Ai,/, f
INFANT BA PTI$M
INVENTION OF MEN,
OR,
DR. BUSHNELL'S ARGUMENTS REVIEWED,
WITH ARTICLES ON
ORIGEN'S TESTIMONY RESPECTING TIIE BAPTISM OF
CHILDREN, AND ON BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
BY
REV. IRAt- CHASE, D.D.
A RICAN BAPTST PUBLICATION SOCIETY,
AAIERICAN BAPTIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY,
530 ARCII STREET.
6*
AN
4 * *  - 
i I' 
PREFACE,
NOT long since, the writer of the following
pages was asked by a very intelligent and conscientious friend, what satisfactory reply could be
made by a Baptist to certain representations in
Dr. Bushnell's volume on Christfan Nur?tre.  The
book was takein down from its place on the shelf;
and a conversation ensued which led to the review here presented.
The subject discussed demands the serious
attention of every one who would be a disciple
of Christ.   It is intimately  connected  with
Christian truth and Christian duties.
The testimony of Origen resqecting thae baptism of
children presents decisive evidence, to which only
a brief reference is made in reviewing Dr. Bushnell's arguments. The article on Baptism for the
3
.Z, 
4                  PREYACE,
Dead, while aiming to explain an exceedingly
difficult passage of Scripture, shows incidentally
the practical importance and the duty of adhering
to what our Saviour has instituted.
May the reader seek for the truth with earnestness; and, like Paul in the glow of his first love,
say from the heart, Lord, what wilt thou have me to
do?
NEWTON CENTRE, November 18th, 1863. 
CONTENTS.
I.
CRGANIC CONNECTION.
The theory of Dr. Bushnell stated in his own words,
with some remarks............................. 17
All the Baptist theories of religion, it is asserted, are
based on the error of an extreme individualism....  24
The child's faith wrapped up in the parent's faith, so
that the child is accounted a believer from the be  ginning.....................................25
Thus it is that infant baptism becomes an appro  priate rite.  It sees the child in the parent, counts
him presumptively a believer and a Christian, and,
with the parent, baptizes him also................ 25
Dr. Bushnell's ingenious assumption contradicts the
common sense of all mankind................... 26
We would avoid two extremes..................... 26
Dr. Bushnell's view of Christian nurture he thinks to
be radically one with the ancient doctrine of baptismin
and regeneration, advanced by Christ, and accepted
by the first Fathers.............................  26
Our reply, confirmed by that of Professor Curtis.. 29, 30
Some otlier demands oi our credulity............  30
5
4100 
CONTENTS.
II.
JEWISH PROSELYTE BAPTISM, AND THE CONVERS.ATTON WITH
NICODEMUS.
The argument stated........................... 31, 32
Oar objection to Mr. Wall's authorities, on this sub ject, in his History of Infant Baptism............ 32
The case of Izates and of the Idumeans............ 33
The statements made by De Wette, by Bengel, and by
Schlneckenburger........................... 33, 34, 37
Baptism never administered to a proselyte's child born
after the time of the proselytism................. 34
The rite performed by the harbinger of Christ, not a
national but a personal concern.................. 35
Christ, in his interview with Nicodemus, it is reason  able to believe, hadi in his mind the preaching and
baptism of John, whose mission it was to make
ready a people prepared for the Lord............ 37, 38
The testimony of Josephus respecting John's bap  tism........................................ 40, 41
A Rabbinic passage quoted by Schoettgen........... 41
Parallel between what our Lord said to Nicodemus
and what, in giving his final commission, he said to
his Apostles................................. 42, 43
What kind of baptism the Apostles would think of,
when they received the great commission......... 46
III.
A DEVELOPMENT SUBSEQUENT TO TIHE DAY OF PENTECOST.
The supposition that, on the day of Pentecost, the
apostle Peter proclaimed an institute which he
G            rI 
CONTENTS.
himself did not then even think of, but which, at a
later period, was properly developed.............. 49
Dr. Bushnell, in his own way, provides a scheme of
development, for saving infant baptism........... 49
The passage quoted from Joel ii: 28 and 29 by the
apostle Peter in Acts ii: 39, and Dr. Bushnell's
commentary, with our objections.............. 50-58
An admirable picture............................. 58
The prophet that hath a dream.................... 61
Iv.
THE RECEPTION OF YOUN(G CHILDREN BY OUR LORD, AND
APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.
What our Lord did, and what he did not do, on that
memorable occasion............................   62
A great principle announced in the admonition, Think
not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to
our father..................................... 64
Difficulties pertaining to infant baptism, which do not
pertain to infant circumcision................. 67, 68
The words of the apostle Paul in 1 Cor. vii: 14, in  stead of proving infant baptism, show that it did
not exist in his time......................... 69, 70
And this testimony is confirmed by Gal. iii: 26, 27...  71
The alleged inconsistency of the Baptists......... 72, 73
The three cases of household baptism: Stephanas,
Lydia, and the jailor.......................  7476
The duty of searching the Scriptures............... 76
Pengilly's Scripture Guide to Baptism.............. 77
Dr. Hackett's Brief Statement of the best established
Results at which Biblical interpreters have arrived
respecting Infant Baptism....................... 77 
CONTENTS.
V.
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.
The phrase, were made disciples, in a passage quoted
from Justin Martyr............................. 79
Proof from John iv: 1, that the making of disciples
is one thing, and the baptizing of them another... 80
Other proofs from Greek usage, especially from a
treatise on baptism found among the writings of
the celebrated Greek ecclesiastical Father, Basil the
Great......................................... 81
Justin Martyr's very particular account of Christian
baptism....................................... 81
Semisch on his life, writings, and opinions........... 83
The meaning of Ireneus in the phrase, Regenerated
unto God............................... 84, 85
Tertullian's opposition supposes, not a current prac  tice, but only that, in his circle, what he opposed
had begun to be practiced...................... 85
Clear and decisive evidence referred to and briefly
stated, proving that Origen should never be quoted
in support of infant baptism..................... 88
The argument from the Shepherd or Pastor of Her  mas........................................ 89-93
Inscriptions on the monuments of children. The
epitaph of Zosimus........................... 93, 94
A passage from a sermon of Gregory Nazianzen,
when Bishop of Constantinople, rocommending that,
ordinarily, children be baptized at the age of about
three years................................. 94
The catacombs of Rome....................   95-97
Analysis and examination of the array of inscriptions
presented in a volume entitled Apostolic Bap  tism......................................  98-100
8 
CONTENTS.
The recent splendid French work by M. Louis Perret
on the Catacombs of Rome, shedding additional
light on this subject........................  101-103
Fleury and Ruinart in their historical works, and
Platner, Bunsen and others in their Descriptions of
Rome, mentioning certain facts which prosve that
the epitaph of little Zosimnus cannot be earlier than
in the fourth century....................... 103, 104
Another passage from Gregory Nazianzen.......... 105
Maitland, an English author, on the Church in the
Catacombs..................................... 106
Bishop Kip on the Catacombs...................... 107
What is disclosed by the nature of the case presented
to the council over which Cyprian presided at Car  thage, about the middle of the third century...... 110
Here the baptism of infants or babes makes its first
appearance in ecclesiastical history............... 111
On what ground Cyprian, in his Epistle to Fidus, does
not place the decision of the council, and on what
ground he does place it..................... 111, 112
He regarded the administration of baptism as the
bestowing of salvation; and he believed that still in
his time, there were new revelations, and that what
was then revealed, or could be shown to be lawful
and conducive to salvation, ought to supersede what
has already been practiced....................... 113
Proofs of his claiming to have visions and revelations. 113
Ambrose, the renowned bishop of Milan, in the fourth
century, utters the prevalent conviction of his time,
thus: No one ascends into the kingdom of heaven
but through the sacrament of baptism............ 115
The so-called Apostolical Constitutions. The prayers
in them to be offered for the infants, whether of the
9 
e ONTENT'S.
church or of the catechumens, prove that infants
were not supposed to have the qualifications re  quired of those who were to be baptized. For the
burden of these prayers is that the little ones may
be brought to such an age and state as to receive
baptism................................... 116
The ambiguous injunction which the Constitutions
contain for the baptism of children............... 117
Pelagius and Augustine........................... 118
Neander's striking remarks on Origen's supposed
reference to apostolical tradition, still more forcible
when applied to Augustine..................... 121
The decision of the council held at Neocoesarea in
Asia Minor, about forty years before the birth of
Augustine, utterly inconsistent with the existence
of infant baptism.......................... 121, 122
Grotius in his annotations on the New Testament;
Balsamo in his compendium of canons; and Zona  ras............................................ 122
Eusebius, the ecclesiastical historian, at the council of
Nice, A.D. 325, incidentally presents the important
fact, that not only he, but also the other bishops
assembled in that great council, had received in  struction before they were baptized.......... 123, 124
Walafrid Strabo's book on the Beginnings and Addi  tions in Ecclesiastical Affairs.................... 124
iHe, about forty years after the close of the eighth
century, unhesitatingly states, that infant baptism
had no existence in the primitive times, but came in
afterwards; and he refers to the well-known fact
that Augustine himself was not baptized when an
infant, but continued long to be a catechumen. 125, 126
10 
CONTENTS.                         11
What is implied in the fact mentioned by Augustine
himself that it was a common thing to inquire re  specting a Christian's child, Is he a catechumen or
abeliever?..................................... 127
Augustine's reply to Boniface concerning the state ment that the baptismal service, when applied to
infants, seemed to be inconsistent wiu  common
veracity..................................  128-132
Its ingenious sophistry pointed out................. 132
Other passages from Augustine himself, showing that
in his time there were, in the church, persons who
neither believed in nor practiced infant baptism. 133, 134
Monitory judgment respecting Augustine, pronounced
by Neander.................................... 134
VI.
INFANT BAPTISM AND INFANT COMMUNION.
Questions of no trivial import respecting infant bap  tism.......................................... 136
Infant communion, along with it, came into use; and
respecting this also similar questions might be
asked.........................................  136
The first mention of infant communion occurs in the
writings of Cyprian, the zealous advocate for the
baptismn of endangered children in their earliest
infancy, about the middle of the third century. He
teaches the necessity of being baptized from John
iii: 5, and of partaking of the Lord's supper from
John vi: 5         3................................ 136, 137
Cyprian's astoundi;ng testimony respecting occurrences
in his time, and in his presence, in connection with
infant communion.............................   38 
, 2                  CONTENTS.
Nearly two hundred years later, Augustine adopts the
same teaching into his system; and, among other
similar declarations, he says: "Most excellently the
Carthagenian Christians call baptism itself nothing
else than salvation, and the sacrament of the body
of Christ nothing else than life. Whence is this
unless from ancient, as I think, and apostolic tradition,
by which the churches of Christ hold, as a fixed fact,
that without baptism and participation of the
Lord's table, no one of mankind can come either
to the kingdom of God or to salvation and eternal
life?".......................................... 14]
Innocent and Gelasius, bishops of Rome, maintained
the necessity of infant communion  from John
vi:53..................................... 141, 142
What appears from the author of a Greek work
ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite; from Pope
Gregory the Great; the council of Toledo; the
Emperor Charleminagne in his Laws; the Ritual at
Rome;  Paschasius Radbert; William De  Cham  peaux; Hiugo a St. Victor at Paris; Lanfranc, arch  bishop of Canterbury; and Paschal II., who was
the Pope about the beginning of the twelfth cen  tury....................................... 142-145
In the twelfth century, the bishop of Paris com  mands his presbyters not to give the elements to
children in any manner; and the custom ceases in
France, and elsewhere almost entirely, throughout
the Roman Catholic Church................. 145, 146
Decrees of the Council of Trent, in the sixteenth
century.................................... 146, 147
Reasons assigned in the Catechism of the Council of
Trent, with other reasons................... 148-150 
CONTENTS.                        13
The Oriental churches still adhere to infant com  munion. Reply ill behalf of the Greek church to
the circular letter of Pope Pius IX........... 150, 151
Singular sights in the course of ages. A most re  markable result.   Hope for other changes in the
right direction............................ 151, 152
IIow shall the great ecclesiastical controversies be
rightly terminated?............................. 152
The arguments that disprove and forbid infant com  mulunion, disprove and forbid infant baptism. Of the
two, infant baptism is the more pernicious........ 153
Infant baptism led to infant communion.  The com  paratively innocent accomplice has been convicted
and condemned. Shall the principal offender be
permitted to escape condemnation?.......... 154, 155
Until infant baptism  be  abandoned, the  entering
wedge for a lax church membership, and for danger  ous errors respecting the efficacy of baptism, and
for other delusions, is in the crevice............. 156
VII.
INFANT BAPTISM AND INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP
Explanation of Tit. i: 6, with Coloss. i: 2, Eph. vi: 1.
The Tract Society's edition of the Bible. John xx:
27. The Latin Vulgate. Chrysostom in one of
his  Homilies.   Coleman's  Antiquities  of  the
Church.................................... 157-160
Dr. Bushnell represents the membership of the infant
to be analogous to the citizenship of the infant in
the eye of our common law. In a strongly related
sense, he says, it is, that the baptized child is a 
CONTENTS.
believer  and  a member  of  the  church.   Our
reply................................. 161, 162
Dr. Bushnell asks, What could be worse in its effect
on the child's feeling than to find himself repelled
from the brotherhood of God's elect?-"It gives
to little children the heritage of Cain, requiring
them to be driven cut from the presence of the
Lord."................................162, 163
We repel no child. Parental affection itself, united with
wisdom, may deem the nursery a place more suitable
for children than the Lyceum or the Town Hall.
The preparatory school before the university...... 163
A passage from Eusebius in his Evangelic Demonstra  tion. Special prayer in the so-called Apostolical
Constitutions for those who were receiving Christian
nurture and instruction......................164
A tract entitled the Duty of giving Christian Instruc  tion to Children, issued at Philadelphia, by the
American Baptist Publication Society....... 165-167
In what respect infant baptism is an encroachment... 168
The eloquence expended on the gathering of human
parents away from their young, might have been
more worthily employed.................... 168, 169
Ample encouragement to labor, pray, and hope for
the early conversion of our children............. 170
The analogy of circumcision does not hold. God ap pointed infant circumcision, not infant baptism;
and the design of circumcision was very different
from the design of baptism as instituted by our
Lord..................................... 172, 1 73
Children are to be affectionately and carefully brought
up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord
by their parents, with the co-operation of their
14 
CONTENrTS.                      15
pastor and of others who would win them to the
Saviour...................................... 174
Finally for the church membership of baptized chil   dren, Dr. Bushnell urges "the opinions of the
church and her most qualified teachers from the
apostolic era downward."......................... 175
The statement of Neander. A paragraph is presented
in which Neander, the accommodating theorist, says,
"Baptism, the visible sign of regeneration, was to
be given, at the very outset," but on the same page
from which that paragraph is taken, Neander, the
conscientious historian, states most explicitly, We
have all reasonfor not deriving infant baptismfrom
apostolic institu       tion........................ 175-178
Shall we regard the historian or the theorist? Shall
we follow the Holy Scriptures or the unauthorized
devices of men?................................ 178
The pious and exemplary parents of Gregory Nazian  zen........................................... 178
Calvin's adventurous assertion that children are bap  tized into future repentance and faith............. 179
Baxter's theory of infant baptism.................. 179
The Cambridge platform and the Half-way Covenant. 179
Cotton Mather and "the way of the Anabaptists".... 180
Decline of religion. The great revival. Whitefield,
Edwards, Hopkins, and others............... 180, 181
Statement in Coleman's Christian Antiquities, cor  roborated by Bunsen in the work on Hippolytus
and hisAge (about the beginning of the third cen  tury,).................................... 182-185
Again we request our readers to ponder the considera  tions which we have presented................... 185
Let baptism as it was instituted by our Lord be re 
16                    CONTENTS.
stored.  The way is open for Christian nurture in
all its amplitude and all its blessedness....... 186-188
It is not our Christian principles, but our failing to
live up to them that is to be censured............ 188
Dr. Bushnell's volume contains much that is valuable.
A desire expressed.......................... 188, 189 
DR. BUSHNELL'S ARGUMENT FOR
INFANT BAPTISM REVIEWED.
-10
I.
ORGANIC CONNECTION.
J.  BUSHNELL, in his work on Christian
Nurture, lays down the following proposition,
namely: That  the child is to grow up a
CGhristian, and never know himself as being
otherwise.   This  he  immediately  modifies
by adding: "In other words, the aim, effort,
and expectation should be, not, as is commonly assumed, that the child is to grow up in sin, to be converted after he comes to a mature age; but that he
is to open on the world as one that is spiritually renewed, not remembering the time when he went
through a technical experience, but seeming rather
to have loved what is good from bis earliest years."
Exceptions he admits; and he proposes to speak of
these in another connection, when they can be stated
intelligibly.
After presenting several weighty considerations in
support of his proposition, he proceeds thus: "If we
17 
18               INFANT TAPTIS.M AND
narrowly examine the relation of parent and child,
we shall not fail to discover something like a law of
organic connection, as regards character, subsisting
between themn;-such a connection as makes it easy
to believe, and natural to expect, that the faith of the
one will be propagated in the other. Perhaps I should
rather say, such a connection as induces the conviction
that the character of one is actually included in that
of the other, as seed is formed in the capsule; and
being there matured, by the nutriment derived from
the stemn, is gradually separated from it.  It is a singular fact, that many believe substantially the same
thing, in regard to evil character, but have no thought
of any such possibility in regard to good. There has
been much speculation, of late, as to whether a child
is born in depravity or whether the depraved character
is superinduced afterwards. But, like many other great
questions, it determines much less than is commonly
supposed; for, according to the most proper view of
the subject, a child is really not born till he emerges
from the infantile state, and never before that time
can he be said to receive a separate and properly in dividual nature.
"The declarations of Scripture  and the laws of
physiology,  I have already intimated,  compel  the
belief that a child's nature is somehow depravated
by descent from  parents who  are under the corrupt ing effects of sin.  But ti:s, taken as a question re lating to the mere p(tnctum temporis, or precise point
of birth, is not a question of arF so. grave  import as 
ORGANIC CONNECTION.
is generally supposed; for the child, after birth, is
still within the matrix of parental life, and will be,
more or less, for many years.  And the parental life
will be flowing into him all that time, just as naturally
and by a law as truly organic, as when the sap of the
trunk flows into a limb. We must not govern our
thoughts, in such matters, by our eyes; and because
the physical separation has taken place, conclude that
no organic relation remains. Even the physical being
of the child is dependent still for many months, in
the matter of nutrition, on organic processes not in
itself. Meantime, the mental being and character
have scarcely begun to have a proper individual life.
Will, in connection with conscience, is the basis of
personality, or individuality; and these exist as yet
only in their rudimental type, as when the form of a
seed is beginning to be unfolded at the root of a
flower.
"At first, the child is held as a mere passive lump
in the arms, and he opens into conscious life under
the soul of the parent, streaming into his eyes and
ears, through the manners and tones of the nursery.
The kind and degrees of passivity are gradually
changed as life advances.  A little farther on it is
observed that a smile awakens a smile; any kind of
sentiment or passion, playing in the face of the parent,
wakens a responsive sentiment or passion.  Irritation
irritates, a frown withers, love expands a look congenial to itself, and why not holy love?  Next, the ear
is opened to the understanding of words; but what
19 
20              INFANT BAPTISM AND
words the child shall hear, he cannot choose, and has
as little capacity to select the sentiments that are
poured into his soul. Farther on, the parents begin
to govern him by appeals to will, expressed in commnands; and whatever their requirement may be, he
can as little withstand it, as the violet can cool the
scorching sun, or the tattered leaf can tame the
hurricane. Next they appoint his school, choose his
books, regulate his company, decide what form of
religion, and what religious opinions he shall be
taught, by taking him to a church of their own selection.  In all this they infringe upon no right of the
child; they only fulfill an office which belongs to
them. Their will and character are designed to be
the matrix of the child's will and character. Meantime he approaches more and more closely, and by a
gradual process, to the proper rank and responsibility
of an individual creature, during all which process of
separation, he is having their exercises and ways
translated into him.  Then at last he comes forth
to act his part in such color of evil, and why not of
good, as he has derived from them."
In these passages it will be perceived that the
author begins by representing the relation of parent
and child to be "something like. a law of organic connection, as  regards  character, subsisting between
them." And this he further defines by adding, " Such(i
a connection as makes it easy to believe, and natural
to expect, that the faith of the one will be propagated
in the other."  Tlhus far, as tle wordl " propagated" 
ORGANIC CONNECTION.
is most frequently used in a figurative sense, the statement seems entitled to a ready admission. But in
the very next sentence there is an important modification: " Perhaps I should rather say, such a connection as induces the conviction that the character
of one is actually included in that of the other, as a
seed is formed in a capsule; and being there matured,
bv a nutriment derived from the stem, is gradually
separated from it."
Here we are taught, not merely that there is something lilce an organic connection, and that thx faith
of the parent comes easily to be the faith of the child,
but also that the character of the child is actually included in that of the parent, as a seed is formed in
the capsule, or seed vessel, of a plant.  "According
to the most proper view of the subject," it is soon
added, "a child is really not born till he emerges
from the infantile state."  te  "is still within the
matrix [or formative womb] of the parental life, and
will be, more  or less, for many years.  And  the
parental life will be flowing into him  all that time,
just as naturally, and by a law as truly organic, as
when the sap of the trunk flows into a limb....
Whatever the requirement of parents may be, he
can as little withstand it as the violet can cool the
scorching sun, or the tattered leaf can tame  tho
hurricane....  Their will and character are designed to be the matrix [or mould] of the child's will
and character." On the 30th page it is stated that
"The parent exercises himself in the child, playing
21 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
his emotions and sentiments, and working a character
in him by virtue of an organic power."
These representations remind us of what we heard,
forty years ago, at New Lanark, in Scotland. The
distinguished free-thinking philanthropist, R-obert
Owen, had invited several strangers, who were from
America and from various parts of Europe, to breakfast with him and his family. At the table he took
occasion to advocate some of his favorite theories.
We are all, he said, creatures of circumstances. And,
holding up his coffee cup, he added, We are no more
responsible for our characters than this cup is for its
shape.
Here was truth, but not the whole truth; and the
true was so exaggerated, and so connected with error,
as to mislead. Dr. Bushnell, certainly, would be as
far as any man from adopting Mr. Owen's conclusion.
But too often his statement is an exaggeration; and it
tends to mystify what it was intended to illustrate.
It can hardly fail to mislead many an honest inquirer;
and it may have confused, in some measure, the ideas
of the ingenious and acute author himself. If he
means to say that, through the arrangements of
Divine Providence, there subsists between the parent
and the child such a connection as enables the parent
to contribute much towards forming the religious
character of the child, we have nothing to object.
Such a connection is involved in the organization of
the family; and it was kindly intended to be preeminently an instrument of benefit, inasmuch as
a2 
ORGANIC CONNECTION.                 23
parents are pre-eminently the natural guides and
guardians of their children. But what in this matter
is emphatically the case with parents is the case also
with others, in proportion to their opportunities of
exerting on the young a good influence in the formation of character. This Dr. Bushnell does not and
cannot deny. Hie seems to admit it fully on the 31st
page, where he says: "Certain it is that we are
never, at any age, so independent as to be wholly
out of the reach of organic laws which affect our
character. All society is organic-the church, the
state, the school, the family; and there is a spirit in
each of these organisms, peculiar to itself, and more
or less hostile, more or less favorable to religious character, and, to some extent at least, sovereign over the
individual man.  A very great share of the power in
what is called a revival of religion, is organic power;
nor is it any the less divine on that account. The child
is only more within the power of organic laws than we
all are. We possess only a mixed individuality all our
life long. A pure, separate, individual man, living
wholly within and from himself, is a mere fiction. No
such person ever existed, or ever can."
After a statement so explicit, it may seem captious
to make any objection. But it is not to this statement that we object, except that what was intended
to be expressed by the word organic would have been
more readily perceived, if it had been expressed by
some other word, or by a circumlocution.
Presented in plain language, the fact is very mani 
24              INRANT BAPTISM AND
fest that every person is influenced more or less by
others, whether the influence be exerted designedly
or undesignedly, and whether it be received consciously
or unconsciously. The great human family are so
constituted, or, in other words, mankind are so organized, that it cannot be otherwise. And in the formation of character, the young especially, as we learn
from observation, reason and Scripture, are likely to
be, in the greatest measure, either benefitted or injured
by those with whom they are connected.
Here, it seems to us, is a solid and sufficient basis
for Christian education, and for the most earnest and
impressive appeals that can be made to parents. Dr.
Bushnell, however, it is probable, has in his mind the
exaggerated part of his representation when he says
(page 31): "This view of an organic connection subsisting between parent and child, lays a basis for
notions of Christian education far different from those
which now prevail, under the cover of a merely fictitious and mischievous individualism." On the 29th
page he says: "The tendency of all our modern
speculations is to an extreme individualism, and we
carry our doctrines of free will so far as to make little
or nothing of organic laws; not observing that
character may be, to a great extent, only the free
development of exercises previously wrought in us,
or extended to us, when other wills had us within
their sphere. All the Baptist theories of religion are
based on this error.  They assume, as a first truth,
that no such thing is possible as an organic connec 
OROANtI  CONNECTION,              2
tion of character." And (page 39), " How can we
ever attain to any right conception of organic duties
until we discover the reality of organic powers and
relations? And how can we hope to set ourselves
in harmony with the Scriptures in regard to family
nurture, or household baptism, or any other kindred
subject, while our theories exclude or overlook
precisely that which is the base of their teachings
and appointments? This brings me to my last argument, which is drawn from infant or household baptism
-a rite which supposes the fact of an organic connection of character between the parent and the child; a
seal of faith in the parent, applied over to the child,
on the ground of a presumption that his faith is
wrapped up in the parent's faith; so that he is
accounted a believer from the beginning. We must
distinguish here between a fact and a presumption of
fact.  If you look upon a seed of wheat, it contains,
in itself, presumptively, a thousand generations of
wheat, though by reason of some fault in the cultivation, or some speck of diseased matter in itself, it
may, in fact, never reproduce at all So the Christian
parent has, in his character, a germ, which has power,
presumptively, to produce its like in his children,
though by reason of some bad fault in itself, or possibly
some outward hindrance in the church, or some providence of death, it may fail todo so. Thus it is that infant
baptism becomes an appropriate rite. It sees the child
in the parent, counts him presumptively a believer and
a Christian, and, with the parent, baptizes him also." 
26              INFANT BAPTISM AND
From this passage it is evident that Dr. Bushnell
would have us understand, by an organic connection
of character between the parent and the child, such a
connection as authorizes us to presume that the child's
faith is wrapped up in the parent's faith; so that the
child is to be accounted a believer from his earliest
infancy. An ingenious assumption indeed! but one
that contradicts the common sense of all mankind.
To account a child in his earliest infancy to be a believer is to account him to be what everybody knows
that he is not; and to baptize him as a believer is to
baptize him as being what everybody knows that he
is not. This consideration alone is sufficient to show
that the proceeding is unwarrantable, and that the
assumption ought not to be made. We shall soon
have occasion to show, also, that it cannot be reconciled with the teachings of our Lord and of his apostles,
and with the practice of their earliest successors.
In regard to the statement that, "All the Baptist
theories of religion are based on the error" of "an
extreme individualism," we think that the author is
under an erroneous impression.  There are two extremes, the one ascribing too much to the parent and
too little to the child; and the other, too much to the
child, and too little to the parent. We would avoid
both of these extremes. We would have parents lay
to heart their responsibilities; and we would have
children remember that they, too, are responsible to
God. We would have parents fulfill their duties
according to their best light and ability; and we 
ORGANIC CONNECTION.           27
would have children fulfill theirs, in the loveliness of
filial obedience, with a due regard to the will of the
Lord. And, as they come to evince a Christian spirit,
and to have a competent knowledge of the simple
truths of Christianity, so as to receive baptism and
the Lord's Supper understandingly and with spiritual
benefit, we would have them baptized, professing
their faith in the Saviour, and their earnest purpose
to live as becomes his sincere and devoted disciples.
In their early childhood we would have them, according to their capacities, receive all good impressions
and influences, from earth and from heaven. We
would have them led by alluring example and timely
instruction to him who said, Suffer the little children
to come unto me, and forbid them not. We would
have them brought up in the nurture and admonition
of the Lord; and we would look fervently and confidingly to-him for his blessing upon them.  We would
have them, like Timothy, when he was a child, know
and love "the Holy Scriptures, which are able to
make wise unto salvation through faith which is in
Christ Jesus." And thus we would have them (to
use the language of our author himself) "pass out,
by degrees, through a course of mixed agency, to a
proper independency and self-possession."
Dr. Bushnell represents his views of Christian
nurture to be "radically one with the ancient doctrine
of baptism and regeneration, advanced by Christ, and
accepted by the first Fathers." Hlie adds, "We have
much to say of baptismal regeneration as a great 
is68 INFANT BAPTISM AND
error, which undoubtedly it is, in the form in which
it is held; but it is only a less hurtful error than
some of us hold in denying it....  The regeneration
is not actual, but only presumptive, and every thing
depends upon the organic law of character pertaining
between the parent and the child, the Church and the
child, thus upon duty and holy living and gracious
example. The child is too young to choose the rite
for himself; but the parent, having him, as it were, in
his own life, is allowed the confidence that his own
faith and character will be reproduced in the child,
and grow up in his growth, and that thus the propriety of.the rite as a seal of faith will not be violated.
In giving us this rite, on the grounds stated, God
promises, in fact, on his part, to dispense that spiritual
grace which is necessary to the fulfillment of its import." (pp. 46, 47.) "Now the true conception is,
that baptism is applied to the child on the ground of
its organic unity with the parents; imparting and
pledging a grace to sanctify that unity, and make it
good in the field of religion. By the supposition,
however, the child still remains within the known
laws of character in the house, to receive, under these,
whatever good may reach him; not snatched away
by an abrupt, fantastical, and therefore incredible
grace.  He is taken to be regenerate, not historically
speaking but presumptively, on the ground of his
known connection with the parent character, and the
vine or church life, which is the life of that charac.
ter. Perhaps I shall be understood more easily, if I 
ORGANIC CONNECTION.,                29
say, that the child is potentially regenerate, being
regarded as existing in connection with powers and
causes that contain the fact, before time and separate
from time. For when the fact appears historically,
under the law of time, it is not more truly real, in a
certain sense, than it was before. And then the grace
conferred, being conferred by no casual act, but resting in the established laws of character, in the church
and the house, is not lost by unfaithfulness, but remains and lingers still, though abused and weakened,
to encourage new struggles. Thus it will be seen that
the doctrine of organic unity I have been asserting,
proves its theologic value, as a ready solvent for the
rather perplexing difficulties of this difficult subject.
Only one difficulty remains, namely, that so few can
believe the doctrine." (pp. 116, 117.)
This "one difficultv" is not easily removed.  It
arises from the utter unreasonableness of the demand
made on our credulity. Respecting Dr. Bushnell's
theory, a candid and intelligent writer, Professor
Curtis, of the University at Lewisburg,  Pa., has
remarked  as follows:  "It assumes always a conjunction of three things, no one of which can be shown
to occur at all.  1. That the parent shall perfectly
discharge his duty; 2. That the Church shall also
perfectly do the same; and 3, That if both of these
do thus, God will in every case not only save that
child at last, but effectually call it in earliest infancy;
so that it shall'open on the world spiritually renewed.'
... It takes for granted that in the case of every 
30                INFANT BAPTIST.
child baptized, the two former, or human conditions,
will be perfectly fulfilled; and then it further presumes
that the third or divine result will not only eventually
but immediately follow. This we think the very
extreme of presuming." *
How can any man wonder that so few can believe
the doctrine? Besides Dr. Bushnell's theory requires
us to believe that the child is to be baptized as a
believer on the ground of its organic unity with the
parents; that baptism imparts and pledges a grace
to sanctify that unity, and make it good in the field
of religion; that God has given us the rite of infant
baptism; and that He has promised to bestow the
spiritual grace necessary to the fulfillment of its
import.
* See the Progress of Baptist Principles in the Last
Hundred Years, p. 257. 
II.
JEWISH PROSELYTE BAPTISM, AND THE CONVERSATION
WITH NICODEMUS.
HE true idea of infant baptism, it is asserted
on the 43d page, "is seen most evidently in the
history of its establishment by Christ, in the
third chapter of John."  The argument is set
forth thus: "The  Jewish nation regarded
other nations as unclean.  Hence when  a
Gentile family wished to become Jewish citizens,
they were baptized in token of cleansing. Then they
were said to be re-born, or regenerated, so as to
be accounted true descendants of Abraham. We
use the term naturalize, that is, to make natural
born, in the same sense. But Christ had come to
set up a spiritual kingdom, the kingdom of heaven;
and finding all men aliens, and spiritually unclean,
he applies over the rite of baptism, which was
familiar to the Jews ('art thou a master in Israel,
and knowest not these things?') giving it a higher
sense:'Except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdomfn of heaven.' But
the Gentile proselyte, according to the custom here
described-here is the point of the argument-came
with his family. They were all baptized together,
young and old, all regenerated or naturalized together;
31 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
and therefore, in tlhe new application made of the rite
to signify spiritual cleansing and regeneration, it is
understood, of course, that children are to comne with
their parents. To have excluded them would have
been, to every Jewish mind, the height of absurdity.
They could not have been excluded, without express
exception; and no exception was made. Some have
questioned whether proselyte baptism existed at this
early age; but of this the third chapter of John is itself
conclusive proof; for how else was baptism familiarly
known to the Jews as connected with regeneration,
-that is, civil regeneration?"
We reply: No one has yet proved that our Saviour,
when he spoke of being born again, expected Nicodemus to have in his mind proselyte baptism and
civil regeneration. We are aware of the assumption
made by Mr. Wall in his History of Infant Baptisn,
and of the array of authorities which he has presented.
But those authorities are not competent and reliable
witnesses respecting what was customary previous to
the Christian era.
Our Saviour incidentally, on a certain occasion,
intimated the pains that had to be taken to make a
proselyte.   "Ye compass sea and land to make one
proselyte." In the depressed state of the Jewish
nation, under the lRomans, cases of proselytism, it is
obvious, must have been much less frequent than
at some former periods. Among those, however,
which did occur within a few years of our Lord's
entering on his public ministry, one was very
32 
JEWISIH PPROSELYTE BAPTISM.            33
remarkable. It was the case of Izates, king of Adia bene, a Syrian territory south of Damascus. The
Jewish historian Josephus, a contemporary of the
apostles, has given a particular account of this dis tinguished individual's becoming a proselyte and of
his being circumcised; but he says not one word of
his being baptized.* At a somewhat earlier period
the Idumeans had, in effect, been compelled to adopt
the Jewish religion. Josephus mentions their being
circumcised, but of their being baptized in connection
with their becoming proselytes he says nothing.t
De Wette, in his Hebrew and Jewish Archeology,
says: "According to the Rabbis, circumcision, an
offering and-baptism were necessary to the reception
of proselytes. Baptism, however, is probably a later
institute, for it is not mentioned in the older writings,
but only in the Gemara, whose  testimony speaks
merely for the time after the destruction of Jerusalem,
and in other later writings.  Yet, connected with
proselyte consecration, there may have been in ancient
times a kind of lustration, from which proselyte
baptism (perhaps not without an intimiation of tlhe
Christian) has risen.1  Dr. Bengel, Professor and
Superintendent of the Theological Seminary at Tiibingen, says: " It was reckoned in the same class with
all those other lustrations to which the Jews w.ere
accustomed.... It was not regarded as a prin
*Antiquities of the Jews, B. X.-C. ii. ~ 3 and 4.
t Antiquities, B. XIII. ix.  1.
t Lehrbuch der hebriiiseh-judischen Arehaologie, Y 246, a.
3 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
cipal thing, nor as an essentially necessary part of
proselyte  consecration....   But  the  entirelv
changed condition to which they found themselves
reduced by the overthrow of their state and of their
temple" (A.D. 70) "led at length, as it seems, to
new and finally more fixed decrees and regulations:n
this subject." (See his work on the age of the Jewish Proselyte Baptism, p. 115.)
According to one of the regulations, "a male is
not baptized till he is well healed of the wound
occasioned by the circumcision, which always precedes.* Hence it is evident that proselyte baptism
was not immediately connected with circumcision.
It intervened at a considerable distance between this
and the presentation of an offering, and was more
closely connected with the offering than with the
circumcision-which, strictly speaking, must always
have been the iTiitiatory rite, whenever it could be
perfornmed.  After the destruction of the temple, the
offering could not lawfully be presented; and after
the destruction of the temple, also, there were times
in which the Jews were by imperial authority forbidden to perform the circumcision. In these circum.
stances, the ablution would naturally assume a greater
importance than at any former period.
Whatever may have been the time when proselyte
* Masculus non baptizatur,  nisi vulnus culo illo, quod
e circumcisione, quae semper praecedit, ceperat, bene curato.
See Danzii Baptism. Proselyt, in Meuschen Nov. Test. ex
Talmude antiq.  Heb. Illustratum, p. 283.
34 
JEWISH PROSELYTE BAPTISM.             35
baptism, ablution, or lustration first came into use, it
was never performed on a proselyte's child born after
the time of proselytism. Hiow then could it be a
model for infant baptism in regard to the children of
Christians born after the conversion of their parents?
Besides, the act was performed by the proselyte himsetf. John's baptism was administered by John to
his disciples; and hence he was denominated the
Baptist-that is, the Baptizer.
The ablution of proselytes among the Jews, whenever it was practiced, must, so far as it was initiatory,
have had reference mainly to ideas of national purity
on the one hand, or to a want of it on the other.
The rite performed by the harbinger of Christ was
not a national but a personal concern. It was administered to such Jews themselves as were penitent;
and it had reference to the penitent individual's being
cleansed from the pollution of his sins, in connection
with the coming of the Messiah.   Its import as a
symbol of purification was readily comprehended in
view of the addresses made to the people, and of its
resemblance to the many ablutions to which they
had been accustomed, especially whenever a person
was cleansed from ceremonial defilements. This was
always a personal transaction; and these ablutions
were ten thousand times more frequent than any
connected with the reception of the proselytes.
Dr. Bengel, in his work already mentioned, observes (p. 63):   "John must have considered the
question, Why baptizest thou? as referring to his 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
baptism-to the essential and characteristic nature
of it, already well known, on account of which the
Jews believed that it would be committed only to
the A1essiah, or to one of his prophetic heralds.  It
was perfectly obvious that they who  came with the
question had reference to his baptism, which was o
peculiar, that there should belong to it an altogether
special divine authority. It would have been quite
superfluous for them to have made particular mention
of proselyte balptism, which would not have been at all
thought of in connection with John's baptism."
The whole subject has been re-examined by another German author, Dr. Schneckenburger; and he
gives, as the result of his investigations, the following
general propositions:
"1. The representation of the Talmud, by itself
and in comparison with other accounts, cannot prove
that proselyte baptism was established before the
time of Christ.
"2. The passages from earlier writings, brought for
the support of the Talmudical accounts, cannot afford
any probable evidence, and much less, any certainty.
"3. The internal opposing evidence, furnished by the
silence of the most considerable writers, or by particular facts which they have mentioned, retains its validity.
"4. The difficulties in the way of admitting that
this custom came to prevail among the Jews after it
had arisen among the Christians are not very great.
Indeed, there are many  reasons making it highly
probable that, as an integral part of the initiatory
86 
JEWISII PROSELYTE BAPTISM.              37'
ceremonies, it came up in this later time, as well as
definite testimonies in favor of such an opinion.
"5. We  are not, therefore, to think of deriving
John's and the Christian rite from the Jewish one; and
usages present themselves more akin to that rite,
both in form and signification, than the ablution of
Jewish proselytes appears to have been."*
To us, indeed, the assumption seems exceedingly
improbable that our Saviour, in his interview with
Nicodemus, had in his own mind, as the type, illustration, and model of entrance into his holy kingdom,
any process of proselytism, vaunted and desecrated
by Pharisaical formalists.   On one occasion he says
"Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites
for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte
and when le is made, ye make him  two-fold more
the child of hlell than yourselves."t   How  mich
more reasonable it is to believe that in the case before us, he had in his mind the preaching and baptism
of his harbinger, whose mission it was to make ready
a people prepared for the Lord.{  Nicodemus, with
all his amiable courtesy, was a Pharisee.  John had 
said to many of the Pharisees and Sadducees, "Bring
forth fruits meet for repentance, and think not to say
* See the volume on the age of the Jewish proselyte
Baptism and its connection with John's and the Christian
Rite.  Ueber das Alter der j udiscehen Proselyten-Taufe und
deren Zusammenlhang mit dem johlanneischen uncl Christlichen Ritus.
Matt. xxiii: 15.         t Luke i: 17 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father"
(as much as to say, Expect not to be received as
being the offspring even of Abraham); "for I say
unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up
children  unto  Abraham."*   The  burden  of his
preaching was, Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven
is at hand.t  "The people that heard him, and the
publicans, justified God, being baptized with the
baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers
rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being
not baptized of him."$   Nicodemus might well be
reminded of the inexcusableness of that rejection.
The Messiah himself, it is well known, approved and
vindicated the teachings and claims of John. The
harbinger's preaching accorded with his own. Matthew (iv: 17) says: "Jesus began to preach, and to
say, Repent; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
And Mark (i: 14, 15) asserts the same, with some
amplification: "After that John was put in prison,
Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the
kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled,
* and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and
believe the Gospel."
To repent was to have such a change of disposition
as to loathe and forsake sin. It was equivalent to
having a new heart, a heart to obey God as his
dutiful child, and thus it was, in effect, to be born
again. It was to be taught of the Lord, and led by
his Spirit, so as to have a right spirit, an earnest
*Matt. iii: 8, 9.        t Matt. iii: 2.       $ Luke  vii: 29, 30.
