upon the sand, considering the baptism it had and hath. Which was, as I have heard from themselves, on this manner;— Mr. Smyth, Mr. Helwisse, and the rest, having utterly dissolved and disclaimed their former church state, and ministry, came together to erect a new church by Baptism; unto which, they also ascribed so great virtue as that they would not so much as pray together before they had it. And, after some straining of courtesy who should begin, and that John the Baptist, Matt. iii. 14, misalleged, Mr. Smyth baptized first himself, and next Mr. Helwisse, and so the rest, inaking their particular confessions. Now, to let pass his not sanctifying a public action by public prayer," his taking unto himself' that honour' which was not given him either immediately from Christ or by the church; his baptizing himself, which was more than Christ himself did; -I demand-Into what church he entered by baptism? Or, entering by baptism into no church-How his baptism could be true, by their own doctrine? Or Mr. Smyth's baptism not being true; nor he, by it, entering into any church-How Mr. Helwisse's baptism could be true; or into what church he entered by it?"d

a 1 Tim. iv. 4, 5.

--

d P. 48. We abstain from commenting on this passage, referring it, with the following, to the solemn consideration of every Baptist, so called. "The first church, in London, was founded soon after 1611, by Mr. Thomas Helwisse. On the controversy about Baptism being agitated by Mr. Smyth, he took the side of the Baptists, and was excommunicated with Mr. Smyth and his followers. He was baptized by Mr. Smyth, and was one of the first in the constitution of that church. On the death of Mr. Smyth, the care of the church was committed to him, and soon after they returned to London; from an idea that they had done wrong to fly from persecution." Hist. of the English Baptists, &c. From about the year 1610 till 1700. By Joseph Ivimey. 1814. vol. ii. p. 505. After what Robinson has said above, would Mr. Ivimey continue to say, "There is no doubt but this silly charge was fabricated by his [Smyth's] enemies, and it is an astonishing instance of credulity that writers of eminent talents have contributed to perpetuate the slander? Vol. i. p. 115. (1811.) He says, in another place, "It must be admitted that there is some obscurity respecting the manner in which the ancient immersion of adults, which appears to have been discontinued, was restored, when after the long night of antichristian apostacy, persons were at first baptized on a profession of faith. Ibid. p. 139. We leave Baptists in the full enjoyment of the consolation these remarks afford them. Why should they be ashamed of Smyth's self-baptism, if Crosby's opinion, in which Mr. Ivimey coincides, be correct, "That after a general corruption of baptism, an unbaptized person might warrantably baptize, and so begin a reformation?' Ibid. p. 144. and 146. And see a note in the edition of 1822, of Neal's Hist. Purit. vol. ii. p. 42. It is due, nevertheless, both to our readers and to Smyth, that the following passage of Smyth's should be introduced here, "If all the commandments of God must be obeyed, then this of baptism, and this warrant is sufficient for assuming baptism. Now, for baptizing a man's self, there is as good warrant as for a man's churching himself: for two men singly are no church; jointly they are a church, and they both of them put a church upon themselves; for as both these persons unchurched, yet have power to assume the church, each of them for himself and others in communion, so each of them unbaptized, hath power to assume baptism for himself with others in communion." See p. 58, in "The Character of the Beast: Or the False Constitution of the Church discovered in certain passages betwixt Mr. R. Clyfton and John Smyth, concerning the Christian Baptism of new creatures or new-born babes in Christ: and False Baptism of infants born after the flesh. Referred to two propositions; 1. That Infants are not to be baptized. 2. That Antichristians

the heathen to the Lord; nor turn from idols to the true God; nor join themselves unto Him in the fellowship' of the gospel; nor have any communion together for their mutual edification and comfort, till some vagrant priest from Rome, or England, be sent unto them, to begin their church-matters with his service-book? And yet this would not serve the turn either, for he would be unto them a barbarian,' and they barbarians unto him. I Cor. xiv. 11. Some years must be spent before each could understand the other's language. Nay, if this were a true ground, That church-matters might not be begun without officers, -it were impossible that such a people should ever either enjoy officers, or become a church; yea, I may safely add, that ever there should be in the world, after the universal visible apostacy of Antichrist, any true either church or officers...'No man takes his honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as Aaron.' Heb. v. 4. Now, God calls no man, ordinarily, but by the church; for I suppose you will not deny but that the choice of officers is a church-matter, and not a matter of the world. And the church must choose none but such as of whose 'knowledge, zeal, and utterance, they have taken trial by the exercise of his gifts,' as you truly affirm elsewhere; and you will not say but this exercise of his gifts, after this manner and for this end, is a churchmatter. Whence it followeth, that both church-matters, yea, and churches also, may, and in cases, must be begun without officers. Yea, even where officers are, if they fail in their duties, the people may enterprise matters needful, howsoever you will have the minister the only primum movens, and will tie all to his fingers !" a

