Question: What  other  evidence  do  the  Scriptures  furnish  on  this  subject  ?

Answer: 1st. There is nothing in the Scriptures which, even by the most remote implication, suggests that the sufferings of the lost shall ever end. 2(1. The constant application to the subject of such figura- tive language as, "fire that shall not be quenched," "fire un- quenchable," "the Avorm that never dies," "bottomless pit," the necessity of paying the "uttermost farthing," "the smoke of their torment arising forever and ever," Luke iii. 17 ; ]\lark ix. 45, 46; Rev. xiv. 10, 11, is consistent only with the conviction that God wills us to believe on his authority that future punish- ments are literall}^ endless. It is said of those who commit the unpardonable sin that they shall never be forgiven, "neither in this world nor in that which is to come." — Matt. xii. 32. It is argued that this language is figurative, and the dictum is quoted '^Theologia syrtiholica non est demonsfrafiva." This is true. But of what are these the figures? What does God in- tend to signify by such symbols? They may miquestionably be pulled to pieces severally, and their meaning brought into doubt in detail. But it must be remembered — (1.) That this language is characteristic of all God's revelations to us of the future of those who die impenitent. Such descriptions color uniformly the whole presentation. (2.) The Bible was intended for popular instruction. Hence the obvious meaning must have been the one intended to be conveyed, and hence the one to which the divine veracity is pledged. This is especially a Aveighty consideration in the case of this doctrine, because — (rt.) It is a practical one of personal concernment, (h.) The language occurs frequently, and strikes the eye of every reader. (<\) The entire historical church (with only individual excep- tions) have, as a matter of fact, interpreted it in the sense of endless suffering. And this in spite of the constant and tremen- dous pressure of human desires toward the opposite conclusion. 10. What presumption on this sidy'ect is afforded by reason and experience ? The Scriptures teach us — (1.) That man is dead in sin and morally impotent. (2.) That repentance and faith are wrought in the soul by the Holy Ghost. Experience teaches us that repentance and faith are as duties exceedingly difficult under the nu)st favorable conditions. Reason and experience unite in teaching us tliat they become more difficult and unusual the longer a person lives and the more definitely his moral char- acter and habits are fixed. 1st. The most favorable possible conditions are afforded in THEORIES OF ANNIHILATION AND RESTORATION. 583 this life. Youth, immature character, the word and the Spirit, and the providence of God and the Christian Church. Su- pernatural demonstrations and purgatorial sufferings would have no equal moral effect. "If they hear not JMoses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead." — Luke xvi. 31. 2d. The law of habit and fixed moral character leads to the conclusion, that the hope of a favorable change must rapidly decrease in proportion as it is delayed. 11. What two views on this subject have been held by different parties in opposition to the faith of the tvhole Christian Church, and the clear teaching of God's ivord ? I. That of the total extinction of the being of the finall}^ reprobate, as the sentence of the " second death," after the last Judgment. This doctrine is styled popularly "The Annihila- tion of the Wicked," and by its advocates "Conditronal Immor- telTty." It has been advocated ably in " Debt and Grace as related to the Doctrine of a Future Life," by C. F. Hudson, and in "The Duration and Nature of Future Punishment," by Henry Constable, and "View of Scripture Revelation concerning a Future State," by Archb. Whately, and in " Life in Christ," by Edward White. They argue that the word "death" means always "cessation of being," and "eternal destruction" means always the "putting- out of existence." We answer — (1.) They fail utterly in their attempt to show that the words and phrases cited ever have, and much more that they always have, the sense contended for. (2.) Their doctrine is in plain contradiction of the uniform representation of Scripture as to the ultimate state of the finally impenitent as illustrated above, Ques. 9. (3.) Their doctrine is in contradic- tion of the natural and universal instinct of immortality wit- nessed to by the religions and literatures of all nations, whether heathen, Jewish, or Christian. II. The opinion of those who agree in general in teaching the future restoration of sinners after an indefinite period of purifying discipline subsequent to death, whether in the inter- mediate state or after the judgment (see above, Ch. XXXVII., Ques. 21). This view rests, (1) upon a class of texts presumed to teach the restitution of all things as Acts iii. 21; Eph. i. 10; Col. i. 19, 20, etc. (2.) Upon what they claim to be a moral intuition that endless punishment would be imworthy of God. We ANSWER — 1st. The passages of Scripture upon which the argument is based would be consistent with this view of ulti- mate universal salvation, if there were no exi^licit statements 584 HEAVEN AND HELL. of Scripture to the contrary. Each class of Scripture must be interpreted in view of the other. And it is self-evident that the general and indefinite must be ruled by the definite and ex- plicit. It is an axiom that the phrase "all" and "all things" in- clude more or less according to the subject. We gladly admit — (1) that ALL in Christ shall be made alive, and (2) that he will be made head of all things absolutely without exception, in the sense that the entire universe, including friends and foes, shall be subjected to his royal supremacy, all revolt subdued, and each class put into its own sphere. — See below, Ques. 14. 2d. The "intuitions" upon Avhich the doctrine is founded are shown below, Ques. 12 and 13, not to be trustworthy. 3d. See above, Ques. 10, as the hope of moral reformation in another life is not accordant with the representations of Scripture, so it is not confirmed by the lessons of reason and experience. 12. Wliai objections are urged against this doctrine derived from the justice of God? The justice of God requires — (1.) That none should suffer for that for which they are not responsible. (2.) That punish- ment should in every case be exactly proportioned to the guilt of the subject. But it is objected — 1st. Multitudes in Christian as well as in heathen lands are not responsible for their impenitency, be- cause they have never in their whole lives had an opportunity of knowing or of receiving Christ. We ANSWER — that the direct statements of the Bible, the whole analogy of the Christian system, and the experience of all Christians, unite in afiirming that all human nature is guilty and deserving of the wrath and curse of God anterior to the gift or the rejection of Christ. If it were not so Christ need not have been given to expiate guilt. If it were not so Christ would be " dead in vain," and salvation would be of debt and not of GRACE. It is objected — 2d. No sin of a finite creature can deserve an infinite punishment, but all endless punishment is infinite. We ANSWER — that the word infinite in this connection is misleading. It is plain that endless sin deserves endless punish- ment, and that is all the Scriptures or the Church teach. One sin deserves the wrath and curse of God. He is under no obli- gation in justice to provide a redemption. The instant a soul sins it is cut off from the commvniion and life of God. As long as it continues in that state it will continue to sin. As long as it continues to sin, it will continue to deserve his wrath and curse. It is obvious that the sinful tempers and conduct in- OBJECTIONS STATED AND ANSWERED. 585 dulged in hell will deserve and receive punishment as strictly as those previously indulged in this life. Otherwise the mon- strous prniciple would be true that the worse a sinner becomes the less is he worthy of blame or punishment. It is objected — 3d. The infinite does not admit of degrees, yet the guilt of diiferent sinners is various. We ANSWER — this is a dishonest cavil. It is plain that suf- ferings alike endless may vary indefinitely in degree. It is objected — 4th. That the moral difference between the lowest saint saved and the most amiable sinner lost may be imperceptible, yet the difference of destiny is infinite. We ANSWER — that this is all true, but the ground of the treatment of the most unworthy believer is the righteousness of Christ, and the ground of the treatment of the least unworthy unbeliever is his own character and conduct. 13, What objection drawn from the benevolence of God is urged against this doctrine ? It is claimed — 1st. That the benevolence of God prompts him to do all in his power to promote their happiness. And as^we have no right to limit that power, we are warranted to hope that he will ultimately secure the happiness of all. We ANSWER — (1.) God's benevolence prompts him to secure the happiness of all his creatures as far as that is consistent with his other attributes of wisdom, holiness, and justice. (2.) We have constant experience that he does inflict upon his creatures evils which have no tendency and no influence in promoting the ultimate happiness of the individuals con- cerned. (3) The benevolence of the supreme IMoral Governor, as concerned for the peace and purity of the universe, concurs Avith his justice in demanding the execution of the full penalty of the law upon all law-breakers, especially upon all who have aggravated their guilt by the rejection of his crucified Son. It is claimed — 2d. That the cultivated intuitions of Christian men assure them that it is inconsistent with the moral perfec- tions of God^Vs^ to bring into existence immortal beings under conditions common to the majority of men, and then to doom them to an after-life of endless misery. We ANswer — (1.) The permission of sin in general is a mys- tery. The ante-natal forfeiture of human beings in Adam is a mystery. But every enlightened human being knows himself to be without excuse, and worth}' of God's wrath. (2.) God has shown his sense of the terrible guilt of men by the penalty he executed upon his own Son, when he suffered in our place. (3.) It is absurd for us to claim that our intuitions are adequate to determine what it will be right for the Moral Governor of all 586 HEAVEN AND HELL. the universe to do Avith finally impenitent sinners. Doubtless righteousness in him is precisely what righteousness is in a per- fectly righteous man. But we do not know all the conditions of the case, and our "intuitions" "are darkened by sin (Heb. iii. 13). Hence our only source of reliable knowledge is the word of God, and that, as we have seen, gives us no ground to hope for repentance beyond the grave. (2.) It is absolutely cruel to follow the example of the devil with Eve in persuading the people that after all God may be more benevolent than the language of his word implies (Gen. iii. 3, 4). 14. What argument for the future restoration of all rational creatures to holiness and happiness is founded upon Rom. v. 18, 19 ; 1 Cor. XV. 22-28; Eph. i. 10; Col. i. 19, 20.? In regard to Rom. v. 18, it is argued that the phrase "all men " must have precisely the same extent of application in the one clause as in the other. We answer, 1st, the phrase " all men " is often used in Scripture in connections which nec- essarily restrict the sense. — John iii. 26; xii. 32. 2d. In this case the phrase "all men" is evidently defined by the qualify- ing phrase, ver. 17, "Avho have received abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness." 3d. This contrast between the " all men " in Adam and the " all men " in Christ is consistent with the analogy of the whole gospel. In regard to 1 Cor. xv. 22, the argument is the same as that drawn from Rom. v. 18. From verses 25-28 it is argued that the great end of Christ's mediatorial reign must be the restora- tion of every creature to holiness and blessedness. To this we answer, 1st, this is a strained interpretation put upon these words, which they do not necessarily bear, and which is clearly refuted by the many direct testimonies we have cited from Scripture above. 2d. It is inconsistent with the scope of Paul's subject in this passage. He says that from eternity to the ascension God reigned absolutely. From the ascension to the restitution of all things God reigns in the person of the God- man as Mediator. From the restitution to eternity God will again reign directly as absolute God. The ultimate salvation of all creatures is argued also from Eph. i. 10; Col. i. 19, 20. In both passages, however, the "all things" signify the whole company of angels and redeemed men, who are gathered under the dominion of Christ. Because, 1st, in both passages the subject of discourse is the church, not the vniiverse; 2d, in both passages the "all things" is limited by the qualifying phrases, "the predestinated," "we who first trusted in. Christ," "the accepted in the beloved," "if ye con- F/EIV OF SOME ARMINIANS. 587 tinue in the faith," etc., etc. See Hodge's " Commentaries on Romans, 1st Coriutliians, and Ephesians." 15. Wliat opinio7is have prevailed among extreme Arminians on this subject ? From their fundamental principles as to the relation of ability to responsibility, they mnst hold that none can perish who have not in some form and degree or another had an op- portunity of availing themselves of salvation through Christ. In order to avoid the obvious inferences from the broad facts of the case, some have supposed that God may extend the probation of some beyond this life. — Scot's " Christian Life." Limborch (Lib. iv., c. xi.) says, that probably all who make a good use of their light in this world will be saved, but if we reject this, rather than believe that the divine goodness could condemn to hell fire these (the ignorant) it appears better to hold that as there is a threefold estate of mankind in this life, — of behevers, of unbelievers, and of the ignorant, — so there is also a threefold estate after this life : of eternal life for believers, of infernal sufferings for unbelievers, and besides these the status ignorantium. CHAPTER XLI. SACRAMENTS, 1. What is the etymology and what the classical and patristic usage of tJie tvord ^^ sac r amentum?" 1st. It is derived from sacro, are, to make sacred, dedicate to gods or sacred uses. 2d. In its classical usage it signified — (1.) That by which a person binds himself to another to perform any thing. (2.) Thence a sum deposited with the court as pledge, and which, if forfeited, was devoted to sacred uses. (3.) Also an oath, especially a soldier's oath of faithful consecration to his coun- try's service. — Ainsworth's " Die." 3d. The Fathers used this word in a conventional sense as equivalent to the Greek MvSrrjpiov, a mystery, i. e., something luiknown until revealed, and hence an emblem, a type, a rite having some latent spiritual meaning known only to the in- itiated, or instructed. The Greek fathers applied the term Mvdn^piov to the Chris- tian ordinances of baptism and the Lord's Supper, inasmuch as these rites had a spiritual significance, and were thus a form of revelation of divine truth. The Latin fathers used the word "sacramentum " as a Latin word, in its own proper sense, for any thing sacred in itself, or having the power of binding, or consecrating men, and in addition they used it as the equivalent of the Greek word jnv6r?'/piov, i. e., in the entirely different sense of a revealed truth, or a sign or symbol revealing a truth otherwise hidden. This fact has given to the usage of this word " sacramentum," in the scholastic theology, an injurious latitude and indefinite- ness of meaning. Thns in Eph. iii. 3, 4, D; v. 32; 1 Tim. iii. 16; Rev. i. 20, the word nvdrr/fnov truly bears the sense of "the revelation of a truth undiscoverable by reason," and it is trans- lated in such passages in the English version, mystery, and in THEIR DEFINITIOiV. 589 the Latin vulgate, ^^ sacramentumy Thus the Romish church uses the same word in two entirely different senses, applying it indifferently to baptism and the Lord's Supper " as bindnig ordinances," and to the union of believers with Christ as a re- vealed truth. — Eph. V. 32. And hence they absurdly infer that matrimony is a sacrament. 2. What is the definition of a sacrament, as given by the Fathers, the Schoolmen, the Romish Church, the Church of England, and in our own Standards ? 1st. Augustine's definition is " Signum rei sacrse," or " Sac- ramentum est invisibilis gratise visibile signum, ad nostram justificationem institutum;" "accedit verbum ad elementum, et fit sacramentum." 2d. Victor of St. Hugo : " Sacramentum est visibilis forma invisibilis gratis in eo collatse." 3d. The Council of Trent: "A sacrament is something pre- sented to the senses, which has the power, by divine institu- tion, not only of signifying, but also of efficiently conveying grace." — "Cat, Eom.," Part II., Chap, i., Q. 6. 4th. The Church of England, in the 25th article of religion, affirms that " Saci'aments instituted by Christ are not only the badges and tokens of the profession of Christian men, but rather they be certain sure witnesses and effectual signs of grace, and of God's good will towards us, by the which he doth work inwardly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in him." 5th. The "Westminster Assembly's Larger Cat.," Q. 162 and 163, affirms that a " Sacrament is a holy ordinance insti- tuted by Christ in his church, to signify, seal, and exhibit to those who are within the covenant of grace the benefits of his mediation, to increase their faith and all otlier graces, to oblige them to obedience, to testify and cherish their love and com- munion with one another, and to distinguish them from tliose that are without." "The parts of a sacrament are two, the one an outward and sensible sign used according to Christ's own appointment; the other an inward spiritual grace thereby signified."