38 
JEWISHII PROSELYTE BAPTISM.           39
desire to be cleansed from all sin, internal as well as
external. In a word, it was to be prepared to enter.
with humility and gratitude, the predicted kingdom
of the holy Messiah.
Ought not Nicodemus, a teacher in Israel, to have
known these things, and to have understood the expressions used by our Lord? Had he never read in
the ancient Hebrew Scriptures, the prayer of a penitent, "Create in me a clean heart, O  God, and renew
a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from
thy presence, and take not thy Holy Spirit from me."*
Had he never read in the Prophets, Wash ye, make
you clean; put away the evil of your doings from
before mine eyes.t   Repent, and turn yourselves
from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be
your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby you have transgressed, and make
you a new heart and a new spirit; for why will ye
die, O House of Israel?I A new heart also will I
give you, and a new spirit will I put within you.
I will put my spirit within you, and cause
you to walk in my statutes.~  There shall come forth
a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall
grow out of his roots....  He shall not judge
after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the
hearing of his ears. But with righteousness shall he
judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek
of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the
Ps. li: 10, 11.    t Is. i: 16.       t Ezek. xviii: 30, 31.
~ Ezek. xxxvi; 26, 27. 
40              INr ANT BxPTlTliS AND
rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips
shall he slay the wicked.* All we like sheep have
gone astray; we have turned every one to his own
way: and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of
us all.t Behold, I will send may messenger, and he
shall prepare the way before me:  and the Lord whom
ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple, even the
messenger of the covenant, whom  ye delight in:
behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. But
who  may abide the day of his coming? and who
shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a
refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap.1
Had Nicodoemus duly considered such passages as
these, he could not have failed to perceive, when our
Lord Coke of being born again, that he had reference
to that change of mind, that purification of the soul,
which is involved in genuine repentance.   It was
manifestly a suitable preparation  for entering the
kingdom of that Holy One who could not be deceived,
and who was to be to all "like a refiner's fire." Some
of the Jews, it is certain, had substantially correct
views on this subject. The preaching of John, and
the baptism which he had been divinely authorized
to administer, had made  a deep  impression,  and
awakened the minds of many.   The statement given
by Josephuts, as well as the more ample record in
the New Testamenet, is worthy of being remembered.
lie says, "Herod slew John that was called the
Baptist, who wvas a good man; and who commanded
t Is. liii:  6.           t Mal. iii:  1, 2.
*Is. xi: 1. 3, 4. 
JEWISII PROSELYTE BAPTISM.
the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness
towards one another, and piety towards God, and so
to come to baptism; for that the washing with water
would be acceptable to himi, if they made use of it
not in order to the putting away of some sins only,
but for the purification of the body; supposing still
that the soul was purified before by righteousness."*
Such a purifying of the soul, it is here evident, was
understood to be distinct from the washing with
water;  for it was to precede that washing.   The
internal change was pre-supposed, as leading to the
external acknowledgment, and as being requisite in
order to make this a baptism acceptable to God.
There is a Rabbinic passage quoted by Schoettgen
in his Hebrew and Talmudical Hours, according to
which He who repents of his sins is like a child born
to-day.t  And on a memnorable public occasion, our
Lord declared, Verily I say unto you, Whosoever
receiveth not the kingdom of God as a little child,
shall not enter therein. it He knew what was needed,
a state of mind childlike and humble before God.
Who does not remember those impressive words of
his: "Thou hast hid these things from the wise and
prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even
so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight."
And who does not perceive that, when he was conversing with Nicodemus, he was expostulating with
* Antiq. B. XVIII., c. v. ~ 2.
t Vol. 1, p. 328, from Ir. Gibborim, fol. 19, 3.
$ Mark x: 15...
41 
42              INFANT BAPTISM AND
a person in danger of being blinded by Pharisaical
prepossessions, and was teaching him what he most
needed to learn?
In every age, the grateful penitent has readily
ascribed his change to God, the Holy Spirit.  And
as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are
children of God. They are born again, born of God,
regenerated.   These  and  similar  expressions, all
must admit, were used in the earliest days of Christianity for indicating the internal and moral change,
the spiritual regeneration, which it demanded. They
occur frequently in the New Testament, and sometimes in the early ecclesiastical fathers, as Justin
Martyr, and Clement of Alexandria, though, at a
very early period, baptism was often confounded with
spiritual regeneration; the sign, with the thing signified.
But in the case before us there is no room for such
a confounding. Our Lord gives unmistakable prominence to the spiritual renewing.   On this he expatiates, as the great absorbing subject; and he
finishes his illustration by saying, "So is every one
that is born of the Spirit." Then, in words of mingled
tenderness and dignity, he proceeds to press on the
Pharisee's conscience the neglect of ample evidence,
and to set forth the great object of his own coming
into the world, that whosoever believeth in him should
not perish, but have eternal life; the love of God in
sending him, and the condemnation of men for loving
darkness rather than light, because their deeds are 
JEWISH PROSELYTE BAPTISM.
evil. Common sense and common candor Iroust understand him as speaking to Nicodemus, not of unconscious babes, but of responsible moral agents. So
when he said to his apostles, "Go ye into all the world,
and preach the gospel to every creature: Hle that
believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he
that believeth not shall be condemned." He had reference, most manifestly, not to unconscious babes,
but to persons to whom the gospel could be preached.
We need not doubt that what we cannot do, he, the
wise and compassionate Saviour, will provide for the
little ones, in a way adapted to their state.
According to the great commission, he that trusts
in the Saviour and obeys him (for baptism is the
appointed manifestation of a purpose to obey him in
all things) shall be saved. But he that refuses to
trust in him shall be condemned.* The unbeliever is
* If any one is troubled that in referring to Mark xvi: 16,
we have written condemned for damned, he will, we trust,
have his mind relieved by the following considerations
1. Condemned expresses truly and exactly the sense of
the word in the Greek original.
2. In the latter part of the conversation with Nicodemus, condemned is used as the opposite of saved; and
condemnation as the opposite of eternal life; and, in referring to Mark xvi: 16, it was desirable to use the word
condemned instead of damned, in order to bring out more
clearly the parallel between the two passages.
3. In 1 Cor. xi: 31, the apostle Paul says: "We are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with
the world."
43 
44              INFANT BAPTISM AND
to be condemned for his unbelief, his sinful neglect
of the gospel. In his case, baptism is not mentioned
at all.  It is precluded by his unbelief.  So, in the
latter part of the conversation with Nicodemus, it is
declared that the believer has eternal life; but that
the unbeliever is condemned for his unbelief, because
he loves darkness, and perversely refuses to come to
the light.   In his case, also, baptism is not mentioned at all, it being precluded by his impenitent and
sinful unbelief.
4. In John v: 24, condemnation is mentioned as the
opposite of everlasting life; and the Greek word, which is
here translated condemnation, is, in the 29th verse, translated damnation.   But, manifestly, the meaning would
have been the same had the passage read thus  The hour
is coining in which all that are in the graves shall hear
his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good,
unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done
evil, unto the resurrection of condemnation.
5. In the sight of God, condemnation rests already on
impenitent and unbelieving sinners here, and it must also
be met in the future world, when the final sentence is
pronounced by the righteous Judge.
6. WVhen, in view of the scriptural usage, mention is
made of sinners as being condemned of God, we naturally
think, not merely of their present condemnation, but also
and especially of that which awaits them on the great day
of future judgment; so that no advantage whatever is
given to those who deny what was so impressively taught
by our Saviour.
7. We need much wisdom and grace to enable us to
present unwelcome truths faithfully and beneficially to
the minds of our fellow-men.   The preachA,, sought to 
JEWISHI PROSELYTE BAPTISM.            45
Surely, we can discover here no traces of Jewish
proselytism, and no evidence of our Lord's establishing Infant Baptism.  On the contrary, we have seen
that he taught in harmony with John, whose teaching
find out acceptable words, and that which was written was
upright, even words of truth. (Eccles. xii: 10.) We must
all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every
one may receive the things done in his body according to
that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. Knowing,
therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men. (2 Cor:
v. 10, 11.)
8. Dr. Doddridge, in his Family Expositor, has given
the following translation and paraphrase of Mark xvi: 16.
The translation, it will be perceived, is printed in italics:
"He who sincerely believes your testimony, and, in token of
that cordial faith, is baptized in my name, and continues to
maintain a temper and conduct suitable to that engagement, shall certainly be saved with complete and everlasting
salvation; but he who believeth not this my gospel, when
opened with such convincing evidence, and finally persists
in willful impenitence and unbelief, as he rejects the most
gracious counsel of God for his recovery, shall be condemned
by his righteous judgment to future and everlasting punishment, and shall, to his dreadful experience, find that
gospel which he has despised to be a savor of death to
him."
9. It will be seen that we have had reasons for using
the word condemned. We should be very sorry to grieve
or embarrass in the least any faithful minister of the
gospel. We would gladly encourage and help him in his
efforts to win the erring and sinful to Christian truth, to
holiness, and to eternal life.   0 that they were wise, that
thes understood this, that they would consider their latter end! 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
and baptism had awakened much attention, and were
exceedingly prominent in the view of the Jews.
John's was the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; and he, according to the best light then
bestowed,  directed to the  coming Messiah  those
whom he baptized, saying unto the people that they
should believe on Him who should come after him,
that is on Christ Jesus.* The baptism which he
administered presupposed repentance, a purification
of soul, in the baptized. It had reference to one's
own spiritual state and his purpose. It was thus a
personal transaction.  In this respect, it resembled
the numerous purifications for ceremonial defilement
among the Jews, and was easily understood, when
administered to the penitent desiring to be purified
from the defilement of sin.
Of the same character, unquestionably, was the
baptism administered by the disciples of Christ, under
his own eye, before his crucifixion. They were carrying forward the work begun by him who had baptized
them, and whose ministry was "the beginning of the
gospel of Jesus Christ." And when at last they were
commanded to go into all the world, and preach, and
baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit, they would not only from the
terms of the commission, but also from the practice
to which they had been accustomed, understand, that
they were to baptize, not unconscious infants but penitent believers. The practice to which they had been
* Acts xix: 4.
46 
JEWISH PROSELYTE BAPTISM.
accustomed is clear and undeniable. That of proselyte-baptism, it is probable, had not yet been established as a part of the ceremony initiating into Judaism.  If it existed at all, it was of comparatively
rare occurrence, and more closely connected with the
presentation of an offering than with the circumcision,
which alone, as the initiatory rite, was prescribed by
the Mosaic law. The practice to which the apostles
had been accustomed, it is well known, had the sanction of our Lord, but this cannot be said of any Jewish proselyte-baptism, or of its being transferred to
the Christian dispensation, whether we regard the
principle which it would involve, or the spirit which
it would cherish.
The baptism introduced by John for penitent Jews,
and practiced also by the disciples of Christ before
his crucifixion, and not any Pharisaical ablution of a
proselyte, would be the baptism of which these disciples would think, when they received the final
commission, modified only by the more full declaration which our ascending Lord saw fit then to make.
This was the baptism which they had reason to
believe was "from heaven;" and it was associated
with announcements and events proclaiming the Messiah and the establishment of the new dispensation.
The important fact to which we here call attention,
ought not to be overlooked; and it cannot be frittered
away by the groundless assertion that John baptized
infants. Of this we have never seen a particle of
evidence  That he did any such thing is contradicted
47 
48         -      INFANT BAPTISI.
by every intimation in the sacred record respecting
his practice, and by the testimony of the Jewish historian, who speaks of him as representing his baptism
to be acceptable to God, when received by the
thoroughly penitent, supposing still that the soul was
ptrified before by righteousness. 
IlI.
THE SUPPOSITION THAT ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST,
THE APOSTLE PETER PROCLAIMED  AN INSTITUTE
WHICH HE HIMSELF DID NOT THEN EVEN THINK OF,
BUT WHICH, AT A LATER PERIOD, WAS PROPERLY
DEVELOPED.
OME who have been constrained to admit that
in the New Testament there is no evidence for
infant baptism, and yet have desired to retain
the practice, suppose it to have been developed,
some time after the days of the Apostles, from a
truly Christian principle. According to their
view, the good seed was planted; but at least one or
two ages were required for its germinating into light,
and yielding blossoms and fruit. Or, it was wisely kept
out of sight; for, had it appeared earlier, it would have
been assailed by the Apostle Paul, as being inconsistent
with his great and favorite doctrine of justification by
faith. Dr. Bushnell has his own way of viewing the
matter.  Without relinquishing arguments from the
New Testament, he provides a schemb of development
for saving infant baptism.  From the words in Acts ii:
39. (The promise is unto you and to your children, and
to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our
God shall call), he gives a discourse entitled, Infant
taRtism: how developed
49
A 
0   INFANT BAPTISI —if tOW DEVELOPED.
The apostle Peter, in the preceding part of his
address, it will be recollected, hlad mentioned the promise in the prophet Joel respecting the gift of the
Spirit, through whose efficacy the people, old and
young, were to be moved and enabled to see visions
and to prophesy.*  And be had just said, "Repent,
and be baptized every one of you in the name of
Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall
receive  the  gift of the  Holy  Spirit."  He adds
immediately, " For the promise [respecting that gift]
is unto you and to your children, and to all that are
afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call."
In other words, The blessings promised are for all
that obey the gospel, whether old or young, at Jerusalem or elsewhere.
Such is the obvious meaning of the apostle.  If any
one doubts it, let him read the words quoted from the
prophiet, in the part of the address (Acts ii: 17) to
which we have referred.
But according to Dr. Bushnell's explanation of the
text, it is "a declaration that can signify nothing but
the engagement of Christ, in his new and more
spiritual economy, to identify children with their
parents, even  as they had been identified in the
coarser provisions of the old.' To you and to your
children,' says the apostle; and here covertly as it
were to himself, are hid infant baptism, infant church
relations, potentially present but as yet undeveloped,
even in -lwhat may be fitly called the seed sermon of
* Jot  ii:  o. 39. 
INFANT BAPTISM-HOW DEVELOPED.               51
the Christian Church. This was no time to be think ing of infants, or children, as related to church polity;
probably there is not one present in the great assem bly. It will be soon enough to settle the church
position of children, when the question rises practi cally afterwards. These converted pilgrims, Par thians, Mledes, Elamites, and strangers of all names,
may not even so much as think of the question till
they reach their homes again.  But the language we
can see is Jewish; language of promise, or covenant,
only with a Christian addition-' and to them that
are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall
call'-and Peter, as we know, did not really come
into the mueaning of this language himself till years
after, when the great sheet let down from heaven
three times, and the actual ministering to a Gentile
convert, showed him whither, and how far, the call
of the Lord might be going, in these times, to run.
Let it not surprise us, then, that the facts of infant
baptism, and of infant church relations, covered as
they are by Peter's language in this first sermon, are
still not yet developed, even to himself-any more
than the fact of Christ's call to the Gentiles."
But Christ had clearly commanded the apostles to go
into all the world and preach to all; and the prophets
had foretold the conversion of the Gentiles. Peter
and the other apostles needed to have the command
brought vividly to their remembrance, with some
additional instructions in regard to the time and
manner of carrying it into execution; but they must 
52      INFANT BAPTISM-HOW DEVELOPED.
have known the fact that the gospel was dec-.gncd
for all.
Dr. Bushnell proceeds: "And when our Baptist
brethren reiterate the formula,'believe and be baptized,'  believe and be baptized,' which they assume
to be absolutely conclusive and final on the question
of infant baptism, because infants can not believe,
they have only to make due allowance for the fact
that Christianity must needs make its chief address
at the outset to adult persons, and their argument
vanishes.  Christianity will of course address itself
to the subjects addressed; and, telling them what
they must do to be saved, it will not of course tell
them, at the same breath, every thing else that is fit
to be known.  In  this manner its language  was
naturally shaped, for a considerable time, so as to
meet only the conditions of adult minds.   When at
length it shall begin to be inquired, What is the condition of immature, or infant minds? it will be soon
enough to say something appropriate to them."
The language of Christianity, for a considerable
time, it is here said, was shaped "so as to meet only
the conditions of adult minds." If this means that
the gospel addressed itself to those who were sufficiently mature to receive it, and.taught them, first of
all, what they must do to be saved, we make no objection. But we cannot forget that Paul and Silas,
when they told the jailer what he must do to be
saved, gave him instruction, without delay, respecting
also his household, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. 
INFANT BAPTISM-HOW DEVELOPED.              53
and thou shalt be saved, and thy house; and they
spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that
were in his house."* When we recollect our Sav iour's manifestation of his lively interest in children,
and his commanding his apostles to baptize believers,
'teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I
have commanded you;' when we think of the manner
in which the apostles mentions Timothy's knowing
the Holy Scriptures fromn early childhood, and of the
command to parents to bring up their children in the
nurture and admonition of the Lord, how can we believe that any considerable length of time elapsed
before the first Christians were taught the elementary
doctrine of Christian baptism, in harmony with  a
tender affection for their children, and a becoming
interest to their spiritual welfare?
In regard to the requiring of faith, Dr. Bushnell
asks, "Does it therefore follow, because it is so continually given to adults as the fixed law of salvationhe that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth
not shall be damned-that infants dying in infancy,
and too young to believe, must therefore be inevitably
damned?   No, it will be answered, even by our
Baptist brethren themselves; for the language referred to was evidently designed only for adult persons, and is of course to be qualified so as to meet
the demands of reason, when we come to the case of
children. And why not also the language,'believe
and be baptized?' Say not that the child is not old
* Acts xvi: 31, 32. 
54      INFANT BAPTISM-lHOW DEVELOPED.
enough to believe, and therefore cannot be baptized,
If he is not old enough to believe, how can he better
be saved?   Is it a greater and higher and more
difficult thing to be admitted to baptism, than to be
admitted to eternal glory?"
We reply: The words in the final commission
(He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
but he that believeth not shall be condemned) were,
of course, never designed for any too youing to believe, and as baptism is mentioned by our Lord and
his apostles as a consequence of believing, there is no
mention at all of one's being baptized who does not
believe.   Whosoever does not become a believer,
there is no occasion for his being baptized; and in
such a case nothing in the commission is said of baptism. This is mentioned there only in connection
with believing. It is omitted in the clause that
speaks of not believing.  They who, through their
love of sin, neglect the gospel, are condemned.  Others
too young to have faith or to make, understandingly
and with spiritual benefit, a profession of their devotedness to the Saviour, we would lead to him
in ways adapted to the'condition of immature and
infant minds,' that they may early know, and love,
and obey him. In our view, to baptize them before
they appear to be believers, would be to disregard
our Lord's arrangement, and deprive them of its
beneft.  Our unauthorized act, performed upon them
in their unconscious infancy, would tend to prevent
their doing what, at the proper time, they should do, 
INFANT BAPTIS'M —HOW DEVELOPED.           55
as conscious and confiding disciples. If, in the mean
time, they be removed from our embrace and from
our parental care, we would commit them, with cheerful confidence, to Him who took up little children in
his arms, laid his hands upon them and blessed them,
without their being baptized, and without deeming it
either requisite or suitable to extend to them the ordinance of baptism. In that spiritual world of which
we all know so little, he can elevate, expand, and, in
every respect, prepare the once infant mind for the
enjoyment of the heavenly state. At present we see
through a glass darkly, and do not know how the
salvation is accomplished; but we trust in the wisdom, power, and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.
"With God all things are possible." It is not for us
to ask which is "greater, and higher, and more difficult," baptism or salvation? and conclude that we
are to baptize all that God can save. The proper
question is, What did our Lord establish as the rule
for his followers here on earth?  This it is for us to
ascertain and observe.
After expatiating on the Pentecostal scenes at
Jerusalem, in connection with the Apostle Peter's
sermon, and showing that much appearing there was
transient, anad that much pertaining to Christianity
was introduced afterwards, Dr. Bushnell at length
comes to his object. "But the particular point," he
says, "for which I have drawn this sketch has been
purposely left behind. Infant baptism., the relation
of the seminal and undeveloped first period of humaa 
56      INFANT BAPTISM-HOW DEVELOPED
existence to Christ and his flock, that which appears
only implicitly in the sermon of Peter, on the day of
Pentecost-where is this, and what is to come, in the
way of development, here? There was no reason,
or even room among the scenes of Pentecost, for so
much as thinking on this subject of infants and their
church relations, and scarcely more for a considerable
time afterward.  It could not become a subject of
attention, until the church itself began to settle into
forms of order and structural organization; and how
soon that came to pass we do not definitely know.
It should therefore be no subject of wonder that infant baptism figures somewhat indistinctly, for so
long a time at least; and scarcely more, that it shows
itself only by implication and a kind of tacit development for a brief time afterwards.
"Furthermore, if it came to pass by a transference
of Jewish ideas into Christian spheres, Jewish modes
and conditions into the Christian order and economy,
-just as Peter's Jewish language, when he said, in
his pentecostal speech,'to you and to your children,'
finally came back to him in its Christian power-it
would make no bold and staring figure anywhere.
If the Christian teachers looked to see all the better
mercies of the old economy transferred into the
Christian, and exalted there into some  higher and
more perfect meaning, we ought certainly not to expect any debate, or any thing but a silent, scarcely
conscious flow of transition, when infants are taken
to be with their parents, in the church, the covenants 
INFANT BAPTISM-HOW DEVELOPED,              57
the Christian Israel of their faith.  And in just thi.
way the defect of any bold declaration on the subject
of infant baptism in the writings of the New Testament, and the fact that it appears only in a few historic glimpses, and occasional modes of speech that
are subtle implications of the fact, is sufficiently accounted for."
Dr. Bushnell intimates that infant baptism came to
pass, just as Peter's Jewish language, when he said,
in his Pentecostal speech,'to you and to your children,' finally came back to him in its Christian power."
But what is here assumed as an illustrating fact, our
readers will perceive, is only an imagination.
Had infant baptism been transferred into the Christian dispensation by a transference of Jewish ideas
into Christian spheres, Jewish modes and conditions
into the Christian order and economy-that is, had
it, as Dr. -Bushnell elsewhere represents, been intuitively transferred-it could not have failed of being
mentioned somewhere in the New Testament, which
so frequently and in so great a variety of connections
introduces the subject of baptism.   For one moment,
let us think of the consultation at Jerusalem respecting circumcision, as it is recorded in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts. Here, if infant baptism came into
use, either in the place of infant circumcision, or on
the same principle, either among the Jewish Christians at Jerusalem, or among the Gentile Christians
at Antioch, the fact could not have been passed over
in silence. Let us think, too, of the account respect, 
58      INFANT BAPTISM-HOW D)EVELOPED.
ing Philip's preaching to the people in the city of
Samaria. "When they believed Philip preaching the
things concerning the kingdom of God and the name
of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and
women."* If children were baptized on account of
the faith of their parents, why does not the record
add the words, and their children. But we will not
detain our readers with instances of silence, where
silence cannot be well accounted for, if there was such
a practice as that of which we are speaking.
In the close of the last extract, Dr. Bushnell
acknowledges that, in the New Testament, infant
baptism "appears only in a few historic glimpses,
and occasional modes of speech that are subtle implications of the fact." Whether it appears there at all
or not, we shall by and by endeavor to ascertain, and
to put our readers in the way of ascertaining.
"But," continues Dr. Bushnell, "we are inquiring
after the mode in which this rite became an accepted
element of the Christian organization, and a part of
the church practice, as we certainly know that it did
at some time afterward. Peter probably conceived as
little what his language might infer respecting it, as
he certainly did what hidden import there was in his
testimony, by the same words, of grace to the Gentiles; for he spoke in prophetic exaltation, as the
ancient prophets did, not knowing what the Spirit of
Christ did signify. But suppose one of these adult
* Acts viii: 12. 
INFANT BAPTISM-HOW DEVELOPED.              59
converts at the Pentecost to have set off, after the few
happy weeks of his sojourn are ended, for his home
in some remote region of Arabia, Parthia or Greece.
He carries Christ with him, he is a new  man, filled
with a strange joy, burning with a strange, all-sacrificing love to the cause of his new Master, and to every
sinner of mankind. He begins to preach the Christ
he loves to his friends, tells them all he knows of the
new gospel, speaks to them as one whom Christ has
endowed with the power to speak.  He gathers a
little circle, which we may call a church, around him,
perhaps converts a little obscure synagogue into a
church.  He knows that he himself was baptized as a
token of his faith, and he has heard a thousand times
repeated, Christ's words,'he that believeth and is
baptized,''except a man be born of water and of the
spirit,' and he does not scruple to baptize all his new
fellow-disciples. Then comes the question, what of
the families? what of the infants we have, who are
not old enough to believe? This, on the supposition
that he had heard nothing of infant baptism before he
]left Jerusalem, which may or may not be true. But
he has heard the whole story of Christ's life many
times over, including the fact of his beautiful interest
in children, and his declaration,' Of such is the kingdom.' He recollects also the ancient religion of his
people; how it identified always the children with
the fathers, and included them in the covenant of the
fathers, raising doubtless the question, whether the 
60       INFANT BAPTISM-HOW DEVELOPED.
gospel in its nobler, wider generosity and completer
grace, would fall short even of the old religion in its
tenderness to the family affections, and its provisions
for the religious unity of families.  And just here, we
will suppose, the words of Peter, in that first sermon,
flash on his recollection-' for the promise is to you
and to your children.' They meant almost nothing,
it may be, when they were spoken, but how full and
clear the meaning they now take! It is like a revelation. The doubt struggling in his bosom is over,
the question is settled.' My children,' he says,' are
with me, one with me in my faith, included with me
in all my titles and hopes, and as I came in, out of
the defilements of sin, and was baptized in token of
my cleansing, so too are they to share my baptism
and be hairs together with me in the grace of life.'
"Thus instructed, he will baptize his children, and
make -his religion a strictly family grace, expecting
them to grow up in it; others also consenting with
him in the same conclusion, and offering their children
to God in the same manner.   And,  as the result,
they will no more be Christians with families, but
Christian families-all together in the church of God.
In this manner, the Pentecost itself, when the seeds
that are in it are developed, will almost certainly
issue the adult baptism there begun, the baptism of
the three thousand, in the common baptism of the
house."
As a work of imagination, the picture here pre 
INFANT BAPTISM-IIOW DEVELOPED.             61
sented is admiirable.  Whiy should we undclertake to
refute it?  A  voice of heavenly wisdom  has  prioclaimed, "Thle prophet that hath a dreamn, let him
tell a dream, and he  that hath my word, let him
speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the
wheat? saith the Lord." *
*Jer. xxiii: 28. 
IV.
THE RECEPTION OF YOUNG CHILDREN BY OUR LORD, AND
APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.
R. BUSHNELL  states (p. 152) that "Christ
comes very near to a specific and formal com       mand of infant baptsim, when we put together,
side by side, what he says of baptism in the
third chapter of  John, and what he says
concerning infants elsewhere."... What
he said to Nicodemus, in the third chapter of John,
we have already considered. Let us now see what
he did and what he said concerning infants and
young children, when they were brought to him,
as related by the Evangelists.*  "Suffer  the little
children," he said, "to come unto me, and forbid
them not, for of such is the kingdom of God.
And he took them up in his arms, put his hands
upon them and blessed them."  He manifested the
tenderest affection and regard for them, in ways
adapted to their state; and thus he encouraged all to
expect from him the spiritual blessings that may be
needed for our children, as well as for ourselves.
But he neither baptized the little ones, nor commanded
them to be baptized. Had infant baptism been in
accordance  with  his will, surely he would  have
* See Matt. xix: 13, 15: Markx: 13-16: Luke xviii: 15-17.
62 
INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.  63
given some intimation of it, on an occasion so favorable.
One of the discourses in the volume before us is
entitled "Apostolic Authority of Infant Baptism;" and
it is based on 1 Cor. i: 16, I baptized also the household of Stephanas. In this Dr. Bushnell presents
afresh the organic unity of the family as a ground for
the baptism of infants. "The father and mother are
net merely a man and a woman, but they are a man
and a woman having children; and accordingly it is
the father and mother, that is, the man and woman
and their children, that are to be baptized." He adds:
"I t is precisely this great fact of an organic unity
that is taken hold of and consecrated, in the field of
religion, by the Abrahamic and other family covenants. And the whole course of revelation, both in
the Old and New Testament, is tinged by associations,
and sprinkled over with expressions that recognize
the religious unity of families, and the inclusion of
the children with the parents. All the promises run
'to you and to your children;' for Peter's language
here is only an inspired transfer and re-assertion of
the Jewish family ideas, at the earliest moment, in
the field of Christianity itself.... In this universal religion, therefore, we are to look for the continuance onward of the old family cbharacter and the
inclusive oneness of fathers with their children.
Tle only difference will be that the oneness will be
raised into a more spiritual and higher sense, just as
every thing else was raised. The children are thus 
64  INPANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTIIORITY.
looked upon to be presumptively as believing in the faith
and regenerated in the regeneration of the fathers."
Rather we would say, the children are looked upon
to be what they are, children of believers, to be
brought up in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord;-and when they give evidence of being
believers, they are looked upon to be such. Believing, like repenting, is a personal act.  It cannot be
performed by proxy. And the Scriptures nowhere
authorize us to assume that children have faith merely
because their parents have, or to account them as
"regenerated in the regeneration of the fathers."
On the contrary, a great principle is announced in
the admonition, "Think not to say within yourselves,
We have Abraham to our father."*
Dr. Bushnell proceeds: "And here again circumcision comes to our aid, as another and distinct
evidence.  For it was given to be'a seal of the
righteousness of faith,' and the application of it, as a
seal, to infant children, involves all the precise difficulties-neither more nor less-that are raised by the.
deniers of infant baptism. Let the point here made
be accurately understood. The argument is not that
infant baptism was directly substituted for circumcision.  Of this there is no probable evidence.  Such
a substitution could not have been made without
remark, discussion, opposition of prejudice, and the
raising of contentions that would have required dis
Matt. ii': 8 
INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.  65
tinct mention, many times over, in the apostolic
history. But the argument is this: that the Jewish
mind was so familiarized by custom with the notion
of an inclusive religious unity in families (partly by
the rite of circumcision), that Christian baptism,
being the seal of faith, was naturally and by a kind
of associational instinct, applied over to families in
the same manner. Not to have made such an application would have required some authoritative interposition, some dike of positive hindrance, to turn
aside the current of Jewish prepossessions. And if
there had risen up, somewhere, a man of Baptist
notions, to ask, Where is the propriety of applying
baptism, given as a rite for believers, to infants, who
we certainly know are not old enough to believe?
he could not even have begun to make an impression
by it. Was not circumcision given to Abraham to be
the seal of. faith? And has it not been applied from
his time down to the present, in this way-applied
to infant children eight days old?  True it is the
doctrine of Christ,' he that believeth and is baptized
shall be saved,' and our apostles too are saying,' If
thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest.' So we
al]l say and think, as relating to adult persons; but
do we not all know that what is given to the father
includes the children, and that his faith is the faith of
the house? Nothing, in short, is plainer than that
every argument raised to convict infant baptism  of
absurdity, holds, in the same manner, as convicting
circumcision of absurdity, and all the religious polity
5 
66  INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.
of the former ages. Every such argument, too, mocks
the religious feeling and conviction of all these former
ages, in a way of disrespect equally presumptuous."
We reply: Abraham, as it is stated in Romn. iv:
11, "received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the
righteousness of the faith which he had, yet being
uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all
them  that believe."  From  him  a nation was to
descend who should possess the land of Canaan, and
be highly favored of God. As a memorial of Abraham's acceptable faith and of the promise given, he
and all his male servants, and his and their male
children eight days old, were to be circumcised.
This was a posiltive institution, having its own
national object and its peculiar purport. Baptism is
a positive institution, having another object and a
different purport. The circumcision of infants, as
well as of adults, was enjoined. The baptism of
infants has not been enjoined by any competent
authority.  It is inconsistent with the design of
baptisnm as represented in the Holy Scriptures.  And,
so far as it is practiced, it displaces and annuls what
our Lord, in his wisdom, has enjoined. These are
difficulties pertaining to infant baptism, which do not
pertain to infant circumcision.
The argument, our author remarks, "is not that
baptism was directly substituted for circumcision
... But the argument is this: that the Jewish
mind was so familiarized by custom with the notion
of an inclusive religious unity in families (partly by 
INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.   67
the rite of circumcision), that Christian baptism, being
the seal of faith, was naturally and by a kind of
associational instinct, applied over to families in the
same manner." In other words: that infant baptism
came, not in the place of infant circumcision, but on
the same principle of an inclusive religious unity in
families; and hence that it was intuitively applied.
When he speaks of Christian baptism as "being the
seal of faith," he must mean the parent's faith.
Baptism is never, in the Bible, called a seal. It is so
called in the Shepherd or Pastor of Hiermas, a relig ious and imaginative work of the second century,
that was widely circulated, and had great influence.
And the phrase seal of faith, used subsequently by
ecclesiastical writers, came to be confounded with the
phrase, seal of the righteousness offaith, used by the
apostle when he speaks of the sign of circumcision
given to Abraham, as a seal of the righteousness of
the - faith which he had, being yet uncircumcised.
The first phrase had reference at first to the faith of
him who received baptism, not to the faith of his
parent; the second, to the justifying or acceptable
character of Abraham's  faith.  Abraham  believed
God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
Know ye, therefore, that they who are of faith, the
same are the children of Abraham."* It is they who
themselves believe; not they who  are merely the
natural offspring of a believer.
It is asked (p. 148), " Do we not all know that
* Gal. iii: 6, 7. 
68  INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY
what is given to the father includes the children.i"
that is, what is given to the father is given to his
children;" and that his faith is the faith of the
house?" We cannot answer in the affirmative, without limitation. The pastorate of a church, or membership in a scientific society, or in some association
of artists, or of mechanics, or of merchants, may be
given to a father, while it is not given to his children. If his faith is to be accounted the faith of the
house, so that they are to be baptized in virtue of it,
why did not the apostle Paul think of this great
principle when he wrote to the Corinthians, "If any
brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be
pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away."*
Why did he not add, But let her without delay be baptized? for, though unbelieving, she is sanctified by her
husband; she is kindly disposed towards himr  and "do
we not all know that his faith is the faith of the house?"
We are not conscious of deserving the charge of
presumptuousness.   We have already shown that for
observing infant circumcision the Jews had reasons
which we have not for observing infant baptism.  We
would let every religious institute rest on its own
basis. We ask only for evidence of its having been
established by competent authority.   The apostles
themselves were sometimes thought to act presump tuously in their efforts "to turn aside the current of
Jewish prepossessions." No better apology is needed
* 1 Cor. vii: 12. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.   69
now, than that which they gave: "We ought to obey
God rather than men."*
From the words of the apostle Paul in 1 Cor. vii:
14, "Else were your children unclean; but now are
they holy," Dr. Bushnell draws another argument for
infant baptism. But the best Biblical scholars of the
present age have clearly shown that the reasoning of
the apostle, in this very passage, proves the nonexistence of infant baptism in his time.
Some Jewish converts, it seems, questioned the
propriety of a believer's continuing to live with an
unbelieving wife or husband, supposing that such intimate intercourse would be defiling.  The apostle
Peter once had occasion to say: "Ye know how
that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew
to keep company or come unto one that is of another
nation," or not a member of the same religious community; -" but God has showed me that I should not
call any man common or unclean."t  With the same
enlarged Christian view the apostle Paul decides the
case presented in the passage before us: Let not the
believing consort thrust away the yet unbelieving.
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified, so that he
is not to be regarded as unclean by the wife; and
the unbelieving wife is sanctified, so that she is not
to be regarded as unclean by the husband..
Hie proceeds still farther to illustrate the propriety of
the course that he enjoins. Addressing the Corinthian
* Acts v: 29.
t' Acts x,: 28. 
70  INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.
church, he says, Else, that is, if the representation
which I have given bc. not correct, if the yet unbelieving, and, of course unbaptized, wife or husband
must be regarded as unclean, and therefore must be
abandoned, then, by a parity of reasoning, your own
children are unclean, and must be abandoned. The
little ones, because they are not yet believers, must
not even touch their own Christian parents I Your
very infants must not be pressed to the bosoms of
their own Christian mothers! But now such absurdity is obvious; but now it is manifest that, instead of
being unclean, they are holy, or clean: they are objects suitable to be administered to and cherished in
all the endearing intercourse of domestic life, according to the arrangements of God for the temporal and
spiritual welfare of families.
The kindred expression, is sanctified, used in connection-with the unbelieving consort, attributes as
much holiness, and holiness of the same kind, to that
consort, as are attributed to the children of the Corinthian Christians. The holiness, in both cases, is
freedom from such a state as would render family
intercourse improper. As it did not imply the baptism of the consort not yet having faith in Christ, so
it did not imply the baptism of the children not yet
having faith in Christ. On the contrary, the reasoning
of the apostle, all must perceive, proceeds on the
assumption that the children referred to were not yet
numbered among the believers, as all persons were
who had been baptized. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTIIORITY. 71
So much for 1 Cor. vii: 14. We ask our readers
to ponder the passage carefully, and see for themselves what it shows. Rightly understood, we are
confident, it will be found by them, as it has been by
others, not only to give no evidence that infants were
baptized, but, on the contrary, to testify positively
that they were not baptized in the time of the apostles.
And this testimony is confirmed by Gal. iii: 26,
27. There the apostle Paul says to the Galatians:
"Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ
Jesus; for as many of you as have been baptized
into Christ have put on Christ." Observe how he
connects the being children of God by faith with
being baptized into Christ. The believers mentioned
in the 26th verse are the same persons that are mentioned in the 27th. And these are as many as have
been baptized. These, as believers, have put on
Christ.  Manifestly, then, the children too young to
do this had not been baptized.
In connection with the misinterpretation of 1 Cor.
vii: 14, we have, on the 155th page, an instructive
exhibition of the tendency of one error to produce
another.  It is there said, " So strong, even, is the
conviction, in these apostolic times, of an organic
unity sovereign over the faith and the religious affinities of children, that, where but one parent only believes, that faith carries presumptively the faith of
the children with it. And upon this grand fact of
the religious economy, baptism  was from the first,
and properly, applied to the children of them that 
72  INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.
believe.  Hence, too, it was that the children of believers were familiarly addressed by them as believers;
as in the epistles of Paul to the Ephesians and Colossians. The epistles are formally inscribed to churches
or Christian brotherhoods:'To the saints which
are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus'
'To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which
are at Colosse.' And yet in both the children are
particularly addressed:'Children obey your parents
in the Lord, for this is right;'' Children obey your
parents in all things, for this is well pleasing unto
the Lord.' In this manner children are formally included among the'faithful in Christ Jesus.'"
We rejoice that there were believing children in
those churches, and that they with others who might
listen to Christian instruction were encouraged to
obey their parents, and thus set a worthy example
for all children. We rejoice to see children now loving and honoring the Saviour as his disciples. Let
them come early, and learn of Him who is meek and
lowly in heart; and let them have the comfort and
the benefit of expressing, in the way that he has appointed for his disciples, their childlike trust and devotedness, and of remembering the cordial consecration all their days. No one needs to be informed that
the children addressed by the apostle were not mere
infants.
The charge of inconsistency, which Dr. Bushnell
urges against those who reject infant baptism, is remarkable: "The objectors themselves are admitting 
INFANT BAPTISM AND) APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.   73
and  practicing, without difficulty, observances that
have comparatively no specific authority at all.  At
the sacrament of the Supper they use leavened bread
without scruple, when they know that it was  niot
used by Christ himself, and was solemnly forbidden
at the festival he was there, in fact, re-appointing for
the Christian uses of his disciples in all future ages.
Where, then, is the authority given for a change even
in the element of the Ioly Supper itself?  The
Christian Lord's Day, too, accepted in the place of
the Jewish Sabbath, and that even against a specific
command of the Decalogue-how readily, and with
how little scruple do they accept the Lord's Day and
let the ancient Sabbath go, when it is only by the
faintest, most equivocal, or evanescent indications
that they can make out a shadow of authority for the
change?' Direct proof! positive command! specific
injunction!' they say;'without these, infant baptism
has no right.' Where, then, do they get their authority for these other observances-one of them
never referred to in the Scripture at all, and the
others so doubtfully that infant baptism has, in comparison, the clear evidence of day?"
What is not referred to in the Scripture at all, we
mnay safely conclude, can make  no part of the institution of the Lord's Supper; and we shall be ready to
practice infant baptism, when  we find as much evidence for it as we have for the observance of the
Lord's Day.
Still another argument is brought forward by Dr. 
74 INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AIUTHIIORITY.
Bushnell, with much confidence.   We  present it in
his own words, p. 153: "What is said in the New
Testament of household baptism, or the baptizing of
households, is positive proof that infants were baptized in the times of the apostles-baptized, that is,
in and because of the supposed faith of the parents.
The fact of such baptism is three times distinctly
mentioned; in the case of'the household of Stephanas,' of Lydia'and her household,' ahd the jailor
'and all his.' In the first case, nothing is said of
faith at all, though doubtless he was baptized as a
believer. In the second, every thing turns on the
personal faith of Lydia-'if ye have judged me to
be faithful.' In the third, it seems to be said, accordinig to an English translation, that all the house believed-' he rejoiced, believing in God, with all his
house.' But the participle believing is singular and
not plural in the original, and the phrase-' with all
his house'-plainly belongs to the verb and not to the
participle.   Rigidly translated, the passage would
ead-' he rejoiced with all his house, himself believ
ing. "
The argument is easily answered.    In the first
case, that of Stephanas, in 1 Cor. i: 16, "I baptized
also the household of Stephanas," weneed only compare this with what is said'near the close of the
epistle, xvi: 15: "Ye know the house of Stephanas,
that it is the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have
addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints."
