with his kindred according to the flesh; and to unite him in close fraternal relations with those whose faith he thus publicly professed. Such being the object of baptism as practiced by the Jews, and such its effect in their opinion, it would, of course, be regarded in the same light by the early Christians, specially by the Jewish Christians. This being a matter of considerable interest and practical importance to us, it claims a larger share of our attention.

If the convert were baptized simply or especially as a means of making a public profession of his new faith, it will follow that he could with propriety be baptized as many times as he embraced a new faith; nay, that he ought to be baptized so often. This course was actually pursued in the time of Christ. John was not simply a Jewish teacher; his religion was quite different from that of the scribes and Pharisees. Theirs was the religion of rites and ceremonial; his the religion of moral reform. They taught that men should fast often, and pay tithes of anise, mint and cumin; he taught that men should practice justice and humanity. He taught so differently from them that it was proper, indeed necessary, for all who embraced his religion to be baptized of him to show that they had renounced faith in the religion of the Pharisees, and had embraced that which required them to "bring forth fruits meet for repentance," or to live morally upright, as the truly reformed ought to live. Hence John's religion was called the baptism of reform.

Jesus was a Jew, a member of the Jewish church, by virtue of his birth. He did not wish, and indeed it was not proper for him, to commence his public ministry in fellowship with that church, when John was preaching a doctrine so much nearer the truth. John did really have need to be baptized of Jesus, since, as a religious teacher, he was far in advance of John; yet under existing circumstances it was proper that Jesus should be baptized by John. By being thus baptized he declared before all men that he rejected the doctrines of the scribes and Pharisees; that he had no fellowship with them, but, as a religious teacher, was proceeding to build on a diffierent foundation. From the very moment he was baptized by John, he occupied a position antagonistic to the Pharisees, and to the old and popular branch of the Jewish church.

He thus publicly professed to be in opposition to the Rabbis and to their doctrines. His teaching is in accordance with his profession made by baptism; and the whole conduct of the Jews towards him from the commencement of his public ministry is in harmony with this view of the matter. Assuming such a position, and teaching a new doctrine, it was proper that he should baptize all who believed in him. Their connection with the old Jewish church was thereby severed; and they became united with the body of Christian believers by the strongest and most sacred of ties. Jesus was so much John's superior that the disciples of the latter, on professing faith in the former, ought to be baptized. They were. For at Ephesus, St. Paul found certain converts to Christianity who had previously believed in the doctrines of John, or had been his disciples. The apostle said to them, "John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, (reform,) saying unto the people, that they should believe on him who should come after him, that is, on Jesus Christ. When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts, xix. 4, 5.) These converts had previously been baptized as John's disciples. This shows conclusively that those who believed in John and were baptized as his disciples, were baptized again on embracing the religion of Jesus. Indeed, it shows that a man was baptized as many times as he changed his faith, or made public profession of a new faith. In fact, it was by baptism that one made public profession of his faith; it was for this purpose that he was baptized. A gentile, on becoming a Jewish proselyte, would be baptized; on becoming a disciple of John, he would be baptized again; and on becoming a convert to Christianity, he would be baptized yet again. In each instance he would make public profession of his new faith by baptism.

The effect of baptism, in the opinion and practice of the early Christians, was very great, as it was also among the Jews. It put an entire end to the connection of the convert with his kindred according to the flesh, so that he was considered as no longer related to them; but it created a connection between him and the fraternity, or household of faith, whose doctrines he professed. This belief respecting the efficacy of baptism, sometimes led to 21

VOL. XV.

reprehensible conduct on the part of new converts. For example, we learn that in one instance at least, a young man married his father's wife. (1 Cor. v. 1.) Baptism having put an end to the relation which formerly existed between them, as believed, he supposed he could with propriety marry her, though she stood to him in the relation of mother. She embraced Christianity, but her husband probably did not; so the connection which had existed between them existed no longer, and the woman was at liberty to form a connection with her son, as if he had not been related to her. So great were the effects of baptism, as then believed; and such were some of the results of that belief.

