

to

consider

the highest

precedents, and treading in the hallowed steps

of the inspired teachers of religion.

few words,

the

is

reasoning

who

munion

and as

imposing

air,

Such, in a

sum and substance

of their

are the advocates of strict

it

com-

approaches with a lofty and

and has prevailed with thousands.

to

embrace what appears

error,

while

me

to

we must bespeak the

we endeavour to sift it

order to expose

a most serious

reader's patience,
to the bottom, in

its fallacy.

Precedent derived from the practice of

spired

men

is

in exact proportion as the spirit of

on which

and the

principle

upon.

If neglectful of these,

letter only,

we

shall

mistakes,

serious

in-

entitled to be regarded as law^

proceeds

it

we

copied,

it is

is

acted

attend to the

be betrayed into the most

since there

are a thousand

actions recorded of the apostles in the govern-

ment of the church, which it would be the

height of folly and presumption to imitate.
Above all things, it is necessary, before we
proceed to found a rule of action on precedent,
carefully to investigate the circumstances under

which

it

occurred, and the reasons on which

it

was founded. The apostles, it is acknowledged,

admitted none to the Lord's supper, but such
but under what
as were previously baptized
;

circumstances did they maintain this course

when a mistake respecting the

Supreme Legislator on the subject of
baptism was impossible it was while a diversity
It

was

at a time,

will of the

of opinion relating to
sist,

to

because inspired

it

could not possibly sub-

men were

remove every doubt, and

at hand,

satisfy the

ready

mind

of

was under circummust have convicted him who

every honest inquirer.

stances,

that

It

decHned compliance with

that ordinance,

and stubborn resistance

wilful prevarication,

the delegates and representatives of Christ,

commissioned them

to

of
to

who

promulgate his laws, with

an express assurance that

**

whoever rejected

them, rejected him, and whoever received them,

received him," and that to refuse to obey their

word, exposed the offender to a severer doom,

Sodom and Gomorrha/

than was allotted to

Their instructions were too plain to be mistaken,

be contemned by a

their authority too sacred to

professor of Christianity, without being guilty of

In such a state of things,

daring impiety.

may be

asked,

ferently from
into the

ration

how

could they have acted

what they did

church

men who

and despised

their

have been to betray their

To have

it

dif-

received

disputed their inspiinjunctions,

trust,

and

to

would

renounce

their pretensions as the living depositaries of

the

mind of Christ

to

have admitted those who,

believing their inspiration, yet refused a

com-

pliance with their orders, would have let into the

church the most unheard of licentiousness, and

polluted

it,

by incorporating with

the worst of men.

its

members

Neither of these could be

'

Matt.

X. 11, 15.

10
tViought of, and no other alternative remained

but to

insist as a test of sincerity

on a punctual

known and acknowledged as the apostolic doctrine.

**Weareof
God," says St. John, '* he that knoweth God
heareth us
he that is not of God heareth not
us
hereby we know the spirit of truth, and
compliance, with what was

the

In short, the apostles

of error." ^

spirit

refused to impart the external privileges of the

church to such as impugned their authority, or

contemned

their

injunctions, which,

whoever

persisted in the neglect of baptism at that time,

and

those circumstances, must necessarily

in

have done.

But

declining the

in

peedobaptists,
is

communion

however eminent

really nothing analogous to their

The resemblance

proceeding.

of

modem

their piety, there

fails

method of
in its most

In repelling an unbaptized

essential features.

person from their communion, supposing such

a one to have presented himself, they would

have rejected the violator of a known precept

he

whom we

refuse,

with mistakins:

is

at

most chargeable only

The former must

it.

either have

neglected an acknowledged precept, and thus

evinced

mind

destitute of principle, or he

John

iv. 6.

n
must have set the authority of the apostles at
defiance, and thus have classed with parties of

Our

the worst description.

paedobaptist bre-

thren are exposed to neither of these charges

convince them that

it is

their

duty

to

be bap-

method which we approve, and they

stand ready, many of them at least we cannot
tized, in the

stand ready to perform

doubt,

them

that

it

is

it

convince

a necessary inference from the

correct interpretation of the apostolic commis-

and they

sion,

will without hesitation

bow

to

that authority.

The most
that,

rigid baptist will

however clear and

of his sentiments
are those

whom

it

may
fails

probably admit

irresistible the

evidence

appear to himself, there

to convince,

and some

of them at least illustrious examples of piety

men who would

tremble at the thought of

deliberately violating the least of the

of Christ or of his apostles

racter

and

striking

whom

it

principles,

contrast with
is

commands

men whose

consequently,
those

cha-

form a

of the persons,

allowed the apostles would have

But to separate ourselves from the

best of men, because the apostles would have
withdrawn from the worst, to confound the
broadest moral distinctions, by awarding the
same treatment to involuntary and conscientious
repelled.

12

which they were prepared to inflict on

stubborn and wilful disobedience, is certainly
a very curious method of following apostolic
" The letter killeth," says St. Paul,
precedent.
error,

" the

maketh alive." Whether the contrariety of these was ever more strongly marked,
than by such a method of imitating the apostles,
let

spirit

the reader judge.

For the clearer

illustration of this point,

us suppose a case.

let

person proposes himself

as a candidate for admission to a baptist church.

The

minister inquires

into

views of the

and respectfully asks

ordinance of baptism,

whether he

his

convinced of the divine authority

is

which was administered to him in

infancy.
He confesses he is not, that on

of the
his

rite

mature deliberation and inquiry he considers

as a

human

invention.

his conviction,

satisfied

is

he

is

he hesitates,

is

a part of his revealed will

he refuses, alleging that

and that some of the

died in the neglect of

it.

case to that of a person

clined the

times

and

it

avowing

urged to confess Christ

essential to salvation, that

rite,

his thus

by a prompt compliance with what

before men,

he

On

it is

is

not

a mere external

holiest of

Here

who

it

is

men have
a parallel

should have de-

ordinance of baptism in primitive

in entire

consistence with the prin-

13
ciples

which we are maintaining, we have no

that the individual in

hesitation in affirming,

question

To

disqualified for Christian

is

communion.

him under such circumstances, would

receive

be sanctioning the want of principle, and pouring contempt on the Christian precepts.

Yet

the conduct

we have now supposed would be

less criminal

than to have shrunk from baptism

in the apostolic age,

because the evidence by

which our views are supported, though

every practical purpose,

for

which accompanied

to that

gation

the utmost

tliat

very high probability;

is

decidedly inferior

their

we can

first

promul-

pretend,

is

the primitive converts

Now,

possessed an absolute certainty.

we

sufficient

since

are prepared to visit an inferior degree of

delinquency to that which would have insured

the rejection of a candidate

how

with the same severity,

by the

preposterous

is it

charge us with departing from apostolical

to

precedent

In the same circumstances, or in

we

circumstances nearly the same,

instantly to act the

same part

stances be essentially varied,

ing

is

were

let

communion

insincere,

'*

are ready

the circum-

and our proceed-

The

proportionably difierent.

refused the
as

apostles,

apostles

of such, and such only,

who

held the truth in un-

righteousness," avowing their conviction of one

system, and acting upon another

and wherever

14

we do
They admitted the weak

similar indications display themselves,

precisely the same.

and erroneous, providing

were not

their errors

of a nature subversive of Christianity

They

do we.

tolerated

differed from their

men whose

and so

sentiments

own, providing they did not

by a deliberate

rear the standard of revolt,

sistance to the only infallible authority

such precisely

the course

is

bear with those

who mistake

inspiration, in points

who

but with none

lect

them.

we

and

We

the dictates of

which are not

essential

wilfully contradict,

or neg-

In the government of the church,

means of information reach, the

as far as our

immediate ambassadors of Christ appear

set

pursue.

re-

us an example of

much

to

have

gentleness

and

mildness, to have exercised a tender consideration of

human

all their

imperfection, and to have reserved

severity for a contumacious rejection

of their guidance, and disdain of their instructions.

And wherever

we humbly

tread in their steps

disposed as they,
those

these features appear,

who impugn

to

being as

little

countenance or receive

their inspiration,

or censure

their decisions.

They were

certainly strangers to that

scheme

of ecclesiastical polity, which proposes to divide

the mystical

body of Christ

into t\vo parts, one

^.-

15
consisting of such as enjoy

communion with

him, the other of such as are entitled to com-

mune

In no part of their

with each other.

writings,

is

the faintest vestige to be discerned

of that state of things, of which our opponents

where a vast majority of

Christians are deemed disqualified

are enamoured,

cere

sinfor

Christian fellowship, and while their pretensions

to acceptance
life,

state

Had
to

with God, and a

eternal

title to

are undisputed, are yet to be kept in a

of

from

seclusion

the

visible

church.

they in any part of their Epistles appeared

broach such a doctrine

had they lavished

high encomiums on the faith and piety of those

with

whom

they refused to associate at the

Lord's supper, our astonishment at sentiments

so singular

such,

and so eccentric, would have been

that scarce

any conceivable uniformity

of manuscripts or of versions, could have accredited

the

passages

that contained

them.

That the primitive church was composed of

professed believers, and none debarred from
privileges, but

erroneous,

such whose

or their

faith

character

was

its

essentially

doubtful,

is

matter of fact which appears on the very surface

of the inspired records, and

was probably never

any age or country, until

an opposite principle was avowed and acted
by the modern baptists, who appropriate its
called in question, in

IG

and

title

immunities to themselves, while

its

with strange inconsistency they proclaim their

whom

conviction, that the persons

are indisputably in possession of

spiritual privileges.

ration of the

For

they exclude

its

interior

and

this portentous sepa-

from the outward and

internal

visible privileges of Christianity

for confining

the latter to a mere handfuU of such as have

" obtained

like precious faith

vain

they seek

in

will

example of the

with themselves,"

for

support in

the

They repeatedly and

apostles.

warn us against resting in external

advantages, and of the danger of substituting
the outward sign for the inward and spiritual
earnestly

grace

but never give the slightest intimation of

the possibility of possessing the

being entitled to the

last.

first,

The

without

assertion of

such an opinion, and the practice founded upon

it,

the reader will at once perceive,

ture from the precedent and

earliest

which

age,

it

is

a depar-

example of the

would be

difficult

to

parallel.

In opposition, however, to

all

that has been

urged to show the obvious disparity between

the two cases,
cry.

The

our opponents

still

reiterate the

apostles did not tolerate the omission

of baptism, and therefore

in tolerating

it.

But

is

we

are not justified

the omission of a duty

17
to

be judged of

moral quality,

in relation to its

without any regard to circumstances, without

any consideration whether it be voluntary or

involuntary, whether it proceed from perversity
of will, or error of judgment, from an erroneous
interpretation of our Lord's precepts, or a con-

tempt of his injunctions

peedobaptist brethren
scientious,

is

to

and

supposing our

be sincere and con-

there any resemblance between

them and those whom the apostles, it is allowed,

would have repelled, except in the mere circumstance of

their being both unbaptized,

the

one because they despised the apostolic

in-

junctions, the other because they mistake

The

former, (supposing

all,)

them

to

have existed at

must have been men over whose conword of God had no m) ."er the

science the
latter

them?

tremble at his word, and are restrained

from following our example by deference to his

will.

such opposite characters are the na-

If

tural objects of a contrary state of feeling,

they

must be equally so of a contrary treatment

nor can any thing be more preposterous than to
confound them together, under the pretence of
a regard to apostolic precedent.
of

mankind should

Our treatment

undoubtedly be the ex-

by our
communion

pression of our feelings, and regulated

estimate of their character.

prescribes

the

contrary

Strict
it

sets

the conduct

18

and the feelings

and erects

at variance,

into a

duty the mortification of our best and holiest

propensities.

The

discipline of the church,

by Christ and

his apostles,

is

as prescribed

founded on prin-

and

ciples applicable to every age,

combination of events to which

it is

every

to

liable, in

world replete with change, where new forms of

error,

new modes

of aberration from the paths

of rectitude and truth, are destined to follow in

rapid and unceasing succession.

we

Among

these

are compelled to enumerate the prevailing

notions of the Christian world on the subject of

baptism

an

error,

which

have no subsistence
Apostles.

Here then

it

is

obvious, could

during the age of

new

arises a

case,

the

and

becomes a matter of serious inquiry, how it

is to be treated.
It plainly cannot be decided
by a reference to apostolic precedent, because

it

nothing of this kind then existed, or could exist.

The precept which enjoined the baptism

converts, might be resisted, but

mistaken,

it

of

new

could not be

and therefore no inference can be

drawn from the treatment, which it is admitted,

the apostles would have assigned to wilful disobedience, that

voluntary error.

is

applicable to the case of in-

The only method

at a satisfactory conclusion,

is

of arriving

to consider

how

IB

they conducted

towards sincere,

themselves

though erring Christians,

with

together

temper they recommend us

to cultivate

the

towards

such as labour under mistakes and miscon-

Without

ceptions, not inconsistent with piety.

expecting a specific direction for the regulation

of our conduct in this identical particular, which

would be to suppose the error in question not

new, it is quite sufficient if the general principle of toleration which the New Testament
enjoins, is found to comprehend the present
instance.

be founded on conviction, as

If action

doubtedly
are as
into

is

much

in

all

it

un-

well-regulated minds,

we

obliged to mould our sentiments

an agTeement with those of the apostles,

as our conduct

inspired precedents of thought

are as authoritative as those of action.

The

advocates of Hwxed communion are clamorous

in their

demand

fellowship,

we

exactly in the

relation

in

that,

should treat

all

same manner

to

church

peedobaptists

as the

apostles

would have treated unbaptized persons in their

day.
But must we not for the same reason
think the

same of them

disclaim as
sensible,

much

as

This, however, they

we do

they ^re perfectly

nor have they the hardihood to deny,

that the difference

is

immense, between a con-

20

mind

scientious mistake of the

Who

it.

can doubt that the apos-

would be the first to feel this

and, as they would undoubtedly,

tles

with

on a

and a deliberate contempt

particular subject,
or neglect of

of Christ,

distinction
in

common

conscientious persons, regulate their

all

conduct by their sentiments,

that, could

they be

recommend a
treatment ? To sum

personally consulted, they would

correspondent difference of

up the argument

Nothing can

few words.

in a

be more hollow and fallacious than the pretension of our opponents that they are guided

we have no precedent in
we have no example

inspired precedent, for

the case
of the

words,

in other

manner

in

which they conducted them-

selves towards such as

subject of baptism
allusion

to

present to

by

fell

into an error

the scriptures

on the

make no

such an error which attaches at

many most

tenacious of

humbly submissive to
imbued with its spirit

its

to

most opposite character

its

dictates,

men,

in a

to those

authority,

and deeply
word, of the

who may be

supposed, in consequence of setting light by the

authority of inspired teachers, to have neglected

baptism in the

first

ages.

Thus much may suffice for apostolic precedent.

There is still one more view of the subject to
which the attention of the reader

is

requested

21

moment.

tor

whether there

remains to be considered

It

is

any

'peculiar connexion

between

and the Lord's

the two ordinances, of baptism

supper, either in the nature of things, or

divine appointment, so as to render
to administer the

no natural connexion

were

instituted at different times,

;

baptism

is

blessed

the

is

They

obvious.

is

our faith in

That

one without the other.

there

ferent purposes

it

mode

trinity,

by

improper

and

for

dif-

of professing

Lord's

the

supper as a commemoration of the dying love

of the

Redeemer

the former

the act of an

is

individual, the latter of a society.

which contain our warrant

The words

for the celebration

of the Eucharist convey no allusion to baptism

whatever

those which prescribe baptism carry

no anticipative reference
as

it is

demonstrable that John's baptism was a

separate institution from that which

was enacted

after our Lord's resurrection, the Lord's

is

And

to the Eucharist.

supper

evidently ajiterior to baptism, and the original

communicants consisted entirely of such as had

not received that ordinance.

To

all

appearance,

the rites in question rest on independent grounds.

But perhaps there

a special connexion between

arising from

the

two,

this

be the

Rarely,

is

if

divine

appoiiitment.

will be easy to point

If

out.

cajse,

it

ever,

are they mentioned together,

and on no occasion

is it

it

asserted, or insinuated,

22
that the validity of the sacrament depends on

observation of the baptismal ce-

the previous

That there was such a connexion

remony.

we

and the passover,

between circumcision

learn from the explicit declaration of Moses,

that

" no uncircumcised person

shall eat thereof."

Let a similar prohibition be

who

asserts

produced
troversy

in the present instance,

is

at

and the con-

an end.

The late excellent Mr.

Fuller, in a

posthumous

pamphlet on

this subject,

an

connexion between the two ordi-

instituted

laboured hard to prove

nances, but his conclusion from the premises

is

so

and precarious, that we strongly suspect

own mind was not fully made up on the sub-

feeble
his

ject.

His reasoning

ed to

satisfy an impartial inquirer.

is

certainly very

little

adapt-

The whole

performance appears more like an experiment of

what might be advanced

in favor of a prevailing

hypothesis, than the result of deep and deliberate

conviction.

On

our opponents are at variance

this point

with each other

Mr. Kinghorn roundly

that baptism has no

Lord's

supper than with

Christianity.
to

asserts

more connexion with the

every other part

of

Thus what Mr. Fuller attempts

demonstrate as the main

pillar of his cause,

23

What

Mr. Kinghorn abandons without scruple.

a fortunate position
arrive,

tions

is

who proceed

that to

which men may

most opposite direc-

in the

a sort of mental antipodes

which yeu-will

reach with equal certainty, whether you advance

by

the east or

From

by the west.