Here the household is described as converts, who ex 
INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTIHORITY.  75
erted themselves to supply the wants of their poor
and afflicted fellow-disciples.
In the second case, that of Lydia, in Acts xvi: 15,
"When she was baptized, and her household, she
besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and abide there'
-we have only to read on to the end of the chapter,
where it is stated, respecting Paul and Silas, when
about to leave the city, after being released from
prison, that they "entered into the house of Lydia;
and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted
them and departed." With Lydia, doubtless, were
her household. She, a seller of purple, it seems, had
a mercantile establishment at Philippi.  Of course,
she would need persons to assist her; and who can
doubt that her household who had been baptized were,
in part at least, the brethren who were seen and comforted?
In the third case, that of the jailor, in Acts xvi:
33, "Hewas baptized, he and all his, straightway,"
we have only to read the preceding verse,"They spake
unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were
in his house. " "All his." who, as stated in the thirtythird verse, were baptized, are manifestly the same
as "all that were in his house," to whom, as stated
in the thirty-second, the word of the Lord was
spoken. Besides,. in the thirty-fourth verse, we are
informed that he rejoiced, with all his house, having
believed in God. IHe, with all his, or all that were
in his house, having believed the word of the Lord 
76  INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.
spoken to them, rejoiced. They all rejoiced, having
believed. What is said of the jailor is here said also
of his household. This is clearly indicated by the
phrase with all his house. If the word of the Lord
was spoken to all that were in his house, and if he
rejoiced with all his house-that is, he and they re.
joiced together (and this is the obvious and undeniable meaning), surely we must admit that not only
he but they also could and did believe. The rejoicing
was a consequence of believing; and how could they
participate in the joy of believing, if they had not
believed? The effort to make it supposed that they
did not believe, by inserting the word himself before
the word believing-" himself believing"-is a very
grave error. We are sorry to see it; especially in
so excellent a man as Dr. Bushnell. The correctness
of our interpretation is further confirmed by the case
of Crispus, mentioned in Acts xviii: 8. "And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on
the Lord with all his house; and many bf the Corinthians hearing, believed and were baptized." 
In view of what has been stated respecting these
and other passages, we hope that our readers will
feel the duty of searching the Scriptures, and of
letting the light of one portion shine upon another
till the whole subject is illuminated.  This they can
easily do. The Bible is at hand; and, in many cases,
it is furnished with references, to facilitate comparison or examination. generally. Besides, there is an
excellent little work prepared with special reference 
INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.  77
to the examination which we are now proposing.
It is entitled "The Scripture Guide to Baptism; or
a faithful Citation of all the passages of the New
Testament which relate to this Ordinance; with the
sacred Text, impartially examined, and the sense
supported by numerous Extracts from the most
eminent and learned Writers. To which is added a
short examination of the Rise and Grounds of Infant
Baptism. By R. Pengilly." It is written with care
and with candor.  It breathes the spirit of Christian
love and fidelity. And the author in his final address
to the candid and pious inquirer, says: "Do not
allow the observations contained in this pamphlet to
influence you in the smallest degree, on a subject of
so sacred a nature. I would advise you to peruse
the passages of Scripture again, omitting all the rest;
and then form your sentiments, and govern your
practice, by the pure unerring word, and that alone."
There is also another help which ought to be mentioned in this connection.  It is the Rev. Dr. HEackett's
Brief Statement of the best established Results at
which Biblical Inrterpreters have arrived respecting
Infant Baptism.  It may be found in a small volume
entitled Baptismal Tracts for the Times.* I-Ie introduces the statement by saying," No decision in biblical criticism, not absolutely unanimous, can be' considered as better established at the present time,
* See also his Commentary on the Acts of the Apostle3
(xvi: 15), second edition, pp. 259-261. 
78 INFANT BAPTISM AND APOSTOLIC AUTIIORITY.
than that of the utter insufficiency of these passages
to prove or to justify the practice referred to, as an
apostolic institution. The following testimonies of
men who are admitted to possess the highest authority
in regard to inquiries of this nature, may be taken as
representing the attitude in which this subject now
stands, as viewed in the light which the present state
of biblical learning has shed upon it. It gives weight
to these testimonies, that they proceed from men
whose ecclesiastical position would naturally dispose
them to adopt a different view; who belong to a
church that practices infant baptism, and who, for
the most part, contend that it is proper to adhere to
it, notwithstanding their acknowledgment that the
usage has no scriptural warrant."
After presenting the remarks of Meyer, Olshausen,
De Wette, Neander and Rnickert, Professor Hackett
closes thus: "Numerous other names,  hardly less
distinguished, not only in this particular department
of learning, but in other kindred branches, offer
themselves  as witnesses to the same  effect.  The
object does not require us to extend the enumeration.
The extracts presented above may be taken as
exhibiting the prevalent view of the ablest authorities,
at the present time, in regard to the question here
discussed. We are authorized to say, that the
opinion that Infant Baptism has any legitimate sanction from any passage in the New Testament is no
longer  a tenable opinion at the  bar  of ]3iblicnl
criticism." 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.
UT Dr. Bushnell has recourse to another
tribunal,  and proceeds  thus:  "Lastly,  it
remains to glance  at the  evidences  from
church history, or the history of the times
subsequent to the age of the apostles. It has
been the mood of Christian learning, in the
generation past-for the learned men have moods and
phases, not to say fashions, like others in the less
thoughtful conditions-to make large concessions in
the matter of baptism, both as regards the manner
and the subjects. But a reaction is now begun, and
it is my fixed conviction that it will not stop, till
the encouragement heretofore given to the Baptist
opinions is quite taken away. It has never been
questioned, however, that infant baptism became the
current practice of the church at a very early date.
It is mentioned, incidentally and otherwise, in the
writings of the earliest church fathers after the age
of the apostles.  Thus it is testified by Justin Mvartyr,
who was probably born before the death of the apostle
John:'There are many of us, of both sexes, some
sixty and some seventy years old, who were made
disciples from their childhood'; and the word made
disciples is the same that Christ himself used, when
79
V. 
80              INFANT BAPTISM AND
he said,' Go, leach [i.e. disciple] all nations, baptizing,' etc.; the same that was currently applied to
baptized children afterwards."
The representation here that the phrase were made
disciples signifies were baptized, is an error, whicn
Mr. Wall and his followers have labored strenuously
to maintain, but which is sufficiently refuted by John
iv: 1, where the Pharisees are mentioned as having
heard'that Jesus made and baptized more disciples
than John.' The making of disciples is there presented as one thing; and the baptizing of them
as another. The true interpretation is put beyond all
question, also, by a treatise on baptism, found among
the works of the celebrated Greek ecclesiastical
Father, Basil the Great.  The treatise consists of
two books or parts.  At the head of the first chapter
of the fv-st book, the author places the proposition,
That- it s requisite, first to become a disciple of the
Lord, Ad  then to be accounted worthy of the hole
baptismr *  He  quotes the comnmand given to the
apostler and remarks, "The  Lord commanded first,
Discipl, all the nations, and then added, Baptizing
them, and so forth....   We  have  thought it
necessary," he says, "to recur to the order prescribed
by the Lord, that thus also, knowing first the import
of the command to disciple, then subsequently receiving the reason of the superlatively glorious baptism,
ye may be well conducted to the completion, being
*'Ort   t Z   pc rop ga3arev-vat  7To) K'pVP     #at 6i Tr  Ka-ra~tcvat  ro O ayiou
ga7rria,uaros. 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.                81
taught to observe all things whatsoever the Lord
commanded his own disciples."*
Other Greek ecclesiastical writers explain and use
the expression in the sanle sense, that is, as having
reference  to  those who  are capable of receiving
instruction. Why, in a ease like this, should we
doubt their ability to understand their own language?
And then, as to the expression,'from their childhood,' or from children-Ax taa8wv-we leave only to
remember that the Greek word, as well as the English
word, is in itself, very indefinite, and is spoken of all
ages from infancy uip to full-grown youth. Who
does not know that it is to be explained according
to the connection in which it is used? And here it
is used in connection with a word which  Greek
writers themselves explain as indicating ability to
hear, believe, and obey. Besides, in Luke viii: 5,
and 54, it is used with reference to the daughter who
is mentioned in the 42nd verse as being about twelve
years of age; and in Acts xx: 12, it is used with
reference to him who in the 9th verse is called a
young man.
Justin Martyr, in his Apology for the Christians,
proposes to give to the Romnan Emperor an account of
Christian baptism: "In what  manner we  dedicate
ourselves to God, being neur-mnade by Christ, we will
explain, lest omitting this, we should seem  to be
guilty of disingenuousness in the narration."  Then
* Vol. IL, p, 624 Ben, ed. 
INFANT BAPTIS.M AND
he proceeds to present such a description as indicates
clearly that the persons baptized acted deliberately
and voluntarily.  "As mnany," lie says, "as are persuaded and believe that our doctrines are true, and
promise to be able to live accordingly, are taught to
pray, and, fasting, to ask from God forgiveness of
their past sins. we praying and fasting with them.
Then they are led by us to a place where there is
water."*   Such  were  the  recipients  of  baptism;
according to him, it is limited to believers-" as many
as are persuaded and believe." His character and
his circumstances alike forbid the supposition that
he gives only a partial and deceptive account of so
important a matter as initiation into the new religion,
and withholds an account which he could have given
respecting  the  initiation of infants.   His  silence,
therefore, on this occasion especially-to say nothing
of his silence elsewhere, throughout his worksshows that there was then no infant baptism  to be
described. Let it now be recollected that his Apology
for the Christians, in which his particular account of
baptismn occurs, was written and presented to the
First Apology or Detfence, c. 61, p. 79, among,.Justini et Martyris
Opera quae extant omnia, Paris ed., A.D. 1742.   "O, rp6,-ar Gv  at i a,;
~~l.,'E                                   (a ra  YILCTss 7ia,'
TOt3rO 55p5a~7T.r5'((    (s~ 5. p'{<c;   T~s'rvtv'C~. (5 ".} 5'57'.l(L.   "OO55lG,,5(C0o'5  KaL
5Car,Erefis     aX'i,v4 ra(,Sr  rh'ji'.1sc,  ('taJa'.(ys(.:a Srt ksy,?y(aa s5raV,  Wat d.osv  ovr's~
duva(,$aC vS~tt~,v,7)ssat, (5l' ioa~5' 75 St.' Sisfiv rs rt~~~~ 5,,' a((s7 (I S~pS soP t~ Oo *JP sis    Ckup55'5'r5a"~JC O'$LtsK,Tss 5C:)r, in~s.\apt)(5 s$ 55(.'T(5'.7g.Qto 5 uuyCrvsoaZQu
;T>~t~r  s7'yo Ad 5'.! Ott""' tVl  QeEii
82 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.                  83
emperor Antoninus Pius, about the year 140, or near
the middle of the second century.
In view of the facts to which we have adverted,
our readers will not be surprised to find that the
author of the recent elaborate work on the Life,
Writings and Opinions of Justin Martyr, still makes
the following large concessions: "Whenever Justin
refers to baptism, adults appear as the objects to
whom the sacred rite is administered. Of an infant
baptism he knows nothing. The traces of it, which
some persons believe they have detected in his wri.
tings, are groundless fancies, artificially produced.
In the words,'Many men and many women, sixty
and seventy years old, who, firom children, have been
disciples of Christ, preserve their continence,' nothing
more is said than that many individuals of both sexes
became disciples of Christ in early life.  The idea of
being  discipled —a.rEv~;a —does  not necessarily
include that of being baptized; it merely brings before our mind a catechumenate.  And even admitting
that the baptismal rite was included in being discipled, this by no means is decisive of a reference
to infant baptism.   From  children-_Ex 7a/8, — contrasted with sixty and seventy years old, may well
denote the entrance on the period of youth."*
Next,  a passage  is  quoted  from  Irenous, who
* Justin Martyr: His Life, Writings and Opinions; by
the Rev. Charles Semiscb. of Trel)nitz, Silesia; translated
from the German, with the authior's concurrence, by J. E.
Ryland. Vol. II., p. 33! and 33,5. 
84              INFANT BAPTISM AND
wrote in the latter part of the second century.  In
this, Irenmus speaks of all as being regenerated unto
God; infants and little children, and lads, and young
men, and older persons. Dr. Bushnell remarks: "In
the phrase regenerated unto God, which is thus applied to infants, expressly named as distinguished
from little children, he refers, it cannot be doubted, to
baptism; which, being the outward sign of such inward grace, was naturally and very properly called
regeneration. Infants plainly could be regenerated
to God in no other sense; and therelure his language
cannot even be supposed to have any meaning, if this
be rejected."
Had Dr. Bushnell examined all that remains of the
works of Ireneus, he would himself, we think, have
been convinced that the phrase now under consideration has no reference to infant baptism.   The result
of such an examination, made for the purpose of ascertaining the import of this phrase, was published
at Andover, inthe Bibliotheca Sacra and Theological
Review for November, 1849. The writer shows that,
"according to Irenseus, Christ, in becoming incarnate
and thus assuming his mediatorial work, brought the
human family into a new relation, under himself, and
placed them in a condition in which they can be
saved. In this sense, he is the Saviour of all. He
restored them, or summed them up anew in himself.
He became, so as to speak, a second Adam, the regenerator of mankind.   Through him they are regenerated unto God: per eum renascunttur in Deum. 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.                85
The thought occurs frequently; and it is variously
modified by the various connections in which it is
introduced." The assumption that Irenoeus is here
speaking of baptism is shown to be unauthorized,
"The context is against it; for the context directs
our attention to Christ and what he himself, personally, came to do for the human family.   It is by
him, and not by baptism, that they are here- said to
be renewed, born anew, or regenerated.   And parallel passages are against it; for they abundantly confirm the sense already given, as being the true sense
of the passage before us."
For the overwhelming evidence adduced we refer
our readers to the article itself.*
In regard to Tertullian, at Carthage in Africa, towards the end of the second century and in the early
part of the third, Dr. Bushnell represents that his
opposition -to infant baptism supposes the current
practice of such baptism at the time. But, manifestly,
it supposes only that, in his circle, what he opposed
had begun to be practiced. Nothing more than this
is proved, unless in his opposition, he uses some expressions that imply the currency of the practice.
Does any such evidence appear?  Not at all.   lie is
showing that baptism is not to be given rashly.
"Give to every one that asketh thee," he adds, "has
its proper subject, and relates to almsgiving;  but
* It has more recently been published as one among the
Baptismal Tracts for the Times, and is entitled, The Mean:.g of Irenaeus in the phrase, Regenerated unto God. 
86              INFANT BAPTISM AND
that command rather is here to be considered,'Give
not that which is holy to dogs, neither cast your
pearls before swine;' and that,'Lay hands suddenly
on no man, neither be partake- of other men's faults.'
...    Therefore, according to the condition ~a:d
disposition and age of each person, the delaying of
baptism is more beneficial, especially in the case of
little ones. For what need is there that sponsors be
brought into danger?   They, through death, may
fail of fulfilling their promises, or they may be defrauded by the coming forth of a bad disposition.
The Lord does indeed say, Forbid them??ot to come
unto me. Therefore let them come while they are
growing up; let them come while they are learning,
while they are being taught whither they are coming.
Let them be made Christians [be identified by baptism with the body of Christians], when they shall
have been able to know  Christ.   Why  hastens the
innocent age to the remission of sins?  More caution
will be used in secular matters; so that to whom
earthly treasure is not intrusted, heavenly may be
intrusted! Let them learn to desire salvation, that
you may appear to have given to him that asketh."
So far is this appeal or expostulation from supposing and proving the current or general practice of
infant baptism, that Neander mentions it as "a proof
that the practice had not yet come to be regarded as
an apostolic institution;  for otherwise he  would
hardly have ventured to express himself so strongly
against it."  "Tertullian " he adds, "I evidentlv means 
EARLY CHYJRcH HIStORY.                81
that children should be led to Christ by instructing
them in Christianity; but that they should not receive
baptism until, after having been sufficiently instructed,
they are led, from personal conviction and by their
own free choice, to seek for it with sincere longing of
the heart."*
Here let it be distinctly noted that Tertullian was
speaking, not of infants properly so called, but of
little ones (parvuli) who had sufficient maturity to be
taught lessons of Christian truth and duty.   This
was perceived by Bunsen, so distinguished as an investigator of civil and of ecclesiastical antiquities; and,
in the work entitled Hippolytus and his Age, he says,
"Tertullian's opposition is to the baptism of young,
growing children; he does not say a word about newborn infants; neither does Origen, when his expressions are accurately weighed. "t
From Origen, in Egypt, at Alexandria, in the first
halfof the third century, Dr. Bushnell adduces the
two passages which have usually been quoted, and
which at first seem to be decisive, in favor of infant
baptism. But these have come down to us, not in
the original Greek, but only in a translation made by
hands accustomed to take great liberties in preparing
Greek works for Latin readers.   Other passages,
some of which are still extant in the original Greek,
are decisive against infant baptism.   In the space
*History of the Christian Religion and Church, Vol. I.,
. 312.
t Vol. II., p. 115, (2ndcl Ed.) 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
which we can here occupy, it would be impossible to
present the facts, so as to do justice to the apparently
conflicting passages, and to all the persons concerned
But we are happy in being able to assure our readers
that, in the Christian Review for April, 1854, they
can find a somewhat extended discussion, entitled,
The Testimony of Origen respecting the Baptism of
Children. It closes with these words: "We have
endeavored to call forth Origen himself, as it were,
and let him give his own testimony. This has been
uttered in his own language, the Greek, as well as
in a translation, so far as it respects the principal passages and several of the others. No room is left for
suspicion of fraud or spuriousness. If we have fallen
into error at any point, may we be set right. If passages, which have commonly been supposed to favor
infant baptism, have been satisfactorily reconciled by
us with passages which decidedly exclude it, all is
well. But if this has not been done,- and a passage
existing only in a translation, or liable to some suspicion of spuriousness, is at variance with a passage
existing still in the original Greek, or liable to no such
suspicion, it is clear that preference must be given to
the authority of the passage still existing in the
original, or liable to no suspicion.   The conclusion is
easy and inevitable:-Origen should never be quotcd
in support of infant baptism. Hie testifies, not only
indirectly, but also directly and expressly, in regard
to children as well as others, that, before being baptized, they were to be taught, and to give evidence of
88 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.
having duly heeded the voice of Christian instructioDn.
"Somewhere in the first two centuries," says Dr.
Bushnell, "the ancient writing called the Shepherd,
or the Shepherd of HIermas, because it purports to
have been written by a teacher of that name, declares the opinion that' all infants are in honor with
the Lord, and are esteemed first of all-the baptism
of water is necessary to all.'"
This very remarkable passage seems to declare that
all infants must be baptized. But let us examine it a
little.  In the first place, the word infants is here
used, doubtless, not in the strictest sense, but so as to
correspond to the words used where it is said that
young children received the Saviour's blessing, or
where he called a little child to him, and set him in
the midst of his disciples, and said, Verily I say unto
you, except ye be converted, and become as little
children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of
heaven; whosoever, therefore, shall humble himself
as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven,' or where the apostle Paul says,'In
malice be ye children.' The phrase'all infants,' in
this connection, must mean all childlike persons;
or, as Archbishop Wake has well expressed the sense
of these words, "all such children."' His translation
of the whole paragraph, in which this phrase occurs,
is as follows: "Whosoever, therefore, said he [the
Shepherd] shall continue as children without malice,
shall be more honorable than all those of whom I
89 
~90        tIFANT BA1TISM A1iD
have yet spoken; for all such children are honored
by the Lord, and esteemed the first of all.  Happy.
therefore, are ye who shall remove all malice from
you, and put on innocence; because ye shall first see
the Lord."
But where is the latter part of Dr. Bushnell's quotation?   The nearest semblance of it that can be
found is at the distance of more than ten pages, where
the Shepherd is explaining what appears in the vision
as stones, representing the ancient patriarchs, coming
out of the deep, and being placed in the building of
the tower.  "It was necessary, said he, for them
to ascend by water, that they might be at rest. For
they could not otherwise enter into the kingdom of
God, but by laying aside the mortality of their former
life. They, therefore, being dead, were nevertheless
sealed with the seal of the Son of God, and so entered into the kingdom of God. For before a man
receives the name of the Son of God, he is ordained
unto death; but when he receives that seal, he is freed
from death, and assigned unto life. Now that seal is
the water of baptism, into which men go down under
the obligation unto death, but come up appointed
unto life. Wherefore to those also was this seal
preached, and they made use of it, that they might
enter into the kingdom of God. And I said, why then,
sir, did these forty stones also ascend with them out
of the deep, having already received that seal? He
answered, Because these apostles and teachers, who
preached the name of the Son of God, dying after 
EARLY CHlURlCH HISTORY.
they had received his faith and power, preached to
them who were dead before, and they gave this seal
to them. They went down therefore into the water
with them, and again came up. But these went down
whilst they were alive, and came up again alive;
whereas those who were before dead, went down
dead, but came up alive.   Through  these, therefore, they received life, and knew the Son of God;
for which cause they came up with them, and were fit
to come into the building of the tower, and were not
cut, but put in entire; because they died in righteousness, and in great purity; only this seal was wanting to
them. Thus you have the explanation of these things."
The author of the writing here quoted, misapprehending the words of our Lord in the third chapter
of John, has such an impression of the necessity and
efficacy of baptism that he dreams of the ancient
patriarchs being baptized in the state of the dead!
The apostles must go to the invisible abode of the
departed, and preach to them, and give them the
seal of the Son of God, the water of baptism? His
work, as we have already had occasion to remlark,
was written, probably, about the middle of the second
century. It breathes a lovely spirit of Christian
kindness, zeal, humility, and conscientiousness. It
has a charm somewhat like that of the Pilgrimi's
Progress. Glowing with piety as well as with imagination, and containing many wholesome admonitions,
and much important truth mingled with some pernicious error, it was widely circulated; and it could
91 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
not fail of having a great influence, both for good and
for evil, on the Christian community in the second,
and third, and subsequent centuries. As, with all
its excellencies, it seems to contain some of the
seminal principles which led, at length, to the Romish
doctrines of supererogation, penance, and purgatory,
so it contains the seminal principles which, with other
influences, led, at length, to the baptism of infants,
namely, the absolute necessity and mysterious efficacy
of baptism.  But it contains no intimation that the
baptism of infants had already begun to be practiced.
Men often adopt principles which it is easier to
hold as theories, than to apply and carry out in real
life; especially when institutes, either divine or
human, and the usages of a numerous and widely
extended community stand in the way. Often, too,
men apply a principle in one direction, without
applyin4 it in others to which it is equally applicable.
Time  and favoring circumstances are requisite in
order to diffuse and establish the principle, to awaken
sufficient interest in its application, and to overcome
all the obstacles.  Thus the visionary and theoretical
baptism of the ancient patriarchs in the state of the
dead, preceded  a considerable length of time the
actual baptism of dying babes.
In the first part of the short sentence which is presented as a quotation from the words ascribed to
Hlermas, nothing is said of baptism; and in the
.cond part nothing is said of children. If Dr. Bushnell wishes to use Hermas as an authority for the
92 
EARLY CHURCIIH HIIISTORY.            93
absolute necessity of baptismn, especially in regard to
the holy patriarchs, after they had departed from
this world, we do not think it needful to detain our
readers by making any particular objection.
We pass to the evidence for infant baptism which
he derives from inscriptions on the monuments of
children, "considered," he remarks, "by antiquarians
to be of a very early age, probably of the first two or
three centuries, in which they are called fideles, that
is, faithfuls, just as children are addressed by Paul
among the'faithful brethren' of Ephesus and Colosse.
The following is an example-(Buonarotti, 17;
Fabretti, cap. 4,)'a faithful among faithfuls, here
lies Zosimus. He lived two years one month and
twenty-five days.'"
Sometimes a bright and lovely child, no older than
this, has begun to think and to speak, to ask questions
and to make. replies, in a manner that has touched
the heart of a pious parent. The dear little one says
that he loves the Lord Jesus Christ that died for him,
and he can repeat the creed, and make the responses
required for the candidate for baptism. The child
mentioned in the inscription, if all that is claimed in
this cat be reliable, had, indeed, a maturity that is
rare and admirable in one so young. His being
numbered so early among the faithful, that is, the
believing, was remarkable. It somewhat exceeded
even the earliest limit mentioned in a celebrated
sermon by Gregory Nazianzen, when bishop of Constantinople, near the close of the fourth century. 
94             INFAN~ BAPTISM AND
After urging on the people the importance of being
baptized, he adds: "But what, it may be asked,
would you say concerning those who are yet infants,
not comprehending either the detriment or the benefit?
Shall we baptize these also? By all means, if any
danger be imminent; for it is better that they be
sanctified without their knowing it, than that they
die without being sealed and initiated.... But
concerning the others I recommend that-waiting
three years, either a little less or a little more, when
they are able to hear and answer somewhat that
pertains to the ordinance, though not understanding
perfectly, yet receiving impressions-you thus sanetify both their souls and their bodies by the great
mystery of initiation."*
The age of little,Zosimus was a few days lessthlian
two years and two months. Instead of being almost
three, he was only a little more than two years old.
This made his case specially interesting. It constituted a memorable distinction; and as a distinction,
as something extraordinary, it might be inscribed on
his monument.  Moreover had all children of believers,
as a matter of course, been baptized, there would
; Ti'a, eizoZ~ zept   o  rt   lTr    at  4r  rg;qa'  &rat5afod,, Ktal JTi
';7; Xaptro;' ga'Ka raara /3a'rIeo/sv; Yrav ye eil-ip rts; irsE7,  KL16VIo.:pszo'
y,,p daaLcvilro  ay~aav,at q areXaEZv daopayitra Kai d-tECa... 6              p  s
ra~v''\)9v b'6Cwtp  yv(,iv, t   TptFTia, dvaul~co"oag, r ILKpo', ETOg rourov, 4 Vr.p
roV-o, ~,:Ka Kai dKovaa  rTL PVrItKOV Kai  d7oKppvea~at uvar6v, Et Kai  I avtpr,a
e      aXXi, 5)  ov, rv,ogea, o,rw,; ayt1a6s'I Kal ePvXam Kai al wtara rT 1Ey6X7) jvua',7[)i" r4; re~eSa6eC;.   Orat. XL. Works of Gregory  Nazianzen, Vol, X.
p. 658.   Paris, 1609. 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.
have been no occasion to speak of his preeminence
in this respect.
Thus much we might say, even if all that has been
claimed for the argument from monumental inscriptions ought to be admitted. But we think that
there is an impropriety in the inscription adduced by
Dr. Bushnell. We allude to the improper and unjustifiable manner in which the word believer, or faithful (fidelis), is used; and respecting this we  shall
soon have occasion to speak more fully. In the next
place, we cannot admit that the epitaphs to which
he refers are of so early an age as to furnish a valid
argument for proving infant baptism to be a part of
primitive Christianity.
Natural caves and subterranean excavations,
whether at Rome or elsewhere, we  have reason to
believe, were occasionally used by Christians in times
of early persecution, as places of refuge, and where
religious services might be performed, especially on
days commemorating  the death of martyrs.  How
early they were used as cemeteries it is impossible
now to ascertain.
In the peaceful times under the emperor Alexander
Severus  (A.D. 222-235),  Calixtus, the bishop  of
Rome, enlarged one of the subterranean vaults, and
furnished it with conveniences for performing worship
and religious rites. It is the cemetery of Calixtus
under the magnificent church of St. Sebastian; and
it first received the name catacomb, a name afterwards
applied to other underground burying places.   One
95 
96              INFANT BAPTISM AND
of his successors, Sextus II., and four deacons, were
put to death in this cemetery, in accordance with the
persecuting edict of Valerian, in the year 258.*
Maximinus, in 311, forbade the Christians to enter
the subterranean places of burial.t  But Constantine
the Great, about the year 313, restored to them their
cemeteries and chapels.1 And from his time, the
burial places were prepared with increased forethought and system. They could be visited without
fear or molestation; and they were honored more
and more, in connection with the increasing honor
paid to martyrs. Wherever the body of a martyr
was  deposited,  his sympathizing  brethren would
love to repair, and strengthen their own faith by
meditation  and religious services.  It was  natural
and commendable to desire for themselves, and for
their kindred and friends, a quiet resting place near the
graves-of those dear and honored ones whose precious
remains were already sleeping there. When the
conveniences of the people in the vicinity, and of the
multitudes attracted to the holy place, required it, a
church edifice, over the place of subterranean repose,
could be erected, having an easy and safe cormmunica
tion with the vaults beneath.
* See Cypriani Epist. ad Successurn, etc., LXXXII. Ben.
ed. p. 165-Xistum autem in cemeterio animnadversum sciatis octavo iduum Augustarum die, et cumn eo diacones
quatuor.
t Euseb. Eccles. Hist. B. IX. ch. 2; and B. VII. ch. 11.
: Euseb. Life of Constantine. B. II. oh. 40.
4 
EARLY CHURCH  HISTORY.               97
In Rome, for several ages, till after'the middle of
the fifth century, the bishops were buried in the cata combs. Leo, denominated the Great, was the first
exception. In the year 462 he was buried, not in a
catacomb, but in the vestibule of the vestry at St.
Peter's. Persons of distinction followed his example.
Many were buried in the courts of the city churches,
or in the sepulchres connected with them. The com mon people still continued to be buried in the cata combs. But the example of the superior classes had
great influence. And when, for suitable honor, the
bones of the martyrs themselves were removed to the
city churches, the zeal for the former places of burial
died away. The places were comparatively neglected.
They fell into a state unfit for use; and in the seventh
or eighth century they ceased entirely to be used as
cemeteries, and were almost forgotten amidst the
public calamities of the times.*
In 1535 some of these dark and dilapidated caverns
were explored.   A  deep interest was awakened.
Bosio, a zealous antiquary, spent more than thirty
years, the last thirty years of the sixteenth century,
in clearing away the rubbish, and penetrating into
recesses that had  been blocked up for ages.  His
work in Italian, on Subterranean Rome, was translated into Latin and enlarged by Arringhi, in two
folio volumnes, published  at Paris in 1659.   Since
that time there have appeared several other interest
* See Arringhi, Roma Subterranea, Tom. II., p. 221.
7 
98              INFANT BAPTI,sM AND
ing and, in various respects, valuable works Jn discoveries made in the catacombs.
Among these discoveries are inscriptions on the
monuments of children. Some years ago, in a volume
entitled Apostolic Baptism, an array of these inscriptions, gathered firom Bosio, Arringhi, Muratori, Buonarotti, Fabretti, Gruter and Boldetti, was presented to
the public for the purpose of proving the apostolic
auithority for infant baptism.  We welcome any comp)etent and credible witnesses that can be summoned.
Let the dead rise from their graves.  Let them be
called forth from the catacombs.   Their testimony
may be valuable concerning the times in which they
lived. But let us not be so unreasonable as to expect
them to testify concerning what was done in times
long before they existed, or in spheres beyond their
knowledge.
Thl-e volume to which we allude presents us thirtytwo inscriptions respecting children.   Ten are called
believers (fideles).  And the age of these, except
only that of Zosimus (the case adduced as an examp-le by Dr. Bushnell), exceeds the age at which
Gregory Nazianzen recommends that children be baptized, as being "able to hear and answer somewhat
that pertains to the ordinance; though not under standing perfectly, yet receiving impressions." Four
are mentioned as being "with the holy," or "with
holy spirits." One is mentioned as being "in the
bosom of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."  One, at the
age of four years, five months, and three days, is 
EARLY CNURCI HIST1.           v     2.9
mentioned, expressly, as a catechumen, "resting in
peace." One, who died soon after the beginning of
the fourth century, a little more than eleven years of
age, is spoken of without any mention of baptism;
for it is too much to assume that this is implied in his
having two names, Simplicia and Colonymus. Frequently a person had more than one name, and was
called sometimes by one of them, and sometimes by
the other.  The inscription itself, in the present case,
says nothing of martyrdom, or of violence.  Ffteen
are designated as newly baptized.
Of two brothers, one who died at the age of seven
years, is called a believer (fidelis); and the other,
who died at the age of somewhat more than eight
years, is said to be newly baptized.   That is, one
child, a lad of seven years, had received baptism before he wts seized with his last and fatal sickness;
another, in the same family, a lad of eight years and
more, not having received it previously, received it
now, probably in view of his danger, and thus he dies
newly baptized. The time of his death, it is important to remember, was about the end of the fourth
century, A.D. 394.  What was the case with him
was, doubtless, in effect, the case with most of the
rest of the fifteen who are mentioned as newly baptized; and more than half of them were more than
six years of age.   Hence more than half of them
were not baptized before arriving at that degree of
maturity.
Thus, it will be perceived, when ye.examine. and
'. * * **! 
INPANT BAPTISM AND
analyze the evidence derived from these thirty-two
witnesses, that instead of proving the apostolic authority of infant baptism, it harmonizes with and
confirms our representations.   Whatever might be
the dreams of such sincere and attractive writers as
Hiermas, or the theories adopted by many zealous
church-teachers, the practice of baptizing infants came
in but gradually. Some, through the influence of erroneous views that were coming to prevail, were
hastened to baptism, "though understanding imperfectly," or even not at all. More were kept waiting
several years; some for an increased degree of maturity and preparation, and some for an increased
probability of retaining the grace which was supposed
to be received with that great remedy for all previous
sin; but were baptized when danger of death was
imminent, and thus died newly baptized. Some were
not baptized at all; and yet, like the catechumen
mentioned, were believed by their kindred and guardians to be "resting in peace," or "with the holy,"
through the grace of him who had said of other little
ones that had not been baptized, "Of sutch is the
kingdom of heaven."
Here we might confidently leave the argument
from the inscriptions on the monuments of children.
But we have more to say respecting the case of Zosimus; and we wish to let our readers see how the
argument stands in the light of some additional discoveries.
In the recent French work. by M\. Louis Ferret, on
~....i*i*.'..'
100 
EARLY CHURCH IIISTORY.               101
the Catacombs of Rome, we have a highly vAluable
contribution to the history of ancient Christian art,
and of some things connected with it.  The work
consists of six folio volumnes; five of engravings, and
one of descriptions.  It is exact, comprehensive, and
splendid.  Among other interesting objects it presents
nearly ninety epitaphs or inscriptions respecting chil dren.  Only nine of these make any reference to baptism; and five of this small number are included also
among the thlirty-two whose testimony we have already considered.  Three childrien are mentioned as
newly ba)ptized.  They died, one at the age of two
years, five monthls, and twenty-five days; one, of one
year and ten months; and one apparently of eighty
days, though the inscription is very imperfect and
uncertain.
Besides these two or three cases, in which it appears
that a child was baptized when about to die, another
is mentioned in which a child (very improperly, we
think) is spoken of as a believer (fidelis):"Florentius
has made an inscription to his well-deserving son
Apronianus, who lived a year, nine months, and five
days. As he was much loved by his grandmother,
and she saw that he was about to die, she requested
of the church that he might depart fi:om the world a
believer." *
* Florentius filio suo Aproniano fecit titulum bene merenti, q (ni) vixit annuiin et meneses nove (min), dies quinque.
Cum soldu amatus faisset a majore sua, et vidit huno
morti constitutum esse, petivit de ecclesia ut fidelis de
sec: o recessisset. 
INFANT BAPTIBM AND
Here, manifestly, the church was supposed to possess a mysterious power; and the dying child was
to be prepared by it, not, indeed, to grow up in the
faith of his parents, as Dr. Bushnell would say, but
to depart from the world a believer. Was this in ac
cordance with the Saviour's command, and with
apostolic doctrine and practice?
When were the inscriptions written? This can be
ascertained in regard to those which mention the
Roman consuls at the time, and hence have been
called consular.   In regard to the others, there is uncertainty.   The earliest of all the consular inscriptions said to have been found in the catacombs is
one that corresponds with our A.D. 98;* the next
earliest, A.D. 10;t and then one A..D. l111. These
three are presented by Boldetti as having been
found in one of the oldest cemeteries, that of St.
Lucina, on the Ostian way, connected with the subterranean chapel which, as we have already stated,
was enlarged and fitted up by Calixtus, in the first
part of the third century.  It seems evident, therefore, that in the second century the catacombs, to some
extent, were used by Christians as places for burying
their dead.  But those earliest inscriptions, it must
be borne in mind, say nothing respecting baptism.
e D.M.
P. Liberio vixit ani n. II. menses n. III. dies n. VIII.
R. Anicio Fausto et Virio Gallo coss.
t N. XXX. Surra et se~ec. coss.
$ Servilia. Annorum XIII., Pis et Bol. coss.
102 
EARLY CHURCu HISTORY.                103
The earliest allusion to the baptism of a child is A.D.
348, the child being, at the age of six years, eight
months, and eleven days, newly baptized. The next
earliest is A.D. 371, the child being,.at the age of
eight years, and fifteen days, newly baptized; and
the next after this, A.D. 374, the child being, at the
age of eight years, newly baptized. All these, it will
be perceived, occur in the fourth century. Besides
these, there are twelve consular inscriptions relative
to children, without any mention of baptism; eight
in the fourth century; three in the fifth; and one in
the sixth.
Dr. Bushnell speaks of the inscriptions without
discrimination; and he supposes them to be "of a
very early age, probably of the first two or three
centuries." But a careful examination proves that
the very example which he has selected, namely, the
epitaph of Zosimus, could have had no existence till
a considerable time after the beginning of the fourth
century.
This inscription is preserved in the gallery of the
Vatican at Rome+   It was taken from the cemetery
of St. Agnes.* This holy young maiden and martyr
was a victim of the persecution under the emperor
Diocletian, according to Fleury, in the year 304, and
according to Ruinart, in the year 306. She was
condemned to be dishonored in one of those caverns
of the race course that served as a brothel. For her
* See M. Perret, Cataconmbes de Rome, vol. V[., p. 154. 
I INFAN'T  AAFTiS'M AAN
faith and firmness she was beheaded.  Her martyr
dom was the occasion of establishing there, in due
time, services of devout commemoration; and there,
at length, came to be the consecrated cemetery and
the renowned church of St. Agnes.*
A fac-simile of the Greek original of the inscription
which has occasioned these remarks, is presented by
Perret in his splendid work on the Catacomrnbs of
Rome. It is one of the nearly ninety that we have
mentioned.' The following is a literal translation:A believer descended from believers (i~se  Lx 7ttx v)
I Zosimus lie here, having lived two years, one
month, and twenty-five days.
Respecting the improper and unjustifiable mnanner
in which the word believer is here used, we shall
soon, as we have already intimiated, have an opportunity of speaking more fully than we have yet done.
The record before us, in whatever mnlanner it may be
explained, cannot testify for the times in which the
apostles lived.  It is far too late.  It must now be
acknowledged by all to be at least considerably later
than the beginning of the fourth century; for the
time and the circumstances of the martyrdom of
St. Agnes preclude the possibility of supposing the
* See Fleury, Histoire Ecclbsiastique, Lie. VIII., Tom.
II., p. 485. Ruinart, Acta sincera, p. 504; and Description
of Rome,(Beschreibung der Stadt Rom) by Platner, Bunsen
Gerhood, and Roste11, vol. I., p. 401.
104 
EARLY CHURCH IISTtRY.               105
earlier existence of a Christian cemetery in the subterranean haunts of revelry and licentiousness near
the race course.
In the same discourse, at Constantinople, from
which we made. a quotation, Gregory Nazianzen,
speaking of various classes of persons who die with,ut baptism, mentions one class as being those whose
failure of being baptized is on account of infancy;from ignorance.*  These, he thinks, will be neither
glorified nor punished by the righteous Judge.
The passage to which we now allude, and the
manner in which, ill the former one, he recommends
the baptism of children, show that it was not uncommon in his time for children to remain unbaptized
on account of infancy, which, for the most part,
naturally involves a state of ignorance.  Ile, himself,
though born after his father became a bishop, and
most carefully educated, it is well known, was not
baptized till he arrived at a period of maturity. The
deferring of his baptism, surely, could not have arisen
from any desire that he might continue to sin as long
as possible. And his recommending to defer the
baptism of children, except when danger of death is
imminent, till "they are able to hear and answer
somewhat that pertains to the ordinance," surely,
also, could not have arisen from any desire that they
might continue to sin as long as possible. No. It
must have arisen from a yet lingering impression of
* via v,,7ri5ra.-if dyvias. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
what was originally required and was according to
primitive usage.
If "baptism was sometimes deferred on superstitious grounds, till severe illness; even in the hope of
sinning with less danger till the performance of the
rite;"-this was one of the fruits of mistaking the
design of baptism, and unwarrantably ascribing to
the baptismal act a mysterious efficacy; while the
same prolific error, the ascribing of a mysterious,
saving efficacy to the baptismal act, urged its being
prematurely performed on the unprepared, and
especially on the dying child. Between'the unjustifiable delaying and the unjustifiable hastening of
baptism there was a middle course, which, to say the
least, many would gladly have followed.
Maitland, an English author, in his work entitled,
The Church in the Catacombs, furnishes us with six
epitaphs of children, not included among those which
we have enumerated. One of the children died at
the age of a year and nine months, newly baptized.
In connection with the five others, no mention is made
of baptism. One of these is expressly mentioned as
a catechumen, who lived nine years, eight months,
and twenty-two days. Of course it is certain that
this child was not baptized, but was receiving preparatory religious  instruction.  He gives  also an
epitaph, included among those which we have already
examined, that of a child who died at the age of
three years and thirty days, newly baptized; and he
remarks that "her extreme youth proves'the custom
106 
EARLY CHIURCHII HISTORY.
of infant baptism."* We learn from another source
that the child died A.D. 367. And he might well
have said, the evidence here proves that, in the latter
part of the fourth century, a child, three years old,
had not been baptized, but being then about to die,
there was administered to her the ceremony which
was supposed by many to have, in such an extremity,
the wondrous power of securing eternal salvation.