Question: On  lohat  principles  is  such  a  definition  to  he  constructed  ?

Answer: 1st. It is to be remembered that the terra "sacrament" does not occur in the Bible. 2d. From the extreme latitude with which this term has been used, both in the sense proper to it as a Latin word, and in that attributed to it as the conventional equivalent of the 590 SACRAMENTS. Greek word i.iv6Tr} (nov , it is evident that no definition of a gos- pel ordinance can be arrived at by a mere reference either to the etymology or ecclesiastical usage of the word "sacramentum." 3d. The definition of a class of gospel ordinances can be properly formed only by a comparison of all the Scriptures teach concerning the origin, nature, and design of those ordi- nances universally recognized as belonging to that class, and thus by determining those essential elements which are com- mon to each member of the class, and which distinguish them as a class from all other divine ordinances. 4th. Those ordinances which are " universally recognized " as sacraments are baptism and the Lord's Supper. "Thomas Aquinas agreed with other theologians, 'Summa,' P. III., Qu. 62, Art. 5, in regarding baptism and the Lord's Supper as ^ potissima sacramentcL '' — Hagenbach, The true question then is. Are there any other divine ordinances having the essential char- ctcteristics which are common to baptism and the Lord's Supper ? 4. Ho20 many sacraments do Romanists make, and hoiv may the controversy between them and the Protestants be decided ? The Roman church teaches that there are seven sacraments, viz., baptism, confirmation, the Lord's Supper, penance, extreme unction, orders, marriage. We maintain,, however, that only baptism and the Lord's Supper can be properly embraced under either the Protestant or the Catholic definitions of a sacrament, as given above. Ques- tion 2. 1st. Confirmation, penance, and extreme unction are not divine institutions, having no warrant whatever in Scripture. 2d. That marriage instituted by God in Paradise, and ordi- nation to the gospel ministry instituted by Christ, although both divine institutions, are evidently not ordinances of the same kind with baptism and the Lord's Supper, and do not meet the conditions of either definitions of a sacrament, since they neither signify nor convey any inward grace.


Question: What  tivo  things  are  included  in  every  sacrament  ?

Answer: 1st. " An outward visible sign used according to Christ's own appointment; 2d, an inward spiritual grace thereby sig- nified."—" L. Cat," Q. 163. See below, "Apol. Aug. Conf" (Hase), p. 267. The Romanists, in the language of the Schoolmen, distin- guish between the matter and the form of a sacrament. The matter is that part of the sacrament subjected to the senses, and significant of grace, e. </., the water, and the act of applying the RELATION OF SIGN TO GRACE SIGNIFIED. 591 water in baptism, and the bread and wine, and the acts of breaking the bread, and pouring out the wine in the Lord's Supper. The form is the divine word used by the minister in administering the elements, devoting them thus to the office of signifying grace. 6. What., according to the Romanists, is the relation hettoeen the sign and the grace signified ? They hold that in consequence of the divine institution, and in virtue of tiie "power of the Omnipotent which exists in them," the grace signified is contained in the very nature of the sacraments themselves, so that it is always conferred, ex opere operato (i. e., ex vi ipsius actionis sacramentalis), upon every receiver of them who does not oppose a positive obstacle thereto. Thus they understand the "sacramental union," or relation between the sign and the grace signified to be p/«/s/ca/, or that which subsists between a substance and its properties, i. e., the virtue of conferring grace is, in the sacraments, as the virtue of burning is in fire. — "Council of Trent," Sess. 7, Cans. 6 and 8. " Cat. Rom.," Part II., Chap, i., Q. 18. Bellarmin, "De Sacram.," 2, 1.


