As I shal herr occasion to resume this subject, when I come to discourse upon the Lord's Supper, I shall defer my observations 4 for the present, and shall conclude this discourse with two

REMARKS.

2. a hille to be regretted, that this ordinance is so rarely meme of discussion in the Desk.

spot unusual for a minister of the Gospel to devote twentyfer sermons annually to the consideration of the Lord's Supper; twelve delivered at what, in this country, is commonly styled the Sacramental lecture, and twelve more on the several Sabbaths, consecrated to the administration of this sacrament. On Baptism, reasonable supposition, that the subjects of this discourse are now, at the same time, ministers rarely preach. Perhaps it is no unfor the first time, brought out in the desk to the consideration of a great part of this audience. Why such a difference is made between two Institutions of Christ, invested with the same authority, solemnity, and influence, I am unable to determine. But, whatbe the ground of this distinction, I am satisfied that it cannot be a good one. There is but too much reason to believe, that not only the persons, particularly the children, who have been baptized, but the Parents, also, are, in many instances, lamentably ignorant of the nature of this Institution, the truths which it declares, the duties which it involves, and the privileges which it confers. Were these things made more frequently subjects of preaching; were they clearly illustrated, and solemnly enforced; there is the best reason to believe, that it would become a far richand more extensive blessing to mankind.

er,

ever may

2. Persons, baptized in their infancy, are here solemnly reminded of their own peculiar duties; and severely reproved for their negli gence in performing them.

How many persons are now in this house, who have been dedicated to God by Baptism in their infancy, and who yet never thought of a single privilege, realized a single obligation, nor performed a single duty, created by this ordinance! It is perhaps questionable, whether some of them are not now ignorant, whether they have been baptized, or not. How melancholy are these facts! How full are they of shame, and sin! How productive ought they to be of remorse, contrition, and amendment! God has called you, my young friends, into his visible kingdom in the morning of life. He has publicly sealed you as his children; and planted you in the nursery of his Church. Remember that this interesting event sprang not from chance, nor from the will of the flesh, nor from the will of man, but from God. He gave your parents the disposition, and the right, to offer you up to him, and to consecrate you to his service. He has publicly acknowledged his particular relation to you; and given you this illustrious token of his kindness and mercy. Think then, I beseech you, of the guilt of disregarding, or

neglecting, this testimony of his mercy to you. All men are bound voluntarily to become his, and to consecrate themselves to his service. To this duty you are under peculiar obligations. By openly acknowledging you as his children, He has, if I may be allowed the expression, laid claim to you in a manner, which, while it demands of you the most intense gratitude, requires of you, also, to assume the character, which He has thus externally conferred; and with all the heart to devote yourselves in the covenant of grace to his service and glory. All men, under the Gospel, are immoveably bound to the performance of this duty. But the obligations, incumbent on you, are peculiar and pre-eminent. Let me request you to ponder this subject with deep and solemn concern, and to inquire with all earnestness of mind, whether you are not in imminent danger of sharing the doom of Capernaum, Chorazin, and Bethsaida.

SERMON CLVII.

THE EXTRAORDINARY MEANS

OF GRACE. THE OBJECTIONS AGAINST INFANT BAPTISM ANSWERED.

MATTHEW XXviii. 19.-Go ye, therefore, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

IN the preceding discourse, I considered, at some length, the Reality, and Intention of the ordinance of Baptism. According to the scheme, then proposed, I shall now proceed to inquire, Who are the proper Subjects of Baptism?

In answer to this inquiry, I observe,

1. That all those, who believe in Christ, and publicly profess their faith in him, are proper Subjects of Baptism.

That such a profession may be made with understanding, the person, who makes it, must be of sufficient age, and sufficient capacity, to know the great doctrines and duties of the Gospel; and must already have become acquainted with them. He must also understand, that it is the Religion of the heart, which is professed, and not merely a speculative belief of the truths and precepts, contained in the Scriptures. Without such knowledge no man can act, in this solemn case, with propriety, decency, or meaning. Nor do I know, that the absolute necessity of such knowledge has ever been questioned. A public declaration of our cordial belief in the doctrines and precepts of the Gospel is what is usually called in this country a Profession of Faith; the ground, on which, indispensably, Adults are admitted to Baptism.

In addition to this, what is equally necessary to such admission, the Candidate also enters publicly into covenant with God; avouching JEHOVAH, the FATHER, the SON, and the HOLY GHOST, to be his GOD; giving himself up to the FATHER, through the Son, and by the HOLY GHOST, as his child and servant; and engaging, that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, he will live soberly, righteously, and godly, in the world. This engagement is substantially what Tertullian calls Sponsio salutis; the engagement of salvation; made universally by adults, who were baptized in his time.

