commanded, is such, that unless we could imagine that there ART. is a charm in it, which is contrary to the spirit and genius of XXVII. the gospel, which designs to save us by reforming our natures, we cannot think that there can be any thing in it that is of itself effectual as a mean; and therefore it must only be considered as a command that is given us, which we are bound to obey, if we acknowledge the anthority of the command. But this being an action that is not always in our power, but is to be done by another, it were to put our salvation or damnation in the power of another, to imagine that we cannot be saved without baptism; and therefore it is only a precept which obliges us in order to our salvation; and our Saviour, by leaving it out when he reversed the words, saying only, he that believeth not,' without adding, and is not baptized, shall be damned, does plainly insinuate that it is not a mean, but only a precept, in order to our salvation.

6

As for the ends and purposes of baptism, St. Paul gives us two: the one is, that we are all baptized into one body, we 1 Cor. xii. are made members one of another? we are admitted to the 13. society of Christians, and to all the rights and privileges of that body, which is the church. And in order to this, the outward action of baptism, when regularly gone about, is sufficient. We cannot see into the sincerity of men's hearts; outward professions and regular actions are all that fall under men's observation and judgment. But a second end of baptism is internal and spiritual. Of this St. Paul speaks in very high terms, when he says, that God has saved us according Tit. iii. 5. to his mercy, by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost.' It were a strange perverting the design of these words, to say, that somewhat spiritual is to be understood by this washing of regeneration, and not baptism; when as to the word save, that is here ascribed to it, St. Peter gives that undeniably to baptism; and St. Paul elsewhere, in two different places, makes our baptism to represent 'our being dead to sin, and buried with Christ;' and our being Rom. vi. ' risen and quickened with him, and made alive unto God Col. ii. 12. which are words that do very plainly import regeneration. So that St. Paul must be understood to speak of baptism in these words. Here then is the inward effect of baptism; it is a death to sin, and a new life in Christ, in imitation of him, and in conformity to his gospel. So that here is very expressly delivered to us somewhat that rises far above the badge of a profession, or a mark of difference.

That does indeed belong to baptism; it makes us the visible members of that one body, into which we are baptized, or admitted by baptism; but that which saves us in it, which both deadens and quickens us, must be a thing of another nature. If baptism were only the receiving us into the society of Christians, there were no need of saying, 'I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' It were

ART. more proper to say, I baptize thee in the name or by the XXVII. authority of the church. Therefore these august words, that

were dictated by our Lord himself, shew us that there is somewhat in it that is internal, which comes from God; that it is an admitting men into somewhat that depends only on God, and for the giving of which the authority can only be derived by him. But after all, this is not to be believed to be of the nature of a charm, as if the very act of baptism carried always with it an inward regeneration. Here we must confess, that very early some doctrines arose upon baptism, that we cannot be determined by. The words of our Saviour to Nicodemus were expounded so as to import the absolute necessity of baptism in order to salvation; for it not being observed that the dispensation of the Messias was meant by the kingdom of God, but it being taken to signify eternal glory, that expression of our Saviour's was understood to import this, that no man could be saved unless he were baptized; so it was believed to be simply necessary to salvation. A natural consequence that followed upon that, was to allow all persons leave to baptize, clergy and laity, men and women, since it seemed necessary to suffer every person to do that without which salvation could not be had. Upon this, these hasty baptisms were used, without any special sponsion on the part of those who desired it; of which it may be reasonably doubted whether such a baptism be true, in which no sponsion is made; and this cannot be well answered, but by saying, that a general and an implied sponsion is to be considered to be made by their parents while they desire them to be baptized.

Another opinion that arose out of the former, was the mixing of the outward and the inward effects of baptism; it being believed that every person that was born of the water,' was also born of the Spirit;' and that the renewing of the Holy Ghost' did always accompany the washing of regeneration.' And this obliged St. Austin (as was formerly told) to make that difference between the regenerate and the predestinated; for he thought that all who were baptized were also regenerated. St. Peter has stated this so fully, that if his words are well considered, they will clear the whole matter. He, after he had set forth the miserable state in which mankind was, under the figure of the deluge, in which an ark was prepared for Noah and his family, says upon that, 1 Pet. iii; the like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us.' Upon which he makes a short digression to explain the nature of baptism, not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer (or the demand and interrogation) of a good conscience towards God; by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who is gone into heaven.' The meaning of all which is, that Christ having risen again, and having then had all power in heaven and in earth' given to him, he had put that

21.

6

virtue in baptism, that by it we are saved, as in an ark, from ART. that miserable state in which the world lies, and in which it XXVII. must perish. But then he explains the way how it saves us; that it is not as a physical action, as it washes away the filthiness of the flesh, or of the body, like the notion that the Gentiles might have of their februations; or, which is more natural, considering to whom he writes, like the opinions that the Jews had of their cleansings after their legal impurities, from which their washings and bathings did absolutely free them. The salvation that we Christians have by baptism, is effected by that federation into which we enter, when upon the demands that are made of our renouncing the Devil, the world, and the flesh, and of our believing in Christ, and our repentance towards God, we make such answers from a good conscience, as agree with the end and design of baptism; then by our thus coming into covenant with God, we are saved in baptism. So that the salvation by baptism is given by reason of the federal compact that is made in it. Now this being made outwardly, according to the rules that are prescribed, that must make the baptism good among men, as to all the outward and visible effects of it: but since it is the answer of a good conscience' only that saves, then an answer from a bad conscience, from a hypocritical person, who does not inwardly think, or purpose, according to what he professes outwardly, cannot save, but does on the contrary aggravate his damnation. Therefore our Article puts the efficacy of baptism, in order to the forgiveness of our sins, and to our adoption and salvation, upon the virtue of prayer to God; that is, upon those vows and other acts of devotion that accompany them: so that when the seriousness of the mind accompanies the regularity of the action, then both the outward and inward effects of baptism are attained by it; and we are not only baptized into one body,' but are also 'saved by baptism.' So that upon the whole matter, baptism is a federal admission into Christianity, in which, on God's part, all the blessings of the gospel are made over to the baptized; and, on the other hand, the person baptized takes on him, by a solemn profession and vow, to observe and adhere to the whole Christian religion. So it is a very natural distinction to say, that the outward effects of baptism follow it as outwardly performed; but that the inward effects of it follow upon the inward acts: but this difference is still to be observed between inward acts and outward actions, that when the outward action is rightly performed, the church must reckon the baptism good, and never renew it: but if one has been wanting in the inward acts, those may be afterwards renewed, and that want may be made up by repentance.

