Essay on the right of infants of believing parents to baptism

Preface

The Essay here presented, was originally written in 1835, and subsequently, in 1837, revised and enlarged. It was not intended for publication, but was designed for the author's own private use. In compliance, however, With the solicitation of an estimable friend, who had read the manuscript, consent was given for its publication, in consecutive numbers of the "Weekly Messenger," of the German Reformed Church, in 1842. And now, in compliance with repeated solicitations, the author, having made some slight alterations, ventures to send it forth, in its present form, with the request, that it be carefulty read ; and with the hope, that it may, in some measure, answer the end for which it is designed, viz : to shew that infants of believing parents have a right to baptism, and must therefore be baptized.

W. C.

Pa, )

January

Berlin, Somerset co. Pa, j 1, 1851. J

Contents

|5nrt Jfixst.

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS.

CHAPTER I. Import of the word Church, - Page 7

Sect. 1. A Church existed before the time of Christ, 9

" 2. A Church existed before the time of Abraham, 18 CHAPTER II.

Distinguishable forms of the Church, 28

Sect. 1. The Patriarchal Church, ... 29 f urt InoL

Questions relative to the right of in/ants of believing parents to baptism.

Quest. 1. Is the Christian Church the same in essence

as the Jewish ? - - - . - - 51 " 2. Does membership belong to the essence or to

the form of the Church ? - - - - 69 " 3. Is the covenant under the Christian dispensation the same as it was under the Paliiarchal and Jewish dispensations ? - - - - 73

" 4. Is membership the same in the Christian

Church U it was in the Jewish f - - - 80

" 5. In what maimer are individuals to be admitted into the Church? 83

» c. If circumcision and

• i What other argumente beside the foregoing be produced te ihen that intents must be lit tnitted Into th< I 1iur< h 6y ' • - l"T

\i:(,imv\i- i. Christ has no .where forbidden it. - 108 " 2. n i the

" ;;. Pan) call - infants of beliei ing pi 1 1 »j

« 4 1. \

i the Church. ... 120

" "». I ijj ■ »oul :

from the » !hureh in Buch p i -

oj deviations from the M . .

» 6. I timony shews that infants were

baptized.

•» The rejection of infant baptism te of quite a

modem date. 141

RIGHT OF LXFAXT5 TO BAPTISM.

Hi /irst.

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATi;

CHAPTER I.

Import of *d Church.

The word Ckvrch is of Greek c It is de-

rived from xvp;: bich means the house of tk*

Lord, ft term applied to any house dedicated to the ip of God, whether a stated building, or a private rig, as in and Co!. 4 : 15. In

process of time the w into lyrioik

n parts of Europe, underwent another contraction. "The E contracted their. ■&, the Genu;-. i'm-Ar,

the Low P.

it ciri from which by

The _nified the p!

: and then by a figure h, called ft

ll for the thing contained, :: eftjne I

uage became gc d word was mperaerfed

8 THE WORD CHTRCH.

by ixxXytsia, which in its proper acceptation, is the same as kyriake in its tropical sense. The word ixxx^gta seems to be derived from ixxa>Ju y to call out of ox from, and in a general usus loquendi, denotes any kind of convocation, or assembly, gathered out of a multitude. An instance of its use in this sense, is found in Acts 19 : 32, 41, where the word is rendered " assembly." The usual rendering of the word, however, is " Church," and in its particular usus loquendi, denotes a religious society, congregation, or assembly, called out from among other men, and set apart for the worship of God. This is the import of the term when employed by the sacred writers, and in this sense its leading applications are the two following :

1. It stands in the singular number; for the whole collective body of saints or peculiar people of God, redeemed out of every nation, kindred and tongue ; as in the following texts: Mat. 16: 18; Gal. 1: 13 5 Eph. 1 : 22 ; 3 : 10, 21 ; Eph. 5 : 23 ; Col. 1 : 18, 24; Heb. 12:23.

