Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

pass from the reading of the classics to the reading of the New Testament. Is there then any thing in the nature of the word immerse or dip, which would require its classical meaning to be altered when the word occurs in the New Testament? Was there any thing in the religious knowledge of the Jews, that would require a departure from the classical meaning? Is there any thing in the meaning, or in the use of the Hebrew word to which Barrio [baptize] corresponds, that requires its classical meaning to be deserted? The Hebrew word to which Barrio [baptize] corresponds, clearly means to dip, to immerse. If an immersion in any case, or on any occasion, was enjoined, the Jews would not be likely to evade the performance of this rite through any views of the spirituality of God. Why then place this word among those, whose classical meaning will not hold in the New Testament, but which have undergone a change in meaning through the influence of the Hebrew language, or the influence of different religious institutions? If we pass from the classical use of the word to that of the Septuagint, we find no necessity for departing from classical use. If, again, we examine the word in the Apocryphal writings, no sufficient reason can be exhibited for departing from the classical use. Nor is there a satisfactory reason for abandoning this use of the word, when it occurs in the New Testament in reference to other subjects than the baptismal rite. Ought then the evidence for the meaning of this word, derived from classic use, to be disposed of in the very summary way of saying, there is a multitude of words whose New Testament meaning does not conform to their classic meaning?

I have now finished my examination, so far as the principal arguments and statements are concerned. On

the various concessions made by Prof. Stuart, I leave my readers to their own reflections. There are some miscellaneous topics, on which a few remarks will not, I trust, be deemed inappropriate.

SECTION FIFTH.

Miscellaneous Topics.

Pharisaic Righteousness.

By some parts of the article which I have been examining, an impression is made, whether intended or not, that strenuousness about retaining the original rite of baptism involves some belief of a mystical efficacy in the rite, or a leaven of Pharisaic righteousness. So far, however, as I have had opportunity to observe, ministers and Christians of the Baptist denomination are remarkably free from any such notion, especially so far as this ordinance is concerned; and to speak to them of the efficacy of baptism, is to use language to which they are unaccustomed, and to which they cannot attach definite ideas. This too is very easily explained. They regard baptism as intended only for those who are already in a state of favor with God, that is, for the truly regenerate; and as nothing, in their view, is baptism, but the immersion of professed believers, zeal in regard to this practice amounts to the same, in them, as zeal would, in others, for any divinely appointed ordinance. And as to Pharisaic righteousness, there is no more ground for such a charge against them, than there would be for a similar charge against the most humble and spiritually minded Protestant, who should vindicate, in the administration

of the Lord's Supper, the use of both bread and wine, in opposition to the Papist, who contends, that the wine must be withheld from the laity. May I be excused for hinting, not I trust, in the spirit of recrimination, that on this point, too, the practice of infant sprinkling has had a very intimate connection with unscriptural dependence on external ceremonies for securing the favor of God. How much do many persons dread that their infants should die without this ceremony! And how often have learned and venerable ministers been summoned, and how often have they hastened, to the chamber of affliction, lest, as it would seem, some little sufferer should breathe its last before the seal of the covenant had been placed upon it!* I would not represent this as a necessary consequence of the sprinkling of infants. Far from it. I only speak of this feeling as what has extensively prevailed in connection with this practice, and what has not yet entirely ceased; still, I trust, the feeling is now less extensively and less strongly cherished.

Language not sufficiently guarded.

In a few instances, the language of Prof. Stuart in his essay is not quite so guarded as propriety would require. In speaking of the mode of the baptismal rite as not being essential, the distinction is not uniformly observed between its being essential, or not, to the rite, and

* A venerable minister, now occupying an eminent station, has been understood to say, that of the salvation of deceased infants who had been baptized, he had no doubt, but in regard to others, though he had hope, yet he could not express so much confidence,

its being essential, or not, to Christianity. And indeed, in a passage or two, the language can hardly fail to convey the idea, that the principle of literal conformity to the original rite involves the sentiment, that immersion is essential to the Christian religion, and thus that the proper performance of this rite enters into the essentials of piety.* A very wrong idea, certainly; and one, which Prof. Stuart would be the last man in the world intentionally to charge upon those whose opinions he has been opposing. Immersion may be essential to the ordinance, so that if a person have not been immersed on a profession of his faith, he may not have complied with the Saviour's injunction; and yet immersion may not be essential to his piety, just as on various accounts, and in various circumstances, no external observance whatever may be essential to piety. As this, however, namely, their not being essential to piety, or salvation, is no argument against external observances in general, so neither is it an argument against the duty and the propriety of immersion in particular.

The word ordinance, too, employed in reference to the washing of feett (John c. 13), is justly liable to exception. However wide may be the possible application of this word, as suggested solely by its etymology, and however variously it may actually be used on common topics, yet its religious use is very considerably restricted; and it invariably suggests to the mind, an external observance of universal and perpetual obligation upon the followers of Christ. Prof. Stuart does not, probably, use the word, when referring to the above named chapter, in this sense. If he does not, his language certainly implies a more grievous charge than he intended.

[blocks in formation]

Tendency of some Leading Principles in Prof. Stuart's Essay.

I venture a remark respecting the tendency of some of the principles developed in the essay which I have been examining. They are not sufficiently safe. Why may not ministers, who favorably regard the views. which it exhibits, be willing to dispense entirely with every thing that has been called baptism, and admit into their churches persons who in their own judgment and by universal opinion, are not baptized, provided those persons profess to think it needless to be baptized? And, thus what security is there for an uncompromising maintenance of his command, by whose authority ministers profess to act? Again; to illustrate the tendency of these principles in an opposite direction, why may not ministers and Christians, out of accommodation to existing circumstances, regard as matters of utter indifference, various appendages which have been attached to the gospel? Such appendages may not indeed be defended, or approved; but, at the same time, their removal may not be thought of sufficient importance to cost an effort. For God is a spirit; he requires the heart; these external things are mere costume.

Influence on the Philological Study of the Bible.

I feel constrained also, in sorrow of spirit, to say that the general impression, made by this article in reference to the philological study of the Bible, is unfavorable. In more minds than one has such a thought arisen. Some persons, of no little discrimination too, have thought that an important scriptural subject has been

« AnteriorContinuar »