from the pollutions of the world, and qualified to stand in the presence of God. It had the indispensible obligation of a Sacrament: and no one who omitted to observe it, after a personal contact with death, was allowed to consider himself included in the Covenant with God."

It is further remarked, that the most remarkable part of the ceremony consisted in the mediatorial character of the person who became a type of the Messiah: for, as He, who knew no sin, bare our sins in his own body on the tree, which were purged away by his blood, so the Levitical purifier of the unclean with the water of separation, was required to be previously clean; but as by that act of purifying the unclean, he became unclean himself, taking on him the uncleanness of others, he was obliged to wash his clothes and to bathe his whole body in water. Thus, it is clear, that, in this case, the sprinkling of water had the same significance as the sprinkling of blood, and was substituted for it, because the blood of the spotless victim could only be shed and sprinkled once; nevertheless, its ashes communicated an inexhaustible virtue to the water wherein they were steeped, and the sprinkling of that water could be repeated as often as it was needful. The one, viewed in this light, bore to the other the same relation as the Sacrament of Baptism bears to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. With equal ingenuity and solidity of argument, Mr. Harcourt explains 1 Pet. iii. 21, in its apparent opposition to St. Paul, 2 Cor. vii. 1, by St. Peter having referred to the mystical and symbolical baptism of the Jews:

"And thus Jewish baptism was opposed to the baptism that saves us-as the symbol to the thing symbolized-as the type to the antitype-as the shadow to the substance."

St. Paul, on the contrary, was writing on the moral and regenerating influence of the Christian Baptism, which he describes as a cleansing from all filthiness of the flesh and Spirit.

Some very sensible observations on Regeneration follow this portion of the work, and are as much recommended to us by their research, as by their orthodoxy. Here the author enters into the question, when were the Apostles regenerated? and shows, that the only transaction stamped with any thing like the features of regeneration was the ceremony of washing their feet -a ceremony nearly equivalent to the Sacrament of Baptismon the necessity of which our Saviour strongly insisted. For there were certain peculiarities in the condition of the Apostles, since they were placed in the transition from one dispensation to another, and were partakers of both, which necessarily caused some variation of that Sacrament from its subsequent institution, both outwardly and inwardly; and it is urged against those who fix St. Peter's regeneration at the day of Pentecost, that it

could not be; since he had received the Holy Ghost before its arrival: 1 John xx. 21, 22, 23.

The effect of Circumcision, expressed as the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, was analogous both in expression and effect to baptism, which was not merely putting away the filth, but the sins of the flesh, and thus cleansing the conscience. When the symbol of the initiatory Sacrament was altered, the change of state did not take place in two gradations in Gentile converts, as in those who had been first circumcised, and then admitted into the Christian covenant, but at once and completely in the ordinance of baptism, in which their old man, their old unregenerate nature expired, the body of sin was buried, and the new man was raised up in them-a new nature, as different from their former, as our glorified bodies shall be to our mortal. It is rightly stated that an invisible grace belongs to every Sacrament, and that our Lord, discussing to Nicodemus the regeneration attendant on baptism, when he said, a man must be born of water and the Spirit, not only checked presumptuous reasonings on the subject, but established its truth by his comparison of it to the wind, of the existence of which we are assured, though we cannot discern its origin, nor describe how far it reaches. St. Paul studiously associates the ideas of baptism and regeneration"Ye are washed; ye are sanctified"-(1 Cor. vi. ii.) Had there been no necessary connection between them, had certain opinions of the present day on the subject been conformable to the Apostle's doctrine, the mention of washing might have been spared.

Every part of this subject is most sensibly treated, and makes us more than ever regret, that the work should be encumbered with its etymologies. The argument on Regeneration is acutely treated, and the inferences are stringently drawn; the orthodox doctrine of our orthodox Church, as developed in our baptismal service, which seems to have given offence to a certain Rev. Mr. Head, who would have passed away from his mortal existence unknown, had he not daringly butted his head against his Bishop, the talented and excellent Bishop of Exeter, is proved against those who hold opposite opinions with a peculiar vigour and with consummate conclusiveness. In refutation of these new interpreters of the Scriptures, of these men who would understand the minds of the Apostles in a way differing from that in which they them

*The presumptuous conduct of this innovating clergyman may be ascertained by all who will read a pamphlet, published at our Office, of which the title is An Address of the Lord Bishop of Exeter to the Clergy of his Diocese on the conduct of the Rev. H. E. Head.

selves understood them, Mr. Harcourt examines the doctrine according to the fathers of the three first centuries, and cogently asks:

"Who are most competent to judge what was the meaning of the language used by the Evangelists and Apostles? Shall we consult those who lived fourteen centuries after them, or those who lived with them, and conversed with them, and were taught by them, and received from them all their knowledge of Christianity? And if no reasonable man can doubt, that their cotemporaries were the most capable of conveying to us that instruction, it follows, that those whom they instructed were in the best condition for receiving the truth, and transmitting it to their successors in return. The nearer we ascend to the fountain-head, the purer will the water flow: the three first centuries, therefore, after the Apostles, were more likely to know in what sense the Apostles themselves used a theological term, than any three centuries that have since elapsed."

None, it would be supposed, could be found ready to controvert this sound canon of criticism; but such unfortunately there are.

