No. 6.] THE CHRISTIAN JOURNAL, AND LITERARY REGISTER. For the Christian Journal. JUNE, 1822. Conversations of a Minister with a Parishioner, on Baptismal Regene ration. CONVERSATION III. Parishioner. You gave your consent, Sir, to another conversation, on the important subject which has been under discussion with us; it being understood, in this stage of the progress, to be confined to the sense of Scripture. Will the present time be convenient to you? Minister. It will; and I begin with expressing my astonishment, that so extensive a sense as your's should be given to the word "regeneration," when it is to be found but in two places in the Bible; one of which, is confessedly irrelative either to your doctrine or to mine; while the other is associated with water baptism. I allude to Matthew xix. 28, which looks for ward to the renewing of material nature; and to Titus iii. 5, which, I be lieve, all commentators connect with baptism, in one shape or in another. For what else can be "the washing," or, as it should be translated, "the laver of regeneration," there spoken of? I will however notice, that the derivation is the same with the expression "born again," which appears in two passages-John iii. 3, and 1 Pet. i. 23. In regard to both of these places, I caution you against supposing, that I put out of view the spiritual principle recognized. The former of the places will come under more especial notice. Parishioner. If I remember rightly, the expression" born of God," is used frequently in the Epistles of St. John. Minister. It occurs no less than six times, but there is material difference between this language and the other. "Regeneration" and "born again," are so used as to intimate the beginning VOL. VL [VOL. VI. The of a new state of existence. "born of God," as the places shew, are they, who without any reference to the time of birth, are in the state designed to be recognized. St. John addressed persons, who must be supposed to have been baptized: but it was not to his purpose, to take notice of the effect of baptism at the time of its being performed. Parishioner. Does not the same Apostle express his meaning under the varied expression "begotten of God??? Minister. He does in one place-1 John v. 18; to which there applies the remark made concerning "born of God." St. Peter also (1 Pet. i. 3,) uses a phrase similar to that now named by you in a way which should caution us of the danger of founding doctrine on metaTM phor. It is where the Apostle says"who hath begotten us again to a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." How curious a theory might ingenuity ground on this passage, by excluding the agency of the Divine Spirit from the work of regeneration; and by ascribing it wholly to the operation of the truth of the resurrection of the Redeemer! But the meaning of the Apostle is evidently no more, than that it is a necessary mean of the recovery from the loss of immor tality in Adam. St. Paul tells the Corinthians, that he had "begotten them through the Gospel," and he speaks of his having "begotten Onesimus in his bonds." Metaphor is a strong way of expressing an interesting truth, which must look to some other source of evidence for elucidation. Regeneration was never introduced into any confes sion of faith, as a distinct head of doc trine, until less than two centuries ago, I do not mention the terms being seldom found in Scripture, to give a low idea of its importance; but to show, that it must be an expressing in meta 21 phor of what is much oftener met with, and less liable to be misconceived of in other words. Parishioner. What are the truths to which you refer? Minister. They are the duties of repentance and faith. I cannot believe, that when our Saviour began to preach his own Gospel, he held back from his hearers any truth essential to salvation: and yet it sufficed him to say " the kingdom of God is at hand, repent ye and believe the Gospel." In like manner, it is said of his disciples-"they went out, and preached that men should repent." So St. Peter, after the Crucifixion, addressing the Jewish multitude concerning their participation in that enormity, made the call-repent and be baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins." And St. Paul delivers the substance of his own preach ing, when he defines it to be " testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." Much more might be produced to the same effect; and I cannot conceive of any truth of the Christian religion, not falling under one of these heads: it being understood, that repentance, according to the original, extends to a change of mind, or inward cast of character. As this applies differently to adults and to infants, was considered in a former interview. Parishioner. This is a position, in which I cannot but concur. And yet the same duties may be put in varied points of view; and metaphor may be introduced with that intent: for instance, in John ii. 1, and following. The circumstances of the case there occurring, called forth the clothing, very much helping to a right interpretation of the duties of which you have spoken. Minister. I concur in your position, as readily as you did in mine. You refer to the interview of our Saviour with Nicodemus. It is a passage, which has an especial claim to discussion, in the present department of the subject. There are some circumstances in it, which are entirely passed over, or slightly touched, on the other side, although helping much to an explanation of the transaction. I wish to know, whether they have engaged your at tention. For instance, why does our Lord censure Nicodemus for not appre hending the metaphor of the new birth, intimating, that being a master in Israel, he ought not to have been a stranger to this point. It does not occur in any book of the Old Testament. Parishioner The precise metaphor does not occur, but this is no disproof of the occurrence of the spiritual meaning. Minister. Were that all, Nicode mus was under no obligation to understand the sentiment in this novel dress. Again, why does the great Teacher acknowledge, that they were earthly things of which he spake? Surely, this does not apply to the spi ritual property of the new birth. Parishioner. I suppose, the matter meant is the earthly similitude of natural birth. Minister. That was well enough understood by Nicodemus, when he said, "How can a man be born when he is old?" Further, why is there mention of being born of water, as well as of the Spirit? Parishioner. Doubtless, because