eration. The Church of Rome has long taught, that regeneration is inseparably connected with this ordinance; and that the ordinance is absolutely necessary, at least in all ordinary circumstances, to the existence of Regencration. From that Church this scheme has spread, with some variations, through several Protestant Churches. I know not, that it is in my power to express, in precise language, the different views, entertained in the Christian World concerning this subject.

Often, if I mistake not, these views are given to us in phraseology, which is indefinite, and sometimes, perhaps, designedly mysterious. A distinction, unknown to the Scriptures, is sometimes made between Regeneration and Renovation. Baptism is sometimes said to be the cause, or the inseparable attendant, of Regeneration, and not of Renovation. What the word Regeneration, thus used, intends, I confess myself unable to determine. So far as I have been able to find, the Regeneration of the Scriptures is but one thing; and denotes, invariably, that change of character, or the cause of that change, by which sinners become holy. Christ has taught us, that to be born again is to be born of the Spirit of God. Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. These two declarations, every person will see, are exactly parallel. To be born again, in the first of them, is precisely the same thing, as to be born of water, and of the Spirit, in the last. To be born of water as here intended, is, in my view, to be baptized; and is as absolutely necessary to our lawful admission into the visible kingdom of God: as to be born of the Spirit, is to our admission into his invisible Kingdom. That to be born of water, and of the Spirit, is the same thing with being born again, must be admitted by every one, who is willing that our Saviour should speak good sense, since he obviously mentions, in this whole discourse, but one Birth; which he introduces to Nicodemus under the phraseology of being born again. What connexion water, here in my view standing for Baptism, has with this subject, I shall further explain hereafter.

With these things premised, I shall now proceed to consider the Question, Whether Baptism ensures, or proves, Regeneration? The arguments, in favour of the affirmative answer to this question, are principally, if not wholly, derived from the following passages of Scripture.

First. Mark xvi. 16, He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Of this passage it is only necessary to observe, that the concluding clause refutes the supposition, which the introductory one is employed to support. Here Christ declares, that he who believeth not, whether baptized or not, shall be damned. This could not be true, if Baptism and Regeneration were thus connected.

Secondly. The same doctrine is argued from the passage quoted above. Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The account, given of the subject in this text, is exactly the same with that, contained in the preceding passage. To be baptized is to be born of water. To be a believer is to be born of the Spirit. He who believeth, whether baptized or not, shall be saved he that is born of the Spirit, whether born of water or not, shall enter into the invisible kingdom of God. In exact accordwith this construction of the passage, our Saviour, in every other part of his discourse with Nicodemus, insists only on being born of the Spirit, as the great qualification for acceptance with

ance

God.

It is, however, to be observed here, that he, who understanding the nature and authority of this Institution, refuses to be baptized, will never enter either the visible, or invisible, kingdom of God. As he refuses to become a member of the visible, he will certainly be shut out of the invisible, kingdom. Considered with reference to a case of this nature, the passage may be justly construed in the literal manner. For he who persists in this act of rebellion against the authority of Christ, will never belong to his kingdom.

Thirdly. This doctrine is also argued from Titus iii. 5, According to his mercy, He saved us by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost.

Whether the words, translated the washing of regeneration, denote Baptism, or not, according to the opinions of different Commentators, is, in my view, immaterial to the present question. If Baptism is denoted by these words; it is called the washing of regeneration, because it is symbolical of that change in the heart; and because Christ has established it, as such a symbol, in his visible Church. Beyond this, nothing can be pleaded from this passage in favour of the doctrine.

There is yet another text, to wit, Eph. v. 26, of an import, similar to that last quoted, which may be urged with somewhat less plausibility, as favouring the same scheme. It is this: As Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that He might sanctify, and cleanse it, with the washing of water by the word. Το this the same answer is obviously to be given with that, which has been already given to the passage last quoted.

These are the only texts, within my knowledge, which can be seriously alleged in favour of this doctrine. I shall now, therefore, proceed to show, that the doctrine is erroneous by the following considerations.

1. It contradicts the general tenour of the Scriptures, relative to this subject.

In the first place, Adults are in the Scriptures required to believe, antecedently to their Baptism.

In the text, the Apostles are directed to make disciples of all nations, and then to baptize them. That they understood their commission in this manner, is unanswerably evident from their own declarations. Repent, therefore, said St. Peter to the Jews, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of the Lord Jesus. When the Eunuch said to Philip, see, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? Philip replied, If thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest. Lydia was baptized after the Lord had opened her heart. The Jailer was baptized in consequence of his Faith. So was Paul. So were Cornelius and his household. From these facts and declarations, it is evident beyond controversy, that Adults were baptized by the Apostles, after they had become, or were supposed to have become, disciples of Christ: or, in other words, after they were either really, or apparently Regenerated.

Secondly. The Scriptures teach us, that the Gospel, or the Truth of God, is the great instrument of Regeneration.

1 Pet. i. 23.

The Truth shall make you free, saith our Saviour. John viii. 32. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is Truth. John xvii. 17. Of his own will begat He us with the Word of Truth: says St. James. James i. 18. Being born again, says St. Peter, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God. The Gospel, says St. Paul, is the power of God unto salvation, to every one that believeth. Rom. i. 16. Again; It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. 1 Cor. i. 21. Again; In Christ Jesus have I begotten you through the Gospel. 1 Cor.

iv. 15.

Thirdly. The Scriptures expressly declare, that Baptism is not the great instrument of regeneration.

