3^.«J-^'.*'
|
';*^*' |
1' t. ■!'• •», |
||
|
£■ -E W '! |
|||
|
*\.»: 1?'" |
« |
h*^i^ %:. |
f^"^*- *.":i |
|
*• ^'^ S ^■^'^K |
% |
|||
|
^■t;*> |
||||
■r*%*T*
. *-„ $
'if^. aft
*"-.-*% M m
7^^^^^
55*"^
Tus rf:*i Yt.SK PUBLIC L'SRART
AS^OR, LENOX Aii'D
TILDITN mnNDATIONS
P, L
V
Theodosia Ernest.
THEODOSIA ^^»^^i»^^-i
m M
^k
THE
: OF ¥A
AMERICAN
THEODOSIA ERNEST;
THE HEROINE OF FAITE
^..^
PHILADELPHIA :
AMERICAN BAPTIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 1420 Chestnut Street.
C
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the j'ear 1866, by
R. B. DAVIDSON,
In the District Court of the United States for the Jliddle District ot Tennessee
Slhcailosia (^riust
OB, THE HEROnSTE OF FAITH.
INTRODUCTION.
DOUBTS SUGGESTED.
jOTHER, have I ever been bapliziMl?''
The questioner was a bright, intelligent, blue-eyed lad, some thirteen summers okl. The deep seriousness of his countenance, and the earnest, wistful gaze with which he looked into his mother's face, showed that, for the moment at least, the question semed to him a ver^^ important one.
" Certainly, my son ; both you and your sister were baptized by the Rev Doctor Fisher, at the time when I united with the church. Your sister remembers it well, for she was six years old ; but you were too 3'oung to know any thing about it. Your Aunt Jones said it was the most solemn scene she ever witnessed ; and such a piayer as the good old doctor made for you, I never hoard before."
"But, mother," rejoined the lad, "sister and I have been down to the river to see a lady baptized by the Bap- list minister, who came here last month and commenced preaching in the school-house. They went down into the river, and then he plunged her under the w\ater, and
(;5)
4 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
quickly raised her out again ; and sister says if that was baptism, then we were not baptized, because we stood on the dry floor of the church, and the preacher dipped hia hand into a bowl of water, and sprinkled a few drops on our foreheads : and she says Cousin John Jones was not baptized either; for the preacher only took a little pitcher of water, and poured a little stream upon his head Sister says she don't see how there can be three bap tisms, when the Scripture says, " One Lord, one faith, one baptism."
" Your sister is always studying about things above her reach, my son. It is better for j^oung people like you not to trouble yourselves too much about these knotty questions in theology."
" But, mother, this don't seem to me to be a knotty question at all. One minister takes a person down into the water, and dips her under it ; another stands on the dry floor of the church before the pulpit, and sprinkles a few drops into her face ; another pours a little stream upon her head. Now, anybody can see that they do three different things ; and if each of them is baptism, then there must be three baptisms. There is no theology about that, is there ?"
" Yes, my child, this is a theological question, and I suppose it must be a very difficult one, since I am told that some very good and wise men disagree about it."
" But, mother, they all agree that there is only ore baptism, do they not ? And if there is only one, why don't they just look into the Testament and see what it is ? If the Testament says sprinkle, then it is sprink- ling; if it says pour, then it is pouring ; if it saj's dip. then it is dipping. I mean to read the Testament, and see if I cannot decide which it is for myself."
" Do 3'ou think, my son, that you will be able to know as much about it as your Uncle Jones, or Dr. Fisher,
DOUBTS SUGGESTED. 5
who baptized you, or Dr. Barnes, whose notes you use in learning your Sunday-school lesson, and all the pious and learned ministers of our church, and the Methodist Church, and the Episcopal Church? They have studied the Testament through and through, and they all agree that a child who is sprinkled is properly baptized."
" Yes, mother, but if the baptisms in the New Teata- ment were sprinkling (and of course the}' were, or such wise and good men would not say so), why can't I find it there, an well as anybody ?"
" Very well, my son, you can read and see ; but if you should happen to come to a different conclusion from these great and learned men, I hope you won't set up your boyish judgment against that of the wisest theolo- gians of the age. But here comes your sister. I wonder if she is oroinor to become a theologian too !"
Mrs. Ernest (the mother of whom we are speaking) was born of very worthy parents, who were consistent members of the Presbyterian Church ; and she had grown up as one of the " baj^tized children of the church." As she "appeared to be sober and steady, and to have sufficient knowledge to discern the Lord's body," she was doubtless informed, according to the directions of the confession of faith, page 504, that it was " her duty and her privilege to come to the Lord's supper." But she had felt no inclination to do so until after the death of her husband. Then, in the day of her sorrow, she looked upward, and began to feel a new, thougli not an intense interest in the things of religion. She made a public profession, and requested baptism for her two children.
The little boy was then an infant, and his sister was about six years old, a sprightly, interesting child, whose flowing ringlets, dimpled chin, rosy cheeks, and spark- ling eyes, wer« the admiration of every beholder.
6 THEODOSIA ERNEST,
Twelve years had passed. The lovely girl had be- come a beautiful and i'emarkably intelligent young lady The little babe had grown into the noble looking, blue- e3'ed lad, with a strong, manly frame, and a face and brow which gave promise of capacity and independent n of thought far above the average of his companions.
Theodosia and Edwin. How they loved each othei ! She, with the doting atfection of an elder child ami only sister, who had watched the earliest developments of his mind, and been his companion and his teacher from his infancy ; he, with the confiding, reverential, yet familiar love of a kind-hearted and impulsive boy, to one who was to him the standard at once of female beauty and womanly accomplishments.
Theodosia came in, not with that elastic step and sprightly air which was habitual with her, but with a slow and solemn gait ; scarcely raising her e3'es to meet her mother's inquiring gaze, she passed through to her own room, and closed the door.
The mother was struck with the deep and earnest seriousness of her face and manner. What could it mean? What could have happened to distress her child?
" Edwin, my son, what is the matter with your sister ?"
" Indeed, mother, I do not know of any thing. We stood together talking at the river bank, and just before we left, Mr. Percy came up to walk home with her. It must be something that has happened by the way."
The mother's mind was relieved. Mr. Percy had beet for many months a frequent and welcome visitor at their pi e.tty cottage, and had made no secret of his admira- tion of her accomplished and beautiful daughter ; though he had never, until a few weeks since, formally declared his love. Mrs. Ernest did not doubt but that some lovers' quarrel had grown up in their w^alk. and this
DOUBTS SUUGESTED. 7
had cast a sharlow upon Tlicodosia's sunny face. She waited somewhat impatiently for her daughter to come out and confirm her conjectures. She did not come, however, and at length the mother arose, and softly opening the door, looked into the room. Theodosia was on her knees. She did not hear the door, or become :;onscious of the presence of her mother. In broken ivhispered sentences, mingled with sobs, she praj'ed •. " Oh, Lord, enlighten my mind. Oh, teach me tin' way. Let me not err in the understanding of th}^ word ; and oh trive me strenorth, I do beseech thee, to do whatever I find to be my duty. 1 would not go wrong. Help 1 oh help me to go right !"
Awe-struck and confounded, Mrs. Ernest drew back, uud tremblingly awaited the explanation she so much desired to hear.
When at length the young lady came out, there was still upon her face the same serious earnestness of ex- pression, but there seemed less of sadness, and there was also that perfect repose of the countenance, which is the result of a newly formed, but firmly settled deter- mination of purpose.
Mrs. i^rnest, as she looked at her, was more perplexed than ever. She was, however, resolved to obtain at once a solution of the m^'stery.
"Mr. Percy walked home with you, did he not, my daughter ?"
" Yes, mother."
" Did 3'ou find him as interesting as usual? What was the subject of your conversation ?"
" We were talking of the baptism at the river."
" Of nothing else ?"
" No, mother ; this occupied all the time."
" Did he say nothing about himself?"
8 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" Not a word, mother, except in regard to the ques- tion whether he had ever been baptized."
''Why, what in the world has possessed you all? Tour brother came running home to ask me if he had been baptized ; Mr. Percy is talking about whether he has been baptized. I wonder if you are not beginning to fancy that you have never been baptized ?"
" T do indeed begin to doubt it, mother ; for if thM was baptism which we witnessed at the river this even- ing, I am quite sure that I never was."
"Well, I do believe that Baptist preacher is driving you all crazy. Pray tell me, what did he do or say, that gave you such a serious face, and put these new crotchets in your head ?"
" Nothing at all, mother. He simply read from the New Testament the account of the baptism of Jesus and of the Eunuch. Then he took the candidate, and they went down both of them into the water, and he bap- tized her, and then they came up out of the water, could not help seeing that this is just what is recorded of Jesus and the Eunuch. If so, then it is the baptism of the Scriptures ; and it is certainly a rerij difer-ent thing from that which was done to me, when Dr. Fisher sprinkled a few drops of water in my face."
" Of course, my dear, it was different ; but I don't think the quantity of icater employed affects the validity of the baptism. There is no virtue in the water, and a few drops are just as good as all the floods of Jordan."
" But, mother, it is not in the quantity of water that the difference consists ; it is in the act performed. One sprinkles a little water in the face ; another pours a little water on the head ; another buries the whole body under the water and raises it out again. Two appl}- (he water to the person, the other plunges the person into the water. Thc}^ are surely very different acts;
DOUBTS SUGGESTED 11
and if what I saw this evening was scriptural baptism, then it is certain that I have never been baptized."
" Well, my child, we won't dispute about it now ; but I hope you are not thinking about leaving j^our own church ; the church in which your grandfather and your grandmother lived and died : and in which so many of the most talented and influential families in the country are proud to rank themselves, to unite with this little com- pany of ignorant, ill-mannered mechanics and common people, who have all at once started up here from nothing."
" You know, my mother, that it is about a year since I made a profession of religion. I trust that before 1 did so, I had given myself up to do the will of my Heavenly Father. Since then I have felt that I am not my own. I am bought with a price. It is my pleasure, as well as mj' duty, to obey my Saviour. I ask, as Paul did. Lord, what wilt tliou have me to do ? You taught me this lesson o^ obedience yourself; and 1 am sure 3'ou would not have me on any account neglect or refuse to obe}^ my Saviour. If he commands me to be baptized, and the command has never been obeyed, / >ihall he obliged to do it. And I trust my mother will encourage me in my obedience to that precious Redeemer she taught me to love."
One who looked into the mother's face, at that mo- ment, might have read there " a tablet of unutterable thoughts." She did not try to speak them. We will not try to write them. She sat silent for a moment, drew her breatn deeply and heavily, then rising hastily went to look for something in her dauojhter's room.
Theodosia was not only grieved but surprised at the evident distress which she had given her mother. While on her knees in prayer to God after her return from the river, she bad determined to do her dutij, and obe}' the
12 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
commandment of Jesus Christ, her blessed Saviour, what ever she might find it to be. But she had not deter- termined to be immersed. That river baptism, con- nected with the reading of those passages of Scripture, had only filled her mind with doubts ; these doubts had yet to become convictions. The investigation was yet to be made. The question, Have I ever been baptized ? had been prayerfully asked. It was yet to be conscien- tiously answered. But if the very doubt was so dis- tressing to her mother, and so ridiculous to Mr. Percy (as it had seemed to be from some remarks he made on the way home from the river), how would the final deci- sion affect them, if it should be made in favor of immer- sion ! Yet, aided by power from on high, she felt her resolution grow still stronger to please God rather than those whom she loved better than all else on earth. And she had peace verging almost on joy.
When her mother came back, Theodosia saw that she had been weeping ; but no further allusion was made to the subject of Baptism, until Mr. Percy came in after supper.
This young man was a lawyer. He had united with the Presbyterian Society, to which Mrs. Ernest and her daughter belonged, during an extensive revival of reli- gion, while he was yet a mere boy. Since he had come to years of maturity, he had constantly doubted whether he was really a converted man, and often seriously re- gretted the obligation that bound him to a public recog- nition of the claims of personal religion. He often made it convenient to be absent when the Sacrament of the Supper was to be celebrated, from an inward con- sciousness that he was an unfit communicant ; yet his external deportment was unexceptionable, and his brethren regarded him as a most excellent member, and one whose intellectual capacity and acquirements
DOUBTS INCREASING. 13
would, one day place him in a condition to reflect great honor on the denomination to which he belonged.
He had already taken a high position in the ranks of Ills profession ; and had come to the sage conclusion, that the possession of the heart and hand of the charm- ing Theodosia was all that was required to complete his arrangements for worldl}" happiness ; and having over- heard her remark to her brother, that if what they had just witnessed was baptism, they had never been bap- tized, he hastened to her side, and on their way home exerted all his powers of raillery to drive this new con- ception from her mind.
As for himself, he had never had a serious thought upon the question. He had l)een told that he was bap- tized in his infancy, and took it for granted that all was right. He had ver}' serious doubts about his ever having been converted, but never the shadow of a doubt whether he had been Ijaptized. When he listened to the religious conversation of some of his friends, and especially of the young lady of whom we are speaking, he heard many expressions, which, to him, were meaningless, and seemed almost fanatical. They talked of sorrows which he had never felt ; of joys, the source of which he could not understand ; and strangest of all, to him, appeared that habitual subjection to the Mader^a will, which led them to ask so constantly, and so earnestly, not what was de- sirable to themselves or agreeable to those about them, but what wa^ required by the command of Christ.
That one should do this, or that, under the conviction that to refuse or neglect to do so would endanger their souVs salvation, he could easil^^ understand; but how any one could attach much importance to any act not absolutely essential to obtain eternal life, was to his mind an unfathomable mystery. He had himself determined to secure his own souPs salvation at any cost, and if he
14 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
had believed that immersion would insure salvation, lie would have been immersed a hundred times, had so much been required. But thinking it as easy to get to heaven without, as with it, the whole business of baptism seemed to him as of the slightest imaginable consequence.
" What difference does it make to you, Miss Ernest," said he, "whether you have been baptized or not? Baptism is not essential to salvation."
" True," she replied ; "but if my Saviour commanded me to be baptized, and I have never done it, I have not obeyed him. T must, so far as I can, keep o,ll his com- mandments."
"But who of us ever does this? I am sure I have not kept them all. I am not certain that I know what they all are. If our salvation depended on perfect obe- dience to all his commandments, I doubt if any body would be saved but you. You are the only person I ever knew who had no faults."
" Oh ! Mr. Percy, do not trifle M^ith such a subject. It is not a matter of jesting. I do not perfectly obey. I wish I could. I am grieved at heail da}^ after day to see how far I fall short of his requirements. Oh, no. I do not hope or seek for salvation by my obedience. If I am ever saved, it will be by boundless mercy freely forgiving me. But then, if I love my Saviour, how can I wilfully refuse obedience to his requirements ? I do not obey to secure heaven by my obedience, but to please him who died to make it possible for a poor lost sinner like me ever to enter heaven. I think I would endeavor to do his will, even if there were no heaven and no hell."
Mr. Percy did not understand this. If he had been convinced that there was no heaven and no hell, he felt quite sure that all the rites, and rules, and ceremonies of religion would give him very little trouble. It was nnl}' in order fo save Jii.^ snnj that he meddled willi re
DOUBTS INCREASING. 15
ligion at all ; and all that could be dispensed with, with- out endangering his own final sah'ation, he regarded tia of very little consequence. He read some portion of the Scriptures almost ever^^ day (when business was not too pressing). He said over a form of prayer ; and sometimes went to the communion table, because he regarded these as religious duties, in the performance of which, and by leading a moral life, he had some in- distinct conception that he. ica^^ irorking out for himself eternal salvation. Take away this one object, and he had no further use for religion, or religious ordinances.
"I know," said he, "that 3'ou are a more devoted Christian than I ever hope to be, but you surely cannot regard baptism as any part of religion. It is a mere form. A simple ceremony. Only an outward act of the body not affecting the heart or the mind. Why even the Baptists themselves, though they talk so much about it, and attach so much importance to it, admit that true believers can be saved without it."
" That is not the question in my mind, Mr. Percy. I do not ask whether it is essential to salvation^ but whether it is commanded in the Word of God. I do not feel at liberty to sin as much as I can, without abandoning the hope that God will finall}^ forgive me. I cannot think of following my Saviour as far off as I can, without resigning my hopes of heaven. Wh}' should I venture as near the verge of hell as I can go without falling in ? My Saviour died upon the cross for my salvation. I trust in him to save me. But he says, ' If ye love me, keep my commandments' — not this one or that one, but all his commandments. How can I pretend to love, if I do not obey him ? If he commands me to be baptized, and I have not done it, / must do it yet. And if that which we saw at the river was baptism, then I have never been baptized."
16 THEODOSIA EKxNEST.
"And so you think that all the learned world are wrong, and this shoemaker, turned preacher, is right ; that our parents are no better than heathens, and a young lady of eighteen is bound to teach them their duty, and set them a good example. Really it will be a feast to the poor Baptists to know what a triumph they have gained. It will be considered quite respectable to be immersed after Miss Theodosia Ernest has gone into the water."
" Oh, Mr. Percy," said the young lady (and her eyes were filled with tears), " how can you talk thus lightly of an ordinance of Jesus Christ ? Was it not respect- able to be immersed after the glorious Son of God had gone into the water ? If my dear Redeemer was im- mersed, and requires it of me, I am sure I need not hesitate to associate with those who follow his example and obey his commandments, even though they should l)e poor, and ignorant, and ungenteel."
" Forgive me, Miss Ernest, I did not intend to offend you ; but really the idea did appear exceedingly ridicu- lous to me, that a young lady who had never spent a single month in the exclusive study of theology, should set herself up so suddenly as a teacher of Doctors of Divinity. If sprinkling were not baptism, we surely have talent, and piety, and learning enough in our church to have discovered the error and abandoned the practice long ago. But pardon me. I will not say one word to dissuade you from an investigation of the sub- ject. And I am very sure, when you have studied it carefully, 3^ou will be more thoroughly convinced than ever before of the truth of our doctrines, and the cor- rectness of our practice. If you will permit, I will assist you in the examination ; for I wish to look into the subject a little to Ibrtify m}' own mind with some argu- ments against these new comers, as I understand there
DOUBTS INCREASING 17
are several others of our members who are almost as nearly convinced that they have never been baptized as you are, and I expect to be obliged to have an occa- sional discussion, in a quiet way."
" Oh, yes. I sliall be so happy to have your assist- ance. You are so much more capable of eliciting the truth than 1 am. When sliall we begin ?"
" To-night, if you please. I will call in after supper, and we will read over the testimony."
They parted at her mother's door. He went to his office, revolving in his mind the arguments that would be most likely to satisfy her doubts. She retired to her closet and poured out her heart to God in earnest prayer for wisdom to know, and strength to do all her Heavenly Master's will, whatever it might be ; and before she rose from her knees, had been enabled to resolve, with full determination of purpose, to obey the commandment, even though it caused the loss of all things for Christ. The only question in her heart was now, " Lord, what wilt thou have me to do ?"
True to his promise, Mr. Percy came in soon after supper, anticipating an easy victory over the doubts and difficulties which had so sud(]enlv sugorested themselves, to the mind of his intended l)ride. He could not help admiring her more, and loving her better, for that inde- pendence of thought and conscientious regard for right, which made the discussion necessary ; and it gratified his vanity to think how fine a field he should have to display- those powers of argument which he had sedu- lously cultivated for the advantage of his professional pursuits.
How he succeeded will be seen in the next chapter.
THE FIRST NIGHT'S STUDY.
THE BOOK OF TESTIMONY.
THE QUESTION STATED.
MEANING OF THE WORD BAPTIZE AS SETTLED BY CHRIST HIMSELF.
VALUE OF LEXICONS.
A MOTHER'S ARGUMENTS. THE DAUGHTER'S ANSWER.
FIEST FIGHT'S STITDT.
OW, Miss Theodosia," said he, " let us begin by examining the witnesses. When we have collected all the testimony, we shall be able to sum up on the case, and you shall bring in the verdict."
" That is right," said she, with a smile, the first that had illumined her face since she stood by the water. " ' To the law and to the testimony ; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.' Here (may it please the court) is the record," handing him a well-worn copy of the New Testament.
" Well, how are we to get at the point about which we are at issue ? It is agreed, I believe, that Jesus Christ commanded his disciples, in all ages, to be bap- tized."
"Yes, sir, I so understand it."
" Then it would seem that our question is a very simple one. It is, whether you and I, and others who, like us, have been sprinkled in their infancy, have ever been baptized ? In other words. Is the sprinkling of infants, in the name of the Father^ Son^ and Holy Ghost, the baptism which is required in this book ?"
" That is the question," she replied. " I merely want to know if I was ever baptized. I was sjjrinkled in the church. That lady, to-da}^, was immersed into the river. If she was baptized, / was not. That is the point. There is but one baptism. Which is it? the sprinkling or the dipping?"
(21)
22 TIlEODObIA ERNEST.
" Oh, if that is all, we can soon settle the question. Sprinkling and pouring and dipping are all baptism, Baptism is the application of water as a religious ordi- nance. It don't matter as to the mode of application It may be done one way or another, so that it is done with the right design. I see from what your dilKculty has arisen. You have misapprehended the nature of the word baptize. You have considered it a specific, rather than a generic term."
" I don't know, Mr. Percy, whether I quite compre- hend you. My difficulty arose from a conviction that the baptism, which we witnessed to-day, was just such a one as is described in the Scriptures, where they went down into the water and came up out of the water — whereas my baptism had nothing about it that at all re- sembled the scriptural pattern. Please don't try to m3^stify the subject, but let us see which was the real baptism."
" 1 did not design to mystify the subject, but to bring it into a clearer light. The meaning expressed by some words, is rather a result than an act. If I say to my servant, go down to the office, he may 7mn there, or ivalk there, or ride there, and he obeys me, equally, which- ever he does — so that he gets there, it is all I require of him. Go, then, is a generic or general word, includ- ing a possible variety of acts. If I say to him, run down to the office, he does not obey unless he goes in this specified manner. So we call run a specific temu That is very plain, is it not ?"
" Certainly, Mr. Percy ; I comprehend that."
" Well, then, I say that baptize is a generic term, Jesus Christ said, baptize all nations. He does not say "Whether you shall do it by sprinkling, or pouring, oi dipping ; so that you attain the end proposed, you may do it as you please. If he had said, sprinkle all nations ;
FIRST night's study. 23
that is specific, and his ministers must have sprinkled. If he had said pour upon them with water, that is a specific act, and they must all have poured. If he had said, dip them in water, then they must all have dipped. The word would have required it. But he used the o-eneral term baptize, which signifies any application of water as a religious ordinance, and of course it does not matter as to the mode. You may take your choice."
" But I should, even in that case," said she, "feel in- clined to choose the same mode that he did, and which the early disciples did. There must have been some reas'on for his preference. But how do you determine that the word baptize is a generic term, as you call it — having three or four different meanings ?"
"Simply by reference to the dictionary. Look at Webster. He is good authority ; is he not. He defines baptism to be the application of water as a religious ordinance. What more do you want?"
" But, Mr. Percy," said Edwin, who had been'a silent, but very attentive listener, " the Baptist preacher told Mr. Anxious, the other day, that baptize and baptism were not English words at all, but the Greek words haptizo and baptismos, transferred into the English Bible and not translated. He said that King James would not permit the translators to translate all the words, for fear of disturbing the faith and practice of the church of England, and so they just kept the Greek word — but if they had translated it at all, it must have read dip or immerse instead of baptize."
" Very well, Edwin, but it is not likely that the Bap- tist preacher is much wiser than Presbyterian preachers, or Methodist preachers, or Episcopal preachers. If dip had been the necessary, or even the common meaning of the word, it is very improbable that it would have remained for this unlearned and obscure sect to have
24 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
discovered it Such statements may do very well to delude their simple followers, but they cannot be ex- pected to impose upon the educated world."
"But, Mr. Percy, I have looked up the words in my Greek Lexicon, and I find it is juat as he said — Baptize does mean to immerse. Baptismos does mean immer- sion."
" Oh, as to that, I suppose you got hold of a Baptizo Lexicon."
" Well, here it is ; Doneo^on's Greek Lexicon. You can look for yourself"
Mr. Percy (who, if he was not a thorough Gfeek scholar, yet knew enough of the language to read it readily,) glanced at the word where Edwin had marked it, and ran his eye along the cognate words.
"Baptizo — To immerse repeatedly into a liquid, to submerge, to soak thoroughly, to saturate.
"Baptisis or Baptismos, immersion ; Baptisma, an ob- ject immersed ; Baptistes, one who immerses ; Baptos, immersed, dyed ; Bapto, to dip, to plunge into water, etc."
He was astonished. The thought had never occurred to him before, that baptize was not an English, but a Greek word ; and that he should look in the Greek Lexicon, rather than Webster's Dictionary, to ascertain its real meaning, as it occurred in the New Testament. He turned to the title page and preface for some evi- dence that this was a Baptist Lexicon, but learned that it was published under the supervision of some of the Faculty of the Presbyterian Theological Seminary at Princeton, N. J. ; the very headquarters of orthodox Presbyterianism.
Here was a new phase of the subject. He could only promise to look into this point more particularly the next day ; when, he said, he would procure several dif
FIRST night's study. 25
ferent Lexicons, bj different authors, and compare them with each other.
" In the meantime," said Theodosia, "there is an idea that strikes my mind very forcibly ; and that is, that the Saviour himself has fixed, by his own act, the mean- ing of the word as he employed ity
"How so, Miss Theodosia?"
*' Just in this way ; suppose we admit that it had a dozen meanings before he used it, and that in other books it has a dozen meanings still, yet it is certain that he was baptized. Now, in his baptism a certain act was performed. It may have been sprinkling, pouring, or dipping; but whatever it was, that act was what he meant b}' baptism. That act was what he commanded. His disciples must so have understood it. He gave (if I ma}' speak so) a Divine sanction to that meaning. And when the word was afterward used in reference to his ordinance, it could never have any other. If he was immersed, then the question is decided ; baptism is im- mersion. If he was sprinkled, baptism is sprinkling. If he was poured upon, baptism is pouring. So we need not trouble ourselves about the Lexicons, but can get all our information from the Testament itself"
" There is a great deal of force in that suggestion, Miss Theodosia. It is a pity you could not be a lawyer (And he thought what a partner for a law3'er she would be, and how happ}' it was for him that he had been able to persuade her to promise to become Mrs. Percy.) But while it is true that we may find all the testimony that we need within the record, yet it is important that we get at the real meaning of the record. And as that was written in Greek, I see no reason why we should not seek in the Greek for its true sense. If baptizo means to dip, and baptismos means a dipping, an immersion, we shall be obliged to rest our cause upon some other
26 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
ground. There must, however, be some mistake about this. I will look into it to-morrow."
" I do not care what the Lexicons say," rejoined Theodosia, " I want to get my instructions entirely out of the word of God. I don't wish to go out of the * record,' as 3^ou lawyers say."
" You are right in that ; but how are we to learn the meaning of the record ? If any document is brought into court, it is a rule of law, founded on common sense, that the words which it contains are to be imderstood in their most common, every-day sense, according to the usage of the language in which they are written. Now this document, the New Testament, it seems, was written in Greek, and we are in doubt about the mean- ing of one of the words. We go to the Lexicon, not for any testimony as to the facts of the case, but only to learn the meaning of a very important word used by the witnesses. Matthew and several other witnesses depose that Jesus and others were baptized. If they were present in court, we would ask them what they mean by that word, baptize. We would require them to describe, in other language, the act which was performed — to tell us whether it was a sprinkling, a pouring, or a dipping. But as we cannot bring them personally into court, we must ascertain what they meant in the best way we can ; and that is by a careful examination of the words which they used, and the meaning that would have been attached to them at the time they used them, by the people to whom they were addressed. Now as the documents were written in Greek, of course they used words in the common Greek sense. And we must ascertain their meaning just as we would any other Greek word in any other Greek author; and that is by reference to the lexicons or dictionaries of the Greek language '
FIRST night's study. 27
•* Yery well, Mr. Percy ; you talk like a judge. But svhat if you find all the lexicons agree with this ? What if they all say that the word means dip, plunge, immerse?"
" Why then, we must either admit that those who are said to have been baptized, were plunged, dipped, im- mersed, or deny the correctness of the Lexicons."
" But if you deny the correctness of the Lexicons in regard to this word, what confidence can we have in them in regard to other words? Brother Edwin is studying Greek, and as often as he comes to a word which he has not met with before, he finds it in the Lex- icon, and so learns its meaning ; but if the Lexicons are wrong in this word, they may be wrong in all. Is there no appeal from the authority of the Lexicons ?"
" Certainl}^ we may do in Greek as we do every day in English studies ; we appeal from Johnson to Webster, and from Webster to Walker, and from Walker to Wor- cester. If one does not suit us we may go to another."
"One more question. Are any of these Lexicons Baptist books, made for the purpose of teaching Baptist sentiments ? If so, you know they might be doubtful testimony."
" On the contrary, the Lexicons are made by classical scholars, for the sole purpose of aiding students in the acquisition of the Greek language. I do not suppose any one of them was made with any reference to theo- logical questions, and probably no one of them by a person connected with the Baptist denomination. It is certain most of them were not, and if they all agree in regard to this word, it must be conceded that they did not give it a meaning to suit their personal theo- logical views. There arc a number of them in the Col- lege library, and I will examine them &11 to-morrow, and tell you the result."
28 THEODOSrA ERNEST.
Mr. Percy went back to his office studying the new phase of the question presented in the meaning of the word. " If baptizo in the Greek means to dip, in its pri- mary, common, every-day use, then Jesus Christ waa dipped. Then every time the record says a person was baptized, it expressly says he was dipped. I wonder if it can possibly be so. If so, why have our wise and talented preachers never discovered it ? or, knowing it, can it be possible that they have systematically con- cealed it V
Theodosia retired to her chamber, where she spent a few moments in prayer to God for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and then took her Testament and read how they were baptized of John in the river of Jordan. How Jesus, after he was baptized, came up out of the water. How they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him, and when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip. She compared these statements with what she had seen at the river, and did not need any testimony from the Lexicons to satisfy her that John's baptism and Philip's baptism was immersion. Why else did they go into the water ? Why else was it done in the river ? Ministers don't go into the river to sprinkle their subjects now-a-days. There was no reason for doing it then. Must I then unite with this obscure sect and be immersed ? Must I break away from the communion that I love so dearly — from all my friends and relatives ? Must I part from my dear old pastor, who was, under God, the means of my conver- sion— who has so often counselled me, prayed with me and for me, wept over me, and cherished me as though I had been his own child ? The very thought was ter- rible. She threw herself on her bed and wept aloud. Her crying brought her mother to her side. She
FIRST night's study. 29
kneeled beside the bed, took the poor girl's hand in both of hers, and bade her try to banish this distressing subject from her thoughts. It was not worth -while, she said, for a young girl like her to set up her own opinions, or even to entertain doubts in opjoosition to her minister and others who had spent their lives in the study of this very thing. As for herself, if her pastor, Mr. John- son, said any thing was in the Bible, she always took it for granted it wan there. He had more time to look into these things than she had. It was his business to do it ; and he was better qualified to do it than an}- of his people. And of course, if sprinkling was not true baptism, he would never have practiced it.
" But, mother," sobbed the weeping girl, " I must an- swer to God, and not to pastor Johnson. Much as I love him, I trust I love my Saviour better ; and if my pastor says one thing, and Jesus Christ another, Mr. Johnson himself has often told us to obey God rather than man. I have no choice ; / mu^t obey my Saviour y
"Of course you must, my child; but Mr. Johnson knows better what the Saviour commands than you do. He understands all about these questions. And he will assure you that you have been properly baptized, I know that he agrees exactly with Dr. Fisher, who bap- tized you, as you yourself well remember "
" I remember that he sprinkled a little water in my face, mother ; but if that was baptism which I witnessed to-day, he certainly did not baptize me."
" Well, my dear, try and compose yourself, and go tn sleep ; and I will send for our pastor to come and see you to-morrow. He will soon satisfy your mind."
" I hope he may; and I will try to sleep. Good-night DDother."
THE SECOND NIGHT^S STUDY.
IN WHICH THEODOSIA IS ASSISTED
BY MR. PERCY, THE PASTOR, AND THE SCHOOLMASTER. PRESBYTERIAN AUTHORITIES:
MR. BARNES;
OK. EXPLAINING SCRlPTUltE BY SCKIPTURE.
THEODOSIA'S OPINION OF THEOLOGICAL WEITEfiS
MORE AUTHORITIES '.
DR. Mcknight, dr. chalxMers, john calvin,
PROF. STEWART, JOHN WESLEY, &c.
SECOFD NIGHT'S STUDY.
UNCTUAL to his promise, Mr. Percy came in soon after supper on the next evening, and found the Rev. Mr. Johnson, the pastor of their church, already there. He had called early to take a social cup of tea, having learned that Theodosia was " like to go crazy about these new-fangled Baptist notions."
He did not think she looked much like a maniac, however, though there was a deep and saddened serious- ness upon her face. Nor did she act like a maniac, for never before had she seemed so respectfully affectionate to him and to her mother.
He had not said a word upon the subject of dispute, and seemed reluctant to approach it ; but when Mr. Percy came in, it could no longer be postponed.
" I am very glad to meet you here, Mr. Johnson," said the young man. " Miss Theodosia and I had quite a discussion yesterday evening on the subject of bap- tism. She has taken a fancy that she has never been baptized ; and I believe that I nearly exhausted my logic in trying to convince her that she had. I hope your arguments will be more effectual than mine."
" Really, my children, I don't know," said the old man, *' what I may be able to do ; I have never studied these controversies much ; I think it is better to live in peace and let every one enjoy his own conscientious opinion. These discussions are apt to run into disputes and quarrels, and often occasion a great deal of ill
(33)
g^ THEODOSIA ERNEST.
feeling. I have known them to divide churches, and even families. It is better to avoid them."
"But what are we to do with such lovely heretics as this ?" said the young man, with a smile and a sly glance loward her mother. " She must be satisfied that she has been baptized, or you will have her running to the school-house next Sunday to hear that uneducated Baptist preacher, and ten to one, she will ask him to go down into the water ancl baptize her according to the New Testament model. She sa^^s she wants to be bap- tized as Jesus Christ vfas, and that was in the river, you know."
"Oh, as to that," rejoined the pastor, "there is no evidence that Jesus Christ was immersed in the river at all. It has been satisfactorily proved that he was sprinkled or poured upon ; and it is very certain that sprinkling was practiced by the apostles and early Christians."
" Oh, I am so glad to hear you say that," replied the young lady. " You don't know what a load it has taken off' my mind Do tell me how it in ascertained that Christ did not go into the river, and what evidence there is that he was sprinkled, and it was sprinkling which he commanded. You can't imagine how anxious I am to know."
Well, I don't know that I can call up all the evi- dence just at this time, and we would not have time to go over it, if I could ; but you ma}'' be assured that there is such evidence, and that of the most satisfactory character, or else all the learned and talented theo- logical scholars of the various Pedobaptist churches would not have continued, for so many ages, to teach and practice it."
" Certainly, I have no doubt the evidence exists, since you say so ; but can't you tell me what it is, or show mo
SECOND night's STUDY. 35
where to find it ? I shall never be able to rest in peace till I am convinced that I have been baptized. And if that which I witnessed at the river yesterday was bap- tism, I am sure I never was."
" Oh, don't be so confident, my daughter. There are more modes of l^aptism than one. That was, perhaps one mode (though of that I have some doubt). You were baptized by another mode. That may have been baptism. Yours certainly ivas.''^
" Well, do please })rove it to me some way, Mr. John- son. What you sa}' is something like what Mr. Percy said yesterday. He told me that baptize was a generic term, expressing rather a certain result than any spe- cific act. I think that was the idea, was it not, Mr. Percy?"
" Exactly ; and if so, I leave it to Mr. Johnson if the manner of reaching the result is not a matter of indif- ference."
" Certainly," said the pastor; " * baptism is the appli- cation of water as a religious ordinance.' It does not matter about the quantity of water or the mode of applying it."
" Yes ; that is what mother said 3'esterday. And we looked in Webster, and found that such was, indeed, the present English use of the word baptize. But bro- ther says baptize is a Greek word slightly modified, and transferred from the Greek Testament to the English. Jt is the New Testament meaning in the time of Christy and among the people for whom the Gospels were first written, that we want, not the meaning that it has ac- quii'ed in the English since its transfer to our language.''
"You see, pastor, she is going to be hard to satisfy. She pleads her cause like a hxwyer."
" No, no, Mr. Percj-, I will not be hard to satisfy. I desire, I long, I pray to be satisfied. I can never rest 3
86 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
till I am satisfied. I only ask for the evidence' You said yesterday that haptizo was a generic term meaning to sprinkle, to pour, or to dip; bnt we found it in the Lexicon, and it proved to l)e a specific term, meaning only to dip. Xot a word was there about sprinkling or pouring. It was simply and only dipping. To-day, Mr. ■Johnson tells me about several modes — but they arc not modes of dipping. And yet if the Greek word haptismos, baptism, means dipping, then the}' must, in order to bo modes of baptism, be modes of dipping But, Mr, Percy, you have not yet told us the result of your examination of other Lexicons."
" We can make nothing out of them. 1 am sorry to say they all agree substantially with the one you have in the house. If we trust to them we must grant that the word means primarily and ordinarily to dip, to plunge, to immerse. Of this there is no doubt."
"Then I am more perplexed than ever. You said yesterday that in order to know what the act was which the disciples performed and Christ commanded, we must ascertain the precise meaning of baptize, as they em- ployed it in the Greek language. You have examined all the Lexicons (the highest authorities) and find they all agree in saying it was dip, ])lunge, immerse. You ad- mitted yesterday that if tiiey should agree in this, the question was settled. If they -said baptize meant to dip, and baptismoH a dipping or immersion, then every time we read that one was ba])tized, we must understand that he was immersed. I thought that was a plain, straight- forward case. I felt that I could understand it. Well, now you say you have examined carefully the other Lexicons, and they all agree with this. No one says sprinkle, no one says pour — all say dip, and conse- quently the Gospel says that Jesus was dipjjed of John m the river of Jondaii. But then our pastor says that
SECOND NIGHT S STUDY. 37
he has evidence that Jesus did not enter the river at all, and that he was sprinkled, and not dipped. Of course he would not say it unless it was so, but I really don't understand how it can be so."
"I have some curiosity on that point myself," said Mr. Percy, evidently relieved to find that he could (for the moment, at least), take the other side of the ques- tion. " I find m^^self in a very close place. These Lexicons have killed me. I don't know what to say. I suppose, of course, there is some way to get around the difficulty ; but I must leave it to our pastor to point it out. For my part, I submit the case."
" Really," said Mr. Johnson, " the question never pre- sented itself to me in just this light before. You must give me a little time to consider about it. And in the meantime let me beg of you both that you will examine some of the standard writers upon the subject. I do not think you have done this yet. What have you in the house ?"
" Not a book upon the subject, except it be the Bible, and I don't much care to read any other till we have examined that. If sprinkling is there, it ought to be so plainly taught that I can see it for myself. If I can't find it, I will always doubt if it is there," rejoined the young lady.
" True, my child," said the pastor ; " but we often fail to see things at first glance, which are very evident when they have once been pointed out, and our attention fixed upon them. This is the advantage of using proper helps to understand the Scriptures. Those not familiar with the language in which they were written, and with the customs and manners of the people to whom they were originally addressed, will derive great assisitance from judicious criticisms. I like, myself, always to read
38 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
a cominentary on every chapter that I attempt to under- stand."
" Oh, as to commentaries, we have Barnes' Notes on the Gospels, and on some of the Epistles. And we have McKnight's exposition and new translation of the Epistles. Uncle Jones admires these old volumes of McKnight's very much, but they always seemed very dry to me. I love Mr. Barnes, and have studied hia notes in Sunday-school and Bihle class all my life."
" Mr. Barnes is a very learned and eminent divine," replied the pastor. " llis notes have attained a wide circulatiou, and won for him an enduring reputation. You cannot follow a safer guide. Have you examined him npon the subject?"
"I sup[)ose," said she, "that I have read it a dozen times, but I never thought any thing particularly about it, and don't recollect a word."
" Suppose, then, you get his Notes, and let us look at them a moment before I leave. I can stay but a few minutes longer."
Edwin had found the volume while they were talking of it, and now handed it to the pastor.
" I suppose we shall find it here, Matthew iii. G, as this is the place where the word baptize first occurs. Mr. Percy, will you have the kindness to read it aloud for our common benefit?"
Mr. Percy read : "And were baptized of him in Jor- dan, confessing their sins." "The word baptize signi- fies, originally, to tinge, to dye, to dain, as those who dye clothes. It here means to cleanse or wash any thing by the apidication of water. (See note, Mark vlL 4.)
"Washing or al)hition was much in use among the Jews, as one of the rites of their religion. It was not customary, however, to baptize those who were converted
SECOND NIGHT'S STUDY. 39
lo the Jewish religion until after the Babylonish oap- Uvity.
"At the time of John, and for some time previous, they had been accustomed to administer a rite of hap- tism or washing to those who became proselytes to their religion, that is, who were converted from being Gen- tiles." * * * " John found this custom in use, and as he was calling the Jews to a new dispensation, to a chanore in the form of their reliorion, he administered thia rite of baptism Dr washing to signify the cleansing from their sins, and adopting the new dispensation, or the fitness for the pure reign of the Messiah. Thc}^ applied an old ordinance to a new purpose ; as it was used by John it was a significant rite or ceremony, intended to denoie the putting away of impurity, and a purpose to be pure in heart and life."
Mr. Percy stopped reading, and looking up at Mr. Johnson, said, "Pardon me, pastor, but if Mr. Barnes were present here as a witness in this case, I would like to ask him a single question by wa}' of a cross-examina- tion. He sa^'s that ' Washing or ablution was much in use among the Jews as one of the rites of their religion,' and yet he tells us that baptism was not in use till after the captivity. Must not baptism then have been some- thing: new and different from the washing or ablution?"
"And I," said Theodosia, " would like to ask a ques- tion too ; perhaps pastor Johnson can answer it as well as Mr. Barnes. He says, when they received a convert from the Gentiles, they baptized him ; John found this rite in use, and merely applied an old ordinance to a new purpose. Now, I want to know how this ordinance was administered. What was the act ^hich they per- formed upon the proselyte ? Did they sprinkle him, or pour upon him, or was he immersed ? If this can be ascertained, It will of couise determine what it was that
40 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
John did when he baptized. Can you tell us, Mr. John- son, which it was ?"
" Yes, my child ; it is universally conceded that the Jewish prosel3^te baptism was immersion. I do not know that this has ever been denied b^^ any writer on either side of this controversy. It is distinctly stated to have been immersion by Dr. Lightlbot, Dr. Adam Clarke, Prof. Stuart, and others who have espoused our cause."
" IIow then do you get rid ot the difficulty ? If, as Mr. Barnes says, 'John applied an old ordinance to a new purpose,' and that old ordinance was immersion, it is absolutely certain that John immersed. There is not room for even the shadow of a doubt."
"It would seem to be so, indeed," said the pastor. *' I never thought of it just in that light before. But though it is admitted by all that the proselyte baptism was immersion, it is doubted by many whether it ex- isted at all before the time of John. Some think it originated about the time of Christ, and that the Jews practised it in imitation of John's baptism."
" I do not see," rejoined Mr. Percy, " how it can make the slightest difference in the result of the argument, whether it was in use before the time of John, or was borrowed from him. If they immersed before the time of John, and he borrowed his rite from them, of course it was immersion that he borrowed. If they immersed after the time of John, and borrowed their rite from him, of course John immersed, or they could not have borrowed immersion from him."
" But if John immersed," said Theodosia, " then Jesus was ivimersed by John. This immersion was called his baptism. The disciples saw it, and spake of it as such ; and ever afterward, whenever baptism was mentioned, their minds would revert to this act; and so, when Jesus said
SECOND night's study. 41
to them, 'Go and baptize,' thc}^ must haA^e understood him to mean, that they should go and repeat on others the rite which they had seen performed on him. And not only so." added the 3'oung lady, " but Christ's disciples had themselves been accustomed to j)ractice the same baptism under his own eye. If John im- mersed, the}' had not only witnessed his immersion of Jesus, but they had themselves immersed hundreds, if not thousands, under the personal direction of Jesus himself."
" That would certainly settle the question. But where did you make that discover}' ?" asked Mr. Percy, increduously.
" Oh, it is in the record," she replied. " Here is the testimony, John iii. 22, 23: 'After these things, came Jesus and his disci])les into the land of Judea, and there he tarried with them, and baptized. And John also was baptizing in JEnon, near to Salim, because there was much water there; and they came, and were Ijaptized.' And in the next chapter it says that the ' Pharisees heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John.' Now John baptized and Jesus baptized. They both did the same thing ; that is as plain as words can make it : as plain as though it said Jesus walked, and John also walked; or Jesus talked, and John also talked. Whatever it was that John did, Jesus was doing the same thing. If John's baptism was immersion, then Jesus and his disciples were im- mersing, and they immersed more than John."
" That is really," said Mr. Percy, " a complete demon- stration. Don't you think so, Mr. Johnson?"
" Well, I must confess it looks so at the first glance. We must look into this matter another time. Let us, for the present, see what Mr. Barnes says further,
42 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
Please read on, Mr. Percy ; I have not much more time to spare this evening." Mr. Percy read on :
" The Hebrew word (tabal) which is rendered by the [Greek] word baptize, occurs in the Old Testament in the following places: — Lev. iv. 6; xiv. 6, 51 ; Num. xix. 18; Ruth ii. 14; Ex. xii. 22; Deut. xxxiii. 24; Ezk xxiii. 15 ; Job Ix. 31 ; Lev. ix. 9 ; 1 Sam. ix. 27 ; 2 Kinga V. 14 ; viii. 15 ; Gen. xxxvii. 31 ; Joshua iii. 15. It occurs in no other places ; and from a careful examination of these passages, its meaning among the Jews is to be derived."
" Oh," said the young lady, " that is what I like ; 1 like to find the meaning in the Scriptures, then I know I can rely upon it. Just wait a minute, Mr. Percy, if you please, till I can get my Bible and hunt out those places, and see how it reads. If it reads sprinkle, then it is all right — sprinkling is baptism ; if it reads pour, then pouring is baptism ; if it reads dip, then dipping is baptism. We will soon see."
" Let me read a little further. Miss Theodosia, and perhaps you may not think it necessary to examine the texts."
She had, however, got her Bible, and was gettins; ready to turn to each text in order, when he resumed as follows :
" From these passages, it will be seen that its radical meaning is not to sprinkle or to immerse. It is to dip. Commonly for the purpose of sprinkling or for some other purpose."
" What ? Do let me see that. Pardon me, pastor, but what does the good man mean ? It is not to sprinkle ; it is not to immerse ; it is to dip / Edwin, please get Webster's Dictionary, and tell us the difier- f»ncc between the meaning of dip and immerse."
6EC0ND night's STUDY. 43
•' Here it is. Immerse is to plunge into a fluid. Dip is to plunge any thing into a fluid, and instantly take it out again."
" Why, Mr. Percy, that just describes the act of bap- tism which we saw at the river. It was not an immer- sion, strictly speaking, but a dipping, a plunging be- neath the water, and a raising out again. * It is not to sprinkle or to immerse ; it is to dip 1 Commonly for the purpose of sprinkling, or for some other purpose.' " " What are you laughing at, brother Edwin ?" " I was only thinking how a preacher would look, dipping a man ' for the purpose of sprinkling' him. But see 1 there goes my teacher, and I believe he is a Bap- tist. At any rate he goes to all their meetings. Let me call him in ; he can tell us something more about these things."
And before any one could interfere, he had run to the door and hailed ^Ir. Courtney.
Seeing this, the Kev. Mr. Johnson arose, and remind- ing the company that he had an engagement at that hour, promised to call again and talk over the matter more, at another day, and took his leave, passing out just as the teacher was coming in,
" Mr, Courtney," said Mr. Percy, " perhaps you can help us a little. We were just looking at Barnes on Baptism."
" I did not know he had ever written on the subject, except some very singular remarks he made in his Notes on the third chapter of Matthew."
" It was those we were examining, and I infer that you do not think very favorably of his argument."
'* I think he makes a very strong argument for the Baptists," "How so?" " Simply thus: It is an axiom in logic as well as in
44 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
mathematics, ' that things which are equal to the same thing, are equal to one another.' Now he states a very remarkable and exceedingly significant fact, when he he says that the Hebrew word tabal is rendered by the ivord baptize. It occurs, he sa^^s, fifteen times in the Hebrew Bible. Now when the Jews translated their Scriptures into Greek, whenever they came to this word, they rendered it baptize; and when our translators came to this same word, they rendered it by the English word dip. It follows, therefore, since dip in English and baptize in Greek are both equivalent to tabal in Hebrew, they must be equivalent to each other.
" Mr. Barnes says further, that the true way to ascer- tain the meaning of this word amono^ the Jews, is to ex- amine carefully the fifteen places where it occurs in the Old Testament. I see. Miss Ernest, that you have the Bible in your hand ; suppose you turn to those places, and let us see how they read. It will not take more than a few minutes of our time."
** I had gotten the book for that very purpose, sir. I like this way of study, comparing Scripture with Scrip- ture. I always feel better satisfied with my conclusions when I have drawn them for myself directly from the Bible."
" Well, here is the first place, Leviticus iv. 6 : ' And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood.'
" The second, Leviticus xiv. 6 : 'And shall dip them into the blood of the bird that was killed over running water.'
" The third, Leviticus xiv. 51 : 'And dip them in the blood of the slain bird and in the running water.'
"The fourth, Numbers xix. 18: 'And a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip it into the water.'
"The fifth, Ruth ii. 14: 'And Boaz said unto her at
fhMdosia Ernest
PAGE 45.
SECOND night's STUDY. 47
moal time, come thou hither, and eat of the bread, and dip thy morsel in the vinegar.'
" The sixth, Exodus xii. 22 : 'And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood.'
" The seventh, Deuteronomy xxxiii. 24 : 'And let him dip his foot in oil.'
"The eighth, Ezekiel xxiii. 15: 'Exceeding in dyed attire.'
" The ninth, Job ix. 31 : ' Yet shalt thou plunge, me in the ditch.'
" The tenth, Leviticus ix. 9 : ' And he dipped his finger in the blood.'
" The eleventh, 1 Samuel xiv. 27 : ' And he (Jonathan) put forth the end of the rod that was in his hand, and dipped it in the honey comb.'
"The twelfth, 2 Kings viii. 16: 'And he (Hazael) took a thick cloth, and dipped it in the water, and spread it on his face.'
"The thirteenth, Joshua iii. 15: 'The feet of the priests that bare the ark were dipped in the brim of Jordan.'
" The fourteenth, 2 Kings v. 14 : ' And he went down and dipped himself seven times in Jordan.'
"The fifteenth. Genesis xxxvii. 31: 'And they took Joseph's coat, and killed a kid, and dipped the coat in the blood.'
" The passage in the 2 Kings v. 14, is very remark- able, since it corresponds precisely in the Septuagint to the text in Matthew. The Septuagint says of Naaman, Ebaptizalo en to Jordane. Matthew says of the people baptized by John, Ebapfisonto en to Jordane. Nobody has ever questioned the correctness of the translation in Kings. He dipped himself in Jordan; and had Matthew been translated by the same rule, it must have read, they were dipped by John in Jordan.
48 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" But 1 fear this subject may be disagreeable to you. Mr. Barnes, I know, is a most eminent minister of your own denomination, and I ought probably to have avoided speaking thus in your presence."
" Oh, no, sir," said the young lady ; " I want to learn the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, on this subject. I am glad to learn it from any source, and in any way. Perhaps you can assist us further ; but let us see what further Mr. Barnes has to say."
Mr. Percy read again :
" In none of these cases can it be shown that the meaning of the word is to immerse entirely. But in nearly all the cases the notion of applying the water to a part only of the person or object, though it was by
dipping, is necessarily supposed It cannot be
proved, from an examination of the passages in the Old and New Testaments, that the idea of a complete im- mersion ever was connected with the word, or that it ever in any case occurred.''^
" Stop, Mr. Percy," said the young lady. " Pray stop, and let me think a moment. Can it be possible that a good man, a pious minister of Jesus Christ, could dare to trifle thus with the holy Word of God ? Oh, it is wonderful I I cannot understand it 1 He said just now, that the meaning of the word ' was to dip for the purpose of spriukliug, or for some other purpose.' To dip means to plunge any thing into a fluid, and immediately take it out again. To immerse means merely to plunge the object in the fluid. Whatever is dipped, therefore, is of necessity immersed, to the same extent that it is dipjicd ; and yet he says these things which the Word says were dipped, were none of them entirely immersed."
*' Do not think too hardly of him," said Mr. Percy. "An advocate who has a bad cause to sustain (1 know
SEOONT) night's STUDY. 49
from experience), is sometimes obliged to resort to just such a jumble, to cover the weak points of his argument,"
" Perhaps," said Theodosia, " it might be excusable in a lawyer, though even of that I am doubtful ; but that a minister of the holy Word of Jesus should thus stoop to * darken counsel with words without knowledge,' is something I never conceived of till now."
" When you have become more familiar with the influ- ence which passion and prejudice, and especially early education and church attachments, exert upon the minds of even the wisest and best of men," said Mr. Courtney, " these things will not appear so strange to you. Mr. Barnes doubtless believes that sprinkling is baptism. He was taught so in early life, and has for many years taught others so. To convince him of the contrary, would now be almost or quite impossible, and when any text of Scripture comes in opposition to this opinion, he can hardly help perverting or misunderstanding it. Vou desired to know the true meaning of the word bap- tize, as it was used in our Saviour's time among the Jews ; and you applied to him for information. He told you very properly that you must go to those places where it occurs in the original of their own Scriptures, and poiiiled out to you the fifteen places, which he assures you are the only places in which it occurs. He has thus given the matter into your own hands. You turn to the places, one by one, and find that in fourteen out of the fifteen it clearly means to dip. That such is the case, he does not deny. He is obliged to grant that ' its radical meaning is to cZzp.' This, now, he has proved from the Scriptures themselves. But this overthrows his sprinkling, so he must get rid of its force. This he undertakes to do — 1. B}' intimating that there is some important difference between dipping and immersion. 'It is not sprinkling nor immersion,' he says; 'it is
50 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
dipping.' And then he tries to confuse the matter by mixing in the object, * for the purpose of s[)rinkling, or for some other purpose,' as though the purpose modified the act performed. The baptism mentioned in these fourteen places was equally dipping, whether it was jjerfornied for the purpose of sprinkling, as when the priest dipped the hyssop ; or for the purpose of smear- ing, as when the priest dipped the tip of his finger in oil ; or for the purpose of cleansing, as when Naaman dipped himself in Jordan; or for the purpose of pollu- tion, as when Job was plunged in the ditch ; or merely for the purpose of wetting, as when Ruth dipped her morsel, or Hazael his thick cloth. The wetting, the de- filing, the cleansing, the smearing, were not the baptism ; they were not the dipping, but a consequence of it. The sprinkling was not the baptism, the dipping, but a sub- sequent and altogether a different act. Then to make 'confusion worse confounded,' he intimates some vast distinction between entire immersion and dipping. These things, said to be baptized in these fourteen places, he can't deny were dipped ; but ' none of them,' he says, 'were entirely immersed.' But the extent of the immersion does not aff'ect the meaning of the word. The word immersed expressed only the act of plunging the object into the fluid. The word dip expressed this act, and the additional one of taking it out again ; and this, he said and proved, was the Scriptural meaning of baptize. As far, then, as they were baptized, they w^ere dipped ; and as far as they were dipped, they were im- mersed. We learn the extent of the dipping from other words, not from this one. If Naaman is said to have dipped himself, or Hazael the cloth, there is not the slightest reason to doubt that the whole person and the whole cloth were immersed. If Jonathan dipped the end of his stalf, vv'hy the end only was immersed. It was
SECOND night's STUDY. 51
immersed, however, just as much as it was dipped or baptized."
"But," said Mr. Percy, "what will you do with the hyssop, and the living bird, etc., that were to be bap- tized into the blood of the slain bird, and where Mr. Barnes says it is clearly impossible that they all should be immersed in the blood of the single bird."
" I simply say that they could be immersed in it as easily as they could be dipped in it. If you will turn to Leviticus xiv. 6, you will see that the blood of the slain bird was to be caught over runiling water ; and as it rested on, or mixed with the water, these things could all be entirely immersed, if need be. You will remem- ber, however, that in common language the whole of a thing is often mentioned when a part is only meant. I say, for instance, that I dipped my pen in ink, and wrote a line ; you do not understand that I dipped more than the point — enough to take up the ink to write. If I tell you that I dipped my hair brush in water, and smoothed my hair, you do not understand that I dipped it in, handle and all, but only the bristles. So only enough of the cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet, etc., may have been dipped to take up enough to sprinkle with ; but as much as they were baptized, so much were they dipped ; and so far as they were dipped, just so far were they immersed. But it does not make any difference to Mr. Barnes or his sprinkling brethren, whether the dip- ping was partial or complete ; for they do not dip their subjects of baptism at all, in whole or in part, for the purpose of sprinkling, or for any other purpose ; and, therefore, if the Scriptural meaning of the word baptize Ls to dip, as Mr. Barnes has so clearly proved by Scrip- ture itself, then they do nrt baptize at all.
" Oh, yes, I see now how it was," said Theodosia, "when Dr. FishfM- performed this ceremony upon me.
52 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
He baptized his own hand ; for he dipped that in the bowl, but he only sprinkled me ; and therefore, accord- ino- to the showing of Mr. Barnes himself, I have never been baptized."
" Do not put down the book yet," said Mr. Courtney. " Just turn to Matthew xx. 22, and you will find that Mr. Barnes has no more difficulty than the greatest Baptist in the land, in understanding the word baptism to signify not only immersion, but complete immersion, whenever it does not refer to the ordinance.
" ' The baptism that I am baptized with.' On this Mr. B. remarks as follows: 'Are ye able to suffer with me the trials and pains which shall come upon you in endeavoring to build up my kingdom ? Are ye able to be plunged deep in afflictions ? to have sorrows cover you like water, and to be sunk beneath calamities as floods, in the work of religion ? Afflictions are often expressed by being sunk in the floods and plunged in the deep waters.' (Ps. lix. 2; Isa. xliii. 2; Ps. cxxiv. 4, 5 ; Sam. iii. 54.)
" You see Mr. Barnes has no more difficulty than the translators of the Old Testament, in giving the word its true meaning — to dip, to plunge, to sink beneath the waters, etc., when it does not refer to the ordinance ; but when it does, all is confusion and mystery."
" I begin to think," said Theodosia, "that theologi- cal writers are not to be relied upon at all. And I feel more than ever inclined to trust to the Bible alone, and study it for myself When such a man as Mr. Barnes can be so far blinded by education and prejudice as to come so near the truth and not see it — to point out the way toward it so plainly, and yet refuse to walk in it, and endeavor to hide it from others by such a strange medley of words, I have no further use for any book on the subject but the word of God. I will study that; and
SECOND night's STUDY. 53
it shall be my only guide. If I find that Jesus was sprinkled in Jordan, I will be content. If I find that he was poured upon, I must be poured upon. If 1 find that he was dipped, then I must be dipped."
" Oh, no, Miss Theodosia ; 3^ou are decidedly too hasty. 1 have often found in court, that a witness whom I expected to testily in my favor, and who evi- ■.jently desired and intended to do so, has nevertheless, on a cross-examination, given such testimony as was altogether favorable to the opposite party. But I dijd not abandon my client, and give up my suit. T sought for other witnesses. Our information on this subject is, as 3^et, very limited. There are other sources of evi- dence; let us examine them. Something may yet turn up to change 3'our 0[)iiiion of theological writers. Did you not say you had McKnight on the Kpistles in the house ?"
" Yes ; and uncle Jones, who you know is one of the Elders in our church, says it is one of the best, if not the very best of commentaries."
" Well, let us see what he says. How will we find the place ?"
"Take a concordance," suggested Edwin, "and look at ever}' place where the word baptize occurs."
" That is a first-rate idea. Well, here is the first place. Romans vi. 4. Buried with Christ by baptism. In the note he says : ' Christ's baptism was not the bap^ tism of repentance, for he never committed any sin. But he submitted to be baptized — that is, to be buried under the water by John, and to be raised out again — • as an emblem of his future death and resurrection. In like manner, the baptism of believers is emblematical of their own death, burial, and resurrection ; perhaps, also, it is a commemoration of Christ's baptism.' " 4
D4 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" Stop, Mr. Percy, are 3^ou sure 3-011 are not reading falsely?"
" Yes, J am perfectly certain. Here is the book, you can see for yourself."
" No; but I thought >'ou must be playing some tricl-; on me. At au}^ rate, McKnight must have bepu a Bap- tist. No one who believed in, and practiced sprinkling, could have written in that way."
" Perhaps he was a Baptist. Let us look at the title page and preface, and see who and what he was. It appears from this, that James McKnight, D.D., was born Sept. 17, 1721. Licensed to preach by the Pres- b3^tery of Irwine of the Scotch Presbyterian church. Ordained at Maybole in 1753. Chosen Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presb^'terian church in 17GU, whicli position he held for more than twent}^ years. This brief history of his life, prefixed to the first volume of his Notes, informs us further, that he spent near thirty years of his life in preparing these Notes, and * that the whole manuscript was written over and over, by his owji hand, no less than five times.' The^^ were there- fore the deliberate and carefuU}' expressed opinions of a most eminent and very learned Presbyterian Doctor of Diviuit}', ami presiding officer of the Presb3'terian church in the countr3'' where he lived. Of course he cannot be suspected of any bias toward the obscure and despised sect called the Baptists."
*' Well, read on then. Theologians are mysterious men."
" That is all he says on this verse. But here is verse 5th. 'Planted together,' etc.
*' The burying of Christ and of believers, first in the water of baptism, and afterward in the earth, is fitly enough compared to the jilanting of seeds in the earth
SECOND night's STUDY. 55
because the effect in both cases is a reviviscence to a state of greater perfection.' "
" Surely, he must consider baptism to be a burial in water. But perhaps he thinks there were several bap- tisms, and that dipping was one form or mode, while spriukling was another."
" No, for here is his note on Ephesians iv. 5. One Ijord, one Faith, one Baptism
" ' Ye all,' says he, * serve one Lord, and all have the same object of faith, and have all professed that faith by the same form of baptism.' "
" Has he any thing else on the subject ?"
" Yes, here, on 1 Cor. x. 2, 'And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.'
" ' Because the Israelites, by being hidden from the Egyptians under the cloud, and by passing through the Red Sea, were made to declare their belief in the Lord and his servant Moses, the Apostle very properly repre- sents them as baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.'
"And here again — 1 Cor. xv. 29 — * Else what shall they do who are baptized for the dead.'
" * Otherwise what shall they do to re[)air their loss who are immersed m sutferings for the resurrection of the dead.'
"And here again — II eb. ix. 10 — 'Divers washinsrs (i^a;j/2.smo.s).'
'"With nothing but meats, and drinks, and divers immersions, and ordinances respecting the body.'
" One more place, and we iiave all that he says upon the subject.
" I Peter iii. 21, ' The like figure whereunto ba]jtism doth now save us, etc'
" The walur of bai)tism is here called the anti-type
56 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
of the water of the flood, because the flood was a type or emblem of baptism in three particulars :
" 1. 'As by building an ark and entering into it, Noah showed strong faith in the promise of God, concerning his preservation, by the very water which was to destroy the Antediluvians for their sins. So by giving ourselves to be buried in the water of baptism, we show a like faith in God's promise, that though we die and are buried, he will save us from death and the punishment of sin, by raising us up from the dead at the last day.'
" 2. 'As the preserving of Noah alive during the nine months of the flood, is an emblem of the preservation of the souls of believers while in the state of the dead, so the preserving believers alive while buried in the water of baptism, is a preflguration of the same event.'
" 3. 'As the water of the deluge destroj^ed the wicked, but preserved Noah by bearing up the ark, in which he was shut up, till the waters were assuaged, and he went out to live again upon the earth ; so baptism may be said to destroy [or represent the destruction of] the wicked, and to save the righteous, as it prefigures both these events. The death of the wicked it prefigures by the burial of the baptized person in the water, and the salvation of the righteous by the raising of the bap- tized person out of the water.' "
" Well, Mr. Percy," said Theodosia, " what do you make of this witness ? Do 3'ou wish to cross-examine him, or ask him any further questions?"
" Yes, 1 would like to ask the Rev. Dr. McKnight if he practiced sprinkling for baptism ; and if he did, upon what grounds he could sustain a practice so different from his own exposition of the teachings of the Scrip- ture."
"As Dr. McKnight has not answered in his writings, and is not present in person, it may be satisfactory,"
SECOND NIGHT'S STUDY. 57
suggested Mr. Courtney, " to inquire of some other rep- resentative of the same church establishment. If you have Dr. Chalmers' Lectures on Romans, yon will find the question answered."
" Yes, sister, don't you know mother bought Chal- mers' Lectures only the other day ? I will go and get the book," said Edwin.
"Ah, here it is — page 152; Romans vi. 4-T. 'The original meaning of the ivord baptism, is immersion ; and, though we regard it as a point of indifferency whether the ordinance so named be performed in this wa}^ or by sprinkling, yet we doubt not that the preva- lent style of the administration, in the apostle's da^^s, was 1)3' the actual submerging of the whole body under water. We advert to this for the purpose of throwing light on the analogy which is instituted in these verses. Jesus Christ, by death, underwent this sort of baptism, even immersion under the surface of the ground, whence he soon emerged again by his resurrection. We, by being baptized into his death, are conceived to have made a similar translation — in the act of descending under the water of baptism, to have resigned an old life ; and in the act of ascendinof, to emerore into a second or new life.' Here we have a distinct avowal of the well-established fact that the meaning of the word bap- tism is immersion, and that the practice of the Apos- tolic church was conformable to this truth. But in the very face of it we have the candid declaration ' that we (Presbyterians) regard it as a matter of indifferency whether the ordinance so named be performed in this way or by sprinkling.' "
" But, Mr. Courtney, how can it be a matter of ' in- dilferency V If the word means immersion, then im- mersion was what Christ commanded — then the ' ordi- nance so-called' is 'immersion.' How can immersion be
58 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
performed by sprinkling? Really, these theologians are a strange, mysterious people. 1 cannot compre- hend them. Christ commands me to be baptized — bap- tism means immersion — then, of course, if he meant an}^ thing, he meant immersion. But these great and good men tell me it is a matter of ' indiiferency' whether I do what he commanded, or something else altogether different from it."
" Pardon me. Miss I'heodosia ; it is only when the theologians are in error, and blinded by their educa- tional prejudices, or attachment to their church forms and dogmas, that they are so unreasonable and so mys- terious."
" Yet I have been accustomed to think they could hardly be in error at all. I have taken it for granted, until yesterday, that what the ministers of our church said about the teachings of the word of God, was all true, as a matter of course. I can hardly believe now that it is not so. I can't understand how those, who are so wise, so learned, so pious, so anxious to know the truth, and who spend all their time in learning and teaching it, can be wrong ; or how a simple girl like me, may difl'er from them and yet be right. I am afraid to take a single step in opposition to my pastor's teaching, though I see clearly (as I think) that I shall step upon the rock of God's unfailing truth ! How can it be, that such good men talk one way and act another ? How do they try to justify their ' indifferency' to the commands of Christ? They give some reason, do they not?"
" I think most of them don't trouble themselves on the subject : they think little, and care little about it — not deeming it essential to salvation. When they do think or read upon the subject, it is in order to quiet their minds, or reply to an opponent. ^J'hey have the practice of their church, received by tradition ; they
SECOND NIGHT'S STUDY. Hij
Lake it for granted it is right. They are where yon were a day or two since, when you took it for granted Ihat the ministers of your denomination coukl not be wrong. They don't think their church can be wrong ; and they twist, pervert, and torture the Scriptures, as you have seen Mr. Barnes do, or openly set aside their teachings as a matter of ' indifferency,' as we have seen Dr. Chalmers do, in order to continue the usage of the ohurch.^^
"But," asked Theodosia, "does not Dr. Chalmers stand alone upon this point of * indifferency V It surely is not common for the ministers of our church (who in learning and piety I have always thought had no supe- riors in the world) to speak of literal obedience to Christ's commandments as a matter of no consequence. To me it seems to border upon absolute impiety, almost ui)on sacrilege. I am in a maze of astonishment."
"If 3^ou will continue your investigations for a little time, you will cease to be astonished at almost any sort of assertions made by the advocates of sprinkling," said Mr. Courtney. " You will, for instance, find them admitting, in one sentence, that immersion was submit- ted to by Christ, and practiced by the Apostles ; and in another, holding it up to the reprobation and al)h()r- rence of every Christian as an indecent and abominable rite. But, in regard to your question. Dr. Chalmers, so far from standing alone, simph' echoes the sentiments of Calvin, the founder of your church, and others of its most eminent supporters. ' It is of no consequence at all,' says Calvin, as quoted by Prof Stuart, 'whether the baptized person is totally immersed, or whether he is merely sprinkled by an affusion of water. This should be a matter of choice to the churches in different regions, although the word baptize signifies to immerse, and the rite of immersion wns practiced b}' the ancient
60 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
church.' 'To this opinion,' says Prof. Stuart, '1 do most fully and heartily subscribe.'"
" Well, I declare ! these Presbyterian Doctors of Divinity are the most mysterious of people to me. They freely admit that the meaning of the word is to Immerse, or to dip, and that immersion was practiced by the first churches — (and of course, if such is the meaning of the word, it must have been practiced by the first churches, as they could not misunderstand the commandment). Yet they lell us that it is of ' no con- sequence at all' whether we obey the commandment or not. Do the other denominations opposed to the Bap- tist occupy the same position?"
"1 cannot answer for all," said Mr. Courtney; "1 can for some. I have here a transcript of some of the writings of Mr. John Wesley, who was the founder of the Methodists, the most numerous of the Pedobaptist sects in this country. He sa3^s, in his notes on Romans vi. 4 — ' The allusion is to the ancient manner of bap- tizing, by immeision.' And he relates in his journal, vol. 3, page 20, * that Mary Welch, aged eleven days, was baptized according to the custom of the first church, and the rule of the church of England, by immersion.'
" On page 24 of the same volume, he says — ' I was asked to baptize a child of Mr. Parker's, second bailiff of Savannah ; but Mrs. Parker told me, neither Mr. P. nor I will consent to its ])eing dipped, I answered, if you certify that the child is weakly, it will suflice (the Rubric sa3's) to pour water on it. She replied nay, the child is not weak, but I am resolved it shall not be dip« ped. This argument I could not confute, so I went home, and the child was baptized by another.' "
" It would seem, then," said Theodosia, " that Mr. Wesley conformed his practice to his belief He be- lieved that baptism was immersion, and refused to bap-
SECOND NIGHT'S STUDY. Gi
tize at all unless he could do it according to the word of God. I honor the man for his consistency."
" Still," said Mr. Percy, " it does not seem that he was influenced by the word of God, but b}^ the ' Rubric' The word of God makes no exception in favor of those who may be certified to ' be weak,' but yet on the au- thority of 'the Rubric,' or formula of the church of England, Mr. Wesley was perfectly ready to dispense with the dipping, and employ pouiing, if the parents would only verlifyy
"Moreover," added Mr. Courtney, "it seems, from his conduct afterward, that he felt as much at liberty himself to change the ordinance of Christ, as the makers of the Rubric had done ; for when he organized his societies, and gave them ' the Discipline' as their or- ganic law, he directed l)aptism to be performed by sprinkling or pouring, if the parties preferred it.
"And though Mr. Wesley once refused to baptize a person at all unless he could do it by dipping, * accord- ing to the custom of the first church,' or under a certifi- cate of weakness, his followers, by his direction and by authorit}' of his Discipline, employ sprinkling almost exclusively, and call immersion a vulgar and indecent practice ; although they will sometimes perform it to satisfy a weak conscience, rather than lose a member.
" Martin Luther, the great reformer and founder of the Lutheran church, evidently entertained the same opinion with the other noted Pedobaptists we have been speaking of After speaking of baptism as a symbol of death and resurrection, he says, ' On this account I could wish that such as are to be baptized, should be comi)letely immersed into the water, according to the meaning of the word and the signification of the ordi- nance, as also, without doubt, it was instituted hy Christ.' Yet Luther is the father of a sprinkling church — the
62 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
Lutheran ; and whether he did so or not, it is evident that his followers, like Drs. Chalmers and Calvin, regard it as a ' point of indifferency.' "
" That is sufficient, Mr. Courtney," replied the young lady ; " I merely wish to know if the other denomi- nations were guilty of the same inconsistency with our own."
After a little further conversation, Mr. Percy and M r Courtney took their leave.
Mrs. Ernest, the mother, had, during the time of this interview, been sitting quietly in a corner, very busily engaged in hemming some ruffles. She took no part in the discussion, but as soon as the gentlemen were gone, she turned to Theodosia, and said —
" My dear child, 1 am perfectly astonished at your behaviour this evening."
