ly creditable to its author,-there still seemed to be room left for a fuller and more systematic discussion of the other great branch of the controversy,-the SUBJECTS of the ordinance, which is touched in the Essay indeed, and touched with the same ability, but which is not the professed object of the writer to treat extensively. This part of the field the circumstances I have before stated had long determined me to occupy anew, previously to the publication of Mr. Ewing's work; and my determination was quickened to action by the appearance of an antago nist to him, and to the late Dr. Dwight, and to myself. I refer to the work of the Rev. F. A. Cox, of Hackney, put forth with the ponderous and appaling title-"On Baptism: chiefly in Reply to the Etymological Positions of the Rev. Greville Ewing, in his Essay on Baptism: the Po emic Discussions of the Rev. Timothy Dwight, S. T. D., L. L. D., in his Work, entitled, Theology; and the Inferential Reasonings of the Rev. Ralph Wardlaw, D. D. in his Lectures on the Abrahamic Covenant."-In some of the advertisements of this work, the first part of the title, I observe, has undergone an alteration; and, instead of the "etymological positions," we have the " etymological novelties," of Mr. Ewing and it is surely, in the annals of controversy, a somewhat curious circumstance, that an opponent should formally announce, in his title-page, a reply to precisely that part of the work he sets himself to oppose, which its author had declared to be unconnected with the course and conclusiveness of his argument: for thus Mr. Ewing had expressed himself:-" Such is my attempt to analyze fanto and its related words. If any shall reject it (I dare say many will); in that case, they will of course disallow my theory for illustrating the ori gin, and the connection of the various meanings of those words. But they will not be able, thereby, to set aside the meanings themselves. These must still be tried by the force of the examples which may be produced in support of each by itself. Although I shall, in what follows, refer my theory to the derivation of the terms, for the sake of showing how well it tallies with the application of them in the examples in which they occur; I shall, in no case, use an argument, in support of their meaning,

which shall rest on that theory."-To announce a formal reply to what an author has thus previously intimated to be unessential to his argument, a speculation of which entire omission leaves its force untouched;-to produce upon the reader's mind, by the very phraseology of a titlepage, the impression, that that is the pith and substance of a work, and what chiefly calls for notice and exposure, which the writer himself announces he will not make the basis of a single proof;—and then, to confirm this false impression and prejudice, by applying ridicule, as the test of truth, to what, even were it overturned, would not, by its removal, affect, in the slightest degree, a single conclusion ;-may be a convenient ruse de guerre,—but it is neither ingenuous nor manly. It is very easy however, and that adds to the convenience.- Whatever diversity of opinion may subsist on some unessential points, Mr. Cox's assault has, in my judgment, left the main positions, on which Mr. Ewing's argument rests in their full strength.

Although the appearance of Mr. Cox's strictures hastened the fulfilment of a previous intention, the following pages are not to be considered as a reply to his work. They are not a formal reply to any one. I follow the train of my own argument, and take notice of the objections of others, as they come in my way. And I trust it will be found, I have not shrunk from meeting my opponents (or rather, let me say, the opponents, the conscientious opponents, of the views I advocate)-fully and fairly, in the main points of their strength. I have had occasion, once or twice, to allude to the strictures of the Rev. Mr. Birt, of Birmingham, on a sermon by my excellent friend, the Rev. H. F. Burder, of Hackney, a neighbor and fellow laborer of Mr. Cox ;-and I gladly embrace the opportunity of saying, that although there may be one or two minor statements in that sermon in which I may not thoroughly acquiesce, it appears to me distinguished by the clearness and cogency and comprehensive brevity of its reasonings, as well as by the piety and Christian meekness of its spirit; and to remain little, if at all affected, in its general principles, by the animadversions of his opponent.-I have now and then referred

to, and quoted, other publications. But indeed these are now, on both sides, so numerous, that I have found it better not to cumber myself by looking into many, and so exposing myself to the temptation of introducing matter, either quite extraneous, or but remotely connected with my argument.

