as every one knows, in consequence of men's expunging beforehand, what they thought prejudicial to the effect of the other portions of Scripture truth. Thus, early Heretics objected to the truth of the human nature of Christ against the Reformers it was urged that the doctrine of "justification by faith only" was opposed to sanctification and holiness: Luther, (although he afterwards repented,) excepted against God's teaching by St. James, and called his Epistle an "Epistle of straw;" fanatics of all ages have rejected the use of both Sacraments: stated or premeditated prayer has been regarded as mere formality, and the like. And in these or similar cases, when at a distance, we can readily see how some wrong tendency of mind suggested all these objections, and how the very truth or practice objected to, would have furnished the antidote which the case needed. We can see e. g. how stated or fixed prayer would have disciplined the mind, how a form would have tended to make the subjects of prayer more complete for we ourselves have felt, how, by the prayers which the Church has put into our mouths, we have been taught to pray for blessings, our need of which we might not have perceived, or which we might have thought it presumption to pray for. And this is a sort of witness placed in our hands, to testify to us, how in other cases also we ought with thankful deference to endeavor to incorporate into the frame of our own minds each portion of the system which God has ordained for us, not daring to call any thing of little moment, which He has allowed to enter into it; much less presuming to "call that common, which God hath cleansed," or to imagine that, because we cannot see its effects or should think it likely to be injurious, it may not be both healthful and essential.

The doctrine, then, of Baptismal Regeneration (rightly understood) may have a very important station in God's scheme of salvation, although many of us may not understand its relation to the rest of that dispensation, and those who do not believe it, cannot understand it. For thus is the method of God's teaching throughout; "first, believe and then ye shall understand."* And this may be said, in Christian warning, against those hard words, in which Christians sometimes allow themselves; as, "the deadening doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration;" language which can only serve to darken the truth to those who use it, and which is by so much the more dangerous, since all Christians believe that Regeneration sometimes accompanies Baptism. Since, also Baptismal Regeneration was the doctrine of

* "We are not therefore ashamed of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, because miscreants in scorn have upbraided us, that the highest point of our wisdom is, Believe. That which is true, and neither can be discerned by sense nor concluded by mere natural principles, must have principles of revealed truth whereupon to build itself, and an habit of Faith in us, wherewith principles of that kind are apprehended.”—Hooker, L. v. § 63.

the Universal Church of Christ in its holiest ages, and our own reformers (to whom, on other points, men are wont to appeal as having been highly gifted with God's Holy Spirit) retained this doctrine, it would seem to require but little modesty in a private Christian, not to feel so confident in his own judgment, as to denounce, in terms so unmeasured, what may after all be the teaching of God; "lest haply he be found to fight against God."

Others again, holding rightly the necessity of Regeneration for every one descended of Adam, would strongly set forth this necessity; but whether God have ordinarily annexed this gift to Baptism, this they would have passed over as a difficult or curious question. They bid men to examine themselves whether they have the fruits of regeneration; if not, to pray that they be regenerate: "This absolute necessity of regeneration," they say, "is the cardinal point; this is what we practically want for rousing men to the sense of their danger, and for the saving of their souls: what privileges may have been bestowed upon them in Baptism, or, in a happier state of the Christian Chrich, might not only be then universally bestowed, but be realized in life, is of lesser moment: regeneration, and the necessity thereof, is the kernel; these and other questions about outward ordinances, are but the husk only: regeneration and 'justification by faith only' are the key-stones of the whole fabric." I would, by the way, protest against such illustrations, whereby men, too commonly, embolden themselves to call any portion of God's institution for our salvation, "husk," or "shell," or the like: let it seem to us never so external, it can in no stage of the Christian course be dispensed with, which these similitudes would imply. Rather, if we use any image, we might better speak of the whole Gospel as an elixir of immortality, whereof some ingredients may be more powerful than the rest, but the efficacy of the whole depends upon the attemperament of the several portions; and we, who formed neither our own souls, nor this cure for them, dare not speak slightingly of the necessity of any portion. Doubtless there are truths, which in one sense (comparatively speaking) may be called the great truths of Christianity, as embodying in them a larger portion of the counsel of God, and exhibiting more fully His attributes of holiness and love. Better perhaps, and more Scripturally might we speak of the truth, the Gospel itself; yet there is no evil in that other expression, if intended solely as the language of thankfulness for the great instances of His mercy therein conveyed. If used, on the other hand, I will not say disparagingly, but as in any way conveying an impression that other doctrines are not in their place essential, or that we can assign to each truth its class or place in the Divine economy, or weigh its value, or measure its importance, then are we again forgetting our own relation to God, and from the corner of His world in which we are placed, would fain judge of the order and cor

