therefore, neither my creed, nor my hope of salvation, could be safely trusted to such guides; and yet it appeared highly requisite to possess some methodical tractate of Christian doctrine, or at least to attempt such a disquisition as might be useful in establishing my faith, or assisting my memory. I deemed it therefore safest and most advisable, to compile for myself, by my own labour and study, some original treatise which should be always at hand, derived solely from the word of God itself, and executed with all possible fidelity, seeing that I could have no wish to practise any imposition on myself in such a matter." "I so far satisfied myself in the prosecution of this plan, as at length to trust that I had discovered, with regard to religion, what was matter of belief, and what only matter of opinion. It was also a great solace 10 me to have compiled, by God's assistance, a precious aid to my faith, or rather to have laid up for myself a treasure which would be a provision for my future life, and would remove from my mind all grounds for hesitation, as often as it behoved me to render an account of the principles of my belief." "It has been my object to make it appear from the opinions I shall be found to have advanced, whether new or old, of how much consequence to the Christian religion, is the liberty not only of winnowing and sifting every doctrine, but also of thinking, and even writing respecting it, according to our individual faith and persuasion; an inference which will be stronger in proportion to the weight and importance of those opinions, or rather in proportion to the authority of scripture, on the abundant testimony of which they rest. Without this liberty there is neither religion nor gospel-force alone prevails,-by which it is disgraceful for the Chris tian religion to be supported. Without this liberty we are still enslaved, not indeed, as formerly, under the divine law, but, what is worst of all, under the law of man, or to speak more truly, under a barbarous tyranny. But I do not expect from candid and judicious readers, a conduct so unworthy of them, that like certain unjust and foolish men, they. should stamp with the invidious name of heretic or heresy whatever appears to them to differ from the received opinions, without trying the doctrine by a comparison with scripture testimonies. According to their notions, to have branded any one at random with this opprobrious mark, is to have refuted him without any trouble, by a single word. By the simple imputation of the name of heretic, they think that they have despatched their man at one blow. To men of this kind I answer, that in the time of the apostles, ere the New Testament was written, whenever the charge of heresy was applied as a term of reproach, that alone was considered heresy which was at variance with their doctrine orally delivered, and that those only were looked upon as heretics, who, according to Rom. xvi. 17, 18. caused divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine of the apostles, serving not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly. By parity of reasoning, therefore, since the compilation of the New Testament, I maintain that nothing but what is in contradiction to it can properly be called heresy. "For my own part, I adhere to the holy scriptures alone-I follow no other heresy or sect. I had not even read any of the works of heretics, so called, when the mistakes of those who are reckoned for orthodox, and their incautious handling of scripture, first taught me to agree with their opponents, whenever those opponents agreed with Baptism," has recently been pub lished at Geneva, in consequence of an attack made upon the Baptists in that part of the world. Several copies of it were consigned to a bookseller at Paris, for a gentleman of that city. The contents of the parcel became known to some persons who wished to suppress the agitation of the subject, and they persuaded the bookseller, as a mat scripture. If this be heresy, I confess with St. Paul, Acts xxiv. 14. that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets-to which I add, whatever is written in the New Testament. Any other judges or chief interpreters of the Christian belief, together with all implicit faith, as it is called, I, in common with the whole Protester of prudence, to detain it. This tant church, refuse to recognize. he did for a time, but was, at last, compelled to relinquish the treasure. "For the rest, brethren, cultivate truth with brotherly love. Judge of my present undertaking according of the Spirit of God-and neither adopt my sentiments, nor reject them, unless every doubt has been removed from your belief by the clear testimony of revelation. Finally, live in the faith of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Farewell." BAPTISTS IN FRANCE. A considerable feeling has of late existed in some parts of the Continent, and especially in France, on the subject of Baptism; but it has been detained in the back ground as much as possible. I would not say the subject has never been made too prominent a feature, both in the writings and conversation of some excellent men, but as a Christian doctrine of the ritual or ceremonial class, while I would not wish to see it occupying a situation among the articles of our faith essential to salvation, I cannot think it should lie in the deadly shadow of the Church of Rome. If it be a New Testament doctrine, set it fairly in the light