in which (as with respect to the children brought to Christ that He
should touch them) baptism is not mentioned, and yet it has so decided a
bearing upon the subject, that we cannot but carefully notice it. St.
Paul is speaking of the case of married persons, when one party believed,
while the other believed not. This he says is not a sufficient reason
for their separation: at least the separation should not be made by the
one that believed. And to satisfy the mind of the believing “brother or
sister” that the children did not suffer, he says,—“For the unbelieving
husband is sanctified by (or in) the wife, and the unbelieving wife is
sanctified by (or in) the husband; _else were your children unclean_,
_but now are they holy_.” It is with the latter part of this verse that
we have to do. The Apostle here declares that children, which have one
believing parent, are on equal terms or in the same condition with
children, both of whose parents are believers; and thus they are said to
be not “_unclean_” but “_holy_.” Now, can there be a doubt, that the
Apostle uses these epithets “unclean” and “holy,” in the same sense in
which they were used in reference to the distinction between the Jews and
the Gentiles? The latter were called “unclean,” because of their
idolatries and other abominations; the former were called “holy,” because
of their connection and Covenant with God. When the Apostle Peter was
sent to preach the gospel to Cornelius, he applied this word “unclean” to
all who were not Jews. “Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a
man that is a Jew, to keep company or come unto _one of another nation_;
but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or
_unclean_.” And the people of Israel are repeatedly called “holy to the
Lord,” because of the Lord’s choice of them and Covenant with them.
“Thou art _a holy people_ unto the Lord thy God,” was the language in
which Moses addressed them. (Deut, vii. 6). And in this description
their children were included: for God’s Covenant with Israel embraced
them also; and thus every man-child, when eight days old, was to receive
circumcision, which was the token of the Covenant. From these things we
may learn the meaning of the Apostle in the passage under consideration.
The _uncleanness_ of the Gentiles was a barrier against their
participating in the Ordinances of the Jewish Church. The _holiness_ of
Israel was their title to those Ordinances; and this too in the case of
their children. Surely, then, when the Apostle says to believing
Christian parents, “Your children are _holy_,” he must mean that they are
entitled to the Ordinances of the Church of Christ! It seems impossible,
if St. Paul’s language has any meaning, to avoid _this_ conclusion,—that
_the children of the faithful_, _as soon as they are born_, _have a
Covenant-holiness_, _and so a right and title to baptism_, _which is now
the token of the Covenant_. Their holiness, that is, their being in
covenant with God, does not date from their _baptism_, but from their
_birth_. {65} To every believing parent God may be supposed to say, as
He said to Abraham, “I will establish my Covenant between me and thee and
thy seed after thee, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.”
Much profit ariseth from this connection, if it be made a right use of.
Baptism, like circumcision, verily profiteth, if the baptized child keep
the law—the requisition which God makes of faith and obedience; but if he
be a breaker of the law, his baptism is made no baptism at all; as
circumcision was in such a case made uncircumcision. (See Rom. ii. 25.)
And let it be farther observed from this text, that it is of _real
believers_ and their children that the Apostle speaks when he says,—“Now
are your children _holy_.” Hence it appears, that the faith of the
parents is the foundation of any children’s claim to baptism.
“_Unclean_” is the description which is given of all others.
The only other passage in this Epistle in which baptism is referred to,
as a Christian Sacrament, is the 13th verse of the xiith Chapter:—“For by
one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or
Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink
into one Spirit.” St. Paul may here allude to baptism in the former part
of the verse, and to the cup in the Lord’s Supper in the latter part of
it. But whatever he may _allude to_, what he _asserts_ is this;—that it
was the baptism of the Holy Spirit which made them real members of
Christ’s mystical body. The baptism of water was the sign of this; but
the sign would have profited them little, if they had not received also
the thing signified. The same may be said of the cup in the Lord’s
Supper. It is for the nourishment of those who are real members of the
Church of Christ by the baptism of the Spirit: in fact, it cannot
possibly nourish any other. The essential unity of all baptized
believers, and yet the diversity of Offices and gifts belonging to the
several constituent parts or members of Christ’s Church, seems to be what
the Apostle is here inculcating upon the Corinthians; and this with the
special design to show them the inconsistency and the evil of their
emulations and divisions. He aimed at curing them of their unseemly
strife, by reminding them that one and the same Holy Spirit had made them
all “members of one body,” but had set those members in their several and
suitable places; so that each should be content with the place assigned
him; and without aspiring to something which had not been given him, or
envying those who might be in a higher or a supposed more honourable
state, should use what he had for the common good,—for the strengthening
and well-being of the whole: “_that there should be_,” as he says in the
25th verse, “_no schism in the body_, _but that the members should have
the same care one for another_.”