The question at issue is, "Were the first converts to Christianity in the habit of considering baptism equivalent to regeneration, and necessarily attended with some spiritual grace, or were they not?" There were doubtless some exceptions, like Simon Magus; but such firmant regulam. The identity of the two terms was the rule. Baptism was accounted a passage into a new life, a resurrection from death, which fundamental ideas inseparably included in them that of regeneration: it was necessary to the concinnity of language, to the harmony of metaphor in its several parts. If baptism was the commencement of a new existence to those admitted within the pale of Christianity-if Christians were born anew, as it were, of incorruptible seed, and the laver in which they were cleansed was denominated the laver of regeneration, it is most absurd to distinguish regeneration from this Sacrament.

Modern "systems of theology have perplexed what before was simple:" we must, therefore, look to the unsophisticated Christianity of the primitive Church. Without entering into the dispute about the comparative authenticity of Barnabas, Hermas, and Clemens Romanus, since they are comprised within the period which the author has prescribed to himself in this chapter, he concedes to them the priority in the research. The first maintains, that we descend into the water full of sins and filth, but ascend from it bearing in our hearts the fruit of fear, and direct our hopes to Jesus by THE SPIRIT: the second declares, that we must ascend through the water to find a rest

ing-place, because we cannot enter into the kingdom of God without laying aside the mortality of our former life, and that thus being dead to our former state, we are sealed with the seal of the Son of God, that seal being the water, into which men descend to die and ascend out of it to live; the third asks, what confidence can we have of entering into the kingdom of God, unless we preserve our baptism pure and uncontaminated? which proves, that Clemens believed, that the sanctifying grace imparted in baptism might be afterwards forfeited and lost by the defilements of the world. In the apostolical constitutions, and one of the Homilies ascribed to him, and also in the recognitions, the same doctrine is asserted.

In the second century, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Theophilus, Melito, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Tertullian add their testimony to the preceding. In Justin Martyr, the language is decisive: he speaks of Christian converts, as being taken to some place where there is water, and being regenerated by the same mode of regeneration as those who preceded them which is a direct evidence of the belief that the blessing of God was annexed to baptismal regeneration. Following doubtless the authority of St. Peter, and conforming himself to the general opinion, he typically connects the Deluge with this Sacrament, in which "Christ, being the first born of every creature, became again the head of another race regenerated by him through water and faith and the wood of the cross, in the same way as Noah, rising on the waters, was saved in his wooden abode." (Dial. cum Tryph. p. 229.) This also is the view which our Church takes of it in the baptismal service; and as an argument against Geologians, professing Christianity and admitting the inspiration of the Bible, yet cavilling at the recorded history of the Deluge, and attempting, by conclusions drawn from discoveries, which cannot be and have not been sufficiently tested, to cast a suspicion upon it, it is very important: since, whilst another part of this work (we omit what we conceive to be misapplications of legends) has shewn the memory of the event to have been preserved all over the world, and fully shewn it, this Christian Sacrament has made the event itself a type and a figure of the internal import of the ordinance by which it is administered, and an ethical direction to the newness of life which it enjoins. Hence, this Father calls baptism "the water of life, which alone can cleanse the penitent." The erroneous inference which has been drawn from his question, what is the use of that baptism which only washes the body? has arisen from inattention to the context, in which he was not speaking of

Christian baptism, but merely of that symbolical washing which the Jews employed.

Irenæus, who lived near to the Apostles, says, that when our Lord committed to his Apostles the power of discipulating (if we may coin a term, uanrevoare) and baptizing all nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, he endued them "with the power of regenerating to God;" in other places he also identifies regeneration with baptism, and mentions infants most expressly among those who, being regenerated unto God, are saved BY JESUS CHRIST.

But Clemens Alexandrinus, whose extensive knowledge of Gentile theology, though he was a very fanciful writer, as all who have read his Stromata must grant, qualified him to see where a general principle of belief existed, unequivocally affirms, that the doctrine of regeneration by water was very antiently and extensively maintained. He notices the Hindu regeneration, the purification of the initiated into the mysteries by water, and supposes the ablutions practised, according to Homer, by Penelope and Telemachus, as preparatives to prayer, to have been an image of baptism derived from Moses.+ Nevertheless, thus comparing profane with sacred things, he does not account baptism merely a commemorative sign of regeneration, but attributes the "effectual union of the Spirit and the water to the baptism of our Lord, whose regeneration in the waters of the Jordan was signified by the declaration from heaven: this day have I begotten thee. He was made perfect by the washing of baptism alone, and sanctified by the descent of the Holy Spirit." The Valentinian, Theodotus quoted by Clemens, whose opinions were not heretical about baptism, any more than those of the other Valentinians, identified regeneration with baptism, plainly asserting that baptism was the ordinary vehicle of regeneration. Under the image of the dove sent from the Ark, which announced to the earth that the wrath of heaven was pacified, Tertullian represents the dove of the Holy Spirit sent forth from heaven down to our earth, that is to our flesh, emerging from the laver after our former state of sin, and bringing the peace of God. In another part of his work on baptism, Tertullian proclaims the blessedness of the baptized, because the grace of God waited on them when they rose from that most sacred laver of their new birth-day. Again, he desires, that it be not thought wonderful, that water should give life, since the nature of water being sanc

* Adv. Heer. iii. 19. του βαπτισματος τῆς εἰς Θεὸν ἀναγεννήσεως. et alibi. + Strom. iv. 22.