universally; and they were, therefore, customarily and proverbially denominated unclean by the Jews. The unbelievers here spoken of were heathen; and were therefore unclean. In this sense, the children born of two heathen parents are here pronounced to be unclean also; as being in the proper sense heathen. To be holy, as here used, is the converse of being unclean; and denotes that which may be offered to God. To be sanctified, as referring to the objects here mentioned, is to be separated for religious purposes; ' consecrated to God;' as were the firstborn, and vessels of the temple; or to be in a proper condition to appear before God. In this text it denotes, that the unbelieving parent is so purified by means of his relation to the believing parent, that their mutual offspring are not unclean, but may be offered unto God. There is no other sense in which a Jew could have written this text, without some qualification of these words. The only appointed way in which children may be offered to God is baptism. The children of believing parents are therefore to be offered to God in baptism.

III. Infant baptism was uniformly practised by the early Christians.

Justin Martyr, born near the close of the first century, observes, when speaking of those who were members of the church, that "a part of these were sixty or seventy years old, who were made disciples to Christ from their infancy." But there never was any other mode of making disciples from infancy, except baptism.

Irenæus, born about the year 97, a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John, says, Christ came to save all persons, who by him are born again unto God; infants and little ones, and children, and youths, and elder persons." By being born again, Irenæus intends being baptized, as he himself elsewhere clearly shows.

Clemens Alexandrinus, born about the middle of the second century, says, "If any one be a fisherman; let him think of an apostle, and the children taken out of the water." Clement is here giving directions concerning images, to be engraven on seal rings. These engravings were sometimes indecent, and sometimes idolatrous. Clement exhorts Christians to adopt such as are becoming and useful; and particu

larly exhorts Fishermen to choose the image of an apostle baptizing infants. This furnishes a decisive proof, that in Clement's view the apostles baptized infants, and that this practice was, in his own time, the general practice of the Christian church.

Tertullian, born about the same time with Irenæus, says, "The delay of baptism is more useful, according to every person's condition and disposition, and even their age; but especially with regard to little children." The reason which he urges for this delay is, that " their faith was not entire, or complete." As Tertullian is here directly opposing the common opinion, it is obvious, that little children were then commonly baptized. The reason why Tertullian proposed this delay, was, that he attributed to baptism an importance not given to it by the Scriptures.

Origen, born about the year 184, and a man of more information than any one of his time, says, “ Infants are baptized for the remission of sins." And again: “The church hath received the tradition from the apostles, that baptism ought to be administered to infants."

Cyprian, who was contemporary with Origen, says, that "sixty-six bishops, being convened in a council at Carthage, having the question referred to them, Whether infants might be baptized before they were eight days old? decided unanimously, that no infant is to be prohibited from the benefit of baptism, although but just born."

Gregory Nazianzen, born in the early part of the fourth century, exhorts parents to offer their children to God in baptism.

Saint Augustin, born in the middle of the fourth century, says, The whole church practises infant baptism; it was not instituted by councils, but was always in use." He also says, that he “did not remember ever to have read of any person, whether catholic or heretic, who maintained that baptism ought to be denied to infants. This," he says, "the church has always maintained."

Palagius, a contemporary with Augustin, declares, that “he had never heard even any impious heretic, who asserted that infants are not to be baptized." Again he asks," Who can be so impious as to hinder the baptism of infants?" Pelagius is here a witness of high authority. He was born in Britain;

and travelled through France, Italy, Africa Proper, and Egypt, to Jerusalem. Had such a practice existed in his time, it seems impossible that he should not have heard of it. He was also an inquistive and learned man; and must therefore have been well informed concerning preceding periods. At the same time, the doctrine of infant baptism was objected against his own opinions by St. Augustin, in such a manner, that Pelagius knew not how to answer the objection. Still these are his own assertions.

A person, who employed himself extensively in examining this subject, gives the following result of all his inquiries :

"First: During the first four hundred years from the formation of the Christian Church, Tertullian only urged the de lay of baptism to infants, and that only in some cases; and Gregory only delayed it, perhaps, to his own children. But neither any society of men, or any individual, denied the lawfulness of baptizing infants.

66

Secondly: In the next seven hundred years, there was not a society, nor an individual, who even pleaded for this delay; much less any who denied the right, or the duty, of infant baptism.

66

Thirdly: In the year 1120, one sect of the Waldenses declared against the baptism of infants; because they supposed them incapable of salvation: but the main body of that people rejected the opinion as heretical; and the sect which held it soon came to nothing.

66

Fourthly: The next appearance of this opinion was in the year 1522."

Had the baptism of infants been ever discontinued by the church; or had it been introduced in any age subsequent to that of the apostles, these things could not have been, nor could the history of them have been found.

SERMON CLIX.

THE MEANS OF GRACE.

EXTRAORDINARY MEANS OF GRACE.

NO INFANTS BUT THE CHILDREN OF BELIEVERS PROPER SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM.

MODE OF ADMINISTRATION.

THEN PETER SAID UNTO THEM, 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 GHOST. FOR 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.

ACTS II. 38, 39.

THE persons here addressed by St. Peter, were a collection of Jews. Of course, they were persons on whom God had placed his covenant, and to whom he had affixed the seal of circumcision. They were persons who had regularly partaken of the passover through life. They were not excommunicated persons. They were therefore still in the covenant. On this ground St. Peter declares to them, that the promise was still to them, and to their children.

Still they were gross sinners, and had imbrued their hands. in the blood of the Redeemer. They had not, indeed, been employed in the external act of putting him to death: this

was done by the Roman soldiery. But they had sought and procured his death with a disposition probably more malignant and abominable than that of his real murderers. Thus they were gross sinners, and were therefore called upon to repent.' They were also required to be baptized, every one of them, in the name of the Lord Jesus, for the remission of sins;' because baptism was now become the initiatory seal of the covenant. As the promise was to them and to their children, according to the gracious declaration of God to Abraham, it follows, that they, being baptized, and thus introduced into the covenant under the Christian dispensation, and made members of the church under that dispensation, their children also were placed under the same covenant, and were to be baptized according to the appointment of God.

These persons, I say, were to be baptized. The question naturally arises, What is it to be BAPTIZED? It will be the design of this discourse to show,

I. That infant baptism is in the Scriptures confined to the children of professing Christians ;

II. To show what baptism is, considered as an external religious rite.

I. I shall attempt to show, that infant baptism is in the Scriptures confined to the children of professing Chris

tians.

This doctrine I derive,

1. From the constitution of the Abrahamic church.

All the Israelites were circumcised. All of them, as was shown in a former discourse, made a public profession of religion, or entered publicly into covenant with God. They all also partook regularly of the passover. Thus, the children of every Jew were the children of a professor of religion; and, as such, received the initiatory seal of the covenant of grace.

As the covenant under the Christian dispensation is, unless in some respect or other altered by the authority which first promulged it, exactly the same as it was under the Abrahamic dispensation, and cannot be lawfully either widened or narrowed by man; it follows, that children are now to be considered in exactly the same light as under the former dispensation, unless the Scriptures have evidently changed the state of their relations and privileges. But, in these respects, no