We are now prepared to see why the Saviour attached so much importance to baptism; and why converts must be baptized in order to enjoy the privileges and benefits of discipleship. Jesus tells Nicodemus that he must be baptized if he would enter the gospel kingdom. He must make a public profession of faith in Jesus as the Christ, separate himself entirely from the fraternity and fellowship of the Rabbis, as he would do by being baptized. He could not be a true and faithful disciple of Jesus while he continued in the fellowship of the Scribes and Pharisees. A cautious and time-serving believer could not be entitled to the privileges of discipleship, neither could he have the enjoyment of a professed and faithful disciple.

Again Jesus says: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Belief was not enough; one must make a public profession of his faith; must dissolve his connection with those whose religious fellowship he had formerly enjoyed, and connect himself with the disciples of Jesus; he must identify his interest with theirs, and become one with them. This he could accomplish by baptism. Having done this, he would be entitled to all the privileges of discipleship, and should enjoy a disciple's reward. Baptism was, therefore, a very important rite; one that ought to be carefully observed by every convert to Christianity, wherever the Jewish opinions concerning it were prevalent. Baptism was necessary in order that the believers might become a distinct and separate body, united together by the strongest ties.

The last commands that Jesus gave his disciples were, that they should "teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." The apostles were not only to preach the doctrines of the gospel, they were not only to spread a knowledge of the truth, they were also to gather the believers into churches; for by baptism they would be brought into a distinct and separate body, the members of which would be united with each other by the strongest ties. A number of converts, baptized as directed by the Saviour, would be a Christian church; they would be constituted a church by virtue of baptism. Understood in this way, the command of the Saviour to the apostles was, that they should preach the gospel in all lands, and organize the converts into churches. Believ ers were not to retain their connection with the religions and fraternities of the day, but were to separate themselves from all these, and be a united body, a Christian fraternity, living in obedience to the precepts of the gospel.

From this subject we may draw instruction of some practical value. We learn that a change has been effecled in respect to the design and object of baptism. In modern times people are not baptized as a sign that they have changed their faith, or have embraced a religion. different from that in which they were educated; but rather to manifest their deeper interest in religion, and to show that they have felt more of its heavenly power than formerly. It is very plain that water baptism, as now employed, finds no authority in the Scriptures; and not even the least support in the custom and practice of the apostles. Among the early Christians, one born cf believing parents, and educated in the doctrines of the gospel, was not baptized; he had no occasion to be. But such a one is now baptized, and there is thought to be equal necessity for it, as if he had been a convert from paganism. A very great change has been effected in respect to the design and object of baptism. If we are governed by the custom of the apostles, we shall baptize only those who have been connected to our faith from a different system of religion. And even then the rite has none of its primitive force, since it is not regarded as being so efficacious as it once was.

If there is no authority in the Scriptures for the baptism of adult persons, much less is there any for the baptism of infants and children, for the purpose for which it is now administered. When a parent changed his faith, he was baptized and his children with him; but no child could consistently be baptized while he remained in the faith in which he was educated, for baptism was administered only to converts from a different religion or faith.

Without claiming for baptism any authority from the Scriptures, we may observe it as a useful and interesting rite, and as typical of that moral purity and heavenlymindedness which the disciple of Jesus should always possess. It may help some to a greater consecration of life than can be attained without it; in this case it is profitable. And many have an earnest conviction, a conviction' strengthened by early education and the uniform practice of churches in our time, that baptism is really necessary, that it has the sanction of Jesus and the apostles for the purpose for which it is now observed, and is the door through which one must enter into the visible church of Christ. Such persons should observe it for conscience' sake. But to those who regard it differently, it is a useless and meaningless rite, and they should not be required to observe it. Let each one be fully persuaded in his own mind, and act agreeably to his convictions of right and duty. We have an undoubted right to adopt and practice any ceremonial which will be an aid to purity and holiness, though apostles taught nothing respecting it, nor observed it in a single instance. In respect to some things we can be the judges of our own needs. We must have a wide margin for diversity of opinion and practice in respect to baptism; only requiring that each one be fully persuaded in his own mind, and act conscientiously in seeking to be buried with Christ in baptism, or in walking faithfully as his disciple without it.

W. R. F.