straitened bounds of scientific matter, and yet his single conclusion here leads him insensibly to a whole parcel of conclusions in religious matter or in ethical matter." Changes of opinion, and tone and habit of thought may be wrought in indirect and unexpected ways. Fifty years ago, John Foster, in his "Essay on Popular Ignorance," congratulated himself on the increased introduction of machinery in the mechanical employments, as it would make the laboring classes understand that there is such a thing as physical law, and thus assist in dispelling from their minds superstitious beliefs in omens, charms and witchcraft. And now Dr. Bushnell explains that machinery has so familiarized the same classes with the unyielding laws of matter, that they are led to expect the same fixity in all phenomena, and have no room in their thinking for the supernatural.

Besides every Intellectual belief gathers round it its appropriate feeling, and when the belief is disturbed, suffering is aroused emotionally. The condition of doubt is painful. And these emotions are beyond the control of the individual. They have become a part of him without his consent, and spring up spontaneously under the fitting circumstances. De Quincey shows that the agitation and sorrow of Eloisa under her sin would have been impossible to a vestal virgin of Rome, but was natural and necessary to her, enveloped as she was by the religious atmosphere of Christianity. Now Science, in that part of it which is merely classificatory, does not excite any antagonism or alarm. Botany and Zoology may go on arranging their groups and subgroups, and no protest will be uttered. But it is when we come to the sciences which assume to account for the concrete forms; or when the large generalizations of scientific philosophy are reached, that existing and inherited beliefs are invaded and painful feelings aroused. Such is the case when Darwin promulgates his theory of the "Descent of Man," and when Spencer announces his sweeping and universal law of evolution. These are at once perceived to be at variance with many existing opinions, creeds and philosophies, and opposition and aversion are instantly excited. To many

of the best minds of the day, imbued with theology, science and religion appear utterly irreconcilable. To them science appears to be tending headlong toward a materialism, dark, desolate and hopeless, in which all man's noblest thoughts and aspirations shall be dissolved as baseless dreams, leaving a morality of "Eat and drink to-day, for to-morrow we die." On the lower ground of literature, which reflects the more general feeling of the public as affected by the new thinking the expression of despondent moods is frequent, at times freighting the lines of poets with a delicious and infectious melancholy. Tennyson, who sings hopefully in "Locksley Hall," in his "In Memoriam," in which many meditations on life, on man's hopes and beliefs, pass through the shadow of a great sorrow, attains but a struggling faith,

"Behold we know not anything;

I can but trust that good shall fall
At last-far off-at last, to all,
And every win er change to spring.

So runs my dream; but what am I?

An infant crying in the night;
An infant crying for the light;
And with no language but a cry."

Again he sickens with the unceasing turmoil and conflict of opinions, and longs for the conscious calm of the "LotosEaters," in a "land in which it seemed always afternoon," to rest and "never wander more." And lastly in a recent sonnet he inquires,

"Is there anything worth the knowing?"

The delicately refined William Morris turns from the problems of the time, "I cannot ease the burden of your fears," is his apology. But he essays to give a few moments of oblivion, and sings a song so enchanting that while you listen you forget

But it is needless to extend the range of illustration. These are but the utterances of widely-prevalent moods. In the midst of the doubts and confusions of this transitional time, Science holds it must continue to calmly do its appointed work. It can but urge loyalty to truth, believing that what is such will

in the end survive, and that the truth cannot be evil, nor produce evil. "Fear not the new generalization," says the deepminded Emerson. "Does the fact look crass and material, threatening to degrade thy theory of spirit? Resist it not; it goes to refine and raise thy theory of matter just as much." Science has its eye on the future, and holds that the highest point of view which the mind of man is capable of attaining will be sufficient for him, giving satisfaction to his thought, stilling doubt, allaying every fear, harmonizing all discord. It feels assured that in the end all will be well, for it is clear that existing beliefs and institutions can only be permanently supplanted, if supplanted at all, by higher ones. Science is full of hope, knowing that,

"Through the ages one increasing purpose runs.”

And the thoughts of men are widened by the process of the suns.

