and by outward deed and gesture declared his good will towards them." And this is alleged as a proof that those who have not followed the innocency of little children, but cast it away; who were not merely born in original sin, but in their works "deny God," by a course of actual transgression, have no need of a vital and radical change of heart, no need of a divine birth and new creation in Christ Jesus, to fit them for that kingdom where the unholy cannot enter. In short, because Christ is pleased, by a declaration of his mercy, in baptism freely to cancel and reverse the effects of original sin in those "who have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," we are taught to infer that faith, repentance, a new heart, and a divine birth unto righteousness are quite needless in order to free us from the dreadful curse of actual and habitual ungodliness!

Let us now examine the proofs alleged from the Articles. The words in the tenth article, "Them which believe and are baptized, are in the Latin copy, renatis et credentibus.'" From this Mr. Watson infers that their compilers viewed the terms baptized and regenerate as convertible, and therefore that regeneration, in his sense of the word, always attends baptism. But both parts of this argument are baseless. Granting that there is, as we believe there is, an important sense of the term regeneration, as a birth into the privileges of the Christian covenant, which always attends baptism, this will not prove a baptismal regeneration of a quite distinct kind, of which we believe that, like an idol, "it is nothing in the world," and that it is only a mischievous delusion, to conceal from adult baptized sinners their absolute need of an inward and saving repentance and renewal of heart. But the Latin article by no means proves the point for which it is alleged. Where the word "renatis" stands alone, it is translated by its proper counterpart "regenerated." It is only when joined with the word "credentibus" that the two are translated "which believe and are baptized; and as if to shew that two are taken in combination, their order is reversed in the translation." And no one, whatever his school of theology, will doubt that all who "believe and are baptized" are also "regenerate and believing."

The sixteenth article is next brought forward to disprove "conditional regeneration." Baptism, it is said, is there identified with the receiving of the Holy Ghost. And here, again, if this were true, it would by no means refute the doctrine which Mr. Watson opposes, that a vital change of heart is necessary for all, whether baptized or unbaptized, who have added actual sin to original guilt. The Holy Ghost was received by Bezaleel and Aholiab, who perished in the wilderness; by Saul, when he prophesied, and by the Apos

tles, at their first call, after the resurrection, and at the day of Pentecost. So that the expression is clearly applied both to higher and lower communications of the Spirit, to those which are external and transient, as well as to those which are lasting and eternal. But there is no proof that in the article these two things are identified. The assertion that "after we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given" is aimed against those "who say they can no more sin, as long as they live here." Now there were never found any to assert that no baptized person could ever sin afterwards. But some who have claimed high attainments in grace have also claimed for themselves a sinless perfection. And if the article be aimed against them, it must intend a far fuller, or at least closer and more intimate "receiving of the Holy Ghost" than such as is common to all the baptized.

The article on baptism is then quoted, but in a way which savours too much of controversial management. That we may not copy the bad example, we shall quote the whole context before we expose the deception :

"Not to multiply this kind of argument, I reprint the 27th Article, and I shall then have more than sufficiently established my position—that the Church of England teaches that adults properly qualified by faith and repentance, and infants in all cases, are in holy baptism born anew:

Baptism is NOT ONLY a sign of profession and mark of difference, whereby christian men are discerned from others that be not christened, but it is also a sign of regeneration or new birth, WHEREBY, as by an instrument, they that receive baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be THE SONS OF GOD BY THE HOLY GHOST are visibly signed and sealed.'

"We have here three distinct benefits enumerated as attendant on baptism. We are told that these benefits belong to those who receive baptism rightly. Now, before I proceed to re-enumerate the benefits, let us first settle who they be, who in the judgment of the Church receive baptism rightly. For if it shall appear that faith in the recipient, or a promise in his behalf by sureties, of future integrity of life, be necessary in all cases, even that of infants, then this article will avail us nothing in establishing our point. How then stands the case? On a reference to the office for private baptism, where no sponsors are required, no vow and no profession, we find that the minister is empowered to pronounce that baptism to be sufficient and valid, which has been done with water, in the name of the holy and blessed Trinity. And as if to set the matter wholly free from doubt, we find in the Rubric at the close of the service already quoted, that two things are mentioned as essential parts of baptism, viz. that the child was baptized with water, and that it was in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' Now, we have here no mention of faith, nor of vows, nor renewal of vows, and we are therefore at liberty to conclude that the Church considers all infants to be rightly baptized, who have been baptized with water in the name of the three Persons of the holy and undivided Trinity. We have then no fears but that all who in infancy were dedicated at the font of the Church, to Christ, have received baptism rightly. What now are the three benefits conferred on all thus baptized? They are-1. Grafted into the Church, or taken into the number of God's elect. 2. The promises of forgiveness of sin are sealed to them by the Holy Spirit. 3. The same Holy

Spirit makes them the sons of God by adoption. Now surely these are the blessings which are comprised in the term regeneration, and he can be no true son of the English Church, who denies that all who-being free from impediment to the reception of grace-are rightly baptized, are born of God. If to be grafted into Christ's holy Church, to be forgiven all the sin and all the punishment due to the sin of Adam's transgression, and to have heaven placed within our reach,-if these things deserve not the name of a newbirth, of a death unto sin, and a birth unto righteousness, then the covenant blessings of christianity are not those which are revealed in the Book of Eternal Life."-(pp. 59-61.)

The reasoning then is of this kind :-All who received baptism rightly obtain the benefit named in the article; but infants in every case where the rubric is observed, are rightly baptized; therefore no further change in their case can afterwards be needed, but only a continuance in a grace already possessed. But why did the author speak of repeating the twenty-seventh article, when he omitted nearly one half of the whole? We will give the remainder : "-faith is confirmed and grace increased, by virtue of prayer unto God.

