we presume, for the purpose of enabling us to contradict it, but as a pattern for our humble imitation.

When the Holy Ghost fell upon the Gentiles, assembled in the house of Cornelius, though Peter had, a short time before, doubted the lawfulness even of eating with them, he considered it as such a seal of the divine approbation, that he felt no hesitation in immediately admitting them to all the privileges of the church. He did not presume (with reverence be it spoken) to be stricter or more orderly than God. "Forasmuch," said he, "as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us who believed, who was I that I should withstand God!" a question which we presume to recommend to the serious consideration of Mr. Kinghorn and his associates. The principle on which he justified his conduct is plainly this, that when it is once ascertained that an individual is the object of divine acceptance, it would be impious to withhold from him any religious privilege. Until it be shewn that this was not the principle on which he rested his defence, or that the practice of strict communion is consistent with it, we shall feel ourselves compelled to discard, with just detestation, a system of action which St. Peter contemplated with horror, as withstanding God: and, when I consider it in this just and awful light, I feel no hesitation in avowing my conviction that it is replete with worse consequences, and is far

more offensive to God, than that corruption of a christian ordinance to which it is opposed. The latter affects the exterior only of our holy religion, the former its vitals; where it inflicts a wound on the very heart of charity, and puts the prospect of union among christians to an interminable distance.

This new doctrine, that the tenure by which religious privileges are held, is appropriated to the members of one inconsiderable sect, must strike the serious reader with astonishment. Are we in reality the only persons who possess an interest in the common salvation? If we are not, by what title do others possess it? Certainly not in consequence of their faith, for we are expressly taught by this writer, that baptism must precede the enjoyment of the privileges which arise from faith ;* in which, however, he expressly contradicts himself, for he assures us that none are fit subjects of baptism who are not previously believers in Christ, and justified in the sight of God by their faith. He must either say, then, that they lose their justification unless they comply with that ordinance, or present us with the portentous doctrine of a justification which stands alone, a widowed and barren justification, productive of no advantage to its possessor.

Let it also be seriously considered, whether the positions we have been examining, do not coincide * Baptism a Term of Communion, p. 30.

with the doctrine of the opus operatum, the opprobrium of the Romish church. But as some of my

readers may not be acquainted with the meaning of these terms, it is proper to remark, that the church of Rome attributes the highest spiritual benefits to certain corporeal actions, or ceremonies, independent of the character and disposition of the performer. For example, she believes that the ceremony of baptism secures to the unconscious infant, by its intrinsic efficacy, the infusion of regenerating grace, without regard to the intention or disposition of the parties concerned; and that the element of bread in the sacrament, operates in the same manner in procuring the pardon, and augmenting the grace, of the communicant. Hence the members of that church lay little stress on the exercise of faith, and the cultivation of holy dispositions, compared to the dependence they place on "bodily exercise," on masses, penances, auricular confessions, and a multitude of external observances, which form the substance of their religion. Consistent protestants, on the contrary, while they conscientiously attend to every positive institute, according to the measure of their light, look upon the few and simple ceremonies of the gospel, as incapable of affording the smallest benefit apart from the dispositions and intentions with which they are performed; agreeably to the doctrine of our Saviour, who tells us, that "God is a Spirit, and they that worship him, must

worship him in spirit and in truth." To expatiate on the incalculable mischiefs which have arisen from the Romish doctrine, is foreign to our purpose; suffice it to remark that it is held in just detestation by all enlightened christians. ⠀⠀⠀

Our business is to shew the coincidence of Mr. Kinghorn's principles with that most dangerous and exploded tenet. He contends that the mere absence of a ceremony, or if you please, an incorrect manner of performing it, is, of itself, sufficient, exclusive of every other consideration, to incur the forfeiture of christian privileges; of the privileges in general which arise from faith.* It is not, according to him, merely the forfeiture of a title to the eucharist which it involves; that, he informs us, is not more affected by it than any other privilege: it is the universal privation of christian immunities which is the immediate consequence of that omission; and, as he acknowledges that many to whom it attaches are regenerated, they must consequently be endowed with right dispositions. For what is that renovation of mind which can exist without them? But if such as are possessed of these in the most eminent degree, which he acknowledges is the case with some pædobaptists, are yet debarred from spiritual privileges, wherein does this differ from ascribing that efficacy to an external rite, which is supposed in the doctrine of the opus operatum: and if those who have faith * Baptism a Term of Communion, p. 30.

are not entitled to the benefits which result from it, because a certain ceremony is wanting, how is it possible to ascribe more to that ceremony?

Whatever degree of prejudice or inattention we may be disposed to impute to some of the advocates of infant baptism, it would be the highest injustice to comprehend them all under the same censure. There are those, no doubt, who, without adopting our views, have exercised as much thought, and exerted as much impartiality, on the subject, as our observation authorises us to expect from the brightest specimens of human nature: nay, this author admits that "it is possible they may be some of the most exalted characters in point of piety." But it surely cannot be doubted that they who merit this encomium, are as conscientious in their performance of infant, as we in the administration of adult, baptism; and as they are, by the very supposition, actuated by dispositions exactly the same, the pure intention of pleasing and glorifying God, if we still conceive them deprived of the privileges which we possess, the difference must be ascribed merely to a ceremony, and the opus operatum returns in its full force. This however is too faint a statement. It returns in a form more aggravated; for the papist only contends for a mysterious union betwixt the outward rite and the inward grace, to which the regenerating influence is immediately ascribed, and * Baptism a Term of Communion, p. 30.

t