work, there should be so many Free Communion Baptists in this country. I became a Strict Baptist. Let me say what is the position of Baptist Churches in my own country. I represent to-night one million of Regular Baptists, all practising Close Communion. Some denominations among us preach Immersion, which are not in connection with the Regular Baptists. The Free-will Baptists practise Open Communion. So do also the Campbellites, but they are not in connection with the Regular Baptists. Of this million, about half a million are in the Northern, and half a million in the Southern States. We feel that we must uphold Strict Communion to maintain the consistency of our churches, and recognise nothing but the immersion of believers as baptism. All denominations are strict in America. The Baptists have to bear the same reproach there as you have here. None of the churches there take Robert Hall's ground, though some individuals do. Now, if we received them to communion, should we not recognise their baptism as real baptism? I am told that here a minister is restrained from uttering freely the truth of God on the subject of baptism. We are not sectarian. I believe that we are less so than any other denomination in the country. I am out and out in my anti-slavery principles. I believe that slavery is the most unmitigated curse that has afflicted humanity, and that it is the sole cause of this terrible war." The collection was then made. It was upwards of £9, including £3 3s. from the chairman. Mr. Norton, Mr. Dickerson, Mr. Woodard, and Mr. Pells, briefly addressed the meeting. The CHAIRMAN, in conclusion, said, "I am what the world calls a 'bigot.' I believe that I am right in what I hold, and that every one is wrong who differs from me. All who have deep convictions must feel the same. trust that so-called 'bigots,' of the right sort, will be multiplied." I Nothing breeds a greater strangeness between the soul and God, than the restraining of prayer before him. OPENING SERVICES. GOSPEL OAK FIELDS BAPTIST CHURCH. THE services of this church, hitherto held in the temporary chapel, Maldenroad, Kentish Town, were transferred on Lord's Day, April 17th, to the newlyerected Albert Hall, Winchester-street. The Rev. W. Trotman, of Blackmore, Essex, preached morning and evening, and the Rev. J. Pells, of Soho Chapel, in the afternoon. On the following Tuesday evening, a public meeting was held to celebrate the transfer of the services to the present very commodious hall. Tea and coffee were provided in the schoolroom over the hall, which was tastefully decorated with flowers and banners. 66 The meeting was opened with the hymn Kindred in Christ," &c. Mr. Dowdall then read the 72nd Psalm, and offered prayer, after which Mr. Wilkin, who presided, gave a brief account of the rise and progress of the cause, and called upon Mr. Cotes, the superintendent of the Sunday school, to read the report of that institution. The Rev. Dr. PRICE, of Aberdare, then moved the first resolution to the effect "That this meeting, believing that the gospel of Jesus Christ, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is the only effectual means of moral elevation as well as spiritual regeneration, rejoices in the appropriation of Albert Hall to the purposes of divine worship on Lord's Days." Dr. PRICE, in a very animated speech, expressed his pleasure at the opportunity afforded him of showing his interest in the spread, in the metropolis, of the doctrines and order of the New Testament Churches, and dwelt on the fact that all the Baptist Churches in Wales, numbering some 60,000 members, were with very few exceptions Strict Communion Churches, and that the opposite practice so prevalent in England, was scarcely even known of in the principality. The Rev. E. PARKER, of Farsley, introduced his very excellent speech by a quaint anecdote illustrative of the sentiments of the resolution, to the effect that the world was upside-down and wanted setting right-and that Christians with the Bible in their hands, were the men to do it. The REV. J. STOCK, of Devonport, moved "That this meeting believes that the more closely the church here established adheres to the doctrines and order of the New Testament, the more effectual will its testimony be against every form of error." Mr. Stock alluded succinctly and forcibly to most of the leading forms of error prevalent on religious subjects, from the wild theories of the Darwinian school, and the more dangerous heresies of Colenso and the Essayists, to the more subtle errors, creeping even into our Dissenting communities, and showed that a close adherence to the doctrines of the gospel was adapted to meet every such erroneous theory. The Rev. W. NORTON Seconded the resolution, urging the absolute necessity of a close adherence to everything which God has revealed, and the importance of remembering that esteem and affection for the servants of Christ must ever be made subservient to our fidelity to Christ himself. The Rev. C. WOOLLACOTT briefly moved "That this meeting has heard with pleasure the report of the Sunday school now transferred to Albert Hall, and wishes those engaged in it every success.' The Rev. W. TROTMAN, of Blackmore, seconded the resolution. On the following Sunday, the Rev. David Wassell, of Bath, preached two excellent sermons, and in the afternoon the annual rewards were given to the children of the Sunday school, when Mr. Wassell gave a very suitable address to them and to their friends. The attendance at all the services was very encouraging, and great obligation was felt to the friends, who had most disinterestedly assisted this little cause at this new step of its progress. ANNIVERSARY SERMONS. KNOWSLEY-STREET SUNDAY SCHOOL, BURY.-On Tuesday evening, May 10th, a sermon, on behalf of the above school, was preached by the Rev. J. P. Chown, of Bradford, from Isaiah xxv. 6. The attendance was not what might have been expected, and which the ability of the preacher, had it been known, would have commanded. On the following Sunday afternoon and evening, two sermons were preached by Mr. F. W. Walter, of Rawdon College. The attendance was good, especially in the evening. The whole amount of the collections and donations was £28. BAPTISMS. BEDFORD.