A highly respected author in our own country, the
Right Rev. Dr. Kip, missionary Bishop of California,
in a work entitled, "The Catacombs of Rome, as
illustrating the church of the first three centuries,"
says, with reference to the inscriptions found there:
"But there is one important truth which we think we
learn from these inscriptions, and that is, the fact of
infant baptism. We meet with the epitaphs of
children who are called neophytes, a title which, of
course, would not have been bestowed upon them
unless they had been received by baptism into the
church. The age at which they died precludes the
idea of that rite having been administered to them
in any way but as infants:
"'To Romanus, a well deserving neophyte, who
lived eight years.'
"' Flavia Jovina, who lived three years and thirty days
aneophyte.  In peace (she died) the eleventh kalends.'
"' The title of Candidus, a neophyte,who lived twentyone months; buried on the nones of Septemnber.' "'t
* P. 281, London, 1847.          t P. 162.
10)7 
INFANT BT3PTISM AND
The inscription for Roranus is a consular one-that
is, one in which the names of the consuls are mentioned (Gratian and Probus), and thus the time of
his death is known to have been A.D). 371.   The
date is entirely omitted by Bishop  Kip, but it is
mentioned by M. Perret and by others. The inscription for I-avia Jovina is the one which Maitland
represents as proving Infant Baptism.  The time of
her death was A.D. 367; but the indication of the
time is entirely omitted by him and by Bishop Kip.
Both of these inscriptions, as well as the third-that
of the little child Candidus, here adduced also for the
support of infant baptism-we have already had
occasion to examine in the earlier part of this discussion. It will be perceived that they can give no
valid testimony. The third presents no indication of
the period in which the child died. Here is no
evidence whatever of this case being earlier thau
the two preceding cases, which occurred in the latter
part of the fourth century.
Hlere, then, we have three children-one dying at
the age of twenty-one months, or one year and nine
months; another dying at the age of three years and
thirty days; and still another dying at the age of
eight years: all neophytes or newly baptized. They
appear to have been baptized, not soon after birth,
as a matter of course, but in cases of emergency just
before manifestly approaching death, as a matter of
necessity; it being onl the one hand deemed desirable
and impiortl nt for children to attain to such a dcgreo
108 
'EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.              109
of maturity as that they could make a personal profession of faith, and on the other, in cases of special
danger, to receive in some way, at all events, a passport to the bliss of heaven. For, in the latter part
of the fourth century, and even earlier, the opinion
had come to be very prevalent that the baptismal
ceremony was absolutely necessary for salvation.
But that this opinion was not yet received by all is
evident from the epitaphs of catechumens, as we have
already had occasion to show, and from other sources.
Bishop Kip himself says, "The following epitaph is
that of a catechumen; for in primitive times the
training of the church began from the earliest age
"Ucillianus to Bacius Valerius, a catechumen, who
lived nine years, eight months, and twenty-two days. "*
This inscription, too, has already passed under our
review; and our readers will see in it an evidence
that the baptism of children was not deemed by all
to be necessary to every one. The distinction between
the catechumens and the baptized is well known: a
catechumen was one who was receiving instruction
in order to be prepared for baptism.
The brief but well conceived and very attractive
work of which we are here speaking, ought not to
have been marred by an attempt to make these monumental inscriptions testify in favor-of a practice not
found in the Holy Scriptures.   "The fact of infant
baptism," when an infant was about to die, in the
* P. 160. 
110             INFANT BAPTISM AND
latter part of the fourth century, is far from being
reliable evidence of what our Lord instituted or his
apostles sanctioned. A book professing to illustrate
the church of the first three centuries is naturally
understood to present what pertains to the church in
each of those centuries, and if any thing is admitted
which belongs in a later century, and not in each of
the earlier, the date of it manifestly ought, if possible,
to be. mentioned; otherwise the readers are likely to
be deceived. In future editions, therefore, we hope
that the author's love of Christian and historical truth
will lead him to  make the needed  correction,  to
inform his readers when the children were baptized,
or omit the argument altogether.
In regard to the case decided by the council over
which Cyprian presided, at Carthage, in Northern
Africa, about the middle of the third century, we
need only call the attention of our readers to
one consideration. We allude to what is disclosed
by the nature of the case presented for decision.
We say nothing here respecting the merits of the
decision itself, which was, that no one, however
young, was to be debarred from baptism and the grace
of God, and thus be lost. The question was, whether
baptism was ever to be administered before the eighth
day after the birth of a child, or whether it was not
rather to follow the law of circumcision, in this
respect. Now, if infant baptism had been in use all
along from the  first, instances  innumerable  must 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.                11I
have occurred in which infants, especially those inr
special danger of death before their eighth day, were
baptized before that day. The usage, in such
circumstances, must have been known; and there
could have been no occasion for discussing and
deciding the matter. Infant baptism, then, could
not have been of long standing. It must have been
just coming into existence; for it needed to be regulated as no institute properly established and well
known could have needed.
But, though we regard the consideration here presented as more than a sufficient reply to all that has
been, and all that can be, urged in favor of infant
baptism from the decision of this council at Carthage,
a little after the middle of the third century, yet it
may be useful to mention a few additional facts pertaining to the subject.
1. It is here that the baptism of infants, or babes,
makes its first appearance in ecclesiastical history.
2. Cyprian, in his epistle to Fidus, in the name of the
council, does not place the decision on the ground of
any ordinance of our Lord, or of any tradition from
the apostles. 3. He does place it on the ground
"that the mercy and grace of God is to be denied to
none born of man.   For since the Lord says in his
gospel:  The Son of man is not come to destroy men's
lives, but to save them, as far as in us lies, if it can be,
no soul must be lost." 4. From this epistle it is
perfectly manifest that he regarded the administration 
112              INFANT BAPTISM AND
of baptism as the bestowing of salvation. 5. tHe
believed, as is abundantly evident from other writings
of his, that still in his time there were new revelations, and that what was then revealed, or could be
shown to be lawful and conducive to salvation, ought
to supersede what had already been practiced, "for
which thing," he says, "Paul also, looking forward
and faithfully consulting concord and peace, laid down
the rule in his epistle, saying: But let the prophets
speak two or three; and let the others judge. But if
any thing be revealed to another sitting by, let the
former one be silent. Here he taught and showed
that many things are revealed to individuals for the
better, and that each ought not pertinaciously to contend for what he once imbibed and held; but willingly
embrace it, if any thing better or more useful be
presented. "*
In this passage Cyprian is defending his course in
regard to the baptizing of heretics, but the principle
is equally applicable to other subjects. He, and unnumbered thousands of his contemporaries, had ima
* Cui rei Paulus quoque prospiciens et concordir et paci
fideliter consulens in epistola sua posuit dicens; Prophetsr
autem duo aut tres loquantur, et caeteri examilent.  Si
autem alii revelatum fuerit sedenlti, ille prior tacft.
Qua inparte docuit et ostendit multa singulis in melius
revelari et debere unumquemque non pro eo quod semel
imbiberat et tenebat pertinaciter congredi, sed si quid
melius et utilius extiterit libenter amplecti. Epist, to
Quintus; 71. C —qp wvist. to Pompeius; 74. Ben. ed.
9 
EARLY cittURCti HISTORY.            113
bibed the opinion that baptism was necessary for salvation to all, even to the unconscious infant.  He
claimed to have visions and revelations. Through
his zeal, his glowing eloquence, his high ecclesiastical
position, and his consummate skill in storms of controversy, his influence was powerful while he lived;
and, when he died a martyr, it became immense. It
extended itself to distant countries, and it has continued to be felt from generation to generation, down
to the present time.  He thought himself inspired,
and thus entitled to give new directions promotive of
salvation; and, doubtless, he supposed that the Holy
Spirit guided the bishops, especially when assembled
in full council.  With these views, he could not fail
of being prompted by all the compassionate feelings
of his ardent mind to make the most strenuous efforts
in favor of what seemed to him so important and
efficacious an expedient.*
* There can be no mistake in what we have said respecting the claims of Cyprian. To his presbyters and deacons
he expresses himself thus: For, which the more moved
and compelled me to write this epistle unto you, ye ought
to know (sinee the Lord has deigned to manifest and reveal it), that it was thus declared, in a vision, etc., Epist.
xi. 3, Oxford Ed. Trans., p. 25.  Know, dearest brethren,
I was, not long since, reproved in a vision for this also;
that we were drowsy in prayer, and watched not therein.
Epist. xi. 5, p. 26.  For the least of all his servants, although set in the midst of very many sins, and unworthy
of his favor, did he, out of his goodness towards us, give
this charge: Bid him be ecure; for peace is at hand. Epist.
3 
JINFANT BAPTISM AND
In other countries, the same opinion, that bapltism
is absoluttely necessary to all for salvation, was more
and more generally adinitted; and it was producing
its effects in various ways. One of the most remark
xi. 7, p. 27.  The Oxford translators remark that,  "at
the time of this vision, there was no human prospect of
the cessation of the persecution; it did cease shortly after
in consequence of the sudden and unexpected overthrow
and death of Decius, in his expedition against the Gothls."
In another communication Cyprian says, The divine censure ceases not to chlastise us by night and day; for, bestdes nijhtliy vi.sios, by day also the innocent age of children
among us is filled with the Holy Ghost, and in ecstasy they
see with their eyes, a,.d hear, andi speak those things
wherein the Lord vouchsafed to admonish and instruct us.
But ye shall hear all when the Lord, who bade me retire,
shall bring me back to you. Epist. xvi. 3, p. 42.  To the
presbyters, deacons., and all the people, he writes: Exult,
therefore, and rejoice with us, when you read our epistle,
wherein I and my colleagues who were with me, report to
you that Celerinus, our brother, renowned alike for his
courage and his character, has been joined to our clergy,
not by human sutffrage, but by divine favor; who, when
he hesitated to assent to the church, was, by her own admnonition and exhortation in a vision by night, compelled not
to hold out against our persuasions. Epist. xxxix. 1, p. 87.
In an epistle to Florenltius, he says: I remember what has
been already shown to me [in visions]: yea, what has
been enjoined by the authority of our Lord and God to an
obedient and fearing servant.  Among otlier things which
he vouchsafed to manifest and reveal, he added this also:
"Whoso  therefore  believeth  not  Christ appointing  a
bishop, shall hereafter begin to h'l![ve him avenging a
114 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.              115
able of these is the impress that it has left on that
singular product of the third and fourth centuries,
the work claiming to be the Constitutions of the HIoly
Apostles. In this work we hear, as it were, an imploring voice for the infants; while Ambrose, the renowned bishop of Milan, in the fourth century, utters
the prevalent conviction of his times in the following
authoritative terms: "No one ascends into the kingdom of heaven but through the sacrament of baptism.
.. There is no exception even of an infant, or
of a person prevented by any necessity. Such may
not be openly and positively punished; but I have no
assurance that they mnay participate in the honor of
the kingdom."*
bishop." Although I am aware that to some persons
dreams appear ridiculous and visions trifling, yet assuredly
it is to such- as had rather believe against bishops, than
believe the bishop. Epist. lxvi. 8, p. 207, 208.
Writing to Cornelius in the name of a council, Cyprian
makes the following statement:  We  have decided, the
Holy Spirit suggesting, and the Lord, by many and plain
visions, admonishing, etc.  [Placuit nobis, sancto spiritu
suggerente, et Dom-ino per visiones mult,s et manifestas
admonente.]   Epist. liv. Ben.  ed, p. 70, Oxford Ed. lvii.
Trans. p. 141.
* De Abrali. lib. ii. c. 11. Nemo adscendit in regnum
cclorum, nisi per sacramentunm baptismatis... Utique
nullum excipit, non inlfantem, non  aliqua preaeventum
necessitate.   Habeant  tamenel  illam  opertam  pcinarum
immunitatem; nescio an  lal-)eant regni honorem.  The
Works of Ambrose, Tom. i., pp. 347 and 351.  Paris, 1686. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
Still, in the most parts of Christendom, a deep impression was prevalent that faith was requisite in
order to be baptized, as well as that baptism was
requisite in order to be admitted into heaven. With
such impressions, who that had parental affection
would not have special desire, who would not earnestly pray, that the dear little ones might arrive at
that state in which, as Origen expresses it, they could
be made capable of receiving the grace of Christ?
Passages occurring in some of the early Christian
writers help us to understand the prayers that were
offered for the infants, whether of the church or of
the catechumens.   These prayers, except the one
which is recorded by Chrysostom as having been used
by the church at Antioch, and which is in remarkable
harmony with the others, are still found in the liturgical part of the Eighth Book of the Constitutions;
a part which,  as to its general  frame-work  and
many of its materials, has evident marks of having
been derived from ancient usage in that venerable
and influential church. These prayers, though in
their present form, written not earlier, probably, than
the fourth century, were intended and adapted to be
received as having come down from a much earlier
period.  They touch a tender chord in the heart of
the Christian parent, and shed' an unexpected light
on the history of Infant Baptism. They show that
infants were not baptized. For the burden of these
prayers is, that the little ones rnay be brought to such
an age and stafe as to receive baptis-i-this being a
116 
EARLY CHURIH HISTORY.               11
'sacrament for the believers,'* without which it was
generally supposed none could inherit the bliss of
heaven.
In the fifteenth chapter of the Sixth Book, immedi ately after an admonition on the danger of sudden
death, there is an ambiguous injunction for the bap tism of children: "Moreover. baptize your children,
and bring them up in the nurture and admonition of
the Lord.   For he saith, Suffer the little children to
come unto me, and forbid them not."
The indefiniteness of the command seems to have
been skillfully adapted to the securing of its reception
as having been derived from the apostles. It could
be explained so as to harmonize with the well-known
apostolic practice of Believers' Baptism. For in the
days of the apostles, there were, doubtless, many
Christian, believing children.   To have children of
this character is mentioned among the qualifications
of the men who were to be ordained as elders.t
Children and other disciples went with Paul out of
the city of Tyre, when he departed; and the company
kneeled down on the shore and prayed.[ Children that
give evidence of true and intelligent faith in Christ,
we all agree, ought to be baptized. The command
now under consideration may have had in view such
young catechumens-little disciples whom the apostles
* See Origen on Exodls, Homily viii, sect. 4, and the
Christian Review for April, 1854, p. 203.
i Tit. i: 6.                          t Acts xxi: 5. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
would not have rejected; and, so understood, it could
easily be regarded as apostolical.   But as it places
baptism prominently in the foreground, and leaves
out of sight the grand prerequisite, it could also be
explained so as to favor and sanction the baptism of
children in early infancy. Its influence would, of
course, be silent, but none the less powerful and extensive. It called for no public discussion. and no
enactment of a council. It came quietly, as a friendly
message from the apostles themselves.  It was admirably fitted to co-operate with other influences
leading in the same direction.  And near the end of
the fourth century, and in the early part of the fifth,
the time of Augustine, it had been thus co-operating
more than a hundred years; so that we need not
wonder at his speaking of infant baptism as being
supported by apostolic tradition.
Two eminent men of that time (near the end of
the fourth century and in the early part of the fifth),
Pelagius and Augustine, are now introduced by Dr.
Bushnell as witnesses for infant baptism. He says,
"So clear, in short, and decided was the authority of
infant baptism, that Pelagius, a man of great learning, who had traveled in Britain, France, Italy,
Africa Proper, Egypt and Palestine, declared, in his
controversy with Augustine, about the beginning of
the fifth century, that he had never heard of any impious heretic or sectaryr, who had denied infant baptism.''What,' he also asked,'can be so impious as
to hinder the baptism of infants?'
118 
EARLY OcURHO HISTORY.               119
In Augustine's animadversions on the epistle which
Pelagius sent to Innocent, bishop of Rome, in his
own defence (the epistle itself has been lost), we find
the paragraphs relative to the subject before us; and
when brought together in their proper connection,
they stand thus:  "Men slander me as if I denied
the sacrament of baptism to infants, or promised the
kingdom of heaven to some persons without the redemption of Christ; which is a thing that I never
heard even any impious heretic say. For who is
there so ignorant of that which is read in the gospel,
as either to affirm this, or even heedlessly say such a
thing, or have such a thought? In a word, who can
be so impious as to hinder infants from being baptized
and born again in Christ, and so make them miiss of
the kingdom of heaven, since our Saviour has said
that none can enter into the kingdom of heaven that
is not born again of water and  the Holy Spirit?
Who is there so impious as to refuse to an infant, of
whatever age, the common redemption of mankind, and
to hinder him, that is born to an uncertain life, from
being born again to an everlasting and certain one?"*
We are quite willing that this testimony of Pelagius, here accurately laid before our readers in its
amplest form, be estimated according to its real value.
Of this they will, perhaps, be better able to judge,
after hearing and examining the testimony of the remaining witness.
* See Augustine, De Peccato Originali, c,. 17, etc. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
"Augustine  himself,  also," says  Dr.  Bushnell,
"testifies-the whole church of Christ has constantly
held that infants were baptized. Infant baptism the
whole church practices.  It was not instituted by
councils, but was ever in use.'"
We reply: Neander states that, " What Augustine
found already existing in the general usage of the
church, he believed might be derived either from
apostolic tradition or the divine institution through
general  councils."*   Infant baptism, it was  well
known, had not been instituted by any such
council; and yet he seemed to find it everywhere
practiced, especially in cases of special danger of
death. Therefore, he inferred it must have been derived from apostolic tradition. This, in his view,
was the only alternative; and, in the work claiming
to be the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, there
was a command to baptize children. But, surely,
there was another way in which the usage, so prevalent in his time, and far more prevalent afterwards,
could have entered.  And we have just seen how it
could and did creep in, silently and gradually. With
all his logical ingenuity and all his rhetoric, he was
very liable to err in regard to the early state of the
ehurehes.  He quotes largely from Cyprian's Epistle
to Fidus; but, we believe, he never mentions any
particular  authority  earlier than  Cyprian.    The
striking remark of the historian on Origen's supposed
* Hist. of the Christian Rel. and Church, Vol. II., p. 664
120 
ref
the
lar
the
an
as
we
co]
an
fre
thi
In
co
as
A
re
w(
th
sh
ca
pC
o
From this canon we obtain a glimpse of light,
* Hist. of the Christ. Rel. and Church, Vol. I., p. 314.
t Melpi KvocopovarCg TrL &Z ocoriL aca br6re foVXcraT'  oadv yap iv ro(rc) KOaVC~)ve    TiKTrovra r6 rIKro013vC, O&  TO  a'KTrov'tJlav rTv 7rpoaa(prciv rT7v c'r'rp +X0yia &iKrvalat. 
122             INF?ANT BAPTISM AND
which, perhaps, Augustine did not possess, on the
state of the eastern churches in respect to baptism in
the early part of the fourth century.  Here it appears
that, in order to be baptized, a personal profession
was expected, as a matter of course, and that, in
making this profession, the deliberate purpose was
manifested as being each one's own. No one could
answer for another, not even the mother for the child;
and the child could not answer at all. The apprehension, therefore, was groundless, that the baptism
of the mother, when she was overwhelmed in the
water, would involve the baptism of the child, or
create a case so perplexing as to render it expedient
to defer the baptism of the mother till after the birth
of the child. She could be baptized without delay.
Our view of the light which shines from the canon
of which we have been speaking, accords with that
which Grotius presents in his Annotations on the
New Testament.  In his note on Matt. xix: 14, he
mentions this canon as being especially worthy to be
noted, and adds, "For, however diversely interpreters may explain, it is manifest that the question
was therefore moved concerning the baptism of the
pregnant, because the child might appear to be baptized at the same time with the mother, while the
custom was not to baptize any, unless upon one's own
choice and profession.*
* IUtcunque enim aliovorsum trahant interpretes, adparet, ideo de baptismo proagnantium motam quastionem. 
EARLY CHURCH HISTORY.              123
In the same manner also the Greek commentators
explain the principle on which the council proceeded
in their decision. One of these, Balsamo, in his
Compendium of Canons, says, The child cannot be
baptized, because it is not yet born, and has not the
deliberate purpose of the profession connected with
the  divinely appointed  baptism.*   And  another,
Zonaras, with equal clearness, expresses himself thus:
The embryo needs baptism when it shall be able to
have the deliberate purpose.t
In the year 325, at the council of Nice, Eusebius,
the ecclesiastical historian, prepared a document for
the signature of the three hundred and eighteen bishops
who were there, and read it in the presence of Constantine the Great, and of the whole council. It is
preserved in the Greek original, both by Socrates and
by Theodoret, in their ecclesiastical histories; and in
it Eusebius says, "As we have received from the bishops
that were before us, both in the previous catechetical
instruction, and also when we received the laver;
as we have learned from the divine Scriptures, and
as, in the presbytery itself, and also in the episcopate,
we have believed and taught, so also now believing,
quod videretur cum  matre simul proles  baptizari,  qu.
tamen baptizari non soleret, nisi super propria voluntate
ae professione.   Vol. I., p. 385, ed. 1755.
*w OV (vva'at O&)7tCat 6, Ta'dtKE'7 Eig o   E'XLv, pl 7rpoafrE,t~V'E'XrLV MS
opo\oyia5 TOS 3etO'J fla-rLJapro.
t To C3pVOI, X L p arriaparog' cT 7rpoaipe 3aat 6vwarat. 
',1     II      NFANT BAPTISM AND
~ve set forth our belief, and it is this: We believe,"
etc.*
Here the important fact is incidentally disclosed
that, not only Eusebius himself, but also the other
bishops assembled in that great council, had received
instruction before they were baptized; and most of
them, unquestionably, had been born of Christian
parents.
About forty years after the close of the eighth
century, the learned Walafrid Strabo, at the request
of Reginbert, wrote a book on the Beginnings and
Additions in Ecclesiastical Affairs. t It is pronounced
by Cardinal Bellarmine to be a useful work.1  It
was printed at Cologne in 1568. It may be found
also in the fifteenth volume of the great collection
published at Lyons in 1677.~ It consists of thirtyone chapters. The twenty-sixth treats of Baptism,
and begins thus:  "Concerning Baptism also some
things are to be said. What was clearly prefigured
in the passage of the Red Sea and of the Jordan, but
* Ka-ao riapcX,our  7rrapa -r  pO ir7pLV Kitc6   -aL rp rp,r Ka-7rX;aeL Kat
"rt ai rd XOVrpO'v da,urop y, &c.  See Socrates, B. I, c. 8, and Theodoret
B. I., c. 12. See also a fair and faithful translation by Dr.
Cave, in his Lives of the Fathers, Vol. II., p. 112, Oxford,
1840; or in the Historical Essay, preliminary to the work
entitled Memorials of Baptist Martyrs, Am. Bap. Pub. Soc.
t De Exordiis et Incrementis Rerum Ecclesiasticarum.
f De Scrip. Eccles.
~ Maxima Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum et antiquorum
:criptorunm Ecclesiasticorunm. 
EARLY CIIURCH IIISTORY.
more obscurely prefigured by many other figures, is
here made known.   This to those who were  converted to faith in the Messiah, was in the beginning
of the new grace first shown by John to have been
provided, not by his own invention, but by divine
constitution; as he himself testifies, saying, He who
sent me to baptize in water," etc. After some other
remarks, the following statements are made:
"It is to be noted that in primitive times, the grace
of baptism was accustomed to be given only to those
who, in body and mind, had come to such maturity
as to be able to know and understand what benefit is
to be obtained in baptism, what is to be professed,
and what to be believed, and, finally, what is to be
preserved by the new-born in Christ.  Indeed the
venerable Father Augustine, in the book of his Confessions, relates concerning himself, that he continued
a catechumen almost to the age of twenty-five years,
with the intention that, through this delay, he, instructed distinctly on each subject, might be led to
choose freely for himself, and the ardent passions of
the slippery age cooling off, he might be better able
to preserve what was to be obtained in baptism.
"But, diligence in the divine religion increasing,
-the lovers of Christian dogmatics understanding
that the original sin of Adam holds liable to punishment, not only those who by their own deeds have
increased the transgression, but even those who are
without any deeds of their own (because, according
to the Psalmist, they are conceived and born in in.
125 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
iquities, they cannot be free from sin, while they
proceed from a corrupt root; so that deservedly
concerning all that is said by the apostle,' all have
sinned, and come short of the glory of God,' and
concerning Adam,' In whom all have sinned),;
This, therefore, the followers of the sound faith perceiving [took care] that the little ones be baptized
for the remission of sins, lest they perish, if they
die.without the remedy of the grace of regeneration.
Not, as certain heretics, opposing the grace of God,
contended that children are baptized by no necessity,
because they have not yet sinned. If this were true,
either they were not to be baptized, or if they were
baptized unnecessarily, then imperfect and not true
in them was the sacrament of baptism, which, in the
creed, we confess to be given for the remission of
sins. Therefore, because all whom the grace of God
does not liberate, perish in original sin, children are
necessarily baptized, even those who have not added
to it by their own evil deeds.  Which also Saint
Augustine shows in his book on the Baptism of
Children, and the African Councils and innumerable
documents of other Fathers testify."*
* Notandum quod, primis temporibus, illis solummnodo
baptismi gratiam dari solitam quii et corporis et mentis
integritate jam ad hoc pervenerant, ut scire et intelligere
possunt quid emolumenti in baptismo consequendum,
quid confidendum atque credendlum, quid postremo renatis
in Christo esset servandum, etc,
126 
EARLY CtIURCH HISTORY.
These paragraphs need no comment. They come
from a source which cannot be suspected of any partiality in our favor; and yet it will be perceived at
once that they confirm the representations which we
have made. They come from a zealous supporter of
infant baptism; and yet they affirm, as an unquestionable historical fact, in the presence of catholic
Christendom, that, in the primitive times, infants were
not baptized, and, of course, that for infant baptisrn
there could have been no genuine tradition from the
apostles. They come from a staunch friend of
Augustine; and yet they show that his strong
language, seeming to assert the universality of infant
baptism, must be received with some abatement; for
they incidentally present evidence from his own pen,
that even he himself was not baptized in his infancy,
although it is well known his mother was distinguished for her Christian piety and her deep solicitude
for his spiritual welfare. That a large abatement of
this kind must be made, appears  also from  other
statements of Augustine himself, to say nothing of
evidence independent of these. In his fourteenth
sermon on the Words of the Apostles, he speaks of
its being a common thing to inquire respecting a
Christian's child, Is he a catechumen or a believer?
That is, is he still receiving preparatory instruction,
or has he been baptized as a believer? To say that
it was common to have occasion to maklie such an
inquiry is equivalent to saying that it was common
for children to be instructed before being baptized.
127 
128            INFANT BAPTISM AND
The reduction of the practice of baptizing instructed
children to the practice of baptizing children too
young to be instructed, or to answer for themselves,
was gradual. It was facilitated in various ways, and
urged on by imperative considerations; but still it had
Dbstacles to overcome.   Augustine still had occasion
to answer some hard questions on the subject.  Of
these we present a single specimen. The established
baptismal service, when applied to infants, seemed to
some intelligent and conscientious persons to be inconsistent with the great principle of  common veracity. This is brought distinctly to view in Augustine's reply to Boniface, a contemporary bishop.
"You seem to yourself," he says, "to have proposed a most difficult question indeed, at the close of
your inquiry. With the carefulness, manifestly, with
which you are accustomed to be exceedingly on your
guard against a falsehood,* you say,'If I set before
you an infant, and ask you whether, when he grows
up, he will be a chaste man? or whether he will be a
thief? your answer doubtless will be, I cannot tell;
and, whether he in that infant age has any good or
evil thought-? You will say, I know not. Since,
therefore, you dare not say any thing either concerning his future behavior or his present thoughts, why
is it that, when they are brought to baptism, their
* Dificillimam sane qusestionem tibi proposuisse visus
es in extremo illquisitionis tuae: ea videlicet intentione
qua soles vehementer cavere mendacium. 
EARLY  CIIURCH  HISTORY.
parents, as sponsors for them, answer and say that
they do what that age can have no thought of; or,
if they have, nobody knows what they are? For we
ask those by whom they are brought, and say,'Does
he believe in God? concerning that age which has
no knowledge whether there is a God or not. They
answer, He does believe; and in like manner answers
are made to all the rest; so that I wonder how.the
parents do in those matters answer so confidently for
the child, that he does this or that good thing which
the baptizer demands at the time of his baptism; and
yet, if at the same time I ask, Will this baptized per son prove chaste? or not prove a thief?  I question
whether any dare so answer, He will, or will not be
such or such a one, and they answer without hesita tion, He does believe in God, and he does turn to God.'
Then at the close, you add,' I entreat you to give me
a short answer to these questions, in such a manner
as that-you do not urge to me the prescription or the
customariness of the thing, but give me the reason
of it.'
"When I had read your letter over and over, and
had considered it as far as my short time would
allow, it made me call to mind my friend Nebridius,
who being a very diligent and sagacious inquirer into
matters that were obscure, especially such as concern
religion, could not endure a short answer to a weighty
question, and took it very ill if any one desired such
a thing; and would with an angry voice and look
reprimand him, if he were a person that might be so
9
129 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
used, as counting him unfit to ask such questions,
who did not consider how much night and ought to
be said on so great a matter.  But I am not angry
with you, as he was accustomed to be; for you are a
bishop occupied with many cares, as I also am;  so
that neither have you the leisure to read a long discourse, nor I to write one; for he being then a young
man, that would not be answered in brief to such
things, made miany inquiries in conversation with me,
and inquired as one at leisure from one that was so
too; but you, considering now your own circumstances
that ask, and mine that am asked, bid me answer
briefly about so great a matter; and this I here do
as well as I can.  The Lord assist me that I may be
aible to satisfy your demland.
"We often express ourselves so, that when Good
Friday is nigh, we say, To-morrow, or, The day after
to-mnorrow is our Lord's passion; though it is a
great many  years ago that he  suffered, and his
passion was never performed but once.  So on the
Lord's Day we say, This day our Lord arose; though
since he arose it is so many years.  Why is there
nobody so silly as to say we lie when we speak so,
but for this reason; because we give names to those
days, from the representation which they make to us
of those on which the things were indeed done; so
that that is called the very day which is not the very
day, but answers to it in the revolution of time; and
that which is not done on that day, but was done a long
time ago, is spoken of as done on that dclay, because
130 
EARLY CHURCH mSTORY.               131
the sacrament of it is then celebrated. Was not
Christ in his own person offered up once for all?
And yet in the sacrament he is offered up, not only
every Easter, but every day; nor does he lie, who,
being asked, says he is offered up.  For sacraments
could not be sacraments if they had not a resemblance
of those things of which they are the sacraments; and
from this resemblance they commonly have the
names of the things themselves.
"As therefore the sacrament of Christ's body is
after a certain fashion Christ's body; and the sacrament of Christ's blood is Christ's blood, so the sacrament of faith is faith. But to believe is nothing else
than to have faith. And so when it is responded
that an infant believes, who has not yet the faculty
of faith, it is responded that he has faith on account
of the sacrament of faith; and that he turns to God,
on account of the sacrament of conversion; because
the response also itself pertains to the celebration of
the sacrament.   So the apostle on this same subject
of baptism says,'We are buried together with Christ
by baptism into death.'  He does  not  say, We
signify a burial; but he uses the word itself, We are
buried; so that he calls the sacrament of so great a
thing by the name of the thing itself.
"And so an infant, though he be not'yet constituted
a believer (fidelis) by that faith which consists in the
will of believers, yet he is by the sacrament of that
faith; for, as he is said to believe, so he is called a
believer; not from his having the thing itself in his 
INFANT LAPTISM AND
mind, but from his receiving the sacrament  of it.
And when a person begins to have a sense of these
things, he does not repeat that sacrament, but understands the force of it, and by the consent of will
squares himself to the true meaning of it; and till he
can do this, the sacrament will avail to his preserva.
tion against all contrary powers, and so far it will
avail that if he depart this life before the use of
reason, he will by this Christian remedy of the sacrament itself (the charity of the church recommending
him) be made free from that condemnation which by
one man entered into the world. He that does not
believe this, and thinks it cannot be done, is actually
an infidel, though he has the sacrament of faith; and
that infant is much better who, though he has not
faith in his mind, yet puts no bar of a contrary mind
against it, and so receives the sacrament to his soul's
health.
"I have given such an answer to your questions
as, I suppose is, to ignorant and contentious people,
not enough; and to understanding and quiet people
perhaps more than enough. Nor have I, to spare
my pains, urged to you the custom's being so firmly
established; but I have, as well as I could, explained
to you the reason of that most beneficial custom."
The ingenious sophistry of this reply, it is probable,
will be more manifest to most of our readers than. it
was to Augustine himself. Indeed he may not have
perceived it at all.'But they whill readily perceive
132 
EARLY CHIURCH  I1SIbORY.
that if the sacrament of faith constitutes the child a
believer, then, to ask, Does this child believe? is to
ask, Has this child received the sacrament of faith?
while this is the very thing which he, not having
received, is now brought for the purpose of obtaining.
The question is asked, and must be satisfactorily
answered, before the baptism, the sacrament of faith,
can be administered. The only way to conceal the
absurd and absolute preposterousness of asking the
question, is to acknowledge duplicity in making the
response, that is, to suppose that in the question,
believing means one thing, and that in the response,
it means another!
The manner in which Augustine denounces as an
infidel every one in the church who was not convinced
of the propriety of the dominant practice commended
by him, is very striking. We allude to the following
passage near the close of the reply: "He that does
not believe this [what was affirmed to be accomplished
in connection with  infant baptism] is actually an
infidel,. though  he  has  the  sacrament  of faith."
From this severe rebuke, as well as from other evidence, it appears that there were such persons who,
in his estimation, needed to be rebuked; and, in pronouncing sentence on these, a fiiendly wvarning might
be given indirectly to the prudence of his friend Boniface, the bishop to whom he was writing. That
there were such persons in the church appears also,
and still more clearly, from a parallel passage in his
work on the Deserts and Remission of Sins and the
133 
134             INFANT BAPTISM AND
Baptism of Children.  There referring to our Saviour's
words in John iii: 19, he asks, Whence does he say,
'Light is come into the world,' unless he says it concerning his advent, without the sacrament of which
advent how are children said to be in the light'  Or
how do not those persons have even this in the love
of darkness, who, as they themselves do not believe
[but are actually infidels] so neither think that their
children are to be baptized, when they fear for them
the death of the body?*
It is painful and humiliating to think of the errors
into which even good and great men are liable to fall;
and it is instructive to see how they sometimes
unconsciously deceive themselves and others.  Here
the mild and monitory words  of Neander may be
called to mind with benefit to us all. They are
worthy of perpetual remembrance. "Augustine," he
remarks, "assumed as that on which faith must fixevery thing given in the tradition of the church;
hence he was led to admit niany foreign elements;
and his well exercised, speculative and dialectic
intellect made it easy for him to find reasons for
* De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione et de Baptismo
Parvulorum, Lib. I., cap XXXIII. (61.) Works, Tom. X., p.
35. Be-. ed.  Undcle, Lux venit in mtundua, nisi de suo dicit
adclventu, sine cujus adventus sacramento quomodo parvuli
esse dicuntur in luce? Ant quomodo non et hoc in dilectione tenebrarum habent, qui quemadmoduin ipsi non
credunt, sic nec baptizandos suos parvulos, arbitrantur, quanldo
oit mortem corporis timent? 
EARLY CHURCII HISTOPRY.               135
every thing.  His system of faith wanted that historical and critical direction, whereby alone, returning
back, at all periods of time, to the pure and original
fountain of Christianity, it could make and preserve
itself free from foreign elements which continually
threaten to mix in with the current of impure temporal tradition. "*
* Hist. of Christ. Rel. anu4 Church, Vol. II, p. 359. 
VI.
INFANT BAPTISM AND INFANT COMMUNION.
E now request our readers to weigh carefiilly
and candidly the evidence which has been
laid  before  them.  The  question  to be
decided is one of no trivial import. Is
Infant Baptism a divine institute, estab         lished by our Lord? or is it an unauthorized device of men?  Was it known and sanctioned
in the days of the apostles, or was it introduced
afterwards? Is it a part of pure and primitive
Christianity, or is it a corruption, a departure from
the simplicity that is in Christ, an expedient resorted
to under the overpowering influence of erroneous
impressions in regard to the efficacy of the baptismal
act, and in regard to its necessity in order to any
one's being admitted into heaven?
Similar questions might be asked also concerning
Infant Communion, which came into use along with
Infant Baptism.
From  time  immemorial,  a participation in  the
Lord's  Supper had Green regarded as one of the
privileges of the baptized.  Infant Communion made
its first appearane  where  Infant  Baptism  first
appeared, namely, in the African churches, and the
first miention of it occurs in the writings of Cyprian,
136 
INf.ANT COMMUtNION.              137
the zealous and powerful advocate for the baptism of
endangered children in their earliest infancy, about
the middle )f the third century.  In his collection of
testimonies addressed to Quirinus,* he teaches the
necessity  of  being  baptized,  from  John  iii: 5;
"Except a man be born again, of water and the Spirit,
he cannot enter into the kingdom of God;" and tLe
necessity of partaking of the Lord's Supper, from
John vi: 53; "Except ye eat of the flesh of the Son of
man, and drink his blood, ye shall not have life in you."
In his Treatise on the Lapsed, he sets forth the
guilt of those who had voluntarily participated in the
heathen sacrifices, and says (c. 7): "Many, however,
were unsatisfied with doing destruction upon themselves; men were urged to their ruin by mutual
encouragements, and the fatal cup of death was
offered from mouth to mouth.  That nothing might
be wanting'to their load of guilt, even infants in their
parents' arms, carried or led, were deprived while
yet tender of what was granted them in the commencement of life.t Will not these children in the
day of judgment say, We did no sin; it was not our
will to hasten from the bread and cup of the Lord
to  an  unhallowed pollution.  We  perish  through
unfaithfulness not our own; and our parents on earth
* B. III., c. 25 and c. 26.
t Infantes quoque parentum manibus, vel impositi vel
attracti, amiserunt provuli quod in primo statim nativitatia
exordio fueraut cf isecuti. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
have robbed us of the parentage in heaven; they
forfeited for us the Church as a Mother, and God as
a Father; and thus while young and unaware, and
ignorant of that grievous act, we are included in a
league of sin by others, and perish through their
deceit."
In c. 16, he makes the following statement:
"Listen to an event that took place in my own
presence, and on my own testimony. I Some parents
who made their escape, in the thoughtlessness of
terror left behind them at nurse an infant daughter,
whom the nurse finding in her hands gave over to
the magistrates.  Unable through its tender years to
eat flesh, they gave it, before an idol to which the
crowd assembled, bread mingled with some wine,
which, however, was the remains of that which had
been used in the soul-slaughter of perishing Christians.
The mother afterwards got back her child, but the
infant was unable to express and make known the
act that had been committed, as she had before been
to understand or prevent it. Through ignorance,
therefore, it arose, that when we were sacrificing
the  mother brought it in with her.  The  child,
however, mixed with the holy congregation, could
not bear our prayers and worship; it was at one
moment convulsed with weeping, then became tossed
like a wave by throbs of feeling, and the babe's soul,
yet in the tender days, confessed a consciousness of'
what had happened with what signs it could, as if
forced to do so by a torturer.  When, lowcveir, after
138 
INFANT COMIMUNION.
the solemnities were complete, the deacon began to
offer the cup to those who were there, and, in the
course of their receiving, its turn came, the little child
turned its face away, under the instinct of God's
majesty, compressed its lips in resistance, and refused
the  cup.  The  deacon, however,  persevered  and
forced upon her, against her will, of the sacrament of
the cup. There followed a sobbing and vomiting.
The eucharist was not able to remain in a body and
mouth that had been polluted. The draught, which
had been consecrated in the blood of the Lord, made
its way from a body which had been desecrated.
So great is the power of the Lord, so great the
majesty.  The secrets of the darkness are laid open
under his sight, and God's priest could not be deceived
in crimes however hidden. Thus much concerning
an infant which had not the age to make known a
crime which was committed on her by the act of
others."
After these singular disclosures, we need not be
surprised at the unequivocal statement of the highest authority in ecclesiastical history, that, "as the
Church of North Africa was the first to bring prominently into notice the necessity of infant baptism, so
in connection with this they introduced also the
communion of infants."*
Ages passed away; and, sometimes in a single age
* Neancer's Hist. of the Christ. Rel. ancd Church, translated by Torrey. Vol I., p. 333.
]39 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
._
great changes occur. Ages passed away, and, in the
meantime, the various influences and pressing con siderations which had introduced infant baptism and
infant communion, continued to extend and confirm
these practices more and more.
After the lapse of nearly two hundred years,
Augustine, in one of his works,* says: "Let us hear
the Lord, speaking, not indeed concerning the sacrament of the laver, but concerning the sacrament of his
holy table, to which no one, unless baptized, rightly
approaches: Unless ye eat my flesh, and drink nmy
blood, ye shall not have life in you.t   Why do we
inquire further?  What can be replied to this?..
. Will any one dare to say that this sentence does
not pertain to children, and that they can have life in
themselves without partaking of his body and blood:
because he does not say,' He that has not eaten,' as
concerning baptism,' He that is not born again:' but
says,' If ye shall not eat,' as addressing those who
were able to hear and understand, which, undoubtedly,
little children are not able to do."
In a sermon he remarks: "Infants they are, but
they receive his sacraments;  infants they are, but
they are made partakers of his table."t In the work
*De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione, et de Baptismo
Parvulorum.  Lib. 1. cap. xx: 26 and 27.  Works, Tom.
x: col. 15. Ben. ed.
t John vi: 53.
: Serm. 174. Do Verbis Apostoli, 1 Tim. 1. Works, Tom.
V., col. 834. Ben. ed.