2. It stands for a particular religious community in a particular place, as in Acts 8 : 1, 3; 11 : 22 ; 14 : 27; &c, and is likewise applied, in the plural number, to the religious communities of a particular province, or provinces, as in Acts 9 : 31 ; 15 : 41 ; Gal. 1 : 22.

Besides these hading applications, the word has a more confined sense; for it is employed to denote a number of people either actually assembled, as in Acts 15 : 22 ; or accustomed to assemble in the same place for religious purposes, as in Rom. 16: 5; Col. 4: 15; and is applied to them before their organization by the election and ordination of rulers or elders, Acts 14: 23.

SECTION L

Having thus ascertained that the Greek term eJcldesia, {in our version rendered Church,) is derived from two words signifying "to call out of" and having found that its predominant import, when used by the sacred writers, is, " a religious society or congregation called out from among other men ;" we proceed to inquire into the following question, viz :

Did an * ekklesia" or Church exist before the time of Christ ?

To bring forward proof to establish this question affirmatively, may, to some, appear altogether superfluous, as maintaining it negatively, would, in effect be denying that " a society of men called out from among others for religious purposes/' existed before the time of Christ. Such indeed is the position of some, for they deny that a Church existed prior to the time of Christ. Whether such a denial be the expression of a firm conviction of the mind, grounded on a careful and deliberate investigation of the subject, or whether it be a position which its advocates are compelled to take, in order to support some favorite theory or dogma of their own, we are unable to say, having never been so fortunate as to learn by what proof it is supposed to be established, nor by what arguments it is attempted to be defended. It certainly cannot, with any degree of propriety, be defended, much less established, on the ground, that t]ae word " Church" is not found in the Old Testament ; for this, even if true, avails nothing, inasmuch as words of similar import are found therein and applied to the Jews. The term " Church" is equivalent to the Greek ixx7.r-na r and has the same meaning, which is, " a society of men called out from among other men and set apart for the worship of God," and hence, if it can be shown that such a society existed before the time of Christ, or the rise of the Christian Church, it necessarily follows that there existed a " Church," in the strict and proper sense of the word, whatever term or terms may have been, or may still be, applied to it.

That such a society did exist, none, we should suppose, who have perused the books of the Old Testament, with proper attention, could possibly deny ; for not only does the whole history of the Israelites, from their departure out of Egypt until the time of Christ, prove them to be a people " called out from among other nations of the world, separated and set apart for the purpose of worshiping God," but the same thing is expressly declared of them. In Deut. 7: 6, it reads, "Thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God. The Lord thy God hath chosen thee, to be a special people unto himself, above all the people that are upon the face of the earth." See also Deut. 14 : 2. Again, in Exodus 19 : 6, it is said, " Ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation." In the first of these quotations we are informed that the Lord chose the Israelites, that is, selected or " called them out" from among all other nations or people .that were then upon the face of the earth, •and in Deut. 10: 12, 13, we learn what was required of this people whom the Lord had chosen; "And now

Israel, what doth the Lord thy God require of thee ? but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love and serve him with all thy soul, and with all thy heart." Again, in Deut. 10 : 20, " Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, Rim shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave/' See also Deut. 6 : 13 ; Deut. 8 : 6. In these quotations we have both the "calling out/' and the " setting apart for the worship-of God," and here too, we have a regular ekklesia, before the time of Christ.

The "calling out" however of this ekklesia or Church, differed from that of the Christian. The latter was composed of individuals, called out from among the several nations of the world, whereas the former was composed of an entire nation or people, called out or separated from all other nations, and consecrated to God, Deut. 7 : 6, 7. The whole people of Israel, must therefore be considered as composing or forming but one ekklesia; for they were confined to one country, had but one altar, and but one fixed place for the performance of their sacrifices, and other ceremonies depending upon them, Deut. 12: 5 — 11; 1 Kings 9: 3, and they are accordingly designated as, "the congregation of Israel," Exod. 12: 3; 16: 1; Josh. 8:35; lKings8:5;2 Chron. 20 : 14. " The congregation of the Lord," Ps. 74: 2; "The assembly of the saints," Ps. 89: 7; "The chosen of the Lord," Ps. 105: 43; And the "nation" and " inheritance" of the Lord, Ps. 106 : 5.