Question: What  is  the  Zivinglian  doctrine  on  this  subject  ?

Answer: Zwingle, the reformer of Switzerland, held a position at the opposite extreme to that of the Romish church, viz., that the sign simply represents by appropriate symbols, and symbolical actions, the grace to which it is related. Thus the sacraments are only effective means of the objective presentation of the truth symbolized. 8. In what sense is the loord " exhibit " used in our standards in reference to this subject ? Compare " Con. of Faith," Chap, xxvii.. Sec. 3, and Chap, xxviii.. Sec. 6, and " L. Cat.," Q. 162. This word is derived from the Latin word " exhibeo," which bore the twofold sense of conveying and of disclosing. It is evi- dent that the term "exhibit" has retained in our standards the former sense of conveying., conferring. As in medical language, "to exhibit a remedy" is to administer it. 9. What is the common doctrine of the Reformed churches as to the relation of the sign to the grace signified ? The Reformed confessions agree in teaching that this rela- tion is, 1st, simply moral, i. e., it is established only by the 592 ■ SACRAMENTS. institution and promise of Christ, and it depends upon the right administration of the ordinance, and upon the faith and knowl- edge of the recipient. And, 2d, that it is real, that is, when rightly administered, and when received by the recipient with knowledge and faith they do really, because of the promise of Christ, seal the grace signified, and convey it to the recipient, {. e., the recipient does receive the grace with the sign. This doctrine, therefore, includes, 1st, the Zwinglian view, that the outward visible sign truly signifies the grace. And, 2d, that they are, as ordinances of God's appointment, seals attached to the promise to authenticate it, as the natural phe- nomenon of the rainbow was made a seal of God's promise to Noah in virtue of the divine appointment. 3d. That as seals thus accompanying a divine promise by divine authority, they do actually convey the grace they signify to those for whom that grace is intended, and who are in a proper spiritual state to receive it, " as a key conveys admission, a deed an estate, the ceremony of marriage the rights of marriage." See Tur- retin, L. xix.. Question 4; "Conf. of Faith," Chap, xxvii. ; " L. Cat.," Questions 162, 163; "Cat. Gene.," sec. 5th, "de Sacra- mentis;" "Conf Faith of the French Church," article 34; "Old Scotch Conf.," section 21.


Question: What  is  the  design  of  the  sacraments  ?

Answer: 1st. That they should signify, seal, and exhibit to those within the covenant of grace the benefits of Christ's redemp- tion, and thus as a principal means of grace edify the church. Matt. iii. 11; Gen. xvii. 11, 13; 1 Cor. x. 2-21; xi. 23-26; xii. 13; Rom. ii. 28, 29; iv. 11; vi. 3, 4; Gal. iii. 27; 1 Pet. iii. 21. 2d. That they should be visible badges of membership in the church, to. put a visible difference between the professed followers of Christ and the world, Gen xxxiv. 14; Ex. xii. 48; Eph. ii. 19; "Conf. Faith," Chap, xxvii., section 1. The Romish Doctrine as to the Efficacy of the Sacraments. 11. What is the Romish doctrine as to the efficacy of the Sac- raments ? 1st. As shown above, under Question 6, they hold that the sacraments contain the grace which they signify. That this grace-conferring energy is inseparable from a genuine sacra- ment, and that as an objective fact, they contain it at all times, and present it alike to all subjects irrespective of character. 2d. In every case of their application, except when posi- ROMISH DOCTRINE AS TO THEIR EFFICACY. 593 tively opposed and nullified, they effect the grace they signify, as an o-pit^ operatum, i. e., by the mere inherent power of the sacramental action itself 12. Upon lohat conditions on the part of the administrator do they believe that the efficacy of the sacrament depends? The genuineness of a sacrament on the part of the adminis- trator, depends, according to the Romanists — 1st. On his being canonically authorized. In case of the sacraments of orders and confirmation he must be a bishop in communion with the pope. In the case of the other sacraments he must be a regular popish priest. The personal character of the bishop or priest, even though he be in mortal sin, does not prevent the effect. — "Con. Trident," Sess. can. 12. 2d. The administrator must, in the act, exercise the posi- tive intention of effecting what the chiirch intends to be effected by each sacrament. Dens (Vol. V., p. 127) says, "To the valid performance of the sacrament is required the intention upon the part of the officiating minister of doing that which the church does. The necessary intention in the minister consists in an act of his will, by which he wills the external action witli the intention of doing what the church does;" that is, of performing a valid sacrament. Otlierwise, although every external action may be regularly per- formed, the whole is void. See "Con. Trent," Sess. 7, canon 11. This leaves the recipient entirely at the mercy of the minister, since the validity of the whole service depends upon his secret intention, and is evidently one of the devices of that anti-Chris- tian church to make the people dependent upon the priesthood. 13. What is the sense in which Protestants admit '■^ intention" to he necessary ? They admit that in order to render the outward service a valid sacrament, it must be performed with the ostensible pro- fessed design of compl;y'^ng thereby with the command of Christ, and of doing what he requires to be done by those who accept the gospel covenant. 14. What condition do the Romanists hold to he essential to the efficacy of a sacrament., on the part of the subject ? 1st. In the case of infant baptism no condition upon the part of the subject is necessary. 2d. On the part of adults, the only condition is that they shall not positively oppose them by absolute infidelity or resist- ance of will {non ponentibus ohicem). Faith and repentance, as 38 594 SACRAMENTS. these are possible to the iinregenerate soul, are also required as necessary to the effect of baptism (" Cat. Eom.," Pt. II., Chap, ii., Ques. 39). Bellarmin, "De Sacramentis," 2, 1, says that the will to be baptized, taith, and penitence, are necessary dispositions enabling' the sacrament to produce its effect, just as dryness on the part of wood is the condition of the fire burning it when applied, but never the cause of the burning. 15. What according to the Papal Church are the effects produced hy the sacraments? 1st. Justifying (sanctifying) grace. 2d. Three of the sacraments, baptism, confirmation, and or- ders, also impress upon the subject "a character." This "sac- ramental character" (from the Greek word x^xpcxnrTJft, a mark, or device, engraved or impressed hy a seal) is a distinctive and indelible impression stamped on the soul, " the twofold effect of which is, that it qualifies us to receive or perform something sacred, and distinguishes one from another." It is upon this account that baptism and confirmation are never repeated, and that the authority and privileges of the priesthood can never be alienated. — "Cat. Rom.," Part IL, Chap, i., Q. 21-25; " Council Trent," Sess. 7, can. 9.


Question: Hoiv  may  this  doctrine  he  disproved  ?

