1 of Solomon; but at that time, proselytes became so numerous, that they were admitted by baptism only. There were "proseJytes of the gate," and "proselytes of righteousness." The former did not adopt the ceremonials of the Jewish law; but the latter were received into the church by baptism, and were not only thought to be cleansed from Gentile pollution, but were permitted to marry a woman of Is rael, and their offspring were admitted to every Jewish privilege. Says the Babylonian Talmud, "Proselytes are not admitted into covenant, but by circumcision, [baptism] and the sprinkling of blood."-Again, "No one is a proselyte, till he has been circumcised and baptized; and if he be not baptized, he remains a Gentile." Abundant evidence of the early use of baptism by the Jews may be obtained by any one, who will recur to the authorities, to which we shall refer at the end of this article. Whether their law, as they supposed, required the use of this rite in the admission of proselytes into their church, may perhaps be considered as very questionable. But so they understood, and so they practised it; and the existence of the custom, at the time of Christ, and before his coming, being admitted, we can not only account for the expectation of the Jews, that "the Christ," and "that prophet," who they knew was to precede him, would baptize, but for other circumstances, concerning this rite, about which there has been much doubt, and perplexity, and contention, and separation. There was a triumvirate, or council of three, who had the entire power of admitting to baptism. When a proselyte expressed his wish to be received into the church of the Jews, these officers examined him, as to his motives and dispositions; taught him at large the fundamentals of their law; enumerated the privileges, which distinguished the people of God; and repeated the promises, which they believed would be accomplished to every Israelite. Children were gene rally baptized with their parents; but if parents, who had been made proselytes, died before the baptism of their children, the council of three took care of their baptism. "If an Israelite," says Maimonides, "takes or finds a heathen infant, and baptizes him for a proselyte, he becomes a member of the church." Says the Talmud of Babylon, "a little child, who is a proselyte, is baptized by the sentence of the Sanhedrim. If his father be dead, and his mother lead him that he may be made a proselyte, the triumvirate become to him, in this service, instead of a father." And again, "If, when one is a proselyte, his sons and daughters become therefore proselytes, all the advantages, received by their father, extend also to them." Again, "When they are adults," says rabbi Joseph, "they may retract; but this is understood of little children, who were made proselytes with their father." Again, "If a female Gentile be made a proselyte, while yet her child is unborn, the child need not be baptized; for the baptism of his mother answers also for him." Concerning the age of the child to be baptized, the rule was "any male child of a proselyte, under the age of thirteen years and a day, and a female, under the age of twelve years and a day, were baptized as infants; at the request, and by the assent of the father, or the authority of the council." If they were above that age, they consented for themselves. Not only did many of the Gentiles receive the law of Moses, and bring their children with them into the Jewish church, but it was a custom of the Jews in war, to bring away the children of the people whom they conquered, either to adopt them as their own, or to employ them as servants; and one of the most diligent and able inquirers, concerning all the peculiarities of this people, affirms, that "the baptizing of infants was a thing, as well known in the church of the Jews, as ever it has been in the christian church." Consider then, 1. That the Jews had used baptism, as a rite by which they initiated converted Gentiles into their church. It was, in their view, therefore, a proper rite of initiation; and if administered to any of their own nation, it must have implied to them, that a new dispensation was given, into which they, who received the rite, were baptized. This will account to us for the inquiry, "why baptizest thou, IF thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?" It will also account to us for the readiness with which the people received the baptism of John. They believed that the Messiah was immediately to come, and were eager to be made acknowledged proselytes, or converts; as Gentiles were made proselytes, or admitted to the privileges of the Mosaic dispensation. 2. John took baptism as he found it, and suggested no change in the subjects of it. Can we suppose then, that men and women, who had always seen children baptized with their parents, would fail of bringing also their children, and of obtaining for them privileges, which they deemed so important, as an admission into the dispensation— the kingdom of the Messiah? 3. No change in the subjects of baptism was suggested by our Lord. But if he intended, that a change so important, as the exclusion of infants, should have been made, would he not have required it? and would not the evangelists have recorded the requisition? If it was a custom, in his time, to baptize the infants of proselytes, or converts, does not the single circumstance, that he did not forbid their baptism, prove, that he intended that they should continue to receive it. 4. If a missionary, who has lived with those only, who practised the baptism of infants, and who himself had always believed in its propriety, should receive a commission to "go, and convert, and baptize a tribe, or people," would he doubt whether he was to baptize also the infant children of those, who were converted by his preaching? And was it not in this general language, that our Lord commissioned his apostles? those apostles, who had been accustomed all their lives to see infants baptized with their parents? " 5. Is it said, that Christ required, that they be baptized, who "repent and believe?" Gentile converts were required also to repent and believe, before they could be admitted into the Jewish church. But this requisition did not exclude their infants;and why should it ours? 6. Considering the use of the ordinance among the Jews, and the subjects, which they admitted to it, how would they naturally understand the words of Peter, (Acts ii. 39.) "the promise is to you, and to your children?" It was in Jerusalem, at the time of the passover, when the city was filled with Jews, that Peter made the address, from which these words are taken. Three thousand, we are told, were converted, and eagerly inquired of the apostles, "men and brethren, what shall we do?" Hear the answer, and give to the expressions the construction, which they naturally demand. "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the Holy Ghost; for the promise is unto you, and to your children." It had never entered into the mind of a Jew to doubt, whether his infant children were proper subjects for the reception of an ordinance, which admitted them into covenant with God. They would have considered the denial of this ordinance to one of their children, as the greatest of injuries. And surely no language could be adapted, more directly than this of the apostle, to confirm this sentiment. 