Kinghorn's book, which

Communion, we should be
was his principal object to
which these

No

such thing

relation

rites

of Mr.

led to expect that

trace

some

specific

bear to each other.

he denies there

title

Baptism a term of

is.

it

relation

the

baptism, he declares,

is

any such

is

no otherwise

connected with the Lord's supper than

it is

and consequently
Christianity

concoction, that
ligion,

essential to the Eucharist,

it is

essential to every part of

so that the omission of

whatever cause,

such an error

is
it

vitiates

in

statement of a

all

from

it,

the

its privileges.

man who makes

and incurs
This

is

by

retracing his

this

steps,

the

loud professions

of attachment to our peedobaptist brethren

can he escape from

first

every branch of re-

disqualifies for all its duties,

the forfeiture of

is

But on

with every other part of Christianity.

his hypothesis,

it

nor

strange dilemma but

and taking

his

stand

with Mr. Fuller on a supposed

instituted relation

between the two ordinances.

Meanwhile,

instructive

labyrinths

it is

what inextricable
the acutest minds are entangled.

to

observe,

in

24

which desert the high road of common sense,

pursuit of fanciful theories.

Having cleared the way by showing that

scripture precedent, properly interpreted, affords

no countenance or support
the remaining task

to strict

communion,
For nothing-

very easy.

is

can be more evident, than that the whole genius

of Christianity

and

dial

favourable to the most cor-

is

treatment of our fellow

affectionate

Christians.

To

them

love

fervently,

bear

to

with their imperfections, and cast the mantle of

forgiveness over their infirmities,

law of Christ.
is

schism

deprecated as the greatest

tends to promote
'*

reprobation.

name

it

Now
all

evil,

the

body

and whatever

subjected to the severest

is

by

beseech you,

of the Lord Jesus,"

Paul, " that ye

is to fulfil

his mystical

in

is

the

the language of St.

speak the same thing, and

among you

that there be no divisions

but that

ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind

same judgment. For

declared unto me, by them who are

of the house

of Chloe, that there are contentions

among

and

in

Now
I

the

this I say,

am

of Paul,

Cephas, and

was Paul
in the

that every one of

and

of ApoUos,

of Christ.

crucified for

name

it

of Paul

you ?
"

has been

you
and

you.

saith,
I

of

Is

Christ divided

or

were ye baptized

In applying these and

25
innumerable other passages of similar import

under discussion, two questions

to the point

occur.

First,

Arc our paedobaptist brethren a

body of Christ?

part of the mystical

Do

other words,

or,

in

they form a portion of that

church, which he has purchased by his precious

blood

If they are not, they are not in a state

of salvation, since none can be in that state

who

are

not vitally united

to

The

Christ.

Bible acknowledges but two classes into which

the whole

human

and the world

dition

whoever

belongs to the
strict

race

there
is

is

no intermediate con-

not of the

first,

necessarily

But the advocates

last.

communion

distributed, the church

is

are loud in their professions

of esteem for pious paedobaptists, nor

any thing they would more

whom

are then,

there

is

resent, than a

doubt

The

of their sincerity in that particular.

sons

for

per-

they exclude from their communion

by

their

own

confession, a part of the

flock of Christ, a portion of his mystical body,

and of that church which he has bought with

his blood.

The next question

is,

whether a formal sepa-

them on the account of their imputed

amounts to what the scripture stiles schism!

ration from

error

Supposing one part of the church

at

Corinth

had formally severed themselves from the other,

E

2G

and established a separate communion, allowing

whom

those

time, the

they had forsaken,

title

same
would this

at the

of sincere Christians,

That

have been considered as a schism?

would,

it

demonstrable from the language of

is

who accuses the Corinthians of

having schisms^ among them, though they never
St.

Paul,

dreamed of forming a distinct and separate

communion. If they are charged with schism,
on account of that spirit of contention, and that
alienation of their affections from each other,

which merely tended

to

an open rupture,

much more would they have

incurred

how
that

censure, had they actually proceeded to that

extremity.

Schism, in

its

primitive

and

literal

sense, signifies the breaking of a substance into

two or more
to a
into

parts,

and when

figuratively applied

body of men, it denotes the division of

and though it may be applied
parties
;

it

to

such a state of contention as consists with the

preservation of external union,

it is

most emi-

nently applicable to a society whose bond of

union

is

dissolved,

the other from

meaning

in terms,

The

sense.

its

and where one part

fellowship.
this is

The

If there

schism in

its

is

any

highest

great Apostle of the gentiles illus-

trates the union of the faithful,

rejects

original

word rendered

by

that

which

divisions, is ffxK^tiaTa, schhmi.

27
subsists

body.

between the members of the natural

" Now ye are the body of Christ, and

members

in particular."

He shows

beau-

in a

and impressive manner, that the several

tiful

members have each his distinct function, and

with
are pervaded by a common sympathy

the express design " that there be no schism in

But when one part

the body."

of the Christian

church avowedly excludes another from

communion, when they refuse

most distinguishing branch of
and hold themselves

in

tlieir

to unite in

the

social worship,

state

of seclusion,

they virtually say to the party thus repelled,

**

We have no need of thee ;"

off

they cut themselves

from the body, and are guilty of a schism

so open

perceive

and conspicuous, that none can

How

it.

is

it

possible for

fail

to

them

to

evade the conclusion to which this reasoning

conducts us, unless they are prepared to deny
the claim of the paedobaptists to be regarded as
the

members

some
betwixt the world and the

of Christ, or place

intermediate station

them

in

But the language of the New Testament, which uniformly identifies the objects of
the divine favour with the members of Christ's

church.

church,
*'

He

is

directly opposed to such a fiction.

loved the church and gave himself for

that he might sanctify and cleanse

it,

it,

by the

washing of water through the word, that he

28
might present

it

to himself a glorious church, not

having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing."

our

It deserves the serious consideration of

opponents,

they are contend'mg for

that

that

schism in the body of Christ, against which he

and

so fervently prayed, so anxiously guarded,

which

his

represent as

apostles

"The

calamity and reproach.

Lord,

"which thou

one

I in

hast given me, I have given

may be

them, that they

greatest

its

glory," said our

we

one, even as

them, and thou in me, that they

be made perfect

one

in

that the world

are

may
may

know

that thou hast sent me,

and hast loved

them

as thou hast loved me."

Here

it

cannot

be doubted that our peedobaptist brethren are

comprehended in this prayer, because our Lord
declares

it

was

preferred, not merely for the

disciples then existing, but for those also

who

should hereafter believe through their word,

adding, " that they all may be one, as thou

Father art in me, and

also

may

find

in

thee, that

be one in us, that the world

lieve that thou hast sent

we

him praying

me."

them

all,

and

for a visible

this

that they all

cates of strict

be-

union among

world might

he intreats

may

may

In these words,

his disciples, such a union as the

easily perceive,

they

be one.

communion plead

in

behalf of

The advofor

a visible

29
disunion

nor will
a

they cultivate

them

avail

it

fraternal

to reply that

towards

alFection

Christians of other denominations, while they

insist

make
one.

on such a visible separation,

it

must

as

apparent to the world that they are not

Internal sentiments of esteem are cogniz-

able only

by the Searcher of hearts

external

indications are all that the world has to judge

by

and so

far are

they from exhibiting these,

that they value themselves in maintaining such

towards their fellow Christians as

a position

confounds them,
infidels

very important point, with

in a

and heathens.

the body,

is

If a rent

and

division in

much

pregnant with so

and offence as the scriptures represent

spirit of love

and concord

is

it,

the

if

the distinguishing

badge of the Christian profession,

it

scandal

it is

surprising

has never occurred to them, that by insisting

on such a separation, as was unheard of

primitive

every approach to which

times,

denounced

scripture as a

in

in the

most serious

is

evil,

they are acting in direct opposition to the genius

of the gospel, and the solemn injunctions of

What

inspired teachers.

may
to

degree of criminality

attach to such a procedure

determine

affirming, that

intention of the

but
it

it is

we have no

is

Head

its

not for us

hesitation

in

most abhorrent from the

of the church, and mise-

rably compensated by that more correct view of

30
the ordinance of baptism, which

support.

its

''

Charity

mandment," "the

fulfilling of

since the religion of Christ

but

and consists

vital,

and

is

is

the law;" and

not ceremonial,

less in correct opinions,

ritual observances,

than in these graces of

the Spirit, which are the " hidden

heart,"

it

alleged in

the end of the com-

is

man

of the

deserves serious consideration, whether

so palpable a violation of the unity of the church,

not more offensive in the eyes of

is

"

tries

Him who

the hearts and the reins," than an invo-

luntary mistake of a ceremonial precept.

Here we must be allowed once more

to the vain boast of a scrupulous

example of the

the

apostles,

to occur

adherence

(the

futility

to

of

which has, I trust, been sufficiently demonstrated,) and request our opponents to reflect
for

moment on

particular.

communion

their essential deviation in this

Say, did the apostles refuse the

men?

Did they set the

example of dividing them into two classes, a
and while
qualified and a disqualified class
they acknowledged the latter were objects of
of good

the

divine

favour,

equally with themselves,

enjoin on their converts the duty of disowning

them

at the Lord's table

be discovered

in

the

New

Are any traces

Testament,

to

of a

society of Purists, who, under the pretence of

31

on

illumination

superior

one

subject,

kept

themselves aloof from the Christian world, excluding from their

whom

communion myriads

of those

they believed to be heirs of salvation

Did they narrow their views of church fellowship, as Mr. Kinghorn avows is the case of the

modern
to

to the

baptists,

purpose of holding up

On

view one neglected truth?

many

separate

communions

will

this plan, as

be witnessed,

as there are varieties of religious taste and pre-

while each fancies

dilection,

neglected duty,

or

some

sufficiently prominent,
will give birth to
sect.
is

The

till

some

it

perceives

truth

some

not rendered

almost every inquiry

solitary

and

antisocial

direct tendency of such a principle,

not merely to annihilate the unity of the

church, but to contract the heart, to narrow

room of ''holding
word of life," to invest every petty
speculation, and minute opinion, with the digthe understanding, and in the

forth the

nity of a fundamental truth.

The

revival or propagation of

ticular truth,

union,

the

being the avowed object of their

members

of

such a society will

almost inevitably attach to

portance

some one par-

it

an undue im-

and, as their attention will be chiefly

directed towards that in which they difler from

others,

and

in

which they are conceived

to

32
excel,

it

will

be a miracle

if

they escape a cen-

While

conceited, disputatious spirit.

sorious,

their constitution

founded, not so

is

much on

a separation from the world, as from the church,

be almost

they will

transfer to the

associations
is

irresistibly

to

a large portion of the

latter,

and

tempted

feelings,

of which the former

the proper object.

How

refreshing

and repulsive

is

to turn

it

principles,

from these

rigid

to the contemplation

of the generous maxims of the New Testament!

*'
Him that is weak in the faith," says St. Paul,
receive ye, not to doubtful disputations ;"*
after

his

meaning,

of various

diversities

illustrating

examples

amongst

his converts,

and

by adducing
of

sentiment

he proceeds to inculcate

the most perfect mutual toleration.

It is ob-

servable, that the differences of opinion

which

he specifies related to the obligation of certain

to which,

positive institutes,

though abrogated

by the new dispensation, part of the church

adhered, while its more enlightened members
understood and embraced the liberty with which
'*
We that are
Christ had made them free.
strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak,

and not

to

please

ourselves."

Rom,

xiv. 1.

moment's

33
attention

to

the

connexion will convince the

that the term weak,

reader,

sages, denotes persons

erroneous

for

both these pas-

in

whose conceptions are

the inspired writer

verting to the different degrees

is

not ad-

of conviction

with which the same truths are embraced, but

to a palpable difference of

the case here decided,

is

Thus

judgment.

fur

precisely similar to

that under present discussion

our difference

from the psedobaptists turns on the nature and

obligation of a positive institute.

which

Paul enjoined the

St.

is still

con-

toleration,

the error with which

are concerned, consists in mistaking a

which

error of

certain ceremonies which

sisted in adhering to

had been abrogated

The

in force.

nor of the modern error

we

ceremony

Neither of the ancient,

is it

pretended that they

are fundamental, or that they endanger the sal-

vation of those

who hold them.

Thus

far

they

stand on the same footing, and the presumption

is

that they ought to be treated in the

manner.
however,

Before
it

we come

same

to this conclusion,

behoves us to examine the principle

on which the apostle enjoins

and

toleration,

if

this is applicable in its full extent to the case of

our psedobaptist brethren, no room

doubt.

The

in question

principle plainly

is,

is

left for

that the error

was not of such magnitude

preclude him

who maintained

it

as to

from the favour

34
" Let not him

God.

of

who

eateth, despise

him who eateth not and let not him who eateth
not, judge him who eateth for God hath re;

Who

ceived him.

man's servant

art thou, that judgest another

To

his

own master he

or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden

is

able to

in the

make him

stand.''

up

standeth
;

God

for

In the same manner,

next chapter of the same Epistle, after

reminding the strong that

their

is

it

duty to

infirmities of the work, he adds

" Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ

bear the

also hath received us to the glory of the Father."

If such
ration,

is

the reason assigned for mutual tole-

and

it is

acknowledged

one, which none can

the obligation

error

which

as

that error

if

is

and as few,

it is

as conclusive

every

tolerating

had been mentioned by name

if

any, are to be

many

duty.

met with who

psedobaptists,

justifies their reception,

indispensable
futile

of

consistent with a state of salvation,

doubt the piety of

only

sufficient

deny without impeaching

the inspiration of the writer,

respecting

be a

to

but renders

Nothing can

not

it

it

an

be more

than the attempt to turn aside the edge

by remarking that there is no

mention of baptism, and that this is not the
subject of which St. Paul is treating, as though
the Bible contained no genera] principles, no
maxims of universal application, but that precise
of this reasoning,

35

must be found

directions

emergence that

Were

for

every

in the lapse of ages

possible

may

occur.

constructed upon this plan, the Bible

it

must be

infinitely

statutes at large.
different

gives general rules of action, broad

it

more voluminous than the

It is composed on one widely

them

principles, leaving

to

be applied under the

guidance of sound discretion

and wherever

it

has decided a doubtful question, accompanied

with an express statement of the principle on

which the decision

has

all

we

are

is

founded, such explanation

the force of an apostolic canon,

bound

to regulate

variety of cases to

which

by which

our conduct in
it

applies.

all

the

Hence we

have only one alternative, either to deny that

those

who

differ

from us on the subject of

baptism are accepted of God, or to receive them

into fellowship,

on

the

same

on exactly the same ground^ and

principle,

that Paul enjoined the

toleration of sincere Christians.

Before

dismiss this part of the subject, on

which the patience of the reader has been

severely tasked, I must beg leave to notice a
striking inconsistence in the advocates of strict

communion.

more certain than that

the communion of saints, is by no means conNothing

is

fined to one particular occasion, or limited to

one transaction,

such

as

that

of assembling

36
around the Lord's table

extends to

it

all

the

modes by which believers recognize each other,

as the members of a common head.
Every
expression of fraternal regard, every participation
in

the

enjoyments of

worship,

social

every

instance of the unity of the Spirit exerted in

prayer and supplication, or in acts of Christian

sympathy and friendship,

the communion of saints,
In truth,

the Eucharist.

communion with our

it

there

the mind

for

which can be

as the celebration of

we

if

are strangers to

fellow Christians on other

impossible for us to enjoy

occasions,

is

as truly belongs to

it

not a piece of mechanism

is

whose
movements are obedient to the call of time and
place.
Nothing short of an habitual sympathy
of

spirit,

set a-going at pleasure,

springing from the cultivation of bene-

and the interchange of kind

volent feeling,
offices,

will secure that reciprocal delight, that

social pleasure,

communion.

which

Its

is

the soul of Christian

richest fruits are frequently

reserved for private conference, like that in which

the two disciples were engaged, in their

Emmaus, when

their hearts

way

to

burned within them,

while the Lord opened to them the scriptures.

When

they take sweet counsel together, as they

go to the house of
bear each

other's

God

in

company, when they

burdens,

that weep, and rejoice with

weep with
them

those

that rejoice

37

no mutual fellowship?

say,

have

Is

not surprising that, losing sight of such

it

Christians

obvious facts, our opponents always reason on

the subject of

communion

merely

sacrament.

to the

ticular they act just as

we

as though

it

related

In every other pardo.

However our opponents may deviate from

scripture, let them at least be consistent with
themselves, and either follow out their
ciples to their just consequence,

own

prin-

by withholding

from the members of other denominations every

token of fraternal regard, or freely admit them to
the Lord's table.
their

mode

As

the case stands at present,

of proceeding

utterly untenable.

is

In a variety of instances, they indulge themselves in those acts of

communion with

paedo-

which are peculiar to Christians tliey

frequently make them their mouth in addressing

baptists

the Deity

they exchange pulpits

and even en-

gage their assistance in exercises intended as a

preparation for the Eucharist

and

after lighting

the flame of devotion at their torch, they most pre-

posterously turn round to inform them, that they

are not

worthy to participate.

It

would be difficult

to convince a stranger to our practice,

were possible

to

it

be guilty of such an absurdity.