140 
INPANT COMMUNION.                141
first quoted, he also says: " Most excellently the
Carthaginian Christians call baptism itself nothing
else than salvation, and the sacrament of the body of
Christ nothing else than life. Whence is this, unless
from ancient, as I think, and apostolic tradition, by
which the churches of Christ hold, as a fixed fact, that
without baptism and participation of the Lord's table,
no one of mankind can come either to the kingdom of
God or to salvation and eternal life?" *
And in one of his epistles he expresses himself in
the following decisive mnanner: "No one who
remembers that he is a Christian of the catholic faith
denies, or doubts, that children unbaptized and not
having partaken of the Lord's body and blood, have
not life in themselves, and thus are exposed to eternal
punishment."t
JuInnocent, bishop of Rome in the time of Augustine,
* Optime Punici Christiani baptismum ipsum nihil aliud
quam salutem et sacramentum corporis Christi, nihil aliud
quam vitam vocant.  Unde, nisi ex antiqua, ut existimo,
et apostolica traditione, qua  ecclesie Christi insitum
tenent, preter baptismutn et participationlerm mensse
Dominice, non solumn ad regnum Dei, sedcl nec ad salutem
et vitam'eternam posse quemquam hominum pervenire?
See Lib I., cap. xxiv., 34. Works, Tom. x., col. 19. Ben. ed.
t Epist. 106.  Nullus qui meminit Catholice fidei Christianum negat aut dubitat parvulos, nec recepta gratia
regenerationis in Christo, sine cibo carniis ejus et sanguinis
potu, non habere in se vitam, ac per hoc pcence sempiternre obnoxius. 
142             INFANT BAPTISM AND
maintained the necessity of infant communion from
John vi: 53.*
Gelasius, also bishop of Rome about a century
later, did the same.t
About the same time-the end of the fifth century
and the beginning of the sixth-the author of the
Greek works ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite
(mentioned in Acts xvii: 34), speaks of infant communion together with infant baptism, as an established usage.  He  was  supposed  to have been
ordained Bishop of Athens by the Apostle Paul;
and his writings had very great influence. They were
translated into Latin; and from the ninth century
they were widely circulated in the Latin or Roman
Catholic Church. At length, however, about the
middle of the fifteenth century, their spuriousness
was detected by Laurentius Valla.~
Near the close of the sixth century (590-604) the
Pope St. Gregory the Great, in his book of Sacraments, treating of the baptism of infants, says: "Who
are not prohibited from nursing before the sacred
communion, if it be necessary."
In the seventh century, the Council of Toledo
(Concilium Toletanum XI.), A.D. 675, excused from
ecclesiastical censure those by whom the bread in
* In literis acl Patres Synocli Milevitanase.
t In Epistola ad Episcopos per Picenum.
t: De Ecclesiastica Hierarchiia, c. VII.
~ See Gieseler's Ecclesiastical History, Vol. II., p. 80. 
INFANT COMMUNION,
the eucharist was rejected through extreme sickness
or in infancy, when they knew not what they did.
A few years before the close of the eight century
(A.D. 790), the Emperor Charlemagne speaks of
infants washed with the water of baptism, and satiated
with the food of the Lord's body and the drinking of
his blood.* In his Laws,t it is ordered that the
presbyter always have the eucharist prepared, so
that when any one sickens, or a child is weak, he mnay
administer the sacrament to him immediately, lest
he die without the communion.
The Ordo PRonmanus, composed in the ninth century, gives the following  direction: "Concerning
children care is to be taken, lest, after they shall have
been baptized, they receive any food or nurse, without
the greatest necessity, before they partake of the
sacrament of Christ's body."
Paschasius Radbert. a little before the middle of the
ninth century, wrote an extensive work on the Lord's
Supper.  In this work, with a startling boldness, he
expounded and defended the doctrine of transubstantiation; and, at the same time, he maintained that
baptized infants, even if they should die before participating, in the holy supper, would be saved in consequence of their union with Christ by baptism.
Controversy ensued, and it was continued for ages.
The opinion that in the eucharist the bread is changed
* Lib). II. De Imniaginibus, c. 27.
t Collected by Ansegisns, Lib. I., c. 161.
143 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
into the body and the wine into the blood of our
Lord, prevailed mnore and more, especially after the
council at Romne in 1079.
William De Champeaux, Bishop of Chalons, an intimate friend of St. Bernard, taught, as Bossuet expresses it,'that he who receives one kind alone receives Jesus Christ entire.'*
Hugo a' St. Victor, at Paris, who died about the
year 1141, maintained that in the eucharist wine alone
might be given to infants, because under each kind,
whether bread or wine, the body and blood of Christ
is at the same time received.t  He pursued a middle
course in respect to the necessity of infant communion. For, regarding the custom of the ancient
church, he taught that the eucharist was indeed to be
given to children, under the form of wine; but with
caution and limitation. For, if in preserving the
blood of Christ, or in administering it to children,
there is danger [of accident to the sacred element],
the observance should rather be omnitted. Then he
says that there is to the children no peril of salvation
if they should depart without the communion, because
they are already made members of Christ by baptism.
Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, taught the
same.  Hugo, in his work on the Sacraments, adds
* Que qui regoit une seule esp'ce, regoit J6sus-Christ tout
entier.
t See J. Bona, Rerum Liturgicarum, Lib. IL., c. 18, ~ ],
p. 723.
144 
TNPAW COMTMUNION.               1 45
with respect to infants, "The sacrament in the form
of blood is to be administered by the finger of the
priest, because such are naturally able to suck."*
Paschal II., who was Pope froin 1099 to 1118,
wrote an epistle (32) to Pontius, Abbot of Clugny,
in which he orders that children, and the feeble who
cannot absorb the bread, may communicate in the
blood alone, deeming this more becoming than to permit a dipped communion.t  He commanded to give
the two symbols separately, except to those who
were extremely sick and to little infants, whom  he
permitted to communicate with the wine. After his
time, this continued to be the usage of the Western
or Romish Church, in regard to infants, so long as
infant communion was practiced.1
In the twelfth century, Odo, Bishop of Paris, who
was alive in 1175, commanded his presbyters not to
give the  elements  to  children  in  any  manner.~
* De Sacramentis et Ceremoniis Ecclesiasticis, Lib. I. e.
20. Idem sacramentum in specie sanguinis est ministrandum digito sacerdotis, quia tales naturaliter sugere
possunt.
t See J. Bona, Rerum Liturgicarum, Lib. II., e. 18, ~ 3,
719.  Ut parvuli et inlfirmi, qui panera  absorbere non possunt, in solo sanguine communicent, hoe decenltius existimans quam intinctam communionenr permittere
I Paschal's Epistle entire is inserted by Baronius, in his
Ecclesiastical Annals, in connection with thle year 1118,
n. 3.  See it also'in 3. Schlilterus, De Libertate Ecelesiarum
Germanicarum, Lib. IV., c. 5, ~ 3.
See his Synodal Statutes, c. 39
;l....:_. 
146            INFANT BArTISM AND
Thus in the Gallican Churlch, the custom of coiamunicating the little ones ceased in the twelfth century; a custom which Hugo a' Victor, a writer of'the
same century, wished to restore, yet affirms to have
ceased, in his tinme, though some vestiges of it still
remained.   In some Roman Catholic countries vestiges of it remained long after his time.*
In the sixteenth century, when the great Lutheran
Reformation occurred, and there was earnest inquiry
on many religious subjects, the Romish  Church, at
the Council of Trent, decreed'that children are not
obligated to the sacramenital communion,' as follows
"Session 2lst (the 5thi under the Supreme Pontiff, Pius IV.), July lo, 1562.
"Doctrine concerning communion, under each kind,
and of children.
"The  holy ecumenical  and  general  council at
Trent,-in the Holy Spirit legitimately assembled, the
same legates of the Apostolic See presiding, since
concerning the tremiendous and most holy sacrament
of the eucharist, in divers places, by the arts of the
most wicked demon, various monsters of errors are
circulated, on account of which in some provinces
many seem to have departed fromnt the faith of the
* For ample evidence of this, gee Zornii Historia Euchiaristise Ilnfantumn, ex Antiquitatibus Ecolesiarum  tuin
Occidentalium  tuin Orientalinun secundum  decem  Sacilorum  seriem  et  multiplicem  varietatem  illustrata,printed at Berlin, in 1736; a work to which we are indebted for its lucid presentation of uiany important facts. 
INFANT COMMUNION.
Catholic Church and from  obedience, has  resolved
that those things which pertain to communion under
each kind, and of children, be in this place expounded.
Wherefore it interdicts to all the faithful of Christ,
and forbids that hereafter they dare either to believe
or to preach, otherwise than is in these decrees set
forth and defined."
"CAN. IV.- That children are not obligated to
Sacramental Comnntunion.
"Finally, the same holy council teaches that
children wanting the use of reason are by no necessity
obligated to the sacramental connmmunion of the eucharist' if regenerated by the laver of baptism and
incorporated  in Christ, they cainnot in that age lose
the already obtained grace of the sons of God. Yet
neither is antiquity therefore to be condemned, if in
some places it has sometimes observed this custom.
For as those most holy fathers have had, according to
the state of that time, probable cause for what they
did, so certainly, it is to be believed, without controversy, that they did it by no necessity of salvation."
Appended to this canon is the following:
"If any one sliall say that the communion of the
eucharist is necessary to children before they come to
years of discretion, let him be anathema."*
* See p. 109-111, Canonies et dclecreta Concilii Tridentiiii,
ex editione Ronana A.D. 1S:84, Leipsic, 1853.  Sessio xxi.
147 
1 4g           INFANT BAPTISM AND
In the catechism of the Council of Trent, published
by command of Pope Pius V., an octavo volume of
more than five hundred pages, these remarks are
made, namelv: "The Council of Lateram [in 1215]
quse est quinta sub Pio IV. Pont. Max. celebrata die xvi.
mensis Julii, MDLXII.
)octrina de communione sub utroque specie et parvulorunm.
Sacro Sancta oeccumnencia et generalis Tridentina synodus
in Spiritu Sancto legitime congregata, presidentibus in ea
eisdem  apostolica  sedis legatis, quum de  trenmendo et
sanctissimo eucharistir sacramento varia diversis in locis
errorum monstra nlequissimi demonis artibus circurnferentur, ob que in nonnullis provinciis multi a catholican ecclosin fide atque obedientia videantur discessisse, censuit
ea, qum ad communionem sub utraque specie et parvulorum pertinent, hoc loco exponenda esse. Quapropter
cunctis Christi fidelibus interdicit, ne posthac de iis aliter
vel credere, vel docere vel pradicare audeant, quam est his
decretis explicatum atque definitum.
e....................
CAN. IV. Parvulos non obligari ad communionem sacramentalem.
Denique eadem sancta synodus docet parvulos usu
rationis carentes nulla obligari necessitate ad sacramentalem eucharistin communionem, siquidem per baptismi lavacrum regenerati et Christo incorporati adeptam
jam filiorum Dei gratiam in illa setate amittere non possunt. Neque ideo tamen damnanda est antiquitas, si eum
morem in quibusdam locis aliquando servavit.  Ut enim
sanctissimi illi Patres sui facti probabilemn causam pro
illius temporis  ratione habuerunt,  ita certe eos nulla
salutis necessitate id fecisse sine controversia credendum
est.
Appended to Can. iv. Si quis dixerit, parrvulis, antequam 
INFANT' COMMUNION,
d,creed that all the faithful should communicate, at
least once a year, at Easter, and that the omission
should be chastised by exclusion from the society of
the faithful. But although this law, sanctioned, as it
is, by the authority of God, and of his church, regards
all the faithful, the pastor, however, will teach that
it does not extend to persons who have not arrived at
the years of discretion, because they are incapable of
discerning the Holy Eucharist from common food,
and cannot bring with them to this sacrament the
piety and devotion which it denlands. To extend the
precept to them would appear inconsistent with the
institution of this sacrament by our Lord:'Take,'
says he,'and eat;' words which cannot apply to
infants, who are evidently incapable of taking and
eating.  In some places, it is true, an ancient practice
prevailed of giving the HIoly Eucharist even to
infants; bufit, for the reasons already assigned, and for
other reasons most consonant to Christian piety, this
practice has been long discontinued, by authority of
the same church.*
Among the "other reasons" alluded to, the following might be mentioned:  1. Because infant communion has no firm foundation in the word of God.
ad annos discretionis pervenerint, necessarium esse eucharistime communionem: anathema sit.
* P. 227. The Catechism is translated into English by
the Rev. J. Donevan, Professor, etc., of the Royal College,
.t Maynooth.
149 
150             INFANT -BAPTISMI AND
2. Because, especially, it is not required in John vi:
53, but the declaration of Christ there made concerning the spiritual reception of himself by faith, had
been misinterpreted and badly distorted from the
genuine sense to tile reception of the sacrament
3. Because it is not necessary in order to obtain salvation. 4. Because it is an unreasonable service, and
a needless stumbling-block to our natural sense of
propriety. 5. Because in being forced upon infants it
is liable to be the occasion of hurtful and scandalous
accidents to the body and blood of Christ, and thus
dishonor him, and bring reproach on the holy ordinance. 6. Because infants cannot examine themselves,
and, discerning the Lord's body, partake of it in
remembrance of him, according to 1 Cor. xi: 24-29.
The Oriental churches still adhere to infant conmmunion. Fourteen or fifteen years ago, the Pope,
Pius IX., by an encyclical or circular letter, in the
modern Greek language, exhorted them to return to
the Roman Church.  Among the replies which this
document called forth fromnt the Greek Church one of
the ablest, that of Alexander de Stourdza, of Edessa,
has recently been translated into English and
published in the  Christian  Review.    The  author
observes: "Our Lord, the High Priest and spotless
victim, said expressly to his disciples,as he presented
to them the cup of the New Testament,' drink ye all
of it.'  Now since the sacrament of the  body  and
blood of Jesus Christ was instituted for a perpetual
observance, even'until he come,' and since our 
INFANT COMMUNON.
Saviour has said,'except ye eat the flesh of the Son
of man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you,'
the Eastern Church, faithful to primitive example,
has never dared to withhold the cup from the laity,
nor even from infants. of tender age. She ordains,
moreover, that the bread shall be drenched in the
consecrated wine." *...  Alluding to the decree
of the Council of Trent, he adds: "The churches of
the west have condemned an immense majority of the
human race to die before they have tasted of the
bread of life! They may accumulate the most
specious arguments in favor of this practice; but
these arguments will never be able to stand before
the right and simple faith, before the authority of the
universal church of all times. Let them beware I
By reasoning in this way they will by little come at
last to allow only the baptism of adults."
Hlere we -pause. From the point of observation at
which we have arrived, let us look around and survey
some of the singular sights which have been disclosed
as successive generations of men have.appeared, and
have passed rapidly away.
In the dim distance of far more than a thousand
years, stand St. Cyprian and St. Augustine, affirming
the necessity of infant communion, and proving it
* In the Greek Church, the bread sodden in the wine is
given to the communicant, from the cup, with a spoon.
This fact is stated by the translator, the Rev. Dr. Arnold,
who resided several years as a missionary at Athens.
151 
152              INFANT BAPTISM AND
from the words of our Saviour in John vi: 53,
"Except ye eat the body of the Son of man, and
drink his blood, ye have no life in you." Other
bishops, yes, bishops of Rome, too, and bishops of
the distant East, echo the same.  It is recognized by
ecclesiastical mandates, and by imperial laws.  At
length circumstances somewhat change. New thoughts
are suggested. Discussions arise. New influences
are felt. Considerations that had been overlooked
are appreciated. The words of our Saviour, that had
been misunderstood and wrongly applied, are correctly
interpreted. And motives pure, and, probably,
motives mixed with human frailty and error, combine,
under the overruling providence of God, to produce
a most remarkable result. What St. Cyprian and
St. Augustine had affirmed on this subject was condemned and anathernatized I condemned and anathematized by the general council at Trent, with the
sanction of him who claimed to be the universal
Bishop, the Vicar and Vicegerent of Jesus Christ on
earth, and with the practical concurrence of all the
Protestant Churches!
Henceforth let no man despair of other changes in
the right direction. But how shall the great ecclesiastical controversies be rightly terminated?   The
Greek and other eastern churches do not acknowledge
the authority of the Romish and other western
churches. But the word of the Lord endureth forever.  While both the great anti-Protestant portions
of Christendom assail each other, and urge their an. 
INFANT COMMUNION,
_-. —- - _
tagonistic claims to apostolic tradition and primitive
usage, let us, thankful to God for the unerring rule of
faith and practice which he has given us, endeavor to
understand and obey it, and set an attractive example
by yielding joyfully the lovely fruits of obedience.
The same arguments, for the most part, that disprove and forbid infant communion, disprove and
forbid infant baptism. And if infant communion is a
great error, infant baptism is a still greater error, and
more pernicious. Infant communion does not deprive the child of the benefits of communion when he
arrives at the age of discretion. But infant baptism,
performed in his early infancy, does, so far as it is regarded, prevent his ever receiving the benefit of
being baptized upon a deliberate profession of his
faith, an event which he ought to be able to remember, amidst the temptations and cares of life, till he
descends into his grave with the well-assured hope of
a glorious resurrection.
Infant baptism not only thus wrongs the child, and
takes from him what belongs to him, and was designed for his use when he becomes a believer, but
it wrongs our Lord himself. It actually, though not
intentionally, sets aside his authority. It perverts an
ordinance which he saw fit to appoint, and applies it
to those to whom it is not adapted, and to whom he
did not intend to have it applied.  It tends, in effect,
to annul what he ordained. Hie instituted baptism
for professing disciples only. The apostles sanctioned
no other. The Bible not only gives no support to
153 
INPANT BAPTISM AND
infant baptism, but it has passages which clearly show
that infants were not baptized in the time of the
apostles. And the earliest ecclesiastical history after
the time of the apostles knows nothing of the practice.
It is a practice that originated in error; in a sad misunderstanding of John iii: 5, and other passages; in
confounding the sign with the thing signified; in attributing a mysterious efficacy to the act of baptism;
and in a commendable parental affection, misguided,
and mingled with the surrounding superstition. It
oame as an angel of light, to perform a work of
mercy. But, angel of light as it seemed to be, it has
done an immensity of evil. Alas, what multitudes
have been deceived with the vain confidence of being
regenerate, and made heirs of eternal life, by an external act performed on them in a state of unconsciousness, or have been led to think that, in connection with such an act, their salvation has, somehow, been secured!
No beautiful association of parental duties and
parental confidence in God, unutterably important as
these are in their places-no ingenious fiction of a
presumptive faith, strong and precious as the agencies
and influences of faithful and judicious parents are
upon their children-no plausible apology whatever
can justify the virtual annulling of the initiatory ordinance which our Lord, in his wisdom and love,
established for the observance of his disciples.
Infant baptism led to infant communion.  Infant
communion, the comparatively innocent accomplice,
154 
INIANT COMMUNION.
has been convicted and condemned. Shall the prin cipal offender be permitted to escape condemnation?
Why should this seeming angel of light still be
caressed and lauded?   Why should theological or
metaphysical, or any pretentious theories, be con structed to keep up a lamentable influence, ill-gotten
at first, and too long retained. No good reason can
be given. Infant baptism has been proved to be, not
an ordinance instituted by our Lord, or authorized by
his apostles, or known to their earliest successors, but
a human device, at a later period-the offspring of
misapprehension and of ill-directed kindness, relying
on the supposed saving efficacy of a religious ceremony.
Whatever may be said of past ages, the present can
have no valid excuse for continuing to maintain the
error which we are deploring.   The present state of
Christendom is summoning us to conflicts and to trials
of our faith, in which we have special need of being
established and built up, not in error, but in the truth.
How else can we satisfy our own consciences? How
else can we meet successfully the Romanists and the
Greeks, with their misleading traditions, or rescue
from infidelity the sceptics, stumbling over our inconsistencies?
The sacraments, baptism and the.ford's supper,
have in themselves no efficacy; but the recipient, in
order to be benefited by them, must receive them with
faith in Christ. This, one of the great principles for
which we have always contended, has nIow come to be
generally conceded by persons of evangelical views in
155 
156               INPANT BAPTISM.
other communions.  "But," as it has been said, with
an alarming truthfulness, "until infant baptism be
openly abandoned, there is a constant tendency to reaction, a danger of relapse. The entering wedge for
the recurrence of all that is most fatal in the delusions
of Popery is in the crevice, and a few hard blows
may at any moment split all other Protestantism to
pieces.  It is not, therefore, merely in regard to the
time and circumstances of a ceremony that Baptists
are contending, but it is for principles the most valuable of any embodied in the Reformation from
Popery, or in the whole range of evangelical pietyprinciples for which the Baptist denomination alone
have consistently and unwaveringly contended during
the last hundred years-principles now regarded with
favor by evangelical Christians of other denomninations, but in great danger of being weakened and disregarded.  So long as infant baptism is preached, a
Newman, or a Pusey, or a Nevin, or a Schaff, can,
without much torturing, convert it into an acknowledgment of baptismal regeneration on the one side,
and a Stoddard or a Bushnell make it the entering
wedge of a lax church-membership on the other."*
* See the excellent work by Rev. Prof. Curtis of the
University at Lewisbl)urg, Pa., on The Progress of Baptist
Principles in the Last Hundred Years, p. 73-85 (Chap. IV.)
t 
vII.
INFANT BAPTISM AND INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP.
HEN the apostle Paul, in his epistle to
Titus, mentions, almong the qualifications
that would  indicate the  suitableness of
a man for the office of a bishop, his being
"the husband of one wife," and his "having
faithful children, not accused of riot or unruly," he probably did not intend to be understood as
saying that no man could be a bishop who was not a
husband, or who had not children, or whose children
were not all believers; but rather that his being a
husband worthily exemplifying marriage as it was
at first divinely instituted, and his having children so
judiciously brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord that some or, all of them were
already baptized believers, would be circumstances
highly favorable to his being selected. We cannot,
therefore, perceive the necessity of thinking with Dr.
Bushnell, that the children here are called faithful or
believers "in a presumptive or merely anticipatory
way;" or that the Ephesian and Colossian children
are included by the apostle among the faithful
brethren of the two cities in the same way. The in
terpretation given of Eph. vi: 1, seems to us forced
and unsatisfactory.  On these words (Children, obey
157 
158             INFANT BAPTISM AND
your parents in the Lord), our author remarks, "It
is not, Children in the Lord, or, Children obey in the
Lord your parents; but it is, Obey them who  are
parents in the Lord; as if their parentage itself, in the
flesh, were a parentage also in the spirit, communicating both a personal and a Christian life. So also,"
he adds, "when the parents are required to give a
nurture in the Lord, we may see that the children are
expected to be grown as saints and faithfuls, and to
be presumptively in the Lord, apart from any expectations and processes of adult conversion." We
cannot help thinking that if he had no particular
theory to maintain, he would himself be satisfied with
the short and simple note on this passage, in the
Tract Society's edition of the Bible: "Obey your
parents: it is to be understood here, as in chap. v: 24,
that the obedience enjoined extends to all things not
contrary to Christ's commands; for the addition, in
the Lord, that is, obey as those who are in the Lord,
or make his will the law of their being, excludes obedience to those commands which are contrary to
Christ's word."
Be this as it may, Dr. Bushnell proceeds thus:
"And it was out of such uses that the term faithful
grew into the peculiar kind of church use in which it
denotes all the supposed members of the Christian
body, whether adults or only baptized children....
The very language supposes a membership in the
church, or among the faithful brethren, by virtue of
baptism, and mere Christian nurture  such as on the 
INFANT CHURCII MEMBERSHIP.            159
footing of strict individualism, held by our Baptist
brethren, could never even be thought of."
But has he proved that in the passages in Titus,
Ephesians and Colossians, the very language supposes such a membership in the church, or among the
faithful brethren, by virtue of infant baptism and
mere Christian nurture, as on the footing of the individualism held by the Baptists, could never even be
thought of? His comment and paraphrase are unsatisfactory; and we cannot admit that the language
in those passages supposes what he infers and
affirms.
The well-authenticated and simple fact is, that the
term faithful grew into its peculiar kind of church use
from the corresponding Latin and  Greek  words
(fidelis and Yttrb0). In John xx: 27, our Saviour says
to Thomas, "Be not incredulous, but believing."'*
Here in the-Latin vulgate, fidelis is the translation
of the Greek word  (it,5,) corresponding to the
English believing or having faith, faithful. So it is in
Titus i: 6, having faithful children; Ephesians i: 1, to
the faithful in Christ Jesus; and in Coloss. i: 2, to
the saints and faithful brethren.  Chrysostom, in one
of his Homilies, explains the use of the Greek word:
"Thou art called a faithful, a believer, because thou
believest God."t  In the earliest ages of Christianity,
* Noli esse inoredulus, sod fidolis.  MV  yi'ov ar~LToT dX art,r,.
t Illtro'ta t1J o    KaXD, o5rt',7arreEt'   r  0e~. H Ior. XXI. ad populum
Antioehenum. 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
they who were baptized were baptized upon a profession of their faith. They were decided believers.
"The faithful, the believers (5 b)oo), is the name
which has uniformly been used to denote such as have
been duly instructed in the fundamental principles of
the Christian religion, and have been received, by
baptism, into the communion of the Church. By this
name they were distinguished on the one hand from
infidels and heretics, and on the other from the
catechumens, etc.* Even since the introduction of
infant baptism, the name has been retained by the
baptized.   "And  so," as Augustine  says  in  his
sophistical letter to Boniface,  "and so an infant,
though he be not yet constituted a believer (fidelis)
by that faith which consists in the will of believers,
yet he is by the sacrament of that faith; for, as [in
the preliminary part of the baptismal ceremony] he
is said to believe, so he is called a believer."
After his expository introduction, Dr. Bushnell now
proceeds to discuss the church memtbership of baptized children. lie proposes to show the nature and
kind of this membership; the reasons why it should
exist; and the fact of its existence.
"The conception," he says, "of this membership
is, that it is a potentially real one; that it stands, for
the present, in the faith of the parents, and the promise
* See the Antiquities of the Christian Church, translated
and compiled from the works of Augusti and others, by
the Rev. Lyman Coleman, p. 58.
160 
INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP.
which is to them and to their children, and that on
this ground they may well enough be accounted be lievers, just as they are accounted potentially men
and  women.    Then,  as  they come  forward  into
maturity, it is to be assumed that they will come for
ward into faith, being grown in the nurture of faith,
and will claim for themselves the membership into
which they were before inserted." He finds a case
analogous in the fact that our common  law makes
every infant a citizen.  "What," he supposes it may
be asked, "can the child do as a citizen? He cannot
vote, nor bear arms; he does not even know what
these things mean; and yet he is a citizen. In one
view he votes, bears arms, legislates, even in his
cradle; for the potentiality is in him, and the state
takes him up in her arms, as it were, to own him as
her citizen.  In a strongly related sense, it is, that
the baptized-child is a believer and a member of the
church.   There  is no  unreality in  the  position
assigned himn; for the futuritionil of God's promise is
in him; and by a kind of sublime anticipation, he is
accepted in God's supernatural economy as a believer,
even as the law  accepts him, in the economy of
society, to be a citizen."
But why "the baptized child?"  Does the sacramient  of faith make the infant a believer,  either
instantly or prospectively?  Why  does the church,
the   ecclesiastical community, restrict her spiritual
care and kindness and the blessings of the gospel to
baptized children?  The civil community, more god
11
161 
162             INFANT BAPTTiMI AND
like, extends care and kindness to all, without distinction. Where is Dr. Bushnell's authority for affirming
that the futurition of God's promise is in the baptized
child, any more than in one that has not been baptized,
both being wisely brought up in the nurture and
admonition of the Lord? Let the promise referred
to be distinctly pointed out.  In what chapter and
verse of the Holy Scriptures is it to be found?
Among the reasons why infant membership should
exist, or be appointed, the following are mentioned:
"First of all, if there is really no place in the Church
of God for infant children, then it must be said, and
formally maintained, that there is none. And what
could be worse in its effect on a child's feeling, than
to find himself repelled from the brotherhood of God's
elect, in that manner? What can the hapless creature
think either of himself or of God, when he is told
that he is not old enough to be a Christian, or be
owned by the Saviour as a disciple?"
We are happy in being able to assure Dr. Bushnell
that we repel no child in this manner.  We  would
welcome and encourage the little one's feeblest aspirations to become a loving and dutiful disciple of the
Saviour.  We would make a distinction, here overlooked, between the child that is a mere infant, and
the child that is of sufficient maturity to participate,
understandingly and with spiritual benefit, in the
ordinances of Christianity, and to appreciate a union
with the church.
"Again." he remarks, "it would be most remarka 
INFANT CHURCH  MEMBERSHIP.             163
ble, if Christianity, organizing a fold of grace and
love in the world and for it, had yet no place in the
fold for children. It spreads its arms to say:' For
God so loved the world,' and yet it has no place, we
are told, for children; children are out of the category
of grace! Jesus himself was a child, and went through
all the phases and conditions of childhood.
Hle said, too,'Suffer little children;' but this was
only his human feeling; he had no official relationship
to such, and no particular grace for theml! They
are all outside the salvation fold, hardening there in
the storm, till their choosing, refusing, desiring, sinning power is sufficiently unfolded to have a place
assigned them within!  Is this Christianity?
In this view, it gives to little children the heritage only of Cain, requiring them to be driven out
from the presence of the Lord, and grow up there
among the outside crew of aliens and enemies.  Let
no one be surprised that, under such treatment, they
stiffen into alienated, wrathful men, ripened for
wickedness."
It is certainly surprising that Dr. Bushnell should
think this to be a just representation of Christianity
without the baptism and church membership of infants.
Parental affection itself, united with wisdom, may
deem the nursery a place more suitable for children
than the lyceum or town-hall; and it may place
them at a preparatory school, before it sends them to
the university, or insists on their being admitted
there. 
164              INFANT BAPTISM AND
In ancient times, persons won from heathenism,
and children the offspring of Christian parents, were
carefully instructed before they were baptized.  Even
so late as in the time of Augustine, according to his
own testimony, as we have seen, it was a common thing
to inquire respecting a Christian's child, Is he a catechumen, or a believer?. That is, Is he still receiving
preparatory instruction, or has he been baptized as a
believer? And Eusebius, in his Evangelic Demon.
stration, speaking in a general way, as one might
speak of a people under a pastor's care or constituting
a Christian congregation, says: There are three
orders in each church or congregation; one, that
of the leaders, and two, those of persons under them;
the people of the Church of Christ being divided into
two orders, into that of believers, and into that of
the persons not yet esteemed worthy of the regeneration by the laver,* that is (more briefly), the people
being divided into two orders, the decided believers,
and the not yet baptized.  These last, who were not
yet deemed suitable for baptism, doubtless were, in
various ways, receiving Christian nurture and instruction.
For such persons, according to the so-called
Apostolic  Constitutions,  special  prayer  in  their
presence was offered, "that God would teach them
- Tpia Kaa' EaK6rqv ~ KK\ av rap y1araa, s'v [      rd   rev  yo~Ev,,o a r  rv
vzro,,3E,TK6o;O, rou -4g bcKXrliag 7oV XptroV Xaoo ei' ~o r,'y/lra 6Ltp,vtEov, et';
TE T7 rtCv r(rtV       r, ga 6v) KiS laDU X7 r pO  oaX6tyyiveoa[a  )'ttot7%,  V.   Do
monstrat. Evangel. Lib. vii., p. 200. 
INFANT CHURCHI MEMBERSHIP.
his commands and his ordinances, implant in them
his saving and holy fear, open the ears of their hearts,
strengthen them in piety, and unite them to and number them with his flock.... 0 God, who through
thy Christ didst appoint the disciples to be teachers,
that men might learn piety; do thou thyself even
now look down upon thy servants who are catechised
in the gospel of thy Christ, and give them a new
heart, and ren ew a right spirit in, their inward parts,
that they may both know and do thy -Till with full
purpose of heart, and with a willing soul.  Account
them worthy of the holy initiation, and unite them to
thy holy church, and make them partakers of the
holy mysteries, through  Christ our hope, who for
them suffered death; through whom glory and worship be given to thee in the Holy Spirit, forever.
Amen "*
Here are persons not immediately admitted to baptism and church membership; and yet, who will say
that they were harshly repelled? And is it right to
insinuate that the Baptist principle, in regard to baptism and church membership  "gives to little children
the heritage only of Cain, requiring them to be driven
out from the presence of the Lord, and grow up there
among the outside crew of aliens and enemies?"
More than thirty years ago, the Baptist denomination in this country published, at Philadelphia, a
tract entitled The Duty of giving Christian Instrue
* Book viii. Chap. vi.
166 
166             INFANT BAPTISM AND
tion to Children.*  "Th is duty," it states, "is, in the
first place, the dictate of reason and affectiont. Reason
requires that the ignorant be instructed-and  the
more important the knowledge, the stronger is the
argument for its being  communicated.   And  the
greater our affection for the persons needing instruction the more intense is our desire to have them instructed. Who does not pronounce it suitable that
children be taught those things which may be useful
to them in the present life? and who that loves his
children does not desire to have them taught? Now,
we take it for granted, that the knowledge of the
Christian religion is more valuable than the knowledge of any other subject; for it fills the mind with
the brightest conceptions of purity and benevolence;
and it is connected with what has the promise of the
life that now is, and of that which is to come. It is,
then, most manifestly, and most emphatically, the
dictate of reason and affection, that Christian instruction be given to children.   Besides, this duty is
clearly implied in the general direction to make the
gospel known.   In the command of our  Saviour,
Preach the gospel to every creature, it is clear that
he would have Christian instruction given to all who
are capable of being instructed. The common sense
of every man understands ihe direction as having
reference to moral agents only, and to all moral
* Number 124 in the catalogue of the American Baptist
Publication Society. 
INFANT CItURCI MAIEMBERSHIP.
agents belonging to the human family.   The gospel
is to be preached to all; and we are to encourage its
mninisters to go forth and instruct the most distant
nations. Surely, then, our own children are not to
be neglected; but so soon as they can understand,
they are to be taught the simple and affecting story
of our redemption, the first principles of the oracles
of God. But further, the duty of giving Christian
instruction to children is expressly enjoined. The
Sacred Scriptures exhibit this duty in the most direct
and positive manner:' Provoke not your children to
wrath,' says an apostle,'but bring them up in the nur-.
ture and admonition of the Lord.' INurture is the more
general term, indicating the education or training up
of children, which, we know, comprehends instruction
and example, rewards and punishments, and whatever
may be necessary in this work. Admonition, as here
used, directs our attention particularly to the mind of
the child, as that with which we have especially to
do; and we are here taught that this nurture and
admonition, or instilling into the mind, must be conformable to the spirit and instructions of our Lord.
So clear and prominent is the duty.  It is the manifest
dictate of reason and affection; it is implied in the
general direction to make the gospel known; and it
is expressly enjoined.  It rests, therefore, on an immovable foundation, and we need no other."7
Views like these,; we  think, indicate  somethii-.
better than "giving to little children the heritage onl —
of Cain."
1 C)7 
168~       INFANT BAPTISM AND
Dr. Bushnell asks, "Where is the encroacbmerrt
when  Christian parents baptize their child into the
same discipleship with themselves, and set it in the
school of Christ?" We reply, that to baptize a babe
is to encroach on our Lord's prerogative. It is virtually to derange what he arranged, to annul what he
ordained, to change what he appointed as an act of
self-consecration, and profession of faith and obedience,
into an act of consecrating another, and of promising
that another believe and obey. In regard to the
child, it is an encroachment on his right, when he be,
comes a disciple, of being consciously present, and
participating in his own baptism, and of recalling it
to mind afterwards, with spiritual benefit. Let the
parents set their child in the school of Christ, according to their best ability and judgmrent; but who has
authorized them to suppose that there is no place in
that school for the little one, unless it be baptized?
Next, we are urged to consider "the remarkable
and certainly painful fact that, in the view which excludes infant baptism and the discipleship of children,
the conversion itself of a parent operates a kind of
dissolution in the family state, than which nothing
can be more unnatural..... God's effectual calling
is no such unnatural grace; it will never call the
parents away from the children,' to be themselves included in the great family of salvation, and look out
in their joy to see their children fenced'away!"
Hlere again  we  have  "infant baptism  and  the
discipleshilt of children" placed together, as if they 
INFANT  CTIURCI   MEM BEPSHIP.C
were inseparable comnpanions, and one could not exist
without the other. Why is this? It does not accord
with the facts that have fallen under our observation.
We never knew a parent who, in consequence of being
converted and uniting with a Baptist church, became
indifferent to the spiritual welfare of his children.
We do not believe that such a case was ever known.
And we are confident that the eloquence here expended on "the gathering of human parents away
from their young," might have been more worthily
employed.
Dr. Bushnell now inquires, "What will justify, or
will naturally produce a more sullen remissness of
duty in parents, than the fact that, for the present,
God has shut away, and is holding away their children, and that they are never to be disciples of the
fold, till after they have been passed round into it,
through long detours of estrangement and ripening
guiltiness? If there is nothing better for them than
to be converted just as heathens are, why should they,
as parents, be greatly concerned for their own example
and the faithfulness of their training, when the conversion is to be every thing, and will have power to
remedy every defect? How refreshing the contrast
when the children, given to God in baptism, are
accounted members of the Church with them, as
being included in their faith, and having.the seal of it
upon them!"
Hiere infant baptism and infant church membership
come as the grand remedy for tardiness of conversion
169 
1l70            INFANT BArlTISM AND
among the children of Christians. rere there nt)
better remedies than these, we should be overwhelmed
with despondency. But we rejoice that without these,
quite as well as with them, we may labor, and pray,
and hope for early conversions. We may daily come
to the Saviour, and in faith and love bring with us
our children, to receive his blessing, to learn of hinm,
and to imbibe his spirit. Train up a child in the way
he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart
from it.*  In this, as in every duty, we acknowledge
our dependence on God for success, and rejoice in the
divine assurance that our heavenly Father is more
disposed to "give the HIoly Spirit to them that ask
him," than we can be to give good gifts to our children.t  Looking up to him as the gracious Being who
works in us and in others "both to will and to do of
his good pleasure,"$ we hear the heavenly voice, "In
the morning sow thy seed, and in the evening witlhhold not thine hand; for thou knowest not whether
shall prosper, either this or that, or whether both
shall be alike good."~ And then we have the apostle's exhortation and assurance, "Let us not be weary
in well doing, for in due season we shall reap if we
faint not. "ll
Thus we have ample encouragement-all  that is
suitable, and possible in the'nature of the case.
t Luke xi: 13.
P  Eccl. xi: 6.
{ Gal. vi: 19.
* Prov. xxii: 6.
$ Phil. ii: 13. 
INSAxNT CIIURCH   EMJBERMRsIP.        171
Leaving out the baptism and church membership of
infants, therefore, we have remaining a just and edifying description of truly Christian parents, when it
is said, " Their prayers, they understand, are to keep
heaven open upon their house. Their aims are to be
Christian. Their tastes and manners are to be
flavored by the Christian hope in which they live.
There is to be a quickening element in the atmosphere
they make. They will set all things upon a Christian footing for their children's sake; and their
children, growing up in such nurture of the Lord, will,
how certainly, unfold what their nurture itself has
quickened."
Dr. Bushnell mentions as another consideration in
favor of his system, that "the church itself, having
this infant membership in it, will unfold other aims
and tempers, and exert a finer quality of power. It
will not be a dry convention of simply grown-up men
and women....  The  parents will learn from
the children quite as much as they teach, and will
do their teaching fitly, just because they learn. The
Church prayers will have a certain paternity and
maternity in them; and the children will feel the
grace of these prayers warming always round them.
....    And the whole volume of religious life
will be unfolded by taking into itself the whole
volume of nature and famnilyfeeling."
In the ancient church, as seen in the work claiming
to be the Apostolical Constitutions, appropriate
prayers were offeed for the infants and for the cate 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
chumens, that they might be prepared for baptism and
church membership. And we do not see why the
children might not feel the grace of those prayers
warming around them, and, in this respect, be  as
much benefited before as after their initiation.  Besides, we fear that, in taking "the whole volume of
nature and family feeling" into the church, more would
be lost than gained by "the whole  volume  of religious life."
That the supposed infant membership is a real and
true fact, Dr. Bushnell maintains "' may be seen from
the following  proofs:  1. Those  declarations  of
Scripture which  assert or assume the  fact.  The
Saviour commands, Suffer little children to come unto
me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom
of heaven....  Nor," it is remarked, "is it any
objection, as respects the children, that'except a
man be- born again, he cannot be entered into this
kingdom;' for, potentially at least, they are thus born
again; and so are as fitly to be counted citizens of
the kingdom, as they are to be citizens of the state.
.  And the great apostle to the Gentiles, in at
least two of his epistles to Christian churches, addresses children, directly, as being included among
the saints, and faithful in Christ Jesus."
2. The  analogy of  circumcision.  " This," it is
argued, "was given to be the seal of faith, and a
church token, in that manner, of a godly seed. Baptism can certainly be the same with as little difficulty
or as little charge of absurdity. True, they were not
172 
INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP.
all Israel that were of Israel; and so all may not be
Israel that are baptized. Enough that God gives the
possibility, in both'cases, in giving the rite itself."
But our readers will bear in mind that he appointed
infant circumcision, not infant baptism; and that the
design of circumcision was very different from the
design of baptism as instituted by our Lord.
Abraham received the sign of circumcision, a seal of
the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being
uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all them
that believe.* In Jesus Christ neither circumcision
availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but faith
which worketh by love.t Baptism was designed to
express the faith and devotedness of the baptized. If
a person is bereft of reason, if through the violence
of a fever, or of some accident, he becomes unconscious, is he to be baptized in his unconsciousness?
If he is,'on what ground, and by what authority?
