mission, as reported by all the evangelists, but also in particular cases-as in the case of the eunuch-positively inhibits infants and untaught persons from christian baptism. Not having, then, precept or precedent for infant baptism, nor any fact to support it, may we not conclude with Neander, that "It is certain Jesus Christ did not ordain infant baptism?"

Had I time, I should have spoken a few things on the degrading and enslaving tendencies of infant baptism, as respects the subject of it in after life; but I see my time is more than expired.

Mr. Rice. May I be permitted to ask a question?

Mr. Campbell. Certainly.

Mr. Rice. I wish to ask, whether my friend has not published that Ireneus means baptism when he uses the word regeneration?

Mr. Campbell. I believe that the word regeneration was used both before and after Ireneus, as equivalent to baptism; but whether, in this case, it does certainly so mean, it would be impossible to prove. Still, that the fathers, as they are called, both Greek and Latin, did generally so use the word, I believe. Tertullian, however, who lived after Ireneus, some twenty years, is the first person known on earth who ever mentioned infant baptism.

[By permission of Mr. Campbell, Mr. Rice now read the following extract from the Milennial Harbinger, vol. ii. Extra, pp. 28, 29.]

"In my debate with Mr. Walker and Mr. McCalla, I objected to the substitution of the word regenerated for immerse, in the extract from IREneus, and other of the primitive fathers, as they are called, on the ground of their not being exactly representatives of the same ideas universally. I admitted that sometimes they used the word regenerated for baptized, but not always; and, indeed, not at all, in the popular sense of regenerated. Well, now it comes to pass, that I represent ALL the primitive fathers as using the term regenerated as equivalent to the term baptized. All this is true; and what then? Why, at that time I used the word regenerated as expressive of a spiritual change, and found that these fathers spoke of a spiritual change as well as we. I could not therefore reconcile this to the exclusive application of the term regenerated to the act of immersion; but on a more accurate and strict examination of their writings, and of the use of this term in the New Testament, I AM ASSURED that they used the term regenerated as equivalent to immersion, and spoke of the spiritual change under other terms and modes of speech," &c.

Mr. Rice, my friends, will have the last word; affirmative or negative, he must have the last word. Now this is all for effect. There is nothing in it whatever. Suppose I admit that all the fathers, from Justin Martyr down to Theodoret, 423, used baptism and regeneration as synonymous, and Ireneus generally with the others, though he lived A. Ď. 178; what does it prove in the case before us? That infant baptism is a Divine institution; because it is probable, even certain, that Ireneus referred to it, under another name, at the close of the second century! [Time expired.

[END OF THE SECOND PROPOSITION.]

PROPOSITION THIRD.

Christian Baptism is for the Remission of Past Sins. Mr Campbell affirms. Mr. Rice denies.

Thursday, Nov. 23-10 o'clock, A. M.

[MR. CAMPBELL'S OPENING ADDRESS.]

MR. PRESIDENT and fellow-citizens: the subject before us this morning, I regard as the most important of any that has yet occupied our attention it is the design of baptism. It must be obvious to all, on the slightest reflection, that the importance of right views on the action and on the subject of baptism, depends wholly on the design and meaning of the ordinance: but still, in order to secure its great and manifold advantages, it behooves all, as accountable agents, to proceed intelligently, with reference both to its action, subject and design. Having seen the action of christian baptism in immersion; the subject of it, in the penitent believer; we shall proceed to consider its design, which, we say, is for the remission of past sins. These are the terms of the proposition before us, to which we respectfully invite your attention.

Baptism is a divine institution; and, like all other divine institutions, it is both wise and good. It is wise; because it secures some end which could not have been secured so well without it. It is good; because it tends to human happiness. These two attributes must belong to baptism, because they belong to the institution of christianity, which is both wise and good in the aggregate, and consequently, in all its parts. But these attributes belong to all divine institutions. Nature, in all its innumerable systems-in all its primary and secondary ordinances-is one vast system of benevolent and wise adaptations, the supreme end of which is the happiness of sentient, intelligent and moral beings.

It is the part of wisdom to gain the greatest and best results in the shortest possible time, and by the fewest and most simple means. This, and this only, is wisdom. It is the part of benevolence to diffuse as much good over the largest field of existence, and for the longest duration possible, and compatible with the fountain whence it emanates. We must, therefore, regard every means employed, or every ordinance of God (for all means are ordinances, and all ordinances are means) as an essential part of the system, without which it would have been deficient-consequently imperfect.

