"the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" the pouring out the Spirit on all flesh"-" the pouring out a spirit of grace and of supplication" -and "the pouring out the Spirit on the seed" of the people of God; but never of immersion in the blood of Christ, or being immersed in the Spirit's influences. You will now judge, to which of the two systems, the argument of baptismal water being an emblem of the Spirit's renovating influences, belongs. You will also judge whether Mr. C. has produced such "positive precept, or precedent," as authorized him to say," that all who have not been immersed in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, after professing the faith of the gospel, have never been baptized, and are yet in an unbaptized state:" thereby unchurching all the churches in the world, the Baptist church excepted, and the Baptist church too, unless he can prove unequivocally, that the apostles baptized by immersion, and by immersion only; and also trace a succession of Baptist churches from their time to the present day. "Hic labor, hoc opus est." Mr. Č. is in honour bound to do so in defence of his new catechism; and the public expectation will be, that if this is ever done, it will be by the theological hero who, on the subject of baptism, has "DEFIED ALL CHRISTENDOM." But ere he attempts this, let me beg leave to observe to him, that the proof of the apostles baptizing by immersion only, must be (according to his own rule,) "by positive precept or precedent:" and with respect to the latter, there must not be a broken link in the chain. For as not only infant baptism, but the baptism of adults, if not by immersion, is according to his catechism a nullity; then, as persons baptized in either of these ways, "are still in an unbaptized state," they have no right to preach the gospel, much less to administer the ordinances of the Christian dispensation to others. I am persuaded

that there is not a moderate and intelligent Baptist, who will say with him, that a mistake in the mode of administering baptism, infers this sweeping and inadmissible consequence. As well might it be said, that the death of Christ is not commemorated by the humble communicant in the ordinance of the

Supper, because, instead of a full meal or supper, he eats only a small piece of bread, and drinks but a spoonful of wine; as that baptism is null and void, because water is applied to only a part, and not to the whole of the body. Nor can the above consequence be inferred from a mistake respecting some of the subjects. For, admitting that Pædobaptists are mistaken with respect to the right of the infant children of church members to baptism, the utmost that could be lawfully inferred is, that in those cases they misapply the ordinance. I repeat my persuasion, that there is not a moderate and intelligent Baptist who will admit of the foregoing consequences, and who will not consider their cause weakened by those novel and crude doctrines, whence he has attempted to draw these illegitimate conclusions.

I shall close this review, with briefly noticing a number of heavy charges, which Mr. C. brings against the Pædobaptist system, as a system, in the 3d No. of the Appendix to his book.

1. "It is will-worship, or founded on the will of man, and not on the will of God."

2. "It has carnalized and secularised the church."

3. "It imposes a religion upon the subjects of it, before they are aware of it."

4. "It has uniformly inspired a persecuting spirit.".

5. That it inspires the subject as soon as he recognises the action, and understands it as his parents explain it, with an idea that he is better than a heathen, or now in a state differing from an unbaptized person.

The first and fifth of these charges have been incidentally noticed, and I trust fully obviated, in the preceding letters. The second can never happen, but where the church and state are amalgamated; and we are not to argue against a thing, from the abuse of it. The third is silly, as it is well known, that the prejudice of education is as strong in the children of Baptists, as of Pædobaptists. The fourth, "that it has uniformly inspired a persecuting spirit," is indeed a serious charge, and if well founded, would be a strong argument, that it is "founded on the will of man, and not on the will of God." But what is the proof which Mr. C. adduces in support of this heavy charge? A detailed account from Benedict's History of the Baptists, of seven persons being illtreated in Virginia, and three or four in Massachusetts, on account of their opposing and probably vilifying infant baptism. I think I am as much opposed as Mr. C. can possibly be, to persecution of any kind, and to any degree, on account of religious tenets, but who can refrain from smiling when he reads this mighty proof of Mr. C.'s unqualified assertion, "that infant sprinkling (as he is pleased to term it) has uniformly inspired a persecuting spirit ?"

As principles, however acquired, are the sources of action, it may be worth while to inquire if there is any thing in the Pædobaptist system, that has a tendency to beget and cherish the hateful spirit of persecution. According to the Pædobaptist system the minor children of church members are planted by baptism in the vineyard or visible church of God; and their parents