the blessed influences of the one may be typified by the cleansing virtue of the other. It means by the Holy Ghost, as it were by water; in like manner as John had announced a Saviour, who should baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire. Minister. It would have been a strange way of expressing the sentiment; being an inversion of the natural order of the two subjects to be compared. The meaning of the Baptist may be explained by the descent of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, in the appearance of "cloven tongues, like as of fire." Or, the other place will bear the translation-"as of fire:". that being agreeable to the sense which the conjunctive particle bears in the original; and this I believe to be the true interpretation, although differing. from our translation. The criticism will not apply to the passage before us; water being the first named, as the most prominent to sense, although to be ac companied by a spiritual operation of infinitely more importance. Before the application of my remarks, I will remind you of a prior incident. It is the message of the sanhedrim to the Baptist-"why baptizest thou, if thou be not that Christ, neither Elias, neither that Prophet ?" This seems to imply, that had he professed to be the giver of the new dispensation then expected, there would have been no inconsistency in his initiating of his converts by the rite of baptism. And yet, we hear of nothing to this effect under the Mosaic economy. Parishioner. I perceive that you design to apply all this to the narrative in the beginning of the third chapter of the Gospel of St. John. Minister. I cannot say, that the aeknowledgment of it has been universal; nor can it be, without the surrendry of some opinions, at the roots of which it directly strikes. But I can say, with great sincerity, that the evidence of it is as distinct as what we usually rely on, in bringing history to the interpretation of Scripture. There are Jewish and heathen testimonies directly to the point. If it be disallowed, it will follow that the Jews, within two or three centuries after the beginning of the Christian era, copied the Christians in the administration of this rite: which is utterly incredible. That at the period now alluded to, and in the succeeding ages, it was practised by the Jews, is conceded; and, if I mistake not, it is continued to the present dav. Parishioner. I beg you to proceed in your application of it to the passage. Minister. It is evident, that Nicodemus came to Jesus under conviction of his divine mission, formed on the rational ground of his miraculous works. He came "by night," to avoid the reproach of an open confession: and that this was intended to be intimated, appears from what is afterwards recorded of the same Nicodemus, when he boldly advocated the cause of Christ, in the measures leading to his crucifixion. Here was a great change of character; but it is not introduced without the remark, that he was the same who formerly came by night. Minister. That is my object; but I must state a fact, which will account for the questions unexpectedly proposed to you. There has been already a plea of a right of explanation from historic fact. It has been transmitted to us, that the Jewish Church, of its own authority, for there is nothing to the effect in the law of Moses, had introduced baptism to accompany circumcision, in the admission of heathen families or individuals to the privileges of Judaism. The persons so initiated were said to be new-born, on account of the new relations into which they entered, and the new obligations which they assumed. A reference to these things, is what Nicodemus might rea sonably have been expected to have understood, as a master in Israel. This representation brings into view They are called "earthly things;" be the outward and visible sign, and the cause, however edifying, their autho- inward and spiritual grace in baptism. rity was of man. The adjunct of the In the 22d verse of the same chapter, element of water in the former custom, as was noticed in one of our interviews, shews the same to have been included Jesus and his disciples are found in the in the newly instituted rite. And the act of baptizing, and it is not noticed general propriety of the metaphor rests as an act then begun. Now I appreon the same ground in the Christian as hend, that Nicodemus is admonished of in the Jewish Church; although, in the the duty of an acknowledgment of latter, there was the superaddition of the Messiah before the world, in the divine institution, and the pledge of the rite instituted by him for that end; but Holy Spirit to accompany it. With With not without the accompaniment of an these recollections, we shall find it easy entire change of inward character, to understand the narrative. from the faulty disposition manifested by the nocturnal visit. Agreeably with this, I do not find any place in which regeneration, or the being born again, is introduced without its signifying of Parishioner. Is what you have stated concerning the Jewish provision, and the language to which it gave occasion, a universally acknowledged fact? the beginning, and not the progress of the Christian state. What can be more express, than the passage of Titus al ready noticed, concerning the washing of regeneration? So, in 1 Cor. vi. 11, when we read-"ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God," we find all these particulars reckoned as co-incident: especially, as a better translation would have made it-"ye have been washed, ye haye been sanctified, ye have been justified," &c. In like manner in Ephes. v. 25, 26, we have-" Christ loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water, by the. word." I am aware of the use made of this last expression: but although I have no desire to lessen the importance of the word, that is, of the Gospel in this holy rite; yet I am persuaded, that a more definite idea is produced, by connecting the last term with the sanctification. This would be agreeable to a more strict rendering of the middle clause; which, instead of " and cleanse," would then be "having cleansed." The same idea is sustained by St. Paul, where he speaks of being "buried" (with Christ) "by baptism into death-that is, to sin: which makes the invisible grace co-incident with the outward sign. The case of St. Paul is worthy of especial notice. Notwithstanding the miraculous evidence vouchsafed to him of divine favour, he was required by