ambiguous terms, on the regenerating power of baptism; but the
majority of them entertain the belief which is expressed by the
Rev. W. J. E. Bennett, in the following quotation from one of the
last sermons he preached at St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, _see_ page
193:--"Here is a great mystery; that by water in holy baptism is
given a regenerating and life-creating grace--that by water we
go down into the font foul and leprous; by grace we rise pure,
spotless, and sound--that by water we go down into the font dead
in trespasses and sins; by grace we rise up from the font alive in
Christ."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"I grant that the popular construction of the
passages which you have quoted supports your opinion, and if a
similar phraseology of speech were employed by the writers of the
New Testament, I should not hesitate to agree with you; but I do
not find such language in any part of the New Testament. I think
that the Liturgy and Articles are to be brought to the test of the
Scriptures, and not the Scriptures to that of the Liturgy. The
latter, though the first of human compositions, is nevertheless of
human authority; the former is given by the inspiration of God."
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"I admit that the Liturgy and the Articles of
our church are human compositions, and that they possess no weight
of authority unless they are in strict accordance with holy writ:
but do not the sacred writers in the most positive terms assert that
baptism is regeneration? Is not the following passage conclusive:
'But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man
appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but
according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration,
and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which he shed on us abundantly
through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justified by his grace,
we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life'"
(Titus iii. 4-7).
_Mr. Roscoe._--"This passage most certainly associates baptism and
regeneration together; but it does not say that we are _regenerated
by baptism_. The washing of regeneration, or baptism, is the mere
external sign of that moral purity which is the effect of the
renewing of the Holy Ghost. And that this is the meaning of the
passage, I appeal to your good sense; for, if we are regenerated by
baptism, where is the necessity of the renewing of the Holy Ghost?"
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"I do not mean that baptism itself regenerates
us, but that the Holy Spirit regenerates us when we are receiving
the sacrament."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"Simon Magus was one of the first converts to
Christianity; he was baptized by Philip, but he was not regenerated
by the Holy Spirit. He had been baptized, but he still remained
unholy, and 'in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of
iniquity.' This simple fact proves that baptism is not regeneration,
unless you are prepared to admit that a regenerate person may be
'in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity;' and if so, what
spiritual advantage does he derive from his regeneration? If by
baptism Simon Magus was made a child of God, and an inheritor of the
kingdom of heaven, it is evident that he required some moral change
after this, as we are expressly informed that his heart was not
right in the sight of God, and that he had no part nor lot in any of
the gifts of the Holy Spirit."
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"I candidly confess that this case of Simon
Magus seems to militate against the doctrine of baptismal
regeneration; or, at any rate, it clogs it with difficulties which
are not easily overcome."
_Mrs. John Roscoe._--"So I think, and so I should imagine every
person of common sense would think. In my opinion, it settles the
question."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"But there are other difficulties which press
upon the doctrine, which seem to me insuperable. If baptismal
regeneration be the only regeneration possible in this world, and no
one can enter into the kingdom of heaven except he be regenerated by
water, what will become of those children who die unbaptized? Shall
we consign all the offspring of the Friends and of the Baptists to
a state of future misery, and nearly all the children of Scotland,
and of those of our own church, who die before the ceremony can be
performed; shall we plunge them, in fact, into hell, with the devil
and his angels, when we know they have committed no actual sin?
What is this but representing the mothers of earth bringing forth
children to people the infernal regions. Most horrible! Indeed,
rather than embrace a doctrine that entails after it such fearful
consequences, I could consent to close my Bible, as a revelation of
wrath rather than of mercy."
