“Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter
into the Kingdom of God.”—John iii. 5.
None can be saved, unless the blood of Christ, the Immaculate Lamb
of God, be imputed to him; and it is His gracious will that it should
be imputed to as, one by one, by means of outward and visible signs, or
what are called Sacraments. These visible rites represent to us the
heavenly truth, and convey what they represent. The baptismal washing
betokens the cleansing of the soul from sin; the elements of bread and
wine are figures of what is present but not seen, “the body and blood
of Christ, which are verily and indeed taken and received by the
faithful in the Lord's Supper.” So far the two Sacraments agree; yet
there is this important difference in their use,—that Baptism is but
once administered, but the Lord's Supper is to be received
continually. Our Lord Christ told the Apostles to baptize at the
time that they made men His disciples. Baptism admitted them
to His favour once for all; but the Lord's Supper keeps us and
secures us in His favour day by day. He said, “This do, as often as
ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
Here, then, a Question at once arises, which it is important to
consider:—At what time in our life are we to be baptized, or
made disciples of Christ? The first Christians of course were baptized
when they were come to a full age, because then the Gospel was for the
first time preached to them; they had no means of being baptized when
young. But the case is different with those who are born of Christian
parents; so the question now is, at what age are the sons of Christians
to be baptized?
Now, for fifteen hundred years there was no dispute or difficulty in
answering this question all over the Christian world; none who
acknowledged the duty of baptizing at all, but administered the rite to
infants, as we do at present. But about three hundred years ago strange
opinions were set afloat, and sects arose, doing every thing which had
not been done before, and undoing every thing that had been done
before, and all this (as they professed) on the principle that it was
every one's duty to judge and act for himself; and among these new
sects there was one which maintained that Infant Baptism was a mistake,
and that, mainly upon this short argument,—that it was nowhere
commanded in Scripture.
Let us, then, consider this subject: and first, it is but fair and
right to acknowledge at once that Scripture does not bid us
baptize children. This, however, is no very serious admission; for
Scripture does not name any time at all for Baptism; yet it orders us
to be baptized at some age or other. It is plain, then, whatever age we
fix upon, we shall be going beyond the letter of Scripture. This may or
may not be a difficulty, but it cannot be avoided: it is not a
difficulty of our making. God has so willed it. He has kept
silence, and doubtless with good reason; and surely we must try to do
our part and to find out what He would have us do, according to the
light, be it greater or less, which He has vouchsafed to us.
Is it any new thing that it should take time and thought to find out
accurately what our duty is? Is it a new thing that the full and
perfect truth should not lie on the very surface of things, in the bare
letter of Scripture? Far from it. Those who strive to enter into
life, these alone find the strait gate which leads thereto. It is no
proof even that it is a matter of indifference what age is proper for
Baptism, that Scripture is not clear about it, but hides its real
meaning; not commanding but hinting what we should do. For consider how
many things in this life are difficult to attain, yet, far from being
matters of indifference, are necessary for our comfort or even
well-being. Nay, it often happens that the more valuable any gift is,
the more difficult it is to gain it. Take, for instance, the art of
medicine. Is there an art more important for our life and comfort? Yet
how difficult and uncertain is the science of it! what time it takes to
be well versed and practised in it! What would be thought of a person
who considered that it mattered little whether a sick man took this
course or that, on the ground that men were not physicians by nature,
and that if the Creator had meant medicine to be for our good. He would
have told us at once, and every one of us, the science and the practice
of it? In the same way it does not at all follow, even if it were
difficult to find out at what age Baptism should be administered, that
therefore one time is as good as another. Difficulty is the very
attendant upon great blessings, not on things indifferent.
But a man may say that Scripture is given us for the very purpose of
making the knowledge of our duty easy to us;—what is meant by a
revelation, if it does not reveal?—and that we have no revelation to
tell us what medicines are good or bad for the body, but that a
revelation has been made in order to tell us what is good or bad
for the soul:—if, then, a thing were important for our soul's
benefit, Scripture would have plainly declared it. I answer, who told
us all this? Doubtless, Scripture was given to make our duty
easier than before; but how do we know that it was intended to take
away all difficulty of every kind? So says not Christ, when He
bids us seek and strive and so find; to knock, to watch, and to pray.
No; Scripture has not undertaken to tell us every thing, but
merely to give us the means of finding every thing; and thus
much we can conclude on the subject before us, that if it is important,
there are means of determining it; but we cannot infer, either
that it must actually be commanded in the letter of Scripture,
or that it can be found out by every individual for and by himself.
But it may be said, Scripture says that the times of the Gospel
shall be times of great light: “All thy children shall be taught of the
Lord, and great shall be the peace of thy children[1].” This is true:
but whose children? The Church's. Surely it is a time of light, if we
come to the Church for information; for she has ever spoken most
clearly on the subject. She has ever baptized infants and enjoined the
practice; she has ever answered to the prophecy as being “a word behind
us, saying, This is the way; walk ye in it.” Her teachers surely
(according to the prophecy) have never been removed into a corner. But
if we will not accept this supernatural mercy, then I say it is not
unnatural that we should find ourselves in the same kind of doubt in
which we commonly are involved in matters of this world. God has
promised us light and knowledge in the Gospel, but in His way, not in
our way.