The language of the New Testament is in accordance with that of the Old on this subject; for it speaks expressly of a "Church in the wilderness," in Acts 7 : 38, where Stephen says, " This (viz. Moses) is he who was in the Church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in Mount Sinai, and with the fathers, who received the lively oracles to give unto us/' In the original the word answering to "Church/' is ekldesia from ix, out of, and xa?iu, to call, and by a careful examination of the passage we learn,

1. That the word is not only applied to the Israelites when assembled at Mount Sinai, but also when journeying in the wilderness ; for it is not said that the angel spake to Moses in Mount Sinai in the wilderness,, but that "Moses was in the Church in the wilderness, with the angel that spake to him in Mount Sinai,'' that is, icith him in the Church, subsequently to his speaking with him in Mount Sinai.

2. We learn, that the word does not mean an unlawful assembly; for, in the first place, the Israelites were brought out from Egypt by the command of God, Ex. 3 : 10 ; Acts 7 : 35. Secondly, they assembled at Mount Sinai in obedience to that command, Ex. 19 : 10 ; and Tliirdly, their forty years' journey in the wilderness was also by the command of God, Num. 14 : 33, 34. Hence the word cannot mean an unlawful assembly or mixed crowd. It is therefore evident,

3. That it means a society of persons " called out from the world, for the purpose of worshipping God." For First, this is expressly declared elsewhere, see Deut. 7 : 6, 7, compared with Deut, 10 : 12, 13, 20. Secondly, the angel that spake to Moses in Mount Sinai, is said to be with him in the Church in the wilderness, Acts 7 : 38; consequently with them during their continuance therein, which was forty years. Thirdly, Moses, through the angel, received the lively oracles, or the word of God, which was to teach " the fathers" the proper worship of

God, and all other duties. Now as the word "Church'' signifies a number of persons associated together, for the purpose of worshipping God, having ordinances of Divine appointment (as the medium of acceptable worship) and means of grace, there was a regular Church of God among the Israelites in the wilderness.

That there existed such a Church among them, after their settling in Palestine, is evident from the parable of our Saviour in Matt. 21 : 33—44, where he speaks of "a certain householder who planted a vineyard, hedged it round about, digged a winepress in it, built a tower, and let it out unto husbandmen, and went into a far country : and when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it," &c.

That the vineyard, in this parable, is a figurative representation of the "kingdom of God," spoken of in verse 43, appears from this, that the same charge is made^ and the same course pursued, in both cases. For First, the fruits of the vineyard were not rendered in their seasons, neither were the fruits of the kingdom of God brought forth. Secondly, the "vineyard" was to be taken from the husbandmen, and the "kingdom" from the chief priests and elders of the people, to whom the parable was spoken, verse 23. Thirdly, the "vineyard'* was to be given to other husbandmen, who would render unto the Lord thereof the fruits in their season, and the "kingdom" was to be given unto a nation which would bring forth its fruits. These particulars imply a course of conduct on the part of those in possession of the kingdom, similar to that of the husbandmen in the vineyard. And as the kingdom is spoken of as being in possession of the chief priests and elders of the Jewish nation, (verse 43; comp. 23,) the conduct of the husbandmen is therefore a representation of what had been, and would be, the conduct of the chief priests and elders in the kingdom of God; for ], Jesus spake to them verse 23. 2, He spake of them, verse 45. 3, He says the kingdom shall be taken from them, verse 43. 4, The reason assigned is their not bringing forth the fruit thereof.