7. On the supposition, that our Lord intended that baptism, in conformity to established usage, should be administered to infants, as well as to their converted parents, have we reason to expect more plain intimations of it, than in the expressions, "suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven?" "Lydia was baptized, and her household?"—"The keeper of the prison was baptized, he, and all his, straightway."-"I baptized," said Paul, "the household of Stephanus." Viewed in connex ion with the usage of the Jews, this mode of expression appears to me to be a very strong presumptive evidence, that no change in this respect was made in the administration of the ordinance. Is it not, I would ask, the very manner, in which we might suppose that it would be mentioned, if the practice of the Jewish church, of baptizing infants, had been continued by the apostles? In some future article, we may resume this subject. [See Lewis' Orig. Heb. vol. 3, 4, p. 456 and seq. Watton on the traditions and usages of the Scribes and Pharisees in the time of our Saviour, vol. i. p. 102. and seq. Lightfoot's Hor. Heb. and Tal. on the verse. And Wall's history of infant baptism, vol. i. p. 65-95.] Sir, ACCOUNT OF A RELIGIOUS SOLDIER. [Abridged from the Christ. Obs. for Dec. 1802.] SHORTLY after the return of the Duke of York from Holland, one of the regiments which had suffered very materially in the different engagements, was in my parish. A private soldier called upon me one evening after divine service, with a request, that I would explain a particular part of my discourse, which he had just heard, expressing at the same time much interest in the general subject of it. I found him to be a very well informed man, of distinguished piety and much religious knowledge. His language and address betrayed evident marks of strong natural sense, aided by an unusual acquaintance with the word of God, and the operations of his grace upon the heart. He frequently called on me during the continuance of the regiment in my neighbourhood, and every succeeding interview gave me fresh proofs of his religious attainments. At length the regiment, having nearly repaired, by fresh recruits, the loss sustained in Holland, was ordered to join a camp then forming, for the purpose of collecting troops for the Egyptian expedition, under the command of Sir Ralph Abercrombie. A few days before their departure W. brought with him another private of the same regiment, who had expressed a particular desire to speak with me, but of whom he knew very little, except that in some of the engagements in Holland he had been observ ed voluntarily to seek danger, and needlessly to hazard his person, as if with a desperate resolution of ridding himself of life. On being introduced to me alone the stranger said, that he hoped I should excuse the liberty he had taken of coming to request that I would purchase a small parcel which he had brought, in order to enable him to supply himself with a few necessaries preparatory to his voyage to Egypt, as he had no other means of raising a little money. On opening his parcel, which he did not do without some confusion, it proved to consist of some clergyman's bands, one or two religious books, and some manuscript sermons. "Sir," said he, "you will hear with surprise, and I cannot mention it without some uneasiness, what I have for a long time concealed from every one around me, that I am in reality a brother clergyman, though now disguised in the habit of a common soldier. My father is a clergyman in Wales; he educated me himself for the church, and procured me ordination with a title to a curacy at in the county of W- my name is EI continued upon that cure three years, during which time, I am sorry to say, through much imprudence and inattention to the decorum which suited my character, I contracted several debts, which I had neither means nor prospect of paying. Fearing disgrace and imprisonment, and knowing my father's inability to assist me, I quitted the town, and formed the resolution of enlisting as a soldier, which I shortly afterwards did, and was soon sent on the expedition to Holland, whence I lately returned. That you may have no doubts as to the truth of my story, which may possibly induce you to sympathize with a brother clergyman in distress, I will show you several letters and papers, which, when you have read, I trust you will give me credit for the truth of my relation." He also wrote some sentences in my presence, which proved his hand-writing to be the same with that of the manuscript sermons he had requested me to purchase. On putting a variety of questions to him, I felt fully satisfied as to the truth of his story. I urged the duty of endeavouring to return, if possible, to the discharge of his ministerial duties, with a mind influenced and improved by the experience of past hardships and misfortunes. I entered into a long conversation with him on the nature and design of christianity in general, as well as the pastoral office in particular; examined him as to his views of the doctrines of the gospel, and explained my own to him very fully: I entreated him to take what I had said in good part, and urged him, by every sacred consideration, to act the -part, which it appead to me his duty and interest to lopt. He said but little in re y, and almost declined saying any more. I therefore purchased his little parcel, gave him a couple of books, and dismissed him with a blessing, once more intreating him to lay to heart what I had said. In two days the regiment went away, nor did I see Wor Mr. E before their departure. In June last my old acquaintance W― called upon me, and said he was just arrived from Egypt, and had a great deal to say to me. "I have now," continued he, "a story to relate, which I am certain you will feel a deep concern in. You, without doubt, remember that young clergyman whom I brought to your house the year before last, the Rev. Mr. E. At that time I knew very little of him; he however, shortly after we had left you, observed with some emotion, that what you said to him made more impression upon his mind, than any thing he had ever heard in the course of his life. He then made me also acquainted with his history. From that time I was confined in the hospital with a fever, and did not see him again before our departure for Egypt. We embarked on board of different ships; it was not therefore till our arrival at Malta, that we met together. Mr. E-took an immediate opportumity of saying, 'W— I have long wished to see you, I want to tell you how greatly indebted I feel to that dear friend of yours at I can never forget him. His words made a deep impression on my heart, and I trust, by the blessing of God, they will make a still deeper.' "I found, on conversing with him, that since I saw him he had become affected with a deep sense of his spiritual danger, and by meditation and secret prayer during the voyage had acquired much insight into 'religion. He |