or made disciples; and that, cansequently, infants, who cannot be thus taught, are to be excluded. It does not appear, say they, that the apostles, in executing Christ's commission, ever baptized any but those who were first instructed in the Christian faith, and professed their belief of it. They contend that infants can receive no benefit from it, and are not capable of faith and repentance, which are to be considered as pre-requisites.

As to the mode.

They observe that the meaning of the word BT signifies immersion, or dipping only that John baptized in Jordan; that he chose a place where there was much water; that Jesus came up out of the water; that Philip and the eunuch went down both into the water. That the terms washing, purifying, burying in baptism, so often mentioned in Scripture, allude to this mode; that immersion only was the practice of the apostles and the first Christians: and that it was only laid aside from the love of novelty, and the coldness of our climate. These positions, they think, are so clear from Scripture, and the history of the church, that they stand in need of but little argument to support them. Farther, they also insist that all positive institutions depend entirely upon the will and declaration of the institutor, and that, therefore, reasoning by analogy from previous abrogated rites, is to be rejected, and the express command of Christ respecting baptism ought to be our rule.

PÆDOBAPTISTS.

are expressly commanded; that if infant baptism had been a human invention, how would it have been so universal in the first 300 years, and yet no record left when it was introduced, nor any dispute or controversy about it? Some bring it to these two ideas: 1. That God did constitute in his church the membership of infants, and admitted them to it by a religious ordinance, Gen. xvii. Gal. iii. 14, 17.-2. That this right of infants to church membership was never taken away. This being the case, infants must be received, because God has instituted it; and, since infants must be received, it must be either without baptism or with it; but none must be received without baptism, therefore infants must of necessity be baptized. Hence, it is clear, that, under the Gospel, infants are still continued exactly in the same relation to God and his church, in which they were originally placed under the former dispensation.

That infants are to be received into the church, and as such baptized, is also inferred from the following passages of Scripture: Gen. xvii. Is. xliv. 3. Matt. xix. 13. Luke, ix. 47, 48. Mark, ix. 14. Acts, ii. 38, 39. Rom. xi. 17, 21. 1 Cor. vii. 14.

Though there are no express examples in the New Testament of Christ and his apostles baptizing infants, yet this is no proof that they were excluded. Jesus Christ actually blessed little children; and it would be hard to believe that such received his blessing, and yet were not to be members of the Gospel church. If Christ received them, and would have us receive them in his name, how can it be reconciled to keep them out of the visible church? Besides, if children were not to be baptized, it would have been expressly forbidden. None of the Jews had any apprehension of the rejection of infants. which they must have had, if infants had been re

The Padobaptists, however, are of a different opinion. As to the subject, they believe that qualified adults who have not been baptized before, are certainly proper subjects; but, then, they think also that infants are not to be excluded. They believe that, as thejected. As whole households were bapAbrahamic and the Christian covenants are the same, Gen. xvii. 7. Heb. viii. 12; that as children were admitted under the former; and that as baptism is now a seal, sign, or confirmation of this covenant, infants have as great a right to it as the children had a right to the seal of circumcision under the law, Acts, ii. 39. Rom. iv. 11. That if children are not to be baptized because there is no positive command for it, for the same reason women should not come to the Lord's supper; we should Dot keep the first day of the week, nor attend public worship, for none of these

tized, it is probable there were children among them. From the year 400 to 1150, no society of men in all that period of 750 years, ever pretended to say it was unlawful to baptize infants; and still nearer the time of our Saviour there appears to have been scarcely any one that so much as advised the delay of infant baptism. Irenæus, who lived in the second century, and was well acquainted with Polycarp, who was John's disciple, declares expressly that the church learned from the apostles to baptize children. Origen, in the third century, affirmed that the custom

F

of baptizing infants was received from baptism, it is observed, that cannot Christ and his apostles. Cyprian, and agree to infants: faith goes before bapa council of ministers (held about the tism; and, as none but adults are capayear 254) no less than sixty-six in num- ble of believing, so no others are capable ber, unanimously agreed that children of baptism; but it is replied, if infants might be baptized as soon as they were must not be baptized because something born. Ambrose, who wrote about 274 is said of baptism that does not agree years from the apostles, declares that to infants, Mark. xvi. 16. then infants the baptism of infants had been the must not be saved, because something practice of the apostles themselves, and is said of salvation that does not agree of the church, till that time. The ca- to infants Mark, xvi. 16. As none but tholic church every where declared, adults are capable of believing, so, by says Chrysostom, in the fifth century, the argument of the Baptists, none but that infants should be baptized; and adults are capable of salvation: for he Augustin affirmed that he never heard that believeth not shall be damned. nor read of any Christian, catholic, or But Christ, it is said, set an example sectarian, but who always held that in- of adult baptism. True; but he was fants were to be baptized. They far- baptized in honour to John's ministry, ther believe, that there needed no men- and to conform himself to what he aption in the New Testament of receiving pointed to his followers; for which last infants into the church, as it had been reason he drank of the sacramental cup: once appointed, and never repealed. but this is rather an argument for the The dictates of nature, also, in parental || Pædobaptists than against them; since feelings; the verdict of reason in favour it plainly shows, as Doddridge observes, of privileges; the evidence in favour of that baptism may be administered to children being sharers of the seals of those who are not capable of all the grace, in common with their parents, purposes for which it was designed; for the space of 4000 years; and espe- since Jesus Christ, not being a sinner, cially the language of prophecy, in re- could not be capable of that faith and ference to the children of the Gospel repentance which are said to be neceschurch, make it very probable that they sary to this ordinance. were not to be rejected. So far from confining it to adults, it must be remembered that there is not a single instance recorded in the New Testament in which the descendants of Christian parents were baptized in adult years.

