66 The ordinance of baptism is the symbol of purification; as the ordinance of the supper is the symbol of Christ's death and atoning sacrifice. Here, then, we are at issue with our esteemed brethren, because they are fond of representing baptism to be an emblem of Christ's death and resurrection; grounded upon a mistaken view of that passage, "Ye are buried with Him in baptism"--which I shall by and bye have occasion to notice. We maintain, that the spiritual purification of the mind from the defilement of sin, is the thing represented in baptism. might be by the spray of the water, or by the showers which descended at that very time; for it is said, that "the clouds poured out water." And yet they were 'baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea." They were certainly not plunged, they were certainly not immersed, or how could it be said that they passed through dry shod?" It must have been a dry baptism indeed, if this was all the baptism they got. Their baptism was the baptism of the rain, which descended at the time of this remarkable miracle. And I might instance a great variety of particulars; such as "he that dippeth his hand with Me in the dish"- Now how is this purification of the that did not imply the total submersion of soul effected? First, by the blood of the hand in the dish, but merely that the Christ, which is said to be sprinkled upon hand was put forth to the dish, or into the the conscience; and therefore it is called dish, to take the sop which Christ had the "blood of sprinkling." And secondly, previously dipped after the same manner. the Holy Spirit's grace in renewing and Therefore, even if I could be brought for a sanctifying the soul; and this also is moment to allow, that "baptism," in the spoken of as shed, poured out, or original application of the word, justified sprinkled; as it is written-"I will the translation "dipping," I should just sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye ask what sort of dipping? whether the shall be clean: a new heart also will I give touching or tinging, or the entire immer-you, and a new spirit will I put within sion of the whole person? When I put you." Again, in the epistle to Titus these According to His mercy, He saved us by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." 66 circumstances together when I analyze the original word-when I mark the use of it in all the alleged instances of baptism recorded in Holy Scripture, and when I find that there are cases both in the Greek Septuagint and in the New Testament in which the word will not possibly allow of the interpretation of immersion or plunging, I am constrained to say, that I view that mode to be anti-scriptural; that is, not only without Scripture warrant, but against Scripture testimony. II. In the second place, I object to this mode of baptism, as being inapposite and inappropriate to represent the thing which baptism intends. We all allow that it is a significant representation. It is is intended to show, by some outward and sensible sign, some spiritual truth, fact or mystery. Now I appeal to you, my brethren, whether the influence of the Holy Spirit, when spoken of in Scripture, is not exhibited as something poured out—something shed abroad? Do we not read of the Holy Spirit as descending-as falling upon the person who is the recipient of His influences; coming down indeed "like rain upon the mown grass, and as showers that water the earth?" Mark me, when I say that it seems essential to the correctness and appropriateness of the sign, that there should be an agreement with and a representation of the thing signified; and that in all true New Testament baptisms, there Now, then, let us ask, what is bap- must be the application of the element tism designed to represent? I answer, to the person, and not the application of at once, the purification of the soul from the person to the element. “În pouring sin. I quite deny that baptism is in- or sprinkling, we apply the element to tended to represent the death and resur- the person baptized. Upon the other rection of Jesus Christ. That the Lord's system, we apply the person to the elesupper is intended to represent; and it ment; and this is an inversion of the would be strange, if our blessed Re-sign, and renders it altogether inapt to deemer had appointed two ordinances to signify that which it was intended to commemorate one and the same thing. I represent. Much stress has been laid upon the Christ's yoke is easy, and His burden expression, "buried with Him by bap-light. But it is admitted to be a painful tism into death;" and persons have trial to some, and must be, I should think, carried to this passage of Scripture the very inconvenient to all, to submit to the notion of an English funeral. But you immersion of the whole body under will observe, that an English funeral is water. Our Baptist friends themselves conducted after a very different manner talk of it as "taking up the cross ;" and from the funerals of the ancients. They a cross it is. Then the question is, wheburied in caves, which caves had distinct ther it is a cross of Christ's making, or chambers. Lazarus was buried in a of our own. If it is not a cross imposed cave. Our Lord Jesus was laid in a by the Saviour, then it is at best but tomb hewn out of a rock. He was de-will-worship," and a compliance with posited in a chamber hewn in the rock, and a stone was rolled upon the mouth of the sepulchre. Now I do ask, what resemblance is there in the world between such a mode of burial in an excavated part of a rock, and that of being put under the water and being brought out of the water again? Not the slightest resemblance on