1 SECTION V. BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS. СНАР. Acts x. 46, 47, 48. Possession of the in title to bap tism. "THEN answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." The narrative in which this statement occurs is doubtfluences of less familiar to our readers. While Peter was preaching the Spirit a the glorious truth, that "whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins;" "the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word." At this the Jews were astonished, not imagining that God would bestow such gifts on the Gentiles. However unwilling they would have been to admit them to the Christian church by baptism, they could not resist the appeal of Peter when he pleaded that these Romans had "received the Holy Ghost as well as we." Evidence of reception into the divine favour, Peter deemed necessary and sufficient to authorize baptism; do we contend for more? dare we accept less? The phrase "forbid water." The phrase, "can any forbid water," has been assumed to mean, 66 forbid water-to be brought?" can any How unfortunate that not one manuscript can be discovered in which these words are found! Surely if Peter did say so, it is very unfortunate that the historian Luke forgot to insert these few last words. Is it desirable to build our faith on clauses which human suggestions add to the Divine Word? Nothing can be plainer than that this was an appeal to the Jews, who felt inclined to object to the baptism of these Gentile converts. SECTION VI. BAPTISM OF HOUSEHOLDS. VI. on facts. It is at once the glory and security of the faith of the SECT. Christian that it rests upon facts, not conjectures; and these facts established by evidence utterly undeniable; Faith rests the incarnation-death-resurrection-ascension-intercession-of Christ, are facts explicitly stated, and adequately proved, to all who admit the inspiration of the Bible-itself a collection of facts resting on evidence so clear that doubt can only arise from criminal disinclination to submit to its authority. May not the Christian justly expect the same satisfactory feature to be apparent on the subject of the positive institutions of the gospel economy? If infants are to be baptized, may not the fact of their being baptized, be expected to appear on the page of sacred history? and if in any portions of the sacred record, will it not be found in those which treat of the baptism of households? households In order that the reader may be able to contemplate the Three whole subject of the baptism of households at one view, I only affirmshall deviate from the order of succession, and introduce ed to be baptized. in this section those from the Epistles as well as those which occur in the Acts. Strictly speaking, there are but three households stated to have been baptized in apostolic history-those of Lydia, the Jailer, and Stephanas. Nothing is directly stated respecting the baptism of the household either of Cornelius or Crispus. We have already seen in the former case that it was those only who had "received the Holy Ghost," that the apostle "commanded to be baptized." With respect to Crispus, it is said he believed with all his house;" and then it is III. CHAP. added that many of the Corinthians, "hearing, believed and were baptized." Doubtless it is just to infer that the household of Crispus were baptized, because it is stated that they believed; but then the grounds from which the baptism of this household is inferred manifestly exclude the possibility of infants being of the number; the only fact affirmed respecting Crispus and "all his house” being that they "believed on the Lord," an act which it is not maintained by modern podobaptists that infants are capable of. Acts xxi. 13 "And on the Sabbath we went out of tire city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake 14 unto the women which resorted thither. And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she at15 tended unto the things which were spoken of Paul: And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and 40 abide there. And she constrained us.... And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren they comforted them, and departed." Acts xvi. 29 "Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and 30 fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out, and said, Sirs, 31 what must I do to be saved? And they said, believe on the Lord 32 Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his 33 house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. And 34 when he had brought them into his house he set meat before them and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house. 1 Cor. i. 16. ch. xvi. 15. "And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.... I beseech you, brethren, ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints." The candid reader will at once perceive that in these passages there is no mention made of infants; and that, mentioned. therefore, whoever would prove its divine authority from SECT. these passages, must fail for want of evidence, as con- VI. jecture can never be the proper friend of faith. It is fre- Infants not quently said, "Infant baptism is right, for there must have been infants in the households of Lydia and the Jailer;" to all which I have only to say, prove that there were, and it will be unnecessary to maintain that there "must have been :" he who cannot prove the former, will find it a vain endeavour to sustain the latter. Dr. Neander candidly admits, "that mention is made of whole families proves nothing, for it does not follow that there were infants among them." It is very remarkable that, to remove all excuse for finding so lamentable an error in the baptism of households, the sacred writers should in each instance, (although apparently accidentally, yet doubtless under the direction of Divine wisdom,) have furnished the most satisfactory proof that there were no infants in the families alluded to. appear in With respect to Lydia, there is no kind of intimation No infants that she was ever married; and, therefore, it is super- Lydia's fluous to make any observations respecting the improba- household. bility of her being accompanied by her infant children in these extensive travels, in which she was now engaged in following her occupation as a seller of purple. The circumstance of the household being called "brethren " in the 40th verse, a term synonimous with the believers, is conclusive evidence against the conjectures of the advocates of infant baptism. In the jailer's case our podobaptist friends make four Case of the jailer. Pœsuppositions which, altogether, will not amount to one dobaptist fact. 1. That the jailer had a wife. 2. That that wife was conjectures a Judd's Reply to Stuart, p. 194. III. hold believers. CHAP. a "fruitful vine." 3. That the children lived. 4. That they were not yet grown up to years of discretion. Now if there were nothing in the narrative to contradict any of these conjectures, they would be but conjectures still; and consequently utterly inadequate to contribute a shadow of justification for the alteration of the sacred ordiHis house- nance of baptism: but it is far otherwise. The statement is clear, that if the jailer had children they all heard the word of the Lord," and all "believed in God." Prove to me that a child "believes in God," in the gospel sense of that phrase, and I ask no questions about its age. Gregory, the patriarch of the Greek church in the fourth century, thought children had better wait for baptism till they could say the creed, and make their own profession of faith; would it not be better for all to wait till children give good evidence that they love their Saviour? Of the household of Stephanas two things are observed: first, that they were baptized; secondly, that they "addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints." Now it must be admitted, even by the fondest mother, that whatever delightful little habits a babe may be addicted to, the "ministry of saints" is not one of the number. To a plain reader of the New Testament, the household baptisms afford no kind of support to the application of the ordinance to infants. Some years since, however, my late esteemed relative, the learned editor of Calmet, and laborious collector of the "Fragments," which constituted the additional volumes, imagined he had made a discovery in Greek criticism which was conclusive in favour of the existence of infants in the households re Mr. Charles Taylor. b |