"a He shows that Helwisse is in error at the outset, where this challenger assumes from premises which Robinson proves not to support that for which they are set down,-what he says is indeed the "effect" of all, "That because we have not taken up a new outward washing or baptism,-for that of amendment of life, he [Helwisse] but adds for fashion-as he hath done, therefore we are of the world; infidels, haters of Christ;' and, what not?" On this, he quickly places Helwisse, by his own argument, in the position of "a vain man, that would deny the grace of God in himself, to advantage an error against other men. Helwisse asserted that "None can come and be joined to Christ without baptism." Robinson makes it clear, from Scripture, that there is saving faith "before baptisın, in some men a longer time, in some a shorter, and in some also dying unbaptized.”b Acts viii. 35, shows, he says, "that they who believe and repent are to be baptized, to wit, being unbaptized before, as they then were, and as we now are not; God having also added to the outward washing, or baptism, though in the false church, the inward washing of the Spirit to repentance, and amendment of life." This sentence is given because of its relation to the lately revived controversy respecting baptismal regeneration. For what Robinson might have intended to convey in it, we are no way accountable. Yet it could not be that he intended a spiritual regeneration, since he pronounces elsewhere the doctrine to be "most false," that " baptism doth, by the very work done, confer grace, and wholly abolish original sin; and that it is of absolute necessity to salvation." In near connexion with the sentence to which our cautionary remark is appended, Robinson writes, "We retain the seal of the covenant of grace, though ministered in Babylon; and not the baptism of Babylon, but the baptism of the Lord in itself, and by the Babylonians, spiritual, usurped, and profaned, but by faith and the Spirit now sanctified to our use... As well may the doctrines of faith there ministered," namely, in the Church of England, " and thence brought by us, be called stolen bread of Babylon, as he [Helwisse] in wantonness of wit, calls the baptism the stolen waters of Babylon.' "e In his "Justification," Robinson had given his reasons for holding that "The church is not gathered, nor men thereinto admitted, by baptism." He adds here, to his former reasons, that "The church is not given to baptism; but baptism, on the contrary, to the church; as are all other the Lord's public ordinances, and oracles." And he says further," John baptized many, but yet gathered no churches; living and dying a member of the Jewish church; therefore the church is not gathered by baptism." If admission into the church be by baptism, he argues, then must casting out be by un-baptizing; and that as often as they return and relapse. Baptism is not a dispensation of Christ's kingly office, but a work of his prophetical: "which is indeed to be joined with admission into the church, and to follow upon it immediately, if the persons be not before baptised.”i "If the church be gathered by baptism, then will Mr. Helwisse's church appear to all men to be built a P. 46. c P. 46, 47. Rom. iii. 2. b Matt. viii. 10. xv. 28. Acts x. 4, 35. Luke xxiii. 40-43. d P. 65. Psal. cxlvii. 19, 20. upon the sand, considering the baptism it had and hath. Which was, as I have heard from themselves, on this manner; - Mr. Smyth, Mr. Helwisse, and the rest, having utterly dissolved and disclaimed their former church state, and ministry, came together to erect a new church by Baptism; unto which, they also ascribed so great virtue as that they would not so much as pray together before they had it. And, after some straining of courtesy who should begin, and that John the Baptist, Matt. iii. 14, misalleged, Mr. Smyth baptized first himself, and next Mr. Helwisse, and so the rest, making their particular confessions. Now, to let pass his not sanctifying a public action by public prayer,a his taking unto himself' that honour' which was not given him either immediately from Christ or by the church; his baptizing himself, which was more than Christ himself did; -I demand-Into what church he entered by baptism? Or, entering by baptism into no church-How his baptism could be true, by their own doctrine? Or Mr. Smyth's baptism not being true; nor he, by it, entering into any church-How Mr. Helwisse's baptism could be true; or into what church he entered by it ?"d h Heb. v. 4. b e Matt. iii. 15. a 1 Tim. iv. 4, 5. d P. 48.-We abstain from commenting on this passage, referring it, with the following, to the solemn consideration of every Baptist, so called. "The first church, in London, was founded soon after 1611, by Mr. Thomas Helwisse. On the controversy about Baptism being agitated by Mr. Smyth, he took the side of the Baptists, and was excommunicated with Mr. Smyth and his followers. He was baptized by Mr. Smyth, and was one of the first in the constitution of that church. On the death of Mr. Smyth, the care of the church was committed to him, and soon after they returned to London; from an idea that they had done wrong to fly from persecution." Hist. of the English Baptists, &c. From about the year 1610 till 1700. By Joseph Ivimey. 