Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1840-09-09

uINToN,s HIS RORY OF BAPTISM.

will be issued from the press of the Am. ar
Bap. Pub and S. S. Society, and ready ia
Tor delivery on the lst of September, en- 10
suing the last sheet being now in the "
hands of the printer. Il will be recollec- 8
ted that Mr.. Hinton promised this book
to the public on the first of August, bat st
owing 10 time spent IN visiting various \
literary institutions and examining their tc
libraries, its forthcoming has been delayed S
few weeks, which delay, we are sure v
will not in the least delract either from its 0
merits or retard its sale. 1t is now the
property of the Am. Bap Pub and S. S.
So ety, and will be published by them
alone, in l2mo. form; comprising abou,
$40 pages, being 70 more han was orr
ginally promised, and contains some 60
pages more than" Roardnan's Memoirs"
the work it was TO resemble.
/! Mr.. Hinton could not have performed
better service to the church, in this day oil
doclrinat controversy and collision ofopin-
ion on the subject of Baptism, than by
preparing the work in question. A work
in our estimation. Judging from the sheets
in our possession, decidedly the happest
Of i's kind that has ever passed through |
the press, and must upon every reasona-
Bile and unprejudcei mind fasten the con-
viclion as 10 the proper subjects, and mode |
of baptism. lndeei we consider that this
book settles the long agltated question.
{ The author has evidently given us the re-
? sultofmuch reading and close vestigation.
# He shows hmselfa master workman, per-
/ fcctly acquainted with his subject, and
h adequate to the task he has undertaken
: Mr.. Hinton very clearly proves that all
}. the evidence the advocates of infant bap-
IF tisn claim for the baptism of babes before
e A. d 100 from the Fathers who four
G shed during the first century. is this pas
T sage from Hermas, Baptism is necessary
t. to alr' which Dr.. Doddrldge ia pedo-bap-
J" tis) says, "onIy proves that baptism is
IT necessary to the proper subjects of it; but
il cannot determine that infants are So"
re And he furnishes the most conclusive It's
n tmony that "there is decisive evidence
g. against it," aud that, from the works of
f. one Of the earliest Christian Fathers, JUS
lie lin Martyr. The vague proof for the
re practice Of infant baptism in the second
" century, as relied on by those who prac-
i'll lice this innovation, MIR. Hinton sums up
,r- in the following passage which we qnote
entire, in order 10 give our readers IA spe-
m, cimen of the style and logic OF the author
nd Referring TO the well known passage in
n Tertulian, he observes:
m. Il am aware that most of the German
We critics, while they consider this passage
10 in the very opposite point of view to Amer
en- lean podobaptis's, Chat it proves infan
ef. ba 2tism not 10 have been an Admitted
practice at the time Of TertulIan's wr
ur ling,) receive it however as an evidence
FAR that infant baptism was then coming in
ION After the most mature reflection, ! appre
no bend the idea Of Robinson 10 be the cor
ose rect one and that with which all critics
ase on further investigations will agree tina
,od it was the baptism of very Young children
ht- and not of babes, that T4rtuIian aIule.
the to; clear evidence that the baptism O
ley babes was not then practise. bccaus
lch children hav ng been baptized when few
ITS, days old. the question of baDtizing then
sta "when they are just able 10 ask for il,
our cannot arise.
The claim for the bare existence @
II il infant baptism in the second century, rest
Gus wholly on the passage of Irenaus, an
in that in Tertulian, who lived at its YER
ons close. Both these passages haze bee
ans prored 10 contain no atiwsi1n 10 the 6aptisg
ru- Of babes. Such baptism is not found i
lin the second century not even referred t
be- as the German critics suppose, for tn
tue purpose of being condemned
be- The unprecedented inquirer after trutt
lses will now be compelled TO agree, that Their
10 is no Evidence of the existence of infar
baptism in the secoLd any more than i
&c ? the first century: and filth can rest alon
riv- on evidence. The state in which hsto
first is lef is part of the provden:ial arrange
ris- ments of Hin who is : Head over Il
orld things TO the church; = and had il been tn
pies design Of Him in whose power it is
over.rule all things, to strengthen Tor ralI
the er TO call folth) oar faith in infant baptism
side by the practice OF the church in The fir
hci- and second centuries. he would undoub
Nor eddy have taken care that satisfactory ev
wo- dence should have been at hand Wit
N 10 respect 10 the observance of the first da
hen. oflhe week instead of the seventh, whic
'on- IS onlv occasionally alluded to ia the Ne,
uch festiment, the most satisfactory evdenc
len exists and had the practice of infant bar
lwn tism been general, which j, must hav
bose been had it been an anostolic comman
Will II IS smposSt6te II should not have been II:
end t'ncily noticed. Ii is not my place. how
1me ever, 10 prove a negative; it is sufficief
lug that no evidence exists of such being N
suf- practice in The two first Centuries Of III
LII Christian church; and this lack of evi
sh dence cannot be compensated by an
'ces amount of evidence Of later date. II
fatal TO the last hold of infant baptism, tn
ray unfounded assumption that il can be trace