ART. IV. THE DOCTRINE OF BAPTISM AS TAUGHT IN THE HEIDELBERG CATECHISM,

BY THE REV. E. V. GERHART, D. D.

Or late the doctrine concerning the Sacrament of Holy Baptism has received special consideration, and called forth. earnest discussions, both within the pale of the Reformed Church and to some extent also among other denominations, occasioned chiefly by the able article of the Rev. Mr. Rupp on Regeneration and Conversion. These discussions afford

new evidence of the fact that the rationalistic tendencies of the prevailing theology have supplanted the old Protestant faith in the Sacraments as appointed means of divine grace. Claiming to be the faithful representative of Reformation ideas, the religious press of our day, generally at least, denies, respecting the efficacy and necessity of Baptism, what the most authoritative Confessions of the Protestant Church with one voice affirm, and affirms what these confessions explicitly

deny. Baptism is the seal of regeneration and of the forgiveness of sins. So these confessions of the sixteenth century all teach; and in this respect they are in harmony with the faith of the Church catholic in every age. But the religious press of our day commonly affirms that Holy Baptism is at most only a significant religious ceremony. The ceremony symbolizes forgiveness and the renewing grace of the Holy Spirit; but the subject of Baptism, whether infant or adult, is not made a partaker of any positive spiritual gift through the medium of the Sacrament itself.

Taking the leading confessions of the Reformation period as the standard of true Protestantism, these low views of the Sacraments, and particularly of Holy Baptism, must be set down as unprotestant. They are the modern form of Socinian error.

In the Reformed Church the discussion of the historical question revolves around the Heidelberg Confession. What does this most authoritative formulary of the original Reformed faith teach? Has it any sympathy with Socinian unbelief? Does it give any support to the rationalistic opinions of the last century and of the present day? Or do its teachings harmonize with the faith of the Church as perpetuated from age to age in every branch of her communion?

To this general question we will endeavor to furnish an answer. Let us interrogate the Catechism itself. It devotes. six questions to the subject of Baptism. These we propose to take up and consider in regular succession.

The more general doctrine of the Reformed Church, as taught in all her confessions, we presented in an article published in this Review, April, 1868, where the reader will find a collation of the teachings of all branches of the Reformed Church-Swiss, French, German, Scotch, Belgic, and other nationalities. They all affirm substantially the same view of the efficacy of Baptism which is given in our Catechism.

Question 69.-How is it signified and sealed unto thee in Holy Baptism, that thou hast part in the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross?

Answer. Thus That Christ has appointed this outward washing with water, and has joined therewith this promise, that I am washed with His blood and Spirit from the pollution of my soul, that is, from all my sins, as certainly as I am washed outwardly with water, whereby commonly the filthiness of the body is taken away.

The terms of this question are connected with question 66, where it is said "the sacraments are signs and seals." The conception of sign and seal runs through all the subsequent questions and answers, though that of seal, or of a sealing transaction, predominates. It is assumed that Baptism does two things it signifies grace, and it seals grace to the subject.

How is this done? The terms of the question imply that it is done in Holy Baptism. These words, "in Holy Baptism,' are significant. They are used in connection with the present tense-thou hast part. The language is not, thou mayest have part, or thou shalt have part in the one sacrifice of Christ. That would imply that Baptism is only a pledge of some spiritual good which is yet future. Nor is the form of the verb thou hast had part. The Catechism does not use the past tense. That would imply that divine grace, communicated at some other time and in some other way, has now Baptism added or attached to it by way of certification, as the seal of the magistrate is put on a legal document to certify its validity.

The present tense is used. The construction of the language means that Holy Baptism is a present sealing transaction, or rather, that Christ seals to us in Holy Baptism the redeeming virtue of His sacrifice. The question inquires how this is, or in what sense this is to be taken.

The answer is, first, that Christ has appointed this outward washing with water, and has joined therewith this promise. Here the appointment is referred to Christ, as also in question 68. In question 66 it is referred to God. The English expression, outward washing with water, is not as strong as the original, Wasserbad; literally water-bath. Compare Titus