respondencies and harmonies of things, which can only be seen or judged of, from the centre, which is God Himself. We cannot, without great danger, speak of lesser, or less essential, truths, and doctrines, and ordinances, both because the passage from "less essential," to "unessential," is unhappily but too easy, and because although these truths may appear to relate to subjects further removed from what we think the centre of Christianity, the mode in which we hold them, or our neglect of them, may very vitally affect those which we consider more primary truths. We can readily see this in cases in which we are not immediately involved. Thus we can see how a person's whole views of Sanctification by the Holy Ghost will be affected by Hoadly's low notions of the Lord's Supper; or how the error of Transubstantiation has modified other true doctrines so as to cast into the shade the one oblation once offered upon the Cross; or how the addition of the single practice of "soliciting the Saints to pray for men," has in the Romish Church obscured the primary articles of Justification and of the Intercession of our Blessed Lord; and yet Transubstantiation was at first connected with high reverential feeling for our Lord, and no one could have anticipated beforehand, that this one error would have had effects so tremendous. If then wrong notions about the one Sacrament, among both Romanists and Pseudo-Protestants, have had an influence so extensive, why should we think error with regard to the other, of slight moment? Rather, should we not more safely argue, that since Baptism is a Sacrament ordained by Christ Himself, a low, or inadequate, or unworthy conception of His institution, must, of necessity, almost, be very injurious to the whole of our belief and practice? Does not our very reverence to our Saviour require that we should think any thing, which He deigned to institute, of very primary moment, not (as some seem now to think) simply to be obeyed or complied with, but to be embraced with a glad and thankful recognition of its importance,

because He instituted it?

The other point, which was mentioned as important to be borne in mind, in the enquiry whether any doctrine be a Scriptural truth, was that we should not allow ourselves to be influenced by the supposed religious character of those whom we happen to know of, as holding it, on the contrary. This we should again see to be a very delusive criterion, in a case where we have no temptation to apply it we should at once admit that Pascal and Nicole were holy men, nay, that whole bodies of men in the Church of Rome had arrived at a height of holiness, and devotion, and self-denial, and love of God, which in this our day is rarely to be seen in our Apostolic Church: yet we should not for a moment doubt that our Church is the pure Church, although her sons seem of late but rarely to have grown up to that degree of Christian maturity, which might have been hoped from the nurture of such a mother: we should not think the compa

rative holiness of these men of God any test as to the truth of any one characteristic doctrine of the Church of Rome. We should rightly see that the holiness of these men was not owing to the distinctive doctrines of their Church; but that God had ripened the seed of life which he had sown in their hearts, notwithstanding the corrupt mixture with which our Enemy had hoped to choke it: we should rightly attribute the apparent comparative failure among ourselves in these times, not to our not possessing the truth, but to our slothful use of the abundant treasures which God has bestowed upon us. They hold the great Catholic truths of our Creeds, and much of the self-discipline (as fasting), or means of grace (as more frequent prayer), which modern habits have relinquished; and these have brought their fruit: yet we should not infer that all which they held was true, because they were holy. Holiness, (whether produced in the teacher or the taught) proves the presence of some truth, not of the whole truth, nor the purity of that truth. And so also, with regard to any doctrine in which persons either within or without our Church may depart from her; no one can say with confidence, that the superior holiness of any who do not accept it, is attributable to their not accepting it. Since it may be only that by their rejection of this one truth, they have not forfeited the blessing of God upon the other truths, which they yet hold: while others who. do hold it, may be holding it in name only, and may never have examined the treasure committed to them, or stirred up the gift that is in them. It may be (to speak plainly) that many who deny or doubt about Baptismal Regeneration, have been made holy and good men, and yet have sustained a loss in not holding this truth and again, that others may nominally have held it, and yet never have thought of the greatness or significance of what they professed to hold. If, again, right practice were a test of doctrine, then could there be no such thing as holding* the truth in unrighteousness, for which how