Ananias to arise and wash away his sins, calling on the name of the Lord:" which could have had no other object, than the consistency of the divine economy, so as not to put asunder what divine institution had joined together. To suppose that the formerly persecuting Saul was not in a state of acceptance in the eye of God, would be inconsistent with the circumstances mentioned especially his ready acceptance of his commission, in the words -- Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" and the consequent command-"Go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do." So that the absence of the remission of sins, or of regeneration, must be understood as com bining with that more important part of the subject, the standing to which he was to be admitted in the eye of the Church. This is confirmed by the light in which the subject was held in the pri mitive Church. The sign in baptism was considered as dispensed with by necessity; which is often applied by the early writers to the case of martyrdom taking place immediately on conversion; and this they called the sufferers being baptized in his blood. But they never speak of his having undergone regeneration, however possessed of the spiritual privilege of such a process. Parishioner. There is a passage which I think you will find it difficult to 'reconcile with your theory. It is Peter iii. 2, where baptism is defined to be, "not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God." Minister. We do not hold that baptism consists in "the putting away of the filth of the flesh :" which can be no more than the outward sign. As to the affirmative part of the definition of St. Peter; if you infer from it any thing against infantine regeneration, because infants cannot give answers or stipulations, the place will make at least as much in favour of the deniers of infant baptism. But against both their opinion and your's, the position should be limited to the objects on which it has a bearing: as, when St. Paul defines "the true circumcision" to be "that of the heart, in the spirit,” it would be irrelevant to object that this is not applicable to infants, except prospectively. It was said figuratively; and was intended of those only who were fit subjects of that spiritual cir cumcision. Parishioner. You seem to have forgotten, that under the word "conversion," there is conveyed the same sense as that of regeneration. Minister. I have not forgotten, that some consider these words as synonymous, but conceive it to be an error. Parishioner. You are probably aware, that our clergy are thought to lay too little stress on conversion, in their discourses. Minister. Is it alleged, that we do not often insist on the necessity of the change of the heart of the sinner from sin to God? Parishioner. The charge does not go to that extent. Minister. When we speak of the duty of repentance, and if it be correctly stated by us, is it not in effect to preach conversion? Parishioner. Certainly it is. Minister. Our fault consists, then, not in neglect of the doctrine, but in not using the word sufficiently often. Have you attended to the frequency of the use of it in the New Testament? Parishioner. My curiosity has not led me to this. Minister. It occurs but once, and that is in Acts xv. 3; which records, that Paul and Barnabas, on their journey from Antioch to Jerusalem, announced "the conversion of the Gentiles." Do you think that this amounts to your idea of regeneration, or that it is discountenance of mine? ! Parishioner. It would be folly to affirm either of these; the place meaning no more than the renouncing of idolatry, and the making of a profession of Christianity. But although the substantive should be found in that place only, there rest on my mind other places in which the adjective and the verb "converted," "convert" and "converteth," appear. Minister. There are such places; but when you read in the Epistle of St. James-" if any err from the truth, and one convert him, let him know, that he who converteth a sinner from the error of his ways, hath saved a soul from death;" do you conceive that it has any relation to the beginning of spiritual life in regeneration, whether it be with or without baptism? Parishioner. Evidently, no. It expresses a fall from grace, and recovery to it. Minister. When St. Peter, in Acts iii. 19, calls to the murderers of his Divine Master" repent and be converted," has it any more relation to the present subject than what was quoted from St. James ? Parishioner. I think it has not. "when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." Is not sin in act the ground of the command? Parishioner. That only is the ground; because it follows on the prediction of the apostacy of Peter. Minister. There is a passage in the 6th chapter of the Prophecy of Isaiah, (verse 10) announcing a judicial blindness of the Jews; which should prove a bar to their being converted. The prophecy is repeated and applied three times in the New Testament. I call those places combined one instance of the use of the word. You will allow this to be foreign to our purpose. Parishioner. The places may reasonably be so considered. Minister. When our Saviour, in the 3d verse of the 18th chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew, in reproof of the ambition, the worldly mindedness, and the bickerings of his disciples, said "except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of hea ven;" whatever ingenuity you may display in preventing the application of this place in favour of my doctrine, you will not pretend that it makes against me. Parishioner. Never. Minister. If these questions should seem captious, I entreat your patience and, if necessary, your pardon. But the places now named, are all in which the word, with its varieties, are found. Why then should so much stress be laid on the continual use of this particular word? There is a reason, lying deeper than as phraseology is concerned. It is imagined, that every individual must undergo and be conscious of conversion from a state of sin to a state of grace. This is what we deny; and is the point on which it would be more consistent to assail us, than to make us offenders for not continually harping on a word, so rarely met in Scripture. We conceive, that under the term repentance," we preach every thing comprehended in “ conversion." And yet, we are not backward to apply this word to the proper subjects of it, and to caution them that it should be of the heart as well as of the life. |