the conditions are fulfilled, and the object obtained, further obligation ceases. But if the notion is more complex and perpetual, the disposition must of course correspond. This consideration is of universal application.

It

Now the covenant which we professedly entered into at baptism, is of the latter description. consists of blessings, not only numerous and perpetual, but internal aud mental. It is for the enjoyment of these blessings that we enter into covenant with God.----There are then in this federal compact, two parties, i. e. God, and the creature :

--Objects of vast importance, given and received and of necessity mutual stipulations as to the enjoyment. The privileges of this covenant, however, being twofold; i. e. of an external nature, as the means of grace afforded to the church of God generally and internal, such as sanctification, peace with God, hope of heaven, &c. which are enjoyed by the real members of Christ alone; there must be a disposition suitable to the possession and enjoyment of both these classes of privileges, before they can fairly be claimed by any individual.

:

To say here that the privileges of the covenant. may be conveyed though there is no disposition corresponding with the nature of these privileges, is the same thing as saying that a person may enter into covenant with God, without a disposition to do So. Which is the same as saying, he enters into covenant at the same time that he does not enter into it mutual agreement being essential to any engagement, and above all, to this between the soul and God.----If it still be contended that a person may possess the blessings, without having the

dispositions of the covenant; then I would observe, this is the same as a person possessing the blessings of a covenant, while he himself is not a member of the covenant, not in the covenant, and has no relation to it. And then it will follow that a person may have the blessings of the covenant without the rite by which we are admitted. If a state of mind (which is essential to the very nature of this engagement) is not necessary; then the covenant itself is not necessary; then the initiating rite of the covenant is not necessary; and thus a person might enjoy the blessings of the covenant without a heart to them; without the covenant and without baptism. So that Dr. M's. notions would in their consequences, annihilate the necessity even of baptism itself.

If it should be here observed, in favour of Dr. M's. views of this subject, that he cannot mean that the covenant can be entered into, and its privileges enjoyed without a corresponding, disposition; for though he does not indeed say this, yet we must allow it to be implied; otherwise it would be grossly absurd, and inconsistent with the nature of the covenant itself. Then I would observe that, one of these consequences will necessarily follow : namely, either that all persons baptised do not enjoy the blessings of the covenant; or that all baptised persons bring with them a previous suitable disposition. Dr. M. may here make his election. If he chuse the former, and admit that all baptised persons do not enjoy the blessings of the covenant; then his fundamental doctrine that all baptised persons are regenerated and saved, is overthrown: and his whole treatise on the "spiritual grace of baptism"

falls to the ground. If the latter course be taken, that is, that all baptised persons bring with them a previous suitable disposition to enter into covenant with God; then I would remark that two insuperable objections lie against this idea.

First, it is manifestly contrary to matter of fact. We know that hypocrisy, is an awful, and very common attendant upon religious professors in all ages; and it is evident that Simon Magus, and Annanias and Sapphira, were hypocrites ab initio. Secondly, if it should still be said that we ought to admit the profession of persons to be real, till we have evidence that it is not so, as God alone can discern the heart; to this I reply, it is one thing to allow a profession in a judgment of charity, (of which, more hereafter,) and quite another to lay 'it down, and assume it as the basis of a doctrine. if it be made the foundation of a doctrine, from which an universal conclusion is to be drawn in favor of all who are baptized; then it must be doctrinally and universally true. In this case I demand how it comes to pass that all persons, offering themselves to be baptized are thus suitably disposed? A right and suitable disposition, to approve God's method of salvation, and to desire, on proper views of the subject, to enter into covenant with God for life and salvation, is a gracious disposition of soul, and a part, and a blessing of the covenant of grace by Jesus Christ. But this would prove them to be regenerate already. But waving this argument for the present, I again ask, how it is that, all persons come to be baptized with a proper disposition of mind? How, and by what means is this disposition formed? Dr. Mant, I presume, will not be able to

account for this. Nor is it possible on his principles to be accounted for. He speaks of baptism as a very great blessing. And if, as he assumes, we are regenerate by it; yea sanctified and justified ; made heirs of salvation, and made holy, and so made meet for heaven; here is every thing afforded us in baptism; both a title to, and fitness for salvation: When previous to baptism, we are considered by Dr. M. as in a state of nature, and under the guilt and pollution of sin. (43). This being allowed will encrease the difficulty of accounting for persons coming to be baptized with all one pure and good disposition of mind; when immediately after their baptism (wherein they are supposed to receive these peculiar blessings,) they become discordant both with the gospel, and with one another.

Dr. M. himself I should think, will not admit that all persons after their baptism, have minds suitable to their baptismal engagements; for he has laboured hard to prove many of them wrong. Baptised" self-denominated" evangelical clergymen---baptised "enthusiasts"----baptised methodists, and dissenters. Truly, if they were all of one mind before baptism, and that mind, a good one, as is supposed, they had infinitely better have remained unbaptised, than become in consequence, a set of discordant, unholy, quarrelsome, self-conceited enthusiasts. I presume, therefore, that neither Dr. M. nor any one else, will attempt to maintain the absolutely untenable ground, of persons being baptised, and enjoying universally the privileges of the covenant, by coming to be baptised with a right disposition of mind.

The assumption of an universally right state of mind, before regeneration, is absurd in itself, when, after baptism, it is found so much otherwise. It is quite ridiculous to contend for a perfection in a state of nature, which is never found, even in a state of grace; a correspondence of heart with God, and with each other is supposed to exist, in a situation of unregeneracy; which situation, under other circumstances, is not allowed to produce any such fruits; while a situation, where all the means are qualified to foster such perfections, is not found in fact to produce them.

If, however, it should still be contended, that persons need not to be supposed to come to baptism with a right disposition, because the very operation of this sacrament is such as to produce a right mind. I would reply, (not here to repeat what we have just observed, that baptism implies engagement and stipulation, in order to its reception, and which must of necessity include a consent of heart to the engagement ;) that if this sacrament of course work this effect, "whatever be the character" of the person baptised, that some very strange consequences will follow.---First, this would make the sacraments strictly and absolutely of Roman Catholic operation, and carry our protestant church back again into the bosom of Route.---Secondly, if this sacrament make men righteous and save them, “when rightly administered," whatever be their character, so must also the sacrament of the Lord's supper restore them to a state of salvation, when rightly administered, whatever be the character of the receiver. Indeed Dr. M. seems to contend for a certain" spiritual" effect attending the "communion",