" Why, mother," said the young lady, in amazement, " what have I done ? I am not conscious of any impro- priety."
*' Do you think, then, that it is perfectly proper and be- coming in you to talk as 3'ou did this evening about the good and eminent clergymen of our church ? It made my tlesh quake and my heart burn to hear that imperti nent little Baptist pedagogue accuse such a man as Dr. Albert Barnes of perverting the scriptures and mys- tifying the truth. I wonder if he thinks a learned and pious Presbyterian minister, like Mr. Barnes, is more likely to be ' Ijliiuled by prejudice and passion' than an ignorant Baptist schoolmaster. You thought I was not listening ; but, though I did not take any part in your C(mversation, I assure you I heard every word of it, and if. it had not been for the presence of Mr. Percy, I do believe I would have been tempted to order the fellow cut of my house. How could you be so destitute of every particle of self-respect, and of all regard for your
SECOND NIGHT'S STUDY. 63
own cburcli — the churcli of your mother and your grand parents, in which you was born and raised, as to permit a man to talk in that way in 3'our presence ? 1 declare I was perfectly ashamed of 3'ou ! If that Mr. Courtney ever shows his face in my house again, I do think I shall insult him."
" Mother, what was it that Mr. Courtney said that was so unl)ecoming and otlcnsive ? 1 am sure he seemed to me onl}' as one anxious to get at the triitli."
" Why ! did he not say that our preachers perverted the Scripture ? Did not he say that they set aside tlie commandments of Christ as matters of ' inditterenc}^ ?' I wonder if he thinks he knows more about the Scri])- tures than Dr. Chalmers or Mr Barnes, or even the weakest preacher in our church 'I I always heard that the Baptists were an ignorant, bigoted, and intolerant sect, and I believe it nowmore than ever. Just to think that—"
" But, mother, please let me say one word. Mr. Courtney did, indeed, intimate that Mr. Barnes had mystified and perverted the Scripture, but did he not prove it before he said it ? It was Mr. Percy who read in Mr. Barnes' notes that we must look in the Old Tes- tament at those fifteen places, to learn the meaning of the word baptize. We looked, and found that in four- teen of the fifteen, the action was dipping, and in none of them sprinkling or pouring. It was Mr. Perc>- who read that ' the meaning of the word is not to sprinkle or to immerse, but it is to dip for the purpose of sprinkling, or for some other purpose.' It was Mr. Perc}^ who read in Dr. Chalmers that ' we (Presbyte- rians) consider it a point of indifferenc}'' whether the ordinance of Christ is performed as he commanded, or In some other way. Now, if Mr. Barnes does prove that the word means ' to dip,' for the purpose of sprinkling,
64 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
or for some other purpose,' and yet tells us that it can be done by pouring, does he not mystify the subject by a strange medley of words ? Was it so very wrong in Mr. Courtney to point out these self-evident prevarica- tions of Mr Barnes, or the openly avowed disregard to the commandment of Jesus Christ and the practice of the Apostolic churches in Dr. Chalmers?
" If Presbyterians are guilty of such inconsistency, I am sorry for it, and ashamed of it, but I can't help seeing it when my attention is directed to it ; and I really do not see how it could have been becoming in me to get angry with those who were so kind as to point it out to me. On this subject I feel that I would be willing to learn the truth even from an infidel or an idiot, if they could aid me."
" It is the part of a true friend," said the mother, "to hide a friend's infirmities, not to divulge and glory in them. And even if our ministers have done and said some thoughtless and silly things, it is not for a Pres- byterian like you, to speak of them, or permit others to speak of them so contemptuously, in 3^our presence. If you have no spirit of resentment, I'll let you know that I have, and Mr. Courtne}' too, if he comes here with any more of his Baptist abuse of our pious and learned ministers."
" But, mother, if our ministers are wrong (as being human they surely may be) how can it be wrong to point out their errors, and guard inquirers after truth from falling into them ?"
" I don't say," replied the mother, " that it is wrong to point out any trifling errors, which they may have inadvertently taught; provided it were done in a mild, g(^ntlemanly, courteous, and Christian manner. But is it kind, is it courteous, is it Christian-like, to accuse a iCjreat and good man like Mr. B.irnos, of tortnrino:. per-
SECOND NIGHT'S STUDY. 65
verting, and m3-stifying the Word of God, to sustain some church dogma or church practice ? Do you call that gentlemanly?"
" My dear motlicr, please don't be so angry with me ; I really can't see wh}- we should not call things by their real names. And I must confess that so far as I can under- stand the meaning of the words, Mr. Barnes does, on this subject, mystify and pervert the language of Scrijv ture, and Dr. Chalmers does clearly intimate that it is no matter whether we do what Christ commanded in this ordinance, or something else — which he did not command. And I begin to fear tliat others on our side of this controversy are in the same predicament. Whether thojic on the other side are not equally incon- sistent, I have yet to learn."
"Weil, my child, I don't know what to do with j'ou. You have no more rcsi)ect for the o[)inions of the learned and excellent ministers of our church, than for those of the most ignorant peojiJe."
" I am determined, mother, that I shall never trust any more to the mere assertions of any man, or set of men, exce})t those holy men who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Whatever 1 can find for myself clearly put down in The Book, that I will believe. Henceforth, the Bible is my only guide, and I will my- self judge of its meaning for myself"
" But, m}' child, do you, can you, think that you are as competent to judge of the true interpretation of the Word as the great and good men who have given all their lives to its study?"
"No, mother; but how if these great and good men disagree? Must 1 turn Catholic, and so secure an infallible priest ? If I don't do this, I must maintain my right to my own private judgment. I am accounta- ble only to God ; T will be guided only by his Word, i
66 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
thought you and pastor Johnson would have encouraged and assisted me in the investigation of this or any othei question connected with m}^ religious faith and practice. I know that he has always told us to examine the Scrip- ture for ourselves — and ' each to be fully persuaded in .his own mind.' "
" Certainly, my child ; but then we thought that your investigations would tend to confirm rather than shake four faith in our doctrines ; but you seem to be losing confidence rather than increasmg it. These studies seem only to disturb and unsettle your mind ; and I fear, if you continue them, they will end in 3^our sepa- ration from us all. How, then, can 1 help desiring that you should leave oti' these distressing investigations ? Till 3'ou do so, I can hardly feel that you are my own dear Theodosia. You begin almost to feel like a stran- ger to me now. I declare, I bel'eve you will break my heart." And, overcome by her maternal feelings, she burst into a flood of tears, in which the daughter freely joined.
THE THIRD NIGHT'S STUDY.
WHICH CONTAINS
THE TESTIMONY OF THE PASTOR'S WITNESSED,
TO PROVE THAT
JOHN DID NOT IMMERSE AT ALL,
AND THAT
CHRIST DID NOT GO DOWN INTO THE WATER,
BUT
WAS BAPTIZED BY SPRINKLING ON THE BANK OF THE RIVER.
^
THIED NIGHTS STUDY.
HE Rev. Mr. Johnson had been the pastor of ^ a larga and wealthy congregation for more than ~J twenty years. Most of the young people of C^/J^ his charge had grown up under his pastoral
(^ supervision, and old and young had been accus-
^ tomed lo regard his word as Gospel truth ; and when Miss Ernest ventured to sugi^est that she had ue\^er been baptized, and asked him for the proof, it was probably the first time that one of the "baptized chil- dren of his church" had ever expressed in his presence any serious doubt of the full authority of his bare and ausupported word.
Alrer the l)nef visit at Mrs. Ernest's which we have recorded, he went to his study and commenced the preparation of a sermon, which he hoped aiul intended should prevent any others of his congregation from any attempt to investigate this subject for themselves.
He did not propose in this discourse to mention the Baptists by name, or to make any attemi)t to refute, or even to denounce their opinions or practices. (To do so might direct attention to them, whereas he desired to divert it from them.) But he determined to describe, and denounce as degenerate and vile ai)ostates, all those who, reckless of the obligations which had been placed upon them in earlj" infanc}', and all the thousand name- less ties which had, in childhood and youth, bound them to the church in which they had been born, and solemnly dedicated to God in baptism, in wliose doctrines they ha<l been instructed by parental lips, and into whose 5 (69)
70 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
communion they had been received by a public profes- sion of their faith, and who should, after all, be induced by some new coming jirosclyter to abandon the faith of their fathers, and the communion of their own church, and break off like wandering stars, to be lost in the darkness of anti-Presbyterian errors
This course, he was confident, would be more elfectual in presei-ving the peace and unity of his church, and the dignity of its pastor, than any attempt to reason about ihe doctrines of this obscure sect of Baptists, who had so suddenl}^ begun to attract attention in his village. fie would overwhelm the doubters and inquirers with such a storm of public indignation, that hereafter no one would dare to doubt ; but in the meantime it was necessary, privately, to satisfy such doubts as had already been expressed.
When, therefore, he had arranged the heads of his discourse, he repaired to his book-case, and took down such authorities as would refresh his memory on the subject of ba[)tism — especially in regard to the points of difficulty suggested by Theodosia and Mr. Percy. The examination of these occupied thetime till in the nio;ht, and was resumed aorain the next mornino^.
Yery early the next evening, having his mind fully charged with all the " strong reasom^^^ upon which Pcdo- baptists are accustomed to rest their cause, he called on Mrs. Ernest and her daughter again.
"Well, madam," said he, "how has our conversation the other evening aff'ected^^our daughter? I trust she has ceased to be so much distressed about these new notions as she was."
"Indeed, Mr. Johnson, she gets worse and worse, and I begin to think Mr. Percy is going the same way. J am so sorry Edwin called in that little Baptist school- master. It made my heart burn to hear them talk aa
THIRD night's STUDY. Tl
they did about the good and pious ministers of our church. It seemed to me they had no more respect for a minister of the Gospel, or even a Doctor of Divinity, than they had for a house carpenter, or a French dan- cing-master."
" How so, Mrs Ernest? 1 am sure your daughter has been too well raised to speak disrespectfully of any minister of the Gospel, or permit another to do it in her presence."
" That is just what I told her. I said I was ashamed of her, and "
" But pray tell me, madam, what has happened ? What was said that was so improper ?"
" Why, only to think that that little impertinent Bap- tist pedagogue had the impudence to say, sir, here in m}^ house, that our ministers i)erverted the Scriptures, de- luded their hearers, set aside the ordinances of Christ, and substituted others in their place, and I don't know what all. I was so angry I could hardl}' see."
" Is it i)ossil)le ! and your daughter heard all of this ?"
" Yes, sir ; and the worst of it is, T do fear, sir, she more than half believes it. You can't think how changed she is, sir! 1 never kuew her to have a particle of self- will before. She was always so gentle and alfectionate, and ready to yield every thing to au}^ body ; but on this subject she is very stubborn, and declares she won't believe a single thing but what she can see in the Bible for herself, even though she had it from your own lips, and all the rest of the preachers in our church,
" Oh, sir," she continued, sobbing (for her maternal feelings had begun to overcome her), "if you don't do something for her she will be lost to us all 1 Do tr}' to show her where that sprinkling is in the Bible. If she can see it there, she will believe it."
Mr. Johnson was fully resolved to make her see the
72 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
sprinkling, if he could ; but was not quite certain as Uj the jdace where he would find it ; and before he had time to reflect much upon the sui)ject, the young lady came into the parlor.
She seemed for the moment slightly embarasscd, evi- dently from the conviction that she had been the object of remark, but greeted her pastor cordially and lespect- fully. It seemed to him, though she was paler than before, that she had grown more beautiful in the last few days. The unusual mental activity, the excitement of a new object of investigation, and the calm, yet firm and solemn determination to learn and to do her whole duty, had imparted to her eye a new and intenser light, and to her countenance a strange, unwonted brightness, as though the spirit, stirred to its inmost depths by these new impulses, and burning with celestial fire, shone through its covering of flesh, and illuminated her face with almost more than mortal radiance.
Could it be possible, he asked himself, that this lovely young creature could speak irreverently of sacred things ?
Alas ! how much her mother and himself had misap- prehended the nature of her feelings. Never in her life had sacred things appeared to her so sacred. It was because those great and good men, whom she had been accustomed from her infancy to look upon with rever- ence, now seemed to her, themselves, to trifle with sacred things, that she could no longer regard them as she had done. The Word of God ; the commandments of Jesus Christ ; the ordinances of the Gospel ; these were sacred things. Never so fearfully sacred as now. And what could she think of those, who, ministering at the altar 01 God, perverted and mystified his Word, to hide the truth from those who sought for knowledge ? What could she think of those who counted the command-
THIRD NIGUT'S STUDY. 73
munts of Christ, and the ordinances which he had insti- tuted, a ^^ matter of indifferencyV She had, indeed, in some degree, ceased to reverence the (so-called) minis- ters of Christ, who could be so false to their sacred obligations as to trifle with God's holy Word, in order to sustain a creed or a custom of their church ; but oh 1 how deep, how ardent, how unutterable was her rever- ence for the Word itself 1 How anxious, how agonizing her desire to know what it required her to believe and to perform.
It may be that the pastor had some suspicion of the true state of her mind in this respect, for when he ad- dressed her, it was with an expression of unusual and most respectful consideration. He felt instinctively that she was not now to be rated like a school-girl, or con- vinced by unsustaincd assertions.
Indeed, he felt a strange restraint in the presence of the earnest-hearted, strong-minded girl ; and was re- volving in his mind how he could best introduce the subject which he came to talk of, when she relieved him by introducing it herself
"You did not have time the other evening," said she, " to finish 3'our remarks on the subject of baptism. You told me, 3'^ou will recollect, that there was good and sufficient evidence to show that our Saviour was not baptized in the river at all, and that he was baptized by sprinkling, and, of course, if this was so, sprinkling is the Christian baptism."
" You state the ease a little too strongly, m}^ daugh- ter; I meant to say only that there is no evidence that he was baptized in the river ; and that the baptism which he commanded (the baptism of the Gospel dispensation) was performed by sprinkling."
" Please, Mr. Johnson, don't try to m3^stify me. Do you men'.i to say that tlie baptism which Christ sub-
74 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
mitted to, and the baptism which he commanded, were two different things, and tliat one was immersion, and the other si)rinkling ?"
'* Not exactl}", my daughter ; 1 only meant to say they might be different. John's baptism was not Christian baptism. It was the baptism of repentance, designed to introduce Christianity. It prepared the way for the Gospel, but was itself no part of the Gos})el dispensa- tion."
"And yet, Mr. Johnson, Mark says it was 'the begin- ning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.' But it does not make any difference to me whether it was Christian baptism or not. I simply want to know about the act performed. John did something, which is called bap- tism. Multitudes came to him, and were baptized by him in the river of Jordan. Jesus also came to him, and was baptized in the river of Jordan. Then Jesus went himself into Judea, and there he tarried and bap- tized ; and at the same time John also was baptizing in ^Enon, near Salim; and Jesus baptized more than John baptized. These baptisms were confined to the Jews; but after his death, Jesus told the disciples to go and preach his Gospel to all other nations, and baptize them; and we learn from the Acts that they who gladl}- re- ceived the Word* were baptized, both Jews and Gen- tiles.
" Now, what I want to know is this : when John baptized, he performed a certain act. When Jesus and his disciples baptized, did they not perform the same act ? and when he commanded to baptize the Gentiles also, did he not command the same act to be performed, and did not the disciples perform the same act, in obe- dience to that command ? The same word is used, does it not mean the same thing ?"
" If it does, my child, it must mean something else
THIRD night's STUDY. 75
besides immersion, for in many of these cases of bap- tism, immersion was out of tiie question. In fact, it is very certain that John did not immerse those whom he baptized ; though if he had, it would not follow that Christ commanded immersion. John may have done one thing, and Christ ma}' have commanded something else."
" Very true, Mr. Johnson ; he ma}^ have done it, but where is the proof that he did ? My name might have been Susan, but then I would not have been called Theodosia. If he had meant another act, he would have used a ditierent word."
"Not if the word might mean either one or the other. You know that we contend that the word baptize means to sprinkle, to pour, to wet, to wash,* as truly as it means to dip or to immerse."
" Well, Mr. Johnson, even supposing it does have all these meanings, the disciples must have understood the Saviour to use it (when speaking in reference to his ordinance) in some one of them, and that one would be fixed by his own example. What he received as baptism from Johu in Jordan, the}' would ever after consider to be baptism ; and would uecessaril}' suppose he meant that act when he used the word, even though it had a hundred meanings. But if you will pardon me for being so troublesome, I would like to know what proof there is that baptize in the Greek language has all these vari- ous meanings ? We looked into a Greek Lexicon the other day to tind the meaning of the word, and we could not find an}' thing at all about sprinkling or j)uuriQg among the definitions there."
"You looked in a Greek Lexicon. You can't read Greek, can you ?"
' See Dr. Miller.
76 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
"No, sir; but brother Edwin is studying the lan- guage, and he found the word, and I could read the definition."
*' And so you think you and Edwin are competent critics of a disputed point in the Greek language?"
" Oh, no I Mr. Johnson, don't laugh at me. If you knew how anxious I am to learn the truth, I am sure you would sympathize with me and assist me. We did not think we knew any thing about it, and that is the reason that we went to the Lexicon to learn. It is not Edward's opinion that I referred to, but that of the learned Prof Donegan. And Mr. Percy has since ex- amined quite a number of other Greek scholars upon the same subject, and he has not found that any one of them gives sprinkling as one of the meanings of baptize, though all agree in dipping."
" And so you, and Edwin, and Mr. Percy set your- selves up to teach such men as Dr. Miller and other learned theological writers of our church, the meaning of the Greek language I Don't you intend presently to write a commentary on the Scriptures ? or a book of Practical Divinity? Edited jointly by Miss Ernest and Mr. Percy 1"
The young lady looked at her pastor in astonishment. She blushed deeply ; tears filled her eyes, and her utter- ance was choked. She had expected sympathy and assistance ; she met with ridicule and rebuke. Poor girl, she did not know how hard it is for one who has long been accustomed to rule other minds, and have his bare assertion received as unquestionable truth, to be called on for proof. If he said baptize meant to sprinkle, what right had she, poor, simple girl, to doubt his word or ask for evidence ? Why, even he, a minister of the Gospel, had never asked for proof when Dr. Miller said it. He had always taken it for gj-anted that baptism
THIRD night's STUDY. 77
was sprinkliug, or such men as Dr. Miller would not have asserted that it was ; nor would the church have enjoined or permitted it.
There was an awkward pause in the conversation, for Theodosia was too deepl}' mortified and embarrassed to know how to begin again.
Mr. Johnson saw that he had made a deep impression, though he did not feel quite certain of its nature. And he said, very mildly, " M}" dear child, don't pretend to be wiser than your teachers. I can solemnly assure you, as a Christian man and a Christian minister, that the word we render baptize does legitimately signify the application of water in any way as well as by immersion, no matter what the Lexicons may say ; and if so, sprink- ling is as much baptism as dipping. The quantity of water used does not affect the validity of the ordinance."
To this Theodosia did not reply. She felt that it was useless to ask again for proof; and if she did not feel disposed to trust even her pastor's solemn declaration in regard to the meaning of baptize, it was because she remembered that Dr. Barnes had proved it to mean "not to sprinkle," but " to dip;" that Stuart admitted this to be its prevalent and common signitication ; that the great Dr. Chalmers expressly asserted that its mean- ing was to dip, and that it was immersion which was practiced in the early churches ; that McKuight and other most eminent and learned Pedobaptists all agreed perfectly with the Lexicons in giving immersion as its true meaning, and proving that such was the under- standing and practice of the apostolic churches. What Baptists might teach she did not know, for as yet she had not read a Baptist book. She had common sense enough to understand that if there had been any sprink- ling or pouring in the Word, such men as Stuart, and Chalmers, and McKnight, would have been sure to find
18 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
it and parade it before the world as a justification of their practice. Though she was silent, therefore, she was far from being satisfied.
Mr. Johnson, acting on the adage that " silence gives consent," considered this point as settled; "and now," he continued, " if this be the case, if the word means to sprinkle or to pour, as well as to immerse, it is evi- dent that John might have dipped, and Christ might have commanded sprinkling, and yet have used the same word which is used to describe John's baptism. I might rest the case here ; but I will go farther, and assert that John's baptism was not immernion at all.^^
"Good evening, Mr. Johnson, I am glad to hear you say that," said Mr. Percy, who chanced to come in at the moment, and heard this strange assertion. " If we can only establish that position we will throw the Bap- tists out of court."
"Nothing is easier done, Mr. Percy," said the pastor. " It could not have been immersion, in the first place, because immersion was impossible.''^
" Of course," said Mr. Percy, " if immersion was im- possible, it could not have been immersion. What was impossible could not have been done."
" Very well, then, that settles the question, for it was clearly impossible for John to have immersed the thou- sands and thousands (not to say the millions) that re- sorted to him for baptism."
" I don't know about that," said Mr. Percy. " In the first place, we must determine just how many there were, and then just how many John was. able to dip. Do you know how many there were ?"
"Not precisely," said the pastor, "but there were great multitudes. The Evangelist says, Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, went to him and were baptized. Now the population of Jeru-
THIRD night's STUDY. 79
salem itself was a prodigious multitude, and that of all Judea added to it would surely be more than one man could dip in the time of John's public ministry,"
" But," said Mr. Percy, " it does not say that all the inhabitants went. It says the places went ; by which we are to understand, that some of each place mentioned went. Just as if I should sa}^ that in the great politi- cal Convention of 1840, all Tennessee was gathered at Nashville to hear Henry Clay. I would not mean that every man, woman, and child in the State was there, but only that there were some from every part of it. Just so, Matthew sa3^s Jerusalem came — that is, a great many people from Jerusalem and Judea, and the country round about Jordan cSlme ; that is to say, the country as well as the cit}' was fully represented in the crowd. Besides, John did not baptize all who came. He posi- tively refused the Pharisees and Sadducees, who com- posed a great part of the Jewish nation. I do not see, therefore, that we have any means of knowing the exact number of the baptized."
"But it can't be denied," said the pastor, "that it was an immense multitude, too man}- for one man to have immersed."
" Will you permit me to ask a question ?" said Thco- dosia, timidly (for she had become almost afraid to speak at all, since that suggestion of the pastor about a joint editorship with Mr. Percy in a body of divinity ) " Will you permit me to ask how much longer it would take to immerse them, one at a time, than it would to sprinkle them one at a time, in a decent and reverent way ?"
" We do not know," said the pastor, " that they ivere sprinkled one at a time. They might have stood in reg- ular ranks along the bank, and John taking a bunch of
so THEODOSIA ERNEST.
hyssop might have dipped it in the river and sprinkled them by dozens as he passed along."
" Or," suggested Mr. Percy, " he might have pro- vided himself with a large sized syringe or squirt gun, and filling it from the river have turned its stream along the ranks, as 1 have seen the boys do at school, sprink- ling a whole bench of boys before the master could see who did it."
This was uttered with such a perfectly serious air that the pastor was obliged to receive it as an amend- ment to his own supposition, though he could not help seeing in what a ridiculous light it placed both the bap- tizer and his subjects ; and surel}'', there is, in the nar- rative of the Evangelists, quite as much evidence of the use of the squirt as of the hyssop.
" There is another thought," said Theodosia, " which it seems to me, will obviate all the difficulty in the way of either a personal dipping or a separate sprinkling of each individual. The Evangelist says that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John — and when the disciples were gathered together after his death, there does not seem, to have been a very great multitude. So it is probable, I should think, that though great multi- tudes came to John, and great multitudes followed Christy yet comparatively few brought forth fruit to justify their baptism. And besides this, as Jesus is said to have baptized, though he did not do it personally, but by his disciples, so John may have done a portion of his baptizing by his disciples.''^
"Spoken like yourself. Miss Theodosia," said Mr. Percy. " That does indeed obviate all difficulty. The baptism, whatever it was, must have been a personal, individual transaction ; and as it would take as long to sprinkle a person, and say over the proper formula of words, as it would to dip him, one is just as possible as
THIRD night's STUDY. 81
the other, and cither entirely practicable with the aid of the disciples. Don't yon think so, Mr. Johnson?"
" No, I do not ; but let it pass. I have another reason for believing that John did not immerse. It says ex- pressly that he baptized in Bethabara, beyond Jordan — and in the wijderness, as well as at the much waters or many waters of ^non, and at the river Jordan. Now, as there is no mention made of a river at Bethabara, oi of a lake in the wilderness, it is fair to infer that no great quantity of water was required — and, consequently, whatever he maj' have done in Jordan, he did not im- merse in Bethabara or in the wilderness."
" Why not, Mr. Johnson ? I can easilj^ understand that he was baptizing in the wilderness, Bethabara, and Jordan ot one and the same time. The Jews (as I have learned in my Sunday-school lessons) called any sparsely settled place a wilderness ; and Bethabara was a ford or a ferry-house, on the east bank of the Jordan. If the neighborhood was lonely, it would be said to be in the wilderness ; and a baptism performed in the Jor- dan, at that place, miglit be said with equal propriety to be performed in the wilderness, in Bethabara, or in Jordan. Just as I might say that a person was bap- tized in Davidson county, or in the cit}^ of Nashville, though the act was performed in the Cumberland river, where it passes the city."
"Well," said Mr. Johnson, * 1 do not insist on this point ; and I leave it more readily, as I have an argu- ment that is perfectly unanswerable ; and that is, that John says himself that he did not immersi — over and over again he repeated this testimony : ' I indeed baptize you with water, but he that comcth after me shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.' * I am come,' he says, ' baptizing with water ;' and again : 'he that sent me to baptize with water.' Now, when 1
82 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
want to know how John baptized, I go right up to tiie reverend man with the hairy garment, and ask him to tell me for himself. ' Did you baptize by immersion ?' ' No, sir ; I baptize with water, not in water. I was sent to baptize with water, not in water — as he that Cometh after mc baptizes with the Holy Ghost, not in the Holy Ghost, and ivith fire, not in fire. So I bap- tize with water, not in the water. I apply the water lo the subject, not the subject to the water.' "
" There does seem to be some force in that," said Mr. Percy.
" To be sure, there not only ^^eems to be, but there i& a world of force in it. It is perfectly unanswerable, sir. I am willing to rest our cause on this one point alone. You can easily understand how one can sprinkle with water, or pour upon with water, but no one wouli] ever speak of immersing with water. ^^
Theodosia began to think of her pastor as she ha(3 done before his visit. He was not, after all, disposed to rest e.very thing on his bare word. He had the proof, and had produced it, and that, too, just as she desired, from the Book itself. Still there was a dilhculty. If John did not immerse, why did he baptize in the river ? Why did Jesus, after he was baptized, come up out of the water ?
These were insuperable difficulties, but she knew not how to present them without seeming wiser than her teacher.
Mr. Johnson, seemingly satisfied with the victory he had won, was about to take his leave, although it was yet earl}^, promising to call again soon, and show that there was no instance of immersion as baptism recorded in the whole New Testament.
"Not only is it true," said he, "that John did not immerse, but there is no recognition of immersion as
THIRD NIGHT S STUDY. 83
baptism in the Book. Neither before the death of Christ, nor afterward, did the disciples ever dip the baptized person in the water."
"Please stop a minute longer," said Mr. Percy. " While we are on John's baptism, I want to ask a single question. If John did not immerse, why did he baptize in the river ? If Jesus was not immersed, how does it happen that he had been in the water ? If Philip did not immerse the Ethiopian Eunuch, for what reason did they go down both of them into the water, before the baptism, and come up out of it after it was done ? Nobody in these days goes down into the water to baptize unless he is a Bai)tist."
"They did not go into the water, then," replied Mr. Johnson, " any more than we Presbyterians do now. There is no proof that John, or Jesus, or Philip, or the Eunuch, ev^er went into the water at all."
"How can that be," asked Theodosia, "when the Scripture says expressly that the3' were baptized ' in the river of .Jordan,' and that Jesus 'came up out of the water,' and that both Philip and the Eunuch 'went down into the water,' and * came up out of the water ?' "
" 1 know it reads so in our version," said the pastor, " but in the original it reads near or at the river, not in it. And down to the water, not into it, and up/ro??i the water, not out o/it."
" Were the translators of our version Baptists T- asked Mr. Percy.
" No, sir. It is well known that they were of the Church of England."
" Had they any motive to favor the cause of the Baptists?"
"None at all, that I can conceive of."
"How, then, did they come to make such blundering work?"
84 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" I cannot tell ; but if they had known that the Ba,[>- tists would make such a handle of these little words ' in, and out of,^ I have no doubt the}" would have been more cautious. I hope now, Miss Theodosia, that 3'our mind is relieved. I will try to see you again to-morrow, when we will finish the subject. For the present, 1 must bid you good-night."
Theodosia accompanied him to the door, to light him out, and glancing up the street in the opposite direction 10 that which he took, she discovered Edwin and Mr. Courtney returning from an evening recitation, and could not resist the desire to hear what the teacher might have to say about baptizing ivith the water at the bank of the river. She accordingly waited till he came b}', and invited him in.
" Well, Courtney," said Mr. Percy, as he entered the parlor, " we have got you in a tight place now."
" Why ? what has happened ? Any thing wonderful ? You look as though you thought so."
" Yes, sir. The truth is, Mr. Johnson did have some strong reasons, and he has brought them out on us to-night. He has in fact proved what he said, and what you seemed to think impossible; that John's baptism was not immersion, and that the Saviour never went into the water at all, but was sprinkled on the bank."
" Well, how did he make all that out ?"
" From the testimon}^ of John himself John says that he baptized not iii but with water. It is easy to conceive of sprinkling with water, but no one ever heard of immersing with water."
"Is that all?"
" Y^es, that is the substance of the argument."
" Is it possible," said Mr. Courtney, " that a minister of Jesus Christ can take such liberties with the Wori^ of God 1 1"
THIRD night's STUDY. 85
" What do you mean ? Mr. Courtney. Is it not all so ?" asked Theodosia, in alarm, for she felt that if her pastor had deceived her, even in this point, she could never trust the word of any one again upon this sub- ject,
"Mr. Percy," said Mr. Courtney, "can 3'ou read Greek ? But never mind, Edwin shall ^et us right."
" I can read a little, and, when in practice, could do as well as most of our graduates," said Mr. Percy.
" Well, then, you can judge if I attempt to deceive you. Now, what will you say if you find that John's assertion, so often repeated, reads in the Greek Testa- ment, in every instance, I baptize you 'in' water, never ' with,^ in a single case ? What will you say if 3'ou read, not only that Christ was baptized ' iVi' Jordan, but 'into' the river of Jordan ?"
" Wh3% I will say that you have gained a victory over all the doubts and difficulties which remained in my mind, and I will be convinced that John immersed, and that Jesus was immersed by him in Jordan."
"And I," said Theodosia, "will be convinced that theologians are the strangest people in the world."
" Say rather, Presbyterian or Pedobaptist theolo- gians, Miss Ernest, for the Baptists do not have to bear up and twist about under such a load of error and ib- consistency, and can consequently afford to talk, right out, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They can afford to take the Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, with every word trans- lated into plain English, and abide by its decisions. They shun no investigation, avoid no controversy, and have no need to change or keep concealed one single word of the holy record. But let us to our task, for it is growing late. Edwin, have you j^our Greek Testa- m«mt here ?" 6
86 T1I£(JI)0SIA ERNEST.
"Yes, sir; and my Lexicon and Grammar."
" Please bring them in.
" Edwin, can you tell us what is the primary and ordinary meaning of the Greek preposition ' en'' ^"
" It means in, sir ; or within, with the idea of rest in a place." (See Bullion's Greek Grammar, p. 170.)
" What is the difference between en and eis ?" •
^^Eis signifles motion from without to within. Er) corresponds to the English preposition in — eis corres- ponds to the English into.^^
" I asked those questions, Mr. Percy, not on your ac- count, but to satisfy Miss Ernest. You are perfectly aware (as every school-boy who has gotten through his Greek Grammar must be) of the correctness of Edwin's answers.
" Now be kind enough to take the Greek Testament, and find John i. 26 — * I baptize with water.' How does it read ?"
" It reads, ' baptizo en udati,^ in water, true enough."
"And so you will find it in every place. See the 31st verse, 'en^ again ; so in the 33d, and every place where this expression, which 3'our pastor so much relies upon, can be found.
" In any other Greek book^ any school-boy would without hesitation, translate it, * I immerse you in water. * I am come immersing in water,' etc. But now, if you will turn to Mark i. 9, you will find that the preposition is not ' en,^ but * eis.'' So that Jesus is said to have been baptized or dipped, not merely in but {'eis') into the river of Jordan.
" Now these two words, en and eis, are the only words by which the Greek language could express, without circumlocution, the idea of going into, or being in a thing or place ; and therefore, if neither of them says
THIRD NIGHTS STUDY. 8T
that the baptism was done in the river, 1 do not see how it could be said to have been done there,
"Now I grant that, very rarel}^ en does mean with, and that it sometimes, though very seldom, does mean at, or near ; but neither of these is the primary, com- mon, every-day use of the word. En means in, in Greek, as much as in does in English. Eia means into, in i^reek, as much as into does in English."
"But, Mr. Courtney, there must be some foundation for Mr. Johnson's supposition, that en means with, or it would not have been so translated."
" Very true, Miss Ernest En does sometimes (though very rarel}") mean with in the sense of the instrument — by which an action is accomplished. But when a man would found an argument on its having that meaning in ever}" particular case, he musty?r.s^ prove that such in of
NECESSITY ITS MEANING IN THAT INSTANCE. W 'En
uda/i' necessarily meant m//? water — if that was even its common, primary meaning, as it would be naturally understood in any other book, or in connection with any other subject, then it might form the basis for an argu- ment ; but no school-boy would think of any thing else but in water, whenever he would see it ; and, conse- quently, for a classical scholar, like your pastor, to form an argument upon ' 10 //A,' as the common meaning of ' en,^ is indicative either of great carelessness, or wilful perversion of the Word of God.
" Here is a fact which will enable you to form some more definite conception of the nature of the case. Some very industrious gentleman has counted the places, and so ascertained that this little preposition 'en' occurs no less than two thousand seven hundred and twent}' times in the New Testament. In about twenty-five hundred of these places, it is in our version correctly rendered IN. In over twenty other places, in would better express
,S8 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
the evident meaiiing of the original. In only about forty places, out of over twenty-seven hundred, does it of necessity mean with, in the sense of the instrument or material with which any thing is done. The chances, therefore, are as twenty-seven hundred to forty, that an argument based on the word * with ' (where it stands for the Greek word 'en ') will lead to a false conclusion, and the chances are as twenty-seven hundred to forty that an argument based on 'in,' as the real meaning of the word, will lead to a true conclusion. I baptize you in water, or, if we translate both words, I immerse, or more properly, I clip you in water, is therefore the true reading."
" But why, Mr. Courtney, should our translators have employed ' with ' whenever ' en^ occurs in connection with baptize ?"
" For the same reason, Miss Ernest, that they refused to translate ])aptize. They were forbidden by King James to change the ' Ecclesiastical words.' The}^ must not teach immersion. But if they had said baptize ' in ' water, it would have been just as plain that there was no sprinkling or pouring in the ordinance, as though they had translated 'baptize' in the New Testament, in the same w^ay that you liave seen they did in the Old, in all the places where (according to Mr. Barnes) the word occurs.
" But the}' did not use ' wliJi,^ in ever}'- case, because that construction would have been, in some instances, such a monstrous perversion, that every one could see it. They did not venture to say that the people were baptized with the river of Jordan, confessing their sins; or that Christ was baptized with the Jordan : or that John was baptizing with the wilderness. Mark i 4. It was only where the connection did not make the mean- ing clearly obvious to the unlearned, that the}'' ventured
THIRD night's SI UDY. 89
to mystify the ordinance by the substitution of with, in the place of the common and primaiy meaning of the 'en.'"
"If I do not forget," said Mr. Percy, ''with, when signifying the instrument b}^ which any thing is done, is in the Greek language, commonly expressed by ' dia' construed with the genitive."
"Yes; but even if John had said ' dia,^ instead of * en,^ the pastor would have had no sufficient basis for his argument ; for even ' dia^ would have been a very slight, and very narrow, and ver}^ sandy foundation. It would only have told that it was water, and not oil, or mud, or sand, or any other instrument or material with which the baptism was performed. It would have said nothing at all a])out the mode of performing the act. If I say that the cloth of which my coat was made was colored with a solution of indigo, I don't even intimate that the solution was sprinkled on it or poured on it. The cloth was dipped in it. 1 only mean that it was dipped in indigo, not in logwood, or madder, or any other dye-stufi". If I sa}^ that the leather of w^hich my boots arc made, was tanned with an infusion of hemlock bark, I don't deny that it was dipped in the infusion, I only mean that it was hemlock, not black oak, or red oak, or any other kind of material that was used."
" Oh, 3'es 1" exclaimed Edwin, who all the time had been a most attentive, though a silent listener. " I asked old aunt Chloe, the cook, only this morning, how she would jret the feathers off the chicken she was killing for dinner. ' I will scald it,' said she, 'with hot water.' And I went into the kitchen, and saw her doing it by jmtting it into the water. And big Joe, the butcher, when he killed our hogs last Christmas, loosened the bristles and hair with hot water, but he did it by im
90 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
mersion, for he dipped them several times into the barrel and then pulled them out and scraped them.''
"That will do, Edwin," said Mr. Percy, laughing. " I see we must give it up. If you won't give us any more illustrations, I will promise never to mention * with^ again, by way of argument on this subject, as long as I live ; and seriously, Mr. Courtney, I feel that I have reason to be ashamed of myself for having been so easily imposed upon by this mere semblance of argu- ment, presented with so much parade, and such an air of confidence, by our pastor, Mr. Johnson. I shall soon begin, like Miss Ernest, to lose conlidence in all teachings but those of the Bible, and in all teachers but my own judgment."
"These, sir, are your only safeguards," replied Mr. Courtney ; " but it is well to remember, that, though God's word is infallible, our judgment may be biased by our feelings ; and when we study the Word, there- fore, we should pray for a hea?^ willing to 7'eceive, and a wilf ready to obey all the commandments of our Heavenly Master. The difficulty with many persons is not so much that they cannot understand as they are u7iwilUng to obey. You will, I fear, find it much easier to satisfy your mind that immersion is the onl}'- scrip- tural baptism, than to abandon your church connec- tions, and submit to be baptized according to the commandment of Jesus Christ. But I must bid you good-night. It is time I was at home.'*
THE FOURTH NIGHT'S STUDY.
WHICH BEGINS IN THE DAY, AND INCLUDES, AMONG OTHER STRANGE THINGS,
THE PASTOR'S PROOF
THAT IMMERSION WAS NOT PRACTISED BY THE APOSTLES
ANY MORE THAN IT HAD BEEN BY JOHN.
THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST.
THE BAPTISM OF THE THREE THOUSAND.
FOUETH NIGHT'S STUDY.
N the following day, the Rev. Mr. JohnsoD called at Mrs. Ernest's cottage soon after dinner. Mrs. E. was delighted with this evident token of his interest in her daughter's welfare. She had now given up all hope of inducing her to abandon the investigation ; and was only anxious to get through with it as soon as possible. Much as she had disliked Mr. Courtney's remarks at the time of his first call, she made no objection to the second visit ; and even went so far as to ask her daughter why she did not invite some of the Baptists to meet Mr. Johnson face to face, when she would see what would become of all their hard sa3'ings about the *' Ministers of our church."
"That little Baptist pedagogue," said she, "would no more dare to say such things as he did about Dr. Barnes, and Dr. Chalmers, and Dr. Mc Knight, in the presence of Mr. Johnson, than he wouUl to put his head into tlie lion's mouth. He finds that he can twist you and Mr. Percy about his thumb just as he pleases, but let him come where Mr. Johnson is, or any body else who has studied this subject, and I'll warrant you he will be as mute as a mouse."
"Well, Miss Theodosia," said the pastor, as soon as the young lady came in, and had exchanged with him the compliments of the morning, " I proved to you last evening, I trust beyond the shadow of a doubt, that John's baptism was not immersion. And 'now, as I have an hour to spare, 1 will, if you can give me your attention, show you that we have quite as good ground
(93)
94 THEODOSIA EK.NEST.
for believing that the Apostles did not immerse any more than John did; and that in Tact there was never any such a thing as even a single instance of immersion as baptism mentioned in the sacred Scriptures."
(Theodosia was about to interrupt him, and ask some further explanation concerning the Greek preposition "e?i," and the English preposition "m//i;" but remem- bering the " Book of Divinity," and thinking it safer not to seem " wiser than her teacher," she continued silent. lie went on, therefore, in blissful ignorance of the utter overthrow of all the beautiful edifice which he had so ingeniously erected the night before.)
" Now be kind enough to get your Bible, and turn to Acts i. 5."
*' Yes, yes, Mr. Johnson," said the mother, "that is the wa}^ to study the subject. ShoAV it to her in the lUble itself, for she declares she won't believe a single word but what she can see in the Bible with her own eyes."
" Well, then, here it is; just read it, my child."
Theodosia read, " For John indeed baptized mth water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence." And as she read, she could not h(ilp giving the passage, in her mind, the true rendering, " John indeed immersed you in water," etc.
" You see from this," resumed the pastor, " that not only John himself said that he baptized with water, but that Jesus Christ also declared the same thing. But that is not the point to which I wish now to direct your attention. We settled that point yesterday. (Yesl tliought Theodosia, but it did not continue settled.) What I want you to notice now is the prophetic declara- tion in this text : ' Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.' Now turn to the second chapter, and you will see the fulfilment of this predic-
FOURTH NIGHT'S STUDY. 95
tion. \\'hen the day of Pentecost was I'ully come, they were .all with one accord in one place, and then and there they received this baptism of the Holy Spirit. Now tell me how this baptism was performed. Just read the 1 7th verse and you will see. 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, that I will pour out of my spirit,' etc. And now read the 83d verse : ' Therefore being by the right hand of God ex- alted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Hol}^ Ghost, he hath iihed forth this, which 3^e now see and hear.' Here then you see that the influences of the Spirit are called a baptism, and they are distinctly said to be 'poured out,^ and to be * shed forth.^ And from this it follows, as a matter of course, that4)aptism is pour i IK I and shedding forth or sprinkling. I do not see how it is possible for any thing to be clearer or more convincing than this."
"Certainly," exclaimed Mrs. Ernest, the mother; ** that must convince an}' body in the world. I should like to know what the school-master could say to that. I do wish, Mr. Johnson, you would preach a sermon on this subject, and just set the matter at rest."
" Pardon me, Mr. Johnson," said Theodosia, " if this argument does not appear so conclusive to me as it seems to you. I was reading this very chapter this morning, and the same difficulty came into my mind then which 3'ou have presented now. It was on m}- mind wlien 1 engaged in prayer, and it was not until nearly dinner time that I was able to see clearly how it could be that baptism is immersion, and yet the Spirit be said to be poured out in this most remarkable bap- tism. Now it is all perfectly plain."
" Well, Miss Ernest, will you please favor us with your explanations ?"
** Certainly," she replied. " Mr. Barnes, in his Notes
OC TllEODOSlA ERNEST.
on Matthew xx. 29, explains baptism in sulIeriDg and distress, to be an overwhelming of the soul with greal and intense afflictions. 'Are you able,' he says, * to be plunged deep in afflictions, and to have sorrows cover you like water, and to be sunk beneath calamities as a flood?' Now in this there is no literal immersion, but the sorrow is represented as covering and swallowing up the mind as water does the body in the act of bap- tism. It is a metaphorical but not a real baptism.
-' So in the case before us. As Christ had told James and John that they should be immersed or overwhelmed b3" sufferings and sorrows, so now he tells all the disci- ples that the}' shall in a few days be immersed or over- whelm^ by the influences of the Holy Spirit. That these influences should cover, overpower, and swallow up their minds, as the water in baptism did their bodies. It is no more a literal baptism than the baptism of suf- fering in Matthew. It is a metaphor ; and the allusion is not to the act done in baptism, so much as to the result ; that is, the swallowing up and ovej^whelming of their minds by the flood of life, and light, and joy, and heavenl}'' influence which that day came upon their souls."
If the mother was surprised at the temerity of her daughter in venturing to differ from her pastor (to her a most unheard-of event), yet her maternal pride was so much gratified by the force and beauty of her reasoning, that she could not be angry, and there was even a smile — a very slight smile of exultation, which crept along the curves of her mouth, as her daughter, with animated face, and a new and strange light in her soul illumining her eyes, entered into the discussion ; and from this lime forth (though she was determined never to be con- vinced that her pastor was or could be wrong) she could not help feelinsj secretly gratified whenever her daughter
FOURTH night's STUDY. 97
bad the best of the argument; and she inwardly enjoyed the evident amazement and perplexity depicted in the Rev. Mr. Johnson's face.
He was amazed, that one. of the " baptized children of his church" should have ventured not only to differ from his opinions, so forcibly expressed, but even to reason with him out of the Scriptures. He was per- plexed, because he could not, for the moment, ^sce what reply he could successfully make.
" Surely, Mr. Johnson," resumed the young lady, after a moment's pause, " you do not imagine that there was in this Pentecostal baptism any real, actual, literal pouring out of the Spirit, like water is poured out of a pitcher, or any literal sprinkling of the Spirit, as the minister sprinkles the water off from the ends of his fingers ?"
" It does not matter at all," he replied, " whether it was literal or figurative, actual or metaphorical, the conclusion must be the same in any case. Tliere is here clearly a baptism, a scriptural baptism ; a baptism, too, of the Gospel dispensation ; and this baptism was per- formed by pouring. Jesus Christ prophetically foretold that they should be baptized with the Holy (jhost; and when the prophecy was fulfilled, Peter says expressly that the Holy Ghost was poured out."
" But he does not say, Mr. Johnson, that the pouring out ivas the baptism. The Holy Spirit cannot he literally poured out, or sprinkled out, nor could the disciples be literall}^ immersed in him, ^any more than they had already been ; for he is, and always was, everywhere present, and had alwaj^s surrounded them on every side. It was clearl3' impossible, therefore, that there could be any literal baptism, in any sense of the word, by sprink- ling, pouring, or immersion. It was not the third per- son of the trinity, the Divine Spirit, that was poured out
9.S THEODOSIA ERNEST.
ami rihed forth, but the miraculous and wonderful influ- ences of the spirit, operating on the hearts and minds of the disciples and others. And if these influences were so powerful, and so universal, as to surround and overpower the minds of the Apostles, they might most beautifully and appropriately be said to be immersed in them. The baptism of the spirit is a soul baptism, not a baptism of the body ; and the minds of the disciples are represented by Christ as about to be taken so com- pletely into the control and direction of the Holy Spirit, that they would^ as it were, be immersed in it and swal- lowed up by it. Such a baptism actually did occur. The minds of the disciples were thus overwhelmed and swallowed up by the wonderful influences of the Spirit of God ; and this is what, it seems to me, was intended by Jesus, when he said they would be immersed in the Holy Ghost."
" Well, as to that," rejoined the mother (whose heart had begun already to follow her daughter), " I can see that their bodies were immersed too, as well as their souls, for there came a sound as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting; and of course it covered them all up, and entirely sur- rounded them, and they were in this way immersed in it."
"If the pouring," resumed Theodosia, encouraged by this open expression of her mother's approval, " if the pouring had any thing to do with the baptism at all, it was only by way of preparation ; for as water might be poured into a vessel preparatory to immersing any ob- ject or person in it, so the preparation of the Holy Spirit for these wonderful influences might be here called his pouring out, as, such preparation is sometimes called a coming doivn, or an entering into, or a sp)ringii}(i up.'''
" I am ready to admit," said the pastor, "that these
FOURTH night's STUDY. 9l»
Pentecostal influences were called a baptism Lj JesHS Christ only in a figure. I hoj^e neither of you think me so silly as to be capable of believing that the per- sonal substance (if I may speak so) of the Holy Si)irit could be literally poured out or sprinkled. But while it is true that this baptism was a figure, it is equally true that our baptism is a figure also. It is designed to exhibit in an emblematical manner the cleansing and purifying influences of the Holy Spirit in our hearts ; how very beautiful and appropriate is it, therefore, as the Holy Spirit is represented as being figuratively poured out in this baptism, that the water which repre- sents his influences should be actually poured out on us when we are baptized."
" It might indeed," said Theodosia, " have been a very beautiful and appropriate emblem, and had our Saviour thought as highly of it as you do, he probabl}" would have appointed it. But he seems to have preferred zm- mersion in water ; and this, while it may signify the cleansing of the Holy Spirit, equally well, or better than the other, signifies also our death and burial to sin, and our living again to righteousness ; and it is thus that Taul explains it when he says, ' we are buried with him l»y baptism into death, that as Christ was raised fron) the dead, so we should walk in newness of life.' It serves also to remind us of the burial and resurrection of Jesus, and prefigures also our own coming death, l)U.rial, and resurrection."
" What Baptist book have you been reading to learn all that?"
" I found it, Mr. Johnson, in a Presbyterian book ; in the Xotes of Dr. James ]\IcKnight on the Oth of Romans. I have never read any Baptist book in my life, unless (as 1 greatl}' susi)ect) the Bible is a Baptist
DOOk."
984169A
100 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
"I fear — I greatl}' fcfir, my child," rejoined the pas- tor, " that you are running into very serious and alarm- ing errors. I have exhorted you, and reasoned with you^ but I fear my labors have been almost in vain. And now, before I take my leave, I feel it my duty solemnly to warn you before God, to take heed where you are going. 1 should be greatly pained, if we should find it necessary to expel you from the church."
" Ex})el me from the church I Why, Mr. Johnson, what do you mean ? Have I been guilty of any im- proper conduct ? What have I done ?"
"Nothing as yet, my child. I am happy to say, you have always been a faithful and consistent communicant since 3'ou first approached the table of the Lord. But now I find you growing wayward and self-willed, whereas^ the Scrii)ture says, ' be not high-minded, but fear — and be in sul)jection to those who have the rule over you in the Lord.' As yet, you have only imbibed some ftilse and injurious notions on the subject of one of the ordi- nances of the church. So far, this has not led you to any overt act of evil which could subject you to the dis- cipline of the church, but if you persevere in this way, and especially, if by your conduct and conversation you lead others to distrust the purity of our doctrines, the propriety of our practice, and validity of our ordinances, it will become our painful duty to deal with you as a disturber of the peace and unity of the church."
The pastor uttered this significant warning with all due solemnity of countenance and impressiveness of manner, but it did not have the effect upon the young lady which he had expected. A week before this time she would have heard it with very difi*erent emotions. Now she had not only learned to fear God rather than man, but she had, upon her bended knees, solemnly re- solved before her Maker and Redeemer that, in regard
FOURTH night's STTTDY. 101
to this subject, she would both learn and do her whole duty, whatever it might cost her.
This was indeed an uuexi;ected, and, to her sensitive spirit, a most terrible test of the sincerity and firmness of that resolution, but it did not cause her to waver even for one moment.
She did, indeed, turn deathly pale. Her chin quivered, and the light for a moment went out in her eye. It was but for a moment, however, and before he had completed the speech, the blood had come back to her face, and her e3'es were sutfused with tears, which, however, did not overflow ; and perfect collectedness of mind and calmness of manner, though with a scarcely perceptible trcmulousness of voice, she mildly replied :
" If it was your purpose, Mr. Johnson, to deter me from making a conscientious and complete investigation of this subject, and then governing my conduct by the written word of God, I beg you will remember that you have yourself instructed me that I ought to obey God rather than man — and this, God helping me, I mean to do, whatever ma}' be the consequences to mu or others.''
" No, no, my child, you do not understand me. I desire you should be governed by the word of God ; but 1 would have you remember that God has given you teachers to help you to a true understanding of his word. It is for this purpose that he has appointed us his ministers, to guide the young, instruct the ignorant, and make known to all what are the teachings of that word."
" But what if our ministers should chance to dis- agree ? Am I to remain all my life in doubt, or take the matter into my own hands and decide for myself? Will the ministers answer for me in the day of judg- ment ? You tell me, ^Ir. Johnson, that Jesus Christ 7
102 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
was sprinkled, but James McKnight, another eminent minister of our own church, a Doctor of Divinity, and for twenty j^ears the Moderator of the General Assem- bly of the Presbyterian church in the countr}^ where he lived, tells me ' that Jet^us submitted to be baptized, that is, to be put under the water and taken out again by John ;^ and Dr. Chalmers, another most eminent minis- ter of our church, tells me ' that the meaning of the loord baptism is immersion ; Martin Luther, the great re- former, says expressly, that it was immersion which was, 'without doubt, instituted by Christ;^ and John Cal- vin, the father and founder of our Presb^^terian church, distinctly' states that ' the word bajAize signifies to im- merse, and the rite of immersion icas practiced by the ancient cJiurcJi !^ "
" Yes, my child, but then do not all these great and good men, at the same time assure you that it is a mat- ter of no importance which way the rite is performed ?"
" They do, indeed ; but that is only their own private or individual opinion. They don't even pretend that the word of God teaches that it is of no consequence whether we do what Christ commanded or not. I cannot think, like Dr. Chalmers, that it is a ' matter of indifferency,' or like Calvin, that ' it is of no conse- quence at all.' I dare not set aside the commandments of Christ for the doctrines of men ; and if you will pardon me for saying it, I do not see how any minister of Jesus Christ can dare to teach such sentiments. If Jesus Christ commanded us to believe and be im- mersed, I surely did not obey that command by being sprinkled.
" Pardon me, Mr. Johnson, for talking so plainly, but you have driven me to it. You promised, this evening, to show me, out of the Scriptures, that the l^aptism of the Gospel dispensation was sprinkling,
FOUKTH night's STUDY. 103
and all you have done was to show me where the Holy Ghost was, by a figure of speech, said to be poured out on the day of Pentecost, and where Christ had prophetically declared that they should, in some sense, that day he metaphorically immersed in the Holy Spirit — for you do not pretend that it was more than a mys- tical and figurative baptism wiiich the Saviour foretold, i'ou did not, and you cannot prove, that this proi)hecy referred to the preparatory 'pouring out' any more than to any of the wonderful influences that follow the outpouring.
" Now I liad learned from ministers of our own church, from Calvin and Chalmers, and as directed by Mr. Barnes, from the word of God itself, that the meaning of the word is a dipping or immersion. I knew that when Jesus was baptized it was done in the river, as immersions are now performed. And that when the Eunuch was baptized they went down into the water, and when the solemn rite was done, they came up out of the water, just as they do in immersions now. I knew that Paul called our baptism a burial. And that our own ministers, as Chalmers and AlcKnight, explained this as an allusion to the custom of the first Church, of baptizing by immersion, and because, in the face of all this visible and tangible evidence that the real and literal baptism submitted to, and commanded by Christ, and practiced by the apostles in the first church, was immersion, I could not, on the authority of a mere figure of speech, and that of doubtful application, be- lieve it to have been pouring, you tell me I am wayward and self-willed, and intimate that I may expect soon to be dealt with as a disturber of the peace and unity of the church."
"I think, Mr. Johnson," said the mother, "that you were a little too hard on Theodosia about that. I never
104 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
could myself see much force in these figures of si)oech or metaphors as Theodosia calls them."
" Whj^ mother," resumed the young lady, "if Mr. Johnson will let me reason in the same way that he does, I will prove to him that the poor little boy of whom we were reading this morning, that was drowned in the river, was actually drowned on dry land by a few drops of water sprinkled on his face."
" I don't &ee how, my daughter ; but here is the paper containing the account of the accident. I would like to hear 30U try."
" ' MELANCHOLY ACCIDENT
" ' It is our painful duty to announce that little Char- lie Freeman, a sprightly lad about nine years old, of a most lovely disposition and extraordinary promise, the only son of his mother, and she a widow, was accident- all3^ drowned this morning in the Cumberland river. We were one of those who recovered the body and bore it to the dwelling of the now doubly-bereaved mother. We cannot describe the sorrow with which this sad event has filled our hearts. We have just left the melancholy scene, where the heart-broken mother is sitting in the midst of a large circle of friends who are all droicned in fear's.''
"Now, Mr. Johnson tells me that the disciples, on the day of Pentecost, were figuratively or metaphorically baptized by jjouriny, and if so, then he asks me to be- lieve that Jesus Christ must have been literally and actually baptized in the same way, that is, by pouring, in the river Jordan. This is the whole argument. Now T say here was a large circle of this poor lady's friends who were metaphoricall}^ said to be drowned in a little »vater running down their faces out of their own eyes ; and if so, then the dear little boy must have been actu-
FOURTH night's STUDY. 105
all}' and literally drowned by a few drops of water run- ning down his face."
" But you forget," said the pastor, "that the lad was said to be drowned in the river. ^^
"Not at all," she replied, "for so also Jesus Christ is said to have been baptized in the river ; but you try to persuade me that he onl}" stood upon the bank, and John took up some of the water of the river, and sprinkled it on his face. And some of our writers tell me that he might have gone a few steps into the water, and there, standing in the river, John took up a little water and poured it on his head out of a muscle shell, or a cup. So I will grant that this poor little lad may have gone to the bank of the river, and that some of the water of the river was thus splashed up into his face ; or that he waded in a little wa}^ and some other boy did the same, took up some water with his hand, and threw it in his face — but that he muat have been drowned by a little water running over his face, is perfectly self-evi- dent, for this is the only way in which the large circle of his mother's friends could have been drowned."
" I see," rejoined the pastor, " that your mind is already made up, and it is scarcely worth while to argue the subject with you any further. You have determined that you will not be convinced. But before I leave you to-day, I will suggest one more point for your con- sideration, which, if you are not already hardened in unbelief, can hardly fail to satisfy you."
" Oh no, Mr. Johnson, I am ready and anxious to be convinced. What have I to gain by believing that im- mersion is the only baptism ? You have alread}^ iuti- mated what I may expect from you and from the church which I have loved so dearly. I fear I have already lost in part the affection of my precious mother" — and her eyes filled with tears.
106 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" No, my daughter," said Mrs. Ernest, " you have not lost my love, and I will love you still, do what you may. I know you are a dear, good, conscientious child, and would not for the world do what you did not believe to be right. If you leave us, my child, I can't help mourn- ing over you, but I will love you still. But do listen to Mr. Johnson, my darling, and see if he can't convince you."
" Certainly, mother ; if Mr. Johnson will show me one Kingle place in the Word of God where baptism is called sprinkling or pouring (not in the way of a metaphor or a figure, but literally and plain l}^), I will be content. If he will show one single instance in which baptism is plainly said to have been dojie by apr^inJclinfj or jxmr- ing — not dimly and metaphorically, as those good ladies were drowned in tears, but actually and really, as the dear child was drowned in the river — I will ask for nothing more. But till he can show it to me in the Bible, I can't believe that it is there."
"As to that," said the pastor, " I can show you sprink- ling and pouring oftener than I can immersion, for there is no such word as immersion used in the whole book."
" I know," said she, " that sprinkling and pouring are mentioned often enough, but not as baptism ; what I want is the place where they are literally said to be actual baptism. I know that immerse does not occur in our version, because dip is generally used where the word baptize occurs ; but if baptism means immersion, as Calvin, McKnight, Chalmers, and others of our min- isters say it does, and as the lexicons of the Greek lan- guage say it does, then immerse occurs, in fact, every time baptize occurs.^^
" Well, well, I see you are not to be easily satisfied on this point ; and I have no more time to spare to-day. I was about to direct your attention to another argu-
rouETH night's study. 107
ment in this same chapter, which will, I trust, set your iDiiul at rest forever.
" Yoii see here that there w^ere no less than three thousand souls converted by Peter's sermon ; and all this vast multitude were added to the church that very day. Now it is clearhj impossible that they could have been baptized by immersion, and, therefore, it must have been done by sprinkling or pouring ; and if so, then sprinkling and pouring must be the Gospel bap- tism. I considei;,^this argument entirely conclusive. I want 3'ou to examine the record of the transaction care- fully and candidly, and if you can believe that these three thousand people were all immersed, 3'ou can believe almost any thing. I will call again next week, and you can tell me what you think of it."
The Rev. Mr. Johnson, as he was saying this, arose and took up his hat to depart.
" Please tell me one thing before 3'OU go," said Thco- dosia. " You said il was impossible that these three thousand persons could have been immersed. Please tell me wh}-."
" For two good and suMicient reasons," he replied. " In the first place, there was not waler enough ; and, in the second place, there was not time enough. And either one of these circumstances was clearly sullicient to render immersion impossible. We will not discuss the subject au}^ farther at present. Examine it at your leisure, and I trust, when I see you again, I will find your mind entirely satisfied. For the present, i must bid you good evening."
Mr. Johnson walked home, thinking what strange perversity it was in a young girl to venture to ibrm an independent opinion on a theological subject, and to question the infallibility of his reiterated assertions,
108 THEODOSTA ERNEST.
and even to undertake to argue the matter with her pastor.
The young lady took her Bible, and began to examine again the passages to which the pastor had referred in their conversation ; but before she had made much progress, her mother required her assistance in some household duties, which occupied her attention till after 15 upper.
Scarce!}^ was supper over, and the table cleared away, when who should come in but her Unqle Jones.
"Well, Theo.," said he, in his unceremonious way, " I am told that I am about to lose my niece, and that you are on the point of turning Baptist."
" Oh, uncle, don't say that I I shall not be lost to you or any of those I love, even though I should feel it my duty to be baptized. I will still be your own niece, and love you as well as ever."
" You will I Then your mind is about made up on the subject, I suppose?"
" Yery nearly, uncle. I have some other points yet to examine, which were suggested b}^ pastor Johnson this afternoon, and unless I find them more "
" Some other points to examine I Suggested by the pastor I Do you, then, undertake to differ with your pastor ; and talk about deciding for yourself in regard to one of the most difficult and complicated questions in theology?"
"Oh, please, uncle, don't be angry; and don't laugh at me. I know I am only a poor simple girl, but I am accountable only to God, and must be decided by my own understanding of his Word. What I can't find in the Scripture for myself, I can't be sure is there. If I don't examine for myself, how can I know au}^ thing about it ?"
" Can't vou take your pastor's word for it?"
FOURTH night's STUDY. 109
" Yes, if lie will show me a 'thus saith the Lord,' as his authority."
" But can't you take it for granted that he has such authority, without his pointing to the chapter and the verse ?"
" It is God's Word, uncle, that I must obe}^ not man's. If it is in the Book, he can't object to showing me where it is. I want to see it for myself. The Apostle praised the Bereans, not because they took Paul's word for all he said, but because ' they searched the Scriptures' for themselves ' to see whether these things were so.' "
" But what if you come to a difierent conclusion from tlie pastor ? Do you think it will be wise to trust your own judgment, rather than that of the many great, and good, and learned men of our church, who have exam- ined this subject more thoroughly, and under much more favorable circumstances, than you can hope to do? Do you think it will be indicative of the humility required by the Gospel of Jesus Christ, for a simple girl not yet out of her teens, and without any theological education, to set up her own opinions against those of the wisest and best men of the age ?"
" No, uncle, I don't intend to set up m}' opinions against those of the great and good men you speak of. But I find that others, equally great and good men, after a careful examination of the sul)ject, have come to a different conclusion ; and that some of these same Doctors of Divinity in our church, while they practice one thing, and instruct us to do it, yet expressly declare that it was another and a very different thing which Christ commanded and the first Christians practiced. Xow 'when the doctors disagree,' not only with each other, but with themselves, what is a poor, simple girl like me to do ? I can't study theology, hut I can study the Ih'ble. If sprinkling, as baptism, is there, T can see
110 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
it. Pastor Johnson says it is there ; other learned theo- logians say it is not. What can I do ? 1 say to each of them, if sprinkling is commanded, show me wliere ; if pouring is commanded, point out the place ; if dipping is commanded, let me see it for myself. If I can't find it, and you can't show it to me, 1 won't believe it's in the book at all. I hope, uncle, you don't really think that I am proud or egotistical ; 1 only want to know just what my Saviour requires. I will believe any thing, and do any thing, if you will only show me that he has said it or commanded it."
"No, my dear child, 1 don't think 3^ou are egotistical or proud. I admire your indei^endence, and I wish every person, in every place, would in the same way search the Scriptures, and understand perfectly the grounds on which their faith and practice rests. It is not only the privilege, but the duty of everj^ person, to examine and decide for themselves personally, what the Word of God requires. Religion is a j)ersonal thing. It requires personal obedience — and that, too, of the heart, which cannot be rendered without some degree of j^^jr- S07ial understanding of the Word. If you trust your conscience in any man's keeping, you place yourself in a dangerous condition. I am rejoiced to see you study- ing this subject for ^^ourself. And indeed I was only trying your courage a little, when I affected to be sur- prised at your doing so. But seriously, my dear Theo., why did you not come to your uncle with your diffi- culties?"
" 1 did intend to consult you, uncle, before my final decision, but the question came up so unexpectedly, and our investigation has gone on so rapidl}^, that I have not yet had any very convenient opportunity ; and be- sides, uncle, to tell the truth, I was afraid you would either be angry, or laugh at me.'
FOURTH night's STUDY. 11]
" You were ! Well, then, I will disappoint you, for so far from laughing at 3'ou, I consider it a very serious and most important question ; and instead of being angry with you, it will give me great pleasure to assist you in the investigation ; and if I can't show you the sprinkling baptism in the Bible, I will be immersed myself. I will not be like those Doctors of Divinity you spoke of, who say one thing and practice another. If Jesus Christ did not command sprinkling, I for one will neither teach nor practice it. I have felt for some time that it was my own duty to investigate this sub- ject, and 1 will do it now — and with your assistance."
" Oh, uncle, don't talk of my assistance. I am but an ignorant, though anxious inquirer after the truth, and am obliged to call for help on others at ever}^ step. If I should speak of rendering assistance to you, I should indeed deserve to be called proud and egotistical."
" Well, well ; any way, my child. If you won't help me, I will help you. Tell me just how far you have got along, what discoveries you have made, and where you are standing now — and then we will consider of the rest."
" It will be too long a stor}^ uncle, to go over all the road that I have traveled. But I have learned that there is 'one Lord, one faith, and one baptism.' I have been inquiring whether that baptism is sprinkling, or pouring, or dipping. I have discovered that baptize, as it is used in the Xew Testament, is a Greek word, and must be understood as those who read and spoke the Greek language in our Saviour's time would under- stand it. Dr. Albert Barnes told me I could learn this oy examining the fifteen places where, he says, the word occurs in the Old Testament. I hunted out each place, and found it meant 'to dip.' I looked in Webster's dictionary, and found that to dip in water, was to plunge an object into the fluid and instantly take it out again —
112 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
the very act which the Baptists perform when they bap- tize. I got Edwin to look in his Greek Lexicon, and he found that the word had the same meaning there- —that baptism was immersion. I read McKnight and Chal- mers on the 6th of Romans, and found that these great Doctors of Divinity in the Presbyterian church agreed in declaring the same thing ; and further, that it was immersion that was practiced by the first church. 1 am told that Luther, and Calvin, and Doddridge, and a great many others of the most eminent of our theo- logians, teach the same things. And I have not yet found in the Word of God a single passage which leads me to any different conclusion. Unless, therefore, I should find, as pastor Johnson assures me I shall, that it was clearly impossible to immerse the three thousand that were added to the church on the day of Pentecost, I must be convinced."
" On what ground does your pastor think it impos- sible?"
" He says there was neither water enough, nor time enough."
" Well, how can you prove that there was ?"
" It don't seem to me, uncle, that it is necessary that I should be able to prove it in any other way than by the mere statement of the Scripture that they were bap- tized ; for if the word baptize means to immerse, then the book says they were immersed; and if they were immersed, there must have been time enough, and water enough, whether I can prove it or not. If I do not be- lieve this, I make God a liar."
" But what if it can be clearly shown that there was not water enough, or time enough ; then would it not be more reasonable to suppose the word has some other meaning, than to believe the record to be false?"
" Perhaps it would, Ijut the pastor only said it. He
FOURTH night's study. 113
did not try to pj^ove it. Nor do I see how it would be possible now to determine how much water there was in Jerusalem eighteen hundred years ago, even if we knew the exact number of gallons it would require tu immerse three thousand people. I remember that we read in 2 Kings xviii. 17, about the * upper pool,'* and in 2 Kings XX. 20, about the ' pooV that Hezekiah made, and in Nehemiah about another '/o Mr? ^ai?i' and 'pool/ and in Isaiah xxii. 9, aljout the 'lualera of the lower pool,^ and in John v. 2, about the ' j^ool of Betheada^ that had five porches, and John ix. 7, about the 'pool of Siloam.^^^
" I think the i)astor will be obliged to give it up, Theo., so far as the want of ivater is concerned ; for in addition to this testimony from the Scripture, we have that of many distinguished travelers, who were, like our- selves, opposed to the Baptists ; and ^'ct all agree that Jerusalem was, and is, one of the best watered cities on the globe. Dr. Robinson, one of these travelers, speaks of ' immense cisterns now, and anciently, existing within the area of the Temple, supplied parti}' from rain water, and partly by the aqueduct,' and tells us also that ' almost ever}' private house had a cistern in it,' p. 480. Speaking of the reservoirs, he says, p. 483 — ' With such reservoirs, Jerusalem was abundantly supplied, to say nothing of the immense pools of Solomon, beyond Beth- lehem, which were no doubt constructed for the benefit of the Holy City.'
" * There are,' he says, ' on the north side of the city, outside the walls, two very large reservoirs, one of which is over three hundred feet long and more than two hundred feet wide, and the other nearly six hundred feet long by over two hundred and fifty feet wide ;' and besides these he mentions the pool of Silom and two others as being without the walls. Within the walls he Qientions 'the pool of Bathshe])a,' 'the pool of Ileze-
114 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
kiah,' and 'the pool of Bethescla.' The pool of Hezekiah he says was about two hundred and forty feet long by about one hundred and forty-four feet broad ; the pool of Bethesda three hundred and sixty feet long by one hundred and thirty feet wide ; and besides these he mentions anaqueiluct and numerous other fountains. (Rob. Resh. in Ral. pp. 480 to 516.)
"But we might have known, without any of thifi testimony, that a city to which the whole male popula- tion of a vast and fertile country v/ere required to resort several times a year, and whose religious cere- monial required such frequent ablutions as did that of the Jews at the time of Christ, would be abundantly furnished with the means of bathing, and consequently present sufficient facilities for immersion. Moreover, the water would not be destroyed by dipping in it ; and therefore the same quantity that would suffice for one would do for a hundred. And it is evident that so far as the water is concerned, any one of these numerous pools, either in or out of the city, would have sufficed. But was there not another and more serious difficulty ? These pools and fountains belonged to the Jews. The same men who hated and crucified Christ now hod con- trol of the water of the city and the suburbs, and is it probable that they would permit the disciples to use them ?*'
" Certainly they would," said Theodosia, " for in con- sequence of the wonderful events of this day, the Scripture says that ' fear came upon every soul,' and that the disciples ' did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people.^ They gave them the Temple to preach in, and it is not likely that they would refuse the pools to baptize in."
"Surely," said Uncle Jones, " that must remove all
POURTH night's STUDY. 115
conceivable difficulty as to the water ; but we may not find it so eas}^ to arrange matters in regard to time. Time has always been a very unaccommodating old fellow; and a day among the Jews was only twelve hours from six in the morning till six at night, and if we can't get the three thousand into the water within that jKiriod, we shall be obliged to leave some or all of them out. and dispose of them in some other way."
" AVell, uncle, I don't see why we can't dispose of .s-o??ie of them in some other way, for the Scripture does not say they were all baptized that day, but only all added to the company of the disciples ; and .so)?if^ of them may have been baptized by John or by the disciples of Jesus Christ before his death, and now only come out pub- licly and consorted with the A})ostles ; and some might have gone up to them and joined their ranks that day and have been baptized afterward. As a person is now said to have joined the Baptists when he makes a profession of religion among them, and is received by them for baptiam.
" But is it by any means certain that three thousand could not all have been immersed that day? It wou^d not be hard to tell if we knew how much time there was; how many administrators there were ; and just how many each one of them could immerse."
" Well, stop a little, Thco. ; let us take up one point at a time. How many hours had they to go upon ? though as to that, I don't see why it would not take about as long to sprinkle or jjoiir upon them, one at a time, and reverently repeat the formula, ' I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,' as it would to immerse them; but we will examine. What sa3-s the record ? It seems that when Peter commenced his speech, it was not 3^et nine o'clock In the morning, which, as the Jews counted from six,
IIB TMEODOSIA ERNEST.
would be the 'third hour in the day.' How lo.Mg before nine it was we cannot tell. We will suppose it was just nine, and there were, consequently, only nine hours remaining, before six in the evening, which closed the day. Peter's speech, as it is recorded, would not have occupied a quarter of an hour in its delivery ; but it is said that he exhorted them with many other words ; so we will suppose he spoke an hour, or we will say two hours. It would then be eleven o'clock. Now we will give them another hour to go to the water, BO that it is twelve o'clock when the baptism begins. Now they must finish, you see, in six hours ; so that is our limit as to time."
" Very well, uncle, we will consider it so, though really I can't see that Peter spoke even one hour, much less two. But now how many administrators were there?"
