Part 2

The argument on behalf of the baptism of infants, which has been thus briefly and imperfectly sketched, is full of conviction and satisfaction; it is an argument for the understanding and the heart; and it is in blessed harmony with all that a believer desires on behalf of his children. We thank God for it; and we thank God that having withheld a direct and formal precept for the practice, he has been pleased to make known his will to us in such a way, as enables us more fully to understand and to appreciate his word. We consider that baptism in any case, but especially to our children, is a valuable privilege; not indeed as a mere ceremony, but as a token of the goodwill of our heavenly Father. We regard the rainbow, not merely because of the beauty of its arch, but because it betokens the covenant which preserves the earth, and perpetuates the seasons. And we regard baptism, not superstitiously, as if it contained some mystic charm, but because it is a memorial of God’s covenant mercy, and the means by which our offspring are dedicated and discipled. And we regard it too, because it is an institution which is in beautiful harmony with the whole system of revelation, in the Old and New Testaments. As the substitute for circumcision, it connects the church at its origin, with the church in its progress, and in its gospel maturity. Whilst the promise, “I will be a God unto thee, and unto thy seed after thee,” remains the same, baptism now attaches to it the sign and the seal which was once affixed by circumcision. The language and the conduct of Christ to little children, in the case before us, is in perfect harmony with their baptism, and with all the principles on which their baptism is practised. And when the apostles baptized households; when they called the children of believers “not unclean but holy;” and when they addressed children in the epistles which they wrote to the churches, they adopted a style of speaking and of action, which is not only in accordance with infant baptism, but which would not have been used if they had considered infants unfit for the ordinance. There are indeed some christians, worthy of our esteem and love, who do not perceive the force of this great argument, and who, therefore, deny to their children the blessed privilege which we thankfully enjoy. But it was not so formerly. The nearer we approach to apostolic times, the more the practice of the church accords with the principles I have advocated; and the most careful and learned ecclesiastical historians bear undeniable testimony to the fact, that for hundreds of years, immediately after the apostles, _the baptism of infants was universal in the church_.

II. In proceeding, from the subject of infant baptism generally, to consider the baptism of the Prince of Wales, I cannot, with propriety, refrain from adverting to some appendages which will be made to his baptism, and which the Church of England sanctions, but which I conceive to be unscriptural and injurious. I allude principally to the sponsors; to the sign of the cross; and to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

The persons who are most interested in the baptism of a child are its own parents. They are its natural guardians; and they are its divinely appointed ministers, to dedicate it to God, and to plead on its behalf the promise of the everlasting covenant. But in the Church of England, the parents seem to be entirely excluded from participating in the service. The twenty-ninth canon declares, not only that “no parent shall be admitted to answer as godfather for his own child,” but that “no parent shall be even urged to be present” at its baptism. And when the parents are thus wrongfully set aside, another class of persons are introduced, called _sponsors_—godfathers and godmothers, who may indeed be relatives or friends of the child, but who sometimes are entire strangers, and who may be foreigners residing in a distant country. The appointment of such persons, however ancient, is not scriptural; and however desirable they may appear to be, when the parents are dead, they are worse than useless when the parents are living. The responsibility which these sponsors take upon themselves is indescribably awful. Standing in the presence of God, they solemnly promise and vow that the child shall renounce the devil and all his works, the pomps and vanity of this wicked world, and all the sinful lusts of the flesh; that he shall believe all the articles of the christian faith; and that he shall keep God’s holy will and commandments, and walk in the same all the days of his life. Such are the things which every sponsor engages shall be done; and I ask, ought any human being to enter into such an engagement? If he does enter into it, will the Lord hold him guiltless if he does not fulfil it? And yet how often is this solemn vow addressed to God, by the thoughtless and profane? And how many sponsors, when they have made it, never afterwards care for the soul of the child, and perhaps never afterwards see its face.