Our mundane system needs a moon as well as a sun. It needs the companionship of six planets, to give it, not merely the number of perfection, but the perfection of adaptation. Destroy any one of these, and philosophy with her ten thousand tongues would proclaim the extinction of our race. Take away the atmosphere, the water, the light, the caloric, the electricity-take away any of these, and leave all the others, and who of all mankind would live to report the disastrous consequences !

From all the realms of nature, then, we must infer that there is no redundancy, no superfluity in any divine system, and especially in the moral and spiritual, which is the highest and best of all. Baptism is, therefore, as essential to christianity, as the moon is to our earth, or as the ocean is to the vegetable and animal kingdoms. In saying that any one ordinance is essential to the perfection of any one system, as some other ordinance is to the perfection of some other system, we do not, however, mean to say, that these ordinances severally occupy exactly the same place in their respective systems: only that they are each equally indispensible to the system of which they are each an integral part. Baptism is therefore essential to christianity, were we to reason only from the analogies of all the systems that comprise one grand universe. But the precept of Jesus Christ alone, gives it essentiality, authority, and value, without any other consideration whatever. He has solemnly and expli citly commanded faith, repentance and baptism to be preached, in his name, to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

He has commanded it [baptism] to be preached for some specific end That end is clearly stated, and often alluded to, in the gospel of the kingdom over which Jesus reigns, and in which alone the hope of immortality flourishes. We have but three, or perhaps at most four, authentic records of the commission authorising this institution. We shall compare them, and compare them in the order in which they stand.

Matthew reports only the things to be done by the apostles, in estab lishing the church. "Go, disciple all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." The things commanded them to teach are not developed here; nor is the end of any one of the duties prescribed so much as named.

Mark expresses it differently: "Go you into all the world, preach the gospel to every creature." This does not indicate what the elements of the gospel are. It, however, adds, that the reception of it will save every The reception of the gospel is thus expressed: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Unbelief, or a rejection of it, secures condemnation. A belief of it, and baptism into it, secures salvation. So the Evangelist Mark represents it.

one.

Luke gives the substance of the commission in his own words. He mentions neither gospel, nor faith, nor baptism, but simply says, "He commanded repentance and remission of sins to be preached, in his name, among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Repentance and remission of sins, with him, then, stand for the whole gospel-for the faith and baptism of the Evangelist Mark. Repentance is, however, but the adjunct af faith, as the remission of sins is of baptism. In preaching repentance and remission, according to Luke, the apostle must therefore have preached faith, repentance, baptism, and remission; for all these terms, or their equivalents, are found in the three versions of the commission now quoted. There remains yet the testimony of John the apostle. It is more concentrated and laconic than any of the preceding. I shall read the whole passage. John xx. 21-23: On one occasion, Jesus (after he arose from the dead) said to the apostles, "Peace be to you: as my Father com missioned me, so I commission you." Having spoken these words, he immediately breathed on them, saying, "Receive the Holy Spirit." Then he added, "Whose sins soever you remit, they are remitted; and whose sins soever you retain, they are retained." They were, then, evangelic

ally to remit sins and to retain them. How this was done, the history of the apostles, after the descent of the Holy Spirit, must explain.

Guided, then, by the four evangelists, as they have placed the commission before us, we shall open the Acts of Apostles, and attempt a special analysis of the first gospel sermon, reported by Doctor Luke in his Acts of the Apostles.

Before proceeding to the analysis, with a special reference to this grand commission, amplified and spread out before us verbally, by these inspired promulgers of the christian system, we are called upon to state the reason why so much stress ought to be placed upon the second chapter of the Acts-upon the day of Pentecost-upon Peter's sermon-and upon the other scenes and transactions of that day. This is all important to the due appreciation of the argument to be deduced from this portion of the inspired documents which constitute our premises in this argument.