We must now ascertain the meaning of the phrase "kingdom of God;" for it has several significations. It denotes

1. The kingdom of power, which includes the whole creation as its subjects, and over which God's power extends, as in Ps. 103 : 19, " Thy kingdom ruleth over all."

2. It denotes the kingdom of grace, which includes the professing worshippers of God as its subjects, and over whom his grace and mercy extend. In this sense it is synonymous with the phrase " kingdom of heaven." See Mark 1 : 15. Comp. Matt. 3:2,4: 17.

3. It denotes the kingdom of glory, or the state of happiness to which the righteous attain after death, and includes all glorified believers as its subjects. Matt. 13 : 43 j 25 : 34^ Mark 9 : 47. John 3 : 3, ft. 1 Cor. 6 : 9, 10 ; 15 : 50.

That the phrase in the passage under consideration, (Matt. 21 : 43,) does not mean the first mentioned kingdom is evident; for that was never in possession of the Jews, and consequently could never be taken from them. That it does not mean the last mentioned, is equally evident; for the transactions, which took place in the vineyard representing the kingdom, arc wholly and altogether inapplicable to the kingdom of glory, and moreover, those who are once admitted as subjects, shall never be ejected, nor shall the kingdom ever be taken from them. The meaning of the term must therefore necessarily be limited or confined to the kingdom of grace, the dispensation of mercy, and manifestation of eternal truth, producing the true knowledge of God, accompanied with that worship which is pure and holy, worthy of that God who is its institutor and its object, and to which the Jews had been first called and chosen by God, to be " a special people unto himself, above all people on the face of the earth," Deut. 14: 2, "to be a kingdom of priests, and a holy uation," Ex. 19 : 6, and who required of them, " that they fear Him, walk in all his ways, love him, and serve him with all their souls, and with all their heart," Deut, 10: 12, 13.

This kingdom of grace, (which is preparatory to the kingdom of glory,) our Saviour says, "shall be taken from" the chief priests and elders of the people, to whom the parable was spoken, (Matt. 21 : 23, 45,) and "given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." What nation that was, we learn from Acts 13 : 46, where Paul says to the Jews, " Seeing ye put the word of God from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo ! we turn to the Gentiles;" see also Matt. 8 : 11. The Gentiles were "the nation" to whom the kingdom was given, or who were admitted into it after the rejection of the Jews ; and as the kingdom, after the admission of the Gentiles, constituted the Church of God among the Gentiles, then must it previously have been the Church of God among the Jews ; for from the latter it was taken, and given to the former.

16 TIIE CHURCH BEFORE CHRIST.

The same doctrine, viz : " the existence of a Church before the time of Christ," is also taught by St. Paul in Rom. 11: 17-24, where he speaks of "a good olive tree" some of whose branches were broken off, and others of "a wild olive tree" grafted in. It is a figure, taken from the custom of grafting branches or scions of wild olive trees, which bare no fruit, into the stock of barren olive trees in a state of cultivation, in order to produce fruitfulness. That "the good olive tree" represents the Jews, and "the wild" one the Gentiles, needs no farther proof than a careful perusal of the passage, which will convince every one of the fact.

The good olive tree must then represent the Jews either as a nation, or else as a Church. If as a notion, it unavoidably follows, that faith was necessary to citizenship among the Jews; that the Gentiles by faith became citizens of Palestine ; that by faith they became incorporated into, and entitled to, all their national privileges : — consequences which are altogether inadmissible^ and highly absurd, and which at once overthrow the position, that the good olive tree represents the Jews as a nation. It must then represent them as a Church, into which the Gentiles, as "wild olive branches/' were ingrafted, or admitted by faith, and by which they became members thereof, and entitled to all its blessings and privileges. In support of this, see Gen. 12: 3; Matt. 8: 11, 12; Acts 13: 46; Gal. 3 : 7, 9, 13, 14. The passage therefore unquestionably proves,

1. That a Church existed be/ore the time of Christ ; for if there was no Church before his time there could be none after it; as the Gentiles, or ingrafted branches, are represented as only taking the place occupied by the natural branches before their breaking off, and as being grafted in among the rest that remained, and partaking with them of the root and fatness of the olive; verse 17.