In imitation of the Church of Rome, the Church of England uses _the sign of the cross_ in baptism; and having poured water on the child, the priest marks him on the forehead with a cross, “in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, and manfully to fight under his banner.” This ceremony is not authorized by the Scriptures. The sign of the cross was never used by Christ and his apostles, either as a part of baptism, or as an appendage to it. The Church of England, therefore, has no right to command it. By so doing, she renders imperative what Christ has not required, and what many of his people deem a vain superstition.

But the most objectionable part of the service, is that which ascribes to baptism _regenerating efficacy_, by which the soul of the child is said to be purified and saved. The language used by the Church of England on this subject, is as follows:—“Dearly beloved brethren, this child is regenerate, and grafted into the body of Christ’s church.” “We yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for thine own child by adoption, and to incorporate him into thy holy church.” “I certify you, that in this case all is well done concerning the baptizing of this child; who, being born in original sin, and in the wrath of God, is now by the laver of regeneration in baptism, received into the number of the children of God, and heirs of everlasting life.” In accordance with these declarations, the child himself is afterwards taught to say by the catechism,—“in my baptism, wherein I was made a member of Christ, the child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven.” And when this same child is brought for confirmation, his baptismal regeneration is declared and ratified by the bishop, when he says, “Almighty and everlasting God, who hast vouchsafed to regenerate these thy servants by water and the Holy Ghost, and hast given unto them forgiveness of all their sins.” All this, you perceive is the language not of a commentator but of the Church herself, uttered by her formularies, in which she plainly, emphatically, and repeatedly declares, that all the children she baptizes are, by their baptism, spiritually regenerated, so as to be the pardoned, adopted, and purified children of God. So decidedly is this doctrine the belief of the Established Church, that the liturgy seems to be constructed entirely on the principle that all her members are spiritually renewed. There is in it, confession of sin, and petition for pardon, such as any regenerated person might offer, but there is in it no prayer that any in the congregation may be born again, and renewed in the spirit of their mind; for that is a change which it is supposed has already taken place in baptism. If, however, it should be thought that we attach too strong a meaning to her language, listen to a statement contained in the charge, which the present bishop of Exeter delivered to his clergy in the year 1836. “The church,” says he, “is a visible body, into which its members are admitted by a visible sign, the sacrament of the new life; in baptism is regeneration; without it we have no warrant of scripture to affirm that the new birth takes place at all; without it we are yet in our sins, in a state of spiritual death, of enmity with God, and of fellowship with the arch enemy in his hatred, and in its everlasting punishment!” Now, in the first place, this doctrine of baptismal regeneration is _unscriptural_, and utterly subversive of the gospel of Christ. No writer in the New Testament ascribes spiritual efficacy to water baptism. John declares that he could baptize with water only, and that Christ alone could baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire. Paul thanks God that he had baptized but few of the Corinthians, and declares that Christ sent him not to baptize but to preach the gospel, which certainly would not have been the case if baptism effected regeneration. There is indeed a baptism, emphatically called the “one baptism,” which does regenerate and save; but it is not water baptism; it is not “the putting away the filth of the flesh;” it is not ceremonial purification; but it is “the renewing of the Holy Ghost,” and “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” What has been said of circumcision, may, therefore, with equal propriety, be said of baptism; “He is not a Christian who is one outwardly; neither is that baptism which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Christian who is one inwardly; and baptism is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” Secondly, the doctrine of baptismal regeneration is _injurious to the souls of men_. There is a strong tendency in the depraved heart of man to exalt ceremonies above morals, and to substitute ritual observances for spiritual religion. This has been done, both with circumcision and with baptism. Some of the Jews taught circumcisional regeneration, and declared that every circumcised man was safe. Precisely the same error has been connected with baptism; and equally injurious consequences follow. By thus substituting a ceremony for faith and for divine influence, and by ascribing to that ceremony what the Spirit of God alone can secure, the word of God is made of none effect; spiritual religion is reduced to a merely mechanical operation; the worldly-minded and the immoral are taught to regard themselves as pardoned and saved, because they have been baptized; and thus thousands perish, whose blood will be required at the watchman’s hand. And thirdly, this doctrine, independently of other circumstances, renders our _nonconformity with the Church of England_, _and our dissent from its services_, _a solemn and imperative duty_. When the present Prayer Book was issued on St. Bartholomew’s day, in 1662, and an “unfeigned assent and consent” to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and to other antichristian doctrines, was demanded, no less than two thousand clergymen refused their signatures. They could not, with a good conscience, declare “that the Book of Common Prayer containeth in it nothing contrary to the word of God;” and therefore they retired from the church in which they had ministered, and submitted to much poverty and persecution. While we desire to value whatever is scriptural in that church, and while we would love all who love Christ, yet, with our convictions of the unscriptural character of this doctrine, and of other doctrines taught in its liturgy, conformity would be a sin, a wilful and presumptuous sin, for which we should have to answer in the great and terrible day of the Lord.