Answer: That the sacraments have not the power of conveying grace to all, whether they are included within the covenant of grace or not, or Avhether they possess faith or not, is certain, because — 1st. They are seals of the gospel covenant (see below, Ques- tion 14). But a seal merely ratifies a covenant as a covenant. It can convey the grace promised only on the supposition that the conditions of the covenant are fulfilled. But salvation and every spiritual blessing is by that covenant declared to depend upon the condition of faith. 2d. Knowledge and faith are required as the prerequisite conditions necessary to be found in all applicants, as the essen- tial qualification for receiving the sacraments. — Acts ii. 41 ; viii. 37; x. 47; Rom. iv. 11. 3d. Faith is essential to render the sacraments efficacious. Eom. ii. 25-29; 1 Cor. xi. 27-29; 1 Pet. iii. 21. 4th. Many who receive the sacraments are notoriously with- out the grace they signify. Witness the case of Simon j\Iagus, Acts viii. 9-21, and of many of the Corinthians and Galatians, and of the majority of nominal Christians in tlie present day. 5th. ]\Iany have had the grace without the sacraments. Witness Abraham, the thief upon the cross, and Cornelius the LUTHERAN VIEW AS TO THEIR EFFICACY. 595 centurion, and a multitude of eminent Christians among the Society of Friends. 6th. This doctrine blasphemously ties down the grace of the ever living and sovereign God, and puts its entire disposal into the hands of fallible and often wicked men. 7th. This doctrine is an essential element of that ritualistic and priestly system which prevailed among the Pharisees, and against which the Avhole New Testament is a protest. 8th. The uniform effect of this system has been to exalt the power of the priests, and to confound all knowledge as to the nature of true religion. As the baptized, as a matter of fact, do not always nor generally bear the fruits of the Spirit, all rit- ualists agree in regarding these fruits as. not essential to salva- tion. Where this system prevails vital godliness expires. Doctrine op Protestant Churches as to the Efficacy of the Sacraments. 17. Wliat is the Lutheran doctrine as to the efficacy of the sacraments ? 1st. They reject the popish doctrine that the sacraments effect grace ex opere operctto. 2d. They maintain that their grace-conferring efficacy resides in the sacraments intrinsically. 3d. That as an objective fact it is communicated to every recipient, whether he have faith or not. 4:th. But it takes effect only in those who have true faith to receive it. As the healing virtue resided in Christ whether the woman touched or not (Matt. ix. 20), yet it would not have availed her unless she had believed and touched. 5th. They hold that this efficacy resides not in the sign or ceremony, but in the Word which accompanies the sign and constitutes it a sacrament. The efficacy is not due to the mere moral power of the truth, nor to the faith of the recipient, but it is supernatural, residing in the power of the Holy Ghost. But not the power of the Holy .Ghost as extrinsic to the truth, but as dwelling in it, and inseparable from it — the virtus Sjjir- itus Sancti intrinsicus ctcredens. See Krauth's " Conservative Reformation," pp. 825-830. 18. JVhat is the Zwinglian and Remonstrant vieio as to the same ? The tendency of thought on this subject first developed by Zwingle was afterward carried out more fully by the Eemon- strants of the next century, and to a greater extent by the 596 SACRAMENTS. Socinians. Low views as to the nature and efficacy of the sacraments have also largely prevailed in this centnry among all evangelical churches, in reaction from the extreme views of the Eomanists and Ritualists. For a general statement of this mode of thought see above, Ques. 7. 19. State the, doctrine of the Reformed churches on this subject. As to their doctrine of the relation of the sign to the grace signified, see above, Ques. 9. Hence as to the efficacy of the sacraments the Reformed — 1st. Deny that they confer grace as an ojyus operatum. 2d. They affirm that they convey no grace to the unworthy recip- ient. 3d. That their efficacy is not of the mere moral power of the truth they symbolize. 4th. That they do really confer grace upon the worthy recipient. 5th. But they do this instru- mentally, because the supernatural efficiency is not due to them, nor to him that administers them, but to the Holy Spirit who as a free personal agent uses them sovereignly as his instru- ments to do his will (virtus Sjnritus Sancti extrinsicus accedens). 6th. That as seals of the covenant of grace they convey and confirm grace to those to whom it belongs, i. e., that is to those who are within that covenant, and in the case of adults, only through a living laith. 7th. That the grace conferred by the sacraments often is conferred upon true believers before and without their use. 20. By lohat evidence is the truth of the Eeformed Doctrine established ? The truth of the Reformed doctrine is established on the one hand by the evidence disproving the truth of the Romish doctrine, set forth under Ques. 16. Its truth as opposed to the meagre Zwinglian view, on the other hand, is established as follows: (1.) That the sacraments are not only signs of the grace of Christ, but also seals of the gospel covenant offering us that grace upon the condition of faith, " is evident from the fact that Paul says that circumcision is the seal of the right- eousness of faith. — Rom. iv. 11. And that the apostle regarded baptism in the same light is evident from Col. ii. 11. In refer- ence to the Lord's Supper, the Saviour said, 'this cup is the new covenant in my blood,' {. e., the new covenant was ratified by his blood. Of that blood the cup is the appointed memorial, and it is, therefore, both the memorial and the confirmation of the covenant itself .... The gospel is represented under the form of a covenant. The sacraments are the seals of that covenant. God, in their appointment, binds himself to the ful- filment of his promises; his people, by receiving them, bind ROMISH VIEW AS TO THEIR NECESSITY. 597 themselves to trust and serve liim. This idea is inchided in the representation given (Rom. vi. 3, 4) in the formula of baptism, and in all those passages in Avhich a participation of Christian ordinances is said to include a profession of the gospel." (2.) As seals attached to the covenant, it follows that they actually convey the grace signified, as a legal form of investiture, to those to whom, according to the terms of the covenant, it belongs. Thus a deed, when signed and sealed, is said to convey the property it represents, because it is the legal form by which the intention of the original possessor is publicly expressed, and his act ratified. It is on this ground that in Scripture, as in common language, the names and attributes of the graces sealed are ascribed to the sacraments by which they are sealed and conveyed to their rightful possessors. — "Conf Faith," Chap, xxvii., section 2. They are said to wash away sin, to unite to Christ, to save, etc. — Acts ii. 38; xxii. 16; Rom. vi. 2, 6; 1 Cor. x. 16; xii. 13; Gal. iii. 27; Titus iii. 5. "Way of Life." The Necessity op the Sacraments. 21. Wliat doctrine do the Romanists maintain as to the necessity of the Sacraments ? The Romanists distinguish, 1st, between a condition abso- lutely necessary to attain an end, and one which is only highly convenient and helpful in order to it. And, 2d, between the necessit}'" which attaches to essential means, and that obli- gation which arises from the positive command of God. Ac- cordingly, they hold that the several sacraments are necessary in different respects. Baptism they hold to be absolutely necessary, either its actual reception, or tlie honest purpose to receive it, alike for infants and adults, as the sole means of attaining salvation. Penance they hold to be absolutely necessary in the same sense, but only for those who have committed mortal sin subse- quently to their baptism. Orders they hold to be absolutely necessary in the same sense, yet not for every individual, as a means of personal sal- vation, but in respect to the whole church as a community. Confirmation, the Eucharist, and Extreme Unction are neces- sary only in the sense of having been commanded, and of being eminently helpful. JMarriage tliey hold to be necessary only in this second sense, and only for those wdio enter into the conjugal relation. — " Cat. Rom.," Fart XL, Chap, i., Q. 13. 598 SACRAMENTS. Puseyitefs, and high churchmen generally, hold the dogma of baptismal regeneration, and of course the consequence that baptism is absolutely necessary as the sole means of salvation. 22. What is the Protestant doctrine as to the necessity of the sacraments ? 1st. That the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper were instituted by Christ, and that their perpetual observance is obligatory upon the church upon the ground of the divine precept. This is evident (1) from the record of their institution, Matt, xxviii. 19; 1 Cor. xi. 25, 2Q>', (2) from the example of the apostles.— Acts ii. 41; viii. 37; 1 Cor. xi. 23-28; x. 16-21. 2d. That nevertheless the grace offered in the gospel cove- nant does not reside in these sacraments physically, nor is it tied to them inseparably, so that, although obligatory as duties, and helpful as means to those who are prepared to receive them, they are in no sense the essential means, Avithout which salva- tion can not be attained. This is proved by the arguments presented above, under Q. 16. The Validity of the Sacraments. This includes whatever is essential to the genuineness of a sacrament, in order that it may avail to the end of its institution.


Question: What  are  the  various  opinions  on  this  subject?