of the New Testament; if not, let it be "hid among the things that are abolished." The little tract under the title of "La Famille Baptiste, or a familiar Treatise on the subject of Infant One of the copies having come into my possession, I have turned a few pages of it into English; and should it be thought that a translation of the whole would be acceptable, and the publication carry a profit worth the acceptance of the Baptist Missionary Society, or either of our other Institutions, it shall, if the Lord will, be sent to the press with that view. The first twelve pages of the little book in question are at your service for the Magazine, if you think the translation may be interesting to your readers. Kensington Gravel Pits. C. S. To the Editor of the Baptist Magazine. First Conversation. Augustus. Papa! have you had us baptized? Father. No, my dear child, Why do you ask me that question? Aug. Oh, because every body is baptized;-and then-people call me names; they say I am a heathen. F. Do you believe in Jesus, my dear child? Do you think that he is the Son of God, and that he atoned for your sins upon the cross? Augustus was a child nine years of age, and appeared, for some time past, to have received the principal truths of the gospel. He answered, therefore, affirmatively to his father's question. Yes, papa, I believe in Jesus. Well then, said his father, What are the privileges of those who believe in Jesus? Aug. "As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." F. Can you not finish the passage? Aug. "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." John i. 12, 13. F. You think then to be saved, and that you are a child of God? Aug. Through the grace of God, I do, dear papa. F. And those who insult God, my child, and who talk of having been baptized; do you think if they are habitually doing so, that they can be children of God and Christians? Aug. They are not the children of God; but I have been told that one may be a Christian without being a child of God. F. My dear child, we ought not to judge but by the sacred scriptures; there I see that the word Christian is applied only to disciples of Christ; men who had believed in him by the preaching of the apostles. Here he opened the Bible at Acts xi. 26., and then at 1 Pet. iv. 16, remarking at the same time, that Peter spoke of Christians as of those that partook of the sufferings of Christ, and on whom the spirit of glory and of God rested, (ver. 13, 14). It appears then, added he, that the names of Christian, and child of God, are synonimous; and I believe they only should be baptized, who have faith in Christ. Yes, cried John; (a fine wellgrown child seven years of age, frank and simple, who nevertheless, was sometimes a little artful and mischievous,) but we who love so much the Saviour, why do you not baptize us? That is another question, answer ed his father: I should not have so much objection, my dear, to administer to you this symbol of entrance into the church of Christ, for it has, I trust, been given to you to believe in him; but your views, my children, are so far from settled, that it appears more desirable to wait till you arrive at an age which will more fully prove the reality of your faith. In the mean time, you are not deprived of any of the means of grace, by deferring your baptism. Oh! Sir, I can no longer contain myself, cried a female servant who had heard me. It is written, "Your children are sanctified," and I will never give up that. It is dreadful to deprive these poor little dears of the seal of Christianity as if they were Jews or Turks. This servant had slipt into the room at the beginning of the conversation, and had remained, under the pretence of arranging some of the furniture, and wiping the dust from the rest. She was a faithful child of God, of exemplary piety, but who had not hitherto been able to restrain her emotions of impatience, whenever this subject was discussed. "Vos enfans sont saints," (Your children are holy) she repeated with energy; Yes, the promise is made to you and to your children;-in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father, which is in heaven." Matt. xviii. 10. "ILS SONT SAINTS," (they are holy) said she once more, with an accent which I can only describe by writing in great letters as you see it here. Mary, said her master, you are a child of God. Will you do a good action? will you save a soul? What made you think of that, said she; would to God I could! But what do you mean? F. You know Henry, our neighbour's servant. F. Never mind that. You know that notwithstanding your attachment to the gospel, he is perpetually asking you to marry him. Mary. The Lord preserve me from it! F. But would you not save a soul, I say, once more? Mary. Well, yes: What would you have me do? Mary. Poor man! He despises believing husband, said she to herthe gospel, he blasphemes our Sa- self, but aloud, and weighing each viour! word the unbelieving husband sanctified (for the same word is used both respecting the father and children) the unbelieving sanctified only because he is married to a faithful wife.... that is strange .... The unbelieving wife sanctified only because she is married to a faithful husband-and sanctified though she remains nevertheless unbelieving, (ver. 13 and 16.) and the apostles expressing only a doubtful hope (ver. 16.) that one of the parties might eventually be saved. "What knowest thou O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou O man whether thou shalt save thy wife?".. Thus they are sanctified in a sense that does not at all imply that they have any part or lot in salvation .... I acknowledge to you, Sir, that I had never seen the subject in this point of view. F. Marry him. Mary. (As if trying to discover her master's design.) Ah! "That if any obey not the word, they also may without the word, be won by the conversation of the wives. 