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"But I do not see that this consequence
necessarily follows; because Almighty God may of his goodness take
these children to heaven, though they may not have been baptized."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"What! if baptism be regeneration. Are not children
conceived in sin, and shapen in iniquity? Do they not partake of
our impurity, and can we suppose that they will carry a depraved
nature with them into heaven? If so, evil abounds there no less
than here; and all the anticipations which we indulge of attaining
a state of unsullied purity and bliss after the close of life, must
be regarded as the illusions of the fancy:--No, their moral nature
must be changed; and if they are not baptized, it must be changed
by the renewing of the Holy Spirit, without the external ceremony,
which proves that regeneration is essentially different and distinct
from baptism. I will give you a quotation from the pen of an
elegant writer, which will, I think, decide the question:--'But
that baptism is not regeneration, is placed beyond all reasonable
debate by the following declarations of St. Paul: "I thank God that
I baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius. For Christ sent me
not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words,
lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect" (1 Cor. i.
14, 17). Nothing is more certain than that, if baptism insures or
proves regeneration, Paul, who so ardently desired the salvation
of mankind, and wished to become, as extensively as possible, the
instrument of their salvation, could not thank God that he baptized
none of the Corinthians but Gaius, Crispus, and the household of
Stephanus. To him it would comparatively have been a matter of
indifference whether they accused him of baptizing in his own name
or not. Of what consequence could the clamour, the disputes, or the
divisions be, which might arise about this subject, compared, on the
one hand, with the salvation, and on the other with the perdition of
the Corinthians? Instead of thanking God in this manner, he would
have baptized every Corinthian who would have permitted him; and,
like a Romish missionary, have compelled crowds and hosts to the
streams and to the rivers in the neighbourhood, that they might
receive the ordinance at his hands. With still less propriety could
he say, if baptism were the means of regeneration, especially if it
insured or proved it, that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to
preach the gospel. Christ, as He himself hath told us, sent St. Paul
to the Gentiles and to the Corinthians, as well as other Gentiles,
_to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan
unto God_. In other words, Christ sent St. Paul to the Gentiles
to accomplish their regeneration. But if baptism be the means of
regeneration, or be accompanied by it, then Christ actually sent him
to baptize, in direct contradiction to the passage just now quoted.
From both these passages it is evident that baptism neither insures
nor proves regeneration, unless we believe that the gratitude of the
most zealous apostle rose in intensity in proportion as he failed in
accomplishing the design of his mission.'"
_Mrs. John Roscoe_ (addressing her husband).--"I think you must now
give up the point; for who can fairly stand against such plain and
powerful arguments?"
_Mr. Roscoe._--"But the doctrine is no less dangerous than
anti-scriptural; and when we reflect on the tendency which the human
mind discovers to derive consolation from any source of relief,
however vague or imaginary, we cannot evince too much ardour in
exploding the fatal delusion. In this country there are multitudes
of baptized persons who discover, at no period of their life, any
other proofs that they have been regenerated than what the parish
register supplies. If these persons, who have grown up in a state
of ignorance of Christianity, corrupt in morals and in manners, are
told by their clergyman that when they were baptized they were made
inheritors of the kingdom of heaven, will they not easily lull the
disquietude of their consciences to sleep, and flatter themselves
with the hope of final salvation, even while they continue the
servants, if not the slaves of sin? Will they, if warned to flee
from the wrath to come, apprehend any danger, seeing they are taught
to believe that they are already the children of God? O fatal
delusion! a delusion no less dangerous to the morals than it is to
the final happiness of man, because it leads him to ascribe the
origin of his religious character to a ceremonial act performed on
him at a period when he knew it not, rather than to his repentance
towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; and teaches him that
he may become a glorified spirit in another world, even though he
lives and he is a sceptic or a blasphemer. Thus a little cold water
taken from a font, and falling from the holy hands of a regularly
ordained priest, imparts such a mysterious sanctity to the subject
whom it touches, as to render any moral or spiritual meetness for
the inheritance of the saints in light quite unnecessary. _How
wonderful!_"
It was amusing to watch the movements of Mrs. John Roscoe
during these discussions, and gratifying to hear her occasional
observations. She would sit sometimes as patient as a judge when
listening to the evidence on some grave charge against a prisoner
at the bar, and at other times she was as restless and fidgety as a
juryman anxious to deliver the verdict, that he might get home to
his dinner as quickly as possible. In general, she held a very tight
rein over her excursive spirit, out of respect to the two principal
disputants; but occasionally it would drop from her grasp, and then
she was off at a tangent.
