thus be benefited, by seeing the rite performed on one with whom they have no special connexion, how much stronger and more salutary is the influence, which the baptism of their child is fitted to exert, on the minds of Christian parents. The water sprinkled in the name of Christ on the body of their child, speaks to the eye and to the heart of those, to whom God has entrusted a charge so precious. It presents an admonition to parental duty, never to be forgotten; and an encouragement to parental hope, never to be relinquished. The performance on the infant of an emblematical rite, shows its spiritual nature. The administration to it of a religious ceremony indicates that is a religious being. The typical purification of the body, teaches that the soul still needs to be purified. The reception of Christian baptism proves that it belongs to Christ, and is claimed for his service. Thus the ceremony is fitted to produce on the minds of parents a solemn impression of the duty which they are called to discharge, in bringing up their child in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. And it is equally fitted to awaken devout gratitude, joy, and hope. In the baptism of their infant they behold the sign, that the object of their strongest and most tender affections, is also the object of the Saviour's love. For to his special kindness it is owing, that around their infant's cradle the happy influences of Christianity are seen and felt ;—that some of the first words he will hear, are the words of him who said, "Suffer the little children to come unto me, and do not hinder them, for to such the kingdom of God belongs ;"-and that one of his earliest lessons will be, that the love of an earthly parent is but a faint pattern of the love of God." If ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give what is good to those who ask him?”

In the several considerations which have now been mentioned we have that harmonious coincidence of doctrines, facts, and tendencies, which constitutes, to the candid inquirer after truth, the most satisfactory and decisive evidence.-We conclude from them all, that infant baptism is not only in accordance with the spirit of Christ, and the genius of his religion, but that it is his ordinance,-being practised by his apostles under his own direction,-and being delivered by them to his church to be observed in all ages.

If in the minds of any, the absence of more distinct and frequent references to the baptism of infants, awaken any surprise, it should be remembered that the want of such evidence can only be made an objection to infant baptism, on the ground that if practised by the apostles of our Lord, more distinct and frequent references might reasonably be expected. But the comparatively low place assigned to all ceremonies in the Christian system, the simple nature of this rite, and its accordance with the universal sentiments and practices of the Jews, are reasons why such evidence should not be expected by us. We have

certain proof of the observance of Christian baptism throughout our Lord's ministry; yet it is not once referred to in any way by three of the Evangelists, and is only noticed incidentally by St. John. If the baptism of many thousand men and women during the life of Christ, was not of sufficient importance to demand mention, and did not on any account require notice, why should the baptism of children, then or subsequently, be expressly mentioned? Moreover, on account of the circumstances of its performance, the baptism of children was less likely to be noticed than the baptism of adults; for the former would follow the latter as a matter of course, and in general be administered in private. Like the Jewish baptisms, it was not a public service, intended for the gaze of the world. It was for the impression of the kindred and friends, and was probably observed in domestic privacy. As the Jewish baptisms were performed by any clean person, and did not need an official administrator, so it was with Christian baptism. The apostles never taught that the ordinance should be administered by their hands, or by those only of presbyters or deacons. Previous custom, and evident propriety, would dictate that it should be performed by a professed Christian; and nothing more was required. Why then should more distinct and frequent references to infant baptism be demanded? If it be considered how little mention is made, in the whole course of Jewish history, of the observance of the many peculiar and difficult services enjoined by the law, which still were observed; it will excite no surprise, that in the brief records of the early Christian church, more distinct and frequent references are not made, to this simple, familiar, and domestic service. We do not deem the want of all statements respecting the instruction of the children of Christian parents, any reason for supposing that they were not instructed in Christianity: still less reason is there for regarding the deficiency of statements concerning the baptism of the infants of Christian parents, as proof that they were not baptized.