-On Lord's Day, April 24th, Mr. Killen preached on Baptism to a very crowded and orderly congregation, and then immersed one young man and four young women. Three of them were trained in our Sunday school, and were called some two years since under a sermon on Baptism.A Baptist. BRAMLEY.-Jan. 3rd, seven; Feb. 7th, four; March 6th, three; by Mr. Ashworth. May 1st, three; by Mr. Lord, late of Birmingham. FARSLEY.-April 3rd, five; May 1st, eight; by Mr. Parker. LATCHFORD.-May 1st, six; by Mr. Wilkinson, pastor. MEADOWSIDE, DUNDEE.-On Lord's Day, May 8th, Ann Frazer, a young believer, was baptised by Mr. John Henderson, and admitted to the Lord's table on the evening of the same day. May her example lead others to go and do likewise. THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH (OR BAPTIST) MAGAZINE. No. CCXLVII.-JULY 1, 1864. Essays, Expositions, &c. THE EARLY "FATHERS" ON BAPTISM. (A Lecture.-Delivered by request.) 1 THES. V. 21. My attention having been directed recently to a sermon on "Infant Baptism," published in Manchester, and in which great stress is laid on the testimony of the ancient fathers in favour of the practice, I now proceed, at the urgent request of several in this congregation, to show what amount of evidence the testimony of the early fathers furnishes in favour of the practice alluded to. On reëxamining this subject, I have no hesitation in declaring it as my belief, that we have evidence as strong as the nature of the case admits of, that during the first two centuries of the Christian era, infant baptism was altogether unknown in the church. The writings of the fathers of that period have been ransacked for traces of it in vain. Barnabas, Hermes, Ignatius, Clemens Romanus, Justin Martyr, Irenæus, and Tertullian, have been examined and reëxamined, but no certain evidence can be extracted from any of them, though every one of them alludes more or less to the baptism of believers. If the truth of this statement can be established, you will admit that there is strong historical evidence against the practice of infant baptism. For it is irrational to suppose that such a practice could prevail, or even exist, for 200 years in the church, and not be mentioned or hinted at by any of the writers that appeared in all that time, especially as the rite in question is one which lies at the very threshold of the Christian temple, and to which the Christian writers of the times make abundant allusions. It has been alleged that some of the writers we have named furnish distinct and unambiguous evidence that infant baptism was practised in their day. Let us examine the allegation. And, first, let us examine Tertullian, as the last writer of the second century. It is affirmed that what he says "proves that all infants had been baptised up to his time." His testimony then must be admitted to be very important. What then does it amount to? A certain lady wrote to Tertullian to ask whether little ones might not be baptised, provided they came and asked for it. To which this father replies, that " Baptism ought not to be administered rashly, the administrators of it know—'Give to him that asketh thee-every one has a right,' as if it were a matter of alms. VOL. XXI.-NO. CCXLVII. T If Philip baptised the eunuch upon the spot, let us remember that it was done under the immediate direction of the Lord. But 'Paul,' you will say, was baptised instantly.' True, because Judas, in whose house he was, instantly knew that he was a vessel of mercy. The condescension of God may confer his favours as he pleases, but our wishes may mislead ourselves and others. It is therefore most expedient to defer baptism, and to regulate the administration of it according to the condition, the disposition, and the age of the persons to be baptised, and especially in the case of little ones. Indeed the Lord saith, 'Forbid them not to come.' Let them come then till they grow up, let them come till they learn whither they are coming, and let them profess Christianity when they know Christ. They know just how to ask salvation, that you may seem to give to him that asketh. Such as understand the importance of baptism are more afraid of presumption than of procrastination, and faith alone secures salvation." Let it be remembered that we are no further concerned with Tertullian than as a witness to the fact of infant baptism, and in respect to this I remark, 1. That neither in this passage, nor (I believe) in any that Tertullian wrote, is the practice of infant baptism at all alluded to. The word he uses is not infants, but parvuli, little ones, who were capable of coming and asking. That Tertullian's parvuli were not infants, see De Jejunus 8, De exhortatione castitatis 9. The truth is that he uses the word, as a writer in the “Cornhill Magazine," 1860, does, who, speaking of the little ones assembling in the “immense temple" at Antwerp, says "If I thought the teaching was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, I would go and sit down on the form cum parvulis, and learn the precious lesson with all my heart." 