The places where he baptized, were the rivers Jordan and Enon, where there was much water: Mat. iii., 6, 16—John iii., 23. What he required of his subjects was confession of sins, and good fruits, Mat. iii., 7, 10. Mark i., 5., and he would not admit the multitude of the Pharisees and Saducees to his baptism, without confession and reformation, although they were the children of Abraham: Mat. iii., 7, 10. Luke iii., 7, 8. What words soever John used when he baptized, whether the same that the apostles were taught to use at the ascension of our Lord, or a set of words telling his subjects to believe in him who should come after him, or any other words, is to me unknown; but he certainly received his commission from heaven, and Jesus, the head of the church, submitted to his baptism.

Whoever carefully considers the texts quoted under the above head, together with corresponding texts respecting the ministry of John, will find that John baptized none but those who are old enough and good enough to make confession of sin, which babies cannot do; that parental virtue was not a sufficient recommendation, without "fruits meet for repentance," and that he baptized in the river Jordan and the waters of Enon. Not a word about infant sprinkling in the whole history of John, nor anything that looks like it.

In John iii., 22, and 4, 1, it looks as if Jesus himself baptized; which he did in the same mannner that Solomon built the temple; that is, it was done by his orders, as John iv., 2, explains it. "Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples." As Jesus never baptized any with water, consequently the children brought to him were not brought for baptism. The passages referred to are Mat. xix., 13, 16. Mark x., 13, 17. Luke xviii., 15, 18. These children were brought to Jesus, that he should put his hands upon them and pray; and the disciples forbade them. Had it been a usual thing for them to be brought to Jesus, for baptism or any thing else, it is not likely that the disciples would have forbidden them. Parents are generally too negligent about bringing their offspring to Jesus; but these, like the mother of James and John, seemed anxious for the good of their infants, and brought them to Jesus that he might bless them, which in great mercy he did, and said "Of such is the kingdom of heaven." From this, it is certain that some, if not all children are meet for the king. dom of God; and indeed, whoever is thus blessed by Jesus, whether young or old, is graciously prepared for that holy place. There is no account that he ever did this but once, and not the least hint that he ever enjoined it upon his disciples; and with what propriety could he enjoin a work upon them, which none but God could do; that is, bless children.

From the passage under consideration, I have heard the following argument drawn, viz., "that if Jesus received children, ministers should; and that if he declared them meet for heaven, they have a right to all the ordinances of the church below." If this argument has any weight in it,

it equally pleads for the Lord's supper; and truly, if a child has a right to baptism, he has the same claim to the communion. As the face of the child can bear a few drops of water, while in the arms of the pereacher or father, so the mouth of the child can receive a crumb of bread and a drop of wine while in the arms of the nurse or mother. But what man in his senses will quote these passages to prove infant sprinkling, when there is not a syllable in them about water sprinkling or dipping? If there is, let it be named, and I will take conviction.

Infant sprinkling can be no proof of obedience in a child, who is ignorant of the meaning, and passive in the action. If any virtue, therefore, attend it, it must be either in the parents, gossips, or priest. A virtue in the parents it is not, unless they can prove from scripture that God has com manded it. This proof I have not yet seen, and am inclined to believe I never shall, while the Bible remains as it is.

A virtue in the gossips it cannot be, without religious lying is a virtue. They promise, before God and the congregation, to renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil, for the child, and keep God's holy law as long as life lasts; which an angel could not do, and which they take no pains to do. This, they promise, not only for the children of their neighbors, but for many that they never see afterwards; and priest, clerk, parents and gossips, all thank God that he has blessed the water to the mystical washing away of sin.

How inconsistently men talk! First, they say that children come into the world innocent, free from sin, fit for heaven; and next inform us that water, in baptism, washes away sin. If they ate clear of guilt and corruption, how can water wash them away? If they are unclean, what can cleanse them but the blood of the Lamb? In one breath, we are informed that none have a right to baptism until they repent, believe, and are in the visible church; in the next, we are told that baptism is an initiating ordinance. While men speak so inconsistantly, who can believe them? Can we think that they believe their own testimonies ?

A virtue in the priest it is not, because he has no New Testament commission for it; and what is not virtuous must be vicious, and everything vicious should be abandoned.

After the resurrection of our Lord, just as he was going to heaven, to leave his apostles, he renewed their commission, made some enlargements and additions thereto, and more fully described their work; which Mat. xxviii., 19, expresses thus: "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Mark, in xvi., 15 16, has it—" Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be damned." Matthew seems to speak most on the work of the preacher, and Mark on the character of the

disciple. This enlargement of the commission authorized them to go and preach among the Gentiles, as well as the scattered Jews. Wherever they went, they were to preach, and those who were taught and believed, were to be baptized; and those who were taught, believed, and were baptized, had the promise of salvation.