We have no commission to baptize infants: nor have we any commission to baptize adults. But we have evidence that both were baptized by the apostles of Christ, under his direction; and therefore we baptize both. We have no direct proof that children under five years of age were baptized by the apostles: nor have we any direct proof that they baptized men and women above fifty. But we have indirect proof which renders the baptism of the former as probable as the baptism of the latter. The nature of the rite, as an emblematical purification, is as appropriate to children as to adults. The conditions of all the baptisms mentioned in the New Testament, exist in children beginning to learn, as well as in scholars more advanced in life. As the rite of purification initiatory to Judaism, which was a sign of God's promises, and of the privileges of his people, was, as a permanent ordinance, principally for infants; so is the rite of purification initiatory to Christianity,

which is a sign of the promises of Christ, and of the privileges of nis people. As Jesus recognized little children as the subjects of his kingdom, so do we. As his apostles baptized families, so do we. As they deemed the children of Christian parents to be holy to the Lord, so do we. We gratefully acknowledge that in a peculiar manner they belong to Christ; they are separated by him from much of the evil of the world, and placed under Christian instruction and influence, that they may grow up, a seed to serve him, a generation to call him blessed. And thus treading in the footsteps of the holy apostles of our Lord and Saviour, we find those advantages resulting now from the observance of the rite he instituted, which afford a bundant cause for devout gratitude, and illustrate the wisdom and the goodness of our Divine Redeemer.*

* Little mention is made of Christian baptism by the fathers, as long as it retained its simple and scriptural character. But their references to infant baptism correpond to their references to baptism in general. Tertullian is the earliest of the fathers, in whose writings anything is found adverse to infant baptism. He is supposed to have been born of heathen parents A.D. 160. From his works we learn, that the baptism of the church in his time differed much from the baptism of the apostles. It was performed by trine immersion; it was accompanied by fasting, exorcism, anointing, crossing, the use of milk and honey; and it was thought to exert a supernatural influence on the soul, to cleanse from past sins. At one period of his life he was eminent as a partizan of what was called the catholic church; at another he was notorious as the supporter of a most absurd and pernicious heresy. In the commencement of his tract on baptism, he thus accounts for the opinions of some who thought that baptism with water was not of perpetual obligation. Vipers, asps, and serpents commonly seek arid places, free from water; but we little fishes, after the manner of our fish (secundum ixovv) Jesus Christ, are born in water." At the close of this tract, he opposes the practice of infant baptism, recommending that children should be baptized when capable of receiving Christian instruction, because it was uncertain what they would become, and because in infancy they had no sins to need the grace of baptism. If he advises further delay, his advice is not for children only, but for unmarried persons, widowers, and widows, and all who were not, by circumstances and character, secure from falling into mortal sin. His own language, and the testimony of his contemporary Origen, show that infant baptism was then a general practice. He does not object to it as an innovation, or as opposed to the common usage of Christians, but as inconsistent with his own superstitious notions respecting the efficacy of baptism. The ground of his objection must be admitted to be both novel and false; and we conclude that the objection itself is equally unreasonable and unscriptural. But his testimony to the existence of infant baptism in the first century after the apostles, is unquestionable; while his opposition indicates both its prevalence when he wrote, and its existence long before that time. "Thus according to the state, and disposition, and also the age of every person, a delay of baptism is more useful, especially in the case of little children. For what necessity is there, that the sponsors should incur danger, since they may themselves fail, through death, of fulfilling their promises; or they may be disappointed by the development of a sinful nature. Certainly the Lord said, 'Do not hinder them from coming to me.' Let them come therefore as they grow up; let them come when

they learn, when they are taught whither they come; let them be made Christians when they are able to know Christ. Why should that innocent age haste to the remission of sins? Men will act with more caution in temporal affairs; so that earthly possessions are not entrusted to one, to whom that which is Divine is entrusted. They should have knowledge to seek salvation, that you may appear to give to him that asketh. For reasons of equal moment unmarried persons should be deferred, for whom trial is prepared, (both those who have not been married, and those who have been bereaved,) until they either marry, or are confirmed in chastity. If any understand the importance of baptism, they will dread its reception more than its delay; since a perfect faith is secure of salvation." This is the first Antipædobaptist

writer; and these are the grounds of his objection.