educated, bid as fair to imbibe the mild and benevolent principles of the gospel, as the children of Baptists whose parents are not under the influence of the foregoing obligations. Again: According to the Pædobaptist system, baptized minors are taught, or ought to be taught, that in consequence of their being planted in the vineyard of the Lord, they are under special obligations "to avoid the pollutions of the world, and to seek by prayer and a diligent attendance on the means of grace the thing signified by baptism," the washing of regeneration, "by the Holy Spirit." Now I should also think, that children thus instructed, and whose minds are imbued with this principle, bid as fair, if not fairer, to be respecters of things divine, and to be as humane, benevolent, and orderly members of society, as the children of those who are taught, that they are under no such obligations from the aforesaid privileges; but taught that they are in the visible kingdom of darkness, and if God converts them it is well, if not they are not blameable; for Mr. C. tells them in p. 197, that " for his own part, he conceives it to be as reasonable to blame a man for being black, or for not being seven feet high, as to blame him for not being a Christian." And I will venture to affirm, that children thus educated, and thus early impressed, will bear a comparison in the aggregate with the children of Baptist families, for a respect for things divine, and for all those charities that are the supports of society, and the sweeteners of social life. I will venture to affirm more, that three-fourths, if not nine-tenths of those who are at present engaged in

ing immorality, and in spreading the benign principles of the gospel of

peace, and of love, are those who have been baptized in infancy. Facts are stubborn arguments, and all theories and speculations, how

3Z

ever specious, must give way to, and bow before them. I freely ad

mit, that many baptized in infancy were persecutors, and addicted to all kind of wickedness; but the question is, was this the consequence of their being baptized in infancy, or of the Pædobaptism system as a system; or the abuse of it in those churches that are unhappily amalgamated with the state, or in those churches that have departed from the truth, or in those where the doctrine of baptism is not correctly understood?

After Mr. C. had thus roundly and unqualifiedly asserted " that infant sprinkling has uniformly inspired a persecuting spirit;" he also informs us, "that every body knows, that Quakers and Baptists have never persecuted." Quakers have nothing to do with the present question, but it may be also worth while to inquire into the fact as it respects Baptists; and also to examine whether or no, there is any thing in the Baptist system, that has a natural tendency to produce this hateful and wicked spirit.

Baptist historians are very fond of telling us, that they are descended from the PÆTROBRUSSIANS, and other ancient sects, who are usually considered amongst the witnesses for the truth in the dark ages of Popery. Be that as it may, it is unquestionably certain that the present Baptist churches, both in Europe and America, are sprung from the Anabaptists, who started up in Germany at the commencement of the Reformation. Their peculiar principles are distinctly recorded, and transmitted to us by MOSHEIM, and other ecclesiastical historians. "They held," says MoSHEIM, "that the church of Christ ought to be exempt from all sin: that all things ought to be common amongst the faithful: that all usury, tithes, and tribute, ought to be entirely abolished: that the baptism of infants was an invention of the devil: that every Christian was in

vested with power to preach the gospel: and consequently, that the Church stood in no need of ministers or pastors: that in the kingdom of Christ civil magistrates were useless: and that God still continued to reveal his will to chosen persons by dreams and visions." Eccl. Hist. London ed. vol. iv. p. 440.

And what was the practical operation and effect of these principles, and especially of the leading principle of a spotless church, whence all the others naturally and necessarily sprung? Was it a high respect for things divine, and humanity, and benevolence, and orderly obedience to the laws? No: but the most unparalleled blasphemy, anarchy, and licentiousness, with an attempt under MUNZER, STUBNER, and STORCK, and other leaders, to overturn all government in church and state: and after disturbing the peace of Germany, and of the surrounding countries for a considerable time, and wounding the Reformation in its very vitals, they were at last with considerable difficulty discomfited, and dispersed by the German princes.

And who is there, who has carefully read Mr. C.'s book, but must have noticed the leading and distinguishing principles of those turbulent fanatics? They plead for a spotless church, and so does Mr. C. -a plausible and imposing idea indeed, but which I trust I have shown is contrary to the design of Jehovah in erecting a church amongst guilty men. They hated and despised the Pædobaptist clergy of the day; and who has read Mr. C.'s Catechism* and other parts of his book, but has been struck by the rancour manifested therein against the Pædobaptist clergy of the present time, and the attempts he has made to bring them into contempt and disrepute? They called "infant baptism an invention of the devil;" and although Mr. C. has

* Vide Quest. 11. 16. 18. 19. 58. 60.

not used the same language, yet he has given the fullest evidence that he hates it as cordially as ever the German Anabaptists did, by the unceasing ridicule he has attempted to pour upon it in almost every page. And if it is a fact, (as I believe it is,) that he is the writer of several essays published in the Washington Reporter, with the signature of CANDIDUS, against moral

less church here below. I have not however any apprehension of present danger from the principles inculcated in the essays alluded to, as they have been encountered by a writer with the signature of TiMOTHY, whose strictures have completely neutralized their deleterious tendency to all, the grossly ignorant and the lawless excepted, the number of which, when com

vania against vice and immorality, who is there who has read these essays, but must have seen that he has imbibed all the leading theological, and political principles of MUNZER, STUBNER, and STORCK; and that should those principles be generally imbibed, then as similar causes produce similar effects, the orderly, happy, and respectable state of Pennsylvania would soon experience all the calamities that Germany and the low countries once experienced from the Anabaptists under the specious pretence of erecting a spotless church?