Is the observance of an external rite, let

that

more solemn part of

religion than

me ask,

addressing

38

And

the Majesty of heaven and of earth?

shall

we depute him to present our prayers at his footstool, who would defile a sacrament by his
presence
rigour,

Suppose them

and

to

to relax

from their

admit pious psedobaptists to their

amount ? To noof
acknowledgment
thing more than a public
their union to Christ, and their interest in his
and as they fully acknowledge both,
benefits
fellowship, to

what would

it

why scruple to do
mon Lord ? Why

it

at the table of their

com-

select an ordinance designed

commemoration of the dying love of the

Redeemer as the signal for displaying the banners of party and by reviving the remembrance
for the

of differences, elsewhere consigned to oblivion,

give the utmost publicity to dissensions,

which

are the reproach of the church, and the triumph

of the world

The only

colour

invented to disguise this

glaring inconsistency,
that

it

is difficult

gravity.

to

is

so pure a logomachy,

speak of

They remind

us,

it

with becoming

forsooth,

that the

expressions of Christian affection in praying and

preaching for each other are not church acts, as

though there were some magic

in

the word

church that could change the nature of truth,

If it is our duty to
or the obligations of duty.
recognize those as fellow Christians

who

are

39
really such,

what

there in the idea of a church

is

that should render

church

" the

is

it

pillar

improper there?

If the

and ground of truth,"

it is

the proper place for the fullest disclosure of

secrets

if

Christians are under an obligation

each other with a pure heart, fervently,

to love
its

and

its

organization can never have been designed to

contract the heart,

by confining the movements

and expressions of charity within narrower limits.

The duty of churches originates in that
of the individuals of which they consist, so that

when we have
principles

ascertained the sentiments and

which ought

in his private capacity,

to actuate the Christian

we

possess the standard

which the practice of churches should be

to

uniformly adjusted.

Nor

is

it

in

this particular

persons whose opinions

we

only,

that the

are controverting are

betrayed into lamentable inconsistency.

Their

concessions on another branch of the subject,

them open to the same imputation. They

acknowledge that many p8edo,baptists stand high
in the favor of God
enjoy intimate communion
with the Redeemer and would, on their removal

lay

be instantaneously admitted to glory.

hence,

Now,

it

seems the suggestion of common sense,

that the greater includes the less, that they

have a

title

to the

who

most sublime privileges of

40
Christianity, the favour of

God, the fellowship

of Christ, and the hope of glory, must be un-

questionably entitled to that ordinance whose

sole design

is

prepare us for the perfect

to

fruition of these blessings.

sible to

To suppose

have an interest in the great redemption,

without being allowed to commemorate

may

he

pos-

it

possess the substance

who

is

that

it,

denied

the shadow, and though qualified for the worship of heaven, be justly debarred from earthly

to

is such an anomaly as cannot fail

draw reprobation on the system of which it

is

the necessary consequence.

ordinances,

Men

long, tremble at the thought of being

will,

more

ere

strict

than Christ, more fastidious in the selection

of the

he

is

members of
in

the church militant, than

choosing the members of the church

triumphant.
Hitherto our attention has been occupied in
stating the

arguments

munion, and replying

practice.

It is

in favour of

mixed com-

to the objections to that

but justice to the subject and to

the reader, before

we

close the discussion, to

touch on another topic.

In every inquiry relating to Christian duty,
our

first

concern should

ascertain the will of the

undoubtedly be to

Supreme

Legislator

41

but

when

this has

we may be

been clone

to our satisfaction,

allowed to examine the practical

tendency of different systems,

which

will

the

effect

be to confirm our preference of that

course of action which

we have found most

We

consonant with the oracles of truth.

far

of

are

from resting the merits of our cause on the

basis of expedience

we

are aware that

who-

ever attempts to set the useful in opposition to

the true,
that

it

misled by false appearances, and

is

behoves us, on

all

occasions, fearless of

consequences, to yield to the force of evidence.

But having,

in

(we would hope

the preceding pages,

proved,

to the satisfaction of the reader)

that the practice of strict

communion has no

support from scripture or reason,

deemed improper

briefly

to

it

cannot be

inquire

into

its

tendency.

The
is

first

effect necessarily resulting

from

a powerful prejudice against the party

adopts

When

it.

all

it,

which

other denominations find

themselves lying under an interdict, and treated

as though

they were heathens or publicans,

they must be more than

it,

or

if

they regard

degree of apathy,
that contempt

apt to inspire.

it

it

men

not to resent

with a considerable

can only be ascribed to

which impotent violence

We

are

is

so

incompetent judges

42
of the light in which our conduct appears, to

those against
frequently

whom

we

it is

more

directed, but the

place ourselves in their situation,

the less will be our surprise at the indications

may

of alienation and disgust which they

The very

evince.

appellation of baptist, together with

the tenets

by which

it

is

designated,

associated with the idea of bigotry

become

nor will

it

permit the mind which entertains that prejudice,

an impartial attention to the evidence by

which our sentiments are supported.
With
mingled surprise and indignation they behold
us making pretensions which no other denomito give

nation of protestants assumes, placing ourselves

in

an attitude of hostility towards the whole

Christian world, and virtually claiming to be

the only church of Christ upon earth.

as

by

it is,

sality,

its

and combining

adapted

in its exterior

to dazzle the imagination,

the senses, there

Rome

Fortified,

claims to antiquity and univer-

is

whatever

and captivate

yet nothing in the church of

that has excited

more indignation and

disgust than this very pretension.

What

must be the sensation produced, when,

absence of

all

is

then

in the

these advantages, a sect, com-

paratively small and insignificant, erects itself

on a solitary eminence from whence

the approach of all other Christians.

it

repels

The power

of prejudice to arrest the progress of inquiry

is

4a
indeed to be lamented

nothing could be more

desirable than that every opinion should, in the

first

instance, be

judged of by

its intrinsic evi-

dence, without regard to the conduct of the per-

who embrace

sons

it

but the strength and

independence of mind requisite

is

rather to

to

such an

effort,

be admired than expected. There are

few who enter on the investigation of theological

questions in that elevated state

secret anti-

pathies or predilections will be sure to

their

instil

venom, and obscure the perception of truth,

and the suggestions of reason.

By

the stern rejection of the

members

of all

other denominations, until they have embraced

our distinguishing tenets, what do

we propose

to effect

intimidate or to convince

do neither.

To

'to

intimidate

is

We can

impossible, while

there are others, far more numerous than ourselves,

ready to receive them with open arms.

The hope
expedient

of producing conviction
is

since conviction
light

by

is

the result of evidence, and no

whatever can be pretended

interdicting their

that

it

to

an

error,^

be conveyed

communion, unless

manifests our intolerance.

to extirpate

by such an

equally groundless and chimerical,

We

it

be

propose

and we plant a prejudice

and instead of attempting

to soften

the minds of our opponents,

we

and conciliate

inflict

a stigma.


44
Professing serious concern that the ordinance of

baptism, as

unpopular
without

was practised

it

we

neglect,

fallen into

rite,

removal of

by a mode

remotest

the

error,

in the first ages, is

attempt to revive an
of procedure, which,

tendency towards

or the elucidation

the

of truth,

answers no other purpose than to make

ourselves

unpopular.

By this
power

preposterous conduct,

we do

to place our paedobaptist brethren

the reach of conviction.

to expect,

however

Since

it is

our

all in

beyond

unreasonable

attractive the ministry,

that

a pious pgedobaptist will statedly attend where

he must despair of ever becoming a member,

and of enjoying the

serious person

is

privileges to

supposed to aspire

which every
:

he attaches

himself, as a necessary consequence, to a con-

nexion in which there

but where he

what

is

is

no such impediment,

certain of hearing nothing but

will foster his prejudices,

and confirm

his

Thus he is excluded from the only

connexion where the arguments for adult baperror.

tism are stated, and

is

exposed

to the constant

operation of an opposite species of instruction.

The

practice

which we are reprobating

is

nearly

equivalent to an inscription over the door. Let

none but baptists enter within these walls

an admirable expedient truly,

for diffusing the

45
baptist sentiments, about as rational as to send

man from London

to Constantinople to study

the evidences of Christianity.

Mr. Kinghorn

is

delighted with this sepa-

ration of the baptists from other denominations

in

avowing

the offices of devotion,

it

as

his

opinion, that no peedobaptist can, without great

impropriety, statedly attend the ministry of one

we may judge from

of our denomination.

If

what he has written on

this subject,

less

he appears

anxious to promote and extend the peculiar

tenets of the baptists, than to preserve inviolate

their sacred seclusion

and

solitude.

His sen-

timents on this subject will probably remind

the poetical reader of Gray's beautiful description

of the bird of night,

which
does to the

Of such

as,

moon complain

wandering near her secret bowers,

Molest her ancient, solitary reign.

may

must be
obvious, that by the policy he recommends, of
keeping the baptists and paedobaptists entirely

Whatever

intention

his

be,

it

separated from each other, even as hearers of

the word, he

is

party, building

strengthening the barriers of

up a middle wall of

partition,

and by cutting off the channels of communication,

and the means of conviction, resigning both

to

the entire and unmitigated operation of their

respective systems.

Is

it

possible to imagine

46
i

any thing more calculated

render the public mind

to stifle inquiry,

to

and

to

stationary,

perpetuate our divisions to the end of the world

From him who was

really solicitous to extend

the triumphs of truth,

we

should expect nothing

would be more abhorrent than such a system

he surely would leave nothing unattempted to
;

break down the rampart of prejudice, and by

making the nearest approaches

to his opponents, ^- "Ay

consistent with truth, avail himself of

all

the

advantages which a generous confidence seldom

to bestow, for insinuating his sentiments,

fails

and promoting

Of

the

his views.

tendency of mixed communion

to

promote a more candid inquiry into our principles,

it

it is

scarcely possible to doubt

would have the

effect of rapidly

baptist denomination as such,

whether

extending the

is

less

For were that practice universally

the

certain.

to prevail,

mixture of baptists and psedobaptists in

Christian societies would probably, ere long, be

such, that the appellation of baptist might be

found, not so properly applicable to churches as

to individuals, while

some more comprehensive

term might possibly be employed

nate the views of collective bodies.

then?
things

to discrimi-

But what

Are we contending for names, or for

If the effect of a more liberal system.

47
shall be found to increase the

who

number

of those

return to the primitive practice of baptism,

and thus follow the Lamb whithersoever he

goeth,

he must be possessed of a deplorable

imbecility and narrowness of mind,

lament the disappearance of

when

who

name,

will

espe-

remembered that whenever

become universal,
the name by which we are at present distincially

is

it

just views on

this subject shall

guished will

An

necessarily cease.

honest

solicitude for the restoration of a divine ordi-

nance

to its primitive simplicity

and purity,

not merely innocent, but meritorious

but

if

is

the

ultimate consequence of such an improvement

should be, to merge the appellation of a party in

which

that

derived from the divine Founder

is

of our religion,

it is

an event which none but a

bigot will regret.

It

were well, however,

if

the evil resulting

communion, were

from the practice of

strict

confined to

on other denominations.

If I

its

effect

am not much

mistaken,

influence on our own.

propriety,
tions

it

Were

would be easy

individuals have

range of

it

my own

exerts a pernicious
it

consistent with

to

adduce excep-

come within the narrow

whose tem-

observation,

perament has been so happy, that they have

completely surmounted the natural tendency of

48
combining the greatest candour

their principles,

towards paedobaptists, with a conscientious reof their

fusal

communion.

Such

instances,

however, must, in the nature of things, be rare.

Generally speaking, the adoption of a narrow

and contracted theory,

will issue in a

contracted mind.

It is too

a habit of treating

all

much

narrow and

to expect that

other Christians as aliens

from the fold of Christ, and unworthy of a participation of the privileges of his church, can

generally unaccompanied with an

be

asperity of

temper, a proneness to doubt the sincerity, to

censure the motives, and depreciate the virtues
of those
so

whom they are

much

rigour.

accustomed

to treat with

Conceiving themselves to be

a highly privileged class as the only legitimate

members of

church,

they are almost in-

evitably exposed to think

more highly of them-

his

selves than they ought to think

their separation, not

and founding

on that which distinguishes

the followers of Christ from the world, but on a

point in which Christians dissent from each other,

they are naturally tempted to attach superlative

importance

The

to the

grounds of difference.

history of the present controversy affords

a melancholy confirmation of these remarks

for the

few who have ventured

liberal

side of the question have, for the

to

appear on the

most

49
part,

been assailed by ungenerous insinuations,

and odious

personalities.

considered as baptists

is

Their claim

be

to

very reluctantly con-

ceded, and the part they have taken has been

imputed

to the love of popularity, or to

some

still

more unworthy motive. Some churches, in their

zeal for strict communion, have even lost sight
of their own principles, and substituted the
doctrine opposed in these pages as a term of

admission, instead of the ordinance of baptism.

Others have refused the privilege of occasional

communion to such as have been known to

down with paedobaptists, at the Lord's table.
Leaving, however, to those to

more

grateful, the

unwelcome

whom it may be

office

the infirmities of their brethren, let

subject

by one more remark.

sit

of exposing

me

close this

In addition to

the other reason* for retracing our steps,

may, with great propriety, alledge the

all

we

spirit of

the times, the genius of the age, distinguished,

as

it

union

is,

beyond

of

common

Christians

former example,
in

the

by the

promotion of a

cause, and their merging their minor

differences in the
ples,

all

cultivation of great

and the pursuiu of great objects.

princi-

Instead

of confining themselves, each to the defence of

his

own

citadel,

directions,

in

they are sallying forth

order to

make

in all

powerful and

'

50

combined attack on the kingdom of darkness.

The church of Christ, no longer the scene of in-

among the several denominations

testine warfare

into

which

it

is

cantoned and divided, presents

the image of a great empire, composed of distant,

but not hostile provinces, prepared to send forth

its

combatants, at the

command

of

its

invisible

Sovereign, to invade the dominions Satan, and

The weapons
made themselves felt

subdue the nations of the earth.

k

#/!
'

of

its

in

warfare have already

the East and in the West,

its

banner

unfurled,

is

without distinction of
the

chosen,

name

or sect,

Him whose

and who goes

conquer, rush to the

eager for

question, than.

And

is

it

''

vesture

it,

the called,

the

is

forth conquering

dipped

and

to

unmindful of every

field,

distinction but that of his friends

too

around

gathers

it

the faithful," who, at the heart-

thrilling voice of
in blood,

and wherever

combat

to

and

foes,

and

ask any other

Who is on the Lord's side? Who?

possible, after

mingling thus their

counsels, their efforts, their prayers, and stand-

by side, in the thickest of the conflict,

in coming up to the help of the Lord, to the help
of the Lord, against the mighty, for them to
turn their backs on each other, and refuse to
unite at that table which is covered with the
ing side

memorial of
victory

No.

his

love,

and the

As we hope, when

fruits

of his

the warfare

51
of

time

is

tabernacles,

accomplished,
in

which

it

and
is

mortal

these

performed,

shall

be dissolved, to celebrate a never-ending feast,

with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the

whole army of the

faithful,

of every age, from

every clime, and from every tongue,

let

us begin

by feasting together here,

to present a speci-

men

love,

of that

harmony and

which are

at

once, the element and the earnest of eternal

felicit5^

ri'M Fn,

PUIMFR, BRISTOL.

LETTERS
TO THE REV.

R.

HALL,

A. M.

CONTAININ'O

AN EXAMINATION OF HIS THEORY,

CHRISTIAN,
1.1

OrPOSITION TO

PARTY COMMUNION:
BY WILLIAM

GILES.

The power of Truth has extorted from some or other of our " opponents,"
the confession of the premises which infer our conclusion.

Dr. Clagett.

Uontion

G H T M A N

AND

PATERNOSTER ROW.
MDCCCXXVU.

C R A

^M P,

HARJETTE AND SAVILL, 107,

ST.

MARTIN's LANE.

PREFACE.

XHE
his

subject in debate between

opponents, must

good man,

reflecting,

importance.

whole

the

be

Mr.

If

bulk

Mr. Hall and

by every

considered

to be a matter

of vital

Hall's theory be correct,

of

the

Christian world has

retained an error, from generation to generation,

that seriously aiFects the genius

the

kingdom of

Christ

and most impartial

nor need any one apologise for

taking a part in that investigation.

that

Mr.

Hall's theory, in one of

features, stands

the

is

true

principal

opposed to the current opinion

strict

that

baptists

directed his principal force

he has evinced

It
its

both of baptists and psedobaptists

against

of

spirit

and, as such, his system

certainly claims the strictest

investigation,

and

more than

in

still,

Mr. H.

it

is

has

doing which,

usual

zeal.

Not

content with calling public attention to his system

n
in octavo volumes, he has recently, with a
to extend

its

condensed

circulation,

view
argu-

his

ments, and sent them forth at a price (in con-

nexion with

his

name)

that will certainly insure

the realization of his desire.

Having

examined every argument

closely

the pamphlet, I have ventured to give

opinion, that

Mr.

all his

my

Hall's system rests entirely

untenable ground,

of

as

it

in

on

and that the most plausible

arguments may, by a

dexterity,

little

be brought forward as a plea for scepticism, and

an excuse for almost every

error.

Such a

must certainly have escaped Mr. Hall's

It

appears to me, that

force of

now

if it

result

notice.

be admitted that the

evidence which the inspired volume

affords

is

so

much

less

than

the lives of the apostles, that

it

was during

what would then

have rendered the unbeliever and disobedient,

cri-

minal and contumacious, ought, for the want of

equal

now,

evidence

to be

considered as an

innocent mistake, or an involuntary and conscientious error

only that

all error

excuse, but that

truth

is,

it

all

must necessarily follow, not

has a

we have

claim

the

to

same

received as positive

to a certain degree, doubtful

and yet,

Ill

if

am

Mr.

not mistaken, such

the tendency of

is

Hall's principal argument,

on which

Mr.

system

his

that

argument

Whether

chiefly rests.

Hall's opponents have detected the sophistry

of this argument,
tigation

of this

know

my

may

but to the inves-

How

my

far

reader will judge

the

more

attention has

larly been directed.

correct,

not

particu-

remarks are
if

correct,

venture to affirm, that some more substan-

ground must be discovered on which

tial

Mr.

