wife," it is natural to understand him to speak of a sanctification adapted to the subject under consideration. And a sanctification adapted to that subject would seem to be this; that by his connection in marriage with a believing wife, he is, in some sort, separated from the society of the heathen, certainly from the familiar intercourse with them which he once had; that, on account of the pious woman with whom he is so closely connected, he is to be regarded in a light different from that, in which he would be regarded, if he were altogether a pagan, and had no such relation to a Christian partner; and that, by the effect which her faith produces upon him, he is brought into such a state, that she may with propriety continue to live with him. Their intercourse comes under a sanctifying influence, by means of her piety. This interpretation, it is evident, gives the same general sense to nyíaorai as to aya, the last being applied to children, and denoting that they, by their very birth, are separated from paganism, and brought into the nursery of the Christian church, where they are to be consecrated to God, and trained up for his service.

It will cast a still clearer light on the meaning of the text, to inquire what was the occasion of the doubt which arose in the minds of the Corinthian converts, and rendered the advice of the Apostle necessary. This doubt unquestionably arose, not in consequence of anything in the original institution of marriage, but in consequence of the special law which God gave to the Israelites, forbidding them to contract marriages with any of the idolatrous people around them; a law which was intended, like many others, to preserve them a holy nation, separate from the rest of the world, till the coming of Christ. The doubt might be occasioned more directly by the instances, in which such prohibited marriages had been dissolved by divine direction, particularly in the time of Ezra. The people of God had formed marriages with the daughters of the surrounding nations; so that as it was said, the holy seed i. e. the Jews, had mingled themselves with those idolatrous people. After a time, those who had thus offended, were brought to consider the evil of what they had done; and they made a covenant with God to put away all the wives, and such as were born of him,

according to the divine command. See Ezra, Chap. ix. and x. Now the Apostle, considering that the economy of the former dispensation was changed and that a new precept was called for, virtually told the Corinthian Christians, that that ancient national law respecting marriage was not binding upon them, any more than the law of circumcision; that those believers who were lawfully married to unbelievers had no occasion to dissolve the marriage bond. And he suggested to them one consideration of great weight; namely; that if according to the Mosaic law, and the example of the people in the time of Ezra, they were to put away their unbelieving partners, and so treat them as pagans, axáðagra, unclean; they must consider their children also as unclean, i. e. heathen children, and put them away likewise, as the people did in the case referred to. In opposition to this, the Apostle appeals to a fact which was well known; namely; that the offspring of such marriages were considered, as they are now, to be a holy seed, ära, just as if both parents were believers, and so were fit to be devoted to God, and to enjoy special privileges in the society of his people.

It will be seen that, in this examination of the passage before us, my chief reliance is upon well known usage as to the word ayos, and its corresponding Hebrew among the Jews, especially when applied to Israelites, whether men or children, by way of distinction from other nations.

I have only one more remark. Those who hold to Infant Baptism, believe that the Children of Christians, even those children who had only one believing parent, were, in the Apostle's time, and in the Corinthian church, actually devoted to God in baptism, and so brought into a peculiar relation to the Christian church. Now on this supposition, what can be more natural, than to suppose that the Apostle referred to this fact, when he said, the children spoken of were aria, holy, i. e. set apart, consecrated to God?

The text, thus interpreted, presents a very satisfactory view of the subject under consideration, and shows how the apostles understood their commission. For we see, that wherever the Christian religion took effect, and men became believers, and formed themselves into a society, their children were considered as appertain

ing to the same society, and as set apart, and devoted to God; just as they were under the former economy. And as they were thus considered to be aɣia, a holy seed, separated from paganism, and consecrated to God; how can we reasonably doubt that they had the sign of consecration put upon them? Whitby states the argument from this text thus: "If the holy seed among the Jews were to be circumcised, and be made federally holy by receiving the sign of the covenant and being admitted into the number of God's people, because they were born in sanctity, or were seminally holy; for the root being holy so are the branches; then, by like reason, the holy seed of Christians ought to be admitted to baptism, the sign of the Christian covenant, and so to be entered into the society of the Christian church."

On the whole, my conclusion is, that although the word aya does not properly mean baptized, it denotes that the children referred to were in such a condition, or were regarded as standing in such a relation to God and his people, that the appointed sign of consecration to God was of course to be applied to them. Or to express it differently; the word aya does not by itself mean, and is not to be rendered, subjects of baptism. But it signifies that the children, to whom it was applied, were to be regarded as Christian children, a holy seed, separated from the heathen, consecrated to God, and to be received and treated as such by the Christian community. The word aya, by itself, can signify no more than this. But if the children were thus regarded as a holy, consecrated seed, it is natural to conclude that they received the sign of this. And the supposition of their being devoted to God by baptism most satisfactorily accounts for the Apostle's calling them aria, holy, or consecrated children.

LECTURE CXV.

INFANT BAPTISM. COLLATERAL EVIDENCE.

In order to give simplicity and unity to my reasoning on the subject of Infant Baptism, I have made it rest chiefly on the inquiry, how the apostles must have understood the commission they received from Christ, to proselyte and baptize all nations. I have considered the point at issue as relating to the just interpretation of Scripture. And as the passage which records the commission, does not explicitly inform us whether infant children were meant to be included or not; I have thought it indispensable to consider what there was in the circumstances of the apostles, as native Jews, especially in their usages respecting children, which would be likely to influence them in their understanding of such a commission from one, who was born and educated in the same community with them. I have thought it important also to inquire, whether there was anything in the previous instructions of Christ, or in the writings of the apostles afterwards, which could help to show in what light they regarded little children. And here we have found, that Christ, exactly in accordance with the principle which was established by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, represented little children, as entitled in a peculiar sense to the privileges of the gospel dispensation, and that the Apostle Paul represented it as a fact, generally known and acknowledged, that the children of believers were a holy seed, consecrated to God, and admitted to special privileges in the Christian community. And if this was the case, we have supposed

it would follow of course, that baptism, the sign of such consecration to God, and of such a relation to the Christian community, was administered to them. Every consideration of this kind will be strengthened, and every such probable conclusion confirmed, by the historical proof which will by and by be produced, that Infant Baptism was actually practised in the early Christian churches. This proof might indeed have been exhibited before any other consideration; and this method might have been attended with some important advantages. But it must be remembered, that, according to our belief, there were obvious considerations, which influenced the apostles and early Christians to practise Infant Baptism. Now what can be more natural than for us first of all to inquire, what those considerations were; and afterwards to present the evidence of the fact, that Infant Baptism was practised in the early Christian church? In this way we at length become fully satisfied, that the considerations which operated upon the minds of the apostles, did actually produce the effect which we have supposed. According to our views, they were the men who introduced the baptism of infants as a Christian ordinance; of course they could not have been influenced in their judgment as we are, by the consideration, that Infant Baptism was a practice already existing. They must have been influenced in another way. The method which I have chosen is, first, to inquire into the circumstances and usages of the apostles, as members of the Jewish community, and to satisfy ourselves, as far as may be, what were the considerations, which would naturally lead them to understand their commission to proselyte and baptize, as including children; next, to attend to anything recorded in the New Testament, which has an obvious correspondence with the supposition, that Infant Baptism was practised by the apostles; and finally to exhibit the proof, that baptism was in fact applied to children in the early Christian churches. This order appears best suited to present the whole subject in a clear light, and to make a just impression on the minds of Christians.

Before proceeding to the argument from Ecclesiastical History, I shall advert to three additional considerations as collateral proof.