The three divine institutions, of nature, of law, and of gospel, have each a commencement homogeneous with itself. To commence any institution, and to continue it, are very different manifestations of divinity. Creation and Providence, are, therefore, different developments of the divine Father. Hence, the glory of God as Creator, Lawgiver, and Redeemer, appears in perfect harmony with the institutions of nature, of law, and of gospel. From nature we learn wisdom, power and goodness; from law, justice, truth and holiness; from gospel, mercy, condescension, and love; from ail these, the eternity, immutability, and infinity of God. The brightest display of each class of perfections was seen in the setting up of these three grand dispensations.

The morning stars sang together, and the sons of God shouted for joy on witnessing the first. Mount Sinai, the theatre of the second, sur⚫rounded by three millions of Jews, displayed the fearful grandeur and awful majesty of the second. Jerusalem, filled with the pentecostal conven- * tion of the world, with the little family of Christ hailing the resurrection morn, saw the superlative displays of the spirit of holiness and of grace on opening the new administration of the remedial system.

Jesus himself inhibited the removal of the apostles from their own metropolis-from the scenes of his humiliation and death-till they were endowed with power from on high-till, baptized in the Holy Spirit, and endowed with all manner of supernatural aids, they could, in good keeping with the genius and character of the reign of grace, set forth the superlative excellencies and claims of the evangelical administration.

The time when, the place where, and the persons by whom this new and transcendantly glorious display of the whole divinity should be developed, had been the subject of prophecy, both verbal and typical. The clear and luminous Micah, the evangelical Isaiah, had, some seven centuries before Messiah was born, explicitly declared, in immediate reference to his time, "That out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem." That these predictions, (uttered Isa. ii., Mic. iv.,) had respect to the commencement of the new reign, Jesus himself, the great Expositor, clearly intimates in his conversation after his resurrection. "Thus," says he, "it is written, (in the prophets already alluded to,) and thus it behooved the Messiah to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."

Jerusalem was then the place where the new law was to commence. And as to the time, it was to be in the last days of the Jewish state, as

the same prophets declare. The interval between the passover and the giving of the Jewish law, is more especially prophetic of the precise time of the promulgation of the new law. The passover was certainly a type of Christ's death. So the apostles distinctly represented it. The giving of the Jewish law succeeded that sacrifice on the fortieth day. The Lord descended on that day to Mount Sinai, and spake in mortal ears all the words of that law of piety and morality which became the covenant, or constitution, of the typical nation. The promulgation of that law occasioned the death of three thousand persons. Now, Jesus died at the time of the passover sacrifice: he arose on the third day; he ascended on the forty-third day; and in one week, and on the first day of that week, the Spirit descended and spake the new law before the world-which occasioned the salvation from death of three thousand persons. No typical prophecy in the Bible, received a more exact accomplishment in its antitype than this one. Besides, Jesus himself foretold, before he left the earth, that in a few days he would send the Spirit down and introduce the new kingdom.

The person by whom this new age was to be introduced was undoubtedly Peter. The Messiah, to sanction his confession of faith, and to communicate it to all men in all ages, promised to him the keys of the kingdom of heaven, that he should open it, and remit and retain sins with all authority. His words are, (Matt. xvi.) "He saith unto them, But who say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto you, but my father which is in heaven. And I say unto you, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Again-Jesus makes another promise indicative of the same commencement of his kingdom. (Acts i.)" You shall receive power after the Holy Spirit is come upon you; and you shall be witnesses for me in Jerusalem, and in Judea, and in Samaria, and to the uttermost parts of the earth." Are we not, therefore, by the highest authority, constrained to look to Jerusalem, to the day of Pentecost, to the apostle Peter, to understand what the new law is; what the gospel means; and how sins are to be remitted to men of all nations during the present administration? No wonder, then, that we have given a new emphasis to the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, inasmuch as the Messiah and his prophets send us to Jerusalem, to Pentecost, and to Peter for the law of remission. Can we, then, possibly err in regarding Peter's ser mon as the opening speech of the gospel age? We must, then, examine it with the greatest care. The synopsis given of it by Luke is very brief, yet it gives the great points. These are the death of the Messiah, his resurrection, ascension, and glorification, with the descent of the Holy Spirit. These five points are all set in a clear, distinct and authoritative form before the great assembly. By the revelations of that day, three thousand are convinced of sin, righteousness and judgment; and, with the most intense and agonizing interest and feeling, inquire what they shall do under the new aspects opened to their consideration. The answer given is such a one as would have been given to the whole world, had it been present and united in the all-engrossing question propound