1814. vol. ii. p. 505. After what Robinson has said above, would Mr. Ivimey continue to say, "There is no doubt but this silly charge was fabricated by his [Smyth's] enemies, and it is an astonishing instance of credulity that writers of eminent talents have contributed to perpetuate the slander? Vol. i. p. 115. (1811.) He says, in another place, "It must be admitted that there is some obscurity respecting the manner in which the ancient immersion of adults, which appears to have been discontinued, was restored, when after the long night of antichristian apostacy, persons were at first baptized on a profession of faith. Ibid. p. 139. We leave Baptists in the full enjoyment of the consolation these remarks afford them. Why should they be ashamed of Smyth's self-baptism, if Crosby's opinion, in which Mr. Ivimey coincides, be correct, "That after a general corruption of baptism, an unbaptized person might warrantably baptize, and so begin a reformation?" Ibid. p. 144. and 146. And see a note in the edition of 1822, of Neal's Hist. Purit. vol. ii. p. 42. It is due, nevertheless, both to our readers and to Smyth, that the following passage of Smyth's should be introduced here, “If all the commandments of God must be obeyed, then this of baptism, and this warrant is sufficient for assuming baptism. Now, for baptizing a man's self, there is as good warrant as for a man's churching himself: for two men singly are no church; jointly they are a church, and they both of them put a church upon themselves; for as both these persons unchurched, yet have power to assume the church, each of them for himself and others in communion, so each of them unbaptized, hath power to assume baptism for himself with others in communion." See p. 58, in "The Character of the Beast: Or the False Constitution of the Church discovered in certain passages betwixt Mr. R. Clyfton and John Smyth, concerning the Christian Baptism of new creatures or new-born babes in Christ: and False Baptism of infants born after the flesh. Referred to two propositions; 1. That Infants are not to be baptized. 2. That Antichristians It were of little use, after this, to enter into Helwisse's attempt to un-church every individual and every assembly that would not seek baptism from himself or his colleagues; or that would not do, in one way or other, as they had done. "He condemns our profession," says Robinson, "as a false profession,' and us as false prophets;' as he doth also, the profession' and 'prophets of the prelates, and Puritans,' as he calleth them; and therein yieldeth necessarily, that the churches making this false profession' under these false prophets,' by him so deemed, are false churches!" "The particulars following in his Book, do more especially concern myself and writings; against whom and which, through high persuasion of his own knowledge, and most unsanctified affections, together with that zeal of God, which I bear him record he had, though not according unto knowledge,' he letteth loose his tongue into most intemperate rage. And, first, he reproacheth me for the use of that for the want whereof I have just cause to blame myself; which is my logic and philosophy,' as being none of the gifts wherewith Christ endued his apostles' wherein he verifieth the old saying, that Knowledge hath no enemy but Ignorance! Logic is nothing but the right use of reason; as is philosophy the love of wisdom, divine and human; and did the apostles want these? Or doth Mr. Helwisse envy unto me my small pittance in them? Would he have me a new Nebuchadnezzar, with an ox's heart in a man's body? Indeed this his judgment against those arts of wisdom and reason well agrees with his ignorant and brutish dealing against me and the truth. And for my ' terms of art,' which he also blameth, they are neither many, nor without cause; nor yet so dark but that an ordinary reader may, as they are explained by me, understand them."c Robinson had mentioned a double consideration" of baptism; the essential, as the washing, "in the name of the Father, &c. ;" and the administrative, by whom, upon whom, and in what communion to be dispensed. Referring to this, he says, "I grant, that the outward and inward baptism are joined together by Christ, and so ought not, by men, to be separated, but joined together in their time and order; but deny, that, therefore, where the inward baptism by the Spirit is not converted, are to be admitted into the True Church by baptism."-1609. Hall tells his Blessed Mother,"-s '-see back, p. 186-Smyth hath washt off thy font-water as unclean, and hath written desperately both against thee and his own fellows." Baptists themselves are not alike fastidious respecting Smyth's conduct. One who had peculiar means of satisfying himself uses no qualifying words where he speaks of "His strange unscriptural conduct in baptizing himself without call or example:" Dr. Stuart, Life of Ainsworth, prefixed to the "Communion of Saints," &c. Edinb. 1789. p. xlii. The difficulties which encompassed the Baptists, notwithstanding their seeming confidence, is partly evinced from some of them suspecting the derived validity of their administration, and therefore despatching Mr. Richard Blount to be immersed in Holland, and, as it appears, by a Mr. John Batte. Blount thus qualified, came home and immersed the pastor, Mr. Samuel Blacklock, who jointly transmitted what validity they might thus have obtained for themselves, to fifty-three others. Crosby, Hist. of the Bap. Vol. i. p. 102, 103. a P. 53. b Rom. x. 2. "He had not the advantage of a learned education." Ivimey's Hist. Bap. vol. i. p. 122. actually manifested, as in the Infants of believers, there the outward is not to be administered; or that being administered unlawfully in apostate churches, it is no outward baptism at all, nor spiritual in itself, though carnally used, nor to be held upon repentance, without repetition. The outward circumcision of the flesh, and the inward circumcision in the 'heart,' which it signified, and whereof it did admonish the circumcised, were joined together of God, and so were to be by men, and might not be severed without great iniquity. Were the Infants therefore, of the true church debarred it? Or, being profanely administered amongst the idolatrous and apostate Israelites, or