THE doctrine of baptismal regeneration, may be traced to an early origin in the Christian church; as early as about the middle of the second century. This fact is much relied on, as evidence of its truth. But it might be adduced for this purpose, with more plausibility, if it were not notorious that even at that early period, other great corruptions had crept into the church. How this doctrine first came to be believed, we may not perhaps, at this late period, be able to determine. Dr. Doddridge accounts for it in the following manner: "In the earliest ages of the church, persons were generally baptized, as soon as they were converted to the cordial belief of Christianity, and therefore, the time of their conversion, and that of their baptism, might naturally enough be spoken of as one; and as this was a period when they did, as it were, come into a new world, it is no wonder that the action by which they testified a change so lately made, should be put for that change itself. In a word, a man by baptism, solemnly professed himself a Christian; and as it was generally the first overt act by which his believing the gospel could be publicly and generally known, and was also supposed to be very near the time of his inward conversion, they dated his regeneration, that is, his happy change, as that word used to signify even among the heathen, from that time."

with the thing signified, and to speak of regeneration and baptism as one and the same thing. The doctrine of transubstantiation may be traced to a similar origin. The bread and wine in the sacrament of the Lord's supper, gradually came to be regarded as the real body and blood of Christ, of which they are only symbols.

A false interpretation of certain passages of Scripture, particularly John iii, 5, and Titus iii, 5, also had much influence in giving currency to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. That some of the early fathers should have mistaken the meaning of these texts, is no more wonderful, than that they should have fallen into other egregious mistakes in interpreting the Scriptures.

When we find Barnabas, one of the apostolic fathers, maintaining that Abraham and his one hundred and eighteen trained servants, signify Jesus and his cross; when we find Origen mentioning that in the account given of the destruction of the Hebrew male children in Egypt, and the deliverance of Moses, Pharaoh is the devil, Pharaoh's daughter is the church, the midwives are the Old and New Testaments, and the male and female children are the animal and rational faculties of the soul, and Moses is the law; that the three hundred foxes caught by Sampson, are teachers of heresy; and that the phrase used by the Apostle, "saved so as by fire," teaches that all the saints after the resurrection from the dead, will be purified by flames, and have the dross of sin burnt off by literal fire; when we find Jerome interpreting the controversy between the two women who came to Solomon, as a representation of the Jewish synagogue and the Christian church contending about the child Jesus-when we find

these facts, and a multitude of others like them, illustrating the exeget ical wisdom of the three first centuries, we need not be surprised to find that the fathers have fallen into the mistake of supposing, that our Savior, when he said, John iii, 5, "Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he can not enter into the kingdom of heaven," did teach the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

But although the word, regeneration, in the writings of the ancient fathers, after the middle of the second century, is generally used to signify baptism or something inseparably connected with baptism, it is not used in this sense, so invariably as some have seemed to imagine. Clemens Alexandrinus uses the word, in one instance at least, to denote a change of character by true repentance. Speaking of a penitent female, he says, "that being born again by conversion, or a change in her temper and behavior, she has the regeneration of life." Chrysostom and Augustine, although they frequently used the language current in their day, admitted that many who were outwardly baptized, were not baptized virtually and spiritually by the Holy Ghost.

As true religion declined, a superstitious observance of outward rites and ceremonies, usurped the place of vital godliness; and the idea of regeneration, as an inward spiritual change of character, became almost entirely lost. For many centuries, no other regeneration was ever thought of by the great mass of Christian professors, but that which was supposed to take place in baptism. The doctrine of baptismal regeneration is still maintained, as it ever has been, by the whole Romish church. It is also maintained by the high church party in the church of England, and in the Protestant Episcopal church in the United States. By the evangelical party in that communion, it is entirely dis

carded. But they meet with great embarrassment, in being obliged to make use of a liturgy, which seems most explicitly to contradict their belief. The high church party strenuously insist that the doctrine of baptismal regeneration is a doctrine of the church-clearly taught in the Prayer-book; and if the language of the Prayer-book is to be understood in its most obvious mean. ing, they certainly have the right of the argument; while it is equally certain, that their opponents have the evidence of Scripture on their side. The English liturgy, it is well known, was compiled from the Romish; and by persons whose eyes were not fully opened to all the corruptions of Popery. It is not surprising, therefore, that it should contain some things which ought to have been excluded. Of these, the doctrine of baptismal regeneration is one.

The language of the baptismal service is very explicit. The minis ter, after the baptism of an infant, is directed to say, "Seeing now dear. ly beloved, that this child is regenerate, and grafted into the body of Christ's church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these benefits," &c. ... "We yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to regene rate this infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for thine own child, by adoption, and to incorporate him into thine own church."