"I think," said she, "a man's bump of credulity must be larger than
his head who would tell me, with decorous gravity, that he really
has faith to believe such an ecclesiastical dogma."
This remark somewhat disconcerted, though it did not displease her
husband, who rather liked to see her display her cleverness, but he
soon recovered himself, and addressing his brother, he said:--
"But these are the consequences which _you_ deduce from the
doctrine, rather than consequences which necessarily follow from its
admission. When the child is baptized we pray that he may _lead the
rest of his life according to this beginning_; which presupposes the
possibility that he may not. If he do not, he forfeits his baptismal
rights, and relapses into a state of condemnation and guilt."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"Then I presume that, by his relapse into a state
of condemnation and guilt, he places himself in a moral condition
similar to the condition in which he would have stood if he had
never been baptized?"
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"Exactly so."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"As a state of guilt and condemnation implies, on the
part of man, depravity and alienation from God, must he not undergo
some _moral change_ in his disposition, his principles, and his
taste, before he can loathe himself on account of his impurities, or
be fitted to dwell in the immediate presence of a holy God; as we
read that 'without holiness no man shall see the Lord?'"
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"Certainly; he must be made good and virtuous
before he can be admitted into heaven."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"But if he were regenerated when he was baptized, and
there is no _other regeneration possible in this world_, you see the
dilemma in which you place a man who by transgression forfeits his
baptismal rights."
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"What dilemma?"
_Mr. Roscoe._--"Why, in despair. You say he needs a moral change to
fit him for heaven; but as that change cannot be produced without
baptism--_and he has undergone the ceremony, which cannot be
repeated_--you place him under the ban of reprobation, unless you
adopt the only alternative which remains for you, that of admitting
him to heaven in his depraved state. Mr. Cole, in his sermon, was
very severe on the evangelical clergy for two things; he asserted
that, by their awful strain of preaching, they generally destroy the
peace of society; and by holding out the hope of salvation to the
most guilty, they destroy its virtue. These were certainly heavy
charges; but do you not perceive that they are charges which may
be brought with strict logical accuracy against the advocates of
baptismal regeneration? For, if they follow out their doctrine to
its legitimate consequences, they are compelled either to admit a
man into heaven in an unregenerated state, who by a relapse into sin
forfeits his baptismal rights, or, after his forfeiture, to tell him
that he cannot be regenerated, by which he is systematically and
inevitably consigned over to despair."
_Rev. Mr. Roscoe._--"Well, I confess that the doctrine appears
involved in more oppressive difficulties than I ever conceived; and
yet, from the quotations which Mr. Cole gave us on Sunday from the
Fathers, it appears to have been a doctrine which was received into
the church very early and very generally."
