페이지 이미지



doubtedly will save none; and faith also without charity profiteth nothing."*

The above are not isolated cases. Dr. Pusey argues the matter considerably at large, in more places than one; and either does not perceive, or hopes his reader will not perceive, that it digs up by the roots all his cant about "regeneration" as "conveyed by baptism," and by baptism "exclusively;" when it turns out that by baptism he does not literally mean BAPTISM; but as his explanation implies he means "repentance from dead works" AND "faith," (issuing in baptism) "in the living God." Is it to be tolerated that writers should thus systematically delude their readers by terms which do not convey the genuine and true meaning which they appear, and seem intended to bear?

In explanation also of 1 Pet. iii. 21, baptism, in figure, like Noah's ark, "saveth us; not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God;" Dr. Pusey writes, "i. e. baptism, not an outward rite, but accompanied with faith, the baptized person answering with a good conscience to the inquiry made into his faith." (44.) That is, we are to understand when he professed to "believe in Christ to the saving of the soul" at his baptism.

And in note K. p. 220, in further pursuit of the same idea, he writes:


This reference to the rite of interrogating candidates at baptism, as to their faith and their purpose in coming to holy baptism, appears to have been recognized by the Fathers generally, as St. Peter's meaning-as' questioning appears to imply some more formal interrogatory as

* We may learn from the above admission that the Professor is obliged to leave it to be implied, that "baptism without faith" may be received. And he asserts that "faith without charity profiteth nothing." It will then inevitably follow from the author's own words, that every baptism received without faith," yea, and a faith which worketh by love," is "PROFITABLE" for " nothing."

Hence, also, forasmuch as Simon Magus's faith, which Dr. Pusey says he possessed, was not attended by charity, his "baptism" grounded upon it profited him "nothing" as St. Peter told him.

In the same place, where the Professor claims faith for Simon Magus, he again declares, that "the unbelieving adult could of course derive no present benefit from baptism." (171, 2.) And in p. 173 he speaks respecting such, that they "receive baptism to their hurt."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

to the faith of the individual, such as that implied in Philip's words, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest,' (Acts viii. 37.) The words of Tertullian, (De Resur. Carnis, c. 48.) The soul is sanctified, not by washing, but by answering;' are not only a comment on St. Peter's words, but almost an authoritative one. The Syriac version, confessing God with a pure conscience,' gives us the tradition of the Eastern church at an early period; at least, it leads us to a public profession of faith, such as that made at baptism.-So St. Augustine: Baptism does not consist so much in the washing of the body, as in the faith of the heart,' whence the inquiry into a good conscience,' must be, inquiry into faith ;"-in proof of the efficacy of the word of faith'—i. e. the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity, then professed and believed, and to be guarded and kept, by God's help,' through life.” (221.)

[ocr errors]


And after more to the same purpose, he adds,

"Other renderings of επερώτημα, are very unsatisfactory, except so far as they come round to this." (Ib.) Theodoret, Dr. Pusey quotes as teaching that in "Baptism" "remission is given through faith alone." (65.)

We need not, though we might, quote more in proof of our position, namely, that the Fathers, (and Dr. Pusey, too, when he seems to forget himself,) when they speak of baptism as giving such magnificent blessings to the baptized, include in that term all those graces of the Spirit which are represented by baptism, and which are professed by all who are baptized.

We have also seen that, in the first two centuries, the terms" regeneration," &c., were employed to designate


"The terms of regeneration, &c. used in the first two centuries." By this we mean that they were then used in a more scriptural and spiritual sense; rather than were confined to the first ages alone, in a sense different from that generally used afterward. Even Dr. Pusey himself acknowledges that Jerome and others" use the term " neration" either as meaning nothing but "being baptised," or else as bing DECLARATIVE of the thing professed at baptism. Thus they used regeneration as applied to our Saviour's baptism. And some applied Ps. ii. 7 to the same event; "Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee:" which the Professor says, can only mean, was declared to be the Son of God." (Note p. 17.)

[ocr errors]

We may observe here that no person, not wishing to be deluded, would take "regeneration" in a literal sense at the hands of such unguarded writers, when they confine it to baptism. Making persons Sons of God by baptism, may, we see, only mean, "DECLARED" to be the sons of God.



a spiritual and holy change of heart, not necessarily connected with baptism.

And further, that at all times, (unless when Popery stifled all truth,) repentance and faith were esteemed sufficient to entail regeneration and salvation without baptism, provided other evidence was given to prove them real. Dr. Pusey admits that the "Papal argument for the absolute necessity of baptism" will not stand, (17,) and yet uses the same argument himself, (p. 13.)