Those who practise infant sprinkling, often have recourse to this commission of the apostles, as a foundation for their practice. It is altogether likely that the apostles understood their own commission, and acted accordingly. The surest way, therefore, to get a true understanding of the nature of the commission, is carefully to consider their conduct. Let Peter take the lead. In Acts xi., 14, 37, Peter lifted up his voice, and preached a very pointed sermon; and when the people heard his doctrine, "they were pricked in their hearts, and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost; for the promise is uuto you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. Then they who gladly received his word, were baptized; and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued steadfast in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."—37, 42. From this passage, we find that Peter preached according to his orders; the people heard, which was their duty; the Holy Ghost applied the truth to their hearts. Filled with godly sorrow for sin, they cried out, "what shall we do?" which is the language of grace in its first operation; Peter had an answer ready, and said, " repent," (this little word is always a prerequisite to baptism,) "and be baptized, every one of you." He does not say, be baptized if you feel the weight of it upon you, but enjoins it upon every one of them, that they might receive remission of sins; and, to encourage them in their godly sorrow for their sins, in general, and crucifying the Lord, in particular, he adds: "For the promise (of the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost) is to you, (fathers,) and unto your children, and to all that are afar off, (both scat tered Jews and Gentiles,) even as many as the Lord our God shall call." The promise here does not intend baptism, which is never viewed in the light of a promise, but always as a command. Here, observe, none were baptized, but such as asked what they should do? who did repent, gladly receive the word, continue steadfast in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in breaking of bread, and in prayers; all of which things infants can not do.

The objection raised here, that three thousand could not be baptized by immersion in one day, equally militates against sprinkling, which takes as long a time. The twelve apostles, and seventy disciples, could soon do it.

Three thousand, divided among eighty-two, would be about thirty-six or thirty-seven for each, who could easily be baptized in less time than an hour. It is no novelty in Virginia, for a Baptist minister to baptize more than thirty-seven in a small part of a day.

The next account of Peter's baptizing, is in Acts x. Cornelius was warned of God by a holy angel, and Peter was called by a vision to go to Cornelius. When he came to his house, and preached to him and his neighbors, the Holy Ghost fell on all those who heard. "Then answered Peter, can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." No account that he went to baptizing before they were converted, but as soon as they received the Holy Ghost, he commanded them, in the name of the Lord, to be baptized. And these were persons who heard Peter, spake with tongues, and magnified God.

What Peter thought baptism figured out, appears from his First Epistle, iii., 21. "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us, (not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Here observe, that baptism does not remove the filth of the flesh, but figures out the way in which we are saved: viz., by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. When we are plunged beneath the wave, we figure out the death and burial of Jesus; and when we rise from beneath the wave, we figure out the resurrection of the Saviour; in doing which, we have a good conscience.

From the history of Peter, then, we have every reason to believe that he understood his commmission in such a manner as did not entitle him to baptize any but penitent believers.

The next baptizer to be taken notice of, is Philip. Whether this was Philip of Bethsaida, one of the twelve, or Philip the deacon, who was an evangelist, or another man of the same name, is not certain; but Philip went down to Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. Acts viii., 5. "And when they believed Philip, preaching concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women." See verse 12. They were not baptized until they believed, and yet were baptized before they received the Holy Ghost in its great effusion; which proves that faith should be antecedent to baptism, and that the receiving of the Holy Ghost in this sort, is something distinct from that grace which makes men saints.

In this same chapter, from verse 26, to the end, we have another account of baptism by Philip. A certain eunuch of Ethiopia had been up to Jerusalem, to worship the God of Israel; and, as he was returning home. ward in his chariot, was reading the 53d of Isaiah; from which it appears

that he was a Jewish proselyte, and, no doubt to me, a real saint, who had not yet been taught a risen Saviour. Philip was commanded by the Spirit to go and join himself to the chariot, which he did, and began at the same scripture which the eunuch was reading, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they came to a certain water, the eunuch said, "See, here is water, what doth hinder me to be baptized?"

How the eunuch came to the knowledge of his duty, in this ordinance, is not certain. Whether he had learned at Jerusalem, or some other place, that such was the practice of the Christians; or had some impres sions of the Spirit upon him, teaching him his duty; or whether Philip taught it to him, I cannot say; but he certainly requested baptism of Philip. "And Philip said unto him, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water," &c. What can be plainer? Philip preached Jesus; the eunuch believed in him; they came to a certain water; they went down both into it, both the ad. ministrator and the subject; baptism was administered; and then they came up out of the water.

The next baptizer in course, is Ananias. When Saul was struck to the earth by the power of God, and led blind to Damascus, the Lord sent Ananias unto him, who went and laid his hands on him, and he received his sight. Then said Ananias unto him, why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. And he arose, and was baptized. Acts ix., 1, 19—xxii., 16.

Paul, the chief apostle of the Gentiles, comes next before us. The first place where he baptized any, that we have an account of, was in Macedonia. (Acts xvi., 14.) He was called by a vision to go to Macedonia; and when he came to that part of it called Philippi, "Upon the Sabbath day went out of the city by a river's side, where prayer was wont to be made; and he sat down, and spake unto the women who resorted thither; and a certain woman, named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, who worshipped God, heard him, whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things that were spoken of Paul. And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought Paul, and his companions, saying: If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house."

This woman came from Thyatira to Philippi, trading in purple: she was a female merchant, and, perhaps, a manufacturer, who first made her purple, and then sold it. She employed either her own children or journeymen to assist her in her trade. She was a worshipper of God, heard the gospel, had her heart opened, attended to the things spoken by Paul,