the canons of African Councils, and the fact is stated that they were followed by very distinguished ecclesiastics. In our own country, anno 690, Benedict Briscop, abbot of Weirmouth, was an ingenious and industrious artificer; and in the reign of Edgar, near the close of the first millennium of the Christian era, a statute occurs recommending priests to learn and diligently practice some useful handicraft--a statute which, for aught I know to the contrary, may still be a part of the law of the land, as it is certain that lately some others were of equal age but not of equal wisdom. BAPTISM. Baptism, or as the word implies, immersion, was the only mode that Christ and his Apostles appointed for entrance into his church and kingdom, and we may search the Scripture and early antiquity in vain for the case of a single individual entering into it in any other manner. In the scriptures, and in early antiquity, we find it always stands connected with faith, reformation, confession, regeneration, and remission of sin. In modern times, this association being exploded, we find it in connection with a lecture to children. Tertullian is the first Christian writer that refers to infant baptism, and he mentions it To this age belongs the celebrated with unequivocal disapprobation. IreDunstan, successively bishop of Win- neus, I believe, was the first to give chester, London, and archbishop of it the sanction of his authority; yet Canterbury. He was born at Glas several ages elapsed before it became tonbury, of noble parentage, and was the common practice of the church. skilled in painting, transcribing, illu- The disseverance of this institution minating, and music, as well as being from its ancient connections, was not an excellent forger and refiner of metal. fully effected till a new principle had Fourthly. The primitive disciples arisen, which was supposed to be assembled every Lord's day to break perfectly capable of supplying their bread-a practice which, with its at- place. That principle was the doctendant subscription for the poor, trine of priestly efficacy. With this continued throughout the early ages. association it assumed an appearance This practice has found no imitators not altogether devoid of plausibility among the sects of modern Protest- and consistency. Its evangelical adantism; and though there is an evi-vocates have had an infinitely more dent impropriety in celebrating the forlorn case to defend; and that they resurrection of the Lord once every should have so far maintained the seven days, while we commemorate credit of a practice essentially inimihis death only once a month, or after cal to the evangelical principle, is a a longer interval though the prac- proof of the great deference paid by tice of the ancient church is well Protestants to authoritative settleknown to all that have any acquaint-ment, above the claims of the clearest ance with church affairs though argument and evidence. We add, some of the greatest lights of the mo- that in almost all Pædobaptist condern churches have attempted to re- gregations, there are individuals who vive the practice, and nothing in our are dissatisfied with the evidence on modern theology was at all repugnant which this practice rests. to it yet it has not been revived. An obstacle has existed, not of a theological but of a financial nature. There must have been resuscitated with it a practice inconsistent with the principles that regulate the finance of modern churches. - J. N. The way to excel, in any kind, is to propose the brightest and most perfect examples to our imitation. No man can write after too good and perfect a copy. He that aims at the heavens will shoot higher than he who aims at a mark within his reach. CORRESPONDENCE. A FREE GOSPEL. "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of THE WORLD" (John.) Christ loved THE CHURCH, and gave self for it" (Paul.) 66 conversion of Jews and Gentiles to the one creed of the apostles, and the one proper name Christian. It is well observed by A. Campbell (Christian System, third edition) - There is a number of incongruities and inaccuracies in the controhim-versy about the nature and extent of the atonement, which, as the mists of the morning retire from the hills before the rising suu, disappear from our mental horizon when the light of scriptural definition breaks in upon our souls. The atonement, or propitiation, has no 'extent,' because God alone is its object. It contemplates sin as a unit in the divine government, and therefore the Lamb of God beareth away the sin of the world;' and his death is a sinoffering. As to its value, it is unspeakable. Commensurate it is, indeed, with the sin of the world, for it makes it just on the part of God, to forgive and save every one that believeth in Jesus. Reconciliation and redemption have, however, a certain limited extent. Reconciliation is not universal, but partial. All do not believe in Jesus: all are, therefore, not reconciled to God through him. Redemption, or deliverance from the guilt, pollution, power, and punishment of sin, is only commensurate with the elect of God, i. e. with those who believe in Je us, and obey him." For many are called, but few are chosen. In this passage, and other scriptures like it, the terms "called" and "chosen" are put in opposition. By the former are denoted those who have been invited into, and have entered upon, the service of Christ by baptism, having washed away their sins calling upon his name: and by the latter, those who have approved themselves as the servants of the Lord, having their fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. The general sense is, that in the dispensation of the grace of God, the publication of certain blessings, subject to such and such conditions, is indiscriminate, and made to all; but the receiving of these blessings, subject to the obedience of faith, is not indiscriminate, nor equally characteristic of all, nor are the benefits of the offer as general as the publication