ePub 版

sinuated in a variety of forms; but can you believe it,-can you believe that a merciful being—the most merciful being in the universe would make an infant suffer for the neglect of its parents, or for their utter inability to have it baptized? Can the clergy themselves believe it? They often torture the feelings of bereaved parents,* by calling in question the safety of their children who have died without the rites of the church. I cannot think them free from some sinister design in doing this : making all due allowance for the prejudices of education, and for the tendency of money to dim the mental vision, and to destroy the kindly feelings of the heart; yet there is something so monstrous and so inhuman in such a sentiment that I cannot help referring the utterance of it, and the maintenance of it to the influence of knavery or priestcraft.

What harm is there in baptismal regeneration? Think of the awful delusion which necessarily flows from the belief of it. Are there not thousands of baptized infidels, drunkards, liars, and perpetrators of every crime ? yet according to Puseyism, they are all the children of God, standing in no need of regenerating grace to make them christians, and to qualify them for the kingdom of God.*

service but the service of the church, and in no court but in an ecclesiastical court, would he have uttered an expression so insulting to bereaved parents, and so fitted to wound the tenderest feelings of the human heart.

* Vide Evan, elical Magazine and Christian Witness,

But let it ever be remembered that baptism can have no power at all unless administered by a duly qualified priest: there may be the water of baptism, and the words of baptism, and the suitable state of mind for the reception or administration of the ordinance, yet without the duly authorized minister, there will be no forgiveness in it, no heavenly inheritance in it, no regeneration in it, and nothing in it worthy of religious esteem. And who is the duly authorized minister ? Puseyism declares most unequivocally that it is that man, and that man alone, who is episcopally ordained,t It is not merely intended that he can do it more respectably, or more advantageously than others; but it is intended that he is the only kind of man under heaven that can do it at all. I Thus it is

* Baptists are accused of making too much of baptism ; but whu can make more of it than the Puseyites ?

+ The ecclesiastical court has however decided differently. In several cases of recent occurrence, the validity of dissenting baptism is clearly established : and consequently, persons baptized in the meeting house, are as fully entitled to christian burial, and to all the hon. ors, immunities, and privileges of consecrated ground, as those baptized in the parish church. But what can the apostolic successors say to this : they claim a monopoly in the manufacture of christians; but by their own ecclesiastical court, this monopoly is broken down; and consequently their claim to be the only ministers of Christ is destroyed." A house divided against itself cannot stand.

* In the prayer book, Charles the First is honoured as a martyr, But this unhappy monarch was baptized at Dunfermline, by a Presby. terian minister; so that, on Tractarian principles he was no christian, much less a martyr. The king of Prussia, godfather to the Prince of Wales, and Prince Albert, his father, were both baptized by presbyterian ministers, and as such baptism is no baptism, they ought not on Tractarian principles, to be called christians. Would the vicar of

[ocr errors]

sought to make the apostolic succession the
very sine qua non of our spiritual enjoyment,
and of our spiritual existence ;—you cannot
hear the gospel without it, or pray without it;
you cannot be baptized * without it; you can-
not be confirmed without it; you cannot eat
the supper of the Lord without it; you cannot
be properly married without it; you cannot
be properly buried without it;—it is all in all
-the one thing needful—the sovereign balm
for every wound and cordial for every fear:-
even if it walk in the counsel of the ungodly,
or stand in the way of sinners, or sit in the
seat of the scornful, you must still say, "whi-
ther thou goest I will go, and where thou lod-
gest I will lodge," or else you are no christian,
no member of Christ's church, and no inheri-
tor of the kingdom of Heaven.
Gedney, and of Bassing bourn, refuse christian burial to these distin-
guished individuals ? to be impartial they ought. Vide Cumming's
Lectures, p. 57.

* It may be necessary to observe that I have used the term baptism in its popular acceptation. My opinion is that aspersion or sprinkling is not the proper mode, and that unconscious babes are not the proper subjects of this ordinance, I agree with the doctrine of the church of England, which is, that dipping and baptizing are synonymous terms. " (If they shall certify him that the child may be well endure it), he shall dip it in the water discreetly and warily," &c.-Prayer Book.



Importance of family worship-interferes with the clerical office

-preaching should be restricted to the priesthood-In prim. itive times no such restriction Hilary - Cranmer-great piety makes a great preacher-Rev. J. Wesley—necessity of Methodism and Dissent—that would be a dark day for England in which they should be overthrown-Persons cast on a desolate island-must have no preaching, and no public worshipPuseyism and Christianity by no means identical-Missionary exertions consist with the latter, not with the former.

" Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name ; and we forbad him because he

followeth not us." Luke ix, 40.

This doctrine, if carried out into all its legitimate consequences, would proscribe the useful and zealous exertions of more than ten thousand servants of the Lord, arrest the progress of christianity, and throw us back upon all the ignorance—and selfishness, and nonsensical institutions of the dark ages of the world. Not the distribution of religious books--not the erection of churches or chapels—not even the exercise of the pulpit itself is perhaps more favourable to the increase, as well as to the maintenance of vital godliness, than the exercise of a well regulated family worship. A pious layman in the morning of the day, and in the evening of the day, calls together his household and the strangers within his gates, that he may read and explain the scriptures, and pray with them, and instruct them in the principles and duties of a religious life. But as he cannot do all this without a temporary assumption of the ministerial office, what is to save him from the charge of pretending to holy orders? and of the guilty practices of the dissenting minister? Between them there is little or no difference: and if one is wrongthe other cannot be right, and both must be consigned to the abyss that swallowed up Korah, Dathan and Abiram.

It is true that monarchs, and prelates, and nobles, and warriors, and statesmen, in accordance with the wishes of the church, keep a chaplain to do the religion of the house; but mere official services are seldom or ever so faithfully, or so effectually performed as those proceeding from the affectionate feelings of a conscientious or paternal regard. Besides, a poor man, for the want of the money qualification, could have no help of this kind, however numerous his family, or urgent his spiritual necessities : and even if he had, like persons in the higher walks of life, neglecting his own soul, and forgetting his own responsibility-he might be induced in the spirit of vain confidence to say, “ Now know I that the

« 上一頁繼續 »