in the following words: "He received the fign of circumeifion, a feal of the righteousness of faith, THAT HE MIGHT

BE THE FATHER OF ALL THEM THAT BELIEVE, THOUGH

THEY BE NOT CIRCUMCISED." (page 12.) That the reader may better judge, we will give the paragraph

entire.

"But Abraham was made the father of many nations; and all who are of faith are his children, and are bleffed with him. This is according to the covenant of promife which God made with Abraham.” This is all very well, but he adds, "He received the fign of circumcifion, a feal of the righteousness of faith, THAT

HE MIGHT BE THE FATHER OF ALL THEM THAT BE

LIEVE, THOUGH THEY BE NOT CIRCUMCISED, though they be not his natural pofterity, THAT RIGHTEOUSNESS MIGHT BE IMPUTED TO THEM ALSO." If Mr. Worcester is correct, it was Abraham's circumcifion, and not his faith, which conftituted him the father of believers!

The paffage here referred to, is Rom. iv. 11. And we complain, 1. That the words are mifquoted. To prove this, we need only compare them with the facred text. Mr. Worcester fays, "a feal of the righteousness of faith, that he might be a father, &c." The apostle fays, a feal of the righteousness of THE faith which he had, yet being uncircumcifed. Although the words he had, are not in the original, they are neceffarily implied and understood, as in our tranflation. Had the words been quoted as they are read in our Bibles, they would have conveyed quite a different meaning. We do not infift that an author fhould always quote fcripture verbatim, but if his variations give a different fenfe, he is certainly accountable for it.

2. We complain that the words are mifapplied. They are applied as they ftand in the Bible, only to Abraham. Circumcifion was a feal to Abraham of his faith, but it is not faid to be fuch to his pofterity, or to any other perfon upon earth. Mr. Worcester has made it a feal of the righteoufness of faith generally. What faith can it be fuppofed that an infant has of eight days old? Was there any faith fealed to fuch? What faith was

fealed to a fervant bought with money, who had been brought up in idolatry, and perhaps ftill attached to it, only compelled to conform to the religion of the Jews, because he was a flave? No man believes that either of the two were fubjects of faith. How then, we ask, was circumcifion a feal of the righteousness of faith to them? But it will be faid, that God commanded them to be circumcifed, and therefore it must have been right. With this we fully agree; but God has no where faid that it was a feal of the righteousness of faith to them. A man may as well believe that every baptized infant is fealed with the righteoufnefs of faith, though he may afterwards prove to be a profligate infidel, as that circumcifion placed them in this privileged condition. He must give up his common fenfe to believe either. We therefore conclude, that if Mr. Worcester's words mean, what the fame expreffions mean when used by others, he has applied an expreffion generally, which the apoftle applied only in a particular cafe; which we confider as a mifapplication of the text.

3. We have charged Mr. Worcester, with making the apostle conclude without premises. This we are now to make out. In order to render it plain to every capacity, we will again fet down his quotation. "He received the fign of circumcifion, a feal of the righteoufnefs of faith, that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcifed." The apostle is here made to say, that Abraham was circumcifed, fo that he might be the father of believers that are uncircumcifed! We afk, in the name of common fenfe, why it was neceffary for Abraham to be circumcifed, in order to conftitute him the father of believers that are uncircumcifed? If there can be any other meaning to the argument, as Mr. Worcefter has placed it before the public, we confefs we have not difcernment enough to fee it. But is it poffible that the apostle should reafon at this rate? He certainly did not. He is placed in this awkward fituation only for the want of having his argument fairly prefented. In order to fee the force of his reafoning, the following words which begin the quotation, ought to be confidered as a parenthe

fs, as they really are, viz. (And be received the fign of circumcifion, a feal of the righteousness of the faith which he had, yet being uncircumcifed.) The fenfe of the paffage will then be plain. The apoftle ftates his argument thus: For we fay, that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcifion, or in uncircumcifion? not in circumcifion, but in uncircumcifion, (and he received the fign, &c.) that be might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcifed." Here the argument refumes its native force, and teaches us that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, when he was in uncircumcifion; fo that he might be the father of all other believers, though they be not circumcifed. Not that he received circumcifion, "FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE," as Mr. Worcester afferts (page 11) to qualify him to be the father of uncircumcifed Gentile believers.