thereof. Thus, many comparatively would be called, by having the offer of eternal salvation made to them; but the number of those who shall obey from the heart, and make their clection sure, would be comparatively few. So also in Rom. v. it is evident that the many, in antithesis to the one, are equivalent to all, and comprehend the whole multitude-the entire species of mankind. is not, however, to be understood as meant, that all mankind are actually justified or made righteous; but only that the benefit of this gift, or grace, or justification of life, is held out to all, and if they do not reap the benefit of it, it is through their own unbelief or disobedience, whereby they judge themselves unworthy of everlasting life. The term "many," in Heb. ix. 28, is generally explained by Arminian teachers, even as many as were born into the MR. EDITOR,--We know that it is laid on all who continue steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine, to preach the gospel to every creature, as opportunity and ability are given them; for so Christ commanded, adding the promise, And lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world" which could not refer to the apostles personally, who were so soon, like others, to disappear; but is, evidently, a promise to giving success to their word, until the conclusion of the world's duration (John xvii. 20.) He, therefore, that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Now, as was observed in a former paper, God cannot call upon man --that is, mankind to believe what is not true; much less will he condemn any creature made after his own similitude, for rejecting a testimony which is not veritable. But in commanding all men every where to repent-every one who hears the gospel, to believe it and be baptized for the remission of sins it must needs follow, that Christ tasted death for every man-that he is the propitiation for the sins, not of the elect only, but also for the sins of the whole world. It is true, we read in some scriptures, that Christ gave himself "a ransom for many" and hence some seek to reconcile the testimonies already considered with what is called "particular redemption"-saying that the word of God cannot contradict itself. On the other hand, the preachers of "general redemption" maintain that the word " many" must comprehend "all," because truth is uniform with itself. But is it for man who is a worm, and knoweth nothing, to comprehend the understanding which is infinite?-to reconcile what he supposes to be discrepant in the things which are revealed to be believed, and where human reason must necessarily be ever at fault? Can mortal man, who is but of yesterday, see the end from the beginning ?-both east and west, and north and south, at a glance? For want of submission of mind to the word of God, as a whole, one half of the religious world says that Christ died only for the elect, and therefore fails in declaring the whole counsel of God to men; whilst the other half denies that Jesus loved the church, and gave himself for it in an especial sense, and so comes short of edifying the body of which he is the head. Hence the divisions and offences contrary to the sound doctrine once delivered to the saints---the absence of unity, in affection and work, among those who otherwise might serve the Lord with one consent; and the stumbling block to the It 66 world" by Calvinistic ones, as many as truly believe in Christ." The former sense cannot be admitted, as being a manifest gloss; and truth needs no such help. It has been already shown that the "many" is often equivalent to "all" but here the apostle speaks of those that "wait for him"-i. e. who wait for Christ's second coming, as a righteous judge, in humble yet in the blessed hope of receiving the reward, which is of grace and not of debt; and these, manifestly, are not the whole human race. So, also, in ii. 10, it is said that Christ bringeth many sons unto glory. Wherefore, the reason why, in some places, Jesus is said to give himself a ransom for "all," and in others only for "many," appears to be, that when all is mentioned, it is meant that to all he offers the blessings of salvation by the gospel; and where many are spoken of, it is considered that by all the gospel will not be obeyed. and stamps a sense of pardoning love and for- You will excuse one remark. I am fully aware that Mr. Campbell is not favorable to the teetotal question; I have seen some of his remarks on this subject, and am of opinion that justice has not been done to that sober principle. But I feel persuaded that total abstinence will as assuredly keep a professor sober, as baptism will be the means of conveying a sense of pardon to the penitent believer. Still there is no comparison between the value of pardon and that of sobriety: yet tippling has kept many a saint from attaining eminence in piety, and many a poor sinner in the gall of bitterness. I have no doubt, that the teaching of baptism as a sign of inward good, and not as a seal of pardon, has been instrumental in keeping many a poor doubting soul in a state of bondage, which, otherwise, might have been assured of the pardoning love of God. I feel thankful for this further light — per On the general truth contained in Christ having given himself for the church in an especial sense, we might speak of it, 1st, with respect to God having had, as he could not but have had, a fixed purpose as to the end for which his Son died, namely, the salvation and bringing to glory of all those whom he had chosen in him before the foundation of the world. 