66 2. It is not a profession by proxy, but a personal profession of Christianity that is here in question. It is assumed on both sides, that baptism was out of the question unless there was a personal application for it. The references to Philip and Paul, as well as the conditions on which baptism was requested, show this. Sponsors, indeed, are mentioned. But it is well known that from a very early period in the history of the Christian church, sponsors were required in the baptism of believers of all ages. The question Tertullian was called upon to answer, was, whether the passages, Give to him that asketh thee”—“ Forbid them not to come," would not justify the extension of baptism to little ones who were taught to come and ask for it. Tertullian could have made no adequate reply to this question without alluding to the practice of infant baptism, if such a practice had then been known. He makes no allusion however to it at all. To the passage, "Give to him that asketh thee," he replies, "Baptism is not a matter of alms;" to the passage, "Forbid them not to come," he replies, "We need not forbid them to come; only let them come in the proper order-first to learn Christ, and then to profess him." This was at the close of the second century, and I have referred to this father first, because the second century furnishes no later writer, and I think it will be admitted that if infant baptism did not exist in his day, it will be a hard thing to prove its previous existence. As it is alleged, however, that other writers, before Tertullian, bear testimony to the prevalence of infant baptism, let us go backward through these two centuries, examining their testimony, in order, on our way back to the apostolic age. The first we meet is Clement Alexandrinus, who flourished not long before Tertullian. This writer is represented as saying to those who were fishermen, that "they ought to have upon their rings the representation of an apostle baptising infants." Why fishermen, rather than those who follow any other calling, should adopt the representation of "an apostle baptising infants," is not now the subject of enquiry. The point is to ascertain whether Clement assumes," in the passage referred to, that the apostles baptised infants. “Little children, let no man deceive you." Here is the passage itself. 'Let your seal be a dove, or a fish, or a ship under sail, as was that of Polycrates, anchor, which Selencus made his choice; and if any one be by trade a 66 or an fisherman, he will do well to think of an apostle, and the children taken out of the water." You know that Jesus addressed his disciples as children, that the apostle John delighted in this name, and Clement himself says, comparing Christ to a pedagogue and his disciples to children, "The baptised ought to be children, even children of God, who have put off the old man," &c. Surely there is a difference between assuming that the apostles baptised infants, and saying that fishermen "would do well to think of an apostle and the children taken out of the water." That baptism is referred to here, there can be no doubt; but the point and beauty of the passage lie in this, that fishermen, when they drag the net full of newly-caught fishes out of the water, would do well to think of the first gospel fishermen, who caught so many souls at the first letting down of the gospel net, and received them issuing from the waters of baptism as new-born converts to the truth. Hence nothing could be more appropriate to the occupation of a fisherman, than a reference to " an apostle and the children taken out of the water." Any reference to infant baptism here would have marred the appropriateness and beauty of the passage. 66 The next writer on our way back that is supposed to bear testimony in favour of infant baptism is Irenæus. Irenæus was Bishop of Lyons, and suffered martyrdom A.D. 202. Here is his testimony:-"Christ came to save all persons, all, I mean, who by him are regenerated unto God-infants, little ones, and young men and aged persons." It is urged in 'exposition of this passage that the fathers always used the words regenerated and baptised indiscriminately." And is it so, then, that because the fathers used these two words indiscriminately, that therefore, when the one is used, the other is always meant? What is there in this passage to fix the meaning of regenerated to the sense put upon it? Because it sometimes means baptised in the writings of the fathers, must it always mean baptised? But if there be nothing to fix baptism as the reference, the testimony is indistinct and equivocal, and such testimony is worthless. Further, the passage contains sufficient evidence that baptism is not meant. Look at it again. "Christ came to save all persons, who by him are regenerated unto God." "By Him." "This is He that baptiseth with the Holy Ghost." Christ was not then on earth to baptise with water, and when he was on earth, Jesus himself baptised not. To be regenerated by Him, is to be regenerated indeed. Besides, the contrary supposition would make Irenæus say that all the baptised are saved, and there is no occasion to suppose him devoid of common sense. If we suppose Irenæus to mean just what he says, he speaks both sound doctrine and good sense. He says that all, of whatever age, who are regenerated unto God by Christ, are partakers of salvation. There is no need to enquire further what he meant. The next we find on our way back to the apostolic age is Justin Martyr. He is said to have flourished about A.D. 150. It is asserted that Justin distinctly says, that certain Christians, being sixty or seventy years old, “had been baptised in their infancy." We are now close upon the apostolic age, when a distinct testimony must needs be of great value.~ Let us quote Justin's words. Certain persons, now sixty or seventy years old, have been discipled from childhood, and have continued uncorrupt." And how is this language transubstantiated into a distinct testimony to the prevalence of infant baptism? Thus. Discipled, means dedicated to God by parents; childhood, means infancy. Hence infant baptism. And is it expected that this should close the controversy? Who knows that the word discipled here means dedicated to God by parents? And who knows that the word childhood here means infancy? The same word in Acts (xx. 12) is used to designate Eutychus, who was then a "young man.' The gloss put on Justin's words reminds us of the saying of the "judicious Hooker"- "There is nothing more dangerous than the licentious and deluding art, which changeth the meaning of words, as alchymy doth or would do the substance of metals; maketh of any thing what it listeth, and bringeth in the end all truth to nothing." The words "discipled from childhood" are easily understood, without supposing that they contain a 66 |