One of Bernard's Reasons" against "Popularity," but as is remarked, “in truth against Christian liberty," is-"It is most apparent that Christ ascending up, gave gifts' for preaching, administration of sacraments, and government, unto sorts of men, who are set out there, Eph. iv. 11, 12, and plainly distinguished from the other saints, the body of the church.' Robinson answers at large, "Against this, hitherto, I take no great exception; though the apostle's meaning may be better laid down thus, That Christ Jesus, the King and Lord of his Church, hath set in it certain sorts and orders of officers, rightly fitted, and furnished with graces, for the reparation of the saints, and edification of his body, to the world's end.-This we affirm as loud as you, and with more comfort... You, in bringing it, have only lighted a candle whereby to discover your own nakedness.-You would conclude,.. That therefore no brethren out of office, may meddle with the reparation and edification of the saints, or church. I do acknowledge that only apostles, prophets, &c. by office, and as works of their ministry, are to look to the reparation and edification of the body; but, that the brethren, out of office, are discharged of those duties, I deny, any more than the rest of the servants' were of watching, though out of office, because 'the Porter' alone was, by office, to watch,' Mark xiii. 34, 37. Yea look, what is laid upon the officers in this place; after a more special manner, by virtue of their office,-that also is laid upon the rest of the brethren elsewhere, in the same words, to be performed in their places as a duty of love, for which they have not only liberty, but charge

a P. 139.

actually manifested, as in the Infants of believers, there the outward is not to be administered; or that being administered unlawfully in apostate churches, it is no outward baptism at all, nor spiritual in itself, though carnally used, nor to be held upon repentance, without repetition. The outward circumcision of the flesh, and the inward circumcision in the 'heart,' which it signified, and whereof it did admonish the circumcised, were joined together of God, and so were to be by men, and might not be severed without great iniquity.a Were the Infants therefore, of the true church debarred it? Or, being profanely administered amongst the idolatrous and apostate Israelites, or to the idolatrous proselytes amongst them, did their abuse change the nature of it in itself? Or, was it no circumcision at all, and so to be repeated, when the Lord vouchsafed to add the circumcision of the heart ?" "b

I would know of these double-washers, whether if a man professing the same faith with them in holiness outwardly, but in hypocrisy, should be baptized by them; and that afterwards his heart should strike him, and God give him true repentance,-let it be the person they know of, that fled from us under admonition for sin, and joining to and being baptized by them, was presently after by themselves found in the same sin, and so censured,-whether, I say, they would repeat their outward washing formerly made as none, because there was not joined with it the inward washing of the Spirit? Or if they think it none, and so the forementioned person not indeed received in by baptism, as they speak, wherefore did they then excommunicate the same person?" c

"If the washing with water in the name of the Father, &c.,' of a fit person by a lawful minister, in a lawful communion and manner, be true baptism, truly and lawfully administered; then, is washing with water, in the name, &c.,' by an unlawful minister, of an unfit subject, and in an unsanctified communion and manner, true baptism unlawfully and falsely administered. The thing done is the same in both; the difference is only in the manner of doing it... An oath taken in earnest, and for a thing lawful, though profanely, bindeth him that took it." d

Treating expressly "Of the Baptism of Infants," Robinson meets his opposite on the question of the "old and new covenants," their nature and applicability; and having prepared his way, he maintains the proposition "That the Infants of the Faithful are within the compass of the New Covenant here spoken of." He begins by placing the opponents in this dilemma: "Since all children coming naturally from Adam are conceived and born in sin,' and by nature the children of wrath;'f if these men believe, as they do of all, that their children so dying shall be saved by Christ, then must they have a part in His Testament, or in this new covenant. There are not two new covenants or testainents established in the blood of Christ, but one. And since Christ is propounded unto us as the Saviour' of the 'body,' which is his church,'s it is more than strange that these men will

a Deut. x. 16. Jer. iv. 4. e Psal. li. 5.

have all Infants to be saved, and yet none of them to be of His body,' or church!' "a

6

He shows, at some length, the error of confounding the covenants made with Abraham and with Moses; and remarks that "the profession of anabaptistry" may be discovered "as not from heaven, by this error, That the covenant with Abraham, I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed,' is the covenant of the law, and not of the gospel. Upon which," he says, " notwithstanding doth depend the rejecting of Infants from the church and baptism; as also the repeating of the baptism received in false churches; as may appear to him who will observe their pleading for 'apostate Israel' as a true church, because it was 'Abraham's carnal seed,' and so had circumcision as a 'seal of a carnal covenant!""