But after all, in the present instance, surely there is no great
difficulty in finding out what God would have us to do, though He has
not told us in Scripture in the plainest way. I say it is not difficult
to see, as the Church has ever been led to see, that God would have us
baptize young children, and that to delay Baptism is to delay a great
benefit, and is hazarding a child's salvation. There is no difficulty,
if men are not resolved to make one.
1. Let us consider, first, what is Baptism? It is a means and pledge
of God's mercy, pardon, acceptance of us for Christ's sake; it gives us
grace to change our natures. Now, surely infants, as being born in sin,
have most abundant need of God's mercy and grace: this cannot be
doubted. Even at first sight, then, it appears desirable (to say
the least) that they should be baptized. Baptism is just suited to
their need: it contains a promise of the very blessings which they
want, and which without God's free bounty they cannot have. If, indeed,
Baptism were merely or principally our act, then perhaps the case would
be altered. But it is not an act of ours so much as of God's; a pledge
from Him. And, I repeat, infants, as being by nature under God's wrath,
having no elements of spiritual life in them, being corrupt and sinful,
are surely, in a singular manner, objects of Baptism as far as the
question of desirableness is concerned.
Let us refer to our Saviour's words to Nicodemus in the text. Our
Lord tells him none can enter into the kingdom of God who is not born
of water and the Spirit. And why? Because (He goes on to say)
“that which is born of the flesh is flesh[2].” We need a new birth,
because our first birth is a birth unto sin. Who does not see that this
reason is equally cogent for infant Baptism as for Baptism at
all? Baptism by water and the Spirit is necessary for salvation (He
says), because man's nature is corrupt; therefore infants must
need this regeneration too. If, indeed, sin were not planted deep in
man's very heart,—if it were merely an accidental evil into which some
fell while others escaped it.—nay, even if, though (as a fact) all men
actually fall into sin, yet this general depravity arose merely from
bad example, not from natural bias, then indeed Baptism of water and
the Spirit would not be necessary except for those who, having come to
years of understanding, had actual sin to answer for: but if, as our
Saviour implies, even a child's heart, before he begins to think and
act, is under Divine wrath, and contains the sure and miserable promise
of future sin as the child grows up, can we do otherwise than
thankfully accept the pledge and means which He has given us of a new
birth unto holiness; and since, by not telling us the time for Baptism,
He has in a way left it to ourselves to decide upon it, shall we not
apply the medicine given us when we are sure of the disease? “Can any
man forbid water,” to use St. Peter's words under different
circumstances, “that” children “should not be baptized?” The burden of
proof, as it is called, is with those who withhold the Sacrament.
Will it be said that infants are not properly qualified for
Baptism? How is this an objection? Consider the text.—“Except one be
born of water and the Spirit,” says our Lord, “he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God.” There is nothing said about qualifications or
conditions here which might exclude infants from Baptism,—nothing
about the necessity of previous faith, or previous good works, in order
to fit us for the mercy of God. Nor indeed could any thing be said.
Christ knew that, without His grace, man's nature could not bear any
good fruit, for from above is every good gift. Far from it. Any such
notion of man's unassisted strength is wholly detestable, contrary to
the very first principles of all true religion, whether Jewish,
Christian, or even Pagan. We are miserably fallen creatures, we are by
nature corrupt,—we dare not talk even of children being naturally
pleasing in God's sight. And if we wait till children are in a
condition to bring something to God, in payment (so to say) of His
mercy to them, till they have faith and repentance, they never will be
baptized; for they will never attain to that condition. To defer
Baptism till persons actually have repentance and faith, is refusing to
give medicine till a patient begins to get well. It would be hard
indeed, if Satan be allowed to have access to the soul from infancy, as
soon as it begins to think, and we refuse to do what we can, or what
promises well, towards gaining for it the protection of God against the
Tempter.
On this first view of the case then, from the original corruption of
our nature, from the need which all men are under from their birth of
pardon and help from God, from Baptism being a promise of mercy just
suited to our need, and from the impossibility of any one (let him be
allowed to live unbaptized ever so long) bringing any self-provided
recommendation of himself to God's favour; on all these accounts, I
say, since God has given us no particular directions in the matter, but
has left it to ourselves, it seems, on the first view of the case, most
fitting and right to give children the privilege of Baptism.
2. But, in fact, we are not, strictly speaking, left without
positive encouragement to bring infants near to Him. We are not merely
left to infer generally the propriety of Infant Baptism; Christ has
shown us His willingness to receive children. Some men have said
(indeed most of us perhaps in seasons of unbelief have been tempted in
our hearts to ask), “What good can Baptism do senseless children? you
might as well baptize things without life; they sleep or even struggle
during the ceremony, and interrupt it; it is a mere superstition.”