Hall's theory, or

There

weight.

is

it

must

fall

under

to rest
its

own

a force and splendour in the

composition of Mr. Hall's pamphlet, very calculated to ensnare the

mind and mislead the judg-

ment of incautious readers

but

it is

a splendour

that will, perhaps, bring to the recollection of

the thoughtful reader the lustre and glory, not

of the " bird of night,"^ but of that peerless bird,

He

the bird of day.

beauty of
it,

its

dazzling plumage, but as he touches

he will find

beautiful

will admire the inimitable

it

as soft

and imposing

and yielding as

and, surveying

it

it is

as a

whole, he will discover that, like that bird,

glaring deformity

is

in its feet

its

these he will

Se Mr. Hall's pamphlet, page 45.

perceive to be preposterously out of order, naked,

and unsightly.

It

becomes the enquirer

against

all

impressions

guard

after truth to

made on

his

mind

favour

in

of any religious sentiment, but those which result

from sound argument. " If the truth make us free,

we

shall be free indeed." I

the productions of

have always admired

Mr. H's pen, and

ever coveted his talent for description,

on

this occasion, that I

before

my

readers

my

with equal advantage.

all

it

might be able

have

if I

has been

to present

objections to his theory

above

It is truth I desire

things to be clearly elicited,

and should

this

be found on the side of free communion^ I shall

heartily rejoice, though every

argument

have

advanced be swept away.

Truth, and truth only

I wish to see triumphant.

But the reader should

consider that the advocates for strict

can never appear

ground with

in this controversy

their

opponents.

communion
on an equal

Such are the

prejudices to be found in a vast majority of professing Christians against

our sentiments on

this

almost sure to be associated

subject, that bigotry

is

with even the

pages of our publications, so

title

that with the exception of but few,

we

cannot

expect to be patiently heard

guarded, give

full force to

nor can we, however

our arguments without

a great risk of giving offence. Should the following Letters be read

by any

psedobaptists, the

Author hopes they

will give

him

sincere attachment

and love

to

credit for his

good men.

all

His principal object has been to prove in opposition to

Mr. H's theory, that there

is

an inseparable

connexion between the two Christian

and that
liever's

as

we

believe the

immersion

Sacred Trinity,
priority of

its

first

to consist in a be-

in water, in the

we

institutions,

name of

the

cannot but contend for the

observance.

We love all who love

our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, but the higher

claim which our Lord has on our love and obedience constrains us to
rule

make obedience to him,

by which we are

others.

And

if

to manifest our

the

love to

they will receive the operation

of our affection through this medium, they shall

find us not a whit behind those

ed to be our more

who are

liberal brethren.

will ever think, that

" Open rebuke

consider-

The wise
is

better

than secret love."

I
lic

have taken the liberty to present to the pub-

what

have written,

in the

form of Letters

VI

addressed to Mr. H.

choosing

this

My principal

reason for

form has been to avoid the frequent

repetition of the

expressions "

" Mr. H." which

in

Mr. Hall " and

any other form could not be

avoided without a disagreeable circumlocution.

with Mr. H. in assuring the

I sincerely unite

reader that "

all I

human names and

may

wish

is

that without regard to

authorities the matter in debate

be entirely determined by an unprejudiced

appeal to reason and scripture," and then,

result be

what

it

may, the end

let

the

have had in view

will be fully answered.

((

Yeritas, etiamsl jucunda non est, mihi tamen

grata

est.^^

Chatham, April, 1827.

CONTENTS.
LETTER
The

I.

reasons that induced the author carefully to exa-

mine Mr. Hall's Theory on Communion

LETTER
Mr. Hall's charge against the

pointed out

strict baptists

reprehended

'page

IL

strict baptists rebutted,

Mr. H.'s

proved to be without foundation.

paedobaptists

and

partiality to the

..-..-

and

his

LETTER

severity towards the

in.

Mr. H.'s argument from apostolic precedents carefully considered.

It

imphes two things,

that baptism may

cases be religiously dispensed with,

mistake

it

and pervert

it

in

some

and that persons

may

it

is

The

without blame.

baptism as presented in the Scriptures

the

nature of

light in

which

viewed both by baptists and paedobaptists, considered

no excuse for error can be derived from any obscurity

attached to scripture evidence;
natural inability;

moral defect.

all

no

excuse for error from

error proved to be sin, arising

Mr. H.'s plea

for the paedobaptists

from

on the

piety cannot extenuate,

attached
piety of

ground of their piety, considered;

but must increase the blame

to error

character will not prevent, but must tend to faciUtate the

spread of error.

Apostolic precedents of thought, as well

as precedents of action, against

Mr. H.'s theory.

Mr. H.'s

the want of conviction proved

the case proved be incorrect

exempting case examined;

to be
in

no excuse for error;

to

theory and wholly impracticable

LETTER

IV.

Mr. H.'s argument from the non-connexion between the

two institutions, examined

His conclusion from the difference


CONTENTS.

Vlll

of opinion between Fuller and Kinghorn without foundation;

baptism authorized by our Lord before the resurrec-

;the

tion

sons;

communicants proved

first

the

to be baptized per-

spiritual qualifications requisite for the Lord's

supper uniformly in

the Scriptures

precede

baptism;

baptism must precede and be connected with the legitimate

participation of the supper.

Baptism,

if

not obligatory on

the believer before his participation of the supper, not so

Profession must always precede participation.

afterwards.

Baptism, the institution in the Scriptures by which a profession

of Christianity

nected in

all

is

made;

that

is

the two

institutions naturally con-

page

essential to Christian institutions,

LETTER

31

V.

Mr. H.'s analogical argimient on the 14th of Romans, examined;

his

analogy defective

the persons

for

apostle pleaded wholly different to the persons for

pleads;

whom

whomM

the

r.

H.

admit of no
the matters about which they
cannot be admitted
diflTered

comparison with a positive institution ;

that baptists and pasdobaptists are to unite in fellowship, and

be scripturally prohibited from

all disputes

about baptism

41

LETTER VL
Mr.H.'s charge of schism on the strict baptists, considered;

Mr. H. aims
ment;
tists

to effect

the charge

the

ill-will

have their

munionists.

ment of

has brought on the

of their brethren

to the strict baptists

all

by alarm what he cannot do by argu-

serious;

it

distinct

Mr. H.

must attach

incoiTect;

strict

if it

bap-

attaches

to all sects of Christians;

terms of communion, even mixed comfaitlifuUy reproved for his

unkind

treat-

-51

his brethren

LETTER Vn.
Mr. H.'s argument founded on expediency, examined
foundto be incoiTect;

illustrated

by

the condition of three

churches, two of which have tried Mr. H.'s plan, and proved
its

inexpediency;

ship

fellow the other has maintained

three other evUs have generally
its strict

and been successful;

followed the liberal policy.

The

conclusion

5Q

LETTERS,

&c.

LETTER L
Dear

Sir,

THOUGH

in

have ventured to place myself

the ranks of your opponents, I hope I am sen-

sible

and

of the deference I ought to pay to the graces

gifts

which

with which

I believe

you

God

has

diligently

endowed you

and conscientiously

devote to the Redeemer's cause.

the appearance of
subject of

ing that

I anticipated

what you had written on the

Communion with

if I

and

great interest, wish-

was mistaken, your arguments might

first reading of your

correct me. I confess, that the

book produced a considerable impression on my

mind and shook, for a time, my full conviction
of the accuracy of the opinions I had so long
;

This continued until I read a paper

maintained.

in the Christian Repository, said to be written

by

you, on the possibility of the salvation of the

Jews, even though they rejected the New Testament. The novelty of the subject induced me
to

examine

it

with more than usual attention

in

doing which,

it

appeared to me, that your argu-

ments were as inconclusive as any ever ventured

in support of a theological sentiment:

thought

while

could discover that you had been led

undue influence of your

great pity and benevolence and, as I felt some
hesitation respecting your arguments in favour of

into error, through the

mixed communion,

was induced

to think that

the same exuberance of good-will and kind wishes

towards the paedobaptists might

your judgment on

have warped

this subject likewise.

fore, resolved closely to

examine

it.

I,

there-

The

result

of that examination will be found in the following

letters.

Believe me, dear Sir,

To

be, with great esteem,

Your's, affectionately.

LETTER
Dear

II.

Sir,

If the developement of truth has been

your main object

you

in this controversy,

your readers

tell

in

why

should

your preface, (without

one shadow of proof,) that "strict communion

only on authority;"'

rests

of a few of
regretted,

examine

its

that

this

e.

i.

on the opinions

leading advocates.

you

did

It is to

more

not

be

carefully

charge before you ventured to assert

Nothing could be

were kind, than

to return a similar compliment, and say, that the
more we see and hear, the more we are convinced
that all those converts to free communion, who
rest their opinion on apostolical precedents of
it.

easier, if

it

thought, really pin their faith, in this matter, to

another man's sleeve.

interest,

Is

it

not notorious, that

honour, and popularity, on the one side

and reproach and contempt on the other, combine to induce the strict baptists to change sides ?
If

human

authority could satisfy their consciences,

they would gladly turn over and shield them-

your name an authority that would

bring upon them the warmest congratulations
selves under

from

who

become proseyour ingenious theory. Can you seriously

all their

lytes to

brethren,

are

Vide Mr. H.'s Preface,

p. 4.

B 2

few

think, that the authority of a

however venerable and

excellent,

ciently operative to induce

men

with yourself, to sacrifice what

fallible

men,

would be

suffi-

of like passions
is

dear to every

man, and voluntarily expose themselves to the

combined reproach of friends and foes ? No, Sir,
this is a state of things from which human nature
will

always

recoil.

have fixed on a more

Surely, then, you might

liberal reason

than

human

authority, to account for the obstinacy of

your

mistaken brethren.
Theological controversy should always be con-

ducted agreeably with the Divine rule of "speaking the truth in love."

But we are sorry

to say,

we think you have not, in this controversy, strictly

adhered to this rule. You appear, at the commencement of your pamphlet,

to claim for us the

good-will and candour of the psedobaptists, by

saying, "

They both concur

in a

common

from which the practice deemed so

ciple,

sive, is the

necessary result.

prinoffen-

Considered as an

argumentum ad hominem, or an appeal to the

avowed principles of our opponents, this reasoning may be sufficient to shield us from the severity of reproach, to which we are often exposed,
nor ought we to be censured for acting upon a
system which is sanctioned by our accusers."
'

Who,

Sir,

could read such sentences as these,

Mr. H.'s Pamphlet,

p.

(>.

without expecting that you would at least shew

the same candour towards your brethren that

had claimed
find as

we

for

them?

But

is it

No

so ?

proceed, that the peedobaptists,

you consider equally

reprehensible, as

you

We

whom

regards

it

baptism as a term of communion, and besides

this to

be unscriptural in their views of baptism,

are the objects of your commiseration

the strict baptists are

made

whilst

to feel, (if feel they

can,) the weight of your severest censure.

After

stretching our candour to the utmost extent, the

only construction

we can

put on your design in

you wished to prevent

others from using the whip, that you might chastise us with scorpions.
Unkind allusions, and
pleading for us

is,

that

hard names, are never likely to convince

opponent

but they

by exposing him

may do him much

to the

an

injury,

contempt and reproach

of others.

Had

you,

Sir, in this controversy,

evinced the

same tenderness towards us that you have towards the peedobaptists, we should have admired your candour and impartiality
and have
;

concluded, that your sole object had been to

convince us of our error.

Nor

should

we have

been offended by any description you might have

given of that error, had you supported your

by sound argument. May we

not reasonably claim from you what you have
description of

it

so gratuitously granted to others,

viz. that

our

6
error

is

" involuntary

deference to the will of

and that we

Him

at

retain

it

in

whose word we

tremble ?"

In

my

next, I intend carefully to examine

your argument, founded on scripture precedents,

and hope I shall be enabled to do it with all the
meekness and sincerity which its importance and
the Christian character demand.

am, dear

Sir,

Your's, &c.

LETTER
Dear

III.

Sir^

If your reasoning on apostolic prece-

we

dents be correct,

are bound, as the disciples

of Christ, to embrace your theory, and freely

receive into our fellowship all

But

received.

your reasoning on this point

your whole superstructure must

if

prove fallacious,
fsiW.

We

whom the Lord hath

cannot but be pleased, notwithstanding

your severity towards

us,

with the candour you

your readers some

of the reasons on which we found our practice.
You say " we are compelled by virtue of them"
(i. e. our sentiments as baptists) " to look upon
have shewn,

in placing before

the great mass of our fellow-Christians as unbaptized.

On no

other ground can

we

principles, or justify our conduct.

alleged,

is,

under

highly

we may

baptized,

communion

esteem

we

brethren, yet, as

we must

Baptism,

it is

possible circumstances, an

all

indispensable term of

maintain our

many

and, however

of our paedobaptist

cannot but deem them un-

of necessity consider them as

approach to the Lord's table.

which
it is not surprizing the baptists
An opinion,
should have embraced, since it has long passed

disqualified for an

current in the Christian world, and been received

by nearly

all

denominations of Christians."

Mr. H's Pamphlet,

p. 4.

You

say, also, " Let

under

all

it

be admitted that baptism

is,

circumstances, a necessary condition of

church-fellowship, and

it

baptists to act otherwise."

is

impossible for the

" The

chief, I

might

say, the only argument for the restricted plan of

communion, is derived from the example of the

apostles, and the practice of the primitive church.
It is alleged, with some appearance of plausibility, that the first

duty enjoined on the primi-

tive converts to Christianity,

that

was, to be baptized;

no repeal of the law has taken place since

that the apostles uniformly baptized their converts

before they admitted them to the sacrament

that during the

first

ages, the church

members who had not submitted

knew

to that rite

and,

of no
;

and

that consequently, in declining a union with those

who, however estimable

in other respects,

obliged to consider as unbaptized,

we

we

are

are follow-

ing the highest precedents, and treading in the

hallowed steps of the inspired teachers of reli" The apostles, it is acknowledged,

gion." ^
admitted none to the Lord's supper but such as
" Their instrucwere previously baptized." ^
tions

It

were too plain

is

to be mistaken."

very natural to ask, after

this liberal state-

ment. Can any religious doctrine or ordinance

rest securely

the apostles

on any other authority than that of

or

is

it

Mr. H.'s Pamphlet,

3 Ibid. p. 8.

necessary to adduce any

p. 6.

" Ibid. p. 7.
4 jbid. p. 9.

other authority to give validity to any received

Only,

religious opinion?

produce clearly

Sir,

such authority for the admission of unbaptized

persons, and our controversy shall at once termi-

Two

nate.

evident from the

deductions are

above concessions

that

the scripture pre-

all

cedents of action are on our side, and that, in

opposing the

you

strict baptists,

posed to the sentiment of almost

world.

Certainly

among

are really op-

all

the Christian

these millions of

human

composed of minds of various orders, there

must be some that cannot be denominated weak

beings,

now

proceed to consider the argu-

ment you oppose

to the sentiments of this vast

brethren.

collection of

human

intelligences

you

these concessions,

call

upon us

for, after all

to receive all

pious unbaptized persons into fellowship with us

and

hallowed steps of the

inspired teachers of religion, in their " precedents
invite us to forsake the

of action," and follow you, in your intellectual

pursuit of them, in their " precedents of thought,"

which you

tell

of action."

us are as " authoritative as those

Your

sons appears to be
feriority

living

Secondly.

First.

The comparative

now from
what might be deduced whilst
of

depositaries

the

That the persons for

are conscientiously mistaken

luntary, and they retain

Master's will.
received

in-

of evidence to be deduced

the Scriptures, to
the

plea for these unbaptized per-

all

it

Thirdly.

whom

in

truth

existed.

whom you

their error

is

plead,

invo-

deference to their

That, as the apostles

they thought to be pious,

who

10

were baptized, we,

in order to follow

their precedents of thought, are

we

all

bound

them

to receive

think to be pious, though unbaptized

that unless

we

do,

in our treatment

we

make no

really

in

and,

difference

towards some of the most excel-

of the earth, and those that are the most

lent

vicious.

have

I think, Sir, I

now

before

me

the whole

would not willingly leave

any part of it untouched. Having, as you conceive, established these positions, you do not fail
to bring your mighty talents to bear, in a most
overwhelming manner, upon your opponents
of your argument.

manner, indeed, very likely to produce a

in a

strong impression upon

all

who do

not closely

examine the ground on which you stand. It is,

I think, one of the best wrought-up pieces of
sophistry I have ever examined.
It approaches
with a " lofty and imposing air ;" and I am fear-

some of your admirers will deem me

weak and presumptuous for attempting to disturb
it.
Be assured. Sir, that I advance towards it
with becoming respect.
ful

that

There are two things which, in your hypothesis, you seem to take for granted.
First. That the
institution of baptism is of a nature that, in some
cases,

it

Secondly.
it,

may

be

religiously

dispensed

That persons may mistake

without blame

nay, that

if

it,

an error,

with.

or pervert
it is

invo-

luntary and conscientious, and of a nature that

it

11

may
at

Him

be retained "in deference to the will of

The

whose word they tremble."

God

the testimony of

Matt.

question.

13

iii.

following

is

respecting the institution in

17 " Then

cometh

Jesus from Galilee to Jordan, unto John to be

But John forbad him, saying,

baptized of him.
I

have need to be baptized of thee, and comest

thou to

And

me?

him, Suffer

it

us to

all

him.

fulfil

And

Jesus answering, said unto

to be so

now

for thus

righteousness.