At the baptism of adults, the minister is directed to say, "Mercifully look upon these thy servants; wash them, and sanctify them with the Holy Ghost; that they being deliv ered from thy wrath, may be receiv. ed into the ark of Christ's church." Again, "Give thy Holy Spirit to these persons, that they may be born again, and be made heirs of everlasting salvation, through our Lord Jesus Christ." After baptism, the minister is directed to say, "Seeing now, dearly beloved, that these per.

sons are regenerate, and grafted into the body of Christ's church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these benefits." The thanksgiving then follows, and after it this prayer: "Give thy Holy Spirit to these persons, that being now born again, and made heirs of everlasting salvation, through our Lord Jesus Christ, they may continue thy servants," &c.

In the church catechism, which all are required to learn before they offer themselves for confirmation, are the following questions and answers. "Ques. What is your name? Ans. N. or M. Ques. Who gave you that name? Ans. My sponsors in baptism, wherein I was made a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven." Such is the teaching of the Prayer-book, which all the ministers of the Episcopal church are obliged to use. While, therefore, we rejoice that there are many evangelical and pious ministers in that church, who adopt scriptural views on the subject of regeneration, we can not but regard them as objects of pity, that they are obliged to make use of formularies so utterly at variance with their doctrinal belief. In order to reconcile their principles and practice, they are under the necessity of resorting to the most unnatural interpretation of the language of the Prayer-book.

Nearly thirty years ago, there was a protracted controversy on this subject, in England, between the high church party and the evangelical. The questions in dispute, were two. 1. Is the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, a doctrine of the Bible? 2. Is it a doctrine of the the church? In the opinion of candid and distinguished judges, the result of this controversy, was victory and defeat, to both parties alike. On the first question, the evangelical party were triumphant. On the second, the high church party were equally so. Thanks be to God, that Vol. II. 51

in the discussion of this subject we have but one question to settle, viz. What is the testimony of the Scriptures? In the following remarks, we propose,

First, To attempt to ascertain what the doctrine of baptismal regeneration is, as maintained by high church Episcopalians, in England and in this country; and

Second, To show that the doctrine, so far from receiving any support from the teaching of Christ and the Apostles, is utterly opposed to the genius of Christianity, and the explicit declarations of the word of God.

What then is the doctrine of baptismal regeneration?

Of this we may

There has been some doubt in the minds of many as to the precise sense in which this doctrine is held by its advocates; and it is not certain that it is held by all in exactly the same sense. perhaps be able to judge, by bringing together and comparing the statements of different individuals. Bishop Brownell of Connecticut, in his late charge to his clergy, thus states the doctrine.

"The true economy of the Christian dren of wrath. It takes them from this religion, regards men as by nature chilstate, which is called in Scripture the 'kingdom of Satan,' and transfers them by baptism into the family, household, and kingdom of the Savior-where they are called children of God,' 'members of Christ,' and 'heirs of the kingdom of heaven.' From adults, repentance and faith are required as qualifications for baptism; and from infants there is required a subsequent repentance and faith, which stands in the nature of a debt, and which they are bound to discharge when they come to years of discretion. After baptism, the person is regarded as in a state of covenant relationship with God; becomes entitled to the aids of his Holy Spirit, and through the instrumentalities ward in the nurture and admonition of provided in the church, is daily set for

the Lord. THIS CHANGE OF STATE, EFFECTED IN BAPTISM, IS CALLED IN SCRIPTURE, AND IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE BAPTISMAL OFFICE, REGENERATION.".

p. 21.

"Let them be assured, that those who

are sacramentally baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, become by that act, (not in name only but in deed and in truth,) 'members of Christ,' children of God,' and 'heirs of the kingdom of heaven;' that by the renunciation of the dominion of Satan, and their adoption into the kingdom of Christ, they are restored to a state of favor with God, and brought within the sphere of the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit. And this is not to be regarded as a mere temporary act, but as an initiation into an abiding state. On this ground the Apostles exhorted their baptized converts to count themselves 'dead unto sin, and alive unto God.'"p. 31.

Bishop Hobart says

"In the sacrament of baptism, we are taken from the world, where we had no title to the favor of God, and placed in a state of salvation in the Christian church." -Sermon on Confirmation, p. 26.

Again, "Into this church, the body which derives life, strength, and salvation, from Christ its head, baptism was instituted as the sacred rite of admission. In this regenerating ordinance, fallen man is born again from a state of condemnation to a state of grace."— Companion for the Altar, p. 186.

Again, "Wherever the gospel is promulgated, the only mode through which we can be admitted into covenant with God, the only mode through which we can obtain a title to those blessings and privileges which Christ has purchased for his mystical body, the church, is the sacrament of baptism."-Ib. p. 189.

Tomline, Bishop of Lincoln, in his refutation of Calvinism, says:

"The word regeneration is in Scripture solely and exclusively applied to the one immediate effect of baptism, once administered; and is never used as sy nonymous to the repentance or reformation of a Christian; or to express any operation of the Holy Ghost upon the human mind subsequent to baptism."-2d edition, p. 86.