This, my brethren, is the language of the world, whoever uses it. It is
putting sight against faith. If we are assured that Baptism has been
blessed by Christ, as the rite of admittance into His Church, we have
nothing to do with those outward appearances, which, though they might
prove something perhaps, had He not spoken, now that He has spoken lose
all force. To such objections, I would reply by citing our Saviour's
“own word and deed.” We find that infants were brought to Christ; and
His disciples seem to have doubted, in the same spirit of unbelief,
what could be the good of bringing helpless and senseless
children to the Saviour of men. They doubtless thought that His time
would be better employed in teaching them, than in attending to
children; that it was interfering with His usefulness. “But when Jesus
saw it, He was much displeased[3].” These are remarkable words: “much
displeased,”—that is, He was uneasy, indignant, angry (as the Greek
word may be more literally translated); and we are told, “He took them
up in His arms, put His hands upon them, and blessed them.”
Christ, then, can bless infants, in spite of their being to all
appearance as yet incapable of thought or feeling. He can, and did,
bless them; and, in the very sense in which they then were blessed, we
believe they are capable of a blessing in Baptism.
3. And we may add this consideration. It is certain that children
ought to be instructed in religious truth, as they can bear it, from
the very first dawn of reason; clearly, they are not to be left without
a Christian training till they arrive at years of maturity. Now, let it
be observed, Christ seems distinctly to connect teaching with Baptism,
as if He intended to convey through it a blessing upon teaching,—“Go
ye and teach all the nations, baptizing them.” If children, then, are
to be considered as under teaching, as learners in the school of
Christ, surely they should be admitted into that school by Baptism.
These are the reasons for Infant Baptism which strike the mind, even
on the first consideration of the subject; and in the absence of
express information from Scripture, they are (as far as they go)
satisfactory. At what age should we be baptized? I answer, in
childhood; because all children require Divine pardon and grace
(as our Saviour Himself implies), all are capable of His
blessing (as His action shows), all are invited to His blessing,
and Baptism is a pledge from Him of His favour, as His Apostles
frequently declare. Since infants are to be brought to Christ, we must
have invented a rite, if Baptism did not answer the purpose of a
dedication. Again, I say, in childhood; because all children need
Christian instruction, and Baptism is a badge and mark of a scholar in
Christ's school. And moreover, I will add, because St. Paul speaks of
the children of Christian parents as being “holy,” in a favoured state,
a state of unmerited blessing; and because he seems to have baptized at
once whole families, where the head of the family was converted to the
faith of the Gospel[4].
To conclude. Let me beg of all who hear me, and who wish to serve
God, to remember, in their ordinary prayers, their habitual thoughts,
the daily business of life, that they were once baptized. If Baptism be
merely a ceremony, to be observed indeed, but then at once
forgotten,—a decent form, which it would neither be creditable, nor
for temporal reasons expedient to neglect,—it is most surely no
subject for a Christian minister to speak of; Christ's religion has no
fellowship with bare forms, and nowhere encourages mere outward
observances. If, indeed, there be any who degrade Baptism into a mere
ceremony, which has in it no spiritual promise, let such men look to it
for themselves, and defend their practice of baptizing infants as they
can. But for me, my brethren, I would put it before you as a true and
plain pledge, without reserve, of God's grace given to the souls of
those who receive it; not a mere form, but a real means and instrument
of blessing verily and indeed received; and, as being such, I warn you
to remember what a talent has been committed to you. There are very
many persons who do not think of Baptism in this religious point of
view; who are in no sense in the habit of blessing God for it, and
praying Him for His further grace to profit by the privileges given
them in it; who, when even they pray for grace, do not ground their
hope of being heard and answered, on the promise of blessing in Baptism
made to them; above all, who do not fear to sin after Baptism. This is
of course an omission; in many cases it is a sin. Let us set
ourselves right in this respect. Nothing will remind us more forcibly
both of our advantages and of our duties; for from the very nature of
our minds outward signs are especially calculated (if rightly used) to
strike, to affect, to subdue, to change them.
Blessed is he who makes the most of the privileges given him, who
takes them for a light to his feet and a lanthorn to his path. We have
had the Sign of the Cross set on us in infancy,—shall we ever forget
it? It is our profession. We had the water poured on us,—it was like
the blood on the door-posts, when the destroying Angel passed over. Let
us fear to sin after grace given, lest a worse thing come upon us. Let
us aim at learning these two great truths:—that we can do nothing good
without God's grace, yet that we can sin against that grace; and thus
that the great gift may be made the cause, on the one hand, of our
gaining eternal life, and the occasion to us, on the other, of eternal
misery.
[1] Isa. liv. 13.
[2] John iii. 6.
[3] Mark x. 14.
[4] 1 Cor. vii. 14. Acts xvi. 15, 33.