The Epistle to the Galatians furnishes us with the next passage in our
important inquiry. It is at the close of the iiird Chapter, the 26th and
two following verses:—“For ye are all the children of God by faith in
Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have
put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither bond nor
free; there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ
Jesus.” Here a new idea is introduced;—a fresh practical use is made by
the Apostle of the Ordinance of baptism. And a very striking and
beautiful idea it is. The order hitherto invariably found to prevail in
what the Scripture says on the subject of baptism is observable also
here. The Apostle first reminds the Galatians that _they were made the
children of God by faith in Christ Jesus_, and then he refers to their
baptism and what they had done by it. As we have considered the
expressions, “baptized into Christ,” as they occur in the Epistle to the
Romans, they need not be noticed here. But the words, “have put on
Christ,” represent to us—what in connection with our subject we have not
had before—the clothing or garments which baptized believers have put on,
and in which they appear (when things are as they ought to be with them)
both before God and before men. This phrase is said to have been taken
from the method of dipping or plunging adults in baptism; who, when they
came forth from the water, were clothed with their own garments as though
they had been new, or with other garments really new. There are two
senses in which true believers may be said to “put on Christ.” First,
they put Him on as their righteousness for acceptance with God or for
their justification; and, secondly, they put Him on—(and this seems
especially intended here)—for sanctification; that is, His Spirit is
imparted to them, by which they are so changed as to become new
creatures. The graces of Christ’s Spirit are sometimes thus described
under the figure of clothing. “Put on, as the elect of God, holy and
beloved,” writes St. Paul to the Colossians, “bowels of mercies,
kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering.” “And above all
these things, put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.” (iii.
12, 14.) The Spirit of Christ ought to be as apparent in those who have
been baptized into Him as the garments which they wear. Nay, His
meekness, and lowliness, and gentleness, and goodness, and
heavenly-mindedness, should become _a part of themselves_—_their very
nature_. For as the work of sanctification, expressed by the being
clothed upon with ‘Christ, is both _internal_ and _outward_, it may be
compared to _the natural beauty_ with which Christ Himself said that God
clothes the plants and the flowers: and when Christians manifest the
genuine influence of the Spirit of Christ, it may then indeed be said of
them, as He said of the lilies, “that Solomon in all his glory was not
arrayed like one of these.” The words in the 28th verse, “There is
neither male nor female,”—connected with what follows, “If ye be
Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed,”—clearly show that circumcision was
superseded, and that baptism now supplied its place.
Upon St. Paul’s declaration in the ivth Chapter of his Epistle to the
Ephesians, “One baptism,” it is perhaps only necessary to remark, that it
again follows faith;—“One faith,”—the same doctrine of salvation once for
all delivered to the saints and to be received by faith,—and then, “One
baptism” with water, by which that faith is professed, and in which
believers are by One Spirit baptized into One body, and dedicated to the
service of the One living and true God. It is One and the same Ordinance
for all,—for Jews and Gentiles; and once administered, not to be
repeated. The practical purpose for which this, with the other Unities,
was mentioned by the Apostle, was to enforce the same lesson as that
given to the Corinthians,—that Christians should “endeavour to keep the
unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (v. 3.)
In the vth Chapter of this Epistle there appears another allusion to
baptism, when the Apostle says, that “Christ loved the Church, and gave
Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of
water by the word.” (v. 26.) It is not necessary to the sense and force
of this verse to suppose that baptism is referred to in it; for the word
of God has a cleansing and sanctifying power, when applied by His Spirit.
“Sanctify them through Thy truth: Thy word is truth;” was Christ’s prayer
for His disciples to His heavenly Father. And He also said unto them,
“Now ye are clean _through the word_ which I have spoken unto you.” And
as it is a continuous and progressive work, which the Apostle is here
speaking of, and not any one particular act,—for the use of God’s
“_word_” in the work of sanctification is continually repeated,—it seems
much more natural to understand the expressions, “with the washing of
water by” or in “the word,” as referring to the figure of water, and its
purifying properties in general, rather than to a single instance of its
application. But there can be no objection to refer these expressions to
baptism, as being an Ordinance which is supposed to be kept always in
remembrance, and to have a constant bearing upon the believer’s life and
conduct. Let us take it here, and every where else, in connection with
the context, and we shall find that it represents—not an imaginary, but a
real—not a temporary, but an abiding—influence upon the soul;—issuing in
its final salvation. Who is this that is said to be washed with water by
the word? The mixed multitude of professors of Christ’s religion?
No:—but “_the Church_,”—the blessed Company of all faithful people—“the
Bride—the Lambs wife.” And what is the effect ascribed to the washing?
Her cleansing and sanctification. But as the Church is composed of
individuals, every individual member thereof is “sanctified, and cleansed
with the washing of water by the word,” and so is made meet to be
presented by Christ to Himself at the last in perfect beauty. Let these
things attend and crown the use of the Ordinances, and men may magnify
them—as Paul did his Office—as much as they please.
