but musical voice, alluding to the fact | ing to break off the s of the formation of the Bible Society, from the body as and what it was destined to accomplish mind."" on behalf of the nations of the earth, exclaimed,The Pyrenees are no more! the Pyrenees are no more!' Would that that illustrious man were present to-day, with all his catholicity of feeling, with all his philanthropy, with all his wisdom, and with all his eloquence. Perhaps, unseen by sense, he was present, and who would not say, Enjoy thy repose, illustrious man; thy name is still fragrant, and thy example is animating the minds of multitudes, who are still endeavour We have deemed i so much of the spa periodical with thes much as it was in the tist-Joseph Hughes of the formation of th originated; and mor baptists have done in of bible translation i world. Beneath is a joyou by a veteran in the Bible circulation. Poetry. BIBLE JUBILEE HYMN. 'Tis the sound of the trumpet that bursts on the ear, The voice that announces the Jubilee Year ! It calls on the nations-it tells them the story Of mercy and love from the Fountain of Light; To the God of the Bible, thanksgiving and glory, Pour forth the full anthem of praise through the land; Of diffusing more widely the life-breathing Word! Praise, praise to our God, that His Word has gone forth, 'Tis the sound of the trumpet that bursts on the ear, Lord! we bless Thee, we praise Thee, Thy Word is not bound; Bears its fruit in the land of the olive and vine; Reviews. tyrs, Heroes, and Bards of the Covenant, By George GilM.A. London: Albert Cock all volume ranks among the ons of the Anti-State-Church We have perused it with much Indeed, this "gifted" writer possess the extraordinary power ing us, as we pass along, with tales and sparkling thoughts. es we feel as if he would weary them, and we wish he would little more sober and commonat in vain, for on he goes, like s own mountain torrents; and sometimes find him breaking Has he not at page 163? where, g the Free Church as ignoring ntary principle whilst reaping s, he says:-"holding, like ns, works without faith." Now o bad; we can allow much to rejudice, but even George Gilith all his poetic fire, must not ed licence like this. We never d of Arminians anywhere who works without faith." For our e wish that both James ArmiJohn Calvin would be so good nd out of the way, as Diogenes lexander, and let us see the Sun. ime this tiresome talk about tor Arminian were ended. e often used merely as offensive mes, and generally by those who ot what they affirm. To return, , to the book before us. As we had read it, we put it into ds of one of our boys, saying, - read that, and see what some ve suffered for God's truth." h the book may find a place in ritish family, and every sabbathbrary. Fure on the Recent Discussion en Messrs. Holyoake and Grant. he Rev. J. H. Hinton, A. M. on: Houlston and Stoneman. obably within the knowledge of E not all, of our readers, that Holyoake the infidel, and Grant stion have had a long disenssion reaching over several evenings, in the metropolis. Mr. Hinton, on those occasions, acted as umpire, and therefore filled a favourable position for making correct observations on the various points As we have ourselves of the contest. had some experience of such matters, having publicly discussed with Robert Owen, Lloyd Jones, and, latterly, with G. J. Holyoake, we know something of the tactics of these men, and how slippery with all his admirable skill, found it, we they are in their movements. Mr. Grant, have no doubt, no easy task to hold fast such a wriggling eel as Holyoake is. Mr. Hinton could sit and look on, and having afterwards with a set lecture, to comtaken notes on the points, come out and he has done his work so well, that parative advantage. He has done so ; all who wish to know the chief points of the debates, and how satisfactorily the infidel's quibbles may be disposed of by a talented and candid christian minister, phlet; which is decidedly the best thing should secure a copy of this cheap pamwhich has appeared in connection with the "Holyoake" discussions. Little Things. London: Hamilton & Co. Such is the brief title of a little book, originally published in Scotland, of which the "seventh impression of five thousand" now lies on our table. Its motto is, "He that contemneth small things, shall fall by little and little ;" and the subjects of the chapters are - Little Duties, Little Kindnesses, Little Efforts, Little Cares, Little Pleasures, and Little Sins; and certainly the saying of Dr. Chalmers "the power of littles"-is well worked out. Mr. G. J. Holyoake refuted in his own words. By Sanders J. Chew. London: Houlston and Stoneman. We have before us now No. 5 of these tracts; and we are gratified to find that they are meeting with an extensive circulation. The attacks of modern infidels are thus made to rebound upon themselves; or are made use of to excite a more lively regard to the holy word of God. Nothing have we to fear but our To the Editor of the Baptist Reporter. DEAR SIR,-Will you permit me to offer the following remarks upon Mr. John Fryer's letter, which appeared in your last