Jesus,

when

it

becometh

Then he

suffered

he was baptized, went

up straightway out of the water

and

lo

the

heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the

Spirit of

God

descending like a dove, and light-

And

ing upon him.

ing. This

is

my

lo

a voice from heaven, say-

beloved Son, in

Matt, xxviii. 18

pleased."

whom I am well-

20: "And

Jesus

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
Teaching them to observe all
the Holy Ghost.
things whatsoever I have commanded you and
lo
I am with you always, even unto the end of
:

Amen."

the world.

said unto them.

Go

Mark xvi.
ye

15, 16

"And he
He

believeth and

is

baptized shall be saved

that believeth not shall be

" Then

and

into all the world,

preach the gospel to every creature.

damned."

that

but he

Acts

ii.

38

Peter said unto them, Repent and be

baptized every one of you, in the

Christ, for

name of Jesus

the remission of sins, and

ye

shall


12
receive the gift of

tlie

Holy Ghost."

" Then they that gladly received

baptized

Ver. 41.

word were

his

and the same day there were added

unto them about three thousand souls." Acts

12.

"But when they believed

viii.

Philip preaching

kingdom of God and

they were baptized both

the things concerning the

the

name of Jesus

Christ,

men and women."

Verses 37 and 38.

" And

Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart,

thou mayest.

And

that Jesus Christ

he answered and said,

is

the

Son of God.

commanded the chariot to stand still

went down both into the water, both

I believe

And

he

and they
Philip and

the Eunuch, and he baptized him." Acts x. 47.

" Can any man forbid water that these should

not be baptized, which have received the Holy
Ghost as well as we?" Acts xvi. 14, 15, 40.
" Whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended
to the things which were spoken of Paul
and
when she was baptized and her household and
entered into the house of Lydia, and when they
had seen the brethren, they comforted them and
departed." Ver. 33 and 34. " And was baptized
and all his house and rejoiced believing in God
with all his house." Every sentence in this unerring testimony, attaches solemnity and sacredness
to the institution, and calls upon all who wish to
enjoy the answer of a good conscience seriously
and impartially to examine its claims.

The

baptists,

from these divine declarations,

consider baptism as an institution in which a pro-

13
fession of the religion of Christ

solemnly made,

is

the Trinity sacredly recognized, and the candidate

consecrated to
that

it is

God

thrice-holy

in that

name

designed to remind him of the inaugura-

work

tion of the Saviour into his

Mediator

to

emblemize

tion, the believer's

death unto

sin

as the great

and resurrec-

his burial

and

his life

unto

and also the glorious doctrine of the

holiness,

final resurrection

of his body

that

it is

an impor-

means of grace and that it is obligatory a sa

command on all that profess to be the disciples of
Christ.
This, Sir^is a view of the institution that
you will not, I think, scruple to acknowledge.

tant

The

psedobaptists differ widely in their opinions

Some

respecting

it.

salvation

and others that

conceive
it

is

it

to be essential to

a sign and seal of

God's covenant with believers and their offspring.

Mr. Burkitt, speaking of infants under the notion
of God's lambs, calls baptism God's ear mark,

which

sheep are distinguished from goats.

his

Mr. Henry

Baptism wrests the keys of the heart

out the hands of the strong

possession
it is;

by

may

man armed,

that the

be surrendered to him whose right

the water

of baptism

is

designed for our

cleansing from the spots and defilements of the

flesh.

Mr. G. Whitefield

(John

iii.

5,)

Does not

this verse,

urge the absolute necessity of water

baptism? yes, where

it

may

be had

will deal with persons unbaptized

Mr. John Wesley

but

we

how God

cannot

tell.

If infants are guilty of ori-

ginal sin in the ordinary

way they

cannot be saved,

14

washed away by baptism.'

unless this be

He

made on

"believed that the holy impressions

his

mind in baptism, were not wholly removed until

he was nine years of age. Dr. Williams Bap-

tism ratifies the promises, and authenticates divine

revelation

baptism

gives a legal

title

to read

the Scriptures, to

all

the contents of that sacred

volume, and to

the

means of conversion.

all

The

obligation to repentance, to holiness, and to obedi-

ence results from being baptized.^

We have now

before us part of the divine testimony concerning

baptism, and some of the different views which

various sects of Christians have of

from

tion that arises

Christians (no matter

this

The ques-

it.

ought any sect of

is,

who are

right or

who wrong

as to the inquiry,) to admit a practice that

entirely nullify an institution that

New

the
it

enjoined in

Testament, and as to matter of fact

Ought

entirely aside ?

ledgments, there

is

own acknow-

a high probability he

tacitly sanction in

its

set

the baptist to concede

baptism, when, according to your

and

is

must

stead,

is

right,

what he conceives

not merely a negation of what is right, but what

is as opposite to his views of the institution as
infant

communion

Can he thus

is

to the design of the supper ?

tolerate a practice

be in defiance to the law of him

by every sacred

consideration to honour

the paedobaptists (if they are, as

tious in their
1

which he views to
whom he is bound

views of the

you

pp. 61 and 62.

or should

say, conscien-

institution,

Vide Coke and More's Life of Wesley.

give up

See Westlake on Baptism,

15
the ordinance and sanction in their baptist mem*-

an indispensable parental
duty, to the neglect of which such solemn con-

bers, the omission of

sequences attach, and which no after conduct can

ever repair
in

its

an omission much more momentous

results than could attach to the neglect of

any parental duty

relating to the temporal interest

of their offspring?

You

will perhaps reply, that

the views of the different parties are not,

by

their

mixed fellowship compromised but we think the

contrary.
If I am bound to receive one unbaptized person, I must by the same rule receive all,
and it may then follow, that I may have under my
charge a whole church who are living in the
neglect of what I believe to be an indispensable
ordinance of Christ, and who are perseveringly
substituting in its place a mere human rite, while
my official situation must place me as a sort of
;

godfather or sponsor to the ceremony.

of mixed fellowship the difficulty

is

greatest on the side of the baptists

see

how

In a state

certainly the

but

cannot

psedobaptists can adopt the practice of

mixed communion, and act with that simplicity

and decorum that are becoming every thing
In such a state
relating to the church of Christ.
of things, the pastor will feel himself bound
strenuously to enforce on one part of his charge

what he
winks
to

at

calls
its

an indispensable duty, while he

omission in others, tacitly dispenses

them the boon of an indulgence, and by

this

kind of liberal connivance renders himself liable

to be despised

by both.

If,

Sir, these are cor-

16
rect deductions from the practice you recommend, surely your presenting a new case will not

be sufficient unless

be a strong and most satisfy-

it

ing case, to induce your

strict

brethren to venture

upon your "portentous" theory.

Your hypothesis

may

likewise supposes persons

mistake, or pervert the institution of baptism with-

out blame

that those that do so err conscienti-

ously, and do
If, Sir, this

it

in

deference to their master's will.

case indeed, and let

we

they might,

it

should act harshly and in an anti-

manner

christian

would be a strong
the consequences be what

could be proved,

if

we

the very reverse of this appears to

And

fact.

here. Sir, I repeat,

me

it is

to be the

a matter of

consequence in the enquiry where the error

little

with us or the paedobaptists.

rests, either

say there
this,

But

did not receive them.

is

a high probability that

by-the-bye,

is

we

You

are right

conceding to the paedobap-

some little possibility that we

may be wrong; and vice versa, some little possibility that they may be right.
But concede
what you will it cannot affect the fact, that error
rests at the door of one or the other, and that
tists

that there

the

erring party

Now,

blameable.
blameless,
things

is

is

to

must

either be blameless

or

to suppose the erring party

suppose

one of the following

either that the Scriptures

which record

the fact in question, are so obscure and ambiguous, that the will of Christ respecting the ordi-

nance

is

placed before us

in

a doubtful

light.


17

or that the erring party do not possess the phy-

powers of mind which are requisite to comprehend it.

You have indeed drawn a contrast between the degree of evidence that existed

sical

in the apostolic

for

which

You

age and that which

I fear infidels will

now

exists,

not fail to thank you.

call the apostles the living depositaries of the

truth,

hand to settle any

You appear to me, (undesign-

and say, they were

disputed point.

at

edly) to be the apologist of error in the following

paragraph.

" The conduct we have supposed would be less

criminal than to have shrunk from baptism in the
apostolic age, because the evidence by which our
views are supported, though sufficient for every
practical purpose,

is

which accompanied
not

Sir,

this,

Rome,

decidedly inferior to that

their first promulgation."

admitting

that such

is

to

Is

the pretensions of

the doubtful nature of scrip-

tural evidence, that nothing can be settled unless

we admit

the legitimacy of an infallible

human

That the apostles were under unerring inspiration to which none can now make
any claim, is certain, but that they had recourse

expositor

to this inspiration to settle disputed points in reli-

gion

we

is

not so certain.

In the ministry of Christ,

him proving what he asserted, from

the writings of Moses and the prophets, and
he plainly told the Jews, if " they believed not
Moses and the prophets, neither would they beWhen
lieve though one rose from the dead."
find

18
the dispute arose about circumcision,

it

does not

appear that the apostles exercised their

infallible

was settled by the

and
the brethren conjointly.
sufferance of them
When a dispute arose between Paul and Barna-

authority, but that the affair

no apostolic authority was used to settle the

Besides, there must have been many
debate.

bas,

churches that the apostles could very seldom,

if

to these they wrote the infallible epis-

ever

visit

tles,

and these were received by the churches

When

as decisive.

Paul wrote to Corinth re-

specting the Lord's supper, he laid before them

"that which he had received of the Lord;" but

we have

the same guide that the Corinthians had

to direct us

nor can

I see

any difference

as to

the force of evidence respecting either of the

institutions

that

the

primitive

Christians

beyond what we now enjoy; the

precisely

had

apostles acted

concerning both, agreeably with the

commission they had received, and

we have

in

plain language that commission faithfully recorded

and illustrated unequivocally by the manner in

which they fulfilled it. I have merely thrown in
these remarks to guard my readers against making
an improper use of your wide statement concerning the different degrees of evidence.
Sir, to the

found

it

argument before us

To

return,

though you have

convenient to assert, that the evidence

have from the Scriptures

is

we

not so strong as that

enjoyed by the primitive Christians, yet I am

sure you will, because you must admit, that it is
sufficiently clear to leave heretics without excuse;


IS

you proclaim
blameless, Infidels, Jews, Soeinians, and all the
But
perverters of the truth, found in the world.

you

for if

refuse

to grant this,

would be so appalling, that I feel persuaded

you would write and write again, and summon
forth all the energies of your mind rather than
inferences so alarming should be adduced from
any sentiment you had advanced. Then it follows,
no excuse for error can be derived from any want
this

This

of perspicuity in the divine testimony.

is

corroborated by the following authorities.

Peter Martyr says, "

It

is

necessary that

we

have a clear testimony from the Holy Scriptures

Owen tells us,

"All things concerning the worship of God in the
whole church or house, now under the gospel,
concerning sacraments."

Dr.

and completely ordered and

ordained by the Lord Jesus Christ, than they
were by Moses under the law." Dr. I. Chauncy
remarks, " Christ hath been more faithful than
are

no

less perfectly

'

Moses, and therefore hath not

left his

without sufficient rules to walk by."

observes, " Christ was

God

as

Moses

rituals as that

churches

Mr.

Polhill

as faithful in the house of

was as perfect for

of Moses was."
Mr. Payne says,
;

his provision

" Surely, so wise a lawgiver as our blessed Saviour

would not give a law to all Christians that was
not easy to be understood by them."'
as easy

to demonstrate

that

It is quite

no excuse can be

Vide Booth*! Animadversions on Dr. Williams,

p. 22fi.

c 2

20

drawn from

want of common and competent

the

understanding- in either party concerned in the

disputed institution.

A. Turrettinus informs us,

"Whatever of importance the scripture delivers
J.

concerning the sacraments,

few pages
stand
in

it."

and that so

may
little

be included in a
child

As a denomination, we

'

common

may under-

possess intellect

with the rest of our fellow-men, and

have had, and

order of

as a

still

have,

Our

intellect.

men

of the highest

psedobaptist friends are

not a whit behind, though you call them

brethren.

We

find

common

with them, good

of them learned

them

our intercourse

in all

sense

weak

men, and many

they have amongst them their

D. D's. and A. M's. as well as ourselves

and

believe learning to be equally respected on both

sides.

Then,

Sir,

can be found on

it is

this

most cogent, that no excuse

head, and that

for the cause of error elsewhere.

that our error

is

our crime, that

we must seek
The result is,
cannot be

it

involuntary, and that our not being convinced

can form no

fair

crime

lies

tion:

excuse for our want of convicat

the

Le
men be governed by

door somewhere.

Clerc justly observes, "if

and conceited of their prejudices,

the most evident things in the world are obscure
and there is no law so clear but a wrangler may
their passions

thousand

raise a

difficulties

about

"

When
'

Dr. Sher-

it."

lock unites in a similar testimony,

by

saying,

a lawgiver has declared his will and

Vide Booth's Animadversions on Dr. Williams,

p. 227.

21
pleasure by a law,

it is

not

fit

that subjects should

be allowed to guess at his mind, and dispute

away

an express law by some surmises and consequences,

how

probable soever they

this rate

may

a law signifies nothing

appear;

if

we may

at the will of our lawgiver without,

an express

law." "And

if this

for at

guess

and against

be allowed, I

know no law of God so plain and express, but a

witty man may find ways to escape the obligation
of it."' Indeed, Sir, I am inclined to think, that
all the errors found even amongst good men may
be traced to some moral defect, and that if we
were morally
likewise

faculty, but

our creed would be so

perfect,

the defect

some

is

ple warps the judgment.

have suffered

not in the perceptive

latent defective

sloth,

moral princi-

It is possible

we may

worldly advantage, the fear

of reproach, the love of applause, or other moral

evils to

prevent impartial enquiry, or to give a

bias to

our minds while

truth

and these

evils

may

we

are

seeking after

prevail unperceived to

a certain extent, through the neglect of close

self-

examination, even where a profession of religion

may be sincere, and its possession real. Let God be

true though every man be found a liar. He has assured us, that a " gift blindeth the eyes ;" that those

cannot believe that receive honour one of another

and on the other hand he has informed us, that" they

do the will of God shall know the doctrine;"

and " that the meek he will guide in the way."

that

Vide Booth's Animadversions on Dr. Williams, pp. 222 and 223.

n
We

now,

are

Sir,

brought to the following

conclusion

attributed

either to natural or

which

is

that the error in question must be

We have,

of the dilemma.

we

moral

inability,

indeed placing us between the two horns

I think,

cannot -take the former, and

if

proved that

we

take the

which we must do, then the whole of your

beautifully wrought arguments must, I fear,
vanish, and like the " baseless fabric of a vision
leave not a wreck behind."
Innocent conscientious involuntary error is a chimera that can have
no existence, but in your benevolent and fertile
mind for we are arrived at a clear conclusion, that
either the baptists or the psedobaptists err, and by
We
erring are blameable in the sight of God.
assume that we have truth on our side while you
latter,

will admit this,

for

whom you

you

reiterate, that the persons

plead are pious, and some of them

illustrious for piety.

shall not

still

cannot

Let

it

be so

their piety I

Our next enquiry

question.

must necessarily be, will their piety extenuate

their fault, or impede the propagation of error ?
Here, likewise, we shall find the reverse. Unerring truth tells us, where much is given much is
required, and reason heartily unites in the senti-

ment.

The

whom
What could

those

may

great Lawgiver

well say of

all

he has so distinguishingly endowed.

I

do more

for

my

vineyard than I

you see, Sir, cannot

therefore be admitted for a moment, nor will the
possession of piety impede the progress of error
have done?

in

others.

The

proposition

Let error be detached from piety

23

appearance or reality, and

either in

be scouted from the world.

will soon

it

For even truth when

held up to view by unclean hands loses

its

force,

and of

native attractions.

its

tion for piety, instead of

much

of

reputa-

impeding the progress of

error in those that maintain

and gives

it, is

really the cause

and energy to
How frequently do we hear it
its extension.
advanced as an argument in favour of almost all
the errors that have disfigured Christianity, and

of

its

stability,

facility

that have proved such barriers to

propagation,

its

that these errors have been believed

That

and good.
their

results,

no reason

all

by the wise

errors are not alike fatal in

must be admitted,

but I can see

to conclude, that the total perversion

two expressive and instructive

institutions, and that especially which is to be
attended to but once, should be ranked amongst

of one

out of

those errors that are of minor consequence.

could never be so considered by him

solemnly enjoined the institution, and

connected
salvation.

you be

it

with that faith which

If then the reasoning

conclusive,

you

is

It

who so
who has

essential to

now

laid before

really require us not only

to sanction the perversion of a positive

command

of our Sovereign Lord and Master, but urge as

a reason

must

why we

should do

it,

that

which you

admit augments the blame attached to er-

and which perpetuates its continuance, and

What then must
gives energy to its extension.
become of your argument drawn from precedents
of thought ? Would the apostles, though they
ror,

24

might think as favourably of erring brethren as

you do, be induced to receive them by such an
argument, and thereby become real accessaries to
both these evils, and thus confound the "broadest

and wrong," of truth and error?

If, Sir, this be the state of the case, and this is the
state of the case for any thing you have yet proved
principles of right

to the contrary, the apostles

of their erring brethren as

we

must have thought

think of them, and

would have acted towards them

as

we now

do.

Hence, precedents of thought, as well as precedents of action, both unite against the theory

you

and it turns
out, that the fellowship you recommend would be
"party," rather than "Christian communion"
a party united to wink at each others' blameable
have attempted

in vain to establish

omission of the positive

command

of that Saviour

under whose banner they are professedly united

and who pretend for

their

excuse that they are

following the dictates of that

on them, and which

cultivate.