That infants are not proper subjects for baptism, because they cannot profess faith and repentance, they deny. This objection falls with as much weight upon the institution of circumcision as infant baptism; since they are as capable, or are as fit subjects for the one as the other. It is generally acknowledged, that, if infants die (and a great part of the human race do die in infancy,) they are saved: if this be the case, then, why refuse them the sign in infancy, if they are capable of enjoying the thing signified? Why," says Dr. Owen, is it the will of God that unbelievers should not be baptized? It is because, not granting them the grace, he will not grant them the sign. If God, therefore, denies the sign to the infant seed of believers, it must be because he denies them the grace of it; and then all the children of believing parents (upon these principles) dying in their infancy, must, without hope, be eternally damned. I do not say that ali must be so who are not baptized; but all must be so whom God would not have baptized." Something is said of

As to the mode.

They believe that the word Barto signifies to dip or to plunge; but that the term Barrig, which is only a derivative of Barr, and consequently must be somewhat less in its signification, should be invariably used in the New Testament to express plunging, is not so clear. It is therefore doubted whether dipping be the only meaning, and whether Christ absolutely enjoined immersion, and that it is his positive will that no other should be used. As the word Bar is used for the various ablutions among the Jews, such as sprinkling, pouring, &c. Heb. ix. 10; for the custom of washing before meals, and the washing of household furniture, pots, &c.; it is evident from hence that it does not express the manner of doing, whether by immersion or affusion, but only the thing done; that is, washing, or the application of water in one form or other. Dr. Owen observes, that it no where signifies to dip, but as denoting a mode of, and in order to washing or cleansing; and, according to others, the mode of use is only the ceremonial part of a positive institute; just as in the supper of the Lord, the time of the day, the number and posture of communicants, the quality and quantity of bread and wine, are circum

idea, that, when men had neglected to receive baptism in their life-time, some compensation might be made for this default by receiving it after death.

BAPTISTS, a denomination of Christians who maintain that baptism is to be administered by immersion, and not by sprinkling. See BAPTISM.

BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD, a practice formerly in use, when a person dying without baptism, another was baptized in his stead; thus supposing that God would accept the baptism of Although there were several Baptists the proxy, as though it had been ad- among the Albigenses, Waldenses, and ministered to the principal. Chrysos- the followers of Wickliffe, it does not tom says, this was practised among the appear that they were formed into any Marcionites with a great deal of ridi- stability until the time of Menno, about culous ceremony, which he thus de- the year 1536. See ANABAPTISTS scribes-After any catechumen was and MENNONITES. About 1644 they dead, they hid a living man under the began to make a considerable figure in bed of the deceased, then, coming to England, and spread themselves into the dead man, they asked him whether several separate congregations. They he would receive baptism; and he separated from the Independents about making no answer, the other answered the year 1638, and set up for themselves for him, and said he would be baptized under the pastoral care of Mr. Jesse; in his stead, and so they baptized the and, having renounced their former living for the dead. If it can be proved baptism, they sent over one of their (as some think it can) that this prac-number to be immersed by one of the tice was as early as the days of the apostle Paul, it might probably form a solution of those remarkable words in 1 Cor. xv. 29: "If the dead rise not at all, what shall they do who are baptized The Baptists subsist under two denofor the dead?" The allusion of the minations, viz. the Particular or Calapostle to this practice, however, is re- vinisticul and the General or Armijected by some, and especially by Dr. nian. Their modes of church governDoddridge, who thinks it too early: he ment and worship are the same as the thus paraphrases the passage: "Such Independents; in the exercise of which are our views and hopes as Christians; they are protected, in common with else, if it were not so, what should they other dissenters, by the act of tolerado who are baptized in token of their tion. Some of both denominations allow embracing the Christian faith, in the of mixed communion; by which it is room of the dead, who are just fallen understood that those who have not in the cause of Christ but are yet sup-been baptized by immersion, on the ported by a succession of new converts, who immediately offer themselves to fill up their places, as ranks of soldiers that advance to the combat in the rooms of their companions who have just been slain in their sight?"

Lay baptism we find to have been permitted by both the common prayer bock of king Edward and queen Elizabeth, when an infant was in immediate danger of death, and a lawful minister | could not be had. This was founded on a mistaken notion of the impossibility of salvation without the sacrament of baptism; but afterwards, when they came to have clearer notions of the sacraments, it was unanimously resolved in a convocation held in 1575, that even private baptism in a case of necessity was only to be administered by a lawful minister.

BAPTISM METAPHORICAL. In Scripture the term Baptism is used as referring to the work of the Spirit on the heart, Matt. iii. 11; also to the

Dutch Anabaptists of Amsterdam that he might be qualified to baptize his friends in England after the same man

ner.

profession of their faith, may sit down at the Lord's table with those who have been thus baptized. Others, however, disallow it, supposing that such have not been actually baptized at all. See FREE COMMUNION.

Some of them observe the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath, apprehending the law that enjoined it not to have been repealed by Christ.

Some of the General Baptists have, it is said, gone into Socinianism or Ariananism on account of which, several of their ministers and churches who disapprove of these principles, have within the last forty years formed themselves into a distinct connexion, called the New Association. The churches in this union keep up a friendly acquaintance, in some outward things, with those from whom they have separated; but in thing more essential disclaim any connexion with them, particularly as to changing ministers, and the admission of members. The General Baptists have,

in some of their churches, three distinct orders separately ordained, viz.-messengers, elders, and deacons. Their general assembly is held annually in Wor-pel of Barnabas is another apocryphal ship Street, London, on the Tuesday in the Whitsun week.