" This is a question," said Uncle Jones, " about which there is some difference of opinion. There were cer- tainly the twelve Apostles, and many think also the seventy others whom Jesus sent out two by two — who must have been present, as Luke says ' they were all with one accord in one place.' If so, then there were eighty- two authorized administrators. But let us, first, to obviate all difficulties, suppose there were only the twelve, who would each have just two hundred and fifty persons to immerse. So on this supposition, the ques- tion is narrowed down to this — can one man immerse two hundred and fifty persons in six hours? I have felt some little curiosity on this subject, and when I have witnessed immersions, have taken out my watch, and observed the time. It has usually required al)Out fifteen minutes to immerse twenty persons ; provided the candidates march in two by two, to the place where the administrator is standing. This allowance of time
FOURTH night's STUDY. 117
permits the work to be done without an}- appearance of haste, and with the coolest deliberation.
" I have been told by several Baptist ministers, who^o veracit}' I have no reason to doubt, that the}' have im- mersed large numlters at the rate of two in every minute, or sixty in half an hour. At this rate the twelve would have finished the work of this occasion in a little over two hours — two hours and ten minutes. If they only worked half so fast, and baptized but one a minute, they had time to get through, and more than an hour and a half to spare. They could each have stopped ever}' half hour, and rested ten minutes, and then have gotten through in time.''
" So, uncle, it is as I suspected, there is no difficulty as to time, even though only the twelve were engaged in the work ; but if the seventy assisted, then how long would it take?"
"In that case, there would have been less than forty persons for each administrator, and of course it could have been done in less than half an hour."
" But, uncle, is it certain that any one besides the twelve were authorized to baptize?"
" Surely, Theo., others must have been, for it is evi- dent that Aquilla, Acts xviii. 2, and Apollos, Acts xviii. 24, and Paul himself, Acts ix. 18, were baptized by othern thoni the twelve. And Peter, when he had preached the Word to the household of Cornelius, did not bap- tize them himself, but directed it to be done by some one else — lets x. 14. But whether this baptism was performed by the twelve, or by the twelve assisted by the sevent}', does not now concern us, as we find there was no want of time in either case. And so you have found nothinir in this case to change your opinion con- cerning the meaning of the word baptize. Now have
you any otiier diJliculties in your way ?"
8
118 TIIEODOSTA ERNEST.
" Not that I know of now, uncle. The case seems to tne to be perfectly plain. But perhaps you can suggest some other source of information which I have not yet explored."
" Indeed, my dear niece, I am m3'self in great per- plexity upon this very question. I have been some time enojajied in its investio-ation ; much lono;er than you have, and have been compelled to come to about the same conclusions with 3'ourself — though this is the first time I have ever mentioned it."
" Oh, uncle, is it possible ? Oh, if I had only known this four days ago."
" Oh, yes. If you had known it, I suppose you would have been quoting Uncle Jones as high authority for your heretical opinions. But I beg you will not men- tion this, even to 3^our mother, until I shall have finally decided the case. But tell me now, Theo., what do you intend to do ?"
" There is onl}^ one thing, uncle, that I caii do. I must obc}' my Saviour — I must be baptized. There la only one reflection that still casts a shade of doubt across my mind, and that is this : if it was immersion that Christ commanded, and the Apostles and first Christians practiced, how has it so universally l)een set aside, and sprinkling substituted in its place?"
" A very important point is that, my dear niece, and I hope you will come to no final conclusion till you have investigated thoroughly the whole subject in all its beariugs. And be assured, if 1 can in any wa}'' assist you, I will be most happy to do so. But your friend, Mr. Courtney, is much more familiar with these subjects than I am. Suppose I mention 3^our difficulty to him and request him to call to-morrow evening. Perhaps I may come with him "
THE FIFTH NIGHT'S STUDY.
WHICH CONTAINS
A VERY IMPORTANT DISCUSSIOJS
ON A
VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION.
NEW CHARACTKKS AND CURIOUS ARGUMENTS.
THE SACRED OR APPROPRIATE USE
OF
THE ^VOKD BAPTIZE,
DISTINGUISHED FROM THE COMMOX.
FIFTH KIGHT^S STUDY.
\NCLE JONES was Professor of Languages in the College to which we have once or twice before referred. A frank, free-spoken man, with a clear head and warm heart, in which affection for his amiable, talented, and l)cautiful niece held no small space. Like most of the members of his denomination, having received his so-called baptism without his own knowledge or consent, he had never, until very recentl}^ felt that he had an}' i)ersonal in- terest whatever in this subject.
He had been informed that he was baptized while yet an infant in his mother's arms, and whether it was prop- erly or improperl}^ done had been no concern of /ii.s'. It had been the dut}^ of his parents and their pastor to attend to that, and he had never inquired whether they did it illy or well.
A few days since, however, his attention had been directed to the subject by a somewhat singular occur- i-ence. Mr. Courtney, the teacher, was spending a leisure hour at Prof. Jones's room, at a time when no recitation claimed the attention of cither, and they were earnestly discussing some item of the morning's news, when two of the college students looked in, and seeing a visitor, were about to withdraw, but the Professor, with his characteristic kindness, called them back, and inquired in what wa}' he could serve them.
After a moment's hesitation the younger, (whose name was Pearson) replied : " Oh, it is of no conse- quence. Professor Jones. Chum and I had a little dis-
(121)
122 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
pute which we agreed to refer to you for decision, but as you are engaged we will call some other time."
" No, no," said the Professor, " come in and tell me DOW. 1 am quite at liberty. Perhaps Mr. Courtney will assist us, if there is any thing important to deter- mine upon."
" Oh, no," said Smith (the other student), " it is of no great importance. We only wish to ask you what is the Greek word for to dip.^^
"It is e^nbapto, bapto, or baptizo, young gentlemen. Why did you not refer to your English and Greek Lexi- con ? That would have enabled you to answer the question for yourselves."
"We did refer to that," said Pearson; " but Smith was not satisfied with the Lexicon. He thought there must be some mistake. Now," he continued, " will you be kind enough to tell us what was the word which, among the Greeks, commonly signified to pour ?"
" Certainly. Gheo signifies to pour^
" Had the Greeks any words which commonly meant to sprinkle?"
" Yes, raJmo meant to sprinkle."
" Had they any word which meant to wet?"
" Certainly, brecho signified to wet. But tell me, young gentlemen, what is the object of these questions ? You know the meaning of these Greek words as well a.s I do."
" Pardon me, Professor, but let me ask one question more. Did not the Greeks have a word which signified to wash ?"
" Yes, they had several. Louo was used to signify a general washing, as by bathing, and nipto a partial one, as of the hands alone. The Greek language was per- haps even more copious in words of this sort than the
FIFTH night's STUDY 12^
Kiiglisli. It had a word to express almost every man- tier of using water."
" Excuse me, Prolessor Jones, but I want to ask one question more. Will 3'ou please to tell us whether bapto and hajjtizo are not as properly, and as commonly ren- dered by dip as cheo is by pour, or raino by spr inkle ^ or louo by waah ?"
" Certainly they are, except when hapfo has its secon- dary meaning, to dye, to color, to stain. But now, young gentlemen, 3'ou must permit me. to turn ques- tioner. 1 desire to know for what purpose you come with such a string of questions to vw, V
" We hope >'ou will not be olt'ended, sir ; but Smith and 1," said l*earson, " went last Sabbath aTternoon to witness the immersion ; and have since had a little dis- cussion on the meaning of the word baptize and its cog- nates, as used in the Scriptures in reference to the ordi- nance.
"We found the words in the Lexicon just as we would any other words, and by this means, were, as I thought, obliged to translate them by dipping or im- mersion.
" But Smith contended that there must be some error in this, and that haptismos must signify a sprinkling or a pouring, as well as a dipping ; and since we could hnd no authority for this in the Grammars or Lexicons of the language, he insisted on coming to you about it."
" Certainl}^ sir, there must be some mistake about these words in the Lexicons, for my father was a Pres- byterian minister, and I know he was a good Greek scholar, and 3^et he not only baptized by sprinkling, but insisted that there was no such thing as immersion ever spoken of for baptism. The president of this col- lege and all the faculty are Presbjterians, and they all approve of sprinkling as baptism— which they certainly
124 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
could not do if the vciy word baptism in the Greek sig- nifies immersion. 1 cannot understand it, sir, if Jesus Christ meant to say sprinkle, why did he not use the word raino? If he meant to say pour, why did he not use the word cheo or eccheo? If he meant to say wet (that is, to apply water in any form), why did he not use the word brecho? As it seems to be certain, from the practice of the best and most learned clergymen of the world, that he did not and could not have meant dip oi immerse, why did he use a word which commonly, if not alwa3''s, meant to immerse ? And which, as a matter of course, every one who read or spoke the Greek would understand to mean immerse ? I wish, Professor Jones, you would be kind enough to explain this to us, sir, for Pearson has annoyed me about it till I have almost lost my patience."
The professor himself was somewhat annoyed by these questions, and the more so because they had been asked in the presence of Mr. Courtney, whom he knew to be a Baptist, and a thorough classical scholar. He was, however, too prudent to permit the students to discover his embarrassment, and only replied, " We often find it much easier to ask questions, young gentlemen, than it is to answer them — but in the present case, you have only to recollect that words often undergo a change of meaning in the lapse of time, or by transfer to other places, and your difficulties with all vanish. We may grant that dipping or immersion is the idea which was originally connected with these words — and so it is still in the classic Greek ; hence this is what you find in the Lexicons of the language ; but the Greek of the New Testament was not the pure classic Greek, but a sort of Jew Greek, if I may so speak, which had come into use in Palestine, and may have been different from the lan- guage as originally spoken and written; ond as the
FIFTH night's STUDY. 125
writers of the New Testament \^ere treating of a new system of religion, they would be ver}^ likely to use words in a new sense. And though it cannot be denied that the idea of submersion is almost always in these words as they occur in the classical writers, yet it does not of necessity follow that it must be in them as con- stantly when they are used by the evangelists."
"Thank you, sir," said Smith. "That is very satis- factory." And the young men took their leave.
When they were gone, Professor Jones, observing the peculiar expression of Mr. Courtney's countenance, was led to continue the subject. " You did not seem," said he, " to be as well satisfied as the boys were with mj explanation."
" If you will pardon mc for saying so. Professor, 1 do not see how you could be satislied with it yourself"
"And why not, i)ray ?"
"Because you have too mucli good sense to take it for gi'anted that a thing is true only because it possibly may be true. You intimated, if you did not plainly assert to the young men, that these words, bapfo, baptizo, and their co-relatives, signify to sprinkle, and pour, in the Greek New Testament, though 3'ou will admit that they never have those meanings in an}' other Greek book; and your sole and entire authority Ibr this assertion, is the fact that some other words have chani^ed their meanino;, and therefore it was possible that these might have done so also. I grant that they might have changed, but there is not even the shadow of any evidence to show that they have really done so. Some men have applied to the Legislature and had their names changed ; and so you and I might have done, but this is ccrtainl}' no proof that our names have been changed. Il' y(ni build an argument, or base an explanation on this change, it is QOt enough to suppose it to be possible that such a
I2fi THEODOSIA ERNEST.
lihstnge migJit occur; you must prove it to be certain that such a change did occur."
"But you will grant," replied Professor Jones, " that it was at least probable, that as Christ was introducing a new order of things in religion, new words, or rather old words with new meanings, should be employed in describing this new ordinance."
" So far from granting that it was probable, I will prove that it was morally impossible ; though, if it had been even probable, it would not justify your conclusions.
" What would you think of the common sense of that member of Congress who should treat the Constitution of the United States in the same way that you treat the Constitution of the Christian church, and earnestl}' and soberly declare that such words as war and peace, taxes and treaties, are not to be understood among us in their common and ordinary acceptation, as they are used by other writers, and as we find them defined in the dic- tionaries— but that war means want, peace means plenty, taxes mean tables, and treaties mean troubles ? You would expect his colleagues to call him a fool. Noi would you think more highly of his wisdom, if he should reply, and defend himself by saying — that it is true these were common English words, the meaning of which had been fixed and known for many ages, yet America was a new country, and the Constitution was designed to usher in a new order of things, and nothing was more natural than that its framers should use words in some new and unnatural sense ! And yet, this is precisely the manner of reasoning adopted by grave and reverend DOCTORS OF DIVINITY, when they attempt to ex- pound the constitution which Christ gave his church. There is not a single word in the whole Greek language the meaning of which is more definitely fixed and more perfectly known than that of haptizo, and those derived
FIFTH night's STUDY 127
from il. Ill any other book but the New Testament, no scholar ever hesitates about its signification. When Homer s])ealvs of a smith baptizing a hatchet or huge pole-axe in cold water, to harden it, we have no difliculty in knowing what he means. We see the smith harden steel in the same manner now, by plunging it in the water.
" When Herodotus says of the Egyptians, that if they touched a swine, they went into the river, and bap- tized themselves with their clothes on, no scholar doubts they plunged into the water.
" W^hen Diodorus Siculus says of a ship that it was baptized in the sea, no scholar doubts that he means to say the ship was sunk — merged in the sea.
" When Plutarch says of the Roman general that he baptized his hand in blood, no one doubts that he dipped his hand in the blood. And yet you know that in these, and many similar places, the very same word is used which is employed in the New Testament to denote the ordinance. You may take the whole range of Greek literature, up to the very time when the Gospels were written, and you cannot find one solitary instance in which these words are used to signify either sprinkling or pouring, nor any one in which they have not in them the idea of an immersion — literal or figurative."
" Yes, Mr. Courtney, but that was classic Greek. The Hebraistic Greek, spoken and written among the Jews, might have been diti'erent."
" So it might. Professor Jones, but as regards this word, it was not diti'erent, nevertheless. If there was any such thing as Jew Greek, you would find it in the translation of their own Scripture, made b}- seventy learned men of their own nation, and hence called by them the Septuagint. With this translation the Jews, in our Saviour's time, were more familiar than v.ith the
128 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
original Hebrew. It was this that Jesus quoted in his discourses. It was this that Matthew, and tlie other writers of the New Testament, refer to, and quote as the Law and the Prophets. This was the Greek which the Jews understood better than any other. If there was, therefore, any such thing as Hebraistic or Jew Greek it was in this book. iSow, sir, you know very well that the idea of dipping, expressed by the Hebrew word ' tabaP is in this Jew Greek nniformly rendered by ' bajJto^ or ' baj^tizo' — and these words are never used in any other than their common classical signification.
"And further still, Josephus, who was a Jew, lived among the Jews, and wrote the history of the Jews, lived and wrote just about the same time that the authors of the New Testament did, and if they wrote in the 'Jew Greek,' he did so also. He wrote for the same people, at the same time, and in the same lan- guage, and uses the same word again and again, but no one ever suspected that he meant sprinkling or pouring, or that lie used it in any other than its common, classi- cal sense. He invariably uses the word to signify sinking, submerging, or dipping. And besides all this, you will please to remember that the greater part of the New Testament was written, not for the Jews, but for the Greeks, to read, and, consequently, if the writers did not use Greek words, in their ordinary Greek sense, they would not be understood — but would, in fact, convey an absolute falsehood. Mark was written at Rome, for the Italians and strangers who read the Greek language there. Luke addressed his Gospel and the Acts to an individual in the Greek nation, for Theophilus is a Greek name. John was written in the ver^^ territory of Greece itself. It is evident, therefore, that even if there had been a peculiar Jewish use of the word, the writers of the Gospels could not have crap]03T(l it
FIFTH night's STUDY. 129
nnless they had explained, at the same time, that they did not use it in its common signification. If 1 say that I was immersed in the Cumberland river people who understand English will think 1 was plunged be- neath the surface of the water — or else that 1 state what was not true ; because this is the common every- day meaning of the word immerse in the language to irhich it belongs. So when these writers say Christ was bai)tized in the river Jordan, everybody that read Greek would understand that he was submerged in the river, for this was the common every-daj' meaning of the word bajitize in the language to which it belonged.''
"I must acknowledge, Mr. Courtney," said the Pro- fessor, "there is a great deal of force in what yoii say; and I really do not, at this moment, see how I can set aside your reasoning. I had no idea that so strong an argument could possibly be made in behalf of immer- sion. But is it not true, sir, that there are many places in the New Testament where the word cannot possibly mean immersion — or where it is at least much more jjrobable that it means something else ?"
" I have no doubt, Professor, that there are a number of places where it would seem much more probable to you that it has some other meaning, if it were not that the usage of the language has fixed its meaning to be immersion. It might seem probable to us that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a war-horse, but the meaning of the words employed in describing his entr}- compels us to believe that he rode on an ass's colt. So, also, it might seem probable that the Pharisees only sprinkled Uie couches on which they reclined at their meals, but the ivord employed shows that the}^ really immersed them, however improbable it might seem to one who was not aware of the extreme care which the superstitious Pharisees employed, lest some part of their furniture
130 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
should escape the contact of the water, and so remaiE m its impurity.
" So, also, when he says that ' The Pharisees and all the Jews eat not when they come from market, except they first wash (immerse) themselves.' It might seem more prol)al)le that they only sprinkled themselves, or crossed their foreheads with holy water, or poured some drops upon the top of their heads : but the words em- ployed declare expressly that they 'immersed.'' I will not refuse to believe God's Word, because he tells me of a circumstance that seems to me improbable. The Scriptures are full of improbable things, but I surely will not dare to change the meaning of the words used to relate them, in order to get rid of the improbability.
" This would be worse than infidelity itself. I believe just what God says, whether it were probable or im- probable.
" But now if you tell me that these things were impos- sible, that is quite a different matter. If any persons or things are said to be baptized, that could not possibly have been immersed, then I must grant that the Scrip- ture either asserts what is not true, or that it uses words in a new and unusual sense. Permit me to suggest to you. Professor, that it would not be an unprofitable study to investigate this point. Take a Greek Con- cordance, and turn to every passage where the word occurs ; and if you find any impossibility in admitting the classical and common meaning, I will be prepared to concede something when we meet again."
" 1 thank you for the suggestion, Mr. Courtney. Vou have indeed thrown new light upon this su])ject. I am just now somewhat bewildered by it. I will examine more carefully, and tell you my conclusions."
It was on Monday that this conversation occurred, and Mr. Courtney was returning home, when he was
FTFTTI NTOIIT'S STUDY. ] '.U
called by Edwin into Mrs. Ernest's, to assist the in-vea ligations of Theodosia and Mr. Percy. It was now neai night on Thursday, and he had yet heard nothing fur- ther from the Pi-ofessor on the subject; but just as h€ was leaving his school room, a lad handed him the fol lowinor note :
"Dear Courtney: — I have been examining, as you suggested, into the Scripture usage of the word 'Bap- tizo^ and its cognates. I am surprised and embarrassed by the results. Difficulties in the way of sprinkling in- crease at every step; yet there are also some dilficulties in the wa}" of immersion. J*erhaps you can easily obviate them. I had last evening a very interesting conversation with ray niece on this subject. She feels that she has been greatly assisted by your advice and suggestions. There is still, however, one point on which her mind remains in doubt. It is this. If Christ commanded immersion, and immersion was practiced by the first churches, how came it to be so universally dis- carded, and sprinkling substituted in its place ? This question, I confess, presents a mystery to me also. Will you do me the kindness to meet me at Mrs. Ernest's to-night, and come prepared to enlighten our darkness on this point ? Yours truly,
"J. M. Jones"
This was a subject to which the teacher had recent!}' given considerable attention, and had collected a num- ber of authorities among Pedobaptist writers, show- ing, not only that immersion was at first the universal practice of all the churches, but also the very time and place when and where pouring first, and sprinkling afterward, were introduced instead of it.
He went home, therefore, and, after supper, selected
132 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
euch books as he thought woiikl he most satisfactory to his inquirers, and took them with him to the widow's cottage.
lie found Uncle Jones already there, who was not long in beginning the discussion.
" I see by the pile of books you have brought," said he, " that you received my note, and have come prepared to remove, if possible, all our historical' difficulties. Before we enter upon the history of the ordinance, will you per- mit me to mention some dilhculties in the way of under- standing the word baptize to signify immersion, where- ever it occurs in the New Testament?"
" Certainly ; for though 1 ventured to tell you (when we talked upon this subject last Monday), that you would not find any imj^o.^sibiliiiet^, I did not even inti- mate that you would find no difficulties. But what are those which have troubled you ?"
"It will perhaps save time if we take \\\) the passages in order. I knew that bapto and baplizo were derived from the same root, and, in classical usage, had pre- cisely the same signification, except that bapto, while it signifies to dip, signifies also to d^^e or color, which baptizo never does.* And I, therefore, found all the places where these words occur.
* "What," says Professor Moses Stuart, page 29S — "What are the classical meanings of bapto and baptizo ? Both those w^ords mean to dip, to immerse, to plunge into any thing liquid. All lexicographers and critics of any note are agreed in this.'' And again, on page 288 : "The original etymological root of baptizo, bapto, and also of the nouns and adjectives kindred with them, appears plainly to be the Cxreek monosyllable bap. The leading and original meaning of which seems to have been dip- ping, immersing, plunging, soaking, drenching in some liquid ; and as closely associated with this, the idea of dyeing or coloring, since this was done by dipping." And again : "The precise dif- ference between bapto and baptizo is, that while they both
FIFTH nigut's study. 133
" 1 will lirst mention those in which there is no direct allusion to the ordinance, but where the word occurs, as it often does in the Old Testament, in connection with other subjects.
'• Theodosia, get your Testament, child, and read them as 1 mention them, according to mj- memorandum. The first is Luke xvi. 24.
" ' Send Lazarus that he may (baptize) dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue.' This seems plain enough ; and so does the second, John xiii. 26, * It is he to whom I shall give the sop when 1 iiavc (baptized) dipi)ed it ; and when he had (baptized) dipped it, he gave it to Judas.' Nor did 1 Ilnd any difficulty with the third, Revelation xix. 13, 'And he was clothed in a vesture (baptized) dipped in blood.' But here in the fourth case, or Mark vii. 4,1 find a diiliculty. 'The (bajitisms) washing of cups, and pots, and brazen vessels, and tables.^ Now, so far as the cups, and pots, and vcsseJs are concerned, the matter is made entirely plain by turning to Leviticus xii. 82, ' Wliether it be any vessel of wood, or raiment, or skin, or sack, whatsoever vessel it be wherein any work is done, it must be j^9w/ into the water, and it shall be unclean until evening, and so it shall be cleansed.' From this it is evident that the cups and other vessels were immersed, or 'jmt into the water ;' but the word translated table, may mean also a couch or bed, and how the beds and tables could bo immersed, I do not so easily understand."
"And yet, uncle,'' said the young lady, " the same Scripture that speaks of the immersion or baptism of
ayrt.e in one common and original meaning, that of immersion or plunging, usage has employed bapto to eTipress the idea of color- ing, as well as the idea of dipping or plunging ; while haptizo ia not employed in the additional sense of coloring." 9
io'l THEODOSIA ERNEST.
the cups, speaks also of that of the tables Whatever was done to the cups, therefore, was done to the tables too."
" Yes, Theo., and that is what makes me doubt if there was any immersion about it. The cups could have been dipped easil3' enough, but to dip beds and tables is quite anolher business."
'M)ut, uncle, if 'putting into the water' was immer- sion, must thc}^ not have been immersed ?"
" It would seem so, Theo., but I can't undeistaud how it could be done."
"The difficulty will all vanish," said Mr. Courtney " if you will remember that the little stool to hold his plate which stood at the head of each guest as he reclined upon the floor, was called a table, and the mat or cloth which he lay upon, was called a couch or bed ; and either of these could be immersed as readily as the cups. They had no massive mahogany tables, or beds containing sixty pounds of feathers, as we have. The poor invalid wliom Jesus healed, did not probably evince any extra- ordinary muscular power when he took up his bed and walked awaj^ with it.
" But we have other testimony l)esides that of. Mark on the subject. What if I show you from the writings of a learned Hebrevv, that the beds and tables not only could be immersed, but that their immersion was habitu- ally practiced by the superstitious Pharisees 1''
" That will indeed remove ever}' shadow of doubt/ said the Professor; "but have you indeed such testi- mony ?"
" Certainly we have. There was a very learned Jew who wrote a very elaborate commentary on the Jewish customs and traditions. Dr. Adam Clarke, the great coramentator, recognizes his authority, and calls him th^ 'great expounder of the JcAvish Law;' nnd, as he
FIFTH xMGHt's study. 135
comes tbus ' properly vouched for,' I trust his evidence will not be disputed. This learned and eminent Rabbi, commonly called Rabbi Maimonides, says, in his com- mentary: 'Every vessel of wood, as a table or bed, re- ceives defilement, and these were washed hij covering in water, anil very nice and particular they were,' he adds, * that thej' might be covered all over.^
" If the article was very large and could not be dipped all at one time, it could still, according to the teaching of this great expounder, be easily immersed. For, says he, 'A bed that is wholly defiled, if he dip it part by part, it is pure. If he dip it in the pool of water it is clean, even though its feet are plunged in the thick clay.'
" rerhai)s," continued Mr. Courtney', addressing Theo- dosia, " your uncle may find it easier to believe Mai- monides than Mark, and if so, the tables are disposed of"
" The Rabbi's explanation does indeed remove all difficulties," said Uncle Jones; "but now look at the first part of the verse. ' The Pharisees and all the Jews except the^' wash their hands, eat not ; and when they come from the market, except they (bai)tize) wash, they eat not; holding the tradition of the elders.' Now I can hardly think it possible that the Jews, whenever they came from market, dipped themselves all over in water, as the word (bapiisanti) emplo^'ed here, would intimate, if immersion indeed be the meaning of the word. It seems as though something else would be much more natural and likely to be done."
" Suppose it was more likely that they should do something else," replied Mr. Courtnc}', "can you not believe, on the authority of the Word of God, that the superstitious Jews would do very uulikel}', improbable, and inconvenient things ? It cannot be denied that it
I3fi THEODOSIA ERNEST.
was just as poasihle foi them to immerse tliemscl^i'j (baptisonti) when they came Irom market, as it was to wash their hands {nipsonli) on ordinary occasions, or before meals ; but it is very easy to determine what it was which they actually did, since it was that which was required by the 'tradition of the elders.' What, then, was this tradition of the elders? Maimer ides shall enlighten us here again. ' If the Pharisees,' say? he, ' touched but the garments of the common people, they were deliled all over as if they had touched a pro- fluous person, and needed immersion, and were obliged to do it ; and hence when they walked the streets, they walked on the side of the way, that they might not be defiled by touching the common i)eople. In a laver (they say) which holds forty seahs of water, every defiled man dips himself.'
" It was, therefore, we see, a veritable immersion which was required by the 'tradition of the elders,' as preserved in their nation and recorded by one of then- most learned Rabbis ; and thougli Doctors of Divinity find it very hard to believe the plain assertion of the Spirit of God, speaking b}' Mark, and fanc}^ there must be some mistake or misunderstanding when he says the Pharisees immersed themselves ; yet 1 have never heard that any of them hesitated to receive the uninsinred testimony of the Jewish Rabbi, or proposed to giv.i to ln>i words new and unheard-of meanings to obviate the necessity' of admitting that immersion was practiced by the superstitious Jews."
" I am very much obliged to you," said the Professor, " for laying the sin of my unbelief at the door of the Doctors of Divinit}' ; and, to tell the truth, they are in some degree resi>onsible for it, for I am doubtful if J should have seen these difficulties so plainly had I not looked at them th ough the theological microscope of
FIFTH night's STUDY. 131
Dr. Miller, of Princeton, Xew Jersey. You have dis- posed of them so easily and so satisfactorily, that 1 am almost ashamed to ask 3'ou for your opinion about the divers washings in Hebrews ix. 10. These washings, you know, are in the original called Baptismois or bap- tisms— were they not some of the many sprinklings enjoined upon the Jews by the Levitical law?"
" Surely, my dear sir, if they had been, Paul would have called them sprinklings. He understood the use of the proper word for i^prinkle, for he uses it in this same connection where he speaks of ' the ashes of an heifer spj^inkling the unclean.' The baptisms were evi- dently something else, and another and altogether dif- ferent word is employed to designate them — one word refers to the sprinkling a required by the law, the other to the inimerfiiona which it commanded."
" But, Mr. Courtney, I have in some way received the impression that the law nowhere commands any immer- sions. It commands sprinklings and ablutions, wash- ings and purifications, but never in any case immersions — so the allusion must lie to some other cleansings than to immersions."
" Permit me to say. Professor, that you could not have received that impression from a careful study of the law itself — 3 uu are probably indebted for it to a Doctor of Divinity. Take your Bible, and turn to the law, and you will read of immersions or dippings in blood — dippings in blood and running water — dippings in oil — dippings in the water of i)urification — and in the practice of the Jews, many, if not most of the washings mentioned in the law, were performed by immersicn, though this was not specifically required by the com- mand. The ten lavers that Solomon made, were for washing the sacrifices, and these were washed by dipt- ping them in the water. The great sea which he made,
138 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
was for the priests to hathe in, 2d Chron. It. 6. And this washing was an immersion. On how many occa- sions do you read, in the 15th of Leriticus, that one 'must wash his clothes, and bathe himself n water?' Are clothes washed without immersion? The vessels of wood, skin, etc., were required to 'to be put into the water'' — was not this an immersion ? And if you doubl that the washing or bathing of their persons was im- mersion, we will learn from Maimonides what it was that they actually did in obedience to this law :
"* In their law,' says this learned Ral)bi, 'whenever washing of the body or the clothes is mentioned, it means nothing else than the washing t\\Q, wlnile body; for if any wash himself all over except the vcr}^ tip of his little finger, he is still in his uncleanness.'
" That this was what the Jews understood by washing, is further evident from the case of Naarnan. The prophet told him to go and wash seven times in Jordan ; and it was regarded as strict and literal obedience when he went and 'dipped himself seven times.' "
" 1 see, Mr. Courtney, that it is just as eas}' to find the ' divers immersions' as the * sprinklings,' and 1 do not see why I should have been so easily imposed upon. I find I must be careful how I receive the assertions even of our Doctors of Divinity."
" Yes, uncle," said Theodosia, " I have determined that I will find every thing in the Bible for myself It is the only way in which I can be certain it is there."
" We have now," said Mr. Courtney, examined every text in the New Testament where the word is translated, and not merely transferred in our version. In several of these places we find it is rendered ' dip,' as it is in the fourteen places mentioned by Dr. Barnes, where it occurs in the Old Testament. In all the other places it
FIFTH night's STUDY. 18U
is rendered wash, and we have ascertained, in every case, that the washing was by ' dipping.' "
" But, Mr. Courtne}^ did not j^ou ascertain this from Kabbi Maimonidcs, and not from the Scriptures them- selves ? I want m}' faitli to stand alone upon the Word of God "
"No, Miss Ernest, we learned it from the word of God itself 1 quoted the Jewish Rabbi to satisfy 3'oui uncle — because (if he will pardon me for sa^'ing so) he seemed to feel that some human testimon}' was needful to sustain the (to liim) strange assertion of the Word of God, that the superstitious Pharisees immersed their tables or couches, and themselves, but we had abundant proof without the Kaljbi's testimony."
" AVhat was it, Mr. Courtney? — please call it to my mind again. The Bible argument is all that I care to remember."
" You are right. Miss Ernest — it is all you nred to remember. You know we have on former occasions determined the meaning of the word baptism, by a variety of methods. We found it to be immersion or dipping. Now, 3'our uncle admitted this, so far as regards all oUier boo^-s but Ihe New TeMament. Here he conceived it mi(jld have a new signification. I con- ceded that it might, but denied that it did ; for the fact that a thing may possibly, or even probably, be true, IS no evidence that it in true. Then to show that it must have a new meaning, he referred to three places where, in our version, it is rendered 'washing.' In Mark vii. 4, he said it seemed unreasonable to think that the Pharisees immersed their tables and beds (for the word * kleina,'' rendered tables, ma}' mean couches as well) ; and therefore he thought he ought to gixe the word some other meaning.
" To this I might have merely replied, the Word of
140 THEODOSTA ERNEST.
God says the ' kleina' were immersed, and therefore it was done. I will not take the liberty to change God's word because it states improbabilities. But we were very accommodating, and reminded him that whatever was done to the tables, or 'kleina,' was the same thing that was done to the * cups' and other vessels, and then turned to Leviticus and showed that ihey were ' put into the water,' and of course the ' kleina' were ' put into the water,' also. This, I am sure, was proof enough, without going to the Rabbi, to see hoiv it was done, and this was all Scripture proof. We went to the Rabbi only to 'make assurance doubly sure.' Then your uncle thought it more reasonable to believe that the Pharisees did something else instead of dipping themselves (as Mark says) when they came from the market.
" I might have answered as before — God says they dipped, and I will not dare to doubt it, though it be improbable.
" But as the text says, they did it ' holding the tradi- tion of the elders.' I referred to the Jewish Rabbi merely to learn what the * tradition of the elders' required on this point, and we found it was just what the word expressed.
" In the third place, your uncle had conceived that the baptismois or washings spoken of in Hebrews ix. 10, could not be immersions, because some Doctor of Divinity had told him there were no immersions ; and we went back to the Old Testament and found immer- sions in abundance — even without those rites which are called ' washings ;' but even these were immersions also, as I have proved by the case of Naaman, and refer^'ed to the Rabbi as confirmatory evidence."
" Very satisfactory, I declare," said the Professor, laughing. " You see, Theo., Mr. Courtney fully
FIFTH night's STUDY. I A 1
appreciates the difficulties in the way of convincing your uncle.
" But let us see what he has to say about these other places which I have marked, and in which the word is used without translation, and refers directly to the ordinance itself The first is Matthew iii. 5, 6, which reads of the baptism of the multitudes by John."
" In regard to that," said Mr, Courtney, "it will not be worth while to consume our time to-night — I will refer j^ou to Miss Theodosia, who has examined it already. I will only say, that if you prefer ' ivaahing'' as your translation of tlie word, there could be no quicker way for John to icaHh them than by dippiuo^ them in the water."
"The next place I have marked," said Uncle Jones, " is the 11th verse of the same chapter, 'I incTeed bap- tize you with water, but he that cometh after me shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.' "
" I trust you find no difficulty there," said Mr. Courtney.
"No," replied the Professor, "except that it presents a strong argument in favor of immersion. The original certainly reads (if we translate as we would in any other book), I immerse you in water, and he shall im- merse you in the Holy Ghost and in fire.
"The next is the IGth verse of the same chapter — 'And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water.' I find a strong argument for immer sion in this also ; for if they did not immerse, I see no reason for o;oinor into the water — or, if we read that he went up from, instead of out of, the water, I still see no reason for even going to it. We do not go to the rivei to sprinkle now — I can't think they did then.
"The next place I have marked refers to the 'much water' of ^non, near Salim : and I think no one cat
142 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
deny that John selected that place for the convenience of baptizing; and so far as it has any be&ring on the case at all, it favors immersion. No other place i^re- sents any difficult^' not alread}' obviated, till we come to the baptism of the three thousand. Here seemed to be some doubtful circumstances, till I talked the subject over with my niece last night, but all is now quite plain; but there are some other instances recorded in the Acts, where immersion does not seem to have been so proba- ble as sprinkling or pouring."
" Please don't speak any more about prohahilities, Professor Jones," exclaimed Mr. Courtney. " You ad- mit that ' baptize,^ the word used to describe this ordi- nance, mealfs to immerse, as its common primary signification in ever}- other book but this, and that the people -^^o read the Greek language, would understand this to be its meaning in this, unless some intimation ivas given that it must not be so understood, or unless this meaning was morally impossible. And now you say it seems more probable that sprinkling sometimes oc- curred. Suppose it were more probable, does not Luke, by using this word baptize, declare that it was not sprinkling or pouring, but clearly and plainly a dip- ping ? Will you dare to give the word a meaning that it never had before, and has not now, in any Greek book in the world, merely because you think it more probable that sonKithing else was done, instead of what Luke says was done ? Show me a case where immersion was impossible, and it will have some weight."
" No, no, Mr. Courtney, the New Testament meaning of the word is the very point in dispute. I shall not allow 3'ou to beg the question on the very position al)out which we are at issue."
" I did not intend, nor do I desire to do any such thing. It is no begging of the question to object to
FIFTH night's STUDY. 143
your mode of settling it. This word was used hundreds of years before Luke wrote this book. Its meaning was as well fixed and defined as that of any word in the Greek language. Luke was writing- to those who read, and spoke, and understood this language (and this word among the rest) in its ordinary sense, according to the familiar every-day usage of the people who employed it. " "We agree, and no critic or scholar of an^^ note has ever denied, that the common, familiar meaning of this word was to immerse, submerge, to dip. This we have proved. But now we want to know in what sense Luke employs it. I answer, that the presumption is, that he employ's it just as every other writer does ; for if he does not, nobody will understand what he means. He must use words in the sense that other people use them, or other people will not know what he means ; but as he wishes to be understood, and writes under the inspira- tion of infinite wisdom, he will use words thus. If this word, therefore, commonly and familiarl}^ meant to im- merse, then it was immersion that he meant when he used the word. To this 3'ou reply, tliat in some cases it i^eems moi^e probable that something else was done, and not the act which this word describes ; and you will therefore make it mean just what 3'ou think is mod likely to have taken place. I object to this mode of deciding the meaning of a New Testament word. If we decide according to this rule, I can show you that Lazarus was never raised from the dead ; for it is to me much more likely that he was only adeep, or in a sort oi trance — and when Jesus called him with a loud voice, it only awakened him. You tell me, how^ever, that the Scripture plainly declares, again and again, that he icas dead, and that Christ rained him from the dead. But I have only to assure you that, though the word rendered dead does mean dead — destitute of life — in every other
144 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
book, and in almost every other place in this book, yet in this particular place it is much more probable that it means asleep, or in a trance ; and, therefore, dead can- not mean destitute of life. If I am at liberty to trifle in this way with any words of the Sacred Record, it ceases to mean an}^ thing but what I, or yow, or any other man may fancy it ought to mean. Every man may make it mean just what he pleases. But pardon me for talking so long — 1 did not intend it when T began. Go on with your references, and I will show you that there is not even a jDrohability that it was any thing else but immersion that was performed in any single case."
" I was," said Uncle Jones, "just about to mention the case of Paul, who was baptized ' standing up,' and of course, it could not be by immersion, Acts ix. : 'And Ananias went his way and entered into the house, and putting his hand upon him, said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me that thou mightest re- ceive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes, as it had been scales, and he received sight forthwith, and aroi^e and was baiMzed.^ Now the Greek word * anastas^ here ren- dered arose, might very properly be rendered standing up ; and if so, he must have been baptized standing."
'* That, if so, Professor, is a very convenient phrase. Let us see how it will work in other places. We read in the Old Testament that ' David arose and fled for fear of Saul.' The same word occurs here. It may mean ' standing up ;' and, if so, then David fled stand- ing. So, also, in this passage, ' Saul rose up out of the cave and went.' It may mean 'standing;^ and, if so, then Saul went standing out of the cave. And in this, ' Saul arose and got him from Gilgal.' It may mean
FIFTH night's STUDY. 1 45
* standing ;' and, if so, then Saul went up from Gilgal 'standing.' "
" Yes," said Theodosia, " and when Ananias and Sapphira died that fearful death, the 3'oung men were standing still all the while the}' were winding up the body, carrying him away, and burying him ; for it reads,
* The young men arose, wound him uj). curried him out, and buried liim.' (Acts v. 6.) Is it not the same word that is used in the original?"
" The very same, Miss Ernest — and so it is where the prodigal son says I will arise and go to my father — 3'ct he does not mean to say that he will go ' stand- ing up.' If you will be kind enough to get Barnes' Notes, you will find a very true and apposite cxi)lana- tion of this word. 'lie ay^ose and went to his father.' 'The word arose,' says Barnes, 'does not impl}- that he had been sitting. It does not refer to an}' change of position, but expresses the act of setting out, or begin- ning to do any thing. It was a common expression among the Hebrews to denote entering u])on a piece of business.' Now, if Luke had said, he sat still and was baptized, it might have made some difliculty ; but if he rose up, or pre[)ared himself, he would do this equally, whether he was sprinkled or immersed. Im- mersion is quite as probable, so far as this word is con- cerned, as sprinkling, or any thing else."
" I must acknowledge that you are right," said Uncle Jones, " and you have convinced me so often that I am almost ashamed to mention another diiliculty which has been suggested — and that is, that there is nothing said about a change of garment, or of their going out of the house ; and then Saul was so feeble that it would seem almost cruel to make him walk half a mile to the river, before he even partook of any food. 1 judge, therefore,
14G THEODOSIA ERNEST.
that the rite must have been performed in the house, and if so, it could not be immersion "
" There is your 'if so^ again. J3ut suppose it was done in the house, are 3'ou sure that there was not a bathing-tub, or a tank, or some other means of immer- sion in the house ? There is surel}^ no evidence that there was not. How do you know that it was half a laile to the river'/ How do you know that there was not a fountain in the yard ? Most rich men's houses in the East are provided with them. You simply read that he 'was baptized,' and every Greek reader would understand this to mean that he was immersed. If you should come down next Sunday to the Baptist church, and appl}^ for membership, and be received and bap- tized— I would, as clerk of the church, record the facts — I would write that you came, made credible profession of faith in Christ, gave satisfactory evidence of genuine conversion, was received and baptized. I need not re- cord that you put on suitable clothing — that you went to the river, or to the pool, or to the baptizing. Every- body would know that you were immersed, if I simply said you were ' baptized.' "
" Well, well, 1 see I have been making ' mountains out of mole hills,' but really the Doctors of Divinity, as you so kindly suggested a while ago, have mucli of the blame to bear. I am almost ashamed to go on with my catalogue of difficulties, lest I provoke both you and Theodosia to laugh at me for m}- simplicity."
" Far from it, my dear sir. It is not long since J stood just where you are standing now. I know from sad experience with how much difficult}' the light of truth makes its way through the mists and fogs by which one's early education has surrounded him ; and how slowl\' it dispels the clouds and darkness of long- established prejudices. It is rare indeed to find 2>.ny
FIFTU night's study. ] \1
one educated as you were, and accustomed as you have been from childhood, to think that whoever might l)e wrong, the Presbj'terians must be right, 3'et exhibiting the candor to acknowledge error, and the conscience to repudiate it so soon as it shall be clearly seen. I hope, you will not refrain from expressing even the shadow of a doubt, if it keeps 3'our mind from seeing clearly the way of Christian duty as required in God's Word What was the next case on your memorandum ?"
" It was that of Cornelius and his friends. Peter says, who shall 'forbid water?' And it seemed to me more natural for him to use this expression, if the water was to be brought to sprinkle them, than if they were to be taken to the water to be dii)ped in it."
"But," replied Mr. Courtney, "Peter does not say the water was to be brought. He only says, who will forbid water (that is to be used in the baptizing of these peoi)le) ? It was simpl}' ecpiivalent to saying, who will forbid their baptism ? But the water might have beeu brought to nn??i<^7\s(^ them. What would hinder it/' I was present once when a Baptist minister said to the sexton of the church, ' Let water be brought for the baptism of six persons this evening' — would you deny that those six persons were to be immersed? In re- cordiuiif the event, I miojht have said, the water wa« brought, and they were baptized — for they were actually immersed in a tank prepared for the purpose under the floor of the church. Now, if one of the deacons had exclaimed, I forbid the water to be brought for the baptism of these candidates, you must (had you been present and reasoned as 3'ou do upon this passage) have concluded that it was sprinkling, and not immersion al all which was spoken of"
" I am satisfied. Mr. Courtney, and do not see any thing in my next case (which was that of Lydia and
148 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
her household) that has not already been disposed of. 1 was going to object that there was nothing said abou't change of apparel and going to or coming from the water — ^but I acknowledge that when I read in a Baptist paper that forty converts were baptized one Sabbath morning, I do not doubt they were immersed, and yet 1 never see a word said about the clothing they wore, "and often nothing about the place where the rite was per- formed So 1 \ull pass to the jailor's baptism. Acts xvi. 33 The only difliculty here is, that as he was bap- tized in the jail, it is very improbable that it was by immersion, since it is not likely there was any conveni- ence for an immersion in an eastern prison."
'* Suppose, Professor Jones, that you should read in a newspaper that * The poor wretch who was last week sentenced to death for the murder of old Mr Gripall, had made a profession of religion, and had been baptized by Elder J. R. Graves, the editor of the Tennessee Bap- tist,' would you imagine that Mr. Graves had i^prinkled him ? Not for one moment ; you could easily believe that the water was brought, and the immersion was done in the murderer's cell, even though not a word was said about the bringing it. As the jailor was master of the prison, could he not have water brought, had it been needful ?
" But the truth is, the baptism was not done in the jail. Read the passage carefully He sprang into the prison, and he brought the Apostles out of it (30th verse). Some say he only brought them out of the inner prison. 1 say he brought them out of that, and into his own house, for (32d verse) they spoke the word of the Lord to all that were in his house. He took them into his family apartments, and there they i reached the Word.
"And then (verse 33d) he took them somewhere else
FIFTH NJOUT'S 8TUi)i. 149
vvliert- ae washed their stripes and was himself baptized; aud then (34th verse) he brought them back into hia house, and set meat before them. You see, therefore, that It was not done in prison, though if it had been, it would have been no proof that it was not immersion."
" I wonder," said Mr. Jones, " that I had never seen the case in this light before. Now, since I have observed it carefully, it is all very plain ; and I have found no other instance where the word occurs in its literal sense, and which presents any difficulties which have not been already considered.
" There is, indeed, the case of the Eunuch, who was baptized by Philii), but the narrative, in all the details of it, absolutely requires immersion to preserve the con- sistency aud probability of the star}'. They went down into the water, and not the one, but both of them went into the water. Then Philip immersed him, and then they came up out of the water. I wonder that any Greek scholar should ever have doubted that they went into and came out of the water ; for, if this is not what is said, it is because the Greek language could ^not ex- press it. In any other book, no scholar would hesitate a moment thus to translate the passage. What is here said to be done, I must concede is precisely what Bap- tists are accustomed to do. And, but for one thing, I am convinced that immersion is the only baptism.^^
"Aud what is that, pray?"
" Simply that I find baptism spoken o^ figuratively or metaphorically in such a way as to lead me to suspect it must be something else. Indeed, in Acts ii. 17, it is almost expressly said to be a pouring."
••■ No, Professor, baptism is not here said to be pour- ing, nor is pouring said to be baptism, though Doctors of Divinity have ventured sui'h assertions.
'* Christ did tell the disciples that they would be iir. 10
150 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
mersed in the Holy Ghost — and Peter did speak of the Holy Spirit as being poured out — but neither of them said that this pouring was the immersion. It might as well have been any other of the wonderful things that happened that day, which could in any respect be com- pared to an immersion.
" But before we go further, let me say one word as to the value of figurative usage in determining the mean- ing of this or any other word.
" Common sense teaches us that the figurative and fanciful must ^ield to the real and actual. When, therefore, we have settled the meaning of a word by its real, literal, every-day usage, we cannot unsettle it by a figure of speech — a chance allusion or comparison. The lanciful must be governed by the actual. This is self- evident. Now, we have seen and settled that the lit- eral meaning of this word is to immeriie. And hence- forth, whenever and wherever we find \i figuratively em- ployed, the allusion must be in some way or other to immersion or some circumstance attending immersion. On this alone will its beauty and appropriateness as a figure depend.
" Now, remembering this, let us examine the case in hand. The allusion cannot be to ' the pouring,' which itself is but a figure — for no literal and actual pouring of the third person of the Trinity could occur. The allusion was not to the manner of the Spirit's coming, but to the copiousness, abundance, and overwhelming nature of his influences ; filling, overflowing, surround- mg, and, as it were, swallowing up their souls. The Greeks often used the word baptized in this way; as baptized in debt, baptized in affliction, baptized in wine (that is, overcome of wine), baptized in iniquity, or as we would express it, aunk in iniquity. We use the word immerse in the same way, when we say of one
FIFTH night's STUDY. 151
that he is immersed in dissipation ; immersed in busi- ness ; immersed in politics, and the like ; we simply mean by such expressions that the dissipation, business, or politics, controls and occupies all the powers and capacities of the man. We do not mean to say that they were poured on him, or i<prinkied on him, but only that they exert an overwhelming influence over him. And just in this sense he told the disciples they ehould be immersed in the Holy Ghost."
** I thank you, Mr. Courtney, for that lucid exposi- tion. I can hardly understand how the matter came to be so mystified in my mind as it has been till now. I will trouble you with but one other case, and that is where the Israelites are said (1 Cor. x. 2) to have been ' all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.' If this was an immersion, you must admit that it was a very dry one, for the Scripture says ex- pressly they went through on dry ground."
" Certainly, I will admit that it was a dry immersion, for it was a figurative, and not a real one. The bap- tism of the Holy Spirit, which we were just speaking of, was a dry immersion. The baptism in sufferings, which Jesus si)oke of so touchingly to James and John, was a dry immersion. The figure in either case was not in the wetting, but in the overwhelming abundance of the Spirit in one, and of sorrow in the other. The allusion in this case is not so much to the act, as to one of the attendant circumstances. They did indeed go down into the sea, as one goes down into the water to be ^mptized. The water stood on each side of them and the cloud covered them — so that they might very appropriately and beautifully be said, in a figure, to be immersed in the cloud and the sea. But the chief allu- sion is to another and altogether ditierent circumstance. As the Christian, by going down into the baptismal
152 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
water, professes his belief in Christ, and takes upon himself a solemn obligation of obedience to the laws of Christ. So the Jews, Paul says, by going down into the sea, and walking beneath the cloud, professed their faith in Moses, and took upon them obligations of obe- dience to him. They were thus ' baptized unto Moses.' The main allusion is not to the act, but to the obliga- tion of the ordinance. Would the iigure be any more beautiful, or anymore a})propriate, if we should say that they were all sprinkled into Moses, or were all poured into Moses ?
"Professor Stuart, on this passage, says: 'The sug- gestion has sometimes been made that the Israelites were sprinkled by the cloud and by the sea, and that this was the baptism which Paul meant ; but the cloud was not a rain cloud, nor do we find an}' intimation thiit the waters of tiie Red Sea sprinkled the children of Israel at that time.' "
"It seems to me," said Theodosia, "that the idea of rain is absolutely precluded ; for if it had rained upon them to any extent, the ground would have been wet, but it says expressly they went through on dry ground.''^
" That would seem to set the matter at rest, Theo., if it were not that the Psalmist, evidently speaking of this very occasion (Psa. Ixxvii. 17, 18), says expressly, 'The clouds poured out water, the skies sent out a sound, thine arrows also went abroad ; the voice of thy thunder was in the heaven, the lightnings lightened the world, the earth trembled and shook.' "
" But the Psalmist does not say, uncle, that these terrible manifestations of Almighty power were directed against the Jeius — they went over dry shod. To them all was light and peace. But the cloud went and stood behind them, and troubled their enemies, the Egyptians. The thunder, and the lightning, and the great storm of
FIFTH night's study. 15:^
rain were upon them, while the Israelites were passing on dry ground."
"Well, Theodosia, 1 give it up. I have no knger an}'' gi-ound to stand u])ou ; and I may as well admit at once, that immersion is the only act which is anywhere in the Bible called a Baptism. 1 have, 1 think, now examined ever}' i)lace that could tlirow any light upon the subject ; and really 1 can't find even a probability of an}' other meaning of the word in any case, while in many this meaning is established by most overwhelming proof."
"Xo, Professor, there is one place you seem to have overlooked, wliich is exceedingly significant; that is Romans, 6th chai)ter, where we are said to be buried with Christ in onr baptism. Here the allusion is most evidently not to any attending circumstance, but to the act itself. We are buried in the water like one who is dead, and raised out of it again like one resurrected. So, we are to consider ourselves as having died to sin, and as having been brought to life again by Christ; Init not to the same life of sin which we led before, but to ' newness of life^ — or a new life — a life of holiness and obedience. That the allusion here is to the act of im- mersion is so evident that none but the most determined and unreasonable cavilers pretend to deny it. I do not know of any single commentator, whose opinions are entitled to any respect, who has ventured to ditfer in regard to this point from Luther, and Calvin, and Dod- dridge, and McKnight, and Chalmers — who all agree that the allusion is to the ancient form of bai)tism by im- mersion, or, as McKnight exi)resses it, to the ordinance in which Christ submitted to be baptized — that is, to be buried under the water, and taken out again by Jolrn,'' etc. (See notes on this ])lace.)
" 1 see " said Uncle Jones. " The Scriptures do not
154 TnE(M)()SIA ERNEST.
even leave * a looj) to hang a doubt upon.' T\u\ coinmoii and every-day nse of the word requires immersion — the scriptural, and especially the New Testament usage of the word, requires immersion — the places where the baptisms were i)erformed required immersion, for why else would they go into the water ? — and even the figures and metaphors drawn from the ordinance de- mand immersion. What shall we say then? Must we not be immersed ?"
" 1 can only answer for myself, uncle. If it was in- mersion which Jesus Christ, my Saviour, submitted to in Jordan, and which he commanded all his disciples to teach and to practice, I cannot hesitate about whether 1 will obey my Saviour — I shall be immersed the first convenient opportunity."
" I cannot yet speak so confidently," rejoined her uncle. " It may he, something will yet turn up to show the matter in some other light. 1 must take more time to consider, and this reminds me that we have not yet examined the history of the ordinance to see whether it is true in fact that sprinkling has been substituted for immersion, or whether, after all, it was not immersion that was substituted for sprinkling. I am under the impression that these Baptists are the same sect that sprung up about the time of Luther and the Reforma- tion— sometimes called Anabaptists, but more frequently I he Mad Men of Munster. 1 grant I have not investi- gated the subject very carefully, but I am certain 1 have somewhere seen or heard their origin in Europe traced back to that occasion, and in this country 1 have been lold they owe their beginning to Roger Williams, who was not properly baptized himself, and consequently could not give valid baptism to any one else. Am I not right in tnose conjectures, Mr. Courtney ?"
Mr. Courtney did not reply until after he had taken
FIFTH night's STUDY. 156
out his watch and observed the time of night. " It is too late," said he, "to answer that question and others which will be suggested by it, to-night. Suppose we postpone the further consideration of the subject till another time."
'• Very well," said Theodosia, who felt that she had sufficient food for one day's reflection in what had already passed. " Come round, both of you, to-morrow night. Come early and take supper with us ; and mean- time, Mr. Courtney, you may leave tliis great armful of old books. May be, I will indulge my womanly curiosity by reading their titles. I don't believe I have much relish for their contents, unless they should be vastly more attractive than their external appearance indicates. Why, some of them look as though they might be a hundred and one years old."
" Old documents are sometimes very valuable," said he, " especially in such a discussion as we are to have to- morrow night. You will l>€ more interested in them than you imagine.'-
THE SIXTH NIGHT'S STUD\.
IN WHICH THE QUESTTOX,
now CHRIST'S ORDINANCE WAS CHANGED.
AND
POUIUNO FIRST, AND THEN SPUlMdlNfi.
SUBSTITUTED IN PLACE OF LMMEllSION.
IS rULLY EXAMINED, AND TEUTHEULLY ANSWERED.
BY THE SPRINKLERS THEMSELVES.
SIXTH OTGHTS STUDY.
HE interest which so learned and excelienl a
Presbyterian as Uncle Jones had exhibited in
'* * the study of Bai)tism, together with affection
J^' for her lovely daughter, had so far removed >^) Mrs. Ernest's objections to this investigation, that she had resolved herself to be present, and take some quiet i)art in the conversation, upon the introduction of sprinkling. Uncle Joncvs she knew was a sincere and pious man. lie was also a man of good sense, sound judgment, and of very extensive informa- tion. And (more than all to her) he was a Jiuling Elder in the Presbyterian Church. If, therefore, Uncle Jones had ventured to doubt about /i/.s baptism, she Viegan to think her daughter could not have com- mitted any very deadly sin in doubting about hers. And, as Uncle Jones had spoken very highly of the logical accumen and historical infornuition of Mr Courtney, she could not see why she should not treat him with such courtesy as was due to an intelligent gentleman, even though he was a poor Haptist school- master. As for his prejudices, which had led him to speak so disrespectfully of the Doctors of Divinity and eminent ministers of " our church" — he had proba- bly received them in his childhood, for she had no doubt he had been reared among the ignorant and bigoted Baptists, who never knew any better, and from whom nothing better could be expected.
When Mr. Courtney came in, therefore, she was the first to welcome him, and express her pleasure that he
Mr)9)
160 THEODOSTA ERNEST.
had come sc early. She exerted herself to entertair him till Theodosia came in, and then went to prepare a nice dish which had just come into her mind for supper. It was not long till the Professor came also ; but not a word was said about the object of their meeting till after the table was removed — when Mr. Covrrtney intro- duced it by saying :
" If I did not misunderstand you, Professor Jones, you expressed some doubt last evening whether im- mersion was not first introduced as baptism by the Mad Men of Munster during the Reformation of Luther ; and whether the Baptists of the United States did not receive baptism from Roger Williams, who was him- self not properly baptized, and therefore could not legally baptize others."
" This is my impression, sir. I do not know exactly how T received it — perhaps I got something of it from reading D'Aubigne's Histor}" of the Reformation — perhaps I received it by hearing something of the kind from the pulpit. I am certain that J have seen or heard it somewhere, and that I thought at the time I had good authority for believing it — otherwise, I should not have given it a place in my memory."
"I have," replied Mr. Courtney, "seen and heard such statements many times from various sources> They are often recorded in i^resbyterian and Methodist newspapers. The}" form a part of every controversy on the subject of baptism; and 3-ou may hear them almost as often as you hear a sermon or listen to a discussion on this subject. It was conscipientl}' very easy for you to receivr; and retain such imi)ressions."
"And yet 1 su})i)ose 3'ou will assure me that I am altogether mistaken, and have been grossly deceived."
"No, Professor Jones, / xluU vot ani^ure you. I do not like that mode of discussion. I will prove to you
SIXTH night's study. 161
(if 3'ou wil. receive the testimony of the mont reliable historians J or that of the most eminent of your own writers on this subject) ; I will prove to you be3^ond all possibility of doubt that those who make such state- ments are either most grossly ignorant or most per- versely false."
" I hope, Mr. Courtney, you don't mean to say that our ministers preach falsehood, or that our religious editors make statements that are not true ?'' said Mrs. Ernest, who already felt her blood begin to boil.
"No, no, sister," said Uncle Jones, who knew her mood. " Mr. Courtney only means to say that our ministers and editors are mistaken, and that he can prove that they have made statements without having lirst carefully examined all the evidence."
" Pardon me, madam," said Mr. Courtney, " I did not intend to use an}' language which would give offence to any one present, and most especially to you. I was my- self for many years a Presbyterian. 1 know the min- isters of that order too well to doubt that, as a bod}', they are in knowledge and piety equal to an}^ in the world. There are among them many who are now my warmest personal friends — men whom 1 love as Chris- tian brethren — men whom I admire as great and valiant soldiers of the cross — men who love Jesus, and are de- voting their lives to his work, and are doing great good in the world. And 3'et there are among them men who, upon this subject, rashly venture to make assertions which most clearly and directly contradict all historical testimony, and which, if there is any tralli in histor}', must be admitted to be false."
" How can that be possible ?" asked Theodosia. " How can a good man dare to say what is not strictly true V
" I do not doubt, Miss Ernest, that most of them really believe what they assert. They are themselves
IG2 THEODOSIA ERNEST
deceived. They have been trained and educated m error. They have trusted to the assertions of others, who had an interest in deceiving them. They get im- pressions, just as your uncle clid, from books, or i)apers, or lectures, or sermons, in whicli such statements are made. They take it for granted they are true — and so repeat them to others — and extend and perpetuate the falsehood, which would at once be evident, if they would go behind these statements and examine the historical records for themselves.
" It is, in part, for this reason, that I do not ask you to take my word for any fact to which I may request your attention. Nor will I ask you to receive the testi- mony of any Bajjtist historian ; you shall have the record to read for yourselves, and that record made in every instance by an opposer of our poor and despised de- nomination. 1 will prove to you, first, that the Baptists in Europe did not originate at the time of the Reforma- tion, but had existed from the very foundation of Chris- tianity ; and then I will show you that the Baptists in the United States do not owe their orioiu to Roo;er Williams, any more than they do to Lord Baltimore or Cotton Mather; and that the validity of their ordinance stands on much safer ground, in point of regular suc- cession from the Apostles, than that of any of the Pedo- baptist sects."
"That is right, Mr. Courtne}^" said Uncle Jones; " let us have one thing at a time. Bring up your wit- nesses."
" Well, I have them ready. But first, let us under- stand distinctly the point on which we are at issue. You understand that the Baptist denomination sprang up as a new thing about the time of the Lutheran Reformation, and owes its origin to those who were then called 'Anabaptists, or the Mad ^Fen of ]\runster ?' ''
SIXTH night's study. 163
*■* Yes ; that was my impression."
" Very well. Now I will show you that this is so far from being true, that there has been, from the very earliest ages of Christianity up to the present time, a body of professing Christians who have always held, as we do now, that baptism is not valid unless it be pre- ceded by instruction and faith in Christ ; and, conse- fluently, that the baptism of infants is no baptism at all.
" I grant that this body of Christian peojjle has not always been called Baptists ; but as they possessed the distinguishing characteristics of the Baptists, it cannot be denied that they ii^ere Baptists."
" No," said Uncle Jones, " if they were professing Christians, and gave evidence of the new birth, baptized only by immersion, and refused to baptize infants, or recognize such baptism as valid, they were doubtless Baptists, by whatever name they chanced to be called."
" Then we are ready to proceed with the case. The first witness I will call is the celebrated ecclesiastical historian, John Lawrence Mosheim, Chancellor of the University of Gottingen. He was, of course, no Baptist, or he could not have held such a position. His history was originally written in Latin, but has been translated into English by Dr. McLaine, of England, and Dr. Mur- dock, in America. This learned and reliable historian says : ' The sacrament of baptism was administered, in this (the lirst) century, without the public assemblies, in places appointed and prepared for that purpose, and was performed by an immersion of the ivhole body in the baptismal font.'
"Of the second century, he says: 'The persons that were to be baptized, after they had repeated the creed, confessed and renounced their sins, and particularly the devil and his pompous alarements, were immersed under water, and received into Christ's kingdom.' No sprink-
104 T UEODOSIA ERNEST.
ling, and no infants, you see, thus far. Tbc}" were such as could profess their faith, and they were * immersed under the water.' McLaine^s Mosheim, vol. p. 4G-C9.
"As a witness of somewhat similar character, I will now introduce the Pedobaptist Neander, whose ' Church History' and his ' Planting and Training of the Chris- tian Church,' have given his name a world-wide celeb- rity.
" This eminent and reliable historian, in a letter to Mr. Judd, says, expressl}^ ' The practice of immersion was beyond doubt prevalent in the whole church. The only exception was made with the t;ick — hence called baptisma clinicorum. '
"And in ' The Plantino^ and Traininor of the Christian Church,' he says : * The usual form of submersion at baptism practiced by the Jews, was transferred to the Gentile Christians. Indeed, this form was most suita- ble to signify that which Christ intended to render an object of contemplation by such a symbol, viz. : the immersion of the whole man in the spirit of a new life.'
" So also says Coleman, another noted Pedobaptist author, the friend and exponent of Neander, who is re- garded as high authority by the op])onents of the Bap- tists, and who takes frequent occasion to express his aversion to their faith and practice — yet a regard for the obvious truth compels him to say, page 3 72, 'Ancient Christianity Exemplified.' * The term baptism is de- rived from the Greek word Bapfo, from which term is formed BajMzo, with its derivatives Baptismos and Baptisma — baptism. The primary signification of the original is to dip, to plunge, immerse. The obvious import of the noun is immersion.'
" Yet, in another place, he affects to regard immersion as a departure from the apostolic usage :
SIXTH night's study. 165
" ' We cannot resist the conclusion,' he says, ' that this mode of baptism was the first departure from the teaching and example of the Apostles on this subject.' ' // it was a departure from their teachings, it was the earliest — for baptism by immersion, unquestionably, was very early the common mode of baptism.'
"Again, page 396, he sa3''s : 'In the rrimitivc Church, immediatel}' subsequent to the age of the Aposiles, this [immersion] was undeniably the common mode of baptism. (The utmost that can ])e said of sprinkling in that early period is, that it was in case of necessity pej^mitted as an exception to a general rule). This fact is so well established that it were needless to adduce authorities in proof of it. * * * * It is a great mistake to suppose that baptism b}' im- mersion was discontinued when infant baptism became generally prevalent. The practice of immersion con- tinued even to the thirteenth or fourteenth century. In- deed it has never been formally' abandoned, but is still the mode of administering infant baptism in the Greek Church, and in several of the Eastern Churches.'
" Here, also, is another Pedobaptist historian. Dr. Philip Schaff, Professor in a Pedobaptist Theological Seminary at Mercersburg, Penns^dvauia. In his ' His- tory of the Apostolic Church,' page 5()8, he says: ' Im- mersion, and not sprinkling, was unquestionably the original normal form [of baptism]. This is shown l)}^ the very meaning of the Greek words Baptize, Bap- tisma, and Baptismos — used to designate the rite. Then again, by the analogy of the baptism of John, which was performed in the Jordan ["e;?"], Matt. iii. 6, compare with IG; also, eis ton Jordanan [^info the Jor- dan], Mark i. 9; furthermore, by the Xcw Testament comparisons of baptism with the passage through the Red Sea, 1 Coi x. 2; with the food, 1 Peler ii. 21; II
166 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
with a hath, Eph. v. 36 ; Titus iii. 5 ; with a 'burial and resurrection, Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12; and, finally, by the general usage of Ecclesiastical antiquity, which was always immersion, as it is to this day in the Oriental, and also in the Gra^co Russian Churches, pouring and sprinkling being substituted only in cases of urgent necessity, such as sickness and approaching death.'"
" Are you sure, Mr. Courtney, that these learned his- torians were not Baptists ?"
" Most certainly I am. Their church connections are as well known almost as their histories. But even if they had been Baptists, I do not see how that would invalidate their testimony. I hope you do not think that Baptists cannot tell the truth as well as other people ?"
" Oh, no, Mr. Courtney, forgive me — I did not mean that; but it seems to me so ve7'y i<traiige that good men can say such thiugs in their writings, and yet act as though they did not believe a single wol*d of what they say. But perhaps the firt^t historians of the church, from whom these men have borrowed their statements, were Baptists."
" Yes, Miss P]rnest, the lirst historians and earliest writers on the customs and practices of the Apostolic; Churches loere Baptists. And it is to tiiem we are reall}^ indebted for all our knowledge of the earliest ages. Matthew, and Mark, and liuke, and John, were Baptists — or else they might never have told us aboui those baptisms in the river Baptists tell about such things now. Paul was a Baptist, or he would never have compared baptism to a burial and resurrection. Peter was a Baptist, or he would never have compared it to the flood. All those New Testament saints were Baptists, as we have seen in our examination of the meaning of the ivord baptize. The very word made
SIXTH night's study. 167
them Baptists. They could not be any thing else ; and, after their clay, the Fathers (as they are called), that is, the earliest writers among the Christians, whose works have come down to us, were all Baptists. It was near three hundred years before there were an}' professed Christians who were not Baptists^
" On what authority do you venture such an as- sertion ?'' asked Uncle Jones.
"I might say," replied the schoolmaster, "that I make it on the authority of 3'our own most eminent and most reliable historians. I have it over the signatures of Koman Catholic, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Dutch Re- formed, and Presbyterian writers, who, while they have been in full connection with those very establishments, all of which have (when they could) been the most viru- lent and cruel per^secutors of the Baptists, and some of which are euen now subjecting our brethren in Europe to fines and imprisonment, and confiscation of property, because they will not conform to the corrupt and cor- rupting superstitions which have been substituted by Popish authority for the ordinances of Christ — have nevertheless openly, plainly, and repeatedly declared, as historians, that the apostolic churches were, in their membership, ordinances, organization, and government, just such as ihe Baptist churches are now. I saj^ I might give this authority ; but I will refer you to the same source from which they, as historians, derived their information. 1 say the Christian Fathers, for the first three centuries, were Baptists, because these Fa- thers say so themselves.
''Justin MaiHyr, who is counted among the earliest of the Fathers, writing to the Emperor, and giving him an account of the churches in his day, about one hundred and fifty years after Christ, says : ' 1 shall now lay be- fore you the manner of dedicating oui-solves to God
168 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
through Christ upon our conversion ; for, shoald I omit this, 1 might not seem to deal sincerely- in this account of our religion. As many as are persuaded and believe chat those things which are taught by us are true, and do promise to live according to them, are directed, first, to pra}^ and ask God, with fasting, the forgiveness of their sins. And we also pray and fast together with them. Tl.en we brimg them to a place where there in water, and they are regenerated in the same way that we are regenerated, for they are washed in the name of the Father,' etc.
" Tertidlian, who lived somewhat later, says: 'When we are read}' to cuter into the water (and even before), we make our protestations before the minister and in the church, that we renounce the devil and all his pomps and vanities — afterward, we are plunged in the water.'
"And again, ' Those who are desirous to dip them- selves holily in this water, must prepare themselves for it by fasting, by watchings, by prayer, and by sincere repentance for sin.'
" But it is needless to multiply authorities. It is the united testimony of all the Fathers who speak of the subject at all, that baptism was in these early ages per- formed only by immersion, except of necessit}- in the near prospect of death. And those who, under such < ircumstances, I'eceived pouring as a ^uhatitute, were never said to have been baptized, but to have been poured upon a.s a suh.stitute for baptism.
" How any man, who has any character to lose, can in the face of all this testimony venture the assertion that sprinkling was practiced in the early churches, and that immersion is a modern invention introduced by the Mad Men of Munstcr, is more than I can com])rehend," Baid Mr. Courtney. " Merle D'Aubigne, the Historian of the Reformation, the very man to whom the Mun-
SIXTH night's study. 169
Bter Men are indebted for most of their presoiit no- toriety— D'Aiilngnc does not venture any such assertion On one point, lie sa3^s, ' It seems necessary to guard against misapprehension. Some persons imagine that the Anabaptists of the time of the Reformation, and the Baptists of our day, are the same. But they are as different as possible. * * * It is but justice to obseive that the Baptists of Holland, England, and the United States (says Fessenden, as quoted .by D'Aubigne), are essentially distinct from those seditious and fanatical individuals above-mentioned, as they profess an equal aversion to the principles of the rebellion of the one, and the enthusiasm of the other.' — Pref to Hist, of Ref , p. 10. But I find J am summing up on the case before I have introduced all the evidence. I have referred to historians ; I wish now to call your attention to the testimony of several of the most eminent and learned theological authors — writing, not as historians, but as theological disputants.
" I will first introduce Professor Moses Stuart, who was a citizen of our own country, and an eminent pro- fessor in one of your own theological seminaries.
" Here is his book. It was written in answer to tht question addressed to him by missionaries in a foreign land, inquiring in what way they should translate the Greek words which in our version read baptize and hap- tism. It was evidently written with great care, and not without much previous study of the subject.
"After referring to a number of eminent and reliable historians in regard to the practice of the early church, he thus concludes : ' But enough — it is a thing made out,' says Augusti, viz. : — the ancient practice of immersion So, indeed, all the writers who have thoroughly investi- gated this subject conclude.
" * T know of no one usage of ancient times,' continues
170 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
Mr. Stuart, ' which seems to be more clearly and more certainly made out. / cannot see how it is possible for any candid man ivho examines the subject to deny this.'
" ' In what manner then,' he asks (p. 362), 'did the churches of Christ from a very early period (to say the least), understand the word baptize in the New Tes- tament ? Plainly they construed it as meaning immer- sion.'
" * We are left in no doubt,' he says again, ' about the generally received usage of the Christian church down to a period several centuries after the apostolic age.'
" Can any testimony be more explicit, or more satis- factory than this ?
" But even Dr. Miller himself, the great champion of Presbyterianism, on this subject declares, ' That it is not denied that for the first few centuries after Christ, the most common mode of administering baptism was by immersion.' "
" Oh, that is enough, Mr. Courtney," said the young lady. "After such declarations by the most eminent historians, and our own theological professors, 1 am sure neither Uncle Jones nor any one else can entertain a shadow of a doubt. We will admit that the practice of the first church was immersion. I was satisfied of that from the Scripture itself, since this was the meaning of the word, and consequently it was immersion that Christ commanded. What I desire to know is, how the change was brought about, and sprinkling introduced."
"All in good time, Miss Ernest, we will come to that presently. Have a little patience. These theological discussions are very tricky affairs. I want to set this point so far beyond all doubt or disputation that no one Villi dare again to intimate that the Baptists originated In the time of Martin Luther.
81XTU night's study. 171
" Here is what Martin Luther says about it himself. No Protestaut will doubt that he is a competent witness. ' The word baptize is a Greek word. It maj^ be rendered immersion, as when we plunge something in water that it may he entirely covered with water — and though that custom is now abolished among the generality (for even children are not entirely immersed, but only have a little water poured on them), nevertheless the}" ought to be completel}' immersed, and immediatel}' drawn out, for the etymology of the word requires it.'