As these letters may be read by some who are not acquainted with Mr. C., or who know not his general moral character, I feel it to be a duty which I owe to him to say, that I do not think he has any such designs, and that should such an event take place, his moral habits would not suffer him to take any part in scenes of anarchy, licentiousness and blood. It is a plausible and unscriptural theory that has led him to speak and write as he has done, and what is no uncommon thing with even good men, his head is at variance with his heart. But although I believe that Mr. C. would take no part in the practical operation of his own principles, yet as human nature is the same in all ages, and in all countries, I have no doubt that there are daring and unprincipled men amongst us, who, if a favourable opportunity offered, would react the scenes of Germany in the 16th century, under the plausible pretext of erecting a spot

is, I trust, but small.

It was with reluctance that I have introduced the German Anabaptists at all into this review. It was not with the design of hurting the feelings, or casting a reflection on the present Baptist Church. For although I think them mistaken on the subject of baptism, with respect to the infants of church members, and the mode of administering that ordinance, yet I feel happy in saying, that they have evinced for upwards of a century past, that they have renounced the anarchical principles of their predecessors, and that they are as firm supporters of lawful civil government as any other religious denomination. It was to point out to Mr. C. the dangerous tendency of those principles he has imbibed and avowed, to induce him to review his present creed; and to induce those who have read his book to reflect before they adopt those principles. His book has been published at a most inauspicious time. For some years past, Christians of different denominations were gradually approaching each other, and a hope was entertained, that all who held the doctrines of grace, would at no very distant day be consolidated into one impenetrable phalanx, and be to the enemies of God, and of his Christ, as terrible as an army with banners." The writings of Dr. Mason of this country, and of Dr. Hall of the Baptist Church in Enggland, on Christian communion, were producing a happy effect: but Mr C.'s inflammatory publication

is directly calculated to widen the breach, and as far as it may have effect, to set those who hold the same fundamental articles of religion, in bitter hostile array against each other. I hope, however, that the time will come when he will reflect on this part of his conduct with regret; that he will retrace his steps and repair the evil which I am persuaded he has done to the church of God, and the interest of a benevolent religion.

I have now finished my brief review of Mr. C.'s book. Mr. C. may perhaps say that it is a brief review indeed; for there are many things in his book which I have not even glanced at. That is indeed true; but I expect that it will be admitted, that I have noticed all his prominent points, and principal arguments against Pædobaptism; and if I have overturned these, then the minor points and arguments must necessarily fall with them, for when the foundation is removed, the superstructure must fall to the ground. It is highly probable that he will reply to these letters, and I would just conclude by observing, that should I reply to him, it will be upon the following conditions only. 1. That my arguments are to be met and combated by the word of God, or sound logical reasoning; and not by such apostrophes as I have already noticed, and the following addressed to Pædobaptists in his book. "O human tradition how hast thou biassed the judgment, and blinded the eyes of them that should know; under thy influence we strain at a gnat and swallow a camel!""What a compound of inconsistencies is necessary to constitute a Pædobaptist!!!" 2. That we are to hear no more about sponsors in baptism, nor of parents promising that their children shall be religious: such things are as absurd and ridiculous in the eyes of Presbyterian Pædobaptists, as they are in his. Nor any more bills of fare for dinner on occasion of the bap

tism of the children of right honourable or dishonourable men. An intelligent public should never be insulted with such miserable stuff instead of argument. Perhaps Mr. C. thinks himself entitled to a little indulgence in such things, as he tells us in the conclusion of his book, that he has a dash of satire in his constitution, and which he finds it difficult to suppress; or to use his own language, he has a "genius naturally inclined to irony, which he has often to deny." Well, although ridicule is not a test of truth, yet as it is of use, for exposing and correcting buffoonery, pedantry, extravagant opinions, and extravagant and immodest pretensions to superior talents and attainments, he has my full and free consent to indulge it liberally against any thing of that kind in these letters, or any thing else, that deserves the satiric lash. But it must be irony; for genuine satire is one thing, and punning on letters in the alphabet, quibbling on single words, horrific apostrophising, and empty declamation, are another. To such things, or such like things, I will assuredly never again reply. Once is enough; perhaps too much.

SAMUEL RALSTON.

FOR THE PRESBYTERIAN MAGAZINE.

SOUND POLITICS THE FRUIT OF A SOUND RELIGION.

"Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” Prov. xiv. 34.

There is no word in the catalogue of vocal sounds which has been more prostituted and abused than the term politics. It is an articulate sound which we hear almost from the mouth of every individual who speaks the English language-but it is a sound, we are certain, very often used without being affixed to any definite idea. It seems, however, in these enlightened times, to be pretty generally understood to