Think,

he

Sir,

spirit

he breathes

commands them

and think again,

if

to

that

which demonstrates blame and forcibly accelerates

the spread of error, can be a reason, a religious

reason

why we

sanction

should give to

we have

You seem

to

it

in

it

the most solemn

our power to give.

have conceived that your hypo-

was rather vulnerable on the side on which I

have, I think, made a breach, and you have raised
I
as strong a buttress as you could to support it

thesis

shall

now endeavour

to try

its

strength.

You

38
say,

"for the clearer

us suppose a case

illustration of this point let

a person proposes himself as a

The

candidate for admission to a baptist church.

minister enquires into his views of the ordinance

of baptism, and respectfully asks, whether he

is

convinced of the divine authority of the

which was administered

He

confesses he

is

not,

rite

him in his infancy.

that on mature deliberation
to

and enquiry he considers it as a human invention.

On his thus avowing his conviction, he is urged to
confess Christ before men, by a prompt compliance with what he

is

satisfied

revealed will; he hesitates

that

it is

external

he

is

a part of his

refuses, alleging

not essential to salvation, that

rite,

have died

in

it is

a mere

and that some of the holiest of men

Here is a parallel
the neglect of it.

case to that of a person

who

should have declined

the ordinance of baptism in primitive times

in entire consistence with the principle

are maintaining,

we have no

and

which we

hesitation in affirm-

ing that the individual in question

is

disqualified

communion."' Such a person you

declare we are bound to reject, and in so doing

for Christian

we

shall

get rid of

all

our responsibility with

regard to the observance of the institution which

Christ has enjoined, for
the

apostles

would have

we

should then act as

acted.

conceding freely, and so much as

prove ruinous to

your

This,

Sir,

is

will, I think,

argument.

It

sounds

strangely to us to be directed to ask a person

See Mr. H.' Pamphlet, pp. 12 and 13.

26
whether he

convinced of the divine authority

is

of an institution, which
authority to support

supposed,

if

it.

we

believe has no such

In the case you have

the person had not been convinced of

the divine authority of believers' baptism, you

would receive him, though unbaptized, making
his conviction the ground of his rejection from
the supper, and his non-conviction the ground of
his admission.
From what part of the theology of
the New Testament will you find that the want of

conviction

is

a satisfactory excuse for the neglect

and yet in this case

you would freely admit it; but ought you to
admit it in one case, and not in every case? Will
of a clearly revealed duty

not a Socinian, or an Arian

tell

you, that

if

you

him of the proper deity of Christ

it ?
But as he is not convinced,
upon the principle you have laid down, you are
bound to receive him and does not such admission
will convince

he will believe

proclaim blameless

world

Besides,

all

may

the

errors found in the

not this anti-baptist, or the

person you would reject, very fairly ask you,

why you

will not

admit that he

may

as conscien-

tiously enjoy his views of the institution as those

who you

grant pervert

the subject, and nothing that

has

His

you represent

has examined

you have advanced

convinced him that the

important as
feels

He

it ?

it

institution

to

be.

is

so

Yet he

persuaded that the Lord has received him.

is

another of those

many new

cases

which

you say may arise, and which must be provided

for.
That as the apostles, the repositories of

n
truth, are not present to tell

him

that

now

it is

of

any importance, he conscientiously believes it is

not, and therefore you ought to think him sincere,
and one that the Lord has received, for he has
been, and would still be so accredited in any
Should you in reply
psedobaptist congregation.
say, that his omission proves that he

is

whom

one

Lord has not received, may he not ask you

from what part of the Scriptures you have authority to come to such a conclusion, or by what
you are authorized to receive one that perverts

the

an ordinance but

to reject another

entiously omits it?

You may

enough to meet such a

have not.

who

consci-

have ingenuity

case, but

I confess I

But what nullifies entirely your honest exempting clause is, its impracticability. Where
is

the poedobaptist congregation to be found, that

has not in
baptists?

some of those contumacious antiNothing can be more common than

it

to hear persons in full fellowship

baptists say, that

they think

and reason on our

essential to salvation,

men have
mitting to

side

with paedo-

we have

scripture

but as baptism

not

is

and so many great and good

died and gone to heaven, without subit,

consequence.

they decline

And

it,

as a matter of

really. Sir,

narrow

as

no
you

may think our sentiments to be, I should hesitate

much to conclude, that the Lord had not received
them.

Dr.

Cox has given

it

as his opinion, that

28

many among

there are

the paedobaptists that are

convinced of baptism, but have not

to act

their conviction ;"

on

''

piety

and you,

enough

Sir, tacitly

you tell us that

there are many among them that would submit to
the institution if they were convinced it was
binding on them, you certainly imply that there
and
are some amongst them who would not
who. Sir, will attempt to contradict such high
confirm his opinion

for while

authorities?

an

It

alluded to
piety

is

and

has received

whom

be kept in

church

then, admitted, that piety of

is

by

possessed

presume you

only possessed by those

would, after
some

is,

order

inferior

:"

so

all,

persons

the

will allow, that

whom

the

Lord

your exempting clause

that

keep from Christian communion

Lord has

received, and they must

"
seclusion from the visible
a state of
then. Sir, forth comes this " portentous

the

separation of the internal from the outward and

and we must
piety as we would

visible privileges of Christianity,"^

treat these persons of inferior

the greatest offenders

that

is

to say,

as they

prove by their negligence that they are weak in

the faith, we must not receive them, though you
tell

us in another part of your book, from apos-

we

tolic authority,

are

bound

to receive

them.

me

this is

may be mistaken, but it appears

what men of common sense would
I

diction.

But another insuperable

Mr. H's. pamphlet,

p. 16.

to
call

a contra-

difficulty aris-

29
ing from your exempting clause

quitted

their

own

*'

that

is,

sombrous " fold

to

attachment to their conscientious,

their

brethren, between the

really tremble for

hawk and

them

you

who have

place our liberal baptist brethren,

shew
erring

the buzzard.

they had hoped that

your doctrine of precedents of thought had fully

demonstrated their right to commune with any

whose faith was orthodox

but now they are, by your exempting
clause, thrown back again amongst their narrowminded brethren
for it is very probable that

paedobaptist congregation
;

there

is

not a paedobaptist congregation

found, but what has in

cious anti-baptists,

it

some of those contuma-

whom

they cordially esteem,

as a sort of connecting link

and

to be

their baptist brethren,

between themselves

men very convenient

any qualms of conscience that may

minds of some of their weak, but
orthodox brethren, on the subject of infant baptism and who, that believes them conscientious,

to silence

arise in the

will not

us

if

approve of their policy

we were

But, alas for

really convinced,

from your

doctrine of apostolic precedents, of the propriety

of what

is

called Christian, in opposition to Party

communion, we cannot act upon it; for your

exempting clause renders it wholly impracticable,
unless we were to do what I think you would
not countenance, viz. receive into our churches
paedobaptists, but, at the

from amongst us

to

same time, prohibit any

go over

to them.

presume

30

you would give as well as take. I have patiently

examined your argument in all its bearings, and
indulge the hope that you will grant, that what
I have written affords at least an argumentum ad
hominem, that should shield us from the severity
of your reproach.
You and my readers will
judge whether it does or does not, a priori, lay
the whole of your fine superstructure prostrate.
I

am,

Dear

Sir,

With

great esteem,

Your's, &c.

ai

LETTER
Dear

IV.

Sir,

It

possible that

is

your

trine of scripture precedents

when your

so confident as

discovered
delighted

it.

many

faith in the

may

not be quite

ingenious mind

discovery that has so

it

first

much

of our liberal, but, before

hesitating brethren, that

doc-

this,

has been almost uni-

versally a matter of triumph

among them.

The

object of this letter will be, to compare notes with

you on the
between

scriptural

the

two

connexion that

ordinances.

subsists

But, before

must task your patience while

I make a few remarks on the random shot you
have discharged against us. You say, " And as

argue the point,

it is

demonstrable that John's baptism was a sepa-

rate institution

from that which was enacted

our Lord's resurrection, the

after

Lord's supper

evidently anterior to baptism, and

is

the original

communicants consisted entirely of such as had

not received the ordinance." If, Sir, you had
really demonstrated what you have so confidently

you would have saved me some trouble

but, so far as I can perceive, the whole of your
demonstration rests on a solitary and disputed
text.
Let us suppose that you are correct, that
John's baptism was a kind of preparatory institution this will not prove that the original communicants were unbaptized, for the following
asserted,

sa

from the unerring oracles of truth

John iii. 22
" After these
things came Jesus and his disciples into the land
of Judea, and there he tarried with them and
testimonies

assert the contrary.

John iv. 1, 2: "Jesus made and

baptized more disciples than John though Jesus
baptized."

Now,

himself baptized not, but his disciples."

Sir,

to suppose that the disciples baptized others,

and yet did not submit to the institution themselves, is to suppose them to have been contumacious, and then we must rank them among those
hardened

anti-baptists

who, you

tell

ought

us,

what
you have asserted concerning these original communicants is a mistake, or that your exempting
and then we are left
clause must be given up
without any test, by which we can distinguish
between the contumacious and the conscientious.
Hence, what you conceive demonstrably serves
your cause in one point, demonstrably destroys it
forming, to use one of your elegant
in another
"
a sort of mental antipodes, which you
figures,
will reach with equal certainty, whether you
advance by the east or by the west," and the point
at which we shall arrive is the exact mid-way
between Scylla and Charybdis, So much for the
not to be received.

It follows,

either that

Eucharist being anterior to baptism.

tion will,

I think,

Cool

reflec-

convince us, that the solemn

commission enjoined on the apostles was the for-

mal establishment of an

ordinance

that

had

already been in use, inculcating the enlargement

of

its

administration, and the express appointment

33
of the name of the mysterious Trinity.
the resurrection of Christ,

been confined to

its

Before

administration had

Jewish proselytes

but

now

they were to teach all nations, and baptize them.

The same reason that would prove baptism administered after the resurrection to be different in
its

nature to that which was practised before the

resurrection, will equally prove that the supper

which was administered before the resurrection

was different in its nature to its use after the
resurrection.
validity,

If

we must

we

set aside the

also the latter

former as to

and then,

if

its

we

take as our data what transpired after our Lord's

resurrection,

we

are sure that baptism preceded

the supper.

Your

treatment of the venerable Fuller, and

the excellent and learned

I

Mr. Kinghorn,

is

what

might have expected from an inferior mind,

but not what I should have anticipated from you.

You say, " The late excellent Mr. Fuller

laboured hard to prove an instituted connexion

between the two ordinances.

On

this point

our opponents are at variance with each other

Mr. Kinghorn roundly asserts, that baptism has

no more connexion with the Lord's supper, than
with every other part of Christianity.

Thus,

what Mr. Fuller attempts to demonstrate as the

main pillar of his cause, Mr. Kinghorn abandons
without a scruple."
But are your inferences
from their different statements fair ? From your

own

quotations from their writings, I should cer-

34

were agreed

tainly conclude they

as to the fact,

was an inseparable connexion between

the two
Mr. Fuller asserts it definitely Mr King-horn indefinitely, by maintaining
that it has a connexion with the whole of Chris-

that there

institutions.

tianity.

And

will not

common

sense assure us,

that if a thing be connected with a whole,

it

must

be connected with every part of that whole?

You know.
authorities

Sir,

that

you and some of your

have supported the doctrine of free

communion on different grounds but though

you have abandoned, without a scruple, what
they scrupulously maintained, it would not be
fair to say you were at variance as to the fact
itself
and yet it would be quite easy, from this
apparent difference between you and them, to
;

reply in your

own

fortunate position

who
I,

proceed

is

in the

words, and say, "

What a
to which men may arrive

that

most opposite directions."

must next express

my

surprise

that

you

should attempt to question the scriptural con-

nexion between the two ordinances, when your

own

concessions are sufficient to answer every

Have you not allowed

question on that subject.

that the apostles

would admit no unbaptized per-

son to their communion

and from this very fact

determine yourself not to admit an anti-baptist ?
Do you not, by this determination, connect the
ordinances?
depositaries

has

not

Would

the

of the truth,

connected,

or

apostles,

the

living

connect what Christ

could

these infallible

35
depositaries be mistaken,
tious error?

ain

and
a

at

fall

into conscien-

after this

loss,

broad

acknowledgment of yours, what excuse to make

for tasking your patience and that of my readers,
while

you

proceed farther with the enquiry

call

upon

us for

some

but as

positive proof that

a connexion between the two rites, I must

endeavour to answer it. You say, " It remains

there

to be

is

considered whether there

is

diny peculiar

connexion between the two ordinances of baptism

and the Lord's supper,

things, or

either in the nature of

by Divine appointment,

so as to render

improper to administer the one without the

other.
That there is no natiy'al connexion is
it

obvious.

and for

They were

instituted at different times

Baptism

different purposes.

is

mode

professing our faith in the blessed Trinity

of

the

is a commemoration of the dying

Redeemer the former is the act of

Lord's supper
love of the

an individual, the latter of a society." You say,

moreover, " The words which contain our warrant for

celebration of the supper,

tlie

allusion to baptism.'"

they,

when

partook of

it is

it,

evident that

and on

convey no

how should
persons who

Certainly not:

whom

all

it

the

was

first

enjoined,

had been previously baptised ? We might fairly

dismiss all controversy on this point, and reply to
your demand for some positive proof, in the language of Mr. Ivimey, by saying, that the " onus
Prove the contrary,
prohandi'*'* was with you.

Mr. H.'s pamphlet,

p. 21.

D 2

36
'*

and the controversy

it

appears to us, that there

is

at

an end."
is

connexion between the two

we

else are

to

However,

a clearly revealed
institutions.

understand by the

What
com-

apostle's

parison of the typical circumstances of the ancient,

and the practice of the Christian church, which

he describes with so much beauty, in connexion
with his apostolic advice to the Corinthians concerning the celebration of the supper.
ch.

" Moreover,

brethren, I

Cor.

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 into Moses in the
cloud, and in the sea.
And did all drink the
same spiritual drink. For they drank of that
spiritual

was

rock that followed them, and that rock

Christ."

this allusion,

and

If the apostle

means any thing by

he must mean that

sets forth the

it

emblemizes

connexion that was known to

between the two Christian institutions, to

both of which the Corinthians had attended.
Again, Sir, you admit that faith and repentance
exist

are indispensable pre-requisites for a participation

of the Lord's supper.

it

Have

But

how

the Scriptures any

can you prove

where connected

these

qualifications with receiving the supper ?

They

are no

where found

in

connexion with the

Eucharist, but solely with baptism.

Where have

the divine oracles said, " Repent," and receive

" Believe," and communicate ?

any enquirer respecting the supper, " If

the Eucharist ?
or, to

thou believest with

all

thine heart, thou

may est?"

37
I

need not

you where you

tell

will

find these

requisitions connected with baptism.

baptism stands
to be

then,

If,

between what you acknowledge

in

connected with the supper,

that as the centre of a line

is

it

must follow,

connected with the

extremities of that line, so baptism must be con-

down

nected, according to the order laid

in the

Scriptures, with spiritual pre-requisites and the

supper

for

is

it

extremes of a

not imaginable

line

how

the

two

can be united, and yet one of

these have no connexion with

In the

centre.

its

centre infallible truth has placed baptism

so that

easier to prove from the Scriptures that faith

it is

and repentance have no connexion with the

le-

gitimate reception of the supper, than to prove

has none with

that baptism

it

because faith

and repentance, in the order laid

down

in the

more remote from the supper

than baptism. In this order our great Lawgiver
has placed baptism
and you must, by a " porScriptures, stand

tentous " leap,

jump over it, or else wade through

we know who has said, " What
joined together, let no man put asun-

But, Sir,

it.

God

hath

der ;" and as

it

is

evident that faith and repent-

ance are indispensable on

all

you
you can

the candidates

receive to the supper, then, see whether

with impunity leave out the connecting link, and

thus separate

what

Infinite

Wisdom

has united.

Apart from baptism, the enforcing the necessity

of either of those graces which we conceive essential

to a

due participation of the Eucharist,

is

but

38
mere assumption,
warrant
I

is

that for

which we have no

in the divine law.

would

farther ask,

is

there not a connexion

between a profession of Christianity, and a participation of its privileges? You tell us "baptism is
a

mode

of professing our faith in the Blessed

Trinity," or

a profession of Christianity

is

and

presume though you have used the indefinite article in this sentence, you would acknowledge there
is

no other scriptural mode of making such a proThen, if baptism be the only mode of

fession.

such a profession, and a profession be inseparably

connected with a participation of Christian privileges, baptism

You
the

say there

two

and the supper must be connected.

is no natural connexion between

institutions:

it

is

true,

they so far

differ,

that the former consists in a person's being baptized, or

immersed

in

water in the name of the

Sacred Trinity, and the latter in the reception of

bread and wine in the name of the Lord
agree in
tion

all

that

is

but they

essential to a Christian institu-

they are enjoined by the same authority,

they are binding on the same person, they unite

in

emblemizing the same Saviour, they are alike

means of grace, and submission

to both are alike

acts of evangelical obedience.

So

that they are

as nearly alike as any two different things can be.

What

should

we

think of a person

its

as-

was no connexion between a room

entrance and in order to prove this, he

sert that there

and

who should

3^

were gravely to say, that the entrance when the

door is open is mere space but that a room is enclosed with walls, ceiled and papered, and consequently that they do not in nature agree we
;

should naturally reply that they were so connected

that the one

think

is

Such,

essential to the other.

have proved,

is

the connexion between

The former

baptism and Christian communion.

is

Sir, I

the porch or entrance to the latter.