2. It proves too, that that Church was among the Jews ; for they are represented by the good olive tree, and the Gentiles by the wild one.

Thus, from what has been said, we think it evident, that the position for which we have contended, (viz. the existence of a Church before the time of Christ,) is firmly established. For besides the testimony of the Old Testament, we find in the Xew, that Stephen speaks of "a Church in the wilderness," Acts 7:38; and that Jesus speaks of "a kingdom of God," (which term as we have seen denotes the Church,) from its first settling in Palestine, until his death, and the subsequent destruction of Jerusalem, when "the kingdom" was to be taken from the Jews, and given to a nation who would " bring forth the fruits thereof." As the time from Moses, "who was in the Church in the wilderness," to Christ, the founder of the Christian Church, embraces a period of about fifteen hundred years, we here have scripture testimony to prove the existence of a Church during all that period, that is, back to the time of Moses. And in the passage last considered, (viz . Rom. 11 : 17-24,) Paul carries it farther back ; for he speaks of the root of the olive tree, representing the Jewish Church, as being " holy" that is, consecrated and set apart for the service or worship of God ; fofcsuch, unquestionably, is the meaning of the word in this place, and by this root he means Abraham who was "called out" and "separated from" his kindred, Gen. 12:1; Josh. 24 : 2, 3 ; from whom the Jews descended; and in whom "all the families of the earth were to be blessed/' Gen. 12:3; Gal. 3 : 8. This carries us back to about two thousand years before Christ, and affords evidence of the existence of "a society called out from the world, and set apart for the service or worship of God/' however small its number, or in other words of a " Church" (however small the number may be of its members) from that period down to the rejection of the Jews from, and the admission of the Gentiles into, the "kingdom," or the founding of the Christian Church.

Section II

Having thus shown from the Scriptures, that a Church existed before the time of Christ, and traced its existence as far back as the time of Abraham, the question now arises,

Did a Church or religious society exist before the time of Abraham ?

It might indeed, and very justly too. we think, be inferred from the nature of the case, that God would, in all ages, have at least some who worship him ; for we are informed that in the most degenerate times of Israel, when the prophet Elijah complained and said, that he alone was left, and his life sought after by the idolatrous multitude, that the answer of God to him was, "I have reserved to myself seven thousand who have-not bowed the knee to Baal," 1 Kings 19 : 10—18.

In reasoning then from the nature of the case, to shew the probability of the existence of a Church before the time of Abraham, we take as granted what, we presume.

THE CHURCH EEFORE ABRAHAM. 19

every one -will be ready to admit, viz : that when God created man, he created him a free moral agent, and designed him as a subject of moral government. But in order that he might act in this capacity, it was necessary that he have a knowledge of his Creator; of the relation he sustained towards him; of the rule or law by which the quality of his moral actions were to be determined ; and also of the consequences of his disobedience or transgression. As a knowledge of these things was indispensably necessary to his happiness as a free moral agent, and as human reason was too weak, too limited, and too uncertain to discover by a process of induction, these important moral truths, we cannot reasonably suppose, that G-od would leave man to himself, with no other guide than his own frail and erring reason, to discover the will of his Maker, on the performance of which all his happiness depended. A revelation of these things being therefore necessary, we might reasonably expect that it would be given; and if so, it must come by direct communication in language from God, that man's knowledge on these subjects might be adequate, complete, of common apprehension, sufficiently authoritative, and adapted to his circumstances.