number, criticising some extracts from my printed Sermon called, "The Baptist.' Allow me, at the outset, to correct a strange error into which Mr. F. seems to have fallen, when he says, that "The Baptist' was evidently written to tickle the ears of your general readers," when it is notorious that it was a discourse prepared for and preached on a special occasion, viz., "The celebration of the Bicentenary of the planting of Baptist Churches in the Counties of Northumberland and Durham." The topics, in Mr. Fryer's letter, to which I shall refer, may, for the sake of distinctness, be classed under the follow ing heads. THE MODE OF BAPTISM. In this remarkable another curious staten to her prayer-book, s the exception and no If immersion be the r lished Church, and sp exception, how comes least nine hundred an of every thousand child tized in that church sprinkling or pouring, a sion? Surely the clerg refractory class of me time for our diocesan themselves and call ba their wayward and diso con The whole passage when viewed in practice of the Esta tissue of incongruities. of England authorizes mands immersion," "b of positive scriptural dir has left the matter open cording to her prayeris only the exception itself;" while according sprinkling is the rule a rare exception. So m case that when an adult public newspapers lay h as something worth a the Editor of the Repor extract and republish mation of his readers. It is strange that M seem to know the mo tism is appointed to even in his own chur would so commit him "Respecting the true mode of administering baptism," he says, "I shall say but little." Little as it may be, it appears to me a pity, for his own sake, that he had not the discretion to say less for either he makes the Church of England to issue her commands like an idiot, or he forgets in the latter part of his own sentence what he had just written in the former. He first says, "the Church of England authorizes and even commands immersion," and then declares that "the church has left the matter open to choice." If the church" According to her pray has commanded immersion, then it can- ling is only the except not be matter of choice with the admin- word "sprinkling" does istrator whether he shall immerse or prayer-book in connecti sprinkle. If it be a "matter open to at all, as expressing eith choice" whether he shall immerse or exception. The rule lai sprinkle, then it cannot be a command priest" in the prayer-b for him to immerse. So that either he shall dip it (the child) makes the church to contradict herself, creetly and warily:" the or giving her credit for consistency, he pour water upon it." flatly, in the same sentence, contradicts word about sprinkling himself. We baptists never contradict baptismal service of the ourselves on this point, but at all times land! Oh! Mr. F., do and in all places affirm, that the only Church Catechism and proper mode of baptism is immersion. As sprinkling is a diff a different action or mode words dip and pour, it is evihave yet to learn the precise paptism appointed in your own E SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. eferring to the antiquated and re argument drawn from cirin favour of infant baptism, dduces our Lord's commission t of his cherished dogma. He Christ, in his institution of the t, said not 'Go ye therefore and nations, baptizing' the adults name,' &c., but 'teach (make of) all nations, baptizing them,' not infants and young children e a part, even the major part of s ?" Well; taking his own in ion of the word "teach," the on cannot refer in the slightest infants, but completely destroys ion which he wishes to establish. rst duty enjoined by the comis to "make disciples of all a christian disciple, all will a believer in Christ. But innnot believe in Christ; infants, e, are not included in the comNay, they are necessarily exfrom it; for being naturally e of believing in Christ, they hen become his disciples. econd duty enjoined by the comis to baptize. Whom? "Them," h Mr. F. understands "all nancluding, of course, all the babies ations. Surely he cannot have ally examined the original words ch our Lord's commission was or he could not so easily have to such an eggregious error. personal pronoun "them," is in culine gender in the original, and agree with the noun in "all nawhich is in the neuter gender. be understood, therefore, to refer other persons; and to whom but e who are made disciples through caching of the gospel. Instead, of the commission authorizing to be baptized, it positively exthem, and recognizes none but es or believers as fit subjects for 1. Beside, I fearlessly affirm ere is not one plain precept for baptism, nor one single clear exof infants being baptized in the Testament from the "Gospel ac cording to Matthew," to the "Revelation of John the divine." It is altogether a work of man's device, and will doubtless eventually be swept away from the churches, with many other "traditions of men," which now impede the progress of Christ's holy gospel in the world. THE ORIGIN OF INFANT BAPTISM. In my Sermon it is said, that "About the beginning of the third century, the primitive practice of baptizing