We must very carefully and retentively notice here what is included in that change of mind to which blessings of salvation are annexed, and which are required and supposed, by the Scriptures, by the Fathers, and even by the admissions of Dr. Pusey himself. They are faith and repentance and these testified at baptism,

1. "With a good conscience;" as Peter, Philip, and Pusey-" If thou believe with all thine heart; and this, 2. A "faith" also accompanied by "charity," Dr. P.; or "confessing God with a pure conscience," (Syr. Ver. ;)


3. The faith of the heart"-(August.)" in the Blessed Trinity, to be guarded and kept through life." We remark here two things:

1. That these principles or graces are both holy and active-living graces; and,

2. That without them, baptism "profiteth nothing;" as Dr. Pusey asserts.


The reader must hold with a most determined hand the truth now established, i. e. that the "faith" which justifies, saves, and, if you will, regenerates man, is not "dormant," or passive," but living and active-a faith which "works by love." We are very serious and earnest upon this score; because it is at this joint that a delusion is introduced. We say delusion; for notwithstanding the above, and other acknowledgments to the same effect, sprinkled over Dr. Pusey's book, they soon become nearly lost and invisible in the mysticism which the learned Professor contrives to envelope all those illuminating sayings. They are, in this author's pages, little more than blazing and momentary luminaries, which, having suddenly disappeared, render the general darkness the more bewildering.


This is no declamation-no calumny. For Dr. Pusey, even before he has finished the very note, (Note H, 222,) takes occasion, in explanation of his sentiments, as upposed to the reformers, to say, "Rather, baptism saves us, as the means appointed by God for remitting sin, and imparting new life." Yes," baptism (he explains it) saves us baptism, without the former admitted "repentance," "faith," embracing "love," and "confession, with a pure conscience," saves us," by "remitting sin, and imparting new life." And this is the common practice throughout his book. Witness pages 82, 83, 84, &c.; where he insists that it has been the notion of the whole Christian church, that the "sacraments do convey that also which they signify;" and " that the benefits of holy baptism are by virtue of the sacrament itself." In other, or rather in many, places, he writes, that the "old Catholic doctrine" was, that "Christ conveyed his grace through his sacraments." (91, 92, 93.)


We admit that some of the Professor's observations apply particularly to infants. With respect to the advantage which he hopes to gain from the attempt to separate the case of infants from that of adults, and to ground, as usual, his arguments upon the loose sayings of the fathers; we have three things to say.

1. We have already, in our Fifth Number, unravelled his sophistry on that head.

2. In our next Number it is intended to disperse entirely the bewilderment, and serpentine character, still lurking under the notion of latent regeneration.

3. But there is another delusion imposed upon us here; i. e. that the regeneration of INFANTS by baptism, as held by the Fathers is exceedingly ambiguous and un-uniform ; or, if uniform, not very intelligible; and where intelligible, is not the regeneration "imparting new life," required by and spoken of in Scripture, consisting in an implanted, holy renewal of the soul to God.



We have collected perhaps more than a hundred of extracts on this and its kindred subjects, which we in



tended to have made large use of, in opposition to the gloss of Dr. Pusey and his brethren. But under the consideration that many of such testimonies would be only an opinion of some persons respecting the opinion of others, and neither of them apostolic or FINAL, we have decided to give only a mere sample; and that either from Dr. Pusey's own pages, or from two or three other veritable and important sources.

The use and design of these references the reader will understand, are mainly these; namely, not to confide in them as Scripture, or even as giving an indisputable and authorized, or general statement of the sentiments of the Fathers, on the subject of baptismal regeneration; but to break the arm, and neutralize the character, of Dr. Pusey's unwarrantable and untrue assumption, that the Christian Fathers are to be received as authorized and intelligible interpreters of Scripture on this point, and that their sense and meaning of the Scriptures is that "one sense" which the Professor ascribes to them, and which he has adopted from them; which is a gross absurdity. For it is perfectly clear, that unless the instruction of the Fathers be so plain, uniform, and obvious, as to compel the assent of every sensible and unprejudiced mind, their instruction, instead of enlightening will only bewilder; and leave every reader to make his own system out of them.

DR. BURGES.-The Professor has himself introduced this author as bringing forward three extracts from the Fathers, in evidence that they did not consider all persons to be regenerate by baptism.

From Chrysostom he quotes: "Some who are ready to breathe their last, run unto baptism, and yet are never a whit the more purged by it."

From Jerome. He speaks of adults "Who appear to receive baptism, but he doubts whether they have the clothing of Christ: and with these he joins Simon Magus, who received the washing of water, but because he had not the Holy Spirit, had not put on Christ. There are many washings, (Ezek. xvi. 4,)-but not unto salvation.""

Augustine teaches; "Sacraments work what they shadow forth in the elect only."-2742.

Of these, Dr. Pusey, says, he cannot find the last. The second he admits; and the first, he tells us, is "mistranslated"!

« 이전계속 »