" Here also is what John Calvin, the very father and founder of the Presb3'terian denomination, sa3's: 'From these words (John iii. 23), it may be inferred that bap- tism was administered by John and Christ by plunging the whole body under the water. Here we perceive how baptism was administered among the ancients, for they immersed the ivhole body in water. ^
" Here is also Dr. Whitby, a very learned and eminent divine of the Church of England : ' Immer- sion,' says he, ' was religiousl}' observed b}' all Christians for THIRTEEN CENTURIES, and was approved by the Church of England. And,' he continues, ' since the change of it into sprinkling was made without any allowance from the Author of the institution, or any license from an}" Council of the Church [of England], l)eing that which the Romanist still urgeth to justify his refusal of the cup to the laity : it were to be wished that this custom [immersion] might be again of general use.'
" This musty looking old volume is ' The History of the Bible, by Thomas Stackhouse, Yicar of Beenham, in England,' a celebrated Episcopal clergj-mau. He says : ' We nowhere read in Scripture of any one's being baptized but by immersion — and several authors 'lave proved, from the acts of councils and anciont
172 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
rituals, that this manner of immersion continued aa much as possible to be used for thirteen hundred years after Christ.'
" The celebrated Prelate, Bishop Taylor, of the Eng- lish Church, V^ice-Chancellor of the University of Dublin, says in his famous work called * Ductor Du- bitantium :' ' The custom of the Ancient Churches was not sprinkling, but immersion, in pursuance of the meaning of the word baptize in the commandment, and the example of our blessed Saviour.'
" Here also is what that earnest-hearted man, Richard Baxter (the author of the ' Call to the Unconverted' and the ' Saints' Rest'), says : * It is commonly con- fessed by us to the Anabaptists, as our commentators declare, that in the Apostles' times the baptized were dipped over head in water.' "
" Oh, please, Mr, Courtney, don't read us any more such testimony. Any one who would not be convinced by what 3'ou have given us, would not believe if you should give us ten times more. Do you pray go on, and show how, and where, and by what authority Christ's ordinance was changed."
" No, no, Mr. Courtney — I want to hear all the proof you have. Never mind Theodosia — girls always are im- patient," said the mother. " I wish Mr. Johnson was here, so we could know what he thinks about these statements, though as for that, I suppose brother Jonea knows nearly as much about it as a preacher."
" Excuse me. Miss Theodosia — I will not detain you much longer on this point ; I haA^e only a few other wit- nesses whose testimony I will urge at this time, though there is scarcely a historian of the early days of Chris- tianity, who does not furnish us with proof. Not many years since, the King of Holland appointed two very learned and able men, one a Professor of Theology
8TXTH night's STUDY. 1Y3
in the Uniycrsity of Gromngen, and the other Chaplain to the King, to examine into the origin and history of the Dutch Baptists. They wrote out the result of their investigations and published the work at Breda, in 1819 In this volume, prepared by these two learned members of the Dutch Reformed Church, Dr. Ypeig and Dr. J. J. Durmont, the authors, after tracing up the history of the Baptists, make use of the foUo^ijig remarkable lanojuaGfe :
" * We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists, and, in later times, Meno- nites, were the original Waldenses, and who have long, in the histor}- of the Church, received the honor of that origin. On this account, the Baptists may be con- sidered AS THE ONLY CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY WHICH
has stood since the days of the apostles, and as a Christian Society which has preserved pure the doctrine of the gospel through all ages. the perfectly correct external and internal econom}^ of the Baptist denomination tends to confirm the truth, dis- puted b}^ the Romish Church, that the Reformation brought about in the sixteenth century was in the highest degree necessary, and at the same time goes to
REFUTE THE ERRONEOUS NOTION OF THE CATHOLICS THAT THEIR COMMUNION IS THE MOST ANCIENT.'
" Such was the impression which this truthful docu- ment made upon the Court, that the Government of Holland offered to the Baptist Churches the support of the State, which was politely but firmly declined, ' as inconsistent with their principles.'
"The celebrated Bishop Bossuet says: 'We are able to make it appear by the acts of councils and by ancient rituals, that for more than thirteen hundred years, bap- tism was administered by immersion throughout the whole church as far as possible."
174 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" Now, if you have any further doubt, I will bring up these very acts of councils, and authentic copies of these same ancient rituals. They are still on record, and it is not difficult to avail ourselves of their explicit testi- mony."
" Oh, no, Mr. Courtney : these historians, and preach- ers, and bishops, were none of them Baptists. We all know that, and if the facts had not compelled them, they would, of course, never have made assertions so injurious to their own cause, and so directly opposed to (heir own practice. If the}' say that baptism was done by immersion for thirteen hundred 3^ears, of course it must have been so. If Mosheim and Neauder, Bossuet and Taylor, Coleman and Whitby, Stackhouse and Baxter, all sprinklers themselves, and all opposed to the Baptists, make such statements, and even Drs. Miller and Stuart, our own most eminent writers on the sub- ject, admit their truth, why need we spend an}" more time ?"
" But what then becomes of your uncle's opinion, that the Baptists originated about the year 1530, with the Mad Men of Munster?"
" Oh, I have given up that opinion (which indeed was not more than an impression) some half an hour ago. The testimony is irresistible. Immersion was most un- questionably the practice of the early churches ; but I am now, like Theodosia, exceedingly anxious to know how it came to be universally displaced, and sprinkling universally adopted in its place."
" You are mistaken, Professor Jones, if 3"0u imagine that this change is b}" any means a universal one. It was made by the authority of the Pope, and is confined to the Roman Catholic Church- and its descendants. The Eastern churches — comprising a vast number of profess- ing Christians— have never adopted sprinkling, but
SIXTH night's study. 175
continue to practice immersion to the present da^' ; and as Professor Stuart truly states, call the Western churches * sprinkled Christians,' by way of derision. If you have any doubt of this, I will prove it to you by the testimony of your own writers of most unquestion- able authority."
*' Oh, no, Mr. Courtney, I do not doubt it. You have convinced me so often, that I am now willing to take 3"our word for any thing you please to assert."
" I thank you, Professor; but still I do not like to deal in assertions. In regard to this point, however, the proof will come in by the way — together with that on the time and manner of the change."
" Do, then, Mr. Courtney, go on with that," said the young lady. " You don't know how provoking it is to be kept so long in suspense."
" Well, here is the testimony. I will leave the stoiy to be told by some of ^he most celebrated members of the sprinkling churches. You will, of course, not doubt their truthfulness. Here is the Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, edited by the learned and celebrated Sir David Brews- ter, Let us read what he says on the subject. In the Article on Baptism :
" ' The first law for sprinkling was obtained in the following manner : Pope Stephen II., being driven from Rome by Astolplms, King of Lombards, in 753, fled to Pepin, who a short time before had usurped the crown of France. While he remained there, the Monks of Cress}^ in Brittany, consulted him whether, in case of necessity, baptism performed by pouring water on the head of the infant would be lawful. Stephen replied that it would. But though the truth of this fact should be allowed, which, however, some Catholics deny, yet pouring or sprinkling was admitted only in cases of necessity. It was not till the year 1311, that the Legis-
176 THEODOSIA ERNEST
lature, in a council held at Ravenna, declared immersion or sprinkling to be indifferent. In this country (Scot- land), however, sprinkling was never practiced in ordi- nary cases, till after the Reformation ; and in England, even in the reign of Edward VI., immersion was com- monly observed. But during the persecution of Mary, many persons, most of whom were Scotchmen, fled from England to Geneva, and there greedily imbibed the opinions of that church. In 1556, a book was published at that place containing the form of pra^^ers and minis- tration of sacraments, approved by the famous and godly learned man, John Calvin, in which the adminis- trator is enjoined to take water in his hand and lay it on the child's forehead. These Scottish exiles, who had renounced the authority of the Pope, implicitly acknowl- edged the authority of Calvin ; and returning to their own countr^^ with John Knox at their head, in 1559, estab- lished sprinkling in Scotland.^ From Scotland, this practice made its way into England in the reign of Elizabeth, but was not authorized by the established church.' "
"Do let me look at that book a moment," said the Professor. " It is very strange that I should have been told, as I am sure I have been b3'^ some of the learned clergy of our church, that sprinkling was what was practiced from the earliest ages, and that immersion was attempted to be introduced in its place by the Ana- baptists of Germany about the year 1530 — when in fact immersion had been always the practice, and it was sprinkling that was substituted by John Calvin, the founder of our church. Can it he possible that Doctors of Divinity will impose such falsehoods on their people in order to sustain the practice of the church f 1 cannot understand it."
" Perhaps you want more testimony before you cau
SIXTH night's study. lit
believe it," said Mr. Courtney ; " and here is ample con- firmatory proof in the plain and explicit declarations of the famous Dr. Wall."
" Please tell me," said Theodosia, " who was Dr. Wall ? I have often heard of him, and 1 know that he wrote one or more books on baptism, but whether on our side or yours, I have never been informed."
"Dr. Wall," said Mr. Courtney, "was a minister of the Episcopal, or English Church, and after the publici.- tion of his work, the satisfaction it gave was so great, that in a general convocation of the Episcopal clergj', held Februar}' yth, 170(5, it was ordered ' that the thanks of this house be given to Mr. Wall, A^icar of Shoreham, in Kent, for the learned and excellent book he has lately written concerning infant baptism.' "
" Then he must have written against the Baptists, if liis work was approved by the clergy of the Episcopal Church."
" Of course he did, and his book is considered to this day the ablest defence of infant baptism which has ever been written."
" Well, what does he sa}^ about the introduction of sprinkling? Does he agree with the Encyclopaedia, which you have read? Where is the passage which speaks of it? Please read it for us."
" * France seems to have been the first country in tbc world where baptism by affusion was used, ordinarily, to persons in health, and in the jmblic way of adminis- tering it. It being allowed to weak children (in the reign of Queen Elizabeth) to be baptized by aspersion, many fond ladies and gentlemen first, and then, by de- grees, the common people, would obtain the favor of the priest to have their children pasa for weak children, too tender to endure dipping in the water. As for Hprink- ling, properly so called, it was at 1645 just then begin-
178 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
ning, and used by very few. It must have begun in the disorderly times after forty-one. They (the Assembly of Divines in Westminster) re-formed the font into a basin. This learned Assembly could not remember that fonts to baptize in had been always used by the primi- tive Christians long before the beginning of Popery, and ever since churches were built; but that sprinkling, Tor the purpose of baptizing, was really introduced (in France first, and then in other Popish countries) in times of Popery, and that, accordingly, all those count? ies in which the usurped power of the Pope is, or has formerly been owned, have left off dipping of CHILDREN IN THE FONTS ; but that all Other countries in the world which had never regarded his authority, do still use it ; and that basins (to sprinkle out of) ex- cept in cases of necessity, were never used by Papists, or any other Christians whosoever, till by themselves.' — Hist, of Infant Baptism, part 2d, chap. 9.
"This," said Mr. Courtney, "is Dr. Wall's account of the first introduction of sprinkling ; and you see that it confirms the truth of what I told you, that it was in- troduced by Popery, and is confined to the countries where Popery prevails, or has prevailed. The Protest- ant sects borrowed it from the Catholics. Now look at page 403 of this other volume, by the same author, md read the passage I have marked.
" ' The way that is ordinarily used, we cannot deny to have been a novelty, brought into this Church (the English) by those that had learned it at Germany, or at Geneva. And they, not contented to follow the ex- ample of pouring a quantity of water (which had there been introduced instead of immersion), but improved it (if I may so abuse that word) from pouring to sprink- ling, that it might have as little resemblance to the an
SIXTH night's study. 179
cient way of baj^tizing as possible.^ — Def. of Hist, of Infant Baptism, p. 403.
" If you consult the Edinburgh EncyclopjBclia, the British Enjyclop.iedia. and the Encyclopaedia Americana, article Baptism, you will find a complete history of the whole subject, the truthfulness of which ^^ouwill feel no disposition to question. You will there learn that in England the Westminster Assembly of Divines had a warm discussion whether immersion or sprinkling should lie adopted. But by the earnest efforts of Dr. liight- foot, who had great interest in the Assembly, sprinkling was adopted by a majority of one. The vote stood — twenty-four for immersion, and twenty-five for sprink- ling. This was 1643 years after Christ. The next year an Act of Parliament was passed, requiring the parents of all children born in the realm to have them sprinkled ; and in 1648, some four years afterward, an Ecclesiasti- cal Council, held at Cambridge, Massachusetts, adopted sprinkling in the place of immersion ; and, in May of the same year, the Legislature of that State passed a law making it a penal offence for any one to say that infant sprinkling was not good and valid baptism."
"That is surely sutlicient," said Uncle Jones, "to satisfy any candid mind, but yet I can hardly believe it, for very astonishment."
" What is there so surprising," replied Mr. Courtney, " in the fact that men should change Christ's ordinances ? 'f hey did the same thing before our Saviour's time ; and he had more than once occasion to reprove them, because they taught ' for ordinances the commandments of men,' and ' made the Word of God of none effect through their traditions.' "
" It is not," replied the Professor, " so much t\i^ fact which fills me with astonishment, as the care which is evidently taken by ministers of ndigion in our church
180 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
to conceal the fact, and make on our minds the impres- sion that sprinkling, instead of being merely allowed by the Pope, was actnally commanded by Jesus Christ, and was commonly practiced by the church till the Baptists undertook to introduce immersion. But, if I do not forget, some of our writers have contended that there was sufficient testimony in the writings of the early Fathers to show that sprinkling was really employed at a very early day. Is it not possible that Sir Dand Brewster, and Dr. Wall, and Professor Stuart, and all those other great names, including Martin Luther and John Calvin themselves, may have been mistaken, and that sprinkling was, after all, the practice of the early church ? Did not Cyprian, one of the ancient Fathers, expressly declare that sprinlvling was' practiced in his day, and was considered valid baptism ? I am sure I have received such an impression from some source."
" You probably received it from some Doctor of Divinity — they are accustomed to make such impressions, but Cyprian says no such thing. The case to which you allude presents the very first instance on record in the whole range of ecclesiastical histor}^ in which it was thought possible to substitute any other act for the act of immersion. The facts have been preserved by Eusebius, one of the Fathers, and the historian of the early churches.
"It appears that a certain man, named Novatian, was taken sick, and was apparently nigh unto death. In this condition he became, as many others have done, greatly alarmed about his condition ; and, professing faith in Christ, desired to be baptized. But he was too weak to be taken out of bed and put into the water. The water was, therefore, poured around him in his bed. He afterward recovered, and devoting himself to the ministry, applied for priestly orders, and the question
SIXTH xMght's study. 181
arose, whether one thus * poured upon' in his bed co\dd be accounted a Cliristian ? Now, it is evident, if pour- ing or sprinkling had been a common mode of adminis- tering the ordinance, this question would never have heen asked.
" Cyprian was written to upon this subject, and he replied, giving it as his opinion that the grace usually conferred in baijtism, might be received hy sucn pour- ing. In other words, that, though this was not baptism. for it is not called baptism, perichism (' perichutheis'), from peri, around, and cheo, to pour — yet he considered it a valid substitute for baptism. This was some time in the third century- after Christ. That such substitu- tion was not common, and had received no general sanction from the church, is evident from the well known fact that the ]\Ionks of Cressy, in 754, wrote to the Pope, Stephen 11., inquiring, * If it be lawful in case of necessity, occasioned by sickness, to baptize an infant by pouring water on its head from a cup, or the hands ?' To which the Pope replied : ' Such a baptism, performed in such a case of necessity, shall be accounted valid.' ' This,' says Basnage, ' is accounted the first law against immersion.' The Pontiff, however, did not dispense with immersion except in case of ex- treme necessity. This law, therefore, did not change the mode of dipping in the public baptisms ; and it was not till five hundred and fifty-seven years, that the legis- lature, in a council at Kavenna, in 1311, declared immer- sion and pouring indifferent."
" Pardon me, Mr. Courtney, if I seem querulous ; but did not OiiiGEN, another of the Fathers, speak of bap- tism as a pouring, when relating the history of the flood- ing of the wood, and the sacrifice by the prophet Elisha in his contest with the prophets of Baal ? Does he not call this wetting a baptism ?" 12
182 THEODOSJA. ERNEST.
" He does indeed, Professor. He calls it a baptism in the same way that the writer of the book of Daniel calls the wetting of Nebuchadnezzar a baptism. He was bap- tized in the dews of heaven. The word in the Hebrew is tahal, which no one ever doubted signified to dip or to immerse. He was dipped in the dews of heaven — a most beautiful, though hyperbolical, figure of speech, expressing the idea that he was as wet as though he had been dipped. The allusion in both cases is to the wetting, not to the act by which the wetting was occasioned."
" I am glad," said Uncle Jones, "that you mentioned that passage in Daniel, for I confess it has been a stum- bling stone to me ; yet you set aside all my other Scrip- tural ditficulties so easily, that I was almost ashamed to mention it. I was going to tell you that baptize must signify something besides immersion, because it was impossible that the deposed monarch could be actually immersed in dew."
" If you had told me so, I would have proved to you," said Mr. Courtney, " that dip does not mean to dip, or to submerge, because Milton, a standard English writer, represents one as saying that he is dipped all over in the perspiration of his own body :
^A cold shudder'uuj deiv dips me all over. '
' If Daniel had been translated as he should have been, His body was dipped in the dews of heaven,' everybody would have recognized the force and beauty of the figure, as we do in Milton. It would have been like that expression which represents the good land of Canaan as 'flowing^ with milk and honey ; or, like that which represents God as pouiHng out blessings till there should not be room to receive them. Such hyperbolical figures are extremely beautiful, and are common in all l*\D images.
SIXTH night's study. 183
"Nebuchadnezzar is said to be dipped in dew, and Origen says the wood and the sacrifice were immersed in water, to express the completeness of the soaking or drenching which they received."
" Yes," said Theodesia, " Edwin made use of the word ducking last evening in the same way. You recolleit, Mr. Courtney, the lad who pulled the bucket of water over on his head in school yesterday, so much to the amusement of all the bo3^s. Well, Edwin, in relating the circumstances, said that the little fellow got a good 'ducking.^ By which he meant, of course, that he was as wet as though he had dived in the water like a duck. It would have been equally proper to have said that he got a good * dipping,' and yet neither ducking or dip- ping means to pour upon — they are diving and plunging still."
" Well, well, Theodosia," said the mother, " that is what I should call stepping from the sublime to the ridiculous. Please go on, Mr. Courtney, and don't mind her nonsense."
" Indeed, Mrs. Ernest, I feel obliged to your daughter for 80 appropriate an illustration of the great principle of interpretation which must guide us in deciding upon the meaning of such passages. She has shown us that not only in Scriptural usage, and in the poets, but even in common talk among the very children, one mode of wetting is sometimes figuratively employed to designate another mode ; and that a person or thing that is as thoroughly wet as though it had been dipped, may be appropriately and beautifully said to be dipped.
"But now to return to the subject of our conversa- tion. I have proved to you, by the united testimony of Mosheim, Neander, and Moses Stuart — of Luther, and Calvin, and Whitby, and Taylor, and Baxter — by Drs. Ypeig and Durmont, Coleman and Bossuet, to whose
184 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
testimony I might have added that of many others of the highest aiithorit}^ both among the ancients and the moierns, that immersion was the practice of the early churches, and continued to be the only practice, except in cases of tiiqjponed necessity, for more than three HUNDRED YEARS. 1 have showcd you further, how ' pouring' was first practiced irregularly, and without authority from the Bible, or the Pope, in some rare cases of extreme sickness, till the Monks of Cressy obtained the sanction of the Pope (not of Christ) for its use in these extreme cat^es of sickne.sf^, more than seven hundred years after Christ, and how immersion and pouring were at length declared to be indifferent by the Pope and his Council (not by the Scriptures) at Ravenna, in 1311.
" I have showed you also how John Calvin and the Westminster Assembly of Divines were the means of bringing sprinkling into the English and Presbyterian Churches of Scotland and England — whence it came over to America with the Colonists.
"I have showed you also that as this change was made by the Pope and the Papal Church, so it is con- fined to those countries which are, or have been, under Roman Catholic rule, and that the Eastern Churches, which never acknowledged the dominion of the Pope, have continued to practice immersion even to the pres- ent day. I have showed you all this, not by the testi- mony of Baptist witnesses, but by that of members of sprinkling churches — by Lutherans, Episcopalians, and Presbyterians ; and these not men of doubtful charac- ter, and unknown to fame, but of world-wide celebrity, both in reojard to their reli^'ious and their intellectual character. He who, after this, will not believe that im- mersion was the baptism of the early churches, would
SIXTH night's study. 185
uot believe though Paul himself should return from the dead to testify."
" But, Mr. Courtney," said Mrs. Ernest, " what if it was ? Must we be immersed, because the old Fathers were immersed ? I thought you Baptists were opposed to old traditions."
" We are opposed, Mrs. Ernest," said he, very sol- emnly. " We are opposed to the substitution of the traditioriH of men for the teachings of the Word of God. We have ascertained from the Word itself tliat it was immersion which was commanded by Jesus Christ. It was thus the early Christians understood it. It was this which, for many hundred years, they practiced ; but at length the man-made ordinance of sprinkling and pouring was introduced by the authority of the Pope and his councils. You have adopted this — your church almost universally practices it — 3'ou have no other au- thority for it, as I have proved by your own writers, but that of the Pope. Is it not true, therefore, that you are in your church ' teaching for doctrines the com- mandments of men ?'
" I did not refer to the usage of the early churches as the authority for immersion. If I could not find it in the Bible, I would not receive it, though it had been practiced from the time of 2s'oah. Tradition is no authority in matters of religion. I may use it to con- firm the teaching of the actual commandment, but where there is no express precept or example recorded in God's Word, I owe no obedience in matters of religion.''
" But wh}^ then, did you go into this long investiga- tion of the practice of the church ?"
" I did it, madam, for the satisfaction of Professor Jones and your daughter, who seemed to have a sort of silent conviction that the simple fact that sprinkling
186 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
was .so generally practiced, was in some way or other sufficient evidence that it must have been commanded in the Scriptures. I, therefore, traced immersion back to Jesus Christ, and showed where he commanded it. I have now traced pou?-ing bacli to Pope Stephen II., and showed where he allowed it in cases of necessity, and to the Popish council at Ravenna, and showed where they allowed it in other cases ; and I have traced sprinkling, properly so-called, back to John Calvin, and showed where he commanded it in his Book of Prayers and Sacraments, published at Geneva. I have, there- fore, founded immersion on the rock of God's Word, and at the same time convinced you all, I trust, that pouring and sprinkling rest only on the aand of human invention — not having even a credible tradition to rest upon."
Uncle Jones listened with some uneasiness to this long speech. He felt its force, and recognized its truthfulness, but he was doubtful of the effect it might have upon his sister. In fact, he was afraid of an explosion.
Affection for her daughter had, however, been work- ing wonders in the mother's mind within the last two days. She found that Theodosia would examine, and she desired that she would do it quickly. She found she was likely to be convinced, and she began to excuse her by considering the weight and invincibility of the arguments. Now, she saw that she was convinced, and every additional reason for such conviction was a comfort to her maternal pride, as it was new proof that her daughter was not such a simpleton as to believe without the most convincing evidence.
She had not the most distant idea of being convinced herself. She did not hear or weigh the testimony for herself — she heard and thought only for Theodosia — and
SIXTH night's study. 187
since her daughter would become a Baptist, she was gratified that it was nothing less than the most unan- swerable arguments that compelled her to do so.
So far, therefore, from looking angry, she seemed rather pleased with this conclusion of the schoolmas- ter's arguments ; and she herself suggested that he should enter upon the other branch of it, by reminding him that he had promised to show that the American Baptists did not originate with Roger Williams any more than the Euroi>ean Baptists did with the Mad Men of Munster.
" That is one of the easiest things in the world to do," replied Mr. Courtney. " Even granting that Roger Williams established the first Baptist Church which was ever known in this country, yet it would not follow that all the Baptists, or any of the Baptist Churches received their baptism from him ; for there have been, every year since his day, more or less regularly immersed Baptists, and regularly ordained Baptist ministers coming to this country ; and even though he had founded the church at Providence, and that in an irregular manner, before any other Baptist Church was founded — that would not invalidate the regularity of any other of the thousands and thousands of Baptist Churches, unless it could be made to appear that they were all colonies from that. I need not, there- fore, spend anytime upon this point. Of all the thousands of Baptist Churches in America, there are none whose pastors and members have had any manner of depend- ence on the church founded by Roger Williams. They have many of them received baptism from the Dutch Bap- tists, of whom Drs. Ypeig and Durmont testify that they belong to a body of Christians who can trace their origin down to the very times of the Apostles. Many
188 IHEODOSIA ERNEST.
of Ihem received it from the IVel.-^h Baptists, who can trace their descent back to the sixth or seventh century. Many of them received it from the English Baptists, who have been the victims of proscription and persecu- tion from a ver}^ earl}' day. But none of them received bai)tism from Roger Williams, or the church said to have been established by him at Providence. The truth is, the society established by Roger Williams, TTolliman, and others, soon died out. It never planted an}^ other church. It cannot be proved that any Baptist who received baptism in that bodj^ and by their authority, was ever concerned in baptizing any founder of other churches."
" I have often heard of Roger Williams," said Theo- dosia, " as the founder of the Baptists in this country. Please tell me what was his relation to them."
" Roger Williams adopted at one time Baptist senti- ments, at least, in some particulars," replied Mr. Court- ney. " He desired to be immersed. There was no Baptist minister at hand, lie consequently immersed one of his followers, who, in turn, immersed him, and then he considered himself competent to immerse others. The little company, thus irregularly baptized, called itself a Baptist church; but, in about four months, Roger Williams himself changed his opinions and withdrew from the society. Tne so-called church soon died out, and the present Baptist Church of Provi- dence was founded on an independent basis, separate and distinct from that. It seems probable, however, from recent historical researches, that the oldest Bap- tist Church in the United States, is that at Newport, in Rhode Island, founded by John Clark, against the regularity of whose baptism there has, so far as I know, been nothing alleged. Though, as to that, even if thin
SIXTH nkjht's study. 189
and all (he other churches of Rhode Idand, had ]>een, and were still, irregular up to the present time, it would not affect the standing of the great body of the churches in the United States, since very few of them derived their baptism directly or indirectly from Rhode Island — and not a single one of them frrym Roger Wzhiams.''
THE SEVENTH NIGHT'S STUDY.
IN AVIIICII IT IS CLEARLY PROVED
BY THE SCRIPTURES THEMSELV^ES
AND BY THE
TKS'riMONY OF THE MOST LKAllNKl)
AND
EMINENT PEDOBAPTIST MINISTERS,
THAT
INFANT BAPTISM
WAS NOT
COMMANDED BY CHRIST OR THE APOSTLES:
INFANT BAPTISM WAS NOT PRACTICED OR
SANCTIONED BY CHRIST OR HIS APOSTLES.
SEVENTH I^IGHT^S STUDY.
HE attentive reader may have observed that
^ Mr. Percy has not favored us with his presence
for the last three niirhts. Thouijh he seemed
so greatly interested in the subject, yet with the third night's stucU' he a[)parently abandoned it. Since that time he had not visited Mrs. Ernest's cottage, or held smy communion with its inmates. He did not know what progress Theodosia liad made in her investigations, nor what assistance she had received from Uncle Jones or others. The remark made by Mr. Courtney, as they were about to sei)arate on that occasion, " that he would find it much easier to satisfy his mind that sprinkling and pouring were not baptism, than he would to abandon his church connections and be baptized according to the commandment of Jesus Christ," had opened his eyes. He had, till that mo- ment, looked upon the sulyect merely as one of curious speculation. It was till then a mere question of fact, to be decided by testimony. As such, its investigation greatly interested him. It was congenial to his logical and discriminating cast of mind, and he had been stud}" ing it as he would a case of law. But he now saw that it was a practical matter. If he decided that he had not been baptized, consistency would require that he should at once apply for baptism. This would break off his connection with a large, and wealthy, and influ- ential body, and tie him down to a little company of obscure and ignorant laborers and mechanics — for of such was the newl3'-organized Baptist Church of which
194 THEODOSIA ERNEST
we have been speaking chiefly composed. This was something he could not think of. His natural pride had never been humbled b}'' the grace of God, and he was not at all prepared to resign a position at once honoral)le and profitable, for one of comparative insig- nificance and contempt. He thought of these things as he was going home that night, and at once resolved that he would have no more to do with the subject.
In this resolution he had been confirmed, by a visit next morning from Colonel White, one of the members of the Session, who was a wealthy speculator in lands, and one of his best patrons. After some conversation about matters o-f business, Colonel White carelessly remarked : " They have it rumored, Squire Percy, that you are on the eve of leaving our church and becoming a Baptist."
" Let me assure you, colonel, that there is not the slightest foundation for such a report. 1 have, indeed, spent a few hours in the investigation of the mode of baptism, but it was for the mere purpose of fortifying my mind with the best arguments in favor of our po- sition on that subject. 1 found, indeed, that the immer- sionists have much firmer ground to stand upon than I imagined ; but I have never for a moment entertained the idea of leaving the Presbyterian Church."
" I am glad to hear it, Mr. Percy, for I prefer, and so do several of our best firms, to employ you to attend to our business, and we had all about concluded that we could never trust our interests in the hands of one so fickle minded as such a change would prove a man to be ; and, besides this, since the death of Deacon Smith, there has been a vacancy in the Church Session, which we have been desirous to fill with some talented and eflicient young man, since the rest of us are now begin- uing to be somewhat advanced in years. We were talk-
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 195
ing of you, and the only objection seemed to be, that you were yet unmarried. I took the liberty to say thai I thought that difficulty would be removed in the course of another month, as 1 understood the wedding-day was fixed. It is no secret, you know. But then, rumor says also, that Miss Theodosia is going over to the Baptists; and that her mother, with all her authority, has not been able to dissuade her from the investigation of the sub- ject, though she sees very plainly where it will lead her."
" It is very true," said the young man, '' that she has been engaged in the study of this subject, but I do not know to what conclusion she may come. For my own part, I have concluded to have nothing more to do with it."
" It is a delicate matter, Mr. Percy, and perhaps 1 ought not to mention it, and nothing but my regard for your future happiness, and the honor of our church, could induce me to do it ; but would it not be wise in you to use your influence (which I know must be very great) to induce her to pause before she takes a step which will cause your house, always after your mar- riage, to be divided against itself? I know I have no right to advise, but I take the liberty of a friend to you, and a friend to your father before you, to merely sug- gest such a thought. Perhaps, on reflection, you may think it advisable, either to see her immediately, or write a little line, stating your own determination, and whatever else you may .think most likely to operate upon her mind, so as to prevent such a terrible event as it would be to you and all of us, should she so far dis- grace her name and dishonor her profession as to leave the communion in which she was born, and by which she has been nourished and taught — in which her grand parents lived and died — and of which she is herself the
196 THEODOSIA ERNEST
ornament and pride, and throw herself away, with all lier loveliness and intelligence, by iiniLing her fate to that ignorant and obscure sect, with a mechanic lor a [)reacher, who have started up here like a mushroom in a single night, and will probably pass away again in a day."
Mr. Percy was about to reply, when the colonel an- ticipated him by rising and grasping the young man's hand ver}^ warmly in both of his. "Pardon me," he paid, " I ought not to have spoken thus. Forget that 1 have said it. But don't forget my case in the Supremo Court. I have entrusted it entirely to you. I wan I you to have all the honor which will accrue from a de- cision in 3'our favor. Good morning. You will need all your time to make preparation for .next week's Cir- cuit Court — you start on Saturday, I believe ?"
" Yes, sir."
" Well, good luck to 3'ou," and the colonel was gone.
Mr. Percy walked his otlice with a restless, undecided air, for some time, and then set himself resolutely to work in the preparation of some cases for the approach- ing court. But he could not banish the subject from his mind. He sometimes thought he would go at once, and have another conversation with his betrothed upon the subject; but when he remembered her earnest and conscientious truthfulness of soul, he feared to lower himself in her estimation by presenting to her an}^ but the real reasons for his abandonment of the investiga- don, and these he hardly dared to own even to himself This was on Wednesday morning. He learned on Thursda}^ that Uncle Jones had been conversing with Theodosia on the subject ; and, on Friday, that both he and Mr. Courtney had been at the cottage ; and Mrs. Tattle had told young Dr. Woodruff, who was his inti-
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 197
mate friend and confidant, that, on the coming Sabbath, Miss Ernest was to be baptized.
Early on Saturday morning, he was obliged to start to a distant county-site to attend a session of the Cir- cuit Court. Before his return (if this story were true) the die would be cast. If he would prevent it at all, he must do it now. He determined to write what he felt he could not speak. The letter read thus :
** Dearest : — 1 must leave town to-morrow, and shall be gone a week. I have been so pressed by business, that I have not been able to call in again, a? I intended when 1 saw 3'ou last. I cannot come to-night, but I cannot leave without expressing to you once more my earnest love. You know, dearest Theodosia, that the happiness of my life is bound up in j'ours. I have no wish or hope in the future but those of which you form a part ; and, if what I am about to sa}^ should be un- j)leasant to you, I beg you will remember that it is dictated by the tenderest and most ardent atlection. It is because I value your happiness even more than my own, that I venture to say what I am about to utter. I have learned from rumor that you have already deter- mined to abandon our church, and unite with that con- temptible sect of Baptists. I do not know if this be true or not. I hope and pray the rumor may prove false. I will not say these Baptists are not right about the mode of baptism. It may be they are. But whether one mode or another be correct, baptism is not essential to salvation. It is a mere, outward form, and I cannot, for the sake of a mere external and non- essential ceremony, abjure the church of my fathers. I fondly hope that she, whom 1 love more than all else in life, will agree with me in this. 1 cannot bear the thought that one so beautiful, so lovely, so accom* 1.3
198 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
plished, so fitted to shine and lead in the highest clrclo of our society — one, too, who has the unbounded con- fidence and atfection of her brothers and sisters in the church — should bring such dishonor upon her father's name, such sorrow to her mother's heart, and such regret to his, who rejoices in the hope that he will be the companion of her life, and the husband of her love, as to prove recreant to her Christian faith — forsake the church of the mother who offered her to God in infancy — of the teachers who instructed her childhood — of the pastor who prayed with her in the time of her conviction, and rejoiced over her at the time of her conversion ; and may I not add of him who, trusting in the solemn promise of our betrothal, expects to spend his life in promoting her happiness ? How can you, ni}'' dearest love — how can you disregard such considera- tions as these ? I know that you are conscientious in every step you take, and 1 beg you to reflect whether these things should not have some influence with you. [ know that you mean to do right, and I entreat that you will consider if such a course will not be wrong. I know I have no right to dictate, but, oh ! I do beseech you, if you have any love for me, that you will not so mortify and distress, not me alone, but all who love you, as to unite your fate with those boorish, unedu- cated, and bigoted people, called Baptists.
" Your distressed, but still most affectionate,
" G. W. Percv."
This note he hardly trusted himself to read, so he sealed it uj), and despatched a messenger to carry it to Mrs. Ernest's. Its immediate effect on Theodosia we have already seen. When she had reached her own room, she threw her head upon her mother's bosom, and, sighing as if a heart-string broke with every
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 199
tiecp-fetched sob tliat came, gave free expression to her uncontrollable distress.
It was long before the mother became sufficiently composed to read the letter, and learn what it was that had occasioned such a terrible heart-sorrow to her loving and sensitive child. Terrible she knew it must be, for never in her life had she seen Theodosia exhibit such unutterable distress. The 3'oung lady herself did not know precisely what the letter contained. She had loved Mr. Percy with all the fervor of a first and only love. The day was fixed onl^'^ a few weeks in the future for their wedding. The preparations, for it were even then begun. To be what Mr. Percy would approve, was to her the highest point of earthly ambition. She prized her peerless beauty, not for its own sake, but because Mr. J*ercy praised it. She valued her accom- plishments, chiefly because Mr. Percy thought them desirable. With all her inde})endence of thought and originality of mind, she had learned to think that she was wrong, if Mr. Percy did not think her right.
In this investigation he had gone with her step by step, so long as he had taken any part in it. She had, till now, not the very slightest suspicion that he would not act out hii> convictions, as well as herself — much less did she imagine that he would so fearfully disa})prove of her obedience to what she now was fully satisfied was the plain and unmistakable command of her Re- deemer.
The first influence of this communication was like that of a heavy blow upon the head. It staggered, and then stunned the mind. She only felt that some great and terrible calamity had fallen on her heart and crushed it. She could not recall the language of the letter, but only a general impression of its contents. But there was, here and there, a word which was burnt into her very
200 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
brain. With all its protestations of affection, she felt (for love is jealous in such things) that if she became a Baptist, she forfeited his love.
To her mother she could speak words no other's ear might hear — and when her sobs had somewhat ceased, and she had been persuaded to lie down, and try to be composed, she drew her mother's face to hers, and while their tears mingled together upon her cheek, she whis- pered, " 1 did not think he could have cast me off for seeking to know and do my duty."
" My precious child, he has not cast you off — he says again and again, that he loves you dearly, and hopes to spend his life in rendering you happy."
" But, mother, does he not say he cannot bear to think of my becoming a Baptist ? Does he not call them, whom now I do believe are the true church of Jesus Christ — does he not call them that contemptible sect ? Does he not say that because he has no right to dictate^ he entreats me not to mortify him, not to distress him, by becoming one of that little company of boorish, uneducated, and bigoted people ? No, no, mother, 1 see it all. If J become a Baptist, I must resign his love — I must give up all the most cherished hopes of my life. After such an expression of his dislike to these poor and humble disciples of Jesus, I would not dare, if I were one of them, to become his wife. I must choose between him and my Saviour — I see it all — but I can't choose now. Oh I my mother, pray for me — pray for me ! You will not cast me ofl', my mother : you will love me still. Will you not, my mother ? You can love, even though I do mortify and distress you, can't you mother?"
" Yes, yes, darling — don't look at me so wildiy. 1 will love you always — 1 will love you dearly. And so will Mr. Percy, even though you do mortify and diti- trees him. He can't help loving you, my sweet child.
SEVENTH night's STUDY 201
No one, who knows you, can do any thing tut love you."
" No, mother, he canH love as I must be loved, were I the wife of his bosom. But I dare not think of that now. I mast pray — I must ask wisdom — I must get strength from heaven. Leave me now, mother, but don't forget to pray for me."
The mother went away — and, kneeling down, poured out her heart in a sincere and fervent prayer, that God would indeed give comfort to her poor child's loving and smitten spirit. While she, the dear, sweet child, lay still upon her bed, and only prayed with those groanings that cannot be uttered, for strength to bear, as well as energy to do — her mind grew calmer and clearer, and when her mother came, an half hour after, to bid hei good-night, she was in a deep sleep, with something almost like a smile upon her face. This may seem strange to one who does not know that one effect of sudden, deep, and terrible sorrow is quickly to exhaust the nervous energies and predispose to heavy slumber. There is, therefore, a most affecting beauty in the lan- guage of the Evangelist, when he says of the disciples, whom Jesus had left only a little time, while he went to pray, that he returned to them, and found them sleeping for sorrow. No other language could so perfectly ex- press the deep, intense, and soul-exhausting agony of mind which the}' had felt on learning that their beloved Lord was soon to perish by the hands of his enemies, and that one of their number should be the wretch who would ])ctray him into their hands.
So Theodosia might now be said to be sleeping for sorrow. She did not wake till after her ordinary time of rising in the morning. When she first became con- scious, there was a feeling of weight upon her eyelids which prevented her from opening them ; and as she
2(l2 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
lay there, raotionless, the events of the past evening began to come back, like the dimly-remembered imagery of some fearful dream. At first, she was only conscious that something terrible had befallen her, and it required some little etfort to remember what it was. . Then came to view the letter, just as it looked when her mother handed it to her as she sat in the parlor. She could se^* every mark of every letter of the superscription. Then the open letter was before her ; and she read some of the lines as they had marked themselves with terrible distinctness on her brain ; others she could not see, but only a dim impression of their sense came up in her re- membrance. When, as she ran thus in her mind over tlie letter, she came to where it read, " I know I haA^eno riglit to dictate — but oh ! I do beseech you, if you have any love for me, that you will not so mortify and dis- tress, not me alone," etc., the tears flowed freely, and she was able to open her eyes.
Her mother had, at that moment, come in, and was bending over her.
" My poor child," said she, as she saw the tears start even before she seemed to be awake — " how do you feel this morning?"
" Is it morning, mother? I have been asleej) — I have had a terrible dream — or was it all reality ? I>o, mother, tell me, did you bring me a letter last night from Mr. Percy?"
•' Yes, my child, you are not quite awake. It was no dream ; but the reality is not so terrible as you imagine. Let me give you this cup of coffee, and you will feel re- freshed."
" Theodosia sat up in bed and sipped the coffee — and shortly afterward got up, and went and sat beside her mother and engaged in some worsted work which she had begun the day before. When her mother went out,
SEVEN ri£ night's STUDY. 203
she followed her, and stood beside her till she returned ; so she continued all through the day, accompanying her as constantl}' and almost as noiselessly as her shadow. She did not speak — she did not weep — she sometimes tried to smile, but it was pitiful to see the effort made to divert her mother's mind and make her think she was not 80 very bad. In this condition we must leave lier for the present, and go to the dwelling of Professor Jones, where Mr. Courtney and the Rev. ^[r. Johnson are waiting to engage in the discussion of the subject of infant l)aptisni — which discussion, if it should prove to be less entertaining than this little narrative of what transpired at Mrs. Ernest's, will, we trust, be more in- structive.
" If I understood you correctly, Mr. Courtney'," said Professor Jones (when they were all assembled), "you asserted that there was in the Scriptures not the slight- est authority for the baptism of infants, and that bap- tism received in infancy is not valid baptism."
" You are nearly correct," said Mr. Courtney, smiling. '■' I did not asaert that there was no such authority, for it is not my habit to deal in mere asserlions. I said that I would prove that this was so."
" But how will you set about proving such a nega- tive?"
" By otfering the only testimony which the nature of the case admits. Our authority to baptize any one, in- fant or adult, is derived only from the command menli or example of Christ or his apostles. All thej^ said and all they did which is of an}^ authority to us, is recorded in the Word of God. Now if I can't find, and you can't show me, any single place where an infant was com- manded to be baptized, or any single ])lace where one is '^aid to have been baptized, then I think I may venture
204 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
to saj that there is no authority there for infant bap- tism.''^
" I think so too ; but I am certain we can show you a number of such places. Can we not, Mr. Johnson ?"
'' Certainly we can. It has alwaj^s been my under- standing that the baptism of the infant children of l)elievers is explicitly commanded b}^ both Christ and the apostles ; and what was required by their precepts, they enforced by their example. They both commanded and they practiced it."
" Tery good. Here then is the point on which we are at issue. If the places are in the Book, you can show them. I will not be unreasonable. I do not ask even for two witnesses — I only require one. Show me one solitary instance of either precept or example, and I will give up the case."
" I have been accustomed to think," said the Profes- sor, " that the commission itself, as recorded in Matt, xxviii. 19, and in Mark xvi. 15, 16, contained all the authority which was given to the Ch' istian Church to administer the ordinance of baptism ; and I had sup- posed that the authority to baptize infants was to be found in what Christ said on that occasion — ' Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ; but he that believeth not shall be damned.' "
" That," said Mr. Johnson, " is what Mark says. Get a Testament and see how it reads in Matthew. I think it is somewhat difterent. Here it is — ' Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoevei I have commanded you : and lo ! I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.' "
*' Very good," said Mr. Courtney. " You have the
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 205
law all now before you. Is there in it a single allusion, even the faintest, to infants ? Did Christ say, as you Presbyterians do, Go baptize l)elievers and their infant children — or believers only ? Matthew says, tearh them and then baptize them. So they must be such as can be taught. But can a little babe, ' mewling and puking in its mother's arms,' be taught the doctrines of salvation by Jesus Christ ? Mark says — ' He that helieveth. and is baptized ;' so that he speaks of none baptized but those who had first believed. Can little infants, who do not yet so much as know their right hand from their left, exercise faith in the Saviour of souls ? You will not, I am sure, venture to say they can, though there have been some Doctor ii of Divinity who wore silly onough to make such assertions. And Matthew, in fact, says just the same thatMark does; for 'the word ren- dered teach here, is not the one that is usually so trans- lated in the New Testament. This word pro])erly means disciple, or make disciples of all nations.' — {Barnes^ NoteSy In. loc.) So also saj^s that eminent and good man, Dr. Doddridge, author of the ' Rise and Progress of Religion' : ' Here it is to be observed, first, certain things are enjoined, viz. : to discijAe — to baptize — to teach. Secondly, these things are enjoined in a certain order, viz. : the order in which they stand in the divine commission.' — (Dod. Lee.) So says also that other great and good man, the pious Baxter, author of * The Saints' Rest' :
" ' Go disciple me all nations — and as for those,' he continues, ' who say they are discipled hy baptizing and not before baptizing, they speak not the sense of tde text, nor that which is true or rational, if they mean it absolutely as so spoken, else why should one be baptized more than another?' * This text is not like some occa- sional historical mention of baptism, but it is the very
20(t THEODOSIA ERNEST
commission of Christ to his apostles for preaching and baptizing, and purposely expresseth their several works in their several orders. Their first task is by teaching to make disciples, who are by Mark called believers. The secoyid work is to baptize them — whcreunto is an- nexed the promise of salvation. The thi7'd is to teach them all other things which are afterward to be learned in the school of Christ. To contemn this order is to renounce all rules of order, for where can we expect to find it, if not here V ' I profess,' he goes on to say, ' my conscience is fully satisfied from this text that it is one sort of faith, even saving faith, that must go before bap- tism ; and the profession whereof the minister must expect.' — Bis. on. the Right to Sacrament, pp. 91-150.
" Dr. Tlibbard, a Methodist, in his Commentary on Matt, xxviii. 19-20, sa3's — 'It is well known that our English version does not give a satisfactor}^ view of this passage. The word rendered teach in the 1 9th verse is altogether a different word in the original from that rendered teach in the 20th. It should read. Go disci- ple, that is make co?? ufW.s' to Christianity of all nations,' etc.
" Neither of you, gentlemen, nor any other Greek scholar, will dispute tha.t ma the ten, ^ate, in the first part of this commission, means make disciples, as certainly as didaskontes means teaching in the last part of it Nor can you, or any man of common sense, pretend thai any are commanded to be baptized, but those who have first been made disciples. Now what is the New Testa- ment meaning of a disciple ? Jesus Christ himself shall answer: Luke xiv. 26, 27, 33. ' If any man come to me and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and chil- dren, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own lite also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth aot bear his cross and come after me cannot be my din-
SEVENTH NIQUT'S STUDY. 207
ciple. So likewise, whosoever he be of you, that for- Baketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my diaciple.^ Do little infants, who do not even know the name of Christ, and scarcely know their own, so love Christ that the love they have to all others is like hatred compared to that the}'' feel for him ? Can little infants forsake all for Christ, and do they daily take their cross and follow him? Then they are his disciples, and are commanded to be baptized. But no sensible man who is not a Doctor- of Divinity would ever think of such absurdity. You do not pretend to baptize infantn on any such grounds. You do not ask in them for any evidence of penitence, or piety, or faith, or love, or any thing else that goes to make a disciples of Christ."
"No," replied Mr. Johnson, " we baptize them on the faith of their jjarents."
" But this commission sa3's nothing about baptizing the children of believing parents. By it the ministers of Christ are commanded to baptize disciples (according to Matthew) and believers (according to Mark) ; but in regard to the children of these disciples and believers, they are both as silent as the grave."
" It was not necessary," said Mr. Johnson, " to put the authority for the baptism of infants in the commis- sion, since the matter is fully provided for elsewhere. I grant that it is not in this passage, but it does not follow that it is not in the Bible."
" Oh 1 no — certainly not," said Mr. Courtney. " I am easy to be satisfied; show it to me in any other place, and it will do quite as well."
" But, I do not feel disposed," said Professor Jones, " to give up this passage so easily. Does not the term 'all nations^ include infants as well as adults ?"
" Certainly, but they were not to baptize all nations, for this would include a// unbelievers and their children,
208 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
as well as believers and their children. They were to Go to all nations (not to the Jews alone, as they had been used to think) ; and among all nations they were lo maKe disciples, as many as they could — and those disciples who believed they were to baptize."
" But, Mr, Courtney, let me put in another plea for the infants. I am very anxious to get them into this commission, for I have always thought they were surely there. It is evident they are not included in the ex- pression ' all nations,' since it is true, as you say, it will include all infidels, idolators, profligates, and mur- derers, as well as the infant children of unbelievers — but are they not included in the word disciples ? May they not, in view of their innocence, and purity, and evident fitness for heaven, be properly called the dis- ciples of Jesus ? Did not Jesus himself compare his disciples to them, and say that none could enter heaven who did not become like one of them ? I will therefore, put it on this ground : None but disciples are to be baptized, but infants are already by nature dis- ciples— and therefore infants are to be baptized."
"But," said Mr. Courtney, "the disciples who were to be baptized were not disciples by nature. They were to be made disciples. They were to be believing dis- ciples, and capable of learning, for they were to be taught. Now as infants are not made disciples by hear- ing the Word — as they are incapable of faith or of instruction in the things that Christ commanded, they cannoi be included in the term disciples."
" Yes, but infants have the natural capacity to believe and to be taught, which will in time be fully developed."
" Very true ; and so when these capacities are fully developed, and they actually have believed, they will have become disciples. You know very well that chil- dren do not ordinarily grow up the disciples of Jesus
Theodosia Ernest.
PAGE 210.
(^
It ^' \
Tbeodosia Ernest.
Yu-
PUBU
.IBRARY
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 213
but the servants of sin, and all of them need conversion after they come to the development of their faculties, be fore they can be disciples. They are in infancy in som6 respects like to disciples, but the}- are vot disciples, but ' are b}' nature the children of wrath even as others' — and as soon as they are old enough, they show it very plainly."
" Well, 1 fear we must give up the commission. But tell me this, if infants are not tit subjects for baptism, how can they be fit for heaven ?"
" Those only are fit subjects for baptism, whom Christ commanded to be baptized. The Gospel has nothing to do with infants. There is in it no command addressed to them, nor is any act, either of mind or body, required of them in order to their salvation. They are no more required to believe than they are to be baptized. They are saved without either. You are required to do both. To you, God says believe and be baptized. You profess to have believed, but you have never made the slightest ellbrt to be baptized. What was done to. you in infancy, without 3^our knowledge or assent, was no act of yours. You are still living in open disobedience to this law. Jesus Christ did not command your parents to have you baptized — putting the responsibility on them, but he commanded you to be baptized for yourself; and that not before you believed, but afterward : ' He that believeth, and [then] is baptized, shall be saved.' "
" It seems to me, Mr. Courtney," said the pastor, " that you are rather early in your application of the subject. We have granted, indeed, that the authority for infant baptism is not in the commission by which we are directed to baptize adult believers, but it may be found elsewhere. A recent writer on this subject, the Rev. Dr. Summers, has very expressively said : ' That
214 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
the New Testament abounds with the proofs of infant baptism.' "
*' Then, sir, it will be very easy to tind at least (tne text which teaches it."
" Certainly it will, not only one, but many."
** But I only ask for one ; and if you have several, give me that first which you most rely upon."
" Well, sir, you have the Testament in 3'our hand, please turn to Matthew xix. 13, 14 : ' Then were brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands upon them, and pray. And the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the king- dom of Heaven.' Do you r.ot see some authority for infant baptism in that?"
" Indeed, sir, I cannot — can you ?"
" Yes. truly. It is to my mind perfectly satisfactory, And I do not see how it can fail to convince any candid man who reads it."
" Your mind, Mr. Johnson, must be easily satisfied then, for I can't see one word about baptism in it."
" Oh ! I do not say that baptism is exjjresuly named in it ; but, sir, the inference is irresistible, that these children were brought to be bajjtized, and that the people \vere accustoined to bring their children for that purpose, and that Jesus commanded his disciples never to forbid it, as you, Baptists, have done, but to suffer the little children to come to him, and make a part of his visible church."
" Is it possible I Pardon me, Mr. Johnson, if I say, that to my mind there can be no inference about the object or purpose for which these children were brought, because it is expressly and very definitely stated in the text. They brought them, that he should 'ay his hands on them, and pray. This was all thc^' came Cor. and
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 215
this was all he did. He did not baptize them. He did not command them to be baptized. He merely (verse 15th) 'laid his hands on them, and departed,' But there is an irresistible inference that 1 draw from this text, and that is, that the disciples had never been accustomed to infant baptism. If they had been in the habit of baptizing children, they could never have objected to their coming to be blessed by Jesus. They would have regarded it as a thing of course. But if they had, like the Baptist Churches, received o«Zv adults, and them only on repentance and profession of faith, it was not at all strange that they should reprove those who brought the little children, who could not believe. And there was a beautiful propriety in the lesson which Jesus taught them, viz. : that though children were not to be baptized, and were not member's of Jiis church, yet they were to be objects of intPnise interest and deep solicitude to his people. Though they were not to be baptized, they were to be prayed for. Parents, there- fore, ought to bring their little children to Christ by faith and prayer, for that he has commanded, but not by baptism, for that he has forbidden, by requiring those who are baptized fust to believe."
" But you cannot deny, Mr. Courtney, that by the kingdom of heaven, in this passage, is meant the visible church, and that Jesus expressly mentions children as n\embers of it ?"
"Indeed, Mr. Johnson, he mentions no such thing. It does not matter at all whether the kingdom of heaven means the church visible or invisible. He does not say that children are members of it, but that its members are like children. He does not say his church is com- posed of children, but of such as are like children. For in the corresponding passage in liuke and Mark, he goes right on, and explains by saying, ' Whosoever shall net
216 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in no case enter therein.' Mr. Barnes, in his Notes on this text, sa3^s : ' Of such as these — that is, of persons with such tempers as these — is the church to be composed. He does not say of thoi^e infants, but of such as resem- bled them, or were like them in temper, was the kingdom of heaven made up. It was proper, therefore, that he Bhould pray for them.' — Notes, in loc. Olshausen, of whose Commentary, Kitto, a brother Pedobaptist of his and yours, declares that it is, on the New Testament, the best now in existence — Olshausen says on this text: * For entering into the kingdom of God, there is en- joined that child-like feeling which enables us most easily to discern the gifts which have been bestowed upon each, and, consequently, puts us in circumstances to fulfill our calling.' He goes on to sa}': ' Of that reference to infant baptism, which it is so common to seek for in this passage, there is clearly not the slightest tj-ace to be found.^ And Bishop Taylor, another emi- nent Pedobaptist, says, in substance, that ' to rely upon this text as proof of infant baptism, proves nothing so much as the want of a better argument.' "
" I think, Mr. Johnson," said Professor Jones, "that we had better, for the present at least, let this* passage stand aside. It certainly gives no direct testimony in our favor, and even the inferential is somewhat doubt- ful. We can atford to let it go, as you know we have many others, about the meaning of which there can be no question. Let us take this, for instance. Acts xi. 38, 39 : * Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins. And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, for the promise is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.' Here, most undoubtedly, the parents and children
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 211
are both included, and that so expressly and plainly, as to leave no room for even the shadow of a doubt."
"That is, indeed," replied Mr. Johnson, "one of the strongest passages, if it be not the very strongest thai we have."
"And yet," said Mr. Courtney, "it has not, in fact, the very slightest value in favor of your faith or practice, but, on the contrary, furnishes at least a ver}' strong inference against them ; for if infant baptism was either recognized or practiced, it is incredible that Peter should not have said, ' Be baptized,' not only 'eA-ery one of you,' but you and your children. All that is said of baptism, is only to those who are commanded to repent. Those who are commanded to be baptized, are Ji7\'<t commanded to repent ; and none are to be baptized l)ut those who have repented — not the penitents and their children.''^
" True, Mr. Courtney; but you forget the last part of the text : ' the promise is to you and your children.' "
" The promise of what ? 3[r. Johnson. What promise is Peter speaking of? Evidently that in the Prophet Joel : * It shall come to pass in the last days I will pour out my Spirit,' etc. On the faith of this promise, Peter says : ' Repent and be baptized, every one of you, and }ou shall recerre the Holy Ghost. For this promise (that is, of the Holy Ghost,) is unto you and to your chil- 4i*eu, and to all that area,far of!',' etc. It was no promise of Ijaptism, but the promise of something that should foUoio their repentance and baptism. But even if the promise did refer to baptism, the subjects of it were not infants, for its application is expressly limited to those who can be called into the repentance and faith of the Gosjiel: ' Even as many as the Lord our God .s7m// call,^ (and no more). Does God call little unconscious infants T If not then they are not tlie persons spoken of" U
218 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
" What, then, do you think is the meaning of the word children ?"
" Simply their descendants In the next chapter, Peter says to these same people, who were all grown men and women: 'Ye are the children of the prophets. ' And nothing is more common in the Scriptures than to speak of the Jewish nation as children of Israel. They were not a nation of babies, nevertheless.
" But even granting, for the sake of argument, that it was little children — infants — that were spoken of, then if they were to be baptized without repentance and faith in Christ, so also are all the aliens and idolators among the Gentiles, for they are included in the term ' all that are afar ofl'. ' And there is the same authority to baptize these as the children. They are equally included in the 'promise:' 'You and j^our children, and all that are afar off? Unless you will admit the promise thus to embrace 'all the world, and the rest of mankind,' you must limit it, as Peter did, by confining it to those * of you,' and of ' your children,' and of the Gentiles whom the Lord our God shall call. If, therefore, this is the strongest, or one of the strongest passages you have, your case is a desperate one indeed. The text contains a command and a promise. It commands men first to repent, and then to be baptized — just as Jesus com- mands them first to believe, and then to be baptizec? And, of course, unless unconscious intents can repent and believe, they cannot be baptized. Then it promises the ' gift of the Holy Ghost' to those who have thus repented and been baptized : for Peter makes this the condition of their receiving it : ' Repent and be baptized, and 5'e shall receive the gift.' And as they might re- ceive the gift of the Spirit on these terms, viz. : baptism and repentance, so might their descendants, and so might even the idolatrous Gentiles, who were now afai
SEA^ENTH night's STUDY. 219
oif — even as many of them as the Lord our God should call."
" That is indeed entirely satisfactor}^" said Professor Jones, " and I am only surprised that I did not see it in that light before. But the truth is. because I saw baptized in one part of the passage, and children in another part, I took it for granted (since it was one of the proof-texts quoted in our confession of faith) that it was the children who were to be baptized. I see now that it was only those who repented ; and I am ready candidly to acknowledge that there is no authority for infant baptism in this text, but there are surely many others."
" Oh, yes," said Mr. Courtney, "you know 'the New Testament abounds with proof of infant baptism.' And if you will turn to 1st Cor. vii. 14, you will find one- which has been relied upon even more conlidently than the one we have just disposed of: ' For the unbelieving husband is sanctilied by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctilied b}' the husband ; else were your chil- dren unclean, but now are they hoi}'.' "
" Well, I should like to see how you will set aside a passage so plain and appropriate as that is," said Mr. Johnson.
"I simply say," rejoined Mr. Courtney, "that there is not one word in it about baptism, either of infants or adults. It has not only no mention of baptism, but not even the most distant allusion to it, direct or indirect."
" Why, sir, does it not say that the children of but one believing parent are Jiohj ? and if they aie holy, are they not fit subjects for baptism?"
" You know," replied Mr. Courtney, " that the words holy and sanctijied, among the Jews, were used in a physical or ceremonial sense, as well as in a moral sense. If the Apostle used them here in a moral
220 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
sense, he stated what was not true, for in this sense the infidel husband or the infidel wife ivas not made holy by the other's faith. The faith of the husband did not make a saint of his wife, nor did the faith of the wife make a saint of her idolatrous husband. They might have been, and doubtless often were more sinful afterward than before the other party was con- verted. Nor does the faith of both parents combined render their children holy, in this sense of the word : for you know and every other man knows, that the children of believers grow up in sin, and need to be con- verted, just as much as the children of unbelievers ; and without such conversion, will just as surely be lost as the children of the vilest. Did David's faith take the incestuous Ammon and murderous Absalom to heaven ? "^You and your wives are both believers : are your children, in this sense, holier than other children ? Do you not daily pray for God's converting grace to make them holy ? It is evident, therefore, that the words sanctified and holy (which are equivalent terms) must here be understood in their other sense. The ex- pression is indeed one of those Hebraisms in which Paul abounds. Its real meaning is very clearly stated by one of your best Presbyterian Commentators, Dr. McKuight — for more than twenty years the Moderator of the Presbyterian General Assembly of Scotland :
" ' I think, therefore,' sa^^s he, ' with Eisner, that the words in this verse have neither a federal nor a moral meaning, but are used in the idiom of the Hebrews, who by sanctified understood what was fitted for a par- ticular use, and by unclean what was unfit for use, and therefore was to be cast away. In that sense the Apos- tle, speaking of meat, says, 1 Tim. iv. 5, It is sanctified (that is, fitted for your use) by the Word of God and prayer. Ver. iv. Every creature of God (fit for food)
SEVENTH night's STUPY. 821
is good, and nothing fit for food is to be cast away aa unclean. The terms of the verses, thus understood, liave a i-ational meauiug, namol}^ that when infidels are married to Christians, if they have a strong atl'ection for their Christian sp(juses, they are thereby sanctified to them — they are fitted to continue married to them ; because their affection to the Christian party will insure to that party the faithful perlbrmance of every duty ; and that if the marriages of Christians and infidels were dissolved, they would cast away their children as unclean — that is, by losing their affection for them, they would expose them, after the barbarous custom of the Greeks, or at least neglect their education ; but by continuing their marriages, their children are Jioly ; they are preserved as sacred pledges of their mutual love and educated with care.'
" Hence he thus paraphrases the text : — * For the infidel husband is sanctified — is fitted to remain married .to the believing wife by his afi'ection for her ; and the infidel wife is sanctified to the believing husband by her afi'ection for him ; otherwise certainly your children would be by you neglected as unclean, whereas indeed they are clean ; they are the objects of your affection and care.'"
"I do not know," said Mr. Johnson, "that we are bound to admit Dr. McKnight's exposition of this pas- sage merely because he was a Presbyterian."
" Certainly not ; but one would naturally suj^pose that if there were any infant baptism in the passage, a learned and eminent Presbyterian Doctor of Divinity would be the man to find it. Perhaps you can show it to be there, though he could not."
" I do not say, Mr. Courtney', that infant baptism is commanded in this passage, but only that it is recog- nized. These children were not morally holy — that is
222 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
self-evident. Yet they are called {' agia^) \vo\y, by the same term which is sometimes used to designate the saints ; that is, the members of the church. Therefore, they must have been church members ; and as none were olmrch members but those who had been baptized, it fol- lows that they must have been baptized. That is what I call a demonstration."
"And if it be so," replied Mr. Courtney, "then the; infidel wife and the infidel husband had also been bap- tized, and were members of the church, for they are called {hagiarai) ' sanctified,' the same term which in this epistle (1st chai)ter and 2d verse) is applied to the members of the church : ' To them that are sanctified in Jesus Christ, called to be .sam^s,' etc. And again, in the 6th chapter and 11th verse, * But 3'e are washed, ye are sanctified ; but ye are justified in Christ,' etc. These sanctified ones called to be saints, and these sanctified ones who were washed and justified in Christ, were, most undoubtedly, members of the Corinthian Church. It was as such that Paul addressed them ; and as the same term {sanctified) is applied to the infidel and idolatrous husband and wife who had a believing companion, it fallows, of course, that, infidel and idolatrous as they were, they must have been members of the church ; and as none are church members but those who have been l)aptized, they must certainly have been baptized. That is what / call, not a demonstration, but a palpable ab- surdity ; yet it stands precisely upon the same ground with your demonstration."
"We must give it u\), Mr. Johnson," said the Pro- fessor, " at least so far as this text is concerned, for if it proves any thing, it proves too much. It will be better for us to give up the children than to take the unbeliev- ing and idolatrous adults. If we ground our practice of baptizing infants on this passage, we must baptize the
SEVENTH NJGHT'S STUDY 223
anbelieving wife on the faith of her husband, and the unbelieving husband on the faith of his wife, as well as their children on the faith of either. This we have never done, and would not dare to do, so we must look for some other passage to sustain our views."
" Not quite yet,'' said Mr. Courtney, smiling ; " I have wrested this weai)on out of your hands, and I will now turn it against 3'ou.
" I will prove, by this very passage, that there was no such thing as infant baptism known in the Corinthian Church, or in the mind of Paul, when he was writing to them ; but that, on the contrary, the Corinthian, and, of course, all tiie other churches of that day, were Baptist Ghurc/ies, in which neither the children, nor the unbe- lieving companions of believers, were baptized, or in any sense reij^anled as church members. If the unbelieving: husband or wife had been baptized and made a member of the church, the (piestion to which the Apostle is evi- dently replying could never have been asked. The Jews, as we learn from Ezra x. 3, were not permitted to continue in the marriage relation with their Gentile wives. Now the question had come up in the Corinthian Church whether a Christian should not, under a similar regulation, sei)arate from an un])elieving and idolatrous companion. But if such unbelieving consoi'ts were by the other^s faith entitled to church membership, and had, consequently, been baptized, such a thing as separation on this ground would never have been thought of It is evident, therefore, that the infidel husband or the infidel wife were not baptized or made church members. There Is in the Scriptures not the slightest allusion to any such church mi^mhers made by the faith of others, and not by their own. These persons were, therefore, in every sense, outsiders. They had no more connection with the church than any other heathens had. But theApos-
224 TMEODOSIA ERNEST.
lie says to their Christian companions, You have no more reason to discard them on this account than church members have to discard their children, for they are also unbelievers, and without the pale of the church. The unbelieving husband and the unbelieving wife, and your '^hildrcn, not their children, stand in the same category. Tlie^^ are all without the church — all unbaptized — and thus far, all equally unfit associates. But as your chil- dren, though not in the church, are holy to you — that is, fit to associate with, so is the unbelieving husband or the unl)elieving Avife, although they are also out of the church.
" That this is the sense in which the Apostle uses the terms sanctified, and holy, and unclean, is evident from the fact, that this is the only sense in which what he says of the parties can be true, and this sense corresponds perfectl}' with the common Scripture usage of the words. Those things and persons among the Jews were called unclean which a holy person might not lawfully touch, use, or associate with. It seems, from Gal. ii. 12, that they considered it very criminal to associate or eat with Gentiles. Peter, it seems, had the opinion that only certain food was tit to eat, and that all other was un- clean. And he said : ' Lord, nothing common or un- clean hath at any time entered into my mouth.' And Paul, 2 Cor. vi. 17, says, quoting from Isaiah: 'Come out from among them, and be ye separate, and touch not the unclean thing,' or, more properly, 'touch no unclean person,' 'and I will receive 3'ou,' etc. Things unfit for holy persons to use were, therefore, to them said to be unclean. Food which such persons might not eat, wat* called unclean food. And persons which they might not associate with, were called unclean persons. In this sense, therefore, neither the unbelieving children, nor the unbelievina: husband, nor the unbelieving ^ife, were to
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 225
be regarded as unclean. They were all equally sancti- fied— fit for the companionship and affection of their be- lieving parents and consorts."
*' That is all plain enough, Mr. Courtney ; but I do not see what it has to do with infant baptism."
" Simply this. The infidel consorts of believeis were not church members — they had not been baptized. When Paul was asked by the church, if the belieAdng husbands and wives must separate from such, he says no ; it is as lawful for them to live together as it is for you to live with your children. But your fhildren are holy [fit associates] to you, and so their companions are sanctified [fit associates] to fJiem. Now there was no force or propriety in the com})arison, unless the children were in circumstances similar to the unbelieving con- sorts— that is, they must all have been alike out of the church, and all unbapfized ; and if the children of be- lieving parents were unbaptized, it was a Baptist Church ; and if the church at Corinth was a Baptist Church, then all the churches [)lanted by the apostles were Baptist Churches."
" I do not feel inclined to grant all that," said Mr. Johnson, " but we have wasted too much time on this text already ; let us proceed. But I see it is of no use to argue with 3'ou, for you are disposed to construe every passage so differently from what we have been accus- tomed to consider their true meaning, that the most conclusive texts have no weight with you whatever."
" But pardon me, Mr. Johnson ; do I not construe them according to the natural and necessary meaning of the language ? I appeal to Professor Jones to say If I have shown any disposition to ])resent any other than the straightforward and ol)vious sense of the pas- cages which we have examined."
"T begin to think," rejoined the pastor, " that my
226 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
brother Jones is himself more than hnlf a Baptist, which accounts for his being so easily convinced."
"Not at all, Mr. Johnson. 1 was very desirous to find infant baptism in the Scriptures ; I confidently believed it was there ; I expected we could have pointed to it without the slightest difficulty ; but I acknowledge that I can't see the slightest trace of it in these proof texts which our church has been so accustomed to rely upon. But though we have no command to practice it, we have authority which is quite equivalent, and that is the practice of the Apostles"
" Certainly," said Mr. Johnson, " I did not expect to find any such absolute command as could not be explained away. It is chiefly on the examples that we rely."
" I hope, Mr. Johnson, 3'ou will do me the justice to acknowledge that I have not explained away any com- mand to baptize infants. I am sure I would not will- ingly even attempt to explain away any command of Jesus Christ, or his Apostles, on this or any other sub- ject. I asked 3^ou to show me a command to baptize info,nts, and you pointed to the commission as a com- mand to baptize those who are the 6t;/id 02/7(7 disciples t)f Jesus. You pointed, then, to an incidental command, to let the children come to Christ, that he might lay his hands on them and bless them. But as the children were not in the other command, so the baptism was not in this. It was not for baptism, but for quite another purpose that he bade them to come. You pointed then to a command and promise given through Peter, but the command was Bejjent, and then be baptized, which, of course, excluded infants. And the promise was not a promise of baptism, but of the gift of the H0I3' Ghost to those whom God should call to repentance, faith, and baptism, which excluded infants from the promise as
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 227
well as the command. You then pointed to the place whi( h we have last examined, which certainly contains not even the shadow of a command to baptize infants ; and so far as it teaches any thing upon the subject, teaches that they were no more to be baptized on the faith of their parents than unbelieving husbands are upon the faith of their wives. You have not found the commandment, because it is not there ; 1 do not like to discourage you, but I assure you, you cannot find the example for the very same reason. This has been con- ceded, over and over again, by the most learned and most zealous advocates of infant baptism. They rest it on ditferent grounds.
" Dr. Wall, the most eminent of them all, distinctly declares : 'Among all the persons that are recorded a:j baptized by the Ai)ostles, there is no express mentiou of any infants.'
" Bishop Burnet says : ' There is no express precept or rule given in the New Testament for the baptism of infants.'
" Richard Baxter says : * I conclude that all the ex- amples of baptism in the Scripture do mention only the administration of it to the professors of saving faith ; and the j^recepts give no other direction.'
" Martin Luther, the great reformer, sa3's : ' It cannot be proved that infant baptism was instituted by Christ, or by the first Christians after the Apostles.'
" Erasmus, another of the Reformers, says in his Notes on Rom. vi. 14: 'The Apostle does not seem to treat of infants. It was not the custom for infants to be bai> tized.'
" Olshausen, the famous Redobaptist commentator, says : ' There is altogether wanting any conclusive proof i^assage for the baj^tism of children in the age of
228 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
the Apostles, nor can the necessity of it l)e dc liiccd from the nature of baptism.'
" Liml)roch, another distinguished Pedobaptist pro- fessor of theology, and the author of a ' System of Diviuit}^' says : ' There is no express command for it in the Scriptures. Nay, all those passages wherein baptism is commanded, do immediately relate to adult persons, since the}' are ordered to be instructed, and faith is a prerequisite as >x necessary qualification.' And again: ' The necessit}^ of infant baptism was never asserted by any council before that of Carthage, held A. D. 418. Wo own that there is no precept, nor undoubted in- stance in Scripture of infant baptism.'
"Dr. II anna, editor of the North British Review, sa3^s : ' The baptismal service [of the English church] is founded upon Scripture, but its application to uncon- scious infants is destitute of any express Scri})tural warrant. Scripture knows nothing of the baptism of infants.'
" Dr. Knapp says: * There is no decisive example of infant baptism in the Scriptures '
" Neander, the great Pedobaptist historian, says: 'It is certain that Christ did not ordain infant baptism.'
" Even your Presbyterian Doctor Miller, of Princeton Theological Seminary, says : ' The fact is, that during the whole threescore years after the ascension of Christ, which is embraced in the New Testament history, we have no hint of the baptism of infants born of Christian parents.'
" So says yoxxY able defender, Professor Moses Stuart: * Commands, or plain and certain examples relative to it in the New Testament, I do not find.'