If -he is not, then an unconscious infant is not to be
baptized. Would not the administration of baptism
in such a case, and in the case of an unconscious
infant, be a manifest departure from the original
design of baptism?  Without a divine command, requiring it, we are unable to see how it could be justified.
In regard to children, Dr. Bushnell adds: "They
must either be taken into the church, or else they must
be excluded till they are old enough to be admitted
* Rom. iv: 11.
173
t Gal. v: 6. 
1 7~4       INFANT BAPTISM AND
on the ground of a religious experience. There is no
other alternative. If they are excluded, then it is
taken for granted that they are to grow up as unbelievers and aliens, which is only their public consignment to evil." Taken for granted that they are to
grow up as unbelievers and aliens I Not at all. The
children are to be affectionately and carefully brought
up by their parents in the nurture and admonition of
the Lord; and their parents are to have the co-operation of the pastor, and the church, and the Sunday-school, and of all who would win the young
to the Saviour and to the blessings here and hereafter, of becoming early his decided and faithful disciples.
The author proceeds: "If they are taken to be in
the faith, presumptively, as in the nurture of their
parents, and so accepted, then every kind encouragement is given to them, and every pledge of divine help
is graciously given to their parents."
What pledge, we respectfully ask, what pledge of
divine help is graciously given to the Pedobaptist
parent that is withheld from the Baptist parent, on
account merely of his conscientiously withholding
baptism from his infant child?
We are next told that "God, on his part, gives no
presumption, either to the parent or their child, that
he is to be only a transgressor and alien; but he gives
the seal of faith"' (Does he?) "as a pledge, to raise
their expectation of what he will do for them,
and to throw the blame of a godless childhood and 
INFANT CIIIURcH  MEMBERSHIP.          17 5
youth, if such there is to be, on themselves."  Where,
in all the Holy Scriptures, such a doctrine can
be found, as the one here taught respecting the
design of Christian baptism, we have been unable to
discover.
3. The holiness of children, mentioned by the apos tle Paul in 1 Cor. vii: 14, is urged as an argument for
their church membership.
4. "All the reasons I have given," says Dr. Bush nell, "for the observance of infant baptism, go to
establish also the fact of infant membership in the
church. All this holds good, especially of that
which discovers the origin of the rite in proselyte
baptism."
Respecting the proofs under these two heads we
do not deem it necessary here to make any remarks.
We refer our readers to what we have already had
occasion to -present for their consideration.
Finally, in addition to the more direct evidences
adduced for the church membership of baptized children, Dr. Bushnell urges "the opinions of the church
and her most qualified teachers, from the apostolic era
downward."
"This whole view of infant membership," he remarks, "as it stood in the first three centuries of the
church history, appears to be well summed up, both
as regards the facts and the reasons, in the following
statement of Neander:' It is the idea of infant baptism, that Christ, through the divine life which he
imparted to, and revealed in, human nature, sanctified 
INFANT BAPTISM AND
that germ from its earliest development.  The child
born in a Christian family was, when all things were
as they should be, to have this advantage over others,
that he did not come to Christianity out of heathenism
or the sinful natural life, but from the first dawning
of consciousness unfolded his powers under the imperceptible, preventing influences of a sanctifying, ennobling religion; that, with the earliest germinations
of the natural self-conscious life, another divine principle of life, transforming the nature, should be brought
nigh to him, ere yet the ungodly principle could come
into full activity, and the latter should, at once, find
here its powerful counterpoise. In such a life, the
new birth was not to constitute a new crisis beginning at some definable moment, but it was to begin
imperceptibly, and so proceed through the whole life.
Hience baptism, the visible sign of regeneration, was
to be given to the child at the very outset: the child
was to be consecrated to the Redeemer firom the very
beginning of its life."*
This remarkable paragraph was occasioned by the
passage in which Irenneus speaks of all as being
regenerated to God through Christ. That the impartial and venerable historian should seem to
acquiesce in the common erroneous opinion of its
having reference to baptism, may easily have arisen
from the intensity with which while, he was reading
* Neandcler's Church History (Torrey's translation), Vol.
I., pp. 311, 312.
l76 
INFANT  cfHI.CtCli MEMAIBERSHIP.
Ireneus, his mind was attracted to other matters
than the one embraced in that passage.   "Regenera tion and baptism," he says, "are in Irenseus intimately
connected; and it is difficult to conceive how the
term regeneration can be employed in reference to
this age [infancy], to denote any thing else than
baptism. Infant baptism, then, appears here as the
medium through which the principle of sanctification,
imparted by Christ to human nature from its earliest
development,  became  appropriated  to  children."
How much does this fall short of baptismal regeneration?  iHe now takes up  "the profound Christian
idea" which he supposes to have been in the mind of
Irenwus, and from it, in conjunction with evangelical,
and perhaps with some mixed ideas in his own mind,
he skillfully develops a plausible theory of infant
baptism-an apology for a practice, which, according
to his own-testimony, was not introduced till long
after the time of the apostles.
Here begins Dr. Bushnell's quotation. Let us look
at it again: "It is the idea of infant baptism, that
Christ, through the divine life which he imparted to
human nature, sanctified that germ fromnt its earliest
development.  The child born in a Christian family
was.. to be under the imperceptible, preventing
influences of a sanctifying, ennobling religion..
A  divine principle of life, transforming the nature,
was to be brought nigh to him:' (In baptism? or in
Christian nurture? or in both?) "ere yet the ungodly
12
177 
INFANT BAPT'ISAI AND
principle could come into full activity....  The
new birth was Inot to cotnstitute a new crisis."
Obviously, however, the new birth must in reality
be something new, though it begin, not at a definable
moment, but imperceptibly, and so proceed through
the whole life.  When it became perceptible, and
there was reasonable evidernce of its existence, it
would be proper and truthfu.l to let it be iudicated by
an appropriate sign.  "Hence" (on account of the
imperceptibility of the beginning of the new birth)
"baptism, the visible sign of regeneration, was to be
given to the chlild at the very outset," says Neander,
the accommodating theorist.  When?!  Wlzen the
child gaue euidence of beirg spiritually regeerated,
says Neander, the conscientious historian. On the
very same page on, which the quoted paragraph
begins, the historian states most explicitly, "We have
all reasors for not deriving infanrt baptism from
apostolic institttion. "
Shall we regard the historian, or the theorist?
Shall we follow the Holy Scriptures, or the unauthorized devices of men?
To streagthei   his argumnent,  Dr. Bushnell  next
presents a statement from  Cave's Primitive Cbristianity, illustrating the power of religion, as seen in
the domestic life of families: " Gregory Nazianzen
peculiarly cormmends his mother, that not only she
herself was cons-ecrated to God, and brought up under
a pious education, but that she conveyed it down, as
a necessary inlenrt aee  to her cbfildrari, and it seems
179 
INFANT CI-IURCH MIEMBERSHIP.
her daughter Gorgonia was so well seasoned with
these holy principles, that she religiously walked in
the steps of so good a pattern; and not only re claimed her husband, but educated her children and
nephews in the ways of religion."*
What renders this statement peculiarly instructive
and valuable is, that the remarkably pious and exem plary parents of Gregory Nazianzen did not think it
their duty to have their offspring baptized in infancy.
It is well known that he did not receive baptism till
he came to years of discretion; and yet at the time
of his birth his father was a minister of the gospel.
Calvin is introduced, making the adventurous assertions that "children are baptized into future repentance and faith; for, though these graces have not
yet been formed in themn, the seeds of both are nevertheless implanted in their hearts by the secret operations of the Spirit."  And Baxter is brought forward
teaching, the doctrine of infant baptism thns: "As
children are made sinners- and miserable by the
parents, without any act of their own, so they are delivered out of it by the free grace of Christ, upon a
condition performed by their parents."
In 1649, the Cambridge Platform limited churchmembership to such as appeared tq be renewed persons; while, throughout New England, except the
Hlartford and Providence colonies, none who were
not members of the church were permitted to be
* Primitive Clhristiarity, pp. 17.,-174.
179 
180             INFANT BAPTISM AND
=
voters in civil affairs. In 1662, all baptized persons
who lived reputably and assented to the gospel, were
allowed to be so far church members as to be voters
in the commonwealth, and to have their children baptized.
We pass over Cotton Mather's unfavorable opinion
in regard to "the way of the Anabaptists," and his
favorable opinion in regard to "keeping persons under
those church dispensations wherein grace is given."
Religion declined. After a long period in which
the churches fell into a state of debility, and "well
nigh lost the idea of spiritual life," there came the
Great Revival, in 1740 and subsequent years, under
the ministration of Whitefield, Edwards and others.
This, in the circumstances of the people, was very
naturally attended with some ill-regulated excitements
and some defective or erroneous views. Speaking of
the kind of religion favored and promoted by the
friends of the revival, Dr. Bushnell says: "It has one
great merit, and one great defect. The merit is that
it displaced an era of dead formality, and brought the
demand of a truly supernatural experience. The
defect is, that it has cast a type of religious individualism, intense beyond  any  former  example.  It
makes nothing of the family, and the church, and the
organic powers God has constituted as vehicles of
grace."
In this connection, and on this topic generally, we
think that Dr. Bushlnell's censure is so severe and indiscriminating as, in manay cases, to become unjust. 
INFANT CHURCH MEMB13ERSHIP.
His  description is a  caricature.  It  cannot  have
reference to Baptists alone. Doubtless, it was designed quite as much for some others, as for them,;
and it may be beneficial to all.
A pupil of Edwards, Dr. Hopkins, in his system of
Divinity, discusses largely the nature and design of
infant baptism.  And he is now introduced.  "IHe
goes even beyond the notion of a presumptive piety
in the children baptized, and says,' The church receive and look upon them as holy, and those who
shall be saved.   So they are as visibly holy, or as
really holy, in their view, as their parents are.'  He
asserts an organic connection of character between
parents and children, as effectual for good as for evil;
nay, that they may as truly, and in the same sense,
transmit holiness as they transmit existence; not, indeed, independently of God, but by virtue of a covenant divinely constituted.'If God,' it is affirmed,
'has been pleased to make a constitution and appoint
a way in the covenant of grace with man, by which
pious parents may convey and communicate moral
rectitude or holiness to their children, they, by using
the appointed means, do it as really and effectually as
they communicate existence to them. In this sense,
therefore, they may convey and giye holiness and salvation to their children.'"  On  another page, Dr.
Hopkins says: "Real  holiness and  salvation are
secured to the children of believers, by the covenant
into which the parents enter with God, as it respects
181 
182             INFANT BAPTISM AND
their children, when they offer them in baptism."*
And "Jesus Christ does, in this transaction, receive
the child into the same visible standing and character
with the parent, as a visible saint, or holy person, and
orders the church to consider and look upon it in this
light. "t
This assertion, that our Lord takes part in the
transaction when an infant is baptized, assumes that
infant baptism is one of his institutes. But we are
constrained to believe that it was not instituted by
him; and that it has no support, either in the Holy
Scriptures or in the earliest ecclesiastical history.  Its
non-existence in the time of the apostles would prove
the non-existence of infant church membership at that
time; but baptism would naturally imply membership.
And now, respecting the matter before us, what is the
testimony of the most reliable works on Christian
Antiquities? We refer our readers to the volume prepared by Professor Coleman. It can easily be procured. There (chap. xiv. sec. 3) they will find the
following statement: "The general introduction of
the rite of infant baptism has so far changed the
regulations of the church concerning the qualifications
of candidates, and their admission, that what was formerly the rule in this respect, has become the exception. The institutions of the chufirch during the first
five centuries, concerning the requisite preparations
for baptism, and all the laws and rules that existed
* Vol.11., p. 291.                    Vol.. p  286.
* Vol. II., p. 291.t Vol. II: p 286.
0 
INFANT cflUrCFf MEMBFRSHIP.
during that period, relating to the acceptance or rejection of candidates, necessarily fell into disuse when
the baptism of infants began not only to be permitted,
but enjoined as a duty; and almost universally observed. The old rule, which prescribed caution in
the admission of candidates, and a careful preparation for the rite, was, after the sixth century, applicable, for the most part, only to Jewish, heathen and
other proselytes. The discipline which was formerly
requisite preparatory to baptism, now followed this
rite."
The statement here made is corroborated by Bunsen,
a writer distinguished alike for his frankness and for
his extraordinary erudition. In his work on Hippolytus and his Age (about the beginning of the third
century), he says: "The Apostolic Church made the
school the connecting link between herself and the
world. The object of this education was admission
into the free Society and brotherhood of the Christian
community. The church adhered rigidly to the principle, as constituting the true purport of the baptism
ordained by Christ, that no one can be a member of
the communion of saints, but by his own free act and
deed, his own solemn vow made in presence of the
church. It was with this understanding that the
candidate for baptism was immersed in water, and admitted as a brother, upon his confession of the Father,
the Son and the Holy Ghost. It understood baptism,
therefore, in the exact sense of the First Epistle of St.
Peter (iii: 21), not as being a mere bodily purification,
183 
184            INPFANT BAPTISMq AND
but as a vow made to God with a good conscience,
through faith in Jesus Christ. Justin Martyr calls
baptism a dedication of ourselves to God. This vow
was preceded by a confession of Christian faith, made
in the face of the church, in which the catechumen expressed that faith in Christ, and in the sufficiency of
the salvation offered by him. It was a vow to live,
for the time to come, to God and for his neighbor, not
to the world and for self; a vow of faith in his becoming a child of God through the communion with his
only begotten Son in the Holy Ghost; a vow of the
most solemn kind, for life and for death. The keeping of this pledge was the condition of continuance in
the church; its infringement entailed repentance or
excommunication.' All church discipline was based
upon this voluntary pledge, and the responsibility
thereby self-imposed.  But how could such a vow be
received without examination? How could such examination be passed without instruction and observation?
"As a general rule, the ancient church fixed three
years for this preparation, supposing the candidate,
whether heathen or Jew, to be competent to receive
it.  With Christian children the condition was the
same, except that the term of probation was curtailed
according to circumstances. Pedobaptism, in the more
modern sense, meaning thereby baptism of new-born
infants, with the vicarious promises of parents or other
sponsors, was utterly unknown to the early church;
not only down to the end of the second but indeed to 
INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP.              185
the middle of the third century. We shall show, in a
subsequent page, how, towards the close of the second
century, this practice originated in the baptism of
children of a more advanced age.
"Hence we find in the Christian school of that
period, four great acts, three of which were common
both to the new converts and to Christian children:
previous examination of the Jewish or heathen candidates who presented themselves; instruction; examination immediately before immersion and the taking
of the vow; and, lastly, that ceremony itself."*
Again we request our readers to ponder the considerations which have been presented. Are they
not sufficient to show the groundlessness of Dr.
Bushnell's arguments for infant baptism? Are they
not sufficient to show that it was not instituted either
by our Lord or by his apostles? And if it was not
divinely instituted and sanctioned, it is an unauthorized -human device, a perversion, an intrusion, crowding out (however unintentionally) what our Lord and
Saviour did institute.  Has  it not a natural and
strong tendency to open the way for untimely and
unsuitable membership and unchristian character in
the church, and for other departures from the regulations established by the wise and gracious Founder
of Christianity? Ought it not then to be discontinued?
Notwithstanding Dr. Bushnell's sincere and earnest
* Vol. II. p. 105,' 2d Ecld. 
186             INFANT BAPTISM AND
rejection of the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration,
as held under the priestly forms of Christianity, some
of the consequences of that doctrine must, almost inevitably, adhere to his system. Infant baptism arose
at first, in great measure, from that doctrine; and
while it exists, there will be imminent danger of its
cherishing an undue and dangerous reliance on  a
ceremony. While it exists, disguise and adorn it as
we may, it is still an unauthorized intrusion; and the
more we disguise and adorn it, the more are evil consequences to be dreaded. The honor of our Lord
and the interests of religion, throughout Christendom,
require that infant baptism be discontinued. He, and
he only, has a right to be obeyed in this matter.
And for the churches and for all the individuals concerned, there is safety only in obedience to his rightful authority.
Let baptism, as it was instituted by him, be restored.
The way is open for Christian nurture in all its amplitude and all its blessedness. The parent's duty is
made as clear and imperative as the most intelligible
words can express a command. The parent is directly
responsible; and, at the same time, he is to seek and
receive all needed help. It is an error, if any suppose
that we welcome only late or explosive conversions.
We would gladly accept the child, with the child's
experience. We ask only for reasonable evidence that
he cordially loves the Saviour, and humbly relying on
his grace, desires, with deliberate purpose, to serve
and honor him forever. 
INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP.            187
The American Baptist Publication Society, in the
Tract which has already been mentioned as having
been issued many years ago, gives the following
representation: "That, in the time of our Lord there
were children who had received the truth in the love
of it, is evident from the twenty-first chapter of
Matthew, where it is stated:' When the chief priests
and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did,
and the children crying in the temple, and saying
Hiosanna to the Son of David, they were displeased,
and said unto him, Hearest thou what these say?
And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never
read, Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou
hast perfected praise?' This is a quotation from the
eighth Psalm; and, it being poetry, it is somewhat
hyperbolical, according to the poetic manner, but the
idea intended to be exhibited is perfectly manifest,
namnely, that God is pleased when young children feel
his love, and utter his praise.
"Instances of early piety have occurred in almost
every age of the world; and they are not rare in our
own country at the present time. Within the circle
of our own observation, and particularly in those
places where special attention has been paid to the
subject of religion, many a striking and lovely example of this kind has presented itself; and we have
been most happily taught the force of the passage,
Out of the mniouths of babes and sucklings, thou hast
perfected praise. Indeed, there is abundant proof
that genuine conversions may occur, and that they 
88            INFANT tAPTISI  AND
have occurred, at a very early period. Why, then,
we ask again, why should we not hope, and labor and
pray for such a blessing in respect to our own chil dren?"
Expressions like these ought to have protected our
denomination from Dr. Bushnell's unfavorable repre sentations. It is not our Christian principles, but our
failing to live up to them, that is to be censured.  In
our endeavors we will welcome help, from whatever
quarter it may come, and in whatever form, whether
of reproach or of commendation, of encouragement
or of admonition. Let the righteous smite me: it
shall be a kindness; and let him reprove vme: it shall
be an excellent oil.*
The volume before us contains much that is valu able. Besides the discourses or essays in which the
arguments occur which we have been reviewing, there
are eight or ten others.  One of them is on "the
ostrich nurture;" one on "the out-populating power
of the Christian stock;" and another is entitled,
"when and where the nurture begins."  The rest are
on parental qualifications; physical nurture to be a
means of grace; the treatment that discourages piety;
family government; plays and pastimes; holidays and
Sundays; the Christian teaching of children; and
family prayer. Without approving every sentiment
expressed, we comnmend the perusal of the book to
* Psalms cxli: 5 
INFANI CIIURCH MEMBERSHIP.
the discriminating reader.  He will find it highly iiiteresting and suggestive.
Would that the author might have health and a
disposition to prepare an improved edition, thoroughly
expurgated of the present errors, and thus furnish, on
a subject of immense importance, a volume that
might be a worthy companioln for his recently published sermons, and for his thrice welcome chapter on
the character of Christ.
189 
0 
rHE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN.
191 
THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.
RIGEN,  it will be recollected, was born at
Alexandria, in the year of our Lord 185, and
died at Tyre, in the year 254.  Like many of
the early fathers-for example, like Clement,
his learned and ingenious predecessor in the
catechetical school, at Alexandria-he  conceived of Christian baptism as having a miraculous,
renewing efficacy on those who were already converted, penitent and believing, or, as we should say,
already renewed.
The following remarkable passage occurs in his
commentary on John   "Moreover, it is fitting to
know that as the wonderful powers  in the cures
wrought by the Saviour, being symbols of the persons who perpetually are liberated by the word of
God from every disease and malady of the soul, were
none the less beneficial, though exerted on the body,
inasmuch as they called to faith those who were
benefited; so the laver by the water, being a symbol
of the purification of the soul, washed in regard to all
pollution from iniquity, is, to him who presents himself to the Deity, none the less and OF ITSELF the
192
4 ~..... 
cited, be calls baptism "The symbol of having been
purified. "t
In his Commentary on John, he speaks of baptism,
indeed, as being "performed in connection with the
renewing of the Spirit, which," he adds, "as it is
from God, even now moves upon the water; but," he
acknowledges, "it is not in all the baptized. "'
Hence he often urges the catechumens (as in
iuomily VI. 5, on Ezekiel, and ioIomily XXI. on Luke)
Xp'  ~ X   eri~at 5'rt c5'Trep a, Kara ra; yeyerr7lZva; 7rd-O 7-jv ao-,po; &pa~     efa!
repii,,ot     te,, uy6oXa  rvyX'vovwat  7~  dat'X6y7o,v 3eiv diraXharro,v,a,z,
1011Kai p~aX-Kiag, ov6~l II-1Y Kai Uc,paliK~; YEIOI',a,                  ig    r
tpoIKaXEa')eaIpe,ai roe)    e               ol',rWo  Kai  rd 6,a  rao  v'6aro,  Xovrpo'v, oy
6oh:), rvyxyvo, kaaap,'oD,              rr6vra tviroi, d7r  KaKia; d7roTrv~ops,, o
Kai Kar' aurd rcJ i,?raprxo-rt savr6p  r, 5stdr,rlr  rft;                         r4;
71[,oIKIoIrlri'l  rpt&'o:;  ilIKX~ oEWo%  E"o'rv  ~t xapto,'6rw-o,Eefw   dpk~? KOai 77yfi.
T)m. vi., 17.
t To cpg.oXo   r- drroKeKaSa'paat.  B. iii., 51.
+.. ura dalcatpaoEwe   y,~6o  ~                    varo,   roa Kai vv,
bre,ZO 7rapa $egv lartv: i Ewo  r6v ~arog, dXX' ov 7ri pr-   rd v"-p EyyVto,.vov.
Tom. vi., 17.
13 
I 94         THE TESTIMONY OF ORI1GEI
to make a worthy preparation, and come to baptism
in a suitable state of mind, so that they may be
washed into salvation.* Speaking in regard to baptism in Homily XXVI. on Luke, he says, "If thou
be holy, thou shalt be baptized inithe Holy Spirit."t
And, in the same connection, he further says,  " To
these who are holy and with entire faith are converted
to the Lord there will be given, in baptism, the grace
of the Holy Spirit and salvation.".
In his Homily III. 1, on Numbers, he remarks,
"Not all that are of Israel are Israelites. Nor does
it follow as a matter of course that all who have been
washed in the water have also been washed in the
Holy Spirit; and, on the other hand, not all are aliens
and destitute of the Holy Spirit who  are numbered
among the catechumens.~
Forom the record in Luke 4: 20, that the eyes of all
that were in the synagogue were fastened on our
Lord, Origen, in his thirty-second Homily on that
book, takes occasion to exclaim, " Happy the congregation coicierning which the Scripture testifies that
the eyes of all weie attentive to him! Ihow I could
* Ut veniatis ad lavacrum, et lavemini in salutem.
t Si sanctus fueris, Spiritu Saileto baptizaberis.
X His vero qui  sancti sult, et tota fide ad Domw num
conuveittuntnr, Spiritus Sancti gratia salusque tribuenda est.
Ad Non enim omnes qui ex Israel,ii sunt Israelite: Neque
omnies qui loti sunt aqua, continuo etiam  Sancto Spiritu
loti sant; sicut e contrario non omrnes qui in catecelumeis
lumerantur, alieni sult et expertes Spiritus Sancti. 
RESPECTING  THE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.   195
wish this assembly to have similar testimony, ths
the eyes of all, of catechumens and believers, o0.
women and men and infants, the eyes not of the bode
but of the soul, were attentively beholding Jesus!"*
As we proceed, let it not be forgotten that Origen
here uses the word infants (infantes, vr,tco) to indicate the children of his congregation; children, the
eyes of whose minds might attentively behold the
Saviour.
Decisive evidence in support of Infant Baptismn, it
hlas been thought by many, is to be found in the works
of Origen.  Three passages have been brought forward and urged with much confidence: one from his
homilies on Leviticus; another from his Homilies
on Luke; and the third from his Commentary, on the
Epistle to the Romans.
From a very early period, these passages have
had great influence.  And  their influence has been
much increased by their being ingeniously set forth
in Mr. Wall's History of Infant Baptism, first published in England, about a hundred and fifty years
ago.  The cause of truth seems to demand that they
be carefully and candidly examined. In view of the
present state of Christendom, we think it important
* Beata congregatio de qua Scriptura testatur, quodcl
omnium oculi erant attendentes in eum! Quam vellem
istum ccetum simile habere testimonium, ut omniurm oculi,
et catechumenorum, et fidelium, et mulierum, et virorum,
et infantiam, non corporis oculi, sed animal, aspicerent
Jesum! 
THIE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
chat they be rightly appreciated. We would invite
attention to the subject, and submit to all candid
inquirers some considerations which, we hope, will
assist them in coming to a just and satisfactory conclusion.
Before introducing the passages themselves, it
ought to be recollected that they exist, not in the
Greek language, in which they were written by
Origen, but only in the Latin, into which they were
translated near the close of the fourth century. The
Homilies on Luke were translated by Jerome;  those
on Leviticus and the Commentary on the Epistle to
the Romans, by Rufin.
On general principles, it must be admitted that a
translation is not so reliable an authority as the
original; and in the cases before us, there are some
special considerations that are adapted to awaken
)ur distrust.
It is well known that the works of Origen have
suffered greatly, not only from the unintentional
injuries of time, but also from injuries more deplorable. Some of them, from various motives, have
been' curtailed; and some have been interpolated.
Many have suffered both by omissions and by
additions.  Many,  too, whose originals no longer
exist, were more or less deformed by the translator,
when they were transferred from the Greek language
into the Latin.
In regard to Jerome, few need to be informed that
he took great liberties in translating workls of Origen.
196 
RESPECTING TIE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.   197
He  did, indeed, reproach Rufin for making certain
unwarrantable changes. But the circumstances were
peculiar.
Jerome and Rufin had been early and intimate
friends. Their studies, their habits of mind, and their
manner of living, in Italy and in Palestine, had, in
maniy respects, been  similar.   Both  were zealous
churchmen. Both were monks: and both were presbyters. Both were highly distinguished for enterprise,
for untiring diligence, and for extensive learning,
especially in ecclesiastical  literature.  Jeromie was
pre-eminent for his knowledge of Hebrew, and for
translating the Holy Scriptures. Rufin, in bringing
out his translation of that speculative and adventurous
work of Origen, entitled, On first Principles,* was
desirous, it is probable, of commending it to the favorable regard of its readers through the influence of
Jerome, wh-o had translated other works of the same
author. In his preface he referred to him respectfully
as a brother and colleague, whose example and manner of translating he had endeavored to follow; and
he used such other expressions as, in connection with
these, made Jerome apprehensive of being himself
suspected of Origenism, which was then regarded by
many as a most dangerous heresy.t Jerome was
* Ispt dpX,,r.
J Frater et collega in prsefatiuncula vocor, et satis apertb
exponuntur crimina mea, quid scripserim, quibus ill coelnm
Origenerm laudibus levaverim....  Voluerat me in
interpretatione quasi previum sequi; et auctoritatem operi
suo ex nostris opuscullis mutuari.  See in Jeromhe's Works,
vol. iv., p. 349, his Apoloqia adversys Ru,fitu-7, lib. 1I 
198      THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
indignant.  He'doubtless suspected Rufin of being
at once heretical and disingenuous.  He resolved to
clear himself, and overwhelm a popular rival.
In his defense or apology against Rufin, he represented him as having changed for the better, the doctrines which Origen had taught, concerning the
Father, and the Son, and the HEoly Spirit, and which.
Roman ears were unable to bear, while he had
retained others equally heretical, and had sometimes
added confirmations to them; so that he who should
read what was sound on the Trinity, would not avoid
what was unsound on other subjects.* The orthodoxy on one point of great interest would allure and
encourage men to receive what was heretical on many
others.
Thus Rufin, in the view of Jerome, had been laboring to promote pernicious errors. This was "the
head and front of his offending."' It was not so much
* QuT quum legissem, contulissemque cum Grmco, illico
animadverti quse Origenes  de  Patre et Filio et Spiritu
Saneto impie dixerat; et quse Romane  aures ferre non
poteranlt, in meliorela partem ab interprete commutata.
Cetera autem dogmata, de angelorum ruina, de animorurn
lapsu; de resurrectionis proestigiis; de mundo vel interniundiis Epicuri; de restitutione omniurn  in  T-qualeln
staturnm; et multa his deteriora, qun  longum esset retexere,
vel ita vertisse, ut in Grneo invenerat; vel de commentariolis Didymi, cqui Origenis apertissimus propugnator est,
exaggerata et firmiora posuisse ut qui in Trinitate Catholicumn legeret, in aliis Hcereticumn non caveret. Apol. adversus
Ruf., lib. i., (vol. iv., p. 355.)
198 
RESPECTING TtIE 3BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.    19'9
that he had changed certain passages, as that in doing
this and in writing his preface, he had been artfully
preparing the way for the reception of doctrines
contrary to those of the church.  Jlerome  says in
reference to his own effort in exhibiting the true version, "I have dragged forth and given up the Heretic,
that I might vindicate the Church from heresy."*
A long and bitter controversy ensued, relative
mainly to speculative opinions and to personal matters, about which we rejoice that we have no necessity
here to speak.
In regard to the changes, Rufin replies that he had
followed the example of Jerome; and he brings two
instances, one from the Homilies on Luke, and the
other from those on Isaiah, where, in passages connected with the doctrine of the Trinity, Jerome
departs from the Greek original of Origen, and inserts
something -of his own, intended to present a better
viewet In the same connection he says to Jerome:
"To translate, word for word, thou hast heretofore
pronounced to be stupid and malicious. In this I
have followed thee. Of this dost thou wish me to
repent, because thou hast lately changed thine opinion,
and sayest that thou translatest word for word? If respecting the faith there occur things that are unedi
* Prodidi Hmereticum, ut Ecclesiam ab heresi vindicarem.
lb., p. 357.
t See the second book of Rufin's "Invectives," inserted
among the works of Jerome (Benedictine edition, Paris,
1706), vol. iv., p. 438. 
THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
fying, thou hast omitted them; and yet not so as to
cut them away entirely and in all places..... I, too,
have done the same very frequently, and have either
omitted some eapressions, or given them suchl  a turn
as to present a sense more beneficial.   For these acts
dost thou think that I ought to repent? I do not
believe that thou thinkest so7."*
From what has already been stated it appears that
Jerome, since he had no heretical design, thought it
right in himself to omit or alter what was erroneous
in the writings of Origen, and to insert freely, at his
own discretion, what in his view was correct and in
harmony with the spirit of the original. We need
not cite what he himself, in various places, acknowledges and defends, and claims credit for doing; as in
his epistle (xxxix. alias 62) to Alexander; where, in
reply to an accusation against him that he had translated Origen, he says, " This not only I have done,
but also the confessor Hilary; and yet each of us,
omitting whatever things were noxious, translated
* Verbum de verbo interpretari: antea, et stultum esse
et malitiosum, pronnaciasti.  In hoc secutus sum te.
Nunquid de hoc vis ut peoniteat me, quia tu modo mutasti
sententiam, et ad verbum interpretatum te dicis? Si qua
in fide minllus edificabant, abstulisti: ut non omnia nec in
omnibus penitus amputares.......    H. e et ego in
quatnplurimis feei, et ant dosecavi ant ad saniorem intelligentiam deelinavi. Pro his me jubes agere poenitentiam 
Non puto hoe te sentire.
200 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.   201
the useful."*'We need not cite the assertions of
learned mnen. Let it suffice just to mention one whom
all will admit to be a competent and unprejudiced
judge.  We allude to De La Rue, the editor of the
Benedictine edition of the works of Origen   In his
preface to the third volume, he adverts to the conjecture of Daille that the Homilies on Luke were not
written in Greek and so early as the time of Origen,
since they contain indications of a later age; and he
remarks that the appearances alluded to might be
accounted for, in part, by recollecting that the translator was Jerome; whose usual manner in translating Greek, he adds, the learned know to have been,
to insert occasionally some things of his own.t
Nor need we bring examples from his translation of
Eusebius's Chronicon, or from any other works of
Origen, than these Homilies on Luke that are now
before us. - In these there are omissions, and there
are additions. Certain things to which Origen refers
in his Commentary on Matthew and on John,l as
having been discussed in his Homilies on Luke, have
been omitted; and there are other evidences that the
work has been abridged. But of this there is no intimation on the part of Jerome.   In his preface, he
* Hoc non solus ego feci; sed et'confessor Hilarius
fecit: et tamen uterque nostrum noxia quseque detruncanls,
utilia transtulit.
t Ilieronum: cui in vertendis Grsois sciunt erudcliti
solemne esse nonnullainterdum de suo inserere.
t On Matthew, tom. xiii., 29 and on John, tom. xxxii., 2. 
202          THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
speaks of translating the Homilies as they are in the
Greek.  At the same  time, he leads us to expect
that he would hold in contempt nice and exact  conformities to words  and sentences.*  lHe therefore
confirms the statement of Rufin on this point. Theire
are also, it is certain, some additions. One of considerable extent may be found in the thirtieth Homily.
Fragmentary parts of the Greek original of the
Homilies on Luke have been brought to light. They
were gathered from various manuscripts in England
and in France, by the diligent researches of the
eminent scholars whose names they bear. They are
known as the Fragments of Grabe and Combefis;t
and they are inserted as notes at the bottom of the
page in the Benedictine edition of Origen. Few and
short as they are, they enable us, as far as they
extend, to compare the translation with the original.
In this way, independently of all other evidence, we
ascertain that in these very Homilies on Luke, Jerome
added freely as well as omitted.
* Jerome's preface to his translation of Origen's Homilies
on Luke  is addressed to his munificent female friends,
Paula and Eustochium. It begins thus: Ante paucos dies
quorundam in  Matthaeum et Lucam  Commentarios  vos
legisse dicistis: e quibus alter et sensibus hebes esset: et
alter in verbis luderet, in sententiis dormitaret.  Quamobrem
petitis, ut istiusmodi nugis contemptis, saltem triginta et novem
Adamantii nostri in Lucam HIomilias, sicut in Grseco habelntur, interpreter.
t Schedy Grabii et Combefisii. 
with it. For the entire satisfaction of every reader,
we place in a note the Greek of Origen and the Latina
of Jerome, with a plain English version of both.*.
* The subject of remark is thie secondl temptation of our
Lord, as recorded in Luke 4: 5-8.
A GREEK FRAGMENT OF ORIGEN'S HOMILY XXX. ON LUKEg.
~~ av'~~~ca         fl'a~    at(X~La; 7-  O'IKoV~E'l7g.  flactX~La; K6,1,ov 0,,,  7-w
KoapiK~v d,ar~,v  ri-,a  -p67rop o, p~V flauiX~o,7at  viro' (bapyvpL'ag oi' 6~ L,,d
KEIO(50Lia;   c,' I,,  yap  -rgv76 ga,,, 7r~,6~v'a-o dv-rdvg  T6,rov  E't; Zv  r6,rov rpa
'EwpLLa  o-wpa-rLKI'7V dylayE~v oo,, O E',o g;u  rLiv, hp1 fllpU4L- byc,.op'av i r,7,'j,v  p
Kai Y('p ~JEL'KIVOv av7rcp rag 8aatLX5La; 7-6V K61IAOV Tiva Tp6rov           Ga,,,v'c5v ~a1~'5L,,a
tizTdv  7rpo~pi'tp7,at ro,4,a, a i,6,ut~ To,4JaL  7,Ep~ye,i71,vaLa  o-rv  L-w,4pog  u'
8is5    a,,Xcvcat  7oV'rcov, Kai ~t"'t  Uv,TO,g,X~~    6   dycovivav-aa, Kai
7o-v~~; T  fu5  a,tXcvolAivovg vTr' ipa, pa' dy('Ii~OV''I" LLL71CI~T'v,po,KVV,176,v
KO,  ai 7,ap6Xa6E,da,,L7v 13a,,Xviav  T,~,v VT' "IA,-  -'xx' " 1-1v,p 3avLX',,at piv
~~~   ai                 7-oTLaL  E"'~a,,i~,',,a 6,9,Xa yiv,7aia T;4~ iLa iovv~S'  ~v
Ka, 71-,,,7 drE,-4~.  8aLXiaIi  ov' /,c,  a'lap~ia~, oiii 3,&4vX,7a, dspa'L,        T)ra,
airo'v~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~"~  /3~()i~~vTa,vi  aSa'   aivT-a   )   a,,,,Nga5 7T6V K6,pAI) Klli
T;'7v  ia i~           T~pO   (J'i 0,1UL Tpd  ai,oi,, KLypT             flf,' Iip P CTdv  (,O Va 
204          TIlE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
Now if Jerome has made such an addition in the
thirtieth Homily; if he has fieely omitted or added
more or less elsewhere; if he was accustomed to do
this, in accordance with what he believed to be true
(The tempter) showed to him all the kingdoms of the world.
Kingdoms of the world,he says of worldly mnen-how some
are governed by avarice, and some by vainglory. For
unless this be the meaning, how was it possible to bring
into one place the places themselves for a bodily view, as,
for example, the kingdom of the Persians, or that of the
Indians?  He showed him therefore how he is able to reign
over the kingdoms of the world, that he might incite himin
to do what he thought would accomplish his overcoming
the Saviour. If thou desirest, he saith, to reign over these;
and for this thou hast come forth, to have a contest, and
to lead into a revolt those who are governed by me-do not
contend. One thing I request: falling down worship mc;
and receive the whole kingdom that is under me. But the
Saviour wishes indeed to reign, and to subject all the
nations, that they may be servants of righteousness and of
truith and of every virtue; but to reign without sin.  Nor
does he wish to be crowned without labor, subjecting
himself to that [evil] one; nor without labor to receive all
the kingdoms of the world and their subjected glory.
Wherefore he saith to him, It is written Thou shalt worship
the Lord thy God, and himn only shalt thou serve.
THE LATIN TRANSLATION, AS PRESENTED BY JEROME.
Ostendit ei omnia regna mundi, et hominum hujus suculi,
quomodo alii regnentur-k fornicatione, alii ab avaritia, illi
populari rapiantur aura, hi formag capiantur illecebris.
Neque vero arbitrandum est, quod regna ei mundi ostendens, 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.  205
and orthodox, and for the sake of illustrating and
confirming the truth, he may have added in tbe fourteenth llHomily the passage respecting baptismn.  He
lived at a time when, in other countries besides Africa,
Persarum, verbi gratia, regnumn, Indoruimque monstraveri, ~
sedl ostendat ei omnia regna mundi, id est, regnumn suum
quomodo regnaret in mundo, ut cohortans eumn facere quod
velebat, inciperet etiam Christurn habere subjectumrn. Vis,
inquit, in horninibus his regnare? [Ostendit innumerabiles
hominurn multitudines, qun suo tenebantur imperio.  Et
revera si miseriam et infelicitatem nostram, simpliciter
volumus confiteri, pene totius mundi rex Diabolus est:
unde et princeps istius sueculi / salvatore vocatur.  Quod
ergo dicit: Vidces hos homines qui sub meo regno sunt:
ostendit ei in puncto temporis, hoc est, in praesenti temporum  cursu, "[qui ad comparationem  seternitatis puncti
instar obtinet.  Neque enim necessarium habuit Salvator,
ut ei dignitates seculi istius et negotia monstrarentur:
statim ut acierm- lurminum suorum ad contemplandum vertit,
et peccata regnantia, et eos qui regnarentur % vitiis conspexit, et ipsurn principem saculi Diabolum  supervenientern, atque gaudentem in propriam perniciem, quia tantos
sub suo habebat imperio.]  Nolo contendas, nolo nitaris,
nrie habeas ullam in certando molestiam. Unum est quod
precor: procidens adora me, et accipe regnurm omne quod
teneo. Verurn Dominus noster atque Salvator vult quiderm
regnare, et omnes gentes subjectas esse ut serviant justitiae,
veritati, cnterisque virtutibus: sed vult regnare quasi
justitia, ut absque labore regnet, ut nihil faciat indecorum,
et non vult absque labore subjectus Diabolo coronari, nec
sic regnare ceteris, ut ipse regnletur a Diabolo.  Unde
loquitur ad eum Jesus: Scripturn est, Doeninum Deum tuum
adorabis, et ipsi soli servies. 
206         THE TESTIMONY OP ORTGEN
and beyond all doubt, there were children baptized at
so early an age that some queries mnight very naturally arise as to the cause and propriety of their
baptism; and in the passage there is allusion to such
(The tempter) showed to him all the kingdoms of the world,
and of the men of this world; how some may be governed
by lasciviousness; others by avarice; those may be swayed
by popular applause; these may be taken by the enticements of form.  Nor is it to be thought that, showing to
him the kingdoms of the world, he would exhibit the kingdom of the Persians, for example, and of the Indians: but
he showed to him all the kilng,doms of the world; that is,
his kingdom, how he reigned in the world; that, having
exhorted him to do what he wished. he might begin to have
even Christ subjected.  Dost thou desire, he saith, to reign
over these men? [lie showed the innumerable multitudes
of men, which were held by his sovereignty-and in truth
if we are willing to confess frankly our misery and unhappiness, the Devil is king of almost the whole world: whence
also he is by the Saviour called the prince of this world.
