Sidor som bilder

contradictions, and conflicting sentiments of our opponents, will show on which side the truth lies. After this, I give a brief account of my own experience, in the character of a Witness for the Defendants; and conclude with a short address to the Court and Jury, in the assumed character of Judge.

I do not come forward as the advocate of the Baptists, either Particular or General open or strict communionists, – their conduct, with few exceptions, being in many respects indefensible. They are justly and ably reproved in a work lately published, entitled, “Modern Immersion not Scripture Baptism :" and, however much I differ from the author in his main subject, I perfectly agree with him in his strictures upon those whom he calls his BAPTIST BRETHREN, for whose edification I transcribe a sentence or two from the work.

“By adopting the plan of OPEN COMMUNION, they practically concede the validity of our baptism, as respects both “the mode and the subject. As they profess to act only from “plain examples or apostolical precepts; and as they can “ find neither in the New Testament for receiving persons at “the Lord's table, after Christian baptism was instituted, who “in the judgment of the first Christians were not baptized, “we must take it for granted, notwithstanding all their eva

sions on this subject, that they consider Pædobaptists really “ baptized. The majority of the Antipædobaptists are advo

cates for STRICT COMMUNION, and consequently will suffer

no Pædobaptist to sit down with them at the Lord's table, “because in their opinion he has not been baptized. In this "they act in harmony with their own scheme of interpreting “the Sacred Volume in respect of positive institutions, seeing,

as said before, they can find no precedent in the New “Testament for admitting people to this sacrament who, in

the judgment of the apostles, were not scripturally baptized. “These very persons, however, will admit Pædobaptists into

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

“their pulpits, and listen with delight to their discourses “will cordially unite with them in prayer, and singing the “praises of God. But can they find any precedent for such “a practice? Did the apostles adopt or sanction such a "procedure? Will our brethren point out an instance, in “which the first and inspired ministers of Christ tolerated “persons whom they deemed unbaptized to preach in their “churches, or to lead the devotional services of their solemn “ assemblies?"

But I come forward to vindicate the ordinance of the house of God, as instituted by himself, established by his beloved Son, and administered by, or through the direction of, the apostles; and as the subject has employed the pens of the ablest writers on both sides, I pretend not to have made any new discoveries. My object has been to maintain the truth of God, to divest the subject of the mysteries in which it has been involved, and to place it in a somewhat different point of view; “not with enticing words of man's wisdom,” for I possess neither an inventive imagination, nor power of language; but I am sensible it cannot suffer even in my feeble hands, for “ God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are.” *

I am aware that I am pursuing an unpopular coursethat I entertain opinions which will be derided, even by many who agree with me in the general view of the subject that my hand is against every man, consequently every man's hand will be against me. Yet I am not disheartened by this; but am bold to declare-that I make faith in our Lord

* 1 Cor. i, 27, 28.


Jesus Christ, i. e. faith in the true and proper sense of the word, -that which "worketh by love,” which is manifested in the first place in the ordinance of baptism, as stated in the New Testament,--a sine quâ non of Christianity; that no unbaptized person can be in a scriptural sense a Christian; and that whoever sets light by this ordinance, or substitutes any thing in its place, cannot, according to the Divine Testimony, be a genuine professor of the gospel, however celebrated his character, or however numerous his adherents. Our Lord declares, “He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved;” and the apostle says, “ with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation ;" * that “without faith it is impossible to please God;" + and that “whatsoever is not of faith is sin." I All religious rites and ceremonies, therefore, performed or observed by any individual before he is the subject of faith, are declared to be sinful, and consequently hateful to God. Such is the case with Infant Sprinkling, Here I take my stand; and until the passages just quoted are expunged from the Bible, I maintain that those who practise that rite practise it in violation of the laws and ordinances of that Book, and thereby take upon themselves an awful responsibility.

I may be thought singular in these particular views; indeed I know few persons, if any, who go with me to their full extent, and estimate so highly the importance of this ordinance: but if there were not another person in the world who thought with me, that would neither shake my faith, nor abate my confidence in what I have advanced. I do not pin my faith upon any man's sleeve; nor call any man master. My opinions are not gathered from the writings of men— they are the result of a diligent searching of the Word of God; and I feel I must either retain them or renounce the authority of the Scriptures, for there appears to me no alternative.

* Rom. x. 10.

+ Heb. xi. 6.

Rom. xiv. 23.

When I commenced this controversy, six of the Authors whose works I have brought forward were living; the subsequent decease of two of them has occasioned no alteration in my plan. I have made no distinction between the living and the dead. And although I have been very free in my animadversions upon their works, yet I bear them no illwill; on the contrary, I wish that they and all their adherents should be happy, both in this life and in that which is to come. But I know that the only way of insuring happiness is by a scriptural regard to the commands of God; without which there can never be any true peace of mind. This is what I have endeavoured, to the best of my ability, to inculcate in the following work, and if only one soul shall, through this means, be brought to rely wholly on the Divine Testimony, it will be of more importance than to “gain the whole world;" and for all the time and labour I have spent, I shall consider myself abundantly rewarded.

As I before observed, I may be thought singular in my opinions: whether there be any who perfectly accord with me in every thing that I have here advanced, I have yet to learn. I therefore implicate no man, nor body of men ; every individual who shall read my book may decide for himself how far he can go with me, and whether I have departed from the standard of Divine Truth, by which Standard only we shall be judged.

Litherland, near Liverpool,

July, 1835.













[ocr errors]

Speech of Counsel for the Plaintiffs — the Case stated

First Witness, Rev. Adam Clarke .

Second Witness, Rev. William Burkitt

Third Witness, Right Rev. Dr. Mant .

Fourth Witness, Rev. Thomas Scott

Fifth Witness,

Rev. Dr. Dwight

Sixth Witness, Rev. Dr. Wardlaw
Seventh Witness, Rev. Greville Ewing
Eighth Witness, Rev. Micaiah Towgood
Ninth Witness, Rev. Richard Watson
Tenth Witness, Rev. Dr. Stewart
Speech of Counsel for the Defendants, containing a Com-

mentary on the Evidence for the Plaintiffs

Cause of the Defendants stated, and defended

Personal evidence adduced

Conclusion, Speech of the Judge


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]



[merged small][ocr errors]


« FöregåendeFortsätt »