1 Pet. iii. 1. F. No, no, not at all; that passage suits the case of those already married; but I would never advise a Christian to marry an enemy to God with these hopes; probably she would be led astray herself. Mary. But what am I to understand then? F. What were you telling me of these children? Mary. "Qu'ils sont saints" (that they are holy.) F. Why? F. Well, what are we to say to Henry? Mary. No, no, no; I never understood it before, I own. Children born of believing parents would not be on that account more sanctified, nor otherwise sanctified than a hea Mary. Because they are born of then would be in outward union Christian parents, F. Where have you read that? Mary. I do not exactly recollect; but I know that it is in the Bible. F. Well: Augustus, look out the passage and read it. Augustus 'found 1 Cor. vii. 14. and read, "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife; and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; else were your children unclean, but now are they holy." Mary wished that what preceded and followed these words should be read as far as verse 16;-asked leave to read them again herself, and became thoughtful. The un with the church of Christ. F. "Think not to say within yourselves; we have Abraham to our Father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham,” Matt. iii. 9. Mary. Every thing does not, however, appear to me decided on the subject of baptism; for it may be said, that probably God, under the new dispensation, besides a spiritual, has an outward people to whom baptism belongs, as circumcision to the people of Israel. F. That is a point we shall have to examine; but, for the present, I would only ask, if you think the passage in question relates at all to the subject of baptism? Do you think in the time of the apostles when a wife became converted and was baptized, received at the Lord's table and considered a child of God, her husband remaining an enemy to the gospel, that he also should be baptized, received at the Lord's table, considered a child of God, or a saint in Christ Jesus? Mary. Evidently not-How very clear! what proof! I am convinced I was in error. John. It is very certain that if I could convert the wife of one of these vile Turks who are so wicked, the Turk would not, therefore, be a child of God, and ought not to be baptized, at least till he was converted too. Aug. And yet the Bible says, that he would be sanctified by his wife. F. "I thank thee O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes." Matt. xi. 25, 26. You see, then, added the father, that the unbelieving husband (who has not, according to other declarations in scripture, either part, or lot, or communion, or agreement, or affinity with those that believe,) is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife sanctified by the believing husband. Mary. Evidently this word has not on all occasions the same meaning, but what does it here signify? F. For the present, then, putting aside that in which we are agreed, and which is evident, before we speak upon the signification of the words, let us rather say what they do not signify. Mary. They certainly do not imply a sanctification such as would give a right, either to baptism, or to the Lord's Supper, or even to the name of a child of God. F. I will then tell you my thoughts. upon the subject, and the more readily, because, supposing it may not satisfy you, the difficulty will still remain as great on your part as on mine, at the same time proving, that the passage contains no authority, whatever, for the baptism of infants. Mary. It is agreed. F. I beg you to observe, that in the chapter from which the passage is taken, which now occupies our attention, the subject is by no means the union of infants with the people of God. The new faith which the Corinthians had recently embraced, brought with it new duties, and destroyed old ones. There existed then, as there does indeed now, on the promulgation of the gospel, a conflict of duties; but these were to them the more diffi cult, as the whole was then entirely new to them. "There is to be no communion between believers and unbelievers," said they to Christians: he that leaves not for my sake, wife and children, and houses, and his own life also, is not worthy of me." These thoughts occupied the minds of the faithful, and caused them to apply to Paul (this is no supposition on my part, see 1 Cor. vii. 1.) on the subject of marriage. They ask him, if a believing husband ought to leave his unbelieving wife, and vice versa : that is clearly the subject: they feared lest an union with one who was unbelieving, was wrong. The great variety of duties that united man and wife, cemented as they should be by love, produced so terrible a conflict with the walk prescribed to Christians, that a woman obliged to obey her husband in a thousand sinful practices, might, at least, question these duties under this new order of things. And on the same ground, a believing hus. band had the same feeling with respect to his unbelieving wife. |