Origen, who was born of Christian parents, A.D. 185, and at Alexandria possessed the most favourable opportunities for knowing the customs of the Christian church, has left testimony to infant baptism, most clear and decisive. We have this testimony only in the Latin translations of Rufinus and Jerome, and their translations are often designedly incorrect. But there is no reason to suspect the correctness of these passages. The references to infant baptism which they contain are incidental ; they are opposed to the opinions of Rufinus; and Rufinus and Jerome were adversaries. There could be no motive, at a time when infant baptism was the universal and undisturbed practice, to seek for it the authority of Origen, by an interpolation which could easily be exposed. It is evident that the doctrine of infant baptism was not an inference from new views of baptism, since the practice of infant baptism is mentioned as universal, and though various reasons were assigned for the institution, its observance was attributed solely to apostolical authority. "The reason may be required why, as the baptism of the church is given for the remission of sins, baptism is also, according to the practice of the church, given to infants."-Hom. 8 in Lev. xii. translated by Rufinus. "Because by the sacrament of baptism the pollution of birth is removed, therefore infants also are baptized."-Hom. in Luc. xiv. translated by Jerome. "On this account the church has received from the apostles the tradition that baptism should also be given to infants.”—Com. in Epist. ad Rom. lib. v. translated by Rufinus.

By a synod at Carthage, A.D. 254, consisting of sixty-six bishops, of which Cyprian was president, infant baptism was referred to as a practice in which all agreed.

Pelagius, in his letter to Innocent, says, that it "was falsely reported by some men that he denied the sacrament of baptism to infants;" but he declares that "he never had heard that even any impious heretic said this, which he mentioned concerning infants."—Augustine, de Peccato Orig. 17.

Augustine, who was born A.D. 354, himself gives similar testimony. "And if any one in this matter require Divine authority, though that which the whole church holds, and which has not been instituted by councils, but has always been retained, is most justly believed to have been delivered by no other than apostolic authority; yet from the circumcision of the flesh, which was formerly received by the people of God, we are able with truth to infer the advantage of the sacrament of baptism to infants." -De Bap. contra Donatistas, lib. iv.

It appears that the objections to infant baptism have arisen from inability to assign a reason for its institution; and this inability has resulted from erroneous views of its nature. Superstitious notions have led to the postponement of baptism, from infancy to childhood, from childhood to maturity, from maturity to old age, and lastly to the hour of death. If it cleanses from guilt, of course, the later it is used, the better.

ACCOUNT OF THE DISSENTERS IN RUSSIA,

PARTICULARLY OF THE DUEHOVNEE CHRISTIANee, or spiriTUAL

CHRISTIANS.

CHAPTER III.

Duchovnee Christianee.-Creed.-Collection of Counsels.-Peculiar Practices.

It has been already stated that the Duehobortzee reject the Scriptures, as a standard of faith and practice, but that the Duchovnee Christianee take them as their only directory in things pertaining to God.

Hearing very strong language employed by a company of Duchovnee Christianee in speaking on this subject, I asked one of them if he considered it impossible for the Holy Spirit to direct men otherwise than by means of the Scriptures. He replied at once, "I cannot say that it is impossible, for I do not know what is and what is not in the power of God; but I have never heard a sufficiently authenticated case of his teaching men otherwise than by Scripture, nor do I suppose that in doing so he acts otherwise than by enabling one to understand the Scriptures; for these, though containing simple declarations, no man does understand until his eyes have been opened by the Holy Spirit.”

The peculiar sentiments of this body are stated in the following translation of a document prepared by some of themselves, to lay before the late Emperor Alexander, on occasion of their imploring protection and redress. It was prepared with a view of showing wherein their sentiments differed from those of the Græco-Russian Church, and also of showing the injustice which had been done to them in accusations which had been brought against them, of disaffection to the government of the empire. Allusion is accordingly made amongst other things, to benedictions accompanied by the sign of the cross, to baptism, to auricular confession, to the Lord's supper, to the use of paintings in worship, to the national custom of naming the child at baptism, on the eighth day after birth, and to that of frequently giving the child the name of the saint to whom that day had been dedicated; all which practices and observances they have abandoned.

Creed of the Duchovnee Christianee.

"I. We look to Jesus as the author and finisher of our faith, and believe in one God, in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. And, in order to the salvation of our souls, we receive the testimonies of the prophets, evangelists, and apostles, as brought forward in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.

"II. We acknowledge but one priest or bishop who sits at the right hand of God, viz. the Son of God, according to Heb. iv. 14, Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into heaven, Jesus the Son of God.' And Heb. vii. 14-21. But according to the