its sponsors shall fulfil, for it, the vows made by them, on its behalf, at baptism; and that, therefore, throughout the period previous to its confirmation, (when FIRST it takes its baptismal vows on itself) the sponsors' character, and not its own, is to form the ground of its security, or danger-its comforts, or its fears.

"Although I confess myself not able, thoroughly, to satisfy my own mind, as to the party on whom lies the responsibility of the baptismal vows, during the period intervening between the baptism and confirmation of the child; yet, on the whole, the idea just advanced, seems to me most consonant with the general tenour of the baptismal service, especially as taken in connexion with the Church Catechism.And, I am the more confirmed in this opinion, because I see not what necessity there can be for the child's afterwards taking the vows on itself, if they rested on it already. And, therefore, if I am correct, we come to this conclusion-that a child regularly baptized, according to the rites of the Church of England, and not yet arrived at the age proper for confirmation is, in the estimation of that Church, safe, whatever its own character may be, if its sponsors, in the mean time, be pious and consistent Christians, And, if this be true, then sponsors do, till the period specified; viz., that of the child's confirmation, vicariously repent and believe for it.

"The responsibility attached to the vows made for the child at baptism, cannot, surely, rest at the same time, on both parties;--and, indeed, Church-people readily confess,-and this concession seems to be made by the Bishop, himself, in his first question at confirmation,-that the child does not take them upon himself till he is confirmed. The consequence, as it seems to me, must be, that till this happens, they, and the responsibility attached to them, must either be totally neutralized, or else rest

on the sponsors. Admit this, and then no less momentous an event than the child's being eternally saved, or lost (should it die before confirmation), depends on their (the sponsors') characters;-THEIR renouncing the devil and all his works, the pomps and vanities of this wicked world, and all the sinful lusts of the flesh;' -THEIR 'believing all the articles of the Christian faith ;'-THEIR keeping God's holy will and commandments, and walking in the same;' the child being responsible only in their persons.

66

According to this representation, then, if the sponsors live a holy life, and the child, previously to its confirmation, die WHILST they are so doing, it is safe;if they lead a wicked life, and the child, previously to its confirmation, die WHILST they are doing so, it is lost. My views of the subject may be incorrect, but this seems, to me, the most intelligible interpretation of the baptismal service, and the Catechism of the Church of England, taken in connexion with each other.

"But, the fact appears to be, as I shall hereafter attempt to show, that the Church of England takes it for granted, that the sponsors of every child, baptized in a proper manner, are pious from the moment of its baptism, till that of its confirma

tion."

* The promise is, that the CHILD shall walk in them all the days of its life; that is, if the Author's opinions, on this point, be just, in the persons of its sponsors, till it shall have been confirmed, and afterwards, of course, in its own person. The child, it is true, much earlier than this, does, in answer to the questions of the catechism, confess the obligation that lies on it to observe the requirements of the Divine law. "These things, when come to age, itself is bound to per form." But, then, this can only refer to the moment when it becomes, in its own person, a responsible being,-the moment of its confirmation.

M

"In winding up the subject, I would observe, that whatever doubt may exist as to who, in the child's early years, constitutes the party, on whom falls the responsibility connected with the promises and vows made for it, at its baptism; there can be no doubt as to the amazing boldness, not to say presumption, of those solemn pledges.

"The whole baptismal service, as well as the catechism purporting to explain it, seem, to me, to have been drawn up by men, who, however great and unquestionable their piety, had, on some highly important Christian doctrines, very indistinct views.

"Such a baptismal service, and such a catechism, might, I conceive, very well, and very probably, have been drawn up by converted South Sea Islanders, in the earlier stages of their Christian knowledge and experience.

"Do not find fault with me, my dear Sir, for the plainness with which I speak. I promise, if you convince me of having erred in judgment, to retract all I have said. Some difficulties attend that explanation of the subject which I have attempted to give; but, I am persuaded, that far greater difficulties attend any other explanation of it.

"As I have already intimated, I cannot but strongly suspect, that they who first introduced the use of baptismal sponsors into the Church, (at what precise period this strange corruption began, I am not a sufficiently good ecclesiastical historian to know) thought (either erroneously, or correctly) that none were fit subjects of baptism but those who had repentance and faith; and, if I am right in my conjectures, we are, then, furnished with the best key to the otherwise quite inexplicable, and, in any case, extravagant expedient, of making one body of indivi.

duals the proxies, the spiritual lieutenants (so far as concerns the exercise of repentance and faith), of another body of individuals.

"This FINESSE is not exceedingly dissimilar from that by which certain courts of justice try causes which, without availing themselves of such an artifice, they would not be allowed to try at all.”

CHAPTER XIII.

"IT is, as we have seen, required and provided,” continued Mr Smith, when the conversation was resumed, "that every child in the Church of England, good, or bad, should learn the Church catechism, and therein be taught to say, that it was, in baptism, made a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven.'

"Now, this, of course, tends greatly to confirm the idea, that the child, during the period between its baptism and confirmation, is not considered, by the Church of England, as a being responsible in its own person; but is to look for its evidences of discipleship, and, therefore, of safety, to the character and conduct of its sponsors. If it were not so, would the strong language in question be put into its mouth, whatever its character may be?

"This (its character), is not even to be inquired into; I mean to say, that the CHURCH makes no provision for this. The Minister may wish to do it, but if he is to be judged by the strict rules and prescriptions of the communion to which he belongs (and by what other rule of judgment can he lawfully be tried?), wo be to him, if he make any demur about sending his young parishioners to be confirmed, on the ground of their depraved spiritual feeling, or practice.

"A very large proportion of Church Ministers, however, never do make any demur of this kind; and, they only, of the whole body, act conformably