6

"We require of them proof, How children are cast out of the church and baptism thereof; and, how the grace of God is so shortened by Christ's coming in the flesh, as to cast out of the church the greatest part of the church before,-the Infants of believers? The Lord Jesus sent out his apostles to teach' or make disciples all nations,' and to 'baptize them;'d opposing' all nations' to that one nation of the Jews. As if he should have said thus,-I have formerly declared my will to that one nation, and circumcised it; 'go' you now, and teach all nations' and baptize them. Now, if Christ's meaning had been, that they should not with the parents-being made disciples, and baptizedbaptize the children; as before they had with the parents,-being made disciples, and circumcised,-circumcised the children; it had been needful he had given them a caveat, to leave the children of the Faithful out in the world, though they had formerly been in the church! If it be objected, that they who were taught, and believed, were to be baptized, therefore not Infants; I deny the consequence. Which should be, if it were true, and therefore not Infidels, and such as refuse the gospel. And this is the opposition which the Scriptures make; setting impenitent and unbelieving persons against the penitent and believing, and not children against their parents; which is childish to imagine!' Allied to this, he says in another place, "That the outward, or visible church, consists of penitent persons and believing only,' opposing them to impenitent and unbelieving, and that such only are to be baptized, I acknowledge, and the Scriptures brought to confirm it; but deny it, opposing believers to their Infants, which are neither unbelievers and impenitent, nor 'innocent,' as is affirmed. The vineyard and kingdom 'f which was taken from the Jews, is let out and given to us; in which, though no briars, nor brambles, nor fruitless trees might grow, yet young plants, and imps, not yet bringing forth fruit actually, both might and may; as children might and may be in God's kingdom, though no rebels." g

A mass of Scriptural information and of pertinent remarks, of which later writers appear to have availed themselves, is contained in the general discussion, most serviceable to the cause it sustains; but which we are precluded from enlarging upon, and confine our notice therefore of Robinson's Survey of "The Confession, &c.," published by Mr. b Gen. xvii. 7, 10. f Matt. xxi. 43.

a P. 73. e P. 81.

c P. 80.
& P. 127.

d Matt. xxviii. 19.

Smyth's followers," and with which he closes this treatise, to simply stating, that he examines only those doctrinal points of theirs which he judged erroneously set down; as, Of God's decree about Adam's sin, Of Adam's fall, Original sin, Free-will, God's love, Man's recovery, Universal redemption, Apostacy from grace, Christ's sacrifice, Repentance, Regeneration, The new creature, The Scriptures needful, Perfection, The visible Church, Magistracy, and Oaths. These subjects occupy thirty-two pages.b

CHAP. XVI.

CLYFTON. AINSWORTH.

THEY are little acquainted with the corruption of their own hearts, and still less with the history of Christianity itself, who are, or affect to be surprised or alarmed at the dissensions and disputations which will ever happen between those Christians who are not privileged with divine inspiration, equal to that graciously imparted to Paul and Barnabas.c Nor is their knowledge of human nature and its best mundane attainments, surpassed by their proficiency in either physical or moral philosophy. It is true our Saviour has prescribed for us an Ultima Thule, that remotest point in the sacred canon which, since He requires it, we ought to strive to attain, " Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.' Such is our state of imperfection, that the very means needful in aiming at this exalted attribute, bring us into that collision of understanding with understanding, which necessarily excites and elicits those evil propensities in their kind and degree, lurking till the occasion draws them forth, in the very best of our species. Let us not be reproached, however, as though we were disposed even to palliate what is in the least respect contradictory to the genius of Christianity. Our purpose is merely to check those perfectionists, who use the terms unity and charity the most loudly, when some one or other of their own exclusive interests, secular or not, as may be, is affected. To such we address ourselves in the language of a late profound investigator into the most abstruse of principles,"You that boast you live conformably to the appointments of the Church, and that no one hears of your noise, we may thank the ignorance of your minds for that kind of quietness.' And we are able to confirm this sentiment by that of a still greater authority, who tells us, "There be two false peaces, or unities; the one, when the peace is grounded but upon an implicit ignorance, for all colours will agree in the dark; the other, when it is pieced up upon a direct admission of contraries in fundamental points: for truth and falsehood in such things are like the iron and clay in the toes of Nebuchadnezzar's a See back, p. 179.

"e

b Helwisse published in 1611, 8vo., "A Proof that God's Decree is not the cause of any Man's Sin or Condemnation: And, that all Men are Redeemed by Christ; and that no Infants are condemned."

c Acts xv. 2.

d Matt. v. 48.

e Aids to Reflection, &c. by S. T. Coleridge. 1825. p. 102.