* Or "hold down the truth," Rom. i. 18, but κaTέxw is used without emphasis, Luke xiv. 9. for "take," "hold ;" and 2 Thess. ii. 6. it signifies "hinder;" Luke iv. 42. " detain," not "keep down." The doubt was not alluded to (Ed. i.,) because it does not in the least affect the argument. In either case the truth is in the persons, whether they keep it for a time, and then at last lose it, or forcibly keep it down, and repress it from rising up, and being present to their minds and influencing them. And so St. Paul, verse 19, directly asserts that "that which might be known of God was manifest in them, for God hath showed it unto them;" and this is explained, verse 20, to be, "His invisible power and Godhead ;" and, verse 21, he says, "they knew God." Their condemnation was not that they knew not God, for then, in comparison, "they had had no sin," (John ix. 41.,) but that they knew Him and yet acted against their knowledge by "changing the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like unto corruptible man," and so at last God gave them up unto an undistinguishing (adóxpos) mind; so that, at last, they lost the knowledge also. And so it is with individuals; men act at first against the light and truth in them, and afterwards, and at length only, is the light withdrawn. See St. August. Tract, 2. in Joann. § 4.

ever the Apostle pronounces the condemnation of the heathen. Further, if the comparison were any test at all, it must manifestly be made not at one period only, but throughout the time that such doctrine has been held by the Church; one must compare, not the men of our own day only, but those of all former times, Confessors, Saints, and Martyrs, which were impossible! This is not said, as if we were competent judges even as to our own times, or as if any could be, but God alone, who searcheth the hearts; for if the number of those who being earnest-minded and zealous men, do not hold Baptismal Regeneration, were increased an hundred fold, or if those who imagining that they hold Baptismal Regeneration, do in fact use it as a screen to hide from themselves the necessity of the complete actual change of mind and disposition necessary to them, were many more than they are, still, who can tell to how many thousands, or tens of thousands, this same doctrine has been the blessed means of a continued child-like growth in grace, who have been silently growing up, supported by the inestimable privilege of having been made God's children, before they themselves knew good or evil; who have on the whole been uniformly, kept within Christ's fold, and are now "heartily thanking their heavenly Father for having called them" thus early to this state of salvation, into which, had it been left to their frail choice, they had never entered; who rejoice with "joy unspeakable and full of glory," that they were placed in the Ark of Christ's Church, and not first called, of themselves to take refuge in it out of the ruins of a lost world.*

Most of this, people will in the abstract readily acknowledge; even if they are not conscious of the full value of the Church, as an Interpreter of Holy Scriptures, still they will confess that Scripture is the only ultimate authority in matters of Faith, and that in searching it they ought not to be biassed by any questions of expediency, or grounds distinct from the obvious meaning of the Inspired word: and yet they will probably find on examination that some of these irrelevant grounds have occasioned them to hold Baptismal Regeneration to be an unscriptural doctrine. If they examined Scripture at all, yet still the supposed effects of this, and of a contrary doctrine, the supposed character of those who hold it, or the reverse, were in

*"They with whom we contend are no enemies to the Baptism of infants; it is not their desire that the Church should hazard so many souls by letting them run on till they come to ripeness of understanding, that so they may be converted and then baptized, as Infidels heretofore have been; they bear not towards God so unthankful minds as not to acknowledge it even among the greatest of His endless mercies, that by making us His own possession so soon many advantages which Satan otherwise might take are prevented, and (which should be esteemed a part of no small happiness) the first thing whereof we have occasion to take notice is, how much hath been done already to our good, though altogether without our knowledge."-Hooker, b. v. § 64. p. 287.