Which therefore he said: Thou seest these men who are
under my dominion.  He showed them to him in a moment
of time; that is, in the present course of times, which
course is as a moment, in comparison with eternity.  For
the Saviour had no need that the dignities and affairs of
this world should be exhibited to him; immediately as he
turned the sight of his eyes to contemplating, he saw both
the sins reigning, and those persons who were governed
by vices, and the prilnce himself of this world, the Devil,
predominant, and rejoicing to his own destruction, because
he had so many under his sovereignty.]  I wish not that
thou contend; I wish not that thou exert thyself; have no
trouble in striving. One thing is what I request; falling 
RESPECTING TIlE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.   207
queries "among the brethren."  Re  had  the most
exalted idea of the efficacy of baptism. Near the
end of the first book of his'Apology,' he mentions as
an objection which had been made against him by one
of his opposers, that he had said, all sins whatever
are remitted in baptism; and he proceeds: Let him
hear us again proclaiming, In baptism the old Adam
entirely dies, and in baptism the new is raised up
with Christ; the earthly perishes, and the supercelestial is born. These things we say... interrogated
by the brethren, we have replied according to our
conviction.* "Residing in a monastery, and venerated as an oracle, he could hardly fail of hearing,
from his brother monks, many inquiries on this and
down, worship me, and receive the whole kingdomn that I
hold. But our Lord and Saviour wishes indeed to reign,
and that all -the nations be subjected, that they may serve
righteousness, truth, and other virtues: but he wishes to
reign as by righteousness, that he may reign without labor,
that he nmay do notlhing unbecoming and he wishes not,
being subjected to the Devil witlout labor, to be crowned
nor so to reign over others that himself be reigned over by
the Devil. Wherefore Jesus saith to him: It is written,
Thou shlta worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt tlho
serve.
* Audiat nlos iterum proclamantes: veterem  Adam  in
lavacro totum mori; et novam cum Christo in baptismate
suscitari: perire choicum, et nasci s-perccelestem.  I1,c
dicimus... interrogati a frcatribus, quid nobis videretur
respondimus. 
THE TESTIMONY uF ORIGEN
kindred subjects. And it must be acknowledged that
the passage in the fourteenth Homily has very much
the aspect of a distinct additional remark, suggested
by the preceding words of the Homily, and here introduced by Jerome, with his usual freedom, for the
special benefit of the inquiring monks.
In regard to the translations by Rufin, also, we have
special reason to doubt their presenting correctly and
without addition the statements made by Origen.
This will be evident when we hear the translator's
own declarations. At the close of the Commentary
on the Epistle to the Romans, he, in a peroration
addressed to Heraclius, adverts to the great labor
which devolved upon him in translating into Latin
some of the productions of Origen, while he endeavored to supply some things not in the manuscripts,
in order to give more completeness to the discussion
of various matters.  These are his words: "While we
desire to supply those things which by Origen in the
hearing of the church were finished off extemporaneously, not so much for the purpose of explanation as
of edification; as we have done in the Homilies or
brief addresses on Genesis and on Exodus, and especially in those things which were spoken by him on the
book of Leviticus, in the style of peroration, but have
been translated by us in the form of explanation.
Which labor of supplying those things which were
wanting we undertook, lest questions touched upon
and left (what in the homiletic style of speaking is
208 
RESPECTING THE BAPTIS5L OF CTIILDREN.   209
often dlone by him) should be distasteful to the La,tin
reader.:nt
This he says he had done, and esl)ecially on tec
Boole of Leviticus; but not on Joshua, Judges, and
tile thirty-sixth and thirty-seventh, and the thirtyeighth Psalm, where, as he soon informs us, he had
merely translated (simpliciter ut invenimus).
But he states that he had found the elaborating of
the Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans peculiarly arduous.  He had alluded to the causes in the
preface: the subject was a deep ocean; the work itself had been interpolated; while, on the other hand,
some books of it were either entirely lost, or could
be found only with the greatest difficulty; anid then
the whole, without marring its symmuetry and connection, was to be compressed into about half the size of
the original work.
He gives us to understand that he had toiled
cheerfully, but, after all, was censured by some.  He
mentions their complaint, and makes reply thus:
d Dum supplere cupimnus ea qun  ab Origene in auditorio
ecelesix ex tempore, non tamn explanationis, quam sdificationis intentione perorata sunit: siout in Homiliis sive in
oratiunculis in Genesin et in Exodum fecimus, et prseciplue
in his quae in librum evitici ab illo quidem  perorandi
stylo dicta, 3 nobis vere explanandi specie translata sent.
Quem laborem adimplendi quan deerant idcirco suscepimus,
ne pulsate queestiones et relictcs, quod  in  Homnilitico
dicendi genere ab illo s'lpe fieri solet, Lati.no lectori fastidium generarent,
14 
TIIE TESTITMONY OP ORGTCEN
"For they say to me, since very many things among
those which you write are regarded as your own, give
your namle in the title, and write, RIUFIN'S books of
Commnnentiary on the El)istle to the Ronmans; as also
among secular authors, they remark, the title bears
the iname, not of him  whlo  is translated from the
Greek, but of the translator. All this, however, they
suggest, not from love to mie, but from hatred to the
author.  But I, who have more regard to mny conscience than to my name, although I appear to add
som)e thiigcs and fill out what are wanting, or to abbreviate those which are long, yet do not think it
right to steal the title of him who laid the foundations
of the work, and furnished mnaterials for constructing
the edifice.  Let the reader judge, when he shall have
examined  the work, to whom  he  may  please to
ascribe its nmerit.  For I have sought, not the  applause- of readers, but the benefit of those who are
proficients. "*
* Aiunt  enim  mibi:  Ini his  que  scribis,  quoniam
plurima in eis tui operis habentur, da titulum nominis tui,
et scribe, RuLfini, verbi gratia, in Epistolam  ad Romanos
explanationumn  libri, sicut et apud auctores, inquiunt,
smculares non illius qui ex Greco translatus est, sead illius
qui transtulit nomiene titulus  tenet.  Hoc autem  totumn
mnihi dolnant Iuon anore mnei, secl odio auctoris.   Vernm
ego qui plus conscientin menie, quam  iomini defero, etiami
si addere aliqua videor et explere quf desunt, aut breviare
quan longa sunt, forari tamein tituilum ejus qui fundamnenta
operis jecit et ooistruendi i ediicii materiamn prubuit, reetunl 1on1 puto.  Sit sani  in arhitrin legontis, om  opus
210 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CIIILDREN.   211
rtufin mentions his translations on Joshua among
those which he had made without additions.* Perhaps, as Dr. Gale suggests, he means to assert this
comparatively in respect to his other translations.
For a  portion of  Origen's twentieth  Homlily on
Joshua, as preserved in the original Greek and presented in the twelfth chapter of the Philocalia (a
selection from some of his works, compiled by Basil
the Great and Gregory Nazianzen), is remarkably
different from the sanme portion, as it is presented in
Rufin's translation.  IHere he seems to have proceeded
with lmuch of his  usual freedom.  For  examnple:
amlong, other things for which nothing is to be found
in the Greek, he inserts the following: "As-also the
Lord says concerning the little ones of the church,
that their angels do always stand in the presence of
the Lord behlolding his face. "t
If he has made additions like this in a book which
he intended and professed merely to translate, lihe
may well be supposed to have made such additions
as he may hlave,thought desirable in the HIomilies on
Leviticus, one of the works which he has mentioned
probaverit, operis merituLm  cui velit adscribere.  Nobis
eniim propositum est non plausumn legentium, sed fructumn
proficientium qunrere.
* Simpliciter ut inlvenimus, et non multo curn labore
tranlstulimus
I Sicut et DoTninus de parvulis ecclesiT dicit, quia angeli
eorum semper assistunt in conspecttu  Dorin.i, videntos
faciem ejus. 
THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
"especially," as having been prepared by him in this
free manner for the use of Latin readers.
In translating the Coluimentary on the Epistle to
the Romans, while he abridged the original work as
a whole, he at least occasionally made additions and
alterations. This is evident not only from what he
has himself said, but also from a comparison of his
version of the Commentary, book i. 2, and book vi. 8,
with the Greek in the Philocalia, chapter xxv. and
chapter ix.  These passages  are exhibited, at full
length, in the Benedictine edition of Origen's works;
and Rufin's version is censured as being unfaithful.*
But we wish to fix the attention of our readers on
what he himself has said in the passages which we
have presented from his "peroration" and his preface
to his translation of the Commentary.   Let us think
of the impressions under which, manifestly, some of
his contemporaries assailed the work.   "For they say
to me," he remarks, "since very many things among
those which you write are regarded as your own, give
your name in the title, and write RuFIN's books of
Commentary on the Epistle to the Bomans."   Let us
next observe the manner in which he replies.  Instead
of denying that very many things in the work are his
own, he proceeds thus: "But I, who  have more regard to my conscience than to my name, although I
appear to add some things and fill out what are
wanting, or to abbreviate those which are long, yet do
* See vol. iv., pp. 44]24i ald pp. 58S0, 581.
212 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF ttlILDREN.    213
not think it right to steal the title of him who laid the
foundations of the work and furnished the materials
for constructing the edifice."
HIere every reader may,v see for himself that in reference to this work, Rufin speaks of adding somne things
and filling out what were wanting, as well at of abbreviating those which were long. We need not,
therefore, expatiate on the remarkable and important
error into which Mr. Wall has fallen in affirmingi of
Rufin that in reference to the Commentary, "h e speaks
of no addition."
It will be perceived that we do not here bring
against the translator any accusation of intending to
deceive his readers; but the manner that he adopted,
and that le frankly avows, of intermingling  some
things of:his own with those of the author, prevents
these translations from having a rightful claim to be
regarded as testimonies coming down to us from the
age in which the author lived.   The additions, whatever they may be, belong to the time, not of the
author, but of the translator; and the work in Greek,
except a few fragments, having perished, it is now impossible to determine, with certainty, what was derived from the original, and what was added.  If a
statement harmonizes better with what is known of
the time or the character of the translator than with
what is known of the time or the character of the
author, there arises, of course, a probability that it is
an addition.
Origen seems generally to be contented with his 
214          THE TESTIMONY OI' ORIGEN
own reasoning in connection with Holy Scripture.
Rufin is less independent. Looking back from about
the close of the fourth century, he would be very
likely to speak of ecclesiastical usage, and to think of
a certain precept as being pertinent in relation to
children; for in the so-called Apostolical Constitutions,
which had then been in circulation a hundred years,
it is enjoined: "Moreover, baptize your children, and
bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord; fo? he saith, Suffer the little children to conte
unto me, and forbid them not.,"* (Book vi. ch. 15.)
That the first six books of the work claiming to be
the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, were written
in the latter part of the third century, and hence after
the time of Origen, yet so early as we have assumed,
has been sufficiently proved in the Prize Essay onl
their origin and contents, appended to Appleton's
edition (New York, 1848), and by Yon Drey, a Professor in the Catholic Theological Faculty at Tuibingen, in his New Investigations-Neue Untersuchungen uiber die Constitutionemn, etc.  In respect to somno
parts of the work, an earlier time, with some original
views, is advocated by the distinguished author of the
work on Hiippolytus and his Age.  The case before us
does not require and our limits forbid any attempt
here to discuss the point.
{  Book vi., ch. 15.   Bal'rfere 6~ vochv Kat ra rv,7'a, Ka,  iKrp,eroes  a,rS'i,
a'a6     KaL poa Ka i    ov vao' re  7lyap 0,~l  -'  ratia   ipXEt,at rpO5  PC Kai 1n asXiE7, afira. 
RESPECTIN:G TIIE Bi'TISM ~OF CHiLD)IEN ]        21)
In view of the facts which we have beenr stating,
we do not see how it can fairly be dceanied that the
passages which  have been urged  as conming from
Origen are far frtomn being of the most reliable character. Perhaps a just historical criticism would discriminate, and mark  the more doubtful  parts wvith
brackets.
HOMIILY VIII. ON LEVITICUS, (clh. 12: 1-8.)
According to Rufin's Lati? verssion.
Hear David speaking: I was, says he, c           onc eived,a
iniqttity, and int sin did msy mot7her bring ne fo?tlh; showing that every soul that is born in the flesh is polluted
with the filth of iniquity and sin; and that, therefore, th-at
was said which we mentioned before, tlhat noile is clean
fromi pollutiotn, tho?tgh his life be but of the length of onee
dlay.  [T'o these considerations it can be added, tlat it
may be inquired why, since the baptism of the church is
given for the remission of sins, baptism is given, according
to the observance of the church, even to children; for
the grace of baptism would  seem  superfluous if thiere
were nothing in children requiring remission and indulgence.]*
* Audi David dicentemi: In inliquitatibus, inquit, concep
tus sum, et in peccatis peperit me mater inea; ostendens
quod quaecunque anima in carme naseatur, iniquitatis et peccati sorde polluitutr; et propterea dictumn esse illud quo(d
jam superius rmemoravimus, quia nemo mundus a sor(le,
nec si unius diei fuerit vita ejus.  [Addi his etiam illu(i
potest, ut requiratur quid causie sit, cum baptisma ecclesia
in remissionem pecatorum detur, secundum ecclesize observantiam etiam parvulis baptismuin dari; cum utique si 
['2E T L EiL?7T'_,O"Y' OF cRIGLTN
OM,NILvY XIV. ON LUI-eTF, (ch. 2: 21-24.)
Accordi7g to Jerome's Latin version.
[Having occasion given in thlis place, I touch again upon
what is frequently inquired about among the brethren.
Children are baptized for the remission of sins.  Of what
sins? or when have they sinned? or how can any reason
of the laver in their case hold good, unless according to
that sense which we have just now mentioned?  None is
free fronm polltiton, though his life be but of the length of
one day upon the earth.  And because, through the sacrament of baptism, the pollution of nativity is removed,
therefore children also are baptized.  For unless any one
be born of water and of the Spirit, he will not be able to
enter into the kingdom of heave?n.l*
COMMENTARY ON TH,i EPISTLE TO TIE ROI0ANS, BooK Y., 9.
According to Rutfin's Latin verszon.
And also in the law it is commanded that a sacrifice be
offered-for the chlild that is born; a pair of tur7tle-doves, or
nihil esset in parvulis quod ad remissionem  deberet et
in dulgentiam pertinere, gratia baptismi superflua videretur.]
* Quod( ftrequenter inter fratres queritur, loci occasions
conimotus retracto.  Parvuli baptizantur in remissionemn
peccatoruyn.  Quorum peccatorunm? vel quo temrpore peecaverunt.?  Ant quomodo potest ulla lavacri in parvulis
ratio subsistere, nisi juxta illumn seensum de quo paulo ante
diximnus: nullus mundts a sorde, nec si Onius diei quidem fuer t
vita ejus stzqer terra?i?n?  Et quia per baptismi sacranientuni
nlativitatis sordies deponultur, propterea baptizantur et
-urvuli.  f\;si enimn quis reuatus fterit ex aqua et spiritu, non
?rtetit.?tr(tre i regnmtn ca?loru..]
216 
RESPECTING THlE BAPTISMI OP CItLDREN.   217
two youig pigeons; of wh1ich one isfor a sin-of-e)ing, t7he
otherfor a btrnt-offering.  For wvhat sin is this one pigeon
offered?  Can the newvblorn child have committed any sin?
and yet it has sin, for whichl the sacrifice is comnanded to
be offered, and from which even he whose l/re is but of one
day is denied to be free.  Of this sin, therefore, David is
to be supposed to have said that which we menitioned
before, ]li sin did mny mother co,'ceive me; for no sin of
his mother is affirmied in history.   [For this also the
church has received a tradition from the apostles to give
baptism even to childreii; for they to whlom the secrets of
the divine mysteries wvere committed, klnew that in all persons there is the native pollution of sin, which must be
done away by the water and the Spirit; on account of
which pollution, even the body itself is called the body oft
sin.]*
If Jerome and Prufin added the sentences included
* Denique et in lege pro illo qui natus fuerit, jubletur
offerlri hostia, par turturum aut duo pulli columnbini; ex
qxibus unus pro peccato, alius in holocantomata.  Pro quo
peccato offertur hic pullus unus?  Numquid unLper ed(litus
parvulus peccare jam potuit?  Et tiamen habet peccatumn
pro quo hostia jubetur offerri, a quo munduls negatur quis
esse, nec si unlius diei fuerit vita ejus.  De hoc ergo etiamn
David dixisse credelndus est illud quod supra memoravimus: quia in peccatis concepit me mater mea.  Secundum historiam enim nullum matris ejus declaratur pecatum.
[Pro hoc et ecclesia ab apostolis tltaditionem suscepit,
etiam parvulis baptismum dare.  Sciebalt enim illi quibus
mysteriorum secreta commissa sunlt divinorum, quod esseut
in omnlibus genuinm sordes peccati, quse per aquamn et.
Spiritum ablui debereut; propter quas etiam corpus ipsum
corpus peccati loominilatur.]  
218          T1E  TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
in brackets, they did only what was in accordance with
their avowed manner in these translations; and they
expressed themselves as they naturally would have
done in the time and circumstances in which they
lived. But whether they actually added these sentences from their own resources or translated them
from Origen, we do not affirm; for we have not the
means of knowing. Certainly Du Pin had too much
reason to say as he does, after speaking of Rufin's
translations, that "Jerome's are not more exact."
Erasmus uttered only the plain truth, when he indignantly remarked that the reader is "uncertain whether
he reads Origen or Rufin." And Dr. Redepenning,
a Theological Professor in the University of Gottingen,
who, within a few years, has published an elaborate
and highly esteemed work on the Life and Teaching
of Origen, in speaking of the Commentary on the
Epistle to the Romans, as we have it from Rufin,
characterizes it as being intermediate between a translation and a treatise: a reproduction adapted to the
views and waits of the later age in which it was prepared. *
But these considerations in regard to Jerome and
Rufin we need not urge. They belong, however, to
* So ist seinl Werk ein Mittleres zwischen Ubersetzung
undcl Bearbeitunlg, eine Wiedererzeugung nach Massgabe
der Ansichtenl undcl Bediirfnisse des spzteren Jahrhunderts.
See Redepenning's Origenes: eine Darstellung seines Lebens
und seiner Lehre. Vol. ii., p. 190. 
RESPEC   T;       r-to g    (.\T: s, I(-,,   ELN. 219
he suibject, aid o     rgit oit to le' ov,i'lokied; cspeciallv if the passages in questionl are to be understood as teaching what they have commonly been
thought to teach, and what, as we hope soon to show,
would be far more likely to be taught by Jerome and
Rufin, even in using the samne words, near the close
of the fourth century, than by Origen, a hundred and
fifty years before.
Even if the words that mention apostolic tradition
be supposed to have come from Origen, be it so. The
expression,  Neander assures us, "can not be  regarded as of much weight in that age, when the inclination was so strong to trace to the apostles every institution which was considered of special importance
and when so many walls of separation, hindering the
freedom of prospect, had already been set up between
that and the apostolic age."'* But these pertinent
considerations, too, we need not urge.
Even if the usage or observance mentioned  be
supposed to have existed in the timne of Origen,
and to have been in accordance with the reputed
teaching of the apostles, be it so.  The inquiry then
arises, What was the usage mentioned? Who are
spoken of as being baptized? Are they infants, as
LIr. Wall and many others translate the word (pavuli), in the sense which we commonly attach to the
w-ord infants?  Are they unconscious babes'?  Not
* Neander's General HIlistory of the Christian Religion
and Chliurch, vol. i., p. 314. 
THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
at all. They are children, such as, in our day, mnight
be found in the Sutnday-school, young children,
instructed in the first principles of the doctrine
of Christ, and professing Christian faith and obedience.
Even  the  Latin  word  i,facns, infant, with  the
literally corresponding Greek,,o, it is well known,
is often used with  much  latitude of  signification.
According to the nature of the discourse and of the
connection, it may be spoken of a child at any time
from his birth to the close of his minority.  An illustration of this remark, with respect to the  Greek,
may be found in the apostle Paul's Epistle to the
Galatians, 4: 1: Now I say that the heir, as long as
he is a child, r-or differeth nothing from a servant,
though  he be lord of all; but is under tutors and
governors until the time appointed of thie father.
We' are aware  that, in order  to support infant
-baptism, SIr. W"Tall, in his History, part i., chapter
v., introduces a passage from the ninth Homily on
Joshua, in the course of whichl these words occur
"Arnd thou  wast  an  infant  in  baptism."*  That
Origen means an infant, not in age, but in a figurative
sense, is manifest from the consideration that he proceeds to speak of our Saviour's writing his lawN on
the heart at the time.  Of course, one would think,
it must have been a heart that could receive and
* Et tu fuisti infans in baptismo.
220 
RESPECTING T-IEF BD.PTIS?I OF CIILTDREN.    221
understand.  That this is the true sense is more
abundantly evident from the subsequent remarks of
Origen, which  Mr. Wall has  not  quoted.  These
show clearly that the writing is connected with instruction and faith.  It is in the hearts of believers*
that the new law is written. Origen says expressly:
But even now by these  things which we speak,
Jesus writes the second law in the hearts of those
who, with sound faith and the whole mind, receive
those truths which are proclaimed."t
In reference to the little ones connected with the
congregation of Israel, as mentioned in Josh. 8: 35,
Origen speaks also in his ninth Homily on that book;
but he says not one word favorable to baptizing unconscious babes. On the contrary, he remarks,
section 9, in making out, after his mianner, a parallel
under the new dispensation: " But the infants will be
those who, having recently believed, are nourished
with the evangelical milk.1
The word employed in the passages under consideration, parvuli, little ones, children, is also, in itself, indefinite; and it is sometimes interchanged with
other words indicating children. Its usual meaning,
* In cordibus credentium.
t Sed et nuno per hec qu- loquimur, Jesus deuterono
mium scribit in eorum cordibus qui inltegra fide et toto
animo qua dicuntur accipiunt.
t Infanltes vero erunt, qui fide nuper suscepta, lacte
evangelico nutriuntur, 
THlE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
and its being freely interchanged, are both strikingly
illustrated in Origen's nineteenth Homily on Luke, as
translated by Jerome; where the word in the singular
number, parvulus, is used as the leading designation
of our Lord, at the time when, in his childhood, he
went up to Jerusalem. The passage to which we
allude is the following: " Not when he came to the
age of youth [adolescentiam, the period from the
fifteenth to the thirtieth year]; not when he entered
publicly on the work of teaching, but when he was yet
a child, parvulus, he had the favor of God:  and, as
all things in him had been wonderful, so also his
childhood, pueritia, was wonderful, so that he was
filled with the wisdom of God.... When,
therefore, as we have said, he was twelve years old,
and, according to custom, the days of the solemnity
were completed, and his parents would return with
the little child, infantulus, Jesus, the lad, puer, remained in Jerusalem, and his parents knew it not.
It was impossible that she [Mary, after
what had been revealed to her] should fear the
infant, infans, was utterly lost.... But when
he was a child, parvulus, he is found in the midst of
the doctors, sanctifying themi and imbuing, them with
knowledge. Because he was a child, parvulus, he is
found in the midst, not teaching them, but interrogating; and this as being suitable to his age, that he
might teach us what is suitable for lads, pueris,
although they may be wise and learned; namely, that
222 
RESPECTING THIE BAPTISM OF CtIILDREN.   223
t11ey should hear masters, rather than desire to teach
or becomne vain and ostentatious."*
Hlere it is most manifest that one who was twelve
years of age is repeatedly called parvulus, and that
the word, in its general purport, corresponds well
with the English word child.
Irensous, in his work against Hieresies, near the
close of the second century, dividing the human
fauily into five classes according to the different
periods of  life, mentions  parvulos, children, after
ir,fanles, infants, and before pueros, lads or youths, as
tlie words are commonly used among us.  He places
parvulos in a position intermediate between the period
of infancy and the period of youth; that is, he places
themi  in the  later and perhaps larger portion of
* Non quanldo venit ad adolescentiam, non quando man
ifeste docebat, sed caum adhuc esset parvulus habebat gratiam.Dei: et quomodo 6mnnia in illo mnirabilia fueranlt, ita
ot pueri iza mirabilis fuit, ut  Dei sapientia compleretur.
Cu.a   orgo, at diximus, duodecim esset arnorum,
et juxta mooemn dies solemnitatis expleti esselnt, et reverterentur pareintes cam ifo(oztulo Jesu, remallsit puer in Jeirusalem, et nesciebant parelntes ejus....  Nunquam fleii
poterat ut perditum formidaret infanteran....  Quoni am
verob parvulus erat, invenitur in medio pr,aceptoruam, sanctificans et erdlienls  0eos.  Quia parvulht. erat, invenitur in
mnedio, non  0os docens, sed interrogans, et boo pro ntatis
officio; at los dooeret quid pueris, quamvis sapientes et
eruditi siIIt, conveoniret, ut audiant potius magistros, qnam
docere, desiderent, et se vana ostontatione non jactent. 
TIlE TESTIM.ONY Or Cvt(N
childhood; and he speaks of Cl(ist as  io   (0 lhe)
an exan])pe of piety, uprightness'nl ol)edience *
On  this topic it wvould seiem Uli,  cessary to say
more.   In itself tl!e word 7)a'viuli, like manv others,
is somewhat indefinite, as we have aliealvy remarked
and therefoie it is liable to be misiiidcleistood; but,
viewed in the light of the undeniable statements which
we have now made, and of the facts well known in
the time of Origen, its mieaniing is sulficientlv clear.
If it be objected that the native pollution of the
child, the reason assigned( foi his nee,di,, the remission of sin, is applicablle to his case from tlhe time of
his birth, and thereforec he should be baptize(d without
delay, even  in unconscious iinfancy; we reply thlat
such was the reasoning of subseqiinetl Flaathiers, but
inot of Origen.   le kept in mnd iw    h'r was requi'id
of every one inii order to be baptized  an,  riceive
remission.   According to his systeim, the sanie native
pollution, whatever it was, that' adliered to tle  newborn child, adhered also to the unbllptized adtilt; and
yet the adult was not  to b)e bap)tized in-imediately.
Hle was first to be instructed.    ie was to be told of
Christ, that he miglht b)elieve oil hi; for such faith
the gospel required.   Hle was to be taluglht the elemenets of the true religion, that he m       iaht know a(nd
* Infantes, et pazvulos, et pueros, et juvenles, et senliores
...  Clirist came in parvulis parv!ius, sanctificeas
banc ipsam  hliabentes  ataternm;  simul et exemilutm,llls
pietatis effectus, et justitie, et subjectionis.  Lib. ii., c. 22
f 4.
224 
RESPECTING  TiJE nPTSA.I OF CliITDREN.   225
love the truthl wlhich he \vas to profess in baptism,
and that he might honor it by a holy life.  He was
to be baptized, when, in Christian knowledge, disposition and deportment, he seemed to be a suitable person.
Why could not Origen have supposed that the same
principle was to be applied to the case of children?
Ie thought much of the preparation required of every
one in order to be benefitted by baptism, as a grand
and blessed remedy for sin.   Subsequent  Fathers
thought so much of the remedy as to deem it efficacious, even without the preparation.
Another fact also it is important to remember.
Origen maintained that sin is not imputed to children,
till they comle to years of discretion.  In his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, he says:
"Until the natural law, sin is dead.   Therefore at
a certain time of age, when any one begins to be
capable of reason, and to have discernment of just
anlld unjust, of right and wrong, then sin, which before
was within the person as dead, is said to revive; because there is nIow within him  a law which forbids,
and there is reason which shows that the thing ought
niot to be done. But that what we say nmay b.e more
clearly understood, let us use a plain example.   It is
written:'Jie that smiteth his fatker or his  oethe7r,
shall su.rely be pheut to death; and he that curset)h hIis
faiher or his nmother, shall surely be put to death7.'
[Lev. xxi: 15 and 17.]  Now a little boy of about
four or five years, if, displeased, as often occurs, he
snii;te with a rod his father or his mnother, deserves
I I 
22g          THE TEFSTIMONY OF ORIGEN
according to the statute, to die.  But, since there is
not yet in him the natural law which nmay teach him'
that he ought not to do injury to his father or to his
mother, and since he knows not that in this is involved the crime of impiety, what he does is indeed
a species of sin, because he smites or curses his father
or his m'other: but in him sin is dead, because through
the absence of the natural law which is not yet in him
sin cannot be imputed to him.  For there is not yet
within him so muchl  reason as to teach him that
this which he does ought not to be done; and therefore by his parents it is not only not reckoned as a
fault, but is received as a pleasant act."*
* Usque ad legern enim naturalem, peccatum mortuumn
est.  Ergo certo etatis tempore ubi rationis capax esse quis
cmperit. et justi injustique, mqui et iniqui hiabere discrimeni, tune peccatum, quod priufs intra hominem velut mortaum habebatur, reviviscere dicitur, pro eo quod est jam
intrinsecus lex qa e vetet, et ratio qun ostendclat non esse
faciendurn.  Sedc ut apertius intelligatur quod dlicimus,
avidenti utamur exemplo.  Scriptanm:,t: Qici pe(cusserit
patre,n, vel natrein, morte noriatur; et Qui;nale'ixr,'it ] att'i,
tant notri, norte moriatur.  Puer ergo parvrulas quatuor fere
ant quinique arnoruin si (ut fieri solet) indignatus virga
percLntiat patrein aut  matreil, quantum  ad preceptum
mn'?dati spectat, mortem deabet.  Sed quia lex in illo nondum est natutralis, que euni  doceat non debere injuriamn
facere patri aut matri,nleo ill hoo crinmei impietatis admitti;
est quidem species peccati quod facit; quia percutit patrem vel matrem, ant maledicit.     i nortuum est in eo peceatum, quia per abs.nitiait uitralis legis, qu(e in eo non 
RESPECTING TIIE BAPTISMI OF CIILDREN.   227
In this passage, Origen does not attempt to state
precisely when children arrive at the period of clear
moral discernment and accountability; but from what
he says it is evident that he supposed it to be at least
some time after "four or five years," or, in other
words, not before entering the sixth year.  And it is
remarked by a distinguished European medical author
that "the seventh year, and the vicinity of each multiple of seven, is characterized by some great change
in the human constitution. Thus the seventh year
is that of the second dentition, and the common belief
fixes at that age the distinct perception of right and
wrong. "*
Moreover, according to Origen's teaching, it is not
before, but when the child comes to the discernment
of right and wrong, that he can be made capable of
receiving the grace of Christ. By the expression
here used, the grace of Christ, he seems to mean the
benefits which Christ graciously bestows on decided
believers in connection with their being baptized.
Our readers may wish to see the whole passage to
which we allude. We give it entire, and leave it with
them to judge of its bearing on the topic before us.
It occurs in the Commentary on the Epistle to the
dum est, peccatum ei non potest reputari. Nondum est
enim intra eum ratio tanta quao eum doceat hoc quod facit,
fieri non debere: et ideo etiam I parentibus non soluim non
reputatur ad culpam, sed ad gratiam jucunditatemque
suscipitur.
* Tilt's Elements of Health, p. 21. 
228          THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
__.
Romans, book v., 2. Remarking on the eighteenth
verse of the fifth chapter, Origen proceeds thus:
"But perhaps thou wilt say, If, one sinning, death
came upon all men, and again the righteousness of
one came upon all men as justification unto life,
neither is any thing done by us that we die, or that
we live, but Adam causes our death, and Christ our
life.
"We have indeed already stated that parents not
only generate but also instruct children. And they
who are born become not only children but also disciples of their parents; and they are urged to the
death connected with sin, not so much by nature as
by education.  For example: If any one departing
from God, worship idols, will he not early teach his
children to venerate idols, and offer sacrifices to demons?  This the child does according to Adam; that
is, from his nativity to the time of the law, when,
coming to the discernment of right and wrong, he can
be made capable of receiving the grace of Christ.
And there he leaves Adam, who either generated or
taught him unto death, and follows Christ, who both
teaches and generates unto life.
"Dost thou wish to know why it is not only from
nativity but also from teaching that death has reigned
from Adam?  Learn this from the contrary.   For
the Lord Jesus Christ, when he came to repair what
had rashly been done, since that first nativity which
came from Adam would generate unto death, introduced a second nativity, which he has called not 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.   229
so much generation as regeneration, through which,
doubtless, he would abolish the fault of the first
nativity; and as he substituted regeneration for generation, so also he substituted another teaching for
the former teaching.  For, sending forth his disciples to
this work, he said not merely, Go, baptize all nations;
but he saith, Go, teach all nations, baptizing therein the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost. Knowing therefore that each is in fault, he
gave a remedy for each, that the mortal generation
might be changed by the regeneration of baptism, and
that the teaching of piety might exclude the teaching of impiety. Not therefore to us doing nothing
has death reigned in us; as, on the other hand, not
to us idle and doing nothing will life reign in us.
But indeed the beginning of life is given by Christ,
not to the unwilling, but to the believing; and we
arrive at perfection of life by perfection of virtues; as
also we hasten to death by similitude of transgression
and the practice of vices. "*
* Sedl dices fortasse: Si uuo peccante mors in omnes
homines pertransiit, et rursus unius justitia in omnes
homines justificatio vita pervenllit, neque uit mroreremur
aliquid nobis gesturm est, neque ut vivamus, sead est mortis
quidem causa Adam, vite autem Cliristuis.
Diximus quideia jam et in superioribus, quod parentes
non solum generant filios, sedl et imbuunt: et qui nasountur, non solum filii parentibus, sedl et discipuli fiunt, et
non tam natura urgentur in mortem peccati, qukm disciplina.  Verbi causa enim, si quis, Deo recedens idola estat,
nonne continuo etiam filios si genuerit docebit idola vener 
THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
In these remarks there are several points that car.
hardly fail to arrest and fix the attention; first, a
maturity sufficient for moral discernment as being
necessary to a child's having capacity or being in a
state for receiving the remission of sin; next, instruc
uiri, et sacrificia offerre dsemoniis?  Hoc secundum Adam
facit, hoc est, a nativitate usque ad agis tempus, quo ad
discretionem recti pravique operis veniens, capax Christi
gratise effici potest: et ibi relinquit Adam qui eum vel gennit vel docuit in mortem, et sequitur Christum, qui eum et
docet et gignit ad vitam.
Vis autem scire quia non solum nativitatis, sed et doctrinse est, in quo mors regnavit ab Adam?  Disce hoc et
contrariis.  Etiam Dominus Jesus Christus cim venissit
qus perper3m gesta fuerant emendare, pro eo quod in
mortem generaret illa quse ex Adam veniebat prima nativitas, introduxit secundam nativitatem, quam non tam generationem quam regenerationem appellavit, per quam sine
dubio vitium prime nativitatis aboleret: et sicut generationi substituit regenerationem, ita et doctrinse substituit
aliam doctrinam. Mittens enim ad hoc opus discipulos
suos, non dixit tantum.  Ite, baptizate omnes gentes; sedcl
ait, Ite, docete omnes gentes, baptizanltes eos in nomine
Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Sciens igitur utrumque
esse in culpa, utrique remedium dedit, ut generatio mortalis regeneratione baptismi mutaretur, et impietatis doctrinam doetrina pietatis excluderet.  Non ergo nihil peccantibus nobis mniors regnavit in nobis: sicut rursum non
otiosis nobis, et nihil agentibus vita regnabit in nobis.
Sed initium quidem vitwe datur a Christo, nlon invitis, sedl
credentibus; et pervenitur ad perfectionem vitse perfectione virtutum, sicut et in mortem dudum proevaricationis
similitudine et vitiorum expletione perventum est.
230 
RESPECTING TIlE BAITISM OF CIHILDREN.   231
tit)n as well as baptism, and preceding it, not merely,
Go, baptize, but Go, teach, baptizing; and then the
great pervading principle so emphatically stated, that
the beginning of spiritual life, as well as its progress,
is given by Christ, not to the idle, the careless, and
indifferent, nor to the unwilling, but to them  that
believe.
Now, what we maintain is, that if Origen speaks
in the passages so often quoted, as coming from him,
in support of infant baptism, he ought to be understood as'referring to the baptism of children of sufficient age to be conscious moral agents. This explanation might be still further confirmed by a survey of
the earliest ecclesiastical formularies and other ancient
documents that have comne down to us, whether as
apostolical constitutions, or in some other form. But
it is not our design now to exhibit any of these. We
have confirmation more direct.  We  have  Origen's
own testimony, showing when children were to be
baptized.
In his work against Celsus, book iii., chapter 59, a
passage is quoted fromn Celsus in which, after mentioning what intelligent and respectable persons are
invited to initiation in the sacred mysteries among the
heathen, this acute and bitter adversary of Christianity
proceeds thus:
"And now let us hear what persons the Christians
invite. Whoever, they say, is a sinner, whoever is
unintelligent, whoever is a mere child, and in short
. *....
. e e 
CD_
0   C  ~                               0D    CD
1*  ~~~~  -, ~~CD    C 
9    0                      ~~~~~~~CD 
~~~~~~CD
CD                      00
q             -               -,                0
C                                    1                                                        -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
CD
0
aq
CD $= -
Zi.
p
E5
0
tz
aq
CD
0
w
11
51
.....
1.11: 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CItILDREN.   233
known, was to he admitted to baptism and the Lord's
supper.  In this passage, the testimony of Origen is
remarkably explicit. It needs no lengthened comment.  The reader himself sees at once  the little
children, as well as the rest, the little children, the
parvuli, or whatever other endearing name they may
bear, were exhorted in a way adapted to their character; and when those of the exhorted who mnake progress show that they have been cleansed by the word,
and, as much as possible, have lived a better life, then
they are admitted to baptism. Celsus reproaches the
Christians for receiving to their fellowship certain
classes of the population. Origen replies triumphantly, with express reference to each class, and
states when, or on what condition, any are admitted.
We would render devout thanks to God that,
under his good and ever-watchful providence, this
passage has been preserved from the ravages of time.
Here it stands, an authentic record in the original
Greek.  Henceforth let its light shine on what has
long been a much obscured place in ecclesiastical
antiquity.
In the next chapter, Origen represents the candidate for Christian initiation as one who has come to
the healing of the word,* that is, to be healed by
evangelical teaching; one who has been cleansed in
the soul, and who loves the Saviour sincerely. In
this connection he says, "Let him with cheerful
*   poeaXXvat ry: Ou  o6you sparet?.
. ~...*.'-: 
234          TIIE TEESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
countenance be initiated into the mysteries of the
religion of Jesus, which, with good reason, are delivered to those only who are holy and pure."*  Setting
forth the holiness and purity required by the Christianl religion, he says, in his third ilHomnily on Genesis,
section 5: "This is the circumcision with which the
Church of Christ circumcises the ears of her infants.
These, I think, are the ears which he required in his
hearers, saying, Who hath ears to hear let him7 hear.
For no one with uncircumcised and impure ears can
hear the pure words of wisdom and truth.t And in
his eighth Homily on Exodus, section 4, he adds:
For there dwelt in us an impure spirit before we
believed-before we came to Christ....W. We have
therefore been received by Christ, and our house has
been purified from the former sins, andadornedwith
the ornaments of the believers' sacraments, which they
have known who have been initiated. "
The Christian mysteries, the sacraments, for this
*    dp'v.... $p6pS /ao r   vot5 a'yog Kai Ka ap6t, sOX6yco tapa,t16peva
gptar77pt   aa T  ar I,,ovv ee6a.
t Hoec est circumcisio, qua ecclesia Christi aures suorum
circumcidit infantumn.  Ista  credo  sunt  aures, quas in
auditoribus suis requirebat, dicens: Qui habet aures caudiendi
audiat.   Nemo  enlim  potest  incircumcisis et immrundis
auribus munda verba sapientis et veritatis audire.
t Habitavit enim in nobis immundus spiritus, antequam
crederemus, antequam veniremus ad Christuni..
Suscepti ergo sumus C Christo, et mundata  est domus
nostra a peccatis prioribus, et ornata est ornalmeitis sacramentorum fidelium, quce norunt qui initiati sunt.
.. e e
be,. 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISI OF CHILDREN.    2,' 5
is the signification of the word mysteries, where
Oigigen speaks of being initiated with cheerful countenance, he says are with good reason for those only
who are pure; and now, including himself with his
hearers-himself, the much loved son of Christian
parents-he states, "There dwelt in us an impure
spirit before we believed." Therefore, manifestly, he
teaches that, before he and those whom he was
addressing believed, they were not prepared to
receive the symbol of having been purified; and it
would have been wrong to confer on them the
believers' sacraments.  Besides, it is difficult to conceive how he could have made the unqualified remark
with which the last quotation ends, if some and even
many, when they were initiated, were not of sufficient
age to have any knowledge of those sacraments.
In the twelfth HIomily on Numbers, section 4, he
further adds: "Let each one of the believers recall
to mind what words he there used at that time when
he first came to the waters of baptism, when he
received the first symbols of the faith, and approached
the salutary fountain; and how he renounced the
devil, that he would not use his pomps, nor his
works, nor comply at all with any of his services
and pleasures."*
* Recordetur unusquisque fidelium, cum primum veynit ad
aquas baptismi, cum siglacula fidei prima suscepit,. et ad
fontem salutarem accessit, quibus ibi tunc usus sit verbis, et
quid renunciaverit diabolo: non se usurum pompis ejus,
14 
THE TESTIMIONY OF ORIGEN
How, in view of such an appeal as this, can we
deny that each one of the believers was expected to
be able to remember the solemn scene of his baptism?
And if each could remember his own baptism, and
what he said and what he did at the time, surely he
could not then have been a mere infant.
Speaking of the linen girdle mentioned in Jeremiah
xiii: 1-11, Origen says, in his eleventh Homily,
section 6, on that book:  "But  why  also linen?
Because it has its generation from the earth.   For a
plant springs up from the earth; then, after being
cultivated, it is combed, and washed and cleansed,
and, with much effort, made suitable for a girdle or
other use.  And so we all have the generation as a
girdle of God; and having the generation from much
careful preparation, we need that we should be
combed, that we should be washed, that we should
cast away the color of the earth. For the color of
the generation of the flax is different from the color
which arises from effort. The color of the generation of the flax is dark, but from effort it becomes
most splendid. And such a change comes upon us
who are generated. We are black at the commencement of our believing. Wherefore at the commencement of the Song of Songs it is said, I am black, but
comely. And at first we are like Ethiopians as to
the soul; then we are cleansed, so that we may
become more splendid (according to the passage,
neque operibus ejus, neque tillis omnino servitiis ejus ao
voluntatibus pariturum.