III. Having thus stated the doctrine of infant baptism as it is taught in the Scriptures, and having shown you what is objectionable in the baptismal service of the Church of England, I desire now to connect this latter part of the discourse more immediately with the former; and therefore keeping in view the baptism of the prince, I shall address you as subjects, as parents, and as children.

_As subjects of the British throne_, the feelings with which you hailed the accession of our beloved Queen Victoria are, I am persuaded, still fresh and joyous in your hearts. Her youth; her education; her deceased father, and her still living and honoured mother; her known attachment to civil and religious liberty, inherited from her royal ancestors of the House of Brunswick; and her virtuous character; all conspired to brighten and to bless the day of her accession, and to fill our hearts with joy and praise. Nor did we fail, as members of the Church of Christ, to make her the subject of special, fervent, and united prayer. And it is a most important and impressive fact, that probably no sovereign, either in Britain or in any other nation under heaven, ever ascended a throne accompanied by more earnest and affectionate supplications than Queen Victoria did. May all those prayers be answered, in the divine bestowment of a long and prosperous reign, followed by a holy and a happy eternity! Nor did the royal marriage tend to lessen either our joy or hope. It enhanced them both. Prince Albert is favourably known to the lovers of protestantism and of piety in this country, as the branch of an illustrious family, which at the era of the Reformation, protected and patronized the immortal Luther, when he was kindling in Germany that sacred flame which rapidly spread through this county, and consumed many of the corruptions and abominations of popery. And now, the royal pair having become parents the second time—the parents of a prince, and heir apparent to the British throne, we earnestly pray that his baptism may be accompanied and followed by an unction from the Holy One, and that he may grow, as the Babe of Bethlehem grew, “in wisdom and in stature, and in favour with both God and man.” Vast indeed is the influence and the responsibility to which, as a British prince, he is probably destined; and much indeed, under God, will depend on the education he may receive; on the talents he may possess; and especially upon the moral and religious character he may acquire. In his reign, if he be spared to reign, and if not before his reign, rank and wealth may have to yield more of their influence to intellect and character, and the many may have to take a still greater share in those national affairs which are now principally conducted by the comparatively few. Ancient monopolies, however serviceable they may have been in former times; and ecclesiastical establishments, injurious at all times, will have to endure a more searching examination than they have even yet experienced, and will probably have to give way to better institutions. And in the prospect of these changes—changes which seem demanded by the interests of the nation and of the Church of Christ: and changes which will require, in their introduction and completion, much of wisdom, human and divine, we feel the necessity of constant earnest prayer, that our rulers and our fellow subjects may be all under the guidance of “Him, by whom kings reign, and princes decree justice.” Believing too that the principles, on which the congregational churches in this country are founded, are scriptural principles, and that they are favourable to civil and religious liberty, to all the national interests, and to the purity and progress of christian truth, we desire to maintain them, as our forefathers did, firmly and devoutly; especially now, when attempts are making to extend among us the superstitions of popery, and the fatal results of priestly domination. If the existence of an Established Church in this country, renders us dissenters, we trust that we are not dissenters from the Church of Christ. Our motto is, Conformity to the Church of Christ in every thing; and nonconformity to every church which has dissented from Christ’s institutions. These are principles, brethren, which are too sacred and important, not only to be trifled with, but even to be advocated by carnal and worldly minds. They belong to “a kingdom which is not of this world;” and we pray that all by whom they are professed, may be equally desirous “to render unto Cesar the things which are Cesar’s, and unto God the things which are God’s.”