This is directly declared by St. Peter, in a passage, already quoted for another purpose, in this discourse, from the third chapter of his first Epistle, verse 21, The like figure wherempto, even Baptism, doth now save us; not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God. In this passage, St. Peter teaches, that the putting away of the filth of the flesh is not, and that the answer of a good conscience is, the means of our salvation. In other words, Baptism is not, but the virtuous character, which is the effect of regeneration, is, the means of eternal life to mankind. This character, I have already shown, is so far from being the consequence of Baptism, that every adult candidate for this ordinance is required to possess it, before he can be lawfully baptized according to the Scriptures.

In perfect accordance with this declaration of St. Peter, St. Paul declares, Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but keeping the Commandments of God. To Jews, of whom there was a considerable number in the Corinthian Church, Cir cumcision was a seal of the righteousness of Faith; just in the same manner, as Baptism now is, to Christians. It had, also, all the influence towards Regeneration, which Baptism now pos

sesses. But, had it ensured, or proved, regeneration with respect to the Jews, who were in the Church at Corinth, the Apostle would not, when writing to them, have declared it to be nothing. For in this case, it would, to them, have been the means of that holiness, in the exercise of which they would have kept the commandments of God. What is true of circumcision, in this respect, is, I apprehend, precisely true of Baptism also.

But this point is placed beyond all reasonable debate by the following declarations of St. Paul. 1 Cor. i. 14, 17; I thank God, that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel. Nothing is more certain, than that, if Baptism ensures, or proves, regeneration, Paul, who so ardently desired the salvation of mankind, and wished to become,as extensively as possible, the instrument of their salvation, could not thank God, that he baptized none of the Corinthians, but Gaius, Crispus, and the household of Stephanus. To him it would, comparatively, have been a matter of indifference, whether they accused him of baptizing in his own name, or not. Of what consequence could the clamour, the disputes, or the divisions, be, which might arise about this subject, compared with the salvation on the one hand, and on the other, with the perdition, of the Corinthians? Instead of thanking God in this manner, he would have baptized every Corinthian, who would have permitted him; and, like a Romish missionary, have compelled crowds and hosts to the streams and rivers in the neighbourhood, that they might receive this ordinance at his hands. With still less propriety could he say, if Baptism were the means of regeneration, especially if it ensured, or proved it, that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel. Christ, as He himself hath told us, sent Paul to the Gentiles and to the Corinthians, as well as other Gentiles, to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God. Acts xxvi. 17, 18. In other words, Christ sent Paul to the Gentiles, to accomplish their regeneration. But, if Baptism be the means of regeneration, or be accompanied by it, then Christ actually sent him to baptize; in direct contradiction to the passage, just now quoted. From both these passages it is clearly evident, that Baptism neither ensures, nor proves, Regeneration. 2. This doctrine is contradicted by experience.

Such persons, as have been baptized in modes, and by ministers, altogether unexceptionable in the view of such, as hold this scheme, have by their fruits, the great Scriptural touchstone, proved themselves to be unregenerated. Simon Magus, Hymenaus, Philetus, Phygellus, and Hermogenes, were all, probably, baptized by inspired Ministers. By Ministers, possessing authority equally unexceptionable, were baptized those gross transgressors in the seven Churches of Asia, so severely reproved by Christ in the second and third chapters of the Apocalypse. It will not be pretended, that these men were regenerated.

Equally conclusive to the same point is the experience of every succeeding age in the Christian Church. Nothing is more certain, than that a multitude of those, who have been baptized by such, as the abettors of this scheme will acknowledge to be authorized ministers, have, in every christian age and country, been guilty of such continual and gross sins, as have proved beyond a doubt, that, instead of being regenerated, they were in the gall of bitterness, and the bond of iniquity. Great numbers of such are found in every class of nominal Christians under heaven. Nothing can more perfectly demonstrate, that Baptism is not accompanied by Regeneration.

It will probably be here replied, that regeneration may be actually conveyed to the souls of the baptized, and yet its influence be lost by their future apostacy or what is often called falling from grace; either because they are not confirmed; or for some other reason.

To this I answer, in the first place, that no such apostary is known in the Scriptures. This position, if I mistake not, has been proved in a former discourse concerning the perseverance of such, as are regenerated. He that heareth my word, said our Saviour to the Jews, John v. 24, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is (has) passed from death unto life.

Secondly. The Scriptures no where teach the doctrine, or duty, of Confirmation, as necessary to the continuance of mankind in holiness: nor as an ordinance of the Christian Church in any sense.

Thirdly. Multitudes of baptized persons give the most unquestionable evidence from their Baptism, or, if Infants, from their first possession of moral agency, that they are sinners only.

Fourthly. Immediately after their Confirmation, they continue to exhibit the same sinful character; and exhibit it through life.

Thus, in every point of view, the doctrine, that Baptism is regeneration, that it ensures, or proves, that it is attended or followed by it, either regularly or commonly, is erroneous, unfounded, and unscriptural. So far is this from being the doctrine of the Scriptures, that, according to them, adults can never offer themselves for Baptism, unless already regenerated. The answer of a good conscience, spoken of by St. Peter, cannot be given by him, who is not regenerated.

In the ancient periods of the Church, as we are informed by Tertullian, the Minister asked the candidate for Baptism, "Dost thou renounce Satan? Dost thou believe in Christ ?" The Candidate answered, "I renounce, I believe." This Tertullian calls "sponsionem salutis ;" "An engagement of salvation ;" and says, that "the soul is consecrated, not by washing, but by answering." To this practice, St. Peter is supposed to refer in the text, repeatedly quoted on this subject. But it is evident, that no person, who is unregenerated, can declare with truth, that he renounces VOL. IV.

39