earth. Yet to speak of our own English funeral, the grave is first prepared, the corpse is lowered into it, and then the earth is poured, sprinkled, or shovelled upon it; so that there seems to be the application of the element to the person. Then, if we are to consider, that that expression of the apostle is intended to represent an accurate conformity to the mode of burial, it will follow that they who are thus "buried" should remain under the element; for the corpse is not brought out when once the earth has been covered upon it, and the words pronounced "Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust." There is no exhumation of the body. So that we are constrained to believe, that, in that and similar expressions, there is no reference whatever to the mode of baptism, but to the spiritual import of baptism; that all baptized persons are professedly "baptized into Christ's death," that they are" crucified with Him," that they are "planted in the likeness of His death." And if my Baptist brother says to me, 'You should be buried with Christ in baptism,' I say to him, 'Why may I not be planted in His death, and stand at the water's edge, in order to receive the significant token of my union to Him, and my participation in the benefits of His death?' To my own mind it appears, then, that this mode of baptism, while it is antiscriptural, is also inapposite and inappropriate. III. In the third place, therefore, it is uncalled for, and altogether unnecessary. the traditions of men, and not after the commandment of God. All that is needful to baptism, is as well expressed, and better expressed, by our own mode. Why, then, should we impose upon ourselves, or exact from others, this service, if Christ did not command it? If it were obligatory by the clear command of God, the thing would be altogether different, and we must obey at any cost or sacrifice. But if Christ Himself has left the mode of receiving this part of His yoke and burden indeterminately and at large, then I say we have the choice as to the meaning and interpretation which we feel justified in affixing to the terms of the command. If Christ has left it at large, then why am I to be brought into bondage? Who can prove to me, that it is either necessary or in any respect called for, that I should do that which it by no means appears evident that Christ himself has required? IV. I am constrained to remark, in the fourth place, that I conceive this mode of baptism to be unseemly. Christ has required, that all things should be done in His worship "decently, and in order;" and I have selected the very mildest term which I could possibly find in the English language, in order to convey the honest convictions of my own mind on this subject, when I have called the method of baptism by immersion unseemly. I can hardly conceive of any thing more unlike what I apprehend to have been the New Testament baptisms, than what is called a baptizing in modern times. Where, I ask, in the New Testament practice, was the baptistry in the primitive churches of Christ? An artificial tank, with sewers, and all other appurtenances, with pipes for filling, and drains for drawing off the water? Where was the dressing of the candidates for baptism-the women in white, the men in black robes? Where were the weights to keep down the borders of the garments, and in all countries. To deprive Chrisor the deacons or other assistants with tianity of its universality of application wands to prevent an unsuitable exposure would be to deprive it of one of its essenof the person? Where the hurrying tial characteristics, and one of the strongfrom the baptistry under the covering of est evidences of its Divine original. Now, another garment, in order that by the certainly in cases of bodily distemper and refreshment of wine or spirits a chill disease, it would not be practicable to might be prevented, and thus the pain-require the subject of baptism on the proful consequences which have sometimes fession of his faith to be submersed in ensued, be as much as possible avoided? the flood, or stream, or baptistry. In a You must judge for yourselves, whether in all these things there is any thing like the simplicity, the consistency, and the order of the primitive mode of administering baptism. Whether, I say, there was any thing of all this, you must determine for yourselves; I consider, that in every feature it is positively unlike the ori-occurred in the case of Bright and ginal. sick chamber, if a man were brought to believe the Gospel, and willing to receive the initiatory rite of baptism, you could not well administer this ordinance to that sick man in a sick chamber by immersion. So in cases of great bodily bulk and extraordinary stature, such as have O'Brien and others, and of some whom I V. Fifthly, I beg to assure you, that in myself have known. There was a valumy conscientious opinion this mode of able man under my own ministry, who baptism is dangerous. It is dangerous to grew so exceedingly corpulent, that persons of a weak and sickly frame; though he had been brought to believe dangerous to those of a nervous and ex-that baptism by immersion was the right citable temperament. Dangerous to the mode of administering the rite, he minister, when he descends, perhaps from died unbaptized, because it was found a warm address in the pulpit, to plunge | impracticable that he should yield to this up to his middle in cold water; danger- mode of receiving the yoke and burden ous to the subject of baptism himself or of Christ. He was afraid that he was of herself; and there are (I regret to say, too unwieldy dimensions to be thus bapbut I must say it,) well authenticated in-tized, and