The next place in Scripture in which baptism is spoken of, is in the iind
Chapter of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Colossians. At the 11th verse he
begins the subject. “In whom also,” that is, in Christ, “ye are
circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the
body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: buried with
Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of
the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead.” The Apostle’s
object here is to show, that the Christian’s completeness in Christ
(asserted in the former verse) is not affected by the want of
circumcision; for that true believers have that which was represented by
circumcision, only under another form and name. By “the circumcision
made without hands,” the circumcision of the heart is evidently intended.
By “the circumcision of Christ” is probably _not_ meant the circumcision
which Christ Himself was subjected to, but the circumcision with which
Christ circumcises. This would therefore refer to the Christian
Sacrament of baptism, wherever rightly received. This is the
corresponding type with, as well as antitype of, circumcision; because,
like circumcision, it represents and seals the blessings of the Covenant
to believers. The latter part of this passage is so like the one already
considered in the vith chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, that it need
not be dwelt upon. The death, burial and resurrection of Christ are not
only signs and patterns of what _should take place_ with respect to
Christians, but they are effectual causes thereof in the case of all who
are spiritually joined to Him; and the whole is, as it were,
_consolidated in baptism_. The faith which goes before, and which is
exercised in the Ordinance, and the fruits which follow after, are all
summed up in and referred to this Sacrament: and well and happy it is,
whenever this is truly the case.
Two texts more remain to be considered in relation to our subject. The
first is found in that passage in the iiird Chapter of St. Paul’s Epistle
to Titus, from the 4th to the 7th verse. “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.” The word here translated “washing” signifies also _a
laver_, or vessel for washing: but the translation is undoubtedly
correct, and _ablution_ or _the act of washing_, is intended. This word
only occurs here and in Ephes. v. 26., which we have already considered;
where it must be translated (as it is) “_washing_:”—“the washing of water
by the word.” That regeneration washes or cleanses the soul from the
filthiness of sin, is all that can be proved by this passage. The
washing is by the regeneration, and not the regeneration by the washing.
There _may be_ an allusion to the Christian Sacrament of baptism; but it
is not at all necessary to the understanding of the Apostle’s words.
_St. Paul is here describing what God does when He saves any_. He sheds
on them abundantly the Holy Ghost through Jesus Christ the Saviour, and
this Holy Ghost regenerates, and washes and renews; and, in connection
with this, God justifies the subjects of this change by His grace, and so
makes them heirs according to the hope of eternal life. The regeneration
and the renewal are not two distinct things; but the latter is the
declaration of the former;—the transforming of the soul into the divine
image, consequent upon and in necessary connection with its regeneration.
But does this text prove, that all who are washed by the water of baptism
partake of regeneration? Then it also proves, that all baptized persons
are saved, and that they are renewed by the Holy Ghost, and that the Holy
Ghost is shed on them abundantly, and that they are justified by God’s
grace, and that they are heirs of eternal life! It is impossible,
without doing violence to God’s word, to rend the blessings, here spoken
of, asunder. They are links in one and the same golden chain, both the
ends of which are in Heaven;—beginning with “the love of God” and
terminating with “eternal life.” And are these things true in the case
of _all who are baptized_? If this were taught in the Scripture, what
then might the infidel say of it? He might then say, that Scripture and
matter of fact directly contradict each other. Or it would follow, that
regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost and justification and
salvation, are terms which mean nothing, because the things they profess
to represent have no practical influence upon the lives of men! We must,
then, take the passage altogether, or not touch it at all. We must not
choose a word or two out of it,—caught by the sound,—and affix a meaning
to them, which is inconsistent with the context and other plain portions
of revealed truth. If baptism be the washing here spoken of, it is
accompanied with regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, shed on
the baptized abundantly; and this cannot be without the exhibition of the
fruits of the Spirit in the life and conduct. And if this be Christian
baptism, where these things are not, Christian baptism is not. And this
is incontestably established by the testimony of St. Peter, in the text
about to be noticed. Let it only be farther observed, in connection with
this passage in St. Paul’s Epistle to Titus, that a no mean authority in
the interpretation of Scripture (Mr. Joseph Mede) thinks, that the
Apostle here alludes to the cleansing of the new-born infant from the
pollutions which attend its birth: and he refers to the description given
in the beginning of the xvith Chapter of the Book of the prophet Ezekiel
in confirmation of this:—“Neither wast thou washed in water.” (v. 4.)
Here, then, _life_ is first found, and then there is _the washing_ for
purification.