Answer: All church parties agree that there must be — 1st. The right "matter," the proper elements, and actions. 2d. The right "form," the prescribed words which attend its administration, and added to the " form " constitute the sacrament. 3d. The right "intention," the serious design of doing what Christ com- manded in the institution of the rite. Different churches differ as to what are the proper "matter," "form," and "intention." It appears certain that no one not sincerely believing in the supreme deity of Christ and in his office as Redeemer, and in the personality of the Holy Ghost, can possibly have the right "intention." Hence the General Assembly, 1814 ("Moore's Digest.," p. 660), decided, "It is the deliberate and unanimous opinion of the Assembly, that those who renounce the fundamental doctrines of the Trinity, and deny that Jesus Christ is the same in substance, equal in power and glory with the Father, can not be recognized as ministers of the gospel, and that their ministrations (baptism, etc.) are wholly invalid." All churches agree that "the efficacy of a sacrament does not depend upon the piety of him that doth THE CONDITIONS OF THEIR VALIDITY. 599 administer it." — "Conf. Faith," Ch. xxvii., § 3, "Can. Cone. Trident," Sess. 7, can. 11. And the "GaUic Conf.," Art. 28, states the common opinion and practice of all the Protestant churches with respect to Romish baptism. " Because, never- theless, that in the papacy some scant vestiges of the true church remain, and especially the substance of baptism, the efficacy of which does not depend on him that administers it, Ave acknowledge those baptized by them, not to need to be re- baptized, although on account of the corruptions adhering, no one can offer his infants to be baptized by them, without suf- fering pollution himself" In respect to the qualifications of the person administrating the Papists maintain that it is essential to the validity of a sacrament that it should be administered by a canonically or- dained minister. For orders and confirmation a bishop, for the rest a priest. But on account of the absolute necessity (as they hold) of baptism for salvation, they admit "all, even from among the laity, whether men or women, whatever sect they profess (to baptize). For this is permitted, if necessity compels, even to Jews, infidels or heretics, provided, however, they intend to perform what the Catholic Church performs in that act of her ministry." — " Cat. of Cone. Trident," and " Cone. Trident," Sess, 7, " On Bapt.," can. 4. Protestants regard the sacraments both as a preaching of the Word, and as authoritative seals, and badges of church mem- bership. Their administration consequently must be confined to those church officers who possess by divine commission the office of teaching and ruling, "neither of which (sacraments) may be dispensed by any, but by a minister of the Word, law- fully ordained." — "Conf Faith," Ch. xxvii., §4 Not regarding baptism as essential to salvation, Protestants generally make no exception in favor of lay- baptism. — "Directory for Worship," Ch. vii., § 1, Calvin's "Instit.," Bk. IV., Ch. xv., § 20. The Authoeitative Statements of vAniotis Chiteches. EoMiSH Docteine. — '■'■Gdi. Cone. Trident," Pt. 2, ch. i., Ques. 8. — "A sacrament is a thing lying open to the senses, which from the institution of God, has the power both of signifying and of effecting holiness and righteousness. " ''Cone. Trident," Sess. 7, can. 1. — "If any one saith that the sacra- ments of the New Law, were not all instituted by Jesus Christ, our Lord, or that they are more or less than seven, to wit, Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony; or even that any one of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament; let him be anathema." Can. 4. — "If any one saith that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, 600 SACRAMENTS. or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification (though all the sacraments are not necessary for every individual); let him be anathema." Can. 6. — "If any one saith that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify; or that they do not confer that grace on those who do not place an obstacle thereunto; as though they were merely outward signs of grace or justice received through faith, and certain marks of the Christian profession, whereby believers are dis- tinguished amongst men from unbelievers; let him be anathema." Can. 8. — "If any one saith that by the sacraments of the New Law gi'ace is not conferred ex uptre openito, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices for the obtaining of grace; let him be anathema." Can. 9.— "If any one says that in the three sacraments, of Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders, there is not imprinted in the soul a character, that is a certain spiritual and indelible sign, on account of which they can not be repeated; let him be anathema." Can. 11. — "If any one saith that in ministers, when they effect and confer the sacraments, there is not required the intention, at least, of doing what the Church does; let him be anathema." ''Cat. Cone. Trident," Ft. 2, ch. i., Ques. 24, 25.— "The other effect of Bai)tism, Confirmation, and Orders is the character which they im- press on the soul. This character is, as it were, a certain distinctive mark impressed on the soul, which inhering, as it does perpetually, can never be blotted out ... it has a twofold effect: it both renders us fit to undertake and i^erform something sacred; and it serves to distin- guish us one from another by some mark. " Belli trmin "De Sac," 2, 1. — "That which actively, proximately, and instrumeutally efiects the grace of justification is that sole external action which is called a sacrament, and tliis is called an opus operatum, being received passively (operatum), so that it is the same for a sacrament to confer grace ex opere operate, that it is to confer grace by virtue of the sacramental action itself, instituted by God for this end, and not from the merit either of the agent or of the receiver. . . . The will of God, which uses the sacrament, concurs indeed actively, but is the principal cause. The sufterings of Christ concur, but is the meritori- ous cause, not however the efficient (cause), since it is not in the act, but has passed away, although it remains objectively in the mind of God. The power and will of the minister necessarily concur, but they are remote causes, for they are requii-ed to effect the sacramental action itself, which afterwards acts immediately. . . . Will, faith, and re- pentance in the adult recipient are necessarily required as dispositions on the part of the subject, not as active causes, for not even faith and re- pentance can either efiect sacramental grace, or give efficacy to the sac- rament, but only remove obstacles, which would hinder the sacraments from exercising their own efficacy, hence in the case of children, where disijosition is not required, justification is effected without these things. If in order to burn wood, the wood is first dried, the fire struck out from, the flint, and then applied to the wood, and then combustion ensues, no one would say that the immediate cause of the combustion was either the dryness, or the striking of fire from the flint, or its apjilication to the wood, but that the primai-y cause is the fire alone, and the instru- mental cau.se is the heating alone." The Luthekan Doctkine. "Aug. Conf.," p. 13. (Hase). — "Sacra- ments have been instituted not only that they might be marks of profes- sion among men, but more that they may be signs and testimonies of AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENTS. 601 tlie will of God toward us set forth to excite and confirra faith in those who use them." "Aj)ol. Augs. Con/.," p. 267. — "And because that in a sacrament there are two things, the sign and the word; the word is the New Testament promise of the remission of sin . , . and the ceremony is as it Avere a picture of the word or a seal showing the promise. Therefore as the promise is ineffective if it be not accepted by faith, so the ceremony is ineffective unless faith accedes. And as the word is given to excite this faith; so the sacrament is instituted, that this representation meeting the eyes may move the heart to believe. " lb., p. 203. — " We condemn the whole class of scholastic doctors, who teach that to one presenting no obstacle the sacraments confer grace ex opere opernto, without any good movement of the ijartaker. But sacra- ments are signs of promises, therefore in the txse of them faith should be present. . . We here speak of the special faith which trusts a present promise, which not only beheves in general that God is, but beheves that I'emission of sins is offered. " Quenstedt {WiUenhurg tl688), Vol. I., p. 169.— "The word of God has, from the will and ordination of God himself, even before and beyond all legitimate use, an intrinsic power divine and common to all men, and sufficient for producing immediately and properly spiritual and divine effects, both gracious and piinitive." "Aug. Co///.," Art. 9. — " They condemn the Anabaptists who disap- prove of the baptism of children, and who affirm that children can be saved wdthout baptism." "Apol. Aug. Con/.," -p. 156. — "The ninth ai'ticle is approved in which we confess, that Baptism is necessary for salvation, and that children are to be baptized, and that the baptism of children is not void, but neces- sary and efficacious to salvation." ''Art. Smaladd," pars. 3, ch. 8. — "And in respect to these things which concern the spoken and outward word, it is steadfastly to be maintained, that God grants to no one his Spirit or grace, unless through the word and with the word outward and preceding. . . Wherefore in this we must constantly persevere, because God does not wish to act otherwise with us than through the spoken word and sacraments, and because whatever is boasted of, as the Spirit, without the word and sac- raments, is the devil himself." The Refobmed Doctrine. "Cofech. Genei\," p. 519. — "A sacrament is an outward attestation of the divine benevolence towards us, which by a visible sign figures sjiiritual graces, for sealing the promises of God to our hearts, whei'eby their vii'tue may be the better confirmed. Do you think that the power and efficacy of the sacrament are embraced not in the outward element, biit flow only from the Sjiirit of God ? I think so, tridy, as it would be pleasing to the Master to exercise his own force through his own instrumentalities, to whatever design he destined them. " "C*'/<. Hfidelh.," Fr. 66. — "Sacraments are visible, sacred signs and seals appointed by God that in their use we may have the promise of the gospel made clearer and sealed; to wit, that God for the sake of the one oblation of Christ bestows on us forgiveness of sins and eternal life." "TIiirti/-nine AHidea,''' Krt. 25. — "Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses and effectual signs of grace, and God's good- will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and dotli not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in him. . . . And in such only as worthily receive the same they have a wholesome 602 SACRAMENTS. eflfect or operation; but they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves damnation, as St. Paul saith." "T^es/. Conf. Faith," ch. 27; "Z. Cat.," Ques. 161-168; ''S. Cat.," Ques. 91-93. See above, page 589. ZwiNGLiAN AND Eemonstrant Doctrine. Limhorcl), "Christ. Theo.," 5, 66, 31. — "It remains to say that God, through the sacraments, exhib- its to us his grace, not hj conferring it in fact through them, but by representing it and placing it before our eyes through them as clear and evident signs. . . And this efficacy is no other than objective, which requires a cognitive faculty rightly disposed that it may be able to appre- hend that which the sign offers objectively to the mind. . . They operate uijon us, as signs representing to the mind the thing whose sign they are. No other efficacy ought to be sought for in them. " CHAPTER XLII. BAPTISM: ITS NATURE AND DESIGN, MODE, SUBJECTS, EFFICACY, AND NECESSITY. The Nature and Design of Baptism. 1. State the facts with regard to the ^prevalence of tvashing ivith tvater, as a symbol of spiritual puri/ication, among the Jews and Gentile nations before the advent of Christ. No other religious symbol is so natural and obvious, and none has been so universally practiced. Its usage is distinctly traced among the disciples of Zoroaster, the Brahmen, the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans, and especially the Jews. In the original tabernacle, the pattern of which God showed Moses on the mount, a large laver stood between the altar on which expiation was made for sin, and the Holy House. At which laver the priests continually washed ere they entered the presence of God. This symbolism penetrated all their re- ligious services and language (Ps. xxvi. 6; Heb. ix. 10), and at the time of Christ it was carried into all the details of secular life (Mark vii. 3, 4). The religious washing of the body with water lay, there- fore, ready to the use of John the Baptist, and the disciples of our Lord.


Question: Was  Johrcs  baptism  Christian  baptism  ?