_Mr. Roscoe._--"Yes, to quote the language of an eloquent writer,
'it is well known that, from a very early period, the most
extravagant notions prevailed in the church with respect to the
efficacy of baptism, and its absolute necessity in order to attain
salvation. The descent of the human mind from the spirit to the
letter--from what is vital and intellectual to what is ritual
and external in religion--is the true source of idolatry and
superstition in all the multifarious forms they have assumed; and
as it began early to corrupt the patriarchal religion, so it soon
obscured the lustre and destroyed the simplicity of the Christian
institute. In proportion as genuine devotion declined, the love
of pomp and ceremony increased; the few and simple rites of
Christianity were extolled beyond all reasonable bounds; new ones
were invented, to which mysterious meanings were attached, till
the religion of the New Testament became, in process of time, as
insupportable a yoke as the Mosaic law. The first effects of this
spirit are discernible in the ideas entertained of the ordinance of
baptism. From an erroneous interpretation of the figurative language
of a few passages in Scripture, in which the sign is identified with
the thing signified, it was universally supposed that baptism was
invariably accompanied with a supernatural effect, which totally
changed the state and character of the candidate, and constituted
him a child of God, and an heir of the kingdom of heaven. Hence
it was almost constantly denoted by the terms _illumination_,
_regeneration_, and others expressive of the highest operations
of the Spirit; and as it was believed to obtain the _plenary_
remission of all past sins, it was often, in order to insure that
benefit, purposely deferred to the latest period of life. Thus
Eusebius informs us that the Emperor Constantine, finding his end
fast approaching, judged it a fit season for purifying himself
from his offences, and cleansing his soul from that guilt which,
in common with other mortals, he had contracted, which he believed
was to be effected by the power of mysterious words and the saving
laver. "This," said he, addressing the surrounding bishops, "_is
the period I have so long hoped and prayed for, the period of
obtaining the salvation of God_." And no sooner was the rite of
baptism administered, than he arrayed himself in white garments,
and laid aside the imperial purple, in token of his bidding adieu
to all secular concerns.' We have here a fair specimen of the
sentiments which were generally adopted upon this subject in early
times; but if the Articles and Liturgy of our own church are to
be submitted to the test of the Scriptures, must not the opinions
of the ancients pass through the same ordeal? I would therefore
say of all the authorities quoted by Mr. Cole, 'To the law and to
the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is
because there is no light in them.' But you will permit me to add,
that if there be such mysterious efficacy accompanying the rite of
baptism, and such danger incurred by a relapse into sin after the
candidate has submitted to it, I think the ancients discovered more
wisdom in having it deferred till the period of their approaching
dissolution, than we do in submitting to it while surrounded by all
the fascinations of sense and the temptations to evil."
_Mrs. John Roscoe._--"I was never a zealous advocate for baptismal
regeneration, but now I repudiate it as an ecclesiastical fiction.
But then comes a very grave question, _What is regeneration?_"
_Miss Roscoe._--"Yes, aunt, one of the gravest and one of the most
important questions that can engage our attention."
_Mrs. John Roscoe._--"And I must have the question satisfactorily
solved. Indeed, I begin to apprehend personal danger, for, though
baptized, I may not be regenerated."
THE RETIRED CHRISTIAN.
The beauty of the morning tempted me to seek the recreation of a
solitary rural walk, and that I might not spend a useless day,
I made a selection of tracts for distribution. After sauntering
through many a pleasant lane and meadow, the freshness of the
grass, the beauty of the wild flowers, and the warbling of the
birds enlivening the scene, I came near to a mansion belonging
to the Marquis of B----, and, availing myself of the privilege
which he generously affords the public, I resolved to visit it.
Walking leisurely up the long shady avenue, I now and then caught
a glimpse of the venerable structure, and at length it came full
in view. It was an irregular building, of the Elizabethan period,
of considerable extent, and in excellent preservation. As I passed
from room to room, examining the articles of taste and of luxury
with which they were adorned, I thought within myself, how little
can all this splendour do to confer true happiness! The collection
of ancient armour interested me, and the portraits of the great
ones of former times carried my mind back to events too intimately
interwoven with our national history ever to be forgotten. Before
I left the library, I deposited between the leaves of some of the
books lying on the table a few tracts, which I hoped might arrest
the attention of some of the members of the noble family, and having
commended these silent messengers of truth to the Divine blessing, I
retired, delighted with what I had seen.