The text, already referred to, in St. Peter, is the 21st verse of the
iiird Chapter of his First Epistle. This perfects the proof of the view
hitherto taken of the Christian Sacrament of baptism; and is _a key_
which would unlock any difficulty which other portions of Scripture might
present;—if indeed such assistance were needed. St. Peter is speaking of
the days of Noah, and he says, that “the long-suffering of God then
waited, while the ark was preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls
were saved by water;” and then he adds, “The like figure whereunto,”—the
corresponding type with it, and the antitype of it—(as was observed
before respecting circumcision) “even baptism, doth now save us,”—but
before he completes the sentence, he breaks off to tell us what this
baptism, of which he speaks, is, “_not_ the putting away of the filth of
the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God,” and then he
finishes what he had begun to say,—“by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
Now if the two things here spoken of in relation to baptism were always
found together, the words of St. Peter would be without meaning; for
none, possessing them both, could be so blind as to imagine that it is
the outward washing which saves them, and not “the answer of a good
conscience;” though _it is possible_ (as experience shows) that men might
be satisfied with the outward sign, and look no farther, as the Jews had
done in the case of circumcision. The Holy Spirit, therefore, by the pen
of St. Peter warns against this error, and assures us, that the baptism
which is unto salvation consists of, not only, nor chiefly, the
application of water to the body, but “the answer of a good conscience
toward God.” It is thought by some, that a _reference_ is here made to
the custom of putting questions to those who were about to be baptized as
to their faith and repentance: and something of this kind had passed
between Philip and the Eunuch, when Philip told him that “if he believed
with all his heart he might be baptized, and the Eunuch answered, I
believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” In every such case there
doubtless is _the baptism_—because there has been _the birth_—of the
Spirit. But though St. Peter’s words _may be_ applicable to such a
custom, if it prevailed in his time, yet, as Archbishop Leighton says in
his Commentary on this text, ‘This questioning and answering farther
expresses the inward questioning and answering which is transacted
betwixt the soul and itself, and the soul of God. The word,’ he says,
‘is _judicial_, and means the interrogation used in law for the trial and
executing of processes: and this is the great business of conscience, to
hold courts in the soul; and it is of continual necessity that it be so.
This “answer of a good conscience unto God” (as likewise its questioning
to enable itself for that answer) is touching great points that are of
chief concern to the soul, its justification and sanctification; for
baptism is the seal of _both_, and purges the conscience in both
respects. Now, the conscience of a real believer inquiring within, upon
right discovery, will make this answer unto God;—“Lord, I have found that
there is no standing before Thee, for the soul in itself is overwhelmed
with a world of guiltiness; but I find a blood sprinkled upon it, that
hath, I am sure, virtue enough to purge it all away, and to present it
pure unto Thee.” And this the Lord does agree to, and authorizes the
conscience, on this account, to return back an answer of peace and safety
to the soul. So for the other: “Lord, I find a living work of holiness
on this soul. Though there is yet corruption there, it is as a continual
grief and vexation: and if I cannot say much of high degrees of grace,
yet I may say, there is the beginning of them;—at least this I most
confidently affirm, that there are real and earnest desires in the soul
after these things. It would know and conform to Thy will, and it would
gladly walk _in all well-pleasing_ unto Thee.” Now He that sees the
truth of these things, owns it as His own work, and engages to advance it
and bring it to perfection.’
Such is the intercourse which the purified conscience hath with God; and
wherever this is, there is the “baptism” which is unto salvation.
In the examination which has thus been made into the Scripture-testimony
concerning the Christian Sacrament of Baptism, no text has been—at least
intentionally—overlooked, from which any additional information could be
obtained on the subject.
* * * * *
From the passages which have been considered, the following conclusions
may be taken as the Summary of the whole:—
1. That baptism with water has been appointed by Christ as the door of
entrance into His Visible Church, and is the token of the Covenant of
grace under the Christian Dispensation, in the place of circumcision,
which was the token of this Covenant upon its formal establishment with
Abraham. To be baptized with water, therefore, is necessary to
constitute any one a member of the Visible Church of Christ or Kingdom of
God upon earth.
2. That since _faith_ hath from the beginning been appointed by God, as
the instrument or means by which men are admitted into Covenant with Him,
it was the command of the Lord Jesus Christ that baptism, which is now
the token of the Covenant, should be administered only to _believers_.
It was the same with respect to circumcision. Abraham believed God: and,
as a believer, he was circumcised. And true believers only are
acknowledged by Christ as rightful members of His Church. Yet as
Abraham’s children were admitted to circumcision together with himself,
it is hence inferred, that the children of believers in Christ should be
baptized, as well as their parents: no prohibition of their admission to
the Ordinance having been given. This conclusion is confirmed by
Christ’s kind reception of the children that were brought to Him—by the
application of Old Testament promises after Christ’s resurrection—by the
declared continuance of the root and fatness of the Olive-tree planted at
first in Abraham—and by the description given of the children of even one
believing parent, namely, that they are holy; that is, such as ought to
be presented to the Lord. Still, no direction to administer baptism to
children has been found, nor is any instance of it recorded.