Answer: The "Council of Trent" (Sess. 7, "De Baptismo," can. 1) de- cided, "If any one should say that the baptism of John had the same eftect with the baptism of Christ; let him be anathema." For controversial reasons Protestants, especially those of the school of Zwingle and Calvin, took the opposite side, and de- cided that the two were identical (Calvin's " Instit," Bk. IV., Ch. XV., § 7-18, Turretin's " Instit.," L. 19, Quse. 16). We believe Calvin, etc., to have been wrong, for the follow- ing reason — 1st. John belonged to the Old and not to the New Testa- ment economy. He came " in the spirit and power of Elias," 604 BAPTISM. Luke i. 17, in the garb, with the manners, and teaching the doctrine of the ancient prophets (Matt. xi. 13, 14; Luke i. 17). 2d. His was the " baptism of repentance," binding its sub- jects to repentance, but not to the faith and obedience of Christ. 3d. The Jewish Church yet remained in its okl form. The Christian Church, as such, did not exist. John preached that " the kingdom of heaven was at hand," but he did not by bap- tism gather and seal the subjects of that kingdom into a sepa- rate visible society. While he lived his personal disciples were never merged with those of Christ. 4th. It was not administered in the name of the Trinity. 5th. Those baptized by John were rebaptized by Paul (Acts xviii. 24-xix. 7). 3. Were the baptisms practiced by the disciples of Christ previ- ous to his crucifixion identical ivith that practiced by the apostles after his ascension? — See John iii. 22 and iv. 1 and 2. Up to the time of his death Christ, like John, conformed to the usages and taught the doctrines of the Jewish dispensation. His crucifixion and resurrection mark the actual transition of the new out of the old dispensation. The nature of his king- dom and his own divinity, and hence the doctrine of the Trin- ity, was not clearly discerned, and the Christian Church as a distinct communion was not yet organized. He preached like John, " Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand," ]\Iatt. iv. 17, and he commissioned his disciples to say "the kingdom of God has come nigh unto you." — Luke x. 9. We, therefore, believe that this baptism practiced by his disciples before his crucifixion was, like tliat of John, simply a preparatory purifying rite binding to repentance. 4. Where is the record of the real institution of Christian baptism contained ? Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. — " Go ye therefore, and disciple {naOrj- rsvdars) all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to ob- serve all things, whatsoever I have commanded you ; and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." 5. Prove fhcd its observance is of pierpetual obligation. This has been denied by Socinians on rationalistic grounds, and by (Quakers (Barclay, " Apol. Prop.," 12, comm. § 6), on the ground of a false spiritualism, and by some parties of Anti- Baptists, who hold baptism to have been exclusively designed for the initiation of aliens to the church, and therefore not ITS ''MATTER'' AND ''FORM:' 605 to be applied to those born within the church, in established Christian communities. That it was designed to be observed everywhere and always is plain — 1st. From the command given in the words of institu- tion. (1.) "All nations," and (2) "alway, even unto the end of the world." 2d. The commands and practice of the apostles. Acts ii. 38 ; X. 47 ; xvi. 33, etc. 3d. The reason of and neces- sity for the ordinance which determined its existence at the hrst, remains and is universal. 4th. The uniform practice of the entire church in all its branches from the beginning.


Question: How  is  baptism  defined  in  our  standards  ?

Answer: "Con. of Faith," Chap, xxviii. ; "L. Cat," Q. 165; "S. Cat," The essential points of this definition are — 1st. It is a wash- ing with water. 2d. A washing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost 3d. It is done with the design to " sig- nify and seal our ingrafting into Christ, and partaking of the benefits of the covenant of grace, and our engagement to be the Lord's."


Question: What  is  essential  to  the  '■'•  matter"  of  baptism?

Answer: As to its "matter," baptism is essentially a washmg unth water. No particular mode of washing is essential — 1st. Be- cause no such mode is specified in the command. — See below, QuevStions 12-21. 2d. Because no such mode of administration is essential to the proper symbolism of the ordinance. — See be- low, Question 11. On the other hand, water is necessary — 1st. Because it is commanded. 2d. Because it is essential to the symbolism of tlie rite. It is the natural symbol of moral puri- fication, Eph. V. 25, 26 ; and it was established as such in the ritual of Moses. 8. What is necessary as to the form of words in which baptism is administered ? It is essential to the validity of the ordinance that it should be administered " in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of tlie Holy Ghost." This is certain — 1st. Because it is included in the command. — Matt, xxviii. 19. 2d. From the significancy of the rite. Besides being a symbol of purifica- tion, it is essentially, as a i"ite of initiation into the Christian church, a covenanting ordinance whereby the recipient recog- nize and pledges his allegiance to God in that character and in those relations in which he has revealed himself to us in the Scriptures. The formula of baptism, therefore, is a summary 606 BAPTISM. statement of the whole Scripture doctrine of the Triune Jeho- vah as he has chosen to reveal himself to us, and in all those relations which the several Persons of the Trinity graciously sustain in the scheme of redemption to the believer. Hence the baptism of all those sects which reject the scriptural doc- trine of the Trinity is invalid. The frequent phrases, to be baptized in "the name of Jesus Christ," or "in the name of the Lord Jesus," or "in the name of the Lord" (Acts ii. 38; x. 48; xix. 5), do not at all present the form of words Avhich the apostles used in administering this sacrament, but are simply used to designate Christian bap- tism in distinction from that of John, or to indicate the uni- form effect of that spiritual grace which is symbolized in bap- tism, viz., union with Christ. — Gal. iii. 27. 9. Wliat is the meaning of the formula '"'■to baptize in the name (f/? TO ovof.ta) of any one" ? To be baptized "in the name of Paul" (e^s t6 uvojua), 1 Cor. i. 13, or "unto JMoses" (e/? ruv Mooudrfv), 1 Cor. x. 2, is, on the part of the baptized, to be made the believing and obedient disciples of Paul and Moses, and the objects of their care, and the participants in whatever blessings they have to bestow. To be baptized in the name of the Trinity (INIatt. xxviii. 19), or " in the name of the Lord Jesus " (Acts xix. 5), or " into Jesus Christ," (Rom. vi. 3), is by baptism, or rather by the grace of which ritual baptism is the sign, to be united to Christ, or to the Trinity through Christ, as his disciples, believers in his doc- trine, heirs of his promises, and participants in his spiritual life.


Question: What  is  the  design  of  baptism  ?

Answer: Its design is — 1st. Primarily, to signifj^ seal, and convey to those to whom they belong the benefits of the covenant of grace. Thus — (1.) It symbolizes "the washing of regeneration," "the renew- ing of the Holy Ghost," which unites the believer to Christ, and so makes him a participant in Christ's life and all other benefits. — 1 Cor. xii. 13; Gal. iii. 27; Titus iii. 5. (2.) Christ herein visibly seals his promises to those who receive it with faith, and invests them with the grace promised. 2d. Its design was, secondarily, as springing from the former, (1) to be a visible sign of our covenant to be the Lord's, i. e., to accept his salvation, and to consecrate ourselves to his service. (2.) And, hence, to be a badge of our public profession, our separation from the world, and our initiation into the visible churcli. As a badge it marks us as belonging to the Lord, ITS EMBLEMATIC IMPORT. 607 and consequently (a) distinguishes us from the world, ('?>) sym- bolizes our union with our fellow-Christians. — 1 Cor. xii. 13.


Question: Wliat  is  tlie  emblematic  import  ofhopfism?

