On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
from him * I am o ^ e of those wiio , ** rather comply with , the custom of Infant Baptism , as an innocent custom , than submit to it as a Christian duty ;" and the arguments adduced in Mr . Belsham ' s Plea , have not convinced me that I have been in an error on
this subject : I agree with Mr- Belsham , ** that the baptizing children of baptized persons at an adult age has nothing to say for itseJf , and that the controversy really lies between those who consider baptism as a Christian ordinance , and those who
think that the command to baptize has a reference only to proselytes . ' Of this latter class I am one , and beg leave to lay before your readers a few remarks on Mr . BelshanVs arguments , in favour of the opposite supposition ,.
J object to the kind of evidence which Mr . Belsham produces , 1 certainly think , that if it were an ordinance positively and absolutely enjoined by Christianity , we should have had some precept or some clear example of it in the New Testament . The
practice of religious worship , if not positively enjoined there , is so in the Old Testament , aud is sanctioi ^ ed by the example of Jesus and the apostles . The substitution of the first day of the we . ek in lieu of the Jewish . Sabbath , cannot , 1 think , be shewn to be a
positive command , but is , hife the custom of Infant Baptism , an innocent and laudable custom , early introduced into the Christian church , probably in the apostolic age , and resting for its authority or its expediency ou the declaration of Paul , " that all days , are .
in reality alike , " and that , consequently , if a proper portion of tirne be set apart fpr religious service , it is of little consequence what day of the week be , appropriated to that purpose . In Christian countries the first day is .
appropriated to public worship , that it may sei o as a , meaiprial of the great truths of our religion ; and the change from . the seventh to the first day , rests qn . the authority of expediency and of tradition , which is sufficient to shew
that it is . not forbidden , though it can pot bo proved that it was , ever commanded * If , Mfo \ Belsh ^ m will be sfcti $ fi £ < l withi a similar degree oft ^ tu thorfrity bejqg ascribed to Infant Baptism * I ; am tmdy tq agrae with ; him > I , think the feet * , winch he hm produced , sufficient tp prove ; ttotit is a »
Untitled Article
ionpeent an 4 laudable custom ,, expedient , as affording a good opportun ity of impressing on the minds of the child ' s relations , the duties which they ought to fulfil towards it , and probably observed in the apostolic age ,
perhaps by the apostles themselves , and certainly without their making any opposition to it ; but I do not think the evidence which he has brought forward * sufficient to establish it as a positive injunction of Christianity . The evidence of the
authenticity of the books of the New Testament , appears to me to differ very materially from that respecting baptism , the testimony of the fathers to the first , being evidence to a fact , with respect to which it is morally impossible , that they should have been mistaken , that with respect to tfee
latter being evidence to a doctrine in which they very probably might be mistaken , and with respect to their reasonings , concerning which Mr . Belsham allows , that they were almost all mistaken . As to the assertion , page 1 . 0 , " In fact , there is no book ot that collection , which forms the
New Testament , the evidence of which can be compared in clearness and decision , with that which establishes the apostolic origin of Infant Baptism ;" if your readers will conipare the evidence produced , in the Plea , with the mass of evidence to the genuineness of the books of the New Testament , to
be found in Gardner ' s Credibility , they will be able to judge , whether this be npt , at least , a very hyperbolical and unguarded assertion - If , however , Mr . Bejsham , on the authority of tradition and the fathers only ,
claims Infant Baptism as a Christian institution , as a positive rite of Christianity , as a Christian duty , that is , as a doctrine of the Christian religion , then 1 do not see upon what grounds he rejects the testimony of the fathers
to original sin ,, &c . ; or if he say , that these *\ re riot similar as being not practices but speculations only ,, why does he reject the testimony of the fathers to the propriety of mixing water with wine at the Lord ' s Supper ,
and , of many qther , superstitious practices ^ collected bQthwilb , that oralnance and wjt ] bt banjisni , such as-. tM pnotfs . tmw iy * iwed < tc * to * r i afoo t * wtoeb {* tK ««< ifti * Uf «» wttangjw the > earJ > L fathers ;? Btem p . # & ** iW
Untitled Article
7 * 6 jf ?« i # 0 f-ft * o # M * . jfteUfam " * Ptw jftr hiftkut Mo&tim-
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Dec. 2, 1817, page 716, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2471/page/20/
-