" So says also your other celebrated writer on this subject, Dr. Leonard Woods : 'The New Testament is silent respecting the subject of infant baptism.' ' 11 is
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 229
evident that infant baptism is not introduced as a sub- ject of particular discussion. It is neither explicitly enjoined or prohibited, and neither is the practice of baptizing children, nor the absence of it, expressly men- tioned.' "
''I declare, Mr. Courtney," said the Professor, "this is very discouraging. If such men as these, all of whom are on our side of this controversy, and all mem- bers of churches that are in the habit of baptizing in- fants— most, if not all of whom, received their own baptism in infancy — many of whom were eminent min- isters, and in the habit themselves of baptizing infants — and some of the most eminent of whom were authors, who, like Stuart, and Miller, and Wood, wrote expressly upon this subject — if such men cannot find the ' com- mand,' or the ' example,' it seems hardly worth while for us to look for it."
" I do not know," said Mr. Johnson, " what they con- sidered a plain command, or an undoubted example, but I conceive that these statements which Mr. Courtney has quoted so glibly, were (to say the least) very ' unguaj'ded ej'p7-6ssions,' yfhiiih. were by no means jus- tified 'from the facts in the case. I grant that there is no express command, but there are man}' examples, which, if not plain enough to satisfy Baptists, are such as will satisf)' any candid inquirer after the truth."
" I only ask 3^ou, gentlemen," said Mr. Courtney, "to show me one which 3^ou will yourselves say is an un- doubted case, after we have examined the testimony. 1 only ask 3'ou to show me one which your own theologi- cal waiters and teachers will agree upon as an undoubted case — or one which they will all agree upon as even a probable case. I do not wish to dissuade you from the attempt, but you could not find one single solUai^y in- stance if your very lives depended on the effort."
230 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" Certainly, Mr. Courtney," said the pastor, "you are speaking without due reflection, for you must know per- fectly well that such examples are as numerous as the household baptisms recorded in the Acts or referred to in the Epistles."
" Not at all," said Mr. Courtney. " I understand what I am saying, and 1 desire to be distinctly under- stood to mean that as there is not (as we have already seen) any command, so neither is there a solitary exami^le, either among the ' households^ o?' any where else, in which baptism was administered either to an infant or to any one else who did not first profess faith or repentance. From the first of Matthew to the end of Revelations, 3^ou may examine every passage in which baptism is mentioned or alluded to, and you not only will find no infant plainly spoken of as baptized, but you will not find so much as an allusion to any such a class as the ' Baptized children of the church.' "
"Surely," replied Professor Jones, "you must be mistaken in this. I am sure I have always thought that there was no more doubt about the Scriptures teaching infant baptism, than about their teaching the divinity of Jesus Christ. I am certain it must be somewhere in the Scriptures."
" Many people are certain that things are In the Scriptures that neither they nor any body else can find there," said Mr. Courtney. " Your Doctors of Divinity have told you it was there, and 3^ou took it for granted that the} told you the truth. But if it is there, you can find it and show it to me. And ever afterward you will know how to give a reason for the faith that is in you on this subject."
" But Mr. Courtney, we have not time to read over the whole Bible to-nisht, to see if there is not some case
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 231
mentioned ; and if we do not, we may c verlook some case."
" That is not necessary. Your Doctors of Divinity have done it for you ; and if they have found any case that liad even the remotest squinting toward infant bap- tism, they have paraded it before the world. Your pastor here is doubtless perfectly familiar with every case that has the slightest bearing upon the subject, and which presents even the shadow of a proof in favor of the practice of your churches. But if you doubt his information, or if he is uuAviJling to trust to his memory iu the case, suppose you take a Concordance, and refer to every place where baptism is mentioned. Here is P>utterworth's Concordance. It will doubtless mention every place where the words occur ; and we can thus test the matter at once.''
" Certainly," said the ])astor. " I greatly prefer that to a reliance upon my own memory ; for though I can without any hesitatiou refer you to several examples, as in the cases of Lydia, and the jailer and Stephanus, and Cornelius ; yet as 1 might forget some place, 1 would leave our defence less jjerfect than I desire."
" We will then work by the Concordance, and will come to each of those cases in their proper order," said the Professor.
" Very good," said the schoolmaster. " Now what is the first placed"
"It is," said the pastor, ' Matthew iii. 7 — 'John saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to hia baptism.' We must admit there were no infants there, but then you know we do not consider John's baptism to be Christian baptism, which was not practiced till after the death of Christ ; and so it does not matter who John baptized, or what class of persona were ba})- tized before the ascension of the Saviour as it was
232 TIIEOI>OSJA ERNEST.
only then that CJunstmn baptism, properly so-called, began to be administered. 1 am willing to grant, there- fore, that there was no mention made of the baptism of an}' infant until after that time."
" That will," said Mr. Courtney, " save us considerable trouble — but it will deprive me of the advantage of at least one very convincing argument against any infer- ence for infant bai)tism. 1 think 1 could easily prove to 3'ou that not only John's baptism, but Christ's bap- tism (1 mean that which is called his, though John says Jesus liimself baptized not, Ijut his disciples), was just the same baptism which He, commanded after his death — and that since John rec^uired repentance and works meet for repentance as preliminary to /ii« baptism, and Christ is expressly said to have first made disciples of those whom he baptized (John iv. 1), unconscious infants were of necessity excluded, and would be, as a matter of course, considered as excluded until an express command was given to include them. But we will pass it by, and the first case of baptism that comes up after the commission had, in your view, full^^ estab- lished the Christian ordinance, was that on the day of Pentecost, Acts 2d chapter. Suppose, Mr. Johnson, you just turn to the chapter, and see if you can find any thing about inlants there."
" Oh, no. We do not pretend," said the pastor, "that those three thousand were any of them infants, or even children. There were evidentl}^ none among them who could not understand the preaching of Peter and the rest, for they gladly received his word (41st verse) before they were ba[)tized, and continued stead, fastly in the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship after- ward. They were all adults, and we must admit also that they were all professed believers."
" Yery well," said Mr. Courtney ; " then we will go on
SEVENTH night's STUDV. 238
10 the next case; but I cannot help remarking \>y the way that it is very extraordinary if they ever baptized iiil'ants iu those days — if they were considered as included in the commission. I say it is very remarkable that all these three thousand should have been old bachelors or old maids, or, to say the least, all unmar- ried, or if married, all childless. Yet such must have been the case, for not a word is said about the duty of bringing their children for baptism — nor among them all was there a single one who brought his little ones that they might be baptized at the same time with his parent. I have been present several times when a number of persons joined your society, and there were always among them more or less who brought their children with them, 1 do not suppose that you ever recorded in 3^our church the baptism of twenty adults, but that they brought some children with them, yet you pretend that the Apostles practiced infant baptism as you do, and still admit that here are three thousand adults and not a single child — but go on to your next case."
" It is," said the pastor, who glanced at the Concord- ance, Acts viii. 12: "* But when they (the people of Samaria) believed Philip preaching the things concern- ing the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Chriiv, they were baptized.' "
"It seems, then," said Mr. C, "that these were adults too ; for they were able to hear preaching, and exercise faith. They believed the preaching before they were baptized, and none were baptized who did not first believe. But you did not read all the verse : does it not go on to say, that they were baptized, both the men, the women, and their children ?"
"No." said Mr. Johnson, with a very perceptible 15
234 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
degree of petulance in his tone, " it only says, * both men and women.' "
" So then, here is another case, where a large company of men and women were baptized, not one of whom were heads of families. It is very remarkable, for if the Apostles taught and practiced infant baptism, Philip had doubtless' instructed them that ' it was their duty and their privilege'' to bring their infant children into the kingdom with themselves. This is what you teach, and this is what your converts do. If Philip taught as you do, his converts were a * peculiar people' truly. But let us pass on to the next case, which was that of Simon the magician, in the next verse ; but as you won't imagine any infant baptism there, we may pass to the next."
"That was," said the pastor, "the case of the Ethi- opian Eunuch (Acts viii. 13) ; and the next that of Saul (Acts ix. 18) ; and the next that of Cornelius and his friends, which I have sometimes considered as a case of household baptism, but on examination I do not see that there is any mention of infants (Acts x. 47)."
" Please read it, Mr. Johnson," said Professor Jones. " I have, I am sure, always looked upon this as one of the proof passages."
" I had such an impression myself," said the pastor, "but I see it cannot be relied upon. ' Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we ? And he com- manded them to be baptized.' Now it is true that Cor- nelius had a family, and he had called together his kiasmen and near friends ; and it seems most likely that there would have been among them some children, but still it does not seem absolutely certain. It is, I should say, a probable case, but I do not present it as a certain one."
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 230
" How can you, Mr. Johnson, I was ready to say how dare you, as a minister of the Gospel of truth, even pretend that there is any doubt about the case at all ? Could little infants in their mothers' arms ' recei\e the Holy Ghost,' and 'speak with tongues,' and 'magnify God,' as these are said to have done in the 44th and 46th verses ? The persons, and the only persons, who were commanded to be baptized, were those who spake with tongues and magnified God, And it was on this evi- dence, and only on this evidence, that * God had granted repentance unto the Gentiles,' that they were admitted to baptism at all. He who could see a probable infant baptism in this, might see it just as well, it seems to me, in the baptism of the three thousand who received the word with gladness, on the day of Pentecost; or the five thousand who received it a few days after ; or in the case of the Samaritans, who believed in the Gospel preached by Philip. If they heard, repented, and ])elieved, these did all that and more, for they received the miraculous influences of the Holy Ghost before their baptism ; whereas the others received them after it, when the}' re- ceived them at all. These did all that those did, and moreover spake with tongues, and 'magnified God,' and yet you talk about their being unconscious infants^
" Oh, well," said the pastor, "you have no need to be- come so eloquently indignant. I said I was willing to pass by this case. I will admit that it is not even a probable instance, if that will satisfy you. We shall, find certain ones enough, so we can aflbrd to be liberal in this. You will not be able, I trust, to dispose so easily of the next, which is the baptism of Lydia, Acta xvi. 15 — 'And of her household ;^ which, as a matter of course, would have some children in it."
"1 do not see how Lydia's household should neces- sarily have children in it. I am acquainted with several
236 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
households in this town that have no infants in them. You have none in yours. You have children, but none too young to repent and believe, make credible profes- sion of their faith, and lead a Christian life ; and if you should all be convinced, in the revival which I believe God is now beginning to send upon our little Baptist church, that you have never been baptized — and should all give us satisfactory evidence of true piety — we would gladly do for you just what Paul did for Lydia. We would baptize you and your household ; but you would not insist that we had baptized any unconscious babe."
" But, Mr. Courtney, you must admit the principle that the ' household was baptized on the faith of its head.' Lj^dia believed, and she and her household were baptized. Now, whether they were large or small, they must have been baptized on their mother's faith."
" No, Mr. Johnson ; it is that principle which I espe- cially condemn and deny. What I say is this — No one under the Gospel is to be baptized, or to be regarded as in any sense a member of Christ's church, or to enjoy any of the privileges of that church, who has not first repented and believed for himself, and in his own proper person: and if you will show me any case where anj one, either old or young, male or female, bond or free, adult or infant, was by the Apostles baptized, who had not first given evidence of his repentance, faith, and conversion, then I admit you have gained your point. I grant that Simon Magus was baptized while yet uncon- verted, but not before he professed to he, and gave such evidence as was satisfactory at the time. For Luke says Simon also believed and was baptized. Now Lydia was baptized and her household was baptized ; but there is no evidence that her household were children. There is no proof even that she was married, or ever had been. She may or may not have had a husband:
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 23T
she may or may not have had children ; she may have been a widow, or she may have been an old maid. The record ssiys not a word on these points. It only says that her name was Lydia — that she came from a distant city, called Thyatira — that she was engaged in the busi- ness of selling purple, which we know, from other sources, was a very respectable and profitable emi)loy- raent. We learn, also, that she was keeping house, and living in such a comforta )le wa^" that she could afford to give the Apostle and his companions a home at her house during their stay. It appears also that she had a family (oikoa), but whether they were children or ser- vants, or both, is not declared ; but one thing is certain, whether they were her offspring or servants, they were grown men, for in the end of this same chapter (verse 40) we read that as soon as Paul and Silas were libera- ted they returned to the house of Lydia and saw the brethren and comforted them. They were therefore men, who could be comforted, and not little children. They were also believers, for otherwise they would not be called brethren.
" Hence the celebrated commentator, Dr. Adam Clarke, very properly remarks : 'She attended unto the things.^ ' She believed them and received them as the doctrines of God, and in this faith she was joined by her whole family, and in it they were all baptized.' And again^ ' The first members of the church of Christ, at this place, were Lydia and her family, and the next in all proba- bility were the jailer and his family.'
" So far, therefore, from being certain or even proba- ble that the household of Lydia were infants, it is placed past all doubt by the Scripture itself, that they were men and breth7^en, who believed and were baptized ; for though their faith is not specially mentioned, yet it is necessarily implied by the calling of them brethren."
238 THEODOSIA ERNEST
" But is it certain, Mr. Courtney, that these brethren were the same who composed Lydia's family ? Might they not have come in there merely to meet the Apos- tle?"
"No, Mr. Johnson; Lydia and her family were the only converts until the Apostle was arrested and thrown into prison. While there, the jailer and his family were converted, and these two families were all the followers of Christ — all the brethren that were in the place. But those at the jailer's house Paul and Silas had just left, when they came to Lydia's house, and saw and comforted the brethren there."
" 1 think, Mr. Johnson," said Professor Jones, "that we may as well let this case go. We can afford to do it, as we have so many others. Ajid it evidently, so far from aiding us, testifies directly against us. The same difliculties cannot exist in that of the jailer and his family, recorded in the same chapter. 1 have always heard that referred to as a most undoubted example."
"Yes," said the pastor. "The jailer was a man in the prime of life, as is evident from the impulsive char- acter of his behavior. He drew his sword, called for a light, and he sprang in, which indicates that he was a man of activity and energy. Now such a man would bo almost certain, if he had a family at all, to have among them some little children. I consider, therefore, that this is an un(iuestionable case. The evidence amounts almost to an absolute demonstration."
" It is a great pit}^" said Mr. Courtney, " to spoil Buch a beautiful and perfect demonstration ; and if we had time, I would spare it for a few minutes, that we might at our leisure admire its beauty and its ingenuity. But as we probably have several other places to ex- amine, we cannot afford to trifle over this. You read, m verse 33, that ' he was baptized, he and all his, straight-
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 239
wa}'.' Now you sa}^ that * all his^ must include one or more infants. I only reply, that if so, they were infants who could hea?' the preaching of the gospel, and could believe it and rejoice in God. For, verse 32, Paul preached to him and all his. And, in verse 34, he re- joiced, believing in God, with all Jiis house. Now, there is not in the record the slightest intimation that there was a child on the premises. There was a family, but whether of adults or children, servants or relations, is not said ; but it is said, that the}^ all heard the Word, all believed, and all rejoiced, just as certainly as they were all baptized. There is the .same testimony of the hearing, believing, and rejoicing as of the baptism. The Baptists will baptize all the children in town, if they will come to them believing and rejoicing in God — not, however, on their parents' faith, but on their own. Your next case is in the 1 8th chapter, is it not ?"
" Yes," said the pastor (glancing at the Concordance which he still held in his hand), "and the 8th verse. 'And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, be- lieved on the Lord, with all his house. And man}- of the Corinthians hearing, believed, and were baptized.'"
" Does it not say that their children were baptized with them on the faith of their parents?"
" 1 read the whole text," replied the pastor, gruffly.
" Then you must consider it a very remarkable text," said Mr. Courtney, " for it declares that among these many Corinthians, there was not a man or woman who had an unconverted child ; for if there had been one, it would, if Paul had taught as you do, have been brought up for baptism. These early Christians were strange people. There were three thousand of them at one time, five thousand a few days after in Jerusalem, a great multitude in Samaria, and man>' more here in Corinth — all childless: for it is incredible that if they
240 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
had children, and had been instructed that * it was their duty and their privilege^ to have them baptized, that some of them would not have done it. Nay, all of them must have done it, or have stood in open disobedience to the requirements of the Gospel. We read of their be- lieving, of their rejoicing, of their breaking of bread, of their assembling for worship, of their ministering to the saints — but never a word of their bringing their little children to be baptized. They evidently did not obey this command, if any such command was given them. And there is never an intimation of any reproof of such inexcusable disobedience."
" I must say, Mr. Courtney," rejoined the pastor, " that you are the most unreasonable man I ever tried to argue with. I have given you, at least, two plain and unquestionable instances in which the families were bap- tized ivith the j^arents, and yet you say that out of these eight or ten thousand converts, there is not one who had his children baptized. To use an expression of youi own, I do not see how you can dare thus to trifle with the Word of Godl"
" I know, Mr. Johnson, that j^ou gave us cases were families were baptized, and you can give us more ; but you have not shown that these families contained a single infant child, and that is the point on which the whole argument turns. I reply to you in the language of you own Pedobaptist historian, the celebrated and acute Neander : * We cannot prove that the Apostles ordained infant baptism, from those places where the baptism of a whole family is mentioned, as in Acts xvL 33; 1 Cor. i. 16. We can draw no such conclusion, because the inquiry is still to be made whether they were in these families any children of such an age that they were not capable of any intelligent reception of Chris-
SEVENTH NIGHT^S STUDY. 241
hanity, for this is the only point on which the case turns,' Ch. Hist. p. 198.
" I might retort by saying that you are exceedingly unreasonable in your mode of argumentation. You say that the Apostles baptized infants. I ask you to prove it. You reply by saying he baptized families. Now if there was never a family without infants, yovLt argument would be complete. But your own family has no infants in it. It consists of two grown sons, a daughter nearly grown, and a servant. My family has no infants in it : it consists of myself, my wife, and my nephew, who assists me in my school. The family of our friend Mrs. Ernest has no infants in it. It consists of her daughter, Miss Theodosia, of her son Edwin, and her old servant, Aunt Chloe. All of whom are old enough to believe and rejoice in God, as the jailor's family did. Should they all determine to obey the commandment of Jesus Christ and be baptized accord- ing to the Gospel order, you can say of her, as Luke does of the jailor and of Lydia — She was baptized, and her household. You see, therefore, that if you would make your argument worth a straw, you must go one step further, and prove that there was an infant in the families. It will not do to say that it is probable there was one. It is just as probable that there is one in yours, or mine, or Mrs. Ernest's, y^X you know there is none. You must, if 3'ou build an argument on the infant as being there, first prove that it was there. If you can't do this, the judgment goes against you of course. I need not prove that it was not there. The burden of proof rests on you. If 3'ou go into court and claim property as the heir of a certain woman's child, you must prove that there was such a child. If you should prove no more than that the woman was married and kept house, and had been heard to speak
242 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
of her family, the court would laugh at 3'ou. That she was married, kept house, and had a fomily, you would be told, was not the slightest legal proof that she had a child. And this is the point on which your whole claim rests. Peter had a family, though so far as we are informed it consisted only of his wife and his wife's mother. And. so Crispus, the chief ruler of the syna- gogue, had a famil}' : who they were, we do do not know ; whether children, grand-children, nephews, or servants. Hib father and mother, and the father and mother of his wife ; his own brothers and sisters, or the brothers and sisters of his wife his clerks or apprentices, if they had lodged in his house and eaten of his table, would have been called — his family, his house ; but whosoever they were, ih^y ' all believed on the Lord,'' and so were not unconscious infants."
" Have we not some other case, Mr, Johnson V in- quired the Professor.
" There is only one other," replied the pastor, " and that is that of the family of Stephanus, mentioned by Paul, 1 Cor. i. 16 — 'I baptized also the household of Stephanus.' "
"And that need not detain us long," said Mr. Court- ney, " for your own Presbyterian Doctor of Divinity, McKnight, in his excellent Commentary, says, ' The family of Stephanus seem all to have been adults when they were baptized; for they are said, chap. xvi. 15, to have devoted themselves to the ministry of the saints.'
"■ We have now examined all your ' examples,' and the infants are not yet discovered. Lydia's family are called 'brethren.' The jailer's family are said 'to be- lieve and rejoice in God.' That of Crispus 'believed in the Lord.' And that of Stephanus ' addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints.' And, Cor. xvi. 16, the c^hurch is directed to ' submit itself unto such.' You
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 243
have not only failed to prove that there were any infants, but I have proved (though by the rules of debate I was under no obligation to do so) that they were all adults, or at least old enough to hear, believe, obey, and rejoice in the Gospel. I leave it now for you to sa}^ yourselves, whether there is, in any of these instances, a single certain example of the baptism of an unconscious in- fant?''
Mr. Courtney paused, but neither of the others felt disposed to answer; after waiting a moment, he con- tinued :
" But 1 am not willing to pass so readily from these passages. You are accustomed, Mr. Johnson, and so are all your ministers, to present these as proof-texts for infant baptism. You will probably go and do it again, though I pray that God may give you a better mind. They stand as proof-texts in your * Confession of Faith,' and yet, in truth, neither they nor 3^ou have ever believed them to be such, or else you are more incon- sistent in your conduct than sensible men are often found to be."
" Why, sir, what do you mean ? Do you intend to insinuate, sir, that we Presbyterian ministers teach as God's truth what we do not believe ?"
" I mean to say, Mr. Johnson, that you teach for God's truth what you do not practice — and you know a good man's practice ought to correspond to his belief You teach that the families of believers are to be bap- tized on the faith of the head of the family. Out of the thousands and thousands of people who are recorded as haling believed and been baptized, you find tliree or four instances in which a whole family believed, and were baptized at the same time, and they are mentioned as a certain man and his family. Xow 3'ou say if these three or four f ami lie f< were baptized, all families of be-
244 THEODOSIA EllNEST.
lievers are entitled to baptism. This is what your argu- ment amounts to, if it has any force at all. Now, in every one of these instances the ivhole family, every member of it, is said to have been baptized."
" Yery well," said Mr. Johnson, " so much the better for our cause — so much the more likely that it included the infants.^''
" It may be so much the better for your cause, but it is so much the worse for your coriHistency. You teach that all the family were included in these baptisms, but you do not baptize all the family. Are not my wife and my nephew members of my family ? but you would not on my faith baptize either of them. Is not old Aunt Chloe a member of Mrs. Ernest's family ? yet you never have baptized her, or urged on Mrs. Ernest the duty of bringing her servant as well as her children. Are not children of ten or twelve, or fifteen or twenty years of age, as much members of the family as the baby is? If these passages prove that one member of the family may be baptized on the faith of the head, they prove equally that every other member may be ; and your only consistent ground is that occupied by Mr. Barnes in his Notes on 1 Cor. i. 16 — 'Household (oikon) the house, the family. The word comprises the whole family, including adults, domestics, slaves, and children.' * * ' It was the custom doubtless for the Apostles to baptize the entire household, whatever might be the age, including domestics, slaves, and children. The head of a family gave up the entire household to God.- If you and Dr. Barnes believe this, you ought to practice it. If Paul baptized all the children, and all the domestics, and all the slaves, and all the other mem- bers of the family, of whatever age, you ought to do it too. You are unworthy to have charge of a Christian church, if you do not, at least, attempt to do it. You
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 245
ought to urge upon your members the ' duty ani privi- tege' of bringing their slaves, where they have them — their men servants and their maidens — their domestics, male or female, ' of whatever age,^iin(\ all their children, whether infant or adult, to be baptized upon the faith of the head of the family. Nor do I see how you could well omit the wife, for although Dr. Barnes has not in- cluded her, she certainly belongs to the family as much as the ' domestics.' If they refuse to perform this duty, which was thus enjoined, as you believe, by the Apos- tles, you can not do less than call them to account for their neglect. If they will still prove obstinate, you must exclude them as disobedient to one of the ' un- doubted ' ordinances of the church of Christ. They are certainly under as much obligation to bring all as to bring the infants."
" Yes," said the pastor ; " but where they have come to years of discretion, we think it best to leave them to come themselves, as an act of personal obedience."
" But you have no right to leave them, even if you do think best. L^'dia did not, according to your account of the matter, leave hers to come when they pleased. The jailer did not leave his — he brought them all straightway. If the head of the family is to have his household baptized, on the authority of these examples, he is not at liberty to leave them to come of themselves. It is his bounden duty to exert all his authority as hus- band, father, and master, to bring his whole family at once to the baptismal basin ; and it is your bounden duty, as a minister of Christ, if you believe such things, to urge the subject upon their attention. Call upon them for the immediate performance of their obligations ; and it is the duty of the church to deal with those who neglect or refuse. But this you never have done. There are none of your ministers who do it ; and I ven-
246 THEODOSIA ERNEST,
ture to say that Mr. Barnes himself has never done it. You never will do— you, none of you, dare to do it. Your own consciences would recoil from the introduc- tion, in this way, of infidels, and blasphemers, and irre- ligious men and women, into the church of Christ, on the faith of their father or master. As you would be afraid to do it 3^ourselves, you do not believe in your hearts that the Apostles did it. It is altogether incon- sistent with every thing we know of their character, and the nature of the churches they established ; and it would therefore be fair to infer that these families which were baptized were families of believers, even if they had not been called brethren in the case of Lydia, or said to believe and rejoice in God in the jailer's — to speak with tongues and glorify God in that of Corne- lius— to believe in the Lord Jesus in that of Crispus, and to give themselves to the Christian ministry in that of Stephanus."
" I did not expect when we commenced," replied Mr. Johnson, "to be able to convince you of j'-our errors in regard to this subject. I have often observed that the more one reasons with a Baptist, the more firml}'^ he fixes him in his baptistical notions. I have, therefore, had no desire for any such controversy as this. It was only to satisfy my friend and brother, Pro* lessor Jones, that I engaged in it at all — and I must now beg leave to decline any further argument upon the subject."
" Pardon me, Mr. Johnson, if in the heat of debate I have made use of any expression that has seemed im- proper, or in any degree disrespectful to you. I did not intend to do so, and regret most sincerely if my feel- ings have led me to overstep the bounds of gentlemanly* discussion."
" Oh, I do not," resumed the pastor, " decline further
SEVENTH night's STUDY. 241
disputation on that ground ; though I m-ght, I think, fairly complain of some of your expressions. I merely do not wish to continue a discussion which is not likely to result in any good."
" Permit me to suggest," said Professor Jones, "that if we leave off here we acknowledge ourselves to be completely routed, for it is certain that we have not 3'et been able to produce a single undoubted precept or example of infant baptism from the Scriptures. But sinse such men as Woods, and Wall, and Stewart, and Coleman, and Noander, concede this, and yet are the firm advocates of the baptism of infants, there must be some other ground on which it can be sustained."
" That is true, sir," replied the pastor. "And I have purposely reserved our strongest argument for the last. But I am sure it will have no influence on Mr. Courtney, nor any other Baptist."
" But, Mr. Johnson, it may have some effect on me. And I hope you will do us the favor to present it for my benefit."
"We will not have time to-night," replied the other, " and for the present at least I am tired of the subject. Perhaps you will hear something at church to-morrow that will satisfy yuur mind " And with this iutimatiou the Rev. gentleman took his leave, and the parties 6€paratetL
\M DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT
THEODOSIA IS BAPTIZED ACCORDING TO THE COMMANDMENT.
AND THE
EXAMPLE OF THE LORD JESUS CHKI8T iti
THE DAT AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT.
E left Theodosia in that most distressful cim- dition, in which duty, struggling with inclina- tion, distracts and rends the mind with agonizing efforts to decide one way or the other.
With her this was not a slight or momentary strife. It was the terrible agony of one who struggles for his very life. Dearer to her than life was Mr. Percy's love; it was her first love; it was her ouiy love ; it was a pure and holy love ; it had been smc- tijned by her mother's fond approval; it had been sanctified by their formal espousals ; the day had been set for the consummation of their happiness ; she had fully given up her whole heart to it; it was the great, con- trolling, soul-absorbing passion of her being ; all the hopes of life were centered here. To tear such lo e fr.m out the heart, was to rend the heart itself Yet sue felt it must be done ; and God gave her strength to do it. All day long, as we said, she had crouched at her mother's side, or followed her likt aer shadow. She seemed to feel that something terrible impended over her, and that she was safer in her mother's presence. Not one word was spoken by either of them on the one subject which occupied the minds of both. Mrs. Ernest observed that, as the day advanced, her daugh- ter's face became more natural in its expression. The lines of agony began to disappear. The eyes no lonfi^er looked so strange and restless ; nor did they tun "'}
(251)
252 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
Her, as in the morning, with that beseeching gaze of agony which almost broke her heart. But still, she noticed that her lips often moved, though she uttered no word ; and when she spoke to her about the business of the household, it was some time before she answered, and then slowly, and often in such a way as to show that she had not fully comprehended her meaning. Her mind was evidently far away.
About three o'clock she laid down her worsted, and taking up the Testament which lay upon her work table, turned to the fourteenth chapter of Luke, and read : " If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be ray disciple ; and whosoever doth not bear his cross and come aftei me, cannot be my disciple. For which of you, intend ing to build a tower, sitteth not down first and counteti: the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it, les: haply after he hath laid the foundation and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, saying, This man began to build, but was not able to finish. Or what kinsj oroinof to make war as^ainst another kino^ sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able, with ten thousand, to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand ? or else, while yet the other is a great way off he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace. So likewise whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be ray disciple."
" Mother," said she, looking up, and speaking as though her mother had known what she was reading, " you will not make It necessary for me tc forsake you too?"
" Why, what do you mean, mj^ daughtei ?"
THE DA-i AFTER THE SEVENTH NIQHT. 253
" Jesus says here, that if I do not forsake all for him, 1 cannot be his disciple."
" Yes, my child, but that has nothing to do with baptism. It means that you must give up all to he religious y
" To be religious, mother, is to ob('y Jesus Christ. *If 3^e love me,' he says, 'keep my commandments.' One of the plainest and most positive of those commandments is, 'Believe and be baptized.^ Baptism is commanded as much as faith. It makes, indeed, a part of the sar. command. I trust I have believed ; but I have never been baptized. Even if the sprinkling which I received in my childhood had been baptism, it luas no act of mine. I have not obeyed : / — must — do — it .^" She pronounced these last four words slowly, with a slight pause between each of them, as though each cost her heart a pang to speak it, and yet it must be said.
" Well, my child, if you must, you must."
" But, mother, you will not forbid me ? You will not
make it needful to disobey you as well as to " But
she could not finish the sentence, and left her mother to guess her meaning.
"No, my dear child, I will not absolutely ybr6''<i you You know what I think al)out these things. Ba^.ism is not essential to salvation, and I had much rather you would remain where you are. I cannot bear to see you sacrifice all 3'our prospects in life for a mere whim, for I don't see but what one baptism is just as good as another. And if 3'ou were not in such distress, I would certainly oppose you, but I see it would do no good ; and though it will mortify and distress me, I will not forbid you. And if you are determined to do it at all hazards, ana it will relieve you of a single pang, I give you my consent."
" Thank you, mother! You do not know what a load
254 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
you have taken oft* my heart." And she buiied her face in her mother's lap, and wept aloud for several minutes Then she arose, wiped her ej-es, and went into her own room and closed the door.
Shall we invisibly follow her there ; see her on her bended knees pour out her soul to God ; hear her cry for help with those inarticulate groanings which the Ai)0stle speaks of; see the resolve take form and sub- stance in her heart ; see her arise with that same strange calmness which we observed after she had prayed the day she came up from witnessing the baptism in the river ; see her open her little writing-desk, and select a sheet ol paper; take her pen and write, "My Dear Mr. Percy ;" then pause, lay down her pen, cover her face with her hands, pressing upon her eye balls, as if to shut out some terrible vision, while a strong convulsive shudder quivers through her frame ? It is past ; she uncovers her face ; looks up beseechingly to heaven ; composes herself; takes up her pen, and writes as fol- lows:
" I received yours on J^'riday evening. To say that its contents gave me very great pain, would but feebly express the truth. I was not only distressed, but most grievously disappointed ; for 1 had sup})osed you were as sincere and earnest in your desire to know and do your whole duty in regard to this subject as I was my- self. Your letter undeceived me. I do not complain of it. I am thankful for your expressions of interest in my welfare, and of affection for myself I will not deny that I had no higher ambition, so far as this world is concerned, than to secure your approbation. But I cannot, even to please you, venture to disobe}^ my Saviour I intend to be baptized to-morrow. 1 am aware, after what you have said, that by doing so, I shall not only
THE DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 255
'mortify and distress' you, but I shall renounce all ulaim to your love. When you return, therefore, I shall be to you but as one dead. I pray j^ou so to consider me ; it will bfe better for us both. And if you will spare me further pain, I do entreat you never to solicit a re- newal of our engagement. It will not give you as much Gain to read this as it does me to write it ; but I have weighed it well. I sa}^ every word deliberately, though sorrowfully. I will not cease to pray for you And will you not sometimes pray for her who was j^our
" Theodosia."
This letter she folded, enclosed, sealed, and directed to Mr. Percy's lodging place, and called the old servant, Aunt Chloe, and directed her to take and leave it there.
This done, she returned to her mother with something almost like a smile of joy upon her face. The peace of God was in her heart ; and if she was not happy, she was no longer wretched. With a low, but calm and almost cheerful voice, she told her mother what she had done, and asked her to make suitable preparation for her baptism. At night she sent a line to Uncle Jones, requesting him, if he could, to be present ; and another to Mr. Courtney, announcing her intention to ask for baptism. She spent most of the time in her own room, alone, until the hour of rest, and then slept sweetly till morning When she awoke, her first thought was ex- pressed in the language of the Psalmist — " I laid me down and slept ; and I awoke again, for the Lord pre- served me." She felt now that she was, in a peculiar sense, in the care of God. She had given all, and had obtained all. She had given up self, and obtained Jesus in all his fulness, and God in all his boundless power and love. Jesus was her Sa^^.our; God was her God Tea, the mighty Maker of the worlds, the omnipotent
256 THEODOSIA ERf^EST.
Ruler of the Universe, was not only her God^ but hei Father. She felt this morning that she might ask what she would. And yet such was the overwhelming con- viction in her heart, that her loving Saviour and her kind Father knew so infinitely better than herself what she most needed, and what would be really best, that she couhl only pray : " ' Thy will be done ;' I leave it all with thee. Do what thou seest best. Give joy or sorrow ; give comfort or affliction ; give life or death. Thou know- est best — thou dost all things well. I trust myself — my soul and body ; my happiness here and hereafter ; all T am, all I have ; all I feared, all I hoped for — I give all iij) to thee. Thou only art my portion now; and I am thine — all thine; I delight to do thy will, oh, my Beloved. I have now no other love but thee, my Saviour, my Father, my Friend. Thou art my all. Jesus is mine, aii<l 1 am his. What can I want beside? Blessed Saviour, mny I never leave thee — may I never grieve thee any more. Lord, thou knowest all things. Thou knowest tli:it [ love thee. Yes, I love thee, and I will keep all thy commandments. Show me thy ways. Thou shalt guide me by thy counsels, and afterward receive me into thy i;ioiy. Yo.s, me — even me — poor, lost, re- bellious sinner that 1 :un. Thou wilt love me freely. Thou wilt save me through thine own infinite mercy. Mercy, all mercy. Not for works of righteousness which we have done, but of his own mercy, he saves us. Jesus, I thank thee. Oh, make me love thee more."
With such incoherent ejaculations of trust, and praise, and prayer, she rose, and prepared for church.
It was strange how the news had got abroad, yet it had sprea<l like wild-fire through the town that Miss Thecxlosiu Ernest Avould that morning apply for bap- tism. At an early hour the school-house was crowded to its utmost capacity, and before the services com
THE DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 257
oienced, even the windows and the doors, and every place was occupied from which one could hope to catch a glimpse at what was going on within, or hear a word of what was said.
The church bells began to ring. Mrs. Ernest had all the morning been distracted between affection for her lovely child, which i)rom]>ted her to go to the school- house, and pride, which urged her to go and sit in hei own pew as though nothing had happened. Curiosity to see and hear what Theodosia would do and say, and what sort of people these Baptists were, joined with affection in pleading for the school-house ; and a sort of indeliuite dread of what Mr. Johnson might say, came to the help of pride. And, it may be, there was some- thing like a mistaken sense of religious duty which spake on that side also. However this may be, the first few strokes of the costly and solemn-sounding bell which had been accustomed to call her to church, seemed suddenly to decide her.
"1 want you to understand, Theodosia," said she, " that though I do not forbitl, yet I do not altogether approve of what you are about to do, and 1 cannot sanction any such proceedings by my presence. ] don't know what Mr, Johnson would think of me, if 1 should forsake our own dear church to wander about after these new comers."
This was a new disappointment to the sensitive child She had greatly relied on her mother's presence to sus- tain her in the untried scenes through which she was about to pass. She had also hoped that Uncle Jones would eall and go with her, but he had not come, and she was alone Yet she was not alone, for she looked up as her mother was speaking, and in her heart said again, "Not my will, but thine be done !" — And the Spirit replied, "Fear not, for / am vith thee; and be not dismayed,
258 TllEODOSIA ERNEST.
for I am tliy God !" " When my father and my mothei forsake me the Lord will take me up."
I do not say that she felt no natural misgivings, no modest shrinking from going alone into a house filled with strangers, with the consciousness that every eye was on her, and every heart full of curiosity to see how she would look, what she would do, and what she would say ; but she thought much less of this than my reader would naturally suppose. The peace of God was in her heart, and it gave to her mind and her manner a quiet yet determined calmness, and a collectedness of thought and perfect self-possession which was surprising even to herself
She set out therefore alone ; for Edwin had not returned from Sabbath-school. Two or three times the mother turned and looked after her as she went, and wished she could consistently, and without displeasing Mr. Johnson, have gone with the dear child.
Mr. Courtney had taken it for granted that Uncle Jones or some of the family would accompany her, and when he saw her coming by herself, he hastened to meet her, and conducted her to a seat.
The preacher was not the same who had been there before, but a stranger who had providentially been sent to fill his place. He was a man about forty j^ears of age, rather below than above the ordinary size ; his complexion dark, his hair slightly silvered with gray, and the top of his head almost bald. His eyes, and indeed the whole expression of his face, were somewhat peculiar. He seemed to have been long in feeble health, and his face was marked with lines of suffering. Its habitual expression was one of sad and sorrowful resignation. The casual observer saw in it no evidence of loft}' genius, or of even extraordinary- talent — and yet he was an extraordinarv man. Though he had but
TllK DAY AFTER THE SEV^ENTH NIGHT. 259
slight acquaiiitaDce with the technicalities of logic, he was a clear and powerful reasoner. Though he knew little of the scholastic theories of theology, he was wonder- fully familiar with the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. Though he professed no acquaintance with ^he metaphysical sul)tleties of mental philosophy, he knew full well how to convince the understanding and move upon the hearts of his hearers. He was not familiar with the ancient classics, yet his style was pure and strong, and not entirely void of elegance. His tones and gestures were not formed by any rules of orator}', yet he was sometimes very eloquent. When he first rose, there was a slight rusticity in his manner, and something in his dress which for a single moment struck Theodosia unpleasantly ; but there was, also, such an air of trusting meekness, that this impression was removed almost as soon as made. His text was John XV. 14 — " Ye are my friends if 3'e do whatsoever 1 command you." And the main object of his sermon was to show the vast ditierence which there is between the so-called obedience M^hich springs from hope, or grows up from fear, and the willing and true obedience of the Gospel which is produced by love. It was a deep, <ieart-searching discourse, and must have left on every attentive hearer's mind the sad conviction that genuine Gospel obedience is much more rare than is commonly imagined. We cannot follow him through all his argu- ment; but we may not omit one portion of 't. "The obedience of love,^^ said he, " makes no division of Christ's commandments into essential and non-essential. 'Ye are my friends if ye do whatever I command you,* whether 7jou think it important or not. We know that we love him when we have respect unto all his com- mandments. The obedience of hope sa^'s, how much viust I do to be permitted to enter heaven ? The
260 TIIEODOSIA EKNEST
obedience of fear asks, what may 1 omit to do, and yet escape from hell ? The obedience of lovie simplj? inquires, * Lord, what wilt thou have me to do V It does not ask, what m uat I do ? but what can 1 do to show my love for Jesus ? Jt does not ask huw far 1 can ven- ture to disobey, and keep my hope of heaven ? How far off can 1 follow Jesus, and yet not be disowned of him? Oh, never, never 1 He who will obc}^ Christ no farther than he ma^' fancy is ea^^ential to ^a,lvation, has never obeyed him at all. Love of self, not love of Christ, is his controlling motive. He is strivino^ not to please his Saviour but to secure his own personal happi- ness. Love teaches a different way. Love delights to do his will. Love delights to do all his will. Love never asks, what is essential to salvation ? but what did Jesus Christ command? Love never asks, how little may I do ? but how much can I do ? If he commands, that is reason enough. He is no loving child who will obey his father only in those things which he must do, or be disowned and disinherited. He is no loving child who will do all he dare to grieve a doting parent whom he believes will pardon all, and love him though he grieves him. He who truly loves him will obey his slightest desires as well as his most peremptory com- mands. He who truly loves will study to know all his will, and in his very heart delight to do it — not to avoid disinheritance — not to secure his estate — not to enjoy his father's bounty, either present or prospective — but simply because the father wishes, asks it, or com- mands it.
" And yet men call themselves obedient children of God, while they refuse to do what he commands, because he does not add to the command a promise of heaven or a threatening of hell. Oh, it is terrible to think how fearful will be their disappointment ! Obeying only to
THE DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 261
secure salvation is itself sufficient proof that they have not obeyed unto salvation Omitting all but what they think essential to salvation is of itself sufficient proof that they have omitted all that is essential to salvation. The faith of the Gospel vjorks by love, and love is obe dient to all his commandments, so far as it is able to know and to do them. When, therefore, Christ Jesus gives a plain command, as that to ' believe and be bap tized,' love will not be content merely to believe. It will do both. It will do whatever Christ commands, and he who stops because there is no penalty of hell fire attached to the last, as there is to the first part of the command, is no friend to Jesus. He does not obey from love to Jes^is, but from love to self. And further, the obedience of love takes the command as it is given. It obey§.inthe same order that Christ requires. It not only does the very acts which he commands, but does them in that very way that he requires them to be done. If Christ commands Jirst to believe and then, when thus prepared, to be baptized, the obedience of love will never venture to reverse Christ's order. It will not seek to be first baptized and then believe. And as the command requires personal obedience, it will never seek to substi- tute obedience rendered by another. Christ commands you yourselves in your own right, and for yourselves, to believe, and then to be baptized. It may be you have not done either. Oh, what a fearful state ! Not to have even begun to obey I It may be you have believed, but are fancying that an act done by your parents, and your pastor, without your knowledge or consent, and which they called baptism, has released you from the obliga- tion to o^bey yourself. But do not mistake. The religion of Christ is a personal religion. The obedience it re- quires is an intelligent and personal obedience. You must be baptized for yourself. It must be an act of
262 THEOPOSIA ERNEST.
your own. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved. The one is to be your oivn act as much as the other. But this command you have never even tried tc obey. You have never made the slightest effort. Oh, if you love Jesus, will you not at least try to obey alt his commandments ?
" One thought more. The obedience of love does whai HE commands. ' Ye are my friends, if ye do whatever T command' — not what others may put in the place of it — not what you may fancy would do as well. You are not to 'teach for doctrines the commandments of men.' Jesus is the sole Lawgiver of his church. His com- mandments, given in person or by those who spake as they were moved by his Holy Spirit, we must obey. If he was immersed in Jordan, then John's baptism was immersion. If John's baptism was immersion, th^^ the bai^tism administered by Jesus and his disciples was immersion ; for John says, Jesus went into a certain place, and there he tarried and baptized. And John also was baptizing in ^non at the same time. And the Pharisees heard how that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John. Whatever one did the other did. It was the same thing, because it is called in the same connection by the same name. And if Jesus and John immersed, it was immersjon that he commanded. Yet men have done away with what he commanded, and substituted sprinkling in its place. To believe and be spiinkled, therefore, is not to do whatever he commands, but to teach and practice for his commands the doc- trines of men ; and of those who do such things he says, 'In vain do they worship me.' Don't call me bigoted for reminding you of this. They are not my w(frds, but the words of Jesus Christ. It is he who says it ; and I believe that he means just what he says. Popes and cardinals, bishops and })riests, have met in solemn con
THE DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 203
clavs and changed the ordinance of Jesus. They have substituted the sprinlding of infants for the immersion of believers. This was oixlained by Christ, and that by anti-Christ. Yet there are many professed believers, men who wouid be grieved if I should intimate that the> did not love the Saviour — who in his name and as his ordinance practice these commandments of men. The very time and place when and where these changes were thus made by popes and councils is recorded by them- selves. They claim to have authority as the vicegerents of Christ on earth to make such changes But the obe- dience of love will never recognize their rule. It obeys Jesus Christ. It does whatever HE commands. And whenever professed religious teachers, whether Catholic or Protestant, teach other commandments as a substitute for his — it rejects them with disdain,"
After the sermon, he came down from the little plat- form which had been erected for his convenience, and announced the church as ready to receive applicants for membership — requesting if there were any present who desired to unite with it, that they would come forward while the brethren sang a hymn, and take a seat allotted for that purpose.
The brethren immediately commenced singing the hymn —
" 'Tis religion that can give Sweetest pleasures while we live ; 'Tis religion can supply Solid comfort when we die."
Before they had completed the first couplet, Theo- dosia arose and walked to the appointed seat. And when they had finished, the minister asked her to give to the church some account of her religious experience, that they might be able to judge of the nature of hei faith and hope
264 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
My reader, who is familiar with her strength of mind, firmness of purpose, clearness of conception, and habit- ual command of the most appropriate language, can form little conception of the surprise which was excited, as much by her manner as her words. She did not wait to be questioned, and simply answer yes or no, as is customary on such occasions ; but modestly arose and turned her face to the audience, and began to relate in a low, but still in a perfectly audible voice, her experience of grace before she made any profession of religion. The house was still as death. Every eye was fixed, every ear attentive to even the slightest modulation of her voice. After describing, in her modest and simple, yet most impressive style, her conviction and conver sion, she paused a moment, as if to think of the pro- priety of saying what was yet upon her mind.
"And why," inquired the minister, who was ignorant of her history, *' did you not then unite with the people of God?"
"At that time," she continued, " I had rarely been in any other but a Presbyterian house of worship. I re- garded Presbyterians as the true church of Christ. Perhaps I would not be going too far if I should say, that I regarded them as the only true church, or at least as the only church that was not involved in some most important error of doctrine or practice — it was my mother's church ;" and her voice faltered, and e^^es filled with tears, as she said it. " It was the church in which God's truth had been made effectual to my conversion I had no shadow of a doubt that it was the church, if not the only church, and with them I did unite. Nor until last Sabbath, did I ever have a doubt that I was right in doing so. Last Sabbath, you will recollect, one of your number was baptized. I had the curiosity to go to the river. As I saw her plunged beneath the
THE DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 265
water, the thought impressed itself upon my mind, if that is baptism, I have never been baptized; for whatever baptism may be, it must always be the same — * One Lord, one faith, one baptism.' I went home and com- menced a careful and thorough investigation of the sub- ject. I found that it was immersion, and not sprinkling, tliai Jesus commanded. It was this which he hiraseli^ as our Example, submitted to in the river of Jordan. It was this which his disciples practiced in his life. It Aras this which he commanded after his death. It was this, therefore, which he required of me. I have not yet ol")e3^ed him, but J desire ' to do whatever he comvianda me.' Mine is, I humbly trust, the 'obedience of love.' I have come here to-day, and it is the first time in my life that I liave ever been in a Baptist Church. I have come to ask 3'ou to bajdize me, if you think me worthj^ qccording to the commandment of the Lord Jesus."
*' Why, this is wonderful!" exclaimed the minister, as she resumed her seat.
"It is the Lord's doing," rejoined Mr. Courtney, "and it is wonderful in our eyes."
" Brethren, what will we do in regard to this applica- tion?"
"I move," said one, "that she be baptized, and re- ceived into the fellowship of the church."
This was, of course, unanimously determined on.
" Wheu will you be baptized, my sister ?" inquired the minister.
"As soon as it may suit your convenience, sir. I am ready now."
" Then after prayer we will at once proceed to the w^aler's side. Let us pray."
They kneeled, and offered up a short and fervent prayer that God would own the ordinance about to be administered in his name — bless her who was to be its 17
266 THE0D(r6IA ERNEST.
recipient — fill her with the comforts of the Gospel — make her a faithful and useful Christian, and at death receive her into his heavenly kingdom.
When Satan finds that he cannot prevent the perform- ance of a religious duty, he often strives to render its performance as distressing as he can. Theodosia had not yet left the house before she began to be assailed by the most terrible temptations. First came the magnifi- cent church, with its soft light, its cushioned pews, its richly carpeted aisles, its tasteful and costly pulpit, its deep-toned organ, and its well-trained choir, which had all her life been the accompaniments of her public de- votions. And she could not but contrast their rich, luxurious elegance and comfort, with the rough plat- form, the naked, dirty floor, the hard benches, and harsh, unskillful voices which had surrounded her to-day. In that splendid church she saw her mother weeping over her daughter's apostacy — her brother showing no in- terest in her fate — her uncle, whom she loved as a father, and upon whose approbation she had confidently relied, yet he had not come near her, though she had earnestly requested his presence — her pastor, who had taught her in childhood, and prayed over her at her con- version— and there was yet another, whom she now scarcely dared to think of They were all there — all happy, all united. She only was a poor outcast from all — yes, yes, from all she loved. With her own rash hand she had cut the ties which bound her to her kin- dred and her friends. She had left all the elegance so congenial to her delicacy and refinement of taste. She had left all the affection so necessary to the very life of her fond, clinging, loving heart, and here she stood alone among these strange?'^, whom, she felt instinctively, with one or two exceptions, had scarcely a sentiment or taste in common with her own Then, as she was walking to
Theodosia Ernest
PAGE 268.
THE DAY AFTER THE SEV^ENTU NIGHT. 265
the river, the^' passed the very spot where she and Mr. Percy stood on the previous Sabbath ; and in a single moment, what visions of affluence and ease, of elegant social enjoyment, of domestic bliss — all the happiness of the loved and loving wife, extending down through many long and blissful years — came vividly before her mind. She could see nothing else. She forgot for a moment where she was, and why she came there. She walked on unconsciously. Unconsciously she took the offered arm of the minister as he came to conduct her into the river. The touch of the water recalled her to herself. She paused, and suddenly withdrew her arm, clasped her hands together, and looked up to heaven, and so stood for some moments, lost in silent prayer Those who could see her face, observed the expression of distress and terror (which they attributed to a natu- ral timidity at entering the water) suddenly gave place to one of J03' and confidence as she again placed her arm within the minister's and walked on. Jesus had heard her prayer — " Oh, Lord, save me ! Give me strength to make all this sacrifice for thee ! Thou art my Saviour. Thou hast commanded this. I do it in obedience to thee. Oh, leave me not. Help, Lord — I have no other helper — thou art now my all.^^ And as she prayed, the visions of earthly bliss vanished from before her, and she saw Jesus stretched upon the cross in dying agony, and he seemed to say, " I bore all this for thee." And she thought of the words of the Apostle — " He died for us." And as she walked along, she remembered what Jesus said — ''Blessed are ye when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and shall cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake. Rejoice yo. in that day, and leap for jcy — for your reward is great in Heaven." "And every one that hath forsaken houses,
270 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
or brethren or sisters, or father or mother, or wife oi children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit everlasting life."
So full}' was her mind occupied with this delightful thought, that she felt no further anxiety, and not the slightest fear. And as she was lifted from the liquid grave, she could not help exclaiming in an audible voice, "Jesus, I thank thee /^^ And then, as they turned to- ward the shore, such a gleam of heavenl}^ peace and holy joy illumined her beautiful face, that several of the brethren and sisters who stood upon the bank, simulta- neously exclaimed, "Blessed be the name of the Lordl"
"Yes," she exclaimed, "blessed be his holy name!" And suddenly she stopped, and with a voice which was naturally sweet and powerful, and had been carefully cultivated, and now was rendered deeper and more ex- pressive by intensity of feeling, she commenced singing :
"Jesus, I my cross have takeu, All to leave and follow thee ; Friendless, poor, despised, forsaken, Thou from hence my all shall be. And whilst thou shalt smile upon me, God of wisdom, love, and might. Foes may hate, and friends disown me, Show thy face, and all is bright. Man may trouble and distress me, 'Twill but drive me to thy breast ; Life with trials hard may press me, Heaven will bring me sweeter rest. Oh, 'tis not in grief to harm me, While thy love is left to me I Oh, 'twere not in joy to charm me. Were that joy unmixed with thee 1"
The effect upon the audience was electrical. Tears streamed from every face; many sobbed and wept ah-ud Among these was a voice which instantly fixed he?
fhoodoiia Ernest.
PAGE 272.
THE DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 273
attention. She looked up among the assembly, and was surprised to see that it had increased since she started into the water to a crreat multitude. The conofregations from several other churches had hurried to the river as soon as they were dismissed from their several places of meeting. Foremost among the crowd stood Uncle Jones, with her mother on one side, and Edwin on the other. It was she that she heard ; for when she saw her daughter standing thus alone, and heard her sing, " Friendless, poor, despised, forsaken," she lifted up her voice and wept. Nor did she weep alone. Strong men, who were not professors of religion, and who were thought to care for none of these things, stood and gazed at that sweet face, all radiant with the love of Jesus, as though it had been the face of an angel ; and as they looked, the big tears chased each other down their unconscious cheeks. The brethren and sisters of the church wei)t ; old men and mothers in Israel wept Young men and maidens wept. But Theodosia heard none, saw none but her mother. As she came to the water's edge, that mother rushed down to meet her, and clasped her closely to her heart. The brothers and sis- ters of the church, who were approaching to give her the hand of fellowship, stood respectfully aside.
" Oh, mother, do 3'^ou — can you forgive me ?"
" Don't talk so, my child ; I have never blamed you YovL have done your duty ; you have done right. You have obeyed your Saviour — he will bless you. I wish I had the courage to follow your example."
" God bless you for those words, my mother ! Oh 1 how full of joy my heart is. He makcth my cup run over. Surely goodness and mercy hath followed me all the days of my life. Uncle, dear uncle, it is blessed to obey. Can't you give up all for Christ?
" Mr. Courtney, I thank you for your teachings. Now
274 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
I knoiL 1 am baptized, I have now done just what Jesiia commanded. 1 have left all and followed him ; and, blessed be his name, I have already that peace which passeth understanding." And as the brethren and sis- ters came crowding round to welcome her into the com- munion of the church on earth, she sang again with that sweet, soul-thrilling voice, to which the intensity of her feelings and utter self-abandonment gave tenfold power:
** Children of the living God,
Take the stranger to your heart — Let me dwell in your abode, Never more from you to part.
" Can you love me ? Will you help m« f Help me on my way to God — Can you love me ? Will you help me ? Help me keep his precious word."
While singing, she continued to give her hand to one after another as they came up ; and as she finished the strain, a sister standing by sang :
'* Yes, come, thou blessed of the Lord, No stranger art thou now — We welcome thee with warm accord, Our friend and sister thou.
"The hand of fellowship, the heart Of love we offer thee ; Leaving the world, thou dost but pan With lies and vanity.
•* In weal or woe, in joy or care, Thy portion shall be ours ; Christians their mutual burdens bear, They lend their mutual powers."
The minister pronounced the benediction, and they led her up the bank, and then each went his way rejoicing.
TUB DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 275
Uncle Jones went home and dined with Mrs. Ernest. When Theodosia had changed her dress, and returned to the parlor, he went up and took her hand as she came in, saying, '* My dear Theo., why did 3'ou not tell me you were going to be baptized to-daj' ? I would have gladly gone with 3'ou to your meeting."
"Then you did not mean to cast me oft"?" said she, her eyes filling with tears. " I thought you too had forsaken me. I sent you a line last night, entreating you to be present — but 3^ou did not come !"
" I did not get it, nor did 1 know, till after church, that 3'ou intended any such thing to-day. 1 missed you from your accustomed seat, and inquired of 3'our mother as soon as the meeting was dismissed, and learned that you had gone to be baptized. We hurried to the river, and fortunately' were just in time to sec 3'OU go into the water."
" Oh, uncle ! I am so glad. I thought that 3'ou, and mother, and all who loved me, so disapi)roved of what I was about to do, that you would none of you be present. God is already giving me back m}' friends."
Jtc * * *
There was 'preaching again at three o'clock, — and as the school-house could not hold half the people, it was thought best to adjourn to the court house. At night the court house was filled to overflowing, and the preacher requested those who were concerned about their souls' salvation, and desired the pra^'ers of the people of God, to take a seat in front of the congrega- tion. More than a dozen came forward at once, among whom were several who had been a long time professors of religion, and some were members of the Baptisti Church. On inquiry, these professors stated that the}^ had been trying to get to heaven, and with this object in view had endeavored to lead in some decree religious
276 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
lives. They had gone to church, partaken of the Sup- per, sometimes pra^^ed, or tried to pray — but took no 2)leasure in religion ; and from what they heard in the morning, were convinced that whatever obedience they had shown was the obedience of fear, or hope, and not of love. For if they could have got to heaven without religion, they would have willingly dispensed with it. They had abstained from open sin, because they knew that those who lived in open sin would surely he lost. They had endeavored to perform certain duties, because they considered the attempt (at least) to do such duties to be essential to salvation. What they did not think thus essential, had little weight upon their conscience Now they saw that they had been fearfully deceived, and desired to seek for the obedience of love — not the obedience which seeks to merit heaven, and continually looks for its reward — but that which receives all mercies as the free gift of God in Christ, and yet longs, and strives, and prays to do all his commandments, because it thus and only thus can exercise, exhibit, and gratify the love of God that fits the heart.
The minister did not try to give then back theii hopes, and make them think that the}^ had no occasion for alarm. He knew full well that Christ will say to many, " Depart from me, I never knew you," who here on earth called him Lord, Lord, and professed to be his disciples. He greatly feared that there were thousands and thousands who had a respectable standing in the church of Christ, who never asked, with the converted Paul, " Lord, what wilt thou have me to do ?" But only with the yet unconverted jailer, " What must I do to be saved ?" This last he knew was most important, but it was not enough. It was a needful and common pre- paration for religion, but it was not religion. It might \cad to seek for faith, but it is not the result of saving
THE DAY AFTER THE SEVENTH NIGHT. 271
faith, for that works by love — and through love purifies the heart — and through love brings forth good works in the life. He was convinced, moreover, that it was infinitely better for many of God's true children to suffer temporary anxiety and alarm, than for one false professor to be confirmed in his delusive hope.
It was determined at the close of this meeting, to appoint one for Monday night, and probably continue to have preaching every night during the week. Whether they did so, and what was the result, we will learn here- after. It is time for us now to return to our study, which at the close of the Seventh 2sMght (the attentive reader will perhaps remember) was about the Scriptural authority, or rather about the utter want of all Sorip* tural authoritv for :nfant baptism.
THE EIGHTH NIGHT'S STUM.
NEW CHARACTERS AND NEW ARGUMENTo
INFANT BAPTISM IS VIRTUALLY FORBIDDKN
IN THE WORD OF GOD.
THE COVENANT OF CIRCUMCISION
FURNISHES NO GROUND OF DEFENCE
FOR INFANT BAPTISM.
EIGHTH NIGHT'S STUD^.
)HE Reverend Mr. Johnson had, early in the preceding week, commenced the preparation of a discourse, which was intended, at once and forever, to put an end to any further defection among his flock. He was a fine declaimer, and was, in the pulpit, accustomed at times to deal in the bitterest denunciation of those who diliered from his party in their religious opinions and practices. He had more power of sarcasm than of reason, and hence, found it easier to denounce the opinions of others than to defend his own. His discourse upon the Sabbath through which we have just passed, was that which we saw him preparing at the commencement of our Third Night's Study. It was designed to be a scornful, bitter, and withering denunciation of all those weak minded and credulous, or fanatical, persons who, in this day of light, and surrounded by such advantages as were pos- sessed by his congregation, could be by any means in- duced to wander away from the sacred pale of Presby- lerianism. We will not trouble the reader with even a synopsis of this remarkable sermon. It had been pre- pared with evident labor and care, and it was delivered with great energy and feeling. Under other circum- stances, it might have produced the eflfect that its author intended, which was to deter any other persons from any investigation of the subject of baptism, or indeed any other religious subject, except for the purpose of confirming their faith in the doctrines in which they had been instructed from their childhood. To have
(281)
282 THEUDOaiA ERNEST.
fully answered his purpose, he should have preacLed i at least a week sooner. Now, it was universally under- stood to be expressly aimed at certain individuals, whom it was well known had been investigating the subject of baptism, and might possibly be considering the pro- priety, or rather the conscientious necessity, of a change of church relationship. Many a glance was turned, during its delivery, to the seats occupied by Uncle Jones and Mrs. Ernest. The latter felt that it was an uncalled-for abuse of her absent child, whom she knew had been impelled to the course she had taken by the sternest and most distressing conviction of indispensa- ble duty ; and though she wept as she listened, her tears were tears of mortification and anger. That sermon did more to destroy her faith in Pastor Johnson, and her affection for her church, than all the anti-Presby- terian arguments she had ever heard. So also it did more to fix the attention of the congregation upon the work which was going on among the Baptists, than any thing which they could have done or said. Many were willing to go and learn at the Baptist meetings whai those terrible and seducing doctrines were which could so excite the iro of their venerable shepherd.
After preaching, he gave notice that a meeting of tUe Sessior would be held at three o'clock, at theparsmage, to attend to some business of importance, and gave a special invitation to the resident ministers (by whom he meant the President of the college, and those of the professors who were also preachers) to meet with them.
Neither Uncle Jones nor Mrs. Ernest said any thing of this ominous announcement to Theodosia, for both had some indistinct conception that the business to be done related to her case.
Uncle Jonf s, as 3nc of the ruing elders, and a mera-
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 283
ber of the Session, felt it his dutj^ to be present. He was a little after the time, however ; and when he ar- rived, he found that tho}^ had already entered upon the discussion of the business on hand. There was an awkward pause in the conversation when he came in, until the pastor remarked that the matter which they were considering might be an unpleasant one to him ; and if so, there would be a ([uorum present should he think best to retire.
" If your business relates in any way to my niece," said the Professor, " I prefer to witness all you have to say or do."
"We were indeed speaking of her," said the pastor; and though it gives me pain to say it, I have felt it my duty, also, to make some mention of your own case, as of one aiding and abetting error in another, if not your- self entertaining opinions which are inconsistent with 3'our obligations as a ruling elder in the church."
There was a slight flush passed over the manly face ol Professor Jones, as the pastor, with evident reluctance, thus gave him to understand that one object of the meet- ing was to inflict the discipline of the church upon his recreant niece, and another to take steps to depose him from the eldership ; but he answered very calmly :
" Don't let my coming in interrupt your order of busi- ness. You will take up one case at a time. 1 will be present when you take action on that of Miss Ernest. When 3'ou are ready to consider mine, I will retire."
" We understand," said the pastor, "that Miss Ernest, while her name was still standing as a member upon our record, has gone to a Baptist society, solicited immer- sion, and has actually been immersed b}- a Baptist preacher. By this act, she has undoubtedly severed all connection with our church, and must of necessity be excluded from our communion. The only (Question is
284 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
whether wc are bound to make the usual citation to si'pear and answer to the charge."
"There can be no doubt," replied Professor Jones, '•that we are bound, according to our rules, to give the ten days' notice of citation, with a coj^y of the charges preferred against the accused. But, in this case, I will take it upon myself to answer for my niece, that she would prefer the quickest and the simplest mode of ex- cision. She has no wish for farther connection with us. She regards herself as already separated from our com- munion, and will probabl}^ make no answer or defence to any charges not affecting her moral or Christian char- acter, which you may think fit to bring against her."
After some consultation, it was decided that it would not be proper to dispense with any of the stipulated formalities of the rules of discipline ; and consequently, all that could at this time be done, was to take order that a copy of the charges preferred against her, the names of the witnesses by whom they were to be estab- lished, and a citation to appear and answer ten days thereafter, should be issued and served upon Miss Theo- dosia Ernest. A committee, consisting of the pastor and clerk, was appointed to carry these measures into execution.
" You are now done with Miss Ernest's case for the present," said Professor Jones, "and I will retire, that you may feel perfect freedom in speaking about mine."
" Oh, no," said the President of the College, the Rev. T. J. McNought, D.D., LL.D., who was present on the [notation of the pastor. " We were merely speaking of what it might be necessary to do in a case such as our brother Johnson conceived j^ours would evenlually be- come, should you continue to progress in the direction in which he imagines you have started."
"Brethren," replied the Professor, " let usnot misun-
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 283
derstand each other. You know me well. I am a plain, blunt man. I will have no concealment on this subject. My niece has carefull}^ studied the Word of God, which our standards declare ' is the only rule of f vith and PRACTICE.' I assisted her in the investigation. We both came to the conclusion, as 1 think every right- minded man must do, that the baptism commanded and spoken of in the New Testament, is neither sprinkling nor pouring, but dipping, or, as it is commonly called, Immersion. This I now firmly believe. This I am ready to prove from the Holy Word to you or an}- one else who feels inclined to inquire into the matter. I will prove it b3' the very meaning of the word baptize. I will prove it by a reference to the jjlaces selected for baptism. By the going down into the water, and the coming up out of the water, said to have preceded and followed baptism. J will prove it by the nature of the aUnsion.'< to baptism, as a bath, as a planting, and a burial. I will prove by the testimony of the Fathers, that it was for centuries the only baptism, and by the testimony of our own ablest writers — such as Wall and Stuart, Neander and Colman — that it continued to be the common baptism for more than thirteen hundred years, even in the Roman Catholic Church, and the churches derived from her, and still con- tinues the only baptism in the Eastern churches. I will show you the very time and place when and where the (hange was made b}^ authority of the Pope and his coun- cil. I will show you when and how the new practice was introduced into England and into this country. I will show you this, not in Baptist books. These facts do not rest on Baptist testimonj', but on that of our own Historians and divines. You knoiv, President McNought, that what I say is true ; and Mr. Johnson knows it, too, ur might know it, if he would look at the evidence in his possession. Now, if to believe these things on such testi 18
286 THEODOSIA ERNEST
moiiy makes one a heretic, I wish you clisliiiCtly to un derstand that I am decidedl}^ heretical. Though I assure you, on my honor as a man and a Christian, that I am ready and willing to see and to acknowledge my error, if any one of you can ipoint it out. On the subject of infant baptism, I am not fully convinced. I am satis- fied, as any one can easily be who will make a critical examination of the Scriptures, with this object in view, that there is neither express commandment nor example to justify the baptism of any hut believers, to be found in the Word of God. Pastor Johnson and myself have together searched diligently to find either the precept or the example, and he, as well as I, was compelled to grant that it is not there. But Woods and Stuart, and others of our most eminent divines, while they have granted this, still contend for infant baptism. There must, therefore, be some other Scriptural ground on which it rests. 1 will be thankful to any one among you who can point it out."
There was a moment's pause. The Session were not prepared for such a confession of his faith and no one knew what to reply.
" I will now retire," continued he. " You have the case before you, and can adopt such measures as you may think best."
After he had gone, " I told you," said the pastor, " that he had become a Baptist in all but the name. I don't believe his niece would ever have left us, but for his encouragement and that of her mother."
"They must have felt," said Colonel White (the lay member whom we have had occasion to mention cnce ])efore), " they must have felt to-day, if they had any feeling left. T would not have been in tlieir places for the best farm in the country. It made my very ears tingle to hear how you belabored them. But it don't
EIGHTH night's STUDY. ' 281
seem to have done him the slightest good. I doubt if there is but one argument that can be brought to beai upon him, and that is the same that so easily convinced my young friend, Esquire Perc}'."
" What is that ?" inquired President McN ought.
"It is the argunientum ad pochelum. I have heard 1 om doctors that the pocket nerve was the most sensi- tive nerve in the whole body. Convince a man that his bread and meat depend upon a correct belief, and he is very apt to believe correctly. This may not be always true of Siicoman, but 1 have never known this argument, when prudentl}' and skillfully presented, to fail of con- vincing a man. You ma}' appoint a committee to ';onfer with brother Jones, and endeavor to convince him of his errors. It is, perhaps, essential that you should ; for this will give him a pleasant and honorable opportunity of recalling his heretical expressions, or at least, of ex- plaining them away. But before you do this, let me intimate to him that the Board of Trustees (of whom you know I have the honor to be the President) will greatly dislike to dispense with his valuable services in the college — but that it is a Presbyterian college j and however much they may esteem him as a man, and value him as a teacher, yet we can retain no one whose ortho- doxy is openly doubtful. Believe me, brethren, you will then find him much more pliable, and ready to be con- vinced that he is wrong."
" You may try it," said the pastor, "but 1 don't be lieve you will succeed. I know him better than you do. He has always been one of the most conscientious men 1 ever knew. He will act as he belie ves.^^
" No doubt of it," rejoined the speculating elder. " He will act as he believes ; but he will believe that it is wrong to make any change in his church relations, or to meddle any farther with the subject of bautism, unless
288 • THEODOSIA ERNEST.
it is in the defence of our opinions. Professor Jones it a poor man. It is not generally known, but it is true, that he has for several years greatly assisted in the support of Mrs. Ernest and her children. He has thus lived fully up to his income. He has now a growing family. He expects to provide for them out of his yearly salary. It is all he can do. Take away this ; turn him out of the house he now occupies, rent free 5 let him feel that he stands suddenly not only destitute, but without employment and friendship — and he is something more or less than man, if he can .look upon his helpless wife and children and refuse to hear to reason."
The Session appointed the pastor and the Rev. T. J. McNought, D.D., LL.D., as a committee to see and labor with their brother Jones, and endeavor to convince him of his errors, especially in regard to infant baptism, as on this point he seemed likely to be most accessible, and then adjourned to meet again at the call of the pastor.
Colonel White considered himself a committee of one to make matters easy for the committee of two. Early in the day, on Monday, he called at the house of Professor Jones, at an hour when he knew he was absent, for he felt the necessity of all the assistance he could obtain, and relied upon Mrs. Jones and the children as his most efficient allies.
'' Is the Professor in this morning, Mrs. Jones?"
"Not just now, sir. He has a recitation at this time. He will be in in half an hour. Take a seat, colonel."
"No, I thank you, madam. 1 called to see Professor Jones a>»out some important business. I will meet him at the college. There is a matter afloat, which I fear is going greatly to injure him in his future prospects ; and I merely called, as a friend, to suggest some plan by
EIGHTH night's STUDY 28«J
'vhien the ruin — for ruin I fear it will be — ma}^ be averted."
" Why, Colonel White, what can you mean ?" asked the lad}^ in just that tone of distress and alarm which he desired to hear.
" Oh," said he, taking a chair, and sitting down where he could look right into her face, " it may be nothing after all. Indeed, I don't really believe it will amount to any thing ; but still, there is, I fear, some danger that he will lose his situation in the college. There is a rumor abroad, you know, that he is about to become a Baptist — or, at least, that he has a little tendency that ■way; and there are some of the trustees who are dis- posed to be very particular about such things — too much so, as I may say. Now, for myself, I am disposed to be liberal ; and 1 shall do what I can — in fact, I may say I have done what I could — to influence their action. You know I have always been in favor of Professor Jones I know him to be a worthy man, and a very superior instructor ; and I know he has the confidence — the im- plicit confidence, as I may say — of the whole com- munity. And what if he does entertain some heterodox opinions about a matter not essential to salvation ? says I. Why, he is a good man, and that is enough for me. But you know, Mrs. Jones, people don't all think alike ; and I am dubious about what the trustees may take a fancy to do. But I can't stay," continued he risino:, and sfoinor toward the door. " I could not do less, as a neighbor, than just to call and tell you my fears. I will try to meet Professor Jones himself, and consult with him about what is to be done."
He sallied out, and about the time that Professor Jones was starting for home, placed himself in the way as he came from the college building,
"T am sorry," said he, "brother Jones, that out
290 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
pastor used such expressions as he did 3'esterday. I don't wonder that you became excited ; 1 could not have borne it half as well as you did. But I am afraid you dropped some expressions that will injure you with the trustees. Some of them have been talking with me this morning. They say that 3'ou as good as declared your- self a Baptist, and they don't see what further use a Presbyterian college has for your services. But I said, wait a while. Jones is a man of impulse. His feelings were touched yesterday, and he said more than he intended. He is as much a Presbyterian as I am. He will be all right in a week. I took the liberty to say thus much for you. I have always been 3^our friend, and I mean to stand by you through thick and thin, so long as I can be of any service to you. 1 don't advise you to conceal or falsify your opinions. I know you are incapable of doing that ; but I merely suggest, since so much depends upon it — your own living, as I may say — that you will be a little more careful and prudent in your expression. Think what you please ; but you are not obliged always to tell all you think. You understand ? I felt bound to give you this little hint. There may be more in it than you are aware of." Such thoughts as these had already intruded into the Professor's mind. His wife had several times sug- gested something of the kind. Till now, however, the danger had seemed distant and undefined. It was indeed a dark cloud, but it hung low on the far-off horizon ; now, it lowered above his very head, and covered all the heavens with its blackness. Nothing but utter ruin stared him in the face. He walked along home, almost blinded by the rush of fearful thoughts. He sat down in silence to his dinner. His wife seemed rven sadder and more distressed than he was. Scarcely had he begun to eat, when she inquired :
EIGHTH night's STUDY 291
" Have you seen Colonel White this morning? he was hero looking for you. 1 told you how it would be, when you first begun to meddle with this subject of baptism ; but you could not be satisfied. And we are now to lose our pleasant home and all our means of support, and be turned out destitute upon the world, just because you would not listen to your wife, and let well enough alone."