Answer: In every sacrament there is a visible sign representing an invisible grace. The sign represents the grace in virtue of Christ's authoritativel}^ appointing it thereto, but the selection by Christ of the particular sign is founded on its fitness as a natural emblem of the grace which he appoints it to represent. Thus in the Lord's supper the bread broken by the officiating minister, and the wine poured out, are natural emblems of the body of Christ broken, and his blood shed as a sacrifice for our sins. And in like manner in the sacrament of baptism the ap- plication of water to tlie person of the recipient is a natural emblem of the " washing of regeneration." — Titus iii. 5. Hence we are said to be " born of water and of the Spirit," John iii. 5, i. e., regenerated by the Holy Spirit, of which new birth baptism with water is the emblem ; and to be baptized " by one Spirit into one body," i. e., the spiritual body of Christ; and to be " baptized into Christ," so as " to have put on Christ," Gal. iii. 27; and to be "baptized into his death," and to be "buried with him in baptism ... so that we should walk with him in newness of life," Rom. vi. 3, 4, because the sacrament of baptism is the emblem of that spiritual regeneration which unites us both federally and spiritually to Christ, so that we have part with him both in his life and in his death, and as he died unto sin as a sacrifice, so we die unto sin in its ceasing to be the controlling principle of our natures; and as he rose again in the resumption of his natural life, we rise to the possession and exercise of a new spiritual life. Baptist interpreters, on the otlier hand, insist that the Bible teaches that the outward sign in this sacrament, being the im- mersion of the whole body in water, is an emblem both of puri- fication and of our death, burial, and resurrection with Christ. Dr. Carson says, p. 381, "The immersion of the whole body is essential to baptism, not because nothing but immersion can be an emblem of purification, but because immersion is the thing commanded, and because that, without immersion, there is no emblem of death, burial, and resurrection, which are in the emblem equally witli purification." He founds his assumption that the outward sign in the sacrament of baptism was de- signed to be an emblem of the death, burial, and resurrection of the believer in union with Christ, upon Rom. vi. 3, 4, and Col. ii. 12. AVe object to this interpretation — 1st. In neither of these passages does Paul say that our baptism in water is an emblem 608 BAPTISM. of our burial with Christ. He is evidently speaking of that spiritual baptism of which water baptism is the emblem ; by which spiritual baptism we are caused to die unto sin, and live unto holiness, in which death and new life we are conformed unto the death and resurrection of Christ. We are said to be " baptized into Christ," which is the work of the Spirit, not "into the name of Christ," which is the phrase always used when speaking of ritual baptism. — ]\Iatt. xxviii. 19; Acts ii. 38; xix. 5. 2d. To be "baptized into his death" is a phrase per- fectly analogous to baptism "into repentance," Matt. iii. 11, and "into remission of sins," Mark i. 4, and "into one body," 1 Cor. xii. 13, i. e., in order that, or to the effect that, we par- ticipate in the benefits of his death. 3d. The Baptist interpretation involves an utter confusion in reference to the emblem. Do they mean that the outward sign of immersion is an emblem of the death, burial, and re- svu'rection of Christ, or of the spiritual death, burial, and resur- rection of the believer? But the point of comparison in the passages themselves is plainly "not between our baptism and the burial and resurrection of Christ, but between oiu- death to sin and rising to holiness, and the death and resurrection of the Kedeemer." 4th. Baptists agree with us that baptism with water is an emblem of spiritual purification, i. e., regeneration, but insist that it is also an emblem (in the mode of immersion) of the death of the believer to sin and his new life of holiness. — Dr. Carson, p. 143. But what is the distinction between regenera- tion and a death unto sin, and life unto holiness. 5th. Baptists agree with us that water baptism is an emblem of purification. But surely it is impossible that the same action should at the same time be an emblem of a washing, and of a burial and a resurrection. One idea may be associated with the other in consequence of their spiritual relations, but it is impossible that the same visible sign should be emblematical of both. 6th. Our union with Christ through the Spirit, and the spir- itual consequences thereof, are illustrated in Scripture by many various figures, e. g., the substitution of a heart of flesh for a heart of stone, Ezek. xxxvi. 2(3; the building of a house, Eph. ii. 22; tiie ingrafting of a limb into a vine, John xv. 5; the putting off of filthy garments, and the putting on of clean, Eph. iv. 22-24; as a spiritual death, burial, and resurrection, and as a being planted in the likeness of his death, Kom. vi. 3-5; as the application of a cleansing element to tlie body, Ezek. xxxvi. 25. Now baptism with water represents all these, because it is an emblem of spiritual regeneration, of which all of ITS MODE. 609 these are analogical illustrations. Hence we are said to be "bap- tized into one body," 1 Cor. xii. 13, and by baptism to " have put on Christ," Gal. iii. 27. Yet it would be absurd to regard Avater baptism as a literal emblem of all these, and our Baptist brethren have no scriptural warrant for assuming that the out- ward sign in this sacrament is an emblem of the one analogy more than of tlie other. — See Dr. Armstrong's "Doctrine of Baptisms," Part II., Chap. ii. The ]\Iode of Baptism. 12. Wliat are the ivords toJiich, in the original language of Scyiptiire, are used to convey the command to baptize? The primary word (idnzco occurs four times in the New Tes- tament (Luke xvi. 24; John xiii. 26; Rev. xix. 13), but never in connection with the subject of Christian baptism. Its clas- sical meaning was, 1st, to dip; 2d, to dye; 3d, to wash by dipping or pouring. The word fiLxnvLZ,(sa, in form, though not in usage, tlie fre- quentative oi (idTtrco, occurs seventy-six times in the New Tes- tament, and is the word used by the Holy Ghost to convey the command to baptize. Its classical meaning was, (1) dip, sub- merge, sink; (2) to wet thoroughly; (3) to pour upon, to drench ; (4) to overwhelm. Besides these, we have the nouns of the same root and usage, f5dTtTi6ida occurring twenty-two times, translated baptism., and fttxTtTidfioi occurring four times, trans- lated baptism, Heb. vi. 2, and icashing, Mark. vii. 4, 8; Heb. ix. 10. The only question with Avhich we are concerned, however, is as to the scrptural usage of these words. It is an important and universally recognized principle, that the biblical and clas- sical usage of the same word is often very different. This effect is to be traced to the influence of three general causes. — See ^'■Baptism, its 3Iodes and Suhjects" by Dr. Alex. Carson; '-'- Mean- ing and Use of the Word Baptkein" by Rev. Dr. Conant, and ^^ Classic, Judaic, Johannic, and Christian Baptism,''' by Rev. James W. Dale, D.D. 1st. The principal classics of the language were composed in the Attic dialect. But the general language used by the Greek-speaking world at the Christian era was the " common, or Hellenic dialect of the later Greek," resulting from the fusion of the different dialects previously existing. . 2d. The language of the writers of the New Testament was again greatly modifled by the fact that their vernacular Avas a form of the Hebrew language (Syro-Chaldaic) ; that their con- stant use of the Septuagint translation of tlie Hebrew Scriptures had largely influenced their usage of the Greek language, espe- 39 . 610 BAPTISM. cially in the department of religious thought and expression; and that, in the very act of composing the New Testament Scriptures, they were engaged in the statement of rehgious ideas, and in the inauguration of rehgious institutions which had their t^'pes and symbols in the ancient dispensation, as revealed in the sacred language of the Hebrew Scriptures. 3d. The New Testament writings are a revelation of new ideas and relations, and hence the words and phrases through wliich these new thoughts are conveyed must be greatly modi- fied in respect to their former etymological sense and heathen usage, and "for the full depth and compass of meaning belong- ing to them in their new application we must look to the New Testament itself, comparing one passage with another, and viewing the language used in the light of the great things which it brings to our apprehension." As examples of this contrast between the scriptural and classical usage of a word, observe, ayytXo'i, angel; TcpEd/Jvrspoi, presbyter or ekhr; hHH\-t]6ia, church; f5a6iXeia rov Osov, or roov ovpavc^v, Mngdom of God, or of heaven; -rcaXiyyEvEdia, i^egenera- tion; ia'/3??, grace, etc., etc. — Fairbairn's "Herm. JManual," Part I., section 2. 13. What is the position of the Baptist churches as to the mean- ing of the Scriptural ivord ^anriZoo, and by ivhat arguments do tJwy seek tojyrove that im.inersion is the only valid mode of baptism? "That it always signifies to dip, never expressing any thing but mode."— " Carson on Baptism," p. 55. He confesses: "1 have ALL tlie lexicographers and commentators against me." Baptists insist, therefore, upon always translating the words (ianzL^oa and fidTiri6).ia by the words immerse and immersion. They argue that immersion is the only valid mode of bap- tism— 1st. From the constant meaning of the word (ianTiZ^a). 2d. From the symbolical import of the rite, as emblematic of burial and resurrection. 3d. From the practice of the apostles. 4th. From history of the early church. 14. What is the position occupied upon this point by all other Christians ? 1st. It is an established principle of scriptural usage that the names and attributes of the things signified by sacramental signs are attributed to the signs, and on the other hand that the name of the sign is used to designate the grace signified. Thus, Gen. xvii. li, 13, the name of covenant is given to cir- cumcisio)! ; IMatt. xxvi. 2r)-28, Christ called the bread his body, and the wine his blood; Titus iii. 5, baptism is called the wash- WASHING TO EFFECT PURIFICATION. 611 ing of regeneration. Thus also the words baptize and baptism are often used to designate that work of the Holy Ghost in re- generation, which the sign, or water baptism, signifies. — Matt. iii. 11; 1 Cor. xii. 13; Gal. iii. 27; Deut. xxx. 6. It follows con- sequently that these words are often used in a spiritual sense. 2d. These words when relating to ritual baptism, or the sign representing the thing signified, imply the application of water in the name of the Trinity, as an emblem of purification or spiritual regeneration, and never, in their scriptural usage, sig- nify any thing whatever as to the mode in which the water is applied. The precise question in debate is to be stated thus. Baptists insist that Christ's command to baptize is a command to "im- merse." All other Christians hold that it is a command to "wash with water" as a symbol of spiritual purification. I have answered, under Question 11, above, tlie second Bap- tist argument, as stated under Question 13. Their first and third arguments, as there stated, I will proceed to answer now. 15. Hoio may it he jjvoved from their scriptural vsage that the words ficxTtvi^oo and fidnzid/ja do not signify immersion., hut wash- ing to effect PURiFiCATiox, ivithout any reference to mode ? 1st. The word occurs four times in the Septuagint transla- tion of the Old Testament, in three of which instances it refers to baptism with water. 2 Kings v. 14 — The prophet told Naa- man to "wash and be clean," and "he baptized himself in Jor- dan, and he was clean." Eccle. xxxiv. 