2ndly, That the new covenant which was dedicated and made of force by the death of Christ, has no respect to the world; and that of the things contained in it, and obtained for the church by his death, these two, faith and repentance, could not be said to be obtained for those who never have them, as forgive-haps I ought to say for the new light now given ness might be said to be. Accordingly, for- by Mr. Campbell on the sacrament of believers' giveness is preached to all men, as a gift and baptism; but I cannot see, at present, that a blessing to be received on certain conditions; sense of pardon is confined exclusively to those but faith and repentance are not preached to who observe this holy ordinance. I am perthe world as blessings given by God, but as the suaded, however, that in the hands of judicious obedience required by him—that is, the very ministers, it may prove an answer to that imconditions on which forgiveness is to be re- portant question, "Shall I bring to the birth, ceived. But to enter upon all that is contain- and not give power to bring forth, saith the ed in these things would be, in fact, to write a Lord ?" May the Lord bless the well-directed labours of his servants. Respectfully yours in the covenant, April, 1849. sermon, or many sermons. I am, Mr. Editor, in submission of mind to all revealed truth, yours, A LOVER OF GOOD MEN. F. A BAPTIST. MR. EDITOR,-I have lately read one volume of your useful miscellany, and the four published numbers of the present year. Of many of the articles I highly approve. As a Baptist of course I think every believer ought to be immersed into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; but I cannot assent to all that is written on John iii. 5, in the present April number. As regards being born of water, the writer contends that baptism is "part of regeneration; not, indeed, the greater, nor the first, second, or third stage of it, but in fact the concluding item, the being born into the kingdom of God." He also says, it implies that by it believers are brought into a new state, (and some of your correspondents say, that without baptism they cannot be brought into this new state); yet the writer admits that those who are born of the Spirit are changed in their views and in heart-have a living faith-are warm in love, and are quickened in hope. Now if this do not constitute a new state of existence, I cannot understand the plainest parts of the word of God. That word says, "He that believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God"-" that to as many as received him, to them gave he power to become sons of God, who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, but of God" - that such are new creatures, old things to them having passed away, and all things become new — that they are brought out of darkness into light these will doubtless be allowed to be new states, but perhaps not the state the writer contends for. But the following passage must, I think, include the one intended -"Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son." Here is a translation —a taking from one state, and bringing into another state, even into that very kingdom of God, into which the writer says baptism alone can introduce us. I am aware, it may be replied, that the apostle here alludes to the baptized church at Colosse. It may be so, but I rather think that he is here speaking of believers in general, and of the power of the gospel; if not, the aforementioned passage, "He that believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God," and others of the same import, will, I think, be sufficient for my argument: for, in this passage there appears to be no reference to believers in their church capacity. But if without baptism we cannot be brought into this new state, in what state are they whose views are changed, who possess faith, love, and hope? The Bible teaches us that there are but two states, the believer and the unbeliever; but according to this writer's views, there must be a kind of middle state: and yet those in this middle state are said to be born of God, and to be in possession of everlasting life, having a new heart, and faith, love, and hope in lively exercise. If J. D. or any of your correspondents, will enlighten my mind on this subject, I (and doubtless many others) will feel much obliged. A LEARNER IN THE SCHOOL OF CHRIST. P.S. Regarding the Replies to the Query, "In what sense is baptism said to be for the remission of sins?" I agree with J. D. when he says, "The act of Jesus dying for us, and the act of remitting sins, are separate and distinct, and that it is only by the application of the blood of Christ to the soul, the sinner can have his sins remitted;" but that this is only done when a person receives baptism, I think the scriptures will not warrant. The reason I conceive why remission of sins is so generally connected with baptism, is, that in the apostles' days this ordinance was always, I believe, ad ministered immediately on a person professing his faith in Christ, as the Son of God: so that he no sooner believed, than he was immersed, and enjoyed the sense of pardon. But it does not necessarily follow that this blessing could not be obtained without baptism, for Peter declares that "whosoever believeth in him shall receive the remission of sins." "All that believe in him," says Paul, are justified." Then I conclude that such have also received the forgiveness of their sins; and these passages I consider to be in unison with the whole tenor of the New Testament. That those who receive baptism with a strong and living faith, enjoy a fuller sense of pardon than those who neglect it, I am not disposed to question; but to insist, as A. C. does, that baptism is the only medium through which remission of sins can be obtained, is, I think, contrary to many portions of scripture, and making more of the ordinance of baptism than the word of God authorises, as well as giving Baptists an unenviable notoriety in the religious world. If any of your correspondents can prove these remarks to be unscriptural, I shall bow to their decision, the eliciting of truth being my object. April 10, 1849. REMARKS BY THE EDITOR. The three preceding articles, addressed to tions, are submitted to the consideration of our the Editor by Baptists of distinct denominareaders. It is thought, by some, that all communications of this character should be