For what purpose, it may be afked, was the apoftle's. argument in this mutilated form introduced into the difcourfes before us? undoubtedly, to give force to the covenant of circumcifion. If it were circumcifion that constituted Abraham the father of believers, it would attach a degree of confideration to that rite, which it would not otherwife poffefs. In this way, it is thought to aid the caufe of infant baptifin. But we afk, was it not Abraham's faith which he had long before his circumcifion, which, according to the apoftle's argument, conftituted him the father of the faithful? He being the first that fubmitted to that rite, might conftitute him the father of the circumcifion; but it was his FAITH, that conftituted him the father of believers.

It is conceived that the author of the difcourfes might with as much propriety have argued from this paflage in his context:For it is written, Curfed is every one that bangeth on a tree; that the bleffing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jefus Chrift."* It. would be impoffible here to fee the propriety of this conclufion as it now ftands before us it is equally fo in the one which Mr. Worcefter has introduced above.. But place this in its proper order, and it will also re

* Gal. iii, 13, 14

fume its native force. The argument ftands thus, Chrift hath redeemed us from the curfe of the law, being made a curfe for us: (for it is witten, Curfed is every one that hangeth on a tree :) that the bleffing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jefus Chrift. The bleffing of Abraham does not come on the Gentiles, because every one is curfed who hangeth on a tree; but because Christ hath redeemed us from the curfe of the law. So, neither was Abraham by being circumcifed constituted the father of believing Gentiles who are uncircumcifed; but by believing God, and having faith reckoned to him for righteoufnefs, when he was in uncircumcifion. We now leave it with a candid public to determine, whether, in his zeal to fupport his hypothefis, Mr. Worcester has not entirely mistaken and mifrepresented the apoftle's argument, and finally drawn a conclufion favourable to his own fcheme, but drawn, it without any premises.

From Mr. Worcester's arguments thus corrected, we fee nothing which leads to the conclufion that the gofpel church (compofed of profeffing believers only,) may not be confidered as the children of Abraham, not by circumcifion, but by faith, and completely blessed in him through Jefus Chrift; notwithstanding the covenant, which contained circumcifion, and all the other Jewish rites, bas

waxed old and vanished away. If our relation to Abraham can be sustained on no better ground, than that we have had the feal of the covenant, as it is called, applied to us in our infancy, (whether by circumcifion or baptifm it matters not,) it will leave us in the fame wretched condition of the unbelieving Jews. Let us not deceive ourfelves by fpending our efforts in defending the thadow, whilft we give up the fubftance.

They which be of faith, faith the apostle, are bleffed with faithful Abraham; and they which are of faith, the fame are the children of Abraham. The feripture hath concluded all under fin, that the PROMISE BY FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST MIGHT BE GIVEN TO THEM THAT BELIEVE. For are all the children of God by faith in Jefus Chrift. For as many of you as have been baptized into Chrift, have put on Chrift. Chrift. There is neither few nor Greek, there is

ye

neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Chrift Jefus. And if ye be Chrift's, then are ye Abraham's feed, and heirs according to the promife." Every. fentence which we have now quoted, feems to look with a forbidding afpect upon the membership and baptifm of unbelievers. If the apoftle had really defigned to have barred the claim of infants, and all other unbelievers, he could fearcely have ufed language more decifive. He has firft informed us that Abraham wasblessed in believing God. He believed the gospel that was preached to him, concerning his feed, the Meffiah, in whom all families of the earth fhould be bleffed. This glorious promife has been fulfilling for ages; and the bleffing of Abraham ftill comes on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ, and through no other medium.

The apoftle is particularly careful to establish this point, that Abraham's faith was reckoned to him for righteoufnefs, when he was in uncircumcifion. By this he has excluded circumcifion from claiming the fmalleft share of honour in the falvation of Abraham, or in his being the father of other believers. He appears equally cautious in difcriminating the characters who are bleffed with Abraham. His language is, That God would justify the heathen through faith. He adds, So then, THEY WHICH BE OF FAITH are bleffed with faithful Abraham. Again, That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles THROUGH JESUS CHRIST. We must find fomething more favourable to unbelievers than what is here expreffed, or we fhall be as unable to blefs them, as Ifaac was Efau, after he had given the blefling exclufively to Jacob.

Still to imprefs the fentiment more deeply, the apostle again refumes his fubject towards the clofe of the chapter, and adds; For ye are all the children of God, by faith in Chrift Fefus. Not by defcending from Abraham, nor any other believer; nor by any external rite whatever. For as many of you as have been baptized into Chrift, have put on Chrift. This language agrees perfectly with the idea of their being all profeffors. But how a But how a paffive infant, of eight days old, can be faid to put on Chrift, to as is inconceivable. It might be faid of fuch as are bap