25 — " He that baptizeth himself after the touching of a dead body." This purification according to the law was accomplished by sprinMinr/ the icater of separation. — Num. xix. 9, 13, 20. Judith xii. 7, Judith "bap- tized herself in the camp at a fountain of water." Bathing was not performed among those nations by immersion; and the cir- cumstances in which Judith was placed increase the improb- ability in her case. It was a purification, for she " baptized herself," and "so came in ctean." 2d. The question agitated between some of John's disciples and the Jews, John iii. 22-30, and iv. 1-3, concerning baptism, is called a question concerning pur if cation, itepi uaOapiGnov. 3d. :\latt. XV. 2; Mark vii. 1-5; 'Luke xi. 37-39. The word ftaitrit^Go is here used (1) for the customary washing of the hands before meals, which was designed to purity, and was habitually performed by pouring water upon them, 2 Kings iii. 11; (2) it is interchanged with the word viTcrao, which al- ways signifies a partial washing; (3) its effect is declared to be to purify, TuxfjapiZ^Ew; (4) the baptized or washed hands are opposed to the unclean, Hoivai<i. 612 BAPTISM. 4th. Mark vii. 4, 8, "Baptism of pots and cups, brazen ves- sels, and of tables," nXivcci, couches upon which Jews reclined at their meals, large enough to accommodate several persons at once. Tlie object of these baptisms was purification, and the mode could not have been immersion in the case of the tables, couches, etc. 5th. Heb. ix. 10, Paul says the first tabernacle "stood only in meats, and drinks, and clivers baptisms." In verses 13, 19, 21, he specifies some of these " divers baptisms " or washings, "For if the blood of bulls and goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh," and " Moses sprinkled both the book and all the people, and the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry." — Dr. iVrm- strong's "Doc. of BajDt.," Part I. 16. Wliat argument in favor of tins view of the siihject may he draivnfrom ivhat is said of baptism luith the Holy Ghost ? Matt. iii. 11; Mark i. 8; Luke iii. 16; John i. 26, 33; Acts i. 5; xi. 16; 1 Cor. xii. 13. If the word fia7triZ,co only means to immerse, it would be incapable of the figurative use to which, in these passages, it is actually subjected. But if, as we claim, it signifies to purify, to cleanse, then water baptism, as a washing, though never as an immersion, may fitly represent the cleansing work of the Holy Ghost. See next Question. 17. What argument may he draivn from the fact that the bless- ings symbolized by baptism are said to be applied by sprinkling and pouring ? The gift of the Holv Ghost was the grace signified. — Acts ii. 1-4, 32, 33; x. 44-48; xi. 15, 16. The fire which did not immerse them, but appeared as cloven tongues, and " sat upon each one of them," was the sign of that grace. Jesus was him- self the baptizer, who now fulfilled the prediction of John the Baptist that he should baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire. This gift of the Holy Ghost is set forth in such terms as "came from heaven," "poured out," "shed forth," "fell on them." These very blessings were predicted in the Old Testament by similar language. — Is. xliv. 3; Iii. 15; Ezek. xxxvi. 25-27; Joel ii. 28, 29. Hence we argue that if these spiritual blessings were predicted in the Old Testament by means of these figures of sprinkling and pouring, and if in the New Testament they were symbolically set forth under the same form, they may, of course, be symbolized by the church now by the same emblem- atical actions. OLD TESTAMENT MODES OF PURIFICATION. 613 18. Wliai argument may he drmon from the mode of 'purijica- tion adopted under the Old Testament ? The rites of purification prescribed by the Levitical law were in no case commanded to be performed by immersion in the case of persons. Washing and bathing is prescribed, but there is no indication given by the words iised, or otherwise, that these were performed by immersion, which was not the usual mode of bathing practiced in those countries. The hands and feet of the priests, whenever they appeared to minister before the Lord, were washed, Ex. xxx. 18-21, and tlieir per- sonal ablutions were performed at the brazen laver, 2 Chron. iv. 6, from which the water poured forth through spouts or cocks. — 1 Kings vii. 27-39. On the other hand, purification was freely ordered to be effected by sprinkling of blood, ashes, or water. — Lev. viii. 30; xiv. 7 and 51; Ex. xxiv. 5-8; Num. viii. 6, 7; Heb. ix. 12-22. Now, as Christian baptism is a puri- fication, and as it was instituted among the Jews, familiar with the Jewish forms of purification, it follows that a knowledge of those forms must throw much light upon the essential nature and proper mode of the Christian rite. 19. Hoio may it he sliown from 1 Cor. x. 1, 2, and from 1 Pet. iii. 20, 21, that to haptize does not mean to immerse ? 1 Cor. X. 1, 2. The Israelites are said to have been " bap- tized mito Moses in the cloud and in the sea." — Compare Ex. xiv. 19-31. The Israelites were baptized, yet went over dry- shod. The Egyptians were immersed, yet not baptized. Dr. Carson, p. 413, says, Moses " got a dry dip." 1 Pet. iii. 20, 21. Peter declares that baptism is the anti- type of the salvation of the eight souls in the ark. Yet their salvation consisted in their not being immersed. 20. What argument as to tJie proper mode of haptism is to he drawn from the record of the haptisms performed hy John? Ist. John's baptism was not the Christian sacrament, but a rite of purification administered by a Jew upon Jews, under JeAvish law. From this we infer (1) that it was not performed by immersion, since the Levitical purification of persons was not performed in that way; yet (2) that he needed for his purpose either a running stream as Jordan, or much water as at ^Enon (or the springs), because under that law whatsoever an unclean person touched previous to his purification became unclean, Num. xix. 21, 22, with the exception of a "fountain or pit in which is plenty of water," Lev. xi. 36, Avhich he could not find in the desert in which he preached. After the gospel dis- 614 BAPTISM. pensation was introduced we hear nothing of the apostles bap- tizing ill rivers, or needing "much water" for that purpose. 2d. In no single instance is it stated in the record that John baptized by immersion. All the language employed applies ijust as naturally and as accurately to a baptism performed by affusion (the subject standing partly in the water, the baptizer pouring water upon the person Avith his hand). The phrases "baptized in Jordan," "coming out of the water," would have been as accurately applied in tlie one case as in the other. That John's baptism was more probably performed by affusion appears (1) from the fact that it was a purification performed by a Jewish prophet upon Jews, and that Jewish washings were performed by affusion. The custom was general then, and has continued to this day. (2.) This mode better accords with the vast multitudes baptized by one man. — Matt. iii. 5, 6; Mark i. 5; Luke iii. 3-21. (3.) The very earliest works of Christian art extant represent the baptism of Christ by John as having been performed by affusion. — Dr. Armstrong's "Doc- trine of Baptisms," Part II., Chap. iii. 21. What evidence is afforded by the instances of Christian haptism recorded in the New Testament? 1st. It has been abundantly shown above that the command to baptize is a command to purify by washing with water, and it hence follows that even if it could be shown that the apostles baptized by immersion, that fact Avould not prove that particu- lar mode of washing to be essential to the validity of the or- dinance, unless it can be proved also that, according to the analogies of gospel institutions, the mere mode of obeying a command is made as essential as the thing itself But the reverse is notoriously the fact. The church was organized on certain general principles, and the public worship of the gospel ordained, but the details as to the manner of accomplishing those ends are not prescribed. Christ instituted the Lord's supper at night, reclining on a couch, and with unleavened bread. Yet in none of these respects is the "mode" essential. 2d. But, in fact, there is not one instance in which the record makes it even probable that the apostles baptized by immersion, and in the great majority of instances it is rendered in the last degree improbable. (1.) The baptism of the eunuch by Philip, Acts viii. 26-39, is the only instance which even by appearance favors immersion. But observe (a) the language used by Luke, even as rendered in our version., applies just as naturally to baptism performed by affusion as by immersion. (^>.) The Greek prepositions, eii, here translated into, and hn, here translated out of., are in innumerable HISTORICAL USAGE. 615 instances used to express motion, toward, unto, smd from. — Acts xxvi. 14; xxvii. 34, 40. They probably descended from the cliariot to the brink of the water. Philip is also said to have "descended to" and to have "ascended from the water," but surely he was not also immersed, (c.) The very passage of Isaiah, which the eunuch was reading, Is. Hi. 15, declared that the Messiah, in whom he believed, should '■'• sprinlde many na- tions." (d.) Luke says the place was "a desert," and no body of water sufficient for immersion can be discovered on that road. (2.) Every other instance of Christian baptism recorded in the Scriptures bears evidence positively against immersion. (a.) The baptism of three thousand in Jerusalem on one occa- sion on the day of Pentecost. — Acts ii. 38-41. (6.) The baptism of Paul. — Acts ix. 17, 18; xxii. 12-16. Ananias said to him "standing up, be baptized," a'j'acJras fSdnridai, and, "standing up, he was baptized." (e.) The baptism of Cornelius. — Acts x. 44-48. {d.) The baptism of the jailor, at Philippi. — Acts xvi, 32-34. In all these instances baptism was administered on the spot, wherever the convert received the gospel. Nothing is said of rivers, or much water, but vast multitudes at a time, and individuals and families were baptized in their houses, or in prisons, wherever they happened to be at the moment. 22. What has been in the past, and what is in the present, the usage of the churches as to the mode of baptism ? In the early church the prevalent mode was to immerse the naked body. For several ages trine-immersion was practiced, or the dipping the head of the person standing in the water three times. In cases of extreme danger of death, and when water was scarce, afi'usion or sprinkling was considered valid (Bingham's "Christ. Antiquities," Bk. II., ch. xi. ; Neander's "Ch. Hist.," Vol. I., Torrey's Trans., p. 310; Schaff's "Ch. Hist.," Vol. II., § 92). The Greek Church has insisted on .im- mersion. The liomish and Protestant churches admit either form. The modern customs favor sprinkling. The Baptists maintain that immersion is the only valid bap- tism. All other western churches deny this and maintain the equal validity of pouring and of sprinkling. — "Con. Faith," ch. xxviii., § 3. No advocate of sprinkling can, in consistency with his own fundamental principles or Avith the historical usages of the Christian Church, outlaw immersion. The opposition of most churches to immersion arises from the narrow and arrogant claims of the Baptists, and from their false views with respect to the emblematic import of bapti.sm, making it a "burying' instead of a "washing"; against this we mean to protest. G16 BAPTISM. Subjects of Baptism.


Question: Wlio  are  the  proper  subjects  of  baptism  ?

Answer: "Conf. Faith," Chap, xxviii., Section 4; " L. Cat," Question 166; "S. Cat.," Question 95. All those, and those only, who are members of the visible church, are to be baptized. These are, 1st, they who make a credible profession of their faith in Christ; 2d, the children of one or both believing- parents.