History

informs us that in the primitive places of worship

baptistries

were made

the porches of their

in

churches, or meeting houses, to teach,

all

who

entered, that baptism

fellowship with the church

was

presume,

to precede their

or in other words,

was the prescribed entrance to the

you must admit this connexion,
or all your reasoning upon your exempting clause
must pass for nothing your contumacious friend
will turn round upon you and say " As you, Sir,
contend that there is no connexion either by di-

that the former

latter.

Besides,

vine appointment, or in nature, between the ordi-

nances, I wish at once to

as for baptism I think

commune

it

with you, and

better to wait until a

What reply could

more convenient season."
you make ? Surely you must either receive him or
give up the point for which you so strenuously
contend and then, according to your own acknow;

ledgement, the " controversy

shall

have the unspeakable

your tiame, (which

ties

on which we

us, that

on

is

at

an end and we

satisfaction of joining

will be a host) to the authori-

rest

this part

our

faith.

It is

fortunate for

of the controversy (though

40

we

are a diminutive sect,") millions will join in

The bulk

the hue-and-cry against you.

pious,

and

of the

illustriously pious psedobaptists fall at

once into our ranks, and will by no means concede

the non-connection between the

nor do we

two

institutions,

your reasoning has made the

upon them. You know the old
adage, vox populi, vox dei ; though this be not always a correct maxim, we must think that in this
find that

least impression

instance

we

are quite safe in believing

prove the contrary.

Again,

it,

baptism

if

until
is

you

not to

precede a believer's participation of the supper,

will

you be

of his
it ?

life

so kind as to inform us at

he

is

or, rather,

what part

under any obligation to attend to

must

it

not follow that he

is

freed

from any obligation whatever? The result of

which will be the following strange contradiction
that our Lord has a right to command, and that
those very persons on whom the command is binding have a right to disobey

For the reasons

it.

have given, there appears to

me

to be as clear a

connection between the two ordinances, as there

is

between

spiritual qualifications

and the

legiti-

mate participation of the Eucharist; and, consequently, that to separate them is an act I dare not
perform, unless reasons more weighty than any

you have advanced can be adduced.

wish to know and do the
believe we both desire to
I

will of

Him

I trust, I

to

whom

submit.

am, dear

Sir,

With

great esteem,

Your's, Slc.

41

LETTER
Dear

Sir,

You

appear to have

when you had

cut your

and connexions, &c.

my

V.

way

you

felt

no small

through precedents

say, " having cleared

my

way, the remaining part of

task

This congratulation of yours reminds

pleasing intelligence I received

years ago,

Leone.

when

On

relief,

was about

to

easy."

is

me

of some

more than thirty

embark for Sierra

enquiry, a gentleman told me, that the

colony had cleared

settlers at that

many

miles of

the country, and that agriculture was rapidly on

the advance.

But

my arrival, to my
what my friend had

found on

great disappointment, that

ground

called cleared land, consisted chiefly of

on which the large

w^hilst the

many places,
trated.

Now

like

it.

ground again.
hearted

had been

felled,

a dense jungle not easily to be peneit

appears to

" cleared" ground

much

trees only

coppice or under-wood, presented in

Alas
I

me

that

what you

in this controversy,
!

you

very

go over the
examine your kind

will have to

now proceed to

comment on

is

call

the 14th chapter of

Romans

your reasoning on that chapter is what logicians call

analogical, which is allowed, I believe, to afford the
smallest degree of evidence that can be

adduced

from anykind of argumentation, and can only afford

conviction where the analogy

is

unequivocably

clear.

'
'

Him that is weak in the faith

receive ye, but

not to doubtful disputation;" and again, "

we

that

are strong, ought to bear the infirmities of the weak,

and not to please ourselves."

Now, though you

may

strict baptists cre-

feel

dit for

it

difficult to

give the

any thing kind, or courteous, yet we think

we may give
with the

ourselves credit for acting agreeably

spirit

are disposed

receive

to

churches those

We

and temper here enjoined.

into

our

houses

and

whom the Lord has received, how-

ever weak, and hope ever to do so, though

agree with a sentiment,

we

have heard that you

once expressed, " that weakness is next to wickedness," and sometimes we have found it almost
Indeed it has required no
as difficult to manage.
small degree of forbearance and self-denial.
far

we

are agree as to the sentiment, but

So

we must

from you in its application, for the folBecause the persons for whom
lowing reasons
the apostle pleaded, bear no kind of resemblance
They were
to the persons for whom you plead.

still

differ

weak in their faith, and under the

But
weak scrupulous consciences.

persons really
influence of

the paedobaptists are not so, at least as a body.

They must be

strong in the faith, for you

tell

us

"many of them are pious, and illustrious for piety,"

and so profound are many of their leaders in theoknowledge, that some of the best books
which have tended to bless and illuminate the
church have been the products of their large and
logical

pious minds.

As

for the people, they are as well

versed in theological knowledge as ourselves, and

43
as strong in the faith as

any of

us; so that

you

must have made a great mistake concerning them,

and I have no
or you have really libelled them
;

doubt, though they are silent on

they secretly feel themselves

am

the subject,

much degraded.

you were to tell

them that their weakness in knowledge and faith
was the ground on which you received them,
they would from such an assertion, form no very
high opinion either of the strength of your unIt
derstanding, or the humility of your mind.
would in their views be a more intolerable term
of communion than baptism itself. And if you
I

inclined to think, that if

avow such
Bristol,

a sentiment to the pious paedobaptists

at

second

table^

There

is

argument

communicants

I think the

would not

at

your

increase.

another disagreement fatal to your

and that is, the vast difference in the

matter about which the controversy at Rome and
;

the present controversy

indeed,

laboured

things agree

is

concerned.

You

have,

hard to make these differing

you have shortened one leg and

lengthened the other

baptism

is

called a rite,

at Rome to meet it is
a rite, and they are both called non-essenStill, Sir, one leg is much
tials and ceremonies.
longer and larger than the other, and there is as
much disparity between them as there is between

and the bone of contention

called

understand that the baptists and paedobaptists

times at Broadmead.

commune

at different

44

That at Rome
was what every one ought, from brotherly love,

a grain of sand and a millstone.

to look over

the other

of such a nature, that

is

love to Christ, and love to our brethren, constrain

us to insist on

it.

Baptism

is

a clearly revealed,

and instructive command, never to

be repealed while the world endures but that at
unalterable,

a mere superstitious observance. You

"
abrogated ceremony ;" but why, I
an

Rome was
call

it

know

not

for there

can discover, that

not the least proof, that I

is

ever had been

it

The weak brother whom

is

one

who

but herbs

by any
food.

thought

it

enjoined.

the apostle speaks of,

unlawful to eat any thing

but I have no recollection that

God

injunction prohibited the use of other

This

weak

above another, but

brother

esteemed one day

does not appear that this

it

esteem of one day above another was founded on

any abrogated command.

superstitious

who

now amongst

persons

act under the

There are weak and

Christians,

same weakness of judgment

they will eat nothing but vegetables, and they

observe certain days

but

it

is

not understood,

either in the one case or the other, that they are

chargeable with the practice of retaining abro-

gated ceremonies, nor have

we any ground

to

suppose that the apostle would have tolerated the

observance of abrogated ceremonies.

He

with-

stood Peter on that ground, because he was to be

blamed, and he so positively opposed

it

in the

church at Galatia, that he assured them, that if

they were " circumcised, Christ should profit

4d

And

them nothing."

he calls them foolish and

bewitched nor is there any thing that the apostle

more strenuously guarded the churches against,
;

than the mixing of abrogated ceremonies with

the injunctions of Christianity.

Is

then, fair

it,

on a footing

to place a sacred ordinance of Christ

with mere straws, the inoffensive produce of weak,

distorted, but otherwise pious

because there
to
^^

make up

is

minds

and then,

a sad discrepancy in the analogy,

the deficiency

unessential ceremonies

by

?''''

It

calling

them both

could never have

been anticipated by the apostle, that nearly eighteen hundred years

epistle,

he had written

after

this

an English divine would attempt to urge

the advice he had given concerning the exercise

of forbearance towards a few weak, ignorant

Rome, who

believers at

retained harmless obser-

vances, as a grave and satisfactory reason for

who

all

believe in baptism as an unrepealed ordi-

nance of Christ,

to tolerate

perversion in those

whom

The

communion.

its

omission and

they received into their

prohibitory clause, connected

with the injunction, clearly shews the nature of

the thing towards which they were to exercise

forbearance

" Him

that

is

weak

in the faith

receive, but not to doubtful disputations.^''

prohibition

But
is

is

is

The

as authoritative as the injunction.

baptism a matter of doubt ?

a high probability that

the strict baptists there

is

we

You say there

are right

and with

not, I believe, a

shadow

of doubt on the subject: nor does there appear

to be

any thing doubtful

in the oracles of

God

46

we admit

concerning

it.

doubtful in

this, I see

If

the Scriptures to be

no reason

why

they should

not be so considered respecting every essential

doctrine

who

err,

and then we must hold blameless all

whatever their error may be. There-

your analogy falls to the ground. The

matter at issue was not to be amongst them the

fore,

subject of dispute

and the reason for

this is

very

was a matter not worth debating

As the matter was doubtful, the Scripabout.
tures being silent about it, debate would never
produce conviction while it was very likely to
destroy Christian harmony.
But can we say
this of baptism
are baptists and paedobaptists to

obvious,

it

be so united, that they are never to enquire or

dispute

about an institution concerning which

they so essentially

This, Sir, can never

differ ?

Our mixed brethren

be admitted for a moment.

do, and must preach about

it

and the paedobap-

must talk about, and still practise infant baptism and the numbers of weak brethren on both
tists

sides,

do what we may,

again, and

like

"

Though

They

But to dispute

will

is

as

argue

results.

dispute again and

often vanquished,

still."

much

apostle's prohibition as

injunction

will

Goldsmith's village schoolmaster,

at variance with the

an omission to regard the

would have been, and

far

worse

This, then, demonstrably proves,

the superstitious observances amongst the

brethren at

Rome

in

its

that

weak

can bear no analogy to Scrip-

47
ture baptism

they are as totally different as any

two things can be. Hence it follows,

whole of your analogical argument
each of

feet,

its

or, in other

must

to

fail

argument,

is

is

lame

words, as there

preposterous disagreement in each of

it

that as the

its

in
is

members,

produce conviction, and, as an

totally inefficient.

Mr. Ivimey observes, that your argument

proves too much, and therefore proves nothing.
I would say, if it proves any thing, it proves too
much.
It is certainly assuming high ground,
and placing ourselves upon a " lofty eminence,"
to pretend to be able infallibly to decide

Lord has received

has its own scales, which

the omniscient

gious sect

their

Every

the standard-royal of heaven.

on whom

are to

reli-

them

Others put in

claim to this prerogative as well as our-

selves,

and

will

But, taking

weigh professors to a drachm.

for granted that our test

it

is

perfectly

many whom we believe

the Lord hath received, that we would not
receive.
There are many who hold antinomian

correct, yet

principles,

we

shall find

whose piety and heart-religion cannot

be suspected, and yet, I presume, you would not

them and if, for the sake of consistency,

you were to do it, I am sure you would soon

receive

repent

R.

it.

Hill,

thought
in
in

In a conversation lately with the Rev.

he very quaintly remarked,

that he

would do more mischief

a church, than six of the largest hogs could do
a gentleman's garden.
The figure was strong,
six antinomians

.48

but I think few

will

doubt

its

who

have tried the experiment

And

correctness.

yet, according

your doctrine, we must open our church doors

and receive them, notwithstanding the polluting

to

contagion they are sure to bring with

These, perhaps, are persons to

object

them.

whom you would

having adjusted your balance to a nicety,

you would pronounce ''tekeV on them, "weighed

in the balance, and found wanting."
But to such
a decision, you know. Sir, any one might object,
and declare his standard to be as correct as
and who could decide between you ?
yours
There are others, of whose orthodoxy not a doubt
;

can be entertained

case.

for instance, let us imagine a

weak

but

pious,

psedobaptist has, in

deference to his supposed regard to the will of

his

God

Master, put his child into covenant with

by baptism

and

one

as the child has received

sign of the covenant, he conscientiously believes

he

is

been

may

be again, for you

arise almost

with

You know what

entitled to the other.

ad

He

tells

has received him, and

we

us mistakes

What

infinitum.

this case ?

tell

are

us he believes the

your child

You

give

Lord

We should,
be true, but

to

do

me

it would be to pervert the

Might he not say, in reply,

credit for

my

involuntary and

conscientious error respecting the baptism of

child

is

do

proof that the Lord hath received

sacred institution.
''

may

direction, answer, this

we have no

to

cannot for a moment

question the truth of what he asserts.

by your

we

has

may

the error in question,

if it

my

be an error,

49
greater than the former ?

If so, please to point

There was a time when the church

very generally practised infant communion, and

it

out to me.

there are some of our ministers

who

be as obligatory as infant baptism.

hope
as

it

to

indulge the

their sentiments will yet generally prevail

some of your

baptist brethren say,

be consistent without

new

believe

case, but

it is

it.

This

is

we cannot

not, indeed, a

you
me, you

an old case revived, and

if

upon the objection you have made to

will reject vast numbers who you have told us,
should be received, "because the Lord has received
them." Now, I cannot see how any thing you
have advanced will afford us any means of resisting this error
and yet I am sure you never
intended to leave a loop-hole through which it
might enter. You would, of course, object, that
you had no proof that the Lord had received the
child
but, still acting on this objection, (on the
supposition that such a case may exist) you would
be guilty of the crime of schism. The same
might be said respecting pious men who have
act

denied the moral obligation of the Lord's day,

and others, equally pious, who have pleaded for
polygamy. These are cases in which I conceive
none of us could admit, that their being received
of the Lord

is

a sufficient reason for us to tolerate

such injurious errors

in the

church of Christ.

have closely examined your comment, and most

heartily approve of the disposition this chapter
inculcates

would

tians possessed

it

to

God

that all sects of Chris-

to a greater extent!

On

this

60
point

we most

differ in

its

cordially agree, but

application

surely never could an

inspired apostle design, that

of his

that which, in

its

should be urged

it

and

in opposition to the express

command

we widely

authoritative

Lord and Master,

principle,

to sanction

after all imprac-

is

ticable.

Having cleared my way,

what now remains is easy.
schism

is

untangible

it is

ever, one satisfaction,

do,

if

cannot say that

Your charge

to attempt to grasp

like striving with a ghost.

harsh and unkind as

But the charge

Utopian.

that what

I
I

is

is

as

have, how-

have yet to

painful, will be short.

I

am.

Dear

Sir,

With

of

it

great esteem,

Your's, &c.

LETTER
Dear

VI.

Sir,
I

have

felt

considerable difficulty in as-

you

certaining the motive, that led

the awful charge of

against the strict baptists,

schism.

cannot think for a

have dressed them up

this is likely to

moment

that

upon them the contempt

their fellow Christians,

be the

you

in this detestable garb, for

the purpose of bringing

and execrations of

to prefer

No,

result.

though

that be far

from

and yet we know motive prompts to every

human action. No doubt then, compassion moved

you

you

to effect at almost

ceived so very desirable.

to carry

by storm, a

had not been

brethren as

any

rate,

You

what you con-

therefore resolved

your arguments

position that

Finding your
"
birds of night," and as unstupid as
sufficient to reduce.

moved by your

reasoning as those

nocturnal

animals would be, you wittingly place yourself in

the midst of them, and most unexpectedly and

alarmingly cry. Fire! Fire!! and yet kind as

your motive has been, and alarming as the call

has been, your brethren seem still to remain as
unmoved, and as tranquil as the people who inhabit the beautiful and salubrious country, that
surrounds Vesuvius or Etna;
sions

all their

have been as short lived as the tremendous

eruptions; the crater ceases to emit

and

apprehen-

their fears with

all to

it.

Indeed,

it

be nothing but smoke, and

contents,

we

are

much

you must have doubted the

own hypothesis, or you would

inclined to think that

correctness of your

its

turns out after

52
not have resorted to such an expedient.
as

may, a more

it

Be

this

serious charge could never be

brought against any denomination of Christians,

and

if

believed cannot

will of all

who

munion.