that it would be very hazardstances in which the immediate cause of ous to trust himself in any hands for dangerous disease, terminating fatally, that purpose. Then in some countries it must be rationally attributed to this prac- would be absolutely impossible to protice of baptism by immersion. The ex-cure at certain seasons of the year enough cellent Dr. Ryland of Bristol was so much of the element of water. I mean in the aware of this, that he always baptized in northern temperatures of the world; in a species of mud boot, which was water- Iceland and Greenland, and other parts proof, and came far above the knees; so circumstanced, it would be really imand I once heard the Rev. Robert Hall possible to get, free from congelation, a contending for the propriety of warming sufficient quantity of water for the imthe water in this climate, before it was mersion of the whole person. used for the purpose of baptism. I do conceive, that where Christ has not commanded a service of this sort, and where it is associated with evident dangers from which any other mode is altogether exempt, we are free to decline what may be deemed a perilous service. Judging, then, that this mode is antiscriptural, inappropriate, uncalled for, and unnecessary, unseemly, dangerous, and even impracticable; I, for one, feel constrained not only to decline it, but to bear my testimony against it. And this part of the subject I shall conclude by a VI. Lastly, I believe this mode of bap- very short extract from the writings of tism in many cases to be impracticable; the Rev. Mr. Watson, a Wesleyan minisand I do not believe that our Lord Jesus ter of great respectability and pretension, Christ would have instituted an ordi- and remarkably distinguished for his nance, which in any given case would be powers of reasoning. He says, "It is found to be impracticable; for His reli- satisfactory to discover, that all attempts gion was designed to be the universal re-made to impose upon Christians a pracligion of mankind, to be applicable in tice repulsive to the feelings, dangerous its rites and institutions to all persons to the health, and offensive to deliof both sexes in all ages, in all climates, cacy, are destitute of all scriptural au thority, and of really primitive practice." And now, brethren, in conclusion; first, you may learn the great importance of looking more to the sense of Holy Scripture, than being led by the sound of it, in forming your opinions, and in studying the Sacred Books. A bold and confident manner may sometimes impress the weak and the feeble minded. A man may say, "You cannot read the New Testament about going into the water,' and 'coming out of the water,' and buried with Christ in baptism,' and a variety of passages of this sort, without feeling at once convinced that this is the only fit mode of baptism." An excellent friend, who sat under my ministry for some years, once said to me, "Sir, no man can read the New Testament for half an hour, without being convinced of the truth of my sentiments." I only said, "Sir, if he read it for half a year, he will alter his views of it, and come over to my side of the subject." And it is the half hour, which does the mischief; it is the cursory reading of the Sacred Volume, without comparingpassage with passage and without availing ourselves of those lights which modern discoveries and the inprovements which have been made in the science of philology have brought to us. Without availing ourselves of these helps we may be carried by the sound and by the semblance of things; but if we study the matter deeply and prayerfully, and with a sincere desire to know the will of God, I believe that we shall embrace the truth as it has been humbly and imperfectly stated to you this morning. it is not its necessary and exclusive meaning; and therefore, they who quote concessions, should, in honour and in fairness, admit that those concessions, after all, are but those of human beings, themselves fallible, and that, though they have made this concession, they never ceased to practise infant baptism, and to practise infant baptism by pouring and sprinkling; so that their very concession amounts to little indeed, in point of argument—for while they made the conces sion they retained the practice, and they retained it upon principle and upon conscience. Whenever, therefore, the concessions of writers are quoted, in order to justify the mode of immersion, I do maintain, that in all fairness, the whole question should be stated, and that though those writers have conceded much, they never-never for one moment, thought of conceding the point, that pouring and sprinkling are not as valid, and much to be preferred, when compared with the other mode. So, the Anglican Church has been appealed to, because, in a certain Rubric of that church, the priest is commanded to dip-(but whether that involves in it the immersion of the whole person is still an open question)—the priest is commanded to dip the child reverentially, discreetly, and advisedly, in water, unless the parents certify that the child is of weakly and of sickly health and constitution, and then he is to sprinkle or pour the water. But the same Rubric, with respect to adult baptism, leaves the thing quite at large, saying nothing of dipping or immersion, but only that the adult is to receive baptism by the pouring or sprinkling of the water. For my own part, I should never think of appealing to the Anglican Church or any other Church as authority in this case; for ecclesiastical establishments have, alas! so many inconsistencies, that we should be extreme In the second place, we may learn from what has been said, that very