formally noticed, either by way of approval or disapproval, as the case may be. Our desire is, in this respect, to avoid extremes; while, at the same time, we accord to every one who writes with any degree of correctness and candour, and whose object is to unfold or vindicate divine truth as revealed in the Bible, the full liberty of giving expression to his opinions. Our esteemed friend and old correspondent, "A Lover of Good Men," and his remarks on the "Lamb of God taking away the sin of the world," and Christ only loving the church, and giving himself for it, we shall leave with the following observations : -The apostles of the Lord knew from the testimony of the prophets, as well as from the teaching of Jesus, that the Heavenly Father has covenanted to create a new heavens and a new earth-a paradise exempt from every evil, and in which the righteous, both angels and men, are to dwell for The disciples of Christ, therefore, may quietly and confidently rest assured, that sinand death, the consequence of sin - will be taken away by the Lamb of God, who came to ever. destroy sin and death, and him that had the power thereof. But it is the church--the chosen, called, and faithful-which will be glorified with her Lord for ever. Hence the gospel is a savor of life unto life, or of death unto death, to those who hear it. Our correspondent "F. A Baptist," we confess, gave us no authority to publish his letter, but the candour and intelligence manifested in it, together with the gratification it will afford to some of our readers, induced us to give it publicity. A short time ago we had the pleasure of presenting the writer with a copy of A. Campbell's Essay on the Remission of Sins, receiving a promise in return, that after reading it he would send his thoughts on the subject, which, in his view, as he then expressed himself, was of paramount importance to the children of men. This promise he has now fulfilled in the letter before us. We are informed, in the first place, of what we have repeatedly been reminded from early life, viz. "that the Baptists are uniformly taught to consider baptism as an outward sign of some inward good." Now we are convinced, and have been for the last twelve or fourteen years, that this view of the subject is both deficient and delusive, and would not endure the searching examination of the apostles of the Lord. The ambassadors of the Prince of Peace taught as plainly, clearly, and emphatically, that bartism is for the remission of sins to every believer of the gospel, as Elisha, by the word of the Lord, commanded Naaman, the Syrian, to dip seven times in the Jordan and be clean (1 Kings v.) The view of immersion referred to, to say the least, deprives the believer who submits to the institution of much consolation, robs the gospel of one half its glory, and leaves the mind still concentrated on the supposed inward good, thereby forming the basis of that erroneous principle which teaches the necessity of Christian experience previous to making the good confession. Men are not born Christians. What, then, is necessary to complete the transition ? An apostle would answer, THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH." But what is faith? The belief in facts that are past, and in facts yet to come. It is the conviction of things hoped for. It is the belief, also, in facts concerning ourselves that we have sinned against heaven and before God—that in us dwelleth no good thing; and therefore, baptism ought not to be attended to under the influence of any other principle than that of guilty, polluted, condemned, though now believing. repenting sinners, seeking pardon, justification, sanctification, and salvation, exclusively by the blood of Christ, through the bath of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Spirit, shed on the church abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour. This is the medium, not only expressive of a change of heart, but of our state before God. Thus baptism is both a sign and a seal- -an end to obtain a good conscience by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. For any person to be baptized under the impression that he is the subject of some inward good, and as a sign of its possession, appears to us most delusive, and somewhat akin to the presumption of assuming self-righteousness before God. May we not ask, with propriety, whether this antecedent inward good- or, in other words, Christian experience is not likely to become the source of hope and joy to the individual, rather than the fulness, riches, and glory of the exalted Redeemer? The consolation of an intelligent disciple of Christ arises from something out of himself. It is the full assurance of hope that consoles his heart. The disciples are saved by hope. But hope that is seen or enjoyed is not hope; for how can a man hope for that which he enjoys? but if we hope for that which we do not enjoy, then do we with patience wait for it. We are firmly convinced, that the baptism of the Baptist leaves on the mind an impression which is truly described by our worthy correspondent, whose communication has elicited these remarks. Let the reader mark well our correspondent's observations: "I have not the least doubt, that teaching baptism as a sign of some inward good, and not as a seal of pardon, has kept many a poor doubting soul in a spirit of bondage and fear, which, otherwise, might have been assured of the pardoning love of God." This we know to be true from painful experience. How much of Christian experience had the three thousand sinners mentioned in the 2nd chapter of the Acts ?-Saul of Tarsus, the chief of sinners ?- -or the Ethiopian eunuch, prior to their immersion into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for the remission of sins? In this institution the disciples pledge themselves to God, and he pledges himself to them: they are his people, and he is their God. What other pledge is now wanted? Can that which is human be more potent than that |