In addressing you _as parents_, who have dedicated your children to God by baptism, I would affectionately remind you of the duties which you owe both to yourselves and to them. The apostle tells you that “they are not unclean but holy”—holy, as the sabbath and the temple were; and holy as all children are who are dedicated to God by a religious rite. When you brought them to the waters of baptism, you thereby testified your conviction of their depravity and of their need of cleansing grace; you thereby testified your belief that the great promise, “I will be a God unto thee, and unto thy seed after thee,” which was once to the Jews, is now unto you and unto your children; and at the same time you testified your intention “to teach them to observe all things whatsoever Christ has commanded.” Remember then, that the great and blessed privilege which you have enjoyed, is connected with corresponding obligations. Having given your children to God by baptism, you are to regard them as being peculiarly his; and you are to regard yourselves not as their proprietors, but as trustees, appointed by Christ, to train them up for the church, and for the service of their Lord and Master. Baptism, you are aware, does not constitute a man a member of any particular church; but it gives him a ceremonial qualification for membership. And this is just the position in which baptism has placed your children. They are candidates for communion with the church; and, as “holy children,” they possess the ceremonial qualification for communion. Now, as you have been the means of giving them the one qualification, you may also be the means of giving them the other. You may, through the divine blessing, be the means of making them spiritually as well as ceremonially holy. And it is the will of God that you should. For that purpose he has committed them to your charge; for that purpose he has authorized you to baptize them; and for that purpose he has given you the blessed assurance, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, AND THY HOUSE.” One of the great principles on which the God of mercy acts, in his moral government of the world, is to bless children for the sake of their believing parents; and the number of such children which are received into our churches, and which are engaged in the christian ministry, is an evidence of the fact, and of the faithfulness of Him by whom the promises are made. But you are not to expect this blessing unconditionally; nor are you to expect it from the mere fact of their baptism. When God made promise to Abraham, and gave him the sign of circumcision as the token of his covenant, he made the fulfilment of that promise to depend on Abraham’s personal piety, and on the religious education of his children. “Abraham,” said he, “shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him. For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment, that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.” And in like manner you are to be known to God, and to command your children and your household after you, to keep the way of the Lord, and to do justice and judgment. As parents, you are to have and to exercise authority in your own families. You are not only to advise and to recommend, but you are to command, and to be obeyed. You are “to rule your children and your own houses well; having your children in subjection with all gravity; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever Christ has commanded;” and ever, acting in accordance with the vow which you have made, “as for me, _and my house_, we will serve the Lord.” Having baptized your children unto Christ, you have motives and encouragements of the most powerful and constraining character, to “bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.” You can appeal to them by the fact that you have given them to Christ; that you “have opened your mouth unto the Lord concerning them, and you cannot go back;” and that, by their baptism, they and you have incurred responsibilities from which neither of you can be released, and which should lead both of you to serious consideration, and to unreserved consecration to God. Oh! then, christian parents, use the power and the privilege which God hath thus put into your hands; use them in connection with earnest and unceasing prayer; enforce them by consistent and holy example; cherish “the full assurance of hope” that, through the grace of God, you will succeed. And you shall succeed; “the Lord will bring upon you that which he hath spoken.” “He will be a God unto you, and unto your seed after you.” Your house shall be saved as well as yourself. “He will pour out his Spirit upon your seed, and his blessing upon your offspring; and they shall spring up as among the grass, as willows by the water courses. One shall say I am the Lord’s; another shall call himself by the name of Jacob; and another shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord, and surname himself by the name of Israel.”