unfair use has been made of the concessions of Pædo-baptist writers and preachers. Many in the spirit of amiable candour have gone a great way in concession, and have granted sometimes in argument that probably (they have never gone farly puzzled to know which is the right and ther) baptism was anciently, in a hot climate, administered by immersion. Our friends have eagerly laid hold of the concessions made by Dr. Doddridge, Dr. Watts, and others, and they have told part of the truth, but they really have not told the whole of the truth; they have said that those writers have granted, andgranted, and granted, that immersion is the meaning of the term; and we all say that it is one meaning of it, but that which is the wrong on any subject. Take for example, the Apocrypha. The Church in her articles teaches that the Apocrypha is not an inspired book, and yet she obliges her ministers to read a lesson from the Apocrypha on certain days in every year, and the Apocrypha asserts that it is an inspired book. What an extraordinary dilemma is this! The Church says, 'You are to read the Apocrypha, but it is not inspired.' You ing this question materially, but that any who have serious doubts, and are willing to go into the subject in its fulness and comprehensiveness, may have the means of satisfying themselves by an appeal to the Scriptures. Let me not be judged harsh, when I say, lastly, that the sentiments of our Baptist brethren will not be found to stand upon this point with Holy Scripture. Appealing to the English version that will not serve them-they therefore quarrel with that version, and they want to have the words baptizo and baptisma translated in their own way, and accord read the Apocrypha, and the Apocrypha itself tells you that it is inspired. The Church says, the priest is to "dip the child warily in water." Does the priest ever dip the child in water? Here then the whole practice of the Church is against that concession, that admitted principle. Here is another dilemma. If I am to be instructed by the practice of the Church, sprinkling or pouring is to be the mode; but if I look into the Rubric, I am told that the priest is to dip the child. There is another great inconsistency. So it is with respect to the burial of the dead, and the baptismal service itself; there are such singular contradic-ing to their own peculiar notions. Now tions, and such marvellous inconsisten. cies, that I was astonished that a respected Baptist brother, whom I sincerely love, should, in a speech which he delivered on the occasion I have referred to, venture to quote the Anglican Church. Could he have sincerely made this appeal to a Church from which he professedly dissented? Therefore the question is not what Churches say, or what individuals say, or what writers concede, but " What saith the Scripture ?" That is the point to which our appeal must be made, and that is the decision by which we must in all cases be bound. | I like a man to come fairly to the New Testament as it is; and if we must compare our opinions and faith on any given subject in a Christian spirit, why, then I say I will content myself with the New Testament which is before us. But no,' say our Christian friends, we must have the words differently translated. It will not do to render the words baptizo and baptisma by baptise and baptism. That is only transferring the word; it is not translating it; and we will have it translated by immerse, and immerse only.' Then, I ask, is it meet and is it modest that our friends should dictate to all Christendom itself, how they will have this word translated? I ask, does it comport with that liberality and candour of which I believe they are the sincere advocates, when they tell you, 'You shall have this word rendered by immerse, and by nothing else but immerse?' I should say, this is not a fair version of the word. In my conscience and before God, I be Thirdly; let the young people in this congregation, most especially, make themselves acquainted with this subject. The time is come when it is peculiarly proper that you should do so. With regard to the controversy between our Baptist friends and the Bible Society, I would recommend a pamphlet which has recently been put forth by the Rev. Dr. Henderson, Theological Tutor of High-lieve it would be an unfaithful version bury College-a work which, with great of the word. And yet we are to have a good temper and candour, seems to me new Society set up, called "The Bible to settle the point, as it relates to the Translation Society," on purpose that question. He has brought much of in the oriental dialects the word may be oriental learning to bear upon the sub- translated by immerse, and nothing but ject of investigation, and in my judg- immerse. All that the Bible Society ment has set the matter at rest. But contends for is, 'Be so good as to transfer above all, I would recommend to my the word, as you have it in our English young friends, Thorn's unanswered and Bibles transferred. Render it by "bapunanswerable book the Rev. Mr. tise" and "baptism;" and then if a Thorn, of Winchester, who has gone convert should ask you, What is the into the question in the length and the meaning of these words? give it accordbreadth of it; and I cannot but think, ing to your own conscientious views.' that those who have the arrangement of But they say, 'No, we will have it in our vestry library, and other sources of our way, or we shall withdraw from knowledge and information, would do your Society, and we shall set up another well to have several copies of that work institution called The Bible Transat hand; not for the purpose of agitat-lation Society. My brethren, I wish to |