Thus all that the scriptures have told us concerning baptism seems to be sufficiently explained. There remains only one place that may seem somewhat strange. St. Paul says, that Christ 1 Cor.i. 17.

ART. sent him not to baptize, but to preach ;' which some have carXXVII. ried so far as to infer from thence, that preaching is of more

end.

value than baptism. But it is to be considered, that the preaching of the Apostles was of the nature of a promulgation made by heralds; it was an act of a special authority, by which he in particular was to convert the world from idolatry Acts viii. and Judaism, to acknowledge Jesus to be the true Messias. 26. to the Now when men, by the preaching of the apostles, and by the miracles that accompanied it, were so wrought on as to believe that 'Jesus was the Christ; then, according to the practice of Philip towards the eunuch of Ethiopia, and of St. Acts xvi. Paul to his jailor at Philippi, they might immediately baptize 31, 32, 33. them; yet most commonly there was a special instruction to be used, before persons were baptized who might in general have some conviction, and yet not be so fully satisfied, but that a great deal of more pains was to be taken to carry them on to that full assurance of faith which was necessary. This was a work of much time, and was to be managed by the pastors or teachers of the several churches; so that the meaning of what St. Paul says was this, that he was to publish the gospel from city to city, but could not descend to the particular labour of preparing and instructing of the persons to be baptized, and to the baptizing them when so prepared. If he had entered upon this work, he could not have made that progress, nor have founded those churches, that he did. All this is therefore misunderstood, when it is applied to such preaching as is still continued in the church; which does not succeed the apostolical preaching that was inspired and infallible, but comes in the room of that instruction and teaching which was then performed by the pastors of the church.

The last head in this Article relates to the baptism of infants, which is spoken of with that moderation, which appears very eminently through the whole Articles of our church. On this head, it is only said to be most agreeable with the institution of Christ, and that therefore it is to be in any ways retained in the church. Now to open this, it is to be considered, that though baptism and circumcision do not in every particular come to a parallel, yet they do agree in two things: the one is, that both were the rites of admission into their respective covenants, and to the rights and privileges that did arise out of them; and the other is, that in them both there was an obligation laid on the persons to the observance of that whole law to which they were so initiated. St. Paul, arguing against circumcision, lays this down as an uncontested Galat. v.3. maxim, that if a man was circumcised, he became thereby a debtor to the whole law.'

Parents had, by the Jewish constitution, an authority given them to conclude their children under that obligation; so that the soul and will of the child was so far put in the power

of the parents, that they could bring them under federal ART obligations, and thereby procure to them a share in federal XXVII. blessings. And it is probable, that from hence it was, that when the Jews made proselytes, they considered them as having such authority over their children, that they baptized them first, and then circumcised them, though infants.

Now since Christ took baptism from them, and appointed it to be the federal admission to his religion, as circumcision had been in the Mosaical dispensation, it is reasonable to believe, that, except where he declared a change that he made in it, in all other respects it was to go on and to continue as before; especially when the apostles in their first preaching told the Jews, that the promises were made to them and Acts ii. 39 to their children; which the Jews must have understood according to what they were already in possession of, that they could initiate their children into their religion, bring them under the obligations of it, and procure to them a share in those blessings that belonged to it. The law of nature and nations puts children in the power of their parents; they are naturally their guardians; and if they are entitled to any thing, their parents have a right to transact about it, because of the weakness of the child; and what contracts soever they make, by which the child does not lose, but is a gainer, these do certainly bind the child. It is then suitable both to the constitution of mankind, and to the dispensation of the Mosaical covenant, that parents may dedicate their children to God, and bring them under the obligations of the gospel; and if they may do that, then they certainly procure to them with it, or in lieu of it, a share in the blessings and promises of the gospel. So that they may offer their children either themselves, or by such others of their friends, to whom for that occasion they transfer that right which they have, to transact for and to bind their children.

All this receives a great confirmation from the decision which St. Paul makes upon a case that must have happened commonly at that time; which was, when one of the parties in a married state, husband or wife, was converted, while the other continued still in the former state of idolatry, or infidelity here then a scruple naturally arose, whether a believer or Christian might still live in a married state with an infidel. Besides the ill usage to which that diversity of religion might give occasion, another difficulty might be made, whether a person defiled by idolatry did not communicate that impurity to the Christian, and whether the children born in such a marriage were to be reckoned a holy seed, according to the Jewish phrase, or an unholy, unclean children, that is heathenish children; who were not to be dedicated to God, nor to be admitted into covenant with him: for unclean in the Old Testament, and uncircumcised, signify sometimes the same thing; and so St. Peter said that in the case of Cornelius God had