Adam being thus put in possession of this knowledge, and fully comprehending the rule which was to determine the quality of his moral actions, and the consequence of his disobedience, would render himself liable to incur the penalty as soon as he transgressed, and if after such transgression, there remained a possibility of his regaining the favor and friendship of God, we may justly infer, from the goodness and mercy of God, that a farther revelation of his will would be made, pointing out, at least obscurely, the way in which reconciliation might be effected in order to preserve him from sinking into despair. But notwithstanding this favorable disposition towards Adam, the infliction of some signal punishment would still be necessary, that he might be convinced that sin would not go unpunished, and that the recollection of what he once suffered on account of it, might induce him to guard against it in future. It cannot therefore be reasonably supposed that Adam, when he had transgressed, and experienced immediately in his own person, and in such a signal manner too, some of the evil consequences of disobedience towards God, would be likely to forget, that misery is the certain consequence of the commission of those things which are not acceptable in the sight of God, and that such things are consequently not to be done. Nor can it reasonably be supposed that he would fail to instruct his offspring, in the knowledge of those things which he knew to be pleasing and acceptable to (rod, and of such as were displeasing to him, so far as he was acquainted with them —such instructions, such warnings, coming as they w ould, from a father, from one who was known to speak from experience, and who, no doubt, shed tears of bitterness, at the recollection of the happiness he once enjoyed, and the misery he then endured on account of his disobedience; could not fail of making deep impressions on the minds of, at least, some of his offspring, and of inducing them, so far as their knowledge extended, to perform those things which were pleasing, and avoid such as were displeasing to God, and productive of misery to themselves.

Then, as the increase of the human family, in its corrupt state, would bring with it an increase of wickedness, such as were averse thereto would have less intercourse, less communion with the ungodly, and more with those who held the same views, had the same feelings, and were engaged in the same pursuit with themselves. The belief also, that God is the righteous Governor of the world, who will punish sin, in which they would be instructed by Adam, who received this doctrine from God ; had experienced the truth of it in his own person ; who lived among them for centuries* and who might be regarded as a " living monument," to attest its truth, joined with his influence as head and father of all, would lead them to seek God's favor, or appease his wrath, by the performance of such things as they supposed would meet his approbation. Hence they would naturally associate together for the performance of such rites as conscience dictated, or God commanded, in order to render Him propitious to them. Such an assembly, thus convened and distinguished from other men, by believing and obeying the commands of God, as far as made known to them, would be a "Church," an "ekklesia," in the New Testament sense ; for there the word is invariably applied to persons, and not to places ; is not limited to numbers, but is employed to denote any number of people, either actually assembled, as in Acts 15 : 22, or accus~ tomed to assemble in the same place for religious pm> poses, as in Rom. 16: 5; Col. 4: 15, and is moreover applied to them before their organization by the election and ordination of rulers and elders, as in Acts 14 : 23. Let us now inquire whether the language of Scripture coincides with the preceding inferences, drawn from the nature of the case, in support of the proposition that a Church existed before the time of Abraham.

It is readily admitted, that Scripture testimony is not so full and complete on this subject, as it is on the existence of a Church after the time of Abraham; nor can we reasonably expect that it should be, when we reflect that the first twelve chapters of Genesis embrace a period of more than two thousand years, a period of greater length than is embraced by the remaining chapters, and all the books of the Old Testament together. Brief however as the history is, it contains some very strong and clear intimations af the existence of a Church or religious society before the time of Abraham.

In reasoning from the nature of the case, to shew the probability of its existence, we took as granted, that "(rod created man a free moral agent," and shewed that a knowledge of his Creator; of his relation towards Him ; of the rule which was to determine the quality of his moral actions; and also of the consequences of his disobedience or transgression, was thereby rendered necessary, and that these things were to be subjects of revelation, made by direct communication in language from God. These positions are confirmed by scripture testimony. See Gen. 1 : 28—30 ; Gen. 2 : 16, 17 ; Gen. 3 : 9—19. But to enter into particulars, we find