Conversion of the Roman Empire 24 Barlestone Hengstenberg on the Gospel of John 262 Barrowden 148, 185, 387, 459 THE GENERAL BAPTIST MAGAZINE. JANUARY, 1865. THE PRINCIPLES OF BAPTISTS AND A RECENT THE position of the body of Christians to which we, as Baptists, belong, may be not inappropriately illustrated by the view the Jews at Rome took of the early Christian church. We are considered a sect, a schism; and we are more or less spoken against among all other Christian people. Nor can we complain of this. As a denomination we are distinguished from all other denominations by marked and important differences in faith and practice. Moreover, at present, in Christendom, we are in a minority, and with little claim to consideration by superior learning, high social position, or great wealth, we dare to differ in some things from overwhelming numbers. We must expect, therefore, a large share of controversial attack, of friendly or hostile opposition. Happily this is not an age when, in theological discussion, the fierce and angry spirit of former years is approved. Every evangelical church is doing much useful work, and bearing its testimony to its Lord. There is a growing feeling of common brotherhood amongst all Christian men. He who enters the arena of controversy, if he would gain a hearing, must "speak the truth in love." The thunders of angry declamation break harmlessly over the heads of those against whom they are hurled, and return in terrific and scathing force upon theirs who send them forth. But our common Christian charity has not rendered all of us indifferent to the interests of truth. Controversy is not dead. Opinions and principles long current and cherished are freely criticised. Denominational watcheries are subjected to the severest tests. Our own views are challenged or repudiated. Men go out from us, and feel no compunctions of conscience, or thank God for the freer atmosphere they at last are privileged to breathe. The times speak loudly to each of us to form sound principles, and maintain them, by the help of God, at all risks. And it will be well for us to seize any occasion that offers itself in order to review our position, to examine the first principles of our ecclesiastical faith, and see whether or VOL LXVII.-NEW SERIES, No. 13. not we are well-grounded and firmly-established upon the secure basis of the Word of God. Any day that we meet for worship may furnish a suitable opportunity. It may be asked, What mean these many and variouslynamed houses of prayer? Why build a conventicle where there is a parish church, where there are district churches, where there are other places of worship not yet filled? Why keep up a systematised distinctness and separation from other denominations? Why these different and rival organizations and societies? If union is strength, disunion is weakness to the common cause. Why not all unite, and provoke one another, not in religious controversy to uncharitable accusations, but only in the religious life, to love and good works? There is reason for separation, at least on the part of one denomination, and that is all we are called upon to show-and while that reason exists, separation must be expected; when it is no longer found, it would be schism and heresy in their true sense to remain apart. The day may come, but it is not yet. At present it is only in hopefulness and prayer that we can look to the time when Love, like death, hath all destroyed, Till then let our charity be large; let our benediction be, "Grace, mercy, and peace to all who love the Lord Jesus in sincerity;" but let us be true to honest conviction, faithful to principle. Now what is our position in recent controversy; what are some of the broad principles we write on our banners? First of all, we maintain that religion is personal, not sacerdotal, nor sponsorial, nor hereditary. If one thing more than another marks Baptists, it is the principle of individualism. Through the personal confession upon which we insist prominence is given to personal renunciation of sin, personal reception of Christ, personal service and responsibility. It seems to us that the Gospel singles us out individually, makes distinct appeals to us, requires separate and independent confession, and lays upon every one of us imperative duties and obligations. It says, repent; and repentance is to be in our own hearts, for our own sins, before God. It says, believe; and faith is an individual trust in a living Saviour. It says, obey; and the keeping of Christ's commandments is to be the evidence of grace, the fruit of renewed life in the soul. Nobody is deputed to repent for us, to believe for us, to profess for us, to obey for us, to take our place before God. Every man is isolated from his fellows, and stands alone before the face of Heaven. Every man" bears his own burden," "has faith to himself" before God, receives into his own heart, and is to manifest in his own life the spirit of grace, the good things of the kingdom of God. Now though general assent would be given in the Christian world to these sentiments, yet there are churches that speak another language. The Church of Rome takes the scriptures out of the hands of her children, sets herself up as an infallible interpreter, does all the thinking, and most of the praying and believing, through her priests, and says, "give yourself up to me, I will save you." She is to her communicants in the place of God. Within her pale there is salvation; excommunication from it s exile from the grace of God. The keys of the kingdom are hers. She Religion is Personal. 66 3 preaches sacerdotal salvation, makes religion an affair of consecrated officials, denying the right and duty of private judgment, and virtually declaring that believers in Christ are not "all kings and priests unto God." The Church of England takes the infant to the font, and receives promises on its account by godfathers and godmothers. The sponsors are deliberately told, "This infant must also faithfully, for his part, promise by you, that are his sureties, (until he come of age to take it upon himself,) that he will renounce the devil and all his works, and constantly believe God's holy word, and obediently keep his commandments ;" and the priest goes on to say, I demand, therefore, dost thou in the name of this child, renounce the devil and all his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous desires of the same, and the carnal desires of the flesh, so that thou wilt not follow, nor be led by them ?" Answer "I renounce them all;" and so on. Now as soon as that child wakes up to consciousness, and begins to know, and think, and act, it discovers that it has been made by the faith and pledges of others a member of the church of Christ. It grows up into life, and its first teaching about itself and religion is that regeneration comes through the faith of sponsors and the ceremony of baptism. The Catechism it is taught declares that repentance and faith are required of persons to be baptized, and that in its infancy it promised them both by its sureties. When the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the Catechism, can be repeated, and the proper age has arrived, the young person is called upon to ratify and confirm these baptismal pledges, to renew "the solemn promise and vow;" and the fiction of sponsorial faith and repentance is retained. There is no distinct and clear recognition of the personality of religion. The candidate for confirmation was regenerated upon the faith and professions of others, and by the sacrament of baptism, before he knew anything about it; and is not and cannot be called upon again to seek the new birth, or to repent and believe and be converted, but only "to ratify and confirm," now he has arrived at years of discretion, what was done for him when he was an unconscious babe. Now against all this we, as Baptists, enter our earnest protest. There is no warrant for any such ceremony, nor for any such sponsorial vows, nor for any such religion by proxy, in the Word of God. To dedicate a child to God, to promise to train it in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, is one thing; but to promise and vow and undertake on its behalf repentance, faith, good works, is quite another. The one is done, it may be supposed, by every Christian parent, though the New Testament gives no public ceremony for it; the other can scarcely be done in good faith by any one who reads duty and religion aright. But to do it, and call it Christian baptism, is to pervert the simplicity, to corrupt the purity, to destroy the significance of an ordinance of Christ, and to throw the door wide open to all manner of errors and corruptions. Conversion is thereby practically ignored, and false hopes and groundless confidence encouraged to the peril of the soul. Nor does any other body of Christians protest as we do, or on our ground, against these errors. Those who retain the custom of infant baptism, but dispense with the sponsors, yet fall into the appearance of asserting that religion is hereditary. The child is recognised in baptism as a member of the Christian community, if not of the Christian church, on the ground of the faith of its parents. Now that religion flourishes |