Page images
PDF
EPUB

THE

HALF-WAY COVENANT:

A

DIALOGUE.

And look that thou make them after their Pattern, which was shewed thee in the Mount.

JEHOVAH.

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: And, lo, I am with you.

JESUS CHRIST.

A

DIALOGUE,

BETWEEN A MINISTER AND HIS PARISHIONER,

CONCERNING THE

HALF-WAY COVENANT.

PARISHIONER. SIR, I am dissatisfied with a part of your public conduct, and am come to open my mind freely to you, if you will be so kind as to allow me an opportunity.

MINISTER. Sir, I am now at leisure, and at your service, and your honest frankness gives me pleasure. Between you and me alone, to let me know the objections you have against any part of my conduct, is to act a friendly part. It is more kind and christian-like, than to keep your thoughts to yourself, to engender a secret disaffection in your heart. And you may be quite assured, that not only now, but in all future times, I shall with pleasure listen to any objections against my public administrations proposed in a friendly, candid manner; and will be ready to be set right, wherein I am wrong; or to let you know the reasons of my conduct. For, next to the light of God's countenance, and the approbation of my own conscience, I prize the good opinion of my fellowmen and particularly, I greatly prize the testimony of the consciences of my own people in my behalf. To your conscience, therefore, I am now willing to approve myself.Open your mind without the least reserve.

PAR. I have lately moved into the parish; I had owned the covenant in the town I came from; my other children have been baptised; we have now another child for baptism, and I hear you refuse to baptise the children of any but those who are in full communion. This gives me pain.

[blocks in formation]

MIN. I cannot give you pain, without feeling pain myself. But you would not desire that I should go counter to the will of my LORD and MASTER, while acting in his name, as his minister; nor would this be a likely means to obtain a blessing for your child. And if I am warranted by the Gospel of Christ to baptise your child, you are very sensible my reputation, and every worldly interest, will join to prompt me to it. You will easily make a convert of me to your opinion, if you can point out one text of Scripture to justify that common practice.

P. I have not studied the point. I cannot mention any texts of Scripture; but it is the custom where I was born and brought up; and I knew not but that it was the custom every where, until I moved into this parish.

M. No, Sir, it is not the custom every where; it was not the custom where I was born and brought up; and there are many churches in the country that are not in the practice.—At the first settling of New-England, there was, so far as I know, not one church that allowed baptism to the children of any but those whose parents were one or both in full communion. About 40 years after the first church was formed, this custom was brought in by a synod that met at Boston, 1662. Many ministers and churches zealously opposed it at the time, and even to this day the custom is not become universal: and of late a considerable number of churches, who had adopted the practice have laid it aside. It is not practised at all in the church of Scotland, as I have been informed by a rev. gentleman of an established reputation, who has lately been invited, and who has removed from thence, to the Presidency of New-Jersey College. And it is certain the confession of faith, catechisms, and directory of the church of Scotland, make no mention of it: neither is the practice mentioned in the Saybrook platform, which has been generally received by the churches in Connecticut; for the council which met at Saybrook, did not see cause to adopt that practice, although it had been introduced by the synod at Boston.-But if you had not studied the point before you owned the covenant; and if you took it for granted, that it was right, merely from education; yet you are able to let me know in

what views, and from what views, and from what motives you owned the covenant: as I suppose you meant to act conscientiously.

P. It was the common opinion that none ought to join in full communion, and come to the Lord's table, but those that were godly, that had on a wedding garment, lest coming unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves. But it was thought that graceless persons might own the covenant, and have their children baptised; and this was my opinion, and I acted on these principles.

M. Yes, Sir, and I suppose the generality of people in the country that own the covenant, in these times, act on these principles. But it was not so from the beginning. The synod in 1662, who first brought in the practice, were not in this scheme. It was known and owned, and publicly declared on all hands, in the time of it, "That the synod did acknowledge, that there ought to be true saving faith in the parent, according to the judgment of rational charity, or else the child ought not to be baptised P.

[ocr errors]

P. But, Sir, I am surprised! Is this true? Was this really the opinion of those who first brought in this practice?

M. It is true, it was indeed their opinion, if we may give credit to their own declarations. No man who was for this practice, perhaps, was of more note than the Rev. Dr. Increase Mather, of Boston, who was a member of the synod, and afterwards wrote in defence of this practice; and no author can in more express language declare his sentiments. These are his own words, in a pamphlet, entitled, " A Discourse concerning the subject of Baptism, wherein the present controversies that are agitated in the New-England Churches, are from Scripture and reason modestly inquired into." p. 52, 53. "In the fifth place, it may be alleged, that the persons in question, either have to the judgment of charity, a justifying faith, or not. If not, they, and consequently their children, are not baptisable. If they have, then they are forthwith admissible to the Lord's supper. Answer.

p See A Defence of the Answer and Arguments of the Synod, &c. against the reply made by the Rev. Mr. John Davenport, Pastor of the Church at New. Haven. Preface, p. 23, 24.

« PreviousContinue »