abolish rites and ceremonies, so that all things may be done to edification."--Methodist Epis. Discipline, Article of Religion 22.

"The heifer, whose ashes were to make the waters of separation, (Num. xix. 2,) the color was no circumstance: but, made by God's command a substantial part of the service; to be red was as much as to be a heifer for though the things in themselves be small, yet His authority is great. If any of Christ's institutions seem necessary to be broken, it will be necessary first, to decry them as poor, low, inconsiderable, circumstantial, and fill the people's heads with a noise and din that Christ lays little stress on them; and in order hereto, call them non-essentials, the accidentals, the minutes, so that the conscience may not kick at contemning them."- Vincent Alsop's Sober Enquiry, p. 289.

"Positive duties stand on a moral foot. To obey God, in whatever he commands is the first moral law, and the fundamental principle of all morality.”—Dr. Waterland's Scripture Vindication part 3. p. 37.

SECTION II.

I HAVE been amused to see how pedobaptists a tempt to prove their scheme. They will first affirm that infant sprinkling is lawful; when we tell them that the Pope has no control over this land, and that the law of New England which enforced pedobaptism is repealed, therefore this argument is not adapted to this country, they will then assert that the Scriptures prove infant sprinkling right. Thus, the word in fant is found at Isa. lxv. 20: Job iii. 16: and Luk xviii. 15: and Sprinkle at Ex. ix. 8: Ez. xxxvi. 25: and Heb. x. 22: and the word right at Gen. xviii. 25: and Amos v. xii: therefore the Bible proves Infant

sprinkling right. They will next assert, infants
are church members, and therefore subjects of bap-
tism; and to prove this, they say, that infauts by God's
appointment, were made members of the Jewish
church; and the law, authorizing their membership,
has not been abrogated. This argument reminds me
of Mr. Jolin Cotton's* reply to Roger Williams; About
A. D. 1651 Mr. Williams complained of the deadly
persecutions that he was suffering from Mr. Cotton,
and said that the civil sword was not appointed as a
remedy in such cases: to which Mr. Cotton replied.
"It is evident that the civil sword was appointed as a
remedy in this case, Deut. xiii, aud appointed it was
by the Angel of God's presence, whom God promised
to send with his people, Ex. xxxiii. 2-3, and that
Angel was Christ, 1st Cor. x. 9, therefore it cannot be
said that the Lord Jesus never appointed the civil
sword as a remedy in such cases, for he did expressly
appoint it in the Old Testament, nor did he ever abro-
gate it in the New.
Thou shalt surely kill him be-
cause he hath sought to thrust thee away from the
Lord thy God. This reason is moral, that is, of uni-
versal and perpetual equity, to put to death any apos-
tate, seducing idolater or heretic."-Backus History,
Vol 1, p. 165, 166.

This is the very course that Mr. Sawyer has taken to prove sprinkling and infant church membership; for thus he says, "Moses adopted washing as a Jewish rite, and John the Baptist adopted the same Moaic washing. The seal of the Abrahamic covenant was circumcision, and not only Abraham, but his seed were initiated into the church by it. Paul baptized disciples, and Christ took little children in his arms and blessed them. The church under the Old Testament economy, recognized their infants as members, and infant church membership has not been abA celebrated Congregational minister.

4

rogated in the New; therefore infant baptism is fully proved." When Mr. Sawyer takes Mr. Cotton's civil sword, and compels us to believe his logic sound, we shall say amen, to his assertions, and not before. Take a parallel to Messrs. Cotton and Sawyer's arguments; Mark x. 13-16. They brought young chil dren to Christ, and he took them up in his arms and blessed them, (which must have been done by speaking to them;) but Jesus Christ was God; Isa. ix. 6: and John x. 35, he called them Gods unto whom the word of God came. What must each of these children have been therefore? But few men are sensible how far a subtle infidel, or a designing learned Christian can wrest the Scriptures without detection, until they have carefully compared their writings with the inspired text.

SECTION III.

The Baptism of John.

1. The testimony of our Lord.

John i. 6, "There was a man sent from God, whose

name was John."

Luke iii. 3, "And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." Mark i. 1, 2, "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as it is written in the prophets, behold I send my mes senger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee." Matt. iii. 5, 6, "Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confess ing their sins." John well understood his commission; he was sent to prepare a people for the Lord, (i. e. for the Lord's church.) He therefore, in accordance with his commission, required of the people 1. Confession of sin. Matt, iii. 6: Mark, i. 5. 2. Repentance. Matt. iii. 2: Mark i. 4: Luke iii. 8, &..

3. Faith in Jesus Christ. Acts xix. 4: Matt. iii. 11: Mark i. 7,8: Luke iii. 15-18: Acts xiii. 25: John i. 29: Mark i. 15, &c. And those who would not comply with these conditions he did not baptize, but rebuked them sharply for offering themselves as candidates for baptism, while unprepared. Matt. iii. 7-12: Luke iii. 7-14. But, with these facts before him, Mr. Sawyer says, p. 2, "Whether the children of believers were included with their parents among the subjects of John's baptism, we are not particularly informed;" but if Mr. Sawyer has failed to discover that infants are not capable of faith, repentance, and confession of sin, I am happy that many of his pedobaptist brethren have honestly confessed that all the subjects of John's baptism were adult Christians. I could quote hundreds,

but these few must suffice.

2. Pedobaptist testimony.

"John Baptist admitted men to baptism, confessing and bewailing their sins."-Cambridge Platform, chapt. 12, sec. 2.

"Adult Jews, professing repentance, and a disposi tion to become Messiah's subjects, were the only persons, as far as we can find, whom John adınitted to his baptism."-Dr. Scott's Family Bible.

"ORIGEN Says we ought necessarily to observe that both St. Matthew and St. Mark say that upon confession of their sins, all Jerusalem, &c., were baptized." --Dr. Gale's Reflections, p. 385.

The disinterested testimony of the great Jewish historian is important: "John, that was called the Baptist, was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness toward one another and piety toward God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing would be acceptable to Him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away of some sins, but for the purification of the

body, supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."-Josephus' Antiquities, book 18, chapt. 5, sec. 2.

SECTION IV.

The Baptism of our Savior.

That the Lord was baptized is evident, from Matt. iii. 13-17: Mark i. 9-12: Luke iii. 21, 22: John i. 31-34. Thus we have the Savior's example in this institution; but it is abundantly evident that he never did practice baptism, from the fact that there is no record of it, and because the Holy Spirit says expressly, John iv. 2, "Jesus himself baptized not." This is fatal to all the pedobaptist volumes written to prove that Christ baptized infants; and as Dr. Taylor says, when remarking upon Matt. xix. 13--15: Mark 13-16: Luke xviii. 15-17, "Using these words to prove infant baptism, proves nothing so much as the want of a better argument."--Dr. Jeremy Taylor.

Having noticed the example and practice of the Lord, we pass to his commands. Matthew xxviii. 19, 20, "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 whatsoever I have commanded you." Mark xvi. 16, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not, shall be damned." The last dying words of a friend, sink deep into the hearts of survivors. The Savior regarding this fact, purposely reserved the law of preaching and baptizing, for the last, and with well selected words, arranged in an order which strictly agrees with the gospel economy, he pronounced the command, and ascended to hi throne in the heavens. I am happy that Mr. Saw