to the idolatrous proselytes amongst them, did their abuse change the nature of it in itself? Or, was it no circumcision at all, and so to be repeated, when the Lord vouchsafed to add the circumcision of the 'heart ?" "b I would know of these double-washers, whether if a man professing the same faith with them in holiness outwardly, but in hypocrisy, should be baptized by them; and that afterwards his heart should strike him, and God give him true repentance,-let it be the person they know of, that fled from us under admonition for sin, and joining to and being baptized by them, was presently after by themselves found in the same sin, and so censured,-whether, I say, they would repeat their outward washing formerly made as none, because there was not joined with it the inward washing of the Spirit? Or if they think it none, and so the forementioned person not indeed received in by baptism, as they speak, wherefore did they then excommunicate the same person " C ? "If the washing with water in the name of the Father, &c.,' of a fit person by a lawful minister, in a lawful communion and manner, be true baptism, truly and lawfully administered; then, is washing with water, in the name, &c.,' by an unlawful minister, of an unfit subject, and in an unsanctified communion and manner, true baptism unlawfully and falsely administered. The thing done is the same in both; the difference is only in the manner of doing it... An oath taken in earnest, and for a thing lawful, though profanely, bindeth him that took it." d Treating expressly "Of the Baptism of Infants," Robinson meets his opposite on the question of the "old and new covenants," their nature and applicability; and having prepared his way, he maintains the proposition" That the Infants of the Faithful are within the compass of the New Covenant here spoken of." He begins by placing the opponents in this dilemma: "Since all children coming naturally from Adam are conceived and born in sin,'e and by nature the children of wrath;'f if these men believe, as they do of all, that their children so dying shall be saved by Christ, then must they have a part in His Testament, or in this new covenant. There are not two new covenants or testaments established in the blood of Christ, but one. And since Christ is propounded unto us as the Saviour' of the body,' which is his church,' it is more than strange that these men will ■ Deut. x. 16. Jer. iv. 4. e Psal. li. 5. d P. 61, 62. b P. 59. c P. 60. Eph. v. 23. Col. i. 18. have all Infants to be saved, and yet none of them to be of His body,' or church!' "a b He shows, at some length, the error of confounding the covenants made with Abraham and with Moses; and remarks that "the profession of anabaptistry" may be discovered "as not from heaven, by this error, That the covenant with Abraham, I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed,' is the covenant of the law, and not of the gospel. Upon which," he says, " notwithstanding doth depend the rejecting of Infants from the church and baptism; as also the repeating of the baptism received in false churches; as may appear to him who will observe their pleading for 'apostate Israel' as a true church, because it was 'Abraham's carnal seed,' and so had circumcision as a 'seal of a carnal covenant!'"c "We require of them proof, How children are cast out of the church and baptism thereof; and, how the grace of God is so shortened by Christ's coming in the flesh, as to cast out of the church the greatest part of the church before, the Infants of believers? The Lord Jesus sent out his apostles to teach' or make disciples all nations,' and to 'baptize them;'d opposing' all nations' to that one nation of the Jews. As if he should have said thus,-I have formerly declared my will to that one nation, and circumcised it; 'go' you now, and teach all nations' and baptize them. Now, if Christ's meaning had been, that they should not with the parents-being made disciples, and baptizedbaptize the children; as before they had with the parents,-being made disciples, and circumcised,-circumcised the children; it had been needful he had given them a caveat, to leave the children of the Faithful out in the world, though they had formerly been in the church! If it be objected, that they who were taught, and believed, were to be baptized, therefore not Infants; I deny the consequence. Which should be, if it were true,—and therefore not Infidels, and such as refuse the gospel. And this is the opposition which the Scriptures make; setting impenitent and unbelieving persons against the penitent and believing, and not children against their parents; which is childish to imagine!"e Allied to this, he says in another place," That the outward, or visible church, consists of penitent persons and believing only,' opposing them to impenitent and unbelieving, and that such only are to be baptized, I acknowledge, and the Scriptures brought to confirm it; but deny it, opposing believers to their Infants, which are neither unbelievers and impenitent, nor innocent,' as is affirmed. The vineyard and kingdom' which was taken from the Jews, is let out and given to us; in which, though no briars, nor brambles, nor fruitless trees might grow, yet young plants, and imps, not yet bringing forth fruit actually, both might and may; as children might and may be in God's kingdom, though no rebels." g A mass of Scriptural information and of pertinent remarks, of which later writers appear to have availed themselves, is contained in the general discussion, most serviceable to the cause it sustains; but which we are precluded from enlarging upon, and confine our notice therefore of Robinson's Survey of "The Confession, &c.," published by Mr. d Matt. xxviii. 19. a P. 73. e P. 81. b Gen. xvii. 7, 10. c P. 80. |