"The baptism of young children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable to the institution of Christ."

Now surely it was rather disingenuous in Mr. Watson to stop short at a semicolon, and yet to tell his readers that he will reprint the article." The clause which finishes the sentence, refutes his whole argument. It shows clearly that the article, so far, relates only to adults, who have faith already, and in whom it may therefore be confirmed; who have received the inward grace of regeneration, and in whom that grace "is increased by virtue of prayer to God." So that the article plainly treats of these persons as partakers of forgiveness and adoption even before their baptism, and teaches us that the outward sacrament is the sign and seal of a grace already given, no less than a means for its further increase and confirmation. This differs toto cœlo from Mr. Watson's view.

Again, the article places infant baptism on a ground quite distinct and independent, by its last clause. Mr. Watson's reasoning, therefore, drawn from the former part, and applied to the case of infants, is a complete perversion of the plain sense of the words, and requires no answer.

In fact the article, taken in its plain and grammatical sense, supplies us with three principles, which are an important guide to the meaning of the other services. First, that no adults can receive baptism rightly, unless possessed of true faith and inward grace, or the substantial benefits of regeneration in its fullest and highest sense. Secondly, that in their case it has a fourfold office; it is a sign of regeneration already possessed in substance, though not yet recognized by the Church; it is an instrument of engrafting into

the Church; and so of a public claim to the title, regenerate; it is a seal of adoption and forgiveness already enjoyed, but not hitherto visibly confirmed; and it is a means for the further increase of faith and grace. Thirdly, that infant baptism rests on a distinct footing, its agreement with the will of Christ, as expressed by his "outward deed and gesture;" that therefore it conveys unconditionally all those benefits which the article states as unconditional; that it is a mark of profession; a sign of inward regeneration; an engrafting into the Church, and sealing of the promises; a cancelling of the curse of original sin, and an actual regeneration in the only sense the word will allow, where faith and repentance are wanting, and there is yet no knowledge of good and evil. But all further blessings are either in the service itself, or after it, in the case of private baptism, suspended upon the conditions of personal faith and repentance.

There is nothing which requires further notice in Mr. Watson's arguments upon this subject. In fact the grand question is entirely passed by, the Scriptural view of Regeneration, or the new creation, irrespective of its connexion with baptism. Till this is first clearly apprehended, the whole controversy will degenerate into a question of ecclesiastical phraseology, an unmeaning strife of words. The quotations from Hooper, Ridley, and Jewell, have the effect of misrepresenting, in nearly equal measure, the views of those authors, and of Mr. Watson's opponents. The former were as far as possible from confounding the reception of baptism with a vital change of heart; and those whom Mr. Watson seeks to refute, equally reject the sentiment that the sacraments are only bare and empty signs. The attempt to place them in collision is futile; the opinions of Hooper and Jewell are, with scarce a shade of difference, those which nine-tenths of the clergy, who are commonly styled evangelical, firmly believe and maintain; although in the subordinate question of mere phraseology, there may perhaps be some diversity in their judgment.

But we must come hastily to a close, for our limits will not allow us to enter on the other topics of the pamphlet, in which there is at least an equal measure of baseless and superficial reasoning. We have not room even for extracts from Mr. Goode's little work, such as we had intended to make; we must therefore content ourselves by commending it to our readers, as a most correct and impartial summary of the present controversy. The facts which it presents to view demand, at this time, the serious, mournful, and deep meditation of every churchman, who longs to see the light of divine truth preserved in its purity and power within the bosom of our Church.

ANCIENT CHRISTIANITY.
Despotism." Vol. II. 8vo.

1842.

By the Author of " Spiritual
London: Jackson & Walford.

THE second portion of one of the most remarkable publications of the present age lies before us. We have read it with somewhat of the care and attention which is its due. Yet we feel that a review, properly so called, is almost out of the question. It will be doing more justice to the author, and more service to the public, if we endeavour rather to construct an argument of our own,— frankly admitting and declaring, at the outset, that we shall derive its main pith and substance from the two volumes of Ancient Christianity.

1

We have already remarked, in a former number, the unvarying tendency of all things human to rapid deterioration; and the constant exhibition of this in the history of the Church throughout all ages and dispensations. The conclusion naturally flowing from this retrospect clearly was, that a declension of the Christian Church might have been anticipated, even taking its rise immediately after the apostolic age.

We also shewed, in another paper,2 that not only might such a "falling away" have been calculated on, from the experience of preceding ages, but that such an occurrence was made still more certain, by clear and positive and repeated predictions, from the mouths and pens of prophets and apostles. The rise of a great and overwhelming APOSTACY was again and again foretold,-alike by Daniel, St. Paul, and St. John, and the period of its open manifestation was most distinctly pointed out, as being that in which the imperial power should be "taken out of the way," that in which the iron or fourth kingdom, Rome, should be severed into ten kingdoms, of mingled iron and clay.

We now propose to enquire, in continuation of the subject, whether this" falling away," which we have seen from past experience to be in the highest degree probable, and which we learn from inspired prediction to be absolutely certain,-did, in fact, visibly take place? And if so, at about what period? The importance of the enquiry at the present moment is most evident, for we are constantly hearing of "the untainted fount of pure antiquity;" s and it hence becomes of no slight interest to discover, what age

1 Churchman's Review, 1842, p. 208--215.

3 British Magazine, 1835, p. 647.

2 Ibid. p.

248-265.