One would think it hardly necessary to observe concerning this engagement, that it ought to be made with sincerity; or that the candidate ought to mean all that which is ordinarily intended by the terms of the profession; or, in other words, that it ought to be made with the heart and not merely with the lips.

2. The Infant Children of Believers are also Scriptural subjects' of Baptism.

This doctrine, as you well know, has been extensively disputed and denied; so extensively, that those who have contended against it, have been formed into a distinct sect, existing in considerable numbers throughout most Christian countries. These persons, originally styled Anabaptists, and Antipadobaptists, have claimed to themselves improperly the title of Baptists; indicating, that they only baptized, or were baptized, in a manner agreeable to the scriptural directions on this subject. While, therefore, I cheerfully acknowledge the distinguished piety and respectability of a considerable number of men in this class of Christians, particularly in Great Britain; I protest against their assumption of this name, so far as it is intended to indicate, that others do not baptize, and are not baptized, agreeably to the principles of the Gos pel. I acknowledge freely their right to their own principles. But their right to conclude, or to assert, that the point in debate between us and them, is settled in their favour, I neither admit nor believe. The name Anabaptists, originally given to them because they rebaptized those who had received baptism in infancy, is an appellation, in every view less objectionable.

In discussing this subject, I shall state, and answer, the objections commonly made against it; and then attempt to support it by direct arguments.

1. It is objected by the opposers of this doctrine, that it is not en joined by any express command, nor warranted by any express declar ation in the Scriptures.

How far this objection is founded in truth, I shall consider hereafter. At present, it will be sufficient to observe, that there are many duties incumbent on us, which are neither expressly commanded, nor expressly declared, in the Scriptures. The principle on which the objection is founded, when expressed generally, is this: Nothing is our duty, which is not thus commanded, or declared, in the Scriptures. According to this principle, Women are under no obligations to celebrate the Lord's Supper; Parents to pray with their children or families, or to teach them to read; nor any of mankind to celebrate the Christian Sabbath; nor Rulers to provide the means of defending the country which they govern, or to punish a twentieth part of those crimes, which, if left unpunished, would ruin any country. The extent to which this principle, fairly pursued, would conduct us, would, I think, astonish even those by whom it is urged.

It is impossible for the Scriptures, if they would be of any seri ous use to mankind, to specify all the particular doctrines, and duties, necessary to be believed, and practised. The volumes, in which such a specification, however succinct, must be made, would be too numerous even to be read, much more to be understood and remembered. The scheme of instruction, adopted by the VOL. IV.

40

Scriptures, is that of stating the objects of our faith, and the rules of our duty, in a manner, which, taken together, may be styled general: although I acknowledge it is, in many instances, to a considerable degree particular. These, it illustrates by examples, and frequently by comments on those examples. Both the instructions and examples, also, are intended to be still farther illustrated by a comparison of passages. Common sense, can'didly employed, may easily, with these advantages, discover all those precepts, which direct the faith and practice of mankind in ordinary cases. Those, which in their nature are more involved, are left to the investigation of superior intelligence, and laborious study.

Such a Code of instruction, every man of thought will perceive, must lay a foundation for a great multitude of inferences. Of these, some will be distant and doubtful; others, variously probable; and others, still, near and certain. Those, which are included in the last of these classes, are ever to be received as being actually contained in the Scriptures, and as directing our faith and practice with divine authority. Every scriptural writer, by attaching this authority to his own inferences, teaches us this doctrine; and enforces upon us the duty of yielding obedience to inferences, clearly and certainly drawn from truths and precepts, expressed in the sacred Canon. I will only add, that, wherever our duty demands either the designed omission, or the adoption, of any given. practice, we are obliged, wherever we cannot obtain certain evidence, to govern ourselves by the superior probability.

If, then, the duty of baptizing Infants can be certainly inferred, or inferred with a probability, superior to that, which is supposed to justify the omission of it, the Scriptures require, that Infants should be baptized.

2. It is objected, that there is no certain Example of Infant Baptism in the Scriptures.

To this I answer, that there is no instance, in which it is declared in so many terms, that infants were baptized. But there are instances, in which, according to every rule of rational construction, this fact is plainly involved. Lydia, and her house, and the household of Stephanus, were baptized. He, who has examined the meaning of the words, house and household, in the Scriptures, cannot fail to perceive, that in their primary meaning, they denote Children, and sometimes more remote descendants. Thus St. Paul said to the Jailer, in answer to his question, What must I do to be saved? Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ; and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. There is no reason to think, that Paul knew what family the Jailer had. On the contrary, he appears merely to have uttered the same doctrine, which had before been announced to the Jews by St. Peter; The promise is to you, and to your dren; and to have used the word, house, necessarily from this ignorance, in the manner, in which it was customarily used by his

chil