I

It has been my endeavor to adhere to the Latin maxim, "Suaviter in modo, fortiter in re," familiarly rendered in English "Soft words and hard arguments." Whether I have succeeded or failed, the reader must judge. If occasionally I may have expressed myself (of which, however, I am not conscious) with becoming asperity, may find forgiveness of Him, who has said, "The servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all men."To his blessing I humbly commend this part of my labors, in the conviction,-a conviction that has gained strength by every new examination of the subject, that the cause is his, and that its opponents, however plausible their scheme may be rendered, (and it is admitted, in some of its points, to be susceptible of great plausibility) have not a foot-breadth of solid scriptural ground to stand upon.

R. W.

13th January, 1825.

INTRODUCTORY

OBSERVATIONS.

SOME are disposed to deprecate all such discussions as the one on which I am now entering, under the common designation of unprofitable controversy. That it is controversy, I admit;-that it is unprofitable controversy, I deny. If I thought it so, I trust I should have grace to abstain from it. But I think otherwise, for the following

reasons:

In the first place: As a pædobaptist, I am accustomed, along with my brethren of the persuasion, to administer the ordinance of baptism, as occasions present themselves, both privately and publicly, to the infant children of be lievers; and we are countenanced in so doing by our churches and congregations. Now every thing that we do, as professed subjects of the Lord Jesus, ought to be done, not blindly, or in mere conformity to custom, but from a scriptural and enlightened conviction of duty. To call any institution an ordinance of God, and persist in adherence to it, without knowing either its import, or the reason of observing it, is unworthy a professor of that religion, which enjoins nothing but what is "reasonable service.'

Secondly: In consequence of the universality of the practice of infant baptism, and the consequent frequency of the abuse and prostitution of the ordinance, believers themselves are in no small danger of attending to it as a mere matter of course, without due consideration, either of the nature of the rite, the grounds on which the administration of it to their children rests, or the parental obligations, so deep and so solemn, that are inseparably connected with it.

Thirdly: I see no reason whatever, why pædobaptists should feel the slightest disposition to evade the question, or the most distant fear,-although on both sides there be minute points of difficulty,-to meet it fully, fairly, may and openly, in all its great general bearings.-There has

2

sometimes appeared to me, to be too much, on the part of pædobaptists, of a disposition to stand upon the defensive merely; too much of the mere nagation of the conclusiveness of arguments used on the side of their opponents, and too little of the direct enforcement of positive evidence on their own;-too much of the shield, and too little of the sword:-I mean, of course, "the sword of the Spirit."

Fourthly: There are too many, especially of the young, who, in the outset of their Christian profession, have not their minds directed at all to the subject. It is an unexamined point. And these persons, when, in this state of want of knowledge and information, they happen to fall in with a baptist friend, a baptist book, or a baptist argument, feel themselves unprepared to meet what is new and startling; their minds are in danger of being immediately unsettled, and of hastily adopting what is presented to them with no little plausibility, and possibly too with much imposing confidence.—I invite the attention of my young Christian readers,-not fearing, that if we are only enabled to come to the subject without the heat of party opinionativeness, in a cool, composed, and reasonable frame of spirit, and especially in humble dependence on Divine teaching, we shall be led into all truth, and established in the due observance of every scriptural institution.

Fifthly The discussion does not exclusively regard a particular instituted observance; it involves principles and topics, such as are very closely connected with the right understanding of a large proportion of the Old Testament scriptures, and of those parts of the New of which the reasonings and illustrations are founded upon the Old ; and also with just views of the Divine procedure towards the church, from the beginning to the end of its history. -This must have been apparent to every person of the slightest discernment, that has bestowed any attention upon the controversy. There is a certain style of speaking and writing regarding the Old and New Dispensations, and the two revelations respectively connected with them, by which, in general, the supporters of the opposite sides of it may be readily distinguished. And this gives an importance to the argument, beyond its direct conclusions respecting the single ordinance which forms its more immediate subject.