The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1874-11-17
TUESDAY, NOV. II, 1874.
Something Fresh on an Old Subtle,

Cincinnati, contains letter from the
Rev. W. 9. DAWSON, q graduate Of Beth.
any College some years ago, lately pastor
Of the Disciples Church in New York
City, giving his reasons for leaving the
ministry Of that denomination and taking
orders in the Episcopal Church. AS il,
well known, one of the leading features Of
the Disciples as q church organization Is
that there is no warrant In the scriptures
Tor infant baptism, and that, therefore,
tho practice Of It is without divine au-
thority, and, contrary to the PIE.
csdenH OIL the Apostolic ministry HS re.
corded in the New Testament Upon this
point Dir. DAWSON expresses himself 81
follows:
" was formerly accustomed 10 rely
upon the argument that there Is neither
command nor example in It's favor In the
New Testament. This seemed 10 me
sufficient entirely 10 discrcdit Il. With.
out asking now whether this position Is
tsnable or not, I Observe that il uuduly
nsrrows the inquiry. The true and only
question Is whether the institution Of IN.
lsnt baptism is Of apostolic origin, not
whether there Is or Is not any reference to
Ii 10 the New Testament. To assume
tina; these propositions are substantially
Identical is On sbsurdiiy which involves
radical miEcOncep!iOn uI the origin, his.
tory and true value Of the New Tesla
menI in its relations TO the Church t-Om
the beginning until now. No one can
understand either the ore or the other
Alright who imsgiues iha! the Church De.
rived its ordinances and institutions from
the New Testament, or that 1t referred Ia
the New Testament for proof Of lhci: di
vine origin Large and far reaching re
suits do no! usually spsibs from ciTcuilOGs
reasoning Of that sort.
The church being toe Piillr aud
Ground Of Truth" was the sole witness
and only authority upon which the books
were received So divine. Having sp-
proved them. il did not reverse the pro-
cess and ask the witness Of these tO1ks
TO authenticate i9 cwn d!y.nc origin end
validate Its ordinances
The true question respecting inIan.
baptism then is, whether either the
church or the New Testament tesiifics &c
is apostolic origin. !! either does SO, II
is proof enough. Here there can be nc
controversy. Ispeak with due reverence
when say that infant bsplism is estab-
liihed by better evidence than the Canon
Ol scripture itself. Down 10 the fourth
century there was much controversy over
some portions OF the latter. The ApCca-
type and the Catholic Epl9t!es and the
Episte 10 the Hebrews, were re.
jected by mauy fathers and By llrgt
sections OF the church, uatil R!ier the
Council Of Nice. But infant baptism i
an undBputei tradition Of the churCh
No church and no father rejected it, anC
the came great witnesses, Origen, IreLIls
and the rest, whose testimony we
weighty enough finally to settle the Canon
and prevent the exclusion Of the Ep:stlt
10 the Hebrews and the Apocalypse, ties
ilfy With one voice that infant baptism
was not only prevalent in their day bu
had been given TO the church by tn
apostles. We can lsy our finger upon III,
beginning Of every corruption which
arose in the church throughout lie history
but no man can point 10 the origin Q
the practice Of baptizjng infants, unles
with these fathers he finds 1t in the yer,
bosom Of the Apostolic Age. 70 Goub
or question il with individual ani IN
remarkable excep;ions) was unknown urll
the beginning Of the AnabHptist madness
which followed the Reformation in Ger
many.
The csnOn Of scripture is purely trsdi
tionary. II the church's tradition is OF n
authority" in reference 10 any thing
then the books Of the New Testament ar
deprived Of the sole proof Of their apps,
tolic origin. By concurrence Of tradi
,ion which is by no means unanimous o.
uHdisputcd, but which creates on extrem
degree Of probability, these books, ant
these only, are alleged TO have been writ
ten by the apostles and evGngelists who's
names they bear, some OF whom ar
known to have been inspired, and other
10y the same tradition AGAIN. are TepIteC
10 have been so. THUS inspiration come
70 Be attributed 70 these books. Thus, snt
thus only.
Irepest that on "intelligent acceptance
ri them is possible only by reliance up
IN the authority" oil the Church's trRdi.
lion. An unreasoniug and unintelligen
faith which accepts them blindly wi;hou
Al Inquiry as to i3,sHes they came, or hoO
they came, may speak about the sole au
,hority Of the scripture as opposed to ira
diiion, but It is impOssible for an inteUigsn
faith TO do so; for il knows that the HOLY
Scriptures themselves are received by ihi
very channel Of tradition.