Assuming, then, for a moment, the truth or feasibleness of this theory, a very little consideration will serve to show, that practically it makes no difference (so far as regards our treatment of the baptized as regenerate) if we adopt it; provided only we carry it out honestly and consistently: for the Bible and the Prayer-book alike pronounce all the baptized to have been " grafted into Christ's Church :" and when the baptized man falls afterwards into sin, the inspired writers most distinctly, and the Prayer-book by implication, treat him as having fallen from grace, or as having sinned against grace.

Now this assumption is never lost sight of or dropped, either in the Bible or in the Prayer-book ;-never, I mean, dropped so that the baptized man should be addressed as a heathen, and bid to become, as for the first time, a member of Christ."

66

So that, on Church principles, we are required to believe that a child is really made a member of Christ in Baptism; and ever afterwards he is to be addressed as having been received into Christ's Church: and, on the hypothetical principle, we are required to assume that the child has been made a member of Christ; and if we adhere to the precedents furnished to us by both Biblo and Prayer-book, this assumption is never to be cast aside; for when the person baptized afterwards falls into sin, we are still to assume that he has fallen from gracein fact, to adhere to our original hypothesis respecting him.

No difficulty is removed by this theory.

On Church principles, you have the difficulty of believing that God has, in such a simple rite as Baptism, made the person a "member of Christ." On the hypothetical theory, you have the difficulty of accounting for the fact that God requires you to assume that IIe has regcnerated

the person baptized, when in all probability (according to your view of Regeneration) He has not; and the further fact, that if the man, after baptism, falls into sin, you are to adhere to the assumption.

But this theory has not been honestly and consistently carried out. It has been applied to explain certain statements in the Baptismal Services, and then abandoned. The child has been pronounced regenerate at the time of Baptism; but if, afterwards, he turns out unspiritual or sinful, then he is at once assumed not to have received grace in Baptism. His after-course of sin is taken to prove that God has withheld grace, not that he has fallen from it.

This is not Scriptural. If we affect to derive our hypothetical theory from Scripture, and explain the Scripture statements respecting the members of the visible Church hypothetically, then we must address the baptized if we see them sin after Baptism, as sinning against grace, for this is what the Apostolic writers do.

With the decrees of God respecting individual souls we have nothing to do, so far as this matter is concerned. They are, as our Article declares, "secret to us;" but we have to follow that "will of God which we have expressly declared unto us in the word of God:" and this expresslydeclared will, in a thousand places of Scripture, is, that He has one Church-that all the members of this Church partake of the grace of His Covenant, and that, if they sin, they are to be treated as those who have fallen from grace, not as those who have never received it.

SECTION VII.

PRAYER-BOOK AND ARTICLES.

it will be necessary to advert very briefly to another point before I conclude this part of the subject.

If I have cited Scripture faithfully in the preceding pages, then we unquestionably derive from Scripture the doctrine that a certain grace is annexed to Baptism, and that all the baptized are assumed to have received this grace therein; in other words, we derive from Scripture the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration.

Doubts, however, have been expressed, by many clergymen, as to whether the Church of England really teaches this doctrine.

Notwithstanding the fact that the Church requires her ministers to assert over each baptized person that he is regenerate, it is said that the Articles express the doctrine more feebly than the Prayer-book does-that the Articles of the Church are her true standard-and that, therefore, her doctrine on this subject is uncertain. I believe that the history of the Baptismal Service and Articles shows, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that there can be no discrepancy between the Articles and the Liturgy on this point.

It is very commonly asserted, that the Baptismal Service represents the Roman Catholic doctrine previously held, which is supposed to be that Regeneration is conveyed absolutely; and that the Articles represent the Protestant doctrine, which is assumed to make the connexion between Baptism and Regeneration more uncertain, if indeed there be any connexion at all. Now, there might be some colour for this assertion, if our

Baptismal Services were derived from, or translations of, the old unreformed Services; which Services (it is assumed) were full of assertions of Baptismal Regeneration.

But what is the fact? Why, that our Baptismal Service (I mean, of course, that of 1552) is the most purely Protestant, so far as its origin is concerned, of all our Services.

It contains far less matter derived from the old Service books than any other part of the Prayer-book.

It is altogether a new Service derived from purely Protestant sources; only one of its numerous prayers (that beginning "Almighty and Immortal God") being found in the old Baptismal offices.

Now, if our Reformers did not believe in the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration, they had the fullest opportunity for expressing that unbelief by omitting out of the New Services all assertions respecting the Regeneration of the person baptized.

But they do the very opposite of this. They compose an almost entirely new Service, into which Service they insert a categorical assertion of the Regeneration of the person baptized-there being no such assertion in the old Romish Service.

In the old Service the only recognition of any benefit which the child has actually received is an indirect assertion in a prayer which the priest was directed to say when he anointed the infant.

66

Almighty God, the Father of our Lord Jesus, who hath regenerated thee of water and the Holy Ghost, and hath given unto thee remission of all thy sins: He vouchsafe to anoint thee with the Unction of His Holy Spirit, and bring thee to the inheritance of everlasting life."

This prayer, which had been retained in the Service of

1549, was omitted in that of 1552, and in its place was substituted the present direct assertion that the infant is 'regenerate and grafted into the body of Christ's Church," and the thanksgiving, in which we render to God thanks that "it hath pleased Him to regenerate this infant with His Holy Spirit, to receive him for His own child by adoption, and to incorporate him into His Holy Church." And we proceed to predicate of the child baptized that he is "dead to sin" and "buried with Christ in His death."

Now, if our Reformers did not hold so high a view of the benefits of Baptism as was held by the Church before the Reformation, how can we possibly account for the fact that they should require us to give thanks for benefits (in word at least) so much greater and more numerous than those recognised in the old Services? And if they were

Judged by their respective Services, Baptism has a far higher position in the English than in the Romish Church, for the whole of the English Baptismal office has to do with Baptism itself, its institution by Christ, the grace and promises connected with it, and its teaching; whereas in the Romish office the administration of the Sacrament itself is thrust into a corner, and four-fifths of the Service have to do with other ceremonies as outward signs of some inward spiritual graces conferred by them, such as the priest breathing on the infant-the priest placing his hands on its head-the exorcising and benediction of the salt-the making the infant taste this salt— three separate exorcisms of the infant itself before its Baptism—the application of saliva before Baptism, an anointing with oil before Baptism, and another anointing with oil after Baptism: so that ir the copy of the Rituale Romanum which I have now before me, out of ten pages occupied by the Baptismal Service, not two have to do with the Sacrament itself.

All these adventitious ceremonies (especially as some of them, e.g., the exorcisms, are supposed to be means of grace in themselves) must detract from the witness of the Church to the grace of Baptism itself as a Sacrament of Christ's institution.