"Neither Scripture nor the writings of our church authorize us to call upon those who have been baptized, whether in their infancy or at a mature age, to regenerate themselves, or to expect regeneration through the workings of the Holy Ghost." -p. 92.

Dr. Mant, a distinguished advocate of this doctrine, whose writings occasioned the controversy in the church of England, to which we have

already alluded, says, (as quoted by the Christ. Obser. Vol. XV, p. 70,)

"To the proselyte from heathenism to the Jewish faith, baptism had been a death to his natural incapacities, and a new birth to the civil privileges of a Jew. To him who should be admitted to a profession of the Christian faith, and who should be born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God,' it was a death unto sin, and a new birth unto those spiritual privileges which should accompany his deliverance from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God."

Baptism is a new birth, by which we enter into a new world, the new creation, the blessings and spiritualities of the kingdom. From this time forward, we have a new principle put into us, the spirit of grace, which besides our soul and body, is a principle of action." *** "The doctrine of regeneration by bap tism is most clearly asserted by her, (the church.) She supposes, not merely that all real Christians are regenerated by God's Holy Spirit, by which I understand all those who live a Christian life, but that those also are so regenerated, to whom baptism is rightly administered, notwithstanding by their future conduct they may forfeit the privileges of their new birth."***"If the work of regeneration is not effected by baptism, it is impossible for any sober man to say when and by what means it is." *** "Sanctification and purity, unspotted and unblemished holiness, are attributed to the church of Christ as the effect of the washing of water." ***"All Christians, all persons who have been baptized, are indis criminately said to have been regenerated.”

Several inquiries are suggested by the foregoing statements.

1. Do these writers mean that baptism itself is regeneration? or that regeneration is effected by baptism? or that it is an invariable concomitant of baptism? Bishop Brownell says, "This change of state effected in baptism, is calledregeneration." According to him, therefore, regeneration is effected in baptism. By what agency, we are not informed. Bishop Hobart calls baptism a "regenerating ordin ance;" which seems to imply that in his view, baptism produces the change. But he says also, "In this regenerating ordinance, fallen man is born again," &c. This language,

while it teaches that baptism and regeneration are inseparable, leaves it uncertain by what agency the change is produced. According to According to Bishop Tomline, "regeneration is the one immediate effect of baptism." This seems to make baptism the cause of regeneration. Dr. Mant calls baptism "a new birth," and speaks of it as "a death unto sin," and a new birth unto the privileges which are conferred on God's children. This seems to make baptism and regeneration identical. It is proper, however, to remark, that none of these writers exclude the agency of the Holy Spirit in regeneration. They all maintain, (whether consistently or not, the reader will judge,) that this divine agent has something to do in effecting this change.

2. Does regeneration in the view of these writers, denote a change of state merely, or does it denote also a change of character?

On this point, their representations do not seem to be entirely consistent. From some things which they affirm, it would seem that they mean by it only a change of state. They speak of it as "a change of state," and never, in so many words, as a change of character. Bishop Brownell most explicitly discards the idea that regeneration denotes "a change of heart." But how can there be any change of moral character, without a change of heart? He also discards, as New Light theology, the idea of a "sudden change of heart by the operation of the Holy Ghost." But if there is a change of character wrought by the Holy Ghost at the moment of baptism, it must be a "sudden change of heart." Besides, Bishop Brownell says, "From adults, repentance and faith are required as qualifications for baptism; and from infants there is required a subsequent repentance and faith." This language seems to imply, that no change of character is expected at the time of

baptism, and consequently that regeneration in the view of Bishop Brownell denotes no change of character. If adults possess the qualifications required; that is, if they are the subjects of repentance and faith, they have already experienced a change of character. They are penitent believers before baptism. What more are they, so far as moral character is concerned, after baptism?

But here difficulties crowd upon us in a mass. If no change of character is effected in regeneration, what does the Holy Spirit do? All these writers, and all who sympathize with them, maintain that those who are regenerated, are born of the Spirit, as well as of water. In the baptismal service they say, "We yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this infant with thy Holy Spirit." But what does the Holy Spirit do in regeneration, if he does not change the heart? Besides, many of the expressions used by these writers, seem to imply that regeneration denotes a change of character. Dr. Mant calls it "a death unto sin." He says also, "From this time forth, we have a new principle put into us,. which ... is a principle of action." And again, "Sanctification and purity, unspotted and unblemished holiness are attributed to the church of Christ, as the effect of the washing of water." Bishop Brownell speaks of baptized persons as "dead unto sin, and alive unto God." This language would seem to imply an inward spiritual change. How persons who are "by nature children of wrath," can become "dead unto sin, and alive unto God," and become the subjects of "sanctification and purity, and unspotted and unblemished holiness," without any change of moral character, is to us inconceivable.

...

But still greater difficulties press upon us. According to all these wri