I walked on some little distance, when, on making a sudden turn, I
descended a winding slope, which led to the front of a neat cottage,
partially concealed by the evergreens which surrounded it. An air of
finished neatness and scrupulous order was everywhere visible, and
its quiet simplicity formed a pleasing contrast to the magnificent
mansion I had just left. The barking of a little dog, and the
crowing of a cock, satisfied me that it was inhabited, though I
saw neither man nor child. Discovering a tasteful seat, formed by
the bended branches of an ash and hazel that grew in fellowship,
I sat me down to rest myself. I did not long remain in suspense
as to the character of the inhabitants, for, while indulging my
fancies, I observed, at some distance, a venerable-looking man
advancing towards the cottage. As he drew near, I rose and saluted
him: he returned the compliment with graceful ease; and his manner
at once convinced me that, though in a rustic garb, he had been
accustomed to mingle in polite society. His frank and kindly
manners at once relieved me from the embarrassment into which his
unexpected appearance had thrown me, and it was with feelings of
interest and pleasure that I accepted his invitation to step into
his cottage and rest myself. The interior of this retreat was as
neat as the outer decorations were beautiful; the furniture was
simple and inexpensive; the only thing which particularly attracted
my attention was a large painting, which, he informed me, was a
favourite family-piece. While I was admiring the picture, and
carefully examining the group there represented, his wife entered
the room, and, after a little general conversation, she pressed me
to remain and dine with them. We soon became somewhat familiar;
and, throwing off reserve, conversed freely, as two old friends
are wont to talk when met together after a long absence. In course
of conversation, my venerable host gave me some account of his
history. His life had been a chequered one, on which had fallen the
lights and shadows of prosperity and adversity. I ascertained that
his name was Armstrong, that he had three children--his daughter,
who was married to an attorney in Bristol, and his two sons, who
resided in London. He had acquired a handsome fortune by industry
and frugality, and having disposed of his business, had retired to
the country to spend the evening of his days in retirement. But
soon the charm and novelty of the country wore away; he was not
happy completely isolated from commercial life and intercourse
with general society; and resolved again to return to more active
pursuits. A favourable opportunity soon occurred, when he disposed
of his country residence, and entered into partnership with a
banking firm of reputed respectability. But, ere long, he found that
he had been deceived; the concern became bankrupt, and in his old
age he lost at one sweep the accumulated property of former years.
The shock to himself and his wife was at first overpowering, but,
when awakening from the stupor into which it had thrown them, they
rejoiced that their children were in a very prosperous condition,
and they had no doubt but they would prove to them comforters in
the hour of their distress. In this they were not mistaken: an
arrangement was soon made for the removal of their parents from the
scene of their sorrow and misfortunes; the cottage which they now
occupied was purchased for them, and to secure them from all anxiety
respecting their future support, an annuity was settled upon them
for life.
When Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong removed to the cottage, they brought
with them an old domestic, who had been in their service for more
than thirty years, and she, with a man-servant, made up the whole of
their family. As they were strangers in the neighbourhood, and in
a manner cut off from intercourse with the world, they lived quite
retired, finding, in the gratification of promoting each other's
happiness, more satisfaction than they had ever enjoyed in the days
of their prosperity.
* * * * *
"Adversity," I remarked, "though dreaded when at a distance, is
often met on its near approach with calmness, and not unfrequently
it becomes a source of greater happiness than prosperity has ever
been able to impart."
"Prosperity," said Mr. Armstrong, "possesses greater attractions
than adversity, but it has a more pernicious influence on the mind.
The prayer of Agur I admire for its simplicity and suitableness,
seeing that wealth and extreme poverty often place our principles
in danger:--'Two things have I required of thee; deny me them not
before I die; remove far from me vanity and lies; give me neither
poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me: lest I be
full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the Lord? or lest I be poor,
and steal, and take the name of my God in vain.'"
"There is no exercise," I observed, "which has such a salutary
influence over the human heart, and over the formation of the
character, as prayer; for, by associating us with the Author of all
excellence, we imperceptibly imbibe a portion of his goodness; it is
the hand which lays hold of his strength; and then we enjoy peace,
because we feel secure amidst all apparent dangers and positive
privations."