236 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~I  I                   D
CD  M   -
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~f  CD CD            C t) 
- CD
CD
CD                  Glq_
I  q  I                                                                 -.
1>                                
q      '                                           CD                      CD
1
.                                                         CD   
I                                                     CD
I             I          I     I                               CD  CD  CD
I I                  -                                  CD      
_                                        .0
10    I                         0  CDCD     0
I                                  CD  0
0, 
'0,                           CD                CD
0                                                   0,
I         lo                  CD  _
0  I  ''00  I  I' lo, 0                              CD  0         _   CD     CDCD
0      '            I' 0, '0  0'                  -        0
'0  0                 0.'0 '0                    0          *
I   I'0         I  0'                                     -.
II    I,,0.,   -.
' 0. I            I          I         CD                          CD
'0',  0       1,                           0
0      I                    -   0,
*   I  0       Ol' *'0         Ol          0.        .  CD                     _   0
0  0''0o,'0    Ol            I  0'                                        CD  
I      I           0'  0''0            -
I  I
0  0 0'  0   I                                     -    _ 0 
I       CD
.I
CD
p
m 0
uq
Z.t,
0
p
CD (D
0 CD
CD 0
0  5
CD
0 0
0  (D
7"
CD
U.q 
;L 
THiE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
of God-tlithis girdle is the church-when we become
suitable to be joined to God.
To be "woven upon the girdle of God,"it is obvious,
must here signify to be incorporated with the church,
or initiated into it by baptism. The representation
as to the time when any one was to be admitted, it
will be perceived, harmonizes remarkably with that
which is given in our longest quotation from Origen's
work against Celsus; and, in effect, utters the same
testimony.
In his Commentary on John, tom. vi., 17, Origen
speaks of Matthew's statement that John the Baptist
baptized unto repentance;  and he most explicitly
represents Matthew as, by this statement, teaching
that the benefit from baptism depends on the deliberate purpose of the baptized, it belonging indeed
to the penitent.*
Origen received with reverence the teachings of the
sacred writers.  Some  deliberate  purpose of forsaking sin, it is therefore evident, he himself thought
to be required of those who were to be baptized; and
hence he must have contemplated them as being of
sufficient age to cherish such a purpose. More than
once he has said in effect, what he says in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, book v., chapter 8, namely: "If any one is previously dead to sin,
he, of course, is buried with Christ; but if any one
*......       6aaKto,  t  6v o  a d trrto-arog  cboEXstav txsaat trg =poatpi.
ta;  V 8 ari5opov aT o o  prarVoovri pig IyyLIoiPEvII.
238 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CHILDREN.   239
does not before die to sin, he cannot be ouried with
Christ. For no one, while alive, is buried. But if
he is not buried with Christ, neither is he legitimately
baptized. "*
In presenting the testimony of Origen respecting
the baptism of children, we have endeavored to avoid
as much as possible all irrelevant matters, and to
state with fidelity and clearness what belongs essentially to the subject. We have taken some pains
to ascertain the truth. We have examined, for ourselves, the voluminous works of Origen; and wve have
become thoroughly convinced that the system of
infant baptism adopted by subsequent ecclesiastical
fathers never entered his mind; although some of
his speculations on the pollution connected with
nativity, on the passage found only in the Septuagint
version, not in the Hebrew original of Job xiv: 4,
and on Psalm li: 5, as well as the somewhat indefinite
statements attributed to him, claiming the authority of apostolical tradition, may have greatly contributed, at a later period, to the establishment of
that system.
The term children, parvuli, was in itself indefinite.
* Si quis prius mortuus est peccato, is necessarib in baptismo conlsepultus est: si verob non ante quis moritur peccato, non potest sepeliri cumn Christo. Nemo enim vivus
aliquando sepelitur.  Qubd si non consepelitur Christo, neo
legitim6 baptizatnr. 
THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
Various and strong influences, in the third and fourth
centuries, were constantly tending to hasten the baptism of children, and make it, strictly and literally,
infant baptism; so that we need not wonder if what
Origen or a reputed apostolical constitution had said,
with some indefiniteness, respecting the baptism of
children in the later portion of childhood, without
saying  precisely what children, soon came  to be
understood and used by many as sanctioning the baptism of children in their earliest infancy. Many a
word, in the lapse of time, has undergone a very considerable change of signification, in consequence of
change in the customs of the people.
Pedobaptism, in the most ancient sense of the word,
the baptism of children capable of professing their
faith in Christ, passed gradually, and, in different
countries, more or less rapidly, though with comparative silence, into infant baptism  in the more
modern sense, the baptism of new-born babes.   For
the most part, historical light in regard to the primitive churches shone but dimly. It is not strange if
even the acute and powerful Augustine sometimes had
his vision obscured in the heat and dust of controversy.  We  are not at all surprised at the manner
in which he, in the fifth century, used the word parvulus; while, with consummate skill and energy, he
confirmed and made triumphant in Africa and elsewhere that system of infant baptism which, according to the most reliable evidence, began to be authoritatively established in that country, by the ardent
240 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISMI OF CHILDREN.   241
and popular Cyprian, about the middle' of the third
century.
Bult on those influences to which we have alluded
we cannot now expatiate   Nor can we exhibit here
the statements respecting baptism that are found in
the works of those Fathers who preceded Origen.
Not one of them says any thing in favor of infant
baptism; while several of them speak in a manner
that is quite inconsistent with the supposition of its
having yet come into existence.  For satisfactory information on this point, we can, with much confidence,
refer our readers to an excellent article by the Rev.
Dr. Ripley, in the Christian Review, for October, 1851.
In this connection, however, we may perhaps be
permitted to add a very few words respecting Tertullian, who, about A.D. 200, in most decided tones of
disapprobation, raises his voice against hastening the
baptism of children.* iHle uses the very word that is
used in the translations from  Origen; and, in the
course of his expostulation, he remarks: "The  Lord
does indeed say, Forbid them not to come unito me.
Therefore let them come while they are growing up;
let them come while they are learning, while they are
being taught whither they are coming. Let them be
made Christians Ebe identified by baptism with the
body of Christians] when they shall have been able
to know Christ. "t
* Prmcipub circa parvulos.
t Ait quidem Dominus, nolite ilos prohibere a.d m  vnstre
16 
THE TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN
In order to be able to know Christ, they needed
not  only a mind  adapted to perceive, but they
needed also to have Christ presented to the mind.
They needed skillful and patient guidance; as, when
Philip asked, Un(lderstandest thou what thou readest?
the eunuch replied, How can I, except some man
guide me?  It is not when they merely begin to be
susceptible of this knowledge, but when by means of
sufficient age, and of suitably extended instruction,
they may reasonably be supposed to be acquainted
with the character and religion of our Lord, that Tertullian would have children baptized.   Ie objects
only to such haste as would preclude their being duly
instructed and established in the principles of piety.
Hle would have them come to Christ by being carefully taught, and receiving the Christian religion.
Hence it would seem that he was speaking, not of
babes or infants properly so called, but of such chlildren as were, at least in some measure, capable of
being taught.
To the same conclusion the Chevalier Bunsen was
conducted by his investigations, the results of which
he has recently given to the world in his very
learned work, entitled, "'Ilippolytus and his Age."
The opinion is there stated( most decidedly, in the
following ternms: "Tertullian's opposition is to the
Veniant ergo dumn adolescLunt, veniant dumn disenut, dum
quo veniianlt doecitair; fiant Christiani qut m  h}aristum
nosso potuerinit.  Lib. 1A Bi   sa,a e 18.
242 
RESPECTING THE BAPTISM OF CHIIILDREN.   243
baptism of young, growing childreni; he does not say
a word about new-born infants.  Neither does Origen, when his expressions are accurately weighed."*
We commend the subject to the consideration of
our readers. We have endeavored to call forth
Origen himself, as it were, and let him give his own
testimony.   This  has been uttered in his own language, the Greek, as well as in a translation, so far
as it respects the principal passages and several of
the others.  No room is left for suspicion of fraud, or
spuriousness.   If we have fallen into error at any
point, may we be set right. If passages which have
commonly been supposed to favor infant baptism,
have been satisfactorily reconciled by us with passages which decidedly exclude it, all is well.   But if
this has not been done, anid a passage existing only
in a translation, or liable to some suspicion of
spuriousness, is at variance with a passage existing
still in the original Greek, or liable to no such suspicion, it is clear that preference must be given to the
authority of the passage still existing in the original,
or liable to no suspicion. The conclusion is easy and
inevitable. Origen should never be quoted in support of i7fant baptism.  He testifies, not only indirectly but also directly and expressly in regard to
children as well as others, that,' before being baptized, they were to be taught, and to give evidence
of having duly heeded the voice of Christian instruction.
* Vol. iii., p.195.  
BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
246 
A 
BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
,/ HAT was it to be baptized for the dead, as
mentioned in 1 Cor. xv: 29?
We confess that we are not prepared to
acquiesce in the conclusion to which Cony         beare and Howson come, in their elaborate
and excellent work on the Life and Epistles of St. Paul, namely, that "the passage nimust be
considered to admit of no satisfactory explanation.
It alludes to some practice of the Corinthians, which
has not been recorded elsewhere, and of which every
other trace has perished."* We think that Dr.
Kendrick has sufficiently shown the unsatisfactory
character of that explanation which has been sought
in supposing that the apostle Paul referred to the
superstitious baptism of living persons instead of
some who had died unbaptized. We doubt the correctness of the interpretation given by Doddridge,
Olshausen and others, that "baptized for (vnlp) is
baptized instead of the dead, tb fill up the ranks
vacated by the dead; to replace those whom death
has snatched away." And we have not been con
* Vol. II., p. 63.
247 
248           BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD,
vinced by the logic and eloquence recently employed
in maintaining that "Baptized for the dead is baptized into a relation to the dead, baptized so as to be
allied with the dead, reckoned among the dead rather
than among the living; so baptized as that they
belong,  by  sacrifice,  suffering, peril,  martyrdom,
rather to the dead than to the living, and are thus
the victims of a fate which has no alleviation nor
apology, except in the resurrection."
Without attempting to discuss the merits of the
numerous opinions which have been brought forward
respecting the passage before us, we would call attention to a few considerations, in the hope that they
may help some candid and inquiring reader to understand the meaning of the apostle.
It is undeniable that the word in the Greek original (,t~p) corresponding to for in the phrase " baptized for the dead," is used, in the New Testament
and in the Greek classics, to signify not only instead
or in the place of, but also respecting or with reference
to-and for, modified in various ways by the context; as to die, suffer, make an offering, hope, thank,
speak, pray, contend, support the claims set up for,
etc. The following passages may serve as illustrations: 2 Cor. xii: 8, For (TrEip, respecting) this thing
I besought the Lord that it might depart from me.
2 Cor. xii: 8, We would not, brethren, have you
ignorant of (Vp, respecting or with reference  to)
our trouble. 2 Thess. ii: 1, Now we beseech you,
brethren, by (v E'p, concernina or with respect to) the 
BAPTISM FOR  THE DEAD.             249
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Phil. i: 7, It is
meet for me to think this of (p with reference to)
you all.  2 Cor. i: 7, Our hope of (,lp, respecting
and for) you is steadfast.  Rom. i: 8, I thank my
God through Jesus Christ for (,tp, with reference or
regard to) you all, that your faith is spoken of
throughout the whole world. Acts xxvi: 1, Then
Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak
for (vLtp) thyself The apostle was permitted to
state what he deemed to be the facts in his case, and
thus show why he should not be condemned. So
among the Greeks, "to speak for the commonwealth"
(V~tp eo; zoOvo) was to "defend it."  Compare the
expression, If for us (Vtp,.pl, nostra causa) you
shall not be able to act (npSE~v) as sustaining our
interests.* According to Xenophon's account in the
preceding part of the paragraph, it will be recollected,
Cyrus had-said that he was not able to speak, that is,
to set forth for his companions, before the proper
authority, the claims of the petition which was to be
presented;  and his companions had  asked, Who
would be more capable of persuading? A kindred
expression occurs in the next book, If I counsel
Cyrus to say something for us (e        Ltip 1;1WV.)t
The Greek preposition of which we are speaking
indicates, most usually, that the'act mentioned in
connection with it, whether external or internal, has
a favorable bearing, or is, in some way, on the side or
t Cyropedia, B. II: 1.
'* Cyropedia, B. I: 6. 
250           13APTISM FORL THE DEAD.
in behalf of the object whose relation to the act it
shows. Sometimes, as we have seen, it signifies merely
respecting or with reference to; and then it is merely
equivalent to the word  Ep;, which usually has this
signification. Sometimes the two words alternate;
as in Eph. vi: 18 and 19, With all perseverance and
supplication for (asps) all the saints; and for (flop)
me, that utterance may be given unto me, etc. In
the first case, the supplication requested is expressly
with respect to; and impliedly, from the context and
the nature of the act, it is for. In the second case,
it is expressly for; and, of course, as the context also
shows, it is with respect to. An equally clear instance of the alternation of these Greek prepositions,
and of their being used as if equivalent to each other,
may be found in the seventh chapter of the second
book of Maccabees. In the ninth verse, one of the
seven- sons who, with their mother, was put to death
by Antiochus Epiphanes, says, "the  King  of  the
world shall raise us up unto everlasting life who have
died for (flp) his laws;" and in the thirty-seventh verse
of the same chapter, another says, "I, as my brothers, offer up my body and life for (7E,p) the laws," etc.
Those martyrs, by their sufferings, bore a noble testimony in behalf of the divine laws which the persecuting tyrant required them to disregard.   Winer's
careful statement should be remembered: "As among
the Greeks, so in the New Testament, the two prepo.
sitions are interchanged with each other. (See Gal.
i: 4.) And the writers themselves do not hold fast 
BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
the difference. The combination of the two, however, is suitably presented in 1 Pet. iii. 18."*
Our Saviour, in discoursing with his disciples,
brings very distinctly to view the idea of a great contest between two parties, the Christian and the AntiChristian. In Luke ix: 50, he says, Hie that is not
against us is for us (T4Ep jimv); and in the parallel
place of Mark ix: 40, He that is not against us is on
our part (Uncap,uwv).  In both of these passages, as
well as in I Cor. xv: 29 (for the dead, Beep rJv vExpzv ),
the author of the ancient Syriac version uses the
same word that he does in Mark i: 44, and Luke v:
14, " Show thyself to the priests, and offer an oblation
for thy cleansing." But in these last two passages
the Greek word in the original corresponding to the
one which he uses and to the English for, is the preposition (kEpt) which we  have mentioned as more
usually signifying with reference to. The offering
was to be with  reference  to  the  cleansing.  It
was  also to be a testimony for it, affirming with
respect to it what was claimed in behalf of the
leper, namely, the reality of his being cleansed or
healed.
After the resurrection of Christ, as well as before
it, he and his followers were on one side, while the
unbelieving and scoffing world was  on the other, in
* See the work entitled Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms, als Grundlage der neutestamentlichen Exegese, p. 328.
251 
B13APTISM FOR THE tEAD.
the great contest to which he referred when he said,
He that is not against us is on our part, or for us
('I0p ~v).  The claims that were set up for him and
for those who trusted in him were rejected. HIis
resurrection was denied, and all their hopes of resurrection and immortality were treated as delusive
dreams.
If now it was understood that in the act of baptism there was a confiding reference to Christ's
dying and rising again to deliver his followers from
sin and death, they who were baptized did, in that
act, take part with him and his friends. In being
baptized they professed not only their trust in him
and their devotedness to him as their Lord and
Saviour, but also their belief in the rightfulness of all
his claims, and in the timely fulfillment of all his
gracious promises to his followers. What though
some-of these had gone down to the grave? He was
able to raise them up again; for he himself had triumphed over death, and had ascended to "the right
hand of the Majesty on high."
In reply to the objection that "' water baptism is
performed not for Christ (lap Xpto~o) but into
Christ (~'; Xp,o,6v); we think it sufficient to remark
that, while Christian baptism was always to recognize Christ as preached in the gospel, it might well be
connected with some variety of expression, according
to the various aspects in which that recognition is
resented, or the various purposes for which it is
mentioned.  In the general commission given by our
252 
BAPTISMI FOR TIE TE.AD.            253
Lord to his apostles, he speaks of baptizing disciples
in or unto (Es) the name, that is, into the recognition
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit
(Matt. xxviii: 19). And yet the apostles sometimes
baptized into Christ Jesus (Rom. vi: 3, and Gal.
iii: 27), or into the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts
viii: 16, and xix: 5); sometimes baptized in or upon
(fi) the name of Jesus Christ (Acts ii: 38), the baptism being grounded upon the sincere and devout
profession of faith in him; and sometimes, in a very
similar sense, baptized in (iV) the name of the Lord
(Acts x: 48).  They had occasion to make Christ
the prominent subject of their discourses; and if he
was duly acknowledged, they could expatiate, at their
discretion, on all contained in the commission and in
the teaching of our Lord. At one time, they could
refer to baptism as a suitable acknowledgment of
Christ, who died on account of our sins, and thence
proceed to remind us of our obligation to die to all
sin, and rise to a new life, as he rose from the dead.
At another time they could refer to baptism as a testimony borne for Christ and his departed followers,
amidst the reproaches of that scoffing unbelief which
denounced him as an impostor, and his followers as
contemptible dupes, any resurrection being an impossibility. In the first case, they would contemplate us
as. receiving the Saviour; in the second as taking his
part and testifying for him.
Christ had predicted his own resurrection.   He had
also declared, He that believeth on me, though he 
254          PINAPTISM FOR THiE DEAD.
werc dead, yet shall he live.*  This is the will of
HTim that sent me, that every one who seeth the Son
and believeth on him may have everlasting life; and
J will raise him up at the last day.t And he had
taught that the hour was coming in which all that are
in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth.1 His own resurrection had divinely confirmed
the authority of his mission on earth and the truth of
all that he had taught. If he had risen, a resurrection was possible. What had been done could be
done again. If he had risen, it was through an exertion of divine power. The same power can raise
others.  If he had risen, through an exertion of
divine power, thus confirming his claims to be an unerring guide,. then others will be raised up according
to his prediction.
The apostle Paul regarded the defending of the
claims set up for Christ as virtually the defending of
"the hope and resurrection of the dead." In his address before the Jewish council at Jerusalem (Acts
xxiii: 6), he is represented as saying, "Of the hope
and resurrection of the dead I am called in question."
In Acts xvii: 3, he is represented as " opening and
alleging that Christ must needs have suffered, and
risen from the dead." And in the 18th verse, which
mentions his interview with "certain philosophers of
the Epicureans and of the Stoics," is it stated that
* John xi  25.
$ Jolhn v: 28 and 29.
t John vi: 40, 
BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.              255
" he preached unto them Jesus and the resurrection."
Respecting Peter and John it is recorded in Acts
iv: 2, that they "taught the people, and preached
through Jesus the resurrection from the dead." In
fActs iv: 33, we  have  the  summary  statement,
"With great power gave the apostles witness of the
resurrection of the Lord Jesus." In Acts v: 30-32,
they say, "The  God of our fathers raised up Jesus,
whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God
exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a
Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are his witnesses of these
things; and so is also the Holy Spirit, whom God
hath given to them that obey him." In Acts x:
39-43, "And we are witnesses of all things which he
did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem,
whom they slew and hanged on a tree.  Him God
raised up- the third day, and showed him openly;
not-to all the people, but unto witnesses, chosen before
of God, even to us who did eat and drink with him
after he rose from the dead. And he commanded us
to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he
who was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick
and dead."
In Acts xiii: 28-39; we have a striking specimen
of the manner in which Paul was accustomed to connect the death and the resurrection of Christ.  He is
addressing the Jews in the synagogue at Antioch in
Pisidia; and he proceeds to say, " Though they found
no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that 
~256       BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
he should be slain. And when they had fulfilled all
that was written of him, they took him down from the
tree, and laid him in a sepulchre. But God raised
him from the dead. And he was seen many days of
them who came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people. And we
declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise
which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled
the same unto us their children, in that he hath
raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the
second Psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. And as concerning that he raised him
up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise: I will give you the sure
mercies of David. Wherefore he saith also in another
Psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption.   For David, after he had served his own
generation by the will of God, fell asleep, and was
laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption. But he
whom God raised again, saw no corruption. Be it
known unto you, therefore, men and brethren, that
through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by him all that believe are justified
from all things, from which ye could not be justified
by the law of Moses."
In his First Epistle to the Corinthians (xv: 3 and
4) he says: " I delivered unto you first of all, that
which I also received, how that Christ died for our
sins, according to the Scriptures, and that he was
buried, and that he rose again the third day, accord. 
BAPTISM FOR TItE DEAD.              257
ing to the Scriptures, and that he was seen," etc. In
his Epistle to the Romans (iv: 24 and 25): "For us
also to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on
him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
who was delivered for our offences, and was raised
again for our justification;"7 and (x: 9 and 10) "the
word of faith which we preach, that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the
dead, thou shalt be saved." In Rom. v: 10: "If when
we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the
death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we
shall be saved by his life."  And viii: 34: "Who is
he that condemneth? It is Christ that died; yea,
rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right
hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. In
his Epistle to the Philippians (iii: 20 and 21): "From
whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus
Christ; who shall change our vile body, that it may
be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to
the working whereby he is able even to subdue all
things unto himself." In Rom. viii: 23, looking forward to the glory which shall be revealed in us, he
mentions, as a completing portion of it, the redenrp
tion of ourbody. iHe consoles the bereaved disciples
at Thessalonica (1 Thess, iv: 13 and 14), by saying:
"I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them who are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even.
ao others who have no hope,  For if [or as] we ho
1Y 
\APTM FO''
BAPTISM FO3R T-ITE 9EA\D.
lieve that Jesus died and rose again, even so
them also who sleep in Jesus will God bring with
him."
The same apostle, standing on Mlars' Hill, closes
his address to the men of Athens by saying: "The
times of this ignorance God winked at, but now com.
mandeth all men everywhere to repent; because he
hath appointed a day in which  he will judge  the
world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath
ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all,
in that he bath raised him from the dead."
And, in harmony with these representations, the
apostle Peter, in his First Epistle (i: 3 and 4) renders
thanks to God, "who, according to his abundant
mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by
the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an
inheritance incorruptible, and  undefiled, and  that
fadeth' not away."
These, and other passages that we pass over in
silence, indicate the importance which the apostles attached to the resurrection of Christ. It puts the impress of the divine sanction on all his claims; and it
is indissolubly connected with the state and prospects
of his followers.  TTenee, the resurrection was regarded as a primary fact in the'Christian system. It
is mentioned in the Epistle to the Itebrews (vi: I
and 2) as being one of the elementary teachings, one
of the principles of the dc,ctrine of Christ.
Our Satviour had said, Iamn the resuzrrection and the
258 
BAPTISM FOR TTIE DEAD.
life.*  HIe is the source of our new life, spiritual and
moral, with the well founded hope that he will finally
redeem even our bodies, making them "spiritual"
(1 Cor. xv: 44), "like unto his glorious body," fitted
for the heavenly state, and will give us, in our completed redemption, to enjoy with him eternal bliss.
He died on account of our sins. We die or becomo
dead to sins.  He rises from the dead to a glorious
and eternal life. We rise by faith in him to a new
spiritual and moral life, which is connected with a
glorious resurrection hereafter, even of the body, and
with the life everlasting in the heavenly mansions.
Our deadness to sin and our new life, our rising to
holiness here, with the hope of a happy future resurrection, and the enjoyment of the eternal bliss promised by the Saviour, we owe, pre-eminently, to his
death and resurrection.   Ilis death is the procuring
cause; his resurrection, the crowning assurance.
According to our Lord's conmmand, whoever trusted
in him for salvation was to be baptized. Baptism
was indeed a symbol of purification; for it was performed in water, a purifying element.   And,  at the
same time, it indicated the source of the purification.
In 1 John i: 7, it is affirmed that the blood of Jesus
Christ...  cleanseth us from all sin.  And  in
Rev. i: 5, glory and dominion forever and ever are
ascribed unto him that loved us, and washed us from
our sins in his own blood.  It is to Christ, suffering a
* Johnl xi  25.
259 
BAPTISM FOR TIIE DEAD.
bloody and ignominous death for lus, and, as he pre
dieted, rising gloriously from the tomb, that we are
to look, with penitence and faith, for purification from
our sins, and for resurrection to a life holy and faith ful here, glorious hereafter, and completely happy forever. Christian baptism, therefore, when the apostles
were fully illuminated, was perceived to have an important and impressive reference to the death of
Christ.
In the view of the Saviour, even before his crucifixion, his sufferings and death appeared as a baptism.
He  was to be overwhelmed, as it were, in deep
waters; and yet he was to rise again, gloriously
triumphant.  "I have a baptism," he said, "to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished."*
Respecting the import of that simple and solemn
rite which he appointed to be observed, in the outset,
by all who  profess faith in himi  we can have no
guides more reliable than his own apostles. One of
these (in the First Epistle of Peter iii: 20 and 21),
mentions the rescue of those who in the ark were
raised up through the waters of the flood, as resenmbling our being saved amidst the solemnities of bap*ism, not a mere external washing, but the seeking
-r professing of a good conscience towards  Gold,
,hrough the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Here, it
will be perceived, he connects our baptism with the
* Lulke xii: 50.
260 
BAPTISM FOR THIE DEAD.              261
resurrection of Christ, and, of course, with his death;
for his death is necessarily presupposed in the mention of his resurrection.
Another apostle connects our baptism expressly
with the death of Christ. In Rom. vi: 3, he mentions our baptism as manifestly recognizing that
death. Presuming that the matter was distinctly
understood by every one who had been baptized, he
asks, Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized
into Jesus  Christ, were baptized  into his death?
This apostle also connects our baptism with the
resurrection of Christ. For he immediately adds,
"Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into
death [and, of course, raised up again], that, like as
Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of
the Father, even so we also should walk in newness
of life. For if we have been planted togetherunited with him-in the likeness of his death, we shall
be also in the likeness of his resurrection.
If we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall
also live with him."
In regard to the words which we have here inserted in brackets, namely: and, of course, raised up
again, it must be evident to every attentive reader
that they are suggested and required by the context.
And this is confirmed by the parallel passage in the
Epistle to the Colossians (ii: 12), where both the
being buried  with  Christ and  the being risen or
raised up with him, are fully expressed, as pertaining
t. the baptismal act: "Buried with him in baptisnm, 
262           BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
wherein [in which emblem] also ye are risen with
him through the faith of the operation of God, who
hath raised him from the dead."
In conversation and in writing, we often omit
words and clauses, as being implied by the expressions used, especially when those expressions, from
the nature of the things mentioned, or from frequent
usage, have come to suggest readily all that needs to
be presented to the mind. We are informed respecting Naaman the Syrian (2 Kings v: 14), " Then
went he down and dipped himself seven times in
Jordan." We do not need to have it expressed that
he rose up again as often as he dipped himself; this
is implied. When the mariner who was once approaching some unknown or dangerous coast, tells us
that, to ascertain the depth of the water, he threw the
lead, and for many hours continued to throw it, that
is, to sink the plummet for sounding at sea; every
one who has any knowledge of the process readily
understands that as often as he threw and sank the
lead he raised it up again.  And when we speak of
immersion as a religious rite, we assume it, as a matter of course, that the person immersed is raised iup
again.  The nature of the case  speaks for itself.
And in every mind the rising again, whether expressed or implied, is connected with the immersion.
Otherwise, this would be a drowning. But as no one
suspects us Of having any intention to commit such a
crime, and as our practice of raising up again those
whom we bury in baptism is well known, a single 
BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
word is sufficient to present to the view of the mind
the whole emblematical act.
In the explanation of these passages we do not
stand alone. To say nothing of many others, whose
opinions are entitled to a respectful regard, we
request our readers to remember that, with reference
to the passage in Rom. vi: 4, Conybeare and I-Iowson have the candor to remark,* "This clause, which
is here left elliptical, is fully expressed, Col. ii: 12,
crt,exSoa9v<~Aers5 o,e.Lv rZ 3aitt   v X xas Orv27Y~P -t
This passage cannot be understood unless it be borne
in mind that the primitive baptism was by immersion."
See Vol. I., p. 439.
Before closing this article, we may have occasion to
advert to what is there stated.
We now hasten to bring together the elements of a
solution of the problem before us. These, we think,
are to be found in the context, and on the face of the
verse itself, 1 Cor. xv: 29, which we are endeavoring
to explain.
In the context preceding, the apostle speaks of
Christ's death for us, of his burial, and of his resurrection, proved by the testimony of eye-witnesses, of
all the apostles, and of more than five hundred
brethren at once.  These  facts  he  represents  as
having been most prominent in his preaching, So, he
says, we preach, and so ye believed. Now, he asks,
"If Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how
* Vol. II., p. 169.
263 
264           13APTISM FOR THE DEAnn
say some among you, that there is no resurrection of
the dead?'
Here follows an expostulation, showing the unreasonablenoss and the pernicious consequences of
such a rejection of the truth. If there be no resurrection, then (1) Christ is not risen; (2) the preaching of the apostles and the faith of their disciples are
useless; (3) the apostles testify falsely respecting
Christ's resurrection; (4) the whole gospel is a delusive fable, and brings no deliverance from sin;
(5) they who have died trusting in Christ have
perished; (6) we too are in a most miserable condition, for our most splendid hope of a glorious immorality, for which we forego every thing else, perishes
when we die.
Here, in contrast with so unutterably miserable a
disappointment to the followers of Christ, there is
brought to view a glimpse of the happy consequences
of his resurrection, his triumphing over all enemies,
even ever death itself, and completing gloriously his
mediatorial work.
Having thus digressed a little according to his
glowing manner, the apostle reverts, in the 29th
verse, to the train of his expostulations: (7) "Else,
what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if
the dead rise not at all? Why are they baptized for
the dead?" As much as to say, HIow, if there be no
resurrection, can they escape the charge of inconsistency, or of falsehood, who, in mnost solemnly protessing their faith, are immersed or buried in baptism 
BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD,
and raised up again, with reference to the dead, as if
testifying for them, that their resurrection ought to be
regarded as a fundamental truth? Why do they exhibit this testimony, this emblematical act with reference to the dead? That is, with reference pre-emi..
nently to Christ, who, the gospel affirms, died for us
and rose again, and then, consequently, with reference
to others whose resurrection he foretold. (8) And
why, confiding in Christ, as if he had risen from the
dead, and thus taking part with him and his followers,
do we stand forth before the world, exposed every
hour to persecution and to death? Why do I, as it
were, die daily?  What am I to gain by all my conflicts and sufferings? I am bereft of reason and
common sense. Beyond the grave, there is no crown
of righteousness laid up for the faithful.-A conclusion
so impious, in view of all the light that nowi shines
on the subject, is instinctively rejected by every
Christian heart; and the denial from which it comes
must be pronounced to be a denial of the truth.
What  is contained.in  number  7, leads  very
naturally to what is contained in number 8; but it is
not identical with it. The difference seems to be
this:  in  number  7, the  question  is, Why  give
such a testimony, so false or so inconsistent. And
then, in number 8, Why, by giving that testimony,
or by any other act, expose ourselves to persecution?
Our interpretation may be briefly expressed thus:
The context treats of rising from the dead. To be
265 
B3APTISM - FOR THE DEAD.
baptized was to be immersed or "buried in baptism,"
and, of course, raised up again. And this was done
with reference to the dead; so that, inasmuch as it
was taking, decidedly, their part, the solemn emblematical act testified for them a belief in their
resurrection. Christ rose from the dead, and all his
followers must. Christ rose; and his followers are
to rise to a life new and holy, though it may be persecuted and self-denying here, and to a life completely
and forever glorious hereafter. Christ rose. He will
come at the last day. The living and the dead will
stand before him, and they will be judged in righteousness.
The conclusion to which we have come, it will be
perceived, rests on a basis independent of the
opinions, whether well founded or not, of men who
have taught since the days of the apostles. But we
may be permitted now to remark that it is confirmed,
substantially, by early writers of the highest authority
in the Greek Church; men whose native language
was Greek, and who, in other respects also, hadri
ample means of understanding the passage. They
represent baptism as having reference to the death
of Christ, and to a rising again. In so representing
this initiatory rite, they sometimes, like Paul in
Rom. vi: 4, mention only our immersion, our going
under or being buried in the water, and leave our
emerging or rising again to be understood as a matter of course. And sometimes, like Paul in Col. ii:
12, they mention both the burial and the rising.
266 
BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD.
The fact that they deemed it sufficient to mention the
well known act in an elliptical manner, would strongly
corroborate our explanation of Romi. vi: 4, if it needed
to be corroborated.
Chrysostom, in his Homily xxiii., on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, uses the following expression'
" We, when we have believed in Christ and his resurrection, are baptized."* In his Homily xl., on the
same Epistle he says: " To be baptized and put
under, then raised up, is an emblem of going down
into the state of the dead, and of rising from it."t
In the same connection he represents Paul as saying,
"If there is not a resurrection, why art thou baptized
for the dead? that is, the bodies. For upon this thou
art baptized, believing in a resurrection of the dead
body."
Theodoret says, "he that is baptized is buried with
the Lord, that, taking part with him in his death, he
may also be a partaker of his resurrection.   But if
the body is dead and does not rise, why then is it
baptized?"~
John of Damascus, in his theological work on the
"-.... 7/,cS  r7-(,3 xpiaTr&)  iraT   TKaip dva,a'a6E arrou  8arri;6PEa.
t TO flarrirffaa  Kai K                  a raOc,,eSaa  etra dvaveavev   7g Eig IUov Kara,'crerog irrt
MipGoXov,  alL 4n!Kce?cv d,6cou.
t  El /,i grtv dvaaraaat, ro Kai /a7rrLr~,',rp r-,v vegkpw'v; rovriart, c) arY l
row.   KaL yap irL roar?) t3lrrr(,.   rov veKpov crStparo; ava,raatyv 7rarrcvwv.
' Toarrt6tev6g,,prlat, r'03 Jc7r6r,vS'rrat, va ro, -ava,ro  Kotco,VrYfas
aL r~ dvaaadoc,)g ytr,,rat Ko,vyv6g. EL rie  VeKo6V E art rO,Jllaod, Kat O'K ca i,raraL,
rTi  frore Kai lairrTLtra,.
267 
3~68       BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD,
Orthodox Faith, B. iv. c. 11, teaches that Baptism is
an emblem of the death of Christ.*
Theophylact on Col. ii: 12, says: "He that is baptized is buried with Christ;"t on Col. iii: 1, " as bythe
going under, baptism typifies death, so by the rising
again, the' resurrection;"I and on 1 Cor. x: 2, "we
ourselves are baptized, imitating death by going
under, and the resurrection by the rising again. "~
Whoever prepared the remarkable Greek work
claiming to be the Apostolic Constitutions, aimed,
doubtless, to make it seem, in his early time, to express the views of the apostles. And in B. iii. c. 17,
he says:"This baptism therefore is given into the
death of Jesus.    The water is instead of the burial;
the descent into the water, the
dying together with Christ; the ascent out of the
water, the rising again with him."]]
And whatever may be the true history of that creed
which, after a few ages, came to be ascribed to the
apostles, and which contained, as one of the articles
usually professed at baptism, the doctrine of the
T*  roS -O roS  ayov roa   XptTOU iart rO O      rTa.
t'O              o-v,-a6r c,vV at,S Xtr
To  1(,irrplla  aTlrep 61a rT; KTara6W,,eo,          ov,.arov, r or JLa tr4; ddvaJeois
t'V dva6raov Tvro?.
] Bart16p,-aa Kat apron, yl, OVtst,TOV,OaT-OV  Jta rT; Kara6otCo;, KaZ ra'71
dv,aataatv  a rta  dvaOc; o.
'EIrr  TOLvvV  TO' itv #flapJLa eL's  7'v.Ova7o,  ToS'IaooV Jct6sAovo  rd ts 
,p dvrT.a.ik,..........   b Kar6. V,aqV r7   avva7roa avelvP,     di,&vas Trd
,vvavaa-rovat. 
BAPTISM FOR TIHE DEAD.
rc.,urrection of the dead, no one can doubt that the
apostles preached that doctrine, and taught their
disciples to acknowledge it, in connection with
acknowledging  that Christ died for  us  and rose
again.
Clement of Rome, in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, says: "Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord
continually shows us that there shall be a future
resurrection; of which he has made our Lord Jesus
Christ the first-fruits, raising him from the dead."*
In comparatively modern times, many not accustomed to the ideas prevalent among the Greek ecclesiastical fathers, seem to us to have perceived, in part,
the true interpretation of the passage before us.
With Melancthon, they represent those who are baptizedfor the dead, as making profession concerning
the dead (profitentes de mortuis). And yet they
seem, very naturally in their circumstances, to have
overlooked one or two considerations belonging to the
case. We allude particularly to the peculiar appropriateness of what is expressed, and of what is
implied, in the word baptized, immersed, ~a i,vo,
buried, and of course raised up again.t
* Karavoflcxowv, dyar,To?,  g; o A0 7r6r,7 0 rnt~tl'Kvrvat J1?7vVtKW rlyv rlv PE -
)ovorav d,v6.ra'tv E'aceaat, 7 rv d,rapX:1v iE,oit7oaro' r.v Kvpio,'II,oov Xptardo,
iK veip$v dvaarfa;.  (XXIV., id Jacobson's Edition; XI: 16, in
Wakefield's.)
t Since this article was written, we have had the pleasure of reading the following note in the English translation,  at  Edinburgh,  of  the  sixth  edition  of  Winer'.
269 
IBAPTISMI FOR TtIE DEAD.
Dr. Meyer, pre-eminent in Germany and elsewhere
at the present time among the learned interpreters of
the New Testament, in the recent edition of his Comnmentary on the Acts of the Apostles, says, respecting
the baptism of the jailer (Acts xvi: 23): Th7e imnmersion, certainly, was an entirely essential part of the
symbolical representation in baptism. And, for confirmation of his remark, he refers to the sixth chapter
of the Epistle to the Romans.*
In the work, which we have already mentioned, on
the Life and Epistles of St. Paul, by two very highly
esteemed clergymen of the Established Church of
Work on the New Testament Diction (p. 400).  It is from
thle pen of the translator, Edward Masson, A.M., formerly
Professor in the University of Athens.......
"Baptism is administered in reference to, represents the
state of the dead, physical and spiritual, and subsequent
resurrection through Christ.  Chrysostom (Homily xx. on
John), says: Tifg 0 6yo, Jot [3a,,roca,o;; acza ENe~rat EvM alvr,v(?oa
Taio; Kaa  Ep()con Scat d:a'raata Ka' w. Kai'ara W oa yi:,sra, r6,vra.
[What is the reason of baptism?  There are celebrated in
its sacred symbols, burial and death, and resurrection and
life. And these all occur together.] The rite of Baptism.
ac;ording to the Greeks, always comprehended Kar,!s7,a, and
da:vi36',, the one representing death, and the other resurrection. The alleged usage in the apostolic Church, of baptizing the (literally) dead, directly or vicariously, would
have been, had it really existed, what Calvin calls it,
foeda baptismi profanatio.".."
* Das Untertauchen war ja ein ganz wesentliohes Stuick
der'raufsymbolik. (Rom. vi.)
270 
BAPTISM FOR TIlE DEAD.
England, there is a paragraph to which according to
our intimation, we now advert. They are speaking
on affairs pertaining to the churches in the time of the
apostle, and they proceed thus:" It is needless to
add, that baptism was (unless in exceptional cases)
administered by immersion, the convert being plunged
beneath the surface of the water to represent his
death to the life of sin, and then raised from his
momentary burial to represent his resurrection to the
life of righteousness.  It must be a subject of regret
that the general discontinuance of this original form
of baptism (though perhaps necessary in our northera climates) has rendered obscure to popular apprehensions, somne very important passages of Scriptu re. "*
No exceptional cases in the times of the apostles,
we are confident, can be shown. Exceptional cases,
in later times, arose from erroneously supposing the
necessity of baptism in order to be saved, and from
erroneously ascribing to such a ceremony a kind of
magical efficacy in communicating divine grace.
With the exercise of a little taste and skill and
coimmon sense, such as our Lord had a right to expect in his ministers and his people, immersion can
be decorously administered in all the world. In
every habitable region of the earth, suitable arrangements for the ceremony can easily be made, with due
regard to the habits of any age or country.
* Vol. I. p. 439.
21 
27~2      B~APTISM FOR TlIE BATD.
In respect to our northern climates, it should be
remembered that, during a part of the year, there
was cold weather in Palestine, where our Lord instituted baptism. In Greece, too, and in the Russian
Empire, there is cold weather.  And yet, in Greece
and throughout even the highest latitudes of the
Russian Empire, and wherever the Greek Church
has prevailed, the Greek word baptism,       a,-, has
been understood to signify and require immersion
and immersion is conitinued to the present day. In
our own country, and in the presence of numerous
spectators, at Nahant and Newport and other places
where there is "much water," we find it practicable
to enjoy the salutary effect and the luxury of bathing
And can it be impracticable for us to be baptized according to the original institute of our Lord and
Saviour? If at any time it be so, and if we really
seek to obey him, he, doubtless, will be well pleased
with our waiting, reverently and confidingly, till it
be practicable. Can it, then, be necessary, and can
it be right, to discontinue the use of that symbolical or
emblematical act which he himself, in his wisdom and
love, appointed; and which sets forth so impressively
a profession of dying to all sin and living to righteousness, through a faith in him who was dead, and is
alive, and will hereafter raise up his followers to a
completely glorious immortality?