In this

differ

fail to

bring on them, the

ill

from them on terms of com-

way

beginning to operate.

am

grieved to see

it is

But this was never your

been so, nothing could be

intention; for

had

easier than to

prove that the charge of schism

must

fall

in the

it

back upon yourself.

mouths of

The term schism,

Jesuitical apostolicals, has served

some other terms in theology, to

operate as scare- crows to frighten the ignorant
and weak. But as you have devoted so large a
portion of your pages to fasten this charge upon
its, and to warn us against its consequences, it is
necessary that some notice should be taken of it.
You tell us, ^' o'X'O'iW'a, " schism, is a word which
signifies the breaking of a substance into two or
more parts, and when figuratively applied to a
body of men, denotes the division of it into parties.^
We ask, admitting your criticism to be
correct, on whom does the charge of schism fall,
on us or on others? You tell us we adhere to apostolical precedents of action, and I hope I have
often with

proved that we have ]^kewhe precedents of thought

on our side ; who, then,

Did the

is

the separating party ?

apostle, that living depositary of truth,

charge those at Corinth with schism, who adhered

had appointed ? You say,

there is a high probability that we are right, and
yet you call upon us to give up all this vantage
to the ordinances as he

Mr. H's. Pamphlet, page 26

63

ground, that

name

we may

schismatics.

not be called by the odious

Prove

to us, that

we have by

a pertinacious or contumacious adherence to error,

separated ourselves from our fellow Christians,

and we
rect,

acknowledge the charge

and repent, as

ashes.

will

spirit

we ought

If as a denomination,

to be cor-

to do, in dust

and

we have gendered

of division by implicitly following like the

Corinthians the

dogmas of our fellow men,

to the

rejection of the authority of Christ, or the spirit

it to us, and we will reBut do not dress us up in these
odious skins without any cause, and thereby expose us to be hunted down and proscribed by our
fellow Christians.
We do not charge you with

prove

of the gospel,

nounce the

error.

schism, though your theory has caused dissensions

among some of our brethren, and perhaps will

do so yet to a greater extent, until this modern
mania shall subside and calm reason resume its
seat.
We love you, and are willing to leave you
in the hands of our common Lord, before whose
We do not
decision we must all stand or fall.
call

upon you

implicitly without reasons, to fol-

low our opinions, nor ought you to draw so

largely on our credulity as to suppose we shall
bow down before your angry strife of words.
" The wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of

God."

putable to us,

Consider that
it

the charge

is

im-

must also be so to every sect of

Christians in the world

Scotland,

if

Calvinists,

Rome, Geneva, England,

Arminians,

Presbyterians,

Independents, Baptists, and even mixed

commu-

nion Baptists, for some of those Latitudinarians

54
have refused to commune with their

And

solely because they are strict.

brethren

strict

it is

known

such have been the liberal sentiments

fact that

by your labour on terms of communion,

few who used indiscriminately
to give to every good case, who now liberally
exclude strict baptists from the list of their benefactions. All have their own terms of communion,
and consequently, according to your decision, all

infused

that there are not a

If separation exposes the sepa-

are schismatics.

rating party to this charge, then all the

outcry

and the nonconformists, whose memorials we revere, and whose

writings have proved such a blessing to the
against dissenters

is

correct,

church of God, were after

matics,

who have

all

petulant schis-

divided the seamless garment

of Christ, and acted in direct opposition to his

prayed, that " they

prayer,

who

one."

In fact,

whole

visible

schismatic

all

might be

your reasoning be correct, the

church is composed of factious
if

societies;

and

to

prescribe rules as

terms of church fellowship, however scriptural

these rules

may

be, as the living depositaries are

not here to give to them the weight of evidence

they require, most certainly expose the prescribing party to the charge of schism.

But " charity is the end of the commandment,

and the fulfilling the law." This charity constrains us to hope and believe that such a charge
is only to be found in your pamphlet, from which

we

trust

it

will soon be

expunged by a rejoinder

from your descriptive pen.

If

we must

pass un-

53
der your ban, call us stupid, or harsh, or

illiberal,

or bigoted, but do not call us wicked, for schism

is

We

wickedness.

love Christ our Saviour,

commands; do not then

conscientiously regard his

let us

remain under

we

this detestable interdict,

but

cause your charity to cast the mantle of forbear-

ance over our

you cannot con-

If

infirmities.

vert us, give us a place in the charitable

list

of

your weak brethren that we may again be acknowledged among the ranks of those who are
called, and chosen, and faithful.
Ah Sir! no
;

longer delight in unmercifully beating your

low servants,
you.

when having
us

up

lest

What must

our

common Master

fel-

reprove

the religious public think of us,

in a style peculiar to yourself held

to contempt,

you would

readers believe, there

the scene that

is

is

have your

something worse behind

yet untold

say as

follows " leaving

whom

it

may

fain

for

you

deliberately

however, to those

to

be more grateful the unwelcome

office, of

exposing the infirmities of their bre-

thren."'

Can you

Sir, in

are approaching your

your

closet while

Lord and

you

ours, persuade

yourself that the manner you have treated your

brethren will agree with

of charity, in

Cor.

St.

Paul's description

xiii. ?

Having

faithfully

animadverted

on this most unpleasant part of

your pamphlet, what now remains is easy and
will all be included in
I

my

am, Dear

next.
Sir,

With

the same esteem,

Your's, &c.
1

Mr. H's. pdinpluct, page 4^.

56

LETTER
Dear

VII.

Sir,

most heartily agree with you,

in the

you have expressed in the following

paragraph. "In every enquiry relating to church

sentiments

duty, our

concern should undoubtedly be, to

first

ascertain the will of the

when

Supreme Legislator

but

hath been done to our satisfaction,

this

we

may

be allowed to examine the practical tendency of dijfferent systems," &c.' You have seen
from the preceding letters, that I have endeavoured to ascertain the will of the Supreme Legislator, on the system you have so powerfully
recommended and I find from the reasons I have
stated, that unless your theory can be placed on
more substantial ground, it can never stand the
;

blast of truth.

on

the sand

and

resembles a fine mansion built

It

the superstructure

beautiful, but

fective.

its

dency, or expediency;
begin by enquiring,

is

essentially de-

its

practical ten-

foundation

now examine

must

very inviting

is

and I think

how

it

we

would be

should

likely to

operate on the internal state of societies, formed

according to your model.

fail

for union

every thing that

If

it fail

here, all

and peace must be

is

must

essential to

calculated to render Christian

fellowship estimable to ourselves, attractive to the

'

Mr.

11 'g.

pamphlet, page 40.

^7
world, or

efficient in

or abroad.

its

operations, either at

home

Indeed, only in such a state of things

Lord be fully answere only necessary

will the prayer of our adorable

wered.

One would

to ask (and reason

think

it

would give us the answer,)

in

what
and peace likely most to prevail? Is it in a
society where there is a decided disagreement,
relating to one out of two positive ordinances of
Christ; or is it in a society where there is the
most entire agreement? Reason assuredly will
say, in the latter, and if so, all your fine theory of
expediency must evaporate. But for the sake of
society are the essential principles of union

illustration, let us

suppose a case.

formed of nearly an equal number of

paedobaptists, all conscientious

society

baptists

is

and

candidates both

adult and infant, are in turn solemnly baptised in

the name of the Sacred Trinity From courtsey and
.

a desire to keep the unity of the

Spirit, the

bap-

tists sit gravely in their pews, while these unconscious babes have imposed on them an ordinance

which they, (the baptists) think is perverted both

In turn the paedoin the subject and the mode.
baptists from the same desire witness the administration of the institution, in a way which they
conscientiously believe perverts its design, and
leads to the utter annihilation of an indispensable

parental duty.

They both

for a time " refrain

from good words though it is a pain and grief

unto them :" the fire kindles, this for awhile is
kept under, but it engenders jealousy, and each
party fears

the

other will

become dominant.

58

With
they

differ, is unintentionally agitated at

discussion

but each side becomes gradually

tated as the subject proceeds,

One

a church

This primarily leads to sober Christian

meeting.

fails,

which

their caution, the matter about

all

recourse

had

is

to

irri-

and when argument

more

efficient

means.

of these conscientious brethren with talents

and piety of the highest kind, boldly

tells his er-

ring brethren, that they rest their hollow fallaci-

ous scheme on

human "

authority," that their er-

ror leads to "sc^/sm," that in this debate they

"resemble certain animals,

own

with their

ments on

who

pelt passengers

produce,'" and that their senti-

this subject,

remind him of the " bird of

night," which,
" Does to the moon complain,
" Of such as, wandering near her secret bowers,
" Molest her ancient solitary reign." 2

Another on the same

side gravely informs his

mistaken brethren, that they are " convinced of

baptism, but they have not piety enough to
their sentiments."^

The

avow

other party with equal

and " in deference to their master's word,

which they tremble," fling back showers of

talents,

at

missiles equally kind

row
you

and

polite,

while

all

the nar-

canaille on both sides, (call them small craft

if

please,) join in this holy warfare, with

weapons, perhaps

lA phrase used by Mr.

3

less polished,

but equally effica-

on a former occasion.

Mr. H's. pampb.

Vide Dr. Cox's Reply to Dr. Wardlaw, &c.

p. 45.

59
cious.

If,

Sir,

minds of the highest order and

most benevolent complexion, have

to carry a point acted in this
to say, that the

way,

in their zeal

too

is it

much

same may take place amongst an

much inferior, and in a society

order of minds so

composed of such heterogeneous materials ? What

has been, may be again but would such a state of
things come up to your desires expressed in your
" Christian, in opposition to Party communion,"
;

or resemble that union expressed in our Lord's

pathetic prayer, " that they all may be one ?"

Ah, no! The

fiend discordance

a field equal to his talents.

mixture, brings to

which

my

would

find here

This unhomogeneous

recollection a caricature

saw many years ago, occasioned by the

union that had then been recently formed between

England and Ireland the consequences of which

The print represented two
are well known.
bulls engaged in a most desperate encounter.
Their ponderous sculls were indeed so united,
that it was at any one's peril to attempt to sepasome of the spectators were made to
rate them
exclaim, " Oh blessed union!" and a group on the
other side, were said to be vociferating " It will
be better bye-and-bye use will make all things
easy." This I fear would too aptly represent a
union, where so great a difference of opinion exists, and where if it ever became tolerable, it
must be, by an abandonment on both sides, of
what each professes conscientiously to believe.
;

We
a

have found

much

less

in

many

churches, that things of

moment, have

led to

angry conten-

60
tions,

and

in not

a few to disgraceful separations.

Let us not then for the sake of an untried theory,

increase these stumbling blocks.

vain to expect

It will

be

communion without union;

union, but on the solid basis of agreement.

that gracious Saviour,

in

oi

When

who, whilst he bears with

our weakness, does not allow us to

trifle

with his

ordinances, shall be pleased eminently to pour out

of his Spirit upon us, then the

watchman

shall see

eye to eye, and we shall have no need to say to

our brother, " know the Lord, for all shall know
him, from the least to the greatest."

Then

all

hearts being fully sanctified by the truth, and all

motives purified, our Lord's prayer will be ac-

complished,

we

shall

"

all

be one, as he, and the

Father are one:" the epithets, baptists, paedobap-

immerge in the more

desirably name Christian, to emerge no more
for ever; and we shall enjoy Christian, and not
party communion ; but not till then. If, therefore,
instead of using your universally admired talents,
to effect what is impracticable, you could be prevailed on to employ them in affectionately and
respectfully pleading the cause of truth, with your
mistaken, though pious, and conscientious bretists,

and

antibaptists, shall

thren, concerning the separating institution,

can

tell,

who

but a flood of light might break in upon

which would produce the most corunion of judgment amongst us? Then we

their minds,
dial

should really he one; and our union and

commu-

nion founded on truth, would be solid and imperishable.

But

till

then

let

us affectionately

61

agree to

differ,

and

unite,

where we can

unite,

without the compromise of what ought to be

dearer than rubies to us

all.

Very little more need be said on

the comparative

expediency of the different systems

that

which

tends the most to produce honest, solid union, in

any

society,

must be the most expedient, and the

most beneficial

in

results.

its

am

far

thinking, that our sincere adherence to

believe to be truth
in the eyes of

as

so repulsive

is

from

what we

and offensive

our paedobaptist brethren in general

you represent

recollect an anecdote in

it.

good Mr. Winter, of

Newbury. A baptist minister called on him with
a case. Mr. W. asked him, " what denomination
He replied, " The Baptist."
he belonged to."
point related of the late

Finding Mr. W. silent, the liberal hapiht added,

" But we hold with mixed communion, Sir.^'' " Indeed," rejoined Mr. W. " then you remind me
of Peter's description of the old world
ing IN AND OUT of the water.'"
paedobaptists well

know,

no farther than they

baptism

that

differ

we

and that a

All reflecting
differ

from them

from us respecting

between the two ordinances,

visible union,

without union in

ment^ could only produce confusion.

passions, the results of
at

*' stand-

that they agree with us in the connec-

tion that subsists

only

a distance

senti-

Our party

which we lament, now act

we to be brought

but were

which you recommend,

must be much worse, and certainly,

into that close contact

the result

" instead of extirpating" an error,

we

plant a

62
prejudice; and instead of softening and conciliat-

ing the minds of

"

liberal

our opponents,

a stigma."^

inflict

we

should

admire your eloquent and

description of

the spirit of

the times.

" The church of Christ," you say, " no longer

the scene of intestine warfare

among

the several

which it is cantoned and

divided, presents the image of a great empire,
composed of distant, but not hostile provinces,
denominations

into

prepared to send forth

command

of

its

its

combatants,

invisible Sovereign, to

at

the

invade the

dominions of Satan, and subdue the nations of

Your

the earth."
is

We

eloquent.

description

is

as correct as

it

are divided into sections and

common cause.
many years, been

cantonments, but united in one

Angry

contentions have, for

kept under, and Christians have cordially agreed

to differ.

why

be the state of the case,

Sir, this

If,

should you fan up the flame of contention?

The mixture you wish

to

promote could never

tend to increase our energies, or to destroy the line

of demarcation.

Baptists

and paedobaptists would

would

still

still

bear

be baptists,
the

same

name.

So

far as

have been able to judge, on a

comparison between the operations of the two

systems,

has failed

suppose

it

have found that mixed fellowship

to produce every object which you

would

insure

and, in some instances,

a sad reverse has been the result.

Mr. H.'s pamphlet,

p. 43.

The following
" Ibid. p. 50.

63
cases,

which have come under

tion, will

confirm what

in the south

have

my own
stated.

observa-

In a town

of our island, a most serious division

took place in an independent congregation. Sixty

or

more of its members separated from

thren, attended the

their bre-

baptist meeting-house,

and

expressed their desire to join in communion with

The

from a wish to evince

and from a confident
persuasion that such an act of liberality would

the church.

baptists,

their brotherly affection,

not

fail to

be followed with conviction, (at least,

among some

of these mistaken brethren) agreed

communion, and receive

them. Some of their members, and some of the
neighbouring ministers and brethren, remonstrated
with them, and assured them, that the result would
prove to be the opposite to what they expected.
But these remonstrances were disregarded, and
to alter their terms of

the liberal plan adopted, with a confident persuasion of

its

success.

This mixed fellowship con-

tinued for, I believe, a year-and-a-half, or

more

but not one of the paedobaptists could see baptism

to be of sufficient importance to submit to
last,

some independent

minister,

it.

At

from the kindest

motives, no doubt, attempted, and really effected

a reconciliation between the remaining

members

of the church and the brethren that had seceded,

the result of which was, that every one of

own

returned to his

fold,

leaving the baptists

without the accession of a single

them.

There

is

a reconciliation

member from

no one but would rejoice

;

but

it

them

in

such

assuredly proves, that

64

your doctrine of expediency is not so certain in

its results as you would have us believe.
I think
I

might venture to affirm, from what

have

experienced, that had this church stood firm to

its

own

baptists

previous system, some of those paedo-

would have been induced

so to

examine

the subject of baptism, that conviction

have followed, and that they

baptized.
0^

am

would

would have been

acquainted with another church

*******,

This church, for the sake of

receiving a few unbaptized persons, altered

its

The consequence was, that as soon

constitution.
as the alteration was made, as many baptized
brethren withdrew as unbaptized persons joined.
This church has tried your plan for some years ;
and, strange as

it

may

these paedobaptists in

appear, though

communion,

it

it

retains

has resolved

never to receive another unbaptized person into

fellowship.

The reason

for this extraordinary

by the minister and some

of its members, was, that they had tried and
proved the inexpediency of mixed communion,
and on that inexpediency alone, had resolved in
resolution, given both

future to prevent

it.

of-fact against the

The

last that I

related to

church,

me

This, Sir,

is

another matter-

expediency of your theory.

shall mention,

and which

had

very recently by the pastor of the

forms

the opposite to the

two

cases

already stated. At * * * * *, an unhappy division took place in an independent congregation,

which resulted in the ultimate removal of its pastor.

Many of this

congregation united

in

worship

65

The

with the baptists.

accustomed

terms

of

baptists

retained their

communion

strict

and

several of these psedobaptists have been baptized,

and now rank amongst its

These
cases, Sir, confirm the truth of the adage, " Honesty is the best policy ;" and of the maxim, that

have joined

the church,

most pious, active, and useful members.

" what

is

morally wrong, can never be politically

right."

In

my

views, founded on long

observation,

three evils have generally followed

policy that

It

the

libera

you recommend.

has opened an asylum to the factious and dis-

contented amongst both baptists and poedobaptists,

into

which they have

tion of concession,

It

fled to avoid the mortifica-

and church

discipline.

has induced some paedobaptists to conclude,

from the indifference which they think the baptists by it evince to baptism, that it is an institution
which may be conscientiously neglected.

And

fear

it

has proved a very powerful in-

ducement with some baptist ministers to withhold

baptism from that place in their ministry in which
the gospel has placed

Having freely

my

it.

laid before

you and

my

readers

views of the nature of our controversy,

sincerely pray, that

if

we must

still

differ in opi-

66

may

nion, that difference

towards each other

that

and peedobaptists

tists

never relax our aifection

may

mixed and strict bap(where they can

unite

conscientiously unite) in opposing the empire of

darkness

and

that,

under the

command and

conduct of the Captain of their salvation, they

may go on from

conquering unto conquer,

until

" the kingdoms of this w^orld shall become the

kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ." Thus
hastening on that glorious day,
the

moon

when

the light of

and the
of seven days. Then,

shall be as the light of the sun,

light of the sun as the light

without any compromise of opinion, or sacrifice

of truth, the whole visible body of Christ shall

be one in judgment, one in heart, one in aim, and

one in universal consecration to the glory of

who

hath redeemed us to

God by

his

Him

blood

having " One Lord, one faith, one baptism."

I

am.

Dear

Sir,

With

unaltered esteem,

Your's,

<fec.

Albion ^3rc$5:

UARJEiTE AM>

SAVILT,,

1C7, ST. 5IART1!M'S

LAMi.^

ij^

[A

.k\

**s

;i^^'
s>