" Oh, not so bad as that I hope, m}' dear." Well, I don't know how any thing could be worse Colonel White says the trustees are going to declare your professorshi}) vacant, or something like it, because you have turned Baptist. And of course we must leave this house, which you know belongs to the college, though we have fitted it up for ourselves just as though it be- longed to us. And you know 3-0U have never saved a dollar of your salary-, though I am sure I never spent the half of it. 1 never could tell what became of it ; and how we are going to live, I should like very much to know. If you depend on those ignorant and stingy Baptists for a support, any body can see we must come to starvation. The^^ could not do much if they would, and they would not do any thing if they could. I'm sure I hate the day ihey came here, to disturb the peace and quiet of our town. They have brought nothing but trouble to me."
" But, my dear wife, things may not turn out so badly after all. I did indeed see Colonel White, and he told nie, as a friend, that some of the trustees are a little piqued at my entertaining opinions on this subject dif- ferent from their own ; but with his influence exerted in my favor, I hardly think I shall lose my situation, at least till I can make other arrangements."
" His influence I Why, he is the very soul and body of <he whole business. You don't know that man as I
292 THEODOSIA ERNEST
do. He can't impose on me with his soft words. J could see the evil intention in his eye while he was talk- ing about it to me. As soon as he saw how much it distressed me, I could see it did his very heart good. He is the. very man that is working your ruin. And all I wish is that you had not yourself placed in his hand the club to beat your brain? out with. If I were you, I would go to the trustees myself, and set the matter right."
" What can I say to them, my dear ?"
" Say ? Why tell them, that though it is true that you have given a little time to the investigation of this subject, you are as good a Presbyterian as any of them, and have no more thought of leaving the Presbyterian Church than President McNought himself. I know you love our church. I have often heard you say so. It was good enough for 3^our father and mother to live in and die in. It was good enough for Timothy Dwight and Jonathan Edwards to live and die in. It is good enough for Pastor Johnson, President McNought, your brother professors, and all the most intelligent, and influential, and wealthy portion of the town, and I comH- see why it is not good enough for you^
" If I were only sure it is the Church of Jesus Christ, that would be all I could ask," he replied; "but I must consider further of this matter."
" Yes, I see how it will be ; you will consider and consider till the mischief is done and we are turned cut of house and home. But I know it's of no use to talk to you. You will just go on your own way. I only wish you may never l)e as sorry as I am that you ever saw a Baptist."
Night came, and with it came the committee appointed by the Session — the reverend pastor and the reverend doctor. They had previously consulted and arranged
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 293
t.ieir plan of argument. Mr. Johnson knew it would not be worth while to go again over the same ground through which they had already traveled. They had in vain searched the ScriptweH to find a single precept or example to justify the baptism of infants. They con- cluded, therefore, they must make it out by inference.
" I understand," said President McNought, " that you insist on some express precept or example for infant l»aptism, before you will receive it as a scriptural prac- tice?"
" Oh, no," said Professor Jones ; " I am by no means particular about the character of the proof. I only ask for Scripture evidence that it was either required or practiced. You may find that evidence in any form you can. You can't find the precept or example, that is certain. We have tried it. If you have any other testi- mony, let us hear it."
** The truth is," said the D.D., "there was no necessity for the precept or example. Tlie case was so plain, that the early disciples could not help understanding the^r duty, so there was no need of commanding it.
" Children had always made a part of the Jewish Church, and unless there was something said to the contrary, they would of course be regarded as making a part of the Christian church. If, therefore, 3'ou cannot prove that they were absolutely excluded from the Chris- tian church, it is most conclusively evident that they were received into it, though there should be no rocoid of the fact."
" To that," said the Professor, " I might reply by Baying that the baptism of infants, if required at all, is a positive institution of our religion, something essen- tially binding upon the Christian churches. And it la difficult for me to conceive how you can make out a positive obligation to perform a certain Christian duty
294 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
in a church capacity, from the mere fact that not one word is said about it. Your argument amounts to this. The Jews circumcised their male infants at eight days old, because God had again and again positively and plainly commanded them to do so; therefore Christians should baptize all their infant children, both male and female, because the Lord has given no commandment on the subject, and further, because we cannot find the slightest allusion to any of the first Christians as having done or refused to do it, nor au}^ intimation that any person was ever expected to do it. Such logic ma}^ be very conclusive to 3'^ou, but I can never be convinced by it.
"But 1 think I may safel}' venture to take the very ground proposed by you, and prove that infants (accor- ding to your own language) ivere absolutely excluded, both by the commandments of the Saviour and the ex- ample of the early Christians. While looking in vain for any precept or example to justify the baptism of infants, we found enough both of precept and example to satisf}^ my mind, since I have come to reflect about :t, that infant bajjtism is absolutely and cXaviYXy forbidden.
" It is forbidden in the commission itself. The com- mand to baptize belie cers is a command not to baptize any but believers. The command to make disciples first and then baptize them, is a command not to baptize any who are not first made disciples. If I tell my serv- ant to go and wash all the old sheep in my flock, it is equivalent to a prohibition to wash the little lambs. If I tell him to cut down all the dead trees in a grove, it is equivalent to a prohibition to cut any green and living ones — and if he should disobey me and cut the green ones also, I would not consider it a valid excuse, that I had last year, on another plantation, expressly ordered him to girdle both green and dry. So the commanf^ to
EIGHTH night's STUDY 295
baptize believers excludes all others ; and as infants cannot believe, it excludes them from the very necessity of the case. Nor would I like to offer, for the violation of this command, such an excuse as tliis: Oh, Lord, I know that thou didst ordain only the baptism of disciples and believers — but as thou didst, under a former dis- pensation, expressly command children to be circum' eised, I thought thou wouldst prefer to have them bap- tized under this, although thou didst omit to tell us so. Would he not reply, What right had you to make ordi- nances for me ? If I commanded the Jews to circumcise their children, it was their duty to do it; and when I command Christians to baptize believers and disciples, it is their duty to do that. ' Ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you.' ' But in vain do you worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.''
"And as a prohibition may be fairly inferred from the command, so it may also from the exampjles. Among all the multitudes who came to John and were baptized of him in Jordan, there was not a single infant. John required repentance and faith in the coming Messiah as an indispensable prerequisite. He taught them that the Father'' s faith would not avail in this new dispensa- tion. ' Think not to say unto yourselves, we have Abra- ham for our father ; but bring forth for yourselves fruits suitable to repentance.'
" Those who were baptized by Jesus and his disciples were also adult believers, for the Pharisees heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John. He made disciples before he baptized them. Of the three thousand mentioned as added to the church upon the day of Pentecost, there was not one infant, nor did they bring an infant with them. Of the five thousand, a few days after, there was not one who was not an adult be- liever. They were men and women. Of the great
296 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
multitude who believed and were baptized in Samaria when Philip preached, there was not a single little child. The Evangelist expressl^^ classes them all under two heads, * both men and women.' And nowhere, in a single case, is there even an intimation that there was a child baptized, nor is any one ever reproved for the neglect to have it done. Now if ///z.s does not absolutely exclude them by example, I do not see what force then^ is in ex- ample. I reply to your argument, therefore, first, by proving that even if infants had not been expressly ex- cluded, there would not be the slightest warrant for their baptism ; and, second, by showing that they were absolutely excluded, both by Christ's command and the practice of the early Christians."
" Then," said Mr. Johnson, " you are unwilling to believe that ' baptism has come in the room of circum- cision,' as I have been accustomed to inform my people every time an infant has been baptized in my church for twenty years."
" Oh, no, Mr. Johnson — not at all. I am very willing to believe it — I may almost say, I am very desirous to believe it. All I ask is that you will give the slightest Scripture proof of it. You are too good a Protestant to ask me to take your word for it, or even the often repeated assertions of all the clergy in the land. Give me one text of Scripture to prove it, and I am as ready and willing to believe as even yourself can wish."
" You know," replied Mr. Johnson, " that we teach * that baptism is instituted by Christ — that it is a seal of the righteousness of faith, and that the seed of the faithful have no less a right to this ordinance under the Gospel than the seed of Abraham to circumcision under fie Old Testament.'"
" Oh, yes — I know you teach this. I have heard an(l read it a hundred times : and I have no doubt most of
EiGiirH night's study 39T
cur people think you have Scripture to show for it. It is not enough, however, for me to know that you teach it ; I want that you should show me where the Lord Jesus teaches it, or where he authorizes you to teach it. Where is it ^aid or even intimated ' that the seed of the faithful have no less a right to this ordinance under the Gospel than the seed of Abraham to circumcision under the Old Testament V If it is in the Bible, you cnn show it. If I read correctly, the seed ol Abraham had a right, or rather were in dut}' bound to circumcise their male children at eight days old, because God expressly commanded it — to give the children of believers the same right to baptism would therefore require an express commandment that they should be baptized. But you know full well there is no such command. I have heard a great deal of, to me, unintelligil)le jargon about ' fed- eral holiness,' and 'covenant holiness,' and the 'cove- nant of circumcision,' and the 'Abrahamic covenant,' etc., etc. There may be a great deal of sense and Scrip- ture in it, but I can't understand it. I want a plain Scriptural statement of the facts. You say that baptism came in the room of circumcision. Show me where the Word says so. Show me any thing like it."
"If you will take the Confession of Faith," replied the Doctor of Divinity, "and turn to the 14Tth page, you will see the texts upon which this doctrine rests."
" Well, here is a copy. Let us find tliem This is coming to the point. If any text is mentioned or re- ferred to which gives to the infant children of believers the same claim to baptism that the descendants of Abraham had to circumcision, or even intimates that baptism has come in the room of circumcision, I am satisfied. This is all I want."
The book was handed to the pastor, who found tbe page, 147, and read as follows: Gen. xvii. T, 0, with
298 TllEODOSlA ERNEST
Gal. iii. 9 — 'And I will establish my covenant letween me and thee, and thy seed after thee, in their genera- tions, for an everlasting covenant ; to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And God said unto Abraham, thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and th}^ seed after thee, in their generations.'"
" Stop a minute," said the Professor. " Let me turn to the place in the Bible. We will understand it better to read it in its connection. Here it is, Gen. xvii. 7-9. Why did they leave out the 8th verse — 'And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an ever- lasting possession; and I will be their God'? This makes it all very plain. God agreed with Abraham that he would give his seed the land of Canaan for a posses- sion forever ; and as a condition, on the other part, he required (see 1 0th verse) that every man child should be circumcised. 1 can understand all that ; but what has it to do with baptism or Christianity ? No more than the carrying of the bones of Joseph out of Egypt."
" Oh, yes it has. Professor Jones, for we read in Gal. iii. 9 "
"Stop a minute, till I find the place. Now — but lei me read it ; I will begin at the 6th verse : ' Even as Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness Know ye, therefore, that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify tl)e heathen through faith, preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, saying. In thee shall all nations be blessed.' And now comes your proof-text — ' So then they which be of faith, are blessed with faithful [believing] Abra- ham.' Now, I think I can understand this; but for the life of me I can't see one word about baptism in it, or of circumcision either. There is no more allusion to
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 29d
either, than there is to the lifting up of the brazen ser pent in the wilderness, or the giving of the law on Sinai, or the falling down of the walls of Jericho. Abraham believed God. So Christians believe. Abraham was blessed for his faith. It was counted to him for right- eousness. So ive, who believe, are also blessed with believing Abraham ; and that is all. There is surely no uifant baptism here. What is the next?"
" It is Romans iv. 11, 12: 'And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faitli which he had, being uncircumcised ; that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised,' etc."
"I have it here," said the Professor, as he found the chapter ; " and to understand the sense, I see it will be necessary to begin at the lirst of the chapter. Paul is proving that justification is by failh, and not by works. So he says even Abraham believed (third verse), and it was counted [or reckonetl] unto him for righteousness ; and in the tenth verse, he asks, how was it reckoned ? before he was circumcised or after ? It was before. He had the faith, and he received the sign of circum- cision as a seal of the n'(jJifeoasfiess of faith. And the Apostle goes on to argue, that if faith was counted to him for righteousness, while he was yet uncircumcised, so it will be counted for righteousness to all who believe in Christ, even though they should not be circumcised. But what has all this to do with baptism ? The subject is never mentioned or alluded to. The sentiment is the same which is expressed in Galatians — Abraham be- lieved, and believing, he was blessed. So Christians, believing as he did, will like him be blessed ; and thus all believers may be counted as his children in faith. The only allusion to circumcision here, is made to show that it had nothing at all to do with the bUsscduess of faith
300 TIIEODOSIA EENEST
To baptism there is no allusion at all. If you will satisfy me that baptism has come in the room of cir cumcision, so that the law of circumcision was trans- ferred to baptism, you must give me something better than this ; and if there were any thing better, the Confession of Faith would havo quoted or referred to it. I take it for granted, therefore, that these are the strongest proof-texts you can present. And if they prove any thing at all, that has any bearing whatever upon the point at issue, it is that all the members of a Christian church must of necessity be professed he- lievem. The seed of Abraham enjoyed certain blessings (the possession of Canaan) in vfl'tue of circumcision, but the righteoui^neiiii of faith pertained to Abraham, as he was w^icircumcised, and now belongs to those who are his children, not by circumcision, or by any thing that came in the room of it, but by the same faith which *ie exercised. Those who believe, and only those, are to je partakers of the blessing. Christianity is a personal, .ndividual, and not a hereditary religion. In the New Dispensation, every man stands on his own foundatioA, and is responsible for himself to God."
" I do not see," replied the President, " why you should think it necessary to have any Scripture to prove a familiar and notorious fad. It is well known that circumcision was the initiatory ordinance of the Jewish Church, and we all agree that baptism is the initiatory ordinance into the Christian church. Of course, then, it takes the place of the /)ther. It beara the same relation to the Christian, that the other did to the Jewish Church. It is the door of entrance. Now, the church of God is, and has been in every age, sub- stantially the same, although existing under different names ; and consequent!}-, the character of the persons admitted to membership must have been the sr.ino
EJGHTH night's STUDY. 301
These persons among the Jews were admitted by cir- cumcision, and among Christians by baptism. Thoy were the infant children of church members among them ; and so, of course, they must be among us. We don't need an^^ express text to prove this, for it is self- evident from the general tenor of the whole Word.''
"Your argument," replied Professor Jones, ' is simply this: Infants were members of the Jewish Church ; and, as the church of God is alwaj^s substau tially the same, they must be members of the Christian church. The door of entrance is changed, l)ut there is no change in the character of the persons who are to enter it."
" Yes, that is precisely what I mean. Whatever other changes were made, there was no change in the member- ship.^''
"Then," said the Professor, "you mean precisely what is certainly not true. Jesus Christ, when he com- r landed the new door to be opened, commanded a /.so that different persons should enter it. To the Jews he said, bring in your male children and servants at eight days old. To Christians he says, bring all who believe in the blessed Gospel which I send you to preach. If he made the one change, he just as clearl}' made the other. Believers — as Mr. Johnson and I have seen in our examination of the word — he plainly commands to be baptized ; but he commands no others, and no others ever were baptized in all the history which the New Tes- tament records. Neither is it true that Christianity is substantially the same as Judaism. It was one of the most earnest labors of Paul to explain and enforce the differen(e. This difference was substantial — it was fun damental — it was constitutional. The other was a re- ligion of works ; this is one of faith. That was one of outward forms; this of inward affections. That con 19
802 TTIEODOSIA ERNEST.
sisted of the whole Jewish nation, both the evil au'l good ; this is confined to the truly converted. That waa a national establishment, and this an assembly of true believers, from which all are to be excluded but the pious in heart and the holy in life This substantial and fundamental change, we, as Presbyterians, recog- nize in fact, though we deny it in theory. We .sa?/ that infants are church members, but we do not, in thia country, treat them as such ; we do not address them aa such ; we do not, in fact, consider them as such. You, in your preaching, are continually urging the baptized children who have come to years of discretion, 'to come out from the world ;' and when the}' are converted, you urge them to join the church. It is true that, by the Confession of Faith (p. 504), you are required to inform them ' that it is their duty and their privilege to come to the Lord's Supper,' whether they give evidence of con- version or not, provided only that they are intelligent and moral. But you never do it; and half our members would not believe that we have any such rule. In other countries, however, this is done. Our theory is carried out into practice, and the church is filled with uncon- verted men and women. This is the legitimate result of infant church-membership."
" I am very sorry," rejoined the pastor, " to hear you talk in this wa}^ I fear you are preparing great trouble for us, and are about to bring down terrible sorrow upon your own head and that of your family. I had hoped, for the honor of our beloved church, that you would have thought better of these things. We have, how- ever, done our duty. The Session deputed us to reason the case with you, and endeavor to convince you of vour errors ; but we find that you will not be conmr&mid. Let us hope, however, that 3^ou will consider further, and carefully weigh the unanswerable arguments which
EIGHTH night's study. 308
we have presented, and let them have their full influ- ence upon your mind. There may be more dependent on it than you are aware of. I suppose it is not worth wliile to spend more time upon the subject ; so we will bid you good-night."
Professor Jones understood very well the ominous import of this parting address. He knew that his home, his emi^loymeut, his all, depended on the will of a few men, some of whom would take pleasure in rendering his condition as wretched as possible, so soon as they had no further hoi)e of binding him to themselves. And he knew, on the other hand, that those to whom he would go, had neither iniluence to aid him, or profitable em- plo3^ment to furnish him the means of supi)ort. As soon as the reverend committee had retired, he fell upon his knees, and offered up to God his thanks, that thus far he had not been tempted to deny his truth, or falsify the solemn convictions of his conscience. And then, in view of what he now began to feel would be in- e\itable, he prayed for strength to obey all the Master's will, and trust God for the consequences :
" Oh, m}' God ! I see before me nothing but trouble and sorrow. Want and affliction stare me in the face. Lord, give me strength to welcome them, or at least, firmly to endure them. Thou canst bring good out of evil. I commit my destiny into thy hands. I have trusted my immortal soul to thee; why ma^^ I not trust my body and my family ? Thou hast promised to save the one and to provide for the others. Help my unbe- lief ! I must go out like Abraham, not knowing whither I go. I look to thee, my Father in heaven, to open the way before me."
As he was rising from his knees, the remark of Tlieo- dosia, as she came from the water with her face so ful] of heavenly J03', came back to his mind with tenfold
304 THEODOSTA ERNEST.
force und beauty — " Uncle, dear uncle ! it is blessed to obey! Can't you give up all for Christ?"
" Yes, yes," he unconsciously exclaimed, " I will — 1 do give up all. I will follow where duty leads, let the consequence be what it may. I will resign my professor- ship to-morrow. God will provide in some way for my wife and children."
The conversation which we have recorded took place in his private study. On returning to his family room, be was delighted to find there his sister, Mrs. Ernest, and her daughter, and also, Mr. Courtney, who had called to have a little conversation with Theodosia, and finding they were about to start out, had accompanied them on their visit.
Mrs. Jones had been so anxious about the result of the conference with the committee, that she could not enjoy the society of her visitors, nor even exert herself successfully for their entertainment. She was, therefore, greatly relieved when her husband came in and took that task upon himself.
" I wish 1 had known that you and Theo. were here," said he, " I would have turned the reverend committee who have just left me over to you."
" I do not understand what you mean," said Mr. Courtney.
" Only this. My brethren in the Church Session have learned that I do not any longer believe that sprinkling is baptism, or that any but believers are to be baptized. And they have deputized Dr. McNought and Pastor Johujon to endeavor to bring me back into a belief of their human traditions. Their main argument at this time was on the baptism of infants as founded on the usage of the Jews. Baptism, they said, has come in the room of circumcision ; and as infants were circumcised.
BIGHTH NIGHT'S STUDY. 805
80 infants must be baptized. What answer would yoD have made ?"
" I would have said : Gentlemen, ^-ou do not your- selves believe that baptism came in the room of circum- cision in any such sense that the same order of persons who were circumcised are to be baptized ; or, if you be- lieve it, you do not act out yonr faith The law of cir- cumcision included only males, but you baptize both males and females. The child, when it was possible, was to be circumcised at eight days old, but you baptize at any other time. The servants and the slaA^es, whether old or young, whether born in their house or bought with their money, were to be circumcised, but you never bap- tize them — but only the children. They were to be cir- cumcised by the parents and not by the priest ; but you require baptism to be done by the minister. If the law of circumcision is transferred to baptism in one particu- lar (without any New Testament authority) it is equally transferred in all the others.
"Then I would have said further: Baptism could not come in the room of circumcision, because circumcision is still in force. No room was ever made for the second by taking away the first. The truth is simply this : God made a covenant or agreement with Abraham, when be was ninety-nine years old, in which he promised to his seed the land of Canaan. The token or memento of this contract was the circumcision of every male. This was the condition of their entering Canaan. This is now the condition of their restoration to it. The promise still stands. The Jews are still a separate people. This is their mark. By this they are yet to claim their inheritance. This is its object, and this the sum of its value. Tlie covenant has not been revoked rt is still in force, and its seal or token still remains.
" God made with Abraham another covenant some
S06 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
twenty-four years earlier, in which he promised him. among other things, ' That in his seed should all the na- tions of the earth he blessed.' — Gen. xii. 3. This is what Paul refers to when he says, Gal. ill. 8 — ' The Go's- pel was preached unto Abraham, and Abraham believed it.' He trusted in the Christ to come, and so was, in a certain sense, a member of Christ's church. So was Noah — so was Enoch — so were all who like Abranam believed God, and it was counted unto them for right- eousness. They were not introduced into it by circum- cision— nor was Abraham himself — for it was twenty- four years after he heard and believed the Gospel, before he was circumcised. He was a member of Christ's mys- tical bod}^, and an heir of the heavenly Canaan, without the seal of circumcision. By it he and his seed became the heirs of the earthly Canaan. This was its object, and no more. The blessings of the Gospel are to us, as to him, the result of personal faith. Thus, they who are of faith, are blessed with [believing] faithful Abra- ham ; and thus far, and no further, this first-made cove- nant with Abraham extends to us. If we believe as he believed, we shall be blessed as he was blessed. This is all that any one can make out of all that is said of the relationship of the Patriarch and believers.
"I should have said to them further: Gentlemen, you call the Jewish nation the church of God, and tell us that the Christian church is the same under a different dispensation. But Christ calls that nation the world, in opposition to his church. The disciples to whom Christ spake, John xv. 19, were men in good and regu- lar standing in the Jewish nation, which you call the church. Yet Christ says, I have chosen you out of the world — and therefore the world, that is, the Jewish na tion, hateth you. Piul was not only a member, but aii eminent member of this Jewish body ; but he says that
EIGHTH night's STUDY - 30t
ht! was a persecutor of the Church of God. Nicodemua was a ' master in Israel ;' but Christ told him he could not come into his church till he had been born again. The Jews needed conversion as much as any, before they could make any portion r)f the church of God. This church God set up for the first time when John began to preach. For the first time he organized a visi- ble assembly of penitent, believing, holy persons. There were good men, pious, devoted men and women, among the Jews ; but they were not gatliered into a church. The Jewish nation had some religious privileges ; but it was not in the Gospel sense a church. And when Christ established his church, he made the terms of member- ship such as were intended to preserve its purity and separation from all national politics. People were not to be born into it, but to enter it by faith and bapti.^m. 'He that believeth and is liaptized.' But b}' the intro- duction, of infant baptism, the object of this arrange- ment is entirely defeated."
" I have often thought," said Theodosia, " since my attention has been directed to the subject, what disas- trous consequences must follow if the theory of Pedo- Daptism were full}" carried out, and infants actually recognized and treated as members of the visible church."
"If you would fully realize what the consequences would be, you have only to go to those States of Europe where this is actually' done. You will see men who 'nlaspheme their Maker on the wa}" to church, go and l)artake of the H0I3' Supper. You will see them leave the church where thej' have so partaken, and openly resort to the ball room, the horse race, the drinking saloon, the gambling house, the cock pit, and even to I he very lowest and vilest haunts of dissipation. They are members of the cLurch. They were made such at eight days old. When the}- could say the catechism
308 THEODOSIA ERNEST
they were coufirmed, and informed, according to the directions of the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, that ' it is their duty and tlieir privilege to come to the Lord's table.' To be baptized in infancy and confirmed in childhood, are all that is needful to church membership. That faith required by the Gospel, they laugh at. They call those who profess to know any thing about it in their own experience, deluded enthusiasts. They know no more of religion than its external ceremonies. They have the form of godliness, but deny the power. Such was the Presl)yterian Church to which Dr. Carson preached in the North of Ireland. ' In the general dis- regard of religion,' says his biographer, 'the people of his charge were not behind their neighbors. Horse races, cock fights, and other forms of sinful diversion were frequent, and were numerously attended even by professing Christians. The soul of this pious servant of God was deeply grieved. He knew well the heaven- born excellence of Christianity, and clearly understood what should be the fruits of the Spirit, but he beheld around him only the works of the devil. He rode into the throng that crowded the race-course, and saw there the members of his own church flying in every direction to escape his sight.' * * 'His church was composed of worldly people, whom neither force nor persuasion could bring into sul)jection to the Laws of Christ.' In Ger- many tind some other European States, eve?^ body is in the church. Every body is recognized as a church mem- ber. Thieves, gamblers, drunkards, and prostitutes are members of the church. There is no such thing as the world. The church has swallowed it up. It has taken all the infidelity, all the atheism, all the blasphemy, al] the vice, and all the depravity of the world into its own bosom. This is the natural and necessary result of re- ceiving all the infants as church members. The church
EIGHTH night's STUDY. S09
has ceased to be the body of Christ, and has become a loathsome mass of hypocrisy and vice. There may be in it some few good and pious believers in Jesus. There are in it many upright, and honorable, and moral citi- zens: but these, as church memhei^a, are not at all to be distinguished from the basest profligates that issue forth from the reeking stews of infamy. They have all alike been baptized in infancy and confirmed in childhood, without any profession of conversion to God — most of t liem den3ing the necessity of any such change, and all sit down alike to the same table of the Lord."
" Surely, Mr. Courtney, you do not mean to speak thus of the Protestant churches of Europe ! I know it is true in regard to the Catholics ; but since the Reformation, it cannot be true of any others."
" Yes, Mrs. Jones, I mean to say this of the Protes- tant churches, wherever they have become national churches, and by the process of infant baptism have ab- sorbed the whole ])opulation. It is necessarily true of any church which receives its members in this way. It would be true in this country, if you Presbyterians, and the Episcopalians, and Lutherans, and Methodists could by any means accomplish what you all so earnestly are laboring to attain — viz. : to induce all the people to have their children baptized."
" Oh, no, Mr. Courtney. You must have conceived a terribly mistaken idea of what we are all aiming at. We desire, I trust, as much as the Baptists themselves, to keep our churches 7)W7-f?, and are as strict in our terms of membership and as rigid in our discipline as you are. We want our churches to consist, as they now do, of godly people, and would not for a day permit such as you have mentioned to remain in our communion."
" I know it, Mrs. Jones ; but in order to do this you Ere obliged continually to repudiate your own acts, ana
310 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
deny in practice what you teach in theory. 1 was speaking of what the result must be, provided you could mduce all the people to have their infants baptized, and should then recognize these baptized ones as church members in fact, as you do in theory.
" Listen one minute, and I will satisfy you that what I say is strictly true. You teach that, as circumcision was the door of entrance into the Jewish Church, so bai>- tism is the door of entrance into the church of Christ. If so, all who are baptized are church members. Now, you Prei<hyterians say all the children of believing parentis must be baptized. In your churches you bap- tize all the children of those parents who have been bap- tized. The Episcopalians baptize any child for whom proper sponsors will stand. The Methodists will bap- tize all the children, with or without believing parents. Now, if you could succeed (as b}^ sermons, books, tracts, and newspapers you are all striving to do) in convincing all the people that you are right, and prevail upon them to bring all their children, and have them thus initiated into the church of Christ — I ask you of whom, in the next generation, would the church consist ? It would be composed of these infants, then grown to manhood. If that generation be like the present, or the past, it will consist mostly of unregenerate men and women. A few will be converted — many will be moral — most will be wicked, and many will be most vile. They will all, how- ever, have entered into the church of Jesus Christ by the door of baptism, and will every one be members of Christ's visible kingdom."
" Oh, no, Mr. Courtney ; we would exclude the wicked ar d unworthy by process of discipline."
' Who would exercise discipline, Mrs. Jones ? This w uld be a l^o^'y of unregenerate men. They would have 0 love to CliMrt or his cause. The power of di^ciplin^
EIGHTH NIGHT'S STUDY. 311
fs in their owu hands. If they exclude all \;hat do not give erideuce of piety, they will exclude themselves. They will do no such thing. They may exclude the ojienly and scandalously vicious, for the reputation of their denomination, while there are several sects striving for the supremacy; but if (as in those countries I spoke of) any one sect could swallow up the rest, and by con- nection with the State become the national r^eligion, then a man would hold his right to the Lord's Supper, and all the pri^ileges of the church, b^^ about the same tenure that he held his right to vote or to exercise any other privilege of citizenship."
"But if this is so, Mr. Courtney, wh}' don't we see at least some illustrations of the principle among us now ? Why are not our churches now filled with unconverted men and women ?"
" Simpl}' because you don't act out your principles. Your churches are filled with unbelievers, but you refuse to recognize them. You daily repudiate your own acts, and continually falsify your own theory. You baptize infants, and you say you do it to intr^oduce them into the church of Christ. But you donH believe it. You never treat them as church members. You give them none of the privileges of church members, "iou don't count them in the list of your church mem- bers. They do not regard themselves as church mem- )ers. They do not claim or enjoy any of the privileges of membership. They do not exercise the discipline of the church on others, nor are the}' considered sub- jects for its discipline. They are practically as separate from the church as the children of an infidel or a Hottentot. It is thus, and only thus, that you retain £^ny degree of purity in yovw actual membership. Your church consists in fact, of believers, and not, as your book says, of ' believers and Uteir children.^ You thus
312 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
obviate one of the evils of infant baptism, by a virtual, repudiation of the act and regarding it in practice as a nullity. Mrs. Ernest does not look upon her son Edwin as a member of the church. She did not consider you a member, Miss Theodosia, till about a year ago, when you professed your faith in Christ, and as they all expressed it, 'joined the church.'' How could 3'ou be said to jom it, if up to that time you had not been con- pidered as separate from it ? The baptized children are urged, like others, to come out from the world, and to unite with the people of God, when they have believed in Christ ; and those who have thus believed, and made them- selves a public profession of their faith, you count as members; and to them and them alone you give the privileges of members. And this simple fact, that 3^ou are obliged to treat the baptized infants, when they grow up, as though they had not been baptized at all, in order to preserve the spirituality and purity of the church, is of itself sufficient proof that your celebrated historian, Neander, tells the truth when he says ' It is certain that Christ did not ordain infant baptism.' "
"Well, Mr. Courtney," replied Professor Jones, "is there any other argument you would have urged upon the attention of my reverend visitors, had you been present ?"
" Yes, sir. I would have said further : Gentlemen, if you found infant baptism on Jewish circumcision ; if you declare, that the Christian and the Jewish Church are the same, but only under different dispensations; and that because infants were circumcised in the old, infants must be baptized in the new, how can you get rid of the necessity for a national church ? The Jewish Church was a national church : it united Church and State The Christian is the same, and it must consequently l>e a national establishment too. We must unite the Churcl
EIGHTH night's STUDY HS
and Stale. For this, every Christian should strive. Of this union, where it exists, no Christian should com- plain ; for there is certainly as much Scriptural authority for it as there is for infant baptism. And further, gentlemen, yoa must receive and recognize not merely three orders of the mhiisti'y, like the Episco- palians ; not merely deacons, priests, and bishoi)s, but also a grand and supreme ruler of them all, similar to the Poi)e. The Jewish polit}' had its common priests, its chief priests — who controlled certain numbers of the others — and its High Priest, who was above them all. So, to correspond, there should be the Presbyters, the Bishops, and the Archbishops, if not the Pope. This has quite as much, and the same sort of Scriptural authority as infant baptism. To this, they would have replied, by saying, that the constitution of the Chris- tian church is to be found in the New Testament, and that we learn what its officers were, by seeing what ones were ordered or recognized b}- Christ and the Apostles ; and tbc}- neither commanded nor recognized but one order of ministers. This is good logic, I do not object to it. But I ask if the membership of the Chris- tian church is not designated in the jNew Testament even more clearl}- than its oj/icers ? If baptism is the door of entrance, show me a single instance where any one is permitted, much less commanded, to enter in upon the faith of an}' but himself. Show me any instance in which an infant was received, oi ordered to be received ; any in which one was recognized as a church member, or even where there was the sliorhtesi allusion to him as such. The}' cannot find one ; and so, upon their own principles, must take the whole para- phernalia of Episcopacy, and Church and State, or give up infant baptism."
"But, Mr Courtney, as you say that among us Pre»-
314 TUEODOSIA ERNEST.
byterians in this country, infant baptism is a mere nul- lity, as we don't count the baptized as church members, or give up the discipline of the church into their hands ; as they have, in fact, no more to do with the church than olher i)eople, and cannot, therefore, injure its standing or diminish its spirituality, what Jiarm can it do to baptize infants ?"
"What harml Alas! madam, 1 am incompetent to tell the thousandth part of the harm that it has done, is doing, and will continue to do so long as it is practiced. Pardon me, if I decline attempting to answer your ques- tion."
'* Well, then, if you can't tell what harm it does, why do you talk so much against it ?"
" I can't tell 1 Oh, yes, but I can tell. I can tell so much that you would not have the patience to hear. 1 can tell such things of it, that you would almost think it impolite to mention. And that is, in truth, the reason why I felt disposed to decline a proper reply to your question. If I should speak of this act, which you per- form as a religious duty, as I ijink it deseives, I should characterize it as a heinous sin, an act of daring rebel lion against God ; and this you would think scarcely becoming in me as your guest. If 1 should tell you all the harm I know of infant baptism, instead of con- vincing, I should probabl}^ make you angry. You have been so long accustomed to look upon it as something sacred and holy, that you could hardly avoid feeling indignant at hearing what I, after careful and prayerful study of the subject, have come to think of it."
" I don't see how you could say much worse things about it than you have already ; but 1 assure you that 1 will keep m}^ temper, let you say what you may. So jrou may cons der yourself as having full license to say
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 31 J
io roe in my own house, any thing that you would feel at liberty to say to me or any one any where else."
"Yes," rejoined Mrs. Ernest, "do go on and tell U3 all you think about it. 1 have some curiosity to uni'ler- stand just what you Baptists do think of us Tresbyte- rians. I know you have a very mean opinion of us, but I would like to know just how mean it is."
" Go on, Courtney ; you have the ladies' curiosity ex- cited now, and you will be obliged to gratify it. If you don't tell what you think, they will imagine it is some- thing very horrible indeed. For myself, I am satisfied now that it is a thiug not commanded, and therefore I would not practice it ; but I don't see what great harm there is in it. It is a simple ceremony, and if not re- quired, a very useless one; but I don't see who is hui^t by it. We are, however, all of us prepared now to hear hard things from the Baptists. We don't look for any thing else."
" I should be very sorry to believe that Baptists were accustomed to say hard things of their opponents, what- ever they may feel it their duty to say to them. Mrs. Ernest thinks I have a very mean opinion of Presbyte- rians. She is utterly mistaken. Many of the best and most earnest-hearted children of God whom I have ever known are Presbyterians. I not only esteem them highly, I love them dearl}^ I love them not only as individuals, but as Christians. I count them my !)rethren and my sisters in the Lord; but at the same time, I think the^^ have been educated in error, and are in some things most grossly deceived. They are to that extent wrong in their faith, and wrong in their practice. The more I love them, the more I would rejoice to set. them right. I hate error and wrong in them as in others. I oppose it ; I reason against it ; I denounce it in them «.H well as in others. It is no": their persons, but their
316 THEODOSTA ERNEST.
opinions that I war against. In most cases. I do not even esteem them less for hokling these erroneoua opinions ; for I know they are sincere and conscientious Thev have been deceived b}^ those who have instructed them. They have never had the truth laid fairly before their minds. Early education, denominational attach- ments and prejudices have enveloped their intellects in such a cloud, that it is hard for the clear light of Scrip- ture truth to find its way into their hearts. I was as honest and sincere when I believed that sprinkling was baptism, and that infants were to be baptized, as I am now. So was Miss Theodosia. Nor were we suddenly convinced that we were wrong. The light shone in little by little. What was at first a doubt, became a certaint}^ by patient investigation. It is not long since I said, as you do — infant baptism is not commanded. It is not authorized by the Word of God, but still it is only a useless ceremony. Let those who will, engage in it. No r;ood is done ; but yet it does no harm. Since that time, 1 have studied the subject more carefully. The more I looked at it, the more fearful it appeared. And I am now fully convinced, that he who baptizes an infant in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, ^.s• guilty of a most enormous sin in the sight of God / And this is not less true because good men have done it, and are doing it still. Good men have often been ignorantly guilty of most enormous crimes. That excellent and holj^man of God, Rev. John Newton, was for years after his conversion engaged in the slave trade. It was tJien considered a reputable and righteous business. Many good men of the past generation were engaged in the manufacture and sale of intoxicating drinks. It was then considered a legitimate and Christian calling. Nc good man will engage in it now. Their ignorance was uheir excuse. God foro^ave them as he did Paul for
EIGHTH night's STUDY 311
persecuting his people — because he did it ignorantly, and verily thought he w.'is doing God service. His con- scientious sincerity did not, however, make the act a righteous one. The deed was still one of terrible wicked- ness and daring impiety. So I sa^' of those who prac- tice infant baptism ; so I would say to them if I could. They may be good men. Some of them are good men — earnest, warm-hearted, devoted Christians; but they are ignorantly sinning against God. It may not be be- coming in me to reprove men older, and better, and more useful than myself; but surely I may entreat them, as ray brethren and fathers, to do ' no more so widcedbj.'' "
"But what is there so wicked about it, Mr. Court- ney ?"
"Much, every wa}'. In the first place, if you will excuse me for talking so plainl}', infant baptism, o^ practiced by Presbyterians in this country, is a continu- ally repeated falsehood !
" You say that ' baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible church, but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of re- generation, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life.' — Con. of Faith, p. 144.
" Now, this is either true or false. If it is true, then
the person baptized is admitted into the visible church
of Christ. You say it is true, and that you do thus
admit him ; but, at the same time, if 1 point you to one
of these members thus received in infancy, staggering
from the grog-shop, and ask you if he is a member, you
tell me — No. You would be ashamed to think that such
a wretch had any connection with your church. Is his
father a member ? Yes, one of the best men in tho 20
318 THEODOSTA ERNEST.
church. Did. he have his children baptized? Yes, 1 suppose he did. Has this man ever been excluded ? No, you reply, he never joined the church. He grew up a wild and reckless boy, and has always been a vicious, dissipated man. He was never in the church; nobody ever thought of such a thing. There is an amiable young lady, moral, irreproachable in her char- acter ; but she makes no pretensions to religion — she is perfectly indifferent to it. Is she a member of your chnrch? Oh, no; our members are all spiritual-minded Christians. She has never even expressed a conviction of sin, or even the slightest desire to join the church. Why do you ask if she is a member ? Simply because I remember wdien she was baptized. Does not baptism admit persons into the visible church ? Yes ; but we never consider them as members till they make a pro- fession of religion and join the church again. Then your baptism is a solemn falsehood, for it does not admit into the church at all.
" But now, if 3^ou take the other horn of the dilemma, and say we do admit them — then I reply, you are guilty of introducing into the church of Christ wicked and unregenerate men and women. If you recognize them as members, and treat them as members, 3'ou at once destroy the distinction between the church and the world. The church no lonsrer is Christ's kingdom. It is no more a body of ///'s* people. It consists, in ];art at least, of the wicked and prolligale descendants of his people.
" But you say, further, that baptism is to the bap- tized *a sign and a seal of his ingrafting into Christ'— ' of his regeneration' — and of ' remission of his sins,' etc. Now this is true or it is false. You saij It is true. A mother brings her babe to have it sprinkled. It is a beautiful child, and she verily thinks she is doing God
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 319
service — and is, herself, a lovel}' object, as she stands there with the infant in her arms. But now 1 ask you, [s that child ' regenerated' ? Is he a ' branch ingrafted into Christ'? Are all his 'sins forgiven'? In other words, is he a believer in Jesus Christ? You say — xVo, it is absurd to think of such, a thing. Then, I reply, your baptism is a falsehood — for it is designed to signify and seal these things, which, in this subject, do not and cannot exist. To a belie cer in Christ, baptism has all this significancy ; but to an unconscious babe it can have none at all. There is not, in fact, in your minds, the slightest suspicion that the child is born again and ingrafted into Christ ; and yet you say to the world, that this ordinance is designed to signify and seal the fact that such is actually the ease.
"/« it no harm thus, in the house of God, as a religious act, and in the very name of Jesus, to proclaim such prac' tical falsehoods to the world ?"
" I declare, I had never thought of it in that light be- fore. Have you any other charge to make against it ?"
"Yes; I say, in the next place, that the baptism of an infant is an act of high-handed rebellion against the Son of God.''
Mrs. Jones and Mrs. Ernest both lifted up their hands in utter astonishment. The former looked at him as though she expected to see him drop down dead after making what seemed to her such an impious announce- ment.
" That is the most astounding statement," said the Professor. " But I know you would not make it, unless you thought you had the evidence to sustain it."
"What!" said Mrs. Jones, "The evidence to provo that it is wicked! — positively wicked/ to baptize a child; an act of rebellion! — high-handed rebellion! Well, I will try to be quiet, just to see what the
820 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
man can say. Go on, Mr. Courtney ; we are all atten- tion."
" Yes," resumed Mr. C, "I have said it; and I will prove that it is not only rebellio7i, but rebellion attended with such circumstances as mark it with a character of peculiar malignancy. Not only a sin, but a terrible sin ; most flagrant in itself, and most terrilic in its con- sequences to the church and to the world."
" Really" said Mrs. Jones, " I am curious to know how you will make it out."
"You know," said Mr. C, "that you Presliyterians are accustomed to count some requirements of Christ as essential, and some as non-essential — or, at least, less essential than others. Now when Christ came into the world, one great object, if not the great object of his mission, was to e^tabli.'ih his visible church. He sot it up himself He instructed his disciples carefully in the nature of its laws, and especiall}^ those organic or con- stitutional laws which lie at the vcr}^ foundation of the whole superstructure. To l/iese laws especially he must have attached great importance. Willful disobedience to these fundamental rules, which regulated and fixed the very nature of the visible kingdom he established, must have been regarded b}^ him as a rebellion of no common order. Now the moi^t important of these fun- damental rules was that which fixed the terms of mem- bership in his kingdom. This lay at the foundation of the whole business. 4' he character, the influence, the prosperity of his new kingdom, must depend upon the character of the persons of whom it was composed Now the Jewish kingdom, though it had in it much of good, and was a beautiful type of better things to come, yet it had included more of the evil than the good. In it the wicked dwelt in the land, and the righteous were among them But now Christ was organizing not a
EIGHTH night's stuhy. 321
temporal, but a spiritual kingdom. His dominion was to be one of interior rule — by the power of love. The subjects of this kingdom were to be converted men and women, who loved God and lived to his glory. No one could belong to it^ as he told Xicodemus, who had not been born again. This was his church. It was designed to be a permanent and living illustration of the power and the purity of his religion. The members of this church were to be his living epistles, known and read of all, describing the nature and results of his religion in their hearts and lives. No fact is more clearly evident than this. The church is not only commanded to be holy — exhorted to be holy — but it is said to be holy, and addressed as though it was thus holy. It is always and everywhere regarded as a body of pro- fessedly' converted men and women. As many as were baptized into Christ had put on Christ. They were those who trusted in Christ. They walked by faith. They lived, but not they — it was Christ that lived in them. They had been sinners, but were called to be saints, and now had an inheritance among them that were sanctified. They were a peculiar people, zealous of good works. Not of the world, not like the world, for Christ had chosen them out of the world. Such was the church as he established it, and such he intended it should continue to the end of time. Now to secure to it this character, he determined that none should be admitted into it but those who repented of sin, and believed on him with saving faith. The door of entrance into this church was b}' the ordinance of baptism. Con- sequently', Avhen ail}' one repented and believed, and gave evidence that he was born again, he was to be bap- tized, and henceforth counted among his people. The very nature cf the church, and the object of its estab- lishment, required that no others should ever be admitted
322 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
How tnen, I ask, can he look without abhorrence and indignation upon that act, in which a minister of this churcli — claiming to act by his authority — subverts the very foundation of his church, changes its nature, and defeats tlie very object of its establishment, by intro- ducing into it, knowingly and willfully, persons who arc confessedly not penitents, not believers, not regenerate, but the children of wrath even as others.
" If baptism converted them — if b}' the act itself they were reg-enerated — there would be some excuse for this course ; but no one of you will pretend to believe that it has any such influence. You know that a baptized child grows up a sinner, just as his unbaptized brother does. Doctors of Divinity talk about such things ; but no man or woman of common sense believes tliat the sprinkling of a little water on a baby's face changes its heart, and makes it a new creature in Christ Jesus. If It is introduced by this act into Christ's visible church, it comes in a sinner, as it is born ; it comes in an un- converted, impenitent, and unbelieving sinner — ^just such a sinner as Christ forbade his ministers ever to intro- duce. And now what is the consequence ? Let us look at the history of the church. It is enough to make one who loves Jesus and his cause weep tears of blood, to see what, have been the results of this rebellious depart- ure from the instructions of the Master. For the first two or three hundred j^ears the church remained what Christ intended. It was a body of professed believers. All history accords to its members a character of singu- lar uprightness and purity. It was a light shining in darkness. But when infants, instead of converts, began to be introduced, its whole character was changed. Its spiritualit}' was gone. Its very ministers were worldly men, contending for wealth, and place, and power. In Ihe course of a few generations, it had, like the national
EIGHTH NTGTIt'S STUDY. 323
churches of Europe of the present day, swallowed up •^^■•16 world. All the villainy and depravity of the lana was in tlie church, or in that establishment that called Itself tlie ciiurch of Jesus Cl^rist. No Pagan, not even the tiger-hearted Nero himself, was so cruel in his per- secution of the Christians, as this bod}^ of baptized infants became when it grew up to manhood, and was invested with the power to kill. Nothing which the most infernal hatred could suggest, and the most diabolical ingenuity could invent, was thought too hard for these baptized ones to iuflict upon those who professed faith in Christ, yet would not conform to their newly intro- duced rites and ceremonies. The most bitter and re- lentless pei'secution was directed especially against those who denied infant baptism. This has continued through every age. It has not been contined to the Roman Catholics. It has been practiced by all the so-called churches that received infaiit members (your own in- cluded) whenever and wherever they have been able to obtain the power. The world has been deluged with the blood of the saints, shed by these members of the church, whom men, professing to be his ministen^, have, in his name, though against his authority, introduced in their infancy. Now I say, the act which thus subverts the very nature of the church of Christ, and leads to such terrific consequences, is no common sin. Such perver- sion of the ver}' fundamental law of his church is no common rebellion. It is a great and terrible crime. It has led to great and terrible results qxqw in the present world. Its consequences, even her^, have been so ter- rific, that our very hearts shudder but to think of them ; what they may be in the eternal world, we cannot con- ceive.
" But I will go further. I said ' the baptism of an infant was a sin — an act of high-handed rebellion against
324 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
God.' 1 have proved it. I will now say even more than this. Infant baptism is impious — it is an act of sacri- lege."
" Be careful, Mr. Courtney, be careful I" exclaimed Mrs. Jones. " This is a solemn subject. You should not thoughtlessly make use of words which convey such horrible impressions."
" I am careful, Mrs. Jones. 1 have chosen these words deliberately, because they are the only words that will fully express my meaning. I mean to say that it ia impious for a professed minister of Jesus Christ to stand up in the presence of the world, and in his name, and by HIS authority, perform, as a solemn and sacred or- dinance of HIS religion, an act which he never com- manded OR authorized! I regard it as a fixed fact, that there is no such commandment or authorit3\ We have been searching for it carefully ; we cannot find it. It is not in the book. And now the question comes up — * Even if it V)e not commanded, what harm is there in it?' This is the question we are endeavoring to answer. I say, If God has not commanded it or authorized it, then to perform it as an ordinance of ms religion, in his name, and by his professed authority, is an act of impi- ous sacrilege ! It can be nothing less. I know your preachers do not so intend it ; I know that they would shudder at the very thought. They verily believe they have the authority, 'fhey do it ignorantly, as Paul per- secuted the church. Ikit though their ignorance may, in a degree, excuse their conduct, it does not change the nature of the act. And for one who has studied the subject, who has looked for the authority and failed to find it, as we have, for such a one thus, in the name of God, to do what God has not required, must require a degree of temeriLj which I trust few of the pr(,>res8ed minieters .^f Christ po^^css."
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 825
" I declare, Mr. Courtnej', it fills ine with a sort of horror to hear you talk. I am almost sorry I insisted on your saying any thing about this subject. I don't and can't believe that what you say is true. And yet I shall never be able again to see an infant baptized with out a feeling of terror."
" But wh}' can't you believe that I tell the truth ? Have I not proved every position by the Word of God?"
" Oh, as to that, any body can prove almost an}- thing they please by the Scriptures. Unitarians, and Uni« vcrsalists, and Methodists, and Episcopalians, and all sorts of people, find plenty of proof in the Bil)le for all they teach."
" Then how are God's people to know Avhat lie reouires of them?"
"Well, I don't see as we can know with any cer- tainty. I have been raised a Presbyterian, and taught that they were right ; and I believe 1 had as soon risk my soul on their faith as au}^ other. 1 don't see as I need to give mj^self much trouble about it."
" You do not deny, Mrs. Jones, that you ought to obey God rather than man, and that the Scriptures are a perfect and infallible rule of faith and practice ?"
" Oh, no, I grant that ; but the difficulty is, that 1 can't understand just what they teach. If I could know what they require, 1 must believe and do it. But Mr. Johnson tells me one thing, and you tell me another, and the Methodist tells me another ; and between you all, I don't know really what I must believe or do."
" 1 will tell you, then. God will hold you responsible for your own faith and practice. You are not, therefore, to rely on me, or the ^lethodists, or on Mr. Johnson, but you are to go to the Bible for yourself. If there is Ruy command to baptize infants there, j'^ou can find it,
526 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
and you can read and understand it as well as a Doctor of Divinit3^ Do not take for granted that what thej say or what I say is true, but seai'ch the Scripturci^ for yourself. Make use of all the helps you can, hut don't let any one convince you that any doctrine is taught, or any practice required, hy the Word, till you can see it in the Word. You will not find the teachings of the Scri})- tures to be either doubtful or contradictor}'' when you go to them, and are willing to believe and practice just what they teach. Doctors of Divinity may contradict each other and themselves, but God's Word is not a book of doubtful oracles. It speaks plainly ; it speaks de- cidedly; and it speaks always the same thing. Try it yourself with reference to this subject. Your pastor tells you that he has authority in the New Testament to baptize infants. Ask him to show it to you. If it is there, he can find it. You can see it as well as he can. He will, perhaps, refer you to the commission. Go bap- tize, etc. ; but you will say, this is only a commission to baptize helievei's. It does not sa}' a w^ord about believ- ers and their children, but only about believers. He will then remind you that Jesus said. Suffer the little ones to come unto me, etc You will repl}^ the^^ did not come to be baptized, but to be prayed for : 'And he laid his hands on them, and departed.' This is good author- ity to pray for children, and to devote them to God by faith, and seek his blessing on them, but none for bap- tizing them. He will then remind 3^ou that Peter says, the promise is to you and to your children,' You will reply, this is a promise of the ' gift of the Holy Ghost,' not of baptism ; and, moreover, it is limited to those 'whom the Lord our God shall call ;' and God does not call unconscious babes. He will then tell you, that ' the unbelieving wife is sanctified b}^ the believing husband, etc. ; else were your children unclean, but now arc they
EIGHTH night's STUDY. 821
holy.' To this,3^our good sense would reply, that there is here not a word about baptism ; and if the child is to be baptized because it is holy, so ought the infidel hus- band and the infidel wife, for they are also sanctified or holy. He will then seek to find some example. He will tell you, that there were a number of families baptized, and it is almost certain there must have been infant children in some of them. You turn to each place, and find that they who were baptized are the same wLo are said to have heard the Word, believed in (xod, rejoicerl in God, spake with tongues, glorified God, ministered to the saints, and, in the case of Lydia's family, are called brethren. Finding neither precept nor example in the New Testament, he will turn to the Old, and tell you about the covenant with Abraham, the seal of which was circumcision, and was applied to the children. Now, be will say, this covenant includes Christians too ; for Paul says. All that believe are the children of believing Abraham. And if his children by nature were circum- cised, his children by faith must be baptized. To this you will reply, true, his children hy faith are to be bap tized, but who are they? Paul says, they are believers, not the infant offspring of believers. You will say, fur- ther, the Jewish infants were circumcised because God expressly commanded it to be done. But God never commanded Christians to baptize their infants. On the contrary, he directed only the penitent, the believing, i;he regenerate, to be baptized, which expressly excludes infants ; and not a single infant ever was baptized during the period of which we have the history in the Scrip- lures. He has nothing more to otfer. This is the sub stance and the sum of what he calls Scriptural authority. Dare you now, with this light in your mind, consider the liaptism of an infant an ordinance of God ? I say, then, try it for yourself Search the Scriptures, as the
S28 TllEUDUSlA ERNEST.
Bereans did, and see if these things are so. 1 do not ask you to take my word for one solitaiy fact or circiim- Btance. Go to the Book. Go not to cavil, but to learn. Go not to twist an argument out of it, but to ascertain your duty. Study it ; pray over it. Don't rest till your mind is satisfied. If you canH find infant baptism in the Word, you may take it for granted it is not there, even though all the Doctors of Divinity in Christendom assert the contrary. If you do find it, bring the Book, and show it to us benighted Baptists, and we will prac- tice it ; for we do earnestl}^ desire, if we know our own hearts, to 'do whatever Christ commands us.' If you find it, it will be your duty to bring it to our notice ; for in that case we are in most woful error. If you are right, we are most fearfully wrong. If God has com- manded us to baptize our infants, we are living in open and avowed rf^6eZ/zo/i. But we desire to obey; and if you will show us our error, so far from growing angry, we will thank you for the care that j^ou show for our good."
" There is much in what you have said," replied Pro- fessor Jones, " that strikes me with amazement. I can- not deny, that infant baptism is in opposition to the Word of God ; but yet, I have never conceived of it as the terrible thing you have represented it. I see, how- ever, that it must be even so. If it does not introduce people into the church, it is a falsehood on its very face ; for this is what it pretends to do. U it does introduce them, then it evidently subverts the very foundation of the church, as a bod^^ of believers. And if God has not commanded or authorized it, it must, indeed, be im- pious to do it in his name, as though he had. I cannot deny this ; but you made some statements concerning the results of its introduction, which I do not feel dig' posed to receive solely on your assertion."
ETGnTII night's STUDY. 329
" My dear sir, I don't desire 3^011 to receire any thing on my assertion. What I do not pi'oce, I beg you will consider as though I did not say. I don't intend to make a*}" assertion, that I cannot sustain by the very best of testimony."
"You said that infant baptism was not introduced in the time of the first Christians, nor until several hun- dred years after C irist. And that a 1 churches, both Protestant and Catholic, who had embraced it, had per- secuted the saints whenever and wherever they pos- sessed the power. All this is quite at variance with what I have always regarded as the truth. I do not deny that it is so, but 1 cannot believe it without the evidence."
Mr. Courtney glanced at the clock, as he replied :
" It is now near bedtime. We will not have time to night ; but at an}' time you may suggest, 1 will convince you that I did not s})eak without reason. I will prove to you, by the testimony of the ancient Fathers, by the testimony of your own most eminent historians and divines, that what I said is strictl}' and entirely true. I will show you, that infant baptism was introduced in the same way, and by the same sort of authority, that pouring and sprinkling were — only that it began at a somewhat earlier day. I will show 3^011, too, what were the consequences to the true believers, who refused to sanction the innovation — how they were driven out to dwell in caves and dens of the earth — how they were tortured and tormented — hunted like wild beasts ; and that not a few hundreds, or thousands, but millions have gained a mart3T's crown — slain for the testimony of Jesus ; not by Pagans ; not by infidels ; not by the people of the world; but hy the viembers of the (so- called) churches of Jesus Christ, made members in their
330 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
infancy by this ' blessed^ ordiuance of infant baptism Where shall we meet ?"
" Oh, come back here," said Mrs. Jones. " I begin to feel a sort of fearful interest in your strange teachings ; something — if you will pardon the comparison — like I would expect to feel in the dying speech of some outlawed wretch, denouncing, on the very scaffold, all that good men hold dear and sacred. I do not mean any disrespect, but I cannot think of an}^ thing else which will so well describe my emotions. I shudder while you talk, to think that you should dare to speak of one of the most beautiful and holy rites of our religion as of a deadly sin ; and yet I want to hear al'^ that you have to say. Sister p]rnest and Theodosia will come over with you again to-morrow night."
" bo be it. then. We will meet here to-morrow night '
THE NINTH NIGHT'S STUDY.
OF THE TIME AND MANNER
IN WHICH
THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS i!^AS SUBSTITUTED BY MEN
FOR THE
BAPTISM OF 13ELIKVEUS.
WHICH CHRIST COMMANDED.
NIITTH ITIGHT'S STUDY.
^^^HERE was no one of the company that assom ^ir^O bled at the Professor's house oi: Tuesday even ing, to continue this discussion, who looked so anxiously for the time of meeting, as did Mrs. Jones. The idea that an act which she had alwa3's regarded as one of the most beautiful and holy of all the rites pertaining to our holy religion, was really no part of that religion, but in fact directly opposed to it, and forbidden by it, had haunted her mind continually ever since the last night's conversation. She had awakened her husband at midnight, to tell him that she should ever after be afraid tc/ see an infant child baptized — and all the day she had been anxiously looking at the arguments of Mr. Courtney, as she called them up one after another in her memory, but could see no fallacy in the reasoning, though it led to what she considered such fearful con elusions. One reflection, however, gave her some com- fort. Infant baptism could not he a sin, otherwise good men could not have practiced it. She was sure, therefore, that there must be some defect in his reasoning, though she could not see it.
And when they had come together, she began the conversation by asking Mr. Courtney if he had not said that he regarded Presbyterian and other Pedo- baptist ministers as good and pious men ?
" Certainly ; I said that I knew some such. Men of
God, whom I love as my brethren in the Gospel. And
I know personall}' of no one among them whom I would
be willing to condemn as being a worse man than myself
2] {W^'^
334 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
"But how can you say that, Mr. Courtney, when you know that they all practice infant baptism, and teach others to do so, which you say is not only a sin, but a most grievous sin : not onl}^ sin, but impious sacrilege ? It seems to mo you are the most inconsistent man I ever heard talk."
" Will you permit me, madam, to answer your (^ues lion by asking several others ? Were Luther and Cal vin and the Reformers good and holy men ?"
"Of course they were, Mr. Courtney. 2s o one has ever doubted that."
" AVas Archbishop Cranmer, who sutfered martyrdom for his religion, under Mary of England, a good and holy man ?"
" Certainly ; he must have been."
" Were our Puritan Fathers, who settled New Lug- land, good and holy men, deserving our reverential and affectionate rememberance for their Christian principle, which led them to sacrifice all for a conscience void of offence?"
" Most assuredly they were ; but what has that to do with my question ?"
" You will see, madam, when T have asked one more. Is it not a great and fearful sin to persecute and take the lives of men for their religious faith ?"
"Of course it is; and no good mrM will do it."
" And yet, madam, our Pilgrim Fathers persecuted the Quakers and the Baptists, and condemned them to l)anishment and death Cranmer, before he was burnt, had been very officious and energetic in bringing Bap- tists to the stake. (See Neal's History of the Puritans). Calvin procured the condemnation of Servetus for hia religion, and Luther urged the princes of his country to persecute those who could not conform to hia opinions You see, therefore, that good and pious men
NINTH nmoot's study. 835
may be led by their very piet}^ (under mistaken notions of duty), to do things which are most fearfully wrong and sinful. Paul verily thought he was doing Goa service when he killed the followers of Jesus ; but his mistake did not make the action right. It was still a most awful sin. He did it ignorantly, and God forgave him. So he will forgive your Pedobaptist brethren who in their ignorance imagine they are obe3'ing him in baptizing little children into his church. But the act is sinful, terribly sinful, nevertheless. You are' to take God^s Word, not the example of those whom 3'ou con- sider holy men, as your standard of right."
" If I did not misunderstand you," said Uncle Jones, "you told us last night, that infant baptism was utterly unknown in the time of the first Christians. Now this is altogether at variance with what our ministers have always taught us to believe. I am sure that thc}^ have labored sedulously to make the impression on our minds, that from the very times of the Apostles till about six hundred years ago, no one had ever questioned that infants should be baptized. I am sure that 1 have been told again and again, from the pulpit and in private conversation, that it was the united testimony of all the Fathers that infant baptism was received from the Apostles, and that we not only have no account of the time and manner of its introduction, but no history of any period of the church wlun it was not universally received and practiced."
"Very likely," replied Mr. Courtney. "Doctors of Divinity often deal in just such sweeping assertions. The same men who assure 3'ou that the New Testament abounds with proof of infant baptism, though no man living or dead has ever been able to show for it a single pre- cept or example, can well afford to make just such state- ments about history. And I say to them in this, as in the
836 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
other case, If there be any record of infant baptism in the first ages of the church, you can ahow it, and 1 can see it. Your mere assertions are not worth a straw — bring in your proof"
'* But have they no such proof?" asked Mrs. Jones " Surely the ministers of our church are as good and as truthful as those of any church, and would not make such assertions without good and sulHcient authority."
" 1 will answer your question, madam, by referring you to - the writings of some of the most eminent ecclesiastical historians, who were I'edobaptists, like yourselves, but who would not stoop to falsify history to promote the interests of a creed. Let me ask youi attention, and yours especially'. Professor Jones, to the testimony of a very remarkable class of these witnesses. Soon after the Reformation, a project was set on foot by the Pedobaptist Protestants of Germany, to collect and embody in a permanent form all the known and reliable facts in the history of the early Christian churches. A great number of the most leai'ned and eminent men of Europe engaged in the work. They had access to all the stores of ancient learning, and were fully competent to explore and appropriate them. Lutheran princes and powerful nobles were patrons of the work, and neither money nor labor was spared to make it a faithful picture of the ancient churches. It proposed to give the history of each century I)}- itself ; and as it was published at Magdeburg, its authors are commonly called the ^Magdeburg Centuriatois.'' It was executed with great care, and has ever since its publication been regarded as one of the most faithful and accurate records of early church hi.story. Now, I want you to remember that there was not a single Baptist among these men ; and then observe their language, which is as followu ; 'They [the Apostles] baptized only the adult or aged,
NINTH nkjiit's study. 837
whether Jews or Gentiles, whereof we have instances in Acts ii., viiL, x., xvi., and xix. chapters. As to the bap- tism of infants we have no example. As to the manner of baptizing, it was by dipping or plunging into the water, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Gliost, according to the allusions contained in the Gth of Romans and the 2d of Colossians.' Thus they speak of the first century ; and of the second century they say : ' It does not appear from any approved authors that there was any change or variation from the former century in re- gard to bai)tism.'
" The learned and acute Erasmus, writing about the same time, says, in his Notes on the 6th of Romans : ' It is nowhere expressed in the apostolic writings that they oaptized children.'
" John Calvin, the founder of your Presbyterian Church, says : ' It is nowhere expressed by the Evangel- ists that any one infant was baptized.'
" Ludovicus Yives, a name of high historical author- ity, says : ' None of old was wont to be baptized but in grown age, and who desired it, and understood what it ^as.'
" Dr. Taylor, of the Church of England, sa3's : ' It la tgainst the perpetual analogy of Christ's doctrine to baptize infants ; for besides that, Christ never gave any precept to baptize them, nor ever himself or his Apos- tles (that did appear) did baptize any of them. All that he or his Apostles said concerning it, requires the previous dispositions of baptism, of which infants are not capable.' — Liber. Proph., p. 289.
" Dr. Mosheim, who is universally known and re garded as high Pedobaptist authority, says, in his Ecclesiastical Histor}^ of the first century : ' No persona were admitted to baptism but such as had been pre viousl}^ instructed into the principal points of Chris-
S38 TUEUDUt;iA ERNEST.
tiiinity, and had also given satisfactory -proof of piou^ dispositions and upright intentions.' Of the second century he says : ' The sacrament of baptism was, during this century, administered publicly twice a year at the festivals of Easter and Whitsuntide. The persons to be baptized, after they had repeated the creed, confessed and renounced their sins, particularly the devil and his pompous allurements, were immersed under water, and received into Christ's kingdom 1)3' a solemn invocation.' Of course they were not unconscious infants.
" Neander, another of your own historians, who has a world-wide reputation, says expressly : ' Baptism was administered at first only to adults, as men were accus- tomed to conceive of baptism and faith as strictly con- nected. We have all reason for not deriving infant baptism from Apostolic institution, and the recognition of it (which followed somewhat later) as an Apostolical tradition, serves to confirm this hypothesis.'
" Coleman, another of your own writers, and a citizen of our own country, says : ' Though the necessity of in- fant baptism was asserted in Africa and Egypt in the beginning of the third century, it was even to the end of i\iQ fourth by no means generally observed, least of all in the Eastern Church, and it finall}^ became a general ecclesiastical institution in the age of Augustine,' which you know was at the beginning of the fifth century.
'' Now tell me what sort of consciences your ministers must have when they assert, in the face of such testi- mony as this, from their own most eminent historians, that infants were always considered right subjects for baptism 1 But this is not all. We have positive proof that Constantine and Gregory, and a great multitude of eminent men whose history is recorded, and who are known to have been born of Christian parents and reared in Christian communities, were yet not baptized
NINTH night's study. 339
till they had made their profession of faith in matuie years — while there is not on record a single, solitary instance of the bai)tism of a c/riUl till the year of our Lord three hundred and sevent}', and that was the son of the Emperor Vallens, which was thought to be dying, and was baptized by the command of his majesty, who swore he would not be contradicted ; and moreover this was not a little infant, but a l^o}" of six years old.— fiee liobinson^s Hist.
'* Now, if in the face of this testimony the}' say that infant baptism was practiced, let them show the proof. Let them bring a single case. Let them prove their Qwn most eminent ecclesiastical historians to be false witnesses, and we will attacii all due importan^o to their statements."
"But, surely, Mr. Courtney," replied Mrs. Ernest, " our ministers cannot be acquainted with these testi- monies."
" It is their own fault then," said he. "These books are in their libraries — the}' quote them on other sub- jects— and if they do not know what they teach on this, it is because they willfully close their eyes to the light in order that the^y may remain in ignorance."
" You say," rejoined Theodosia, "that these writers, who make such concessions, are Pedobaptists. They were members of churches which baptize infants by sprink- ling. They were themselves baptized by sprinkling in their infancy ; and yet they state, in most express terms, that it was not so commanded by Christ — it was not so ordained by the Apostles — and nothing of the sort was practiced by the first Christians, nor for several Hun- dred years. How, then, could they conscientiously remain even for a day in their church connection ? 1 cannot undei stand what soi't of consciences such men have."
340 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" Nor can I, Miss Ernest, but I will let them speuU for themselves. The learned Curcclleus is one of them, and he says : ' Infant baptism was not known in the world the first two centuries after Christ. In the third and fourth it was approved by few ; but at length, in the fifth, it began to obtain in divers places ; and therefore,' he continues, ' we Pedobaptists observe this rite indeed as an ancient custom, but not as an Apostolic institution. The custom of baptizing infants did not begin before the third century after Christ, and there appears not the least footstep of it for the first two centuries.' Or if you prefer a more recent exposition of their reasons, take Kitto's Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, a standard Pedobaptist theological work, and turn to page 287, vol. 2."
" I have the book on the table here," said Uncle Jones. " Here, Theo., find the place and read. Here it is."
" ' Infant baptism was established neither by Christ nor his Apostles. In all places where we find the ne- cessity of baptism notified, either in a dogmatic or his- torical point of view, it is evident that it was only meant for those who were capable of comprekending the word preached, and of being converted to Christ by an act of their own will.
** 'A pretty sure testimony of its non-existence in the days of the Apostles, may be inferred from 1 Cor. vii. 14, since Paul would certainly have referred to the bap- tism of infants for their holiness; but even in later days, several teachers of the church, such as Tertullian (De Bapt.) and others, reject this custom. Indeed, his church in general (that of North Africa) adhered longer than others to the primitive regulations. Even when the baptism of infants was already theoretically derive rl
NINTH night's STUDY 841
from the Apostles, its practice was, nevertheless, for a loDor time confined to a mature a^e.'
" Did you not say that the author of this work was a Pedobaptist, Mr. Courtney?"
" Certainly I did. It was prepared by a number of very learned and eminent Pedobaptist divines, and is regarded by Pedobaptists as a standard theological vork."
" Well, I must say, that Pedobaptist theological writers are strange people," replied Theodosia, *' but 1 will read on : — ' In support of a contrary opinion the advocates [of infant baptism] in former ages (now hardly any) used to appeal to Matt. xix. 14, Suffer little chil- dren, etc. ; but their strongest argument in its favor is the regulation of baptizing all the members of a house- hold or family, 1 Cor. xvi. 17; Acts viii. 8; xvi. 33; but in none of these instances has it been proved that there were little children among them. And even sup- posing that there were, there was no necessity for ex- cluding them from baptism in plain words, since such exclusion was understood as a matter of course.'
" Surely, Mr. Courtney, the man is a Baptist I"
" Oh, no," said, Mr. Courtney ; " read on. You will come to his strong reasons presently." She read on :
" ' Many circumstances conspired early to introduce infant baptism. The confusion between the outward and inward conditions of baptism, and the magical effect that was attributed to it ; confusion of thought about the visible and the invisible church ; condemning all those who did not belong to the former ; the doctrine of the natural corruption of man so closely connected with the preceding ; and finally the desire of distinguishing Chris- tian children from the Jewish and heathen, and of com- mending them more effectually to the care of the Chris- tian communit}^ — all these circumstances, and many
^42 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
more, have contributed to the introduction of infant bap- tism at a very early period.'"
** Now we will come to his reasons. He has told us that it is not in the Scriptures ; that it was not ordained by Christ; that it was not known to the Apostles; that it was the offspring of that error which attributed a magical influence to baptism, and to the mistaken idea that no one could be saved without it — together with numerous other circumstances ; and now read on, if 3'0 1 please, and learn the reasons wh}^ he, notwithstanding all this, is a Pedobaptist."
" * But, on the other hand, the baptism of children is not at all at variance with the principles of the Christian religion, after what has been observed on the separation of regeneration and baptism ; for since it cannot be de- termined when the former begins (the real test of its ex- istence being only in the holiness continued to the end of a man's life), the fittest point of baptism is evidently the beginning of life.'' ' Nevertheless, the profession of faith is still needed to complete it. Confirmation, or some equivalent observance, is therefore a very impor tant consummation. The fides infantium [faith oi' infants] is an absurd assumption of which the Scriptures know nothing.' 'On the other hand, the baptized child is strongl}^ recommended to the community and to the Spirit of God dwelling therein, becoming the careful ob- ject of the education and holy influence of the church: I Cor. vii. 14, Nature and experience therefore teach us to retain the baptism of infants now that it Is intro- duced.' "
"Oh, 3^es," said Mrs. Jones, "I always feel a much greater irterest in children that have been baptized. It is such a blessed privilege to bring our little ones to God, and dedicate them to him in the presence of all hia people."
NINTH night's STUDY. 343
" For my part,'* replied Mr. Courtlier, " I greatly pre- fer Christ and his Apostles, to ' nature and experience,' as my teachers in religion. It is, indeed, a blessed privilege to be allowed to dedicate our children to God ; and for doing this, we have full authority in the Word of God. We are to dedicate them by faith and prayer, and bring them up for him. But, let me say to you, in the language of Dr. Dwight, one of the most eminent ministers of your own church: * Nothing is a pri\ilege, in the religious sense, but what God has made such ; and he has made nothing such, except in his own way and on his own terms. Baptism is a privilege when admin- istered and received in the manner appointed by him, but in no other. When this ordinance is received in any other manner, it is plainly no obedience to any command of his, and therefore has no promise — and, let me add, no encouragement to hope for a blessing.'" — Dwighl^s Sermons, vol. iv. p. 343.
" I am almost afraid," said Uncle Jones, " that you will think me captious ; but I cannot yet feel quite satis- fied about this matter. You have, indeed, shown very clearl}', that many very eminent historians and standard writers, who, it is well known to all the world, were Pedobaptists, have conceded — and, indeed, have in some sense pj^oued — that infant baptism did not originate till the ttird century, or later. But yet, it seems to me that I have seen quotations from the early fathers them- selves, which proved that baptism of infants had been practiced from the very first. Has there not been re- cently discovered some ancient manuscri})t, which throws light upon this subject ? I am sure I have heard some rumor of such a thing."