believers only was corrupted, and infants were admitted to that ordinance." Mr. F. is of opinion, that infant baptism was "received from the apostles and by them planted in the different countries." In opposition to his opinion it may be sufficient to place the opinion of the learned Neander: "Baptism was administered at first only to adults;" and of a writer in the North British Review (Pedobaptist) for August, 1852: "The scripture knows nothing of the baptism of infants. There is absolutely not a single trace of it to be found in the New Testament." "He Mr. F. introduces Irenæus, to prove that infants were baptized in the middle of the second century. He does not quote the words of Irenæus which are supposed to refer to infant baptism; but they are the following, as translated from the Latin by Dr. Ripley: (Christ) came to save all by himself; all, I say, who by him are born unto God, infants and little ones, and children, and youths, and elder persons." Can even the genius of Mr. F. find in this passage one word about water, one word about sprinkling, one word about dipping, or one word about baptism at all? The The opinion of Hagenbach upon this passage is, that it does not "afford any decisive proof" that children were baptized. "It does not say that he (Christ) redeemed children by the water of baptism, unless the term renasci be interpreted by the most arbitrary petitio principii to refer to baptism." famous Baumgarten-Crusius declares, that "the celebrated passage in Irenæus is not to be used in favour of infant baptism." And Winer, Starck, Rossler, Munscher, Von Cöln, all decline to borrow any support for infant baptism from this passage. (See Baptist Magazine, March, 1852.) If infant baptism has no better foundation to stand upon, in the middle of the second century than the words of Irenæus, it must be con- dipping believers onl fessed that it rests upon "The baseless fabric of a vision." Mr. F. also brings forward Tertullian to prove that I am wrong in saying that infant baptism was introduced "about the beginning of the third century." Tertullian flourished, A.D. 200, and is the first writer who distinctly notices infant baptism. Neander, when speaking of Tertullian's time, says, "That infant baptism was certainly not a generally prevailing practice; was not yet regarded as an apostolical institution. On the contrary, as the assertions of Tertullian render in the highest degree probable, it had just begun to spread." William Jones, one of the best authorities that can be quoted, states that infant baptism "crept into the christian church towards the latter end of the second, or early in the third century." And these opinions are confirmed by the new work which has recently appeared, and which is exciting so much public attention"Hippolytus and his Age." By Dr. Bunsen. If Tertullian flourished in the year of our Lord 200; if in his day infant baptism "had just begun to spread;" and if the opinions of the above writers have any weight, then I was not far from the mark in saying that infant baptism was introduced "about the beginning of the third century." THE BISHOPS AND DIOCESES OF THE Mr. F. introduces the bishops who figured at the period above-named with evident satisfaction. As he has, doubtless, great veneration for those reverend personages, it may not be unpleasant to him to look, for a moment, at their miniature likenesses as drawn by the pencil of Mosheim: "Though several (of the bishops) yet continued to exhibit to the world illustrious examples of primitive piety and christian virtue, yet many were sunken in luxury and voluptuousness, puffed up with vanity, arrogance, and ambition, possessed with a 'spirit of contention and discord, and addicted to many other vices that cast an undeserved reproach upon the holy religion, of which they were the unworthy professors and ministers!" No wonder that such prodigies of godlessness and vice should be disposed to infants in their stead. the present day are, your city especiallyorder of men. He also speaks of t sixty-six African bish dent gusto, which m from an Exeter subal were the "dioceses" of bishops? Let Dr. answer this question: ages the bishop's char never called a dioces to which the bishop's was always named, am speaking of, by a Gi which answers to th parish, and means proj hood." "The words parish are, if not synon of each other." As t or congregation had b called bishop, so ever one congregation or antiquity are unanimo one bishop no more th tion, and one parish." church was "almost un until the expiration of t So it turns out that t in the middle of the t no dioceses at all; overseers of single ch as baptist ministers ar Whence descended, bishops, with princel stately palaces, and mi from the apostles, we from their poor, labo cuted immediate succe not as apostles, but sufferers for Christ. THE BAPTISTS Mr. F. seems to di the baptist denominati church. His words a "the Baptist Church, a ter) is pleased to style Mr. L. is certainly according to modern denomination of christi belongs, a Church; an it, by way of distinctio Church." He acknow free from defects and b theless, he thinks it upon it more of the cha |