" You are not at all mistaken," replied Mr. Courtney. "A manuscript of Hyppolytus was found, in 1842, in an Airmenian convent on Mount Athos. in T Tkey, by
844 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
Minoides Minas, a Greek scholar of celebrity, who wai employed at the time b3^ M. Yilleman to search for ancient books and manuscripts. This work has been carefully examined by many eminent critics and scholars, and there is now no doubt that it is genuine. Mr. Bun- sen, a very noted Pedobaptist scholar, has made it the basis of a book on the early churches", in the preparation of which he consulted also the ancient canons and con- stitutions."
" But pray tell us who was Hippolytus ?" " He was the pastor or bishop of the church at Pon- tus, near the mouth of the Tiber, in Italy, and had been a pupil of Irgeneus. He lived in the early part of the third century, and probably wrote the work in question about two hundred and twenty-five or two hundred and thirty years after Christ."
" Well, what is his testimony about baptism ?" " He says : ' We in our days never defended the bap- tism of children, which in my da}' had only begun to be practiced in some regions, unless it were as an exception and innovation. The baptism of infants we did not know.' And Mr. Bunsen, his translator and editor, adds (vol. iii. p. 180): ' Pedobaptism, in the more modern sense — meaning thereby baptism of new-born infants, with the vicarious promises of parents or other sponsors ^ — was utterly unknown to the early church, not only down to the end of the second century, but indeed to the middle of the third.' "
" But," asked Mrs. Jones, "is there nothing at allin the early fathers in favor of infant baptism ?"
" Not one word, madam, for the first two centuries — not even an allusion to it. It had not yet been in- vented. They had never heard of it; nor, so far as wc can judge from their writing-, had they so much as thouyhl of it.
NINTH night's STUDY 345
" Clemens, who is counted among the first, and is said to. have been a companion of Paul, says : ' They are right subjects of baptism, who have passed through an examination and instruction.'
" Ignatius, of the same age, who is said to liave been a disciple of John, and to have seen and talked with Peter and Paul, sa3's : ' Baptism ought to be accom- panied with faith, love, and patience, after preaching The other writers of this century were Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Hermes, and Barnabas (?) ; but it is admitted by those who have searched for it most diligently, that noi one word about infant baptism is to be found in any of their works. So also in the second centur}', Dr. F. A. Cox, as quoted by Orchard, sa3'S : 'Justin Mart^T, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Tatian, Minucian, Felix, Iraineus, and Clement of Alexandria, constitute the Christian writers of this second centur}' ; who, so fai from directly speaking of infant baptism, never once utter a syllable upon the subject.'
" Clement sa3's, indeed : ' The baptized ought to be children in malice, but not in understanding ; even such children who, as the children of God, have put off the old man with the garments of wickedness, and have put on the new man.' These are the only children he speaka of as having a right to baptism."
"You mention ineneus," said Uncle Jones. " If I do not forget, I have heard him quoted as authority for Infant baptism."
" I have no doubt of it. Those Doctors of Divinity who consider baptism and regeneration as all the same thing, have discovered in his writings the following sen- tence : ' Christ passed througli all ages of man, that he might save all b}^ himself; all, I saj^ who are by him regenerated to God — infants, and little ones, and chil dren, and youths, and persons advanced in years
346 THEODOSIA ERNEST
Now, this is the only allusion which it is pretended that Iraaneus makes to infant baptism ; and some have had the temerit}^, not to say the dishonesty — since they them- selves consider baptism and regeneration as the same thing, and because Ir^eneus, in some other place, uses regenerate in the sense of baptize — to strike out vpcfen- erated here and put in baptized, and then refer to Ir*- reus as having recognized infant bai)tism."
" I am sure," said Theodosia, " that the cause must be a very weak one which requires such support, and they must be very weak advocates of any cause who could stoop to employ such arguments in its favor."
" So also it is claimed by some, that Justin Martyi recognized the baptism of infants, when he says to some aged Christians that they had been the followers of Christ from their childhood ; or, as these men read, from their infancy. But it is well known that, in those days, all minors — that is, all under twenty-five years of age, for that was considered the limit of manhood — were often called children, and even infants. And we read of some instances of persons becoming bishops while they were infants — that is, before they came of age ; and of many persons being led to martyrdom while they were infants, and making earnest profession of the faith which they felt in their hearts, and sealed with their blood. The Baptists will baptize as many such infanta as desire to enter into the church of Jesus Christ. But you will not accuse us, on that account, of practicing the baptism of unconscious babes ;* and these men- tioned by Justin Martyr, are not said to have been 6ap- tized in infancy, but to have followed Christ from their mfancy. It is not till the beginning of the third cen-
* Foi an immense amount of testimony on this pomt. ge<« Robinson's History of Baptism.
NINTH night's study. 347
tory that we find the very first certain allusion to the baptism of children ; and these were not babes, but little boys and girls old enough to ask for baptism, though yet too young to understand its import.
" By this time, salvation and baptism had begun to be regarded as inseparable, and loving parents began to inquire anxiously, What will become of our children if they die unbaptized ? To this, the answer commonly given was, that they must be lost. Why not, then, bap- tize, and so secure their salvation ? It seems that a certain wealthy lady, named Quintilla, who was probably a mother, and felt this very natural anxiety about her little ones, had come to the conclusion that if they o,sk-cd for baptism, they ought to have it, whether they gave evidence of conversion or not ; and she wrote a letter tc Tertullian, the bishop of the church at Carthage, ^-o ge^ his sanction to this novel doctrine. The answer of Ter- tullian to this letter has been preserved, and containj the first undoubted allusion to the baptism of children which is recorded in the annals of church history."
" If infant baptism had been a universal custom, as i» pretended by some," said Theodosia, "there never could have been any occasion for Quintilla to write to Tertul- lian on the subject, for children would have been bap- tized, as a matter of course, whether they asked for it or not.'"
" Very true; and Tertullian would have replied to her, that it had always been the practice of the church to baptize the little darlings, and she need not even wait for them to ask for it ; but he did no such thing. ' Those who administer baptism,' he says, ' know very well that it is not to be rashly given.' The good lady evidently thought that it was enough if the children could a.si- for it, and had quoted the Scripture, ' Give to him that asketh.' To this, Tertullian says: 'What
348 TIIEODOSIA KllNEST.
give to him that asketh I Every one hath a right to it as to a thing of alms 1 Nay ! say, rather, give not that which is holy to the dogs ; cast not your pearls ])ofore swine ; lay hands suddenl}'^ on no man ; be not partaker of other men's sins.' It would seem that she had re- ferred to the cases of the Eunuch and of Paul, as having received the ordinance as soon as they asked for it. And to this, TertuUian replies : ' If Philip baptized the Eunuch on the spot, let us remember that it was done under the immediate direction of the Lord.' The Eunuch was a, believer of the Scripture; the instruction given by Philip was seasonable; the one preached, the other perceived the Lord Jesus, and believed on him. Water was at hand, and the Ai)ostle, having finished the affair was caught away. But 3'ou say, Paul was baptized in stantly. True, because Judas, at whose house he was instantly knew that he was a vessel of mercy. The con descension of God may confer his favors as he pleases but 0U7' wUhea may mislead ourselves and others.
" This lady seems to have referred, as ^"ou do, to the words of Jesus, * Suffer little children,' etc. And to this, TertuUian says, as Baptists do now : ' The Lord does indeed say forbid them not to come unto me ; and let them come while they are growing up ; let them come and learn, and let them be instructed when the}' come ; and when they understand Christianity, let them profess th emselves Christians. '
" In another of his works, TertuUian says : * Adults are the only proper subjects of baptism, because fasting, confession of sins, prayer, profession, renouncing the levil and his works, arc required of the baptized.'
" It is evident, therefore, that at this time, the begin- ning of the third century, the baptism of children had just begun to be spoken of.
" Xuw, strange as it ma}' seem to you, your Doctory
NINTH night's STUDY. 34U
of Divinity are accustomed to base the strongest of all their historical arguments on this letter of TertuUian to Quintilla."
' How is that possible ?"
" They say, infant baptism must have existed, or Ter- tuUian would not have opposed it. If it existed then, it must have existed from the Jirst, because we have no histor}- of its introduction, and no account of any pre- vious opposition to it. And it is incredible that it could have been introduced without opposition."
"And what answer," said Mrs. Jones, " can you make to such reasoning as that ?"
" We simi)ly say that it did not exist before. That this is the Jirst proposal to introduce it, and that it wan opposed."
" Very satisfactory, I declare ! But what evidence have you that this wati the first ?"
" The best evidence that is possible : It is the first on record: If the advocates of infant baptism say there was any previous one, let them produce it. But we might put our defence on different ground. We might admit that infant baptism was at the beginning of the third century a generally received and recognized cus- tom of the churches, and yet it would not follow, by any means, that it was received from the Apostles or had any Divine authority.
" You do not believe that the Episcopal And Catholic rite of confirmation is of Divine authority, and yet it can be traced back as far as infant baptism. You do not believe that there is any Divine authority for sign- ing the baptized with the sign of the cross, 3'et Ter- tuUian distinctly recognizes this as an existing custom in his day. So he does the giving of the newly bap- tized a mixture of milk and honey, and anointing them with holy oil. The doctrine of baptismal regeneration 22
850 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
and of purgatory both date hack to or before this earlj day, as do the observance of some of the feast days and fast days, and a A^ast amount of the most absurd aw^ silly mummery of the Komish Church.
" The first we read of these fooleries, they were already in the churches ; they liad, so far as we know, never been o})posed ; they were there long before we find any trace of infant baptism there, and yet who of you wiJi dare to say, on these grounds, that Christ and his Apostles ordained that candidates for baptism should be divested of their clothing — should have salt put ir their hands — should be daubed with the priest's spittle — clothed in white on cominoj out of the water — sii^ned with the sigu of the cross — anoiuted with chrism — walk from the water with a lighted taper in their hands, etc., etc.
" The truth is, the simplicity of the Gospel was cor- rupted even in the Apostles' days ; aud it v,'as not the least onerous of their labors to prevent and correct unauthorized additions to and modifications of their teachings. The simple fart, therefore, that we find any doctrine or any jjractice in the churches at an early day, is no evidence at all that it was received either from Christ or his Apostles. The Scriptures are our only guide. This you as Protestants admit, and by tliis ycu aie precluded from all recours. to 'the traditions ot tiic first Christians,' in regard to infant baptism, or any thii.g else concerning the doctrines and ordinances of our religion. So that it is nothing to you nor to me if infant })aptism had existed before TertuUian's time. We have shown, however, that so far^ from being a general practice before that time, it then was for the first time proposed, and it required all the third and most of the fourth to secure it any considerable foot- hold in the churches, and tiiat it did not become estoh
NINTH night's STUDY. 351
tithed a,s an ecclesiastical institution till the time of A-ugustine, in the early part of the fifth centniy.
" Jt is true, as you may read in almost ever}' writci on baptism, that Cyprian, who was the successor of TcrtuUian in the church at Carthage, received a lettei from one Fidus, of whom nothing more is known than that he wrote such a letter, asking how soon after birth it might be proper to baptize. This was about forty years after Tertullian wrote to Quintilla on the subject, Cyi)rian, it seems, did not feel quite able to decide this momentous question, and called a council of sixty-seven of his brother bishops of North Africa, who gave it as their opinion that the ' Grace of God should not be withheld from any son of man, and that a child might be kissed with the kiss of charit}' o,s a brother, so soon as it is born.^ This was in the 3'^ear A. I). 257. It was this same Cyprian who gave it as his opinion that water poured about a person in bed (if he was sick and could not be immersed) would answer in the place of baptism."
" What was the effect of this decree of the African Council?"
"It seems to have had none. It is likelv that it re- lieved the doul)ts of Fidus ; and infants were probably baptized in Africa to some limited extent, but we have no record of any such baptisms. One hundred years after this. Dr. Wall, the Pedobuptist historian, saya complaints were common that mothers could not be prevailed on to i)ut their children into tlie water at baptism. More than one hundred and twenty 3'ear9 after this, Gregory, the Bishop of Constantinople, gave his opinion on the baptism of infants or babes. These are his words : ' But some say, what is your opinion of infants who are noi capable of judging either of th« grace of baptism or of the damage sustained by the waul
852 TTIEODOSIA ERNEST.
of it ? Shall we ba[)tize them too ? By all means, if there be antj apparent danger ; for it were better they were sanctified without knowing it, than that they should die without being sealed and initiated. As for others, 1 give m}' opinion, that when they are three years of age or thereabouts (for then they are able to hear and answer some of the mystical words ; and although they do not fully understand, they ma}^ receive impressions), they may be sanctified, both soul and body, by the great mys- tery of initiation.'
*' But neither the decree of Cyprian's sixty-seven bishops, nor the opinion of Gregory himself, seem to have convinced the common people ; for in the next generation — at the beginning of the fifth century — the priests and bishops woo had espoused the new practice, which they doubtless found profitable to their own purses, if not to the souls of the little water-made Chris- tians, found it needful to meet in solemn council, and pass another decree, declaring that ' Infants ought to be baptized for the remission of sins, and that all who de- nied this doctrine should be accursed.'
" Previous to this, great multitudes of believers, grieved and disgusted with the corruptions and innova- tions which had crept into the so-called Catholic Church, had withdrawn, and formed separate societies of their own. From the arguments and the decrees which were designed to bring these heretics back into the bosom of Mother Church, it appears that they were, in some particulars, very much like our Baptist Churches.
" The Catholic bishop, Augustin, represents them as asking, * What good the sacrament of Christ's baptism could do unconscious infants V
"And to this question he replies, 'That in regard to that matter, it is piously and truly believed that the faith of those by whom the child is presented, profits
NINTH night's STUDY. 353
the child.^ But as this reasoning did not prove suf- fioientl}' convincing, another council was called, which decreed, ' That it was their will that whosoever denies that little children by baptism are freed from perdition and eternally saved, ihat they be accursed.' And this decision being affirmed and sanctioned by the Pope, in 417, we may from that time consider infant baptism and baptismal salvation as established doctrines of that body which historians are accustomed to call the Church. But the decree, with its appended curse, proved insuf- ficient to convince the stubborn-hearted Baptists. They refused to baptize their children, and they disowned tlie baptism of the Catholics by refusing to receive them into their communities till they had been baptized by themselves. This the Catholics called re-baptism, or Anabaptism ; hence the name of Anabaptists, which has been api)lied to us almost to the present day. For these great crimes, the Catholics turned against them the strong arm of the secular power. They procured a decree of the Emperor, that not only those who re-bap- tized, but those who received the ordinance at their hands, should l)e put to death. ' By this law,' says Gibbon, ' three hundred bishoi)s, and several thousand of the inferior clergy, were torn from their churches, stripped of their ecclesiastical possessions, and banished to the Islands.' From this day down to the present, in every country where Fed. baptists have had the poicer, our brethren have been the subjects of bitter and unre« lenting persecution. We can trace them through the pages of history by the light of the fires that consumed them, and b}' the rivers of blood which the}^ have shed in testimony of their faith. Millions and millions of these slaughtered saints are standing now with those who were l)cheaded for the testimony of Jesus ; slain not b}^ their pagan foes, but by their so-called Christian
354 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
brethren I — by people whom your writers call 'the Church,' and whose history you record as the history of the Cliurch! 1 1
" When this work of death commenced, they re- proached Augustin (whom historians call a ^aint) witli the death of-their pastors, and told him that God would require at his hand the blood of these martyrs at the day of judgment. 'Martyrs!' he rei)lied. *I know nothing about your martyrs. Martyrs indeed ! Mar- tyrs to the devil ! There are no martyrs out of tlic church.' We have not time to trace their history through the coming ages, under the different names which have been given them, as Donatists, Novatianists, Cathari or Puritans, Paulicians, Henricans, Petrobru- sians, Mennonites, Albigences, Waldenses, etc. ; but let me suggest, if you desire to pursue the subject furthei-, that you read Orchard's History of the Foreign Bap- tists, which contains in a small space an immense amount of information concerning these persecuted and afflicted disciples of Jesus."
"1 do not think," said Professor Jones, "that we need to spend further time upon this point now. I confess, for my own part, I am more than convinced. I only wonder that these facts are not more generally known."
" They are public propert}'," replied Mr. Courtney, " and have long been known to Baptists ; but your Ped ^baptist friends will not read them or listen to them. And when we absolutely force them upon their attention, they take it for granted there must be some mistake about it, or else they would have heard them from their own ministers. But I agree with you that we have spent time enough in our present conversation ; and as there is preaching at the court house to-night yai)pose we adjourn to meet again to-morrow "
NT NT 11 N It; [IT'S STUDY. 355
" 1 li()[)e you will meet here," said Mrs. Jones, " for I l.avc yet one very serious clwirgc to offer against the Baptists."
" Permit me, madam, to inquire what it is, that I nay oe better prepared to meet it."
" It is your c/o.se communion. I am almost willing to Admit that immersion is the only baptism, and that infants are not in the Scriptures required to be baptized — though even about these points there must l)C some mistake on your part, for our ministers are certainl}^ as learned and as pious as yours, and yet they have alwa3'3 represented the facts as very different from the pictures you have drawn."
" But 3'ou forget, Mrs. Jones, that it is by the testi- niou}' of ijou)^ own IiisforinDfi and your own ministei^s tiiat I have established these facts. I have scarcely (pioted a single Baptist authorit}'. The men who say that there is no precept or example of infant baptism in the Scriptures, are among the most learned and emi- nent of your own writers. The men who say that the \'ery meaning of the word baptize is to immerse, and that it was immersion only which was for ages prac- ticed by the church, are such men as Mc Knight and Chalmers, among the most eminent of your own Doctors of Divinity. The men who say that it is certain that infant baptism was not ordained by Christ or the Apos- tles, and was not introduced until after the second cen- tury, are such men as Neander, Coleman, and Kitto, among the most learned and eminent of your own eccle- siastical historians and Biblical critics. Such men would not sa}" such things unless the truth compelled them."
"That is very strange, Mr. Courtney; but I can't deny that it is true : and I may be convinced that you
356 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
are right in these things ; but I am sure I never can be reconciled to your practice of restricted communion."
" Don't be so certain of that, madam. I have nc doubt I shall be able to show you to-morrow that yoh Presbyterians are just as much restricted in your termt of communion as we are. The only difference betweei* us is on the question, What is baptism ? But it is noT> time to go to the meeting."
I'hoy found the house already filled, and the service* had commenced when they arrived. They had not been there long, when those who stood near the door saw a horseman ride up and dismount. It was Mr. Percy. My reader will remember that, after writing that letter to Theodosia, he had gone to another county to attend the Circuit Court. He reached the place on Sabbath morn- ing, just before church time, and attended the Presby- terian meeting. At any other time he would probably have made the fatigue of his journey an excuse for remaining at his hotel ; but he was very unhappy that morning, and hoped in church to find some remission of the feverish anxiety which preyed upon his mind. He could not feel satisfied that he had done right in leaving off the investigation of the subject of baptism himself, or in endeavoring to prevent Theodosia from acting out her conscientious convictions of duty. He had wished a hundred times, as he rode along, that he had never written that unfortunate letter. Yet 'he never suspected for a moment the influence it was des- tined to have upon his own matrimonial prospects That Miss Ernest loved him most devotedly he was well assured ; nor did the thought ever enter his mind, that either this or any other event was likely to break off their engagement, or even postpone their marriage. But when he remembered the earnestness of heart with which she regarded every question pertaining to religion,
NINTH night's STUDY. 351
he felt that he must have occasioned great distress to her; and lie bitterly reproached himself that he had permitted his selfishness so far to triumph over his affection.
He had at first congratulated himself that he had made to her such an appeal as she could not disregard, and consequently had secured the object wliich he had in view ; but on reflection, he began to feel that he should esteem her more highly and love her more ten- derly, if it should prove true that her religious princi- ples were so strong and her sense of duty so predomi- nant, that she would not listen even to the voice of love itself dissuading her from the path of right.
He began to hope that she would disregard his entreaties and do her dut}'. He wished he could return in time to tell her that he would not for the world put any restraint upon her conscience. He comforted himself by the thought that, if his letter had any effect, it would only be to postpone her decision until his return, when he determined to take all difficulties out of her way.
When he took his seat in the church, his heart and his mind were in another place. Could he but know what had been her decision — where she was sitting then — what she was doino; ! He rose when the conorreixation stood up to pray — he sat down when the preacher said amen, as did the others, but he heard no sentence of :he prayer. They sang an old familiar h3'mn to an air which he had learned in childhood ; he joined in the singing, but when it was done he could not have told what was the tune or the words. When the preacher announced his text, he started as from a dream, and as he repeated it : " To him who knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin" — the Si)irit at once applied It to his heart. He felt that this was precisely the case with himself He had examined the meaninor of Christ's
858 TllEUDOSIA ERNEST
commanduieiit He was satisfied that he had not obeyed it. He knew that it was his duty to tlo what Christ commanded, but he had deliberately and will- fully refused to do it ; and what was worse, he had ex- erted all the influence which he possessed to induce Miss Ernest to do the same.
The main thoughts of the sermon were, First, that men are always inclined to find excuses for their wick- edness.
Second, there is no excuse more frequently offered, or more implicitly relied upon, than ignorance.
Third, that although ignorance, when involuntary and unavoidable, may be plead in mitigation of one's guilt, as Jesus taught us when he said that he who knew not. his master's will and did it not, should be beaten with feiv stripes — yet those who might learn their duty were doubly guilty. Their ignorance itself was sin ; and those who knew and acknowledged their duty, and yet neglected or refused to do it, had not even the shadow of an excuse. Whatever doubt there might exist in any other case, their sinfulness was certain, and their guilt was fearful.
As the preacher dwelt upon this last thought, an ex- pression of agony quivered in the muscles of Mr. Percy's face, and the tears started in his eyes. He rested his Head on ".he pew before him, and covered his face to avoid tlie observation of those about him ; and as soon ^s the congregation was dismissed, hastened to his room at the hotel, and passed the rest of the da}' in most distressful reflections on his past conduct and present condition Not this one sin alone, but hundreds of othois, nay, more than he could count, came rushing back upon his memory. A lifetime of .szV? — sin against light, sin against love, sin against deep and plain con- victions of duty ; sins of his early boyhood, sms of his
NINTH NIGUT'S STUDY. 359
lieydaN yoiitii. sins of mature manhood, all crowded aroun. him and seemed to call down Heaven's vengeance on his iiead. He tried to pray, like the poor publican, iiod be merciful to me a sinner. But liis prayer seemed to be reflected back by the ceiling of the room. It had no messenger to bear it up to the throne He felt that he was lout. His sin had found him out, and he had no Saviour His hoj^es were all gone. He knew not what to dc. Night came, ajid he sat there on the side of the bjd, without a light, feeling that the darkness of the night was light in comparison with the darkness in his heart.
His agony of mind was so "-'-eat that he could not think. He could onl}^ feel. He would kneel down to pray, but he had no words to utter. He could oidy groan in his spirit. He would rise up again and sit u})on the side of the bed. Thus tiie night wore away. At last he threw himself upon the bed, and from mere ex- haustion fell asleep. When he awoke in the morning, his head was throbbing with pain, and his eyes were red and swollen. He excused himself from breakfast, and had a cup of coffee sent to his room. He felt that he could not attend to the business of the court, and sent for a lawyer of his acquaintance, made over to him a minute of his cases, with instructions to have them post>- poned if possible, and if not to appear for him. He then tried to consider what he ought to do in regard to his own condition as a sinner before God. It was not so much the fear of punishment that distressed him, as an overwhelming sense of yuilt ! "Oh!" he exclaimed, again and again, " what a sinner I What a sinner I have been ! What a sinner I am 1 Can there be mercy for a wretch like me 1 God have mercy on me a sinner "
Aftei some hours he ordered his horse, and started
360 THEODOSIA ERNEST
for Lvmc. He passed another night of horror on llio way — excusing himself for his speedy return, by sa37ing what was very true, "that he did not feel well."
The second day, as he rode along, he found his heart going out more frequently in pra3^er, not so much for pardon as for deliverance i'vom sin. He loathed himself for his vileuess, and longed to be delivered from the power of sin. And he began to think of Jesus more and more as a Saviour from iiin rather than from hell, until at length he found that he was looking to Jesus to save him from his sins. " Yes," said he, "he came to save sinners — not the righteous, but sinners. And his name was called Jesus, because he saves his people from their sins. Will he not save me ? But I am not one of his people. I am an outcast. I have betrayed him in the house of his friends. Can he, will he save me V And the Spirit said, " Come unto me all ye that are wear}^ and heavy laden, and I will give you rest. And wJiosoever cometh I will in nowise cast out." " Surely," he replied, " that includes my case. Blessed Jesus, save me. Save or I perish. Save, I cannot save myself Save, I give myself into thy hands. Yes, I take thee for my Saviour. Thou wilt save me. Thou dost save me. Oh, precious, precious Saviour ! Thou art indeed the Lord of ray heart. Show me what thou wilt have me to do. I have nothing but sin, but thou hast all needful righteousness to plead for me. Be my intercessor. Be my Redeemer. Yes, thou wilt forgive — thou hast already pardoned. I trust my soul to thee, and I believe that thou art able and willing to keep it to the day of redemption."
His distress was gone. He had found hope — he had found i)eace — he had found joy. He rode on home with a glad heart. What now had become of all his lofty aspirations for worldly fniuc and wealth. Wliat did ho
NINTH night's STUDY. 361
care now for position in society, for professional repu- tation, for all indeed that but three days ago enlisted his desires. He counted them as less than vanit}- and ^nothing. One only question now filled all his heart, and that was "Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do?" rie could understand now what Theodosia had meant when she talked so much about obedience to the Master's will. It was with these feelings he rode into the town, ignorant of all that had transpinul since he left — know- ing nothing of the effect which his letter had produced on Theodosia ; nothing of her baptism ; nothing of the meeting which was in progress. He saw the light in the court house, and heard the singing — dismounted and approached the door — and learned that it was a Baptist meeting. Without further question he went in and sat down.
The sermon was on the importance of Christians pro- fessing Christ before the world. And at its close, the announcement was made that the church was ready to receive applications for membership — and candidates for admission were requested to take a designated seat while the brethren sang a hymn. They had scarcely commenced the second stanza when Professor Jones and Mr. Percy came from opposite sides of the room. Neither had been conscious that the other was in the nouse. Both their hearts were full, and who will won- der that when they met they rushed into each others' arms, and wept upon each others' necks !
Need I tell how Theodosia drew her heavy vail down over her face, and how her heart beat audibly while she listened for the words that should explain this myster}' ?
She was not kept long in suspense, Mr. Percy was the first to relate his experience of grace. He date<l his conversion only a few hours back. " This very day."
3r,2 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
said he, "for the first time I have been enabled to real ize the pardon of my sins. I fancied some years ago that I had been converted, but am now convinced that I was self-deceived.'" He then began at his early con- viction of sin, and related the history of his connection with the Presbyterians — his recent examination of the subject of baptism. Though fully convinced that im- mersion was the only baptism, he had felt that it would be ruinous to his worldly prospects to change his church connections; and he told how it was that his sin had found him out in a distant town — what agony of mind he had endured for the past two days, and how it pleased God to speak peace to his soul as he was coming home. That he had seen the light in the court house, and learning that it was a Baptist meeting, had come in with the determination to ask for baptism.
I need not detain the reader by any account of the experience of grace which was related by Professor Jones. Nor need I attempt to describe the emotions of Theodosia, her mother, or Mrs. Jones, while this scene was passing. I will simply say that Uncle Jones and Mr. Percy, with some half a dozen others, were re- ceived, and Sabbath morning set as the time for theii baptism.
THE TENTH NIGHT'S STUD?.
WHICH IS MAINLY DEVOTED
SUBJECT OF ^' CLOSE COMMUNION."^
TENTH NIGHT'S STUDY.
)N accordance with the request expressed by M rs. Jones, as her visitors were about to leave on lliQ previous night, our company of inquirers met al her house to hear her complaint about close com- munion. This sul)ject had now assumed a new and touching interest to her. It had associated itself with her domestic atiections. She felt that hence- forth, in a very important sense, she must be separated from her husband ; and though from the moment that she saw he had decided upon being baptized, she had, from courtesy and affection, refrained from any further argument to him — 3^et her heart was full of reasons, which she longed for an opportunity to pour out upon some one else, showing that, in this })articular at least, the Baptists were the most bigoted, selfish, conceited, and uncharitable people that ever deserved tlie name of Christians. Mrs. Ernest, though she had entertained the same opinion until her daughter and her brother had become associated with the people she had formerly so much condemned, yet was now almost ready to admit that they might be right in this, as well as other things. In truth, she was like a great multitude of both sexes in all our religious bodies, who never have any opinion of their own upon an^' disputed point of faith or prac tice. She had always had full faith in the learning and the piety of her brother Jones and her })astor Johnson Wliat Uiey said was true, she never thought of doubting. They were, to her, infallible as the priest to a Catholic. What had she to do with these knotty questions ? Had 23 (3G.-.I
.•566 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
not her pastor spent his life in studying them ? and was it not in part for this that he was paid, to do the peo- ple's thinking for them, and tell them what was the true faith and practice of a Gos})cl church ?
But now, when her brother doubted the pastor's word, and even Theodosia had gotten the better of him in the argument, her confidence was gone ; her mind was all unsettled ; she knew not where to look for truth ; she must have time to choose anew her spiritual guide ; and in doing this, she was likely to be influenced more by her feelings than her judgment.
Mr. Courtney found Mrs. Ernest and Theodosia wait- ing for him when he called to accompany them to the Professor's residence ; and even Edwin had been dili- gently studying his lessons, that he might gain time to go with them and listen to the discussion. On their arrival, they found that the Rev. Dr. McNought, the President of the college, had called to take a friendly cup of tea ; and, at the urgent request of both the Pro- fessor and Mrs. Jones, he consented to remain and take part in the conversation. Uncle Jones stepped out for a moment, and Mrs. Jones introduced the subject by saying :
" Don't you think it hard, Doctor, that my husband has placed himself in a position that will forever pre- vent us from communing together at the table o^ the Lord ? I declare it almost breaks my heart when [ think of it."
" It does indeed seem hard, madam; but we all know that Professor Jones has only acted in accordance with the requirements of his conscience. I do not think that any uwo. who knows him can find any reason to blame him for any thing ^'it too great haste in making his de- cision. If he had tak'en more time, and examined the
TENTU night's STUDY. iu7
whole subject with proper care, he must have .^. -^eto different conclusions."
" No, doctor, Mr. Jones did not act hastily. This is no new subject to him. He has been laboring over it for months, and I feared how it would end. He has ex- amined it with the most careful attention, and decided with cool and pra3^erful deliberation. He knows every inch of the ground over which he has passed, and can give you a reason for every change of opinion that he nas made. He is not a man lightly to change his faith on any superficial investigation ; and tliat is what so much troubles me. I know when his mind is once de- cided, and he has oi)enly expressed his conviction, he is immovable as the Kock of Gibraltar. I have no hope of ever winning him back. His i)ath and mine are henceforth separate : I am a Presbyterian, he is a Bap- tist. He will abandon his professorshii) ; he will engage in the work of the ministry. I shall go and listen to his preaching ; 1 shall be present when he administers the Supper of the Lord, and neither I nor his sister here — who loves him more than any one in the world except myself — neither of us can partake of the elements at the table where our own brother and husband is pre- siding. He will be bound to reject us from the company of those whom he will call the saints of God, as though we were not Christians, and never expected to commune together in heaven."
'•As for me," said Mrs. Ernest, " if brother ever be- comes the pastor of a church, and thinks that I ought to be baptized, I shall let him baptize me. I suspect he is as competent to judge of the meaning of the Scripture as Mr. Johnson, if he only took the same pains to study into it. But I don't see why the Baptists can't act like other Christians. We always invite them to our table — wliy should they not invite us to theirs ? Don't we all
368 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
trust in the same Saviour ; and are we not all seeking the same heaven ? I wonder if they expect there will be two tables up there, and the}^ can sit down by themselves in the very presence of Jesus, and send every one who has not been under the water to another apartment ? No, no 1 we will all commune together there, and we ouo;ht all to commune too;ether here. I don't blame brother or Theodosia for becoming Baptists, for I know they were compelled to do it b}' a sense of duty ; but I do blame the Baptists for being so bigoted and unchari- table, and acting as though they thought nobody was good enough for heaven but themselves ; and I don'^ see as they are so much better than other people, aftei all."
" You place the matter on the right ground," replied Dr. McNought. " Every man ought to be fully per- suaded in his own mind, and then ought to be at liberty to act out his own convictions of duty. We demand tliis for ourselves, we ought to concede it to others. If any one feels that he cannot obey Christ without being immersed, let him be immersed ; but let him not say, that because Iris conscience requires immersion, that therefore every peraonK'i must. I profess to love the Lord Jesus, and I desire sincerely and honestly, if I know m3^ own heart, to ol)ey all his commandments. But while Professor Jones has become fully convinced that the Lord commanded us to be immersed after we believe, I am as fully convinced that he commanded us to be sprinkled while we were yet unconscious babes. My conscience, therefore, is satisfied ; and if I shoild be immersed, I should commit a grievous sin, for I would be doing that in professed obedience to Christ which Christ has never commanded. Now, Baptists have no right to ask me to violate my conscience, nor (I say it with all due respect to you, Mr. Courtney) have the}
TENTH night's STUDY. 369
any right to exclude me from the table of the Lord for not doing what I regard as a sin."
" You set the subject in a very strong light," replied Mr. Courtney, "and I am glad you do so. I wish to meet this difficulty fairly and candidly. I seek no eva- sion, and am willing to submit our faith and our prac- tice, in this and every other particular, to the sternest and strictest Scriptural tests. If we are wrong, no people in the world should sooner hasten to get right than we, who have no law but the Scripture, and no leader but Christ. And now, let us look at your argu- ment. You say that a church has no Scriptural riglit. to exclude from her communion any person who professes to love the Lord Jesus, and desires to obey all his com- mandments, whether he regards those commandments in the same li^ht which the church does or not. A ojreat many professed Christians seem to see the subject in the same light. They say it is the Lord^s table ; and because it is his, and not ours, the church in which the table is set has no right to exclude from it any who profess to love the Lord, and who desire to approach it."
" Certainly," said Mrs. Jones; "I do not see how any body of Christians could ever have felt disposed to arrogate to themselves the authority to determine who shall and who shall not approach the table of the Lord, or upon what authority they can possibly rest so pre- sumptuous a claim."
" Doubtless, then," mildly replied Mr. Courtney, "you will think it is a great exhibition of personal self-con- Qdence, or of Baptist assumption on my part, when I assure you that I can prove, not only to my own satis- faction, but also to yours and Dr. McXought's —
" I. That every church of Christ has the exclusive right within itself to decide who shall be participants •n its communion.
S7C THEODOSTA ERNEST.
*'II. That all Pedobaptists, including Presbyterians, are accustomed to recognize and exercise this right, on the same general principles that Baptists do ; and,
III. That no church can refuse or neglect to exercise that right without being guilty of open rebellion against the positive requirements of the law of Christ.''^
" I don't know," replied she, " what you may be able to do about the first and the last of your three proposi tions ; but I am sure you can't make me believe that Presbyterians and Methodists either believe in or prac- tice close communion like the Baptists. You and my husband have proved so man}- strange things from the Scriptures since he has been engaged in this investiga- tion, that I won't deny that you can prove any thing you say you can, which depends upon them. But the faith and practice of our church, I am sure, I know as much about as you do. And I know we have never set any such restrictions around our table, as you habitually set around yours. We have always regarded it as the Lord's table, and we constantly invite to our com- munion all who profess to love the name of Jesus."
" You almost tempt me, madam, to prove my second proposition first, and show you at once that 3"ou Presby- terians are as close in your communion as we are, and that the only difference between us is that you are more open in your baptism."
" I wish you would, and I think then I could better attend to your proof on the other points."
" Very well — since you desire it, we will take this up first, and then return to the other. If I did not mis- understand you, it is your opinion that all who profess to love the Lord Jesus should be invited to his table, and that the practice of your people is in accordance with, this rule."
" Certainly ; it is the Lord's table and not ours. And
TENTH MOnr'S STUDY. 3T1
we do not undertake to decide on the fitness of those who approach it. Let every one judge for himself. ' To his own master he standeth or falleth ;' whoever thinks he has the love of Jesus .n his lieart, let hira come."
" Then of course you invite the Roman Catholic, whom you regard as a follower and subjeci of anti Christ, the man of sin — the great enemy and persecutor of the church, of whom it was foretold that * he should wear out the saints of the Most High.' He will assure you that altliough he h)ves, and reverences, and wor- ships the Blessed Virgin Mother of God, he also loves her Son and the holy cliihl Jesus. And he will assure you, moreover, that his conscience absolutely' demands of him to be the very creature of the Pope, which he is known to be. If he should renounce his faith and prac- tice, he feels that he would be guilty of a mortal sin. Of course, Doctor, you would not exclude him 'for not doiuiir what he would reo^ard as sin.'
"Then there is the Unitarian. He claims that he lovea Christ and delights in his service, although he denies his divinity, au<l regards him onl}' as a creature. He is sincere and honest in his faith; of course you make Inm welcome. He says he could not worship Christ without being guilty of idolatry; and no idolator hath any part in the kingdom of heaven. You surely will not reject him for not doing what he hoiiedly belie vcs would place his soul in danger of destruction.
"And near him stands a Universalist. You invite him. of course for he sa3's he loves Christ better than any of us, and has more reason to love him. We can only love him as the Saviour of those who believe and repent, but he can love him as the Saviour of all the human race ; and he will assure 3'ou that he would re- ^rard it as dishonorable to God to condemn a sr.ul to
372 TUEODOSIA ERNEST.
endless punishment for the few sins he might be able to commit in this life, that he would feel himself fearfully guilty should he venture in his heart to believe that he will do it. And I am sure, Doctor, you could not, ac- cording to the rule you laid down awhile ago, exclude him for not believing what, in his opinion, he could not believe without sin.
"There are also many people in the world who come to your meetings, who have never connected themselves with any religious society, who, nevertheless, make great professions at times of their love to Jesus. They thank their God that they are so much better than many members of 3^our church. Not only will the}-- assure you that they love God better than you or I, but can boast they have ahuays loved him, and never haye done much, if any thing, for which they think he can com- plain of them. Upon what ground can you exclude these : since, according to your rule, it is the LonVs table, and every one is entitled to judge for himself of his fitness to approach it ? How dare you say that each and all of these shall not come and fill your table every time the cloth is spread, mixing with yourselves as every way 3'our equals, and showing to the world that they are in all respects equally entitled to this great and distinctive privilege of the church of Jesus Christ ?"
" Oh, no, Mr. Courtney, I did not mean that. 1 don't want to commune with Roman Catholics, or Unitarians, or Universalists,or non-professors ; and we Presbyterians never have been accustomed to invite to our table any such people. All I meant to say was, that we iuAite all tho^e whom we have rea.son to regard as converted men or women, and who have made an open profession of their faith in Ghrist.^^
"Ah, madam, that is quite a different thing from in
TENTH night's STUDY. 373
Tiling all who profess to love the Lord of the table. It seems then, after all, that you, not they, are to be the judge of their fitness. But will Dr. McNought agree to this new rule ? He says, if I did not misunderstand him, * No church has any right or ought to have any in- clination to exclude any one from the table of the Lord who professes to love the Lord Jesus, and to desire to obey all his commandments, and who is sincere and honest in his conviction that his faith and practice is correct, however undely it may differ from that of the chuj'ch whose communion he seeks.'"
" Perhaps I expressed myself a little too loosely," replied the Doctor. " 1 did not intend to say that the church is to have no discretion in the matter ; but only that she has no right to exclude any whom she recog- nizes as genuine and evangelical Christians. Now, you Baptists do not pretend to doubt (at least you often say so) that Presbyterians and Methodists, and members of other evangelical churches, are just as good Christians as you are yourselves, and every way as worthy and well qualified for the the table of the Lord as you are, saving only that we have not been under the water ; and as we are prevented from going under the water by our conscientious regard to what we understand to be the commandments of Christ, you have no right and ought to have no disi)Osition to exclude us on that ac- count."
" Never mind the Baptists just now. Doctor. We will come to them presently. We are now investigating the practice of Presbyterians, and the principles on which it rests, and we have progressed thus far. You do not, it seems, leave it for every one to determine for himself in regcard to his fitness to commune. You do not invite all who may think themselves worthy and well qualified, but those on^y whom you have reason to think are con-
374 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
v^erted or regenerated men — and the testimony on which you regard them as such is the fiict that the}^ are mem- bers in good standing in any of those churches which require evidence of conversion as a prerequisite to mem- bership."
" Precisely so, sir," replied the Doctor. " 1 cculd not have described our practice more perfectly myself."
"But there is. another thing which you Presbyte rians require besides evidence of conversion, and which you will no more dispense with than 3'ou will with that."
"And what is that, pray?" asked Mrs. Jones. =' Vou seem to know more about us than we do ourselves."
"You shall yourself answer ^-our own question, madam. When one not previousl}^ a member of any religious denomination is converted from his sins, re- pents and believes, and gives good evidence that he has become a new creature in Christ Jesus, do you at once, without an}' further preliminaries, invite him to your communion table ?"
" Certainly we do, as soon as he has made a public profession and united with the church. We could not, of course, invite one who was not a member of any church."
" Very good ; but in what manner does he become a member ? Is he not received in the ordinance of baji- tism?"
" Of course — if he has not been baptized in infancy he must be baptized. Baptism is the door of entrance into the church, and no one can be a member who has not been baptized."
" Perhaps, Doctor, you maybe more familiar with the practice of your denomination than Mrs. Jones. Do you agree with her that no one is recognized as a full mem- ber till he has been baptized; or do you invite him at
TENTH night's STUDY. 8t6
once to your table as soon as you are satisfied that he IS a converted man ?"
" Our rules in regard to this matter," replied the Doc- tor, " are clearly laid down on pages 504 and 505 of the Confession of Faith, ' On the admission of persons to Sealing Ordinances':
" ' Children born within the pale of the visible church and dedicated to God in baptism, are under the inspec- tion and government of the church, and are to be taught to read and repeat the Catechism, the Apostles' Creed, and the Lord's Prayer. Tlie}' are to be taught to pra}'', to abhor sin, to fear God, and to obe}' the Lord Jesus Christ ; and when the}' come to years of discretion, if they be free from scandal, appear sober and stead}'', and to have sufficient knowledge to discern the Lord's body, they ought to be informed that it is their duty and their privilege to come to the Lord's Supper.' 'When iin baptized persons apply for admission into the church, they shall, in ordinary cases, after giving satisfaction with respect to their knowledge and piety, make a public pro- fession of their faitli in the presence of the congrega- tion; and thereupon be baptized.' "
"And on page 456," replied Mr. Courtney, "you will tind this rule — 'All baptized persons are members of the church, are under its care, and subject to its government and discipline ; and when they have arrived at ^^earg of discretion, they are bound to perform all the duties of church members.^
" It would seem, therefore, that although you are, ao- cording to your 'Confession of Faith,' at liberty to dispense with any public profession of faith in the case of those baptized in infancy, you are not to dispense with baptism. All the baptized, whether converted or unconverted, are, when "they come to years of discretion. ' bound to perform all the duties of church meml>cr»
876 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
And if the celebration of the Holy Supper is one of the duties of church members, they are bound to commune ; but no one whom you regard as unhaptize.d, however pious he may be, can be permitted to approach your table, any more than any one whom we regard as un- baptized can come to ours. What then is the difference between your practice and ours ? In what respect is your communion more open than ours ? Simply aud only in this : That you, according to page 456 of your Con- fession of Faith, admit the unreligious and unconverted, who have never even professed to be the subjects of regenerating grace, provided they were baptized in their infancy — while we admit none who have not made for themselves a credible profession of their repentance and faith. I will, however, do you the justice to say, that many of your churches in this country so far repudiate your own rules, as not to invite or require the baptized children to come to the table of the Lord till they have given evidence of conversion ; and these bodies and our- selves, therefore, stand on precisely the same ground — that is, we each require evidence of both conversion and baptism, before we admit or invite any to our com- munion."
"But yet," said Mrs. Ernest, "we can't stand upon the same ground, for we always invite you, and you never invite w-s."
" The reason is not, madam, that we do not act upon the same principle, but that we differ in regard to what baptism is, and consequently as to who have been bap- tized. You consider all baptized who have been sprin- kled in infancy. We regard those only as baptized who have been immersed on a profession of their faith. But you no more extend your invitation to commune to those whom you consider unbaptized than ive do. Your bap- tism reaches further than ours, but your invitation to
TENTH NIQHT^S STUDY. 3Tt
commune iiecfr reaches heyoiid your baptism. Do you uot see, therefore, that all our ditference of opinion is .simply about baptism, and not about communion? Sliow us that the sprinkling of infants is Scriptural baptism, and we can, and will at once extend our invita- tion to the communion so as to embiace 3'ou all. But until you can show us that, 3'ou surely cannot ask us to invite those whom we regard as unbaptized, while 3'oii cannot invite those whom yoa regard as unbaptized ?
" Except in case of the children of your own church members, you require both conversion and baptism as prerequisites to communion. And for the most part, in this country, though not in Europe, you repudiate your Confession so far as to require it even of them. You refuse to commune with Universalists, and Unitarians, and Roman Catholics, because, although you think they have been baptized, you do not believe the}' have ex- perienced the regeneration of the Gospel. You refuse to commune with a newly converted person, though satisfied that he is really born again, till he has pub- licly professed his faith, and been baptized. It was on this ground that Professor Moses Stuart, one of your ablest writers and most learned men, said that if a pious member of the society- of Quakers or Friends should so far forsake his principles, as to desire to commune with him at the table of the Lord, he must refuse unless he would be first baptized.
" Precisely so it is with us. We also require evidence, both of conversion and of baptism. We ask for neither more nor less than you do. Are you not satisfied r* or Bhall we spend further time upon this point ?"
" I did not," replied the Doctor, " need to be told that Presbyterians require baptism as a i)rerequisite to com« munion. No one has ever doubted it. so far as 1 have
378 THEODOSIA ERNEST
been informed. I am sure no one ever had any reasoja to doubt it."
•'* On what ground, then, do you complain of us so bitterly, since we require nothing more than you do?"
" We do not complain of you for requiring hajAlsm as a necessary and invariable prerequisite to commu- nion, but for requiring immersion, and thus setting up your judgment against that of the whole Christian world. You will not only have baptism, but you must have your own baptism — whereas, we receive that of all other denominations, including yours. How then can you say that we stand on the same ground ?"
" I do not say that we stand on the same ground as regards baptism. Here I know we differ as far as a few drops sprinkled upon the forehead of an unconscious babe, differs from the plunging of a believing Christian man or woman into a liquid grave. But in regard to communion, we agree, at least, so far as this subject under discussion is concerned. That is, we both require baptism as preparatory to a Scriptural approach to the Lord's Table. This much you freely admit You admit also, that no Presbyterian Church is accustomed to invite or permit the approach of those to your com munion whom you regard as unbaptized. You will admit, moreover, that you have somewhere, in what yon call * The Presbyterian Church,' the power to exclude from your communion such as you may deem unwortliy. I need not, therefore, dwell any longer on this point. You cannot deny that 1 have fully established my second proposition, which was, as you will remember— That Fedobaptist churches, eoen Presbyterians, are ac- customed, as well as Baptists, to recognize and exercise the right to determine for themselves whom it is proper' and expedient to admit to their communion. And I havi*
TENTH NIGHT'S STUDY. 3T9
proved, also, that you as well as we refuse to admit airy one who has not, in your opinion, been baptized.
"So far we are perfectly agreed ; but because you con- sider many persons as baptized whom we regard as uii- baptized, 3''ou can invite many whom we must refuse. Here, then, is the gi-st of the whole dispute. Now, let rae ask 3'ou one question. Does not the Presb^'terian Church claim and exercise the right to decide for her- aelf what baptism is, according to her understanding of the Scriptures ?"
" Certainly she does," replied the Doctor, " and you may find her decision, with the proof-texts on which it rests, recorded on page 140 of the Confession of Faith: ' Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary ; but baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling.' "
" Why then should you or any one complain if a Bap- tist Church should feel that she had equally the right to decide for herself according to her understanding of the Scriptures, and should give her opinion and the proof- texts on which it rests ? And what if she should come to the conclusion, that ' dipping the person in the water is necessary,' and that baptism cannot be administered at all 'by pouring,' or 'by sprinkling?' What then? Must she act as though she did not believe it? Must she submit her judgment to yours, and receive as bap- tism, on 3'our recommendation, what she solemnly be- lieves and declares is no baptism ? Yet this is what you so modestly re(iuire her to do, when you deny to her the right to exclude from her communion the sprinkled ani the i)Oured-on members of Pedobaptist societies. If sprinkling and pouring are not baptism, then they have not been baptized ; and if they have not been baptized, then they are not Scripturally prepared for communion."
" But how is it made so certain," asked Mrs. Ernest.
380 THEODOSIA ERNEST
" that no one can be permitted to commune who has not been baptized ? I know it is the common practice of the churches of all denominations, but I don't rcmembi-r any express declaration of Scripture on which it rests/
"It is not necessary, madam, to have any express precept, when we have a plain and unmistakable exam- ple. But in regard to this point, we have what is equiva lent to both.
" We have the often repeated command — Repent and be baptized, believe and be baptized — showing that bap- tism was at once to follow penitence and faith, without anj^ intervening act. Then we have the unvarying ex- ample, many thousand times repeated, showing that this command was thus understood and thus literally obeyed. They believed and were baptized. Baptism instantly followed the profession of their faith, leaving no time for the observance of any other rite between ; and then we read, Acts ii. 46, that after their baptism they con- tinued ' in breaking of bread.'
" Moreover, the sacrament of the Supper is a church ordinance. It was ordained to be observed by the church, assembled together in a church capacity. And of course no one could participate in it but church members. And no one has ever been regarded as a church member till he had been baptized. This was the door of entrance, the initiatory rite b}^ which one was received among and united to the people of God, and so became entitled to the privileges of the visible kingdom of Christ. Hence the Apostle, in writing to the ancient churches, fre- quentl}" alluded to their baptism ; alwa^^s addressing them as baptized persons, who had put on Christ in baptism ; who had been buried with him by baptism ; who had been planted together with him by baptism ; who had been in a certain sense regenerated hy baptism ; and who were in some sort saved b}'' baptism. This \%
TENTH night's STUDY. 881
80 evident that no sect or denomination have ever con- sidered the unbaptized as church members and commu- nicants. The open communion Baptists are, so far as I know, the first and the onlj' Christians who have advo- cated the giving of the communion to those whom they regarded as unbaptized.
" That godly, learned man and excellent commentator Dr. Poddridoje, author of ' The Rise and Proofress of Religion in the Soul,' and many other excellent works, saj^s : 'It is" certain that Christians in general have always been spoken of as baptized persons by the most ancient Fathers, and it is also certain, so far as our knowledge of i)rimitive Christianity extends, that no unbaptized person received the Lord's Supper.' — (tI/z.s- cellaneouH Worki<, \). 510.) Dr. Wall, the great cham- pion of Pedobaptism, sa3's expressly: 'No church ever gave the communion to au}^ persons before they were baptized.' 'Among all the absurdities that ever were held, none ever maintained that any persons should partake of the communion before they were baptized.' Lord Chancellor King, of the Church of England, in his work on the Church, says, page 190: 'Baptism was alwa\'s precedent to the Lord's Supper, and none ever re- ceived the Eucharist till he had been baptized.' And those who might have any d-oubt about this, he refers to the testimony of Justin Martyr, who describes the prac- tice of the primitive churches in his famous 'Apology,* addressed to the Roman Emperor, al)out the 3'ear A. D 138 or 139. You will find a translation of so much of this memorable document as refers to this subject, in one of your own historians, Rev. Lyman Coleman s Apostolical and Primitive Church, page o40. ' After baptizing the believer and making him one with us, we conduct him to the brethren, as they are called, where thev are assembled fervently to offer up their commoti 24
382 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
supplication for themselves, for hira who has beet illuminated, and for all men everywhere, that we may live worthy of the truth which we have learned, and be found to have kept the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation. After prayer, we salute one another with a kiss. After this, bread ansl a cup of wine and water are brought to the president, which he takes, and offers up praise, etc.'"
" Oh, that is enough, Mr. Courtney. I did not wani to know what Justin Martyr, or Lord King, or Dr Wall, or an}^ bod}- else said about it, but only what was in the Scriptures. If I understand aright, you Bap- tists claim that your faith and practice rests exclusively on them."
"That is very true, Mrs. Ernest; but I thought it might be satisfactory to you to know that the same Scriptures which have led us to require baptism as an essential prerequisite to communion, have been equally able to convince all our most learned and zealous oppo- nents, so that in whatever else we may be found to dif- fer, we agree in this. A sect of the Baptists themselves are, I believe, the first and only people who have ever attempted to show from the Scriptures that the commu- nion of the church may be shared with the unbaptized; and the3' were led to this evidently from their desire to be free from the reproach of close communion. They could not deny that immersion was the only baptism, and therefore they could not but regard their sprinkled brethren as unbaptized, and they could only commune with them by denying that baptism was an essential pre- requisite to the Eucharist. But not even Robert Hall, who was the leader, or at least, the ablest champion of his sect, with all his vast learning and surpassing elo quence, could persuade the Pedobaptists that they ought to dispense with baptism in their communicanta
TENTH night's STUDY. 383
though many of them and some Baptists profess to have been convinced that Baptists ought to dispense with it in regard to those who wish to approach their table. But the great body of the Baptist Churches still agree with their Pedobaptist brethren in requiring baptism before communion, and we must continue to do so till some one can find in the Scriptures some precept or ex- ample for reversing the order so plainly established by Christ and the Apostles, which places repentance and faith first, then baptism, and then the breaking of bread and the other ordinances of the church of God.
"It is as evident u any thing can be, that if any Jew or Gentile had professed his faith in Christ in the Apos- tles' days, and yet had neglected or refused to put on Christ in his holy ordinance of baptism, he would never have .been invited to the privileges of a church member."
" Of course he would not have been," replied the Doctor, " for there was then no room at all for doubt about the nature or the subjects of baptism. The Apos- tles had the act visibly set before their eyes by Christ himself. And the peoi)le all knew what was intended when they were commanded to be baptized. If any one refused or neglected to obey, it was xjrima facie evi- dence that he was no Christinn, and consequently an unfit subject for commumon. It showed that he either did not believe or was disobedient at heart. The early churches, therefore, were bound to reject all who would not be baptized. But now the case is ver^^ different. The mode of baptism has now, in many minds, become a matter of great uncertainty. Some think it is one thinor and some another ; and some think it anv one of three things. Now, since good Christians ma}" thus, while they seek and intend to do right, yet fall intc the wrong, how can any church take it upon herself
S84 THEODOSTA ERNEST.
to decide that one of these modes is right and all oth(;r8 are wrong, and so exclude all who do not conform to her standard ? for now a failure to conform is not, as in the Apostles' days, an evidence of an unbelieving or a rebellious spirit, but only of a mistaken appre- hension of duty, into which the most sincere and pious Christian is liable to fall.''
" I acknowledge, Doctor, that this argument has a great deal of plausibility about it. It is the best that can be offered in favor of open communion, and has succeeded in imposing upon the minds of some eminent Baptists. But now, if you will give me your candid attention for a few minutes, I will show you that it is utterly destitute of any Scriptural foundation or logical forced
" You speak very confidently, sir, and I will gladly give you the attention you require ; but if you can do what you say, I will concede that you are a master in logic — for I conceive it perfectly unanswerable."
" I know, Doctor, that it is the best and strongest ar- gument which can be made for open communion ; ?nd yet I am sure I can satisf3^3^ou that it ought not to have the very slightest iveight in the decision of this contro- versy— because it has not even the shadow of a founda- tion in the Word of God on which to rest. But before 1 enter upon it further, 1 will, with your consent, go back and take up the first general proposition which 1 pur- posed to establish when we entered upon this discussion, and that was, as 3'ou will recollect. That every church of Christ has the exclusive right within herself to decide who shall be partakers of her communion. We have seen already in what manner your church and others are accustomed to exercise this right. It is simply the right to determine who shall be entitled to the privileges of membership — a right which must of necessity belong
TENTH NIGHT'S STUDY. 38fc
to every such organization in oider to preserve its purity or perpetuity."
"I do not," said the Doctor, "feel disposed to dispute with you about this. If a Baptist church is a church of Christ, I am willing to grant that within certain limits it is to judge of the qualifications of its members and communicants."
"What are the 'limits,' Doctor, to which you refer?"
"The requirements of the Scriptures. She is to require only such qualifications as the Scriptures de- mand."
" But who is to judge of what the Scriptures de- mand. Doctor, the church or the applicants for her communion?"
" She must, of course, judge for herself The Scrip- ture is given for her guidance. She must examine for herself, and be governed by her understanding of its instructions. Those who are not of her membership can have no right to dictate to her in the matter of their own reception — that is self-evident."
" But now. Doctor, what if she should, upon a careful examination of the Scriptures, come to the conclusion, as your church has done, that no one is permitted to commune that has not been baptized ?"
" Then as a matter of course she will do as we do — admit none who have not been baptized."
" But suppose she should come tu the additional con- clusion that sprinkling and pouring are 7iot baptism, and that, contrary to the decision of your church, dip- ping of the person in the water is necessary to constitute a Scriptural baptism — what then?"
" Why, then I suppose she must admit none who have not been thus 'dipped,' for she cannot recognize any others as baptized."
" Of course she must. That is self-evident. And
386 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
now, Doctor, I trust 3'ou see the fallacy of your boasted argument for open communion ; for if every church is to decide foi^ herself who shall commune, subject only to the laws of Christ, and if ahe is to be the interpreter and judge of these laws, and should be led to determine that these laws demand that every communicant s/ia// have been immersed, what could she do for those who had been only sprinkled or poured ui)on ? Must she not reject them, however good and pious thej' might be? They may be sincere and honest — they may be intelli- gent and learned ; but they are not to decide this question for the church. Those without cannot dictate the terms of communion to those who are within. The church must for herself examine. For herself she must decide, and upon her own decision she must act. What if the nature of baptism he the subject of doubt to many good and holy men — she as a church has notli- ing to do with their doubts, unless they are her own members. What if good and pious men, seeking to go right, do sometimes go wrong, she as a church is not to forsake what she thinks rioht, and i>;o wrono; too, merely to accommodate them. On the contrary, she is to stand firmly, like a great rock in the wilder- ness, a fixed and settled wa3'-mark, which men may see afar off in their wanderings, and by it be guided back into the old paths. If others, like the mariner at sea without his chart and compass, wander to and fro, being wafted about with every wind of doctrine — she is to stand like the light-house, against whose base the winds and waves beat alike in vain, standing ever erect, and sending far across the ocean of doubts and uncer- tainties the calm and changeless light by which they may direct their course into the destined haven.
"Now look at your argument again. In the days of the Apostles, every one knew certainly what baptism
TENTH night's STUDY. 381
vva.s, and evoiy ohurch was bound to exclude all who had not been baptized. But now, many good and pious people luive become doubtful what baptism is. Some think it one thing, and some another ; and therefore, no church of Jesus Christ ought to have any opinion about it ; and every one ought to be received who thinks // im- aelf baptized. The church has no right to decide even as to what constitutes the very act hy which men are admitted to her membership, or as to who shall be permitted to enjoy the peculiar and distinctive privi- leges of members. This must all be left to the good and pious, ivithout ht^r ronk^i, to determine for her. If they have doubts, she must give up her right to deter- mine for herself, antl humi)!}' receive those who judge themselves to be worthy and well qualified, although she ma}' have no doui)ts at all. Do yoU not see, that if the principle on which 3'our argument rests be once admitted, it will destroy' not only the independence, but the ver}' organization of the churches ? The principle is this — A Baptist Church has decided that certain prerequisites are needful to lier membershii) or commu- nion ; but there are certain persons, out of her ranks, who think she ought not to require these preliminaries, and demand the privileges of church members v/ithout having complied with them. The church consents to their demand — admits them on their terms — abandons her own judgment, and repudiates her own rules — does she not at once lose her distinctive character, and cease to be a Baptist Church? Is she a church at all, when those without make laws for her — decide (questions of faith and practice for her, and determine who shall take the place of members at her table, and by what rules she shall exercise her discipline ? — for if the\' determine that she has no right to exclude a member for want of baptism, they can, of course, with equal reason deter-
388 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
mine that she has no right to exclude any one for anj other cause.
" Look at your argument again. It takes it for granted, that because you and some other good and pious men doubt about the nature of the act of baptism, that therefore no one com arrive at any ceiiainty in re- gard to it ; and therefore no church of Christ has any right to take any decisive action in regard to it. If this be true in respect to baptism, it is, of course, equally so in regard to other things ; and the necessary result will be, that no church has a right, in regard to any subject, to hold opinions, and to act upon them, if good and pious people of other denominations chance to differ from them. Your argument, if it is good for any thing at all, destroys all church independence and all church sovereignty, and makes it necessary for every church of Christ to go out and ask those who are not of her membership, and have no special interest in her affairs, what she may believe, and teach, and do ; and this in regard to matters which are to her of the most vital im- portance, involving her very existence, by determining for her who she shall admit to the privileges of member- ship."
" Oh, no, Mr. Courtne}', I did not intend to intimate that the church had no right to deny memhen^hiij to those who might sincerel}' and honestly differ from her on matters about which good men have not been able to agree. But we were s[)eaking of onl}' occasional com- munion ^
" The principle is the same. Doctor, whether the com- munion be occasional or continual. If he may commune once, why not twice ? If twice, why not a dozen times — and, indeed, every time the table is spread? And if he may, of right, continually enjoj' this peculiar and 'lislinctivo privilecre of cbnrfli nioTnl"M-«]iip. whv not
TENTH night's STUDY. 389
every other privilege? If we have no right to exclude you from communing with us occasionally, we have none to exclude you perpetually — and if we have no right to exclude you, who are not a member of our church, we could not, of course, exclude one who is a member for a similar cause. Your right to determine for a church the terms of its communion, includes the right to de- termine for it any other principle of faith or practice. If you may dictate who shall commune once, you may with equal propriety dictate who shall commune all the time. And yet, you modestly require us, because for- sooth you and some other good and pious men are doubtful about the nature of baptism, to ^ield our con- victions to your doubts, and assure us that we have no right to decide for ourselves upon the nature of the very act of initiation into our membership — forgetting, of course, that your own church has positively decided for herself, page 146 of the Confession, where she declares that 'dipping of the person in water is not necessary;' and on page 431 (chap. vii. of Directory), where she absolutely requires the minister to 'baptize the child with water, by pouring or sprinkling it on the face of the child, without adding any other ceremony.' Pres- byterians cau decide for themselces what baptism is ; sm can Methodists ; so can Lutherans ; so can Episco- palians ; so can Roman Catholics ; so can every body else who will decide that it is sprinkling or pouring. But if the Baptists claim the same privilege, they are counted guilty of the most unheard-of presumption, and all the Pedobaptist world desires to know by what authority- they venture, like other churches, to think for themselves, investigate for themselves, and come to their own conclusions; or, if they must think, and investigate, and decide, yet you demand to know how
390 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
they can dare to carry out their convictions in theii practice."
" Oh, no, Mr. Courtney, we do not," said Mrs. Jones, " object to your deciding for yourselves. It is to the nature of your decision that we object. If you had decided, like all the rest of the Christian world, that baptism was sprinkling or pouring, or that it was of little consequence which way it was done, no one could object to your exercise of the abstract right to decide for yourselves. But we do think it is evidence of either bigotry or self-conceit, when 3''0U set up your opinions against the whole religious world."
" Your idea of church independence, then, is simply this : Every Baptist church has a full and perfect right to think and decide for herself on all matters of faith and practice, provided she will always think and decide just as your church does.
" But, Doctor, I have another objection to your argu- ment, which makes me wonder how it could ever for a single moment have imposed upon any thinking Baptist — and that is, that it assumes, and takes for granted as the very basis on which it rests, that no one now can cer- tainly know what the act of baptism was. In the days of the Apostles, you say, there could not be any doubt about this, and therefore all who would not be baptized, must of necessity have been excluded ; but now it is so very uncertain, that good men, meaning to go right, may yet go wrong, and must not on that account be excluded. Let us look at it again in this light. The Apostles knew what baptism was, for they had seen the Saviour himself baptized. The early churches knew, for they had seen the Apostles baptize according to the pattern which Jesus showed in Jordan. But we who live in these ends of the earth, are entirely de- pendent for our information on the written Word of
TENTH night's STUDY. 391
God. The Holy Spirit of Inspiration attemjited to con- vey to us in writing such an account of the organiza- tion of a church, and the ordinances of Christ's visible kingdom, that we might continue them to the end of time ; but he made such bungling work of it, that it is now absolutely impossible to find out what he meant. We can neither know who were the persons to be initi- ated, nor b3'' what act they are to be brought in.
"It is true, that he commanded people first to believe and then to be baptized. It is true, that he never, in a single instance, commanded any one to be baptized ivho had not believed. And that there is not in the record a i^ingle cane in whicli an}' but a professed be- liever ever was baptized, nor is there a single allusion, direct or indirect, to the baptism of an unconscious babe. And yet men sa}', that no one now can certninly determine that he did not command, and does not now require, that little infants who cannot believe or perform an}'- act of intelligent worship, shall be baptized, and thus made members of his churches.
" True, his people are always spoken of as a renewed and regenerated people ; as a holy and peculiar people, zealous of good works. The churches of the Scriptures were addressed as active, intelligent, and pious people. And we know, from sad and frequent observation, that the baptism of an infant does not regenerate it or make it any holier than it was before. We know that baptized children do not, on account of their baptism, grow \\\) servers of God and of his laws, yet no one now can tell that Christ did not require these unconverted children of wrath and heirs of hell, to be brought into his church and counted among its members.
"And then as regards the act of initiation, which the Scriptures call baptism, your argument takes for granted that nobodv can now tell what it was. True,
392 TUEODOSIA ERNEST.
ihe very word itself declares that it was imiiiersioii, if we should read it as wo do in any other book. Nc scholar ever dreamed of its meaning to sprinkle or to pour, in any book except the Bible, nor in any part of the Bible but the New Testament, nor in any place ir. the New Testament where it does not refer to the ordi- nance. p]verywhere else its signification is sufficiently plain. When Josephus, writing in the same language, and about the same time with the Evangelists, speaks of a youth being baptized in a lake till he was drowned, no scholar ever doubted that the lad was dipped. When he speaks of a ship being baptized in the sea, no one ever ventured to doubt that he meant to say it was aunk. No one ever doubted what Hippocrates means when he speaks of the surgeon baptizing his probe into a wound. No one doubts what Homer means when he speaks of the blacksmith baptizing a huge pole axe in water to harden the steel. Those who are engaged in teaching our young men a knowledge of the Greek language, never have any difficulty in deciding about the meaning of this word in any of the poets, or philosophers, or his- torians of Greece. The Lexicons of the language all agree in giving 'to dip,^ ' fo plunge,^ as at least its pri- mary and most common signification ; and ??o one of them gives to sprinkle or to pour — and yet you say, no one can tell for certain that this word means to dip, and not to sprinkle or to pour.
" It is true, according to the testimony of Dr. Barnes, that this word is used in the New Testament in the place of the Hebrew word ' tabal.^ And Professor Stuart, one of your own ablest scholars, expressly says, that this word tabal always means ' to dip.'' It is true that in the fifteen places where Dr. Barnes says it occurs in the Old Testament, it is translated 'dip^ or 'plunge,^ in every place but one, and there it is 'dyed,^ which sui)]><)sed
TENTH night's STUDY. 893
a previous act of dipping, jet no one can know that it does not mean to sprinkle or to pour.
" It is true, tliat 3'our most eminent Biblical scholars, as Stuart, Kitto, Chalmers, and McKnight, agree that it meant immerse, and state expressly that immersion was the act which was performed in the first churches ; and yet 3'ou say, no one can certainl}' know what it was wnich Christ commanded, and the church must now re- quire.
" il is true, the Holy Spirit, as if to obviate the very possibility of any misunderstanding, makes frequent and variert allu.'^ion^ to it in the AVord, speaking of it as a burial, a bath, and the like. True, he has gone into particulars, so far as to explain that it was done in the ' rivers,' and places where there was * much water:' and that they went down into the water to do it, and came up out of the water after it was done ; and yet we can't know any thing about what it was.
" True, the history of the early churches, written by the sprinklers themselves, as the Magdeburg Centuria- tors, Mosheim and Neander, clearly shows that, in the language of the London Quarterly, devoted to the inter- ests of the Church of England, ' There can be no ques- tion that the original form of baptism — the very meaning of the word — was complete immersion, and that for at least four centuries au}^ other form was either unknown or regarded as an exceptional, almost a mon- strous case.'
" True, we can show from ancient rituals and chuivih canons, that for more than thirteen hundred years it was the only act recognized as baptism, except in cases of alarming sickness.
"Tru2, we have the most unexceptionable records, made by the sprinklers themselves, showing the very time and manner of the chanofe from immersion to
394 ^ THEODOSTA ERNEST.
sprinkling, and the very decree of the Pope, on whose authority it was done ; and yet you take for granted that no Baptist Church now can tell for certain which it was that Christ commanded. And on this ground you demand as a right that slie shall give to those who have submitted to the Pope's ordinance of sprinkling, under the false impression that it was baptism, the same church privileges that she offers to those who have entered into Christ's visible kingdom through the door which he appointed.
" If you have any doubts about the nature of baptism or the subjects of baptism, 3^ou may plead them for wliat they are worth before his bar to whom we all must give account ; but you must not expect Baptist Churches to participate in them, or to act as though it were to them a matter about which there was even the slightest uncertainty. If there are any two things which they are satisfied are clearly and definitely set forth in the Word of God, they are, that believers are the only persons commanded to be baptized, and that those com- manded to be baptized are commanded to be immersed. They have therefore not even the shadow of a doubt that you are unbaptized, and if baptism is a Scriptural prerequisite, as you yoursehos believe and teach, then yo". are not prei)ared and cannot claim communion at their hands, unless you undertake to decide for them whom they shall consider as baptized."
" Oh, we arc willing to acknowledge," replied Mrs Jones, "that we cannot demand it as a matter of right. But the courfe.--y, Mr. Courtney, What we may not demand as a right, we surely may claim on the ground of Christian courtes}" and kindness — I had almost said ui)on the ground of common politeness. And now 1 ask you seriously to say if you do not think that yon BaDtists arc selfish and discourteous, to sav the least
TENTH night's STUDY. 395
in your refusal to invite any but immersed believers to sit down with you ? You admit that others are just as good Christians as yourselves, do 3^ou not?"
" Certainly ; we do not refuse because you are not pious, but because you have not been bajjtized. And you as well as we believe that the Master does not permit all Christians, but only all Christians who are members of a visible church, and who have been baptized. You never invite a person to your communion merely be- cause you consider him a converted man and a good Christian. You wait till he has joined the church, and been baptized."
"But we think," said Mrs. Jones, "that we have been baptized. You will grant that we are as sincere and honest in our opinions as you are in yours. The great majority of the Christian world think our opinion better founded than yours: would it not, therefore, be proper and becoming in you to show so much respect to the decision of more tlian half of Christendom, and so much Christian liberality to those who conscien- tiously differ from you, as to extend your invitation to them, not of right, but purely out of courtesy and politeness?"
" That can never be properly called Christian coui- tesy, madam, which asks for the sacrifice of Christian principle — and 1 am quite as willing to meet th2 demands of open communion on this ground as on *.he other But before we enter into the argument, 1 would like to go back and call up the third proposition, which I stated at the beginning of this discussion, and that is — That no church can either neylect or refuse to exercise the right which has been given her by her Head, to preserve the purity of her communion, without being guilty of open rebellion against the positive requirements of the law of (Jh7'ist.
396 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" We have already seen that every clnirch possesses this right, and it is plain that the duty to exercise it fol- lows from its possession. Somebody must decide who shall be communicants ; if not, there is no bar between the church and the world. If every one who chooses may not come, who shall decide who may ? We answer, the church herself"
"By what rule?"
" By the law of Christ, as laid down in his word."
" May she not neglect or refuse to decide for herself, and leave it to those without to come or not to come, as they may tliink best ?"
"No ; for God has constituted her the guardian of hia ordinances, which he has placed within her gates."
" But may she not reverse his order, and give com munion first, and then baptism ?"
"No ; she must, of course, be governed b}^ /?!> /aw;."
"May she not dispense with baptism altogether?"
" Certainly not, if his law re(piires it."
" May she not treat all those as baptized who think themselves baptized ?"
"No; she is to be governed by his Word as she wi- derstands it, and not as it may be understood by those without her ranks. Slie is to examine and decide for herself. She is to recognize and treat as baptized those only whom she believes to have actually been baptized according to the Scripture model. She is not the law giver, but simi)ly the executor of the laws of Christ. She is not at liberty to set them aside for any whims of her own. Nor is she at liberty to enforce one part and not another. .If, therefore, he requires baptism as a prerequisite to communion, she dare not in any case refuse or neglect to do so also. She must see his rules carried out, or she becomes unfaithful to her trust, and a rebel to her Lord.
TENTH night's STUDY. 391
" If you have any doubt that each church is consti- tuted thus by Christ the guardian of her own purity, and of the sanctitj* of his ordinances as administered within her doors, I refer 3^ou to Romans xiv. 5, and 2 Thess. iii. 6, in which the power of the church to de termine whom they will receive, and the duty of the church to withdraw from every one who walked dis- orderly, is distinctly recognized. But both the right and the imperious obligation for its constant, faithful, and impartial exercise, follows of necessity from the simple fact, that if the church does not herself exclude the unprepared and the unworthy, there is no one to do it and it cannot be done at all.
" I am now ready to answer your question about the Christian courtesy of refusing to invite the unbaptized to our communion. Permit me to put it in proper form for you, and let us see how it will sound. We will sup- pose it to be communion day at tlie Baptist church, and that your church in a body comes to our door, and asks admission to our table — not as a matter of right, but on the ground of Christian courtesy. You say to us, very affectionately and kindly — Dear brethren in Christ, we are fully persuaded that no unbaptized person, accord- ing to the laws of our Redeemer, should ever be per- mitted to approach his table. \Vt^ never permit anj* to come to it in our church whom rve do not believe to have been baptized. We could not do it without sinning against God. We know very well, brethren, that you act upon (he ><ame rule. You agree with us that it would be ver3' wrong and sinful to permit any to approach your table whom you do not think have been baptized. We know, also, that you believe that we have not been baptized, and consequentl}' that you cannot permit us to approach without doing what you icould regard as an ad. of open and deliberate rebellion against the laics of Christ. 25
398 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
But we regard you all as Christian gentlemen and ladies, and quite familiar with the laws of jDoliteness and Chris- tian courtesy, and it must be very evident to you that these laws require you to invite us to your communion. You surely will not be so impolite as to refuse us."
"Oh, Mr. Courtney, that is too bad! Surely you have no right to look upon us in such a light as that 1"
" I am well aware, madam, that your people have not been accustomed to see in this light your claims that we should invite you to our communion. You are so accustomed to think of yourselves as baptized, that you cannot fully realize the fact that others should think differently. But thus the case must always appear to the mind of any well informed Baptist. Nor is this by any means the worst of it.
*' It is always and everywhere considered an act of great discourtesy to ask one to do any thing which it is well known he will regard as a moral w^rong, though it should be asked of him only as a private individual, and in his personal capacity. But the discourtesy is much greater when you ask him, as a public man, in his official capacity, and in direct and open opposition to his avowed and publicly acknowledged sentiments, to do what not only you know he would consider wrong, but what all the world knows^ or might know, he would so regard ; what he has again and again publicly declared that he could not do without a grievous disregard of his con s(dentious convictions of right. To ask, for instaiK-e, of a Son of Temperance, whom you know is pledged not to drink intoxicating li([uors ; whom you know feels that he is under peculiar and solemn obligations not to drink ; yet to ask him not merely to disregard the obli- gation, which you know, and which the world knows, that he recognizes as binding upon his conscience ; but to ask him to do it publicly and officially as a Son oj
TENTH NIGHT'S STUDY. 399
Tempera ice, in the Division room, would be sometliing such an act of discourtesy, though much less flagrant than it is to ask a Baptist, as a Baptist, in his public capacity as a church member, to disregard his obliga- tions to his Saviour, by which the purity of the church and the sanctity of the ordinances are to be preserved."
" Oh, dear, no I Please, Mr. Courtney, don't think so hardly of us. I am sure none of our ministers or mem- bers ever intended an^'- thing of the sort when they in vited you to our communion, or complained that you did not invite us to yours. We never thought about its being a matter of conscience with 3'ou."
" And why should 3'ou not have thought of it, when we have preached it in the pulpit, and proclaimed it through the press, and repeated it continually in private conversation ? No one need be ignorant of the ground on which Baptists stand in regard to this question. Their sentiments have been long and plainly before the world. There is no one who has any occasion to com- plain of them, who does not know, or might not know, that they cannot dispense with what they conscientiously regard as Christian baptism ; and that on this account, and not from any impoliteness or discourtesy, they are debarred from inter-communion with sprinkled Chris- tians.
" But I have not done with this question of courtesy I want our Pedobaptist friends to see precisel}'' where they stand. After you have asked us to disregard the most sacred obligations, to repudiate our conscientious convictions of duty, and as a church, in our assembled and official capacity, to refuse obedience to what you well know we all regard as the imperative law of Christ, and to perform an act which you well know we earnestly believe he has forbidden ; when we respectfully decline to do it, and kindly give you our reasons, you set up a
4(lO THEODOfilA ERNEST.
great and senseless cry of bigotry, of selfishness, of ig- norance, and (will you pardon me for saying it?) OF CHRISTIAN DISCOURTESY; as though it were more discourteous for us firmly to resist all 3- our solicita- tions to disregard our Master's Word, than it is for you, ^ho profess like us to love him, to ask irs to do it, or complain of us for not doing it."
"But we do not ask you to do what ice think wrong."
" No, you only ask us to do what you know we think wrong, and then abuse us because we dare not do it. But let it i)ass. I should think. Doctor, you would find some serious, if not insuperable difficulties in your plan of inter-communion with other denominations, over whose discipline you have no control."
" How so?"
" Let me explain The peculiar and distinctive privi- lege of a church member in good standing in your church, is the liberty of approach to the Lord's table. When you exclude the unworthy, they can no longer be per- mitted to sit down with 3'ou at this sacred feast. Now suppose you exclude a member to-day for heresy in doc- trine, or irregularity in practice, and he goes to-morrow and unites with some other denomination, can he not, according to your principles, come right back, and claim a seat at your table as the member of another de- nomination, although you have just driven him away as a member of your own?"
" That might possibly happen ; but I do not think we have ever been much troubled with cases of that sort."
"That is because your open communion is held in theory, but seldom reduced to practice. If there were, in fact, that inter-communion between you and Baptists, which many of you profess so much to desire, I can conceive that it might happen very often, to the utter destruction of any effective discipline in both ])Oiliea
TENTH night's STUDY. 401
Let us see. You require of all your communicants who have children, that they bring them to the church for baptism, do you not ?"
" Certainly ; it is the solemn duty of every Christian parent to dedicate his offspring to God in this holy ordi- nance at his earliest convenience."
*' Yery good. Now suppose some one of them should take a fancy to ask you for the text on which this re- quirement is based. You might, as you very well know, search all the New Testament, from Matthew to Revela- tion, and you could not produce a solitary precept or example. You would try to satisfy him with a wordy jargon about the covenant of circumcision, etc. But he might reply, Jewish children were circumcised at eight days old, because God commanded it to be done. If Christian children are to be baptized, you can sho^ where he commanded that "
" You will say — No, but a command was not neces- sary ; they were to be baptized as a matter of course.
" Very well, then. Of course it was done, and you can show me at least one case among the thousands of ' both men and women,' in which there was one little child But you can't find it. And he begins to doubt the pro priety of performing as an ordinance of Christ, what Christ did not command. He cannot be persuaded to bring up the little ones into the church. You exhort him and reason with him in vain ; and you are obliged at last to exclude him. I have read of such a case. You exclude him, and he comes to us, and we receive him. Now he holds the same opinions, and is guilty of the same practices. But though you could not commune with him as a member of your own church, because he was guilty of the heinous sin of denying infant baptism, you will welcome him back the very next Sabbath as a Baptist. You urge him to sit down to the same table
402 THEODOSIA ERNEST
from which you have just now formalh^ expelled him And I suppose, if he should decline to accept, you would henceforth abuse him as a narrow-minded, selfish, bigoted, and intolerant Baptist, who thought himself too good to commune with other Christians.
" The same thing might happen to us, and this furnishes an additional reason why we cannot commune with other denominations. I have said we could not, because you were in our view unbaptized ; and that is of itself an unanswerable and all-sufRcient reason, if there were no other. Bnt there is another growing out of this matter of church discipline. Let us suppose a case for illustration. A minister in our church has im- bibed the idea that the sprinkling ceremony, which you borrowed from the Roman Catholics, is valid baptism, and insists upon introducing it into our churches. We would regard it as a great wrong. We would, for the peace and purity of our communion, at once expel him, and deny him the privileges of the church. He goes to you, and you receive him gladly, and the very next day he comes back and claims, as a member of your church, privileges which we had just now formally denied him as a member of our own. Do you not sec that this rule, carried out in actual practice, must neces- sarily destroy the force of all attempts at church dis- cipline ?"
"But how do Baptists now avoid that difRculty among themselves ?*'
" Yery easily and simply. The right to our commu- nion never extends beyond the reach of our discipline."
" Then how can members of one Baptist Church claim a seat at the table of another ; for, if I understand your church polity, every one of your churches is an independent body."
" They rannot claim it as a right, and our inv^'^ation
TENTH night's STUDY. 408
to commiinc is extended by courtesy onl^- to those whose faith and practice is so like our own^ that no per- son could be a member in good standing with them who would not stand ecjually well with us.
"The rule adopted by Mr. Wesley (Discipline, sec. 5th), and which is founded alike in Scriptural principles and common sense, is the same in substance as that which regulates our practice. That is, ' no person shall be admitted to the Lord's Supper among us, wdio is guilty of any practice for which we would exclude a member of our church.' This rule you see at once compels us to deny all who teach and practice sprink- ling for baptism, and all who engage in what we regard as the sinful though solemn mocker}^ of baptizing un- conscious infants, or any others who have not made a personal and credil)le })rofession of repentance and faith, according to the i)lain requirements of the Word of God, whicli always and everywhere puts repentance and faith before baptism, as it puts baptism before com- munion. We are bound to tliis course by that solemn and most impressive injunction of the Apostles, 2 Thess. iii. G — * Now we command 3'ou, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw your- selves from every brother that w-alketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which ye 7'eceived frovi us.'' "
" I <leclare, Mr. Courtney," said Mrs. Jones, " I had no idea that you Baptists had so good and satisfactory reasons for your singular exclusiveness ; and I promise you now that I wnll never complain of you again. In fact, if I ever liecome a Baptist, I shall be a flose com- munion Baptist."
"I do not see," said Mrs. Ernest, " how any one can take the Scripture for his guide, and be any thing else; aDd I have been thinking all the time that there must be t:ome good Bible reason for it. or else Theodosia and
404 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
her uncle would not have agreed to it — but now, when 1 come to think of it, I have not heard either of them say a word on the subject.*'
The reader will recollect, that at the beginning of this conversation Professor Jones bad gone out of the room, for some cause at that time unexplained. He returned after a few minutes, but took no part in the conversa tion, in which indeed he seemed to feel but very little interest. Mrs. Jones had quickly noticed his abstracted manner, so different from his ordinary behaviour ; and had several times cast an uneasy glance into his face, hoping to read there the cause. But she could only learn that it was in some way connected with Theodosia, whom he loved with the affection of a father. Each time she looked, his eye was resting with an expression of the deepest pity upon his lovely niece, who took no more part in the conversation than himself. In truth she had spoken very little to any one since the appearance of Mr. Tercy at the court-house on the preceding night. His relation of his experience of grace, and his declara- tion of his desire to be baptized, had placed him in a new relation to her. She did not know that he had then never seen her letter — and once (but only for a moment) the thought intruded into her heart that all this change had been made for her sake, and not for Christ's. She repelled it, however, in the instant that it came, and all day long had held herself ready to welcome him back to his place in her heart as her betrothed, and felt that she could love him now with an affection even deei)ei and more intense, higher and purer and holier than that which with such agony of effort she had been trying to strangle in her heart. She thought lie would have come and spoken to her before she left the meeting, but he did not seem to notice her presence there. She was sure he would call in the morning — but dinner was on tlie
TENTH night's STUDY 40£
table, and he had not come. That letter of hers must have prevented ; but surely there was not in it any harsh expression, any single word of unkindness. Did not her heart ache with the very intensity of her love, while she was writing it ? And now she tried to recall it, sentence by sentence, and word by word, to see if there was any thing there which she should not have said.
The afternoon wore slowly away. She sat at the win dow where she could see the door of his office, but it was never ojicned. She listened to every foot fall on the pavement, but she heard not his familiar step. Once the hitch of the front door was moved, and she sprang from her scat, and felt the blood crimson all her face and neck ; but she sat down in a moment, for she knew it was her brother Edwin. Mr. Courtney called after supi)er. Mr. Percy had not come yet; but she hoped to meet him at her uncle's. He was not there — and her spirit retired within itself; and «he sat as mute, 'lud almost as unconscious of what was pussing around her, as a marble statue.
When Uncle Jones went out, it was to see Dr. Wood- ruff, a cousin of Mr. Percy, who was also his most de^ voted friend and confidant. He was to have officiated as the bridegroom's friend on the expected w^edding-day, and had just returned from Mr. Percy's mother's, wdiere he had spent the day with one whose earthly career seemed likely soon to close. He had come in to break the melancholy tidings as best he could to Theodosia.
The facts, as he related them to Professor Jones, were briefly these : The servant who waited on Mr. Percy's office had gone there in the morning, and had found the young man lying upon his face on the floor, with Theo dosia's letter in his hand. When the servant entered he seemed to be asleep He aroused him, and raised liim
406 TIIEODOSTA ERNEST
up ; but liis looks were so wild, and his face was so pale, and his words (rather muttered than spoken) so strange and unnatural, that he placed him on the bed and ran for his cousin, the doctor.
When Doctor Woodruff came, and read the letter, he understood how it had been. Mr. Perc^^ from the time he wrote and sent that distressing letter to Theodosia, in the previous week, had been in a state of most intense mental excitement. Much of the time he had been suf- fering extreme agonj^ of mind. His ph^^sical powers had become greatly exhausted, and his nervous system debilitated and excitable. He had gone from the meeting in the court-house (where he had so unexpectedly had an opportunity to ask for Christian baptism) to his office. There he found Theodosia's letter. He had never till then conceived that his letter would have occasioned such distress to her, or that it would have led her to such a determination. Yet if he had been entirely self-collected, and his mind had not been already exhausted by long continued over-excitement, the shock which the reading of her reply now gave him, would have been speedily followed by calmer thoughts, and an instant determination to see her at once, confess his fault, ask her forgiveness, and set himself right in her heart. But exhausted in body and excited in mind as he was, the revulsion of feeling was too great to be en- dured. He read on till he came to where she said, " When you return, I pray you to consider me but as one dead. It will be better for us both." The papei seemed to grow black before Ms eyes. The room was suddenly darkened. He felt a strange, dreamy calmness creep over his brain. He sunk down out of his chair in a deep swoon, or fainting fit, upon the floor. He became conscious after a time, but had not strength to rise , Bud subsided again into a strange, unquiet sleep, mixed
TENTH night's STUDY. 40T
tvilh half-waking dreams, in which he saw a beauteous form, more like an angel than a being of the earth, who came and raised him up, and looked into his e^^es so Badly, so reproachfully, and 3^et so tenderly, that he struggled to tell her how his heart bled at the remem- brance of the act which caused her so much sorrow — but he could not speak. He strove to raise his hand and make some sign to assure her that he loved her better for her firm adherence to the truth, but the muscles would not obey the will. He could not move — he could not speak — and she was gone. Oh, how deep and how long was the darkness of that night ! She was gone ! He felt that she was lost to him forever. The very light of his life was darkness now — and 3'et he waited and watched for her return. Could she leave him thus ? Would she not love him still ? Hark 1 he hears her footstep. The door opens. Some one touches him. He starts from his slumber to greet her with some word of love, but he sees only his servant, who is trying to re- move him from the floor to the bed. lie stares at him with the strange gaze of incipient madness, and bids him leave him to rest in peace. The doctor saw at once that a long and fearful brain fever was the best that he could hope for ; and while his strength was yet comparatively undiminished, resolved to remove him to his mother's house, some two miles in the country'. This done, he prepared such remedies as his medical skill suggested, sat down, and watched beside his bed till he was satis- fied that there was no immediate danger ; and then, at his mother's request, came in to explain to Theodosia the reason why he had not called on her. He had thought best to explain, as we have seen, to Uncle Jones, and leave him to make it known to his niece.
The Professor had been so much occupied with this matter, that he scarcely heard the discussion which was
408 TIIEOUOSIA ERNEST
going on in his presence. He was glad wlien a pause ic the conversation showed that the parties engaged had, for the present, at least, exhausted their ammunition, and were prepared for a temporary truce, if not for a permanent peace. He turned their attention to some other subject, and in a few minutes the Reverend Doctor took his leave.
Uncle Jones walked home with Theodosia. They walked slowly ; and when Mrs. Ernest and Mr. Court- ney had gotten some way before them, he broke the silence by reminding her that she had not spoken a word all through the evening ; "and," said he, " I will tell you why. You were distressed that Mr. Percy had not called to see you since his return, and wondering what could be the cause. Will it relieve your mind to tell you that he is sick ?"
" I will not deny to you, uncle, that such was the subject of my thoughts. I hope he is not seriously unwell."
** The doctor does not think him in any immediate danger, but fears it will be long before he can resume his business."
" Why, uncle, what can be the matter? I am sure 1 never saw him look better than he did last night. Did you not notice the brightness of his eye, and the fresh- ness of his cheek, and how rich and mellow was his voice while he was telling what God so wonderfully had done for his soul ?"
"I was myself too much engaged to observe him closely, but I can well imagine that the unnatural flush- ing of his cheek, and the unusual brilliancy of his eye, were but the tokens of that intense mental excitement which preceded, if it did not produce, the fever from which he is suifering now."
They liad reached the cottas^e door. Uncle Jonea
TENTH night's STUDY. 409
tb Might best not to go into any fuither particulars, and returned to his home.
That night, if one had passed by the window of Theo- dosia's room, he might have heard many a sob, mingled with half-uttered prayers. Had she known all the truth, h' I sobs might have been louder ; but her prayers could hardl}^ have been more earnest.
The messenger who went next da}' to inquire, re- turned to say that Mr. Percy was no better; and so it was the next day — and the next. Doctor Woodruff had called in a brother practitioner, but did not reveal to him, nor even to Mr. Percj-'s mother, the whole secret of his attack. The letter which he found in his hand, he had considerately laid aside, to be returned to him should he recover. Its existence was a professional secret. He attributed his illness to the long and tire- some journey on horseback through the sun, and to such excitement of mind as he had himself publiclj^ described before his strange attack.
On Saturday evening Mrs. Ernest received a line from Mrs. Percy, saying that her son was growing dail}' worse and worse ; and, strange to tell, he had in his delirium conceived a singular fancy that Theodosia had ceased to love hhn, and had even formally discarded him. This idea, she said, was uppermost in all the wanderings of his mind, and evidently was exerting a great influence upon the progress of his disease ; and Doctor Woodruff had suggested that if Theodosia could herself assure him of her continued affection, it might have a soothing, and perhaps a healing influence.
Mrs. Ernest handed the note to her daughter, with the remark, that in consideration of their well-known betrothal, there could be no impropriety in granting Mrs. Percy's request.
" We ^vill go \o him a once, dear mother," said I'hea
410 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
dosia, when she had read the note, with eyes full of tears " Even a brief dela}^ may be of fatal consequence."
When they reached Mrs. Perc3''s house, he had fallen into an unquiet slumber, from which they did not seek to awaken him. They sat down in the room, and con- versed in a low tone about the nature of his disease, and other matters which the circumstances suggested. Theodosia took but little part in this conversation, ex- cept as a most eager listener. She sat down near the head of the low couch on which he lay, but i)resently arose, and, under pretence of shading the patient's eyes, adjusted the candle so that it should not shine upon her own. Oh, who can tell the thoughts that then were thronging in her maiden heart 1 How changed he was ! How pale — how corpse-like was his cheek! How wasted was the thin, emaciated hand, which lay outside the cover ! How parched and feverish the lips ! How sunken the eyes I How would they look when he should open them ? Would he know her ? Would he speak to her ? What if he ifiow should open his eyes and see me here ? — and she almost unconsciously moved her chair back out of his range of vision as she thought of it. His lips moved : she reached the spoon in the tumbler of water upon the little table, and moistened them. He opened his eyes wide ; he looked her steadily in the face ; he glanced at her white dress ; he looked in her face again. She fancied that the expression of wonder on his face gave place to a scarcely perceptible smile. But he did not speak ; he did not make any sign of recognition. She sat down again and wept.
" You must need rest, Mrs. Percy. You may go and sleep, and leave the care of him to us to-night," said Mrs. Ernest. " We will watch him as tenderly as you could do yourself."
Mrs. Perc; laid down, and Theodosia withdrew to some
liiiAfiu
Theodosia Ernest.
•>■ Y-*K
PUBLIC LIBRARY
AS'XOR, LEKOX AND
TENTH NTGHT'S STUDY. 413
distance from the conch, and sat where she oould see every change that passed upon his face. The love which she had for a time endeavored to eradicate from out her mind, had only, like the lofty oak when torn and wrenched ]ty the might}' storm, extended its roots more widely and deepl}', and clasped them more firmly' round her heart ; and now, when tlie cause which led her to cast it oil' had been removed, she clung more ardentl}^ and de- votedly than ever to the hope that he would 3'et be hers. Again and again during that long night, when she has- tened to do some little act of kindness, did he open his eyes and look at her witli a kind of wondering tender- ness in his gaze ; but yet he did not speak, nor was she sure that he recognized her at all.
He slept more quietly that night than he had 3'et done, and when the doctor came next day, he whisi)ered in his ear that a beautiful vision had come to him in his dreams and looked at him so lovingly, that he was ready to speak, and ask it whence it came, but feared his voice might break the charm, and it would vanish from his sight.
" You must stay with us, my child," said Mrs. Perc}^ " till my sou gets better. He talked of you continually until 30U came, but now it seems as though your very presence in the house exerts a sort of magic influence over hiui, for he is (juiet, and does not so much as lisij 3-our name. The doctor says if you coubl but become his nurse, he may yet recover. Will you not, jn^ daughter ?"
" If my mother thinks there would be no impropriety in my doing so."
"Certainly, Theodosia, 1 think you ought to retuiu and assist Mrs. Percy in every way you can. But your uncle and I are going ^o be baptized to-day,
114 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
an^ 3^ou will not be willing to be absent from the meet- ing."
This conversation took place in the ball, from which there was an open door leading to the patient's room He heard Theodosia's voice ; he thought he heard her name. He made some sound, which recalled his mother to his side, and looking in her face with a more natural expi'ession than he had since his attack, he said :
" Mother, I thought I saw her spirit here last night, and just now I am sure I heard her voice, and thought that some one called her name. Tell me if she is here."
" Would you like to see her, my son ?"
" Oh, yes; I want to ask her to forgive me before 1 die."
"You do not think 3'ou are going to die, my child !"
" I have strange feelings, mother. I do not know what death is, or how he comes ; but I am sure I have been very near the world of spirits."
" Do you feel any alarm at the prospect of death ?"
" My mind is very weak, mother. I scarcel}^ feel or think at all. I have a blessed Saviour : I remem- ber that ; and I will trust him, even though I die. But tell me — did I hear her voice, or was it but a dream ?"
" Try to compose yourself, my child. The doctor says that you must sleep awhile this morning. If you wish to see Miss Ernest, I will send for her."
" Do you think she would come ?"
" I know she would. So make yourself easy, and you shall see her when you wake."
On returning to her visitors, Mrs. Percy related this conversation, and insisted that Theodosia must remain tD be there when he awoke ; and as the young lad}^ did n^t object, Mrs. Ernest went home without her. She laid down on her arrival, and took a short nap, and Ihci]
TENTH night's STUDY. 415
taking Edwin b}' the band, joined Uncle und Aunt Jones on their wa}' to the Baptist meeting.
When the usual invitation was given to those who desired membership with the church to come forward and make their profession, Uncle Jones was sur})rised and delighted to see botli his wife and his sister go up and ask admittance into the church of God. Neither of them had said a word to him upon the subject, for though both had yielded to their convictions of the truth, that immersion is the only baptism, some days before, and both had Ijeen convinced that believers are the only Scriptural subjects of bai)tism, they could neither of them overcome their repulsion to the practice of close communion, or consent to sever their connec- tions with those to whom the}^ had such strong attach- ments, until the explanations of Mr. Courtne}- in their last conversation put it beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Lord Jesus not only commanded believers, and them only, to be immersed, but that he had also for- bidden-all who had not believed and been immersed to approach his table, and required of those who had in this way become, according to his order, the members of his church, that they should carefully guard the purity and the perpetuity of his ordinances, by permit- ting no one to partake with them in the peculiar privi- leges of church members who had not, like themselves, been made members according to the same Gospel order. This difliculty removed, thej' were now ready to be baptized.
We need not detain you any longer, gentle reader, by
describing to you the ba[)tism of these three, who, with
several otlicrs, followed the example of their Saviour, by
going down into the water, and were buried with him in
the liquid grave. Nor can we now continue the history
in which you have come, we trust, to feel so great an iu- 26
416 TIIEOPORIA ERNEST.
terest that you would gladly see the end. We have finished our ten nights' study of Scripture baptism. We have examined it in regard to its mode, its subjects, and its results. We have endeavored to do it plainly and candidly, but if we know our own hearts, we have tried to do it kindly — and in the spirit of that " charity'' which " rejoices in the truth."
We are grieved to leave our darling Theodosia in such distress. But she must remain a little while in the valley of tears, until, by her own sorrows, she has been taught how to sympathize with the sorrowful. He was the wisest man of earth who said, " By the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better." She needs the discipline of grief to fit her for the life of eminent usefulness which lies before her — and the history of which will soon be given in another volume.
A DREAM,
IN
kev;ew of n. l. rice^s
NOTICE OF THE
THEODOSIA ERNEST
FIRST SERIKS,
BY THE AUTHOR OF THEODOSIA.
reEFACF.
The (■>nly attempted review or extended anfavor able notice of the first volume of Tbeodosia Ernest, appeared in the St. Louis Presbyterian, from the pen of \Ui Editor, N. L. Rice, D.D. 'i'liat notice is liere given, and a review of Mr. R.'s singular statements reviewed in a dream — and also the natural eft'ect of snrh. a treatment of the best arguments ever produced by I'resbyterians or Pedobaptists — the conversioi of Pastor Johnson. We regard this review, in connec- tion with Mr. Rice's notice, as the most powerful argument in favor of Baptist positions.
J. R. Graves.
Nashville. 1857.
NOTICE OF THEODOSIA.
BY N. L. RICE. AS IT APPEAKKD IN THE ST. LOUIS PRKSBYTERIAN.
|F perseverance and ingenuity were evidences of religious truth, tliere could no longer be a doubt that immeraion is the only valid baptism. Long and earnestly have the advocates of this doctrine labored to sustain its claims. The pulpit, the newspaper, the tract, the book, learned argument, and assertion, and ridicule, have all been laid under requisition. Then the whole Bible must be translated anew to make it sustain the Baptist sense. And now we have before us, by the kindness of a friend, a Baptist novel, the title of which is " Theodosia Ernest, or the Heroine of Faith.^^ The author has modestly concealed his name, but the work is published by Graves, Marks & Ruthland, Nashville, Tennessee. The book is really instructive and amusing. We purpose briefly to notice a few of its peculiarities.
It displays throughout a consciousness of the weak- ness of the doctrine it is intended to advocate. 1st. The title betrays this consciousness — " The Heroine of Faith." There is in ever}' Christian's heart a strong sympathy with the struggles and conflicts of a genuine faith, rising above the allurements and persecutions of a wicked .world. The author has thought it necessary to take advantage of this noble sympathy. If he had adopted tlie more truthful title — " The Heroine of Inv mersion^^ — the book would have fallen still-born from
(410)
420 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
the press. There is little that is either noble or roman tic in the zeal of a professing Christian, young or old for a narrow sectarian dogma. The author judged, merely, that the cause of immersion needs the advan- tage of a title far nobler than itself.
The same conscious weakness shows itself in the choice of a heroine instead of a hero, and of a heroine who is a highly cultivated, sensitive young lad}' of eighteen. Who can help strongl}' sympathizing with such a young lad}', devotedly pious, evidently conscientious, willing to sacrifice every thing for the truth, conducting an argument against two or three men much older than herself? We forget the cause and sympathize with the girl. We put double weight to her arguments, and feel gratified at the perplexities into which her antagonists are thrown. The author of the novel judged rightly that the cause of immersion and anti-pedobaptism claims all this sympathy and more. If he had been a hero, instead of a youthful heroine, his hearers would have weighed his arguments, instead of being carried away with sympathy.
The cause needed even stronger sympathy ; and, therefore, Miss Theodosia Ernest is brought in conflict with the man to whom she was engaged to be married — a cold-hearted, formal Presbyterian lover — whom she loves most devotedly. He opposes her joining " the contemptible sect of Baptists" — (we naturally sympa- thize with a person opposed). She, poor girl, is thrown into a paroxysm of grief, sighs, weeps, and prays, and resolves to break off the engagement, just for the pure love of immersion I The reader feels his eyes filling with tears of sympathy for the dear distressed creature who had also her mother in opposition, and is almost ready to be immersed himself just to comfort her. Who would have thought that a Baptist knew so well how
NOTICE OF TUEODOSIA. 421
much it was necessary to excite the sympathies of his readers to prevent them seeing the flimsiness of his arguments ?
The necessities of immersion were even greater. Although Miss Theodosia is singularly furnished with Baptist arguments, for one who has just rt ason to doubt the validity of her baptism, Professor Courtne}', an ac- complished scholar, is called to aid her. He, having been a Presbj^terian, and having examined the whole sub- ject, is perfectly at home in the discussion. He under stands Greek, and he can read all the learned authors on the subject. On the other side we have, first, Mr. Percy, the gentleman engaged to Miss Theodosia, who is represented as wholly ignorant of the sul)ject ; Rev, Mr. Johnson, the young lad3''s pastor, who is made to talk like an ignoramus and a simpleton ; and Professor Jones, the heroine's uncle, who had confessedly never examined the subject, and scarcely had sense enough to keep him out of the fire. With such combatants on each side, immersion may lift its head in bold defiance. We cannot help admiring the author's clear perception of the necessities of his cause. It was exceedingl}' proper that he should select, as the advocates of Pedobaptism, such persons as Mr. Percy, who " had never had a serious thought upon the question" (p. 13); Mr. John- son, who said, " I have never studied these controversies much"; and " Uncle Jones," who, though Professor cf Languages, had considered it the dut}' of his parents And their pastor to attend to his baptism, and " h&d never inquired whether they did it illy or well" (p. 121). It is precisel}^ over such persons, as the author rightly judged, that Baptist controvertists gain the victory. And 3'et we cannot but wonder that he would so publicly disgrace his cause by selecting such ignoramuses as the opponents of the learned Mr Courtney I
422 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
The respective chaiacters being thus selected, the ad vocates of immersion are, of course, allowed to make bold assertions which are utterly untrue, and to keep out of view the merits of the case, whilst their ignorant ind soft-headed opponents gape and wonder. Thus "the heroine of faith" decides, as by intuition, that baptism is an act, and that if immersion is baptism, sprinkling and pouring cannot be. Her intellect is too lofty, and her perception too clear, to hesitate for a moment to decide against forty-nine fiftieths of the wisest and best men that have lived both in ancient and modern times. The author rightly judged that this heroine ought to be very self-conceited. Mr. Percy is made to admit, what every tolerable scholar knows to be untrue, that all the lexicons sustain the immersion- ists. It suited the purpose of the writer to keep out of view the declaration of the learned Baptist, Carson, that "all the lexicons" were against them. "Professor Jones," poor simpleton, is made to express the opinion that immersion was first introduced "by the Mad Men of Munster during the Reformation of Luther." He '^annot tell, poor fellow, where he got the idea ; but " perhaps he got something of it from reading D'Au- bigne's History of the Reformation — perhaps he re- ceived it by hearing something of the kind from the pulpit." And the accomplished Baptist, Mr. Courtney, has " seen and heard such statements many times from various sources. They are often recorded in Presbyte- rian and Methodist newspapers" (p. IGO). And the learned gentleman gravely goes to work to disprove this statement, which was never made by any tolerably informed Presbyterian, or recorded in any respectable Pedobaptist pa[)er. The book abounds with such vile misrepresentations.
The book is written with ingenuity — it waa nerossarY
NOTICE OF TIIEODOSIA. 42S
that it should be. It keeps out of view the facts and arguments on which Pedobaptists rely, or caricatures them to make them appear ridiculous. It puts into their mouths arguments they never use. It manufac- tures history to suit the occasion. In a novel, all this can be done in such a way that the uninformed reader will not readily detect it. We are gratified at observing how distinctly the writer shows, first and last, that the cause of immersion needs very peculiar advantage in order to sustain its claims.
After all, since he was advocating a fiction, he is probably right in adopting fiction as the means of its defence. The only way to find so ignorant and stupid Presbyterians as Percy, Johnson, and Jones, is to man- ufacture them for the occasion ; and nowhere, but in the imagination of a zealous immersion ist, can such Presl>yterian young ladies as " Theodosia Ernest, the Heroine of Faith," be found. The author could not successfull}' nssail reaZ, living Presbyterians ; and, there- fore, being resolved on battle and a victory, he manu- factures a few to suit him, and then chooses their weapons for them, and directs them how to use them, so they will be sure not to hurt them. Brave man ! Don Quixote was scarcely his equal.
Verily, the cause of anti-Pedobaptism seems to be " on its last legs." If it cannot induce the Christian world to receive an immersionist Bible, and if novel? ^ill not Srustr.in it, what is it to do ?
SD
Theodosia Ernest.
PAGE 426.
CHAPTER I.
A dkp:am.
HAD a dream, but whether it was all a dream, let him who reads it judge.
Methought in m}' dream that I was in Pastor Johnson's study. He had in his hand the Pres- byterian newspaper, called the Presbyterian of St. Louis. He had just found the article of Doctor Rice on Theodosia. His little gray e3'es began to twinkle the moment they caught the caption, "A Baptist Xovel," for, since his troubles with the young lady and her uncle, he has devoured with great avidity every thing which he could find against the Baptists. As he was reading, however, a heavy frown began to gather on his brow, his lips were pressed together with convulsive energy, and the paper shook with the tremulous excitement which pervaded his whole body. He continued to read, however, until he had finished the piece, and then, as if to assure himself that he had not read amiss, he began at the caption and read it every word again. When he had done, he folded the paper carefully, put it into the inside pocket of his coat, looked into the fire for several seconds, then nodded his head three times very signifi cantly, not straight forward with the chin toward his breast bone, but diagonally, with the chin inclined to- ward the left shoulder, and the back of his head drawn toward the right.
What this peculiar pantomine might signify, I was, in my dream, g^'eatly at a loss to determine, until he had
(427)
<28 TiiEODOSIA ERNEST.
gone into the room where his wife was engtiged in '.lei domestic duties.
" Mrs. Johnson," said he, '* I. desire that j^ou will j)ack my carpet-bag. I must make a journey to St. Louis, and to get home before the Sabbath must start this morning."
" Why, my dear, what in the world is the matter ?"
" I want to go and see Doctor Rice, madam ; I don't like the way he talks about me. He has had the auda- city to call me a fool, madam ; na}^ more, he has even declared ihat there is not so great a fool in our whole denomination. It is too much, madam, for human nature to endure. I feel it my duty to go and talk to him as a Christian brother ; I want to tell him to his face that I think he has done me great injustice, and, in short, has treated me very badly."
Mrs. Johnson seemed instinctivelj^ to understand that delaj^ or remonstrance was out of the question. She made at once the needful arrangements, and her husband was gone.
Then I saw, in my dream, that he entered the loom where the Reverend Doctor was en<?ao:ed in writino-.
" I presume this is the Reverend Doctor Rice," said he. " M3' name is Johnson, sir ; the Reverend Mr. John- son, of , 1 felt it my duty, sir, to come and see you
about your paper of the "
"Ah, I am glad to see you, Mr. Johnson Take & seat, sir ; I hope you have had a pleasant journey."
" Why, yes, sir, reasonably so ; but in fact I have a great dislike to traveling, and nothing would have in- duced me to take the journey but a conviction of duty. I felt it to be my duty, sir, to come and tell you that 1 ihink you have treated me very badly, sir. And let mc say, sir, that you have done more to destroy my confi- dence aft. "^hat of mv cr^n<iroiration, in the truthful iirs'
A DREAM. 429
of our positions on the Baptismal question, than all the Baj)tist arguments I have ever heard."
" Why, my dear sir, what can 3'ou mean ?"
Mr. Johnson pulled the paper before referred to out of his pocket, and found the article on Theodosia.
" I suppose, sir," said he, holding it up before tiie Doctor, " you will not deny that 3-ou are the author of tliat ?"
" Certainly not," replied the Doctor, as he glanced rapidl}' down the column like one who was familiar with the words. " 1 take credit to m3'self, sir, as being the first, and, so far as I know, the only person who has attempted to answer that peculiar book."
"T have no objection," replied Mr. Johnson, "to your answering the book. In fact, no one could rejoice more than I to see it rightly answered, but I want you to uuderstand that you have done me and those who stood with me in that discussion very great injustice. It was unkind, sir, it was ci'uel in 3'OU to intimate that there was not in all the Presbyterian denomination so great a fool as I, just ])ecause 1 had never carefulh' examined the subject of baptism for myself, but trusted to Doctor Dwight and Doctor Miller, and our other Doctors of Divinity for my information and my arguments. I have alwa^'s had a great regard, sir, for our Doctor?; of Di- vinity. I have supposed they must be pious, and learned, and truthful men. I thought I could rely upon any thing I had learned from a Prei<byterian Doctor of Divinity ; I therefore took the substance of their arguments, not venturing to employ' a single one of my own, and yet for doing this you count me as a simple- ton and called me a fool."
" Ah, my dear brother Johnson, you must excuse me ; I did not at first understand precisely who you were. I begin to see it now. Let me assure you, sir, 'liai J
430 THEODOSIA ERNEST
heartily sympathize with you on the loss of so lonely a member as Miss Theodosia, and so influential an Elder as her Uncle Jones. I can easily understand, ray dear sir, that you were deeply wounded by that event, and still feel a little sore on the subject. But you must not fall out with your friends on that account. We must DO SOMETHING io break the force of the arguments pre- sented by the author in his sillj^ narrative of that transaction. We must either meet those arguments with sober logic, or we must destroy their influence by ridicule. I am sure when you have come to look at the matter calmly, j^ou will not only excuse but even approve what I have said."
"What, sir! excuse and approve 3^our calling me a fool, just because I used no better arguments than had been furnished me by our greatest Doctors of Di- vinity ! P^
'• Ah, my dear brother, I see that you do not yet quite understand me. I mean to say that, in order to destroy the influence of that silly narrative, we must either fairly meet and logically confute the facts and arguments by which Miss Theodosia and her uncle were convinced that we are wrong and the Baptists are right, or else we must turn attention from them by calling the book a ' novel,' and laughing at the argu- ments as though they were not worth answering. And now let me say to you in confidence, that it was a great deal easier to insinuate that as a ' noveV it must be a work unfit for the pious to read, and ridicule and laugh at the book, than to disprove its facts or answer its argumsnts. 1 trust, therefore, you will not take it too much to heart if you come in for your share of the laugh, since you can't help seeing that if 1 had allowed your arguments and those of your friend. Professor Jones, to be the best we have, our cause is at once and
A DREAM. 431
forerer irretrievably ruined ; but by adroitly repieseni ing these as perfect nonsense and foolishness, I make the impression on the minds of my readers that we have some others of most tremendous power, which could not possibly have failed to convince your opponents if you had only known them aiid brought them forward." " But, sir," replied Mr. Johnson, " I am sure I brought forward the very best that I could find — I took those of our most eminent Doctors of Divinity, living and dead, the present company only excepted. I would like to know, sir, if any doctor in our church ever stood higher than Timothy Dwight, D. D., and Samuel Miller, D. D., one the President of Yale College, the other an honored professor for many years in our leading Theo- logical Seminary, that at Princeton, New Jersey. I thought, sir, I was safe from the charge of folly when 1 followed Dwight and Miller, and consequently I took the same ground with these eminent men to show Miss Theo- dosia that John did not baptize by immersion, but that the Lord Jesus must have been sprinkled on the bank of the river. Just turn to volume four, page 349, of D wight's Divinity — '// 2«,' says he, 'incredible thai the multitudes which John baptized in the wilderness were immersed. It will not be mistrusted that this promiscu- ous assembly were immersed naked. To have immersed them with their clothes on would have exposed them to certain disease and death.^ Now, I did not care to state it just in this way to Miss Theodosia, so I said that they could not have been immersed on account of their great numbers, and for this 1 had the authority of several Doctors of Divinity. Says Doctor Summers, page 82 of his work on Baptism: '// was not possible for him to baptize the immense multitudes that came to his baptism by immersing them,'' and gives as a reason that his ministry lasted only a year or less, and in thai
432 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
lime * he baptized, perhap.^, two or tliree millions.' Ho thinks, as I did, that they must have stood in rows along the bank, while the Baptist sprinkled them either with or without h^^ssop, he don't know w^hich. So also Doctor Eagletou, of Tennessee, gives the same explanation.
" The great Doctor Rice, I know, does not venture to Bay, like Summers and Dwight, that it was ^ imposaihle'' and ' incredible,^ but even he, in his work on Baptism, page 116, founds an argument on the assumption tt^t 'it wan not very probable.'' And Doctor Miller, whom some will consider a greater than llice, expressly says, 'There z.s no evidence, and I will venture to nay, no probability, that John ever baptized by initnersion.'' Then, when I wished to prove tliat the Ajio.stle did not immerse any more than John had done, what better could I do than follow these great Doctors ? Doctor Dwight ex- pressly says, volume four, page 349: 'It in impossible that those whom Peter and his companions baptized on the day of Pentecost should have been immersed,^ and gives as reasons, first, thai ihey had no suitable clothes; second, there was not time enough, and he plainly inti- mates that there was not water enough.
"So. Doctor Summers says it was impossible, because there were no places suitable for immersion, and besides it was impossible for the twelve to baptize such a mul- titude ill the six or eight hours that remained of the ii&y. So also Doctor Uice himself, ])age 120 of his work on Baptism, makes in substance the very same argument 'Where,' he exullingl}' asks, ' did the Apos- tles find suflScient water for the immersion of so many?' And again, ' The number — could the twelve Apostles baptize three thousand persons in that day?' Anu Doctor Miller, whom some will think a greater even Jian Doctor Kice, declares, after dwelling upon these
A DREAM. 43:3
cliliicuUies of the case, ' The man, therefore, who can believe tha. the three thousand on the day of Pentecost were baptized b}' immersion, must have great faith and a wonderful facility of ' accommodating his belief to his wishes.'
" On these two points, therefore, you see I had the authority of our most learned Doctors, including even Doctor N. L. Rice himself and yet Doctor Rice calls m fi fool because I could not do better than them all."
"Oh, no; excuse me, my dear brother Johnson, but these were not the points to which I particularly referred I grant you had the substance ol* ourarguments on these points, but then that argument of yours based upon with as the signification of the Greek preposition ' en,^ you must allow that it was rather simple in 3'ou to rest so much ui)on the phrase wiih water.'' "
" Not at all, sir; I can admit no such thing. The truth is, sir, this is our great argument to the minds of the unlearneil. It has more plausibility in it than any other that I have ever read. And, sir, 3'ou must let me tell you that though you may now cull it silly and rale mo as a fool for using it, 1 did it on the authority of more than 01. e of our Doctors of Divinity. The Rev. Alex- ander Newton, 1>. D., in the ' True Baptist,' makes a long and carefully elaborated argument, based upon this ren- dering of the wor.l. Dr. Summers, page lUO, says ex- pressly that ' with' is the proper meaning of the word * when found in connection with baptism.' And even the great Doctor Rice himself, in his debate with Camp bell, page 191, quoted Bloomfield to show that it was 'with water' and not in water that 'en hudati'' should be rendered. How then can Doctor Rice call me a fool for using his own argument, and that of other doctors almoat etpial to himself?"
" 1 don't deny that I alluded to it," replied the doctor; 27
434 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
" but I know loo well its fallacy to risk our cause upou [t as you did. But it was not for this so much as for your calling attention to those unguarded admissions of Barnes, and Chalmers, and McKiiight, that I thought, to say the least, you were somewhat indi^creel.^^
" Why, m}^ dear sir, were not these all Presbyterians? Were they not all Doctors of Divinity ? Could I not venture to direct an inquiring member ol" the Presby- terian Church to our own Presbyterian Doctors of Diviuit}^ for information? 1 know those men were counted among the wisest and the best of all our doctors ; I took it for granted that the^^ had studied the subject before they Avrote about it ; 1 had, I am sure, no suspicion that they would mislead those who trusted to their teaching."
" But when you found which way they were leading your inquirers why did you not contradict and o[)pose their testimon}^ ?"
" 1 did do my best," replied Mr. Johnson, "but the truth is 1 am not, like you, a Doctor of Divinity, and therefore I could not contradict such men with as good a face as you can. If you had been there you migh^ have said, ' My dear young friends, it is true that these learned men and eminent masters in the Presbyterian Church do teach thus, but they are utterly in error. They have stated what is entirely devoid of truth ; you may take my word, but you cannot trust to theirs.' But jou, no more than I, could have denied that Dr. Barnes admits baptize in Greek to be the same as tabal in He- brew, and that he says and proves that it in the Scrip- tures signifies 'to dip.'' You, no more than I, could have denied that Chalmers and McKnight do both un- questiona))!}^ give immersion as the meaning of the word, and both agree that it was immersion that John and the apostles employed. Thai is too plain foi argu-
Theodosia Ernest.
PUBLIC L:
I
A DREAM. 437
meut. But then, as you are a Doctor of Divinity, as well as they, and have been Moderator of the General Assembly one year, as McKnight was for twenty, you might have ventured to dispute their word — you might have called in question either their learning or their veracity, for if they told what is not true it must have been either from ignorance or falsehood ; but it would not have done for a plain and simple pastor like myself to put my word against that of anj^ one of these great doctors, much less against all three. I assure you, sir, that 3'ou Doctors of Divinity have a great advantage over us common pastors in such a discussion as that. When that learned Professor of Theology, Moses Stuart, says that all critics antl lexicographers of any note are agreed that immersion is the common aud primary meaning of the word baptism, and that the first Chris- tians so understood it, you can simply say it is no such thing ; but people would expect me to prove it, and that very plainly, too, before the}^ would believe that Stuart lied about it, or that a man of his eminent learning couhl be mistaken.
"When the learned Martin Luther says that 'Bap- tism is a Greek word, and signifies immersion,' and that the et^-mology of the M'ord seems to demand that the person baptized ' should be wholly immersed, and then immediately drawn out of the water,' as he does in his works, vol. 1, p. 336, you could reply: 'Doctor Martin Luther must be egregiously mistaken about this, for I, Doctor X. L. Rice, have examined into the matter, and find it is not true.' When that 'godly, learned man, John Calvin,' in his Institutes, b. iv., s. 15, says that The word baptize signifies to immerse, and it is certain that immersion was the practice of the ancient church,' I/O?/, as a Doctor of Divinity, can say; 'Doctor John Calvin was mistaken — this is not true.' When that
438 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
very learned and eminent scholar, Casaubon, says, • The manner of baptizing was to plunge or dip thera into the water, as even the word baptism plainly enough shows,' you have only to say: 'Casaubon was either very ignorant of the matter, or else he lied, for I, Doctor N. L. Rice, have found it was not so.'
" When the learned Bishop Bossuet declares that ' Baptize signifies to plunge, as is admitted by all the world ;' when the famous critic Yencma says : ' The word baptizien, to baptize, is nowhere used in the Scripture for sprinkling;' when the great scholar says, in commenting on Matt. iii. 6 : ' Baptism consists in the immersion of the whole body in water' — you can simply reply : ' I know these learned foreigners say such things, but Doctor N. L. Rice knows better.'
" When such a man as Doctor George Campbell., of Scotland, the President of a Presbyterian College, says that ' the word baptizien, both in the sacred authors and classical, signifies to dip, to plunge, to immerse, and wus thus rendered by Tertullian, the oldest of the Latin fathers,' that 'it is always construed suitabi}^ to this meaning,' that * it is never in any case, sacred oi classical, employed in the sense of rain or sprinkle, you have only to say, that ' Doctor George Campbell diflTers on these points from Doctor N. L. Rice.'
"When a learned professor of Greek, like the well- known Charles Anthon, of Columbian College, the author of some of our most valuable classical school books, expressly asserts that * the primary meaning of the word is to dip or to immerse, and its secondary meanings, if it ever had any, all refer in some way oi other to the same leading idea,' that 'sprinkling and pouring are entirely out of the question,' you have only to say: 'Mr. Anthon is only a learned profe^.'io?' of lancjuages, and I, a Doctor op Divinity, take it upon
A DREAM 43^
m^'solf to assure you that he is entirely mistaken. It IS NOT TRUE ; and whether Professor Anthon is igno- rant or false, the world may judge.'
" Now if I, a simple, untitled pastor, should talk so, they would not believe me. I tried it, sir. I asserted roundly, just as Doctor Miller had done. I intended to use his very words : * Now we contend that this word does not necessarily, or even commonly, signify to im- merse, but also implies to wash, to sprinkle, to pour on water, and to tinge or dye with any liquid, and there- fore accords very well with the mode of baptism by sprinkling or affusion.' ' I can assure you,' he says in another place, ' that the word we render baptize does legitimately signify- the application of water in any way as well as b}' immersion.' Now I could make assertions as confidently as even Doctor Rice himself, but I found that I was expected to prove them, and that from the Scriptures, and in sucli a way that the demonstration should be p'lain to the common sense of an earnest and shrewd, quick-witted girl. I assure you 1 had rather have tried to satisfy a dozen Doctors of Divinit3^"
" But why did you not go to the Lexicons, as I did in m}^ Lexington debate ? Why did you })ermit that young lawyer to wrest this weapon out of your hands at the very beginning ? Mr. Campbell began to quote the Lexicons on me, but T showed that this was a game at which two could play."
"And yet 1 am sure, sir, Miss Theodosia would have said that you lost the game, however well j^ou played. The truth is. Doctor Albert Barnes, by pointing to the places in the Old Testament where they could find the meaning of the word as it was used among the Jews, had taken away the necessity for any reference to Lex- icons, unless it were to prove that Barnes was a false interpreter, and this I did not like to do. But what
440 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
pould the Lexicons have availed for my purpose, even as quoted b}^ yourself? You appealed to eleven of them, and I suppose you gave the most favorable defini- tions you could extract. Now, you will remember that neither Miss Ernest nor Mr. Percy had taken any such ground as Mr. Carson had done, or as Mr. Campbell did in your debate. No one in our compan}- insisted that immerse was the only and neceaaary meaning of the word, but only that it was the common and most fre- quent meaning, in connection with which it was most likely to be employed, and which it must therefore (according to the ordinary rules of interpretation) be understood, unless the context required some other. Now you know, as well as 1, that the rule of the Lexi- cons is to give the common, every-day meaning, as the primar}^ or Jirst definition. And yet, when you at- tempted to ascertain the meaning of the word baptizo by the Lexicons, what did they testify ?
''Scapula, according to j'our own rendering, gives baptizo, to dip or immerse ; also to dye, as we immerse things for the purpose of coloring or washing them ; also to plunge, submerge, to cover with water, etc.
''Hedericus gives to dip, immerse, to cover with watei.
''Stephanus. — To dip, to immerse, as we immerse things for the purpose of coloring or washing 5 to merge, submerge, to cover with water.
" Schleusner. — To plunge, to immerse.
**Farkhurst. — To immerse in, or wash with water.
*^JRobinscn. — To immerse, to sink
" Schrivellius. — To baptize, to immerse. Oroves. — To dip, immerse, immerge, plunge. *Bretschneider. — Properly often to dip.
"Suidas. — To sink, to plunge, to immerse.
" Ware. — To wash, perform ablution, cleanse ; sec- ondly, to immerse.
A DREAM. 441
** Oreenjield. — To immerse, immerge, submerge, sink.
" Now, out of all the eleven, you could find but one, and that unknown to fame, which does not give dip or its equivalent as its first and common meaning. Miss Ernest would have said the testimony' is ten to one against 3"ou. If you had come into court with ten wit- nesses against 3'ou, and onlj' one for you, Mr. Percy, as a lawyer, would have declared your case utterly hope- less.
"But Mr. Campbell, at that time, gave you several other Lexicons, among which was
"Bobertson^s Thesaurus, which defines it to immerse, to wash.
"Pason. — To dip, to immerse, to d3'e, because it is ione by immersing.
" Donegan. — To immerse repeatedly into a liquid, to submerge, to sink
"Jones. — Plunge, dip, bai)tizc, bury, overwhelm.
"Bass. — To dip, immerse, plunge in water. Baptisma, immersion, dipping,
" Stokius. — To dip, to immerse in water.
" So we have in all sixteen witnesses who depose that this is its primary and common meaning. Sixteen who testify that it must thus be understood when nothing in the context requires another sense. And only one who gives to wash as its primary meaning. Mr. Campbell also mentioned several others, whom he said ^ave it the same sense, and you did not disi)ute his word."
" But what of all that ?" replied the Reverend Doctor Kice. " I would have set aside all that array of dic- t,ionaries bj' quoting just one sentence from the great Uaptist, Doctor Carson, who ought surely to under- stand what he says, and who was no friend to sprink- ling: and vet he expressly says, 'Tqat all the Lexi-
442 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
CONS ARE AGAINST HIM.' This IS testimony enough foi me."
" But it would not have been for Miss Theodosia or Mr. Percy. They would have asked to see the book and the place, and would have read it for themseWes, and doing so, would have been sure to discover what you must have known before you quoted it, that he does not say that all the Lexicons are against the Baptists — he docs NOT say that all or any of the Lexicons gives sprinkling or pouring as a meaning of the word — he does NOT say that they do not all agree in giving dip or its equivalent as the primary and common meaning. ' On this point,' he says, ' 1 have no quarrel with the Lexicons. There is the most complete harmony among them in representing dip as the primary meeting of bapto and baptizo.' But Mr. Carson denies that it has any secondary meaning at all, or that it ever means any thing else but dip or immerse. And it is on this point, that he says, page 55, ' He has all the Lexicograp)iers and Commentators against him.' I could not have satisfied my inquirers with such a misrepresentati'i^n, even though my conscience could have permitted me to use it. We all know that the Lexicons give secondary meanings to these words, and in our company there was no disposition to question the propriety of their doing so. But, sir, it has struck me with surprise, since my attention has been turned to the subject, that not a single one of all the seventeen Lexicons referred to and quotec by you and Mr. Campbell give spruikle or pour as even a secondary meaning. They give wash and cleanse, but several of them are careful to explain that It is because things may be washed and cleansed by dip- ping them in water. And I have been thinking, espe- cially since I read your piece, that what we are accus tomed to call baptism is not even a washing — for if the
A DREAM. 44Z
Doctor should tell me to wash one of my children, who was sick, with warm water, I am sure I should not feel that I had carried out the prescription by dipping the tip of my fingers in the water and touching them to his forehead. And the trutli is, sir — I suppose T may just as well tell it — that since you have made so light of all the arguments which I advanced in our discussion, and yet have given me no better, nor told me to whi h of all our Doctors I can go to find any more forcible or convincing, I begin to doubt whether we are not both mistaken, and that Miss Ernest and her friends had better reasons for leaving us than I can ever find for re- maining where I am."
" Yes," exclaimed Professor Jones (who suddenly made his appearance, unaccountably, as people often do in dreams), " I have often thought how angry we should be if those who owe obedience to us should render it as some of us render obedience to God. Doctor Rice, for example, says to a little servant boy on Saturday night, go wash yourself, or go bathe yourself, and put on clean clothing for the Sabbath. The servant, instead of bath- ing his whole body, takes a few drops of water in the palm of his hand and pours it on the top of his head. ' You little rascal,' Doctor Rice would say, ' why did j'ou not wash yourself as I directed you ?'
" * I did wash myself, sir.'
' ' You did I Do you call that washing yourself 1 W"hy, 3^ou did not even wet your scalp. Come here sir ; I'll teach you how to trifle with my commandments.
" * Please, sir I' exclaims the lad. ' Please sir, don't punish me, T am sure, sir, I did wash myself; I can prove it to 3'ou, sir.'
'" Why, you little impertinent. You just now con- fessed that you only put a few drops of water ou the top of your head.'
444 THKMIMISIA ERNEST.
*' * I know it, sir ; but that was washing myself, sir ; 1 tau prore it by the united testimony of all your Doc TORS OF Divinity, including the Reverend Doctor N. L. Rice. You may be so angry, sir, just now, that you don't remember it, but in 3^onr Lexington debate you 8aid again and again that baptize means to loash, and of course wash means to baptize, and when you and our other Doctors of Divinity baj^tize, you only put a few droi)s of water on the person's head. Besides, you said again and again, that wash was a ' generic'' word (I believe that was it, sir), and might be performed in any way, and as this is the way which all the great Doctors of Divinity use when GOD tells them 'to wash ' people, I am sure, sir, you could not expect vie to do more in obedience to your command than you do in obedience to IIis.'
"But let it pass; I have just called in, Doctor, to thank you for dealing so kindly with me in your article on Theodosia. It is customarj^ when one has been driven by his convictions of duty to leave some denomi- nations for others for those he leaves to seek b}^ defama- tion to destro}' his peace and injure his usefulness. It is customary to attack his character and impugn his motives. And the same course has sometimes been adopted to counteract the influence of a controversial BOOK. When its arguments could not be met and refuted, the moral or Christian character of the author has been assailed with a malignity which argues very little for the piety of the assailants, and of itself affords prima facie evidence that there is something rotten in the sj^stem which requires such foul means to sustain it, and breeds such rancorous spirits to contend for it. But it has gratified me much to see that you speak of me in ' sorrow more than anger ;' that you are more inclined to pity than abuse. You think me weak
A DREAM. 445
ftnd foolisL, and that is the worst of it. I could expect no less than that, for we all are apt to think dis paragingl}' of the intellect which cannot see what seems to ours as clear as light. You thought that my friend, Mr. Johnson, was simple, because he failed to convince my niece and myself; and I might have expected that you would think still worse of me, because I could not be convinced. If Mr. Johnson had used all the argu- nents which he could have found in the works of Pres- Dyterian Doctors of Divinity, you might witli good reason have thought him a simpleton indeed.
" He contended, with Doctor Miller and other doctors, that the word baptize means to sprinkle or to pour, as truly as to immerse.
" Like several others, and yourself among them, he denied that John's baptism was Christian baptism,
" Like you and all the rest he denied that Jesus went into the water, or that John baptized in Jordan, but asserted that he sprinkled the people standing in rows on the bank.
" Like you and the other doctors, he denied that there was water enough to be had in Jerusalem to immerse three thousand, or time enough to do it.
" Like 3"0U and the other doctors, he made an argu- ment upon the demgn of baptism, as being bette: S3''mbolized by sprinkling than immersion.
" Like you and the other doctors, he made a very plausible argument upon the Pentecostic outpouring of the Holy Ghost as baptism.
" Like you and some of the other doctors, he made the strongest argument that it is possible to make upon ' with water^ as the translation of * en udati.' And he gave to each and every one of these arguments all the force to which it was logicalh' entitled, and if they could not stand before the simple, common sense of «
146 THEODOSIA ERNEST.
strong-minded, earnest-hearted girl, it was not his fault but the fault of the arguments. If he had presented all the arguments which he could have found gravely set forth by Doctors of Divinity, little Edwin himself would have laughed him out of countenance. What if, like Doctor Dwight, he had declared that 'Christ him- self has expressly taught us that immersion is unessen- tial to the administration of this ordinance.^
" When he said to Peter, John xiii. : ' He that is washed needeth not care to wash his feet, but is clean every whit,' from which the learned doctor concludes that ' a symbolical washing is perfect although applied only to the feet ; as perfect as if it were applied also to tlie hands and the head, and if this construction be admitted, it must also be admitted that the declaration is general and extends to every other symbolical wash- ing, and therefore to baptism, unless excluded by some plain exception.' See Dwight's Divinity, vol. 4, pp. 150, 157.
" So also another Doctor of Divinity declares, thai ' Christ discountenanced the practice of immersion in religious purifications. He that is washed, said he to Peter, needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.' John xiii. 9, 10. By reading this text in its connection, we will perceive that so far from introducing the practice of washing the body all over as a religious rite, he discouraged it, by declaring it unnecessary, and by refusing to gratify Peter, who wished to have the water ap[)lied to him in a more profuse manner than the Saviour was using it.' See James Wood, D. D., on Christian Baptism, page 35. If Doctor Wood is con sistent with himself, he applies the water to the baby's dear little foot, for it was the application of water to the ' hands^ or the ' head^ that Jesus ' discountenanced'' and * discouraged ' I presume, therefore, that Doctor
A DREAM. 441
Wood is not only a Pedobaptist, but a pedal-'ba.i>Vist, a foot-baptize r.
"What if Mr. Johnson had said, as more than one of the Doctors of Divinity has done, that there is the same proof that the Eunuch immersed Philip that there is that Philip immersed the Eunuch ? Yet the great Doctor Miller says : ' There is the same evidence that Philip was plunged as that the Eunuch was.' And Doctor Dwight argues that if ' ew^ means into, and ' ek^ means out of, in the narrative of this transaction, they were both plunged twice and the Eunuch Un^'e times. Here are his words : ' The declarations here made, are made concerning the Eunuch and Philip; alike of both it is said that IJiey went down wto the ivafer, if we render eis into; of both also it is said that when they came up out of the water, if we render the word ek out of Now let us see what will bo the true im[)()rt of the passage according to this method of construing the words in question, and they icent down both into the icater, both Philip and the Eunuch. That is, they were both ptunged And he baptized him, that in, Philip plunged the Eunuch. And when they were come up out of the water ; that is, when they had both .been plunged a second time and risen up from their immersion, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip. In other words, they were both plunged twice and the Eunuch three times.' See Dwight's Divinity, vol. 4, p. 350, Sermon on Baptism.
" Suppose that Mr. Johnson, lilvc Doctor Wood, had gravel}' argued that the Eunuch must have been baptized by sprinkling, because he had been reading in Isaiali, and Isaiali somewhere, though not in the ])assage quoted as that which he was reading, says that Messiah shall sprinkle many nations, while ever}' scholar knows that in the Septuagint, which it is most likely he was read- ing, the word sprinkle (lof^« not occur, but ' thaumasontaV
i48 THEODOSIA ERNEST
astonish, * so shall he astonish many nations.' And Doctor Adam Clarke says it is the best rendering of the Hebrew. That the Jews so understood the Hebrew is evident from their so translating it ; and therefore, whether the Eunuch read Hebrew or Greek, he could have found no such word as sprinkle.
"But though your Doctors of Divinity had talked volumes of such nonsense, my friend, Mr. Johnson, had "ense enough to see that arguments like these could not be expected to stand the scrutiny of earnest, inquiring common sense, even in a simple girl, and therefore would not offer them. He used the best you have, and did the best he could with them. 1 grant that both he and I used some very simple arguments; nay, that all our arguments were silly as long as we argued against the truth, for every false argument must he foolish, but neither of us was as silly as some of you Docturs of Divinity, and since you have yourself condemned and ridiculed the very arguments by which not only he but thousands of your people are deluded and prevented from yielding obedience to Christ, I trust both he and they will see their folly, abandon their errors, obey their Lord, and like my niece and myself, unite with his risible church.''
CHAPTER IL
>^^^HEN I saw, in my dream, that Pastor Johnson
"™ ^ sat with his good old wife, in their own quiet room ; but his countenance was sad, and she saw that his heart was troubled, and knew that something had gone amiss with him during nis absence. With true womanly tact slie sought to find out what it had been without seeming to ask.
" I hope, my dear, you had a pleasant journey, and met with no disagreeable accidents by the way."
" It was as pleasant as I had expected."
" You saw Doctor Rice, of course. I have been told since you started that he is a perfect model of a Chris- tian gentleman, and would certainly explain every thing to your satisfaction. Did you not find it so ?"
" Gentleman ! Why, yes ; I suppose he is what people call a gentleman — a polished, pleasant gentleman — and he made, probably, what he thinks the best apology that the case admits of"
"But you were not quite satisfied with it? Well, I don't wonder. It ivas too bad to call you a greater simpleton than could be found in all the Presbyteriau Church. But what explanation did he make ?"
" M}^ dear wife," said the pastor, suddenly raising his e3^es, and looking earnestly into her face, " I begin to think that our Doctors of Divinity are no more to be confided in than other people, and that Miss Ernest, Esquire Percy, and Professor Jones, were right in just casting all their assertions aside, and going to the sacred Word and hunting out its teachings for them- selves."
(449)
450 TIIEODOSIA ERNEST.
"Why, Mr. Johnson 1"
" Yes, my dear ; I never mean to trust the bare as&ei tion of any Dodor of Divinity again as long as 1 live Just think of it now — Doctor Rice laughs at my argu ments in favor of sprinkling, and at Mr. Percy's and at those of Professor Jones. He holds them up to the scorn of the world. He speaks of them as though they were almost beneath contempt ; and yet you and I know very well that tho}^ are arguments which I borroiced, EVERY ONE OF THEM, from a Doctor of Divinity. Tbey are the very name arguments which have been emplo3'ed by Doctor Eagleton, by Doctor Newton, by Doctor Wood, by Doctor Summers, by Doctor Miller, by Doctor Dwight, and even b}^ Doctor Rice himself But to make the world believe that we have some stronger and better arguments he laughs at these, as though they were the mere twaddle of the veriest ignoramus in all Chrisien- dom. But does he bring forward any stronger or any better ones? Does he point to the chapter and the page in the works of our Doctors of Diviyity, where they presented any thing more convincing ? So far from it, he was obliged to own to Professor Jones, whom I met at his house, that he had himself emplo\^ed these very arguments in his debate with Campbell; and the Professor also pointed out to him the volumes and the pages in the works of our greatest doctors, where they had employed arguments so much sillier than mine, that I would have been ashamed to mention them to a shrewd, sensible girl, like Theodosia. Now, what am 1 as a Christian man and a Christian minister to do ? J have all the time believed that we were right, and, therefore, I so preached and practiced. But you know I would sooner cut off this right hand than use it to sprinkle another babe if Christ does not require it. It was because I trusted to the teaching of our doctors
^MMt^
Tbeodcwia Eruess.
A DREAM. 453
that I thought he must be right ; but wlien these doctors hold up these very arguments, by which 1 was convinced, to the scorn of the religious world, and yet give me no better in the place of them, I can't help thinking there is something rotten in the system some- where.
" I intend, God helping me, to search into the Hcrip- ture teachings for mi/>>elf. I remember that we could not find a single command to baptize infants, nor a single example of one baptized. I remember that our own best commentators, such as Barnes in this country, and Olshausen in Europe, say there is nothing about it in the text 1 most relied upon, ' Suffer the little children to come unto me.' I remember that we could not find one single text, which even our own Doctors of Divinity all agree upon as requiring or justifying the practice — that even concerning the covenant of circumcision, which Doctor McNought thinks is our strongest fortress. Professor Stuart expressly declares, in his commentar}- on Genesis xvii. and Galatians, that they can afford it no countenance whatever ; and as to sprinkling, even Doctor Rice himself did noi, and dare not say that the Greek word baptize in the Scriptures has ever been truly rendered .<})ritifi-le by any reliable Lexicon or emi- nent critic. lie only contends that it may be rendered to ivash, and then says that washing may be done by sprinkling a dozen drops or less of water on the person's heatl. But can it be thus done? If 3'ou or I should tell one of the children to wash, not his face, but to wash hunself, would he consider it a full and complete obedi- ence if he should only dip the tip of his fingers m water, and touch them on his head, or face, or feet, or hands; for I don't see as there is any more propriety in touching one ])art than another."
" I don't think we would, my dear," replied the goo<3 28
454 TilEODOSIA ERNEST.
woman. "And if this be so, I am sure it must be some wicked mockery to do that in obedience to God''s com- mands, which we woukl consider as the veriest trifling if it were done in the place of actual obedience to a similar command b}^ us."
" I am afraid, my dear," resumed the pastor, " I am awfully afraid we have been wrong. God knows 1 meant to do right — God knows 1 verily believed that 1 was riirht; but this communication of Doctor Ilice has made the case look fearfuU^^ dark to me.
" I have thought, and prayed, and thought again, until my brain is dizzy. I can't help seeing Jesus baptized, as Mark says, 'AYs,' not merely in, but into the river of Jordan. I can't help seeing the Eunuch and Philip going down into the water, then the baptism, then the coming up out of the water. I fear our doctors twist aud pervert the words in trying to make them mean any thing less. I fear some of them almost prevaricate to hide the simple and natural meaning of the language. But oh, it is a dreadful thought that we have all the time been wrong; that I, a minister of Christ, have all my life been the advocate of error, and have been doing in his name that which he never commanded, and having constantly undone that which he actually did commis- sion all his ministers to do. I must study more about it. I must pray more over it. But if I fmd it so — ■ much as 1 love my i)eople, much as I love my church, lauch as I love my brethren in the ministry, much as I love the doctrines and the ordinances which I have so long taught and administered, I trust I love the truth and love my Saviour better than them all, and I will go down into the water as the Eunuch did, and Mr. Percy shall himself baptize me, as Philip did the Eunuch, and when we come up out of the water I trust to meet the
Theodosia Ernest.
PAGE 455.
A DEEAM. 457
Spirit of the Lord ready to find a place for me to labor, and to bless my work."
******
Then I saw, in my dream, some few weeks after this, f.hat Mr. Percy had returned from his visit to Nashville and the hill country of Tennessee (an account of whioh is given in the second volume of Theodosia Ernest), and he M^as standing in the same place where Theodosia had gone down into the water. The company that stood upon the bank consisted of a great multitude. Many of them had walked in a procession from the beautiful new Baptist meeting-house, which stood near the old school-house where Theodosia lia<l been admitted to the visible company of Christ's [)eople. Many others had come from the magnificent old building, in which, until recentl}', Pastor .Johnson had been accustomed to min- ister for many years. Many had come from other places of worship, and not a few were there who seldom witnessed any act of religion but one like this, which called Ihem out merely to gratify tlieir curiosity. But 7ast and various as was the crowd, the}- were silent, and solemn, and tearful, when the old man sto])ped at the verge of the water, turned to their expeelant gaze, and briefly gave the reasons wli}', following his Saviour's example, and in obedience to his positive command, which he could no longer misunderstand, he was about to "be buried with Christ by baptism."
Those reasons we have not space to tell as he told them that day. It is enough for us merely to state that, after earnest i)rayer for guidance from above, he had resolved to '' f>earch the Scripturc^^^ and discard the doctors That he had been unable to find any sprink- ting commanded or practiced as baptism. Nor could he and a single text which either commands or justifies the baptism of babes, Presbyterian Doctors of Divinity
•45S THEODOSIA ERNEST.
tliemselves being judges, since each text that one may c'aim as teaching it, a half a dozen others will declare has no relation to the case,
"There are," said he, in conclusion, " many of my own former people here. I see their once familiar faces. Some look on me with pity ; and could I have continued to practice, in my Master's name, what he has nowhere commanded, I should need their pity.
" Some look on me with heartfelt sorrow ; and I see even now the traces which their tears have marked upon their loving faces My friends, I am happier now than I have been for many months. Doubt has now given way to certainty, hesitation to decision — the struggle, the long, agonizing, heart-rending struggle between old attachments and personal inclination, on the one hand, and duty to my Lord and Master on the other, has ceased at length, and 1 have 2:)eace with God and peace with my own conscience.
" It may be there are some who look on me with angers some who will follow me with bitter words ; some who may malign my motives, and seeK to destroy my charac- ter ; some who may send out rumors that their old pastor was deranged, or something worse, and that the people whom he served so long were glad to be so easily rid of him. Such things have been said of others, and, doubt- less, will be said of me. But, though you may revile mc, I will love j^ou still. Though you may persecute me, 1 will still pray for you, and long and strive to bring you to a knowledge of the whole truth of the glorious gospel of my blessed God. And since you cannot make me hate you, you cannot harm me by your hatred. I part with 3^ou all in the love of the gospel, and pray for all, that God will help you see, as I have seen, the sin and danger of setting aside the ordinance of Christ,
A DREAM, i^lf
and teaching for doctrines the traditions and command ments of men."
Then they went down into the water, b©th Mr. Percy and the former pastor, and he baptized him ; and they came up out of the water, and I awoke— and behold it was a dream 1 And yet, kind reader, wan it all a dream *
'P yi -f END
\.
I
^Pff 8 I94C
■T ---*.. #
f:.^^
■« ^'^K-t^ji
|
t -J |
|
|
•*: ..* -^^^ |
*-**.'^_^
*.:«
t,..«
M M
i*""f^